How Far Was Early Modern Criminal Activity Driven By Necessity - Literature review Example

How Far Was Early Modern Criminal Activity Driven By Necessity? Various crimes were perceived different in England in the period between 1500 and 1750. In Briggs, et al. the law should be seen “through religion and morality” and depends on the category of people served by the law whether it is the general public or whether it is the elite class (65). The information about various crimes depended on the statutes, records of the court proceedings and witness testimony (Gaskill 43). This document examines the crimes of murder, witchcraft, and coining and how they were driven by necessity. Various crimes were either necessitated by inadequate statutes to regulate crimes, the public perception about crime and misconception of justice as jurors engaged in corruptions and ignorance of judicial proceedings. Witchcraft Witchcraft was one of the most common crimes in England. Witchcraft cannot be defined using a single term. Different individuals use various terms to describe witchcraft. In most cases, women were associated with witchcraft because they could be easily criminalized in execution of “a centralized criminal justice system and a protestant nation (Clark 67).” In the application of criminal judicial system, the stories of witchcraft were narrated in different versions in order to suit different cultures (Brooks & Lobban 73). In Clark, most of the perpetrators of witchcraft were strongly defended by their relatives and the grand juries and justices of peace (81). The most intriguing thing about witchcraft was the description of crime and association with the women. It appears that witchcraft was something people had to engage in in order to survive. It was taking as a defence system against attack by the enemies or evil spirits (Gaskill 56). For example, the desire to secure ones resources such as land resulted to accusations and counter-accusations that propagated other crimes. The details of the various crimes in the society were maintained in the court proceedings or from disputes settled in through mediation and regions. Women were accused of crimes of witchcraft and even laws enacted to deal with the vice (Brooks & Lobban 73). The records obtained from church courts and the circuit court the history confirms that women were involved in interpersonal conflicts and not the alleged witchcraft. In most cases the conflicts were caused by religious beliefs, social differences, land issues, compensation for work and services, and any other form of social involvements. It was evident that most of the defendants were accused wrongly due to matters arising from relationships with one another (Gaskill 78). Witchcraft was either real or just a perception as some people threatened others to cause terror. Those believed to witchcrafts were feared and considered dangerous persons in the society. It was for the fear associated with witchcraft that lured some people into it so that they could seek protection of their property and against any social conflict (Briggs, et al. 86). Others who felt insecure engaged in witchcraft in order to acquire social status and a sense of security. As some people launched accusations and counter accusations against their friends and relatives, it turned out that the family and relatives of the accused came out strongly in defence of the accused persons. Consequently, the defendants could engage in other crimes such as murder in order to destroy evidence of retaliate their accusers (Spargo 47). The accused sought for legal intervention to clear themselves of the allegations. However, when the legal process failed to achieve their goals they engaged in witchcraft in pursuit justice and the quickest method of achieving justice. The persons accused of witchcraft were also capable of committing other crimes of varying magnitude. Even after the accusation the accused person could plead not guilty and provide sufficient evidence to clear themselves of any blame (Gaskill 98). The judges are responsible for determining cases in courts also engaged in corrupt deals and protected the accused persons against any claim of witchcraft. However, the society perceived witchcrafts as a threat to the community. Consequently, the community lost faith with the judicial system and the existing laws and started taking revenge against the offenders. They started witch-hunting the offenders in and killed them in order to feel secure in society free of witchcraft (Clark 93). Therefore, whereas individuals engaged in witchcraft in order to protect themselves the community felt unsafe because of those practicing witchcraft hence they killed them in order to feel secure. In order to secure the state from the influence of the church, the state enacted witchcraft statutes to handle issues relating to witchcraft. “Witchcraft had become a political symbol as anti-popery and Jacobite” (Clark 114). The elites had maintained records of cases relating to witchcraft while the religious writers used tales, literature escapism images, satire and romanticism to express the ideology of witchcraft in the society. The use of various figures of speech in expressing the perception of witchcraft depicted relationship between witchcraft and its perceived importance. Coining Unlike the crime of murder and witchcraft the crime of coining was considered baseless because it was it did not have any biblical connotation. There were no statutes criminalizing coining before the eighteenth century thus many people considered coining as an economic activity (Brooks & Lobban 75). Coining was not considered as a serious crime because it was a victimless crime and not well elaborated in the religious perspectives. There was no clear distinction between thief and labourer or artisan and coiner. As such there are many people who did not recognize clippers as a crime and instead, the clippers were considered as heroes (Spargo 64). It involves clipping and counterfeiting. Counterfeiters were given respect in the society because they increased the circulation of coins. Many people did not believe that coinage was a crime deserving severe punishments such as corporal punishments. Counterfeiters were perceived as professionals providing benefit to the community (Clark 179). However, since every monarch through William III had failed to restructure the statutes dealing with coining a few people believed that coining was a serious criminal offense of high treason or capital punishment. The court demanded prosecution of the perpetrators of coining, but there was a serious challenge for prosecuting jurors in establishing the crime of the suspects (Briggs, et al. 116). Therefore, lack of the legal framework to criminalize coning between 1500 and 1750 gave the perpetrators a leeway to generate income through engaging in crime. The manner in which the crime of coinage was handled elucidated story of double agents, informers and blackmailers. In order to establish those involved in coinage informal processes existed in the absence of formal legal framework. The informal processes included use of blackmailers, informers and agents to share information relating to perpetrators of coinage (Howard 46). Informers were expected to give information about the whereabouts of the offenders in the society. If the informers failed to give any information about the offenders, they were coerced or threatened to with physical harm in order to turn in the suspects. After the suspects confessed of their crime the offenders were pardoned for exposing their colleague, the offenders involved in coinage were hired to work at the royal mint (Gaskill 142). The emergence of cycle of subterfuge to deal with coinage established a cartel of beneficiaries who depended on each other. For example, the use of informers to reveal information about the coiners was intended to benefit the informers from the activities of the coiners. On the other hand, coiners were the main beneficiary of their activities (Clark 207). Since there was individual victim, informers and coiners benefited from the activities of coining without raising complaint from the society. The statutes enacted to regulate criminal activities in the society deters the would be criminals to avoid engaging future crimes. However, in the absence of statutes no one can be held liable for an act or omission not regulated by the statutes (Briggs, et al. 146). The law enforcers used the vacuum created by absence of statutes regulating the coining activity for their benefits. For example, in 1680s the coinage resulted to drain off a huge amount of money followed by recoinage in 1690s. This resulted to enactment of state policy that created and sustained social resentment towards the coiners. In addition, it weakened the powers of legal endorsements due to corrupt and flexible nature of the enforcement of those sanctions (Brooks & Lobban 65). There was constant change of public image since clipping resulted to decline of coinage and recoinage and triggered unrest among the members of the public which resulted in sequence of trials and acquittals that undermined the public image of the state that the coinage crime intended to reserve. Murder The crime of murder has both legal and religious interpretation. The details of the crime are also available in print and sworn affidavits. Various rulers, judges, clergies and judicial precedents provided various explanations about the crime of murder (Gaskill 143). In the analysis of different writers of pre-meditated murder of mid-sixteenth century and the print culture that developed from the trials, the findings gives an account of accomplished felons dramatized and circulated in leaflets to spread the message of god’s providence and limitations (murder through miracles as well as trial and execution). This led to the establishment of killing legends. In the account of murder, the studies indicate that the evidence of murder were established from bodies discovered in the deathbed screams, the appearance of ghosts and birds as messengers appearing in dreams as well as corpse touching (Howard 52). While most of the evidence of murder crimes is available in the court records, the witness testimony plays the critical role in determining the occurrence of the murder crime. The details provided in the court records and witness testimony has been used to provide evidence of murder in the court proceedings. The focus was to establish guilt as evidence rather than basing the case on facts. In the seventeenth century, the countryside voices were given less currency, and permissible truth was decided through an “objective evaluation of empirical evidence” (Howard 54). The prosecution of murder was undermined by the fewer standards of evidence, overreliance on community testimony as well as the fewer detective and forensic work. Various studies emphasized the significance of pre-trial work (Gaskill 186). They revealed how individual society and their administrators revolutionized the structures of law and common perception to influence more findings and trial of violent murder to replace divine providence with more informal, skilled and scientific process to criminal justice system. The senior judicial members were inefficient, corrupt and inactive. Jurors, local governors, and senior judges were tasked with transforming the judicial system. In the course of the seventeenth century the reward for providing evidence, identification of suspects and judicial amnesties for increased accessories improved (Clark 213). The provision of evidence was based on a reward system offered in the justice system. That implied that the provision of evidence for murder, identification of murder suspect, as well as the provision of testimony, was dependent on reward offered to the witness (Brooks & Lobban 64). Furthermore, the corrupt judicial process was inadequate to protect the victims since the prosecuting officers were the main beneficiaries or murder due to corrupt deals. Women were accused of infanticide and laws enacted to deal with those crimes. It was very rare for men to be associated with infanticide. Illegitimate sex and its suppression such as the murder of infants were targeted by laws prohibiting an infanticide. Women also acted as accusers and infants and had significant knowledge about the women bodies (Briggs, et al. 178). Furthermore, they were culprits of theft crime of items such as goods, food, clothing, etc. The involvement of women was limited to the extent of knowledge they possessed on particular issues. The nature of the prosecution of perpetrators of murder was dependent on evidence available. Individuals could escape a penalty either through corrupt deals or destruction of the evidence (Clark 217). The perpetrators of crimes aimed at getting material benefits or revenging against another offense committed by the victims. In conclusion, the studies involving crimes and necessity in Europe between 1500 and 1750 identifies the three main forms of crimes namely witchcraft, murder and coining. The perpetrators of various crimes were motivated by various factors. For example, the crime of coinage was not regulated either by religion or state statutes. Since many people did not consider the coinage as a crime, the coiners could be held guilty any crime. This necessitated enactment of statutes to regulate the conducts of the public and change their perceptions regarding the coinage. Also, there was a necessity to establish a legal procedure for punishing the offenders. The general belief that coinage was not a crime and that it had the economic benefit of increased circulation of currency acted as a motivating factor for engaging in the crime. Witchcraft was given different interpretations in the society. Some people considered witchcraft as necessary for protecting themselves against evils and their colleagues. Furthermore, some perpetrators of witchcraft were on a revenge mission against the evils committed against them by other people. Those accused of witchcraft could launch counteraccusation thus furthering the crimes. Finally, the crime of murder was recognized by the religious and state rules. The recognition of crime and execution of the offenders depended on the evidence provided by eye witnesses, evidence from the scene of crime and information developed in the courtroom during case proceedings. Works Cited Briggs, John; Mclnnes, Angus; Vincent, David and Harrison, Christopher, “Crime and Punishment in England: An Introductory History” (Routledge, 1996): 1-288. Brooks, Christopher & Lobban, Michael, Communities & Courts in Britain, 1150-1900.” (A&C Black, 1997): 61-83. Clark, Sandra, “Women and Crime in the Street Literature of Early Modern England.”Palgrave Macmillan, 2004): 1-256. Gaskill, Malcolm, “Crime and Mentalities in Early Modern England.” (UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000):1-377. Howard, Sharon, “Law and Disorder in Early Modern Wales: Crime and Authority in the Denbighshire Courts, C.1660-1730.” (University of Wales Press, 2008): 1-295. Spargo, John, W. “Juridical Folklore in England: Illustrated by the Cucking-Stool.”(Literary Licensing, LLC, 2013): 1-170. Read More