Knitting, Witchcraft, and Feminism
Or, Yet Another Example of How Women Did Not Have a Renaissance.
According to the East Midlands Knitting Industry heritage website, Henry Carey, Lord Hunsdon, sponsored NOT ONLY a significant troupe of actors, but also the man who invented England's first knitting frame: William Lee. Hunsdon sponsored Lee in his quest to get a patent from Queen Elizabeth, but she refused because of pressure from the hand-knitters who didn't want to lose work and also because Lee's knitting frame produced stockings that were too coarse. He refined his design, but Hunsdon died before Elizabeth agreed to give Lee the patent.
Lee went to France, where he set up shop and continued to refine his design. After Henri IV died in 1610, though, things went south for Lee, and he died penniless in 1614. His son James packed up their remaining frames and men and headed back to England. He sold the frames in London, then went back to Nottingham, joining forces with one of his father's colleagues who had also been refining the frame's design. By the time of the Restoration, Nottingham had become one of the major centers of the stocking-knitting industry.
What is typical about all of this is how much it focuses on men. The history of the knitting industry may also include these stories about the Lee men and their Industrial-Revolution-style improvements in productivity, but what about sixteenth- and seventeenth-century women who knit? Where are their stories? It seems counterintuitive to be demanding for more representation of women in the history of knitting, and yet, that's what we see.
Knitting was very clearly a woman's occupation, too -- or even a child's occupation. When Queen Elizabeth visited Norwich on August 16, 1578, one of the pageants featured a display of the city's textile industries, including knitting, but not by men: Vpon the stage there stoode knitting at the one ende eyght small women children spinning Worsted yarne, and at the other ende as many knitting of Worsted yarne hose.
From THE IOYFVLL Receyuing of the Queenes most excellent Maiestie into hir Highnesse Citie of NORVVICH (1578; STC 11627).
I find it really interesting that the guild chose "women children" to represent them and to perform their craft in front of the queen. It suggests that women and even children did have a place in the knitting industry -- that the early industrialization of knitting did not mean a masculinization of the craft, or at least, not a successful one.
Knitting still remained firmly within the sphere of "good huswifery" too, and even in one seventeenth-century witch pamphlet turns into a sinister symbol of a woman's domestic power gone out of control. The accused witch Mary Sutton knits while seducing, according to one of her accusers: [Master Enger's servant], being in his distraction both of bodie and minde, yet in bed and awake, espied Mary Sutton, (the daughter) in a Mooneshine night come in at a window in her accustomed and personall habite, and shape, with her knitting worke in her hands, and sitting downe at his beds féete, sometimes working, and knitting with her néedles, and sometimes gazing and staring him in the face, as his griefe was thereby redoubled and increased. Not long after she drewe néerer vnto him, and sate by his bedde side (yet all this while he had neyther power to stirre or speake) and told him if hee would consent she should come to bedde to him, hee should be restored to his former health and prosperitie. [...]
[H]ee that before had neither power to moue, or speake, had then presently by diuine assistance frée power and libertie to giue repulse to her assault, and deniall to her filthie and detested motion: and to vpbraide her of her abhominable life and behauiour, hauing before had three bastards and neuer married. She vpon this (séeing her suite cold, and that Gods power was more predominant with him then her diuellish practise, vanished, and departed the same way shee came.
She was no sooner gone, but as well as hee could, hee called for his master, told him that now hee could tell him the cause of this vexation: That Mother Suttons daughter came in at the window, sate knitting and working by him, and that if hee would haue consented to her filthinesse, hee should haue beene freede from his miserie, and related all that had happened.
From Witches Apprehended, Examined and Executed, for notable villanies by them committed both by Land and Water (1613; STC 25872).
There's a weird conflation here between Mary Sutton's knitting, her magical power, and her sexuality. The fact that she is knitting and working not in her own house but in another man's bedroom becomes part of the magic that she practices (the other part being, of course, the sex magic threatened by the presence of her ladybits). This will come back later. It also connects with the idea of witches riding on broomsticks or distaffs -- riding the implements of domesticity to escape that very domesticity, and indeed to challenge the patriarchal rule of Christianity altogether.
The man in question is recovering from what we would recognize as some sort of seizure or mild stroke, which he believes to have been caused by the the Suttons (both mother and daughter) in vengeance for talking badly about them. IF Mary Sutton did indeed sneak into this man's bedroom and offer him healing sex (a claim which I by no means accept as true just because dude said so), she must have been trying to save her life by bargaining with him. After all, the gossip and the accusations of witchcraft had already been flying around "all Bedfordshire" for a while by this point. If the man's accusation is true, it reads to me like the act of a woman who is willing to try anything to avoid the untenable situation that she's being forced into.
Even the biased narrator of the pamphlet cannot conceal how awesomely brave and canny Mary Sutton was. The next morning, Enger decides to track her down. Notice again the emphasis on her huswifery and practicing it in someone else's house: The next morrow hee tooke company along with him, and went into the fields, where hee found her working, and tending her hogges. There Master Enger speaking to her, she was a verie good huswife, and that shee followed her worke night and day: No sir, said she, My huswifery is very slender, neyther am I so good a follower of my worke as you perswade mee: with that, he told her that she was, and that she had béene working at his house the night before.
She would confesse nothing, but stood in stiffe deniall vpon her purgation: Insomuch as the Gentleman by fayre entreaties perswaded her to goe home with him, to satisfie his man, and to resolue some doubts that were had of her. She vtterly refused, and made answere she would not stirre a foote, neyther had they authoritie to compell her to goe without a Constable: Which Master Enger perceiuing, and seeing her obstinacie to be so great, fell into a greater dislike, and distrust of her then he did before, and made no more a doe, but caused her to bee set vpon an horse-backe to be brought to his house.
All the company could hardly bring her away, but as fast as they set her vp, in despight of them shee would swarue downe, first on the one side, then the other, till at last they were faine by maine force to ioyne together, and hold her violently downe to the horsebacke, and so bring her to the place where this perplexed person lay in his bed. Where being come, and brought by force to his bed-side, he (as directions had beene giuen vnto him) drew blood of her, and presently beganne to amend, and bee well againe. But her assiduitie and continuall exercise in doing mischiefe, did so preuaile with her to doe this fellow further hurt, that watching but aduantage, and opportunitie to touch his necke againe with her finger: It was no sooner done, and she departed, but he fell into as great or farre worse vexation then he had before.
"Neither had they authority to compel her to go without a constable." You go, Mary Sutton! You stand up for yourself and fight them off! I don't even want to know how they drew blood in the servant's bedroom; it's pretty clear that it must have been horrible for her.
The accusation that she had been "working" in Enger's house the previous night reads to me like an accusation of prostitution. That must be part of the accusation of witchcraft. In Mary's case, "witchcraft" seems to imply that she practiced various domestic arts outside of the house AND outside of marriage. That's the really unforgivable thing, somehow. She's already an outcast in the community for her three bastard children outside of marriage. The whole conflict arose because her mother, a poor woman whom the townspeople chose to be their hogkeeper (and who hadn't had conflicts with them for the past 21 years!), had some sort of disagreement with Enger. Then he suffers some misfortunes and blames them all on Mother Sutton AND on her daughter. Why her daughter? Who's the father of these bastard children, anyway?
I feel like I need to finish Mary Sutton's story, because it's horrific.
So Enger's son dies, and they all (naturally) blame Mary: The morrow after Master Enger road into the fields where Mary Sutton (the daughter) was, hauing some of his men to accompany him, where after some questions made vnto her, they assayed to binde her on horse-backe, when all his men being presently stricken lame, Master Enger himselfe began to remember, that once rating her about his man, he was on the sodaine in the like perplexitie, and then taking courage, and desiring God to bee his assistance, with a cudgell which he had in his hand, he beate her till she was scarce able to stirre.
God, Enger's a right piece of work. They then give Mary a ducking in the classic if-she-floats-she's-a-witch mode. She sinks at first, then floats after. They find a "witch's teat" on her thigh (because after BEATING HER UNCONSCIOUS and then NEARLY DROWNING HER, it's just the icing on the abuse cake to strip her naked and search for any mole or birthmark that could possibly be called a "witch's teat"). THEN -- and this is the most heartbreaking part -- they make her young son testify against her. After this, they duck her AGAIN, this time with each thumb bound to the big toe of the opposite foot. And when they pull her out, is she broken? Does she give up? And then being taken vp, she as boldly as if she had béene innocent asked them if they could doe any more to her.
OH, MARYYYY. You get the sense that she could have withstood just about anything that they tried to do. Anything except one. When Master Enger began to accuse her with the death of his cattell, the languish of his man, who continued in sorrow both of bodie and mind from Christmasse to Shrovetide, as also the death of his sonne: All which she constantly denied, and stood at defiance with him till being carried towards a Iustice, Master Enger told her it was bootlesse to stand so obstinately vpon deniall of those matters, for her owne sonne Henry had reuealed all, both as touching her selfe and her mother, and of the time and manner of their plotting to torment his little boy: when she heard that, her heart misgaue her, she confessed all.
Her heart misgave her, indeed. Poor woman.
In a witch trial, if you confessed, you could recant and often live. In this case, though, Mary was executed anyway, along with her mother. And the odious Master Enger got his scapegoats.
It's basically the Horrible Histories' take on witch trials:
Only, you know, not funny at all.
I realize that I've wandered a bit far from the original topic. And my main point isn't original at all: women were treated badly in seventeenth-century England! SHOCK. But my larger point is that the way that women are effaced from common historical accounts -- even of the history of as female-centric a craft as knitting -- only perpetuates the notion that they haven't ever (and can't) do anything of interest beyond producing more (male) babies. Again: not an original idea! But seeing women systematically erased from history still upsets me.
And for all the evils of witch trials, the one positive thing that they did result in was printed materials that preserve the courage and resourcefulness of women like Mary Sutton, while emphasizing just how often supposedly "rational" men failed to live up to their own hype. I'm not saying that men were the only ones acting irrationally in witch trials -- they demonstrably were not. But witch trials prove that men were not the bastions of rationality that so many misogynists claim they inherently are.
According to the East Midlands Knitting Industry heritage website, Henry Carey, Lord Hunsdon, sponsored NOT ONLY a significant troupe of actors, but also the man who invented England's first knitting frame: William Lee. Hunsdon sponsored Lee in his quest to get a patent from Queen Elizabeth, but she refused because of pressure from the hand-knitters who didn't want to lose work and also because Lee's knitting frame produced stockings that were too coarse. He refined his design, but Hunsdon died before Elizabeth agreed to give Lee the patent.
Lee went to France, where he set up shop and continued to refine his design. After Henri IV died in 1610, though, things went south for Lee, and he died penniless in 1614. His son James packed up their remaining frames and men and headed back to England. He sold the frames in London, then went back to Nottingham, joining forces with one of his father's colleagues who had also been refining the frame's design. By the time of the Restoration, Nottingham had become one of the major centers of the stocking-knitting industry.
What is typical about all of this is how much it focuses on men. The history of the knitting industry may also include these stories about the Lee men and their Industrial-Revolution-style improvements in productivity, but what about sixteenth- and seventeenth-century women who knit? Where are their stories? It seems counterintuitive to be demanding for more representation of women in the history of knitting, and yet, that's what we see.
Knitting was very clearly a woman's occupation, too -- or even a child's occupation. When Queen Elizabeth visited Norwich on August 16, 1578, one of the pageants featured a display of the city's textile industries, including knitting, but not by men: Vpon the stage there stoode knitting at the one ende eyght small women children spinning Worsted yarne, and at the other ende as many knitting of Worsted yarne hose.
From THE IOYFVLL Receyuing of the Queenes most excellent Maiestie into hir Highnesse Citie of NORVVICH (1578; STC 11627).
I find it really interesting that the guild chose "women children" to represent them and to perform their craft in front of the queen. It suggests that women and even children did have a place in the knitting industry -- that the early industrialization of knitting did not mean a masculinization of the craft, or at least, not a successful one.
Knitting still remained firmly within the sphere of "good huswifery" too, and even in one seventeenth-century witch pamphlet turns into a sinister symbol of a woman's domestic power gone out of control. The accused witch Mary Sutton knits while seducing, according to one of her accusers: [Master Enger's servant], being in his distraction both of bodie and minde, yet in bed and awake, espied Mary Sutton, (the daughter) in a Mooneshine night come in at a window in her accustomed and personall habite, and shape, with her knitting worke in her hands, and sitting downe at his beds féete, sometimes working, and knitting with her néedles, and sometimes gazing and staring him in the face, as his griefe was thereby redoubled and increased. Not long after she drewe néerer vnto him, and sate by his bedde side (yet all this while he had neyther power to stirre or speake) and told him if hee would consent she should come to bedde to him, hee should be restored to his former health and prosperitie. [...]
[H]ee that before had neither power to moue, or speake, had then presently by diuine assistance frée power and libertie to giue repulse to her assault, and deniall to her filthie and detested motion: and to vpbraide her of her abhominable life and behauiour, hauing before had three bastards and neuer married. She vpon this (séeing her suite cold, and that Gods power was more predominant with him then her diuellish practise, vanished, and departed the same way shee came.
She was no sooner gone, but as well as hee could, hee called for his master, told him that now hee could tell him the cause of this vexation: That Mother Suttons daughter came in at the window, sate knitting and working by him, and that if hee would haue consented to her filthinesse, hee should haue beene freede from his miserie, and related all that had happened.
From Witches Apprehended, Examined and Executed, for notable villanies by them committed both by Land and Water (1613; STC 25872).
There's a weird conflation here between Mary Sutton's knitting, her magical power, and her sexuality. The fact that she is knitting and working not in her own house but in another man's bedroom becomes part of the magic that she practices (the other part being, of course, the sex magic threatened by the presence of her ladybits). This will come back later. It also connects with the idea of witches riding on broomsticks or distaffs -- riding the implements of domesticity to escape that very domesticity, and indeed to challenge the patriarchal rule of Christianity altogether.
The man in question is recovering from what we would recognize as some sort of seizure or mild stroke, which he believes to have been caused by the the Suttons (both mother and daughter) in vengeance for talking badly about them. IF Mary Sutton did indeed sneak into this man's bedroom and offer him healing sex (a claim which I by no means accept as true just because dude said so), she must have been trying to save her life by bargaining with him. After all, the gossip and the accusations of witchcraft had already been flying around "all Bedfordshire" for a while by this point. If the man's accusation is true, it reads to me like the act of a woman who is willing to try anything to avoid the untenable situation that she's being forced into.
Even the biased narrator of the pamphlet cannot conceal how awesomely brave and canny Mary Sutton was. The next morning, Enger decides to track her down. Notice again the emphasis on her huswifery and practicing it in someone else's house: The next morrow hee tooke company along with him, and went into the fields, where hee found her working, and tending her hogges. There Master Enger speaking to her, she was a verie good huswife, and that shee followed her worke night and day: No sir, said she, My huswifery is very slender, neyther am I so good a follower of my worke as you perswade mee: with that, he told her that she was, and that she had béene working at his house the night before.
She would confesse nothing, but stood in stiffe deniall vpon her purgation: Insomuch as the Gentleman by fayre entreaties perswaded her to goe home with him, to satisfie his man, and to resolue some doubts that were had of her. She vtterly refused, and made answere she would not stirre a foote, neyther had they authoritie to compell her to goe without a Constable: Which Master Enger perceiuing, and seeing her obstinacie to be so great, fell into a greater dislike, and distrust of her then he did before, and made no more a doe, but caused her to bee set vpon an horse-backe to be brought to his house.
All the company could hardly bring her away, but as fast as they set her vp, in despight of them shee would swarue downe, first on the one side, then the other, till at last they were faine by maine force to ioyne together, and hold her violently downe to the horsebacke, and so bring her to the place where this perplexed person lay in his bed. Where being come, and brought by force to his bed-side, he (as directions had beene giuen vnto him) drew blood of her, and presently beganne to amend, and bee well againe. But her assiduitie and continuall exercise in doing mischiefe, did so preuaile with her to doe this fellow further hurt, that watching but aduantage, and opportunitie to touch his necke againe with her finger: It was no sooner done, and she departed, but he fell into as great or farre worse vexation then he had before.
"Neither had they authority to compel her to go without a constable." You go, Mary Sutton! You stand up for yourself and fight them off! I don't even want to know how they drew blood in the servant's bedroom; it's pretty clear that it must have been horrible for her.
The accusation that she had been "working" in Enger's house the previous night reads to me like an accusation of prostitution. That must be part of the accusation of witchcraft. In Mary's case, "witchcraft" seems to imply that she practiced various domestic arts outside of the house AND outside of marriage. That's the really unforgivable thing, somehow. She's already an outcast in the community for her three bastard children outside of marriage. The whole conflict arose because her mother, a poor woman whom the townspeople chose to be their hogkeeper (and who hadn't had conflicts with them for the past 21 years!), had some sort of disagreement with Enger. Then he suffers some misfortunes and blames them all on Mother Sutton AND on her daughter. Why her daughter? Who's the father of these bastard children, anyway?
I feel like I need to finish Mary Sutton's story, because it's horrific.
So Enger's son dies, and they all (naturally) blame Mary: The morrow after Master Enger road into the fields where Mary Sutton (the daughter) was, hauing some of his men to accompany him, where after some questions made vnto her, they assayed to binde her on horse-backe, when all his men being presently stricken lame, Master Enger himselfe began to remember, that once rating her about his man, he was on the sodaine in the like perplexitie, and then taking courage, and desiring God to bee his assistance, with a cudgell which he had in his hand, he beate her till she was scarce able to stirre.
God, Enger's a right piece of work. They then give Mary a ducking in the classic if-she-floats-she's-a-witch mode. She sinks at first, then floats after. They find a "witch's teat" on her thigh (because after BEATING HER UNCONSCIOUS and then NEARLY DROWNING HER, it's just the icing on the abuse cake to strip her naked and search for any mole or birthmark that could possibly be called a "witch's teat"). THEN -- and this is the most heartbreaking part -- they make her young son testify against her. After this, they duck her AGAIN, this time with each thumb bound to the big toe of the opposite foot. And when they pull her out, is she broken? Does she give up? And then being taken vp, she as boldly as if she had béene innocent asked them if they could doe any more to her.
OH, MARYYYY. You get the sense that she could have withstood just about anything that they tried to do. Anything except one. When Master Enger began to accuse her with the death of his cattell, the languish of his man, who continued in sorrow both of bodie and mind from Christmasse to Shrovetide, as also the death of his sonne: All which she constantly denied, and stood at defiance with him till being carried towards a Iustice, Master Enger told her it was bootlesse to stand so obstinately vpon deniall of those matters, for her owne sonne Henry had reuealed all, both as touching her selfe and her mother, and of the time and manner of their plotting to torment his little boy: when she heard that, her heart misgaue her, she confessed all.
Her heart misgave her, indeed. Poor woman.
In a witch trial, if you confessed, you could recant and often live. In this case, though, Mary was executed anyway, along with her mother. And the odious Master Enger got his scapegoats.
It's basically the Horrible Histories' take on witch trials:
Click to viewOnly, you know, not funny at all.
I realize that I've wandered a bit far from the original topic. And my main point isn't original at all: women were treated badly in seventeenth-century England! SHOCK. But my larger point is that the way that women are effaced from common historical accounts -- even of the history of as female-centric a craft as knitting -- only perpetuates the notion that they haven't ever (and can't) do anything of interest beyond producing more (male) babies. Again: not an original idea! But seeing women systematically erased from history still upsets me.
And for all the evils of witch trials, the one positive thing that they did result in was printed materials that preserve the courage and resourcefulness of women like Mary Sutton, while emphasizing just how often supposedly "rational" men failed to live up to their own hype. I'm not saying that men were the only ones acting irrationally in witch trials -- they demonstrably were not. But witch trials prove that men were not the bastions of rationality that so many misogynists claim they inherently are.