Female Masculinity: Petty Treason And Gendered Crimes, 1650-1750

'In her Passion she gave him the wound he dy'd of, bu did not design to have killed him.this barbarous Fact she was committed for. [she ought to] have endeauvour'd by some proper Means, to bring him to a better Temper'.

Joyce Hodgkis was convicted of Petty Treason in 1714 and was subsequently burned at the stake. A victim of several years of domestic abuse, Joyce Hodgkis rose up against her husband and in the heat of the moment delivered him a fatal blow. In today's society a plea of 'Battered Woman Syndrome' would have been presented to the court in an attempt to justify the violent retaliation of a continually abused woman. In the early modern period however, this was an entirely different matter. Husbands' were granted the right of beating their wives in order to "control" them; men were not always found culpable if they accidently beat their wives to death. According to contemporary social rules, for a woman to kill her husband was so unnatural that convictions for spousal murder differed enormously. Notions of patriarchy and female subordination so heavily influenced early modern society that killing one's husband was considered analogous to regicide, hence the title attributed to this crime.

Prior to the Offences Against the Person Act enacted in 1828 there were several different distinctions of murder that were identified in the legal system. The killing of one's husband, master or social superior, threatened notions of a pre-ordained hierarchical society and was thus differentiated from other types of murder. Law and order in early modern society was so dependent on the authority of patriarchal figures that a murderous wife was seen to diminish or usurp her husband's claims to authority. The 'perfect' wife in the early modern period was to be subordinate to her husband, to obey his commands in accordance with traditional belief, sustained through biblical references, of male superiority both biologically and culturally. From the Garden of Eden in Genesis and the tale of Eve's transgression, female inferiority was a well-established philosophy in the early modern period. In marriage, men assumed responsibility of their wives and faced the task of taming someone so inherently prone to sin. Several historians such as Shani D'Cruze, Louise A. Jackson and Robert Muchemblad have identified violence as a crime most associated with "Masculine brutality. On the part of a woman, however, violence was universally perceived as abnormal". Looking at the time period in which the 'murderous' wife was convicted of Petty Treason as an entire subdivision of homicidal crime is very fascinating as it highlights the extent to which men were glorified in contemporary society.

On the theme of female violence and murder, a focus on the supposed inadequacy of women has dominated historiographic literature. Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks has criticised feminist historians for being "overly celebratory or overly pessimistic; only highlight[ing] women's agency or oppression". This method of establishing a distinctively female history, adopted by scholars such as Leopold Von Ranke, merely offers an account of historical events. The violent actions of women, following this school of thought, are presented as either in response to subordination or in pursuit of self- establishment. This approach proves invaluable in highlighting the experiences of women but contradicts the point of studying women, it instead analyses the effects of societal boundaries and rubrics. A second school of thought that follows gender in the early modern period is that of the linguistic turn or the 'new cultural history'. Scholars of this mode of thought place too high a regard on the use of language as a way of understanding traditional notions of female inferiority. This area of historiography offers no fixed theories regarding the specific acts, motives or meanings of the female murderer but instead focuses on the language that was attributed to certain crimes. This approach can offer an overview of how societies categorised specific acts of violence but does not provide an adequate theoretical assessment of the 'murderous' wife.

This exploration of petty treason between 1650 and 1750, will bridge the gap between these schools of thought by shedding some light on the feminine perspective. Existing studies of petty treason in the early modern period would benefit from a more in depth analysis of gender inequalities from both a legal and cultural viewpoint. As opposed to focussing on these acts in relation to notions of subordination or agency, this research will explore the female mind-set in order to challenge contemporary gendered assumptions. Scholars of the early modern period have placed a great emphasis on highlighting the perceived biological and cultural differences between men and women yet many have failed to identify moments when these distinctions have become blurred. The act of committing petty treason, for a woman, involved stepping outside the social norms and adopting classically masculine traits. The idea of feminine masculinity is greatly under-theorised and it is this concept of gender reversal that will be analysed throughout this thesis.

Jean E. Howard's work on cross-dressing offers an outline of the cultural rules of apparel that defined gender in the early modern period. The Elizabethan Sumptuary Proclamations defined what fabrics, colours and adornments were suitable for men and women according to their social position. Social order was dependant on guidelines such as dress codes so to defy these boundaries not only defied the laws of nature but also threatened to disrupt the social structure. Howard noted, if a man wore women's dress he: 'Undermined the authority inherently belonging to the superior sex and placed him in a position of shame.[and if a woman wore a man's dress she] symbolically left their subordinate positions and became masterless women'.

'Masterless Women' were often described as uncontrollable whores in the early modern period and were seen to represent an ungodly force. Controlling the ways in which men and women could dress was merely one method of enforcing the parameters of a patriarchal society in which the subservience of women was crucial. Physical appearance was used to differentiate the sexes but there was an underlying belief that their personalities were inherently different too. Men were perceived as strong and rational whereas the typical woman was seen to be weak, chaste and silent. The Haec Vir Tract, from 1620, argued:

'"The mannish woman declares that custom, not nature dictates women's dress and women's subservient place in society. And that this "custome" is an idiot"'.