ladies hair

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
behanner
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 8:39 am

Re: ladies hair

Postby behanner » Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:17 pm

Brother Ranulf wrote:Any canonical or civil law punishment at that time must have been cause enough for stress . . .


I don't think it is about stress but about openness. Like stripping yourself down to show that you have nothing to hide.



User avatar
Sophia
Post Centurion
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:46 pm
Location: Camberwell, London
Contact:

Re: ladies hair

Postby Sophia » Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:05 pm

When it comes to punishment for adultery, lewdness and other types of crimes which could be tried in a church court it could be derived from Numbers 5:11-31 which is the passage that Halachah (Jewish religious law) uses as the starting point for the rules about married women covering their hair. It might be worth checking the crimes for which these women were being punished.


aka Thomasin Chedzoy, Tailor at Kentwell Hall

User avatar
behanner
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 8:39 am

Re: ladies hair

Postby behanner » Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:59 pm

Sophia, yes and no, Old Testament law without a doubt influenced Canon law on this but it is very unlikely that anyone except the canonist who was in charge of the court would have known that and by the end of the Middle Ages it was just part of the culture.



Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: ladies hair

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:24 am

Brother Ranulf are you doubting the healing touch of St Cuthberts sock?
"I find your lack of faith disturbing."


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

User avatar
Merlon.
Post Centurion
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:31 pm
Location: under a pile of cables in a server room

Re: ladies hair

Postby Merlon. » Wed Sep 15, 2010 8:13 am

Perhaps Brother Ranulf or other Latin speakers can peruse http://colbycanonlaw.wordpress.com/ where a transcript of mid 13th century book on canon law can be found. Liber extravagantium decretalium (Decretales Gregorii IX) (1234) all 721 pages of it....



User avatar
Brother Ranulf
Post Centurion
Posts: 962
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 7:46 pm
Location: Canterbury

Re: ladies hair

Postby Brother Ranulf » Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:53 am

I have already seen that resource thanks, plus much on 12th century Canon Law debates and cases. My favourite (I have quoted it before on this forum) is this very short but complete Bishop's court case concerning one Alice, who was accused of malicious gossiping:

"Alicia dicitur esse ribalda et defamatrix suorum vicinorum Citata comparuit et negat articulum et habet diem ad proximum capitulum quo die defecit in purgatione Ideo fustigata VIies circa ecclesiam diebus dominicis"

[Alice is said to be foul-mouthed and a slanderer of her neighbours. Summoned to appear and she denied the charges and there was (only) one day until the next court hearing on which day she failed the ordeal. Therefore: beaten with sticks (fustigata could also mean clubs) on six occasions around the (outside of the) church on Sundays.]

Marcus - Cuthbert's shoe and his belt (but not, alas, his socks) were credited with healing miracles after his death, but an amazing number of miracles were associated with him during his lifetime. My favourite is the one where he and his horse, on a long journey through desolate countryside, found themselves hungry and without food. The horse began tugging at the old straw thatch on a ramshackle ruined building and a linen bundle fell out, containing bread, cheese and meat. Both horse and rider were fed. The whole point of miracles is that they have to defy common sense and logical explanation, so this one qualifies in spades.


Brother Ranulf

"Patres nostri et nos hanc insulam in brevi edomuimus in brevi nostris subdidimus legibus, nostris obsequiis mancipavimus" - Walter Espec 1138

Langley
Post Centurion
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 1:36 pm
Location: West Midlands

Re: ladies hair

Postby Langley » Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:19 am

Looks like hte thing about hair being shorn as a punishment for impropriety is a re-enactorism then? Agreed? Shame - it was always a fun item for teasing MOPS.



User avatar
Brother Ranulf
Post Centurion
Posts: 962
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 7:46 pm
Location: Canterbury

Re: ladies hair

Postby Brother Ranulf » Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:39 pm

It doesn't appear as a penalty in any of the cases I have studied, but I haven't looked beyond the 13th century. I would be interested to hear if anyone knows of its use in the later medieval period.


Brother Ranulf



"Patres nostri et nos hanc insulam in brevi edomuimus in brevi nostris subdidimus legibus, nostris obsequiis mancipavimus" - Walter Espec 1138

User avatar
behanner
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 8:39 am

Re: ladies hair

Postby behanner » Thu Sep 16, 2010 8:27 pm

I've never seen it or heard of it in that period and frankly I don't think it fits the mode of the period.
I suspect it comes to re-enactors as a combination of 20th century use as a punishment combined with the fact that Joan of arc in movies is always shown wearing short hair while getting burned but her hair being short is part of what she was burned for and not punishment.



User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Re: ladies hair

Postby Colin Middleton » Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:23 pm

Langley wrote:Looks like hte thing about hair being shorn as a punishment for impropriety is a re-enactorism then? Agreed? Shame - it was always a fun item for teasing MOPS.

You'll just have to tease them for having lice instead!


Colin

"May 'Blood, blood, blood' be your motto!"

Image

User avatar
Malvoisin
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Bulewelle

Re: ladies hair

Postby Malvoisin » Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:51 pm

Looks like hte thing about hair being shorn as a punishment for impropriety is a re-enactorism then? Agreed? Shame - it was always a fun item for teasing MOPS.

Roger Hart in "Witchcraft" states that before a witch was pricked; that is using a needle to discover hidden devil's marks, the witchs whole body was shaved. The reasons for this were three fold: "the suspect may have tiny hidden amulets concealed on her; the devil might be hiding in her hair; any devil's marks had to closely inspected."
Sir George Mackenzie describes pricking in 1666.


Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses... In peacetime

User avatar
behanner
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 8:39 am

Re: ladies hair

Postby behanner » Mon Sep 20, 2010 10:16 pm

Malvoisin wrote:Roger Hart in "Witchcraft" states that before a witch was pricked; that is using a needle to discover hidden devil's marks, the witchs whole body was shaved. The reasons for this were three fold: "the suspect may have tiny hidden amulets concealed on her; the devil might be hiding in her hair; any devil's marks had to closely inspected."
Sir George Mackenzie describes pricking in 1666.


That is signifigantly later then what we are talking but actually very interesting.



User avatar
KedlestonCraig
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:53 pm
Contact:

Re: ladies hair

Postby KedlestonCraig » Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:31 pm

behanner wrote:I've never seen it or heard of it in that period and frankly I don't think it fits the mode of the period.
I suspect it comes to re-enactors as a combination of 20th century use as a punishment combined with the fact that Joan of arc in movies is always shown wearing short hair while getting burned but her hair being short is part of what she was burned for and not punishment.

It was for witchcraft.
Malleus Maleficarum (Germany 1486) probably contains much of what you need to know about witches in the late fifteenth century. This witch hunter's manual instructed that the women should be shorn of their hair as it was believed to harbour evil.


I'm still alive - just spending time with my wife and daughter :-)

User avatar
behanner
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 8:39 am

Re: ladies hair

Postby behanner » Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:02 am

KedlestonCraig wrote:
behanner wrote:I've never seen it or heard of it in that period and frankly I don't think it fits the mode of the period.
I suspect it comes to re-enactors as a combination of 20th century use as a punishment combined with the fact that Joan of arc in movies is always shown wearing short hair while getting burned but her hair being short is part of what she was burned for and not punishment.

It was for witchcraft.
Malleus Maleficarum (Germany 1486) probably contains much of what you need to know about witches in the late fifteenth century. This witch hunter's manual instructed that the women should be shorn of their hair as it was believed to harbour evil.


Stand corrected. I wonder if it dates back earlier then that or if and when it began being practiced in England.




Return to “1100-1500”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests