Being a criminal in Elizabethan England was almost a job for some people. Many relied on committing crimes to get them through their daily lives. During this era, much of England's population was made up of poverty-stricken people who didn't have nearly enough means to provide for themselves. People would give and do anything to make ends meet. Due to this issue, a lot of crimes were committed as "desperate acts of the poor." (Alchin). An example of one of those desperate acts is vagrancy. Vagrants were people who didn't have a substantial home, nor any professional work. They survived by travelling around to different places and begging, but unfortunately for them, "a goodly proportion of beggars doubled as thieves." (Smith,272) and they would …show more content…
be punished for the crime. Another crime commonly commit by the poor as a way to gain wealth was cutpursing. At the time, people didn't hold onto wallets. They held onto purses or sacks full of coins that were usually tied around their waists.
The cutpursers would go around to places like gatherings, plays, markets and churches, then slit open the purses of the citizens there and grab the riches that had fallen out. As for other crimes of the lower class, there were drunkenness, rowdy behavior, owing money, telling lies, petty treason, hooking and more. Crime was a major issue in Elizabethan England and the poor had a large role in that.
The Elizabethan era was especially not the time to act out against the law. For the poor, there were all sorts of "physical and rather gruesome" (Elgin, 22) punishments one could receive. They dealt with crime in a much more brutal way than we do now, but this was necessary. England had an exceptional amount of crime at the time and people needed to know that their lives were at stake. Unlike today, prison was hardly considered a punishment during the Elizabethan era. It was merely just the place where people that had been accused would stay until they had been tried, and claimed either guilty or innocent. Beside prison, the stocks and the pillories were the next least brutal way to serve for your crimes. They were big wooden planks that the convict
…show more content…
would be held to for however long they deserved and were used for people who had commit "minor crimes like drunkenness, rowdy behavior, owing money and telling lies" (Elgin,23) . The stocks confined only one leg, while the pillory confined the head and both hands. This punishment wasn't incredibly horrible on it's own, but "could be as painful as public opinion decided, as the crowd gathered round to throw things at the wretched criminal." (Picard). Aside from those forms of punishments, most ended fatally, as "some two hundred crimes warranted a death penalty" (Smith, 272). However, crimes that might seem quite minor to us now could of result in something such as hanging for a person during those times. It was not at all a pleasant way to go, but there were worse. One of those horrible ways being hanging, drawing and quartering. This punishment was "the greatest and most grievous punishment used in England" (EyeWitness To History). It had multiple steps to it, the first being that the convict was hung until they were on the verge of death, then taken down right before they had passed away. When the convict was barely even conscious, they would be tied to the tail of a horse and then painfully dragged face-down through the streets. After that came the quartering part of the punishment which consisted of the person's body being chopped into four pieces, all while they were still alive. The pieces were then displayed in public places, intending for people to see them. This was the way most punishments were in the Elizabethan era. They wanted people to see what could happen if they dared to break the law. Other common punishments for the poor were burning, whipping, branding, pressing, boiling, starvation, mutilation, and more. Overall, the law was to be taken very seriously during this time. If it was broken, there was a large chance that it would be punishable by death. Lastly, the nobility.
The nobility was the highest of the two classes in Elizabethan England. They were typically akin to a family that was honourable and wealthy, usually some sort of ties to royalty had made it that way. Furthermore, crime wasn't just an act of needy poor folk... there was a good chunk of well-off citizens that were active in crime just as much. Considering the nobility were already born into riches, they didn't break the law because they were destitute in any way, like the commoners. As a matter of fact, they rarely even took part in any of the same crimes as the poor. Since they were the nobility and obtained more wealth, they could "become involved in crime which were not shared by other people." (Alchin). Some of these crimes included blasphemy, sedition, spying, rebellion, alchemy, murder, witchcraft and high treason. Treason was the most serious and horrible crime you could commit. It was the act of attempting to "plotting to kill or overthrow the Queen." (Robbins, 121). Since the Elizabethan citizens believed that the monarch was there to represent God, "it was like committing a sin against God" (Elgin, 12)Generally, this grave crime would be punishable by hanging, drawing and quartering, but a noble man might "be pardoned by the crown" (Singman, 21). This meant that although somebody might commit a capitol crime, they could be pardoned because of their social status. The criminal would still be punished, and potentially keep the death sentence,
but they had it much better off than the poor ever did. For example, a noble man might commit a crime that would traditionally result in being hung, but "their death is converted into the loss of their heads only" (Eye Witness to History). This was not a much better way to die, but was still more honourable than any other punishment. That is what it came down to. The nobility had the benefit of their wealth and royalty, and in the case of the law, it treated them well.
In colonial America, the court structure was quite different from that of their mother country, Great Britain. The system was a triangle of overlapping courts and common law. Common law was largely influenced by the moral code from the King James Version of the Bible, also known as moral law. In effect, these early American societies were theocratic and autocratic containing religious leaders, as well as magistrates. Sometimes these men were even one and the same. The criminal acts in colonial America were actually very similar to the crime prevalent in our society today. However, certain infractions were taken more seriously. Through the documents provided, we get a look at different crimes and their subsequent punishments in colonial
There was a growing sense that the poor did not deserve assistance and so in 1834 the ‘Poor Law Amendment Act’ was introduced. This was designed to make conditions more severe and to even further force self-improvement amongst the poor. ‘The central objective…was to withdraw poor relief from men judged ‘able-bodied’ in Poor Law terminology’. (Thane: 1978: 29) Alternatives such as the work-house were introduced. The notion that you should only ask for help if you desperately needed it as a last resource loomed. The Charity Organisation Society was ‘a body w...
Social crime was considered a victimless crime, and has no capital punishment tied to it. Highwaymen were hanged for their crimes because they robbed on the King’s highway and that was considered a capital crime. Crimes committed by people like Ethrinton Wrathan who “was condemned…for breaking open the Warehouse of John Hide, Esq; and taking thence 1080 Yards of Sail-Cloth, value £90.” (Ordinary’s Account, 4) This offence was punishable by death due to the reason that any crime over a shilling was a capital crime.
It was believed that everyone and everything was designed for a certain place and purpose, and some classes are given partial treatment based on their place in society, thus causing worse punishments and increase in crime rates. Anyone accused of capital crimes were given the right to a trial, although their legal defense was minimal. However, in most cases involving the state, the courts would ignore evidence. Walter Raleigh (1552-1618), for example, was accused of treason in 1603. Even though many believed that the charged were fabricated, and he had a convincing defense, he was found guilty and condemned to death. (Harrison) Cases like this weren’t uncommon with the prolonged expectations of poor social classes. The nobility, ranked immediacy under royalty, was seen as better in every way, including felonious acts. Continuing, it is stated that “most property crime during Elizabethan times, according to The Oxford Illustrated History of Tudor & Stuart Britain, was committed by the young, the poor, or the homeless” (Harrison). The escalated level of crime is reason that the lower classes were so poor and mistreated. They lived under an invisible but heavy pressure to commit minor crimes such as petty theft and pick pocketing in order to survive on the
In fact, many believed the poor were just worthless idlers who were not even trying to better there own situations, but instead were taking the high roads away from taxes and worries (Document 11). There were many observed instances in which those in poverty, when given the opputinity to better their lives, chose to stay poor and recieve handouts. One such cause comes from William Turner, and English Physican for Lord Earl of Somerset when he recounts how poor folks often begged on the Earl's door but when Turner offered to help health wise, they chose to stay sick and beg (Document 6). Similar to modern day abusers of the American Wellfare system, officals became very angry with idlers who did nothing but feed off the wealth of the working class in the form of alms. They even believed that idlers should be expelled from their communites as they only bring economics down (Document 5). Many also thought that in order received any aid at all a person must be working. Reforms such as the Workhouse Test Act in 1723, though this occured later than the period of discussion, were a result of these opinions. This act, among others, required that people work a set amount of hours before they could receive any aid. Even the famous Cardinal Richelieu of France believed that the idlers were “good-for-nothings” who were restricting those who actually needed help from getting it while they were being lazy and greedy (Document 8). This opinion of certain poor indivudals being lazy and abusing resources remains amoung those in power even today in
Today some people can get away with just about any small crime with no punishments, but in the Elizabethan era you'd think twice before committing a crime. For stealing fruit in the Elizabethan era you can lose your hand. Today you would get community service or some other small punishment. The punishment you were given had to do with the crime, your wealth, and who you were connected to.
In the Elizabethan Era, many crimes were similar to today, but there were also some that have dissipated today. In the upper class, composed of the nobles, were mostly accused of crimes that involved religion and government. This included, but was not limited to: alchemy, high treason, blasphemy, and witchcraft. Alchemy is the magic power of turning things of little value into valuable items, closely related to witchcraft. On the other side of the social spectrum, lower class people usually committed crimes out of utter desperation. Commoners would often have to beg for food and money just to make it through. However, begging was taken very seriously at the time and a very punishable crime. Other punishable crimes could include adultery and being in debt to another individual (Law and Punishment- Travel Through Elizabethan England). Obviously common crimes like theft, murder, and assault were taken very serious...
Criminals were not dealt with in private. They were displayed in towns and the middle of the marketplace for all the people to see. Many were witnessed by hundreds of people. Commoners treated punishment days as “exciting” days out("Elizabethan Crime and Punishment" 1). The crowds of people who gathered for the public punishments and executions could be considered twisted individuals. They relished these days. For example, theft resulted in public hanging for all of the people to watch. Often times crimes were falsely accused and the crowds knew it, but nothing could be done. Small crimes, such as stealing bird eggs would result in a death sentence. It was the terrible price starving people had to pay because the government made begging illegal("Elizabethan Crime and Punishment" 1). Many crimes resulted in brutal beatings. Beatings and executions were definitely not an issue, the only question was the type of beating a person would get or how they a would be executed("Elizabethan Crime and Punishment" 1). A lot of times the Upper class was exempt from punishment unless it was a serious crime. Unfortunately, the Commoners did not get that valuable treatment because they were almost always in trouble. With any evidence of relationships with evil spirits condemned a person to death by hanging, burning, or drowning. More punishments included: beheading, pressing, and the drunkard's cloak. The drunkard’s cloak was basically a big barrel
The principle of bail is basic to our system of justice and its practice as old as English law itself. When the administration of criminal justice was in its infancy, arrest for serious crime meant imprisonment without preliminary hearing and long periods of time could occur between apprehension and the arrival of the King's Justices to hold court. It was therefore a matter of utmost importance to a person under arrest to be able to obtain a provisional release from custody until his case was called. This was also the desideratum of the medieval sheriff, the representative of the Crown in criminal matters,
The Elizabeth Poor Law advocated and placed responsibility of the poor to the churches and government. If parishes could not meet the responsibilities, counties were required to assume relief-giving functions. The government became the chief enforcer of poor relief. However, the local parishes fulfilled their welfare responsibilities in several ways. They provided outdoor relief to persons in the homes; provided indoor relief to person in special institutions that came to be variously known as almshouse, poorhouses or workhouses; or required person to become indenture servants or apprentices. It also required relatives to care for their impoverished relatives. The poor were provided with unemployment relief, initiated works; regulated local prices to help poor persons; gave in-kind assistance such a as food, clothing, and wood, provided health care; and removed children from abusive households’ and gave legal protection . Many local jurisdictions possessed “laws of settlement” that entitled people to receive local poor law relief after a year’s residence.
When Shakespeare was born in 1564, Queen Elizabeth had taken power a mere 6 years prior, and her justice system was very different from ours. In this paper, I hope to explore some of the ways punishments were different, such as how many crimes had individual punishments, often times depending on how severe the crime was. I will also go in-depth to one of the most infamous cases of the medieval period.
Crime and punishment in the Elizabethan era where split into two different classes. The upper class consisted of the nobility,courtiers, and the Royal family etc. The lower class consisted of every one else.( Elizebethean-era.org.uk)Crimes and punishments would vary between each class. If someone was in the upper class they could be charged with a more sever crime than the lower class. Punishment would dramatically be different if both an upper and lower class people committed the same crime. For example if someone were in the upper class and they Murdered some one they could be charged a death sentence. If a lower class person murdered someone they would be tortured then killed if not already dead. Many crimes that an upper class person did where not common for the lower class and same for the upper class.
The Classical School of Criminology generally refers to the work of social contract and utilitarian philosophers Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham during the enlightenment in the 18th century. The contributions of these philosophers regarding punishment still influence modern corrections today. The Classical School of Criminology advocated for better methods of punishment and the reform of criminal behaviour. The belief was that for a criminal justice system to be effective, punishment must be certain, swift and in proportion to the crime committed. The focus was on the crime itself and not the individual criminal (Cullen & Wilcox, 2010). This essay will look at the key principles of the Classical School of Criminology, in particular
This Gospel according to Shaw, identifies poverty as the greatest crime ever and its morality aims to cleanse the society of this vice. Undershaft explains in the third act establishing “there are not fifty genuine professional criminals in London. But there are millions of poor people, they poison us morally and physically” the last point of which alludes to the supposedly intolerable and immoral phrases mentioned in the preface: “Poor but honest,” and “the respectable poor” often used by people like Shirley to justify poverty. While poverty needs to be eradicated to some extent, I am of the opinion that it is not so great an evil and in reality, it is needed to provide the necessary motivation and incentive for hard work, Undershaft himself talks about his difficulty in “finding a man that would be out of the running altogether if he were not a strong man” as an heir to his business, the man he describes here could only be one who has seen poverty and has such strong will to rise against it...
Since the beginning violence has been a part of our lives. Crime has been a big problem in recent years. Everyday lives are being taken from families and loved ones. During the medieval times penalties for crimes were very extreme. Back in England victims, were first partly strangled, then were disemboweled and was then hacked into four pieces as punishment for their crimes. Since they committed the crime they must pay the price; taking the life of another human is unjust, age isn’t an excuse, and violent criminals shouldn’t get life in prison.