Elizabethan women - any recourse to wrongful accusations?

Question

In the Elizabethan era (Shakespeare's times), what would happen if a man wrongly accused a woman of something (deliberately) but there were no other witnesses. Would the man's word always win out over the women's? Would she have any recourse to avoid punishment or just have to bear it? What would be her best hope of avoiding punishment?

Answer 1

I tend to agree with Fruitnroo; the higher the woman's social standing, the better her chances, though even the highest could not always escape punishment. Take Anne Boleyn: charges of witchcraft and incest were cooked up against her, and adultery was treason, the greatest crime. Adultery against the king, the state, was treason. However, a man's word would unfortunately be taken before hers, as she had very few rights, if any.

I believe one way in which a woman could escape death as punishment was by saying she was pregnant, in which case she was examined to see if it were true.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/16/sosteacher/history/49619.shtml
http://www.william-shakespeare.info/elizabethan-women.htm
http://www.elizabethi.org/us/women/
http://www.seatofmars.com/womensrights.htm (I think this is a little negative!)
http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=2254957902771 (This book would be useful)
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/women_in_tudor_england.htm

Answer 2

I don't know if the man's word would always be believed over the woman's. I imagine that if the man were of higher social standing, or even if the man and woman were of equal social standing, the man would be believed before the woman. I think the only way a woman's word would hold precedence over a man's is if she and her family were of a significantly higher social standing than he was. That would probably be her only chance.

As for avoinding punishment, she would probably have to find some kind of solid proof or have the word of someone powerful on her side, but if there were no other witnesses, I doubt this would be possible. Her best hope to avoid punishment (sadly) might be to seek the pity of the men who would decide her fate, or to find a man powerful enough to have her punishment lessened or waived. Money also plays a big role - if she's from a powerful house, and the offense can be overlooked, perhaps she can quietly buy her way out of it.

Answer 3

i'm guessing you're pertaining to abortion. If a woman would not prefer a toddler for despite reason (unplanned pregancy to illustrate) there're different recommendations extra effective than abortion. If the youngster is a newborn then she ought to evaluate leaving it at a hearth-station (i don't comprehend if all states do this). putting up a toddler for adoption is a extra effective selection than abortion. Rgardless of how many months a woman is pregnant...it extremely is a existence she's carrying interior her, and having an abortion may be the equivalent of a homicide. If a woman would not prefer to get pregnant there're many diverse counsel on the thank you to stay away from that.

Answer 4

The law gave a husband full rights over his wife. She effectively became his property. The man's word was law. A wife who committed adultery could expect to be severely punished as Catherine Howard found out. A peer could have his adulterous wife burned at the stake if the king/queen agreed. A wife who killed her husband did not commit murder – she committed the far worse crime of petty treason. This also lead to her being burned at the stake. Wife beating was common and the logic of Tudor England was that the wife would have provoked her husband into beating her and if she had behaved properly, he would not have beaten her. Therefore she herself was responsible for her beating! In theory, a wife could walk away from a marriage – but to what? Who would keep her? Who would employ her? Therefore, women had to stay in a marriage even if it was a brutal one as there was very little else she could do.If a wife displeased her husband in any way, real or imagined, he would turn her out of the house with just a shift to cover her. And she had no right of redress.

Wife beating was common and was considered righteous punishment for an erring and disobedient wife.

Divorces were rare and only granted by Parliament in extreme cases.

Annulments were granted by an ecclesiastical court or by the Pope. They were granted for: nonconsummation, near degree of relationship, insanity, or previous Pre contract with another.


Apparently madness was sometimes a way to avoid punishment during some of Tudor period.

Women were taught from birth they were inferior to men.

The concept of female inferiority predates Christianity. But Medieval and Renaissance society was shaped by the Church in ways that Westerners find hard to fathom nowadays. And the Church was shaped by Paul's misogyny.

Women were taught, and believed, they were instruments of the devil. Females were the authors of original sin who lured men away from God and salvation.

Women were the only imperfection in God's creation. They learned they were commanded by God to render unquestioning obedience to their husband and to learn in silence from him in all subjection, the same way they behaved at home to their parents.

Answer 5

She would need a man to champion her cause. To defend her honor!

Answer 6

in those days----suicide--public humiliation and contempt--sometimes jail----so many choices