Hubbry Logo
Matthew HopkinsMatthew HopkinsMain
Open search
Matthew Hopkins
Community hub
Matthew Hopkins
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Matthew Hopkins
Matthew Hopkins
Matthew Hopkins
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Black and white image of Hopkins. He holds a stick in one hand and has the other placed on his hip, and wears a large hat and wide boots.
A portrait of Matthew Hopkins, 'The Celebrated Witch-finder', from the 1837 edition of The Discovery of Witches.

Matthew Hopkins (c. 1620 – 12 August 1647) was an English witch-hunter whose career flourished during the English Civil War. He was mainly active in East Anglia and claimed to hold the office of Witchfinder General, although that title was never bestowed by Parliament.[1]

The son of a Puritan minister, Hopkins began his career as a witch-finder in March 1644[a] and lasted until his retirement in 1647. Hopkins and his colleague John Stearne sent more accused people to be hanged for witchcraft than all the other witch-hunters in England of the previous 160 years,[2][3][4] and were solely responsible for the increase in witch trials during those years.[5][6][7][8][9][10][11]

His methods of investigating witchcraft drew heavy inspiration from the Daemonologie of King James I, which was directly cited in Hopkins's non-fiction book The Discovery of Witches.[12] Although torture was nominally unlawful in England, Hopkins often used techniques such as sleep deprivation to extract confessions from his victims.[13]

Early life

[edit]

Little is known of Matthew Hopkins before 1644, and there are no surviving contemporary documents concerning him or his family.[14] He was born in Great Wenham, Suffolk,[15][16][17] and was the fourth son[15] of six children.[18] His father, James Hopkins, was a Puritan clergyman and vicar of St John's of Great Wenham, in Suffolk.[17][19] The family at one point held title "to lands and tenements in Framlingham 'at the castle'".[20][21] His father was popular with his parishioners, one of whom in 1619 left money to purchase Bibles for his then three children James, John and Thomas.[16]

Thus Matthew Hopkins could not have been born before 1619, and could not have been older than 28 when he died, but he may have been as young as 25.[22] Although James Hopkins had died in 1634,[16] when the iconoclast William Dowsing, commissioned in 1643 by the Parliamentarian Earl of Manchester[23] "for the destruction of monuments of idolatry and superstition", visited the parish in 1645 he observed that "there was nothing to reform".[24] Hopkins's brother John became Minister of South Fambridge in 1645 but was removed from the post a year later for neglecting his work.[25] Hopkins states in his book The Discovery of Witches (1647)[26] that he "never travelled far ... to gain his experience".[27]

In the early 1640s, Hopkins moved to Manningtree, Essex, a town on the River Stour, about 10 miles (16 km) from Wenham. According to tradition, Hopkins used his recently acquired inheritance of a hundred marks[28] (£66 13s. 4d.) to establish himself as a gentleman and to buy the Thorn Inn in Mistley.[29] From the way that he presented evidence in trials, Hopkins is commonly thought to have been trained as a lawyer, but there is scant evidence to suggest this was the case.[30]

Witch-hunting

[edit]
Main articles: European witchcraft, Witch trials in England, and witch trials in Early Modern Europe
See also: Elizabeth Clarke and Bury St Edmunds witch trials
Frontispiece from Matthew Hopkins's The Discovery of Witches (1647), showing witches identifying their familiar spirits

Following the Lancaster Witch Trials (1612–1634), William Harvey, physician to King Charles I of England, had been ordered to examine the four women accused,[31] and from this there came a requirement to have material proof of being a witch.[32] The work of Hopkins and John Stearne was not necessarily to prove any of the accused had committed acts of maleficium, but to prove that they had made a covenant with the Devil.[33] Before this point, any malicious acts on the part of witches were treated identically to those of other criminals, until it was seen that, according to contemporary beliefs about the structure of witchcraft, they owed their powers to a deliberate act of their choosing.[34]

Witches then became heretics to Christianity, which became the greatest of their crimes and sins.[35] Within continental and Roman Law witchcraft was crimen exceptum: a crime so foul that all normal legal procedures were superseded. Because the Devil was not going to "confess", it was necessary to gain a confession from the human involved.[36]

The witch-hunts undertaken by Stearne and Hopkins were mainly in East Anglia, in the counties of Suffolk, Essex, Norfolk, Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire, with a few in the counties of Northamptonshire and Bedfordshire.[1] They extended throughout the area of strongest Puritan and Parliamentarian influences which formed the powerful and influential Eastern Association from 1644 to 1647, which was centred on Essex.[37][38] Both Hopkins and Stearne would have required some form of letters of safe conduct[39][40] to be able to travel throughout the counties.[41]

According to his book The Discovery of Witches,[26] Hopkins began his career as a witch-finder after he overheard women discussing their meetings with the Devil in March 1644 in Manningtree. The first accusations were actually made by Stearne, and Hopkins was appointed as his assistant. Twenty-three women were accused of witchcraft and were tried at Chelmsford in 1645. As the English Civil War was in progress, the trial was conducted not by justices of assize, but by justices of the peace presided over by the Earl of Warwick.[42] Four died in prison and nineteen were convicted and hanged. During this period, excepting Middlesex and chartered towns, no records show any person charged of witchcraft being sentenced to death other than by the judges of the assizes.[43]

Hopkins and Stearne, accompanied by the women who performed the pricking, were soon travelling over eastern England, claiming to be officially commissioned by Parliament to uncover and prosecute witches. Together with their female assistants, they were well paid for their work, and it has been suggested that this was a motivation for his actions.[44] Hopkins stated[26] that "his fees were to maintain his company with three horses",[45][46] and that he took "twenty shillings a town".[46] The records at Stowmarket show their costs charged to the town to have been £23 (equivalent to £4,700 in 2023) plus his travelling expenses.[47]

The costs to the local community of Hopkins and his company were such that, in 1645, a special local tax rate had to be levied in Ipswich.[48] Parliament was well aware of Hopkins and his team's activities, as shown by the concerned reports of the Bury St. Edmunds witch trials of 1645. Before the trial, a report was carried to Parliament – "as if some busie men had made use of some ill Arts to extort such confession"[49] – that a special Commission of Oyer and Terminer was granted for the trial of these witches.[49] After the trial and execution the Moderate Intelligencer, a parliamentary paper published during the English Civil War, in an editorial of 4–11 September 1645, expressed unease with the affairs in Bury.

Methods of investigation

[edit]

Methods of investigating witchcraft drew heavy inspiration from the Daemonologie of King James I, which was directly cited in Hopkins's The Discovery of Witches.[50] Although torture was nominally unlawful in England, Hopkins often used techniques such as sleep deprivation to extract confessions from his victims.[51] He would also cut the arm of the accused with a blunt knife, and if she did not bleed, she was said to be a witch. Another of his methods was the swimming test, based on the idea that as witches had renounced their baptism, water would reject them. Suspects were tied to a chair and thrown into water: all those who "swam" (floated) were considered to be witches. Hopkins was warned against the use of "swimming" without receiving the victim's permission first.[52] This led to the legal abandonment of the test by the end of 1645.[52]

Hopkins and his assistants also looked for the Devil's mark. This was a mark that all witches or sorcerers were thought to possess that was said to be dead to all feeling and would not bleed – although it was sometimes a mole, birthmark or an extra nipple.[53] If the suspected witch had no such visible marks invisible ones could be discovered by pricking. Therefore, "witch prickers" were employed, who pricked the accused with knives and special needles looking for such marks, normally after the suspect had been shaved of all body hair.[54][55] It was believed that the witch's familiar, an animal such as a cat or dog, would drink the witch's blood from the mark, as a baby drinks milk from the nipple.

Opposition

[edit]

Hopkins and his company quickly ran into opposition after their work began,[42] but one of his main antagonists was John Gaule, vicar of Great Staughton in Huntingdonshire.[56][57] Gaule had attended a woman from St Neots who was held in gaol charged with witchcraft until such time as Hopkins could attend. Upon hearing that the woman had been interviewed, Hopkins wrote a letter[56][58] to a contact asking whether he would be given a "good welcome". Gaule hearing of this letter wrote his publication Select Cases of Conscience touching Witches and Witchcrafts; London, (1646)[59] – dedicated to Colonel Walton of the House of Commons[56] – and began a programme of Sunday sermons to suppress witch-hunting.[58]

In Norfolk, both Hopkins and Stearne were questioned by justices of the assizes about the torturing and fees.[60] Hopkins was asked if methods of investigation did not make the finders themselves witches, and if with all his knowledge did he not also have a secret,[46][61] or had used "unlawful courses of torture".[61] By the time this court session resumed in 1647, Stearne and Hopkins had retired, Hopkins to Manningtree and Stearne to Bury St Edmunds.[46][61][62]

Colonial impact

[edit]

Hopkins's witch-hunting methods were outlined in his book The Discovery of Witches, which was published in 1647. These practices were recommended in law books.[63] During the year following the publication of Hopkins's book, trials and executions for witchcraft began in the New England colonies with the hanging of Alse Young of Windsor, Connecticut, on May 26, 1647, followed by the conviction of Margaret Jones. As described in the journal of Governor John Winthrop, the evidence assembled against Margaret Jones was gathered by the use of Hopkins's techniques of "searching" and "watching".[63]

Jones's execution was the first in a witch-hunt that lasted in New England from 1648 until 1663.[64] About eighty people throughout New England were accused of practising witchcraft during that period, of whom fifteen women and two men were executed.[64] Some of Hopkins's methods were employed during the Salem Witch Trials,[65] which occurred primarily in Salem, Massachusetts, in 1692–93. These trials resulted in 19 executions for witchcraft,[66][67] one man, Giles Corey, pressed to death for refusing to plead,[68] and 150 imprisonments.

Death and legacy

[edit]
See also: Matthew Hopkins in popular culture

Matthew Hopkins died at his home in Manningtree, Essex, on 12 August 1647, probably of pleural tuberculosis. He was buried a few hours after his death in the graveyard of the Church of St Mary at Mistley Heath.[69] In the words of historian Malcolm Gaskill, Matthew Hopkins "lives on as an anti-hero and bogeyman – utterly ethereal, endlessly malleable".[70] According to historian Rossell Hope Robbins,[71] Hopkins "acquired an evil reputation which in later days made his name synonymous with fingerman or informer paid by authorities to commit perjury".[72]

What historian James Sharpe has characterised as a "pleasing legend" grew up around the circumstances of Hopkins's death, according to which he was subjected to his own swimming test and executed as a witch, but the parish registry at Mistley confirms his burial there.[17]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Matthew Hopkins

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Matthew Hopkins (c. 1620–1647) was an English lawyer-turned-witch-hunter who operated primarily in during the era, claiming the self-appointed title of Witch-finder General. Beginning his activities around 1644 in , , Hopkins, along with his associate John Stearne, investigated accusations of by employing controversial methods such as pricking suspects for insensitive "devil's marks," depriving them of sleep to provoke confessions or visions of familiars, and subjecting them to the water ordeal where floating was deemed evidence of guilt. These practices, justified under the Witchcraft Act of 1604, led to the trials and executions of over 100 individuals across counties like , , and between 1645 and 1647, with Hopkins reportedly earning fees equivalent to a gentleman's —around £100 per visited—through victim payments and local sponsorships. Hopkins documented his rationale and techniques in the 1647 pamphlet The Discovery of Witches, a concise defense against critics who accused him of fabricating evidence and profiting from hysteria amid the era's social and political instability. The work, illustrated with depictions of familiars and suspects, argued for the empirical detection of witchcraft through observable signs rather than mere spectral testimony, reflecting Puritan zeal but drawing skepticism for its reliance on unverified prickers and coerced admissions. His campaigns intensified witch-hunting in England beyond judicial norms, contributing to a spike in convictions during a period of weakened ecclesiastical oversight, though later historical analysis questions the exact scale of his influence versus local panics. By late 1646, facing legal challenges and public backlash—including a parliamentary into his methods—Hopkins curtailed his hunts and died the following year, possibly from , in ; unsubstantiated rumors of his own ducking as a persist but lack contemporary evidence. His legacy endures as a symbol of opportunistic , emblematic of how individual agency exploited religious and legal ambiguities to fuel mass trials, with modern scholarship emphasizing economic incentives and wartime chaos as causal drivers over ideological fervor alone.

Early Life and Background

Family Origins and Upbringing

Matthew Hopkins was born around 1620 in Great Wenham, , , a rural parish in . He was the fourth son among six children of James Hopkins, a Puritan clergyman who had been educated at Peterhouse College, , and assumed the vicarage of St. John's Church in Great Wenham circa 1612. James Hopkins, who died around 1634, maintained a strict reflective of Puritan doctrine, which prioritized rigorous moral discipline and unyielding fidelity to scripture. This environment exposed young Matthew to intensive religious instruction, likely beginning with paternal guidance in scriptural study before any formal schooling. , including Hopkins' father, interpreted biblical passages such as Exodus 22:18—"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"—as literal mandates against malevolence, fostering a worldview that viewed as a tangible threat to godly order. While records of Hopkins' formal education remain sparse, indicating it was probably modest and localized rather than advanced, his familial immersion in Puritan texts and sermons would have reinforced beliefs in demonic influences and the perils of spiritual deviation prevalent in early 17th-century . This upbringing occurred amid the intensifying religious tensions of the period, as Puritanism gained traction against perceived Anglican laxity, shaping Hopkins' early conception of divine justice and communal purity.

Pre-Witch-Hunting Occupations

Prior to his emergence as a witch-finder in 1644, Matthew Hopkins resided in , , where contemporary accounts describe him as working as a lawyer's or maintaining a modest legal practice. This role likely afforded him practical knowledge of local court procedures, evidence presentation, and community networks, including exposure to gossip and disputes that characterized small-town legal work in early 17th-century . By early 1644, Hopkins identified himself as a gentleman ("Gent.") in legal documents from , a status implying sufficient prosperity from clerical or advisory services to support without manual labor. No primary records indicate involvement in property ownership, trade, or other enterprises beyond legal support roles, and claims of tavern ownership lack corroboration from parish or court archives. Historical evidence shows no prior engagement by Hopkins in witchcraft prosecutions, distinguishing his pre-1644 career from the era's ambient of —harmful attributed to suspected witches—which permeated rural under the 1604 Witchcraft Act and Puritan-influenced communities. Such beliefs, rooted in biblical precedents like Exodus 22:18, were widespread but not yet channeled by Hopkins into systematic detection.

Entry into Witch Detection

Initial Accusations in Essex (1644)

In late 1644, suspicions of witchcraft emerged in , , targeting , an elderly, lame woman whose mother had previously been executed for sorcery. Local tailor John Rivet accused Clarke of bewitching his , prompting initial investigations amid the disruptions of the , which weakened central authority and heightened Puritan anxieties over demonic influences. Matthew Hopkins, a local residing in , collaborated with associate John Stearne to interrogate Clarke, employing prolonged wakefulness and questioning rather than physical . Under this scrutiny, Clarke confessed on March 25, 1645, to entertaining demonic familiars—imps named Holt (a greyhound-like spirit), Jarmara (a black spaniel-like), Sack-and-Sugar (white rabbits), and Newes (a )—which suckled blood from teats under her arm and caused harms such as deaths, illnesses, and crop failures, consistent with prevailing folk beliefs in spectral pacts derived from biblical and demonological traditions. Her testimony implicated additional women in , including Anne West and her daughter Rebecca, expanding accusations to around two dozen suspects based on claims of shared imps and mutual curses. These confessions, recorded in contemporary examinations, were presented as of supernatural causation by local justices, who viewed the imps' described activities—such as throttling hogs or afflicting neighbors—as explanations for unexplained misfortunes in a lacking modern pathology or veterinary understanding. The initial wave culminated in trials at assizes in July 1645, where Clarke and three others were convicted and hanged, lending perceived legitimacy to the accusations in the eyes of authorities navigating wartime instability.

Self-Styled Witchfinder General Role

In 1645, Matthew assumed the title of Witchfinder General following initial witchcraft accusations in , , presenting himself as a specialized without any documented parliamentary commission, despite later claims of official endorsement. This self-designation aligned with the era's demand for witch detection amid the English Civil War's disruptions, which from 1642 eroded traditional order and amplified communal suspicions of sorcery as a cause of misfortunes. Hopkins collaborated with John Stearne, whom he met in , establishing a that began with Stearne accusing local women of sorcery in 1644 before Hopkins took a leading role. Their joint efforts facilitated broader investigations by dividing tasks, with Stearne conducting physical examinations such as for the Devil's mark, thereby enhancing the scope and efficiency of their operations across multiple suspects. As witchcraft fears proliferated in , and Stearne were engaged by towns to investigate outbreaks, traveling to sites like upon local request during the Civil War's instability from 1645 to 1647. This pattern of invitation-based consultancy underscored ' role as an opportunistic responder to regional , operating under sanction from communities desperate for resolution to perceived supernatural threats.

Investigative Methods and Justifications

Techniques for Identifying Witchcraft

Hopkins primarily utilized the "watching" technique, which involved confining suspected witches and depriving them of sleep for up to three or four nights to observe whether familiars—imps manifesting as animals such as mice, rabbits, or dogs—would appear to suck blood from teats or marks on the suspect's body. This method, adapted from earlier English folk practices and continental inquisitorial traditions, was described by as a means to provoke visible through the imps' nocturnal visits, with confessions often following sightings of such entities during vigils conducted by his assistants. A key element of watching included scrutinizing the suspect's body for unusual growths or teats from which familiars allegedly fed, as reported in confessions where imps like a dog or were seen nursing; for instance, Anne West confessed to harboring a that suckled under her during such observation. These sessions, sometimes involving multiple watchers to prevent , drew on precedents from prior English witch trials but were intensified under for systematic application across multiple suspects simultaneously. The pricking test complemented watching by entailing a thorough bodily search, often stripping the suspect, to locate the "Devil's mark"—a natural blemish, mole, or supernumerary growth rendered numb and bloodless by satanic pact. Hopkins and female searchers employed sharp instruments like bodkins or to probe these areas, interpreting insensitivity or failure to bleed as confirmatory evidence, a practice rooted in mid-16th-century English legal precedents and amplified during his operations without requiring judicial oversight in many instances. The ordeal, though less central to ' routine than watching or , involved cross-binding the suspect's thumbs to toes and submerging them in deep water, with floating deemed indicative of guilt due to water's supposed rejection of the impure. Endorsed by as lawful under emergency civil war conditions and aligned with biblical trials by ordeal (Numbers 5:16–31), this test had been sporadically used in English counties like Lancaster prior to 1645 and was applied in some East Anglian venues with local magisterial approval, though emphasized it as secondary to his preferred methods.

Theological and Empirical Rationales

Hopkins justified his pursuit of witches through a theological framework rooted in biblical injunctions and royal demonological treatises, positing as a covenant with that enabled supernatural causation of tangible harms. He invoked Exodus 22:18, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," as a direct scriptural command mandating the prosecution of witches as agents of the devil responsible for empirical damages such as unexplained deaths and agricultural failures. This aligned with the Puritan worldview prevalent during the era, which emphasized and the supernatural repercussions of sin, interpreting misfortunes as judgments or demonic interventions rather than mere coincidence. Empirically, Hopkins relied on confessions from accused witches detailing pacts with the devil and the deployment of familiars, or imps, to inflict harms, which he presented as corroborative evidence across multiple cases. In , he documented instances where suspects voluntarily admitted to sending imps—such as a white kitling named Holt or a greyhound-like spirit called —to cause livestock deaths or human ailments, with these accounts mutually confirming details among separate confessors. Such testimonies, obtained through methods like prolonged watching rather than overt in some records, were deemed reliable when aligned with witness observations of spectral visitations and subsequent harms, countering skeptics by linking predicted demonic actions to realized outcomes like crop blights. Hopkins further drew methodological rationale from King James I's Daemonologie (1597), which argued that witches' buoyancy in water stemmed from their renunciation of , providing a quasi-empirical test for diabolic allegiance. This integration of royal authority reinforced his view of as a verifiable causal mechanism, where imps and spells directly produced observable effects, justifying intervention to avert further providential chastisements.

Campaigns and Operations

Activities in East Anglia (1645–1647)

In 1645, following his early investigations in Essex, Matthew Hopkins expanded his witch-hunting operations into , targeting reported instances of maleficium such as livestock deaths and unexplained illnesses attributed to neighborly disputes. He collaborated closely with his associate John Stearne and local female searchers who physically examined suspects for identifying marks, often eliciting confessions under prolonged questioning that revealed purported networks of accomplices. These efforts focused on rural clusters, including where three individuals were executed on August 27, 1645, after accusations of bewitching a brewhouse leading to fatalities among drinkers. A pivotal event occurred at in during August 1645, where Hopkins facilitated the examination of suspects from across the county before a special commission under justices including John Godbolt, resulting in the execution of 18 people—mostly women—on August 27 following convictions for covenanting with the devil and causing harm through familiars. The trials drew on chains of testimony, with initial complainants linking suspects to communal misfortunes like crop failures and child deaths, amplifying fears of organized . By September 1645, Hopkins moved to , arriving in on an invitation dated August 15 from local ministers and officials concerned over similar reports of spectral assaults and bewitchments. There, 10 individuals were indicted, leading to six executions in December 1645 after confessions implicated groups using imps to inflict injuries. Operations continued into 1646, including where nine were accused in August, with two hanged following evidence of maleficium tied to personal vendettas. Throughout 1646–1647, Hopkins revisited sites like , where seven women were hanged in January 1646 for confessed pacts and harms, and other locales such as and Wattisham, where isolated cases of illness causation prompted further probes into familial or communal witch covens. These campaigns relied on endorsements from ministers and justices, who provided logistical support amid the civil war's disruptions, though some verdicts ended in acquittals or ignoramus bills when evidence faltered.

Scale of Convictions and Executions

During his campaigns from 1645 to 1647, Matthew Hopkins and his associates were involved in the accusation and conviction of approximately 200 to 300 individuals for across and parts of , , , and . Of these, around 112 were executed, primarily by hanging, as was standard under for felony convictions of without . This scale represented a sharp escalation from prior English witch hunts, where annual executions rarely exceeded a handful despite sporadic prosecutions since the Witchcraft Act of 1563; Hopkins' efforts accounted for roughly one-fifth to one-quarter of the estimated 500 total executions for in between 1560 and 1700. Convictions often occurred in batch trials at , such as the sessions in July 1645 (where dozens were indicted) and the trials in the same year (yielding 18 executions from 68 tried), with juries accepting confessions as evidence when they included verifiable details of familiars—animal-shaped imps—and specific maleficia like crop failures or livestock deaths correlating to accused individuals' grudges. These prosecutions were initiated voluntarily by local magistrates and communities amid the disruptions of the (1642–1646), which heightened fears of supernatural sabotage, rather than through centralized royal mandates. The executions, while numerically dominant in this brief period, equated to less than 0.01% of East Anglia's population of roughly 500,000, underscoring localized hysteria rather than nationwide purge. Following ' cessation of activities in 1647, witch trial convictions and executions in England plummeted, with fewer than 100 recorded thereafter until the last under the in 1682, reflecting waning elite support and judicial skepticism absent his systematic prompting.

Fees and Economic Aspects

Hopkins and his associate John Stearne typically levied a fee of 20 shillings per town for their witch-detection services, supplemented by reimbursements for travel, lodging, and related expenses borne by the hiring communities. These charges were met by local parishes or towns, which sought to mitigate perceived witchcraft-related damages to crops, cattle, and inhabitants, as documented in regional accounts from between 1645 and 1647. Specific records from , , in January 1646, reveal payments to Hopkins amounting to £23, excluding additional traveling costs, for investigations yielding multiple accusations. Similar negotiated terms applied elsewhere, with no fixed rate per conviction but allowances for the scale of operations, including assistants and horse maintenance. In A Confirmation and Discovery of Witch-Craft (1648), Stearne maintained that their earnings did not exceed prior professional income, were collected transparently in public view, and excluded any bribes or gratuities, positioning the fees as equitable compensation for time and outlays rather than exploitation. Contemporary sources lack indications of extortionary practices beyond these standard arrangements, with payments reflecting communal consensus amid widespread fears of maleficium. Economic motivations were evident but aligned with prevailing demand; Hopkins' activities tapered off by late 1647 as invitations from towns diminished, underscoring reliance on voluntary commissions driven by local convictions in witchcraft's tangible perils over independent profiteering. Such paralleled fees for other specialized 17th-century professionals, like attorneys handling civil disputes, amid an era where skilled labor commanded 10–30 shillings monthly.

Opposition and Controversies

Contemporary Challenges and Critics

Reverend John Gaule, a Puritan clergyman from Great Staughton in Huntingdonshire, emerged as a prominent critic of Matthew Hopkins' methods through his 1646 pamphlet Select Cases of Conscience Touching Witches and Witchcraft. Gaule specifically denounced practices like pricking the skin to identify the devil's mark and prolonged sleep deprivation, deeming them unbiblical, prone to eliciting coerced confessions, and presumptive of guilt without due scriptural warrant. His critique, motivated by local witchcraft accusations in his parish that mirrored Hopkins' techniques, urged caution against unchecked zeal and emphasized reliance on established legal and theological standards over innovative interrogations. Gaule's publication provoked wider debate, highlighting concerns over the ethical boundaries of witch detection amid the English Civil War's social upheavals, though it did not halt ' operations immediately. In parallel, regional legal resistance surfaced, notably in , where grand juries in 1645–1646 acquitted several suspects despite testimony and examinations presented by and his assistant John Stearne, underscoring localized skepticism toward the scale and methods of the hunts. Such challenges reflected accusations of procedural overreach and potential profiteering, yet they occurred against a backdrop of broader elite consensus on witchcraft's dangers, with many magistrates in commissioning Hopkins and endorsing convictions under prevailing statutes like the 1604 Witchcraft Act. This divide—between vocal detractors advocating restraint and authorities prioritizing perceived supernatural threats—illustrated the era's uneven but predominantly supportive environment for intensified witch prosecutions.

Hopkins' Responses and Defenses

Hopkins countered allegations of procedural irregularity by maintaining that his methods adhered to scriptural precedents and English , eschewing prohibited tortures like the rack or irons in favor of non-coercive separations of suspects to elicit voluntary, remorseful confessions. He explicitly denied extracting admissions through duress, asserting that any watching or walking of suspects—practices he noted had been phased out by magistrates—did not qualify as under contemporary standards. Central to his defense was the legitimacy of the swimming ordeal, which he aligned with the trial by bitter water in Numbers 5:11–31, positing that water, symbolizing and rejection of Satanic pacts, would supernaturally repel the guilty while accepting the innocent. This test, he argued, invoked without human-inflicted pain, mirroring approved biblical mechanisms for discerning guilt. Against charges of fabricated collusion, Hopkins highlighted the uniformity of independent confessions, where separated suspects provided matching accounts of familiars' names (e.g., Holt or Jarmara), shapes (e.g., rabbits or mice), and suckling sites on the body, often verified by witnesses observing the imps' appearances and physical teats as blood-feeding evidence. He rejected leniency toward unrepentant witches, contending that empirical signs of their guilt—coupled with Exodus 22:18's mandate—demanded execution to avert ongoing demonic affliction on communities. The , enacted under King James I, classified as a punishable by when used to evil spirits, harm persons or property, or cause murder, thereby providing the statutory basis for prosecutions in secular courts such as . This legislation, building on earlier statutes from 1542 and 1563, shifted trials from ecclesiastical to jurisdiction and emphasized of maleficium—tangible harms like illness or crop failure attributed to sorcery—over mere . ' operations aligned with these provisions, as local justices of the peace commissioned investigations without employing judicial , which in required a royal warrant and typically involved instruments like the rack, absent in East Anglian cases. Techniques such as , termed "keeping awake" by watchers, fell within accepted interrogative practices of the era, akin to vigilant custody to prevent escape or rather than coercive mutilation, and were not deemed under English definitions that prioritized physical or extremity. to locate the devil's mark—a supposedly insensitive spot—likewise involved superficial needle probes causing negligible blood loss, reported as standard for verifying pacts without violating prohibitions on excessive force, distinguishing English hunts from continental inquisitorial extremes like or burning at the stake. Executions by , not fire, adhered to felony penalties under the Act, reflecting a restraint rooted in procedural norms over punitive spectacle. Ethically, proponents justified aggressive detection as a moral imperative to safeguard communities from witchcraft's causal perils, invoking Exodus 22:18's directive against tolerating witches and viewing unpunished sorcery as enabling ongoing harms like unexplained deaths, which empirical testimonies linked to demonic agency. This stance prioritized collective welfare, positing that rare false convictions paled against the substantiated threat of maleficium, as affirmed in contemporary Puritan treatises emphasizing biblical justice. Critics, including vicar John Gaule in his 1646 tract Select Cases of Conscience Touching Witches and Witchcraft, conceded witchcraft's reality but warned of ethical pitfalls in presuming guilt sans corroborative proof, advocating restraint to avert superstition-driven miscarriages while upholding the Act's evidentiary thresholds. Gaule's objections highlighted a intra-era debate on balancing zeal with prudence, critiquing unchecked methods as breeding doubt in genuine cases without rejecting the underlying ontology of diabolic pacts.

Later Career and Death

Decline and Retirement (1647)

By late 1646, the intensity of Hopkins's witch-hunting campaigns had peaked, with his final documented active involvement in East Anglian trials occurring around that time, after which invitations from local authorities diminished as targeted regions had largely processed accusations and opposition mounted. Critics like the clergyman John Gaule, who published Select Cases of Conscience Touching Witches and Witchcrafts in 1646, publicly challenged the methods and presumptions of professional witch-finders, arguing they encouraged baseless accusations and bypassed due judicial process, thereby eroding support among magistrates and communities. This skepticism, combined with the exhaustion of prosecutable suspects in areas like Essex and Suffolk, contributed to a natural tapering of demand without any centralized prohibition or disgrace. Hopkins subsequently returned to his home in , , ceasing his itinerant operations by early , while his associate John Stearne relocated to and continued limited investigations on his own, though at a markedly reduced scale as the broader panic subsided. Stearne's sporadic efforts, documented in isolated trial records into , lacked the coordinated fervor of their joint campaigns and yielded fewer convictions, reflecting the voluntary wind-down amid waning enthusiasm from Puritan authorities. This retirement aligned with broader shifts following the conclusion of the in 1646, as Royalist defeats diminished the chaotic environment that had initially fueled anti-witch under Parliamentarian control, allowing local governance to prioritize stability over further purges without subjecting Hopkins to formal trial or expulsion. No evidence indicates coercion or legal sanction against him; instead, the cessation appears self-initiated as opportunities evaporated.

Circumstances of Death

Matthew Hopkins died on August 12, 1647, at his home in , , likely from pleural , a form of consumption that caused respiratory decline and was common in the era. He was approximately 27 years old, having been born around 1620. Parish records from the Church of St. Mary the Virgin in , —near —document his burial on the same day, stating: "Matthew Hopkins, son of Mr James Hopkins Minister of Wenham was buried at , August 12 1647." The prompt burial aligns with practices for victims to limit contagion spread, and the site's old churchyard, now destroyed, held his . A persistent legend claims Hopkins was tried as a witch, subjected to his own swimming test—where sinking indicated guilt—and executed by drowning or in . This tale lacks contemporary substantiation and first emerged decades after his death, contradicting the verified parish entry and medical evidence for as the cause. No records from associates like John Stearne, who continued corresponding on matters post-1647, support the story. Hopkins's abrupt death curtailed any planned expansions to his 1647 publication The Discovery of Witches, rendering Stearne's subsequent A Confirmation and Discovery of (1648) the main contemporary account of their methods beyond Hopkins's work.

Writings and Publications

The Discovery of Witches (1647)

The Discovery of Witches is a 1647 authored by , structured as a series of queries posed to a witch-finder—implicitly Hopkins himself—with responses defending detection methods employed in East Anglian cases beginning in 1645. The tract recounts investigations in areas including , , and , , where 23 individuals were indicted and 19 hanged after confessions detailing pacts with the and harms via familiars. Hopkins presents these as empirical validations, citing specifics such as imps named Holt (a white kitling), Jarmara (a fat spaniel), and (a greyhound-ox hybrid), which suspects reportedly summoned by name during overnight watches, corroborating victim testimonies of dated injuries like deaths and illnesses. Central arguments justify identifying witches through the Devil's mark—extra teats insensible to pricking, used to nurse imps—and the swimming ordeal, where buoyancy signifies water's rejection of the baptism-denying witch, drawing on precedents like King James I's Daemonologie. These methods, Hopkins contends, stem from biblical authority, notably Exodus 22:18 ("Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"), rather than arcane learning, prioritizing "experience" as the "surest and safest way to judge." Confessions are portrayed as voluntary, obtained without torture, with witches naming accomplices and marks' locations, thus forming a chain of self-corroborating proofs against claims of fabrication. The publication responds to judicial skepticism, including queries to Norfolk assize judges, and implicitly counters critics like John Gaule, whose 1646 Select Cases of Conscience Touching Witches and Witchcraft assailed invasive searches and prolonged vigils as unbiblical excesses. refutes accusations of sorcery against himself by invoking Matthew 12:26 on Satan's undivided kingdom, while compiling English statutory precedents under the 1604 Act over foreign demonological treatises, positioning his approach as domestically rooted judicial aid.

Legacy and Assessments

Influence on Subsequent Witch Hunts

Hopkins' campaigns and the 1647 publication of The Discovery of Witches, which defended techniques like pricking for insensitive marks, watching for familiars, and water ordeal, sustained certain prosecutorial methods in England after his retirement, amid ongoing but diminishing hunts. Post-1647 trials, such as the 1662 prosecutions and the 1664 under Sir Matthew Hale—yielding 18 executions—incorporated evidentiary approaches like coerced confessions and spectral testimony resembling Hopkins-described imps, though without his direct involvement. Overall executions fell sharply from the estimated 300 during Hopkins' 1645–1647 peak, with sporadic cases continuing until the 1684 hangings marked the end, driven by Restoration-era legal reforms and emerging skepticism rather than any abatement tied to his cessation. These practices crossed to the American colonies via East Anglian Puritan emigrants familiar with Hopkins' era, informing procedures despite fewer overall prosecutions. In the 1692 , examiners searched suspects for anomalous marks via pricking or probing, mirroring Hopkins' witch-mark hunts, while accusations of spectral assaults paralleled his emphasis on invisible agents like familiars. Hale's acceptance of such evidence in 1664, cited approvingly by in (1693) to justify Salem convictions, indirectly extended Hopkins-influenced standards, culminating in 20 executions and several deaths in custody. The swimming test, which Hopkins advocated as divine judgment since water would reject the diabolically buoyant witch, surfaced in colonial contexts beyond Salem, notably Virginia's 1706 ordeal of , who floated and faced mark searches before acquittal on retrial—highlighting adapted but limited application amid sparser American hunts totaling under 50 executions colony-wide. thus amplified a methodological template for the 1640s English spike and transatlantic echoes, but post-1660 rationalist critiques eroded hunts autonomously, curtailing their scale irrespective of his legacy. The 1968 British film Witchfinder General, directed by Michael Reeves and starring as Matthew Hopkins, depicts him as a sadistic opportunist who employs brutal and during his witch-hunting campaigns in 1640s . The portrayal exaggerates Hopkins' methods for dramatic effect, including graphic scenes of pricking, swimming tests, and personal vendettas, while loosely drawing from his historical activities but fabricating elements like a vengeful pursuit by a soldier. Price's performance became iconic in horror cinema, cementing Hopkins' image as a archetypal villain, though the film's ahistorical liberties prioritize anti-authoritarian themes over fidelity to records of his self-justified interrogations. In literature and folklore, Hopkins appears as a cautionary figure of tyrannical zealotry, with 20th-century novels such as Ronald Bassett's 1966 Witchfinder General reinforcing his role as a profiteering fanatic amid civil war chaos. Popular memory has amplified myths surrounding his death, including unsubstantiated tales that he was tried and executed as a witch via his own swimming test in 1647, despite contemporary accounts indicating he succumbed to at age 27 after retiring to . These distortions, echoed in later plays and media like a 2019 Essex production addressing his torture sites, often overlook the era's widespread supernatural anxieties and legal tolerances for witch-hunting. Some cultural representations offer nuanced views, portraying Hopkins within the context of genuine 17th-century fears of diabolical pacts and societal upheaval during the English Civil Wars, rather than as a singular embodiment of . This counters one-dimensional villainy by noting how his methods, while aggressive, aligned with prevailing demonological texts and commissions from local authorities, though amplified for narrative impact in fiction.

Historical Reappraisals and Debates

Modern historiography has traditionally portrayed Matthew Hopkins as a opportunistic hysteric whose activities from 1645 to 1647 precipitated the execution of up to 100 individuals in East Anglia, framing him as a sadistic profiteer who exploited wartime chaos for personal gain through fees and sensationalism. This view, dominant in 19th- and early 20th-century accounts, emphasizes the injustice to presumed innocents and attributes the hunts to mass delusion rather than reasoned inquiry. Recent scholarship, notably Malcolm Gaskill's analysis, reevaluates Hopkins within the contextual rationality of mid-17th-century , where belief in as a tangible threat was near-universal among Protestants, including who saw it as diabolical rebellion amid civil war upheavals. Gaskill argues that Hopkins' methods—such as for insensible marks and to induce confessions—drew from established English legal precedents and folk practices predating continental influences, rather than inventing novel tortures, and were endorsed by local magistrates who viewed elicited admissions as valid evidence of pacts with the . These confessions often detailed specific maleficia (harmful acts like crop failures or livestock deaths) corroborated by neighbors' testimonies, lending them empirical weight in an era prioritizing testimonial and circumstantial proof over modern skepticism. Debates over misogyny in Hopkins' hunts highlight tensions between feminist interpretations and evidence-based reassessments; while approximately 75-80% of victims across English witchcraft prosecutions were women, reflecting cultural perceptions of female susceptibility to temptation, Hopkins' cases involved notable male accusees—comprising up to 25% in East Anglian records—targeting familial or communal groups suspected of collective sorcery, not isolated gender-based persecution. Causal analyses emphasize that accusations stemmed from observable misfortunes attributed to witches' interventions, such as unexplained illnesses or economic ruin, treated as real causal agents in a worldview integrating divine providence and demonic agency, rather than arbitrary misogynistic fantasy. Such reevaluations critique presentist dismissals of the hunts as irrational hysteria, noting that contemporaries, including critics like John Gaule, engaged Hopkins on evidentiary grounds rather than rejecting outright, underscoring the internal logic of a where failing to prosecute perceived threats equated to societal . This approach reveals biases in earlier narratives that retroject Enlightenment rationalism, undervaluing the hunts' role in addressing what participants empirically experienced as verifiable harms through the era's diagnostic framework.

References

  1. https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Matthew-Hopkins-WitchFinder-General/
  2. https://scholarlypublishingcollective.org/psup/preternature/article/5/1/29/290394/The-discovery-of-witches-Matthew-Hopkins-s-Defense
  3. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674025424
  4. http://www.witchtrials.co.uk/matthew.html
  5. https://www.heritagedaily.com/2020/07/matthew-hopkins-the-real-witch-hunter/134360
  6. https://departments.kings.edu/womens_history/witch/witchlist.html
  7. https://rmc.library.cornell.edu/witchcraft/exhibition/ferreting/witchfinding.html
  8. https://openmedia.yale.edu/projects/iphone/departments/hist/hist251/transcript14.html
  9. https://www.ancient-origins.net/myths-legends-europe-history-ancient-traditions/witchfinder-0021584
  10. https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=dhp
  11. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Matthew-Hopkins
  12. https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hopkins-9316
  13. https://graphic-witchfinders.tumblr.com/post/149422376704/who-was-matthew-hopkins
  14. https://rqs.freeola.com/media/other/4247/BOOKLET-JN-MATTHEWHOPKINSWITCHFINDERGENERAL.pdf
  15. http://www.chrispenhall.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Witchcounty-TheEssexMagazine-Dec2000.pdf
  16. https://biographics.org/matthew-hopkins-biography-witchfinder-general/
  17. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo2/A85006.0001.001/1:9?rgn=div1;view=fulltext
  18. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z3jb3j6/revision/6
  19. https://www.history.co.uk/articles/john-stearne-the-witchfinder-general-matthew-hopkins-right-hand-man
  20. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/14015
  21. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/31511/31511-h/31511-h.htm
  22. https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:653832/s4096383_final_thesis.pdf
  23. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/14015/14015-h/14015-h.htm
  24. https://practitioners.exeter.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Eastanglianwitchtrialappendix2.pdf
  25. https://www.discoverbritain.com/history/icons/mathew-hopkins-witchfinder-general/
  26. https://visit-burystedmunds.co.uk/blog/the-largest-witch-trial-in-english-history
  27. https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2021/10/sir-matthew-hale-and-evidence-of-witchcraft/
  28. https://pages.uoregon.edu/dluebke/Witches442/Execution.htm
  29. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/early-modern-witch-trials/matthew-hopkins-witch-finder/
  30. https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:653832/s4096383_final_thesis.pdf?dsi_version=9c3725cd88ef9658b800cdac719ab8cc
  31. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/16450/pdf
  32. https://archive.org/download/confirmationdisc00steauoft/confirmationdisc00steauoft.pdf
  33. https://www.facebook.com/groups/clactonhistory/posts/2444259399039601/
  34. https://www.history.co.uk/articles/the-life-of-matthew-hopkins-the-opportunistic-witchfinder-general
  35. https://nightbringer.se/nightbringer/witch_hopkins.html
  36. https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/podcasts/the-rise-and-fall-of-matthew-hopkins-witchfinder-general/
  37. https://norfolkrecordofficeblog.org/2014/10/20/norfolk-witchcraft-trials/
  38. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/witchcraft-in-early-modern-europe/devil-in-east-anglia-the-matthew-hopkins-trials-reconsidered/457471091C78984FFDB263B9CF2290BD
  39. https://www.historyanswers.co.uk/people-politics/the-witchfinder-general-qa-with-professor-malcolm-gaskill/
  40. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/14015
  41. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/early-modern-witch-trials/an-act-against-witchcraft/
  42. https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/religion/overview/witchcraft/
  43. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/englands-witch-trials-were-lawful-180964514/
  44. https://onelastsketch.wordpress.com/2013/06/01/matthew-hopkins-advanced-interrogation-techniques/
  45. https://www.mass.gov/news/witchcraft-law-up-to-the-salem-witchcraft-trials-of-1692
  46. https://textandcanon.org/suffer-not-a-witch-to-live/
  47. https://earlofmanchesters.co.uk/who-was-matthew-hopkins-the-witchfinder-general/
  48. http://www.essexrecordofficeblog.co.uk/tag/matthew-hopkins/
  49. https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/10074815/matthew-hopkins
  50. https://folklorethursday.com/halloween/fact-and-fiction-the-fate-of-the-witchfinder-general/
  51. https://dokumen.pub/detestable-and-wicked-arts-new-england-and-witchcraft-in-the-early-modern-atlantic-world-9781501751066.html
  52. https://academic.oup.com/past/article/198/1/33/1514400
  53. https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2017/10/exeter-witchcraft.page
  54. https://www.historyanswers.co.uk/medieval-renaissance/from-matthew-hopkins-to-salem-how-the-english-civil-war-conjured-forth-the-witch/
  55. https://www.themonastery.org/blog/seven-strange-and-barbaric-witch-tests-used-in-the-salem-witch-trials
  56. https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/7286/1/369396.pdf
  57. https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/witchcraft-in-colonial-virginia/
  58. https://www.history.com/articles/7-bizarre-witch-trial-tests
  59. https://www.epoch-magazine.com/post/sink-or-swim-the-swimming-test-in-english-witchcraft
  60. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Witchfinder-General
  61. https://streetsofsalem.com/2013/10/21/the-witchfinder-on-film/
  62. https://www.slashfilm.com/1202759/the-dark-true-story-behind-vincent-prices-witchfinder-general-matthew-hopkins/
  63. https://www.euppublishing.com/doi/10.3366/jbctv.2023.0655
  64. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-49931945
  65. https://streetsofsalem.com/tag/matthew-hopkins/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.