Christian Weech

The copied justices’ appeal reports Christian Weech’s conviction and sentence of death for witchcraft, while arguing that the evidence was too weak.

A calendar notice records a grant of pardon for witchcraft to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech of Norfolk, under 16 April 1604.

Christian and Thomas Weech petition Salisbury for support as Norfolk justices appeal to Lord Chancellor Ellesmere to let Christian’s pardon pass the Great Seal. Their appeal alleges obstruction by adversaries, weak trial evidence and three years of costly imprisonment.

A calendar notice records a pardon grant to Christian Weech for the offence described as the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft, on 3 April 1610.

Scope

Printed calendar summary, copied justices’ appeal and two calendared pardon notices. Full research commentary, source comparisons and evidence gaps from the authoritative edition accompany the source passages.

Editorial conventions

Printed edition transcription, not manuscript diplomatic transcription. Printed line wrapping and line-end hyphenation removed; superscript royal abbreviations flattened typographically. The original orthography of the copied appeal is retained. Modern readings are separate. Calendar headings, prose summaries and footnotes are identified as editorial. Marginal dates are separate metadata. No unseen original wording or Latin supplied.

Notes on the edition

Comparison of sources: Calendar heading and editorial summary — editorial note

The word Richard at the foot of p.109 continues as Jenkinson on p.110. This is one entry, not two letters. P.255 above the heading closes the preceding unrelated item. The twelve names belong to the editor’s summary, not a surviving signature block inspected here. Footnote markers are omitted here and the relevant notes are reproduced separately.

Christian and Thomas Weech petition the Earl of Salisbury. The editor dates the undated item to 1606 or earlier. Twelve named Norfolk justices have supported Christian, Thomas’s wife, who is imprisoned under a death sentence for witchcraft. A royal pardon has been granted and passed the Privy Seal, but, according to the petitioners, their enemies have prevented it passing the Great Seal. The justices have appealed again to the Lord Chancellor; the petitioners ask Salisbury and the Privy Council to support her release. The catalogue reference attached to this entry is P.1067.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067 · context

Christian and Thomas Weech to the Earl of Salisbury. [1606 or before].—Sir Henry Gawdy, Sir Edward Cleer, Sir William Paston, Sir Miles Corbett, Sir Philip Woodhouse, Sir Thomas Barney, Dr Redmayne, William Yelverton, Richard Jenkinson, John Burm, Thomas Richardson, Bartholomew Cotton, Justices of the Peace in Norfolk, have written on behalf of Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, who is in prison under sentence of death for witchcraft. The King accordingly granted his letters of pardon to her, but although these have passed the privy seal, they have been stayed from passing the Great Seal by the sinister means of her enemies, and she is still in prison to the great grief of her husband. The Justices of the Peace have again sent a letter to the Lord Chancellor in her favour, to effect her pardon according to the King's intent, and petitioners ask Salisbury and others of the Privy Council to lend their support to this appeal for her release.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 1067.)

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067 · context

Comparison of sources: Copied appeal on the reverse — editorial note

This is advocacy, including reported trial attendance, an assessment of weak evidence, an innocence claim, character testimony and an allegation of obstruction. It is not an acquittal or an independently verified account of finances. The superscript abbreviations are flattened typographically; printed line wrapping is removed. No missing original endorsements or signatures are invented.

The true copy of the honourable appeal of several knights and justices of his Majesty’s peace for Norfolk, made on Christian Weech’s behalf to Thomas, Lord Ellesmere, Lord Chancellor of England. May your Lordship be informed, at the request and on behalf of the distressed gentleman Thomas Weech, that his wife Christian, his only support and guide, is in prison condemned to die for witchcraft. Through earlier representations made under our hands, he petitioned the King for her pardon. The King granted it by special grace and it passed the Privy Seal. Before it could pass the Great Seal, however, their adversaries learned of it and, as we are informed, obtained a stay by alleging, among other things, that neither the woman nor her offence was known to us. This is untrue. We were at her trial and heard the testimony and proofs against her, which in our judgment were too weak to condemn her. We know her as a gentlewoman of ancient descent who lived most of her life without suspicion of witchcraft until shortly before her trial. Although God in his secret wisdom permitted her to be found guilty and sentenced, we are fully persuaded she is innocent of the offence for which she remains condemned. We inform your Lordship of this in view of her modest, religious and discreet conduct since condemnation. Since the King in his goodness and mercy has granted her pardon, which has passed the Privy Seal and awaits only the Great Seal, we ask you, in whose power the matter rests, to favour Thomas and his wife by allowing it to pass. She may then be delivered from the long imprisonment she has endured for three years, to their great financial harm, if not their utter ruin. We leave the matter to your considered judgment, as their distressed condition may move you.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067 · context

The true coppie of the honorable sute of diverse worshippfull knights and Justices of his Maᵗˢ peace for the county of Norfolk made on the behalfe of Christian Weeche, unto the right honorable Thomas, Lorde Ellismere, Lorde Chauncellor of England. Yt maye please your Lordshippe to be advertized at the requests and in the behalfe of a poore distressed gent, Thomas Weeche, whose wife and onely staye and guide, Christian Weeche, beinge in prison condempned to die for witchcrafte, the poore gent, by meanes of foremer advertisements geven by us under our handes became an humble suter unto the Kings Maᵗⁱᵉ for her pardon, who of his speciall grace graunted the same, and it passed under his previe seale, but before it coulde passe the great Seale his and her adversaries understandinge therof used means, as we are inforemed, to stay the same alledginge amongest many other allegations that the woman and her facte was utterly unknowne unto us; which is not soe. For her facte, we weare at her triall and harde suche testimonie and proofes as were then alledged against her, beeinge in our judgments to weake to have condempned her. And for our knowledge of the woeman, we knowe her to be a gentlewoman verie aunciently decended, and for the greatest parte of her life to have lived without any maner of note or suspition of exercizinge of the devilishe and detestable practize of witchcrafte untill some small time before her triall. And howsoever yt pleased God in his secret wisedome to sufer her to be founde guiltie and receive judgement for the facte, yet we are fully perswaded that she is cleare of that wherof she nowe remaine condempned. All which we have thought fittinge to advertize your Lordshippe of in respect of her owne modest religious and discreet cariage ever since her condempnation, and also to become humble suters to your Lordshippe that, seeinge it hathe pleased his moste excellent Maᵗⁱᵉ of his infinite goodnes and mercie to graunt her his pardon, which hathe passed the privie seale and staies onelye for the greate seale, that yt would please your Lordshippe, in whose power it onely rest, to yeelde your honorable favour soe farre to the said Thomas Weeche and his sayd wife as to suffer her said pardon to passe the great seale wherbye she may be delivered of her longe imprisonment which now by the space of three yeares she hathe induered to her housebonds and her great hinderaunce, yf not thier utter undoeinge. And so leave the same unto your honores grave consideration to doe therin as the poore gentlemans distressed estate and his wiffes may moove.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067 · context

Comparison of sources: Relevant calendar footnotes — editorial note

The nearby note about probate of a will belongs to the preceding entry and is excluded. Cleer’s biographical note is not independently verified here.

The editor records Cleer’s death in 1606 and dates the pardon grant to 16 April 1604, referring to Green’s calendar, page 96.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 p.109 note attached to Edward Cleer and p.110 pardon footnote · context

Edward Cleer: “Died in 1606.” “She was granted a pardon on April 16, 1604. [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 96.]”

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 p.109 note attached to Edward Cleer and p.110 pardon footnote · context

Comparison of sources: Calendared pardon grant of 1604 — editorial note

The marginal date is recorded separately from the sentence. The bracketed 14 and 16 April are documentary date references, not two proven trials or two releases. The grant is not proof that the Great Seal was completed or Christian was released.

A grant of pardon for witchcraft to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, of Norfolk. The notice appears under 16 April 1604 and refers to docquets of 14 and 16 April.

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice · context

Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. [April 14 and 16. Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice · context

Comparison of sources: Calendared pardon grant naming Mary Freeston — editorial note

The marginal date is 3 April 1610. This is legal-record wording, not proof of supernatural causation. Whether this relates to the earlier prosecution, a fresh prosecution, or another administrative process remains unresolved.

A grant of pardon to Christian Weech for the offence described in the notice as the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft.

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice · context

Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft. [Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice · context

Comparison of sources: Notestein on the two pardon notices

Notestein reads the two calendar references as repeated pardons and asks whether this was Christiana Weekes of Wiltshire. His question is not an identification. The Wiltshire person, later accusations and place are not merged into the Norfolk record. The book is derivative evidence, not a newly discovered trial record.

1610. Norfolk. Christian[a] Weech, pardoned in 1604, now again pardoned. _Ibid._, 96, 598. Was this the Christiana Weekes of Cleves Pepper, Wilts, who in 1651 and 1654 was again and again accused of telling where lost goods were? See _Hist. MSS. Comm. Reports, Various_, I, 120.

Wallace Notestein, A History of Witchcraft in England from 1558 to 1718, Washington, D.C.: The American Historical Association, 1911, Wallace Notestein, A History of Witchcraft in England from 1558 to 1718 (Washington, American Historical Association, 1911), Appendix C, chronological entry for 1610, printed p.397; accessible Gute… · context

Comparison of sources: Ashton and the claim of a renewed accusation

Ashton explicitly draws his examples from State Papers calendars and says Christian was accused again. The two calendar notices do not by themselves prove a second accusation or trial. His narrative inference is preserved as later interpretation, not imported as a separate prosecution.

1604. 16 Ap. Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. She was one of the extremely fortunate, for she was again accused of this crime. 1610. 3 Ap. Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft.

John Ashton, Ashton 1896, London: Ward and Downey, 1896, John Ashton, The Devil in Britain and America (London, Ward and Downey, 1896), chapter XX, pardon examples, p.274 as recorded in the earlier dossier; Gutenberg text inspected, original page image not newly checked., John Ashton, The Devil in Britain and America (London, Ward and Downey, 1896), chapter XX, pardon examples, printed p.274 as identified in the earlier dossier; text inspected in the Gutenberg editi… · context

Comparison of sources: Gaskill on neighbourliness and witchcraft

This short sentence comes from the public chapter summary, paragraph 3, and frames the use of witchcraft cases to study social relations. The chapter’s Weech discussion, reported at pp.224–225 and note 77, was not accessible in the publisher preview. Mendham and any additional manuscript references remain inherited leads, not verified case facts. A copy of those pages would allow the lead to be checked.

It is a point of entry, not an end in itself.

Malcolm Gaskill, Gaskill 2013, Woodbridge: Boydell, 2013, Malcolm Gaskill, “Witchcraft and Neighbourliness in Early Modern England,” in Steve Hindle, Alexandra Shepard and John Walter, eds., Remaking English Society Social Relations and Social Change in Early Modern England (Woodbridge, Boydell, 2013), 211–232. Cambridge Core publisher chapter record., Malcolm Gaskill, “Witchcraft and Neighbourliness in Early Modern England,” in Steve Hindle, Alexandra Shepard and John Walter, eds., Remaking English Society Social Relations and Social Change in E… · context

Comparison of sources: Supported findings

The available primary evidence is a printed calendar entry spanning Salisbury pages 109–111, with a copied contemporary appeal on the reverse, and two State Papers calendar notices. These are three archival witnesses as represented by editors, not three original manuscripts inspected in this pass.

The appeal reports that Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, was condemned to die for witchcraft. It says a pardon passed the Privy Seal but was stopped before the Great Seal. Its advocates claim weak evidence, good reputation and three years of imprisonment; these remain attributed statements.

The printed correspondence entry is undated and editorially placed at 1606 or before. The reported three years cannot be subtracted from an assumed date to manufacture a trial date.

The calendar separately records grants in April 1604 and April 1610. The 1610 notice names Mary Freeston. No fresh trial, completed sealing, release or ultimate fate is established.

Richard Jenkinson spans the page break. P.255 belongs to the preceding unrelated entry; the Weech item is P.1067. The older separate-letter reconstruction is superseded.

All represented source text is English apart from administrative abbreviations. No continuous Latin original has been recovered. The modern-English versions are readings of the entire represented units, not translations of an unseen original.

Christian and Thomas Weech to the Earl of Salisbury. [1606 or before].—Sir Henry Gawdy, Sir Edward Cleer, Sir William Paston, Sir Miles Corbett, Sir Philip Woodhouse, Sir Thomas Barney, Dr Redmayne, William Yelverton, Richard Jenkinson, John Burm, Thomas Richardson, Bartholomew Cotton, Justices of the Peace in Norfolk, have written on behalf of Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, who is in prison under sentence of death for witchcraft. The King accordingly granted his letters of pardon to her, but although these have passed the privy seal, they have been stayed from passing the Great Seal by the sinister means of her enemies, and she is still in prison to the great grief of her husband. The Justices of the Peace have again sent a letter to the Lord Chancellor in her favour, to effect her pardon according to the King's intent, and petitioners ask Salisbury and others of the Privy Council to lend their support to this appeal for her release.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 1067.)

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067 · context

The true coppie of the honorable sute of diverse worshippfull knights and Justices of his Maᵗˢ peace for the county of Norfolk made on the behalfe of Christian Weeche, unto the right honorable Thomas, Lorde Ellismere, Lorde Chauncellor of England. Yt maye please your Lordshippe to be advertized at the requests and in the behalfe of a poore distressed gent, Thomas Weeche, whose wife and onely staye and guide, Christian Weeche, beinge in prison condempned to die for witchcrafte, the poore gent, by meanes of foremer advertisements geven by us under our handes became an humble suter unto the Kings Maᵗⁱᵉ for her pardon, who of his speciall grace graunted the same, and it passed under his previe seale, but before it coulde passe the great Seale his and her adversaries understandinge therof used means, as we are inforemed, to stay the same alledginge amongest many other allegations that the woman and her facte was utterly unknowne unto us; which is not soe. For her facte, we weare at her triall and harde suche testimonie and proofes as were then alledged against her, beeinge in our judgments to weake to have condempned her. And for our knowledge of the woeman, we knowe her to be a gentlewoman verie aunciently decended, and for the greatest parte of her life to have lived without any maner of note or suspition of exercizinge of the devilishe and detestable practize of witchcrafte untill some small time before her triall. And howsoever yt pleased God in his secret wisedome to sufer her to be founde guiltie and receive judgement for the facte, yet we are fully perswaded that she is cleare of that wherof she nowe remaine condempned. All which we have thought fittinge to advertize your Lordshippe of in respect of her owne modest religious and discreet cariage ever since her condempnation, and also to become humble suters to your Lordshippe that, seeinge it hathe pleased his moste excellent Maᵗⁱᵉ of his infinite goodnes and mercie to graunt her his pardon, which hathe passed the privie seale and staies onelye for the greate seale, that yt would please your Lordshippe, in whose power it onely rest, to yeelde your honorable favour soe farre to the said Thomas Weeche and his sayd wife as to suffer her said pardon to passe the great seale wherbye she may be delivered of her longe imprisonment which now by the space of three yeares she hathe induered to her housebonds and her great hinderaunce, yf not thier utter undoeinge. And so leave the same unto your honores grave consideration to doe therin as the poore gentlemans distressed estate and his wiffes may moove.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067 · context

Edward Cleer: “Died in 1606.” “She was granted a pardon on April 16, 1604. [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 96.]”

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 p.109 note attached to Edward Cleer and p.110 pardon footnote · context

Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. [April 14 and 16. Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice · context

Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft. [Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice · context

Context: About this case and its sources

Reference: Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P.1067, as printed in Owen 1976, pp.109–111; Green 1857, pp.96,598
Record dates: 1604 and 1610; appeal undated
Source languages: English
Record types: Copied appeal, calendar summary and pardon notices
Principal people: Christian Weech; Thomas Weech, her husband; Thomas, Lord Ellesmere, Lord Chancellor; Earl of Salisbury; Mary Freeston, named in the 1610 pardon notice
Norfolk justices named in the calendar: Sir Henry Gawdy; Sir Edward Cleer; Sir William Paston; Sir Miles Corbett; Sir Philip Woodhouse; Sir Thomas Barney; Dr Redmayne; William Yelverton; Richard Jenkinson; John Burm; Thomas Richardson; Bartholomew Cotton
Recorded disposition: Pardon grants are calendared in 1604 and 1610. The undated appeal describes a pardon delayed before the Great Seal. These notices do not establish a release date.
Source distinction: The justices’ names are supplied by the printed calendar summary; individual signatures have not been examined here.
Texts in this edition: Printed calendar summary, copied justices’ appeal and two calendared pardon notices.
Text status: Printed source edition; original manuscripts not transcribed here.
Edition: 25 October 2026 · version 1.0
How to cite: Witches in Early Modern England, Christian Weech, reading edition, 25 October 2026, section title and source folio or page.

Christian and Thomas Weech to the Earl of Salisbury. [1606 or before].—Sir Henry Gawdy, Sir Edward Cleer, Sir William Paston, Sir Miles Corbett, Sir Philip Woodhouse, Sir Thomas Barney, Dr Redmayne, William Yelverton, Richard Jenkinson, John Burm, Thomas Richardson, Bartholomew Cotton, Justices of the Peace in Norfolk, have written on behalf of Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, who is in prison under sentence of death for witchcraft. The King accordingly granted his letters of pardon to her, but although these have passed the privy seal, they have been stayed from passing the Great Seal by the sinister means of her enemies, and she is still in prison to the great grief of her husband. The Justices of the Peace have again sent a letter to the Lord Chancellor in her favour, to effect her pardon according to the King's intent, and petitioners ask Salisbury and others of the Privy Council to lend their support to this appeal for her release.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 1067.)

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067 · context

The true coppie of the honorable sute of diverse worshippfull knights and Justices of his Maᵗˢ peace for the county of Norfolk made on the behalfe of Christian Weeche, unto the right honorable Thomas, Lorde Ellismere, Lorde Chauncellor of England. Yt maye please your Lordshippe to be advertized at the requests and in the behalfe of a poore distressed gent, Thomas Weeche, whose wife and onely staye and guide, Christian Weeche, beinge in prison condempned to die for witchcrafte, the poore gent, by meanes of foremer advertisements geven by us under our handes became an humble suter unto the Kings Maᵗⁱᵉ for her pardon, who of his speciall grace graunted the same, and it passed under his previe seale, but before it coulde passe the great Seale his and her adversaries understandinge therof used means, as we are inforemed, to stay the same alledginge amongest many other allegations that the woman and her facte was utterly unknowne unto us; which is not soe. For her facte, we weare at her triall and harde suche testimonie and proofes as were then alledged against her, beeinge in our judgments to weake to have condempned her. And for our knowledge of the woeman, we knowe her to be a gentlewoman verie aunciently decended, and for the greatest parte of her life to have lived without any maner of note or suspition of exercizinge of the devilishe and detestable practize of witchcrafte untill some small time before her triall. And howsoever yt pleased God in his secret wisedome to sufer her to be founde guiltie and receive judgement for the facte, yet we are fully perswaded that she is cleare of that wherof she nowe remaine condempned. All which we have thought fittinge to advertize your Lordshippe of in respect of her owne modest religious and discreet cariage ever since her condempnation, and also to become humble suters to your Lordshippe that, seeinge it hathe pleased his moste excellent Maᵗⁱᵉ of his infinite goodnes and mercie to graunt her his pardon, which hathe passed the privie seale and staies onelye for the greate seale, that yt would please your Lordshippe, in whose power it onely rest, to yeelde your honorable favour soe farre to the said Thomas Weeche and his sayd wife as to suffer her said pardon to passe the great seale wherbye she may be delivered of her longe imprisonment which now by the space of three yeares she hathe induered to her housebonds and her great hinderaunce, yf not thier utter undoeinge. And so leave the same unto your honores grave consideration to doe therin as the poore gentlemans distressed estate and his wiffes may moove.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067 · context

Edward Cleer: “Died in 1606.” “She was granted a pardon on April 16, 1604. [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 96.]”

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 p.109 note attached to Edward Cleer and p.110 pardon footnote · context

Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. [April 14 and 16. Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice · context

Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft. [Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice · context

Context: What has changed

The continuous P.1067 entry replaces the older two-letter reconstruction. Richard Jenkinson is one person across the page break, and P.255 belongs to the preceding entry. The 1604 and 1610 calendar notices have both been checked in saved page images. Dr Redmayne’s duplicated supposed forename is removed. The copied appeal includes its conclusion on page 111, including the stated three years of imprisonment.

The export contains four events and five central person narratives rather than twelve repetitive justice assertion blocks. All eighteen people remain. The justices’ names and collective role are preserved in the appeal’s full source citation and note, the people register and the master. Their individual attendance is not inferred. Earlier seventeen-assertion and thirty-three-row research versions remain preserved.

The continuous P.1067 entry replaces the older two-letter reconstruction. Richard Jenkinson is one person across the page break, and P.255 belongs to the preceding entry. The 1604 and 1610 calendar notices have both been checked in saved page images. Dr Redmayne’s duplicated supposed forename is removed. The copied appeal includes its conclusion on page 111, including the stated three years of imprisonment. The export contains four events and five central person narratives rather than twelve repetitive justice assertion blocks. All eighteen people remain. The justices’ names and collective role are preserved in the appeal’s full source citation and note, the people register and the master. Their individual attendance is not inferred. Earlier seventeen-assertion and thirty-three-row research versions remain preserved.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 24, 25 · context

Comparison of sources: 2 Sources and editorial method

The copied appeal is a transcription of a printed documentary text, not a fresh diplomatic reading of handwriting. No unresolved printed word is silently supplied; uncertainty concerns the underlying originals, dates, identities and administrative outcome. All continuous text represented here is English. No full Latin original has been recovered.

Printed edition transcription, not manuscript diplomatic transcription. Printed line wrapping and line-end hyphenation removed; superscript royal abbreviations flattened typographically. The original orthography of the copied appeal is retained. Modern readings are separate. Calendar headings, prose summaries and footnotes are identified as editorial. Marginal dates are separate metadata. No unseen original wording or Latin supplied. The copied appeal is a transcription of a printed documentary text, not a fresh diplomatic reading of handwriting. No unresolved printed word is silently supplied; uncertainty concerns the underlying originals, dates, identities and administrative outcome. All continuous text represented here is English. No full Latin original has been recovered.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 27, 28 · context

Context: src-cal

G. Dyfnallt Owen, editor, Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House, volume 24, Addenda 1605–1668 (London, HMSO, 1976), pp.109–111, Christian and Thomas Weech to the Earl of Salisbury, P.1067. Also catalogued under the Salisbury manuscripts title.

https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-cecil-papers/vol24/pp94-112

Printed edition pp.109–111 checked against user screenshots and public BHO text. P.1067 is one entry. Original manuscript not inspected. The summary is editorial prose; the reverse appeal reproduces contemporary wording.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, editor, Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House, volume 24, Addenda 1605–1668 (London, HMSO, 1976), pp.109–111, Christian and Thomas Weech to the Earl of Salisbury, P.1067. Also catalogued under the Salisbury manuscripts title. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-cecil-papers/vol24/pp94-112 Printed edition pp.109–111 checked against user screenshots and public BHO text. P.1067 is one entry. Original manuscript not inspected. The summary is editorial prose; the reverse appeal reproduces contemporary wording.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 30, 31, 32 · context

Context: src-pardon1604

Mary Anne Everett Green, editor, Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series of the Reign of James I 1603–1610 (London, Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857), p.96. Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604.

https://archive.org/details/calendarofstatep01grea

Printed calendar p.96 directly inspected 24 October 2026. Original 1604 docquets not inspected. A calendared grant does not prove Great Seal completion or release.

Mary Anne Everett Green, editor, Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series of the Reign of James I 1603–1610 (London, Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857), p.96. Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604. https://archive.org/details/calendarofstatep01grea Printed calendar p.96 directly inspected 24 October 2026. Original 1604 docquets not inspected. A calendared grant does not prove Great Seal completion or release.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 34, 35, 36 · context

Context: src-pardon1610

Mary Anne Everett Green, editor, Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series of the Reign of James I 1603–1610 (London, Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857), p.598. 3 April 1610 [Docquet]; Gale volume GALE|MC4323500001.

https://archive.org/details/calendarofstatep01grea

Printed calendar p.598, PDF page 612, independently inspected 24 October 2026. Original docquet not inspected. Calendar records pardon grant 3 April 1610 for murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft; no new trial, release or completion of sealing inferred.

Mary Anne Everett Green, editor, Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series of the Reign of James I 1603–1610 (London, Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857), p.598. 3 April 1610 [Docquet]; Gale volume GALE|MC4323500001. https://archive.org/details/calendarofstatep01grea Printed calendar p.598, PDF page 612, independently inspected 24 October 2026. Original docquet not inspected. Calendar records pardon grant 3 April 1610 for murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft; no new trial, release or completion of sealing inferred.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 38, 39, 40 · context

Context: Image coverage

Salisbury_50.png — 982 × 356 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image.

Salisbury_51.png — 854 × 1588 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image.

Salisbury_52.png — 992 × 404 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image.

Salisbury_53.png — 1156 × 136 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image.

Weech_pdf110.png — 858 × 1356 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image.

Weech_pdf612.png — 858 × 1356 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image.

Salisbury 50 shows the heading and first names on p.109; 51 shows p.110; 52 supplies the continuation on p.111; 53 is a narrow duplicate of the 1610 notice. The full State Papers page images supply the 1604 and 1610 notices with page and date context. Source files are retained unchanged with hashes.

Salisbury_50.png — 982 × 356 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image. Salisbury_51.png — 854 × 1588 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image. Salisbury_52.png — 992 × 404 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image. Salisbury_53.png — 1156 × 136 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image. Weech_pdf110.png — 858 × 1356 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image. Weech_pdf612.png — 858 × 1356 pixels. Printed page image, not an original manuscript image. Salisbury 50 shows the heading and first names on p.109; 51 shows p.110; 52 supplies the continuation on p.111; 53 is a narrow duplicate of the 1610 notice. The full State Papers page images supply the 1604 and 1610 notices with page and date context. Source files are retained unchanged with hashes.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 · context

Context: 1 Calendar heading and editorial summary

Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067

Source layer: Modern calendar editorial prose, checked against user screenshots; not the manuscript’s wording

Date metadata: Undated

Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067 Source layer: Modern calendar editorial prose, checked against user screenshots; not the manuscript’s wording Date metadata: Undated

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 51, 52, 53 · context

Christian and Thomas Weech to the Earl of Salisbury. [1606 or before].—Sir Henry Gawdy, Sir Edward Cleer, Sir William Paston, Sir Miles Corbett, Sir Philip Woodhouse, Sir Thomas Barney, Dr Redmayne, William Yelverton, Richard Jenkinson, John Burm, Thomas Richardson, Bartholomew Cotton, Justices of the Peace in Norfolk, have written on behalf of Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, who is in prison under sentence of death for witchcraft. The King accordingly granted his letters of pardon to her, but although these have passed the privy seal, they have been stayed from passing the Great Seal by the sinister means of her enemies, and she is still in prison to the great grief of her husband. The Justices of the Peace have again sent a letter to the Lord Chancellor in her favour, to effect her pardon according to the King's intent, and petitioners ask Salisbury and others of the Privy Council to lend their support to this appeal for her release.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 1067.)

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067 · context

Context: 2 Copied appeal on the reverse

Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067

Source layer: Contemporary English wording reproduced in a printed calendar; original manuscript not inspected

Date metadata: Undated

Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067 Source layer: Contemporary English wording reproduced in a printed calendar; original manuscript not inspected Date metadata: Undated

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 63, 64, 65 · context

The true coppie of the honorable sute of diverse worshippfull knights and Justices of his Maᵗˢ peace for the county of Norfolk made on the behalfe of Christian Weeche, unto the right honorable Thomas, Lorde Ellismere, Lorde Chauncellor of England. Yt maye please your Lordshippe to be advertized at the requests and in the behalfe of a poore distressed gent, Thomas Weeche, whose wife and onely staye and guide, Christian Weeche, beinge in prison condempned to die for witchcrafte, the poore gent, by meanes of foremer advertisements geven by us under our handes became an humble suter unto the Kings Maᵗⁱᵉ for her pardon, who of his speciall grace graunted the same, and it passed under his previe seale, but before it coulde passe the great Seale his and her adversaries understandinge therof used means, as we are inforemed, to stay the same alledginge amongest many other allegations that the woman and her facte was utterly unknowne unto us; which is not soe. For her facte, we weare at her triall and harde suche testimonie and proofes as were then alledged against her, beeinge in our judgments to weake to have condempned her. And for our knowledge of the woeman, we knowe her to be a gentlewoman verie aunciently decended, and for the greatest parte of her life to have lived without any maner of note or suspition of exercizinge of the devilishe and detestable practize of witchcrafte untill some small time before her triall. And howsoever yt pleased God in his secret wisedome to sufer her to be founde guiltie and receive judgement for the facte, yet we are fully perswaded that she is cleare of that wherof she nowe remaine condempned. All which we have thought fittinge to advertize your Lordshippe of in respect of her owne modest religious and discreet cariage ever since her condempnation, and also to become humble suters to your Lordshippe that, seeinge it hathe pleased his moste excellent Maᵗⁱᵉ of his infinite goodnes and mercie to graunt her his pardon, which hathe passed the privie seale and staies onelye for the greate seale, that yt would please your Lordshippe, in whose power it onely rest, to yeelde your honorable favour soe farre to the said Thomas Weeche and his sayd wife as to suffer her said pardon to passe the great seale wherbye she may be delivered of her longe imprisonment which now by the space of three yeares she hathe induered to her housebonds and her great hinderaunce, yf not thier utter undoeinge. And so leave the same unto your honores grave consideration to doe therin as the poore gentlemans distressed estate and his wiffes may moove.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067 · context

Context: 3 Relevant calendar footnotes

Owen 1976 p.109 note attached to Edward Cleer and p.110 pardon footnote

Source layer: Modern editorial apparatus, not contemporary testimony

Date metadata: Editorial notes

Owen 1976 p.109 note attached to Edward Cleer and p.110 pardon footnote Source layer: Modern editorial apparatus, not contemporary testimony Date metadata: Editorial notes

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 73, 74, 75 · context

Edward Cleer: “Died in 1606.” “She was granted a pardon on April 16, 1604. [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 96.]”

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 p.109 note attached to Edward Cleer and p.110 pardon footnote · context

Context: 4 Calendared pardon grant of 1604

Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice

Source layer: Nineteenth century calendar abstract checked against saved page image

Date metadata: 1604-04-16

Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice Source layer: Nineteenth century calendar abstract checked against saved page image Date metadata: 1604-04-16

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 84, 85, 86 · context

Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. [April 14 and 16. Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice · context

Context: 5 Calendared pardon grant naming Mary Freeston

Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice

Source layer: Nineteenth century calendar abstract checked against saved page image

Date metadata: 1610-04-03

Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice Source layer: Nineteenth century calendar abstract checked against saved page image Date metadata: 1610-04-03

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 94, 95, 96 · context

Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft. [Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice · context

Comparison of sources: 4 Secondary discussion

These later accounts help trace how the story has been told. Ashton and Notestein rely on the calendars and do not supply independent trial evidence. Their inferences are kept out of the primary chronology. Historical public-domain passages are reproduced below; the modern copyrighted chapter is represented by a short quotation and a clearly bounded public-summary discussion.

These later accounts help trace how the story has been told. Ashton and Notestein rely on the calendars and do not supply independent trial evidence. Their inferences are kept out of the primary chronology. Historical public-domain passages are reproduced below; the modern copyrighted chapter is represented by a short quotation and a clearly bounded public-summary discussion.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 104 · context

Context: Notestein on the two pardon notices

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/31511

Quoted passage: 1610. Norfolk. Christian[a] Weech, pardoned in 1604, now again pardoned. _Ibid._, 96, 598. Was this the Christiana Weekes of Cleves Pepper, Wilts, who in 1651 and 1654 was again and again accused of telling where lost goods were? See _Hist. MSS. Comm. Reports, Various_, I, 120.

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/31511 Quoted passage: 1610. Norfolk. Christian[a] Weech, pardoned in 1604, now again pardoned. _Ibid._, 96, 598. Was this the Christiana Weekes of Cleves Pepper, Wilts, who in 1651 and 1654 was again and again accused of telling where lost goods were? See _Hist. MSS. Comm. Reports, Various_, I, 120.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 107, 108 · context

1610. Norfolk. Christian[a] Weech, pardoned in 1604, now again pardoned. _Ibid._, 96, 598. Was this the Christiana Weekes of Cleves Pepper, Wilts, who in 1651 and 1654 was again and again accused of telling where lost goods were? See _Hist. MSS. Comm. Reports, Various_, I, 120.

Context: Ashton and the claim of a renewed accusation

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44412

Quoted passage: 1604. 16 Ap. Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. She was one of the extremely fortunate, for she was again accused of this crime. 1610. 3 Ap. Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft.

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44412 Quoted passage: 1604. 16 Ap. Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. She was one of the extremely fortunate, for she was again accused of this crime. 1610. 3 Ap. Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 112, 113 · context

1604. 16 Ap. Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. She was one of the extremely fortunate, for she was again accused of this crime. 1610. 3 Ap. Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft.

Context: Gaskill on neighbourliness and witchcraft

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/remaking-english-society/witchcraft-and-neighbourliness-in-early-modern-england/CF966482B8986F43CB507C338D1F8988

Quoted passage: It is a point of entry, not an end in itself.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/remaking-english-society/witchcraft-and-neighbourliness-in-early-modern-england/CF966482B8986F43CB507C338D1F8988 Quoted passage: It is a point of entry, not an end in itself.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 117, 118 · context

It is a point of entry, not an end in itself.

Context: 5 People and roles

The first six identities cover the central family, named victim, recipients and royal authority. The remaining twelve are named in the calendar editor’s list of Norfolk justices. A name in that list does not certify an original signature or physical presence at the trial.

The first six identities cover the central family, named victim, recipients and royal authority. The remaining twelve are named in the calendar editor’s list of Norfolk justices. A name in that list does not certify an original signature or physical presence at the trial.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 121 · context

Context: Christian Weech

Condemned for witchcraft and seeking completion of a pardon. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6.

Condemned for witchcraft and seeking completion of a pardon. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 123 · context

Context: Thomas Weech

Husband and petitioner seeking Christian’s pardon. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6.

Husband and petitioner seeking Christian’s pardon. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 125 · context

Context: Thomas, Lord Ellesmere

Lord Chancellor addressed in the copied appeal. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6.

Lord Chancellor addressed in the copied appeal. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 127 · context

Context: King James I

Royal authority is referred to in the appeal and pardon context. The existing James I label is retained for identity review; no personal attendance or independently documented intervention is asserted.

Royal authority is referred to in the appeal and pardon context. The existing James I label is retained for identity review; no personal attendance or independently documented intervention is asserted.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 129 · context

Context: Mary Freeston

Named in the offence covered by the 1610 pardon notice. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6.

Citations: Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice

Named in the offence covered by the 1610 pardon notice. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6. Citations: Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 131, 165 · context

Context: Earl of Salisbury

Recipient asked to support the request for Christian’s release. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6.

Citations: Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067

Recipient asked to support the request for Christian’s release. See the complete narrative and citations in section 6. Citations: Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 133, 171 · context

Context: The twelve named justices

Sir Henry Gawdy; Sir Edward Cleer; Sir William Paston; Sir Miles Corbett; Sir Philip Woodhouse; Sir Thomas Barney; Dr Redmayne; William Yelverton; Richard Jenkinson; John Burm; Thomas Richardson; Bartholomew Cotton.

Source: Owen pp.109–110, calendar heading and editorial summary of P.1067, reproduced in section 3. These names are retained individually in the master and WEME people list. Dr Redmayne has no verified forename here; John Burm retains the printed spelling. The editor identifies the group as justices, but their individual signatures and attendance remain unverified. No repeated person assertion is needed to duplicate the same collective source claim twelve times.

Sir Henry Gawdy; Sir Edward Cleer; Sir William Paston; Sir Miles Corbett; Sir Philip Woodhouse; Sir Thomas Barney; Dr Redmayne; William Yelverton; Richard Jenkinson; John Burm; Thomas Richardson; Bartholomew Cotton. Source: Owen pp.109–110, calendar heading and editorial summary of P.1067, reproduced in section 3. These names are retained individually in the master and WEME people list. Dr Redmayne has no verified forename here; John Burm retains the printed spelling. The editor identifies the group as justices, but their individual signatures and attendance remain unverified. No repeated person assertion is needed to duplicate the same collective source claim twelve times.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 135, 136 · context

Context: Christian Weeche

Citations: Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067; Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice; Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice

Citations: Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067; Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice; Green 1857 p.598; under 3 April 1610; unnumbered notice

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 159 · context

Context: Thomas Weeche

Citations: Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067; Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067; Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice

Citations: Owen 1976 pp.109–110; heading and editorial summary; P.1067; Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067; Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 162 · context

Context: Thomas, Lorde Ellismere

Citations: Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067

Citations: Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 168 · context

Context: Original Hatfield witness

P.1067 is the printed locator. Neither recto nor reverse manuscript image has been inspected. Handwriting, endorsements, signatures and original lineation remain unverified.

P.1067 is the printed locator. Neither recto nor reverse manuscript image has been inspected. Handwriting, endorsements, signatures and original lineation remain unverified.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 174 · context

Context: Pardon instruments

Original 1604 and 1610 docquets and any warrants or enrolled patents remain uninspected. Sealing and release cannot be certified.

Original 1604 and 1610 docquets and any warrants or enrolled patents remain uninspected. Sealing and release cannot be certified.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 176 · context

Context: Trial and chronology

Trial court, exact conviction date, underlying indictment and relationship of the two pardon notices remain unknown.

Trial court, exact conviction date, underlying indictment and relationship of the two pardon notices remain unknown.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 178 · context

Context: Identities

The named justices are retained as source-associated people; individual attendance at trial is not separately proved. Dr Redmayne has no verified forename here. John Burm retains the printed spelling. No automatic database identity matching is requested.

The named justices are retained as source-associated people; individual attendance at trial is not separately proved. Dr Redmayne has no verified forename here. John Burm retains the printed spelling. No automatic database identity matching is requested.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 180 · context

Comparison of sources: Secondary leads

Gaskill pp.224–225 and note 77 would be useful. Mendham, additional manuscript leads and the proposed link to Christiana Weekes remain unverified.

Gaskill pp.224–225 and note 77 would be useful. Mendham, additional manuscript leads and the proposed link to Christiana Weekes remain unverified.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 182 · context

Context: Precise evidence that would advance the edition

The most useful addition is an uncropped image of both sides of Hatfield P.1067, including endorsements and signatures, with its current repository catalogue description. Next are the original docquets behind Green pp.96 and 598 and any warrants or enrolled patents: these could distinguish a grant from completed sealing. Gaskill pp.224–225 including note 77 would let the reported locality and archival leads be checked. These files would improve the evidence; they are not required to use this available-source review edition.

No enquiry has been sent. Any archive request should quote P.1067 as the printed locator pending repository confirmation, and quote the exact calendar date and page for each docquet rather than inventing a shelfmark.

The most useful addition is an uncropped image of both sides of Hatfield P.1067, including endorsements and signatures, with its current repository catalogue description. Next are the original docquets behind Green pp.96 and 598 and any warrants or enrolled patents: these could distinguish a grant from completed sealing. Gaskill pp.224–225 including note 77 would let the reported locality and archival leads be checked. These files would improve the evidence; they are not required to use this available-source review edition. No enquiry has been sent. Any archive request should quote P.1067 as the printed locator pending repository confirmation, and quote the exact calendar date and page for each docquet rather than inventing a shelfmark.

Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 186, 187 · context

Comparison of sources: Full references for abbreviated passage labels

The passage labels are abbreviated to meet the importer’s 200-character limit. Full references follow.

ps-secondary-notestein_weech: Wallace Notestein, A History of Witchcraft in England from 1558 to 1718 (Washington, American Historical Association, 1911), Appendix C, chronological entry for 1610, printed p.397; accessible Gutenberg text.

ps-secondary-ashton_weech: John Ashton, The Devil in Britain and America (London, Ward and Downey, 1896), chapter XX, pardon examples, printed p.274 as identified in the earlier dossier; text inspected in the Gutenberg edition, original page image not newly checked.

ps-secondary-gaskill: Malcolm Gaskill, “Witchcraft and Neighbourliness in Early Modern England,” in Steve Hindle, Alexandra Shepard and John Walter, eds., Remaking English Society Social Relations and Social Change in Early Modern England (Woodbridge, Boydell, 2013), 211–232. Cambridge Core publisher chapter record.

1610. Norfolk. Christian[a] Weech, pardoned in 1604, now again pardoned. _Ibid._, 96, 598. Was this the Christiana Weekes of Cleves Pepper, Wilts, who in 1651 and 1654 was again and again accused of telling where lost goods were? See _Hist. MSS. Comm. Reports, Various_, I, 120.

1604. 16 Ap. Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. She was one of the extremely fortunate, for she was again accused of this crime. 1610. 3 Ap. Grant to Christian Weech of pardon for the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft.

It is a point of entry, not an end in itself.

Editorial note: Source supported locations

Location projection revision: Norfolk: County association in the1604 calendar and justices’ appeal. No prison, trial town or house is identified by this link. Existing source texts and English renderings are unchanged. Geographic association is not proof of physical attendance, a magic location or statutory jurisdiction.

A grant of pardon for witchcraft to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, of Norfolk. The notice appears under 16 April 1604 and refers to docquets of 14 and 16 April.

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice

Grant to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech, co. Norfolk, of pardon for witchcraft. [April 14 and 16. Docquet.]

Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604, Green 1857 p.96; under 16 April 1604; unnumbered notice

The true copy of the honourable appeal of several knights and justices of his Majesty’s peace for Norfolk, made on Christian Weech’s behalf to Thomas, Lord Ellesmere, Lord Chancellor of England. May your Lordship be informed, at the request and on behalf of the distressed gentleman Thomas Weech, that his wife Christian, his only support and guide, is in prison condemned to die for witchcraft. Through earlier representations made under our hands, he petitioned the King for her pardon. The King granted it by special grace and it passed the Privy Seal. Before it could pass the Great Seal, however, their adversaries learned of it and, as we are informed, obtained a stay by alleging, among other things, that neither the woman nor her offence was known to us. This is untrue. We were at her trial and heard the testimony and proofs against her, which in our judgment were too weak to condemn her. We know her as a gentlewoman of ancient descent who lived most of her life without suspicion of witchcraft until shortly before her trial. Although God in his secret wisdom permitted her to be found guilty and sentenced, we are fully persuaded she is innocent of the offence for which she remains condemned. We inform your Lordship of this in view of her modest, religious and discreet conduct since condemnation. Since the King in his goodness and mercy has granted her pardon, which has passed the Privy Seal and awaits only the Great Seal, we ask you, in whose power the matter rests, to favour Thomas and his wife by allowing it to pass. She may then be delivered from the long imprisonment she has endured for three years, to their great financial harm, if not their utter ruin. We leave the matter to your considered judgment, as their distressed condition may move you.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067

The true coppie of the honorable sute of diverse worshippfull knights and Justices of his Maᵗˢ peace for the county of Norfolk made on the behalfe of Christian Weeche, unto the right honorable Thomas, Lorde Ellismere, Lorde Chauncellor of England. Yt maye please your Lordshippe to be advertized at the requests and in the behalfe of a poore distressed gent, Thomas Weeche, whose wife and onely staye and guide, Christian Weeche, beinge in prison condempned to die for witchcrafte, the poore gent, by meanes of foremer advertisements geven by us under our handes became an humble suter unto the Kings Maᵗⁱᵉ for her pardon, who of his speciall grace graunted the same, and it passed under his previe seale, but before it coulde passe the great Seale his and her adversaries understandinge therof used means, as we are inforemed, to stay the same alledginge amongest many other allegations that the woman and her facte was utterly unknowne unto us; which is not soe. For her facte, we weare at her triall and harde suche testimonie and proofes as were then alledged against her, beeinge in our judgments to weake to have condempned her. And for our knowledge of the woeman, we knowe her to be a gentlewoman verie aunciently decended, and for the greatest parte of her life to have lived without any maner of note or suspition of exercizinge of the devilishe and detestable practize of witchcrafte untill some small time before her triall. And howsoever yt pleased God in his secret wisedome to sufer her to be founde guiltie and receive judgement for the facte, yet we are fully perswaded that she is cleare of that wherof she nowe remaine condempned. All which we have thought fittinge to advertize your Lordshippe of in respect of her owne modest religious and discreet cariage ever since her condempnation, and also to become humble suters to your Lordshippe that, seeinge it hathe pleased his moste excellent Maᵗⁱᵉ of his infinite goodnes and mercie to graunt her his pardon, which hathe passed the privie seale and staies onelye for the greate seale, that yt would please your Lordshippe, in whose power it onely rest, to yeelde your honorable favour soe farre to the said Thomas Weeche and his sayd wife as to suffer her said pardon to passe the great seale wherbye she may be delivered of her longe imprisonment which now by the space of three yeares she hathe induered to her housebonds and her great hinderaunce, yf not thier utter undoeinge. And so leave the same unto your honores grave consideration to doe therin as the poore gentlemans distressed estate and his wiffes may moove.

G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067, Owen 1976 pp.110–111; copied contemporary appeal on reverse; P.1067

Reading register: Full reading edition held on the source record

The full English-first reading-edition body is supplied in the linked edition source’s full_text field. Original texts, English renderings, citations, uncertainty and source-layer distinctions are retained. This source is the project reading edition, not a newly recovered primary manuscript. Database storage does not by itself certify publication.

Weech · reading edition, Witching reading edition; prepared 2026-10-25; edition version 1.0; reading identifier edition-weech. · context

People

Bartholomew Cotton: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Christian Weech: Condemned for witchcraft and seeking completion of a pardon
Dr Redmayne: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Earl of Salisbury: Recipient asked to support the request for Christian’s release
John Burm: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
King James I: The son of Mary Queen of Scots, known as James VI, King of Scotland (1567), and James I, King of England, Scotland and Ireland (1603). By the time James VI became James I of England, he was avidly interested in using scientific principles to prove or disprove witchcraft charges. James' interest in the efficacy of witches appears to have begun during the storms he encountered at sea while he sailed back from Denmark with his 15 year old wife Queen Anne. The captain of the ship blamed witches for the bad weather. James personally interrogated witches from the town of Trenton, including Gellis Duncane, Agnes Sampson (of Paddignton), Agnes Tompson (of Edinbrough), and Dr. Fian (an account featured in Newes From Scotland (1591)) Soon after, he wrote _Dmonologie_ (1597) while still in Scotland, a text which promoted the belief that female witches were the Devils students and servants; the Devil gave witches image magic, medicinal magic, and poisons with which to harm their enemies. In the Act of 1604, James I of England expanded the definition of witchcraft to include more specific crimes, and a more European understanding of maleficium; causing personal injury, the conjuration of spirits, and the use of corpses in magic became capital offenses. This new Act also divided the crime, creating first-degree and second-degree witchcraft. It is hard to know how much influence _Dmonologie_ had, although it was reprinted after James English coronation (1603), or how much influence the 1604 Witchcraft Act had. It would appear that once in print, these texts took on a life of their own, quite apart from the wishes of the King who invoked them. James' own interest in witchcraft soon faded; he would be key in exposing fraudulent witchcraft charges asserted by Anne Gunter in 1605, John Smith in 1616, and Katherine Malpas in 1621. The King also allegedly held somewhat of a mischievous side, encouraging an "imposture" in his court to call out the name of the knight Sir John, in order to get Sir John "to stamp with madness," and find himself unable to ever begin discourse with the King due to constant interruption.
Mary Freeston: Named in the offence covered by the 1610 pardon notice
Richard Jenkinson: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Sir Edward Cleer: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Sir Henry Gawdy: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Sir Miles Corbett: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Sir Philip Woodhouse: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Sir Thomas Barney: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Sir William Paston: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Thomas Richardson: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.
Thomas Weech: Husband and petitioner seeking Christian’s pardon
Thomas, Lord Ellesmere: Lord Chancellor addressed in the copied appeal
William Yelverton: Named among the Norfolk justices in the printed calendar summary; individual signature and attendance are not verified.

Events

The copied justices’ appeal reports Christian Weech’s conviction and sentence of death for witchcraft, while arguing that the evidence was too weak.
Christian and Thomas Weech petition Salisbury for support as Norfolk justices appeal to Lord Chancellor Ellesmere to let Christian’s pardon pass the Great Seal. Their appeal alleges obstruction by adversaries, weak trial evidence and three years of costly imprisonment.
1604, April 16: A calendar notice records a grant of pardon for witchcraft to Christian, wife of Thomas Weech of Norfolk, under 16 April 1604.
1610, April 3: A calendar notice records a pardon grant to Christian Weech for the offence described as the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft, on 3 April 1610. The offence is described as the murder of Mary Freeston by witchcraft. Bewitchment and Murder index that attributed legal description, not a new incident, trial or finding of magical causation. (a documentary entry)

Sources

Wallace Notestein, A History of Witchcraft in England from 1558 to 1718, Washington, D.C.: The American Historical Association, 1911 (later scholarship)
John Ashton, Ashton 1896, London: Ward and Downey, 1896, John Ashton, The Devil in Britain and America (London, Ward and Downey, 1896), chapter XX, pardon examples, p.274 as recorded in the earlier dossier; Gutenberg text inspected, original page image not newly checked. (scholarship) (later scholarship)
G. Dyfnallt Owen, Salisbury MSS 24, vol. 24, London: HMSO, 1976, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, P. 1067 (calendar)
Mary Anne Everett Green, CSPD James I, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1857, Docquets 14 and 16 April 1604 (calendar)
Malcolm Gaskill, Gaskill 2013, Woodbridge: Boydell, 2013, Malcolm Gaskill, “Witchcraft and Neighbourliness in Early Modern England,” in Steve Hindle, Alexandra Shepard and John Walter, eds., Remaking English Society Social Relations and Social Change in Early Modern England (Woodbridge, Boydell, 2013), 211–232. Cambridge Core publisher chapter record. (scholarship) (later scholarship)
Christian Weech — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Weech_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx (edition)
Weech · reading edition, Witching reading edition; prepared 2026-10-25; edition version 1.0; reading identifier edition-weech. (edition)

Credit

Witches in Early Modern England research edition. Human editorial and review credits await confirmation.