Margaret Reed and Margaret Howhett

Margaret Reed, a widow, brought a defamation cause against Margaret Howhett concerning the allegation that she was a horse goodmother water witch. The court recorded the female defendant’s appearance and a direction for proof; the abbreviated denial remains uncertain.

The court later listed Reed against Howhett and a reciprocal Howhett against Reed proceeding. Their short procedural notations remain uncertain. The reciprocal listing gives no cause, so no further witchcraft allegation or judgment is inferred.

Scope

Three entries, three explicitly partial date-heading extracts and Raine’s printed abstract. Full research commentary, source comparisons and evidence gaps from the authoritative edition accompany the source passages.

Editorial conventions

Square brackets mark expansions, missing text or editorial descriptions; question marks mark tentative readings. Original text and English readings remain separate.

Notes on the edition

Comparison of sources: Defamation entry on folio 144 verso — editorial note

Whole bounded entry represented; denial expansion and return notation provisional; water is interlinear. This is a clerk’s compressed allegation, not a witness deposition. For proof does not establish that proof was supplied.

Margaret Reed, widow, against Margaret Howhett. In a defamation cause, namely that she was a horse goodmother water witch. The female defendant appeared and [denies?]. For proof. [Return notation unresolved.]

Margaret Reed and Margaret Howhett court acts, Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, ff.144v,145v,146r; governing headings ff.143r,145r,145v. Native saved photographs rechecked 25 October 2026., Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.144v · context

[Party column] margaret Red vid[ua] con[tra] margaret howhett [Main entry] in ca[us]a diffamac[ionis] viz yt sh[e] was a horse goodmother [interlinear insertion: water] wych comp[ar]uit rea et neg[at?] ad proband[um] [return notation unresolved]

Comparison of sources: Reed against Howhett on folio 145 verso — editorial note

Whole bounded entry; short notation unresolved

Margaret Reed, widow, against Margaret Howhett. [Let it stand over?]

margaret Red vid[ua] con[tra] margaret howhett st[et?]

Comparison of sources: Reciprocal listing on folio 146 recto — editorial note

Whole bounded reciprocal listing; cause and notation unresolved; the reciprocal cause is unspecified and does not establish a second witchcraft allegation.

Margaret Howhett against Margaret Reed, widow. [Let it stand over?]

margaret howhett con[tra] margaret Red vid[ua] [short notation: st[et?]]

Comparison of sources: January governing date extract — editorial note

Date extract only, not the complete court heading. Ellipses mark omitted wording. Normalisation changes the year only, not day and month to Gregorian equivalents.

Acts of the court, 31 January 1569.

Act[a] Cur[ie] xxxjº Januarij 1569º

Comparison of sources: Next court date extract — editorial note

Date extract only, not the complete court heading. Ellipses mark omitted wording. Normalisation changes the year only, not day and month to Gregorian equivalents.

Acts of the court […] 1 February in the year 1569.

Act[a] Cur[ie] […] primo ffeb[ruarij] aº 1569º

Comparison of sources: February governing date extract — editorial note

Date extract only, not the complete court heading. Ellipses mark omitted wording. Normalisation changes the year only, not day and month to Gregorian equivalents.

Tuesday, 21 February […] in the year of the Lord 1569.

die martis xxjº ffeb[ruarij] […] aº d[omi]ni 1569º

Comparison of sources: Complete printed abstract in Raine — editorial note

Whole printed abstract, not a complete manuscript transcription. Printed line-break hyphen in Howhett is joined. No date is printed in CXX itself.

120. Defamation. Margaret Reed against Margaret Howhett, in a defamation cause, namely that she was a horse goodmother water witch. [B]

James Raine, James Raine, Depositions and Other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the Courts of Durham, London: J. B. Nichols and Son, 1845, James Raine, ed., Depositions and Other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the Courts of Durham, Extending from 1311 to the Reign of Elizabeth, Surtees Society 21 (London: J. B. Nichols and Son, 1845), p.91, no.CXX., James Raine, ed., Depositions and Other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the Courts of Durham, Extending from 1311 to the Reign of Elizabeth, Surtees Society 21 (London: J. B. Nichols and Son, 1845)… · context

CXX. Defamatio. Margaret Reed against Margaret Howhett, in causa diff. viz. that she was a horse goodmother water wych. [B]

Comparison of sources: Tenno

Tenno places the case in 1566–1567 and cites Raine p.91 in note 55. The located original sequence instead places these acts in January and February 1569/70. Her direction of the proceeding, Reed against Howhett, agrees with the original. Her discussion cautions against inferring witch beliefs from insulting adjectives. The present record is an act-book entry, rather than the witness deposition implied by her terminology. The source of her earlier date has not been established. Her interpretation supplies context, not independent testimony about either woman.

illustrations of the gravity of insult

Siiri Tenno, Tenno 2009, Durham University, 2009, Siiri Tenno, Religious Deviance in the Elizabethan Diocese of Durham, MA by research thesis, Durham University, Department of Theology and Religion, September 2009, printed p.114, n.55 (PDF page 115)., Siiri Tenno, Religious Deviance in the Elizabethan Diocese of Durham, MA by research thesis, Durham University, Department of Theology and Religion, September 2009, printed p.114, n.55 (PDF page 115). · context

Comparison of sources: Kittredge

Kittredge cites Raine p.91 but reverses the parties’ roles in the witchcraft defamation allegation. Folio 144v identifies Reed as the first party against Howhett. The reciprocal listing on f.146r gives no cause and does not corroborate Kittredge’s direction of the alleged witchcraft insult. His approximate year also does not replace the original date headings. This is a derivative historical interpretation, not a second independent account of the words.

about 1569 Margaret Reed is charged with calling Margaret Howhett “a horse goodmother water wych”

George Lyman Kittredge, Kittredge 1907, American Antiquarian Society, 1907, George Lyman Kittredge, Notes on Witchcraft, Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society 18 (1907), p.191, n.121; scan PDF page 44., George Lyman Kittredge, Notes on Witchcraft, Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society 18 (1907), p.191, n.121; scan PDF page 44. · context

Comparison of sources: Supported findings

Margaret Red, normalised here as Margaret Reed, is identified as a widow. On f.144v she proceeds against Margaret Howhett in a defamation cause concerning the words horse goodmother water wych. The party order supports Reed as complainant and Howhett as defendant. Neither woman’s age, residence, family nor a supernatural act is established.

The clerk combines Latin procedural wording with English alleged defamatory words. Water is an insertion above the line. The female defendant appeared; the proposed denial expansion remains tentative. Ad probandum means for proof, recording a procedural direction rather than proof actually given. The return notation remains unresolved.

The governing 31 January heading on f.143r is followed by the f.144v entry, then a new 1 February heading on f.145r. The act sequence normalises January 1569 as January 1569/70, or 1570. On ff.145v–146r the 21 February heading governs Reed against Howhett and the reciprocal Howhett against Reed listing. These are court-record dates, not dates when the words were allegedly spoken.

The short February notations are provisionally read stet, let it stand over. Neither supplies a verdict. The reciprocal listing states no cause; it does not establish that Reed called Howhett a witch. No witnesses, adjudication, punishment, costs or final outcome are securely identified in the represented entries.

Raine’s p.91 abstract preserves the parties and epithet but omits widowhood, the interlinear placement of water, the appearance and proof wording, the unresolved return sign and the later listings. The current Durham catalogue explicitly maps Raine’s siglum B to act book DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2. This confirms the source chain without treating the abstract as the whole manuscript.

The compound insult is preserved without a speculative gloss. It does not establish horse injury, a familiar, shape changing, a baptismal incident or a swimming test. The named parties are not merged with Katherine Reed at f.155r or Thomas Reed in a later entry. Similar surnames do not establish identity or kinship.

CXX. Defamatio. Margaret Reed against Margaret Howhett, in causa diff. viz. that she was a horse goodmother water wych. [B]

[Party column] margaret Red vid[ua] con[tra] margaret howhett [Main entry] in ca[us]a diffamac[ionis] viz yt sh[e] was a horse goodmother [interlinear insertion: water] wych comp[ar]uit rea et neg[at?] ad proband[um] [return notation unresolved]

margaret Red vid[ua] con[tra] margaret howhett st[et?]

margaret howhett con[tra] margaret Red vid[ua] [short notation: st[et?]]

Act[a] Cur[ie] xxxjº Januarij 1569º

Act[a] Cur[ie] […] primo ffeb[ruarij] aº 1569º

die martis xxjº ffeb[ruarij] […] aº d[omi]ni 1569º

Context: About this case and its sources

Reference: Durham University Library, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, ff.144v,145v,146r; date extracts ff.143r,145r,145v
Source languages: Latin and English
Court: Durham ecclesiastical court records
Case: Defamation; a reciprocal listing is also represented
Parties: Margaret Reed or Red, described as a widow; Margaret Howhett
Record dates: January–February 1569/70; headings retain 1569 as written, with the year beginning on 25 March
Coverage: Three case entries, three partial date headings and Raine’s printed abstract
Outcome: Not established; procedural signs and a denial contraction remain unresolved
Texts in this edition: Three entries, three explicitly partial date-heading extracts and Raine’s printed abstract.
Text status: Manuscript reading with unresolved procedural signs.
Edition: 25 October 2026 · version 1.0
How to cite: Witches in Early Modern England, Margaret Reed and Margaret Howhett, reading edition, 25 October 2026, section title and source folio or page.

CXX. Defamatio. Margaret Reed against Margaret Howhett, in causa diff. viz. that she was a horse goodmother water wych. [B]

[Party column] margaret Red vid[ua] con[tra] margaret howhett [Main entry] in ca[us]a diffamac[ionis] viz yt sh[e] was a horse goodmother [interlinear insertion: water] wych comp[ar]uit rea et neg[at?] ad proband[um] [return notation unresolved]

margaret Red vid[ua] con[tra] margaret howhett st[et?]

margaret howhett con[tra] margaret Red vid[ua] [short notation: st[et?]]

Act[a] Cur[ie] xxxjº Januarij 1569º

Act[a] Cur[ie] […] primo ffeb[ruarij] aº 1569º

die martis xxjº ffeb[ruarij] […] aº d[omi]ni 1569º

Comparison of sources: Source identification and image quality

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, Northumberland commissary Consistory court act book, November 1561–July 1570. The current catalogue maps Raine’s B siglum to this volume and identifies digitised images. Catalogue retrieved 25 October 2026: https://n2t.durham.ac.uk/ark:/32150/s1jw827b67m.xml#DDR-EJ-CCA-3-2

The current IIIF manifest has 191 canvas positions. Saved native assemblies of ff.144v–145r and 145v–146r measure 5407 by 3997 pixels, matching the manifest. Crops retain native source pixels. The short entries are substantially legible, while the denial contraction, return sign and February notations remain uncertain even at this resolution. Larger interpolation would not supply missing evidence. The photographs suffice for this bounded edition; expert collation could resolve signs, while an outcome requires additional records.

Manifest: https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/manifests/trifle/32150/t1/mz/p3/t1mzp38wc87m/manifest. Attribution: Durham University Library. Manifest rights: Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivatives 4.0. Source copies remain unchanged; crops and tile assemblies are identified as viewing derivatives.

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, Northumberland commissary Consistory court act book, November 1561–July 1570. The current catalogue maps Raine’s B siglum to this volume and identifies digitised images. Catalogue retrieved 25 October 2026: https://n2t.durham.ac.uk/ark:/32150/s1jw827b67m.xml#DDR-EJ-CCA-3-2 The current IIIF manifest has 191 canvas positions. Saved native assemblies of ff.144v–145r and 145v–146r measure 5407 by 3997 pixels, matching the manifest. Crops retain native source pixels. The short entries are substantially legible, while the denial contraction, return sign and February notations remain uncertain even at this resolution. Larger interpolation would not supply missing evidence. The photographs suffice for this bounded edition; expert collation could resolve signs, while an outcome requires additional records. Manifest: https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/manifests/trifle/32150/t1/mz/p3/t1mzp38wc87m/manifest. Attribution: Durham University Library. Manifest rights: Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivatives 4.0. Source copies remain unchanged; crops and tile assemblies are identified as viewing derivatives.

Margaret Reed and Margaret Howhett — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Reed_Howhett_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx, Authoritative Word edition; paragraph indices 23, 24, 25 · context

Context: 2 Original entries and complete modern English

Square brackets expand contractions or label editorial observations; a question mark marks a tentative reading. Spelling and party order are retained. Layout is represented by party-column and main-entry labels, not a facsimile. No unreadable notation is silently omitted.

Square brackets expand contractions or label editorial observations; a question mark marks a tentative reading. Spelling and party order are retained. Layout is represented by party-column and main-entry labels, not a facsimile. No unreadable notation is silently omitted.

Context: Defamation entry on folio 144 verso

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.144v

https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m&canvas=t1td504rt414

Source layer: Original act book; expanded diplomatic reading checked against saved native colour photographs 25 October 2026

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.144v https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m&canvas=t1td504rt414 Source layer: Original act book; expanded diplomatic reading checked against saved native colour photographs 25 October 2026

[Party column] margaret Red vid[ua] con[tra] margaret howhett [Main entry] in ca[us]a diffamac[ionis] viz yt sh[e] was a horse goodmother [interlinear insertion: water] wych comp[ar]uit rea et neg[at?] ad proband[um] [return notation unresolved]

Context: Complete modern English reading

Editorial note: Whole bounded entry represented; denial expansion and return notation provisional; water is interlinear. This is a clerk’s compressed allegation, not a witness deposition. For proof does not establish that proof was supplied.

Editorial note: Whole bounded entry; short notation unresolved

Editorial note: Whole bounded reciprocal listing; cause and notation unresolved; the reciprocal cause is unspecified and does not establish a second witchcraft allegation.

Editorial note: Date extract only, not the complete court heading. Ellipses mark omitted wording. Normalisation changes the year only, not day and month to Gregorian equivalents.

Editorial note: Whole printed abstract, not a complete manuscript transcription. Printed line-break hyphen in Howhett is joined. No date is printed in CXX itself.

Raine omits widowhood, the interlinear insertion, the appearance and proof clause, the return sign and both later listings. His abstract retains the party direction and epithet. It cannot support treating the entry as a deposition or assigning the date of a neighbouring printed case to this one. The catalogue’s B mapping and the located original supply the archival identification.

Editorial note: Whole bounded entry represented; denial expansion and return notation provisional; water is interlinear. This is a clerk’s compressed allegation, not a witness deposition. For proof does not establish that proof was supplied. Editorial note: Whole bounded entry; short notation unresolved Editorial note: Whole bounded reciprocal listing; cause and notation unresolved; the reciprocal cause is unspecified and does not establish a second witchcraft allegation. Editorial note: Date extract only, not the complete court heading. Ellipses mark omitted wording. Normalisation changes the year only, not day and month to Gregorian equivalents. Editorial note: Date extract only, not the complete court heading. Ellipses mark omitted wording. Normalisation changes the year only, not day and month to Gregorian equivalents. Editorial note: Date extract only, not the complete court heading. Ellipses mark omitted wording. Normalisation changes the year only, not day and month to Gregorian equivalents. Editorial note: Whole printed abstract, not a complete manuscript transcription. Printed line-break hyphen in Howhett is joined. No date is printed in CXX itself. Raine omits widowhood, the interlinear insertion, the appearance and proof clause, the return sign and both later listings. His abstract retains the party direction and epithet. It cannot support treating the entry as a deposition or assigning the date of a neighbouring printed case to this one. The catalogue’s B mapping and the located original supply the archival identification.

Context: Reed against Howhett on folio 145 verso

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.145v

https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m&canvas=t1tgm80j359j

Source layer: Original act book; expanded diplomatic reading checked against saved native colour photographs 25 October 2026

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.145v https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m&canvas=t1tgm80j359j Source layer: Original act book; expanded diplomatic reading checked against saved native colour photographs 25 October 2026

margaret Red vid[ua] con[tra] margaret howhett st[et?]

Context: Reciprocal listing on folio 146 recto

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.146r

https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m&canvas=t1tgm80j359j

Source layer: Original act book; expanded diplomatic reading checked against saved native colour photographs 25 October 2026

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.146r https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m&canvas=t1tgm80j359j Source layer: Original act book; expanded diplomatic reading checked against saved native colour photographs 25 October 2026

margaret howhett con[tra] margaret Red vid[ua] [short notation: st[et?]]

Context: 3 Court headings and dates

The first entry lies after the 31 January heading and before the next 1 February heading. The later pair falls under 21 February on f.145v. The preceding late 1569 sequence supports English old-style year notation 1569/70. Normalising to 1570 changes the year only; these day and month dates are not converted to Gregorian equivalents. None dates the alleged insult itself.

The first entry lies after the 31 January heading and before the next 1 February heading. The later pair falls under 21 February on f.145v. The preceding late 1569 sequence supports English old-style year notation 1569/70. Normalising to 1570 changes the year only; these day and month dates are not converted to Gregorian equivalents. None dates the alleged insult itself.

Context: January governing date extract

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.143r

https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m

Source layer: Original act-book heading extract

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.143r https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m Source layer: Original act-book heading extract

Act[a] Cur[ie] xxxjº Januarij 1569º

Context: Next court date extract

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.145r

https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m

Source layer: Original act-book heading extract

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.145r https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m Source layer: Original act-book heading extract

Act[a] Cur[ie] […] primo ffeb[ruarij] aº 1569º

Context: February governing date extract

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.145v

https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m

Source layer: Original act-book heading extract

Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, f.145v https://iiif.durham.ac.uk/index.html?manifest=t1mzp38wc87m Source layer: Original act-book heading extract

die martis xxjº ffeb[ruarij] […] aº d[omi]ni 1569º

Context: Complete printed abstract in Raine

https://archive.org/details/depositionsother00churrich/page/91/mode/1up

Source layer: Nineteenth-century printed extract from the original record

https://archive.org/details/depositionsother00churrich/page/91/mode/1up Source layer: Nineteenth-century printed extract from the original record

CXX. Defamatio. Margaret Reed against Margaret Howhett, in causa diff. viz. that she was a horse goodmother water wych. [B]

Comparison of sources: Manuscript comparison

Party spelling: original Red; Raine Reed. The edition uses Reed as the normalised name and retains Red in transcription.

Insertion: original water above the line; Raine prints it continuously.

Procedure: original comp[ar]uit rea et neg[at?] ad proband[um]; absent from the printed abstract.

Later acts: the two February listings are additional original entries; they are not reproduced in Raine’s CXX.

Party spelling: original Red; Raine Reed. The edition uses Reed as the normalised name and retains Red in transcription. Insertion: original water above the line; Raine prints it continuously. Procedure: original comp[ar]uit rea et neg[at?] ad proband[um]; absent from the printed abstract. Later acts: the two February listings are additional original entries; they are not reproduced in Raine’s CXX.

Context: Tenno

https://etheses.durham.ac.uk/id/eprint/167/

Source quotation: “illustrations of the gravity of insult”.

https://etheses.durham.ac.uk/id/eprint/167/ Source quotation: “illustrations of the gravity of insult”.

illustrations of the gravity of insult

Context: Kittredge

https://americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44817238.pdf

Source quotation: “about 1569 Margaret Reed is charged with calling Margaret Howhett “a horse goodmother water wych””.

The source chain is explicit: Tenno p.114 n.55 and Kittredge p.191 n.121 each cite Raine p.91; Raine’s B maps through the current catalogue to DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2; the original entry is located at f.144v. These later works do not provide independent witnesses to the alleged words. Their disagreements are retained as historiographical discrepancies, not competing manuscript readings. The complete copyrighted thesis is not redistributed.

https://americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44817238.pdf Source quotation: “about 1569 Margaret Reed is charged with calling Margaret Howhett “a horse goodmother water wych””. The source chain is explicit: Tenno p.114 n.55 and Kittredge p.191 n.121 each cite Raine p.91; Raine’s B maps through the current catalogue to DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2; the original entry is located at f.144v. These later works do not provide independent witnesses to the alleged words. Their disagreements are retained as historiographical discrepancies, not competing manuscript readings. The complete copyrighted thesis is not redistributed.

about 1569 Margaret Reed is charged with calling Margaret Howhett “a horse goodmother water wych”

Context: 1570, January 31

Review note: Date heading at f.143r governs f.144v; year as written 1569, understood as 1569/70 from sequence. Denial expansion and return mark unresolved; no outcome asserted.

Review note: Date heading at f.143r governs f.144v; year as written 1569, understood as 1569/70 from sequence. Denial expansion and return mark unresolved; no outcome asserted.

Context: 1570, February 21

Review note: 21 February 1569/70, normalised year 1570, from the f.145v governing heading. Claim is a general review classification, not evidence of the reciprocal cause. Stet is tentative.

Review note: 21 February 1569/70, normalised year 1570, from the f.145v governing heading. Claim is a general review classification, not evidence of the reciprocal cause. Stet is tentative.

Context: Margaret Howhett

The review file uses the general existing event label Claim, without proposing a new vocabulary item. This does not classify the unspecified reciprocal cause as witchcraft. No location, kinship, witness, sentence or familiar is invented. Dates and source qualifications must be retained during human review; person matching and duplicate checks remain with the database editor. Local structural checks do not establish live importer acceptance.

The review file uses the general existing event label Claim, without proposing a new vocabulary item. This does not classify the unspecified reciprocal cause as witchcraft. No location, kinship, witness, sentence or familiar is invented. Dates and source qualifications must be retained during human review; person matching and duplicate checks remain with the database editor. Local structural checks do not establish live importer acceptance.

Context: neg[at?]

Tentative expansion of the abbreviated denial; retain question mark and do not make a certain admission or denial.

Tentative expansion of the abbreviated denial; retain question mark and do not make a certain admission or denial.

Context: Return notation on f.144v

Unresolved sign; no deadline or next hearing date inferred.

Unresolved sign; no deadline or next hearing date inferred.

Context: st[et?] on ff.145v and 146r

Tentative procedural reading; no dismissal or outcome inferred.

Tentative procedural reading; no dismissal or outcome inferred.

Context: Reciprocal cause

Not stated; no second witchcraft accusation created.

Not stated; no second witchcraft accusation created.

Context: Dates

Court heading dates, English old-style year normalised only; alleged speech dates unknown.

Court heading dates, English old-style year normalised only; alleged speech dates unknown.

Context: Meaning of epithet

Unresolved beyond the recorded insult; no magical practice inferred.

Unresolved beyond the recorded insult; no magical practice inferred.

Evidence gap: Outcome and witnesses

Not securely located; the later search is a bounded reconnaissance, not proof of absence.

Not securely located; the later search is a bounded reconnaissance, not proof of absence.

Context: Identities and residence

No residence, family or database identity match established.

No residence, family or database identity match established.

Comparison of sources: Secondary discrepancies

Tenno’s date and Kittredge’s role reversal are not adopted; origins of errors unknown.

Tenno’s date and Kittredge’s role reversal are not adopted; origins of errors unknown.

Comparison of sources: English readings and editorial qualifications

The date-heading translations retain 1569 as written. January and February are understood as 1569/70 under a year beginning on 25 March; the sortable year 1570 is not a Gregorian day conversion. The letter B following Raine’s printed abstract is his editorial source siglum, not another word of testimony.

Acts of the court, 31 January 1569.

Acts of the court […] 1 February in the year 1569.

Tuesday, 21 February […] in the year of the Lord 1569.

120. Defamation. Margaret Reed against Margaret Howhett, in a defamation cause, namely that she was a horse goodmother water witch. [B]

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-Raine-original: James Raine, ed., Depositions and Other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the Courts of Durham, Extending from 1311 to the Reign of Elizabeth, Surtees Society 21 (London: J. B. Nichols and Son, 1845), p.91, no.CXX.

ps-Raine-english: James Raine, ed., Depositions and Other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the Courts of Durham, Extending from 1311 to the Reign of Elizabeth, Surtees Society 21 (London: J. B. Nichols and Son, 1845), p.91, no.CXX.

120. Defamation. Margaret Reed against Margaret Howhett, in a defamation cause, namely that she was a horse goodmother water witch. [B]

CXX. Defamatio. Margaret Reed against Margaret Howhett, in causa diff. viz. that she was a horse goodmother water wych. [B]

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.

Reed–Howhett · reading edition, Witching reading edition; prepared 2026-10-25; edition version 1.0; reading identifier edition-reed-howhett. · context

People

Margaret Howhett: Margaret Howhett was the opposing party in the defamation cause brought by the widow Margaret Reed. A later reciprocal listing places Howhett first against Reed but does not state its cause. The entries establish neither a second witchcraft allegation nor a final outcome.
Margaret Reed: Margaret Reed, written Red and identified as a widow, pursued Margaret Howhett in a defamation cause concerning a witchcraft insult. She appears again as complainant and as opposing party in Howhett’s reciprocal listing. No judgment or personal history is established.

Events

1570, February 21: The court later listed Reed against Howhett and a reciprocal Howhett against Reed proceeding. Their short procedural notations remain uncertain. The reciprocal listing gives no cause, so no further witchcraft allegation or judgment is inferred. (a documentary entry)
1570, January 31: Margaret Reed, a widow, brought a defamation cause against Margaret Howhett concerning the allegation that she was a horse goodmother water witch. The court recorded the female defendant’s appearance and a direction for proof; the abbreviated denial remains uncertain. (a documentary entry)

Sources

Margaret Reed and Margaret Howhett court acts, Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2, ff.144v,145v,146r; governing headings ff.143r,145r,145v. Native saved photographs rechecked 25 October 2026., Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections DDR/EJ/CCA/3/2 (court record)
James Raine, James Raine, Depositions and Other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the Courts of Durham, London: J. B. Nichols and Son, 1845, James Raine, ed., Depositions and Other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the Courts of Durham, Extending from 1311 to the Reign of Elizabeth, Surtees Society 21 (London: J. B. Nichols and Son, 1845), p.91, no.CXX. (printed selection)
Siiri Tenno, Tenno 2009, Durham University, 2009, Siiri Tenno, Religious Deviance in the Elizabethan Diocese of Durham, MA by research thesis, Durham University, Department of Theology and Religion, September 2009, printed p.114, n.55 (PDF page 115). (scholarship) (later scholarship)
George Lyman Kittredge, Kittredge 1907, American Antiquarian Society, 1907, George Lyman Kittredge, Notes on Witchcraft, Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society 18 (1907), p.191, n.121; scan PDF page 44. (scholarship) (later scholarship)
Margaret Reed and Margaret Howhett — authoritative research edition, WEME authoritative research edition, Reed_Howhett_Authoritative_Source_Edition.docx (edition)
Reed–Howhett · reading edition, Witching reading edition; prepared 2026-10-25; edition version 1.0; reading identifier edition-reed-howhett. (edition)

Credit

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