Centuries ago, our ancestors were all staunch, conservative people, the pillars of society. Right? Everyone attended church and rigidly followed the dictates of religious and community leaders. Puritans exhibited "tolerance, mutual regard, affection, and prudent common sense." It is only in recent years that morals have decayed, crime has increased, and promiscuous sex has become commonplace. Correct?
Yeah, right.
A book by Roger Thompson published about twenty years ago refutes those stereotypes. In the book Sex in Middlesex: Popular Mores in a Massachusetts County, 1649-1699, Thompson reveals that our ancestors carried on in a more freewheeling style than do most folks today. Thompson closely studied the court cases of Middlesex County, Massachusetts, for the years 1649 through 1699. He summarizes his findings in this book and also names many of the people prosecuted. This is a resource you might not want to overlook when researching Middlesex County ancestors!
In those years the Puritan Church was the leading religion in Middlesex County. However, Thompson points out that a much higher percentage of the general population was prosecuted for crimes at that time than today. That is, the "crime rate" was higher in the 1600s than today.
Note: Of course, that statement assumes that the legal authorities prosecuted crimes with the same vigor then as today. It also assumes the definition of a crime has not changed since the 1600s. Neither assumption is correct. Nonetheless, the crime rate obviously was very high in the 1600s, even by today's standards.
Many of the "crimes" of the 1600s would be ignored today, such as fines for failure to attend church, uttering oaths in public, working on the Sabbath, or drawing away the affections of a maid. However, other crimes of today were quite popular years ago as well: murder, robbery, rape, swindling, non-performance of contract, disorderly conduct, and more.
Perhaps the most common "crime" in the 1600s was that of sexual intercourse. There were different variations of it from a legal viewpoint, depending on whether or not the lady became pregnant and also whether or not the couple was willing to get married. The punishment for the young ladies was often worse than for the the men. Public whippings on the bare backs of 8-month-pregnant women were not uncommon. The strictest punishments of all were handed out when the "couple" were both of the same sex. That seems ironic for a county named "Middlesex."
Another ironic twist can only be determined after studying modern biology. Today's fertility experts report that the chances of conceiving a child are about one in fifty. That is, to conceive a child, a couple has to commit sex an average of fifty times. Obviously, as an average, you can expect there are wide variations in that number, both above and below.
The courts of the 1600s did not possess that bit of information about fertility. When reading the old court documents, it becomes apparent that the courts assumed that the ratio was closer to one-to-one. It is probable that many more couples engaged in sexual activity than the few who happened to get caught.
When an unmarried woman was convicted of fornication, the court had the task of determining the father, after which they levied fines and ordered the man to pay child maintenance as well. We will never know how accurate the court judgments were in determining fatherhood, but it is a safe bet that the error rate was high.
Surprisingly, one of the more common crimes of our ancestors was the act of bestiality. There are many, many cases of this prosecuted in Middlesex County in the 1600s. The number of convictions for bestiality seems to be very high for a county that had a rather low population by today's standards. If you had ancestors in Middlesex County in those years, you may be surprised when you open this book and discover what your ancestors were really doing. I bet THOSE stories were not handed down in the family from generation to generation!
Sex in Middlesex is a fascinating read. It will appeal to most family historians who wish to learn more about the times in which our ancestors lived. We can assume that most North American counties had somewhat similar stories as those who came from Puritan and conservative Middlesex County in Massachusetts.
Sex in Middlesex was published in 1989 but is still available through most bookstores if you specify ISBN 0870236563. I found it listed on RootsBooks.com, Amazon.com, and BarnesAndNoble.com, and I suspect it is available elsewhere as well. It is available in both hardcover and paperback.
A "limited preview" (excerpts) of the book, but not all pages, can be found on Google Books at http://tinyurl.com/34vdz9.
Another very insightful book, but from the Civil War era, is "The Story the Soldiers Wouldn't Tell: Sex in the Civil War" by Thomas P. Lowry, M.D.
Posted by: Paul K. Graham | September 04, 2007 at 06:14 PM
I have no problem with it. "Facts is facts," as Uncle Remus would say. One of my ancestors "back in the day" seduced and married a Vatican Cardinal. She'd been widowed twice and, with children, she determined a Cardinal would be able to sustain her well. Seems she was correct, historically speaking.
The concept of "popular crimes" did give me a moment's start, however. I would that crime were never popular, but alas, it seems it has been throughout the ages. Too much freedom and too little of it both contribute, methinks.
Happy Dae.
http://www.ShoeStringGenealogy.com/ssg1.htm
Posted by: Happy Dae | September 04, 2007 at 11:38 PM
I'm going to have to read this book. My husband does have ancestors that were there at that time, one of whom held the position of "Tithing Man." From what I understand, he made sure church members tithed, as well as kept order during church services, woke up those who fell asleep, and ordered parents to control their children during services. I'm curious to see if he was ever on "the wrong side of the law."
Posted by: Elaine | September 05, 2007 at 03:00 AM
Hello. I know about the book but have never read it. I'll see if it's the Library. I'd just like to make a comment that the author should have continued with his thoughts and made it a series of books: Sex.. in 1700's, .. in 1800's, etc.
A brother of my KIDDER ancestor in 1700's Chelmsford, MA, lost a wife in childbirth, lost a second wife, then lost 3 daughters, and his house burned down. When he found another woman, she moved in with him, but he refused to marry again - much to the dismay of the minister in his town.
And, the birth of my grandmother in the winter of 1888-1889 is a BIG mystery. My "educated guess" is that a married woman in a small town in CT either had an affair, was raped, or there was incest involved. She had a young son, had lost a baby daughter, and, without the benefit of her husband, got pregnant in the "summer of 1888."
I'm sure that a book author, if asked, could hear many stories !
P.S. In the 1800's in northern Maine and in Canada, cousins married cousins - because there was no one else around to marry. I wonder what the minister said about that.
Posted by: Betty | September 05, 2007 at 06:32 AM
Human nature is the same from generation to generation so why is anyone surprised about the fact that "crime" existed before us?
What is different about today is the nonchalance exhibited by many over sexual misbehavior whose consequences are still considerable. At least in the past those who broke the laws were made to feel shame and, believe me, the fear of being shunned by your neighbors was a real threat and worked to insure a semblance of virtue when no real virtue existed.
Posted by: Margaret | September 05, 2007 at 08:08 AM
Sounds alot like today's TV show, "Desperate Housewives".
Posted by: Edmund Deane | September 05, 2007 at 08:46 AM
I would like to recommend a book that addresses some of the same subject matter, "Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America" by David Hackett Fischer, Oxford University Press, 1989. It covers the four major migrations to North America from England: East Anglia to Massachusetts, the South of England to Virginia, North Midlands to the Delaware and Borderlands to the Backcountry. Each group brought with them distinct social mores and ideas about what was and wasn't a crime. Fascinating reading! And the author does discuss some of the more interesting bestiality cases.
Posted by: Vera | September 05, 2007 at 08:57 AM
I too would like to recommend Albion's Seed. It makes a very good companion to Sex in Middlesex. My copy of Sex in Middlesex arrived yesterday. Imagine my surprise when I found my own relatives mentioned in several of the case studies!
Posted by: Suzanne | September 08, 2007 at 08:15 AM
I tried to query "Happy Dae" about her post, but frew blanks. I suspect her to be a hoaxstress--
Posted by: Geezerdawg | September 08, 2007 at 07:43 PM
Nope. Happy Dae is well known in these areas and is a real person.
Posted by: Dick Eastman | September 08, 2007 at 10:06 PM
The message posted by Margaret on Sept. 5 is right on track. I agreee 100 percent. There is no shame anymore, how many of us reading these comments know of someone, maybe many in our own extended families that either lived together before marriage or never bothered to get married or have had abortions. We have no constraints in our society anymore. Sure I even look at the records and compare marriage dates with the first birth. It is very revealing!
Posted by: Dean | September 08, 2007 at 11:06 PM