The Deviant Dead in the Norfolk Landscape

Whyte, Nicola

doi:10.1179/lan.2003.4.1.24

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…She has shown that there was a spatial pattern in which gibbets were placed on common land near parish boundaries. 15 However, this pattern has yet to be found elsewhere. In fact, in most counties spaces as close to the crime location as was convenient were chosen.…”

Section: Typography Of Hanging In Chains Locationsmentioning

confidence: 92%

The Gibbet in the Landscape: Locating the Criminal Corpse in Mid-Eighteenth-Century England

Dyndor¹

2015

A Global History of Execution and the Criminal Corpse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Typography Of Hanging In Chains Locationsmentioning

confidence: 92%

The Gibbet in the Landscape: Locating the Criminal Corpse in Mid-Eighteenth-Century England

Dyndor¹

2015

A Global History of Execution and the Criminal Corpse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Archaeologists and landscape historians have noted the widespread medieval practice of executing criminals on or adjacent to archaeological features, especially prehistoric burial mounds (e.g . Whyte 2003 ; Reynolds 2009 ; Meurkens 2010 ). In the post-medieval period such practices are not widely known in the British Isles, although there are a couple of examples.…”

Section: Locating the Gibbetmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The positioning of the gibbet by the roadside was significant and some historians have suggested that gibbets were placed at crossroads or boundaries (Whyte 2003 ) or along highways (Gatrell 1994 , p. 267). Placing the gibbet by the road obviously allowed for viewing by greater numbers of people.…”

Section: Locating the Gibbetmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An attempt will first be made to determine what factors were significant in the selection of gibbet locations across England and Wales. It has been suggested that gibbets were placed on parish boundaries (Whyte 2003 ) and on highways (Gatrell 2004). While there were gibbets placed on such sites, these were not the only places on which gibbets were situated, and a variety of considerations were involved in selecting the gibbet location.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there were gibbets placed on such sites, these were not the only places on which gibbets were situated, and a variety of considerations were involved in selecting the gibbet location. Finally the paper will consider the legacy of the gibbet in the contemporary landscape of which, with the exception of Whyte ( 2003 ), there has been no scholarly analysis. We make extensive use of the data collected for the Wellcome Trust funded research programme ‘Harnessing the Power of the Criminal Corpse’.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Landscape of the Gibbet

Tarlow¹,

Dyndor²

2015

Landscape History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the Murder Act of 1752 until the Anatomy Act of 1832 it was forbidden to bury the bodies of executed murderers unless they had first been anatomised or ‘hung in chains’ (gibbeted). This paper considers some of the observations of the Wellcome-funded project ‘Harnessing the Power of the Criminal Corpse’ as they relate to the practice of gibbeting. The nature of hanging in chains is briefly described before an extensive discussion of the criteria by which gibbets, which often remained standing for many decades, were selected. These are: proximity to the scene of crime, visibility, and practicality. Exceptions, in the forms of those sentenced by the Admiralty Courts, and those sentenced in and around London, are briefly considered. Hanging in chains was an infrequent punishment (anatomical dissection was far more frequently practised) but it was the subject of huge public interest and attracted thousands of people. There was no specified time for which a body should remain hanging, and the gibbet often became a known landmark and a significant place in the landscape. There is a remarkable contrast between anatomical dissection, which obliterates and anonymises the body of the individual malefactor, and hanging in chains, which leaves a highly personalised and enduring imprint on the actual and imaginative landscape.

show abstract

References

2007

Ideas of Landscape

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Deviant Dead in the Norfolk Landscape

Cited by 8 publications

References 8 publications

The Gibbet in the Landscape: Locating the Criminal Corpse in Mid-Eighteenth-Century England

The Gibbet in the Landscape: Locating the Criminal Corpse in Mid-Eighteenth-Century England

The Landscape of the Gibbet

References

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About