William de Briouze Jr
¶ De dicto prio miraculo suspense. Nobilis ¶ Post hec in crastinum, nobilis vir dominus Willelmus de Breuse, baro, et miles filius quondam domum Willelmi de Breuse viri predicte domine Marie supra proximo examinate, productus a procuratore Capituli Herefordensis ad probationem dumtaxat miraculi supradicti, supra iuratus, dixit primo in virtute iuramenti prestiti per eundem, quod decem et octo anni erunt inter festum Beati Michaelis29th Septemberproxime futuri et festum Omnium Sanctorum1st Novemberquod idem testis custodiebat terram predicti patris sui in qua erat tunc guerra inter Walenses et dominum Edwardum regem Anglorum qui nunc est, et terra dicti testis, et predicti patris sui vocata de Gouer, quam dictus testis tunc custodiebat est in Wallia. Accidit tempore predicto quod quidam malefactor qui in dicta guerra erat de rebellibus dicti domini Regis, nomine Willelmus Cragh, de dicta terra de Gouer oriundus, fuit captus per gentes custodientes terram patris dicti testis, et suam, cum quodam alio malefactore qui vocabatur Traharn ap Howel, et ambo fuerunt iudicati ad suspendium et suspense, per gentes ipsius testis, et patres sui quadam die circa mediam primam, in loco vocato de Sweyneseye, siue prope dictum locum in eius tamen districtu circa mediam leucam Anglicanam a dicto loco, seu Castro de Sweyneseye.
¶ Item secundo dixit, quod cum fuisset circa horam nonam dicte diei, et gentes iam commedissent superuenerunt rumores ad patrem dicti testis, et ad ipsum, quod trabs media siue lignum inter medium dictarum furcarum in quo predicti duo filant suspense; ceciderat, et hoc uiderunt de aula dicti castri hospicii predicti domini patris ipsius testis, et ipse testis et plures alii de familia eorum, et ex hoc fuerunt valde admirati, et fuerunt missi aliqui ad videndum quid hoc erat, et illi qui iuerunt retulerunt patri ipsius testis, et ipsi testi, et aliis, quod dicta trabs inter media, siue lignum in quo predicti duo fuerant suspensi erat fractum, et quod predicti duo suspensi erant mortui.
¶ Item tercio dixit, quod quia dictus Willelmus Cragh, erat malefactor valde famosus,This word is smudged a little as it has been written on an erasure. et publicus, pater predicti testis qui non erat presens tempore captionis predictorum, sed tempore suspendii in dicta terra sua, precepit quod dictus Willelmus Cragh iterum suspenderetur, et quod alius qui cum eo suspensus fuerat sepelliretur, et ita sicut precepit fuit execucioni mandatum. Et dictus Willelmus Cragh fuit iterum resuspenus, et pependit suspensus in dictis furcis a dicta hora none usque ad vesperos, scilicet usque ad occasum solis, quem occasum vocant vesperos in patria predicta, ut dixit. Tunc amici dicti Willelmi Cragh suspensi pecierunt corpus eius a patre dicti testis ut possent ipsum in crastinum sepellire, et fuit concessum eis, quia gentes dicti testis, et ipsius testis retulerant et communiter dicebatur, quod dictus Willelmus Cragh erat mortuus quando fuit secundo suspensus. Et predicta omnia de morte dicti suspensi dictus testis retulit de credulitate , et de relatu alieno, non quod ipse tunc viderit dictum Willelmum mortuum, vidit tamen de dicto castro sicut dixit ipsum Willelmum Cragh prima vice quando fuit suspensus pendere, in dictis furcis in mane, et etiam postmodum postquam fuit iterum suspensus vidit sicut dixit, et audiuit dici ab aliis quod dictus Willelmus Cragh pendebat in dictis furcis usque ad dictam occasum solis.
¶ Quarto dixit,'t' added above the line later in lighter ink. quod post predictum occasum solis eadem die qua dictus Willelmus Cragh suspensus fuerat, amici ipsius Willelmi Cragh propter graciam eis factam a patre ipsius testis quod idem Willelmus posset sepelliri, apportauerunt ipsum Willelmum, nescit tamen sive inligno rotundo, vel in quo alio ut dixit interrogates, ad villam dicti Castri vocatam de Sweyneseye, in domum cuiusdam burgensis, dicte ville de cuius nomine interrogatus dixit se non recordari, et tunc ipse testis cum aliis familiaribus dicti patris sui, et suis descendit de dicto Castro, et declinauit ad dictam villam coherentem ipsi Castro, ut videret predictum Willelmum qui fuerat suspensus, et inuenit ipsum in domo dicti burgensis intra domum ante primum, et maius ostiumdicte domus, stantem suppinum in terra per eum modum per quem potest stare homo mortuus, et ipse testis, et omnes alii qui ipsum Willelmum Cragh videbant, reputabant ipsum Willelmum Cragh mortuum, sicut predictus testis dixit. Et predictus Willelmus Cragh illa hora qua dictus testis eum vidit, habebat totam faciem nigram, et in parte sanguinolentam, siue sanguine cruentatam, et oculi ipsius Willelmi exiuerant de locis suis pendentes extra palpebras dictorum oculorum et concauitates ipsorum oculorum erant replete sanguine. Os autem dicti Willelmi Cragh, et collum et guttur et omnes alie partes circum ad iacentes,The addition to this word appears to be in the same ink, and made at the time of writing. et etiam nares erant replete sanguine, ita quod impossibile erat secundum viam nature sicut respondit idem testis interrogatus quod dictus Willelmus Cragh posset spirare, vel respirare aerem per dictas nares suas, uel per os suum, uel per guttur, aut per collum quod erat inflatum, et ingrossatum et indignatum racione suspensionum predictarum, potissime dixit se credere quod secundum viam nature non posset spirare et respirare aerem per os et per guttur suum, et etiam per collum seu uenas colli, quia lingua dicti Willelmi pendebat extra os suum quasi ita longa sicut est digitus manus hominis medius longior, et dicta lingua erat nigra tota, et inflata et ita grossa cum sanguine sibi ad herente sicut homo habet communiter duos pugnos simul iniunctos, ita quod si vixisset dictus Willelmus non potuisset secundum viam nature retrahere ad se dictamque linguam in tantum erat grossa, et inflata, nec spirare, vel respirare per os suum aerem sicut tunc fuit visum eidem testi, et ad huc idem sibi videtur ut dixit.
¶ Quinto dixit quod viso dicto Willelmo Cragh, qui suspensus fuerat in statu predicto in domo predicti burgensius, dictus testis rediit ad Castrum predictum et tunc predicta domina Maria nouerca sua, cum ei fuissent relata predicta, dixit ipso teste audiente et presente, cum deuocione sicut eidem testi videtur, iste homo fuit bis supensus et habuit magnam penam. Prium deu, et seint Thomas de Cantelup qe luy donne vie, et si il luy donne vie, nous le amenerouns a lauant dit seint Thomas. Et tunc dicta domina misit vnam ex domicellabus suis nomine Jouantam,The capital 'J' is smudged and appears to have been written on an erasure. iam mortuam ad mensurandum dictum Willelmum Cragh, predicto sancto Thome de Cantilupo, et predicta domicella iuit, et mensurauit eum, sicut postmodum dicta domicella retulit predicte domine sue, et ipsi testi et aliis, et plicauit vnum denarium sterl’, super caput dicti Willelmi secundum morem Angl’, sicut dicta domicella retulit, et reportauit filum cum quo mensuauerat dictum Willelmum, et postmodum dictum filum fuit inuolutum cera ad modum candele, et portatum per dictum Willelmum Cragh, post sanitatem recuperatam ad tumulumdicti sancti Thome de Cantilupo in dicta Ecclesia Herefordensi.
¶ Sexto dixit, quod post dictam mensurationem dictus Willelmus Cragh,'dictus' slightly unclear in the manuscript as the red ink from overleaf has seeped through the page. stetit sicut idem testis dixit quod tunc publice, referebatur in statu in quo erat tempore mensurationis predicte, quasi usque ad mediam noctem, et tunc incepit spirare et respirare flatum, et mouere unam tibiam sicut dicebatur, quid autem circa modum operationis dicti miraculi, et sanitatis a dicto Willelmo recuperate in eadem nocte, et in tribus diebus proxime tunc sequentibus fuerit subsecutum, dictus testis interrogates. Respondit se nescire.
¶ Septimo dixit, quod quarta die post dictam mensurationem cum publice referretur, quod dictus Willelmus Cragh miraculose erat restitutus ad vitam, idem testis cum aliis rediit ad domum dicti burgensis, in qua prius viderat dictum Willelmum iacentem mortaum, ut idem testis et alii reputabant, ad videndum predictum Willelmum, et in uenit ipsum in domo predicti burgensis iacentem in quodam lecto, et lingua eius fuerat in parte deinflata, et tumor et inflatura dicte lingue fuerant in parte mitigate. Sed tamen ad huc dicta lingua stabat in parte extra os predicti Willlelmi, et licet spiraret et respiraret flatum, tunc tamen non poterat loqui nec fuerat locutus a tempore suspendu supradicti de dictis quatuor diebus, ut publice ferebatur. Oculi eciam dicti Willelmi erant in parte emendati, et meliorati, sed tamen non uidebat dictus Willelmus, nec uidere tunc poterat cum eisdem, nec discernere gentes, facies etiam, collum et guttur dicti Willelmi erant ad huc inflata non tamenAppears to be a contemporary addition, in the same hand as the main text. in tantum sicut quando quarta die ante idem testis dixit se vidisse Willelmum predictum. Et tunc idem testis dimisit predictum Willelmum, et non vidit eum ex tunc, nec scit quid actum, fuerit tunc circa eum quousque dictus Willelmus perfecte curatus venit cum patre, et cum nouerca ipsius testis, et cum ipso teste per quinque septimanas, vel quasi postquam ipsum ultimo viderat ad Ecclesiam Herefordensem ad quam venit idem Willelmus Cragh, nudis pedibus cum eisdem, cum fune seu laqueo cum quo suspensus fuerat ad collum ipsius Willelmi, et dictus laqueus fuit dimissus in Ecclesia Hereford', et quedam furce ceree cum ymagine cerea hominis suspensi que pater predicti testis fecit fieri, et offerri propter dictum miraculum in Ecclesia Heref’, ante tumulum dictum domini Thome.
¶ Octauo dixit quod postmodum dictus Willelmus Cragh, qui vouerat ire ultra mare presente dicto teste patre ipsius, et aliis rediit ad terram suam, et idem testis vidit eum post predictam in dicta terra sua per decem annos, et ultra pluries et finaliter dictas Willelmus Cragh obiit in terra sua predicta infirmitate naturali, sunt fere duo anni elapsi.
¶ Item dixit se audiuisse audita proprio dictum Willelmum Cragh referentem dum peteretur ab eo quid viderat, et senserat quando fuit suspenus, et post predictum suspendium, et qualiter fuerat curatus, quod sibi videbatur quod quidam episcopus albusWritten in lighter ink later. indutus albis paramentis reposuerat linguam ipsius Willelmi in os eiusdem Willelmi, et sic receperat spiraculum vite, non tamen exprimebat dictus Willelmus Cragh, quod ipse testis audiuerit ut dixit predictum episcopum fuisse dictum dominum Thomam de Cantilupo, nec aliquid aliud exprimebat idemIn same ink and hand as the main text, and therefore likely to have been been contemporary. dictus Willelmus se vidisse, uel sensisse quod ipse testis sciat, ut dixit pertinens ad probationem miraculi antedicti in furcis, vel postquam depositus extitit ab eisdem furcis.
¶ Post hoc dictus dominus Willelmus de Breuse, fuit iuxta formam tercii interrogatorii, super tercio articulo de miraculis formati, interrogatus si miraculum quod dixerat accidisse in personam dicti Willelmi Cragh, fuerat supra, aut contra naturam. Respondit quod ex dispositione quam viderat in dicto Willelmo, non credebat, nec estimabat quod per vires vel potenciam nature humane potuerit curari a passione quam habuerit, et tunc evitasse mortem post suspendium supradictam.
¶ Item ad quartum interrogatorium. Respondit supra in versiculo quinto dixit.
¶ Item ad quintum interrogatorium. Respondit quod nec herbe, nec lapides nec alique alie res naturales vel medicinales, nec incantaciones, nec supersticiones, nec fraudes alique superuenerunt in operatione dicti miraculi, quod ipse testis sciat, uel credat vel audiuerit dici immo credit totum contrarium potissime, quia pater ipsius testis, et ipse testis et eorum officiales, et ministri habebant odio dictum Willelmum Cragh quia erat pessimus malefactor, et peior aliis malefactoribus, et perpetrauerat multa maleficia, necando homines et robando et incendia faciendo in terra eorum, et erat valde robustus. Dixit etiam interrogatus quod modus suspendendi homines in patriaIn same ink and hand as the main text, and therefore likely to have been been contemporary. est talis, quod statim moriuntur suspensi post suspendium, quia laqueus cursilis apponitur ad collum eorum, et nodus dicti laquei stat retro ex parte colli, ita quod statim suffocantur, et si non morerentur et fraus aliqua interueniret in suspendio, per quam vita suspensi posset prorogari; carnifex secundum modum patrie qui tales suspendit suspenderetur. Dixit etiam quod licet consuetudo sit in patria predicta Wallie, quod illi qui suspendendi sunt possint euadere cum pecunia si placet dominis temporalibus qui faciunt tales iudicari ad suspendium, pro redemptione tamen, dicti Willelmi Cragh, pater dicti testis noluit recipere redemptionem, licet tam pro ipso Willelmo Cragh, quam pro alio cum eodem Willelmo suspenso offerentursibi centum vacce ab amicis dictorum suspensorum.
¶ Item ad sextum interrogatorium. Respondit, quod fides, et deuotio dicti Willelmi Cragh fuit augmentata ratione dicti miraculi, quia cessauit a perpetratione dictorum maleficiorum, et etiam aliorum de partibus illis qui ex hoc habent maiorem fidem et deuotionem in deum, et in dictum sanctum Thomam, et frequenter peregrinantur ad tumulum dicti Sancti Thome.
¶ Item ad septimum. Respondit, quod dictus Willelmus Cragh erat circa .xl. annorum ut eidem testi videtur, nescit tamen a quibus parentibus ortus nec de quo manso sed fuerat oriundus de dicta terra de Gouer ut supra deposuit.
¶ Item ad octauum interrogatorium. Respondit quod cencies et ultra viderat dictum Willelmum ante predictum suspendium, quia erat oriundus de terra dicti patris sui et sua et post dictum suspendium pluries vidit eum sanum quia vixitIn lighter ink than the main text; appears to have been added later. per decern annos et ultra post dictum suspendium, et obiit morte naturali biennium est elapsum vel circa, sicut deposuit supra in versiculo Viiio dixit.
¶ Item ad nonum et decimum interrogatorium, est per ipsum testem responsum, supra in primo et secundo tercio, quarto, quinto, sexto, et septimo capitulo dicti sui, et etiam ad undecimum interrogatorium quantum ad annum et locum in quo predicta fuerint, de die tamen interrogatus dixit se non recordari, de mense dixit quod fuit inter festum sancti Michaelis,29th Septemberet festam Omnium Sanctorum,1st November de illis autem qui presentes fuerant in dicto suspendio, dixit interrogatus se non recordari.
¶ Item ad .xii. interrogatorium. Respondit quod fama publica, et vox communis fuit in partibus illis et est ad huc, et omnes gentes communiter loquentes de hoc credunt et asserunt quod miraculose, et mentis dicti sancti Thome de Cantilupo, dictus Willelmus Cragh fuerit resuscitatus. Interrogatus de cuius sciencie, dixit se audiuisse ita publice, referri ab omnibus qui de predictis loquebantur, et a nullo audiuit dici contrarium. Interrogatus quid vocabat et quid credebat esse famam publicam, et communem oppinionem in hac sui deposition. Respondit quod quando aliqua res est ita uera, quod gentes communiter asserunt publice ita esse, et nullus dicit contrarium, nec apparet contrarium, et ita erat in casu de quo ipse deposuit, sicut dixit.
¶ Item ad xiii interrogatorium, est per ipsum responsum supra.
¶ Item interrogatus an deposuerit prece prece precepto timore odio amore precio, et lucri dati vel promissi habiti vel habendi causa, et utrum doctas vel instructus fuerit testificari, et an concordauerit cum aliis testibus sic deponere. Respondit quod non.
¶ Item interrogatus si fuerit de parentela dicti domini Thome. Respondit se credere quod sic, in tercio vel in quarto gradu, sed non est bene certas de hoc, ut dixit, nec vidit ipsum dominum Thomam nisi semel uel bis quod recolat dum ipse testis erat puer, propter fauorem tamen parentele, vel ex aliqua causa alia nisi causa veritatis dixit per sacramentam per eum prestitum, quod non deposuerat, nec dixerat supradicta.
¶ Item interrogatus de etate sua. Respondit quod erat circiter .xlvi. annorum.
¶ Item interrogates, si viderat aliquid aliud miraculum quod crederet accidisse meritis dicti domini Thome de Cantilupo. Respondit quod non. Sed de multis miraculis audiuerat hoc referri. Et quia videbatur sufficienter examinatus fuit licenciatus, et deposuit in vulgari Gallico.
¶ Concerning the said first hanging miracle. Afterwards, on the next day, the noble man, baron and knight, son of the former Lord William de Briouze the aforesaid husband of Lady Mary, (examined immediately above,) was brought forward by the proctor of the Chapter of Hereford to give testimony to the above said miracle. The above being under oath, firstly he said according to the virtue of [his] oath [and] stating by the same [oath], that there will be eighteen years between the next feast of the blessed Michael29th September in the future and the feast of All Saints1st November upon which he gave his testimony, since he had taken custody of the lands of his aforementioned father. At that time there was a war between the Welsh and lord Edward (who is now King of the English),See Dictionary of National Biography entry for more details: http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/printable/8517 and they call the land of the said witness and his aforementioned father in Wales Gower, which the said witness is now in custody of. It happened at the aforementioned time that a certain malefactor,The Latin here reads 'malefactores'. I have chosen to translate it as 'malefactor', both because it reflects the Latin implication od one who 'does bad deeds' but also because the term is commonly used by historians of crime in the Middle Ages, such as Merback, 1999 (who during the said war was a rebel [against] the said lord king), named William Cragh, originally from the said land of Gower. He was captured by the men protecting the said witness’ father’s and his own lands, with a certain other malefactor who was called Trahaearn ap Hywel. This was during the taking of Oystermouth Castle, mentioned in the short annals contained in Neath Abbey's Domesday Breviate: LINK – to extra material. And both were sentenced to be hanged, and to be hanged by the witness himself and his father’s peopleDespite the rise in legal officials across the course of the Middle Ages, by the fifteenth century, it was still the local community which was chiefly responsible for the apprehension and punishment of criminals(McCall, 1979: 52). on a certain day around the middle of Prime the said locality called Swansea, or even near the said locality’s district, around half an English league from the said locality of his said Castle of Swansea.
¶ Further, second he said, that it had been around the ninth hour of the said day,This equates to early to mid-afternoon by our modern reckoning: nine hours after sunrise. and people had already gone to eat, [when] rumours came up to the said witness himself and [his] father and that the centre beam or the wood between the middle of the said gallows on which the aforesaid two were suspended, gave way. And this was seen from the hall of the lodge of the said castle of the said father of the witness himself, and the witness himself and many others from his household and as a result of this they were very amazed, and they sent some messengers to see what had happened. And when those who went returned to the father and the witness himself and they said to the witness himself and the others that the middle beam between the wood upon which the aforesaid two were hanged was broken, and that the aforesaid two were dead.
¶ Further, thirdly he said, that because the said William Cragh was a very famous, and public, malefactor, the father of the aforesaid witness (who was not present at the time of the aforesaid capture, but was in his said lands at the time of the hanging) ordered that the said William Cragh be hanged again, and that the other who was hanged with him be buried; and so the command was carried out, just as he ordered. And he said that said William Cragh was again rehanged and he hung suspended on the said gallows from the said ninth hour until Vespers,Vespers was the sunset service in the medieval Church. For more on the canonical hours, see Introduction [link]. certainly all the way up to sunset, at the time they call evening in the aforesaid land of his father. Then the friends of the said hanged William Cragh asked for his body from the father of the said witness in order to be able to bury it themselves the next day.It was normal for executed criminals to rely on friends and family rather than the Church to ensure they had a proper burial (Handley, 2011: 51;Daniell, 1997: 247;and McCall, 1979: 75). And the concession was made, because the people of the said witness, and the witness himself reported, (and it was commonly said) that the said William Cragh was dead when he was hanged the second time. And everything said previously concerning the death by the said hanging, the said witness reported from what he believed and from the reports of others, because he had not seen the said dead William himself at that time; nevertheless he said that he saw, just as he said, from the said castle when William Cragh himself had been hanged the first time on the said gallows in the morning, and also a while afterwards he saw him hanged again, just as he said. And he heard it said by others that the said William Cragh was hanging on the said gallows until about the said setting of the sun.
¶ Fourthly, he said, that after the aforesaid setting of the sun the same day that the said William Cragh was hanged, the friends of William Cragh himself (on account of the favour that the father of the witness himself made), were able to bury the same William. Yet having been questioned, he did not know whether they carried William themselves to the town of the said castle of Swansea from the house of a certain burgess (the said townsman whose name he said he said he could not recall when questioned), or if was in fact on a wooden wheel or even by another means. And then the witness himself with other members of his father’s household and his [own] men descended from the said castle, went down to the said town adjoining the castle itself, and he saw the aforesaid William who was hanged, and he discovered him in the house of the said burgess. Inside the house [he was] resting head-downwards on the ground in front of the first and larger doorway of the said house, remaining still as only a dead man can, and the witness himself and everyone else who saw William himself thought that William Cragh himself was dead, just as he said previously in his testimony.For a discussion of the contemporary views on the signs of death, see Vauchez, (1997: 491). And the at that time when the said witness saw the aforesaid William Cragh, he had a totally black face, and with bloodied or blood encrusted parts, and the eyes of William himself had popped out of their place, hanging down outside the eyelids of the said eyes, and the hollows of the eyes themselves were filled with blood. Moreover, the mouth of the said William Cragh and [his] neck and throat and all other parts situated around about, and even [his] nostrils were full of blood.It is a typical sign of death by hanging for the corpse to have a protruding tongue, with blood exuding from the mouth (Sharma, 2008: 56).The face also swells, with open and protruding eyes, while the tongue is often thrust out and damaged by ‘the convulsive action of the jaws’. The longer it takes to die, the more swollen the face neck, lips eyes and tongue become, because the heart and lungs only slowly shut down, meaning that blood continues to be pumped to the head, but cannot return to the heart due to the effect of the rope on the jugular vein, resulting in a build-up of blood in the face and features (Forbes et al., 1833: 175). When they questioned him, the same witness answered in this way: that it was impossible that the said William Cragh would have been able to breathe in or breathe out air through his said nostrils or though his mouth, or through his throat, or through his neck according to the way of nature, because it was inflamed and swollen and misshapen on account of the aforesaid hanging. Foremost he said he believed that (according to the way of nature) he was not able to breathe in and breathe out air through the mouth, and through his throat, and also through the neck, or the neck veins, because the tongue of the said William was hanging outside of his mouth further than if it was the length of the middle finger of a man’s hand; and the said tongue was black and inflamed with his own blood, and as swollen as if an ordinary man was holding two fists together at the same time; that therefore if he had been alive the said William would not have been able to withdraw his said tongue naturally for it was so swollen and inflamed, nor would he have been able to breathe in or even breathe out air through his mouth. This had been seen by the witness at that time, and it seemed the same to him up until this point, just as he said.
¶ Fifthly he said that seeing the said William Cragh, who was hanged, in the aforesaid position in the house of the aforesaid burgess, the said witness returned to the aforesaid castle. And then (when he had reported back the aforesaid [events] to her), the aforesaid Lady Mary his stepmother said, with devotion as it seemed to the same witness, (the witness himself hearing, and being present): ‘That man was hanged twice and had a great punishment. I pray to God and St Thomas of Cantilupe to give him life, and if they give him life we will bring him to praise the said St Thomas’These words are recorded in vernacular French by the notaries, instead of being translated into Latin like the rest of the testimony. Her promise to bring William to praise Thomas refers to the pilgrimage they later made to the saints tomb in Hereford. Compassion was a common emotional experience in ‘the theatre of public punishments, where pain was the spectacle’, (Merback, 1999: 152). And then the said lady sent one of her ladies in waiting named Jovanta
This is the second of three serving girls named in the course of these testimonies. Servants made up around a third of urban populations by this time in medieval Europe, of which percentage females consisted just over a half (Leyser, 1995: 156)' We do not often hear of named individuals like this, but for further reading on the subject see Shahar, (2003: 203-4);Jewell, (2007: 69-74); and Leyser, (1995: 156-8). (now dead), to measure the said William Cragh to the aforesaid St Thomas de Cantilupe;For more details on the practice of measuring bodies to saints, see Finucane, (1977); andVauchez, (1997: 456-7, 490). and the aforesaid lady in waiting went and measured him. After a while the said lady in waiting reported back the aforesaid [events] to her mistress, and the witness himself and others, and she folded one silver penny [placing it] on the said William’s head following the English custom,For further examples of pennies being bent in this manner, see Webb, (2000: 74). The bending of the penny is corroborated by several other witnesses. CLICK HERE. just as the said lady in waiting reported back, and she carried back the string with which she had measured the said William, and after a while the said string was covered in wax almost in the manner of a candle.This as a popular English custom in the Middle Ages. The idea was that a thread was used to measure the body, and that in the event of a miraculous cure the thread would be made into a votive candle for the saint responsible for the miracle. It was particularly common as a long-range device intended to attract the attention of the saint. For more on this practice, see Webb (2000: 74); Finucane (1977); Bartlett, (2006: 8-9) and Vauchez, (1997: 456-7, 490). And it was carried by the said William Cragh, after he regained health to the tomb of the said St Thomas of Cantilupe in the said Hereford Cathedral.For other accounts of this pilgrimage, CLICK HERE. For a detailed description of Thomas’ tomb and the creation of his shrine as a pilgrimage destination, see Crook, (2011: 235-9).
¶ Sixthly he said, that after the said measuring, the said William Cragh remained in that state (just as the same witness said and as it was commonly reported) from the aforesaid time of measuring, up to the middle of the night. And then it was said that he began to breathe in and breathe out breath, and move a leg. The said witness was asked [if he knew] anything concerning the manner of the working of the said miracle and of the reason for the recuperation of the said William in the same night and [how] he had been following the next three days which followed. He replied that he did not know.
¶ Seventh he said that four days after the said measuring, [hearing] by common report that the said William Cragh was miraculously restored to life, the same witness returned with others to the house of the said burgess, in which he had seen the said William lying dead earlier; and the same witness and others thought to look at the aforesaid William, and went themselves to the house of the aforesaid Burgess. [Cragh was] lying on a certain bed and his tongue was in part shrunken, and less distended and inflated; the said tongue was in part soothed. But still part of the said tongue remained in part outside of the aforesaid William’s mouth at this point; and [though] it allowed him to breathe in and breathe out breath, he was still not able to speak at that time nor had he been able to speak from the above-said time he was hanged, to the said fourth day, and this was spoken about publically.A fundamental requirement for the initiation of any inquisitorial or enquiry process called for by the papacy was ‘publica fama’. See Kelly (2013: 8-29) for a full discussion. The put-out eyes of the said William were in part improved, and made better, but still the said William could not see, nor was he able to see at that time, nor recognise people. Furthermore the appearance of the neck and throat of the said William were swollen until this point, yet when on the fourth day before the same witness said he saw the aforesaid William they were not so bad. And then the same witness dismissed the aforesaid William, and did not see him from then, nor did he know anything concerning his conduct at that time, until the said William was completely cured [and] he came with the father and stepmother of the witness himself, five weeks after when the witness had last seen [him], to the cathedral at Hereford;Visits to the tombs of saintly bishops was not an uncommon occurrence in this period. Robert Grossetesse’s tomb in Lincoln was similarly visited at this time, while he too was being considered for canonisation (Webb, 2000: 69 and Crook, 2011). For further discussion of the veneration of tombs as a pilgrimage destination, see Sumption (1975: 23). The idea that the miracle was ‘proclaimed’ during this visit is a demonstration of the spreading the news of miracles by word of mouth and the whole town getting involved (Webb, 2000: 73;Hole, 1954: 102; Sumption, 1975: 150-1). to which the same William Cragh came, bare foot,Conducting a pilgrimage in bare feet was a common practice in this period, as it was believed that the discomfort added to the penance and ascetic purpose of the endeavour. The parents of the apparently drowned and resuscitated Joanna were said to have walked barefoot to Hereford to give thanks to St Thomas for the miracle. (Webb, 2000: xiv and 75). For further examples and discussion of this, see Sumption (1975: 123-8). with the same rope or noose with which William himself had been suspended by the neck, and the said noose was left at Hereford Cathedral; and a certain wax gallows with a likeness of a hanged waxed man, (which the aforesaid father of the witness had caused to be made,) [was] offered on account of the said miracle in Hereford Cathedral, before the tomb of the said master Thomas.The practice of offering wax models is well documented at Hereford, where over 2000 are known to have been left for St Thomas. The image was supposed to relate to the miracle being sought or granted – in William’s case a wax man hanging on the gallows, but others included a head for chronic headaches and eyeballs for blindness. For further details, please see, Webb (2000: 74-5); Nilson (1999: 105); Sumption (1975: 157);
Vauchez (1997: 221, 456-7). For the origins of this custom growing out of previously held pagan beliefs, see, Crook (2011: 21-2).
¶ Eighth he said that after the said William Cragh, who vowed to go beyond the sea in person,This a reference to the pilgrimage to the Holy Land which William Cragh apparently promised to undertake immediately after his pilgrimage to Hereford. Pilgrimage to the Holy Land and Jerusalem was deemed to be the most dangerous (and therefore the most rewarding) of all (Sumption, 1975). Perhaps the extent of the miraculous nature of William Cragh’s revival was thought to warrant such and extreme journey to truly reflect his appreciation. the father of the said witness himself and others returned to his lands, and the same witness saw him after the aforesaid [events] in his said lands for ten years and some beyond [this]; and finally the said William died in his aforesaid lands of natural weakness, almost two years ago.
¶ Further he said he had heard said this particular said William Cragh reported what he had seen and felt while he had entreated, when he was hanged, and after the aforesaid hanging, and in what manner he had been cured. It had seemed to him that a certain bishop clothed in white with white apparel put back the tongue of William himself into the mouth of the same William, and thus he had recovered the breath of life. However, he said the said William Cragh did not pronounce, as far as the witness himself had heard, that the aforesaid bishop was the said master Thomas de Cantilupe; nor did the same William pronounce seeing or experiencing anything other pertaining to testing the before-said miracle on the gallows or appeared after he was taken down from the same gallows, he said.
¶ After this the said master William de Briouze, being near the third question on the third article, on the form of the miracle, they asked if the miracle which he had said occurred in the person of the said William Cragh, was beyond or against nature.A fundamental characteristic of a miracle was that the occurrence had to be seen as going ‘against’ or ‘above’ what is naturally possible in this world as miracles were seen as being part of the Augustinian model of God’s higher natural order (Sumption, 1975: 54-5 and 65). He replied that from the disposition that he had seen in the said William he did not believe, nor estimate that by natural human strength or resilience would it have been possible to cure [him] of the suffering which he had [undergone] and thereby avoided death after the above-said hanging.
¶ Further to the fourth question; he replied what he said on the fifth statement above.
¶ Further to the fifth question; he replied that the witness himself knew or believed or had heard he said that neither herbs, nor stones or even other natural things or medicines, nor enchantments,There was deemed to be a fine line between magic and miracle at the time, particularly in cases relating to the raising of the dead, for although it is a key Christian tenant that the dead will live again and that Christ was resurrected, the act could also be seen as the work of a necromancer. For a detailed discussion of medieval ideas on the subject, see Rampton (1999). nor superstitions, nor trickery or other intervened in the operation of the said miracle.The possibility that some trickery was involved in Williams ‘miraculous’ recovery is worth considering. Experiments were carried out in the nineteenth century replicating the hanging procedure. Results showed that a small hole made in the windpipe just below where the rope sits allows the suspended individual to continue breathing enough to survive though their face will still become swollen and puce (Forbes et al., 1833: 176). No indeed, he believed totally the opposite, principally because the witness’ father himself and the witness himself, and his officials, and attendants hated the said William Cragh because he was the worst criminal, and worse than other criminals, and had perpetrated many crimes, and brought about the murder of men and robberies and arson in his land, and was very physically robust. Furthermore he said when questioned that the manner in which men were hanged in his father’s land is such that they die immediately from hanging after being hanged, because a running noose is placed around their neck, and the knot of the said noose rests at the back part of the neck in such a way that they are suffocated at once, and if they do not die and somehow trickery intervenes in the hanging by means of which a hanged man is able to prolong [his] life the executioner who did the hanging is hung [himself], according to the manner of the father's land. He said also that it is permitted in the customary practice in the native land of the aforesaid Wales that those who ought to hanged can evade hanging with money if the ransom satisfies the temporal lord. However, [concerning] the ransom for the said William Cragh, the father of the said witness was unwilling to receive the ransom, although he had been offered 100 cows for William Cragh himself and for the other man hanged with the same William, by the friends of the said hanged men.Murderers could be pardoned in return for compensation usually paid by the criminal’s family (Gordon et al., 2000: 243; McCall, 1979: 71).
Out of 317 criminal cases recorded over a two year period in the Lincolnshire Assize Rolls, 271 bought their way out of punishment by paying fines (Ibid).
¶ Further to the sixth question; he replied that the faith, and devotion of the said William Cragh was increased on account of the said miracle because he ceased to perpetrate the said crimes.Reformation of character following a miracle was deemed to be an important part of the miracle process, (Koopmans, 2011), and indeed the main reason for the Virgin Mary interceding on behalf of sinners (Warner, 1976: 324-5). Criminals were said to have been reformed thanks to the intercession of St Thomas Becket many of which were performed at his tomb in Canterbury (Sumption, 1975: 128). For further discussion and examples of saintly intercession, see Vauchez (1997: 133-4) and Clements-Jewery (2005). And also, others from those parts had greater faith and devotion in God and in the said St Thomas due to this [miracle], and frequent pilgrimages were made to the tomb of the said St Thomas.Cults growing up around saints did tend to be local in nature. For further discussion and examples, see Vauchez (1997: 130-3).
¶ Further to the seventh [question]; he replied that it seemed to the same witness that the said William Cragh was about 40 years old. However, he did not know to what parents he had been born, nor where he lived; but he had been born in the said lands of Gower as he testified above.
¶ Further to the eighth question; he replied that he had seen the said William a hundred times and more before the aforesaid hanging because he was born in the said lands of him and his father. And he said after the said hanging, he often saw him [Cragh] healthy because he lived for ten years and more after the said hanging, and died a natural death two years ago, just as he testified above in the eighth statement.
¶ Further the ninth and tenth question were answered by the witness himself above in the first and second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh articles of what he said, and also to the eleventh question of the year and the place in which the aforesaid had happened. They asked about the day; he said he did not remember; concerning the month, he said that it was between the feast of St Michael and the feast of All Saints,Between the 29th Spetember and 1st November. but concerning those who were present at the said hanging, he said when they asked him he could not remember.
¶ Further to the twelfth question, he answered that it was public opinion and the voice of the community in those parts and is to this [day], and all the people commonly discussed this they believed and asserted that the said William Cragh was resuscitated because of the miraculous-ness and the intention of the said St Thomas de Cantilupe.The most common request for a saint’s intercession was in the hope of a cure(Porterfield, 2005: 70; Vauchez, 1997: 466-77).
For the full history of Thomas’ cures into the seventeenth century (when his relics were paraded around the streets of Hereford to ward off the plague), see Crook (2011: 305-6). They asked about who thought [this]; he said he had had heard this from public report from all who discussed the aforesaid [events], and had not heard anyone say the opposite. They asked what he was calling and what he believed to be public report, and common opinion in this his testimony? He replied that when something is so true that people commonly assert publically that it had come to pass and no one said the opposite nor did it appear the opposite; and it happened [to be so] in the case in which he himself was testifying, he said.A fundamental requirement for the initiation of any inquisitorial or enquiry process called for by the papacy was ‘publica fama’. See Kelly (2013: 8-29) for a full discussion.
¶ Further the thirteenth question is answered by his above responses.
¶ Further they asked whether his testimony have or will have caused by prayer, command, fear, hate, love, reward, profit gained or promised; and whether he had been taught or instructed in the testimony and whether he had harmonised this testimony with other witnesses. He replied no.
¶ Further they asked if he was related to the said master Thomas? He replied that he believed that yes, about three or even four times removed,For the precise relationship between the Briouze family and Thomas de Cantilupe, see ‘Introduction’. but he was not quite certain about that, and he said, he had not seen the LordThomas himself, except once or twice, that he recalled, when the witness himself was a boy. However, he said by the sacraments by his oath that he had not testified nor had he said the aforesaid [testimony] on account of the goodwill of relatives or from any other cause nor by any cause other than the truth.
¶ Further they asked about his age. He replied that he was about 46 years old.
¶ Further they asked, if he had seen any other miracle that he believed occurred through the merits of the said Lord Thomas de Cantilupe? He replied no. But he had heard this reported about many miracles [i.e. heard of his involvement in many miracles].Thomas’s miracles became well known across England, and even in France (Vauchez, 1997: ??) And because he seemed to have been having examined he was dismissed, and he testified in the French vernacular.
Notes
¶ Concerning the said first hanging miracle. Afterwards, on the next day, the noble man, baron and knight, son of the former Lord William de Briouze the aforesaid husband of Lady Mary, (examined immediately above,) was brought forward by the proctor of the Chapter of Hereford to give testimony to the above said miracle. The above being under oath, firstly he said according to the virtue of [his] oath [and] stating by the same [oath], that there will be eighteen years between the next feast of the blessed Michael29th September in the future and the feast of All Saints1st November upon which he gave his testimony, since he had taken custody of the lands of his aforementioned father. At that time there was a war between the Welsh and lord Edward (who is now King of the English),See Dictionary of National Biography entry for more details: http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/printable/8517 and they call the land of the said witness and his aforementioned father in Wales Gower, which the said witness is now in custody of. It happened at the aforementioned time that a certain malefactor,The Latin here reads 'malefactores'. I have chosen to translate it as 'malefactor', both because it reflects the Latin implication od one who 'does bad deeds' but also because the term is commonly used by historians of crime in the Middle Ages, such as Merback, 1999 (who during the said war was a rebel [against] the said lord king), named William Cragh, originally from the said land of Gower. He was captured by the men protecting the said witness’ father’s and his own lands, with a certain other malefactor who was called Trahaearn ap Hywel. This was during the taking of Oystermouth Castle, mentioned in the short annals contained in Neath Abbey's Domesday Breviate: LINK – to extra material. And both were sentenced to be hanged, and to be hanged by the witness himself and his father’s peopleDespite the rise in legal officials across the course of the Middle Ages, by the fifteenth century, it was still the local community which was chiefly responsible for the apprehension and punishment of criminals(McCall, 1979: 52). on a certain day around the middle of Prime the said locality called Swansea, or even near the said locality’s district, around half an English league from the said locality of his said Castle of Swansea.
¶ Further, second he said, that it had been around the ninth hour of the said day,This equates to early to mid-afternoon by our modern reckoning: nine hours after sunrise. and people had already gone to eat, [when] rumours came up to the said witness himself and [his] father and that the centre beam or the wood between the middle of the said gallows on which the aforesaid two were suspended, gave way. And this was seen from the hall of the lodge of the said castle of the said father of the witness himself, and the witness himself and many others from his household and as a result of this they were very amazed, and they sent some messengers to see what had happened. And when those who went returned to the father and the witness himself and they said to the witness himself and the others that the middle beam between the wood upon which the aforesaid two were hanged was broken, and that the aforesaid two were dead.
¶ Further, thirdly he said, that because the said William Cragh was a very famous, and public, malefactor, the father of the aforesaid witness (who was not present at the time of the aforesaid capture, but was in his said lands at the time of the hanging) ordered that the said William Cragh be hanged again, and that the other who was hanged with him be buried; and so the command was carried out, just as he ordered. And he said that said William Cragh was again rehanged and he hung suspended on the said gallows from the said ninth hour until Vespers,Vespers was the sunset service in the medieval Church. For more on the canonical hours, see Introduction [link]. certainly all the way up to sunset, at the time they call evening in the aforesaid land of his father. Then the friends of the said hanged William Cragh asked for his body from the father of the said witness in order to be able to bury it themselves the next day.It was normal for executed criminals to rely on friends and family rather than the Church to ensure they had a proper burial (Handley, 2011: 51;Daniell, 1997: 247;and McCall, 1979: 75). And the concession was made, because the people of the said witness, and the witness himself reported, (and it was commonly said) that the said William Cragh was dead when he was hanged the second time. And everything said previously concerning the death by the said hanging, the said witness reported from what he believed and from the reports of others, because he had not seen the said dead William himself at that time; nevertheless he said that he saw, just as he said, from the said castle when William Cragh himself had been hanged the first time on the said gallows in the morning, and also a while afterwards he saw him hanged again, just as he said. And he heard it said by others that the said William Cragh was hanging on the said gallows until about the said setting of the sun.
¶ Fourthly, he said, that after the aforesaid setting of the sun the same day that the said William Cragh was hanged, the friends of William Cragh himself (on account of the favour that the father of the witness himself made), were able to bury the same William. Yet having been questioned, he did not know whether they carried William themselves to the town of the said castle of Swansea from the house of a certain burgess (the said townsman whose name he said he said he could not recall when questioned), or if was in fact on a wooden wheel or even by another means. And then the witness himself with other members of his father’s household and his [own] men descended from the said castle, went down to the said town adjoining the castle itself, and he saw the aforesaid William who was hanged, and he discovered him in the house of the said burgess. Inside the house [he was] resting head-downwards on the ground in front of the first and larger doorway of the said house, remaining still as only a dead man can, and the witness himself and everyone else who saw William himself thought that William Cragh himself was dead, just as he said previously in his testimony.For a discussion of the contemporary views on the signs of death, see Vauchez, (1997: 491). And the at that time when the said witness saw the aforesaid William Cragh, he had a totally black face, and with bloodied or blood encrusted parts, and the eyes of William himself had popped out of their place, hanging down outside the eyelids of the said eyes, and the hollows of the eyes themselves were filled with blood. Moreover, the mouth of the said William Cragh and [his] neck and throat and all other parts situated around about, and even [his] nostrils were full of blood.It is a typical sign of death by hanging for the corpse to have a protruding tongue, with blood exuding from the mouth (Sharma, 2008: 56).The face also swells, with open and protruding eyes, while the tongue is often thrust out and damaged by ‘the convulsive action of the jaws’. The longer it takes to die, the more swollen the face neck, lips eyes and tongue become, because the heart and lungs only slowly shut down, meaning that blood continues to be pumped to the head, but cannot return to the heart due to the effect of the rope on the jugular vein, resulting in a build-up of blood in the face and features (Forbes et al., 1833: 175). When they questioned him, the same witness answered in this way: that it was impossible that the said William Cragh would have been able to breathe in or breathe out air through his said nostrils or though his mouth, or through his throat, or through his neck according to the way of nature, because it was inflamed and swollen and misshapen on account of the aforesaid hanging. Foremost he said he believed that (according to the way of nature) he was not able to breathe in and breathe out air through the mouth, and through his throat, and also through the neck, or the neck veins, because the tongue of the said William was hanging outside of his mouth further than if it was the length of the middle finger of a man’s hand; and the said tongue was black and inflamed with his own blood, and as swollen as if an ordinary man was holding two fists together at the same time; that therefore if he had been alive the said William would not have been able to withdraw his said tongue naturally for it was so swollen and inflamed, nor would he have been able to breathe in or even breathe out air through his mouth. This had been seen by the witness at that time, and it seemed the same to him up until this point, just as he said.
¶ Fifthly he said that seeing the said William Cragh, who was hanged, in the aforesaid position in the house of the aforesaid burgess, the said witness returned to the aforesaid castle. And then (when he had reported back the aforesaid [events] to her), the aforesaid Lady Mary his stepmother said, with devotion as it seemed to the same witness, (the witness himself hearing, and being present): ‘That man was hanged twice and had a great punishment. I pray to God and St Thomas of Cantilupe to give him life, and if they give him life we will bring him to praise the said St Thomas’These words are recorded in vernacular French by the notaries, instead of being translated into Latin like the rest of the testimony. Her promise to bring William to praise Thomas refers to the pilgrimage they later made to the saints tomb in Hereford. Compassion was a common emotional experience in ‘the theatre of public punishments, where pain was the spectacle’, (Merback, 1999: 152). And then the said lady sent one of her ladies in waiting named Jovanta
This is the second of three serving girls named in the course of these testimonies. Servants made up around a third of urban populations by this time in medieval Europe, of which percentage females consisted just over a half (Leyser, 1995: 156)' We do not often hear of named individuals like this, but for further reading on the subject see Shahar, (2003: 203-4);Jewell, (2007: 69-74); and Leyser, (1995: 156-8). (now dead), to measure the said William Cragh to the aforesaid St Thomas de Cantilupe;For more details on the practice of measuring bodies to saints, see Finucane, (1977); andVauchez, (1997: 456-7, 490). and the aforesaid lady in waiting went and measured him. After a while the said lady in waiting reported back the aforesaid [events] to her mistress, and the witness himself and others, and she folded one silver penny [placing it] on the said William’s head following the English custom,For further examples of pennies being bent in this manner, see Webb, (2000: 74). The bending of the penny is corroborated by several other witnesses. CLICK HERE. just as the said lady in waiting reported back, and she carried back the string with which she had measured the said William, and after a while the said string was covered in wax almost in the manner of a candle.This as a popular English custom in the Middle Ages. The idea was that a thread was used to measure the body, and that in the event of a miraculous cure the thread would be made into a votive candle for the saint responsible for the miracle. It was particularly common as a long-range device intended to attract the attention of the saint. For more on this practice, see Webb (2000: 74); Finucane (1977); Bartlett, (2006: 8-9) and Vauchez, (1997: 456-7, 490). And it was carried by the said William Cragh, after he regained health to the tomb of the said St Thomas of Cantilupe in the said Hereford Cathedral.For other accounts of this pilgrimage, CLICK HERE. For a detailed description of Thomas’ tomb and the creation of his shrine as a pilgrimage destination, see Crook, (2011: 235-9).
¶ Sixthly he said, that after the said measuring, the said William Cragh remained in that state (just as the same witness said and as it was commonly reported) from the aforesaid time of measuring, up to the middle of the night. And then it was said that he began to breathe in and breathe out breath, and move a leg. The said witness was asked [if he knew] anything concerning the manner of the working of the said miracle and of the reason for the recuperation of the said William in the same night and [how] he had been following the next three days which followed. He replied that he did not know.
¶ Seventh he said that four days after the said measuring, [hearing] by common report that the said William Cragh was miraculously restored to life, the same witness returned with others to the house of the said burgess, in which he had seen the said William lying dead earlier; and the same witness and others thought to look at the aforesaid William, and went themselves to the house of the aforesaid Burgess. [Cragh was] lying on a certain bed and his tongue was in part shrunken, and less distended and inflated; the said tongue was in part soothed. But still part of the said tongue remained in part outside of the aforesaid William’s mouth at this point; and [though] it allowed him to breathe in and breathe out breath, he was still not able to speak at that time nor had he been able to speak from the above-said time he was hanged, to the said fourth day, and this was spoken about publically.A fundamental requirement for the initiation of any inquisitorial or enquiry process called for by the papacy was ‘publica fama’. See Kelly (2013: 8-29) for a full discussion. The put-out eyes of the said William were in part improved, and made better, but still the said William could not see, nor was he able to see at that time, nor recognise people. Furthermore the appearance of the neck and throat of the said William were swollen until this point, yet when on the fourth day before the same witness said he saw the aforesaid William they were not so bad. And then the same witness dismissed the aforesaid William, and did not see him from then, nor did he know anything concerning his conduct at that time, until the said William was completely cured [and] he came with the father and stepmother of the witness himself, five weeks after when the witness had last seen [him], to the cathedral at Hereford;Visits to the tombs of saintly bishops was not an uncommon occurrence in this period. Robert Grossetesse’s tomb in Lincoln was similarly visited at this time, while he too was being considered for canonisation (Webb, 2000: 69 and Crook, 2011). For further discussion of the veneration of tombs as a pilgrimage destination, see Sumption (1975: 23). The idea that the miracle was ‘proclaimed’ during this visit is a demonstration of the spreading the news of miracles by word of mouth and the whole town getting involved (Webb, 2000: 73;Hole, 1954: 102; Sumption, 1975: 150-1). to which the same William Cragh came, bare foot,Conducting a pilgrimage in bare feet was a common practice in this period, as it was believed that the discomfort added to the penance and ascetic purpose of the endeavour. The parents of the apparently drowned and resuscitated Joanna were said to have walked barefoot to Hereford to give thanks to St Thomas for the miracle. (Webb, 2000: xiv and 75). For further examples and discussion of this, see Sumption (1975: 123-8). with the same rope or noose with which William himself had been suspended by the neck, and the said noose was left at Hereford Cathedral; and a certain wax gallows with a likeness of a hanged waxed man, (which the aforesaid father of the witness had caused to be made,) [was] offered on account of the said miracle in Hereford Cathedral, before the tomb of the said master Thomas.The practice of offering wax models is well documented at Hereford, where over 2000 are known to have been left for St Thomas. The image was supposed to relate to the miracle being sought or granted – in William’s case a wax man hanging on the gallows, but others included a head for chronic headaches and eyeballs for blindness. For further details, please see, Webb (2000: 74-5); Nilson (1999: 105); Sumption (1975: 157);
Vauchez (1997: 221, 456-7). For the origins of this custom growing out of previously held pagan beliefs, see, Crook (2011: 21-2).
¶ Eighth he said that after the said William Cragh, who vowed to go beyond the sea in person,This a reference to the pilgrimage to the Holy Land which William Cragh apparently promised to undertake immediately after his pilgrimage to Hereford. Pilgrimage to the Holy Land and Jerusalem was deemed to be the most dangerous (and therefore the most rewarding) of all (Sumption, 1975). Perhaps the extent of the miraculous nature of William Cragh’s revival was thought to warrant such and extreme journey to truly reflect his appreciation. the father of the said witness himself and others returned to his lands, and the same witness saw him after the aforesaid [events] in his said lands for ten years and some beyond [this]; and finally the said William died in his aforesaid lands of natural weakness, almost two years ago.
¶ Further he said he had heard said this particular said William Cragh reported what he had seen and felt while he had entreated, when he was hanged, and after the aforesaid hanging, and in what manner he had been cured. It had seemed to him that a certain bishop clothed in white with white apparel put back the tongue of William himself into the mouth of the same William, and thus he had recovered the breath of life. However, he said the said William Cragh did not pronounce, as far as the witness himself had heard, that the aforesaid bishop was the said master Thomas de Cantilupe; nor did the same William pronounce seeing or experiencing anything other pertaining to testing the before-said miracle on the gallows or appeared after he was taken down from the same gallows, he said.
¶ After this the said master William de Briouze, being near the third question on the third article, on the form of the miracle, they asked if the miracle which he had said occurred in the person of the said William Cragh, was beyond or against nature.A fundamental characteristic of a miracle was that the occurrence had to be seen as going ‘against’ or ‘above’ what is naturally possible in this world as miracles were seen as being part of the Augustinian model of God’s higher natural order (Sumption, 1975: 54-5 and 65). He replied that from the disposition that he had seen in the said William he did not believe, nor estimate that by natural human strength or resilience would it have been possible to cure [him] of the suffering which he had [undergone] and thereby avoided death after the above-said hanging.
¶ Further to the fourth question; he replied what he said on the fifth statement above.
¶ Further to the fifth question; he replied that the witness himself knew or believed or had heard he said that neither herbs, nor stones or even other natural things or medicines, nor enchantments,There was deemed to be a fine line between magic and miracle at the time, particularly in cases relating to the raising of the dead, for although it is a key Christian tenant that the dead will live again and that Christ was resurrected, the act could also be seen as the work of a necromancer. For a detailed discussion of medieval ideas on the subject, see Rampton (1999). nor superstitions, nor trickery or other intervened in the operation of the said miracle.The possibility that some trickery was involved in Williams ‘miraculous’ recovery is worth considering. Experiments were carried out in the nineteenth century replicating the hanging procedure. Results showed that a small hole made in the windpipe just below where the rope sits allows the suspended individual to continue breathing enough to survive though their face will still become swollen and puce (Forbes et al., 1833: 176). No indeed, he believed totally the opposite, principally because the witness’ father himself and the witness himself, and his officials, and attendants hated the said William Cragh because he was the worst criminal, and worse than other criminals, and had perpetrated many crimes, and brought about the murder of men and robberies and arson in his land, and was very physically robust. Furthermore he said when questioned that the manner in which men were hanged in his father’s land is such that they die immediately from hanging after being hanged, because a running noose is placed around their neck, and the knot of the said noose rests at the back part of the neck in such a way that they are suffocated at once, and if they do not die and somehow trickery intervenes in the hanging by means of which a hanged man is able to prolong [his] life the executioner who did the hanging is hung [himself], according to the manner of the father's land. He said also that it is permitted in the customary practice in the native land of the aforesaid Wales that those who ought to hanged can evade hanging with money if the ransom satisfies the temporal lord. However, [concerning] the ransom for the said William Cragh, the father of the said witness was unwilling to receive the ransom, although he had been offered 100 cows for William Cragh himself and for the other man hanged with the same William, by the friends of the said hanged men.Murderers could be pardoned in return for compensation usually paid by the criminal’s family (Gordon et al., 2000: 243; McCall, 1979: 71).
Out of 317 criminal cases recorded over a two year period in the Lincolnshire Assize Rolls, 271 bought their way out of punishment by paying fines (Ibid).
¶ Further to the sixth question; he replied that the faith, and devotion of the said William Cragh was increased on account of the said miracle because he ceased to perpetrate the said crimes.Reformation of character following a miracle was deemed to be an important part of the miracle process, (Koopmans, 2011), and indeed the main reason for the Virgin Mary interceding on behalf of sinners (Warner, 1976: 324-5). Criminals were said to have been reformed thanks to the intercession of St Thomas Becket many of which were performed at his tomb in Canterbury (Sumption, 1975: 128). For further discussion and examples of saintly intercession, see Vauchez (1997: 133-4) and Clements-Jewery (2005). And also, others from those parts had greater faith and devotion in God and in the said St Thomas due to this [miracle], and frequent pilgrimages were made to the tomb of the said St Thomas.Cults growing up around saints did tend to be local in nature. For further discussion and examples, see Vauchez (1997: 130-3).
¶ Further to the seventh [question]; he replied that it seemed to the same witness that the said William Cragh was about 40 years old. However, he did not know to what parents he had been born, nor where he lived; but he had been born in the said lands of Gower as he testified above.
¶ Further to the eighth question; he replied that he had seen the said William a hundred times and more before the aforesaid hanging because he was born in the said lands of him and his father. And he said after the said hanging, he often saw him [Cragh] healthy because he lived for ten years and more after the said hanging, and died a natural death two years ago, just as he testified above in the eighth statement.
¶ Further the ninth and tenth question were answered by the witness himself above in the first and second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh articles of what he said, and also to the eleventh question of the year and the place in which the aforesaid had happened. They asked about the day; he said he did not remember; concerning the month, he said that it was between the feast of St Michael and the feast of All Saints,Between the 29th Spetember and 1st November. but concerning those who were present at the said hanging, he said when they asked him he could not remember.
¶ Further to the twelfth question, he answered that it was public opinion and the voice of the community in those parts and is to this [day], and all the people commonly discussed this they believed and asserted that the said William Cragh was resuscitated because of the miraculous-ness and the intention of the said St Thomas de Cantilupe.The most common request for a saint’s intercession was in the hope of a cure(Porterfield, 2005: 70; Vauchez, 1997: 466-77).
For the full history of Thomas’ cures into the seventeenth century (when his relics were paraded around the streets of Hereford to ward off the plague), see Crook (2011: 305-6). They asked about who thought [this]; he said he had had heard this from public report from all who discussed the aforesaid [events], and had not heard anyone say the opposite. They asked what he was calling and what he believed to be public report, and common opinion in this his testimony? He replied that when something is so true that people commonly assert publically that it had come to pass and no one said the opposite nor did it appear the opposite; and it happened [to be so] in the case in which he himself was testifying, he said.A fundamental requirement for the initiation of any inquisitorial or enquiry process called for by the papacy was ‘publica fama’. See Kelly (2013: 8-29) for a full discussion.
¶ Further the thirteenth question is answered by his above responses.
¶ Further they asked whether his testimony have or will have caused by prayer, command, fear, hate, love, reward, profit gained or promised; and whether he had been taught or instructed in the testimony and whether he had harmonised this testimony with other witnesses. He replied no.
¶ Further they asked if he was related to the said master Thomas? He replied that he believed that yes, about three or even four times removed,For the precise relationship between the Briouze family and Thomas de Cantilupe, see ‘Introduction’. but he was not quite certain about that, and he said, he had not seen the LordThomas himself, except once or twice, that he recalled, when the witness himself was a boy. However, he said by the sacraments by his oath that he had not testified nor had he said the aforesaid [testimony] on account of the goodwill of relatives or from any other cause nor by any cause other than the truth.
¶ Further they asked about his age. He replied that he was about 46 years old.
¶ Further they asked, if he had seen any other miracle that he believed occurred through the merits of the said Lord Thomas de Cantilupe? He replied no. But he had heard this reported about many miracles [i.e. heard of his involvement in many miracles].Thomas’s miracles became well known across England, and even in France (Vauchez, 1997: ??) And because he seemed to have been having examined he was dismissed, and he testified in the French vernacular.
