Alizon Device and John Law (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
Alizon Device and John Law
Background context: the 1604 statute
Before examining the case of Alizon Device and John Law, it's important to understand the legal framework that shaped the 1612 Lancashire witch trials.
When James VI and I ascended to the English throne in 1603, he brought with him a deep personal interest in witchcraft. Historians have identified his accession as a crucial catalyst for reforming witchcraft legislation in England. The 1604 Witchcraft Act was particularly significant because it made the conjuring of spirits a capital offence (an offence punishable by death).
The 1604 Act represented a major shift in English law. Unlike earlier legislation that focused primarily on harm caused by magic, this new statute emphasized the theological crime of making pacts with evil spirits - reflecting James I's continental European influences and his personal writings on demonology.
Key features of the 1604 statute
- Continental influence: James promoted the continental European view that witchcraft originated from a pact with the Devil
- Threat to social order: The diabolical pact was seen as threatening the stability of society
- First successful prosecution: The 1612 trial, as recorded by Thomas Potts (clerk of the court), was the first clear evidence that the new law was working effectively
Fusion of elite and popular beliefs
The historian Stephen Pumfrey argued that the Lancashire trials represented a unique fusion of two different approaches to witchcraft:
Elite demonology (learned, continental beliefs):
- Focused on the diabolical pact with Satan
- Emphasised the theological threat of Devil worship
- Shaped by educated inquisitors and scholars
Popular beliefs (traditional English folk beliefs):
- Focused on maleficium (harmful magic causing practical harm)
- Belief in familiar spirits (companion animals that helped witches)
- Concerned with everyday misfortunes like illness, death of livestock, crop failure
The Unique English Approach to Witchcraft
Pumfrey noted that trial records show complex interactions between these two belief systems. Elite inquisitors could transform popular non-diabolic beliefs into stories of Satanism that the accused themselves sometimes came to accept. Importantly, English elites accepted the popular English belief in familiars, whereas continental European demonology had no place for such creatures. This fusion made English witch trials distinctive from their continental counterparts.
The initial encounter: 18 March 1612
The case that would eventually lead to the notorious 1612 Lancashire witch trials began with a seemingly ordinary roadside encounter.
John Law: the pedlar
John Law was a pedlar from Halifax - a person who travelled from place to place selling small goods such as pins, ribbons, and other household items. On 18 March 1612, he was travelling with his pack of wares on his back through Colne-field, carrying out his normal business.
Alizon Device: the beggar
Alizon Device was begging outside Pendle Forest on the road to Colne when she encountered Law. She was the granddaughter of Elizabeth Southerns (known as Old Demdike), one of the two matriarchs at the centre of the Lancashire witch accusations.
What happened during the encounter
According to Thomas Potts' account in The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches (1613):
- The request: Alizon asked John Law for some pins
- The refusal: Law refused to give her any pins
- Alizon's anger: She reacted angrily to his refusal
- Immediate illness: Law immediately suffered great pain and became paralysed down one side (presumably from a stroke) and unable to speak
- The familiar appears: Law then saw Alizon's familiar spirit in the shape of a black dog with very fearful fiery eyes, great teeth, and a terrible countenance looking him in the face
- Alizon's brief appearance: Alizon briefly appeared to him again
- Continuing torment: Law remained in great pain, unable to travel or work, tormented by the maleficium (harmful magic) caused by Alizon
Alizon's own testimony
According to Alizon's own account, she was relatively inexperienced in witchcraft. She testified that:
- Her familiar spirit (the black dog) appeared to her immediately after the encounter with Law
- The spirit asked if she would like to harm Law
- As a self-described novice witch, she told the dog to harm Law
- She was apparently surprised when the curse worked immediately and effectively
This testimony suggests either genuine belief in her own magical powers or a confession shaped by interrogation and the expectations of the authorities. Modern historians debate whether accused witches truly believed in their powers or whether confessions were the product of leading questions, torture, or the desire to tell interrogators what they wanted to hear.
Contradictions in the accounts
There are significant contradictions in the various accounts of what actually happened between Alizon and John Law. These contradictions are important because they raise questions about the reliability of the evidence.
Alizon's confession
At her trial, Alizon confessed to laming (paralysing) Law because he would not sell her any pins.
John Law's testimony
John Law stated at the trial that Alizon had begged him for pins and he had refused her, after which he became ill. This matches the basic account in Potts' narrative.
Abraham Law's testimony
However, Abraham Law (John's son) told the court something quite different:
- Alizon had no money to pay for the pins
- Despite this, his father had actually given her some pins
Critical Evidence Contradiction
Abraham Law's testimony directly contradicts both Alizon's confession and John Law's own testimony. This raises serious questions about what actually transpired:
- If John Law gave Alizon pins, why would she curse him?
- Why did John Law himself testify that he refused her?
- Was Alizon's confession reliable, or was it shaped by expectations of what a witch accusation should look like?
These contradictions highlight the problematic nature of witchcraft trial evidence, where accounts could be influenced by interrogation techniques, cultural expectations, and the desire to conform to established narrative patterns.
Thomas Potts' interpretation
Naturally, Thomas Potts presented the encounter according to the established narrative pattern of witchcraft accusations. He portrayed it as the typical story of:
- A witch being refused help or charity by a member of the community
- The witch retaliating in revenge through magical harm
This was a common pattern in witchcraft accusations across early modern Europe - the idea that witches would curse those who refused them aid.
The role of Abraham Law: escalation of the case
Abraham Law played a crucial role in transforming a personal dispute into a legal case that would eventually ensnare 19 people.
Abraham learns of his father's condition
Abraham Law was living in Halifax when he received a letter informing him of his father's sudden illness and paralysis. He immediately travelled to Colne to see his father.
Confrontation with Alizon Device: 29 March 1612
On 29 March 1612 (eleven days after the initial encounter), Abraham went in search of Alizon Device and brought her to see his father. The confrontation was highly emotional:
- Alizon's plea for forgiveness: Alizon begged John Law for forgiveness
- John Law's response: He freely and voluntarily forgave her for the "wicked offence"
- Alizon's emotional state: She humbly acknowledged what had happened, cried out to God to forgive her, and fell to her knees with weeping tears
John Law's testimony at trial
At the trial, John Law gave evidence with great emotion. According to Potts:
- He spoke "with weeping tears in great passion"
- He turned to Alizon and said, "This thou knowest to be too true"
- Alizon humbly acknowledged the truth of his statement
- She again asked both God and Law to forgive her
Why Did John Law Forgive Alizon?
John Law's willingness to forgive Alizon is striking. Possible explanations include:
- Christian duty: A genuine Christian impulse to forgive
- Belief in her powers: He may have feared further harm if he didn't forgive her
- Sympathy: Despite his suffering, he may have felt sympathy for the young woman
- Pressure: He may have felt social or family pressure to show mercy
The fact that he forgave her yet still testified against her at trial suggests the complex pressures operating in these cases.
Abraham Law's anger and the legal complaint
Despite his father's forgiveness, Abraham Law was incensed (extremely angry). He was not prepared to let the matter rest and took decisive action:
- He reported the matter to Roger Nowell, a local magistrate
- Nowell was known for his active interest in prosecuting witchcraft cases
- At the trial, Nowell specifically requested that Abraham Law's examination be read in court because this case of witchcraft was "more eminent and apparent than the rest"
The witch-hunt snowballs
From Abraham Law's initial complaint to Roger Nowell, the investigation quickly escalated:
- The case expanded rapidly through March and April 1612
- By the end of April, 19 people were in custody at Lancaster Castle
- They were all awaiting trial at the August assizes (court sessions)
The Power of One Accusation
This dramatic escalation shows how one accusation could trigger a wave of investigations, as authorities uncovered (or created) a supposed network of witches in the Pendle area. Abraham Law's decision to pursue the case - despite his father's forgiveness - demonstrates how individual actions could determine life or death for accused witches. Had Abraham accepted his father's forgiveness and not reported to Roger Nowell, the 1612 Lancashire witch trials might never have occurred.
Background: the Demdike and Chattox families
To fully understand Alizon Device's case, it's essential to know about the long-standing rivalry between two families in the Pendle area.
The two matriarchs
Two elderly women headed rival families in the Pendle Forest area:
Elizabeth Southerns (Old Demdike):
- Grandmother of Alizon Device
- Died in prison before the trial
- Reputed to have been practising witchcraft for many years
Anne Whittle (Old Chattox):
- Rival of Old Demdike
- Eventually hanged as a witch in 1612
The origins of family rivalry: 1601
The chain of events leading to the 1612 trial can be traced back to around 1601, when the two families fell out over a theft:
The theft:
- Some clothing and grain worth 20 shillings were stolen from Alizon Device
- The following Sunday, Alizon saw Anne Redferne (daughter of Old Chattox) wearing a stolen cap and band
- The two families began trading accusations of theft and slander
The settlement:
- Old Chattox appears to have been the more powerful of the two women
- John Device (Alizon's father) offered Old Chattox a settlement
- He promised to pay her a yearly tribute of grain
- This arrangement settled the situation temporarily
- However, when John Device died a few years later, the payments stopped and tensions resumed
The Tribute System
The yearly grain tribute that John Device paid to Old Chattox reveals the power dynamics at play. This was essentially a protection payment - by giving Chattox grain annually, the Device family hoped to avoid being cursed or harmed. When the payments stopped after John's death, the fragile peace between the families collapsed, setting the stage for the 1612 accusations.
Competition for a limited market
Historian John Swain suggests the rivalry went deeper than one theft incident. The families may have been competing for economic survival:
Sources of income:
- Healing and folk medicine: Acting as wise women or cunning folk
- Begging: Regular expeditions asking for charity
- Extortion: Using their reputation for witchcraft to obtain money or goods
Evidence of healing activities:
- Alizon Device said that although she couldn't cure John Law, her grandmother Old Demdike could have done it if she had lived
- John Nutter had asked Demdike to cure a sick cow, but it died
- Some of those accused were probably practitioners of herbal or folk medicine
- When healing failed, they inevitably got blamed
The Economic Importance of Magical Reputation
Swain argues that a reputation for witchcraft, and being more successful than rivals, was economically important. This may explain why the families were such bitter enemies - they were competing for the same limited resources and clientele. In an impoverished area like Pendle, where survival was precarious, any perceived competition for income could fuel intense rivalries. A reputation as a powerful witch or healer could mean the difference between receiving charity and being turned away.
The Nutter family accusations: c.1595
Even before the 1601 family dispute, accusations of witchcraft were being made against Old Chattox:
The incident:
- Around 1595, Christopher Nutter was travelling home from Burnley with his sons Robert and John
- They lived at Greenhead, an impressive residence within Pendle Forest
- Old Chattox was living as a tenant on their land with Anne and Thomas Redferne
Robert Nutter's accusation:
- Robert was unwell and insisted he had been bewitched by Chattox and her daughter
- His father didn't believe him
- Robert threatened Thomas Redferne that he would have him removed from his house
- Robert then left for Chester
- He died on his return from Chester
Christopher Nutter's death:
- Soon after Robert's death, Christopher became ill
- He died after three months
- Although initially sceptical about witchcraft, Christopher insisted on his deathbed that he had been bewitched
- However, he did not name any individuals
Later consequences:
- John Nutter, the surviving son, would later give evidence against Old Chattox at the 1612 trial
- This shows how old grievances and suspicions accumulated over many years
The Long Memory of Witchcraft Accusations
The Nutter family case demonstrates how witchcraft accusations could simmer for years before erupting into formal legal action. Christopher Nutter's deathbed belief in his own bewitchment - despite his earlier scepticism - shows how illness and fear could transform doubters into believers. The fact that John Nutter testified against Chattox seventeen years after his brother's death illustrates how communities preserved memories of suspected witchcraft, waiting for the right moment to bring formal charges.
Family connections
The Demdike family:
- Elizabeth Southerns (Old Demdike): Matriarch, died in prison
- Christopher Howgate: Old Demdike's son, reported as being at the Malkin Tower meeting
- Elizabeth Device: Widow of John Device, hanged
- James Device: Hanged
- Alizon Device: Hanged
- Jennet Device: Key witness against her own family
The Chattox family:
- Anne Whittle (Old Chattox): Matriarch, hanged
- Elizabeth Whittle (Bessie): Daughter
- Anne Whittle: Daughter, hanged, married to Thomas Redferne
- Marie Redferne: Granddaughter
Exam guidance
Understanding the significance of the Alizon Device case
When answering exam questions about the Lancashire witch trials, remember that the Alizon Device and John Law case is significant because:
- It triggered the wider investigation: One complaint to Roger Nowell led to 19 arrests
- It shows the fusion of beliefs: The case combines popular beliefs (maleficium, familiars) with elite concerns about diabolical pacts
- It reveals contradictions: The conflicting testimonies raise questions about the reliability of evidence
- It demonstrates social tensions: Economic hardship, family rivalries, and community conflicts all played roles
- It illustrates the legal process: From accusation to magistrate to trial, showing how the 1604 Act was applied
Common Pitfalls to Avoid
- Don't treat witchcraft accusations as simple fact: Always consider the contradictions and different perspectives
- Don't ignore the social and economic context: Poverty, competition for resources, and family feuds were crucial factors
- Don't overlook the role of individuals like Abraham Law: Personal decisions to pursue or drop accusations could determine who lived or died
- Don't forget the legal framework: The 1604 Act created the conditions that made these prosecutions possible
Linking to wider themes
When writing essays, connect the Alizon Device case to:
- The impact of the 1604 Witchcraft Act: This case demonstrates how the new law was applied in practice
- Social and economic conditions: Poverty in Pendle, competition for scarce resources
- Gender: Most accused were women, often elderly and marginalised
- The role of witnesses: Jennet Device would later testify against her own family
- Continental vs. English beliefs: The fusion of different witch-hunting traditions
Key Points to Remember:
- 18 March 1612: Alizon Device encountered John Law and allegedly cursed him after he refused her pins
- Key contradiction: Abraham Law testified his father had given Alizon pins, contradicting other accounts
- Abraham Law's role was crucial: Despite his father's forgiveness, Abraham reported Alizon to magistrate Roger Nowell, triggering a massive investigation
- 19 people arrested by end of April 1612: One accusation snowballed into a major witch-hunt
- Long-standing family rivalries: The Demdike and Chattox families had been feuding since at least 1601, competing for income from healing, begging, and their reputations as wise women
- The case demonstrates fusion of beliefs: Elite demonology (diabolical pacts, Devil worship) combined with popular English beliefs (maleficium, familiar spirits like the black dog)
- Economic competition: Both families relied on their reputations as healers and wise women for survival in an impoverished area
- Accumulated grievances: The Nutter family accusations from c.1595 show how witchcraft suspicions could persist for decades before formal prosecution