by Clem Fandango

Part three -   The Perils of Moral Hypocrisy in Old Glasgow.

‍

Regarding the issue of sexual misdemeanors, the historical records suggest that the burden of punishment and guilt often fell disproportionately on women. For instance, on April 22, 1602, Marget Holme, a prostitute who had already been subjected to the punishments of ducking, carting, and banishment the previous week, had the audacity to return to Glasgow. In response, the Kirk Session determined  - 

‍

''...in the hiche house, within the tolbooth of this citie... therin to remain whil the morn at ten hours... Then to be taen to the castell and thence to be cartet down throut this town fra the said castell to the water of Clyde, then to be dowkit and baneseit this town for ever, and to have the sound of drum strykand at the wynd-head, croce, and hidder end of the brig, and she and her carter and cart standand still, and the drummers to cry, this person, Marget Holme, for her huirdom and harlotrie, committit be her in this town, is baneseit furth of this town, and is tane on the cart to be dowkit in Clyde, with certification to her, gif ever she shall be fund in this town hereafter, she shall be brunt on the cheik, and baneseit thereafter furth of the samine.''

‍

The same Kirk Session in the same year treated Marget Holme's male counterparts with considerable leniency. They decided that:

‍

"...whatever person shall be found a paunder or resetter of whores or [have] whoremongers in their house, shall make their repentance at the pillar in sackcloth, and on Monday, be carted through the town, with this inscription on their forehead, 'A Pandrus'.''

‍

In the annals of Glasgow's past, the treatment of criminals and offenders reveals a striking contrast between the city's self-proclaimed moral standing and the realities of its justice system. While public shaming and humiliation were common punishments, often reserved for women, the true measure of the town's moral fibre is found in its response to more serious crimes.

‍

One notable example is the case of Thomas Myln, a surgeon who dared to criticize the town and its leaders in 1589. For his perceived transgressions, Myln was forced to make a public apology, faced a hefty fine, and even lost a year's pension. The message was clear: dissent, no matter how justified, would not be tolerated in this self-righteous community.

‍

Even more troubling is the handling of sexual crimes, particularly rape. Despite being one of the "pleas of the crown," cases of rape were rarely met with meaningful punishment. In 1590, the town's own executioner, John Anderson, confessed to a brutal attempted rape, yet he was merely banished from the town, with the threat of a flogging should he return. Similarly, in 1612, a "Highlandman fiddler" accused of raping an eight-year-old girl was subjected to little more than a stint in the stocks before being sent on his way.

‍

These examples paint a disturbing picture of a society that was more concerned with maintaining its outward appearance of morality than with truly upholding justice. The public humiliation of petty offenders, particularly women, stood in sharp contrast to the leniency shown towards those who committed grievous crimes. This hypocrisy undermines the very foundation of a just and equitable system of law and order.

‍

End of part three.

Next time - Town records on Sexual Intercourse in the 16th century!

‍