The reverse or back-face of the English Janus to-wit, all that is met with in story concerning the common and statute-law of English Britanny, from the first memoirs of the two nations, to the decease of King Henry II. set down and tackt together succinctly by way of narrative : designed, devoted and dedicated to the most illustrious the Earl of Salisbury / written in Latin by John Selden ... ; and rendred into English by Redman Westcot, Gent.

CHAP. XX.

Their severe punishments of Adultery, by maiming some parts of the body. The reason of it given by Bracton. The like practised by Danes and Normans.

30.

THe Husband if his Wife playes the Whore, cuts off her hair, strips her naked, and turns her out of doors in presence of her Kindred, and drives her through the Streets, lashing or beating her as she goes along.

They were formerly in this Northern part of the World, most severe punishers of Adultery, and they ahd such Laws as were

—ipsis Marti Venerique timenda;* 1.1

that is, such as would

Put Mars and Venus in a trance Of fear, amidst their dalliance.

King Knute ordered,* 1.2 That a Wife, who took another Passenger on board her than her Husband, and

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Oft times ith' nights away she hies, And into other harbour flyes.* 1.3

(Well speed thee and thine, fair Venus; nor do I willingly bring these ill tidings to thy tender Ducklings.) should have her Nose and ears cut off.

I remember,* 1.4 Antinous in Homer threatens Irus with the chopping off his Nose, Ears and Privities; and Vlysses inflicts that very punishment upon his Goat-herd Melanthius, for his having been too officious in his pimping attendance upon the Gallants, that haunted the house in his absence. How any one should deserve this penalty, which so disfigures Nature, I do not yet sufficiently understand.

Heraclid••s Ponticus informs us,* 1.5 That Law-makers were wont to maim that part especially which committed the misdemeanour. In testimony of this, he mentions Tytius his Liver as the Shop and Work-house of Lust; and it were not hard matter to bring in other more pertinent in∣stances; and

Pereant partes, quae nocuere.

saith some Poet,

The parts that did the hurt, Let them e'en suffer for't.

However it was not Melanthius his Ears, and by no means his Nose that offended; no nor the good Wives neither that commits the fact: as Martial the merry Wag tells a certain Husband,

Quis tibi persuasit nares abscindere moecho?* 1.6 Non hàc peccata est parte, marite, tibi.

that is, with modesty to render it,

What made thee, angry man, to cut The Nose of him, that went to rut? 'Twas not that part, that did th' offence: Therefore to punish that, what sense?

But who doth not see, that a Woman hath no other parts of her body so lyable to maiming or cutting off? Both those parts make much for the setting her off; nor are there any others in the whole outward frame of the Microcosm, which being cut off, do either more disparage beauty, or withal less afflict the animal vertue, as they call it, by which life is maintain'd. Now for those, who of old time did unlucki∣ly, that is, without the favour of those Heathen Gods Prema and Muti∣nus, to whose service they were so addicted, offer violence to untain∣ted chastity;

the loss of members did await the lust of such persons, that there might be member for member

(they are the words of Hen∣ry Bracton,* 1.7 a very ancient Writer of our Law, and they are clear testi∣monies, that the English have practised the Law of like for like) quia virgo, cùm corrumpitur, membrum amittit, & ideò corruptor puniatur in eo in quo deliquit:* 1.8 oculos igitur amittat propter aspectum decoris, quo virgi∣nem concupivit; amittat & testiculos, qui calorem stupri induxerunt. So long ago,

Aut linguam aut oculos aut quae tibi membra pudorem* 1.9 Abstulerant, ferro rapiam.

sayes Progne to her Sister Philomele, speaking of the filthy Villain Te∣reus, who had ravished her,

I'le cut out his eyes or tongue, Or those parts which did thée the wrong.

and Plautus in his Play called Paenulus, Sy. Facio quod manifesto moechi haud ferme solent. Mi. Ruid id est? Sy. Referovasa salva.

I remember I have read that Jeoffry de Millers a Nobleman of Norfolk,* 1.10 for having inticed the Daughter of John Briton to an Assignation, and ingaged her with venereal pledges; being betrayed and trepann'd by the Baggage, underwent this execution; and suffered besides, whatso••ver a Fathers fury in such a case would prompt him to do: But withal, that King Henry the third was grievously offended at it, dis-inherited Briton, banished him,* 1.11 and gave order by Proclamation, that no one should pre∣sume, unless it were in his Wives case, to do the like. But these passa∣ges are of later date, and since the Normans time and from them; unless you will bring hither that which we meet with in Alured's Law concern∣ing* 1.12 a Man and a Maid-servant.

From whence we slide back again to Tacitus.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Juvenal. S••••.
• * 1.2

  Canut. leg. can. 50.
• * 1.3

  Theognis.
• * 1.4

  Odyss. 18. & 22.
• * 1.5

  In Allegoriis ••omeric.
• * 1.6

  Martial. l. 3. Epig. 43.
• * 1.7

  Bracton. de Coronâ l. 3. c. 28.
• * 1.8

  An. 18 Ed. 3. fol. 20. à Bri∣ton. cap. 25.
• * 1.9

  Ovid. Meta∣mor. l. 7.
• * 1.10

  Matth. Parls in H. 3. pag. 1000.
• * 1.11

  Vid. l. 2. art. 8.
• * 1.12

  Alured. leg. can. 25.