Broadening the Scope: Moving beyond Simple Sources

Abstract

In order to comprehend more about how contemporaries of the Essex poisoners understood criminality, it is necessary to consider multiple sources. From these we can discover why certain depictions and discourses of female criminality gained traction while others did not. The analysis of competing narratives allows for greater understanding of the complexities that are part of the process of gender construction and the consequential way in which female experiences and differences are considered. The narratives of Che sham, May and Southgate’s cases underline how adherence to gender norms resulted in reward and praise for some women, while others who apparently failed to abide by normative gender expectations were censured and punished for their perceived deviance. Nineteenth-century laws themselves were, in many ways, very prescriptive of gender norms and expectations for both men and women. It has been argued that these laws encouraged women in particular to assume behaviours and ‘identities’ that were gender appropriate.¹ Examination of the narratives used to tell the stories of these three women shows that there was no clear definition of what constituted a ‘bad’ woman, as each was depicted in a very different fashion. A variety of stereotypes was invoked to depict their abnormality: Chesham was construed as the bad mother and wife, May the greedy and manipulative woman who used burial clubs to make money, and Southgate as the ‘fallen woman’ or prostitute.