It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

17th Century Witchmarks Intended to Protect James I Found at Knole House

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Archaeologists from the Museum of London Archaeology have dated to 1606, a series of hidden scratches made under floorboards, in ceilings joists and within a fireplace in a bed chamber prepared for James I at Knole House. The "Witchmarks" or apotropaic marks were also found surrounding the chamber directly above and are thought to have been made by craftsman who constructed the rooms in anticipation of a visit by the king in the months following the Gunpowder Plot (1605). The Knole House's owner, Thomas Sackville, taking every precaution to ensure the king's safety would presumably have ordered their placement to construct a barrier against malicious forces.

Pictures from Daily Mail article (via Obscuragator):





Additional sources of images and information:

Past Horizons
The Telegraph
edit on 2014-11-5 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Neat article but what's really remarkable is that leaders of nations and the clergy - supposedly the most "educated" in a time of widespread ignorance - actually believed in witchcraft. When they charged someone with death for partaking in witchcraft didn't they ever think it wouldn't be so easy to grab someone and hang them or burn them at the stake? A true witch would turn into a bird and fly away or strike down anyone who tried to harm them.

I think they knew what they were doing and just swayed the masses to make an example of someone so they could be more powerful. So who were the truly evil ones?



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Seems to have worked he was never turned into a newt and lived to 58.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Hanslune

Sounds good to me. I'm convinced!



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: EveStreet

Did you happen to catch my thread the other day about the Torryburn Witch?

It wasn't an easy transition out of the dark ages.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 10:07 PM
link   
well shucks I posted the same topic, I did a search, sorry about that, fascinating though isn't it



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 10:09 PM
link   
here is the info I posted on the book he also wrote

Daemonologie

Here be witchmarks! Carvings to protect James I after 1605 Gunpowder Plot found in Kent rt.com... The book he wrote. Daemonologie. by King of England James I www.gutenberg.org... internetshakespeare.uvic.ca...;jsessionid=B83D3A8FE007F347B978E70B248D926C From the Daemonologie In the dialogue, the authority-figure, Epistemon, explains what kinds of "unlawful charms, without natural causes" are to be considered witchcraft: I mean by such kind of charms as commonly daft wives use, for healing of forspoken [bewitched] goods, for preserving them from evil eyes, by knitting . . . sundry kinds of herbs to the hair or tails of the goods; by curing the worm, by stemming of blood, by healing of horse-crooks, . . . or doing of such like innumerable things by words, without applying anything meet to the part offended, as mediciners do. The crucial test is that the charm works at a distance, unlike accepted medicine; it is witchcraft even when its purpose is good. In all fairness, it seems likely that by the time Macbeth was written James had become rather more skeptical; he continually warned his judges not to allow themselves to be deceived.

edit on 103030p://bWednesday2014 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)


these apotropaic are very spell like themselves, yes?
edit on 103030p://bWednesday2014 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

You strike an interesting note. I always thought it was odd how common wards against witchcraft, or methods of determining who was a witch, etc. were really just witchcraft in and of themselves. But, since they were supposed to unveil the witch, they must have been from God and not Satan? I guess.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 10:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Headshot

Are you familiar with the Witch of Endor? (and no, not a Ewok)



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

No problem, it happens to everyone! To answer your question: Yes, it amounts to warding off malicious magic with magic.







 
9

log in

join