Lady Katherine Ferrers - Was She The "Wicked Lady"?

Was She The "Wicked Lady"?

Support for Katherine being the "Wicked Lady" is largely circumstantial. Katherine did live during the English Civil War, and being from a Royalist family and marrying into another Royalist family, times were desperate, and throughout her short life Katherine would have watched both families' fortunes, and numerous young members of the families, slowly being lost. During that era many young gentlemen, and more than a few well bred ladies, took to highway robbery as a means of preserving their dwindling estates, so it is certainly not a leap of fantasy to suggest that Katherine Ferrers may have put on a mask and ridden out at night as an armed robber.

Similarly, the circumstances of Katherine's early death (the precise date of her death is not known, only her burial) have fuelled speculation. According to the legend of the Wicked Lady, the highwaywoman was shot and wounded, and died near her home in Markyate, but her servants recovered her body and she was carried home to be buried. The actual cause of Katherine's death is not recorded (which, some speculate, one would expect if she had been shot during the course of highway robbery), and the most obvious other cause, childbirth, would appear to be ruled out as she is not recorded to have given birth to any children. It is frequently implied that as she had not become pregnant during the 12 years of her marriage to Thomas Fanshaw, either he or she must have been infertile (although he was also frequently away from home fighting).

But it must be remembered that the key events did take place at a time and in a place where a bloody civil war was raging. Accordingly, Parish records, never the most reliable of documents from that era, are even more liable to be incomplete during a time of conflict.

However, those who seek to exonerate Katherine Ferrers of banditry using the historical record have also encountered difficulty.

It is suggested that the Wicked Lady was supposed to be preying upon travellers on the common from a base in Markyate and that this is where the Wicked Lady returned after being shot. But it appears the family property at Markyate had already been sold, and historical records support this contention. However, Markyate is not especially close to Nomansland common, and the alternative mooted, a hideout in Gustard Wood (just north of Wheathampstead), seems much more likely from a purely geographical standpoint. Whilst this certainly indicates an inconsistency with the parts of the legend, it is hardly proof of innocence.

Similarly, it is pointed out that the alleged accomplice of the Wicked Lady, Ralph Chaplin, was actually caught on Finchley Common (over 20 miles from Nomansland common, an unrealistic distance to cover twice in one night on 17th century roads and leave any time for robbery), and was hanged. However, whilst demonstrating that the alleged accomplice of the Wicked Lady seems unlikely (or perhaps, it is unlikely he was still her accomplice when he was finally caught) given the location of his last, unsuccessful, attempt at robbery, that discovery sheds little light on who the Wicked Lady really was (accomplice or no accomplice).

It has also been suggested on behalf of Katherine Ferrers that the nomer, "Wicked" came to be applied to her by misnomer, either by confusing her with the (unrelated) "Wicked" Lord Ferrers who was hanged in 1688 for being Catholic. Another possible misnomer is attributed to Earl Ferrers who was hanged at Tyburn in 1760 for the murder of a manservant. He too came to be known afterwards as 'Wicked Lord Ferrers'. It has also been suggested that the moniker "Wicked" could have been applied to Katherine solely because she allowed the family estates to fall into ruin, although as it was her husband who either sold off (or had sequestered) most of the family assets, and as a wife in 17th century England she would be powerless to stop him, that is probably an uncharitable view.

Both sides have tried to argue that the manner of Katherine's burial suggests that either she was, or was not, the infamous highwaywoman.

The problem with the arguments marshalled against Katherine being the Wicked Lady is that they assume that an absence of evidence proving Katherine to be the highwaywoman proves her innocence. Whilst that might be true in a court of law, in interpreting vague and limited historical evidence, the absence of positive proof is not the same as proof of a negative. The strongest argument in favour of the theory that Katherine Ferrers was the Wicked Lady is that for nearly 400 years she was believed to be so, and that even if the original evidence upon which those beliefs rested is now lost, it is probable that the origins of that belief had much more substantial foundations.