I wrote an article on this bizarre character. "Exorcizing Madness in Late Elizabethan England: The Seduction of Arthington and the Criminal Culpability of Demoniacs" was published in Journal of British Studies 47.1 (January 2008): 30-52 (doi: 10.1086/522351;  http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/522351). I would love to chat about how he, Hacket, and Coppinger (and Giles Wigginton) poisoned the waters for the Presbyterian-puritan movement in the late 1580s and early 1590s. Thanks, Owen Williams (owilliams@folger.edu)

From Anna Battigelli:

Owen:  I appreciate your analysis of how denying legal culpability required taking into account definitions of madness and demonic possession.  As you point out, at issue is a definition of conscience.  Can you say more about how this case affected the Presbyterian-puritan movement in the late 1580s and early 1590s?