Witch Hunts and So forth - Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions

Guy_Person · **Witch Hunts and So forth -** 03-08-07

I know I haven't posted in a long time. I thought you guys might appreciate this, though....

The following is most of an essay I've been working on for a women's history class about medieval and early modern Europe. The lecture for the course has assigned responsibility for the massive witch hunts of this time with misogyny, greed, jealousy and superstition among commoners, with Catholic and Protestant assertions of lethal authority. Even with outbreaks of ergot infection (see below). Well, the ergot explanation is good because at least it admits that there is more going on than simple material concerns.

I've tried to write this paper ignoring the typical academic skepticism. Maybe magic worked. Maybe witchcraft was real, or at least as real as it needed to be. I hate the dry scientific approach that shoves magic and healing into simple ideas like "social constructions" or psychological safety blankets. There's got to be more going on. Ideas are important.

Quote:

In order to understand the phenomenon of the witch hunts in Europe during the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries, it is critical to understand the cultural ethos surrounding pleasure, pain and healing. Control over the meaning of sexuality was critical for the rule of the first and second estates over the third. Then, there was healing, which in the early modern period was coming more and more into the hands of noble and bourgeois men. Finally, this essay will discuss the changing ideologies of this period and how they affected ideas about feminine sexuality and health. In this way, the attack on witches, heretics and innocent women can be understood as a consolidation of meaning and magic into the hands of a changing axis of patriarchs. Witchcraft, as it was and at it came to be characterized in this period.
Accusations of witchcraft were second only to accusations of adultery or illegitimate birth in their usefulness in discrediting the power and authority of figures in medieval Europe . From Alice Kyteler of Kilkenny to Maude of Artois (both 13th century) to Joan of Arc (15th century), women especially suffered accusations of magical interference or even Satanism as a means to eliminate their power. Furthermore, these specific cases and their outcomes show what an important role social class played in magic. Maude and Alice both managed to escape torture and execution; Alice Kyteler was a terribly wealthy noblewoman in Ireland with important ties in the bourgeoisie through banking; Maude of Artois was a noblewoman with direct kinship ties to the royal house of France . Joan of Arc burned on the stake because she was a visionary peasant who had outlived her usefulness to the king of France . Dame Kyteler’s case, in particular, emphasizes the role that class played in witch hunts, as she was set free by her son, and was allowed to remain so. On the other hand, her attendants and female employees were, “publicly burnt… solemnly whipped… [or] exiled” (Levack, p. 42). These women all belonged to the third estate.
However, it would be false to apprehend the early modern witch hunts as merely class struggles or battles for political power. Such would imply that the accusers were entirely cynical. Because educated, sanctioned male physicians and uneducated, female healer women both used techniques and tools that were equally superstitious by contemporary standards, it would also be false to explain the witch hunts as a triumph of rationality, or science over magic. Besides, in the minds of the time, simply using herbal ointments or potions that have scientifically proven to be toxic, in order to cause harm, was just as magical as an invocative spell. Healing and necromancy both were conceived of as wizardry for a long time in Europe .
This was not always such a serious concern for Europeans. Wergelds that would have to be paid for murder, according to Salic Law, would also be paid by “a witch [who] eats a man [if] it [could] be proven that she did this” (Amt, p. 4

. Even practicing witchcraft, if it could be proven, would require punishment. But, as it inspired fear and distrust in the community against the accused and was, essentially, defamation, if it proved to be false, the accuser would be liable (Amt, p. 4

. A transforming ideology of what, exactly, made one a witch and what that implied was hugely responsible for the vulnerable and victimized legal status of witches a millennium later.
The Malleus Malificarum, published in 1486, redefined witchcraft as Satanism and detailed its overtly sexual nature, as well as the means in which to deal with such transgressors. The text was incredibly influential across Catholic Christendom and, ultimately, in Protestant kingdoms. Its misogynistic assertion “that since [women] are feebler both in mind and body, it is not surprising that they should come more under the spell of witchcraft” (Summers, p. 44) was a long time coming. In Dame Kyteler’s case, she and her attendants were attributed with consorting with an incubus, although it was not clear whether he was Satan or one of his minions. If such accusations were being leveled against an upper class woman, then it should be clear that other women in the early 14th century would be accused of Satanism as well.
In 1374, Pope Gregory XI declared that all manners of magic were, essentially, Satanic. But, as noted, before, there were numerous practices that were basically magical that were employed by healers of either sex. What’s more, practical spells were employed, especially throughout the countryside, by peasants, such as laying salt across a threshold to ward off bad spirits, or leaving milk in a bowl outside in order to attract good fairies. These were pagan rituals, to be sure, but did not threaten their soul in terms of sin or virtue, or their loyalty, in terms of orthodoxy or tithing. So, the issue remained muddy.
Two years before the Malleus was published, then, Pope Innocent VIII reiterated Gregory’s position that all magic was Satanic. But what constitutes magic? Whose magic? To this day, catholic priests perform the magical feat of transubstantiation, and holy water is used to protect the soul from damnation during baptism, as well as to cure various ailments. As far as a medieval individual was concerned, both pagan and Catholic magic offered solutions to everyday problems. So, the issue demanded resolution.
Key to the Malleus Maleficarum are the moralities of pleasure and pain that it clearly professes. Although there were skeptics and critics of the witch hunts, clerical and civil authorities took witchcraft absolutely seriously, and the Malleus was an incredibly useful tool for understanding and prosecuting it. Witchcraft, and its rituals were described as profane orgies of demons, animals and human beings, mostly women, Sabbaths used to achieve numerous ends. The bulk of the text is taken up by describing those ends which constitute attacks on male sexuality, such as causing impotence, or inducing men to have sex when their reason would tell them not to. What is important to note, though, is that the very rituals of the Sabbath would be an attack on male sexuality in the sense that they are transgressions against virginity and chastity enshrined by the patriarchy. The authors identify the source of this sin as uncontrollable female lust that is satisfied through a sexual pact with the Devil, or demons. In this way, “disordered sexuality is identified with the devil, inverted gender roles and sexual dysfunction with witchcraft, and defective social and political hierarchies with women” (Broedel, 179). That is to say, the Malleus reified sexual hierarchy by redefining witchcraft as a sexual transgression.
Interestingly, the Malleus offers dozens of invocative magical remedies for the malicious spells of witches, such as “the Sacred Sign of the Cross, or by the recital of the Angelic Salutation… exorcism… or excommunication” (Summers, p. 165). It even contains herbal spells for protection against a witch while interrogating her, such as the salt and herb wax-ball to be worn around the neck (Summers, 228). And so, once again, it is important to recognize that although magic in general was condemned by the Papacy, it was the magic associated with the poor , and with women that was actually being attacked by the Inquisition. Sexualizing and demonizing this tradition is what allowed for such abject brutality.
The control of sexuality was, for both Catholic and Protestant nations, a very important aspect of maintaining material and intellectual power over the working class. Marriage was the most common way in which this was carried out, as it required monogamy and submission on the part of the female to the male. Even writers who argued against taking on the institution of marriage admit that “[a woman], much against her will, must suffer his will, often with great misery though she loves him well. All his foulness and his indecent playings—be they even accompanied with filthiness, especially in bed—she shall, whether she wishes to or not, suffer them all”(Amt, p. 92). The author is dated compared to the witch hunts, as he attributes filthiness to men, rather than women. Still, this illustrates the wife’s obligation of submission to her husband, and how, through a man, the church could control female sexuality. Single women—widows and the like—therefore, were the easiest scapegoats, as their sexuality was not bridled by a man. These were the innocent women most commonly victimized by the witch hunts.
Some scholars have related the witch hunts to outbreaks of ergot infection in bread supplies, as the fungus contains hallucinogenic chemicals. This may account for instances of possession or the appearance of apparitions, but “why was not the whole population of an area affected equally?” (Wiesner, p. 269). On the other hand, the ergot explanation can account for “Saint Vitus’ Dance, a violent disease causing descents into madness and death that struck like a plague when a village or region unsuspectedly ate bread made from ergot-infected wheat” (Pinchbeck, p. 192). The more important that role ergot played here, however, is in its intentional use. Midwives, another extremely common group of women targeted by witch hunts had, “[for] thousands of years perhaps… [been] used… for its ability to induce labor” (Pinchbeck, p. 191).
Child rearing was the highest cause of death for women until very recently, and so, because of their ritual accountability, a midwife was very vulnerable to accusations of malificia. Midwives were ritually accountable because they used magic and medicine—one in the same, really—to help women through child labor, as well as with various other ailments. In the countryside, where witch hunts were most sweeping, sanctioned doctors were rare, and so a midwife was often the only choice. And why not choose her, if her invocations and herbal ointments were reasonably effective, and soothing?
Like the Malleus Maleficarum was changing notions about feminine sexuality, the Church-controlled universities were changing ideologies about healthcare. In urban areas, midwives were marginalized as bourgeois families began to demand men who were trained at these institutions for their medical concerns. This had been commencing for a long time before the witch hunts, and the 1322 case of a woman physician in Paris demonstrates the slow battle that universities were fighting to monopolize healthcare. The charges brought against her show that she was practicing herbalism, “and that she does this without the license of the chancellor of the church of Paris and of the said dean and masters” (Amt, p. 109). This would be a given, considering that universities did not admit women. In her defense, Jacoba Felicie exclaims that “it used to be that a woman allowed herself to die, rather than reveal her secret illnesses to a man, because of the modesty of the female sex, and because of the shame which she would have suffered revealing them… many women… perished” (Amt, p. 111). Ultimately, the academics won this case, but it would be much, much longer before midwifery would be attacked out right.

Discuss.

darklingmiss · 03-09-07

Decent paper. The trials were a power struggle between the "science" of the Christian church and the spiritual healing offered by women AND men and the knowledge they had of their local flora and fauna. I think that the mystical aspect to the story is one that is placed upon it by those outside looking in. Natural healing, is, well, natural. And to make it into something supernatural or mysterious is missing the point completely.

Higher magic and herbalism are two very different talents and practices, and the ignorance of the people at the time that still continues to this day creates a stigma on those who would come naturally (pun intended) to the art. It causes them to deny their talents for fear of persecution, even if today it is limited to namecalling and odd glances. Now we just kill the spirit instead of killing the witch, and nobody goes to jail for that.

InKY · 03-09-07

I appreciated this essay.

Guy_Person · 03-10-07

I really don't think of the Church, during this specific period, as representing science. They were equally magical, and equally pragmatic about it.

Guy_Person · 03-10-07

I really don't think of the Church, during this specific period, as representing science. They were equally magical, and equally pragmatic about it.

Iron's Rite · 03-10-07

Very good. You're doing a good job of pointing out that witchhunts were something that happened due to multiple factors. It's nice to see something that doesn't get reactionary about the subject; yet still doesn't excuse the actions of those in power.

Guy_Person · 03-12-07

Well, I know I used to vigorously defend christianity on this forum, just on principle, but it's been a long few years. I no longer even believe in god.

People who study systems of power think of them in terms of law order, or social contracts, or monopolies on force. They see governments and capital. Hegemony describes the complex way that through force, and through persuasion, power has a role in everyday life.

What I tried to illustrate here is the way that Europe's first and second estate waged a kind of mystical warfare over the hearts and minds of the third estate. Through violence, and dominance over views on sexuality, the second estate was able to monopolize magic.

And I think that means more than the sober academic would accept. Yes, magic is symbolic capital--that is, magic workers earned a kind of prestige and emanence--and yes, the church would be interested in controlling that capital to maintain hegemony. But magic is also... well.. magic. It was more than a commodity that imposters sold to the needy, it's almost a human need.

Dyshade · 03-13-07

A human need that they still cater to today. Man has always been drawn to the mystical. It is in our nature to be drawn towards that which is wonderous and magical. It is also part of our nature to sometimes take advantage of others weaknesses.

Jordyn · 03-19-07

Quote:

Originally Posted by darklingmiss

Decent paper. The trials were a power struggle between the "science" of the Christian church and the spiritual healing offered by women AND men and the knowledge they had of their local flora and fauna. I think that the mystical aspect to the story is one that is placed upon it by those outside looking in. Natural healing, is, well, natural. And to make it into something supernatural or mysterious is missing the point completely.

Higher magic and herbalism are two very different talents and practices, and the ignorance of the people at the time that still continues to this day creates a stigma on those who would come naturally (pun intended) to the art. It causes them to deny their talents for fear of persecution, even if today it is limited to namecalling and odd glances. Now we just kill the spirit instead of killing the witch, and nobody goes to jail for that.

being christian, you get treated in the same manner by those who really have no reason to hate it..so the "we're so persectued still", doesn't work for me anymore, i've been subjected to insults by both sides.

it's a good essay, you make some valid points, give thorough information and some good examples of those commonly persecuted; however

the church as established by the roman empire has always been bastards, look at the culture that grasped a small cult concept and used it to conquer nations in ways they hadn't thought of before, constantine organized it.

i blame it all on the romans, which can be traced to greek patriarchy, for the downfall of women, the core of the christian faith was wielded as just another weapon in their quest for world domination, credited to his wife, interestingly enough, but that's like blaming guns for killing people.

i enjoyed this book, it may help you on your quest if you're looking into the reasons humanity shifted from matriarchial worship to male domination...

myth and sexuality

that's what it's about, the people...religion is just a tool for those who are mean by nature to excuse behaviors they know in their gut is not right. rather than "the devil made me do it" they can use the "Gd made me do it" excuse.

darklingmiss · 03-20-07

I don't even see it as a Christian vs Nonchristian argument. To me it's the faithful against the nonfaithful. Those who are strong in spirit are threatening to those who would bend others to their will, because they are unshaken in faith. It doesn't matter which god, if any, they serve. What matters is that they are the square pegs that the establishment just can't get to fit into round holes.

Jordyn · 03-20-07

Quote:

Originally Posted by darklingmiss

I don't even see it as a Christian vs Nonchristian argument. To me it's the faithful against the nonfaithful. Those who are strong in spirit are threatening to those who would bend others to their will, because they are unshaken in faith. It doesn't matter which god, if any, they serve. What matters is that they are the square pegs that the establishment just can't get to fit into round holes.

in the context of his essay, who would be those "unshaken in faith?"

those so adamant of the evils in those they are prosecuting that they developed horrible ways to expunge that evil through forced confessions or those subjected to the tortures?

they have other methods that were less public for dealing with those who didn't fit into an ideal society...i could agree if you said it was an arguement for the mysogynistic tendencies that patriarch societies enforced through out the history of man and woman, but faith is such a fine, personal line that only the person wielding it and their god can judge the depth of that faith, those torturing heretics were as faithful to their convictions as the heretics that cried innocence, were to theirs.

only faith can instill that level of oblivious cruelty, blinding a person from the true reasons for their actions.

Guy_Person · 03-20-07

Blah. What?

You have to remember that, in all likelihood, the majority of women (and men) who were accused of witchcraft and tortured or even burned for it were probably just as christian (in terms of worldview, not faith or whatever) as the people who accused them, and the people who tortured them.

It's a lot more complicated, I think, than patriarchy versus matriarchy. Women were all ready servile to, vulnerable to, and controlled by men at this time. And besides, understanding it as partiarchy verus matriarchy would create the total historical fiction that the accusors were somehow in cahoots with the church, which there is no evidence for, otherwise, we'd have heard about it decades ago.

There were a lot more than two sides to this whole thing.

Dark Messiah · 03-21-07

If I commit the energy and time to read this thread, is it going to come off like a bad Dan Brown novel?

(And yes, I know that's being redundant)

Guy_Person · 03-21-07

I don't know who Dan Brown is, but I think I'm pretty cool.

Jordyn · 03-22-07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy_Person

Blah. What?

You have to remember that, in all likelihood, the majority of women (and men) who were accused of witchcraft and tortured or even burned for it were probably just as christian (in terms of worldview, not faith or whatever) as the people who accused them, and the people who tortured them.

It's a lot more complicated, I think, than patriarchy versus matriarchy. Women were all ready servile to, vulnerable to, and controlled by men at this time. And besides, understanding it as partiarchy verus matriarchy would create the total historical fiction that the accusors were somehow in cahoots with the church, which there is no evidence for, otherwise, we'd have heard about it decades ago.

There were a lot more than two sides to this whole thing.

femphobia?

there's so many theories as to what set off the inquisitions, but through out contemporary catholic/christian values women have been feared, frightening in their sexuality, and their ability to make men blathering fools.

there was this amazing book i read by a psychology that talked about demons in our society and what about the mind set we have to believe...he went through the various inquisitions but spent most of the book discussing the satan persecutions early in the eighties...that people could believe such ideals as dozens of babies being sacrificed, Michelle Remembers type of experiences that most have been proven as false, fake or exaggerated.

couldn't that be contemporary comparison as to what could have happened that allowed such atrocities to be done, among civilized peoples, as he suggested in his book a societal mindset flustered with real evils in the world create their own, closer to home and able to be dealt with personally, it's easier to blame the devil than accept what's really wrong with the world.

i'm going to have to make a trip to the library now to get the title and author of that book.

Shadowborn · 03-22-07

Interesting essay. If you're interested in another angle on this topic, I'd suggest reading A Fever in Salem: A New Interpretation of the New England Witch Trials by Laurie Carlson. It provides an interesting theory of a scientific explanation for the sudden rash of witchcraft accusations and the physical evidence of them: viral encephalitis.

darklingmiss · 03-22-07

Any time you study history, you have to remember that each source, even the primary sources that these authors are drawing from, are all written by people. So objective history is like doublethink. It doesn't really exist except for in terms, and even those are contradictory. Only way to conclusively know what happened would be to have been there at the time.