The Reasons for Torture

This past weekend’s chapter in Witchcraft in Europe had some of the most interesting documents. Yet, what stood out to me the most was not in a document itself but in the preface of document 48 “The Prosecutions in Scotland”. It is here that Kors and Peters point out that in Scotland, there is the “denunciation of one alleged witch extracted under torture from another accused witch” (318). This is further seen in the reading as it does not talk about trying to get names of other witches from those that were accused. Instead, every event of torture is coupled with interrogations on how they were set into a contract with a devil and how or what magic they have performed in their lives. This idea of not being able to use accusations that precipitate from torturing was shocking as it is against what I had always thought of. My viewpoint of witch trials was that those interrogating the witches were looking for the other witches in the community. They did not care why or how they got into witchcraft as they were already thought to be guilty. To them, they saw witches as knowing each other and the easiest way to find others without them causing harm to the innocent. Perhaps this was an idea unique to Scotland but still interesting as it leads me to the question of if you can question others accused by a "witch" if there was no torture inflicted upon him/her.

SandWITCHES

In the Jean Bodin passage the twelfth crime of witches is killing with poisons or spells that is distinct from other than violence. I feel that it could be confusing with people getting sick for many other reasons, even though I know that hygiene was not as bad as I originally thought before this class, people still get sick at pretty frequent rates from the food they consume. Many cooks and bakers should be at fault here for food bourne illnesses getting people sick and thinking that an enemy of them is a witch that poisons them because they were around them when they felt sick or died from the food. But also, I am surprised to not hear any stories of bakers getting accused of being a witch for killing some people, since they got sick over the food they consumed from their place of business and though that they did it on purpose. Now thinking about it bakers might've been able to kill people easily since there was no way of knowing they did it.

Remember the babies...

A New Perspective

As I have read the chapters in this book my perspective and understanding of what a witch was considered to be and the acts they were accused of has significantly changed. Coming into this course, I didn't have much background concerning this subject matter, but what I thought reflected what I would consider the stereotype of witches: casting spells, dancing around fires and being burned alive. Now, especially after reading the excerpts from The Malleus Maleficarum, I realize that the crimes that witches were accused of went beyond just casting spells. An example of my new understanding is the horrible things they were accused of doing to infants. While it is always disturbing to harm infants in any way, I have noticed a significant shift from chapter 2 to chapter 6 of this text. For instance, in chapter two they were said to transfix the corpse of an unbaptized infant onto a tree with a stake in order to prevent the child from emerging and injuring others. That has since progressed to:

“[After killing the infant in its cradles or next to the parents’ side and making it look natural] we secretly take them from their graves and cook them in a cauldron, until the whole flesh comes away from the bones to make a soup which may easily be drunk… whoever drinks [this] immediately acquires much knowledge and becomes a leader in our sect” (Kramer and Sprenger 193).

Prior to reading this book, and having discussions in class, my knowledge concerning the history of witchcraft did not include knowing that witches were said to eat and/or drink babies or create illusions that made men think their “virile members” disappeared.

https://images.app.goo.gl/rdyHAuqg1ayXHQ7n6  

Frogs, ducks, and black cats, oh my!

"...when any novice is to be received among them and enters the sect of the damned for the first time, the shape of a certain frog appears to him, which some are accustomed to call a toad. Some kiss this creature on the hind-quarters and some on the mouth; they receive the tongue and saliva of the beast inside their mouths. Sometimes it appears unduly large, and sometimes equivalent to a goose or a duck, and sometimes it even assumes the size of an oven" (pg 115).

What interesting things await us once we have decided to go to the depths of Dante's Inferno! Not fiery gates or evil laughter, oh no! But frogs! Toads! A black cat will coil its tail in the corner! 

Depravity will happen with men amongst men, women amongst women! The assumptions presented in Chapter 4 and the exert "Pope Gregory IX: Vox in Rama" proved to be hilarious--what was assumed of what happens when you choose to leave your faith seems to be more realistically some crazy fantasy than real life.

Now you see me, now you don't

"'You have served me well and will serve more and better. I commit what you have given into your custody,' and having said that at once disappears"(18, pg 116)

There seems to be a common theme of witchcraft having the ability to disappear and appear whenever it seems convenient. Therefore needing the concept of belief, very similar to the idea of religion just in a more negative context. 

Is Our Boy Bernardino Hitler Sr.?

Hitler went on his own "witch hunt" and while doing so instilled fear of Jews into Germany. Is Bernardino doing the same with the catholic church? Bernardino preaches to his catholic crowd with some gruesome details about putting witches to death. Like Hitler, Bernardino is creating fear in his audience. He is telling them that if any witchcraft is done bring the accused and burn them to death. Now I don't know about you but I would be terrified that someone that didn't like me would falsely accuse me of witchcraft. Bernardino is publicly admitting to murder and no one sees a problem with this. I think it is because everyone is too scared to speak out against it. Bernardino says "there was also another woman taken who confessed that she had done like deeds… but she died in another manner: for she was not strangled before she was put upon the pyre, and the fire was kindled there while she was alive” (136). Is there any other reason for this much detail but fear? I think he is trying to scare his audience into burning witches in his name, he even said “I wish I could make it happen here too” (135). Just as Hitler was a major player in instilling the fear of Jews to Germans, Bernardino was a major player (I think) in getting the catholic people to fear witches.


                                                 

Have Your or A Loved One (Usually a Woman) Dabbled in Witchcraft?

    "70. Have you believed that there is any woman who can do that which some, deceived by the devil, affirm that they must do f necessity or at his command, that is, with a throng of demons transformed into the likeness of women, (she whom common folly calls the witch Hulda), must ride on certain beasts in this infidelity, you should do penance for one year on the appointed fast days..." (Kors/Peters pg 64)

This quote, as well as the 20 or so others all sound like one of those financial compensation commercials. But, instead of getting money in return you get told to repent for believing your next door neighbor, Miriam, is riding beasts into the night but might also actually be Hulda in disguise. Or 3 demons in a trench coat riding a goat. You'll never really know but to cure you of this totally-not-delusion, you must repent on specific fasting days. From a modern mind this seems trippy but for that time, you couldn't trust anyone. Not even your goat.

It's okay to eat infants so long as you put them back the way you found them

"[Infants] appear to be cut up into pieces, eaten, and gluttonously stuffed into the witches' stomachs. Then, through the mercy of the witch ruler, they are returned [in one piece] to their cradles" (Kors/Peters 78). 

 This quote demonstrates the complexity of the magic belief system and the absolute horror of what it would be like to actually believe these things were happening. I found myself pausing a lot while I was reading just to appreciate how much detail went into freaking out about witchcraft. It's all very well though out. And, yeah, it would be completely terrifying to think a bunch of women in the neighborhood sneak out at night, frolic around, eat a bunch of infants, and then everything's fine in the morning. You'd want to burn people too if you thought they reached for a bite of your baby whenever they wanted something to munch on at midnight.

How these documents influenced fiction

Did any details in the reading remind anyone of stories they've heard about witches?
(For example: the lamias in section 10)