Why was there so much variation in the judicial prosecution of witchcraft within Early Modern Europe?

However, this belief in demonological witchcraft alone does not explain why there was so much variation across Europe. Countries such as Switzerland and France that accepted the belief also saw many endemic cases of witchcraft, and it was only in isolated areas that intensive witch-hunts occurred. A second explanation for the variation in judicial prosecution of witchcraft is that different judicial systems were used throughout Europe in the Early Modern period. The marked contrast lies between Spain and Italy. Both were under the control of the Inquisition and the Holy Office, and the Holy Roman Empire – several ‘small kingdoms, principalities, duchies and territories’ under one legal code, the Carolina. Spain and Italy executed only 300 people for witchcraft throughout the period, in comparison to the Holy Roman Empire, who executed approximately 50,000. In Spain and Italy, judicial procedure was very strict; it followed specific guidelines in publications made by the Holy Office, and was supervised by central authorities, such as the supreme council in Madrid who had to approve any sentencing. The courts of the inquisition were not interested in ‘local neighbour’ accusations, believing most to be unfounded, and the elite did not widely accept the demonological view. This ensured that prosecutions for witchcraft would only occur if fraud or heresy was believed to have been committed, and allowed people accused of witchcraft legal council and to be shown a copy of what they had been accused of. The Holy Office also forbade torture and declared that any testimony given by the accused was not used in further accusations; Tedeschi believed that this system was ‘a pioneer in judicial reform’. In Barcelona in the 1530s, a witch-hunt was prevented as a result of this judicial system, due to the supreme council overturning the sentences passed by local courts. This system therefore explains to some extent why Spain and Italy saw a comparatively small amount of witch prosecution in the Early Modern period.

Although the Roman Empire had a unifying judicial code and followed the inquisitorial system, it was not often enforced. Individual countries and regions therefore effectively had autonomous judicial systems. In many cases, this meant that trials for witchcraft were held in secular courts by local people, who could be influenced by their individual beliefs and be very biased in their sentencing and punishments. Furthermore, under the law, a confession or two eye-witness accounts were required to prosecute somebody, and as there was little regulation, torture was often used to gain this confession, or people deemed ‘unfit to testify’ were accepted as witnesses. Switzerland, who also had an autonomous judicial system, tried 8,800 people and in the Pays de Vaud, the conviction rate was 90%, in comparison to only 21% in Geneva where there was a centralised judicial system. In France, there was a centralised system, and it was only in geographically isolated areas therefore, such as Lorraine, where extensive witch-hunts were able to take place. Ankarloo believed that ‘social and geographical distance made the elite more antagonistic to cultural deviation’, as they could not be brought under the control of central judiciary.

In England, a third ‘accusatorial’ judicial system was used. People could accuse others of witchcraft, and they would be tried either within secular courts by Justices of Peace who had little training, or more commonly by the assizes. This was a central form of justice, where the country was divided into six circuits and visited twice a year by allocated judges who were experienced and trained. A jury also had to be present, and a unanimous decision was required to gain a conviction. Furthermore, torture was forbidden, so false confessions were not gained and as a result England saw relatively few witch-hunts. Therefore it becomes increasingly clear that the judicial system of a country contributed greatly to the variation in witch prosecutions in Early Modern Europe.  

As already mentioned, torture was utilized by the inquisitorial system in parts of the Holy Roman Empire, and on the whole not by the accusatorial system. Its use was very important in determining high judicial prosecution, as often when torture was used a confession would be gained. In countries where the demonical view of witchcraft was accepted by the elite, the confession usually consisted of the accused admitting to having a compact with the devil and therefore being a witch, but also to meeting on the sabbat, as this would ensure that the torture would be brought to an end. By admitting to this, the accused would be asked to list the other people that met on the sabbat and as a result, they would all face trial - effectively creating a witch-hunt. This can be seen in Bamberg in 1623 – 1633, where 600 people were prosecuted for witchcraft as a result of one person being accused and naming accomplices who then did the same thing. Denmark took precautions against witch-hunts created in this way, by making it illegal to try people based on the confession of another. It can be seen therefore that this kind of ‘snow-ball’ effect did not happen in countries where torture was not permitted, for example in England and Spain, as multiple accusations were not made. Furthermore, even if torture had been used in these countries to gain a confession, it is unlikely that the confession would have led to witch-hunts, as the judges did not hold beliefs in demonical witchcraft.  

The Reformation and Counter Reformation also contributed towards the variation that existed in the judicial prosecution in Europe. Keith Thomas believed that in areas where the Reformation had taken hold, such as Germany, people no longer had rituals and superstitions to believe in as Protestantism had condemned them. As there was no scientific explanation for events to replace these superstitions, people turned to a belief in witchcraft. Furthermore, Protestantism defined Christianity for the individual, making them more involved and informed. As a result, the Reformation created ‘a specific image of the witch as a servant of Satan, as an enemy of God’ that had not existed before. This allowed people to identify those who were not living by the new moral codes, as witches that needed expelling from society. The Reformation therefore helped to establish the belief in diabolism that led to some regions seeing high levels of judicial prosecution.

In countries and areas where ‘Christian militancy and religious intolerance’ existed, witchcraft trials were greater in number. Not only were people accused of witchcraft in these areas for practicing maleficium, they were also accused if they were ‘white witches’ supposedly doing good. This is because Christianity that followed the Reformation and Counter Reformation was opposed to all superstition, and therefore believed that the white witches had also received their powers from the devil, and deserved punishing. In Spain and Italy for example, people were tried for witchcraft as a result of heresy, as the Inquisitors were trying to outlaw superstition and correct immoral behaviour. They relied heavily on the bible for justification of this however, using passages such as ‘thou shalt not suffer a witch to live’ to encourage accusations.

Although these factors made witch-hunts more likely in some regions, there were exceptions. Essex for example experienced a witch-hunt in 1645 despite England as a whole not having the preconditions that would usually make it possible. It was a result of circumstances particular to the time however that allowed it to happen. Matthew Hopkins, a professional witch-hunter began work accusing people of witchcraft, sometimes based on a demonological pact and finding evidence to prove their guilt. The Civil War also caused disruption to the assizes, which resulted in trials being held in secular courts, where torture was illegally used as it was not being centrally controlled. This led to 900 people being executed in nine months.

Overall therefore, it can be seen that there was great variation in judicial prosecution of witchcraft within Early Modern Europe as a result of different circumstances existing in different areas. It can be seen that in general, high prosecution levels occurred if the elite in an area had a belief in demonological witchcraft, combined with an autonomous judicial system that allowed torture to be practiced, and where the Reformation and Counter Reformation had had a large impact. Although witch-hunts could occur when not all of the factors were present, in France for example, the hunts were often localised and sporadic, rather than continual and widespread. When the three factors all existed in one place, such as in the Holy Roman Empire, they complemented one another, intensifying the witch-hunts. This is because torture can only occur in an area of a decentralised judicial system, and torture is what created confessions. These confessions would only then be effective in creating a witch-hunt within areas where the elite held a demonological view of witchcraft. It can therefore be seen that prosecutions in countries such as England were limited, as there was a central judicial system and not a common belief in demonology. It was the Inquisition in Spain and Italy that prevented high judicial prosecution, as they did not even acknowledge witchcraft as a crime – it was considered heresy.

Bibliography

Brian Levack, The Witch-hunt in Early Modern Europe (Longman, 1987)

Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic (Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1971)

Alan Macfarlane, Witchcraft in Tudor and Stuart England (London: Routledge and K. Paul, 1970)

Christina Larner, Enemies of God: The Witch-hunt in Scotland (Blackwell Publishers, 1981)

Gustav Henningsen, The Witches’ Advocate: Basque Witchcraft and the Spanish Inquisition, 1609 – 1614 ()

Carlo Ginzburg, The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries ()

Bengt Ankarloo and Gustav Henningsen, Early Modern European Witchcraft: Centres and Peripheries (Clarendon Press, 1993)

Geoffrey Scarre, Witchcraft and Magic in 16th and 17th Century Europe (Macmillan Education Limited, 1987)

James Sharpe, Witchcraft in Early Modern England (Longman, 2001)

E. William Monter, Witchcraft in France and Switzerland (Ithaca, 1976)

---