The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (2024)

Luiz Eugênio 22/09/2024

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (2)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (3)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (4)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (5)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (6)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (7)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (8)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (9)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (10)

The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (11)

Prévia do material em texto

<p>‘ Broedel has provided an excellent study, not only of the Malleus and its authors,</p><p>but just as importantly, of the intellectual context in which the Malleus must be</p><p>set and the theological and folk traditions to which it is, in many ways, an heir.’</p><p>PETER MAXWELL-STUART, ST ANDREWS UNIVERSITY</p><p>WHAT WAS WITCHCRAFT? Were witches real? How should witches</p><p>be identified? How should they be judged? Towards the end of the</p><p>middle ages these were serious and important questions – and completely</p><p>new ones. Between 1430 and 1500, a number of learned ‘witch-theorists’ attempted</p><p>to answer such questions, and of these perhaps the most famous are the</p><p>Dominican inquisitors Heinrich Institoris and Jacob Sprenger, the authors</p><p>of the Malleus Maleficarum, or The Hammer of Witches.</p><p>The Malleus is an important text and is frequently quoted by authors across</p><p>a wide range of scholarly disciplines.Yet it also presents serious difficulties: it is</p><p>difficult to understand out of context, and is not generally representative of late</p><p>medieval learned thinking. This, the first book-length study of the original text in</p><p>English, provides students and scholars with an introduction to this controversial</p><p>work and to the conceptual world of its authors.</p><p>Like all witch-theorists, Institoris and Sprenger constructed their witch</p><p>out of a constellation of pre-existing popular beliefs and learned traditions.</p><p>Therefore, to understand the Malleus, one must also understand the contemporary</p><p>and subsequent debates over the reality and nature of witches. This book argues</p><p>that although the Malleus was a highly idiosyncratic text, its arguments were</p><p>powerfully compelling and therefore remained influential long after alternatives</p><p>were forgotten. Consequently, although focused on a single text, this study has</p><p>important implications for fifteenth-century witchcraft theory.</p><p>This is a fascinating work on the Malleus Maleficarum and will be essential</p><p>to students and academics of late medieval and early modern history, religion</p><p>and witchcraft studies.</p><p>HANS PETER BROEDEL</p><p>is Visiting Assistant Professor of History at Hamilton College, New York</p><p>The</p><p>M</p><p>alleusM</p><p>aleficarum</p><p>and</p><p>the</p><p>construction</p><p>of</p><p>w</p><p>itchcraft</p><p>B</p><p>R</p><p>O</p><p>E</p><p>D</p><p>E</p><p>L</p><p>COVER ILLUSTRATION</p><p>Witches concocting an ointment to be used</p><p>for flying to the Sabbath,</p><p>Hans Baldung Grien, Strassburg, 1514</p><p>The Malleus Maleficarum</p><p>and the construction of witchcraft</p><p>Theology and popular belief</p><p>H A N S P E T E R B R O E D E L</p><p>broedel.cov 12/8/03 9:23 am Page 1</p><p>H</p><p>an</p><p>s</p><p>Pe</p><p>te</p><p>r B</p><p>ro</p><p>ed</p><p>el</p><p>-</p><p>97</p><p>81</p><p>52</p><p>61</p><p>37</p><p>81</p><p>4</p><p>D</p><p>ow</p><p>nl</p><p>oa</p><p>de</p><p>d</p><p>fro</p><p>m</p><p>m</p><p>an</p><p>ch</p><p>es</p><p>te</p><p>ro</p><p>pe</p><p>nh</p><p>iv</p><p>e.</p><p>co</p><p>m</p><p>a</p><p>t 0</p><p>4/</p><p>27</p><p>/2</p><p>01</p><p>9</p><p>11</p><p>:1</p><p>7:</p><p>42</p><p>AM</p><p>vi</p><p>a</p><p>fre</p><p>e</p><p>ac</p><p>ce</p><p>ss</p><p>The Malleus Maleficarum and</p><p>the construction of witchcraft</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page i</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>STUDIES IN EARLY MODERN</p><p>EUROPEAN HISTORY</p><p>This exciting series aims to publish</p><p>challenging and innovative research in all areas</p><p>of early modern continental history.</p><p>The editors are committed to encouraging work</p><p>that engages with current historiographical</p><p>debates, adopts an interdisciplinary</p><p>approach, or makes an original contribution</p><p>to our understanding of the period.</p><p> </p><p>Professor Joseph Bergin,William G. Naphy and</p><p>Penny Roberts</p><p>Already published in the series</p><p>The rise of Richelieu Joseph Bergin</p><p>Sodomy in early modern Europe</p><p>ed. Tom Betteridge</p><p>Fear in early modern society</p><p>eds William Naphy and Penny Roberts</p><p>Religion and superstition in Reformation Europe</p><p>eds Helen Parish and William G. Naphy</p><p>Religious choice in the Dutch Republic: the reformation of</p><p>Arnoldus Buchelus (1565–1641)</p><p>Judith Pollman</p><p>A city in conflict:Troyes during the French wars of religion</p><p>Penny Roberts</p><p>Witchcraft narratives in Germany: Rothenburg 1561–1652</p><p>Alison Rowlands</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page ii</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>The Malleus Maleficarum and</p><p>the construction of witchcraft</p><p>Theology and popular belief</p><p>HANS PETER BROEDEL</p><p>Manchester University Press</p><p>Manchester and New York</p><p>distributed exclusively in the USA by Palgrave</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page iii</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Copyright © Hans Peter Broedel 2003</p><p>The right of Hans Peter Broedel to be identified as the author of this work has been</p><p>asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.</p><p>Published by Manchester University Press</p><p>Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9NR, UK</p><p>and Room 400, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010, USA</p><p>www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk</p><p>Distributed exclusively in the USA by</p><p>Palgrave, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York,</p><p>NY 10010, USA</p><p>Distributed exclusively in Canada by</p><p>UBC Press, University of British Columbia, 2029 West Mall,</p><p>Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2</p><p>British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data</p><p>A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library</p><p>Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data applied for</p><p>ISBN 0 7190 6440 6 hardback</p><p>0 7190 6441 4 paperback</p><p>First published 2003</p><p>11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1</p><p>Typeset in Perpetua with Albertus</p><p>by SNP Best-set Typesetter Ltd., Hong Kong</p><p>Printed in Great Britain</p><p>by Bell & Bain Ltd. Glasgow</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page iv</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Contents</p><p>Acknowledgments page vii</p><p>Note on translation ix</p><p>1 Introduction: contested categories 1</p><p>2 Origins and arguments 10</p><p>3 The inquisitors’ devil 40</p><p>4 Misfortune, witchcraft, and the will of God 66</p><p>5 Witchcraft: the formation of belief – part one 91</p><p>6 Witchcraft: the formation of belief – part two 122</p><p>7 Witchcraft as an expression of female sexuality 167</p><p>Bibliography 189</p><p>Index 205</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page v</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page vi</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Acknowledgments</p><p>I am much indebted to the generous assistance of a number of people on this project.</p><p>I would like to thank especially Robert Stacey for his tireless assistance and encour-</p><p>agement in all aspects of this work. I also owe much to Mary O’Neal’s incisive com-</p><p>ments and encyclopedic knowledge of early-modern witchcraft history. I would like</p><p>also to thank Henning Sehmsdorf, Fritz Levy, and Gerhild Scholz Williams who read</p><p>this manuscript at various stages and offered valuable criticism. I owe special thanks</p><p>to my wife, Sheryl Dahm Broedel, not only for her patience, but also for her invalu-</p><p>able criticisms of my writing and ideas.</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page vii</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page viii</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Note on translation</p><p>The popularity of the Malleus in the English-speaking world stems in large part from</p><p>the ready availability of the Montague Summers translation, but, as has often been</p><p>noted before, this translation suffers from serious defects. In particular, Summers</p><p>relied upon very late Latin editions, which differed substantially from the original. In</p><p>this book I have used as my primary Latin text the 1991 photographic reprint of the</p><p>first edition of the Malleus (1487), supplemented by the 1519 Jean Marion edition. I</p><p>have retained the original Latin throughout in the notes; in addition to noting appar-</p><p>ent errors in the Latin, where necessary I have given the alternative Latin from the</p><p>1519 edition within brackets.The English translations are my own and are my respon-</p><p>to take the witch constructed by learned</p><p>theologians, the witch of traditional legend, folktale, and rumor, and the old</p><p>woman huddled before the inquisitor’s bench and to blend them into a single</p><p>being – a being capable of satisfying the demands of all situations in which her</p><p>existence was meaningful.</p><p>The Malleus was not, then, as Sprenger ingenuously stated in his</p><p>“Apology,” merely a compilation of materials drawn from ancient and author-</p><p>itative sources; it was instead a unique assemblage of experience and author-</p><p>ity juxtaposed in shifting ways.47 Like all medieval academics, Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger were acutely conscious of the value and importance of authorities,</p><p>both to formal argumentation and to more casual discourse. Above all, they</p><p>cite continuously from scripture; but in clear second place come the authors</p><p>of canon and civil law: Gratian’s Decretum, the Decretals of Gregory IX, the Dec-</p><p>retalium Liber Sextus, Justinian’s codification of civil law, and commentators on</p><p>all of these. Among the Malleus’ other frequently cited authorities (such as</p><p>Isidore of Seville, Gregory I, Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite, Albertus</p><p>Magnus, and the Glossa Ordinaria) there are also more recent works related to</p><p>the Dominican educational background of its authors: these include Raymond</p><p>of Penyafort, Peter of Palude, and, especially, Johannes Nider.48 But there is</p><p>also Institoris and Sprenger’s own personal testimony; for despite our doubts</p><p>as to the precise extent of their inquisitorial experience (it is not even certain</p><p>that Sprenger had ever presided over a witch-trial) they both claimed exten-</p><p>sive personal knowledge, and possessed a fund of narrative accounts taken</p><p>from their own experiences or those of their informants.49</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger begin their text by examining witchcraft at its</p><p>most abstract, from the perspective of the Dominican theological system, and</p><p>the analysis which follows was intended to mimic the forms of Thomist</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 21</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 21</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>disputation. This method, which the authors call “scholastic,” begins with a</p><p>series of propositional questions. Then follows the counterargument, the cita-</p><p>tion of seemingly contrary authorities, a responsio or solution to the problem,</p><p>and finally the replies to specific objections. In capable hands, and applied to</p><p>appropriate subject matter, this sort of analysis was highly persuasive and</p><p>carried considerable prestige – no doubt the reason it was chosen by our</p><p>authors since it was not terribly responsive to their needs. First, and perhaps</p><p>foremost, it appears that Institoris and Sprenger found it difficult to subordi-</p><p>nate their discussion to the rigid logic of the questio; they often embark on</p><p>rambling digressions into related but not strictly relevant topics, occasionally</p><p>even abandoning their chosen method entirely.50 Second, the requirement that</p><p>all objections be answered in full seems to have weighed rather heavily upon</p><p>the authors. Although, to their credit, Institoris and Sprenger address difficult</p><p>questions, their replies are often testy, ranging from terse, unsatisfying dis-</p><p>missals to lengthy and confusing bouts of jargon-filled debate.</p><p>Despite all of this, however, the main contours of their argument remain</p><p>clear.The first part of the Malleus begins with two preliminary questions, both</p><p>of which are necessary to the more detailed argument to follow. First, they</p><p>ask whether the existence of witches is an essential tenet of Catholic teaching</p><p>or whether witchcraft is instead imaginary, the result of some occult but</p><p>natural process, the deluding phantasms of the devil, or simply the fancies of</p><p>overwrought human minds.51 The latter possibilities the authors then emphat-</p><p>ically deny: they point out that because the devil exists and has the power to</p><p>do marvelous things, witchcraft, if done through his aid and with the permis-</p><p>sion of God, could certainly be real as well. They draw a comparable conclu-</p><p>sion from the authorities – scriptures, doctors of the Church, theologians,</p><p>canon and civil law; for, they argue, if witchcraft were imaginary and witches</p><p>non-existent or essentially harmless, they would surely not be so consistently</p><p>and severely condemned.</p><p>Witches, in their view, are beings who are not, and could not be, imag-</p><p>inary, but who “can, with the help of demons, on account of the pact they have</p><p>with them, and with the permission of God, bring about real harmful magical</p><p>effects.”52 In the Malleus, witchcraft is specifically predicated upon this combi-</p><p>nation of an overtly expressed pact with the devil, the active participation of</p><p>the witch in acts of maleficium and consequent actual, physical, harm. All else</p><p>definitionally is not witchcraft and does not fall within the purview of the</p><p>authors’ investigation. The pact is crucial, for it articulates the relationship</p><p>between the witch and Satan through which witchcraft must arise; through her</p><p>pact,</p><p>the witch has offered herself completely and has bound herself to the devil really</p><p>and in truth and not fantastically and in the imagination only, and thus it ought</p><p>22 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 22</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>to be understood that she cooperates with the devil in body and in truth; for</p><p>all works of witches are to this end, whether they always carry out their witch-</p><p>craft through the pact, or through a glance, or through the spoken word, or</p><p>through the operation of some instrument of witchcraft deposited under the</p><p>threshold of a house.53</p><p>Since both the pact and the harm that springs from it are real, witchcraft must</p><p>be real as well.</p><p>This conception of witchcraft is strikingly narrow: maleficium is not</p><p>simply a kind of magical or occult harm, but harm wrought through a coop-</p><p>erative endeavor on the part of both the witch and devil, when bound together</p><p>in a particular kind of contractual relationship. Such a restricted definition</p><p>required defense. In particular, the authors had to prove that occult harm arises</p><p>exclusively from the devil and the witch in concert, since, in practical terms,</p><p>if a witch could raise storms without the help of any demon simply by drop-</p><p>ping rotten sage into running water, or if the devil in his turn could cause tem-</p><p>pests without the aid of any witch, it would be difficult to know when to blame</p><p>inclement weather on witchcraft and when not.54 In a long and convoluted</p><p>response, Institoris and Sprenger argue in effect that although devils can and</p><p>do work evil without the aid of witches, for various technical reasons they</p><p>prefer not to do so. In fact, bad angels find the help of a witch so convenient</p><p>when working physical harm, that they employ them as a matter of course</p><p>whenever they wish to cause malicious injuries (maleficiales).55 As far as the</p><p>witches themselves were concerned, the matter was simpler, since if they</p><p>really were witches, they must definitionally do their evil work through the</p><p>devil. Although a person might employ natural agents to produce occult but</p><p>still natural effects, when a witch employed any object, word, or behavior in</p><p>her magic it was merely as a sign or adjunct to the power of the devil.</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger recognize that this is potentially confusing, and</p><p>attempt to clarify their position using the example of fascinatio, the evil eye.56</p><p>They accept as an established fact that the gaze of certain persons – menstru-</p><p>ating women for example – has a natural power capable of bringing about</p><p>physical effects, and that in some angry or disturbed old women this gaze may</p><p>be sufficient to do real harm to young and impressionable minds and bodies.</p><p>But the authors also insist that such old women are exactly the sort who are</p><p>often witches, in which case the malice of demons inspires and assists the</p><p>natural power of their eyes. The authors’ point, to which they</p><p>will return</p><p>several times, is that the mere possibility of a natural explanation for misfor-</p><p>tune does not mean that all misfortunes are natural. Quite the contrary, where</p><p>there are witches there will be witchcraft, and so only in the absence of pos-</p><p>sible malefactors should natural agencies be considered as possible causes for</p><p>harm. In this way, the Malleus employs the related categories of “witch” and</p><p>“witchcraft” reciprocally, using the presence of one to determine the existence</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 23</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 23</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>of the other. Where there are witches, a category that is inevitably socially</p><p>defined, there must be witchcraft; where there are maleficiales, misfortunes</p><p>that are perceived to be malicious, there must be witches. This link between</p><p>moral behavior and ambiguous harm, between the perception of human malice</p><p>and malicious misfortune, allows the authors to extend their conception of</p><p>witchcraft to an almost limitless number of applications and makes plausible</p><p>their claim that witches constitute a serious threat to Christendom.</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger believed that witchcraft was already endemic</p><p>throughout much of Europe and was increasing daily. They explain that this</p><p>evil had increased in recent times because of an unhappy congruence between</p><p>the three necessary preconditions for witchcraft: the presence of witches (or</p><p>of women ready to fill that role), the active participation of the devil, and the</p><p>permission of God.57 In this complex of interrelated variables, the necessary</p><p>link between natural and supernatural realms was provided by the pact joining</p><p>the witch with the devil. Looking at the problem from this perspective, the</p><p>authors then begin to construct a formal definition of “witch.” Maleficium is not</p><p>a major concern here, for although witchcraft may be a highly visible and fully</p><p>sufficient sign of the witch, it is not a necessary one, for a witch is a witch</p><p>whether she ever casts an evil spell or not, provided only that she has entered</p><p>into an express compact with the devil.This unholy allegiance does determine</p><p>the witch’s behavior, but her acts are those associated more with heresy than</p><p>with the infliction of injury:</p><p>Mark well, too, that among other things, [witches] have to do four deeds for</p><p>the increase of that perfidy, that is, to deny the Catholic faith in whole or in</p><p>part through verbal sacrilege, to devote themselves body and soul [to the devil],</p><p>to offer up to the Evil One himself infants not yet baptized, and to persist in</p><p>diabolic filthiness through carnal acts with incubus and succubus demons.58</p><p>This list is interesting not only for the lack of any mention of maleficium, but</p><p>also for the emphasis placed upon sexuality and reproduction. Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger would argue that it was the specifically sexual link between demons</p><p>and witches which was responsible for the appalling growth of witchcraft in</p><p>their day, serving to lure already immoral women further into sin, holding</p><p>them in sexual servitude, and providing, as well, future generations of witches.</p><p>In the following three questions, the authors examine this curious state</p><p>of affairs in more detail, beginning with an attempt to construct a coherent</p><p>picture of the power and the nature of demons and to explain their interest in</p><p>human sexuality. Logically, they should then turn to the other half of the equa-</p><p>tion and examine the role of the witch herself. But before they do so, they try</p><p>to address a perceived weak point in their argument, and embark on a long</p><p>and confusing questio on the possible influence of the stars, both as the agents</p><p>24 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 24</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>of specific acts of maleficium and upon the growth of witchcraft in general.59</p><p>The latter point is simplest and addressed first: again following accepted</p><p>authorities, Institoris and Sprenger argue that neither “fate,” nor the stars, nor</p><p>the Powers that move them can determine human destinies, much less the sort</p><p>of specific behavior required to become a witch, for the alternative would deny</p><p>free will. Not that the human will is absolutely free, of course, else decisions</p><p>would be made entirely at random: rather the will is informed by various</p><p>extrinsic agents of which the stars are one. But stars affect only the body;</p><p>angels, bad and good, affect the intellect; while God alone influences the will.</p><p>It can happen that stars may give a person bodily appetites or physical predilec-</p><p>tions that make him more prone to witchcraft, but the catalyst for the specific</p><p>sins of witchcraft will still be the temptations of the devil and not the stars,</p><p>just as a choleric person, although naturally prone to anger, must be tempted</p><p>in order to commit murder and is personally responsible for his actions if he</p><p>does so. That the influence of the stars might lie behind specific occasions of</p><p>maleficium is more problematic, and harks back to the unsatisfactory response</p><p>to the possibility of natural causation in the second question. Ultimately,</p><p>although the response is now considerably longer, it remains much the same.</p><p>Celestial bodies cause natural effects, but the works of witches which are called</p><p>malicious harms are not of this kind, in as much as they arise out of harm done</p><p>to creatures contrary to the accustomed order of nature.60</p><p>The logical basis for this argument is the Aristotelian dictum that from the</p><p>effect the cause is known; in this case the works of witchcraft are invariably</p><p>harmful and unnatural and so cannot have a cause that is natural, as are the</p><p>stars, or intrinsically good, as are the Powers that move them. Although not</p><p>compelling, this argument allows Institoris and Sprenger to make an additional</p><p>important distinction before moving on to the subject of witches and women:</p><p>astrologers and magicians may employ operations that resemble the works of</p><p>witchcraft, but because they utilize the natural power of the stars for their own</p><p>private good, they cannot be witches.</p><p>It goes without saying that magicians and astrologers are also invariably</p><p>male; that witches are most commonly female, Institoris and Sprenger accept</p><p>as a simple fact, verified by their own experience and common consensus.61</p><p>This is in part a function of simple feminine frailty, and they assemble a tire-</p><p>some collection of authorities to show that women are more credulous than</p><p>men, more impressionable, more superstitious, more impulsive, more prone</p><p>to emotional extremes: in sum more easily ensnared by the devil due to their</p><p>weaker minds and bodies. More importantly, though, just as the devil’s power</p><p>is greatest where human sexuality is concerned, so too is this woman’s great-</p><p>est weakness, for she is naturally more sexual than men, “as is made plain by</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 25</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 25</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>her many carnal depravities.”62 Throughout the Malleus, women are virtually</p><p>synonymous with the appetites of the flesh, and, in the minds of the authors,</p><p>this carnal desire is without doubt the mainspring of contemporary witchcraft:</p><p>women’s lust leads them to copulate with the devil, to use magic to gain new</p><p>lovers and revenge themselves against former ones, and to all manner of other</p><p>sins. Thus it is no wonder, Institoris and Sprenger conclude, that witches are</p><p>properly called maleficae and not malefici, for “all [witchcraft] comes from</p><p>carnal lust, which is in women insatiable.”63 In this way, the spread of witch-</p><p>craft in modern times is readily explicable through the increasing numbers of</p><p>lustful and ambitious women who fall easily into league with the devil. Because</p><p>this is the case, it is equally clear that lust, and especially lust that is manifested</p><p>in some egregious sin such as</p><p>adultery or fornication, is a reliable behavioral</p><p>indicator of a predisposition toward witchcraft. It is not sufficient in itself, of</p><p>course, as not all adulteresses are witches, but the authors’ point is that many</p><p>are, and so a woman’s sexual behavior is a legitimate subject for inquisitorial</p><p>inquiry and examination.</p><p>Witchcraft in the Malleus thus emerges as a phenomenon that is explic-</p><p>itly gendered and sexual. It arises from the insatiable sexual appetites of</p><p>women; sexual intercourse with her master is the sign of a witch’s servitude,</p><p>and increasing the devil’s progeny is one of her chief goals. Conversely, a</p><p>witch’s magic is especially apt to disrupt the course of benign sexual relation-</p><p>ships and fruitful reproduction, both because the devil’s power in this field is</p><p>so great, and because the witch herself is predisposed toward this sort of mis-</p><p>chief. Just how it is that witches bring about these misfortunes is the subject</p><p>of the next several questions, in which Institoris and Sprenger attempt to map</p><p>out the limits of witches’ power and at the same time to continue to demon-</p><p>strate the close relationship between witchcraft and more conventional moral</p><p>turpitude.</p><p>To begin with, a witch can influence a man’s passions, filling minds with</p><p>excessive love or hatred.64 The devil’s ability to influence or delude the senses,</p><p>and to bring fanciful images directly to mind, allows witches to do this, but it</p><p>is their own desire for the chance to gratify their lusts while ruining the lives</p><p>of others that makes this sort of evil so prevalent. As a rule, witches are just</p><p>as repulsive physically as morally and desperately need the help of the devil to</p><p>obtain the lovers whom they crave. As a result, this kind of magic is regrett-</p><p>ably common, and the authors cannot count the number of times “adulterers</p><p>inflamed with passion for the foulest of women have set aside their most beau-</p><p>tiful wives.”65 Similarly, obstructing procreation is no trick at all for the devil,</p><p>who can either interpose himself invisibly between man and woman during</p><p>procreation, cause an abortion or sterility in the woman’s womb, or, most</p><p>common of all, cause impotence or some other sort of sexual dysfunction in</p><p>26 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 26</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>men. But when this is the result of witchcraft, as is most often the case, it is</p><p>further proof of the libidinous character of witches, who are eager to cast this</p><p>kind of spell because they know that if men cannot perform sexually with their</p><p>wives they will be more likely to submit to the witch’s own adulterous</p><p>embraces.66 And so, the authors point out, “the fact that witches are more fre-</p><p>quently adulteresses, prostitutes, and the like is shown by the evil impediment</p><p>they place on the act of generative power.”67</p><p>One of the most alarming of these impediments is a witch’s ability to</p><p>cause a man’s penis to vanish into thin air, so that he can “see and feel nothing</p><p>except his smooth body, uninterrupted by any member.”68 This is the sort of</p><p>thing that chronically happens to adulterers who are not sufficiently attentive</p><p>to their mistresses’ needs, or worse, who abandon them entirely, thus pro-</p><p>voking vengeance. Fortunately, as the authors reveal, the loss of one’s penis is</p><p>only one of the devil’s illusions, and not a real transformation – although this</p><p>is unlikely to be of much comfort to those afflicted, since, as they go on to say,</p><p>the condition is generally permanent. Similarly, when witches change them-</p><p>selves or others into the shape of animals, this is just another illusion, because</p><p>a real metamorphosis is beyond the devil’s powers.69 But since the deceptions</p><p>of the devil seem substantially real to every test that an average person is likely</p><p>to devise, as a matter of practice it will make little difference whether one is</p><p>assailed by a real wolf or a witch in wolf-form, save that the latter is likely to</p><p>be even more cunning and vicious.</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger conclude their tale of witches’ evil deeds with an</p><p>odd little digression about the abominable practices of midwife witches.70</p><p>These creatures are the worst of all their kind, for they kill infants both in the</p><p>womb and at birth, and are even in the habit of stealing, vampire-like, into</p><p>homes to drink the blood of children. Worse still, even when they do not kill</p><p>the children they deliver, witch-midwives devote them to the devil, dooming</p><p>them to a life of evil.The questio is unusual both because it does not follow the</p><p>normal “scholastic” method – it is a simple series of assertions, supported</p><p>mainly by anecdotal evidence – and because it does not follow logically from</p><p>the proceeding catalogue of kinds of supernatural harm – the question focuses</p><p>completely upon the reprehensible character of the witch-midwives’ crimes.</p><p>In one respect, though, the question does provide a fitting conclusion to</p><p>this portion of the authors’ argument, for it states in the most forceful terms</p><p>yet, Institoris and Sprenger’s contention throughout, that although a witch</p><p>may utilize the devil’s power to do evil, she does it for reasons that are her</p><p>own: witchcraft may be perilously tied to the demonic, but it is an entirely</p><p>human sin.</p><p>This is a necessary point, for Institoris and Sprenger are about to tackle</p><p>the difficult question of why, since all witchcraft is dependent upon the per-</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 27</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 27</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>mission of God, God should be inclined to permit it.71 This is an especially</p><p>important problem since, as the authors observe with annoyance, certain sapi-</p><p>entes among the clergy argue that witchcraft cannot be real, since God does</p><p>not permit such freedom to the devil as the abominable deeds of witches would</p><p>require. In order to avoid meeting this formidable objection head on, the</p><p>authors make a discreet withdrawal, and treat witchcraft in this context simply</p><p>as a part of the larger issue of the existence of evil. God has, of course,</p><p>ordained all things, but he permits witchcraft for the same reasons that he</p><p>permits any other sin. First, because an action which may appear evil from all</p><p>human perspectives may in fact be the cause of much good, and thus witch-</p><p>craft may provide opportunities to test, warn, or purge true Christians. And</p><p>second, because if God did not permit witchcraft, he would be denying a</p><p>measure of freedom to witches. He does not will witchcraft to happen, but</p><p>he has created human beings with the capacity to sin, and just as God per-</p><p>mitted Satan to fall, and Adam and Eve to sin, he is similarly compelled to</p><p>allow witches to work their evil with the devil’s aid.Yet these traditional expla-</p><p>nations for the existence of sin obviously fail to answer the whole objection.</p><p>For although it may be granted that God is required to allow witches to sin,</p><p>it does not seem to follow necessarily that he should also give the devil leave</p><p>to rain down wholesale destruction upon the innocent in the process.The per-</p><p>mission to sin is one thing, the grant of deadly supernatural power is quite</p><p>another. But Institoris and Sprenger put forth the ingenious, if rather circular</p><p>argument that witchcraft is permitted precisely because the witch’s sin enables</p><p>the divine permission necessary for witchcraft.72</p><p>Here, the first section of the Malleus comes to an end.73 Although the</p><p>description of witchcraft that Institoris and Sprenger have built up over eight-</p><p>een dense questiones may seem disturbingly vague and even contradictory, it</p><p>has actually proceeded in reasonably ordered fashion. Each questio approaches</p><p>witches and witchcraft from a slightly different direction, establishing the</p><p>relationships between the natural and supernatural, between women and</p><p>demons, superstition and sin, witchcraft and sexual sin, God and evil, and so</p><p>on. Rather like a pendulum swinging back and forth</p><p>between extremes, the</p><p>Malleus has located witchcraft within a series of arcs described by devils and</p><p>women along one axis, and magic and sin along the other. The length of each</p><p>swing is not always regular, but as the interior of the arcs are drawn and</p><p>redrawn with each subsequent questio, essential characteristics of the category</p><p>gradually emerge.</p><p>In the second part of the book, the authors get down to actual cases; they</p><p>abandon the “scholastic” method, and proceed descriptively, with evidence</p><p>provided by numerous exempla. Institoris and Sprenger are no longer con-</p><p>cerned with what is theoretically possible, but with what, in their experience,</p><p>28 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 28</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>actually happens. The focus of their inquiry shifts accordingly, from abstract</p><p>moral and theological issues to concrete questions about witches’ behavior,</p><p>and especially about maleficium and the possible remedies for it. Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger begin their examination by expanding chiefly upon topics introduced</p><p>in the first section, adding details, clarifications, and frequently lurid illustra-</p><p>tive examples to the dry arguments already presented. The authors’ goal is to</p><p>demonstrate how their theoretical construction of witchcraft is reflected in</p><p>real-world experience, and to prove that there is a “real” witch who is consis-</p><p>tent with both:</p><p>And lest these things [the acts of witches] be thought incredible, they have been</p><p>settled in the first part of this work through questions and the solutions to argu-</p><p>ments, to which, if it is necessary, the skeptical reader can return to investigate</p><p>the truth. For the present, only those acts and deeds discovered by us or written</p><p>by others in detestation of so great a crime are to be considered, in case, by</p><p>any chance, the earlier questions may be difficult for anyone to understand; and</p><p>from these things that are related in this second part, he who thought that there</p><p>are no witches and that no witchcraft can be done in the world may take back</p><p>his faith and rebound from his error.74</p><p>For the most part, their project is now descriptive, and several chapters</p><p>are almost entirely taken up with examples alone. In places, however, they</p><p>must also make some revealing adjustments to their model in order for it to</p><p>remain consistent with reality as they see it.</p><p>In part one of the Malleus, they showed that witches can, with the devil’s</p><p>aid, do fantastic things; now they concede that the situation is more compli-</p><p>cated, and that witches cannot, after all, injure or kill everyone they might</p><p>wish to. In fact, witches operate under a variety of handicaps.75 Some persons</p><p>are under God’s special protection; guardian angels defend saints and holy</p><p>men; others may be “naturally” resistant to witchcraft due to the influence of</p><p>celestial bodies and the angelic intelligences that move them; and the rites of</p><p>the Church can procure similar supernatural protection for devout Christians.</p><p>As the authors’ observe, sacramentals and exorcisms are designed specifically</p><p>to combat demonic power, and so must have the same sort of virtue against</p><p>witchcraft. Institoris and Sprenger also note that men of their own class,</p><p>public magistrates who bring witches to justice, are almost never bewitched.</p><p>Perhaps God has sympathy for their dangerous task and shields them from</p><p>harm; perhaps the devil himself provides them with incidental protection</p><p>since, in order to hasten a witch’s damnation, he deprives her of her powers</p><p>when she is taken by the accredited agents of justice. The authors testify that,</p><p>whatever the cause, they are alive and well despite the best efforts of their</p><p>victims.</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 29</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 29</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>After this introductory digression into the limits of witches’ power, Insti-</p><p>toris and Sprenger turn to the various strategies witches employ to gain new</p><p>recruits, all of which unsurprisingly exploit the immoderate physical appetites</p><p>of women.76 To recruit “honest matrons, little given to carnal vice, but who</p><p>covet more earthly possessions,” witches will often cause milk cows to go dry,</p><p>so that the distraught women will consult some local witch for advice, adopt</p><p>some superstitious and blasphemous remedy, and in this way be led down the</p><p>path to damnation. With “young maidens, more given to ambition and the</p><p>pleasures of the flesh,” the matter is easier, and established witches need only</p><p>find some pretext under which the girls can be discreetly introduced to hand-</p><p>some and desirable young devils.77 Finally, women who have been abandoned</p><p>by their lovers seek out the devil of their own accord, either to satisfy their</p><p>lusts or to gain revenge. Of all witches, these sad women are the most</p><p>common, for “just as young women of this kind are innumerable, as, alas, expe-</p><p>rience teaches, so the witches who arise from them are unnumbered.”78</p><p>Most of the time, the devil is strangely detached from the business of</p><p>finding new recruits, preferring to delegate this sordid business to the witches</p><p>themselves. When the time is right, the devil appears before the assembled</p><p>witches and promises them prosperity and long life in this world.79 In return,</p><p>they produce the novice witch who must abjure her former faith and perform</p><p>an oath of homage to the devil, giving herself to him, body and soul, for ever.</p><p>The devil then commands her to bring as many people as possible under his</p><p>sway, and instructs her in the art of making a magic goo from the bodies of</p><p>unbaptized children.Though some novices may balk at this, the devil is shrewd:</p><p>he asks such women only to do as much as they are willing to do, leaving the</p><p>most horrid acts of sacrilege for later.</p><p>Once a witch has accepted the devil, she immediately acquires the ability</p><p>to fly from place to place and the regular attentions of a demon lover, both of</p><p>which are well attested by current reports and traditional authorities.80</p><p>Witches also acquire the ability to perform magic with the devil’s aid,</p><p>although, somewhat unexpectedly, Institoris and Sprenger admit that not all</p><p>witches’ magic is necessarily malign. For obscure reasons, witches are divided</p><p>into three classes: those who only cause harm, those who heal as well as harm,</p><p>and those who heal, but cannot bring about injuries.81 The most formidable</p><p>kind of witch, possessing the most impressive occult arsenal, is the midwife-</p><p>witch, who specializes in killing and eating unbaptized children; she becomes</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger’s archetype, standing for all the others.</p><p>The remainder of the second part deals with maleficium proper, and con-</p><p>sists of a remarkably thorough catalogue of witches’ powers to do harm.82 As</p><p>mentioned before, witches can prevent procreation in various ways, turn</p><p>themselves or others into animal form, or create convincing illusions of all</p><p>30 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 30</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>sorts. They can also induce the devil to possess people, cause all manner of</p><p>sickness in humans or beasts, raise storms, and steal milk. In short, a large</p><p>proportion of life’s calamities are encompassed by the witches’ extensive</p><p>magical repertoire.</p><p>Unfortunately for the consistency of their argument, Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger recognize that some kinds of misfortune appear to be attributable</p><p>solely to the devil. Lightning strikes, for instance, often occur seemingly</p><p>without the participation of any witch, although it may be that the witch</p><p>responsible simply remains undetected.83 Worse, the authors are also forced</p><p>to admit that maleficium is not quite the exclusive property of witches. Since</p><p>demons are not particularly choosy about whom they aid, it is quite possible</p><p>for someone who is not technically a witch to work harmful magic</p><p>by virtue</p><p>of a tacit pact alone, a pact forged whenever anyone uses superstitious means</p><p>or rites to achieve some end.84 Such was a traditional ecclesiastical under-</p><p>standing of malign magic, but because maleficium is such an important part of</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger’s conception of what witches are it creates an annoy-</p><p>ing gray area around the periphery of the authors’ definition of witchcraft.</p><p>From the authors’ perspective, a more helpful exception to the rule is</p><p>the bizarre miscellany of male wizards which concludes their description of</p><p>witches’ practices.85 Although these men are counted among those “addicted</p><p>to witchcraft,” it is difficult to call them witches: they do not practice con-</p><p>ventional maleficium, have intercourse with the devil, or indulge in most other</p><p>characteristically witch-like activities, and their social roles are relentlessly</p><p>male. Some such men are soldiers, such as the notorious “archer wizards”</p><p>(malefici sagittarii) who shoot their arrows into a crucifix in order to acquire</p><p>diabolically enhanced accuracy. But whatever their occupation, they are not</p><p>obvious social deviants, despite their grievous sins, so that “witchcraft” for men</p><p>does not correspond to a readily identifiable life style.The male witch is known</p><p>strictly on the basis of sacrilegious behavior. He is thus a kind of marginal</p><p>“witch,” who serves to define in different ways the bounds of “normal” femi-</p><p>nine witchcraft.</p><p>Yet despite Institoris and Sprenger’s best efforts to define witchcraft</p><p>clearly, in their next topic, the possible remedies for maleficium, the line</p><p>between witchcraft and other magical operations becomes perilously obscure.</p><p>The problem is that a bewitched person looking for a cure has few options: a</p><p>human curative agency is impossible, because witchcraft is the work of the</p><p>devil and beyond a mortal’s natural capacity to undo; divine help, though pos-</p><p>sible, is extremely unlikely (given that God has permitted the initial affliction,</p><p>He is not often moved to remove it); finally, although the remedies of the</p><p>Church will exorcize demons and keep them at bay, they are not much use</p><p>once a magical spell has taken effect in accordance with divine will.The victim</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 31</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 31</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>is thus in a real quandary, since the only remaining source of relief is the devil</p><p>or his agents:</p><p>It appears besides that [the bewitched] will be freed very rarely, however much</p><p>they may implore divine assistance and the support of saints; therefore they</p><p>cannot be freed except by the help of demons, which, however, it is not per-</p><p>mitted to seek.86</p><p>Yet despite the warning of Aquinas and the theologians that a man may not</p><p>lawfully look to cure witchcraft, certain canonists argued that the situation was</p><p>not so cut and dried, and that in the absence of viable alternatives, the works</p><p>of the devil might be legitimately destroyed through “vain and superstitious</p><p>means.”87</p><p>Throughout this section of the Malleus, Institoris and Sprenger try to rec-</p><p>oncile these contradictory positions, and establish some guidelines by which</p><p>allowable remedies may be distinguished from condemned superstition. Their</p><p>solution is to create a narrow space for acceptable “vanities” between diaboli-</p><p>cally effective but unlawful practices on one side, and perfectly acceptable but</p><p>presumably ineffective remedies on the other. They cannot clearly define this</p><p>acceptable “space,” because the nature of the operator remains much more</p><p>important in the authors’ minds than the nature of the operation. It is unac-</p><p>ceptable under any circumstances to go to a witch to have maleficium removed,</p><p>even if she harms nothing else in the process; on the other hand, “a remedy</p><p>which is performed with certain superstitious rites, but in which no other</p><p>person is harmed, and not done by manifest witches” may be fine.88 No</p><p>wonder, then, that they scrupulously avoided this subject while in a theologi-</p><p>cal discursive mode, for, difficult as it is to justify in practice, it would be</p><p>appallingly hard to do so in theory. In effect, Institoris and Sprenger author-</p><p>ize a limited amount of commerce with a passive, instrumental devil, in pref-</p><p>erence to any association with the more active moral evil of the witch. This</p><p>decision allows them to give tentative approval to a variety of obscure occult</p><p>practices which are perhaps legitimate for that reason alone.89</p><p>The remainder of this section of the Malleus examines both preventative</p><p>and curative responses to various manifestations of maleficium, in a manner</p><p>roughly parallel to the treatment of witchcraft itself in the previous section.90</p><p>Throughout, Institoris and Sprenger are concerned to separate unlawful super-</p><p>stition, identified by principles laid down by Aquinas and Nider, from per-</p><p>missible Christian countermagic. The authors consistently endorse a very</p><p>liberal application of sacramental substances and Christian charms as the best</p><p>possible preventative measures. Houses should be doused liberally with holy</p><p>water, man and beast should be festooned with written charms, and holy wax</p><p>and herbs should be placed on every threshold to ward off witches’ occult</p><p>32 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 32</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>assaults. If it would curb the power of witches, Institoris and Sprenger are</p><p>quite prepared to see the sacramentals of the Church, and the rite of exor-</p><p>cism besides, employed by pious lay men and women, and, in the event that</p><p>such steps should be neglected or prove to be ineffective, the authors recom-</p><p>mend a graduated hierarchy of responses, beginning with a regimen of prayer,</p><p>confession, pilgrimage, and exorcism. Should these too fail, the patient may</p><p>then turn to a broad range of possible folk remedies, which Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger examine with an eye to separating the permissible wheat from the</p><p>condemned chaff.</p><p>Ultimately, however, the bewitched cannot hope for an infallible remedy,</p><p>for the power of witches is too strong. There is only one completely reliable</p><p>way to combat witchcraft, and this is to eliminate the witches, the course of</p><p>action Institoris and Sprenger endorse in one of the most impassioned passages</p><p>of the Malleus:</p><p>But alas, lord God, although all your judgments are just, who will free the poor</p><p>people who have been bewitched, crying out in their continuous pains? Now</p><p>that our sins have aroused him, the Enemy very much has the upper hand.</p><p>Where are those who have the strength to dissolve those works of the devil</p><p>through licit exorcisms? This single remedy seems left to us, that, by punishing</p><p>through various means the witches responsible, judges restrain their outrages,</p><p>whence the occasions for the sick to visit witches will be removed. But, alas,</p><p>no one feels this in his heart.91</p><p>To aid these embattled judges, the final portion of the Malleus provides a</p><p>detailed guide to the conduct of witch-trial. Much of this is fairly technical,</p><p>taken up with sample documents and advice on how to reject troublesome</p><p>appeals, but Institoris and Sprenger begin by making the more general point</p><p>that witchcraft is everyone’s problem and not the exclusive concern of the</p><p>Inquisition alone.92 If witchcraft were purely a matter of heresy this might not</p><p>be true, but the authors make the interesting argument that a witch is a heretic</p><p>in the same way as is a simoniac, only as a convenient legal fiction. Heresy,</p><p>after all, is a matter of belief, and the devil does not really care if witches reject</p><p>Christianity in their hearts or not; the outward show is all that really matters</p><p>to him, as that is all that is needed to ensure damnation. Witches do not nec-</p><p>essarily hold any false opinions about the faith, but are still guilty of apostasy,</p><p>as well as whatever secular crimes they may have committed. Although this</p><p>may seem like unnecessarily legalistic wrangling,</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger were</p><p>in fact entering into an important and contentious debate over the extent of</p><p>the Inquisition’s jurisdiction. The constitutions of Clement V had forbidden</p><p>both the papal Inquisition and local episcopal courts to try cases of manifest</p><p>heresy alone and without the participation of the other. Institoris and Sprenger</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 33</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 33</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>argue that because witchcraft does not “savor of manifest heresy,” it is fair game</p><p>for an episcopal court alone. Further, because witchcraft is generally known</p><p>by physical injuries, the witch may also be tried competently by secular courts</p><p>for crimes against civil law. Particular cases might, it was true, call for the</p><p>overlapping jurisdictions of the Inquisition, and of the episcopal and the secular</p><p>courts, but in general witches could be tried by the episcopate without the</p><p>participation of the Inquisition or, where capital punishment was not called</p><p>for, by the secular arm.</p><p>With this introductory encouragement to their colleagues out of the way,</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger begin a step by step guide to the conduct of a witch-</p><p>trial, from the method of initiating the process and assembling accusations, to</p><p>the interrogation of witnesses, the formal charging of the accused, the inter-</p><p>rogation and torture of the defendant, and the final determination of guilt and</p><p>assessment of the penalty. The treatise is interesting from a legal perspective,</p><p>and reveals much about how the authors accumulated the experience they</p><p>brought to their treatise, but it does not contribute much to the image of</p><p>the witch already developed. In fact, the process is very much the other</p><p>way round: Institoris and Sprenger’s legal procedures would be meaningless</p><p>without recourse to their already established conception of a witch. For</p><p>example, the authors recommend that the accused be asked why she remains</p><p>in a state of adultery or concubinage, because such women are more gravely</p><p>suspected than are “honest women.”93 Similarly, a woman’s guilt is known by</p><p>an inability to weep during torture, since the gift of tears is a gift from God</p><p>denied to witches.94 In short, a witch-trial based upon the model in the Malleus</p><p>is only practical if one accepts at the outset the conception of the witch and</p><p>of witchcraft that it has constructed. This is, in fact, true of the Malleus as a</p><p>whole. The book’s argument is predicated upon a series of assumptions about</p><p>the nature of creation, about man’s relationship with God and with the devil,</p><p>and about witchcraft and witches, assumptions we shall now examine.</p><p>Notes</p><p>1 For biographical accounts of Institoris and Sprenger, see Peter Segl, “Heinrich Institoris:</p><p>Persönlichkeit und literarisches Werk,” in Peter Segl, ed., Der Hexenhammer (Cologne:</p><p>Böhlau Verlag, 1988), 103–26; Joseph Hansen, ed., Quellen und Untersuchungen zur</p><p>Geschichte des Hexenwahns und der Hexenverfolgung im Mittelalter (reprint, Hildesheim:</p><p>Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1963), 360–407; Joseph Hansen, Zauberwahn, Inqui-</p><p>sition und Hexenprozess im Mittelalter (1900; reprint, Munich: Scientia Verlag Aalen, 1964),</p><p>474–500; Jacobus Quétif and Jacobus Echard, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum (1719–23;</p><p>reprint, New York: Burt Franklin, 1960), vol. 1, pt. 2, pp. 880–1, 896–7; Amand</p><p>Danet’s introduction to Henry Institoris and Jacques Sprenger, Le Marteau des sorcières,</p><p>ed. and trans. Amand Danet (Paris: Civilisations et mentalités, 1973), 30–45. Sources</p><p>for both lives are conveniently collected in André Schnyder, Malleus Maleficarum. Kom-</p><p>mentar zur Wiedergabe des Erstdrucks von 1487 (Göppingen: Kümmerle, 1993), 25–102.</p><p>Henricus Institoris is simply the Latin form of the author’s German name, Heinrich</p><p>Krämer (that is, shop-keeper).</p><p>34 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 34</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>2 “propter senium gantz chindisch.” Ammann, “Innsbrucker Hexenprocesse,” 86.</p><p>3 Hansen, Quellen, 380–90.</p><p>4 For Dominican educational practice, see William A. Hinnebusch, The History of the</p><p>Dominican Order, 2 vols. (New York: Alba House, 1973), 2:1–230, and R.F. Bennet, The</p><p>Early Dominicans (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1937), 55. Like all Domini-</p><p>can convents, Schlettstadt had a priory school for the humanities and, since 1400, had</p><p>also supported a studium artium. Segl, 103.</p><p>5 Prior to being named a professor of theology, Institoris was regularly referred to as</p><p>“Henricus Institoris de Sletstat, artium magister et theologiae lector.” See Schnyder,</p><p>Kommentar, docs. 5, 8, 10, 12, pp. 35–7. For Institoris’ doctorate see ibid., doc. 15, p.</p><p>38. It was not unusual for busy Dominicans to receive advanced degrees while in Rome</p><p>on other business, for which purpose (among others) there was a studium generale</p><p>attached to the papal court. Hinnebusch, 1:43.</p><p>6 Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 4, p. 34.</p><p>7 “Sententias nostras interdicti et suspensionis divinorum per nos in oppidum Lipczk ob</p><p>praesentiam Bohemorum fautorum haereticorum.” Ibid., doc. 5, p. 35.</p><p>8 “exercere officium inquisitionis, ubi non erit inquisitor vel ubi erit de licentia sua et</p><p>beneplacito.” Ibid., doc. 8, 36. See also Henry Charles Lea, A History of the Inquisition in</p><p>the Middle Ages, 3 vols. (1888; reprint, New York:The Harbor Press, 1955), 1:370.</p><p>9 “Religionis zelus, litterarum sciencia, vite integritas et fidei constancia aliaque laudabilia</p><p>probitas et virtutum merita.” Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 11, pp. 36–7.</p><p>10 Ibid., doc. 8, 36; Danet, 38.</p><p>11 Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 10, p. 36.</p><p>12 Ibid., doc. 13, p. 38.</p><p>13 Ibid., doc. 18, p. 40.</p><p>14 Ibid., doc. 19, p. 40.</p><p>15 Further conflicts arose in 1490, apparently over Institoris’ conduct of an inquisition,</p><p>when his Order censured him for “the many scandals which he perpetrated in the</p><p>province” (“propter multa scandala, que perpetravit in provincia”); and again in 1493,</p><p>when he was ordered on pain of excommunication to quit a lucrative but contested posi-</p><p>tion as cathedral preacher in Salzburg (he did not, and the affair dragged on into the</p><p>next year). Ibid., docs. 49, 55–7, pp. 58, 60–1.</p><p>16 Institoris recalled that Reiser, in his confession prior to execution, claimed that the</p><p>heretics, especially the Waldensians and Hussites, “increase daily in strength and</p><p>numbers.” Henricus Institoris, Tractatus Varii (np: 1496), sermon 2.1; Schnyder,</p><p>Kommentar, 33, n. 1.</p><p>17 Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 16, pp. 38–9.</p><p>18 See especially Institoris’ sermons on eucharistic errors in Tractatus Varii, passim; and</p><p>Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 16, p. 38. For a full bibliography of Institoris’ works, see</p><p>Quétif and Echard, 897.</p><p>19 Rudolf Endres, “Heinrich Institoris, sein Hexenhammer und der Nürnberger Rat,” in</p><p>Der Hexenhammer, 207.</p><p>20 K.O. Müller, “Heinrich Institoris, der Verfasser des Hexenhammers und seine Tätigkeit</p><p>als Hexeninquisitor in Ravensburg im Herbst 1484,” Württemburgerische Vierteljahreshefte</p><p>für Landesgeschichte N.F. 19 (1910): 397–417.</p><p>21 Hansen, Quellen, 24–7.</p><p>22 Ibid., 27–8.</p><p>23 Ibid., 29.</p><p>24 For accounts of the 1485 witch persecution in Innsbruck, see Hansen, Quellen, 385–6;</p><p>Ammann, passim; and Schnyder, Kommentar, docs. 31–44, 48–54.</p><p>25 Dienst, 80–1.</p><p>26 Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 12, p. 136.</p><p>27 Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 32, pp. 49–50.The grant of an indulgence was standard pro-</p><p>cedure for inquisitorial investigations, see Lea, Inquisition, 1:407.</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 35</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 35</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>28 Malleus, pt. 3, qu. 1, p. 194.</p><p>29 “Si quis scit vidit vel audivit aliquam esse personam hereticam et maleficam diffamatam</p><p>vel suspectam et in speciali talia practicantem que in nocumentum hominum iumento-</p><p>rum aut terre frugum.” Ibid., pt. 3, qu. 1, p. 195.</p><p>30 Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 35, p. 51.</p><p>As Golser points out in his letter, by the consti-</p><p>tution of Clement V, inquisitors were otherwise at least nominally required to conduct</p><p>their business in association with episcopal authorities. See Lea, Inquisition, 1:387.</p><p>31 Richard Kieckhefer, Repression of Heresy in Medieval Germany (Philadelphia: University of</p><p>Pennsylvania Press, 1979), 99–112, and passim.</p><p>32 Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 42, p. 53. “Et si non recederet quantocius, tunc vice mea</p><p>paternitas vestra sibi dicere dignetur, quod satis multa scandala sunt suborta propter</p><p>malum processum suum, quod non remaneat in loco, ne deterius aliquid inde sequatur</p><p>aut sibi contingat.” Ibid., doc. 41, p. 53.</p><p>33 “aber in practica sua apparuit fatuitas, quia multa presupposuit, que non fuerunt</p><p>probata.” Ibid., doc. 43, p. 53.</p><p>34 “Quanti enim ceci claudi aridi et diuersis irretiti infirmitatibus iuxta formam iuris ex</p><p>vehementi suspitione super maleficarum eis huiusmodi infirmitates in genere vel in</p><p>specie predicentes.” Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 12, p. 139.</p><p>35 Ibid.</p><p>36 Schnyder, Kommentar, doc. 54, p. 54.</p><p>37 The result of the archduke’s inquiry was published by Molitor in the form of a dialogue</p><p>between the two lawyers and Sigismund, in which Sigismund, interestingly enough,</p><p>adopts the voice of skepticism. See Ulrich Molitor, Tractatus de Pythonicis Mulieribus, in</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger, Malleus Maleficarum (Frankfurt am Main: Nicolaus Bassaeus,</p><p>1580); Lea, Inquisition, 3:541–3.</p><p>38 Hartmann Ammann, “Eine Vorarbeit des Heinrich Institoris für den Malleus Maleficarum,”</p><p>Mitteilungen des Institutes für österriechischen Geschichtsforschung 8 (1911), 461–504.</p><p>39 As early as 1496, shortly after Sprenger’s death, Servatius Fanckel, a professor of the-</p><p>ology at Cologne, wrote that Sprenger contributed nothing to, and knew nothing about</p><p>the compilation of the Malleus: “Es [sic] quidem verum . . . quod malleus maleficarum</p><p>inscribitur magistro Jacobo Sprenger pie memorie et uni altieri inquisitori sed magis-</p><p>ter Jacobus nihil apposuit aut scivit de compilatione dicti libri.” Schnyder, Kommentar,</p><p>doc. 61, p. 62.</p><p>40 Joseph Hansen has persuasively argued that Institoris was virtually the sole author of</p><p>the text, and, in the main, modern scholarship has tended to confirm his view, although</p><p>his evidence is almost entirely circumstantial, centered mostly around the difficulty of</p><p>fitting the authorship of such a lengthy text into Sprenger’s busy schedule. Hansen,</p><p>Quellen, 404–7, and Danet, 43–5; Schnyder is more cautious, Kommentar, 419–22.</p><p>41 Institoris was also perhaps motivated by an order of Sixtus IV which in 1479 had given</p><p>the University of Cologne the power and the obligation to censor books. Innocent VIII</p><p>abrogated this order in 1487, which was perhaps just as well, because the form of Insti-</p><p>toris’ approbation bears no resemblance to the university’s official nihil obstat. Henry</p><p>Charles Lea, Materials Toward a History of Witchcraft, 3 vols., ed. Arthur C. Howland</p><p>(1939; reprint, New York:Thomas Yoseloff, 1957), 1:337–8.</p><p>42 Joseph Hansen, “Der Malleus Maleficarum, seine Druckausgaben und die gefälschte</p><p>Kölner Approbation vom J. 1487,” Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kunst 17</p><p>(1898): 119–68.</p><p>43 Schnyder, Kommentar, 422–5. Schnyder’s thesis would be more convincing were it not</p><p>for the testimony of the eighteenth-century Jesuit scholar, Joseph Hartzheim, who</p><p>claimed to have seen documents now lost in which two of the Cologne faculty protested</p><p>against the fraudulent use of their names in the second approbation. Either Hartzheim</p><p>or Institoris would seem guilty of fraud, and Institoris is usually considered the more</p><p>likely suspect.</p><p>36 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 36</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>44 See Amos Funkenstein, Theology and the Scientific Imagination: From the Middle Ages to the</p><p>Seventeenth Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), 6.</p><p>45 See their discussion of whether the canonists or the theologians should determine</p><p>whether an individual is guilty of heresy, Malleus, pt. 3, p. 189.</p><p>46 “Et quia in morali iam laboramus materia, unde argumentis variis et declarationibus</p><p>ubique insistere opus non est . . . ideo precamur in deo lectorem ne demonstrationem</p><p>in omnibus querat ubi accomodata [sic] sufficit probabilitas ea deducendo qui constat aut</p><p>visus vel auditus propria experientia aut fide dignorum relationibus esse vera.” Ibid., pt.</p><p>2, p. 86.</p><p>47 Malleus, Apology, 2; see also Sydney Anglo, “Evident Authority and Authoritative Evi-</p><p>dence: The Malleus Maleficarum,” in Sydney Anglo, ed., The Damned Art: Essays in the</p><p>Literature of Witchcraft (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1977), 1–31.</p><p>48 For the purposes of comparison, a rough count of the number of times a given author-</p><p>ity is cited in the Malleus can be obtained from the index of references in Schnyder’s</p><p>Kommentar, 288–98: the Bible (274), Thomas Aquinas (119), Augustine (75), Aristotle</p><p>(34), Johannes Nider (22), Isidore of Seville (18), Gregory I (17), Dionysius the Pseudo-</p><p>Areopagite (13), Henry of Seguso (13), Jerome (12), Albertus Magnus (11),William of</p><p>Paris (10), Cassian (8), Raymond of Penafort (8),Vincent of Beauvais (8), Peter of Palude</p><p>(6). A similar count reveals 270 references to canon and civil law, but this number may</p><p>be high because it counts the citation of a particular canon as reference to all possible</p><p>appropriate collections of canons since Institoris and Sprenger often did not distinguish</p><p>between collections of law.</p><p>49 Of the narratives in the the Malleus that appear to be taken from the inquisitors’ own</p><p>experience, most are situated in the diocese of Constance (20 accounts, 9 from Ravens-</p><p>burg alone); others are taken from the dioceses of Strassburg (10), Brixen (9), Speyer</p><p>(8), Basel (7), Augsburg (2), and Worms (1). There are but two accounts from lower</p><p>Germany, one each from Koblenz and Cologne, while two more are from Rome.</p><p>50 In the Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 12, for example, when the authors set out to show the horri-</p><p>ble crimes of witch-midwives, they simply abandon their method for flat assertions.</p><p>51 Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 1, pp. 7–13.</p><p>52 “malefici sunt qui demonum auxilio propter pactum cum eis initium maleficiales reales</p><p>effectus permittente deo procurare possunt.” Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 1, p. 10.</p><p>53 “[In quo pacto] malefica se totam obtulit et astrinxit diabolo vere et realiter et non fan-</p><p>tastice et imaginarie solum, ita etiam oportet quod cooperetur diabolo vere et corpo-</p><p>raliter. Nam et ad hoc sunt omnia maleficorum opera ubi super [sic: semper] aut per</p><p>pactum aut per visum aut per locutionem seu per alicuius maleficii [sic] instrumenti</p><p>repositi sub limine domus operatione sua maleficia exercent.” Ibid.</p><p>54 Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 2, p. 14.</p><p>55 Ibid., 16.</p><p>56 Ibid., 17.</p><p>57 Ibid., 20.</p><p>58 “Attento etiam quod inter alios actus habent pro augmento illius perfidie quattuor</p><p>exercere videlicet, fidem catholicam in toto vel in parte ore sacrilego abnegare seipsos</p><p>in corpore et anima devovere, infantes nondum renatos ipsi maligno offerre, spurcitiis</p><p>diabolicis per carnales actus cum incubis et succubis demonibus insistere.” Ibid.</p><p>59 Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 5, pp. 29–39.</p><p>60 “Celestia autem corpora effectus causant naturales cuiusmodi non sunt effectus male-</p><p>ficorum qui dicuntur maleficiales utpote in malum creaturarum preter consuetum</p><p>ordinem nature prosilientes.” Ibid., 37. Compare Thomas Aquinas’s similar proof in</p><p>Summa contra Gentiles, bk. 3, pt. 2, ch. 114.</p><p>61 Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 6, pp. 39–46.</p><p>62 “[Ratio naturalis est, quia plus carnalis viro existit] ut patet in multis carnalibus spurci-</p><p>tiis.” Ibid., 42.</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 37</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 37</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>63 “Omnia per carnalem concupiscentiam que quia in eis est insatiabilis.” Ibid., 40.</p><p>64 Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 7, pp. 46–52.</p><p>65 “Quot enim adulteri pulcerrimas uxores dimittentes</p><p>in fetidissimas alias inardescunt.”</p><p>Ibid., 49.</p><p>66 Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 8, pp. 52–9.</p><p>67 “Scilicet quod adultere fornicarie etc. amplius existunt malefice ostenditur per imped-</p><p>imentum maleficiale super actum generative potente.” Ibid., 52.</p><p>68 “Nihil valeat videre et sentire nisi corpus planum et nullo membro interruptum.” Ibid.,</p><p>pt. 1, qu. 9, pp. 55–9, 57.</p><p>69 Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 10, pp. 59–63. For the authorities, see Lea, Materials, 1:179–80; Hansen,</p><p>Quellen, 39.</p><p>70 Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 11, pp. 63–4.</p><p>71 For reasons that are unclear, the authors arbitrarily divide this discussion into two ques-</p><p>tiones; this is a confusing development, as the solutions to the arguments presented at</p><p>the beginning of question 12 are found at the end of question 13. Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 12–13,</p><p>pp. 64–71.</p><p>72 This is a long and at times theologically complex argument, which is made no clearer</p><p>by another arbitrary division into four questions. Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 14–17, pp. 71–81.</p><p>See chapter 4 below.</p><p>73 The first part of the Malleus actually closes with a short aid to preachers, answering</p><p>various common-sense objections to the reality of witchcraft sometimes brought up by</p><p>troublesome laymen. The chapter is interesting but adds little to the main thrust of the</p><p>book’s argument. Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 18, pp. 81–5.</p><p>74 “Et ne hec quasi incredibilia putarentur. Ideo in prima parte operis per questiones et</p><p>argumentorum solutiones sunt decisa. Ad quas si opus sit dubius lector per investiganda</p><p>veritate recurrere potest. Ad presens tantummodo acta et gesta per nos reperta sive</p><p>etiam ab aliis conscripta in detestationem tanti criminis sunt deducenda ut priores ques-</p><p>tiones si fortassis alicui difficiles ad intelligendum forent. Ex his quae in hac secunda</p><p>parte traduntur fidem capiat et ab errore resileat quo nullam maleficam et nullum mal-</p><p>eficium posse fieri in mundo estimavit.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 5, pp. 111–12.</p><p>75 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, pp. 86–92.</p><p>76 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 1, pp. 92–5.</p><p>77 “Sed erga iuvenculas ambitioni et voluptatibus corporis magis deditas.” Ibid., 93.</p><p>78 “Et sicut talium iuvencularum non est numerus ut heu experientia docet, ita nec</p><p>numerus maleficarum ex eis insurgentium.” Ibid., 94.</p><p>79 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 2, pp. 95–101. This account is derived principally from those</p><p>found in book 5 of Johannes Nider’s Formicarius.</p><p>80 Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, chs. 3–4, pp. 101–11.</p><p>81 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 2, p. 95.</p><p>82 This topic covers eleven short chapters. Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, chs. 5–15, pp. 111–47.</p><p>83 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 15, p. 147.</p><p>84 For example, Institoris and Sprenger know of a magus who produced “witch-butter”</p><p>without having made an express pact with the devil. Ibid. pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 14, p. 143.</p><p>85 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 16, pp. 147–52.</p><p>86 “Apparet etiam quod rarissime liberantur quantumcumque divinum auxilium et suffra-</p><p>gia sanctorum implorant, ergo non nisi auxilio demonum liberari possunt, quod tamen</p><p>non est licitum querere.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 2, p. 152.</p><p>87 Provided, of course, that these fall well short of harmful magic and demonolatry. Ibid.,</p><p>153.</p><p>88 “Vero remedium quod quibusdam ceremoniis supersticiosis practicatur non tamen in</p><p>nocumentum alicuius persone aut per manifestos maleficos agitatur.” Ibid., 156.</p><p>89 Ibid., 153, 157.</p><p>90 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 2, chs. 1–8, pp. 158–84.</p><p>38 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 38</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>91 “Sed heu domine deus cum omnia iudicia tua iusta sunt quis liberabit pauperes male-</p><p>ficiatos et in continuis doloribus eiulantes, peccatis nostris exigentibus inimicus nimis</p><p>praevaluit, ubi sunt qui licitis exorcismis illa opera diaboli dissolvere valeant. Hoc</p><p>unicum ergo superesse videtur remedium ut iudices eorum [sic: earum] insultus adminus</p><p>refrenant [sic: refrenent] variis penis auctrices maleficas castigando, unde et infirmis fac-</p><p>ultas visitandi maleficas amputabitur, sed heu nemo percepit corde omnes que sua.” Ibid.,</p><p>pt. 2, qu. 2, pp. 155–6.</p><p>92 Ibid., pt. 3, pp. 184–94.</p><p>93 Ibid., pt. 3, qu. 6, p. 201.</p><p>94 Ibid., pt. 3, qu. 15, p. 213.</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 39</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 39</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>3</p><p>The inquisitors’ devil</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger begin their analysis of witchcraft by observing that for</p><p>witchcraft to have any effect, three things must concur: the devil, the witch,</p><p>and the permission of God. For them, as for us, the devil provides a convenient</p><p>starting point, because the witchcraft of the Malleus depends upon an unusual</p><p>conception of what the infernal side of the Christian pantheon is all about.</p><p>Like so many late-medieval cultural icons, the inquisitors’ devil is not amenable</p><p>to simple definition; nor is it easy to determine in what form and to what</p><p>extent the devil was actually “present” in peoples’ minds. Jeffrey Burton</p><p>Russell maintains that the sinister presence of the devil was medieval man’s</p><p>ubiquitous companion, that “The eternal Principle of Evil walked in solid, if</p><p>invisible, substance at one’s side and crouched when one was quiet in the dark</p><p>recesses of room and mind.”1 At the same time, however, and with equal</p><p>justice, Richard Kieckhefer can point to the evidence of witchcraft prosecu-</p><p>tions themselves, which suggest that to most people the devil was not of any</p><p>particular concern, appearing instead “more as a legendary figure of folklore</p><p>than as the master of a demonic cult.”2 One might plausibly maintain that these</p><p>divergent views were the products of different levels of culture, one clerical</p><p>and the other “popular,” but the late-medieval devil was also to everyone a sort</p><p>of chameleon, whose particular appearance was dictated more by circum-</p><p>stances and context than by anything else. Further, there was a considerable</p><p>common ground between the conceptions of the diabolic held by learned</p><p>inquisitors and those of their less educated informants. This partial consensus</p><p>was possible because some clerics had come to accept a complicated and not</p><p>wholly consistent vision of the devil, as at once a transcendent principle of</p><p>evil, and at the same time as a being who was present daily in all manner of</p><p>supra-normal encounters and phenomena. Certainly, the location of the tran-</p><p>scendent in the immanent corresponds with a general tendency in late-</p><p>medieval religion, but in the devil’s case it also created difficult problems:</p><p>where a transcendent God could manifest himself in the mundane world</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 40</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>through a variety of mediating agents, a transcendent devil was traditionally</p><p>not so well equipped.3 While God was represented in the various manifesta-</p><p>tions of the Trinity, and had as well an array of angels and saints, to say nothing</p><p>of the Church, the devil had only a multitude of demons to carry out his will</p><p>on earth. Because all demons were perceived as beings of essentially the same</p><p>type, not obviously distinguished from their master, the mere existence of</p><p>minor demons could potentially lead to Satan’s trivialization. To reconcile the</p><p>apparent ubiquity of demonic power with a transcendent principle of evil,</p><p>some clerics began to insist upon the necessity for human mediation of the</p><p>diabolic side of the supernatural.</p><p>Such a striking dislocation of diabolic agency from the being of the devil</p><p>stands in stark contrast to the thinking of earlier ages, and requires some expla-</p><p>nation. The basic Christian devil of the Fathers had been a relatively coherent,</p><p>consistent figure, who competently played out his well-defined role in God’s</p><p>creation. This is not to say that the conception of the devil had ever been</p><p>simple, but in the earlier Middle Ages most clerics would probably have</p><p>accepted as their starting point Augustine’s view of a powerful but strictly</p><p>limited devil.4This</p><p>orthodox Christian demon was a fallen angel, who retained</p><p>his angelic nature despite the loss of grace, and whose aerial body, superhuman</p><p>intellect, and vast experience enabled him to do wonderful things. He was,</p><p>however, entirely separated from the divine, and could not perform true mir-</p><p>acles or do anything truly supernatural: a demon was simply a creature created</p><p>by God, differing from the birds and beasts only in degree, and not in kind.</p><p>Because the devil lacked the capacity for moral goodness, he was man’s supe-</p><p>rior in neither a moral nor an absolute sense, and, despite his remarkable phys-</p><p>ical and intellectual powers, he could always be overcome, albeit with</p><p>difficulty, by pious minds turned entirely toward God.5</p><p>Demons had a job to do, however, and that was to make life miserable</p><p>for people on earth by tempting them to sin and by afflicting them with</p><p>injuries. Tempting men came easily to demons, for their powers of observa-</p><p>tion revealed our weaknesses and inner characters, while their spiritual natures</p><p>allowed them to beguile surreptitiously those already prone to succumb.</p><p>Demons had considerable influence over such unlucky souls, and were able to</p><p>persuade them to sin</p><p>in marvelous and unseen ways, entering by means of that subtlety of their own</p><p>bodies into the bodies of men who are unaware, and through certain imaginary</p><p>visions mingling themselves with men’s thoughts, whether they are awake or</p><p>asleep.6</p><p>This connection between demonic activity and human sin was responsi-</p><p>ble for the prominence of the devil in Augustine’s thought. Not only was man’s</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 41</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 41</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>own fall the direct result of a failure to resist the devil’s lure, but the tempta-</p><p>tions of the fiend continued to inspire all manner of sins and create countless</p><p>roadblocks on the way to paradise. For Augustine, “evil” was first and foremost</p><p>moral evil and an expression of sin; when Augustine’s devil did evil in the</p><p>world, his presence was known principally by human behavior and not by mis-</p><p>chance or misfortune.7</p><p>In comparison, the devil’s power to cause physical harm was of almost</p><p>trivial concern. It was true, Augustine admits, that the natural powers of</p><p>demons enabled them to bring about physical harm – they might cause disease,</p><p>for example, by rendering the air unwholesome – but, since any mundane</p><p>injury was ultimately inconsequential when compared with the death of the</p><p>soul, Augustine was interested in demons’ capacity for physical harm only</p><p>when it complemented their ability to tempt man into sin. Black magic was</p><p>an important example of this kind of behavior: demons used their powers to</p><p>give efficacy to magicians’ spells not because they enjoyed causing suffering,</p><p>but because by doing so they confirmed the efficacy of superstitious magical</p><p>rites.Thus, men who longed to do evil were rewarded by God with the decep-</p><p>tion of demons. For example, when men used superstitious rites to discover</p><p>the future,</p><p>many things happen for the diviners in accordance with their divinations, so</p><p>that, enmeshed in them, they are made more curious and entangle themselves</p><p>more and more in the multiple snares of a most pernicious error.8</p><p>The same principle applied when demons impersonated pagan gods, and</p><p>bestowed benefits upon their deluded worshipers: by so doing they prevented</p><p>the superstitious from turning towards true religion. Similarly, demons de-</p><p>ployed their powers to do harm and to tempt in concert to lure people to have</p><p>recourse to magical remedies:</p><p>How many wicked things [the devil] suggests, how many things through greed,</p><p>how many things through fear! With these allurements he persuades you to go</p><p>to the soothsayers, the astrologers, when you have got a headache. Those who</p><p>abandon God and resort to the devil’s amulets have been beaten by the devil.</p><p>On the other hand, if the suggestion is made to someone that the devil’s reme-</p><p>dies are perhaps effective for the body – and so-and-so is said to have been</p><p>cured by them because when the devil had received a sacrifice from him he left</p><p>off troubling his body, having got possession of his heart; [one should say] “I</p><p>would rather die than employ such remedies.”9</p><p>Yet no matter how terrible demons might be, everything they did, whether it</p><p>was to tempt or punish the evil or to test the merit of the good, was done at</p><p>the express command of God and by his will:</p><p>42 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 42</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>For [demons] can only act within the limits allowed them; and they are given</p><p>liberty of action by the profound and just judgment of God most high, in accor-</p><p>dance with the desserts of men, some of whom rightly endure affliction, but</p><p>no more, at the hands of those demons, while others are, with justice, deluded</p><p>by them, and brought under their sway.10</p><p>Demons remained morally culpable for the evil that they did, for they enjoyed</p><p>it and did it freely, but ultimately responsibility for their actions lay in the just</p><p>but inscrutable will of God. Under such circumstances, one should avoid the</p><p>devil and shun his works, but one need not fear provided one had faith in God.</p><p>Rather, one should say with Augustine’s imaginary headache sufferer, “God</p><p>scourges me and delivers me as he wills.”11</p><p>This Augustinian conception of the devil was never entirely displaced</p><p>during the Middle Ages, but by the twelfth century it was being amended in</p><p>the course of new learned speculation about the devil and his role in creation.12</p><p>Though scholastic theologians, and Thomas Aquinas in particular, added little</p><p>that could truly be called innovative to the conception of the devil, they did</p><p>alter the ways in which he and his works were perceived, in such a way that</p><p>they emerged more powerful, more independent, and more obviously present</p><p>in the quotidian world than before.13</p><p>Systematization was the hallmark of scholastic demonology: Aquinas’s</p><p>great achievement in this field was the creation of a theoretical framework in</p><p>which the devils of Augustine, Dionysius, and the early Church could com-</p><p>fortably reside alongside their more contemporary kin.14 The mere existence</p><p>of such a system, though, had an inevitable effect upon the subject being sys-</p><p>tematized. Aquinas followed Augustine in his insistence that demons were</p><p>naturally created beings, but drew the logical conclusion that both demonic</p><p>behavior and physiology were therefore legitimate objects of investigation and</p><p>analysis. As created beings, demons obeyed the same physical laws which gov-</p><p>erned the rest of the universe; from the observation of demonically inspired</p><p>effects, from knowledge gleaned from scripture and other authorities, and</p><p>from reliable accounts of encounters with devils, Aquinas had at his disposal a</p><p>body of evidence which he could interpret with reason, logic, and certainty</p><p>according to Aristotelian precepts. Consequently, it was possible to know pre-</p><p>cisely the nature of demonic bodies, demons’ intellectual abilities and limita-</p><p>tions, their speed and range of movement, the qualities of their will and</p><p>emotions, and even their sexual proclivities.15 The ambiguity which had char-</p><p>acterized previous descriptions of the devil was now lost: it was possible to</p><p>know exactly who and what the devil was, and how he would behave under</p><p>given circumstances. Further,Aquinas situated demons within an ordered hier-</p><p>archy of creation, in which by their angelic natures they stood mid-way</p><p>between God and man.16 For this reason, so far as Aquinas was concerned, all</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 43</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 43</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>demons were metaphysically superior to man just as they were man’s physical</p><p>and intellectual superiors; from this derived a belief in diabolic</p><p>potency that</p><p>was correspondingly greater and more threatening than Augustine’s. This dia-</p><p>bolic superiority was clearly expressed in the uniform insubstantiality of</p><p>Aquinas’s demons, since unlike most previous writers, he insisted that demons</p><p>lacked any sort of corporeal body whatsoever: demons were powers and intel-</p><p>ligences rather than beings in a physical sense.17</p><p>There was no room in Aquinas’s universe for the ambiguously drawn</p><p>demons of clerical exempla or the spirits of “folk-demonology,” mischievous</p><p>angels who had fallen to earth mid-way between heaven and hell.18 Aquinas</p><p>did not deny that trolls, fairies, incubi, and other sensible manifestations of the</p><p>devil were encountered; he maintained simply that they were of the same order</p><p>as the intangible beings who brought punishment and temptation. In all of their</p><p>guises demons were essentially the same, fallen angels with angelic powers,</p><p>whose proper dwelling place was hell, but who resided in the lower air by</p><p>divine permission for the express purpose of carrying out the divine will.19</p><p>The problem was to make evidence based upon direct observation of sensible</p><p>demons square with evidence of the devil’s unseen presence and with his the-</p><p>ologically determined identity.</p><p>This is the difficulty Aquinas faced when addressing the existence of</p><p>incubus demons. Although it was a necessary condition of their spiritual</p><p>natures that demons could not generate human offspring,Thomas recognized</p><p>that both authority and common experience reported otherwise. To reconcile</p><p>this apparent contradiction, he constructed an elaborate and unconvincing sce-</p><p>nario in which succubi received semen from their human partners and then</p><p>used this as incubi to inseminate women.20 Normally, of course, human semen</p><p>lost its calor naturalis, and hence its potency, when removed from the body, but</p><p>the superhuman speed of demonic motion was sufficient to overcome even</p><p>this obstacle. But if this provided a satisfactory explanation for how demons</p><p>seemed able to generate human offspring, it did not really explain why they</p><p>should want to do so in the first place. For unlike Guibert of Nogent’s demons,</p><p>who sought intercourse with women for “sport alone,” the demons of the</p><p>Summa take no delight in carnal sins and looked only to lead men into</p><p>perdition.21</p><p>This example illustrates how difficult it could be, even for Thomas</p><p>Aquinas, to reconcile a theologically and metaphysically consistent demon with</p><p>his earthly manifestations. Consequently, in scholastic demonology there is a</p><p>perceptible dichotomy between the highly abstracted, impersonal, invisible</p><p>devil of theory, and demons in their more concrete, personal, and sensible</p><p>forms.22 This discontinuity in the devil’s nature is important, because it proved</p><p>compatible with notions of witchcraft in a way that traditional conceptions of</p><p>44 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 44</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>the devil were not; witches could, for some theorists, occupy this gap in the</p><p>diabolic realm, mediating between the demons of theory and the world of</p><p>earthly misfortune. Thus, as a general rule, the less the demons of a late-</p><p>medieval treatise resembled the fallen angels of Augustine, the greater the</p><p>importance, power, and danger of witches.</p><p>For example, consider the comparatively conservative views of Felix</p><p>Hemmerlin, a Swiss reformer, who wrote extensively about demons in the</p><p>generation prior to Institoris and Sprenger.23 He was interested in the devil’s</p><p>immediate and physical appearances in the world, rather than as some abstract</p><p>principle of moral evil: his devil is mainly a cause of tangible misfortune rather</p><p>than of sin. But Hemmerlin’s demons are in other respects quite traditional;</p><p>they do not abdicate their responsibilities to their human followers, and when</p><p>there is mischief to be done, they do it themselves, for their own (or God’s)</p><p>reasons. When Hemmerlin discusses the relationship between man and devil,</p><p>it is the role of demon that is most important. For example, Hemmerlin</p><p>tells us that a woman of Erfurt had a demon, who spoke fluently in German,</p><p>Latin, and Czech. Institoris and Sprenger would doubtless have called her a</p><p>witch for this reason alone, and made her the focus of the narrative. For</p><p>Hemmerlin, however, she is of no further interest; instead, it is her demon</p><p>who claims center stage: this industrious devil bragged that he was the same</p><p>spirit who had seduced the Bohemians away from the true faith, and that he</p><p>then destroyed with hellfire the fortifications of the invading Catholic army,</p><p>because the commanding princes “did not hold God before their eyes but</p><p>divided the territory of the kingdom among themselves before victory had</p><p>been achieved.”24 Not only does Hemmerlin’s devil act without human medi-</p><p>ation, his activities are securely determined by a conventional moral order: he</p><p>punished the Catholic army because of the sins of its leaders.</p><p>Hemmerlin also believed in magic. He knew, for instance, that peasant</p><p>women brewed poisonous herbs and roots together to cause storms.When the</p><p>pot was exposed to the sun, the fumes rose into the air and condensed into</p><p>violent storm clouds, apparently through a process partly natural and partly</p><p>diabolic.25 He describes a “mulier strega,” who could turn herself into a cat</p><p>and killed many infants in their cradle before she was burned, and observes</p><p>that “the world is full of this curse.”26 Yet for Hemmerlin, the devil had not</p><p>been eclipsed by witches, and demons retained a well-defined role in the pro-</p><p>duction of evil. Whereas misfortune in the Malleus is virtually the exclusive</p><p>prerogative of witches, Hemmerlin’s demons might still cause storms of their</p><p>own accord, and were even known to make off with a penis or two.27</p><p>Less consistent and less traditional spirits inhabit the work of Petrus</p><p>Mamoris, regent of the University of Poitiers, who wrote an interesting tract</p><p>on the subject of witchcraft at the request of the bishop of Saintes around</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 45</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 45</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>1460.28 In this work, the Flagellum Maleficorum, Mamoris tries to line up the</p><p>theoretical powers of demons with the most concrete examples possible, since</p><p>there are, regrettably, certain persons who will concede nothing, “unless some</p><p>gross and sensible example is given them.”29 While his examples are certainly</p><p>“gross and sensible,” they also feature demons of unusually trivial appearance.</p><p>Mamoris’ demons included not only the shop-worn inhabitants of exemplary</p><p>stories; they were also the products of his own extensive experience. Like</p><p>Institoris, Mamoris was not a man of high birth – in his youth, he had worked</p><p>as a shepherd – and his considerable first- and second-hand knowledge of</p><p>demons would seem to accord with the views and experiences of most</p><p>common people. He had encountered demons masquerading as ghosts and pol-</p><p>tergeists, as well as the annoying spirits that disturbed the sleep of sheep and</p><p>shepherds alike. He was also extremely credulous; not only was Mamoris pre-</p><p>pared to accept almost any account of strange occurrences as substantially true,</p><p>he also insisted upon interpreting ambiguous phenomena as demonic. In this</p><p>he can be compared with another demonologist, the more traditional, and con-</p><p>siderably more intellectually sophisticated, Johannes Nider (d. 1437).30Where</p><p>Nider contended, following William of Paris, that humans, and not demons,</p><p>go out at night and put tangles in horses’ manes, Mamoris maintained that</p><p>demons regularly did exactly this, and recommended giving one’s horses a</p><p>splash of holy water as a remedy.31 Similarly, while Nider qualified his tales of</p><p>stone-throwing devils, admitting that such things were often attributable to</p><p>the frauds of wicked people, it did not occur to Mamoris to be so cautious.32</p><p>Nor do Mamoris’ narratives serve an</p><p>sibility, but I have benefited from the advice and assistance of Professors Barbara Gold</p><p>and Carl Rubino of Hamilton College’s Classics Department, and from the dedicated</p><p>revisions of the readers for Manchester University Press.</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page ix</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>TMMPR 8/30/03 5:36 PM Page x</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>1</p><p>Introduction:</p><p>contested categories</p><p>On the morning of October 29th, 1485, dignitaries began to assemble in the</p><p>great meeting room of Innsbruck’s town hall. They included Cristan Turner,</p><p>licentiate in the decretals and the special representative of Georg Golser,</p><p>bishop of Brixen, Master Paul Wann, doctor of theology and canon law,</p><p>Sigismund Saumer, also a licentiate in the decretals, three brothers of the</p><p>Dominican Order, a pair of notaries, and the inquisitor, Henry Institoris.1They</p><p>were there to witness the interrogation of Helena Scheuberin, who, along with</p><p>thirteen others, was suspected of practicing witchcraft. Scheuberin would have</p><p>been familiar to at least some of these men: an Innsbruck native, she had</p><p>been married for eight years to Sebastian Scheuber, a prosperous burger. She</p><p>was also an aggressive, independent woman who was not afraid to speak her</p><p>mind, a trait which on this occasion had landed her in serious trouble. From</p><p>the formal charges against her, we learn that not long after the inquisitor had</p><p>first arrived in Innsbruck with the stated intention of bringing witches to</p><p>justice, she had passed him in the street, spat, and said publicly, “Fie on you,</p><p>you bad monk, may the falling evil take you.”2 Worse still, Scheuberin had also</p><p>stayed away from Institoris’ sermons and had encouraged others to do like-</p><p>wise, even going so far, as the next charge against her reveals, as to disrupt</p><p>one sermon by loudly proclaiming that she believed Institoris to be an evil man</p><p>in league with the devil – a man whose obsession with witchcraft amounted</p><p>to heresy.3</p><p>It is possible that Scheuberin was aware that she had a reputation for</p><p>harmful sorcery, and that her fear of suspicion led her unwisely to take the</p><p>offensive when the inquisitor appeared. If such were the case, her tactics were</p><p>spectacularly ill-conceived. Institoris was a man who treasured his orthodoxy</p><p>above all things, and we may well imagine that he was deeply offended by</p><p>Scheuberin’s slander; more seriously, though, her attack upon the work of the</p><p>Papal Inquisition was manifest evidence that she was herself either a heretic</p><p>or a witch. A searching investigation of Scheuberin’s life and character ensued,</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 1</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>producing additional charges: she had kept company with suspected heretics;</p><p>she had caused a woman’s illness in order to have her husband as her lover;</p><p>and, most seriously, in January of the previous year she had killed, either</p><p>through witchcraft or through poison, a knight with whom she wished to have</p><p>an adulterous affair.4 Scheuberin thus stood accused of using magic to cause</p><p>injury and death, of causing maleficium in the jargon of the court. Since this</p><p>was a charge familiar to all those in attendance at her interrogation, the various</p><p>members of the tribunal must have expected to hear testimony directly rele-</p><p>vant to this crime. If so, they were in for a surprise.</p><p>In the preamble to the charges against Scheuberin, the inquisitor alluded</p><p>to sorcery only indirectly; instead he dwelt upon the relationship between</p><p>witchcraft and sexual immorality, the one being, in his opinion, a necessary</p><p>complement to the other. Institoris observed that,</p><p>[just as it is hard to suspect an upstanding and decent person of heresy,] so on</p><p>the contrary a person of bad reputation and shameful habits of faith is easily</p><p>defamed as a heretic, indeed it is a general rule that all witches have been slaves</p><p>from a young age to carnal lust and to various adulteries, just as experience</p><p>teaches.5</p><p>Helena Scheuberin was an ideal example of this principle: a woman of ques-</p><p>tionable morals, rumored to be sexually promiscuous, and with a reputation</p><p>for maleficent magical power. Hence, for Institoris, she was a witch, and, by</p><p>definition, once this identification was made, she also became guilty of</p><p>demonolatry and of personal and sexual commerce with the devil. For</p><p>Institoris, such an identification was crucial to his thinking about witches, and</p><p>the function of an inquisitorial proceeding was in large part to provide a</p><p>context in which this identification could be made and proved. To this end, he</p><p>began his interrogation with a series of questions about Scheuberin’s virginity</p><p>and sexual history that made his fellow commissioners exceedingly uncom-</p><p>fortable.6 Soon Bishop Golser’s representative asked the inquisitor directly to</p><p>cease this line of questioning since it seemed to him improper and irrelevant</p><p>to the case at hand. Institoris then began to question the witness about several</p><p>specific points of her testimony, but again his manner was so offensive to the</p><p>episcopal commissioners that they protested and called a halt to the morning’s</p><p>proceedings.</p><p>When the court reconvened, it was with a telling addition: the bishop’s</p><p>representatives had sanctioned the presence of Johann Merwais, whom the</p><p>documents reveal to be a licentiate in the decretals and a doctor of medicine.</p><p>From Institoris’ perspective, though, his calling was infinitely more sinister:</p><p>he was an advocate for the defense – a lawyer. Merwais immediately raised</p><p>questions about the trial’s validity, accusing the inquisitor of asking leading</p><p>2 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 2</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>questions and of making a variety of serious procedural errors. Upon inve-</p><p>stigation, the defense council’s motion to dismiss was approved, and over</p><p>Institoris’ vehement objections the commission vacated the process and</p><p>released the suspects.</p><p>Through this little drama we see clearly revealed the extent to which the</p><p>category “witch” was contested in late-fifteenth-century Germany. All the</p><p>learned men at Scheuberin’s trial believed in witchcraft. If, up to this point,</p><p>Bishop Golser and his representatives had supported the inquisitor with no</p><p>real enthusiasm, they certainly had not interfered with his investigation. Nor</p><p>did they object to prosecuting those who caused injuries through magic. They</p><p>and the inquisitor simply disagreed about how a witch should be recognized,</p><p>and, on a more fundamental level, about what a witch actually was. Moreover,</p><p>this was not simply an isolated confrontation between inquisitorial and local</p><p>authorities but rather a reflection of a much more widespread debate within</p><p>the learned, ecclesiastical community over these same issues. Thus, inspired</p><p>by this local humiliation, Henry Institoris retired to Cologne to write a</p><p>detailed and comprehensive defense of his beliefs. And so, in a way, the insults</p><p>of an otherwise obscure woman were responsible for one of the best-known,</p><p>most quoted, and, indeed, most infamous of all medieval texts, the “Hammer</p><p>of Witches,” the Malleus Maleficarum.</p><p>The study which follows examines the problem of the construction of witch-</p><p>craft in fifteenth-century Europe, with particular reference to this text. Prior</p><p>to the fifteenth century, people spoke in terms of heretics, of maleficium, of</p><p>monstrous female spirits – the lamiae and strigae, but not of a single compos-</p><p>ite category, “witch.” By the mid-sixteenth century, however, educated men</p><p>generally agreed upon the definitions of “witch” and “witchcraft,” definitions</p><p>which drew upon, but were clearly distinguished from, older categories. Since</p><p>the Malleus played a significant role in this evolution of terms, it seems rea-</p><p>sonable</p><p>obvious didactic purpose, as did Nider’s</p><p>more traditional exempla. They were simply intended as evidence of the devil’s</p><p>nature and behavior, although the two do not always exist comfortably side by</p><p>side.</p><p>The most impressive ability of Mamoris’ demons was their powers of</p><p>local motion, for although they could not move anything in an absolute sense,</p><p>as this power belonged to God alone, they could move objects relative to them-</p><p>selves.33 Through this power demons could alter the weather, cause disease,</p><p>carry witches through the air, and so on. As an example, Mamoris relates that</p><p>he once knew a nobleman who had a familiar spirit named “Dragon.” Dragon</p><p>was a minor demon who had the bad luck to encounter another, stronger,</p><p>demon who bound him in a ring, seemingly for no other reason than sheer</p><p>malice.The stronger devil would take poor Dragon with him as he rummaged</p><p>through people’s houses, leaving the ring stuck behind a door or in a hole until</p><p>his business was finished. From this tale, Mamoris concludes that the devil was</p><p>able to manipulate both Dragon, and Dragon’s tangible prison, by his powers</p><p>of local motion: “For demons are of a nature superior to the rational soul which</p><p>cannot move the body.”34 One cannot help but think that if little Dragon is of</p><p>46 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 46</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>a nature superior to that of human beings, the exact extent of his superiority</p><p>is elusive indeed. Similarly unthreatening demons populate Mamoris’ accounts</p><p>of stone-throwing devils, whose mischief also provided painfully direct evi-</p><p>dence of the power of demons to move objects locally.35</p><p>Mamoris evidently thought in terms such as these when he envisioned</p><p>the direct and unmediated influence of demons in human affairs. Demons were</p><p>indeed commonly encountered, but their assaults were more likely to be</p><p>annoying rather than really terrifying, of the order of broken windows rather</p><p>than broken bones. He does not deny that devils can do much greater things,</p><p>and readily admits that since even certain stones have the power to turn the</p><p>mind to love or madness, “so much more can the devil through transmutation</p><p>of the blood and humors and in another subtle way horribly produce hatred</p><p>in the mind and pain in the flesh.”36 Yet it was also entirely characteristic of</p><p>Mamoris to say this in reference to witchcraft rather than to any of the devil’s</p><p>personal endeavors. Like Institoris, Mamoris saw witchcraft as the far more</p><p>frightening aspect of diabolic power: witches were the ones responsible for</p><p>infertility, madness, the slaughter of infants, infestations of werewolves, and</p><p>plague.</p><p>In short, in direct, worldly encounters with the authors of demonological</p><p>treatises and their informants, demons often seemed insufficiently imposing to</p><p>carry plausibly the responsibility for the world’s ills. Nider, in his Formicarius,</p><p>tells of a mildly troublesome demon who haunted the house of a priest living</p><p>near Nuremburg,</p><p>with hissings, whistlings, and blows, not very distinct, but audible; for some-</p><p>times he would beat on the walls of the house, and sometimes the joker would</p><p>blow, as it seemed, on the various pipes of actors, and he would indulge in a</p><p>lot of unrestrained behavior doing these sorts of things, that nonetheless do no</p><p>harm.37</p><p>The worst that this demon could do was frighten those unfamiliar with</p><p>its antics, and hide articles of clothing in out of the way places. Similarly, the</p><p>Franciscan, Alphonso de Spina, who around 1460 devoted the long final book</p><p>of his Fortalitium Fidei to the attacks of demons, was likewise frightened in his</p><p>youth by a noisy but seemingly harmless house spirit.38 Such demons, he says,</p><p>were responsible for beating on wine casks, and pulling off one’s covers at</p><p>night, but could do no other harm. Many demonologists had similar experi-</p><p>ences, and all had heard first-hand accounts of such things.</p><p>The extent to which conceptions of the devil in general were influenced</p><p>by this sort of narrative depended upon the relative weight assigned to the evi-</p><p>dence of eyewitness testimony. For Nider and Hemmerlin, although such nar-</p><p>ratives were important, they did not outweigh the importance of more</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 47</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 47</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>traditional exempla in which the devil retained a more traditionally “hellish”</p><p>role. In the work of Mamoris, Spina, and Institoris and Sprenger, the testi-</p><p>mony of personal experience was given proportionally more authority, and</p><p>their characterizations of demons were more apt to reflect comparatively</p><p>trivial encounters with various spirits.</p><p>As appearances of the devil in late-medieval demonologies become</p><p>increasingly mundane, their authors become more apt to identify as demonic</p><p>all manner of supra-normal encounters, and so to assimilate demons with</p><p>various traditional spirits. This was nothing new: the process of assimilation</p><p>had been going on ever since Christians first identified pagan spirits and deities</p><p>with the devil. But because some fifteenth-century scholastics had come to</p><p>accept appearances of a very concrete and material, but not awesomely pow-</p><p>erful devil as representative, they were also able to accept narrative accounts</p><p>of encounters with such spirits, or with demons sharing many of their char-</p><p>acteristics, as substantially real and meaningful. In this way, as the demono-</p><p>logical conception of the devil began to approximate that of more humble folk,</p><p>demonologists were able to accept as true an increasing number of traditional,</p><p>“popular” narratives, thus validating their increasingly “popular” conception of</p><p>the devil. Hemmerlin reported that in his day, demons “appear frequently in</p><p>Denmark and Norway, and there they are called trolls, and on account of their</p><p>familiarity with people they are not feared, but people make use of their obe-</p><p>dience.”39 One could argue that later demonologists suffered from a similar</p><p>problem, as their devils began to assume the contours of a variety of familiar</p><p>but not overtly demonic spirits.</p><p>Ghosts are a good example of this process, since there was no necessary</p><p>reason why a spirit of the dead should be anything other than what it appeared</p><p>to be. Jacobus de Clusa, a fifteenth-century expert on the subject, was in fact</p><p>convinced that most apparitions around monasteries, churches, cemeteries,</p><p>and houses were actually the insubstantial spirits of the dead. Jacobus explained</p><p>that the reason exorcisms were so often ineffectual these days, a fact which</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger ascribed to witchcraft, was that rites intended to drive</p><p>off demons were being wrongly applied to the Christian dead.40</p><p>While demonologists did not deny that ghosts existed, they believed that</p><p>spirits claiming to be ghosts almost invariably turn out to be demons in dis-</p><p>guise. Mamoris tells of a spirit which haunted a house with the usual cries and</p><p>groans, claiming to the ghost of a dead lady:</p><p>Many people heard this spirit day and night, but saw nothing. He revealed many</p><p>things which had been done in the past, and these revelations were found to be</p><p>true. He also used to admonish the people of the house to do many good</p><p>things.41</p><p>48 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 48</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Yet appearances were deceiving: the ghost interspersed certain superstitiosa</p><p>along with his good advice, and on this basis a “wise man” was able to discover</p><p>that the spirit was actually a demon. Such things, Mamoris concluded, happen</p><p>all the time. By interpreting situations such as this as encounters with the devil,</p><p>Mamoris and his colleagues succeeded not only in demonizing ghosts and</p><p>similar apparitions, but also in giving their demons the characteristics of ghosts</p><p>and nature spirits.42</p><p>This is most</p><p>obvious where the actual appearance of the devil is con-</p><p>cerned. The Christian devil is naturally a master of illusion, and when he was</p><p>required to assume a shape for the benefit of mortal senses, the Church tra-</p><p>ditionally maintained that virtually any form was available to him. But as the</p><p>character of the devil began to merge with those of other supra-normal beings,</p><p>his physical appearance changed also. Like demons, traditional nature spirits</p><p>could assume human form, but in their case it was customary to have some</p><p>signal flaw or abnormality in their appearance so that their true nature might</p><p>be known. Many European nature spirits, for instance, might appear as normal</p><p>or attractive humans from the front, but were hollow when observed from</p><p>behind.43 As early as the thirteenth century, Caesarius of Heisterbach reported</p><p>that when a certain woman inquired why a demon always retreated by walking</p><p>backward, the devil replied: “Although we may assume human form, yet we</p><p>have no backs.”44 By the fifteenth century, similar ideas about the devil’s appear-</p><p>ance were making their way into learned demonologies. Alphonso de Spina</p><p>maintained that although the devil could transform himself into an angel of</p><p>light, or even appear as Christ on the cross, through “diligent inspection,” a</p><p>tail or some similar deformity would give him away.45 Thus for Spina, the tra-</p><p>ditional Scandinavian saying, “When the tail is seen, the troll is known,” could</p><p>just as easily have been applied to the devil.46</p><p>Thinking of the devil as he appeared on earth in these terms encouraged</p><p>demonologists to construct a two-tiered model of the demonic, elaborating</p><p>upon the disjunction already present in scholastic theory between the devil in</p><p>his abstract and his more material forms. The most dramatic example of this</p><p>exercise is found in the fifth and final book of Spina’s Fortalitium Fidei, a lengthy</p><p>discussion of the devil, his nature, origins, and works. There is a hierarchy of</p><p>demons in hell, Spina tells us, and each is charged with oversight of some spe-</p><p>cific sin – Asmodeus rules lust, Mammon greed, Behemoth gluttony, and so</p><p>on. There is, in addition, an army of invisible demons all around us, some</p><p>responsible for specific places, others assigned to tempt particular people, and</p><p>all of us can count on having at least one demon specifically charged with our</p><p>own spiritual ruin. Fortunately, every demon is opposed by a particular good</p><p>angel, and the two spiritual armies are constantly engaged in merciless warfare</p><p>over the fate of human souls. Since the day of creation, Satan has turned all</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 49</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 49</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>his powers toward mankind’s destruction, and there is not a crime, a sin, an</p><p>evil in the world, for which he is not somehow responsible.47</p><p>Thus far, Spina’s account of demons and their works is unusual only for</p><p>its elaboration. As a Franciscan, Spina looked at demons in a traditional way,</p><p>more as the source of sin than of misfortune. Undoubtedly demons did cause</p><p>storms and disease, but more importantly, they excited heretics and Jews</p><p>against the Church, and had built up a fortress of sin in opposition to the citadel</p><p>of God.48 To delineate this earthly city of sin and its legions of heretics, Jews,</p><p>and criminals arrayed against Christendom was Spina’s primary objective, and</p><p>occupies the first four books of the treatise. Nonetheless, Spina concludes his</p><p>text with an elaborate description of demons themselves, and, one is shocked</p><p>to discover, that they are unambiguously the beings of folklore.49 They are the</p><p>duen de casa, who break crockery, disturb sleepers and go bump in the night;</p><p>they are incubi and succubi, who apart from their more direct assaults perch</p><p>on sleepers’ chests and send them erotic dreams; they are the praelia, who</p><p>comprise the phantom armies that appear at times to men; they are the night-</p><p>mares who oppress men in their sleep; they are fates and familiar spirits; and</p><p>finally they are the bruxae, demons who deceive old women into thinking that</p><p>they can fly through the night with Diana and do impossible things. In short,</p><p>Spina demonizes a host of traditional spirits, and grafts their characteristics</p><p>uncomfortably onto a very traditional conception of the devil’s nature and</p><p>duties. This sort of assimilation of folklore and Christian theory had been</p><p>attempted before, of course, but usually in the context of exemplary stories</p><p>intended to educate the unlettered about the “reality” that lay behind tradi-</p><p>tional beliefs. Spina, however, elevated this process to a formal enumeration</p><p>of diabolic types, and in so doing brought into painful clarity the contrast</p><p>between demons as they appeared visibly and as they operated invisibly in</p><p>theory.</p><p>In the Malleus, this dichotomous and non-traditional conception of the</p><p>devil is an integral part of the authors’ argument. Whereas they discuss the</p><p>devil continuously throughout the text, they usually do so in terms of his</p><p>powers and motives in the abstract. These are formidable indeed. Due to the</p><p>fineness of their natures, the scope of their experience, and the revelation of</p><p>higher spirits, demons had knowledge far surpassing man’s.Their will adhered</p><p>immovably to evil, and they sinned always in pride, envy, and malice. Although</p><p>they were intangible spirits, demons could nonetheless do marvelous things</p><p>through the exercise of their intellect and will alone. The authors revealed to</p><p>their curious readers the formidable extent of the devil’s powers:</p><p>They will discover how [the devil] knows the intentions in our hearts, how, too,</p><p>he can transmute bodies, substantially and accidentally, with the assistance of a</p><p>50 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 50</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>second agent, how he can move bodies locally, and alter the inner and outer</p><p>senses so that they perceive something else, and how he can, although indirectly,</p><p>alter a person’s mind and will.50</p><p>That demons used these powers tirelessly to the detriment of mankind,</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger demonstrate through a catalogue of typical diabolic</p><p>activities:</p><p>Rational in mind, yet reasoning without discourse, subtle in evil, desirous of</p><p>doing harm, ingenious in deceit, they alter the senses, they corrupt disposi-</p><p>tions, they agitate people while they are awake, and disturb sleepers through</p><p>dreams, they bring disease, they stir up storms, transform themselves into</p><p>angels of light, they bear hell with them always, they usurp the worship of God</p><p>to themselves through witches; through them they bring about the magic arts,</p><p>they seek to rule over the good and attack them further as much as possible;</p><p>to the elect they are given as a trial, and always they lie in wait for a person’s</p><p>ruin.51</p><p>This demonic agenda represents a considerable change from that assumed</p><p>by earlier authors: where Augustine, for example, saw diabolic evil chiefly in</p><p>terms of temptation and subsequent sinful human behavior, Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger saw the work of demons rather in acts of material harm. While, to</p><p>Augustine, the locus of the demonic threat was essentially interior, manifested</p><p>in the impulse to sin, and resisted through the grace of God, in the Malleus the</p><p>operation of demons is conceptually outside one’s self; even when demons per-</p><p>secute a sleeper through dreams, the dreams are not his own, but have been</p><p>sent, like an unwelcome psychic parcel, to the recipient. This change in the</p><p>locus of demonic activity allows Institoris and Sprenger to make an analogical</p><p>association between demons and witches: since the harm caused by demons</p><p>resembles traditional ecclesiastical definitions of maleficium very closely, and</p><p>since demons and witches share similar goals and means, it was possible to</p><p>elide the earthly presence of one in favor of the other.52</p><p>The devil was, of course, still the power behind</p><p>the witches’ magic: his</p><p>was the aerial body that entered into men and inspired minds to love or hatred,</p><p>his were the illusions that allowed old women to appear as cats or wolves, or</p><p>that made beautiful brides look like disgusting old hags, and his was the power</p><p>of motion that carried witches around on their brooms or that brought storms</p><p>to damage crops and disease to injure men and animals.Yet in the Malleus, the</p><p>devil himself is strikingly absent in all of this. When a witch dips a twig into</p><p>water and then sprinkles that water into the air, rain followed automatically,</p><p>without any overt sign of the devil’s involvement. Similarly, when she pierces</p><p>a wax image, the devil mechanically transfers the injury to the intended</p><p>victim.53 In this, the devil is merely the efficient cause of the effect; he bears</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 51</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 51</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>no responsibility for the injury himself.54 He did not tell the witch whom to</p><p>injure or whom to spare; he was not personally present at all. In fact, magical</p><p>procedures were such a reliable conduit of demonic power that the proper use</p><p>of diabolic countermagic could even induce the devil to injure his own witches.</p><p>In one case, when women wished to determine who was responsible for cows</p><p>going dry, they hung a pail of milk over the fire and beat it with sticks; a demon</p><p>then came and transferred their blows to the witch.55 In short, the powers of</p><p>the devil are utilized very much like any other natural force or property,</p><p>without his overt presence being known in any way.</p><p>This view was not, of course, entirely original. Both Augustine and</p><p>Thomas Aquinas accepted that the demonic component of magic was con-</p><p>cealed, since the whole point was to trick people into sin. But in the Malleus</p><p>this traditional perspective no longer makes sense: witches knew full well that</p><p>their magic came from the devil, or else they were not really witches; instead,</p><p>the devil seemed to act mechanically because either the pact or his own nature</p><p>forced him to accept that role. Furthermore, magic was no longer simply a</p><p>supplementary diabolic project; in the Malleus it has become the principal</p><p>means by which demons work their harm in the world.</p><p>Incubus demons offer an illuminating specific example of Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger’s thinking about demons and witches. Because they define witches</p><p>as such through their personal relationships with the demons, and incubi in</p><p>particular, these spirits had to appear to witches regularly and directly. Fur-</p><p>thermore, as Institoris and Sprenger strongly imply, these are the devils who,</p><p>while invisible, give potency to the witches’ magic. The relationship between</p><p>witch and incubus, therefore, provides the point at which the theoretical</p><p>powers of demons are realized in the form of the witch’s diabolic magic.</p><p>Despite this, incubi are in some ways less than completely formidable</p><p>creatures. The incubi and succubi of Christian tradition were originally minor</p><p>spirits (almost certainly demonized forms of traditional nature spirits, polter-</p><p>geists, and house spirits), and, although the association of witches with incubi</p><p>was a necessary component of witchcraft in the Malleus, the only first-hand</p><p>accounts of such associations came from the witches themselves, who con-</p><p>fessed to such liaisons under torture or its threat.56 Their descriptions of their</p><p>demon lovers were colored by their own traditional or “popular” perceptions</p><p>of supra-normal encounters, demonic and otherwise, and these, in turn,</p><p>informed the inquisitors’ conception of the witches’ devil. The outgrowth of</p><p>this dialogue was a demon that retained many characteristics of traditional</p><p>spirits, and whose very lack of a forcefully diabolic nature served to empha-</p><p>size the witch’s own guilt and responsibility.</p><p>In the experience of Institoris and Sprenger, for example, it was rare for</p><p>a demon to recruit a witch directly; more often, witches themselves acted as</p><p>52 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 52</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>the devil’s agents. The authors had extensive personal knowledge of this pro-</p><p>cedure, and refer to it at least four times. In one instance, they had heard the</p><p>confession of a young repentant witch from Breisach, who confessed that her</p><p>aunt had brought her upstairs to a room filled with fifteen young men, dressed</p><p>in green, after the fashion of knights, and demanded that she take one of them</p><p>as her husband. The girl was beaten until she consented, whereupon she was</p><p>initiated into the society of witches.57 Witches did not always enjoy such luck,</p><p>however, and these stories could end more happily. In an analogous narrative,</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger relate that in order to seduce a certain devout young</p><p>virgin, a wicked old witch took her upstairs to a room full of beautiful young</p><p>devils, warning her first not to make the sign of the cross. But because the girl</p><p>secretly did so anyway, “the demons in that same place were unable to reveal</p><p>their presence to the virgin in their assumed bodies,” and she escaped with</p><p>nothing worse than the witch’s impotent malediction.58</p><p>In these narratives, the incubus plays a markedly passive role. It is the</p><p>witch, and not the devil, who is responsible for luring victims to the erotic</p><p>rendezvous, and it is the witch who must spell out the terms of the encounter.</p><p>Nor is the devil once found very “devilish”: the young knights dressed in green</p><p>suggest fairies more than demons, as does their meeting place on liminal</p><p>ground – in rooms above stairs or ladders. The liminal nature of the demon</p><p>likewise emerges in his choice of season, for, as Institoris and Sprenger remark,</p><p>these encounters typically coincide with periods of sacred time: Christmas,</p><p>Easter, and Pentecost.59 For the witch, herself a liminal figure, the devil is</p><p>present at all times; for the rest of society, the devil was truly “near” only under</p><p>certain special conditions, such as those arising from the person or operation</p><p>of a witch. For a witch, an upstairs room on a feast day could be filled with</p><p>demons, and she could bring guests into their presence; for those fortified with</p><p>the sign of the cross, on the other hand, the demons were quite absent – they</p><p>did not really “exist” at all.60</p><p>To Institoris and Sprenger, witchcraft depended upon this intimate bond</p><p>between woman and demon, close even to the point of identity. In the Malleus,</p><p>the account of Institoris’ prosecutions of witches in Ravensburg describes pre-</p><p>cisely how this relationship was determined.61 They report that about twenty-</p><p>eight miles southeast of the town, a very severe hailstorm had damaged the</p><p>fields and vines in a swathe a mile wide, so that for the space of three years</p><p>scarcely anything would grow there. The people of the town suspected witch-</p><p>craft, “and clamored for an inquisition.” Institoris was duly summoned, and,</p><p>after careful investigation, he seized two suspects, a bath-woman named Agnes</p><p>and Anna of Mindelheim, whom he imprisoned separately. Agnes was inter-</p><p>rogated first, but she stoutly proclaimed her innocence through “very light</p><p>questioning.”This clearly showed that Agnes, like many witches, was provided</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 53</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 53</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>by the devil with maleficium taciturnitatis, the preternatural ability to withstand</p><p>torture in silence, so it was undoubtedly due to the miraculous intervention</p><p>of God that Agnes confessed, and Institoris happily recalls that when she “was</p><p>suddenly freed and released from her chains, although in the place of torture,</p><p>she laid bare all of the crimes which she had perpetrated.”62 Not only did she</p><p>confess to works of maleficium, but under the questioning of an inquisitorial</p><p>notary, “she publicly confessed to</p><p>everything else she was asked about the</p><p>renunciation of the faith and her filthy, diabolical pacts with an incubus</p><p>demon.”63 In Institoris’ mind, if Agnes was indeed a witch, as she manifestly</p><p>was, she had also to be guilty of these crimes, for this was what witchcraft was</p><p>all about.That there was no evidence that she had done these things was unsur-</p><p>prising, because Agnes, like all witches, had been “most secret” in her dealings</p><p>with the devil; proof of her guilt, therefore, depended upon her thorough con-</p><p>fession. But it is characteristic of the inquisitor’s thought that Agnes’s interro-</p><p>gation about the details of her liaisons with the devil had to be completed</p><p>before she was questioned about her use of destructive magic.</p><p>Agnes claimed that she had been lured into the sect by another witch,</p><p>who had brought her to her home to meet the devil in the guise of a young</p><p>and handsome man.64 Having been seduced sexually, Agnes was apparently</p><p>unable or unwilling to do without her demon again, and had been with him</p><p>for some eighteen years. When asked about the hailstorm, she confessed that</p><p>one day at about noon, a demon had come to her house and asked her to bring</p><p>some water out to the plain, because he wanted to make rain. As she was told,</p><p>Agnes met the devil standing under a tree. There she dug a little hole in the</p><p>ground and poured the water into it. She then stirred the water with her finger</p><p>“in the name of the devil and all the other demons,” at which point the water</p><p>disappeared and the devil rose up into the air to produce the hailstorm.65</p><p>Under questioning, Agnes described a world filled with demons, who</p><p>were her lovers, companions, and supervisors. Under their guidance and tute-</p><p>lage she worked her magic and evil deeds, while they rewarded her achieve-</p><p>ments and punished her failures – all of this completely invisibly to her</p><p>neighbors, who suspected her simply of harmful magic. The notary had first</p><p>questioned her about the charges brought against her, that she had done harm</p><p>to man and beast through witchcraft, “since no one had testified against her</p><p>concerning the renunciation of the faith and carnal depravity with an incubus</p><p>demon.”66 To make good this lack was the inquisitor’s objective.</p><p>Agnes was not, however, quite alone in this world of demons, and she</p><p>implicated a confederate, Anna of Mindelheim, in her crimes. “But this was</p><p>remarkable,” says Institoris, that “when on the following day the other woman</p><p>had been exposed for the first time to the very lightest questioning, in as much</p><p>as she was hung by her thumbs scarcely clear of the ground” she freely con-</p><p>54 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 54</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>fessed to everything without the least discrepancy between her testimony and</p><p>that of Agnes.67 There was at least one difference, however: the devil recruited</p><p>Anna directly, without any intermediary. According to Institoris, the devil</p><p>appeared to Anna in the guise of a man, as she went to visit her lover, “causa</p><p>fornicationis,” and made her a proposition:</p><p>“I am the devil, and if you wish, I will always be ready at your good pleasure,</p><p>nor shall I desert you in any necessity whatsoever.”68</p><p>This initial unmediated intimacy with the devil was reflected in Anna’s</p><p>character, for, as Institoris notes, Anna was a much worse witch than Agnes,</p><p>for she had been the sexual slave of the devil for longer, had done more harm,</p><p>and, unlike Agnes, was unrepentant when she was burned. Of course Anna’s</p><p>“confession” was contingent upon that of Agnes, who had the benefit of giving</p><p>her story first, and had also the comparative luxury of negotiating her confes-</p><p>sion with her interrogators. Agnes was thus able to shift her burden of moral</p><p>responsibility onto the unseen and ghostly presence of her demon; the inquisi-</p><p>tors interrogated Anna with a script ready to hand, and so it is unsurprising</p><p>that her relations with the devil should be more intimate than those of her</p><p>colleague.</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger are fully aware that by making the witch the focus</p><p>for demonic encounters on earth, they are suggesting a new paradigm for dia-</p><p>bolic behavior. It is true, they grant, that there had always been incubus and</p><p>succubus demons to plague mankind, but their traditional role had now</p><p>changed. In the past, their mode of attack and their motives were sexual: they</p><p>most often persecuted those whose sins were of a particularly sexual nature,</p><p>and their diabolic rape was intended to be neither pleasant nor welcome. This</p><p>destructive sexuality Institoris and Sprenger now attributed to witches:</p><p>whereas, “in times gone by, incubus demons infested little women against their</p><p>own wills,” nowadays “they subject themselves to a wretched servitude for the</p><p>sake of carnal pleasure, a most disgusting thing.”69 Incubi and succubi now fol-</p><p>lowed a precise order of attack, determined by the willingness of their human</p><p>partners. To those women wholly willing to have them they came freely; to</p><p>those who were unwilling they had to be sent – and this was the work of</p><p>witches.70</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger illustrate this new order of demonic sexual assault</p><p>with the story of a man of Coblenz, who was prone to strange and debilitat-</p><p>ing sexual fits. Although no other person seemed to be present, the man would</p><p>begin to move as if copulating, until, “after enduring fits of this kind for a long</p><p>time, the poor man fell to the ground, destitute of all his strength.”71 The man</p><p>claimed to be completely unable to resist these spasms, and blamed a woman</p><p>who had returned some offense with curses for bewitching him.</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 55</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 55</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Compare this story with the roughly contemporary narrative of the</p><p>Dominican theologian, Jordanes de Bergamo. Jordanes tells of a demon who</p><p>assumed the likeness of a beautiful girl in order to seduce a hermit:</p><p>When he was done and had arisen, the demon said to him, “behold what you</p><p>have done, for I am not a girl or a woman but a demon,” and at once he dis-</p><p>appeared from view, while the hermit remained absolutely astonished. And</p><p>because the demon, with his great power, had withdrawn a very great quantity</p><p>of semen, the hermit was permanently dried up, so that he died at the end of</p><p>a month’s time.72</p><p>Although the demons in each story afflict their victims with a kind of non-</p><p>productive sexual excess, the incubus of the Malleus acts at the behest of</p><p>the witch. Jordanes’ more traditional spirit both tempts and punishes sin.</p><p>Jordanes’ demon is tangibly present, and explains his performance to his</p><p>victim; the demon of the Malleus is invisible, without physical presence or hint</p><p>of personality, existing only as the bearer of an affliction and the instrument</p><p>of a witch.</p><p>In a sense, Institoris and Sprenger’s witch is Jordanes’ demon trans-</p><p>formed: an obviously feminine, insatiably sexual creature, in whom an excess</p><p>of sexuality corresponds with the destruction of sexuality in others. Indeed,</p><p>in the Malleus, at times the two are not even distinguishable. On one occasion,</p><p>the authors tell us, a man was harassed by “a demon in the form of a woman,”</p><p>who persistently sought sexual intercourse. The creature was eventually ban-</p><p>ished with the help of the sacramentals of the Church, “Whereby,” we learn,</p><p>“the devil had either been present in his own person in the form of a witch,</p><p>or with the actual body of a witch, since, with God’s permission, he is able to</p><p>do both of these things.”73 This demon, whose behavior was entirely sugges-</p><p>tive of a succubus, thus appeared to his victim, “as a witch”; the witch, whose</p><p>form or whose body the devil appropriated, was, in turn, identified in appear-</p><p>ance and behavior with the succubus herself.74</p><p>Although in their confessions, witches often sought to portray them-</p><p>selves as tools of the devil, Institoris and Sprenger consistently</p><p>rejected this</p><p>possibility. The work of demons, in their view, depended upon the guiding</p><p>malice of witches, and this applied not just to traditional manifestations of</p><p>maleficia, but to other more definitively demonic behaviors, the most remark-</p><p>able of which was diabolic possession. Prior to the Malleus, possession was an</p><p>entirely characteristic occupation of the devil, having little, if anything, to do</p><p>with witchcraft. Institoris and Sprenger, however, are entirely consistent in</p><p>their subordination of the demons’ earthly activities to the agenda of their</p><p>human minions. Granted, demons were capable of possessing people any time</p><p>God should require; but, Institoris and Sprenger contended, demons usually</p><p>56 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 56</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>possessed their victims at the instance of witches, since God granted demons</p><p>more latitude when acting through witches than otherwise.75 Although they</p><p>cited various traditional cases of demonic possession, it is clear that they con-</p><p>sidered possession through witches a relatively more serious threat.76</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger illustrate their understanding of demonic pos-</p><p>session with a long story – in fact, the longest single narrative account in the</p><p>Malleus. It is taken from Institoris’ own experience: while a young man in</p><p>Rome, Institoris encountered a priest possessed by a demon. Although usually</p><p>lucid, the priest lost his senses whenever he wished to visit holy places or spend</p><p>his time on anything divine; just as bad, he stuck out his tongue involuntarily</p><p>whenever he passed a church or knelt for the salutation of the Virgin. Though</p><p>such behavior was not uncommon for demoniacs, the cause of his affliction</p><p>gave reason for comment: he claimed that</p><p>a certain woman, a witch, brought this infirmity upon me; for when chastising</p><p>her on account of a certain disagreement about Church rules, while I was</p><p>chiding her rather harshly, because her will was stubborn, she said that after a</p><p>few days I would be afflicted with these things which then befell me. But the</p><p>demon dwelling in me also reports this: that a maleficium has been placed by the</p><p>witch under a certain tree, and that unless it is removed, I cannot be freed, but</p><p>he is unwilling to point out the tree.77</p><p>Initially, it appeared as if the demon was correct: a full battery of exorcisms</p><p>in a variety of holy places fails to provide the priest with relief. Only when a</p><p>pious bishop spends forty days in a continuous regimen of fasting, exorcism,</p><p>and prayer is the young man delivered.</p><p>The notable thing about this saga is the way in which demonic posses-</p><p>sion becomes an aspect of witchcraft, almost wholly unrelated to the demon</p><p>himself. The demon even comments in a detached way upon the priest’s</p><p>predicament: he has no stake in the witch’s quarrel; he has nothing personally</p><p>to do with the entire process.This is, in fact, a necessary part of the narrative,</p><p>as it is the demon who identifies the witch and explains the completely mate-</p><p>rial, and not spiritual, basis for the priest’s affliction. Institoris does not even</p><p>consider the demon’s further remarks relevant to the proceedings, despite the</p><p>fact that, as the priest was undergoing exorcism, the demon within him cried</p><p>out:</p><p>“I don’t want to go out.” And when asked for what reason, he responded, “On</p><p>account of the Lombards.” And he was asked again why he was unwilling to</p><p>depart on account of the Lombards. Then he answered in the Italian tongue,</p><p>although the sick priest did not know that language, saying that all of them prac-</p><p>tice such and such, naming the worst vice of lust.78</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 57</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 57</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Under other circumstances, a young man possessed by a demon, raving pre-</p><p>sumably about sodomy, would have at least raised eyebrows. Because sin so</p><p>often provided the occasion for possession, a demon’s dialogue with its exor-</p><p>cist, and especially its commentary upon the spiritual state of the possessed</p><p>and of others, was naturally of considerable interest, yet, to Institoris, the</p><p>words of the demon do not pertain to the subject at hand – witchcraft. Hence</p><p>he reports them merely as curiosities; the cause of possession, Institoris seems</p><p>to suggest, is found buried under trees rather than buried in the soul.</p><p>For Institoris and Sprenger, witchcraft is the key to understanding the</p><p>demonic, and not the other way round. The devil exists in two almost com-</p><p>pletely autonomous forms: the powerful, largely theoretical demons who</p><p>invisibly moved men to sin and caused calamities on earth, and the minor</p><p>spirits who haunt houses and crossroads. The witch, defined by her relation-</p><p>ship with an incubus demon (itself mid-way between these extremes) provides</p><p>a necessary intermediate term in this system, allowing the awesome power of</p><p>the devil to operate on earth without the incongruous presence of decidedly</p><p>unimpressive demons as agents. The witch thus becomes a human extension</p><p>of the diabolic realm, at times capable of assuming the characteristics, motives,</p><p>and behaviors of demons, while still retaining those of women. Further,</p><p>because Institoris and Sprenger identify witches with actual women, they</p><p>locate responsibility for misfortunes in the witches’ own real, socially con-</p><p>structed, moral evil, rather than in some abstract, dualist principle of evil or</p><p>in the malice of nature spirits and preternatural beings. This kind of concep-</p><p>tion of the demonic, I would suggest, corresponds closely with a level of</p><p>anxiety in witch-beliefs that is at least in part responsible for sustained witch-</p><p>prosecutions in the late fifteenth century: on the one hand, it accurately mir-</p><p>rored notions of maleficium and the harmful occult powers of humans found in</p><p>traditional European peasant communities; on the other, it provided a context</p><p>in which these beliefs could be embraced by a learned clerical elite.</p><p>As a point of contrast, let us consider the somewhat earlier work of</p><p>Nicholas Jacquier, an inquisitor in France and Bohemia.79 In his treatise, the</p><p>Flagellum Haereticorum Fascinariorum, witchcraft is largely compatible with that</p><p>of the Malleus, but Jacquier takes a more traditional view of the devil and his</p><p>role. Jacquier conceives of witchcraft principally in terms of a heretical cult:</p><p>to him it is the “abominable sect and heresy of wizards,” in which demons, not</p><p>witches, play the leading roles.80 Whereas other heresies may have been insti-</p><p>gated by the devil, with their perverse doctrines being handed down from one</p><p>generation to the next by men, here, “this worst of sects and most infamous</p><p>of heresies is handed down personally through demons themselves.”81 In con-</p><p>sequence, where the Malleus begins with a discussion of the devil’s theoretical</p><p>powers, Jacquier takes as his point of departure the devil’s ability to appear</p><p>58 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 58</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>actually and sensibly to men.82 Jacquier’s devil is the leader of his cult: he</p><p>appears visibly to men to induce them to renounce God and the Church, and</p><p>to take him instead as their lord; he instructs his followers in evil, providing</p><p>them with poisons and magic potions, as well as with specific instructions con-</p><p>cerning how and where to use them; and he demands offerings from his sec-</p><p>taries – food and drink were acceptable, human semen was better, and the</p><p>blood of innocents was the best of all.83 In sum, the devil of the Flagellum is</p><p>far more personally responsible for the activities of witches than is his coun-</p><p>terpart in the Malleus.</p><p>Jacquier’s conception of the relationship between the devil and his sect</p><p>appears much influenced by a number of stories current in mid-fifteenth-</p><p>century France.These accounts emphasized</p><p>the devil’s desire to usurp the cult</p><p>of God, and hence emphasized the devotional, quasi-religious nature of the</p><p>bond between witches and the devil. Most important to Jacquier was the cel-</p><p>ebrated case of William Adelmo, prior of St. Germain-en-Laye, doctor of the-</p><p>ology, and a man whom Jacquier knew quite well. In 1453, Adelmo publicly</p><p>confessed that he had renounced the faith, entered into the sect of witches,</p><p>and had worshiped the devil. He further confessed that</p><p>When he was introduced into said sect, the devil proposed that Master William</p><p>might well, if he wished, be able to increase the devil’s domain, and instructed</p><p>the same Master William to preach that sects of this kind were nothing except</p><p>illusions.84</p><p>The devil in Adelmo’s account appears as the subtle master of a secret society</p><p>whose members lurk concealed in all walks of life. In the Flagellum Haeretico-</p><p>rum, it is the existence and membership of this society, which the devil so clev-</p><p>erly wished to keep secret, that is at issue, and not maleficia per se. Although</p><p>the fascinarii are sorcerers who deploy diabolic magic by the devil’s will, they</p><p>derive their unique character from their personal dependence upon the devil</p><p>and their membership in his cult, not from their occult powers. Indeed,</p><p>Jacquier recognized that maleficia had nothing necessarily to do with this</p><p>heretical sect; since malign magic could function regardless of whether one</p><p>worshiped the devil or not, there were doubtless many maleficii who were</p><p>not fascinarii.85 Such persons must, or course, be linked with the devil by</p><p>some sort of pact, either tacit or explicit, but this could easily be an individ-</p><p>ual, personal arrangement that did not imply membership in the devil’s</p><p>organized cult.</p><p>This posed a problem for Jacquier’s conception of the fascinarii: since mal-</p><p>eficium was not in itself direct evidence of membership, an inquisitor had to</p><p>look, not for the ambiguous presence of harmful magic, but for witnesses to</p><p>the Sabbat and evidence of the demonic cult itself, which, as Institoris’ expe-</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 59</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 59</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>rience with Agnes and Anna suggests, could be very hard to come by. Direct</p><p>and immediate commerce with the devil, although necessary to witchcraft,</p><p>was likely to be secret and hidden, to be revealed only through torture and</p><p>interrogation once suspects had already been identified on other grounds.</p><p>While Institoris and Sprenger’s construction of witchcraft could readily trans-</p><p>late ideas about malign magic from a popular idiom to the more learned envi-</p><p>ronment of the inquisitors, Jacquier’s could not. His was a model much better</p><p>suited to the testimony of a fallen doctor of theology than to a village brew-</p><p>wife. Certainly, once prosecutions had begun, it was easy to extract the names</p><p>of confederates from accused witches through torture, and Jacquier was at</p><p>pains to defend the legal validity of such tactics, but because his conception of</p><p>the witch was dependent upon heresy and the devil, initial accusations were</p><p>not easy to obtain.86</p><p>Moreover, because Jacquier had a much more unified, conception of the</p><p>devil, in whom power and personality were closely joined, he had no way to</p><p>determine if the blame for any given misfortune lay with a witch or with the</p><p>devil.Where Institoris and Sprenger subordinated the operation of demons on</p><p>earth to the power of witches, blaming supernatural harm on witches as a</p><p>matter of course, Jacquier was more cautious, noting that whatever demons</p><p>did through witches, they could and would do of their own accord.87 As a</p><p>result, while many of Jacquier’s ideas about witchcraft would be accepted by</p><p>theorists of the following century (his notions of the diabolic Sabbat in par-</p><p>ticular), his construction of witchcraft failed to provide the consensus within</p><p>the community of witch-believers – including learned theoreticians, magis-</p><p>trates, and inquisitors as well as unlettered peasants and townsfolk – neces-</p><p>sary for sustained witchcraft prosecutions. For a well-defined, fully threatening</p><p>witch-figure to emerge, the devil as a personality had to be divorced from the</p><p>day-to-day operations of witchcraft. Such a separation would enable demo-</p><p>nologists to accept a more remote, “god-like” conception of Satan, more in</p><p>accord with current theological trends, as well as the ideas of both Protestant</p><p>and Catholic writers of the next century. It was just this consensus that</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger’s model of the demonic would provide.</p><p>Notes</p><p>1 Jeffrey Burton Russell, Witchcraft in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press,</p><p>1972), 102.</p><p>2 Richard Kieckhefer, European Witch Trials (Berkeley, University of California, 1976), 36.</p><p>See also David Gentilcore, From Bishop to Witch (Manchester: Manchester University</p><p>Press, 1992), 248.</p><p>3 For the late-medieval tendency “to grasp the transcendent by making it immanent,” see</p><p>Carlos M.N. Eire, War Against the Idols:The Reformation of Worship from Erasmus to Calvin</p><p>(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 11 and passim.</p><p>60 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 60</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>4 See Valerie J. Flint, The Rise of Magic in Early Medieval Europe (Princeton: Princeton</p><p>University Press, 1991), 146–57; Jeffrey Burton Russell, Satan: The Early Christian</p><p>Tradition (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981). St. Augustine wrote extensively on</p><p>the nature of demons, but especially influential were De Divinatione Daemonum and De</p><p>Civitate Dei, books 9–10.</p><p>5 Augustine, City of God, trans. Henry Betteson (London: Penguin, 1972), 8.15.</p><p>6 Augustine, The Divination of Demons, trans. R.W. Brown, in Saint Augustine.Treatises on</p><p>Marriage and Other Subjects, ed. Roy J. Deferrari (New York: Fathers of the Church,</p><p>1951), 430.</p><p>7 For one example among many, see Augustine’s sermon on John the Baptist: “The ancient</p><p>enemy is always on watch against us; . . . He sets lures and traps, he insinuates evil</p><p>thoughts; to goad people to ever worse kinds of fall he sets out advantages and gains,</p><p>it is painful to reject his evil suggestions and willingly accept death as we know it.”</p><p>Augustine, Sermons, trans. Edmund Hill, ed. John E. Rotelle (Brooklyn: New York City</p><p>Press, 1992), pt. 3, vol. 4, sermon 94A, p. 20.</p><p>8 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, trans. D.W. Robertson, Jr. (Indianapolis:</p><p>Bobbs-Merrill/Library of Liberal Arts, 1958), 23.35.</p><p>9 Augustine, Sermons, sermon on Esau and Jacob, 4:36, pp. 205–6.</p><p>10 Augustine, City of God, 7.35. See also 8.24.</p><p>11 Augustine, Sermons, 4:36, p. 206.</p><p>12 Precisely why this occurred is difficult to say, but see Russell, Witchcraft in the Middle</p><p>Ages, 101–32, and Edward Peters, The Magician, the Witch, and the Law (Philadelphia:</p><p>University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978), 93–8.</p><p>13 Since we are here ultimately concerned with the work of fifteenth-century Dominicans,</p><p>Aquinas is unquestionably the most relevant scholastic theorist. Charles Edward</p><p>Hopkin argues for the essential conservatism of Thomist demonology in his doctoral</p><p>dissertation, “The Share of Thomas Aquinas in the Growth of the Witchcraft Delusion”</p><p>(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1940). See also Jeffrey Burton Russell,</p><p>Lucifer:The Devil in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1984).</p><p>14 Hopkin, 177.</p><p>15 Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, ed. Institutio Studiorum Medievalium Ottaviensis</p><p>(Ottowa: Studii Generalis O. Pr., 1941), pt. 1, qu. 50–64; Postilla in Job; De Malo and</p><p>De Potentia in Questiones Disputatae. At the same time, a similar scholarly project defined</p><p>the character and capacities of angels: “Scholastics explored with great logical rigor and</p><p>tenacity the angels’ intellectual and emotional capacities, their personhood, their sim-</p><p>plicity, their problematic relationship with time and space, and even the metaphysical</p><p>bases for their</p><p>being. Indeed, at the university they developed what may properly be</p><p>called an ‘angelology,’ a science of angels.” David Keck, Angels and Angelology in the Middle</p><p>Ages (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 74.</p><p>16 See, for example, Summa Theologiae, pt. 1, qu. 64, art. 4.</p><p>17 Dyan Elliott, Fallen Bodies: Pollution, Sexuality, and Demonology in the Middle Ages</p><p>(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), 129; see Summa Theologiae, pt.</p><p>1, qu. 50, art. 2, resp. 9.</p><p>18 In the late twelfth century,Walter Map recorded an interview with one of these lesser</p><p>spirits, one of the angels who, “without assistance or consent to Lucifer’s crime, were</p><p>borne by foolishness to wander after the accomplices of sin” (“qui sine coadiutorio uel</p><p>consensu culpe Luciferi vagi post fautores scelerum fatue ferebamur”). He and his</p><p>fellows, he claimed, had no desire for the ruin of cities or the blood and souls of men;</p><p>rather, they were apt to play jokes and make risible illusions with their powers. “Every-</p><p>thing that we can, we do for laughter, and nothing for tears.” (“Omne quod ad risum</p><p>est possumus, nichil quod ad lacrimas”). De Nugis Curialium, ed. M.R. James (Oxford:</p><p>Clarendon Press, 1914), dist. 4, c. 6, lines 8–17.</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 61</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 61</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>19 Summa Theologiae, pt. 1, qu. 64, art. 4.</p><p>20 Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 51, art. 3; De Potestate, Questiones Disputatae, qu. 6, art. 8; and Hopkin,</p><p>77–9.</p><p>21 Although one may wonder how tempting such necessarily hurried couplings could pos-</p><p>sibly have been. Guibert of Nogent, De Vita Sua, Patrologia Latina 156, 958: “Sunt quoque</p><p>quedam in nequitiis infligendis atrocia, aliqua vero solis contenta ludibriis.” See also</p><p>Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, pt. 1, qu. 63, art. 2.</p><p>22 Hans Peter Duerr, Dreamtime, trans. Felicitas Goodman (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1985),</p><p>5.</p><p>23 For dates and biography of Felix of Hemmerlin (known in Latin as Felix Malleolus), see</p><p>Hansen, Quellen, 109.</p><p>24 “Nam dicti Principes non proposuerunt deum ante conspectum suum sed inter se</p><p>diviserunt regni terminos terrarum ante Triumphum.” Felix Hemmerlin, Tractatus de</p><p>Credulitate Daemonibus Adhibenda, in Heinrich Institoris and Jacob Sprenger, Malleus</p><p>Maleficarum (Frankfurt, 1600), 2:431.</p><p>25 Felix Hemmerlin, Dialogus de nobilitate et rusticitate, in Hansen, Quellen, 110.</p><p>26 “hac maledictione plena est terra.” Ibid., 110–11. The woman is Finicella, burned in</p><p>Rome in 1424.</p><p>27 Hemmerlin, Tractatus, 429. A devil in the guise of a holy man removes a sinning priest’s</p><p>male member which has been the cause of all his difficulties. Naturally, it returns to</p><p>view, even larger than before, at the worst possible moment.</p><p>28 See Hansen, Quellen, 208–9.</p><p>29 “quod numquam de talibus aliquid concederent, nisi proponeretur eis aliquod grossum</p><p>exemplum sensibile.” Petrus Mamoris, Flagellum Maleficorum (Lugdunum [Lyon], 1621),</p><p>12.</p><p>30 See Hansen, Quellen, 88–9.</p><p>31 Johannes Nider, Praeceptorium Legis s.Expositio Decalogi (Strassburg: Georg Husner, 1476),</p><p>1.11, p; Mamoris, 45.</p><p>32 Nider, Praeceptorium, 1.11, s; Mamoris, 19 and passim.</p><p>33 “Non enim coelum vel aliquod totum elementum mouere potest, quia destrueretur ordo</p><p>Vniuersi, quem Deus instituit: sed potest mouere corpora sibi proportionata.” Ibid.,</p><p>16.</p><p>34 “Sunt enim diaboli superioris naturae ad animam rationalem, quae non potest movere</p><p>corpus.” Ibid.</p><p>35 Institoris and Sprenger use a similarly trivial, not to say humorous, example of demons’</p><p>powers of local motion in the Malleus. A priest, and a friend of one of the authors, was</p><p>fortunate enough to witness a man being bodily transported through the air for some</p><p>distance by a demon.The victim was a student who had been drinking beer with friends,</p><p>and when an associate declined to fetch more, on account of an ominous thick cloud</p><p>blocking the door, he unwisely declared that “Even if the devil were there, I will go to</p><p>get a drink” (“Etsi diabolus adesset potum apportabo”).When he went outside, the devil</p><p>swept him up. Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 3, p. 102.</p><p>36 “Multo plus potest daemon per transmutationem sanguinis et humorum et alio subtili</p><p>modo horrorem incutere, in mente odium, et in carne dolorem.” Mamoris, 32.</p><p>37 “strepitibus et sibulis [sic] ac pulsibus, non multum excellentibus sed manifestis; ali-</p><p>quando enim ad parietes percutiebat; aliquando vero ioculator varias mimorum fistulas</p><p>ut videbatur flabat, et talia non nociua multum gestiebat.” Johannes Nider, Formicarius</p><p>(1480; facsimile, Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1971), 5.2, 200.</p><p>38 Alphonso Spina, Fortalitium Fidei (Lugdunum [Lyon]: Gulielmus Balsarin, 1487), book</p><p>5, consideration 10.</p><p>39 “Et his diebus taliter apparet frequenter in Dacia et Nortuvegia, et ibidem Tolli dicuntur;</p><p>et propter assuetudinem ab hominibus non timentur, sed homines ipsorum obsequiis</p><p>utuntur.” Hemmerlin, Tractatus, 428.</p><p>62 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 62</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>40 Lynn Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental Science (New York: Columbia</p><p>University Press, 1934), 4:289. For an overview of this problem, see André Goddu,</p><p>“The Failure of Exorcism in the Middle Ages,” in Albert Zimmerman, ed., Soziale</p><p>Ordnungen im Selbstverständnis des Mittelalters, 2 vols. (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter,</p><p>1980), 2:540–77.</p><p>41 “Qui quidem spiritus audientibus multis die et nocte, et nihil tamen videntibus, multa</p><p>in tempore praeterito facta revelavit, quae fuere cognita vera fuisse, et ad multa bona</p><p>facienda gentes domus admonebat.” Mamoris, 20.</p><p>42 A great many more examples might be given, but an interesting one is Nider’s</p><p>insistence that the bestial men and women sometimes encountered in the forest are not</p><p>real “wild men,” but demons who appear to deceive the unwary. Nider, Praeceptorium, k</p><p>(qu. 6).</p><p>43 Reimund Kvideland and Henning K. Sehmsdorf, eds., Scandinavian Folk Belief and Legend</p><p>(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988), 216–17.</p><p>44 “Licet corpora humana nobis assumamus, dorsa tamen non habemus.” Caesarius of</p><p>Heisterbach, Dialogus Miraculorum, 2 vols., ed. Joseph Strange (1851: reprint,</p><p>Ridgewood New Jersey: Gregg Press, 1966), 3.6, p. 118.</p><p>45 Spina, consid. 11.</p><p>46 Katherine M. Briggs, The Vanishing People (London: B.T. Batsford, 1978), 76.</p><p>47 Spina, consid. 1–6.</p><p>48 Ibid., consid. 6.</p><p>49 Ibid., consid. 10.</p><p>50 “Invenient etiam qualiter cognoscit cogitationes cordium nostrorum qualiter etiam</p><p>possit transmutare corpora adminiculo alterius agentis substantialiter et accidentaliter,</p><p>qualiter etiam possit movere corpora localiter immutare etiam sensus exteriores et inte-</p><p>riores ad aliquid cogitandum qualiter etiam possit immutare hominis intellectum et vol-</p><p>untatem licet indirecte.” Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 3, p. 22.</p><p>51 “[Enim sunt humani generis inimici,] mente rationales absquam tamen discursu intelli-</p><p>gentes, in nequicia subtiles nocendi cupidi semper in fraude novi, immutant sensus,</p><p>inquinant affectus, vigilantes turbant, dormientes per somnia inquietant, morbos infer-</p><p>unt, tempestates concitant, in lucis angelos se transformant, semper infernum secum</p><p>portant, erga maleficos divinum cultum sibi usurpant, magice artes per eos fiunt, super</p><p>bonos dominari appetunt et amplius proposse infestant, electis ad exercitium dantur,</p><p>semper fini hominis insidiantur.” Ibid., 23.</p><p>52 For example, compare Isidore of Seville’s well-known definition of malefici: “Hi et</p><p>elementa concutiunt, turbant mentes hominum, ac sine ullo veneni haustu violentia</p><p>tantum carminis interiment.” Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae, ed. W.M. Lindsay (Oxford:</p><p>Clarendon, 1911), 8.9, lines 9–10.</p><p>53 Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 11, p. 132.</p><p>54 Ibid.</p><p>55 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 2, p. 156. Likewise if one burns the intestines of an animal killed by</p><p>witchcraft, the devil will similarly heat the witch’s bowels. Ibid., 158.</p><p>56 One may compare,</p><p>for example, the incubus reported by Caesarius of Heisterbach, who</p><p>reverted to an annoying house spirit when rebuffed, throwing things and changing food</p><p>on plates to filth, or that of Gobelinus Persona, who “talked freely with all comers,</p><p>played delicately on a musical instrument, played at dice, drank wine, but never allowed</p><p>himself to be seen except his hands which were slender and soft.” Caesarius of</p><p>Heisterbach, Dialogus Miraculorum 3.6; Gobelinus Persona, Cosmodromium, aet. vi, c. 70,</p><p>in Lea, Materials, 1:286.</p><p>57 Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 2, pp. 96–7.</p><p>58 “Demones ibidem existentes suam presentiam in assumptis corporibus illi virgini</p><p>nequiebant ostendere.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 4, p. 110. This story also appears, with</p><p>slight variations, in pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 1, p. 94.</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 63</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 63</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>59 Demons do this, Institoris and Sprenger explain, so as to mock and offend God. Ibid.,</p><p>pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 4, p. 110.</p><p>60 Institoris and Sprenger maintain that each of us is assigned to the care of two angels,</p><p>one good and one bad. For the normal run of humanity, the angels are “present” only</p><p>in a highly abstract way, for example as the voice of temptation or of conscience; the</p><p>witch, on other hand, will regularly eat, chat, and have sexual relations with her demon.</p><p>Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 3, p. 25.</p><p>61 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, chs. 1 and 15.</p><p>62 “subito libere et a vinculis absoluta licet in loco torture et cuncta flagitia ab ea perpe-</p><p>trata detexit.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 15, p. 146.</p><p>63 “Cetera omnia de fidei abnegatione et spurcitiis diabolicis cum incubo demone pactis</p><p>interrogata publice fatebatur.” Ibid.</p><p>64 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 1, p. 94.</p><p>65 Perhaps to demonstrate that he is not leading his witness, Institoris relates the ex-</p><p>change between Agnes and the notary as a literal interrogation. In this instance Agnes</p><p>“was asked ‘With what words or in what ways did you stir the water?’ She replied ‘I</p><p>stirred it with my finger, but in the name of that devil and of all the other devils.’ ”</p><p>(“Interrogata demum quibusne verbis aut modis aquam mouisset. Respondit digito</p><p>quidem moui, sed in nomine illius diaboli et omnium aliorum demoniorum.”). Ibid., pt.</p><p>2, qu. 1, ch. 15, p. 146.</p><p>66 “Cum nemo testis de fidei abnegatione ac carnali spurcitia cum demone incubo</p><p>aduersus eam deposuisset, [eo quod illa secretissma sint illius secte cerimonialia.]”</p><p>Ibid.</p><p>67 “Sed et hoc mirabile cum sequenti die altera questionibus etiam leuissimis exposita</p><p>primo fuisset vtpote digito vix a terra elevata post libere soluta, praefata omnia non dis-</p><p>crepando in minimo.” Ibid.</p><p>68 “Demon sum, et si volueris ad tuum beneplacitum semper ero paratus, nec in quibus-</p><p>cumque necessitatibus te deferam.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 1, p. 94.</p><p>69 “Incubi demones in retroactis temporibus infesti fuerunt mulierculis contra ipsarum vol-</p><p>untatem.” “Sed sponte pro voluptate re fetidissima miserabili servituti se subiicientes.”</p><p>Ibid., pt. 2, qu.1, pt. 4, p. 108.</p><p>70 Although men too might succumb to the wiles of an attractive succubus, Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger add “not so actively of their own will,” since “from the natural force of reason</p><p>which is stronger in men than in women, they shrink more from such practices” (“Non</p><p>ita voluntarie practicatio reperitur cum ex naturali vigore rationis quo viri mulieribus</p><p>praeeminent talia plus abhorrent”). Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 2, ch. 1, p. 159.</p><p>71 “Post diutinas huiusmodi vexationes pauper ille collisus in terram omnibus viribus</p><p>destituit.” Ibid.</p><p>72 “Quo facto cum surrexisset, dixit illi demon: Ecce quod egisti; non enim sum puella</p><p>sive mulier, sed demon, et statim disparuit ab oculis eius; ille vero attonitus remansit.</p><p>Et quia demon maximam seminis habundantiam virtute eius attraxerat, continue</p><p>heremita ille desiccatus completo mense defunctus est.” Jordanes de Bergamo, Questio</p><p>de Strigis, in Hansen, Quellen, 198. Hansen gives a date of around 1460 for the treatise,</p><p>but Lea (Materials, 1:301) has it composed in 1470–71. Jordanes seems otherwise</p><p>unknown.</p><p>73 “Ubi diabolus per se in effigie malefice, aut cum presentia corporali malefice affuerat,</p><p>cum utrumque facere deo permittente potest.” Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, p. 88.</p><p>74 Similar blurrings of the lines between witch and demon can be found in German witch-</p><p>trials, where unholda is at times used as a synonym for the devil. In one trial, cited by</p><p>Hans Peter Duerr, the devil is referred to as “the old Perchtl,” a word which, like unholda,</p><p>was more often used of witches or evil spirits. Duerr, 5.</p><p>75 Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 10, p. 126.</p><p>76 As the title of their chapter makes plain: “Concerning how demons sometimes sub-</p><p>64 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 64</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>stantially inhabit people through the operations of witches” (“De modo quo demones</p><p>per maleficarum operationes homines interdum substantialiter inhabitant”). Ibid., 125.</p><p>77 “Mulier inquit quedam malefica hanc mihi infirmitatem contulit; briganti enim contra</p><p>eam ratione cuiusdam displicentie circa regimen curie cum eam durius increpassem quia</p><p>cervicose voluntatis erat dixit: quod post paucos dies haberem intendere his que mihi</p><p>contingerent. Sed et demon in me habitans hoc idem refert quod maleficium sub quadam</p><p>arbore positum sit a malefica, quod nisi amoveatur non potero liberari, sed nec arborem</p><p>vult indicare.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 10, pp. 127–8.</p><p>78 “Nolo exire. Et cum interrogaret, qua de causa, respondit propter lombardos. Et inter-</p><p>rogatus denuo, cur propter lombardos egredi nollet, tunc respondit in ytalica lingua</p><p>cum tamen infirmus sacerdos illud ideoma ignoraret dicens, omnes faciunt sic et sic,</p><p>nominando pessimum vitium luxurie.” Ibid., 128.</p><p>79 Jacquier wrote the Flagellum around 1458, and remained an inquisitor until his death in</p><p>1472. Hansen, Quellen, 133.</p><p>80 The phrase, “secta et haeresis maleficorum fascinariorum,” appears repeatedly through-</p><p>out the text. For a summary description of the sect’s activities and organization, see</p><p>Nicholas Jacquier, Flagellum Haereticorum Fascinariorum, ed. Ioannes Myntzenbergius</p><p>(Frankfurt am Main: N. Bassaeum, 1581) ch. 7, pp. 36–51: “De differentia inter sectam</p><p>et haeresin fascinariorum modernorum, et illusionem mulierum de quibus loquitur c.</p><p>Episcopi.”</p><p>81 “Haec pessima sectarum et haeresum nefandissima, traditur per ipsosmet Daemones.”</p><p>Ibid., 44.</p><p>82 Ibid., 7.</p><p>83 Ibid., 50–2.</p><p>84 “Quod quando ipse fuit introductus ad dictam sectam, Diabolus asserebat, quod ipse</p><p>Magister Guilhelmus bene posset si vellet, augmentare eiusdem Demonis dominium,</p><p>praecipiendo eidem Magistro Guilhelmo praedicare, quod huiusmodi secta non erat nisi</p><p>illusio.” Ibid., 27. Mamoris also knew Ediline, and tells substantially the same story,</p><p>67–8.</p><p>85 For example, Jacquier observes that “all witches generally, and especially the heretical</p><p>fascinarii, are betrayers and accustomed to lying in the perpetration of their evil deeds”</p><p>(“Omnes enim malefici communiter, presertim heretici fascinarii sunt proditores et</p><p>fictionibus assueti in maleficiorum perpetratione.”). Jacquier, 111.</p><p>86 Of course once prosecutions had begun, it was easy to extract the names of confeder-</p><p>ates from accused witches under torture, and Jacquier is at pains to defend the validity</p><p>of such procedures. Ibid., 173–4.</p><p>87 Ibid., 117.</p><p>THE INQUISITORS’ DEVIL 65</p><p>TMM3 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 65</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>4</p><p>Misfortune, witchcraft,</p><p>and the will of God</p><p>An obvious corollary to a belief in witches is the perception that certain kinds</p><p>of recognizable injuries or misfortunes are due to witchcraft, and it is clear</p><p>from the sources that many people in medieval Europe were, at times, pre-</p><p>pared to accept certain kinds of misfortunes</p><p>as the result of witchcraft or</p><p>harmful magic.1 Not everyone, however, understood the relationship between</p><p>magic and its effects in the same way. For unlettered peasants and townsfolk</p><p>– for everyone, in fact, but a small elite of educated men and women – the</p><p>relationship between “magic” and its intended result was probably a straight-</p><p>forward case of cause and effect, in which the witch or sorcerer who deployed</p><p>occult powers for harmful ends was as much responsible for the resulting</p><p>injuries as was a person wielding a knife with murderous intent.</p><p>For the theologically more sophisticated elite, however, the relationship</p><p>between a witch, her magic, and associated injuries, was fraught with diffi-</p><p>culties of considerable complexity. From their perspective, since the witch</p><p>could not be the immediate cause of magical harm, both because a demon</p><p>actually effected the injury, and because the witch had no power to compel</p><p>the demon to do her bidding, the extent to which witches were actually</p><p>culpable for the injuries inflicted by demons in their name was questionable.</p><p>The matter was further complicated by the fact that demons could act only</p><p>with the permission of God. Hence, if demons acted merely in accordance</p><p>with divine will, why should either the witch or the demon be blamed for</p><p>the outcome? And why, too, should God have chosen to give the witch or the</p><p>demon free latitude to carry out magical assaults of their own volition in the</p><p>first place? To endorse witch persecution, educated Christians had to answer</p><p>these questions in such a way that the witch would emerge as the efficient</p><p>cause of worldly misfortune. When she was not, when either a witch’s power</p><p>to cause harm or her moral responsibility for it were called into question, late-</p><p>medieval writers tended to dismiss the dangers posed by witchcraft.The wide-</p><p>spread skepticism about the reality of witchcraft in the late Middle Ages</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 66</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>responded precisely to this concern that the belief in witchcraft as, say, Insti-</p><p>toris and Sprenger understood it, was a gross affront to both the omnipotence</p><p>and justice of God. To understand the alternative explanations for magical</p><p>harm and witchcraft propounded by Institoris and Sprenger and their col-</p><p>leagues, we need therefore first to take a more general look at medieval</p><p>conceptions of magic and misfortune.</p><p>There was never a single, universally applicable explication of misfortune in</p><p>the Middle Ages. Instead, circumstances dictated the conceptual model appro-</p><p>priate to the beliefs of the observer. In any given instance, a substantial number</p><p>of interpretations were possible, witchcraft being one and never the most</p><p>prevalent. Misfortune, as Rodney Needham observes, can be explained in any</p><p>number of ways:</p><p>If misfortune strikes, you can blame an inscrutable god or capricious spirits;</p><p>you can concede that it is the just retribution of your sin, or else that it is the</p><p>automatic consequence of some unintended fault; you can put it down to bad</p><p>luck . . . , or more calculating you can ascribe it to chance.2</p><p>During the Middle Ages, all of these possible explanations for sudden misfor-</p><p>tune (with the possible exception of chance) were available alongside witch-</p><p>craft, making for overlapping and competing patterns of considerable</p><p>complexity.</p><p>For instance, the Franciscan chronicler Salimbene de Adam reported that</p><p>in 1287 a large crowd of Pisans had gathered in a square to watch a great bell</p><p>being hung. Then, “just as it was being lifted off the platform, it tipped over</p><p>and fell to the ground. But it injured no one, save for a young man whose</p><p>foot it cut off.”3 Human life was full of such unexpected mischances, but to</p><p>Salimbene, as to all knowledgeable clerics, it was misleading to call such an</p><p>unfortunate accident an “evil,” for God had so ordered his creation that events</p><p>which were injurious or harmful from one perspective always contributed to</p><p>some ultimate good. Men might be made to suffer either toward some</p><p>inscrutable end known only to God, or for their own just punishment and</p><p>correction as, it so happened, in the case of the maimed youth:</p><p>For he had once kicked his father with this foot and therefore did not escape</p><p>with impunity. Thus, by a misfortune of this kind, God demonstrated his</p><p>justice.4</p><p>For Salimbene, the cause of the young man’s punishment lay directly in his sin.</p><p>Such an explanation did not necessarily rule out subsidiary factors – the</p><p>workmen may have been careless, the platform may have been unstable, or a</p><p>demon may have pushed over the bell – but it did establish why this man was</p><p>harmed and no other, and explained the precise nature of his injuries.</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 67</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 67</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>The basis for Salimbene’s understanding of this incident was provided by</p><p>Augustine’s thorough delineation of the problems posed by misfortune and</p><p>material evil in the world. According to Augustine, divine providence dictated</p><p>all the injuries suffered by man, although for a number of potentially quite dif-</p><p>ferent reasons. Some punishments were purificatory, intended to “discipline</p><p>and correct” the sinner and to guide him along the path to salvation. All other</p><p>misfortunes and injuries, Augustine believed, were</p><p>imposed either in retribution for sins, whether past sins or sins in which the</p><p>person so chastised is still living, or else to exercise and to display the virtues</p><p>of the good.5</p><p>God did not, however, administer correction directly, but relied instead upon</p><p>the agency of men and of angels, both evil and good. Through them, all were</p><p>made subject to the consequences of Adam’s sin; even the innocent were con-</p><p>demned to suffer the countless miseries of human life due simply to their own</p><p>fallen natures and life in a now fallen creation. For Augustine, storms, tem-</p><p>pests, earthquakes, fire, flood, famine – in short the entire gamut of possible</p><p>calamities – were “not directed to the punishment of the wickedness and law-</p><p>lessness of evil man, but are part of our common condition of wretchedness.”6</p><p>Hence, even infants newly baptized and free from any possible culpability had</p><p>to suffer disease, accidents, and even the assaults of demons, because they were</p><p>doomed to live in a world made dangerous by the sins of their fathers. God</p><p>did not, however, harm the innocent in any absolute sense, despite the physi-</p><p>cal miseries he might inflict: true, demons were allowed to torment innocent</p><p>children, but, “we must never think that these sufferings can do them real</p><p>harm, even if they grow so severe as to cut off the soul from the body,” since</p><p>death would merely hasten the journey of blameless souls to paradise.7</p><p>Augustine argued that although divine providence was the ultimate cause</p><p>of misfortunes and injuries, only human sin was to blame.To look outside one’s</p><p>self, and place responsibility for catastrophes on fallen angels or evil men, was</p><p>both misguided and, at worst, a dishonest evasion of responsibility. Instead,</p><p>when good Christians considered the suffering wrought by some sudden or</p><p>unexpected injury,</p><p>First, they consider in humility the sins which have moved God’s indignation</p><p>so that he has filled the world with dire calamities. And although they are free</p><p>from criminal and godless wickedness, still they do not regard themselves as so</p><p>far removed from such wrongdoing as not to deserve to suffer from temporal</p><p>ills which are the recompense for sin.8</p><p>This did not mean, of course, that ill-doers should not be punished, still less</p><p>that criminals were not culpable for their crimes, since they freely willed the</p><p>68 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 68</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>evils they committed. Augustine differentiated,</p><p>however, between the crimes</p><p>of men and the seemingly random hazards of the world. In the case of the</p><p>latter, it was pointless to rail against the angel that carried out God’s will,</p><p>whether evil or no, since never in the least degree could they exceed the</p><p>freedom allowed them by God.</p><p>Augustine’s interpretation of misfortune as the collective product of</p><p>God, demons, and human sin, was echoed repeatedly during the Middle Ages.</p><p>Isidore of Seville, for example, writes that “When God visits his wrath he sends</p><p>apostate angels as his ministers, but limits their powers, so that they do not</p><p>do the evil they wish.”9 Similarly, Gregory the Great reminds readers of his</p><p>Moralia in Job that</p><p>You see that one and the same spirit is both called the Lord’s spirit and an evil</p><p>spirit; the Lord’s, that is, by the concession of just power, but evil, by the desire</p><p>of an unjust will, so that he is not to be dreaded who has no power but by per-</p><p>mission; and, therefore, that Power is the only worthy object of fear, which is</p><p>when It has allowed the enemy to serve the purpose of a just judgment.10</p><p>And so, too, in the tenth century, Rather of Verona comments that the power</p><p>to punish or correct belonged to God alone, and only “those who are deceived</p><p>by this power ascribe it to the deceiver himself.”11Thus all punishment, all mis-</p><p>fortune, all the evils of the world were ultimately the work of God, who infu-</p><p>riated the devil by turning his malice to good ends: such was the traditional</p><p>Christian interpretation of misfortune, until the end of the thirteenth century,</p><p>when several factors conspired to modify this understanding, and to shift</p><p>responsibility for misfortune away from God and towards his ministers.</p><p>Of course, monastic writings had long been filled with demons of an</p><p>appearance quite different from those of the theologians and canonists. Athana-</p><p>sius, for example, represented the life of St. Anthony as a continuous and quite</p><p>personal struggle with the devil. Temptations rose to torment the saint not as</p><p>a consequence of his fallen nature, but from the machinations of the fiend,</p><p>whose “commission” it was in every case to waylay pious youth.12 When temp-</p><p>tation failed, the devil resorted to more physical methods and assaulted the</p><p>saint with blows and fearful visions of wild beasts.Yet, although Anthony lived</p><p>with daily and direct intercourse with demons, Athanasius always imparts the</p><p>clear sense that the saint’s victory was inevitable and that the devil was pow-</p><p>erless before God: Anthony mocks the demons that assail him, telling them</p><p>that “it is a sign of your helplessness that you ape the form of brutes,” and that</p><p>they tire themselves needlessly, “for faith in our Lord is a seal to us and a wall</p><p>of safety.”13</p><p>Anthony’s career provided a paradigm for the monastic life that was repli-</p><p>cated faithfully many times, both in the vitae of saints and in the experiences</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 69</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 69</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>of humbler monks. Like Anthony, monks conceived of themselves as constantly</p><p>beset by temptations orchestrated by the devil, for whom the purity of their</p><p>lives acted as irresistible bait. Consistently referring to these inner struggles</p><p>in terms of combat and battle with an exterior foe, their war stories are inhab-</p><p>ited by aggressive, formidable opponents, who, if ultimately answerable to</p><p>divine will, had to appear self-willed and independent for cogent dramatic</p><p>reasons.14 Numerous examples reminded monks constantly that they lived in</p><p>an environment in which the power of Satan was incessantly at work, in which</p><p>any stray thought or mischance was a manifestation of the devil’s immediate</p><p>presence.</p><p>It was possible, indeed easy, for this view of the world to be taken to</p><p>extremes. Peter Damian tells of a monk named Marinus, who daily encoun-</p><p>tered the devil in various forms: he appeared as an angel of light to trick</p><p>Marinus into minor sins, and, in less pleasant guise, the devil joined mock-</p><p>ingly in the celebration of opus Dei.15 Still more remarkable was the case of</p><p>Ricalmus, a thirteenth-century Carthusian monk and the abbot of Schönthal,</p><p>who, by special grace, could see the normally invisible demons that swarmed</p><p>about him, and who recorded his experiences for posterity. Ricalmus’ world</p><p>was filled with demons who were responsible not only for interior temptation</p><p>but also for all the other petty annoyances which distracted him from proper</p><p>concentration on the divine office:</p><p>The devils, without a particle of respect for his character or his years used to</p><p>call him a “dirty hairless rat;” afflicted him with bloating of the stomach and</p><p>with diarrhea, with nausea and with giddiness; so benumbed his hands that he</p><p>could no longer make the sign of the cross; caused him to fall asleep in the choir</p><p>and then snored so as to make the other monks think that it was he who was</p><p>snoring.They would speak with his voice, make him cough, force him to expec-</p><p>torate, hide themselves in his bed and stop his nostrils and his mouth so that he</p><p>could not breathe, compel him to urinate, or bite him like fleas; and if, endeav-</p><p>oring to fight off drowsiness, he exposed his hands to the cold air, they would</p><p>draw them back under the coverlet and warm them again . . . All the noises</p><p>that proceed from the human body, all those that issue from inanimate things</p><p>are simply the work of evil spirits, except the sound of bells, which is the work</p><p>of good spirits. Hoarseness, toothache, partial loss of voice, errors committed</p><p>in reading, the whims and impulses of the sick, gloomy thoughts, and the thou-</p><p>sand petty accidents of the body and the life of the soul are due to diabolic</p><p>powers.16</p><p>Admittedly, Ricalmus is an extreme case. For one thing, it is painfully appar-</p><p>ent in his account that diabolic power has become an excuse for embarrassing</p><p>personal lapses; for another, his is an altogether dualist world, permeated by</p><p>the forces of darkness. Yet the assumptions about the role of demons in this</p><p>70 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 70</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>world that lay behind his tale were readily understood, and accepted, by his</p><p>peers.</p><p>Provided that such accounts were confined to a monastic milieu, it was</p><p>possible to interpret them quite traditionally, as examples of an old and</p><p>respected genre of narrative.With the twelfth century, however, and especially</p><p>with the expansion of preaching that followed on the heels of the Fourth</p><p>Lateran Council, many of these stories were distributed in sermons further</p><p>afield, where they may well have helped to disseminate the image of a power-</p><p>ful, self-willed, and physically concrete devil, operating with minimal divine</p><p>oversight.17 Moreover, in some of these exempla, which competed in sermons</p><p>side by side with more edifying accounts of divine judgment, monastic demons</p><p>merged with the destructive spirits of folk tradition to emphasize diabolic</p><p>responsibility for misfortune at the expense of the divine.18</p><p>To take one example, the Dominican preacher Thomas of Cantimpré</p><p>wrote in 1258 that during a demonically inspired storm, the vines of a noto-</p><p>rious usurer were left intact, and that aerial demons were even heard to cry</p><p>out, “Cave, cave,” when an overzealous member of their company approached</p><p>his lands too closely.19 Thomas intended, of course, to illustrate that material</p><p>prosperity is no sure indication of spiritual merit as well as the diabolic nature</p><p>of usury, but in the process he created a group of free-wheeling demons, to</p><p>all appearances acting very much of their own accord. Nor were such tales</p><p>repeated only in sermons for the laity. Gerald of Wales told essentially the</p><p>same anecdote but in a rather different context in his Itinerarium Kambriae.20</p><p>In Gerald’s version, a terrible storm had one evening destroyed the crops of</p><p>a Cistercian monastery,</p><p>to focus upon this text, and to determine how its authors arrived at</p><p>their particular conception of witchcraft, how the idea of witchcraft func-</p><p>tioned within wider cognitive fields, and where the witch of the Malleus fit into</p><p>the learned discourse of fifteenth-century witchcraft.7</p><p>First, however, we must understand the basic arguments of the text, its</p><p>origins, structure, and methods. This study, taken up in chapter 2, locates the</p><p>text and its authors in space and time, as the products of both Dominican and</p><p>German experience. The arguments of the Malleus are a response to failure</p><p>and an answer to critics both numerous and hostile.They aim in the first place</p><p>to demonstrate the existence and prevalence of witchcraft and the terrible</p><p>threat it poses. Secondly, the text provides sufferers from witchcraft with a</p><p>broad range of remedies, both legal and spiritual, of proven effectiveness.</p><p>INTRODUCTION: CONTESTED CATEGORIES 3</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 3</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Finally, the text is a guide for civil and ecclesiastical authorities to the suc-</p><p>cessful detection and prosecution of witches. In the course of these prolonged</p><p>discussions, Institoris and Sprenger provide a remarkably complete picture of</p><p>their witch, along with descriptions of her origins, habits, and powers.</p><p>Before this image could be plausible, even intelligible, to a theologically</p><p>sophisticated audience, however, Institoris and Sprenger had to define appro-</p><p>priate relationships between witchcraft and established conceptual fields. This</p><p>problem was pressing because, as will be argued throughout, the authors’ con-</p><p>ception of witchcraft was ultimately grounded in traditional beliefs and prac-</p><p>tices, neither of which had an inherent theological component. In order to</p><p>construct a category of “witch” on the basis of such beliefs, theoreticians were</p><p>obligated to make it compatible with a learned, theologically informed world-</p><p>view. An examination of the relationships between witchcraft, God and the</p><p>devil, the projects of chapters 3 and 4, follows in the inquisitors’ footsteps,</p><p>and reveals how they reconciled data from testimony and experience with their</p><p>assumptions about the nature of the universe.</p><p>That witchcraft was necessary in the first place seems much the product</p><p>of a peculiarly late-medieval way of looking at the devil and diabolic power.</p><p>Many witch-theorists, Institoris and Sprenger prominent among them,</p><p>embraced an oddly bifurcated devil, a being of transcendent but mechanical</p><p>power for evil, and a creature whose physical presence was more often of an</p><p>almost trivial appearance. This disjunction between impressive diabolic power</p><p>and minimal diabolic presence demanded a mediator who could channel and</p><p>direct disordering and harmful forces on earth. The witch neatly filled this</p><p>void. A comparison of the beliefs of various fifteenth-century witch-theorists</p><p>reveals that those who held different, more unitary, conceptions of the devil</p><p>conceived of witches that were correspondingly less powerfully threatening.</p><p>Their witches remained firmly subordinate to devils, fully dependent upon</p><p>their masters for leadership and agenda.</p><p>A second problem faced by all witch-theorists was to explain why a just</p><p>God would grant permission for witches to wreak such havoc upon the world.</p><p>Here again, the belief in a powerful, aggressive, threatening witch corre-</p><p>sponded to a mechanical and liberal view of divine permission. Where God</p><p>provided meaningful oversight to demons, witchcraft was not particularly</p><p>threatening. If, however, God was so offended by human sin that virtually all</p><p>diabolic requests to visit punishment upon it were approved, witches were free</p><p>to utilize the power of the devil almost automatically. This was a view of dia-</p><p>bolic and divine power that was intensely anthropocentric; although the source</p><p>of power was ultimately supernatural, it was deployed only by the will and</p><p>effort of men and for their own purposes.</p><p>4 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 4</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>In a universe where God and the devil had to such an extent abandoned</p><p>their traditional roles, learned theologians had plenty of space in which to</p><p>carve out the new category of witchcraft. In the Malleus, the witch becomes</p><p>the effective agent of diabolic power, a living, breathing, devil on earth in</p><p>respect to those around her. On the other hand, the witch’s power was to some</p><p>extent balanced by the power of the Church, which could deploy divine power</p><p>in the form of sacraments and sacramentals for the protection of the faithful.</p><p>While God and the devil retreated into mechanical passivity the efforts of their</p><p>human followers became increasingly important. For this reason, the argu-</p><p>ments of the Malleus focus as much upon spiritual remedies as upon the power</p><p>of witches, and upon the thin but critical line that separates the diabolic power</p><p>from the divine.</p><p>Although the broad contours of late-medieval learned conceptions of</p><p>witchcraft were determined by basic metaphysical assumptions, the specific</p><p>form these conceptions took was primarily the result of the evidence and</p><p>experience available to various authors. In chapter 5 I take up the epistemo-</p><p>logical problems posed by belief in witchcraft. In the case of Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger, their category “witch” responded to their experience as inquisitors,</p><p>experience which included extensive familiarity with the oral testimony of</p><p>victims of witchcraft and of accused witches themselves. Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger did not preside over the trials of learned individuals or even of locally</p><p>prominent ones; their witches were the common people’s witches, those</p><p>unpleasant and unpopular individuals held responsible for damaging crops,</p><p>souring milk, and causing illness out of petty malice. In their trials, rumor,</p><p>hearsay, and legend played an important part. Moreover, because of their</p><p>Dominican training, the authors were predisposed to accept almost any con-</p><p>sistent body of testimony at face value.They repeatedly report as fact anything</p><p>authenticated by the testimony of “reliable witnesses.” As a result, Institoris</p><p>and Sprenger’s notion of witchcraft retained a congruence with traditional</p><p>beliefs lacking in the constructions of authors with different experience or</p><p>epistemological orientations.</p><p>For all theorists, late-medieval witchcraft was a composite – a combina-</p><p>tion of motifs derived from a number of quite different traditions: those asso-</p><p>ciated with monstrous female spirits, animal transformation, demonolatrous</p><p>heresy, maleficent magic, and superstition are among the most prominent.</p><p>Chapters 5 and 6 set these categories in relation to one another, and show how</p><p>witch-theorists combined them according to the evidence available to them</p><p>and their assumptions about the world. The resulting composite figures were</p><p>in no way haphazard; rather, each theorist used one of these established cate-</p><p>gories as a kind of conceptual template to provide the underlying principles</p><p>INTRODUCTION: CONTESTED CATEGORIES 5</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 5</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>around which his version of witchcraft was ordered and constructed. In the</p><p>Malleus, as in some other German texts, the witch was defined through her</p><p>maleficium and practice of magic.Throughout southern Europe authors tended</p><p>to center witchcraft around those traditions earlier associated with the bonae</p><p>res and other female spirits. Many French models of witchcraft depicted the</p><p>witch more as a demonized heretic – a being defined by her willing entry into</p><p>the demonic pact and her worship of the devil. In every case, however, the</p><p>template originally chosen by the witch-theorist both defined and restricted</p><p>the field of his inquiry and the scope of his investigation, while determining</p><p>but had spared the fields of a neighboring knight, with</p><p>whom the monks had been embroiled in a protracted boundary dispute. The</p><p>knight insolently and publicly proclaimed that by the just judgment of God</p><p>this misfortune manifestly demonstrated that he was in the right. The abbot</p><p>would have none of this, however, and replied that on the contrary the calamity</p><p>was simply in accord with the usual practice of demons, who spared their</p><p>friends and afflicted their enemies. The account is interesting because here we</p><p>have two competing interpretations of misfortune set side by side, although,</p><p>doubtless, had the situation been reversed the witty abbot would have been</p><p>quick to seize the alternative explanation.Yet the ease with which demons are</p><p>transformed from the scourge of sinners to the enemies of the just is striking.</p><p>Nor are these demons simply straw men to be overcome by Christian faith,</p><p>even that of pious monks; they are instead formidable foes, whose assaults must</p><p>be endured.</p><p>Neither of these authors would have seen anything particularly incon-</p><p>gruous in his respective exempla, since he would have interpreted them with a</p><p>similar understanding of the relationship between God, sin, and misfortune.</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 71</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 71</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Of course that is not to say that less learned folk would necessarily have</p><p>grasped the unspoken consistency among them, but that while the clergy</p><p>endorsed a thoroughly Augustinian demonology there was a limit to how much</p><p>freedom they allowed the devil. Although demons in exempla might appear</p><p>to act freely, their behavior was theoretically under close divine supervision.</p><p>But even as the demons in ecclesiastical narratives marshaled their strength,</p><p>scholastic theologians were setting about to refine and systematize their rela-</p><p>tionships with God, just as they were doing with demonic origins and nature.</p><p>The result of this investigation was a marked loosening of the bonds by which</p><p>the devil was confined and controlled, and a kind of theological sanction for</p><p>enhanced diabolic power and responsibility.</p><p>The contribution of Thomas Aquinas to the problem of misfortune lay in</p><p>two principal areas: the causes of evil and the extent of divine supervision of</p><p>demons. Of these, the most basic and abstract was his discussion of the cause</p><p>of evil, which was in turn based on two fundamental sets of ideas. The first,</p><p>taken from Augustine and ultimately Plato, assumed that evil was a species of</p><p>privation, the lack of some native or otherwise appropriate good; the second</p><p>was the Aristotelian theory of fourfold causation – material, formal, efficient,</p><p>and final.21 In short, Aquinas argued that God, who was wholly good, could</p><p>not be the cause of any evil of any kind whatsoever, except accidentally, because</p><p>privation could only result from a deficient cause which could not be God.22</p><p>Certainly God permitted evils to happen, because they were necessary to the</p><p>goodness of his creation, but he did not in any sense cause them to happen.</p><p>Even if his justice demanded that a man die, God was only the cause of justice,</p><p>and not of death.23 But since, as Aquinas clearly says, all evils must have a cause</p><p>(“omne malum aliqualiter causam habeat”), whence comes evil? The answer is</p><p>that one simply has to look for the last defective cause in the chain of efficient</p><p>causes; to use Aquinas’s example, when a boat sinks due to the carelessness of</p><p>a sailor, that particular evil may be traced back only to the sailor in whom the</p><p>defect lay and not to God.</p><p>This line of analysis extended to the injuries caused by demons. Cer-</p><p>tainly, everything that demons did, they did only with the permission of</p><p>God, but it was much more difficult to say exactly what this permission meant,</p><p>and how and why it was granted. For Aquinas, the key consideration was the</p><p>difficult distinction between divine permission and divine will. Demons</p><p>attacked men in two ways: first, by instigating them to sin through tempta-</p><p>tion, and, second, more directly through punishment. God ordered both</p><p>kinds of attack for the higher good, but, while God’s just judgments sent</p><p>demons to punish certain men, temptation was sometimes permitted even</p><p>though God did not will it.24 But for this distinction to have meaning, God’s</p><p>permission must be a more generous form of oversight, a kind of passive</p><p>adjunct to God’s active will; hence Aquinas’s demons appear to have had much</p><p>72 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 72</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>more latitude over the manner and subjects of temptation than they did over</p><p>direct punishment.</p><p>Still worse for unfortunate sinners, in Aquinas’s mind, temptation could</p><p>lead directly to punishment. In his discussion of the effects of Christ’s passion,</p><p>he explains that the devil may legitimately be said to have power over mankind:</p><p>To the first point it should be said that the devil is not found to have had power</p><p>over people to such a degree that he could harm them without God’s permis-</p><p>sion, but that he was justly permitted to injure people whom by tempting he</p><p>had induced to give consent.25</p><p>If the devil, in other words, was allowed to tempt a man of his own choosing,</p><p>and if that man succumbed, the devil might also be allowed to punish him, not</p><p>because God willed it, but because by sinning the man had placed himself in</p><p>the devil’s power. In this way, Aquinas allowed a considerable expansion of</p><p>both the devil’s power to make trouble and his responsibility for it.To be sure,</p><p>it was not that the devil had ceased to be God’s slave, or that he was no longer</p><p>ultimately answerable to divine will; rather, Aquinas perceived the nature of</p><p>divine oversight to be more flexible and more remote.</p><p>By the end of the thirteenth century, popular beliefs, monastic narra-</p><p>tives, and theological speculation had thus converged around a more auto-</p><p>nomous conception of the devil’s power. Contributing to this trend, perhaps,</p><p>were also anxieties felt by the Church about diabolically inspired heresy, as</p><p>well as the widespread dissemination of dualist beliefs. To many people, it</p><p>seemed as if God were no longer so intent on the micro-management of his</p><p>demons, and that now demons held a correspondingly greater share of the</p><p>responsibility for worldly misfortune.26 Thus, especially after Aquinas had</p><p>seemingly exculpated God of any share in the actual production of misfortune,</p><p>late-medieval scholarly and ecclesiastical interest tended to focus on demons</p><p>as the efficient cause of misfortunes in the world, and it was within this context</p><p>that magic was understood.</p><p>While the devil was still constrained closely by divine will and defeated easily</p><p>by Christian faith, malign magic was a relatively minor concern, for while</p><p>neither Augustine nor his successors ever denied the existence of harmful</p><p>magic, the restrictions they placed upon the devil’s freedom of operation</p><p>placed serious limitations upon its use.27 Indeed, a battery of arguments, all of</p><p>which depended ultimately upon the power and justice of God, opposed the</p><p>need for serious persecution of sorcerers.</p><p>In the first place, to allow malefici to usurp the administration of divine</p><p>justice would be unseemly at best. As Rather of Verona remarked irritably, if</p><p>you believed that the world was full of witches flying around at night, and that</p><p>misfortunes were due to their evil magic, what became of the lessons of Job?</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 73</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 73</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Who I say, of people being deceived like this, seeing a man being whipped like</p><p>the admirable Job . . . would urge him to say, and would believe it justly</p><p>said, “The Lord gives, the Lord takes away, as the Lord pleases, so it is done?”</p><p>No, he would ascribe it to wicked angels or to certain pitiable men and would</p><p>urge that some controller – or “rainmaker” as he is called – be summoned and</p><p>begged with gifts to deign to cure it . . . For not to mention the loss of such</p><p>glory as was Job’s, would they not do this about a mere trifle, a penknife or a</p><p>shoelace.28</p><p>Since demons cannot do any harm without the Lord’s direct and explicit</p><p>permission, the victim of a magical attack would be better advised to spend</p><p>his time searching his own conscience rather than ferreting out witches.</p><p>Rather’s position was simple, clear, and unmistakably Augustinian: misfortune</p><p>came ultimately from God; and so, like Job, we should bear it with patience.</p><p>To most educated Christians of late antiquity, magic was a subspecies</p><p>of pagan idolatry, and just as God permitted demons to impersonate pagan</p><p>deities, he also occasionally allowed demons to give efficacy to magical oper-</p><p>ations. In both cases, his motive was the same: to lead the souls of supersti-</p><p>tious operators to perdition: hence, the principal victims of magic were the</p><p>magicians themselves, who, like pagans, properly could be punished, but,</p><p>better still, should be converted.29 Denigrating magicians as virtual pagans also</p><p>led early theologians to be skeptical of their powers. Indeed, again according</p><p>to Augustine, much of what magicians appeared to do was simply an illusion</p><p>of the devil, and Augustine invariably referred to magic as a lie, a deceit, or a</p><p>deception.30 Superstitious diviners, he claims, were “subjected to illusion and</p><p>deception as a reward for their desires”; the supposedly benign magic of</p><p>theurgy was “all the invention of lying demons.”31</p><p>From this perspective, all works of the devil were kinds of deceit: magic,</p><p>superstition, paganism, were all, by this way of thinking, at bottom empty of</p><p>substance; they were delusions. This was a tradition enshrined in a number of</p><p>influential early-medieval canons, most notably the canon Episcopi, but also a</p><p>decision of the Council of Braga that demons could not control the weather.32</p><p>Pastoral concern to limit the scope of demonic power kept it alive. Hence</p><p>early-medieval penitentials denounced those who believed that enchanters</p><p>were able to summon storms, or use demons to sway the people’s minds, or</p><p>that some women could magically inspire love and hatred, or steal one’s</p><p>goods.33 In precisely the same way, German penitentials of the late fifteenth</p><p>century continue to condemn those who believe in the reality and efficacy of</p><p>weather-witches, werewolves, broomstick-riders, “and other such heathen,</p><p>nonsensical impostures.”34</p><p>Although this conception of magic would have a lasting influence upon</p><p>ecclesiastical thinking, it was never fully accepted. On the one hand, a popular</p><p>74 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 74</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>belief in the efficacy of magic was simply too strong to be dispelled. Augus-</p><p>tine himself, for instance, gave grudging credence to “that pernicious and</p><p>abominable science by which, as the tale goes, one man’s crops could be trans-</p><p>ferred to another’s land.”35 On the other, most authors acknowledged that,</p><p>given their natural powers, demons could do much more than work mere illu-</p><p>sions. Thus in his little treatise, De Magicis Artibus, Hrabanus Maurus (d. 857)</p><p>argued that magic per se had no power at all, unless the magician had made a</p><p>pact with a demon and unless God in his wisdom permitted the demon to act</p><p>in accordance with the magician’s wishes.36 This being the case, however, real</p><p>effects could follow upon magical operations. When scholastics analyzed the</p><p>devil’s nature, irrespective of the question of divine permission, logic com-</p><p>pelled them to enlarge considerably the range of his powers: simply by virtue</p><p>of their angelic natures, demons could confound the senses, create illusions,</p><p>delude the mind, cause bodily infirmity, illness and death, control the weather,</p><p>move with preternatural speed, transport physical objects, and so on.37</p><p>Yet even so, traditionally minded writers insisted that God would never</p><p>permit demons to use these powers freely. It would, for one thing, be dan-</p><p>gerously impractical. In the thirteenth century, William of Paris allowed that</p><p>harmful magic was effective occasionally because demons were permitted</p><p>sometimes to chastise men in this way, but he did not permit his readers to</p><p>suppose that this happened often:</p><p>For when it has become clear to you how much care there is in the wisdom</p><p>and goodness of the creator for people and human affairs, it will plainly dawn</p><p>on you that he does not commit the government of them to images, or to stars,</p><p>or to the luminaries, or even to the heavens, nor in any way expose them to</p><p>the will of magicians or acts of harmful magic.38</p><p>To William, this was a matter of common sense, “For no beautiful woman</p><p>would remain undefiled, no prince and no magnate would remain safe, if</p><p>demons were permitted to appear and to give satisfaction to the evil will of</p><p>men.”39</p><p>William’s argument reflects an ancient confidence in Christ’s triumph</p><p>over Satan; because magic was a tool and invention of the devil, his defeat</p><p>logically gave his followers immunity. As Peter Brown puts it, “the Church was</p><p>the community for whom Satan had been bound: his limitless powers had been</p><p>bridled to permit the triumph of the Gospel; more immediately, the practic-</p><p>ing Christian gained immunity from sorcery.”40 Early medieval discussions of</p><p>magic regularly took such protection for granted. For example, Isidore of</p><p>Seville provided the Middle Ages with its standard exposition of magic in a</p><p>vastly influential and much quoted précis of Augustine’s views. According to</p><p>Isidore,</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 75</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 75</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Magicians are those who are commonly called malefici [evil-doers] on account</p><p>of the magnitude of their crimes. These persons excite the elements, disturb</p><p>the minds of men, and without any draught of poison, with violence only</p><p>through their incantations, they kill . . . For having summoned demons they</p><p>dare to boast that each destroys his enemies by the evil arts. And these men</p><p>also make use of blood and victims, and often take the bodies of the dead . . .</p><p>and the blood of a cadaver is scattered to arouse [demons], for demons are said</p><p>to love blood. And so, as often as necromancy is performed, water is mixed</p><p>with gore so that by the color of blood they are more easily excited.41</p><p>Although Isidore grants that sorcerers could readily effect material harm</p><p>through their magic, he makes it plain, following Augustine, that he speaks</p><p>here of pagan magicians: his sources are Lucan,Vergil, and Varro, and he nestles</p><p>“De magis” comfortably between “De Sibyllis” and “De paganis.” When later</p><p>commentators quoted this passage, they modified Isidore’s text to adapt his</p><p>meaning to a fully Christian society. Burchard of Worms, Ivo of Chartres, and</p><p>Gratian all included variations on Isidore’s definition of magicians in their col-</p><p>lections of canons, although mistakenly attributing it to Augustine himself.</p><p>Magicians, they reported, could excite the elements only with divine permis-</p><p>sion, and their magic could harm only those men “who have little trust in</p><p>God.”42</p><p>Just who these faithless men were, though, was not entirely clear. While</p><p>Augustine and Isidore had conceived of magic as a kind of adjunct paganism,</p><p>a scourge afflicting those who had not yet embraced Christianity, later writers</p><p>viewed magical harm instead in more general terms as a punishment for</p><p>sinners. This made perfect sense, since if, following Aquinas, demons could</p><p>punish sinners of their own accord, they should equally have the power to</p><p>work diabolic magic. In this vein Jacques de Vitry encouraged his readers to</p><p>remember that,</p><p>In truth, diviners and witches are unable to harm</p><p>those who are confessed and</p><p>penitent, nor are they able to delude those who place their hope in God; they</p><p>are accustomed, however, to delude sinners, because God permits this for the</p><p>expulsion of sins.43</p><p>By the late Middle Ages, then, there was a substantial and authoritative</p><p>body of opinion highly skeptical of the ability of magicians to inflict injuries</p><p>as they wished. For many, this traditional view of magic and misfortune</p><p>remained entirely sufficient: among the most spiritually inclined – those whose</p><p>attention was focused single-mindedly upon the divine – harmful magic, like</p><p>misfortune of any kind, was a matter of small concern since a man’s fate lay</p><p>wholly in the hands of God. Thus Henry Suso, a fourteenth-century German</p><p>Dominican and mystic, enjoined his friends to embrace all suffering as a gift</p><p>of God:</p><p>76 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 76</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>A suffering man should remember [the martyrdom and glory of the saints] and</p><p>rejoice that God has deigned, by means of suffering, to associate him with his</p><p>dearest friends.44</p><p>Preachers, whose main concern was the spiritual welfare of laymen, likewise</p><p>often took a traditionalist line, emphasizing the impotence of the devil before</p><p>the omnipotence and goodness of God. Although finding forthright denials of</p><p>magicians’ power to harm the innocent is not so easy after 1300, still, preach-</p><p>ers often spoke of magic in generally Augustinian terms, as a deceit or illusion</p><p>and not the object of fear.45</p><p>Scholars trained in the via moderna, who in large part rejected the Thomist</p><p>conception of the universe, were also generally little interested in the problem</p><p>of witchcraft. Not viewing the sensible world as the lowest emanation of a</p><p>unified hierarchical system, Nominalists tended to focus their investigation of</p><p>physical, earthly effects on observable secondary causes.46Without doubt, God</p><p>was the first and final cause of all things, but because material effects could</p><p>not be conceived as a direct expression of rational (and so comprehensible)</p><p>divine thought, it was pointless to look to heaven for causes which could be</p><p>found more easily and more reliably here on earth.47 Witchcraft, from this</p><p>perspective, could never be a necessary cause of a given effect, because human</p><p>and demonic (or angelic) realms were not deterministically linked. Nor could</p><p>one of Ockham’s followers ever arrive at an absolutely valid determination</p><p>of witchcraft, because on purely epistemological grounds, one could admit</p><p>a cause and effect relationship only if both terms were known; causation</p><p>could never be determined only by effects.48 For these reasons, most late-</p><p>medieval nominalists remained comparatively unconcerned by the physical</p><p>dangers posed by witchcraft and seldom wrote witch-treatises. A rare excep-</p><p>tion was Samuel de Cassini, who, in the early sixteenth century, attacked the</p><p>reality of witches’ flight in conventionally nominalist terms. There was no</p><p>cause, Samuel maintained, which produced an effect directly, except as “natu-</p><p>rally ordained,” meaning that the agent possessed the natural and intrinsic</p><p>power to carry it out.49 Demons, furthermore, despite their powers of local</p><p>motion, lacked the natural ability to move corporal bodies through the air;</p><p>and, if they should by some chance happen to do so, the result, properly speak-</p><p>ing, would be a miracle, and a miracle could never be the occasion for sin.50</p><p>Hence, Samuel concluded, the flight of witches was merely a delusion, and</p><p>those who felt otherwise offended against both the omnipotence and the</p><p>justice of God.</p><p>Even among demonologists, authors who embraced this more traditional</p><p>view of divine oversight, and the consequent limitations on demonic power,</p><p>the persecution of witches seemed less necessary, even when they accepted</p><p>the reality of a devil-worshiping sect. Ulrich Molitor, for example, admitted</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 77</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 77</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>that witches existed, and that they were deservedly punished for giving</p><p>homage to the devil, but he also stressed that whatever else they might do,</p><p>witches could not be in any sense the efficient cause of misfortune. While</p><p>demons could, when God permitted, bring about worldly evils, “sometimes</p><p>as punishment, for the correction of the wicked, sometimes as temptation, for</p><p>the increase of merit, and sometimes as a foreshadowing of a future action of</p><p>grace,” witches themselves had nothing to do with any of this.51 Witches</p><p>believed that they could bring about misfortune only because they were</p><p>deluded by the devil. Storms, for instance, were caused by natural agencies,</p><p>such as the movement of the stars or planets, or by demons if God willed it.</p><p>In either case, though,</p><p>when [the devil] knows beforehand of a future calamity of this kind, he then</p><p>stirs up the minds of Malckiesae mulieres, sometimes by persuading them himself;</p><p>sometimes on account of envy, which such wicked women bear toward a neigh-</p><p>bor, he inspires them to a deed of vengeance, as if he were teaching the women</p><p>to provoke storms of this kind and disturbances of the air.52</p><p>There was no reason, then, to fear old women when they brewed potions or</p><p>cast water into the air, because whatever calamity ensued was destined by</p><p>divine providence to happen anyway. Maleficium was not, to Molitor, a visible</p><p>and efficient sign of the devil, but a useless and meaningless gesture, designed</p><p>only to impress and delude the simple-minded.53</p><p>Molitor’s views were shared by other learned men. Around 1475, Jean</p><p>Vincent, the prior of Les Moustiers, wrote a tract in which he argued that</p><p>witches were deluded into accepting the destruction caused by the devil as</p><p>their own. Witches, he writes, were those who believed that they were car-</p><p>ried to the Sabbat by a demon, while they actually slept in their beds. At the</p><p>Sabbat, they burned alive children taken from their mothers’ breasts. But by</p><p>his knowledge of causes, the devil could predict which children would sicken,</p><p>which vines would wither, and where and when storms would strike. He sug-</p><p>gested these things to the sleeping women, who then sincerely claimed respon-</p><p>sibility for them when they occurred.54 More assertive yet was the famous</p><p>Dominican reformer and theologian, Nicholas of Cusa. In a sermon on the</p><p>pervasive belief in witches, Nicholas wondered why it was, if the devil had a</p><p>free hand, that where faith in Christ and his saints was cultivated, the land was</p><p>most blessed.</p><p>Where, however, men believe those maleficia to be done effectually, there more</p><p>witches are discovered, nor can they be extirpated with fire and sword, because</p><p>the more diligently this kind of persecution is carried out, the more the delu-</p><p>sion grows. For persecution argues that the devil is more to be feared than God,</p><p>78 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 78</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>and that he can heap up evils in the midst of evils, and so, at last, the devil, who</p><p>is so feared, is sated and so his purpose is achieved.55</p><p>For this reason, and to spare the blood of innocents, Nicholas urged his audi-</p><p>tors to abandon the fruitless persecution of old women and turn their minds</p><p>instead to God, the real arbiter of their fate.56</p><p>To argue, on the contrary, that witches used their magic to cause harm</p><p>freely, and that they were personally and immediately responsible for the</p><p>injuries that ensued, required theorists to address the problem of divine per-</p><p>mission. Simply to assert that all that witches did, they did with the permis-</p><p>sion of God, was insufficient. Though late-medieval demonologists seem</p><p>endlessly to repeat the phrase, “with the permission of God,” whenever they</p><p>discussed the powers of witches and demons, almost as a polite</p><p>gesture in the</p><p>direction of divine omnipotence, the phrase explains nothing precisely because</p><p>it could explain anything at all. As Petrus Mamoris points out, to say that</p><p>something happened with divine permission is to state the patently obvious,</p><p>“since there is nothing in the world which God does not permit, either good</p><p>or evil.”57 Nor was God’s wholesale grant of power to demons a palatable</p><p>prospect: only a few authorities, such as the early-sixteenth-century witch-</p><p>theorist,Vincente Dodo, went down this path.</p><p>Dodo, however, held that, with the permission of God, the devil was</p><p>responsible for the flight of witches, their amazing transformations, and their</p><p>malevolent magic, but that, “in consequence, divine permission is to be under-</p><p>stood negatively.”58 That is, God permitted demons to do anything they</p><p>pleased, provided he did not specifically prohibit it: Dodo maintained that God</p><p>normally allowed all created beings, including demons, the free use of their</p><p>natural powers, unless, as sometimes happened, he should intervene. In this,</p><p>Dodo’s argument was a logical extension of scholastic principles, but for most</p><p>of his colleagues such a broad-ranging capitulation by the heavenly host was</p><p>difficult to accept. Even in the Malleus God was not so passive; Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger were careful to remind their readers that demons were merely</p><p>agents, whom God employed to castigate sinners: “For God is accustomed to</p><p>inflict the evils which are done for the exaction of our sins on earth, through</p><p>demons acting as though they were his torturers.”59</p><p>Perhaps prompted by such difficulties, by the mid-fifteenth century, the-</p><p>orists had begun to explore an alternative explanation of magical harm.</p><p>Because God allowed demons to lend efficacy to superstitious observances</p><p>in order to punish the operator, so the argument ran, divine permission</p><p>depended more upon the magician’s sin than that of his victim. The theory</p><p>probably had its genesis in statements such as that of the early-fourteenth-</p><p>century theologian,William of Ware, who declared that “magicians are unable</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 79</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 79</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>to disturb the minds of good men who do not believe such things, but only</p><p>the minds of infidels and evil men.”60 Although perfectly orthodox and tradi-</p><p>tional,Ware’s statement could easily be misinterpreted to mean that the effi-</p><p>cacy of magic is dependent upon belief, and this is, in fact, precisely what one</p><p>finds in a contemporary devotional treatise on the Ten Commandments,</p><p>Robert of Brunne’s Handlyng Synne. There, a witch explains to a bewildered</p><p>bishop why he is unable to emulate her magic and animate her magic milking</p><p>bag:</p><p>Ye beleue nat as y do:</p><p>wold ye beleue my wordys as y,</p><p>Hyt shulde a go, and sokun ky.61</p><p>In other words, if the witch is to be trusted, her maleficium depends upon her</p><p>own sinful belief and not presumably upon the sins of her victims.62</p><p>A little more than a century later, Johann Nider developed and refined</p><p>this idea in his own examination of the decalogue, the Praeceptorium. In a ques-</p><p>tion devoted to the power of malefici to injure men, Nider argues that, with</p><p>the devil’s aid, they can cause harm to external things – to property, person,</p><p>and reputation – but not to the soul.63 As proof he adduces standard exempla</p><p>showing the power of the devil to torment Job and Anthony. Nonetheless,</p><p>Nider insists that sinners are much more afflicted by magic than the good, both</p><p>because the demons are defenseless before the power of the cross and because</p><p>the devil has greater power over sinners. For this reason, Nider adds an impor-</p><p>tant qualification to his explanation of image magic: when a witch strikes a</p><p>man’s image, “a demon invisibly harms the bewitched person in the same way,</p><p>with God’s permission, if the guilty person merited it.”64 At the same time,</p><p>though, the sins of the witches are relevant to Nider: when he asks why witches</p><p>employ sacraments and other divine things in their magic, he responds that “as</p><p>God is more gravely offended by men . . . the greater the power he gives to</p><p>a demon over bad people.”65 It is quite possible that the homines malos in this</p><p>phrase are the witches themselves and not their victims, but regardless of his</p><p>intentions it was easy to read Nider otherwise, as implying that a demon’s</p><p>power to do evil was at least in part a function of the magnitude of the witch’s</p><p>sin.66 If so, witchcraft was understandable as a kind of economy of effort,</p><p>whereby two sinners were punished at one time.</p><p>Writing not long after Nider, Martin of Arles developed and combined</p><p>these ideas in his tract against witchcraft and superstition. Martin argues that</p><p>just as God works miracles on account of Christian belief and faith, so false</p><p>and evil beliefs lead God to permit bad things to happen. When God recog-</p><p>nizes excessive adherence to vain observances, he allows the devil to give them</p><p>efficacy:</p><p>80 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 80</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Just as true and Christian faith works miracles on those of good faith, so an evil</p><p>and false belief, God permitting, sometimes works, or rather earns, misfor-</p><p>tunes. For we have daily experience of people of bad faith whom God thus pun-</p><p>ishes on account of bad faith; indeed, God knows that some people adhere</p><p>excessively to vain observances, permits some events to happen, and so, in</p><p>consequence they are led to hold this belief even more strongly, so that their</p><p>blindness becomes greater and they fall into the snare that they have made for</p><p>themselves.67</p><p>So, the more superstitious people are, the more their superstitions seem well</p><p>founded.</p><p>God, however, Martin suggests, does not restrict himself to punishing</p><p>the individual sinner alone; sometimes he is so angered by sin that he punishes</p><p>collectively, so that in profligate communities the good are punished along with</p><p>the wicked.68 When a community is saturated with superstitious beliefs, God</p><p>permits demons to punish that community collectively through witchcraft.</p><p>Thus, Martin writes that</p><p>for the worthy flagellation and punishment of these crimes, God permits so</p><p>many infirmities, pestilences, and storms, sterilities of the earth and of har-</p><p>vests, the death of cattle and beasts of burden to happen.69</p><p>This notion corresponds to a general tendency in late-medieval religion to look</p><p>at both sin and salvation in collective terms: just as an individual’s good works</p><p>redounded to the credit of his confraternity, so his sins could bring punish-</p><p>ment upon them all.70 And such punishment could be disturbingly severe.</p><p>A popular exemplum in late-medieval sermons reported that after a drunken</p><p>soldier knocked over the pyx with a beer pot, God’s justice required that</p><p>the entire region should be devastated. In the version of Johannes Herolt,</p><p>a fifteenth-century Dominican preacher,</p><p>[the sea] passed beyond its bounds and flooded the land of many provinces,</p><p>destroying villages and exterminating such a host of men that in all a hundred</p><p>thousand perished.71</p><p>The destruction finally abated, though only after the specific sin responsible</p><p>had been discovered and proper collective atonement had been made. If Jean</p><p>Delumeau is right that “The Europeans who lived between the advent of the</p><p>Black Death and the end of the religious wars had an acute sense of an accu-</p><p>mulation of misfortune,” then finding the source of such evils would be a press-</p><p>ing concern.72 The sin of witchcraft was in many ways the perfect explanation:</p><p>heinous enough to warrant the most awful punishment and secret enough</p><p>to exist anywhere, it enabled all the calamities of the world to rest on the</p><p>shoulders of socially marginal women.</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 81</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 81</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com</p><p>at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Working from this established relationship between sin and retribution,</p><p>late-medieval demonologists were gradually able to expand the limits of divine</p><p>permission. Petrus Mamoris, like Martin of Arles, explains that the power of</p><p>witchcraft depends upon the sins of the operators themselves:</p><p>for the execrations of the devil have efficacy among those who believe or adhere</p><p>to such cursed diabolical machinations, or doubt and fret in some article of the</p><p>faith, or wickedly desire to test, or from some wonder or curiosity want to try</p><p>or to see, these maleficia, or to assist those who make them: all of which is</p><p>dangerous to the faith.73</p><p>But, whereas for Martin the efficacy of witchcraft depends only upon igno-</p><p>rance and superstition, Mamoris is more liberal. He argues that magical harm</p><p>could stem from either excessive credulity or excessive erudition, for while</p><p>the former might lead to superstition, the latter leads to skepticism.74 Mamoris</p><p>felt that not to believe in the power of witchcraft was as bad, and just as likely</p><p>to incur punishment, as vana credulitas. Similarly, Nicholas Jacquier remarks</p><p>that the devil was especially liable to injure skeptics through witchcraft:</p><p>Whence a few ignorant people boast very foolishly, asserting that they do not</p><p>fear demons or witches, nor their witchcraft, unless the witches themselves</p><p>personally approach those who are boasting after this fashion and administer</p><p>some poisonous substance to them in their drink or food, whence they can be</p><p>harmed.75</p><p>To Mamoris and Jacquier, witchcraft was not a problem largely confined to the</p><p>rural lower classes: anyone (hypothetically) could be a witch, and anyone could</p><p>be bewitched. This was especially true, if, as Jacquier argued, defenses which</p><p>might be adequate against the devil alone, failed against witch and demon com-</p><p>bined. Although the natural power of demons was sufficient to carry out any</p><p>act of witchcraft, Jacquier maintained that demons were frequently prevented</p><p>from the full exercise of their power by the ministry of good angels or by spir-</p><p>itual defenses in human hands. In such cases, however, witches could more</p><p>easily approach their victims and do them harm, since under some circum-</p><p>stances divine permission was more liberal with respect to witchcraft than if</p><p>the devil had acted directly.76</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger use these ideas about the relationship between</p><p>divine permission and witchcraft in their own complicated model of misfor-</p><p>tune. Once again, the authors foreground the active role of the witch at the</p><p>expense of both God and the devil: in their view, sudden misfortune is almost</p><p>always the result of witchcraft, and not the work of angels or demons alone.</p><p>Their explanation for this is neither logically nor literally consistent: the</p><p>degree of autonomy they allow to the devil, to the witch, and even to God,</p><p>82 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 82</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>varies according to context, and they can devise no rule that is not immedi-</p><p>ately contradicted by exceptions. But, no matter: what counts is that they</p><p>devise an explanation for the prevalence of witchcraft in the world which is</p><p>consistent with conventional orthodox assumptions.</p><p>In good scholastic fashion, Institoris and Sprenger begin by considering</p><p>the nature of misfortune analytically. Injuries, they maintain, are of four kinds:</p><p>ministeriales (beneficial misfortune), noxiales (merited punishment), maleficiales</p><p>(malicious harm, or witchcraft), and naturales (natural harm).77 Although these</p><p>terms denote intentions or motives behind mischance, Institoris and Sprenger</p><p>are really concerned with their agents: beneficial harm is the work of angels;</p><p>merited injuries are carried out by demons, presumably under the supervision</p><p>of God; natural injuries are due simply to natural causes, such as droughts</p><p>caused by the motion of the stars and planets; and, finally, “Effects are said</p><p>to arise from harmful magic when the devil works through witches and</p><p>sorcerers.”78</p><p>Maleficiales were of special interest because they were the most common</p><p>and the most dangerous form of harm. Demons always prefer to work through</p><p>the agency of witches, in part for the damnation of their souls, but more</p><p>importantly because God permits them to do more harm through witchcraft</p><p>than he would otherwise allow:</p><p>But because they seek to work through witches of this kind, in order to insult</p><p>and offend the Creator and at the same time to bring about the loss of souls,</p><p>knowing that in such a way, as God is more angered so he permits them more</p><p>power to rage, and because innumerable acts of witchcraft are perpetrated</p><p>which the devil would not be allowed to inflict on humans if he alone were</p><p>working to harm people, but which the just, hidden judgment of God permits</p><p>to be done through witches, on account of their perfidy and denial of the</p><p>Catholic faith, accordingly such maleficia, by just judgment, are imputed sec-</p><p>ondarily to [witches], however much the devil might be the primary actor.79</p><p>Thus, witches are directly responsible for witchcraft, because it is their sin that</p><p>gives the devil his power to injure in their name. In this way, Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger carry the arguments proposed by earlier theorists to their logical</p><p>conclusion: if God punishes men collectively on account of sin, and if the inten-</p><p>sity of punishment is proportional to divine anger, then the more God is</p><p>offended, the more he grants the devil latitude to harm the guilty and inno-</p><p>cent alike. There is no sin more offensive to God than witchcraft, so malefi-</p><p>cium itself provokes God to grant the devil permission to make it work: “just</p><p>as because of the sins of the parents the innocent are punished, so now are</p><p>many innocent people damned and bewitched on account of the sins of the</p><p>witches.”80 Demons could, of course, injure without the permission of the</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 83</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 83</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>witch, but, because they were loath to do so, this happened only when they</p><p>were specifically commanded by God to do so.</p><p>The mechanical nature of this conception of diabolic power is particu-</p><p>larly evident in Institoris and Sprenger’s discussion of superstitious methods</p><p>of identifying a witch. Even practices which rely upon the implicit participa-</p><p>tion of the devil are reliable, they argue, because demons are prohibited from</p><p>harming the innocent. Thus, if a devil is doing some witch’s bidding in animal</p><p>form and is wounded in process, it is the witch – and only the witch – who</p><p>bears a corresponding wound.</p><p>For it is one thing to be harmed by the devil through a witch, and another to</p><p>be harmed by the devil himself, without a witch. Because when the devil in the</p><p>form of an animal receives blows, he then inflicts them upon another who is</p><p>joined to him through a pact . . . Accordingly, he can harm only the guilty and</p><p>those joined to him through a pact, and in no way the innocent. When demons</p><p>seek to do harm through witches, however, then even the innocent are often</p><p>afflicted, by divine permission, in revenge of so great a crime.81</p><p>Oddly enough, then, the limitations of demonic power could be reliably</p><p>exploited to identify guilty witches, precisely because demons themselves are</p><p>mere passive agents, strictly bound by the terms of their pacts with witches</p><p>and subordination to God.</p><p>Through this argument, Institoris and Sprenger aligned the causes and</p><p>agencies of misfortune to give the widest possible scope to witchcraft. Unfor-</p><p>tunately, however well this model may have reflected contemporary fifteenth-</p><p>century conditions, it fits the traditional pattern of Christian beliefs quite</p><p>poorly. For example, the inquisitors’ argument becomes quite seriously</p><p>muddled when they attempt to explain the trials of Job. The problem is</p><p>that</p><p>Job’s afflictions were carried out by the devil in person; they were, then, nox-</p><p>iales and not maleficiales. But Job was also an innocent man, and when injuries</p><p>happen to the innocent, they are maleficiales and not “merited.” Some trouble-</p><p>maker must have asked for an explanation, for Institoris and Sprenger reply</p><p>with open annoyance:</p><p>If, indeed, someone with too great a curiosity were to insist on knowing, just</p><p>as often this material permits a strange insistence on the part of the defenders</p><p>of witches, always lashing the air about the outer shells of words, and never</p><p>penetrating to the marrow of truth, why Job was not persecuted by the effects</p><p>of harmful magic through a demon, as he was by injuries.To these curious sorts</p><p>it can be answered that Job was persecuted by the devil alone and not through</p><p>the mediation of a male or female witch, either because this kind of supersti-</p><p>tion had not yet been discovered, or, if it had been discovered, then divine</p><p>84 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 84</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>providence desired that the power of the devil be made known to the world,</p><p>for the glory of God, as a warning of his plot.82</p><p>Job, in the minds of the authors was clearly an exception: under normal cir-</p><p>cumstances, demons caused injuries only through witches, and usually had to</p><p>do so if their victims were otherwise innocent.</p><p>This, then, was why witchcraft was so dangerous: God was so offended</p><p>by the existence and practices of witches that he gave the devil more latitude</p><p>to use his power for the affliction of men, affliction manifested in the magic</p><p>of witches.This argument assumed that divine permission was a kind of sliding</p><p>scale, automatically contingent upon circumstances: some actions, such as sin</p><p>or the magic of witches, allowed greater applications of demonic power,</p><p>others, such as prayer or Christian countermagic, allowed less. Hence, God’s</p><p>pervasive distaste for sex gave witches and the devil correspondingly greater</p><p>power over human and animal sexuality.83 For this reason, witches character-</p><p>istically destroyed fertility because such magic was more likely to work as</p><p>planned than was weather magic or demonic obsession. Similarly, some species</p><p>of maleficium were inherently less permissible, and were only efficacious if the</p><p>victim was stained with sin. For example, although witches could make the</p><p>penis of a sinner appear to vanish, they could not so delude anyone in a state</p><p>of grace.84 Because God granted permission to harm according to these estab-</p><p>lished rules (exactly as the devil participated in witchcraft), Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger conceived of witchcraft as very much a personal duel between the</p><p>witch and her victim, each trying through his or her actions to slide the scale</p><p>of permission in his or her own favor.</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger held a view of the world that was both extremely</p><p>mechanistic and highly anthropocentric. Because the beneficent power of God</p><p>and the destructive power of the devil both functioned mechanically, the</p><p>importance of the human operators who could successfully manipulate these</p><p>powers was necessarily increased. Institoris and Sprenger also saw, however,</p><p>that in the supernatural battle between witches and the Church, the Church</p><p>was sadly overmatched: sacramental magic alone could not wipe out the</p><p>scourge of witchcraft, only ameliorate its effects; to destroy witchcraft, it was</p><p>necessary to destroy the witches.</p><p>Notes</p><p>1 Although it is dangerous to generalize about medieval folk-beliefs, evidence from</p><p>modern and early-modern sources suggests a more or less consistent traditional</p><p>European understanding of witchcraft and misfortune. See Gábor Klaniczay, “Witch-</p><p>Hunting in Hungary: Social or Cultural Tensions?” in Klaniczay, The Uses of Supernatural</p><p>Power, trans. Susan Singerman, ed. Karen Margolis (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990),</p><p>167. For modern folk conceptions of misfortune, see Bente Gullveig Alver and Torunn</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 85</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 85</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Selberg, “Folk Medicine as Part of a Larger Concept Complex,” ARV 43 (1987), 21–44;</p><p>David Rheubottom, “The Seeds of Evil Within,” in David Perkin, ed., The Anthropology</p><p>of Evil (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1985), 77–91.</p><p>2 Rodney Needham, Primordial Characters (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press,</p><p>1978), 31.</p><p>3 Salimbene de Adam, The Chronicle of Salimbene de Adam, ed. and trans. Joseph L. Baird</p><p>(Binghamton: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1986), 640–1.</p><p>4 Ibid.</p><p>5 Augustine, City of God, 21.13, 990.</p><p>6 Ibid., 22.22, 1066.</p><p>7 Ibid., 21.14, 992.</p><p>8 Ibid., 1.9, 14–15.</p><p>9 Isidore of Seville, Sententiae, 1.1, c. 10, 17–18, in Lea, Materials, 1:69.</p><p>10 Gregory the Great, Morals on the Book of Job, ed. James Bliss (Oxford: John Henry Parker,</p><p>1844), 2.17.</p><p>11 Rather of Verona, The Complete Works of Rather of Verona, ed. and trans. Peter L.D. Reid</p><p>(Binghamton: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1991), 1.8.</p><p>12 Athanasius, The Life of St. Antony, trans. Robert T. Meyer (Westminster, Maryland: The</p><p>Newman Press, 1950), c. 9, p. 28.</p><p>13 Ibid.</p><p>14 Examples abound, but see especially Gregory the Great, Dialogues, trans. O.J.</p><p>Zimmerman (New York: Fathers of the Church, 1959), 3.19.</p><p>15 Peter Damiani, De Castitate, 3.4, Patrologia Latina 145, 713.</p><p>16 Antonio Graf, The Story of the Devil, trans. Edward Noble Stone (New York: MacMillen,</p><p>1931), 97–8. See also Lea, Inquisition, 3:381–2; and Peter Dinzelbacher, “Der Realität</p><p>des Teufels im Mittelalter,” in Segl, Der Hexenhammer, 151–75. I have not been able to</p><p>obtain the text of Ricalmus’ book, the Liber Revelationum de Insidiis et Versutiis Daemonum</p><p>adversus Homines; Dinzelbacher’s reference is Bernardus Pezius, Thesaurus Anecdotorum</p><p>Novissimus, I/2 (Augusta Vindelicorum [Augsburg], 1721), 373–472.</p><p>17 A suggestion of Edward Peters, who observes that for a monastic audience the terror</p><p>of this devil was considerably mitigated by the formidable spiritual defenses which</p><p>monks could deploy. For laymen and perhaps even secular clerics who were not so well</p><p>fortified, the devil would then naturally appear as a relatively more threatening figure.</p><p>Peters, 92–3.</p><p>18 Similarly, as the Church grew more inclusive after 1200, theological discourse began</p><p>increasingly to reflect traditional popular beliefs. See Jacques Le Goff, “The Learned and</p><p>Popular Dimensions of Journies in the Otherworld in the Middle Ages,” in S.L. Kaplan,</p><p>ed., Understanding Popular Culture (Berlin: Mouton, 1981), 31; and Alan Bernstein, “The-</p><p>ology between Heresy and Folklore:William of Auvergne on Punishment after Death,”</p><p>Traditio 38 (1982): 4–44; 5–6, and passim.</p><p>19 Thomas of Cantimpré, Bonum Universale de Apibus (NP: 1627) book 2, c. 57.3.</p><p>20 Giraldus Cambrensis, Itinerarium Kambriae, in Opera, vol. 6, ed. James F. Dimock</p><p>(London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer, 1866), 1.12, p. 91.</p><p>21 For an in-depth study of Thomist theories of causation, see Francis X. Meehan, Efficient</p><p>Causality in Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas,The Catholic University of America Philosoph-</p><p>ical Studies 56 (Washington, D.C.:The Catholic University of America Press, 1940).</p><p>22 Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, pt. 1, qu. 49.</p><p>23 Aquinas, Summa. Theologiae, pt. 1, qu. 49, art. 2.</p><p>24 “To the first point, it should be said that bad angels attack people in two ways. First, by</p><p>inciting them to sin. In this they are not sent by God to attack people, but are some-</p><p>times permitted to do so according to God’s just judgments. Sometimes, however, they</p><p>attack men by punishing them, and in this they are sent by God.” (“Ad primum ergo,</p><p>dicendum quod mali angeli impugnant homines dupliciter. Uno modo, instigando ad</p><p>86 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 86</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019</p><p>11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>peccatum. Et sic non mittuntur a Deo ad impugnandum, sed aliquando permittuntur</p><p>secundum Dei justa judicia. Aliquando autem impugnant homines puniendo. Et sic mit-</p><p>tuntur a Deo.”) Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 114, art. 1, ad. 1.</p><p>25 “Ad primum ergo dicendum quod non dicitur sic diabolus in homines potestatum</p><p>habuisse, quasi posset eis nocere, Deo non permittente; sed quia juste permittebatur</p><p>nocere hominibus, quos tentando ad suum consensum perduxerat.” Ibid., pt. 3, qu. 49,</p><p>art. 2. Lest one suppose that this situation has been somehow altered with Christ’s</p><p>passion, Aquinas immediately adds that, although Jesus has indeed provided a remedy</p><p>to damnation, “the devil can still tempt men’s souls and harrass their bodies.” Ibid.</p><p>26 The growth of a more powerful, more terrible conception of the devil is discussed in</p><p>Russell, Lucifer, 159–207 and passim; see also Russell, Witchcraft in the Middle Ages,</p><p>101–32, and Peters, 91–8.</p><p>27 For Augustine’s own views on the powers of demons to inflict maleficia on a magician’s</p><p>behalf, see his refutation of Apuleius in City of God, 8.19, in which he asserts that “all</p><p>the marvels of sorcery are achieved by means of the science taught by the demons and</p><p>by their operations.”</p><p>28 Rather of Verona, 1.10, 32–3.</p><p>29 Flint, 146–57.</p><p>30 Demons could not, for example, create real substances out of nothing or effect real</p><p>transformations, although their powers over the human mind created illusions to this</p><p>effect; many other marvelous things demons did by virtue of the natural characteristics</p><p>of their spiritual bodies. Augustine, City of God, 18.18, 782–4.</p><p>31 Augustine, De Doctrina Christiana, 23.35; City of God, 10.10, 385.</p><p>32 See Lea, Materials, 1:143.</p><p>33 Burchard of Worms, Corrector, in Hanson, Quellen, 41.</p><p>34 Stephen of Lanskrana, provost of St. Dorothy’s in Vienna, Himmelstrasse (1484). Quoted</p><p>in Johannes Janssen, History of the German People after the Close of the Middle Ages, trans.</p><p>A.M. Christie (New York: AMS Press, 1966), 16:231.</p><p>35 Augustine, City of God, 8.19, 325.</p><p>36 Hrabanus Maurus, De Magicis Artibus, Patrologia Latina 110, 1095–108.</p><p>37 See, for example, Thomas Aquinas, Expositio in Job, 1.3: “It should be understood . . .</p><p>that with the permission of God demons can cause disturbances in the air, excite winds,</p><p>and make fire fall from heaven” (“Considerandum est . . . quod deo permittente dae-</p><p>mones possunt turbationem aeris inducere, ventos concitare et facere ut ignis de coelo</p><p>cadat”). All this, and much more, they did through the power of local motion which was</p><p>natural to both good and evil angels.</p><p>38 “Cum enim innotuerit tibi, quanta cura sit sapientiae, et bonitati creatoris de hominibus,</p><p>et rebus humanis, elucescet tibi evidenter, quia nec imaginibus, nec stellis, nec lumi-</p><p>naribus, aut etiam coelis committit gubernationem eorum, nec eos exponit ullo modo</p><p>voluntatibus magorum, aut maleficiis.” William of Paris, De Universo, pt. 1, c. 46, in</p><p>Opera Omnia (Paris, 1674; reprint, Frankfurt am Main: Minerva, 1963), 666.</p><p>39 “Nulla enim mulier speciosa incorrupta remaneret, nullus principum, nullus magnatum</p><p>incolumnis persisteret si daemones malis voluntatibus hominum adesse et satisfacere</p><p>permitterentur.” Ibid.</p><p>40 Peter Brown, “Sorcery, Demons, and the Rise of Christianity from Late Antiquity into</p><p>the Middle Ages,” in Mary Douglas, ed., Witchcraft Confessions and Accusations (London:</p><p>Tavistock Publications, 1970), 15.</p><p>41 “Magi sunt, qui vulgo malefici ob facinorum magnitudinem nuncupantur. Hi [permissu</p><p>Dei] elementa concutiunt, turbant mentes hominum [minus confidentium in Deo] ac</p><p>sine ullo veneni haustu, violentia tantum carminis interimunt . . . Demonibus enim</p><p>adcitis audent ventilare, ut quisque suos perimat malis artibus inimicos. Hi etiam</p><p>sanguine utuntur et victimis, et saepe contigunt corpora mortuorum . . . Ad quos</p><p>suscitandos cadaveris sanguis adjicitur. Nam amare daemones sanguinem dicitur.</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 87</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 87</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Ideoque quoties necromantia fit, cruor aqua miscetur, ut colore sanguinis facilius pro-</p><p>vocentur.” Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae, De Magis, 8.9. Ivo of Chartres, Decreti, “De</p><p>Incantoribus . . . ,” 11.67, Patrologia Latina 161, 760–1.</p><p>42 “Hi permissu Dei elementa concutiunt, turbant mentes hominum minus confidentium</p><p>in Deo ac sine ullo veneni haustu, violentia tantum carminis interimunt.” Ivo of</p><p>Chartres, loc. cit. The passage is headed “Ex dictis Augusti.”</p><p>43 “Vere enim confitentibus et penitentibus nocere nequeunt malefici et divinatores, nec</p><p>illudere eis qui spem suam ponunt in Deo, peccatoribus autem illudere solent, quia</p><p>Deus, exigentibus peccatis, permittit.” Jacques de Vitry, The Exempla of Jacques de Vitry,</p><p>ed. Thomas Frederick Crane (London : David Nutt, 1890), no. 262.</p><p>44 Henry Suso, The Exemplar, ed. Nicholas Heller, trans. Ann Edward (Dubuque:The Priory</p><p>Press, 1962), 5.2, p. 176. See also Richard Kieckhefer, Unquiet Souls: Fourteenth Century</p><p>Saints and Their Religious Milieu (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 50–</p><p>88.</p><p>45 See Larrisa Taylor, Soldiers of Christ: Preaching in Late Medieval and Reformation France</p><p>(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), 117–19, and as a good example, Jean Gerson,</p><p>De Erroribus circa Artem Magicam, in Oeuvres complètes, ed. Palemon Glorieux (Paris:</p><p>Desclee, 1969), 7:80.</p><p>46 Heiko Oberman, “The Shape of Late Medieval Thought:The Birthpangs of the Modern</p><p>Era,” in Oberman, The Dawn of the Reformation: Essays in Late Medieval and Early Reforma-</p><p>tion Thought (Edinburgh:T. & T. Clark, 1986): 18–38; 27.</p><p>47 Gordon Leff, The Dissolution of the Medieval Outlook (New York: Harper and Row, 1976),</p><p>57–9; Francis Oakley, Omnipotence, Covenant, and Order (Ithaca: Cornell University Press,</p><p>1984), 80–1.</p><p>48 Leff, 29, 76–7.</p><p>49 “quod nulla causa agit immediate ad effectum aliquem in passo nisi naturaliter ordinata</p><p>ad illum producendum.” Samuel de Cassini, Questio Lamiarum, in Hansen, Quellen, 266.</p><p>50 Ibid., 267, 264.</p><p>51 “Quandoque talia permittit, in poenam correctionis peiorum, quandoque in tentationem</p><p>augmentandorum meritorum, quandoque in prodigium futurae gratiarum actionis.”</p><p>Ulrich Molitor, Tractatus de Pythonicis Mulieribus, in Institoris and Sprenger, Malleus Malefi-</p><p>carum (Frankfurt am Main, 1580), 695, 712–13.</p><p>52 “Ita ut huiusmodi plagam praenoscit futuram, ex tunc commovet mentes huiusmodi</p><p>Malckiesarum mulierum, aliquando eisdem persuadendo: aliquando ob invidiam, quam</p><p>tales sceleratae mulieres adversus proximum gerunt, in vindictam mouendo easdem</p><p>sollicitat, quasi ipsas mulieres doceat huiusmodi tempestates, et aeris turbationes</p><p>prouocare.” Ibid., 698.</p><p>53 Ibid. Molitor was equally skeptical of Aquinas’s theory that incubus demons could sire</p><p>human children with stolen semen. Ibid., ch. 10.</p><p>54 Jean Vincent, Liber adversus Magicas Artes et eos qui dicunt artibus eisdem nullam inesse</p><p>efficiam, in Hansen, Quellen, 229.</p><p>55 “Vbi autem homines credunt ista maleficia effectualiter fieri: ibi reperiuntur plures mal-</p><p>efici: nec possunt extirpari igne et gladio, quia quanto diligentius huiusmodi persecutio</p><p>fit: tanto plus crescit delusio. Nam persecutio arguit quod diabolus plus timetur quam</p><p>deus: et quod possit medio malorum mala ingerere, et demum placatur diabolus qui sic</p><p>timetur: et sic optinet intentum.” Nicholas of Cusa, Opera (Paris, 1514; facsimile reprint,</p><p>Frankfurt am Main: Minerva, 1962), vol. 2, bk. 9, fol. 172.</p><p>56 Other skeptics had similar qualms. See for example the echoes of William of Paris in</p><p>work of the sixteenth-century Florentine Jurist, Gianfrancesco Ponzinibio, who argues</p><p>that although witches might injure men through their maleficium, their power to do</p><p>harm was strictly limited since otherwise all men might seem to be in the hands of</p><p>demons, which since the advent of the Savior was certainly not true. Tractatus de Lamiis</p><p>et Excellentia Juris Utriusque, in Paulus Grillandus,</p><p>Tractatus de Sortilegiis (Frankfurt am</p><p>Main: 1592), 279.</p><p>88 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 88</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>57 “Ad quod respondent praedicti quod hoc est ex permissione divina: sed sic respondere</p><p>ridiculum est, quoniam nihil fit in mundo quod Deus fieri non permittat, sive bonum</p><p>sit, sive malum.” Mamoris, 12.</p><p>58 “Diabolus potest de facto hominem localiter movere (permittente deo) ad maleficium</p><p>perpetrandum adque obscenos actus explendos. Permissio divina in ista conclusione</p><p>intelligitur negative.”Vincente Dodo, Apologia, in Hansen, Quellen, 277.</p><p>59 “Mala enim que nostris exigentibus [peccatis] in mundo fiunt, deus velut per suos tor-</p><p>tores iuste per demones solet infligere,” quoting Nider, Formicarius, 5.4 (who supplies</p><p>the missing peccatis). Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 15, p. 145. Similarly, “punishments are</p><p>often brought about through the ministry of demons,” (sepius tamen ista ministerio</p><p>demonum exercent), pt. 1, qu. 1, p. 11.</p><p>60 “Et idcirco magi nequeunt turbare mentes bonorum qui talia non credunt, sed mentes</p><p>infidelium et malorum.” Guillermus Vorillongus, Super Quatuor Libris Sententiarum, dist.</p><p>34, in Lea, Materials, 1:167.</p><p>61 Robert of Brunne, Handlyng Synne, ed. F.J. Furnivall (London: Early English Text Society,</p><p>1901), ln. 544–6, p. 20. The treatise is an English translation of William of Wadington’s</p><p>Manuel des Pechiez; this exemplum, however, was an addition of Robert’s own, and replaced</p><p>one of Gregory the Great’s tales.</p><p>62 The bishop’s perfectly understandable, if illogical, response was that the witch should</p><p>at once cease to believe in her magic.</p><p>63 Nider, Praeceptorium, 1.11, y.</p><p>64 “Invisibiliter demon maleficiatum hominem eodem modo ledit dei permissione si</p><p>demeruit reus.” Ibid., v.</p><p>65 “Secundo ut deus sic grauiter per homines offensus . . . demoni maiorem potestatem in</p><p>homines malos tribuat.” Ibid., z.</p><p>66 Later witch-theorists, such as Martin of Arles discussed below, certainly did so.</p><p>67 “Quod sicut vera et Christiana fides mirabilia operatur in bene credentibus, sic mala et</p><p>falsa credulitas, Deo permittente, euentus malos interdum operatur, vel potius demere-</p><p>tur. Nam experimus quotidie in male credulis, quos ita Deus punit propter malam</p><p>fidem, imodum [sic] cognoscit Dominus nimium adhaerere aliquibus vanis obseruantiis,</p><p>permittit aliquos euentus contingere, et ita eos plus consequenter firmari in tali opin-</p><p>ione, ut maior fiat caecitas eorum, et in laqueum cadant, quem sibi fecerunt.” Martin</p><p>of Arles, Tractatibus de Superstitionibus, printed in Jacquier, 437.</p><p>68 See Augustine, City of God, 1.9.</p><p>69 “Quod ad dignam flagellationem et punitionem horum flagitiorum permittit Deus tot</p><p>infirmitates, pestilentias, et tempestates, sterilitates quoque terrae, nascentium fruc-</p><p>tuum, et interitum pecorum et iumentorum euenire.” Martin of Arles, 438. Martin’s</p><p>views were not unique: St. Bernardino of Siena, for example, announced in a sermon</p><p>that “Another sin which derives from pride is the sin in regard of charms and of div-</p><p>inations, and because of this God many times doth send his scourges into cities.” See</p><p>Bernardine of Siena, Sermons, ed. Nazareno Orlandi, trans. Helen Josephine Robins</p><p>(Siena:Tipografie sociale, 1920), 26.2, p. 165.</p><p>70 For the importance of community to late-medieval conceptions of salvation and late-</p><p>medieval religion in general, see A.N. Galpern, “The Legacy of Late Medieval Religion</p><p>in Sixteenth Century Champagne,” in Charles Trinkhaus and Heiko A. Oberman, eds,</p><p>The Pursuit of Holiness in Late Medieval and Renaissance Religion (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1974),</p><p>141–76; and John Bossy, Christianity and the West 1400–1700 (Oxford: Oxford Univer-</p><p>sity Press, 1985), 35–75.</p><p>71 Johannes Herolt, Miracles of the Blessed Virgin (1435–40), trans. C.C. Swinton Bland</p><p>(London: George Routledge and Sons, 1928), c. 10, pp. 27–9; the exemplum is a retelling</p><p>of Caesarius of Heisterbach, 7.3, although with a new moral: “From this may be seen</p><p>that sometimes the whole community is punished for the fault of one.”</p><p>72 Jean Delumeau, Sin and Fear: The Emergence of a Western Guilt Culture, 13th–18th Centuries,</p><p>trans. Eric Nicholson (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990), 302.</p><p>MISFORTUNE, WITCHCRAFT, AND THE WILL OF GOD 89</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 89</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>73 “Nam apud illos diabolicae execrationes efficaciam habent qui credunt vel adhaerent</p><p>talibus execratis machinationibus diabolicis, vel dubitant et formidant in articulo fidei,</p><p>vel experiri nequiter volunt, vel ex quadam admiratione seu curiositate volunt hec mal-</p><p>eficia tentare, sive videre, vel facientibus assistere: quae omnia sunt periculosa in fide.”</p><p>Mamoris, 58.</p><p>74 Ibid., 31.</p><p>75 “Unde valde stulte se iactant nonnulli ignari, asserentes, se non timere Daemones vel</p><p>maleficos, nec eorum maleficia, nisi malefici ipsi appropinquantes personaliter huius-</p><p>modi se iactantibus aliquam rem venenatam eis ministrauerint, in potu vel cibo, unde</p><p>laedi possint.” Jacquier, 93.</p><p>76 Ibid., 111, 117. Perhaps because in Jacquier’s mind, a witch’s maleficium resembled a</p><p>kind of poison, against which supernatural defenses might prove unreliable.</p><p>77 Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 2, pp. 15–16.</p><p>78 “Et Maleficiales effectus dicuntur quando demon per maleficos et per magos operatur.”</p><p>Ibid., 16.</p><p>79 “Sed quia in contemptum et offensam creatoris simul et in perditionem animarum</p><p>querunt huiusmodi per maleficas exercere scientes quod per talem modum sicut deus</p><p>amplius irritatur ita et amplius permittit eis potestatem seuiendi; quia et de facto innu-</p><p>mera malificia perpetrantur que non permitterentur diabolo inferre hominibus si per se</p><p>solum affectaret homines ledere que tamen permittuntur iusto et occulto dei iudicio</p><p>per maleficas propter perfidiam et catholice fidei abnegationem. Unde et eis iusto iudicio</p><p>talia maleficia imputantur secundario quantumcunque diabolus sit actor principalis.”</p><p>Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 11, pp. 131–2.</p><p>80 “Unde de sicut innocentes puniuntur ex culpis parentum, ita et iam plures innoxii</p><p>damnificantur et maleficiuntur propter peccata maleficorum.” Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 14, p. 71.</p><p>This is a curious argument, and the authors admit that it is not for everyone: they advise</p><p>preachers, for example, to explain misfortune with a simpler, if still unsatisfying propo-</p><p>sition: “Sine culpa nisi subsit causa non est aliquis puniendus.” Ibid., 76.</p><p>81 “Quia aliud est a demone per maleficam ledi, et aliud per ipsum demonem absque</p><p>malefica, quia demon per se in effigie animalis tunc verbera suscipit quando alteri sibi</p><p>per pactum coniuncto infert. [Et quando cum eius consensu ad talem apparitionem sub</p><p>tali forma et modo se ingessit.] Unde sic tantummodo noxios et sibi per pactum coni-</p><p>unctos nocere potest et nullo modo innocentes. Per maleficas autem ubi demones ledere</p><p>querunt tunc etiam innocentes permissione diuina in ultionem tanti criminis sepe affli-</p><p>gunt.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 9, p. 124.</p><p>82 “Si quis vero curiosius insistaret sicut plerumque hec materia curiosas patitur a malefi-</p><p>carum defensoribus instantias: semper in cortice verborum aerem verberantes et medul-</p><p>lam veritatis numquam penetrantes. Cur Job non maleficiali effectu per demonem sicut</p><p>noxiali percussus fuit. His curios[is] etiam responderi potest quod Job fuit percussus a</p><p>diabolo solum et non mediante malefico vel malefica. Quia hoc genus superstitionis</p><p>vel nondum erat inuentum vel si erat inuentum diuina tamen praeuidentia voluit ut</p><p>potestas demonis mundo ad precauendum eius insidias pro dei gloria innotesceret.” Ibid.,</p><p>pt. 1, qu. 2, p. 16.</p><p>83 “Plus permittit deus super hunc actum per quem primum peccatum diffunditur quam</p><p>super alios actus humanos.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 6, p. 114. Although to modern readers</p><p>this makes very little sense, Institoris and Sprenger apparently assumed that God’s</p><p>motives in this case would be so obvious as to</p><p>require no further explanation.</p><p>84 This protection, however, extended only to the perception of the just of their own</p><p>bodies: although the devil could not delude them into believing that their own bodies</p><p>had been mutilated, he could still deceive them with illusions of absent penises in others.</p><p>Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 7, p. 117.</p><p>90 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM4 8/30/03 5:39 PM Page 90</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>5</p><p>Witchcraft:</p><p>the formation of belief</p><p>– part one</p><p>Ambrosius de Vignate was a well-respected magistrate and legal scholar, a</p><p>doctor of both canon and civil law, who lectured at Padua, Bologna, and Turin</p><p>between 1452 and 1468. On several occasions he participated in the trials of</p><p>accused witches: he tells us that he had heard men and women alike confess</p><p>– both freely and under torture – that they belonged to the sect of witches</p><p>(“secta mascorum seu maleficorum”) and that they, and others whom they</p><p>implicated, had done all sorts of strange and awful things. The presiding</p><p>inquisitors at these trials accepted this testimony as substantially true, and</p><p>began prosecutions on this basis. Ambrosius, however, had grave doubts as to</p><p>whether such bizarre crimes were plausible or even possible. In the twelfth of</p><p>his twenty-one questions concerning the prosecution of heresy, he wonders</p><p>What, therefore, do we say about women who confess that they walk at night</p><p>over great distances in a moment’s time, and enter the locked rooms of others,</p><p>with the assistance of their diabolic masters (as they say), with whom they</p><p>speak, to whom they make payment, and with whom (as they say) they have</p><p>carnal intercourse, and by whose persuasion (as they say) they deny God and</p><p>the Virgin Mary, and with their feet trample the holy cross, and who, with the</p><p>help of demons (as they say), kill children and kill people, and make them fall</p><p>into various injuries, and who say that they do many things like these, and say</p><p>that they sometimes transform themselves into the form of a mouse, and some-</p><p>times, they say, the devil transforms himself into the form of a dog, or some</p><p>other animal? Are these and similar things possible, or likely, or credible?1</p><p>In this passage, Ambrosius describes the “cumulative concept of witchcraft” as</p><p>he encountered it – a combination of traditional legendary motifs, demonola-</p><p>trous heresy, and maleficent magic that some of his learned colleagues con-</p><p>sidered the definitive characteristics of a very real and very dangerous sect. As</p><p>aspects of a coherent and supposedly quite real whole, this particular arrange-</p><p>ment of heterogeneous elements was new to the fifteenth century, and many</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 91</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>people were openly skeptical. Ambrosius, for one, refused to accept the reality</p><p>of the composite model of witchcraft and insisted upon treating each element</p><p>individually. While men and women might indeed be guilty of working mal-</p><p>eficium, their transformation into animals, he believed, was impossible. There-</p><p>fore, when magistrates were faced with the confessions of accused witches, he</p><p>required that they distinguish carefully between testimony which was possible</p><p>and probable and that which was not.2</p><p>Like his counterparts in the Inquisition, Ambrosius was faced with two</p><p>basic problems of belief: was witchcraft in fact real, and if so, what, precisely,</p><p>was it? These two questions were intimately related: witchcraft so constituted</p><p>as to be implausible either on empirical or theological grounds was more likely</p><p>to be considered a delusion or an illusion than a representation of objective</p><p>reality. In order for witch-beliefs to be persuasive, they first had to make sense</p><p>in the context of what fifteenth-century people knew about the world. Of</p><p>course, different people “knew” quite different things, and constructed their</p><p>notions of witchcraft accordingly. To make sense of these diverse opinions, to</p><p>understand the learned late-medieval discourse of witchcraft, we first need to</p><p>comprehend the evidence and assumptions out of which categories of witch-</p><p>craft were constructed, and then determine why some conceptions of witch-</p><p>craft appear to have made more sense, and been more widely persuasive, than</p><p>others.</p><p>Assessing the evidence</p><p>All learned theorists based their models of witchcraft upon data of similar</p><p>kinds. First, there were their own personal and immediate experiences of</p><p>witchcraft, meager though these usually were. Second, there were the narra-</p><p>tive accounts of others – the testimony of witnesses, the confessions of</p><p>witches, and tales of more general provenance – for most authors, but espe-</p><p>cially for inquisitors and magistrates, a much larger and more significant cat-</p><p>egory. Finally there were authoritative Latin texts, the Bible above all, but also</p><p>the narratives and pronouncements of a diverse assemblage of past authorities.</p><p>Virtually all of this material came provided with its own interpretive frame;</p><p>narratives about witchcraft were constructed in accordance with a prior</p><p>understanding of the phenomenon, and reflected the beliefs of authors and</p><p>narrators past and present. In this way, witch-theorists were exposed to ide-</p><p>alized models of witchcraft of varying degrees of specificity, sophistication, and</p><p>comprehensiveness. Variance between pre-existing interpretive models, or</p><p>between models and evidentiary experience or accepted authority, was the</p><p>driving force behind the late-medieval learned discourse on witchcraft.</p><p>92 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 92</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Ambrosius de Vignate, for example, urged caution when descriptions of witch-</p><p>craft contradicted the evidence; in turn, just such skepticism inspired Insti-</p><p>toris and Sprenger to compose a rebuttal. More specifically, however, the</p><p>dimensions of the category “witch” in the Malleus were determined by an</p><p>apparent contradiction of a different sort, between notions of witchcraft</p><p>authorized by learned texts, and more popular representations of witchcraft</p><p>evinced by the testimony of witnesses. As Dominicans, the authors were</p><p>trained to accept the authority of the text, their own sensible experience, and</p><p>the testimony of reliable witnesses; any valid proposition should be verifiable</p><p>by each of these means. As inquisitors, however, they found that their experi-</p><p>ence in the courtroom seemed to contradict accepted authorities. Because they</p><p>had no mechanism by which to discount experiential evidence, they were faced</p><p>with a contradiction between two equally valid epistemological standards in a</p><p>matter of considerable importance. Since such a contradiction could not be</p><p>allowed to stand, they constructed new models which could reconcile the</p><p>competing demands of experience and traditional authority.3</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger worked out this problem within an intellectual</p><p>framework provided by the teaching of Aquinas, and though this debt is</p><p>obvious, it must not be taken for granted. Although Aquinas was the canoni-</p><p>cally accepted theologian of the Dominican Order, for the rest of Europe, and</p><p>even for many Dominicans, he was not quite the dominant intellectual force</p><p>of the late Middle Ages that he is sometimes thought to be.4 Quite the con-</p><p>trary, at most schools the most popular, vigorous, and influential intellectual</p><p>trend of the fifteenth century was the nominalist, Franciscan, via moderna.5</p><p>In many places Aquinas still suffered from his association with the extreme</p><p>Aristotelianism condemned at Paris almost two hundred years before. The</p><p>Malleus, though, was written at the University of Cologne, the most doggedly</p><p>Thomist school in Europe. There the faculty did not even bother to teach</p><p>the via moderna, and had, in fact, banned it from the curriculum in 1425.</p><p>Lambertus de Monte Domini, one of Sprenger’s most</p><p>distinguished colleagues</p><p>at Cologne, and the man whose name appears first on the faculty endorsement</p><p>of the Malleus, even went so far as to lead an abortive drive to obtain beatifi-</p><p>cation for Aristotle.6</p><p>This rigorously Thomist background affected Institoris and Sprenger’s</p><p>interpretation of witch-beliefs in ways that went well beyond the conventional</p><p>association of Aquinas with the theory of the diabolic pact. The Thomist uni-</p><p>verse was characterized by a strong sense of integration: there was no sharp</p><p>separation between the natural and supernatural realms. For this reason it was</p><p>possible to derive valid, albeit speculative, knowledge of the higher orders of</p><p>creation from sense-experience, because, in Heiko Oberman’s words, “in</p><p>Thomas’ metaphysical ontology the natural and supernatural realms are organ-</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 93</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 93</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>ically joined by the Being of God.”7 In this system, the world of sensible expe-</p><p>rience was simply one rung on a hierarchy of creation that ascended at last to</p><p>God, and which, in its entirety, was an expression of God. For this reason, and</p><p>particularly because the chain of cause and effect relationships extended down</p><p>the hierarchy of being through various mediating agents, it was possible to</p><p>apprehend, at least partially, the higher realms through the observation of</p><p>earthly effects.</p><p>Such an exalted view of rational knowledge was possible in turn because</p><p>of a particular kind of epistemological optimism. For Aquinas, all rational</p><p>knowledge was located in this realm of the sensible: to know something ration-</p><p>ally was invariably the result of the application of reason to sensory experi-</p><p>ence.8 Unless one had cause to think otherwise, sensory experience had to be</p><p>a reliable indicator of the actual state of the world, since it was inherently</p><p>unlikely that God would have made beings who would be chronically mis-</p><p>taken.9 For this reason, one might ordinarily accept a given proposition as epis-</p><p>temologically valid simply because it was accepted as such by large numbers</p><p>of people.10 In absolute terms, this rule was applied only to knowledge of first</p><p>principles, propositions which were perceived as true the moment their terms</p><p>were apprehended. Even for more complex propositions, though, the intel-</p><p>lect was never mistaken in any absolute sense, but only “accidentally,” due to</p><p>errors in the formulation of a proposition (a faulty definition of “man,” for</p><p>example, would lead the intellect to erroneous conclusions about the nature</p><p>of men). With due care, then,Thomist scholastics had every reason to believe</p><p>that what large numbers of people believed about the world essentially</p><p>reflected reality. Aquinas, for example, accepted the existence of minor</p><p>demonic spirits, since</p><p>Many persons report that they have had the experience, or have heard from</p><p>such as have experienced it, that Satyrs and Fauns, whom the common folk call</p><p>incubi, have often presented themselves before women . . . Hence it seems</p><p>folly to deny it.11</p><p>This relationship between knowledge and experiential reality privileged</p><p>the argument from personal observation and from personal experience,</p><p>whether direct or based upon the testimony of reliable witnesses, over argu-</p><p>ments based solely upon the dictates of authorities. Thus, Albert the Great</p><p>remarked that “Every accepted proposition which is established by sense per-</p><p>ception is better than that which contradicts the senses; and a conclusion which</p><p>contradicts sense perception is not credible.”12 The Church, however, placed</p><p>an important restriction upon such arguments. As Albert explained, although</p><p>in other cases the argument from authority was weak, in theology the argu-</p><p>ment from authority was pre-eminent, since, “in theology, the argument from</p><p>94 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 94</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>authority is from the inspired teaching of the Spirit of Truth.”13 The difficulty</p><p>was to find out exactly where the realm of theology began and the realm of</p><p>mundane experience came to an end. Since this was by no means an easy or</p><p>an obvious distinction, contradictions between authority and experience</p><p>inevitably arose. Late medieval theorists were faced with a problem of this kind</p><p>when they considered the problem of witches, because a long line of ecclesi-</p><p>astical authorities had dismissed the practices of alleged witches as largely</p><p>delusional.</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger addressed this problem head on: they maintained</p><p>that regardless of what authorities might seem to say, regardless of the plain</p><p>sense of canons, the evidence of one’s own senses, of manifest experience, had</p><p>to take precedence:</p><p>Who is so stupid that he would affirm on that account that all their bewitch-</p><p>ments and magically inspired harms are fantastic and imaginary when the con-</p><p>trary is apparent to everybody’s senses?14</p><p>In this respect, the authors of the Malleus are nothing like the popular image</p><p>of medieval scholastics, hopelessly dependent upon their authorities; they rely</p><p>instead upon what they perceive as empirical evidence. What Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger and other scholastic demonologists did take as a matter of faith,</p><p>however, is that the universe operated according to rules, or, rather, by the</p><p>natural laws of creation. Witchcraft, like the devil himself, was a part of this</p><p>creation and operated only by its laws. Hence, there was nothing necessarily</p><p>“supernatural” about witchcraft, and educated observers could devise a</p><p>detailed, systematic, and comprehensive description of the phenomenon from</p><p>a knowledge of natural law and the observation of witchcraft’s material effects,</p><p>even if it was not amenable to direct observation. Thomist scholastics sup-</p><p>posed, simply, that an investigator could follow the trail of cause and effect up</p><p>and down the hierarchy of being, and that theologically determined truths</p><p>about the nature of creation would accurately inform his understanding of sen-</p><p>sible, earthly events. In this way, a metaphysically higher cause could be</p><p>adduced from a particular mundane effect. In the case of witchcraft, for</p><p>example, reported impotence could be used as evidence for a whole range of</p><p>otherwise hidden causes: the pact between the witch and the devil, diabolic</p><p>powers, and the ultimate justice of divine judgments.</p><p>Thomistically oriented demonologists thus seamlessly joined the mate-</p><p>rial world with higher metaphysical realms, making possible an easy move from</p><p>the human to the diabolic, and, ultimately, the divine. Strangely enough, this</p><p>conception of the world was remarkably compatible with that of traditional</p><p>European communities. If we can visualize the former as a vertically oriented</p><p>chain of being, extending upward from the material world to the supernatu-</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 95</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 95</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>ral, we can think of the latter as a horizontal field in which the realm of normal</p><p>experience extends outward into the supranormal.15 For peasants and inquisi-</p><p>tors both, spirits and magic were not so much supernatural as preternatural:</p><p>they exceeded the common bounds of experience, but were not in any sense</p><p>beyond nature itself. For this reason, narratives informed by a traditional</p><p>understanding of the supranormal world could make sense to Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger provided they were reoriented to fit their hierarchically structured</p><p>conception of creation.</p><p>An example of this process appears in Institoris and Sprenger’s account</p><p>of a town that was ravaged by the plague. There was a rumor that a woman</p><p>recently buried “was gradually swallowing the shroud in which she had been</p><p>buried, and that the plague could not cease until the entire shroud was swal-</p><p>lowed and consumed</p><p>at</p><p>the same time the inherent plausibility of his definition of “witch” and “witch-</p><p>craft” and the extent to which these categories could be used to drive witch-</p><p>craft persecutions.</p><p>I will argue that the strength of the category “witchcraft” in the Malleus</p><p>was that the narrative paradigms by which evaluations of witchcraft and the</p><p>identification of witches were made on the local level in daily life informed its</p><p>construction. In villages, witchcraft was created within a discursive field of</p><p>“words and deeds,” in narrative accounts of unexpected or otherwise unex-</p><p>plainable harm.8 In these narratives, the various threads that comprised</p><p>maleficium were woven together to decide the identity of witches beyond rea-</p><p>sonable doubt. In the Malleus, Institoris and Sprenger raised these explanatory</p><p>mechanisms to the level of learned discourse, by integrating them (however</p><p>uncomfortably) into a more theologically sophisticated conception of the</p><p>world. In essence, the authors provided their audience with a window onto</p><p>the discursive field in which their informants constructed witchcraft them-</p><p>selves, and in so doing gave their own construction of witchcraft a utility and</p><p>persuasive force not found in its competitors.</p><p>Necessary to the success of this model was the close identification of the</p><p>theorists’ witches with the persons of reputed local maleficae, and to make this</p><p>identification stick, Institoris and Sprenger had to admit that an astonishingly</p><p>wide array of practices and behaviors were tantamount to witchcraft: magic</p><p>of almost any kind, rumors of animal transformation, stories of fairies or</p><p>changelings, magical flight, the evil eye, all could be interpreted as direct evi-</p><p>dence of witchcraft. Moreover, for this same reason it is plausible to assume</p><p>that the description of the persons of witches themselves in the Malleus cor-</p><p>responded closely to Institoris and Sprenger’s actual experience; hence the</p><p>final chapter of this study argues that their much noted emphasis upon women</p><p>as the overwhelming practitioners of witchcraft is quite probably descriptive</p><p>rather than prescriptive in nature. Nonetheless, Institoris and Sprenger’s inter-</p><p>pretation of this apparent fact was very much their own, and depended closely</p><p>upon their intense fear of the disordering power of female sexuality. Just as</p><p>the person of the witch is closely identified with that of the devil in the Malleus,</p><p>6 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 6</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>so too does unbridled female sexuality come to be all but indistinguishable</p><p>from demonic power.</p><p>The conception of witchcraft which emerges from this examination of</p><p>the Malleus is idiosyncratic, one of a large number of competing notions of</p><p>what witchcraft was all about in the late fifteenth century.Yet within fifty years</p><p>of the text’s publication, the learned definition of witchcraft had stabilized,</p><p>and a category of witchcraft that closely resembled that in the Malleus was</p><p>widely accepted. In large part, I would suggest that this growing consensus</p><p>was due to the accord between the witch of the Malleus and perceived reality.</p><p>In all probability, to most learned observers, “witches” and “witchcraft” in the</p><p>world about them would look more like those described in the Malleus than</p><p>those in similar texts. Nor was the conception of witchcraft in the Malleus as</p><p>vulnerable to criticism as were witches modeled after notions of heresy or</p><p>night-flying women. Perhaps as important, though, was Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger’s explicit claim to the status of authority combined with the ready</p><p>availability of their text.The authors of witch-treatises were men with an acute</p><p>sensitivity to the value of textual authority, yet prior to 1500, authoritative</p><p>texts on witchcraft were not widely available.There are virtually no references</p><p>to contemporary texts on witchcraft in fifteenth-century witch-treatises,</p><p>except to Nider’s Formicarius, which was not, in any case, really a witch-</p><p>treatise at all. This complete absence of textual references allowed authors to</p><p>give full reign to their own experience, with consequent regional variations.</p><p>The publication of the Malleus changed this picture dramatically. By 1500,</p><p>eight editions of the Malleus had been published, and there were five more by</p><p>1520. By the time of Institoris’ death around 1505, his work could be found</p><p>in many libraries and judicial reference collections throughout Europe,</p><p>although especially in Germany.9 The simple presence of a comprehensive,</p><p>authoritative guidebook created a certain uniformity of discourse in subse-</p><p>quent witchcraft debate. Almost immediately, authors of witch-treatises began</p><p>to refer to Institoris and Sprenger as accepted authorities on the subject. In</p><p>an extensive treatise written in the early sixteenth century, the Dominican</p><p>inquisitor Sylvester Prieras treats the Malleus throughout as the authoritative</p><p>witchcraft text, and refers to Institoris as a vir magnus.10 At about the same</p><p>time, Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola praises the Malleus at length in his</p><p>dialogue on witchcraft, and lists its authors along with Augustine and Gregory</p><p>the Great as authorities on the subject.11 Furthermore, as Wolfgang Behringer</p><p>has pointed out, “Although throughout Europe between 1520 and 1580 no</p><p>new edition of the Hexenhammer was published, it remained the authoritative</p><p>work and was present in regional libraries.”12</p><p>When the witchcraft debate heated up again in the second half of the six-</p><p>teenth century, authors no longer bothered to argue about what witchcraft</p><p>INTRODUCTION: CONTESTED CATEGORIES 7</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 7</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>was; instead, they argued over whether it existed. Almost everyone accepted</p><p>the basic terms of the category “witch,” a category substantially similar to that</p><p>presented in the Malleus and in subsequent texts. When, for example, Johann</p><p>Weyer attacked the reality of witchcraft in his De Praestigiis Daemonum, he</p><p>argued explicitly against the witch of the Malleus.13 When Jean Bodin prepared</p><p>his counter-blast, Démonomanie des sorciers, he did nothing to alter the terms of</p><p>the debate; he simply refuted Weyer’s argument.14 At this time, too, the Malleus</p><p>enjoyed a second surge of popularity, as sixteen new editions were produced</p><p>between 1576 and 1670. George Mora estimates that between thirty and fifty</p><p>thousand copies were distributed during this time by publishers in Frankfurt</p><p>and the Rhineland, Lyon, Nuremburg,Venice, and Paris.15</p><p>It is this shift from idiosyncratic text to generally accepted reference</p><p>work that is most perplexing. Even granting that the Malleus offered one of</p><p>the most persuasive constructions of late-medieval witchcraft, this does not</p><p>explain its continued popularity a century later. Moreover, by the late six-</p><p>teenth century there were a number of more recent works, notably those of</p><p>Bodin and Delrio, in which the treatment of witchcraft was as comprehensive</p><p>as the Malleus. To an extent, however, the very antiquity of the Malleus made</p><p>it an attractive text.The Malleus was in this sense a kind of classic of the genre,</p><p>a text whose rough edges were dulled by age. Because of it, sixteenth and</p><p>seventeenth-century authors were no longer compelled to write of the new</p><p>sect of witches; their witches had a short, but well-documented history. The</p><p>Malleus was an agreed-upon starting point for the discourse of witchcraft, a</p><p>position graphically illustrated by the collections of demonological texts that</p><p>began to be produced in the 1580s. These texts were usually multi-volume</p><p>collections of sources drawn from a variety of periods, but all began with the</p><p>Malleus. Thus for generations of scholars, investigations into the problem of</p><p>witchcraft began quite literally with Institoris and Sprenger’s famous text, and</p><p>appropriately too, since the very notion of “witchcraft” owed so much</p><p>in her stomach.”16 When the body was exhumed, half of</p><p>the shroud was indeed found to have disappeared into the gullet of the corpse,</p><p>and the horrified magistrates at once had the body decapitated, and the head</p><p>thrown from the grave, at which time the plague ceased. This narrative is</p><p>intensely traditional: a spirit of the dead is causing disease, which will abate</p><p>only when the corpse is mutilated or destroyed.17 Such an interpretation,</p><p>however, was completely at odds with the accepted teachings of the Church,</p><p>and generations of clerics had condemned such beliefs and practices as super-</p><p>stitious nonsense. Institoris and Sprenger accept the story nonetheless as being</p><p>essentially accurate, provided that the dead woman had been a witch, and that</p><p>the plague was due to divine anger over the town’s earlier willingness to let</p><p>her live and die unmolested, so that when her body was exhumed and muti-</p><p>lated, and her misdeeds exposed in the subsequent inquiry, God’s wrath was</p><p>allayed.18 Although Institoris and Sprenger understand the immediate cause of</p><p>the plague as the anger of a vengeful God rather than the traditional malice of</p><p>a spirit, their world was as fully anthropocentric as that of traditional peasant</p><p>communities: for both, just as disease could be caused by human behavior and</p><p>the violation of normative social boundaries, so a cure might be effected</p><p>through a ritual, communal performance. Further, as Institoris and Sprenger</p><p>suggest, discrepancies between a dead person’s putative social position and</p><p>hidden, rumored, behaviors could result in unwanted post-mortem activity</p><p>until the “secret” was brought to light and the ambiguity was resolved. Thus,</p><p>the authors were able to recast an episode grounded in a traditional under-</p><p>standing of the relationship between the living and the dead in ways accept-</p><p>able to their own understanding of creation, while keeping the underlying</p><p>structures and meanings of the story intact.</p><p>Perhaps the most striking aspect of this account, though, is Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger’s willingness to accept a supernatural cause for an outbreak of the</p><p>plague on the basis of a local “rumor.”This faith in the substantial accuracy of</p><p>96 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 96</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>common reports of cause and effect relationships was necessary, because if the</p><p>inquisitors were not prepared to accept that particular misfortunes were</p><p>caused by witchcraft, prosecutions based upon reports of maleficium would be</p><p>impossible. Institoris and Sprenger, however, had faith not only in a deter-</p><p>ministic model of causation that transcended all boundaries between quotid-</p><p>ian experience and the diabolic and divine, but also in the native ability of man</p><p>to recognize such relationships when they were encountered. They write that</p><p>witchcraft is known by its effects, “for from the effects one arrives at knowl-</p><p>edge of the cause.”19 The effects of witchcraft were so remarkable, so clearly</p><p>not of the mundane material world, that they could not be caused by man</p><p>alone:</p><p>The power of corporal man cannot extend itself to the causation of works of</p><p>this kind, which always has this quality, that the cause along with its natural</p><p>effect is known naturally and without wonder.20</p><p>The appearance of supernatural or preternatural phenomena, then, was suffi-</p><p>cient to warrant the assumption of a supernatural or preternatural cause; in</p><p>essence, Institoris and Sprenger argue that the perception of supranormal</p><p>effects indicates the real presence of the preternatural or supernatural agen-</p><p>cies. Knowledge of witches was gained through an intuitive apprehension of</p><p>what was and was not within the normal bounds of human experience: if illness</p><p>or misfortunes were perceived to be “wonderful” in their scope, severity, or</p><p>swiftness of onslaught, the presence of maleficium, and consequently of witches,</p><p>was all but certain.</p><p>The assumed authority of personal perceptions, eyewitness experience,</p><p>and the testimony of witnesses pervades the arguments of the Malleus. When</p><p>the authors confidently assert that witches were more often women than men,</p><p>they remark that “it is not expedient to deduce arguments to the contrary,</p><p>since experience itself, in addition to verbal testimonies and the witness of</p><p>trustworthy men, makes such things credible.”21 They establish that witches</p><p>have frequent sexual relations with demons, because this has “been seen or</p><p>heard in personal experience or by the relations of trustworthy men.”22 There</p><p>can also be no doubt that some witches “work marvels over the male member,”</p><p>since this, too, “is established by the sight and hearing of many, and from</p><p>common report itself.”23 In these, and many other instances, Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger consistently privilege the argument from experience: the most per-</p><p>suasive arguments were those supported by the greatest weight of experien-</p><p>tial evidence, either in terms of quantity or quality.</p><p>This reliance upon actual experience dictated in turn the forms which</p><p>evidence had to take. Personal experience of witchcraft was not generally</p><p>recorded in propositional statements of belief, but in narratives which related</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 97</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 97</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>the experience itself.24 Narratives of this kind do not normally contain explicit</p><p>statements about the beliefs of the storyteller, which must be inferred by</p><p>readers or auditors. When narratives circulate in fairly restricted, homoge-</p><p>neous communities, the underlying belief systems are easily apprehended; this</p><p>is not at all the case, however, when narratives circulate more widely, and when</p><p>narrator and auditor hold quite different assumptions about the nature of the</p><p>world. Unlike many previous ecclesiastical commentators, who either dis-</p><p>missed popular narratives as fabulous or reinterpreted them beyond recogni-</p><p>tion, Institoris and Sprenger combined a trust in the substantial accuracy of</p><p>such tales with an interpretive system that preserved much of their essential</p><p>meaning. In this way, narrative evidence provided the basis for a conception of</p><p>witchcraft that bridged traditional folk-beliefs and ecclesiastical erudition;</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger created a model of witchcraft which could be expressed</p><p>propositionally in scholastic style, but which rested upon their interpretation</p><p>of a very large number of narrative examples. Indeed, the greater part of the</p><p>evidence in the Malleus consists of their interpretations of narrative. André</p><p>Schnyder counts 279 different exempla in the Malleus, most of which involve</p><p>witchcraft or the devil.25Yet the Malleus is not precisely a collection of exempla,</p><p>because unlike traditional medieval tale collections, such as Nider’s Formicar-</p><p>ius, it does not use narratives chiefly as illustrative moral examples, but as</p><p>proofs sufficient in themselves.</p><p>For instance, Institoris and Sprenger advise that persons whose minds are</p><p>turned toward love or hatred by witchcraft should fortify themselves with daily</p><p>invocations of their guardian angel and frequent visits to the shrines of the</p><p>saints. After two examples of the efficacy of these procedures, the authors are</p><p>quite satisfied that they have supplied sufficient proof of their claims:</p><p>Wherefore it deserves to be concluded that the aforesaid remedies are most</p><p>certain against a disease of this kind, and thus whosoever uses these weapons is</p><p>most certain to be freed.26</p><p>So much does the Malleus depend upon evidence of this kind that the logic of</p><p>the inquisitors becomes at times completely indistinguishable from the logic</p><p>of their stories. When they set out to prove that the regular application of</p><p>sacramentals may reliably ward off the evil powers of witches, they marshal a</p><p>long series of narratives as evidence.27 In particular they mention the mayor</p><p>of Wiesenthal who fortified himself every Sunday</p><p>with holy water and blessed</p><p>salt. One Sunday, however, in his haste to attend a wedding, he neglected this</p><p>precaution and was immediately and painfully bewitched. This coincidence</p><p>proved to the mayor, and to the inquisitors, the efficacy of his customary sacra-</p><p>mental defenses and the reality of witchcraft: the mayor’s malady was known</p><p>to be witchcraft because it struck when he was not sacramentally protected;</p><p>98 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 98</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>the sacramentals were known to be an effective defense against witchcraft for</p><p>exactly the same reason.</p><p>Although such an argument was not strictly logical because a syllogism</p><p>cannot provide proof of its premise, Institoris and Sprenger accepted the logic</p><p>of personal experience and its narratives as a fully sufficient arbiter of truth.</p><p>In their minds, as in the narratives to which they appealed, the appearance</p><p>of causal connections demonstrated their existence, and by accepting such</p><p>narrative episodes as valid evidence in themselves, Institoris and Sprenger</p><p>were able to elevate the discourse of village magic to the level of learned</p><p>disputation.</p><p>In this discourse, the voice of collective opinion or common report was</p><p>every bit as important as specific eyewitness accounts, and so Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger were singularly sensitive to the value of rumor. 28 Indeed, local</p><p>rumors provided such a reliable indication of the presence of witchcraft that</p><p>when such rumors reached the authorities, they were sufficient in themselves</p><p>to warrant an investigation. Most investigations, Institoris tells us, begin in this</p><p>way, without any specific accusations.29 His sample declaration which would</p><p>formally initiate the inquisitorial process testifies to the centrality of rumor in</p><p>the hunt for witches:</p><p>It often comes to the ears of such and such official or judge, of such and such</p><p>a place, borne by public gossip and produced by noisy reports, that such and</p><p>such a person from such and such a place has done such and such things per-</p><p>taining to maleficia against the faith and the common good of the state.30</p><p>When rumors coalesced around particular individuals, they could lead to spe-</p><p>cific charges. Much of the evidence Institoris assembled against Helena</p><p>Scheuberin at Innsbruck amounted to very little more than rumor. The first</p><p>charge against her states that she is</p><p>defamed particularly regarding the death of a certain knight, Spiess by name,</p><p>and this not even in Innsbruck but all over the place throughout the surround-</p><p>ing regions, and especially among the noble and powerful.Whether he perished</p><p>by poison or witchcraft there remains some doubt. However it is generally</p><p>rumored that it was from maleficium because the witch had been devoted to</p><p>evil-doing from her youth.31</p><p>Having a bad reputation, mala fama, was almost a requirement for real witches</p><p>as far as Institoris was concerned, and provided an important link between</p><p>moral delinquency and maleficent magic. A bad reputation might encompass</p><p>a wide range of moral failings and social deviance, and provided the necessary</p><p>ground for more sinister rumors of witchcraft to take root.32</p><p>Rumors provided witch-hunters with the perfect narrative basis for their</p><p>inquiries. It is often said that accusations of witchcraft came principally from</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 99</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 99</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>the lower ranks of society and not from the elite, and in a general sense this</p><p>seems to be true; but in an environment where vague rumors of maleficia were</p><p>swirling around, it may also be that concrete accusations were constructed by</p><p>prosecutors through the examination of rumor-bearing informants.33 It is a</p><p>characteristic of rumor narratives that they become more detailed, more</p><p>rooted in local conditions, and more attached to specific points of reference,</p><p>as they are challenged and interrogated.34 Further, as witnesses are required</p><p>to supply increasing levels of detail, they become increasingly amenable to the</p><p>guidance of the interrogator, and begin to look to the forms and subtext of</p><p>the examiner’s questions to provide the bases for their answers.35 The avail-</p><p>ability of rumor legends, then, may have determined the extent to which an</p><p>investigator was able to impose his own conception of witchcraft upon locally</p><p>divergent cases. If this were the case, then the activities of the inquisitor begin</p><p>to assume familiar contours: he becomes the catalyst which transforms suspi-</p><p>cion and diverse experience into an actionable charge focused upon a single</p><p>person. In modern rural France, this role is assumed by the “unwitcher” who</p><p>occupies a crucial position between the bewitched victim and the alleged</p><p>witch.36 As authorities agitate the community, and the level of anxiety rises,</p><p>the amount of rumor in circulation rises as well; eventually, such “hot” legends</p><p>may become reified into a set of consistent, specific accusations.37</p><p>From rumors, memorates, and denunciations and confessions couched</p><p>in traditional terms, Institoris and Sprenger constructed their image of witch-</p><p>craft. As inquisitors and priests they were uniquely well positioned to hear an</p><p>astonishing range of opinion and narrative concerning witches, and were</p><p>equally obliged to make sense of it all. The witch-beliefs of the Malleus draw</p><p>heavily upon traditional beliefs and previously constituted categories which</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger reinterpreted in a manner consistent with a theologi-</p><p>cally Thomist view of the world. The success of this project was due less to</p><p>their theological sophistication and rigorous logic (neither of which is espe-</p><p>cially evident), than to their sensitivity to the world picture of their inform-</p><p>ants. They did not simply demonize popular belief, but tried instead to</p><p>reconstruct it for their own purposes. Their picture of witchcraft was suc-</p><p>cessful precisely because it corresponded so closely with the ideas of the less</p><p>well educated. Other demonologists treated witchcraft as a sect, worse than,</p><p>but otherwise similar to, other heresies; because of their epistemological and</p><p>metaphysical assumptions, however, Institoris and Sprenger understood witch-</p><p>craft much more as did the common man, as part of a spectrum of human</p><p>interaction with preternatural and supernatural powers. For this reason,</p><p>although the model of witchcraft in the Malleus is certainly a composite, con-</p><p>structed from several different but interrelated idea-clusters, the fit between</p><p>this model and supranormal events as they were reported was closer than the</p><p>100 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 100</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>competing models of other learned observers, and was thus more persuasive.</p><p>Edwin Ardener has proposed that categories have a center of gravity, a zone</p><p>most characteristic of their qualities, and that the “density gradients” of cate-</p><p>gories are related in some way to frequency of association or interaction</p><p>with reality.38 If this is the case, Institoris and Sprenger’s vision of witchcraft</p><p>was more successful than those of their competitors because its center of</p><p>gravity was more closely aligned with the perceived reality of their</p><p>contemporaries.39</p><p>To go beyond this sort of general statement, and to try to see exactly</p><p>how Institoris and Sprenger constructed their categories of “witch” and “witch-</p><p>craft” is more difficult. Like all learned witch-theorists of the late Middle Ages,</p><p>they worked with reference to rules, evidence, and already extant symbols and</p><p>categories: first, they accepted a set of more or less rigid assumptions about</p><p>the world and its creator with which any construction of witchcraft had to be</p><p>consistent; second, they had evidence, principally in narrative form, about a</p><p>number of identifiable</p><p>individuals whose antisocial behavior or normative</p><p>boundary transgressions were defined by reference to maleficia and related</p><p>categories; third, to make sense of this evidence, they had available a quite</p><p>nebulous cluster of symbols, beliefs, and narrative structures associated with</p><p>magic and supranormal beings which could be reordered in terms of any</p><p>number of new categorical constructs. This is, of course, too schematic a map</p><p>of the field of late-medieval witchcraft, but nevertheless an attempt to analyze</p><p>late-medieval witchcraft in terms of its constituent categories and symbols</p><p>seems worthwhile.40 Not only is this a reasonably clear path to tread, but the</p><p>late-medieval debate over witches centered upon just such problems of cate-</p><p>gory ascription and definition. In the analysis that follows, we will look at five</p><p>interrelated categories in turn, each of which appears repeatedly in late-</p><p>medieval demonological discourse: the processions of spectral women, heresy</p><p>and the diabolic cult, maleficium, superstition, and gender.</p><p>“Good women” and bad: strigae, lamiae, and the bonae res</p><p>Of all the beliefs out of which constructions of witchcraft were formed, the</p><p>most unfamiliar to modern readers are quite probably those associated with</p><p>various sorts of nocturnal female spirits. These beings inhabited the world of</p><p>medieval peasants, for whom they were part of an extensive traditional lore</p><p>with antecedents that reached well back into the pre-Christian past. To edu-</p><p>cated clerics of the Middle Ages, such traditions were almost as alien as they</p><p>appear to the modern researcher, and so they, like us, sought out interpreta-</p><p>tions which would make sense of them, some of which were gradually assim-</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 101</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 101</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>ilated with notions of maleficium and heresy, and ultimately provided paradigms</p><p>by which the larger phenomenon of witchcraft was understood.</p><p>Scattered throughout a variety of medieval sources are tantalizing hints</p><p>of a widespread tradition about the fantastic nocturnal escapades of women</p><p>and female spirits. According to the disapproving accounts of churchmen,</p><p>some women believed that they secretly left their homes at night to attend the</p><p>court of a goddess or spirit, often identified as Diana, and rode with her on</p><p>lengthy processions, traveling great distances in the blink of an eye.These ideas</p><p>smacked of paganism, idolatry, or worse, and are accordingly condemned in</p><p>the canon Episcopi, first recorded in the early tenth century in the penitential</p><p>of Regino, abbot of Prüm.41 In the following century, a well-known canonist,</p><p>Burchard, bishop of Worms, repeated Regino’s warnings in his confessional</p><p>interrogatory, Corrector et Medicus:</p><p>Have you believed or participated in that infidelity, which some wicked women,</p><p>turned back after Satan, seduced by illusions and phantoms of demons, believe</p><p>and confess: that with Diana, goddess of the pagans, and an innumerable mul-</p><p>titude of women, they ride on certain beasts and traverse great distances of the</p><p>earth in the silence of the dead of night, obey her commands as if she were their</p><p>mistress, and on certain nights are called to her service?42</p><p>If anyone believes such things, and, Burchard adds, “an innumerable multitude,</p><p>deceived by this false opinion, believe these things to be true,” then she must</p><p>do penance for two years.</p><p>Burchard, Regino, and other early-medieval ecclesiastics were all agreed</p><p>that there was nothing substantial behind these tales of rustic women, and that</p><p>nobody actually left their homes at night to gad about with spirits. It was rather</p><p>the deceptions of the devil that were to blame: at the same time as he walked</p><p>abroad at night with his fellows in the guise of Diana and her train, he sent</p><p>dreams to poor ignorant women so that they would believe themselves to be</p><p>traveling in the place of the demons. Nonetheless, this clerical skepticism</p><p>should not be interpreted as tolerance because it was also quite clear that these</p><p>beliefs were sinful, superstitious, and diabolically inspired. Insofar as these</p><p>women believed themselves to go voluntarily, they participated in the demons’</p><p>designs.Thus, although the nocturnal processions of spectral women were illu-</p><p>sory, they were also quite clearly linked to the devil, a link that could be</p><p>expanded in different contexts.</p><p>Exactly what constituted this traditional belief is difficult to say, since the</p><p>evidence available is scattered and contradictory, and suggests a group of more</p><p>or less related components rather than a single, coherent belief-system.43 It is</p><p>remotely possible that the consistent references to Diana indicate the presence</p><p>of a relict pagan cult, but it seems more likely that the perception of broadly</p><p>102 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 102</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>similar motifs in a variety of traditions provided the attractive force neces-</p><p>sary to create an amalgam of beliefs, roughly centered around the nocturnal</p><p>activities of women and female spirits.44 Certainly the variety of names by</p><p>whom the leader of this host was known suggests conflation of this sort, since</p><p>Herodias, Abundia, Satia, Holda, Perchta, and others, all supervised proces-</p><p>sions of night-traveling women, exactly as did Diana.</p><p>Neither is it entirely certain just what these beings and their followers</p><p>were wont to do on their evening rides. Some accounts suggest simply that</p><p>they rode to some gathering place where they danced and feasted, and then</p><p>returned home. In the thirteenth century, however,William of Paris (d. 1249),</p><p>added that Domina Abundia and her ladies were believed to enter houses at</p><p>night and bring abundance and riches when they found offerings prepared for</p><p>them.45 In his Corrector, Burchard mentioned a similar belief connected with</p><p>the Fates or “the sisters,” who were said to come into houses at certain times</p><p>of the year and bring good luck if they found food and drink waiting for them.46</p><p>Neither Burchard nor William identified these ladies with Diana and her train,</p><p>but other authors made this connection explicit. In the Romance of the Rose</p><p>(c. 1270), Nature remarks that since women are credulous and emotional, they</p><p>are especially susceptible to illusions and phantoms:</p><p>As a result, many people in their folly think themselves sorcerers by night, wan-</p><p>dering with Lady Abundance. And they say that in the whole world every third</p><p>child born is of such disposition that three times a week he goes just as destiny</p><p>leads him; that such people push into all houses; that they fear neither keys nor</p><p>bars, but enter by cracks, cat-hatches, and crevices; that their souls leave their</p><p>bodies and go with good ladies into strange places and through houses.47</p><p>John of Frankfurt, writing in the early fifteenth century, provides a similar,</p><p>albeit more detailed, warning against the dangers of these beliefs. He advises</p><p>that a Christian should most especially flee, lest he should come to believe this,</p><p>what old women report at people’s births: that certain goddesses come and</p><p>place a destiny of good or bad fortune upon a father’s offspring and predict a</p><p>death by hanging or by the sword, or great honor, or something similar which</p><p>shall definitely come about . . . And certain people say that if a boy is born with</p><p>a caul, that he is one of those who traverse great distances in the space of one</p><p>night, vulgarly, “die farn leude” [the wayfarers]. In short, people afflicted by this</p><p>insanity give the service which ought to be God’s alone to those who are really</p><p>demons, falsely believing them to be the dispensers of good things. So some</p><p>even do on the five feast days of the four seasons and on the night preceding</p><p>the ember days.48</p><p>Although they are scattered over several centuries, taken together these</p><p>accounts suggest a reasonably consistent body</p><p>of belief, closely related to the</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 103</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 103</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>rural European “fairy cults” described by nineteenth and twentieth-century</p><p>folklorists. In its medieval form, the tradition centered upon a belief in troops</p><p>of spectral women, led by some specific but variously named mistress, which</p><p>visited houses at certain times of the year and brought either good fortune or</p><p>ill, depending upon their reception.49 These beings might also determine a</p><p>person’s fate at birth, and claimed a certain number of people, sometimes up</p><p>to a third of humanity, as their own.50 Those chosen, who appear to have been</p><p>mainly women, accompanied the trouping “fairies” on their rounds, paid court</p><p>to their mistress, and attended their revels. According to most accounts, these</p><p>women believed that they participated bodily in such activities, although some,</p><p>like Jean de Meun, represent the night-travelers as entering trance-like</p><p>dreams, knowing full well that they accompanied the goddess in spirit only.</p><p>Like their mistress, these peripatetic female specters were known by many</p><p>names – fays, fates, good women, and good sisters – but for the sake of con-</p><p>venience, and to avoid the anachronistic connotations of the word “fairy,” I will</p><p>subsequently refer to them as the bonae res, the “good things,” a term used by</p><p>the Dominican inquisitor, Stephen of Bourbon (d. 1261), in his description of</p><p>the phenomenon.51</p><p>The full range of traditions with which the bonae res were associated was,</p><p>however, considerably more extensive than this generalized overview would</p><p>suggest. Sometimes the restless dead accompanied the bonae res on their nightly</p><p>rounds, and both Holda and Perchta were occasionally known to lead the</p><p>Furious Horde.52 The nocturnal processions of women were also related to a</p><p>set of more sinister beliefs – legends of female spirits who stole into houses</p><p>to kill children and work other crimes. Such beings were often called lamiae,</p><p>their name derived conventionally from laniare (to rend) and their distressing</p><p>habit of tearing children into bits. In the thirteenth century, Johannes de Janua</p><p>gave this etymology in his widely read Catholicon, and added that “old women</p><p>pretend that lamiae enter houses through closed doors, kill infants and tear</p><p>them to pieces, and afterwards restore them to life, and they have the faces of</p><p>people but the bodies of beasts.”53 Such beings had clear literary antecedents</p><p>in the classical Roman figure of the strix, the malevolent, bird-like, female</p><p>monsters of Ovid and Apuleius, but medieval authors often associated lamiae,</p><p>in less monstrous forms but with equally sinister intent, with the troupes of</p><p>bonae res.54 William of Paris, for example, discusses lamiae immediately after</p><p>his account of Abundia and her ladies, and explains that both are essentially</p><p>beings of the same type:</p><p>You ought to understand in the same manner those other evil spirits which the</p><p>vulgar call stryges and lamiae and which appear at night in houses in which there</p><p>are nursing babes, which they seem to tear to pieces when snatched from their</p><p>104 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 104</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>cradles or to roast in the fire. They appear in the form of old women; however,</p><p>they are neither true old women, nor is it possible that children are truly</p><p>devoured.55</p><p>William states further that although these monsters appeared in the guise of</p><p>old women, they were really demons who, as spirits, could not truly consume</p><p>infants. They were, however, occasionally permitted to kill children to punish</p><p>their parents. Demons were happy to oblige, because in so doing they inspired</p><p>fear which led to superstitious idolatry – for exactly the same reason as the</p><p>demon impersonating Domina Abundia provided good luck.</p><p>Several centuries earlier, Burchard had made the same connection</p><p>between the monstrous lamiae and the more benign bonae res.With words iden-</p><p>tical to those he applied to the followers of the bonae res, he condemns the</p><p>belief of women who think that they go out at night on murderous errands in</p><p>spectral form:</p><p>Have you believed what many women, turned back to Satan, believe and affirm</p><p>to be true: do you believe that in the silence of the quiet night when you have</p><p>gone to bed and your husband lies on your bosom, that while you remain in</p><p>bodily form you can go out by closed doors and are able to cross the spaces of</p><p>the world with others deceived by the same error, and without visible weapons</p><p>slay persons who have been baptized and redeemed by the blood of Christ, and</p><p>cook and eat their flesh, and in place of their hearts put straw or wood or some-</p><p>thing of the sort and having eaten them make them live again and give an inter-</p><p>val of life?56</p><p>Quite clearly, both Burchard and William of Paris interpreted belief in lamiae</p><p>and similar creatures under the general rubric provided by the canon Episcopi,</p><p>and with good reason. Given the devil’s well-attested power to produce noc-</p><p>turnal delusions and phantoms, and his desire to provoke superstitious, idol-</p><p>atrous belief, the canon provided a useful conceptual template through which</p><p>a great many vaguely similar beliefs could be understood and condemned.</p><p>Such learned incredulity, although common, was not universal. At least</p><p>a few observers found it difficult to dismiss widespread and persistent tes-</p><p>timony as the result of diabolically inspired delusions, especially as the</p><p>canon Episcopi did not seem to bear directly upon tales of lamiae and the like.</p><p>Gervaise of Tilbury (d. 1235) was perhaps the most credulous of thirteenth-</p><p>century writers: he declared that many women, like the women of Diana’s</p><p>company, claimed that they went out at night in the company of lamiae</p><p>and flew across remote parts of the world.57 Unlike the more benign night-</p><p>travelers, however, they did not bring good luck when they entered houses at</p><p>night; instead they oppressed sleepers, moved infants from place to place,</p><p>drank human blood, and caused serious illness.58 Although Gervaise acknowl-</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 105</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 105</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>edged that some claimed that “these nocturnal fancies arise from timidity and</p><p>melancholy, as in the insane,” while others “assert that they have seen such</p><p>imaginations in dreams so vividly that they seemed to be awake,” he could</p><p>accept neither explanation because the weight of his personal experience told</p><p>against it. He knew reliable women, his neighbors, who had seen these beings</p><p>abroad at night; he had heard women confess that they went out at night with</p><p>the lamiae and molested infants; he had seen women bearing wounds which</p><p>corresponded exactly with those given to nocturnal apparitions in the form of</p><p>cats by vigilant watchmen. All of which told strongly against the delusional</p><p>nature of such creatures, which should accordingly be combated by pious</p><p>means.59 The grounds for Gervaise’s credulity should be noted: he was not</p><p>simply “superstitious,” but rather convinced by the weight of experiential evi-</p><p>dence that these beings were real, an epistemological stance identical to that</p><p>of later witch-hunters.</p><p>Originally, perhaps, these several different species of night-travelers, the</p><p>lamiae and the bonae res, had been relatively distinct. It is also possible that both</p><p>destructive strigae and more benign spirits were once logical counterparts</p><p>within a more comprehensive system of belief, much as the benandanti appear</p><p>to have had the malandanti as their perpetual foes. Among learned clerics,</p><p>Stephen of Bourbon taught that while strigae and the bonae res were equally</p><p>imaginary, they were otherwise well differentiated: strigae rode wolves at night</p><p>and killed children, but</p><p>the bonae res had less fierce steeds and were, at worst,</p><p>petty vandals. The name “Holda” may also point to such a distinction, for it</p><p>suggests those positive attributes associated with the words “kind,” or “gra-</p><p>cious”; indeed, the medieval Holda was so well considered as to be occasion-</p><p>ally identified with the Virgin Mary.60 Likewise, the common German word</p><p>for witch in the Middle Ages was unholda, the good spirit’s inverted counter-</p><p>part. Unfortunately, more concrete evidence for such a system is hard to find,</p><p>and the evidence provided by names is ambiguous since it is also true that</p><p>words such as holda or bilwis might stand equally for fairies or for malevolent</p><p>witches.61 In any event, for most learned clerics, and probably for most</p><p>common folk as well, the various spectral trains of nocturnal women had</p><p>obvious similarities and were very easily conflated. John of Salisbury, writing</p><p>in the mid-twelfth century, provides an early example of exactly this kind of</p><p>assimilation, when he writes about those women who say that they followed</p><p>“a certain woman who shines by night, or Herodias, or the mistress of the</p><p>night” to assemblies and banquets. There, these women assert that</p><p>they are employed with the tasks of various kinds of service: some are handed</p><p>over for punishment, some others are elevated for their renown, each as they</p><p>deserve. Moreover, infants are exposed to lamiae, and some having been indis-</p><p>106 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 106</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>criminately torn to pieces are added to those already thrown into the stomach</p><p>by ravenous maws; while some are tossed back by the mercy of the ruler and</p><p>replaced in their cradles.62</p><p>By the fifteenth century, this failure to discriminate between different</p><p>types of night-going women had become general: instead of describing the</p><p>lamiae and the bonae res as different but related components of peasant belief,</p><p>learned commentators constructed a single complex, containing elements</p><p>drawn from both traditions. It is this conflation of strigae with the more benign</p><p>followers of Diana or Abundia that informs the witch debates of the late Middle</p><p>Ages. Martin of Arles provides a fairly typical fifteenth-century account of the</p><p>nefarious activities of these night-flying women in his catalogue of rustic super-</p><p>stitions. Among these, Martin describes the Broxae, women who claimed to fly</p><p>through the air at night and transform themselves into animals. He acknowl-</p><p>edges that these are the women whose beliefs are condemned by the canon</p><p>Episcopi, but he goes on to emphasize the criminal nature of their imaginary</p><p>excursions. Any distinction between the bonae res and the malevolent striga is</p><p>completely invisible to Martin:</p><p>Whence some little women, devoted to Satan, seduced by the illusions of the</p><p>devil, believe and confess that they ride during the hours of the night with</p><p>Diana, goddess of the pagans, or Venus, in company with a great multitude of</p><p>women, and do other abominations, for example, tear away babes from the</p><p>breasts of their mothers, carry them off and eat them, enter houses through</p><p>chimneys or windows, and disturb the inhabitants in various ways, all of which</p><p>happens exclusively in their imaginations.63</p><p>The common people greatly feared these women, and rang bells and lit fires</p><p>at crossroads and in the fields on the night of St. John’s day, lest witches fly</p><p>overhead and cause thunder and storms. This, Martin remarks, “I have seen</p><p>with my own eyes.”64</p><p>The beliefs surrounding the troupes of night-traveling women thus</p><p>occupy a somewhat paradoxical place in the late-medieval witch debate. As</p><p>Norman Cohn recognized, elements drawn from this tradition were necessary,</p><p>if the newly (re)constructed witch category was to be truly threatening.</p><p>Without the ability to travel at preternatural speed, it was just not possible to</p><p>envision hundreds or thousands of women assembling at night and carrying</p><p>out their nefarious deeds without causing an obvious commotion.65 In addi-</p><p>tion, although both heretics and malefici could certainly be alarming, there</p><p>were recognized and effective procedures for dealing with them. Assimilation</p><p>with the monstrous striga and lamia of folklore, however, resulted in hosts of</p><p>newly demonic witches whose terrible occult powers and ruthlessly destruc-</p><p>tive agenda required new and more energetic measures to combat them.</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 107</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 107</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>The contrary, however, was also true: where this assimilation was incom-</p><p>plete, as was the case especially in southern Europe, maleficae remained well</p><p>differentiated from the spectral women of the night, and “witchcraft” did not</p><p>become a critical problem. It was equally the case that constructions of witch-</p><p>craft in which these night-travelers were too centrally placed were not con-</p><p>vincing, both because they ran squarely counter to the always troublesome</p><p>canon Episcopi, and because the testimony of suspect “witches” themselves</p><p>strained credulity.66</p><p>These difficulties are best seen in the witch-treatises themselves. At one</p><p>end of the spectrum, Alphonso de Spina tried, probably harder than anyone</p><p>else, to push the traditional category distinctions of the canon Episcopi far</p><p>enough to accommodate fully diabolized witches.67 In his opinion, the Bruxae</p><p>or Xorguinae of popular superstition were demons who deceived old women</p><p>in their dreams, making them think that they traveled by night, killed children,</p><p>and did other evil deeds. Although these women were deceived, Alphonso</p><p>makes it plain they readily participated in this evil, and would commit their</p><p>crimes in reality if only they could:</p><p>The truth of the matter, however, is that when these evil persons wish to use</p><p>these most wicked fictions they consecrate themselves with words and unguents</p><p>to the devil, and the devil immediately receives them in his work and takes the</p><p>form and the imagination of every one of them and leads them to the places</p><p>which they wish, although their bodies remain insensible and covered by the</p><p>shadow of the devil so that no one can see them, and when the devil sees in</p><p>their imaginations that they have completed all they wish, not withdrawing from</p><p>their imaginations the diabolical fancies which they see, he leads back their</p><p>imaginations, joining them with their own moving bodies.68</p><p>In this account, Alphonso comes very close to endorsing the very belief he</p><p>purports to condemn, since the process he describes – in which the “imagi-</p><p>nations” of women wander about with the devil – sounds suspiciously like the</p><p>actual separation of body and soul. Instead of harmless delusions created by</p><p>the devil, women created their own monstrous fantasies, which Satan gave the</p><p>semblance of reality. He not only transported their figura et fantasia to remote</p><p>places, he also thoughtfully concealed their dreaming bodies while he did so,</p><p>so that annoying nay-sayers could not point to the obvious evidence of snoring</p><p>women to discredit their stories. But, for Alphonso, these women do no real,</p><p>concrete harm; instead their crime is heresy. Thus, the women of the canon</p><p>Episcopi who assert that they follow Diana at night are not merely supersti-</p><p>tious; rather, they are devil-worshiping heretics who are justly consigned to</p><p>the stake, since their heresy consists not only of the invocation to the devil</p><p>which precedes their dreams, but also of the dreams themselves, for which</p><p>108 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 108</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>they are apparently fully liable. For example, Alphonso remarks that in</p><p>Gascony and Dauphiné there are great numbers of these perverse women who</p><p>say that they assemble at night in a deserted place “where there is a boar on a</p><p>rock</p><p>which is commonly called ‘el Boch de Biterne,’ and that they meet there</p><p>with lighted candles and adore the boar, kissing him on his anus.”69 For this,</p><p>he continues, many had been arrested by the inquisition and burned – there</p><p>was even a painting commemorating the event in the house of the inquisitor</p><p>of Toulouse, which Spina had personally admired.</p><p>Alphonso de Spina gave the delusions of night-traveling women their</p><p>greatest practical significance. It was, in his view, no longer sufficient simply</p><p>to condemn as superstitious those who believed that their dreams were real;</p><p>the dreams themselves were criminal and deserved severe punishment. It is</p><p>difficult to see, however, how such a model of witchcraft could be especially</p><p>threatening to the populace at large, since no matter how much these heretics</p><p>were responsible for their fantasies, they were still just fantasies, and not the</p><p>cause of real harm. Furthermore, witchcraft so defined could neither be sep-</p><p>arated from notions about nor the persons of the women who believed that</p><p>they rode with the bonae res, and there is no indication that medieval people</p><p>in general found either particularly threatening or bothersome.</p><p>The experience of Nicholas of Cusa, the great reformer and theologian,</p><p>provides a case in point. In 1457, while traveling through the French Alps, he</p><p>met two old women who had been imprisoned for witchcraft and threatened</p><p>with the stake.They told him that they were in the service of Domina Abundia,</p><p>and went with her to revels where there was laughing, dancing, and celebra-</p><p>tions, and where hairy wild men devoured unbaptized children. By their own</p><p>admission these women were apostate Christians, since they had vowed them-</p><p>selves to “Richella” in return for good fortune and had promised to abstain</p><p>from all Christian observances. Nicholas at once recognized that these women</p><p>had been deceived by the devil in their dreams, and that, although grievous</p><p>sinners, they were not maleficae. In the Lenten sermon in which he gives this</p><p>account, he concludes that sometimes the devil</p><p>deludes some old and infatuated woman, and leads her on so that she is cap-</p><p>tured and tortured as a witch, and God permits this on account of her sins, and</p><p>then very great evils follow, because of the death of an innocent. Therefore</p><p>beware, lest wanting so much to be rid of evil, yet more evil is garnered.70</p><p>Accordingly, Nicholas arranged for these “decrepit and delirious” women to</p><p>receive penances and be released. Their dreams, no matter how bizarre, did</p><p>no real harm; the women were not, therefore, maleficae, and so their perse-</p><p>cution was both pointless and wrong. It is true that they had made an unholy</p><p>bargain with the devil, but they had been tricked into doing so, and were, in</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 109</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 109</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>any case, less than fully culpable by reason of their age, poverty, gross igno-</p><p>rance, and failing mental health.</p><p>Despite their differences, Alphonso de Spina and Nicholas of Cusa both</p><p>accepted an essentially conservative and traditional view of witchcraft, in</p><p>which the experiences of women who followed the bonae res were basically</p><p>imaginary. For others, this kind of faith in ecclesiastical tradition seemed no</p><p>longer possible. Alonso de Madrigal, bishop of Ávila, was one prominent</p><p>churchman whose initial stance of traditional skepticism was shaken, and</p><p>finally demolished, by the weight of circumstantial evidence. In his Commen-</p><p>tary on Genesis (c. 1436),Alonso had remarked that in his region of Spain there</p><p>were women who through certain superstitious observances and unguents</p><p>believed themselves transported to sumptuous feasts in distant places.71 Upon</p><p>investigation, however, it was determined that while these women thought</p><p>they were abroad, they were really lying motionless in a stupor, completely</p><p>insensible of their actual surroundings and conscious of neither words, nor</p><p>heavy blows, nor even burns.Thus, their journeys were nothing but the deceits</p><p>of the devil. Several years later, in his Commentary on Matthew (c. 1440),Alonso</p><p>had completely changed his mind. He now maintained</p><p>that what is said of certain women who run about through many places at night</p><p>is true. For this has often been discovered and judicially punished. And some,</p><p>wanting to imitate their infamous ceremonies, have incurred great distress. Nor</p><p>can it be said that this happens in sleep, since not only those who have them-</p><p>selves undergone this, but many others, too, have testified to this thing. Nor is</p><p>there any reason that this should be doubted, though it is true that among the</p><p>simple much that is false has been mixed up with some truth, because demons</p><p>desire to do harm not only to morals, but also to faith.72</p><p>In this passage,Alonso tries explicitly to convince his readers that his dramatic</p><p>about face was justified, and that women really do fly through the air at night.</p><p>Like Gervaise of Tilbury, his newfound credulity rested upon the value of tes-</p><p>timony and personal experience, which had finally become too compelling for</p><p>him to dismiss. For example, although he acknowledges that there are theo-</p><p>logical arguments to the contrary, he argues that demons have the power to</p><p>carry people from place to place since “this is so manifest, that it would be</p><p>imprudent to deny it, when we have met a thousand witnesses who have been</p><p>made aware of this.”73 Rather than dismiss the unanimous verdict of so many</p><p>witnesses, it was now easier for Alonso to revise the meaning of the canon</p><p>itself, such that it now forbade only the belief that women rode with Diana</p><p>and similar spirits, and not belief in the night ride itself.</p><p>For many other witch-theorists, such a deliberate misreading of the</p><p>canon was just as unacceptable as was complete skepticism, which created a</p><p>110 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 110</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>serious problem for those more inclined to consider arguments on both sides</p><p>of the issue. Around 1460, in a treatise dedicated to Francesco Sforza, the</p><p>Dominican theologian Girolamo Visconti took time to ponder whether</p><p>“lamias, which the vulgar call strias” go to the ludus in fact or in imagination</p><p>only.74 As he had encountered it, witchcraft was a composite of beliefs drawn</p><p>from popular traditions, maleficia, and demonic heresy, although the various</p><p>parts of this whole were so poorly integrated in his mind that he never quite</p><p>convinces himself, or his readers, of its objective reality. Witches go to their</p><p>assemblies, or ludi, riding on broomsticks or demons in the shape of wolves;</p><p>they do this for base, material motives, in order to gain money, revenge, or</p><p>success in love; once there, they adore the “lady of the game” as a goddess, kill</p><p>baptized infants, work black magic, and feast upon oxen which their mistress</p><p>then magically restores to life.75 To determine how much of this is real,</p><p>Visconti marshals evidence and arguments, both for and against. On one side</p><p>there is the testimony of the accused witches themselves and of witnesses who</p><p>have seen these women abroad, the evidence of undeniable magical harm, and</p><p>the undoubted power of the devil to do marvelous things. On the other, there</p><p>is the testimony of canonical authorities and numerous respected churchmen,</p><p>the fact that the women can be seen sleeping even while they claim to be riding</p><p>at night, and the incredible nature of their claims.</p><p>Visconti’s solution is interesting. The evidence of authority, and of the</p><p>physical bodies of sleeping women, is irrefutable, and such “witches” do not</p><p>really go to the ludus, rather, they, and those who think that they see them, are</p><p>deceived by the devil. At the same time, because demons have the power to</p><p>transport people from place to place at fantastic speeds, and because theolo-</p><p>gians are agreed that incubi and succubi are</p><p>real, it is possible that women might</p><p>attend these nocturnal assemblies and mingle physically with demons,</p><p>“because, following logic, many things are possible, which are nonetheless</p><p>false.”76 This is an extremely half-hearted endorsement of the canon Episcopi,</p><p>but Visconti will not go further. He does not seem able to reject the validity</p><p>of the canon out of hand, because his understanding of witchcraft is so firmly</p><p>rooted in testimony and narratives concerning the bonae res and their fol-</p><p>lowers, as his “witches” are still recognizably the same as the women con-</p><p>demned by the canon. Nonetheless, despite Girolamo’s reluctance to do away</p><p>with the canon completely, he provides the intellectual basis for that move, for</p><p>once the reality of the Sabbat was accepted as a possibility, a sufficient quan-</p><p>tity of circumstantial evidence would establish it as fact.</p><p>The crux of the problem was the power of the devil: did he give sub-</p><p>stance to the claims of alleged night-travelers, or merely defraud their minds</p><p>and senses? Confusion on this score was nothing new. Back in the thirteenth</p><p>century, in another of Stephen of Bourbon’s stories, a priest was invited out</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 111</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 111</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>for a ride with the bonae res, and rode a wooden beam to a great feast attended</p><p>by many beautiful people. When he made the sign of the cross, the glorious</p><p>party vanished, and the naked priest was discovered in the wine cellar of a</p><p>local lord and narrowly avoided being hanged as a thief.77 Stephen’s expressed</p><p>purpose was to mock superstitious belief, but this same exemplum could also</p><p>demonstrate the real power of the devil to transport people invisibly into</p><p>locked rooms while at the same time deceiving their senses. In other words,</p><p>Stephen’s narrative made exactly the same point as did Girolamo Visconti: such</p><p>things are possible, even if they do not usually happen.78</p><p>Around 1470 the Dominican theologian Jordanes de Bergamo took</p><p>Girolamo’s argument to its logical conclusion in his Questio de Strigis.79 “Strigae</p><p>or strigones,”, he writes, are “men and women who run about at night over long</p><p>distances or enter houses by the power of demons, who also are said to bewitch</p><p>children.”80 Once again, this conception of witchcraft centers around the com-</p><p>panies of night-traveling women, and so, like Girolamo, Jordanes must address</p><p>the problem of the canon Episcopi head on. His solution is simple: where the</p><p>canon specifically forbids belief, in animal transformations for example, the</p><p>devil accomplishes this through illusions; in all other cases, witches may do</p><p>things in reality or in their dreams, depending upon the mood of the devil.</p><p>Thus, when baleful strigae suck the blood of children at night, this may be the</p><p>devil acting in some woman’s stead, or it may be the woman herself, trans-</p><p>ported and otherwise abetted by Satan.</p><p>This “half-a-loaf ” approach to witchcraft, in which, as Jordanes remarks,</p><p>“some things pertaining to witches should be rejected from the hearts of the</p><p>faithful, while some, in fact, should be firmly held,” satisfied apparently no one</p><p>else.81 In particular the issue of maleficium proper was entirely peripheral to</p><p>the subject of strigae, and for this reason his witches continued to resemble</p><p>evil, heretical, fairies – the lamiae of Gervaise of Tilbury’s and Stephen of</p><p>Bourbon’s exempla made real – more than they did the maleficial witches of</p><p>the Malleus.</p><p>Elsewhere, definitions of witchcraft took rather different directions and</p><p>the whole issue of the bonae res and the canon remained of secondary impor-</p><p>tance. North of the Alps, especially, writers were on the whole disinclined to</p><p>attach the label “witch” to the woman who rode with the bonae res, and accord-</p><p>ingly interpreted their beliefs in a more traditional manner. Nider’s Formicar-</p><p>ius, for example, a text which would remain one of the definitive sources for</p><p>information about witchcraft throughout the fifteenth century, treated the</p><p>women who believed they rode with Diana traditionally. One of his teachers,</p><p>Nider recalls, had told him of a woman who could not be cured of her super-</p><p>stitious beliefs until a Dominican persuaded her to let him, along with several</p><p>others, witness her flight.82 When the moment came, she put a large bowl on</p><p>112 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 112</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>a table, seated herself in it, and began to apply a salve to her body while saying</p><p>an evil charm. She fell at once into a deep sleep, in which she thrashed so vio-</p><p>lently that she fell from the table and hit her head.When she awoke she claimed</p><p>to have been out with Venus, but the protestations of the witnesses finally con-</p><p>vinced her of her error. Nider complements this account with other details of</p><p>medieval traditional lore. He tells the well-known incident from the life of St.</p><p>Germanus, in which the saint found lodging at a house where peasants had</p><p>set out a feast in expectation of a visit by the Good Women of the night.</p><p>Germanus stayed up to keep watch, and was not surprised when a horde of</p><p>demons in the likeness of women entered the house, sat down at the table,</p><p>and began to eat.83 Through these stories, Nider makes the point that while</p><p>demons are responsible for belief in Diana,Venus, and the Good Women, those</p><p>who believe in these things are not themselves demonic, merely superstitious,</p><p>stupid, and rather silly. They do not kill babies, cause storms, ride on wolves</p><p>or assume animal form; instead, these are all characteristics that Nider asso-</p><p>ciates with heretical malefici.</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger generally concurred. In the Malleus, they argue</p><p>that it is necessary to distinguish clearly between the women described in the</p><p>canon Episcopi and “real witches,” who committed real crimes and knowingly</p><p>devoted themselves to the devil.84 Where, however, Nicholas of Cusa and his</p><p>like could use this distinction to exculpate accused witches, for Institoris and</p><p>Sprenger the canon Episcopi describes a virtually empty set: they have no per-</p><p>sonal experience of such women, and seem to feel it rather unlikely that they</p><p>would ever meet them. If a woman was found who superficially resembled</p><p>those discussed in the canon, she would doubtless fall within their expansive</p><p>parameters of witch proper.</p><p>Nonetheless, Institoris and Sprenger incorporated many of the charac-</p><p>teristics of the malign cousins of the less savory night spirits into their own</p><p>conception of witches. Night flight, for example, was one of the definitive</p><p>characteristics of both the lamiae and the bonae res, and does not seem to have</p><p>been much associated with traditional representations of malefici. The Malleus,</p><p>however, routinely describes witches as having the power of flight.The authors</p><p>explain that when witches want to fly, they take an unguent made from the</p><p>limbs of slaughtered children and smear it over a chair or some other piece of</p><p>wood, at which signal an invisible devil will come and bear them away.85 Some-</p><p>times, Institoris and Sprenger admit, the devil actually appeared in the form</p><p>of an animal to carry the witch, but he far preferred her to fly by means of</p><p>the magical salve so that more children might be killed before baptism. In this</p><p>way, the authors brought the witch’s infanticide – another of the lamia’s most</p><p>obvious characteristics – alongside her powers of flight to form a new, logical</p><p>whole. They created a fusion of the lamiae with the malefica which effectively</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 113</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 113</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>replaced earlier conceptions of malign female spirits while remaining fully</p><p>compatible with them.</p><p>For this reason, Institoris and Sprenger can support this interpretation</p><p>with narratives that closely resemble those that had been told about lamiae and</p><p>their kin. They relate that in the same year that their book was begun, in the</p><p>city of Speyer, a pair of women had words which escalated, more muliercularum,</p><p>into an abusive quarrel.86 Since one of the women was rumored to be a witch,</p><p>the other went home fearing for her newborn child and scattered blessed</p><p>herbs, consecrated salt, and holy water around his cradle. Her fears were war-</p><p>ranted, because in the middle of the night she heard her son whimpering, and</p><p>when she went to comfort him, she found his cradle empty. Weeping for the</p><p>loss of her son, the poor woman lit a candle, and was relieved to find the baby</p><p>under a table in a corner, sniffling but unharmed. That the witch was unable</p><p>to do more than this, Institoris and Sprenger attribute to the mother’s good</p><p>sense and prompt deployment of sacramental defenses. It is impossible to tell</p><p>whether the authors have reworked this very traditional account of the depre-</p><p>dations of lamiae to fit their ideas about witchcraft, or whether such stories</p><p>were beginning to influence the discourse of village magic.87 In either case,</p><p>the story illustrates how a clear occasion for maleficia – a mundane quarrel</p><p>between two women, one with reputed malign occult powers – could evoke</p><p>a much more monstrous and diabolical conception of witchcraft.</p><p>Similarly, Institoris and Sprenger incorporated the trance-like dream</p><p>state of women who ride with the bonae res into their image of the witch.They</p><p>had once asked a women whether witches could travel in their imaginations,</p><p>through illusion, or bodily, and she had replied that both ways were possible.</p><p>When they wanted to go to the assembly of witches, either a devil could trans-</p><p>port them, or, if that were inconvenient, they could invoke the devil and go</p><p>to sleep; a bluish vapor would then proceed from their mouths by which they</p><p>were clearly aware of everything that was done there.88 Again, this narrative</p><p>does not appear grounded in learned conventions (the mist issuing from</p><p>a sleeper’s mouth is too obviously suggestive of the soul leaving the body),</p><p>but in a more popular representation of the dream trance. Nonetheless, it fits</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger’s purposes well, since it makes clear that it is the witch</p><p>herself, more than any devil, who is responsible for her dreams. In the Malleus,</p><p>when a witch dreams of the Sabbat, she does so accurately, as a valid, if still</p><p>inferior, substitute for her actual presence at the event.</p><p>In this way, Institoris and Sprenger transformed the motifs of folk tradi-</p><p>tions into substantial truths about witchcraft. All that the canon Episcopi and</p><p>Burchard of Worms held to be delusions, they found to be the awful truth. All</p><p>evidence to the contrary was either irrelevant, because it did not apply to</p><p>witches, or it was erroneous. Sometimes it was both. For example, the popular</p><p>114 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 114</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>stories of obviously slumbering women who claimed to fly at night might</p><p>either refer to stupid, deluded women who were not witches, or to witches</p><p>who were actually abroad at night, while demons assumed their forms in their</p><p>husbands’ beds.89 Thus, where Alphonso de Spina’s devil made dreaming</p><p>women invisible in order that his deceits might appear more real, the devil in</p><p>the Malleus used his illusions to conceal the reality of their absence. Similarly,</p><p>perceptions of the bonae res merely masked the real presence of demons or</p><p>witches:</p><p>There was an error arising from the demons of the night or, as old women say,</p><p>die seligen [the fairies], but who are witches or demons in the form of witches,</p><p>have to consume everything so that afterwards they may give back more</p><p>abundantly.90</p><p>This substitution of witches for demons blurred the stark division</p><p>between the diabolic fantasies of the canon and the diabolic “realities” of the</p><p>Malleus such that fairy beliefs could be interpreted as just one more manifes-</p><p>tation of witchcraft. Institoris and Sprenger could do this because they</p><p>embraced a concept of the witch that was simultaneously concrete and dia-</p><p>bolic, able to incorporate both dreaming old women and the devils from whom</p><p>their dreams came. In this way, Institoris and Sprenger functionally legislated</p><p>the superstitious women of the canon, along with their fantasies, out of exis-</p><p>tence, to be replaced in their entirety by the shockingly real presence of the</p><p>witch.</p><p>Notes</p><p>1 “Quid ergo dicimus de mulieribus, quae confitentur nocturno tempore ambulare per</p><p>longa locorum intervalla in momento temporis, et intrare cameras alienas clausas, coa-</p><p>diuvantibus earum magistris daemonibus (ut dicunt), cum quibus loquuntur, quibus</p><p>praestant censum, et cum quibus (ut dicunt) habent copulam carnalem, et quibus per-</p><p>suadentibus (ut dicunt) abnegant deum et virginem Mariam, et cum pedibus conculcant</p><p>sanctam crucem, et quae daemonibus coadiuvantibus (ut dicunt) interficiunt pueros et</p><p>interficiunt homines, et faciunt eos cadere in infirmitates diversas, et quae dicunt</p><p>se multa his similia facere, et aliquando se transformare in formam muscipulae, et</p><p>diabolum dicunt se aliquando transformare in formam canis, vel alterius animalis? An</p><p>haec et his similia sint possibilia, vel versimilia, vel credenda?” Ambrosius de Vignati,</p><p>Tractatus de Haereticis, in Hansen, Quellen, 216.</p><p>2 Ibid., 225.</p><p>3 See Clifford Geertz, “Religion as a Cultural System,” in Geertz, The Interpretation of Cul-</p><p>tures (New York: Basic Books, 1973), 100–1.</p><p>4 The Dominican Order accepted St. Thomas as their definitive theologian in 1329.</p><p>Hinnebusch, 2:159.</p><p>5 Heiko Oberman, “Via Antiqua and Via Moderna: Late Medieval Prolegomena to Refor-</p><p>mation Thought,” Journal of the History of Ideas 48 (1987): 23–40.</p><p>6 Ibid., 28.</p><p>7 Author’s italics. Heiko Oberman, “Fourteenth Century Religious Thought:A Premature</p><p>Profile,” in Oberman, The Dawn of the Reformation, 6.</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 115</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 115</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>8 Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, qu. 87, arts. 6 and 8.</p><p>9 See Scot MacDonald, “Theory of Knowledge,” in Norman Kretzmann and Eleanor</p><p>Stump, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Aquinas (Cambridge: Cambridge University</p><p>Press, 1993), 160–95; 185.</p><p>10 Ibid., 170–85; see also Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, qu. 85, art. 6.</p><p>11 Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, pt. 1, qu. 51, art. 3, quoting Augustine, City of God, 15.23.</p><p>See also the Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 3.</p><p>12 “Omnis enim acceptio, quae firmatur sensu, melior est quam illa quae sensui contradicit,</p><p>et conclusio, quae sensui contradicit, est incredibilis.” Albertus Magnus, Physica, lib.</p><p>8, tract. 2, c. 2, in Opera Omnia, ed. Paulus Hossfeld (Aschendorf: Monasterium</p><p>Westfalorum, 1993), vol. 4, pt. 2, p. 587; cf. Hinnebusch, 2:127.</p><p>13 “Ad quartum dicendum, quod in theologia locus ab auctoritate est locus ab inspiratione</p><p>spiritus veritatis. Unde Augustinus . . . In aliis autem scientiis locus ab auctoritate</p><p>infirmus est et infirmior ceteris, quia perspicacitati humani ingenii innititur, quae</p><p>fallibilis est.” Albertus Magnus, Summa Theologiae tract. 1, qu. 5, ch. 2, in Opera Omnia,</p><p>ed. Dionysius Siedler et al. (Aschendorf: Monasterium Westfalorum, 1978), 18; cf.</p><p>Hinnebusch, 2:127.</p><p>14 “Quis tam stolidus vt propterea omnia eorum maleficia et nocumenta esse fantastica et</p><p>imaginaria affirmaret cum ad sensum omnibus appareat contrarium.” Malleus, pt. 2, qu.</p><p>1, ch. 3, p. 105.</p><p>15 Kvideland and Sehmsdorf, 9.</p><p>16 “ubi fama volabat quod quedam mulier sepulta lintheamen in quo sepulta erat succes-</p><p>siue deglutiret et quod pestis cessare non posset nisi ex integro lintheamen deglutiendo</p><p>ad ventrem consumpsisset.” Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 15, p. 75.</p><p>17 Similar stories were told by Saxo Grammaticus and William of Newburgh; for discus-</p><p>sion of the medieval ghost in folk</p><p>and clerical traditions, see Claude Lecouteux,</p><p>Geschichte der Gespenster und Wiedergänger im Mittelalter (Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 1987),</p><p>and Jean-Claude Schmitt, Les Revenants (Paris: Gallimard, 1994).</p><p>18 Women with reputations for malign occult powers were notoriously restless after death;</p><p>for the best known example see the tale of the witch of Berkeley in William of Malmes-</p><p>bury, De Gestis Regum Anglorum, ed. William Stubbs (London: Longmans, Green, Reader</p><p>and Dyer, 1887–89), 1:253–5.</p><p>19 “Nam ex effectibus deuenit in cognitionem cause.” Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 5, p. 36.</p><p>20 “[Ex quibus elicitur quod] virtus corporalis hominis ad huiusmodi opera causanda non</p><p>se extendere potest que semper hoc habet ut causa cum suo effectu naturali nota sit nat-</p><p>uraliter absque admiratione.” Ibid. In a fine example of the application of scholastic exclu-</p><p>sionary categories to practical problems, Institoris and Sprenger explain that if a man</p><p>could be found who did have the power to create such marvels, he could not really be</p><p>called a “man” at all. Of course, if this being were not a man, he must necessarily be</p><p>either a devil or an angel, since these are the only rational beings in creation. See ibid.,</p><p>pt. 2, qu. 2, ch. 8, p. 183.</p><p>21 “et quidem in contrarium in argumenta deducere non expedit cum ipsa experientia</p><p>preter verborum et fidedignorum testimonia talia facit credibilia.” Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 6,</p><p>p. 40.</p><p>22 “Constant ergo omnia aut visus vel auditus propria experientia aut fide dignorum relat-</p><p>ibus.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 4, p. 108.</p><p>23 “Nulli dubium quin malefice quedam mira operantur circa membra virilia vt ex visis et</p><p>auditis plurimorum imo et ex ipsa publica fama constat.” Ibid., pt. 1, qu. 9, p. 56.</p><p>24 As is true of all supra-normal encounters. See Lauri Honko, “Memorates and the Study</p><p>of Folk Belief,” in Reimund Kvideland and Henning K. Sehmsdorf, eds., Nordic Folklore</p><p>(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989), 100–9.</p><p>25 Kommentar, 351–408. Although approximately four fifths of these are drawn from liter-</p><p>ary sources, in comparison with contemporary texts using comparable numbers of</p><p>116 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 116</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>exempla, Institoris and Sprenger include an extraordinarily high number of narratives</p><p>drawn from their personal experience.</p><p>26 “Quare et merito concluditur praefata remedia contra huiusmodi morbum esse certis-</p><p>sima ita quod certissime ita liberantur quicumque his armis vtuntur. Malleus, pt. 2, qu.</p><p>2, ch. 3, p. 165.</p><p>27 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, p. 88.</p><p>28 Similarly in the nineteenth century, J. Lecœur reported that when peasants in the Bocage</p><p>began to suspect that their misfortunes were due to witchcraft, “They worry, they mull</p><p>it over, and look at what is happening around them with distrust. The talk continues;</p><p>soon one name is mysteriously on everyone’s lips.” Esquisses du bocage normand (Condé-</p><p>sur-Noireau, 1887), 2:38; cited in Judith Devlin, The Superstitious Mind: French Peasants</p><p>and the Supernatural in the Nineteenth Century (New Haven:Yale University Press, 1987),</p><p>102.</p><p>29 This procedure, the diffamatio, was not unique to inquisitorial investigations of witch-</p><p>craft.When an inquisitor suspected the presence of heretics but denunciations were not</p><p>forthcoming, he could require persons generally acknowledged to be respectable and</p><p>trustworthy to denounce those who failed to live as good Catholics. A.S. Turberville,</p><p>Medieval Heresy and the Inquisition (1920; reprint, London:Archon Books, 1964), 142–3,</p><p>190–1.</p><p>30 “Ad aures talis officialis aut iudicis talis loci pervuenit pluries fama publica referente ac</p><p>clamosa insinuatione producente quod talis de tali loco dixit vel fecit talia ad maleficia</p><p>pertinentia contra fidem ac communem vtilitatem reipublice.” Malleus, pt. 3, qu. 1,</p><p>p. 196.</p><p>31 “diffamata insuper plurimum super mortem cuiusdam militis Spiess et hoc nedum in</p><p>Ysbruck sed et circumquaque per vicinas terras et presertim apud nobiles et potentes.</p><p>An autem toxico vel maleficio ipsum interemit, manet sub dubio, communiter tamen</p><p>famatur, quod maleficio eo quod a iuventute maleficiis servivit.” Ammann, 39.</p><p>32 See David Gentilcore, 243–4.</p><p>33 For example Robin Briggs, Witches and Neighbors: The Social and Cultural Context of</p><p>European Witchcraft (New York:Viking, 1996), 398.</p><p>34 Georgina Boyce, “Belief and Disbelief: An Examination of Reactions to the Presentation</p><p>of Rumor Legends,” in Paul Smith, ed., Perspectives on Contemporary Legend (Sheffield:</p><p>CECTAL Conference Papers Series no. 4, 1984), 64–78; 75.</p><p>35 Gorden W. Allport and Leo Postman, The Psychology of Rumor (New York: Henry Holt,</p><p>1947), 52.</p><p>36 Jeanne Favret-Saada, Deadly Words:Witchcraft in the Bocage, trans. Catherine Cullen (Cam-</p><p>bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 9 and passim. Modern American Satanism</p><p>“experts” offer a similar and in many ways more exact parallel. See Linda Dégh, “Satanic</p><p>Child Abuse in a Blue House,” in Linda Dégh, Narratives in Society:A Performance-Centered</p><p>Study of Narration, Folklore Fellows Communication 255 (Helsinki: Academia Scien-</p><p>tiarum Fennica, 1995), 358–68.</p><p>37 Dégh, 360–3. See also Allport and Postman, 34 and 36.</p><p>38 Edwin Ardener, “Social Anthropology, Language and Reality,” in Semantic Anthropology,</p><p>ASA monograph 22 (London: Academic Press, 1982): 1–14; 8.</p><p>39 See also Donald P. Spence, “The Mythic Properties of Popular Explanations,” in Joseph</p><p>de Rivera and Theodore Sarbin, eds., Believed-In Imaginings:The Narrative Construction of</p><p>Reality (Washington, D.C.: APA, 1998): 217–28.</p><p>40 Neither this method nor this insight is my own, and the following discussion owes an</p><p>obvious debt especially to Norman Cohn and Joseph Hansen. See also Cohn, Europe’s</p><p>Inner Demons (New York: Basic Books, 1975), Richard Kieckhefer, Magic in the Middle</p><p>Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), and Andreas Blauert, Frühe Hex-</p><p>enverfolgungen (Hamburg: Junius, 1989).</p><p>41 Regino of Prüm, De Ecclesiasticis Disciplinis, ii, c. 364, Patrologia Latina 132, 352.</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 117</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 117</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>42 Burchard of Worms, Decreta, xix, Patrologia Latina 140, 963. For English translation see</p><p>John T. McNeill and Helena M. Gamer, trans., Medieval Handbooks of Penance (New York:</p><p>Columbia University Press, 1938).</p><p>43 Contra Carlo Ginzburg, who posits the existence of an inclusive “mythic complex,” based</p><p>loosely upon the models provided by Eurasian shamanism. See Ginzburg, “Deciphering</p><p>the Sabbath,” trans. Paul Falla, in Bengt Ankarloo and Gustav Henningsen, eds., Early</p><p>Modern European Witchcraft (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990): 121–37; however, see also</p><p>Robert Muchembled, “Satanic Myths and Cultural Reality,” in Ankarloo and Henningsen,</p><p>139–60;Wolfgang Behringer, Chonrad Stoekhlin und die Nachtschar (Munich: Piper, 1994);</p><p>and Claude Lecouteux, Fées, sorcières et loups-garous au Moyen Âge: histoire du double (Paris:</p><p>Imago, 1992).</p><p>44 A genuinely persuasive interpretation of the evidence for a medieval cult of Diana (or</p><p>whomever) is difficult to find; see, however, Flint, 122–5; Duerr, 15; Carlo Ginzburg,</p><p>The Night Battles, trans. John and Anne Tedeschi (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Uni-</p><p>versity Press, 1992), 40–50, and Ecstasies:Deciphering the Witches’Sabbath, trans. Raymond</p><p>Rosenthal (New York: Pantheon Books, 1991), 89–121; Cohn, Europe’s Inner Demons,</p><p>210–24.</p><p>45 William of Paris, 1066.</p><p>46 Burchard of Worms, 971.</p><p>47 Guillaume de Lorris and Jean de Meun, The Romance of the Rose, trans. Charles Dahlberg</p><p>(Hanover: University Press of New England, 1971), lines 18411–60, 305–6.</p><p>48 “[Sequitur quinto,] quod christiano permaxime fugiendum est, ne fidem adhibeat huic,</p><p>quod vetule referunt in nativitatibus hominum quasdam deas venire et necessitatem</p><p>geniti proli imponere fortunium aut infortunium, suspendium, occisionem</p><p>gladialem</p><p>aut dignitatem magnificam vel consimile prenunciare, que necessario eveniant. [Unde</p><p>eciam si quis submergatur aut suspendatur, dicunt consolatorie se exhortantes tales nec-</p><p>essario tamquam prenunciatum evenisse.] Et quidem si puer nascitur in pellicula, dicunt</p><p>ipsum esse de illis, qui magna spacia in una nocte per transeunt, vulgariter ‘die farn</p><p>leude’ etc. Denique homines in hanc labuntur demenciam, ut cultum soli deo debitum</p><p>ipsis, qui vere demones sunt, exhibeant quosque largitores bonorum false existimant.</p><p>Sic eciam quidam faciunt in quintis feriis Quatuor temporum et in nocte precedenti</p><p>quarte ferie Cinerum.” John of Frankfurt, Questio, utrum potestas cohercendi demones . . .</p><p>in Hansen, Quellen, 76.</p><p>49 For the medieval cult of the fairies, see Gustav Henningsen, “ ‘The Ladies from the</p><p>Outside’: An Archaic Pattern of the Witches’ Sabbath,” in Ankarloo and Henningsen,</p><p>191–215; for the European fairy cult generally, see Éva Pócs, Fairies and Witches at the</p><p>Boundary of South-Eastern and Central Europe, Folklore Fellows Communication 243</p><p>(Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica, 1989), and Briggs, The Vanishing People.</p><p>50 This belief is also found in Burchard, who refers to the women concerned simply as</p><p>“Fates” (parcae). Corrector, Patrologia Latina 140, 971.</p><p>51 Étienne de Bourbon, Anecdotes historiques, ed. A. Lecoy de la Marche (Paris: Libraire</p><p>Renouard, 1877), exempla 368–9. Stephen uses the word to distinguish the good women</p><p>of the night from the evil strigae.</p><p>52 Ginzburg, The Night Battles, 44–55.</p><p>53 Cited in Lea, Materials, 1:112; the etymology is from Isidore; Gregory the Great</p><p>describes the lamia with a human face and a bestial body as a metaphor for heresy and</p><p>for hypocrites (Magna Moralia, in Lea, 1:110–11). It is worth noting that Johannes’ con-</p><p>temporary, Albertus Magnus, gave a far more prosaic description of the lamia: “an enor-</p><p>mous fierce animal which emerges from the forest at night and skulks into orchards</p><p>where it slashes and uproots trees.” Albertus Magnus, De Animalibus, trans. James J.</p><p>Scanlan (Binghamton: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1987), 22.112,</p><p>p. 155.</p><p>118 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 118</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>54 For a discussion of Roman literary witches, see Eugene Tavenner, “Canidia and Other</p><p>Witches,” reprinted in Witchcraft in the Ancient World and Middle Ages, ed. Brian Levack</p><p>(New York: Garland Publishers, 1992), 2:14–39; and Baroja, The World of the Witches,</p><p>17–40.</p><p>55 “Idem et eodem modo sentiendum est tibi de aliis malignis spiritibus, quas vulgus stryges</p><p>et lamias vocant, et apparent de nocte in domidus in quibus parvuli notriuntur, eosque</p><p>de cunabulis raptos laniare, vel igne assare videntur. Apparent autem in specie vetularum</p><p>videlicet, quae nec vere vetulae sunt, nec vere pueros devorare.”William of Paris, 1066.</p><p>56 “Credidisti quod multae mulieres retro Satanam conversae credunt et affirmant verum</p><p>esse, ut credas inquietae noctis silentio cum te collocaveris in lecto tuo, et marito tuo</p><p>in sinu tuo jacente, te dum corporea sis januis clausis exire posse, et terrarum spacia</p><p>cum aliis simili errore deceptis pertransire valere, et homines baptizatos, et Christi san-</p><p>guine redemptos, sine armis visibilibus et interficere, et decoctis carnibus eorum vos</p><p>comedere, et in loco cordis eorum stramen aut lignum, aut aliquod huiusmodi ponere,</p><p>et commestis, iterum vivos facere, et inducias vivendi dare?” Burchard, 973. See also</p><p>Katharine Morris, Sorceress or Witch? The Image of Gender in Medieval Iceland and Northern</p><p>Europe (Lanham: University Press of America, 1991), 160–2.</p><p>57 Gervaise of Tilbury, Otia Imperialia, ed. Felix Liebrecht (Hanover: Carl Rümpler, 1856),</p><p>c. 93, p. 45.</p><p>58 Ibid., c. 86, pp. 39–40.</p><p>59 Ibid., c. 93, pp. 45–46.</p><p>60 See Edgar A. List, “Holda and the Venusberg,” Journal of American Folklore 73 (1960):</p><p>307–11 and “Is Frau Holda the Virgin Mary?” German Quarterly 32 (1953): 80–4.</p><p>61 Duerr, 169, n. 29, citing the Handwörterbuch des deutschen Aberglaubens, c. 1314.The gloss</p><p>on the Lex Salica gives fara or “the one who goes” for striga, which may also suggest an</p><p>early association of nocturnal witches with night-traveling women.</p><p>62 “Quare est quod noticulam quamdam vel Herodiadem vel praesidem noctis dominam</p><p>concilia et conventus de nocte asserunt convocare, varia celebrari convivia, ministerio-</p><p>rum species diversis occupationibus exerceri, et nunc istos ad poenam trahi promeri-</p><p>tis, nunc illos ad gloriam sublimari. Praeterea infantes exponi lamiis, et nunc frustatim</p><p>discerptos, edaci ingluvie in ventrem trajectos congeri, nunc praesidentis miseratione</p><p>rejectos in cunas reponi.” John of Salisbury, Polycraticus, sive de Nugis Curialium et Vestigiis</p><p>Philosophorum, 2.17, cited in Lea, Materials, 1:172–3. John firmly believed that no edu-</p><p>cated person should give credence to such “empty and senseless falsehoods.”</p><p>63 “Unde quaedam mulierculae inseruientes Satanae, daemonum illusionibus seductae,</p><p>credunt et profitentur nocturnis horis cum Diana Paganorum Dea, vel Venere, in magna</p><p>mulierum multitudine equitare, et alia nephanda agere, puta paruulos a lacte matris</p><p>auellere, assare, et comedere, domus per caminos seu fenestras intrare, et habitantes</p><p>variis modis inquietare, quae omnia et consimilia solum fantastice accidunt eis.” Martin</p><p>of Arles, 363.</p><p>64 Ibid.</p><p>65 Cohn, Europe’s Inner Demons, 205. One must admit, though, that there is an element of</p><p>circular reasoning in this argument since the notion that women assembled in vast</p><p>throngs at night was surely drawn from the traditions of the bona res and company to</p><p>begin with.</p><p>66 Compare the experiences of Nicholas of Cusa, below.</p><p>67 Alphonso de Spina (c. 1420–91) was a baptized Jew who became a Franciscan theolo-</p><p>gian at Salamanca, the confessor of King John II of Castile, and bishop of Orense.</p><p>Compare Hansen, Quellen, 145.</p><p>68 “Veritas autem huius facti est quod quando iste male persone volunt uti his pessimis fic-</p><p>tionibus consecrate se cum verbis et unctioribus diabolo, et statim dyabolos recipit eos</p><p>in opere suo et accipit figuram earum et fantasiam cuiuslibet earum ducitque illas per</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 119</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 119</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>illa loca per que desiderabant corpora vero earum remanent sine aliqua sensibilitate et</p><p>cooperit illa dyabolus umbra sua ita quod nullus illa videre possit, et cum dyabolus videt</p><p>in fantasiis earum quod impleuerant que volebant non amouendo ad [sic] earum fantasiis</p><p>diabolicas fantasias que viderunt reducit illas imaginationes coniungens cum suis pro-</p><p>priis motibus et corporibus.” Alphonso de Spina, consid. 10.</p><p>69 “ubi est aper quidam in rupe qui vulgariter dicitur el boch de biterne et quod ibi conu-</p><p>eniunt cum candelis accensis et adorant illum aprum osculantes eum in ano suo.” Ibid.</p><p>70 “Et ideo infatuatam mulierem aliquam vetulam deludit, et ducit ut quasi malefica</p><p>capiatur et trucidetur, et deus permittit ob peccata ista, et tunc sequuntur maxima mala</p><p>ob mortem innocentis sanguinis. Ideo cauendum est valde ne volendo malum eiicere:</p><p>malum accumuletur.” Nicholas of Cusa, IX, fol. clxxii, “Haec omnia tibi dabo.”</p><p>71 Alphons Madrigal Tostatus, Commentary on Genesis, Hansen, Quellen, 109, n. 1.</p><p>72 “Quod dicitur de mulieribus, quae per noctem discurrunt per diversa loca, etiam verum</p><p>est. Nam saepe hoc inventum est et iudicialiter punitum. Et aliqui volentes imitari</p><p>earum nefandas caeremonias, magna incommoda incurrerunt. Nec potest dici illud per</p><p>somnium accidere, cum non solum ipsi, qui passi sunt, sed etiam plures alii huius rei</p><p>testes erant. Nec est aliqua causa de his dubitandi. Verum est autem, quod apud sim-</p><p>plices aliquibus veris multa falsa circa haec admixta sunt, quia daemones non solum in</p><p>moribus, sed etiam in fide nocere cupiunt.” Commentary on Matthew, qu. 47, Hansen,</p><p>to their</p><p>fertile imaginations.</p><p>Notes</p><p>1 Although the trial records themselves have been lost, detailed notes of the proceedings</p><p>were made for Bishop Golser, and survive in Brixen’s episcopal archives; they have</p><p>been partially edited by Hartmann Ammann, “Der Innsbrucker Hexenprocess von</p><p>1485,” Zeitschrift des Ferdinandeums für Tirol und Vorarlberg 34 (1890): 1–87. See also Eric</p><p>Wilson, “Institoris at Innsbruck: Heinrich Institoris, the Summis Desiderantes and the</p><p>Brixen Witch-Trial of 1485,” in R.W. Scribner and Trevor Johnson, eds., Popular</p><p>Religion in Germany and Central Europe, 1400–1800 (New York: St. Martin’s Press,</p><p>1996): 87–100.</p><p>2 “Pfie dich, du sneder minch, daz dich das fallend übel etc.” Ammann, “Innsbrucker</p><p>Hexenprocess,” 40.</p><p>3 When Institoris asked her to explain her remark, Helena replied that she had said it</p><p>“because you preach nothing except heresy” (“Ideo dixi, quia nunquam predicatis nisi</p><p>heresim”). And when Institoris asked, “how so?” she continued “because you do not</p><p>8 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 8</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>preach except against witches” (“Quia non predicatis nisi contra maleficas”). Ibid.,</p><p>36.</p><p>4 Ammann, “Innsbrucker Hexenprocess,” 36; Heide Dienst, “Lebensbewältigung durch</p><p>Magie: alltägliche Zauberei in Innsbruck gegen Ende des 15. Jahrhunderts,” in Alfred</p><p>Kohler and Heinrich Lutz, eds., Alltag im 16. Jahrhundert (Vienna:Verlag für Geschichte</p><p>und Politik, 1987): 91–3. Scheuberin had a reputation for folk medicine and had lent</p><p>the knight, one Leopold von Spiess-Friedberg, her expertise. When he did not recover,</p><p>he turned instead to a learned Italian physician, who also failed to effect a cure, but did</p><p>apparently induce the dying knight to accuse Scheuberin of witchcraft.</p><p>5 “per oppositum personam male fame et inhonestam in fidei moribus de heresi faciliter</p><p>infamari, ymo et regula generalis est, quod omnes malefice a iuventute carnalitatibus</p><p>et adulteriis servierunt variis, prout experiencia docuit.” Ammann, “Innsbrucker</p><p>Hexenprocess,” 39–40.</p><p>6 For the interrogation of Helena Scheuberin and the response of the episcopal commis-</p><p>sioners, see ibid., 65–72.</p><p>7 In a general sense, this approach to the problem of late-medieval witchcraft is inspired</p><p>by Stuart Clark’s ground-breaking work and, in particular, Thinking with Demons:The Idea</p><p>of Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997); more</p><p>specifically, the ideas of semiotic and symbolic anthropologists informs my emphasis</p><p>upon the conceptual power of category construction. See especially the work of</p><p>Clifford Geertz, Edwin Ardener, James Fernandez, Rodney Needham, Malcolm</p><p>Crick, George Lakoff, and Dan Sperber.</p><p>8 Since witchcraft, as Institoris and Sprenger observe, invariably comes to light through</p><p>the witch’s “words and deeds.” “Hoc enim est maleficarum proprium concitare adver-</p><p>sum se, vel verbis inutilibus aut factis, puta quam petit sibi praestari aliquid, aut infert</p><p>ei damnum aliquod in orto [sic] et similia hoc ut occasionem recipiant et se manifestant</p><p>in verbo vel in opere.” Henricus Institoris and Jacobus Sprenger, Malleus Maleficarum</p><p>(1487; facsimile reprint, Göppingen: Kümmerle Verlag, 1991), pt. 3, qu. 6, p. 201.</p><p>9 André Schnyder, “Der Malleus Maleficarum: Fragen und Beobachtungen zu seiner Druck-</p><p>geschichte sowie zur Rezeption bei Bodin, Binsfeld und Delrio.” Archiv fur Kulturgeschichte</p><p>74 (1992): 325–64; Sigrid Brauner, Fearless Wives and Frightened Shrews:The Construction</p><p>of the Witch in Early Modern Germany, ed. Robert H. Brown (Amherst: University of</p><p>Massachusetts Press, 1985), 32. Although not translated into German until the eigh-</p><p>teenth century, the message and ideas in the Malleus were disseminated to those unversed</p><p>in Latin. “For example,” writes Brauner, “at the request of the city of Nuremburg,</p><p>Kramer provided a manuscript with trial instructions in both Latin and German” for the</p><p>benefit of municipal judges with no knowledge of Latin (33).</p><p>10 Sylvester Prieras (c. 1456–1523), De Strigimagarum, Daemonumque Mirandis, Libri Tres</p><p>(Rome: 1521), a.1.</p><p>11 Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola, Strix (Argentoratum [Strassburg]: Carole</p><p>Weinrichius, 1612), 131–2.</p><p>12 “Obwohl in ganz Europa zwischen 1520 und 1580 keine Neuauflagen des</p><p>Hexenhammers gedruckt wurden: er blieb das maßgebende Werk und war in den</p><p>regionalen Bibliotheken vorhanden.” Wolfgang Behringer, Hexenverfolgung in Bayern</p><p>(Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1988), 82. Behringer also observes that knowledge of the</p><p>Malleus informed the composition of interrogatories in late-sixteenth-century German</p><p>trials (132).</p><p>13 Although Weyer quotes a variety of witch-treatises, he relies most extensively upon the</p><p>Malleus to provide him with erroneous notions of witchcraft. See George Mora, intro-</p><p>duction to Johann Weyer, Witches, Devils, and Doctors in the Renaissance, trans. John Shea</p><p>(Binghamton: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1991), li–lvi.</p><p>14 Gerhild Scholz Williams, Defining Dominion:The Discourses of Magic and Witchcraft in Early</p><p>Modern France and Germany (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995), 68.</p><p>15 Mora, lxxxiv.</p><p>INTRODUCTION: CONTESTED CATEGORIES 9</p><p>TMM1 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 9</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>2</p><p>Origins and arguments</p><p>The Malleus is an idiosyncratic text, reflective of its authors’ particular expe-</p><p>riences and preoccupations. It is, in the first place, an expression of a distinc-</p><p>tively clerical worldview, the product of two lifetimes of academic, spiritual,</p><p>and pastoral experience within the Church. But more than this, it is also the</p><p>result of a peculiarly Dominican encounter between learned and folk tradi-</p><p>tions, an encounter determined in part by the demands of inquisitorial office,</p><p>and in part by the requirements of effective preaching and pastoral care. Yet</p><p>although the Malleus is certainly a Dominican text, it is not necessarily repre-</p><p>sentative of Dominican or even inquisitorial thought as a whole. Dominicans</p><p>in France, Spain, and, to a lesser extent, in Italy had quite different notions of</p><p>what witches were all about, and of the means required to curb their spread.</p><p>Despite the book’s subsequent popularity throughout the continent, the</p><p>Malleus is very much a book written by and about people living in southern</p><p>Germany and the Alps, and reflects this more or less coherent cultural tradi-</p><p>tion. Finally, the authors themselves were unusual figures in their own right,</p><p>whose personal histories – especially that of Institoris – manifest themselves</p><p>in their writing.</p><p>When Henry Institoris began to compose the Malleus, some time in</p><p>1485–86, he was well into his fifties, in other words, by medieval standards,</p><p>he was already an old man.1 Indeed, early in 1486, after a particularly unpleas-</p><p>ant encounter with the inquisitor’s zeal, Georg Golser wrote to a friend that</p><p>Institoris seemed “completely childish on account of his age.”2 Yet Golser’s</p><p>appraisal was almost certainly wrong: despite his age, Institoris was not senile.</p><p>Rather, he was a man capable of inspiring profound animosity in those he met,</p><p>and his “childishness” seems to have been a permanent feature of his person-</p><p>ality, perhaps exacerbated by, but not the result of, his advancing years. The</p><p>casual insult does, however, make the point that despite a career that left him</p><p>exceptionally well qualified to tackle his subject, Institoris was not someone</p><p>who was so well respected by his peers that his views on witchcraft would be</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 10</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>accepted without question. Quite the contrary, he was widely (and perhaps</p><p>even charitably) regarded as being somewhat eccentric.</p><p>Undeniably, Institoris was a well-educated man. At a young age he had</p><p>entered the Dominican convent in his</p><p>Quellen, 107.</p><p>73 “Et istud ita manifestum est, quod imprudentia sit, illud negare, cum mille nobis testes</p><p>occurrant, qui sibi horum conscii sunt.” Hansen, Quellen, 106.</p><p>74 “Utrum lamie que uulgari nomine strie nuncupantur vere et non fantastice siue appar-</p><p>enter ad ludum eant.” Girolamo Visconti, Lamiarum sive Striarum Opuscula (Milan:</p><p>Leonardus Pachel, 1490), a ii. Visconti was a professor of logic at the University of</p><p>Milan, and later Domincan Provincial of Lombardy, a position he probably held until his</p><p>death in 1477. See Hansen, Quellen, 200–1.</p><p>75 Girolamo Visconti is unusual in his insistence that the devil and his allies killed only bap-</p><p>tized infants. His conclusion, which is very typical of his thinking, is that divine justice</p><p>normally allows only baptized Christians to be killed because such children are led</p><p>immediately to heaven. When, on occasion, an unbaptized child is slain, then doubtless</p><p>he was destined for a life of sin, in which case the limbo of children is a better alterna-</p><p>tive to hell. Visconti, b. iii.</p><p>76 “Quia secundum logicos multa sunt possibilia, que tamen sunt falsa.” Ibid., a viii.</p><p>77 Étienne de Bourbon, 97. The same principle lies behind a story of William of Paris,</p><p>in which a man thinks that he is attending a feast in glorious castle, attended by beau-</p><p>tiful women, but awakes to find himself in a puddle embracing mud. William of Paris,</p><p>1065.</p><p>78 Because Stephen is writing moral exempla, and not a theoretical treatise, logical contra-</p><p>dictions trouble him little, if at all. In later stories, he states the contrary position, that</p><p>women cannot magically enter locked rooms at night, and one suspects that this would</p><p>be his considered opinion. Étienne de Bourbon, 368 and 369.</p><p>79 Hansen, Quellen, 195–200.</p><p>80 “Apud fere omnes per strigas sive strigones intelliguntur mulieres aut viri, qui de nocte</p><p>sive domos aut per longa spatia virtute demonis discurrunt, qui etiam parvulos fascinare</p><p>dicuntur.” Ibid., 196.</p><p>81 “Aliqua quidem abicienda sunt de ipsis strigis a cordibus fidelium, nonnulla vero firmiter</p><p>sunt tenenda.” Ibid., 200.</p><p>82 Nider, Formicarius, 2.4, 71.</p><p>83 Ibid., 72.</p><p>84 Malleus, pt. 1, qu. 1, p. 10. This is also the tack chosen by Ulrich Molitor, who devotes</p><p>the ninth chapter of his witch-treatise to the problem of whether women really go to</p><p>the feast at night, or whether this occurs only in dreams. He cites the usual authorities</p><p>120 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 120</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>and pronounces the whole affair nothing but a delusion of the devil. As in the Formicar-</p><p>ius, though, these beliefs are not really central to his concept of witchcraft. See Molitor,</p><p>705–8.</p><p>85 Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1, ch. 3, p. 104.</p><p>86 Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 1, p. 88.</p><p>87 Gervaise of Tilbury, for example, had told an almost identical story about lamiae over</p><p>two hundred years earlier; see 3.86, 40. The tale can also be found in modern German</p><p>folklore: see no. 89, “Watching Out for the Child,” in Jacob Grimm, The German Legends</p><p>of the Brothers Grimm, ed. and trans. Donald Ward, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: Institute for the</p><p>Study of Human Issues, 1981), 1:99.</p><p>88 “Ex tunc quasi vapor quidam glaucus ex eius ore praecederet, unde singula que ibi ager-</p><p>entur perlucide consideraret.” Malleus, pt. 2, qu. 1.3, p. 105.</p><p>89 Ibid.</p><p>90 “Error erat vt venientes de nocte demonibus aut vt vetule dicunt die seligen sed sunt</p><p>malefice vel demones in earum effigiis debent omnia consumere vt post abundantius</p><p>tribuant.” Ibid., pt. 2, qu. 2, ch. 8, p. 183.</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 1 121</p><p>TMM5 8/30/03 5:40 PM Page 121</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>6</p><p>Witchcraft:</p><p>the formation of belief</p><p>– part two</p><p>In the previous chapter we examined how motifs drawn from traditional beliefs</p><p>about spectral night-traveling women informed the construction of learned</p><p>witch categories in the late Middle Ages.Although the precise manner in which</p><p>these motifs were utilized differed between authorities, two general mental</p><p>habits set off fifteenth-century witch-theorists from earlier writers. First, they</p><p>elided the distinctions between previously discrete sets of beliefs to create a</p><p>substantially new category (“witch,” variously defined), with which to carry</p><p>out subsequent analysis. Second, they increasingly insisted upon the objective</p><p>reality of their conceptions of witchcraft. In this chapter we take up a rather</p><p>different set of ideas, all of which, from the clerical perspective, revolved</p><p>around the idea of direct or indirect commerce with the devil: heresy, black</p><p>magic, and superstition. Nonetheless, here again the processes of assimilation</p><p>and reification strongly influenced how these concepts impinged upon cate-</p><p>gories of witchcraft.</p><p>Heresy and the diabolic cult</p><p>Informed opinion in the late Middle Ages was in unusual agreement that</p><p>witches, no matter how they were defined, were heretics, and that their activ-</p><p>ities were the legitimate subjects of inquisitorial inquiry.1 The history of this</p><p>consensus has been thoroughly examined, and need not long concern us here.2</p><p>Instead, let us examine how the witch-theorists of the fifteenth century used</p><p>ideas associated with heresy and heretics to construct their image of witches.</p><p>This is a problem of several dimensions, involving both the legal and theolog-</p><p>ical approaches to heresy and to magic, and the related but broader question</p><p>of why heretics were conflated with magicians, malefici, and night-travelers in</p><p>the first place.</p><p>TMM6 8/30/03 5:37 PM Page 122</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>WITCHCRAFT: THE FORMATION OF BELIEF 2 123</p><p>Part of the solution to this problem is related to the idea of the demonic</p><p>pact. Magic, from a very early point in Christian history, was closely related</p><p>to idolatry: magicians received their powers in return for their worship of</p><p>pagan idols, who were, of course, really devils. So Pharaoh’s magicians were</p><p>able to work their wonders. With paganism dead or dying, demons could, at</p><p>times, afford to eliminate their now extraneous idols, and insist that they</p><p>receive service directly in return for their magical gifts. In the endlessly</p><p>popular story of Theophilus, the devil required the unfortunate man to</p><p>produce a written pact in which he explicitly repudiated the Christian God.</p><p>Like Theophilus, a given magician might come by his power either through an</p><p>explicit pact, or, like the sorcerers of Pharaoh, through some pagan observance</p><p>in which the devil was not directly named. This distinction, between an open</p><p>or manifest pact, in which the operator made an explicit bargain with the devil,</p><p>and a tacit pact, in which the participation of the devil was concealed, was</p><p>important, but in either case the devil was always involved.</p><p>Augustine himself had strongly suggested that any accommodation</p><p>between man and devil implied some kind of pact and the denial of God. In</p><p>De Doctrina Christiana, he concludes a lengthy denunciation of various magical</p><p>and superstitious observances with a passage critical to the medieval under-</p><p>standing of magic:</p><p>Therefore all arts pertaining to this kind of trifling or noxious superstition con-</p><p>stituted on the basis of a pestiferous association of men and demons as if through</p><p>a pact of faithless and deceitful friendship should be completely repudiated and</p><p>avoided by the Christian, “not that the idol is anything,” as the Apostle says, but</p><p>because “the things which heathens sacrifice they sacrifice to devils, and not to</p><p>God.”3</p><p>The practice of magic, then, was very close to apostasy in Augustine’s opinion,</p><p>as it would be for most churchmen throughout the Middle Ages. There were</p><p>exceptions, but not many: in Aquinas’s view all magic accomplished through</p><p>“invocations, conjurations, sacrifices, fumigations, and adorations” implied a</p><p>pact with</p><p>home town of Schlettstadt, a house well</p><p>known for its excellent library and provincial school.3 There, Institoris</p><p>received training in the humanities before matriculating to the four-year</p><p>course in the arts required of all Dominicans.4 The curriculum of the</p><p>Dominican studium artium centered upon rational philosophy, and above all</p><p>upon the works of Aristotle. Students began with grammar and logic, and</p><p>then proceeded to natural philosophy, metaphysics, and moral philosophy. But</p><p>at the same time they were also prepared for their work in the ministry by</p><p>attending courses of practical lectures on basic theology, scriptural interpre-</p><p>tation and effective preaching. Graduates of these schools could then claim</p><p>the title of Master of Arts, and a rank comparable to that of graduates of the</p><p>universities.</p><p>The most promising of students, however, among whom Institoris was</p><p>plainly numbered, were encouraged to continue their education at a school</p><p>for advanced theology; and Institoris probably studied theology at the studium</p><p>generale at Cologne, which, after St. Jacques in Paris, was the most prestigious</p><p>Dominican school in fifteenth-century Europe. There he would have studied</p><p>and lectured on sacred scripture, the Sentences of Peter Lombard, and the the-</p><p>ology of Thomas Aquinas. All in all a degree of Master of Theology required</p><p>at least fourteen years of higher education, but, since friars were required to</p><p>teach as lectors at provincial schools for between five and seven years before</p><p>they could be awarded their degrees, all of this time need not have been spent</p><p>at the university. Hence, Institoris probably spent at most three or four years</p><p>at Cologne, before leaving with the titles of Master of Arts and Lector in</p><p>Theology, and, though his subsequent career would seem to have left him</p><p>scant time for further study, he nonetheless continued to lecture, eventually</p><p>receiving his doctorate in theology at Rome in 1479.5</p><p>Institoris’ most important pursuit, however, was always a vigorous,</p><p>zealous and uncompromising war against the enemies of the faith, whomever</p><p>he might perceive them to be. Heretics and witches had this much in common</p><p>with the emperor and reforming clergy: all were the objects of Institoris’ righ-</p><p>teous wrath. This aggressive zeal for the faith, combined with his considerable</p><p>personal ambition, secured rapid advancement for Institoris within the Order.</p><p>Although little is known of his early career, we do know that in 1467, at about</p><p>the age of 37, he received an important position in the papal commission</p><p>assigned to combat the Hussites in Bohemia and central Germany. Institoris’</p><p>job was to preach against heresy and to collect money to assist the campaign;</p><p>in October of 1467, we find the head of the commission, Rudolf, bishop of</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 11</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 11</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>Wratislava and papal legate, writing to encourage and assist Institoris by del-</p><p>egating to him the power to remit sins and the authority to grant plenary indul-</p><p>gences.6 In another letter, written four years later, Institoris agreed to lift the</p><p>interdict he had placed upon the town of Lipczk in retaliation for the contin-</p><p>ued presence of “supporters of Bohemian heretics,” which would indicate that</p><p>he had also been provided with a corresponding stick with which to beat the</p><p>intransigent.7</p><p>Institoris’ success and apparent popularity in Rome obtained an appoint-</p><p>ment for him as inquisitor in 1474, with all of the privileges of a preacher-</p><p>general of the Order. His appointment was unusual, however, in that instead</p><p>of being appointed to a particular province, Institoris was authorized “to carry</p><p>out the office of the Inquisition, either where there is no inquisitor, or, where</p><p>there is, by [that inquisitor’s] permission and pleasure.”8 By the terms of this</p><p>assignment, Institoris was now free to choose his own residence and move</p><p>about as he pleased, an unusual honor for one so new to the Holy Office. In</p><p>the Inquisition Institoris found his calling, and soon received additional pro-</p><p>motion for his successful prosecution of heretics and witches. In 1478, Pope</p><p>Sixtus IV appointed him inquisitor to upper Germany, a position to which</p><p>he was reappointed in 1482 with Jacob Sprenger as colleague. In the mean-</p><p>time, as Schlettstadt’s most famous son, he had been elected prior of the</p><p>Dominican convent there in 1481, although just two and one half years later</p><p>he was released from the obligations of that office, possibly to allow him to</p><p>devote his energies more fully to the Inquisition.</p><p>By 1485 Institoris was easily the most experienced inquisitor in</p><p>Germany, and was held in high esteem in Rome: in the letter confirming his</p><p>position as inquisitor for upper Germany, Pope Sixtus was unstinting in his</p><p>praise, commending him as a man notable for his “zeal for religion, knowledge</p><p>of letters, integrity of life, constancy of faith, and other praiseworthy virtues</p><p>and merits.”9 Nonetheless, there was also a sharply contrasting side to Insti-</p><p>toris’ life and character, hard to reconcile with such a glowing endorsement,</p><p>unless we see Brother Henry as one of those people adept at ingratiating them-</p><p>selves with their superiors while systematically alienating their subordinates</p><p>and peers.</p><p>Certainly Institoris was widely disliked, and the belligerence, self-</p><p>righteousness, and refusal to compromise that served him so well on the</p><p>inquisitor’s bench caused him difficulty in other contexts. For example, at</p><p>exactly the same moment as he was receiving his first appointment to the</p><p>Inquisition in 1474, Institoris was facing a lengthy prison sentence, the result</p><p>of his typical inability to restrain himself when fired with zeal for a just cause.</p><p>In a sermon defending the temporal powers of the pope against imperial</p><p>infringement, Institoris had allowed himself to make several personal and slan-</p><p>12 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 12</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>derous remarks about the emperor himself.The emperor was not amused and</p><p>nor was the Dominican general chapter, which ordered Institoris to be jailed</p><p>for detracting from the majesty of the emperor.10 Indeed, only the interven-</p><p>tion of the master-general of the Order saved Institoris from prison: the same</p><p>letter that gave him his promotion suspended his sentence, a suspension that</p><p>was eventually made permanent in 1479.</p><p>But if it was easy to pardon an excess of enthusiasm on behalf of the</p><p>papacy, it was less simple to excuse Institoris’ frequent quarrels and mis-</p><p>adventures within his own Order. In April of 1475, the master-general was</p><p>again compelled to intervene in Institoris’ affairs, this time to authorize the</p><p>prior of the convent at Basel to settle a dispute between Institoris and two</p><p>other Schlettstadt friars, each of whom had charged the other with the theft</p><p>of a sum of money.11 The matter was settled, apparently in Institoris’ favor, but</p><p>it is indicative of his ability to carry a grudge that four years later the unfor-</p><p>tunate prior at Basel was still receiving instructions from the master-general,</p><p>this time authorizing him to resolve Institoris’ charges of slander against his</p><p>opponents.12</p><p>A more serious matter arose in 1482, when Institoris had been given the</p><p>job of collecting money donated for the war against the Turks, and was strongly</p><p>suspected of embezzling funds. On March 26th he was summoned to present</p><p>himself in Rome within nine days or face “the gravest penalties,” including, but</p><p>not limited to, the loss of all goods, privileges, offices and rank, to be followed</p><p>by expulsion from the Order, excommunication and imprisonment.13 Nor was</p><p>Rome entirely convinced of the effectiveness of its draconian threats, for just</p><p>six days later a papal commission also wrote to the bishop of Augsburg, asking</p><p>him to determine “as secretly and cautiously as could be done” whether</p><p>Insti-</p><p>toris was still in the city and ordering him to be detained if he was. The com-</p><p>mission further specified that all money, silver, and jewels which Institoris had</p><p>deposited with “a certain widow” were to be recovered by any expedient means</p><p>and entrusted to someone of greater reliability.14 Although the conclusion of</p><p>the affair is undocumented, Institoris was evidently not convicted of anything</p><p>serious since he retained his position within the Inquisition, and was back in</p><p>papal good graces by the following summer. He was not, however, given</p><p>further financial responsibilities.</p><p>It is hard to know what to make of these scandals, but they dogged Insti-</p><p>toris’ career.15 Though Institoris never mentions his troubles in his writings, it</p><p>seems likely that they contributed to the keen hostility with which he greeted</p><p>any hint of criticism, and to his self-image as a man unjustly persecuted by</p><p>numerous enemies. To Institoris’ superiors, however, it seems that, when</p><p>weighed in the balance, Institoris’ devotion to the papacy and the Church – as</p><p>well as his capacity for hard work – counted for more than his occasionally</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 13</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 13</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>serious lapses in judgment. In consequence, despite his constant bickering</p><p>with his colleagues and his intermittent brushes with more serious discipli-</p><p>nary proceedings, Institoris retained his position as inquisitor for most of his</p><p>long life and he was still pursuing witches and heretics in Bohemia when he</p><p>died, probably in 1505.</p><p>For most of his life, then, Institoris was involved with the fight against</p><p>heresy. At the beginning of his career we find him participating in the trial and</p><p>execution of the Waldensian “bishop,” Frederick Reiser – an event which, Insti-</p><p>toris tells us, confirmed his belief in the ever-increasing power of heresy in</p><p>Christendom.16 Soon afterwards, Institoris was preaching against the Hussites,</p><p>and his experience with Utraquism goes far toward explaining his concern</p><p>with sacramental heresies of all kinds. Such were his chief concerns at least</p><p>through 1480, when, while in Augsburg, he perceived “a dangerous error con-</p><p>cerning the daily communion of the laity,” and initiated inquisitorial proceed-</p><p>ings accordingly.17 Indeed, a great deal of Institoris’ writing – even that on</p><p>witchcraft – is closely tied to his conceptions of the sacrament and the ways</p><p>in which a physical object can mediate between the natural and supernatural</p><p>worlds.The Malleus was Institoris’ only work on witchcraft, but he wrote about</p><p>the sacrament on several occasions, attacking eucharistic errors, great and</p><p>small.18</p><p>By 1480, however, Institoris had become concerned by the dangers of</p><p>witchcraft, and he accordingly began to prosecute suspected witches with</p><p>vigor. Unfortunately, the precise extent of the inquisitor’s campaign is not</p><p>clear. Though Institoris claimed extensive personal experience in witch pros-</p><p>ecutions both in the Malleus and his personal correspondence (for instance in</p><p>a report written in 1490 to the Nürnberg city council, he boasted of having</p><p>been responsible for the discovery and execution of more than two hundred</p><p>witches19), there is an almost complete lack of corroborating evidence. Indeed,</p><p>on the basis of contemporary documents, the only witch-trials in which</p><p>Institoris’ participation can be proven are those which took place in Ravens-</p><p>burg in 1484 and in Innsbruck in the following year.Though additional records</p><p>might easily have been lost, it seems certain that Institoris’ own account of</p><p>the extent of his personal experience in witchcraft prosecutions is greatly</p><p>exaggerated.</p><p>Whatever his previous experience, however, in the autumn of 1484 Insti-</p><p>toris arrived in Ravensburg and began at once to preach against witchcraft.20</p><p>In response to his request that Ravensburgers come forward to denounce</p><p>“hechsen ald unholden,” a number of suspects were arrested, and eventually</p><p>eight women were convicted and burned. Yet although Institoris seems here</p><p>to have had the support of the mayor and other civic officials, elsewhere he</p><p>met with opposition from local officials, both secular and ecclesiastical, who</p><p>14 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 14</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>resented the sudden expansion of inquisitorial activity against foes even more</p><p>nebulous than usual.</p><p>In response, Institoris went to Rome that winter, carrying a letter, signed</p><p>both by him and his colleague, Jacob Sprenger, asking for explicit authority to</p><p>prosecute witchcraft. By early December he had received an entirely satisfac-</p><p>tory reply in the form of the famous “witch-bull,” the Summis Desiderantes of</p><p>Innocent VIII, which recognized the existence of witches and the authority of</p><p>inquisitors to do what was necessary to get rid of them; Institoris and Sprenger,</p><p>the pope commanded, were neither to be molested nor hindered in any</p><p>manner whatsoever by any authority, under pain of excommunication and</p><p>worse.21 Further, the bishop of Strassburg was asked to enforce the provisions</p><p>of the bull, and to compel obedience, through excommunication if necessary,</p><p>or, failing that, through an appeal to the secular arm. Six months later, Inno-</p><p>cent supplemented this endorsement with personal letters to Archduke</p><p>Sigismund and the archbishop of Mainz, thanking them for their efforts, but</p><p>also urging them to be even more active in their support of the Inquisition.22</p><p>At the same time, Innocent wrote to the abbot of Weingarten, who had</p><p>apparently assisted Institoris’ campaign in Ravensburg the previous year, to say</p><p>that he had urged the Archduke to protect him from the retaliation of those</p><p>he had offended – some indication of just how unpopular Institoris’ efforts</p><p>had been.23</p><p>Meanwhile, Institoris had taken his campaign back to Germany, stopping</p><p>first in Tyrol and the town of Innsbruck.24 At the time, Innsbruck was a pros-</p><p>perous but unspectacular south German town, notable only for its proximity</p><p>to Italy (the source of its prosperity) and the presence of the archduke, who</p><p>had a permanent residence there since the early years of the century.25 Tyrol</p><p>was, Institoris tells us, a notorious hotbed of witches; but it is just as likely</p><p>that simple convenience, combined with his haste to begin prosecutions,</p><p>explains his choice of location – the diocese of Brixen, which included</p><p>Innsbruck, being the first territory within his jurisdiction on the road from</p><p>Rome.26</p><p>As was proper, Institoris first presented himself and his credentials to</p><p>Golser, the bishop, in order to obtain his consent and support (although with</p><p>the recent promulgation of the witch-bull, and with Innocent VIII still actively</p><p>promoting his inquisitors’ investigations, the bishop could hardly refuse). In</p><p>mid-July Golser circulated the witch-bull throughout his diocese with an open</p><p>letter to all ecclesiastical personnel, commanding them to assist Institoris’</p><p>investigations and offering an indulgence of forty days to all who would step</p><p>forward to denounce witches.27 In addition, Institoris had advertisements dis-</p><p>played prominently about town, most likely (as he recommends in the Malleus)</p><p>through notices on the walls of the parish church and town hall which invited</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 15</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 15</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>anyone with any knowledge of witchcraft whatsoever to come forward and</p><p>testify, under pain of severe ecclesiastical and secular penalties.28</p><p>Institoris knew his audience well, as the tenor of such an appeal shows.</p><p>There was no talk of devils, or diabolic pacts, or intercourse with Satan; at this</p><p>point in his investigation the emphasis was placed squarely upon concrete mis-</p><p>fortunes attributed to maleficium and rumors of malign occult powers. Further,</p><p>people were advised to come forward “if anyone knows, has seen or heard that</p><p>any person is suspected of being a heretic and witch, and particularly of prac-</p><p>ticing things which do harm to people, cattle or the fruits of the earth.”29 At</p><p>the same time, Institoris began a vigorous schedule of preaching, in an effort</p><p>to educate his audience about the dangers of witchcraft, its signs and telltale</p><p>characteristics, and to recommend permissible countermeasures. To all</p><p>appearances, Institoris’ campaign was immediately successful: soon he was</p><p>hearing an impressive stream of testimony – an extensive melange of direct</p><p>accusations, rumors, legends, and snippets of traditional witchcraft beliefs –</p><p>out of which, over the next five weeks, he was to cull sufficient evidence to</p><p>indict about fifty witches. At this point, however, something happened. The</p><p>proceedings were delayed for three weeks, at which time Institoris produced</p><p>a second, alternative list which indicted only fourteen suspects – seven from</p><p>the first list and seven altogether “new” witches, prominent among whom was</p><p>Helena Scheuberin.</p><p>By mid-September, Bishop Golser wrote to Institoris granting him full</p><p>episcopal jurisdiction, and authorizing him to conduct trials in the bishop’s</p><p>name.30 But once again Institoris’ proceedings were impeded, this time by</p><p>order of the archduke, who ordered Institoris to consult with a colleague – a</p><p>pastor from a nearby town whom the bishop named as commissioner. It was</p><p>not until October 14th that these two men, accompanied by witnesses and a</p><p>notary, began to hear formal testimony concerning the suspects. Although the</p><p>proceedings at Innsbruck did not conform to the neat patterns laid down in</p><p>inquisitorial manuals, this was not unusual for the period. As Richard</p><p>Kieckhefer has shown, in late-medieval Germany the activities of the papal</p><p>Inquisition (to say nothing of episcopal inquisitions) were very much ad hoc</p><p>affairs.Typically, inquisitors operated as independent autonomous agents; they</p><p>had little supervision outside the papal curia, and their objectives and juris-</p><p>dictions were only loosely defined.31 Often enough, such institutional short-</p><p>comings led to inertia, but where motivated inquisitors actively campaigned</p><p>against heresy, they led to disorganized and irregular proceedings.</p><p>Given the above, it is not altogether strange that Institoris’ investigations</p><p>ran into difficulties. Yet, even so, it is surprising that his investigation should</p><p>have suffered so sudden and so thorough a collapse: within a month, on</p><p>16 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 16</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>November 14th, Golser wrote another two letters – the first to Institoris</p><p>directly, complaining of the scandals and the dangers which his trials had gen-</p><p>erated and urging him to quit the town; the second, to a friend and priest in</p><p>Innsbruck, saying that,</p><p>if [Institoris] does not withdraw with all speed, you, father, should say to him</p><p>in my place that more than enough scandals have arisen because of his bad trial,</p><p>and that he should not remain in this place, lest anything worse should follow</p><p>from this or happen to him.32</p><p>Although Golser does not specify the precise scandal he has in mind, he</p><p>is probably referring to the interrogation of Helena Scheuberin with which we</p><p>began. He was apparently offended by the nuts and bolts of the inquisitor’s</p><p>case, since he later commented to a friend that the inquisitor had “clearly</p><p>demonstrated his foolishness” since “he presumed much that had not been</p><p>proved.”33 Institoris for his part could not disagree more, and maintained in</p><p>the Malleus that he would have needed an entire book to record all the instances</p><p>of malign magic reported in Innsbruck alone:</p><p>For how many of the blind, of the lame, of the withered, of those ensnared by</p><p>diverse infirmities, legally swear that they strongly suspect that infirmities of</p><p>this kind both in general and in particular have been caused by witches?34</p><p>An especially large number of alleged witches were suspected of love</p><p>magic, which Institoris blamed upon the high number of bitter, betrayed</p><p>women in the town.35Yet this connection between female sexuality and witch-</p><p>craft, so obvious to the inquisitor, was decisively rejected by the investigating</p><p>commission that so abruptly halted the proceedings.</p><p>Institoris, however, refused to let matters rest, and he spent the next</p><p>several months hanging around Innsbruck collecting evidence, harassing wit-</p><p>nesses, even briefly seizing a suspected witch or two on his own initiative, all</p><p>in all making of himself an insufferable nuisance. This independent foray into</p><p>witch-hunting, combined with the wretched outcome of the trial, induced the</p><p>bishop, a man who from the outset had been less than enthusiastic about the</p><p>campaign, to write his letters urging the inquisitor to quit the city and trouble</p><p>its citizens no more. This one-sided correspondence grew progressively more</p><p>insistent until in February 1486, his patience exhausted, the bishop wrote to</p><p>Institoris for the last time. He expressed astonishment that Institoris remained</p><p>in his diocese where his presence had brought errors, dissension, and scandal,</p><p>and ordered him to cease molesting the citizens of Innsbruck and to return at</p><p>once to his convent, lest the husbands and friends of the women whom Insti-</p><p>toris had persecuted lay hands on him and do him injury. Further, in language</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 17</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 17</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>unusually blunt for correspondence among ecclesiastics, Golser informed</p><p>Institoris that he was to do nothing further in his diocese save leave it.36 This</p><p>a disgruntled Institoris finally did, retiring to Cologne and leaving behind him</p><p>an enraged citizenry, annoyed officials, and a thoroughly perplexed archduke,</p><p>who hired two prominent doctors of law, Ulrich Molitor and Conrad Stürtzel,</p><p>to explain the whole witchcraft business to him once and for all.37</p><p>But by this time Institoris had also begun to write his treatise on witch-</p><p>craft as a rebuttal to his critics and as a program for further action. He began</p><p>with a short manual on technical matters: a series of instructions, advisories,</p><p>and model documents for judges presiding over witchcraft prosecutions.38</p><p>Soon afterwards he decided to write a more substantial and ambitious work,</p><p>one in which strictly judicial matters would comprise only the final part. This</p><p>was to become the Malleus Maleficarum, the work that he was to “co-author”</p><p>with his fellow inquisitor, Jacob Sprenger.</p><p>Institoris’ choice of Sprenger as his collaborator was both politic and</p><p>wise. Perhaps first and foremost, Jacob Sprenger was a man far more distin-</p><p>guished and far less contentious than Institoris; second, both as an academic</p><p>and within the Dominican Order, Sprenger’s career was exemplary. Having</p><p>established himself as an outstanding scholar at an early age, by 1468 Sprenger</p><p>was already lecturing on the sentences at the University of Cologne, even as</p><p>he was still working towards his master’s degree; ten years later, he was a pro-</p><p>fessor of theology; and, by 1480, Sprenger had been elected dean of the the-</p><p>ology faculty. Sprenger was also well known outside the schools as the “apostle</p><p>of the Rosary,” since his ardent devotion to the Virgin had been rewarded with</p><p>a vision in which he was exhorted to spread the cult of the rosary through-</p><p>out Germany. To this end, Sprenger had introduced rosarial brotherhoods</p><p>to Germany, which immediately enjoyed tremendous popularity. Finally,</p><p>Sprenger was active in Dominican politics as a champion of the Observantine</p><p>reform: he was elected prior of the prestigious convent at Cologne in 1472</p><p>while surprisingly young (probably no older than his mid-thirties), and just</p><p>two years later he won appointment as vicar to the Observant convents on the</p><p>upper Rhine; then in 1481 he</p><p>also became inquisitor to the same area, prin-</p><p>cipally Mainz, Trier, and Cologne. In short, Sprenger could boast of a career</p><p>as successful and as varied as any Dominican could hope for. Indeed, so</p><p>estimable were Sprenger’s intellectual and spiritual attainments, that some</p><p>have questioned the actual extent of Sprenger’s contribution to the Malleus.39</p><p>Although Sprenger certainly wrote the “Apologia auctoris” which prefaces the</p><p>Malleus, and did so in terms that strongly suggest his active participation in its</p><p>writing, nonetheless because the work is of one piece stylistically (and Insti-</p><p>toris definitely wrote the third part of the text single-handedly), and because</p><p>the Malleus throughout reflects Institoris’ known preoccupations, it is likely</p><p>18 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 18</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>that beyond lending the work the prestige of his name, Sprenger’s contribu-</p><p>tion was minimal.40</p><p>However it came into being, by 1487 Institoris had the manuscript of the</p><p>Malleus in hand, and the same desire to produce as authoritative a text as pos-</p><p>sible that had likely led him to seek Sprenger’s collaboration in the first place</p><p>now induced him to try to obtain the formal endorsement of the faculty of</p><p>Cologne.41 Institoris’ efforts resulted in two endorsements. The first, signed</p><p>by just four members of the theology faculty, allowed that the first two parts</p><p>of the text contained nothing contrary to sound philosophy and the Catholic</p><p>faith, and endorsed the third as a model for actual witchcraft prosecutions</p><p>(provided that nothing was done repugnant to canon law).The second boasted</p><p>twice as many signatories, but was also more general; not even mentioning</p><p>the Malleus, it simply commended the Inquisition for its zeal, acknowledged</p><p>the existence of witches, and encouraged all good Christians to assist in the</p><p>fight against this pestiferous sect.</p><p>Exactly how Institoris came by these approbations is a complex and con-</p><p>tentious question. Hansen has suggested that the second endorsement is, in</p><p>effect, a forgery committed by Institoris with the help of a compliant notary</p><p>after the first failed to meet his expectations.42 Schnyder, however, has recently</p><p>given new life to a simpler alternative – that the first endorsement was signed</p><p>only by those members of the faculty who could take the time to read and</p><p>review the entire book, while sympathetic but typically busy academicians</p><p>could sign the more general endorsement in good conscience.43 In any case,</p><p>however accomplished, the result was the same: the Malleus was now printed</p><p>with an impressive collection of credentials, prefaced first by the papal bull,</p><p>Summis Desiderantes, then by the two approbations, uncomfortably spliced</p><p>together, and finally by letters signed by Maximilian I in 1486, placing inquisi-</p><p>tors under his protection. In short, the text proclaimed itself to be as author-</p><p>itative as the authors’ ingenuity could make it.</p><p>That such a show of authority was needed demonstrates just how novel</p><p>the Malleus actually was. Certainly there had been witch-treatises before, but</p><p>these had either refrained from making sweeping judgments, had remained</p><p>agreeably obscure, or had avoided doctrinal pronouncements altogether. The</p><p>Malleus, on the other hand, was readily available in printed editions, addressed</p><p>thorny doctrinal problems without flinching from (or even acknowledging)</p><p>their problematic consequences, and looked at an old but always disturbing</p><p>subject in a new way. Witchcraft had for centuries remained on the periphery</p><p>of Church doctrine and, although always a grave sin and a serious concern, it</p><p>had never before been considered a cause for real alarm. In the Malleus though,</p><p>witchcraft was elevated to a pivotal position in the struggle between man and</p><p>the devil, and was given new responsibility for the world’s ever-increasing ills.</p><p>ORIGINS AND ARGUMENTS 19</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 19</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>The Malleus, in other words, proposed a basic shift in the way in which the</p><p>Church should conceptualize evil, a shift which not all contemporaries were</p><p>prepared to accept.</p><p>Institoris and Sprenger wrote the Malleus with several stated objectives: first,</p><p>it was to refute critics who denied the reality of witchcraft and hindered the</p><p>persecution of witches; second, it was to provide arguments, exempla, and</p><p>advice for preachers who had to deal with witchcraft on the pastoral level;</p><p>and third, to lend detailed assistance to judges engaged in the difficult work</p><p>of combating witchcraft through legal prosecution. In broad terms, each of</p><p>the book’s three sections deals with one of these issues, while also addressing</p><p>the two problems central to the work: “what is witchcraft?” and “who is a</p><p>witch?”</p><p>Underlying this division, however, is a surprisingly sophisticated sense</p><p>that categories are in part determined by the fields of discourse to which they</p><p>pertain.44 Thus, whereas a legal determination of witchcraft depends upon a</p><p>sufficiency of evidence of a particular kind, derived from behavior observed</p><p>and conjectured, this is a kind of determination wholly inappropriate to the-</p><p>ological discourse. That Institoris and Sprenger understood this distinction is</p><p>readily demonstrated by their consideration of who should legitimately be</p><p>called a heretic: heresy, in the strict sense, was an error in understanding and</p><p>of faith, ultimately discernible by God alone. For this reason, the authors</p><p>submit, a theologian would never be willing to make a certain determination</p><p>of heresy because, no matter what a man’s behavior, it would be impossible to</p><p>know if he acted out of an error of faith. For a canonist (or an inquisitor), on</p><p>the other hand, a man was a heretic when he was so designated by the lawful</p><p>judgment of men.45 In other words, the definition of the category “heretic”</p><p>corresponded to the kind of discourse in which the term was used.</p><p>Similarly, the seemingly utilitarian arrangement of the Malleus responds</p><p>to more sophisticated epistemological considerations, as each section treats</p><p>its subject matter with changing rules of argumentation, types of evidence</p><p>and criteria for logical validity. Accordingly, the first section examines</p><p>witchcraft in largely theoretical terms, through the lenses of theology</p><p>and natural philosophy, by citation of authority, and by means of “scholastic”</p><p>argumentation.</p><p>But, in the second section, when the authors turn to matters of practice,</p><p>they begin by remarking:</p><p>Because we are now concerned with moral issues whence there is no need to</p><p>insist upon varied arguments and expositions in everything . . . therefore we</p><p>pray God that the reader should not seek a demonstration of all things where</p><p>20 THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM</p><p>TMM2 8/30/03 5:38 PM Page 20</p><p>Hans Peter Broedel - 9781526137814</p><p>Downloaded from manchesteropenhive.com at 04/27/2019 11:17:42AM</p><p>via free access</p><p>a suitable probability suffices, the truth of which follows conclusively from our</p><p>own experience, seen and heard, and from the relations of witnesses worthy of</p><p>belief.46</p><p>Thus Institoris and Sprenger call attention to the fact that their argument,</p><p>which has up to this point tried to follow the rules of scholastic and theolog-</p><p>ical argumentation, will now be framed in what they conceive of as moral</p><p>terms; henceforth they will appeal to the rule of authority only to provide</p><p>context for reliable human experience. This differentiation between kinds of</p><p>discourse, however, cannot denote the presence of rigid boundaries between</p><p>different realms of human experience, since it is an essential characteristic of</p><p>the authors’ thought that the truth theologically determined must correspond</p><p>at some level with the reality of sensory experience and vice versa. Rather,</p><p>this distinction is necessary to illuminate the witch in all her aspects, which</p><p>indeed is the point of the Malleus:</p>
  • questionário tele aula 2
  • Diplomacia econômica internacional unidade Iii
  • Diplomacia econômica internacional unidade Ii
  • Diplomacia econômica internacional unidade I
  • Topico atuação profissional teleaula 1
  • Topico de atuação profissional unidade 1
  • Unidade 2
  • SCM570_2_3
  • DIREITO_CONSTITUCIONAL_RESUMO_PARA_A_PRO
  • atividade neurociencia das emoções
  • Globalização e Relações Sociais
  • Regionalismo e Papel da Mulher em O Quinze
  • QUESTIONÁRIO 02 SOCIOLOGIA ORGANIZACIONAL
  • Em uma pequena economia aberta com perfeita mobilidade de capitais e câmbio flutuante, discuta os efeitos de uma redução das importações sobre a t...
  • a gurra na Ucrânia tem impactos significativos na segurança europeia ?e o impacto da gurra na Ucrânia se limitam ao âmbito sem afetar a economia globa
  • As mudanças nos padrões de comércio internacional nos anos 1920, marcadas por práticas protecionistas e busca por autossuficiência, contribuíram pa...
  • Considerando as informações do texto apresentado, analise as situações hipotéticas a seguir, a respeito da aduana e sua fiscalização. I. Se o B...
  • Considere o cenário descrito a seguir: Um produtor rural da área leiteira possui uma terra com 17 hectares de extensão, mão de obra contratada, equ...
  • Considerando o texto e seus conhecimentos sobre as formas de governo, avalie as afirmativas a seguir em relação à monarquia. I. A monarquia é um...
  • O processo de independência do Brasil ocorreu sem participação popular. Em 12 de outubro de 1922, D. Pedro I foi aclamado imperador. Como herdeiro ...
  • Questão 2Para Vygostky, a noção de estrutura da idade refere-se a um conjunto de relações integrais entre funções psicológicas, focalizando as suas...
  • O Positivismo teve uma significativa influência sobre a formulação de ideais republicanos compartilhados pela maioria do segmento militar que desej...
  • A tabela mostra as movimentações do estoque do Produto A O valor unitário dos itens que ficaram em estoque ao 7) final da segunda compra, considera...
  • (UFRPE/2019) Controle orçamentário é um sistema de planejamento econômico-financeiro das operações de uma empresa, e de fiscalização da execução do...
  • 4. Nos mecanismos de reação dos alcadienos, quando ocorre a hidrogenação desses compostos, o resultado sempre é o consumo da dupla ligação, forman...
  • Acerca dos “seis princípios do realismo político” enumerados por Morgenthau (MORGENTHAU, Hans J. A política entre as nações. Brasília: Funag, 2003....
  • Anatomy_and_Physiology_2e_-_WEB_c9nD9QL-9
  • Exercício Avaliativo - Módulo 3_ Revisão da tentativa

Conteúdos escolhidos para você

40 pág.

Grátis

Feminist Theory Justice and the Lure of the Human_traduzido

USP-SP

5 pág.

Grátis

RESUMO The limits of the state: Beyond statist approaches and their critics - Timothy Mitchell

UNILA

31 pág.
Ted Hopf The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory

UFBA

16 pág.
Tópicos INAYATULLAH; BLANEY (2004) - International Relations and the Problem of Difference (Capítulos 1-3)

UNILA

3 pág.
TRADUÇÃO/RESUMO: Taking Preferences Seriously A Liberal Theory of International Politics - Andrew Moravcsik

UNILA

Perguntas dessa disciplina

Grátis

Which of the following alternatives is correct? The construction of teaching identity occurs in three ways: a. Construction of theories, confront...

Grátis

What is the controversy surrounding satanic abuse rituals? a) The controversy is related to the complex cosmology of the Order of the Nine Angles...
What marked decisively a new trajectory for the Angolan territory, distinct from that previously outlined by Diogo Cão in the Kingdom of Congo? a....
What is the purpose of presenting the guidelines of NR-8, NR-14, and NR-18 in the context of construction and buildings?Present the importance of ...
What are the advantages of the ETERNIT® dry construction system? I- The ETERNIT® dry construction system allows for the execution of works with si...
The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft] The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft - Relações Internacionais (2024)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Geoffrey Lueilwitz

Last Updated:

Views: 6407

Rating: 5 / 5 (60 voted)

Reviews: 91% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Geoffrey Lueilwitz

Birthday: 1997-03-23

Address: 74183 Thomas Course, Port Micheal, OK 55446-1529

Phone: +13408645881558

Job: Global Representative

Hobby: Sailing, Vehicle restoration, Rowing, Ghost hunting, Scrapbooking, Rugby, Board sports

Introduction: My name is Geoffrey Lueilwitz, I am a zealous, encouraging, sparkling, enchanting, graceful, faithful, nice person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.