Gwendolyn Prosecuting Witchcraf in an Bellinger Age of Upheaval: How the Reformation Transformed English Witch Trials

Fantastic visions of witches boiling the fat of babies, copulating with demons, and renouncing their baptisms to dedicate themselves to the devil haunted sixteenth- and seventeenth-century England. Alleged “witches” were accused of conjuring storms, killing livestock, and bewitching their victims into illness and death. Tese women and men were believed to practice malefcarum, or evil deeds provoked by the devil or demons, which they supposedly used to harm innocent people in order to create misery and chaos.1 Tales of twisted midnight sabbaths of devil worship characterized by tables of rotting food and perverted orgies swept across the kingdom, creating alarm. Rumors proliferated about how the witches consumed human fesh under the veil of darkness and in the secrecy of forests, how seemingly ordinary villagers tiptoed from their beds and few into the night using potions of baby fat. During the Black Mass, the devil himself supposedly built an army of

1 Henricus Institoris and Jacobus Sprenger, Malleus Maleficarum, trans. Christopher S. Mackay (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006). 11 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

Tales of twisted midnight sabbaths of devil worship swept across England during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Rumors proliferated about how the witches consumed human flesh under the veil of darkness and in the secrecy of forests, how seemingly ordinary villagers tiptoed from their beds and flew into the night using potions of baby fat. (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.)

witches to spread turmoil across the land.2 During this period the English crown broke with the Catholic Church, forcing the English to make sense of witchcraf in a new age dominated by secular rather than religious authority.3 While a general decline in the dominance of Catholic authority in Europe occurred throughout Europe during the seventeenth century, in England the break was complete. One institution especially afected by this shif was the court system, as ecclesiastical courts lost infuence to the increasingly centralized royal courts. At the same time, the strength of the English king led to a fairly organized court centralization project, in contrast to the Holy Roman Empire during same period. 4 Te English developed new social and political roles as they sought to combat witchcraf through the English court system during its secularization. Because witchcraf was both a religious and a secular

2 Information from this paragraph can be found in Stuart Clark, Thinking with Demons: The Idea of Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997). 3 Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1971). 4 Gregory Durston, Witchcraft and Witch Trials: A History of English Witchcraft and Its Legal Perspectives, 1542 to 1736 (Chichester: Barry Rose Law Publishers, 2000); J.A. Sharpe, Crime in Early Modern England, 1550-1750 (London: Longman, 1999). 12 Gwendolyn Bellinger crime, it helps illustrate how people employed these new roles. By examining the works of demonologists, political philosophers, and judges, and accounts of local trials, this article investigates how monarchs, judges, and common people acquired new positions of authority and molded popular ideas about witchcraf and witch trials through the courts during this time of transition. Teir involvement in witch trials shaped views about witchcraf and about the efcacy of the trials themselves. Over time, the heightened enthusiasm of small communities and untrained people led to an increasing sense of skepticism about witchcraf among judges and a reevaluation of how best to eradicate witchcraf within the kingdom. While Keith Tomas suggests that the waning of Catholicism in England led to the decline of magical beliefs and superstitions, this article argues rather that religious change prompted English society to combat witchcraf in new ways. Te ways in which people navigated the legal system in order to gain authority over witchcraf varied according to their position in society. Monarchs held a divine position and were expected to safeguard their kingdoms from all threats, even supernatural ones. Teir efort to combat disorder enabled a system for witch trials to be conducted in which witches were described as an immediate threat to the kingdom. In the courts, royally appointed judges maintained a special role, designated by God, to root out and prosecute witches. Te involvement of judges, and their testimonies and demonologies, helped create a sense of consistency in legal proceedings against witchcraf and popular notions about how to characterize and identify a witch. Common people, too, perceived their own sense of authority in witch trials. Afer the Reformation, they increasingly felt capable of judging the piety of their neighbors and were more likely to accuse others of witchcraf. By relying on the popular notions of witchcraf described by judges, common people increased the enthusiasm for witch trials, prompting judges to become more skeptical of their testimonies. Extensive research exists on witch trials in Europe, especially the nature of the trials and the reasons that people believed in witchcraf. Most notably, Stuart Clark’s Tinking with Demons: Te Idea of Witchcraf in Early Modern Europe and Keith Tomas’s Religion and the Decline of Magic ofer detailed analyses of the views of witchcraf in early modern Europe. Unlike these works, this article does not ask why people condemned witches but rather investigates the transition of identity for diferent “sources of authority”

13 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

during an important period of both religious and political change in English history. Demonstrating how these people viewed themselves in relation to a perceived threat to society illustrates how, in times of dramatic change, people seek to better understand their position in society in order to protect their interests and preserve their well being.

Te Relationship Between Kingly Authority and Witchcraf John Cunningham was placed in a cart outside of his prison on January 23, 1591. Tere he sat, bound for Castle Hill, unable to stand because of the miserable condition of his body. Afer Cunningham endured the Scottish “boots,” a torture device used to crush the leg bones, witnesses recorded that “bloud and marrowe spouted forth in great abundance” from his legs “whereby they were made unserviceable for ever.”5 Cunningham, referred to in the records as “Doctor Fian,” a young schoolteacher from Northern Brunswick, was accused of bewitching a gentleman and attempting to bewitch a young girl.6 King James VI of Scotland and his council oversaw Cunningham’s examination, torture, and confession. Afer retracting his confession of guilt, Cunningham endured more torture, including the boots and the removal of his fngernails.7 Despite this torture, he maintained his innocence. Interpreting Cunningham’s silence as the result of a heart hardened by the devil, James and his council found Cunningham “guilty of renouncing his Christian baptism and pledging himself to the devil,” and sentenced him to death for this “crime against God, the King, and the country.”8 James commanded that Cunningham be strangled and then thrown into a great fre. Because of the remnants of these chilling accounts of Scottish torture and execution, James VI of Scotland has earned the title of “witch hunter” in modern scholarship. James ruled Scotland from 1567 until his death in 1625 and succeeded the throne of England from Queen Elizabeth I in 1603. Scholarship on James’s role in early modern witch trials is based on his 1597 publication of Daemonologie, a book supporting the hunting and condemnation of witches, and on the North Berwick witch trials of the

5 “News From Scotland,” in Daemonologie, ed. G.B. Harrison (London: The Bodley Head Quartos, 1924), 28. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid., 34. 14 Gwendolyn Bellinger

John Cunningham, a young teacher from North Brunswick, was accused of witchcraft in 1591 and tortured using a device known as "the boots," which crushed the leg bones. (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.) early 1590s. Te trial of John Cunningham provides one example in these frst of many Scottish witch trials. His story ofers a glimpse of the Scottish monarch’s role in relation to the supernatural. Monarchs in the British Isles rarely ordered witch trials directly, let alone oversaw the process. Even James, afer ascending to the English throne, grew skeptical of the prevalence of witches within his kingdom. James’s written work serves as an excellent example of how demonologies can be viewed as a form of political philosophy. James argued that political authorities possessed a unique role that enabled them to combat the devil’s infuence in society. Two aspects of King James’s philosophy are critical to understanding this new concept of the monarch and his afliation with witchcraf: 1) the new relationship between monarchies and Christianity and 2) the expectation that a monarch should keep order and peace. Demonology was the systematic study of demons and witchcraf, ofen

15 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

King James VI of Scotland has earned the title of "witch hunter" in modern scholarship for his role in early modern witch trials. James was believed to be immune to witches’ spells because of his divine position as king. Portrait by John de Critz, c. 1606. (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.)

16 Gwendolyn Bellinger including advice to judges on distinguishing witches and their behavior, and advice for their arraignment and punishment. Ofen the works discussed the witches’ disdain for God and their malevolent practices, perverting Christianity and harming neighbors. James’s work mirrors popular demonologists in this time. Although they were considered more radical than the average intellectual, demonologists should not been dismissed as anomalies. Tese men were important fgures in their society and their works circulated widely. Many served as prominent judges and their demonologies were informed by the political philosophy of the day. Te emerging political philosophies of the sixteenth century placed kings in a position of both religious and material control, creating a new secular force with which to safeguard kingdoms from witchcraf. In the sixteenth century kings began acquiring roles previously designated for religious authorities. In England, afer Henry VIII broke from the Catholic Church in 1534, he crowned himself head of the Anglican Church. Christian beliefs still governed peoples’ lives, but religion and the monarchy became even more closely intertwined. Te English Parliament passed the frst statute against witchcraf in 1542, confrming the new concept of witchcraf as a secular crime. Stuart Clark has noted the integration of a king’s divine role and the abolition of witchcraf.9 He argues that the power and political position of witches bore an inverse relationship to the divine and magical position of kings and other authority fgures. But beyond explaining how witches rivaled the king’s power with their own demonic power, he fails to explain why the king’s divine power was jeopardized during this time. Te Reformation and shifing sixteenth-century political attitudes toward monarchs’ right to rule produced increased anxiety over the ability of monarchs to maintain unity and quell disobedience. Te monarch represented God’s divine agent, leaving the pope with a smaller role than in previous centuries. Te monarch needed to maintain the religious as well as political peace of his realm, a peace that was challenged by witchcraf. Clark’s theory connecting the divine right of kings and the threat of witchcraf can be expanded by focusing on the anxiety that monarchs felt toward the disturbance of religious and political order within their kingdoms and how this anxiety

9 The following discussion integrates aspects of Stuart Clark’s Fifth Section, “Politics,” in Thinking with Demons, 549-680. 17 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

prompted a merging of political philosophies and demonologies. Clark suggests that alleged witches fell victim to political aggression because early modern politics contained a “mystical dimension.” God bequeathed divine ofces of power, and only through successfully confronting the malevolent magic of witchcraf could the legitimacy of divine rule be demonstrated.10 Clark explains the concept of early modern kingship as an ofce of “charisma,” applying Max Weber’s notion that a charismatic leader, believed to possess traits of “supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifcally exceptional powers or qualities,” created the basis of his authority.11 He argues that witches also possessed these exceptional powers and therefore rivaled the power of kings. In this time monarchs in England still employed the “divine touch” and performed miracles. James I demonstrated immunity to witches’ spells because of his divine position as king. His agents could strip witches of their power by detaining them in prisons managed by royal authority. Tis “charismatic domination” of kings, bolstered by their immunity to witchcraf, was critical to the king’s ability to rival the power of witches. Te perception of a divinely warranted political position threatened by religious disobedience is echoed in the political theories of James’s Te True Law of Free Monarchies and Basilikon Doron. James relied on scripture and examples of biblical kings to justify his view “of the mutual duty and allegiance betwixt a free and absolute monarch and his people.”12 He argued that the monarch protected his people and served as God’s “lieutenant on earth,” acting as a judge and as a father while observing religious law. As for Christian subjects, he emphasized that they should obey their ruler, even if he acted as a tyrant. James stressed that biblical prophets never encouraged rebellions against princes, no matter how malicious. He argued that the monarch maintained a special position and only God could judge him; the people did not have the right to remove authority from a position designated by the divine. Te fear of religious disunity, upheaval, and rebellion runs like a thread through James’s writing. He depended upon religious conformity in order to secure political obedience. Maintenance of the Christian religion and

10 Clark, Thinking with Demons, 552-618. 11 Max Weber, Economy and Society, quoted in Clark, Thinking with Demons, 582. 12 James I, True Law of Free Monarchies and Basilikon Doron, ed. Daniel Fischlin and Mark Fortier (Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 1996), 47-157. 18 Gwendolyn Bellinger

punishment for those undermining it defned the ideal Christian ruler. Witches not only rejected the relationship of church and state, but also rejected God. To an early modern Christian, witches opposed God in every way, renouncing their baptism to worship the devil and practicing malefcarum. Witchcraf mimicked Christianity by inverting Christian practices, making them grotesque.13 At the same time, both witchcraf and absolute monarchy demanded full allegiance from subjects to their leaders. By choosing the devil, witches rejected God and the king. Diverging from authority contradicted the ideas associated with it, notably, political order and unity. Terefore, “the very notion of witchcraf was inseparable from how disorder was ofen conceived and experienced.” According to James, disorder worsened with time. In his preface to Daemonologie, he explains that he was moved to write in reaction to skeptics because of “the fearefull aboundinge at this time in this countrie, of these detestable slaves of the Devill.”14 Te increase in “devilish practices” was, according to James, due to “the greate wickedness of the people … whereby God justlie punisheth sinne.”15 James suggested that protection against witches would be granted to those who condemned them. God protected the magistrates following his law when examining and punishing witches because, “He will not permit [the witches’] master to trouble or hinder so good a woorke.”16 Furthermore, only by punishing a witch with death could a magistrate follow God’s law and the “municipall law of all Christian nations.”17 While one accused witch, Agnis Tompson, was said to have boasted of her multiple attempts to kill James, including conjuring a ferce storm while he sailed from Denmark and casting numerous deadly spells, her eforts were to no avail. As News From Scotland boldly proclaimed, the king survived because his relationship with God triumphed over the witch’s evil intentions.18

13 For further discussion of inversion and witchcraft in early modern life see Clark, Thinking with Demons. 14 James I, Daemonologie, xi. 15 Ibid., 81. 16 Ibid., 50. 17 Ibid., 77. 18 “News From Scotland,” in Daemonologie, 17. 19 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

Te Magistrate’s Role in Witchcraf Trials Foul and ferce weather spoiled farmers’ crops, livestock perished without warning, and children fell ill, their bodies contorted and thrashing about for hours as they cried out the names of their neighbors, accusing fellow villagers of bewitching them. Te victims of misfortune, interpreting their bad luck as the cruelty of witchcraf, turned to the law for justice across Europe.19 In the late sixteenth century, local judges visited the bewitched to examine the validity of their afictions in order to better determine the guilt of the accused. Tey conducted interviews with townspeople or villagers in an attempt to perform a fair and just trial. Like the king, the justices of the early modern court began to accumulate religious roles in the 1500s, establishing themselves as authorities over heterodoxy. By acquiring this new role, they shaped the precedents of legal proceedings against witches and interpreted legal examples for witch trials, attempting to create a more uniform legal response to witchcraf. In the process, they ofen relied on their own experiences. Tese magistrates hoped to crush disorder and disunity by relying on their individual authority to eradicate witchcraf in their respective jurisdictions. Tis desire to uphold orderliness would eventually lead judges to realize the ease with which locals could distort evidence, and this drove them to diferentiate between “fraudulent” and “true” evidence. By acquiring new religious roles, judges hoped to standardize witch trial procedures, but confronted unexpected challenges in relation to the distinction between true and false evidence, leading to modifcations of their assumptions about the crime they were appointed to prosecute. Although legal proceedings against heretics and witches by secular authorities occurred in medieval Europe during the Inquisition, early modern kingdoms felt a new responsibility to eradicate witchcraf beginning in the sixteenth century. Witch trials mainly sprang into existence in the early fourteenth century, once Pope John XXII (1316-1334) extended inquisitorial powers to investigate witchcraf as a heresy, because of accused witches’ unorthodox use of the sacraments.20 Te 1324 trial of Alice Kyteler,

19 For more on the social fear of maleficarum and witch accusations, see Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1971), 460. 20 Pope John XXII, “Sorcery and the Inquisitors,” in Witchcraft in Europe, 400-1700: A Documentary History, ed. Alan Chalres Kors and Edward Peters (Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 2001), 119-120. 20 Gwendolyn Bellinger

Like the king, the justices of the early modern court began to accumulate religious roles in the 1500s, establishing themselves as authorities over heterodoxy. By acquiring this new role, they shaped the precedents of legal proceedings against witches and interpreted legal examples for witch trials, attempting to create a more uniform legal response to witchcraft. (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.)

her son, and her servants represented the frst organized accusation and trial of “black magic.”21 During the fourteenth and ffeenth century, witch trials and the production of literature generated by clergy to advise others on witches’ characteristics and activities continued to rise. It was not until the sixteenth century that the prosecution of witches truly fourished under secular authorization. Due to the fragmentation of Christendom following the Reformation and the emerging philosophies that emphasized the centrality and divinity of the king, magistrates stepped into the role of deciding religious orthodoxy and heterodoxy in cases of witchcraf. Te fourteenth- and ffeenth-century witch trials ofen had involved the guidance of Church leaders. Inquisitors under the direction of the Catholic Church handed over sorcerers or witches accused of heresy to secular authorities, and they advised judges on how to seek out and prosecute witches. In fact, as late as the ffeenth century, clerics felt secular authorities sometimes hindered Church proceedings against witches. In 1484, Pope Innocent VIII issued the Summis

21 “The Sorcery Trial of Lady Alice Kyteler (1324),” in Medieval Popular Religion, 1000-1500, ed. John Shinners (Toronto: Higher Education University of Toronto Press Inc., 2008), 263-267. Shinners notes in his introduction to the source that Alice and her accomplices were described as heretics and sorcerers instead of witches. 21 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

desiderantes afectibus, a papal bull recognizing the existence and threat of witchcraf and preventing secular authorities from interfering with Church regulations against it.22 Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger, two ffeenth- century clerics, wrote the well-known Malleus Malefcarum in 1486, a guide to fnding and proceeding against witches.23 Tey advised judges on how to successfully carry out trials, specifying the number of witnesses needed in a trial procedure, which trial methods remained unlawful, and tips for extracting a confession from a suspected witch. Te Malleus was written to instruct these judges how to Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger, two fifteenth-century properly handle witchcraf in part to relieve the clerics, wrote the well-known 24 Malleus Maleficarum in 1486, inquisitors of their northern German duties. which advised judges on how to successfully carry out trials, Tey did not, however, let the judges forget specifying the number of witnesses that authority ultimately remained with God needed in a trial procedure, which trial methods remained and the Church. Te judges were expected unlawful, and tips for extracting a confession from a suspected witch. to strictly follow the procedures laid out by (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.) Church authorities and to use blessed palm and salt to protect themselves from the witches.25 As the political powers in sixteenth-century Europe strengthened at the expense of their ecclesiastical counterparts, new secular agents initiated witchcraf investigations themselves, pushing out zealous clergymen. Royal magistrates commandeered the authority of clerics and formed their own legal guidelines to prosecute witches. Te nature of the crime shifed from heresy against the Church to treason against the king and against God. In England before 1542, ecclesiastical courts had jurisdiction over witch trials with the support of secular courts. Afer the Reformation, the English legal

22 Jennifer Kolpacoff Deane, A History of Medieval Heresy and Inquisition (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2011), 213. 23 Some controversy surrounds Sprenger’s role as an author of the Malleus Maleficarum. For more see Jeffrey Burton Russell, Witchcraft in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1972). 24 Henricus Institoris and Jacobus Sprenger, Malleus Maleficarum, trans. Christopher S. Mackay (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 435. 25 Ibid., 503-504. 22 Gwendolyn Bellinger

system strengthened its hold.26 Ecclesiastical courts still maintained a role in the trials but their power diminished. Bishops and other religious leaders pushed for the secular authorities in England to pursue cases of witchcraf because the ecclesiastical courts lacked the power to properly prosecute. Compared to some regions on the European continent, the trials within England remained relatively limited. Brian Levack estimates the total number of trials to be around 3,000 in the British Isles, and Scotland alone counted for half the proceedings in Britain. In contrast, he estimates the much smaller regions of French-Comté and Lorraine to have had as many as 5,000 trials, Switzerland at least 10 ,000 trials, and the German lands perhaps as many as 45,000.27 Te comparatively lower number of trials in Britain arguably is due to the organization of courts in England, in which the higher courts oversaw lower courts.28 England provided courts with a hierarchy and did not rely simply on local trials but rather a network of courts and legal proceedings. For example, royal judges heard cases biannually while traveling on circuit. Never remaining in one place, these judges were removed from local afairs and prejudices. Tis system facilitated the magistrates’ changing perceptions of witchcraf accusations as the seventeenth century progressed. In contrast to the centralized English system, Scotland relied on local authorities without much judicial training or experience. Tese authorities could easily be infuenced by local bias. Levack argues that this is the reason for Scotland’s high execution rate compared with its English neighbor. He also claims that Scottish witchcraf accusations and executions declined once Scottish judges went on circuit in the latter half of the seventeenth century.29 While the numbers of trials increased in most kingdoms following the Reformation, those kingdoms with centralizing court systems witnessed fewer trials than those without. While sixteenth- and seventeenth-century religious leaders continued

26 Gregory Durston, Witches and Witch Trials: A History of English Witchcraft and Its Legal Perspectives, 1542-1736 (Chichester: Barry Rose Law Publishers, 2000), 173. 27 Brian Levack, The Witch-Hunt in Early Modern Europe (Harow: Pearson Education Limited, 2006), 21. Levack prepared French estimates from A. Soman, “The Parlement of Paris and the Great Witch Hunt (1565-1640),” Sixteenth Century Journal 9 (1978): 35. Swiss estimates from Behringer, Erob sich das ganze Land; and German estimates from G. Bader, Die Hexenprozesse in der Schweiz (Affoltern, 1945) and Behringer, Erob sich das ganze Land, 61-62. 28 Durston, Witches and Witch Trials, 200. Brian P. Levack, Witch-Hunting In Scotland: Law, Politics and Religion (New York: Routledge, 2008), 4. 29 Levack, Witch-Hunting In Scotland, 3. 23 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

to write demonologies, clerics no longer instructed ofcials on how to carry out their profession. Magistrates now had full authority. Te English clergyman Henry Holland dedicated his A Treatise Against Witchcraf (1590) to “honorable lords.” He wanted to explain to the public God’s role in fghting evil, not to tell judges how to proceed with witch trials, as Kramer did in the Malleus Malefcarum. Afer justifying the arraignment of witches by providing biblical precedent, Holland made no attempt to advise magistrates on their duty, because “God put into the hartes of our Honourable Iudges to doe the like in these time, where and when the occasion is ofered.” He then stated that the pastor’s duty was to know his congregation, and if he discovered a witch, he must turn the suspect over to the civil magistrate in order that the suspect “with some greater torments come to repentance, that so they may be saved.”30 Notably, Holland stated that witches came to repentance and could be saved by their arrest by magistrates, rather than by a confession to clergy. Common beliefs of the early modern period suggested that God could only forgive a witch if he or she confessed and was executed. Following the Reformation, Protestants denied the magic of the Church, including the miracles of exorcism and transubstantiation.31 As a result, Protestants turned from the magical power of the Church to secular regulations to secure themselves from the threat of black magic. Only when arrested and imprisoned by a royal magistrate did the suspected witch lose his or her powers. Magistrates served as a means for witches to repent and as protection from dark magic. Te magistrate prided himself on his immunity to witches’ charms. By fulflling their divine duty to seek and punish witches, magistrates enjoyed inviolability. God protected the magistrates in order to ensure that they could complete their responsibilities.32 Although the devil visited witches to give them courage and convince them not to confess, the witches were lef vulnerable to the strength of the kingdom. Ideas about what characterized a “witch” evolved for centuries. While the fourteenth and ffeenth centuries relied on clerical works to delineate aspects of witchcraf, magistrates ofen wrote about their own experiences working with witches in the court system during the sixteenth century.

30 Henry Holland, A Treatise Against Witchcraft (Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 1590), 16-41. 31 Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic, 52-53. 32 Ibid., 51. 24 Gwendolyn Bellinger

Tese works refected their new task of determining the characteristics of witchcraf, replacing the responsibility of the Church. Trials were subject to scrutiny and debate. How did a judge proceed against a child practicing witchcraf? Should a judge execute a witch who only attended a witches’ sabbath but never practiced malefcarum? What if witches recant their confessions? Judges waded through these issues in an attempt to hammer out a more uniform legal system to increase uniformity and predictability within their courts. Although falling short of uniformity, judges infuenced their fellow ofcers through their own accounts, managing to create some sense of solidarity even though trials relied on the individuality of the judge. Despite the production of numerous manuals written by judges delineating the appropriate sanctions to be taken against witches, no standardized set of instructions ever materialized, and controversies fourished. For example, while writers on the subject of witchcraf all demanded the death of a proven witch, the evidence that supplied absolute proof versus the evidence that supplied presumption could vary tremendously and ultimately rested upon the conscience of the judge.33 Presuming that a suspect performed witchcraf did not result in a guilty sentence. If a witch only confessed under torture or if accusations and rumors did not have enough witnesses, the evidence was presumed, not absolute.34 Evidence considered strong by most writers included the inability to cry in front of a judge, a confession without the use of torture, or the presence of a witch’s mark. One judge insisted that the presence of a witch’s mark should always result in a guilty verdict.35 However, the judge maintained the authority to decide if the mark was actually given to the suspect by the devil or if it was natural. Terefore, even evidence deemed absolutely valid was subject to the evaluation of the judge. By the end of the sixteenth century, magistrates claimed an interesting

33 In England, witches were supposed to be executed simply for renouncing God and accepting the devil, but it was rare for a witch to be executed unless there was proof of maleficarum. 34 Jean Bodin, On the Demon-Mania of Witches (Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2001), 195. Torture was not legal in England. For more see Durston, Witches and Witch Trials. 35 In France and elsewhere on the continent, it was thought that the witch’s mark was given by the devil upon the making of a pact. In England, it was commonly believed that witches had “familiars,” or demons in the shape of animals. These demons would suck the witch’s blood, leaving a mark where they fed. Both regions considered the mark a valid form of evidence and recognized that the mark did not appear on every witch. Therefore, the lack of a mark did not necessarily guarantee innocence. 25 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

position when confronted with witchcraf, serving as intermediaries between the accused and the law while also representing a redeemer to the local people and, ironically, also to the witches they executed. Locals believed that the execution of witches saved their souls from the devil. Only a magistrate could properly identify a witch, legally punish him or her, and simultaneously save the soul of the accused. He worked within a larger context of witch trials presided over by fellow judges, drawing from the experiences and warnings of his colleagues while maintaining his own opinions and decisions. Some historians ascribe the existence of witch trials to the will of the people, arguing that the magistrates responded to the demands of locals.36 However, the evidence supports a more complex narrative. While accusations typically arose from local levels, magistrates also responded by order of the king and through their own initiative. As magistrates wrote of their own experiences, the understanding of witchcraf evolved into a code for prosecuting the accused. Tey managed to create a more systematic means of punishing witches, but maintained their ability to rest on their own decisions and opinions. Te magistrate mediated between the orderliness sought by the king and the suspicions and worries of locals. While accusations few between villagers, the magistrate applied a salve to local turmoil. However, with time, magistrates noticed that locals could take advantage of the orderly system of witch trials. By knowing the signs of bewitchment, possession, and guilt that judges used to conduct fair trials, people could construct fraudulent evidence against their neighbors. Magistrates were forced to rely on their ability to diverge from typical trial procedures by adding a degree of skepticism in their evaluations of witches. Te will of the people gained authority in trials. Te voices of women, children, and criminals could be heard in these trials but not in others. As the authority and demands of the people grew, the magistrates worried that their own authority would not be respected. So while kings’ reliance on magistrates in witchcraf trials increased the power of secular institutions over ecclesiastical ones and advanced a more systematic means of evaluating and prosecuting witches, it also led to the growing skepticism surrounding trials that would continue to

36 Jonathan L. Pearl, Crime of Crimes: Demonology and Politics in France, 1560-1620 (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1999). 26 Gwendolyn Bellinger

By knowing the signs of bewitchment, possession, and guilt that judges used to conduct fair trials, people could construct fraudulent evidence against their neighbors. Magistrates were forced to rely on their ability to diverge from typical trial procedures by adding a degree of skepticism in their evaluations of witches. (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.) grow throughout the seventeenth century.

Te Authority of Common People Te early seventeenth-century English community of Lincoln described Joane Flower as a malicious and estranged woman whose “eyes were fery and hollow, her speech fell and enuious, her demeanour strange and exoticke.”37 When Flower’s neighbors afrmed that she frequently threatened them with menacing curses of revenge and ofen dealt with “familiar spirits,” the community reacted not with astonishment but rather with a new confdence in their ability to indict her. Te consensus among Lincoln’s residents toward Flower was that “the whole course of her life gaue great suspicion that she was a notorious Witch.” Her neighbors’ accusations merely confrmed the community’s suspicions. Te growing secularization of the courts gave common people in villages or small urban areas the sense that they might be believed when

37 The Wonderfvl Discoverie of the Witchfcrafts of Margaret and Phillip Flower, Daughters of Ioan Flower neere Beuer Castle (London: G. Eld, 1618), 8. 27 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

making an accusation. Despite lacking titles, positions of authority, and the training of intellectuals, they felt entitled to assume authority over the religious and the supernatural afer the Reformation. Tis in turn increased the skepticism of the magistrates. Judges did not operate as servants to the suspicions of the common people. Not every case of witchcraf ended with an execution or even a guilty charge. Evidence suggests that growing skepticism about accusations of witchcraf were rooted in the friction between the authority of local testimonies and the authority of judges. Te judges’ increasing hesitancy toward local testimonies emerged from an underlying fear of disorder. Today it is difcult to understand what sort of threat witchcraf posed to the English 400 years ago. Modern medicine can diagnose and cure diseases that were mysterious to people in the sixteenth century. Te weather forecast for the entire week can be checked on the Internet. Te perceptions of most people in the modern Western world diverges greatly from that of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europeans, who faced unforeseeable fres, storms, crop failures, illnesses, and deaths on a regular basis. But most importantly, no modern police force protected the neighborhoods afer dark. Tese people investigated crimes themselves. Tey were in charge of their own safety. Afer the Reformation, Protestants relied less and less on the Church and more on their individual beliefs and personal relationship with the Divine. Max Weber argued that a “religious mass intellectualism” developed in early Protestant communities. Tis sprouted from the development of an “intellectual skepticism and rationalistic Enlightenment” characteristic of religious reform.38 Tis sense of independence can be seen in individuals who gained a position of authority over the piety of their neighbors. Keith Tomas has studied the relationship between the growth of Protestantism and the changing views of magical practices. He notes that Protestants relied less on rituals and more on belief and one’s personal relationship with God. According to Tomas, the Reformation “diminished the institutional role of the Church as the dispenser of divine grace. Te individual stood in a direct relationship to God and was solely dependent upon his omnipotence. He could no longer rely upon the intercession of intermediaries, whether

38 Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Stephen Kalberg (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2009), 411-412. 28 Gwendolyn Bellinger saints or clergy.”39 Religion was an essential aspect of politics and daily life. Skipping church on Sundays could lead to criminal charges. In a society defned by faith and prayer, those holding an ambiguous position in society were most likely to be accused of witchcraf. Tomas argues that the individuality achieved in Protestantism led to an attempt to take magic out of the Catholic tradition and, with time, to an overall decline in the belief in magic. However, it can be argued that this individuality played a role in the increase in English witch trials during the sixteenth century. Accepting this new Protestant mindset, individuals felt more in control of their personal piety and therefore felt more inclined to judge the piety of their neighbors. Tis new entitlement of community members to judge one another’s religious devotion can be seen in many accounts of witchcraf accusations. Te community in Lincoln had questioned Joane Flower’s morality well before her neighbors accused her of witchcraf. Likewise, in the 1615 case of the Sutton witches of Bedford, writers emphasized Mary Sutton’s three bastard children and her single status. Te notorious case of the Witches of Warboys included the story of one “Mother Samuel.” Apparently ailing from bewitchment, children blamed Samuel for their illnesses. Te anonymous author who detailed the events leading up to this trial emphasized Samuel’s frequent cursing, lewdness, and worst of all, her “negligent church going and slackness in God’s service.”40 Te fate of an accused witch relied on the evidence brought forth by his or her neighbors. Te will of community fgures could literally save or condemn those charged. Gentlemen, doctors, and other educated and respectable members of the community were the most infuential witnesses in these trials. Generally, relatives called on local doctors when a family member fell ill. When the young English girl Jane Trockmorton became ill, her mother took her to Doctor Barrow, who struggled to fnd a natural cause for her ailment. Afer Jane’s third visit to the doctor without any conclusive diagnosis, he diagnosed sorcery.41 Another example of the reliance on reputation in witch accusations

39 Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1971), 76. 40 The Most Strange and Admirable Discouerie of the Three Witches of Warboys (London, 1593), 26. 41 Ibid. 29 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

The fate of an accused witch relied on evidence brought forth by his or her neighbors. The will of community figures could save or condemn those charged. (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.)

occurred in 1615 in the County of Bedford. Master Enger accused Mary Sutton of using witchcraf to kill his livestock and cause his servants to fall ill and die.42 Te community supported Enger’s accusation because he was an “honest” “Gentleman of Worship,” who supplied “both food and clothing” to Sutton. Sutton, on the other hand, was a beggar with an illegitimate child. Te good reputation of Master Enger earned him support from his neighbors. Sutton’s bad reputation led to her demise. In general, the higher one’s position in society, the more one’s voice was heard. But while respected gentlemen and doctors played very important roles in witch trials, almost anyone could provide a testimony in witchcraf cases. Robin Briggs describes villages and small towns as places in which people “could not escape each other.”43 He ascribes the existence of witch

42 Witches Apprehended, Examined and Executed, for the Notable Villanies by Them Committed Both by Land and Water (London, n.p., 1615). 43 Robin Briggs, Witches and Neighbours: The Social and Cultural Context of European Witchcraft (London: HarperCollins, 1996), 4. 30 Gwendolyn Bellinger

trials to a general popular belief of the people, not from enforcement by higher reaches of the government. Briggs argues that being “at odds with [one’s] neighbors” was the most common reason that trials occurred. But if anyone could accuse someone else of witchcraf, what prevented resentful commoners from accusing long-time foes? How could one discern between an accusation based on true suspicion and one based on bitterness from an unrelated issue? To early modern magistrates, witchcraf did exist, but so did false testimonies. How did the involvement of so many people afect the way in which judges conducted trials? Trials resulted from accusations made by witnesses whom the court typically denied a voice. Jean Bodin asserted that women, children, and even criminals should be allowed to testify, since it could be so difcult to fnd evidence of witchcraf, because most activities took place at night.44 Grave consequences resulted from the involvement of children in trials: in the case of “Mother Samuel” in England in the late sixteenth century, for instance, fve young sisters insisted that she bewitched them. Children were most likely saturated with stories of witchcraf from an early age. Even if no trials or executions took place in their towns, churches still preached about the dangers of witchcraf and gossip about executions could not be quieted. Te prevalence of stories about witch trials probably created a negative feedback loop, producing further trials. Briggs argues that the popularity of European witch trials at this time related to the pervasiveness of popular supernatural beliefs transmitted through demonologies fresh of the printing press and through warnings spread by the Church. According to Briggs, “every trial, every public reading of the confessions made by the accused, must have reinforced the symbiosis, providing more material to be recycled in the future.”45 But this process of “recycling” stories and popular ideas of the witch’s sabbath, devil’s pact, and general behavior or characteristics of witches did more than just lead to an increased number of trials. It also led to increasing skepticism on the part of magistrates. As early as 1584, Reginald Scot published Te Discovery of Witchcraf, a controversial work questioning the legitimacy of witchcraf. James I demanded all copies be burned afer his ascent to the English throne. In one section Scot doubted the legitimacy of witchcraf accusations by

44 Bodin, On the Demon-Mania of Witches. 45 Briggs, Witches and Neighbours, 382. 31 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

questioning the reliability of those making the accusations. According to Scot, “Hobgoblin and Robin-Goodfellow are contemned among young children, and Mother Alice and Mother Bungie are feared among old fools.”46 Scot scolded the English for listening to the imaginative thoughts of children and the inventive gossip of the elderly.

Te Courts’ Role in the Waning Belief in Witchcraf Why belief in witchcraf eventually disappeared from early modern Europe remains a contested question among scholars. Scot mistrusted the testimony of locals. But no single factor can explain the growing skepticism and eventual halting of executions. Te frst key factor leading to the hesitancy of judges stemmed from the centralization of the kingdom. Kings began acquiring roles generally designated for religious authorites, creating a new relationship between Christianity and the secular roles of the monarch. Monarchs sought to acquire certain responsibilities for themselves, including the establishment of an organized, united kingdom, blessed by God with the authority of the monarch central to society. Secondly, the English court system was organized through a series of circuit courts. Judges, appointed to the Westminster courts, performed their duties at various assizes to hear local cases across England.47 Juries were made up of 21-70 men of high status who supposedly lacked bias in the case. Gregory Durston argues that the breakdown of the assize courts in the 1640s during the English Civil War “localized” felony trials and therefore lef judges victim to the biases and gossip of the community. Tis led to the explosion of witch trials mid-century. Around 101 indictments for witchcraf occurred in Essex in the period between 1620-1680, whereas only 34 indictments occurred between 1580-1709 in Cheshire.48 Few or no indictments occurred in other counties following the English Civil War. Tis centralization transformed the means by which the people positioned themselves within communities. Tis second key factor meant judges did not simply stay in one small town but responded more formally to the central government of these early states. When farmers, women, workers, and other common people increasingly became involved in

46 Reginald Scot, The Discovery of Witchcraft (London, 1584). 47 Durston, Witchcraft and Witch Trials, 195. 48 J.A. Sharpe, Crime in Early Modern England, 1550-1750 (London: Longman, 1999). 32 Gwendolyn Bellinger

The process of recycling stories of the witch's sabbath, devil's pact, and other characteristics of witches' behavior not only increased the number of trials, but also led to increasing skepticism on the part of magistrates. (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.) these trials, not only did the judges manage to separate their own biases from those of the people, they began to sense a mounting atmosphere of scheming and calculation between neighbors. Most of those accused were estranged from their communities and mistrusted due to personal disputes with their neighbors. Te more the judges avoided these personal battles within communities and ceased developing personal relationships with the accusers, the more objectively they could examine evidence. Te third factor leading to increasing skepticism of witch trials was a greater ability to distinguish “fraudulent” charges. Judges managed to discern which evidence was not strong enough or when evidence appeared to be faked. Many characteristics of witchcraf were reinforced by common gossip, demonologists, and even churches “recycling” stories and 33 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

information about the supernatural. Coupled with a growing sense of “conspiracy” within communities, judges became more aware that commoners could easily accuse their neighbors even though they lacked sufcient evidence. J.A. Sharpe examines the fraudulent bewitching of a young girl from North Moreton England in 1604.49 Te case of Anne Gunter involved Anne’s father, Brian Gunter, who sought the assistance of King James I afer a local court tried and acquitted three women he accused of witchcraf. It would later become public that the Gunters were blufng. Anne Gunter confessed that her father pressured her In 1584, Reginald Scot published The Discovery of Witchcraft, in to drink liquids that made her ill and forced her which he scolded the English for listening to the imaginative to hide pins in her mouth before she vomited thoughts of children and the inventive gossip of the elderly. to give the illusion that her afiction originated King James I had all copies from witchcraf. He also gave her a copy of of the book burned. (Image courtesy of Wikimedia.) Te Witches of Warboys and Darrell’s Book Concerning Some that were Bewitched so that she could mirror the symptoms of bewitchment described in these well-know works. Like Briggs, Sharpe attests that “print culture was joining with popular beliefs, helping to defne witchcraf and to inform opinion on how both witches and those bewitched acted.” Only afer leaving North Moreton and staying at the home of Henry Cotton, bishop of Salisbury, did Anne confess her deception to her caretaker, who suspected the bewitchment to be false. Sharpe asserts that many of Anne’s neighbors believed her plight and only those who viewed her bewitchment from an outside perspective noted the fctitious characteristics of her supposed ailment. Tose already convinced of her bewitchment did not notice any suspicious characteristics. Te fourth factor in the increasing hesitancy of authority fgures toward witch trials lay in the disorder associated with the trials. Te involvement of the common people, coupled with the judge’s escalating uncertainty at

49 For more on the account of Anne Gunter, discussed in the following paragraphs, see J.A. Sharpe, The Bewitching of Anne Gunter: A Horrible and True Story of Deception, Witchcraft, Murder, and the King of England (New York: Routledge, 2000). 34 Gwendolyn Bellinger

these peoples’ authentication, led to a growing sense of unease. Judges and magistrates feared that lending common people’s stories too much credence could undermine the authority of the kingdom and “could hurt the ofces of secular and religious authorities.”50 When the interests of locals conficted with that of the judges, witch trials, ironically, caused as much political disorder as they were supposed to prevent. Conficts between locals and judges jeopardized not only the position of the judge but could even threaten his safety. Should the commoners feel their opinions, accusations, and testimonies held more truth than the opinions of their trained superiors, not only would the judges lose their standing as men of authority, but the entire system of centralized authority would be threatened. Te judges were appointed by, and served, the king. If the people rebelled against magistrates, they rebelled against the authority of their monarch. Even in situations in which obedience to authority prevailed, some intellectuals still worried that passion ruled the actions of the people. Witch trials could cause accumulating accusations, furthering feuds and causing witch panics. As intellectuals recognized trials could easily get out of hand, many wished to dampen the excitement to prevent disturbing the stable system of authority in place. Richard Bancrof, bishop of London, helped to suppress John Darrell’s preaching. Darrell, a young preacher, had a career as a Protestant exorcist.51 When he accused a number of women from Nottingham of bewitching his apprentice, Bancrof recognized Darrell’s discourse could lead to a witch panic. He not only exposed Darrell as a fraud, but he continued to act as a skeptic in cases involving the supernatural. A few years before the Gunter case, he became involved in exposing the fraudulent bewitching of Mary Glover, a 14-year-old girl from London who accused her neighbor Elizabeth Jackson of causing her illness.

Te Changing Mechanics of Witch Trials Jean Bodin declared that “it is an abuse of both divine and human laws to pardon a penitent witch, under the pretext that the laws and canons require one to pardon repentant heretics.” His statement refects the anxieties of many Europeans at the time. Here was the ultimate crime, a crime both

50 Ibid., 152. 51 Ibid., 150-151. 35 Traces | The UNC-Chapel Hill Journal of History

blasphemous and treasonous. Trough the lens of this supernatural threat one sees many of the efects of the Reformation and changing political tides in England during the late sixteenth century. Monarchs, judges, and common people used the legal system to gain control over the perceived threat posed by witchcraf during this time of religious change. Monarchs managed to acquire a new identity with the dwindling prestige of the Catholic papacy. Te philosophy that these monarchs were appointed by divine will to maintain a Christian kingdom fueled their desire to stamp out sacrilegious devil-worshippers. Te philosophy of divinely appointed kings was not new in the sixteenth century, but only afer the Reformation did monarchs begin obtaining responsibilities previously held by the Church. A new sense of duty to combat witchcraf allowed witch trials to become an increasingly systematic and centralized feature of these kingdoms. Kings employed judges to oversee the courts. Tey decided the fate of all criminal activity, including witchcraf cases. Although witch trials had always required the power of secular authorities to carry out executions, the medieval period generally relied on the advice and decisions of clerics for religious crimes. Securing authority over these crimes allowed magistrates to decide the fate of accused witches. Tey gained the ability to decide if evidence against the accused was sufcient enough for an execution and used earlier cases as examples in an attempt to create a sense of legal consistency. Te decline in religious authority likewise created an environment in which common people used their standing in their communities to judge the piety of community members. In towns and villages, rumor and the opinions of respectable citizens infuenced witch accusations and evidence in trials. Teir reliance on notions about witchcraf promulgated through church sermons, pamphlets, and hearsay meant that the characteristics and evidence of witchcraf became increasingly consistent. Te personal nature of accusations alarmed judges. Because of the centralized court system, judges were not regularly exposed to local prejudice and rumors. Skeptical of the authority of the people, judges realized the ability of locals to take advantage of the legal system. Mistrustful of the authority of these locals and the evidence they presented, judges developed a sense of skepticism toward witch trials. Tis is not to say that they became doubtful of the notion of witchcraf, but they realized the

36 Gwendolyn Bellinger difculty of detecting false evidence during trials. It was not a decline in belief in witchcraf, then, that generated a decline in witch trials in England. Tough skeptics of witchcraf existed in this period, the real cause of the decline can be linked to these new identities and responsibilities within sixteenth- and seventeenth-century England. By obtaining some authority over the religious realm, leaders helped create an environment that would enable systematic witch trials. Tis environment, however, illuminated the difculties of relying on local opinions and fnding sufcient evidence to convict accused witches. Tese fundamental changes in the mechanics of witch trials and assumptions about witchcraf and evidence derived from the new religious perspectives achieved during the sixteenth century, as people from all ranks of society reimagined their social identities and roles in society.

37