A Research Of The Witch Craze Of 1540-1660 As ‘a War Against Women’

Pursuant to the latest estimates, over 75% of those executed for witchcraft in Early Modern Europe were women, leading one to ask why they are so heavily represented. The years 1540-1660 marked the peak of those executed, with particular moments of high intensity across the time range provided (also known as the ‘witch craze’), in turn reflecting an increased radical momentum. The frequency of persecutions and witch-hunts were not constant throughout, again leading one to question the reasoning behind this fluctuation. Historians such as Wolfgang Behringer argue that such activities can be attributed to the poor socio-economic conditions, whereby the inexplicable environmental shifts called for a scapegoat as a form of coping with the social tensions and fears. 1560-73 essentially marked the beginning of ‘The Little Ice Age’ and an era of of climatic deterioration, which also saw increased accusations. Similarly, the branching out of Christianity, caused religious and ultimately political discontent, furthering the social anxieties of the era. However, these events must be studied in affiliation with gender studies in order to attempt at determining the question and whether the radicalization of the persecutions was indeed a ‘war’ and a singling out of the sexes.

The term ‘witch-hunt’ can be defined as being a campaign against those considered unorthodox or a threat to society, though more recent ideas express “the idea of a paranoid search for hidden deviants”. In this respect, the feminist argument that women were systematically targeted deems to be a probable one. The infamous Malleus Mallificarum, a treatise majorly underpinning as well as defining ‘witchcraft beliefs’, exemplifies the misogyny of the era explored, which when examined alongside the outstanding sexual nature to many of these witch trials, paints a more detailed picture in possibly explaining the psychology behind the objectification and ultimately persecution of women. This in turn leads one to believe that we can rightfully express the witch-hunts as a systematic war against women in attempts to cope with the growing social anxieties. However, male persecutions, regional variation and the lack of momentum in the radicalization of social beliefs in certain areas, may downplay this line of argument.

In order to fathom the psychology behind the segregation of the sexes and ultimately determine the reasoning behind a potential specific targeting of women, one must establish the general consensus on their image and position in society courtesy to the time period expressed. Firstly, the overarching female Christian prototype is entrenched in the Bible from the story of Adam and Eve, whereby through Eve’s temptation and ‘sin’, the supposed female complexion is illustrated. Eve was Satan’s first human ally as well as the first to disobey God, thus essentially making her the weaker of the two sexes. This concept resonated onto Early Modern European society, whereby women were worthy of the honor of being wives but were deemed ‘non-conformists’ if they stepped outside the realm of what was considered ‘socially accepted’. Similarly, the typical witch was anything in connection with a ‘non-conformist’. Despite the caricatured stereotypes of the ‘witch-figure’ there is not a single definition to describe a ‘non-conformist’ but the overwhelming characteristics of those accused were “old, unattractive, disliked and female’, who were “assertive, do not require nor give love and does not nurture men or children”. The prototype of the witch is also encapsulated in literature and art, with the likes of Hekate, the Goddess of magic, witchcraft, the night and necromancy or Diana, the Goddess of moon, hunt and nature. In Ancient culture the witch figure was often depicted as an independent woman and often very liberal, as seen with the story of Medea, a very intelligent sorceress, who defied the mold of the ‘normal woman’ by killing her children, father and brother as a form of revenge. Such representations and perceptions potentially define how a woman could be ‘unorthodox’ to traditional standards and expectations. This notion, factored with the Malleus Maleficarum as well as external social anxieties, created the right breeding ground for the systematic targeting of women.

Explaining the heavy representation of women during the witch craze has led to a divide amongst historians such as Wolgang Behringer and Anne Barstow. The feminist writer Barstow has somewhat convincingly argued that the “witch craze zeros in on a profound tragedy, not just of women who were murdered senselessly but also of the gradual eradication of vital female culture”, hence propelling the argument of a systematic war which targets the very nature and being of women [ref]. Barstow builds on the idea that there was an ever growing desire to control women’s reproductive and sexual nature and choices in the 1560’s, which was in turn backed by a greater use of violence during the proceedings. She furthers her argument by stressing the importance of understanding the role of the patriarchy, a system of society or government through which men hold the power, in defining the societal norms, hence anything beyond the perceived expectation could easily be affirmed as opposition and thus prosecution was very likely. By contrast, the cultural historian, Behringer, validly stresses the importance of climatic deterioration and hunger, in explaining the frequency and intensity of the witch hunts in the 16th and 17th Century. Behringer states that these factors contributed to the creation of a social anxiety within peasant communities, which consequently led them to demand the prosecution of witches as well as encourage a more austere punishment. Behringer rightfully takes into consideration the general feeling and mentality of communities, which may help explain why in some countries such as; Normandy, Russia, Estonia and Iceland, more men were persecuted than women, hence making us question the extent to which the witch-hunts were sex-specific rather than possibly sex related. Behringer’s viewpoint stands in that witch-trails were driven from below and were made possible by the cumulative concept (the idea of a pact with the devil and a Sabbath), this then gives greater credibility to Barstow’s argument in that there was an element of sexual fantasy behind the witch hunts, which women were more likely to be associated with but Behringer merely takes this explanation and analyses it with a greater scope. These theories could be analyzed and decomposed through the examination of particular trials, persecutions and statements.

The study of Margaret Jones’ accusation from 1648 strongly reflects Barstow’s perception. Jones, a midwife and healer from Boston, was suspected of having “an apparent teat in her secret parts”, yet, despite the explanation from a friend that a difficult childbirth had caused this tear, Matthew Hopkins, a witch hunter from Essex, determined that her mark was “in the contrary part”. Though this is solely one case, many other accusations focus on and revolve around a similar concept, that of physical abnormalities, such as the likes of Joan Petersen’s and Eunice Coles’ accusations. The mark, which was considered to resemble a teat, was understandably common, by modern perceptions, but were thought of in connection with animal familiars, demons and imps who could supposedly ‘suck’ on these. In turn, this idea propelled the argument that such physical signs were an “inversion of a natural female function”. This ultimately supports the idea of the desire to implement a patriarchal determined standard of the female anatomy and anyone who surpassed this challenged the norm and was hence deemed a witch. Similarly, the intense clinical male observations of the female body further support’s Bartow’s claim. The frequent occurrence of public trials (especially in the Swiss, French and German lands) were always conducted by male magistrates and male searchers and similarly throughout Scotland the use of a ‘witch pricker’ to examine and probe the female body was also always done so by a man. Hence, we can determine that there was a societal desire to control womens’ bodies according to the implemented expectation. Given that in some localities in Europe, such as Essex, England and Basel of Namur (present day Belgium) whereby the estimated percentage of women executed for witchcraft resides at over 90%, Barstow’s perception deems somewhat probable. However, given that this argument is reliant upon an estimated figure and a few written accounts when determining whether there was indeed an explosion of extreme misogynistic behavior in Early Modern Europe, this may challenge credibility of the argument as one could also question the reliability of the written accounts based on who was writing it, which in many instances we do not know. The events described could be misjudged, exaggerated or equally invented for an alternate purpose. I would agree more with Christina Larner and Carol Karslen, that Barstow’s viewpoint is too “simplistic”. They in turn credit the wider social conditions for the overwhelming representation, which Barstow deems improbable.

Nonetheless, Barstow rightfully accounts for the marginalization and criminalization of women on the basis of their curative skills or their “beneficent effects on their communities”. Women delivered babies, performed abortions, predicted the future, and most importantly for this argument, frequently acted as village healers, through their positions as surgeons, physicians and apothecaries. Barstow’s judgement offers value as it is through this light that we are able to see women not only wielding influence and control within the domestic sphere but also over men and the “idiom of the supernatural”. This ultimately allowed for their demonization and provided a form of explanation to the fantasies often associated with witchcraft or even the unexplainable. Otherwise known as ‘wise women’, they often used a variety of of folk remedies, mainly herbs and ointments as part of their work, which may also have contributed to stereotypical illustration of the ‘witch-figure’ who makes magical potions or casts spells from cauldrons, furthering Barstow’s argument of of male fantasies and a desire to tame female behavior that drove twitch-hunts. However, accusations were most likely to arise when a ‘treatment’ was unsuccessful and the villagers incurred further or sustained illness or even died unexpectedly. This ultimately left healers susceptible to the accusation of the practice of “magical arts for maleficent purposes”. The treatise, The Malleus Maleficarum, directly highlights this issue as well, by stating that those who could cure, could also injure. Given, the customary role women upheld in early modern society, Barstow’s judgement has credibility in the respect that women were vulnerable to charges against their jobs surrounding multiple aspects of medicine. Studies of witchcraft depositions in France, Switzerland, Hungary, Austria, England, Scotland and some German regions, show that many of those prosecuted for witchcraft were in fact wise women. In the Parlement of Paris, one half of the witchcraft cases involved accusations of “magical healing”. Similarly, midwives were also prosecuted for witchcraft. Their liability arose from the ease at which they could be blamed for the unexpected deaths of infants. During the 16th and 17th Century, roughly 25% of all children died at either birth or during the first few months of their lives, thus making the midwife a plausible culprit of the crime. Lastly, Barstow justly, in part also attributes the criminalization of women to their professional overlap with that of male doctors and clergymen. She claims it was as a result of the manifestation of a professional jealousy that women were then accused of witchcraft. The possibility of women having greater influence and power than men, was a root cause for suspicion and ultimately fear and the exclusion of men from the birthing rooms for example, often left them to imagine what went on inside. In the case of a misfortunate event, it is easy to see why the women would be held accountable.

At this day, it is indifferent to say in the English tongue, “she is a witch” or “she is a wise woman” - Reginald Scot, Discoverie of Witchcraft

Reginald Scot, a country gentleman and MP from Kent, was a sceptic who argued against the belief in witches. His second book, The Discoverie of Witchcraft, was essentially a “study of the superstitions surrounding witchcraft in country districts and courts of law”, whilst simultaneously arguing in favor of non-magical reasons and causes for the accusations and the witch phenomena. Importantly however, for Scot to acknowledge the unconcerned nature regarding the distinctions made between women who worked as folk healers or midwives and witches, significantly strengthens Barstow’s argument. Ultimately, he acknowledges that these two statuses could be used interchangeably and this not only somewhat justifies the reasoning behind the radical momentum in accusations and witch-hunts in 1584 Europe, the year his treatise was published, but it also re-emphasizes the misogynistic attitude women faced, the fact that these witch-hunts were sex-specific and not necessarily sex related and the ease with which women could be held accountable and suspected. Scot’s critical tone in this statement highlights his opposition, which is interesting to see. His highly enlightened views as he credits the psychological and in other parts of his work, the sociological factors behind the phenomena, resembles some of the ideologies which stand today (400 years later). His approach matches both Barstow’s and Behringer’s arguments, which places him outside the realms of his time. This is further supported by the fact that he assailed the likes of Jacobus Sprenger, the joint author of the Malleus Maleficarum (1494) as well as Jean Boudin, author of the Demonomie des sorciers’ (Paris 1580) in his book, both of which reflected a deeply misogynistic attitude. Furthermore, given that upon James I’s accession onto the English throne, he ordered the burning of every copy of Scot’s book, conveys a sense of a deeply established patriarchy attempting protect its authority at all costs and this can ultimately be seen at the expense of women, who fell as scapegoats to this struggle. On the other hand, given that his book was well received and gained significant attention and popularity, as it was translated into Dutch and republished throughout the 17th century, may suggest that others agreed with Scot which downplays the argument of an inherently insecure patriarchy who were set upon systematically targeting women.

Therefore, Barstow’s argument here upholds credibility to an extent however, it is also limited in scope. Provided that women often accused each other of witchcraft signposts that the witch hunts were not necessarily caused by a professional jealousy by their male counterparts. Moreover, given that the wise woman was a profession deeply established across many eras, it is difficult to attribute the sudden spike in prosecutions to the explanation of a ‘war against women’. Indeed, there is some element to it, however, Barstow fails to mention the wider social conditions as well which may have incentivised this, like the historian Wolfgang Behringer argues.

Women were also an easy target as a result of a change in the judicial system and their ever growing association with supernatural influences. The historian Christina Larner, rather differently than Barstow, validly frames a debate surrounding the concept of social control in the age of ‘confessional states’. Larner argues that the dramatic rise in witch-hunts can be attributed to the elites who controlled the courts, as their “motivation to reform unchristian beliefs and disorderly behavior” stemmed from a “political zeal to centralize control” and as such women fell susceptible to the thought of being evil. Up until this period, women were regarded in law as being the responsibility of their fathers or their husbands, hence they were associated with ‘passivity’. However, with a tightening of laws surrounding sexual activities in an attempt to make society more conservative, Larner describes this as a “law and order crisis were women were the a prime symbol of disorder.”