Subject: Inquisition vs. witch hunting hysteria
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 20:59:27 -0700
The Inquisition and the witch burning craze were actually
two very different and distinct movements with different
goals. They are commonly, and mistakenly, lumped together by
the crowd that euphemistically refers to the "burning
times" either through lack of knowledge of the real
historical events or because they desire to achieve greater
sympathy for the past transgressions committed against
pagans.
There were actually two different Inquisitions. The medieval
Inquisition was gradually built up by several Popes over the
course of the early middle ages to try to put down the
Catholic sects that were popping up and threatening the
domination of the Vatican. The primary targets of the
medieval Inquisition were groups such as the Albigensians
and Gnostics (and later, the Templars and Cathars). The
primary purpose of the Inquisition was to bring "heretics"
back into the fold. It was formalized by Gregory IX in 1233
and he dispatched Dominican friars into S. France. When the
inquisitors would arrive in a district there was usually a
grace period for anyone that wanted to recant and come back
to "Mother Church" with punishments that ranged from light
penance to monetary fines. Anyone that refused went to
trial. Although the accused weren't told who their accusers
were, if they could name their enemies then testimony from
those individuals wouldn't be taken into consideration. Most
verdicts from these trials were guilty and sentence was
determined by the local magistrate as heresy was considered
a civil as well as spiritual crime. Burning of heretics was
uncommon, with the usual punishment being imprisonment,
fines, or hanging.
Although torture was forbidden by papal decree, Innocent IV
finally legitimized its use in 1254. A verdict of guilty
also meant confiscation of property by the civil ruler, who
usually turned over part of it to the Church. This led to
various corruptions of law like graft, bribery, simony, etc.
and cast doubt on some of the inquisitors themselves.
Generally, the inquisitors were eager to receive abjurations
of heresy and to avoid trials; their purpose was to win back
the heretics, rather than to burn them. The ecclesiastics
were easily satisfied with assurances of goodwill - the
sternest repressors were the secular rulers, who came to use
the persecution of heresy (it was a civil crime, too,
remember) as a weapon of state.
The Inquisition was an emergency measure and was employed
mainly in S. France, N. Italy, and Germany. Paul III
assigned the medieval Inquisition to the Congregation of the
Inquisition, or Holy Office, in 1542 and its primary purpose
then became to combat the rise of Protestantism.
Interestingly, the Inquisition has never been abandoned by
the Catholic Church. In 1965 it was renamed the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith and is intended to govern
vigilance in matters of faith.
The Spanish Inquisition was independent of the medieval (or
Roman) Inquisition and was established in 1478 by Ferdinand
and Isabella with the reluctant approval of Sixtus IV. It
was controlled entirely by the Spanish Monarchy and its most
notorious head was Tomas de Torquemada. The popes were never
reconciled to the institution as they regarded it as an
usurpation of church prerogative. But, the Spanish at the
time were the most powerful realm in Europe, as well as the
most devout, and the Catholic Popes certainly didn't want to
piss off their most ardent supporters. The purpose of the
Spanish Inquisition was to discover and punish converted
Jews (and later Muslims) who were insincere. However,
Torquemada liberalized the definition of heresy to the point
that virtually nobody was safe and anyone that didn't do
exactly as the Spanish Monarchy said was libel to be tinder
for the notorious autos-da-fe. The Spanish Inquisition was
finally abolished in 1834.
The hysteria against witchcraft was entirely distinct from
both of the Inquisitions. Until the Middle Ages, Paganism
was not only legal, but popular. Compared to the religious
militancy of the Catholic Church, Paganism was not only
relatively benign, but offered much more in the way of
personal freedoms and freedom of thought. This made it
rather difficult for the Church to dominate those that
hadn't embraced Christianity. And, since its rather
difficult to make a charge of heresy stick to someone that
was never a member of the Church to begin with, the guiding
principles of the Inquisitions didn't apply.
As the Church desired to be the dominate secular power in
Europe as well as spiritual, it needed to take control of
the masses in order to hold sway over the monarchies. Few
emotions engender a greater deal of unreasoning obedience in
humans than fear. In order for the Church to promise
salvation and protection to the ignorant masses they needed
to not only create fear, but something to fear. What better
object to hold out as fearful than your number one rival -
Pagans? There was no central Pagan body such as the
Christians had, so the various belief systems were pretty
much on their own and easy pickings. Around the middle of
the fifteenth century the Church began to equate
non-Christian beliefs with devil worship.
Although a papal bull had been issued against witchcraft in
1484, it didn't really have any teeth until a pair of rabid
German inquisitors, Jacob Sprenger and Henricus Institor,
published the infamous Malleus Maleficarum which drew bits
and pieces out of context from the Bible and the written
dogmas of the various Pagan groups, carefully mixed and
matched the quotes and filled in the blank spots with
imagination to produce a document that not only provided a
guide to recognizing and countering the dangers and
damnations of "the Devil and his demons" but also gave
detailed instructions on how to get folks to confess to
their "blasphemous dealings with the Devil".
The Vatican realized that it really had something, now. Here
was a field guide to getting anyone to confess to anything
that you wanted along with a laundry list of "crimes against
humanity" that you could accuse them of. The witchcraft
hysteria race was off and running.
Not to be outdone in Christian zealotry, the Protestants
quickly jumped on the bandwagon and made witch hunting an
interdenominational pasttime. Whereas the Inquisitions had
been a Catholic show all the way, this new game was open to
anyone that wanted to join in.
Although the unwashed masses of the time may have been
unlearned, they weren't stupid. Accusing your enemy of
heresy would most likely get them a fine and maybe some jail
time - after which they'd be free to get even. Accusing your
enemy of witchcraft was a much surer way of doing away with
them altogether. Afterall, them devil-worshippin' witches
were daaaaangerous. They'd wither yer crops, make yer wife
frigid, eat yer children, fer God's sake! they could give ya
a dick that a mouse wouldn't be proud of! Besides, it looked
good on your resume to say that you'd defended Holy
Christianity by ferreting out the witches in your
neighborhood.
The Inquisitions had been pretty well structured, organized
and controlled. The witch hunting craze went out of control
quickly as any bozo with a copy of the Malleus Malleficarum
(or any of the numerous copycat treatises that came out
afterward) could be an expert witchfinder and get into the
body count competition. With fear being what it is, whenever
times got tough the emotion took over and folks would start
looking for someone to blame things on. The witchfinders
would dust off their thumbscrews and go after the dirty
buggers (today we use lawyers for this).
Witch hunting went on for a much longer period than the
Inquisitions and wasn't restricted to any particular
geographic location or religious group. The real number of
people killed during the witch trial crazes will probably
never be known, but some of the figures that bandied about
are undoubtedly incorrect. I've seen some "experts" claim
that 250,000 died in the sixteenth century alone. That's the
equivalent of wiping out the entire population of London
every decade during that time. Although a handful of the
records from those dark times list those killed by name, and
are probably accurate, the majority of documents simply list
"2000 burned at Badenwurtzenschnitzel". This is clearly a
case of "Oh, yeah? So what if you fried 50 in your village
last year. We toasted, uh . . . 500, yeah, 500 of the
bastards just last month. We're better defenders of the
Faith than you are. Nyah, nyah, nyah."
At any rate. The whole purpose of this little diatribe of
mine was to try to clear up a common misconception that the
witch burning hysteria of the Middle Ages was the same thing
as the Inquisition. Hope I've shed a little light on this.
Vygg
--------------4483F5CC5082EA498C2132FE
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The Inquisition and the witch burning craze were actually two very different
and distinct movements with different goals. They are commonly, and mistakenly,
lumped together by the crowd that euphemistically refers to the "burning
times" either through lack of knowledge of the real historical events or
because they desire to achieve greater sympathy for the past transgressions
committed against pagans.
There were actually two different Inquisitions. The medieval Inquisition
was gradually built up by several Popes over the course of the early middle
ages to try to put down the Catholic sects that were popping up and threatening
the domination of the Vatican. The primary targets of the medieval Inquisition
were groups such as the Albigensians and Gnostics (and later, the Templars
and Cathars). The primary purpose of the Inquisition was to bring "heretics"
back into the fold. It was formalized by Gregory IX in 1233 and he dispatched
Dominican friars into S. France. When the inquisitors would arrive in a
district there was usually a grace period for anyone that wanted to recant
and come back to "Mother Church" with punishments that ranged from light
penance to monetary fines. Anyone that refused went to trial. Although
the accused weren't told who their accusers were, if they could name their
enemies then testimony from those individuals wouldn't be taken into consideration.
Most verdicts from these trials were guilty and sentence was determined
by the local magistrate as heresy was considered a civil as well as spiritual
crime. Burning of heretics was uncommon, with the usual punishment being
imprisonment, fines, or hanging.
Although torture was forbidden by papal decree, Innocent IV finally
legitimized its use in 1254. A verdict of guilty also meant confiscation
of property by the civil ruler, who usually turned over part of it to the
Church. This led to various corruptions of law like graft, bribery, simony,
etc. and cast doubt on some of the inquisitors themselves. Generally, the
inquisitors were eager to receive abjurations of heresy and to avoid trials;
their purpose was to win back the heretics, rather than to burn them. The
ecclesiastics were easily satisfied with assurances of goodwill - the sternest
repressors were the secular rulers, who came to use the persecution of
heresy (it was a civil crime, too, remember) as a weapon of state.
The Inquisition was an emergency measure and was employed mainly in
S. France, N. Italy, and Germany. Paul III assigned the medieval Inquisition
to the Congregation of the Inquisition, or Holy Office, in 1542 and its
primary purpose then became to combat the rise of Protestantism. Interestingly,
the Inquisition has never been abandoned by the Catholic Church. In 1965
it was renamed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and is intended
to govern vigilance in matters of faith.
The Spanish Inquisition was independent of the medieval (or Roman) Inquisition
and was established in 1478 by Ferdinand and Isabella with the reluctant
approval of Sixtus IV. It was controlled entirely by the Spanish Monarchy
and its most notorious head was Tomas de Torquemada. The popes were never
reconciled to the institution as they regarded it as an usurpation of church
prerogative. But, the Spanish at the time were the most powerful realm
in Europe, as well as the most devout, and the Catholic Popes certainly
didn't want to piss off their most ardent supporters. The purpose of the
Spanish Inquisition was to discover and punish converted Jews (and later
Muslims) who were insincere. However, Torquemada liberalized the definition
of heresy to the point that virtually nobody was safe and anyone that didn't
do exactly as the Spanish Monarchy said was libel to be tinder for the
notorious autos-da-fe. The Spanish Inquisition was finally abolished in
1834.
The hysteria against witchcraft was entirely distinct from both of the
Inquisitions. Until the Middle Ages, Paganism was not only legal, but popular.
Compared to the religious militancy of the Catholic Church, Paganism was
not only relatively benign, but offered much more in the way of personal
freedoms and freedom of thought. This made it rather difficult for the
Church to dominate those that hadn't embraced Christianity. And, since
its rather difficult to make a charge of heresy stick to someone that was
never a member of the Church to begin with, the guiding principles of the
Inquisitions didn't apply.
As the Church desired to be the dominate secular power in Europe as
well as spiritual, it needed to take control of the masses in order to
hold sway over the monarchies. Few emotions engender a greater deal of
unreasoning obedience in humans than fear. In order for the Church to promise
salvation and protection to the ignorant masses they needed to not only
create fear, but something to fear. What better object to hold out
as fearful than your number one rival - Pagans? There was no central Pagan
body such as the Christians had, so the various belief systems were pretty
much on their own and easy pickings. Around the middle of the fifteenth
century the Church began to equate non-Christian beliefs with devil worship.
Although a papal bull had been issued against witchcraft in 1484, it
didn't really have any teeth until a pair of rabid German inquisitors,
Jacob Sprenger and Henricus Institor, published the infamous Malleus
Maleficarum which drew bits and pieces out of context from the Bible
and the written dogmas of the various Pagan groups, carefully mixed and
matched the quotes and filled in the blank spots with imagination to produce
a document that not only provided a guide to recognizing and countering
the dangers and damnations of "the Devil and his demons" but also gave
detailed instructions on how to get folks to confess to their "blasphemous
dealings with the Devil".
The Vatican realized that it really had something, now. Here was a field
guide to getting anyone to confess to anything that you wanted along with
a laundry list of "crimes against humanity" that you could accuse them
of. The witchcraft hysteria race was off and running.
Not to be outdone in Christian zealotry, the Protestants quickly jumped
on the bandwagon and made witch hunting an interdenominational pasttime.
Whereas the Inquisitions had been a Catholic show all the way, this new
game was open to anyone that wanted to join in.
Although the unwashed masses of the time may have been unlearned, they
weren't stupid. Accusing your enemy of heresy would most likely get them
a fine and maybe some jail time - after which they'd be free to get even.
Accusing your enemy of witchcraft was a much surer way of doing away with
them altogether. Afterall, them devil-worshippin' witches were daaaaangerous.
They'd wither yer crops, make yer wife frigid, eat yer children, fer God's
sake! they could give ya a dick that a mouse wouldn't be proud of! Besides,
it looked good on your resume to say that you'd defended Holy Christianity
by ferreting out the witches in your neighborhood.
The Inquisitions had been pretty well structured, organized and controlled.
The witch hunting craze went out of control quickly as any bozo with a
copy of the Malleus Malleficarum (or any of the numerous copycat
treatises that came out afterward) could be an expert witchfinder and get
into the body count competition. With fear being what it is, whenever times
got tough the emotion took over and folks would start looking for someone
to blame things on. The witchfinders would dust off their thumbscrews and
go after the dirty buggers (today we use lawyers for this).
Witch hunting went on for a much longer period than the Inquisitions
and wasn't restricted to any particular geographic location or religious
group. The real number of people killed during the witch trial crazes will
probably never be known, but some of the figures that bandied about are
undoubtedly incorrect. I've seen some "experts" claim that 250,000 died
in the sixteenth century alone. That's the equivalent of wiping out the
entire population of London every decade during that time. Although a handful
of the records from those dark times list those killed by name, and are
probably accurate, the majority of documents simply list "2000 burned at
Badenwurtzenschnitzel". This is clearly a case of "Oh, yeah? So what if
you fried 50 in your village last year. We toasted, uh . . . 500, yeah,
500 of the bastards just last month. We're better defenders of the Faith
than you are. Nyah, nyah, nyah."
At any rate. The whole purpose of this little diatribe of mine was to
try to clear up a common misconception that the witch burning hysteria
of the Middle Ages was the same thing as the Inquisition. Hope I've shed
a little light on this.
Vygg
--------------4483F5CC5082EA498C2132FE--
--------------74733E81101B--
Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
Message-ID: <39BB3D6C.1A1A@luckymojo.com>
From: catherine yronwode
Organization: Lucky Mojo Curio Company
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01-C-MACOS8 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Inquisition vs. witch hunting hysteria]
References: <39BAB2B5.1086@luckymojo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 48
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 07:44:30 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.204.136.117
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 968571870 209.204.136.117 (Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:44:30 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:44:30 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:25124
Vygg Stonehand wrote:
>
> catherine yronwode wrote:
>
> > Do you have a bibliography that might be appended to this article,
> > something i could look through for substantiation and further
> > insights?
>
> -----------------
>
> Malleus Maleficarum,
> transl. Elizabeth Satyre,
> unpublished, 1976.
>
> A General History of Europe in the 14th and 15th Centuries,
> Denys Hay,
> New York, Longman, 1966.
>
> A History of Europe from the Invasions to the XVI Century,
> Henri Pirenne,
> London, George Allen and Unwin, 1939.
>
> The Medieval Papacy,
> Geoffrey Barraclough,
> London, Thames and Hudson, 1968.
>
> Religion and the Decline of Magic,
> Keith Thomas,
> Harmondsworth, Penguin Books, 1982.
>
> Imprisonment of the Will: the History of Religious Persecution as it
> Applies to Modern Witchcraft,
> Elizabeth Satyre,
> New York, Clannan Publishing, 1970.
>
> -----------------
>
> Don't know how many of these are still in print (I know that
> Elizabeth Satyre's books are no longer available), but you may be
> able to find some of them in your local public library. I used bits
> and pieces from an assortment of other works for some of my
> references, but these were the main ones.
>
> Vygg
Thanks, Vygg. .
cat
