First book to deny witchcraft found

[Stoneage Dinosaur]

A 16th century Kent housewife narrowly missed being burnt at the stake for being a witch after rebuking a vicar's son for abusing her dog, a newly-discovered book reveals.

The remarkable story of Margaret Simons, her over-exuberant pet and a superstitious clergy is detailed in a 16th century counterblast against the witch-hunting fever which was sweeping Europe at the time.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

[Ryda Wong, EBfCo.]

Originally Posted by Stoneage Dinosaur

A 16th century Kent housewife narrowly missed being burnt at the stake for being a witch after rebuking a vicar's son for abusing her dog, a newly-discovered book reveals.

How cool! I really hope that whoever buys it makes it availabe to scholars. Seriously, it's a goldmine of a text.....

[Tarquin Farquart]

Ooh reasonably interesting comment:-

Anybody who has studied witch trials in the 16th and 17th century knows that witches in England were not burnt, they were hanged and as such Margaret Simons was never in any danger of being burnt at the stake. The only incidence in which English witches would be burned is if they had killed their husband in which case they were guilty not of witchcraft, but petty treason - a burning offence (trust me, I'm doing an MA thesis on it). Scott's pamphlet is well known and available in full in most academic literature on the subject. Yes, he held different beliefs to most at the time, but the general uneasiness with the system and the methods of trying witches was widespread. Witchhunts (and Matthew Hopkins title of witchfinder general is an 18th century concept)were only really prevalent during the civil war. It was a tragic time, but fortunately very shortlived in real terms, witchcraft itself not being outlawed until the mid 16th century and the last hanging late in the 17th.

- Anon, UK

one of my housemates just did a thesis on Reginald Scott (he may be the source of Tarquin's comment, tho I doubt it) and a lot of his research was really interesting. will have to let him know about this.

I find it odd just how much certain individual representations of a particular issue become universalised. for many, say "slavery" and the only thing to come to mind is the USAn model; similarly with witch hunts the image of burning seems to take precedence in spite of it not being particularly widespread, particularly in the UK.

then again, there does seem to be a general ignorance about witch hunts, at least in my experience.

Is Trevor-Roper's workstill basically the accepted version of the the witch-craze?

http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=c...html&Itemid=27

[Andrew of Ware]

A couple of years ago there was an article on Witchcraft in 'BBC History' magazine which said that the numbers of witches killed in late mediaeval Europe is smaller than most people think. I think the article said that the number was about 50,000 in about 300 years (still 50,000 too many, of course).

Continental Europe was a lot worse than England where only a few hundred - maximum 500 - witches were killed in over 200 years. Only in a handful of cases were the witches burnt. Scotland probably saw about 2,000 killings (considering its population was only a tenth of England's this is a high number). A lot more were burnt there as well.

A lot of people were accused of witchcraft, said the article, but the vast majority were acquitted or merely fined or jailed. Of the cases in England the writer found that almost 90% of accused people were acquitted and only about 3% were executed (usually hung). Europe as a whole saw a lower acquittal rate and higher percentage of executions than in England.

[Lancastrian]

Torture of suspected witches was also outlawed early on in England (Torture in the sense of hot irons, shattering the jaw, and the dreaded Ear Pear. You could still make people walk in a circle until they could no longer stand, interrogate them for hours on end, and refuse them sleep.), and use of the Malius Maleficarum was frowned upon. Not having much access to the book that told you how to break the accused's knees to make them answer your extremely leading questions probably contributed to England's high aquittal rate.

[Cactus Wren]

I hope, with Ryda, that this becomes available to scholars and the general public: I'd like to know what differences there are between this (described as a first edition) and the edition currently in print.

[Skeptic]

Originally Posted by Cactus Wren

I hope, with Ryda, that this becomes available to scholars and the general public: I'd like to know what differences there are between this (described as a first edition) and the edition currently in print.

Considering the age of the book, the text is now in the public domain.

[notjustnebodee]

Only 5,000 pounds? Surely a discovery like this should be worth at least another zero.

Originally Posted by Andrew of Ware

A couple of years ago there was an article on Witchcraft in 'BBC History' magazine which said that the numbers of witches killed in late mediaeval Europe is smaller than most people think. I think the article said that the number was about 50,000 in about 300 years (still 50,000 too many, of course).

Continental Europe was a lot worse than England where only a few hundred - maximum 500 - witches were killed in over 200 years. Only in a handful of cases were the witches burnt. Scotland probably saw about 2,000 killings (considering its population was only a tenth of England's this is a high number). A lot more were burnt there as well.

A lot of people were accused of witchcraft, said the article, but the vast majority were acquitted or merely fined or jailed. Of the cases in England the writer found that almost 90% of accused people were acquitted and only about 3% were executed (usually hung). Europe as a whole saw a lower acquittal rate and higher percentage of executions than in England.

In support of the above quote, the vast majority (over 95%) of mideval european witch executions seem to have been in a non-catholic area of Germany-France-Switzerland. In this are, almost all accusations led to executions. "Continental Europe" was of course not homogenous in this respect. Aquittals of witch accusations were the rule in Catholic countries. Since the Catholic Church saw witch-craft as pure superstition, the Spanish Inquisition recorded 6 executions of witches and about 50,000 aquittals of accused witches.

Originally Posted by Dibblah

In support of the above quote, the vast majority (over 95%) of mideval european witch executions seem to have been in a non-catholic area of Germany-France-Switzerland. In this are, almost all accusations led to executions. "Continental Europe" was of course not homogenous in this respect. Aquittals of witch accusations were the rule in Catholic countries. Since the Catholic Church saw witch-craft as pure superstition, the Spanish Inquisition recorded 6 executions of witches and about 50,000 aquittals of accused witches.

I just wanted to add that there seems to be a local urban myth here in Sweden that the Spanish Inquisition existed all over the world and burned a lot of witches from the year 1000-1800. They did not. Isabel started the Inquisition to specifically persecute morsicos and marranos (insincere moor and jew converts), and in the cities where they operated, they also took over other kinds of legal persecutions, like homosexuals and Lutherans. One major reason that moriscos and marranos were persecuted in Spain was that Isabel wanted to consolidate the Reconquista and there was a lot of civil unrest at the time in Spain, especially between religious factions, so they expelled the jews. I find the idea that one reason that they persecuted lutherans may have been that lutherans accused innocent people of being witches and burned them ironic, but that this was an outspoken reason is pure conjecture on my part - it seems more reasonable to think that they merely persecuted lutherans since they were heretics.

one of my favourites was a pagan site I stumbled upon a bit ago, which claimed that Matthew Hopkins (England, died 1647) presided over the Salem Witch Trials (North America, 1692-1693) and sent upwards of three hundred people to their deaths (sigh...)

the witch trials were one of the most despicable incidents in Western history, but the mythology and pseudohistory surrounding them is incredible.

I don't think Salem even hit the 50 mark in total killed by execution and those who died in the gaul. Although I admit that we don't have exact numbers 300 is WAY off.

*Lives near Salem and is a bit of an expert*

[Andrew of Ware]

I had a quick re-read of Geoffrey Parrinder's book on 'Witchcraft' and he confirms that fewer than a thousand people were killed in England (nearly all hung) because of witchcraft. Since that book was published that figure has been revised downwards.

Can I tell a heartwarming story I learnt recently when I visited the village of Walkern which is not far from Ware? The village was the home of the last person to be sentenced to death for witchcraft in England. She was Jane Wenham and in 1711 a farmer accused her of bewitching him to give her money. Another neighbour said she turned into a cat at night and others said she flew around the village. She was ducked in the village duck pond. She floated and so she was arrested and taken to Hertford (the town next to Ware). The judge had no choice but to do so.

At the Hertford Assizes she was tried by an enlightened judge who said that there was no law against flying, 'provided due care was taken.' ( ) The jury were not as enlightened - they probably all came from Hertford ( ) - and found her guilty and said she should be sentenced to death.

The judge, once the fuss had died down, petitioned Queen Mary and she was pardoned. Jane could not return to her superstitious village so the judge smuggled her out of Hertford to live in the manor house of the squire of the village of Hertingfordbury. Here she lived in contenetment and luxury to the end of her days. Her case was one that led to the repeal of the laws against witchcraft in England and Wales in 1736.

It is good to hear of such sensible people in the past. (I might also add that nearly all of the people accused by Matthew Hopkins were declared innocent, often on the word of local clergy.)

[Silkenray]

Originally Posted by Andrew of Ware

the village of Hertingfordbury

My husband and I pass by Hertingfordbury on occasion when we visit relatives in the more westerly parts of Hertfordshire. We always remark that the town seems to have a few too many suffixes...

[Pudding Crawl]

Originally Posted by Silkenray

We always remark that the town seems to have a few too many suffixes...

Me too- I went further and added more to create the Ultimate Placename. I can't remember it beyond Hertingfordburysheepywestonunderlymebystone-on-the-Wold, though.

[Andrew of Ware]

Originally Posted by Silkenray

My husband and I pass by Hertingfordbury on occasion when we visit relatives in the more westerly parts of Hertfordshire. We always remark that the town seems to have a few too many suffixes...

Originally Posted by Pudding Crawl

Me too- I went further and added more to create the Ultimate Placename. I can't remember it beyond Hertingfordburysheepywestonunderlymebystone-on-the-Wold, though.

Yes, it has got a silly name. Although, Silkenray, 'Sawbridgeworth' runs it close! (I can say that as I no longer work in the town.) I always think 'Ware' is a much more dignified name. All done and dusted in four letters.

Despite being close to Hertford, Hertingfordbury is quite a pretty village. I wonder if any American snopesters have been to the church? It has a monument to the Calvert family (who became the Lords Baltimore), some of whom founded the state of Maryland and the city of Baltimore.

[Silkenray]

Originally Posted by Pudding Crawl

Me too- I went further and added more to create the Ultimate Placename. I can't remember it beyond Hertingfordburysheepywestonunderlymebystone-on-the-Wold, though.

Phew! We're not the only people who do this!