European Witch Trials (RLE Witchcraft): Their Foundations in Popular and Learned Culture, 1300-1500 (Routledge Library Editions: Witchcraft)

by Richard Kieckhefer

In popular tradition witches were either practitioners of magic or people who were objectionable in some way, but for early European courts witches were heretics and worshippers of the Devil. This study concentrates on the period between 1300 and 1500 when ideas about witchcraft were being formed and witch-hunting was gathering momentum. It is concerned with distinguishing between the popular and learned ideas of witchcraft. The author has developed his own methodology for distinguishing popular from learned concepts, which provides adequate substantiation for the acceptance of some documents and the rejection of others. This distinction is followed by an analysis of the contents of folk tradition regarding witchcraft, the most basic feature of which is its emphasis on sorcery, including bodily harm, love magic, and weather magic, rather than diabolism. The author then shows how and why learned traditions became superimposed on popular notions – how people taken to court for sorcery were eventually convicted on the further charge of devil worship. The book ends with a description of the social context of witch accusations and witch trials.

Genres: Nonfiction

188 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1976

About the author

"John Evans Professor of Religious Studies. Research interests focus mainly on the late Middle Ages, with special interest in church architecture and in the history of witchcraft and magic. Currently writing books on "the mystical presence of Christ" in the late Middle Ages (an exploration of the relationship between ordinary and extraordinary piety, between shared religious culture and exceptional religious experience) and late medieval church-building (an inquiry into the collaboration and conflict among different interest groups in the creation of monuments meant to serve and symbolize communal interests). Books include European Witch Trials (Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1976),Repression of Heresy in Medieval Germanyi (Pennsylvania, 1979), Unquiet Souls (Chicago, 1984), Magic in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1989),Forbidden Rites (Sutton and Penn State, 1997), and Theology in Stone(Oxford, 2004). A theme underlying much of his research is the way in which communities create and sustain a sense of shared culture in the face of difference, dissention, and dispute."
http://www.religion.northwestern.edu/...

"In addition to the DAAD, his research has been supported by the Guggenheim Foundation, the American Council of Learned Societies, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. In 2006, he was elected a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard...

Reviews

[Sam · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an interesting take on the European witch trials and what drove them. Kieckhefer aims to illustrate the distinction between those drive by popular belief and those that stemmed from learnt behaviours resulting from elite levels within society, particularly those in charge of trials, torture, and other positions of power. This is clearly a difficult separation to make even if the records were fully intact and reliable never mind where trials records weren't kept or were written up after the fact. This is an issue that is addressed by Kieckhefer with a means of categorising the reliability of source material given early on in the thesis. From there he lays out the accusations and trials that fall into the popular culture category before diving into the learned culture, both of which provide some interesting insights into the drivers behind the witch trials. He certainly makes an good case for this approach, particularly around how the 'confessions' from one trial could influence another through the accusers or the approaches taken by the 'investigators'. Some points were a bit of stretch based on the information available but overall Kieckhefer's thesis is pretty well supported based on the evidence provided.

[Mary Kate · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really thought Kieckhefer's methodology was questionable, and his intense desire to classify the types of witchcraft and types of sources into clean categories was just plain troubling. I think retrospective distinctions like that are potentially useful tools for modern conceptualizations, but for the most part, I think they oversimplify things. It provided an interesting perspective on the witch trials, but I just couldn't get all of the way on board. Kieckhefer might be on to something, but he doesn't have the whole story.

[Abby Omlor · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 out of 5 Stars

This was fine, I read it for my history class and I'm writing a book report on it. There were some parts that were very interesting, like when he went into specific case and what people were accused of, both others were a bit dull.