To what extent were the European Witch Trials between 1580-1660 a result of the misogynistic views of the men in power and their desire for Patriarchy?
Introduction
The cause of the witch trials in Early-Modern Europe has been an area of much debate for many years. According to some historians, such as Anne Llewellyn Barstow, the witch trials were a result of the misogynistic views of the dominant men of society and their desire for true patriarchy. However, historians such as Robin Briggs and Robert Thurston have since challenged this view, stating instead that the witch trials of Early-Modern Europe were an attempt to release social tensions among neighbouring villagers in a period anomie. Whereas, Hugh Trevor-Roper and Keith Thomas have suggested that the trials were instead a consequence of the maintenance of Christianity and demonization of any alternative religions. Nevertheless, the evidence supporting Barstow’s analysis is the most persuasive and strongly suggests misogyny and patriarchy are the main causes for the Early-Modern European witch trials.
Feminist View
Feminist historian Anne Llewellyn Barstow, author of one of the more controversial and popular books documenting the witch trials, argues that “for the first time [women were] criminalised as a group [and]... hunted out primarily because they were women.” Crucially, Barstow’s judgement as to the reasons for the witch trials are based on a wide variety of contemporary sources, such as woodcuts, written accounts and statistical evidence from several European countries, thus giving her argument a high degree of persuasiveness. Two crucial pieces of primary evidence help to support Barstow’s interpretation of the cause of the Early-Modern European witch hunts.
One such piece of evidence is an engraving depicting three nude witches playing leapfrog, which highlights the supposed sexuality of the witch. This erotic image portrays women performing sexual acts upon themselves and each other and, according to Brian Levack, “can legitimately be considered the pornography of its day”. Though the engraving does help to prove the existence of a long-term feeling of misogyny in Europe, when accompanied with other engravings and woodcuts of the period, it was made in one place, at one time and so the typicality of this evidence is questionable. Nevertheless, when accompanied with the statistics that 96% of those accused of witchcraft in Wielkopolska, Poland, 93% in Essex, England and 82% in South-Western Germany were women, both pieces of evidence serve to support Barstow’s interpretation that the witch trials in Early-Modern Europe were due to the misogyny felt by the inquisitors and other men in power at the time.
Furthermore, in Barstow’s own opinion, these “statistics [alone] are sufficient to document an intentional mass murder of women... to ignore them... is to deny the most persistent fact about the persecutions.” Moreover, Christina Larner is very persuasive in her supporting of this viewpoint that “the ratio of females to males... reinforces the theory that the witch hunt was part of the sex war.” Similarly to Barstow, Larner uses large amounts of statistical analysis, as well as breakdowns of crucial primary evidence to support her theory, making her argument all the more persuasive.
For example, she uses evidence from countries such as England and Russia, where 92-95% of the victims were female. Furthermore, Anderson and Zinsser also convincingly agree with this view, stating clearly that “the witchcraft persecutions remain the most hideous example of misogyny in European history”. Anderson and Zinsser place the trials in the historical context of women’s rights and explain how the laws of the time “denied women control” over any aspect of their lives, demonstrating the misogyny already present in society. In addition, each of these historians use not only primary evidence, but also the key statistics from the witch trials as evidence for their arguments that the trials were caused by the misogynistic views of men.
On the other hand, the feminist argument for the cause of the Early-Modern European witch trials has been criticised by other historians, such as Thomas Fudge, due to the large number of men also accused of witchcraft, alongside the female victims. Fudge suggests that “making witch-hunting gendercide... is unsupportable and patently absurd”. Fudge’s argument is to a degree persuasive as he does base his argument on solid statistical evidence, such as the fact that a quarter of the accused witches across the whole of Europe were male.
Fudge’s viewpoint, that the witch trials were not a result of the misogyny of the period, is supported by David Pickering, when he describes a witch as “an old hag”, which was the traditional image of a witch, shown through the many engravings and woodcuts depicting witches as old women. Therefore, it could be argued that women were the main group accused due to the conventional image of a witch being established as a woman, not because of any patriarchal views held by men.
Barstow acknowledges these points, however, and manages to support her argument in regards to these facts; she acknowledges that “about 20 percent of the accused were male” and responds with the fact that most of them “were related to women already convicted” Barstow uses many examples to support this; for instance, in the case of Claudine Simonette and her son, Antoine, in Lorraine, Claudine was convicted, but Antoine set free, having only been accused due to his mother’s conviction. As a result of Barstow’s explanation of these factors, her argument becomes much more persuasive for the cause of the witch trials of Early-Modern Europe being caused by the misogyny of the period and the male desire for patriarchy.
In addition, it must be noted that the witch craze came about at a time when death rates had been significantly lowered from prior decades and people were living longer. A portion of these people who were living longer were women, specifically widows. An unmarried woman past birthing age was considered a burden on society. Though women were starting to work more during this period, widows of an older age could not work as easily as those who were younger and as they had no family of infants to care for either, they were useless to society as a whole. The “old hag,” described by Pickering as the main target of the trials, could easily be relating to older widows. These women generally lived alone and often had a cat, who would be seen as a familiar to the witch-obsessed population, though there were many cats as pets in this age as they would catch the rodents, helping to stop the spread of disease.
There is also another theory, related to Pickering’s established image of a witch, that focuses on Alewives. The brewing and selling of ale was actually a predominantly female profession in history, with records indicating this as far back as the 14th century. When you view images of these Alewives, they are often wearing a tall hat, sometimes with a point at the end and the majority of these workers were either married or widowed women. However, around about the start of the witch craze in Europe, women were being ousted from their sources of individual income as men decided they wanted to sell the ale themselves. Unlike women, men of any marital status had an established legal and social status within the community and they were able to commercialise the industry.
As men started to take over the industry, women are seen to be pushed back into their previously designated roles in the domestic sphere. In addition, evidence from the London Brewers Guild suggests that the majority of women still selling ale at this time were widows and therefore independent women who did not have a husband on which to rely for income. Though this may have been due to new laws that limited and prohibited women’s rights. For example, an order of 1540, in the city of Chester deemed that women between 14-40 were no longer permitted to sell ale, cutting the vast majority of women out of the market and allowing only those not of childbearing age to participate.
The relation of Alewives to the witch craze may seem like a stretch, but events such as the witch trials in Europe must be viewed within the context of their time. The ale industry ousting women at this time only goes to support Barstow’s argument that the witch trials were a war against women. Especially when it is considered that Alewives were often mocked by men and portrayed as sexually deviant, similarly to how the witches are portrayed in contemporary woodcuts and paintings. While men and women both sold ale, the Alewife demonisation continued, however only the female sellers were negatively affected by this. Alewives were considered as disobedient wives in a time when men were used to ruling over the female population. In a time when women were starting to climb and make their own lives for themselves, the men dragged them back down; they stole their independence and their livelihoods in an attempt to keep women in the place the men had assigned to and to take the money that should have been theirs.
It cannot be denied that women were the ones to suffer the most from the witch trials in Early-Modern Europe and that is because the trials were designed that way. Women were the target of the Patriarchy because the common woman had started to realise that she was worth more and was able to do more with her life. This went against everything the men had enforced upon them across the centuries and it seems they decided drastic action was required.
Religious View
Another approach to the causes of the witch trials in Early-Modern Europe is the religious interpretation that they were a result of an attempt to maintain either Protestant or Catholic Christianity as the dominant religion of different parts of Europe. Hugh Trevor-Roper, the chief opinionator for this view, has argued that “both Roman Catholics and Protestants found it useful to tar their opponents with the brush of witchcraft.” Trevor-Roper argues that to be a Protestant in Roman Catholic territory, and vice versa, was a dangerous position to be in, due to witchcraft accusations being used in order to purge Protestant or Roman Catholic areas of the less dominant denomination of Christianity.
This is a persuasive argument because of the decline of the Wars of Religion in Europe, which ceased at around about the same time as the witch trials came to an end, which Trevor-Roper uses as evidence for his theory. Furthermore, Keith Thomas has argued that “religious beliefs were a necessary pre-condition of the persecutions,” supporting Trevor-Roper’s interpretation of the causes of the witch trials.
Their arguments are persuasive because they each use statistics of high amounts of witch trials in highly religious areas of Europe, including over 300 in the Holy Roman Empire. Their arguments are given further support by contemporary philosopher Thomas Hobbes, who wrote that he did not think “their witchcraft is any real power... they are justly punished for... their trade being nearer to a new religion.”
In addition, many primary sources give detailed accounts of witchcraft and the accused being associated with the Devil, showing a strong link to the witch trials being caused by religion. For example, contemporary engravings illustrate witches making pacts with the Devil and receiving images and familiars from him. This evidence is useful, as it displays how those in power used such propaganda in order to make others in their different areas of Europe turn against those accused of witchcraft, in fear of going to Hell.
The evidence from Hobbes is useful, not only because it is contemporary to the trials, but also because it shows that at least some of the people knew there was no witchcraft, but were merely using it as an excuse to go after those who did not share the same religious beliefs that they did. Hobbes can also be considered a reliable source since he was a philosopher and as such, he was simply offering his thoughts on the reasons behind the persecutions, with no discernible ulterior motive. Secondly, as an educated man, he would have been well-informed of the situation on the Continent, as he travelled there a lot in his life. Therefore, since he believed that religion was often a cause of the trials, then his opinion carries some weight towards the religious argument.
In dispute with this religious argument, Scarre and Callow have suggested that “there is an absence of evidence that Roman Catholics normally prosecuted Protestants, or conversely.” They use evidence of Roman Catholic and Protestant countries trading fugitives to stand trial in support of their argument and in dispute of Trevor-Roper’s. They also go on to argue that the Wars of Religion, used as evidence for Trevor-Roper’s argument, “helped to establish the conditions in which the persecution might take root... they were a catalyst rather than the cause” of the witch trials of Early-Modern Europe. Additionally, social historian Robin Briggs notes how “the witchcraft persecutions... took place in areas hardly touched by the conflict” of the Wars of Religion. For example, most of the conflict took place in and around the Holy Roman Empire, but quite a few witch trials occurred all across each European country, including the British Isles, Russia and Iceland, all countries which were far away from the Wars of Religion.
It should also be considered that, as Scarre and Callow suggest, the religious views of the victims were simply a “catalyst,” and not the cause. In a similar vein, correlation does not mean causality, and as the evidence does not strongly support this view, it could have been a mere coincidence, or alternatively a devise used against the women who were accused, in order to further damn them. It would not be the first time, or the last time, in history that accusations of religious or even socio-political views were thrust onto the heads of those accused when it wasn’t even necessarily true.
Therefore, due to the lack of crucial evidence for the religious interpretation for the causes of the witch trials in Early-Modern Europe, compared to the large amount of facts and statistics supporting the feminist approach, it can be clearly seen that the trials were more the result of misogyny and the desire for a patriarchal society.
Socio-Economic View
Alternatively, Robin Briggs offers a third interpretation, that the witch trials of Early-Modern Europe were caused by the tensions in society and claims that most accusations “reflect[ed] the generally disadvantaged position of the witches.” Briggs is acclaimed for his work, by Fudge, who states that his “important work... draws renewed attention on local communities... stressing the immediate social context.” This serves to show the popularity of this interpretation among historians. Briggs’s view can be supported by evidence that many of the accused were “ideal scapegoats” for the social tensions in villages; “isolated, widely disliked and often unproductive figures” in societies. For instance, quotes from Reginald Scot in 1584 and John Gaule in 1646, show each describe a typical “witch” in much the same way, as “old women whom their neighbours found obnoxious”. Therefore, this evidence supports his argument, as elderly women who had some sort of impediment, or were disliked in society, would not have been able to work and would therefore be considered as unproductive members of society and perfect scapegoats for their neighbours to accuse of witchcraft.
Nevertheless, the strong evidence supporting this social interpretation does not dispute the feminist theory of misogyny and a desire for patriarchy being at the root of the trials. In fact, this theory actually assists in strengthening Barstow’s argument, as the evidence used by Briggs shows women to be the main victims of the trials. Social historian, Robert Thurston, admits that “75 per cent or more of the victims were female” and clearly states that there was a feeling of “general misogyny” in “what was obviously a patriarchal society”. Therefore, the argument put forward by Barstow is still the most persuasive argument for the cause of the witch trials in Early-Modern Europe.
Conclusion
In conclusion, though many historians have suggested the cause of the witch trials in Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries was either religion or the need to release social tensions, there is not strong enough evidence to support them. Of course, there is much to indicate that religion may well have played a part in the trials and the social tensions may have determined who was accused and who were the accusers.
Overall, however, the evidence and the persuasive arguments proposed by historians, such as Barstow and Larner, leave the impression that to the greatest extent, the European witch trials of 1580-1660 were mainly the result of the misogynistic views of the men in power and their desire for patriarchy. It must be considered, also, that the historians who argue against the patriarchal causes of the witch trials are largely male themselves. While this is not a damning factor in their own cases, nor does it discredit any of their research into the topic, it is far easier for a woman to pick up on the aggressions that our ancestresses have suffered for millennia at the hands of men in power, just as it is easy for the men who view these aggressions to dismiss them outright, even when the evidence is as damning as it is in the case of the European witch craze.
Final Thoughts
Having reviewed the evidence, there is no doubt in my mind that the witch craze in Early-Modern Europe was the cause of the rampant misogyny the women of the period faced every single day at the hands of the Patriarchy who wished to keep them down and preserve their status quo.
Unfortunately, witchcraft used to be considered an actual crime punishable by death. However, this was not quite so long ago as we may believe; the last woman known to have been executed for accusations of witchcraft was, at the time of writing this essay, in 2011.
Almost 300 years after the repeal of the Witchcraft Act in the UK, the 2,500 women murdered on these charges may receive a pardon and an apology, as campaigns in Scotland still rage to this day to have the verdicts overturned of these tortured and executed women. A formal apology was given by the leading Scottish MP on International Women’s Day in 2022, however, for the women hanged as witches, this still comes centuries too late.
Gallery
Bibliography
Books
-
Anderson, B. and Zinsser, J. (1988) A History of Their Own: Women in Europe, Harper & Row.
-
Barstow, A. (1994) Witchcraze, HarperCollins.
-
Briggs, R. (2002) Witches and Neighbours: the Social and Cultural Context of Witchcraft, Blackwell.
-
Hart, R. (1973) Witchcraft, The Garden City Press Limited.
-
Larner, C. (2004) ‘Was Witch-hunting Woman-hunting?’ in Oldridge, D. (ed.) (2004) The Witchcraft Reader, Routledge [originally published C. Larner (1984) Witchcraft and Religion, [Blackwell] pp. 79-91].
-
Levack, B. (2006) The Witch-hunt in Early Modern Europe, Longman/Pearson.
-
Levack, B. (ed.) (2004) The Witchcraft Sourcebook, Routledge.
-
Oldridge, D. (ed.) (2004) The Witchcraft Reader, Routledge.
-
Pickering, A. (2009) OCR A Level History B, Different Interpretations of Witch-hunting in Early Modern Europe, c.1560-1660, OCR/Heinemann.
-
Pickering, D. (1996) Dictionary of Witchcraft, Cassell.
-
Scarre, G. and Callow, J. (2001) Witchcraft and Magic in sixteenth and seventeenth century Europe, Palgrave.
-
Thomas, K. (1971) Religion and the Decline of Magic, Penguin.
-
Thurston, R. (2007) The Witch Hunts, Pearson.
-
Trevor-Roper, H, (1967) ‘The European Witch-Craze of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’, in Trevor-Roper, H, The Crisis of the Seventeenth Century, Harmondsworth (1967).
Journal Articles
-
Briggs, R. (1996) ‘Early Modern Witch-hunts’, in History Review, issue 25.
-
Fudge, T. (2006) ‘Traditions and Trajectories in the Historiography of European Witch-Hunting’, History Compass, Vol. 4, Issue 3.
-
Lemieux, S. (2007) ‘Witch-hunting in Early Modern Europe: the end of the “Bloodbath of the Innocents”’, in History Review, issue 57.
-
Rowlands, A. (2002) ‘The “Little Witch Girl” of Rothenburg’, in History Review, issue 42.
-
Sayer, K. (1994) ‘Feminism and History’, in Modern History Review, vol. 6, issue 2.
Magazine Articles
-
Camporesi, P. (1989) ‘Bread of Dreams’, in History Today, vol. 39, issue 4.
-
Davies, O. (1999) ‘Witchcraft: the Spell that didn’t Break,’ in History Today, vol. 49, issue 8.
-
Larner, C. (1981) ‘Witch beliefs and Witch-hunting in England and Scotland’, in History Today, vol. 31, issue 2.
-
Monter, E.W. (1980) ‘French and Italian Witchcraft’, in History Today, vol. 30, issue 11.
Useful Website Articles