Medieval European magic

Medicinal practices in the Middle Ages were often regarded as forms of “natural magic”. One in particular was referred to as a “leechbook”, or a doctor-book that included masses to be said over the healing herbs. For example, a procedure for curing skin disease first involves an ordinary herbal medicine followed by strict instructions to draw blood from the neck of the ill, pour it into running water, spit three times and recite a sort of spell to complete the cure. In addition to the leechbook, the Lacnunga included many prescriptions derived from the European folk culture that more intensely involved magic. The Lacnunga prescribed a set of Christian prayers to be said over the ingredients used to make the medicine, and such ingredients were to be mixed by straws with the names “Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John” inscribed on them. In order for the cure to work, several charms had to be sung in Latin over the medicine.[2]

Prayers, blessings, and adjurations were all common forms of verbal formulas whose intentions were hard to distinguish between the magical and the religious. Prayers were typically requests directed to a holy figure such as God, a saint, Christ, or Mary. Blessings more often were addressed to patients, and came in the form of wishes for good fortune. Adjurations, also known as exorcisms were more directed to either a sickness, or the agent responsible such as a worm, demon, or elf. While these three verbal formulas may have had religious intentions, they often played a role in magical practices. When the emphasis of a prayer so apparently relied on the observance of religiously irrelevant conditions, we can characterize it as magical. Blessings were more often than not strictly religious as well, unless they were used alongside magic or in a magical context. However, adjurations required closer scrutiny, as their formulas were generally derived from folklore. The command targeted at the sickness or evil left the possibility of refusal, meaning the healer entered a battle with the devil in which he or she relied on a holy power to come to his/her aid. Though people at this age were less concerned with whether or not these verbal formulas involved magic or not, but rather with the reality of if they were or were not successful.

Not only was it difficult to make the distinction between the magical and religious , but what was even more challenging was to distinguish between helpful (white) magic from harmful (black) magic. Medical magic and protective magic were regarded as helpful, and called ‘white’, while sorcery was considered evil and ‘black’. Distinguishing between black magic and white magic often relied on perspective, for example, if a healer attempted to cure a patient and failed, some would accuse the healer of intentionally harming the patient. In this era, magic was only punished if it was deemed to be ‘black’, meaning it was the practice of a sorcerer with harmful intentions [3]

Legislation against magic could be one of two types, either by secular authorities or by the Church. The penalties assigned by secular law typically included execution, but were more severe based on the impact of the magic, as people were less concerned with the means of magic, and more concerned with its effects on others. The penalties by the Church often required penance for the sin of magic, or in harsher cases could excommunicate the accused under the circumstances that the work of magic was a direct offense against God. The distinction between these punishments, secular versus the Church, were not absolute as many of the laws enacted by both parties were derived from the other [3]

The persecution of magic can be seen in law codes dating back to the 6th century, where the Germanic code of Visigoths condemned sorcerers who cursed the crops and animals of peasant's enemies. In terms of secular legislation, Charles the Great (Charlemagne) was arguably the strongest opposing force to magic. He declared that all who practiced sorcery or divination would become slaves to the Church, and all those who sacrificed to the Devil or Germanic gods would be executed.[3]

Charlemagne's objection to magic carried over into later years, as many rulers built on his early prohibitions. King Roger II of Sicily punished the use of poisons by death, whether natural or magical. Additionally, he proclaimed that ‘love magic’ be punished regardless of if anyone was hurt or not. However, secular rulers were still more concerned with the actual damage of the magic rather than the means of its infliction.[3]

Instructions issued in 800 at a synod in Freising provide general outlines for ecclesiastical hearings. The document states that those accused of some type of sorcery were to be examined by the archpriest of the diocese in hopes of prompting a confession. Torture was used if necessary, and the accused were often sentenced to prison until they resolved to do penance for their sins.[3]

Important political figures were the most frequently known characters in trials against magic, whether defendants, accusers, or victims. This was because high-society trials were more likely to be recorded as opposed to trials involving ordinary townspeople or villagers. For example, Gregory of Tours recorded the accusations of magic at the royal court of 6th century Gaul. According to History of the Franks, two people were executed for supposedly bewitching emperor Arnulf and prompting the stroke that lead to his death.[3]

The fourteenth century already brought about an increase of sorcery trials, however the second and third quarters of the fifteenth century were known for the most dramatic uprising of trials involving witchcraft. The trials developed into catch-all prosecution, in which townspeople were encouraged to seek out as many suspects as possible. The goal was no longer to secure justice against a single offender but rather to purge the community of all transgressors. The term “witchcraft” has multiple connotations, all involving some type of sorcery or magic. However, by the late Middle Ages this term developed into someone who went beyond mere sorcery and acted in league with other witches on behalf of the Devil. Friars preached that not only are the witches who work for the devil guilty, but also all those who fail to report these culprits. This led to an outbreak of accusations, in fear of being accused themselves. Trials inspired more trials, and this increase in trials inspired the rise in the frequency of literature on witches. The famed culmination of this literary tradition was the Malleus maleficarum written in 1486 by Jacob Sprenger and Henry Kramer. This classic case of misogynist witchcraft treatise and its impact on magic in the Middle Ages will be explored later in this article. The growing popularity of literature regarding witchcraft and magic lead to an even greater upsurge in trials and prosecutions of witches.[4]

The stereotype of the witch finally solidified in the late Middle Ages. Numerous texts singled out women to be especially inclined to witchcraft. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, women defendants outnumbered men two to one. This difference only became more pronounced in the following centuries. The disparity between women and men defendants was primarily due to the position women held in late medieval society. Women in this era were far less trusted than men, as they were presumably weak minded and easily dissuaded. General misogynist stereotypes further encouraged their prosecution, which lead to a more stiffened stereotype of witches. Massive witch trials swept across Europe in the second half of the fifteenth century. In 1428, more than 100 people were burned for killing others, destroying crops, and working harm by means of magic. This trial in the Valais provided the first evidence for the fully developed stereotype of a witch, including flight through the air, transforming humans into animals, eating babies and the veneration of the Devil. The unrestricted use of torture in combination with the adoption of inquisitorial procedures as well as the development of the witch stereotype and a dramatic rise in public suspicion ultimately caused the swelling fervor and frequency of these sweeping witch hunts.[3]