The Witch-cult in Western Europe | Page 2

their opponents,
deny the facts in toto. Both parties believed with equal firmness in a
personal Devil, and both supported their arguments with quotations
from the Bible. But as the believers were able to bring forward more
texts than the unbelievers and had in their hands an unanswerable
argument in the Witch of Endor, the unbelievers, who dared not
contradict the Word of God, were forced to fall back on the theory that
the witches suffered from hallucination, hysteria, and, to use the
modern word, 'auto-suggestion'. These two classes still persist, the
sceptic predominating. Between the believer who believed everything
and the unbeliever who disbelieved everything there has been no
critical examination of the evidence, which presents a new and
untouched field of research to the student of comparative religion.
Among the believers in witchcraft everything which could not be
explained by the knowledge at their disposal was laid to the credit of
supernatural powers; and as everything incomprehensible is usually
supposed to emanate from evil, the witches were believed to be
possessed of devilish arts. As also every non-Christian God was, in the
eyes of the Christian, the opponent of the Christian God, the witches
were considered to worship the Enemy of Salvation, in other words, the
Devil. The greater number of these writers, however, obtained the

evidence at first hand, and it must therefore be accepted although the
statements do not bear the construction put upon them. It is only by a
careful comparison with the evidence of anthropology that the facts fall
into their proper places and an organized religion stands revealed.
The common beliefs as to the powers of the witches are largely due to
the credulous contemporary commentators, who misunderstood the
evidence and then exaggerated some of the facts to suit their
preconceived ideas of the supernatural powers of the witches; thereby
laying themselves open to the ridicule of all their opponents, past and
present. Yet the ridicule is not fully deserved, for the facts are there,
though the explanation is wrong; for even the two points, which are
usually considered the ultimate proof of the absurdity and incredibility
of the whole system--the flying on a broomstick through the window or
up the chimney, and the transformation into animals--are capable of
explanation. The first can be accounted for when the form of early
mound-dwellings is taken into consideration, and when it is
remembered that among savage tribes there are often taboos connected
with the door, the two-faced god being essentially a deity of the door.
Besides this the fertility rites connected with the broom should be taken
into account. The second should be compared with similar accounts of
transformation into animals among the cults of other nations. Mr. A. B.
Cook's comment on the Greek ritual applies quite as well to Western as
to Eastern Europe: 'We may venture on the general statement that
within the bounds of Hellenic mythology animal-metamorphosis
commonly points to a preceding animal cult.'[1]
It is interesting to note the class of mind among those contemporary
writers who believed in the reality of the facts confessed at the trials as
compared with those who disbelieved. It will be seen that the most
brilliant minds, the keenest intellects, the greatest investigators, were
among the believers: Bodin, Lord Bacon, Raleigh, Boyle, Cudworth,
Selden, Henry More, Sir Thomas Browne, Matthew Hale, Sir George
Mackenzie, and many others, most of whom had heard the evidence at
first hand. The sceptics were Weyer, pupil of the occultist Cornelius
Agrippa; Reginald Scot, a Kentish country squire; Filmer, whose name
was a byword for political bigotry; Wagstaffe, who went mad from

drink; and Webster, a fanatical preacher.[2] The sceptics, with the
exception of Weyer, appear to have had little or no first-hand evidence;
their only weapon was an appeal to common sense and sentiment
combined; their only method was a flat denial of every statement which
appeared to point to supernatural powers. They could not disprove the
statements; they could not explain them without opposing the accepted
religious beliefs of their time, and so weakening their cause by
exposing themselves to the serious charge of atheism; therefore they
denied evidence which in the case of any other accusation would have
been accepted as proof.
The evidence which I now bring forward is taken entirely from
contemporary sources, i.e. the legal records of the trials, pamphlets
giving accounts of individual witches, and the works of Inquisitors and
other writers. I have omitted the opinions of the authors, and have
examined only the recorded facts, without however including the
stories of ghosts and other 'occult' phenomena with which all the
commentators confuse the subject. I have also, for the reason given
below, omitted all reference to charms and spells when performed by
one witch alone, and have confined myself to those statements