Re: Witchcraft, Lycanthropy, Drugs & Disease (Review) Jenny jennyg@compuserve.com Sun Oct 11 18:05:25 1998 : The thing I hate about using this method is the use of *br*: propaganda. Though there may be a tid-bit of accurate *br*: information there, propaganda is simply a well developed *br*: lie. *p*Yeah, it's a mess! And I think that too many people approach this subject naively, simply accepting what they read at face value (at least, if it agrees with them <g>). Historical witchcraft is a very complex, emotional subject -- you've got to question everything.*p*As a side note, please don't hesitate to ask me to provide evidence for anything I say. Some people get mighty offended when you "question" them -- I promise I won't! Too many citations tends to bog stuff down, but I'm always happy to explain what evidence I'm basing my statements on.*p*: The thing I dislike about trial records is they do not show *br*: who was pagan and who was Christian, because they can't. *p*You're right -- they can't. Because it depends on how *you* define "Pagan". The division between Christianity and Paganism isn't as neat as most people make it out. If Joan of Arc, a devout Christian, also hears voices at a fairy tree, does that make her Pagan? What about Paolo Gasparutto, who believes that Christ singled him out to fight in spirit to protect the fertility of the crops? Or a French peasant who prays to St. Guinefor, the Holy Greyhound -- a saint the Church doesn't recognize?*p*The "Paganism" that appears in the witch trials is almost invariably Christo-Paganism. The "witch" considers herself Christian despite the fact that her beliefs, spells, and customs have a pre-Christian origin. It is the Church, not the witch, who generally labels such things "Pagan" or "Satanic."*p*: I've seen some of these lists, and they lump _known_ *br*: Christians in with "pagans", and this seems wrong *br*: to me. It seems like, the more names you can get in there, *br*: the better your purpose is served*p*I've noticed that, too, and I find it very disturbing. There are so many people who feel I'm "dishonoring" my ancestors when I say that "only" 40,000 - 60,000 people died. As if there was some quota we had to meet before it became a bona fide atrocity!*p*Another disturbing fact: the estimate that nine million witches died in the Burning Times originated in the late 19th century. But it didn't become popular until after World War II -- after the six million deaths of the Holocaust became widely known. I swear it's almost as if some people were trying to "one-up" the Jews, to "prove" that we were the most persecuted minority ever.*p*: Citing where the Church bit itself *br*: seems to have little to do with "our" religous *br*: persecution, save that they used "our" faiths as a *br*: means to deal with a political or economic problem. *p*Which raises an interesting question -- if the people who died in the persecution weren't "real" witches, why should a Witch study the Burning Times?*p*For me, there are several reasons. One, it interests me. I was studying this subject before I became a Witch. Two, it has a lot to say about modern "Satanic Panics" -- it's frighteningly relevant to things that're going on around us now.*p*Three, there are some Pagan elements in the trials. I *don't* believe that Paganism had a Faithful Remnant, some secret clique of Masters who preserved the Old Ways perfectly intact throughout years of persecution. The Christo-Paganism of the witch trials, of popular medieval religion, is what happened to my ancestors' faith. *p*I have no doubt that these "witches" would disagree with me calling them "Pagan". If I could somehow meet Anna Gamperle and say, "Sister! I, too, am a Witch and have renounced the Christian faith of my childhood", she would immediately flee, screaming in terror, for the safety of the nearest church.*p*I respect her self-definition -- if she thinks of herself as a Christian, then she is Christian in my book. But I also see echoes of the Old Ways in her wisdom, and that more than anything else is what draws me.*p*: I also find that most of these sites are run by individuals *br*: who absolutely despise the Church. *p*<g> I swear there are people who, when you say "Christ", their heads spin around like Linda Blair's in _The Exorcist_. Wanna get 'em really mad? Use the word "Christo-Pagan" a lot. Speaking from personal experience, nothing will torque a Pagan fundamentalist faster <g>. It's like saying "Judeo-Christian" around white supremicists.*p*: Yet, if you *br*: were most likely to survive a Church trial, why is the *br*: Church getting all the blame? *p*It's largely a relic, from back before we had good evidence.*p*In the 19th century, most secular historians blamed the persecution on the Church. They saw it as an explosion of medieval superstition and religious hysteria. And yes, that definitely was connected to the fact that most of these historians were either Protestants (blaming the Catholics) or atheists (blaming Christianity in general).*p*Other factors included: 1) the "an inquisition/the Inquisition" error. 2) the Lamothe-Langon forgeries -- a series of enormous trials which supposedly occurred in southern France in the 14th century, where the Inquisition killed as many as 400 women were killed in one day. Scholars didn't figure out that these were forgeries until 1972! 3) We had no data! No one had ever tabulated the trial evidence, so no one knew how many witches were killed by the Inquisition vs the secular courts. 4) Much of the witch hunting propaganda was written by inquisitors (including the Malleus Maleficarum, that most famous of manuals). So this naturally led people to expect that inquisitors would be fierce witch-hunters.*p*Today, it's mainly kept alive by either prejudice or (more commonly) bad research. Since the 1970's, most historians have abandonned this theory, because there's so much evidence against it. *p*: Given what I know about the Salem *br*: trials, I'd wage a bet that 90% of those executed in the *br*: Ingusition and all the other times were Christain. *p*I agree. If you take a hard-line definition of "Pagan" (ie., completely non-Christian)... well, I only know of one trial that involves a Pagan! Even if you use my immensely broad "Christo-Pagan" category, I'd still guess that only 5%-10% of the trials involve significant levels of Paganism.*p*: But, how do we know they were "witches", and not *br*: just saddled with the title?*p*According to the Inquisition, none of them were. At the end of the "Basque Dream Epidemic", one of the largest crazes on record, the Spanish Inquisition announced that it was unable to find evidence that even one act of genuine witchcraft had occurred! It was all hysteria. "There were neither witches nor bewitched," wrote one inquisitor, "until they were talked and written about."*p*Because of the difficulty of determining who was a "real" witch, I usually refer to all of the accused as witches. I don't mean that they were necessarily Pagan -- most, in fact, weren't. One of the things I'm going to try to do is to write "Witch" when I'm talking about Pagans, and "witch" when I just mean someone who was accused of witchcraft. But to date I haven't been very consistant about this. <g>*p*: His reply was not nice. He stated that I was a *br*: "plant" by the Church, and I was only out to seed *br*: "his People" with discontent before "my *br*: gestopoe" comes in to "burn" him and *br*: "his kind". Last I checked, I thought I was his *br*: kind, unless he meant, more pointedly, zealots.*p*<LOL!> Boy, I hear you! I have been told SOOO many times that I'm a running dog of the Patriarchy... or a closet Christian... I get it from both sides: from Pagans who're furious that I'm dishing the Nine Million Martyrs, and from fellow feminists who're enraged that I say most feminist writing on this subject is stereotypical and inaccurate.*p*Some days it makes me want to do a take-off on Sojourner Truth's famous speech, _Ain't I a Woman?_: "I can think -- and ain't I a feminist? I can read original manuscripts, balance conflicting evidence, and construct a logical argument -- and ain't I a feminist?"*p*: I like this site better, anyway. It has far better color *br*: coordination and the hostess is prettier. <G>*p*<g> Flattery will get you everywhere. Though Deb and Searles are to thank for the site's look. I'm only computer-literature at the 1st Grade level, so I have to have my parents dress me before I can go out!*p*Jenny Re: Witchcraft, Lycanthropy, Drugs & Disease (Review) Infiniti 51 Sun Oct 11 15:11:40 1998