Tortured versus Untortured Testimony

[Carla O'Harris]

Raven,

Do you know of any sources that compile all of the untortured testimony we have in regards to the witches? Or of sources that compare the relative amounts of untortured testimony to tortured testimony? Or that compare the tortured testimony with the results of a rigorous examination of the untortured testimony? It seems to me that having all of this material to-hand is very important in discussions of this matter.

If such a compilation does not exist, it would probably be beneficial for important Elders and Leaders within the witchcraft movement to officially petition leading scholars in the field to make such materials available. In this way, scholars could begin to take positions of service to religious communities by making needed materials available. It might even be possible to frame a grant proposal in such terms, if one knew (which I don't) how to write grants. Given the at least limited recognition of multiculturalism and the need to balance the historical scales with respect to minorities, I would think a religious minority like witches would qualify as needed recipients of religious material and testimony.

The argument might go something like this : Although witches have never had a written scripture, the oral histories have been very important. Due to persecution, these oral histories have been denied to us, and to the extent that some relevant fragments of those oral histories lie in the documents of the persecutors, it is our right to ask to have those materials ready to hand in order to reconstruct our traditions. I think this is a relevant and reasonable request.

It is likely that such a request would be met by at least some scholars with the polemics that witchcraft represents no such historical religious minority at all, and that it was "recently invented", etc., ad nauseum. But such an assertion could be precisely the place not only for a well-placed rebuttal, but more importantly, potentially even political action and protest aimed at demonstrating the strength and resolve of those who consider themselves to be part of a historically-persecuted religion. Such collective action -- even if by a small number of people -- could become the basis for well-placed rebuttals to come into greater limelight and consideration.

What do you think? Do such compilations exist? If so, where can we find them? If not, is it worthwhile letter-writing and lobbying to that end?

[raven grimassi]

Do you know of any sources that compile all of the untortured testimony we have in regards to the witches? Or of sources that compare the relative amounts of untortured testimony to tortured testimony? Or that compare the tortured testimony with the results of a rigorous examination of the untortured testimony?



What do you think? Do such compilations exist? If so, where can we find them? If not, is it worthwhile letter-writing and lobbying to that end?

As always, Carla, you pose fascinating questions. No, I am not aware of any studies of comparisons per se. I do not think the matter was/is important enough to scholars. This is because they either do not believe that Witches existed or they subscribe to the hysteria theory. I do not know of any scholars who believe there might be some evidence of pagan Witchcraft in any trial material.

I have read in various books some mention of the differences between confessions extracted by torture and those "freely" given. One problem, however, is the definition of torture. In some cases such things as the use of thumbscrews were not considered to be torture. So some confessions "freely" given "without torture" do not actually qualify by our modern standards. Trying to sort this all out would be a huge undertaking. And again, I do not think any scholars would bother (particularly not on our behalf).

My own research has been to compare confessions in Italian Witch trials with those of other European regions. This is because we do know what constituted freely given confessions. In most cases they were extracted through the same means that police departments use. This included sleep deprivation, fear, bartering, social pressure, relentless badgering, humiliation, and so forth.

Other confessions, particularly those in small villages and towns, were actually given without abuse. These are found in the confessions to local priests, who later turned them over to Church authorities. Much of the benandanti material comes from such confessions.

Some of the Italian Witchcraft trial transcripts contain not only pagan elements such as the worship of Diana, but also elements of non-Christian magic that survived over the centuries. The latter is noted by historian Ruth Martin in her book Witchcraft and the Inquisition in Venice 1550-1650. The Christian magic of this era refers to the use of communion wafers, holy water, and other Christian elements for use in potions and spells. The evidence that such elements did not appear in some trial transcripts, but non-Christian elements did, is supportive of a surviving Witchraft tradition.

[Carla O'Harris]

I have read in various books some mention of the differences between confessions extracted by torture and those "freely" given. One problem, however, is the definition of torture. In some cases such things as the use of thumbscrews were not considered to be torture. So some confessions "freely" given "without torture" do not actually qualify by our modern standards. Trying to sort this all out would be a huge undertaking. And again, I do not think any scholars would bother (particularly not on our behalf).

My own research has been to compare confessions in Italian Witch trials with those of other European regions. This is because we do know what constituted freely given confessions. In most cases they were extracted through the same means that police departments use. This included sleep deprivation, fear, bartering, social pressure, relentless badgering, humiliation, and so forth.


Ok, here it seems like we could draw upon some sort of contemporary Law Enforcement testimony. The issue at hand is the legitimacy of information extracted under what is called "coercive interrogation". Perhaps we could even ask someone who works in such a field what the range of opinions are. I suspect, regardless of what we think of its ethics, that it is fairly commonly used, and probably considered effective. But this would require some checking. If we can get a measure of the effectiveness of coercive interrogation based on its scale (is it more effective to sleep deprive and humiliate or to torture? (please, please, please don't take this as some kind of detached endorsement of these methods -- regardless of the ends, I personally do not endorse such unethical acts -- but ethics does not speak to effectiveness : something can be effective but unethical ; something can be ethical but ineffective)) according to modern law enforcement procedure, we could get an estimate of how accurate we should take some of the testimony.

Or to put it differently --- if the criteria used to disqualify the testimony of witches during this era were applied to modern law enforcement, how much of modern testimony would be crippled? I don't know if anyone has considered this in depth. Are you really going to get people who are a part of a secretive, persecuted group to readily volunteer information, or are interrogators going to have to get -- and I hesitate to use this word in this context -- "creative"?

One argument against the tactics used was that the Inquisitors were reading off a kind of standard question sheet. Question : is this any different than modern interrogators in certain circumstances? Isn't law enforcement method to study defining characteristics of a wanted group, and then utilize that information in interrogation? Obviously the question of out-and-out torture hazes things to say the least --- the familiar and quite valid argument that you'd answer "yes" to anything just to get them to stop. But does that invalidate the method of preexisting questionairres? (It begins to sound like I am an apologist for the Inquisition! Rest assured, I am not -- I just desire to know how much of the evidence we can consider valid, which is an important point for a group practically genocided out of existence.)


Other confessions, particularly those in small villages and towns, were actually given without abuse. These are found in the confessions to local priests, who later turned them over to Church authorities. Much of the benandanti material comes from such confessions.

Now this is fascinating. We have to compile this information.


Some of the Italian Witchcraft trial transcripts contain not only pagan elements such as the worship of Diana, but also elements of non-Christian magic that survived over the centuries. The latter is noted by historian Ruth Martin in her book Witchcraft and the Inquisition in Venice 1550-1650. The Christian magic of this era refers to the use of communion wafers, holy water, and other Christian elements for use in potions and spells. The evidence that such elements did not appear in some trial transcripts, but non-Christian elements did, is supportive of a surviving Witchraft tradition.

I agree. I will have to check out her book. Is it readily available, or is this a search and get lucky kind of thing?

[Carla O'Harris]

http://www.rowangrove.org/articles/a-11.htm

has,


With its call for an "examination of conscience" on the eve of Christianity's third millennium, the Vatican has opened most of its central archives on the Roman Inquisition to give scholars a clearer picture of these persecutions in medieval and early modern Europe.

The opening is a windfall for historians -- documents covering 3-1/2 centuries of heresy trials, theological controversies and book bannings -- as well as a test of the growing body of revisionist thinking that the Inquisition wasn't so bad after all. The Inquisition and the church's Index of Forbidden Books have been studied extensively from records in Italian provincial archives, but until now much has remained hidden in secret Vatican files in Rome.



This is an interesting distinction : Italian provincial archives, in addition to
secret Vatican files.

It would be helpful to have a nonpolemical guide to the study of the Inquisition. Hutton acts as if the archives have been unavailable to study to such an extent that earlier scholars such as Lea, who is certainly an important historian in this regard, can be disregarded. To what extent is this true? What is the historiography in this regard?



Many historians have softened toward the Inquisition in recent decades, arguing that uniformity of religious belief was needed to curb anarchy in medieval Europe. Their studies show that torture was used sparingly and that less than 2 percent of the Inquisition's known suspects were executed. Any defendant, they note, could have an attorney, a right not yet introduced in secular courts.



Yah, how much are these "historians" getting paid by the Catholic Church? This kind of shameful apologetics should be laughed at, not given any serious thought.

[Carla O'Harris]

And Raven, check this out :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_Secret_Archives :


In an article on the Vatican Secret Archives, we find the following :


The Secret Archives were removed from the Vatican Library in the 17th century under the orders of Pope Paul V and remained absolutely closed to Vatican outsiders until the late 19th century, fueling rumors of what might be secreted away there.


Two and a half centuries is certainly enough time for expurgations.


The entire contents of the pre-8th century archives, with undoubtedly the world's best collection of heretical texts, have disappeared, according to the Vatican's official account of the library's history, "for reasons not entirely known."

Oh, did I say expurgations? Silly me. This sentence should be read and re-read. The entire contents of the world's best collection of heretical texts has just "disappeared". How "convenient".

This is important because it demonstrates expurgation on the part of the Vatican and should underline the extreme carefulness we must take in overestimating the value of what they do reveal.


The documentation is a little scanty before the 13th century,

Ha! I'd like to know what that means!! So before 1200, scanty documentation. There's got to be a lot expurgated there as well.

Keep in mind that this wikipedia article has existed since 2004, and Catholic Church is all over anything on the web, so we can take this article to comprise absolutely what they cannot dispute -- because Wikipedia is collectively edited, and they most certainly have Catholic apologists participating in that collective editing disputing what they would see as "bias". Therefore what is said here probably represents tip of the iceberg kind of information.


There is no browsing, selected scholars must ask in advance for the precise document they wish to see, thus they must know in advance that such a document exists. The catalogue is not complete.


Oh, wow, what an "open door" policy!! No browsing. Only "selected scholars". Asking in advance. Having to know the document exists. An incomplete catalogue. Not an intimidating atmosphere at all.


The Vatican Secret Archives have been estimated to contain 30 miles of shelving (quite expansive), and there are 35,000 thick volumes in the selective catalogue alone: "Publication of the indexes, in part or as a whole, is forbidden," according to the regulations current in 2005.

Why forbidden?

Wikipedia also has this interesting article on historical revisionism :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism_%28political%29 :


Historical revisionism (also but less often in English "negationism"[1]), as used in this article, describes the process that attempts to rewrite history by downgrading, denying or simply ignoring essential facts.

Sounds like something we see all the time.

And this site,

http://www.revisionism.nl/

while humorous, has some instructive examples that might be called upon, especially this, which I think you'll find funny and instructive :

http://www.revisionism.nl/Parthenon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm

It tries to argue that the Parthenon never existed, and see how they do so!!

And this looks worthy of a visit :

http://www.library.upenn.edu/collections/rbm/mss/lea/lea-library.html

We should do a "witch field trip" there and then stop by the Leland archives in the same town.