David Asker ’13

WRI 138 – The Inquisition

Winner of a 2009-2010 Quin Morton '36 Writing Seminar Essay Prize

Assignment: Develop an argument about some aspect of the social context of criminal justice
in early modern Europe. You may choose to focus on one specific facet, such as the religious,
social, political, gender, or economic aspects of some set of early modern criminal
proceedings. You must use relevant secondary sources to place your research in its historical
and scholarly context.

“Here is a Fire lit, that rages mighty far”: Causes of the Dalarna Witch Craze in
a Top-Down Perspective

One evening in early October 1667, in the remote province of Dalarna, Sweden,

nine-year-old Mats Nilsson came home from herding the family goats. He told his father of a

peculiar incident he had observed: allegedly, his eleven-year old friend Gertrud had walked

on the water of the Dal River.1 This seemingly inconspicuous event proved the starting point

of the largest witch craze in Scandinavian history, spreading like “fire in dry juniper twigs”2

and resulting in nearly 300 convictions for witchcraft. Even to contemporary observers, the

hysteria seemed a “Rage of Satan” unparalleled in recorded history anywhere in the world. 3

Attempting to make sense of this extraordinary development, Swedish historian Bengt

Ankarloo, noting an overrepresentation of women among the accused, suggests that “an

interpretation in terms of a conflict between the sexes seems… highly appropriate.”4

Witchcraft accusations, Ankarloo holds, constituted an attempt to remove powerful and

affluent women from their positions of privilege, as such women posed “a real threat to male

1
Birgitta Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede 1668-1671: Bakgrund i Övre Dalarna:
Social och ecklesiastisk kontext, (Almqvist & Wiksell: Stockholm, 1990) 20-1
2
Rev. Gustav J. Elvius, ”A short and simple account of the tribulations and abductions of children by the evil
witches of Rättvik”, 1670, in History of Psychiatry 2004; Vol. 15, 483
3
Bishop Olaus Laurelius, quoted in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 64
4
Bengt Ankarloo, “Sweden: The Mass Burnings (1668-1676)” in Early Modern European Witchcraft: Centers
and Peripheries (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990) 316
supremacy in the peasant community.”5 In stark contrast, Raisa Maria Toivo implies that “the

gender roles… are actually something historians are imposing on the records;” rather, there

“seem to have been other social conflicts behind the accusations.”6 Toivo agrees with

Ankarloo that conflict triggered the trials; however, these conflicts were personal quarrels

between neighbors and acquaintances, rather than part of systemic clash over the patriarchal

structure of society. A final third view, rejecting conflict as a major cause altogether, is

advocated by Per Sörlin, who asserts that the witchcraft trials arose out of a genuine belief in

physically destructive maleficium, which prompted people to seek out human sources of their

misfortunes. These beliefs, Sörlin argues, were the root cause giving rise to both social

conflicts and to the witch craze, rather than the former directly causing the latter.7 There is

thus widespread scholarly disagreement on the issue of causation, ranging from the systemic

conflict theories of Ankarloo to the cognitive models of Sörlin.

Notably, however, these three positions have a common denominator: they

approach the witch craze from the bottom up, focusing on what drove people to produce the

accusations which formed the basis of the phenomenon. However, an accusation does not

equal a trial; the latter entails the involvement of the authorities, an actor given remarkably

little attention by the abovementioned scholars. However, particularly in the case of Dalarna,

both secular and ecclesiastic authorities were instrumental in bringing about the craze, by

providing additional judicial manpower and bending legal rules to enable the trials to take

place. One skeptical royal advisor even noted, in regards to the witch hysteria, that “the more

we involve ourselves in this business, the worse it will get… if we left it untouched it would

go away.”8 Yet the craze was not left untouched: Authorities willingly – sometimes

5
Ibid.
6
Raisa Maria Toivo, ”Women at Stake: Interpretations of Women’s Role in Witchcraft” in ARV: Nordic
Yearbook of Folklore 2006; Vol. 62, 192-3
7
Per Sörlin, “Witchcraft and Causal Links: Accounts of Maleficent Witchcraft in the Göta Hogh Court in the
Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries”, in ARV: Nordic Yearbook of Folklore 2006; Vol. 62, 51-3
8
Karl Gustav Wrangel, quoted in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 150
enthusiastically – made essential contributions to its expansion. However, none of the

explanations of the abovementioned scholars can be successfully applied to account for this

crucial fact; convictions do not fit a pattern of targeting powerful women, most courts

members and involved officials had no personal relationships – let alone conflicts – with the

accused, and there is much evidence that many of them doubted the reality of maleficium.

Rather, it appears the authorities were mainly concerned with the local population’s

misunderstanding of Christian doctrine and lack of fear of God and religious institutions.

Witchcraft, seen chiefly as a form of diabolism, was symptomatic of these problems, and

persecuting it was part of the authorities’ effort to strengthen the vigor of Lutheran

Christianity in Dalarna; as such, is was essentially a confessionalization effort.

Confessionalization refers to the process of shaping a community in accordance with a given

religious confession, through means such as education, propaganda and punishment.9 It was

the combination of the confessionalization drive from above, fueled by and utilizing

accusations from below, that produced the Dalarna witch craze. The subject of this paper is

the former, more neglected causal factor: It argues that the clergy, the royal government and

its judiciary made indispensible contributions to causing the craze, in terms of legal

manipulation and resource allocation, and that they did so as part of an effort to imbue

Dalarna with respect for Lutheran Christian values and institutions, as the appearance of

witchcraft seemed to indicate these were under threat.

Before unfolding this argument in depth, it may be appropriate to briefly recount

the development of the Dalarna witch craze. The province of Dalarna is located in western

Sweden, bordering Norway; in the 1660s, it was relatively densely populated, but isolated

from the rest of the country by poor communication infrastructure.10 The starting point of the

witchcraft phenomenon has been dated by contemporaries as well as historians to October

9
John M. Headley et al., Confessionalization in Europe: 1555-1700 (Ashgate: Burlington, 2004), xviii
10
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 150
1667, when the first witchcraft accusation appeared in the parish of Älvdalen.11 Interrogations

with the accuser as well as the accused followed, producing more accusations, some of them

targeting people outside the parish, prompting local authorities to expand the investigations

throughout 1668. By the spring of 1669, accusations had been levied in Älvdalen, neighboring

Lillhärdal and the nearby town of Mora.12 In the summer of this year, the High Court in

Stockholm resolved to appoint a commission of officials, “some of the Clergy, some of the

Laity, to make a Journey to the Town aforesaid… to examine the whole business.”13 The

Commission operated in Dalarna until 1671, after which the craze spread north and north-east,

and its epicenter shifted to other provinces.14 The craze had some peculiar characteristics: the

average age of the accuser was as low as nine, with an even younger median age,15 and 86%

of those convicted were women.16 The gender discrepancy mirrors a general trend in

European witch hunts, and though child accusations also occurred throughout Europe, this

pattern was exceptionally pronounced in Sweden.17 The most common type of accusation

involved allegedly abducting children to witches’ Sabbaths at the mythical location of

Blåkulla, where the children would feast, dance and pledge their soul to Satan.18 Once

accused, very few people managed to escape legal punishment,19 and the number of people

convicted totaled 279.20

The courts’ high propensity to punish provides a first, important clue to

understanding an essential cause of the craze: the authorities took an active interest in the

11
Ibid., 20-1
12
Ibid., 44 and 56
13
Elavus Skragge, An Account of What Happen’d in the Kingdom of Sweden in the Years 1669, and 1670 and
upwards, in Relation to some Persons that were accused for Wicthes; and Tryed and Executed by the King’s
Command, trans. and ed. Anthony Horneck (London: Printed for S. Lownsd, 1682) 6
14
Ankarloo, “The Mass Burnings,” 300-2
15
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 119
16
Ibid., 98
17
Edward Peters and Alan Charles Kors, Witchcraft in Europe, 400-1700: A Documentary History, (University
of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia, 2001), 17
18
Per-Anders Östling, “Blåkulla Journeys in Swedish Folklore” in ARV: Nordic Yearbook of Folklore 2006; 62,
81
19
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 97
20
Ibid., 98
witch trials. This is apparent from the very first accusation in 1667, summarized by the court

as follows:

Mats Nilsson, who saw Gertrud’s walk on the water, has been the first to reveal
this, so that [the] pastor soon became aware of it, who also has not delayed the
investigation thereof, but immediately summoned Gertrud to him, and long held
her in interrogation. But that time he could not get any confession from her, until
the second time soon thereafter, albeit to the great anguish of Gertrud, who is by
Satan much tormented.21

It was the pastor, one Reverend Lars Elvius, who did “not delay” to launch an

investigation of witchcraft based on the testimony of a nine-year-old boy, and appears to have

devoted considerable effort – two lengthy interrogations within a short period of time and in

the face of Gertrud’s “great anguish” – to obtain a confession. Elvius was clearly the most

active party; Mats merely related the story of Gertrud’s alleged witchcraft to his father,22

while the Reverend, upon hearing this news from Mats’ father, enthusiastically turned it into a

legal case. From the very first witchcraft accusation, the active involvement of the authorities

was indispensible to bringing about the trials.

The behavior of Elvius is interesting in another way. The Reverend acts

forcefully upon the evidence provided by a nine-year old; in Swedish law, Bengt Ankarloo

notes, basing “a verdict, particularly when it concerned the death penalty, on evidence from…

small children was downright illegal.”23 The Reverend is not alone in his error; as noted

above, the witnesses employed by the royal Commission and local courts throughout the craze

had an average age of nine. Clearly, the authorities were willing to bend the legal framework

21
“hafwer… Matz Nilsson… som Gertrudz gång på watnet såg, detta först oppenbarat, så at pastor hafwer det
strax fått weta, hwilken och icke hafuer drögt med ransakningen dher öfuer, uthan gänast låtit kalla Gertrud till
sigh, och länge hafft henne i förhör. Men dhenn gången kunde han inthet få någon bekännelsse av henne för än
andre gången näst dher effter, dock med Gertrudz store anfächtande hwilken av satan mycket ähr plågadt” in
account of the Älvdalen parish court proceedings from 1668, in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas
Utbrottsskede, 21
22
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 20
23
Ibid., 296
of criminal justice to allow the trials to proceed. Ankarloo suggests this was simply due to the

ignorance of local courts in regards to proper judicial procedure,24 but the fact that the

Commission from Stockholm relied on child evidence to the same extent largely invalidates

this view. Some legal experts in the Commissions even objected to using evidence from

children, but “the majority,” in Ankarloo’s own words, “held a different opinion.”25 As

opposition was voiced, the Commission was clearly aware it acted outside the legal

framework, but still chose to proceed. It is evident that the authorities did not intend just to

ensure the implementation of Swedish law when entertaining the accusations; rather, they

redefined or ignored Swedish law in order to entertain the accusations. One of the few

skeptical voices in the royal Privy Council, that of Per Brahe, remarked that “this harsh

persecution will probably increase the witch craze.”26 Evidently, even some contemporary

observers believed that the official response to the accusations was a causal factor behind the

craze. Given Brahe’s prominent position in the government, it is remarkable how little impact

his views seem to have had; perhaps, his interpretation was accepted but simply not seen as

problematic: Increasing the craze, in terms of the number of trials, might not have been

altogether undesirable.

Indeed, enthusiasm to pursue the issue was not limited to the local level; the

account of Rev. Elavus Skragge even indicates that “his Majesty [Charles XI] was pleased to

appoint [the] Commissioners.”27 Had the Commission simply been a necessity to uphold the

law in the face of legitimate accusations of criminality, it would have amounted merely to a

necessary diversion of judicial resources, in which case it would hardly have “pleased” the

King. One could object that Skragge, as a local priest, might have had limited insight into the

24
Ibid., 300
25
Ibid., 297
26
“Den skarpa executionen lär öka trolldomen” in Per Brahe, quoted in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska
Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 65. Lagerlöf-Genetay asserts that ”executionen” is to be understood as
”förfarandet” rather than ”avrättningarna.”
27
Skragge, An Account of What Happen’d, 9
true sentiment of Charles XI. However, Skragge had served as preacher at the royal court and

had numerous contacts in the government,28 and was presumably well informed of events in

Stockholm. Also, the fact that the King chose to divert additional resources to an issue he had

strong legal grounds – indeed, legal imperatives – to ignore is itself a testament to the

importance royal authorities ascribed to the witchcraft phenomenon. Thus two things are

clear: Firstly, the vast majority of trials – and hence the overall craze – could not have

occurred without an extra-legal decision on behalf of the authorities to allow child testimonies

as evidence, and to send additional manpower to Dalarna to turn the prolific accusations into

investigations and trials. Secondly, since the law was itself being manipulated to enable the

trials, something must have been at stake for the authorities other than upholding the law.

What, then, were the stakes in Dalarna in the late 1660s that authorities found so

compelling? Applying the theories of Ankarloo, Toivo and Sörlin to resolve this question

does not produce any satisfactory answers consistent with the evidence. Toivo’s explanation

is the most obviously inapplicable one: after the summer of 1668, at which point the royally

appointed Commission took charge of the trials, there are simply no pre-existing personal

relationships, much less personal conflicts, between the involved officials – having travelled

there from Stockholm – and the accused, being peasants in the Swedish outback. Attempting

to explain the King’s and Royal Court’s decisions to form the Commission through personal

conflicts is, for the same reasons, even more far-fetched, and lacks support from primary

sources. Ankarloo’s view may appear more feasible, but also lacks support in officials’

statements, and does not fit the pattern of convictions: among the few accused witches

acquitted by court, powerful and affluent women were especially frequent.29 While these

women were probably better able to organize a legal defense with reliable, favorable

witnesses, the fact that the courts generally accepted their innocence indicates that their sole

28
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 59
29
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 95
purpose was not to disempower such women. Thus this application of both Ankarloo’s and

Toivo’s explanations lack support among the letters and statements by the authorities

themselves, and square poorly with the overall patterns of the craze.

An application of Sörlin’s theory, by contrast, is not as easily rejected; while it

does not hold up to close scrutiny, it is a helpful starting point to describe the real motivations

behind the authorities’ contributions to the craze. Sörlin argues that a genuine belief in, and

fear of, the reality of witchcraft was the main causal factor; with very few exceptions, secular

and ecclesiastic authorities alike seem to have shared such a belief. A local official expressed

wishes “that God Almighty would let nothing evil befall… [those] who will investigate and

judge this Witchcraft matter.”30 The anxiety of such officials indicates a view of witchcraft as

potentially dangerous, and thus necessarily real. Even the High Court, in its internal

deliberations, assumed that the accusations were not outright false.31 It would seem the

necessary preconditions to apply Sörlin’s theory are present.

However, Sörlin focuses exclusively on maleficium, or physically destructive

witchcraft; towards this specific phenomenon, most courts and other officials were more

skeptical. Within the Commission there was, according to its own records, “a great

deliberation as to whether such things had not been tricks of Satan and false visions… to

obscure the truth.”32 In his 1670 summary of how child abductions occurred, Reverend

Gustav Elvius of Rättvik cautiously adds the qualifier that “at least the victims thought so;” he

concludes the summary with declaring that he “urged the mothers to try to obtain the truth

30
”att Gud Alsmechtigh ville Eders Nådhe, sampt fleere andre som om desse Trulldoms saaker skohle ransaka
döma och exequera, att intet ondt må them vederfaras,” in Johan Arfwedsson, Letter to Gustav Duwall, 27 June
1668, in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 39
31
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 66
32
”ett stort efftertänkiande om sådant icke hafwa warit ett satans gäckerij och en falsk syyn... till at förwilla
sanningen,” in protocoll from the court of Mora, September 1668, quoted in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska
Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 38
from the children, since I could not find it myself.”33 These are just two examples of the

countless expressions of doubt in the reality of maleficent witchcraft on behalf of the Swedish

authorities. Historian Lagerlöf-Genetay has claimed that the consensus, nevertheless, was that

such phenomena were generally real, as this “most probably had been a prerequisite for

awarding capital punishment.”34 Such an assumption is contradicted, however, by an

intriguing statement by King Charles XI: Having received a request from abroad to account

for the witchcraft developments, “the King modestly replied that his Judges and

Commissioners had caused divers Men, Women and Children to be Burnt and Executed upon

such pregnant Evidences, as were brought before them; but whether the Actions they

confessed, and which were proved against them, were real, or only effects of strong

Imagination, he was not yet able to determine.”35 Apparently, according to the most

influential authority in the country, “pregnant Evidence” justifying execution could be

presented without proving the reality of maleficium. Maleficent witchcraft was clearly not the

major concern of the authorities; “strong Imaginations” sufficed.

These “strong Imaginations” provide a clue to the authorities’ preoccupation

with witchcraft. When examining the officials’ statements and measures in response to the

witchcraft accusations, there is a common emphasis on disloyalty to God and Christian

society; the key issue is diabolism – dealing with and worshipping the devil – rather than

maleficium. This is most evident in the testimonies produced in response to interrogation:

questioners, clearly skeptical of claims of maleficium, are preoccupied with generating

information on pacts with the devil. While the specific questions of interrogators have not

been systematically recorded, documentation frequently mentions inquiry as to whether the

33
Elvius, ”A short and simple account,” 486. Note that Rev. Gustav Elvius is not identical to the
abovementioned Rev. Lars Elvius; the latter held a much less skeptical view of maleficium.
34
”Reales-synen har sannolikt varit en förutsättning för att dödsstraff skulle utdelas” in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De
Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 148
35
Skragge, An Account of What Happen’d, 6
accused “had not been to bed with Satan?”36 The courts seem to have pursued this question

with considerable persistence. The Mora court records relate how “the pastor brought [the

accused woman] out with him and examined her in private as to whether Satan had also had

coitum with her? In the beginning she had found it much embarrassing to confess this, but has

nevertheless eventually admitted to having had [such] business with him in full.”37 The courts,

as was the tendency throughout Europe, seem to have devoted much effort to uncovering

diabolic elements in the confessions, not relenting in the face of initial denial.

The preoccupation with diabolism in the interrogations is indicative of a deeper

concern with the state of Lutheran Christianity in Dalarna. In a statement announcing the

creation of the Commission in May 1669, the government in Stockholm announced that its

purpose was “to bring this wretched, corrupted People unto the right and truthful path.”38 The

Swedish term used for “People” is “Folket,” which necessarily refers to the population of the

province at large rather than any subset, such as those afflicted by or practicing witchcraft.

This reveals an interesting attitude: the problem, the government held, was not limited to

those directly involved in the crimes, but symptomatic of a deeper predicament: Dalarna’s

deviance from the “right and truthful path.” The bishop of the diocese containing Dalarna,

Olaus Laurelius, specifies the concerns: in a letter to the Svea High Court – the institution

which, together with the bishop, organized the creation of the Commission – Laurelius

attributes the witchcraft phenomenon to “the People’s pride and ingratitude [and their]

contempt for the word of God.”39 It is remarkable that the bishop himself admits these

problems, as they reflect poorly on his spiritual leadership. This is especially true in light of

36
“icke hade warit i säng med satan?” in records from the court of Mora, December 1668, quoted in Lagerlöf-
Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 143
37
”Då tog pastor henne uth medh sigh och examinerade henne ensligen om satan och hade hafft coitum med
henne? I begynnelsen hafwer hon fuller tycht blygsamt wara at bekänna detta, men hafuer likwähl omsider
tillstått sig fullelighen haft at beställa med honom,” in Ibid.
38
”och bringa detta Usla förförde Folket på rätta och sanna wägen”, in Swedish Privy Council, Letter to Oluas
Laurelius, 22 May 1669, quoted in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 60
39
”för folcksens säkerhet och otacksamheet skull – Gudz Ordz föracht,” in Olaus Laurelius, Letter to the Svea
High Court, 20 June 1669 in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 61
the attention he had given to Christian indoctrination during his time in office: as early as

1648, he had ordered that “each Sunday morning the entire parish should gather in a House, to

be questioned about the Catechisms.”40 Evidently, both the Bishop and the High Court were

aware of the limited penetration of Christian education in Dalarna, and at least the Bishop was

deeply concerned with it, and linked it to the practice of witchcraft.

The Bishop’s view is relevant, as he was highly influential in shaping the

authorities’ response to the craze: He corresponded closely with the royal government as well

as local officials, both of whom requested his advice. In the early stages of the craze, Lars

Elvius wrote the bishop a desperate call for guidance: “I will soon have no idea how to act…

On how I am to proceed with [the witches and their victims,] I humbly request the advice of

Your Excellency… which I will implement with sincerity and faithfulness.”41 Another local

clergyman writing the bishop thanked him for “the advice Your Honor gave in response to my

question.”42 Apparently, multiple local officials deferred decisions to Laurelius an early stage,

and heeded his views. Similarly, secular officials in Stockholm corresponded closely with the

bishop as they made the decision to form the Commission; a process during which Laurelius

voiced the interpretations mentioned above.43 It seems the Bishop’s view linking the

witchcraft to disrespect for Christianity exerted influence on the authorities’ response.

The connection drawn between witchcraft and poor standards of Christianity is

understandable in light of the contents of many children’s testimonies. Often, these included

mockery, distortion or misunderstanding of Christian concepts and institutions. Among the

40
”at it Huus skule huar Sundags morgon heela Sochnen omkring, komma fram til Catechismi förhör,” in Olaus
Laurelius, Om Prestelefwernet, quoted in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 61
41
“Iagh är snart rådlös huru iagh skall bära migh åth... Huru iagh medh dhem här effter skall procedera, beder
iagh E.Höghährwyrdighet... Ödmiukelighen om underrättelsse, huars Resolution iagh medh alfwar och trooheet
effterkomma skall,” in Lars Elvius, Letter to Olaus Laurelius, July 5, 1668, in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska
Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 39
42
Rev. Gustav J. Elvius, “Letter to the Bishop of the Diocese of Västerås, 31 January 1671,” in History of
Psychiatry, 2004, Vol. 15, 487
43
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 61
activities Children reported from the Blåkulla Sabbaths, the teaching of distorted prayers

feature frequently. One child claimed having been taught to pray a mockery of Our Father:

“Our serpent, the Devil be thy name, thy kingdom go to Satan, Evil One thy will be done, lust

on earth as lust in heaven.”44 Another “had learnt this homework: ‘Our Father who art deepest

down in Hell’.”45 Even if the child had not learned this from Satan in Blåkulla, the fact that

they learned it from someone, or even made it up themselves, must have been worrisome to

clergymen and secular lords, as an indicator of lack of respect for Christian teachings. Bishop

Laurelius’ suggestion of “contempt for the word of God” does not appear entirely misplaced.

Also, the fact that children were taught diabolic catechisms at Blåkulla is relevant in itself, as

it may be seen as a mockery of the apparently unsuccessful teaching of Christianity.

The poor results of such teachings were also evident in some testimonies

containing misinterpretations of biblical events; a recurring theme is the death and

resurrection of Satan. The children would witness Satan dying from illness at Blåkulla, and

they “carried him out to be buried… but just as they carried him through the door, he ran back

in again… and danced around with [the children], and all the guests were happy again.”46 The

investigators responded by “holding a little exam with [the child] as to her Christianity;”47

their interpretation was that she had misunderstood, or even ridiculed, the concept of the

resurrection of Christ. Some intentionally blasphemous reinterpretations of Christianity

occurred: A boy recounted having been preached to by Satan not to “believe in that wooden

God [the crucifix of Christ]. He was the poor son of a carpenter. He had nothing to eat. So he

44
Quoted in Per Sörlin, “The Blåkulla Story: Absurdity and Rationality,” in ARV: Nordic Yearbook of Folklore,
1997, Vol. 53, 134
45
”lärdt der desse lexor, fader wår nederst i helwetit,” in ”Testimony of Hans Pärsson, 10 January 1671,” in
Rickard L. Sjöberg, ”Child Testimonies during an Outbreak of Witch Hysteria: Sweden 1670-71”, in Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Association for Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 1995, Vol. 36, 1051
46
“burit ut honom så som till att begrafwas… och rätt som dhe kommo medh honom inom kammardörren,
sprang han in tillbaka igen… och dansade om kring med henne, då blefwe alla gästerna glada igen” in
questioning of Gertrud Svensdotter, quoted in Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede,
137
47
“at hålla en lijten examen medh henne uthi hennes christendom” in Ibid.
began stealing and they nailed him up.”48 By attributing such statements to witches or the

Devil, the children could voice bold insolence towards the church, making it evident to the

authorities that such sentiments existed. There was concern that these tendencies were not

limited to children: Rev. Gustav Elvius did “suspect that these… stories might have been

suggested to them [by others].”49 Authorities worried that such testimonies were indicative of

wider irreverence towards Christianity. In light of such statements, Bishop Laurelius’

concerns seem understandable and maybe even legitimate.

The bishop’s worries were shared by secular authorities. A public speech, held

by the President of the Commission Lorentz Creutz as he arrived in Mora, prominently

references religious education: Creutz reminds his listeners – a crowd of 3000 locals,

according to Skragge50 - how God had ensured that “the Youth of the Country has been

educated and corrected in the Catechisms, and that the holy word of God has been – purely

and without corruption - preached in our fatherland for many years;” however, he noted,

“some in the congregation [still] offend God and abuse his Holy name;” thus, the Commission

must, “by the God-given sword, punish those erroneous and corrupted limbs of the

congregation of God.”51 Clearly, even secular members of the Commission saw a clear and

worrisome link between insufficient religious indoctrination and witchcraft, and it was this

link that necessitated the use of “the God-given sword” of criminal justice.

While the objection may be raised that Creutz might have veiled his true

intentions in religious language when justifying the Commission’s presence to locals, private

documents demonstrate similar reasoning. As Creutz requested instructions from the High

48
Elvius, “A Short and Simple Account,” 485
49
Ibid., 486
50
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 68
51
”Landzens Ungdom uthj sin Catechismj styckan – underwijsas och rättas och Gudz heliga ordh i wårt K.
Fädernesland nu så monge år – reent och oförfalskat – predikas” and ”een deel i församblingen skall förtörna
Gud och missbruka hans H. nampn” and ”det af Gudi [givna svärdet och straffa] den wrångom och dee
fördärfuade Gudz församblingz lemmar,” Lorentz Creutz, quoted in Ibid.
Court on how to conduct the Commission’s work, the court replied that “as is Christian, those

who confess their sins and want to denounce the Devil and his being should immediately be

pardoned, without any subsequent punishment. But those persisting and strongly resisting

[should] be punished and tormented and their lives taken.”52 The High Court, in other words,

wanted punishment to be entirely contingent on the attitude of the accused towards the Devil

and the Christian faith. Evidently, punishment was intended to serve a goal defined in terms

of Christianity, by removing “those persisting” in diabolism from “the congregation of God.”

As such, it was part of an effort to confessionalize a religiously flawed community,

attempting to purify and rectify its religious life in the model of proper Lutheran Christianity.

The authorities’ motive of confessionalizing the province is better understood

when the witch craze is viewed in a wider context. Simultaneously with appointing the

Commission and launching the trials, secular authorities decided to intensify religious

education in the region: the construction of a new school of religious instruction was ordered

in Mora in 1669, and it received additional resources in 1670.53 In a letter to Bishop Laurelius,

Rev. Gustav Elvius writes: “I have no doubts that… the rage of Satan would decline if we

only remain firm in prayer and fasting as Christ our Saviour has advised us, and if every

household would follow [your] wise and thoughtful advice.”54 The Reverend is convinced that

adherence to Christian teachings – those of Christ as well as of ecclesiastic officials – is the

key to resolving “the rage of Satan;” punishing the guilty is part of a wider solution, aiming to

imbue the province with Christian virtues. Finally, viewing the craze in a wider Swedish

context is helpful to understanding the authorities’ position: Sweden in the 1660s was an

expanding power, and in many of its colonial holdings, such as northern Lapland and Estonia,

52
”warandes christeligt, at dhe som bekiänna sin synd och willia afsäja diefwulen och hans wäsende, att dhe
strax pardoneras och benådas, uthan något där på fölliande straf; Men dhe förhärdadhe och motwillige
hårdeligen straffas, pijnas och af daga tagas,” in Svea High Court, Letter to Lorentz Creutz, 7 August 1669, in
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 64
53
Lagerlöf-Genetay, De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede, 58
54
Elvius, “Letter to the Bishop,” 487
the clergy was struggling with “rampant paganism” among the locals.55 Violent government

responses were not unprecedented; in Estonia, confessionalization was, in the words of

William Monter, “backed up by cavalry.”56 Against this background, an indication of failing

Christian indoctrination in Sweden proper must have been alarming, and forceful responses

close at hand.

This perceived failure of Christian teachings and institutions to fully penetrate

the province of Dalarna was the major reason why secular courts, the royal government and

the Church of Sweden all made the Dalarna witch craze a priority, investing resources and

redefining laws to address it. This is a relevant fact, since the nature of the craze, with its

exceptionally young accusers, should not have warranted trials by a strict reading of Swedish

law; yet magistrates and potentates were willing to ignore this legal obstacle, allocate

additional judicial manpower to the province, scrupulously interrogate all involved and punish

the vast majority of them. Without the willing contributions of the Swedish authorities, one

can safely say that the craze would not have occurred; some of the trials might, but hardly the

massive phenomenon remembered today. Scholars like Toivo, Sörlin and Ankarloo have

taken the authorities’ contributions largely for granted in their focus on explaining the origins

of the accusations; clearly, these are but one of the two components whose fusion resulted in

the witch craze. The other – the involvement of authorities – has received much less attention,

and none of theories of the above scholars can be successfully applied to explain it. This paper

constitutes an attempt to answer that question, in terms of an effort to confessionalize an

isolated, misguided province into the mold of a virtuous Christian society.

55
E. William Monter, ”Scandinavian Witchcraft in Anglo-American Perspective,” in Early Modern European
Witchcraft: Centers and Peripheries (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990) 430
56
Ibid.
 Bibliography

Ankarloo, Bengt. “Sweden: The Mass Burnings (1668-1676).” In Early Modern European
Witchcraft: Centers and Peripheries. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1990

Arfwedsson, Johan. Letter to Gustav Duwall, 1668. In De Svenska Häxprocessernas

Utbrottsskede 1668-1671: Bakgrund i Övre Dalarna: Social och ecklesiastisk
kontext. Transcribed by Birgitta Lagerlöf-Genetay. Almqvist & Wiksell:
Stockholm. 1990.

Elvius, Gustav J. “A short and simple account of the tribulations and abductions of children
by the evil witches of Rättvik”. 1670. Translated by Rickard L. Sjöberg. In
History of Psychiatry. 2004; Vol. 15.

Elvius, Gustav J. “Letter to the Bishop of the Diocese of Västerås 31 January 1671.” In
History of Psychiatry. 2004; Vol. 15.

Headley, John M. et al. Confessionalization in Europe: 1555-1700. Ashgate: Burlington.

2004.

Heikkinen, Antero and Kervinen, Timo. ”Finland: The Male Domination.” In Early Modern
European Witchcraft: Centers and Peripheries. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. 1990

Horneck, Anthony. An Account of What Happen’d in the Kingdom of Sweden in the Years
1669, and 1970 and upwards, in Relation to some Persons that were accused for
Wicthes; and Tryed and Executed by the King’s Command. London: Printed for
S. Lownsd. 1682.

Lagerlöf-Genetay, Birgitta. De Svenska Häxprocessernas Utbrottsskede 1668-1671:

Bakgrund i Övre Dalarna: Social och ecklesiastisk kontext. Almqvist &
Wiksell: Stockholm. 1990.

Monter, E. William. ”Scandinavian Witchcraft in Anglo-American Perspective.” In Early

Modern European Witchcraft: Centers and Peripheries. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. 1990.
Peters, Edward and Kors, Alan Charles. Witchcraft in Europe, 400-1700: A Documentary
History. University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia. 2001.

Sjöberg, Rickard L. ”Child Testimonies during an Outbreak of Witch Hysteria: Sweden 1670-
71”. In Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 36 (1995): 1039-51

Svea High Court. Letter to Lorentz Creutz, 1669. In De Svenska Häxprocessernas

Utbrottsskede 1668-1671: Bakgrund i Övre Dalarna: Social och ecklesiastisk
kontext. Transcribed by Birgitta Lagerlöf-Genetay. Almqvist & Wiksell:
Stockholm. 1990.

Sörlin, Per. “Witchcraft and Causal Links: Accounts of Maleficent Witchcraft in the Göta
Hogh Court in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries.” In ARV: Nordic Yearbook
of Folklore 62. (2006): 51-80

Sörlin, Per. “The Blåkulla Story: Absurdity and Rationality.” In ARV: Nordic Yearbook of
Folklore 53 (1997): 131-52

Toivo, Raisa Maria. ”Women at Stake: Interpretations of Women’s Role in Witchcraft.” In

ARV: Nordic Yearbook of Folklore 62. (2006): 187-205

Östling, Per-Anders. “Blåkulla Journeys in Swedish Folklore.” In ARV: Nordic Yearbook of

Folklore 62. (2006): 81-122