The Witch as Hare or the Witch's Hare: Popular Legends and Beliefs in Nordic Tradition

Author(s): Bodil Nildin-Wall and Jan Wall

Source: Folklore, Vol. 104, No. 1/2 (1993), pp. 67-76
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of Folklore Enterprises, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1260796
Accessed: 11-07-2015 02:50 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Folklore Enterprises, Ltd. and Taylor & Francis, Ltd. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Folklore.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Folklorevol. 104, 1993 67

The Witch as Hare or the Witch's Hare:

PopularLegendsand Beliefs in Nordic Tradition
BODIL NILDIN-WALL and JAN WALL

IN the Nordic countries notions of connections between witches and haresbelong to

three different tradition complexes. The first one is known from Denmark and
sporadicallyfrom Southwest Sweden and southern Norway. It is a Continentalbelief,
which is also currentin the British Isles, namely the belief that a witch can transform
herself into a hare and in that shape performvarious mischievousor malignantdeeds.
The secondbelief existsin all Nordic countriesexceptDenmark.Witchesaresupposed
to be able to create a supernaturalcreaturewhich is given life and sent out in order
to steal milk or dairy produce;in Southwest Sweden, and once or twice in Norway,
this creatureis said to resemble a hare, although mostly looking somewhat different
from a naturalhare. The most common name for the animal is mjilkhare,'milkhare',
but there are severalother names as well, mostly compounds with the word 'hare' in
them. Except in the southwesternregion the supernaturalmilk-thiefis mostly said to
look like a grey ball or a spool. Its name in those parts is generally derived from the
verb bdra, 'to carry',the most common form is bjdra,'a carrier'.That name is also
dominantin the easternpartof southernSweden, though therethe creatureis supposed
to look like a hare. The area belongs roughly to the 'milkhare'region. An exception
as far as the name and the animal shape is concerned is Norway, where the creature
is called trollkatt, 'trollcat' whether it resembles a cat-as it sometimes does in the
southern parts of the country-or the normal grey ball.
A milkhareis usually said to be made from heddles and bits of wood or, in parts
of the area, from bits of besoms and scrubbing brooms. The making of the creature
may be accompaniedby the witch selling herself to the Devil and a satanic pact. In
northern Sweden and Finland the milk-thief is often given blood from the owner to
bring it to life, or a communion wafer is used. Charms that promise the owner to the
Devil, such as 'I give you blood, the Devil gives you vitality, you'll run on earth for
me, I'll burn in Hell for you', are common.
We will only occasionally refer to traditions and legends outside the region where
the creatureis supposed to resemble a hare, but we would like to stress the fact that
differencesin names and shapes are not necessarilyof overwhelmingimportance.The
fundamentalidea that a woman-madeobject can be magicallybroughtto life and sent
out to do its owner's bidding is common to the whole area. There are certain slight
indicationsthat this belief might earlierhave been spreadover a largerpart of Europe.
On the Danish island Bornholm a bare and sporadicallyin southwest Sweden a
milkharemight signifyboth a womanwho has transformedherselfinto a hareandsecretly
sucks other people's cows, and a supernaturalcreaturewhich has been made for the
same purpose. A similar tradition is known from Norway where 'trollcat' on a few
occasions signifies a female milkthief in cat shape.
Finally and thirdly there exists in the Nordic countries a widespreadtraditionof a
supernaturalhare,the trollhare,'trollhare',which is seen in the woods where it annoys

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
68 BODIL NILDIN-WALL and JAN WALL

and fools men out shooting. We have confined our investigationof this belief to the
areaswherethe two others exist. Occasionallythe trollhareis connectedwith a specified
witch-male or female.Also occasionallyit may be said to belong to a femalewoodspirit,
but generallyit justexistsin the woodswithoutany specificationof belongingto anybody.
As a matterof fact, in modern times, if an owner is mentioned it is mostly the Devil-
or the hare might be the Devil himself. This tradition seems especially valid if the
man who encounters it has been out shooting, or even poaching, on a Sunday.
Illustrationsof what happens to a Sunday shooting party can be found in medieval
church paintings, and it is also now and then mentioned in older literarysources.
The material for this paper has been gathered together after somewhat different
principles. A complete survey of materialabout the milkharewas made by Jan Wall
for his dissertation.That investigationhas laid the foundationfor this paper as well.
A large part of the materialabout the trollhare,from the region where the two beliefs
coexist, was examinedand filed at the same time. As regardsmaterialabout the witch
transformedinto a hare we have had to confine ourselves to a more limited selection
and to a great extent to trust to published sources.'
The three differenttraditionswe have to deal with are not only connected by the
hare shape. The transformedwitch is sometimes, although not very often, accused of
stealing milk in exactly the same way as a milkhare.She might suck cows at pasture
or in byresand carrythe milk home in her belly. But she might also behave in exactly
the same way as a trollhare.She entices the hounds to chase her all day, or turns up
when a man has takenout his gun, and lures him into shooting at her time and again,
knowing he can't hurt her without making certain ritual preparations.
The milkhareon the other handis by some informantscalledtrollhare.A milk-stealing
trollharekeeps all the characteristicsof the supernaturalmilk-thief, and is in fact a
milkhare.Some informantsmakeno distinction between the milk-stealingharecreated
by a witch and the supernaturalhare who dwells in the woods, while others in the
same areaor even the same parishexplicitlystatethat they aretwo differentphenomena.
The hare shape is clearly of primaryimportancefor the mergingof the traditions,and
sportsmen'syarns are the common denominator.This mixture of two traditionsis at
least a couple of hundred years old and evidence of it is found in records from
witch-trials.2
The trollharetraditionis a wholly male tradition. Men hunt, shoot or poach, and
they are the ones who meet the supernaturalhare, try to shoot it and fail. Memorates
and legends about trollharesare exclusivelytold by men, of men and presumablyalso
to men. If a woman exists within the bounds of these stories-and this happens very
rarely-she is the owner of the trollhare.But-as is hardlyever the case with a milkhare
or a transformedhare-the person who owns a trollharemight be male, seems in fact
to be more often male than female.
The belief in milkhares might be classified as a female tradition. However, the
classificationis not at all as self-evidentand naturalas that of the trollharetradition.
The informantsare male as often as female; there are within the milkharetradition
memoratesand legends of how a milkhareis shot by a man, similar to those of how
a trollhareis shot. They are exclusively male. But there are, as we will show, other
ways of destroyingmilkharesand/or revealingtheir owners. These methods are used
both by men and women. Memoratesof meetingswith milkharesarethus differentiated.
As we have alreadymentioned, men are the observersand agents when shooting; on
the other hand observationsof the creaturewhile it is sucking cows or seen near them

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE WITCH AS HARE OR THE WITCH'S HARE 69

at pasture or in the byre are mostly made by females. The actors in the legends are
thus often of both sexes. A legend may relatehow a housewife observesthat the cows
stop giving milk, sees the hare in their vicinity or even sucking them, and tells her
husbandwho then preparesto shoot it. The threatto the cows and the food they provide
affects the existence of the whole family and is a matter for discussion between man
and wife. It is thereforehardlyrelevantto analysethe traditionin termsof maleas opposed
to female. A more profitableviewpoint is to regardthe witch's activities in terms of
threats against the stability of a community.
Still we are inclined to regardthe milkharetraditionas mainly female.As has already
been stated,the owner of this supernaturalcreatureis almostexclusivelya woman. The
cows and the tending of them, the dairy and its produceare, or were at least formerly,
within the femalesphereof activity,a fact which partlyexplainswhy only femaleswere
suspectedof going to such lengths as creatingthe milk-thiefsand therebyrisking their
souls. The widely spreadbelief in and fear of milk-stealingcreaturesalso underlines
the importanceof milk productionfor the private economy in the Nordic countries.
It is much harderto define traditionsconcerning the transformedwitch in terms of
male or female. She might be hunted or shot, just like the trollhareor the milkhare,
she might now and then suck cows, but often she is just observed round dwellings,
sitting around, staring-regarded as ominous, but not really doing anything. The
informantsof the tradition belong to both sexes.
We have decided to concentrateour treatmentof legends about haresto types which
tell how they arerenderedharmlessand/orhow the witch is exposed.Legendsbelonging
to the threetraditioncomplexesaremostlyof verysimplestructures;they maybe grouped
togetheras belonging to certain'types' but they are not migratorylegends in the sense
that it is possibleto positivelystaterelationsbetweendifferentvariantsor tracedifferent
redactionsor interdependences.They mostly consist of just a few motifs, common in
the whole area and told in one simple, straightforwardmove. So they may have been
constructedindependentlyon severaldifferentoccasions but belong together because
of the fact that they are born within the same tradition.
The term moveis taken from Propp's Morphologyand signifies an entity of actions
springingfrom the initial event. Its extentusually covers severalmotifs.3But the same
motif might be common to more than one move and differentmoves in a compound
legend might develop from identical motifs. As the moves exist on a syntagmaticlevel,
the action within equivalentmoves might vary extensivelyor even be totally different
on a paradigmaticlevel.
As we statedabove,the naturalway of getting rid of a hare is to shoot it, and legends
of such shootings belong to all three traditions.They vary in structureand in function
but it is still possibleto theoreticallydistinguisha primaryform,which by addingmotifs,
elaboratingdetails, changing structuresmight-still theoretically-be turned into all
the other legends where the supernaturalhare is shot.
This primary form is made up in the following way: a man tries to shoot a hare,
finds it impossible, realiseshe has to do with a supernaturalanimal and abandonsthe
attempt.
A usual addition is an episode where he comes back the next day preparedfor the
situation with, for example, a silver bullet. If we set the transformedwitch aside for
the moment, the hare is then killed. If it was a trollharethe carcasssimply disappears
or turns into a bush of heather or something like that. If it was a milkhareit reverts
to the object it was created from in the first place.

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
70 BODIL NILDIN-WALL and JAN WALL

Legends about shooting a trollhareare the least varied. The form we have indicated
is by far the most common; often a remarkis added that the gun was spoilt if you shot
at such a hare, or that it was no use trying to shoot anything else after meeting such
a creature.Elaborationsof the theme are often made along lines of describinghow the
hare reacts when it is first shot at. It might sit still and laugh, or its hair might fly
all over the place. It might be all covered in blood without a hair left on its body, or
all four legs might be shot off, but it keeps running.
However,therearesome instanceswhen therearemoredefinitechangesin the function
of the legend. Sometimes there is an introductorypart where the shooting is said to
be done on a Sunday. Somewherein the story the hare is clearly stated as belonging
to the Devil. The legend then turns into a warning against Sunday shooting and the
man who has brokenthe norm repents and never repeatshis offence. In one extreme
case he is even said to hang up his gun for ever, never trying to go out shooting again
even on weekdays.4
If the trollharebelongs to a male witch, he may use it to scare awayother men from
what he considers his shooting-ground.There are stories where the whole ground is
filled with hares, and men shoot one after the other, but when they want to collect
the game it is all gone. Or they may, with less variationfrom the primaryform of the
legend, spend the whole day trying to shoot the hare that can't be killed, thus leaving
the real game for the male witch.
Legends of the shooting of a milkharecan follow the primarypatternstated above.
When the sportsmansuddenlycomes acrossthe harein the woods, legendsof milkhares
and trollharesare exactly identical and only when the hare has been killed and an
interpretationof the event is made,will it be possibleto know what kindof supernatural
hare was shot. This interpretationis often based on what remainsof the hare, but it
may also be made without any statement of that kind.
Sometimesthe legend is variedto the extentthat the man knows he is trying to shoot
a milkhareor a trollhare,makes the necessary preparationsand shoots it. The only
differencelies in the initial situation, the foreknowledgethat the hare is supernatural,
and the lack of the final interpretationof what was met with. It is quite possible to
say that one sequenceof the legendis shiftedfromthe finalto the initialsituationwithout
its position being of fundamentalimportance.The interestis focused on the shooting
of a hare,not primarilyon the destructionof a supernaturalcreaturewhich constitutes
a threat to the family or the community.
There is, however,a thirdgroupof legendsof how a milkhareis destroyedby shooting.
In thosethe accountof the shootingis reducedto the bareessentials,while the description
of how it has been spotted, what harm it was doing, how it behaved in order to suck
cows, who its owner was, etc., has been addedbeforeand afterthe shooting event. The
interesthas been shifted and the legend transformedfrom a sportsman'syarn to a tale
of how you may protectyourself againsta witch's evil doings, incidentallyat the same
time causing her harm.
Legends of how a milkhare-or in southernNorway a trollcat-is destroyedby other
means than shooting are constructedin the same way. The creaturemight be beaten
or kickedto death or cut apart.These legends arenot very common, but their existence
clearly shows that the function of this type of legend is differentfromthat of the types
which constituted the starting-pointof our examination.It is not very plausible that

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE WITCHAS HARE OR THE WITCH'SHARE 71

you wouldget nearenoughto a hareto kickit or, as in one case,beat it with your
cap and thus kill it. The intentionmust insteadbe to show how you may destroy
somethingsupernatural.
Legendsof the destruction of milkhares seldomleadto the discoveryof the creature's
owner.It is true that a greatmanylegendsidentifyan owner,but the identification
is not an integrated partof the story.Or it maybe morecorrectto saythatthe owner's
identityis establishedwithoutthe legendbeing told, the discoveryof her is simply
not partof the subject.Forexamplethe storycan beginlikethis: 'Therelivedan old
womanin thatcottage,shewascalledso-and-so andshe hada milkhare.' Thenthe story
goes on to tell how the hare was shot, without the woman everbeing referred to, and
ends by declaring:'Andafterwards she didn'thaveso much milk.'
Therearehowevera few instance(to be exactfive, fourfromsouthernSwedenand
one fromsouthernNorway)wherea motifhasbeenadded,in orderto makeit possible
for the storytellerto revealthe witch.The legendsin all otheraspectsbelongto the
lastgroupunderdiscussion.Whenthe creatureis killedanddissolvesintothe objects
it was madefrom,one of the objectsis markedand thus makesan identificationof
theownerpossible.Theobjectsarea silverchain,a silverspoon,a napkin,a handkerchief
and a towel.None of thesefive objectshas everanythingto do with the makingof
a magicalmilk-thief,so the only purposefor theirintroductioninto the legendis to
providea meansof exposingtheir makers.5
Legendsof howa transformed witchis shotaretheoreticallyprimarilyidenticalwith
thoseof shootinga trollhareor a milkhare.A manmeetsa hareandtriesto shootit.
The taskturnsout to be impossibleandhe understands thatthe hareis reallya witch.
Orhe knowsbeforehand thatthe hareis not normal,buta transformed witch,andstill
triesto kill it, but findsit impossible.Motifsof how the harereactswhenshot at are
commonto all threetraditions.The mancanalsotry to kill the harein anotherway-
beatit to deathor cut it apart.As we havealreadyseen,a milkhareis sometimeskilled
like that.
Therearealso otherlegendsof how the transformed hareis hurt,but not killed-
someof themso detailedthatit is improbable thattheycanhavedeveloped independently
of eachother.Oneof thesetells how a mancomesto a farmwherehe formsa liaison
withone of the women.Eachmorninghe ridesout to houndsandtheychasethe same
hareall day long but are incapableof catchingit. Then one night he sees that his
girlfriendtakessomethingout of a pot, with which she smearsher handsand feet.
He pretendsto be asleep,but in the morninghe smearsthe feetof his dogsandhorse
with the samegrease.Thatdaythe houndsnearlycatchthe hareandit only justgets
awayandinto the farmhouse.Whenthe manentershe findsthe girl quitewornout
and with tornclothes,and understands whatkind of harehe had been chasing.6
The laststorydiffersverymuchfromthe usuallegendsaboutshootingor hunting
supernatural hares.Of the two mainthemeswe areespeciallyinterestedin here-the
killing of the supernatural creatureorthe exposureof thewitch-the lastoneis present,
but it is not of majorimportance, the interestis focusedelsewhere.The discoveryof
the witchis madeandthe structureof the storyin a way leadsup to the disclosure
of heridentity,butsheis notrevealed becausesheis seenasa threatandmustberendered
harmless.The interestis insteadfocused on solving the problemof why the harecan't
be caught.In types of legendswherehunting-or shooting-is the main topic the witch's
hare shape remains of primary importance.

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
72 BODIL NILDIN-WALL and JAN WALL

A development that differs from traditionsof milkharesor trollharesoccurs when

the hareis actuallyshot-though still not killed. The means of reallyharmingthe hare,
with a silver bullet or other magically working shots, are common to all three beliefs.
But when the hare is a transformedwitch, the actual hurting it at the same time
constitutes a discoveryof the witch's identity. A very common form of the legend tells
that the man out shooting, when he has realised that he must use a special kind of
bullet, hits the hare in one of its hind legs and then pursues it to a farm. There the
haredisappearsthrougha smallopening.When people enterthe house,one of its women,
usually the housewife, is discoveredwith a broken leg or badly hurt in some way. It
is then clearto everybodythat she was the hare.Sometimes,however,the transformation
occurs immediatelywhen the shot harms her, so that it is actually observed by the
person or persons playing parts in the story.
In legends of this type the main topic is no longer the actual shooting of a hare,but
insteadthe exposing of a witch, thus renderingher harmless. In exactlythe same way
as in legends of milkharesthe function of the story shifts and the listener is taught
how to get rid of an ominous and annoying creature.When the story has changed in
this way the hareshape becomes of secondaryimportanceand the legend might as well
be told about a witch in anotheranimalshape. In Sweden and Norway that is normally
the case. The transformedwitch might appear as a cat or a bird-often a magpie.8
Sometimes it is said that she is not shot at but hurt in some other way, but mostly
the animal shape is the only essential differencein the paradigmaticstructureof the
legend. It is notablethat cats and magpies are animalswhich are normallynever shot,
in fact it is frequently stated that shooting them spoils the gun and should never be
attempted.So the man who wantsto renderthe witch in shapeof cat or magpieharmless,
has to break a well-known and widely spread norm of behaviour.
We have alreadystated that some types of legends concerning the destruction of a
milkhareor the exposureof a witch in hareshape have a differentfunction from legends
where the actual shooting of a trollhareor a milkhare,or the hunting of a witchhare,
is the main topic. The new function is accompaniedby changes in the structure.The
introductoryelements deal with the identificationof a threatto an indivdual, a family
or a largergroup of persons and the preparationsfor removingthis threat. The actual
removalof it-the shooting-is naturallyof great importance,but it does in no way
dominate the story. Thus the changing structure mirrorsthe changing function.
Before we turn to legends about the exposure of owners of milkharesa few words
must be said aboutthe close relationsbetween a witch and her supernaturalmilk-thief.
When a milk-stealingcreatureis hurt or killed the owner is sometimessaid to be injured
in the same way.When a milkhare,a bjdraor a trollcatreturnshome afterhaving stolen
milk, it is often so full that some of it leaksout along the way.These supposedleavings-
excrementor vomit-are in fact some species of quick-growinggelatinous fungi. There
was, however,a widespreadbelief that if the leavingswerewhipped or burnt, the owner
of the milk-thief felt pain and had to come to the place where it happened.
Different scholarshave sought explanationsfor the mechanismthat forcesthe owner
to revealherselfor transfersa hurt fromthe milk-thiefto its owner.It has been suggested
that the explanationof the ball-shapedbjdrais to be found in age-old--17,000 years
old-shamanistic beliefs, where the magical objects was some kind of helper to the
shaman.9Apart from the fact that the name of the creaturein Saami tradition-the
only Nordic traditionwhere it is relevantto speak of Shamanism-is a loan from one

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE WITCHAS HAREOR THE WITCH'SHARE 73

of the Nordiclanguages,10 the 'modern'creature'sfunctionis all wrong.Frombeing

a creaturebelongingto a maleShamanin a huntingcultureandtraditionit wouldhave
hadto be transformed into a creaturebelongingto a femalewitchin a cattle-rearing
cultureand tradition.
It hasalsobeensuggested-thetheorybeingmainlybasedon Norwegianmaterial-
thatthe conceptionbehinda trollcatin the shapeof a catcouldbe the oldNordicbelief
of a person'shug(soul)beingableto leavethe bodyandtakea differenthamn(shape),
while a trollcatin the shapeof a ball is a magicalobject.As supportof this theory
it is statedthat an injuryto the cat is sufferedby the witchas well, while an injury
to the ball only destroysthe ball itself." The theoryis exceedinglyattractive.It is
impliedthatthereasoning includesmilkhares andbjdras. Wewouldthenhavea southern
region where the witch bodily takes the shape of an animal, a middleregionwhereher
hug takes the animal shape, and a northern region where she sendsout an objectin
the formof a ball.
However,thetheorydoesnotstanda testagainstthematerial. Injuriesto themilk-thief
in animalshape,cat or hare,areseldomtransferred to the witch.On the otherhand
an injuryto the ball often resultsin the sameinjuryto the owner,whetherit is a
Norwegiantrollcat,a Swedishbjdraor a Finnishpara.It is alsoa verycommonfeature
in the traditionthatthe womanhas morethanone milkthief.For example,it is told
fromVdisterg6tland in Swedenthatwhena witchhaddiedhermilkhares camerunning
fromall directionsto her cottage.12It is not probablethat somebody'shugwouldbe
able to enterseveraldifferentshapesat once, or that the differentpartsof it would
be able to run aroundafterthe woman'sdeath.
Therearehowevercertainclearindicationsthatthe conceptionsof hugandthe hug
takinghamnwerepartof the traditional witchbeliefs.In recentlegendsit is sometimes
doubtfulwhetherthe underlyingconceptis thatthe transformed witchis reallybodily
transformed, or whetherit is herhugthathasleft herbodyandis seenin animalform.
Forthe audienceof the legends,though,thisdistinctionprobably hadno meaningatall.
In a witch-trialin Bohuslinin Swedenduringthe 17thcentury,one of the accused
womenwas consideredthe femaleparticipantof the followinglegend.Her husband
hadseena cat sittingon the edgeof a well. He gavethe cat a pushso thatit fell into
the well. Whenhe got indoorshe foundhis wife on her bed, wet throughand with
a brokenleg. The womantriedto defendherselfby sayingthatthe storyhadnot been
told abouther,but aboutanotherwomanfromJutlandin Denmark.'3 Logically,we
ought here to reckon with the cat being the woman's hug cat-hamn, it hadbeen
in as
possible for it to get from the well into the house and into its humanshape,without
being spotted.
Duringanothertrialin Slkne in southernSwedenin 1728a womanwas accused
of owninga harewhichsuckedcowsbelongingto a largeproperty.The harewasseen
on its ownsuckingcows,but also-accordingto two witnesses-in the companyof its
owner'shugin humanshape.The woman'slikenessappeareddressedin a blackblouse
anda blackskirt,floatingsomefeet abovethe ground.Whenon one occasionit was
followedit wentto the accusedwoman'scottage,whereit disappeared indoors.The
pursuerswentafterit andfoundthe womannakedin bedalthoughit wasalreadynine
o'clock in the morning. That fact was regardedas an extremelysuspicious
circumstance.14 This trial gives a very late example of the old hug concepts, describing
the apparitionand its behaviour-floating above the ground, etc.-in the same way as

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
74 BODIL NILDIN-WALL and JAN WALL

the old Norse sources,15 and confirms that the concepts are still linked to beliefs in
witches. At the same time it shows us that the milk-thief and its owner are regarded
as two separatebeings.
Finally, during a third witch-trialin Jimtland in Sweden in 1651, two children told
the following story. They were herding cattle, when a bdra came running. The boy
threwhis knifeoverit and it fell overand startedkickingits feet. While they werelooking
at it a goat came along and wanted to chase them off. They fought against it and it
was transformedinto the accused woman. She promisedthem riches and finally they
gave the animal back to her.16No mention is made of what the bdralooked like, but
as it kickedits feet it was apparentlyin animal form. A legend very similarto this story
in which the milk-thiefmight be a trollcatis known from recent times, so it is possible
that an animal in cat shape is meant. What we want to stress is the fact that here we
have the supernaturalmilk-thiefin animal shape and at the same time the transformed
owner in animal shape.
The legends that were retold during the witchcrafttrials show that there is a very
close relationshipbetween the woman and her supernaturalmilk-stealinganimal. In
spiteof that they areregardedas two separatebeingsand maybe seen togetherin different
forms.We cannot presentany new and revolutionarytheory explainingthe conceptions
behind the relationshipwhich was supposedto bind them to each other,but only point
to the fact that a close affinity between a witch and the tools of her witchcraft, and
betweenthose tools and their victim, is nearlyalwayssupposedto exist. The possibility
that Christianinfluenceshavetendedto put additionalstresson the relationshipcannot
be disregarded.The witch was often supposed to have promisedher soul in returnfor
the milk-thief or to have given it her blood, the seat of the soul.
As has alreadybeen stated, legends from southern Sweden and southern Norway
seldom mention that an injury to a milkhareor a trollcat simultaneously injures its
owner and so serves to reveal her identity. In Bornholm, where the belief that a
transformedwitch in hare shape can steal milk from cows has coexistedwith the belief
in a manufacturedmilk-stealinghare for at least a couple of hundredyears, the motif
does belong to the tradition.There is, for example,a legendabouta man who discovered
that his cows had no milk in the morning. Armed with a whip, he rode down to the
meadow and hid himself. Early in the morning he espied an animal like a hare. He
rode up to it and whipped it. The hare ran away,but the man followed and went on
whipping. In the neighbourhoodof a house, he heardthe old woman who lived there
screaming.So she must have sent off the hare, and every time the hare was hit by the
whip, the woman felt it." It is theoretically possible that this legend indicates a
conception of the harebeing the woman'shug, but the wordingof the story shows that
such a thought at least did not exist in the mind of the informant.
Legendsof how the ownerof a milkhareis discoverednormallydealwith the whipping
or burning of the hare'sleavings. Such legends are much more common in Northern
Scandinavia,but occasionally they are told about milkhares.The ritual treatmentof
the leavingsis alsooftenencounteredin memorates.The normalstructureof both legends
and memoratesis the following: Someone finds leavings of the hare round the farm,
oftencombinedwith an observationof the creatureor with the factthat a cow has stopped
giving milk. The leavings are burnt or whipped; sometimes a combination of both
methods is used. As a result the milk-stealingmay end, or the owner has to come to
the place and revealherself. When she has done so her power over the cows and their
milk is at an end.

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE WITCHAS HAREOR THE WITCH'SHARE 75

The motifsmaybe elaborated in differentways,detailinghow,whereandwhenthe

burninghasto be done,whatkindof fuel to use, etc. Sometimesa descriptionof the
owner'shurryis added:she comesrunningwith somehouseholdtool in her handor
hasherchildon herarmor is only halfdressed.In an areain SouthwestSwedenand
SoutheastNorwayit is saidthat the witchwantsto borrowsomethingto put in her
mouth.If she gets that, her milk-thiefis saved;if not, it must die. In one case it is
even saidthat the witchherselfdies.
The structureof the legendis verysimpleandexactlythe sameas whenthe milkhare
is shotor the transformed witchhurt.An act of witchcraftis discoveredor suspected,
proper ritual measures are taken,the witchor her agentis renderedharmless.
The samestructuraldescriptionalso fits a secondwayof revealingthe ownerof a
milkhare-notthroughthe hare,but throughthe buttermadefromthe milk it has
brought.Legendsof thattypearecommonto severaldifferent beliefsconcerning magical
milk-stealing,milkingthroughknives,stealingthegoodnessfromthemilkof cowswithin
a certainarea,etc.Milkharesarementionedonly occasionallyin connectionwith this
type of legend,whichcan be summarisedlike this: A womanwith few cows sells a
lot of butter.The butteris testedwith a specialkindof knifeand bloodappearsin
the cut. The womanis revealedas a witchand thus renderedharmless.
Speakingin evenmoregeneralterms,the legendscanbe saidto containthreedifferent
elements,structuredin the followingway:a threatto a communityis discoveredor
suspected,properritualmeasuresaretaken,the threatis removed.This description
fits the typesof legendswhichdealwith howa milkhareis discoveredanddestroyed,
the removalof the threatto the milkbeingof primaryinterest.It also fits legendsof
howa transformed witchin animalshapeis hurt,exposedandthusrenderedharmless.
Finallyit fitsalltypesof legendsof howtheownerof a supernatural milk-thiefis revealed
and so loses her power.
It doesnotfit the typesof legendswe haveusedas a theoretical primaryform,where
no harmcomesto thesupernatural creature. The threatagainstthecommunity is realised
but no actionto removeit is taken.
Finallythe descriptiondoesnot at all fit legendsof trollhares,
or the typesof legends
wherethe actualshootingof milkharesor transformed witchesis the maintheme.A
generaldescriptionof the courseof eventsin thoselast typesmaybe: an impossible
taskis set,thetaskis solvedby ritualor magicalmeans,a supernatural agentis identified.
The positionof the last elementis not fixed, but its place in the sequenceis not
conclusive.
Exceptionsoccuramongthe shootinglegends,for examplein legendsof Sunday
hunting.Thosecanbe describedin thisway:a community's rulesarebroken-abreach
of norms-(youmustnot go out shootingon Sundays),a supernatural agentappears-
a sanction-(theDevil's trollhare),the breakingof rulesis discontinued.
Huntingandshootingareactivitiesthatdo not normallyconcernthe wholefarming
and cattle-rearing communitythat formsthe backgroundto the legendswe have
investigated.Threatsand hindrancesto those activitiesare directedagainstsingle
individuals, notagainsta bodyof individuals andtheirmeansof supporting themselves.
Only when those outside activitiescome into conflictwith everydaylife and the
normativerulesof the community,do they haveto be directedinto otherchannels.
Legendsof haresmet when shootingmay thereforebe entertainingor excitingand rather
tell of someonepitting his wits againsta supernaturalagent.Legendsconcerningmagical

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
76 BODIL NILDIN-WALL and JAN WALL

milk-stealing,on the other hand, touch on means of survivalfor the whole community.
Such supernaturaltheft was regardedas a very real threat, and the whole subject was
too serious to be treated lightly.
Dialect, Placenameand FolkloreArchive,
Vallgatan22,
S-411 16, Gothenburg,Sweden

NOTES
This paper was given at the Nordic-Celtic Legend Symposium held in Galway, Ireland, in
March 1991.
1. Milkhare, trollcatand to some extent trollhareare exhaustively dealt with in Jan Wall,
Tjuvmjo'lkande vdsen.L A'ldrenordisktradition.II. Yngrenordisktradition(Magicalmilk-stealing
creatures.I. In olderNordictradition.II. In laterNordictradition),(Uppsala, 1977-78).References
to these works will be given only sporadically.Legends of transformedwitches are published
in Evald Tang Kristensen, DanskeSagn. 6.2. Hekseriog Sygdomme(Arhus, 1901). In some cases
traditionalmaterialfrom Folklore Archives in Sweden will be referredto.
2. E.g. at a trial concerning milkharesin Vartoftain Visterg6tlandwhere two men testified
that the entrailsof a hare they had shot had boiled and that another had been quite impossible
to kill. (Handlingerro'randetrolldomoch vidskepelseI. June llth 1720. Riksarkivet,Stockholm.
Also Wall I 1977, p. 153.)
3. VladimirPropp, TheMorphologyof theFolktale(2 ed. rev.and ed. by L. A. Wagner)(Austin
& London, 1979), pp. 92-96.
4. E.g. IFGH 1072.8; 4316.34-35; 4431.23; 4684.18. Folkminnesarkivet,Goteborg.
5. LUF 6328.10-12; 466.76; 4797.1. Folklivsarkivet,Lund; Per S$derbick, Skrock,sed och
sdgen i en smdlandssocken (Stockholm, 1921), pp. 58-60; Sigurd Nergaard,Hulder og trollskap:
Folkeminnefraa 0sterdalen(Oslo, 1925), p. 179; Wall II 1978, p. 102.
6. Kristensen (1901), pp. 30-32.
7. E.g. Kristensen (1901), pp. 83-84; IFGH 719.90, Follkminnesarkivet,G6teborg.
8. E.g. IFGH 1344.17; 3257.14; 5337.8, Folkminnesarkivet,G6teborg;Olav Nordbo, Segner
og sogurfrd Boherad(Oslo, 1945), p. 95.
9. BirgittaLagerl6f-Genetay,De svenskahdxprocessernas utbrottsskede
1668-1671(Stockholm,
1990), pp. 192-193.
10. Normally smiera-gahtto,the form varies with different dialects.
11. Bente Alver,'Conceptionsof the Living Human Soul in the NorwegianTradition',Temenos
7 (1971), pp. 7-33. Republishedin NordicFolklore:RecentStudies,ed. Kvidelandand Sehmsdorf
(Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1989).
13. ULMA 2311:1.20, Folkminnesarkivet,Uppsala. In medievalchurch murals, illustrating
this belief, the witch is sometimes depicted with more than one milk-thief.
14. Emanuel Linderholm, De stora hdxprocesserna i Sverige(Uppsala, 1918), pp. 93-94.
14. Handlingar rSrande trolldom och vidskepelse I. October 24-26th 1728 (Riksarkivet,
Stockholm). Also Wall I 1977, pp. 156-159.
15. Dag Str6mbick, 'The Concept of the Soul in Nordic Tradition',Arv 31 (1975), 18-19.
16. JamtlandsochHdrjedalens Dombok(1651),pp. 224-225, OstersundsLandsarkiv.Also WallI
1977, pp. 141-142.
17. Iorn Pio, 'Sagn og overtro'(BornholmTuristirbogen, 1971), pp. 55-60.

This content downloaded from 67.182.22.149 on Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:50:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions