Scandinavian Journal of History

ISSN: 0346-8755 (Print) 1502-7716 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/shis20

Lay and Inquisitorial Witchcraft Prosecutions in

Early Modern Italy and Denmark

Louise Nyholm Kallestrup

To cite this article: Louise Nyholm Kallestrup (2011) Lay and Inquisitorial Witchcraft
Prosecutions in Early Modern Italy and Denmark, Scandinavian Journal of History, 36:3,
265-278, DOI: 10.1080/03468755.2011.580130

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03468755.2011.580130

Published online: 29 Jul 2011.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1265

View related articles

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=shis20
Louise Nyholm Kallestrup

LAY AND INQUISITORIAL WITCHCRAFT

PROSECUTIONS IN EARLY MODERN ITALY
AND DENMARK

This article explores the differences between Danish lay and Roman inquisitorial witchcraft
prosecution, by investigating the understanding of witchcraft and how it inflicted on the
course of the trials. For the first half of the 17th century, the understanding of witchcraft
among Danish lay judges corresponded to popular beliefs. Focus remained on malevolent
magic, and the diabolical pact was rarely introduced until after the verdict, when torture
was initiated. To the Roman Inquisition, the pact with the devil, namely the implicit pact,
was crucial when sentencing the illiterate villagers, since it made it possible to incorporate
the offender into a learned theological system of ideas.

Keywords early modern period, Italy, Denmark, witchcraft, torture

In the summer of 1649 two women were convicted of witchcraft by the Roman
Inquisitor in Orbetello. On a hot August day they were whipped publicly in the streets of
the town to the sounds of trumpets. One can only imagine the attention they attracted.
Before undergoing this physical punishment, the two women had abjured their beliefs
to the inquisitor. Following the whipping they were both exiled from the territory
forever. Some 30 years earlier, in the village of Storvorde in the northern part of
Denmark, a woman called Johanne Pedersdatter had also been convicted of witchcraft.
Initially, she had been sentenced by the manor court. Afterwards, her case had been
tried at the county court in Viborg, and here the sentence had been confirmed. Johanne
Pedersdatter was burned at the stake. To understand and explain the divergences of these
two examples we need to compare legal reactions to witchcraft in Italy and Denmark –
that is, lay and inquisitorial witchcraft prosecutions.1
Reorganized by Pope Paul III in 1542, the Holy Office became the most important
instrument of the Catholic Reformation. The Roman Inquisition was placed directly
under the Pope, and except for the tribunal in Venice, inquisitors worked independent
of secular authorities. The Roman Inquisition thereby distanced itself from the Spanish
Inquisition due to the monarchical constitution of the latter state.2 By the mid-16th
century the Roman Inquisition had jurisdiction over cases of witchcraft in most of the
Italian Peninsula. The prosecutions intensified after the 1580s, peaking around 1600 in

Scandinavian Journal of History Vol. 36, No. 3. July 2011, pp. 265–278
ISSN 0346-8755 print/ISSN 1502-7716 online © 2011 the Historical Associations
of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/03468755.2011.580130
266 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY

most areas. In Denmark, witchcraft trials reached their zenith a bit later, or around
1620. As opposed to the Italian Peninsula the Danish trials were led by lay judges. The
divergences in practice are significant, given the fact that these two court systems were
prosecuting the same offence: witchcraft. Only a small number of individuals were exe-
cuted by the Roman Inquisition for witchcraft, and the great majority before the Council
of Trent. According to Rainer Decker an estimated number of executions after 1542 is
below 300.3 In Denmark, half of the people tried were executed. Consequently around
1,000 people ended their lives at the stake.4
In this article I will introduce the concept of witchcraft as adopted by the two court
systems. After clarifying the concept and the purpose of the trial, I will move on to
the conduct of the witchcraft trials, stressing procedures relating to accusation, torture,
sentence and penalty in order to highlight some key differences and similarities between
lay and inquisitorial witchcraft trials.

The concept of witchcraft in the legal framework: the Roman

Inquisition
The early modern inquisitors viewed popular superstition and witchcraft as heresy. The
concept of magic had been debated since the early Christian Church. However, the early
modern inquisitors’ condemnation of magicians was particularly based on the doctrines
of St. Thomas Aquinas. By performing magical rituals, the magician laid herself open to
the charge of heresy and apostasy. Thomas Aquinas had argued that the selfish and often
destructive purpose of the rituals ruled God out as the prime mover. Thomas Aquinas
had introduced two categories of diabolical pact: one implicit and another explicit. This
distinction turned out to be particularly useful, as it provided the early modern inquisi-
tors with theological endorsement to condemn all kinds of magic and witchcraft. The
magicians condemned by Thomas Aquinas were learned or semi-learned individuals per-
forming ritual magic.5 However by the late 16th century, focus changed and the main
suspects now belonged to a broader group of illiterate villagers. Prosecuting popular
superstition and witchcraft became a way to eliminate beliefs that did not correspond
to official Catholic doctrines. In 1585, Sixtus V had published the bull entitled Coeli et
terrae. The bull condemned all kinds of magic – learned and popular – and for the first
time included astrology and divination.6
By employing the implicit pact on villagers, it was possible for the Inquisition to
convict this large group of people within a theological framework, even though the
defendants were ignorant of the diabolical aspect of their magical rituals. The theolog-
ical condemnation was identical with the legal. Witchcraft was a crime against faith; it
was heresy and apostasy. The motive was to make the defendant recognize his religious
errors, to make him abjure his heretic beliefs and to bring him back into the fold.

The concept of witchcraft in the legal framework: the Danish lay

authorities
Prior to the Lutheran Reformation both beneficial and maleficent magic was subject to
prosecution. Presumably, the secular courts concentrated only on malevolent magic,
leaving trials of beneficial magic to the Church. Very few trial records are preserved and
pertinent information has to be extracted from the medieval law codes. The medieval
 LAY AND INQUISITORIAL WITCHCRAFT PROSECUTIONS 267

church laws of Zealand and Scandia both stated how a person accused of witchcraft had
to defend himself or herself before a jury.7 In addition, the Law of Jutland stipulated
that a person accused of maleficent magic should also defend himself or herself before
a jury.8 What is significant in this legislation is that the placing of responsibility was the
key issue, if the damaged party was to claim compensation.
Following the Lutheran Reformation all trials were conducted by lay authorities,
though considerable weight continued to be given to guidance from theologians when
framing the laws. Now church laws were no longer binding, and therefore the Law of
Jutland was the sole legislation on witchcraft. In the 16th century three procedural laws
were introduced. The Copenhagen Articles of 1547 prohibited testimonies from sen-
tenced witches as evidence. Furthermore, torture was not to be instigated until after the
verdict. Sources on trials from the 17th century clearly show that the regulation on tor-
ture was followed in most cases. The picture is slightly different when it comes to the use
of denunciations from convicted witches. Even though such testimonies were not offi-
cially accepted as evidence by the courts, it was surely included as strong circumstantial
evidence.9 Both prohibitions are traditionally referred to by scholars as being a tighten-
ing up of procedures for the benefit of the defendants.10 At the same time, however, in
categorising convicted witches as untrustworthy, these articles evidently corresponded
to a theological framework. A witch was by definition seen as a dishonest and untrust-
worthy person because of her diabolical contract. In 1576, King Frederick II introduced
a third procedural restriction in the so-called Kalundborg Articles by ordering that all
witches convicted by the lower local courts should have their cases tried at a county
courts. Consequently, no condemned person was to be executed until the verdict had
been confirmed by a county court.
It is important to emphasize that none of the laws of the 16th century included a
precise definition of the crime of witchcraft. Therefore, witchcraft was defined by its
maleficent aspect with reference to the Law of Jutland throughout the 16th century.
An age of Lutheran orthodoxy had begun in 1596, when Christian Friis was installed as
the king’s chancellor.11 The first half of the 17th century was characterized by orthodox
personas taking central seats in both the secular and the ecclesiastical administration.
The orthodox years were characterized by powerful efforts devoted to disciplining the
population and excluding other forms of Protestantism than Lutheranism, especially
Calvinism. As a part of the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of Luther’s Ninety-
Five Theses in 1617, the Danish authorities passed a package of disciplinary laws, one of
which concerned witchcraft.12
Passed in October of that year, the Ordinance of 1617 differentiated between ‘true
witches’, who had entered a pact with the devil, and performers of the ‘secret arts’,
referring to beneficial magic and divination. As a result the guilt of witches was now
determined entirely based on their contract with the devil. In the Ordinance of 1617
the Danish secular courts introduced a legal definition of guilt that rested on theo-
logical ideas. Legally, the witches’ pact with the devil now constituted the cause for
prosecution, marginalizing the physical damage caused by the witch. Justification for an
accusation of involvement in beneficial magic was that this was ‘the first alphabet of every
true witch’, meaning that beneficial magic and divination were to be regarded the first
step on the path to becoming a fully-fledged diabolical witch. Throughout the 16th cen-
tury Danish theologians, such as Peder Palladius – the first Lutheran bishop of Zealand
– and the prominent professor of the University of Copenhagen, Niels Hemmingsen,
268 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY

had worked to draw attention to beneficial magic.13 Like Catholic theologians and the
Inquisition, Danish theologians condemned all types of magic. Through the Ordinance
of 1617, Danish theologians finally succeeded in criminalizing beneficial magic.
To sum up, the crime of witchcraft was prosecuted within two frameworks. Within
the first, Roman inquisitors prosecuted the crime of witchcraft within a theological
framework. It was seen as a crime against the Christian faith. The intention was to make
the defendant abjure his or her heretical beliefs, thereby reconciling him or her with the
Church. Within the Danish lay framework, the scenario was less simple. The Lutheran
Reformation in Denmark had removed the religious aspect from the crime of witchcraft,
leaving theologians without formal influence. Until 1617, prosecution for witchcraft was
regarded entirely as a lay matter motivated by the physical damage caused by the witch.

Accusations and denunciations

Moving on to the conduct of the trials, it seems only natural to begin with the accusa-
tions and denunciations. In the inquisitorial trial, the majority of cases were instigated by
denunciations from co-villagers, and as a voluntarily testimony (sponte comparente). The
local priest or confessor often played the part of mediator, convincing the witness to go
to the inquisitor. In the Tuscan town of Orbetello the inquisitor himself instigated only
a few trials. The inquisitor had arrived in the autumn of 1648, and he had immediately
sent out an edict of faith. This was a common practice for the Roman Inquisition. The
edict ordered all inhabitants of Orbetello and the surrounding areas to report heretics or
suspects of heresy, thus including witchcraft, to the inquisitor. Orbetello was the capital
of the Spanish garrison states in Italy, also known as I Presidios. Lay and military adminis-
tration was, therefore, Spanish, but clerical administration belonged to the bishopric of
Sovana. The town included a large concentration of soldiers, because the entire region
was dominated by military activities, and several battles at sea were fought outside the
shores of the region. Shortly before the inquisitor arrived in 1648 the town had been
besieged by the French army.14 In the inquisitorial protocols military presence was also
visible, since many of the women on trial were accused of having practiced love magic
on their soldier amici.15
The inquisitor’s role as investigator, accuser, and judge was fundamental to the
course of the trial. It was entirely up to him to determine which denunciations were to
end in full-blown trials. He alone was to decide whether a crime had been committed.
Many denunciations never developed into actual trials. In fact, in Orbetello the majority
of the more than 100 denunciations made during the first 18 months after the arrival
of the inquisitor remained denunciations.16 Such was the case of Madalena di Maura,
accused by a captain’s wife of causing the captain’s impotence. Apparently, the captain
had left his wife behind on the island of Mallorca in order to serve with the Spanish
army in Orbetello. When he was finally reunited with his wife, several years after his
departure from Mallorca, the captain had become impotent. A little later, the captain’s
wife was told by some local women that her husband had been with another woman,
Madalena di Maura. Surely the impotence must have been a spell of witchcraft cast on
the captain by his vengeful mistress. Witnesses furthermore testified how rumour had it
that Madalena had once bewitched a young girl, by letting the girl smell a flower. The girl
later died. A number of witnesses confirmed the relationship between Madalena and the
captain. They even had two children together. Moreover, the captain himself admitted
 LAY AND INQUISITORIAL WITCHCRAFT PROSECUTIONS 269

both to having had an affair and to his somewhat awkward problem. The inquisitor
nevertheless dismissed the trial, the last witness being the captain, who promised not
to commit adultery again.17
The Danish accusatorial procedure was analogous to a civil lawsuit. In other words,
an injured party had to be present, before a case was initiated. In an accusatorial system
it was the injured party, who ‘decided’ whether a crime was committed. The judge
had to assess the evidence and the trustworthiness of the witnesses – not the suspect’s
beliefs. An initial trial was held at the local lower courts, where the suspect had to be
formally charged with witchcraft. The accuser then placed his hand on the head of the
alleged witch, pronouncing the words: ‘I hereby accuse you of being a true witch’. Then
a number of witnesses were presented, including defence witnesses and usually the local
priest. If the suspect was convicted, the trial was brought before a county court, where
the suspect had to be formally accused all over again. Although someone may have been
sentenced by a lower court there were cases where nobody formally showed up to accuse
him or her at the county court. This was the case in the trial of Anne Lundtz, a woman
convicted of witchcraft by the town court of the Skaw (Skagen). Numerous witnesses had
testified of her use of maleficent magic, but when the trial was brought to the county
court in Viborg, no one appeared to accuse her formally. The judges therefore dismissed
the case.18
In a number of cases the accused was acquitted based on the witnesses being unreli-
able. Usually this referred to witnesses being related to the victim. However, in a small
collection of noteworthy trials the court considered the witnesses unreliable for theolog-
ical reasons. These trials centred on diabolical possessions inflicted by the alleged witch,
and the only witness identifying the witch was usually the victim; or in other words the
person allegedly possessed by a demon. The testimonies were accounts of the demon,
speaking through the mouth of the victim. Occasionally the ‘demon’ had identified the
witch in front of a larger ‘audience’. The Danish lay judges generally avoided referring to
theology when sentencing. In cases of possession, however, where the demon ‘testified’,
they would most often dismiss the case by referring to the demon as a liar.
This was evident in the trial of Mette Poulsdatter in 1623. She was accused of send-
ing an evil spirit into the son of a fellow villager, Jacob Nielsen. A number of witnesses
testified how they had visited Jacob Nielsen’s house and heard the demon speak from
the mouth of the child. The demon had identified Mette Poulsdatter as its sender. Mette
Poulsdatter was also accused of traditional maleficent magic in causing the death of a man
as well as an illness of cows and calves. Furthermore, the deceased himself had blamed
Mette for the disease, which eventually led to his death. The judges, however, did not
find the evidence sufficiently weighty. As for the accusations of demonic possession, all
of the witnesses referred to the voice coming from the child’s mouth. The court stressed
that since this voice was actually the demon speaking, the allegations were never to be
trusted. The demon could not be regarded a reliable witness. He was by his diabolic
nature a liar. As for the accusations that she had bewitched people and cattle, the judges
emphasized that Mette had not ‘made a promise of evil’ or pronounced ‘evil words’ to
any of the witnesses. This expression refers to the verbal threat of the devil, commonly
used by witches – something along the lines of ‘may you burn in hell!’ Several peo-
ple may have suspected Mette Poulsdatter of witchcraft, but none of them recalled that
she had threatened them with the devil. Combined with the dismissed testimony of the
deceitful demon, this absence of evidence meant that Mette Poulsdatter was acquitted.19
270 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY

The purpose of the Danish accusatorial trial was primarily to settle the question of
guilt and to enable the injured party to claim compensation. Furthermore, the losing
party had to pay the costs of the trial. There is no doubt that this meant that a large
number of accusations never materialized into actual trials, simply because the costs
were too high the accuser. At the county courts the question of guilt was no longer in
the hands of local judges. And this is probably the main reason why half of the people
sentenced by the lower courts were acquitted by the county courts.
To conclude, even before a suspect was charged with witchcraft, it is possible to
detect an interesting consequence from the two kinds of procedures. In the inquisito-
rial system the inquisitor alone decided whether to press charges against the suspect,
and he was alone in determining whether a crime had been committed. Consequently,
it was the inquisitor’s understandings of witchcraft and other kinds of magical rituals,
which characterized these trials. Witchcraft was a crime committed against God, and
in this sense God was the injured party. In an accusatorial system in Denmark all tri-
als were initiated by an accusation by people of the peasantry. The role of the judge
was to settle the question of guilt, not to question the beliefs of the implicated per-
sons, and the Church had no formal influence, when settling the question of guilt.
In this sense the crime convicted by the Danish courts reflected popular beliefs of
witchcraft.

The procedures of torture

The use of torture was an essential component in a Roman inquisitorial as well as Danish
accusatorial witchcraft trial. In both court systems torture was employed to ensure that
the defendant admitted to all his or her errors. However, the juncture at which torture
was implemented differed significantly. The witchcraft trials of the Roman Inquisition
always proceeded with torture before sentencing the suspect. The Danish trials did not
instigate torture until after finding the defendant guilty.
In an inquisitorial trial torture was usually employed in the final cross-examination.
Afterwards, it remained for the suspect to confirm the statements they had given during
torture. The protocols of Orbetello confirm how the inquisition employed torture as a
standard procedure in witchcraft trials. All the people convicted in Orbetello had under-
gone torture before sentencing. One must bear in mind how cautious the inquisitor was
during his investigation.20 In the Orbetello trials no suspect was taken into custody,
unless a thorough investigation had provided the inquisitor with enough evidence to
prove that a crime had been committed. Consequently, the purpose of torture was not to
make defendants confess to their errors, but to make them confess to all of their errors.
It is worth mentioning that the inquisitor in Orbetello took note of the defendant’s insis-
tence on innocence even under torture. Denying serious accusations of maleficent magic
under torture suggested the person was innocent. The question of confession was in fact
a question of evidence in an inquisitorial trial. Since heresy was considered a crime of
the intellect, admitting to the offence was considered the only true evidence.21 Torture
was thought of as the most efficient way of obtaining a confession. By confession, the
accused demonstrated the will to reconcile with God. Here the Inquisitor played the
double role of judge and confessor. On the one hand, the inquisitor had to prosecute
against a crime, namely heresy. He had to protect the faith against abuse and misconcep-
tions. On the other hand, he had to save the soul of the suspect. In an inquisitorial trial
 LAY AND INQUISITORIAL WITCHCRAFT PROSECUTIONS 271

the Inquisitor was also confessor, and by confessing the suspect obtained the possibility
of absolution.
When applying torture, the inquisitors followed a set of strict rules. The inquisito-
rial manuals contained regulations on methods, duration, and to employ torture on those
persons recommended. The customary method was the use of a rope, the ‘strappado’,
with which the defendant had his hands tied behind his back and suspended. Torture
should not leave the defendant with permanent injuries, although some of the defen-
dants of Orbetello did complain about their injuries.22 Furthermore, the defendant had
to be in a certain state of physical health before torture could be exercised. A case from
Orbetello demonstrates how the inquisitor had doubts as to whether to proceed with
torture on a pregnant woman. He summoned a physician, who found no reason not to
implement torture, as ‘the rope’ would cause no damage to her unborn child.23
In Denmark, torture was standard procedure in all trials that led to conviction. After
the conviction, the witch was then tied to a ladder and stretched.24 However, the pro-
tocols rarely contain reports of interrogations carried out during torture. Torture was
regarded as a way of preserving the soul. During the examination, a priest repeatedly
prayed for the witch. This meant that the witch was granted the opportunity to confess
all her sins, including divulging the names of her fellow conspirators. In between tor-
ture and execution, the witch was often confronted with her statements on a number
of occasions. It was not rare for this to lead to the withdrawal of accusations. When
questioned about accomplices during her trial in 1612, Maren Nielsdatter from Aalborg
denounced another woman from Aalborg, Apeloni Ibsdatter.25 However, before she was
pushed into the flames, Maren withdrew her accusations. This did not help Apeloni,
against whom the seeds of suspicions had been sown. She was convicted of witchcraft
seven years later. A number of trials confirm how accusations from convicted witches
were difficult to shake off. Legally, these accusations could not lead to a trial. The
idea was that a convicted witch was regarded a dishonest person in the same way as
a thief, but a mere accusation of witchcraft was indeed defaming. Many defendants
testified that they had been regarded witches ever since being accused by a convicted
witch – regardless of the fact that the accusation had frequently been retracted. This
goes to show how the reputation of being a witch clung to the accused person, even
though the rumours originated from the desperation of someone who was about to be
executed.26
In Denmark torture was not confined to a single occasion. Sometimes it took place
even when the convicted witch had been tied to the ladder and was just waiting to
be pushed into the flames. At this point it was common for the priest to question the
witch one last time, making sure she had confessed to all of her diabolic deeds. Only by
confessing to all of her sins, God would spare her from spending the afterlife in eternal
agony. When compared to Catholic practice, such procedures reflect a significant focus
on the afterlife in Protestant Denmark. Danish judges found statements just prior to the
execution to be especially reliable. The idea was that people would not dare tell a lie,
when they were so close to meeting their Maker. Similarly, denunciations made on a
deathbed were given greatest credence.
The inquisitors instigated torture before sentencing to make sure that defendants
received a verdict, which corresponded to their misdeeds. Merely out of consideration
for the defendants’ soul, there was an obligation to ensure that the entire set of errors
was revealed to the inquisitor. Only by doing so was it possible to make peace with God
272 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY

and to be reconciled with the Church. The reason Danish lay authorities did implement
torture after conviction was mainly legal in nature: the authorities wanted to exclude
false confessions. However, the decision was also supported from a theological point
of view. In early modern Denmark the sentence for a convicted witch was the stake.
Confessions given under torture could not change this fact. However, by confessing,
defendants demonstrated the will to find reconciliation, and it was now up to God to
mete out their due sentence.
Since heresy was a religious offence and a sin, the Inquisition considered confes-
sion to be the only admissible proof. The inquisitor played the dual role of confessor
and judge. In this context, torture became a way of obtaining evidence. This is interest-
ing from a comparative perspective, as confession in Danish trials played only a minor
role during the collection of evidence. Danish lay judges emphasized ‘the promise of
evil’, referring to the witch threatening a person with the devil. Usually these threats
were directed against the person’s health, family or livestock. In order to be taken
into consideration, the ‘promise of evil’ had to have been realized before being consid-
ered substantial evidence. This is reflected in many trials, among them the one against
Chresten Lauridtzen from the village of Jerslev in 1634. The local court had sentenced
Chresten, and his case was then brought to the County Court in Viborg on Jutland.
At the county court he was accused of having threatened a woman, saying she would
become a cripple. In addition to these accusations Chresten had also been reputed to
be a witch, ever since the death of a local villager eight or nine years prior to the trial.
The county judges nevertheless dismissed the case. They emphasized how the suppos-
edly bewitched woman was healthy, married, and had given birth to two children after
the threat of witchcraft.27
In the Lutheran kingdom of Denmark, torture, confession, and execution were seen
as ways of mitigating God’s anger against the king for the iniquities perpetrated by his
people. Witchcraft remained, it was believed, a sin particularly apt to rouse God’s anger.
Society, or rather the king, was required to punish its sinners; otherwise God would
vent his anger on society as a whole, causing famine, war or diseases. In this system
lay authorities and ecclesiastics administered the preliminary stages of salvation. The
idea was that true forgiveness could come from God alone. In the Roman Inquisition a
suitable sentence was meted out by the inquisitors. In other words the inquisitor admin-
istered God’s salvation. In this way the witchcraft trials reflected an essential difference
between Catholic idea of the Church’s intercession between the believer and God and
a Protestant individual relationship with God. A key notion of the Lutheran faith was
the personal relationship that human beings had with God. Man could not buy forgive-
ness through penance. He had to believe in God and to trust Him, if he was to aspire
to Salvation. Man could not obtain forgiveness for his sins in this life; the true sentence
was passed by God in the afterlife. Therefore following the Lutheran Reformation, the
Catholic idea of penance, as a way of atoning for sin, no longer played a part. Therefore,
the Danish judges found support in Lutheran theological doctrine for their conviction
that the witches were not capable of redemption in this life. Only God was able to
forgive man, and in this way Danish Protestantism directed attention towards the after-
life. On the other hand, the Catholic idea of penance as a way of atoning for sin meant
that, if she acknowledged her sinful behaviour, the witch was sentenced to a punishment
that would let her re-enter Catholic community. In this light Catholicism became more
concentrated on this life.
 LAY AND INQUISITORIAL WITCHCRAFT PROSECUTIONS 273

Sentence
To the Roman Inquisition the term ‘witchcraft’ covered a variety of prohibited rituals.28
Although all kinds of magical experiments were condemned in the bull of Sixtus V, some
represented even graver crimes than others. In an inquisitorial trial, the defendant’s
intentions played a significant role throughout the case. This practice was maintained
during the passing of the sentence. The defendants in Orbetello were pronounced either
‘suspected of heresy’ or ‘gravely suspected of heresy’. The gravest offence was the one
combining an explicit diabolical pact with an explicit desire to harm – as opposed to
the offence of entering into an implicit pact with no intention to do anything but heal.
The Roman Inquisition made use of several penalties throughout the Post-Tridentine
era. Generally the most severe penalty passed by the Inquisition was public flogging and
exile. In Orbetello public flogging took place in the streets to the sound of the blowing of
trumpets. Penalties also included imprisonment, fines, and the galleys. Every sentence
included salutary penalties, consisting of recitation of prayers, regular communion and
confessions, attending mass etc.
In Denmark, the legal notion of witchcraft included maleficent magic only until
1617. From then on the distinction between ‘secret arts’, referring to divination and
healing (and reverse witchcraft), and ‘true witches’, who explicitly had entered a pact
with the devil, was introduced by the authorities. Introducing such a distinction meant
that the intention of the suspect was emphasized and became essential to the verdict.
The Ordinance of 1617 also established a new and extended set of penalties. Until then,
persons convicted of witchcraft were sentenced to death. A death sentence meant end-
ing life on the stake. Tied to a ladder, the convicted witch was offered a preliminary
salvation by a priest before being pushed into the flames. However, the newly intro-
duced categories of ‘true witchcraft’ and ‘secret arts’ added a new set of penalties. The
Ordinance required practitioners of the ‘secret arts’ to be sent into exile leaving their
house and property. The aristocracy was subject to special penalties. Execution took
place by sword instead of burning. Extant witchcraft trials of Denmark only include
evidence of one noble woman convicted of witchcraft.29
Comparison of the two legal systems evidently leads to noticing the differences in
harshness of the sentences passed. The lightest sentence in the Danish system was almost
equal to the harshest sentence of the inquisitorial system. Danish witchcraft trials show
how Mosaic and Lutheran laws were weaved together. The key to Lutheranism was a
personal relationship with God. God alone was able to forgive man. According to this
idea the Catholic idea of penance as a way of atoning for sin was rejected. However,
a personal relationship with God was challenged by Mosaic Law, which influence on
Danish society became even more pronounced as the country entered the 17th century.
Mosaic Law demanded that the King punished his subjects, for otherwise God would
vent his anger on the entire country. The King was obliged to punish sinners, although
he was never in a position to grant forgiveness. Pure salvation could not be obtained in
this life. One had to wait until the afterlife, since God alone held the power of salvation.
Punishing witches became, therefore, an act undertaken on behalf of society to demon-
strate to God how lay authorities would under no circumstances tolerate offenders. The
intention was not to re-socialize one individual but to protect the rest of society.
In the inquisitorial system the exceptional use of the death penalty symbolized the
Catholic idea of penance as a way of atoning for sin. Practitioners of witchcraft and
magic were not to be eliminated. The intention was to eliminate their heretical beliefs.
274 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY

The performers of magic and witchcraft had to realize that their behaviour was sinful
in order to make them repent their errors. If they did so, they were able to return to
the Church. Even in the gravest cases, in which the convicted witch was facing to be
flogged, the inquisitor was ordered to handle the matter with great caution. Flogging
was considered extremely debasing – as it was in the Danish legal system. This meant
that the whip was only to be used in cases involving particularly grave errors. Even then
the inquisitor had to be careful, since it was important not to remove the option of a
return to the Catholic Church.

Concluding remarks
Danish county judges shared a common understanding of witchcraft with the popu-
lace. But to Danish theologians it was crucial to make the offender confess his or her
diabolical pact. In the Danish trials the witch’s relation with the devil was usually not
introduced before it came to the County Court. Empirically it appeared mainly in the
witches’ confessions given under torture. For ordinary people the pact with the devil
was not a prerequisite for the exercise of witchcraft. Despite the fact that theological
ideas introduced in the Ordinance of 1617 divided ‘secret arts’ from ‘true witches’,
the accusatorial way of proceeding prevented the law from working in practice, since it
was still up to ordinary people to assess whether a crime had been committed or not. A
sentence for beneficial magic remained alien to the people.
Consequently, witchcraft trials in Denmark and Italy should be studied in a broader
context, relating to processes through which those in power centralized their power and
sought the unification of their subjects. The rise of orthodoxy in Denmark presented
opportunities for the Danish Lutheran Church to gain influence in witchcraft trials, but
the theological ideas had the accusatorial legal system against itself. In Italy, the Catholic
Church represented by the Inquisition proceeded in trials of witchcraft, and the inquisi-
torial system made it possible to prosecute witches on the basis of theological ideas.
Nevertheless, the Inquisition abstained from doing so. They focused instead on getting
the accused to acknowledge their sin, to repent, and to seek reconciliation with the
Church. To the Inquisition, prosecuting witchcraft and superstition was primarily an
effort to discipline the population, and this effort formed part of a larger reform of the
Catholic Church from the second part of the 16th century. The Catholic Church was
motivated by a desire to discipline the individual’s religious and moral life more than by
a fear of diabolical conspiracy. The Thomist distinction between the implicit and explicit
diabolical pact proved to be an extremely useful tool in the pursuit of witchcraft. By dis-
tinguishing between the two degrees of diabolical pact, the Inquisition could incorporate
all popular superstition and witchcraft in its interpretative framework.

Notes
1 This article highlights some of the legal historical aspects of my Ph.D. disserta-
tion, which was published in 2009 as a monograph in Danish: I pagt med Djævelen.
Trolddomsforfølgelser og trolddomsforestillinger i Danmark og Italien efter Reformationen (A
Pact with the devil. Witchcraft persecutions and witchcraft beliefs in Denmark and
Italy following the reformation). A gender perspective is applied in my article ‘Fra
klog kone til kætter’. Previously Danish and Italian witchcraft prosecution have
 LAY AND INQUISITORIAL WITCHCRAFT PROSECUTIONS 275

merely been studied within their national context. Among the research on Italian
witchcraft, fundamental to the present comparative study, are the works of Oscar Di
Simplicio, Adriano Prosperi, John Tedeschi, Mary O’Neil, Ruth Martin and Carlo
Ginzburg. The history of Orbetello during Spanish Italy is outlined in Tognarini,
‘Orbetello. I presidios di Toscana e il Mediterraneo’, and in Dandelet and Marino,
eds., Spain in Italy. For the Danish part of the comparison, the standard account of the
witchcraft trials is still Johansen. Da Djævelen var ude. Henningsen and Wittendorff
have published the important works on popular culture and witchcraft. The most
recent comparative study is Dillinger. Evil People. The trials against the two Italian
women are located at the Archivio per la Congregazione della Dottrina della Fede
(ACDF) in the Vatican. The trial against Pollonia di Gallo ACDF, Siena processi,
51, fol. 11r–48v; the trial against Lucida di Canino, ACDF, Siena processi, 51,
fol. 196r–231v. The trial against Johanne Pedersdatter is preserved at the Danish
National Archive in Viborg (DNAV), B 24–54, fol. 212r–214r.
2 The Spanish Inquisition established at the reign of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella
in 1478.
3 Decker, Witchcraft and the Papacy, 212–14. In my studies of Orbetello, I have not
detected one single execution.
4 This figure is an estimated figure only; cf. Johansen, ‘Denmark: The Sociology of
Accusations’, 344ff.
5 Relevant extracts of the two Summae (‘Summa theologia’ and ‘Summa contra gen-
tiles’) are published in English in Kors and Peters, Witchcraft in Europe 400–1700,
93–6.
6 Maxwell-Stuart, ‘Coeli et terrae’, 59–60.
7 Jensen, Trolddom i Danmark 1500–1588, 13–14.
8 Law of Jutland (Jyske Lov). In Iuul and Kroman, Danmarks gamle Love, 224.
9 Kallestrup, I pagt med Djævelen, 120–7.
10 Johansen, Da Djævelen var ude, 22–3.
11 Born 1556, Christian Friis was Royal Chancellor until his death in 1616. Bricka,
Dansk Biografisk Leksikon, vol. 5, 402–7.
12 The two other ordinances dealt with fornification and exaggerated luxury, in
Rørdam, Danmarks Kirkelove, 59–63.
13 Palladius, En Visitatsbog (1542); Niels Hemmingsen (d. 1600), his most famous trea-
tise is on witchcraft: En undervisning aff Den Hellige Scrifft hvad mand døme skal om den
store oc gruelige Gudsbespottelse som skeer med Troldom Sinelse Manelse oc anden saadan Guds
hellige Naffns og Ords vanbrug. Item 33 Propositiones mot Troldom. Der til 33 Propositiones om
Spaadom. Translated from Latin into Danish by Rasmus Reravarius, c. 1570. Bricka,
Dansk Biografisk Leksikon, vol. 7, 324–34.
14 See Mangio, ‘L’assedio di Orbetello e l’occupazione francese’.
15 Kallestrup, I pagt med djævelen, 30–6; Tognarini, ‘Orbetello, I presidios di Toscana e
il Mediterraneo’, 105–89.
16 ACDF, Siena, processi 51, 52. In addition three trials are located in 40, 42.
17 Denunciations of Madalena di Maura, ACDF, Siena, processi, 51, fol. 287r–292v.
18 Convicted by the town court in The Skaw (Skagen) 30 September 1610, trial dis-
missed by the county court in Viborg 26 October 1610, DNAV, NLA B 24–512,
279r–286r.
19 Convicted by the town court in Aalborg 4 April 1623, acquitted by the county court
in Viborg 26 April 1623, DNAV, NLA B 24–538, fol. 106r–108r.
276 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY

20 This cautiousness is explicated in many writings, among them is the manual of

Cardinal and former inquisitor Desiderio Scaglia Prattica per procedere nelle cause del
tribunal del Sant’Officio (c. 1625), ACDF, StStE 5e, ch. 8. The Prattica of Desiderio
Scaglia is the topic of an article by Kallestrup entitled ‘Maleficium ò “abuso di
sacramento”?’.
21 Duni, Under the Devil’s Spell, 25.
22 In the trial against Prete Stefano Tommei, the suspect complained of an injured
shoulder caused by the rope. ACDF, Siena, processi, 50, fol. 177.
23 The trial against Faustina di Leusta, ACDF, Siena, processi, 51, fol. 242r–261v.
24 Jensen, Trolddom i Danmark, 44.
25 In a series of witch trials in Aalborg (1612–1621) nine people were charged, and
seven ended their lives at the stake, Kallestrup, I pagt med Djævelen, 124ff.
26 In a trial from 1634 linked to Else Jacobsdatter originally convicted in 1620, the
defendant Kerstin Thamisdatter stated how she had been known to be a witch, ever
since she was accused by Else Jacobdatter for taking part in burning down the mill in
Sejlflod by means of witchcraft, DNAV, NLA B 24–545, fol. 122r–125v.
27 The trial of Chresten Lauridtzen, DNAV, NLA B 24–524, fol. 245r–251r.
28 ACDF, StStE, 5e, nr. 2; fol. 22v–23r.
29 Christenze Kruckow, convicted by the Supreme Court (Kongens Retterting) in 1621.
The proceedings are published by Jacobsen, Christenze Kruckow.

References

Archives
Archivio per la Congregazione della Dottrina della Fede, the Vatican (ACDF).
Danish National Archive, Viborg (DNAV).

Literature
Bricka, C. F., ed. Dansk Biografisk Leksikon. Vol. 5. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandles
Forlag, 1891.
———, ed. Dansk Biografisk Leksikon. Vol. 7. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandles Forlag,
1893.
Dandelet, Thomas, and James Marino, eds. Spain in Italy. Leiden: Brill, 2007.
Decker, Rainer. Witchcraft and the Papacy: An Account Drawing on the Formerly Secret Records of
the Roman Inquisition. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2008.
Dillinger, Johannes. Evil People. A Comparative Study of Witch Hunts in Swabian Austria and the
Electorate of Trier. Charlotttesville: University of Virginia Press, 2009.
Di Simplicio, Oscar. Inquisizione, stregoneria, medicina. Siena e il suo stato (1580–1721). Siena:
Edizione Il Leccio, 2000.
———. Autunno della stregoneria. Maleficio e magia nell’Italia moderna. Bologna: Il Mulino,
2005.
Duni, Matteo. Under the Devil’s Spell. Witches, Sorcerers, and the Inquisition in Renaissance Italy.
Florence: Syracuse University in Florence, 2007.
Ginzburg, Carlo. The Night Battles: Witchcraft & Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth & Seventeenth
Centuries. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983.
Henningsen, Gustav. The Witches’ Advocate: Basque Witchcraft and the Spanish Inquisition. Reno:
University of Nevada Press, 1981.
Iuul, Stig, and Erik Kroman. Danmarks gamle Love paa Nutidsdansk. Vol. 1–3. Copenhagen:
Det Danske Sprog og Litteraturselskab, 1945–1948.
 LAY AND INQUISITORIAL WITCHCRAFT PROSECUTIONS 277

Jacobsen, J. C. Christenze Kruckow. En adelig Troldkvinde fra Chr. IV’s Tid. Copenhagen:
G. E. C. Gads forlag, 1972.
Jensen, Karsten Sejr. Trolddom i Danmark 1500–1588. Copenhagen: Arken Tryk, 1981.
Johansen, Jens Chr. Vesterskov. ‘Denmark: The Sociology of the Accusations’. In Witchcraft
in Early Modern Europe, ed. Bengt Ankarloo and Gustav Henningsen, 339–65.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.
———. Da Djævelen var ude. . . Trolddom i det 17. århundredes Danmark. Viborg: Odense
Universitetsforlag, 1991.
Kallestrup, Louise Nyholm. ‘Maleficium ò ‘abuso di sacramento’? Konsensus i kardinal
Scaglias inkvisitionsmanual og den posttridentine forståelse af trolddom i Italien
1560–1620’. Historisk Tidsskrift 102, no. 2 (2002): 282–305.
———. I pagt med Djævelen. Trolddomsforestillinger og trolddomsforfølgelser i Italien og Danmark
efter Reformationen. Copenhagen: ANIS, 2009.
———. ‘Fra klog kone til kætter: helbredelse, trolddom og inkvisition i det tidlig moderne
Orbetello’. Den Jyske Historiker, no. 124 (2010): 73–92.
Kors, Alan C., and Edward Peters, eds. Witchcraft in Europe 400–1700. A Documentary History.
Revised by Edward Peters. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001.
Mangio, Carlo. ‘L’assedio di Orbetello e l’occupazione francese di Porto Longone e di
Piombino: Un episodio italiano della Guerra dei Trent’Anni’. In Orbetello e i presidios,
ed. Anna Guarducci, 200–10. Florence: Centro editoriale toscano, 2000.
Martin, Ruth. Witchcraft and the Inquisition of Venice 1550–1650. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,
1989.
Maxwell-Stuart, P. G. The Malleus Maleficarum. Selected, trans., and annotated by P. G.
Maxwell-Stuart. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2007.
O’Neil, Mary R. ‘Discerning Superstition. Popular Errors and Orthodox Response in Late
Sixteenth Century Italy’. Ph.D. diss., Stanford University, 1982.
———. ‘Magical Healing, Love Magic and the Inquisition in Late 16th Century Modena’.
In Inquisition and Society in Early Modern Europe, ed. Steven Haliczer, 88–114. Totowa,
NJ: Barnes and Noble, 1987.
Palladius, Peder. En visitatsbog. Published in modern Danish with introduction and notes by
Martin Schwarz Lausten. Copenhagen: ANIS, 2003.
Prosperi, Adriano. Tribunali della coscienza. Inquisitori, confessori, missionari. Torino: G.
Einaudi, 1996.
Rørdam, H. F. Danmarks Kirkelove samt udvalg af andre bestemmelser vedrørende kirken, skolen
og de fattiges forsørgelse fra Reformationen indtil Christian V’s Danske Lov. 1536–1683.
Copenhagen: Selskabet for Danmarks Kirkehistorie, 1886.
Tedeschi, John. ‘Inquisitorial Law and the Witch’. In Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe,
ed. Bengt Ankarloo and Gustav Henningsen Gustav, 83–120. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1990.
Tognarini, Ivano. ‘Orbetello. I presidios di Toscana e il Mediterraneo. Il destino di un terri-
torio tra Cosimo de’Medici, Bernardo Tanucci e Napoleone’. In Orbetello e i presidios,
ed. Anna Guarducci, 105–89. Florence: Centro editoriale toscano, 2000.
Wittendorff, Alex. ‘“Evangelii lyse dag” eller hekseprocessernes mørketid? Om Peder
Palladius historieopfattelse’. In Tradition og kritik. Festskrift til Sven Ellehøj, ed. Grethe
Christensen Karl-Erik Frandsen, Kai Hørby, Benito Scocozza, and Alex Wittendorff,
89–119. Copenhagen: Den danske historiske forening, 1984.
———. ‘“Fire stolper holder et skidehus”. Tidens forestillingsverden’. In Christian IV’s
verden, ed. Sven Ellehøj, 214–49. Copenhagen: NNF, 1988.
278 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY

Louise Nyholm Kallestrup is Assistant Professor at University of Southern Denmark.

Her Ph.D. was a comparative study of Danish and Italian witchcraft persecutions and
witchcraft beliefs. She is the author of a number of articles on Danish and Italian
witchcraft prosecution, and her book I pagt med Djævelen. Trolddomsforestillinger og trold-
domsforfølgelser efter Reformationen [A pact with the devil. Witchcraft persecutions and
witchcraft beliefs in Denmark and Italy following the reformation] was published in 2009.
A revised and extended version of this book will be published in English translation by
Palgrave-Macmillan in 2011. She is currently contributing to as well as being chief editor of
a conference volume from an international conference entitled ‘Heresy, Magic and Natural
Philosophy’, held at University of Southern Denmark in November 2010, and to be pub-
lished in 2011/2012. Address: Institute of History and Civilization, University of Southern
Denmark, Campusvej 55, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark. [email: lnk@hist.sdu.dk]