The Hammer of Witches

they were punished with such a penalty: by the head meaning execution by beheading and by hooks for the tearing of the body, even to being cast to beasts to be devoured. Now, however, they are burned, perhaps because of the female sex. Likewise, they are prohibited from social participation. Wherefore it is added: let not such people be permitted to approach the threshold of another, otherwise their goods shall be burned. Nor should anyone receive them or consult them; otherwise, they are deported to an island and all their goods are confiscated. Note here the penalty of exile with the loss of all honors for those who consult or receive such people. When preachers make these penalties known to the people and the rulers of the lands, they burn with more zeal against witches maleficas; specifically female practitioners of harmful magic than from the citation of other scriptures. Furthermore, those laws are commended which oppose their witchcraft. For as stated above in the law concerning them: "Others, however, who do this so that the harvests of men are not flattened by winds and the stoning of hail, are worthy not of punishment but of reward." How it may be lawful to impede such things will appear below, as was briefly touched upon.

How can anyone deny all these things or frivolously resist them without being tainted by the stain of heretical depravity heretical depravity refers to the crime of heresy, suggesting that denying the reality of witchcraft is itself a religious offense? Let each person judge for himself, unless perhaps ignorance excuses him; but what kind of ignorance provides an excuse will appear immediately below. Concluding from all the premises, the Catholic and most true assertion is that there are witches malefici; those who perform harmful magic who, by the help of demons demonum; fallen angels or evil spirits and because of a pact pactum; a formal agreement with the devil entered into with them, can procure real harmful effects by God's permission—not excluding that they are also able to produce glamorous effects and fantasies through illusory means. But because the present investigation is concerned with harmful effects, which differ greatly from others, this point is not relevant here, since such people are called sorcerers or enchanters rather than "malefici." Finally, because they take the foundation of their error from the words of the Canon The "Canon Episcopi," a 10th-century legal text that seemed to claim witchcraft was an illusion, specifically the last two errors (not speaking of the first, which condemns itself while it wanders too far against the truth of scripture), one must proceed to a sound understanding of the Canon. And first, against

the first error of those saying the "middle" is fantastic but the "extremes" are real. Here it must be noted that while there are fourteen capital species in the genus of superstition superstitionis; in this context, any religious practice not sanctioned by the Church (which for the sake of brevity it is not expedient to recite, both because they are clearly recited by Aristotle in the eighth book of the Ethics and in the Secunda Secundae by Saint Thomas [Aquinas] in question 92, and also because a mention of them will be made below where the gravity of this heresy is treated, in the final question of this first part), the species under which these kinds of women are contained is called the species of pythons pythonum; those possessed by a spirit of divination, in whom a demon either speaks or works wonders. And it is often first in order.

However, the species under which the "malefici" witches who cause physical harm are contained is called the species of witches. And because they differ greatly from one another, it is not necessary that one who labors in one species should also be included under the others. Therefore, just as the Canon makes mention of those [illusory] women and not of the "malefici," so does he falsely interpret the Canon who wishes to reduce such imaginary transportations of bodies to the whole genus of superstition and all its species. Thus, they argue that just as those women are only moved imaginarily, so too are all witches. And he further falsifies the Canon who would argue from it that a witch concurs only imaginarily in the harmful effect of sickness or disease. Furthermore, such erring people are reprehended when they concede that the extremes are real—namely, the demon working and the real effect of the disease—but say the "middle" instrument—namely, the person of the witch—occurs only fantastically, when nevertheless the middle participates in the nature of the extremes. Nor is it valid to say that the fantasy itself is something real, because fantasy as such can effect nothing nor concur in the operation of a demon, except through a pact entered into with the demon. In this pact, the witch has offered herself and bound herself to the devil truly and really, and not only fantastically and imaginarily; so also it is necessary that she cooperate with the devil truly and bodily. Now, all the works of witches are directed toward this, where they always exercise their witchcraft either through a pact, or through sight, or through speech, or the touch of a harmful instrument placed under the threshold of a house, as will be clear in the following question. Furthermore, if anyone ver—