Please reply to this thread with your review of a relevant article/text. If you have problems using the forum, please send your review to me.
Deviance B
Deviance B
Book Review - Werewolves and the Possessed
You need to be logged in to post in this topic.
-
0 likes
-
Nicky Hallett, 'Witchcraft, Exorcism and the Politics of Possession in a Seventeenth-Century Convent'
By focusing on the case study of Margaret and Elizabeth Mostyn, who were two seventeenth-century nuns living in an English convent in Antwerp, Nicky Hallett’s ‘Witchcraft, Exorcism and the Politics of Possession in a Seventeenth-Century Convent’ provides a unique insight into the personal experiences of bewitchment, possession and exorcism. Being a volume in Ashgate’s ‘Contemporary Editions’ series, which is dedicated to publishing texts written by, for and about early modern women, the book predominantly consists of Sister Margaret’s spiritual diary, correspondence, and other nuns’ reminiscences about the Mostyn sisters. By restoring the voices of two women with captivating spiritual lives, Hallett illustrates the daily lives of a group of early modern women that have been hardly investigated by historians. The primary sources are usefully contextualised in a comprehensive introduction detailing broader European intellectual conversations and popular controversies about possession. Hallett emphasises that for those who were believed to be possessed, possession was a very real phenomenon that brought considerable emotional turmoil. Moreover, it is claimed that possession was complicated by the combining of intellectual, medical and theological discourses of the early modern period, which had a crucial role in informing understandings of possession in the seventeenth century. Although a firm conclusion is far from explicit, Hallett convincingly stresses that possession was regarded as a highly complex phenomenon in the early modern period, despite being an accepted part of a comprehensive worldview.
Firstly, a consistent theme that emerges from Hallett’s text is the idea that possession was an emotional experience. Whereas most cases of possession rarely give insight into the experiences of the participants, it is highly significant that Hallett’s book is primarily formulated by sources that were written by the women themselves. This is from the extensive set of personal writings of the Mostyn sisters revealing substantial detail of their thoughts before, during and after their exorcism. Even though the reader is not exposed to authentic sources as Hallett has modernised the language, such editing undeniably enhances the accessibility of the sources. What appears most beneficial from the primary documents is the insight into the emotional states of the authors, as this crucially allows the reader to understand that possession was for them a very real experience. This is particularly illustrated by the extensive pain that the sisters experience, such as Sister Margaret’s description of the ‘sheer agony’ felt from being unable to control her own thoughts and speech. Such personal insights highlight the considerable value of case studies by focusing on the particular for challenging traditional theories. For instance, the exposure to the emotional states of the Mostyn sisters importantly reveals the narrowness of Michel de Certeau’s argument that convent possessions began from the fourteenth century within new or recently reformed religious Orders because they enabled nuns to register their opposition to the changes of the Catholic Reformation through the drama that unravelled. Such an argument is highly representative of previous research that has tended to focus on the religious propaganda that often emerged during convent possessions, as is the case of the possession in the convent of the Grey Sisters of Bethlehem in Leuven in 1606. Certainly, the religious Order that the Mostyns joined, the Discalced Carmelites, was reformed in 1648, and the sources reveal that the major disturbances occurred when the women first arrived at the new foundation in the same year. However, it is quite clear that the sisters believed their possession to have originated from the bewitchment of disappointed suitors in 1642, and the effects were felt most acutely at an individual rather than a community level. The fact that the descriptions of their pain originate from the personal spiritual diary of Sister Margaret that was unintended for a public audience largely strengthens Hallett’s ability to modify the strength of traditional theories that regard convent possessions as mere political attempts expressing concerns and doubts during a transitional period because this only accounts for a limited range of possession outbreaks. Although Hallett does not offer an alternative theory, there has so far been little research on the way in which possession was experienced; therefore, it is undeniable that the rich qualitative evidence from this case study provides insight for further investigation on the emotions of the possessed.
Moreover, Hallett’s strongest claim is that a complex mix of intellectual, theological and medical discourses was crucial in informing understandings of possession in the seventeenth century. By exhibiting supernatural physical strength, screaming, crying, fainting and suffering from uncontrollable seizures and convulsions, the sisters showed all the traditional marks of diabolic possession, yet this was subject to considerable scrutiny before possession was confirmed. Paying attention to the diagnosis of possession, rather than only how possession was dealt with, is a particular strength of Hallett’s text. It valuably highlights that there was more to possession than simply believing in diabolic interference and exorcism. Indeed, at an intellectual and theological level, there was considerable debate regarding the possibility and nature of possession. For instance, in 1603, the English physician Edward Jorden explained the symptoms of possession in terms of the disease of hysteria, whereas the Dutch physician Levinus Lemnius believed it frivolous to refer the causes of illness to evil spirits, but did accept that the Devil could make naturally caused ailments worse. Moreover, the Catholic authorities after the Synod of Rheims in 1583 advised that physicians should first examine subjects suspected of possession to ensure that there was no medical explanation for their condition, insisting that priests must be able to ‘distinguish a possessed person from other individuals who suffer from melancholia or any other illness’. Indeed, the influence of such discourses is largely apparent when considering that Sister Margaret initially believes that her suffering is the result of ‘a despairingly melancholy humour’, and it is only when symptoms intensify and the doctor fails to offer a comprehensive medical explanation that possession is confirmed. By carefully contextualising the sources with contemporary discourses, it is laudable that Hallett avoids simply diagnosing the Mostyn sisters as mentally ill, as this would merely categorise them in clinical terms. Not only would such an approach silence their experiences, it would also prevent further investigation. Instead of dismissing such behaviour, it is important to acknowledge that for early modern people, the specific behaviour categorised as ‘diabolic possession’ was extremely complex, which required coherence, cognition, and recognition on behalf of the protagonists. Therefore, as Hallett convincingly demonstrates through the case of the Mostyn sisters, even though possession was part of a comprehensive worldview, confirming possession was far from easy as it was subject to contemporary intellectual, medical and theological discourses.
Interestingly, the most conclusive point Hallett maintains throughout the text is that witchcraft and possession were increasingly blurred in the early modern period. Whereas demonic possession involves evil spirits inhabiting an individual against their will, witchcraft necessitates the collaboration of a human with the devil intending to cause harm, and Hallett maintains that the two were hardly distinguishable by the seventeenth century. Such a conclusion is unsurprising when considering that the possession of the Mostyn sisters was the direct consequence of an unpleasant encounter with an individual later identified as the cause of bewitchment. It becomes apparent in Sister Margaret’s diary that their possession was the result of bewitchment by their suitors in 1640 and 1642, with the effects only emerging after the women had professed as nuns at the convent. Certainly, it is important to consider that Hallett’s conclusions are somewhat limited due to her methodological approach of using a case study, as it deals only with one particular group of people and may not be entirely representative of similar instances. By applying the relationship to Europe in general, rather than to the case study more specifically, this rather weakens the creditability of Hallett’s claim. In fact, Moshe Sluhovsky is particularly scathing of historians associating demonic possession in convents with witchcraft, claiming that they go too far because these are largely exceptional cases. Indeed, Hallett is far from unique in identifying this relationship, due to the considerable attention given to such cases as the mass demonic possession of the Ursuline nuns of Loudon in 1633, which was claimed to be the result of the sorcery of Father Urbain Grandier who was executed in 1634, despite the fact that it is only one of five known cases of demonic possession in France being connected to witchcraft. Nevertheless, this is hardly surprising when considering the availability of numerous sources due to the extensive publicity it received at the time, combined with the fact that the Prioress from Loudon subsequently wrote her memoirs and took part on a lecture tour around Europe which attracted large crowds. Hallett’s claim is rather too strong when considering that it is based on specific exceptions, being further limited by the fact that there is currently insufficient research to convincingly reveal the frequency of possession cases turning into witchcraft accusations. However, it is important that the relationship has been noted because the case study most importantly raises the issue that possession in the seventeenth century could be a complex phenomenon and more research is necessary to sufficiently address this. Therefore, it would be unsatisfactory to dismiss what is viewed as an exceptional case in current historiography because it would present a distorted representation of reality.
To conclude, Hallett’s book is a valuable contribution to the historical debate on the nature of possession in the early modern period. Although there are few clear conclusions, which is to be expected when considering that this is the first time that issues surrounding possession have been raised in regard to early modern English convents, the meticulous footnoted detail indicates that Hallett draws upon previous research and importantly raises new questions about the complex nature of possession. Certainly, caution is necessary in applying these findings to other cases of possession in early modern Europe because the text is limited by being based on one case study that is not necessarily representative of similar situations. The text most importantly implies that further analysis on possession in English convents, as well as research on the personal experiences of the possessed, needs to be conducted in order to most effectively enhance understanding of the complexities of possession in the early modern period.
0 likes -
William de Blécourt, 'A Journey to Hell: Reconsidering the Livonian “Werewolf”
Willem de Blécourt begins with a summary of the trial of Thies of Kaltenbruna, a Livonian man who was put on trial for heresy in Jürgensburg, Swedish Livonia, in 1692. Thiess openly proclaimed himself to be a werewolf, claiming that he ventured into Hell with other werewolves in order to do battle with the Devil and his witches. Although claiming that as a werewolf he was a "hound of God", the judges deemed him guilty of trying to turn people away from Christianity, and he was sentenced to be both flogged and banished for life. After this, the article mainly examines the relevant historiography on the Thies case and suggests prospects for new investigations into the Livonian werewolf. Blécourt focuses on the highly influential interpretation of Thies’ activities as shamanistic, as proposed by Carlo Ginzburg. Blécourt key aim is to critique and revise this interpretation.
According to Ginzburg, the werewolf Thies was part of a mid- and east-European shamanistic complex of myths and rituals that included figures as geographically separated as the Italian benandanti, the Hungarian taltos, and the Ossetian burkudzauta. Furthermore, he claimed that this complex could also offer a vital clue to the origin of the witches’ sabbat. Many subsequent historians have followed Ginzburg’s interpretation, such as the werewolf writer Adam Douglas who called Thies, ’only one among a number of representatives of the survival of shamanistic ideas that were, however, destined to be entirely misunderstood in the then prevailing western culture and so persecuted mercilessly.’
However, Blécourt believes Ginzburg fails on several counts. Firstly, Ginzburg fails to provide evidence of werewolves that fit into the definition of what a shaman is. That is, one who goes into a trance and undertakes a journey to an alternate world with the aid of spirits, to find solutions for problems in this world. Blécourt states that even if the soul of a shaman was capable of taking the shape of a wolf during a trance, it does not follow that every metamorphosis was a trance experience. Certainly, in Thies’ account nothing points in that direction. According to Ronald Hutton, European traditions of shapeshifting are, ‘conceived of as a technique used in the normal, physical world, without any associations with spirit helpers, trance-states or performances before audiences.’ They are, ‘essentially a separate phenomenon.’ This key difference between the spiritual nature of the shaman and the physical nature of the werewolf is pivotal in rejecting Ginzburg’s theory.
Blécourt draws on other historians to support this view. According to Klaniczay, there were signs of decline and disintegration of shamanistic beliefs within Europe and he concluded that, ‘all this cannot be called shamanism proper, not even in the case of the Hungarian taltos; to do so would expand the characteristics of shamanism in an unacceptable fashion.’ He also argued that the magicians discussed as part of the complex represented a version of shamanism that had disintegrated into various elements without any real cohesion.
Additionally, Blécourt points that Thies was said to be part of a group of werewolves and was only active on particular days of the year whereas shamans are considered to operate mainly on their own and whenever need dictates. Finally, he argues that a shamanistic trance journey would suggest a longer stay in hell than rushing in and out again.
Blécourt also accuses Ginzburg of misusing sources. He states that Thies’ case and its assessments were severely misrepresented as Ginzburg, as well as a number of other authors, relied solely on the version of the interrogation published by Austrian National Socialist Otto Hofler. From this edition substantial elements were omitted, the most important being Thies’s occupation as a blesser.
Moreover, Blécourt criticizes Ginzburg on his failure to account for the particularities of local belief. ‘To place these traditions under the heading of shamanism is to conceal how distinctive a regional belief it is,’ wrote Ronald Hutton. Like Blécourt, a new generation of German folklorists who in the 1960s had distanced themselves from Nazi folklore criticized Ginzburg’s treatment of the case. They accused Ginzburg of superficial comparisons and of neglecting cultural contexts; to them his methods ignored their new approach and resembled the history propagated by outdated nineteenth-century folklorists.
Blécourt also disagrees with the links made by Ginzburg between werewolves and witches. Becoming a werewolf and roaming around with other werewolves seems to have been a Baltic version of the devil’s pact and attendance at a sabbat. It nevertheless does not follow that this seventeenth-century regional concept of the werewolf formed the basis of sabbat imagery. Werewolves were drawn into the persecution of witches, and the notion of the sabbat was usually superimposed on existing notions of meetings, whether actual or just hearsay. The judges in Jurgensburg may have attempted to turn Thies’ admissions about his stay in hell into an attendance at the sabbat presided over by the devil, but the old man relegated everything that had to do with the devil to the wizards he and his companions were fighting.
Overall, Blécourt presents a strong critique of the views held by Ginzburg, using a great deal of primary sources and the views of fellow historians to support his argument. Blécourt seems to advocate a more thorough interrogation of the historical evidence, suggesting that to be accurate we must take into account local history and cannot fit the cultural beliefs of mainland Europe into a single perspective. However, despite these strengths one could disagree with Blécourt’s definition of ‘shaman’, and thus a large part of his argument, as someone else’s definition of a shaman may be closer to the perception of werewolves in early modern Europe. One could also criticize Blécourt as he does not present any real theory of his own and contribute to the historiography on werewolves. He merely tears down a previous theory and suggests that more work needs to be done.
0 likes -
Katheryn A. Edwards, Werewolves, witches and wandering spirits; Traditional Belief and Folklore in Early Modern Europe (Missouri, 2002)
This book by Katheryn Edwards eleven sections, with different historians writing each section. Do not let the title of this book fall you, the chapters are much more in depth than just a study of werewolves, witches and spirits. From shape shifters, to ghosts, to exorcism, to Jews, to the Devil, this book covers all aspects of this type of deviance. In the introduction, however, Edwards fails to acknowledge all elements of the discussion, focusing greatly on themes of witchcraft within the introduction. Nevertheless, I think Edwards succeeds in her aims to re-examine how medieval society and themes of deviancy can be approached.
The main theme outlined in the introduction and continued throughout, is the need for historians to analyse events involving deviant groups individually. Individual cases only go so far in helping to explain a trend. It is more accurate to reflect on individual circumstances and outcomes. Edwards aims to highlight in this book how historians should not be so generalising, and should not always been so focused on achieving conclusions of continuity or change throughout the medieval period, and across the whole of Europe. This is especially true when discussing witches. dwards claims that historians are too willing to accept testimonies they read as valid evidence of certain behaviour occurring in early modern Europe, where as time and place are essential categories we must examine when analysing cases.
From this suggestion, although Edwards does not explicitly say this, it is implied that examples of witchcraft and others alike, are relatively scarce to how we view early modern witchcraft now. For example, she believes it is possible to examine individual cases. Moreover, suggests that such stories are embedded within Inquisitorial records, so not obviously dominant.
Physical representations are closely examined, with the conclusion that werewolves do not retain humanistic characteristics, but nor do they encompass the animalistic elements which we assume they would. Werewolves are far from their domestic counterpart, dogs, for example. Instead, these animalistic symbols stand for something. They provide meaning about an individual whilst ensuring that the individual remains part of a collective.
I received contrasting opinions on the concept of werewolves when comparing this book to the article ‘Werewolves and Flying Witches’ by Oldridge. Edwards gives the impression that werewolves were treated more favourably as their condition could be medically explain. The phenomena of lycathropy was diagnosed and linked to porphyria, a rare congenital disorder that is characterised by extreme light sensitivity and destructive ulcers which deform the face. However, Oldridge explicitly notes that supposed lycanthropes were not sympathetic figures, which is a modern creation, unrepresentative of the early modern period, thus the degree to which medical diagnosis can explain treatment of werewolves can be debated.
Ideas of transmission and interpretation are distinctive subjects throughout the book. The articles in this book take a step away from why witches and werewolves were treated in certain ways, and instead explores how they were given such identities and how such identities were fashioned. These ideas, however, are reliant on how the notion of truth and reality are interpreted. By taking a more terminological and methodological approach to these topics, Edwards attempts to uncover what truth was for people in early modern Europe, how truth was created, and how this changed for different people.
A significant point that the book makes, is the idea that some deliberately fashioned themselves as a deviant in order to influence society. Deviant people had specific identities and were recognised in society. The example is given of Asmodea who uses witchcraft as a means to create herself as a subject and to form a world in which she can be the active and influential member that she may not have been otherwise. Similarly, in Dean Phillip Bell’s chapter on Worms and the Jews, he argues that the way magic was practiced and perceived mattered because it expressed Jewish identity in the distinctions that were drawn between Christian and Jewish magic. Magic did not necessarily lead to exclusion, but in fact inclusion to that community. Themes of persecution and toleration therefore appear throughout the book.
By using chapters written by an array of historians, the book offers different viewpoints on an array of topics. We are not limited only to the view of Edwards. What she seemed keen to achieve from this book was to gather new ways of analysing history, which is successful when using a variety of historians. They ultimately use different sources, and analyse sources in different ways.0 likes -
C.W. Garrett, ‘Witches, Werewolves and Henri Boguet’, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Western Society for French History, 4 (1976), 126-34
Clarke W. Garrett’s succinct analysis of the ‘possessed’ in Saint-Claude, an unassuming eastern French town and home of prominent demonologist Henri Boguet, certainly provides a useful overview of witch trials in the region during Boguet’s stint as Chief Judge. Garrett, writing in 1976, successfully details numerous accounts of witchcraft in the French community, although it certainly lacks innovation and ultimately draws tentative conclusions. Published in ‘Western Society for French History’, a comprehensive overview of a wide range of French disciplinary backgrounds, Garratt cites a wide range of sources in his analysis, principally William Monter’s European Witchcraft (1969), Erik Midelfort’s Witch Hunting in South-western Germany, 1562-1684 (1972) and Julio Caro Baroja’s The World of the Witches (1970). The main focus however is Henri Boguet’s Discours des Sorciers (1602) and is relentlessly referred to by Garrett. All of the events described by Garrett took place in a nine year period between 1598-1607 and they include some of the more surreptitious acts of witchcraft. A chronological approach is adopted by Garratt who methodically investigates a selection of these cases, addressing a range of issues including physical metamorphosing, social stereotyping and importantly, the confessions of ‘alleged’ witches.
Archetypal problems with microhistories persist: Garrett admitted in his second conclusion that his analysis had failed to advance the field of the possessed throughout Europe. He even asks the reader ‘Was possession more common in certain regions?’ Moreover, reference is made to the ‘character’ and ‘reputation’ of Saint-Claude which narrows the scope of Garrett’s argument as these characteristics may not be found elsewhere. Additionally, in Saint-Claude, devilish powders were seen as the cause of local afflictions – no evidence can be found for this phenomena elsewhere. On the other hand, this article does elucidate the idea of witches confessing their guilt (albeit often as a result of torture). Garrett describes Boguet’s ability to extract information from alleged witches, effectively legitimising the practice. An explanation is also provided for this. Garrett agrees with scholars such as Nicky Hallett who contend that possession was an emotional experience.
An interesting point of discussion which emerges from Garrett’s piece is that of the devil’s influence. Throughout the article Garrett stresses that possession is an emotional state of mind caused by the devil infiltrating one’s mind. However, a large section of this article has drawn evidence from confessions made by witches often during exorcisms. Therefore, how can one believe these confessions whilst under the influence of the devil? Garrett addresses this issue, stating that catholic authorities were aware of this, in fact a committee of theologians at the University of Paris declared that “one must never admit the accusations of demons.”
Garrett’s analysis will advance the field of witches and the possessed to an extent although being a microhistory it must be viewed with a degree of caution. Garrett admitted that he hadn’t succeeded on two fronts: firstly to clarify the connection between popular religious beliefs and witchcraft and secondly to identify pan-continental witchcraft trends. What becomes devilishly clear is that there is a tacit acceptance from Garrett that his article needed expanding upon.0 likes -
Rheinheimer, Martin, 'The belief in werewolves and the extermination of real wolves in Schleswig-Holstein', Scandinavian Journal of History, 20 (1995), pp. 281-294.
Rheinheimer's article is an attempt to explain the viciousness with which certain parts of Scandinavia, particularly Denmark's Schleswig-Holstein, dealt with wolves up until the 18th century. He goes about this by putting forth numerous reasons as to why wolves were especially persecuted, citing chiefly deep rooted associations with magic and werewolves. He says that the contempt for wolves among Schleswig-Holstein's population went beyond most other places; wolves were caught and then hanged on gallows, similar to what they might do to human criminals.
The reasons put forward by Rheinhimer for the harsh treatment of wolves are quite numerous. One such reason is that peasants saw attacks made by wolves as an excuse to petition for lower taxes. They thought that if their lords saw the trouble that the wolves were brining, which mainly consisted of cattle and horses dying, then taxes would be lowered in order to help cover any losses. Rheinhimer backs up this claim with an attachment to a list sent from the borough of Hutten to the local Duke detailing the total cost created by attacks from wolves. The list includes an appeal to the Duke for tax relief.
Another reason for the hostilities shown towards wolves is that it would increase the superiority of the elite. Rheinhimer argues that by organizing wolf hunts, local lords are able to exercise and increasing their power over peasants and ordinary people. This idea is not fully developed in the article, especially since Rheinhimer later mentions that many often shirked their wolf hunting duties.
Rheinhimer states that a hatred for wolves was also brought out by their relationship with death. He links attitudes towards wolves with spirits of the dead and demons as well as associations with criminality. He also argues that wolf hunts were often used as scapegoats due to their close relationship with death and evil. The hunting of wolves could serve to allay other fears, namely war and disease. Rheinhimer notes that wolf hunts in Schleswig-Holstein were particularly active around the Thirty Years War.
Similarly, Reinhimer states that a lot of the association with death and evil was born out of a strong belief in werewolves, magic and witches. Despite a sharp decline in the belief of the supernatural by the 18th century, inhabitants of Schleswig-Holstein had held the belief that humans could transform into wolves with the help of demons or magic. This idea was born out of the belief that witches could transform. The negative and evil connotations surrounding witches served to increase hostility to werewolves, and by extension wolves. The aforementioned practice of hanging wolves was born out of the belief that hanging helped abate magical powers, especially the influence of demons or possession by dead souls. Rheinhimer is able to adequately support this idea through the example of the mayor of Ansbach; shortly after the mayor's death, the townspeople of Ansbach believed he had possessed a wolf that had caused some attacks. Reinhimer also shows the abundance of such views by citing instances of people admitting to being werewolves, though acknowledges that these were almost certainly done under torture. He also notes that the belief in werewolves being caused by magic was eventually replaced by the more rational idea that it was caused by a disease. Although beliefs in werewolves declined greatly, the mythos surrounding them served to further people's negative associations with wolves, especially due to their connection with death.
Reinhimer's article does not tell us a great deal about how werewolves were treated by the people of Schleswig-Holstein, and by extension, the rest of Scandinavia. Although there is some mention of what people thought of werewolves, and to a lesser extent witches as well, the main focus of the article is taken up to explain what people thought of wolves not werewolves. It does, however, give us a greater understanding of the wider effect that views of werewolves may have caused.
For the most part the argument put forward is sound. Reinhimer reasons for high hostility to wolves are explained thoroughly and are well backed up with the one exception being the idea that the elite gained substantially from wolf hunts and encouraged them. Reinhimer also places a fear of wolves into a more modern context, showing that many of the attitudes towards wolves displayed by the people of early modern Schleswig-Holstein are sill around today through the account of some wolves escaping from a zoo.
For the most part, Reinhimer's use of sources is good. He provides examples of the sort of events that he mentions in his article, such as the list of dead livestock containing a plea to lower taxes, an account of a man put on trial for being a werewolf and the reactions of the town of Ansbach to the belief that their mayor had come back as a werewolf. His references also appear to be fairly comprehensive and varied.0 likes