Europe's inner demons

The concept of maleficium provides a convenient starting-point; and as a first step we can forestall some possible confusions. Anthropologists working in present-day “primitive” societies have often found it convenient to distinguish between “sorcery” and “witchcraft”. “Sorcery” commonly refers to a technique: the use of substances or objects believed to be imbued with supernatural power, usually to the accompaniment of verbal spells or gestures, with the intention of harming one’s fellows. The source of “witchcraft”, on the other hand, lies not in technique but in the person: the witch is full of destructive power.⁽¹⁾ Now in Europe this distinction was known, but it was not absolute: sorcery and witchcraft overlapped — as indeed they do in many primitive societies today. Sorcery could be practised by any ordinary person, once the technique was mastered — but it could also be practised by a witch. A witch might operate through the use of substances or objects or spells or gestures as well as by the mere deployment of his or her indwelling power. In either case the deed was called by the same Latin name.

Maleficium, which originally meant simply an evil deed or mischief, was used in official documents from the fourth century onwards in the specific sense of “Harm-doing by occult means”; and the usage persisted throughout the Middle Ages. Sorcerer and witch alike were designated by maleficus if male, malefica

if female.

The world of Antiquity knew all about maleficium, and it would be perfectly possible to trace that part of the story back not only to ancient Rome but to Sumer; but fortunately it is unnecessary. For our purpose it is enough that maleficium and accusations of

maleficium are to be found from the establishment of the first Germanic kingdoms onwards. From the sixth century to the thirteenth, laws and chronicles and epic poetry contain scattered references to the matter, most of them quite free from religious overtones. Though the evidence is not abundant, it is sufficient to show how maleficium had been regarded in pagan times, and how it continued to be regarded by many laymen in a Christianized Europe.

Tales of maleficium

figure in the history of the first of the Frankish dynasties, the Merovingians. The historian of the Franks, St Gregory of Tours, tells of a case which had occurred within his own experience. When in 580 Queen Fredegond lost two of her young sons in an epidemic, she was easily persuaded that they were victims of sorcery: her hated stepson Chlodovic must have employed his mistress’s mother to make maleficia against the boys. The woman was arrested and tortured until she confessed. Armed with this confession, Fredegond persuaded her husband, King Chilperic, to abandon Chlodovic to her vengeance; the young man was duly stabbed to death by hired assassins. Meanwhile the alleged sorceress withdrew the confession that had been wrung from her. It made no difference to Fredegond, who had the woman burned alive.

Fredegond’s misfortunes continued, and so did her hunt for sorcerers. In 583 a third son caught dysentery and died. Soon afterwards the mayor of the palace, Mummulus, happened to remark that he possessed a certain herb which could quickly cure even the most hopeless cases of dysentery. The remark was reported to Fredegond, and she set to work at once. This time several women were arrested and tortured until they confessed that the mayor had employed them to kill the young prince by maleficium. Some of the women were burned, others were broken on the wheel; after which the torturers tackled Mummulus himself. Even after he had been repeatedly flogged and splinters had been driven under his nails, he would admit only that the women had supplied him with salves and potions, as a means of securing the good graces of the king and queen. Sent into exile, he died on the journey from the consequences of the torture.⁽²⁾