In February 1526, the Spanish Inquisition issued a witchcraft regulation, which accepted witches and their participation in the Sabbath of Satan as a reality. The regulation recommended repentance rather than death sentence for the condemned and banned confiscation of their property. Thirty-three women were hanged based on Joan Malet’s testimony, and the Spanish Inquisition charged him with making false accusations and burned him at the stake in Barcelona in July 1549.
The persecution of witchcraft in the Iberian peninsula was far more “restrained” than in the northern region. The Spanish Inquisition persecuted mainly Protestants, Conversos (baptized descendants of Jews and Moors), and those who illegally smuggled forbidden books into Spain. The Basque trials had a system of checks and balances, and inquisitors were instructed to inquire whether the maleficent deeds witches confessed to, such as having killed.
Spanish witches were targeted on a smaller scale than the Jews and Muslims living in the regions, but they were nonetheless hunted, questioned, and tortured during the existence of the Spanish Inquisition. However, the Spanish did not hunt and kill witches with the same ferocity as the rest of Europe.
The Basque witch trials of the seventeenth century represent the last attempt at rooting out supposed witchcraft from Navarre by the Spanish Inquisition. One notorious witch hunter of the period, Joan Malet, roamed from village to village, identifying witches on the basis of supposed invisible markings on their bodies. In 1638, she was found guilty of being a witch for a second time.
Witches were burned at the stake, nine million witches died in the years of the witch persecutions, and once a woman was found guilty of being a witch.
📹 Ugly History: The Spanish Inquisition – Kayla Wolf
Dig into the era of the Spanish Inquisition, when the Catholic Church was charged with rooting out and punishing heresy.
What was the most common way of executing those accused of witchcraft?
The Salem Witch Trials of 1692 involved over 200 people accused of practicing witchcraft, with twenty executed, most by hanging. The trial was the only state-sanctioned execution of its kind. Dozens suffered under inhumane conditions, including torture and imprisonment without trials. The tragedy of the trial is largely due to the failure of the court and laws during that time, which made visions, dreams, and spirits’ testimony permissible evidence.
The court accepted flimsy accusations, which would seem laughable today. The trials occurred just as Europe’s “witchcraft craze” from the 14th to 17th centuries was winding down, with an estimated tens of thousands of European witches, mostly women, executed.
Who made witchcraft punishable by death?
During the 16th and 17th centuries, religious tensions in England led to the introduction of severe penalties for witchcraft. Henry VIII’s Witchcraft Act 1541 was the first to define witchcraft as a felony, punishable by death and forfeiture of goods and chattels. It prohibited the use of devise, practice, or exercise of witchcraft, to steal money, treasure, consume, destroy, or provoke people to unlawful love or intent.
The Act also removed the benefit of clergy, which exempted accused from the King’s courts from those convicted of witchcraft. This statute was repealed by Henry’s son, Edward VI, in 1547. The act was a significant step in addressing the issue of witchcraft in England.
How were witches punished in the 17th century?
In 1555, three witches were burned in Derneburg, Germany. In mainland Europe, most convicted witches were hanged or burned to death. In Scotland, all those found guilty of witchcraft were executed, usually by strangling and burning their bodies. This was done to prevent the devil from bringing them back to life or using them for evil magic. Between 1563 and 1727, around 2500 people were found guilty and killed in Scotland.
How were witches punished in the 1500s?
The majority of trials conducted during the witch trials were designed with the objective of securing convictions, which frequently resulted in the imposition of a death sentence. In England, those accused of witchcraft were typically executed by hanging, whereas in other countries, they were subjected to more gruesome forms of capital punishment, including burning at the stake or strangulation. The Cornell Witchcraft Collection contains a wealth of information on the trials, including original depositions from victims.
How were those accused of witchcraft tried?
This resource contains legal documents related to witchcraft trials, where accused individuals were accused, witnesses were called, and confessions were made, sometimes with torture. Those found guilty would be executed. However, not all accusations of witchcraft were believed, as people were suspicious of attempts to pretend to be bewitched or be a witch. For instance, Katherine Malpas’ relatives pretended she was a witch for financial gain. Witchcraft caused fear within society but also became a normal part of life.
Newcomers to a community might be accused of witchcraft due to suspicion from their neighbors, or people might pretend to be bewitched for money. The harvest failed, and people became more suspicious of witchcraft. Witchcraft trials became a platform for grievances and disputes to be discussed, and people stood in testimony for or against their neighbors. Understanding the history of witchcraft reveals more about everyday life for ordinary people in early modern England than the supernatural.
How were people punished during the Spanish Inquisition?
Inquisitors were responsible for a town’s repression of heresy, where citizens were forced to confess to their beliefs. Those who confessed received punishments like pilgrimage or whipping. If they did not, torture and execution were inevitable. Heretics were not allowed to face accusers, received no counsel, and were often victims of false accusations. Bernard Gui, a guidebook for inquisitors, pronounced over 600 people guilty of heresy in the early 14th century. However, there were also numerous abuses of power, such as Count Raymond VII of Toulouse burning heretics at the stake and Count Alphonese confiscating accused lands to increase his wealth.
What was the punishment for witchcraft?
The Old Testament’s Exodus states that “Thou shalt not permit a sorceress to live”, and many faced capital punishment for witchcraft. From 1400 to 1775, around 100, 000 people were prosecuted for witchcraft in Europe and British America, with between 40, 000 and 60, 000 executed, mostly in Europe. Witch-hunts were particularly severe in parts of the Holy Roman Empire. Prosecutions reached a high point from 1560 to 1630, during the Counter-Reformation and European wars of religion.
During the medieval era, mainstream Christian doctrine denied the belief in witches and witchcraft, condemning it as a pagan superstition. Some argue that the work of Dominican Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century helped lay the groundwork for a shift in Christian doctrine, where certain theologians began to accept the possibility of collaboration with devil(s) and obtaining supernatural powers.
Christians were not of the belief that magic in its entirety is demonic, as members of the clergy practiced crafts such as necromancy. However, witchcraft was still assumed as inherently demonic, leading to backlash due to the collective negative image. A branch of the inquisition in southern France was involved in investigating witches.
What were the witch trials of the Spanish Inquisition?
The age of witch trials spanned from 1450 to 1750, involving most of Western Europe. In Germany, 75% of all witchcraft trials took place, with 480 occurring in Southwestern Germany. These trials were central due to the lack of centralized leadership and control over a region’s governing body, allowing a prince or bishop to burn as many people as they saw fit.
The Basque trials, which lasted from 1609 to 1614, were part of the Periphery and had several factors that differentiated them from central trials. The number of deaths, involvement of the Inquisition, child witches, and skeptics were some of the factors that differentiated them from central trials.
Over 7, 000 witches were accused during the Basque trials, but only eleven were executed, five burned in effigy, and six burned alive. The largest group of accused was children, while adult men and women were accused almost equally. The Edict of Grace likely led to the large number of people being accused, but most people escaped with little punishment.
The Spanish Inquisition had sole jurisdiction over cases of superstition, including witchcraft, which allowed the Basque trials to maintain control and prevent any one figure from gaining too much power. Skeptics like Inquisitor Salazar and Bishop Figueroa pointed out the flaws in the Basque accusations, such as Bishop Figueroa’s belief in the Malleus Maleficarum and Inquisitor Salazar’s inconclusive results.
The concept of the witch in the Spanish Basque Provinces was similar to the witch concept in the central trials, but the Basque trials differed from the Central trials due to the trials themselves and how they were handled.
Who was the most brutal inquisitor?
The grand inquisitor was the head of the Inquisition in Spain, with ecclesiastical jurisdiction from the Vatican. He was assisted by a council of five members and consultors, who filled all offices by agreement between the government and the grand inquisitor. The council, especially after Philip II’s reign, put more control of the institution into the hands of the civil power. After Clement VII’s papacy, priests and bishops were sometimes judged by the Inquisition.
The first grand inquisitor in Spain was Tomás de Torquemada, who became synonymous with brutality and fanaticism associated with the Inquisition. Torquemada used torture and confiscation to terrorize his victims, and his methods were the product of a time when judicial procedure was cruel by design. The sentencing of the accused took place at the auto-da-fé, an elaborate public expression of the Inquisition’s power. The number of burnings at the stake during Torquemada’s tenure is generally estimated to be about 2, 000.
Ferdinand and Isabella issued an edict on March 31, 1492, giving Spanish Jews the choice of exile or baptism, leading to over 160, 000 Jews being expelled from Spain. Francisco, Cardinal Jiménez de Cisneros, promoted the suppression of Muslims with the same zeal that Torquemada had directed at Jews. In 1502, he ordered the proscription of Islam in Granada, the last Muslim kingdom in Spain to fall to the Reconquista.
The Inquisition then devoted its attention to the Moriscos, Spanish Muslims who had previously accepted baptism. Expressions of Morisco culture were forbidden by Philip II in 1566, and within three years, persecution by the Inquisition gave way to open warfare between the Moriscos and the Spanish crown. By 1614, around 300, 000 people had been expelled from Spain entirely.
What was the worst witch trial in history?
The Würzburg witch trials of 1625-1631 were one of the largest mass trials and executions in Europe, and one of the largest witch trials in history. The trials took place in the self-governing Catholic Prince-Bishopric of Würzburg, present-day Germany, during the Thirty Years War between Protestants and Catholics. The trials resulted in the execution of hundreds of people, including women, children, and men, who were burned at the stake, sometimes after being beheaded or alive.
The trials were conducted by a Catholic Prince Bishop who aimed to introduce the Counter-Reformation in his territory. The trials were one of the four largest witch trials in Germany, along with the Trier witch trials, Fulda witch trials, and Bamberg witch trials.
What was the difference between the witch trials and the Inquisition?
Witch trials were frequently conducted by secular authorities, thereby reducing the threat of witchcraft to a lesser degree. The Inquisition, on the other hand, was a response to the necessity of an ecclesiastical force to prosecute heresy.
📹 How Bad was the Spanish Inquisition? (Short Animated Documentary)
The Spanish Inquisition, to put it mildly, has a bad reputation. It’s known for its brutality and repression but just how true is the …
Not sure how you can talk about the Inquisition and not mention that the Moors conquered and forcibly ruled over Spain for 800 years (yes, eight hundred!) right before this, and that the Reconquista that led to this event was in direct response to that Muslim invasion. I never understood the “no one expects” joke because it was an inevitability.
Plus, persecution of witchcraft was banned in 1604 after the only major witchcraft trial held in Spain in Zugarramundi (near the French border, not a coincidence), torture was practised only through three methods that could never draw blood, mutilate or permanently damage the individual, the accused could not be tortured for periods of more than 1 hour and 15 minutes, and confessions uttered via torture had to be confirmed. In the Americas, only Spanish people were held accountable to the inquisition, leading to people bribing authorities to change their status from Spanish or mestizo to Indigenous to avoid being tried and there were numerous cases of prisoners in civil jails blaspheming to be transported to Inquisitorial jails, which were notably more lenient.
Thing about witch hunting was that, while the Church generally didn’t believe witchcraft was real, they still saw it as a sin/crime to attempt to perform witchcraft. Their reasoning was, chanting a spell won’t actually curse someone, but if you chant a spell BELIEVING that it will curse someone, you’re still guilty of ATTEMPTING to do wrong. Like how, if you fire a gun at someone intending to kill them, it’s attempted murder, even if it turns out that (unbeknownst to you) the gun was unloaded, so your victim was never in actual danger.
i remember reading somewhere awhile ago that it was a somewhat common practice in iberia at the time to claim to be possessed when accused of a crime, for it prompted your case to get sent to the inquisition and they were seen as more lenient and less prone to death sentences due to (generally) not being alligned to local nobles/burghers (who might have influence over the common court and screw you if given reason.) If you were catholic, of course.
It’s an interesting note that the spanish inquisition became famous mainly because protestant kingdoms didn’t have an institution with that name. Although they did the same things, they made sure quite successfully that the spaniards were acknowledged as the worst of all. Truth is other kingdoms committed the very same tortures and kills, and in some cases in greater numbers than the spanish institution. Good examples are the baltic crusades carried by Denmark, Sweden and Germany, the cathars massacres in France, the executions of catholics in protestant countries, or the witchhunts Europe-wide based on the german book Malleus Maleficarium.
When you had a trial by the inquisition, it was more likely that you would get a fair trial, considering the times. But if you had a trail by secular authorities, whatever the country, things would be always manipulated against you (manipulated in favour of the one in power). They would torture till the accused confessed although he didn’t commit the thing he was accused of. On the contrary, the inquisition, most of the times, tried to search for the truth of the matter. And no. Joan of Arc wasn’t judged by the inquisition. There were some pro-England corrupt and bought clergy-men involved (but not from the inquisition), and also secular authorities. It was a sham. They needed an excuse for her to be put to death. A political move. No much time later, the inquisition made a revision of the case, and they found out all the brutal irregularities, and they officially declared it was a false trial. And she was canonized (made saint). This was like a few decades later, IIRC. Witch trials were more of a Modern Era thing. And they happened a bit more in northern protestant countries. The problem was printing press. The book Malleus Malleficarum got viral, even when the church officially considered it a bad book (prohibited), but it was too late, printing press made it viral (that was a new phenomenon). So witch trials were condenmed by church authorities, but they happened (not so frequently as people now believe they did) in towns with mass hysteria and small secular authorities who had read the book.
Good article: I’m stunned that there are some people who seriously believe that the Spanish Inquisition burned tens of millions of people (no exaggerating, at least two people I have encountered genuinely believe this). There was a great BBC time watch documentary called “The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition” which gives a true picture of the reality of the Inquisition. Based on their records, it is estimated that 3000 people were executed by the Spanish Inquisition over a 300 year period. Make no mistake, that’s 3000 too many, but to make a near contemporary comparison Henry VIII is estimated to have executed around 10,000 people during his 38 year reign.
Finally someone sheds some truth! I did a history paper on the Spanish inquisition during High school. It was mainly a focus on the social impact of the inquisition but I did mention how they weren’t as bad as people like to think. Big problem is that every time I mention that they aren’t as bad as commonly depicted. I get labeled as a religious extremist.
I remember perusal a television program on the Spanish Inquisition once that made a point about how it wasn’t as bad as everyone seems to think it was. But since the program was aired on a Catholic-specific television station, I wasn’t sure if the website was just trying to whitewash it or not. Thanks for confirming.
History Matters, Thank you very much for putting the Spanish Inquisition into context of it’s time period. Many documentaries that talk about the Spanish Inquisition seem to leave that out, instead comparing the Spanish Inquisition to modern times. Also, little bonus history fact. In the vast majority of cases an inquisitor was not a full time job. In most cases when there was an accusation of heresy, a local priest would be temporarily given the title of inquisitor. After the inquisitor finished the investigation, he would then go back to being a priest.
Read some Rodney Stark on this subject: the tougher authorities were the civil authorities; the Catholic Dominicans frequently were able to avoid imposing the harsher penalties. The civil authorities were concerned about political subversion, while the Church was concerned for the souls of the accused. Two very different objectives, sadly linked together.
Great article that shed some light about the real Inquisition. I would have added some cultural aspects that impacted on today’s Spanish thought and culture. One of the Inquisition’s main responsibilities was the cultural alignment of literature to the Catholic dogma. For instance, those books containing too much fantasy were no favoured by the censorship. During the Middle Ages, it was common finding fantasy books about the Arthuric legends, but from the establishment of the Inquistion onwards, they gradually vanished. The story of Don Quixote reflects the above mentioned fact. Who is the main character interested in bringing don Quixote back to reality? Right, the priest. Was it a metaphor written by Cervantes? Probably he did it unconsciously. What it is uncontestable is that no Spanish author could have ever produced such a fantasy book as Harry Potter. Magical realism surged in the only area where the intervention of the Inquisition on society was testimonial: the West Indies.
I thought I liked this website but after they actually bother to research for this topic, in which everyone just exposes popular folklore without attempting to investigate the truth behind what they say. Now this website is between the few ones that has my attention and in which I expect not to be fooled. So basically thank you for your integrity
Thank you for bursting the bubble of the Black Legend. Yes, it was brutal by modern standards but nowhere as bad as by its time’s, which is how History should be considered altogether. The propaganda labor led by the English, French, Dutch and even Italians, as historian Elvira Roca Varea has published in several books, has exaggerated a reputation out of any proportion and I’m glad people are taking matters into their own hands to educate others better. Thank you!
udicial system: The prisoner did not have to prove his innocence, but the accuser had to prove his guilt, with the accuser being punished with the maximum penalty for his accusation if it was false and clearly self-serving. In addition to the fact that the inquisitorial agents carried out investigations, they did not have the means to today, but they went to the places where the acts were committed, questioned the witnesses and verified or ruled out hypotheses. This way of acting made them very guarantee-oriented and at the same time efficient, which caused them to also be given civil cases, such as violations of the law or murders. In America they hunted those who sold slaves from non-enslavable peoples, in Spain I remember an inquisitorial report where it talks about a miller who used his donkey to murder a client he did not like, if they had not done a methodical investigation, the case would be It would have closed how an accident and how much the donkey would be sacrificed, but they discovered evidence that the miller prepared everything to provoke the murder.
Thomas de Torquemada was the first appointed inquisitor, the Inquisitor General, who presided over the bloodiest time of the Inquisition. In 1491 he produced the rules/guidelines of how to conduct an inquisition. In his twenty years more than 2000 lost their live and hundreds more were tortured. Accused were imprisoned. No trial was conducted. A series of interviews took place with the prisoner returned to their cell afterwards. The family hand no contact. All was secret! This process could go on for weeks or months, with the accused not necessarily knowing what he is accused of. The accused were not allowed witnesses to give testimony on their behalf.
“Philip II” by William Thomas Walsh, 1937 TAN Books. What I know of this subject comes from this book. Mr Walsh received the highest cultural honor of Spain, The Cross of Comendador of the Civil Order of Alfonso the Wise for this work in 1944. Conservative Catholic view largely dismissed today but a real eyeopener for me. All 750 pages. Stuck in Phoenix, AZ for a week some years ago and this fell into my lap. Could not put it down.
Something to be said, in the Spanish America the indigenous peoples were protected by the church and laws, and couldn’t be accused of heresy the same way as Mestizos, mixed indigenous-europeans, and Europeans. The priests were meant to christianize them and were considered subjects of the Crown, so under the Leyes de Indias (“Laws of the Indies”), they had a special status and legal impunity to slavery, and were encouraged to convert by living in the cities and getting the closest to some sort of “modern education” (mostly religious), normally in their native language, by priests. Also, even though the article does estates that “it was worse in other places”, it would have been better to say ‘how’ worse it was in comparation: as an example, in the Kingdoms of the Iberian Peninsula under the Spanish Monarchy, there were roughly 300 people sentenced during the whole duration of the Spanish Inquisition, and more than 5’000 in just the first years in the German Kingdoms of the Holy Roman Empire (I don’t remember the numbers for France, so I won’t comment about that).
I felt like making a Spanish Inquisition joke, but seeing how many there already are, I will instead leave you with the interesting fact that Vermont was not one of the ‘original thirteen colonies’ on the American flag. It actually fought as an independent nation-state and was disputed as New York territory until New York was convinced to drop its claim in 1790. Vermont even minted its own coins and had a post service!
Given how they were first major inquisition to reform in 1614 (confession through torture was not a confession, and even without torture was not evidence enough to pass the verdict, you should use science and verify if “occult objects” are really occult etc.) thanks to Alonso de Salazar Frias which led to practically all inquisitions adopting this reforms and chilling out by second half of the 17th Century, most of it is because they did hunt “heretics” a lot – something which British remembered and it spread through English speaking World. Not many people back then cared about converted Jews and Muslims unfortunately. Heck it took 500 years for Spain to apologize for forcible expulsion of Jews and Muslims. Ironically it was due to what Salazar saw as miscarriage of justice in the witch trial that was allegedly committed in area near the border with France. He objected his own ruling (he was junior inquisitor in panel of 3 IIRC) and was set up to be the appellate Inquisitor – whole case was soon found to be mass hysteria in which around 3000 people confessed willingly to consorting with the devil. He did punish the few ring-leaders to prison sentences – basically for lying. But acquitted like 99.8% of the people. I would have to check the details, but I think that only people that were killed as a result of this trial were those convicted by French inquisition (as I said it was very close to the border) – which back then had it’s worst period when it came to things like witch trials.
Do one on the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions in the Americas, I’m curious! Especially Spain’s colonialization (they had much more Natives to work with) and how they turned Natives into Spanish-speaking Catholics so quickly. I love learning about these people, my last name starts with ‘De-‘ despite being Italian, so I must have Iberian heritage of some form and that’s a great honor, especially since I speak Spanish AND Portuguese!
The science fiction writer Lester Del Rey’s grandfather was a wealthy landowner who was visited by three priests of the Inquisition. He turned to his faithful retainers and said the equivalent of, “Boys, string these varmints up for me, will ya?”, left their corpses hanging and fled the country. When I first heard this story, I thought, “Well, good for him”, but upon reflection, I thought, “Just what was Grandpa Del Rey UP TO that he was willing to leave everything he owned behind that way?”
The Spanish Inquisition lasted nearly 300 years and they executed less than 3500 people. Also, the Moriscos were a huge problem in Spain – “former” Muslims that didn’t leave when the Reconquista was completed. The reason for this lies within the Muslim faith itself – if you’re a Muslim you are allowed to lie about your faith to avoid any negative consequences. This doctrine is called “Taqiyya” and is well established in Islam. The issue is that a LOT of the Muslims who stayed in Spain didn’t sincerely convert – instead continuing to practice their faith while pretending to be Catholic. By the time the Reconquista was completely this had been an issue for decades – Muslims in reconquered areas often converted… then turned around and aided the Moors when they had the chance. There’s a ton of examples of this happening and it’s the biggest reason why the Inquisition was started – to basically be the counter-intelligence arm of the Spanish state to deal with the guerilla tactics of the Moriscos. Also the Inquisition had a WAY lower body count than pretty much any of the other religious movements at the time – however the same impetus that had the English play up the “Black Legend” also hyped up the Inquisition.