WITCHCRAFT STUDIES,1959-1971:

A BIBLIOGRAPHICAL SURVEY

By DONALD NUGENT

Popular fascination with a subject as exotic as witchcraft is more or less

perennial, which may be the reason the subject has somehow been considered off
limits to scholars, at least to historical scholars.1 This is rather strange inasmuch
as the witch trials of the Age of the Reformation may have claimed more lives
than the more conventional heresy cases. Recently this “conspiracy of silence”
has broken down. In 1969, for example, a very traditional American Historical
Association sponsored a panel on witchcraft at its annual convention. There
scholars, including nuns, witnessed an engaging debate on the new interpretations,
including rare talk of such things as the osculum infame-kissing the devil’s pos-
terior. That was only symptomatic of the complete legitimization of a subject
upon which there has recently been a great deal of literature-both scholarly and
popular-and this is an effort to bring that literature together.
There is no occult significance to the beginning date of our study-1959-
whereby this becomes a survey of thirteen years. This was the year of the publi-
cation of Rossell Hope Robbins, The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology
(Crown, 1959).2 Robbins’ point of view was essentially that of the past-nine-
teenth century rationalism which refused to take witchcraft seriously-but his
work is still valuable. The important point is that he concluded with a colossal
bibliography of 1,140 items that obviates going beyond 1959. It would be pro-
hibitive for the author to consider every work published since that time. For
this reason the scholar will want to use this essay in conjunction with two other
 WITCHCRAFT STUDIES, 1959-1971 711183
bibliographies. First, there is H. C. Erik Midelfort, “Recent Witch Hunting Re-
search, or Where Do We Go from Here?” Papers of the Bibliographical Society
ofAmerica, LXII (1968) 373-420, which lists 509 items, almost all published
since 1940. Secondly, there is the formidable study of Robert Mandrou,
Magistrats e t sorciers en France au XVIIe sikcle (Paris: Plon, 1968), which lists
515 items, including 87 sources.
The uniqueness of the present work is probably three-fold. First, though
not done in catalogue form, it is an annotated survey which, apart from a few
exceptions which avoid repetition, provide critical comments or elucidation of
the works under consideration. It should be pointed out, however, that Midel-
fort’s admirable bibliography is prefaced with a knowledgeable bibliographical
essay. Secondly, the present work purports to cover the entire Western experi-
ence of witchcraft, from Antiquity to the contemporary, whereas the others
were concerned with the “classic” period that extends from somewhere in the
Middle Ages until Early Modern times. Finally, the author has the advantage of
addressing himself t o some important literature published since Midelfort and
Mandrou went to press. This will include some items to be published in 1972,
after the time of this writing. Where possible, this author will cite paperback
editions. It goes without saying that in a work of such scope the author will
almost inevitably and inadvertently miss an original study or two, t o which
authors he herewith expresses his regrets and apologies.
This survey centers upon the historical studies, though it cannot avoid
some incidental treatment of such related fields as anthropology, theology and
psychopathology. The concern is witchcraft, one species of the occult, and not,
as such, magic, mysticism, theosophy, and other related fields of the occult.
Fiction and studies of fiction are excluded. Some periodical literature is included,
but periodicals such as Folklore, Fate, Pentagram, Beyond and Ambix are ex-
cluded as prohibitive. Midelfort will refer the reader t o the recent pertinent
literature in Folklore. Moreover, the interested reader can consult Martin Marty,
“The Occult Establishment,” Social Research, XXXVII (Summer, 1970), 212-
230 with great profit. His is a survey of recent literature in more than a dozen
occult periodicals, though organized under a different frame of reference.
The author does not intend to argue particular causes. He recognizes that
for many reasons-the value-charged nature of the sources, the fact that many
of them were extracted under duress and still many of them destroyed-there
is less consensus in the area of witchcraft than in most others. He would rather
not attempt to define witchcraft at this juncture, simply accepting the working
arrangement of a distinction between black and white witchcraft, with the for-
mer being “diabolic,” as even the late Gerald Gardner would allow.
Insofar as is possible, the corpus of literature will be allowed to speak for
itself. I believe this literature points to various trends. First, there is obviously
a quantitative increase of this literature, both scholarly and popular, over the
last decade. Secondly, there is a more scientific approach to the subject, both
in the ecumenic sense of openness, including openness to synthetic and inter-
disciplinary studies, as well as in the more confining sense of quantification.
Thirdly, the new openness has led the great majority of scholars to conclude
 712184 JOURNAL OF POPULAR CULTURE
that historic witchcraft had at least a hard core of realitv to it. The older
rationalist attitude that could dismiss witchcraft as mere delusion has been
effectively overturned. Fourthly and finally, it is almost universally agreed now
that witchcraft was not a peculiarly Medieval thing. The great ages of witch-
craft were those of the Renaissance and Reformation, especially the latter. This
hardly means that the disintegration of Medieval civilization was unrelated.
The primary organization of what follows will be historical. Three main
periods are stressed: Antiquity, the Renaissance (used here in the broad sense
of an age of transition between the Middle Ages and Modern times, approxi-
mately 1350-1650), and the contemporary. The accent naturally gravitates
towards the second of these, the “classic” period. Inasmuch as scholars are
generally disinclined by training and temperament to address themselves to the
contemporary, the more popular works will correspondingly be brought in
towards the end of the survey. There will be a concluding review on medicine
and psychopathology, and we can begin with some preliminary comments on
broad theory.
Here fundamentals inevitably lead us to some mention of anthropology.
One of the most important works of the last decade was undoubtedly that of
Claude Ldvi-Strauss, The Savage Mind,.trans. from the French (University of
Chicago Press, 1966), a technical book that seeks “to legitimize the principles
of savage thought.” The jnterested scholar will want to follow this up with the
entire issue of Annales: Economies, Socie‘&, Civihations of May-August, 1971,
which takes up current problems in anthropology, mythology, sexuality and
alchemy. This special issue features a lead article by L6vi-Strauss, “Le Temps
du Mythe,” 533-540 and “Mythe et histoire: REflexions sur les fondements de
la pens’ee sauvage” by Maurice Godelier, which registers some dissent. Certainly
the shaman can be considered at least a logical antecedent of the witch. Here
one should see the beautifully bound and magnificently illustrated work of
Andreas Lommel, Shamanism: The Beginnings of Art, trans. Michael Bullock
(McGraw-Hill, 1967). Lommel, drawing primarily upon German scholarship,
supports Lbi-Strauss in arguing that a “primitive” society could not produce
such a complex personality as the shaman. The general trend towards the re-
habilitation of the primitive is reinforced by the authority of Mircea Eliade,
Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy trans. by Willard R. Trask (rev. ed.,
Pantheon, 1964). More pertinent are the anthropological studies related directly
to European witchcraft. Geoffrey Parrinder, Witchcraft: European and African
(London: Faber & Faber, 1963) is a readable comparativist study. Parrinder
scouts the popularizers who connect European and African witchcraft and argues
convincingly the want of proof that Africa is the matrix. At the same time, he
brings out some striking analogies between the two varieties. Lucy Mair, Witch-
craft (world University Library, 1969), though concerned with African witch-
craft, relates her work specifically to that of A. J. D. Macfarlane, Witchcraft in
Tudor and Stuart Enghnd (Harper Torchbooks, 1970). Both stress witchcraft
as a primitive explanation of misfortune. This view, which goes back at least to
E.E. Evans-Pritchard, is elaborated upon in a Festschrift in his honor edited by
Mary Douglas, Witchcraft Confessions and Accusations (London: Tavistock,
 WITCHCRAFT STUDIES, 1959-1971 713185
1970). This, along with Witchcraft and Sorcery: Selected Readings, ed. Max
Marwick (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1970), reveals the unfolding anthropologist-
historian dialogue. In the introduction to the former, the editor, Professor Doug-
las, formulates the rule as follows: “Where social interaction is intense and ill-
defined, there we may expect to find witchcraft beliefs. Where human relations
are sparse and diffuse, or where roles are fully ascribed, we would not expect t o
find witchcraft beliefs.” Two caveats may be in order. First, in an area as large
and differentiated as Europe, we are likely to find both conditions together.
Secondly, as Douglas points out, anthropologists generally approach witchcraft
from the “point of view of the accuser, always assuming that the accusation is
false.” Of course, anthropologists enjoy no monopoly on this assumption.
With Antiquity we can begin t o review works that are more historical in
nature and more intimately related to witchcraft. A good starting point for gen-
eral orientation is the superb second edition of The Oxford Classical Dictionary,
ed. N. G. L. Hammond and H. H. Scullard (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970). The
standard work on the Mysteries, which have been seen as forerunners of European
witchcraft, is George E. Mylonas, Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries (1961;
Princeton University Press, 1969). Ancient alchemy, like the Mysteries, relates
as a part of the matrix of Western witchcraft. Jack Lindsay, The Origins of Al-
chemy in Graeco-Roman Egypt (London: Frederick Muller, 1970) is a valuable
general account, though too highly condensed and perhaps too credulous. He
happily shows how alchemy relates t o the larger attempts to reccver the secrets
of nature, not excluding drugs, and speaks of the “Poppyland” of Minoan cul-
ture. Mircea Eliade, The Forge and the Crucible: The Origins and Structure of
Alchemy, trans. Stephen Corrin (Harpers, 1962; Harper Torchbooks, 1971), is a
brilliant comparativist study of the sexualized world of the alchemist.
The notion that medicine was long in disengaging itself from magic and
sorcery is attested by the erudite but readable and beautifully illustrated study
of John Scarborough, Roman Medicine (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1969).
Scarborough treats the background of this “magico-medical” tradition. The
general rule was expressed by Ulpian: “those who chant, or those who expel
evil spirits, should not be thought of as physicians.” Scarborough’s article,
“Gnosticism, Drugs, and Alchemy in late Roman Egypt,” which traces points of
contact between Gnosticism and alchemy and which is replete in bibliography,
will be published in Pharmacy in History, XI11 or XIV,in late 1971 or early 1972.
The later Roman Empire saw an increase of the irrational in society.
John Ferguson, The Religions of the Roman Empire (Ithaca: Cornell University
Press, 1970), is a general study but, unfortunately, shows insufficient recognition
of the role of witchcraft in Roman popular religion. Ferguson should be supple-
mented by Ramsay MacMdlen, Enemies of the Roman Order: Treason, Unrest
and Alienation in the Empire (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967).
Some of these themes are elaborated upon by E. R. Dodds, Pagan and Christian
in an Age of Anxiety: Some Aspects of Religious Experience from Marcus
Aurelius to Constantine (Cambridge University Press, 1965; Norton Library,
1970). This study is not and probably could not be as provocative as the author’s
earlier and monumental The Greeks and the Irrational (195 1 ; Berkeley and Los
 714186 JOURNAL OF POPULAR CULTURE
Angeles: University of California Press, 1963), but if he made Zeus a sorcerer
in the one he makes St. Paul a Gnostic in the second. On Gnosticism, R. M.
Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianity (New York: Columbia University
Press, 1959), is solid and readable. This can be complemented with Grant’s
“Early Alexandrine Christianity,” Church History XL (June, 1971), 133-144,
which brings together the more recent literature. Geo Widengren, Mani and
Manicheism, trans. Charles Kessler (1961; London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson,
1965), is a learned but readable account of “the last great gnostic,” whose legacy
is seen as primarily in the occult.
It seems to me that Peter Brown, “Sorcery, Demons, and the Rise of
Christianity from Late Antiquity into the Middle Ages,” in the earlier cited col-
lection of Mary Douglas, Witchcraft Confessions and Accusations, is an experi-
ment which does not succeed. Brown takes his lead from the accuser-oriented
studies of anthropology, applies it (or misapplies it) to broad political, social
and religious tensions, and effectively denies the reality of sorcery. For some
recent evidence that the ancients took sorcery seriously, see the new Loeb Class-
ical Library edition of Libanius: Selected Works, ed. and trans. A. F. Norman
(Cambridge:: Harvard University Press, 1969) and especially C. A. Behr, Aelius
Aristides and the Sacred Tales (Chicago: Argonaut, 1967). A. A. Barb, “The
Survival of the Magic Arts,” The Conflict Between Paganism and Christianity in
the Fourth Century, ed. Arnaldo Momigliano (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963),
100-125, is a significant and superb piece of work. Reversing an earlier formula,
he argues that magic derives from degenerate religion. He is basically empirical,
however, in underscoring (1)how the old pagans charged the Christians them-
selves with being magicians, (2) how the emperors preceded churchmen in the
repression of the occult, with the fourth century being akin in this respect to
the Late Middle Ages, and (3) how difficult it can be t o deny the reality of ancient
witchcraft in the face of the hundreds of magic lapidaries that have been un-
earthed and the fact that almost all contemporaries took it seriously. Barb ad-
vances several other insights which can have incidental bearing upon Renaissance
and contemporary witchcraft.
A review of some pertinent studies on Satan and the Bible can take us into
European history proper. Rivkah Schirf Kluger, Satan in the Old Testament,
trans. Hildegard Nagel (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1967), is a
difficult but provocative book. In her work, done from the point of view of
Jungian psychology, she argues that Satan is a development of the divine person-
ality Himself. Norman Cohn, “The Myth of Satan and his Human Servants,” in
the previously cited Witchcraft Confessions and Accusations, ed. Mary Douglas,
brings together the pertinent texts, but seems a little disappointing after his cele-
brated The Pursuit of the Millennium: Revolutionary Messianism in Medieval
and Reformation Europe and Its Bearing on Modern Totalitarian Movements
(rev. and expanded ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 1970). Mircea
Eliade, Mephistopheles and the Androgyne, trans. J. M. Cohen (Sheed and Ward,
1965), reprinted as The Two and the One (Harper Torchbooks, 1969) is a pro-
found analysis of the “coincidence of opposites” across the centuries. Claude
Seignolle has edited a long (902 pp.) collection of folktales about the devil: Les
 WITCHCRAFT STUDIES, 1959-1971 715187
Evangiles du diable selon la croyancepopulaire (Paris: G. P. Maisonneuve et
Larose, 1964). James K d a s , The Satanward View: A Study of Pauline Theol-
ogy (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1966), stresses the demonic in St. Paul.
More important is his learned but quite readable Jesus and the Power of Satan
(Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968). The latter is a bold interpretation of
the New Testament along dualistic lines as a cosmic struggle between good and
evil. Henry Answar Kelley reveals the new concern with evil as a metaphysical
entity. In his The Devil, Demonology and Witchcraft: The Development of
Christian Beliefs in Evil Spirits (Doubleday, 1968), he concludes rather skepti-
cally; he reconsiders his position, however, in “Death of the Devil?” Common-
weal, XCIII (November 6,1970), 146-149. Leon Cristiani, Evidence of Satan
in the Modern World, trans. Cynthia Rowland (Macmillan, 1962) was never
dubious about the devil in the first place, and charts his existence from the
Cure‘ d’Ars to Red China. The reader who would relate secular humanism to
Satanism will be interested in two books that appeared almost simultaneously.
There is Erich Fromm, You Shall Be as Gods: A Radical Interpretation of the
Old Testament and its Tradition (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1966), a provoca-
tive but unconvincing effort to deduce a secular humanism from the Old Testa-
ment and its tradition. The author stops short of the implications of the title.
Kenneth Hamilton, Revolt against Heaven: An Inquiry into Anti-Supernatural-
ism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), is a statement of the “death of God”
movement that could relate to neo-Satanism.
Getting into the Medieval period proper, one finds exactly fifty years
after Margaret Alice Murray’s The Witch-Cult in Western Europe (1 921 ; London:
Oxford University Press, 1962) that there is little learned enthusiasm about her
various theories. William A. Chaney, The Cult of Kingship in Anglo-Saxon
England: The Transition from Paganism to Christianity (Berkeley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press, 1970), would provide no more than
underpinnings for Murray, but his thesis for pagan continuity is not considered
persuasive. Giuseppe Bonomo, Caccia alle strege (Palermo: Palumbo, 1959),
who traces the origins of witchcraft from ancient Rome and carries it forward
to the nineteenth century, does speak of a belief in a ‘‘societh di Diana” in
Italy. The knowledgeable demonologist Eric Maple, author of The Dark World
of Witches (A. S. Barnes, 1962) and The Domain ofDeui2s (A. S . Barnes, 1966),
expressed his reservations. The most systematic and devastating attack upon
Murray is found in Elliott Rose, A Razor for a Goat: A Discussion ofcertain
Problems in the History of Witchcraft and Diabolism (University of Toronto
Press, 1962). Dissent from Murray is also registered in Julio Car0 Baroja, f i e
World of the Witches, trans. 0. N. V. Glendinning (University of Chicago Press,
1964), which may be the most brilliant and best balanced synthesis of the
decade. Baroja carefully and insightfully delineates the evolution of witchcraft
from Antiquity until its demise with the Enlightenment. Baroja, who has made
an extensive study of Basque witchcraft, is inclined to favor that it was a reality.
He also suggests some fascinating associations between Catharism and witchcraft.
The latter is the line of thought of Jeffrey B. Russell, whose Witchcraft in
the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1972) promises to be a major
 716188 JOURNAL OF POPULAR CULTURE
~~ ~ ~~

book. Russell’s book follows the argument of his paper, “Medieval Witchcraft
and Medieval Heresy,” delivered before the American Historical Association in
1969. Russell, who accepts the reality of witchcraft but rejects Murray’s views,
stresses the close links between the Cathari and Antinomian heresies and witch-
craft. Russell finds some support for his thesis in German studies like Theodore
Bkttner and Ernst Werner, Circumcellionem und A d m i t e n (Berlin: Akademie-
Verlag, 1959), Gottfried Koch, Frauenfrage und Ketzertum im Mittelalter (Ber-
lin: Akademie-Verlag, 1962), and Martin Erbstosser and Ernst Werner, Ideolo-
gische Probkme des Mittelalterlichen Plebejertuns (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag,
1960). Heresies o f t h e High Middle Ages, trans. and ed. Walter Wakefield and
Austin P. Evans (Columbia University Press, 1969), is a fine collection of sources
that supports a relationship between heresy and witchcraft. French interest in
such groups as the Cathars and the occult is also considerable. Lucy Delattre,
Les Cathares (Mont de Marsan: Jean-Lacoste, 1966), though not very scholarly,
traces connections to such groups as the Templars. The Templars themselves
will still remain a mystery despite the popular sleuthing of Louis Charpentier,
Les rnyst&es Ternpliers (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1967). Debate on the Cathars,
again, especially their “nihilism,” will be found in Christine Th,ouzellier and
He‘rve Rousseau, “Points de m e sur le Catharisme,” Annales: Economie‘s,
Socie‘t&, Civilisations, XXIV (1969), 128-141. R. Morghen, “Probl‘&messur
l’origine de l’hCrbsie au Moyen Age,” Revue historique, CCXXXVI (1966), 1-16,
brings together the views of such scholars as RenhNelli and, while stressing an
evangelical side of the origins of such groups as the Cathars, stresses their central-
ity and is silent as to their ultimate evolution. Denis de Rougement has not
given us as provocative a book as his Love in the Western World, trans. Mont-
gomery Belgion (Pantheon, 1956), but his Love Declared: Essays on the Myth
of Love, trans. Richard Howard (Pantheon 1963), explores links between Gnosti-
cism and eroticism, the latter being studied into the twentieth century. And
Gerard de Se‘de, Le tre‘sor Cathare (Paris: Julliard, 1967), does argue connections
between the troubadours and the Cathars. In general, there seems to be more
interest in relating Medieval witchcraft to Judeo-Christian and Gnostic heresy
than to paganism.
There is no natural chronological frontier between the Middle Ages and
the Renaissance. Many of the aforesaid works carry over into the Renaissance,
and in this section the effort will be to isolate the works that deal more or less
distinctively with Renaissance (and Reformation). One can start with the im-
portant study of Charles G. Nauert, Agrippa and the Crisis ofRenaissance
Thought (University of Illinois Press, 1965) which points up the typicality of
Agrippa and the direct relationship between skepticism and the occult. Lewis
Spitz, ‘‘Occultism and Despair of Reason in Renaissance Thought,” Journal of
the History ofldeus, XXVII (1966), 464-469, confirms Nauert. Frances A.
Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (University of Chicago Press,
1964), confirms and traces the revival of the occult in the Renaissance. Edgar
Wind, Pagun Mysteries in the Renaissance (rev. ed.; Harmondsworth: Penguin,
1967), explores the darker side of Renaissance Culture from Cusa to Bruno.
Gene A. Brucker, “Sorcery in Early Renaissance Florence,” Studies in the
 WITCHCRAFT STUDIES, 1959-1971 717189
Renaissance, X (1962),7-24, observes the coincidence between the advent of
humanism and the revival of sorcery and, while confirming the reality of Italian
sorcery, accepts the view that it was more an Alpine and Northern European
thing. While not made explicitly pertinent to witchcraft or to this particular
period, Robert Mandrou, “Les femmes dans l’Histoire,” Revue historique,
CCXLII ( 1 9 6 9 ) ,339-346, brings together important literature in this new area
which confirms, among other things, a revolt of women in the sixteenth century,
a very suggestive notion, In this context one can cite Thomas Rogers Forbes.,
The Midwife and the Witch (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966), a col-
lection allowing that not a few were in fact “witch-midwives’’ practicing the
black arts. Beyond Nauert, several biographical studies must be mentioned.
Marcel Bataille has done a popular biography of the notorious Gilles de Rais
(Paris: J’ai Lu, 1968). There is also the Procds de Cilles de Rais, with a long
introduction by Georges Bataille (Pans: J. -J. Pauvert, 1965), confirming the
demonism of Gilles. Valentine Penrose, Erzskbet B i t h o y , la comtesse sanglante
(Paris: Mercure de France, 1969) is a reliable study of “the female Gilles de
Rais,” a model for the Vampire legend, and includes extracts from her trial.
A number of studies address themselves more nearly t o the age of the Re-
formation, generally confirming that this period coincided with the height of
the witch-craze. Norman 0. Brown, Life against Death: The Psychoanalytical
Meaning of History (Vintage, 1959), the controversial neo-Freudian plea for “a
resurrection of the body,” could be treated anywhere in these pages, but chapter
XIV, “The Protestant Era,” relating Luther and the demonic, is probably most
relevant. Brown argues that Luther “peopled” Germany with the devil. H. R.
Trevor-Roper, “Witches and Witchcraft,’’ Encounter, XXXVIII (May-June, 1967),
3-25, 13-34, can also be found in The European Witch-craze of the 16th and 17th
Centuries (Harper Torchbooks, 1969). This is a synthesis which stresses broad
social and sexual tensions and which, despite disclaimers, has the effect of sneak-
ing rationalism in through the back door. Trevor-Roper has already drawn some
fire. Among his critics is E. William Monter, very active in witchcraft scholarship.
Monter’s “Patterns of Witchcraft in the Jura,” scheduled for the December, 1971
issue of the Journal of Social History, promises to be a “demolition” of the
notion of social conflict on anything above.the village level. Monter states that
Julio Caro Baroja will emerge as “the primary hero” in “The Historiography of
European Witchcraft: Progress and Prospects,” due out early in 1972 in the
Journal of Interdisciplinary History. Already published is “Witchcraft in Geneva,
1537-1662,”Journal of Modern History XLIII (June, 1971), 179-204, a critique
of the “black legend” associated with Calvin’s Geneva. Monter stresses, with an
array of scholarship, that Calvinism was no monolith and that there was no
peculiarly Calvinist theory of witchcraft. Monter’s book of readings, European
Witchcraft (New York: Wiley, 1969),is a valuable collection cogtaining, for ex-
ample, translations of the better part of two essays by the great Etienne Delcambre.
Finally, Monter has provided a review essay of Robert Mandrou and Trevor-Roper,
earlier cited, and Carlo Ginzburg’s fine I beneandanti: Ricerche sulla stregoneria
e sui culti agrari tra Cinquecento e Seicento (Turin: Einaudi, 1966), an ancient
fertility cult radicalized into witchcraft, in “Trois Historiens Actuels de la Sorcel-
71 8/90 JOURNAL OF POPULAR CULTURE
lerie,” Biblioth2que d’humunisme et renaissance, XXXI (1969), 205-213.
Studies on the major countries can now be considered. Germany was, of
course, a hot-bed of witchcraft. Karl Baschwitz, Hexen und Hexenprozesse
(Munich: Kitten & Loening, 1963), breaks with the old skeptical rationalism
of the school of Joseph Hansen, and has provided a fresh and stimulating con-
tribution along psychological lines. Wolfgang Kriimer, Kurtrierische Hexen-
prozesse im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert (Munich: Scharl, 1959), studies cases in
the Palatinate, 1570-1661, and corroborates the old notion of Nikolaus Paulus,
Hexenwahn und Hexenprozess wornehmlich im 16. Juhrhundert (Freiburg:
Herder, 1910), that Protestants and Catholics emulated each other in the per-
secution of the accused witches. The publication of synthetic studies in Ger-
many has been arrested by the old fixation upon Ideengeschichte. That is
another reason to welcome H. C. Erik Midelfort’s volume, The Social and In-
tellectual Foundations of Witch Hunting in Southwestern Germany, 1562-1684,
to be published by Stanford University Press in 1972. Midelfort was a panelist
at the convention of the American Historical Association in 1969, and his paper
“Witchcraft and Religion in Sixteenth-Century Germany: The Formation and
Consequences of an Orthodoxy,” will be published in the December, 1971 issue
of the Archiw f i r Reformationsgeschichte. He argues principally that witch-
craft dogma was flexible until the end of the sixteenth century when its solidi-
fication among Catholics led them to greater severity and that a major reason
for the end of the witch-craze was the acknowledged difficulty of determining
exactly who might be a witch. Hence, the decline in prosecution preceded the
decline in belief. Midelfort belongs to the insurgent anti-rationalist school of
historiography.
The role of the Puritans has been a major question in English studies. R.
Trevor Davies, in Four Centuries of Witch Beliefs (London: Methuen, 1947),
earlier attributed much of the persecution to Puritan rigor; this view finds in-
direct support in Scotland with Ronald Seth, In the Name of the Devil (Walker,
1969), case studies of some dozen witches. And D. P. Walker, The Decline of
Hell: Sewen teenth-Century Discussions of Eternal Torment (University of
Chicago Press, 1964), develops how extensively “predestinationists” were even
accused of worshipping the devil. This line of thought has not been followed
up, and the trend has been to question a correlation between Puritanism and
the witch-craze. For example, John L. T e d , “Witchcraft and Calvinism in
Elizabethan England: Divine Power and Human Agency,” Journal of the History
ofIdeas, XXIII (1962), 21-36, stresses that the attribution of power to Satan
would have been an affront to the Calvinist doctrine of the majesty of God, an
argument that seems too deductive. James Hitchcock, “George Gifford and
Puritan Witch Beliefs,” Archiw f$r Reformationsgeschichte, LVIII (1967), 90-99,
is ambivalent.
England has produced two major and original studies of witchcraft within
the last year, neither supporting a significant relationship between Puritanism
and the witch-craze, which began in England during Elizabeth’s reign. First, there
is Macfarlane’s Witchcraft in Tudor and Stuart England, previously mentioned,
a fine scientific study based primarily upon extensive archival research in Essex
 WITCHCRAFT STUDIES, 1959-1971 719/91
County, but with conclusions for England more broadly. The author accepts
the reality of witchcraft though he is, like the anthropologists, accuser oriented.
Macfarlane sees little correlation with insanity or Puritanism, stressing personal
tensions and misfortunes. The author has drawn up interesting and instructive
statistics, but the limited terrain thoroughly researched and the peculiarities of
English witchcraft advise restraint in general applications. Macfarlane’s work is
associated with that of Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline ofMagic (Charles
Scribner’s Sons, 1971). A learned, synthetic and formidable (716 pp.) study, his
primary argument is that, with the Reformation, a more spiritualized religion
succeeded the “church magic” (he is ambiguous as to whether this was official
theology or a popular superstition) of the Middle Ages. Yet Thomas acknowl-
edges the increase of witchcraft after the Reformation. The explanation is in a
secondary argument: the Reformation stripped away the “protective ecclesi-
astical magic” which had earlier kept sorcery at bay. That is, Protestants stressed
the devil but apparently gave the people insufficient protection against his
snares. I am not sure that these two arguments are properly integrated, but the
author seems to be implying the eitherlor of a white magic of the Middle Ages
or the black magic of the Reformation. Thomas’ approach to the Puritans is not
systematic and not entirely convincing. For example, he argues that there was
no orgy of witch hunts during the Cromwellian interlude, yet he himself points
out elsewhere that prosecutions declined a generation earlier. Despite any short-
comings, the author is generally judicious and his may be the greatest study of
English witchcraft published in this century. Several other English studies can
be mentioned. K. M. Brigs, Pale Hecate’s Team: An Examination of the Beliefs
on Witchcraft and Magic among Shakespeare’s Con temporaries and his Immed-
iate Successors (Humanities Press, 1962), is a scholarly study that continues the
break with Murray’s theories. Edgar Peel and Pat Southern, The Trials of the
Lancashire Witches: A Study of Seventeenth Century Witchcraft (Taplinger,
1969), is popular, rehabilitating and occasionally naive.
A leading French concern has been t o study the role and impact of the
judges in the witch trials. Jean Vartier, Sabbat juges e t sorciers: Quatre sickles
de superstition duns la France de 1’Est (Paris: Hachette, 1968), however, is not
a very systematic or critical study. This rationalist work aspires t o challenge
some of the conclusions of Etienne Delcambre, Le concept de la sorcellerie duns
le duche‘de Lorraine au XVIe et XVIIe si&le, 3 vols. (Nancy: Socie‘te d’Arch-
e‘ologie Lorraine, 1948-1951) without comparable industry or profundity. While
Vartier seems to be saying that the lay judges of the sixteenth century were
more cruel in fact than the ecclesiastical judges of the fifteenth century, a whole
new line of argument is developed by Robert Mandrou’s massive (583 pp.)
Magistrats e t sorciers en France au X V I P si2cle: Une analyse de psychologie
historique, cited earlier for its bibliography. Mandrou postulates a dichotomy
between the superstitious masses and the intellectual elite whereby the latter, as
particularly represented by lay judges, were the spearhead of a mental revolution
(observe subtitle) that pointed to the Enlightenment. Mandrou, then, has alleg-
edly come upon a key to the modern world. He should be read in conjunction
with Michel de Certeau, “Une Mutation Culturelle et Religieuse: Les Magistrats
720192 JOURNAL OF POPULAR CULTURE
devant les Sorciers du XVIIe SiCcle,” Revue d’histoire de I%glise de France
(1969), 300-319. Though Certeau has high regard for Mandrou’s work, he
argues brilliantly that the decline of the witch-craze is not so much a matter of
lay judges succeeding theologians, as it is th: role of science which cuts across
both. Georges Mongr’edien, Lkonora Galigai: Un proc& de sorcellerie sous
Louis XI11 (Paris: Hachette, 1968), has the effect of reinforcing Certeau’s case.
Likewise, an important ar5icle of Pierre Chaunu, ‘‘Sur le fin des Sorciers au
XVIIe Si&le,” Annaks: Economies, Soci%, Civilisations (1969), 895-910,
stresses that the more critical mentality of seventeenth century judges was an
expression of a more general mentality which fol1owed;rather than preceded,
new directions in theology. There may be some question, then, as to how much
of Mandrou will stand. There are several recent studies of probably the most
famous French demonologist and lay judge, Jean Bodin, who is, of course,
anterior to any mental revolution. E. William Monter, in “Inflation and Witch-
craft: The Case of Jean Bodin,” Action and Conviction in Early Modern Europe,
eds. Theodore K. Rabb and Jerrold E. Seigel (Princeton University Press, 1969),
371-389, argues the consistency of the Bodineana. Ursula Lange, Untersuchungen
zur Bodins Dernononamie (Frankfurt am Main: V. Klostermann, 1970), is the
most recent learned study on the Dernononamie.
Certeau, Mandrou and others have observed that “sorcery” is especially
rural and possession especially urban; the latter becoming particularly conspicu-
ous as we move into the seventeenth century. Here one should mention Certeau’s
own “Ce que Freud fait de !’histoire ff propos de: ‘Une Nivrose Demoniaque au
XVIIe Sikcle,’ ” Annales: Economies, Socie‘t&, Ciuifisations (May-June, 1970),
654-667, a learned critique of Freud’s 1922 study of a demoniac. Still more im-
portant is the splendid small volume of the late Jean Lhermitte, Diabolical Pos-
session: True and Fake, trans. P. J. Hepburn-Scott (London: Burns & Oates,
1963). Lhermitte, whose credentials were impeccable, has given us a general
study with special attention t o cases of seventeenth century demoniacs. Though
he sees these cases as generally demonopathic, he is open in principle to cases of
genuine possession. With reference t o what is perhaps the best known case of
the time, Edmund,Esmonin, “Un ProcSs de Sorcellerie: L’Affaire Urbain
Grandier,” in his Etudes sur la France des XVIIe et XW11e sickles (Pans: Presses
Universitaires de France, 1964), 331-346, argues that there is insufficient evidence
to consider Grandier a victim of Richelieu. It presently appears doubtful that
Esmonin will unseat the older study of Aldous Huxley, The Devils of Loudun
(Harpers, 1952). Black Masses allegedly touched the court of Louis XIV, but
Maurice Rat, La royale Montespan (Paris: Plon, 1959), exonerates the favorite
of the Sun King.
A consideration of the age of the great witch-craze can conclude with
miscellaneous comment on some other countries. Baroja’s fine study has been
followed up with Vidas magias y inquisicion (2 vols., Madrid: Taurus, 1967).
Henry Kamen, The Spanish Inquisition (Mentor, 1968), confirms the more en-
lightened attitude of the Spanish Inquisition on witchcraft. Beyond Bonomo,
Brucker and Ginzburg, a valuable Italian study is Ernest0 de Martino, Sud e
rnagia (Milan: Feltrinelli, 1960), a review of such things as the evil eye in mod-
 WITCHCRAFT STUDIES, 1959-1971 721193
ern southern Italian villages. For Ireland, there is a slim (76 pp.) but reliable
volume by Patrick E. Byrne, Witchcraft in Ireland (Cork: Mercier Press, 1967),
which focuses upon such episodes as those of Dame Alice Kyteler and the
notorious Hellfire Club. On the latter, see Daniel P. Mannix, The Hellfire Club
(Ballantine, 1959), a readable and reliable account. For America, Chadwick
Hansen, Witchcraft at Salem (George Braziller, 1969; Signet, 1970), is a revision-
ist work which concludes that the Salem witches were probably guilty as charged.
John Demos, “Underlying Themes in the Witchcraft of Seventeenth-Century
New England,” American Historical Review, LXXV (June, 1970), 1311-1326,
wants to be skeptical and stresses witchcraft as an outlet for frustrated aggressive
impulses.
The period between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries will be
treated sparingly here. The decline in witch prosecutions preceded the decline
of belief in the supernatural. The shadow of Satan is still quite visible in Henri
Platelle, Les Chrgtiensface au miracle: Lille au X V l l e sikcle (Paris: Cerf, 1968).
The vagaries of insanity are analyzed in Michel Foucault, Folie et Dzraison:
Histoire de lafolie a l ’Zge classique (Paris: Plon, 1961), a brilliant interdiscipli-
nary study that focuses upon seventeenth-century France but extends beyond to
Sade and Nietzsche. Francois Ribadeau Dumas, Les rnugiciens de Dieu (Paris:
Robert Laffont, 1970), is a knowledgeable but popular account of the “grands
illumin5s” from the theosophical mysticism of Jacob Boehme to the demonic
mysticism of the fin-de-sikcle. For the decadents of late romanticism, brief
mention can be made of George Ross Ridge,Joris-Karl Huysrnans (Twayne,
1968), a popular biography that will not replace the older study of Robert
Baldick, The Life of/. -K. Huysmans (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955), with
its treatment of P’ere Boullan. On Aleister Crowley, see The Confessions of
Aleister Crowley, ed. John Symonds and Kenneth Grant (Hill and Wang, 1970;
Bantam, 1971), allegedly dictated to “the Ape of Thoth” while Crowley, what-
ever he was, was under the influence of heroin. Richard Cavendish, The Black
Arts (Putnam’s, 1967; Capricorn 1968), is as good as any survey in print and
contains much on Crowley and his contemporaries.
One of the most arresting areas of recent occult studies is demonic inter-
pretation of Adolf Hider and Nazism. This started as early as 1936 in C. G.
Jung’s essay, “Wotan,” in The Collected Works o f C . G . Jung (Pantheon, 1964),
X, 179-193. For Jung, Wotan was an archetype of the “furor teutonicus.”
Generally speaking, this is highly speculative terrain where academic scholars
have feared t o tread, at least in any comprehensive sense. Exceptions include
Konrad Heiden, Der Fuhrer: Hider’s Rise to Power, trans. Ralph Manheim
(1944; Howard Fertig, 1968). For Heiden, Hider was “the Antichrist,” and
though Heiden provides much support for a demonic interpretation, this is
subordinated to massive scholarship of a more orthodox variety. Learned pop-
ularizers and men of letters are less hesitant, with a host of Frenchmen especially
willing to situate the malign powers in Nazi Germany. Probably the most popu-
lar effort is the fascinating book of Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier, The
Morning ofthe Magicians, trans. Roll0 Myers (Stein and Day, 1963; Avon, 1968).
They take a more Oriental rout than Jung to reach comparable conclusions:
 722194 JOURNAL OF POPULAR CULTURE
Hitler was a demoniac, Nazism the St. Vitus Dance of the twentieth century,
and genocide ritual murder. Inevitably and necessarily, speculation outstrips
documentation, but this does not condone misinterpretation on matters for
which ample documentation exists. For example, the construction put upon
Rudolf Steiner in the Morning of the Magicians should be read in conjunction
with Robert Galbreath, “Traditional and Modern Elements in the Occultism of
Rudolf Steiner,”Joumal ofPopukzr Culture, 111 (1969), 451467. Another
stimulating work is Renk Alleau, Hitler et les socie‘te‘s secr2tes (Paris: Bernard
Grasset, 1969). Alleau, for whom Nazism was ‘‘la gnose raciste,” a mixture of
illuminism and Darwinism, is more empirical than The Morning of the Magicians.
He traces the development of secret cults like the German Order and the Thule
Society, and even provides the membership roll of the latter (pp. 245-258).
Moreover, Alleau has published some stunning plates, like that of the masonic
lodge of Nuremberg. More speculative again is Jean-Michel Angebert, Hider e t
la tradition Cathare (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1971). Preposterous though the
title may seem, the author develops some striking analogies between Hider and
the Cathari, though he again would seem to press his case too far. It should be
pointed out, however, that Friedric‘h Heer, one of the most respectable of in-
tellectual historians, has more than scented a Manichaean ideology in the mind
of Hider. See his Der Glaube des Adolf Hider: Anatomie einer politischen
Religiosidt (Munich: Bechtel Verlag, 1968).
Generally, Germans are understandably wanting in enthusiasm in this
whole area, but Hans-Jochen Gamm, Der Braune Kult: Das Dritte Reich und
seine Ersatz Religion (Hamburg: Rutten & Loening, 1962), sees National
Socialism as an ersatz religion. Ernst Hanfstaengl, Hider: Les annges obscures,
trans. Claude Noel (Paris: TrGvise, 1967), who once knew Hider well, considered
him a demoniac and provides interesting insights. Dr. Hans-Dietrich Kdhrs,
Hiders Krankheit (NeckargemGnd: K. Vowinckel, 1965), develops the thesis
that Hider was driven by the “demonic snare” of drugs, including a mixture
that contained belladonna, incidentally common with Renaissance witches.
Several other works should be mentioned. Ray Petitfr’ere, La mystique
de la croix gamme‘e (Paris: France-Empire, 1962), a book that makes rewarding
reading, generally lets Hider speak for himself. Interestingly, Hider at one point
charged Himmler and Rosenberg to prepare a sort of satanic bible of the Third
Reich. Himmler’s curious interest in Medieval heroes like Henry the Fowler and
in the Bhagavad-gita, which he took to bed with him, can be found in Roger
Manvell and Heinrich Fraenkel, Heinrich Himmler (London: Heinemann, 1965)
and Gerald Reitlinger, f i e ss: Aiibj of a Nation 1922-1945 (Viking 1968). In
sum, congruencies between Nazism and the demonic are striking, and it would
seem more than time for scholars to take this problem seriously.
The contemporary revival of witchcraft, on which the popular literature
is overwhelming, has attracted the attention of some academicians. Theodore
Roszak, The Making of a Counter Culture: Reflections on the Technocratic
Society and its Youthful Opposition (Doubleday, 1969), is excellent for the
larger setting. Roszak presents a fine analysis of the new eroticism, the lure of
the Orient, and the new shamanism. John Charles Cooper, Religion in the Age
 WITCHCRAFT STUDIES, 1959-1971 723195
ofAquarius (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971), is an engaging generd
study that gives proper attention to witchcraft, but inadvertently misrepresents
my own position. The author’s “The Renaissance and/of Witchcraft ,” Church
History, XXXX (March, 1971), 69-78, is an effort to compare and contrast the
nature and origins of Renaissance and contemporary witchcraft. My “The City
of God Revisited,” Cross Currents, XIX (1969), 241-255, attempts maximum
perspective, though I would make it explicit that my comments on witchcraft
are directed towards black witchcraft, or Satanism. Marcello Truzzi, an academic
sociologist, has worked extensively in this area. His “Towards a Sociology of the
Occult: Notes on Modern Witchcraft,’’ a paper that will appear in Pragmatic
Religions: Contemporary Religious Movements in America, eds. I. I Zaretsky
and M. P. Leone (Princeton University Press, 1972), is a commendable intel-
lectual organization of the diverse groups of the new wave of witches. Truzzi’s
“The Occult Revivd as Popular Culture: Some Random Observations on the
Old and the Nouveau Witch,” is another paper t o appear in slightly revised form
in the Sociological Quarterly, scheduled for 1972. Truzzi concludes that the
new wave is more of individuals than covens, more “self-designated” than hered-
itary witches. His bibliographies are extensive.
Of course, the origins of the new wave of witches antecede any talk of a
counter culture and probably go back t o the postwar activities of the late
Gerald Gardner in England. Gardner revealed a characteristic turn of the new
wave: much of the new literature o n witchcraft is written by avowed witches
themselves. Gardner, a rehabilitationist who owed something t o Margaret
Murray, first published the misleadingly titled Witchcraft Today (London:
Rider, 1954; Citadel, 1970) that deals with historic witchcraft, then The Mean-
ing of Witchcraft (London: Aquarian Press, 1959). Gardner’s principd concern
was to distinguish witchcraft from black magic and Satanism, issuing in a defini-
tion that is rather exclusive and narrow. Jack L. Bracelin, Gerald Gardner, Witch
(London: Octogon Press, 1960), is a sympathetic and popular biography. Sybil
Leek, an English witch now resident in America, has an eye for the market place
and has written a spate of books after her popular Diary o f a Witch (Englewood
Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hdl, 1968; Signet Mystic, 1969). Doreen Valiente, Where
Witchcraft Lives (London: Aquarian Press, 1962), is a Gardnerian. Another
English white witch is revealed in the essentially reliable biography of June Johns,
King of the Witches: The World o f A l e x Sanders (London: Peter Davies, 1969).
Sanders, being eclectic, is often held suspect by the Gardnerians.
A number of American witches, no doubt with an eye to both proselytism
and profit, have published books. Raymond Buckland, Ancient 6 Modern Witch-
craft (HC Publishers, 1970) is the work of a Gardnerian and is popular and one-
sided, but still of value. Louise Huebner, Power through Witchcraft (Los Angeles:
Nash, 1969; Bantam, 1971), is strictly commercial. Leo L. Martello, Weird Ways
of Witchcraft (HC Publishers, 1969), is a rambling book, apparently done by an
insider. Anton Szandor LaVey emerges as the foremost apostle of Satanism in
The Satanic Bible (Avon, 1969), an uninhibited transvaluation of values, succeeded
by The CompZeat Witch (Dodd, Mead, 1971).
It would be prohibitive to treat all of the popular studies on the new witches.
 724196 JOURNAL. OF POPULAR CULTURE
Robert Graves, “Witches in 1964,” Virginia Quarterly Review, XL (1964), 550-
559, provides interesting comment on Gardner. Veronica Thomas, “The Witches
of 1966,” Atlantic Monthly, CCXVIII (September, 1966), 119-125, can be a-
corrective to Gardnerian exclusivism. Jdian Franklyn, Death b y Enchantment:
An Examination of Ancient and Modern Witchcraft (London: Hamish Hamil-
ton, 1971), is up to date and is out to score some points on the Gardnerians.
C. H. Wallace, Witchcraft in the World Today (Award Books, 1967), has a taste
for theory but is casual with statistics. Susy Smith, Today’s Witches (Englewood
Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970), is a chatty book based on interviews with or
observations of American witches. Susan Roberts, Witches, U.S . A . (Dell, 1971),
surveys the whole American scene. Martin Ebon, ed., Witchcraft Today (Signet
Mystic, 1971), is a useful collection of case studies. Brad Steiger, Sex and Satan-
ism (Ace, 1969), is sensational as it moves back and forth through history. Hans
Holzer, The Truth about Witchcraft (Doubleday, 1969), is of the rehabilitation-
ist school. Justine Glass, Witchcraft: The Sixth Sense (1965; No. Hollywood:
Wilshire, 1970), is mistitled, for her key psychics could not generally be con-
sidered witches. Georges J. Demaix, Les esclaves du diable (Paris, 1970), reveals
incidental French interest in the English-speaking world.
California is perhaps the most conspicuous focus of Western witchcraft
today. This was the point of the rather sensational articles in Esquire, LXXIII
(March, 1970), authored by Craig Karpel, Gay Tdese, Tom Burke and William
Kloman. Nevertheless, there is a solid and rather detached study by Arthur
Lyons, Jr., The Second Coming Satanism in America (Dodd, Mead, 1970),
which reaches its climax with an acute analysis of the Church of Satan. This
very knowledgeable author has broad contacts and has based his study on ex-
tensive field work. Jonathan Eisen, Altamont: Death of Innocence in the Wood-
stock Nation (Avon, 1970), raises the spectre of diabolicism in “the Wood-
stock Nation.” George Bishop, Witness to Evil (Los Angeles: Nash, 1971), re-
lates the spectacular TatelLa Bianca murders and provides incidental indication
of Charles Manson’s association with the occult. Arthur Lyons, Jr. informs me
that Ed Sanders has produced a significant study on “the Manson family”
to be published by Dutton shortly, part of which will appear in Esquire (Novem-
ber, 1971). This enormous body of literature on contemporary witchcraft
should compel scholars to take a fresh look at the historic subject.
Before concluding this long bibliographical odyssey from Egypt to Cali-
fornia, something should be said about attitudes in psychiatric studies, them-
selves rather indicative of larger trends. An older view rather too facilely equated
witchcraft and mental disease, an attitude still forwarded by Ilza Veith, Hysteria:
The History o f a Disease (University of Chicago Press, 1965) and in R. E. L.
Masters, Eros and Evil: The Sexual Psychopathology of Witchcraft (Matrix
House, 1966). A number of articles by George Rosen point up the need for a
more critical and contextual definition of insanity. See his “Psychopathology
in the Social Process: A Study of the Persecution of Witches in Europe as a
Contributiorl to the Understanding of Mass Delusions and Psychic Epidemics,”
Journal of Health and Hurnun Behavior, I (1960), 200-21 1; and “Dance Frenzies,
Demonic Possession, Revival Movements and Similar so-called Psychic Epidemics:
 WITCHCRAFT STUDIES, 1959-1971 725197
An Interpretation,” Bulletin o f the History ofMedicine, XXXVI (1962), 13-
44. Bernard Barnett, in a brilliant article,-“Witchcraft, Psychopatholo& and
Hallucination,’’ British Journaf of Psychiatry, CXI (1965), 439-445, argues
that the question was not so much one of insanity as of drugs, incidentally sug-
gesting a whole new approach that would bring out much logical continuity in
the history of witchcraft. Now it is psychiatry that may be on the defensive.
In, as it were, the revenge of the occult upon science, Thomas S. Szasz, who
received an award from Scientology, has attacked the fundamental postulates
of psychiatry in The Manufacture of Madness: A Comparative Study of the
Inquisition and the Mentaf Health Movement (Harper and Row, 1970), wherein
the psychiatric establishment emerges as the new inquisition. Szasz is valuable
only as a symbol of the larger fact that witchcraft must be approached on its
own terms. This does not necessarily exclude psychopathology. We can finish
on an ecumenic note. Misogyny has been a significant factor in the genesis of
historic witchcraft. In a valuable synthesis exploring man’s “oscillation be-
tween love and fear” of women, Wolfgang Lederer, The Fear of Women (Har-
court Brace Jovanovich, 1968), calls for an end of the “fertility”-“aggressivity”
division of labor of the sexes. It is time for a truce. It is time for reconciliation.

NOTES
11 would like to thank H. C. Erik Midelfort, Jeffrey Russell, E. William
Monter, John Weakland, and Arthur Lyons, Jr., for their kind communications
which have helped me with this bibliography, and my colleague John Scar-
borou h for his generous assistance on the section on Antiquity.
%lace of publication for all books is New York, unless specifically noted
otherwise and with certain common-sense exceptions. Doubleday books are
published at Garden City, New York.

Donald Nugent is Associate Professor of History at the University of Kentucky,

Lexington, and the author of numerous articles on the Renaissance and Reforma-
tion and modern witchcraft. He is currently working on a book on Satanism.