This page intentionally left blank THE HAMMER OF WITCHES The Malleus Maleficarum, first published in 1486, is the standard medieval text on witchcraft and it remained in print throughout the early modern period Its descriptions of the evil acts of witches and the ways to exterminate them continue to contribute to our knowledge of early modern law, religion and society Mackay’s highly acclaimed translation, based on his extensive research and detailed analysis of the Latin text, is the only complete English version available, and the most reliable Now available in a single volume, this key text is at last accessible to students and scholars of medieval history and literature With detailed explanatory notes and a guide to further reading, this volume offers a unique insight into the fifteenth-century mind and its sense of sin, punishment and retribution C h r i stopher S M ac kay is Professor in the Department of History and Classics at the University of Alberta He is the author of, among many books and articles, Ancient Rome: A Military and Political History (Cambridge University Press, 2005) THE HAMMER OF WITCHES A Complete Translation of the Malleus Maleficarum CHRISTOPHER S MACKAY CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521747875 © Christopher S Mackay 2006, 2009 This publication is in copyright Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press First published in print format 2009 ISBN-13 978-0-511-53982-4 eBook (EBL) ISBN-13 978-0-521-74787-5 paperback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of urls for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate Kelliae meae Coniugi atque adiutrici optimae Contents Maps page viii Introduction Authors Purpose of the work Composition and publication of the work Outline of the work Sources Disputed questions Intellectual context Role of women in sorcery Historical background Overall assessment of the Malleus Suggestions for further reading Notes on the translation (a) Method of making references to the text (b) Sources not from canon law (c) Citations of canon law (d) Outlining of the disputed questions (e) Remarks on certain words in the translation (f ) Difficulties with grammatical gender the hammer of witches ( malleus maleficarum ) vii 12 16 17 19 25 27 31 39 42 42 42 52 55 56 58 59 46°N 4°E N 48°N 0 (Liège) Rhône e Schlettstadt 50 100 200 150 miles 250 km Como 10°E Bormio/ Wormserbad Einsiedeln Lindau Lake Constance ube Isar Et 12°E Brixen Innsbruck Trent Füssen Tachov 14°E Adriatic Sea Regensburg Landshut Freising Augsburg n Da 12°E Southern Germany and surrounding areas 100 150 mm en Berne Mai n Nuremberg Rohrbach Wiesenthal Marburg 10°E Map HES S E Strasburg Freiburg Basel Boltigen Geneva °E SEE DETAIL Lendelbrunn S AVO Y 50 Cologne ell Mo s Aachen Lausanne e ôn Metz Lüttich Sa 86°E Ill 50°N 4°E use Me Si Lech ne Inn Rh i sch 14°E 46°N 48°N 50°N Part III 252B–C 643 to have happened in this same city of Speyer When a respectable person was affected with sorcery in the shins and summoned a female diviner of this kind to regain her health, the diviner entered the house, and after looking at her made such an exception She said, “If you not have scales and hair in the wound, I will be able to pull out everything else.” Although the woman had come from two miles away in the countryside, the diviner also revealed the reason for the harm, saying, “It happened to you because you quarreled with a female neighbor on such-and-such day.” Apart from scales and hair she pulled out a large number of objects of various kinds and restored her to health.522 The fourth is when they make use of superstitious ceremonies or 252C have others so, such as wishing to be visited before sunrise523 or another fixed time, or saying that they cannot heal illnesses older than the last Ember Days524 or that they can heal only two or three people in a year (It seems that they525 heal not by healing but by ceasing to harm.) Very many other considerations concerning the circumstances of such people can be added For the most part, in the past they had an evil and reprehensible way of life or a bad reputation or were adulteresses or the survivors526 of sorceresses, and hence this grace of healing was not granted by God as the result of any holy way of life Incidentally, midwife sorceresses, who surpass all other sorceresses in their crimes, are included here (they were also mentioned in Part One527 of the work).528 Their number is in fact so great, as has been learned from their confessions, that it is thought that there is no village where their kind are not found Clearly, governmental authorities could provide partial relief from this danger by licensing only midwives who 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 For the notion that demonic “remedies” for sorcery actually signify simply that a demon has stopped causing harm, see 154D–155A, 174A, and 254B Cf the pre-dawn practice in 179D See Pt ii n 444 I.e., the demons with whom the supposed healers are co-operating The interpretation of this expression has caused difficulties, but the sense is explained by the notion that sorceresses have to leave behind a daughter as a successor (see 141B) The implication here certainly is that the mother is dead, and may refer to the situation when she has previously been burned alive as a sorceress Q 11 (63C–64C); see also Pt ii, Q 1, Ch 13 (137B–141D) According to the main table of contents (6A), Method 20 of sentencing deals with midwives, but there is no overt indication of a new topic here The (here unlisted) Method 19 seemingly follows in the next paragraph Perhaps the reason why these topics are listed in the inverse order in the table of contents is that the order is determined by the concluding paragraph (254B), where the midwives are mentioned first 644 The Hammer of Witches 252D–253A 252D have taken an oath,529 along with remedies mentioned in Part Two530 of the work Sorcerer archers are another incidental topic.531 The safer the harborers, abettors and defenders whom they have in the lands of noblemen and princes are, the more dangerous is their existence, which clearly insults the Christian Religion That all such harborers, abetters and so on are generally more damnable in certain situations than all the sorceresses is explained as follows The defenders of such people are divided by canonists and theologians into two categories While some defend the error and others defend the individual, the former are more damnable than those who hold the error since they are to be considered not simply heretics but heresiarchs, as is explained in 24, Q 3, “Qui illorum.” The laws generally not speak of such defenders because they are not distinguished from other heretics, but the often cited Chapter “Ad abolendam,” § “Praesenti” is relevant here There are certain others who, while not defending the error, defend the person who holds the error inasmuch as they use their force and power to prevent such sorcerers or any other heretics from falling into the hands of a judge of the Faith for examination and punishment, and commit similar acts Similarly, their abettors fall into two categories.532 There are some 253A who exercise public authority, that is, people in government like temporal lords or spiritual ones who hold temporal jurisdiction,533 and such people can be abettors in two ways, either through omission or commission They so by omission when they omit to things that they are obligated to about sorcerers or those suspected or defamed as 529 530 531 532 533 In effect, midwives would belong to a guild In the Middle Ages, organizations called guilds were set up to regulate the practices within specific specialized crafts, and anyone who wished to practice that craft had to be accepted into the local guild and swear an oath to uphold all guild regulations, which were enforced by officials appointed either by the guild itself or by the municipal government Presumably, it is this sort of regulatory regime and not the oath itself that the author has in mind as a solution to the problem of murderous midwives Presumably this is a general reference to the remedies described in Pt ii, Q 2, since no “remedies” for sorceress midwives are treated there (or in the main discussion of such midwives in Pt ii, Q 1, Ch 13 [137B–141D]) According to the main table of contents (6A), Method Nineteen of sentencing deals with archer sorcerers, enchanters of weapons and any nigromancers, but there is no overt indication of a new topic here This topic is apparently added to the section on male sorcerers because abettors are likewise regularly male, but in the table of contents (6A) there is no mention of this topic at all The distinction is between simple secular lords and ecclesiastical figures who also directly rule their territories, a common phenomenon in the Holy Roman Empire Interestingly, this distinction has been introduced into the source material in Eymeric, who in place of the ecclesiastical rulers specified subordinate officials of the secular lords Part III 253A–C 645 such or believers, harborers, defenders and abettors, though they have been ordered to so by a bishop and inquisitor534 or by one of them For instance, if they not arrest them or carefully guard those who are under arrest, or not take them to the place within their territory to which they have been commanded, or not swiftly execute the sentence passed on them, or the like, as is explained in the beginning of Chapter “Ut inquisitionis” (Liber Sextus, “Heretics”) They so by commission if, for instance, they release people under such arrest without the permission or order of the bishop or the judge responsible for that person, or directly or indirectly hinder the proceedings, passing of judgment or sentence concerning them, or commit similar acts, as is explained in the cited Chapter “Ut inquisitionis,” § “Prohibemus.” The penalties imposed on such people are explained in the previous material 253B at the end of the second principal division535 of the work, where there is a treatment of sorcerer archers and other enchanters of weapons For the present let it suffice to say that all such people are excommunicate by law and incur twelve great penalties, as is explained in the first Chapter “Excommunicamus,” § “Credentes” (Extra, “Heretics”) and the cited Chapter “Ut officium.”536 If they remain in this state of excommunication for a year with an obstinate frame of mind, then they are to be condemned as heretics, as is explained in the same chapter and paragraph cited As for the questions of which people are to be considered harborers and whether they are to be considered as heretics, the response is that those who receive such sorcerer archers or any sort of enchanters of weapons, nigromancers or heretical sorcerers (the people who have been the subject of this entire work), are divided into two categories just like their defenders and abettors There are some who take such people to themselves not just once or twice but several times and frequently, and by the sense of the word are properly harborers (receptatores from receptare), because the verb is a frequentative form.537 Such harborers are sometimes without guilt, 253C that is, they so through ignorance and never had any prior suspicion 534 535 536 537 Another instance of forgetting to change a reference to an inquisitor in Eymeric to one to a judge I.e., Pt ii Apparently, 151C–D is meant, which is actually at the end of Pt ii, Q Ut inquisitionis is clearly meant This is a term of Latin grammar From certain verbs were formed secondary verbs which signified the intensive or repeated performance of the concept conveyed by the original verb Hence, the verb receptare is derived from recipere (“to take, receive”) and literally means “to receive repeatedly” and hence “to harbor.” 646 The Hammer of Witches 253C–D of those people Sometimes they commit a guilty act, that is, when they know their errors and are not unaware that the church always persecutes such people as the cruelest foes of the Faith.538 Yet, the lords of the earth nonetheless harbor them, hold them, defend them, and so on.539 It is because such people literally are harborers of heretics that they are so designated, and the laws speak of them, saying that they are excommunicate according to the first Chapter “Excommunicamus,” § “Credentes.” Some people have not received sorcerers or heretics of this kind several times and frequently but just one or twice, and it seems that these people are not properly called “harborers” (receptatores), because the heretics did not visit frequently, but “receivers” (receptores), because they received the heretics rather than harbored them.540 The Archdeacon does say the opposite on the topic of the word “receptatores” in Chapter “Quicumque,” but there is little force in this since what we should care about is deeds and not words 253D There is a difference between harborers and receivers in that lords of the earth are always called harborers of them, while simple people, who not have the means or power to drive them out, are without guilt even if they receive them.541 Finally, the question of the people who hinder the bishops’ office of the inquisition against such sorcerer heretics: who are they and are they to be called heretics? The response to this is that hinderers of this kind are divided into two categories There are some who cause a direct hindrance, for instance, those who in their own rashness free from prison people who have been arrested on a charge of heresy or those who break up proceedings involving the Faith and inflict wounds on witnesses in a case involving the Faith for having given testimony Another instance is if a temporal lord decrees that no one but himself should try this charge or that an accusation on this charge can be laid before no one but himself and that testimony can be given only before him, and the like These people are said to cause 538 539 540 541 The reference to these people being “the cruelest foes of the Faith” has been added to the source material from Eymeric and presumably reflects the idea that sorceresses are far worse than the regular heretics discussed by Eymeric This reference to secular lords has been added to the source material in Eymeric and reflects the idea that the spread of sorcery is abetted by the refusal of secular powers to anything about it (compare the discussion in 148C–150A) Another distinction based on Latin grammar: receptor is the agent noun derived from the verb recipere, while receptator is the form for the corresponding frequentative verb (see n 537) Cf the lenient treatment of the subordinates of lords who harbor sorcerer archers in 149C–D Part III 253D–254B 647 a direct hindrance according to the notes of John Andreae on the word “directe” [“directly”] in Chapter “Statutum” (Liber Sextus, “Heretics”) Also included are those who directly hinder the proceedings, passing of judgment or sentence in such a case involving the Faith or who give aid, counsel or favor in carrying out such acts Such people are very culpable, but nonetheless, they are not to 254A be judged heretics for this reason unless it is otherwise apparent that they are ensnared in similar errors of sorcerers with obstinate will They are, however, stricken with the sword of excommunication by the law according to Chapter “Ut inquisitionis,” § “Prohibemus,” so that if they remain in that state of excommunication for a year, they are to be condemned as heretics, as is explained in the chapter and paragraph cited There are those who cause an indirect hindrance, such as those who decree that no one but members of the temporal lord’s retinue should take up arms to capture heretics and the like, according to the notes of John Andreae on the word “indirecte” [“indirectly”] in Chapter “Statutum.” Such people are less culpable than those of the first category They (including those who give counsel, aid or favor for this purpose) are not heretics but are excommunicate according to the cited Chapter “Ut inquisitionis,” so that if they remain in this excommunication for a year with an obstinate frame of mind, they are to be condemned as heretics according to the cited chapter, § “Prohibemus.” This is to be interpreted as meaning that they are condemned as heretics with the understanding that if they are willing to return to the church, they are granted mercy 254B after having first abjured the error Otherwise, they are handed over to the secular court as unrepentant heretics, as is explained in Chapter “Ad abolendam,” § “Praesenti.” In conclusion Sorceress midwives, like other sorceresses who inflict acts of sorcery, are condemned and sentenced according to the circumstances of the crimes, and so are sorceresses who break acts of sorcery in the superstitious manner discussed above542 through the work of the Devil, since there is no doubt that they can inflict such acts in the same way that they can remove them Consequently, by the demons’ instructions the sorceresses come to some sort of agreement whereby some are supposed to cause harm, and others to heal, so that in this way they can all the more easily increase their breach of the Faith by ensnaring the minds of the simple folk 542 251B–252A 648 The Hammer of Witches 254B–D Since sorcerer archers and other sorcerer enchanters of weapons are supported only by the favor, defense and harboring accorded to them by governmental authorities, they all are subject to the penalties discussed above Those who have at all impeded any officials in their duty against such sorcerers and their abettors and so on are similarly excommunicate and are subject to all the penalties as abettors When they remain for a 254C year in that state of excommunication with an obstinate frame of mind, then if they are willing to return to the church, they make an abjuration of hindering and abetting and are granted mercy Otherwise, they are handed over to the secular arm as unrepentant heretics Even before they have remained in a state of excommunication for a year, proceedings can still be instituted against such hinderers as abettors of heretics (this is argued in the last paragraph of Chapter “Accusatus”).543 What has been said of the abettors, defenders, harborers and hinderers in a situation involving sorcerer archers and so on should also be understood in all regards concerning any sorceresses or sorcerers who inflict injuries on humans, domestic animals and the fruits of the earth Any sorcerers who seek forgiveness in the forum of penance with a contrite and humbled spirit, bewailing their sins and making a genuine confession, are granted mercy Otherwise, when they become known, those upon whom this is incumbent on the basis of their office should institute proceedings against them, summoning, arresting, seizing and conducting proceedings against them in all regards according to the circumstances of the crimes up to and including the definitive sentence in the way that has been treated, if and to the extent that such governmental 254D authorities wish to escape the noose of eternal damnation on account of the excommunication imposed on them by the church [Note on Sources Major identified source for Q 34: Eymeric, Dir 2.51–54] quest ion thirt y-f ive of this l ast part: t he m ethods of sentencing any sorcerers who lodge frivolous or unjust appeals IF the judge perceives that the denounced person is in the end taking refuge in the remedy of appeal, the first thing to be noted is 543 Oddly, Eymeric cites not the decretal “Accusatus” but the privileges of inquisitors granted in Urban IV’s apostolic letter “Prae cunctis” and confirmed by subsequent popes Part III 254D–255B 649 that it is sometimes decided that an appeal is valid and just, sometimes that it is frivolous and void The proceedings in matters of the Faith should be summary, simple and informal,544 as has often been stated in the foregoing, on the basis of Chapter “Multorum querela” in the Clementines, where the remedy of appeal is in fact forbidden, but because it is sometimes the case that the hard work entailed by the matter means that judges readily postpone and delay it, they can note that in a situation where the denounced person feels that he has in fact been oppressed by the judge contrary to the law and justice on the grounds that the judge was unwilling to allow him to defend himself, or that by himself and without a panel of others or the agreement of the bishop or his vicar 255A the judge sentenced him to questioning under torture, despite the fact that he could have got other sufficient proofs for and against him,545 and the like, then in that case the appeal would be just Otherwise, not The second thing to be noted is that when an appeal of this kind is presented to the judge, he ought to ask for a copy of the appeal without emotional consternation, making a verbal declaration that he need not hurry He should note that when the denounced person hands over the copy of the appeal, he still has two days to respond and after this another thirty to present the attachment.546 In the situation where he is very experienced and knowledgeable, he could immediately make his response and give one kind of attachment or the other, but in order for the proceedings to be conducted cautiously, it is better to set for the denounced person a deadline of ten, twenty or twenty-five days within which the kind of attachment that the judge decides to give will be given and received, the judge reserving the right to make a postponement within the statutory period of time The third thing to be noted by the judge is that within the statutory period of time he ought to carefully consider and examine the reasons 255B for the appeal (the alleged prejudicial rulings) If, after convening a good panel of experts, he sees that he has unjustly and unduly oppressed the denounced person by not allowing him to defend himself or by exposing him to questioning under torture at an inappropriate time or the like, then upon the arrival of the deadline that he has set, he should correct 544 545 546 199B–C The provision about other proofs is an addition to the source material from Eymeric The apostoli (here translated as “attachment”) was a letter that the judge against whom the defendant was appealing included with the appeal to indicate to the authority with whom the appeal was being lodged whether or not he agreed with the appeal (in the former case, the attachment was referred to as “reverential”) 650 The Hammer of Witches 255B–D his error and bring the proceedings back to the point and the situation obtaining at the point when the defendant asked for lines of defense, or when the judge set a deadline for an interlocutory ruling or the like, and remove the prejudicial ruling Once this is removed, he can carry out the proceedings as before, because when the prejudicial ruling is rescinded, the appeal, which had had some validity, is rendered void according to Chapter “Cessante” (Extra, “Appeals”) At this point the circumspect and prudent judge should note that while certain prejudicial rulings are remediable (these are the ones just discussed, and that discussion is relevant to them), others are irremediable, for instance, if the denounced person was actually and in fact questioned under torture and appeals after coming through it safely,547 or if some valuables and other useful items were received at the same time 255C as containers and devices that sorcerers use and these were burned,548 and other acts that cannot be remedied or retracted In that case the method just mentioned (returning the proceedings to the situation obtaining when the prejudicial ruling was imposed) would not be relevant The fourth thing to be noted by the judge is that he has thirty days from the day of his response to present the attachment according to Chapter “Ab eo” (“Appeals,” Liber Sextus) He could set for the petitioner the last statutory day (the thirtieth) for the presentation of the attachment, but to prevent the appearance that he wishes to harass the denounced person and to make sure that he does not render himself suspected of undue harassment, thereby confirming the allegation of having made a prejudicial ruling against the denounced person, it is better to set a suitable deadline that is within the statutory period of time, for instance, ten or twenty days later Later, upon the arrival of the deadline, he can, if he does not wish to settle the matter,549 make a postponement, saying that he has been tied up with other affairs or the like The fifth thing to be noted by the judge is that when he sets a deadline for the appellant who is petitioning for an attachment, he should not set 255D one merely for giving the attachment but for giving and receiving it at the same time, because if he assigns one only for giving it, then the judge against whom the appeal is being lodged would have to send it to the 547 548 549 I.e., without confessing This clause is an amusing adaptation of Eymeric’s example: “or if books were received from him and then burned.” Instead of this clause, Eymeric has: “if he sees this to be expedient.” Part III 255D–256A 651 appellant He will therefore set him a deadline, that is, such-and-such day of such-and-such year, for the judge to give him such an attachment as he will decide to give and for the appellant to receive it from the judge Sixth, he should note that in setting this deadline he should not say in his response550 that he will give a favorable or unfavorable attachment, but in order to deliberate more fully he should say that he will present such a letter as he will at that time decide should be presented He should also note that in setting this deadline for the appellant, he should, in order to thwart every stratagem, chicanery and evil intent on the appellant’s part, specify the place, day and hour, for instance, setting the twentieth day of August of the present year at the hour of Vespers,551 in the chamber of this judge located in such-and-such house552 of Suchand-Such city (place), for the judge to give to Such-and-Such appellant such a attachment as he will decide should be presented and for him to receive it Seventh, he notes that if he decides in his mind to keep the denounced person in detention, as the crime requires and justice demands, in setting 256A the deadline he should write down that he is setting for this appellant such-and-such deadline for the judge to give the attachment and for the appellant to receive it in person, and is assigning such-and-such place to the same appellant for the judge to give the attachment to him and for him to receive it from the judge In this situation, the judge has the discretion to detain the appellant, provided that an unfavorable attachment is first given; otherwise not Seventh,553 the judge should note that he should make no alteration in the status of the appellant by arresting him or by questioning him under torture or by releasing him from prison or in some other way, from the hour when the appeal was presented to him until the hour when he hands over to him the unfavorable attachment In summation Note that it often happens that when the denounced person is uncertain whether the sentence to be passed will be against him, he often resorts to the remedy of appeal in order to escape the judge’s sentence by subterfuge since he is sure of his guilt Hence, he lodges an appeal against the judge, citing frivolous reasons, for instance, that the judge kept him in detention after arrest and was unwilling to 550 551 552 553 I.e., in his initial, verbal response to the lodging of the appeal I.e., last afternoon office Eymeric specifies “house of Preachers,” meaning the local convent of Dominican friars Should be “eighth.” (In Eymeric, this sentence is simply an additional note in the seventh point; when this was converted into an independent point here, it was mistakenly given the wrong number.) 652 The Hammer of Witches 256A–C release him to a suitable surety, and other specious, frivolous arguments When this appeal is presented to the judge, he should ask for a copy 256B of the appeal, and when he has it, he should respond immediately or two days later, in this response fixing for the appellant the day, hour and place for the giving and receiving of the attachment that the judge will decide upon (within the statutory deadline, for instance, the tenth, fifteenth, twentieth or thirtieth day of such-and-such month) Within the period of time set for this deadline, the judge should carefully examine the copy of the appeal and the prejudicial rulings (reasons) because of which he is appealing, and with a good panel of legal experts he should deliberate about whether he should present an unfavorable attachment, that is, a negative response, thereby quashing the appeal, or a favorable attachment, that is, an affirmative response (“reverential letter”) to be sent to the judge to whom the person is appealing, thereby deferring to the appellant If the judge sees that the reasons for the appeal are false (frivolous) and void, and that the appellant wishes only to escape judgment through subterfuge or to delay it, he should give an unfavorable attachment (one of refusal) If, however, he sees that the rulings are in fact prejudicial, having been unjustly imposed upon him and being irremediable, or if he is uncertain whether this is so, or else, being worn 256C out by the malice of the appellant, he wishes to relieve himself of such a burden, he should present to the appellant a favorable (or “reverential”) attachment Upon the arrival of the deadline set for the appellant, if the judge has not yet drawn up the attachment (response), or is not ready for some other reason, he can issue a postponement, with either a single peremptory deadline or one after another, down to the thirtieth day, which is the final statutory deadline for presenting a favorable attachment If, on the other hand, he has drawn it up and is ready, he can immediately give the attachment to the appellant If he decides to give an unfavorable attachment (one of denial), upon the arrival of the peremptory deadline set by him, he will present it in writing in the following manner “An d the af orementioned judge, in response to the aforementioned interposed appeal (if it deserves to be called an appeal) states that he has conducted and intends to conduct the proceedings justly and in accordance with the Canon’s sanctions” – or “Imperial statutes or laws” – “and did not deviate from the path of either554 law and does not intend 554 I.e., secular or ecclesiastical This distinction is added to the discussion of Eymeric, who mentions only the “law.” Part III 256C–257A 653 to, and by no means made a ruling to the appellant’s prejudice and does not intend to He had no such understanding, as is made clear by the specious nature of the alleged reasons.” He should go through them 256D individually “For he did not make a prejudicial ruling in arresting him and holding him in detention after his arrest, because the judge was and is reasonably obliged to keep him in detention after his arrest as someone convicted of heresy” – or “vehemently suspected in the judge’s eyes” – “since he was denounced to the judge for such-and-such heretical depravity, and the judge had many witnesses against him Nor did the judge make a prejudicial ruling in his refusal to release him to a surety Since the charge of heresy is one that concerns more significant crimes, and since the appellant persisted in his denial after being convicted, he was and is by no means to be released even to the greatest surety, but was and is to be detained in imprisonment.” In this way, the judge should go through all the other reasons, and when this is done he should say the following “Hence, it is apparent that the judge conducted the proceedings in an appropriate and just manner, by no means deviated from the path of the law, and did not make a prejudicial ruling in any regard Rather, the appellant is striving to escape judgment through the subterfuge of using specious, contrived reasons to make an unjust and inappropriate appeal For these reasons, his appeal is frivolous and void, having been lodged because of no prejudicial ruling and being errant in form and content Since the laws not defer to frivolous appeals 257A and neither should judges,555 the judge states that he is not granting the appeal that has been lodged nor intends to so, and that he is not deferring to him and does not intend to so He offers this response as an unfavorable attachment to the aforementioned Such-and-Such, who is making an inappropriate appeal in this way, and orders it to be immediately inserted directly after the appeal that was presented to him.” With this, he should hand it over to the notary who presented the appeal to him When the unfavorable at tachment has been granted in this way to the appellant, the judge should immediately resume the proceedings and carry out his duty, ordering the person to be arrested (put into detention) or seized or giving him a deadline for his appearance before the judge, or something similar that would make it apparent that he is not ceasing to act as judge He will resume the proceedings against the 555 This clause is copied from the first line of Liber Sextus 2.2.5 (“Quum appellationibus”), which deals with frivolous appeals 654 The Hammer of Witches 257A–C appellant until he is prohibited from doing so by the judge with whom the appeal has been lodged The judge should, however, be careful not to make any alteration regarding the status of the appellant by arresting 257B him or, if he already has been arrested, by releasing him from prison, or by doing anything else, from the hour when the appeal was presented to him until he grants to him the unfavorable attachment From that point on, however, he will be able, as has already been stated, to these things if justice requires, until he is prohibited by the judge with whom the appeal has been lodged In that case, he should send the appellant to that judge with the protocols closed and sealed and with a reliable and safe guard, under appropriate surety, if necessary If the judge decides to grant a favorable attachment (a reverential letter), upon the arrival of the peremptory deadline assigned to the appellant for the giving and receiving of the attachment, he will grant it in writing in the following manner “An d the af orementioned jud ge, in response to the appeal that has been lodged (if it deserves to be called an appeal) states that he conducted the proceedings in the present case in a just manner and as he ought to have and not otherwise, and does not think that he ruled to the prejudice of the appellant, as is clear in terms of the alleged reasons.” He should run through them individually “He did not rule to his prej257C udice in saying ” He should run through the reasons for the appeal individually, responding in a better way556 and as truthfully as he can.557 He should conclude as follows “Hence, it is apparent that the judge in no way ruled to the prejudice of the appellant or gave him cause for the appeal, and that instead the appellant feared that the proceedings would result in justice according to his demerits For this reason, his appeal is frivolous and void, not having been lodged on account of any prejudicial ruling, and according to the law the judge should not defer to him Out of reverence for the Apostolic See to which the appeal was made, however, the judge states that he is granting this appeal and is making and intends to defer to the appellant, remitting this entire matter to Our Most Holy Lord the Pope and to the Apostolic See and setting for the appellant a fixed period of time, namely such-and-such 556 557 The sense of “better way” is not self-evident Perhaps it means that in his response the judge should give a more favorable interpretation of his actions that have been cited as the grounds for the appeal Note that at the least this clause implies a willingness to give an account that is less than fully truthful if not actually mendacious Part III 257C–258A 655 number of months counting from now, within which he has to present himself to Our Lord the Pope in the Roman Curia558 with the closed and sealed protocols that will be turned over to him by the judge, either after giving suitable surety that he will present himself in the Roman Curia, or under a reliable and secure escort that will be granted to him by the judge.” The judge offers this response to this appellant as an affirmative 257D attachment, and it is ordered that it should be inserted directly after the appeal that was lodged and presented to him With this, the judge will turn it over to the notary who presented the appeal to him The prudent judge should note that as soon as he grants the reverential attachment to the appellant, he immediately ceases to act as the judge in the case for which he lodged the appeal, and he can no longer take cognizance of it unless the case is remitted to him by Our Most Holy Lord the Pope Hence, he can no longer intervene in that case except in sending the appellant in this manner to Our Lord the Pope and in assigning to him a suitable deadline, for instance, one of one or two or three months, so that the judge would be able in the meanwhile to prepare himself and make arrangements about the appellant, receiving appropriate surety from him about his appearance and about presenting himself in the Roman Curia within the deadline 258A that has been set If the appellant cannot present such surety, he should be sent under a reliable escort, or he should oblige himself as best he can to present himself within the deadline that has been set to Our Lord the Pope in the Roman Curia Otherwise, this will cause the appeal to fail If the judge has another case in which he is conducting the proceedings against her559 but he560 has not lodged an appeal, he will continue to act as judge as before After the appeal has been allowed and the reverential attachment granted, even if the appellant is accused and denounced before the judge on other charges of heresy which were not at issue in the case for which he lodged the appeal, he does not cease to act as judge Rather, he may proceed freely with informing himself and examining witnesses, just as before Once the first case is finished in the Roman Curia or remitted to the judge, he is free to carry out the proceedings in the second one 558 559 560 The Roman Curia is the term for the papal administration An inadvertent slip into the feminine gender Back to the generalizing masculine 656 The Hammer of Witches 258A–C Judges should note that they should send the protocols closed and sealed to the judges in the Roman Curia who are to render justice after examining the merits of the protocol Inquisitors561 should not take the 258B trouble to litigate against the appellants there, but should send them off to be judged by judges responsible for them there.562 If the inquisitors are unwilling to play a role against the appellants, these judges will, on the basis of their office, conduct the proceedings at the insistence of the appellants, if they desire an end to the matter The judges should also note that if they are summoned in person at the insistence of the appellants and they appear, they should nonetheless make sure not to take an oath in the case at all, but should take care to present the protocols and turn over the entire case, and be sure to return as quickly as possible in order to avoid being worn out by the fatigue, misfortunes, hard work and damnable expenses there For in that case damage to the Church ensues and the heretics are strengthened, and afterwards the judges563 not find so much favor or reverence and are not feared in the way that their presence now causes Also, when all the other heretics see that the judges are being worn out and detained in the Roman Curia, they will raise their horns, and they will feel disdain and malice, and become bolder in sowing the seeds of heresy Then, when action is taken against them, they will appeal in a similar manner The other564 judges are also rendered feebler at prosecuting matters of 258C the Faith and exterminating heretics, if they fear that through similar appeals they will be worn out by wearisome misfortunes All these results will be highly detrimental to the interests of the Holy Faith and Church of God, and may the Church’s Groom565 deign to save her from each of them! 561 562 563 564 565 Another reference to inquisitors that has been inadvertently left unmodified The late medieval papal curia had a reputation for inefficiency and corruption, and the present denunciation comes from the personal experience of Eymeric, who introduces the passage (entitled “That inquisitors should not waste time in the Roman Curia”) with the following statement: “Many years ago now, I, Brother Nicholas Eymeric, Inquisitor in Aragon, once wore down many men in the Roman Curia until their condemnation for the charge of heresy, as their demerits demanded, and conversely, I have also been worn down by various tedious, miserable toils and expenses, and so I have experienced the ways of the Curia Hence, it is my advice that inquisitors should take care not to conduct personally or take part in matters of the Faith that are transferred by appeal to the Roman Curia unless they are confident that they have full pockets and great favor in the Curia and that their business will be finished in short order, things about which it is not easy to have reasonable confidence.” I.e., ecclesiastical (Here Eymeric was actually referring to the deleterious effect that it would have on bishops if the inquisitors were tied up with appeals in Rome.) I.e., secular I.e., Christ Part III 657 Praise be to God, extermination to heretics, peace to the living, and eternal repose to the dead Amen [Note on Sources Major identified sources for Q 35: Eymeric, Dir Pt “On an appeal that is lodged from an inquisitor” (de appellatione que fit ab inquisitore) and “That inquisitors should not waste time in the Roman Curia” (quod inquisitores non debent moram trahere in romana curia)] ... articles, Ancient Rome: A Military and Political History (Cambridge University Press, 2005) THE HAMMER OF WITCHES A Complete Translation of the Malleus Maleficarum CHRISTOPHER S MACKAY CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY. .. from the main text of the Malleus, and an unsubstantiated statement in a later source that two of the signatories of the Approbation asserted that they had not in fact signed it The procedural... scholasticism, namely realism, which was associated with the Dominicans (Aquinas himself was a Dominican) Aquinas was a very widely read man, and the large majority of the many citations in the Malleus come