The Benandanti. Field cults and witches in the 16th and 17th centuries

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Benandanti. Field cults and witchcraft in the 16th and 17th centuries is a historical study by Carlo Ginzburg . The original edition appeared in 1966 when Ginzburg was 26 years old under the name 'I Benandanti. Stregoneria e culti agrari tra Cinquecento e Seicento 'published by Einaudi . Karl Friedrich Hauber translated the work into German in 1980. Today it is a standard work in the historiography of the European 'witchcraft' of the early modern period in Europe.

Ginzburg describes in his work the 'fertility cult' of the Benandanti in the rural society of Friuli between 1550 and 1650. The Benandanti are farmers and ordinary citizens who were born with the 'lucky cap' - amniotic sac - at their birth. They act as defenders of the harvests and the fertility of the fields, can recognize 'witches' and heal diseases caused by them.

Ginzburg's interest in knowledge is to shed light on the religious attitudes that existed parallel to the Christian elite culture. He shows how the Benandanti were equated with their opponents, the Stregoni ( witches ), through gentle, constant pressure from the Inquisition over the course of a century . According to Ginzburg, this form of belief was linked to a larger complex of traditions and spread over large parts of Central Europe. With the book, Ginzburg enables important conclusions to be drawn for the uncovering of the origins of the popular 'witchcraft', entirely in the sense of micro-history (smaller social units are examined in detail, which allow conclusions to be drawn about larger connections).

Synopsis

The work is divided into four chapters, which are preceded by two prefaces written by Ginzburg. In the older foreword from 1966, Ginzburg explains that in his work he uses process material from the Inquisition to reconstruct the outlines and various forms of expression of the 'fertility cult'. Over a period of 70 years this slowly adapted to the traditional pattern of the 'witchcraft' with its 'diabolical sabbath', which was designed by the Christian official culture. In earlier years the Benandanti referred to themselves as 'good Christians' who fought for Christ and against the 'devil'. They defied the suggestive questions of the Inquisition, which tried to lead them to confessions to the contrary. Over time, more and more features of the 'Witches Sabbath' were found in their confessions. In the later years these came independently from the interrogated and without pressure from the Inquisition. Ginzburg regrets that he cannot systematically follow the parallels between Benandanti and 'witches' being due to a lack of suitable source material.

In his investigations, Ginzburg refers to various scientific positions on the history of the 'witchcraft' in early modern Europe. It differs from the assumptions of various scientists in the middle of the 19th century. They generally saw the confessions of those accused of 'witchcraft' as the result of hallucinations, the use of ointments based on intoxicating substances and pathological, hysterical states. Ginzburg criticizes the fact that the studies at this time were particularly interested in explaining the course and mechanism of the persecution. He, on the other hand, has a real interest in the form of belief itself.

Ginzburg also differs from Arno J. Mayer's hypothesis on 'fertility cults'. He describes its base of source material as insufficient. He criticizes the fact that all hypotheses do not yet explain why 'witches' and 'priests' of this presumed fertility cult appear from the beginning as figures who are hostile to the harvest and resolves to take up this point.

He announces to the reader that he will investigate the relationships between Benandanti and shamans in another book . According to Ginzburg, Mircea Eliade has also confirmed a connection between the two . At the end of the preface, Ginzburg mentions Marc Bloch as a role model for his approach to this study. Ginzburg first analyzes the individual process files independently of one another and then compares them with one another on the basis of previously defined aspects. By looking at parallels in other places, he tries to make comparisons in order to draw the picture of a larger unity.

1. The night fighting

The first chapter deals with reports on two Benandanti from 1575: On the one hand Paolo Gasparutto from the village of Iassico. The second Benandante is a Cividade public crier named Battista Moduco. Paolo Gasparutto first denies all allegations, but then admits to having said that in a dream he was fighting with Stregoni ('witches'). He and Battista Moduco both claim to have confessed and not to be 'heretics'. Moduco declares to fight invisibly in the 'spirit' four times a year, at night for Christ and the harvest, against the Stregoni, who are on the side of the 'devil'. You become a Benandanti when you are 'born wearing a lucky bonnet'. This means the amniotic sac or afterbirth. Apparently the inquisitor did not know the word Benedante. They will continue to be interrogated until both admit that the 'devil' sent them an 'angel' who seduced them to lead the spirit out of the body. The inquisitor forces Moduco to recognize the 'sabbath of the witches' again at the Benandanti meetings. Ginzburg shows the Inquisition's first attempt to equate the Benandanti beliefs with those of the 'witchcraft'.

Ginzburg explains that the Benandanti do not question the reality of their meetings to which they go 'in spirit'. He draws parallels to 'witches' in other parts of Italy, such as Domenica Barbarelli in 1532, to show the connection to the larger complex of traditions. He further discusses whether these ' visions ' could have been triggered by the use of special psychoactive ointments or by epilepsy. He calls the theologian Alfonso Tostado . He wrote that Spanish ' witches ' rubbed themselves with ointments and spoke certain words, they fell into a deep sleep and became insensitive to fire and blows. He deals with examples of an ox herder from Latisana (Benandante) and a prostitute named Menica di Cremos (Banandante) who mentioned oils or ointments. He sees in this the first signs of the adjustment to the 'witchcraft'. Ginzburg sees the assumption justified, however, that not all ' witches ' made use of ointments that cause hallucinatory delirium. Neither Gasparutto nor Moduco mention ointments. However, they spoke of a long, deep sleep, a lethargy that made them insensitive. Only one Benandante woman (Maria Panzona) 1618-1619 suffered from epilepsy. Ginzburg uses further examples from Benandanti to explain the state of loss of the senses and separation of the 'spirit' from the body.

In Modena he finds the first evidence of nocturnal 'witch meetings'. But not on 'devil worship', but a ' cult around Diana ' since the end of the 14th century. As a further parallel he draws on the trial of 1692 against a ' Lithuanian' werewolf ' . An older farmer named Thiess says that he goes to 'hell' with others and fights against the 'devil'. They bring the seeds back to earth so that the harvest does not spoil. According to Thiess, ' werewolves ' are the 'dogs of God'. The ' werewolves ' in Lithuania and the Benandanti in Friuli lead Ginzburg to believe that field cults used to be widespread throughout Central Europe. Ginzburg sees the parallel to Lithuania as proof of a real relationship between shamans and Bendanti. He suspected that it was a question of the survival of an 'older fertility rite' that had its origins in pre-Christian Europe but was later Christianized.

2. The processions of the dead

In the second chapter of the book, Ginzburg deals with the trial files of people who claimed to see the dead. In total, there were eleven women and four men who deal with 'nightly moving the dead'. He first discusses the interrogation of Anna la Rossa in 1582, who claimed to be able to speak to the dead. He then describes two similar cases that occurred later that year. Donna Aquilina and Caterina la Guercia. Ginzburg sees this as evidence of the connection between the Benandanti and those who claim to see the dead. Ginzburg also deals with analogies of the Benandanti and the belief in ' nocturnal cavalry ' , which, according to Ginzburg, had a considerable distribution. As a result, women rode out with the ' pagan ' goddess Diana on certain nights . He also shows analogies using examples of the ' Wild Hunt ' or the 'Angry Army'.

He connects this report with the many other European myths about the 'wild hunt' and states that in the Central European countries the name Diana has often been replaced by the name Holda or Perchta. Ginzburg then highlights the report of the French bishop Wilhelm von Auvergne , in which he described a popular belief about a female 'deity' named Abundia or Satia. It shows parallels to the Benandanti beliefs. Ginzburg highlights further evidence of popular belief in the 'procession of the dead' in the late medieval reports by the Dominican monk Johannes Nider , the chaplain Matthias von Kemnat , the Swiss preacher Johann Geiler von Kaysersberg , as well as other trial files from the Inquisition. Towards the end of the second chapter, Ginzburg compares the ideas of the Benandanti with the tradition of the Perchtenlauf . Pp. 82-83 . According to Ginzburg, these are all evidence of the larger complex of religious traditions that was spread across Central Europe.

3. The Benandanti between inquisitors and witches

According to Ginzburg, the myth of the 'Feld'-Benandanti between 1575-1580 and 1620 with the characteristics already described is documented throughout Friuli. In the third chapter, Ginzburg outlines a period of change using further examples. When describing a trial of 1583 against the Benandante Tofolo di Buri, the indolence of the Inquisition towards the Benandanti is striking, as they do not fit into the pattern of 'traditional witchcraft'. Research drags on over the years. Ginzburg notes that no trial against Benandanti has been completed in 50 years. Apart from the one against Gasparutto and Moduco.

Ginzburg argues that between Benandanti and the Inquisition a level of real encounter, enmity or oppression is missing. In the trials dealt with in this chapter, Ginzburg shows that the Inquisition had nothing in hand against the Benandanti if they claimed that the Benandanti were Christians like the others. Ginzburg notes that the Benandanti's ability to heal 'enchanted' people was considered indicative of 'witchcraft'. The temptation was therefore great to see the Benandanti “healers” as “good sorcerers” but still “sorcerers”.

Around the second decade of the 17th century, the Benandanti began to take on the well-known and codified traits of the 'witches' and 'sorcerers' participating in the 'Sabbath' on their own. In further process examples, Ginzburg shows how the inquisitor tries to urge the accused with his questions in the direction of the pattern of the 'traditional witchcraft'. The Benandanti are getting bolder and are not only aware of their importance as 'healers', but they are also more and more openly indicating 'witches' and 'wizards'. With their accusations and causing unrest, Ginzburg argues, the Benandanti ultimately caused a trend reversed than before. They were clearly opposed to the 'witches' and not put on an equal footing.

Ginzburg closes the chapter with a brief excursus on a witch trial in Parma in 1611. One of the defendants confessed after the torture that she took part in the 'Sabbath'. The elements she describes are very similar to the battles of the Benandanti. Ginzburg sees this as proof of the approximation to the 'witchcraft' as well as of the greater geographical spread of the tradition.

4. The Benandanti on the Witches' Sabbath

The fourth chapter begins with a detailed description of the 1618 trial against the Benadantin Maria Panzona. Ginzburg notes that it seems as if the alignment of the Benandanti with the 'witches' and 'sorcerers' long awaited by the judges finally came about by itself. Panzona herself recognizes the 'Sabbath' presided over by the 'devil' in the nightly meetings in which she takes part and confesses in great detail. In the middle of the process, she had an epileptic fit. Ginzburg describes her confession as a decades-old assertion that is embedded in a dark and tenacious tradition and not as the hallucination of an epileptic.

Ginzburg deals with a traditional confession by Giovanni Sions 16 years later. For the first time, it provides a coherent popular image of the 'diabolical sabbath' in Friuli, which corresponds to that of the inquisitors. Proof of the equation of the Benandanti with the traditional pattern of 'witchcraft'. Sion claims that the 'festivals' he attended were real.

Another focus of this chapter is the case of the farmer Michele Soppe in 1642. He goes from village to village, crosses the sick against payment and explains who is responsible for the illness. With this accusation of alleged 'witches' he creates countless enemies. In court he, like Maria Panzona and Giovanni Sion before, tries to save his autonomy as a Benandante from the 'diabolical' work of the 'witches'. His trial also dragged on for years and he died in Udine dungeon before the verdict was pronounced .

Ginzburg concludes that in those decades around 1640, the belief in 'diabolical witchcraft' was finally established in Friuli. The Benandanti had included the images of the 'Witches' Sabbath' in their descriptions of the 'night battles' and superimposed them. He thinks, however, that it would be premature to assume that 'diabolical witchcraft' would always and everywhere have been experienced uniformly as a myth imposed by the Inquisition. Although the image of the 'witchcraft' originated in the culture of the learned, it was a very attractive reality for the peasants. Ginzburg suspects that the defendants were more influenced by the hegemony of the church this decade.

"Ultimately, the fate of the Benandanti was unique. When Benandanti were misunderstood, or almost misunderstood, they turned into witches too late to be persecuted.

reception

The work received mixed reviews in professional circles. David V. Herlihy of Harvard University and Michael Hunter of Birkbeck, University of London , noted that the book might never have been translated had Ginzburg's later work ' Cheese and the Worms - A Miller's World around 1600' not been for that a lot of attention paid. John Martin of Trinity University, Texas , finds it unsurprising that "The Night Battles," like "Cheese and the Worms," ​​received mixed reviews. He sees the reason in the fact that Ginzburg, as a historian of European popular culture, crossed the elusive disciplinary boundary that separates history from religious history and also from historical folklore . The mixed voices are discussed below.

praise

content

The work 'The Benandanti, Field Cults and Witch Creatures in the 16th and 17th Centuries' has been praised by many critics. According to William Monter of Northwestern University , Ginzburg's book is the only sustained attempt to address the problems of popular and elite culture within the very extensive literature on 'witch hunts' in early modern Europe. According to Monter, it contributed to breaking the taboo on the history of 'witchcraft' in Europe for scientists. Herlihy notes that this study was immediately recognized as pioneering the history of European 'witchcraft'. Brian P. Levack of the University of Texas at Austin also sees the book as a milestone and one of the most original and inspiring contributions to the history of 'witchcraft' in the last twenty years since its publication. According to Patricia H. Jobe of the University of Chicago , the book even became a standard work in this area and met with a great response. It describes a revolutionary attempt to restructure the peasant mentality and thus to examine a segment of society outside of traditional historical research. Also HC Erik Midelfort from the University of Virginia agrees with Monter, Herlihy, Jobe and Levack in relation to the importance of the work agreement. Similarly, Hunter believes that this book is undoubtedly important in illuminating popular beliefs of the early modern period. Jun Sato of the University of Cambridge also finds the work valuable as only records of elite culture are normally available. According to Sato, the gap between the interrogations of the judges and the confessions of the accused, the records of the Inquisition, makes it possible to gain a certain insight into popular beliefs. She describes the book as important, as it has raised the problem of the anthropological conception of shamanism as well as drawing attention to shamanic phenomena in Europe in the Middle Ages and early modern times.

According to Martin, Ginzburg wrote his work at a time when most scholars still viewed 'witchcraft' as the result of local or macroscopic crises in early modern Europe. He sees Ginzburg's epistemological interest in demonstrating the relative autonomy of popular culture. According to Martin, Ginzburg has placed his discovery of the history of this agrarian 'fertility cult' at the center of a new and convincing interpretation of 'witchcraft' in the course of his career. Leland L. Estes from Chapman University praises the work as an excellent monograph and Alby Stone calls it in the journal "Folklore" valuable reading for anyone interested in medieval peasant life.

In 2015, Emilie Bergmann from the University of California, Berkeley combined Ginzburg's findings with that of Augustin Redondo in his essay 'Las tradiciones hispánicas de la estantigua' in 'Otra manera de leer el Quijote'. Redondo does not explicitly associate his work with agricultural 'fertility rites', but is of the opinion that popular belief has deep roots in Northern Europe and that Christian orthodoxy depicted the traditional leaders of secret processions as 'devils'.

method

Methodologically, too, Ginzburg's work has been described by many critics as exemplary. According to Levack, Ginzburg described himself as "working halfway between history and anthropology". This book, with its exploration of popular beliefs, reflects just such interdisciplinary concerns, according to Levack. At the same time, however, it never loses its identity as a historical work. Levack praises Ginzburg for the careful and historical use of the comparison method. The result is an excellent demonstration of a historian's craft.

Jeffrey Burton Russell of the University of California praised Ginzburg's method as a successful example for future studies of 'popular' religions. Ginzburg provides an impressive example of how the views of the elites can be superimposed on popular beliefs and customs and thus transform them. It is precisely for this that Hunter describes the work as exemplary. According to him, Ginzburg shows excellently how beliefs of popular culture can be freed from the traditions that have been transmitted to us. Midelfort also sees the work as proof that court records can be used to get to the ideas and assumptions of farmers. He congratulates Ginzburg on his careful and sensitive reading of the inquisitorial files. The book is a seminal example of the subtle and sophisticated reconstruction of a popular culture. Jobe also praises Ginzburg's method and calls him a sensitive analyst. She thinks the gap in culture, which distinguishes the questions of the inquisitors and the answers of the peasant Benandanti, would have been a major obstacle for many others. Wayne Shumaker from the University of California, Berkeley also agrees with the praise for the sensitive use of the sources. He calls the work an "enviable" book and emphasizes the wealth of source material. According to Levack, this is one of the first studies to use court records to gain direct access to popular beliefs. According to him, Ginzburg benefits from a number of inquisitorial records that are relatively unencumbered by torture and can thus reveal a clear gap between the ideas of the Benandanti and those of the inquisitors.

stylistics

The style of the work did not receive much praise. At least Herlihy mentioned that the work was short and well written. Alby Stone emphasizes Ginzburg's lively presentation of the subject. Robert Nossen of the University of Pittsburgh describes it as clearly organized and effective in its presentation. And Jobe says the book has the drive and wealth of ideas that are characteristic of Ginzburg's more mature works.

criticism

Much remains vague

Some authors criticize the fact that much remains open and vague after reading it. Levack notes, for example, that it is not certain whether the assimilation of the Benandanti with the ideas of the inquisitors was as complete as Ginzburg claims. Because only a small minority of the Benandanti actually admitted that they had attended the 'Sabbath'. Hunter cites the date and origins of the spread of the 'cult' as vague. Even whether the Benandanti actually got together, apart from their dreamy night fights, remains open. Martin also describes Ginzburg's hypotheses as unproven and perhaps not at all provable. Just like Shumaker, who only finds them temporarily acceptable. Midelfort agrees with Hunter. In his opinion, there is no evidence that the Benandanti gathered for any ritual at night. He understood Ginzburg on pages 133 and 134 as though they might have done so. He bases his criticism on Ginzburg's description that the Benedanti apparently dreamed of such nocturnal encounters in unison. According to him, Ginzburg argues that the Benandanti experienced their ceremonies "intense and emotional". Ginzburg's language led Midelfort to believe that he was talking about real ceremonies. He also points out the uncertainty as to whether the Benandanti should be called a 'cult' at all. Herlihy similarly emphasizes the question of whether the Benandanti meetings and even their battles ever really took place. For him, this question inevitably leads to the thought of how a 'cult' can survive if its members never meet to practice their rites and pass on beliefs.

Herlihy calls the book profoundly enigmatic. In search of precedents and parallels, Ginzburg discovered the trial of a supposed 'werewolf' in Lithuania in 1692. Herlihy questions whether there are any Western precedents. Because Lithuania is far from Friuli and the date is much later than the Benandanti confessions. - Historia Nocturna , published in 1986 , provides an answer to Herlihy's questions. In it, Ginzburg shows a multitude of affinities between many popular beliefs which, according to him, relate to the witches' Sabbath. In it, the Friulian Benandanti and the Lithuanian 'werewolf' appear in a sea of ​​comparable examples. They all have a certain family resemblance to the Benedanti. This work is about Ginzburg's study on the shamans and Benedanti, which was announced in the foreword of this book.

Lack of contextualization

Midelfort criticizes that work is not strongly contextualized as ethnography. Ginzburg could not point to tensions or changes that these Benandanti brought to the attention of precisely at this point in time. According to Midelfort, the result is a strangely static and vague description of the cult itself.

Criticism of Ginzburg's interest in knowledge

Various authors criticize the fact that no conclusions can be drawn from the study of the Benandanti about a larger geographical area and traditions. Leland L. Estes of Chapman University believes it is less likely that the Benandanti story tells a great deal about what happened north of the Alps. The 'big hunts' in the north, in his opinion, were mostly secular affairs. Furthermore, despite the survival of extensive records and other documentation for many of the 'witch jad outbreaks' in the north, there is little evidence to suggest cultic practices of any kind. What he finds most important is the point of the careless and lazy handling of the Inquisition in matters of the Benandanti. For him, this attitude is in stark contrast to the extreme fear of 'witches' that motivated the activities of many judges in Northern Europe. According to him, it is likely that the persecution of Benandanti and 'witches' in the north were relatively different phenomena based on different institutional and social bases.

Midelfort thinks Ginzburg's view that the Benandanti were survivors of the same 'agrarian cult' is strange. In his opinion, one cannot assume a large, universal 'cult community' based on only a few assumed survivors. Midelfort admits that Ginzburg's portrait does not depend crucially on the supposed universality of a pre-Christian 'cult'. However, he criticizes his vision of universal meaning. According to him, this is not supported at all by his evidence. Jobe also shares Midelfort's view. According to her, Ginzburg fails when he imposes a theoretical superstructure on the documentary record, the weight of which he cannot bear.

Midelfort, on the other hand, questions Ginzburg's assumption that the Benandanti assimilated the 'witchcraft' under pressure from the Inquisition. He sees problems with Ginzburg's portrayal of changes. The Benandanti have learned to deal with the disapproval of the inquisitors. Midelfort thinks that if Ginzburg hoped his book would illustrate the power of post-Gramsci hegemony , one would have to admit that the Benandanti were surprisingly resilient and resourceful at keeping their old 'cult' going. According to Midelfort, it will take a lot of work before there will be anything like a history of this newly recognized variety of religious experience.

Criticism of the source selection and evaluation

Midelfort considers Ginzburg's strict use of trial files to be harmful. They give him no facts about the real situation of these folkloric beliefs in the general worldview of the peasants. Jobe also questions the scope with the sources used. She herself came up with a quantitative basis that, in her opinion, does not support Ginzburg's conclusions. From Ginzburg's notes, she reads that he obtained information from only forty-eight experimental dossiers and briefly mentions about 15 additional denunciations after 1647. In seven of the forty-eight cases, it is not Benandanti on trial, although information about the 'cult' emerges randomly. In the remaining 41 trials, only six Benandanti were found guilty of 'heresy' and officially convicted, although another, Michele Soppe, would certainly have been found guilty in their opinion, but already died in prison. In fact, according to Jobe, from the evidence presented by Ginzburg, only twenty of the Benandanti accused by the Inquisition appear to have actually been interrogated. The other interrogation files contain charges that were never followed up. Jobe explains that the Inquisition trials were conducted in strict secrecy. There appeared to be no means for other Benandanti to know that they were suspected. Thus, the six public judgments over a period of seventy years were the only way to find out that the beliefs of the 'cult' had been declared suspect. In view of the large geographic extent and the isolated location of Friuli, Jobe finds it very unlikely that the inquisitorial prosecution can be held responsible for a deformation of the 'cult'. She does not consider the case files to be numerous enough to support the Ginzburg conclusions. In Jobe's opinion, the fragmentary documentation does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the cause of the collapse of the Benandanti myth. Some of the testimonies later quoted by Ginzburg speak of agrarian beliefs of the traditional kind, albeit in a watered-down form. According to Jobe, it's possible the myth didn't break down at all.

Formal

Stone says the book's index is not comprehensive enough. He regrets that there is no bibliography as such. However, admits that the appendix with its transcripts of a number of inquisitorial procedures, the extensive notes and references largely compensate for this.

Thesis by Margaret Alice Murray

Another point of criticism taken by various critics is Ginzburg's contribution to the thesis of Margaret Alice Murrays , a student of James George Frazer .

Ginzburg positions himself in his foreword to her thesis. According to Ginzburg, their investigations gave rise to real interest in the forms of belief of 'witches' or alleged 'witches' for the first time. According to her, the 'witch being' has its roots in a very old 'fertility cult'. In their opinion, the 'Sabbath' described in the 'Witch Trials' refers to meetings that have actually taken place. Ginzburg believes that his research supports that part of Murray's thesis, which proceeds from the roots of the 'witchcraft' in an old 'fertility cult'. However, he partially distances himself from it and criticizes Murray's uncritical formulation at the beginning and the recourse to files very late in the processes in which the adaptation to the traditional scheme of the 'witchcraft' of the Inquisition had already been completed. On the basis of the source material, according to Ginzburg, no conclusions can be drawn about the existence or non-existence of a “group” organized by “witches” in Europe.

Levack calls Ginzburg's statement that he supports Murray's claim that 'witchcraft' has its roots in an ancient 'fertility cult' as slightly misleading. According to Levack, Ginzburg and Murray have very different ideas about what constitutes a 'cult'. Both also have very different ideas about the role that 'fertility cults' have played in forming 'witch beliefs'. Levack finds it regrettable that Ginzburg's book has been discussed mainly in the context of Murray's now outdated thesis, for his study, according to him, is of greater value than its contribution to the controversy that aroused Murray's thesis.

Russel also writes that Ginzburg's work supports an element of Murray's thesis. According to him, Ginzburg speaks in his foreword to the question of whether there really were 'witches', both against Russell's own views and those of Norman Cohn's . Russell makes it clear that he himself never argued for the existence of an organized 'witch cult'. Only for the likely existence of individuals or groups practicing 'witchcraft'. Accordingly, Ginzburg misunderstood his position. Russel supports Ginzburg's thesis that it remains open whether there actually was an organized 'cult'. Herlihy also mentions that Ginzburg is reluctant to support part of her thesis through his reconstruction.

Jobe also points to the at least partial confirmation of the outdated theory. Ginzburg's work became the touchstone of a debate between Norman Cohn and Jeffrey Burton Russell about the reality of 'witch meetings', according to Jobe. In their opinion, Ginzburg distances himself from the theses of such debates in his introduction to the English edition. In his view, the sources do not answer such questions. For him, asking them only means repeating the mistake of the inquisitors, who were only interested in the physical reality of the 'Sabbath'.

expenditure

  • Original: Carlo Ginzburg: I Benandanti. Stregoneria e culti agrari tra Cinquecento e Seicento. Einaudi, Turin 1966, ISBN 978-88-06-16188-0 .
  • Carlo Ginzburg. Translation by Friedrich Hauber: The Benandanti. Field cults and witches in the 16th and 17th centuries. Syndicate authors and publishing company, Frankfurt am Main 1980, ISBN 3-8108-0160-7 .
  • Carlo Ginzburg. Translation by John Tedeschi, Anne Tedeschi: The Night Battles: Witchcraft & Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth & Seventeenth Centuries. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore 1983, ISBN 978-0-8018-4386-0 .

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d e f g Patricia H. Jobe: Review of The Night Battles. Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: Renaissance and Reformation / Renaissance et Réforme . tape 10 , no. 3 , 1986, ISSN  0034-429X , pp. 307-310 , JSTOR : 43444601 .
  2. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag ah ai aj ak al am an ao Carlo Ginzburg : Die Benandanti. Field cults and witches in the 16th and 17th centuries. Syndicate authors and publishing company, Frankfurt am Main 1980, ISBN 3-8108-0160-7 .
  3. ↑ a b c d Michael Hunter: Review of The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cult in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: History . tape 69 , no. 227 , 1984, ISSN  0018-2648 , pp. 513-513 , JSTOR : 24419788 .
  4. ↑ a b c d e f David V. Herlihy : Review of The Night Battles. Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries; The Jews of Europe and the Inquisition of Venice, 1550-1670 . In: Social History . tape 11 , no. 1 , 1986, ISSN  0307-1022 , pp. 103-105 , JSTOR : 4285493 .
  5. ^ A b c d e John Martin: Journeys to the World of the Dead: The Work of Carlo Ginzburg . In: Journal of Social History . tape 25 , no. 3 , 1992, ISSN  0022-4529 , pp. 613-626 , JSTOR : 3789031 .
  6. ^ Edward William Monter: Review of The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: The Sixteenth Century Journal . tape 15 , no. 2 , 1984, ISSN  0361-0160 , p. 250-250 , doi : 10.2307 / 2541463 , JSTOR : 2541463 .
  7. ^ A. Dufour, Edward William Monter: Trois Historiens Actuels De La Sorcellerie . In: Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance . tape 31 , no. 1 , 1969, ISSN  0006-1999 , pp. 205-213 , JSTOR : 20674567 .
  8. ^ A b c d e Brian P. Levack: Review of The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: The Journal of Interdisciplinary History . tape 16 , no. 4 , 1986, ISSN  0022-1953 , pp. 729-731 , doi : 10.2307 / 204549 , JSTOR : 204549 .
  9. ↑ a b c d e f g H. C. Erik Midelfort : Review of The Night Battles. Witchcraft & Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth & Seventeenth Centuries . In: The Catholic Historical Review . tape 72 , no. 4 , 1986, ISSN  0008-8080 , pp. 648-650 , JSTOR : 25022410 .
  10. ↑ Jun Sato: European Shamanism in Context: The Case of the "Benandanti" . In: Cambridge Anthropology . tape 25 , no. 3 , 2005, ISSN  0305-7674 , p. 17-37 , JSTOR : 23820768 .
  11. ^ A b Leland L. Estes: Review of The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: Technology and Culture . tape 26 , no. 4 , 1985, ISSN  0040-165X , pp. 833-834 , doi : 10.2307 / 3105627 , JSTOR : 3105627 .
  12. ^ A b c Alby Stone: Review of The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: Folklore . tape 96 , no. 2 , 1985, ISSN  0015-587X , pp. 267-267 , JSTOR : 1259662 .
  13. ^ Emilie L. Bergmann: Lyric Ruptures: Góngora's "Soledad primera", Lines 222-232 . In: Confluencia . tape 30 , no. 3 , 2015, ISSN  0888-6091 , p. 60-68 , JSTOR : 43490131 .
  14. ^ A b Jeffrey Burton Russell: Review of The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: Church History . tape 54 , no. 4 , 1985, ISSN  0009-6407 , pp. 521-522 , doi : 10.2307 / 3166527 , JSTOR : 3166527 .
  15. ^ A b Wayne Shumaker: Review of The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: Renaissance Quarterly . tape 38 , no. 1 , 1985, ISSN  0034-4338 , pp. 130-132 , doi : 10.2307 / 2861342 , JSTOR : 2861342 .
  16. ^ Robert Nossen: Review of The Night Battles: Witchcraft and Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries . In: Journal of Ritual Studies . tape 2 , no. 1 , 1988, ISSN  0890-1112 , pp. 140-141 , JSTOR : 44368376 .