|
ITALIAN FOLK MAGIC vs ITALIAN WITCHCRAFT
The contemporary folk magic systems in Italy reflect strong elements of Catholicism, as they have
since the late Middle Ages. In America, and elsewhere, we are seeing the rise of what is
commonly called Christian witchcraft.
The latter is a blending of contemporary Wiccan and witchcraft
elements, which are formed around a Christian core. This process is not unlike the
evolution of modern folk traditions in Italy.
Modern Italian witchcraft traditions, by
contrast to contemporary Italian folk traditions, typically do not
contain Christian elements. Instead they focus upon Pagan elements of
magic and religion. However a few
traditions have adapted certain Catholic aspects of saint veneration,
which constitute a Christian veneer masking earlier Pagan deities.
Some contemporary folk traditions
erroneously view themselves as practitioners of a form of Italian
witchcraft, but are instead a branch of common folk magic and healing traditions that
are rooted in Italian Catholic culture.
Ironically these folk practitioners reject the authenticity of
Italian witchcraft traditions that do not reflect their beliefs and
practices. Sadly, being highly
active in their judgment and criticism of others, they bring
little else than disharmony to the Pagan & Craft community. One example can be found on the website
Stregoneria Italiana,
a group with members who actively contrive to foster ill feelings toward
author Raven Grimassi with frequent erroneous and negative posts in
various forums and chat rooms throughout the Internet.
Today we face many problems associated with
the misconceptions that do exist regarding Italian folk magic systems and
Italian witchcraft. Although they
share certain basic elements, the two systems reflect a clear
distinction. This is reflected in
the 19th century field studies of Charles Leland who comments:
“The witches of Italy form a class
who are the repositories of all the folklore; what is not at all
generally known, they also keep as strict secrets an immense number of
legends of their own, which have nothing in common with the nursery or
popular tales, such as are commonly collected and published …the
more occult and singular of their secrets are naturally not of a nature
to be published”.
Nineteenth century folklorist Lady de Vere describes such a structured witch cult in an
article she wrote in 1894: "...the
community of Italian witches is regulated by laws, traditions, and customs
of the most secret kind, possessing special recipes for sorcery" (La
Rivista of Rome, June 1894).
As noted, Italian folk magic traditions
possess various aspects of Christian beliefs and practices. These are often rooted in the
venerations of saints or the use of sacred or holy objects such as holy
water, the communion wafer, or the rosary. In addition various elements of folk
magic are liked to important dates in Christianity such as Christmas Eve
and festivals celebrating
a variety of saints. Many of these
displaced earlier Pagan festivals such as the summer solstice, which is
now celebrated as St. John’s Day.
Italian witchcraft possesses active
elements of pre-Christian religion, and incorporates the aid of spirits, faeries,
astronomical forces, and a variety of Pagan deities. Ancient Roman writers depict witches
associated with the goddess Hecate, Diana, and Proserpina. Ancient writers in Europe also
associate witches in Italy with the goddess Venus, and the god Priapus. None
of these elements are found in traditional Italian folk magic traditions,
but they do reside in older forms of Italian witchcraft. Most modern scholars have ignored or dismissed
the earlier writings that mention pre-Christian elements within Italian
witchcraft, and do not consider them as evidence of an actual
witches’ sect.
Contemporary scholars investigating folk
magic and Italian witchcraft have conducted field studies that involve
interviews with folk practitioners in Italy. Almost one
hundred percent of these individuals are Catholic or some other
denomination of the Christian faith.
By contrast the field studies conducted in 19th century
Italy, by such folklorists as J.B. Andrews, Lady de Vere, Roma Lister, and Charles Leland involved
individuals who claimed to be witches. Naturally, in accord, the material
and conclusions gathered by contemporary scholars and 19th
century folklorists differ greatly.
It is noteworthy that five folklorists in Italy during the 19th century independently discovered a
commonality within witchcraft traditions in different regions of Italy (none of which conform to common folk magic or folk
traditions then or now).
Most modern scholars focus on the folk
healer in Italy, and tend to see the arts and customs of this figure
as definitive of the cultural norms.
While this view may be true of contemporary traditions in modern
culture, it fails to appreciate the significance of the existing Pagan
elements preceding the modern folk traditions that contain them. The majority of scholars today view
pre-Christian elements as insertions into a Christian framework instead
of seeing them as evidence of the survival of ancient pre-Christian
religion. One example appears in
the feast day of San Domenico in Cocullo (Abruzzo region)
whose statue is covered with living snakes and carried in a
procession. This site was earlier
the home of the Marsi, a pre-Christian Pagan
tribe that worshipped the goddess Angizia, a
type of snake deity.
The customs associated with the feast of
San Domenico strongly suggests that the Pagan
elements pre-existed in a readily adoptable form that fit the Christian
veneer. However, most scholars
appear to believe that such Pagan elements are not evidence of
pre-existing sects and their beliefs and practices that were later
incorporated into saint veneration in the Christian era. As previously noted, most modern
scholars seem to reject the idea that modern folk traditions are actually
Christian offshoots of earlier Pagan beliefs and practices.
When exploring for the correct chronology
regarding Pagan and Christian elements, it is noteworthy that the Church
and its agents seem to have intentionally displaced things as they
Christianized. One example is the
festival day of the goddess Diana on August 13th, which was
displaced with the Ascension of Mary on August 15th. Another example is the birth of Jesus
placed near the Winter Solstice, and his resurrection in the spring. The death of Jesus on a tree (wooden
cross) also resembles pagan themes in Europe. When we add to this the Pagan elements
contained within saint veneration, the evidence seems weighted against
the Christian markers in terms of origins, chronology, and who took what
from whom.
David Gentilcore, a historian of early modern Italy, held that while it was impossible to draw absolute
distinctions between schooled medical professionals, ecclesiastical
healers, and illiterate "wise-women," that medical knowledge
flowed between these three groups. This is one example of how common
elements within a group (or tradition) do not necessarily demonstrate
that the systems or organizations are the same. The differences between
Italian folk magic/folk customs and Italian witchcraft appear to reveal
the truth of such a view. Gentilcore also notes
that while some cures were known and accessible to all members of
society, others were restricted to community wisewomen:
"Some cures were immediately
accessible, being the common lore of all members of society; others were
restricted to community wise women (referred to in the Otrantine trial records as magare)
and midwives. As we shall see, they belong to the system of the
sacred because they attempted to establish relationships with the sacred
and influence it, although they did so outside ecclesiastical structures" - From Bishop to
Witch, page 129 (Gentilcore).
Gentilcore notes that
historians and folklorists lack a full comprehension of folk
methods. This has led to an
unintentional misrepresentation of the traditions by the academic
community. Gentilcore
cites the concealment involved in secret societies as a factor in the
misunderstanding of academic researchers:
"..to view
these 'exorcising techniques' simply as lay versions or applications of
ecclesiastical rituals would be to rob them of their richness and miss
their other sources of inspiration. The folklorist and historian is not entirely to blame, since the invocations and
prayers were often revealed by the healer without the accompanying
prescription or magico-medical practices.
This is usually the choice of the informant (or, in the case of the episcopal and inquisitional trials, the accused) for
whom the secret cannot be revealed to him without both the ritual and the
healer losing their efficacy. Because of the importance of secrecy
witnesses could not often be sure what the healer said or did" - page 134
Although most
modern scholars dismiss or reject the pre-Christian elements of
contemporary Italian folk traditions, there are some who do recognize the
importance of them in understanding folk systems. Several scholars recognize that
Christian themes (particularly related to saints) and biblical
associations (historiola) have been constructed
around pre-existing Pagan beliefs and practices. Gentilcore
notes:
"The brief
magical formula that followed the historiola
was usually pronouned sotto voce, its very
secrecy giving it limitless power. By their nature, such words had
to escape the comprehension of the uninitiated in order to be
effective. Giuseppe Cocchiara identifies
this part of the invocation as a surviving pre-Christian magical formula
on to which has been tacked the Christian historiola.
Yet often the magical formula itself, which depends on the exorcisng power of words, took on a Christian form..."
This modification and arrogation of the foundational Pagan
elements of folk traditions has blinded most scholars to the lore,
beliefs, and practices of the earlier pre-existing authentic forms of
Italian witchcraft. By choosing to
view the modified Christian folk traditions as the original and normal
model, modern scholars fail to search in earnest for its Pagan roots (or
to recognize it once they encounter it).
Few if any modern scholars have personally
interviewed contemporary Italian witches.
One of the small numbers of modern scholars to explore the topic
of Italian witchcraft today is anthropologist Sabina Magliocco
who authored an article titled Spells, Saints, and Streghe
(published in Pomegranate, issue #13, August 2000).
In her article, Magliocco states that most of her knowledge of
Italian folk magic comes from ethnographic research and fieldwork in Sardinia, where she spent a cumulative 18 months living in a
highland community of sheep and goat pastoralists between 1986 and
1990. She makes it clear that her
knowledge is in the area of Italian folk magic. There is no claim by her
to possess anything resembling an intimate knowledge of Italian
witchcraft (as practiced in Italy or elsewhere). It seems likely that shepherds in Sardinia did possess some knowledge of folk magic as many
Italian do. However, it seems reasonably certain that these commoners
knew little if anything of authentic forms of witchcraft. Therefore they cannot seriously be viewed
as expert witnesses on Italian witchcraft.
Magliocco comments on the
influence of Charles G. Leland's Aradia, or the Gospel of Witches, and
goes on to say that Leland's material does not bear a strong resemblance
to Italian folk magical practice as documented in the ethnographic record
of the last 100 years. She also
claims this is true of modern Italian witchcraft traditions. Naturally there is little reason why
they should, because they are two different systems. As we have already
seen, the community of Italian witches possesses secret customs and
traditions (again noted by 19th century folklorist Roma Lister).
As previously Charles Leland mentions the
following from his field studies among self proclaimed witches (as
opposed to common people in a shepherd community, as was the case with Magliocco’s field studies):
“The witches of Italy form a class
who are the repositories of all the folklore; what is not at all
generally known, they also keep as strict secrets an immense number of
legends of their own, which have nothing in common with the nursery or
popular tales, such as are commonly collected and published ... the more
occult and singular of their secrets are naturally not of a nature to be
published ....”
In this light Magliocco’s
views are difficult to reconcile with those of professional Folklorists
in the 19th century who performed field studies among people who defined
themselves as witches. She
comments that Italian-American Witchcraft or Stregheria traditions differ
from Italian folk magical practice in several important ways. She first
states that Italian folk magic is not an organized or unified religion,
but a varied set of beliefs and practices. This is true, which is one of the
primary reasons it differs from Italian witchcraft.
Magliocco writes that while
folk magic has deep historical roots, it is not a survival of an ancient
religion, but an integral part of a rural peasant economy and way of
life, highly syncretized with folk Catholicism.
This is another reason why it differs from Italian witchcraft. She continues with the view that
knowledge of magical practices was at one time diffused throughout the
rural population, rather than limited to a secret group of magical
practitioners. Indeed such things
were diffused, but they were diffused from the secret societies into the
common population. However, the
material was never understood by the non-initiated, and was quickly
Christianized to conform with the standards of
contemporary society. Within the
“rural population” it quickly transformed into a diluted and
altered form that today is known as folk magic.
Magliocco concedes that the
context of Italian folk magical practice differs considerably from that
of contemporary Italian-American revival witchcraft, so that materials
are not always easily transferable from one system to another. This is precisely one of the main
reasons why they need to be understood as different systems. Their
differences do not render either as unauthentic but speak to different
systems that are not dependent upon one another.
In
her article, Magliocco states that all
traditions are perpetually in flux as their bearers constantly
re-interpret and re-invent them with each individual performance. She
further comments that revival and revitalization are part of the process
of tradition, even when the result is different from the original
practice itself. Ironically her
argument is therefore as true of folk magic as it would be of Italian
witchcraft. Consequently, since
folk traditions transform within the model that Magliocco
supports, they cannot be the measure of “authenticity” when
comparing them against Italian witchcraft or other systems. This would be particularly true of
anything that pre-dated the folk tradition, since the tradition itself
has transformed into something different from its roots.
Magliocco writes that one of
the problems with the idea of a unified organization of Italian witches
is that the Italian peninsula could not be said to have anything
resembling an integrated culture between the end of the Roman Empire (453ce) and the beginning of the 20th century,
making the existence of a secret, organized Italian witch cult nearly
impossible. However, the reality is that five folklorists in Italy (during the 19th century) independently discovered a
commonality within witchcraft traditions in different regions of Italy. Magliocco also comments that the development of a
unified Italian system of ritual magic, diffused through oral tradition
on a popular level, is unlikely before the 20th century. She goes on to add that any
generalizations about an Italian folk culture need to be treated with
great caution. The latter
statement is very true, which is yet another reason why folk traditions
and folk magic systems cannot be the universal measurements of
authenticity in an investigation and comparison of Italian witchcraft.
To understand Italian folklore and folk
magic (as opposed to authentic forms of witchcraft) it is helpful to look
at its literary history. According
to folklorist Italo Calvino (Italian Folktales)
it is generally accepted that Italian tales were recorded from the oral
tradition by the early Middle Ages.
Gianfrancesco Straparola and Giambattista
Basile compiled the earliest works. Straparola
wrote tales of wizardry and enchantment.
Basile wrote down old tales of
enchantment and superstition spoken by Italian peasants in Venice, Crete, and along the Mediterranean coast (circa
1637). Laura Gonzenbach,
a Swiss-German born in Sicily, gathered oral tales from the peasants of Sicily, and published her work in 1870.
The writings of Straparola
and Basile provide us with a snapshot of common
Italian lore, as it existed it Italy around the 15th century. Because we possess no earlier works it
is almost impossible to know what alterations were made over the
centuries, and how similar the tales are in relationship to the roots of
the beliefs and practices depicted in the written accounts. A further problem arises when we ask
whether beliefs about witches in folk tales represent what people actually
believed, or whether they reflect the fantastic.
In the book Out of the Woods: The
Origins of the Literary Fairy Tale in Italy and France, edited by
Nancy Canepa (published by Wayne State
University Press, 1997) the author points to manipulations and transformations
of the earlier folklore tales by certain authors of the 18th
century. This resulted in a change
of not only the core and flavor of the original folktales, but also
altered the social history through which they originally arose. Canepa notes
that this dominated fairy-tale scholarship well into the 1970s.
Scholar Jack Zipes,
in his book The Trials and Tribulations of Little Red Hiding Hood
(Routledge, 1993) states that
folktales “were told by priests in the vernacular as part
of their sermons to reach out to the peasantry”. Canepa points
out that “The authors – and audiences – of the first
French tales, as of the earlier Italian tales, were the elite frequenters
of courts and salons, and these authors lost no opportunity to use the
tales to air their views on prevailing social and political
conditions…” This
leaves us with the problem of how contrived were the retold tales, and
what personal gain existed in each occasion of the telling? In such a light, popular lore again
becomes unreliable as a standard by which to view the authenticity of
folklore as a reliable means of discerning cultural integrity. Instead it can be seen as exposing
political stratagem.
Canepa notes the problem
with viewing popular lore as reflective of the culture as a whole: “Moreover, in the case of the
fairly tale (v. other forms of ‘fantastic’ literature), the
situation of a given work in a precise sociocultural
context is further obfuscated by the tendency to regard fairy tales, even
when they are literary creations of individual authors, along the same
lines as oral folkltales: that is, as
collective, anonymous, products of a tale-telling community that may span
vast chronological and geographic boundaries”.
The problem for scholars is that the written
tales (which as we’ve seen have been manipulated and transformed
over the centuries) comprise the bulk of the research data used by the
academic community. Although some
modern scholars still seek out oral accounts, the written tales that
people have been exposed to from birth have no doubt contaminated the
oral tales that can still be encountered in contemporary times among the
common people. The problem is
further confounded by the fact that modern scholars reject the field
studies of 19th century folklorists who recorded the oral
accounts of lore and witchcraft drawn from people professing to be
witches. The favoring of exoteric
material over esoteric material by the academic community has resulted in
a misunderstanding of Italian witchcraft (both old and new) that may
never be resolved.
|
