Unveiling Superstition in Vieste: Popular Culture and Ecclesiastical Tribunals in the 18th-Century Kingdom of Naples

Abstract

This study aims to analyse two trials involving magic, superstition, exorcism, and witchcraft, which were held in 1713 in the Diocese of Vieste (present-day Apulia), Kingdom of Naples. It aims to illuminate the dynamics between the Church, magical practices, and the territorial context, providing insights into this less-explored period in inquisition history when the Catholic Church’s fight against superstition was beginning to wane. The first trial against Rita di Ruggiero is very rich in detail, giving us a clear vision of which magical practices were used during the Modern Age. Additionally, it touches, albeit only marginally, on a theme that will be crucial for the duration of these practices in the Kingdom of Naples: the complex interactions between state and ecclesiastical authorities. The second 1713 trial involving Elisabetta Del Vecchio explores accusations of bewitchment, contributing to our understanding of witchcraft paradigms.

1. Introduction

The aim of this study is to shed light on the dynamics between the Church, magical practices, and the local context in the Kingdom of Naples and to offer insights into this lesser-known period in the history of the Inquisition, when the battle against superstition was beginning to decline. To better understand the reasons for the endurance of these magical practices into the twentieth century, the events described here should be placed in the context of broader relations between bishops and secular courts. This broader context will not be addressed here, but it has been the subject of extensive analysis (Romano 2023). This study aims to demonstrate that the bishops’ lack of interest in punishing magical practices allowed for the survival of such practices until the first half of the twentieth century, as their presence in Lucania in the 1950s was attested to in the ethnographical research of Ernesto De Martino (De Martino 1959).

I decided to analyse two trials conducted in 1713 within the Diocese of Vieste, Kingdom of Naples, related to evil magic (maleficium), documentation for which was maintained in the Acta Criminalia collection of the archive of the bishop’s court in Vieste. The first trial in 1713 was held against a woman called Rita di Ruggiero, who was accused of owning a “pagan hand” (mano pagana)—the limb of an unbaptised dead child—to practice evil magic against children. It offers rich detail on magical practices and reveals complex interactions between state and ecclesiastical authorities. Specifically, the woman was accused of having practiced evil magic on the child of Niccolò Pastorella, a servant of the vicarius (the deputy of the bishop in his absence), for vengeance, as he refused to return belongings of Rita’s that the vicarius had confiscated after a previous arrest. Rita explained to the court that after making several requests for the return of her belongings, she had warned Niccolò Pastorella that she would have recourse to the services of the secular authorities of the Kingdom of Naples (Delegation of the Royal Jurisdiction) and that she would not only do so to avoid scandal for the vicarius. The trial ended with her exculpation, and it is probable that this outcome was because the priority of the Church was to protect the honour of its members rather than to care for their souls (Mancino and Romeo 2013; Firpo 2022).

The second trial was held against a woman called Angela Carella for the alleged bewitchment of a young man called Giacomo Donnangelo, but it soon turned into a trial against another woman called Elisabetta del Vecchio, who was accused of performing magic operations on him, witchcraft banquets, and fraud.

The trials describe the magic practices of the people in rich detail and contribute to our understanding of the Italian maleficium paradigm, which was more linked to evil magic and sorcery than diabolic witchcraft, as in the alpine region.1

The paradigm of maleficium as malevolent magic was also at the basis of the moderate orientation of the Holy Office against the alleged witches (striges/maleficae). It was formalised in two documents: the Instructio pro formandis processibus in causis strigum, sortilegiorum et maleficorum (Romeo 1990; Decker 2008) and the Prattica per procedere nelle cause del Santo Officio (Dall’Olio 2001b, pp. 79–90; Lavenia 2001, pp. 36–80; Romeo 1990, pp. 25–65). In these documents, it is assumed that ignorant women deluded by the devil practise malevolent magic (maleficium).

This model, which was prevalent but not exclusive in the Italian context, was inspired by the Canon Episcopi, a medieval collection of canon law, and did not contemplate the existence of a real Sabbath, which was the basis for the concept of witchcraft as a diabolic sect of women that adored the devil, as expressed in the Malleus Maleficarum, a book written in 1486 by the German inquisitor Heinrich Kramer. The ecclesiastical tribunal of Vieste, in affirming the concept of women as unable to do harm with magic arts because of their ignorance, seems to follow the moderate line of the Holy Office, showing more interest in maintaining control over these crimes under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction than strictly punishing the alleged culprits.

2. Materials and Methods

The exploration of these mostly unknown archival records—thanks to their rich details—led me to a methodological choice aligned with the epistemological framework of cultural studies. I decided to embrace a qualitative investigative approach with what the anthropologist Clifford Geertz called “thick description”, defined as “the interpretation of social interaction in a given society in terms of that society’s own norms and categories” (Burke 1987, p. 3). Access to exhaustive procedural documentation encompassing Informationes (the preliminary phase of the trials), trial proceedings, testimonials, confessions, and judgments allows us to reach a rich array of interpretative insights based on both micro- and macro-historical research methods. The trials consisted of long interrogations that show the improper translation of the popular categories of magic into stereotypes imposed by the judges and based on theological, canonical, and inquisitorial patterns (Burke 1987, p. 40; Ginzburg 1979, 1983; 1989a, pp. 23–34; 2006, p. 311).

3. Superstition and Popular Magic: Preliminary Definitions

The two trials of Vieste testify that caution regarding bewitchment and witchcraft allegations, in addition to concerns for the jurisdictional supremacy of the secular authorities, allowed the superstitions to survive into the first half of the twentieth century, as demonstrated by the anthropologist Ernesto De Martino (De Martino 1959). Thus, it is necessary to consider that the concept of superstition (superstitio) (See Burkardt 2010), and its transformation, can be analysed in a longue durée. During the Middle Ages, syncretic forms of devotions persisted in rural areas, representing a natural apotropaic response to impending negative forces, such as poor harvests, plagues, and storms. This necessitated a series of individual and collective protection devices based on the use of liturgical formulas and sacred objects, such as blessed hosts and holy water, for magical and propitiatory purposes. For example, saintly images with miraculous powers were used to heal illnesses, white candles were used to ward off evil spirits, and incense fumigations were used to cure animals. All these paraliturgical activities, which were not condemned by the Church, fell into a category that still operated within a tolerated space and were considered “vain observances” or “superstitiones”, which the Church—being engaged in other battles, particularly the fight against heresies—did not concern itself with (Romeo 1990).

4. Popular Devotions and Inquisition

The Protestant reformation that rocked the European religious conscience in the early 16th century saw the Catholic Church attempting to contain this powerful competitor, which attacked not only the vain observances of the folkloric world but also accused the Catholic Church itself of having its own vain observances, superstitiones, based on ritualism. Driven by the pressing Protestant reform, in the early 16th century, the Church found itself compelled to reflect on means of eradicating the vain observances that abounded, especially in rural villages (Cameron 2010, pp. 20–23; Clark 1997, pp. 532–33; Delumeau 1974, pp. 461–87). From the second half of the 16th century, popular devotions with pagan flavours came under the scrutiny of the reformed Inquisition.

5. The Bull “Coeli et Terrae Creator”

The direct intervention of Pope Sixtus V via the bull “Coeli et terrae creator”, in 1586, transformed superstitio from vain observance and material error into abuse and heresy. The bull was the consequence of the diffusion of medieval demonophobic treatises of Thomistic imprint and a renewed ecclesiastical jurisprudence based on the works of Girolamo Menghi and Martin Del Rio (Brambilla 2006, pp. 143–44; Caffiero 2015, pp. 129–30; Lavenia 2014a, 2014b). It is important to make a distinction between two different juridical facies of superstitio: superstitio simplex and diabolica superstitio. Simple superstitio was characterised by therapeutic illicit prayers and could be punished with salutary penances, as it was considered a material error. Meanwhile, diabolica superstitio implied a pact with the devil and a violation of the first commandment (idolatry). The latter crossed into the crime of heresy and became pertinent for inquisitors (Lasson 2010).

6. From Bishops to Inquisitors: The Direct Control over Superstition and the Bull “Immensa Aeterni Dei”

Direct control over superstitio by inquisitors was judicially sanctioned by the bull “Immensa Aeterni Dei”, issued by Pope Sixtus V, which extended the power of inquisition not only to manifest heresy but also to presumed heresy (Prosperi 1996, p. 391). Presumed heresy thus referred to vain observances (superstitiones), including divination, enchantments, spellbinding, and magical therapeutic practices, involving the intervention of a supernatural agent beyond the control of the sacred space (metaphorical or real) delimited by the Church, thus involuntarily invoking the devil. Thomas Aquinas’ definition of superstitio returned, as echoed in modern demonological treatises: both an explicit pact with the devil and an involuntary implicit pact were heretical. Superstitio thus became a potential hint of a crime of faith when moving from the Canon Episcopi—which denies the reality of witchcraft and flight to the Sabbath—to demonological treatises; that is, it moved from sorcery (involuntary) to witchcraft (voluntary) (Bailey 2001, p. 962; Clark 1997, pp. 11–30; Lavenia 2003, p. 465; Martino 2011, pp. 69–116).

7. The Control of Popular Religiosity

After the period of 1530–1570, which was dedicated entirely to the repression of heresy and witchcraft, superstitio became a main issue of interest. In this field, the Church moved more cautiously, directly addressing the control and surveillance of popular religiosity (Prosperi 1996, pp. 368–99). The penetration of Tridentine directives was challenging, especially in the Kingdom of Naples, where they had to contend with a deeply rooted folkloric tradition. Indeed, from the beginning of the Modern Age, the living conditions of the rural population were strained by plagues, famine, and a lack of hygiene. In this scenario of real and psychological misery, magic worked as a powerful protective tool against the risks of existence and against impending negativity, represented, for example, by a failed harvest. Agricultural rituals flourished, and practices with pre-Christian roots were still active, especially considering that during the Middle Ages, the Church had allowed their maintenance in an attempt to give a different meaning to these beliefs and practices rather than extirpate them by substituting “pagan” symbols with symbols and elements of Catholic liturgy (Romeo 1990). The Church conducted an acculturative process in order to Christianise vain observances and, after the Council of Trent, a choice was made to monitor and register them in denunciations and spontaneous confessions (spontanea comparitio), rather than punish them, from the perspective of control and surveillance (Prosperi 1996). Therefore, cases brought to trial for popular magical crimes or diabolical superstitio mainly resulted in penance, exile, or the payment of fines (Brambilla 2006, p. 147).

8. Ecclesiastical Tribunals and Superstition: The Specificity of the Dioceses of the Kingdom of Naples

In the Kingdom of Naples, the acculturation strategy was subjected to continuous re-adjustment on a precarious balance. To keep the faithful within the Church’s fold, the ecclesiastical authorities were forced to compromise with folkloric tradition, laboriously distinguishing between the tolerated and non-tolerated among the vast categories of superstitio. This was also due to the fact that the authorities managing the pastoral care of the dioceses—the bishops—were often unaware of the territorial realities under their jurisdiction. In order to avoid the spread of superstition, the Council of Trent imposed residency requirements for the bishops within the diocese itself and compelled them to carry out “ethnographic missions” in the most remote and inaccessible areas of the dioceses’ rural peripheries (Burke 1987, pp. 40–47; Del Col 2006, p. 626; Ginzburg 1989a, pp. 22–33; Prosperi 1996, p. 371). Furthermore, in the Kingdom of Naples (except for the capital city of the Kingdom), bishops were also deputised for inquisition. They often came from noble families of the northern peninsula and found themselves facing a radically different cultural reality characterised by the strong presence of a pre-Christian substratum, which was difficult to dissolve.

9. Unofficial Healers: Country Priests, Midwives, and Village Therapists

Indeed, above the horizon of unofficial healers, there were also priests (Di Simplicio 2000, pp. 99–110). Country priests—often drawn to the clergy out of necessity rather than vocation—shared the beliefs and values of their community, and they were often asked to perform ritual healings on livestock or to unbind those affected by magical “spells” (Duni 1999; O’Neil 1984). They were often the first magical operators to perform overtly superstitious rituals for therapeutic purposes or covertly superstitious rituals under the veil of an imprecisely codified exorcism practice, such that they were the official providers of therapy. Furthermore, they enjoyed the support of local witches (better called sorcerers), who were the unofficial therapeutic operators: midwives, healers, village therapists, and devout Catholics, as Rita de Ruggiero and Elisabetta Del Vecchio were (Corsi 2013; Milani 1986, 1994; Montesano 2012).

10. The Ambivalence of Magic

Magic operated within a framework of bewitchment management based on resolving attacks through counter-magic. Both the local and ecclesiastical perception of the healer figure invested it with an ambivalent power due to the intrinsic ambivalence of magic, capable of both healing and poisoning and blessing and cursing (Romeo 1990). Diseases were often attributed to preternatural or diabolical causes. These perceived diabolical influences were believed to act through tangible individuals rather than as divine retribution. Typically, these individuals—largely women and often elderly—were identified as culprits, a designation influenced by both practical and societal factors (Agrimi and Crisciani 1992). Primarily, elderly women not engaged in agrarian labour assumed roles as wet nurses and midwives within their communities. Secondly, their status as widows or unmarried women placed them on the margins of societal acceptance within the Catholic community, rendering them potentially threatening to established social order. Additionally, drawing from ancient, gendered divisions of labour in which women were associated with herb lore, these women possessed intimate knowledge of herbal remedies, which could be perceived as both healing and harmful. The attribution of malefic abilities to these women, capable of both healing and harming, became intertwined with notions of diabolical pact-making, conflating their medicinal practices with accusations of witchcraft. Notably, ecclesiastical authorities categorised maleficium as a form of magical homicide subject to secular legal jurisdiction, contrasting with magic-related crimes tried in ecclesiastical or episcopal courts as matters of faith. Within a societal framework in which a fear of malevolent forces prevailed, identifying scapegoats within the community became imperative. Elderly women, often marginalised within Christian communities due to widowhood or unmarried status, possessing knowledge of traditional pharmacopeia and perceived as capable of both healing and harming, perfectly fit the stereotype of the witch.

11. A Strategic Point of Defence: Vieste as a Spanish Military Presidium and a Border of Christianity Facing the Ottoman Empire

Amidst the broader context of the Kingdom of Naples, the Diocese of Vieste is worthy of specific analysis. Due to its position, isolated but overlooking the Adriatic coasts, as well as located directly in front of the dangerous Ottoman Empire, the Diocese of Vieste was a point of interest both for Rome and the Spanish Viceroyalty (Spedicato 1995, p. 13). Indeed, there was a military presidium kept directly by a Spanish general (Castellano) and by the papal court in Rome. The latter, in order to maintain a balance of power on the dangerous border, had a particular eye for the diocese and avoided its suppression, even if it was small (Spedicato 1995, p. 14). At the same time, Vieste was dependent (suffraganea) on the larger Diocese of Manfredonia (the ancient Siponto)2, where during that period, the seat was occupied by one of the most zealous bishops in the Kingdom of Naples, Vincenzo Maria Orsini, from 1675 to 1680 (with the subsequent papal figurehead being Benedict XIII) (see De Caro 1966). The period spanning from the latter half of the seventeenth century to the early eighteenth century marked a discernible shift in the ascendancy of both state powers and episcopal authorities, coupled with a gradual decline in the Inquisition’s engagement with matters of magic, witchcraft, and superstition. The Kingdom of Naples had already asserted its jurisdictional prerogatives both locally and centrally, superseding the feeble initiatives of the bishops and the Vatican ambassador (Nuncius). At the same time, during the pontificate of Pope Innocent XI (1679–1689), there was a new season of reform in the body of the Catholic Church.). The Pontiff encouraged the bishops to engage in their pastoral duties across the Italian peninsula, causing a shift to a renewed interest in censoring superstitions and magic (Del Col 2006, p. 628; Menniti Ippolito 2004). The attention to superstitions and magic arts was manifested in the Orsini Synodal Acts of 1678, in particular in chapter II, paragraphs II and III, in which he banned magic, witchcraft, and divination (Magos, Striges, Maleficos, Veneficos, and Ariolos) (Ursino 1678a, Caput II, De fide tuenda, II–III, pp. 134–35). Orsini also added into the Appendix of the synod the Edictum of the Holy Office against heresy, magic, and “superstition”, with the order for the priests of the diocese to publish it two times per year, on the first Sunday of Lent and the first Sunday of Advent. (See Ursino 1678b, Titulus II ex Libro Costitutionum, Cap. II, comma 4 Editto del S.Offitio, pp. 2–8.) He also prepared a questionnaire for apostolic visitors, through which he collected statistics on the lifestyle and Christian manners of the people among the diocese (Burke 1987, p. 44). These dispositions apparently had an impact on the small, dependent Diocese of Vieste and on the deep examinations of the alleged culprits by the episcopal court in the trials that will be analysed in the following paragraphs.

12. The Trial of Rita de Ruggiero: Prosecuting Superstition and Guarding the Honour of the Clergy

12.1. Maleficium: A Case of Public Order

The first case study, dated 1713, involved a woman named Rita di Ruggiero.3 On 17 June 1713, the public prosecutor (Promotoris fiscalis) presented himself in front of the episcopal court. According to his report, Rita di Ruggiero—a resident of the aforementioned town—was accused of owning an unbaptized child’s hand, colloquially referred to as a “mano pagana”. The prosecutor asserted that Rita intended to employ this artefact for purposes associated with “superstitions”, rituals, and magical practices. The prosecutor further elucidated his case, asserting that on that very morning, the mano pagana accidentally fell from Rita’s balcony (Mignale) and was found by Mattea Ruggiero, her niece, who was in Rita’s house. Mattea brought it to a neighbour, Porzia Pastorella, who from that moment owned the aforementioned mano pagana. The prosecutor contended that Rita, through magical arts, caused illness in several children in the town, specifying that the victims were the son of Niccolò Pastorella and Giovanna Fuccio, the son of Niccolò Cappabianca and Gentilia Capite, and the son of Alessio Stunij and Antonia Moisè. Consequently, he urged an immediate inquiry and the imprisonment of Rita, advocating for legal consequences as per established laws, with the intent to set a precedent for other people in order to avoid the spread of popular magic practices. Responding promptly, the general vicarius convoked witnesses, of which Porzia Pastorella was the first. Once in front of the episcopal court, Porzia declared that Mattea, the sixteen-year-old niece of Rita, found the hand in a canvas bag. Alarmed, the girl went to her house and told her what she had found. After consulting with her neighbours and her confessor, Porzia decided to take possession of the pagan hand from Mattea and subsequently delivered it to the vicarius. Upon his inspection during her interrogation, Porzia identified the hand, confirming its characteristics:

“This is the same hand that Mattea found on the Mignale of Rita and brought to show me. It consists of four whole fingers and one broken, housed in a small white canvas bag, within which there is another layer of black taffeta. The said hand is further enveloped in pieces of wet, oil-soaked paper”.4

Porzia Pastorella declared that she knew where the mano pagana had come from: Rita’s sister-in-law, Genzilla Della Torraca, the mother of Mattea and wife of Portia’s brother, Niccolò Pastorella, who had experienced the tragic delivery of a stillborn girl four years prior. The midwife, Lidia Telli, carefully enveloped the lifeless infant in white fabric. In a gesture of compassion, Rita volunteered to bury the unbaptized child in a deconsecrated place. A few hours later, Rita returned, explaining that her son—who had accompanied her for the burial—became frightened, prompting their premature return. Surprisingly, she placed the bundle containing the deceased infant in the breadbox of Porzia’s husband, suggesting it would be more appropriate for him to undertake the burial. Porzia had noticed that the bundle was no longer covered in white fabric but an old pair of pants. Suspicious, Porzia opened it on her mother-in-law’s advice to check whether the body was intact:

“[…] and having unstitched it, I saw with my own eyes that the aforementioned creature did not remain as it was placed by the midwife, as it had been placed whole and without any missing limbs. At that time, it was missing one hand, and I do not remember if it was the right or left, but it was evident that it had been cut. After recognising the rest of the body, I also saw that on one foot, near the popliteal bone, a piece of flesh and skin was missing, seemingly cut. For this reason, I said to my aforementioned mother-in-law, ‘Rita must have cut off a hand and a piece of flesh from the creature’, and my mother-in-law replied, ‘Her soul will weep’”.5

12.2. Popular Magic Tools and “Mana”

The mano pagana was a supposedly powerful popular magic tool commonly used for magical practices in the Kingdom of Naples (Romeo 2020). The concept of “mana” attributes magical energy to this hand, which was believed to be bestowed by demons due to the unbaptized status of the child involved (Delumeau 2018, p. 482). Specifically, Rita was accused by Porzia Pastorella of having practiced bewitchment (maleficium) against her son, touching the child in vengeance for the quarrel she had with her husband Niccolò Pastorella. After the denunciation of Porzia, other women in the neighbourhood, Antonia Moisé and Genzilla Capite, also accused Rita de Ruggiero in front of the episcopal court of bewitching their children by touching them. Therefore, Rita emerged as a quintessential archetype of the rural witch endowed with the malevolent touch (Di Simplicio 2000, p. 111; Briggs 1996).

Popular culture did not establish clear boundaries that distinguished tolerated magical operations (considered beneficial) from forbidden magical rituals (deemed malefic). While ecclesiastical authorities perceived the inherent ambivalence in magical healers as “superstitious”, in the popular mentality, good and evil could coexist within the same figure, attributing the malevolent or benevolent nature to the action performed. Therefore, for the women of the village, Rita was also a therapeutic operator (Di Simplicio 2000), as she had the capability both to heal and to harm. For both ecclesiastical authorities and the common people, magical practices were characterised by precise sequences that placed them in a defined framework. Magical practices to kill (ad mortem) and to gain love (ad amorem) had rituals and characteristics distinct from healing practices (ad sanitatem), as these latter practices involved elements of Catholic liturgy and were often employed to neutralise magical harmful practices through the tactic of counter-magic (Di Simplicio 2000, p. 112).6 This aligns with Keith Thomas’ classic interpretation, whereby the magical practitioner was alternatively capable of healing or bewitching (Thomas 1971, p. 44). Hence, it can be asserted that a certain devotional creativity in the Modern Age consisting of rituals and unofficial prayers for health, while branded as superstition by ecclesiastical authorities, was classified as beneficial in popular belief, in stark contrast to maleficent magic (Bailey 2007; Cameron 2010; Caravale 2003; Fantini 1996, 2000, 2005). Indeed, many of the women interrogated declared that they had gone back to Rita to heal their children. However, at that time, what aroused suspicion among the women was a change in Rita’s healing process. According to all testimonies, Rita used to touch children’s bellies and recite prayers. In the case of the children of Antonia Moisé and Genzilla Capite, the magical operation differed. Rita took them in her arms and placed them on her chest; then, the two women declared that she “emptied” them, meaning that she shook them and drained away their vital energy, performing on them maleficium, with the malevolent touch.

12.3. The Midwife Lidia Telli: An Unofficial Consultant for the Illness of the Children

In pursuit of confirmation, Nicola Cimaglia, the general vicarious, first enlisted the expertise of the midwife Lidia Telli. In Vieste, as in other places in the Kingdom, midwives were authorised to baptize newborns if they were born in precarious conditions or far from the church (Gentilcore 1994, p. 144; Romeo 2020, p. 68). They were often considered dangerous figures capable of harming newborns due to their ambivalent nature, straddling magical practices and religion (Van Teijlingen et al. 2004). In the case of infant illnesses or childbirth difficulties, midwives were frequently accused of being witches: pregnant women were especially vulnerable to sorcery and the evil eye, and midwives were often regarded with a certain degree of suspicion. Hence, an innocent practitioner might be accused of sorcery if a delivery had an unhappy outcome or if there were difficulties with nursing the infant (Gentilcore 1994, p. 146).

Therefore, ecclesiastical authorities—despite the strict distinction in theory between superstition, magic, and religion—had an ambivalent attitude towards midwives, who occupied an intersectional space (Di Simplicio 2000, pp. 99–110; Gentilcore 1994, p. 146; Romeo 2020, p. 68). They could be responsible for abortions, the death of newborns, and magical operations, but at the same time, they could administer sacraments to unbaptized newborns. In the case of the newborn of Genzilla Della Torraca from whom Rita took the limb, Lidia was recognised for her medical competence during the delivery. When the woman was called to assess the health of the child of Antonia Moisé, who was presumed to be bewitched by Rita, she answered with a clear diagnosis:

“As I have seen with my own eyes, and according to my expertise observed diligently by order of this Episcopal Court, I found that the said son is indeed damaged by a spell in the chest, for which he has been completely dried, and is of less stature than it was, and should be, for his age, especially since when I took him at the time his mother gave birth, he was born beautiful and healthy, as I know that he grows for about seven or eight months before being bewitched”.7

The ecclesiastical court, recognising the need for a thorough examination, called upon the physician of the town, Francesco Santopietro, to ascertain whether the illnesses affecting the child were the result of natural causes or bewitchment. This aligns with the Instructio pro formandis processibus in causis strigum sortilegiorum et maleficorum, which mandates the search for “corpus delicti”, or evidence of maleficium, to prevent the transfer of accused individuals to secular courts (Brambilla 2006, p. 145; Decker 2008, p. 146; Lavenia 2001, pp. 70–71; Tedeschi 1997, p. 214).

In his statement, the physician provided invaluable diagnostic documentation through an extensive exposition elucidating the four potential causes of the children’s deterioration: malnutrition, worms, comedones, and obstruction of the mesenteric glands. According to the medical manual to which Santopietro referred, De morbis puerorum by Scipione Mercurio, in addition to the four aforementioned natural causes, there was a fifth cause: fascinatio (bewitchment): […] the fifth and last cause of illness of children is bewitchment for which children become fragile and sick (as written in the XXIX article of Est mulleci praxi liber V de morbis puerorum).8

12.4. The Diagnosis Made by the Physician Francesco Santopietro: Fascinatio

Nevertheless, during the period afforded for her defence, Rita’s legal representative against the ecclesiastical tribunal, Don Francesco Ciarpagliano, presented incontrovertible evidence. Primarily, numerous witnesses attested to Rita’s identity as a woman who was engaged in communicative, confessional, and pious activities devoid of any indication of an association with witchcraft. An additional dimension was introduced to the proceedings: Rita’s assertion that Niccolò Pastorella had assaulted her. The woman testified that she had been incarcerated in the past and her belongings confiscated. In the archive, there is no evidence of a previous trial against Rita except for the deposition of Lonarda Sciarro, a woman accused of having used evil magic against the Royal Spanish governor, who declared that Rita de Ruggiero was in the episcopal prison with her in 1675.9 Once liberated, Rita had implored Niccolò to convey to his uncle—who served the vicar similarly—the need to return her confiscated possessions. Niccolò declined and they quarrelled, during which Niccolò Pastorella kicked Rita. Given Niccolò and his uncle’s affiliation with the vicarius, this aspect likely influenced the proceedings. Rita, having failed to regain possession of her belongings, appealed to the Delegation of Royal Jurisdiction in Naples for justice. She declared she had decried to the State an abuse of power on a subject of the Viceroy by ecclesiastical authorities. As the previous trial had ended and she had served the sentence, she had the right to regain her belongings.

12.5. The Involvement of the Delegation of Royal Jurisdiction

Intriguingly, the State Archives of Naples yielded no evidence of Rita di Ruggiero’s petition, with a sole reference found in Pandette 165, housing the antiquarian inventory and, thus, the presumed repository of the Records of the Delegation of Royal Jurisdiction: a note pertaining to a request from a woman in Vieste named Margherita di Ruggiero, precisely dated 1713.10 Despite forwarding her petition to Naples, Rita reported to the vicarius that she encountered a continued deprivation of her belongings. During his interrogation, Niccolò Pastorella averred that Rita had menaced him with maleficium. Rita, in response, acknowledged the threat but framed it as an expression of his fortune in being in the vicar’s employ and that she did not want to create a scandal; otherwise, she would have brought a lawsuit against him to the Viceroy because Niccolò mistreated her “in the honour and as a person”.11 However, her case ostensibly failed to find any significance or merit in the eyes of the Delegation of Royal Jurisdiction, which evidently refrained from scrutinising the restoration of her confiscated belongings. Due to the scarcity of information, it is only possible to make a conjectural hypothesis. The servants of the vicarius—namely, Niccolò Pastorella and his uncle—took advantage of their privileged condition, underscoring the recurrent interplay between state authority and ecclesiastical power dynamics. The servants of the vicarius—namely, Niccolò Pastorella and his uncle—took advantage of their privileged condition, mistreating a subject of his Majesty.12 The lack of interest of the Delegation of Royal Jurisdiction may be attributed to the geographical remoteness of Vieste, which was situated kilometres away from Naples, making it difficult to supervise affairs in the small diocese. Furthermore, Rita di Ruggiero contended that during the delivery of her sister-in-law’s (Genzilla Della Torraca) infant, she could not have been present due to her restricted freedom. Her incarceration, by the way, was converted to a tenure at the residence of the court usher thanks to the institution of pleggiaria.13 Upon interrogation, the usher asserted that Rita had not ventured beyond her abode. Due to this new incarceration in ecclesiastical prisons, Rita presented a plea to Bishop Camillo Caravita, complaining that the vicarius Nicola Cimaglia had subjected her to imprisonment employing stringent measures from the beginning, obstructing her access to the legal proceedings and sabotaging her defence.14 In a harsh letter on August 14, the vicarius ordered the examination of Rita’s conditions by the city’s three physicians, directing them to attend the prison and ascertain the prisoner’s state; unfortunately, the physicians’ responses could not be found in the archive of the Episcopal court.15 After a long defence, during which all witnesses who, in the previous interrogation, had declared that they saw with their own eyes that Rita had exhumed the newborn child to cut his hand off declared that they had only heard about it, Rita was liberated due to a lack of evidence.

13. The Trial of Elisabetta Del Vecchio: From Bewitchment to Fraud

13.1. The Report of Giacomo Donnangelo

On 12 September 1713, the general vicarius of the Episcopal Tribunal received the denunciation of a young man, Giacomo Donnangelo, who accused a woman called Angela Carella of having bewitched him.16 Giacomo declared that he had gone to two sanctuaries—Santissima Incoronata in Foggia and San Vito in Polignano—in order to be exorcised by the exorcists of the sanctuaries; however, the operations had seemingly failed, as Giacomo seemed to feel better but, upon returning to Vieste, experienced pain once again. He declared that a woman called Elisabetta told him that the person responsible for the maleficium was his neighbour, Angela Carella. Giacomo did not add other details and asked the bishop’s court to find the culprits. The denunciation immediately turned into an Informatio, and the episcopal court called Don Carmine Rescigno (the local priest) and Apollonia Ianola (Giacomo’s mother) to testify. The next day, Giacomo was interrogated.17 He declared to the episcopal court that a woman had been to his house several months before and had asked his mother, Apollonia, to sell her a towel. After that, the woman—whose name was Elisabetta—had told Apollonia that she knew Giacomo had been bewitched and had offered to heal Giacomo herself under the sole condition that he remove every object of devotion that was placed above his bed. Giacomo presumed that Elisabetta was going to perform diabolic magic because of the requirement that all objects signifying Catholicism be removed, as the force of the saints and the power of God could act as obstacles to the devil’s intervention (Lopez 1984). Giacomo declared to the vicarius that he had not removed anything, as he did not want to go against God. Elisabetta also affirmed that she would have worked to assist the soul of Giacomo during the night, in the form of an invisible entity. Giacomo, during his interrogation, went on to declare that the woman had visited his house and had performed the following operations: she had licked his forehead, bitten the nails of his hands and feet, picked some of the hair from the left and right sides of his head, and recited inaudible words. The intelligibility of the words was a critical element—a distinction between prayer and unknown or magical words. What often characterises magical formulas or superstitious prayers, as highlighted in numerous studies and evident in the documentation of this work, is their unintelligibility or their being whispered, characterising them as incomprehensible words (Frajese 2011). For the ecclesiastical authorities, it is essential to remember that unknown words were equated with magical words. Two monks, Vincenzo Giustiniani and Pietro Querini, had already raised the question in 1513 via a letter to pope Leone X, the “Libellus ad Leonem X”. In their letter, they urged the pontiff to change the language of masses from Latin to local idioms to prevent the public, who were unfamiliar with Latin, from replicating it in private devotion, transforming it into a magical formula (Giustiniani and Quirini 1995, comments by Geminiano Bianchini, pp. 95–114; Lavenia 2013). Another element supporting this need was expressed in 1559 by a decree of the Holy Office, which forbid all the illicit prayers in local idioms, also emphasising the risk that the devil might be conjured through lexical errors in the recitation of a prayer (Frajese 2006, pp. 376, 380–82). Other elements led the interrogation in the direction of an allegation of witchcraft. The very night after the healing, while sleeping, Giacomo had felt his bed levitating. When Elisabetta returned to his house the following day, she declared that the bed was levitating due to her presence and that she was there to assist him in an invisible form. Giacomo then narrated how something strange had occurred during that night. The day after, when Elisabetta had again returned to the house, Giacomo had told her that he had felt a huge weight on his stomach the previous night.18 Elisabetta had answered that she had worked all night long for him, going to all the sanctuaries, and that she was tired and hurt, as “her companions”—she did not specify who—had not allowed her to heal Giacomo because he had not removed the devotional objects from above his bed. Giacomo’s statement refers to modern folkloric imagination, influenced by strong post-Tridentine preaching on the devil’s powers, illusions, and his connection to magic, witches, and wizards, allowing them to move and reach bodies at night, especially during sleep (Clark 1997, p. 193). After that, she again returned to Giacomo’s house, bringing a wax doll with needles, telling him that she had found it in the backyard of his neighbour, Angela Carella, and that this woman was responsible for causing his pain with the doll (maggia).19 Giacomo refused to believe the accusation against Angela Carella, as she was his “commara” (Godmother), a role in popular Italian culture that also served as insurance against magical actions. Elisabetta had declared that she would have attended the mass at the festivity of Saint Anthony of Padua on the 13th of June to lick the pavement, that she would have eaten only water and bread, and that she would have burnt the doll in order to repel the curse. Instead, Giacomo, Don Carmine Rescigno, Elisabetta, and the deacon Don Leonardo Quarto burned the wax doll in Giacomo’s room. Regardless, he did not feel any relief. The day after, Elisabetta offered her services again; however, Giacomo, taking the advice of Don Carmine Rescigno, did not accept.

13.2. The Interrogation of Elisabetta Del Vecchio and the Involvement of Don Carmine Rescigno, the Local Priest

The second person questioned was Elisabetta Del Vecchio.20 She was portrayed as yet another curative figure endowed with ambivalent qualities and capabilities, possessing the duality to both ameliorate and inflict harm, to nullify curses and invoke them. It is interesting to note that on the very first day, she had met Giacomo Donnangelo and his mother in order to offer her therapeutic services after being called by the priest Don Carmine Rescigno. The latter intervened, warning Elisabetta not to use superstitions or any other thing offensive to God, or else she would not receive absolution. What is evident in this statement is the condemnation—at least on paper—by the ecclesiastical authorities of superstition, which was understood in its diabolical aspect. It should have been absolved in forum fori in front of the vicarius (as the deputy of the bishop during his absence) (Brambilla 2006, pp. 56–57). The impossibility of absolution, as threatened by Don Carmine, clearly indicates how the “superstitious” practices Elisabetta would have carried out were diabolical, a crime of faith falling under the jurisdiction of the Holy Office.

However, the woman replied to the court that she would heal Giacomo with the assistance and help of God. Elisabetta had previously told Giacomo to remove religious relics and devotional items from above his bed, claiming that she and her companions would come at night to heal him by working magical practices on his body. He refused because he was afraid that his wife, who was pregnant, would become scared, so Elisabetta assured Giacomo that she would blindfold his wife to prevent her fear, using a spell on her eyes. These initial statements by Giacomo reveal a wide range of information about magical practices for therapeutic purposes and their relationship with official devotion.

Elisabetta confirmed her visit to Giacomo the previous evening and stated that she was present under the table while Giacomo and his mother recited the rosary. Of particular interest is the coexistence in the imagination of Elisabetta of her non-corporeal movement during the rosary recitation, revealing a continuity between the magical world and the world of official devotion (Romeo 1990, p. 190). This confirms the strong syncretism in popular religiosity, a logical continuity, and coherence between what the ecclesiastical authority of the Modern Age defined as superstition and official devotion, as theorised by Ernesto de Martino in his famous research in the 1950s and defined as Popular Catholicism (De Martino 1959). During his interrogation, Giacomo had declared that Elisabetta had also told him that, if he wished, she would show him where the bewitchment (maggia) against him physically existed: “It’s inside a small house in a hole, inside the house of Angela Carella”.21 Moreover, she had explained to Giacomo that the bewitchment was working against him as follows: as Angela Carella pricked and tormented the doll that she had made, at the same time, Giacomo experienced suffering in his person.22

The elements present in this statement immediately evoke the use of sympathetic magic through a simulacrum (Mauss 2002; Dubuisson 2016). Hair, similar to the nails Elisabetta had chewed off Giacomo, represented elements intimately connected to a person’s body and was a common component of magical operations; furthermore, common items, such as nursing pins, were used for their sharp nature and their common use for tying bands. In this trial, they were employed to prick the doll, which, in turn, represented the bewitched person (the practice of using a bewitching doll has been attested in numerous ethnographic and anthropological studies, including those by Ernesto de Martino on popular magic in Lucania (De Martino 1959)).

The woman also declared that she had been expressly called to heal Giacomo by Don Carmine Rescigno at the request of the mother of the young man, Apollonia. Elisabetta declared that she had accepted in order to avoid disappointing Apollonia; however, when she had gone to the house of Angela Carella in order to buy a hat (coppolella), she had seen that the latter had hidden a wax doll behind a toilet in her backyard. She had asked Angela if she had had any argument with Giacomo, and Angela had answered that she was angry with him, as she had asked him to pick up some unspecified things from Terra di Bari (in present-day Apulia), and he had refused. Therefore, she had made the wax doll. Elisabetta had asked Angela if she could remove it because Giacomo was tormented and his mother was more in pain than he was, but Angela had answered that it was too late. The only thing Elisabetta could do would have been to try to heal him by biting his nails and picking his hair, as she effectively did. When questioned by the vicarius if she had told Giacomo that she would have been assisting him in an invisible form during the night, she boldly denied it.

13.3. The Interrogation of Apollonia: A Worried Mother in the Modern Age

During her interrogation, Apollonia, the mother of Giacomo, declared that Elisabetta had asked her for twenty-five copper coins, consisting of nine and three horses with a cross, because she had to take them to the crossroads of the sanctuary roads where Giacomo had gone, and half a quart of flour because she had to make a banquet with her companions (convito).23

As stated by Giacomo in his interrogation, Elisabetta’s healing operation had required the bed to be cleared of sacred images, resulting in suspicion of the direct involvement of the devil; moreover, Elisabetta’s visit in invisible form, along with other “companions”, sparked in Giacomo a suspicion of the underlying involvement of witchcraft. Here, the presence of a group of women—whom Elisabetta referred to as “companions”—is evident. The term “companions” recalls the notion of the witch’s coven or the Mediterranean gioco, comprising the followers of the goddess Diana mentioned in the Canon Episcopi (Ginzburg 1989b, pp. 65–98). Elisabetta had also reported to Giacomo that her companions had injured her, as they disagreed with her therapeutic work, revealing that in her estimation, the other participants were involved in diabolical magical practices.

Concerning the use of copper coins, Elisabetta attributed an apotropaic symbolic value to the coin due to the cross that was engraved on it. Elisabetta aimed to use the cross symbol on the coins to counteract the magic performed on Giacomo. It cannot be ruled out that the choice of metal (i.e., copper) had an alchemical basis or was linked to the transmission of magical knowledge from the higher clergy to the lower clergy and then to the people (Barbierato 2002; Lopez 1974, 1984; O’Neil 1984; Romeo 1990). From the ecclesiastical authorities’ point of view, the magical use of cross symbolism was considered an abuse of sacred things, falling into the category of diabolical superstition.24 Although practices in this category that were oriented towards healing were not severely punished, they were closely monitored, as they often accompanied not only therapeutic magical practices but also love-related ones, which fell into the category of diabolical magic. An example is the baptism of objects, such as magnets, which was widely practiced in modern Italy to attract love or a specific person for magical purposes.25 This implied a denial of the free will granted by God to humans, as magical acts influenced the victim’s will supernaturally, usually with the intervention of the devil who, existing between the human and divine planes, could manipulate the occult properties of nature when invoked.

Nevertheless, this case reveals the intricate connection between purely magical practices and devotion. The coins were supposed to be placed near the sanctuaries Giacomo had visited for his “healing” but, simultaneously, they had to be positioned at crossroads.

13.4. The Interrogation of Don Carmine Rescigno: The Exorcism

The next person interrogated was Don Carmine Rescigno on the 10th of October.26 The priest confessed that he had called Elisabetta to help heal Giacomo, but only because he had wanted to quiet Giacomo’s mother, Apollonia. He confirmed that he had taken Giacomo to three different sanctuaries—San Michele Arcangelo on Monte Sant’Angelo, Santissima Incoronata in Foggia, and San Vito in Polignano (all three in present-day Apulia)—in order to be exorcised by the exorcists of the sanctuaries; however, even if Giacomo felt better for a while, when he returned to Vieste, his torments began again. He also declared that he had admonished Elisabetta to avoid using any superstition or magical practice to heal the young man.

In his deposition, he added that Elisabetta had brought the wax doll to the house of Giacomo and that he had burned it following the rules of the Flagellum Daemonum—the exorcist’s manual by Girolamo Menghi (Dall’Olio 2001a, pp. 81–124; Romeo 1990, pp. 109, 143). The wax doll had entirely burnt but had not emitted any odour; therefore, there was no maleficium in it. This episode underscores a strong inclination towards exorcism among the clergy of Vieste during the 17th and 18th centuries, aligning with the teachings of Girolamo Menghi. While the Holy Office downplayed the fight against superstitions, the local clergy maintained a fervent stance. Elisabetta’s reaffirmation of her initial deposition, even when accused, and the defence of her advocate, provide interesting insights into the distinct framing of superstitio and magic by the ecclesiastical authorities of Vieste within the legal–canonical context. Additionally, it reflects a Hippocratic–Galenic perspective of the body, attributing afflictions to rebellious spirits (Alfieri 2021, p. 48).

13.5. The Defence of the Advocate of Elisabetta: The Ignorance of Women in Magical Arts

The advocate of Elisabetta, who had been given six days by the vicarius for her defence, aligned—perhaps on purpose—with the ecclesiastical authorities’ perception of popular femininity, influenced by Scaglia’s Prattica, portraying Elisabetta as an ignorant woman undeserving of esteem.27 The second point he highlighted in his defence’s report challenged the nature of Elisabetta’s practice, which was deemed non-magical:

“It is well-established that Elisabetta’s documented actions lack probable magical elements. Nail biting, hair and ear straightening, and forehead licking, noted in the informative process without substantive backing, signify vanity. Elisabetta’s remark after licking the forehead, stating it was salty, implies that Giacomo D’Angelo had more salt in his head during torment than Elisabetta, who pretended wisdom in treating him”.28

After this observation, the advocate addressed the sole element that could have been genuinely suspicious—her purported nocturnal manifestation. As per the informative process, Elisabetta had claimed to Giacomo that, despite locked doors, she would enter his house at night for his protection, planning a banquet with her companions. She had promised to blindfold both Giacomo and his wife to prevent fear. However, Elisabetta had not carried out this plan, likely due to her lack of knowledge of magical arts. The advocate of Elisabetta pointed out that the actions she performed to heal Giacomo were not ones of natural magic based on systematic and sequential operations with specific effects on matter. What she had performed, instead, was confused, and could, therefore, have no empirical result. He contended that the actions performed by Elisabetta also did not refer to erudite magic, which was deemed perilous and punishable according to the Prattica.29 Instead, what she performed was “superstition”, a futile observance with no efficacy, reserved for ignorant, deluded women. The discourse delved into the discussion of the simulacrum, the object employed for the spell, specifically the wax doll. Here, the advocate highlighted that this aspect was driven solely by vanity, as affirmed by the insightful witness, Don Carmine Rescigno, who had noted that the burnt doll had emitted no odour. To ask for Elisabetta’s absolution, the advocate concluded by elucidating the explicit difference between superstition and magic, bolstering the argument with pertinent legal references, asserting that if Elisabetta did not engage in magical operations, as everything appeared to have been simulated, she warranted no penalty. He also asserted that women subject to punishment for engaging in what the ecclesiastical authority considered vain observances, even with the intention of achieving effects devoid of harm to others, were only liable for penalties of a light nature. At first glance, Elisabetta seemed to have the peculiar traits of a witch, as Giacomo had declared that she told him that she would have been under the bed in an invisible form of a spirit (Clark 1997, passim). However, by examining the testimony, it was revealed that the day before, Giacomo had complained to Elisabetta about the bed lifting, providing her with an opportunity to inquire about his night. The advocate stated that she affirmed that she was in Giacomo’s room as an invisible spirit because her goal was to gain fame for being a witch.30 Therefore, Elisabetta’s motive was financial extortion, not magical healing. Her practices, considered vain observances, should not necessarily have been denounced because according to the Praxis of Genuense, women who performed superstitions were ignorant regarding the prohibitions dictated by the law.31

At the end of the trial, Angela Carella was absolved of guilt, while Elisabetta was condemned to a strong public act of penance. Compelled to wear a sack made of black fabric, she was obliged to carry a lit candle in hand, with an iron gag on her mouth, and proceed in front of the congregated church during Sunday mass, thereby subjecting herself to public penance (Brambilla 2006, p. 56).

14. Conclusions

This study analysed two 1713 trials within the Diocese of Vieste, Kingdom of Naples, concerning accusations of maleficium (evil magic), which have been preserved in the Acta Criminalia collection of the Archive of the episcopal court in Vieste.

These records enabled a methodological approach using Clifford Geertz’s “thick description”, providing deep insights into judicial processes and cultural perceptions of magic. The trials illustrate the Italian maleficium paradigm, which is associated more with malevolent magic than the concept of diabolic sect witchcraft prevalent in other parts of Europe. Influenced by the Canon Episcopi, this paradigm viewed women as deluded by the devil rather than part of a diabolic conspiracy.

Neither of the alleged culprits, Rita de Ruggiero and Elisabetta Del Vecchio, received a condemnation for the crime of maleficium. This confirms the trend both within the episcopal courts of the Kingdom of Naples and the Holy Office that preferred to manage such accusations with a focus on pastoral care rather than severe judicial measures. Furthermore, it suggests that the ecclesiastical court of Vieste, in taking this soft approach to punishing such practices, as most of the courts in the Kingdom of Naples did, allowed magical practices to prosper even after the Modern Age, as shown by the studies of Ernesto de Martino in the first half of the twentieth century (De Martino 1959).