Does 'In Defense Of Witches' Reference Real Historical Witch Trials?

I just finished 'In Defense of Witches' and was struck by how deeply it roots itself in real witch trial history. The book doesn't just mention famous cases like Salem or Pendle—it excavates lesser-known trials across Europe, showing how accusations followed patterns of misogyny and property disputes. What's chilling is how accurately it mirrors historical records: the types of women targeted (midwives, herbalists, widows), the absurd 'evidence' used (moles as devil's marks), and the economic motives behind accusations. The author draws direct lines between medieval witch hunts and modern persecution of unconventional women, using court transcripts and trial pamphlets to prove these weren't just superstitions but systematic oppression.

'In Defense of Witches' surprised me by focusing less on magic and more on real legal terror. It spotlights how witch trials were early class warfare—many victims were poor women whose livestock 'mysteriously' ended up with accusers afterward. The book quotes trial transcripts where judges openly admitted envy of a widow's thriving farm as motive.

It brilliantly contrasts historical hysteria with modern witch tropes. The same traits that got women burned in 1600—independence, sexual agency, herbal knowledge—are now commodified as 'girlboss' aesthetics. The author uses trial records to show how witch hunts weren't about magic but about controlling women's bodies and labor. For a fictional take on these themes, check out 'The Mercies' by Kiran Millwood Hargrave or 'The Witch's Trinity' by Erika Mailman.

Reading 'In Defense of Witches' felt like uncovering a dark family album of feminist history. The book meticulously cross-references its arguments with documented witch trials, from the 15th-century 'Malleus Maleficarum' persecutions to the Basque witch panic of 1609. It doesn't romanticize or speculate—it cites trial records showing how 'witchcraft' charges were often cover-ups for stealing land from single women or silencing female healers who competed with male doctors.

The most haunting section compares trial interrogation techniques to modern gaslighting tactics. The book reproduces actual questions asked to accused witches ('When did you first lie with the Devil?'), revealing how coerced confessions mirrored patriarchal control. It also highlights survivors like Dietrich Flade, a judge who turned against witch hunts and was burned for it—a historical detail most pop culture ignores.

What makes this stand out from other witch histories is its focus on how trial structures persist. The author parallels medieval water tests with today's online mob justice, showing how societies still ritualistically punish 'difficult' women. For deeper dives, try pairing it with 'The Witch' by Ronald Hutton or the documentary 'The Burning Times.'