Why Europes wars of religion put 40,000 witches to a terrible death

[Voltaire2]

It was a terrifying phenomenon that continues to cast a shadow over certain parts of Europe even today. The great age of witch trials, which ran between 1550 and 1700, fascinates and repels in equal measure. Over the course of a century and a half, 80,000 people were tried for witchcraft and half of them were executed, often burned alive.

And then trials disappeared almost completely.

Their appearance was all the more strange because between 900 and 1400 the Christian authorities had refused to acknowledge that witches existed, let alone try someone for the crime of being one. This was despite the fact that belief in witches was common in medieval Europe, and in 1258 Pope Alexander IV had to issue a canon to prevent prosecutions.

But by 1550 Christian authorities had reversed their position, leading to a witch-hunt across Christendom. Many explanations have been advanced for what drove the phenomenon. Now new research suggests there is an economic explanation, one that has relevance to the modern day.

Economists Peter Leeson and Jacob Russ of George Mason University in Virginia argue that the trials reflected “non-price competition between the Catholic and Protestant churches for religious market share”.

As competing Catholic and Protestant churches vied to win over or retain their followers, they needed to make an impact – and witch trials were the battleground they chose. Or, as the two academics put it in their paper, to be published in the new edition of the Economic Journal: “Leveraging popular belief in witchcraft, witch-prosecutors advertised their confessional brands’ commitment and power to protect citizens from worldly manifestations of Satan’s evil.”

The Guardian

[MineralMan]

1. The prejudice against pagan religious beliefs reflected by

that persist, even today. The Christian church, in all of its varieties, strongly dislikes competition for the minds (and money) of the populace. Rarely does that extend to criminal legal action against pagans today, but the battle continues.

It's a mark of weakness, I believe, and fear of losing relevance and control. Economic considerations, too, play a role.

[Cartoonist]

2. Non-price competition

More proof religion is a scam.

I have a question. Why is it prohibited to eat a cheeseburger, or to wear mixed threads? I suspect it is for some money reason, but I'm just guessing.

I don't mean to start a new thread, but this money angle in the article needs more light.

[MineralMan]

4. There is not a rational reason for some dietary laws in Judaism.

A lot of it had to do with animal sacrifice rules, though. As far as mixing fibers for clothing, I have no idea at all why that rule existed. Not eating pork and some shellfish, however had health reasons. Pigs are often infected with trichinosis in the kind of conditions that prevailed at that time, and shellfish can have high levels of toxins in them at various times. So those laws made some sense.

Lots of things having to do with religious rules are senseless, really.

[Cartoonist]

5. I wasn't looking for RATIONAL reasons

This is religion we're talking about.

I get the health concern, but since you can eat cheese and meat, why can't you eat them together? Same with fabrics.

My guessing goes to trying to cut a deal with dairies and/or slaughterhouses. Same with sheep shearer's. At the least, I'll bet my pocket change (I'm not allowed to mix coins and folding money) these rules lead to fees.

[MineralMan]

7. Can't eat meat seethed in its mother's milk.

By extension, no meat and cheese together. Weird logic.

[Act_of_Reparation]

8. Imagine the Bronze Age equivalent of Donald J. Trump comes to power in the Ancient Near East...

...and straight up prohibits clothes made of different threads because some guy in a polyester shirt jumped in front of him at the buffet one morning.

[PragmaticDem]

3. I thought it was more like 50,000-60,000.

[Voltaire2]

6. They are using the conservative estimate.

The exact number is not really important.