The need for a good edition and translation of the Malleus Maleficarum has been a long-felt need in witchcraft studies. Although a facsimile of the first edition was published in 1993, there is no good modern edition of the Latin text of the Malleus. English readers usually encounter the Malleus through Montague Summers’ 1928 translation, which is often misleading about the text. And so, even though the Malleus has been consistently cited as a key text in studies of early modern witchcraft and its persecution, scholarship about it has been based on some rather poor representations of the text. Christopher Mackay’s new edition and translation of the text are thus welcome additions to the study of early modern witchcraft and supernatural belief.
Mackay’s edition consists of three parts: a long introduction and edition of the Latin text in the first volume followed by a translation in the second volume. The introduction is, unfortunately, somewhat disappointing. Though he does try to give a fairly comprehensive introduction to the work and its background, much that might have been included is either only briefly referred to or not included at all. Considering, for instance, the importance of gender in recent studies of witchcraft, one might have imagined that Mackay would consider Institoris’ attitudes (as Institoris was very likely the sole author, I will refer to him alone as the author) towards gender--which is certainly an important topic in the text itself--but there is little reference to gender. Nor is there much reference to popular belief and its reflection in the Malleus. And, even when important aspects of the background are discussed, they are often presented in anachronistic and demeaning ways: medieval scholastic argument, which is Institoris’ mode of reasoning in the Malleus, to take one example, is introduced through the medium of Erasmus’ satires on scholasticism, while medieval law is introduced through a comparison to modern Anglo-American law in which Anglo-American law is set up as normative. Setting up the explanations in this way is misleading, and of little help in understanding the background and reasoning of the Malleus. For a better introduction to the Malleus see Hans Peter Broedel’s recent monograph, The Malleus Maleficarum and the construction of witchcraft: Theology and popular belief (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003).
Though most users of Mackay’s edition are likely to refer to the translation, it is worth noting that he has provided a very useful edition of the Latin text. His text is “meant to serve as an interpretation of the text of the first edition that will allow a reasonably competent reader of Latin to follow the text readily” (vol. 1, 173). The availability of a facsimile of the first edition, edited by A. Schnyder (Göppingen: Kummerle Verlag, 1993), the base text for Mackay’s edition, makes a simple transcription of the text unnecessary, and given the “lack of consistent capitalization, punctuation or paragraphing” (vol. 1, 173) in the original, such a transcription would be of limited use--those who need such a text can easily refer to the facsimile. Mackay’s transcription of the text is carefully done--in a check of several passages I found only one minor error in transcription--and his editing of the text does make it much more accessible. Those able to read Latin will find Mackay’s text to be an easier read than the original, as well as a good guide to the original.
Mackay’s translation will undoubtedly be the part of his edition that is most commonly used. A comparison of passages shows quickly that Mackay’s translation stays closer to the Latin than Summers’, and is, in general, a better guide to the sense of the Latin. However, Mackay’s translation has some quirks too, the most important concerning his translation of the key Latin words maleficus, malefica, and maleficium. These are, as Mackay notes, “the uniform terms used in the Malleus to describe malevolent magic and its practitioners” (vol. 2, 7). An understanding of these three words is thus key to understanding much of what Institoris writes in the Malleus. Mackay translates them “sorcerer,” sorceress,” and “sorcery,” although he does suggest that “‘witch’ and ‘witchcraft’ would be the natural translations.” Mackay’s rationalization for translating in this way is twofold: “first, there is no natural male equivalent in English to ‘witch’”; and second, “‘witchcraft’…seems to be a female-oriented word, and so a gender-neutral term for practicing magic was called for.” He concludes that “the terms related to ‘sorcerer’ seemed best suited for the requirements.” While he is probably right that most people associate witchcraft with women, and that using witch and witchcraft as the equivalent of the Latin terms is problematic, translating the words by sorcerer, sorceress, and sorcery is also problematic, since these words had culturally specific meanings in the medieval and early modern period. Translating the Latin words as he does removes one difficulty only to introduce a new one into the text. As Mackay himself notes (vol. 1, 53), the basic meaning for maleficus/malefica is “evil-doer” and for maleficium “evil-doing”. Given Institoris’ association of witchcraft with heresy, and his belief that both represented a form of demonic evil, it would have been better to translate the three terms according to their basic meaning in Latin--which would have avoided both the problems of gender references and of misleading readers by conflating the meanings of witchcraft, sorcery, and related terms in medieval and early modern Europe.
The Malleus Maleficarum was one of the earliest texts of its kind, and though it is unclear how profound its influence was in the time of the witch trials, it does stand as an important example of the interaction of popular belief and theology in early modern Europe. A new edition and translation have thus been long desired by scholars of early modern witchcraft. Although there are some problems with the introduction and translation, Christopher Mackay’s new edition and translation of the Malleus Maleficarum will, nonetheless, put the study of the Malleus on a far more solid foundation.
--------
[Review length: 995 words • Review posted on July 6, 2007]