Abstract
Common assumptions that believers of witchcraft in the early modern period were uneducated fanatics overgeneralize the complex interplay of early modern science and theology. The study of demons, known as demonology, was considered a science. It was a respected field that was studied and debated. Theologians scrutinized, defended, and revised demonological theories. Thinkers turned over foundational concepts and split hairs over the fine details of theology. Since educated scholars were considered authorities on demonology, they repeatedly wrote, talked, and theorized about the topic in a similar fashion to other ideologies of the early modern era. Due to this, authors of demonological texts had to overcome objections to their writings made by scholars who disagreed with the field. Disputes were numerous, multi-faceted, and overlapping, so this article will consolidate and examine common objections concerning demons, God, and natural magic. Some naysayers rejected the incorporeality of demons and their ability to interact with humankind, while others argued that God would not allow witchcraft to exist, often looking to canon law to justify their claims. More intricately, natural magic was of significant concern when attempting to make determinations about demonic interference. Each of these arguments could benefit from a close individual analysis, but they will be condensed for the purposes of this paper in exchange for a more comprehensive view of the ideological landscape of early modern studies of witchcraft.
Recommended Citation
Pickard, Abigail. "The Devil’s in the Details: Opposition to Demonology in Early Modern Europe." The Purdue Historian 12, 1 (2025). https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/puhistorian/vol12/iss1/5
Included in
Catholic Studies Commons, European History Commons, History of Christianity Commons, History of Religion Commons, Legal Commons, Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons