Friday, October 31, 2008

Author Erika Mailman on Why I Love...

I love historical fiction, because I love the opportunity to learn about women's lives of the past, whether glorious or painful. It helps me hold a mirror up to my own life, and see that I am lucky to live when and where I can vote, where I can speak my mind, where I can take penicillin and not die from a minor infection, where I can undergo labor that is still risky, but knowing my chances of coming out of it alive, with a healthy child, are pretty strong.

History seems to give the lion’s share of textbook coverage to men and battles, but I like to know what women of the day were doing. Sometimes it takes some digging, but the research is always compelling and allows me to feel kinship for these women who made the best of the world they were given.

In the most recent instance, I buried my nose in books about medieval witchcraft. I studied a world where society measured women’s value by how many children they produced, and how many of those they managed to raise to a “safe” age. I learned that having a male relative (father, son, husband) was key to protecting oneself—many widows or unmarried women found themselves accused.

I learned that the cards were stacked against women accused in medieval Europe (New England was far more reasonable—more on that later). Getting one’s case dismissed is hard when you are not allowed to have an advocate (lawyer) speak for you, or even to know who is accusing you. Those were two procedural suggestions from the Malleus Maleficarum, the witch hunting Bible written in the late 1480s. This pseudo-legalistic book by two friars provided a guide to help magistrates figure out how to properly try a witch. A bestseller of its day, it winged its way across the countryside, allowing baffled lawmen to confidently hold inquisitions.

The reason magistrates withheld the accusers’ names? So that the witch could not summon the Devil or other witches to visit retribution on the accusers’ heads.

And why not permit her to be represented? Because anyone who supports heresy is a heretic in turn.

Fertility plays a huge role in witchcraft accusations—and as women are childbearers, they were more frequently accused, although certainly men also faced trial in significant numbers. In a world without supermarkets, staying alive requires that you have a successful harvest and properly store the food, effectively raise and keep animals, and have your own children to help do all this work…all of which hinges on fertility.

Small wonder, then, that so many of the accusations relate to cows and chickens dying—there’s milk and egg production squandered and lying in the dirt. Other accusations involved controlling the weather (and hence crop growth)… this medieval woodcut shows witches calling down the rain with the magic stew in their cauldron.

And of course, many, many accusations related to miscarriages, stillbirths, newborn deaths and outright infertility. These are issues we still struggle with today… imagine that grief compounded by an angry belief that someone else did that to you.

In 1656, a woman who had been pregnant at the same time as my ancestor, Mary Bliss Parsons, accused her of witchcraft. While Mary’s baby thrived, the accuser’s died soon after birth...and she blamed Mary for it. This was just one of many crimes her Massachusetts neighbors felt she was responsible for. The others also fell in line with the fertility concerns of centuries: that she made a cow, pig and sow die, caused a neighbor boy to trip in the woods while tracking down his family’s errant cow, and made spun yarn diminish in volume. (She also faced oddball accusations like being able to go into water and not get wet.)

Mary spoke for herself in court, so effectively that she won. And here’s where New England was fairly reasonable: nearly 30 percent of witchcraft cases ended in acquittal. As a new country, not so deeply entrenched in the centuries of witch hunting that Europe endured, the colonies behaved far gentler to their witches. Even when executed, witches knew kindness—the preferred method was hanging, a presumably quicker death than burning at the stake.
Mary again faced the witchcraft accusation 18 years later; apparently, the court’s ruling was unconvincing. She was—mindblowingly—acquitted again, and died of old age in her eighties.

Mostly these sojourns into the past make me so, so grateful that I live when and where I do. Although to be honest, I’d give my eyeteeth (who needs them, really—and in fact what are they?) for a chance to visit the 1800s just for a day.

Preferably not a day when someone with tuberculosis sneezes on me, or a day when I’m giving birth to a breech baby…or a day when a migraine hits…or I have food poisoning and it’s 30 below zero and I have to keep running to the outdoor privy… or I really hate the candidate running for office and wish that I could cast a vote… and my husband tells me it isn’t proper for women to vote… or a day when… actually, maybe I’ll stay here in 2008.

* * * * *
Erika Mailman is the author of The Witch’s Trinity, which just came out in paperback Oct. 7. The Malleus Maleficarum is still in print, sadly, in a 1970s reprint. The image comes from a 1489 book on witchcraft, De Lamiis, reproduced in Kors & Edwards: Witchcraft in Europe 1100-1700. Erika’s website is, and she blogs about witchcraft issues at


  1. There are lots of times when I think that I would love to go back in time, but I think that I am too attached to all the mod cons we have, including things like safe drinking water etc!

    Thanks for posting for us.

  2. I loved the Witch's Trinity and I'd love more books about the witchcraze. I'm totally checking out Ms. Mailman's blog!

  3. Marg--I totally agree, a TEMPORARY trip to the past would be great, but I'd like to stay here where my survival chances are better.

    Ms, thank you so much--I hope you enjoy the witchcraft posts over at my blog.

  4. Erika,

    A few years ago I saw the stage play of "The Crucible" and realized that the woman who had a series of miscarriages probably was Rh negative and was incompatible with her husband.

    I think Catherine of Aragon may have had the same problem which caused her series of miscarriages or stillbirths.

    Hemolytic disease of the newborn.

    It's something we don't see today due to the advent of rhogam in the 1960s, and that is why Rh negative women have to get shots during their pregnancy and after giving birth (if they have an Rh positive baby.) To avoid creating the antibodies that would be so destructive to future pregnancies.

    Ah, but no one understood blood banking hundreds of years ago and it was much easier to blame midwives who tended the women during pregnancy and at the births.

    Just thought I'd throw some medical trivia and insight your way in response to the subject of blaming women for other women's infertility.


  5. That's really fascinating, Linda. Thanks for sharing that!


  6. I enjoyed your book and hearing you read in SF. Women have been targeted for so many centuries in all cultures; it's fascinating to read about the ones who survived and how they did it.

  7. Vanitha, It was a pleasure to meet you and I'm really looking forward to your book. It sounds great!