"harnessed for good and evil ends" (Malcolm Gaskill on the ambiguity of Witchcraft)

OK, since I gave Malcolm Gaskill such a hard time in a recent post, in this one I will strive to, as the song says, accentuate the positive. In particular I want to give Gaskill credit for the relatively evenhanded approach he takes to the question of the relationship between Witchcraft and malefic magic (evenhanded, that is, at least when compared to many other prominent scholars of historical Witchcraft, which, admittedly, is setting the bar dismally low).

Here, for example, is a sentence from the second paragraph of the Preface to Gaskill's book about John Stearne and Matthew Hopkins: Witchfinders: A 17th Century English Tragedy:

"In this world, one of the strangest and most pervasive beliefs was that in witchcraft: unseen power, thought by many to be diabolical, harnessed for good and evil ends."

A little later on (pp.1-3), when discussing the case of Elizabeth Clarke, who was the first victim of Matthew Hopkins and John Stearne, Gaskill can't quite seem to make up his mind. First he states that a "wise woman". identified as Goodwife Hovey, would have been deemed a Witch by "parish ministers and ecclesiastic courts", but that among the lay public (or at least in the mind of John Rivet), a woman, like Hovey, who was "famed for her skill in healing and divination" would not be seen as a Witch because that designation was reserved for a "hag who visited disaster upon her enemies."

You see, John Rivet's wife was dying, and Rivet had sought the aid of Goodwife Hovey to save her. Hovey, in turn, had informed Rivet that his wife was the victim of a curse. Upon receiving this news, Rivet, or so the story goes, seized upon the idea that the curse was due to one Elizabeth Clarke, an impoverished, one-legged widow who lived alone. Several members of Clarke's family, including her mother, had previously been denounced and executed as Witches, and because of this, according to Gaskill:

"As a legacy of this shame, it is likely that she [Elizabeth Clarke] had been a marked figure all her life, reviled but perhaps also revered among her watchful neighbors." [emphasis added]

Also in his little book Witchcraft: A Very Short Introduction, Gaskill explicitly acknowledges the historical ambiguity of the appellation "Witch". For example, he not only heads one subsection "Healers and Hags", but he also spends some time discussing the specific cases of two women, Elizabeth Mortlock and Appoline Beher, who were sought after as healers, and who found themselves denounced and convicted of Witchcraft because of their practice of beneficial magic

And in his book Crime and Mentalities in Early Modern England , Gaskill provides us with a very significant primary source attesting to the popular usage of the phrase "white witch" in the late 17th century (this was previously noted in my earlier post "The White Witches Of Our Ancestors"):

"Also in 1694, a dispute came to a head between the Crook and Baron families who shared a house at Overhilton (Lancashire). Henry Baron regularly quarelled with James Crook's wife (she had already received a warrant for his good behaviour), and when one of the Baron's calves died suddenly he accused her of witchcraft. On learning that she refused to appear before a JP, Baron was heard to say 'it was ill liveing near a white witch & ... if one did kill a white witch one could not be hang'd for it'. Soon afterwards, he beat her severely and she died. [Words in quotes are from court records dated 16 March, 1694. See Gaskill 2000 for more on the original source.]

This particular point should not be overstated. Gaskill's acknowledgements concerning the ambiguous nature of Witchcraft have the air of a reluctant, half-hearted concession. Clearly Gaskill does not wish to dwell or or draw too much attention to either the positive magic attributed to Witches, or to the positive attitudes about Witches that inevitably resulted from that positive magic. Nevertheless he feels obligated, as indeed he is, to admit the reality of the association between Witches and beneficial magic.

The bottom line is that whenever we encounter other scholars, such as Ronald Hutton, who categorically deny that the word Witch was used during the time of the Witch-hunts to refer to practitioners of beneficial magic, we can call Malcolm Gaskill as a witness to counter Hutton's misrepresentations of the truth.

The "Bought Priesthood" of Historical Witchcraft Scholarship

Most scholars ply their humble trade far away from the public eye, with very little attention ever being paid to their labors outside the narrow confines of their chosen academic niche. Part of the reason for this is that most scholars can barely explain their research to the other experts in their own sub-fields, let alone make themselves understood (much less entertaining) while speaking to the "general" public (i.e. the ignorant masses).

In fact, when we do encounter "scholars" on television, radio, print media, and internet media outlets, these often turn out to be either ancient alien cranks, or, worse yet, card-carrying members of the "bought priesthood".

The term "bought priesthood" might be unfamiliar, but the concept is very straightforward, and the phenomenon itself is sufficiently pervasive that it is easily recognized once you know what to look for. The term is supposed to have originated back in the early days of the American labor movement, but has been revived more recently thanks to Noam Chomsky. The "bought priesthood" is composed of people with genuine academic training (or other legitimate claims to knowledge significantly beyond that of the average layperson) who make themselves available to the mass media as "experts" who can be relied upon to neither ask the wrong questions, nor to give the wrong answers. A "bought priest" is someone who knows, without having it spelled out, what needs to be assumed. And it is precisely in the reinforcement of these assumptions that the bought priests earn their keep. 

It is not an easy job. The bought priest must lend just enough intellectual gravitas to the Dominant Paradigm. Too much simply won't do, especially because the primary goal of all bought priests is to appear regularly on television, and that medium does not mix well with taxing people's intelligence.

The point, however, isn't for all the bought priests to monolithically toe a single party line. Rather, it is their job to delineate the proper boundaries of what one is allowed to think, while maintaining the illusion of having thought of it on one's own. Therefore there are different scripts to be read from depending on whether the opinionating is done on MSNBC, PBS, FOX, CNN, The Comedy Channel, etc (or the Guardian, versus the Telegraph, versus the New York Times, versus the Wall Street Journal, etc).

A few examples might help to clarify all of this. For economists, being in the bought priesthood means never questioning the sacrosanct principles that deficits are bad and balanced budgets are good. For political scientists it means never questioning the two-party system. For foreign policy experts it means never asking why the United States needs so many military bases in other people's countries. For scholars of religion it means framing all religious issues in terms of "God". As previously mentioned, though, some amount of variation on these themes is also part of the game, especially when taking into account the proclivities of one's target audience.

For scholars of historical Witchcraft the following guidelines are expected of those who desire entry into the bought priesthood, thereby opening the door to possible television appearances, being published in the mainstream media, etc:

1. First, and most importantly, one must insist that the Witch-hunts weren't really all that bad after all.
2. Always emphasize the "malevolence" of Witches and either deny altogether or diminish as much as possible any connection between Witchcraft and beneficial magic.
3. Shift the blame for Witch-hunting from the political and religious leaders and institutions of the times, and squarely onto the shoulders of "the people", who, in their ignorance and superstition, "demanded" the execution of Witches, which the princes and priests and pastors only very reluctantly agreed to.
4. And loudly repeat in as many ways as possible that those who were the targets of the Witch-hunts had absolutely nothing to do with Paganism (modern, ancient, or otherwise), and that anyone who thinks such a thing is, at best, a deluded romantic fool.

Bonus points are also awarded for:

a. Mocking feminists.
b. Insinuating a relationship between Paganism and Nazism.
c. Denunciations of Margaret Murray

"Witch trials were comparatively rare"? (Or, Shit Malcolm Gaskill says)

Once again I must turn my attention to the unedifying public spectacle of a noted scholar grotesquely misrepresenting the most basic historical facts in the name of dispelling "myths". The following is from an op-ed piece written by Malcolm Gaskill ("one of Britain's leading authorities on the history of witchcraft", if he does say so himself, and, to be fair, he is in fact a well respected scholar and author of innumerable important publications on historical Witchcraft) and published in The Guardian on April 5, 2010 (Witch-hunts then -- and now):

"The history of witchcraft helps us to understand this tragic phenomenon [modern cases of violence against people accused of Witchcraft]. Unfortunately, the subject remains littered with powerful myths. Some modern witches sing a protest song called Catch the Fire, which mentions the 9 million women burned during the "witch-craze". Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code says 5 million. The actual figure was about 50,000. This still might seem a lot for an imaginary crime, but viewed in context of time, space and population levels, it's clear that witch trials were comparatively rare. Plus executions followed in only about half of trials."

Were witch trials really "comparatively rare"? (Uh, and "compared" to what, exactly?) Well, in the comparatively small nation of Scotland, which was hardly the epicenter of the European Witch-hunts, there was one year (1649) in which there were 399 documented Witchcraft trials. In fact, during the next 13 years there were over 1000 more trials, for a sustained average of over 100 a year from 1649-1662. If we view these Scottish Witch trials "in context of time, space and population levels", this would be the equivalent of nearly half a million 21st century American citizens being put on trial for the crime of Witchcraft over a span of 14 years. And while it is true that only half (a mere 250,000 or so!) of these would be convicted and then publicly burned at the stake, the other half would still be severely tortured before being acquitted. And by "severely tortured" I am referring to methods that would make Guantanamo look like a tropical vacation resort. Here is another way of putting these deaths in "context": the rate at which people were burned at the stake for the crime of Witchcraft in Scotland between the years 1649 and 1662 was three times higher (or more) than the rate at which young Americans died in Vietnam between the years 1962 and 1975. For more information on the Witch-hunt in Scotland, see these three posts of mine and links therein:

• Benevolent Magic and "The Survey of Scottish Witchcraft"
• Julian Goodare Contradicts His Own Data on Witches and Healers
• Malevolent Magic and "The Survey of Scottish Witchcraft"

In Iceland, an even smaller country and another place that does not figure prominently in the history of Witch-hunting, there were "only" 20 executions for Witchcraft (that we have good documentation for). But this was in a nation with a population at the time of about 50,000 inhabitants (about 1/20 that of Scotland). And all of these executions took place in less than three decades. That means that if we again look at the "context of time, space and population levels", Witch-hunting was almost as intense in Iceland as it was in Scotland. For more in the Witch-hunts in Iceland, check out these links:

• The Executed
• Angurgapi: The Witch Hunts in Iceland
• Witchcraft and Sorcery in Iceland

So much for the periphery. What about the places that were at the center of the action? In just a few regions of what was at the time the Holy Roman Empire (in what is today western Germany and some bordering regions of France and Switzerland), the phenomenon of Witch-hunting reached such a frenzy that otherwise staid and sober scholars have actually felt compelled to employ the term "superhunt". These are the very same scholars who, like Gaskill, never tire of lecturing modern Pagans on the grave sin of historical exaggeration. In just one of these outbreaks (in Alzenau, just east of Frankfurt) nearly 10% of the adult population was put to death (and these were predominantly women, so one in six adult women were executed).

Although the European Witch-hunts lasted over three centuries (from the Witch trials in Valais which began in 1427 and in which over 350 people were put to death in 20 years, to the last trickle of official trials and executions in the mid 18th century), and  ranged from one end of Europe to the other (from Transylvania to Scotland and from Sweden to Spain), the superhunts were highly concentrated outbursts of murderous Witch hysteria that accounted for almost a quarter of all executions for Witchcraft in Europe (according to William Monter). These concentrated outbreaks of Witch killings occurred in Trier (1586-95), Mainz (1593-1631), Fulda (1602-06), Cologne (1627-35), Bamberg (1616-30), and Waldenburg (1616-30), leading to the deaths of at least 10,000 people in a relatively small region of Europe over a span of just 45 years. [See Monter on "Germany's Superhunts" in Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, Volume 4: The Period of the Witch Trials.]

The bottom line is that it is an act of scholarly malfeasance to blithely state that "it's clear that witch trials were comparatively rare." Sadly, though, it has become de rigueur for certain self-appointed demythologizers to squander their academic credentials in the service of this kind of revisionist propagandizing, which aggressively promotes the (comforting to some) notion that Witch-hunts, Inquisitions, heresy-hunting, and other sins of the past, really weren't all that bad after all. I mean, well, "comparatively" speaking, you know.


See also:
"Witches and other evils": Jacqueline Simpson and Steve Roud on Witches and Witchcraft
Julian Goodare Contradicts His Own Data on Witches and Healers

Sexy Virgins, Hipster Jesus, And Other Signs Of The Apocolypse

The end is coming. The end of Christianity, that is. Hopefully. Well, that might be a bit over-optimistic, but according to Amanda Marcotte, writing for Alternet, "The much-analyzed Millennial generation is turning away from religion, especially Christianity, in record numbers."

The main course of Amanda's article,  "Jesus Was A Hipster? 7 Funniest Ways Christian Churches Are Trying to Get Hip With the Kids", is her list, as advertised in the title, of seven, count 'em seven, unintentionally (and therefore all that much more) humorous attempts at cool-ness by would be youth-evangelizers. You should go to the article to get the hilarious details, but here is one especially notable highlight:

"Mark Driscoll is a well-known nutty preacher in Seattle whose entire schtick is trying to dress up old-fashioned fundamentalist misogyny like it’s the cool new thing the kids are doing these days. His main strategy is talking about sex all the time. It’s incredibly important to Driscoll that you understand he’s a sex machine, and to generally imply that following Christ turns men into insatiable horndogs. He published a sex manual for Christians last year, one that portrays Christian marriage as something of a pornographic fantasy of women living in a state of permanent submission and sexual availability."

Of course there is nothing new under the sun. All this has happened before and all this will happen again. I am, of course, referring to the ultimate farcical attempt at Christian youth outreach: The Christian Side-Hug.

"Secrets of Britain's Sharia Councils"

This is a very educational documentary. It turns out that if a woman is beaten by her her husband, this might simply be his way of telling her that she needs to improve her cooking skills. And so forth.

Why did the other knights suspect Sir Balin of Witchcraft? (1485)

In days of old, when knights were bold, and the Round Table had just been invented ....

This post focuses on a story found in the first two sections of Malory's "The Book of Sir Balin" (first published in 1485, but probably written a decade of more previously). Therein is told the tale of the "poor knight" who succeeded where all of Arthur's other knights, and even Arthur himself, had failed.

The task that Balin, the poor knight, alone had managed to complete, had to do with a newly arrived "damsel, the which was sent on message from great Lady Lylle of Avelion." When the damsel presented herself to Arthur, the King noted that she was "girt with a noble sword, whereof the king had marvel," and further noted that, at least in his opinion, the bearing of such a weapon did not "beseemeth" the damsel, who in response explained that she very much wished to be relieved of the sword, but that, alas, in order for that to happen she would first have to find "a passing good man of his hands, and of his deeds, and without villany or treachery and without treason," for only such a knight would be able to draw the sword from the scabbard with which she was "girt". After first Arthur, and then all of the other knights in his court, tried without success to withdraw the sword, Sir Balin finally stepped forward "and drew it out easily."

But then an odd thing happened. Or possibly not so odd, depending on one's estimation of humanity. The other knights immediately began to harbor a "great despite" toward this Balin fellow, for he had committed the grave sin of making them all look like chumps. Of course these good knights did not wish to frame their base envy in honest terms, which would force them to admit that they were angry at having been bested by one who was their better in virtue. Instead they preferred to imagine that Balin must have cheated by employing some form of supernatural assistance: "the most part of the knights of the Round Table said that Balin did not this adventure all only by might, but by witchcraft."

The other knights do not suspect that Sir Balin has committed any sort of maleficium. That is, there is not the slightest hint that Balin has used magic to cause harm to anyone. Nor is Balin hated by all of the other knights, but only by "the most of them," and, in particular, and precisely because he has succeeded in this "adventure", and, thereby, proven that he is "without villany or treachery and without treason," which, apparently, was not the case with his other knights, King Arthur, who until recently had had Balin incarcerated, now takes quite a liking to Balin, and promises to make things right.

There is much more to the story of Sir Balin. But as far as the accusation of Witchcraft against him goes, the case is very straightforward. He was not suspected of maleficium, nor was he universally hated. And, in fact, it is made plain that those who did hate him did so only out of simple envy, not because they genuinely believed him to be an evil man, nor that he had done anything evil. Indeed, this story well illustrates what Edward Philips wrote in his General Dictionary (published in 1653), namely that Witchcraft is the capacity whereby "Wonders may be wrought, which exceed the common Apprehension of Men."

Here is the relevant passsage from Malory taken from the 1904 Houghton Mifflin edition edited by Clarence Griffin Child.

THE BOOK OF SIR BALIN

I. After the death of King Uther Pendragon reigned Arthur his son, the which had great wars in his days, for to get all England into his hand; for there were many kings within the realm of England, and in Wales, Scotland, and in Cornwall. So it be- fell on a time, when King Arthur was at London, there came a knight and told the king tidings how that the king Rions of North Wales had reared a great number of people, and were entered into the land, and burnt and slew the king's true liege people. "If this be true," said Arthur, "it were great shame unto mine estate, but that he were mightily withstood. " "It is truth," said the knight, "for I saw the host myself." "Well," said the king, "let make a cry: " that all the lords, knights, and gentlemen of arms, should draw unto a castle, called Camelot in those days, and there the king would let make a council general, and a great joust.

So when the king was come thither, with all his baronage, and lodged as they seemed best, there was come a damsel, the which was sent on message from the great Lady Lylle of Avelion; and, when she came before King Arthur, she told from whom she came, and how she was sent on message unto him for these causes. Then she let her mantle fall, that was richly furred, and then was she girt with a noble sword, whereof the king had marvel, and said, " Damsel, for what cause are ye girt with that sword ? It beseemeth you not." "Now shall I tell you," said the damsel; "this sword, that I am girt withal, doth me great sorrow and cumbrance, for I may not be delivered of this sword but by a knight, but he must be a passing good man of his hands, and of his deeds, and without villany or treachery and without treason. If I may find such a knight that hath all these virtues, he may draw out this sword out of the sheath. For I have been at King Rions; it was told me, there were passing good knights, and he and all his knights have assayed it, and none can speed."

"This is a great marvel," said Arthur, "if this be sooth. I will myself assay to draw out the sword, not presuming upon myself that I am the best knight, but that I will begin to draw at your sword, in giving ex- ample to all the barons, that they shall assay every one after other, when I have assayed it." Then Ar- thur took the sword by the sheath and by the girdle, and pulled at it eagerly, but the sword would not out. "Sir," said the damsel, "ye need not to pull half so hard; for he that shall pull it out shall do it with little might." "Ye say well," said Arthur; "now assa} r ye, all my barons; but beware ye be not defiled with shame, treachery, nor guile." "Then it will not avail," said the damsel; "for he must be a clean knight, without villany, and of a gentle strene of fa- ther's side and mother's side." Most of all the bar- ons of the Round Table, that were there at that time, assayed all by rowe, but there might none speed. Wherefore the damsel made great sorrow out of mea- sure, and said, "Alas! I weened in this court had been the best knights, without treachery or treason."

"By my faith," said Arthur, "here are good knights as I deem as any be in the world; but their grace is not to help you, wherefore I am displeased."

II. Then fell it so, that time, that there was a poor knight with King Arthur, that had been prisoner with him half a year and more for slaying of a knight, the which was cousin to King Arthur. The name of this knight was called Balin, and by good means of the barons he was delivered out of prison; for he was a good man named of his body, and he was born in Northumberland. And so he went privily into the court and saw this adventure, whereof it raised his heart, and would assay it as other knights did; but for he was poor, and poorly arrayed, he put him not far in press. But in his heart he was fully assured to do as well, if his grace happed him, as any knight that there was. And, as the damsel took her leave of Arthur and all the barons, so departing, this knight, Balin, called unto her, and said, "Damsel, I pray you, of your courtesy, suffer me as well to assay as these lords; though that I be so poorly clothed, in my heart me seemeth I am fully assured as some of these other, and me seemeth in my heart to speed right well." The damsel beheld the poor knight, and saw he was a likely man ; but, for his poor arrayment, she thought he should be of no worship without villany or treachery. And then she said unto the knight, "Sir, it needeth not to put me to more pain or labour, for it seemeth not you to speed, thereas other have failed." "Ah! fair damsel," said Balin, "worthiness and good tatches and good deeds are not only in arrayment, but man- hood and worship is hid within man's person; and many a worshipful knight is not known unto all peo- ple ; and therefore worship and hardiness is not in arrayment." "By God!" said the damsel, "ye say sooth; therefore ye shall assay to do what ye may."

Then Balin took the sword by the girdle and sheath, and drew it out easily; and when he looked on the sword, it pleased him much. Then had the king and all the barons great marvel, that Balin had done that adventure; many knights had great despite of Balin. "Certes," said the damsel, "this is a passing good knight, and the best that ever I found, and most of worship, without treason, treachery, or villany, and many marvels shall he do. Now, gentle and courteous knight, give me the sword again." "Nay," said Balin, "for this sword will I keep, but it be taken from me with force." "Well," said the damsel, "ye are not wise to keep the sword from me, for ye shall slay with the sword the best friend that ye have, and the man that ye most love in the world, and the sword shall be your destruction." "I shall take the adventure," said Balin, "that God will or- dain me, but the sword ye shall not have at this time, by the faith of my body." "Ye shall repent it within short time," said the damsel, "for I would have the sword more for your avail than for mine, for I am passing heavy for your sake ; for ye will not believe that sword shall be your destruction, and that is great pity." With that the damsel departed, making great sorrow.

Anon, after, Balin sent for his horse and armor, and so would depart from the court, and took his leave of King Arthur. "Nay," said the king, "I suppose ye will not depart so lightly from this fellowship. I suppose ye are displeased, that I have showed you unkindness; blame me the less, for I was misin- formed against you. But I weened ye had not been such a knight as ye are of worship and prowess; and if ye will abide in this court among my fellowship I shall so advance you, as ye shall be pleased." "God thank your highness," said Balin; "your bounty and highness may no man praise half to the value; but at this time I must needs depart, beseeching you al- way of your good grace." "Truly," said the king, "I am right wroth for your departing; I pray you, fair knight, that ye tarry not long, and ye shall be right welcome to me and to my barons, and 1 shall amend all amiss that I have done against you. " " God thank your great lordship," said Balin, and therewith made him ready to depart. Then the most part of the knights of the Round Table said that Balin did not this adventure all only by might, but by witchcraft.

As it turns out, I write like H. P. Lovecraft.

According to "I Write Like", I write like H. P. Lovecraft. I simply couldn't be more pleased with myself.

I write like
H. P. Lovecraft

I Write Like by Mémoires, journal software. Analyze your writing!

Here is the text that I submitted for "analysis" (it is from the post An Orthodox theologian explains what he means by "Inclusivism" and "Tolerance"):

Rev. Dr. George C. Papademetrious is a prominent Orthodox theologian who is especially noted for his involvement in inter-faith dialogue (see his official biography at the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America website). Father Papademetrious is a highly educated and exceptionally articulate man. When he writes about the relationship between Christianity and other religions he is not satisfied with glib, politically correct catch-phrases. Where he finds simplicity, he does not shy away from stating things plainly, even bluntly. And where he finds complexity, he insists on giving that complexity it's full due.

As far as I can see, there is no reason to doubt that Father Papademetrious has a genuine personal commitment to religious tolerance, and an abhorrence of all religious violence and persecution regardless of who the victims (or perpetrators) are. And he also possesses a clearly demonstrated interest in and sympathy for non-Christian religious traditions and their adherents.

But while Father Papademetrious' intelligence and humaneness shine through in his writings, this only makes it all the more jarring when one realizes the unambiguous import of what he believes to be the truth about all non-Christian religions. In particular, he insists that Christianity alone offers "salvation" and contains "saving truths". But somehow he makes this claim in the name of "tolerance" and "inclusiveness" (and also in the name of rejecting "exclusivism"). But Father Papademetrious is not here engaging in any deception or sophistry. He states very clearly what he means by "exclusivism", "inclusivism" and "tolerance". On close inspection, his definitions turn out to be rather counterintuitive, but they are not completely unreasonable, and they are presented in a very forthright and even well-reasoned manner, so there is no excuse for misunderstanding him.

The association between beneficial weather magic and Witchcraft on the Isle of Man, according to the Holinshed's Chronicles (1586)

The following text is taken from The Holinshed Project at Oxford University:

Giraldus noteth a conten|tion betwéene the kings of England & Ireland for the right of this Iland, but in the end, when by a compr [...]|mise the triall of the matter was referred to the liues or deaths of such venemous wormes as should be brought into the same, and it was found that they died not at all, as the like doo in Ireland, sentence passed with the king of England, & so he reteined the Iland. But howsoeuer this matter standeth, and whether anie such thing was done at all or not, sure it is that the peo|ple of the said Ile were much giuen to witchcraft and sorcerie (which they learned of the Scots a nation great|lie bent to that horible practise) in somuch that their women would oftentimes sell wind to the mariners, inclosed vnder certeine knots of thred, with this in|iunction, that they which bought the same, should for a great gale vndoo manie, and for the lesse a fewer or smaller number.

The authors of the Chronicles are essentially just repeating the tale about Manx weather Witches found already in Ranulf Higden's Polychronicon, written in Latin in the mid 14th century. Moreover, the decision by John Trevisa, when translating the Polychronicon into Middle English in 1387 (link), to characterize the weather magic of the women of the Isle of Man as "Witchcraft", is upheld in the Chronicles. It should be emphasized that the Chronicles have nothing good to say about Witchcraft, or at least no desire to say anything good of this "horible practise". And yet the only specific example cited to illustrate the way in which "the people of the said Ile were much giuen" to Witchcraft is a clear and unambiguous case of beneficial magic!

[The image, depicting a "Mudhead" dancer, at the top of the post is from:  Roediger, Virginia More. Ceremonial Costumes of the Pueblo Indians: Their Evolution, Fabrication, and Significance in the Prayer Drama. Berkeley:  University of California Press,  c1991 1991. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft8870087s/]

Finnish Witch selling wind to sailors. Olaus Magnus, 1555.

Looking it up: Witches and Witchcraft in some early English dictionaries

.
The post is mostly just a raw "data dump" consisting of selections from four of the earliest English language dictionaries (dated 1604, 1656, 1658, and 1755). In every case it is shown that "Witch" and "Witchcraft" are not defined in terms maleficium, but rather in terms of magical powers in a very general way without direct reference to harmful magic. There are references to the perverse Christian notion that magic is associated with "the Devil, or evil Spirits", but this is not said uniquely of Witchcraft alone, but also of Necromancy. In many other sources from the same period one also finds the Devil (and "evil spirits") associated with Conjurers, Sorcerers, Prophetesses, etc. Also, even when Witchcraft is specifically being associated with evil spirits, as in Philips' General Dictionary of 1656, the actions attributed to Witches are described as "Wonders", and in the same Dictionary, the entry for "Wonders" refers to "the seven Wonders of the World," and there is nothing to indicate an association with maleficium or anything of the sort. Moreover, the word "Witch" is explicitly presented in the sources below as being synonymous with a variety of other words to denote magical practitioners, including especially: "Magician", "Prophetess", "Enchantress", "Wizzard", and "Sorceress" (as well as, although somewhat less directly, with "Conjurer", "Wise Man", "Cunning Man", "Astrologer", and "Diviner").

1.
ROBERT CAWDREY'S A TABLE ALPHABETICAL (1604)

magitian, (g) one vsing witchcraft


2.
Glossographia Anglicana Nova: Or, A Dictionary, Interpreting Such Hard Words of Whatever Language, as are at Present Used in the English Tongue, by Thomas Blount (1656)

Pythoness, a Woman posses'd with a Familiar, or Prophecying Spirit, a Sorceress, or Witch.


3.
The New World of English Words, or, a General Dictionary, by Edward Phillips, 1658

Cunning-Man, one skilled in Astrology; a Diviner, a Conjurer.
Enchantress, a Witch or Sorceress
Magician, one that possesseth Magick, which was the same with the Persians as Philosophy among the Greeks, i. e. the Study of the more secret and mysterious Arts: Whence the Three Wise Men in the East, that came to adore the Savior of the World, were call'd Magi, but the Word now is commonly taken in a bad Sense, for a Wizard, Sorcerer, or Conjurer.
Magick, or Diabolical Magick, the Black Art, a dealing with Familiar Spirits, Conjuring, Sorcery, Witchcraft.
Natural Magick, or Natural Philosophy, an innocent and useful Science, teaching the Knowledge and mutual Application of Actives to Passives, so as to make many excellent Discoveries: But this Study being corrupted by the Arabians, and fill'd with many superstitious Vanities, the Word began to be taken in an ill Sense.
Magick Square, is when several Numbers, in Arithmetical proportions, are disposed into such parallel and equal Ranks, that the Sums of each Row taken any way, either directly or side-long, shall be all equal.
Necromancy, an Art, by which Communication is held with the Devil, so as to call up the Spirits of the Dead, such as the Witch of Endor made Use of to cause Samuel to appear to Saul.
Python, a venomous Serpent; also a familiar of prophecying Spirit, or one possessed with it.
Pythoness, a Woman so possessed [see Python, above]; a Prophetess; a Sorceress, or Witch.
Sorcerer, one that uses Witch-craft, a Wizzard, Magician, or Inchanter.
Sorceress, a Witch or Hag.
Wise-Man, see Cunning-Man
Witch, an old Hag, or Woman that deals with Familiar Spirits.
Witchcraft, the black Art, whereby with the Assistance of the Devil, or evil Spirits, some Wonders may be wrought, which exceed the common Apprehensions of Men.


4.
A Dictionary of the English Language, Samuel Johnson, 1755

Wárlock., Wárluck n.s. [vardlookr, Islandick, a charm; werloʒ, Saxon, an evil spirit. This etymology was communicated by Mr. Wise.] A male witch; a wizzard.
Warlock in Scotland is applied to a man whom the vulgar suppose to be conversant with spirits, as a woman who carries on the same commerce is called a witch: he is supposed to have the invulnerable quality which Dryden mentions, who did not understand the word: "He was no warlock, as the Scots commonly call such men, who they say are iron free or lead free." [From John Dryden's notes on his own translation of Vergil's Aeneid (link), specifically in reference to the fact that Vergil allows his hero to be wounded in battle (in Book XII), thus demonstrating that Aeneas "was no warluck", that is to say, he did not possess "the invulnerable quality" that "in Scotland", according to Johnson, is supposed, by "the vulgar", to be characteristic of both Witches and Warlocks.]