Help and Info

Well, I am doing a report on Wicca and having some great trouble finding 7 physical attributes that prove of being a witch in the Burning Age. I know one is the the "Devil's Mark". Please, I only turn here cause I am having trouble and it seemed like a logical place to ask.

Login or Signup to reply to this post.

If you can get here then you can google this. It would be of more help to you. The devils mark was merely 'any' physical mark that the inquisition would 'use' to say that someone was a 'witch'....

In my readings of the witch trials I read that a lot of people sentenced to death by accusation of being a witch from having black cats, being hysterical or aimlessly babbling at times, spending a substantial amount of time in the woods especially at night, and for just being suspicious in whatever was deemed suspicious enough to be witchcraft.

Some signs that associated people as being witches were warts, moles, spots, and skin discoloration.

It was common also that they would use a needle to prick the blamed witch till they could find a a place which was not sensitive to pain .If they could find that was taken as proof that witchery was involved .However there are places in human body that are less sensitive than others ,nothing so paranormal about that .

They would also tie something heavy to them and through them in a river and if they survived they were said to be a witch.

there is the touch test. If the victim of witchcraft was having a fit, and the witch touched the victim, the victim's fit would stop because touching your victim was the same as showing sympathy and causing the curse to return to the witch. The accused was often blindfolded, and the 'victim' was probably faking it
Another popular witch-detection method was to make the accused submit to The Lord's Prayer Test, in which the person had to recite the Lord's Prayer without making any mistakes. It was believed that only the innocent could recite it all the way through without error, as surely those possessed by the Devil could never manage to recite holy words

A birth mark is a birth mark. There is no mark which tells that a person is a witch, a witch is someone who casts spells and follows his/ her path.
You think that a witch must have a mark to be considered as a witch? Well, you are wrong.
People did believe that witches must have a mark for being considered as a witch, but it was in the 'witches trial'.
In this time, when witches were tortured, the people the tortured were not even actual witches.
They believed that witches were the daughters of inccubus which had relationships with young women...
So, you can understand that the real witches were not even tortured, unless they were caught because of other reason.
You see, it was just a way of the church and the government to get money, because when they killed the witch- all of her property and money was shared between the church and the government...
The devil's mark was just a way of the church to show the people that they were not wrong, or otherwise - it was a way to lie them and to make them believe that the persons the tortured were actual witches.
They looked for scars and birth marks, and if they didn't have, they claimed they had 'special un seen marks'. They claimed that if the 'witch' didn't have a scar or birth mark- he/ she had a mark that the eye can not see.
Well, i hope you understand that a witch is a witch and a wiccan is a wiccan and they need no mark to be so...

yes star we know this dear :) we are just replying to his questions for his paper. i am sure none of us beleave that it a sign that someone is a witch, it is just what was a method used in the distant past. So I hope that you didnt take this as our personal ideas of how to tell if someone practices witchcraft or not..

UH starwitch honey he 'asked' about a 'mark' in the Burning times which was 'long ago' that mark is NOT what defines a witch 'now. It's apparently some kind of history report he's doing please read and then 'understand' what's being asked before responding.....