Strigae, Magi, Venefici

[speculumphilosophi]

So, my interest in witchcraft. Mostly it's academic and I view witches as very connected to ancient paganism. This is because pagans in the earlier Roman World practised what we call "witchcraft" as a socially accepted activity. People then, I think, had a stronger connection to nature and spirituality. It's true that even in pagan Rome, witchcraft could get you into big trouble, if some accusation of malice was brought to the courts, such as damage to crops. So, I think the more accepted norm was divining the future, healing, herbs and so forth. As I can fathom, the real intolerance towards witchcraft was later promoted by the Church, due to the desire to stamp out paganism.
Anyway, for anyone interested, the title above is merely to explain some Latin terms for "witch". The mediaeval term is striga, strigae, which (pardon the pun) seems to denote a sinister female witch. Magus, Magi, as we know, refers to a sorcerer. "Maga" is a far more classy, I think, term for a female witch, who is revered. Veneficus seems to be a far more sinister name for a male witch. I have often found female witches referred to as "anicula", which is simply an old woman, often using roots and magic stones.
These are the ancient Latin terms for "witch". As I gather, some witches were viewed negatively while others were held in awe, or feared.

Post automatically merged: Aug 8, 2026

I believe the restriction of English language books and sources for paganism and pagan practises is dry land swimming. This term Bruce Lee used to describe the practice of Karate in America, outside it's source history of martial arts in China. So, even if the Druids were active in the British Isles, many of them knew Greek (although, the Druids were sometimes a bit sinister and not my favourite pagans).
If you learn either Latin or Greek you get access to teachings that even Elena Blavatsky doesn't cover. To give an example, how many people have learned which elements correspond to which physical senses, sight, hearing, smell and so on? The elements being Ignis, terra, umidum, aeres. How many people heard of mundus Cereris or the pagan classifications of spirits? We got democracy, arts, politics, the calendar and astrology from the ancient world. The same applies to paganism and esoteric teachings.

Post automatically merged: Aug 11, 2026

It seems nobody here has heard of the elements and senses, so I will explain it in case possibly someone might be interested.
(1)The element of fire (ignis) relates to the sense of sight since we perceive light via the eye. Some animals like cats reflect light by a glow.
(2) The element of (aer,) or air, connects to hearing and air is the medium by which sound is perceived by the ear.
(3) The element of (terra) earth is sensed by touch or tactus.
(4) The element called uvidum or aqua, i.e. water corresponds to taste, since the mouth has saliva. It's a wet sense.
(5) The element also of air connects to olfactus or smell. Except smell indicates changes of state in the air.
The question then is so what?
Well, we then pass to the psychic senses.
(1) Clairvoyance (think it's spelled that way)
(2) Clairaudience (hearing voices, sounds, vibrations)
(3) Clairolfaction, psychic smell.
(4) Clairgustance, similar to synthesis.
So, the senses have connection to the elements of earth, air, fire and water. Beyond that, a very small number of people experience the psychic senses.
There is probably little interest in this information but I found it quite helpful to learn.

 

[Sophia]

Thank you, I am always interested to learn about the elements.

 

[ahathoor]

This is because pagans in the earlier Roman World practised what we call "witchcraft" as a socially accepted activity.

That simply isn't true. It's not just trials as you meantioned, the institution of the witch hunt and the "satanic" (witch) panic was endemic to ancient Rome (down to the fact that typically women were accused of maleficent magic and poisoning en masse), and the general temperament of violent spiritual suppression is readily exemplified by how they dealt with early Christians.

Service magicians did and could operate in pre-Christian rome with more legal latitude than after, but for one it was considered "kinda shady" to begin with, and also it's misleading to equate our idea of the "witch" with what these practicioners did.

teachings that even Elena Blavatsky doesn't cover

Blavatsky is a today infamously inaccurate source, who generally went off on her own tangent and got most things reliably wrong from the perspective of cultures and sources she raccooned all her nonsense together from... so access to things "not even she" covered isn't saying much.

It seems nobody here has heard of the elements and senses, so I will explain it in case possibly someone might be interested.

what exactly makes you think nobody in an occult forum with some pretty deep discussions has heard of a thousands of years old, basic correspondence one can iirc find on literal wikipedia?

 

[Dyn Hysbys]

Plainly, this is nonsense.
Rome had a very proscriptive state religion. The punishment for defying the state was usually death.
'Witchcraft' is a relatively modern description of transgressive practices. Witchcraft was transgressive, it threatened the stability of the state. It was never 'tolerated' by the state either before or after the change to Christianity.
Viewing the past through rose-tinted 'closer to nature' lenses is your first error.

 

[ahathoor]

without going into demonization of any historical culture (or ourselves), generally most everything that seems hybristic or repressive in our Western culture can be cleanly traced back to ancient Rome - the idea that Man is on a quest to impose order on chaotic and cruel nature (including the spirit world, women, foreigners, sacred groves, dangerous animals, etc.) is very markedly Roman, as well as the violent affront at anything daring to challenge the mastery and sovereignty of Man (which meant Roman Man) in doing these things

(see also: Black Iron Prison)

Also the violent suppression and following fallout of the Dionysian revival in Republican Rome is worth looking into... the summer of love is not a new invention, and we've been through a few cycles of suppression and re-emergence (Io Bacchus, Hail Eris)

 

[speculumphilosophi]

Plainly, this is nonsense.
Rome had a very proscriptive state religion. The punishment for defying the state was usually death.
'Witchcraft' is a relatively modern description of transgressive practices. Witchcraft was transgressive, it threatened the stability of the state. It was never 'tolerated' by the state either before or after the change to Christianity.
Viewing the past through rose-tinted 'closer to nature' lenses is your first error.

You haven't read The Apology by Apuleius yet (you can find the R.F. Meyer version online. Also, it's a mistake to look at the Roman pagan world through a static period of time. Apuleius was tried for sorcery around the time of Antonius Pius, which was relatively late. If we go later yet, then we encounter intolerance of paganism as Christianity gains a foothold.
So, Apuleius explains how the term for "witch" (Magus) has the same sense as the Persian, and essentially just means the use of ceremony and invocations to gain the favour of the gods (most often Mercury). We can use his argument today, in fact, since Christians "pray" either to heal illnesses or destroy enemies in war. Pagans (in a sense witches) mostly do the same thing and the line between an Isis devotee, cult member of Magna Mater (Cybele) is very thin.
Essentially, the situation likely varied as centuries passed by. I do know Marcus Aurelius was recognised as using magic rites to pacify enemy nations, and this was simply accepted. Elagabalus practised magic with his mother and grandmother, using charms and pendants.
There is an older law of the 12 tables that apparently sends offenders to the flames for cursing a neighbours crops or misuse of magic.
Really, it's not a good idea to generalise. From what I gather, witchcraft was massive in the Roman world. There was especially a focus on sexual rites, where sex was more than simply an act of passion.
As an incidental fact, Caligula's wife was said to have practised witchraft.

Post automatically merged: Saturday at 9:24 PM

Apuleius, definition of magic:

"you hear, you who so rashly accuse the art of magic? It is an art acceptable to the immortal gods, full of all knowledge of worship and of prayer, full of piety and wisdom in things divine, full of honour and glory since the day when Zoroaster and Oromazes established it, high-priestess of the powers of heaven. Nay, it is one of the first elements of princely instruction, nor do they lightly admit any chance person to be a magician, any more than they would admit him to be a king."

Post automatically merged: Saturday at 9:28 PM

And here, on the fiction of accusing a real witch:
"But for the man who exposes a magician, credited with such awful powers, to the danger of a capital sentence, how can escort or precaution or watchmen save him from unforeseen and inevitable disaster? Nothing can save him, and therefore the man who believes in the truth of such a charge as this is certainly the last person in the world who should bring such an accusation."

Post automatically merged: Saturday at 9:29 PM

In the original:
"Enimuero qui magum qualem isti dicunt in discrimen capitis deducit, quibus comitibus, quibus scrupulis, quibus custodibus perniciem cæcam et ineuitabilem prohibeat? Nullis scilicet. Et ideo id genus crimen non est eius accusare, qui credit."