Massimo Centini

Animali e stregoneria

Introduction

Animali e stregoneria. Scopri il legame tra animali e stregoneria nei tribunali del XV e XVI secolo. Massimo Centini esplora il ruolo degli animali e la loro connessione con le emarginate dell'epoca.

Abstract

Riprendendo alcuni passaggi del suo libro, Massimo Centini affronta la presenza animale nei tribunali storici del XV e XVI secolo e il suo legame con le altri grande emarginate e senza voce di quel periodo storico: le streghe.

Review

This article, "Animali e stregoneria," introduces a compelling topic at the intersection of historical criminology, cultural studies, and animal history. The abstract effectively outlines the core focus: an examination of the presence of animals within the historical tribunals of the 15th and 16th centuries, and crucially, their perceived link to human figures similarly marginalized and voiceless, specifically witches. This premise offers a unique lens through which to explore the broader socio-cultural dynamics and belief systems that characterized this tumultuous period, promising insights into how societies processed deviance, otherness, and the boundaries between human and animal realms. The subject matter itself is inherently fascinating and holds significant potential for shedding light on under-explored aspects of late medieval and early modern European legal and social history. By drawing a parallel between animals and witches as "great marginalized and voiceless" entities within the judicial system, the article appears to offer a nuanced perspective on the complex interplay of superstition, legal practices, and societal anxieties. The work of Massimo Centini, as indicated, often delves into such intricate cultural phenomena, suggesting a well-informed and contextualized approach to this challenging subject. The specified timeframe (15th and 16th centuries) provides a clear historical framework for the analysis. However, the abstract's explicit mention of "Riprendendo alcuni passaggi del suo libro" (Taking some passages from his book) raises a question regarding the originality of the research presented *within this specific article*. While drawing upon an author's previous extensive work can provide a strong foundation, a journal article is typically expected to offer new analysis, synthesis, or case studies. Reviewers would ideally hope to see how this article either re-contextualizes existing findings for a new argument, presents entirely new data not covered in the original book, or offers a novel methodological approach. Without further detail on the specific tribunals or geographical focus, or the primary sources consulted for *this particular piece*, it is difficult to fully assess the depth and specific contribution of the article beyond its intriguing premise.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.