This test was that the accused was stripped down to their undergarments, bound in rope, and tossed in the nearest body of water. It was believed that if they were a witch the water would reject them and they would float. However if they weren 't a witch then they would sink. They had things in place to save the drowning innocent person but it wasn 't exactly uncommon for them to drown. There was the "prayer test" which was completely unfair. This test was created under the belief that witches were incapable of reciting script for the Bible. Therefore they had the accused read aloud a passage from the Bible and if they made any mistakes they were seen as a witch. This is pretty much how I would describe public speaking from hell. In reality the accused could have been illiterate, nervous, or just made a simple mistake but either way it didn 't matter. Then there was the "touch test" which was truly biased. This one worked under the belief that a victim of witchcraft would have s special reaction to their evildoer. It was mostly used when the victim was thought to be possessed. So while the victim was having a fit the accused witch would be told to lay a hand on the victim. If there was no reaction then they were innocent but if the victim was to come out of their fit they were seen as guilty. Witch hunters also looked for "witch marks" or in reality any possible blemish on the accused. A suspected witch would sometimes be stripped and publicly examined for any blemish. A blemish was believed to be the mark that was left on the accused after making the pact with the devil. However they could call anything a witch mark either it was a mole, birthmark, scar, or even bruises. So they typically found "evidence" to link the accused to witchcraft. Another was "pricking and poking". This was based on the idea that witch marks didn 't bleed and were numb to pain. So the accused would have a special needle stabbed
This test was that the accused was stripped down to their undergarments, bound in rope, and tossed in the nearest body of water. It was believed that if they were a witch the water would reject them and they would float. However if they weren 't a witch then they would sink. They had things in place to save the drowning innocent person but it wasn 't exactly uncommon for them to drown. There was the "prayer test" which was completely unfair. This test was created under the belief that witches were incapable of reciting script for the Bible. Therefore they had the accused read aloud a passage from the Bible and if they made any mistakes they were seen as a witch. This is pretty much how I would describe public speaking from hell. In reality the accused could have been illiterate, nervous, or just made a simple mistake but either way it didn 't matter. Then there was the "touch test" which was truly biased. This one worked under the belief that a victim of witchcraft would have s special reaction to their evildoer. It was mostly used when the victim was thought to be possessed. So while the victim was having a fit the accused witch would be told to lay a hand on the victim. If there was no reaction then they were innocent but if the victim was to come out of their fit they were seen as guilty. Witch hunters also looked for "witch marks" or in reality any possible blemish on the accused. A suspected witch would sometimes be stripped and publicly examined for any blemish. A blemish was believed to be the mark that was left on the accused after making the pact with the devil. However they could call anything a witch mark either it was a mole, birthmark, scar, or even bruises. So they typically found "evidence" to link the accused to witchcraft. Another was "pricking and poking". This was based on the idea that witch marks didn 't bleed and were numb to pain. So the accused would have a special needle stabbed