It misses the forest for the trees. The overwhelming majority of the populace of Europe during the period under discussion (800-1200AD) was subject to the direct justice of their liege lord. If Baron von Snufflebottom said you were guilty, you were guilty and your head would be off as soon as they found an axe. The only people subject to trial by ordeal were Baron von Snufflebottom and his posse, and the ordeals were leverage in the power struggle between church and state. If Baron von Snufflebottom decided that the local bishop was living too large off his tribute, he might get his buddies together to reef down on the bishop. If the bishop could get his posse together in time they could find a quisling to accuse Snufflebottom of witchcraft. Then it came down to who has the juice - Snufflebottom can toe the line and be innocent of witchcraft, or he can make this a thing and stick his hand in boiling water. It wasn't an effective test of guilt, it was an effective test of power. And this is why The Crusades happened, Martin Luther happened, the Reign of Terror happened, etc etc etc. European history is one long pissing match between church and state.
I had an ancestor who accused a guy of witchcraft - the first guy of my family to come to america, in fact. Matthias, my many great grandfather, had a spat with a dude and the dude burned Matthias' house with Matthias' wife inside. Pretty messed up, but Matthias didn't have proof it was the dude and so he accused the dude of witchcraft. He said the dude could pass through locked doors and convince people of things they didn't want to do. It's crazy to me how an accusation of witchcraft was pretty much, "that guy's doing some shady shit and I don't like it." Like, the bad dude in the story was good at picking locks and had a silver tongue, but for prosecution those became otherworldly powers. It makes me wonder - at the time did people think of these accusations in a more plain way than we think of them now? Did most people know witchcraft as a shorthand, not for magic but for having skills common to scoundrels?
Whenever you hear "Salem Witch Trials" you should immediately think "Sarah Palin, Tea Party and Death Panels." Salem was about urban vs. rural. It was the city intellectuals vs. the country farmers. It was the "true Americans" vs. the "liberal elites." And the liberal elites got burned at the stake. And if you have more friends than he does, guilt is utterly irrelevant. I mix... a large, famous reality TV show involving people locked up together for months at a time. And as I have to sit in the chair making it sound good for ten hours at a stretch, I have to listen. I've gotten good at listening for quality, not content; I can zone them out a lot of the time. But sometimes I don't. I had a formative experience a few years back where there were two stupid girls who were friends with a smart girl. And the smart girl did something that the stupid girls didn't appreciate - I think she talked to Bob first when they wanted her to talk to Mary and then Bob. So one of them came to her and said "why didn't you talk to Mary first?" and the girl said something like "because Mary would have told Bob and she would have told Bob this instead of that and since we need Bob to hear that I figured I should make an end run and take care of it. Sorry I didn't talk to you first." So stupid girl one nods and smiles and goes to stupid girl two. She relays this story. Then she says "I hate the way smart girl leaves hair on her brush." Stupid girl two says "and she's always so uppity." Stupid girl one says "yeah! Who does she think she is!" and so on for the next ninety minutes working themselves up into a lather over what a horrible person smart girl is. Within three hours there was a shouting confrontation over what a slob smart girl is and how she has no respect for other people because she left her underwear on the floor in the bedroom. Stupid girls splintered from smart girl, dogged her, made her life horrible, got the whole house to burn the witch and she was gone in three days. People rarely fight over what the fight is about. They fight over not liking your face. This is why smart people hate stupid people - because smart people can be right and still be burned at the stake. And this is why stupid people hate smart people - because they think it's about being right instead of being on our side. How many millions of people voted against their own healthcare? How many millions voted against their own financial best interests? How many people effectively foreshortened their lives by edging their worlds just that much closer to Dickensian hell? And they did it with a smile to show those goddamn coastal liberals a thing or two. This is why Democrats lose. They have to find the poor smart people while the Republicans just need to point at the witch. "that guy's doing some shady shit and I don't like it."
It's crazy how comforting tribalism can be - and not just the aspect of being a part of something, but the aspect of someone else being outside. I guess that guarantees the ebb and flow of a two party system - for as long as you're not the one making the rules you can point to the ruling party and say "we must come together to defeat them!"