The relationship between law, bureaucracy, and state formation in early modern witchcraft prosecutions is examined through the theoretical tension between Zygmunt Bauman’s analysis of institutional violence and Norbert Elias’s civilizing process. The witchcraft trials are understood as representing a meeting point between these approaches: large-scale prosecutions required bureaucratic mechanisms, whilst the monopoly of violence was necessary to enforce judicial processes in the absence of material evidence. Through analysis of witchcraft trial pamphlets (1566–1720), it is demonstrated how the legitimacy of prosecutions was constructed through emphasising adherence to due legal process and the reputation of judicial authorities. The secular positioning of witchcraft laws is shown to have facilitated monarchical consolidation of power, wresting spiritual authority from the church. Through examination of treason cases, clerical involvement, and anti-Catholic rhetoric, the pamphlets reveal how religious decentralisation proceeded unevenly between England and Scotland. The vulnerability of emergent bureaucratic mechanisms to exploitation by charismatic individuals like Matthew Hopkins demonstrates how institutional violence became integral to, rather than contradictory to, the civilizing process, ultimately revealing witchcraft prosecutions as crucial sites for negotiating the boundaries of legal authority during state formation.