Boston, 1702.
[29] Dated 1697-8.
[30] P. 12.
[31] Meric Casaubon was born in 1599 and died in 1671. His
learned, lively, and vastly entertaining work, A Treatise
concerning Enthusiasme, as it is an Effect of Nature: but
is mistaken by many for either Divine Inspiration, or
Diabolicall Possession, appeared in 1655, and in a “Second
edition: revised, and enlarged” in 1656. It shows an open
mind and a temper rather skeptical than credulous. Passages
of interest in our present discussion may be found on
pp. 37-41, 44, 49, 94-95, 100, 118, 174 (Quakers), 286,
of the second edition. Of particular significance is the
Doctor’s account of his visit to a man who was thought to
be possessed but whom he believed to be suffering from some
bodily distemper (pp. 97 ff.). Casaubon’s treatise (in two
parts) Of Credulity and Incredulity, in Things Natural,
Civil, and Divine, came out in 1668, and was reissued, with
a new title-page (as above), in 1672. A third part, Of
Credulity and Incredulity in Things Divine and Spiritual,
appeared in 1670. Webster’s assault upon Casaubon in his
Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft was made in apparent
ignorance of the fact that the venerable scholar had been
dead for some years (see p. 24, below).
[32] Compare Reginald Scot’s chapter “Of Theurgie, with a
Confutation thereof” (Discoverie of Witchcraft, book xv,
chap. 42, 1584, p. 466, ed. 1665, p. 280). See also Henry
Hallywell, Melampronoea: or A Discourse of the Polity
and Kingdom of Darkness. Together with a Solution of the
Chiefest Objections brought against the Being of Witches,
1681, pp. 50-51.
[33] Cap. iv, §15, ed. Mosheim, 1773, I, 395-396.
[34] Sadducismus Triumphatus, ed. 1726, p. 336; see James
Crossley’s Introduction to Potts, Discovery of Witches in
the County of Lancaster, reprinted from the Edition of 1613
(Chetham Society, 1845), p. vi, note 2. This experiment
was twice tried as late as 1712, in the case of Jane
Wenham, by the Rev. Mr. Strutt, once in the presence of Sir
Henry Chauncy, and again in the presence of the Rev. Mr.
Gardiner. Its ill success is recorded by a third Anglican
clergyman,--Mr. Francis Bragge (A Full and Impartial
Account of the Discovery of Sorcery and Witchcraft,
Practis’d by Jane Wenham, London, 1712, pp. 11, 15).
[35] Letter to Glanvill, Sept. 18, 1677, Works, ed. Birch,
V, 244. Compare Dr. Samuel Collins’s letter to Boyle, Sept.
1, 1663 (Boyle’s Works, V, 633-634).
[36] In a letter to Glanvill (Works, V, 245).
[37] See Demonologie ou Traitte des Demons et Sorciers
... Par Fr. Perreaud. Ensemble l’Antidemon de Mascon, ou
Histoire Veritable de ce qu’un Demon a fait & dit, il y a
quelques années, en la maison dudit Sʳ. Perreaud à Mascon.
Geneva, 1653.
[38] Theological Works, ed. 1830, IV, 480-482.
[39] In his Ravillae Redivivus, reprinted in the Somers
Tracts, 2d ed., VIII, 510 ff. (see especially pp. 546 ff.).
Weir, who was unquestionably insane, was executed in 1670.
[40] Diary and Correspondence of Samuel Pepys, London,
1885, IV, 275. On elf-arrows cf. Pitcairn, Criminal Trials
in Scotland, I, ii, 192, 198; III, 607, 609, 615; W.
Henderson, Notes on the Folk-Lore of the Northern Counties,
1879, pp. 185 ff.
[41] Evelyn may have derived his information from Sir
William Phips’s letter to the home government (Oct.
14, 1692), as Dr. G. H. Moore suggests (Final Notes on
Witchcraft in Massachusetts, N. Y., 1885, p. 66). For the
letter see Goodell, Essex Institute Collections, 2d Series,
I, ii, 86 ff. Phips’s second letter (Feb. 21, 1692-3, to
the Earl of Nottingham) is printed by Moore, pp. 90 ff.
[42] The remark, sometimes heard, that Calvinism was
especially responsible for witch trials is a loose
assertion which has to reckon with the fact that the last
burning for witchcraft at Geneva took place in 1652 (see
Paul Ladame, Procès criminel de la dernière Sorcière brulée
à Genève, Paris, 1888).
[43] Compare Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, Part I,
section 2, member 1, subsection 3:--“Many deny Witches at
all, or if there be any, they can doe no harme: of this
opinion is _Wierus, lib. 3. cap. 53, de præstig. dæm_.
Austin Lerchemer, a Dutch writer, _Biarmanus_, _Ewichius_,
_Euwaldus_, our countryman _Scot_ ... but on the contrary
are most Lawyers, Diuines, Physitians, Philosophers.”
[44] Wier’s great work, De Praestigiis Dæmonum, was
published in 1563, and was afterwards much enlarged. It
went through many editions.
[45] See the extraordinary list in William Drage,
Daimonomageia. A Small Treatise of Sicknesses and Diseases
from Witchcraft, and Supernatural Causes, 1665. Webster
considers this subject at length in Chap. xii of his
Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, 1677, with a full
discussion of van Helmont’s views. Cf. Henry More, Antidote
against Atheism, Chaps. 4-5 (Philosophical Writings, 2d
ed., 1662, pp. 97 ff.).
[46] “Ea dæmonis subtilitate uelocitateque imperceptibili,
ori ingesta, nostris ad hæc oculis uel celeritate eius
uictis, uel fascino delusis, uel interiecto corpore aereo
aut aliter motis eo intus uel foris uel utrinque humoribus
aut spiritu caligantibus.” De Præstigiis Dæmonum (Basileæ,
1568), iv, 2, pp. 352-353.
[47] Even Bekker (see p. 35, below), who approaches the
subject from the philosophical direction, and whose logical
process is different from Wier’s, is greatly indebted to
him.
[48] Compare the fate of Bekker in 1692 (p. 39).
[49] A Treatise proving Spirits, Witches and Supernatural
Operations, 1672, p. 35.
[50] The same, p. 46.
[51] Dæmonologie, Workes, 1616, p. 92. On Wier in general,
see Carl Binz, Doctor Johann Weyer, ein rheinischer Arst,
der erste Bekämpfer des Hexenwahns, Berlin, 1896.
[52] He expressly asserts his belief in their existence (A
Discourse upon Divels and Spirits, chap. 32, p. 540; cf.
chap. 16, p. 514).
[53] Discoverie of Witchcraft, xiii, 22-34, ed. 1584, pp.
321 ff., ed. 1665, pp. 181-201 (with cuts). Most of the
tricks which Scot describes are identical with feats of
legerdemain that are the stock in trade of every modern
juggler:--“To throwe a peece of monie awaie, and to find
it againe where you list” (p. 326); “To make a groat or
a testor to sinke through a table, and to vanish out of
a handkercher very strangelie” (p. 327); “How to deliver
out foure aces, and to convert them into foure knaves”
(p. 333); “To tell one without confederacie what card he
thinketh” (p. 334); “To burne a thred, and to make it whole
againe with the ashes thereof” (p. 341); “To cut off ones
head, and to laie it in a platter, &c.: which the jugglers
call the decollation of John Baptist” (p. 349). The picture
of the apparatus required for the last-mentioned trick
is very curious indeed (p. 353). The references to Scot,
unless the contrary is stated, are to all the pages of
the first (1584) edition, as reprinted by Dr. Brinsley
Nicholson (London, 1886).
[54] King James remarks, in the Preface to his Dæmonologie,
that Scot “is not ashamed in publike Print to deny, that
there can be such a thing as Witch-craft: and so maintaines
the old errour of the Sadduces in denying of spirits”
(Workes, 1616, pp. 91-92).
[55] In what an orderly way one may proceed from an
admission of the doctrine of fallen angels to the final
results of the witch dogma may be seen, for instance, in
Henry Hallywell’s Melampronoea: or A Discourse of the
Polity and Kingdom of Darkness, 1681. Hallywell had been a
Fellow of Christ’s College, Cambridge.
[56] See p. 9, above.
[57] P. 39. See Nicholson’s reprint of the 1584 edition, p.
xlii.
[58] Page 46.
[59] Introduction to the Chetham Society reprint of Potts’s
Discoverie of Witches, pp. xxxviii-xxxix.
[60] Pages 202-215.
[61] P. 228. Perhaps Webster is merely “putting a case”
here; but he certainly seems to be making an admission, at
least in theory.
[62] Page 230.
[63] Pages 294 ff.
[64] Page 294.
[65] Pages 297-298.
[66] Pages 302-310.
[67] P. 308. On the astral spirit, see also pp. 312 ff.
[68] Page 310.
[69] Pages 10-11.
[70] See also pp. 267 ff.
[71] Page 73.
[72] Page 231.
[73] Pages 242-243.
[74] Page 244.
[75] Pages 245-246.
[76] Page 247.
[77] Page 260.
[78] Page 267.
[79] Note, however, that the upholders of the current
beliefs on witchcraft are also many times emphatic enough
in similar cautionary remarks. A first-rate example is the
following characteristic passage from Dr. Casaubon, whom
Webster calls a “witchmonger”:--
“And indeed, that the denying of _Witches_, to them
that content themselves in the search of truth with a
superficial view, is a very plausible cause; it cannot be
denied. For if any thing in the world, (as we know all
things in the world are) be liable to fraud, and imposture,
and innocent mistake, through weakness and simplicity; this
subject of Witches and Spirits is.... How ordinary is it to
mistake natural melancholy (not to speak of other diseases)
for a Devil? And how much, too frequently, is both the
disease increased, or made incurable; and the mistake
confirmed, by many ignorant Ministers, who take every wild
motion, or phansie, for a suggestion of the Devil? Whereas,
in such a case, it should be the care of wise friends, to
apply themselves to the Physician of the body, and not to
entertain the other, (I speak it of _natural_ melancholy)
who probably may do more hurt, than good; but as the
learned Naturalist doth allow, and advise? Excellent is the
advice and counsel in this kind, of the Author of the book
_de morbo Sacro_ attributed to _Hippocrates_, which I could
wish all men were bound to read, before they take upon them
to visit sick folks, that are troubled with melancholy
diseases” (A Treatise proving Spirits, etc., 1672, pp.
29-30: cf. p. 14, note 31, above).
[80] Pages 219, 220, 224.
[81] Saducismus Triumphatus, Part II, ed. 1682, p. 4. (ed.
1726, pp. 225-226). Glanvill is here replying to Webster,
whose book, it will be remembered, appeared in 1677.
[82] Increase Mather’s copy is in the Harvard College
Library.
[83] Lowell, New England Two Centuries Ago, Writings,
Riverside edition, II, 73.
[84] Leviathan, i, 2 (English Works, ed. Molesworth, III,
9). Compare Hobbes’s Dialogue between a Philosopher and
a Student of the Common Law of England (English Works,
VI, 96):--“L. I know not. Besides these crimes, there is
conjuration, witchcraft, sorcery and enchantment; which are
capital by the statute I James, c. 12.--P. But I desire
not to discourse of that subject. For though without doubt
there is some great wickedness signified by those crimes;
yet I have ever found myself too dull to conceive the
nature of them, or how the devil hath power to do so many
things which witches have been accused of.” Wier is far
more humane, as well as more reasonable. If one holds, he
writes, that witches are to be severely punished for their
evil intent, let it be remembered that there is a great
difference between sane and insane will. “Quod si quis
contentiose uoluntatem seuerius puniendam defendat, is
primum distinguat inter uoluntatem hominis sani perfectam,
quae in actum uere dirigi coeperit: et inter uitiatae
mentis sensum, uel (si uoles) corruptam amentis uoluntatem:
cui suo opere, quasi alterius esset, colludit diabolus, nec
alius insulse uolentem subsequitur effectus.” De Præstigiis
Dæmonum, vi, 21, ed. 1568, pp. 641-642.
[85] Table-Talk, 1689, p. 59 (the first edition). Selden
died in 1654.
[86] Soldan, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, ed. Heppe, II,
243.
[87] A Candle in the Dark: or, A Treatise concerning the
Nature of Witches & Witchcraft, 1656, p. 41.
[88] Sir Robert Filmer’s brief tract, An Advertisement to
the Jury-men of England, touching Witches, was occasioned,
according to the Preface, by “the late Execution of Witches
at the Summer Assizes in Kent.” It was first published in
1652, and may be found annexed to the Free-holders Grand
Inquest, 1679. The case which elicited Sir Robert’s little
book is reported in A Prodigious & Tragicall History of the
Arraignment, Tryall, Confession, and Condemnation of six
Witches at Maidstone, in Kent, at the Assizes there held
in July, Fryday 30, this present year, 1652 (London, 1652,
reprinted 1837).
[89] A. D. White, A History of the Warfare of Science with
Theology, 1896, I, 362.
[90] Wood, Athenæ Oxonienses, ed. Bliss, III, 1114.
[91] Dr. Hutchinson’s admirable work, An Historical Essay
concerning Witchcraft, which still remains one of the
most valuable treatises on this subject that we have, was
published in 1718. It appeared in a second edition in 1720,
in which year he was appointed Bishop of Down and Connor.
[92] I have used a copy of the French translation,--Le
Monde Enchanté, Amsterdam, 1694. This was made by Bekker’s
direction and revised by him. Each of the four volumes has
a separate dedication, and each dedication (in the Harvard
College copy) is authenticated by Bekker’s autograph
signature.
[93] This concludes Bekker’s First Book.
[94] What precedes is, in substance, Bekker’s Book II.
[95] This is the substance of Bekker’s Third Book.
[96] “De Christelijke Synodus ... heeft, ... met
eenparigheyd van stemmen, den selven Dr. Bekker verklaart
intolerabel als Leeraar in de Gereformeerde Kerke; en
vervolgens hem van sijn Predik-dienst geremoveert” (decree
in W. P. C. Knuttel, Balthasar Bekker de Bestrijder van het
Bijgeloof, the Hague, 1906, p. 315).
[97] Knuttel, p. 319.
[98] Knuttel, p. 357. Strictly speaking, it was not for his
denial of modern witchcraft that Bekker was punished, for
it is in the last two books of his treatise that he deals
particularly with this subject, and these did not appear
until after he had been unfrocked. Still, his Second Book,
which got him into trouble, contains all the essentials.
It denies the power of the devil and wicked spirits to
afflict men, and holds that the demoniacs of the New
Testament were neither possessed nor obsessed, but merely
sufferers from disease. For a full analysis of Bekker’s
work and an account of the opposition which it roused,
see Knuttel, chap. v, pp. 188 ff.; for the ecclesiastical
proceedings against Bekker, see chap. vi, pp. 270 ff. The
various editions and translations of De Betoverde Weereld
are enumerated by van der Linde in his Balthasar Bekker,
Bibliographie (the Hague, 1869), where may also be found a
long list of the books and pamphlets which the work called
forth. There is a good account of Bekker’s argument in
Soldan’s Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, neu bearbeitet von
Dr. Heinrich Heppe (Stuttgart, 1880), II, 233 ff. See also
Roskoff, Geschichte des Teufels, Leipzig, 1869, II, 445 ff.
[99] Theologians took infinite pains to distinguish between
miracles (_miracula_), which could be wrought by divine
power only, and the kind of wonders (_mira_) which Satan
worked. See, for example, William Perkins, A Discourse of
the Damned Art of Witchcraft, 1608, pp. 12 ff., 18 ff.;
Del Rio, Disquisitiones Magicæ, lib. ii, quæstio 7, ed.
1616, pp. 103 ff. Sir Robert Filmer, in An Advertisement
to the Jurymen of England, Touching Witches (appended to
The Free-holders Grand Inquest, 1679; cf. p. 34, note 88,
above), makes merry with such fine-spun distinctions. “Both
[Perkins and Del Rio],” he says, “seem to agree in this,
that he had need be an admirable or profound Philosopher,
that can distinguish between a Wonder and a Miracle; it
would pose _Aristotle_ himself, to tell us every thing that
can be done by the power of Nature, and what things cannot;
for there be daily many things found out, and daily more
may be, which our Fore-fathers never knew to be possible
in Nature” (pp. 322-323). Cf. Calef, More Wonders of the
Invisible World, 1700, p. 35.
[100] Cf. Soldan, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, ed.
Heppe, II, 243:--“Zu derjenigen freieren Kritik der
biblischen Schriften selbst sich zu erheben, welche
das Vorhandensein gewisser, aus den Begriffen der Zeit
geschöpfter dämonologischen Vorstellungen in der Bibel
anerkennt, ohne daraus eine bindende Norm für den Glauben
herzuleiten,--diese war freilich erst einem späteren
Zeitalter vorbehalten. Bekker kannte, um seine sich ihm
aufdringende philosophische Ueberzeugung mit der Bibel
zu versöhnen, keinen andern Weg, als den der Üblichen
Exegese, und daher kommt es, dass diese nicht überall eine
ungezwungene ist.” It is instructive to note the pains
which Sir Walter Scott takes, in his Second Letter on
Demonology and Witchcraft, to harmonise the Bible with his
views on these subjects.
[101] To avoid all possibility of misapprehension I shall
venture to express my own feelings. The two men who appeal
to me most in the whole affair of witchcraft are Friedrich
Spee, the Jesuit, and Balthasar Bekker, the “intolerable”
pastor of Amsterdam. But what I _feel_, and what all of
us feel, is not to the purpose. There has been too much
feeling in modern discussions of witchcraft already.
[102] Sigmund Riezler, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse in
Bayern, Stuttgart, 1896, p. 143.
[103] Ibid.
[104] Soldan, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, revised by
Heppe, II, 37; cf. G. L. Burr, The Fate of Dietrich Flade,
1891 (reprinted from the Papers of the American Historical
Association, V).
[105] Jean d’Espaignet and Pierre de Lancre, the special
commissioners, are said to have condemned more than 600
in four months (Soldan, ed. Heppe, II, 162; cf. Baissac,
Les Grands Jours de la Sorcellerie, 1890, p. 401). I have
no certain evidence of the accuracy of these figures,
for I have seen only one of de Lancre’s two books, and I
find in it no distinct statement of the number of witches
convicted. He makes various remarks, however, which seem
to show that 600 is no exaggeration. Thus he says that the
Parliament of Bordeaux, under whose authority he acted,
condemned “an infinity” of sorcerers to death in 1609
(Tableau de l’Inconstance des Mauvais Anges et Demons,
Paris, 1613, p. 100). “On fait estat qu’il y a trente mille
ames en ce pays de Labourt, contant ceux qui sont en voyage
sur mer, & que parmy tout ce peuple, il y a bien peu de
familles qui ne touchent au Sortilege par quelque bout” (p.
38). The commission lasted from July to November (pp. 66,
456, 470); besides those that the two commissioners tried
during this period, they left behind them so many witches
and wizards that the prisons of Bordeaux were crowded and
it became necessary to lodge the defendants in the ruined
château du Hâ (pp. 144, 560). Cf. pp. 35 ff., 64, 92, 114,
546. The panic fear that witchcraft excites is described
by de Lancre in a striking passage:--“Qu’il n’y ayt qu’vne
seule sorciere dans vn grand village, dans peu de temps
vous voyez tant d’enfans perdus, tant de femmes enceintes
perdãs leur fruit, tant de haut mal donné à des pauures
creatures, tant d’animaux perdus, tant de fruicts gastes,
que le foudre ni autre fleau du ciel ne sont rien en
comparaison” (pp. 543-544).
[106] An Account of what Happened in the Kingdom of Sweden,
in the Years 1669, 1670 and Upwards, translated from the
German by Anthony Horneck, and included in Glanvill’s
Saducismus Triumphatus, ed. 1682 (ed. 1726, pp. 474 ff.).
Horneck’s version is from a tract entitled, Translation ...
Der Königl. Herren Commissarien gehaltenes Protocol uber
die entdeckte Zauberey in dem Dorff Mohra und umbliegenden
Orten, the Hague, 1670. Cf. Thomas Wright, Narratives of
Sorcery and Magic, II, 244 ff.; Soldan, ed. Heppe, II,
175 ff.; Vilhelm Bang, Hexevæsen og Hexeforfølgelser især
i Danmark, Copenhagen, 1896, pp. 48 ff. This is what Mr.
Upham calls Cotton Mather’s “favorite Swedish case” (Salem
Witchcraft and Cotton Mather, Morrisania, 1869, p. 20). It
was, in a manner, “Leonato’s Hero, your Hero, every man’s
Hero” toward the end of the seventeenth century, since
it was one of the most recent instances of witchcraft on
a large scale. The good angel in white who is one of the
features of the Mohra case appears much earlier in England:
see Potts, Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches, 1613, Chetham
Society reprint, sig. L (a reference which may serve as a
note to Mr. Upham’s essay, just cited, p. 34).
[107] Frans Volk, Hexen in der Landvogtei Ortenau und
Reichsstadt Offenburg, Lahr, 1882, pp. 24-25, 58 ff.
[108] Scot, Discoverie of Witchcraft, 1584, p. 543; F.
Hutchinson, Historical Essay, 2d ed., p. 38; W. W., A True
and Just Recorde, of the Information [etc.] of all the
Witches, taken at S. Oses (London, 1582). For extracts from
W. W.’s book I am indebted to Mr. Wallace Notestein, of
Yale University.
[109] F. Legge, The Scottish Review, XVIII, 261 ff.
[110] Thomas Potts, The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in
the Countie of Lancaster (London, 1613), reprinted by the
Chetham Society, 1845; Thomas Wright, Narratives of Sorcery
and Magic, Chap. xxiii.
[111] Whalley Lancashire, by Whitaker, pp. 213 ff.; Chetham
Society reprint of Potts, as above, pp. lix ff.; Wright,
as above. Chap. xxiii; Heywood and Brome’s play, The
Late Lancashire Witches, 1634; Calendar of State Papers,
Domestic Series, 1634-1635, pp. 77-79, 98, 129-130, 141,
152; Historical Manuscripts Commission, 10th Report,
Appendix, Part IV, p. 433; 12th Report, Appendix, Part II,
p. 53, cf. p. 77; Notes and Queries, 3d Series, V, 259, 385.
[112] Nichols, History and Antiquities of the County of
Leicester, II, 471.
[113] See pp. 7 and 58.
[114] Whitelocke’s Memorials, Dec. 13, 1649, ed. 1732, p.
434; Brand, Popular Antiquities, ed. Hazlitt, III, 80;
Ralph Gardner, England’s Grievance Discovered, in Relation
to the Coal-Trade, 1655 (reprinted, North Shields, 1849,
Chap. 53, pp. 168 ff.).
[115] A Prodigious & Tragicall History of the Arraignment
[etc.] of Six Witches at Maidstone.... Digested by H. F.
Gent, 1652 (reprinted in an Account, etc., London, 1837).
[116] A True and Impartial Relation of the Informations
against Three Witches, 1682.
[117] Sir J. H. Lefroy, Memorials of the Discovery and
Early Settlement of the Bermudas or Somers Islands, II, 601
ff.
[118] A Full and True Relation of the Tryal (etc.) of Ann
Foster, London, 1674 (Northampton, reprinted by Taylor
& Son, 1878). Cf. W. Ruland, Steirische Hexenprozesse,
in Steinhausen’s Zeitschrift für Kulturgeschichte, 2.
Ergänzungsheft, Weimar, 1898, pp. 46 ff.
[119] N. E. Hist. Gen. Register. XXIV, 382.
[120] Letter of Oct. 8, 1692, Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections,
V, 65. Compare, on the whole question, the remarks of
Professor Wendell in his interesting paper, Were the Salem
Witches Guiltless? (Historical Collections of the Essex
Institute, XXIX, republished in his Stelligeri and Other
Essays concerning America, New York, 1893) and in his
Cotton Mather, pp. 93 ff.
[121] A long and curious list of cases of defamation may be
seen in a volume of Depositions and other Ecclesiastical
Proceedings from the County of Durham, extending from
1311 to the Reign of Elisabeth, edited by James Raine for
the Surtees Society in 1845 (Publications, XXI). Thus, in
1566-67, Margaret Lambert accuses John Lawson of saying
“that she was a chermer” (p. 84); about 1569 Margaret
Reed is charged with calling Margaret Howhett “a horse
goodmother water wych” (p. 91); in 1572, Thomas Fewler
deposed that he “hard Elisabeth Anderson caull ... Anne
Burden ‘crowket handyd wytch.’ He saith the words was
spoken audiently there; ther might many have herd them,
beinge spoken so neigh the cross and in the towne gait as
they were” (p. 247). So in 1691 Alice Bovill complained of
a man who had said to her, “Thou bewitched my stot” (North
Riding Record Society, Publications, IX, 6). See also
Historical Manuscripts Commission, Report on Manuscripts
in Various Collections, I, 283; Lefroy, Bermudas or Somers
Islands, II, 629 (no. 15).
[122] See, for example, Mr. Noble’s edition of the Records
of the Court of Assistants, II, 43, 72, 85, 94, 95, 104,
131, 136,--all between 1633 and 1644.
[123] See Drake’s Annals of Witchcraft in New England;
Noble’s Records, as above, 1, 11, 31, 33, 159, 188, 228,
229, 233.