_For words not given here see Glossary._
——————
P. 2. “Ring bells.” Still done in Switzerland, and, I think, elsewhere.
P. 10. “As _Merlin_.” Cf. p. 72.
P. 14. “That cause ... taken away.” The mediæval Latin saying, “ablata
causa tollitur effectus”. Repeated p. 319.
P. 17. “W. W. 1582.” [In his preface.] A proof that witches were not
then burnt in England; but it shows how the question of witchcraft was
then exercising the people that Ade Davie, the wife of a husbandman,
pp. 55–7, thought that she was to be burnt. W. W. says also that Mr.
Justice Darcie, persuading Eliz. Bennett to confess, said: “As thou
wilt have favour confesse the truth. For so it is, there is a man
of great learning and knowledge come over lately into our Queenes
Majestie, which hath advertised her what a companie and numbers of
Witches be within Englande: whereupon I and other of her Justices have
received Commission for the apprehending of as many as are within these
limites, and they which doe confesse the truth of their doeings, they
shall have much favour: but the other they shall be burnt and hanged”
(B. 6). She and others that confessed had the favour of being hanged
like the rest; possibly they had the additional favour of being hanged
first. The first notice that I have yet come across of burning is that
of Mother Lakeman at Ipswich, 1645. W. W., in his Dedication, speaks
of these witches as “rygorously punished. Rygorously, sayd I? Why it
is too milde and gentle a tearme for such a mercilesse generation. I
should rather have sayd most cruelly [? civilly] executed: for that
no punishment can be thought upon, be it never so high a degree of
tormēt, which may be deemed sufficient for such a divelishe & dānable
practise”; and again, “the magistrates of forren landes ... burning
them with fire, whome the common lawe of Englande (with more mercie
then is to be wished) strangleth with a rope.” The burning was, I
presume, inflicted under the ecclesiastical law, De hæret. comburendo.
But burning was not at first universally adopted (a proof that it was
not imposed by the common law), for at the Assizes at Maidstone, 1652,
they were hanged, but “Some ... wished rather they might be burnt to
Ashes: alledging that it was a received opinion amongst many [for in
some cases it was held as proof against a witch that her mother had
been burnt for the same crime] that the body of a witch being burnt,
her blood is prevented thereby from becomming hereditary to the Progeny
in the same evill, which by hanging is not.”
P. 19. “Excommunicat persons.” Evidence of Scot’s haste, and of his
trusting to his memory. Wishing to find the Latin for “runnawaie”, I
looked into M. M. and found: “Nota quod excommunicati, item participes
& socii criminis, item infames, et criminosi nec servi contra dominos
admittentur ad agendum, & testificandum in causa fidei quacunque.” It
will be observed that he remembered “infames” as “infants”, and, as
there might have been a misprint in his copy, I have consulted all—not
a short list—in the British Museum. Possibly he was influenced by W.
W.’s book, which had taken a strong hold on him, if it were not one of
the causes of his writing, for there, children from 6¾ to 9 years
(infants in law) were taken as witnesses against their mothers, while
one woman’s proof was that her infant in arms pointed to the house!
P. 24. “To the God speed.” This, by the context, might be taken as
meaning that he came to a fortunate issue. But it was, and is, in
use as given to a person setting forth on a journey, etc. Hence,
here, and especially at p. 481, it seems to mean that he came at
the commencement, when one receives or gives this salutation. As is
recorded in an instance at Windsor, “R. S. probably gave the God speed
at the assembly, and God’s name so frayed the witches that they fled,
and so frayed the devil that he was conquered in a hand-to-hand fight.”
——— “At shrift.” This was laid down by Roman Catholic priests, though
it was, and is, a rule with them that no confessor can reveal a
confession, even before a court of law!
P. 41. “But bargained to.” The sense requires “[not] to observe”.
Probably a slip of the printer, possibly through the “but”, and the
concurrence of two t’s.
P. 42. “_La volta._” A fact strangely overlooked (as is David’s
dancing) by the damners of dancing.
——— “Socke the corps.” The same in p. 124 explains that this is sewing
the body in its winding-sheet or sheets. The phrase is Kentish.
P. 45. “Young maister”, _i.e._, their new master, they having just come
under the devil’s sway.
P. 48. “Of fiftie.” In Scot, as in others, we find uses of “of”
which are to us strange. Here is a clearer example than usual of its
synonymity with our “by”. Cf. also p. 76, and Auth. Ver., 1 Cor. xv,
5-8.
P. 50. “The veines have passage.” For as little, others—as Paracelsus,
by R. Browning, etc.—have been credited—to the discomfiture of
Harvey—with the knowledge of the circulation of the blood. Even
Shakespeare is so credited by some whose knowledge will assert
positively that the moon is _not_ made of green cheese.
P. 60. “Their not fasting on fridaies.” Scot’s Protestantism here
went beyond the ordained Protestantism of his age, as did that of B.
Jonson’s Cob.
P. 78. “Clime up and take it.” Not the nest, but his own belongings.
A good example of the pronoun not referring to its grammatical
antecedent, but to the antecedent which was most in the mind of the
narrator.
P. 80. “Away withall” = “Companion with” here, in other places “agree
with”. An expression that sounds odd to us, but then used practically
and metaphorically, from the idea of companionship on a journey, when
companionship was almost or altogether necessary.
P. 84. “The [night]mare.” Most, I suppose—among them I myself—have
known that these occur at times to a person in a deep sleep. My
fourth nightmare, a horrible, troubled, and inconsequent dream, so
far as I can remember, occurred some two years ago; three, at only a
month or two’s interval between each, occurred years ago, when in a
snake country. Then one appeared to be on and in my primitive bed, or
wriggling about my wattle and daub bedroom, the only room I had. I
thought myself wide-awake, bed, bedroom, and furniture being plainly
visible, and my thoughts and conclusions were as coherent, and myself
as self-possessed as at any moment of my life, until a sense of
unreality came upon me, and by two or more vigorous efforts of both
mind and body I awoke myself. My experience, and that recorded p. 84,
will explain various ghostly stories—I do not say all—wherein the
sufferer asserts positively, and believes, that he was wide-awake.
——— “As sure as a club.” The derivation and meaning—as sure as is a
tangible club that can or will strike you—is obvious; but I have heard
it at the card-table, as though derived from the sureness of the cards
thus named. An example of a false application arising from the apparent
sameness of the words, and possibly in the first instance from a
jocular use of the phrase.
P. 85. “Hampton.” Folk-lore worth recording. I conjecture, but only
conjecture, that this word was suggested by the hempen or flaxen
garments laid for his use, its sequent “hamten” being coined to rhyme
with “stampen”.
P. 87. “To her that night.” I have placed “him” in the margin, my own
conjecture and the reading of the British Museum MS. of parts of Scot.
But in Fletcher’s _M. Thomas_, iv, 6, we have the same spell, with some
slight variations, and ending—
“She would not stir from him [St. George] that night”,
which more agrees with Shakespeare’s quotation in _Lear_, iii, 4—St.
Withold
“Bid her alight
And her [the nightmare’s] troth plight.”
——— “_Viderunt_”, etc. Altered, apparently, from Vulgate, which has
“Videntes ... essent pulchræ”, etc.
——— “_Filios Dei._” Scot here alters “_Filii_” to the objective,
because it follows “doo interpret”. He does the same elsewhere, whether
it be English verb or preposition that precedes. Thus, 422, we have
“_Vitas Patrum_”, because it follows “prooved”; 458, “in _Speculo
exemplorum_”; and 381, “in _Circulo Salomonis_; 544, “Spiritum”,
because the words follow “signifieth”. We find one instance of the same
in Nash’s _Summers Last Will and Test._
P. 90. “He accuseth.” Bodin, ii, 6.
P. 91. “A faggot maker.” Bodin, ii, 6.
P. 94. “In the western ilands”, as in the “still vexed Bermoothes”.
P. 95. “Saccaring bell” = a sacring bell, the bell rung at the
elevation of the host, when all true, _i.e._, Roman Catholic,
worshippers fall on their knees.
——— “A morrowe masse”—a morning mass. All masses, except, I think, on
Christmas Day and Good Friday, and except in certain churches, where
the older usage was by prescription allowed, being in Scot’s time, and
now, celebrated before noon. This rule was made by the Pope in 1550-58.
P. 99. “(His reason onelie reserved).” Not Bodin’s reason, but that of
the sailor.
P. 104. “_Abacuck._” _Bel and the Dragon_, 36, 37.
——— “One syllable nor five words.” A curiously sounding phrase; but he
seems to have used “syllable” as we do, figuratively, meaning, “in the
same sense”, while the five words are, “not even differing five words
in the form of expression”.
P. 107. “Witch is disposed”, [to plague] being understood.
P. 110. “Make so foolish a bargaine or doo such homage to the devill.”
We would more exactly say “bargaine [with] or”.
P. 111. “Exod. 22” [18]. Did Scot quote from memory? The Sept., φ ου
ποιησετε [var.] περιβιωσετε Ox. ed., nor have I found Scot’s verb as a
recognised variant.
P. 113. “Eccl.” is twice in the margin put for “Ecclus.”, the
Apocryphal Book. In p. 145, by, I suppose, a printer’s error, “Eccle.”
is put for “Ecclus.” Elsewhere, Scot rightly gives “Ecclus.”
P. 115. “Osee 6” [1, 2]. Vulg. has “2. Quia ipse cepit, et sanabit
nos; percutiet, et curabit nos. 3. Vivificabit nos post duos dies.”
The “ego”, etc., is only found in Deut. xxxii, 39, where the Vulg. has
“vivere faciam”.
——— “If you looke into [what I have written concerning] _Habar_”, etc.
P. 119. “Besmearing with an ointment.” Such beliefs then current
justify more than is now supposed the beliefs of Elizabeth and her
counsellors, and the execution of her would-be murderer.
——— “Wolves doong.” A bit of folk-lore, which has, I think, sufficient
_vraisemblance_ as to be worthy of trial, the more so as it is said to
this day that a young dog shows fear at the smell of a dried piece of
wolf’s skin.
P. 126. “_Eliz. Barton._” See Froude’s _Hist._, v, 1. She was of
Aldington, Kent, and a servant of the father or grandfather of Jane
Cobbe, Reg. Scot’s first wife.
P. 127. “In his mightie power.” Either the “in” of the line above
brought about its insertion here, or, more likely, it was used as it is
“in his name”, though in such a case as this we should say “through” or
“by”.
P. 132. “1572.” This booklet is not known, I believe; nor is it in the
Stat. Regs.
P. 142. “Eccle” [Ecclus, 49, 16, 17].
P. 145. “Covered himself with a net.” An excellent example that this
phrase meant disguising himself, or trying to conceal himself. It may
seem odd, that “with a net” should mean this, because one naturally
thinks of a single fold; but a fisherman conceals his head and body in
folds of netting.
P. 146. “Finger in a hole.” I presume it is meant that Saul shut
himself out of all means of knowing what really went on, as much as if
he had closed up a hole in a shut door or window-shutter, through which
alone he could see—or have light thrown upon—the subject.
P. 147. “She saith to herself” [but intentionally loud enough for Saul
to hear].
P. 150. “Right ventriloquie.” This excellent investigation of the Bible
story might be read with advantage by those who even now hold that
Samuel really appeared by God’s allowance or command. Such a belief
involves three impossibilities. First, that God having repeatedly
declined to answer Saul by lawful means, now by an afterthought changed
His mind. Secondly, that He who from the time of Moses had so condemned
witchcraft, that Saul had put it down as far as he could, and that with
blood, now favoured the action of a witch, and that in so notorious a
case that it could not but be, as it was, known to all Israel. Thirdly,
that the Deity must have put a lying spirit into the mouth of a true
and God-blessed prophet, since the prophecy did not come true in more
than one important point.
P. 151. “_Aias_ and _Sadaias_.” Here he rightly distinguishes the two;
but in 141, and in his list of authors consulted, he gives “Rabbi
Sedaias Haias”. “Haias Hai”, or “Haja”, was a celebrated Babylonian
Rabbi, born 969 A.D.; died 1038. Sedaias or Saadja flourished
_circa_ 900-40.
P. 155. “Called Pythonissa.” Not by that exact word, either in Sept.,
or Vulg., or Greek N.T. Vulg., 1 Sam. xxviii, 7, has “mulier pythonem
habens”; and in Acts xvi, 16, the Greek, the Vulg., and Beza have
similar wordings.
——— “Liber pater.” “Liber” is “Bacchus” in Scot himself; but
Porphyrius—whom Th. Cooper and Calepine follow—says of “Liber pater”:
“Eundem Solem apud superos: Liberum patrem in terris: Apollinem apud
inferos.”
P. 158. “Then a cousening queane” = Than [believe that], etc. I
note: 1. That the (.) before “Then” should probably be a (,), though
occasionally we have (;) where only (,) is required. 2. That as in this
book we rarely have “then” for “than”, I conjecture that this mode of
spelling was not at the time universal, but only commencing.
P. 159. “_Nemo scit._” Slightly altered from the question. 1 Cor. ii,
11, and not the Vulgate words, but apparently more those of Beza.
——— “_Tu solus_” [2 Chron. vi, 30]. Vulg. reads, “tu _enim_ solus
nosti _corda filiorum_ hominem”; it has also “corda”, where David
speaks to Solomon similarly, 1 Chron. xxviii, 9; but “universas mentium
cogitationes” follows it.
——— “_Ego Deus_” [Jer. xvii, 10]. He omits “_probans_” before
“_renes_” in Vulg.
P. 162. “Epotherses.” Rightly, in 163, “Epitherses”.
P. 166. “By revolution.” I presume by revolution of the planets
(and stars, as was then thought), until they came into a certain
“constellation”, _i.e._, position as regards one another. This I gather
from a previous page.
——— [Margin] “Zach. 10.” We have here a further example of the loose
references, common in those days, to the Bible made by both Roman
Catholics and Protestants. The first clause is in sense is given Zach.
10 [, 2], and somewhat, Isai. 44 [9, 10]; but the remainder from Ps.
cxxxv, 16, 17; though “months”, etc., is placed third instead of first,
while “let them shew” is, I take it, a variant of Isai. xli, 23.
P. 168. “Firmament.” His error in writing “earth” shows his haste, and
explains in part the wording of his Scripture quotations. Cf. pp. 19,
174. But see also note, p. 503.
P. 169. “The increase of the moon.” This, his doubtful doubt as to the
Remora, his belief that the bone in a carp’s head staunched blood, show
that Scot was not naturally sceptical in matters of knowledge, but that
he only gave up the beliefs of his day after investigation.
P. 171. “_Mahomets_ dove.” He would express his belief, as Wier does
more openly, that it (as the eagle) was taught to do its feats.
P. 173. “ηχὼ”. In those days the Η, now confined to the capitals, was
used, as here in the original, for the small letter η.
P. 174. “Pharaoh the Persian kings.” Other references to the Pharaohs
in this book show that these curious transpositions were due to haste
of composition and of revisal both of his MS. and of the printed copy.
P. 176. “Manacies.” Not having met with this form, I presume that it is
a press error for “menacies”. It is so changed in the second edition.
P. 180. “Faile to dreame by night.” Scot’s general statement may be
true, but must in some instances be modified. From my youth, for
many—say at least twenty—years, I tried to remember my dreams for this
very purpose, and could remember them for a short while very well; but
never could I find that what I had thought on during the day, or the
days before, gave even a suggestion to my dreams. Thrice, however,
of late years, I have been able to trace my dream to something I had
casually thought of, though not meditated on. This edition of Scot, as
well as the question of witchcraft, has occupied both my mind and time
since November, and it is now October, yet not a single dream has had
reference to anything connected with these subjects. Similarly, family
matters have both busied me and worried me for some months, and yet
these matters have never intruded themselves, not even when my dreams,
and at one time a near approach to nightmare, showed that my digestion
was out of order. From my own instance, I should rather say that dreams
most frequently seem to be natural reliefs to the thoughts that I had
indulged in, or that might have beset me, in my waking hours.
P. 182. “Of physicall dreames.” I suppose he means dreams from physical
causes.
P. 182. “_Melancholicall._” Proceeding from “black bile”, which, in the
opinions of that day, produced melancholy, that form of madness called
melancholia. I would add that “melancholy” is often used in Scot for
mad melancholia, and for the supposed humour melancholy or black bile,
and that, unless this is borne in mind, some of his sentences will be
misunderstood.
P. 183. “De Profundis.” Ps. cxxix; Vulg. cxxx; Prayer Book. All that
follow are given consecutively, I think, in the _Rit. Rom. Officium
Defunctorum_.
——— “Pleasant and certain dreams.” Formerly an at least English
notion, as expressed by the servant-lover of Bombastes:
“And morning dreams, they say, come true.”
P. 184. “Eleoselinum.” Translated in the second edition as “mountain
parsley.”
——— “Sium” in the second edition is “yellow water-cress”.
——— “Acarum vulgare”, “common acorus”—our “Asarum Europ.”
P. 185. “An errand ... from farre countries.” A similar tale is told—in
some English work against witchcraft after Scot—of an Italian judge who
thus tried a supposed witch.
P. 187. “A thousand for one that.” Here the “that” does not, as with
us, refer to the “one” but to the “thousand” = “he might have cited
a thousand that fell out contrarie” for one that fell out truly. A
thousand for one, though four words seem, as it were, to have been
considered one thought. See Shakespearean noting under this page.
P. 190. “To offer ... to Moloch.” Curious that Scot, knowing that fire
was accounted holy, should not have seen that this idolatrous rite was
in its essence a purifying, and possibly an expiatory, one.
P. 198. “_Menehas_” (example, Deut. xix, 10). Hebr. מנחש. Here he does
not quite agree with Wier, i, § 9.
——— “Philosophers table.” Cf. Strutt, _s. n._ The philosopher’s game,
played on a “table” or board.
——— “Sober writer.” Of course, ironical.
——— “Of each letters.” Either misprint for letter, or rather, perhaps,
a loose way of saying “of each [set of] letters”, or “of the letters of
each person’s name or names”.
——— “Unequal number of vowels.” A bit of folk-lore as yet, I think,
unnoticed.
P. 200. “Added the Apocrypha.” Council of Trent, 1550, made them of
equal authority with those which the Church of England defines as
“Canonical Scriptures”.
P. 202. “True loves.” Garden pansies, viola tricolor, L. (Britten and
H.), four-leaved grass, occasional variations of the three-leaved
grass, trefoil.
——— “To our left side.” So far an explanation why horse-shoes, salt,
etc., are thrown against ill-luck over the left shoulder.
P. 205. “_Sero rubens._” P. 169, Scot quotes this in English as
a lawful divining from natural causes, in fact, as a weatherwise
observation.
P. 206. “_Stella errans._” I presume he means a planet, partly because
a comet was then thought a portent, differing in origin and nature from
a star, partly because Cicero uses the plural in the sense of planets.
——— “_Non est._” Not from Vulg. or Beza; probably his own rendering.
P. 209. “Milvus” [Jer. viii, 7]. Sentence as in Vulg., while the Geneva
version, like our Authorised version, has storke.
P. 210. “Significators”, _i.e._, of the planets which have meanings
according to their positions and co-positions or “constellations”.
P. 212. “Sapiens.” A sop of flattery for their client.
P. 213. “Maketh themselves cuckoldes.” = Who by their negligence and
ignorance cause themselves to be made cuckolds, while pretending to
know every other person’s future.
P. 225. “Phaers Virgil” [B. 4, _ad fin._]. Scot, however, has printed
each line as two.
P. 230. “Balme”, etc. Note that each longer line has an extra syllable
at the end.
P. 232. “This is as true a copy.” Apparently a press error for “This
is a true copy”, as given in the second edition, the printer having,
inadvertently, almost reduplicated the “is”.
P. 233. “✠ Thomas.” His and our “N.” (or sometimes “John”, etc.),
anyone who may be the invoker.
——— “A popish periapt.” The distances between these letters are
somewhat variable, the “ka” and “am” are near enough to be syllables.
But I have not misspent my time in a search for the true original.
P. 234. “Whistle for a pardon.” An expression still used for other
things than pardon. Possibly founded on an ironical reference to the
nautical idea, that when you whistle for a wind you get it, and more of
it than you want. I have been spoken to for whistling on board ship.
More probably, however, because whistling denoting want of care and
thought, as in bench-whistler, one might as well expect a pardon or the
thing wished for, after merely whistling for it, as expect larks to
drop into one’s mouth.
P. 238. “Plumme.” I know not whether Scot meant to translate
“_Stircus_” literally, but it would be curious to know whether this
signification was formerly given to “plum”. It could well bear it.
P. 240. “Constant opinion” = firm belief or firm faith.
——— “_Homerica Medicatio._” The physician was “Ferrerius”, alias
“Auger”, or “Oger Ferrier”—not “Ferrarius”, as given throughout the
text, in his list of authors, and in his contents—born at Toulouse,
1513, physician in ordinary to Catherine de Medicis, and afterwards
returned to his birthplace, where he died in 1588. B. 2, ch. ii, of his
_Vera medendi modus_ is headed “De Homerica Medicatione”. And here I
would at once say, that for the discovery of “Ferr_e_rius” and of the
following passages, and of the cause of Scot’s curious blunder, the
reader and myself are indebted to my ever-ready Shakespearean friend,
the Rev. W. A. Harrison. “When,” says Ferrier, “patients will not
yield to ordinary treatment, one must have recourse to another kind,”
which he describes generally in the margin as “Amuleta”. And first he
speaks of “appensiones et physicæ alligationes”, then of “Caracteras &
Carmina”. These, he says, Galen (and Trallianus) at first ridiculed,
but that Trallian had seen (I believe in his mind’s eye) a tractate
of Galen’s in which, as the heading of a chapter, or somewhere else,
were the words “Homericam medicationem; _quod Homerus suppressum verbis
sanguinem, et mysteriis sanatos effectus prodiderit_.” The italicised
passage is that nonsense-sentence of Scot’s at the end of the chapter.
It could only have arisen from Scot’s haste, but was also due to the
fact that, as in the British Museum copy of the Lyons edition, 1574,
the “s” of “verbis” is so faint as to give the not careful reader
the form “verbi”. But Ferrier, like Scot, attributed such cures to
imagination or a “fixed fansie”, or “constant opinion”; on which also
I would refer to Sir H. Holland’s book on the _Effect of Imagination
in Disease_. Thus he continues: “Deprehendi itaque curationis hujus
eventum non a caracteribus non ex carmina permanare. Sed tanta est
vis animi nostri, ut si quid honesti sibi persuaserit, atque in ea
persuasione firmiter perseveravit, idipsum quod concepit agat, &
potenter operetur.... Si neque fidentem, neque diffidentem nihilominus
vis animi agentis operabatur. Id in dentium doloribus ... aperte videre
licet. Nam præcantator ita movet non reluctantis ægroti animum, ut
dolor ... sensim extinguatur.... At si forte æger diffidet, aut plane
ridiculum existimet remedium ... præcantante vis nulla erit.... Non
sunt ergo carmina, non sunt caracteres quo talia possunt, sed vis animi
confidentis, & cum patiente concordis.” Wier v, 19, §1-4, gives the
Ferrerius quotation, as well as his name, rightly. The staunching of
blood by words refers to the cure in the _Odyssey_.
P. 242. “Through sudden feare.” Similar cases are known to physicians
at the present day, whether through fear or some other sudden emotion.
A Protestant medical man can well believe _some_ of the tales of
diseased pilgrims cured at, say, the shrine of Our Lady of Lourdes,
though no more believing in such miracles than do Roman Catholics when
Protestant anointers anoint and sometimes cure through the same cause.
P. 243. “Hearbe Alysson.” So called because it cured hydrophobia
(Pliny). Phil. Holland says, “Some take it to be _Asperula_, the
wood-rose”; Holyokes Rider gives “rubia minor, cannabis agrestis”.
P. 244. “Scarifie.” Might be done with a gum lancet; but the magical
tooth might have the advantage in some instances of affecting the
thoughts, and through them the body, as noted, p. 240.
——— “_Os non._” This, preceded by “✠ Jesus autem transiens ✠ per
medium illorum ibat ✠”, with a ✠ after “eo”, was, according to Paulus
Grillandus, who twice witnessed it, a charm producing taciturnity
and insensibility under torture! Something, either this or something
else, being repeated by the prisoner in an inaudible voice, a scroll
containing these words and signs was found “in capite sub scruffia
scilicet inter crines” (Wier v, 12, § 3).
P. 244. “Throwe.” He might have added, “when you have got it”, before
which time she would have been released, if not one way yet by another.
P. 245. “Tye.” Is like the “scarifie”; as one generally uses a
handkerchief.
P. 248. “That thou hereby ... patient as Job.” This is to me one of the
oddest examples I have seen of the confusion of two or more pronouns
as to their subject; for though the “thou” a line above clearly refers
to the worm, this one cannot refer to anything but to the horse; for
after exorcising the worm in the name of the Trinity, he surely would
not exhort it to be as “patient as Job” and as “good as St. John”,
particularly as the exorcism was made that the worm might be expelled
and die.
P. 251. “Remeeve.” An excellent example of the devices had recourse to
by Elizabethan versifiers to obtain a rhyme.
P. 257. “Certeine name.” I presume this caution is inserted lest one
hurt Tom instead of Harry.
——— “Each image must have in his hand.” For the true reading cf.
“Extracts from Wier”. Scot must, I think, have trusted too much to his
memory.
——— “Domine Dominus”, etc. Pss. 8. 27. 102. 109. Prayer Book numbering.
P. 264. “Bladder.” Clearly a press error for bladders.
——— “Ribbes and genitals.” Conjoined, apparently, from a remembrance of
the procreation of Eve, Genesis ii, 21, 22.
P. 265. “Sir _John_ ... pulpit.” As the story was told of “as honest
a man ... whereof mention was lately made”, he was of the Church of
England; see under p. 461 for “Sir”. And since, I have found that
Bishop Hutchinson in his Dedication calls him Sir John Grantham.
Seemingly we thus have evidence of the dress in the pulpit; but one
unwilling to be convinced might retort that the very mention of his
sacerdotal dress is proof that he went into the pulpit exceptionally
attired, and not to preach, but to perform a quasi-sacerdotal office.
P. 266. “Hundred and eight.” Here, from the “sayers of the charm”, the
authority is, in all probability, the Vulg. Its 108 is our 109, Scot
not having in this instance changed the numbering.
——— “Seachers.” Probably “Sea[r]chers”, as given in the second edition,
but it may have been a form of seekers, since seche = seek.
——— “Horsse shoo.” This superstition probably had its origin from
Stonehenge times and before, since the inner stones there, apparently
the more sacred portion, and, so far as one can now judge, the
corresponding part at Avebury, each form a horse-shoe. Sir H. James
first, I believe, noticed the true shape at Stonehenge, and I
afterwards independently observed it, both there and then at Avebury,
and connected it with this horse-shoe superstition in _The Antiquary_,
vol. ii, Oct. 1880.
——— “_Alicium._” Have not as yet found this.
P. 267. “Herbe betonica.” “Stachys betonica”, Plin., b. 25, c. 8.
——— “Pullein”, etc. “Verbascum”; “Thapsus”, L., “bullock’s lungwort”
(Kent). Tusser, like Scot, calls it “Longwort”, a variant of “Lungwort”.
P. 268. “Baccar.” “Nardum rusticum”, or, according to Sprengel,
“Valeriana Celtica”, L.; others “foxglove”, or “asarabacca”.
——— “Browze”. Gives us the meaning of Bowze = boughs, it being so spelt
to accord, as was the custom, not only in rhyme but in spelling.
——— “Vervain.” “Verbena officinalis”, L. (and other verbenas?), used,
according to Park, “against poison, venom of beasts, and bewitched
drinks”.
——— “Palma.” Willows in England were used as the palm on Palm Sunday;
sometimes the yew; but here I incline to think he means Palma Christi,
a flat-hand rooted orchis.
——— “Antirchmon.” I suspect a misprint for “antirrhinum”, calf’s snout,
snap-dragon, A—. Linn. Pliny, b. 25, c. 8, says it is much esteemed by
enchanters.
——— “Lappoint.” Minshen gives “Lapouin”, as the French for lapwing, but
I have been unable to find this word. Wier v, 21 § 6, says, as Scot,
“Dicuntur & pennæ upupæ suffitæ, phantasmata fugare”, and the upupa,
then as now, was taken to be the lapwing, though Th. Cooper says,
“Wherefore [from his crest as described] it cannot be our lapwing ...
it is rather ... an Houpe” [hoopoe], which it is likely from the names,
both being onomatopeiatic. The daughter of the vicar of Oare, near
Faversham, Kent, Miss K. P. Woolrych, says that an old man, when young,
heard lappoint as the common name for the still-abounding lapwing.
P. 269. “Cleave an oken branch.” One is tempted to think this bit of
folk-lore is a reminiscence of Druidical times.
P. 271. “Ps. _Exaltabo_” Ps. 245, Pr. B. vers.
P. 273. “Nameles finger.” Wier, “innominatum”. From this last, which
is not so much nameless as “unhappy”, etc., I think the middle finger
is meant, “digitus impudicus”, “famosus”, “infamis”, under which
latter epithet, cf. Persius, Sat. ii, for the reason. At 325 he calls
the middle finger the long, and at 326 the middle, at 329 the longest
finger.
P. 275. “Made room.” Gave occasion or opportunity.
P. 284. “_Finallie._” This is in italics, the mark of a quotation, but
it is not from the Rhemish Test. of 1582, given as one of the books he
consulted, nor have I yet found from what Protestant version he took it.
P. 289. “Eccle. 1. & 1.” Probably a press error for 1 & 13, the words
being a remembrance of the sense of verses 13 and 17. It is not Ecclus.
P. 294. “The corral.” Can we see in this the origin of the almost
universal coral for children when teething?
——— “Dinothera.” Cannot find it.
——— “Aitites.” Properly “Aetites”, a stone said to be found in the
eagle’s nest. Plin., b. 7, c. 3.
P. 294. “Droonke as apes.” An expression readily understood by those
who have watched the purposeless doings of apes and their throwing
themselves about.
——— “Amethysus.” This occurs twice, but I know it not as a variant of
amethystus. “Corneolus.” Various descriptions are given of this by
Pliny, Bartholome, Th. Cooper, Minshen, and Holyokes Rider, but I
presume (as given by Bailey) it is our cornelian.
P. 295. “Smarag.” The emerald. “Mephis.” Unknown to me.
P. 296. “Whereby ... concluded.” It is improbable that this is, as
elsewhere, concealed irony. Much more probably Scot was not free from a
belief in the influences of the stars on the formation of these stones,
just as he believed in the influence of the moon in the sowing of
seeds, though he did not believe in astrology.
P. 300. “Academicall discourses.” He refers to the disputations held by
students and candidates at the colleges, as these, of course, naturally
set forth the opinions of others.
P. 301. “Serpent abandon.” Is this fabulous folk-lore or not?
P. 302. “Celondine, Chelidonius”, cf. p. 293. It appears from
Dioscorides and Pliny, 25, 8, that the Chel. majus, L., is that spoken
of.
P. 303. “Reneweth bleeding.” This variant, that it does so either at
“the presence of a deare friend or mortall enimie”, and not merely at
that of the murderer, is worthy of note.
P. 304. “Our Princess doth.” This, vouched for by one such as Scot,
shows the real piety and wisdom of Elizabeth as against the scandals of
the then times and the beliefs of after times.
P. 312. “Black children.” I put this down either to looseness of
writing or to that want of discrimination (or colour blindness) which
led Elizabethans to speak of things as black, etc., which approached
that colour. “As black as a toad.”
P. 314. “Two manner of todes.” An example of the universal belief that
all insects, and some eels, serpents, and toads, were not begotten,
but produced by the action of the sun on inanimate matters, in fact by
spontaneous generation. Even the generation of man was held to require
the co-operation of the sun.
——— “Of the fat of a man ... lice.” He means, I presume, of fat beneath
the skin of a living person, a belief apparently confirmed by the
death of persons from lice; for Bartholome, Batman’s alias Trevisa’s
translation, says, l. 18, c. 88: “Lice and nits gender in the head or
in the skinne”; and just before, they are engendered “of right corrupt
air & vapoures that sweate out betweene the skinne and the flesh by
pores.”
P. 316. “Aqua composita.” Not in Ovid’s sense, but, I presume = spirits
of wine or rectified wine, etc., though I have not come across the term
elsewhere. I may add that Aqua was used = Succus.
P. 319. “The cause being taken away.” See note, p. 14.
P. 333. “Nether card.” Scot evidently did not know “the pass”; possibly
his age did not.
P. 338. “Gaggle of geese.” The then correct term for a flock of geese.
Cf. _The Boke of St. Albans_, at the end of “Hawking”.
P. 339. “Send them to Pope.” Unable to refer “them” to the “horses” or
to the “neighbors”, I am forced to believe it an error for “then”.
——— “Unto the doore.” This (.) should be (,) the “W” marking, as usual,
the beginning of (the purport of) his speech.
P. 342. “You meane to cut.” He would say, “which you would make believe
to cut”.
P. 367. “Extraordinary.” Beyond the number of his ordinary lemans.
P. 374. “Had I wist.” A proverbial saying, at one time much in fashion
= had I known. Used here for an uncertainty which turned out an ill
certainty.
P. 386. “Goeth before.” Takes precedency of.
——— “Be abroad.” Cf. “Extracts from Wier II.”
——— “If his cap be on his head.” Cf. “Extracts from Wier II.”
P. 390. “_Duratque._” When Dr. Fian was examined, James VI being
present, he, after the two torturings of the rope, and boots,
confessed, among other things, that he had bewitched a gentleman—a
rival lover—and “caused the sade Gentleman that once in xxiiii howers
he fell into a lunacie and madnes and so continued one hower together”.
The gentleman was brought before the king, and went violently mad for
an hour, leaping so high that he touched the ceiling with his head, and
behaving so violently that the gentlemen present had to get assistance
and bind him hand and foot. Fian became penitent, and renounced the
devil; next day said the devil had appeared and would again have
persuaded him, but he resisted him. However, he, Fian, obtained the key
of his prison door and fled. Re-captured, he denied all his confession,
saying that he had only made it through fear of torture. Then “His
nailes upon all his fingers were riven and pulled out with ... a payre
of pincers, and under everie naile there was thrust in two needels over
even up to the heads. [Here, I presume, there is a hysteron proteron.]
Then was he ... convaied again to the torment of the bootes wherein
he continued a long time, and did abide, so many blowes in them, that
his legges were crusht and beaten together as small as might bee, and
the bones and flesh so brused, that the bloud and _marrow_ spouted
forth in great abundance, wherby they were made unserviceable for
ever,” he still declaring that what he had said before “was onely done
and said for feare of paynes which he had endured”. He was strangled,
and his body burnt, according to law, towards the end of Jan. 1591.
The italicising is mine. Can anyone read this without a shudder, and
without feelings of indignation that will express themselves?
The gentleman who went mad for an hour, and then said he had been in a
sound sleep, doubtless acted a part to confirm the tale of his friend.
This is confirmed by the fact that, violently as he behaved, he seems
to have hurt no one, not even himself.
P. 406. “Common copulation.” Used as “friendly conjunction” or working
together, in opposition to “carnal copulation”, a phrase he employs
when necessary.
——— “To whome be honour.” Is there an omission here of (as seems
most likely) “In the name”, etc., or are we to look back as far as
“Tetragrammaton”, etc., for antecedents? a course in which I cannot
myself believe.
P. 413. “My verie name.” Cf. App. II, p. 60, § 22, though I know not
that this phrase is there explained, we may conjecture from it that we
have, while alive, spiritual “names after a Magical manner”, whatever
that may mean.
P. 414. “ffalaur” (Diagram). If one were really wanted, a most
excellent example—whether we look to Scot’s other uses of this word, or
to the names of the other three spirits in the diagram—that “ff” was
merely “F”.
P. 416. “Ps. xxii and li.” Prayer Book numbers and version.
P. 418. “Are written in this booke.” It is clear, therefore, that Scot
took this experiment of Bealphares, and in all probability from ch. 8
inclusive to this one, from some conjuring book, not improbably T. R.’s.
P. 419. “_In throno._” Neither this nor its English equivalent is
to be found in any of these conjurations. In p. 417 we have, “which
conteinest the throne of heaven”; but unless the true translation be
“which are conteined in the throne of the heavens”, this cannot be “in
throno”. On the whole, I think that it refers to some conjuration not
copied by Scot, thus strengthening the supposition set forth under
Extracts from Wier II, and p. 418.
——— “Then say _In throno_.” I feel by no means content with the change
of “then” to “thou”. “And” may be an = “if”, but I do not remember an
instance of Scot’s use of “and” in this sense. Or this “and” may be an
accidental insertion by the printer, when after “_throno_” we might
understand [adding] “that thou depart”, etc.; and this, I suspect, is
the sense intended, whatever the emendation may be.
P. 421. “Ch. xv.” The making of the holy water is the Latin form
of that Englished from the Missal at p. 445. Hence, I presume, the
blessing of the salt is from the same.
P. 423. “In such a place N.” There being no (,) N. seems here to be
used for any place, as it has been used for any man or spirit. So
“this N.”, p. 424, refers to a bond or document. In pp. 425-6, where
“N.” occurs four times, it can, so far as I can see, mean nothing else
but the place, the crystal or other matter, in which the spirit is to
appear. In p. 428, we have also “to your N.”, explained just afterwards
as “into your christall stone, glasse”, etc. And in p. 429, “anie N.” =
gold, silver, etc. “N.” was therefore a general indefinite, not used,
as now, for a man only; still, its most likely etymon seems to be the
initial of “Nomen”.
——— “On thy booke.” In 424 we have “by the holie contents in this
booke”, and “kisse the booke”. From these, and from the statements in
the additions to the third edition that the conjuror is to consecrate
and take a Bible with him, I presume, that one is here meant to be used.
P. 425. “Other bond.” That, I presume, which follows on this page.
P. 425. “Made a man for ever.” I note this 1584 use of the phrase.
P. 426. “I constreine the spirit of N.” The after text might induce
one to suppose that “the” = thee, but the phrase is repeated seventeen
times in this chapter, and “thee spirit of N.” not once, though we have
“the spirit of thee N.” once, and “thou spirits of N.” thrice. Our
Elizabethan ancestors were apt thus to mingle up the second and third
persons.
P. 428. “Proove this.” Try it; put it to the proof.
P. 431. “(Blew miracles).” A friend suggests “trew”; but though this is
probably the sense, yet I hesitate to change the word. W. B., in _Notes
and Queries_, fully explains this as “_blaues wunder_”, an “amazing
or wonderful wonder”, the adjective being intensative, as is perhaps
“blue” in the phrase, “once in a blue moon,” _i.e._, never.
P. 434. “Doctor Burc.” The Burcot cozened into buying a familiar from
Feats, p. 522.
——— “He strake.” Spirit-rapping, therefore, is older than this century,
though the manner was different.
P. 436. “Matins at midnight.” The Franciscans solemnise matins directly
midnight is passed.
P. 437. “Officiall.” The French name. Cf. Cotgrave and Du Cange.
P. 439. “To to abridge.” A printer’s repetition; one being at the end
of a line, the second at the beginning of the next.
P. 441. “_Deus in adjutorium._” Ps. lxx. Prayer Book.
——— “Excommunicate.” 479. “Infatuate.” The form originated _circa_
1400, from “infatuatus”, etc., before the verbs existed, and are not
examples of “ed” eliding or coalescing when the verb ends in “d” or
“t”. This last, however, is found in Scot, and in a work at least ten
years older.
P. 442. “Vitas.” See note 87. 458. Ditto.
P. 444. “Except in a plaie.” Probably, therefore, had witnessed
Moralities, etc.
P. 446. “Increase.” Error for “incense”. _Tobit_ viii, 5. (W. A.
Harrison.) Vulg. has no word for this in viii, 2; “Fumus”, in vi, 8.
Genevan version, “perfume”. Whether “incense” be Scot’s own word, or
the rendering of some English version, I know not.
P. 459. “Sunne ... is 3966000.” The nearest to this computation that I
can find is that of Archimedes, who made the sun’s distance 1,160 times
the earth’s semi-diameter, that is, 3,985,760 miles. Scot, however,
must have taken some later computation, as he speaks of the sun’s
“neerest” distance.
——— Note, a pound of good candles, such as were offered in church, cost
threepence.
P. 461. “Sir John” = the aforesaid priest. Cf. 265, 361, and “Sir
Lucian”, 463; also 468, the translation of “Dominus”.
P. 466. “Kings bench.” Note, still so called in 1583.
P. 467. “Most noble and vertuous personage.” Probably Leicester. Cf.
close of letter.
P. 468. “Sir John Malborne,” 1384. Hence an Englishman, and not a
German, was in all probability the first to raise his voice against the
cozenages of mediæval witchcraft.
P. 471. “Collen.” Cologne.
P. 474. “Three images.” As pointed to by the text, it appears from
Bodin that, “Un Prestre Sorcier curé d’Istincton [Islington] demi
lieuë pres de Londres, a esté trouvé saisis 1578 de trois images de
cire conjurées, pour faire mourir la Reyne d’Angleterre, & deux autres
proches de sa personne.”
P. 476. “Wherein a Gods name.” = Wherein in God’s name. No oath, but he
means to explain that the miracle consisted in his being able to read
the canonical scriptures written in God’s name, or inspired by Him, but
not the fabulous Apocrypha.
——— “The good speed.” See note, p. 24.