had been with him in his kitchen, which is next to his sleeping-room;
he again heard the same noise in his study or closet; he rose to see
what it was, and not having found anything more than he did the first
time, he was going to shut the door, but he felt some resistance to
his doing so; he then went in to see what this obstacle might be, and
at the same time heard a noise above his head towards the corner of
the room, like a great blow on the wall; at this he cried out, and his
people ran to him; he tried to reassure them, though alarmed himself;
and having found naught he went to bed again and fell asleep. Hardly
had these lads extinguished the light, than M. de S. was suddenly
awakened by a shake, like that of a boat striking against the arch of
a bridge; he was so much alarmed at it that he called his domestics;
and when they had brought the light, he was strangely surprised to
find his bed at least four feet out of its place, and he was then
aware that the shock he had felt was when his bedstead ran against the
wall. His people having replaced the bed, saw, with as much
astonishment as alarm, all the bed-curtains open at the same moment,
and the bedstead set off running towards the fire-place. M. de S.
immediately got up, and sat up the rest of the night by the fire-side.
About six in the morning, having made another attempt to sleep, he
was no sooner in bed than the bedstead made the same movement again,
twice, in the presence of his servants, who held the bed-posts to
prevent it from displacing itself. At last, being obliged to give up
the game, he went out to walk till dinner time; after which, having
tried to take some rest, and his bed having twice changed its place,
he sent for a man who lodged in the same house, as much to reassure
himself in his company, as to render him a witness of so surprising a
circumstance. But the shock which took place before this man was so
violent, that the left foot at the upper part of the bedstead was
broken; which had such an effect upon him, that in reply to the offers
that were made to him to stay and see a second, he replied that what
he had seen, with the frightful noise he had heard all night, were
quite sufficient to convince him of the fact.
"It was thus that the affair, which till then had remained between M.
de S. and his domestics, became public; and the report of it being
immediately spread, and reaching the ears of a great prince who had
just arrived at St. Maur, his highness was desirous of enlightening
himself upon the matter, and took the trouble to examine carefully
into the circumstances which were related to him. As this adventure
became the subject of every conversation, very soon nothing was heard
but stories of ghosts, related by the credulous, and laughed at and
joked upon by the freethinkers. However, M. de S. tried to reassure
himself, and go the following night into his bed, and become worthy of
conversing with the spirit, which he doubted not had something to
disclose to him. He slept till nine o'clock the next morning, without
having felt anything but slight shakes, as the mattresses were raised
up, which had only served to rock him and promote sleep. The next day
passed off pretty quietly; but on the 26th, the spirit, who seemed to
have become well-behaved, resumed its fantastic humor, and began the
morning by making a great noise in the kitchen; they would have
forgiven it for this sport if it had stopped there, but it was much
worse in the afternoon. M. de S., who owns that he felt himself
particularly attracted towards his study, though he felt a repugnance
to enter it, having gone into it about six o'clock, went to the end of
the room, and returning towards the door to go into his bed-room
again, was much surprised to see it shut of itself and barricade
itself with the two bolts. At the same time, the two doors of a large
press opened behind him, and rather darkened his study, because the
window, which was open, was behind these doors.
"At this sight, the fright of M. de S. is more easy to imagine than to
describe; however, he had sufficient calmness left, to hear at his
left ear a distinct voice, which came from a corner of the closet, and
seemed to him to be about a foot above his head. This voice spoke to
him in very good terms during the space of half a _miserere_; and
ordered him, _theeing_ and _thouing_ him to do some one particular
thing, which he was recommended to keep secret. What he has made
public is that the voice allowed him a fortnight to accomplish it in;
and ordered him to go to a place, where he would find some persons who
would inform him what he had to do; and that it would come back and
torment him if he failed to obey. The conversation ended by an adieu.
"After that, M. de S. remembers that he fainted and fell down on the
edge of a box, which caused him a pain in his side. The loud noise and
the cries which he afterwards uttered brought several people in haste
to the door, and after useless efforts to open it, they were going to
force it open with a hatchet, when they heard M. de S. dragging
himself towards the door, which he with much difficulty opened.
Disordered as he was, and unable to speak, they first of all carried
him to the fire, and then they laid him on his bed, where he received
all the compassion of the great prince, of whom I have already spoken,
who hastened to the house the moment this event was noised abroad. His
highness having caused all the recesses and corners of the house to be
inspected, and no one being found therein, wished that M. de S. should
be bled; but his surgeon finding he had a very feeble pulsation,
thought he could not do so without danger.
"When he recovered from his swoon, his highness, who wished to
discover the truth, questioned him concerning his adventure; but he
only heard the circumstances I have mentioned--M. de S. having
protested to him that he could not, without risk to his life, tell him
more.
"The spirit was heard of no more for a fortnight; but when that term
was expired--whether his orders had not been faithfully executed, or
that he was glad to come and thank M. de S. for being so exact--as he
was, during the night, lying in a little bed near the window of his
bed-room, his mother in the great bed, and one of his friends in an
arm-chair near the fire, they all three heard some one rap several
times against the wall, and such a blow against the window, that they
thought all the panes were broken. M. de S. got up that moment, and
went into his closet to see if this troublesome spirit had something
else to say to him; but when there, he could neither find nor hear
anything. And thus ended this adventure, which has made so much noise
and drawn so many inquisitive persons to St. Maur.
"Now let us make some reflections on those circumstances which are the
most striking, and most likely to make any impression.
"The noise which was heard several times during the night by the
master, the female servant, and the neighbors, is quite equivocal;
and the most prejudiced persons cannot deny that it may have been
produced by different causes which are all quite natural.
"The same reply may be given as to the papers which were heard to
rustle, since a breath of air or a mouse might have moved them.
"The moving of the bed is something more serious, because it is
reported to have been witnessed by several persons; but I hope that a
little reflection will dispense us from having recourse to fantastic
hands in order to explain it.
"Let us imagine a bedstead upon castors; a person whose imagination is
impressed, or who wishes to enliven himself by frightening his
domestics, is lying upon it, and rolls about very much, complaining
that he is tormented. Is it surprising that the bedstead should be
seen to move, especially when the floor of the room is waxed and
rubbed? But, you will say, some of the witnesses even made useless
efforts to prevent this movement. Who are these witnesses? Two are
youths in the service of the patient, who trembled all over with
fright, and were not capable of examining the secret causes of this
movement; and the other has since told several people that he would
give ten pistoles not to have affirmed that he saw this bedstead
remove itself without help.
"In regard to the voice, whose secret has been so carefully kept, as
there is no witness of it, we can only judge of it by the state in
which he who had been favored with this pretended revelation was
found. Repeated cries from the man who, hearing his closet door beaten
in, draws back the bolts which he had apparently drawn himself, his
eyes quite wild, and his whole person in extraordinary disorder, would
have caused the ancient heathens to take him for a sibyl full of
enthusiasm, and must appear to us rather the consequence of some
convulsion than of a conversation with a spiritual being.
"Lastly, the violent blows given upon the walls and panes of glass, in
the night, in the presence of two witnesses, might make some
impression, if we were sure that the patient, who was lying directly
under the window in a small bed, had no part in the matter; for of the
two witnesses who heard this noise, one was his mother, and the other
an intimate friend, who, even reflecting on what he saw and heard,
declares that it can only be the effect of a spell.
"How much good soever you may wish for this place, I do not believe,
sir, that what I have just remarked on the circumstances of the
adventure, will lead you to believe that it has been honored with an
angelic apparition; I should rather fear that, attributing it to a
disordered imagination, you may accuse the subtility of the air which
there predominates as having caused it. As I am somewhat interested
in not doing the climate of St. Maur such an injury, I am compelled to
add something else to what I have said of the person in question, in
order that you may know his character.
"You need not be very clever in the art of physiognomy to remark in
his countenance the melancholy which prevails in his temperament. This
sad disposition, joined to the fever which has tormented him for some
time, carried some vapors to his brain, which might easily lead him to
believe that he heard all he has publicly declared; besides which, the
desire to divert himself by alarming his domestics may have induced
him to feign several things, when he saw that the adventure had come
to the ears of a prince who might not approve of such a joke, and be
severe upon it. Thus then, sir, you will think as I do, that the
report of the celebrated Marescot on the subject of the famous
Margaret Brossier agrees perfectly with our melancholy man, and well
explains his adventure: _a natura multa, plura ficta, a daemone nulla_.
His temperament has made him fancy he saw and heard many things; he
feigned still more in support of what his wanderings or his sport had
induced him to assert; and no kind of spirit has had any share in his
adventure. Without stopping to relate several effects of his
melancholy, I shall simply remark that an embarkation which he made on
one of the last _jours gras_, setting off at ten o'clock at night to
make the tour of the peninsula of St. Maur, in a boat where he covered
himself up with straw on account of the cold, appeared so singular to
the great prince before mentioned, that he took the trouble to
question him as to his motives for making such a voyage at so late an
hour.
"I shall add that the discernment of his highness made him easily
judge whence this adventure proceeded, and his behavior on this
occasion has shown that he is not easily deceived. I do not think it
is allowable for me to omit the opinion of his father, a man of
distinguished merit, on this adventure of his son, when he learned all
the circumstances by a letter from his wife, who was at St. Maur. He
told several persons that he was certain that the spirit which acted
on this occasion was that of his wife and son. The author of the
relation was right in endeavoring to weaken such testimony; but I do
not know if he flatters himself that he has succeeded, in saying that
he who gave this opinion is an _esprit fort_, or freethinker who makes
it a point of honor to be of the fashionable opinion concerning
spirits.
"Lastly, to fix your judgment and terminate agreeably this little
dissertation in which you have engaged me, I know of nothing better
than to repeat the words of a princess,[671] who is not less
distinguished at court by the delicacy of her wit than by her high
rank and personal charms. As they were conversing in her presence of
the singularity of the adventure which here happened at St. Maur, 'Why
are you so much astonished?' said she, with that gracious air which is
so natural to her; 'Is it surprising that the son should have to do
with spirits, since the mother sees the eternal Father three times
every week? This woman is very happy,' added the witty princess; 'for
my part, I should ask no other favor than to see him once in my life.'
"Laugh with your friends at this agreeable reflection; but, above all,
take care, sir, not to make my letter public: it is the only reward
that I ask for the exactitude with which I have obeyed you on so
delicate an occasion.
"I am, sir,
"Your very humble, &c.
_St. Maur, May 8, 1706._"
APPROBATION.
"By order of the Lord Chancellor, this dissertation on what we must
think of spirits in general, and of that of St. Maur in particular,
has been read by me, and I have found nothing therein which ought to
hinder its being printed.
"Done at Paris, the 17th of October, 1706.
(_Signed_) "LA MARQUE TILLADET.
"The king's permission bears date the 21st November, 1706."
Footnotes:
[662] St. Ambrose, Com. on St. Luke, i. c. 1.
[663] Martha Brossier, daughter of a weaver at Romorantin, was shown
as a demoniac, in 1578. See De Thou on this subject, book cxxiii. and
tom. v. of the Journal of Henry III., edition of 1744, p. 206, &c. The
affair of Loudun took place in the reign of Louis XIII.; and Cardinal
Richelieu is accused of having caused this tragedy to be enacted, in
order to ruin Urban Grandier, the cure of Loudun, for having written a
cutting satire against him.
[664] M. de Lannoy has made a particular dissertation De Causa
Secessionis S. Brunonis: he solidly refutes this fable. Nevertheless,
this event is to be found painted in the fine pictures of the little
monastery of the Chartreux at Paris.
[665] Eliberitan Council, an. 305 or 313, in the kingdom of Grenada.
Others have thought, but mistakenly, that it was Collioure in
Roussillon.
[666] Jesus, the son of Sirach, author of Ecclesiasticus, believes
this apparition to be true. Ecclus. xlvi. 23.
[667] This story has been related in the former part of the work, but
more succinctly.
[668] Arist. Treatise on Dreams and Vigils.
[669] The Abbe de Vallemont, in his work on the Singularities of
Vegetation. Paris, 1 vol. 12mo.
[670] This was a century and a half ago; but the Philosophical
Transactions record no account of any successful result to such
experiments.
[671] Madame the Duchess-mother, daughter of the late king, Louis
XIV., and mother of the duke lately dead, of M. the Count de
Charolois, and of M. the Count de Clermont.
LETTER OF M. THE MARQUIS MAFFEI
ON MAGIC;
ADDRESSED TO
THE REVEREND
FATHER INNOCENT ANSALDI,
OF THE ORDER OF ST. DOMINIC;
TRANSLATED FROM THE ITALIAN OF THE AUTHOR.
LETTER OF M. THE MARQUIS MAFFEI ON MAGIC.
MY REVEREND FATHER,
It is to the goodness of your reverence, in regard to myself, that I
must attribute the curiosity you appear to feel to know what I think
concerning the book which the Sieur Jerome Tartarotti has just
published on the _Nocturnal Assemblies of the Sorcerers_. I reply to
you with the greatest pleasure; and I am going to tell my opinion
fully and unreservedly, on condition that you will examine what I
write to you with your usual acuteness, and that you will tell me
frankly whatever you remark in it, whether good or bad, and that may
appear to deserve either your approbation or your censure. I had
already read this book, and passed an eulogium on it, both for the
great erudition displayed therein by the author, as because he
refutes, in a very sensible manner, some ridiculous opinions with
which people are infatuated concerning sorcerers, and some other
equally dangerous abuses. But, to tell the truth, with that exception,
I am little disposed to approve it; if M. Muratori has done so in his
letter, which has been seen by several persons, either he has not read
the work through, or he and I on that point entertain very different
sentiments. In regard to my opinion, your reverence will see, by what
I shall say, that it is the same as your own on this subject, as you
have done me the favor to show by your letter.
I. In this work there is laid down, in the first place, as a certain
and indubitable principle, the existence and reality of magic, and the
truth of the effects produced by it--superior, they say, to all
natural powers; he gives it the name of "diabolical magic," and
defines it, "The knowledge of certain superstitious practices, such as
words, verses, characters, images, signs (_qy._ moles), &c., by means
of which magicians succeed in their designs." For my part, I am much
inclined to believe that all the science of the pretended magicians
had no other design than to deceive others, and ended sometimes in
deceiving themselves; and that this magic, now so much vaunted, is
only a chimera. Perhaps even it would be giving one's self superfluous
trouble to undertake to show that everything related of those
nocturnal hypogryphes,[672] of those pretended journeys through the
air, of those assemblies and feasts of sorcerers, is only idle and
imaginary; because those fables being done away with would not prevent
that an infinite number of others would still remain, which have been
repeated and spread on the same subject, and which, although more
foolish and ridiculous than all the extravagances we read in romances,
are so much the more dangerous, because they are more easily believed.
It would, in the opinion of many, be doing these tales too much honor
to attempt to refute them seriously, as there is no one at this day,
in Italy, at least, even amongst the people, who has common sense,
that does not laugh at all that is said of the witches' sabbath, and
of those troops or bands of sorcerers who go through the air during
the night to assemble in retired spots and dance. It is true, that
notwithstanding, that if a man of any credit, whether amongst the
learned or persons of high dignity, maintains an opinion, he will
immediately find partisans; it will be useless to write or speak to
the contrary, it will not be the less followed; and it is hardly
possible that it can be otherwise, so many minds as there are, and so
many different ways of thinking. But here the only question is, what
is the common opinion, and what is most universally believed. It is
not my intention to compose a work expressly on magic, nor to enter
very lengthily on this matter; I shall only exhibit, in a few words,
the reasons which oblige me to laugh at it, and which induce me to
incline to the opinion of those who look upon it as a _pure_ illusion,
and a _real_ chimera. I must, first of all, give notice that you must
not be dazzled by the truth of the magical operations in the Old
Testament, as if from thence we could derive a conclusive argument to
prove the reality of the pretended magic of our own times. I shall
demonstrate this clearly at the end of this discourse, in which I hope
to show that my opinion on this subject is conformable to the
Scripture, and founded on the tradition of the fathers. Now, then, let
us speak of modern magicians.
II. If there is any reality in this art, to which so many wonders are
ascribed, it must be the effect of a knowledge acquired by study, or
of the impiety of some one who renounces what he owes to God to give
himself up to the demon, and invokes him. It seems, in fact, that they
would sometimes attribute it to acquired knowledge, since in the book
I am combating the author often speaks "of the true mysteries of the
magic art;" and he asserts that few "are perfectly instructed in the
secret and difficult principles of this science;" which is not
surprising, he says, since "the life of man would hardly suffice" to
read all the works which have treated of it. He calls it sometimes the
"magical science," or "magical philosophy;" he carries back the origin
of it to the philosopher Pythagoras; he regards "ignorance of the
magic art as one of the reasons why we see so few magicians in our
days." He speaks only of the mysterious scale enclosed by Orpheus in
unity, in the numbers of two and twelve; of the harmony of nature,
composed of proportionable parts, which are the octave, or the
double, and the fifth, or one and a half; of strange and barbarous
names which mean nothing, and to which he attributes supernatural
virtues; of the concert or the agreement of the inferior and superior
parts of this universe, when understood; makes us, by means of certain
words or certain stones, hold intercourse with invisible substances;
of numbers and signs, which answer to the spirits which preside over
different days, or different parts of the body; of circles, triangles,
and pentagons, which have power to bind spirits; and of several other
secrets of the same kind, very ridiculous, to tell the truth, but very
fit to impose on those who admire everything which they do not
understand.
III. But however thick may be the darkness with which nature is hidden
from us, and although we may know but very imperfectly the essential
principles and properties of things, who does not see, nevertheless,
that there can be no proportion, no connection, between circles and
triangles which we trace, or the long words which signify nothing, and
immaterial spirits? Can people not conceive that it is a folly to
believe that by means of a few herbs, certain stones, and certain
signs or characters, we can make ourselves obeyed by invisible
substances which are unknown to us? Let a man study as much as he will
the pretended soul of the world, the harmony of nature, the agreement
of the influence of all the parts it is composed of--is it not evident
that all he will gain by his labor will be terms and words, and never
any effects which are above the natural power of man? To be convinced
of this truth, it suffices to observe that the pretended magicians
are, and ever have been, anything but learned; on the contrary, they
are very ignorant and illiterate men. Is it credible that so many
celebrated persons, so many famous men, versed in all kinds of
literature, should never have been able or willing to sound and
penetrate the mysterious secrets of this art; and that of so many
philosophers spoken of by Diogenes Laertius, neither Plato, nor
Aristotle, nor any other, should have left us some treatise? It would
be useless to attack the opinions of the world at that time on this
subject. Do we not know with how many errors it has been infatuated in
all ages, and which, though shared in common, were not the less
mistakes? Was it not generally believed in former times, that there
were no antipodes? that according to whether the sacred fowls had
eaten or not, it was permitted or forbidden to fight? that the statues
of the gods had spoken or changed their place? Add to those things all
the knavery and artifice which the charlatans put in practice to
deceive and delude the people, and then can we be surprised that they
succeeded in imposing on them and gaining their belief? But let it not
be imagined, nevertheless, that everyone was their dupe, and that
amongst so many blind and credulous people there were not always to be
found some men sensible and clear-sighted enough to perceive the
truth.
IV. To be convinced of this, let us only consider what was thought of
it by one of the most learned amongst the ancients, and we may say,
one of the most curious and attentive observers of the wonders of
nature--I speak of Pliny, who thus expresses himself at the beginning
of his Thirtieth Book;[673] "Hitherto I have shown in this work, every
time that it was necessary and the occasion presented itself, how very
little reality there is in all that is said of magic; and I shall
continue to do so as it goes on. But because during several centuries
this art, the most deceptive of all, has enjoyed great credit among
several nations, I think it is proper to speak of it more fully." "No
men are more clever in hiding their knaveries than magicians;" and in
seven or eight other places he endeavors to expose "their falsehoods,
their deceptions, the uselessness of their art," and laughs at it. But
one thing to which we should pay attention above all, is an invincible
argument which he brings forward against this pretended art. For after
having enumerated the diverse sorts of magic, which were employed with
different kinds of instruments, and in several different ways, and
from which they promised themselves effects that were "quite divine;"
that is to say, superior to all the force of nature, even of "the
power to converse with the shades and souls of the dead;" he adds,
"But in our days the Emperor Nero has discovered that in all these
things there is nothing but deceit and vanity." "Never prince," says
he, a little lower down, "sought with more eagerness to render himself
clever in any other art; and as he was the master of the world, it is
certain that he wanted neither riches, nor power, nor wit, nor any
other aid necessary to succeed therein. What stronger proof of the
falsity of this art can we have than to see that Nero renounced it?"
Suetonius informs us also, "That this prince uselessly employed magic
sacrifices to evoke the shade of his mother, and speak to her." Again,
Pliny says "that Tirdates the Mage (for it is thus it should be read,
and not Tiridates the Great, as it is in the edition of P. Hardouin),
having repaired to the court of Nero, and having brought several magi
with him, initiated this prince in all the mysteries of magic.
Nevertheless," he adds, "it was in vain for Nero to make him a present
of a kingdom--he could not obtain from him the knowledge of this art;
which ought to convince us that this detestable science is only
vanity, or, if some shadow of truth is to be met within it, its real
effects have less to do with the art of magic than the art of
poisoning." Seneca, who also was very clever, after having repeated a
law of the Twelve Tables, "which forbade the use of enchantments to
destroy the fruits of the earth," makes this commentary upon it: "When
our fathers were yet rude and ignorant, they imagined that by means of
enchantments rain could be brought down upon the ground, or could be
prevented from falling; but at this day it is so clear that both one
and the other is impossible, that to be convinced of it it does not
require to be a philosopher." It would be useless to collect in this
place an infinity of passages from the ancients, which all prove the
same thing; we can only __________ the book written by Hippocrates on
Caducity, which usually passed for the effect of the vengeance of the
gods, and which for that reason was called the "sacred malady." We
shall there see how he laughs "at magicians and charlatans," who
boasted of being able to cure it by their enchantments and expiations.
He shows there that by the profession which they made of being able to
darken the sun, bring down the moon to the earth, give fine or bad
weather, procure abundance or sterility, they seemed to wish to
attribute to man more power than to the Divinity itself, showing
therein much less religion than "impiety, and proving that they did
not believe in the gods." I do not speak of the fables and tales
invented by Philostrates on the subject of Apollonius of Thyana, they
have been sufficiently refuted by the best pens: but I must not omit
to warn you that the name of magic has been used in a good sense for
any uncommon science, and a sublimer sort of philosophy. It is in this
sense that it must be understood where Pliny says,[674] although
rather obscurely, "that Pythagoras, Empedocles, Democritus, and Plato,
traveled a great deal to acquire instruction in it." For the rest,
people are naturally led to attribute to sorcery everything that
appears new and marvelous. Have not we ourselves, with M. Leguier,
passed for magicians in the minds of some persons, because in our
experiments on electricity they have seen us easily extinguish lights
by putting them near cold water, which then appeared an unheard-of
thing, and which many still firmly maintain even now cannot be done
without a tacit compact? It is true that in the effects of electricity
there is something so extraordinary and so wonderful, that we should
be more disposed to excuse those persons who could not easily believe
them to be natural than those who have fancied tacit compacts for
things which it would be much more easy to explain naturally.
V. From what has just been said, it evidently results that it is folly
to believe that by means of study and knowledge one can ever attain
any of those marvelous effects attributed to magic; and it is
profaning the name of science to give it an imposture so grossly
imagined; it remains then that these effects might be produced by a
diabolical power. In fact, we read in the work in question that all
the effects of magic "must be attributed to the operation of the
demon; that it is in virtue of the compact, express or tacit, that he
has made with him that the magician works all these pretended
prodigies; and that it is in regard to the different effects of this
art, and the different ways in which they are produced, that authors
have since divided it into several classes." But I beg, at first, that
the reader will reflect seriously, if it is credible, that as soon as
some miserable woman or unlucky knave have a fancy for it, God, whose
wisdom and goodness are infinite, will ever permit the demon to appear
to them, instruct them, obey them, and that they should make a compact
with him. Is it credible that to please a scoundrel he would grant the
demon power to raise storms, ravage all the country by hail, inflict
the greatest pain on little innocent children, and even sometimes "to
cause the death of a man by magic?" Does any one imagine that such
things can be believed without offending God, and without showing a
very injurious mistrust of his almighty power? It has several times
happened to me, especially when I was in the army, to hear that some
wretched creatures had given themselves to the devil, and had called
upon him to appear to them with the most horrible blasphemies, without
his appearing to them for all that, or their attempts being followed
by any success. And, certainly, if to obtain what is promised by the
art of magic it sufficed to renounce God and invoke the devil, how
many people would soon perform the dreadful act? How many impious men
do we see every day who for money, or to revenge themselves on some
one, or to satisfy a criminal desire, rush without remorse into the
greatest excesses! How many wretches who are suffering in prison, at
the galleys, or otherwise, would have recourse to the demon to
extricate them from their troubles! It would be very easy for me to
relate here a great number of curious stories of persons generally
believed to be bewitched, of haunted houses, or horses rubbed down by
will-o'-the-wisp, which I have myself seen at different times and
places, at last reduced to nothing. This I can affirm, that two monks,
very sensible men, who had exercised the office of inquisitors, one
for twenty-four years, and the other during twenty-eight, have
assured me that of different accusations of sorcery which had been
laid before them, and which appeared to be well proved, after having
examined them carefully and maturely, they had not found one which was
not mere knavery. How can any one imagine that the devil, who is the
father of lies, should teach the magician the true secret of this art;
and that this spirit, full of pride, of which he is the source, should
teach an enchanter the means of forcing him to obey him? As soon as we
rise above some old prejudices, which make us excuse those who in past
ages gave credence to such follies, can we put faith in certain
extravagant opinions, as what is related of demons, incubes, and
seccubes, from a commerce with whom it is pretended children are born.
Who will believe in our days that Ezzelin was the son of a
will-o'-the-wisp? But can anything more strange be thought of than
what is said of tacit compacts? They will have it, that when any one,
of whatever country he may be, and however far he may be from wishing
to make any compact with the devil, every time he shall say certain
words, or make certain signs, a certain effect will follow; if I, who
am perfectly ignorant of this convention, should happen to pronounce
these same words, or make the same signs, the same effect ought to
follow. They say that whoever makes a compact with the devil has a
right to oblige him to produce a certain effect, not only when he
shall make himself, for instance, certain figures, but also every time
that they shall be made by any other person you please, at any time,
or in any place whatever, and although the intention may be quite
different. Certainly nothing is more proper to humble us than such
ideas, and to show how very little man can count on the feeble light
of his mind. Of all the extraordinary things said to have been
performed by tacit compacts, many are absolutely false, and others
have occurred quite differently than as they are related; some are
true, and such as require no need of the demon's intervention to
explain them.
VI. The evidence of these reasons seems to suffice to prove that all
which is said of magic in our days is merely chimerical; but because,
in reply to the substantial difficulties which were proposed to him by
the Count Rinaldi Carli, the author of the book pretends that to deny
is a heretical opinion condemned by the laws, it is proper to examine
this article again. For the first proof of its reality, is advanced
the general consent of all mankind; the tradition of all nations;
stories and witnesses _ad infinitum_ of theologians, philosophers, and
jurisconsults; whence he concludes "that its existence cannot be
denied, or even a doubt cast upon it, without sapping the foundations
of what is called human belief." But the little I have said in No. IV.
alone suffices to prove how false is this assertion concerning this
pretended general consent. Horace, who passes for one of the wisest
and most enlightened men amongst the ancients, reckons, on the
contrary, among the virtues necessary to an honest man, the not
putting faith in what is said concerning magic, and to laugh at it.
His friend, believing himself very virtuous because he was not
avaricious--"That is not sufficient," said he: "are you exempt from
every other vice and every other fault; not ambitious, not passionate,
fearless of death? Do you laugh at all that is told of dreams, magical
operations, miracles, sorcerers, ghosts, and Thessalian
wonders?"[675]--that is to say, in one word, of all kinds of magic.
What is the aim of Lucian, in his Dialogue entitled "Philopseudis,"
but to turn into ridicule the magic art? and also is it not what he
proposed to himself in the other, entitled "The Ass," whence Apuleius
derived his "Golden Ass?" It is easy to perceive that in all this
work, wherein he speaks so often, the power ascribed to magic of
making rivers return to their source, staying the course of the sun,
darkening the stars, and constraining the gods themselves to obey it,
he had no other intention than to laugh at it, which he certainly
would not have done if he had believed it able to produce, as they
pretend, effects beyond those of nature. It is, then, jokingly and
ironically that he says they see wonders worked "by the invincible
power of magic,"[676] and by the blind necessity which imposes upon
the gods themselves to be obedient to it. The poor man thinking he was
to be changed into a bird, had had the grief to see himself
metamorphosed into an ass, through the mistake of a woman who in a
hurry had mistaken the box, and giving him one ointment for another.
The most usual terms made use of by the ancients, in speaking of
magic, were "play" and "badinage," which plainly shows that they saw
nothing real in it. St. Cyprian, speaking of the mysteries of the
magicians, calls them "hurtful and juggling operations." "If by their
delusions and their jugglery," says Tertullian, "the charlatans seem
to perform many wonders." And in his treatise on the soul, he
exclaims, "What shall we say of magic? what almost all the world says
of it--that it is mere knavery." Arnobius calls it, "the sports of the
magic art;" and on these words of Minutius Felix, "all the marvels
which they seem to work by their _jugglery_," his commentator remarks
that the word _badinage_ is in this place the proper term. This manner
of expressing himself shows what was then the common opinion of all
wise persons. "Let the farmer," says Columella, "frequent with neither
soothsayers nor witches, because by their foolish superstitions they
all cause the ignorant to spend much money, and thence they lead them
to be criminal." We learn from Suidas, "that those were called
magicians who filled their heads with vain imaginations." Thus, when
speaking of one of these imposters, Dante was right when he said[677]
"he knew all the trickery and knavery of the magic art." Thus, then,
it is not true that a general belief in the art of magic has ever
prevailed; and if, in our days, any one would gather the voice and
opinion of men of letters, and the most celebrated academies, I am
persuaded that hardly would one or two in ten be found who were
convinced of its existence. It would not be, at least, one of the
learned friends of the author of the book in question, who having been
consulted by the latter on this matter, answers him in these
terms--"Magic is a ridiculous art, which has no reality but in the
head of a madman, who fancies that he is able to lead the devil to
satisfy all his wishes." I have read in some catalogues which come
from Germany, that they are preparing to give the public a "Magic
Library:" _oder grundliche nagrichen_, &c. It is a vast collection of
different writings, all tending to prove the uselessness and
insufficiency of magic. I must remark that the poets have greatly
contributed to set all these imaginations in vogue. Without this
fruitful source, what becomes of the most ingenious fictions of Homer?
We may say as much of Ariosto and of our modern poets. For the rest,
what I have before remarked concerning Pliny must not be
forgotten--that in the ancient authors, the word magic is often
equivocal. For in certain countries, they gave the name of magi, or
magicians, to those who applied as a particular profession to the
study of astronomy, philosophy, or medicine; in others, philosophers
of a certain sect were thus called: for this, the preface of Diogenes
Laertius can be consulted. Plato writes that in Persia, by the name of
magic was understood "the worship of the gods." "According to a great
number of authors," says Apuleius, in his Apology, "the Persians
called those magi to whom we give the name of priests." St. Jerome,
writing against Jovinian, thus expresses himself--"Eubulus, who wrote
the history of Mithras, in several volumes, relates that among the
Persians they distinguish three kinds of magi, of whom the first are
most learned and the most eloquent," &c. Notwithstanding that, there
are still people to be found, who confound the chimera of pretended
diabolical magic with philosophical magic, as Corneillus Agrippa has
done in his books on "Secret Philosophy."
VII. Another reason which is brought forward to prove the reality and
the power of the magic art, is that the laws decree the penalty of
death against enchanters. "What idea," says he, "could we have of the
ancient legislators, if we believe them capable of having recourse to
such rigorous penalties to repress a chimera, an art which produced no
effect?" Upon which it is proper to observe that, supposing this error
to be universally spread, it would not be impossible that even those
who made the laws might suffer themselves to be prejudiced by them; in
which case, we might make the same commentary on Seneca, applied, as
we have seen, to the Twelve Tables. But I go further still. This is
not the place to speak of the punishments decreed in the Scripture
against the impiety of the Canaanites, who joined to idolatry the most
extravagant magic. In regard to the Greek laws, of which authors have
preserved for us so great a number, I do not remember that they
anywhere make mention of this crime, or that they subject it to any
penalty. I can say the same of the Roman laws, contained in the
Digest. It is true that in the Code of Theodosius, and in that of
Justinian, there is an entire title concerning _malefactors_, in which
we find many laws which condemn to the most cruel death magicians of
all kinds; but are we not forced to confess that this condemnation was
very just? Those wretches boasted that they were able to occasion when
they pleased public calamities and mortalities; with this aim, they
kept their charms and dark plots as secret as it was possible, which
led the Emperor Constans to say, "Let all the magicians, in whatever
part of the empire they may be found, be looked upon as the public
enemies of mankind." What does it matter, in fact, that they made
false boastings, and that their attempts were useless? "In evil
doings," says the law, "it is the will, and not the event, which makes
the crime." Also, Constantine wills that those amongst them should be
pardoned who professed to cure people by such means, and to preserve
the products of the earth. But in general these kind of persons aimed
only at doing harm; for which reason the laws ordain that they should
be regarded as "public enemies." The least harm they could be accused
of was deluding the people, misleading the simple, and causing by that
means an infinity of trouble and disorder. Besides that, of how many
crimes were they not guilty in the use of their spells? It was that
which led the Emperor Valentinian to decree the pain of death "against
whomsoever should work at night, by impious prayers and detestable
sacrifices, at magic operations." Sometimes even they adroitly made
use of some other way to procure the evil which they desired to cause;
after which, they gave out that it must be attributed to the power of
their art. But what is the use of so many arguments? Is it not certain
that the first step taken by those who had recourse to magic was to
renounce God and Jesus Christ, and to invoke the demon? Was not magic
looked upon as a species of idolatry; and was not that sufficient to
render this crime capital, should the punishment have depended on the
result? Honorius commanded that these kind of people should be treated
with all the rigor of the laws, "unless they would promise to conform
for the future to what was required by the Catholic religion, after
having themselves, in presence of the bishops, burned the pernicious
writings which served to maintain their error."
VIII. What is remarkable is, that if ever any one laughed at magic, it
must certainly be the author in question--since all his book only
tends to prove that there are no witches, and that all that is said of
them is merely foolish and chimerical. But what appears surprising is,
that at the same time he maintains that while in truth there are no
witches, but that there are enchantresses or female magicians; that
witchcraft is only a chimera, but that diabolical magic is very real.
Is not that, as it appears to some, denying and affirming at the same
time the same thing under different names? Tibullus took care not to
make nothing of these distinctions, when he said: "As I was promised
by a witch, whose magical operations never fail." While treating in
this book of witchcraft and magic, it is affirmed that the demon
intervenes on both, and that both work wonders." But if that is true,
it is impossible to find any difference between them. If both perform
wonders, and that by the intervention of the demon, they are then
essentially the same. After that, is it not a contradiction to say
that the magician acts and the witch has no power--that the former
commands the devil and the latter obeys him--that magic is founded on
compacts, expressed or tacit, while in witchcraft there is nothing but
what is imaginary and chimerical? What reason is given for this? If
the demon is always ready to appear to any one who invokes him, and is
ready to enter into compact with him, why does he not show himself as
directly to her whom the author terms a witch as to her to whom he is
pleased to give the more respectable title of enchantress? If he is
disposed to appear and take to himself the worship and adoration which
are due to God alone, what matters it to him whether they proceed from
a vile or a distinguished person, from an ignoramus or a learned man?
The principal difference which the author admits between witchcraft
and magic, is, that the latter "belongs properly to priests, doctors,
and other persons who cultivate learning;" whilst witchcraft is purely
fanaticism, "which only suits the vulgar and poor wretched women;"
"also, it does not," says he, "derive its origin from philosophy or
any other science, and has no foundation but in popular stories." For
my part, I think it is very wrong that so much honor should here be
paid to magic. I have proved above in a few words, by the authority of
several ancient authors, that the most sensible men have always made a
jest of it; that they have regarded it only as a play and a game; and
that after having spared neither application nor expense, a Roman
emperor could never succeed in beholding any effect. I have even
remarked the equivocation of the name, which has often caused these
popular opinions with philosophy and the sublimest sciences. But I
think I can find in the book itself of the author, enough to prove
that one cannot in fact make this distinction, since he says therein
"that superstitious practices, such as figures, characters,
conjurations, and enchantments, passing from one to the other, and
coming to the knowledge of these unhappy women, operate in virtue of
the tacit consent which they give to the operation of the demon."
There then all distinction is taken away. He says again that,
according to some, "nails, pins, bones, coals, packets of hair, or
rags, found by the head, of children's beds, are indications of a
compact express or tacit, because of the resemblance to the symbols
made use of by true magicians." Thus, then, witches and those who are
here styled _true magicians_ employ equally the same follies; they
equally place confidence in imaginary compacts--and consequently they
should both be classed in the same category.
IX. It is proper to notice here that it is not so great a novelty as
is generally believed, to make a distinction between witches and
magicians. Nearly two hundred years ago James Wier, a doctor by
profession, had already said the same thing. Never did an author write
more at length upon this matter; you may consult the sixth edition of
his book, _De Praestigiis Daemonum et Incantationibus_, published at
Basle. He there proves that witches ought not to be condemned to
death, because they are women whose brain is disturbed; because all
the crimes that are imputed to them are imaginary, having no reality
but in their ill will, and none at all in the execution; lastly,
because, according to the rules of the soundest jurisprudence, the
confession of having done impossible things is of no weight, and
cannot serve as the foundation of condemnation. He shows how these
foolish old women come to believe that they have held intercourse with
some evil spirit, or been carried through the air; so far nothing can
be better; but otherwise, being persuaded that there are really magic
wonders,[678] and thinking that he has himself experienced something
of the kind, he will have magicians severely punished. He says,[679]
"that very often they are learned men, who, to acquire this diabolical
art, have traveled a great deal; and who, learned[680] in Goesy and
Theurgy,[681] whether through the demon or through study,[682] make
use of strange terms, characters, exorcisms, and imprecations;" employ
"sacred words and divine names, and neglect nothing which can render
them skillful in the black art;"[683] which makes them deserving of
the punishment of death.[684] "But," according to him, "there is a
great difference between magicians and witches, inasmuch as these
latter[685] make use neither of books, nor exorcisms, nor characters,
but have only their mind and imagination corrupted by the demon." He
calls witches "those women who pass for doing a great deal of harm,
either by virtue[686] of some imaginary compact, or by their own will,
or some diabolical instinct;" and who, having their brain deranged,
confess they have done many things, which they never have nor could
have performed. "Magicians,"[687] he says, "are led of themselves, and
by their own inclination, to learn this forbidden art, and seek
masters who can instruct them in it; wizards, on the contrary, seek
neither masters nor instructions; but the devil takes possession of
those women," whom he thinks the most likely to be deceived, "on
account of their old age, of their melancholy temperament, or their
poverty and misery." Everybody must see, and I have sufficiently shown
it already, to how many difficulties and contradictions all this
doctrine is subject; what we must conclude from it is, that wizards as
well as magicians have equally recourse to the demon, and place their
hope in him, without either of them ever obtaining what they wish. The
author sometimes believes he renders what he says of the power of
magic, and in short reduces it to nothing, by saying, that all the
wonderful effects attributed to it have no reality, and are but
illusions and vain phantoms; but he does not remark that it is even
miraculous to cause to appear that which is not. Whether the wands of
Pharaoh's magicians were really metamorphosed into serpents, or that
they appeared to be thus changed to the eyes of the beholders, would
either of them equally surpass all the power and industry of men. I
shall not amuse myself with discussing largely many inutilities which
may be found in this work; for instance, he does not fail to relate
the impertinent story of the pretended magic of Sylvester II., which,
as Panvinius has shown, had no other foundation than this pope's being
much given to the study of mathematics and philosophy.
X. It is owned in the new book, that it is very likely some woman may
be found "who, with the help of the demon, may be capable of
performing a great many things even hurtful to mankind," and that by
virtue "of a compact, express or tacit;" and it is added, that it
cannot be denied that it may be, without absolutely denying the
reality of magic. But when, so far from denying it, every effort on
the contrary is made to establish it; when it is loudly maintained
that persons may be found who, with the assistance of the demon, are
able to produce real effects, even of doing harm to people; how, after
that, can it be denied that there are witches, since, according to the
common opinion, witchcraft is nothing else? Let them, if they will,
regard as a fable what is said of their journeys through the air to
repair to their nocturnal meetings; what will he gain by that, if,
notwithstanding that, he believes that they possess the power to kill
children by their spells, to send the devil into the body of the first
person who presents himself, and a hundred other things of the same
kind? He says, that "to render the presents which he makes more
precious and estimable, and the more to be desired, the demon sells
them very dear, as if he could not be excited to act otherwise than by
employing powerful means, and making use of a most mysterious and very
hidden art," which, doubtless, he would have witches ignorant of, and
known only to magicians. But then they pretend that this art can be
learned only from the devil, and to obtain it from him they say that
he must be invoked and worshiped. Now, as there is hardly an impious
character, who, having taken it into his head to operate something
important by his charms or spells, would not be disposed to go to that
shocking extreme, we cannot see why one should succeed in what he
wishes, whilst the other does not succeed; nor what distinction can be
made between rascals and madmen, who are precisely of a kind. I hold
even, that if the reality and power of magic are granted, we could not
without great difficulty refuse to those who profess it the power of
entering places shut up, and of going through the air to their
nocturnal assemblies. It will, doubtless, be said that that is
impossible, and surpasses the power of man; but who can affirm it,
since we know not how far the power of the rebel angels extends?
I remember to have formerly heard some persons at Rome reason very
sensibly on the difficulty there is sometimes of deciding upon the
truth of a miracle, which difficulty is founded on our ignorance of
the extent of the powers of nature.
[[688] It is true that it would be dangerous to carry this principle
too far; doubtless, we are not to deduce from it that nothing ever
happens but what is natural, as if the Sovereign Author of all had in
some measure bound his hands, and had not reserved unto himself the
liberty to comply with the wishes and prayers of his servants--of
sometimes according favors which manifestly surpass the powers he has
granted to nature. It may often happen that we doubt whether an effect
is natural or supernatural; but also how many effects do we see on
which no sensible and rational person can form a doubt, good sense
concurring with the soundest philosophy to teach us that certain
wonders can only happen by a secret and divine virtue? One of the most
certain proofs which can be had of this is the sudden and durable cure
of certain long and cruel maladies. I know that simple and pious
persons have sometimes attributed to a miracle cures which might very
well be looked upon as purely natural; but what can be opposed to
certain extraordinary facts which have sometimes happened to very wise
and wide-awake persons, in the presence of sensible and judicious
witnesses who have attested them, and confirmed by the report of the
cleverest physicians, who have shown their astonishment at them? In
this city of Verona, where I live, an event of this kind happened very
recently, and it has excited the wonder of every one; but as the truth
of it is not yet juridically attested I abstain from relating it. But
such is not the case with a similar fact, verified, ten years ago,
after the strictest examination. I speak of the miraculous cure of
Dame Victoire Buri, of the monastery of St. Daniel, who after a
chronic ague of nearly five years' duration, after having been
tortured for several days with a stitch in her side, or acute pain,
and with violent colics--having, in short, lost her voice, and fallen
into a languid state, received the holy viaticum on the day of the
fete of St. Louis de Gonzaga. In this condition, having fervently
recommended herself to the intercession of the saint, she in one
moment felt her strength return, her pains ceased, and she began to
cry out that she was cured. At these cries the abbess and the nuns ran
to her; she dressed herself, went up the stairs alone and without
assistance, and repaired to the choir with the others to render thanks
to God for her recovery. I had the curiosity to wish to inform myself
personally of the fact and of these circumstances, and after having
interrogated the lady herself, those who had witnessed her cure, and
the physicians who had attended her, I remained fully convinced of the
truth of the fact. I, I repeat, whose defect is not that of being too
credulous, as it sufficiently appears by what I write here.
Again, I may say, that finding myself fourteen years ago at Florence,
I was in that city acquainted with a young girl, named Sister
Catherine Biondi, of the third order of St. Francis; through her
prayers a lady was cured in a moment and for ever of a very painful
dislocation. This circumstance was known by everybody, and I have no
doubt that it will one day be juridically attested. For myself, I
believe I obtained several singular favors of God through the
intercession of this holy maiden, to whose intercession I have
recommended myself several times since her death. The wise and learned
father Pellicioni, abbot of the order of St. Benedict, her confessor,
said that if we knew the life and family arrangements of this inferior
sister, we should soon be delivered from all sorts of temptations
against faith.
In effect, what things we are taught by these facts, which remain as
if buried in oblivion! What subtile questions are cleared up by them
in a very short time! Why do not the learned, who shine in other
communions, give themselves the trouble to assure themselves of only
one of these facts, as it would be very easy for them to do? One alone
suffices to render evident the truth of the catholic dogmas. There is
not one article of controversy for the defence of which it would not
be necessary to compose a folio; whereas, only one of these facts
decides them all instantly. We advance but little by disputation,
because each one seeks only to show forth his own wit and erudition,
and no one will give up a point; while by this method all becomes so
evident that no reply remains in answer to it. And who could imagine
that among so many miracles verified on the spot, in different places,
and reported in the strictest examinations made for the canonization
of saints, there would not be one which was true? To do so, we must
refuse to believe anything at all, and to make use of one's reason.
But when one of these facts becomes so notorious that there is no
longer room to doubt it, if after that some difficulty presents itself
to our feeble mind, which, so far from grasping the infinite, has only
most confused knowledge of material bodies, will not any one who
wishes to reason upon them be obliged to decide them suddenly by
saying, "I do not understand it at all, but I believe the whole?"
Those also, who, through the high opinion they have of their own
knowledge, laugh at all which is above them; what can these men oppose
to facts, in which Divine Providence shines forth in a manner so
evident not only to the mind but to the eyes? In regard to those who,
from the bad education which they have received, or from the idle and
voluptuous life which they lead, stagnate in gross ignorance; with
what facility would not one of these well-proved facts instruct them
in what they most require to know, and enlighten them in a moment on
every subject?]
To return to my subject. If it is sometimes difficult to decide on the
truth of a miracle, how much more difficulty would there be in
observing all the qualities which suit the superior and spiritual
nature, and prescribing limits to it. In regard to the penalties which
the author would have them inflict on magicians and witches,
pretending that the former are to be treated with rigor, while, on
the contrary, we must be indulgent to the latter, I do not see any
foundation for it. Charity would certainly have us begin by
instructing an old fool, who, having her fancy distorted, or her heart
perverted, from having read, or heard related, certain things, will
condemn herself, by avowing crimes which she has not committed. But if
we are told, for instance, that, after having made a little image, an
ignoramus has pierced it several times, muttering some ridiculous
words, how can we distinguish whether this charm is to be attributed
to sorcery or magic? and consequently, how can we know whether it
ought to be punished leniently or rigorously? However it may be done,
no effect will follow it, as has often been proved; and whether the
spell is the work of a magician or a wizard, the person aimed at by it
will not be in worse health. We must only remark, that although
ineffectual, the attempt of such wizards is not less a crime, since to
arrive at that point, "they must have renounced all their duty to God,
and have made themselves the slaves of the demon:" also do they avow
that to cast their spells they must "give up Jesus Christ, and
renounce the baptismal rite." It is commonly held that "the demons
appear to them, and cause themselves to be worshiped by them." This is
certainly not the case; but if it were so, why should witches have
less power than magicians? and on what foundation can it be asserted
that they are less criminal?
XI. Now, then, let us come to the point, which has deceived many, and
which still deludes some. Because in the Scripture, in the Old
Testament, magic is often spoken of as it then was, they conclude that
it still exists, and is on the same footing at this day. To that a
reply is easy. Before the advent of the Saviour, the demon had that
power; but he no longer possesses it, since Jesus Christ by his death
consummated the great work of our redemption. It is what St. John
clearly teaches in the Apocalypse, when he says[689]--"I saw an angel
descend from heaven, holding in his hand the key of the well of the
abyss, and a long chain with which he enchained the dragon, the old
serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and he bound him for a thousand
years." The Evangelist here makes use of the term "a thousand years"
to designate a period both very long and indeterminate, since we read,
a little lower down, that the demon shall be unbound at the coming of
Antichrist.[2] And "after a thousand years," says St. John, "Satan
shall be unbound, and shall come out of his prison." Whence it
happens, that in the time of Antichrist all the wonders of magic shall
be renewed, as the apostle tells us, when he says[691] that his
arrival shall be marked with the greatest wonders that Satan is
capable of working, and by all sorts of signs and lying prodigies.
But till then, "the prince of this world," that is to say, the demon,
"will be cast out." Which made St. Peter say, that in ascending to
heaven, Jesus Christ has subjugated "the angels, the powers, and the
virtues;" and St. Paul says, that "he has enriched himself with the
spoils of principalities and powers;" and that "when he shall give up
the kingdom to God even the Father, and destroyed all principalities,
and powers, and rule." These various names indicate the different
orders of reprobate spirits, as we learn from different parts of the
New Testament. Now, to understand that the might and power which the
demon has been deprived of by the Saviour, is precisely that which he
had enjoyed until then of deceiving the world by magical practices, it
is proper to observe, that until the coming of Jesus Christ there were
three ways or means by which the reprobate spirits exercised their
power and malice upon men:--1. By tempting them and leading them to do
evil. 2. By entering into their bodies and possessing them. 3. By
seconding magical operations, and sometimes working wonders, to wrest
the worship which was due to Him. At this day, of these three kinds of
power, the demon has certainly not lost the first by the coming of the
Saviour, since we know with what determination he has continued since
then, and daily does continue, to tempt us. Neither has he been
deprived of the second, since we still find persons who are possessed;
and it cannot be denied, that even since Jesus Christ, God has often
permitted this kind of possession to chastise mankind, and serve as a
warning. Thence it remains, that the demon has only been absolutely
despoiled of the third; and that it is in this sense we must
understand what St. Paul says, "that Satan has been enchained." Thence
it comes, that since the death of our Saviour all these diabolical
______ having no longer the same success as before, those who until
then had made a profession of them, brought their books to the
apostles' feet, and burned them in their presence." For that these
books treated principally of magic, we learn from St. Athanasius, who
alludes to this part of the Scripture, when he says, that "those who
had been celebrated for this art burned their books." It is not that,
even in the most distant time, braggarts and impostors have been
wanting who falsely boasted of what they could not perform. Thus we
read in Ecclesiasticus--"Who will pity the enchanter that is bitten by
the serpent?" In the time of St. Paul, some exorcists, who were Jews,
ran about the country, vainly endeavoring to expel demons; this was
the case with seven sons of one of the chief priests at Ephesus. It is
this prejudice which made Josephus believe[692] that in the presence
of Vespasian and all his court attendants, a Jew had expelled demons
from the bodies of the possessed by piercing their nose with a ring,
in which had been encased a root pointed out by Solomon. In his
narrative of this event, we may see, in truth, that the demons were
obliged to give some sign of their exit; but who does not perceive
that what he relates can proceed only from one who has suffered
himself to be deceived, or who seeks to deceive others?
XII. From what I have said, it is obvious, that if in the Old
Testament the magic power, and the prodigies worked by magic, are
often spoken of, there is in return no mention made of it in the New.
It is true, that as the world was never wanting in impostors, who
sought to appropriate to themselves the name and reputation of
magician, we find two of these seducers named in the Acts of the
Apostles. The one is Elymas,[693] who, in the isle of Cyprus, wished
to turn the attention of the Roman proconsul from listening to the
preaching of the apostles, and for that was punished with blindness.
The other is Simon, who for a long time preaching in Samaria that he
was something great, had misled all the people of that city, so that
he was generally regarded there as a sort of divine man, because
"through the effect of his magic he had for a long time turned the
heads of all the inhabitants;" that is to say, he had seduced and
dazzled them by his knaveries, as has often happened in many other
places. For it is evidently shown that he could never succeed in
working any wonder, not only by the silence of the Scripture on that
point, but also on seeing the miracles of St. Philip he was so
surprised at them, and so filled with admiration, that he directly
asked to be baptized, and never after quitted this apostle. But having
offered some money to St. Peter, in order to obtain from him the
apostolical gift, he was severely reprimanded by him, and threatened
with the most terrible punishments, to which he made no other reply
than to entreat the apostles to intercede for him themselves with
Jesus Christ, that nothing of the kind might happen to him. This is
all we have that is certain and authentic on the subject of Simon the
magician. But in times nearer to the apostles, the authors of
apocryphal books and stories invented at pleasure, profited well by
the profession of magic, which Simon had for a long time skillfully
practiced; and because the magic art is fruitful in wonders, which
certainly render a narrative agreeable and amusing, they attributed
endless prodigies to him; amongst others they imagined that, in a sort
of public discussion between him and St. Peter, he raised himself into
the air, and was precipitated from thence to the ground at the prayers
of that apostle. Sigebert mentions this, and, if I mistake not, it has
appeared in print at Florence. The most ancient apocryphal works
which remain to us, are the Recognitions of St. Clement, and the
Apostolical Constitutions. In the first, they make Simon say that he
can render himself invisible, traverse the most frightful precipices,
fall from a great height without hurting himself, bind with his own
bonds those who enchained him, open fastened doors, animate statues,
pass through fire without burning himself, change his form,
metamorphose himself into a goat or a sheep, fly in the air, &c. In
the second they make St. Peter say, that Simon being at Rome, and gone
to the theatre about noon, he ordered the people to go back and make
room for him, promising them that he would rise up into the air. It is
added, that he did in effect rise up into the air, carried by the
demons, saying he was ascending to heaven, at which all the people
applauded; but at that moment St. Peter's prayers were successful, and
Simon was hurled down, after he had spoken beforehand to him, as if
they had been close to each other. You can read the whole story, which
is evidently false and ill-imagined. It is true that these old
writings, and a few others of the same kind, have served to deceive
some of the fathers and ecclesiastical authors, who, without examining
into the truth, have permitted themselves to go with the stream, and
have followed the public opinion, upon which many things might be said
did time allow. How, for instance, can any one unhesitatingly believe
that St. Jerome could ever have written that St. Peter went to Rome,
not to plant the faith in that capital, and establish therein the
first seat of Christianity, but to expel from thence Simon the
magician? Is there not, on the contrary, reason to suspect that these
few words have passed in ancient times, from a note inadvertently
placed in the margin, into the text itself? But to confine myself
within the limits of my subject, I say that it suffices to pay
attention to the impure source of so many doubtful books, published
under feigned names, by the diversity and contradiction which
predominate amongst them relatively to the circumstance in question,
by the silence, in short, of the sovereign pontiffs and other writers
upon the same, even of the profane authors who ought principally to
speak of it, to remain convinced that all that is said of it, as well
as all the other prodigies ascribed to the magic power of Simon, is
but a fable founded solely on public report. Is there not even an
ancient inscription, which is thought to be still in existence, and
which, according to the copy that I formerly took of it at Rome,
bears: "Sanco Sancto Semoni Deo Filio," which upon the equivoque of
the name, has been applied to Simon the magician by St. Justin, and
upon his authority by some other writers, which occasioned P. Pagi to
say on the year 42, "That St. Justin was deceived either by a
resemblance of name, or by some unfaithful relation;" but that which
must above all decide this matter is the testimony of Origen, who says
that indeed Simon could deceive some persons in his time by magic, but
that soon after he lost his credit so much, that there were not in all
the world thirty persons of his sect to be found, and that only in
Palestine, his name never having been known elsewhere; so far was it
from true that he had been to Rome, worked miracles there, and had
statues raised to him in that capital of the world! Origen concludes
by saying, that where the name of Simon was known, it was so only by
the Acts of the Apostles, and that the truth of the circumstances
evidently shows that there was nothing divine in this man, that is to
say, nothing miraculous or extraordinary. In a word, the Acts of the
Apostles relate no wonder of him, because the Saviour had destroyed
all the power of magic.
XIII. To render this principle more solid still, after having based it
upon the Scripture, I am going to establish again with my usual
frankness, upon tradition, and show that it is truly in this sense the
passages in the fathers, and ancient ecclesiastical writers, must be
understood. I begin with St. Ignatius the Martyr, bishop, and
successor of the apostles in the pulpit of Antioch. This father, in
the first of the Epistles which are really his, speaking of the birth
of the Saviour, and of the star which then appeared, adds, "Because
all the power of magic vanished, all the bonds of malice were broken,
ignorance was abolished, and the old kingdom of Satan destroyed;" on
which the learned Cotelerius makes this remark: "It was also at that
time that all the illusions of magic ceased, as is attested by so many
celebrated authors." Tertullian, in the book which he has written on
Idolatry, says, "We know the strict union there is between magic and
astrology. God permitted that science to reign on the earth till the
time of the Gospel, in order that after the birth of Jesus Christ no
one might be found who should undertake to read in the heavens the
happiness or misfortunes of any person whomsoever." A little after, he
adds: "It is thus that, till the time of the Gospel, God tolerated on
the earth that other kind of magic which performs wonders, and dared
even to enter into rivalry with Moses."
Origen, in his books against Celsus, speaking of the three magi, and
the star which appeared to them, says that then the power of magic
extended so far, that there was no art more powerful and more divine;
but at the birth of the Saviour hell was disconcerted, the demons lost
their power, all their spells were destroyed, and their might passed
away. The magi wishing them to perform their enchantments and their
usual works, and not being able to succeed, sought the reason; and
having seen that new star appear in the heavens, they conjectured that
"He who was to command all spirits was born," which decided them to go
and adore him.
St. Athanasius, in his treatise on the Incarnation, teaches that the
Saviour has delivered all creatures from the deceits and illusions of
Satan, and that he has enriched himself, as St. Paul says, with the
spoils of principalities and powers. "When is it," he says afterwards,
"that the oracles have ceased to reply throughout all Greece, but
since the advent of the Saviour on earth? When did they begin to
despise the magic art? Is it not since mankind began to enjoy the
divine presence of the Word? Formerly," he continues, "the demons
deluded men by divers phantoms, and attaching themselves to rivers and
fountains, stones and wood, they drew by their allusions the
admiration of weak mortals; but since the advent of the Divine Word,
all their stratagems have passed away." A little while after, he adds,
"But what shall we say of that magic they held in such admiration?
Before the incarnation of the Word, it was in honor among the
Egyptians, the Chaldeans, the Indians, and won the admiration of those
nations by prodigies; but since the Truth has come down to earth, and
the Word has shown himself amongst men, this power has been destroyed,
and is itself fallen into oblivion." In another place, refuting the
Gentiles, who ascribed the miracles of the Saviour to magic, "They
call him a magician," says he, "but can they say that a magician would
destroy all sorts of magic, instead of working to establish it?"
In his Commentary on Isaiah, St. Jerome joins this interpretation to
several passages in the prophet--"Since the advent of the Saviour, all
that must be understood in an allegorical sense; for all the error of
the waters of Egypt, and all the pernicious arts which deluded the
nations who suffered themselves to be infatuated by them, have been
destroyed by the coming of Jesus Christ." A little after, he
adds--"That Memphis was also strongly addicted to magic, the vestiges
which subsist at this day of her ancient superstitions allow us not to
doubt." Now this informs us in a few words, or in the approach of the
desolation of Babylon, that all the projects of the magicians, and of
those who promise to unveil the future, are a pure folly, and dissolve
like smoke at the presence of Jesus Christ. Again, he says elsewhere,
that "Jesus Christ being come into the world, all kinds of divination,
and all the deceits of idolatry, lost their efficacy; so that the
Eastern magi understanding that a Son of God was born who had
destroyed all the power of their art, came to Bethlehem."
Theophilus of Alexandria, in his Paschal Letter addressed to the
bishops of Egypt, and after him St. Jerome, who has given us a Latin
translation of this letter, says that Jesus Christ by his coming has
destroyed all the illusions of magic. They add, "Jesus Christ by his
presence having destroyed idolatry, it follows that magic, which is
its mother, has been destroyed likewise." They call magic the mother
of idolatry, because it transfers to another the confidence and
submission which are due to God alone. St. Ambrose says, "The magician
perceives the inutility of his art, and you do not yet understand that
the promised Redeemer is come." I could bring forward here many other
passages from the fathers if I had the books at hand, or if time
allowed me to select them.
XIV. But why amuse ourselves with fruitless researches? What I have
said will suffice to show that this opinion has been that of not only
one or two of the fathers, which would prove nothing, but of the
greater number of those among them who have discoursed of this matter,
which constitutes the greater number. After that it is of little
import if in after and darker ages a thousand stories were spread on
the subject of witchcraft and enchantments, and that those tales may
have gained credit with the people in proportion to their rudeness and
ignorance. You may read, if you have any curiosity on the subject, a
hundred stories of that kind, related by Saxo Grammaticus and Olaus
Magnus. You will find also in Lucian and in Apuleius, how, even in
their time, those who wished to be carried through the air, or to be
metamorphosed into beasts, began by stripping themselves, and then
anointing themselves with certain oils from head to foot; there were
then found impostors, who promised as of old to perform by means of
magic all kinds of prodigies, and still continued the same
extravagances as ever.
A great many persons feel a certain repugnance to refusing belief in
all that is said of the prodigies of magic, as if it was denying the
truth of miracles, and the existence of the devil; and on this subject
they fail not to allege, that amongst the orders in the church is
found that of exorcists, and that the rituals are full of prayers and
blessings against the malice and the snares of Satan. But we must not
here confound two very different things. So far from the miracles and
wonders performed by Divine power leading us to believe the truth of
those which are ascribed to the demon, they teach us on the contrary
that God has reserved this power to himself alone. We experience but
too often that there are truly evil spirits, who do not cease to tempt
us. In respect to the order of Exorcists, we know that it was
established in the church in the first ages of Christianity; the most
ancient fathers make mention of them; but from none of them do we
learn that their order was instituted against witchcraft and other
knaveries of the same kind, but only as at this day, to deliver those
possessed; "to expel demons from the bodies of the possessed;" says
the Manual of the Ordination. It is not, then, denied, that for
reasons which it belongs not to us to examine, God sometimes allows
the demon to take hold of some one and to torment him; we only deny
that the spirit of darkness can ever arrive at that to please a
wretched woman of the dregs of the people. We do not deny that to
punish the sins of mankind, the Almighty may not sometimes make use in
different ways of the ministry of evil spirits; for, as St. Jerome
says,[694] "God makes men feel his anger and fury by the ministry of
rebel angels;" but we do deny that it ever happens by virtue of certain
figures, certain words, and certain signs, made by ignoramuses or
scoundrels, or some wretched females, or old mad women, or by any
authority they have over the demon. The sovereign pontiff who at this
day governs the church with so much glory, discourses very fully[695]
in his excellent works on the wonders worked by the demon and related
in the Old Testament, but he nowhere speaks of any effect produced by
magic or by sorcery since the coming of Jesus Christ. In the Roman
ritual we have prayers and orisons for all occasions; we find there
conjurations and exorcisms against demons; but nowhere, if the text is
not corrupted, is there mention made either of persons or things
bewitched, and if they are mentioned therein, it is only in after
additions made by private individuals. We know, on the contrary, that
many books treating of this subject, and containing prayers newly
composed by some individuals, have been prohibited. Thus they have
forbidden the book entitled _Circulus Aureus_, in which are set down
the conjurations necessary for "invoking demons of all kinds, of the
sky, of hell, the earth, fire, air, and water," to destroy all sorts
of "enchantments, charms, spells, and snares," in whatever place they
may be hidden, and of whatever matter they may be composed, whether
male or female, magician or witch, who may have made or given them,
and notwithstanding "all compacts and all conventions made between
them." Ought not the fact that the church forbids any one to read or
to keep these kind of books, to be sufficient to convince us of the
falsehood of what they imagine, and to teach us how contrary they are
to true religion and sound devotion. Three years ago they printed in
this town a little book, of which the author, however, was not of
Verona, in which they promised to teach the way "to deliver the
possessed, and to break all kinds of spells." We read in it that
"those over whom a malignant spell has been cast, lead such a wretched
life that it ought rather to be called a long death, like the corpse
of a man who had just died," &c. That is not all, for "almost all die
of it," and if they are children, "they hardly ever live." See now the
power which simple people ascribe, not only to the devil, but to the
vilest of men, whom they really believe to be connected with, and to
hold commerce with him. They say afterwards in this same book[696]
that the signs which denote a malignant spell are parings, herbs,
feathers, bones, nails, and hairs; but they give notice that the
feathers prove that there is witchcraft "only when they are
intermingled in the form of a circle or nearly so." And, again, you
must take care that some woman has not given you something to eat,
some flowers to smell, or if she has touched the shoulder of the
person on whom the spell is cast. We have an excellent preservative
against these simplicities in the vast selection of Dom Martenus,
entitled _De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus_, in which we see that amidst
an infinity of prayers, orisons and exorcisms used at all times
throughout Christendom, there is not a passage in which mention is
made of spells, sorcery, or magic, or magical operations. They therein
command the demon in the name of Jesus Christ to come out and go
away--they therein implore the divine protection, to be delivered from
his power, to which we are all born subject by the stain of original
sin; they therein teach that holy water, salt, and incense sanctified
by the prayers of the church may drive away the enemy; that we may not
fall into his toils, and that we may have nothing to dread from the
attacks of evil spirits; but in no part does it say that spells have
power over them, neither do they anywhere pray God to deliver us from
them, or to heal us. It is so far from being true that we ought to
believe the fables spread abroad on this subject, that I perfectly
well remember having read a long time ago in the old casuists, that we
ought to class in the number of grievous sins the believing that magic
can really work the wonders related of it. I shall remark, on this
occasion, that I know not how the author of the book in question can
have committed the oversight of twice citing a certain manuscript as
to be found in any other cabinet than mine, when it is a well known
fact that I formerly purchased it very dear, not knowing that the most
important and curious part was wanting. What I have said of it may be
seen in the Opuscules which I have joined to the "History of
Theology."[697] For the present, it suffices to remember that in the
famous canon _Episcopi_, related first by Reginon,[698] we read these
remarkable words--"An infinite number of people, deceived by this
false prejudice, believe all that to be true, and in believing it
stray from the true faith into the superstition of the heathen,
imagining that they can find elsewhere than in God any divinity, or
any supernatural power."
XV. From all I have hitherto said, it appears how far from truth is
all that is commonly said of this pretended magic; how contrary to all
the maxims of the church, and in opposition to the most venerated
authority, and what harm might be done to sound doctrine and true
piety by entertaining and favoring such extravagant opinions. We read,
in the author I am combating, "What shall we say of the fairies, a
prodigy so notorious and so common?" It is marvelous that it should
be a _prodigy_ and at the same time _common_. He adds, "There is not a
town, not to say a village, which cannot furnish several instances
concerning them." For my part, I have seen a great many places; I am
seventy-four years of age, and I have perhaps been only too curious on
this head; and I own that I have never happened to meet with any
prodigy of that kind. I may even add that several inquisitors, very
sensible men, after having exercised that duty a long time, have
assured me that they also never knew such a thing. It is not often
that fairies of all kinds of shapes and different faces have passed
through my hands, but I have always discovered and shown that this was
nothing but fancy and reverie. On one side, it is affirmed that there
is a malicious species among them, who were amorous of beautiful
girls; and on the other, they will have it, on the contrary, that all
witches are old and ugly. How desirable it would be, if the people
could be once undeceived in respect to all these follies, which accord
so little with sound doctrine and true piety! Are they not still, in
our days, infatuated with what is said of charms which render
invulnerable rings in which fairies are enclosed, billets which cure
the quartan ague, words which lead you to guess the number to which
the lot will fall; of the pas key, which is made to turn to find out a
thief; of the cabala, which by means of certain verses and certain
answers, which are falsely supposed to contain a certain number of
words, unveils the most secret things? Are there not still to be found
people who are so simple, or who have so little religion, as to buy
these trifles very dear? For the world at this day is not wanting in
those prophets spoken of by Micah,[699] whom money inspired and
rendered learned. Have we not again calendars in which are marked the
lucky and unlucky days, as has been done during a time, under the name
of Egyptians? Do they not prevent people from inhabiting certain
houses, under pretence of their being haunted? that is to say, that in
the night spectres are seen in them, and a great noise of chains is
heard, some saying that it is devils who cause all this, and others
the spirits of the dead who make all this clang; which is surprising
enough that it should be spirits or devils, and that they should only
have the power to make themselves perceived in the night. And how many
times have we seen the most fatal quarrels occur, principally amongst
the peasants, because one amongst them has accused others of sorcery?
But what shall we say of spirits incube and succube, of which,
notwithstanding the impossibility of the thing, the existence and
reality is maintained? M. Muratori, in that part where he treats of
imagination, places the tales on this subject in the same line with
what is said of the witches' sabbath; and he says[700] "that these
extravagant opinions are at this day so discredited, that it is only
the rudest and most ignorant who suffer themselves to be amused by
them." One of my friends made me laugh the other day, when, speaking
of the pretended incubuses, he said that those who believed in them
were not wise to marry. Again, what shall we say of those tacit
compacts so often mentioned by the author, and which he supposes to be
real? Can we not see that such an opinion is making a god of the
devil? For that any one, for example, living three or four hundred
leagues off, may have made a compact with the devil, that every time a
pendulum shall be suspended above a glass it shall mark the hour as
regularly as the most exact clock. According to this idea, that same
marvel will happen equally, and at the same moment, not only in this
town where we are, but all over the earth, and will be repeated as
often as they may wish to make the experiment. Now this is quite
another thing from carrying a witch to the sabbath through the air,
which the author asserts is beyond the power of the demon; it is
attributing to this malicious spirit a kind of almightiness and
immensity. But what would happen if some one, having made a compact
with a demon for fine weather, another on his part shall have made a
compact with the demon for bad weather? Good Father Le Brun wishes us
to ascribe to tacit compacts all those effects which we cannot explain
by natural causes. If it be so, what a number of tacit compacts there
must be in the world! He believes in the stories about the divining
rod, and the virtue ascribed to it of finding out robbers and
murderers; although all France has since acknowledged that the first
author of this fable was a knave, who having been summoned to Paris,
could never show there any of those effects he had boasted of. Let any
one have the least idea of the invisible atoms scattered abroad
throughout the world, of their continually issuing from natural
bodies, and the hidden and wonderful effects which they produce, one
can never be astonished that at a moderate distance water and metals
should operate on certain kinds of wood. The same author sincerely
believes what was said, that the contagion and mortality spread
amongst the cattle proceeded from a spell; like the man who affirmed
that his father and mother remained impotent for seven years, and this
ceased only when an old woman had broken the spell. On this subject,
he cites a ritual of which Father Martenus does not speak at all,
whence it follows that he did not recognize it for authentic. To give
an idea of the credulity of this writer, it will suffice to read the
story he relates of one Damis. But we find, above all, an
incomparable abridgment of those extravagant wonders in a little book
dedicated to the Cardinal Horace Maffei, entitled, "Compendium
Melificarum," or the "Abridgment of Witches," printed at Milan in
1608.
XVI. In a word, it is of no little importance to destroy the popular
errors which attack the unalterable attributes of the Supreme Being,
as if he had laid it down as a law to himself that he would condescend
to all the impious and fantastic wishes of malignant spirits, and of
the madman who had recourse to them, by seconding them, and permitting
the wonderful effects that they desire to produce. Do reason and good
sense allow us to imagine that the Sovereign Master of all things, who
for reasons which we are not permitted to examine, refuses so often to
grant our most ardent prayers for what we need, whether it be public
or private, can be so prompt to lend an ear to the requests of the
vilest and most wicked, by allowing that which they desire to happen?
So long as they believe in the reality of magic, that it is able to
work wonders, and that by means of it man can force the demon to obey,
it will be in vain to preach against the superstition, impiety, and
folly of wizards. There will always be found too many people who will
try to succeed in it, and will even fancy they have succeeded in it in
fact. To uproot this pest we must begin by making men clearly
understand that it is useless in them to be guilty of this horrible
crime; that in this way they never obtain anything they wish for, and
that all that is said on this subject is fabulous and chimerical. It
will not be difficult to persuade any sensible person of this truth,
by only leading him to pay attention, and mark if it be possible that
all these pretended miracles can be true, whilst it is proved that
magic has never possessed the power to enrich those who professed it,
which would be much more easy. How could this wonderful art send
maladies to those who were in good health, render a married couple
impotent, or make any one invisible or invulnerable, whilst it has
never been able to bring a hundred crowns, which another would keep
locked up in his strong box? And why do we not make any use of so
wonderful an art in armies? Why is it so little sought after by
princes and their ministers? The most efficacious means for
dissipating all these vain fancies would be never to speak of them,
and to bury them in silence and oblivion. In any place where for time
immemorial no one has ever been suspected of witchcraft, let them only
hear that a monk is arrived to take cognizance of this crime and
punish it, and directly you will see troops of green-sick girls, and
hypochondriacal men; crowds of children will be brought to him ill
with unknown maladies; and it will not fail to be affirmed that these
things are caused by spells cast over them, and even when and how the
thing happened. It is certainly a wrong way of proceeding, whether in
sermons, or in the works published against witches, to amuse
themselves with giving the history of all these mad-headed people
boast of, of the circumstances in which they have taken a part, and
the way in which they happened. It is in vain then to declaim against
them, for you may be assured that people are not wanting who suffer
themselves to be dazzled by these pretended miracles, who become
smitten with these effects, so extraordinary and so wonderful, and try
by every means to succeed in them by the very method which has just
been taught them, and forget nothing which can place them in the
number of this imaginary society. It is then with reason that the
author says in his book, that punishment even sometimes serves to
render crime more common, and "that there are never more witches than
in those places where they are most persecuted." I am delighted to be
able to finish with this eulogium, in order that it may be the more
clearly seen that if I have herein attacked magic, it is only with
upright intentions.
XVII. The eagerness with which I have written this letter has made me
forget several things which might very well have a place in it. The
greatest difficulty which can be opposed to my argument is that we
sometimes find, even amongst people who possess a certain degree of
knowledge and good sense, some persons who will say to you, "But I
have seen this, or that; such and such things have happened to
myself." Upon which it is proper, first of all, to pay attention to
the wonderful tricks of certain jugglers, who, by practice and
address, succeed in deceiving even the most clear-sighted and sensible
persons. It must next be considered that the most natural effects may
sometimes appear beyond the power of nature, when cleverly presented
in the most favorable point of view. I formerly saw a charlatan who,
having driven a nail or a large pin into the head of a chicken, with
that nailed it to a table, so that it appeared dead, and was believed
to be so by all present; after that, the charlatan having taken out
the nail and played some apish tricks, the chicken came to life again
and walked about the room. The secret of all this is that these birds
have in the forepart of the head two bones, joined in such a way that
if anything is driven through with address, though it causes them
pain, yet they do not die of it. You may run large pins into a man's
leg without wounding or hurting him, or but very slightly, just like a
prick which is felt when the pin first enters; which has sometimes
served as a pastime for jokers. In my garden, which, thanks to the
care of M. Seguier, is become quite a botanic garden, I have a plant
called the _onagra_,[701] which rises to the height of a man, and
bears very beautiful flowers; but they remain closed all day, and only
open towards sunset, and that not by degrees, as with all other night
plants, but in budding all at once, and showing themselves in a moment
in all their beauty. A little before their chalice bursts open, it
swells and becomes a little inflated. Now, if any one, profiting by
the last-named peculiarity, which is but little known, wished to
persuade any simple persons that by the help of some magical words he
could, when he would, cause a beautiful flower to bloom, is it not
certain that he would find plenty of people disposed to believe him?
The common people in our days leave nothing undone to find out the
secret of making themselves invulnerable; by which they show that they
ascribe to magic more power than was granted to it by the ancients,
who believed it very capable of doing harm, but not of doing good. So,
when the greater number of the Jews attributed the miracles wrought by
the Saviour to the devil, some of the more sensible and reasonable
among them asked, "Can the devil restore sight to the blind?"[702] At
this day, there are more ways than ever of making simple and ignorant
persons believe in magic. For instance, would it be very difficult for
a man to pass himself off as a magician, if he said to those who were
present, "I can, at my will, either send the bullet in this pistol
through this board, or make it simply touch it and fall down at our
feet without piercing it?" Nevertheless, nothing is easier; it only
requires when the pistol is loaded, that instead of pressing the
wadding immediately upon the bullet as is customary, to put it, on the
contrary, at the mouth of the barrel. That being done, when they fire,
if the end of the pistol is raised, the ball, which is not displaced,
will produce the usual effect; but if, on the contrary, the pistol is
lowered, so that the ball runs into the barrel and joins the wadding,
it will fall on the ground from the board without having penetrated
it. It seems to me that something like this may be found in the
"Natural Experiments" of Redi, which I have not at hand just now. But
on this subject, you can consult Jean Baptista, Porta, and others. We
must not, however, place amongst the effects of this kind of magic,
what a friend jokingly observed to me in a very polite letter which he
wrote to me two months ago:--A noisy exhalation having ignited in a
house, and not having been perceived by him who was in the spot
adjoining, nor in any other place, he writes me word that those who,
according to the vulgar prejudice, persisted in believing that these
kinds of fire came from the sky and the clouds, were necessarily
forced to attribute this effect to real magic. I shall again add, on
the subject of electrical phenomena, that those who think to explain
them by means of two electrical fluids, the one hidden in bodies, and
the other circulating around them, would perhaps say something less
strange and surprising, if they ascribed them to magic. I have
endeavored, in the last letter which is joined to that I wrote upon
the subject of exhalations, to give some explanation of these wonders;
and I have done so, at least, without being obliged to invent from my
own head, and without any foundation, to universal electrical matters
which circulate within bodies and without them. Certainly, the ancient
philosophers, who reasoned so much on the magnet, would have spared
themselves a great deal of trouble, if they had believed it possible
to attribute its admirable properties to a magnetic spirit which
proceeded from it. But the pleasure I should find in arguing with
them, might perhaps engage me in other matters; for which reason I now
end my letter.
Footnotes:
[672] The author here alludes to the hypogryphe, a winged horse,
invented by Ariosto, that carried the Paladins through the air.
[673] Magicus Vanitates.
[674] Plin. lib. xxx. c. 1.
[675]
"Somnia, terrores magicos, miracula, sagas,
Nocturnos lemures, portentaque Thessala rides?"
HORAT. lib. ii. Ep. 2.
[676] Inexpugnabili magicae disciplinae potestate, &c.--Lib. iii.
[677] Delle magiche frodi seppe il Givoco.--Dante, _Inf._ c. 20.
[678] Pp. 139 and 145.
[679] P. 9.
[680] P. 144.
[681] _Goesy_, or _Goesia_, is said to be a kind of magic. It is
asserted that those who profess it repair at night to the tombs, where
they invoke the demon and evil genii by lamentations and complaints.
In regard to _Theurgy_, the ancients gave this name to that part of
magic which is called _white magic_. The word _Theurgy_ signifies the
art of doing divine things, or such as God only can perform--the power
of producing wonderful and supernatural effects by licit means, in
invoking the aid of God and angels. _Theurgy_ differs from _natural
magic_, which is performed by the powers of nature; and from
_necromancy_, which is operated only by the invocation of the demons.
[682] P. 170.
[683] P. 654.
[684] P. 749.
[685] P. 9.
[686] P. 30, de Lam.
[687] P. 94.
[688] What is enclosed between the brackets is a long addition sent by
the author to the printer whilst they were working at a second edition
of his letter.
[689] Et vidi angelum descendentem de coelo habentem clavem abyssi et
catenam magnam in manu sua; et appehendit draconem, serpentem,
antiquum, qui est Diabolus et Satanas, et ligavit eum per annos
mille.--_Apoc._ xx. 1.
[690] Et cum consummati fuerint mille anni, solvetur Satanas de
carcere suo.--_Apoc._ v. 7.
[691] Cujus est adventus secundum operationem Satanae in omni virtute
et signis et prodigiis mendacibus.--2 Thess. ii. 9.
[692] Joseph. Antiq. lib. viii. c. 2.
[693] Acts viii. 6.
[694] Mittet siquidem Dominus in iram et furorem suum per angelos
pessimos. Hier. ad Eph. i. 7. p. 574.
[695] Vid. de Beatif. lib. iv. p. i. c. 3.
[696] Pp. 67, 75.
[697] P. 243.
[698] Lib. ii. p. 364.
[699] In pecunia divinabunt.--Mich. iii. 11.
[700] P. 127.
[701] Now well known as the evening primrose.
[702] Numquid daemonium potest coecorum oculos asperire? Joan. ix,
21.
LETTER
_From the_ REVEREND FATHER DOM. AUGUSTINE CALMET, _Abbot of Senones,
to_ M. DE BURE SENIOR, _Librarian at Paris._
SIR--I have received The Historical and Dogmatical Treatise on
Apparitions, Visions, and particular Revelations, with Observations on
the Dissertations of the Reverend Father Dom. Calmet, Abbot of
Senones, on Apparitions and Ghosts. At Avignon, 1751. By the Abbe
Lenglet du Frenoy.
I have looked over this work with pleasure. M. du Frenoy wished to
turn to account therein what he wrote fifty-five years ago, as he says
himself, on the subject of visions, and the life of Maria d'Agreda, of
whom they spoke then, and of whom they still speak even now in so
undecided a manner. M. du Frenoy had undertaken at that time to
examine the affair thoroughly and to show the illusions of it; there
is yet time for him to give his opinion upon it, since the Church has
not declared herself upon the work, on the life and visions of that
famous Spanish abbess.
It is only accidentally that he composed his remarks on my
Dissertations on Apparitions and Vampires. I have no reason to
complain of him; he has observed towards me the rules of politeness
and good breeding, and I shall try to imitate him in what I say in my
own defence. But if he had read the second edition of my work, printed
at Einsidlen in Switzerland, in 1749; the third, printed in Germany at
Augsburg, in 1750; and the fourth, on which you are now actually
engaged; he might have spared himself the trouble of censuring several
passages which I have corrected, reformed, suppressed, or explained
myself.
If I had wished to swell my work, I could have added to it some rules,
remarks, and reflections, with a vast number of circumstances. But by
that means I should have fallen into the same error which he seems to
have acknowledged himself, when he says that he has perhaps placed in
his works too many such rules and remarks: and I am persuaded that it
is, in fact, the part that will be least read and least used.[703]
People will be much more struck with stories squeamishly extracted
from Thomas de Cantimpre and Cesarius, whose works are everywhere
decried, and that one dare no longer cite openly without exposing them
to mockery. They will read, with only too much pleasure, what he
relates of the apparitions of Jesus Christ to St. Francis d'Assis, on
the Indulgence of the Partionculus, and the particularities of the
establishment of the Carmelite Fathers, and of the Brotherhood of the
Scapulary, by Simon Stock, to whom the Holy Virgin herself gave the
Scapulary of the order. It will be seen in his work that there are few
religious establishments or societies which are not founded on some
vision or revelation. It seemed even as if it was necessary for the
propagation of certain orders and certain congregations; _so that
these kind of revelations were, as it were, taken by storm_; and there
seems to have been a competition as to who should produce the greatest
number of them, and the most extraordinary, to have them believed. I
could not persuade myself that he related seriously the pretended
apparition of St. Francis to Erasmus. It is easy to comprehend that it
was a joke of Erasmus, who wished to divert himself at the expense of
the Cordeliers. But one cannot help being pained at the way in which
he treats several fathers of the church, as St. Gregory the Great, St.
Gregory of Tours, St. Sulpicius Severus, Peter the Venerable, Abbot of
Clugny, St. Anselm, Cardinal Pierre Damien, St. Athanasius even, and
St. Ambrose,[704] in regard to their credulity, and the account they
have given us of several apparitions and visions, which are little
thought of at this day. I say the same of what he relates of the
visions of St. Elizabeth of Schonau, of St. Hildegrade, of St.
Gertrude, of St. Mecthelda, of St. Bridget, of St. Catherine of
Sienna, and hardly does he show any favor to those of St. Theresa.
Would it not have been better to leave the world in this respect as it
is,[705] rather than disturb the ashes of so many holy personages and
saintly nuns, whose lives are held blessed by the church, and whose
writings and revelations have so little influence over the salvation
and the morals of the faithful in general. What service does it render
the church to speak disparagingly of the works of the contemplatives,
of the Thaulers, the Rushbrooks, the Bartholomews of Pisa, of St.
Vincent Ferrier, of St. Bernardine of Sienna, of Henry Harphius, of
Pierre de Natalibus, of Bernardine de Bustis, of Ludolf the Chartreux,
and other authors of that kind, whose writings are so little read and
so little known, whose sectaries are so few in number, and have so
little weight in the world, and even in the church?
The Abbe du Frenoy acknowledges the visions and revelations which are
clearly marked in Scripture; but is there not reason to fear that
certain persons may apply the rules of criticism which he employs
against the visions of the male and female saints of whom he speaks in
his work, and that they may say, for instance, that Jeremiah yielded
to his melancholy humor, and Ezekiel to his caustic disposition, to
predict sad and disagreeable things to the Jewish people?[706]
We know how many vexations the prophets endured from the Jews, and
that in particular[707] those of Anathoth had resolved to put their
countryman Jeremiah to death, to prevent him from prophesying in the
name of the Lord. To what persecutions were not himself and Baruch his
disciple exposed for having spoken in the name of the Lord? Did not
King Jehoiakim, son of Josiah, throw the book of Baruch into the
fire,[708] after having hacked it with a penknife, in hatred of the
truths which it announced to him?
The Jews sometimes went so far as to insult them in their dwellings,
and even to say to them,[709] _Ubi est verbum Domini? veniat_; and
elsewhere, "Let us plot against Jeremiah; for the priests will not
fail to cite the law, and the prophets will not fail to allege the
words of the Lord: come, let us attack him with derision, and pay no
regard to his discourse."
Isaiah did not endure less vexation and insult, the libertine Jews
having gone even into his house, and said to him insolently[710]--_Manda,
remanda; expecta, re-expecta; modicum ibi, et modicum ibi_, as if to
mock at his threats.
But all that has not prevailed, nor ever will prevail, against the
truth and word of God; the faithful and exact execution of the threats
of the Lord has justified, and ever will justify, the predictions and
visions of the prophets. The gates of hell will not prevail against
the Christian church, and the word of God will triumph over the malice
of hell, the artifice of corrupt men, of libertines, and over all the
subtlety of pretended freethinkers. True and real visions,
revelations, and apparitions will always bear in themselves a
character of truth, and will serve to destroy those which are false,
and proceed from the spirit of error and delusion. And coming now to
what regards myself in particular, M. du Frenoy says, that the public
have been surprised that instead of placing my proofs before the
circumstances of my apparitions, I have given them afterwards, and
that I have not entered fully enough into the subject of these proofs.
I am going to give the public an account of my method and design.
Having proposed to myself to prove the truth, the reality, and
consequently the possibility of apparitions, I have related a great
many authentic instances, derived from the Old and New Testament,
which forms a complete proof of my opinion, for the certainty of the
facts carries with it here the certainty of the dogma.
After that I have related instances and opinions taken from the
Hebrews, Mahometans, Greeks, and Latins, to assure the same truth. I
have been careful not to draw any parallel between these testimonies
and the scriptural ones which preceded. My object in this was to
demonstrate that in every age, and in all civilized nations, the idea
of the immortality of the soul, of its existence after death, of its
return and appearance, is one of those truths which the length of ages
has never been able to efface from the mind of nations.
I draw the same inference from the instances which I have related, and
of which I do not pretend to guarantee either the truth or the
certainty. I willingly yield all the circumstances that are not
revealed to censure and criticism; I only esteem as true that which is
so in fact.
M. du Frenoy finds that the proof of the immortality of the soul which
I infer from the apparition of the spirit after death, is not
sufficiently solid; but it is certainly one of the most palpable and
most easy of comprehension to the generality of mankind; it would make
more impression upon them than arguments drawn from philosophy and
metaphysics. I do not intend for that reason to attack any other
proofs of the same truth, or to weaken a dogma so essential to
religion.
He endeavors to prove, at great length,[711] that the salvation of the
Emperor Trajan is not a thing which the Christian religion can
confirm. I agree with him; and it was useless to take any trouble to
demonstrate it.[712]
He speaks of the young man of Delme,[713] who having fallen into a
swoon remained in it some days; they brought him back to life, and a
languor remained upon him which at last led to his death at the end of
the year. It is thus he arranges that story.
M. du Frenoy disguises the affair a little; and although I do not
believe that the devil could restore the youth to life, nevertheless
the original and cotemporaneous authors whom I have quoted maintain
that the demon had much to do with this event.[714]
What has principally prevented me from giving rules and prescribing a
method for discerning true and false apparitions is, that I am quite
persuaded that the way in which they occur is absolutely unknown to
us; that it contains insurmountable difficulties; and that consulting
only the rules of philosophy, I should be more disposed to believe
them impossible than to affirm their truth and possibility. But I am
restrained by respect for the Holy Scriptures, by the testimony of all
antiquity and by the tradition of the Church.
"I am, sir,
Your very humble
and very obedient servant,
D. A. CALMET, Abbot of Senones."
Footnotes:
[703] Dom. Calmet has a very bad opinion of the public, to believe
that it values so little what is, perhaps, the best and most sensible
part of the book. Wise people think quite differently from himself.
[704] Neither Gregory of Tours, nor Sulpicius Severus, nor Peter the
Venerable, nor Pierre Damien, have ever been placed in a parallel line
with the fathers of the Church. In regard to the latter, it has always
been allowable, without failing in the respect which is due to them,
to remark certain weaknesses in their works, sometimes even errors, as
the Church has done in condemning the Millenaries, &c.
[705] An excellent maxim for fomenting credulity and nourishing
superstition.
[706] What a parallel! how could any one make it without renouncing
common sense?
[707] Jeremiah xxi. 21.
[708] Jerem. xxxvi.
[709] Jerem. xvii. 15.
[710] Isai. xxviii. 10.
[711] Tom. ii. p. 92 _et seq._
[712] It is true that what Dom. Calmet had said of this in his first
edition, the only one M. Lenglet has seen, has been corrected in the
following ones.
[713] P. 155.
[714] A bad foundation; credulous or interested authors.
THE END.
Transcriber's Notes:
Passages in italics indicated by underscore _italics_.
The original text includes Greek characters. For this text version these
letters have been replaced with transliterations set off by [Greek: ]
tags.
The original text includes several blank spaces. These are represented by
_______________ in this text version.
Footnote punctuation has been standardized for consistency.
Misprints corrected:
"Corpernican" corrected to "Copernican" (page vii)
"destitue" corrected to "destitute" (page xvii)
"superstit on" corrected to "superstition" (page xx)
"Apocalapse" corrected to "Apocalypse" (page 40)
"for" corrected to "fro" (page 55)
"thousands" corrected to "thousand" (page 57)
"predjudices" corrected to "prejudices" (page 61)
"repentence" corrected to "repentance" (page 87)
"sorcerors" corrected to "sorcerers" (page 100)
"subtil" corrected to "subtile" (page 112)
"Loudon" corrected to "Loudun" (page 128)
"Gassendy" corrected to "Gassendi" (page 146)
"statue" corrected to "stature" (page 161)
"testiomony" corrected to "testimony" (page 179)
"Ratzival" corrected to "Ratzivil" (page 204)
"embarrasment" corrected to "embarrassment" (page 220)
"Mohometans" corrected to "Mahometans" (page 222)
"ancesters" corrected to "ancestors" (page 231)
"cf" corrected to "of" (page 238)
"Other" corrected to "Others" (page 248)
"treaties" corrected to "treatise" (page 254)
"Spiridon" corrected to "Spiridion" (page 258)
"not not" corrected to "not" (page 262)
"drangement" corrected to "derangement" (page 278)
"neigborhood" corrected to "neighborhood" (page 282)
"d'Englebert" corrected to "d'Engelbert" (page 286)
"obervations" corrected to "observations" (page 305)
"of" corrected to "off" (page 326)
"corpuscules" corrected to "corpuscles" (page 329)
"or" corrected to "for" (page 342)
"our" corrected to "out" (page 349)
"childen" corrected to "children" (page 360)
"her her" corrected to "her" (page 372)
"abe" corrected to "able" (page 386)
"or" corrected to "on" (page 390)
Missing text "III." added (page 411)
"permittted" corrected to "permitted" (page 412)
"One" corrected to "On" (page 434)
Some quotes are opened with marks but are not closed. Obvious errors
have been silently closed, while those requiring interpretation have
been left open.
Additional spacing after some of the quotes is intentional to indicate
both the end of a quotation and the beginning of a new paragraph as
presented in the original text.
All other spelling and punctuation is presented as in the original.