Waterhouse, of Hatfield Peveril, being angry with another girl, 'shee
goinge home dydde as she had seene her mother doe, callynge Sathan, whiche
came to her (as she sayd) in the lykenes of a great dogge'.[878] At
Aberdeen in 1597 Agnes Wobster said that the Devil appeared 'in the liknes
of a lamb, quhom thow callis thy God, and bletit on the, and thaireftir
spak to the'.[879] James Device, one of the chief of the Lancashire witches
in 1613, confessed 'that vpon Sheare Thursday was two yeares, his
Grand-Mother Elizabeth Sothernes, alias Dembdike, did bid him this
Examinate goe to the Church to receiue the Communion (the next day after
being Good Friday) and then not to eate the Bread the Minister gaue him,
but to bring it and deliuer it to such a thing as should meet him in his
way homewards: Notwithstanding her perswasions, this Examinate did eate the
Bread; and so in his comming homeward some fortie roodes off the said
Church, there met him a thing in the shape of a Hare, who spoke vnto this
Examinate, and asked him whether hee had brought the Bread.'[880] In 1621
Elizabeth Sawyer, the witch of Edmonton, said that 'the first time that the
Diuell came vnto me was, when I was cursing, swearing, and
blaspheming'.[881] The evidence of the Huntingdonshire witches, John
Winnick and Ellen Shepheard, in 1646 (see above, p. 219), and of Dorothy
Ellis of Cambridgeshire in 1647, also show that the animal which appeared
to the witch after an access of emotion was at once acknowledged as God and
accepted as the familiar. Mary Osgood of Andover in 1692 'confesses that
about 11 years ago, when she was in a melancholy state and condition, she
used to walk abroad in her orchard; and upon a certain time, she saw the
appearance of a cat, at the end of the house, which yet she thought was a
real cat. However, at that time, it diverted her from praying to God, and
instead thereof she prayed to the devil.[882]
The familiars in human form were human beings usually of the sex opposite
to that of the witch. As these familiars were generally called 'Devils' it
is sometimes difficult to distinguish them from the Grand-master;[883] but
the evidence, taken as a whole, suggests that at certain parts of the
ritual every individual of the company was known as a Devil. This
suggestion is borne out in the modern survival of an ancient dance in the
Basses-Pyrenees, where the dancers to this day are called Satans.[884]
Lady Alice Kyteler, in 1324, was accused that the Devil came to her
'quandoque in specie cujusdam aethiopis cum duobus sociis'.[885] In 1598
the Lyons witches, Thievenne Paget and Antoine Tornier, speak of 'leurs
Demons' as distinct from the great Devil, and the evidence of all the other
witches shows that 'il y a encor des Demons, qui assistent a ces
danses'.[886] De Lancre says that there was more than one Devil: the great
one, who was called Maitre Leonard, and a little one called Maitre Jean
Mullin. It was this smaller Devil who held the meetings in the absence of
the Chief:
'en la place du Grad maistre, il n'y auoit qu'vn petit Diable ou Demon
qui n'auoit point de cornes, lequel ne contentoit pas la compagnie
comme son maistre. Qu'elles n'auoient tant de confiance en toute la
trouppe des mauuais Anges qu'en celuy seul qu'ils auoient accoustume
d'adorer & seruir.--A table on se sied selon sa qualite, ayant chacun
son Demon assis aupres, & parfois vis a vis. Et quand ils ont mange,
chaque Demon pred sa disciple par la main, & danse auec elle.'[887]
In 1618 Joan Willimott of Leicester confessed 'that shee hath a Spirit
which shee calleth Pretty, which was giuen vnto her by William Berry, whom
she serued three yeares; the Spirit stood vpon the ground in the shape and
forme of a Woman, which Spirit did aske of her her Soule, which shee then
promised vnto it, being willed thereunto by her Master'.[888] In 1633,
Margaret Johnson, the Lancashire witch, stated that 'besides theire
particular familiars or spirits, there was one greate or grand devill, or
spirit, more eminent than the rest. Shee allsoe saith, yt if a witch have
but one marke, shee hath but one spirit; if two, then two spirits; if
three, yet but two spirits. Shee alsoe saith, that men witches usually have
women spirits, and women witches men spirits.'[889] In 1649 at St. Albans a
man witch had 'two familiars, the one in the form of a dog, which he called
George, and the other in the likeness of a woman, called Jezebell'.[890] In
1662 at Auldearne Issobell Gowdie confessed
'ther is threttein persones in ilk Coeven; and ilk on of vs has an
Sprit to wait wpon ws, quhan ve pleas to call wpon him. I remember not
all the Spritis names; bot thair is on called Swein, quhilk waitis
wpon the said Margret Wilson in Aulderne; he is still [always] clothed
in grass-grein. The nixt Sprit is called Rorie, who waitis wpon Bessie
Wilsone, in Aulderne; he is still clothed in yallow. The third Sprit
is called The Roring Lyon, who waitis wpon Issobell Nicoll, in
Lochlow, and he is still clothed in sea-grein. The fowrth Spirit is
called Mak Hector, qwho waitis wpon Jean Martein, dawghter to the said
Margret Wilson; he is a yowng-lyk Devill, clothed still in
grass-grein.... The nam of the fyft Sprit is Robert the Rule, and he
still clothed in sadd-dun, and seimis to be a Comander of the rest of
the Spritis; and he waittis wpon Margret Brodie, in Aulderne. The name
of the saxt Sprit is called Thieff of Hell, Wait wpon Hir Selfe; and
he waitis also on the said Bessie Wilson. The name of the sevinth
Sprit is called The Read Reiver; and he is my owin Spirit, that
waittis on my selfe, and is still clothed in blak. The aucht Spirit is
called Robert the Jackis, still clothed in dune, and seimes to be
aiged. He is ane glaiked gowked Spirit. The nynth Spirit is called
Laing. The tenth Spirit is named Thomas a Fearie, &c.[891] Ther wilbe
many vther Divellis, waiting wpon our Maister Divell; bot he is bigger
and mor awfull than the rest of the Divellis, and they all reverence
him. I will ken them all, on by on, from vtheris, quhan they appeir
lyk a man.'
In a later confession Issobell gave the names more fully. 'The names of owr
Divellis that waited wpon ws, ar thes. First, Robert, the Jakis; Sanderis,
the Read Reaver; Thomas, the Fearie; Swein, the roaring Lion; Thieffe of
Hell, wait wpon hir self; Makhectour; Robert, the Rule; Hendrie Laing; and
Rorie.'[892] In Connecticut in 1662 'Robert Sterne testifieth as followeth:
I saw this woman goodwife Seager in ye woods wth three more women and with
them I saw two black creatures like two Indians but taller. I saw the women
dance round these black creatures and whiles I looked upon them one of the
women G. Greensmith said looke who is yonder and then they ran away up the
hill. I stood still and ye black things came towards mee and then I turned
to come away.'[893]
4. _Transformations into Animals_
The belief that human beings can change themselves, or be changed, into
animals carries with it the corollary that wounds received by a person when
in the semblance of an animal will remain on the body after the return to
human shape. This belief seems to be connected with the worship of
animal-gods or sacred animals, the worshipper being changed into an animal
by being invested with the skin of the creature, by the utterance of
magical words, by the making of magical gestures, the wearing of a magical
object, or the performance of magical ceremonies. The witches of the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries appear to have carried on the tradition
of the pre-Christian cults; and the stories of their transformations, when
viewed in the light of the ancient examples, are capable of the same
explanation. Much confusion, however, has been caused by the religious and
so-called scientific explanations of the contemporary commentators, as
well as by the unfortunate belief of modern writers in the capacity of
women for hysteria. At both periods pseudo-science has prevented the
unbiassed examination of the material.
There are no records extant of the animals held sacred by the early
inhabitants of Great Britain, but it is remarkable that the range of the
witches' transformations was very limited; cats and hares were the usual
animals, occasionally but rarely dogs, mice, crows, rooks, and bees. In
France, where the solemn sacrifice of a goat at the Sabbath points to that
animal being sacred, it is not surprising to find both men and women
witches appearing as goats and sheep. Unless there were some definite
meaning underlying the change of shape, there would be no reason to prevent
the witches from transforming themselves into animals of any species. It
would seem then that the witches, like the adorers of animal gods in
earlier times, attempted to become one with their god or sacred animal by
taking on his form; the change being induced by the same means and being as
real to the witch as to Sigmund the Volsung[894] or the worshipper of
Lycaean Zeus.[895]
In the earlier cults the worshipper, on becoming an animal, changed his
outward shape to the eye of faith alone, though his actions and probably
his voice proclaimed the transformation. The nearest approach to an outward
change was by covering the body with the skin of the animal, or by wearing
a part of the skin or a mask. The witches themselves admitted that they
were masked and veiled, and the evidence of other witnesses goes to prove
the same. Boguet suggests that the disguise was used to hide their
identity, which was possibly the case at times, but it seems more probable,
judging by the evidence, that the masking and veiling were for ritual
purposes.
In Lorraine in 1589 a male witness stated that 'indem wird er eine Hoele,
welche sie nennen die Morelianische Klippe, gewahr, darinnen sechs Weiber
mit Larven umb ein Tisch voll guldernen und silbernen Geschieren herumb
tanzten'.--Bernhardt's Nicolaea said that she had seen in an open field
'mitten am hellen Tage, einen Tantz von Maennern und Weibern, und weil
dieselben auff eine besondere Weise und hinterruecks tantzten, kam es ihr
frembd fuer, stunde derhalben still, und sahe mit allem Fleiss zu da ward
sie gewahr, das etliche in dem Reyhen waren so Geiss und Kuhfuss
hatten'.[896] At North Berwick in 1590 seven score witches 'danced endlong
the Kirk yard. John Fian, missellit [muffled, masked] led the ring.'[897]
The witches whom Boguet examined in 1598 confessed to using masks: 'Les
Sorciers dansent doz cotre doz, pour ne pas estre recogneus; pour la mesme
raison ils se masquent encor' auiourd'huy pour la plus part.--Ils se
masquent pour le iour d'huy, selon que Clauda Paget l'a confesse, & auec
elle plusieurs autres.--Estienne Poicheux rapportoit que partie des femmes,
qu'elle auoit veues au Sabbat, estaient voilees. Et pour cela aussi les
Lombards par leurs loix les appellent _Mascas_.'[898] In 1609 de Lancre
points out that in the Basses-Pyrenees there were two grades of witches:
'Il y en a de deux sortes. Auc[~u]s sont voilez pour doner opinion aux
pauures que ce sont des Princes & grads seigneurs. Les autres sont
decouuerts & tout ouuertemet dacent, & ceux cy ne sont si pres du maistre,
si fauoris ne si employez.'[899] In 1613 Barbe, the wife of Jean-Remy Colin
de Moyemont, said that 'elle a veu dancer les assistans en nombre de sept a
huict personnes, partie desquelles elle ne cognoissoit ad cause des masques
hideux qu'elles auoient de noire.'[900]
Josine Deblicq in Hainault (1616) was asked, 'Que savez vous de la
troisieme danse? R. Elle eut lieu au Rond-Cheneau, sur le chemin de
Nivelles, pres d'une fontaine. Il y avait bien 21 ou 22 femmes, toutes
masquees, chacune avec son amoureux accoutre d'un deguisement bleu, jaune
ou noir.'[901] In 1652 a French witch 'dist qu'elles dansoient les dots
l'une a l'autre et qu'au milieux il y auoit vne feme masquee tenant vne
chandelle'.[902]
It will be seen from the above that the witches were often disguised at the
dance, a fact strongly suggesting that the masking was entirely ritual. As
the witch trials in Great Britain seldom mention, much less describe, the
dance, it follows that the greater number of the cases of masks are found
in France, though a few occur in Scotland, still fewer in England.
The transformation by means of an animal's skin or head is mentioned in the
_Liber Poenitentialis_ of Theodore in 668 (see p. 21). It continued among
the witches, and in 1598 in the Lyons district 'il y a encor des Demons,
qui assistent a ces danses en forme de boucs, ou de moutons. Antoine
Tornier dit, que lors qu'elle dansoit, vn mouton noir la tenoit par la main
auec ses pieds bien haireux, c'est a dire rudes & reuesches'.[903]
In many cases it is very certain that the transformation was ritual and not
actual; that is to say the witches did not attempt to change their actual
forms but called themselves cats, hares, or other animals. In the Aberdeen
trials of 1596-7 the accused are stated to have 'come to the Fish Cross of
this burgh, under the conduct of Sathan, ye all danced about the Fish Cross
and about the Meal market a long space'. Here there is no suggestion of any
change of form, yet in the accusation against Bessie Thom, who was tried
for the same offence, the dittay states that 'there, accompanied with thy
devilish companions and faction, transformed in other likeness, some in
hares, some in cats, and some in other similitudes, ye all danced about the
Fish Cross'.[904] In 1617 in Guernsey Marie Becquet said that 'every time
that she went to the Sabbath, the Devil came to her, and it seemed as
though he transformed her into a female dog'.[905] Again at Alloa in 1658,
Margret Duchall, describing the murder of Cowdan's bairns, said 'after they
war turned all in the liknes of cattis, they went in ouer Jean Lindsayis
zaird Dyk and went to Coudans hous, whair scho declared, that the Dewill
being with tham went up the stair first with margret tailzeor Besse Paton
and elspit blak'. On the other hand, Jonet Blak and Kathren Renny, who were
also present and described the same scene, said nothing about the cat-form,
though they particularize the clothes of the other witches. Jonet Blak
said, 'the diwell, margret tailzeor with ane long rok, and kathren renny
with the short rok and the bony las with the blak pok all went up the stair
togidder'; while Kathren Renny said that 'ther was ane bony las with ane
blak pok, who went befor ower Jean Lindsayis zaird dyk and Margret tailzeor
with hir'.[906] The evidence of Marie Lamont (1662) suggests the same idea
of a ritual, though not an actual, change; 'shee confessed, that shee,
Kettie Scot, and Margrat Holm, cam to Allan Orr's house in the likenesse of
kats, and followed his wif into the chalmer'; and on another occasion 'the
devil turned them in likeness of kats, by shaking his hands above their
heads'.[907] In Northumberland (1673) the same fact appears to underlie the
evidence. Ann Armstrong declared that at a witch meeting Ann Baites 'hath
been severall times in the shape of a catt and a hare, and in the shape of
a greyhound and a bee, letting the divell see how many shapes she could
turn herself into.--They [the witches] stood all upon a bare spott of
ground, and bid this informer sing whilst they danced in severall shapes,
first of a haire, then in their owne, and then in a catt, sometimes in a
mouse, and in severall other shapes.--She see all the said persons
beforemencioned danceing, some in the likenesse of haires, some in the
likenesse of catts, others in the likenesse of bees, and some in their owne
likenesse.'[908]
The method of making the ritual change by means of magical words is
recorded in the Auldearne trials, where Isobel Gowdie, whose evidence was
purely voluntary, gives the actual words both for the change into an animal
and for the reversion into human form. To become a hare:
'I sall goe intill ane haire,
With sorrow, and sych, and meikle caire,
And I sall goe in the Divellis nam,
Ay whill I com hom againe.'
To become a cat or a crow the same verse was used with an alteration of the
second line so as to force a rhyme; instead of 'meikle caire', the words
were 'a blak shot' for a cat, and 'a blak thraw' for a crow or craw. To
revert again to the human form the words were:
'Hare, hare, God send thee care.
I am in an hare's likeness just now,
But I shall be in a woman's likeness even now',
with the same variation of 'a black shot' or 'a black thraw' for a cat or a
crow. The Auldearne witches were also able to turn one another into
animals:
'If we, in the shape of an cat, an crow, an hare, or any other
likeness, &c., go to any of our neighbours houses, being Witches, we
will say, I (or we) conjure thee Go with us (or me). And presently
they become as we are, either cats, hares, crows, &c., and go with us
whither we would. When one of us or more are in the shape of cats, and
meet with any others our neighbours, we will say, Devil speed thee, Go
thou with me. And immediately they will turn in the shape of a cat,
and go with us.'[909]
The very simplicity of the method shows that the transformation was ritual;
the witch announced to her fellow that she herself was an animal, a fact
which the second witch would not have known otherwise; the second witch at
once became a similar animal and went with the first to perform the ritual
acts which were to follow. The witches were in their own estimation and in
the belief of all their comrades, to whom they communicated the fact,
actually animals, though to the uninitiated eye their natural forms
remained unchanged. This is probably the explanation of Marie
d'Aspilcouette's evidence, which de Lancre records in 1609:
'Elle a veu aussi les sorcieres insignes se changer en plusieurs
sortes de bestes, pour faire peur a ceux qu'elles rencontroient: Mais
celles qui se transformoyent ainsi, disoyent qu'elles n'estoyent
veritablement transformees, mais seulement qu'elles sembloyent l'estre
& neantmoins pendant qu'elles sont ainsi en apparences bestes, elles
ne parlent du tout point'.[910]
The best example of transformation by means of a magical object placed on
the person is from Northumberland (1673), where Ann Armstrong stated that
'Anne Forster come with a bridle, and bridled her and ridd upon her
crosse-leggd, till they come to [the] rest of her companions. And when she
light of her back, pulld the bridle of this informer's head, now in the
likenesse of a horse; but, when the bridle was taken of, she stood up in
her owne shape.... This informant was ridden upon by an inchanted bridle by
Michael Aynsly and Margaret his wife, Which inchanted bridle, when they
tooke it of from her head, she stood upp in her owne proper person.... Jane
Baites of Corbridge come in the forme of a gray catt with a bridle hanging
on her foote, and bridled her, and rid upon her in the name of the
devill.'[911] This is again a clear account of the witch herself and her
companions believing in the change of form caused by the magical object in
exactly the same way that the shamans believe in their own transformation
by similar means.
The Devil had naturally the same power as the witches, but in a greater
degree. The evidence of Marie Lamont quoted above shows that he transformed
them into animals by a gesture only. It seems possible that this was also
the case with Isobel Shyrie at Forfar (1661), who was called 'Horse' and
'the Devil's horse'. The name seems to have given rise to the idea that
'she was shod like a mare or a horse'; she was in fact the officer or
messenger who brought her companions to the meetings. She was never seen in
the form of a horse, her transformation being probably effected by the
Devil, in order that she might 'carry' the witches to and from the
meetings; Agnes Spark said that Isobel 'carried her away to Littlemiln,
[and] carried her back again to her own house'.[912]
There is also another method of transformation, which is the simplest. The
witches themselves, like their contemporaries, often believed that the
actual animals, which they saw, were human beings in animal form. Jeannette
de Belloc, aged twenty-four, in the Basses-Pyrenees (1609), described the
Sabbath as 'vne foire celebre de toutes sortes de choses, en laquelle
aucuns se promen[~e]t en leur propre forme, & d'autres sont transformez ne
scayt pourquoy, en animaux. Elle n'a iamais veu aucune d'elles se
trasformer en beste en sa presence, mais seulement certaines bestes courir
par le sabbat.'[913] Helen Guthrie of Forfar (1661) states the case with
even greater simplicity: 'The last summer except one, shee did sie John
Tailzeour somtymes in the shape of a todde, and somtymes in the shape of a
swyn, and that the said Johne Tailzeour in these shapes went wp and doune
among William Millne, miller at Hetherstakes, his cornes for the
destructioune of the same, because the said William hade taken the mylne
ouer his head; and that the diuell cam to her and pointed out Johne
Tailzeour in the forsaid shapes unto her, and told her that that wes Johne
Tailzeour.'[914]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 831: Forbes, ii, p. 33.]
[Footnote 832: _Examination of John Walsh._]
[Footnote 833: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, p. 236.]
[Footnote 834: _Spalding Club Misc._, i, pp. 157-60.]
[Footnote 835: _Alse Gooderidge_, p. 27.]
[Footnote 836: From an unpublished trial in the Justiciary Court at
Edinburgh.]
[Footnote 837: Glanvil, pt. ii, pp. 136, 137, 152.]
[Footnote 838: Sharpe, p. 191.]
[Footnote 839: Forbes, ii, pp. 33.]
[Footnote 840: F. Hutchinson, _Hist. Essay_, p. 77.]
[Footnote 841: Giffard, p. 18.]
[Footnote 842: _Witches at Chelmsford_, pp. 24-32; Philobiblon Soc., viii.]
[Footnote 843: _Rehearsall_, par. 2-5.]
[Footnote 844: Also called Tissey. Compare the name of the magic cat given
to Frances More by Goodwife Weed, p. 219.]
[Footnote 845: In Ales Hunt's own confession (q. v.) the animals in
question are called _colts_. I would suggest that this is _cotes_, the
well-known provincialism for _cats_; but the recorder understood the word
as _colts_ and further improved it into _horses_.]
[Footnote 846: _Witches taken at St. Oses_, A 3, A 5, C 3 and 4, B 2, B 5
and C 1, B 3.]
[Footnote 847: Giffard, pp. 19, 27, 39.]
[Footnote 848: Potts, B 3.]
[Footnote 849: Fairfax, pp. 32, 33, 34, 79, 82.]
[Footnote 850: _Wonderfull Discouerie of Elisabeth Sawyer._]
[Footnote 851: Whitaker, p. 216.]
[Footnote 852: Howell, iv, 834 et seq.]
[Footnote 853: Davenport, pp. 1-12.]
[Footnote 854: Gibbons, p. 113.]
[Footnote 855: Gerish, _The Divel's Delusions_, p. 12.]
[Footnote 856: Glanvil, pt. ii, pp. 151, 157.]
[Footnote 857: Petto, p. 18.]
[Footnote 858: De Lancre, _L'Incredulite_, pp. 801, 803.]
[Footnote 859: La Martiniere, pp. 42-3 (ed. 1671).]
[Footnote 860: Imp = A slip, sapling, scion; hence applied to persons with
the meaning child, lad, boy.]
[Footnote 861: _Lawes against Witches_, p 7.]
[Footnote 862: Howell, iv, 855.]
[Footnote 863: Davenport, p. 12.]
[Footnote 864: Id., p. 1.]
[Footnote 865: _Witches at Chelmsford_, pp. 20, 29.]
[Footnote 866: _Examination of John Walsh._ His master was Sir Robert
Draiton.]
[Footnote 867: Giffard, p. C., see _Percy Soc._, viii.]
[Footnote 868: De Lancre, _L'Incredulite_, p. 803.]
[Footnote 869: Howell, iv, 834, 836.]
[Footnote 870: Davenport, p. 5.]
[Footnote 871: _Witches at Chelmsford_, p. 24. Philobiblon Soc., viii.]
[Footnote 872: _Witches taken at St. Oses_, p. C 4.]
[Footnote 873: _Alse Gooderidge_, pp. 26, 27.]
[Footnote 874: Howell, iv, 845, 853, 856.]
[Footnote 875: _Moore Rental_, Chetham Society, xii, p. 59.]
[Footnote 876: Scheffer, quoting Tornaeus.]
[Footnote 877: Davies, p. 231. For a similar practice in modern England,
see _Transactions of the Devonshire Association_, vi (1874), p. 201.]
[Footnote 878: _Witches at Chelmsford_, p. 34. Philobiblon Soc., viii.]
[Footnote 879: _Spalding Club Misc._, i, p. 129.]
[Footnote 880: Potts, H 3.]
[Footnote 881: Goodcole, _Wonderfull Discoverie_, p. C.]
[Footnote 882: J. Hutchinson, ii, p. 31; Howell, vi, 659.]
[Footnote 883: 'Nos sorciers tiennent la plus-part de ces Demons pour leurs
Dieux,' De Lancre, _Tableau_, p. 23.]
[Footnote 884: Moret, pp. 247 seq.]
[Footnote 885: Camden Soc., _Dame Alice Kyteler_, p. 3]
[Footnote 886: Boguet, pp. 69, 132.]
[Footnote 887: De Lancre, _Tableau_, pp. 67, 197.]
[Footnote 888: _Wonderfull Discoverie of Margaret and Phillip Flower_, E
3.]
[Footnote 889: Whitaker, p. 216.]
[Footnote 890: Gerish, _The Divel's Delusions_, p. 12.]
[Footnote 891: Pitcairn notes: 'Issobell, as usual, appears to have been
stopped short here by her interrogators, when she touched on such matters',
i.e. the fairies.]
[Footnote 892: Pitcairn, iii, pp. 606, 614.]
[Footnote 893: Taylor, p. 81.]
[Footnote 894: _Volsunga Saga_, Bks. I, II; Wm. Morris, _Collected Works_,
xii, pp. 32. 77.]
[Footnote 895: Pausanias, viii, 2, 3, 6, ed. Frazer. Cp. also the animal
names applied to priests and priestesses, e.g. the King-bees of Ephesus;
the Bee-priestesses of Demeter, of Delphi, of Proserpine, and of the Great
Mother; the Doves of Dodona; the Bears in the sacred dance of Artemis; the
Bulls at the feast of Poseidon at Ephesus; the Wolves at the Lupercalia,
&c.]
[Footnote 896: Remigius, pt. i, pp. 65, 67.]
[Footnote 897: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, pp. 245-6.]
[Footnote 898: Boguet, pp. 120, 132-3.]
[Footnote 899: De Lancre, _Tableau_, p. 129.]
[Footnote 900: Fournier, p. 16.]
[Footnote 901: Monoyer, p. 30.]
[Footnote 902: Van Elven, v, p. 215.]
[Footnote 903: Boguet, p. 132.]
[Footnote 904: _Spalding Club Misc._, i, pp. 97, 114-15, 165; Bessie Thom,
p. 167. Spelling modernized.]
[Footnote 905: Goldsmid, p. 10.]
[Footnote 906: _Scottish Antiquary_, ix, pp. 50-2.]
[Footnote 907: Sharpe, pp. 132, 134.]
[Footnote 908: _Surtees Soc._, xl, pp. 191, 193, 194.]
[Footnote 909: Pitcairn, iii, pp. 607, 608, 611. Spelling modernized.]
[Footnote 910: De Lancre, _Tableau_, p. 128.]