DEMONS AND FAMILIARS
One of the most authoritative of the older writers upon Witchcraft,
Francesco-Maria Guazzo, a member of the Congregation of S. Ambrose ad
Nemus,[1] in his encyclopædic _Compendium Maleficarum_, first published
at Milan, 1608, has drawn up under eleven heads those articles in which a
solemn and complete profession of Witchcraft was then held to consist:
_First_: The candidates have to conclude with the Devil, or some other
Wizard or Magician acting in the Devil’s stead, an express compact by
which, in the presence of witnesses they devote themselves to the service
of evil, he giving them in exchange his pledge for riches, luxury, and
such things as they desire.
_Secondly_: They abjure the Catholic Faith, explicitly withdraw from
their obedience to God, renounce Christ and in a particular manner the
Patronage and Protection of Our Lady, curse all Saints, and forswear
the Sacraments. In Guernsey, in 1617, Isabel Becquet went to Rocquaine
Castle, “the usual place where the Devil kept his Sabbath: no sooner had
she arrived there than the Devil came to her in the form of a dog, with
two great horns sticking up: and with one of his paws (which seemed to
her like hands) took her by the hand: and calling her by her name told
her that she was welcome: then immediately the Devil made her kneel down:
while he himself stood up on his hind legs; he then made her express
detestation of the Eternal in these words: _I renounce God the Father,
God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost_; and then caused her to worship and
invoke himself.”[2] De Lancre tells us that Jeannette d’Abadie, a lass
of sixteen, confessed that she was made to “renounce & deny her Creator,
the Holy Virgin, the Saints, Baptism, father, mother, relations, Heaven,
earth, & all that the world contains.”[3] In a very full confession made
by Louis Gaufridi on the second of April, 1611, to two Capuchins, Father
Ange and Father Antoine, he revealed the formula of his abjuration of
the Catholic faith. It ran thus: “I, Louis Gaufridi, renounce all good,
both spiritual as well as temporal, which may be bestowed upon me by
God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, all the Saints of Heaven, particularly my
Patron S. John-Baptist, as also S. Peter, S. Paul, and S. Francis, and
I give myself body and soul to Lucifer, before whom I stand, together
with every good that I may ever possess (save always the benefit of the
sacraments touching those who receive them). And according to the tenour
of these terms have I signed and sealed.”[4] Madeleine de la Palud, one
of his victims, used a longer and more detailed declaration in which
the following hideous blasphemies occurred: “With all my heart and most
unfeignedly and with all my will most deliberately do I wholly renounce
God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; the most Holy Mother of God; all the
Angels and especially my Guardian Angel, the Passion of Our Lord Jesus
Christ, His Precious Blood and the merits thereof, my lot in Paradise,
all the good inspirations which God may give me in the future, all
prayers which are made or may be made for me.”[5]
_Thirdly_: They cast away with contempt the most Holy Rosary, delivered
by Our Lady to S. Dominic;[6] the Cord of S. Francis; the cincture of S.
Augustine; the Carmelite scapular bestowed upon S. Simon Stock; they cast
upon the ground and trample under their feet in the mire the Cross, Holy
Medals, _Agnus Dei_,[7] should they possess such or carry them upon their
persons. S. Francis girded himself with a rough rope in memory of the
bonds wherewith Christ was bound during His Passion, and a white girdle
with three knots has since formed part of the Franciscan habit. Sixtus
IV, by his Bull _Exsupernæ dispositionis_, erected the Archconfraternity
of the Cord of S. Francis in the basilica of the Sacro Convento at
Assisi, enriching it with many Indulgences, favours which have been
confirmed by pontiff after pontiff. Archconfraternities are erected not
only in Franciscan but in many other churches and aggregated to the
centre at Assisi. The Archconfraternity of Our Lady of Consolation, or
of the Black Leathern Belt of S. Monica, S. Augustine and S. Nicolas
of Tolentino, took its rise from a vision of S. Monica, who received
a black leathern belt from Our Lady. S. Augustine, S. Ambrose, and
S. Simplicianus all wore such a girdle, which forms a distinctive
feature of the dress of Augustinian Eremites. After the canonization
of S. Nicolas of Tolentino it came into general use as an article of
devotion, and Eugenius IV in 1439 erected the above Archconfraternity.
A Bull of Gregory XIII _Ad ea_ (15 July, 1575) confirmed this and added
various privileges and Indulgences. The Archconfraternity is erected in
Augustinian sanctuaries, from the General of which Order leave must be
obtained for its extension to other churches.
[Illustration: PLATE III
COMPENDIVM MALEFICARVM. Francesco-Maria Guazzo. Title-page of Second
Edition
[_face p. 82_]
_Fourthly_: All witches vow obedience and subjection into the hands
of the Devil; they pay him homage and vassalage (often by obscene
ceremonies), and lay their hands upon a large black book which is
presented to them. They bind themselves by blasphemous oaths never
to return to the true faith, to observe no divine precept, to do no
good work, but to obey the Demon only and to attend without fail the
nightly conventicles. They pledge themselves to frequent the midnight
assemblies.[8] These conventicles or covens[9] (from _conuentus_) were
bands or companies of witches, composed of men and women, apparently
under the discipline of an officer, all of whom for convenience’ sake
belonged to the same district. Those who belonged to a coven were, it
seems from the evidence at trials, bound to attend the weekly Esbat.
The arrest of one member of a coven generally led to the implication
of the rest. Cotton Mather remarks, “The witches are organized like
Congregational Churches.”
_Fifthly_: The witches promise to strive with all their power and to
use every inducement and endeavour to draw other men and women to their
detestable practices and the worship of Satan.
The witches were imbued with the missionary spirit, which made them
doubly damnable in the eyes of the divines and doubly guilty in the eyes
of the law. So in the case of Janet Breadheid of Auldearne, we find that
her husband “enticed her into that craft.”[10] A girl named Bellot, of
Madame Bourignon’s academy, confessed that her mother had taken her to
the Sabbat when she was quite a child. Another girl alleged that all
worshippers of the Devil “are constrained to offer him their Children.”
Elizabeth Francis of Chelmsford, a witch tried in 1566, was only about
twelve years old when her grandmother first taught her the art of
sorcery.[11] The famous Pendle beldame, Elizabeth Demdike “brought vp her
owne Children, instructed her Graundchildren, and tooke great care and
paines to bring them to be Witches.”[12] At Salem, George Burroughs, a
minister, was accused by a large number of women as “the person who had
Seduc’d and Compell’d them into the snares of Witchcraft.”
_Sixthly_: The Devil administers to witches a kind of sacrilegious
baptism, and after abjuring their Godfathers and Godmothers of Christian
Baptism and Confirmation they have assigned to them new sponsors—as it
were—whose charge it is to instruct them in sorcery: they drop their
former name and exchange it for another, generally a scurrilous and
grotesque nickname.
In 1609 Jeanette d’Abadie, a witch of the Basses-Pyrénées, confessed
“that she often saw children baptized at the Sabbat, and these she
informed us were the offspring of sorcerers and not of other persons, but
of witches who are accustomed to have their sons and daughters baptized
at the Sabbat rather than at the Font.”[13] June 20, 1614, at Orleans,
Silvain Nevillon amongst other crimes acknowledged that he had frequented
assemblies of witches, and “that they baptize babies at the Sabbat with
Chrism.... Then they anoint the child’s head therewith muttering certain
Latin phrases.”[14] Gentien le Clerc, who was tried at the same time,
“said that his mother, as he had been told, presented him at the Sabbat
when he was but three years old, to a monstrous goat, whom they called
l’Aspic. He said that he was baptized at the Sabbat, at Carrior d’Olivet,
with fourteen or fifteen other children....”[15]
Among the confessions made by Louis Gaufridi at Aix in March, 1611, were:
“I confess that baptism is administered at the Sabbat, and that every
sorcerer, devoting himself to the Devil, binds himself by a particular
vow that he will have all his children baptized at the Sabbat, if this
may by any possible means be effected. Every child who is thus baptized
at the Sabbat receives a name, wholly differing from his own name. I
confess that at this baptism water, sulphur, and salt are employed: the
sulphur renders the recipient the Devil’s slave whilst salt confirms his
baptism in the Devil’s service. I confess that the form and intention are
to baptize in the name of Lucifer, Belzebuth and other demons making the
sign of the cross beginning backwards and then tracing from the feet and
ending at the head.”[16]
A number of Swedish witches (1669) were baptized: “they added, that he
caused them to be baptized too by such Priests as he had there, and made
them confirm their Baptism with dreadful Oaths and Imprecations.”[17]
The giving of a new name seems to have been very general. Thus in May,
1569, at S. Andrews “a notabill sorceres callit Nicniven was condemnit to
the death and burnt.” Her Christian name is not given merely her witch’s
name bestowed by the demon. In the famous Fian case it was stated that
when at the meeting in North Berwick kirk Robert Grierson was named great
confusion ensued for the witches and warlocks “all ran hirdie-girdie,
and were angry, for it was promised that he should be called Robert
the Comptroller, for the expriming of his name.”[18] Euphemia McCalyan
of the same coven was called Cane, and Barbara Napier Naip. Isabel
Goudie of Auldearne (1662) stated that many witches known to her had
been baptized in their own blood by such names as “Able-and-Stout,”
“Over-the-dike-with-it,” “Raise-the-wind,” “Pickle-nearest-the-wind,”
“Batter-them-down-Maggy,” “Blow-Kate,” and similar japeries.
_Seventhly_: The witches cut off a piece of their own garments, and as a
token of homage tender it to the Devil, who takes it away and keeps it.
_Eighthly_: The Devil draws on the ground a circle wherein stand the
Novices, Wizards, and Witches, and there they confirm by oath all their
aforesaid promises. This has a mystical signification. “They take this
oath to the Demon standing in a circle described upon the ground,
perchance because a circle is the Symbol of Divinity, & the earth God’s
footstool and thus he assuredly wishes them to believe that he is the
lord of Heaven and earth.”[19]
_Ninthly_: The sorcerers request the Devil to strike them out of the book
of Christ, and to inscribe them in his own. Then is solemnly brought
forward a large black book, the same as that on which they laid their
hands when they did their first homage, and they are inscribed in this
by the Devil’s claw.
These books or rolls were kept with great secrecy by the chief officer
of the coven or even the Grand Master of a district. They would have
been guarded as something as precious as life itself, seeing that they
contained the damning evidence of a full list of the witches of a
province or county, and in addition thereto seems to have been added a
number of magic formulæ, spells, charms, and probably, from time to time,
a record of the doings of the various witches. The signing of such a book
is continually referred to in the New England trials. So when Deliverance
Hobbs had made a clean breast of her sorceries, “She now testifi’d, that
this _Bishop_ [Bridget Bishop, condemned and executed as a long-continued
witch] tempted her to sign the _Book_ again, and to deny what she had
confess’d.” The enemies of the notorious Matthew Hopkins made great
capital out of the story that by some sleight of sorcery he had got
hold of one of these Devil’s memorandum-books, whence he copied a list
of witches, and this it was that enabled him to be so infallible in his
scent. The Witch-Finder General was hard put to it to defend himself from
the accusation, and becomes quite pitiful in his whining asseverations of
innocence. There is a somewhat vague story, no dates being given, that
a Devil’s book was carried off by Mr. Williamson of Cardrona (Peebles),
who filched it from the witches whilst they were dancing on Minchmoor.
But the whole coven at once gave chase, and he was glad to abandon it and
escape alive.
Sometimes the catalogue of witches was inscribed on a separate parchment,
and the book only used to write down charms and spells. Such a volume was
the Red Book of Appin known to have actually been in existence a hundred
years ago. Tradition said it was stolen from the Devil by a trick. It
was in manuscript, and contained a large number of magic runes and
incantations for the cure of cattle diseases, the increase of flocks, the
fertility of fields. This document, which must be of immense importance
and interest, when last heard of was (I believe) in the possession of the
now-extinct Stewarts of Invernahyle. This strange volume, so the story
ran, conferred dark powers on the owner, who knew what inquiry would be
made ere the question was poised; and the tome was so confected with
occult arts that he who read it must wear a circlet of iron around his
brow as he turned those mystic pages.
Another volume, of which mention is made—one that is often confused[20]
with, but should be distinguished from, these two—is what we may term
the Devil’s Missal. Probably this had its origin far back in the midst
of the centuries among the earliest heretics who passed down their
evil traditions to their followers, the Albigenses and the Waldenses
or Vaudois. This is referred to by the erudite De Lancre, who in his
detailed account of the Black Mass as performed in the region of the
Basses-Pyrénées (1609) writes: “Some kind of altar was erected upon the
pillars of infernal design, and hereon, without reciting the _Confiteor_
or _Alleluya_, turning over the leaves of a certain book which he held,
he began to mumble certain phrases of Holy Mass.”[21] Silvain Nevillon
(Orleans, 1614) confessed that “the Sabbat was held in a house.... He
saw there a tall dark man opposite to the one who was in a corner of
the ingle, and this man was perusing a book, whose leaves seemed black
& crimson, & he kept muttering between his teeth although what he said
could not be heard, and presently he elevated a black host and then
a chalice of some cracked pewter, all foul and filthy.”[22] Gentien
le Clerc, who was also accused, acknowledged that at these infernal
assemblies “Mass was said, and the Devil was celebrant. He was vested
in a chasuble upon which was a broken cross. He turned his back to the
altar when he was about to elevate the Host and the Chalice, which were
both black. He read in a mumbling tone from a book, the cover of which
was soft and hairy like a wolf’s skin. Some leaves were white and red,
others black.”[23] Madeleine Bavent, who was the chief figure in the
trials at Louviers (1647), acknowledged: “Mass was read from the book
of blasphemies, which contained the canon. This same volume was used in
processions. It was full of the most hideous curses against the Holy
Trinity, the Holy Sacrament of the Altar, the other Sacraments and
ceremonies of the Church. It was written in a language completely unknown
to me.”[24] Possibly this blasphemous volume is the same as that which
Satanists to-day use when performing their abominable rites.
_Tenthly_: The witches promise the Devil sacrifices and offerings at
stated times; once a fortnight, or at least once a month, the murder of
some child, or some mortal poisoning, and every week to plague mankind
with evils and mischiefs, hailstorms, tempest, fires, cattle-plagues and
the like.
The _Liber Pœnitentialis_ of S. Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury
668-690, the earliest ecclesiastical law of England, has clauses
condemning those who invoke fiends, and so cause the weather to change
“si quis emissor tempestatis fuerit.” In the _Capitaluria_ of Charlemagne
(died at Aachen, 28 January, 814), the punishment of death is declared
against those who by evoking the demon, trouble the atmosphere, excite
tempests, destroy the fruits of the earth, dry up the milk of cows, and
torment their fellow-creatures with diseases or any other misfortune.
All persons found guilty of employing such arts were to be executed
immediately upon conviction. Innocent VIII in his celebrated Bull,
_Summis desiderantes affectibus_, 5 December, 1484, charges sorcerers
in detail with precisely the same foul practices. The most celebrated
occasion when witches raised a storm was that which played so important
a part in the trial of Dr. Fian and his coven, 1590-1, when the witches,
in order to drown King James and Queen Anne on their voyage from
Denmark, “tooke a Cat and christened it,” and after they had bound a
dismembered corpse to the animal “in the night following the said Cat
was convayed into the middest of the sea by all these witches, sayling
in their riddles or cives, ... this doone, then did arise such a tempest
in the sea, as a greater hath not bene seene.”[25] The bewitching of
cattle is alleged from the earliest time, and at Dornoch in Sutherland
as late as 1722, an old hag was burned for having cast spells upon the
pigs and sheep of her neighbours, the sentence being pronounced by the
sheriff-depute, Captain David Ross of Little Dean. This was the last
execution of a witch in Scotland.
With regard to the sacrifice of children there is a catena of ample
evidence. Reginald Scot[26] writes in 1584: “This must be an infallible
rule, that euerie fortnight, or at the least euerie month, each witch
must kill one child at the least for hir part.” When it was dangerous or
impossible openly to murder an infant the life would be taken by poison,
and in 1645 Mary Johnson, a witch of Wyvenhoe, Essex, was tried for
poisoning two children, no doubt as an act of sorcery.[27] It is unknown
how many children Gilles de Rais devoted to death in his impious orgies.
More than two hundred corpses were found in the latrines of Tiffauges,
Machecoul, Champtocé. It was in 1666 that Louis XIV was first informed of
the abominations which were vermiculating his capital “des sacrilèges,
des profanations, des messes impies, des sacrifices de jeunes enfants.”
Night after night in the rue Beauregard at the house of the mysterious
Catherine la Voisin the abbé Guibourg was wont to kill young children for
his hideous ritual, either by strangulation or more often by piercing
their throats with a sharp dagger and letting the hot blood stream into
the chalice as he cried: “Astaroth, Asmodée, je vous conjure d’accepter
le sacrifice que je vous présente!” (Astaroth! Asmodeus! Receive, I
beseech you, this sacrifice I offer unto you!) A priest named Tournet
also said Satanic Masses at which children were immolated; in fact the
practice was so common that la Chaufrein, a mistress of Guibourg, would
supply a child for a crown[28] piece.
_Eleventhly_: The Demon imprints upon the Witches some mark.... When
this has all been performed in accordance with the instructions of those
Masters who have initiated the Novice, the latter bind themselves by
fearful oaths never to worship the Blessed Sacrament; to heap curses on
all Saints and especially to abjure our Lady Immaculate; to trample under
foot and spit upon all holy images, the Cross and Relics of Saints; never
to use the Sacraments or Sacramentals unless with some magical end in
view; never to make a good confession to the priest, but always to keep
hidden their commerce with hell. In return the Demon promises that he
will at all times afford them prompt assistance; that he will accomplish
all their desires in this world and make them eternally happy after their
death. This solemn profession having been publicly made each novice has
assigned to him a several demon who is called _Magistellus_ (a familiar).
This familiar can assume either a male or a female shape; sometimes he
appears as a full-grown man, sometimes as a satyr; and if it is a woman
who has been received as a witch he generally assumes the form of a rank
buck-goat.
It is obvious that there is no question here of animal familiars, but
rather of evil intelligences who were, it is believed, able to assume
a body of flesh. The whole question is, perhaps, one of the most dark
and difficult connected with Witchcraft and magic, and the details of
these hideous connexions are such—for as the Saints attain to the purity
of angels, so, on the other hand, will the bond slaves of Satan defile
themselves with every kind of lewdness—that many writers have with an
undue diffidence and modesty dismissed the subject far too summarily
for the satisfaction of the serious inquirer. In the first place, we
may freely allow that many of these lubricities are to be ascribed to
hysteria and hallucinations, to nightmare and the imaginings of disease,
but when all deductions have been made—when we admit that in many cases
the incubus or succubus can but have been a human being, some agent of
the Grand Master of the district,—none the less enough remains from the
records of the trials to convince an unprejudiced mind that there was
a considerable substratum of fact in the confessions of the accused.
As Canon Ribet has said in his encyclopædic _La Mystique Divine_, a
work warmly approved by the great intellect of Leo XIII: “After what
we have learned from records and personal confessions we can scarcely
entertain any more doubts, and it is our plain duty to oppose, even if
it be but by a simple affirmation on our part, those numerous writers
who, either through presumption or rashness, treat these horrors as idle
talk or mere hallucination.”[29] Bizouard also in his authoritative
_Rapports de l’homme avec le démon_ writes of the incubus and succubus:
“These relations, far from being untrue, bear the strongest marks of
authenticity which can be given them by official proceedings regulated
and approved with all the caution and judgement brought to bear upon them
by enlightened and conscientious magistrates who, throughout all ages,
have been in a position to test plain facts.”[30]
It seems to me that if unshaken evidence means anything at all, if
the authority of the ablest and acutest intellects of all ages in all
countries is not to count for merest vapourings and fairy fantasies, the
possibility—I do not, thank God, say the frequency—of these demoniacal
connexions is not to be denied. Of course the mind already resolved
that such things cannot be is inconvincible even by demonstration,
and one can only fall back upon the sentence of S. Augustine: “Hanc
assidue immunditiam et tentare et efficere, plures talesque asseuerant,
ut hoc negare impudentiæ uideatur.”[31] In which place the holy doctor
explicitly declares: “Seeing it is so general a report, and so many
aver it either from their own experience or from others, that are of
indubitable honesty and credit, that the sylvans and fawns, commonly
called incubi, have often injured women, desiring and acting carnally
with them: and that certain devils whom the Gauls call _Duses_, do
continually practise this uncleanness, and tempt others to it, which is
affirmed by such persons, and with such confidence that it were impudence
to deny it.”
The learned William of Paris, confessor of Philip le Bel, lays down:
“That there exist such beings as are commonly called incubi or succubi
and that they indulge their burning lusts, and that children, as it
is freely acknowledged, can be born from them, is attested by the
unimpeachable and unshaken witness of many men and women who have been
filled with foul imaginings by them, and endured their lecherous assaults
and lewdness.”[32]
S. Thomas[33] and S. Bonaventura,[34] also, speak quite plainly on the
subject.
Francisco Suarez, the famous Jesuit theologian, writes with caution
but with directness: “This is the teaching on this point of S. Thomas,
who is generally followed by all other theologians.... The reason for
their opinion is this: Such an action considered in its entirety by
no means exceeds the natural powers of the demon, whilst the exercise
of such powers is wholly in accordance with the malice of the demon,
and it may well be permitted by God, owing to the sins of some men.
Therefore this teaching cannot be denied without many reservations and
exceptions. Wherefore S. Augustine has truly said, that inasmuch as
this doctrine of incubi and succubi is established by the opinion of
many who are experienced and learned, it were sheer impudence to deny
it.”[35] The Salmanticenses—that is to say, the authors of the courses
of Scholastic philosophy and theology, and of Moral theology, published
by the lecturers of the theological college of the Discalced Carmelites
at Salamanca—in their weighty _Theologia Moralis_[36] state: “Some deny
this, believing it impossible that demons should perform the carnal
act with human beings,” but they affirm, “None the less the opposite
opinion is most certain and must be followed.”[37] Charles René Billuart,
the celebrated Dominican, in his _Tractatus de Angelis_ expressly
declares: “The same evil spirit may serve as a succubus to a man, and
as an incubus to a woman.”[38] One of the most learned—if not the most
learned—of the popes, Benedict XIV, in his erudite work _De Seruorum
Dei Beatificatione_, treats this whole question at considerable length
with amplest detail and solid references, Liber IV, Pars i. c. 3.[39]
Commenting upon the passage “The sons of God went unto the daughters of
men” (Genesis vi. 4), the pontiff writes: “This passage has reference
to those Demons who are known as incubi and succubi.... It is true that
whilst nearly all authors admit the fact, some writers deny that there
can be offspring.... On the other hand, several writers assert that
connexion of this kind is possible and that children may be born from
it, nay, indeed, they tell us that this has taken place, although it
were done in some new and mysterious way which is ordinarily unknown to
man.”[40]
S. Alphonsus Liguori in his _Praxis confessariorum_, VII, n. 111, writes:
“Some deny that there are evil spirits, incubi and succubi; but writers
of authority for the most part assert that such is the case.”[41]
In his _Theologia Moralis_ he speaks quite precisely when defining the
technical nature of the sin witches commit in commerce with incubi.[42]
[43] This opinion is also that of Martino Bonacina,[44] and of Vincenzo
Filliucci, S.J.[45] “Busembaum has excellently observed that carnal
sins with an evil spirit fall under the head of the technical term
_bestialitas_.”[46] This is also the conclusion of Thomas Tamburini,
S.J. (1591-1675); Benjamin Elbel, O.F.M. (1690-1756);[47] Cardinal
Cajetan, O.P. (1469-1534) “the lamp of the Church”; Juan Azor, S.J.
(1535-1603); “in wisdom, in depth of learning and in gravity of judgement
taking deservedly high rank among theologians” (Gury); and many other
authorities.[48] What a penitent should say in confession is considered
by Monsignor Craisson, sometime Rector of the Grand Seminary of Valence
and Vicar-General of the diocese, in his Tractate _De Rebus Uenereis ad
usum Confessariorum_.[49] Jean-Baptiste Bouvier (1783-1854) the famous
bishop of Le Mans, in his _Dissertatio in Sextum Decalogi Præceptum_[50]
(p. 78) writes: “All theologians speak of ... evil spirits who appear in
the shape of a man, a woman, or even some animal. This is either a real
and actual presence, or the effect of imagination. They decide that this
sin ... incurs particular guilt which must be specifically confessed,
to wit an evil superstition whereof the essence is a compact with the
Devil. In this sin, therefore, we have two distinct kinds of malice, one
an offence against chastity; the other against our holy faith.”[51] Dom
Dominic Schram,[52] O.S.B., in his _Institutiones Theologiæ Mysticæ_
poses the following: “The inquiry is made whether a demon ... may thus
attack a man or woman, whose obsession would be suffered if the subject
were wholly bent upon obtaining perfection and walking the highest paths
of contemplation. Here we must distinguish the true and the false. It is
certain that—whatever doubters may say—there exist such demons, incubi
and succubi: and S. Augustine asserts (_The City of God_, Book XV,
chapter 23) that it is most rash to advance the contrary.... S. Thomas,
and most other theologians maintain this too. Wherefore the men or women
who suffer these impudicities are sinners who either invite demons ...
or who freely consent to demons when the evil spirits tempt them to
commit such abominations. That these and other abandoned wretches may be
violently assaulted by the demon we cannot doubt ... and I myself have
known several persons who although they were greatly troubled on account
of their crimes, and utterly loathed this foul intercourse with the
demon, were nevertheless compelled sorely against their will to endure
these assaults of Satan.”[53]
It will be seen that great Saints and scholars and all moral theologians
of importance affirm the possibility of commerce with incarnate evil
intelligences. The demonologists also range themselves in a solid phalanx
of assent. Hermann Thyraus, S.J.,[54] in his _De Spirituum apparitione_
says: “It is so rash and inept to deny these (things) that so to adopt
this attitude you must needs reject and spurn the most weighty and
considered judgements of most holy and authoritative writers, nay, you
must wage war upon man’s sense and consciousness, whilst at the same
time you expose your ignorance of the power of the Devil and the empery
evil spirits may obtain over man.”[55] Delrio, in his _Disquisitiones
Magicæ_, is even more emphatic: “So many sound authors and divines
have upheld this belief that to differ from them is mere obstinacy and
foolhardiness; for the Fathers, theologians, and all the wisest writers
on philosophy agree upon this matter, the truth of which is furthermore
proved by the experience of all ages and peoples.”[56] The erudite
Sprenger in the _Malleus Maleficarum_ has much the same.[57] John Nider,
O.P. (1380-1438) in his _Formicarius_, which may be described as a
treatise on the theological, philosophical, and social problems of his
day, with no small acumen remarks: “The reason why evil spirits appear as
incubi and succubi would seem to be that ... they inflict a double hurt
on man, both in his soul and body, and it is a supreme joy to devils thus
to injure humankind.”[58] Paul Grilland in his _De Sortilegio_ (Lyons,
1533) writes: “A demon assumes the form of the succubus.... This is the
explicit teaching of the theologians.”[59]
“It has often been known by most certain and actual experience that
women in spite of their resistance have been overpowered by demons.”
Such are the words of the famous Alfonso de Castro, O.F.M.,[60] whose
authoritative pronouncements upon Scripture carried such weight at the
Council of Trent, and who was Archbishop-elect of Compostella when he
died. Pierre Binsfeld, _De confessione maleficarum_, sums up: “This is a
most solemn and undoubted fact not only proved by actual experience, but
also by the opinion of all the ages, whatever some few doctors and legal
writers may suppose.”[61]
Gaspar Schott, S.J. (1608-66), physicist, doctor, and divine, “one
of the most learned men of his day, his simple life and deep piety
making him an object of veneration to the Protestants as well as to the
Catholics of Augsburg,” where his declining years were spent, lays down:
“So many writers of such high authority maintain this opinion, that it
were impossible to reject it.”[62] Bodin, de Lancre, Boguet, Görres,
Bizouard,[63] Gougenot des Mousseaux,[64] insist upon the same sad facts.
And above all sounds the solemn thunder of the Bull of Innocent VIII
announcing in no ambiguous phrase: “It has indeed come to our knowledge
and deeply grieved are we to hear it, that many persons of both sexes,
utterly forgetful of their souls’ salvation and straying far from the
Catholic Faith, have (had commerce) with evil spirits, both incubi and
succubi.”[65]
I have quoted many and great names, men of science, men of learning,
men of authority, men to whom the world yet looks up with admiration,
nay, with reverence and love, inasmuch as to-day it is difficult,
wellnigh inconceivable in most cases, for the modern mind to credit the
possibility of these dark deeds of devilry, these foul lusts of incubi
and succubi.[66] They seem to be some sick and loathly fantasy of dim
mediæval days shrieked out on the rack by a poor wretch crazed with agony
and fear, and written down in long-forgotten tomes by fanatics credulous
to childishness and more ignorant than savages. “Even if such horrors
ever could have taken place in the dark ages,”—those vague Dark Ages!—men
say, “they would never be permitted now.” And he who knows, the priest
sitting in the grated confessional, in whose ears are poured for shriving
the filth and folly of the world, sighs to himself, “Would God that in
truth it were so!” But the sceptics are happier in their singleness
and their simplicity, happy that they do not, will not, realize the
monstrous things that lie only just beneath the surface of our cracking
civilization.
It may not impertinently be inquired how demons or evil intelligences,
since they are pure spiritual beings, can not only assume human flesh
but perform the peculiarly carnal act of coition. Sinistrari, following
the opinion of Guazzo, says that either the evil intelligence is able to
animate the corpse of some human being, male or female, as the case may
be, or that, from the mixture of other materials he shapes for himself
a body endowed with motion, by means of which he is united to the human
being: “ex mixtione aliarum materiarum effingit sibi corpus, quod mouet,
et mediante quo homini unitur.”[67] In the first instance, advantage
might be taken, no doubt, of a person in a mediumistic trance or hypnotic
sleep. But the second explanation seems by far the more probable. Can
we not look to the phenomena observed in connexion with ectoplasm as
an adequate explanation of this? It must fairly be admitted that this
explanation is certainly borne out by the phenomena of the materializing
séance where physical forms which may be touched and handled are built
up and disintegrated again in a few moments of time. Miss Scatcherd,
in a symposium, _Survival_,[68] gives certain of her own experiences
that go far to prove the partial re-materialization of the dead by the
utilization of the material substance and ectoplasmic emanations of the
living. And if disembodied spirits can upon occasion, however rare, thus
materialize, why not evil intelligences whose efforts at corporeality are
urged and aided by the longing thoughts and concentrated will power of
those who eagerly seek them?
This explanation is further rendered the more probable by the recorded
fact that the incubus can assume the shape of some person whose embraces
the witch may desire.[69] Brignoli, in his _Alexicacon_, relates that
when he was at Bergamo in 1650, a young man, twenty-two years of age,
sought him out and made a long and ample confession. This youth avowed
that some months before, when he was in bed, the chamber door opened and
a maiden, Teresa, whom he loved, stealthily entered the room. To his
surprise she informed him that she had been driven from home and had
taken refuge with him. Although he more than suspected some delusion,
after a short while he consented to her solicitations and passed a night
of unbounded indulgence in her arms. Before dawn, however, the visitant
revealed the true nature of the deceit, and the young man realized he had
lain with a succubus. None the less such was his doting folly that the
same debauchery was repeated night after night, until struck with terror
and remorse, he sought the priest to confess and be delivered from this
abomination. “This monstrous connexion lasted several months; but at last
God delivered him by my humble means, and he was truly penitent for his
sins.”[70]
Not infrequently the Devil or the familiar assigned to the new witch
at the Sabbat when she was admitted must obviously have been a man,
one of the assembly, who either approached her in some demoniacal
disguise or else embraced her without any attempt at concealment of his
individuality, some lusty varlet who would afterwards hold himself at
her disposition. For we must always bear in mind that throughout these
witch-trials there is often much in the evidence which may be explained
by the agency of human beings; not that this essentially meliorates their
offences, for they were all bond-slaves of Satan, acting under his
direction and by the inspiration of hell. When the fiend has ministers
devoted to his service there is, perhaps, less need for his interposition
_in propria persona_. Howbeit, again and again in these cases we meet
with that uncanny quota, by no means insignificant and unimportant,
which seemingly admits of no solution save by the materialization of
evil intelligences of power. And detailed as is the evidence we possess,
it not unseldom becomes a matter of great difficulty, when we are
considering a particular case, to decide whether it be an instance of a
witch having had actual commerce and communion with the fiend, or whether
she was cheated by the devils, who mocked her, and allowing her to deem
herself in overt union with them, thus led the wretch on to misery and
death, duped as she was by the father of lies, sold for a delusion and by
profitless endeavour in evil. There are, of course, also many cases which
stand on the border-line, half hallucination, half reality. Sylvine de
la Plaine, a witch of twenty-three, who was condemned by the Parliament
of Paris, 17 May, 1616, was one of these.[71] Antoinette Brenichon, a
married woman, aged thirty, made a confession in almost exactly the same
words. Sylvine, her husband Barthélemi Minguet, and Brenichon were hanged
and their bodies burned.
Henri Boguet, a Judge of the High Court of Burgundy, in his _Discours des
Sorciers_, devotes chapter xii to “The carnal connexion of the Demons
with Witches and Sorcerers.” He discusses: 1. The Devil knows all the
Witches, & why. 2. He takes a female shape to pleasure the Sorcerers,
& why. 3. Other reasons why the Devil (has to do) with warlocks and
witches.[72] Françoise Secretain, Clauda Ianprost, Iaquema Paget, Antoine
Tornier, Antoine Gandillon, Clauda Ianguillaume, Thieuenne Paget, Rolande
du Vernois, Ianne Platet, Clauda Paget, and a number of other witches
confessed “their dealings with the Devil.”[73] Pierre Gandillon and his
son George also confessed to commerce with the Demon. Under his third
division Boguet lays down explicit statements on the matter.[74][75]
This unnatural physical coldness of the Demon is commented upon again and
again by witches at their trials in every country of Europe throughout
the centuries. I have already suggested that in some cases there was a
full materialization due to ectoplasmic emanations. Now, ectoplasm is
described[76] as being to the touch a cold and viscous mass comparable
to contact with a reptile, and this certainly seems to throw a flood of
light upon these details. It may be that here indeed we have a solution
of the whole mystery. In 1645 the widow Bash, a Suffolk witch, of Barton,
said that the Devil who appeared to her as a dark swarthy youth “was
colder than man.”[77] Isobel Goudie and Janet Breadheid, of the Auldearne
coven, 1662, both asserted that the Devil was “a meikle, blak, rock man,
werie cold; and I fand his nature als cold, a spring-well-water.”[78]
Isabel, who had been rebaptized at a Sabbat held one midnight in
Auldearne parish church, and to whom was assigned a familiar named the
Red Riever, albeit he was always clad in black, gave further details
of the Devil’s person: “He is abler for ws that way than any man can
be, onlie he ves heavie lyk a malt-sek; a hudg nature, uerie cold, as
yce.”[79]
In many of the cases of debauchery at Sabbats so freely and fully
confessed by the witches their partners were undoubtedly the males who
were present; the Grand Master, Officer, or President of the Assembly,
exercising the right to select first for his own pleasures such women as
he chose. This is clear from a passage in De Lancre: “The Devil at the
Sabbat performs marriages between the warlocks and witches, and joining
their hands, he pronounces aloud
Esta es buena parati
Esta parati lo toma.”[80]
And in many cases it is obvious that use must have been made of an
instrument, an artificial phallus employed.[81]
The artificial penis was a commonplace among the erotica of ancient
civilizations; there is abundant evidence of its use in Egypt, Assyria,
India, Mexico, all over the world. It has been found in tombs; frequently
was it to be seen as an ex-voto; in a slightly modified form it is yet
the favourite mascot of Southern Italy.[82] Often enough they do not
trouble to disguise the form. Aristophanes mentions the object in his
_Lysistrata_ (411 B.C.), and one of the most spirited dialogues (VI) of
Herodas (_circa_ 300-250 B.C.) is that where Koritto and Metro prattle
prettily of their βαύβων, whilst (in another mime, VII) the ladies visit
Kerdon the leather-worker who has fashioned this masterpiece. Truly
Herodas is as modern to-day in London or in Paris as he ever was those
centuries ago in the isle of Cos. _Fascinum_, explains the _Glossarium
Eroticum Linguæ Latinæ_,[83] “Penis fictitius ex corio, aut pannis
lineis uel sericis, quibus mulieres uirum mentiebantur. Antiquissima
libido, lesbiis et milesiis feminis præsertim usitatissima. _Fascinis_
illis abutebantur meretrices in tardos ascensores.” As one might expect
Petronius has something to say on the subject in a famous passage where
that savage old hag[84] Œnothea fairly frightened Encolpius with her
_scorteum fascinum_, upon which an erudite Spanish scholar, Don Antonio
Gonzalez de Salas, glosses: “Rubrum penem coriaceum ut Suidas exsertim
tradit uoce φαλλόι. Confecti & ex uaria materia uarios in usus olim
_phalli_ ex ligno, _ficu_ potissimum qui _ficulnei_ sæpius adpellati,
ex _ebore_, ex _auro_, ex _serico_, & ex _lineo panno_, quibus Lesbiæ
tribades abutebantur.”[85] And Tibullus, speaking of the image of
Priapus, has:[86]
Placet Priape? qui sub arboris coma
Soles sacrum reuincte pampino caput
Ruber sedere cum rubente fascino.
The Church, of course, condemned with unhesitating voice all such
practices, whether they were connected (in however slight a degree) with
Witchcraft or not. Arnobius, who regards all such offences as detestable,
in his _Aduersus Nationes_, V (_circa_ A.D. 296), relates a curiously
obscene anecdote which seems to point to the use of the fascinum by the
Galli, the priests of Berecynthian Cybele,[87] whose orgies were closely
akin to those of Dionysus. And the same story is related by Clement
of Alexandria Προτρεπτικὸς πρὸς Ἕλληνας (_circa_ A.D. 190); by Julius
Firmicus Maternus, _De Errore profanarum Religionum_ (A.D. 337-350);
by Nicetas (_ob._ _circa_ A.D. 414) in a commentary on S. Gregory of
Nanzianzus, oratio XXXIX; and by Theodoret (_ob._ _circa_ A.D. 457)
_Sermo octaua de Martyribus_. Obviously some very primitive rite is in
question.
Lactantius, in his _De Falsa Religione_ (_Diuinarum Institutionum_,
I, _circa_ A.D. 304), speaks of a phallic superstition, akin to the
fascinum, as favoured by the vestals, and implies it was notoriously
current in his day. That eminent father, S. Augustine, _De Ciuitate
Dei_, VII, 21, gives some account of the fascinum as used in the rites
of Bacchus, and when he is detailing the marriage ceremonies (VI,
9), he writes: “Sed quid hoc dicam, cum tibi sit et Priapus nimius
masculus, super cuius immanissimum et turpissimum fascinum sedere nona
nupta iubeatur, more honestissimo et religiosissimo matronarum.” The
historian, Evagrius Scholasticus (_ob._ post A.D. 504), in his _Historia
Ecclesiastica_ (XI, 2), says that the ritual of Priapus was quite open
in his day, and the fascinum widely known. Nicephorus Calixtus, a later
Byzantine, who died about the middle of the fourteenth century but whose
Chronicle closed with the death of Leo Philosophus, A.D. 911, speaks of
phallic ceremonies and of the use of ithy-phalli.[88]
Council after council forbade the use of the fascinum, and their very
insistence of prohibition show how deeply these abominations had taken
root. The Second Council of Châlon-sur-Saône (813) is quite plain and
unequivocal; so are the synods of de Mano (1247) and Tours (1396).
Burchard of Worms (died 25 Aug., 1025) in his famous _Decretum_ has:
“Fecisti quod quædam mulieres facere solent, ut facere quoddam molimen
aut mechinamentum in modum uirilis membri, ad mensuram tuæ uoluptatis,
et illud loco uerendorum tuorum, aut alterius, cum aliquibus ligaturis
colligares, et fornicationem faceres cum aliis mulierculis, uel aliæ
eodem instrumento, siue alio, tecum? Si fecisti, quinque annos per
legitimas ferias pœniteas.” And again: “Fecisti quod quædam mulieres
facere solent, ut iam supra dicto molimine uel alio aliquo machinamento,
tu ipsa in te solam faceres fornicationem? Si fecisti, unum annum per
legitimas ferias pœniteas.”
Other old Penitentials have: “Mulier qualicumque molimine aut per seipsum
aut cum altera fornicans, tres annos pœniteat; unum ex his in pane et
aqua.”
“Cum sanctimoniali per machinam fornicans annos septem pœniteat; duos ex
his in pane et aqua.”
“Mulia qualicumque molimine aut seipsam polluens, aut cum altera
fornicans, quatuor annos. Sanctimonialis femina cum sanctimoniali per
machinamentum polluta, septem annos.”
It is demonstrable, then, that artificial methods of coition, common
in pagan antiquity, have been unblushingly practised throughout all
the ages, as indeed they are at the present day, and that they have
been repeatedly banned and reprobated by the voice of the Church. This
very fact would recommend them to the favour of the Satanists, and
there can be no doubt that amid the dark debaucheries which celebrated
the Sabbats such practice was wellnigh universal. Yet when we sift
the evidence, detailed and exact, of the trials, we find there foul
and hideous mysteries of lust which neither human intercourse nor the
employ of a mechanical property can explain. Howbeit, the theologians
and the inquisitors are fully aware what unspeakable horror lurks in the
blackness beyond.
The animal familiar was quite distinct from the familiar in human shape.
In England particularly there is abundance of evidence concerning them,
and even to-day who pictures a witch with nut-cracker jaws, steeple hat,
red cloak, hobbling along on her crutch, without her big black cat beside
her? It is worth remark that in other countries the domestic animal
familiar is rare, and Bishop Francis Hutchinson even says: “I meet with
little mention of _Imps_ in any Country but ours, where the Law makes
the feeding, suckling, or rewarding of them to be Felony.”[89] Curiously
enough this familiar is most frequently met with in Essex, Suffolk, and
the Eastern counties. We find that animals of all kinds were regarded
as familiars; dogs, cats, ferrets, weasels, toads, rats, mice, birds,
hedgehogs, hares, even wasps, moths, bees, and flies. It is piteous
to think that in many cases some miserable creature who, shunned and
detested by her fellows, has sought friendship in the love of a cat or
a dog, whom she has fondled and lovingly fed with the best tit-bits she
could give, on the strength of this affection alone was dragged to the
gallows or the stake. But very frequently the witch did actually keep
some small animal which she nourished on a diet of milk and bread and
her own blood in order that she might divine by its means. The details
of this particular method of augury are by no means clear. Probably the
witch observed the gait of the animals, its action, the tones of its
voice easily interpreted to bear some fanciful meaning, and no doubt a
dog, or such a bird as a raven, a daw, could be taught tricks to impress
the simplicity of inquirers.
The exceeding importance of blood in life has doubtless been evident
to man from the earliest times. Man experienced a feeling of weakness
after the loss of blood, therefore blood was strength, life itself, and
throughout the ages blood has been considered to be of the greatest
therapeutic, and the profoundest magical, value. The few drops of
blood the witch gave her familiar were not only a reward, a renewal of
strength, but also they established a closer connexion between herself
and the dog, cat, or bird as the case might be. Blood formed a psychic
copula.
At the trial of Elizabeth Francis, Chelmsford, 1556, the accused
confessed that her familiar, given to her by her grandmother, a notorious
witch, was “in the lykenesse of a whyte spotted Catte,” and her
grandmother “taughte her to feede the sayde Catte with breade and mylke,
and she did so, also she taughte her to cal it by the name of Sattan and
to kepe it in a basket. Item that euery tyme that he did any thynge for
her, she sayde that he required a drop of bloude, which she gaue him
by prycking herselfe, sometime in one place and then in another.”[90]
It is superfluous to multiply instances; in the witch-trials of Essex,
particularly whilst Matthew Hopkins and his satellite John Stearne were
hot at work from 1645 to 1647 the animal familiar is mentioned again
and again in the records. As late as 1694 at Bury St. Edmunds, when
old Mother Munnings of Hartis, in Suffolk, was haled before Lord Chief
Justice Holt, it was asserted that she had an imp like a polecat. But
the judge pooh-poohed the evidence of a pack of clodpate rustics and
directed the jury to bring a verdict of Not Guilty.[91] “Upon particular
Enquiry,” says Hutchinson, “of several in or near the Town, I find most
are satisfied it was a very right Judgement.” In 1712 the familiar of
Jane Wenham, the witch of Walkerne, in Hertfordshire, was, at her trial,
stated to be a cat.
In Ford and Dekker’s _The Witch of Edmonton_ the familiar appears upon
the stage as a dog. This, of course, is directly taken from Henry
Goodcole’s pamphlet _The Wonderfull Discouerie of Elizabeth Sawyer_
(London, 4to, 1621), where in answer to this question the witch confesses
that the Devil came to her in the shape of a dog, and of two colours,
sometimes of black and sometimes of white. Some children had informed
the Court that they had seen her feeding imps, two white ferrets, with
white bread and milk, but this she steadfastly denied. In Goethe’s
_Faust_, Part I, Scene 2, Mephistopheles first appears to Faust outside
the city gates as a black poodle and accompanies him back to his study,
snarling and yelping when _In Principio_ is read. This is part of the
old legend. Manlius (1590), in the report of his conversation with
Melanchthon, quotes the latter as having said: “He [Faust] had a dog
with him, which was the devil.” Paolo Jovio relates[92] that the famous
Cornelius Agrippa always kept a demon attendant upon him in the shape
of a black dog. But John Weye, in his well-known work _De Præstigiis
Dæmonum_,[93] informs us that he had lived for years in daily attendance
upon Agrippa and that the black dog, _Monsieur_, respecting which such
strange stories were spread was a perfectly innocent animal which he
had often led about himself in its leash. Agrippa was much attached to
his dog, which used to eat off the table with him and of nights lie in
his bed. Since he was a profound scholar and a great recluse he never
troubled to contradict the idle gossip his neighbours clacked at window
and door. It is hardly surprising when one considers the hermetic works
which go under Agrippa’s name that even in his lifetime this great man
should have acquired the reputation of a mighty magician.
Grotesque names were generally given to the familiar: Lizabet; Verd-Joli;
Maître Persil (parsley); Verdelet; Martinet; Abrahel (a succubus); and
to animal familiars in England, Tissy; Grissell; Greedigut; Blackman;
Jezebel (a succubus); Ilemanzar; Jarmara; Pyewackett.
The familiar in human shape often companied with the witch and was
visible to clairvoyants. Thus in 1324 one of the accusations brought
against Lady Alice Kyteler was that a demon came to her “quandoque in
specie cuiusdam æthiopis cum duobus sociis.” The society met with at
Sabbats is not so easily shaken off as might be wished.
NOTES TO CHAPTER III.
[1] Two local Milanese Orders, the Apostolini of S. Barnabas and the
Congregation of S. Ambrose _ad Nemus_, were united by a Brief of
Sixtus V, 15 August, 1589. 11 January, 1606, Paul V approved the new
Constitutions. The Congregation retaining very few members was dissolved
by Innocent X in 1650. The habit was a tunic, broad scapular, and capuche
of chestnut brown. They were calced, and in the streets a wide cloak of
the same colour as the habit.
[2] E. Goldsmid, _Confessions of Witches under Torture_, Edinburgh, 1886.
[3] ... renoncer & renier son Createur, la saincte Vierge, les Saincts,
le Baptesme, pere, mere, parens, le ciel, la terre & tout ce qui est au
monde. _Tableau de l’Inconstance des mauvais Anges_, Paris, 1613.
[4] Je, Louis Gaufridi, renonce à tous les biens tant spirituels que
temporels qui me pourraient être conferés de la part de Dieu, de la
Vierge Marie, de tous les Saints et Saintes du Paradis, particulièrement
de mon patron Saint Jean-Baptiste, Saints Pierre, Paul, et François, et
me donne corps et âme à vous Lucifer ici présent, avec tous les biens que
je posséderai jamais (excepté la valeur des sacrements pour le regard de
ceux qui les recurent). Ainsi j’ai signé et attesté. _Confession faicte
par messire Loys Gaufridi, prestre en l’église des Accoules de Marseille,
prince des magiciens ... à deux pères capucins du couvent d’Aix, la
veille de Pasques le onzième avril mil six cent onze._ A Aix, par Jean
Tholozan, MVCXI.
[5] Je renonce entièrement de tout mon cœur, de toute ma force, et de
toute ma puissance à Dieu le Père, au Fils et au Saint-Esprit, à la très
Sainte Mère de Dieu, à tous les anges et spécialement à mon bon ange, à
la passion de Notre Seigneur Jésus Christ, à Son Sang, à tous les mérites
d’icelle, à ma part de Paradis, à toutes les inspirations que Dieu me
pourrait donner à l’avenir, à toutes les prières qu’on a faites et
pourrait faire pour moi.
[6] S. Pius V, Bull _Consueuerunt_, 17 September, 1569: Bl. Francisco de
Possadas, _Vida di Santo Domingo_, Madrid, 1721.
[7] In England at this date it was felony to possess an _Agnus Dei_.
[8] _Spondent quod ... ad conuentus nocturnos diligenter accedent._
[9] Coven, coeven, covine, curving, covey, are among the many spellings
of this word.
[10] R. Pitcairn, _Criminal Trials_, Edinburgh, 1833.
[11] _Examination of Certain Witches_, Philobiblion Society, London,
1863-4.
[12] Thomas Potts, _Discoverie of Witches_.
[13] ... qu’elle a veu souuent baptiser des enfans au sabbat, qu’elle
nous expliqua estre des enfans des sorcieres & non autres, lesquelles ont
accoutumé faire plustost baptiser leurs enfans au sabbat qu’en l’église.
Pierre de Lancre, _Tableau de l’Inconstance des mauvais Anges_, Paris,
1613.
[14] ... qu’on baptise des enfans au Sabbat auec du Cresme, que des
femmes apportent, & frottent la verge de quelque homme, & en font sortir
de la semence qu’elles amassent, and la meslent auec le Cresme, puis
mettant cela sur la teste de l’enfant en prononçant quelques paroles en
Latin. Contemporary tract, _Arrest & procedure faicte par le Lieutenant
Criminel d’Orleans contre Siluain Neuillon_.
[15] ... dit que sa mère le presenta (dit-on) en l’aage de trois ans
au Sabbat, à vn bouc, qu’on appelloit l’Aspic. Dit qu’il fut baptisé
au Sabbat, au Carrior d’Oliuet, auec quatorze ou quinze autres, & que
Jeanne Geraut porta du Chresme qui estoit jaune dans vn pot, & que
ledit Neuillon ietta de la semence dans ledit pot, & vn nommé Semelle,
& brouilloient cela auec vne petite cuilliere de bois, & puis leur en
mirent à tous sur la teste.
[16] J’advoue comme on baptise au Sabath et comme chacun sorcier fait vœu
particulièrement se donnant au diable et faire baptiser tous ses enfants
au Sabath (si faire se peut). Comme aussi l’on impose des noms à chacun
de ceux qui sont au Sabath, différents de leur propre nom. J’advoue
comme au baptême on se sert de l’eau, du soufre et du sel: le soufre
rend esclave le diable et le sel pour confirmer le baptême au service du
diable. J’advoue comme la forme et l’intention est de baptiser au nom
de Lucifer, de Belzebuth et autres diables faisant le signe de la croix
en le commençant par le travers et puis le poursuivant par les pieds et
finissant à la tête. Contemporary tract, _Confession faicte par messire
Loys Gaufridi, prestre en l’église des Accoules de Marseille, prince des
magiciens_, MVCXI.
[17] Anthony Hornech’s appendix to Glanvill’s _Sadducismus Triumphatus_,
London, 1681.
[18] _Newes from Scotland_, London, W. Wright, 1592.
[19] Præstant Dæmoni ... iuramentum super circulo in terram sculpto
fortasse quia cum circulus sit Symbolum Divinitatis, & terra scabellum
Dei sic certe uellet eos credere se esse Dominum cœli & terræ. Guazzo,
_Compendium_, I. 7, p. 38. I have corrected the text, which runs “uellet
eos credere eum esset ...”
[20] Even by so industrious a searcher as Miss M. A. Murray.
[21] Dressant quelque forme d’autel sur des colon̅es infernales, & sur
iceluy sans dire le _Confiteor_, ny l’_Alleluya_, tournant les feuillets
d’vn certain liure qu’il a en main, il commence à marmoter quelques mots
de la Messe. De Lancre, _Tableau_, p. 401.
[22] ... que le Sabbat se tenoit dans vne maison.... Vit aussi vn grand
homme noir à l’opposite de celuy de la cheminée, qui regardoit dans vn
liure, dont les feuillets estoient noirs & bleuds, & marmotait entre ses
dents sans entendre ce qu’il disoit, leuoit vne hostie noire, puis vn
calice de meschant estain tout crasseux.
[23] On dit la Messe, & que c’est le Diable qui la dit, qu’il a vne
Chasuble qui a vne croix: mais qu’elle n’a que trois barres: & tourne le
dos à l’Autel quand il veut leuer l’Hostie & le Calice, qui sont noirs, &
marmote dans vn liure, duquel le couuerture est toute velue comme d’vne
peau de loup, auec des feuillets blancs & rouges, d’autres noirs.
[24] On lisait la messe dans le livre des blasphèmes, qui servait de
canon et qu’on employait aussi dans les processions. Il renfermait les
plus horribles malédictions contre la sainte Trinité, le Saint Sacrement
de l’autel, les autres sacrements et les cérémonies de l’Eglise, et il
était écrit dans une langue qui m’était inconnue. Görres, _La Mystique
Divine_, trad., Charles Sainte-Foi, V. p. 230. There is a critical
recension of _Die christliche Mystik_ by Boretius and Krause, Hanover,
1893-7.
[25] _Newes from Scotland_, London, W. Wright (1592).
[26] Book III. p. 42.
[27] T. B. Howell, _State Trials_, London, 1816. IV, 844, 846.
[28] S. Caleb, _Les Messes Noires_, Paris, s.d.
[29] Après ce que nous ont appris les livres et les âmes, il ne nous est
pas permis de douter, et notre devoir est de combattre, ne fût-ce que
par un simple affirmation, les nombreux auteurs qui, effrontément ou
témérairement, traitent ces horreurs de fables ou d’hallucinations. _La
Mystique Divine_, nouvelle édition, Paris, 1902. III, pp. 269, 270.
[30] Ces histoires, loin d’être fabuleuses, ont toute l’authenticité
que peut leur donner une procédure instruite avec tout le zèle et le
talent que pouvaient y apporter des magistrats éclairés et consciencieux,
auxquels, à toutes les époques, les faits ne manquaient pas. Libre III.
c. 8.
[31] _De Ciuitate Dei_, xv. 23. I quote Healey’s translation, 1610.
[32] Esse eorum (qui usualiter incubi uel succubi nominantur) et
concupiscentiam eorum libidinosam, necnon et generationem ab eis esse
famosam atque credibilem fecerunt testimonia uirorum et mulierem qui
illusiones ipsorum, molestiasque et improbitates, necnon et uiolentias
libidinis ipsorum, se passos fuisse testificati sunt et adhuc asserunt.
_De Universitate_, Secunda Pars, III. 25.
[33] Si tamen ex coitu dæmonum aliqui interdum nascuntur, hoc non est per
semen ab eis decisum, aut a corporibus assumptis; sed per semen alicuius
hominis ad hoc acceptum, utpote quod idem dæmon qui est succubus ad
uirum, fiat incubus ad mulierem. _Summa_, Pars Prima, quæstio 1, a 3. at
6.
[34] Succumbunt uiris in specie mulieris, et ex eis semen pollutionis
suscipiunt, et quadam sagacitate ipsum in sua uirtute custodiunt,
et postmodum, Deo permittente, fiunt incubi et in uasa mulierum
transfundunt. _Sententiarum_, Liber II, d. viii, Pars Prima, a 3. q. 1.
[35] Docet S. Thomas ... et consentiunt communiter reliqui theologi....
Ratio huius sententiæ est quia tota illa actio non excedit potestatem
naturalem dæmonis, usus autem talis potestatis est ualde conformis prauæ
uoluntati dæmonis, et iuste a Deo permitti potest propter aliquorum
hominum peccata. Ergo non potest cum fundamento negari, et ideo non
immerito dixit Augustinus, cum de illo usu multis experientiis et
testimoniis constet, non sine impudentia negari. _De Angelis_, l. iv. c.
38. nn. 10, 11.
[36] Begun in 1665 by Fra Francisco de Jésus-Maria (_ob._ 1677).
[37] Negant aliqui, credentes impossible esse quod dæmones actum carnalem
cum hominibus exercere ualent. Sed tenenda est ut omnino certa contraria
sententia. _Theologia moralis_, Tr. xxi. c. 11. p. 10. nn. 180, 181.
[38] Idem dæmon qui est succubus ad uirum potest fieri incubus ad
mulierem. In his monumental _Summa S. Thomæ hodiernis Academiarum moribus
accomodata_, 19 vols. Liège, 1746-51.
[39] _De Seruonem Dei Beatificatione_, Romæ, MDCCXC, Cura Aloysii
Salvioni. Tom. VII. pp. 30-33.
[40] Quæ leguntur de Dæmonibus incubis et succubis.... Quamuis enim
prædicti concubitus communiter admittantur, sed generatis a nonnullis
excludetur ... alii, tamen, tum concubitum, tum generationem fieri
posse, et factam fuisse existimauerunt, modo quodam nouo et inusitate,
et hominibus incognito. Sancho de Avila, bishop of Murcia, Jaen, and
Siguenza, S. Teresa’s confessor (_ob._ December, 1625), in a commentary
on Exodus discusses the curious question: _An Angeli de se generare
possint?_
[41] Quidam hos dæmones incubos uel succubos dari negarunt; sed
communiter id affirmant auctores.
[42] Ad bestialitatem autem reuocatur peccatum cum dæmone succubo, uel
incubo; cui peccato superadditur malitia contra religionem; et præterea
etiam sodomiæ, adulterii, uel incestus, si affectu uiri, uel mulieris,
sodomitico, adulterino uel incestuoso cum dæmone coeat. Lib. III, Tract
iv. c. 2. Dubium 3.
[43] The word bestialitas has theologically a far wider signification
than the word _bestiality_. In 1222 a deacon, having been tried before
Archbishop Langton, was burned at Oxford on a charge of bestiality. He
had embraced Judaism in order to marry a Jewess. Professor E. P. Evans
remarks: “It seems rather odd that the Christian lawgivers should have
adopted the Jewish code against sexual intercourse with beasts, and
then enlarged it so as to include the Jews themselves. The question was
gravely discussed by jurists whether cohabitation of a Christian with
a Jewess, or _vice versa_, constitutes sodomy. Damhouder (_Prax. rer.
crim._ c. 96 n. 48) is of the opinion that it does, and Nicolaus Boer
(_Decis._, 136, n. 5) cites the case of a certain Johannes Alardus, or
Jean Alard, who kept a Jewess in his house in Paris and had several
children by her: he was convicted of sodomy on account of this relation
and burned, together with his paramour, ‘since coition with a Jewess
is precisely the same as if a man should copulate with a dog’ (_Dopl.
Theat._ ii, p. 157). Damhouder includes Turks and Saracens in the same
category.” _The Criminal Prosecution and Capital Punishment of Animals_,
p. 152. London, 1906.
[44] An oblate of S. Charles, d. 1631.
[45] 1566-1622. His _Synopsis Theologiæ Moralis_ is a posthumous work,
published 1626.
[46] Bene ait Busembaum quod congressus cum dæmone reducitur ad peccatum
bestialitatis. Hermann Busembaum, S.J., 1600-1668.
[47] _Theologia moralis decalogalis et sacramentalis._ Venice, 1731.
[48] Præter autem crimen bestialitatis accedit scelus superstitionis. An
autem, qui coit cum dæmone apparente in forma conjugatæ, monialis, aut
consanguiniæ, peccet semper affective peccato adulterii, sacrilegii, aut
incestus? Uidetur uniuerse affirmare Busembaum cum aliis ut supra.
[49] Paris, 1883.
[50] A private manual only delivered to priests.
[51] Omnes theologi loquuntur de congressu cum dæmone in forma uiri,
mulieris aut alicuius bestiæ apparente, uel ut præsente per imaginationem
repræsentato, dicuntque tale peccatum ad genus bestialitatis reuocandum
esse, et specialem habere malitiam in confessione declarandam, scilicet
superstitionem in pacto cum dæmone consistentem. In hoc igitur scelere
duæ necessario reperiuntur malitiæ, una contra castitatem, et altera
contra uirtutem religionis. Si quis ad dæmonem sub specie uiri apparentem
affectu sodomitico accedat, tertia est species peccati, ut patet. Item si
sub specie consanguineæ aut mulieris conjugatæ fingatur apparere, adest
species incestus uel adulterii; si sub specie bestiæ, adest bestialitas.
[52] 1722-1797. He was a monk of Bans, near Bamberg.
[53] Quæri potest utrum dæmon per turpem concubitum possit uiolenter
opprimere marem uel feminam cuius obsessio permissa sit ob finem
perfectionis et contemplationis acquirendæ. Ut autem uera a falsis
separemus, sciendum est quod dæmones (incubi et succubi, quidquid dicant
increduli) uere dantur: immo hoc iuxta doctrinam Augustini (lib. 15, _de
Ciuit. Dei_, cap. 23) sine aliqua impudentia negati nequit: ... Hoc idem
asserit D. Thomas, aliique communiter. Hic uero, qui talia patiuntur,
sunt peccatores qui uel dæmones ad hos nefandos concubitus inuitant, uel
dæmonibus turpia hæc facinora intentantibus ultro assentiuntur. Quod
autem hi aliique praui homines possint per uiolentiam a dæmone opprimi
non dubitamus: ... et ego ipse plures inueni qui quamuis de admissis
sceleribus dolerent; et hoc nefarium diaboli commercium exsecrarentur,
tamen illud pati cogebantur inuiti. D. Schram, _Theologia Mystica_, I.
233, scholium 3, p. 408. Paris, 1848.
[54] 1532-1591. Provincial of the Jesuit province of the Rhine.
[55] Congressus hos dæmonum cum utriusque sexus hominibus negare, ita
temerarium est, ut necessarium sit simul conuellas et sanctissimorum et
grauissimorum hominum grauissimas sententias, et humanis sensibus bellum
indicas, et te ignorare fatearis quanta sit illorum spirituum in hæc
corpora uis utque potestas. C. x. n. 3.
[56] Placuit enim affirmatio axiomatis adeo multis, ut uerendum sit ne
pertinaciæ et audaciæ sit ab eis discedere; communis namque hæc est
sententia Patrum, theologorum et philosophorum doctiorum, et omnium fere
sæculorum atque nationum experientia comprobata. Liber II, quæstio 15.
[57] Asserere per incubos et succubos dæmones homines interdum procreari
in tantum est catholicum, quod eius oppositum asserere est nedum dictis
Sanctorum, sed et traditioni sacræ Scripturæ contrarium. _Pars prima,
quæstio_ 3.
[58] Causa autem quare dæmones se incubos faciunt uel succubos esse
uidetur, ut per luxuriæ uitium hominis utramque naturam lædant, corporis
uidelicet et animæ, qua in læsione præcipue delectari uidentur. This
divine was a prominent figure at the Council of Bâle. I have used the
Douai edition, 5 vols. 1602.
[59] Dæmon in forma succubi se transformat, et habet coitum cum uiro ...;
accedit ad mulierem in forma scilicet uiri.... Ita firmant communiter
Theologi.
[60] Certissima experientia sæpe cognitum est fœminas etiam inuitas a
dæmonibus fuisse compressas. _De justa hæreticorum punitione_, Lib. I. c.
xviii. Salamanca, 1547.
[61] Hæc est indubitata ueritas quam non solum experientia certissima
comprobat, sed etiam antiquitas confirmat, quidquid quidam medici et
iurisperiti opinentur. _Conclusio quinta._
[62] Affirmatiuam sententiam tam multi et graues tuentur auctores, ut
sine pertinaciæ nota ab illa discedi non posse uidatur.
[63] _Rapports de l’homme avec le démon._
[64] _Les hauts phénomènes de la magic._
[65] Sane ad nostrum, non sine ingenti molestia, peruenit auditum quod
... complures utriusque sexus personæ, propriæ salutis immemores et a
fide catholica deuiantes, cum dæmonibus incubis et succubis abuti.
[66] The Dean of S. Paul’s (_Christian Mysticism_, 1899, p. 265) urbanely
dismisses the whole subject with a quotation from Lucretius:
Hunc igitur terrorem animi, tenebrasque necessest
Non radii solis, neque lucida tela diei
Discutiant, sed naturæ species ratioque. (I. 147-49.)
These Fears, that darkness that o’erspreads our Souls,
Day can’t disperse, but those _eternal_ rules
Which from firm Premises true _Reason_ draws,
And a deep insight into _Natures_ laws. (_Creech._)
[67] _De Dæmonialitate_, 24.
[68] _Survival_, by various authors. Edited by Sir James Marchant,
K.B.E., LL.D. London and New York.
[69] So in Middleton’s _The Witch_, when the young gallant Almachildes
visits Hecate’s abode, she exclaims:
’Tis Almachildes—the fresh blood stirs in me—
The man that I have lusted to enjoy:
I’ve had him thrice in incubus already.
And in a previous scene Hecate has said:
What young man can we wish to pleasure us,
But we enjoy him in an incubus?
[70] Ce commerce monstreux dura plusiers mois; mais Dieu le délivra enfin
par mon entremise et il fit pénitence de ses péchés.
[71] Auoir esté au Sabbat; ne sçait comme elle y fut transportée ...
qu’au Sabbat le Diable cogneust charnellement toutes les femmes qui y
estoient, & elle aussi la marqua en deux endroicts.... Que le Diable
la cogneu vne autrefois, & qu’il a le membre faict comme un cheual, en
entrant est froid comme glace, iette la semence fort froide, & en sortant
la brusse comme si c’estoit du feu. Qu’elle receut tout mescontentement
que lors qu’il eut habité auec elle au Sabbat, vn autre homme qu’elle ne
cognoist fit le semblable en presence de tous, que son mary s’appercut
quand le Diable eut affaire auec elle, & que le Diable se vint coucher
auprez d’elle fort froid, luy mit la main sur le bas du ventre, dont
elle effrayée en ayant aduerty son mary, il luy dict ces mots, Taise-toy
folle, taise-toy. Que son mary vit quand le Diable la cogneust au Sabbat,
ensemble cet autre qui la cogneust après.
[72] L’accouplement du Demon avec la Sorcière et le Sorcier.... 1. Le
Demon cognoit toutes les Sorcieres, & pourquoy. 2. Il se met aussi en
femme pour les Sorciers, & pourquoy. 3. Autres raisons pour lesquelles le
Demon cognoit les Sorciers, & Sorcieres.
[73] ... qui Satan l’auoit cogneue charnellement.... Et pource que les
hommes ne cedent guieres aux femmes en lubricité.
[74] Il y a encor deux autres raisons pour lesquelles le Diable
s’accouple auec le Sorcier: La premiere, que l’offense est de tant plus
grande: Car si Dieu a en si grande haine l’accouplement du fidelle auec
l’infidele (Exodus xxxiv., Deuteronomy xxxvii.), à combien plus forte
raison détesterait celuy de l’homme auec le Diable. La seconde raison
est, que parce moyen la semence naturelle de l’homme se pert, d’où vient
que l’amitié qui est entre l’homme & la femme, se conuertit le plus
souuent en haine, qui est l’vn des plus grands mal-heurs, qui pourroient
arriuer au mariage.
[75] In chapter xiii Boguet decides: l’accouplement de Satan auec le
Sorcier est réel & non imaginaire.... Les vns donc s’en mocque̅t ... mais
les confessions des Sorciers qui j’ay eu en main, me font croire qu’il en
est quelque chose! dautant qu’ils ont tout recogneu, qu’ils auoient esté
couplez auec le Diable, & que la semence qu’il iettoit estoit fort froide
... Iaquema Paget adioustoit, qu’elle auoit empoigné plusiers fois auec
la main le me̅bre du Demon, qui la cognoissoit, & que le membre estoit
froid comme glace, lo̅g d’vn bon doigt, & moindre en grosseur que celuy
d’vn homme: Tieuenne Paget, & Antoine Tornier adioustoient aussi, que le
membre de leurs Demons estoit long, & gros comme l’vn de leurs doigts.
[76] Heuze, _Do the Dead Live?_ 1923.
[77] John Stearne’s _Confirmation and Discovery of Witchcraft_.
[78] Robert Pitcairn, _Criminal Trials_, Edinburgh, 1833, III. pp. 603,
611, 617.
[79] _Idem._
[80] Le Diable faict des mariages au Sabbat entre les Sorciers &
Sorcieres, & leur joignant les mains, il leur diet hautement
Esta es buena parati
Esta parati lo toma.
Mais auant qu’ils couchent ensemble, il s’accouple auec elles, oste la
virginité des filles. Lancre, _Tableau de l’Inconstance_, p. 132.
[81] This has been emphasized by Miss Murray in _The Witch-Cult in
Western Europe_ (“The Rites”), but she did not realize that the fascinum
was well-known to demonologists, and the use thereof severely reprobated
_sub mortali_ by the Church.
[82] See G. Belluci, _Amuletti Italiani antichi e contemporanei_; also
_Amuletti italiani contemporanei_. Perugia, 1898.
[83] Auctore P.P. Parisiis, MDCCCXXVI.
[84] Crudelissima anus. _Petronii Satirae._ 138. p. 105. Tertium edidit
Buecheler. Berlin. 1895.
[85] _Titi Petronii Satyricon_, Concinnante Michaele Hadrianide.
Amstelodami, 1669. Amongst the figures on the engraved title-page is a
witch mounted on her broomstick.
[86] _Priapeia._ LXXXIV.
[87] For whose impudicities see S. Augustine, _De Ciuitate Dei_, VII. 26.
[88] Priapi lignei in honorem Bacchi.
[89] Francis Hutchinson, _Historical Essay_, London, 1718.
[90] _Witches at Chelmsford_, Philobiblion Society, VIII.
[91] Francis Hutchinson, _Historical Essay on Witchcraft_, 1718.
[92] _Elogia Doctorum Uirorum_, c. 101.
[93] Liber II.; c. v.; 11, 12.