Chapter VII: The Witch in Dramatic Literature (2)

Elizabeth Demdike and Jennet Hargreaves belonged to the first Lancashire witch-trials, the prosecutions of 1612; Frances Dickenson and Mal Spencer were involved in the Robinson disclosures of 1633; so it is obvious that Shadwell has intermingled the two incidents. In his play we have a coursing scene where the hare suddenly changes to Mother Demdike; the witches raise a storm and carouse in Sir Edward’s cellar something after the fashion of Madge Gray, Goody Price, and Goody Jones in _The Ingoldsby Legends_; Mal Spencer bridles Clod, a country yokel, and rides him to a witches’ festival, where Madge is admitted to the infernal sisterhood; the witches in the guise of cats beset a number of persons with horrible scratchings and miauling, Tom Shacklehead strikes off a grimalkin’s paw and Mother Hargreave’s hand is found to be missing: “the cutting off the hand is an old story,” says Shadwell in his notes. It will be seen that the later dramatist took many of his incidents from Heywood and Brome, although it is only fair to add that he has also largely drawn from original sources.

Shortly after the Restoration was published a play dealing with one of the most famous of English sibyls, _The Life of Mother Shipton_. “A New Comedy. As it was Acted Nineteen dayes together with great Applause.... Written by T[homas] T[homson].” Among the Dramatis Personæ appear Pluto, the King of Hell, with Proserpina, his Queen; Radamon, A chief Spirit; Four other Devils. The scene is “The City of York, or Naseborough Grove in Yorkshire.” It is a rough piece of work, largely patched together from Middleton’s _A Chaste Maid in Cheapside_ and Massinger’s _The City Madam_, whilst the episodes in which Mother Shipton is concerned would seem to be founded on one of the many old chap-books that relate her marvellous adventures and prophetic skill. Agatha Shipton (her name is usually given as Ursula) is complaining of her hard lot when she encounters Radamon, a demon who holds high rank in the court of Dis. He arranges to meet her later, and returns to his own place to boast of his success. He reappears to her dressed as a wealthy nobleman; he marries her; and for a while she is seen in great affluence and state. At the commencement of Act III she finds herself in her poor cottage again. As she laments Radamon enters, he informs her who he really is, and bestows upon her magical powers. Her fame spreads far and wide, and as popular story tells, the abbot of Beverley in disguise visits her to make trial of her art. She at once recognizes him, and foretells to his great chagrin the suppression of the monasteries with other events. In the end Mother Shipton outwits and discomforts the devils who attempt to seize her, she is vouchsafed a heavenly vision, and turns to penitence and prayer. The whole thing is a crude enough commixture, of more curiosity than value.

There are some well-written episodes in Nevil Payne’s powerful tragedy _The Fatal Jealousie_,[16] produced at Dorset Garden early in August, 1672. Among the characters we have Witch, Aunt of Jasper, the villain of the piece. Jasper, who is servant to Antonio, applies to his aunt to help him in his malignant schemes. At first he believes she is a genuine sorceress, but she disabuses him and frankly acknowledges:

I can raise no Devils,
Yet I Confederate with Rogues and Taylors,
Things that can shape themselves like Elves,
And Goblins——

Her imps _Ranter_ and _Swash_, _Dive_, _Fop_, _Snap_, _Gilt_, and _Picklock_, are slim lads in masquing habits, trained to trickery. None the less they manage an incantation scene to deceive Antonio and persuade him that his wife, Caelia, is false. An “Antick Dance of Devils” which follows is interrupted by the forcible entry of the Watch. The Aunt shows Jasper a secret hiding-place, whereupon he murders her and conceals the body in the hole. He pretends that she was in truth a witch and has vanished by magic. The Captain of the Watch, however, had detected her charlatanry long before, and presently a demon’s vizor and a domino are found on the premises. Later a little boy, who is caught in his devil’s attire, confesses the impostures, and trembling adds that in one of their secret chambers they have discovered their mistress’s corpse stabbed to death. Finally Jasper is unmasked, and only escapes condign punishment by his dagger. The character of the Witch is not unlike that of Heywood’s _Wise Woman of Hogsdon_, although in _The Fatal Jealousie_ the events take a tragic and bloody turn. Smith acted Antonio; Mrs. Shadwell, Caelia; Mrs. Norris, the Witch; and Sandford was famous in the rôle of Jasper.

There are incantation scenes in Dryden’s tragedies, but these hardly come within our survey, as the magicians are treated romantically, one might even say decoratively, and certainly here no touch of realism is sought or intended. We have the famous episode in _The Indian-Queen_ (produced at the Theatre Royal in January, 1663-4), when Zempoalla seeks Ismeron the prophet who raises the God of Dreams to prophesy her destiny;[17] in the fourth act of _Tyrannick Love_ (Theatre Royal, June, 1669), the scene is an Indian cave, where at the instigation of Placidius the magician Nigrinus raises a vision of the sleeping S. Catharine, various astral spirits appear only to fly before the descent of Amariel, the Saint’s Guardian-Angel; in _Œdipus_, by Dryden and Lee (Dorset Garden, December, 1678), Teresias plays a considerable part, and Act III is mainly concerned with a necromantic spell that raises the ghost of Laius in the depths of a hallowed grove. In _The Duke of Guise_, moreover (Theatre Royal, December, 1682), there is something of real horror in the figures of Malicorne and his familiar Melanax, and the scene[18] when the miserable wizard, whose bond is forfeit, is carried shrieking to endless bale, cannot be read without a shudder even after the last moments of Marlowe’s _Faustus_. Act IV of Lee’s _Sophonisba_ (Theatre Royal, April, 1675) commences with the temple of Bellona, whose priestesses are shown at their dread rites. Cumana is inspired by the divinity, she raves in fury of obsession, there is a dance of spirits, and various visions are evoked.

In Otway’s curious rehandling of _Romeo and Juliet_ which he Latinized as _The History and Fall of Caius Marius_ produced at Dorset Garden in the autumn of 1679, the Syrian witch Martha only appears for a moment to prophesy good fortune to Marius and to introduce a dance of spirits by the waving of her wand.

Charles Davenant’s operatic _Circe_ (Dorset Garden, March, 1676-7) is an amazing distortion of mythological story. There are songs without number, a dance of magicians, storms, dreams, an apparition of Pluto in a Chariot drawn by Black Horses, but all these are very much of the stage, stagey, born of candle-light and violins, hardly to be endured in cold print. Ragusa, the Sorceress in Tate’s _Brutus of Alba: or the Enchanted Lovers_ (Dorset Garden, May, 1678) is a far more formidable figure. Tate has managed his magic not without skill, and the conclusion of Act III, an incantation, was deservedly praised by Lamb. Curiously enough the plot of _Brutus of Alba_ is the story of Dido and Æneas, Vergil’s names being altered “rather than be guilty of a breach of Modesty,” Tate says. But Tate supplied Henry Purcell with the libretto for his opera _Dido and Æneas_, wherein also witches appear. It must not be forgotten that _Macbeth_ was immensely popular throughout the whole of the Restoration period, when, as has been noted above, the witch scenes were elaborated and presented with every resource of scenery, mechanism, dance, song, and meretricious ornament. Revival followed revival, each more decorative than the last, and the theatre was unceasingly thronged. Duffett undertook to burlesque this fashion, which he did in an extraordinary Epilogue to his skit _The Empress of Morocco_, produced at the Theatre Royal in the spring of 1674, but for all his japeries _Macbeth_ never waned in public favour.

Spirits in abundance appear in the Earl of Orrery’s unpublished tragedy _Zoroastres_,[19] the principal character being described as “King of Persia, the first Magician.” He is attended by “several spirits in black with ghastly vizards,” and at the end furies and demons arise shaking dark torches at the monarch whom they pull down to hell, the sky raining fire upon them. It was almost certainly never acted, and is the wildest type of transpontine melodrama.

Edward Ravenscroft’s “recantation play” _Dame Dobson, or, The Cunning Woman_ (produced at Dorset Garden in the early autumn of 1683) is an English version of _La Devineresse; ou les faux Enchantements_ (sometimes known as _Madame Jobin_), a capital comedy by Thomas Corneille and Jean Donneau de Vise. This French original had been produced in 1679, and both the stage-craft and the adroit way in which the various tricks and conjurations are managed must be allowed to be consummately clever. An English comedy on a similar theme is _The Wise Woman of Hogsdon_, the intricacies of which are a triumph of technique. _La Devineresse_ was published in 1680 with a frontispiece picturing a grimalkin, a hand of glory, noxious weeds, two blazing torches and other objects beloved of necromancy. There are, moreover, eight folding plates which embellish the little book, and these have no small interest as they depict scenes in the comedy. But _Dame Dobson_ cannot be accounted a play of witchcraft; it is no more than an amusing study of dextrous charlatanry. The protagonist herself[20] is of that immortal sisterhood graced by Heywood’s sibyl, of whom it is said “She is a cunning woman, neither hath she her name for nothing, who out of her ignorance can fool so many that think themselves wise.”

Mrs. Behn, in her amusing comedy _The Luckey Chance; or, An Alderman’s Bargain_, produced at Drury Lane in the late winter of 1686, 4to, 1687, has made some play with pretended magic in the capital scenes where Gayman (Betterton) is secretly brought by the prentice Bredwel (Bowman), disguised as a devil, to the house of Lady Fulbank (Mrs. Barry). Here he is received by Pert, the maid, who is dressed as an old witch, and conducted to his inamorata’s embraces. But the whole episode is somewhat farcically treated, and it is, of course, an elaborate masquerade for the sake of an intrigue.[21]

Shadwell in 1681 took Witchcraft seriously, and notwithstanding the half-hearted disclaimer in his address “To the Reader” that prefaces _The Lancashire Witches_ I think he was sensible enough to recognize the truth which lies at the core of the matter in spite of the grotesqueness of the formulæ and spells doting hags and warlocks are wont to employ. Witchcraft was still a capital offence when some fifteen years later Congreve lightly laughed it out of court. Foresight (_Love for Love_), “an illiterate old Fellow, peevish and positive, superstitious, and pretending to understand Astrology, Palmistry, Phisiognomy, Omens, Dreams, etc.,” is in close confabulation with his young daughter’s Nurse, when Angelica his niece trips in to ask the loan of his coach, her own being out of order. He says no, and presses her to remain at home, muttering to himself some old doggerel which bodes no good to the house if all the womenfolk are gadding abroad. The lady fleers him, twits him with jealousy of his young wife: “Uncle, I’m afraid you are not Lord of the Ascendant, ha! ha! ha!” He is obstinate in his refusal; and she retorts: “I can make Oath of your unlawful Midnight Practices; you and the Old Nurse there.... I saw you together, through the Key-hole of the Closet, one Night, like _Saul_ and the Witch of _Endor_, turning the Sieve and Sheers, and pricking your Thumbs to write poor innocent Servants’ Names in Blood about a little Nutmeg-Grater, which she had forgot in the Caudle-Cup.” “Hussy, Cockatrice,” storms the old fellow beside himself with rage. Angelica mocks him even more bitterly, accuses him and the Nurse of nourishing a familiar, “a young Devil in the shape of a Tabby-Cat,” and with a few last thrusts she departs, trilling with merriment, in a sedan-chair.

To return for a brief space to an earlier generation when it would have hardly been possible, or at least highly inadvisable, to treat Witchcraft in this blithesome mood, of two plays that would almost certainly have been of great interest in this connexion we have only the names, _The Witch of Islington_, acted in 1597, and _The Witch Traveller_, licensed in 1623.

In addition to _The Masque of Queens_, which as has already been noted, served to some extent for a model to Shadwell when inditing his encyclopædic notes on magic, Ben Jonson in that sweet pastoral _The Sad Shepherd_ introduces a Scotch witch, Maudlin. The character is drawn with vigorous strokes; realism mingles with romance.

During the quarrel scene which opens _The Alchemist_ Face threatens Subtle:

I’ll bring thee, rogue, within
The statute of sorcerie, _tricesimo tertio_
Of Harry the Eight.

Dapper the gull asks Subtle for a familiar, as Face explains (I, 2):

Why, he do’s aske one but for cups, and horses,
A rifling flye: none o’ your great familiars.

And later in order to trick him thoroughly Dol Common appears as the “Queene of Faerie.” The Queen of Elphin or Elfhame, who is particularly mentioned in the Scotch witch-trials, seems to be identical with the French Reine du Sabbat. In 1670 Jean Weir confessed: “That when she keeped a school at Dalkeith, and teached childering, ane tall woman came to the declarant’s hous when the childering were there; and that she had, as appeared to her, ane chyld upon her back, and one or two at her foot; and that the said woman disyred that the declarant should imploy her to spick for her to the Queen of Farie, and strik and battle in her behalf with the said Queen, (which was her own words).”[22]

Beaumont and Fletcher afford us but few instances of witchcraft in the many dramas that conveniently go under their names. We have, it is true, a she-devil, Lucifera, in _The Prophetess_, but the incident is little better than clowning. Delphia herself is a severely classical pythoness far removed from the Sawyers, Demdikes, and Dickensons Sulpitia, in _The Custom of the County_ dons a conjurer’s robe and at Hippolita’s bidding blasts Zenocia almost to death by her spells, but yet she is more bawd than witch. Peter Vecchio in _The Chances_, “a reputed wizard,” is as sharp and cozening a practitioner as Forobosco, the mountebank, a petty pilferer, who is exposed and sent to the galleys at the end of _The Fair Maid of the Inn_; or Shirley’s Doctor Sharkino[23] whom silly serving-men consult about the loss of silver spoons and napkins; or Tomkis’s Albumazar; nay, Jonson’s Subtle himself.[24]

In Marston’s _Sophonisba_ (4to, 1606) appears Erictho, borrowed from Lucan. The Friar in Chapman’s _Bassy d’Ambois_ (4to, 1607) puts on a magician’s habit, and after a sonorous Latin invocation raises the spirits Behemoth and Cartophylax in the presence of Bussy and Tamyra.

A far more interesting drama than these is Shirley’s _S. Patrick for Ireland_, acted in Dublin, 1639-40, which has as its theme the conversion of Ireland by S. Patrick and the opposition of the Druids under their leader Archimagus. The character of S. Patrick moves throughout with a quiet spiritual dignity that has true beauty, and the magicians in their baffled potency for evil are only less effective. This drama is a work of stirling merit, to which I would unhesitatingly assign a very high place in Shirley’s theatre. We are shown the various attempts upon S. Patrick’s life: poison is administered in a cup of wine, the Saint drinks and remains unharmed; Milcho, a great officer, whose servant S. Patrick once was, locks him and his friends in a house and fires it. The Christians pass out unscathed through the flames which devour the incendiary. In the last scene whilst S. Patrick sleeps Archimagus summons a vast number of hideous serpents to devour him, but the Apostle of Ireland wakes, and expels for ever all venomous reptiles from his isle, whereon the earth gapes and swallows the warlock alive. Particularly impressive is the arrival of S. Patrick, when as the King and his two sons, his druids and nobles, are gathered in anxious consultation at the gates of their temple, they see passing in solemn procession through the woods a fair company with gleaming crosses, silken banners, bright tapers and incense, what time the sweet music of a hymn strikes upon the ear:

Post maris sæui fremitus Iernæ
(Nauitas cœlo tremulas beante)
Uidimus gratum iubar enatantes
Littus inaurans.

(Now that we have crossed the fierce waves of ocean to Ireland’s coast, and Heaven has blessed its poor fearful wanderers, wending our way along with joy do we see a sunbeam of light gilding these shores.)

As Marlowe’s _Dr. Faustus_ has already been treated in this connexion it may not be altogether impertinent very briefly to consider some three or four other Elizabethan plays in which the Devil appears among the Dramatis Personæ, even if he act no very prominent part. These for the most part fluctuate between the semi-serious and merest buffoonery. Thus the prologue of _The Merry Devil of Edmonton_ (4to, 1608), in which the enchanter Peter Fabell tricks the demon who has come to demand the fulfilment of his contract, is at the opening managed with due decorum, but it soon adopts a lighter, and even trivial, vein. William Rowley’s _The Birth of Merlin, or The Childe hath found his Father_ (not printed until 1662) is a curious medley of farce and romance, informed with a certain awkward vigour and not wholly destitute of poetry. Dekker’s _If it be not good, the Divel is in it_ (4to, 1612), which may be traced to the old prose _History of Friar Rush_, depicts the exploits of three lesser fiends who are dispatched to spread their master’s kingdom in Naples. It is an unequal play, the satire of which falls very flat, since it is obvious that the poet was not sincere in his extravagant theme.[25]

Ben Jonson’s _The Devil is an Ass_, acted in 1616, is wholly comic. Pug, “the less devil,” who visits the earth, and engages himself as servant to a Norfolk squire, Fabian Fitzdottrel, is hopelessly outwitted on every occasion by the cunning of mere mortals. Eventually he finds himself lodged in Newgate, and in imminent danger of the gallows were he not rescued by the Vice, Iniquity, by whom he is carried off rejoicing to the nether regions. His fate may be compared with that of Roderigo in Wilson’s excellent comedy _Belphegor: or, The Marriage of the Devil_ (produced at Dorset Garden in the summer of 1690), who with his two attendant devils flies back to his native hell to escape the woes of earth.

In _The Devil’s Charter_, however, by Barnaby Barnes (1607), we have what is undoubtedly a perfectly serious tragedy, which if not exactly modelled upon, at least owes many hints to Marlowe’s _Faustus_. It is flamboyant melodrama and wildly unhistorical throughout, a very tophet of infernal horror. The chief character is a loathsome caricature of Pope Alexander VI,[26] and, as we might expect, all the lies and libels of Renaissance satirists and Protestant pamphleteers are heaped together to portray an impossible monster of lust and crime. The filthiest scandals of Burchard, Sanudo, Giustiniani, Filippo Nerli, Guicciardini, Paolo Giovio, Sannazzaro and the Neapolitans, have been employed with one might almost say a scrupulous conscientiousness. The black art, in particular, occupies a very prominent place in these lurid scenes. Alexander has signed a bond with a demon Astaroth, and it is to this contract that all his success is ascribed. In Act IV there is a long incantation when the Pope puts on his magical robes, takes his rod and pentacle, and standing within the circle he has traced conjures in strange terms, commencing a Latin exorcism which tails off into mere gibberish. Various devils appear, and he is shown a vision of Gandia’s murder by Cæsar,[27] with other atrocities. At the climax of the piece we have the banquet with Cardinal Adrian of Corneto, and whilst the guests talk “The Devill commeth and changeth the Popes bottles.” The Borgias are poisoned, and in a far too protracted “Scena Ultima” Alexander discourses and disputes frantically with the demons who appear to mock and torment him. There is the old device of an ambiguous contract; presently a “Devil like a Poast” enters winding a horn to summon the unhappy wretch, who raves and shrieks out meaningless ejaculations as he is dragged away amid thunder and lightning. This sort of thing pandered to the most brutalized appetites of the groundlings, and _The Devil’s Charter_ may be summed up as a disgusting burlesque not without its quota of vile stuff that is so repulsive as to be physically sickening.

Upon a careful consideration of those seventeenth-century plays which have Witchcraft as their main theme, and leaving on one side, for our purpose, the essentially romantic treatment of the subject, however realistic some details of the picture may be, it is, I think, beyond dispute that _The Witch of Edmonton_ in the figure of Mother Sawyer offers us the best contemporary illustration of the Elizabethan witch. The drama itself is one of no ordinary merit and power, whilst the understanding and restraint which set the play apart from its fellows also raises it to the level of genuine tragedy. It should be noticed that we see a witch, so to speak, in the process of making. Mother Sawyer is in truth the victim of the prejudices of the village hinds and ignorant yokels. When she first appears it is merely as a poor old crone driven to desperation by her brutal neighbours; the farmers declare she is a witch, and at length persecution makes her one. She is malignant and evil enough once the compact with the demon has been confirmed; she longs from the first to be revenged upon her enemies and mutters to herself “by what art May the thing called Familiar be purchased?” But, in one sense, she is urged and hounded to her destiny, and the authors, although never doubting her compact with the powers of darkness, her vile and poisonous life, show a detached but very real sympathy for her. It is this touch of humanity, the pathos and pity of the poor old hag, repulsive, wicked, and baleful as she may be, which must place _The Witch of Edmonton_ in my opinion among the greatest and most moving of all Elizabethan plays.

It is no pleasant task to turn now to the theatre of the eighteenth century in this connexion. The witch became degraded; she was comic, burlesqued, buffooned; a mere property for a Christmas pantomime: _Harlequin Mother Bunch_, _Mother Goose_, _Harlequin Dame Trot_, Charles Dibdin’s _The Lancashire Witches, or The Distresses of Harlequin_[28] whose tinsel, music, and mummery drew all the macaronis and cyprians in London to the Circus during the winter of 1782-3.

Some subtle premonition of the great success of Harrison Ainsworth’s powerful story _The Lancashire Witches_—for this and the macabre _Rookwood_ are probably the best of the work of a talented writer now unduly depreciated and decried—seems to have suggested to the prolific Edward Fitzball his “Legendary Drama in Three Acts,” _The Lancashire Witches, A Romance of Pendle Forest_, produced at the Adelphi Theatre, 3 January, 1848. It was quick work, for it was only a month before, 3 December, 1847, that Ainsworth, writing to his friend Crossley of Manchester, states that he has accepted the liberal offer of the _Sunday Times_—£1000 and the copyright to revert to the author on the completion of the work—that his new romance _The Lancashire Witches_ should make its appearance as a serial in the paper. He had already sketched out the plan, and he must have given Fitzball an idea of this, or at least have allowed the dramatist the use of some few rough notes, for although the play and the novel have little, one might say nothing essential, in common, the chief character in the theatre, Bess of the Woods, “140 years old, formerly Abbess of S. Magdalen’s, doomed for her crimes to an unearthly age,” is none other than the anchoress Isolde de Heton.[29] The fourth scene of the second act presents the ruins of Whalley Abbey by moonlight. During an incantation the picture gradually changes; the broken arches form themselves into perfect masonry; the ivy disappears from the windows to show the ruby and gold of coloured glass; the decaying altar glitters with piled plate and the gleam of myriad tapers. A choir of nuns rises from the grave to dance with spectral gallants. Among the votaries are Nutter, Demdike, and Chattox “Three Weird Sisters, doomed for their frailties to become Witches.” But they utter no word, and have no part save this in the action. This scene must have proved extraordinarily effective upon the stage. It owes much to the haunted convent in Meyerbeer’s _Robert le Diable_, produced at the Académie Royale in November, 1831, and given in a piratical form both at Drury Lane and Covent Garden within a few weeks. Nor is it comparable to its original. In Fitzball’s melodrama O. Smith appeared as Gipsy Dalian, a new character; and Miss Faucit (Mrs. Bland) as Bess of the Woods. The play, for what it is, a luridly theatrical and Surrey-side sensation, has merit; but to speak of it in the same breath as Middleton or even as Barnes would be absurd.

Shelley’s genius has with wondrous beauty translated for us scenes from Calderon’s _El Magico Prodigioso_, one of the loveliest songs of the Spanish nightingale. On another plane, admittedly, but yet, I think, far from lacking a simple comeliness of its own and surely not without most poignant pathos, is Longfellow’s New England Tragedy _Giles Corey of the Salem Farms_.[30] The honest sincerity of Cotton Mather, the bluff irascible heartiness of Corey himself, the inopportune scepticism of his wife—which to many would seem sound common sense—the hysteria of Mary Walcot, the villainy of John Gloyd, all these are sketched with extraordinary power, a few quiet telling touches which make each character, individual, alert, alive.

In the French theatre we have an early fourteenth-century _Miracle de Nostre Dame de Robert le Dyable_, and in 1505 was acted _Le mystère du Chevalier qui donna sa femme au Diable_, à dix personnages. As one might well expect during the long classical period of the drama Witchcraft could have found no place in the scenes of the French dramatists. It would have been altogether too wild, too monstrous a fantasy. And so it is not until the 24 floréal, An XIII (11 June, 1805) that a play which interweaves sorcery as its theme is seen at the Théâtre français, when _Les Templiers_ of Raynouard was given there. A few years later _Le Vampire_, a thrilling melodrama by Charles Nodier and Carmouche, produced on 13 August, 1820, was to draw all idle Paris to the Porte-Saint-Martin. In 1821 two facile writers quick to gauge the public appetite, Frédéric Dupetit-Mèré and Victor Ducagne, found some favour with _La Sorcière, ou l’Orphelin écossais_. Alexandre Dumas, and one of his many ghosts Auguste Maquet, collaborated (if one may use the term) in a grandiose five-act drama _Urbain Grandier_, 1850. _La Sorcière Canidie_, a one-act play by Aurélien Vivie, produced at Bordeaux in 1888 is of little account. _La Reine de l’Esprit_ (1891) of Maurice Pottecher is founded to some extent on the _Comte de Gabalis_, whilst the same author’s three-act _Chacun cherche son Trésor_, “histoire des sorciers” (1899) was not a little helped by the music of Lucien Michelet. There are many excuses for passing over with a mere mention _Les Noces de Sathan_ (1892), a “drama ésoterique,” by Jules Bois, and _Les Basques ou la Sorcière d’Espelette_, a lyric drama in three acts by Loquin and Mégret de Belligny, produced at Bordeaux in 1892, has an interest which is almost purely local. Alphonse Tavan’s _Les Mases_ (sorciers), a legendary drama of five acts of alternating prose and verse seen in 1897 was helped out by every theatrical resource, a ballet, chorus, mechanical effects, and confident advertisement. Serge Basset’s _Vers le Sabbat_ “évocation de sorcellerie en un acte” which appeared in the same year need not be seriously considered. Nor does an elaborate episode “Le Sabbat et la Herse Infernale,” wherein Mons. Benglia appeared as Satan, that was seen in the Folies Bergère revue, _Un Soir de Folie_, 1925-6, call for more than the briefest passing mention.

In more recent days Victor Sardou’s _La Sorcière_ is a violent, but effective, melodrama. Produced at the Théâtre Sarah-Bernhardt, 15 December, 1903, with De Max as Cardinal Ximenes and Sarah Bernhardt as the moresque Zoraya, it obtained a not undeserved success. The locale of the tragedy is Toledo, anno domini 1506; Act IV, the Inquisition scene; and Act V, the square before the Cathedral with the grim pyre ready for the torch, were—owing to the genius of a great actress—truly harrowing. Of course it is very flamboyant, very unbalanced, very unhistorical, but in its gaudy theatrical way—all the old tricks are there—_La Sorcière_ had an exciting thrill for those who were content to be unsophisticated awhile.

John Masefield’s adaptation from the Norwegian of Wiers-Jennsen, _The Witch_,[31] a drama in four acts, is a very different thing. Here we have psychology comparable to that of Dekker and Ford. Nor will the performances of Miss Janet Achurch as Merete Beyer and Miss Lillah McCarthy as Anne Pedersdotter easily be forgotten. As a picture of the horror of Witchcraft in cold Scandinavia, the gloom and depression of formidable fanaticism engendered by Lutheran dogma and discipline with the shadow of destiny lowering implacably over all, this is probably the finest piece of work dealing in domestic fashion with the warlock and the sorceress that has been seen on the English stage since the reign of wise King James three hundred years ago.

NOTES TO CHAPTER VII

[1] The _Floralia_, the most wanton of Roman festivals, commenced on the fourth day before the Kalends of May, and during these celebrations the spectators insisted that the _mimæ_ should play naked, “agebantur [_Floralia_] a meretricibus ueste exutis omni cum uerborum licentia, motuumque obscænitate,” says the old commentator on Martial I, 1. “Lasciui Floralia laeta theatri” Ausonius names them, _De Feriis Romanis_, 25. Lactantius, _De Institutionibus Diuinis_, I, 20, writes: “Celebrantur ergo illi ludi cum omni lasciuia, conuenientes memoriæ meretricis. Nam praeter uerborum licentiam, quibus obscænitas omnis effunditur; exuuntur etiam uestibus populo flagitante meretrices; quæ tunc mimorum funguntur officio; et in conspectu populi usque ad satietatem impudicorum luminum cum pudendis motibus detinentur.” Both S. Augustine and Arnobius reprehend the lewdness of these naked dances. At Sens during the Feast of Fools, when every licence prevailed, men were led in procession _nudi_. Warton (_History of English Poetry_, by T. Warton, edited by W. C. Hazlitt, 4 vols., 1871), II, 223, states that in the Mystery Plays “Adam and Eve are both exhibited on the stage naked, and conversing about their nakedness; this very pertinently introduces the next scene, in which they have coverings of fig-leaves.” In a stage-direction of the Chester Plays we find: “Statim nudi sunt.... Tunc Adam et Eua cooperiant genitalia sua cum foliis.” Chambers, _The Mediæval Stage_, II, 143, doubts whether the players were actually nude, and suggests a suit of white leather. Warton, however, is probably right.

[2] Phales was an early deity, very similar to Priapus, and closely associated with the Bacchic mysteries. For the refrain see _The Acharnians_, 263-265.

[3] See Callot’s series of character-etchings, _I Balli di Sfessanio_.

[4] Not to be confused with the printer Fust, as was at one time frequently supposed.

[5] In Marlowe’s play Faust welcomes “German Valdes and Cornelius.” Who Valdes is has not been satisfactorily explained. The suggestion of Dr. Havelock Ellis that Paracelsus seems intended is no doubt correct.

[6] Translated from the Middle Dutch by Harry Morgan Ayres, with an Introduction by Adriaan J. Barnouw. _The Dutch Library_, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. 1924.

[7] The International Theatre Society gave a private subscription performance of _Mary of Nimmegen_ at Maskelyne’s Theatre on Sunday, 22 February, 1925. But such a play, presenting crowded scenes of burgher life, the streets, the market-place, to be effective demands a large stage and costly production.

[8] Meroe is the hag “saga et diuina” in Apuleius, _Metamorphoseon_, I.

[9] _Macbeth_ was tinkered at almost from the first. Upon the revival of the play immediately after the Restoration the witch scenes were given great theatrical prominence. 7 January, 1667, Pepys declared himself highly delighted with the “divertissement, though it be a deep tragedy.”

[10] _The Witch of Edmonton_ was revived under my direction for two performances at the Lyric Theatre, Hammersmith, 24 and 26 April, 1921. Sybil Thorndike played the Witch, Russell Thorndike, the Familiar; Ion Swinley, Frank Thorney; Edith Evans, Ann Ratcliffe; and Frank Cochrane, Cuddy Banks.

[11] 4to 1634: _Stationers’ Register_, 28 October.

[12] In a famous Scotch trial for witchcraft, 1661, Jonet Watson of Dalkeith confessed “that the Deivill apeired vnto her in the liknes of ane prettie boy, in grein clothes.”

[13] Liber III. _De Magis et Maleficis Finnorum._

[14] Tegue o’ Divelly was acted by Antony Leigh, the most famous comedian of his day, and an intimate friend of Shadwell.

[15] Curiously enough Halliwell in _The Poetry of Witchcraft_, a private reprint of Heywood and Shadwell’s plays, 80 copies only, 1853, has not reproduced the italic letter but gives all the dialogue in roman to the great detriment of this edition.

[16] Licensed for printing 2 November, 1672, and published quarto with date 1673.

[17] At a later revival Ismeron’s recitative “Ye twice ten hundred Deities” was set by Purcell.

[18] Dryden’s. He wrote the first scene of the first act, the whole of the fourth act, rather more than one-half of act five, and Lee is responsible for the rest of the tragedy.

[19] For a full analysis and critical examination of _Zoroastres_ see my article in the _Modern Language Review_, XII, Jan., 1917.

[20] The title-rôle Dame Dobson was played by Mrs. Corey, a mistress of broad comedy, who was much admired for her humour by Samuel Pepys.

[21] Mrs. Behn owes a hint to Shirley’s _The Lady of Pleasure_, licensed by Sir Henry Herbert, 15 October, 1635; 4to. 1637. It must be confessed that she has managed her scenes with more wit and spirit than the older dramatist, whose charming verse is perhaps too seriously poetical for the actual situation.

[22] George Sinclar, _Satan’s Invisible World Discovered_, 1685. Reprint, Edinburgh, 1871. Supplement, I, p. xii.

[23] _The Maid’s Revenge_, acted 1626, printed 1639.

[24] Compare Mopus in Wilson’s _The Cheats_ (acted in 1662); Stargaze in _The City Madam_; Rusee, Norbrett, and their accomplices in _Rollo_; Iacchelino in Ariosto’s _Il Negromante_; and a score beside.

[25] Sir Adolphus Ward, _English Dramatic Literature_, 1899, II, 465, says that Langbaine wrongly supposed the source of this play to be “Machiavelli’s celebrated _Novella_ on the marriage of Belphegor.” But this is hardly correct. Langbaine wrote: “The beginning of his Play seems to be writ in imitation of _Matchiavel’s_ Novel of _Belphegor_: where _Pluto_ summons the Devils to Councel.”

[26] For a fitting account of Alexander VI see _Le Pape Alexandre VI et les Borgia_, Paris, 1870, by Père Ollivier, O.P.; also Leonetti _Papa Alessandro VI secondo documenti e carteggi del tempo_, 3 vols., Bologna, 1880. _Chronicles of the House of Borgia_, by Frederick, Baron Corvo, 1901, may be studied with profit. Monsignor de Roo’s _Material for a History of Pope Alexander VI_, 5 vols., Bruges, 1924, is of the greatest value, and completely authoritative.

[27] The murderer of the Duke of Gandia is unknown to history, if not to historians.

[28] The songs only are printed, 8vo, 1783.

[29] Fosbrooke, _British Monachism_, says that in the reign of Henry VI one Isolde de Heton petitioned the King to let her be admitted as an anchoress in the Abbey of Whalley. But afterwards she left the enclosure and broke her vows, whereupon the King dissolved the hermitage.

[30] The incidents are historically correct. See Cotton Mather’s _Wonders of the Invisible World_. Corey refusing to plead was pressed to death.

[31] Originally produced 10 October, 1910, at the Royalty, Glasgow: in London, 31 January, 1911, at the Court. Revived at the Court, 29 October, 1913, when it ran for a month, and was afterwards included in the subsequent three weeks’ repertory season.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

This Bibliography does not aim at anything beyond presenting a brief and convenient hand-list of some of the more important books upon Witchcraft. It does not even purport to give all those monographs to which reference is made in the body of this study. A large number of books I have thought it superfluous to include. Thus I have omitted general works of reference such as the _Encyclopædia Britannica_, Du Cange’s _Glossarium ad scriptores mediæ et infimæ latinitatis_, Dugdale’s _Monasticon_; daily companions such as the Missal, the Breviary, the Bible; Homer, Vergil, Horace, Ovid, Petronius, Lucan; Shakespeare, Marlowe, Ford, Dryden, Burton’s _Anatomy of Melancholy_, and English classics; those histories which are on every library shelf, Gibbon, Lingard, Ranke; and such histories as the _Cambridge Modern History_.

On the other hand, I have of purpose included various books which may not seem at first sight to have much connexion with Witchcraft, although they are, as a matter of fact, by no means impertinent. In order to appreciate this vast subject in all its bearings, even the desultory or amateur investigator should at least be fairly grounded in theology, philosophy, and psychology. The student must be a capable theologian.

I have devoted some particular attention to the works of the demonologists, now almost universally neglected, but a close study of which is essential to the understanding of occultism and the appreciation of the grave dangers that may lurk there.

I am only too conscious of the plentiful lacunæ in this Bibliography. However, to attempt anything like a complete catalogue—if, indeed, it were possible to essay so illimitable a task—would involve the listing of very many thousands of books, and would itself require no inconsiderable a tale of volumes.

I need hardly point out that side by side with works of the highest importance it has been found necessary to include a few of no great value, which yet have their use to illustrate some one point or special phase.

GENERAL

CAILLET, ALBERT L. _Manuel bibliographique des sciences psychiques ou occultes, science des Mages, hermétique, astrologie, Kabbale, Francmaçonnerie, médecine ancienne, mesmérisme, sorcellerie, singularités, etc._ 3 vols. Paris, 1913.

GRÆSSE, JOHAN GEORG THEODOR. _Bibliotheca magica et pneumatica._ Leipzig, 1843. (In spite of obvious defects a very valuable bibliography.)

YVE-PLESSIS, R. _Bibliographie française de la sorcellerie._ Paris, 1900. (An immense and exhaustive work on French books.)

AARON THE GREEK [Simon Blocquel]. _La Magie rouge._ Paris, 1821.

ABNER, THEODORE. _Les apparitions du Diable._ Brussels, 1879.

ACONTIUS. _Stratagemata Satanæ._ Libri VIII. Basle, 1565.

_Acta Sanctorum._ Par les Bollandistes. Antwerp, Tongerloo, Brussels, 1644 _sqq._ Reprinted, Paris, 1863 _sqq._

ADHÉMAR DE CHABANNES. _Chronicle_: in _Monumenta Germaniæ historica_. Ed. G. A. Pertz, etc. Vol. IV.

AGOBARD, S. _Opera omnia._ Migne, _Patrologia latina_. Vol. CIV.

AGRIPPA, HEINRICH CORNELIUS. _La philosophie occulte de Henr. Corn. Agrippa ... traduite du latin_ [par A. Levasseur]. 2 vols. Hague, 1727.

_Œuvres magiques ... mises en français par Pierre d’Aban._
Rome, 1744. (Of the last rarity. There are other editions,
Liège, 1788; Rome, 1800; Rome, 1744 (_circa_ 1830); but all
these are extremely scarce.)

ALANUS (Alain de Lille). _Aduersus hæreticos et Waldenses._ Ed. J. Masson. Paris, 1612.

ALANUS, HENRICUS. _Ciceronis de Divinatione et de Fato._ 1839.

ALBERT, LE PETIT. _Alberti Parui Lucii libellus de mirabilibus Naturæ arcanis._ (This treatise which tells how to confect philtres, make talismans, use the hand of glory, discover treasures, etc., has been very frequently translated into French, generally under the running title _Les secrets merveilleux de la magie naturelle et cabalistique_....)

BL. ALBERTUS MAGNUS, O.P. _Opera omnia._ Ed. Father Peter Jammy, O.P. 21 vols. Lyons, 1651, etc.

_De alchimia._ (This treatise is said to be doubtful.)

_De secretis mulierum._ (This work is certainly not from the
pen of the great Dominican doctor, to whom, however, it was
universally ascribed. There are a vast number of editions, and
translations, especially into French. _Les secretz des femmes
et homes ... stampato in Torino par Pietro Ranot_, N.D. _circa_
1540. _Les secrets admirables du grand Albert._ Paris, 1895.)

_Commentaria._ Lib. IV, dist. 34. _An maleficii impedimento
aliquis potest impediri a potentia cocundi._ (_Nœud de
l’aiguillette._)

ALEXANDER III, POPE. _Epistolæ_ apud _Regesta R. R. Pontificum_. Nos. 10, 584-14, 424. Ed. Jaffé. And Löwenfeld’s _Epistolæ Pontif. Rom. ineditæ_. Leipzig, 1885.

ALEXIS. _Secreti del reverendo Donno Alessio Piemontese._ Venice, 1555. (Attributed by Girolamo Muzio to the alchemist Girolamo Ruscelli.)

ALLARD, PAUL. _Histoire des persécutions._ 5 vols. Paris, 1892.

_Julien l’Apostat._ 3 vols. Paris, 1900.

ALPHONSUS LIGUORI, S. _Theologia Moralis._ 9 vols. Malines, 1828. Also ed. P. Gaudé, C. SS. R. Rome, 1905.

ALVARO, PELAYO. _De Planctu Ecclesiæ._ Venice, 1560.

AMBROISE DA VIGNATE (_c._ 1408). _Tractatus de Hæreticis._ Rome, 1581.

AMBROSE, S. _Opera omnia._ Ed. Paolo Angelo Ballerini. 6 vols. Folio. Milan, 1875.

ANANIA, GIOVANNI LORENZO. _De Natura Dæmonum._ Apud Vol. II. _Malleus Maleficarum._ 1669.

_Anonymi Gesta Francorum et Aliorum Hierosolymitanorum._ Oxford.

ANTONELLI, G. PROF. _Lo spiritismo._ _Fede e Scienza_, II. 11, 12. Rome.

ANTONINUS, O. P. S. _Confessionale._ Florence, 1496.

ANTONIO A SPIRITU SANCTO, O.D.C. _Directorium Mysticum._ Paris, 1904.

AREMI (LE SAGE). _Secrets de vieux Druide._ Lille, 1840.

ARETINI, ANGELO. _Tractatus de maleficiis._ 1521.

ARIES, MARTIN. _De superstitionibus maleficorum._ Rome, 1559.

ARIMINENSIS, AUGUSTINUS. _Additiones in Angeli Aretini Tractatum de maleficiis._ Milan, 1514.

ARNAULD DE VILLENEUVE. _De Maleficiis._ Lyons, 1509.

ARNOULD, ARTHUR. _Histoire de l’Inquisition._ Paris, 1869.

AROUX. _Mystères de la Chevalerie et de l’amour platonique._ 1857-8.

ARPE (PETR. FRID.). _De Prodigiosis Naturæ et Artis Operibus Talismanes et Amuleta._ Hamburg, 1717.

ATHANASIUS, S. _Opera omnia._ Migne, _Pat. Græci_. Vols. XXIII-XXVIII.

ATWOOD, M. A. _A Suggestive Inquiry into the Hermetic Mystery._

AUGUSTINE, S. _Opera omnia._ Migne, _Pat. Lat._ Vols. XXXIX-XLVII.

_De Ciuitate Dei._ Ed. J. E. C. Welldon, D.D., Dean of Durham.
2 vols. 1924. (The introduction and appendices must be used
with caution.)

_Confessiones._ Ed. P. Knöll. _Corpus Scriptorum Eccl.
Latinorum_ (Vienna.) XXXIII.

D’AUTUN, JACQUES. _L’Incredulité savante._ Lyons, 1674.

D’AVALLON, ANDRÉ, ET CONDIS. _Dictionnaire de droit canonique._

AZPILCEUTA, MARTIN. _Opera omnia._ 3 vols. Lyons, 1589.

BACO, R. _De secretis operibus magiæ._ Paris, 1542.

BACON, ROGER. _Epistola de secretis operibus._ Hamburg, 1608; 1618. (The same work as _De mirabili potestate artis et naturæ et de nullitate magiæ_. Paris, 1542; Oxford, 1604; London, 1859.)

BAISSAC, JULES. _Les grands jours de la sorcellerie._ Paris, 1890.

BALLERINI, ANTONIO, S.J. _Opus theologicum morale._ 7 vols. Prati, 1892.

BANG. _Norske Hexeformularer._ Christiania, 1902.

BARONIUS, CESARE VEN. _Annales ecclesiastici._ 38 vols. Lucca, 1738-59.

BARRETT. _Magus or Celestial Intelligencer; Being a complete system of Occult Philosophy, etc._ 1801.

BASIL, S. _Opera omnia._ Paris, 1839.

BASIN, BERNARDUS. _De artibus magicis._ 1482; and Paris, 1506.

BECANUS, MARTIN, S.J. _Opuscula Theologica sive Controversiæ Fidei inter Catholicos et Hæreticos hujus temporis._ Duaci, 1634.

BEER, M. _Social Struggles in the Middle Ages._ London, 1924.

BEKKER, BALTHASAR. _De Betoverde Wereld._ 4 vols. Amsterdam, 1691-93.

BENEDICT XIII. _Vita del Sommo Pontefice Benedetto XIII._ Venezia, 1737.

BENEDICT XIV, POPE. _De Beatificatione et Canonizatione._ 9 vols. Rome, 1787.

BENOIST, J., O.P. _Histoire des Albigeoises et des Vaudois._ Paris, 1691.

BERNARD, S. _Opera omnia._ Migne, _Pat. Lat._ CLXXXII-CLXXXV.

BERNARD OF COMO, O.P. _Lucerna inquisitorum hæreticæ prauitatis ... et eiusdem Tractatus de Strigibus...._ Milan, 1566; Rome, 1584.

BERNARD OF LUXEMBURG, O.P. _Catalogus hæreticorum omnium._ Erfurt, 1522.

BERTAGNA, J. B. _De casuum reseruatione in Sacramento Pœnitentiæ._ Turin, 1868.

BERTHIER, O.P. _L’Étude de la Somme Théologique de S. Thomas d’Aquin._ Paris, 1905. (Appendix III. _Spiritisme et hypnotisme d’après S. Thomas._)

BESTERMAN, THEODORE. _Crystal-Gazing._

BIEL, GABRIEL. _Supplementum in 28 distinctiones ultimas 4ti magistri sententiarum._ (1486.) Basle, 1520.

BINSFELD, PETER. _De Confessionibus Maleficorum._ Treves, 1589.

BODIN, JEAN. _De la démonomanie des sorciers._ Paris, 1580.

_Le fleav des demons et sorciers._ Nyort, 1616.

BOGUET, HENRY. _Discours des Sorciers._ 3rd ed. Lyons, 1590.

BOISSARDUS, JAN. JAC. _De Diuinatione et Magicis Prasetigiis._ Oppenheimii, 1615.

BONAVENTURA, S. _Opera omnia._ 10 vols. Quaracchi, 1882-1902.

BRAND, J. _Observations on Popular Antiquities._ 2 vols. 1813.

BRETT, G. S. _A History of Psychology._ Vol. I, Ancient and Patristic; Vol. II, Mediæval and Early Modern; Vol. III, Modern Psychology.

BROGNOLI, O.F.M. _Alexicacon, hoc est de maleficiis._ Venice, 1714.

BRUNUS, CONRADUS. _De hæreticis et schismaticis._ Rome, 1584.

BUDGE, SIR E. A. WALLIS. _Tutankhamen: Amenism, Atenism, and Egyptian Monotheism, with Hieroglyphic Texts of Hymns to Amen and Aten._

_Egyptian Magic._ Third Impression. London, N.D. [1923].

_Bullarium Papæ Benedicti XIV._ Rome, 1746.

BURCHARD, WORMACIENSIS. _Decretum._ Migne, _Pat. Lat._ Vol. CLX.

BURKITT, F. G. _The Religion of the Manichees._ Cambridge, 1925.

BUTLER, ALBAN. _Lives of the Saints._ 1756-9; 2 vols. Dublin, 1833.

BZOVIUS, A. _Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ._ Apud Zilettum, _q.u._

CÆSALPINUS, ANDREAS. _Dæmonum inuestigatio._ Florence, 1580.

CAIETANUS, THOMAS. _De Maleficiis._ 1500.

CALMET, AUGUSTIN DOM, O.S.B. _Traité sur les Apparitions des Esprits, et sur les Vampires._ 2 vols. Paris, 1751.

CAPPELLO, S.J., FELIX M. _De Censuris._ Rome, 1919.

CARENA. _Tractatus de officio Sanctæ Inquisitionis._ Lyons, 1669.

CASSINIS, SAMUEL DE. _Question de la strie._ 1505.

CAUZ, C. F. DE. _De Cultibus Magicis._ 1771.

CHARLEY, T. _News from the Invisible World._ Wakefield, n.s. (_circa_ 1850).

CHRYSOSTOM, S. JOHN. _Opera omnia Græce._ Edidit H. Savile. 8 vols. Etonæ, 1612.

CHURCHWARD, ALBERT. _The Arcana of Freemasonry._

CIRVELIUS, PETRUS. _De magica superstitione._ 1521.

_Clementis Alexandrini Opera._ 2 vols. Venice, 1757.

_Collectanea Chemica._ (Select Treatises on Alchemy and Hermetic Medicine.) 1893.

COLLIN DE PLANCY, J. A. S. _Dictionnaire Infernal._ Editio princeps. 2 vols. Paris, 1818. (I have used the sixth, and last, edition, one vol. Paris, H. Plon. 4to, 1863. The six editions differ widely from one another. This famous work is valuable, but often uncritical and even erroneous.)

COLLIUS, FRANCIS. _De Animabus Paganorum._ Milan, 1622.

CONCONIER. _L’âme humaine._ Paris, 1890.

_L’hypnotisme franc._ Paris, 1898.

CONDROCHIUS, BAPTISTA. _De morbis ueneficis ac ueneficiis._ Libri IV. Venice, 1595.

COUNCELL, R. W. _Apologia Alchymiæ._

CRESPET, PÈRE CELESTINE. _La haine de Sathan contre l’homme._ Paris, 1590.

CROWE, CATHERINE. _The Night Side of Nature._ 2 vols. 1848. (A standard work; very frequently reprinted.)

CUTHBERT, O.S.F.C., FATHER. _God and the Supernatural._ London, 1920.

DANEAU, LAMBERT. _Les Sorciers._ 1574. There is an English tr. _A Dialogue of Witches_, 1575. [London?]

DAYNES, GILVBERT W. _The Untrodden Paths of Masonic Research._

DE LANCRE, PIERRE. _Tableau de l’inconstance des mavvais anges et démons._ Paris, 1612.

_L’incredvlité et mescréance dv sortilège._ Paris, 1622.

_Du Sortilège._ 1627. (This is the rarest of De Lancre’s books, and very little known.)

DELASSUS, JULES. _Les Incubes et les Succubes._ Paris, 1897.

DELEHAYE, H., S.J. _Légendes Hagiographiques._ Brussels, 1906. Trans. by Mrs. V. M. Crawford as _The Legends of the Saints_. (_The Westminster Library._)

DELRIO, MARTIN ANTON, S.J. _Disquisitionum Magicarum Libri Sex._ Louvain, 1599.

_Devil, History of the, Ancient and Modern, with a Description of the Devil’s Dwellings._ Durham, 1822.

DIANA, R. P. D. ANTONINUS. _Resolutiones morales._ Lyons, 1633.

DIDRON, M. _Iconographie chrétienne. Histoire de Dieu._ Paris, 1843. Eng. tr. 2 vols, by E. J. Millington. London, 1851. Bohn’s Library.

DOBBINS, F. S. _False Gods, or the Idol Worship of the World._ Boston, _circa_ 1870.

DORAT, S.J., JOSEPH. _Psychologia._ Vol. VI of _Summa Philosophiæ Christianæ_. 8 vols. Rome.

DRAGO, LUIGI VINCENZO. _Il materialismo e il dogma._ _Fede e Scienza._ IV, 40 Rome.

DULAURE, J. A. _Des Cultes qui ont précédé et amené l’idolâtrie._ 1805.

_Des Divinités Génératrices._ Paris, 1805.

DU PREL, CARL. Tr. C. C. Massey. _The Philosophy of Mysticism._ 2 vols. London, 1889.

ELICH, PHILIP LUDWIG. _Dæmonomagia, siue de dæmonis cacurgia._ Frankfort, 1607.

ENNEMOSER, JOSEPH. _The History of Magic._ 2 vols. London, 1854.

ERASTUS, THOMAS. _De lamiis seu strigibus._ Basle, 1577.

_Errores Gazariorum seu illorum qui scobam uel baculum equitare probantur._ 1450.

EVENIUS, SIGISMUND. _Dissertatio physica de magia._ 1512.

EWICK, JOHN. _De sagorum quos uulgo ueneficos appellant natura._ Bremen, 1584.

EYMERIC, O.P., NICHOLAS. _Directorium Inquisitorum._ Rome, 1585; Venice, 1607.

FERRERES, S.J., I. B. _Theologia Moralis._ 11th ed. Rome, 1921.

FRANZELIN, S.J., CARDINAL I.B. _De Deo Uno._ Rome.

FRAZER, SIR JAMES. _Folk-Lore in the Old Testament._ London, 1923.

FREDERICQ, DR. PAUL. _Corpus documentorum Inquisitionis hæreticæ prauitatis neerlandicæ._ 5 vols. Ghent, 1889 _sqq_.

_Geschiednes der Inquisitie de Neerlanden tot aen hare
herinrichting onder Keizer Karel V_ (1025-1520). Ghent, 1892
_sqq._

FREUD, SIGISMUND. _Totem and Taboo. Resemblances between the Psychic Lives of Savages and Neurotics._ London, 1919.

GAFFARELLUS, JAC. _Curiositates Inauditæ._ Hamburg, 1706.

GAMS, PIUS BONIFACIUS, O.S.B. _Die Kirchengeschichte von Spanien._ 5 vols. Regensburg, 1862.

GARRIGON-LEGRANGE, O.P., REGINALD. _De Reuelatione._ 2nd ed. 1921.

GAYA, LOUIS DE. _Cérémonies nuptiales de toutes les nations._ Paris, 1680.

GEBHART, EMILE. _L’Italie mystique._ Paris, 1893.

GEILER, JOHANN. _Die Emeis. Dies ist das Buch von der Omeissen._ 1516.

GEMELLI, O.F.M., AGOSTINO. _Psicologia e Biologia._ Rome, 1920.

_Non Moechaberis._ Milan, 1923.

GERBERT. _Epistolæ._ Migne. _Pat. Lat._ Vol. CXXXIX.

GERUASIUS OF TILBURY. _Otia imperialia._ Written _circa_ 1214.

GIESSLER, J. C. L. _Ecclesiastical History._ Eng. tr. 1853.

GILLY, WILLIAM STEPHEN. _Narrative of Researches among the Vaudois._ London, 1824.

GIUSTINIANUS, BERNARDUS. _Historia Generale della Monarchia Spagnuola Antica, e Moderna._ Venezia, 1674.

GODELMANN, JOHAN GEORG. _Disputatio de Magis_. Frankfort, 1584. _Tractatus de Magis._ 1591.

GODWIN, WILLIAM. _Lives of the Necromancers._ London, 1834.

GÖRRES, JOHANN JOSEPH. _Die christliche Mystik._ 4 vols. 1836-42. French translation: _La Mystique Divine, Naturelle, et Diabolique_.... 5 vols. Paris, 1861.

GOUGENOT DES MOUSSEAUX, HENRI ROGER.

_Dieu et les Dieux._ Paris, 1854.

_Mœurs et pratiques des Démons._ Paris, 1854.

_La magie au dix-neuvième siècle._ Paris, 1860.

_Les médiateurs et les moyens de la magie._ Paris, 1863.

_Les hauts phénomènes de la magie._ Paris, 1864.

(Vampires; the Incubus and the Succubus.)

GOUJET, ABBÉ. _Histoire des inquisitions._ 2 vols. Cologne, 1759.

GREGOROVIUS, FERDINAND. _Geschichte der Stadt Rom im Mittlealter._ 7 vols. 5th ed. Stuttgard and Berlin, 1903 _sqq._

GREGORY VII, POPE S. _Epistolarum libri_ apud Mansi _Sacrorum conciliorum nona ... collectio_. Florence, 1759. Also _S. Gregorii VII epistolæ et diplomata_. Ed. Horoy. Paris, 1877.

GREGORY XV, POPE. _Gesta Pontificum Romanorum._ Venice, 1688. IV, 522-36.

GREGORY THE GREAT, POPE S. _Opera omnia._ Ed. J. B. Gallicoli. 17 vols. Venice, 1765-76. Reprinted by Migne. _Pat. Lat._ LXXV-LXXIX.

GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS, S. _Opera omnia._ Paris, 1609-11. Migne. _Pat. Gr._ 4 vols. XXXV-XXXVIII.

GREGORY OF TOURS, S. _Scriptores Rerum Merouinginarum apud monumenta Germaniæ historica._ I, Pt. I, pp. 1-30. 1884-5.

GRILLANDUS, PAULUS. _De sortilegiis._ Lyons, 1533.

GUAITA, STANISLAS DE. _Essais de sciences maudites._ Paris and Brussels, 1886.

GUAZZO, FRANCESCO MARIA, AMBROSIAN. _Compendium Maleficarum._ Milan, 1608. (One of the most valuable of the earlier writers.)

GUI, BERNARD. _Practica Inquisitionis hæreticæ prauitatis._ Ed. Mgr. C. Douais. Paris, 1886.

GURY, S.J., I. P. _Theologia moralis._ 15th ed. Rome, 1907. Cum supplemento, Acta et Decreta nouissima. 2 vols. Rome, 1915.

HALES, ALEXANDER OF. _Summa uniuersæ theologiæ._ Cologne, 1622.

HANSEN, J. _Quellen und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Hexenwahns._ Bonn, 1901.

HARTMANN, FRANZ. _The Life of Phillippus Theophrastus Bombast, of Hohenheim, known by the name of Paracelsus, and the Substance of his Teachings. Magic, White and Black._

HASKINS, CHARLES HOMER. _Studies in the History of Mediæval Science._ London, 1924.

HAUBER, E. D. _Bibliotheca magica et scripta magica._ 1738-45.

HAURÉAU, B. _Histoire de la Philosophie Scolastique._ Paris, 1880.

HECKETHORN, CHARLES WILLIAM. _Secret Societies of All Ages and Countries._ 2 vols. London, 1897.

HEDELIN, FRANÇOIS. _Des Satyres, Brutes, Monstres et Demons._ Paris, 1627. Reprinted, Liseux, 1888.

HEINER, FREDERICH. _De Processu Criminali Ecclesiastico._ Rome, 1920.

HEISTERBACH, CÆSARIUS. _Dialogus Miraculorum._ _Circa_ 1225. Reprints, 1861, 1901.

HERRMANN. _Institutiones Theologiæ Dogmaticæ._ 2 vols. Rome, 1914.

HETZENAUER, O.M.C., MICHAEL. _Commentarius in librum Genesis._ Rome, 1910.

HILDEBERT, S. _Opera omnia._ Paris, 1708.

HINCMAR. _Opera omnia._ Migne, _Pat. Lat._ Vols. CXXV, CXXVI.

HOCHSTRATEN, JACOB VON. _Quam grauiter peccent quærentes auxilium a maleficiis._ 1510.

HOFFMANN, FRIDOLIN. _Geschichte des Inquisition._ 2 vols. Bonn, 1878.

HOLMES, EDMOND. _The Albigensian or Catharist Heresy._ London, 1925.

(A truly amazing defence of the Albigensians. The author has
completely misunderstood their heresies.)

HOWEY, M. OLDFIELD. _The Horse in Magic and Myth._ London, 1923.

HUEBER. _Menologium S. Francisci._ Munich, 1608.

HUGON, R. P. _De Deo Uno et Trino._ 2 vols. Rome.

_Inquisition._ _Orden que Comunmente se Guarda en el Santo Oficio de la Inquisition._ Valencia, 1736. (Contains all the forms and procedure of the Holy Office.)

IVES, GEORGE. _A History of Penal Methods._ 1914. Chapter II: “The Witch Trials.” (The whole volume is valuable.)

JACOLLIOT, LOUIS. _Occult Science in India and among the Ancients._

JACQUERIUS, NICOLAS. _Flagellum Dæmonum Fascinariorum._ 1458.

JADEROSA, FEDERICO. _Theologia Moralis._ Rome, 1922.

JAUER, NICOLAUS VON. _Tractatus de superstitionibus._ 1405.

JENNINGS, HARGRAVE. _The Rosicrucians: their Rites and Mysteries._

JORDANUS DE BERGAMO. _Quæstio de strigis._ 1476. MS. 3446. Bibliothèque nationale, Paris.

KELLY, EDWARD. _The Alchemical Writings of Edward Kelly._ Trans. from the Hamburg Edition of 1676. 1893.

KHUNRATH, H. _Amphitheatrum Sapientiæ Æternæ Solius Veræ, Christiano-Kabalisticum, Diuino-Magicum, nec non Physico-Chymicum, Tertriunum, Catholicon._ Hanover, 1609.

KRAKEWITZ VON, ALBERT JOACHIM. _De theologia dæmonum._ Wittenberg, 1715.

KRONE. _Fra Dolcino und die Patarerer._ Leipzig, 1844.

LAURENT-NAGOUR. _Occultismus und Liebe_, 1903.

LAVATER, LOYS. _De spectris, lemuribus, etc._ Geneva, 1570.

LEA, HENRY CHARLES. _History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages._ New York, 1887; London, 1888; and 3 vols., 1906.

_Superstition and Force._ Philadelphia, 1866. 3rd ed., 1878;
4th ed., 1892.

_Studies in Church History._ Philadelphia, 1869.

_History of the Inquisition in Spain._ 4 vols. London, 1906-7.

_The Inquisition in the Spanish Dependencies._ New York, 1908.