soundest and best part of men did hold and maintain And amongst other things he did ever shew a minde and disposition in the greatest part of his bookes to call in doubt and question the apparition of Specters In the which notwithstanding he doth mervelously repugne and contrary himselfe not knowing if there were any specters or if there were none somtimes alledging the authority of Psellus sometimes that of Facius Cardanus his owne father Both which did constantly maintaine the Specters and Apparitions of divells and especially Facius Cardanus who had not onely one spirit and familiar but seaven all at one time which did reveale vnto him and acquaint him plainely with many strange and goodly mervailes and sometimes affirming that all whatsoever was spoken and reported of the Apparition of spirits and Specters was nothing else but ieasts tales and leasings But this shall suffice for the discussing of Cardan his reasons and opinions Let vs now therefore proceede to refute the opinion of those which affirme that the Angells and divells cannot take vpon them a body like vnto this of ours CHAP. V. Of the Arguments of those which deny that the Angells and Divells can take vnto them a Bodie THey which doe deny that the Angells and divells can take vnto them a body do not ayme at the marke to deny their essence as do the Saduces but they doe it onely to disprove and impugne their Apparition For it is a good consequent If the Angells and divells take not vpon them any body then can they not appeare And if one should reply vnto them and say That in our spirit and vnderstanding the Angells and divells may give some shew and token of their presence To this they have their exception readie That things spirituall and intelligible and all sorts of intelligences doe represent themselves by things that are sensible Wee will see therefore by what reasons they indevour to proove First objection to proove that Angells and divells cannot take vnto them a body that an Angell or a divell cannot take a body vnto them No body say they can be vnited to an incorporall substance but onely that it may have an essence and a motion by the meanes of that substance But the Angells and diuells cannot have a body vnited in regard of any essence for in so doing we must conclude that their bodies should be naturally vnited vnto them which is altogither vntrue and therefore it remayneth that they cannot be vnited vnto a bodie but onely in regard of the motion which is a reason of no sufficiencie for the approving of their opinion For thereof would follow an absurditie in regarde of the Angels to wit That they might take all those bodies that are moved by them which is a verie great and grosse errour For the Angell did move the tongue of Balaams Asse and yet he entred not in his tongue And therefore it cannot be said that an Angell or a Divell can take a bodie vnto them Answere to the first Argument or obiection To this Argument I answere That true it is that an Angell and a Divell cannot to speake properly take vnto them every bodie that is moved For to take a bodie signifieth to adhere vnto the bodie Now the Angels and the Divels do take vnto them a bodie not to vnite it to their nature and to incorporate it together with their essence as hee that taketh any kinde of meate for sustenance much lesse to vnite the same to their person as the sonne of God tooke vpon him the humane nature But they doe it onely that they may visibly represent themselves vnto the sight of men And in this sort the Angels Divels are said to take a bodie such as is apt fit for their apparition Cap. 15. calest Hierachiae as appeareth by the authoritie of Denys Ariopagyte who writeth that by the corporal forms the properties of Angels are knowne and discerned The second Argument Againe they say That if the Angels and Divels doe take a bodie it is not for any necessitie that they have but onely to instruct and exhort vs to live well as do the Angels or to deceive and destroy vs as do the Divels Now both to the one and the other the imaginarie vision or the tentation is sufficient and therefore it seemeth that it is not needfull they should take veto them any bodie Answer to the second Argument I answere that not onely the imaginarie vision of Angels is necessary for our instruction but that also which is corporall and bodily as we shall show anone when we intreate of the Apparition of Angels And as concerning the Divels God doth permit them both visibly and invisibly to tempt vs some to their salvation and some to their damnation Moreover they thus argue The third Argument Li. 3. ca. 11. 12. That God appeared vnto the Patriarchs as is to be seene in the old Testament and the good Angels likewise as Saint Augustine proveth in his Bookes of the Trimitie Now wee may not say that God tooke vpon him any body except onely in that mysterie of his Incarnation And therefore it is needlesse to affirme that the Angels which appeare vnto men may take vpon them a bodie Answer to their third Argument I answere as doth Saint Augustine who sayth That all the apparitions which were in the olde Testament were made by the ministerie of Angels who formed and shaped vnto themselves certaine shapes and figures imaginarie and corporall by which they might reduce and drawe vnto God the soule and spirite of him that sawe them as it is possible that by figures which are sensible men may be drawne and lifted vp in spirit and contemplation vnto God And therefore wee may well say that the Angels did take vnto them a bodie when they appeared in such apparitions But now God is sayde to have appeared because God was the butte and marke whervnto by vision of those bodies the Angels did endevour and seeke to lift vp vnto God the soules of men And this is the cause that the Scripture sayth That in these Apparitions sometimes God appeared and sometimes the Angels Their fourth Argument Furthermore they make this obiection Like as it is agreeing naturally to the soule to be vnited to the bodie so not to be vnited vnto a bodie is proper and naturall vnto the Angels and Divels Now the soule cannot bee separated from the bodie when it will Therefore the Angels and Divels also cannot take vnto them a bodie when they will For answere whereof I confesse that everie thing borne and ingendred hath not any power over his being Answer to their fourth Argument for all the power of any thing floweth from the essence thereof or presupposeth an essence And because the soule by reason of her being is vnited vnto the body as the forme thereof it is not in her puissance to deliver herselfe from the vnion of
Answer to their tenth Argument do not suffice to produce a true shape of a humane body but onely by the due and ordinary meane of generation Neverthelesse so it is that the Angells and divells are capable to clothe themselves and to put on a certaine similitude of humane bodie as touching the colour and figure and other such exterior Accidents and that especially at such a time as when it may suffice them by a locall motion to moove any such bodies by meanes whereof both the vapors are thickned and againe purefied and made thin as also the clowds are diversly painted and figured But they obiect againe that this is not sufficient But they say that it behooveth the cause A reply to the former answer mooving to infuse some vertue into the body mooved but cannot infuse any vertue except it touch it And if it bee so that the Angells have not any touching nor feeling with the bodie it seemeth that then they cannot moove it And therefore it must needes be that they cannot take vpon them any body Answer to the reply But it may be said that the Angells by their commandement onely may moove the body with a motion locall which they give vnto it in touching of it not with a corporall kinde of touching but a spirituall A surreply to the former answer Against this solution they dispute further saying It behoveth the mover and the thing moved to be connexed and vnited togither as appeareth by Aristotle But in saying that an Angell doth commaund any thing of his own will Li. 7. Phisee it is to bee presupposed that then hee is not together with the bodie which is saide to bee governed by him and therefore he cannot move the bodie only by his commaundement Herevnto I answere That the commaundement of the Angell doth demaund an execution of his vertue and puissance and therefore it must of necessitie bee that there be some spirituall touching of that bodie by which it is moved The eleventh Argument They insist yet further and say That the Angels cannot move bodies with any locall motion and that therefore in vaine should the bodies bee obedient vnto them seeing they should still remain immoveable And to prove this they bring diverse arguments 8. Phisicorum Arguments vrging that angels cannot move bodies with a locall motion Their first Argument is taken from the authoritie of Aristotle who sayth That the locall motion is the principall and most perfect of all other motions Now the Angels if it be graunted that they take a bodie cannot vse any lesser or inferiour motions It followeth therefore by a more forcible reason that they can much lesse vse any locall motion which is the greatest and the most excellent of all others Answer to the first reason But the answere is easie and we say That the Angels moving themselves with a locall motion by the phantasmaticall bodie which they take may also cause the other lasser motions by vsing some corporal agents for the producing of those effects which they purpose like as the Smith vseth fire to soften the yron and to reduce it to that which they have an intention to make of it And as touching that saying of Aristotle That the locall motion is the chiefest of all motions the reason thereof is because everie corporall nature having life as apt to move it selfe locally by the meanes of the soule bee it either reasonable or sensitive which giveth life vnto it The second reason Their second Argument is That the locall motion of naturall bodies doth follow their formes But the Angels are not causes of the formes of naturall bodies and therefore they cannot be a meane to give them any locall motion Answere to the second reason Neverthelesse answere may be made them That in bodies there bee other locall motions then those that doe adhere vnto the formes as the flowing and ebbing of the Sea doe not follow the substantiall forme of the water but the influence of the Moone with much greater reason therefore may other locall motions then such as adhere to the formes follow spirituall and incorporall substances The third reason Their third Argument is That the corporall members do obey to the conception of the soule in a locall motion in asmuch as they have from her the beginning of life now the bodies which the Angels take vnto them have not from them the beginning of life for then it would behoove that the bodies and the Angels should be vnited togither And therefore it followeth that the bodies by them assumed cannot bee obedient to any locall motion Answer to the third reason I answere That the Angels have their vertue lesse restrayned or hindred then the soules insomuch that being separated from all corporall massinesse they may neverthelesse take an ayrie bodie the which they can move locally at their will and pleasure Their tvvelfth Argument Besides all the former Arguments they replie yet further and say That everie corporall motion doth not obey to the commaund of the Angels as touching the forming and fashioning thereof now the figure which the angels take is as a kinde of forme And therefore by the onely commaundement of the angels cannot any bodie take any forme or figure whatsoever bee it either of man or of any other diverse kinde comprised vnder one gender To this the answere is That the figure which the Angells take Answer to their tvvelfth Argument is in very truth a forme which is made by the abscision and dismembring as a man may say of the thickning of the ayre or by the purefaction of it or by the similitude and motion which may bee taken of the same matter But there is a very great difference betweene the forme Figure that is made so accidentally and that which is naturall and according to the true substance of a thing the which cannot possibly be confounded with this accidentall Figure Their thirteenth Argument that divells cannot take a body This is not all which they obiect for they say further touching the Divells That if they doe invest themselves with a body then they ought to be within the body which they have taken Now S. Ierome interpreting that place of the Psalmist The Lord in his holy Temple and the Glosse doe say that the divells do command and rule over images and idolls externally and cannot be in them internally and the idolls are bodies as every man knoweth And therefore it cannot be said that the divells can take vpon them any bodies Answer to their thirteenth Argument I answer That to be in or within a body of some substance hath a double and two-folde entendment or vnderstanding In the first sort it is vnderstoode vnder the Tâ—rmes of Divinitie And in this manner nothing letteth but that the Divell may be in a body In the second sort it is meant according To the essence as in giving a beeing to the
not be credible that men may in very deede be chaunged into woolves First I deny that the Scripture doth precisely affirme that Nabuchodoneser was changed into a beast but that he did eate hay as a beast and that the nailes of his fingers and his feete did grow as the clawes of an Eagle The which is a thing worthie to be marked and doth evidently shew vnto all such vndiscreete persons as would have men to be transformed into woolves how much their mindes and vnderstanding are subiect to vnconstancie and indiscretion that they cannot make any profite but do wrest to their ownesense that which being well examined doth make altogether against them For in that the Scripture saith the nailes of Nabuchodonozer did grow in such a manner and that hee did eate hay as an Oxe it giveth vs to vnderstand that his forme or shape was not changed but that hee had so lost the vse of reason and his vnderstanding that hee thought and imagined himselfe to bee a beast and hee didde therefore eate hay as a beast not that hee was really and indeede a beast For seeing his essentiall forme was not changed as themselves do confesse and the corporall and reasonable parts of man are two essences so lincked and conioyned together that before the day of death they can never be seperated how can it be that the reasonable part being not possible to bee changed because it is essentiall to man as themselves alleadge yet the body which is vnited and tyed vnto the reason and vnderstanding should and may notwithstanding bee changed and transformed Certainely the bodie of man and the soule are Relatives and a man cannot presuppose a humane body to be living and walking but hee must give vnto it a reasonable soule and so likewise on the contrarie part wee cannot take any consideration heere below of a living soule vsing reason but we must give it a body proportioned with all the draughts features and lineaments of a man This being a thing so true and certaine as to make a doubt thereof would be a manifest errour and against the principles of naturall Philosophie How can it then bee that the soule being not to be changed by their owne confession our bodies neverthelesse should bee changed and take the body of a beast But they inferre yet further say men have the power to make a cherry-tree or such like plant Obiection by sundry examples to beare and bring foorth roses or apples and they can change yron into steele and the forme of silver into gold wherefore then should it be thought so strange a matter that the divell should change the figure of a body into some other shape seeing his power doth by farre exceede that of men Solution and answer to the first example Goodly comparisons no doubt as though the man which doth graft in a tree a rose or any other graft be he that doth cause to grow within or vpon the tree or the wilde stocke that which is so strange and different from the proper substance of the tree and not rather nature it selfe which by meanes of the sappe of the tree mounting to the graft doth make it to be incorporated and vnited to the barke and body of the same tree and as Virgil saith Vdo facit in elescere libro Certaine it is that he which doth graft it doth nothing else but lend his hands to Nature the which as touching the rest according to the power that God hath given it doth worke and bring it forth causing it to come to these effects as we see The which howsoever they may seeme marvelous yet are they notwithstanding meerely naturall and easie to bee comprehended as proceeding from that which doth delight in the diversitie of her worke and as Petronius Arbiter saith Non vno contenta valet natura tenore Sed commutatas gaudet habere vices Great is the force of nature her course oft changing Never contented with one kinde of working Now God hath not given such power vnto the divell so to transforme any body into another and to alter and change the substance thereof in any sort neither is there any likenesse or identity of reason betweene the grafting of a tree and the transmutation of an entire and solide substance into another body And more then that howsoevering grafting of any thing a man do cut away even halfe the stocke to incorporate the graft yet doth the stocke still remaine the same and the graft taketh it noriture of the sappe of the stocke and doth retaine the nature thereof and that this is so it is apparant for that in the grafting of roses vpon an hawthorne or other wilding or an oke they will grow to be greene by reason of the sappe of the wilding or of the oke And therefore the nature of the tree is not so changed by the new grafting of it but that a man may easily take knowledge of the first substance thereof the which is farre otherwise in the substance of any man that is said to be changed and transformed by the divell for that therein cannot be discerned the tract or shew of any humane shape So that then the divell must bee acknowledged to bee of more might and puissance then Nature it selfe the which the Hebrewes did esteeme in a maner as a god Answer to the 2. example Now as touching that they alleadge that man doth change yron into steele and silver into gold they do not see how therein they doe most grosely and absurdly speake against themselves For I will vse no other then their owne comparison to refell all those that shall maintaine the transmutation of any true substance For as it is most certaine that yron doth easily refine it selfe into that which in nature is next and neerest vnto it that is steele neverthelesse it is alwaies yron and is easie to be discerned from that steele which is fine and naturall And as silver being molten and dissolved with matters of another nature may easily take the colour of gold and come to counterfait and adulterate the same and yet is not able to change it but that it will be discovered for such as it is being tried either with the graver the touchstone the hammer or some such meanes In like manner the divell howsoever by charming the eyes and sight of the beholders hee doe seeme in some sort to adulterate and falsifie the substance of man in making it appeare other then it is indeede yet neverthelesse doth not the humane substance suffer any change or alteration So that we may briefely resolve and conclude this point with Saint Thomas of Aquine that the divell deceiving and deluding both the inward and outward senses In 2. sententia distinct 8 and consequently the iudgement of men doth represent vnto them things divers and farre different from their naturall substances neither is the same a thing more new or strange vnto him then it is vnto some men who
the body And so in like manner it is not in the power of any Angell or divell to vnite themselves to any body as the forme thereof but they may well take a body whereof they may be the mooving cause and if a man may so speake as the figure of the figure Their fist Argument They affirme moreover that betweene the body assumed if I may vse this word and the party assuming there ought to be some proportion and similitude But betweene an Angell or divell and a body there is not any proportion for both the one and the other are of divers kindes and by consequent both of them are incompatible together Answer to their fist Argument To this I answer That if the proportion be taken according to the quantitie greatnes measure there is no proportion betweene the Angells or divells a body because their greatnesse is not of one and the same kinde nor of one and the same consideration Notwithstanding nothing can let but that there may be a certaine habitude of an Angell to a body as of a thing that mooveth to the motion and of a thing figured to the figure the which may be termed a proportion The sixt Argument Another Argument they make which is this No substance finite whatsoever it be can have many operations together An Angell is a substance finite and therefore it cannot both minister vnto vs and take to it selfe a body together Answer to their fixt Argument But this is easily dissolved for I say that these two operations To take a body and to serve in their ministerie are ordained mutually to the Angells And therefore nothing hindreth them but that the Angells may vse both of them at once Their seaventh Argument and together Againe they inferre that if Angells and divells do take a body eyther it is a Celestiall Body or some other having the nature of some of the foure Elements Now the Angells cannot take a Celestiall Body for that the Body of the heaven cannot devide it selfe nor cannot make any abstraction from it selfe much lesse can the divells have that power seeing the Angells have it not Besides they cannot take vnto them a body of Fire for then they should consume and burne the bodie neere to which they doe approach much lesse can they take a body of the Ayre for that is not figurable neyther can they take any bodie that is a moveable Element and retaineth no forme nor yet by the same meane can they have a Terrestriall bodie for we see it written how the Angels do very soone sodainly vanish away out of sight as it appeared by that angel which came to Tobias And the divels also when they shew themselves in any aparition can in a moment withdraw themselues from the sight of men And therefore being vnable and vnapt to take vpon them any body eyther Elementarie or Celestiall It must needes follow that they appeare not at all Answer to their seaventh Argument To this I answer That the Angells and divells may take a body of any Element whatsoever and which themselves will yea and of many Elements mixt together Neverthelesse it is most likely to be true and the common opinion is What kinde of body Angells divells take vnto them when they appeare that they doe soonest of all take vnto them a bodie of the ayre by thickning the same and forming it of vapors that mount and arise from the earth and in turning and mooving it at their pleasure as the winde mooveth the clowds being able to make the same to disappeare and vanish away againe whensoever they will by reason that it is nothing but a vapor Their eight Argument But yet this will not satisfie them but they go further saying That every assumption of a body is limited and bounded with some Vnion But of an Angel and of a body there cannot be made any of those Three meanes of vnity of which Aristotle speaketh For they cannot bee made one by Continuation by Inseparabilitie Lib. 1. Phisico nor by Reason To this a man may answer as before That there is not any vnion in the assumption of a body by an Angel For if there were a vnion then in truth that which Aristotle speaketh should bee requisite betweene the Angel and the body which it assumeth But there is not betweene them any vnion save onely that which is of a thing mooving to the thing mooved as wee have before affirmed Againe the good Angells say they in appearing vnto vs eyther do take True Figures visible and palpable or such as are altogether False Their ninth Argument If they have such as be True it should then follow that if they appeare in a humane body then they do assume a True humane body But this is impossible vnlesse we should say That an Angell may enter into the body of a man which is a thing not convenient nor agreeable vnto the Angelicall Nature And if they have False Figures this would be much more vnfitting and vnbeseeming them for that all feyning and dissembling or any kinde of fiction is very vnseemely in the Angells of Truth And therefore in what sorte and fashion it bee the Angells cannot take any Body vpon them Answer to their ninth Argument To this obiection I answer That the bodies which the Angells do take have True and vnfeyned formes so farre forth as they may be seene and perceived by the senses be it in their colour or their Figure but not according to the nature of their kinde For that cannot become sensible but by accident That therefore is no cause why a man should say that there is any fiction and feyning in the Angells for they do not oppose set before our eyes humane shapes and formes because thereby they would bee thought and esteemed to be men but to the end that by their humane properties we should know the vertues of the Angells And like as Metaphorras speeches are not therefore any whit the sooner to be reputed false in which by the similitude of things other significations are comprehended So the figures and formes of Angells are not false because they are taken and assumed to the similitude and semblance of men More then so they reply that the Angells and divells by the vertue of their Nature Their tenth Argument cannot worke or create any effects within humane bodies save only by the meanes of their naturall vertues But their naturall vertues cannot be in things corporall to forme any Figure of a humane body but onely by the vsuall and determined meane of generation to wit by the seede naturally ordayned to that effect in which sort the Angells and divells cannot take a body vpon them And the same reason and consideration is there of other figures of carthly bodies also which they take vnto them But heerevnto this answer may be made them That albeit the naturall vertues of a body
privation of depravation of any thing Besides that the peccant and faultie humours should worke more in humane bodres then those can do which are naturall and do entertaine the harmony of the body I cannot conceive how it may be done but wee must seeke out some other reason thereof then that which is yeelded by Pomponatius or Avenrois or any other naturall Philosophers whose reasons I hold it convenient in this place to set downe and to see what they aleadge to make vs beleeve that there is no other cause but Nature onely which doth worke in and vpon our bodies our senses and our humours whatsoever is seene to happen vnto them supernaturally The argument of Avicen and other Philosophers touching the power of nature producing supernaturall effectes Lib. 4. natur cap. vltimo Lib. 5. Phisicâ— cap. 9. Lib. 3 de Trins First they affirme touching the bewitching and enchanting of the eyes that oftentimes the soule of many persons doth worke vpon the body of another as vpon their owne proper person And therefore they inferre that the soule by her owne naturall vertue and power is able at it owne will and pleasure to alter and change the senses of persons and to bewitch their eyes And of this opinion are Avicen and Algazel But long time before them Saint Augustine was of a contrarie opinion For he saw little or no reason how it could be that men should have any such power or puissance one vpon another vnlesse it were onely by the operation of the divell And although it may be obiected that the eye of a sicke bodie may naturally wound and offend the sound eyes of another that shall regard and looke vpon the sicke partie yet so it is that a naturall reason may be yeelded for that as being caused either by meanes of the ayre infected and directed from the eye of the patient towardes the eyes of the sound person or else by reason of some secret Sympathie which some men have with others And sometimes also by a kinde of Antypathie a man may receive a kinde of naturall Fascination or Enchantment by the eyes as little children in looking vpon a Toade and that little bird which the French name Rubieâ—â—â— and the Greekes call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the which Elian and Snydâ—s do write Lib. 17. cap. 13. In verbo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how it hath this propertie that it healeth the malady or disease called the Purples by looking vpon the patient from whom it taketh by the eyes the infection and venome thereof And for this cause in times past they did vse in selling this bird to carry him close covered with a linnen cloth for feare lest the partie so diseased should have served his turne by it Of divers kindes of charmes and enchantments which being supernatural the naturall Philosophers attributed to nature in looking on the same before he had bought it I know that Plinie recounteth how amongst the Bulgarians and in Ilbrium there are certaine whole families of Witches which they of Avergne do call Fascignaires or rather Sorcerers which with their very looke doe kill those whom they looke on with a crosse or felonous eye or aspect This maketh me to remember that which Aulus Gelliuâ— spenketh of in his Treatise entituled Noctas Atticae how there be some families in Africa Lib. 9. ca 4. who on the contrary doe vse to bewitch and for speake foldoes with their tongue and voyce and in giving out praises and speeches of commendation do worke the death and destruction both of trees of bruite creatures and of children Now the Philosophers doe thinke to yeelde a naturall reason heereof saying That those praises and commend at ory speeches doe engender in the heart a kinde of ioy and gladnesse and in the vaporous spirits which the naturall heaâ—e doth open cause to rebound as it were pel mell or confusedly by the face and eyes through which the venome and poyson of the enchauntment doth strike into the eies of others And this is the cause why Aristâ—tle writeth Sect 20. proble 24. That there was a custome that when one would praise any bodie they would vse to say and wish that Much good might do him the praisas which were given him But whatsoever the Philosophers doe alleadge touching this enchaunting or witch craft wrought with the speeche yet the trueth is Answer to the former argument that no man hath any such power to kill another except it proceede of the Divell by the permission of God much losse hath 〈◊〉 the power to cast or send foorth by his eies into the eies of another man any infection that should be able to change and alter the habite or state of the body so readily as is vsed to be doone by diabolicali enchantments with the which such as come to bee striken and attainted are commonly surprized in amoment And the very Antients themselves in my opinion seemed not to be ignorant that such kinde of enchantments That all enchantments wrought by speeches or lookes doe happen only extraordinarily and beyond the course of nature In Epodis Minusive lanquet Fascinum Of diverse superstirious devises vsed by the Antients against vvitcherafts and enchantments done either by the voyce or by the eyes did never happen but extraordinarily and beyond the course of nature And that was the cause that in such cases they ayded themselves with their superstitions to drive and chase them farre away from them that they might not be stricken nor attached by them Some of them vsed to carry tied about their neekes a certaine kinde of image or figure made in forme of a mans member thinking that by vertue of the same no Sorcerers shoulde be able to hurte them And such figure a they called Fascinum like as Horacâ— also nameth it because it hindered Fascinations or Enchaumments Others againe vsed to weare vppon their sore-heads in forme of a Garland the flower called Our Ladies Gloves and in Latine named Bacchar even for the same occasion and for feare lest some ill tongue shoulde charme or câ—chanut them which Virgil affirmeth in theseverses Bacchare frontem Cingite nevati noceat â—â—ala lingua future Which may be thus englished About his browes let be a wreathe of Bacchar knit That by an evill talking tongue our Poet be not bit And others there were that did vse to spit in their owne besomes or breasts as Theocritus testifieth saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The signification whereof in english is thus 〈…〉 might 〈…〉 that 〈◊〉 â—as Vpon my breast I follow spetting thrise The same also is to be seene amongest the Greeke Epigrammes Libus 4. Epigr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And likewise in Tibâ—lus in this verse Despart in â—â—olles sibi quisque sinns Vpon hsi owne most tender breast Each man to spie doth hold it best But Theophrastus speaking of superstitious persons dooth witnesse the same yet much more saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that
reasons which he afterwardes yeeldeth in shewing That the divell doth serve himselfe of the humours or braine in men corrupted so seizing on the same doth enter into the bodies of such distempered persons in the tiem of their fittes that from the braine troubled and offended doth proceede this disease of the Epilepsie or the Falling-evill But I say according to the resolution of Saint Thomas Aquine that the divell may possesse the humours being corrupted or the braine being so troubled and offended of the paâ—tie so diseased and that this is a thing that doth happen vsually and commonly And I wot wel that the antient Magitians to call vp their divells or spirits and to know of them such things as were to come did helpe themselves with the bodies of Epileptiques and persons troubled with that disease Into the which the divells did easily enter at such time as the evill or fit tooke them and did speake by their mouthes vnto the Magitians or by some other externall signes did declare vnto them what was to come And I remember that I have read in Apuleius that he was accused before the Proconsull of Affricke Apologia 1. Apuleius servum suum Thallum remâ—tis arbitris secreto loco arula lucerna paucis consciis carminâ— cantatum corruere fecit deinde nescium sui excitâ—vit Obiection touching strange languages and prophecies c. vttered by persons distempered that it should be by nature corrupted how that he aided himselfe with his servant Thallus being surprized with the Falling-sicknesse at such time as he performed his magicke sacrifices And hee defended or excused himselfe of this crime so coldely that he seemeth to consent therevnto And it is well knowne that next to Apollonius Thianeus he was one of the greatest Magitians that can be remembred But saith yet Levinus those medecines that doe purge Melancholie Madnesse Burning-fevers the Epilepsie and such like do cause all those thinges to cease which we affirm to be caused in such bodies by the divels namely to speake strange languages to prophecie and fore-tell things to come to tell wonders of things past and to doe that which is not possible for man to doe by nature Therefore it may be concluded that it is not the divell but rather Nature corrupted which so moves the humors and stirres vp troubles the soule in that maner But I doe vtterly deny that the divells by medecines can be driven or cast out of such bodies neither can hee proove it vnto me by any example I am not ignorant that Pomponatius writeth Answer to the former Obiection that the divel cannot be cast out of bodies possest by medecines De precantat But it appears not that those purges did ex pell the divell In oratio de laudibus medecinae that the antient Exorcists or Coniurers did purge with helleborus the bodies of such as were beset with divells before they made their coniurations howbeit he cannot alleadge or bring me any good and sound historie to proove his saying And though he affirme that the wife of Frauncis Maigret Savetier of Mantua who spake divers languages was healed by Calceran a famous Phisitian of his time who did minister vnto her a potion of helleborus And that Erasmus agreeing with him doth write how hee himselfe saw a man of Spoleta in Italie that spake the Almaine tong very well albeit hee had never beene in Almaine and that after a medecine had beene given vnto him hee did avoid by the fundament a great number of wormes and so was healed and did never after speake the Almaine tongue any more yet doe I hold the truth of this very suspitious It might bee rather that the divels left these presently vpon the medecines given them onely because he would have men beleeve and wickedly attribute this power to bee in phisicke rather then to any worke of God though it were not indeed by any vertue of the phisicke Lib. 2. cap. 16. de abdit rer causis and do rather give credite to Fernelius one of the greatest Phisitians of our age who doth vtterly denie that there is any such power in phisicke And he reciteth a historie of a young Gentleman the sonne of a Knight of the Order who being possessed by the divell could not in any sorte be healed by any potions medicines or diet ministred vnto him Nor by that neither You may assoone beleeve the one as the other for all phisicke all superstitions and Coniurations are of like efficacie in this case Opinion of the Astrologers confuted That the speaking of strange languages c. by persons distempered in their bodies proceedeth of the influence of the Starres but onely by Coniurations and Exorcismes And even in our time there was better triall made heereof in that woman or Demoniaqne of Vervin who for all the medicaments that were given vnto her by those of the pretended reformed religion could never be healed but onely by the vertue and efficacie of the holy Sacrament of the Altare But to come to other matters of this kinde As little reason also have the Astrologers to attribute vnto their Starres such force and influence as to say That they doe infuse and instill into humane bodies certaine admirable faculties and so doe cause them to speake divers and straunge languages for their opinion is as farre from the trueth and to be abhorred as that of the Phisitians neither can they finde any reasons whereby they are able or ought to perswade that the Starres are the cause of any such myracle chauncing in the bodies of men And howsoever for proofe of their Assertion they doe vrge That the Moone according to the encreasing and decreasing thereof dooth produce very terrible effectes in the bodies of Lunatique persons and that according to certaine constellations of the Starres the corporall matter is disposed more or lesse to receive the celestiall Impressions yet dooth it not followe for all that That the Lunatiques in speaking and vttering diverse languages are not surprised and possessed by the Divell but that the same their diversity of tongues should proceed from the Starres For what should I say more But that the auntient Paynims themselves were not ignorant but did acknowledge that both Melancholique persons Mad-men and Lunatiques speaking diverse and sundry languages and prophecyings were men possessed with Divelles And therefore they did vse to call them Fanaticos and sometimes Ceritos Ceritus quasi Cereristus gracis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plâ—utuâ— in Poe nulo neque nos populus pro Ceritis insectabit lapidibus De sacro morbo 1. Reg. as if they shoulde say Persons stricken by Ceres sometimes Demetrioleptous and Numpholeptons and Daimonountas as Lucian witnesseth and sometimes persons possessed by Hecate which was an infernall divell or by Heros as saieth Hippocrates And in the Bible in the bookes of Kings wee see that Saul being in a melancholique passion was assailed and vexed with an evill spirite and
Apparitions it will be requisite that we define what a Specter is A Specter or Apparition Definition of a Specter In Latine it is called SpectruÌ„ a spectando of seeing is an Imagination of a substance wihout a Bodie the which presenteth it selfe sensibly vnto men against the order and course of nature and maketh them afraid And notwithout great reason do I make the Imagination to be the Genus vnto a Specter because the Imagination according to the iudgemeÌ„t of Themistius is no other thing but a motion of the soule which the sense being set in action doth create and engender And forasmuch as the sight is of all other senses the most excellent liuely and actiue therefore is it that the Imagination hath sometimes taken the name of a Specter or strange sight of a Phantosme of a visioÌ„ And the Fantasie also which is formed in the spirit or vnderstanding hath beene called by the name of light or rather of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which commeth of the eyes and of the light without which nothing can bee seene or discerned So that the seuerall and speciall kindes of the Imagination are the Specter or strange sight the Phantosme the vision the fantasie which the Greekes seuerally cal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And first of all Suydas saith De placitis philosop â—ruâ—n Definition of a phantosme what it is That a Phantosme which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an imagination of thinges which are not indeede and doth proceede of the senses being corrupted which Plutarch also doth seeme to confirme Howbeit that some moderne Physitians doe goe further and doe confound a Specter and a Phantosme together taking both the one and the other for a false vision The which opinion for my part I cannot allow because in verie truth the Specter is that which our Ciuil Lawyers haue cald 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. ostentum D de verb. signiff Glossar and the Phantosme which commeth of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for a false imagination by which wee doe perswade our selues be it in sleeping or waking that some obiect doth present it selfe vnto vs. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mostellum Math. 14. Mark 6. The differeÌ„ce betweene a Phantosme a Specter And albeit many Authors and namely the holy Scriptures do take a PhaÌ„tosme for a Specter truly appearing vnto the sense not corrupted nor deceiued yet if we will soundly interpret them we must say that they must be vnderstoode to speake according to the vulgar and common opinion which doth confound the Specter and the Phantosme together or else that they regarded the propertie of Spirits the which do vse to take a fantastique or imaginatiue bodie to appeare vnto vs. And to shew yet further what difference there is betweene theÌ„ both Certaine it is that a Phantosme is a thing without life and without substance And the Specter hath a substance hidden and concealed which seemeth to moue the fantastique body the which it hath taken Moreouer the Phantosme being as it is a thing without life hath not any will whereas the Specter if it will doth appeare vnto vs if it will not it doth not appeare And as Saint Ambrose saith Huius naturae est non videri voluntatis videri Li I. in Lucam ca. I. de Angel apparit The nature thereof is not to be seene but the will of it is to be seene Of Visions and their generall kindes After the Phantosme and the Specter commeth the vision to be considered of which Saint Augustine maketh three sortes one which is done by the eyes of the body as that of the three men who appeared vnto Abraham Lib contra Adimantum Gen. 18. Exod. 3 Math. 17. Mar. 9. Luk. 9. and that of Moyses who saw the bush to burne and that also of the Apostles who saw Moyses and Elias when Christ was transfigured in the mountaine before them Another sort of visions is by Imagination which is done when our thought is rauished vnto heauen and wee see nothing by the exteriour senses but we imagine onely by some diuine and heauenly inspiration as was that of Saint Peter Acts. 10. when he was rauished in an extasie he saw all sortes of vncleane creatures and heard a voyce which bade him eate of that he saw The third sort may be said Intellectuall because it is done onely in the vnderstanding Daniel 5. as when Balthasar saw a hand writing vpon the wall To these three sortes of visions we may wel adde a fourth and fifth which happen in dreaming and do present themselues onely either in full sleepe or betweene sleeping and waking when wee neither sleepe nor wake which the Hebrewes call Thardema And first for that in our sleepe when one dreameth or seemeth to behold any thing which shall betide and happen in very deede according as was dreamed And thus doth Macrobius define a vision in his Commentarie vpon the dreame of Scipio where hee discourseth of all dreames in generall and he produceth these examples One dreameth saith he that his friend whome hee thinketh to be away in a farre countrie is returned and the next day he seeth him and findeth that his dreame falleth out to be true Or he dreameth that his friend hath left certaine money with him and the next day hee seeth his friend repaire vnto him accordingly to commit a suÌ„me of money vnto his trust and fidelitie And as touching that which is betweene sleeping and waking which some call To bee in a traunse It is when partly in sleeping and partly with the bodily eyes waking one seeth any thing to appeare before him Such was that vision of the Domesticall or houshold gods of the Phrigians which Aeneas perceiued betweene sleeping and waking when hee was in Candye For after that Virgil had said a little before That those gods which Aeneas had saued and taken out of the middest of the fire at the burning of Troy had appeared to him sleeping hee addeth in the end Yet sure this was no sleepe nor dreame me thought their faces bright Their hayre wrapt vp in foldes I saw I knew them well by sight A colde sweate trickling down my limmes then did me sore affright All these sortes of visions haue their name amongst the Hebrewes The one they call The Daughter of the voyce another The cleere mirrour another The rauishment of kissing and the last as we said is called Thardema of al which we shall speake more amply in the Treatise of Angelles and especially of that vision of the Face which Moses only enioyed and which properly is not to be called a vision whatsoeuer the Rabbins do dreame thereof For the word of God in the holy scriptures doth plainly expresse That the vision of face to face Numb 12. ver 6. â— 8 is farre diuers and different from the other visions aboue specified For when Aaron murmured against Moses in that he did so manifestly
a substance without a body presenting it self sensibly vnto men I say a substance without a body because that euery body must of necessitie haue longitude latitude and profunditie which otherwise wee call thicknesse and ought therefore by consequence to bee palpable and subiect to handling which in Spirits is not possible who clothing themselues with an ayrie bodie and being of themselues substances without bodyes are not palpable neither can be touched with the hand But of this we will entreat hereafter more at large and of this point especially Lib. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether the diuels haue a body of ayre as Origen maintained or whether they bee pure and simple Spirits and may enter into a dead body and moue the same as if it had sense and feeling which is a thing that happeneth very seldome and is against the nature of Spirits and Apparitions It followeth in our definition which presenteth it selfe and appeareth vnto men sensibly I say to men because Specters doe neuer appeare to any other creatures but vnto those which are reasonable Numeri 22. Homil. 13. in Numer sub finem And although wee read in the Bible that the Asse of Balaam saw the Angel yet as Origen writeth That was contrary to his owne proper nature not onely that it perceiued and sawe the Angell but also that God opened his mouth and made him to speake So that both the one the other of these points is in very truth an impossibilitie to all beastes and vnreasonable creatures aswell for that they want the Organ or instrument of mans voyce as also for that they neither haue reason whereby to discerne Specters Phantosmes from true bodyes nor yet vnderstanding whereby to be illuminated with the bright beames of discerning superiour things which doe onely enter into the consideration of the soule and into the discourse iudgement of humane vnderstanding The consideration wherof hauing with some preuailed more theÌ„ was fit who being not able to conceiue in their thoughts how an Asse should be able to see an Angel or to speak they were perswaded moued thereunto peraduenture with the authoritie of some Rabbins that the Asse was a Diuell disguised which Balaam by force of his magicke Charmes had coniured to cary him toward Balaac But in my opinion there is neither reason nor any apparance of truth in their saying But we ought rather to take the very litterall sense and meaning of the Scripture and to thinke that it was a very naturall Asse and not forged and framed by enchantments Moreouer it is added in the definition of a Specter that it presenteth it selfe against Nature That is to say against that common order of things which naturally is established in the world since the creation thereof So that all Apparitions aswell of Angels as of diuels may be accounted as myracles and doe neuer shewe themselues but that they presage and fore-shew something Besides this word against Nature doth put a difference betweene the name of a Specter or Apparition and those which the Latynes call Prodigium and Portentum The former of which the Hebrewes name Mopheth wee not hauing any apt tearme for it may call it a Prodigie and the latter for that we cannot otherwise name it in our language we may likewise call a Portent Lauater saith Portentum is a betokening of strange things to come in time Nowe the Prodigie doth differ from a Specter in that it commeth naturally happeneth often yet notwithstanding doth alwayes presage some euill or strange thing to come And the Portent is when certaine Coelestiall bodyes vnusuall and vnaccustomed of which notwithstanding a naturall reason may be rendered doe appeare in the avre as Comets or Blazing-starres Flashings of fire Lightnings in a cleere and faire weather and others of this kind which doe alwayes presage some euil to ensue after a certaine season For so doth Fostus Pompeius define Portentum and all the Grammarians after him Some may say vnto me That a Mouster is also against nature and that therefore my difference is of no strength nor certaintie But the answere is easie because I sayde before That a Specter is a substance without a body which putteth a notable and plaine difference betweene a monster and a Specter For a monster is a liuing creature and by consequence a corporall substance which is borne or brought foorth hauing strange members or is of another kinde then that wherof it is engendered This therefore shall suffice for the definition of a Specter or strange Sight and Apparition CAP. II. Of the diuers Names and tearmes which are often vsed in the matter of Specters IT will not bee amisse if now in the Discourse following wee deliuer and explane all those termes and auncient Names by which both the Hebrewes Greekes and Latynes haue vsed to expresse and name all kindes of Specters both good and bad to the which we will also adioyne those of the Arabians and of other moderne and later Authours both French and Italian to the intent that nothing may be wanting whereby this our Discourse may bee beautified and enriched Of the seuerall names of good Angels The good Angels doe alwayes take their Names their vertues and their properties of God as Michael Gabriel Raphael and by the two principall Languages to wit the Hebrew and Greeke they are named by the Name of Messengers For Malach in the Hebrew signifieth a Messenger and commeth of the vnusuall word Luach which signifieth to declare or denounce And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greeke doe denotate asmuch The Arabians doe a little change the Ebrew word and do call an Angel Melech as is often read in the Alcoran of Mahomet Moreouer in the same signification of a Messenger or Coelestiall Ambassadour is taken also the Hebrew word Chasmal whereof as I thinke was deryued the auncient name of Chasmillus by which both the Thuscans and Latines in former times did name and designe Mercurie the Messenger of the Gods For as wee shall shewe in another place the greatest part of the names of the Paynim Gods both those which they placed in the Heauens as also their home-borne or countrey Gods and their Infernall Gods likewise were drawne from the Hebrewes The which if Chrisippus had vnderstood he would not haue laboured and toyled himselfe so much to finde out the Etimologie of their Names In lib dena â—uâ— Deoâ—um as hee did as Cicero witnesseth of him Moreouer the Angels are called Ruhhoth that is to say Spirits which Dauid also testifieth saying Râ—h in the Aâ—â—bian tongue iâ— an Aâ—gel commeth of Ruach a Spirit Osè malachau ruhhoth Who maketh his Angels his Spirits placing Ruhhoth in the plurall number as if hee would haue vs to vnderstand that Intellectuall and Spiritual things such as are pure subtill and separated from all confused grosse and ayrie matter were made Angels by God the Creator And
former But they will say perhaps that we see often in the Ayre Comets Fiery Flames and other Prodigies True this I will not deny but these things which they say are seene in the Ayre doe not take their originall neither of their Atomes nor of the Aire but are engeÌ„dred of the vapours dryed vp from the earth as it is well known by the writings of good Philosophers And the Ayre is susceptible capable of them by reason of some emptines in it which doth easily yeeld and giue place and receiueth that which is sent vnto it from below Besides it is very euident that such figures and Images as are seene in the Ayre haue not any life in them as haue the true Specters the which also the Epicures ought to shewe by good reasons to be carried to and fro and to moue themselues in the Ayre For if they had attributed motion and stirring vnto Specters and had proued that naturally without hauing any soule or life they might notwithstanding be seene wandring and running hither and thither in our forme or in any other and that they are not onely to bee seene in all partes of the ayre but in all other places whatsoeuer then this might haue stood them in great stead to haue impugned the Apparition of Specters supernaturally or against nature Moreouer if they will affirme that the transparent and thicke Ayre receiuing our figure by refraction doth moue it selfe as we doe and doth liue and change from place to place as we doe then must they also proue vnto vs that the same should be a Specter and not the Image of the obiect opposed thereunto the which vanisheth away as soone as the same doth absent it selfe from it Of the Apparition of Images formed in the Ayre by way of reflexion And seeing we are now in the Discourse of Images formed in a thicke Ayre It is to be vnderstood that their nature is to appeare either by the refraction of our owne naturall and proper forme or by reflexion As touching their appearance by refraction wee haue alreadie spoken sufficiently Of Images appearing in the Ayre by reflexion and how it is done But as concerning those which are by reflexion It is most certaine that their propertie is to appeare by another forme then ours namely of some lightsome bodie which groweth into the thicke and grosse Ayre in the humid and moist concretion of the same or into the Glasse of a mirrour making a reflexion of that thing which is reuerberated and beaten backe againe into our sight Thus by way of reflexion may a man see within a looking Glasse those men which are walking and marching in the streetes And sometimes a man shall thinke that men are walking neere the wals of his chamber which notwithstanding is nothing so but that onely there is a reflexion of those persons whoÌ„ we see aloofe walking and going vp and downe So likewise by way of reflexion may a man see in the heauens sometimes a second Sunne the Image of the true Sunne and so likewise of the Rainbowe Howbeit that this latter as Aristotle would haue it is not any reflexion but a relation of the Aspect vnto our eye-sight But vnder his correction that is not so For if the Rainebowe in the heauens doe not yeeld a reflexion to our sight it would not be seene in the water or in a looking Glasse as it is and as dayly experience sheweth vs. And this also may serue for a solution to that Argument of the Epicures who by comparison of the clothes of Tapistrie that imprint their colours in the wall opposed would proue that the Ayre may alâ—o cast any forme or Image of it selfe For the coloures of the Raine-bowe and of Tapistry Hangings are for the most part liuely coloures as Azure or skye colour red carnation and greene all which doe naturally cast a great luster which may easily yeeld an impression vpoÌ„ any solid thing may reflect vnto our eyes And yet neuerthelesse I see not how this can be a good argument to shew that the Ayre can engender formes or figures which may referre themselues to the eyes as Specters and not rather as colours Answer to the 4. argument of the Epicures Last of all touching that which the Epicures affirme how of the bodies of things doe issue and remaine certaine Spoyles The same hath not any foundation vppon naturall reason or vpon any apparance of truth For is there any likelyhoode or probabilitie that if the creatures doe leaue behinde them their after burthens or other such spoyles bereaued from them in the places where they haue bene That therefore the bodies be they dead or be they aliue doe leaue an Image or impression of themselues in their absence after they are departed from those places It is most certaine that the bodies of any creatures haue not any thing in them which either in their life time or after that their substance is perished can be abstracted or separated from them For otherwise of one body there should bee two made which were a straunge thing and altogether abhorring from nature And were not much different either from the Fables of the Poets who of a dead bodie made the abstraction of a shadowe In lib. 4. Eneid In his Dialogues of the dead where he bringeth in Diogenes and Hercules speaking which they called the Image and I doll thereof as is affirmed both by Sergius and Lucian and the Commentator vpon Homer or else from those fabulous and idle dreames of the Rabbins and Talmudistes which had their Nephes as saith the Author of Zoar. But the truth is that those creatures which do vse to cast their spoyles from them do leaue no other then a thinne sleÌ„der skinne I had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which being superfluous is no more remaining or abiding with the bodie Howbeit that it commeth from the bodie as appeareth both by the after-burthens of all creatures wherein the young ones beeing wrapped and enfolded in the bellies of their dams yet in comming from thence doe easily and naturally cast them off as also by the spoyles of the Serpent or Snake and by the skinnes of the Silke-wormes and the Caterpillers the which superfluities are drawn and cast off particularly from these beastes or creatures as a marke to the one to wit the Silke-wormes and Caterpillers that they doe chaunge from their former state and to the other namely the Serpents to shew the poisons and ill hearbes and seedes which they haue eaten all the Winter according as Virgil writeth of them Lib. 2. Eneid The opinion and Argument of the Epicures touching the cause why meÌ„ do conceiue feare at the sight of straÌ„ge formes and figures These Arguments being thus finished let vs now come to that which the Epicures affirme to bee the cause why any should bee touched and attainted with feare when they see such Images and figures which they affirme naturally to flit and flie
1. 3. which are sayde to have so much power and puissance to worke myracles Rabbi Moses Egyptian mocketh and scoffeth at them that beleeve it and calleth them deceyvers and lyers that go about to perswade the simple credulous people to beleeve such fooleries And it had beene well done of Albertus Magnus if hee had helde his tongue and beene silent when he wrote of the confection of those Rings and Caracters which hee referred to the starres But that such kinde of Rings and Caracters are meerely superstitious and Diabolicall And that the Divell doth sometime enter into them and inclose hmselfe within them I will cite no other prooves vnto you then Andreas and Pamphilus two Phisitions Lib. 6. Desimplicibus medecin and the Horoscopes or casters calculators of Nativities and such like Starre-gazers all which doe gather their herbes at a certaine set houre observing verie curiously both the course of the starres and the verie hower wherein the Divell hath chiefest power and commaund over the herbes which they preserve and keepe And the same Andreas and Phamphilus did write certain Bookes which as Galen writeth they intituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is to say The charmes and changes of hearbes consecrated to the Divels And more then that Pamphilus doth teach and set downe what ceremonies wordes and enchantments ought to bee vsed in pulling and gathering of the hearbes and rootes to the intent saith he That the Divell who hath rule and commaund over the herbes that are gathered may not doe any hurt or annoyance to them that gather them You may see therefore how that such superstitions ought not to be referred to the celestiall vertues or influences but vnto the power of the Divell which worketh vppon them supernaturally to deceive and seduce those that are giuen to be so superstitious The second argument of the Peripatetiques The Peripatetiques do yet insist further vpon the Puissance of the Heavens And they say That every natural Agent working vpoÌ„ divers obiects doth continually produce divers Actions as if waxe morter wood be put neere to the fire the waxe will melt the morter will grow harder and the wood will either burne or bend And yet notwithstanding all these operations have a certaine similitude from the part of the Agent for if one being a farre off do see the wax to melt hee may iudge that there is some fire neâ—re the which vpon occasion can as well harden the morter and burne the wood likewise Wherefore the heaven being a naturall Agent and having many things neere adioyning vnto it It must needes be that it must worke many effects Of the which the one is particularly the certaine signe of the other albeit many of them doe never take effect nor can be knowne what they be And forasmuch as of great events it must needes be that the causes be strong and forcible so contrariwise where the causes are powerful puissant the effects also must of necessitie be admirable because in nature the causes are ever answerable to the effects It is therefore no mervaile if the heaven do produce Specters and such like micaculous effects it having such power over the inferior Bodies Answer to their second Argument But this argument may bee soone aunswered in two words That the influence of the heavens doth worke by the will of God many things that are strange and admirable and yet such neverthelesse as are naturall But that the heavens haue the power to worke above nature and so to produce Specters that can in no wise be granted nor admitted because Nature it selfe is contrary therevnto the which ought first to be regarded and considered as the cause before wee can admit or allow of her effects Thus you see how easily all the reasons of the Peripatetiques are refuted and overthrowne how strong soever they seeme to be made to proove such power in the heavens Let vs now therefore see what they alledge to deny the essence and being of Divells The first Argument of the peripatetikes to pro that there are no divells Their first argument is that the Art Magike is nothing but meerely vaine and false But the intention of Magike is held to be principally of and by the Divells Therefore the Divells are not at all but are a vaine and false thing To this argument I answere That trew it is that Magike is a vaine Science and prohibited Answer to their first Argnment that the effects thereof are full of abuse and scandalous But that the Art Magicke is nothing and that the divells can not worke by it by the meanes of Magicians and Sorcerers is no consequent Their second Argument Their second argument is that if there be divells then they have a soule and members necessary to execute and performe the functions of the soule as wee see in living creatures And to the end that such things should consist and be the divells must of necessitie have a more solide and firme element then the ayre to wit the water or the earth where it behooveth them to abide and remaine Answer to their second Argument But this argument is of no sorce for I deny that it is necessary the divells should have a body and admit they doe make a shew of one when they appeare vnto vs yet that followeth not that they have such a one of their own nature but they do fit and accommodate themselves to our senses taking vnto them a body of an ayrie subtile and thin substance Their third Argument Their third argument is that if it bee graunted there bee Divelles it is principally in respect of Specters But the Specters are vaine or come for the most parte of the secret causes of the Heavens or of Nature and therefore all that which is said of divells is meerely false and vntrue Answer to their third Argument To this argument we neede not make any answer seeing we have before sufficiently satisfied them in this point Their fourth Argument is that it is not probable there should be any divells in that spatious emiptie circuit of the ayre or in the earth because Their fourth Argument if they be in so great a number as it is affirmed that they are they might be then as thicke and in as great a multitude as the birds of the ayre and so every place would be full of Specters spirits divells which would yeelde divers feares and terrours vnto men But that is not so For hardly shall a man see in the space of twenty yeares that in any Province any Specters do appeare and present themselves and when they do at any time shew themselves it may be attributed vnto Nature Again they adde this reason that if there be divells they should be either friends or enemies vnto men if enemies then some should be hurt and offended by them especially such as make a mocke and ieast at them and their essence as namely the
thing and in working man in it which is proper vnto God onely Howbeit that God doth not make a part in the essence of any thing For God is a substance seperated and abstracted solely and onely in it selfe And for the further interpretation of Saint Ierome and the Glose which say That the divell is not in images wee may affirme that they do privily and closely reprehend the false opinion of the Paynims and Idolaters who made but one thing of the Idoll were it of wood brasse or stone and of the vncleane spirit that remained within it and by that meanes would have made a living substance of that which in it owne nature was sencelesse and without life not having eyther hands to touch withall or feete to goe on or tongue to speake with except such onely as the divell did seeme to give vnto it by his deceitfull illusions Their fourteenth Argument To make short they obiect this argument also If the Angells and divells do take to them any body eyther they are vnited vnto The whole body or to some Part thereof If they be vnited onely to a Part thereof then can they not moove the other part but onely by the meanes of that part which they do moove But this cannot possibly be for otherwise the body assumed should have such parts as should have the Organs determined to the motion which is proper to none but living bodies But if the Angells and divells be Vnited immediately to the whole body it behooveth them then also to possesse everie part of that body which they have taken to them and so by that meanes they should be in many places which is proper and appertaining to God onely And therefore the Angells and divells cannot take any body vnto them Answer to their fourteenth Argument To this argument answer may be made in this manner That the Angell or divell so taking any body vpon him is wholy in the whole body which it assumeth or else in a part thereof as the soule is in the body For albeit he be not the forme of the body which it assumeth as is the soule yet so it is that he is the moover thereof Now it behooveth that the moover and the thing mooved should be together And it is nothing to the purpose to say that an Angell or divell filling a body whole and entyre of substance can be in divers places for the whole body assumed by an Angell or divell is not but in one place onely albeit the same be admitted to have many members and many parts Thus farre have I done my best both to set downe and to refute all the reasons and arguments obiected by those who deny that Angells and divells can assume and take vnto them a body to the intent that from hence forth their mouths might be stopped and that they may not esteeme as fables the histories of Specters and of the Apparitions of spirits Of the opinion of the Iewish Rabbins touching the Apparitions mentioned in the old Testament But before I come to conclude this discourse I may not forget to tell you how that many of the Rabbins and Iewes which have taken vpon them to interpret the holy Scriptures have held opinion and beene of the beliefe that those Angells which appeared to the Patriarkes and Prophets did not appeare in any body nor did assume vnto them any body to make themselves visible And of this opinion amongst others was Rabbi Moses one of the most learned Rabbins of the Iewes who said That all that which is read and recorded in the olde Testament of the Apparition of Angells did come by an imaginarie vision that is to say sometimes in sleeping and sometimes in waking But this position as Saint Thomas of Aquin calleth it The Aquin quest de Miracalis Arti. 7. cannot prevaile against the truth of the Scriptures for by the phrase and manner of speeches which are vsuall in the bookes of the old Testament it is easie to know and discerne a difference that which is signified and declared to have Appeared purely and simply to our eyes from that which is said to bee done by the meanes of a Propheticall vision For when it ought to be vnderstoodâ— that any Apparition was made by way of vision there are some words put downe and insert which doe properly appertaine to the vision such as the Scriptures do intend as in Ezechiel Ezechiel ce 8. the spirit of the Lord saith he lifted me vp betweene the heaven and the earth led me into Ierusalem by the visions of the Lord. I say therefore that when it appeareth that things are said to be done simply wee ought to vnderstand them as done simply and truly Now we reade in the old Testament that many Apparitions have beene made in body And therefore we ought to grant that the Angells do sometimes assume and take vnto them a body in forming such a body as is sensible and subiect to the externall and corporall vision as well as some kinde of shapes do forme themselves in our imagination which do produce an imaginative vision when wee are sleeping But this shall suffice touching this matter Let vs come therefore to the Sceptiques whose manner is to doubt of all things and do make a question whether our senses be true or not CHAP. VI. Of the opinions of the followers of Pirrhon Sceptiques and Aporretiques and what they alleadge to shew that the humane senses and the imaginative power of man are false HAving fully and amply satisfied those that deny the being of Angells and divells and the Apparitions of Specters Now remaineth to bee handled the last point that wee promised to speake of to wit Whether that which we doe perceive by our externall and outward senses sound and not corrupted or that which our imaginative faculty apprehendeth in working be false and not considerable And although this point doth not almost deserve to have any place in this Discourse by reason that the opinion of all men hath in all ages condemned such as have held nothing to be true and certaine of that which commeth and falleth vnder the senses Yet that we may make them to see at this day the errour and incredulitie of some mad-headed and braine-sicke Philosophers of former times like vnto our Atheists and Libertines at this day I was the more willing to set downe thereasons which mooved them to thinke That the truth of each thing was hidden from vs and that nothing could be comprehended but that which is false and vntrue But you must vnderstand that the source and first originall of this error came from Socrates who saide That he knew not any thing save this one thing onely The opinion and saying of Socrates to wit that he knew nothing But therein he was repugnant to himselfe for seeing that he knew some thing he shewed that he had at the least a certaine science and knowledge of that one thing And in saying
they have so acted the well representing and acting of their partes as themselves in the midst of their sporte have become truely and indeede furious and have done actes of outrage and fury even such as the parties did whome they represent The historie of Aesope the Stage player is well knowne who playing the pâ—â—te of Thiâ—stes did with his Scepter kill one of his owne boyes This Aesope was a great friend of Cicero and Hâ—râ—câ— gave him the epytheâ— and title of a grave man Lucian writeth of a certaine Actor or Stage player who playing the part of Aiax in a fury became in the middest of his parte so troubled and distracted in his senses that he did not any more faine himselfe to be furious but hee grow so truly and indeede From some he â—ore off their clothes From the Musitions hee snatched away their flutes and cornets To him that acted Vlysses if his coppe or bonnet wherewith hee was covered had not guarded him he had made his head a drinking place for the flâ—es In the end not content with these fooleries he descended from two Stage and placed himselfe in the middest betweene the Roman Senatours who having beene in times past Consulles were not without some feare lest this gallant would have mistaken them for Vlysses and Agamemnon and so have whipped them as if they had beene some curtall curre This historie maketh me to remember Vibius Gallus a Romane Oratour of whome Seneca speaketh how hee became as a man would say a very foole and distracted of his wittes only through the voluntary merrinesse and pleasaunt conceitednesse of his owne minde For hee vsing to immitate too too much the vaines of foolish persons and counterfaiting them to his vtmost This immitation so changed him in nature that hee became a meere foole and naturall indeede But to give an ende to this Discourse of furious and mad men I may not forget what Tertullian saith That those who be furious doe imagine that they fee other men or beasts in those whome they beholde as Orestes sawe his mother in his sister Electra and Aiax imagined Vlysses and Agamâ—â—non to be amongest a heird of beasts And to make shorte Agave and Athamas pursued and slew their owne children supposing they had killed savage and wilde beasts This shall suffice to be spoken touching the senses and the fantasie and concerning such who oftentimes by reason of the organs sensitive ill disposed or by means of their fantasie corrupted by sickenesse madnesse melancholy love excessive furie and other accidents have either externally or internally felt their naturall powers to be altered and changed and have deceived themselves by false visions and phantosmes It is now time that wee come to another question which ariseth out of this Discourse and can not well be seperated from it to wit If the divell can at any time convey or mingle himselfe with the senses either being sound or corrupted or with the humours and fantasie being offended oriâ— it be onelie the power and facultie of Nature or of the Starres which doe worke those marvellous effects vpon our bodies as is affirmed by Aveâ—reis Pomponatius and other Physitians who doe ordinarily attribute all things vnto Nature CHAP. XII That the Divoll doth sometimes convey and mingle himselfe in the Senses being corrupted and in the Phantasie affended contrarie to the opinion of the naturall Philosophers WE have heretofore shewed that ofttimes the Senses by reason of their imbecillity depravation and the Phantasie by meanes of divers maladies both corporall and spirituall doe feele in themselves an alteration from their proper and particular faculties as the eyes from seeing perfectly the eares from hearing the nose from smelling the mind and the phantasie from reasoning and discoursing and from discerning things by the vse of reason All which is so manifest and evidently true as to doubt thereof would be too too grosse a follie and ignorance because we see that the same daily happeneth and there are very few men who in their habitude or custome of life doe not receive and admit through accesse of yeares some change and alteration of their naturall senses and some dimination of their spirits And as touching those who in truth are wholy troubled and distracted from their sense or vnderstanding the examples thereof are so frequent and the multitude of them is so great and copions that no man can be ignorant of the same Yet this is not the point wherein any difficultie resteth or wherein should â—â—nsist the sumâ—â— of this dispuâ—e But it is sufficient plainely and simply to affirme that the nature of man may receive in it selfe changes may erre by the senses may be perverted in her discourse and may loose the vse of reason of prudence and of vnderstanding To be briefe in things which receive no contradiction as this same it should be but a vaine and lost labour to enter into any subtile discourse and to seeke out any great reasons and argumentes In heaping vp of the which a man shall bee sooner reprooved of too much curiositie then commended for his learning For this cause also have not I dwelt much in playing the Philosopher and dilating vpon that which is easie for every man to know and see of himselfe And if I have alleadged and cited both some reasons of phisicke and some histories which made to my purpose the same hath beene done rather by forme and way of discourse touching things whereof the notion is common then of any intention or purpose to enter into the depth and secrets of Philosophie especially in that which doth in no sort require the knowledge of a Philosopher But now as it is commonly seene that in the pursuit of any discourse which is easie in the first beginnings thereof it is vsuali to meete with some difficulties arising out of the principall matter a So doth it now fall out that in speaking of the senses and the phantasie I am fallen I know not how into an high and difficult question proceeding of that matter and that is Whether in the Senses being either sounder corrupteds or 〈◊〉 able Phaneasin being wounded and offended the Divâ—ll can possibly mingle and convey himselfe and there exercise his furie or if it be Nature only that worketh therein al aloue as is held by Pomponatius and Avenrâ—is according as I have formerly alleadged That nature is not the cause of any marvellous effects by working vpon the Senses or the phantasie corrupted or offended A speciall thing that maketh me firmely to beleeve that it is a kinde of mockery to say that Nature dooth worke in the Senses corrupted or in the Phantafie offended is this that then is must needes be inferâ—ed that the nature of man is more stâ—dâ—g and puissant when if is corrupted and depraved then when it is in it formd and entire estate Which indeed is nothing else but to erre in all true naturall Philosophie which doth ever preferre the habite before the
more therefore may it stand with reason that the Sorceresses even in the company of their husbands may be ravished and grow into an extasie and see in their imagination such divelish visions even as they be laid by the sides of their hushauds Now of these kindes of ravishment by way of extasie I can alleadge vnto you an infinite number of histories but it shall suffice that I recire two or three onely which I have read in Caietan named de Vio an interpreter vpon S. Thomas of Aquine and in Nider from whom both Silvester Prieras Spranger Henry Institoris and others having made that booke intituled Mullens maleficarum and Ghirlandus also have collected the better part of their Treatise Now De Vie sheweth how himselfe did knowe a certaine woman a Sorceresse In quast 106. secunda secunda arti 3. which was exceedingly enamored of a young man and whom the divell did annoint all naked with a certaine oyntment perswading her that he would bring her into the house of her beloved This woman having beene of a long time in an extasie and comming againe to her selfe affirmed that she had bin and laine with her friend and no man could perswade her to the contrarie notwithstanding that in very deede she was found laid all naked in her bed and there had beene so exceedingly wearied and toyled that being taken with an hoarsenesse by reason of the extreame colde which she had endured she was driven to keepe her bed till she was throughly eased and refreshed And Caietâ—â— had not afterwardes shewed and made it manifest vnto her that this which she had seene was nothing else but an imagination she would never have conceived the truth thereof so greatly was she deceived and abused by the divell And hee telleth farther how he knew an olde woman who had reported and given out that she would not faile to bee at the Sabbaoth and that she should be transported thither from her chamber howbeit for all this shee was found starke naked in the same chamber altogether sencelesse and in an extasie insomuch as the illusion and deceit of the divell being made manifest and apparant vnto her she was converted and brought to be of another minde And Nider alleadgeth also an example of another old woman who being by no meanes to be converted or perswaded by her Inquisitour shee did in the end betake her selfe to enter into her chamber at such time as she vaunted that she would goe to her Sabboth and there was she seene how at the first she beganne to sleepe sitting and then to grow into a great sweate holding a bason in her hand the which falling downe shee also fell vpon the ground all at her length and there discovering her secret parts she was afterwards awakened not without being greatly ashamed and confounded That Witches and Sorcerers have sometimes carnall copulation with the divell and bee in outward appearances changed into the shapes of beasts But that wee may not fall away too soone from our purpose touching Sorcerers and others who have sworn allyance and confederacie with the divell Besides that they be ravished in an extasie they have sometime also carnall copulation with him and may be changed in the forme and shape of divers beasts And albeit the Phisitians will come vpon vs with their disease called Ephialte or the Falling-sicknesse the which we have formerly described and with their Licantropie with which diseases they that be taken and surprized do imagine themselves to have carnall companie with spirites or doe thinke themselves to bee changed into Woolves yet in very truth so it is that there be some men and women which in very deede have had copulation as Incubi or Sutcubi with the divells and have beene changed into Woolves so farre forth as the outward sight and sense was able to discerne and have had the same affection as Woolves have and which is more have beene coupled with the females of Woolves This is a thing in some fort very difficult and hard to be beleeved esperially of such as 〈◊〉 naturallists and doe attribute most thinges to the worke power of nature and I know that Plinie doth make a mocke and ieast at it and especially at that which is called Lycantropiâ— which he accompteth but a meere fable And yet neverthelesse himselfe alleadgeth Evanthes a Greeke Author who saith that there is in Arcadia a certaine linage of men Lib. 8. cap. 22 who passing over a certaine flood or river doe become woolves and repassing the same do returne into their humane shape againe So that he is doubtfull of that which he ought to beleeve in that point And being ignorant of the power of divells hee râ—steth himselfe vpon the power of nature which is in some sort excusable in him being but a Pagan But it is a question worthie the handling to knowe whether the divells have the power to change in verie deede Question whether the divell can change the bodies of men indeed or not the substance of mans bodie or whether it be in 07 shew and apparance onely deceiving not onely the fantasie of the Sorcerer or of the partie which shall bee bewitched or enchanted but also the externall senses of those that shall behold them The truth is this question hath beene handled by Saint Augustine who holdeth Aunsvver Lid. 18. de civi dei that the true bodies of men cannot in any sort be changed by the Art of the divell but that he may well bee in such a body as is fantasticall and which either in dreaming or in imagination doth diversly alter and change it selfe by many sorts and kindes of things that doe present themselves vnto the minde And albeit the same be not indeede a true body yet may it take the forms and shape of a body suppressing and keeping as it were asleepe the outward senses of men in such sort as their true bodies may in the meane while repose themselves and be at rest in some other place surprised and overcome with a deepe and profound sleepe And the same Saint Angustine goeth yet further and saith how himselfe knew the father of one named Prestaâ—â—tius who was changed into a Muse and being thus metamorphosed did carrie vpon his backe certaine cariages and baggage of souldiers And this learned Doctour doth set down his resolution That this was nothing else but a meere illusion of the divell and that the father of Prostantius was not changed into a Mule and much lesse did hee carrie any bagge or baggage but that these were the divells which did charme and enchant the eyes of the beholders making them beleeve that the father of Prostantius was a Mole and carried those burdens baggage notwithstanding that it was they themselves which carryed them And agreeable to this resolution of Saint Augustine Gulielmus Parisiensis doth recount a certaine history which is worthy the marking Vltima parte de vnivers because in things of like