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
and apparantly enioy this priuiledge to see God face to face he heard how God said vnto him That his seruant Moses might see him with out any impediment but that other Prophets should see him onely by vision The Hebrew Text is Bammarâ Elau ethuadaa That is to say I will manifest my selfe to them in vision Definition of a Fantasie what it is It resteth now that we speake of the Fantasie which is no other thing but an Imagination and impression of the Soule of such formes and shapes as are knowne or of such as shall bee imagined without any sight had of them Or which shall bee receiued and vnderstoode of others to bee such by reasons and arguments This definition giueth S. Augustine writing to Nebridius And first as touching the imagination of things knowne Episto 72 It is most plaine and euident that whensoeuer we dreame of them presently there commeth into our thought the Phantosme and Image of them As if we dreame of our friend Immediatly he presenteth himselfe to our mindes and imagination in the same stature face habite person and a thousand other such particularities which are notable in him So if we dreame of our Countrey It seemeth vnto vs that we see the very wayes before vs whereby we trauell our houses our lands and our friends which Apollonius the Rhodian very well expresseth in these verses As when it chanceth In Argonaut◠a thing to men oft chauncing That one in forraine soyle farre off goes wandring Yet findes no place so farre though farthest off But when he listes can see the same and through The high wayes of his Countrey sometimes erreth Sometimes his house his goods his lands beholdeth Now here now there his curious thoughts oft turning He leades them through a thousand places running This sort of Fantasie Cattius a famous Epicure of his time of whome Horace maketh mention in one of his Satyres doth call a Specter But Cicero writing to Cassius iesteth at him that not without cause The difference betweene a Specter and a Fantasie A vision or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a sensible apprehension 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a motion of the heauenly spirits as sayth S. Ba. vpō Esay For there is a very great difference between the one the other for that the one is a simple imagination of the spirit or minde and the other is a sensible vision The one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a thinking or imagination as Homer calleth it The other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is plainely and manifestly seene and the same Poet in another place calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now as touching things not knowne nor seene but imagined in the minde they are for the most part spirituall and without corporall substance or they are conceiued and vnderstoode by humane reason and gathered by demonstrations as to beleeue that there is a God which gouerneth the world and hath a care and ouersight of mankinde Now these Fantasies which may bee named also Intellectuall are comprised as the Stoicks say partly by similitude as Socrates by his Image and partly by the proportion or Analogy of one thing to another and that is either by way of encrease or diminution by increase as Cyclops and Titius Giants by diminution as a Pigmey and a Dwarfe and partly by translation as wee say the eyes of the breast and by composition as an Hippocentaure a Tragelaphe and others such like monsters composed of two seuerall kindes of creatures and by the contrary of a thing as death by life And generally those things which are incorporall and vniuersall are comprehended by the meanes of such things as are corporall according to the saying of the Ciuilians For by the ground say they which oweth seruitude and yeeldeth benefit a man may comprehend the seruice and benefite belonging thereunto which are things meerely incorporall Now of al these kindes of Imagination which we haue so amply and at large described It may be gathered that there are two sortes of Imagination Two kindes of Imagination namely one Intellectuall and without corporall substance The other sensible and corporall Intellectuall Incorporall Sensible and Corporall Imagination Intellectuall what it is The Intellectuall is the Fantasie of which is bred and engendred in vs a memory or remembrance as the Peripatetickes speake and the discourse of the reasonable soule I meane that discourse which is proper only vnto man by the which he ballanceth and weigheth the things present by those which are past foreseeth by things past those which are to come after For albeit the vnreasonable creatures doe sometimes seeme to haue a kinde of discourse or dreaming in them as is to be seene in Horses and Dogges yet this dreaming or discourse in them is no other then meerely bestial and brutish which doth not accomodate nor apply it selfe but onely to things present by an vnreasonable appetite desire vnto those things which they loue and by eschewing and abhorring to their vtmost powers that which may be fearefull or contrary vnto them And therefore Epictetus speaking of those fantasies Theocritus which are sodainly carryed by the outward senses into the inward powers of the soule and doe carry feare and terrour with them as namely Thunders Earthquakes fearefull sights terrours and other such like things He said very well that they are common to vs with the brute beastes which are guided onely by their brutish senses But that the resolution which hee calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is proper and peculiar vnto man And for as much as it happeneth that such fantasies are out of the power will Terrours bred in the mind by the sense common to men with with brute beastes and election of the soule It followeth that they proceed of the senses which being no longer held vnder the rule and gouernment of the reason they doe more sauour of the brutall then the reasonable part of the soule And if peraduenture it shall be obiected that often times euen wise men themselues are not exempted from these feares and apprehensions To this I answere that it is not possible but the bodie of man should tremble and start at those things as beeing framed and compounded of Spirits apprehensiue subtill and sensible but it is soone quieted and as it were brought in temper againe by the soule which doth reassure and restore courage vnto it As when one casteth a stone into the water he shal see the water for a while to bubble vp and bee troubled but soone after it returneth to it former estate Imagination sensitiue twofold and whence it commeth The definition of a Specter opened and confirmed in the seuerall parts thereof Now touching that Imagination which is sensitiue either it is false and commeth either of the imaginatiue power corrupted or of the senses hurt and altred or else it is true and then it is that which we call a Specter which we defined to be
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
so doth S. Lib. 15. cap. 23. de ciuitate Des. Augustine interpret that place And forasmuch as the Angels were created by God strong and puissant and are ordayned as Iudges of the world hauing the Regiment and gouernement thereof in diuers charges degrees and authorities For this cause the Hebrewes call them also Abirim which signifieth strong and Elobim Gods or Iudges And because they haue their vnderstanding sharpe quicke and subtill therefore they call them also Shanim which ought to be vnderstood both actiuely and passiuely For besides that of themselues they haue their vnderstanding quicke and subtill they doe also sharpen and open the vnderstanding and Intellectuall powers of men whom they visite Of the seuerall names of Diuils or euill Angels amongst the Hebrewes Greeks and Arabians Now the euil Angels diuels are also named like as the good Angels are Malachim by the name of messengers yet so as they haue an addition of an Epithet sit and answerable to their wicked euil nature which is Raaim The which some being deceiued by the affinitie of the Letters haue turned into Rashim which signifieth Heades Chiefes or Colonels But I do not know that I did euer read the word Rashim simply for Diuels And if it bee in any place vsed for the same it is rather by way of an Allegorie then otherwise as I am not ignorant that the Hebrewes allegorically doe call the Deuils The diuels in the auncient French were called Guelsers of the Almanie word Vaguerant id est Vagabond which commeth of the Hebrew word Gala. Rashe-galijoth That is Heads or Chiefes of Captiuitie and Chiefes of mishappe and of encombraÌ„ce Moreouer the deuils are called also as the angels Ruhhoth Spirits and in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Spirits deceiuers and wicked and euill spirits They are also tearmed by the Greekes Daemones and Diaboli Daemones because they bring feare vnto men and Diaboli because they are Detractours Lyers slaunderers which the Hebrewes doe expresse also in their Language by the Name of Satanim which in the vulgar Translation is translated Diuels Calumniators and enemies And the Arabians euen to this day doe retaine this name For they call the Diuels Satainim as is to bee seene in diuers places of the Alcoran Besides they are called of the Hebrewes Elilim as authors of all Idolatrie and of the Idoles of the Paynims And of this name in my opinion is deryued the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which as writeth Macrobius The auncient Greekes did vse to call both Apollo and Bacchus which in very truth were two Diuels that had more Images erected in their names then any other of the Heathen Gods and did longest of all abuse and seduce the Greekes the inuentours of all Idolatrie The seuerall names of diuels amongst the Latynes The Latynes also for their partes are not vnfurnished nor vnprouided of fit Names proper and significatiue touching Diuels For they vsed by diuers and seuerall Names to call them Lares Laruae Lemures Genij Manes And that those which they termed Lares were Diuels It appeareth in that Cicero translating Plato his Timeus calleth that Lares which the Philosopher named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Diuels The Grammarian Festus agreeing with Cicero saith also that they are Infernall gods or the soules of men And as touching the regard of the soules It is no strange matter to finde in S. Augustine and other auncient Authors That our forefathers beeing Gentiles did thinke That the soules of men after their dissolution from the bodies did become Daemones or Diuels Of Lares or Domesticall gods or diuels In lib. 6. Acneidos in the expheatioÌ„ of the ver Sedibus huncrefer ance suis Now these Lares were domestical or houshold gods because as Seruius said in olde times the dead bodies were vsually enterred and buried in their houses And therefore those Lares that is to say the soules of the dead were adored and worshipped euery one particularly in that house where their bodies were enterred Of the name of Lares was deriued that of Laruae which were Shadowes or Ghostes tormenting the domesticall and particular inhabitants of priuate houses And certaine it is that euen in the time of our fathers the Polapians being a certaine Northerne people before they were reduced to the Christian faith did bury the bodies of their parents in the harthes of their Chimneies and for default thereof they were vexed and tormented with Spirits that appeared vnto them The Philosopher Plutarch likewise doth affirme that these Lares haue the ouersight of houses In Problem Râ—â— and that they are most seuere and cruell exactors and punishers of faultes committed and searchers or Inquisitors of the life and actions of those persons which are within their iurisdiction or precincts And he saith that they are clothed with Dogge-skinnes because as the Dogge is a beast that excelleth in sent and smelling so doe they as it were smell out a farre off the sins and misdeedes of men to the intent they may sharply punish and chastice them for the same But hee might haue added this rather if hee had beene a Christian That as Dogges are naturally enuious So these Lares or Diuels of this kinde do beare enuy and malice to mankinde Notwithstanding Festus whome we do gladly alledge seemeth to affirme That these Lares are sometime good for he names them sometime Praestites because they were thought to make all things safe and to keepe and preserue all thinges carefully and sometimes Hostilios for that they were supposed to driue away enemies But howsoeuer it bee certaine it is they were no other then verie Diuels who if they seemed sometimes to ayde and helpe men and to doe them some good yet the same was to the intent they might afterwardes worke them the more and greater harme and damage aswell inwardly in their Soules and consciences as outwardly in their bodies and goods Touching those Spirits which they call Lemures they are reckoned amongst the Laruae or hurtfull Spirites Of the Spirits called Lemures and are indeede Diuels which doe appeare in the night in the forme of diuers Beastes but most commonly in the shape and figure of dead men And Parphirus the Interpreter of Horace calleth them the Shadowes or wandring soules of men that dye before their time which is but an errour of the Pagans and hee addeth That the name of Lemures commeth of Romus the brother of Romulus by the chaunging of one letter into another because the Ghost or shadowe of that Prince did pursue Romulus his murtherer who to the intent hee might pacifie it instituted a feast which as the auncient Romane Calender and Ouid do set it downe was solemnized on the ninth day of the moneth of May Li. 5. Fastorum and by the Romans was called Lemuria which is as a man should say The feast of the Hob-Goblins Gli Farfarelli Maz zaruoli or Mazzapengoli Warre-Wolues or
colour as Homer describeth her Mercury was painted like a young man hauing his eyes alwayes open as one that was euer waking with bright yellowe hayre and a yellowe downe vpon his chinne and cheekes as if it did but newly begin to frizzle or to curle Venus had her eyes delicate and wanton and her lockes of golde yellow Iuno had grosse and thicke eyes rising vp towardes her head like vnto the eyes of an Oxe And so generally were the rest of the Gods painted by the Gentiles in diuers formes and fashions Notwithstanding all this proceeded of nothing else but from the errour of our Imagination which suffereth it selfe to bee deceiued and seduced by the painting which imprinted in it a kind of false notion I say a notion because the ignorant common sort of people is perswaded of the same and suffereth it to take place in their minde or vnderstanding which is as easie also to be deceiued as is their Imagination But a man of wisedome and iudgement who hath his vnderstanding more cleare and open is not easily therewithall seduced but notwithstanding al paintings and fictions his Intellect or vnderstanding power pierceth through the Imagination as the Sunne pierceth or shineth through the cloudes and spreading it selfe with her light doth easily beleeue in a spiritual manner that God and the Angels are Spirituall The second Argument of the Epicures The second Argument of the Epicures touching the humane bodie of God was that God tooke vpon him that forme which was or could be imagined to be the most beautifull in the whole world And they say that the humane forme or shape is of all others the most goodly and excellent And therefore wee ought to thinke that God is carnall and corporall as men are Hereunto needeth no answere to bee made because the consequence of their argument is not good Answere to the 2. Argument viz. That God should retaine vnto himselfe the Figure of a man because the same is the most excellent of all other creatures in the world For the Diuinitie of God neither is nor can be in any corporall substance But it is an Incorporall and spirituall essence which hath nothing common with that substance which is proper vnto these earthly creatures The 3. Argument of the Epicures The third last argument of these Philosophers is a Gradation or heaping vp of Syllogismes which kinde of argument the Greekes call a Sorites and they frame it in this sort It is held and confessed of all that God all other celestial powers are exceedingly happy But no person can be happy without vertue And vertue cannot bee present in any without reason and reason can bee in none but in the figure and shape of man Therefore it must bee granted that the Gods which haue the vse of reason haue the forme of man also But the whole frame of this Argument Answere to the 3. Argument may soone and easily bee dissolued by denying that reason can bee in no other then in a humane shape For both God and the Angels who haue a diuine and spirituall vnderstanding haue the vse of reason notwithstanding that they be not of a corporal substance And reason in man commeth not of the humane body but from the soule of man which is Spirituall Diuine made vnto the likenesse of God and capable of reason of prudence and of wisedome Now whereas it might be obiected to the Epicures That in making their Gods to haue a humane bodie they doe therein make them subiect to death and dissipation To auoide this absurditie Absurdities in the opinion of the Epicures they doe tumble into a greater affirming that their bodie is as a body and their bloud as bloud not hauing any thing but the lineameÌ„ts proportioÌ„ of a man being exempted froÌ„ all crassitude thicknes which in a word is asmuch as to say that their Gods were rather Idols of men theÌ„ very men and rather framed by the paterne of men theÌ„ as men in truth substance which is a thing the most ridiculous that can be imagined But will some say To what purpose serueth all this touching our matter of Specters I haue saide before that the Saduces did maintaine God to haue a bodie to the ende they might the better deny the appearing of Specters which are substances without a bodie Also the Epicures made their Gods to haue bodies that so they might holde them in the heauens idle and doing nothing and by consequence might deny their Apparition vpon Earth Of the opinion of the Epicures who thought there were no Diuels nor Spirits In vita Bruti For as touching Diuels or Spirites they beleeued there were not any but did confound them all in the number of their Gods And that they did but make a iest of Specters appeareth by the speech of Cassius in Plutarch and in that that Celsus halfe an Epicure writing against the Christians Lib. 2.6 8 â—â—â—tra Celsum did denie them flatly and absolutely as is to bee seene in Origen who hath aunswered him and did reproue the Christians in that they would allowe of any powers or Spirites contrary to the Gods supposing according to his owne saying and opinion that there were no Diuels Besides that hee made a mocke and a iest of Angels and of the Resurrection of the bodie and generally of all those Apparitions which were made both in the old and new Testament And now that wee speake of contrary powers Contra Stâ—ices it putteth mee in remembrance of a speech of Plutarch who reproueth Chrisippus for that in this vniuersall body of the worlde so well ordained and framed he should graunt so great an inconuenience to wit that there should be a kinde of Diuels afflicting and tormenting men to the disturbance of the concord and harmonie of the world Which being well ordained by the Authour and maker thereof ought not to bee thought to beare or sustaine any thing which should be incommodious to it self and by lapse and coÌ„tinuance of time should worke the confusion and destruction of the same But it seemeth that Plutarch repreheÌ„ded Chrisippus vpon a desire and humor of contradiction rather then moued vpon any iust cause or matter of truth For the diuels do not worke any domage or inconuenience to the world being bridled restrained by the hand and power of God And if they do torment men or tempt them it is to exercise them or to manifest the glory and iustice of God of the which they are sometimes made the executioners S. Bernard in Sermone 1. de transla S. Malach Diabolus inquit malleus calest is opificis factus est malleus vniuersa terra And as in each Common-Wealth well instituted there bee executioners ordained for the punishment of Malefactors and such as trouble and disturbe the publicke peace and good of the common-weale and yet the vniuersall body of the coÌ„mon-weale is not therby offended
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
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
great and notable Magician Empedocles and before him Pithagoras by their impostures would have made the world beleeve that there was in them a kinde of divinitie I know not what For the same Pithagoras fained that hee had beene in hell and was come from thence and he tooke vpon him to recite vnto the people of Crotona all whatsoever had happened vnto any of them particularly so that he was generally esteemed for ever after as a man highly beloved of the gods as n = b Li. 5. de vita philosophorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diogenes reporteth of him And as touching Empedocles we have yet extant certaine verses of his which he made before his death and by them he chanted and gave it forth vnto the people of Agrigentum his fellow Cittizens that he was no mortall man but a god immortall and a benigne and favourable god that soiourned at that present amongst them to the intent he might ayde and succour them that did invocate and call vpon him And in truth after he had made those verses a humour tooke him to cast himselfe into the midst of the flaming fire of Mount Mongibel to the end that disappearing on a suddaine from the sight of men and so being no more seene it might have beene imagined that hee was flowne into heaven But the flame more iust then he discovered his imposture for it cast vp againe from below one of his slippers or pantables and so it was knowne that this poore and wretched braine sicke Philosopher was there burnt and consumed to ashes Neverthelesse such impostures and illusions as these have gone farther then to meane and small persons For even the greatest have somtimes helped themselves by them to insinuate themselves by little and little into the mindes and affections of men vnder the covert and colour of religion The king Minos the law-maker of Candye at such time as he had a purpose to bring in and establishe lawes in his realme fained that Iupiter did daily speake vnto him face to face and that he was as Homer saith his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is his familiar and one with whome he had private and speciall conference The which got him such fauour with the people that his name growing therevpon to be famous and of great credite he gave such a countenance and authoritie to his lawes that they were kept and observed longer then were any other amongst the Greeks In Politicis And Lycurgus also as Aristotle writeth did serve himselfe of this devise for the establishing of those lawes which he instituted and made in his Common-wealth Numa Pompiâ—ius king of the Romans did likewise faine thâ—t the Numph Egeria had familiaritie and acquaintance with him and did informe him of those lawes which he prescribed vnto the people of Rome a nation at that time very vnapt to be taught and instructed and which could verie hardly by râ—ason of their fiercenesse and martiall courage be tamed and brought to civiline had it not beene by the onely meanes and colour of religion The Roman Chieftaine Sertorius did help himself by the meanes of a white Hinde to stay his souldiers from revolting whereas otherwise they being wearie of the warres had a determination to yeelde or reconcile themselves to their adversaries And Mahomet his Dove which he had taught to take corne out of his eare was a principall helpe and instrument vnto him to make the Ismaclites or Arabians beleeve that it was the holie-Ghost that came to inspire him with that pernitious and detestable law which he invented and instituted by the ayde not of the holy-ghost as he vannted but of the Iew Abdala and of Sergius an Apostata monke renied To be short even in the time of our fathers the Cheriffe and the Sophy of Persia two notable hypocrites insinuating themselves by degrees into the heartes of the people vnder a pretence of religion have gained so great authority and preheminence that either of them seising of that province where they inhabited have dispossessed the rightfull and auntient possessours of the same and have set their crownes vpon their owne heads And why should we forget that superstition which was observed at the enterrement of the Roman Emperours which was as plaine an imposture and full of deceipt and illusion as was any of those whereof we have before spoken Every man knoweth that when the dead bodies of these Roman Emperors were to be burned there was a living Eagle set vpon an engine made of purpose And assoone as the fire was kindled the Eagle was suffered to flie away and therevppon the common saying was That it was the soule of the deceased Emperour which mounted from thence vp into Heaven as Herodian witnesseth Libr. 4. histor Caesarum In Apollogia ad Divesfrat And Iustine Martir affirmeth that there was alwayes one deputed and ordained by the successour of the dead emperour who should vpon his oath averre That hee had seene the soule of the emperour which was said to be deified to issue out from the pile of fire and to flie directly vp into heaven The wordes of Iustine are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In vita Aug. sub finem The same also dooth Dion write who saith that Livia the wife of Augustus did give tenne thousand crownes vnto Numerus Atticus Pretor to have an Affidavit made that hee sawe Caesar Augustus mount vp into heaven In lud de morte Claud. Neronis And Seneca reciteth how Drusilla being deified by Caligula who was both her brother and her husband he found out a fellow that sware hee had seene Drusilla mount vppe into heaven whereat when all men mocked and jeasted at him in good earnest every body on all sides hissing at him hee protested in the open Senate That if from thencefoorth hee shoulde at anie time after in the open streete and at mid-day see any man slaine whomsoever he would never more be drawne to beare witnesse of it But before wee give over this our Discourse of impostures and delusions I holde it not amisse to sette downe three Histories of this subiect the most notable and famous that were ever read or observed in any Authours whatsoever For by the same it is to be scene how three severall lewd and vngratious youthes for the enioying of their amorous and lustful desires have ayded themselves with the cloake of religion and have fained themselves to be gods Eschines that great and famous Oratour writing to a friend of his touching the variable and sundry traverses Epist 10. troubles and daungers which hee had passed in the time of his travells and voyages abroade during his exile amongst many others recounteth how hee came to lie at roade in the haven of Trâ—ada before that great and famous towne of Troy where hee went ashoare to the intent he might refresh himselfe and his company from the travell of the Sea and that hee might the more at his pleasure contemplate and
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
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
had no other remedie to drive away this evill but the Harpe of David To make short Levinus himselfe is constrained to confesse That the humours are the principall cause of all maladies partaking of melancholy Lib. 2. cap. 1. de occult nat miraculis or of any fever But that the Divells the Starres the Qualitie of the ayre adioyning and other things externall do accompany them as accidents And therefore away with all these reasons of the Naturalists who because they will deny that there be any Divells doe attribute and yeelde more power vnto humane nature and to the Starres than to the Spirits that are supernaturall and above nature the which they can not comprehend to be by any means in essence because they doe too too much ground themselves vpon nature and do not acknowledge any thing above or beyond it Opinion of those that doe attribute all charmes and enchantments vnto the virtue of hearbs c. But some of them there be who passe yet further on and doe affirme that the charmes and enchauntments wherewith they do enchaunt and constraine men be it either to the loving of some woman or to hate her so as they cannot endure to dwell and abide with her do proceede from the vertue of hearbes or the starres or from the imagination troubled and corrupted rather than of any working or power of the Divell And they doe alleadge for their authoritie the Physitian Avicen Opinion of Avicen touching enchauntments who saith that Enchantments have not any effect or force in nature nor any vertue or power to change the health of any man or the state of his welfare into sickenes or infirmities And that they which are of opinion that there bee any enchaunted doe enchaunt themselves by the vehemencie of their imagination And these men doe alleadge that also which he afterwardes reciteth vaunting of himselfe For my part saith hee I make no account of any Sorcerer whatsoever neither doe I knowe any Enchaunter be hee never so cunning and expert in his Arte that can constraine me against my will to lift vp or to moove so much as my little finger And more than so I never knewe any that hath himselfe to be enchaunted but I have healed and delivered him from that imagination that hee hath beene enchaunted Vpon this authoritie do they relie vtterly reiecting and disallowing any Enchauntments to be wrought by meanes of Divells and consequently denying their essence and being Avicen his opinion confuted Neverthelesse for any thing saide by Avicen there are so many experiences to the contrary of such as have been inchaunted and bewitched that it were a poynt of too too great incredulitie to doubt of it And as touching that they say That charmes and enchantments doe not proceede of the vertne of hearbes c. That if there be any charmes and enchauntments in Nature the same proceedeth of the force of hearbes and of the influence of the starres rather than of any spirits Therein is no great apparance of any truth or veritie For if it were so it must needes followe that the wordes and speeches which Enchaunters and Sorcerers doe vtter shoulde not have any force nor efficacie But it hath beene a thing approoved by all Antiquitie that divers have beene enchaunted by wordes and speeches vttered which Lucan a very learned Poet and great Philosopher dooth testifie saying Mens hausti nulla sanie polluta veneni Excantata perit A man inchaunted runneth madde That never any poyson had I confes indeede that God hath given many properties vnto hearbes and vnto simples yea and those so admirable that they have the power and vertue not onely to preserve our humane bodies in health but also vtterly to overthrow and to bring it to confusion in such sort as if the same were enchanted Nevertheles that they should so worke vpon the body that the soule inwardly should feele the force and effect thereof it is not possible not to be beleeved except that together with the hearbes there be intermingled some charmes or wordes of enchantment And of this was not Ovid ignorant as appeareth by that which her speaketh of Medea saying Protinus horrendis infamia pabula succis Lib. 9. Mâ—tamory Conterit tritis Hecaetei a carmina miscet Then horride herbs hateful drugs together she doth bruse And in the bruising damned spels hellish charms doth vse And that of the learned Poet Virgil Miscueruntque herbas non innoxia verba Lib. 3. Georgic which is And therewithall they mingle sundria hearbs Ever and among vsing not harmelesse words But more plainely and manifestly doth Propertius recount how the Sorcerers doe give a force and power vnto their hearbs thereby to enchant and charme persons did vse to stirre and moove them in some ditch into the which they made some floud of raine or water to come Quippe Collinas ad fossam moverit herbas Stantia currenti diluerentur aqua Lib. 5. Elegiarum Within some ditch she stirs her hearbs which she had placed There with the running water to be washed Now Apuleius and other antient Authors have written that Sorcerers did vse to worke do their charmes in some ditch or pit And therefore Propertius in those verses bringing in a Sorceresse mooving and stirring her hearbes in a ditch what other thing doth he intend to shew but that together with the hearbs there were mingled also certaine charmes the which did give a force and vigour to the hearbs to worke wonders by the cooperation of the divell Furthermore Virgil doth recite yet other ceremonies which the Sorcerers vsed in gathering of their hearbes Lib. 4. Aeneid Falcibus lunae ad lumen quaeruntur adhenis Pubentes herbae nigri cum lacte veneni all which were nothing else but damnable superstitious and divelish inventions as to cut them in the night time by the light of the Moone-shine with a hooke of brasse which maketh me also to remember certaine observations of the Magitians and Sorcerers in times past in cutting of their hearb Elleborus Mandragoras and the herbe Panaceum whereof Theophrastus speaketh and derideth it as a foolish and vaine superstition Lib. 9. de historia herbarum cap. 9 and those also of the Druides amongest the antient Gaules who vsed without any knife or yron to plucke the hearbe which they called Selago and in gathering thereof they went alwayes clothed or apparrelled with a kinde of white surplisse with their feete bare and naked verie cleane and well washed and before that they gathered it their fashion was to consecrate bread and wine and after they had gathered it Lib. 24. cap. 11. to put the same into a faire white napkin as Plinie writeth of them That neither the vertue of hearbes nor the influence of the starres can worke or rule the affections of men to love or hatred Moreover it is a most grosse absurditie to affirme that the hearbes being