The Witchcraft Delusion in New England: Its Rise, Progress, and Termination, (Vol 1 of 3). Calef Robert
Читать онлайн книгу.
from the Dutch Witchelen, or Wiichelen, which properly signifies whinnyng and neighing like a Horse; also to foretell or prophecy; and Wiichelen, signifies a Soothsayer; for that the Germans (from whom our Ancestors the Saxons usually descended) did principally (as Tacitus tells us) divine and foretel Things to come by the whinnying and neighing of their Horses; Hinitus and Trenitus are his Words."
Witchcraft is not defined by Blount himself; while under the Article Witch, he extracts from Master William Perkins: "Witchcraft is an Art serving for the working of Wonders by the Assistance of the Devil, so far as God will permit." To make the Definition of Witchcraft still more plain, Mr. Blount extracts thus from an old Author named Delrio,1 who defines Witchcraft to be "An Art, which by the Power of a Contract, entred into with the Devil, some Wonders are wrought, which pass the common Understanding of Men."
As we approach a later Age, Lexicographers are pretty careful in their Definitions of Witchcraft. Bailey, in his folio Dictionary of 1730, says it is "the Art of bewitching, enchanting, divining, &c."
Johnson, though a Believer in Witchcraft, shirks the Definition of it thus: "The Practice of Witches. Bacon. Power, more than natural. Sidney."
Noah Webster published a Dictionary of the English Language in 1806, in which he says a Witch is "a Woman accused of magical Arts, a Hag." Witchcraft, "the Practice of Witches, a Charm." The great Lexicographer must have marvelled at these Definitions in his later Years; if so, he fails to make due Atonement in his incomparable "Unabridged." But the learned Editor of the "Imperial Dictionary,"2 Dr. Ogilvie, appears to have taken such Liberty with Dr. Webster's Work as to bring it up to the Standard of the Times, especially in that Class of Words in which Witchcraft is prominent. His Definition is so much to the Point, so clear, and so well expressed, that it is, though long, extracted entire: "Witchcraft, the Practice of Witches; Sorcery; Enchantments; Intercourse with the Devil; a supernatural Power, which Persons were formerly supposed to obtain Possession of by entering into Compact with the Devil. Indeed it was fully believed that they gave themselves up to him, Body and Soul, while he engaged that they should want for Nothing and be able to assume whatever Shape they pleased, to visit and torment their Enemies, and accomplish their infernal Purposes. As soon as the Bargain was concluded, the Devil was said to deliver to the Witch an Imp or familiar Spirit, to be ready at call, and to do whatever it was directed. By the Aid of this Imp and the Devil together, the Witch, who was almost always an old Woman, was enabled to transport herself through the Air on a Broom-stick or a Spit, and to transform herself into various Shapes, particularly those of Cats and Hares; to inflict Diseases on whomsoever she pleased, and to punish her Enemies in a Variety of Ways. The Belief of Witchcraft is very ancient. It was universally believed in Europe till the 16th Century, and even maintained its Ground with tolerable Firmness till the Middle of the 17th Century. Vast Numbers of reputed Witches were condemned to be burned every Year, so that in England alone it is computed that no fewer than 30,000 of them suffered at the Stake."
Dr. Ogilvie closes his Definition with one Extract from Shakespeare:
"He hath a Witchcraft
Over the King in's Tongue."
It cannot be denied that the Existence of Witchcraft is as fully taught in the Bible as Slavery. The Light of Science has extinguished the one, while the other yet struggles against Fate.3 To urge the Authority of the Bible, that Slavery is a divine Institution, and therefore should be sustained, is just as reasonable as it would be to urge the Existence of Witches; and were there as many Interests at Stake in keeping alive Witchcraft, it would find as many Advocates, doubtless, as Slavery.
At first, Voices against Witchcraft were faint and few. Such was the Bewilderment of the human Mind in early Ages that Men hardly dared to think in Opposition to the Superstitions of the Multitude. Yet there were always some who doubted the delegated Power of the Devil, though they were not often lavish enough of their own Safety to let their Disbelief be known. Still, there are, no Doubt, some "dark Corners of the Earth" where it would not be entirely safe for one to declare publicly that there is no such Matter as Witchcraft. Nor is this so much to be wondered at, when, at the present Day, and in a Portion of our own Country, a Man cannot speak against Slavery, but at the Peril of his Life. This is no new Aspect growing out of the present Rebellion, but it has been thus many Years.
Few Men dared to speak boldly against the Existence of Witchcraft before the Year 1700. Though they disbelieved in it they were afraid to attack it. They began by endeavouring to show the Insufficiency of the Evidence relied upon in particular Cases. In this Way, Frauds were detected and exposed, and the Eyes of Judges were opened.
Among the early and successful Combatants of Witchcraft in England was Sir Robert Filmer. This Gentleman, though he out-went Machiavel himself in Arguments to uphold Despotism, yet he entered a pretty effectual Demurrer against the Prerogative of the Devil, as attempted to be manifested in the Persons of aged Matrons. Lancashire was distinguished above all other Counties in England in Sir Robert's Time for its Production of Witches; but when his native County, Kent, was scourged by the imaginary Arts of Satan, he thought it Time to make a public Declaration of his Views in Regard to the Nature of the Evidence made Use of for the Conviction of Witches. He therefore prepared a Treatise which he entitled "An Advertisement to the Jury-men of England, touching Witches," printed in 1680, but whether it was ever printed before does not appear from this Impression. In this Work he criticises the Productions of some of the prominent Authors in Favor of Witchcraft with much Ability.
To the Assertion that Witches act under a Contract with the Devil, Mr. Filmer observes, "That the Agreement between the Witch and the Devil they call a Covenant, and yet neither of the Parties are any Way bound to perform their Part; and the Devil, without Doubt, notwithstanding all his Craft, hath far the worst Part of the Bargain. The Bargain runs thus in Master Perkins's Work: 'The Witch as a Slave binds herself by Vow to believe in the Devil, and to give him either Body, or Soul, or both, under his Hand-writing, or some Part of his Blood. The Devil promiseth to be ready at his Vassal's Command, to appear in the Likeness of any Creature, to consult and to aid him for the procuring of Pleasure, Honor, Wealth, or Preferment; to go for him, to carry him any whither, and to do any Command.' Whereby we see the Devil is not to have Benefit of his Bargain till the Death of the Witch. In the Meantime, he is to appear always at the Witche's Command, to go for him [or her], to carry him any whither, and to do any Command; which argues the Devil to be the Witche's Slave, and not the Witch the Devil's Slave. And though it be true which Delrio affirmeth, 'That the Devil is at Liberty to perform or break his Compact, for that no Man can compel him to keep his Promise;' yet on the other Side, it is as possible for the Witch to frustrate the Devil's Contract, if he or she have so much Grace as to repent; the which there may be good Cause to do, if the Devil be found not to perform his Promise. Besides, a Witch may many Times require that to be done by the Devil, which God permits not the Devil to do; thus against his Will the Devil may lose his Credit, and give Occasion of Repentance, though he endeavor to the utmost of his Power to bring to pass whatsoever he hath promised; and so fail of the Benefit of his Bargain, though he have the Hand-writing, or some Part of the Blood of the Witch for his Security, or the Solemnity before Witnesses, as Delrio imagineth."
Thus much is given to show in what Manner the Advocates of Witchcraft were combatted, without denying the actual Existence of it. It was as much as could be safely advanced in the seventeenth Century. To have come out boldly, and denied the Thing altogether, would have been to proclaim a Disbelief of the Teachings of the Bible; and this would have defeated the very Object sought to be attained. It has, beyond Question, occurred to all thinking Men in every Age, that Witches and Devils could not have a Being without God's Permission; that if they did or do exist, it is his Pleasure that they should; that, therefore, if God wished to destroy such Miscreants he would do it by making War on them himself, instead of compelling Mankind to fight them blindfolded for all Eternity, or during the World's Existence.
There are few Readers probably who have not heard of a Book upon Witchcraft by a royal Hand – a King of England. James I wrote a Book to which he gave the Title, Dæmonologie. To those who have not studied the State of Society in England
A Jesuit of Loraine. His Book was a "Magical Disquisition."
In three Volumes, royal Octavo, Glasgow, 1856-9.
This Part of this Introduction was written not long before the Southern Rebellion began.