The Witch cult in Western Europe

M >> Margaret Alice Murray >> The Witch cult in Western Europe

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29

_Barbara Napier_, continued. And siclyke, the said Barbara was
accusit, that sche gaif hir bodelie presens vpoun Alhallowewin last
was, 1590 yeiris, to the frequent conuentioune haldin att the Kirk of
North-Berwick, quhair sche dancit endlang the Kirk-yaird, and Gelie
Duncan playit on ane trump, Johnne Fiene missellit [muffled] led the
ring; Agnes Sampsoun and hir dochteris and all the rest following the
said Barbara, to the nowmer of sevin scoir of persounes.... And the
Devill start vp in the pulpett, lyke ane mekill blak man, haifand ane
blak buik in his hand, callit on ewerie ane of thame, desyring thame
all to be guid serwandis to him, and he sould be ane guid maister to
thame. Robert Griersoun and Johne Fian stuid on his left hand; and the
said Robert ffand grit fault with the Dewill, and cryit out, that all
quhilkis wer besyd mycht heir, becaus his hienes pictour was nocht
gewin thame, as wes promesit; the said Effie McCalyan remembrand and
bid[d]and the said Robert Griersoun to speir for the pictour, meaning
his Maiesties pictour, quhilk sould have been roistit. Robert
Griersoun said thir wordis, 'Quhair is the thing ye promiseit?'
meaning the pictour of walx, dewysit for roisting and vndoing his
hienes persoune, quhilk Agnes Sampsoune gaif to him; and Robert cryit
to 'haif the turne done'; yit his hienes name was nocht nameit, quhill
thay that wer wemen nameit him; craifand in playne termes his hienes
pictour. Bot he ansuerit, 'It sould be gottin the nixt meitting; and
he wald hald the nixt assemblie for that caus the soner: It was nocht
reddie at that tyme.' Robert Griersoune ansuerit, 'Ye promiseit twyis
and begylit ws.' And four honest-like wemene wer very ernist and
instant to haif itt. And the said Barbara and Effie McCalyane gatt
than ane promeis of the Dewill, that his hienes pictour sould be
gottin to thame twa, and that rycht sone: And this mater of his hienes
pictour was the caus of that assemblie.

This ends the evidence of the witches; the point to be proved now is the
identity of the man whom they believed in and obeyed as God incarnate.

In all cases of murder or attempted murder it is necessary to find the
person who would benefit, for murder is differentiated from manslaughter by
the fact that it is deliberately planned and that it is done for a motive.
In the case of the witches of North Berwick, the man who instigated the
meetings, and to whom consequently suspicion points, was Francis Stewart
Earl of Bothwell. His position as regards both the King and the witches
must therefore be investigated.

Francis, afterwards Earl of Bothwell, was the eldest son of John Stewart
and Jane Hepburn, sister of that Earl of Bothwell whom Mary Queen of Scots
married. Francis succeeded his maternal uncle in title and estates. His
father, Lord John Stewart, was an illegitimate son of James V. The Pope,
however, legitimized all the natural children of James V; and Mary, after
her accession, granted letters of legitimation[150] to her two
half-brothers, John Stewart, and James, afterwards the Regent Moray. John
was slightly the elder of the two, and had he been legitimate would have
been the heir to the exclusion of Mary. The Regent Moray left only
daughters, whereas John Stewart had several sons, of whom Francis was the
eldest. Francis might therefore claim to be the next heir male to the
throne of Scotland, and possibly of England, had James VI died without
children. James's own opinion of the matter is shown in his speech to his
Parliament in 1592, when he denounced Bothwell as an aspirant to the
throne, although he was 'but a bastard, and could claim no title to the
crown'. Bothwell, however, was himself no bastard, though his father was.
But the significance of the witches' attempt, as well as the identity of
the chief personage at their meeting, is given in Barbara Napier's evidence
as to the reason for the attempted murder of the King, 'that another might
have ruled in his Majesty's place, and the government might have gone to
the Devil'. By changing the title 'the Devil' by which he was known to the
witches, to the title 'Earl of Bothwell' by which he was known outside the
community, the man and the motive are manifest. This hypothesis is borne
out by the contemporary accounts.

The trial of the witches created a great stir, and Bothwell's name was
freely coupled with the witches'. He denied all complicity; this was only
natural, as confession would have meant an acknowledgement of high treason.
But his followers might have betrayed him. The two leaders, Agnes Sampson
and John Fian, were tortured. Sampson admitted that the wax image was made
at the instance of Francis, Earl of Bothwell; an admission sufficiently
damning, but beyond that she would say nothing. The real danger to Bothwell
lay in Fian. Under torture he made admissions and signed a confession in
the presence of the King. He was then

'by the maister of the prison committed to ward, and appointed to a
chamber by himselfe; where, foresaking his wicked wayes, acknowledging
his most ungodly lyfe, shewing that he had too much folowed the
allurements and enticements of Sathan, and fondly practised his
conclusions, by conjuring, witchcraft, inchantment, sorcerie, and such
like, hee renounced the Devill and all his wicked workes, vowed to
lead the lyfe of a Christian, and seemed newly converted to God. The
morrow after, upon conference had with him, he granted that the Devill
had appeared unto him in the night before, appareled all in blacke,
with a white wande in his hande; and that the Devill demaunded of him,
"If hee woulde continue his faithfull service, according to his first
oath and promise made to that effect": Whome (as hee then saide) he
utterly renounced to his face, and said unto him in this manner,
"Avoide! Sathan, avoide! for I have listned too much unto thee, and by
the same thou hast undone me; in respect whereof I utterly forsake
thee". To whome the Devill answered, that "once ere thou die thou
shalt bee mine". And with that (as he sayd) the Devill brake the white
wand, and immediately vanished foorth of his sight. Thus, all the
daie, this Doctor Fian continued verie solitarie, and seemed to have a
care of his owne soule, and would call uppon God, showing himselfe
penitent for his wicked life; neverthelesse, the same night, hee found
such meanes that he stole the key of the prison doore and chamber in
which he was, which in the night hee opened and fled awaie to the
Saltpans, where hee was alwayes resident, and first apprehended. Of
whose sodaine departure, when the Kings Majestie had intelligence, hee
presently commanded diligent inquirie to bee made for his
apprehension; and for the better effecting thereof hee sent publike
proclamations into all partes of his lande to the same effect. By
means of whose hot and harde pursuite he was agayn taken, and brought
to prison; and then, being called before the Kings Highnes, hee was
reexamined, as well touching his departure, as also touching all that
had before happened. But this Doctor, notwithstanding that his owne
confession appeareth, remaining in recorde under his owne hande
writting, and the same thereunto fixed in the presence of the Kings
Majestie and sundrie of his Councell, yet did hee utterly denie the
same. Whereupon the Kings Majestie, perceiving his stubborne
wilfulnesse, conceived and imagined, that in the time of his absence,
hee had entered into newe conference and league with the Devill his
maister'. [Fian was then subjected to the most horrible tortures that
could be devised.] 'And notwithstanding all these grievous paines and
cruel torments, hee would not confess anie thinges; so deeply had the
Devill entered into his heart, that hee utterly denied all that which
he before avouched; and would saie nothing thereunto, but this, that
what hee had done and sayde before, was onely done and sayde, for fear
of paynes which he had endured'.[151]

He continued steadfast and was executed at the Castle Hill.

The character of Fian is perfectly consistent. Under torture he signed a
confession, which confession might have implicated Bothwell. That night
Bothwell himself, or one of his emissaries, obtained access to the prisoner
and arranged for his escape. The wretched Fian was faced with death either
way; if he retracted his confession, he would die as a criminal by the
hands of the law; if he held to it, he would die as a traitor by the hands
of his comrades. There was no alternative. All that day he 'continued verie
solitarie', calling upon God, but by night he had made his choice and fled.
He apparently escaped without difficulty. The story of his stealing the
keys of his own cell and of the prison door is absurd; the escape was
obviously effected by connivance just as later on Bothwell's own escape was
effected. Fian went back to his own home, where, according to James's
surmise, he had an interview with the Devil (i.e. Bothwell), and there he
tamely waited till the officers of the law came and recaptured him. This
tameness is not in keeping with the rest of his character. A man with
sufficient courage and resource to get out of a strongly guarded prison
would have made good his escape; an easy enough matter in those turbulent
times. Fian then must have been retaken because he wished to be retaken.
For fear of torture and in hope of pardon he signed the first confession,
implicating Bothwell,[152] yet later he endured agonies of torture with the
certainty of death rather than acknowledge one word which might lead to the
discovery that James was bent upon. James's surmise was perhaps more than a
mere guess; it was prompted by his knowledge of the facts. Fian had had an
interview with his Master, whom he believed to be God Incarnate, and like
many a Christian martyr he atoned for the first betrayal by steadfast
courage through cruel torment even to death.

Reading the accounts in the light of this supposition, it is seen that
every one, including James, suspected Bothwell. Even if they did not
acknowledge his divinity, they feared the magical powers which, as Chief of
the Witches, he was supposed to wield. It is impossible to study the
details of this period without realizing the extraordinary fear which James
had of his cousin; it was fear with an underlying horror, totally different
from his feeling towards his other turbulent subjects. When Bothwell,
seeking pardon, was introduced into Holyrood Palace by Lady Athol in the
early morning of July 24, 1593, he entered the King's chamber. James,
always undignified, was caught in the middle of his morning toilet; he
tried to run into the Queen's room, but the way was barred by Bothwell's
friends and the door was locked. 'The king, seeing no other refuge, asked
what they meant. Came they to seek his life? let them take it--they would
not get his soul.'[153] This remark, made in the urgency and excitement of
the moment, is highly significant. Had Bothwell been, like many of James's
other enemies, merely an assassin, James would not have spoken of his soul.
But Bothwell as the Devil of the witches had the right to demand the
yielding of the soul, and James was aware of the fact.

The birth of James's children removed Bothwell's hopes of succession; the
power of the witch organization, of which he was the Chief, was broken by
the death of its leaders. He had made a strong bid for power, he failed,
fled the country, and finally died in poverty at Naples. There George
Sandys the traveller heard of him: 'Here a certaine _Calabrian_ hearing
that I was an _English_ man, came to me, and would needs perswade me that I
had insight in magicke: for that Earle _Bothel_ was my countryman, who
liues at _Naples_, and is in those parts famous for suspected
negromancie.'[154]

The Devil being actually a human being, the letter of introduction to him,
given by a man-witch to a would-be proselyte, becomes quite credible. It is
worth quoting verbatim:

'Monseigneur, d'autant qu'il me faut retirer de la Religion des
Chrestiens, afin que ie multiplie vostre party, duquel estant, il est
raisonnable que ie vous glorifie et assemble tant de gens que ie
pourray, ie vous enuoye ce porteur pour estre du nombre: c'est
pourquoy ie vous prie de l'aider en ses amours.'

Satan's reply to the novice shows a distinctly human trace of temper:

'Vous autres Chrestiens vous estes perfides et obstinez: Quand vous
auez quelque violent desir, vous vous departez de vostre maistre, et
auez recours a moy: mais quand vostre desir est accompli, vous me
tournez le dos comme a vn ennemi, et vous en retournez a vostre Dieu,
lequel estant benin et clement, vous pardonne et recoit volontiers.
Mais fay moy vne promesse escrite et signee de ta main, par laquelle
tu renonces volontairement ton Christ et ton Baptesme, et me promets
que tu adhereras et seras auec moy iusqu'au iour du iugement; et apres
iceluy tu te delecteras encore auec moy de souffrir les peines
eternelles, et i'accompliray ton desir.'[155]

4. _As an Animal_

[Illustration]

In many religions the disguising of the principal personage--whether god or
priest--as an animal is well known. The custom is very ancient--such
disguised human beings are found even among the palaeolithic drawings in
France; and on a slate palette belonging to the late pre-dynastic period of
Egypt there is a representation of a man disguised as a jackal and playing
on a pipe.[156] The ritual disguise as an animal is condemned, with great
particularity, as devilish, in the _Liber Poenitentialis_ of Theodore of
the seventh century (see _supra_, p. 21), showing that it continued in
force after the conversion of England to an outward appearance of
Christianity. From the analogy of other religions in which the custom
occurs, it would appear that it is a ritual for the promotion of fertility;
the animal represented being either the sacred animal of the tribe or the
creature most used for food.

The suggestion that the Devil was a man, wearing either an animal's skin or
a mask in the form of an animal's head as a ritual disguise, accounts as
nothing else can for the witches' evidence as to his appearance and his
changes of form. A confusion, however, exists from the fact that the
witches, and therefore the recorders, usually spoke of the familiars as the
Devil; but in almost every case the disguised man can, on examination of
the evidence, be distinguished from the animal familiar.

The animal forms in which the Devil most commonly appeared were bull, cat,
dog, goat, horse, and sheep. A few curious facts come to light on
tabulating these forms; i.e. the Devil appears as a goat or a sheep in
France only; he is never found in any country as a hare, though this was
the traditional form for a witch to assume; nor is he found as a toad,
though this was a common form for the familiar; the fox and the ass also
are unknown forms; and in Western Europe the pig is an animal almost
entirely absent from all the rites and ceremonies as well as from the
disguises of the Devil.

The witches never admitted in so many words that the Devil was a man
disguised, but their evidence points strongly to the fact. In some cases
the whole body was disguised, in others a mask was worn, usually over the
face. The wearing of the mask is indicated partly by descriptions of its
appearance, and partly by the description of the Devil's voice. The
Lorraine witches in 1589 said that the Devils 'koennen nimmermehr die
Menschliche Stimme so aussdruecklich nachreden, dass man nicht leicht daran
mercke, dass es eine gemachte falsche Stimme sey. Nicolaea Ganatia, und
fast alle andere sagen, dass sie eine Stimme von sich geben, gleich denen,
so den Kopff in ein Fass oder zerbrochenen Hafen stecken und daraus reden.
Auch geben sie etwann eine kleine leise Stimme von sich.'[157] The North
Berwick Devil in 1590 was purposely disguised out of all recognition: 'The
Devil start up in the pulpit, like a mickle black man, with a black beard
sticking out like a goat's beard; and a high ribbed nose, falling down
sharp like the beak of a hawk; with a long rumpill' [tail].[158] This was
Barbara Napier's account; Agnes Sampson describes the same personage, 'The
deuell caused all the company to com and kiss his ers, quhilk they said was
cauld like yce; his body was hard lyk yrn, as they thocht that handled him;
his faice was terrible, his noise lyk the bek of an egle, gret bournyng
eyn: his handis and legis wer herry, with clawis vpon his handis and feit
lyk the griffon, and spak with a how voice.'[159] Boguet states that 'on
demanda a George Gandillon, si lors qu'il fut sollicite par Sata de se
bailler a luy, Satan parloit distinctement. Il respondit que non, & qu'a
peine pouuoit il comprendre ce qu'il disoit.'[160] The evidence of the
witches in the Basses-Pyrenees makes it clear that a disguise was worn, and
that a mask was placed on the back either of the head or of the person;
this also explains part of Agnes Sampson's evidence given above. The effect
of the mask at the back of the head was to make the man appear two-faced,
'comme le dieu Janus'. In the other case 'le diable estoit en forme de
bouc, ayant vne queue, & au-dessoubs vn visage d'homme noir ... & n'a
parole par ce visage de derriere.--Vne grande queuee au derriere, & vne
forme de visage au dessoubs: duquel visage il ne profere aucune parole,
ains luy sert pour donner a baiser a ceux qui bon luy semble.--Marie
d'Aspilecute dit qu'elle le baisa a ce visage de derriere au dessoubs d'vne
grande queue; qu'elle l'y a baise par trois fois, & qu'il auoit ce visage
faict comme le museau d'vn bouc.--Bertrand de Handuch, aagee de dix ans,
confessa que le cul du grad maistre auoit vn visage derriere, & c'estoit le
visage de derriere qu'on baisoit, & non le cul.'[161] The Devil of the
Basses-Pyrenees evidently wore a mask over the face, for he had 'la voix
effroyable & sans ton, quand il parle on diroit que cest vn mullet qui se
met a braire, il a la voix casse, la parole malarticulee, & peu
intelligible, parcequ'il a tousiours la voix triste & enroueee'. On
occasions also 'il quitoit la forme de Bouc, & prenoit celle d'homme'.[162]
In 1614 at Orleans Silvain Nevillon said 'qu'il vit a la cheminee vn homme
noir duquel on ne voyoit pas la teste. Vit aussi vn grand homme noir a
l'opposite de celuy de la cheminee, & que ledit ho[~m]e noir parloit comme
si la voix fut sortie d'vn poinson. Dit: Que le Diable dit le Sermo au
Sabbat, mais qu'on n'entend ce qu'il dit, parce qu'il parle co[~m]e en
grodant.'[163] The devil who appeared to Joan Wallis, the Huntingdonshire
witch, in 1649, was in the shape of a man dressed in black, but he 'was not
as her husband, which speaks to her like a man, but he as he had been some
distance from her when he was with her'.[164] Thomazine Ratcliffe, a
Suffolk witch, said that the Devil 'spoke with a hollow, shrill
voyce'.[165] According to Mary Green (1665) the Somerset Devil, who was a
little man, 'put his hand to his Hat, saying, How do ye? speaking low but
big'.[166] In the same year Abre Grinset, another Suffolk witch, confessed
that she met the Devil, who was in the form of 'a Pretty handsom Young Man,
and spake to her with a hollow Solemn Voice'.[167] John Stuart at Paisley
(1678) said the Devil came to him as a black man, 'and that the black man's
Apparel was black; and that the black man's Voice was hough and
goustie'.[168]

The coldness of the devil's entire person, which is vouched for by several
witches, suggests that the ritual disguise was not merely a mask over the
face, but included a covering, possibly of leather or some other hard and
cold substance, over the whole body and even the hands. Such a disguise was
apparently not always worn, for in the great majority of cases there is no
record of the Devil's temperature except in the sexual rites, and even then
the witch could not always say whether the touch of the Devil was warm or
not. In 1565 the Belgian witch, Digna Robert, said the devil 'etait froid
dans tous ses membres'.[169] In 1590, at North Berwick, 'he caused all the
company to com and kiss his ers, quhilk they said was cauld lyk yce; his
body was hard lyk yrn, as they thocht that handled him'.[170] In 1598
Pierre Burgot, whose statement is quoted by several authors, 'a confesse,
que le Diable luy donna a baiser sa main senestre, qui estoit noire, comme
morte, & toute froide'.[171] In 1609, in the Basses-Pyrenees, Isaac de
Queyran, aged 25, said that he and others 'le baiserent a vne fesse qui
estoit blanche & rouge, & auoit la forme d'vne grande cuisse d'vn homme, &
estoit velue'.[172] This shows the ritual disguise of the person and
suggests the use of an animal's hide with the hair still attached. In 1645
the Essex witch Rebecca West said 'he kissed her, but was as cold as
clay'.[173] At Salisbury in 1653, when the witch Anne Bodenham persuaded
Anne Styles to join the community, 'then appeared two Spirits in the
likenesse of great Boyes, with long shagged black hair, and stood by her
looking over her shoulder, and the Witch took the Maids forefinger of her
right hand, and pricked it with a pin, and squeezed out the blood and put
it into a Pen, and put the Pen in the Maids hand, and held her hand to
write in a great book, and one of the Spirits laid his hand or Claw upon
the Witches whilest the Maid wrote; and the Spirits hand did feel cold to
the Maid as it touched her hand, when the witches hand and hers were
together writing'.[174] At Forfar in 1661 three of the witches agreed as to
the coldness of the Devil; 'Elspet Alexander confesses that the divill
kissed hir selfe that night and that it was ane cold kisse; Katheren Porter
confesseth that the divill tooke hir by the hand, that his hand was cold;
Isobell Smith confessed that he kissed hir and his mouth and breath were
cold.'[175] In 1662 the Crook of Devon witches were also in accord. Isabel
Rutherford 'confesst that ye was at ane meeting at Turfhills, where Sathan
took you by the hand and said "welcome, Isabel", and said that his hand was
cold.--Margaret Litster confessed that Sathan took you be the hand and
stayed the space of half an hour, Sathan having grey clothes and his hand
cold.--Janet Paton confessed that Sathan asked you gif ye would be his
servant, whilk ye did, and Sathan took you be the hand, and ye said that
his hand was cold.' On the other hand Agnes Murie 'knew not whether his
body was hot or cold'.[176] According to Isobel Gowdie at Auldearne in
1662, 'he was a meikle blak roch man, werie cold';[177] at Torryburn,
Lilias Adie found his skin was cold;[178] and the Crighton witches in 1678
said, 'he was cold, and his breath was like a damp air'.[179] In 1697
little Thomas Lindsay declared that 'Jean Fulton his Grand-mother awaked
him one Night out of his Bed, and caused him take a Black Grimm Gentleman
(as she called him) by the Hand; which he felt to be cold'.[180]

The evidence as to the forms assumed by the Devil is tabulated here under
each animal, each section being arranged in chronological order.

1. _Bull._--In 1593 at Angers 'Michel des Rousseaux, age de 50 ans, dict
que ledict homme noir appelle Iupin se transforma aussitost en Bouc ... et
apres leur auoir baille des boueetes de poudre, il se trasforma en
Bouuard'.[181] At Aberdeen in 1597 Marion Grant confessed that 'the Devill
apperit to the, sumtyme in the scheap of a beist, and sumtyme in the scheap
of a man'. Jonet Lucas of the same Coven said that the Devil was with them,
'beand in likenes of ane beist'. Agnes Wobster, also of the same Coven,
acknowledged that 'thaireftir Satan apperit to the in the likenes of a
calff, and spak to the in manner forsaid, and baid the be a gude servand to
him'.[182] In 1608 Gabriel Pelle confessed that he went with a friend to
the Sabbath, where 'le Diable estoit en vache noire, & que cette vache
noire luy fit renoncer Dieu'.[183] De Lancre says that at Tournelle the
Devil appeared 'parfois comme vn grand B[oe]uf d'airain couche a terre,
comme vn B[oe]uf naturel qui se repose'.[184] At Lille in 1661 the witches
'adored a beast with which they committed infamous things'.[185] According
to Isobel Gowdie in 1662, the Devil of Auldearne changed his form, or
disguise, continually, 'somtym he vold be lyk a stirk, a bull, a deir, a
rae, or a dowg'.[186] [In the above, I have taken the word 'beast' in its
usual meaning as an animal of the cattle tribe, but it is quite possible
that the Lille beast, _beste_ in the original, may have been a goat and not
a bull. This seems likely from the fact that the sacrifice was by fire as
in the other places where the Devil used the goat-disguise.]

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29