Introduction to the 1948 Version
It has been observed that "it is quite impossible to
appreciate and understand the true and inner lives of men and women in
Elizabethan and Stuart England, in the France of Louis XIII and during the
long reign of his son and successor, in Italy of the Renaissance and the
Catholic Reaction——to name but three European countries and a few definite
periods—— unless we have some realization of the part that Witchcraft
played in those ages amid the affairs of these Kingdoms. All classes were
affected and concerned from Pope to peasant, from Queen to cottage girl."
Witchcraft was inextricably mixed with politics. Matthew Paris tells us
how in 1232 the Chief Justice Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent,
(Shakespeare's "gentle Hubert" in King John), was accused by Peter
do Roches, Bishop of Winchester, of having won the favour of Henry III
through "charms and incantations". In 1324 there was a terrific scandal at
Coventry when it was discovered that a number of the richest and most
influential burghers of the town had long been consulting with Master
John, a professional necromancer, and paying him large sums to bring about
by his arts the death of Edward II and several nobles of the court. Alice
Perrers, the mistress pf Edward III, was not only reputed to have
infatuated the old King by occult spells, but her physician (believed to
be a mighty sorcerer) was arrested on a charge of confecting love philtres
and talismans. Henry V, in the autumn of 1419, prosecuted his stepmother,
Joan of Navarre, for attempting to kill him by witchcraft, "in the most
horrible manner that one could devise." The conqueror of Agincourt was
exceedingly worried about the whole wretched business, as also was the
Archbishop of Canterbury, who ordered public prayers for the King's
safety. In the reign of his son, Henry VI, in 1441, one of the highest and
noblest ladies in the realm, Eleanor Cobham, Duchess of Gloucester, was
arraigned for conspiring with "a clerk", Roger Bolingbroke, "a most
notorious evoker of demons", and "the most famous scholar in the whole
world in astrology in magic", to procure the death of the young monarch by
sorcery, so that the Duke of Gloucester, Henry's uncle and guardian, might
succeed to the crown. In this plot were further involved Canon Thomas
Southwell, and a "relapsed witch", that is to say, one who had previously
(eleven years before) been incarcerated upon grave suspicion of black
magic, Margery Jourdemayne. Bolingbroke, whose confession implicated the
Duchess, was hanged; Canon Southwell died in prison; the witch in
Smithfield was "burn'd to Ashes", since her offence was high treason. The
Duchess was sentenced to a most degrading public penance, and imprisoned
for life in Peel Castle, Isle of Man. Richard III, upon seizing the throne
in 1483, declared that the marriage of his brother, Edward IV, with the
Lady Elizabeth Grey, had been brought about by "sorcery and witchcraft",
and further that "Edward's wife, that monstrous witch, has plotted with
Jane Shore to waste and wither his body." Poor Jane Shore did most
exemplary penance, walking the flinty streets of London barefoot in her
kirtle. In the same year when Richard wanted to get rid of the Duke of
Buckingham, his former ally, one of the chief accusations he launched was
that the Duke consulted with a Cambridge "necromancer" to compass and
devise his death.
One of the most serious and frightening events in the life of James VII
of Scotland (afterwards James I of England) was the great conspiracy of
1590, organized by the Earl of Bothwell. James with good reason feared and
hated Bothwell, who, events amply proved, was Grand Master of more than
one hundred witches, all adepts in poisoning, and all eager to do away
with the King. In other words, Francis Stewart, Earl of Bothwell, was the
centre and head of a vast political plot. A widespread popular panic was
the result of the discovery of this murderous conspiracy.
In France as early as 583, when the infant son and heir of King
Chilperic, died of dysentery, as the doctors diagnosed it, it came to
light that Mumolus, one of the leading officials of the court, had been
secretly administering to the child medicines, which he obtained from
"certain witches of Paris". These potions were pronounced by the
physicians to be strong poisons. In 1308, Guichard, Bishop of Troyes, was
accused of having slain by sorcery the Queen of Philip IV of France
(1285-1314), Jeanne of Navarre, who died three years before. The trial
dragged on from 1308 to 1313, and many witnesses attested on oath that the
prelate had continually visited certain notorious witches, who supplied
him philtres and draughts. In 1315, during the brief reign (1314-1316) of
Louis X, the eldest son of Philip IV, was hanged Enguerrand de Marigny,
chamberlain, privy councillor, and chief favourite of Philip, whom, it was
alleged, he had bewitched to gain the royal favour. The fact, however,
which sealed his doom was his consultation with one Jacobus de Lor, a
warlock, who was to furnish a nostrum warranted to put a very short term
to the life of King Louis. Jacobus strangled himself in prison.
In 1317 Hugues Géraud, Bishop of Cahors, was executed by Pope John
XXII, who reigned 1316-1334, residing at Avignon. Langlois says that the
Bishop had attempted the Pontiff's life by poison procured from witches.
Perhaps the most resounding of all scandals of this kind in France was
the La Voison case, 1679-1682, when it was discovered that Madame de
Montespan had for years been trafficking with a gang of poisoners and
sorcerers, who plotted the death of the Queen and the Dauphan, so that
Louis XIV might be free to wed Athénais de Montespan, whose children
should inherit the throne. The Duchesse de Fontanges, a beautiful young
country girl, who had for a while attracted the wayward fancy of Louis,
they poisoned out of hand. Money was poured out like water, and it has
been said that "the entire floodtide of poison, witchcraft and diabolism
was unloosed" to attain the ends of that "marvellous beauty" (so Mme. de
Sévigné calls her), the haughty and reckless Marquise de Montespan. In her
thwarted fury she well nigh resolved to sacrifice Louis himself to her
overweening ambition and her boundless pride. The highest names in
France——the Princesse de Tingry, the Duchesse de Vitry, the Duchesse de
Lusignan, the Duchesse de Bouillon, the Comtesse de Soissons, the Duc de
Luxembourg, the Marguis de Cessac——scores of the older aristocracy, were
involved, whilst literally hundreds of venal apothecaries, druggists,
pseudo-alchemists, astrologers, quacks, warlocks, magicians, charlatans,
who revolved round the ominous and terrible figure of Catherine La Voisin,
professional seeress, fortune-teller, herbalist, beauty-specialist, were
caught in the meshes of law. No less than eleven volumes of François
Ravaison's huge work, Archives de la Bastille, are occupied with
this evil crew and their doings, their sorceries and their poisonings.
During the reign of Urban VIII, Maffeo Barberini, 1623-1644, there was
a resounding scandal at Rome when it was discovered that "after many
invocations of demons" Giacinto Contini, nephew of the Cardinal d'Ascoli,
had been plotting with various accomplices to put an end to the Pope's
life, and thus make way for the succession of his uncle to the Chair of
Peter. Tommaso Orsolini of Recanate, moreover, after consulting with
certain scryers and planetarians, readers of the stars, was endeavouring
to bribe the apothecary Carcurasio of Naples to furnish him with a quick
poison, which might be mingled with the tonics and electuaries prescribed
for the ailing Pontiff, (Ranke, History of the Popes, ed. 1901,
Vol. III, pp. 375-6).
To sum up, as is well observed by Professor Kittredge, who more than
once emphasized "I have no belief in the black art or in the interference
of demons in the daily life of mortals", it makes no difference whether
any of the charges were true or whether the whole affairs were hideous
political chicanery. "Anyhow, it reveals the beliefs and the practices of
the age."
Throughout the centuries witchcraft was universally held to be a dark
and horrible reality; it was an ever-present, fearfully ominous menace, a
thing most active, most perilous, most powerful and true. Some may
consider these mysteries and cantrips and invocations, these sabbats and
rendezvous, to have been merest mummery and pantomime, but there is no
question that the psychological effect was incalculable, and harmful in
the highest degree. It was, to use a modern phrase, "a war of nerves".
Jean Bodin, the famous juris-consult (1530-90) whom Montaigne acclaims to
be the highest literary genius of his time, and who, as a leading member
of the Parlement de Paris, presided over important trials, gives it as his
opinion that there existed, no only in France, a complete organization of
witches, immensely wealthy, of almost infinite potentialities, most
cleverly captained, with centres and cells in every district, utilizing an
espionage in ever land, with high-placed adherents at court, with humble
servitors in the cottage. This organization, witchcraft, maintained a
relentless and ruthless war against the prevailing order and settled
state. No design was too treacherous, no betrayal was too cowardly, no
blackmail too base and foul. The Masters lured their subjects with
magnificent promises, they lured and deluded and victimized. Not the least
dreaded and dreadful weapon in their armament was the ancient and secret
knowledge of poisons (veneficia), of herbs healing and hurtful, a
tradition and a lore which had been handed down from remotest antiquity.
Little wonder, then, that later social historians, such as Charles
Mackay and Lecky, both absolutely impartial and unprejudiced writers,
sceptical even, devote many pages, the result of long and laborious
research, to witchcraft. The did not believe in witchcraft as in any sense
supernatural, although perhaps abnormal. But the centuries of which they
were writing believed intensely in it, and it was their business as
scholars to examine and explain the reasons for such belief. It was by no
means all mediæval credulity and ignorance and superstition. MacKay and
Lecky fully recognized this, as indeed they were in all honesty bound to
do. They met with facts, hard facts, which could neither have been
accidents nor motiveless, and these facts must be accounted for and
elucidated. The profoundest thinkers, the acutest and most liberal minds
of their day, such men as Cardan; Trithemius; the encylcopædic Delrio;
Bishop Binsfeld; the learned physician, Caspar Peucer; Jean Bodin; Sir
Edward Coke, "father of the English law"; Francis Bacon; Malebranche;
Bayle; Glanvil; Sir Thomas Browne; Cotton Mather; all these, and scores
besides, were convinced of the dark reality of witchcraft, of the witch
organization. Such a consensus of opinion throughout the years cannot be
lightly dismissed.
The literature of the subject, discussing it in every detail, from
every point of view, from every angle, is enormous. For example, such a
Bibliography as that of Yve-Plessis, 1900, which deals only with leading
French cases and purports to be no more than a supplement to the
Bibliographies of Græsse, the Catalogues of the Abbé Sépher, Ouvaroff, the
comte d'Ourches, the forty-six volumes of Dr. Hoefer, Shieble, Stanislas
de Guaita, and many more, lists nearly 2,000 items, and in a note we are
warned that the work is very far from complete. The Manuel
Bibliographique, 3 vols., 1912, of Albert L. Caillet, gives 11,648
items. Caillet has many omissions, some being treatises of the first
importance. The library of witchcraft may without exaggeration be said to
be incalculable.
It is hardly disputed that in the whole vast literature of witchcraft,
the most prominent, the most important, the most authorative volume is the
Malleus Maleficarum (The Witch Hammer) of Heinrich Kramer (Henricus
Institoris) and James Sprenger. The date of the first edition of the
Malleus cannot be fixed with absolute certainty, but the likeliest
year is 1486. There were, at any rate, fourteen editions between 1487 and
1520, and at least sixteen editions between 1574 and 1669. These were
issued from the leading German, French and Italian presses. The latest
reprint of the original text of the Malleus is to be found in the
noble four volume collection of Treatises on Witchcraft, "sumptibus
Claudii Bourgeat", 4to., Lyons, 1669. There is a modern German translation
by J.W.R. Schmidt, Der Hexehammer, 3 vols., Berlin, 1906; second
edition, 1922-3. There is also an English translation with Introduction,
Bibliography, and Notes by Montague Summers, published John Rodker, 1928.
The Malleus acquired especial weight and dignity from the famous
Bull of Pope Innocent VIII, Summis desiderantes affectibus of 9
December, 1484, in which the Pontiff, lamenting the power and prevalence
of the witch organization, delegates Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger as
inquisitors of these pravities throughout Northern Germany, particularly
in the provinces and dioceses of Mainz, Cologne, Tréves, Salzburg, and
Bremen, granting both and either of them an exceptional authorization, and
by Letters Apostolic requiring the Bishop of Strasburg, Albrecht von
Bayern (1478-1506), not only to take steps to publish and proclaim the
Bull, but further to afford Kramer and Sprenger every assistance, even
calling in, if necessary, the help of the secular arm.
This Bull, which was printed as the Preface to the Malleus, was
thus, comments Dr. H.C. Lea, "spread broadcast over Europe". In fact, "it
fastened on European jurisprudence for nearly three centuries the duty of
combating" the Society of Witches. The Malleus lay on the bench of
every magistrate. It was the ultimate, irrefutable, unarguable authority.
It was implicitly accepted not only by Catholic but by Protestant
legislature. In fine, it is not too much to say that the Malleus
Maleficarum is among the most important, wisest, and weightiest books
of the world.
It has been asked whether Kramer or Sprenger was principally
responsible for the Malleus, but in the case of so close a
collaboration any such inquiry seems singularly superflous and nugatory.
With regard to instances of jointed authorship, unless there be some
definite declaration on the part of one of the authors as to his
particular share in a work, or unless there be some unusual and special
circumstances bearing on the point, such perquisitions and analysis almost
inevitably resolve themselves into a cloud of guess-work and bootless
hazardry and vague perhaps. It becomes a game of literary
blind-man's-bluff.
Heinrich Kramer was born at Schlettstadt, a town of Lower Alsace,
situated some twenty-six miles southwest of Strasburg. At an early age he
entered the Order of S. Dominic, and so remarkable was his genius that
whilst still a young man he was appointed to the position of Prior of the
Dominican House at his native town, Schlettstadt. He was a
Preacher-General and a Master of Sacred Theology. P.G. and S.T.M., two
distinctions in the Dominican Order. At some date before 1474 he was
appointed an Inquisitor for the Tyrol, Salzburg, Bohemia, and Moravia. His
eloquence in the pulpit and tireless activity received due recognition at
Roma, and for many years he was Spiritual Director of the great Dominican
church at Salzburg, and the right-hand of the Archbishop of Salzburg, a
munificent prelat who praises him highly in a letter which is still
extant. In the late autumn or winter of 1485 Kramer had already drawn up a
learned instruction or treatise on the subject of witchcraft. This
circulated in manuscript, and is (almost in its entirety) incorporated in
the Malleus. By the Bull of Innocent VIII in December, 1484, he had
already been associated with James Sprenger to make inquisition for and
try witches and sorcerers. In 1495, the Master General of the Order, Fr.
Joaquin de Torres, O.P., summoned Kramer to Venice in order that he might
give public lectures, disputations which attracted crowded audiences, and
which were honoured by the presence and patronage of the Patriarch of
Venice. He also strenuously defended the Papal supremacy, confuting the
De Monarchia of the Paduan jurisconsult, Antonio degli Roselli. At
Venice he resided at the priory of Santi Giovanni e Paolo (S. Zanipolo).
During the summer of 1497, he had returned to Germany, and was living at
the convent of Rohr, near Regensburg. On 31 January, 1500, Alexander VI
appointed him as Nuncio and Inquisitor of Bohemia and Moravia, in which
provinces he was deputed and empowered to proceed against the Waldenses
and Picards, as well as against the adherents of the witch-society. He
wrote and preached with great fervour until the end. He died in Bohemia in
1505.
His chief works, in addition to the Malleus, are: Several
Discourses and Various Sermons upon the Most Holy Sacrament of the
Eucharist; Nuremberg, 1496; A Tract Confuting the Errors of Master
Antonio degli Roselli; Venice, 1499; and The Shield of Defence of
the Holy Roman Church Against the Picards and Waldenses ; an
incunabulum, without date, but almost certainly 1499-1500. Many learned
authors quote and refer to these treatises in terms of highest praise.
James Sprenger was born in Basel, 1436-8. He was admitted a novice in
the Dominican house of this town in 1452. His extraordinary genius
attracted immediate attention, and his rise to a responsible position was
very rapid. According to Pierre Hélyot, the Fransican (1680-1716),
Histoire des Ordres Religieux, III (1715), ch. XXVI, in 1389 Conrad of
Prussia abolished certain relaxations and abuses which had crept into the
Teutonic Province of the Order of S. Dominic, and restored the Primitive
and Strict Obedience. He was closely followed by Sprenger, whose zealous
reform was so warmly approved that in 1468 the General Chapter ordered him
to lecture on the sentences of Peter Lombard at the University of Cologne,
to which he was thus officially attached. A few years later he proceeded
Master of Theology, and was elected Prior and Regent of Studies of the
Cologne Convent, one of the most famous and frequented Houses of the
Order. On 30 June, 1480, he was elected Dean of the Faculty of Theology at
the University. His lecture-room was thronged, and in the following year,
at the Chapter held in Rome, the Master General of the Order, Fra Salvo
Cusetta, appointed him Inquisitor Extraordinary for the Provinces of
Mainz, Trèves, and Cologne. His activities were enormous, and demanded
constant journeyings through the very extensive district to which he had
been assigned. In 1488 he was elected Provincial of the whole German
Province, an office of the first importance. It is said that his piety and
his learning impressed all who came in contact with him. In 1495 he was
residing at Cologne, and here he received a letter from Alexander VI
praising his enthusiasm and his energy. He died rather suddenly, in the
odour of sanctity——some chronicles call him "Beatus" - on 6 December,
1495, at Strasburg, where he is buried.
Among Sprenger's other writings, excepting the Malleus, are
The Paradoxes of John of Westphalia Refuted, Mainz, 1479, a closely
argued treatise; and The Institution and Approbation of the
Confraternity of the Most Holy Rosary, which was first erected at Cologne
on 8 September in the year 1475, Cologne, 1475. Sprenger may well be
called the "Apostle of the Rosary". None more fervent than he in spreading
this Dominican elevation. His zeal enrolled thousands, including the
Emperor Frederick III, in the Confraternity of the Most Holy Rosary, which
was enriched with many indulgences by a Bull of Sixtus IV. It has been
observed that the writings of Father James Sprenger on the Rosary are well
approved by many learned men, Pontiffs, Saints and Theologians alike.
There can be no doubt that Sprenger was a mystic of the highest order, a
man of most saintly life.
The Dominican chroniclers, such as Quétif and Echard, number Kramer and
Sprenger among the glories and heroes of their Order.
Certain it is that the Malleus Maleficarum is the most solid,
the most important work in the whole vast library of witchcraft. One turns
to it again and again with edification and interest: From the point of
psychology, from the point of jurisprudence, from the point of history, it
is supreme. It has hardly too much to say that later writers, great as
they are, have done little more than draw from the seemingly inexhaustible
wells of wisdom which the two Dominicans, Heinrich Kramer and James
Sprenger, have given us in the Malleus Maleficarum.
What is most surprising is the modernity of the book. There is hardly a
problem, a complex, a difficulty, which they have not foreseen, and
discussed, and resolved.
Here are cases which occur in the law-courts to-day, set out with the
greatest clarity, argued with unflinching logic, and judged with
scrupulous impartiality.
It is a work which must irresistibly capture the attention of all mean
who think, all who see, or are endeavouring to see, the ultimate reality
beyond the accidents of matter, time and space.
The Malleus Maleficarum is one of the world's few books written
sub specie aeternitatis. |