A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages; volume III

[458] Synod. Patricii c. 16 (Haddan and Stubbs, II. 329).—Gregor. PP. VII. Regist. VII 21.—Reginon. de Discip. Eccles. II. 347 sqq.—Burchardi Decret. Lib. X., Lib. XIX. c. 5.—Ivon. Decreti P. XI.—Ivon. Panorm. VI. 117; VIII. 61 sqq.—P. II. Decret. caus. XXXIII. Q. 1, c. 4.—Mall. Maleficar. P. I. Q. 8.—Guibert. Noviogent. de Vita sua I. 12.—Rigord. de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1193.—Durandi Specul. Juris Lib. IV., Partic. IV., Rubr. de Frigidis, etc.—Johann. Saresberiens. Polycrat. II. 9-12.—Pet. Blesens. Epist. 65.

The belief in “ligatures” is one of the oldest and most universal of superstitions. Herodotus (II. 181) relates that Amasis who reigned in Egypt about the middle of the sixth century B. C., found himself thus afflicted when he married the Cyrenean princess Ladice. Notwithstanding the political importance of maintaining the alliance cemented by the marriage, he accused her of employing sorcery and threatened her with death. In her extremity she made a vow in the temple of Venus to send a statue of the goddess to Cyrene. Her prayer was heard and her life was saved.

[459] Gest. Treviror. Archiep. c. 19.—Lambert. Hersfeld. Annal. ann. 1074.—Höfler, Prager Concilien, p. xvi.

[460] Chron. Turon. ann. 1061.—Chron. Halberstadiens. (Leibnit. S. R. Brunsv. II. 127-8).—Gest. Treviror. c. 38 (Martene Ampl. Coll. IV. 181-2).

[461] Laws of Edward and Guthrum, 11.—Laws of Ethelred, v. 7.—Cnut Secular. 4 (Ed. Kolderup Rosenvinge p. 36).—Athelstan’s Dooms, I. 6.—Laws of Edward the Elder, 6.—Ll. Henrici lxxi. § 1.—Ingulph’s Chron. Contin. (Bohn’s Edition, p. 258).

[462] Olaf Tryggvesson’s Saga, 69, 70, 83 (Laing’s Heimskringla).—Kristinrettr Thorlaks oc Ketils, c. xvi.

For the intimate connection between sorcery and malignant spirits, see Finn Magnusen’s Priscæ Vet. Boreal. Mythologiæ Lexicon, s. v. Tröll, pp. 474 sqq.

[463] Wibaldi Epist. 157 (Martene Ampl. Coll. II. 352).—Baron. Annal. ann. 1181, No. 6-10.—C. 1 Extra. XLV. 3.—C. 2 Extra, v. 21.—Johan. Saresberiens. Polycrat. c. xxviii.

Catoptromancy was a practice duly handed down from classical times. Didius Julianus, during his short reign, found time to obtain foreknowledge of his own downfall and the succession of Septimius Severus, by means of a boy who with bandaged eyes looked into a mirror after proper spells had been muttered over him (Æl. Spartiani Did. Julian. 7), and Hippolytus of Porto gives us in full detail the ingenious frauds by which this and similar feats were accomplished (Refut. omn. Hæres. IV. 15, 28-40).

[464] Concil. Rotomagens. ann. 1189 c. 29 (Bessin, Concil. Rotomagens. I. 97).—Concil. Paris, ann. 1212 P. v. (Martene Ampl. Coll. VII. 105).—Cæsar. Heisterb. IV. 99.

[465] Cæsar. Heisterb. V. 2, 3.

[466] Cæsar. Heisterb. II. 12; V. 18; XII. 23.

In spite of their lifelike contemporary details, these stories are evidently founded on that of Theophilus of Cilicia, which had so great a currency during the Middle Ages. He was archdeacon until dismissed by his bishop, when in despair he had recourse to Satan, to whom he gave a written compact pledging himself to endure the pains of hell throughout eternity. He was forthwith restored to his position and enjoyed high consideration until, overwhelmed with remorse, he appealed to the Virgin. By assiduous penitence he won her aid, and she caused the compact to be returned to him.—Hroswithæ de Lapsu et Convers. Theophili.

[467] Rogeri Bacon Epist. de Secretis Operibus Artis c. i., ii. (M.R. Series, pp 523-7).—Th. Cantimprat. Bonum universal. Lib. II. c. 56.—Præcept. Antiq. Rotomag. c. 109 (Bessin, Concil. Rotomagens. II. 67, 76).—Durandi Specul. Juris Lib. IV. Partic. IV. Rubr. de Sortilegiis.—Synod. Andegavens. ann. 1294 c. 2 (D’Achery, I. 737).

[468] Britton, ch. 29.—Owen’s Laws and Institutes of Wales, II. 910-2.—P. Exon. Summula exigendi Confess. (Harduin VII. 1126).—Myrror of Justice c. I. § 4; c. II. § 22; c. III. § 14.—Regiam Majest. Scotiæ, Edinburgi, 1609, fol. 163-7.

[469] Livres de Jostice et de Plet, pp. 177-83, 284 (Dig. XLVIII. viii. 3., Marcianus).—Beaumanoir, Coutumes du Beauvoisis, Cap. XI. §§ 25, 26.—Olim, II. 205, 619.—Vaissette, IV. 17-18; Chron. Bardin, Ib. IV. Pr. 5.

[470] José Amador de los Rios (Revista de España, T. XVII. pp. 382, 384-5, 388, 392-3; T. XVIII. p. 6).—Concil Legionens. ann. 1012 c. 19; C. Compostellan. ann. 1031 c. 6; C. Coyacens. ann. 1050 c. 4; C. Compostellan. ann. 1056 c. 6 (Aguirre, IV. 388, 396, 405, 414).—Histor. Compostellan. Lib. I. c. lxiv.—Pelayo, Heterodoxos Españoles, I. 590.

[471] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. ix. l. 17; Tit. xxiii. 11. 1, 2, 3.

[472] Constitt. Sicular. III. xlii. 1-3.—Cechetti, La Republica di Venizia e la Corte di Roma I. 15.—Chron. Senoniens. Lib. IV. c. 4 (D’Achery II. 631).—Huillard-Bréholles, Introd. pp. DXXV., DXXX.—Assises de Jerusalem, Baisse Court c. 271 (Ed. Kausler, Stuttgart, 1839).—Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 91.

Frederic’s reputation is indicated in the lines—

“Amisit astrologos et magos et vates. Beelzebub et Astaroth, proprios penates Tenebrarum consulens per quos potestates Spreverat Ecclesiam et mundi magnates.” (Huillard-Bréholles, l. c.).

And Michael Scot, to succeeding generations, was not the philosopher, but the magician—

“Michele Scotto fu, che veramente Delle magiche frode seppe il giuoco”—(INFERNO, XX.)

whose wonders are commemorated in the “Lay of the Last Minstrel”—

“In these fair climes it was my lot To meet the wondrous Michael Scott, A wizard of such dreaded fame That when in Salamanca’s cave Him listed his magic wand to wave, The bells would ring in Nôtre Dame.”

[473] Treuga Henrici, No. 21 (Böhlau, Nove Constit. Dom. Alberti, Weimar, 1858, p. 78).—Sachsenspiegel Lib. II. c. 13.—Schwabenspiegel, c. CXVI. § 12 (Ed. Senckenberg); Cod. Uffenbach. c. CCLXXI. § 6.—Lilienthal, Die Hexenprocesse der beiden Städten Braunsberg, Königsberg, 1861, p. 70.—Iarnsida, Mannhelge c. vi., xxv. (Ed. Hafniæ, 1847, pp. 22, 46).—Ll. Gulathingens. Mannhelge-Bolkr, c. iv., xxv. (Ed. Hafniæ, 1817, pp. 137, 197).

[474] Leges Scaniæ Provin. Andreæ Sunonis Archiep. Lunden. (Thorsen, Skanske Lov, Kjobenhavn, 1853).—Raguald. Ingermund. Ll. Succor. Lib. x. c. 5 (Stockholmiæ, 1614).—Canut. Episc. Vibergens. Exposit. Legum Juciæ Lib. III. c. lxix. (Hafniæ, 1508).—Ancher, Farrago Legum Antiq. Daniæ (Hafniæ, 1776).—Leges Opstalbomicæ ann. 1323 (Gaertner Saxonum Leges Tres, Lipsiæ, 1730).—Olai Magni de Gent. Septentrion. Lib. III. c. 22.

[475] Concil. Valentin, ann. 1248 c. 12 (Harduin. VII. 427).—C. Cenomanens. ann. 1248 (Martene Ampl. Coll. VII. 1377).—C. Mogunt. ann. 1261 c. 30 (Hartzeim III. 604).—C. Nugaroliens. ann. 1290 c. 4 (Hard. VII. 1161).—C. Baiocens. ann. 1300 c. 63 (Ib. VII. 1234).—C. Treverens. ann. 1310 c. 79-84 (Martene Thesaur. IV. 257-8).—C. Palentin. ann. 1322 c. 24 (Hard. VII. 1480).—C. Salmanticens. ann. 1335 c. 15 (Ib. VII. 1973-4).—Annal. Domin. Colmariens. ann. 1279 (Urstisii II. 16).

[476] Raynald. ann. 1258, No. 23.—Potthast. No. 17745, 18396.—Eymeric. p. 133.—C. 8, § 4, Sexto v. 2.—Chron. Bardin. ann. 1270 (Vaissette, IV. Pr. 5).

[477] Archives de l’Inq. de Carc. (Doat, XXVII. 7).—Bern. Guidon. Practica, P. III. c. 42, 43.—Th. Aquin. Summ. Sec. Sec. XC. 2; XCV. 4.—Johann. Saresberiens. Polycrat. c. xxviii.—Bern. Basin de Artibus Magiæ, conclus. iii.-ix.—Prieriat. de Strigimagar. Lib. III. c. 1.—Eymeric. pp. 342, 443.—Alonso de Spina, Fortalic. Fidei, fol. 51, 284.—Revelat. S. Brigittæ Lib. VII. c. 28.—Archidiac. Gloss. super c. accusatus § sane (Eymeric. 202).—Rogeri Bacon Op. Tert. c. xii.; Epist. de Secret. Operibus Artis c. vi., vii., ix.-xi.

When, in 1473, some Carmelites of Bologna asserted that it was not heretical to obtain responses from demons, Sixtus IV. promptly ordered an investigation, and directed the results to be transmitted to him under seal.—Pegnæ Append. ad Eymeric. p. 82.

Bernardo di Como draws the nice distinction that it is not heretical to invoke the devil to obtain the illicit love of a woman, for the function of Satan is that of a tempter.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s.v. Dæmones, No. 2.

In 1471 the arts of printing and alchemy were coupled together as reprehensible by the Observantine Franciscans, and their practice was forbidden under pain of disgrace and removal. Friar John Neyseeser disobeyed this rule, and “apostatized” to the Conventual branch of the Order, which was less rigid.—Chron. Glassberger ann. 1471.

[478] Doat, XXVII. 7; XXX. 185.—Rogeri Bacon Epist. de Secretis operibus Artis c. iii.—Th. Aquin. Summ. Sec. Sec. XCVI. i.—Ciruelo, Reprovacion de las Superstitiones, P. III. c. 1.—Grandes Chroniques V. 272.—Guill. Nangiac. Contin. ann. 1323.—Savonarola contra l’ Astrologia, Vinegia, 1536, fol. 33.—Ars Notoria, ap. Cornel. Agrippæ Opp. Ed. Lugduni, I. 606.—The Notory Art of Solomon, translated by Robert Turner, London, 1657.

[479] Tacit. Annal. II. 28-32; III. 22; XII. 14, 52, 68; Histor. II. 62.—Zonaræ T. II. (pp. 185, 192).—Sueton. Vitell. 14.—Tertull. de Idololat. ix.—Lib. IX. Cod. xviii. 2.—Prudent. contra Symmach. II. 449-57.—Bedæ opp. Ed. Migne I. 963-66.—Augustin. de Civ. Dei Lib. v. c. 1-7.

[480] Rolandini Chron. Lib. XII. c. 2 (Murat. S.R.I. VIII. 344).—Monach. Patavin. Chron. (Ib. VIII. 705).—Raynald. ann. 1305, No. 7.—Savonarola contra l’Astrologia, fol. 25.—Villari, Storia di Savonarola, Ed. 1887, I. 197-8.—MS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 229-30.—Doat, XXXVII. 258.—Bern. Guidon. Pract. P. v.—Johann. Saresberiens. Polycrat. II. xix., xx., xxv., xxvi.—Th. Aquin. Summ. Sec. Sec. xcv.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxii.—D’Argentré, I. I. 263; II. 154.—Eymeric. p. 317.—Manilii Astron. Lib. IV.—Rogeri Bacon Op. Tert. c. xi. (M. R. Series I. 35-6. Cf. 559-61).

[481] P. de Abano Conciliator Different. Philos. Diff. ix., x. (Ed. Venet. 1494, fol. 14-15.). Cf. Albumasar de Magnis Conjunctionibus Tract III. Diff. i. (Aug. Vindel. 1489).

The Conciliator was a work of immense reputation. The preface of the edition of 1494 speaks of three or four previous printed editions, and there were repeated later ones up to 1596. Curiously enough, it was never included in the Roman and Spanish Indexes, though it appears in that of Lisbon of 1624 (Reusch, der Index der verbotenen Bücher, I. 35).

[482] Bayle, s. v. Apone.—G. Naudé, Apologie pour les Grands Hommes, Ch. XIV.—Muratori Antiq. Ital. III. 374-5.

For the printed works attributed to Peter of Abano, see Grässe, “Bibliotheca Magica et Pneumatica,” Leipzig, 1843. The one by which he is best known is the “Heptameron seu Elementa Magiæ,” a treatise on the invocation of demons, printed with the works of Cornelius Agrippa. This version, however, is incomplete. A fuller and better one is among the MSS. of the Bibliothèque Nationale, fonds latin, No. 17870.