Witchcraft and Scepticism at the Edward Worth Library: the Quest for Truth in Superstitious Europe
‘It is better to lean toward doubt than toward assurance in things difficult to prove and dangerous to believe’ – Michel de Montaigne (1533-92)
Introduction
An episode in Macbeth by William Shakespeare: the three witches. Mezzotint by J.R. Smith, 1785, after H. Fuseli, 1783. Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0). Source: Wellcome Collection.
This exhibition looks through the lens of books on witchcraft held at the Edward Worth Library that date from the fifteenth to eighteenth centuries collected by theologian and dean of Saint Patrick’s Cathedral, John Worth (1648-88), and his son Edward Worth (1676-1733), a distinguished book collector and physician. The books owned by John Worth delve into the religious and political dynamics of the notorious witch hunts of early modern Europe while Edward Worth’s books come from both medical and superstitious perspectives. These select works offer valuable insight into the existing beliefs on witchcraft during the time – from the witches’ mark, night flying, diseases of the bewitched, and carnal relations with the Devil, to the persecutions and trials that plagued peoples’ lives. John and Edward Worth, who were rational thinkers themselves, created a collection of books on witchcraft that shows the rise of men dedicated to dispelling irrational beliefs while exposing those who used their medical knowledge to prove witchcraft’s existence. The sceptical authors from the Worth Library who dismantle tales of infernal pacts between witches and the Devil and challenge religious teachings convey the importance of testing convention.
Biblical Interpretations of the Enigmatic Witch
Worth Family Bible. The Holy Bible containing the Old Testament and the New: Newly translated out of the originall Tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and reviled by his Majesties speciall command … (Cambridge, 1629), i, title page.
The Worth Family Bible was donated to the Worth Library on the 10th of May, 2014 by Cleone and Peter Blomfield of Queenstown, New Zealand. The Bible itself was printed in Cambridge in 1629 and has John Worth’s signature on the title page. John Worth used the Bible’s flyleaves to record the births of his loved ones and the early deaths of his two daughters, Anne and Susannah, and ‘deare wife’ Comfort Worth.[1] John Worth’s profound connection to the Worth Family Bible is evident in how he meticulously chronicled family milestones within its pages, transforming the text into a living biography of the Worth family. The title page, engraved by John Payne (1607-47), depicts the heavens, two women representing Peace (holding an olive branch) and Justice (with her sword), and scenes from the Old Testament including the story of Adam and Eve with the Tree of Knowledge to the left of Justice.[2] To the right of Peace are scenes from the New Testament including the nativity and resurrection of Jesus Christ.[3] Because the Worth Family Bible is a King James version of the Holy Bible, sponsored by King James VI and I of Scotland and England and written by clergymen, it is a pivotal text to the understanding of witchcraft during the time period. This version of the Bible places an emphasis on popular European understandings of witchcraft, the Devil, and magic.[4] King James (1566-1625) was a believer in witchcraft who, in 1597, published Daemonologie, an 88-page treatise on the threat witches impose on society, using his authority to demand that society eradicates accused witches.[5] Between 1560 and 1700, 513 witches were tried in English courts, some of them later executed.[6] Although the King James Bible should not solely be blamed for inciting many of Europe’s witch hunts that led to many trials and executions, it certainly contributed to the persecution of innocent lives by instilling superstitious fear in society.
Greek Septuagint, He Palaia Diatheke kata tous Hebdomekonta … (London, 1653), title page.
The King James Bible was used to authenticate the existence of witches. The most well-known passage from the King James Bible on witchcraft is ‘Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live’.[7] However, many scholars argue that this passage has been translated from Latin and Hebrew to English and other vernacular languages incorrectly. The original Hebrew Bible was first translated into the Greek Septuagint version. In the Greek Septuagint, Exodus 22:18 was translated to ‘Ye shall not save the lives of sorcerers’.[8] The difference between the two translations of Exodus 22:18 in the Greek Septuagint and the King James Bible lay in the translation of the Hebrew word ‘mekhashepha’. In the Greek Septuagint, this word was rendered to ‘pharmakeia’, or a poisoner, while this same word was translated to ‘witch’ in the King James version.[9] Another translation of this same passage is ‘do not permit wrongdoers to live’, although many argue that the Latin term ‘maleficos’ undoubtedly means ‘witch’ in English.[10] This verse along with many others was interpreted by members of the clergy and legal authorities as a divine command from God to annihilate witches while proving the existence of witchcraft in the eyes of the church. In I Samuel from the King James Bible, Saul, King of Israel, faces the threat of the Philistine army who he needs to fight in battle the next day.[11] When God does not speak to him or offer him guidance, Saul seeks help from ‘a woman that hath a divining spirit’ known as the Witch of Endor so that he could ask her to summon the spirit of the prophet Samuel to ask him what his fate in battle would be.[12] This biblical story too was evidence used by King James and the Church of England to convey the existence of witches, at the same time establishing that the Bible was used as a perfect, authenticating text to validate other narratives written by clergymen and leaders advocating for the persecution of witches.
Another story used to convey the existence of witches from the King James Bible was the temptation of Eve in Genesis. Members of the clergy described Eve as the original witch as she decided to stray from the good path of righteousness before Adam did, giving into the Devil’s temptations when he appeared to her as a snake.[13] Theologians argued that if Eve had not given into temptation, convincing Adam to eat the forbidden fruit with her, death would not have been brought to the human race. Starting in the second century, theologians began to view women, who were all thought to be descendants of Eve, as weak and more likely to give into temptation than men.[14] Thus, the associations an already-patriarchal society made between Eve’s weakness and all women collided with the connections between women and witchcraft.[15] The Malleus Maleficarum was a witch-hunting manual published by Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger in 1486 that translates to ‘The Hammer of Witches’ in English. This manual uses the story of Eve’s temptation in Genesis from earlier translations of the Bible not only to validate their own argument that witches exist, but also to prove that the majority of witches were women who, like Eve, were filled with carnal lust and temptation ‘which in women is insatiable’.[16] Through looking at the many versions of the Bible, it is evident that clergymen and leaders have been using the religious text to validate their own beliefs in witchcraft since the beginning of the second century.
Witches and the Devil: Mere Metaphors for the Evil In All Human Souls?
John Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft … (London, 1677), title page.
The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft by John Webster (1611-82) is another one of the Worth Library’s treasures on witchcraft that exposes corruption within the Christian church, criticizes those who believe in witchcraft, and argues that the Bible has been mistranslated from the original Hebrew, Greek, and Latin versions. The book was published in London in 1677 and was owned by John Worth whose shelfmark is on the head of the spine, reflecting his probable alignment with the notion that witchcraft was unfounded. It was bound in contemporary dark mottled calf. Webster, the author of the book, was a schoolmaster and polemicist born in Yorkshire, England on the 3rd of February, 1611. As Clericuzio notes, Webster studied chemistry in the 1630s, making it along with teaching and medicine his lifelong occupations.[17] In 1632, he was ordained as a minister and began working at the parish of Kildwick as an assistant to the priest. He was an important figure as he participated in the reconstruction of religious and social life and gave sermons in London where he advocated for people’s ability to interpret the scriptures as they wished.[18] Two themes constantly came up in his sermons: the criticizing of traditional learning techniques where people learn not from experiment but rather by blindly accepting others’ theories, and the idea that the Devil is not a physical being that can tempt someone but instead is a metaphor for the evil inside all human souls. As the minister of Kildwick and a proud questioner of society’s accepted beliefs, Webster came to the conclusion that there was deceit connected with accusations of witchcraft in his community and that witches did not exist and were merely metaphors and fictional scapegoats for horrible occurrences in society similar to the symbol of the Devil.
Webster reinforced his credibility while condemning other authors for their lack of original research on witchcraft. Although Webster dedicated The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft to many of his colleagues and trusted friends from Yorkshire, he stated that he did not do so to ‘beg protection for it [his book]’, stating that his work does not possess ‘weakness’ in its argument that witches do not exist.[19] He admitted that he has lived a ‘solitary’ and ‘sedentary’ life, having ‘more converse with the dead than the living, that is, more with Books than with Men’ but that this well-informed lifestyle has given him more credibility to speak on such controversial matters with accuracy.[20] After looking at numerous works written by authors who confirmed the existence of witches, Webster came to realize that all the scholars had borrowed from each other, transcribing what others had written before them despite never seeing witchcraft with their own eyes.[21] He argued that some authors write about strange controversies such as witchcraft for ‘profit’, ‘vain-glory’, and so they can steal the ‘condemned Witches goods’.[22] According to Webster, these scholars and clergymen mistranslated Hebrew words from the Old Testament to fit their pre-meditated beliefs that witchcraft exists. Webster believed that the biased scholars also took fables from Greece about ‘terrestrial women’ that were written to scare children and used the stories as more evidence to prove witchcraft’s existence.[23] After reading High-Dutch, Low-Dutch, French, Hebrew, Latin, and Italian texts, Webster saw that many translations of religious texts had rendered the words ‘maleficus’, ‘magus’, ‘prastigias faciens’, and ‘Incantator’ to ‘witch’ with uncertainty when instead, the words could mean ‘wrong-doer’, ‘magician’, ‘trickster’, and ‘enchanter’.[24]
John Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft … (London, 1677), p. 1.
One of the primary authors who John Webster criticized was Joseph Glanvill (1636-80), a witchcraft-believer who relied on biblical texts steeped in mistranslations.[25] According to Webster, Glanvill was a ‘witchmonger’ on the hunt to incriminate innocent people for witchcraft charges based on mistranslations and ‘general accusations without particular proofs’.[26] Joseph Glanvill fought back against Webster in his book, Sadducismus Triumphatus, which defended the reality of witches and supported the continuation of the witch hunts. While Webster stated in his book that words such as ‘maleficus’, ‘magus’, ‘prastigias faciens’, and ‘Incantator’ have been translated wrongly into the English ‘witch’, Glanvill argued that the translations were correct as they were ‘several names of a Witch’.[27] Glanvill used the Bible as his evidence that witchcraft exists, quoting Exodus 22:18: ‘Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live’.[28] Not only did Glanvill refute Webster’s argument, but he also attacked Webster’s masculinity, mocking him for saying that the term ‘Wizzard’ has been translated correctly between different versions of texts but not the word ‘witch’.[29] Glanvill stated, ‘Wizzards then Webster will allow, that is to say, He-Witches, but not She-Witches. How tender the Man is of that Sex!’.[30] Here, Glanvill implied that Webster is too soft on women, arguing that the supposed compassion Webster has towards women is why he refused to believe in witchcraft, later calling witches Webster’s ‘beloved Hags’.[31]
Webster touched on the concepts that witches have carnal relations with the Devil in order to achieve their power and that they possess the witches’ mark. It was believed that a formal ceremony took place after the Devil revealed himself to a witch where she would reject her Christian faith and baptism, trample over a cross, and bend over backwards before the Devil to kiss his buttocks in allegiance to him.[32] In return, the Devil would give the witch a ‘distinctive mark’ on a ‘concealed’ spot of her body before equipping her with the power and potions she needed to wreck havoc on humanity.[33] Thus, examiners would check for the witches’ mark on the bodies of the accused in order to achieve physical evidence to prove guilt. As for the mark of the witch, Webster stated that there are ‘Nodes, Knots, Protuberances, Warts, and Excrescences’ that grow on the bodies of all humans, some ‘from their mother’s wombs’ and others that grow ‘afterwards’.[34] He argued that these marks become more prevalent with age and that, if everyone was searched for a witches’ mark, ‘few would go free’.[35] As for humans having carnal relations with the Devil, Webster suggested that instances of such behavior would have been recorded in the scriptures and that Moses would have included it along with the major carnal sins of bestial copulation and sodomy condemned by the law.[36] Here, Webster used his knowledge on human anatomy as a chemist and his inferences on religious scripture to further denounce the existence of witches.
False Confessions Under Torture
Sir Robert Filmer, The free-holders grand inquest, touching our sovereign lord the King and his Parliament. To which are added observations upon forms of government. Together with directions for obedience to governours in dangerous and doubtful times (London, 1680), frontispiece portrait of King Charles II of England.
The Free-holders Grand Inquest… written by the Knight Sir Robert Filmer (1588-1653) is another book on witchcraft owned by theologian John Worth, further proving his stance on witchcraft holding no validity. The Worth Library’s edition of the book bought by John Worth was published in London in 1680, bound in Irish blind-tooled dark brown sheep, and features a portrait of King Charles II of England (1630-85). Author and political writer Sir Robert Filmer was most likely born in East Sutton, Kent, in 1588, the eldest of the eighteen children of Sir Edward Filmer and his wife, Elizabeth.[37] Filmer went to grammar school in Canterbury before enrolling in Trinity College, Cambridge in 1604.[38] Later, he married Anne Heton who some believe was a child bride before they had their first child and Filmer was knighted by King James I in 1619.[39] After the death of Filmer’s father, he involved himself in politics, serving as justice of the peace and an officer of the county militia.[40] The Free-holders Grand Inquest… served as a royalist survey on English law and history where Filmer argued that there must be a single authority such as a king in order for a government to run properly. Before Sir Robert Filmer passed away in 1653, the Kent summer assizes convicted ten people of witchcraft in late July of 1652, hanging at least six of them.[41] This event prompted Filmer’s last work that was added to The Free-holders Grand Inquest titled, An Advertisement to the Jury-Men of England, Touching Witches. In the advertisement, Filmer ridiculed the Jury-Men of England, stating that there was no evidence to support the conviction and that witches did not exist.[42]
Sir Robert Filmer began the section of his book on witches by going through the proofs and presumptions written to convict witches that were numbered and listed by theologian William Perkins (1558-1602).[43] While Perkins believed the sexual covenant between a woman and Devil could ‘not be called into question’, Filmer argued that the Devil would never enter into such a pact because, according to Perkins, the Devil would have to ‘do any command’ that the witch desires.[44] To Filmer, the covenant was impossible as the Devil would never willingly make himself ‘the Witches slave’.[45] Another piece of evidence used to convict was the confession of a witch that was typically obtained through torture methods such as using ‘the Rack’ to stretch the victim’s body until their limbs dislocated or by swimming a witch where if she sank, she was ‘innocent’, and if she floated she would be ‘taken for a Witch, convicted, and punished’.[46] It was believed that only a witch would float because the Devil, who was thought to be ‘most light’ and made of ‘Air’, would hold her up above the water by positioning himself underneath her.[47] According to Filmer, these violent methods of torture were not only unlawful, but could only result in false confessions from the victims who, in their agony, would say anything to make the torture cease.[48]
Similar to Webster, Filmer conveyed that when words were translated from the original Hebrew language that the Bible was written in, to various other tongues, multiple mistakes were made regarding a misconception on the definition of words. Although words such as ‘Diviner’, ‘Witch’, and ‘Wizard’ appear in the Hebrew Bible, Filmer stated that the words did not have the same connotations as they do in English and other vernacular languages.[49] While in the English language, the words reflect a certain level of wickedness and impurity, the meanings are vastly different in the Hebrew language. In Hebrew, the word ‘Diviner’ means someone who searches for future events the way a prophet might, ‘Witch’ means ‘a Jugler’ or changing and turning, and ‘Wizard’ means a ‘cunning’ man.[50] His analysis underscored the importance of linguistic accuracy by highlighting discrepancies that challenge conventional English interpretations.
Diseases by Witchcraft
Daniel Sennert, Practicae Medicinae … (Wittenburg, 1652), i, title page.
One of the Worth Library’s most radical texts on witchcraft and diseases is the sixth volume of Daniel Sennert’s book on occult diseases and medicine which was published in Wittenberg in 1652 and titled, Practicae Medicinae. Worth’s copy was bound in England in contemporary sprinkled calf and was added to the Worth Library’s collection by Edward Worth, most likely for its information on anatomy and medicine, rather than its stance on witchcraft being real. A portrait of the author Daniel Sennert (1572-1637) sits at the top of the title page accompanied by the emblems of a column covered in vegetation to his left and one of a ship at sea to his right. A man representing ‘experience’ and a woman meant to be ‘reason’ are depicted below the two emblems just above the circular engraving of Hippocrates and Hermes shaking hands atop an altar. Daniel Sennert himself was a prolific physician, professor, and academic writer on the topics of chemistry, medicine, and alchemy. He was born on 25 November 1572 in Wroclaw, Poland and moved to Germany later on in his life. Sennert was a Professor of Medicine at the University of Wittenberg responsible for introducing chemicals to the teaching of medicine at the university and advocating for experimentation instead of using only theoretical approaches.[51] He argued that after the ‘fall of man’, when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit and fell from innocence and God’s good graces, humanity had to learn from nature and experimentation rather than revelation and religion.[52] Despite Sennert’s vast knowledge in the world of science and his stance on advocating for experimentation, he followed societal beliefs on witchcraft and never tried to dispute the idea that witches were living amongst communities in early modern Europe. Instead, Sennert created a form of ‘new science’ with other scholars and physicians of the time where medical knowledge was used to prove witchcraft’s existence, the two flourishing together.[53]
Sennert attributed many occult diseases that could not be cured or identified including phthisis, plague, and venereal diseases to witchcraft.[54] He stated, ‘If any doubt it [that some diseases are caused by witchcraft] we have Eye-witnesses to prove it’.[55] One of these eyewitness accounts recalled a young woman, who was eight months pregnant at the time, said to have vomited strange objects such as wood, crooked nails, brass needles, and hairballs – according to Sennert, a clear indication that the lady had been bewitched.[56] In a separate account, a young man desired to leave a young woman after being intimate with her. Because he planned to leave this woman, it was said that she placed a curse on him that removed his genitals, only restoring them after he attempted to kill her by choking her with a towel.[57] Sennert argued that the previous events confirmed by ‘credible Authors’ were undoubtedly true and that many of the occult diseases that remained undiagnosed and only known by the unusual symptoms and behaviors patients possessed were likely caused by witchcraft, thus explaining their mysteriousness.[58] Because new illnesses began to be imported from other countries into Europe as exploration throughout the world increased, medical professionals did not have adequate explanations for the unusual, newly-discovered, and sometimes irregular diseases that they had never come across before.[59] Other diagnostic challenges similar to the new diseases that Sennert came upon included those who suffered from epileptic seizures and convulsive fits, these ailments often having ‘idiosyncratic’ symptoms that, when they could not be explained, were attributed to witchcraft.[60]
Daniel Sennert, Practicae Medicinae … (Wittenburg, 1652), vi, p. 1.
Sennert asked himself a question: ‘Is it the Witches purpose to hurt men by diseases?’.[61] He came to the conclusion that witches did inflict pain on men for enjoyment, proven by the fact that when a witch was burnt and dead, the patients suffering from unknown diseases were often immediately cured.[62] Sennert believed that some women were the ‘cause’ of evil and occult diseases as they were thought to anoint themselves at night, dream of flying over mountains, and make a covenant with the Devil.[63] He stated that the Devil bestows power on female witches so that they may go forth and cause ‘melancholy diseases’ and affect the humors of the human body.[64] He argued that witches would be powerless without the help of the Devil who gives them the ability to kill and inflict pain, the Devil even hurting men and removing their genitals on the witches’ behalf.[65] Despite the witch being powerless without aid and power from the Devil, Sennert suggested that witches were guilty of the deaths and injuries caused by the Devil because it was the witch who requested and willed for the punishment on humanity to occur.[66]
On the matter of how to cure someone who had been bewitched, Sennert argued that because some occult diseases and maladies had been caused by the Devil and through supernatural means, they often could not be cured by natural, earthly resources and medicine.[67] Instead, ailments caused by the Devil could typically only be cured by performing exorcisms calling upon the authority of God to put an end to witchery and the Devil’s intervention on human bodies.[68] However, Sennert did say that some natural remedies including the use of rosemary and sage fumes, anointing a person’s joints with dog and bear grease, and cleansing baths could be useful in curing those who have been bewitched but that, in the end, everything is in God’s hands.[69] Ironically, Daniel Sennert himself died of an ‘occult disease’ on 21 July 1637 after contracting the plague.[70]
Victims of the Devil?
Johann Weyer, Opera Omnia De Praestigiis Daemonum (Amsterdam, 1660), portrait of Johann Weyer, Sig. *4v.
Unlike Daniel Sennert, Dutch-born physician Johann Weyer’s book, Opera Omnia: De Praestigiis Daemonum (Amsterdam, 1660), harshly criticized the ‘unlawful’ techniques used to incriminate accused witches.[71] The Worth Library’s edition of Weyer’s book bought by Edward Worth was published at Amsterdam in 1660 and features an engraved portrait of Weyer (1515-57) clutching a skull and scroll along with diagrams of astrological signs, a ten-year-old girl, insects, and plants throughout the book. Johann Weyer was born in 1515 in Grave, The Netherlands where he resided until the age of fifteen when he moved to Antwerp to learn as an assistant to scholar Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa of Nettesheim.[72] Around 1534, Weyer moved to Paris to further his study of medicine before going back to his homeland to begin his career in medicine. It is quite possible that Weyer wrote his book, Opera Omnia: De Praestigiis Daemonum, not only to criticize the witch hunts and trials that caused the spilling of innocent blood in Europe’s Early Modern period, but also to attack the corruption within the Christian church that was known to incite the hunts using religious dogma.[73] Weyer is an essential figure in the study of witchcraft as he was one of the first opponents and criticizers of the witch hunts and, after his death, was honored with mental health and human rights organizations named after him for the work he put in fighting for innocent lives.[74] Today, Weyer is remembered as the figure who initiated the late sixteenth-century debate on the existence of witches and their punishment through the help of De Praestigiis Daemonum.[75] Although Weyer did believe in witches and magic, he was adamant that they were innocent victims of the Devil that should never be killed and lacked the supernatural abilities many members of society believed them to possess.[76]
The primary clerical belief that many members of society shared was that people (primarily women) became witches by entering a sexual pact with the Devil in order to access his powers.[77] This act would mean that the Devil had a freedom and power that God allowed to affect human lives, a power consistently illustrated in the Bible such as in the story of Job when the Devil abuses Job with God’s approval to test if he will stray from the righteous path.[78] Weyer refuted the idea of a person making a covenant with the Devil through sex, thus arguing against the ‘central component of the clerical conception of witchcraft’.[79] Weyer claimed that the notion of the pact with the Devil was ‘deceptive, foolish and of no weight’.[80] Instead, Weyer went into great detail in his book about the ‘sexual promiscuity’, ‘greed’, and ‘lust’ for power within clergy members; accusing popes, bishops, priests, and monks of being in league with the Devil and stating that women accused of witchcraft needed to be liberated.[81] He argued that many of the women who were accused of witchcraft were often confused old women suffering from melancholic humors and other illnesses that made them dream of mystical occurrences that they later confessed to inquisitors.[82] Weyer not only had sympathy for women accused of witchcraft, but used his role as an esteemed physician to try and explain that even if a woman was a witch, she did not have any power to inflict pain on others and that if someone was hurting, it was either the Devil’s doing or an imbalance of the bodily humors.[83]
Johann Weyer, Opera Omnia De Praestigiis Daemonum (Amsterdam, 1660), title page.
One of Weyer’s biggest opponents was a man named Thomas Erastus (1524-83) who advocated for the death penalty of accused witches, rejecting Weyer’s call for mercy.[84] Where Weyer believed there was a distinction between natural magic and demonic magic, Erastus did not.[85] In De Praestigiis Daemonum, Weyer argued that if a woman truly was a witch, she should not be punished because she was a victim of Satan and demonic magic, the Devil able to corrupt her mind in her natural state of ‘mental weakness’ all women were thought to share.[86] Weyer quoted Aristotle who said that it was ‘more wicked to kill a woman than a man’ because men are ‘by nature superior’ and murdering a ‘far weaker opponent is nothing manly’.[87] To Weyer, magicians were the true evildoers as he believed they were the ones who made ‘a pact with demons’ and could be cured by repenting and learning about religious doctrine instead of eradicating them.[88] Erastus, on the other hand, argued that the witch was to blame and should be killed as she invited the Devil in through the fragility of her own feeble will found in the nature of all women, inherited from Eve.[89] Erastus saw no difference between natural and demonic magic, black and white magic, or magician and witch; to him, all individuals who sought to gain power greater than nature bestowed on them were witches and heretics that went against God’s will.[90] Many modern scholars argue that Weyer could have had a much stronger argument if he had not believed that magicians are evil and had instead said that the Devil never recruits humans to do his work no matter what.[91]
The Fraudulency of Witchcraft and Black Magic
A witch at her cauldron surrounded by monsters. Etching by Jan van de Velde II, 1626. Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Source: Wellcome Collection.
François de Saint André wrote Lettres de Mr. de St. André, Conseiller-médecin Ordinaire du roy, à quelques-uns de ses amis, au sujet de la Magie, des Maléfices et des Sorciers, published at Paris in 1725, which translates to ‘Letters from Mr. de St. André, Council-physician in Ordinary to the King, to some of his friends, concerning Magic, Malefices, and Sorcerers’. The Worth Library’s edition of the book is bound in eighteenth century lightly sprinkled brown calf and was added to the collection by Edward Worth. The only book solely on witches that Edward Worth purchased, the text signifies his stance of disbelief towards witchcraft. Author St. André was born in the early 1700’s in an area known as ‘La Manche’ or ‘the sleeve’ in Normandy, France, a lesser-known author on diseases and the permanent physician to the King of France.[92] During St. André’s time, dictionaries began to redefine words on witchcraft such as ‘enchantment’ that changed from meaning the effect of ‘charms, words, and magic figures’ to including the word ‘pretended’ to convey that charms had no actual effect.[93] Still, many members of the clergy insisted on the Devil’s power and the existence of witches which heavily influenced society to continue believing in witchcraft.[94] St. André’s book is a collection of letters originally sent to his friends that discusses his belief that natural or white magic is a valuable form of learning and that black magic is fraudulent as well as his stance that witches do not exist as they are associated with the dishonesty of black magic. To St. André, white magic previously used by the Ancients ‘uncovered laws of nature’ that could cure diseases and bring the utmost wisdom, while black magic was ‘operated fraudulently through pretended charms, spells, divinations, and evocations of evil spirits’.[95]
St. André’s argued that it is an insult to God to think that the Devil has the authority to control the universe and inflict pain on humans; inciting storms, earthquakes, floods, and bringing death and agony to both humans and animals.[96] He suggested that only when God permits can the Devil tempt and interfere with the lives of humans as seen in the story of Job, and still, these events are far and few.[97] He stated that anyone who passes off demonic ‘visions, dreams, and imaginations… as real things’ are ignorant.[98] St. André related a story of a nine-year-old girl who was supposedly bewitched by another woman.[99] According to eyewitnesses, the girl vomited eggshells, glass, needles, hair, balls of thread, and horse dung.[100] Every time the woman who was thought to have bewitched the young girl approached the house, the girl became more agitated, falling into fits of convulsions accompanied by lower abdominal pain. Caregivers and eyewitnesses attributed the girl’s suffering to the Devil who had given a witch power to inflict harm, a conclusion that St. André rejected, stating that the girl’s pain could have been caused by God or natural bodily obscurities and that there is ‘no need to resort to the Devil to explain it’.[101] St. André stated that when a natural healing ointment was rubbed on the young girl, her pain ceased, proving his point that the Devil should never be blamed for the common disturbances of the bodily humors.[102] St. André also argued against the idea of the witches’ sabbath where a witch would meet the Devil out in the woods and have carnal relations with him, worshiping him naked with other witches and demonic beings. He contends that the Devil has nothing to do with this situation either, the witches’ sabbath being nothing more than a ‘drug-induced orgy caused by narcotic ointment which the participants rub on themselves’.[103]
Conclusion
The eighteenth century marked a turning point in Europe’s intellectual landscape. While remnants of the superstitious past persisted in all groups throughout society, a wave of rational scientific thought began to sway public opinion fueled by the scepticism that many of the authors from the Worth Library shared. Traditional, power-hungry authorities in the Christian church who had previously validated the belief in witchcraft using the Bible continued to view rational thought and inquiry as threats to papal power and religion.[104] The Worth’s Library’s sceptics on witchcraft were some of the most important figures in Europe to lay the groundwork for societal transformation and enlightenment. Due to this transformation, the figure of the witch has evolved from a feared reality to a whimsical icon. The legacy of those who dared to question recognized dogma reminds us today of the power of human curiosity and the quest for veracity in the midst of ingrained beliefs.
The History of Witches and Wizards, 1720. Wellcome Collection. Public Domain Mark. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Text: Ms Emily Higgins, Third Year Student, Creative Writing and Literature & Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Wheaton College, Norton, Massachusetts, USA.
Bibliography
Anon, ‘François de Saint-André’, Wikimanche.
Boran, Elizabethanne, ‘Daniel Sennert at the University of Wittenburg’, Alchemy and Chemistry at the Edward Worth Library 2011 Exhibition.
Boran, Elizabethanne, ‘The Worth Family Bible’, Edward Worth Library June 2014 Book of the Month.
Burgess, Glen, ‘Filmer, Sir Robert’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
Clericuzio, Antonio, ‘Webster, John’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
Debus, Allen G., The Chemical Philosophy: Paracelsian science and medicine in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Mineola, NY, 2002).
Estes, L. Leland, ‘The Medical Origins of the European Witch Craze: a Hypothesis’, Journal of Social History, 17, no. 2 (1983), 271-84.
Filmer, Robert, Sir, The free-holders grand inquest, touching our sovereign lord the King and his Parliament. To which are added observations upon forms of government. Together with directions for obedience to governours in dangerous and doubtful times (London, 1680).
Gevitz, Norman, ‘“The Devil Hath Laughed at the Physicians”: Witchcraft and Medical Practice in Seventeenth-Century New England’, Journal of History of Medicine, 55 (January, 2000), 5-36.
Glanvill, Joseph, Sadducismus Triumphatus: Or, A Full and Plain Evidence Concerning Witches and Apparitions. In Two Parts. The First Treating of Their Possibility. The Second of Their Real Existence, 4th ed. (London, 1726).
Greek Septuagint, He Palaia Diatheke kata tous Hebdomekonta … (London, 1653).
Gunnoe, Charles D., Jr, ‘The Debate between Johann Weyer and Thomas Erastus on the Punishment of Witches’, in James Van Horn Melton (ed.), Cultures of Communication from Reformation to Enlightenment, (Aldershot & Burlington, VT, 2002), pp 257-283.
Hoorens, Vera, ‘Why Did Johann Weyer Write De Praestigiis Daemonum?’, Low Countries Historical Review (2014), 129, no. 1, 3-24.
Klein, Joel A., ‘Daniel Sennert and the chymico-atomical reform of medicine’, in Andrew Cunningham and Ole Grell (eds.), Medicine, Natural Philosophy and Religion in Post-Reformation Scandinavia (New York, 2016), pp 20-37.
Levack, P. Brian, The Witch-Hunt of Early Modern Europe, 4th ed. (New York, 2015).
Mackay, Christopher S. The hammer of witches: a complete translation of the Malleus Maleficarum (Cambridge, 2009).
Sennert, Daniel, Practicae Medicinae (Wittenburg, 1652).
Sheriff, D. Mary, Enchanted Islands: Picturing the Allure of Conquest in Eighteenth-Century France (Chicago, 2018).
Slaughter, Lashonda, ‘King James and the Intellectual Influences of the Witchcraft Phenomenon in England and Scotland’, Ph.D. (Georgia State University, 2020).
St. André, François, Lettres de Mr. de St. André, conseiller-medecin ordinaire du roy : à quelques-uns de ses amis, au sujet de la magie, des malefices et des sorciers (Paris, 1725).
Stolberg, Michael, Learned Physicians and Everyday Medical Practice in the Renaissance (Berlin & Boston, 2022).
The Worth Family Bible. The Holy Bible containing the Old Testament and the New: Newly translated out of the originall Tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and reviled by his Majesties speciall command … (Cambridge, 1629).
Valente, Michaela, Johann Weir: Debating the Devil and Witches in Early Modern Europe (Amsterdam, 2022).
Webster, John, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft … (London, 1677).
Weyer, Johann, Opera Omnia De Praestigiis Daemonum (Amsterdam, 1660).
Wilkins, S. Kay, ‘Attitudes to Witchcraft and Demonic Possession in France during the Eighteenth Century’, Journal of European Studies, 3, no. 4 (1973), 348-62.
[1] Boran, Elizabethanne, ‘Worth Family Bible’, Edward Worth Library June 2014 Book of the Month.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Slaughter, Lashonda, ‘King James and the Intellectual Influences of the Witchcraft Phenomenon in England and Scotland’, Ph.D. (Georgia State University, 2020), p. 1.
[5] Ibid., pp 1 & 3.
[6] Ibid., p. 3.
[7] The Worth Family Bible. The Holy Bible containing the Old Testament and the New: Newly translated out of the originall Tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and reviled by his Majesties speciall command … (Cambridge, 1629), Exodus 22:18.
[8] Greek Septuagint, He Palaia Diatheke kata tous Hebdomekonta … (London, 1653), Exodus 22:18.
[9] Ibid., Exodus 22:18.
[10] Slaughter, ‘King James and the Intellectual Influences of the Witchcraft Phenomenon in England and Scotland’, p. 46.
[11] Ibid., p. 34.
[12] The Worth Family Bible, I Samuel. 28: 3-20.
[13] Slaughter, ‘King James and the Intellectual Influences of the Witchcraft Phenomenon in England and Scotland’, p. 43.
[14] Ibid., p. 43.
[15] Ibid., p. 44.
[16] Mackay, Christopher S. The hammer of witches: a complete translation of the Malleus Maleficarum (Cambridge, 2009), p. 47.
[17] Clericuzio, Antonio, ‘Webster, John’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Webster, John, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft … (London, 1677), Sig. *3r.
[20] Ibid., Sig. *3v.
[21] Ibid., see Webster’s preface, Sigs. A1r-a3v.
[22] Ibid., p. 19.
[23] Ibid., p. 21.
[24] Ibid., p. 114.
[25] Glanvill, Joseph, Sadducismus Triumphatus: Or, A Full and Plain Evidence Concerning Witches and Apparitions. In Two Parts. The First Treating of Their Possibility. The Second of Their Real Existence, 4th ed. (London, 1726).
[26] Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, p. 11.
[27] Glanvill, Sadducismus Triumphatus, p. 14.
[28] Ibid., p. 114.
[29] Ibid., p. 18.
[30] Ibid., p. 18.
[31] Ibid., p. 21.
[32] Levack, P. Brian, The Witch-Hunt of Early Modern Europe, 4th ed. (New York, 2015), p. 30.
[33] Ibid., p. 30.
[34] Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, p. 82.
[35] Ibid., p. 82.
[36] Ibid., p. 50.
[37] Burgess, Glen, ‘Filmer, Sir Robert’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, p. 8.
[38] Ibid., p. 8.
[39] Ibid., pp 8 & 9.
[40] Ibid., p. 9.
[41] Ibid., p. 12.
[42] Filmer, Robert, Sir, The Free-Holders Grand Inquest, touching our sovereign lord the King and his Parliament. To which are added observations upon forms of government. Together with directions for obedience to governours in dangerous and doubtful times (London, 1680), p. 338.
[43] See Perkins, William, A Discourse of the Damned Art of Witchcraft; so farre forth as it is revealed in the Scriptures, and manifest by true experience in The Works of that Famous and Worthy Minister of Christ in the Universitie of Cambridge, Mr. W. Perkins, 3 vols (Cambridge, 1618).
[44] Filmer, The Free-Holders Grand Inquest, p. 319.
[45] Ibid., p. 320.
[46] Ibid., p. 327.
[47] Ibid., p. 327.
[48] Ibid., p. 326.
[49] Ibid., pp 335 & 336.
[50] Ibid., pp 335 & 336.
[51] Boran, Elizabethanne, ‘Daniel Sennert at the University of Wittenburg’, Alchemy and Chemistry at the Edward Worth Library 2011 Exhibition.
[52] Debus, Allen G., The Chemical Philosophy: Paracelsian science and medicine in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Mineola, NY, 2002), p. 196.
[53] Estes, L. Leland, ‘The Medical Origins of the European Witch Craze: a Hypothesis’, Journal of Social History, 17, no. 2 (1983), 271.
[54] Klein, Joel A., ‘Daniel Sennert and the chymico-atomical reform of medicine’, in Andrew Cunningham and Ole Grell (eds.), Medicine, Natural Philosophy and Religion in Post-Reformation Scandinavia (New York, 2016), p. 28.
[55] Sennert, Daniel, Practicae Medicinae (Wittenburg, 1652), p. 88.
[56] Ibid., p. 89.
[57] Ibid., p. 89.
[58] Ibid., p. 89.
[59] Estes, The Medical Origins of the European Witch Craze: a Hypothesis, 272.
[60] Gevitz, Norman, ‘“The Devil Hath Laughed at the Physicians”: Witchcraft and Medical Practice in Seventeenth-Century New England’, Journal of History of Medicine, 55 (January, 2000), 15.
[61] Sennert, Daniel, Practicae Medicinae, p. 90.
[62] Ibid., pp 90 & 91.
[63] Ibid., pp 91 & 92.
[64] Ibid., p. 92.
[65] Ibid., p. 93.
[66] Ibid., p. 93.
[67] Ibid., p. 96.
[68] Ibid., 100 & 101.
[69] Ibid., 99 & 100.
[70] Boran, ‘Daniel Sennert at the University of Wittenburg’.
[71] Hoorens, Vera, ‘Why Did Johann Weyer Write De Praestigiis Daemonum?’, Low Countries Historical Review (2014), 129, no. 1, 3 & 5.
[72] Valente, Michaela, Johann Weir: Debating the Devil and Witches in Early Modern Europe (Amsterdam, 2022), p. 25.
[73] Hoorens, ‘Why Did Johann Weyer Write De Praestigiis Daemonum?’, 3.
[74] Ibid., 6.
[75] Gunnoe, Charles D., Jr, ‘The Debate between Johann Weyer and Thomas Erastus on the Punishment of Witches’, in James Van Horn Melton (ed.), Cultures of Communication from Reformation to Enlightenment, (Aldershot & Burlington, VT, 2002), p. 257.
[76] Valente, Johann Weir: Debating the Devil and Witches in Early Modern Europe, p. 9.
[77] Gunnoe, ‘The Debate between Johann Weyer and Thomas Erastus on the Punishment of Witches’, p. 259.
[78] Ibid., p. 259.
[79] Ibid., p. 259.
[80] Weyer, Johann, Opera Omnia De Praestigiis Daemonum (Amsterdam, 1660), p. 2.
[81] Hoorens, ‘Why Did Johann Weyer Write De Praestigiis Daemonum?’, 11.
[82] Weyer, Opera Omnia De Praestigiis Daemonum, p. 183.
[83] Stolberg, Michael, Learned Physicians and Everyday Medical Practice in the Renaissance (Berlin & Boston, 2022), p. 537.
[84] Gunnoe, ‘The Debate between Johann Weyer and Thomas Erastus on the Punishment of Witches’, p. 257.
[85] Valente, Johann Weir: Debating the Devil and Witches in Early Modern Europe, p. 147.
[86] Ibid., p. 148.
[87] Weyer, Opera Omnia De Praestigiis Daemonum, p. 540.
[88] Valente, Johann Weir: Debating the Devil and Witches in Early Modern Europe, p. 148.
[89] Ibid., p. 148.
[90] Gunnoe, ‘The Debate between Johann Weyer and Thomas Erastus on the Punishment of Witches’, p. 267.
[91] Hoorens, ‘Why Did Johann Weyer Write De Praestigiis Daemonum?’, 11.
[92] Anon, ‘François de Saint-André’, Wikimanche.
[93] Sheriff, D. Mary, Enchanted Islands: Picturing the Allure of Conquest in Eighteenth-Century France (Chicago, 2018), p. 39.
[94] Ibid., p. 40.
[95] Ibid., p. 40.
[96] St. André, Francois, Lettres de Mr. de St. André, conseiller-medecin ordinaire du roy : à quelques-uns de ses amis, au sujet de la magie, des malefices et des sorciers (Paris, 1725), pp 3 & 4.
[97] Ibid., p. 19.
[98] Ibid., p. 4.
[99] Ibid., p. 213.
[100] Ibid., p. 213.
[101] Ibid., p. 52.
[102] Ibid., p. 216.
[103] Wilkins, S. Kay, ‘Attitudes to Witchcraft and Demonic Possession in France during the Eighteenth Century’, Journal of European Studies, 3, no. 4 (1973), 351.
[104] Ibid., 357.