Elizabeth Stile of Windsor, in 1579, gives a description of Father Rosimond's changes of form, which points to his being the Chief of the Windsor witches: 'She confesseth, her self often tymes to haue gon to Father Rosimond house where she founde hym sittyng in a Wood, not farre from thence, vnder the bodie of a Tree, sometymes in the shape of an Ape, and otherwhiles like an Horse.'[132] In the reign of Elizabeth, 1584, there is a list of eighty-seven suspected persons, among whom occur the names of 'Ould Birtles the great devil, Roger Birtles and his wife and Anne Birtles, Darnally the sorcerer, the oulde witche of Ramsbury, Maud Twogood Enchantress, Mother Gillian witch' and several other 'oulde witches'.[133] The account by John Stearne the pricker, in 1645, indicates that one of the magistrates of Fenny Drayton was the local Devil: 'Some will say, It is strange they should know when they should be searched, if it be kept private. I answer, Let it be kept never so private, it hath been common, and as common as any other thing, as they themselves have confessed: for so did they of Fenny-Drayton in Cambridge-shire, who made very large Confessions, as, that the devil told them of our coming to town.'[134] One of the clearest cases, however, is that of Marsh of Dunstable in 1649, 'whom Palmer confessed to be head of the whole Colledge of Witches, that hee knows in the world: This Palmer hath been a witch these sixty years (by his own confession) long enough to know and give in the totall summe of all the conjuring conclave, and the Society of Witches in England.'[135]

In Scotland a certain number of identifications are also possible. Alison Peirson, tried in 1588, learnt all her charms and obtained all her knowledge from the Devil, who came to her in the form of Mr. William Sympson, her mother's brother's son, who was a great scholar and doctor of medicine in Edinburgh.[136] Jonet Stewart in 1597 'learnt her charms from umquhill Michaell Clark, smyth in Laswaid, and fra ane Italean strangear callit Mr. John Damiet, ane notorious knawin Enchanter and Sorcerer'.[137] In the trial of Marion Pardon of Hillswick in 1644 'it was given in evidence that a man spoke of the devil as Marion Pardon's pobe, i.e. nurse's husband or foster father'.[138] In a case tried at Lauder in 1649 there is an indication that one of the magistrates was the Chief of the witches; Robert Grieve accused a certain woman at a secret session of the court, 'but the Devil came that same night unto her, and told her that Hob Grieve had fyled her for a witch'.[139] Isobel Ramsay in 1661 was accused that 'you had ane uther meiting wt the devill in yor awne hous in the liknes of yor awne husband as you wes lying in yor bed at qch tyme you engadged to be his servant and receaved a dollar from him'.[140] When a man had special knowledge as to which women were witches, it is suggestive that he might be himself the Devil; as in the case of the Rev. Allan Logan, who 'was particularly knowing in the detection of witches. At the administration of the communion, he would cast his eye along, and say: "You witch wife, get up from the table of the Lord", when some poor creature would rise and depart.'[141]

It seems probable that the infamous Abbe Guibourg was the head of the Paris witches, for it was he who celebrated the 'black mass' and performed the sacrifice of a child, both of which were the duties of the 'Devil'.[142]

At Salem also the account given by the witches of the Rev. George Burroughs points to his filling the office of 'Devil', for he was 'Head Actor at some of their Hellish Randezvouses, and one who had the promise of being a King in Satan's kingdom.—He was the person who had Seduc'd and Compell'd them into the snares of Witchcraft'.[143] That Burroughs was a religious person is no argument against his being also the 'Devil' of Salem. Apart from the well-known psychological fact that a certain form of religious feeling can exist at the same time as the propensity to and practice of sexual indulgence, there is proof that many of the witches were outwardly religious according to the tenets of Christianity. So many Christian priests were also followers of the witch-religion that the Inquisitors of the sixteenth century were greatly exercised in their minds as to how to deal with the offenders. Antide Colas confessed that she attended the midnight mass on Christmas Eve, then went to a witch meeting, and returned to the church in time for the mass at dawn on Christmas morning.[144] At Ipswich in 1645 'Mother Lakeland hath been a professour of Religion, a constant hearer of the Word for these many years, and yet a witch (as she confessed) for the space of near twenty years'.[145] The best-known case of the kind is that of Major Weir in Edinburgh in 1670, whose outward appearance tallies with the usual descriptions of the Devil, and whose conduct is only explainable on the supposition that he actually was the Chief of the witches: 'His garb was still a cloak, and somewhat dark, and he never went without his staff. He was a tall black man, and ordinarily looked down to the ground; a grim countenance, and a big nose.'[146] His reputation for piety was so great that a woman, who had actually seen him commit an offence against the criminal law, was flogged for mentioning the fact and thus defaming a man of such extreme and well-established piety. He was tried as a witch on his own unsolicited confession, and was burnt together with his staff, dying 'impenitent' and renouncing all hope of a Christian heaven. The most interesting case historically, however, is that of the Devil of the North Berwick witches (1590). The number of people involved was thirty-nine, i.e. three Covens; but though the names of all were known, only four were tried. The records are given in considerable detail, and the identification of the Chief is therefore possible.

The character of the accused in this case is of great importance when considering the evidence. Nothing more unlike the conventional idea of witches can well be imagined than the man and women who were arraigned on that occasion. Agnes Sampson, the wise wife of Keith, was 'a woman not of the base and ignorant sort of Witches, but matron-like, grave and settled in her answers, which were all to some purpose'. John Fian, or Cunynghame, was a schoolmaster, therefore a man of education; Effie McCalyan, the daughter of Lord Cliftonhall, was a woman of family and position; Barbara Napier was also of good family. These were clearly the moving spirits of the band, and they were all persons capable of understanding the meaning and result of their actions.[147]

The accusation against the witches was that they had met together to plot the murder of the King and Queen by witchcraft. The trial therefore was on a double charge, witchcraft and high treason, and both charges had to be substantiated. Keeping in mind Lord Coke's definition of a witch as 'a person who has conference with the Devil to take counsel or to do some act', it is clear that the fact of the Devil's bodily presence at the meetings had to be proved first, then the fact of the 'conference', and finally the attempts at murder. The reports of the trial do not, however, differentiate these points in any way, and the religious prepossession of the recorders colours every account. It is therefore necessary to take the facts without the construction put upon them by the natural bias of the Christian judges and writers. The records give in some detail the account of several meetings where the deaths of the King and Queen were discussed, and instructions given and carried out to effect that purpose. At each meeting certain ceremonies proper to the presence of the Grand Master were performed, but the real object of the meeting was never forgotten or even obscured.

The actual evidence of the affair was given by Agnes Sampson (also called Anny Simpson or Tompson), John Fian, Euphemia or Effie McCalyan, and Barbara Napier. As it was a case of high treason, the two leaders, Sampson and Fian, were tortured to force them to divulge the name of the prime mover. Both these two and Effie McCalyan were condemned and executed; Barbara Napier, equally guilty according to the evidence but more fortunate in her jurors, was released; for which action the jurors themselves were subsequently tried.

Though the means used by the witches may seem ridiculous, the murderous intention is very clear. First they performed incantations to raise a storm to wreck the Queen's ship on her way to Scotland, and the storm which actually arose very nearly effected their purpose. As it failed, however, they betook themselves to the accredited method of melting a waxen image, but they were also ready to use poisons, which were to their minds the most virulent that could be prepared.

I have arranged the evidence so as to make as far as possible a consecutive narrative of the occurrences.

John Fian, tried December 26, 1590. The first items relate to his consulting with the Devil and working witchcraft. 7. Item, Fylit, for the rasing of wyndis att the Kingis passing to Denmark, and for the sending of ane letter to Marioun Linkup in Leyth, to that effect, bidding hir to meit him and the rest, on the see, within fyve dayes; quhair Satan delyuerit ane catt out of his hand to Robert Griersoune, gevand the word to 'Cast the same in the see hola!': And thaireftir, being mountit in a schip, and drank ilk ane to otheris, quhair Satane said, 'ye shall sink the schip', lyke as thay thocht thay did. 8. Item, Fylit, for assembling him selff with Sathane, att the Kingis returning to Denmark; quhair Satan promeist to raise ane mist, and cast the Kingis Majestie in Ingland.

Agnes Sampson, tried January 27, 1591. The first part of the dittay is entirely occupied with her conferences with the devil and her healing the sick by his advice. 40. Item, fylit and convict, of the delyuerie of ane letter, quhilk John Fiene, clerk, maid in George Mutis bak[e] hous in the Pannis, accumpaneit with the gudwyff of the hous, Gelie Duncan [and eight others], quha convenit thair for rasing of storme, to stay the Quene's hame cuming to Scotland; eftir consultatioun, quhether Gelie Duncan or Bessie Thomsoun wes meitest to send the letter with; and concludit to send the said Gelie, quhilk letter wes send to Marioun Lenchop in Leyth. The effect quhairoff is this: Marioun Lenchop, ye sall warne the rest of the sisteris, to raise the wind this day, att eleavin houris, to stay the Quenis cuming in Scotland. Lyke as they that wer convenit at the Pannis sould do their part be-eist; and to meit thame that wer in the Pannis; and att thair meting, thay sould mak the storme vniversall thro the see. [Then follows the method of doing this by casting in a cat.]

[From Newes from Scotland.] The said Agnis Tompson (Sampson) confessed, that the Divell, being then at North Barrick Kirke attending their comming, in the habit or likenesse of a man ... and having made his ungodly exhortations, wherein he did greatly inveigh against the King of Scotland, he received their oathes for their good and true service towards him, and departed; which done, they returned to sea, and so home again. At which time, the witches demaunded of the Divell, 'why he did beare such hatred to the Kinge?' who aunswered, 'By reason the King is the greatest enemie hee hath in the world.' All which their confessions and depositions are still extant upon record.

Barbara Napier, tried May 8, 1591. Released. Assisors tried June 7, and acquitted. The said Barbara was accusit, that scho gaif hir presens, in the maist develisch and tressonabill Conventioune, haldin be hir and hir complices in the Divellis name, vpoune Lambmes-ewin last, att the New-heavin callit Aitchesounes-heavin, betuix Musselburcht and Prestonpannis, sin his Majestie come furth of Denmark; quhair war assemblit nyne principallis, to witt, Agnes Sampsoune, Jonett Straittoun, Ewfame McCalyeane, hir selff, Johne Fiene, Robert Griersoun, George Moitis wyffe in Prestoune, Margrett Thomsoune, and Donald Robesoune; quhilk is nyne persounes, the Devill, quha wes with thame in liknes of ane blak man, thocht maist meit to do the turne for the quhilk thay wer convenit; and thairfore, he sett thame nyne nerrest to him selff, in ane cumpany; and thay, togidder with the wyffe of Saltoune myle and the rest of the inferiouris, to the nowmer of threttie persounes, standand skairse the lenth of ane buird frae the foirsaid nyne persounes in ane vthir cumpany;[148] Agnes Sampsoune proponit the distructioune of his hienes persoune, saying to the Dewill, 'We haif ane turne ado, and we would fain be att itt gif we could, and thairfore help ws to itt'. The Dewill ansuerit, he sould do quhat he could, bott it wald be lang to, because it wald be thoirterit [thwarted], and he promeist to hir and thame ane pictour of walx, and ordenit hir and thame to hing, roist, and drop ane taid, and to lay the droppis of the taid [mixed with other supposedly virulent poisons], in his hienes way, quhair his Maiestie wald gang inowre or outowre, or in ony passage quhair itt mycht drop vpoun his hienes heid or body, for his hienes distructioune, that ane vther mycht haif rewlit in his Maiesties place, and the ward [government] mycht haif gane to the Dewill. Att the quhilk conventioune, his hienes name wes pronunceit in Latine; and Agnes Sampsoune wes appointit to mak the pictour and to gif it to the Devill to be inchantit, quhilk scho maid in deid, and gaif itt to him; and he promiseit to giff it to the said Barbara and to Effie McCalyan, att the nixt meting to be roistit. Margarett Thomsoun was appointit to dropp the taid. There wes ane appointit to seik sum of his hienes linning claithes, to do the turne with.

Agnes Sampson, continued. Anny Sampsoun affirmed that sche, in company with nyn vthers witches, being convenit in the nycht besyd Prestounpannes, the deuell ther maister being present standing in the midis of thame; ther a body of wax, schaipen and maid be the said Anny Sampsoun, wrappit within a lynnyng claith, was fyrst delyuerit to the deuell; quhilk efter he had pronuncit his verde, delyuerit the said pictour to Anny Sampsoun, and sche to hir nyxt marrow, and sa euery ane round about, saying, 'This is King James the sext, ordonit to be consumed at the instance of a noble man Francis Erle Bodowell!' Efterwart again, at ther meting be nycht at the kirk of Northberick, wher the deuell, cled in a blak gown with a blak hat vpon his head, preachit vnto a gret nomber of them out of the pulpit, having lyk leicht candles rond about him. The effect of his language was till knaw, what skaith they had done, whow many they had won to ther oppinion sen their last meting, what succes the melting of the pictour had tane, and sic vain toyes. And because ane auld sely pure plowman, callit Grey Meill, chancit to say that 'nathing ailit the King yet, God be thankit' the deuell gaif him a gret blaw. Then dyuers amang them enterit in a raisonyng, maruelling that all ther deuellerie culd do na harm to the King, as it did till others dyuers. The deuell answerit, 'Il est vn home de Dieu'.[149]

Euphemia McCalyan, tried June 9, 1591, executed (burnt alive) June 25, 1591. Evidence was first given as to her practising witchcraft and consorting with well-known witches. Item, indyttit and accusit, of the conventicle had att North Berwick Kirk, tuentie dayes before Michelmas, 1590; and thair inquyring for the Kings pictour, gewin by Annie Sampsoun to the Dewill, to be inchantit, for the tressonabill distructioun of the King. Item, indyttit and accusit, for being att ane Conventioun haldin at the New Heaven callit the Fayrie-hoillis, att Lambmes last wes, to the effect immediatlie aboue writtin. Item, Indytit and accusit, for an Conventioun halden by yow and utheris notorious Wichis, youre associattis, att the Brwme-hoillis, quhair yow and thay tuik the sea, Robert Griersoun being your admerell and Maister-manne. [Then comes the recital of the magical means used to raise a tempest], quhairby the Quene wes putt back be storme. Item, Indytit, for consulting with the said Annie Sampsoun, Robert Griersoun, and diuers vtheris Wichis, for the tressonabill staying of the Quene's hame-cuming, be storme and wind; and rasing of storme, to that effect; or ellis to haif drownit hir Majestie and hir cumpany, be coniuring of cattis and casting of thame in the sea, at Leith, at the bak of Robert Griersounis hous.

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



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 home 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 come 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.]

2. Cat.—The earliest example of the cat-disguise is in the trial of the Guernsey witches in 1563, when Martin Tulouff confessed:

'q il y a viron ung quartier d'an passez q il soy trouva auvecqs la Vieillesse aultremẽt dit Collenette Gascoing, en la rue de la fosse au Coully, la ou l y avoet chinq ou vi chatz, d'ou il y en avoet ung qui estoet noir, qui menoit la dance, et danssoient et luy dyst lad^te Collenette, q il besait led^t Chat et d^t q il estoet sur ses pieds plat, et que ladite Collenette le besa p de derriere, et luy p la crysse, et q fracoize Lenouff sa mere y estoet et Collette Salmon fae de Collas du port, laqlle alloet devat et s'agenouillerent to^s devat le Chat et l'adorerẽt en luy baillat le^r foy, et luy dist ladite Vieillesse q ledit Chat estoet le diable.'[187]

Francoise Secretain, in 1598, saw the Devil 'tantost en forme de chat'. Rolande de Vernois said, 'Le Diable se presenta pour lors au Sabbat en forme d'vn groz chat noir.'[188] In 1652 another French witch confessed that 'il entra dans sa chambre en forme d'ung chat et se changea en la posture d'un home vestu de rouge', who took her to the Sabbath.[189] Both the Devonshire witches, Mary Trembles and Susanna Edwards, in 1682, stated that they saw him as a lion, by which they possibly meant a large cat.[190] In this connexion it is worth noting that in Lapland as late as 1767 the devil appeared 'in the likeness of a cat, handling them from their feet to their mouth, and counting their teeth'.[191]

3. Dog.—At Chelmsford in 1556 Joan Waterhouse 'dydde as she had seene her mother doe, callynge Sathan, whiche came to her (as she sayd) in the lykenes of a great dogge'.[192] In 1616 Barthelemy Minguet of Brecy was tried for witchcraft. 'Enquis, comme il a aduis quand le Sabbat se doit tenir. Respond, que c'est le Diable qui luy vient dire estant en forme de chien noir, faict comme vn barbet, parle a luy en ceste forme. Enquis, en quelle forme se met le Diable estant au Sabbat. Respond, qu'il ne l'a iamais veu autrement qu'en forme de barbet noir. Enquis, quelles ceremonies ils obseruent estant au Sabbat. Respond, que le Diable estant en forme de barbet noir (comme dessus est dit) se met tout droit sur les pattes de derriere, les preche'.[193] etc. In Guernsey in 1617 Isabel Becquet went to Rocquaine Castle, 'the usual place where the Devil kept his Sabbath; no sooner had she arrived there than the Devil came to her in the form of a dog, with two great horns sticking up: and with one of his paws (which seemed to her like hands) took her by the hand: and calling her by her name told her that she was welcome: then immediately the Devil made her kneel down: while he himself stood up on his hind legs; he then made her express detestation of the Eternal in these words: I renounce God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost; and then caused her to worship and invoke himself.'[194] Barton's wife, about 1655, stated that 'one Night going to a dancing upon Pentland-hills, he went before us in the likeness of a rough tanny-Dog, playing on a pair of Pipes, and his tail played ey wig wag wig wag'.[195] In 1658 an Alloa witch named Jonet Blak declared that he appeared to her first as 'a dog with a sowis head'.[196] In 1661 Jonet Watson of Dalkeith said that 'the Deivill apeired vnto her, in the liknes of ane prettie boy, in grein clothes, and went away from her in the liknes of ane blak doug'.[197] According to Marie Lamont of Innerkip in 1662, 'the devill in the likeness of a brown dog' helped to raise a storm.[198] Margaret Hamilton, widow of James Pullwart of Borrowstowness in 1679, was accused that she met 'the devil in the likeness of a man, but he removed from you in the likeness of an black dog'.[199] The Highland witches in the eighteenth century saw the devil as a dog; he was 'a large black ugly tyke', to whom the witches made obeisance; the dog acknowledged the homage 'by bowing, grinning, and clapping his paws'.[200] In the case of the dog-disguise, there is again a similarity with Lapp beliefs and customs, the appearance of the Devil as a dog being not uncommon in Lapland.[201]

4. Goat.—An interesting point as regards this form of disguise is that it does not occur in Great Britain, nor have I found it so far in Belgium. It prevailed chiefly in France, from which all my examples are taken. At Poictiers in 1574 'trois Sorciers & vne Sorciere declarent qu'ils estoyent trois fois l'an, a l'assemblee generale, ou plusieurs Sorciers se trouuoyent pres d'vne croix d'vn carrefour, qui seruoit d'enseigne. Et la se trouuoit vn grand bouc noir, qui parloit comme vne personne aux assistans, & dansoyent a l'entour du bouc.'[202] At Avignon in 1581 'when hee comes to be adored, he appeareth not in a humane forme, but as the Witches themselues haue deposed, as soone as they are agreed of the time that he is to mount vpon the altar (which is some rock or great stone in the fields) there to bee worshipped by them, hee instantly turneth himselfe into the forme of a great black Goate, although in all other occasions hee vseth to appeare in the shape of a man.[203] In Lorraine in 1589 the Devil 'sich in einen zottelichten Bock verwandelt hat, und viel staerker reucht und uebeler stinckt als immer ein Bock im Anfang des Fruehlings thun mag'.[204] In Puy de Dome in 1594 Jane Bosdeau's lover took her to a meeting, and 'there appeared a great Black Goat with a Candle between his Horns'.[205] In 1598 'Satan apres auoir prins la figure d'vn Bouc, se consume en feu'.[206] In the Basses-Pyrenees in 1609:

'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.—Marie d'Aguerre dit qu'il y a vne grande cruche au milieu du Sabbat, d'ou sort le Diable en forme de bouc.—D'autres disent qu'il est comme vn grand bouc, ayant deux cornes devant & deux en derriere; que celles de devant se rebrassent en haut comme la perruque d'vne femme. Mais le commun est qu'il a seulement trois cornes, & qu'il a quelque espece de lumiere en celle du milieu. On luy voit aussi quelque espece de bonet ou chapeau au dessus de ces cornes. On a obserue de tout temps que lorsqu'il veut receuoir quelcun a faire pacte auec luy, il se presente tousiours en homme, pour ne l'effaroucher ou effraier: car faire pacte auec vn Bouc ouuertement, tiendroit plus de la beste que de la creature raisonnable. Mais le pacte faict, lors qu'il veut receuoir quelqu'vn a l'adoration, communemẽt il se represente en Bouc.'[207]

Silvain Nevillon confessed at Orleans in 1614 'qu'il a veu le Diable en plusieurs facons, tantost comme vn bouc, ayant vn visage deuant & vn autre derriere'.[208]

5. Horse.—I give here only the references to the Devil when actually disguised as a horse, but there are a very great number of cases where he appeared riding on a horse. These cases are so numerous as to suggest that the horse was part of the ritual, especially as the riding Devil usually occurs in places where an animal disguise was not used, e.g. in 1598, in Aberdeen, where Andro Man 'confessis that Crystsunday rydis all the tyme that he is in thair cumpanie'.[209] The actual disguise as a horse is not common. Elizabeth Stile of Windsor in 1579 'confesseth, her self often tymes to haue gon to Father Rosimond house where she found hym sittyng in a Wood, not farre from thence, vnder the bodie of a Tree, sometymes in the shape of an Ape, and otherwhiles like an Horse'.[210] Helen Guthrie in 1661 stated that when the Forfar witches were trying to sink a ship, 'the divell wes there present with them all, in the shape of ane great horse. They returned all in the same liknes as of befor, except that the divell wes in the shape of a man.'[211] Mary Lacey of Salem in 1692 said that he appeared in the shape of a horse. 'I was in bed and the devil came to me and bid me obey him.'[212]

6. Sheep.—The sheep-disguise, which is perhaps a form of the goat, is usually found in France only. In 1453 'Guillaume Edeline, docteur en theologie, prieur de S. Germain en Laye, et auparavant Augustin, et religieux de certaines aultres ordres ... confessa, de sa bonne et franche voulonte, avoir fait hommage audit ennemy en l'espece et semblance d'ung mouton'.[213] Iaquema Paget and Antoine Gandillon in 1598 said that 'il prenoit la figure d'vn mouton noir, portant des cornes'.[214] In 1614 at Orleans Silvain Nevillon was induced to reveal all he knew; 'dit qu'il a veu le Diable en plusieurs facons, tantost comme vn bouc, ores comme vn gros mouton'.[215]

The rarer animal disguises are the deer and the bear. Of these the deer is found at Aberdeen in 1597, Andro Man 'confessis and affermis, thow saw Christsonday cum owt of the snaw in liknes of a staig';[216] at Auldearne in 1662, 'somtym he vold be lyk a stirk, a bull, a deir, a rae, or a dowg';[217] at Hartford, Connecticut, 1662, Rebecca Greensmith said that 'the devil first appeared to her in the form of a deer or fawn'.[218] The bear is still rarer, as I have found it only twice—once in Lorraine, and once in Lancashire. In 1589 'es haben die Geister auch etwann Lust sich in Gestalt eines Baeren zu erzeigen'.[219] In 1613 Anne Chattox declared that the Devil 'came vpon this Examinate in the night time: and at diuerse and sundry times in the likenesse of a Beare, gaping as though he would haue wearied [worried] this Examinate. And the last time of all shee, this Examinate, saw him, was vpon Thursday last yeare but one, next before Midsummer day, in the euening, like a Beare, and this Examinate would not then speake vnto him, for the which the said Deuill pulled this Examinate downe.'[220]

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 27: Danaeus, E 1, ch. iv.]

[Footnote 28: Gaule, p. 62.]

[Footnote 29: Cannaert, p. 45.]

[Footnote 30: Spalding Club Miscellany, i, pp. 171, 172.]

[Footnote 31: De Lancre, Tableau, pp. 398, 399.]

[Footnote 32: Id., L'Incredulite, p. 801.]

[Footnote 33: Baines, i, p. 607 note. For the name Mamillion see Layamon's Brut, p. 155, Everyman Library.]

[Footnote 34: Bourignon, Vie, p. 222.—Hale, p. 37.]

[Footnote 35: Pitcairn, iii, pp. 605, 607, 613.]

[Footnote 36: Hale, p. 58.]

[Footnote 37: Surtees Soc., xl, pp. 191, 193.]

[Footnote 38: Fountainhall, i. 15.]

[Footnote 39: Howell, vi, 660.—J. Hutchinson, ii, p. 31.]

[Footnote 40: Alse Gooderidge, pp. 9, 10.]

[Footnote 41: Boguet, p. 54.]

[Footnote 42: Wonderfull Discouerie of Elizabeth Sawyer, C 4, rev.]

[Footnote 43: County Folklore, iii, Orkney, pp. 103, 107-8.]

[Footnote 44: Stearne, pp. 28, 38]

[Footnote 45: Highland Papers, iii, pp. 16, 17.]

[Footnote 46: It is possible that the shoe was cleft like the modern 'hygienic' shoe. Such a shoe is described in the ballad of the Cobler of Canterbury, date 1608, as part of a woman's costume:

'Her sleeves blue, her traine behind, With silver hookes was tucked, I find; Her shoes broad, and forked before.' ]

[Footnote 47: Danaeus, ch. iv.]

[Footnote 48: De Lancre, Tableau, p. 69.]

[Footnote 49: Cooper, Pleasant Treatise, p. 2.]

[Footnote 50: Burns Begg, p. 217.]

[Footnote 51: Examination of John Walsh.]

[Footnote 52: Potts, D 3, B 2.]

[Footnote 53: Baines, i, p. 607 note.]

[Footnote 54: Hale, p. 46.]

[Footnote 55: Howell, iv, 833, 836, 840, 854-5.]

[Footnote 56: Stearne, p. 13.—Davenport, p. 13.]

[Footnote 57: Stearne, pp. 22, 29, 30.]

[Footnote 58: Glanvil, pt. ii, pp. 136, 137, 147, 149, 156, 161-5.]

[Footnote 59: Hale, p. 58.]

[Footnote 60: Petto, p. 18.]

[Footnote 61: Denham Tracts, ii, p. 301.]

[Footnote 62: Howell, viii, 1035.]

[Footnote 63: Elinor Shaw and Mary Phillips, p. 6.]

[Footnote 64: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, pp. 51-6.]

[Footnote 65: Id., i, pt. ii, p. 162.]

[Footnote 66: Id., i, pt. ii, pp. 245-6, 239. Spelling modernized.]

[Footnote 67: Melville, pp. 395-6.]

[Footnote 68: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, p. 210.]

[Footnote 69: Spalding Club Miscellany, i, pp. 124, 127, 164, 172.]

[Footnote 70: Pitcairn, ii, p. 537.]

[Footnote 71: County Folklore, iii, p. 103. Orkney.]

[Footnote 72: From the record of the trial in the Justiciary Court, Edinburgh.]

[Footnote 73: Spottiswode Miscellany, ii, p. 65.]

[Footnote 74: Pitcairn, iii, p. 599.]

[Footnote 75: Sinclair, p. 122.]

[Footnote 76: Id., p. 47.]

[Footnote 77: Arnot, p. 358.]

[Footnote 78: Scottish Antiquary, ix, pp. 50, 51.]

[Footnote 79: Kinloch, pp. 114, 128, 132.]

[Footnote 80: Pitcairn, iii, p. 601.]

[Footnote 81: From the records in the Justiciary Court, Edinburgh.]

[Footnote 82: Pitcairn, iii, p. 603.]

[Footnote 83: Burns Begg, pp. 221-39.]

[Footnote 84: Sharpe, pp. 131, 134.]

[Footnote 85: Hogers, a coarse stocking without the foot.]

[Footnote 86: Glanvil, pt. ii, pp. 291-5, 297.]

[Footnote 87: Scots Magazine, 1814, p. 200.]

[Footnote 88: Narrative of the Sufferings of a Young Girle, pp. xxxix-xli—Sadd. Debell., pp. 38-40.]

[Footnote 89: A true and full Relation of the Witches of Pittenweem, p. 10.—Sinclair, p. lxxxix.]

[Footnote 90: Sharpe, p. 191.]

[Footnote 91: Camden Society, Lady Alice Kyteler, p. 3.]

[Footnote 92: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, p. 687.]

[Footnote 93: De Lancre, Tableau, p. 123.]

[Footnote 94: Bodin, p. 226.]

[Footnote 95: Boguet, pp. 8, 96.]

[Footnote 96: De Lancre, Tableau, p. 130.]

[Footnote 97: Id., L'Incredulite, pp. 799, 800. The second Devil is called Tramesabot on p. 802.]

[Footnote 98: Van Elven, La Tradition, v (1891), p. 215. Neither the witches' names nor the place are given.]

[Footnote 99: Cannaert, pp. 44, 53-4, 60.]

[Footnote 100: Fountainhall, i, p. 14.]

[Footnote 101: Horneck, pt. ii, p. 316.]

[Footnote 102: Taylor, pp. 81, 118.]

[Footnote 103: Green, pp. 9, 14.]

[Footnote 104: Howell, vi, 660, 664; J. Hutchinson, ii, pp. 31, 37.]

[Footnote 105: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, p. 51.]

[Footnote 106: Melville, p. 395.]

[Footnote 107: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, p. 246. Spelling modernized.]

[Footnote 108: Spalding Club Misc., i, p. 127.]

[Footnote 109: De Lancre, Tableau, p. 68.]

[Footnote 110: Scottish Antiquary, ix, pp. 50, 51.]

[Footnote 111: Pitcairn, iii, p. 601.]

[Footnote 112: Burns Begg, pp. 221, 223, 234, 235, 239.]

[Footnote 113: Taylor, p. 81.]

[Footnote 114: Cannaert, p. 60.]

[Footnote 115: Glanvil, pt. ii, p. 164.]

[Footnote 116: Chambers, iii, p. 298.]

[Footnote 117: Glanvil, pt. ii, p. 316.]

[Footnote 118: Sinclair, p. lxxxix.]

[Footnote 119: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, p. 56.]

[Footnote 120: Id., i, pt. ii, p. 163.]

[Footnote 121: Spalding Club Misc., pp. 119-21.]

[Footnote 122: Id., i, p. 171.]

[Footnote 123: Pitcairn, ii, p. 478.]

[Footnote 124: De Lancre, L'Incredulite, p. 36.]

[Footnote 125: Id., Tableau, p. 401.]

[Footnote 126: Potts, B 4.]

[Footnote 127: Wonderful Discovery of Margaret and Phillip Flower, p. 117.]

[Footnote 128: Sinclair, p. 160.]

[Footnote 129: Kinloch, p. 144.]

[Footnote 130: Law, p. 27 note.]

[Footnote 131: Cotton Mather, p. 159.]

[Footnote 132: Rehearsall both straung and true, par. 24.]

[Footnote 133: Calendar of State Papers. Domestic, 1584, p. 220.]

[Footnote 134: Stearne, p. 45.]

[Footnote 135: Gerish, The Divel's Delusions, p. 11.]

[Footnote 136: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, pp. 161-4.]

[Footnote 137: Id., ii, pp. 26-7.]

[Footnote 138: Hibbert, p. 578.]

[Footnote 139: Sinclair, p. 48.]

[Footnote 140: From the record in the Justiciary Office, Edinburgh.]

[Footnote 141: Chambers, iii, p. 299.]

[Footnote 142: Ravaisson, 1679, pp. 334-6.]

[Footnote 143: Mather, pp. 120, 125; J. Hutchinson, History, ii, pp. 37 seq.]

[Footnote 144: Boguet, p. 125.]

[Footnote 145: Lawes against Witches and Conivration, p. 7.]

[Footnote 146: Wilson, ii, p. 158.]

[Footnote 147: The trials are published by Pitcairn, i, pt. ii.]

[Footnote 148: There were present on this occasion thirty-nine persons, or three Covens. See chap. vii on the Organization.]

[Footnote 149: Bannatyne Club, Melville, Memoirs, p. 395. The sycophantic Melville adds; 'And certanly he is a man of God, and dois na wrang wittingly, bot is inclynit to all godlynes, justice and virtu; therfore God hes preserued him in the midis of many dangers.']

[Footnote 150: Reg. Mag. Sig. Scot., No. 565, Feb. 7, 1550/1.]

[Footnote 151: Newes from Scotland. Quoted in Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, pp. 213-23.]

[Footnote 152: It is perhaps significant that the confession of John Fian, and the trials of both Barbara Napier and of Bothwell himself for witchcraft, have disappeared from the Justiciary Records.]

[Footnote 153: Burton, v, p. 283.]

[Footnote 154: Sandys, p. 250.]

[Footnote 155: De Lancre, Tableau, pp. 176, 177.]

[Footnote 156: Quibell, pl. xxviii. The palette itself is now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.]

[Footnote 157: Remigius, pt. i, p. 38.]

[Footnote 158: Pitcairn, i, pt. ii, p. 246. Spelling modernized.]

[Footnote 159: Melville, p. 395.]

[Footnote 160: Boguet, p. 56.]

[Footnote 161: De Lancre, Tableau, pp. 68, 73, 126.]

[Footnote 162: De Lancre, Tableau, pp. 225, 398.]

[Footnote 163: Id., L'Incredulite, pp. 799-801.]

[Footnote 164: Stearne, p. 13.]

[Footnote 165: Id., p. 22.]

[Footnote 166: Glanvil, pt. ii, p. 164.]

[Footnote 167: Petto, p. 18.]

[Footnote 168: Glanvil, pt. ii, pp. 294-5.]

[Footnote 169: Cannaert, p. 54.]

[Footnote 170: Melville, Memoirs, p. 395.]

[Footnote 171: Boguet, pp. 53-4.]

[Footnote 172: De Lancre, Tableau, p. 148.]

[Footnote 173: Howell, iv, 842.]

[Footnote 174: More, pp. 196-7.]

[Footnote 175: Kinloch, pp. 115, 129, 132.]

[Footnote 176: Burns Begg, pp. 219, 221, 228, 230.]

[Footnote 177: Pitcairn, iii, p. 603.]

[Footnote 178: Chambers, iii, 298.]

[Footnote 179: Fountainhall, i, p. 14.]

[Footnote 180: Narrative of the Sufferings of a Young Girle, p. xli; Sadd. Debell., p. 40.]

[Footnote 181: De Lancre, L'Incredulite, p. 769.]

[Footnote 182: Spalding Club Misc., i, p. 129.]

[Footnote 183: De Lancre, L'Incredulite, p. 794.]

[Footnote 184: Id., Tableau, p. 68.]

[Footnote 185: Bourignon, Parole, p. 87; Hale, p. 26.]

[Footnote 186: Pitcairn, iii, p. 613.]

[Footnote 187: From a trial in the Guernsey Greffe.]

[Footnote 188: Boguet, pp. 8, 70, 411.]

[Footnote 189: La Tradition, v (1891), p. 215.]

[Footnote 190: Howell, viii, 1034, 1036.]

[Footnote 191: Pinkerton, i, p. 473.]

[Footnote 192: Witches of Chelmsford, p. 34; Philobiblon Soc., viii.]

[Footnote 193: De Lancre, L'Incredulite, p. 805.]

[Footnote 194: Goldsmid, p. 12.]

[Footnote 195: Sinclair, p. 163.]

[Footnote 196: Scottish Antiquary, ix, 51.]

[Footnote 197: Pitcairn, iii, p. 601.]

[Footnote 198: Sharpe, p. 132.]

[Footnote 199: Scots Magazine, 1814, p. 201. Spelling modernized.]

[Footnote 200: Stewart, p. 175. The whole account is marred by the would-be comic style adopted by the author.]

[Footnote 201: Pinkerton, i, p. 473.]

[Footnote 202: Bodin, p. 187.]

[Footnote 203: Michaelis, Discourse, p. 148.]

[Footnote 204: Remigius, pt. i, p. 90.]

[Footnote 205: F. Hutchinson, Historical Essay, p. 42.]

[Footnote 206: Boguet, p. 141.]

[Footnote 207: De Lancre, Tableau, pp. 67, 68, 69, 126.]

[Footnote 208: Id., L'Incredulite, p. 800.]

[Footnote 209: Spalding Club Misc., i, p. 125. Cp. Elworthy on the Hobby-horse as the Devil, Horns of Honour, p. 140.]

[Footnote 210: Rehearsall both Straung and True, par. 24.]

[Footnote 211: Kinloch, pp. 122-3.]

[Footnote 212: Howell, vi, 663-4; J. Hutchinson, ii, pp. 36-7.]

[Footnote 213: Chartier, iii, 44-5.]

[Footnote 214: Boguet, p. 70.]

[Footnote 215: De Lancre, L'Incredulite, p. 800.]

[Footnote 216: Spalding Club Misc., i, p. 121.]

[Footnote 217: Pitcairn, iii, p. 613.]

[Footnote 218: Taylor, p. 98.]

[Footnote 219: Remigius, p. 98.]

[Footnote 220: Potts, E 3.]



III. ADMISSION CEREMONIES

1. General

In the ceremonies for admission, as in all the other ceremonies of the cult, the essentials are the same in every community and country, though the details differ. The two points which are the essence of the ceremony are invariable: the first, that the candidates must join of their own free will and without compulsion; the second, that they devote themselves, body and soul, to the Master and his service.

The ceremonies of admission differed also according to whether the candidate were a child or an adult. The most complete record of the admission of children comes from the Basses-Pyrenees in 1609:

'Les Sorcieres luy offrẽt des petits enfans le genoueil en terre, lui disant auec vne soubmission, Grand seigneur, lequel i'adore, ie vous ameine ce nouueau seruiteur, lequel veut estre perpetuellement vostre esclaue: Et le Diable en signe de remerciement & gratification leur respond, Approchez vous de moy: a quoy obeissant, elles en se trainant a genouil, le luy presentent, & luy receuant l'enfant entre ses bras, le rend a la Sorciere, la remercie, & puis luy recommande d'en auoir soing, leur disant par ce moyen sa troupe s'augmentera. Que si les enfans ayans attainct l'aage de neuf ans, par malheur se voueent au Diable sans estre forcez ny violentez d'aucun Sorcier, ils se prosternent par terre deuant Satan: lequel iettant du feu par les yeux, leur dit, Que demandez vous, voulez vous estre a moy? ils respondent qu'ouy, il leur dict, Venez vous de vostre bonne volonte? ils respondent qu'ouy, Faictes donc ce que ie veux, & ce que ie fay. Et alors la grande maistresse & Royne du Sabbat qui leur sert de pedagogue, dict a ce nouueau qui se presente, qu'il die a haute voix, Ie renie Dieu premierement, puis Iesus Christ son Fils, le S. Esprit, la vierge, les Saincts, la Saincte Croix, le Chresme, le Baptesme, & la Foy que ie tiens, mes Parrain & Marraine, & me remets de tout poinct en ton pouuoir & entre tes mains, ne recognois autre Dieu: si bien que tu es mon Dieu & ie suis ton esclaue. Apres on luy baille vn crapaud habille auec son capot ou manteau, puis il commande qu'on l'adore; si bien qu'obeyssans & estants mis a genouil, ils baisent le Diable aupres de l'[oe]il gauche, a la poitrine, a la fesse, a la cuisse, & aux parties honteuses, puis leuant la queue ils luy baisent le derriere.'[221]

The novice was then marked by a scratch from a sharp instrument, but was not admitted to the 'high mysteries' till about the age of twenty.[222] As no further ceremonies are mentioned, it may be concluded that the initiation into these mysteries was performed by degrees and without any special rites.

At Lille, about the middle of the seventeenth century, Madame Bourignon founded a home for girls of the lowest classes, 'pauvres et mal-originees, la plus part si ignorantes au fait de leur salut qu'elles vivoient comme des betes'.[223] After a few years, in 1661, she discovered that thirty-two of these girls were worshippers of the Devil, and in the habit of going to the Witches' Sabbaths. They 'had all contracted this Mischief before they came into the House'.[224] One of these girls named Bellot, aged fifteen, said 'that her Mother had taken her with her when she was very Young, and had even carried her in her Arms to the Witches Sabbaths'.[225] Another girl of twelve had been in the habit of going to the Sabbath since she also was 'very Young'. As the girls seem to have been genuinely fond of Madame Bourignon, she obtained a considerable amount of information from them. They told her that all worshippers of the Devil 'are constrained to offer him their Children. When a child thus offered to the Devil by its Parents, comes to the use of Reason, the Devil then demands its Soul, and makes it deny God and renounce Baptism, and all relating to the Faith, promising Homage and Fealty to the Devil in manner of a Marriage, and instead of a Ring, the Devil gives them a Mark with an iron awl [aleine de fer] in some part of the Body.'[226]

It is also clear that Marguerite Montvoisin[227] in Paris had been instructed in witchcraft from an early age; but as the trial in which she figures was for the attempted poisoning of the king and not for witchcraft, no ceremonies of initiation or admission are recorded.

In Great Britain the ceremonies for the reception of children are not given in any detail, though it was generally acknowledged that the witches dedicated their children to the Devil as soon as born; and from the evidence it appears that in many cases the witches had belonged to that religion all their lives. It was sometimes sufficient evidence against a woman that her mother had been a witch,[228] as it presupposed that she had been brought up as a worshipper of the Devil.

The Anderson children in Renfrewshire were all admitted to the society at an early age.[229] Elizabeth Anderson was only seven when she was first asked to swear fealty to the 'black grim Man.' James Lindsay was under fourteen, and his little brother Thomas was still 'below pupillarity' at the time of the trial, where he declared that he had been bribed, by the promise of a red coat, to serve 'the Gentleman, whom he knew thereafter to be the Devil'.[230] At Forfar in 1661, Jonet Howat was so young that when Isabel Syrie 'presented hir to the divell, the divell said, What shall I do with such a little bairn as she?' He accepted her, however, and she was evidently the pet of the community, the Devil calling her 'his bonny bird'.[231] At Paisley, Annabil Stuart was fourteen when, at her mother's persuasion, she took the vows of fidelity to the Devil.[232]

Elizabeth Frances at Chelmsford (tried in 1556) was about twelve years old when her grandmother first taught her the art of witchcraft.[233] Elizabeth Demdike, the famous Lancashire witch, 'brought vp her owne Children, instructed her Graund-children, and tooke great care and paines to bring them to be Witches'.[234] One of her granddaughters, Jennet Device, was aged nine at the time of the trial.

In Sweden the children were taken regularly to the assemblies,[235] and in America[236] also a child-witch is recorded in the person of Sarah Carrier, aged eight, who had made her vows two years before at her mother's instigation.

The ceremony for the admission of adults who were converts to the witch religion from Christianity follow certain main lines. These are (1) the free consent of the candidate, (2) the explicit denial and rejection of a previous religion, (3) the absolute and entire dedication of body and soul to the service and commands of the new Master and God.

The ceremonies being more startling and dramatic for adults than for children, they are recorded in Great Britain with the same careful detail as in France, and it is possible to trace the local variations; although in England, as is usual, the ceremonies had lost their significance to a far greater extent than in Scotland, and are described more shortly, probably because they were more curtailed.

The legal aspect of the admission ceremonies is well expressed by Sir George Mackenzie, writing in 1699 on the Scotch laws relating to witchcraft in the seventeenth century:

'As to the relevancy of this Crime, the first Article useth to be paction to serve the Devil, which is certainly relevant, per se, without any addition.... Paction with the Devil is divided by Lawyers, in expressum, & tacitum, an express and tacit Paction. Express Paction is performed either by a formal Promise given to the Devil then present, or by presenting a Supplication to him, or by giving the promise to a Proxie or Commissioner impowered by the Devil for that effect, which is used by some who dare not see himself. The Formula set down by Delrio, is, I deny God Creator of Heaven and Earth, and I adhere to thee, and believe in thee. But by the Journal Books it appears, that the ordinary Form of express Paction confest by our Witness, is a simple Promise to serve him. Tacit Paction is either when a person who hath made no express Paction, useth the Words or Signs which Sorcerers use, knowing them to be such.... Renouncing of Baptism is by Delrio made an effect of Paction, yet with us it is relevant, per se ... and the Solemnity confest by our Witches, is the putting one hand to the crown of the Head, and another to the sole of the Foot, renouncing their Baptism in that posture. Delrio tells us, that the Devil useth to Baptize them of new, and to wipe off their Brow the old Baptism: And our Witches confess always the giving them new Names.... The Devil's Mark useth to be a great Article with us, but it is not per se found relevant, except it be confest by them, that they got that Mark with their own consent; quo casu, it is equivalent to a Paction. This Mark is given them, as is alledg'd, by a Nip in any part of the body, and it is blew.'[237]

Reginald Scot,[238] writing considerably earlier, gives a somewhat similar account of the English witches, though couched in less legal phraseology:

'The order of their bargaine or profession is double; the one solemne and publike; the other secret and priuate. That which is called solemne or publike, is where witches come togither at certeine assemblies, at the times prefixed, and doo not onelie see the diuell in visible forme; but confer and talke familiarlie with him. In which conference the diuell exhorteth them to obserue their fidelitie vnto him, promising them long life and prosperitie. Then the witches assembled, commend a new disciple (whom they call a nouice) vnto him: and if the diuell find that yoong witch apt and forward in renunciation of christian faith, in despising anie of the seuen sacraments, in treading upon crosses, in spetting at the time of eleuation, in breaking their fast on fasting daies, and fasting on sundaies; then the diuell giueth foorth his hand, and the nouice joining hand in hand with him, promiseth to obserue and keepe all the diuell's commandements. This done, the diuell beginneth to be more bold with hir, telling hir plainlie that all this will not serue his turne; and therefore requireth homage at hir hands: yea, he also telleth hir, that she must grant him both hir bodie and soule to be tormented in euerlasting fire: which she yeeldeth vnto. Then he chargeth hir, to procure as manie men, women, and children also, as she can, to enter into this societie.... Sometimes their homage with their oth and bargaine is receiued for a certeine terme of yeares; sometimes for euer. Sometimes it consisteth in the deniall of the whole faith, sometimes in part. The first is, when the soule is absolutelie yeelded to the diuell and hell-fier: the other is, when they haue but bargained not to obserue certeine ceremonies and statutes of the church; as to conceale faults at shrift, to fast on sundaies, etc. And this is doone either by oth, protestation of words, or by obligation in writing, sometimes sealed with wax, sometimes signed with bloud.'

Forbes says that

'an express Covenant is entred into betwixt a Witch, and the Devil appearing in some visible Shape. Whereby the former renounceth God and his Baptism, engages to serve the Devil, and do all the Mischief he can as Occasion offers, and leaves Soul and Body to his Disposal after Death. The Devil on his part articles with such Proselytes, concerning the Shape he is to appear to them in, the Services they are to expect from him, upon the Performance of certain Charms or ceremonious Rites. This League is made verbally, if the Party cannot write. And such as can write, sign a written Covenant with their Blood.'[239]

The general order of the ceremony of admission can be gathered from the evidence given at the trials, though no one trial gives the order in its entirety. The ceremony might take place privately, at a local meeting, or in full Sabbath; it was the same for either sex, except that the men were not usually introduced, the women were sometimes introduced, sometimes not. If there were any sort of introduction, it was by some one who was acquainted with the candidate; usually the person who had induced her to join. She was brought before the Devil, who asked her if she would be his faithful servant, and if she would renounce her previous religion, and dedicate herself to his service, taking him as her God. After the renunciation and vows, the Devil baptized her in his own great name, and among the Scotch witches gave her a new name by which she was known afterwards at the Sabbaths and other meetings. The ceremony concluded by giving the witch a mark or 'flesh-brand' on some part of the body.

2. The Introduction

It is not clear whether the introduction of a candidate by a member of the society was an early or a late detail. It is quite possible that it was early, the introducer standing in the same relation to the candidate as the Christian sponsors stand to a candidate for baptism. On the other hand, it is quite comprehensible that, when the witch religion became an object of persecution, no new member could be admitted unless vouched for by some trustworthy person. In the cases where the first meetings with the Devil are recorded, both systems are apparently in vogue. Occasionally, however, the accounts show a confusion on the part of the recorder. Thus Anne Chattox said that Mother Demdike introduced her to the Devil in Mother Demdike's own house, and that she there yielded her soul to him; and in another place she is reported as saying that 'a thing like a Christian man, for foure yeares togeather, did sundry times come to this Examinate, and requested this Examinate to giue him her Soule: And in the end, this Examinate was contented to giue him her sayd Soule, shee being then in her owne house, in the Forrest of Pendle.'[240] The two statements are not inconsistent if we conclude that in her own house she consented to join the society, and in Mother Demdike's presence she took the vows. As a rule the men seem to have joined at the direct invitation of the Devil himself, especially when they came of witch families.

3. The Renunciation and Vows

The renunciation of previous errors of faith and the vows of fidelity to the new belief are part of the ceremony of admission of any convert to a new religion. The renunciation by the witches was explicit, but the records are apt to pass it over in a few words, e.g. 'I denied my baptism,' 'I forsook God and Christ,' 'Ils renient Dieu, la Vierge, et le reste,' 'Vne renonciation expresse a Iesu-Christ & a la foy'; but occasionally the words are given in full. Mackenzie, quoting from Del Rio, gives the formula thus: 'I deny God Creator of Heaven and Earth, and I adhere to thee, and believe in thee.'[241] The actual formula is still extant in the case of the priest Louis Gaufredy, tried before the Parliament of Aix in 1611:

'Ie Louys Gaufredy renonce a tous les biens tant spirituels que corporels qui me pourroyent estre conferez de la part de Dieu, de la vierge Marie & de tous les Saincts de Paradis, pareillement de mon patron S. Iean Baptiste, S. Pierre, S. Paul, & S. Francois, & de me donner de corps & d'ame a Lucifer icy present auec tous les biens que ie feray a iamais: excepte la valeur du Sacrement pour le regard de ceux qui le recevront: Et ainsi le signe et atteste.'[242]

Jeannette d'Abadie, aged sixteen, said that she was made to 'renoncer & renier son Createur, la saincte Vierge, les Saincts, le Baptesme, pere, mere, parens, le ciel, la terre & tout ce qui est au monde'.[243] The irrevocability of this renunciation was impressed upon the Swedish witches in a very dramatic manner: 'The Devil gave them a Purse, wherein there were shavings of Clocks with a Stone tied to it, which they threw into the water, and then were forced to speak these words: As these Shavings of the Clock do never return to the Clock from which they are taken, so may my Soul never return to Heaven.'[244]

The vows to the new God were as explicit as the renunciation of the old. Danaeus says, 'He commaundeth them to forswere God theyr creator and all his power, promising perpetually to obey and worship him, who there standeth in their presence.'[245] The English witches merely took the vow of fealty and obedience, devoting themselves body and soul to him; sometimes only the soul, however, is mentioned: but the Scotch witches of both sexes laid one hand on the crown of the head, the other on the sole of the foot, and dedicated all that was between the two hands to the service of the Master.[246] There is a slight variation of this ceremony at Dalkeith in 1661, where the Devil laid his hand upon Jonet Watson's head, 'and bad her "give all ower to him that was vnder his hand", and shoe did so'.[247]

In Southern France the candidates, after renouncing their old faith, 'prennent Satan pour leur pere et protecteur, & la Diablesse pour leur mere'.[248] At Lille the children called the ceremony the Dedication,[249] showing that the same rite obtained there.

4. The Covenant

The signing of a covenant does not occur in every case and was probably a late introduction. Forbes, as quoted above, gives the contract between the Devil and his follower, with the part which each engages to perform. In Somerset the witches signed whether they could write or not, those who could not write putting a cross or circle as their mark.[250]

The free consent of the candidate is a point always insisted on, and by the confessions of the witches themselves the consent was often not merely freely but actually willingly given. Isobel Crawford of the Irvine Coven in 1618 was accused that the devil 'come to hir awin dur in similitud of ane blak man, and prommeist, gif sche wold be his servand, sche sould have geir aneuch, and sould not want. Quhairunto sche was ever reddy to accord.'[251] Little Jonet Howat said that the Devil 'bade her renounce her God, and she answered, Marry, shall I'.[252] In the dittay against Christian Grieve, it is stated that 'Sathan desired you to be his servant whilk ye willingly granted to be.... And sicklike the minister posing you upon the foresaid particulars especially anent the renunciation of your Baptism, ye answered that Sathan speired at you if ye would do it and ye answered "I warrand did I."'[253] Bessie Henderson and Janet Brugh, of the same Coven, acknowledged the same. To the former 'the Devil appeared and asked you gif you would be his servant whilk ye freely and instantly accepted and granted thereto'.[254] Janet Brugh was rather more emphatic: 'Sathan desired you to be his servant whilk ye willingly promised to be and likeways desired you to renounce your baptism whilk ye willingly did.'[255]

The written contract appealed very strongly to the legal minds of the judges and magistrates, and it is therefore often mentioned, but in Great Britain there is no record of the actual wording of any individual covenant; the Devil seems to have kept the parchment, paper, or book in his own custody. In France, however, such contracts occasionally fell into the hands of the authorities; the earliest case being in 1453, when Guillaume Edeline, Prior of St. Germain-en-Laye, signed a compact with the Devil, which compact was afterwards found upon his person.[256] The witch Stevenote de Audebert, who was burnt in January 1619, showed de Lancre 'le pacte & conuention qu'elle auoit faict auec le Diable, escrite en sang de menstrues, & si horrible qu'on auoit horreur de la regarder'.[257]

The contract was said to be signed always in the blood of the witch, and here we come to a confusion between the mark made on the person and the mark made by the person. It seems clear that part of the ceremony of initiation was the cutting of the skin of the candidate to the effusion of blood. This is the early rite, and it seems probable that when the written contract came into vogue the blood was found to be a convenient writing-fluid, or was offered to the Devil in the form of a signature. This signing of a book plays a great part in the New England trials.

The contract was usually for the term of the witch's life, but sometimes it was for a term of years, the number of which varies considerably. As Scot says, 'Sometimes their homage with their oth and bargaine is receiued for a certeine terme of yeares; sometimes for ever.'[258] Popular belief assigns seven years as the length of time, at the end of which period the Devil was supposed to kill his votary. The tradition seems to be founded on fact, but there is also a certain amount of evidence that the witch was at liberty to discontinue or renew the contract at the end of the allotted term. Such a renewal seems also to have been made on the appointment of a new Chief. In France, England, and New England the term of years is mentioned; in Scotland it is mentioned by the legal authorities, but from the fact that it occurs seldom, if ever, in the trials it would seem that the contract of the Scotch witches was for life.

Magdalene de la Croix, Abbess of a religious house in Cordova in 1545, made a contract 'for the space of thirty years', she being then a girl of twelve.[259] In Paris in 1571 'il y eut vn aduocat lequel confessa qu'il auoit passe l'obligation au Diable renonceant a Dieu, & icelle signee de son propre sang. Encores s'est il verifie par plusieurs procez, que l'obligation reciproque entre le diable, & le sorcier, contient quelquesfois le terme d'vn an, deux ans, ou autre temps.'[260] At Faversham in 1645 Joan Williford said 'that the Devil promised to be her servant about twenty yeeres, and that the time is now almost expired'.[261] In Huntingdonshire in 1646 Elizabeth Weed of Great Catworth confessed that 'the Devill then offer'd her, that hee would doe what mischiefe she should require him; and said she must covenant with him that he must have her soule at the end of one and twenty years, which she granted'.[262] In 1652 Giles Fenderlin of Leaven Heath was tried for that when he was a soldier at Bell in Flanders he made a five-years' covenant with a Jesuit; 'after the said five years was expired, in 1643 he renew'd the said Covenant with the Jesuit for 14 years longer: whereupon he drew a Covenant for him with the Devil, pricking the two fore-fingers of his right hand with an needle, and drew bloud, wherewith he writ his name with his own bloud, and then covenanted with the Devil, That if he should be safely protected during the space of 14 years aforesaid, while such time as it expired, that then he was to take away both body and soul as his own right and interest.'[263] At Lille in 1661 Madame Bourignon's girls indicate the renewal of the contract: 'The Devil gives them a Mark, which Marks they renew as often as those Persons have any desire to quit him. The Devil reproves them then more severely and obligeth them to new Promises, making them also new Marks for assurance or pledge, that those Persons should continue faithful to him.'[264] In Somerset in 1664 Elizabeth Style said that the Devil 'promised her Mony, and that she should live gallantly, and have the pleasure of the World for Twelve years, if she would with her Blood sign his Paper, which was to give her Soul to him'.[265] At Groton in New England in 1671, according to Elizabeth Knap, 'the terme of time agreed upon with him was for 7 yeers; one yeere shee was to be faithfull in his service, and then ye other six hee would serve her, and make her a witch'.[266] At Newcastle-on-Tyne in 1673 Ann Armstrong 'deposeth that Ann Drydon had a lease for fifty yeares of the divill, whereof ten ar expired. Ann Forster had a lease of her life for 47 yeares, whereof seaven are yet to come. Lucy Thompson had a lease of two and forty, whereof two are yet to come, and, her lease being near out, they would have perswaded this informer to have taken a lease of three score yeares or upwards.'[267] In New England some of the 'afflicted' said of Goodwife C. that 'she had Covenanted with the Devil for ten Years, six of them were gone, and four more to come'.[268] In modern France the belief in the contract for a term of years is recorded, but nothing is said of the renewal of the contract or of the fate of the witch who refuses such a contract. In the department of Entre-Sambre-et-Meuse the full method of entering on such a contract is known: 'Si vous voulez venir au bois avec moi, vous verrez un homme venir a vous. C'est le chef. Il vous demandera si vous voulez vous engager dans la societe. Si vous acceptez, le terme d'engagement est de sept ans et vous gagnerez une plaquette par jour.'[269] Among the Walloons the neophyte takes with him a black hen, which the Devil buys, and then ratifies the contract, 'le pacte est fait pour une duree de sept ans.'[270]

5. The Baptism

Records of the baptism of candidates are rare, the rite being possibly copied from the Christian ceremony and therefore of later date. It does not seem to occur in England and hardly at all in Scotland. The earliest mention is in the Basses-Pyrenees (1609), where Jeannette d'Abadie stated 'qu'elle a veu souuent baptiser des enfans au sabbat, qu'elle nous expliqua estre des enfans des sorcieres & non autres, lesquelles ont accoutume faire plustost baptiser leurs enfans au sabbat qu'en l'Eglise'.[271] The rite, however, was practised in Bute in 1662: Margret NcLevine confessed—

'that being in a litle chamber in Balichtarach the devill came to her in the lyknes of a man and deseired hir to goe with him, and that she refusing he said I will not [blank] and she gave him [blank] she never saw afterward and that she knew it was the devill and after he went that he came bak and asked hir to give him hir hand quhich she refusing to doe he took hir by the midle finger of the rycht hand quhich he had almost cutt off hir and therwith left hir. Her finger was so sorely pained for the space of a moneth ther after that ther was no pain comparable to it, as also took her by the right leg quhich was sorly pained likewayes as also be the devill. Item he came to her againe as she was shaking straw in the barne of Ardroscidell in a very ugly shape and that there he desired hir to goe with him and she refusing he said to her I will either have thy self or then thy heart. Item that he healed her sore foot and finger quhich finger is yet be nummed. Item that before he haled her that she made a covenant with him and promised to doe him any service that he wold imploy hir in. Item that he asked quhat was her name. She answered him Margret the name that God gave me, and he said to her I baptise the Jonet.'[272]

Isobell NcNicoll 'confessed that as she was in her owne house her alone drawing acquavittie the devill came to her in the lyknes of a young man and desyred her to goe with him and confesses that she made a covenant with him quhairin he promised that she should not want meanes enough and she promised to be his servand. Item that he baptised her and gave her a new name and called her Caterine. Item that about a moneth therafter in the night as she went out of her own back dore she met with the devill and spok with him.'[273]—Jonet McNicoll 'confesses with remorse that about hallowday as she was in Mary Moore's house that there appeared to her two men the on a gross copperfaced man and the other a wele favored young man and that the copperfaced man quhom she knew to be ane evil spirit bade her goe with him. Item confesses that she made a covenant with him, and he promised that she wold not want meines eneugh and she promised to serve him and that he gave her a new name saying I baptise the Mary.'[274]—Jonet Morisoune 'traysted with the divill at the Knockanrioch, being the second tyme of her meeting with him, that shee made covenant with the devill ... quairin she promised to be his servant etc. that shee asked quhat was his name his answer was my name is Klareanough and he asked quhat was her name and she answered Jonet Morisoun, the name that God gave me, and he said belive not in Christ bot belive in me. I baptise the Margarat.'[275] The Swedish witches (1669) were also baptized; 'they added, that he caused them to be baptized too by such Priests as he had there, and made them confirm their Baptism with dreadful Oaths and Imprecations.'[276] Curiously enough the most detailed account comes from New England (1692). Mary Osgood, wife of Captain Osgood, went 'to five mile pond, where she was baptized by the devil, who dipped her face in the water, and made her renounce her former baptism, and told her she must be his, soul and body for ever, and that she must serve him, which she promised to do. She says, the renouncing her first baptism was after her dipping.'[277] The account of Goody Lacey's experience is given in the form of question and answer:

'Q. Goody Lacey! how many years since they were baptized? A. Three or four years ago, I suppose. Q. Who baptized them? A. The old serpent. Q. How did he do it? A. He dipped their heads in the water, saying, that they were his and that he had power over them. Q. Where was this? A. At Fall's River. Q. How many were baptized that day? A. Some of the chief; I think they were six baptized. Q. Name them. A. I think they were of the higher powers.'[278]