Printer Friendly

Scourging the temple of god: towards an understanding of Nicolas Jacquier's Flagellum haereticorum fascinariorum (1458).

In 1458, the Dominican inquisitor Nicolas Jacquier wrote the Flagellum haereticorum fascinariorum (The Scourge of Heretical Bewitchers). Designed both to expose a heretical sect and to defend an orthodox demonology, the tract survives in at least nine contemporary manuscript copies and a print edition which appeared in 1581. (1) Despite the tract's wide dissemination, there is no comprehensive study of the Flagellum in the English language, and what scholarship there is has remained hampered by a failure to read the text in its entirety. The Flagellum's chief concern is a new sect of 'witches', the fascinarii, who gathered at nocturnal Sabbaths to worship the Devil, denying the Christian faith and performing harmful magical acts (maleficia) with the aid of their demonic associates. (2) But the tract is also concerned with those who do not believe that the fascinarii actually exist in physical reality. In fact, the text consistently identifies those who believe the fascinarii do not exist with members of sect itself. The tract is a fierce defence of the reality of demonic intervention in the world and of the reality of the fascinarii, aiming to scourge the sect from the temple of God.

The reception of Jacquier's text by scholars in the last one hundred years has been shaped by the seminal and still valuable work of Joseph Hansen, who in 1901 published a series of extracts from important witchcraft texts, the Quellen und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Hexenwahns und der Hexenverfolgung im Mittelalter). (3) Hansen's choice of excerpts from the Flagellum formed part of an early twentieth-century 'liberal-rational school' of witchcraft scholarship. (4) Important events in the history of witchcraft were chosen and organized to reveal an intellectual 'development' in the conceptualization of witchcraft. The result was that Hansen included those sections of the Flagellum which formed part of the 'progress' of ideas about the reality of the Sabbath or which related directly to 'evidence' about the 'real' sect of the fascinarii. (5) Exempla and material in Jacquier's text considered peripheral to the development of the history of witchcraft, but in fact central to Jacquier's argument, were removed.

Hansen's influence persists among scholars who no longer subscribe to his historical method. Werner Tschacher, in his excellent short study of night flight, 'Der Flug durch die Luft zwischen Illusionstheorie und Realitatsbeweis', only refers to the excerpts of the Flagellum in Hansen's compendium. (6) In English-language scholarship the problem is marked in the most recent and highly influential study of demonic reality, Walter Stephens's Demon Lovers: Witchcraft, Sex and the Crisis of Belief (2002). (7) Stephens claims that his method is based on reading witchcraft treatises 'cover to cover' and as 'complete wholes', yet he has only consulted Jacquier's text in the excerpts printed in Hansen's collection. (8) Jacquier's use of scriptural exempla, for example, is entirely omitted by Stephens in his discussion of the reality of night flight. (9) Yet, on the same page, Stephens cites exactly the same exempla used by Jacquier as 'crucial' parts of Jean Vinet's near-contemporary Tractatus contra demonum invocatores. On this basis, Stephens is able to boil down one hundred and eighty pages of more and less complex argument to a simplistic stereotype. With ill-disguised contempt, Stephens labels Jacquier's proof of demonic reality 'pathetic', without having read it. (10)

Despite these methodological problems, in Jacquier's case Stephens is right to emphasize that bodily interaction between demons and witches was an important part of late medieval theological discourses of all kinds, be they the real presence in the Eucharist or ideas of night flights to the Sabbath. Yet the motivations for theological concerns about bodily reality and their role in complex interplays of social, intellectual, and cultural life are not easily reduced to Stephens's thesis that late medieval demonological theory was the symptom of a 'crisis of belief'. According to Stephens, theorists attempted to combat their own disbelief by developing elaborate defences of demonic reality. (11) In contrast, and following a hermeneutic suggested by Stuart Clark and Quentin Skinner, I argue that the Flagellum is concerned about a crisis of belief, but that the crisis is not Jacquier's own. (12) Instead, the text gives us access to believers' anxieties about the unbelief of a sect of witches who in many ways resemble other heretics, and who worship demons in the pattern of Old Testament idol worshippers or the pagans of the early Christian era. Jacquier's response to this crisis is to place it within the narrative schemas of divine providence from the creation of the world. This story of divine action and sovereignty is consistent because of the consistency of the Godhead, a consistency which is, in turn, made clear in the revealed narratives of Christian history. That is, Jacquier applies an openly circular hermeneutic which relies on the assumption of Christian belief.

In contrast to Stephens, the most recent French scholarship on the Flagellum has initiated a rigorous study of Jacquier's text. In 1999, a group of scholars at the University of Lausanne projected a study of the witchcraft literature written between the earliest tracts of the second quarter of the fifteenth century, and Heinrich Kramer's famous Malleus maleeficarum . (13) An important part of this project was completed at the end of 2008 by Martine Ostorero's doctoral thesis, Le diable au sabbat: litterature demonologique et sorcellerie (1440-1460). Ostorero's thesis is a study of three demonological texts written in the 1450s and 1460s: Jean Vinet's Tractatus contra demones invocatores, Jacquier's Flagellum, and the Flagellum maleficorum by the theologian Pierre Marmor. (14) It aims to refocus attention on individual texts. (15) In keeping with the method of other Lausanne historians of early witchcraft, Ostorero uses the texts primarily to trace a history of demonological discourse. (16) Extending Ostorero's model to include close reading of the first section of the Flagellum, this essay will trace Jacquier's treatment of demonic illusion and corporeality, and conclude by signalling possibilities for reuniting the often separate fields of witchcraft history and late medieval cultural history.

Before turning to examine the opening chapters of the Flagellum in detail, it is necessary to underline Nicolas Jacquier's varied and wide-ranging participation in fifteenth-century political and theological cultures. Jacquier was probably born in Dijon sometime in the early fifteenth century. (17) He was incorporated into the Council of Basel in 1433 as a Dominican from Dijon. (18) He was active for several years at the Council, playing an important role in its prosecution of Pope Eugenius IV for heresy. Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini (later Pope Pius II) records the details of this debate in his De gestis concilii Basiliensis commentariorum, bookending his discussion of the intense argument over Eugenius' heresy with two references to brother Nicolai, a Burgundian Dominican. (19) Of the seven resolutions debated, the first three passed by the Basel theologians were general propositions about the supremacy of the Council over the Pope. These formed the ground on which the particular resolutions against Eugenius could stand. (20) Aeneas draws attention to brother Nicolai particularly in relation to the last four resolutions, which deal specifically with Eugenius' obdurate heresy. Other evidence of Jacquier's activity at the Council is sparse. He appears in a list of council members dealing with the proposals of the kings and princes to mediate between the Council and Pope. (21) He appears again on 16 June 1439 involved in the deposition process for Pope Eugenius. (22) On 7 May 1440, he was given authority to act as a representative of the deputation on the faith. (23) Jacquier's final appearance at the Council was to protest against the levy of a tenth on all ecclesiastical benefices. (24)

No clear record of Jacquier's activities survives for the 1440s. He reappears in the 1450s as an inquisitor in the Burgundian territories, initially around Lyon, where he was involved in a demonic possession case in 1452, and later in Northern France and the Low Countries. His two major demonological treatises were written during this period: the De calcatione demonum (Concerning the Trampling of Demons, 1457) and the Flagellum haereticorum fascinariorum (1458). (25) The De calcatione seems to work as a sort of prologue to the Flagellum. It ends with a brief reference to the dangers of a new group of heretical demon worshippers called the fascinarii. Reading the De calcatione as a prelude or introduction to the Flagellum is supported by several manuscripts of the tract, where the scribe has incorporated the Flagellum into the De calcatione. (26) The two manuscripts of the Flagellum consulted in preparing this essay are linked to the Burgundian University town of Louvain. (27) The first, Brussels, Bibliotheque royale, manuscript 11441-42, was owned by a professor of theology at Louvain, Henri de Zomeren, and later by the Abbey of Parc. (28) The second, Brussels, Bibliotheque royale, manuscript 733-41, was owned by the Abbey of Saint Martin. The provenance of these manuscripts shows that the Flagellum was read in learned clerical circles in fifteenth-century Burgundy.

Alongside these activities, Jacquier had an active career as a diplomat for both Philip le Bon, the Duke of Burgundy, and the Dominican order. In 1451, Jacquier acted as Philip's ambassador to the Court of Frederick III, commissioned with persuading the Emperor to mount a crusade. (29) A tract written by Jacquier for this embassy laments the lack of support for clerics in the Holy Land. Four years later, in 1455, Jacquier represented Philip in Hungary. (30) From 1459 to 1460, just after completing the Flagellum, he travelled to Italy to represent the Dominican Master General, Martial Auribelli, in the process for the canonization of Catherine of Siena, where he worked to persuade the Doge of Venice to advocate for Catherine's canonization. (31) In the late 1460s, Jacquier undertook a mission which united diplomacy for Philip le Bon and his role as a Dominican inquisitor. Probably at the request of the Dominican Congregation of Holland, he travelled to Bohemia as an inquisitor against the Hussites. (32) During this time he wrote a tract against the errors of the Hussites, defending traditional Thomist eucharistic theory against the demand for the Eucharist in both kinds, and undertook diplomatic work for Philip le Bon with the King of Bohemia. (33) In 1471, Jacquier was in Ghent, commissioned by the Bishop of Tournai to collect material on the miracles of Colette of Corbie. (34) It was probably there that he died in 1472. (35)

Philip le Bon actively encouraged the Dominican reform movement which led to the foundation of the Congregation of Holland in 1457. (36) Responding to what it saw as an individualization and privatization of communal life, Dominican reform in Burgundy was characterized by strict adherence to rules governing collective behaviour in religious houses. (37) Jacquier was associated with the Dominican house in Lille, one of the first reformed houses in the new Congregation, from the year 1464. (38) His association with Martial Auribelli also links him to the reform movement. (39) The connections between Jacquier, Dominican reform, and the Burgundian court provide numerous possibilities for interpreting the Flagellum, possibilities which I begin to investigate in the final section of this essay where I situate Jacquier's views on demonic reality alongside a story from the courtly Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles.

Jacquier's Flagellum forms part of a burgeoning literature in the fifteenth century concerning a new sect of demon-worshipping heretics. Descriptions of a sect like that attacked in the Flagellum developed from older accounts of heretical conventicles, as well as trials for heresy in the first half of the fifteenth century. They were given a definite literary form in a series of treatises which appeared at the time of, and with some connection to, the Council of Basel. (40) Differences of opinion over the physical reality of the meetings of the sect are found across these early treatises. Johannes Nider, in his Formicarius, was sceptical about the reality of flight to the Sabbath, but did not deny its possibility. (41) For the anonymous author of the Errores gazariorum, however, the reality of the Sabbath was certain. (42) These 'Basel' treatises have a Burgundian connection through the recently re-dated Vauderye de Lyonois en brief and Martin le Franc's lengthy French poem, Le Champion des Dames. (43) Martin was secretary to the Council's pope, Amadeus VIII, and dedicated the work to the Duke of Burgundy, Philip le Bon. The Champion stages, in dialogue form, the opposition between those who believe in the reality of the witches' Sabbath and those who believe that it is a demonic delusion created through the manipulation of blood.

Concerns over the reality of night flight and the Sabbath were, in part, motivated by the status of a single legal canon, the Canon Episcopi. The Canon Episcopi was supposedly promulgated at the fourth-century Council of Ancyra. (44) First found in Regino of Prum's tenth-century collation De synodalibus causis et disciplinis ecclesiasticis, in the twelfth century the Canon found its way into Gratian's encyclopaedic compendium of medieval canon law, the Decretum. (45) The Canon states that women who believe that they ride on 'beasts with Diana, the goddess of the pagans ... and in the silences of the night traverse great spaces of earth' are experiencing 'phantasms' administered 'by the malignant spirit'. (46) If one accepted that the Canon applied to the new witch sect, then the Sabbath must be considered illusory. To those who believed that the new sects were real, in the sense that they involved bodily meetings in real places with real people, the Canon presented a problem.

From the 1440s to 1458, texts sporadically dealt with the illusory nature of nocturnal flight to the Sabbath. (47) In his Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (c. 1440), the Bishop of Avila Alfonso Tostado addressed the question of whether the Devil could carry people from place to place. (48) Tostado argued that divine permission is necessary for any demonic transportation. The flight of women to the Sabbath could not be an illusion since witches are often discovered and punished; ipso facto, punishment was just, and the crimes were real. (49) Although demonic illusions may occur, the Canon Episcopi is directed against the worship of false gods like Diana who are in reality demons. Tostado's Commentary also makes it clear that those who think that members are forced to join the sect are incorrect. The truth is that members join the sect of their own free will through a pact with the Devil. The opposite view was taken by the Dominical Cardinal John of Torquemada in his Commentary on Gratian's Decretal (1445-51). (50) Torquemada's Commentary reiterates the Canon's position, arguing that women are generally more susceptible than men to demonic illusion. Sometime in the early 1450s, Jean Vinet, a Dominican inquisitor in Carcassonne, wrote the Tractatus contra demonum invocatores, in which he argued for the bodily reality of demons. (51) Vinet's tract seeks to render the Canon redundant on historical grounds: the sect described by the Canon does not resemble modern idolatrous demon worshippers. (52) Although similarities exist between the Flagellum and the arguments employed by Tostado and Vinet, there is no conclusive evidence that their texts were known to Jacquier. (53) The similarities arise through the use of a common cultural vocabulary to deal with a common challenge: disbelief in the reality of demonic action in the world.

The Flagellum begins by clearly articulating the arguments proposed by those who deny the physical reality of demonic action. First, the meetings and actions of the fascinarii are a demonic illusion; second, this assertion is supported by the Canon Episcopi; third, God does not allow demons or thefascinarii the power to work maleficia, since he is all-powerful and good; and fourth, the evidence of accused fascinarii should be inadmissible since it may be brought about by demonic illusion. (54) The first, second, and fourth propositions are based on the belief that demons have the power to delude humankind. The third is another attempt to remove the possibility that the fascinarii really exist and is grounded in the problem of evil--how is it possible for a good God to allow such evil? To refute these arguments, Chapters 1-6 (36 pages) of the Flagellum consider the problem of demonic illusion and corporeality; Chapters 7-9 (36 pages) address the Canon Episcopi and its relation to the modern sect of the fascinarii; Chapters 10-25 (97 pages) discuss the different powers of demons, and what this tells us about the actions of God; and Chapters 26-28 (13 pages) deal with the legal validity of evidence given by the members of the sect. (55)

Jacquier's interpretive schema is strongly evident in the tract's opening. The preface of the Flagellum provides in nuce a view of the purpose, methods and argument of the entire tract. The next six chapters go on to define exactly how demons act in the world. Demons always act to deceive humans. They can make false representations to people through the manipulation of material inside a person, or act externally with real bodies. However, even when they appear to the external senses, the bodies in which they appear are not really alive.

The first sentence of the Flagellum reveals that the tract is designed to deal with a concrete situation: the obstacles which are prohibiting the inquisition from prosecuting the fascinarii.
   Flagellum fascinariorum, scilicet hereticorum maleficorum, (56)
   coactus impedimentis inquisitionis officio frequenter occurentibus,
   ego frater Nicolaus Iaquerii, ordinis fratrum praedicatorum
   pusillus, plano stylo facere duxi de divinis scripturis et
   sanctorum doctrinis, per quod flagellum de templo dei, quod est
   ecclesia fidelium, eiciantur quedam perversa dogmata ac stolidae
   assertiones, quibus male suffulti plerique ...

   (praef i) (57)

   [I, brother Nicolaus Jaquerius, most lowly brother of the order of
   preachers, have begun to write the scourge of the bewitchers, that
   is to say of heretical workers of harmful magic (malefici), in a
   plain style from the divine scriptures and the teachings of the
   saints, compelled by the frequent occurrence of impediments to the
   office of the inquisition, so that through this scourge certain
   perverse dogmas and stupid assertions, by which many evil things
   have been introduced, might be thrown out of the temple of God,
   that is, the Church of the faithful ...] (58)

The function of the inquisition is to deal with heresy: in the case of the Flagellum, the hereticalfascinarii or malefici. But the prosecution of this heresy is in some way being hindered by certain 'perversa dogmata ac stolidae assertiones'. In fact, this opening reveals that the tract has two purposes. The first is to drive from the Church those members of the sect of the fascinarii, who, in the disguise of normal Christians, argue that the sect is simply an illusion. The second is to scourge the evil sect of the fascinarii itself. How does the tract plan to undertake this task? Jacquier immediately states the foundational authorities of his argument: scripture and the teachings of the saints. It must be noted that there is a certain irony in Jacquier's claim to do this in plano stylo. This most lowly of brothers professes stylistic simplicity in a crescendo of alliteration ['Flagellum fascinariorum', 'impedimentis inquisitionis', 'officio ... occurentibus', 'praedicatorum pusillus plano'] and an assonantal chiasmus ['divinis scriptures et sanctorum doctrinis'].

The opening of the preface involves a characteristic manipulation of Christian metaphor. The term flagellum (scourge) is used by Jacquier to signify the active function of his text in the world. The language of scourging is biblical, drawn from Christ's cleansing of the temple. (59) By appropriating this language, the text itself takes on the symbolic function of Christ in the world, aligning its author and the office of the inquisition with the person of Christ. For Jacquier, God's divine goodness cannot tolerate the presence of evil inside his temple. The job of the faithful servant and author is to give an earthly form to Christ's biblical body, re-presenting it for the good of all believers. The text-as-scourge motif is most directly articulated in the final sentence of the preface, unifying the text's introduction. The text itself mirrors the form of a scourge:
   ... hoc opusculum aggressus sum, quod per quasdam particulas, quasi
   per quedam capitula distinguere curavi, ex quibus velut quibusdam
   funiculis factum et compositum resultet flagellum fascineriorum.

   (praef. v)

   [I have undertaken this little work, which I have taken care to
   divide into certain sections, as though into certain chapters, so
   that from these, just as if made and arranged out of certain knots,
   the scourge of the fascinarii might result.]

The historical-theological method of the text is highlighted both by its structural form and by this manipulation of biblical imagery to define the text's immediate social role.

The image of the inquisitor tying a cord of argument, with chapters forming the knots, in order to drive heresy from the Church of the faithful, reveals a particular idea of temporality which informs the argument method employed throughout the tract. The image is given meaning by its relation to divine scripture--the present historical situation is a recapitulation of biblical narrative. The joining of two times in a single metaphoric-narrative structure creates a mutually reinforcing truth. Jacquier's scourge is Christ's scourge; Christ's scourge is Jacquier's scourge. Time becomes telescoped into a single narrative moment.

Although this way of viewing time is always refracted through the person of Christ, the opening passage also shows how biblical narratives are made to participate in this same structure of temporal overlay. The temple of God is the Church of the faithful. The most important implication of this direct symbolic relation is that a variety of Old Testament sources become narrative resources for understanding, interpreting, and producing the contemporary phenomenon of thefascinarii and its relation to the Church. (60)

Armed with these resources--a view of the flagellum as an instrument of God in a contemporary heretical situation, the authority of scripture and the doctrine of the Church, and the temporal unification of biblical narratives with contemporary events--we are ready to discover exactly what these fascinarii are. The word itself is derived from the classical Latin fascino, to cast a spell, andfascinum, an evil spell or bewitchment. (61) Why Jacquier adopted this name is unclear--to my knowledge it does not appear elsewhere in the early literature of witchcraft. (62) But the meaning given to the word is not unclear. Thefascinarii are 'malefici', workers of harmful magic ['maleficia], and they are 'haeretici', heretics. (63) It is the second of these definitions which is quickly elaborated in the preface. The founders of the sect are demons, who turn men upside down ['subvertunt'], to convert them to demon worship. This is the heresy: the fascinarii do not worship God, but demons. The fascinarii attend a synagogue, make offerings to demons, and deny the catholic faith. (64)

But--here is the crux--many assert that the fascinarii do not attend the synagogue while they are awake and in the real world, but that their experiences are brought about by the fantastical delusion of demons, interiorly, while the fascinarii are asleep. (65) According to Jacquier, those who argue that the synagogue is an illusion draw on the Canon Episcopi. From this position, the Canon's supporters go on to assert that demons are not given the power to carry out maleficia at the invocation of thefascinarii. They find it marvellous that a great, good, and all-powerful God could allow such maleficia. If demons did possess such great power they would quickly destroy all humankind. The Canon's supporters conclude, therefore, that demons cannot have the power to perform such maleficia. Following from the belief that the sect is an illusion, Jacquier's opponents complete their obstruction of the inquisition by arguing that the evidence of people charged with belonging to the sect is inadmissible, since the accomplices identified may only be demonically supplied illusions. The Flagellum is designed by Jacquier to whip each of these false beliefs out of the temple of God, the Church.

The first chapter of the Flagellum begins this task by focusing squarely on the problem of demonic illusion: 'Therefore, because it is fitting to speak about illusions, the first task is to see what an illusion is.' (66) Various meanings of the verb illudere are discussed, but Jacquier limits himself to one: those who delude with an evil intent, to bring about evil through false representations of words or things. (67) Evil of this kind is given a present, future, and past reference through Jacquier's use of biblical material. (68) Christ speaks directly to the Church to warn against such deceivers, who are like false prophets, wolves in sheep's clothing. (69) The words of the gospel, in the present imperative ['attendite'], speak directly to the modern Church. According to II Peter, deceivers ['illusores'] will also appear in the last days ['novissimis diebus']. (70) This future reference creates a sense of historical distance between the time of the epistle and the time when the prophecy is fulfilled, that is, the fifteenth-century rise of the fascinarii. In this way, the gospel speaks directly, whereas the epistle speaks prophetically and directly. There is both temporal immediacy and temporal distance between the world of scripture and the fifteenth century. The final scriptural material used by Jacquier to open the tract comes from Genesis 3. 13: the serpent deceives Eve and she eats. The problem of demonic illusion is present in the beginning. The relation between humankind and the serpent is set in train at the beginning of time, and will remain until the arrival of the novissimae dies. This is both a temporal extension from beginning to end, and a focusing of human temporal experience into the narrative of the Fall.

Having defined the question of demonic illusion within the history of salvation, Jacquier moves to define the ways in which demons can operate. (71) Firstly, demons can act by administering interior phantasms to sleeping people. These people think that they do things which they do not really do. But if these illusions happen, they occur through manipulating material inside the bodies of the deluded. (72) Dreams come about through the movement of spirit and blood to form representations of things already experienced. That is, even in the case of deluded ideas of flight in sleep, demons operate on material substance. On this point, Jacquier follows the scholastic adoption of Aristotle's somatic theory of dreams. (73) This mode of deception is that described in the Canon Episcopi. Those women who believe that they ride on beasts with Diana or Herodias are deluded by such interior apparitions.

In addition to the authority of scripture and scholastic Aristotelianism, the Flagellum also relies on the authority of liturgy. To guard against the carnal pollution of wet dreams brought about by demonic manipulation of blood and spirit, monks are accustomed to protect themselves with prayer, like the famous prayer of St Gregory, Te lucis ante terminum. (74) The liturgical life of the Church is a formative source of material for understanding and acting in the world. For example, a little later in the tract Jacquier points out that anyone who frequently listens to the Mass will know from the Gospel that demons are able to cause sickness. (75) Or again, when the petition 'deliver us from evil' is said as part of the Lord's Prayer, it is proper to see this as referring to demonic evil. (76) Prayer is not just a means of relating to God, but a way of comprehending the world.

Returning to the question of how demons deceive, the third chapter of the Flagellum moves from definitely unreal illusions experienced internally, to those which happen through the real experiences of the exterior senses. (77) The role of the senses limits the meaning of the word realiter to things which can be directly experienced by the conscious body, those things which happen perceptibilite. (78) So, the Devil appeared to Christ during his temptation in the wilderness not as a spiritual being but as a being perceptible to his external bodily senses. (79) Likewise, a demon appeared sensibly to St Margaret, in the form of a man in chains. (80) But, through the intervention of the Holy Spirit, she realized it was a demon and cast it to the ground, trampling its head beneath her feet. When she released her foot, the demon 'vanished like smoke'. (81)

The exemplum of St Margaret is important for understanding Jacquier's approach on a number of levels. Embedded within Jacquier's text, it serves to prove the point about the bodily reality of demonic appearance--something cannot be imaginary if you can put your foot on it. But it also points forward to the next step in Jacquier's argument: when demons assume a bodily form, that form is used to deceive. The deceptive body in Margaret's exemplum is revealed to be insubstantial. When named and subdued, the demonic body dissolves. The way that the demon's body is revealed to be demonic, however, has nothing to do with the Saint's own knowledge. It is a revelation 'per spiritum. (82) This is not always the case. Just as God can be the source of knowledge concerning a demonic body, with his permission ['deo permittente'] humans can also remain deceived. (83) This is demonstrated by the exempla of Saul and the witch of Endor, and the apostate Theophilus who sold his soul to the Devil for career advancement. (84)

This section of the tract includes sixteen pages with numerous exempla to prove the external and real presence of demonic bodies. A passage at the end of the fourth chapter clarifies the reason for this emphasis:
   Supradictae autem narrationes diversarum apparitionum, quae per
   Daemones factae sunt, ad sensum exteriorum, diversis hominibus, tam
   iustis, quam perversis, imo et ipsi domino Iesu Christo, idcirco
   hic aliquantulum diffuse introductae sunt, ut evidentius appareat,
   imo et error manifestus et periculosis illorum, qui nimis
   attendentes ad ea, quae de illusionibus interioribus hominum
   dicuntur illo cap. Episcopi supraalligato. Putant autem male
   asserunt quod demones non apparent hominibus ad sensus exteriores,
   quin potius, omnia huiusmodi demonum facta circa homines asserunt
   esse illusoria velut quaedam somnia.

   (pp. 24-25)

   [However, the aforesaid stories of different apparitions, which
   were fashioned by demons for the exterior sense of different
   people, as much for the just as for the perverse, and even for the
   Lord Jesus Christ himself, are introduced here somewhat diffusely.
   This is done in order that it may appear evident how manifest and
   dangerous is the error of those who pay too much attention to those
   things which are talked about concerning the interior delusions of
   men in the aforementioned Canon Episcopi. For they think, but they
   assert badly, that demons do not appear to men to the exterior
   senses, and, what is more, they assert that all such deeds of
   demons among men are illusions as in dreams.]

The target of this extensive material on demonic bodies is those who hold to the Canon Episcopi, asserting that demons only act 'per interiores illusiones et fantasticas apparitiones'.

According to Jacquier, this opinion is demonically inspired and intended to protect the sect of the fascinarii. Having moved through biblical and narrative material from saints' lives and other legends, Jacquier demonstrates this last point through a contemporary exemplum which is of great structural importance to his argument, that of William Adeline. (85) Adeline was accused of preaching that the witches' Sabbath did not really occur. When tried, however, Adeline recanted, testifying that the Devil had told him to preach against the reality of the sect's meetings during his participation in just such a Sabbath. In his account of the Sabbath, Adeline stated that he saw the Devil, worshipped him in the form of a man or a goat, and denied Christ, the catholic faith, the blessed Virgin and the Cross. (86) The very real Sabbath was matched by a very real trial. Not only does Jacquier give William's name and title, the trial is dated to 12 December 1453, and is located in the Chapel of the Bishop of Evreux. (87) Adeline's confession was given freely ['sponte'] and was recorded on a certain leaf of paper ['quondam schedulam'], which, prostrate and weeping, he showed to the court. This written proof contained the confession that he had preached that the sect was nothing but an illusion. Alongside names, dates, places, and the authoritative written testimony stamped with judicial authority ['coram iudicibus fidei'], Jacquier adds a further proof:
   Hunc Magistrum Guilhelmum ego qui haec scribo novi et
   frequentissime vidi antequam esset de hoc crimine suspectus.

   (p. 27)

   [I, who am writing this, knew and saw this Master William very
   frequently before he was suspected of this crime.]

Jacquier's proof is entirely consistent with the method of proof for the existence of the Sabbath and the truth of Adeline's confession. Jacquier has seen this man (vidi) and he has re-embodied the text of Adeline's schedulam by presenting it almost verbatim in his own written text ['ego qui haec scribo']. The rare use of first-person pronoun and first-person verb underscores the immediacy of the exemplum. These complementary methods reveal an insistence on the reality of the text ['schedulam', 'ego scribo'] which embodies the reality of the sect. This logic applies both to the scene in the Bishop's palace described in the passage, and to the text of the Flagellum itself.

To refine further the ways in which demons appear to the exterior senses, Jacquier sets forth the three ways in which demons interact with humans. (88) First, demons appear in something naturally made by God. For this to happen, demons require God's permission. Second, demons can appear through something made by humans. This is the way in which demons inhabit humanly constructed idols, or participate in necromancy or other magical arts. (89) Third, demons can appear through things made by demons themselves. These forms made by demons are not made by nature or humans. The modern reader assumes that these demonic constructions must be supernatural. These forms are, however, made from 'materia elementalis' (elemental material) and with the demons' 'potestas naturalis' (natural power), which they retained after the Fall. For Jacquier, demons cannot create without preexisting material or outside nature. (90)

The underlying point is that demonic action must always be subject to God's permission. The importance of divine permission is discussed by Jacquier at great length later in the Flagellum. But it is worthwhile noting how often divine permission is expressed in the form of an ablative absolute. Permittente Deo (literally, 'with God permitting) makes a regular appearance alongside demonic action, right from the beginning of the tract. This form of expressing divine permission allows God to remain grammatically independent of parts of the sentence which deal directly with demonic action. The form of the ablative absolute allows God's permission to remain relatively uninvolved with demonic perversion. (91)

Even if demons can assume bodies with divine permission, their bodies are still deceptive. The chief deception of the demonic body is that it appears to be alive. (92) But a demon does not, like a soul, give a body life; instead it commandeers the body, like a sailor moving a ship. (93) In this way, a demonic body is real in the sense that it appears to the senses, but not real in the sense that it is not alive. This argument is standard demonology and derived chiefly from Augustine and Aquinas. (94) Its inclusion in the Flagellum preserves orthodox catholic doctrine about God's unique role as the creator of life. To make this clear, Jacquier includes a brief summary of Aquinas' discussion of the generation of Genesis's race of Giants. (95) Giants seem, at first, to be prime examples of a demonic creation of life. But Aquinas proves that they are actually created by human semen collected by demons in male and female form.

For Jacquier, the relationship between demonic bodies and the creation of life is not simply a cerebral puzzle. It is a pressing reality for the inquisition because of the confessions made by the fascinarii that they have sex with demons at their synagogue. Walter Stephens is undoubtedly correct to argue that this evidence of demonic sex is being used to demonstrate the bodily reality of demons. (96) Jacquier underscores the link by using the adverbs veraciter, realiter, and corporaliter about sex with demons, and by claiming that such sex is physically totally exhausting. (97) In the context of Jacquier's argument, this evidence of bodily reality through real sex is, to a far greater extent than Stephens's account suggests, part of a system of mutual reinforcement. Demonic sex is proof of demonic bodily reality, but the demonic bodily reality testified to by Aquinas is also proof of the bodily reality of demonic sex. This proof concludes the Flagellum's discussion of the nature of demonic illusions and lays the foundation for the assault on the Canon Episcopi mounted in the following chapters (7-9). (98)

Jacquier's arguments about illusion, deception, distorted experience, and bodily reality resonate strongly with a problematic that structures many of the narratives in the popular collection of courtly tales, the Cent Nouvelle Nouvelles (One Hundred New Tales), written for the Burgundian court sometime between 1456 and 1461. (99) This collection of courtly love tales seems an unusual place to find connections with ecclesiastical discourse on reality and illusion, but the resonances between the fourteenth tale of the Nouvelles and the Flagellum show how this narrative material appeared across genre boundaries. Generic boundaries are in any case fluid for the Nouvelles, which draw their material both from the secular fabliaux tradition and from collections of preaching exempla like that used in the Dominican preaching tradition.

While the influence of Dominican thought on the cultural life of the Burgundian court has not yet been charted in detail, the Duke of Burgundy chose his confessors from the Dominican order and promoted its reform. (100) The Dominican Chapter General was held in Burgundian territory at Nimegue in 1459. Enguerrand Signart, confessor to the future Charles the Bold, was probably one of the Dominican inquisitors involved with the prosecution of William Adeline in 1453. (101) Jacquier's embassies for Philip show his direct link to the court, although the extent of his interactions remains unclear. But regardless of any direct links between Jacquier and the Cent Nouvelle Nouvelles, the two texts reveal a set of common concerns.

The fourteenth tale of the Nouvelles tells the story of a lustful hermit who wishes to sleep with the beautiful daughter of a nearby widow. He comes to the widow's house at night, bores a hole in its wall and speaks through a hollow stick into her ear. He declares himself to be an angel of the Lord sent to announce that her daughter is to bear the hermit a son who will become pope and reunite and reform the Church. The woman is deceived, and goes to visit the hermit with her daughter. The hermit feigns piety and pretends to be deeply troubled by the woman's tale, asking: 'does it really seem to you that the tale you tell is not a mere hallucination or illusion?' (102) The woman replies: 'I heard the voice ... as clearly as I hear yours now, father. You can be sure that I was not asleep.' The hermit suggests that they both sleep on it, since 'The Devil, who is envious of others, certainly works a myriad of ruses, by transforming himself into an angel of light.' The woman returns home seeking verification of her auditory hallucination. The hermit repeats his message the next night, and again cries off the next day, seeking a definitive third visitation. The whole procedure is repeated, and the woman again takes her daughter to visit the hermit. Having (supposedly) tested the veracity of the vision, the monk leads the daughter into the chapel, where they pray and he delivers a 'short sermon on the topic of the dreams, visions, apparitions, and revelations which often visit people'. The hermit and the daughter, still in the chapel, disrobe and have sex. The relationship continues until the girl falls pregnant. She gives birth to a daughter, dashing the hopes of the mother, forcing the hermit to flee, and dishonouring the girl.

The story's anti-clerical satire is clear. The hermit uses theological subtlety to fulfil his sexual desires. He first manipulates the tradition of holy dreams. He then ironically tests his own deception. Like other fifteenthcentury theorists of visions, he uses the proof text that the Devil appears as an angel of light to question the veracity of the vision. (103) The tale therefore forms part of, and comments on, the intense debate about how to test visions and discern spirits which continued throughout the fifteenth century, a debate in which the Flagellum also participates. (104) To underline the irony of the situation, the hermit's sermon is on precisely the subject debated in these texts: 'dreams, visions, apparitions, and revelations'.

Beyond the satire, which itself uses cultural plots shared between the Flagellum and the world of the Burgundian court, the Nouvelle relies heavily on reading conventions central to the argument of the Flagellum. Consider, first, the treatment of the widow. Initially, she seems a candidate for the classic argument of the Canon Episcopi, since she seems deluded by the interior operation of demons. It is clear to the reader, however, that she has in fact experienced a 'real', though deceptive, vision. This is one of the models of diabolical deception explored by Jacquier in the Flagellum: the manipulation of the woman involves a real body (that of the hermit) acting externally on the body of the woman. This is, then, not a simple replication of the Canon Episcopi, a fact made clear by her statement (which the reader recognizes as true) that she 'was not asleep' when she experienced the vision.

Within the tale, deceiver and deceived come to live in a world almost completely determined by the deception initiated by the hermit. In this way, the hermit is equivalent to the Devil, or demon, in Jacquier's scheme. The deception of the tale is entirely physical and happens in the 'real' world. The bodily nature of the deception is exemplified by the hermit's sex with the daughter--the proof of bodily reality used in the Flagellum. Given the structural role of the hermit, who stands in the place usually reserved for the Devil in stories of the same narrative type in both the Flagellum and the exempla tradition, and his strong textual association with the Devil, it is not unwarranted to see the tale as a story about sex with a devil. Concern for the 'real world' and bodily reality is further reflected in the verisimilitude of the tale's presentation. The 'reality-effect' of the text is created by the tale's being placed in the mouths of real members of the Burgundian Court, and enhanced by its situation in a particular time and place ['in the duchy of Burgundy', 'not long ago'], much like the verisimilitude with which Jacquier endows Adeline's confession. (105) Such stylistic devices are a feature of fifteenth-century French literature, including many of the Nouvelles. (106)

The importance of the reader and author knowing the hermit's deception is another feature of narration which ties the fourteenth tale to the narrative logics of the Flagellum. Clarity of vision is provided outside the tale, in the person of the reader who knows from the beginning that the hermit is 'clothed with the mantle of hypocrisy'. A clear example of this mode of reading is given when the hermit talks to the widow about the possibility that her vision was a deception: 'The Devil, who is envious of others, certainly works a myriad of ruses, by transforming himself into an angel of light.' The narrative interest or enjoyment for the reader is that this sentence means one thing within the world of the narrative, and another for the reader, who realizes that even in speaking the 'true' words, the hermit is himself embodying the Devil whom he is supposedly attempting to avoid. The reader sees through the multiple layers of deception, figuratively disrobing the hermit of his mantle of hypocrisy. This view of the whole narrative structure, which dispels the demonically spun shadows of deception, is precisely that view adopted by the Flagellum. It is possible to see through the deceptions of the Devil--clever and intricate though they are. In so doing, the reader also sees through the fleshly desires which the Devil uses as enticements to sin, those desires which form the initial narrative condition of the Nouvelle.

As if to make this point bodily, the moment at which the 'Devil' sets in train the destruction of his illusory world is when the hermit becomes naked. As in Jacquier's narratives, sex epitomizes the 'real' bodily world, and the Devil, when unmasked and made manifest as illusion, disappears. It is here that the hermit sows the seed of his own downfall. By fully entering the 'real', fleshly, bodily world figured by sex, the hermit's realm of deception can no longer remain self-sufficient. So long as it is grounded in immaterial verbal manipulation, the deception of the Devil can stand. When embodied in the physical, natural world, the hermit's construction comes crashing down with the objective sexual difference between the promised male child destined to become pope, and the real body of his daughter. At this point, the hermit flees the country and vanishes from the tale.

This comparison of the Nouvelle and the Flagellum reveals a common cultural structure available in late medieval culture across various boundaries of cultural production. The Nouvelle's schema provides the reader outside the world of the text with a clear and coherent vision of the tale in toto, created by a narrator who already knows the story. The author of the Flagellum, too, can see through the webs of deception spun by the fascinarii and their diabolical masters, and attempts to persuade the reader to do the same. The knowledge of deception is possible through divine revelation, the participation of new events in biblical patterns, and the physical location and verification of the crimes of the fascinarii. In applying these patterns of interpretation, the Flagellum attempts to strip the sect of its 'mantle of hypocrisy', expose it to the light of truth, and scourge it from the temple of God.

Further work remains to be done on the text of Jacquier's Flagellum. This brief survey of his opening arguments has only begun to touch on the ways in which Jacquier's logic is inflected by traditional late medieval structures of metaphor, wider philosophical problems, and the concerns of the Dominican reform movement. By situating witchcraft texts like Jacquier's alongside a broader late medieval cultural and intellectual history, the history of witchcraft can be integrated into the structures of meaning which were used and adapted by people across a variety of genres and cultural forms in the fifteenth century. And this integration, in turn, shows the variety of ways in which witchcraft functioned to forge new meanings and to resolve and restate intellectual and cultural patterns and problems.

School of History

Queen Mary, University of London *

* This essay is based on research conducted towards an MA completed at the University of Melbourne in 2010. I would like to thank Prof. Charles Zika and Dr Megan CassidyWelch for their support and advice, and Prof. Miri Rubin and the anonymous reviewers for suggesting subsequent improvements.

(1) Martine Ostorero, 'Le diable au sabbat: litterature demonologique et sorcellerie (1440-1460)' (unpublished doctoral thesis, Universite de Lausanne, 2008), pp. 119-27;Thomas Kaeppeli, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum medii aevi, 3 vols (Rome: Ad. S. Sabinae, 1980), iii, pp. 174-75; Emile van Balberghe, Les Manuscrits medievaux de l'abbaye de Parc (Brussels: Ferraton, 1992), pp. 38, 132-34. Citations from the Flagellum are from the generally reliable and more accessible 1581 Frankfurt am Main (Nicolaus Bassaeus) print edition.

(2) The meetings are generally termed synagogues by Jacquier. On the terms, see Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 53-54. Important recent studies of the origins of this new witchsect are Kathrin Utz Tremp, Von der Haresie zur Hexerei: "wirkliche" und imaginare Sekten im Spatmittelalter (Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 2008); and Michael D. Bailey, 'From Sorcery to Witchcraft: Clerical Conceptions of Magic in the Later Middle Ages', Speculum, 76 (2001), 960-90.

(3) Quellen und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Hexenwahns und der Hexenverfolgung im Mittelalter (Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1901). Excerpts of the Flagellum derived from Hansen are translated into Italian in S. Abbiati, A. Agnoletto, and M. R. Lazzati, La Stregoneria: diavoli, streghe, inquisitori dal Trecento al Settecento (Milan: Arnoldo Mondadori, 1984), pp. 71-78.

(4) Brian P. Levack, 'Crime and the Law', in Witchcraft Historiography, eds J. Barry and O. Davies (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007), pp. 146-63 (p. 147); Werner Tschacher, Der Formicarius des Johannes Nider von 1437/38: Studien zu den Anfangen der europaischen Hexenverfolgungen im Spatmittelalter (Aachen: Shaker, 2000), pp. 1-2.

(5) A similar selection was made in Henry Charles Lea, A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, 3 vols (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1888; repr. New York: Russell and Russell, 1955), iii, pp. 497, 515.

(6) 'Der Flug durch die Luft zwischen Illusionstheorie und Realitatsbeweis: Studien zum sog. Kanon Episcopi und zum Hexenflug', Zeitschrift des Savigny-Stftungfur Rechtsgeschichte, 85 (1999), 225-76.

(7) Walter Stephens, Demon Lovers: Witchcraft, Sex and the Crisis of Belief (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002).

(8) Stephens, pp. 10, 422.

(9) Stephens, pp. 134-36.

(10) Stephens, p. 21.

(11) See for example Stephens' argument that witchcraft theorists like Jacquier 'did not, not even usually' believe that their claims about demonic interaction 'corresponded to reality' (p. 10).

(12) According to Clark, some people actually 'believed in witchcraft' and 'thought that their beliefs corresponded to reality' (Thinking with Demons: The Idea of Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), p. 10). Quentin Skinner enunciates a principle very like that applied by Clark: 'If the people we are studying assert that there are witches in league with the devil we must begin by assuming that this is exactly what they believe'. This helps to avoid explanations which, when they uncover something which seems 'absurd', resort to the 'interpretive charity' of making the absurdity be the sign of, for example, Freudian displacement ('A Reply to my Critics', in Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics, ed. James Tully (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988), pp. 231-88 (pp. 246-47)). 'Interpretive charity' of the Freudian kind is the underlying structure of Stephens's analysis (see Stephens, p. 100). The argument is between a 'hermeneutic of suspicion' and a 'hermeneutic of belief', and is not easily resolved without situating Jacquier's text within various late medieval cultural structures. See Paul Ricoeur, Freud and Philosophy; an Essay on Interpretation, The Terry Lectures (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970).

(13) Martine Ostorero, Kathrin Utz Tremp, and Agostino Paravicini Bagliani, L'imaginaire du sabbat: edition critique des textes les plus anciens, 1430 c.-1440 c. (Lausanne: Universite de Lausanne Section d'Histoire Faculte des Lettres, 1999), p. 15.

(14) The title Flagellum maleficorum appears only in later print editions, suggesting that it may have been adopted because of the influence of Jacquier's Flagellum. There is some evidence that Marmor knew Jacquier's tract (Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 147, 460).

(15) Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 4.

(16) Ostorero, Utz Tremp, and Paravicini Bagliani, L'imaginaire.

(17) For accounts of Jacquier's career, see Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 97-116; Michael D. Bailey, 'A Sabbat of Demonologists: Basel, 1431-1440', Historian, 65 (2003), 1375-96 (pp. 1392-93); Kaeppeli, Scriptores, pp. 172-75; Hansen, Quellen, pp. 133-34; Jacobus Quetif and Jacobus Echard, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum, 2 vols (Paris, 1719), i, pp. 847-48.

(18) H. Dannenbauer and others, eds, Concilium Basiliense: Studien und Quellen zur Geschichte des Concils von Basel, 8 vols (Basel: Helbing und Lichtenhahn, 1896-1936), ii, p. 316. On Jacquier at the Council, see also ibid., vi, pp. 475, 498, 503; and Franz Egger, Beitrage zur Geschichte des Predigerordens: die Reform des Basler Konvents (1429) und die Stellung des Ordens am Basler Konzil, 1431-1448 (Bern: Lang, 1991), pp. 122, 126, 129.

(19) Aeneas Sylvius Piccolominus, De gestis concilii Basiliensis commentariorum, eds Denys Hay and W. K. Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967), pp. 16-17, 94-95. Both Hay and Smith and Ostorero identify this friar as Jacquier (Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 98).

(20) Aeneas Sylvius Piccolominus, pp. 32-33. For the resolutions, see ibid., pp. 20-21.

(21) Concilium Basiliense, p. 475.

(22) Concilium Basiliense, pp. 498, 503.

(23) Concilium Basiliense, pp. 115-16.

(24) Jacquier exhibited a document of protest, but was refused an audience. He then left the Council (Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 99). The text of Jacquier's document is in Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 539-40.

(25) For a summary of the De calcatione, see Martine Ostorero, 'Un Predicateur au cachot: Guillaume Adeline et le sabbat', Medievales, 44 (2003), 73-96. On dating the De calcatione, see Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 105.

(26) For example, Bruxelles, Biliotheque royale, MS 733-41. For the most recent list of manuscripts, see Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 120, 127.

(27) On manuscripts and the wider European circulation of the Flagellum, see Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 120-26.

(28) Van Balberghe, Les Manuscrits medievaux, p. 133. On the Abbey of Parc's interest in demonology, see Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 92.

(29) Helmut Weigel and Henny Gruneisen, eds, Deutsche Reichstagsakten (Gottingen, 1969), XIX/I, pp. 104, 144; Nicolae Iorga, Notes et extraits pour servir a l'histoire de croisades au XVe siecle, 6 vols (Paris/Bucharest: E. Leroux, 1899-1916), iii (1902), pp. 342-45; Heribert Muller, Kreuzzugsplane und Kreuzzugspolitik des Herzogs Philipp des Guten von Burgund (Gottingen: Vandenhoek und Ruprecht, 1993), p. 54; Jacques Paviot, Les Ducs de Bourgogne, la croisade et l'Orient (fin XlVe siecle-XVe siecle) (Paris: Presses de l'Universite de Paris-Sorbonne, 2003), pp. 123, 125-26.

(30) Deutsche Reichstagsakten, p. 412; Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 102-03; Muller, p. 80; Paviot, pp. 139, 145; Yvonne Lacaze, 'Philippe le Bon et les terres d'Empire', Annales de Bourgogne, 36 (1964), 81-121 (p. 90).

(31) M.-H. Laurent, Il Processo Castellano, vol. IX, Fontes Vitae Catharinae Senesis Historici (Siena: Universita di Siena, 1942), LXXIII, pp. 486-88.

(32) Gilbert de la Haye, 'Biblioteca Belgo-Dominicana: Notice sur Nicolas Jacquier', reproduced in Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 541-43.

(33) Bruxelles, Bibliotheque royale MS 11441-43, fols 1-18; Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 114.

(34) Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 115; Quetif and Echard, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum, p. 848.

(35) Quetif and Echard, p. 848; A. De Meyer, La Congregation de Hollande ou la reform dominicaine en territoire bourguignon (Liege: Imprimerie Soledi, 1946), p. 15; Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 115.

(36) De Meyer, pp. xxiv-xxvii; Franck Mercier, La Vauderie d'Arras: une chasse aux sorcieres a l'automne du moyen age (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2006), pp. 66-67; Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 108.

(37) De Meyer, pp. xxviii-xxix.

(38) Quetif and Echard, p. 848; Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 107. Jacquier was possibly a signatory to reforms of the Dominican Vicars General and fathers of the Congregation of Holland in Harlem in 1465. De Meyer, pp. 6-16.

(39) Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 348; De Meyer, p. xxxiii.

(40) For editions of these texts, see Ostorero, Utz Tremp, and Paravicini Bagliani, L'imaginaire. See also Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 13-40. On early trials, see Hansen, Quellen, pp. 459- 66; Martine Ostorero, Folatrer avec les demons: Sabbat et chasse aux sorciers a Vevey (1448) (Lausanne: Section d'histoire, Faculte des lettres, Universite de Lausanne, 1995); Arno Borst, 'The Origins of the Witch-Craze in the Alps', in Medieval Worlds: Barbarians, Heretics, and Artists in the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991). On the importance of the Council of Basel and for a full bibliography on the subject, see Bailey, 'A Sabbat of Demonologists'; also Michael D. Bailey, Battling Demons: Witchcraft, Heresy, and Reform in the Late Middle Ages (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003).

(41) Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 434-35; Tschacher, 'Der Flug durch die Luft', pp. 261-62. On Nider and the Formicarius, see Tschacher, Der Formicarius; and Bailey, Battling Demons, particularly pp. 11-53.

(42) Ostorero, Utz Tremp, and Paravicini Bagliani, pp. 278-99, 321-23; Tschacher, 'Der Flug durch die Luft', p. 262; Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 433.

(43) Ostorero argues for a date some time in the 1450s. See 'Le diable', pp. 41-70, 441-44; and Ostorero, Utz Tremp, and Paravicini Bagliani, L'imaginaire, pp. 439-508.

(44) Tschacher, 'Der Flug durch die Luft'; Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 412-18; Alan Charles Kors and Edward Peters, Witchcraft in Europe, 400-1700: A Documentary History, 2nd edn (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001), pp. 60-63.

(45) Causa 26 q. 5 c. 12. On Gratian, see Kors and Peters, pp. 72-77.

(46) Kors and Peters, p. 62. Hansen, Quellen, pp. 38-39.

(47) On the following, see Tschacher, 'Der Flug durch die Luft', pp. 264-68; and Siegfried Leutenbauer, Hexerei- und Zaubereidelikt in der Literatur von 1450 bis 1550 (Berlin: J. Schweizer, 1972), pp. 26-28.

(48) Hansen, pp. 105-09; Ostorero,'Le diable', pp. 435-38; Bailey,'A Sabbat of Demonologists', pp. 1393-94; Stephens, Demon Lovers, pp. 146-54.

(49) Hansen, p. 107.

(50) Hansen, pp. 112-18; Ostorero,'Le diable', pp. 455-58; Bailey,'A Sabbat of Demonologists', p. 1393; Edward Peters, The Magician, theWitch, and the Law (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978), pp. 149-50.

(51) Hansen, pp. 124-30. On dating Vinet's tract, see Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 91. The tract was not widely known until a print edition appeared in 1483.

(52) Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 185-219, 445-46.

(53) The relationship between Jaquier and Torquemada is discussed in Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 455-58.

(54) This structural principle is also recognized by Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 118-19.

(55) Chapter 28 does not appear in some manuscripts, but is present in both Brussels manuscripts. Compare Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 126.

(56) The word maleficorum is not present in the 1581 edition, but appears in both Brussels manuscripts.

(57) I use the latest edition of the preface in Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 549-52.

(58) Unless otherwise noted, translations are my own. I have attempted to translate as comprehensibly as possible while remaining literal. This often alters the emphasis of Jacquier's Latin, for example here, where the original emphasis is placed on Flagellum, not the authorship of the tract.

(59) Compare John 2. 13-22.

(60) Compare Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, trans. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall (New York: Continuum, 1989), pp. 306-10; Peters, The Magician, the Witch, and the Law, pp. 147-48.

(61) OLD s.vv. fascino and fascinum. There is some evidence that these words are related to the evil eye. Fascinatio as bewitching through the eyes appears in some classical texts (e.g. Aeneid 3. 103) and seems to be implied by the Vulgate s use of the verb fascino at Galatians 3. 1. Jean Vinet's Tractatus contra demonum invocatores uses the verb with something of this connotation. See Hansen, Quellen, p. 129. However, there is no mention of the evil eye in Jacquier's tract, and the classical references are not unanimous in attributing the term to ocular magic (e.g. Catullus 7. 12). See Tschacher, 'Der Flug durch die Luft', p. 268.

(62) On this point I am indebted to advice from Prof. Michael Bailey, Prof. Dr Werner Tschacher, and particularly Dr Ostorero. Dr Ostorero has found two uses of fascinarius or derivatives in the fifteenth century, both of which post-date the Flagellum: the first in a manuscript of the Vauderye de Lyonois, Trier, Stadtbibliothek, MS 613, fol. 50v; the second in a manuscript of Giordano da Bergamo's Questio de strigis, Paris, Bibliotheque nationale de France, MS lat. 3446. A survey of early literature on witchcraft shows that the verb fascino is not uncommon. A Spanish tract from around 1411 is entitled Tratado de aojamiento ofascinologia (Hansen, p. 71). Pope Eugenius IV used infascino in 1437 in describing the actions of a demon worshipping sect (Hansen, p. 17). It is possible that the term is a Latin rendering of a French vernacular word. In the Champion des Dames, members of the sect are called Faicturieres, which exists in Provencal as fachurier and fachurar. This word is given Latin form in the Quintus liber fachureriorum, a book containing Claude Tholossan's early tract against the witch sect, Ut magorum et maleficiorum errors (Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 48-52; also Paravy, 'A propos de la genese', p. 333; Ostorero, Utz Tremp, and Paravicini Bagliani, L'imaginaire, pp. 359, 452).

(63) See Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 331-34.

(64) Flagellum, praef. ii. The application of the term 'synagogue' to the meetings of a heretical sect may be evidence of anti-Jewish transferral, or may be apocalyptic language derived from Revelation 2. 9 (Ostorero, 'Le diable', pp. 33-35, 53, 334; Mercier, La Vauderie, p. 71; Ostorero, Utz Tremp, and Paravicini Bagliani, L'imaginaire, pp. 323-27; Carlo Ginzburg, Ecstasies: Deciphering the Witches' Sabbath, trans. Raymond Rosenthal (London: Hutchinson Radius, 1990), pp. 63-86).

(65) Flagellum, praef. ii: 'Asserunt igitur plerique fascinarios ... operatione demonis intantum in somnis esse fantasticis illusionibus deceptos ... praemissa fascinariis vigilantibus non contingunt in rei veritatem, sed solum interiori dormientium illusione.'

(66) Flagellum, p. 1: 'Quoniam igitur de illusionibus loqui opportet, opus est primo videre, quid sit illusio.'

(67) Flagellum, p. 2: ... illudens intendit per falsas rerum vel verborum repraesentationes malum inferre ...'

(68) For the following, see Flagellum, pp. 1-2.

(69) Matthew 7. 15.

(70) II Peter 3. 3.

(71) Flagellum, pp. 3-5.

(72) Flagellum, pp. 3-5.

(73) Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Ia IIae, q. 80 a. 2 resp. Stephen Kruger, Dreaming in the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), pp. 83-122; Jan R. Veenstra, Magic and Divination at the Courts of Burgundy and France: Text and Context of Laurens Pignon's Contre Les Devineurs (1411) (Leiden: Brill, 1998), pp. 176-84; Ostorero, Utz Tremp, and Paravicini Bagliani, L'imaginaire, pp. 222-23.

(74) Flagellum, p. 4: 'Daemonum illusiones solent devotae personae bene regulatae, anti lecti ingressum ad dormiendum devotis orationibus provide se praemunire.'

(75) Flagellum, p. 89.

(76) Flagellum, p. 95.

(77) Flagellum, pp. 5-11.

(78) Compare Flagellum, p. 3: 'Frequenter contigit hominibus dormientibus interius fieri repraesentationes quarundam rerum quas tunc ita existimant se facere quas tamen realiter non faciunt'; p. 5: 'De apparitionibus per quas ... hominibus ... se praesentes exhibent daemones secundum experientiam realem sensuum exteriorum ...'; and p. 6: 'Apparuit itaque Diabolus Christo perceptibiliter non solum secundum sensum visus sed etiam ad sensum auditus.'

(79) Flagellum, p. 6; Matthew 4. 1-11; Luke 4. 1-13.

(80) Flagellum, p. 8; Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum historiale (Douai: 1624; repr. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1964), pp. 514-15.

(81) Flagellum, p. 9: 'ille velut fumus evanuit'.

(82) Flagellum, p. 8.

(83) Flagellum, p. 11.

(84) Flagellum, pp. 11-14. Endor: I Samuel 28. 7-25. Theophilus: Vincent of Beauvais, pp. 840- 41. The 1581 version of the Theophilus story contains a textual problem.

(85) On Adeline, see Ostorero, 'Un Predicateur'.

(86) Flagellum, p. 26: 'Daemonem vidit et coluit apparentem quandoque in forma hominis, quandoque in forma hirci, ubi abnegavit Deum et fidem catholicam beatamque virginem et crucem'.

(87) The date is incorrectly given as September 1453, in the 1581 edition.

(88) Flagellum, pp. 27-30.

(89) This is one of Jacquier's few references to magical practices. For Jacquier, the magical arts are abhorrent to Christians since anyone who practises magic has broken the baptismal vow to renounce the Devil. See Ostorero, 'Le diable', p. 229.

(90) On the Thomist reluctance to split 'natural' and ' supernatural', see John Bossy, 'Met on the Via Moderna', in The Medieval Church: Universities, Heresy, and the Religious Life, eds Peter Biller and Barry Dobson (Woodbridge: Ecclesiastical History Society, 1999), pp. 309-24 (p. 323); Stuart Clark, 'The Rational Witchfinder: Conscience, Demonological Naturalism and Popular Superstitions', in Science, Culture and Popular Belief in Renaissance Europe, eds Stephen Pumphrey, Paulo L. Rossi, and Maurice Slawinski (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1991), pp. 222-48 (pp. 222-27); Clark, Thinking with Demons, pp. 161-78.

(91) Such a clear separation is not fully preserved by Jacquier, but the ablative absolute remains his favoured way of dealing with divine permission.

(92) Flagellum, pp. 30-36.

(93) Flagellum, p. 31: 'non tamen dat vitam vestimento, sed solummodo movet ipsum, sicut et nauta movet navem, non tamen vivificat eam'.

(94) Jacquier's quotations from Augustine are actually directly derived from Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Ia, q. 51 a. 3 sol. ad. 6, in which Aquinas cites Augustine, De Civitate Dei XV 8-9, 23. See also Maaike van der Lugt, Le ver, le demon et la vierge: les theories medievales de la generation extraordinaire (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2004), pp. 238-39.

(95) On the generation of giants, see van der Lugt, pp. 212-23, 278-79.

(96) Stephens, Demon Lovers, especially pp. 58-124.

(97) Flagellum, p. 36: 'cum daemonibus voluptantur carnaliter adeo vehementer quod aliqui ex eis asserunt se postmodum uno vel duobus diebus valde corporaliter fatigatos ...'.

(98) These chapters are considered in my article, 'Crushing the Canon: Nicolas Jacquier's Response to the Canon Episcopi in the Flagellum haereticorum fascinariorum', in Magic, Ritual, and Witchcraft (forthcoming).

(99) Franklin P, Sweetser, ed., Les Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1966). For an English translation, see Judith Bruskin Diner, The One Hundred New Tales (Les Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles) (New York: Garland, 1990). On the dating of the Nouvelles, see Richard Vaughan, Philip the Good: The Apogee of Burgundy (London: Longmans, 1970), p. 158; Diner, pp. xi-xiv; Les Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles, p. xi.

(100) Bailey, 'A Sabbat of Demonologists', p. 1386. For the following, see De Meyer, La Congregation, pp. xxiv-xxvi; Mercier, La Vauderie, pp. 64-67; Andrea G. Pearson, Envisioning Gender in Burgundian Devotional Art, 1350-1530 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), p. 10.

(101) Ostorero, 'Un Predicateur', n. 36.

(102) All translations of the Nouvelle come from Diner, The One Hundred New Tales, pp. 62-66.

(103) II Corinthians 11. 14.

(104) Important contributions include Jean Gerson's two tracts for the Council of Constance, in Paschal Boland, The Concept of Discretio Spiritum in John Gerson's 'De Probatione Spirituum' and 'De Distinctione Verarum Visionum a Falsis' (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America, 1959); and Johannes Nider, Formicarius (Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1971). Nider's Formicarius is so greatly concerned with visions, that a later edition was retitled De visionibus ac revelationibus (Helmstadt, 1692). In his introduction to the 1971 edition, Biedermann incorrectly identifies the De visionibus as an independent work (p. xi). There is a vast literature on late medieval vision and visionaries. See, for example, Barbara Newman, 'What Did It Mean to Say "I Saw"? The Clash between Theory and Practice in Medieval Visionary Culture', Speculum, 80 (2005), 1-43; Dyan Elliott, Proving Women: Female Spirituality and Inquisitional Culture in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004); and Nancy Caciola, Discerning Spirits: Divine and Demonic Possession in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003). In its emphasis on testing visions, the Nouvelle departs significantly from one of its possible models, Decameron IV.2 (Giovanni Boccaccio, The Decameron, trans. Mark Musa and Peter Bondanella (New York: Norton, 1983)). For other versions of the tale, see Pierre Champion, ed., Les Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles (Paris: Droz, 1928), p. xxxv.

(105) Nancy F. Regalado, 'Effet de reel, Effet du reel: Representation and Reference in Villon's Testament', Yale French Studies, 70 (1986), 63-77 (pp. 73-74), derived from Roland Barthes, The Rustle of Language, trans. Richard Howard (NewYork: Hill and Wang, 1986), pp. 141-48.

(106) Diner, The One Hundred New Tales, p. xi.
COPYRIGHT 2011 Australian and New Zealand Association for Medieval and Early Modern Studies
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2011 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Champion, Matthew
Article Type:Critical essay
Geographic Code:4EUUE
Date:Jan 1, 2011
Previous Article:Books received.
Next Article:Turning catholic: Peele's The Battle of Alcazar and Captain Thomas Stukeley.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters