Mind and Heart of the Negotiator 6th

Edition Thompson Test Bank

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://testbankdeal.com/download/mind-and-heart-of-the-negotiator-6th-edition-thom
pson-test-bank/
Mind and Heart of the Negotiator 6th Edition Thompson Test Bank

Chapter 1 – Test Bank – Negotiation: The Mind and Heart 1

MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS

1. Negotiation is best described as:

A. a contest of wills between opposing parties
B. an interpersonal decision-making process necessary whenever people cannot achieve
their objectives single-handedly (p. 2)
C. a third party mediation
D. the process of compromise so as to instigate conflict with one side coming out the victor
2. When it is said that economic forces are a key reason for the importance and relevance of negotiation skills,
what is meant by that?
A. During economic periods of high supply, low demand, negotiators cannot expect to gain much
during a negotiation
B. Skilled negotiators don’t need to take economic forces into account when negotiating
C. Economic pressures and forces mean that negotiators need to know how to operate in
uncertain and ambiguous environments (p.4)
D. The dynamic, changing nature of business means that people must renegotiate their existence in
organizations throughout their careers

3. When negotiators are described as being interdependent, that means people need to know how to:
A. integrate their interests and work together (p. 3)
B. have similar incentive structures
C. be self-sufficient and self-focused
D. develop different norms of communication

4. Regarding some of the major shortcomings that negotiators struggle to overcome, “lose-lose” negotiation
occurs when negotiators:
A. settle for too little by making concessions that are too small
B. leave money on the table because they fail to recognize and exploit opportunities for
mutual gain (p. 5)
C. accept all terms offered by the counterparty
D. do not sign a binding contract

5. When a negotiator rejects a proposal that is demonstrably better than any other option available, this is
called:
A. the agreement bias
B. the winner’s curse
C. walking away from the table or hubris (p. 6)
D. settling for too little

6. Nobel Laureate Herb Simon distinguished optimizing from satisficing. Satisficing is best defined as:
A. helping other people
B. negotiating a slice of the pie that is much larger than your original aspirations
C. settling for something less than you otherwise could have had (p. 7)
D. setting high aspirations

7. Which of the following is a myth that negotiators often hold about negotiation?
A. Whatever is good for one party must be good for the counterparty
B. A good negotiator should always approach a counterparty as if they were of equal status
C. Good negotiators play it safe and do not take risks
D. Good negotiators rely on intuition (p. 8 9-10)
Copyright ©2015 Pearson Education, Inc.

Visit TestBankDeal.com to get complete for all chapters

 Chapter 1 – Test Bank – Negotiation: The Mind and Heart 2

8. Negotiation is a mixed-motive enterprise, which refers to the fact that parties:

A. manage both economic and psychological dimensions
B. have incentives to cooperate as well as compete (p. 8)
C. use both deliberate thought and intuition
D. balance rewards and costs

9. Being a successful negotiator depends on:

A. “outsmarting” the counterparty
B. the counterparty’s lack of preparation
C. experiential learning, feedback, and learning new skills (p. 10)
D. always letting the other party tip their hand first

10. A key reason why business people need negotiation skills is due to the increased specialization of skills. This
skill specialization increases the need for negotiators to understand the motivations behind another’s
behavior because:
A. people are less dependent on each other for project success
B. people are becoming less competitive with one another in the workplace
C. people are more dependent on each other in the workplace (p. 3)
D. managers must customize incentive and punishment structures for all employees

11. Information technology provides special opportunities and challenges for negotiators. One of the main
challenges for negotiators is:
A. disposing of old equipment
B. training employees in new software
C. troubleshooting system security issues
D. working in a culture of 24/7 availability (p. 4)

12. Besides language and currency issues, one of the main challenges that globalization presents for negotiators
is:
A. the tendency of people to see what they want to see when appraising their own performance
B. learning and adjusting to different norms of communication between parties (p. 4)
C. finding housing for employees
D. controlling the economic forces within the country

13. Negotiators who have developed a bargaining style that works only within a narrow subset of the business
world will suffer unless they can:
A. act more competitively
B. act more cooperatively
C. take risks
D. broaden their negotiation skills across businesses, industries, and cultures (p. 5)

14. One of the major shortcomings in negotiation occurs when negotiators make an offer that is too generous
and is immediately accepted by the counterparty. This negotiation trap is called:
A. egocentrism
B. the confirmation bias
C. the winner’s curse (p. 5)
D. the mixed-motive negotiator

15. The tendency for people to view their decision making and negotiation abilities in a way that is flattering or
fulfilling for them is known as:
A. focal points
B. self-reinforcing confidence
C. reactive devaluation
Copyright ©2015 Pearson Education, Inc.
 Chapter 1 – Test Bank – Negotiation: The Mind and Heart 3

D. egocentrism (p. 6)

16. A number of biases affect a negotiator’s ability to negotiate effectively. One of these biases, the confirmation
bias, is best defined as:
A. the tendency of people to see what they want to see when evaluating a situation for
themselves (p. 6)
B. being aware of one’s own incompetence
C. setting high aspirations and attempting to achieve as much as possible
D. settling for something less than what could have been achieved with better effort

17. Why is the human tendency to satisfice over the long run of a negotiation relationship, detrimental?
A. Satisficing creates a competitive negotiation which affects the potential for pie-expansion.
B. The satisficing party settles for a mediocre option, or something less than they could
otherwise have. (p. 7)
C. The satisficing party’s aspirations are too high and therefore they push too aggressively during
negotiation, creating a feeling of enmity with the other’s party.
D. The tendency of a person to see what they want when appraising their performance leads people to
selectively seek information that confirms what they believe is true.

18. What vicious cycle occurs when negotiators are affected by the self-reinforcing incompetence bias?
A. People are unaware of their own incompetence and this lack of skill deprives
negotiators of both the ability and the expertise to know they are not producing
correct responses. (p. 7)
B. The negotiator gets stuck in a cycle of settling for something less that they could have otherwise
negotiated and then feeling animosity towards the other negotiating party.
C. Negotiators are so self-focused that they are unable to empathize with the other party’s interests or
goals
D. A negotiator focuses on the values that are personally important to them but neglects to investigate
the values that are unimportant to them, thus limiting their decision making abilities.

19. With regard to negotiation style, truly effective negotiators are neither tough or soft, but rather they:
A. are friendly
B. are principled (p. 8)
C. rely on intuition
D. are dignified

20. Negotiation experience in the absence of _______, is largely ineffective at improving negotiation skills.
A. optimism
B. successful outcomes
C. high profile parties
D. diagnostic feedback (p. 9)

21. Effective negotiation involves all except which of the following?

A. Deliberate planning
B. Thoughtful preparation
C. Use of a “gut feeling” or intuition (p. 9-10)
D. Systematic reasoning

22. A key to successful preparation is assuming the counterparty is as smart, informed, and motivated as you
are. What is the name of such a perspective?
A. The optimizing model
B. The fraternal twin model (p. 10)
Copyright ©2015 Pearson Education, Inc.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
much larger. The most conscientiously moderate estimate makes out a
total of at least 3,400 between the years 1580 and 1680, and the
computer declares that future discoveries in the way of records may
force us to increase this figure very much.[177] On the Continent many
thousands suffered death in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
Mannhardt reckons the victims from the fourteenth to the seventeenth
century at millions,[178] and half a million is thought to be a moderate
estimate. In Alsace, a hundred and thirty-four witches and wizards were
burned in 1582 on one occasion, the execution taking place on the 15th,
19th, 24th, and 28th of October.[179] Nicholas Remy (Remigius) of
Lorraine gathered the materials for his work on the Worship of
Demons,[180] published in 1595, from the trials of some 900 persons
whom he had sentenced to death in the fifteen years preceding. In 1609,
de Lancre and his associate are said to have condemned 700 in the
Basque country in four months.[181] The efforts of the Bishop of
Bamberg from 1622 to 1633 resulted in six hundred executions; the
Bishop of Würzburg, in about the same period, put nine hundred persons
to death.[182] These figures, which might be multiplied almost
indefinitely,[183] help us to look at the Salem Witchcraft in its true
proportions,—as a very small incident in the history of a terrible
superstition.
These figures may perhaps be attacked as involving a fallacious
comparison, inasmuch as we have not attempted to make the relative
population of New England and the several districts referred to a factor
in the equation. Such an objection, if anybody should see fit to make it,
is easily answered by other figures. The total number of victims in
Massachusetts from the first settlement to the end of the seventeenth
century was, as we have seen, twenty-eight,—or thirty-four for the whole
of New England. Compare the following figures, taken from the annals
of Great Britain and Scotland alone. In 1612, ten witches were executed
belonging to a single district of Lancashire.[184] In 1645 twenty-nine
witches were condemned at once in a single Hundred in Essex,[185]
eighteen were hanged at once at Bury in Suffolk[186] “and a hundred and
twenty more were to have been tried, but a sudden movement of the
king’s troops in that direction obliged the judges to adjourn the
session.”[187] Under date of July 26, 1645, Whitelocke records that “20
Witches in Norfolk were executed”,[187] and again, under April 15, 1650,
that “at a little Village within two Miles [of Berwick] two Men and three
Women were burnt for Witches, and nine more were to be burnt, the
Village consisting of but fourteen Families, and there were as many
witches” and further that “twenty more were to be burnt within six Miles
of that place.”[189] If we pass over to the Continent, the numbers are
appalling. Whether, then, we take the computation in gross or in detail,
New England emerges from the test with credit.
The last execution for witchcraft in Massachusetts took place in 1692,
as we have seen; indeed, twenty of the total of twenty-six cases fell
within the limits of that one year. There were no witch trials in New
England in the eighteenth century. The annals of Europe are not so clear.
Six witches were burned in Renfrewshire in 1697.[190] In England, Elinor
Shaw and Mary Phillips, “two notorious witches,” were put to death at
Northampton in 1705 (or 1706).[191] In 1712 Jane Wenham was
condemned to death for witchcraft, but she was pardoned.[192] Two
clergymen of the Church of England, as well as a Bachelor of Arts of
Cambridge,[193] gave evidence against her. Just before the arrest of Jane
Wenham, Addison in the Spectator for July 11, 1711, had expressed the
creed of a well-bred and sensible man of the world: “I believe in general
that there is, and has been such a thing as Witchcraft; but at the same
time can give no Credit to any particular Instance of it.” Blackstone, it
will be remembered, subscribed to the same doctrine, making particular
reference to Addison.[194] Prompted, one may conjecture, by the stir
which the Wenham trial made, the Rev. J. Boys, of Coggeshall Magna, in
Essex, transcribed, in this same year, from his memoranda, A Brief
Account of the Indisposition of the Widow Coman. This case had
occurred in his own parish in 1699, and he had given it careful
investigation. Both in 1699, when he jotted down the facts, and in 1712,
Mr. Boys was clearly of the opinion that his unfortunate parishioner was
a witch. His narrative, which remained in manuscript until 1901,[195]
may be profitably compared with Cotton Mather’s account of his visit to
Margaret Rule in 1693.[196] Such a comparison will not work to the
disadvantage of the New England divine. Incidentally it may be
mentioned that the mob “swam” the widow Coman several times, and
that “soon after, whether by the cold she got in the water or by some
other means, she fell very ill, and dyed.” Let it not be forgotten that this
was six years after the end of the witchcraft prosecutions in
Massachusetts. In 1705 a supposed witch was murdered by a mob at
Pittenween in Scotland.[197] In 1730, another alleged witch succumbed to
the water ordeal in Somersetshire.[198] The English and Scottish statutes
against witchcraft were repealed in 1736,[199] but in that same year
Joseph Juxson, vicar, preached at Twyford, in Leicestershire, a Sermon
upon Witchcraft, occasioned by a late Illegal Attempt to discover
Witches by Swimming,[200] and in 1751 Ruth Osborne, a reputed witch,
was murdered by a mob in Hertfordshire.[201] The last execution for
witchcraft in Germany took place in 1775. In Spain the last witch was
burned in 1781, In Switzerland Anna Göldi was beheaded in 1782 for
bewitching the child of her master, a physician. In Poland two women
were burned as late as 1793.[202]
That the belief in witchcraft is still pervasive among the peasantry of
Europe, and to a considerable extent among the foreign-born population
in this country, is a matter of common knowledge.[203] Besides,
spiritualism and kindred delusions have taken over, under changed
names, many of the phenomena, real and pretended, which would have
been explained as due to witchcraft in days gone by.[204]
Why did the Salem outbreak occur? Of course there were many
causes—some of which have already suggested themselves in the course
of our discussion. But one fact should be borne in mind as of particular
importance. The belief in witchcraft, as we have already had occasion to
remark, was a constant quantity; but outbreaks of prosecution came, in
England—and, generally speaking, elsewhere—spasmodically, at
irregular intervals. If we look at Great Britain for a moment, we shall see
that such outbreaks are likely to coincide with times of political
excitement or anxiety. Thus early in Elizabeth’s reign, when everything
was more or less unsettled, Bishop Jewel, whom all historians delight to
honor, made a deliberate and avowed digression, in a sermon before the
queen, in order to warn her that witchcraft was rampant in the realm, to
inform her (on the evidence of his own eyes) that her subjects were being
injured in their goods and their health, and to exhort her to enforce the
law.[205] The initial zeal of James I. in the prosecution of witches stood in
close connection with the trouble he was having with his turbulent
cousin Francis Bothwell.[206] The operations of Matthew Hopkins (in
1645-1647) were a mere accompaniment to the tumult of the Civil War;
the year in which they began was the year of Laud’s execution and of the
Battle of Naseby. The Restoration was followed by a fresh outbreak of
witch prosecution,—mild in England, though far-reaching in its
consequences, but very sharp in Scotland.
 With facts like these in view, we can hardly regard it as an accident
that the Salem witchcraft marks a time when the Colony was just
emerging from a political struggle that had threatened its very existence.
For several years men’s minds had been on the rack. The nervous
condition of public feeling is wonderfully well depicted in a letter
written in 1688 by the Rev. Joshua Moodey in Boston to Increase
Mather, then in London as agent of the Colony. The Colonists are much
pleased by the favor with which Mather has been received, but they
distrust court promises. They are alarmed by a report that Mather and his
associates have suffered “a great slurr” on account of certain over-
zealous actions. Moodey rejoices in the death of Robert Mason, “one of
the worst enemies that you & I & Mr. Morton had in these parts.” Then
there are the Indians:—“The cloud looks very dark and black upon us, &
wee are under very awfull circumstances, which render an Indian Warr
terrible to us.” The Colonists shudder at a rumor that John Palmer, one of
Andros’s Council, is to come over as Supreme Judge, and know not how
to reconcile it with the news of the progress their affairs have been
making with the King. And finally, the writer gives an account of the
case of Goodwin’s afflicted children, which, as we know, was a kind of
prologue to the Salem outbreak:—“Wee have a very strange th[ing]
among us, which we know not what to make of, except it bee Witchcraft,
as we think it must needs bee.”[207] Clearly, there would have been small
fear, in 1692, of a plot on Satan’s part to destroy the Province, if our
forefathers had not recently encountered other dangers of a more tangible
kind.

In conclusion, I may venture to sum up, in the form of a number of

brief theses, the main results at which we appear to have arrived in our
discussion of witchcraft:—
1. The belief in witchcraft is the common heritage of humanity. It is
not chargeable to any particular time, or race, or form of religion.
2. Witchcraft in some shape or other is still credited by a majority of
the human race.
3. The belief in witchcraft was practically universal in the seventeenth
century, even among the educated; with the mass of the people it was
absolutely universal.
 4. To believe in witchcraft in the seventeenth century was no more
discreditable to a man’s head or heart than it was to believe in
spontaneous generation or to be ignorant of the germ theory of disease.
5. The position of the seventeenth century believers in witchcraft was
logically and theologically stronger than that of the few persons who
rejected the current belief.
6. The impulse to put a witch to death comes from the instinct of self-
preservation. It is no more cruel or otherwise blameworthy, in itself, than
the impulse to put a murderer to death.
7. The belief in witchcraft manifests itself, not in steady and
continuous prosecution, but in sudden outbreaks occurring at irregular
intervals.
8. Such outbreaks are not symptoms of extraordinary superstition or
of a peculiarly acute state of unreason. They are due, like other panics, to
a perturbed condition of the public mind. Hence they are likely to
accompany, or to follow, crises in politics or religion.
9. The responsibility for any witch prosecution rests primarily on the
community or neighborhood as a whole, not on the judge or the jury.
10. No jury, whether in a witch trial or in any other case, can be more
enlightened than the general run of the vicinage.
11. Many persons who have been executed for witchcraft have
supposed themselves to be guilty and have actually been guilty in intent.
12. Practically every person executed for witchcraft believed in the
reality of such a crime, whether he supposed himself to be guilty of it or
not.
13. The witch beliefs of New England were brought over from the
Mother Country by the first settlers.
14. Spectral evidence had been admitted in the examinations and
trials of witches in England for a hundred years before the Salem
prosecutions took place.
15. Trials, convictions, and executions for witchcraft occurred in
England after they had come to an end in Massachusetts, and they
occurred on the Continent a hundred years later than that time.
16. Spectral evidence was admitted in English witch trials after such
trials had ceased in Massachusetts.
 17. The total number of persons executed for witchcraft in New
England from the first settlement to the end of the century is
inconsiderable, especially in view of what was going on in Europe.
18. The public repentance and recantation of judge and jury in
Massachusetts have no parallel in the history of witchcraft.
19. The repentance and recantation came at a time which made them
singularly effective arguments in the hands of the opponents of the witch
dogma in England.
20. The record of New England in the matter of witchcraft is highly
creditable, when considered as a whole and from the comparative point
of view.
21. It is easy to be wise after the fact,—especially when the fact is
two hundred years old.
 [1] That the New Englanders brought their views on demonology and
witchcraft with them from the Mother Country is a self-evident proposition,
but it may be worth while to refer to a striking instance of the kind. The Rev.
John Higginson, writing from Salem to Increase Mather in 1683, sends him
two cases for his Illustrious Providences,—both of which he “believes to be
certain.” The first is an account of how a mysterious stranger, thought to be
the devil, once lent a conjuring book to “godly Mr. [Samuel] Sharp, who was
Ruling Elder of the Church of Salem allmost 30 years.” The incident took
place when Sharp was a young man in London. The second narrative Mr.
Higginson “heard at Gilford from a godly old man yet living. He came from
Essex, and hath been in N. E. about 50 years.” It is a powerfully interesting
legend of the Faust type, localised in Essex. In a postscript Mr. Higginson
adds, “I had credible information of one in Leicestershire, in the time of the
Long Parliament, that gave his soul to the Divel, upon condition to be a
Famous Preacher, which he was for a time, &c., but I am imperfect in the
story.” (Mather Papers, Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 4th Series, VIII, 285-
287). See also the cases of witchcraft before 1692 collected in S. G. Drake’s
Annals of Witchcraft in New England. Dr. Poole is far nearer the truth in
saying that “the New-England colonists had no views concerning witchcraft
and diabolical agency which they did not bring with them from the Old
World” (Witchcraft in Boston, in Winsor, Memorial History of Boston, II,
131) than President White is when he remarks that “the life of the early
colonists in New England was such as to give rapid growth to the germs of
the doctrine of possession brought from the mother country” (Warfare of
Science with Theology, II, 145).
[2] A masterly short account of the various elements which made up the
fully developed doctrine of witchcraft as it was held during the three centuries
of especial prosecution (1400-1700), and of the sources from which these
elements were derived, may be found in the first chapter of Joseph Hansen’s
Zauberwahn, Inquisition und Hexenprozess im Mittelalter (Munich and
Leipzig, 1900). A learned and able essay by Professor George L. Burr, The
Literature of Witchcraft, reprinted from the Papers of the American Historical
Association, New York, 1890, should also be consulted. Professor Burr
emphasises the sound and necessary distinction between witchcraft and
magic. But he seems to go too far in his insistence on this distinction as vital
in the history of witchcraft: “Magic itself is actual and universal. But
witchcraft never was. It was but a shadow, a nightmare: the nightmare of a
religion, the shadow of a dogma. Less than five centuries saw its birth, its
vigor, its decay” (p. 238; p. 38 of reprint). This statement is true if by
witchcraft is meant (and this is Professor Burr’s sense) the fully developed
and highly complicated system set forth in the Malleus Maleficarum and in
Del Rio’s Disquisitiones Magicae—what Hansen (p. 35) calls “der
verhängnisvolle Sammelbegriff des Hexenwesens,”—which was not possible
until scholasticism had schematised the diversified elements of belief in
magic and demonology and sorcery and devil-worship which Christian
theology and Christian superstition had derived from the most various sources
—from Judaism, classical antiquity, Neo-Platonism, and the thousand-and-
one beliefs of pagan converts. But, important as this fully developed system
was—and true though it may be that without the schematising influence of
scholastic philosophy the witch-prosecution which was epidemic in Europe
from 1400 to 1700 could hardly have taken place—we should never forget
that the essential element in witchcraft is maleficium—the working of harm to
the bodies and goods of one’s fellow-men by means of evil spirits or of
strange powers derived from intercourse with such spirits. This belief in
maleficium was once universal; it was rooted and grounded in the minds of
the people before they became Christians; it is still the creed of most savages
and of millions of so-called civilised men. Throughout the history of
witchcraft (in whatever sense we understand that word), it remained the
ineradicable thing,—the solid foundation, unshakably established in popular
belief, for whatever superstructure might be reared by the ingenuity of
jurisconsults, philosophers, theologians, or inquisitors. Without this popular
belief in maleficium, the initial suspicions and complaints which form the
basis and starting-point of all prosecutions would have been impossible and
inconceivable. With this popular belief, the rest was easy. The error into which
Professor Burr has fallen is due, no doubt, to his keeping his eye too
exclusively on the Continent, where the prosecutions were most extensive,
where, in truth, the fully developed system was most prevalent, and where the
inquisitorial methods of procedure give to the witch-trials a peculiar air of
uniformity and theological schematism. Thus he has been led, like many other
historians, to over-emphasise the learned or literary side of the question. For
us, however, as the descendants of Englishmen and as students of the history
of English colonies in America, it is necessary to fix our attention primarily
on the Mother Country. And, if we do this, we cannot fail to perceive that the
obstinate belief of the common people in maleficium—a belief which, it
cannot be too often repeated, is not the work of theologians but the universal
and quasi-primitive creed of the human race—is the root of the whole matter.
(On savage witchcraft see the anthropologists passim. Good examples may be
found in Karl von den Steinen, Unter den Naturvölkern Brasiliens, 1894, pp.
339 ff.)
On maleficium see especially Hansen, pp. 9 ff. Nothing could be truer than
his words:—“Wie viel auch immer im Laufe der Zeit in den Begriff der
Zauberei und Hexerei hineingetragen worden ist, so ist doch sein Kern stets
das Maleficium geblieben. Aus dieser Vorstellung erwächst die angstvolle
Furcht der Menschen und das Verlangen nach gesetzlichem Schutze und
blutig strenger Strafe; von ihr hat die strafrechtliche Behandlung dieses
Wahns ihren Ausgang genommen” (p. 9). “Das Maleficium, mit Ausnahme
des Wettermachens, ist ohne alle Unterbrechung von der kirchlichen und bis
in das 17. Jahrhundert auch von der staatlichen Autorität als Realität
angenommen, seine Kraft ist nie ernstlich in Abrede gestellt worden; es bildet
den roten Faden auch durch die Geschichte der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung”
(p. 13). Everybody knows that the most convincing evidence of witchcraft—
short of confession or of denunciation by a confederate—was held to be the
damnum minatum and the malum secutum.
The difference between England and the Continent in the development of
the witchcraft idea and in the history of prosecution is recognised by Hansen
(p. 34, note 1). President White, like Professor Burr, has his eye primarily on
the Continent (Warfare of Science with Theology, 1896, I, 350 ff.). His
treatment of demoniacal possession, however, is much to our purpose (II, 97
ff., 135 ff.).
[3] King James’s connection with the history of witchcraft almost deserves
a monograph for it has never been adequately discussed, and various
misconceptions on the subject are afloat. Thus Mr. H. M. Doughty, in an
interesting but one-sided essay on Witchcraft and Christianity (Blackwood’s
Magazine, March, 1898, CLXIII, 388), remarks that “the new King James had
long lived in abject fear of witches”—an assertion that he would find it
impossible to prove, even if it were true, as it seems not to be.
[4] The act of 5 Eliz. c. 16 (after reciting that 33 Henr. VIII. c. 8 had been
repealed by 1 Edw. VI. c. 12) prescribes the penalty of death for witchcraft
which destroys life, imprisonment for that which causes bodily injury (death
for the second offence); in certain harmless kinds of sorcery (such as
accompanied the search for treasure or stolen goods) the second offence is
punished by imprisonment for life. 1 Jac. I. c. 12 follows 5 Eliz. c. 16 in the
main. Its chief differences are,—greater detail in defining witchcraft; the
insertion of a passage about digging up dead bodies for purposes of sorcery;
death for the first offence in cases of witchcraft which causes bodily injury;
death for the second offence in treasure-seeking sorcery and the like. Before
one pronounces the new statute much severer than the old, it would be well to
examine the practical operation of the two. In particular, one ought to
determine how many witches were executed under the law of James I. who
would not have been subject to the death penalty under the law of Elizabeth.
This is not the place for such an examination. On treasure-seeking sorcery see
the learned and entertaining essay of Dr. Augustus Jessopp, Hill-Digging and
Magic (in his Random Roaming and Other Papers, 1893).
[5] See p. 64 below. Strictly speaking, the Commonwealth did not begin
until 1649, but this point need not be pressed.
[6] See F. Legge, Witchcraft in Scotland (Scottish Review, XVIII, 267);
Thomas Wright, Narratives of Sorcery and Witchcraft, Chap. xxv.
Whitelocke, under date of Oct. 4, 1652, notes “Letters that sixty Persons Men
and Women were accused before the Commissioners for Administration of
Justice in Scotland at the last Circuit for Witches; but they found so much
Malice and so little Proof against them that none were condemned”
(Memorials, 1732, p. 545). Cf. also his very important entry on the same
subject under Oct. 29, 1652 (pp. 547-548).
[7] Epistolæ Ho-Elianæ, Familiar Letters, edited by Joseph Jacobs, 1890,
book ii, letter 76, p. 506: “To my Honourable Friend, Mr. E. P., at Paris” (cf.
Jacobs’s notes pp. 783-784). The letter is dated “Fleet, 3 Feb. 1646.” This is
certainly Old Style. Howell is a queer dater, but a reference in this letter to the
departure of the Scottish army (p. 505) proves that the letter was written after
Dec. 21, 1646. There is a similar passage about witches in book iii, letter 2, p.
515 (also to Porter), dated “Fleet, 20 Feb. 1646.”
[8] Letters, as above, book iii, no. 23, pp. 547 ff., dated “Fleet, 20 Feb.
1647,” i. e. doubtless 1648.
[9] See Jacobs’s Introduction, pp. xlii-xliii. The question whether Howell’s
letters were actually sent to the persons to whom they are addressed or
whether they are to be regarded merely as literary exercises composed during
his imprisonment (see Jacobs, pp. lxxi ff.) does not affect, for our purposes,
the value of the quotations here made, since the letters to which we now refer
actually purport to have been written in the Fleet, and since they were first
published in the second edition (1650) in the additional third volume and
from the nature of things could not have appeared in the first edition (1645).
They must, at all events, have been composed before 1650, and are doubtless
dated correctly enough.
[10] See p. 64, below.
 [11] Sermon xvii (Whole Works, ed. Heber and Eden, 1861, IV, 546).
[12] Whole Works, III, 57; cf. Sermon vii (Works, IV. 412).
[13] See p. 7, above, note 4.
[14] A Tryal of Witches, at the Assizes held at Bury St. Edmonds ... 1664
(London, 1682), pp. 55-56. This report is reprinted in Howell’s State Trials,
VI, 647 ff., and (in part) in H. L. Stephen’s State Trials Political and Social
(1899), I, 209 ff. See also Hutchinson, An Historical Essay concerning
Witchcraft, chap. viii. (1718, pp. 109 ff.; 2d ed., 1720, pp. 139 ff.); Thomas
Wright, Narratives of Sorcery and Witchcraft, II., 261 ff. Hale’s opinion was
regarded as settling the law beyond peradventure. It is quoted, in A True and
Impartial Relation of the Informations against Three Witches ... Assizes
holden for the County of Devon at the Castle of Exon, Aug. 14, 1682
(London, 1682), Address to the Reader. For Roger North’s comments on the
Exeter case, see p. 192, below. A Collection of Modern Relations of Matters
of Fact, concerning Witches & Witchcraft, Part I (London, 1693), contains “A
Discourse concerning the great Mercy of God, in preserving us from the
Power and Malice of Evil Angels. Written by Sir Matt. Hale at Cambridge 26
Mar. 1661. Upon occasion of a Tryal of certain Witches before him the Week
before at St. Edmund’s Bury.” The date is wrong (1661 should be 1664), but
the trial is identified with that which we are considering by the anonymous
compiler of the Collection in the following words: “There is a Relation of it in
print, written by his Marshal, which I suppose is very true, though to the best
of my Memory, not so compleat, as to some observable Circumstances, as
what he related to me at his return from that Circuit.” The date of the trial is
given as “the Tenth day of March, 1664” on the title-page of the report (A
Tryal of Witches) and on page 1 as “the Tenth day of March, in the Sixteenth
Year of the Reign of ... Charles II.” On page 57 the year is misprinted “1662.”
Howell’s State Trials, VI, 647, 687, makes it 1665, but 16 Charles II.
corresponds to Jan. 30, 1664—Jan. 29, 1665: hence 1664 is right. The
(unfinished) Discourse just mentioned must not be confused with Hale’s
Motives to Watchfulness, in reference to the Good and Evil Angels, which
may be found in his Contemplations Moral and Divine, London, 1682
(licensed 1675-6), Part II, pp. 67 ff.
[15] Roger North, Life of the Lord Keeper Guilford, ed. 1826, I, 121.
[16] Wonders of the Invisible World (London, 1693), p. 55. Mather also
reproduces the substance of the report above referred to (note 14) in the same
work. Bragge, too, reproduces it, in the main, in his tract, Witchcraft Farther
Display’d, 1712, in support of the accusation against Jane Wenham.
[17] Lives of the Chief Justices, 1849, I, 561 ff., Chapter xvii. See also the
criticism of Hale in a letter of George Onslow’s, 1770, 14th Report of the
Historical MSS. Commission, Appendix, Part IX, p. 480.
[18] Published in 1682.
[19] Edition of 1826, I, 117 ff.
[20] State Papers (Domestic), 1682, Aug. 19, bundle 427, no. 67, as quoted
by Pike. History of Crime in England, II, 238.
[21] A Tryal of Witches, as above, p. 41.
[22] That is, hysteria.
[23] A Tryal, as above, p. 42. Cf. the Supplementary Memoir, in Simon
Wilkin’s edition of Browne’s Works, 1852, I, liv-lvi.
 [24] Anatomy of Melancholy, 1621, Part 1, section 2, member 1, subsection
3. I quote from the edition of 1624.
[25] The following short character of Glanvill, by Bishop Kennet, may be
quoted, not because it is just, but because it might conceivably be brought
forward by somebody in rebuttal of this proposition:—“Mr. Joseph Glanvill
of Lincoln College, Oxon. Taking the Degree of M. A. in the beginning of
1658, was about that Time made Chaplain to old Francis Rous; one of
Oliver’s Lords, and Provost of Eaton College.—He became a great Admirer
of Mr. Richard Baxter, and a zealous Person for a Commonwealth. After his
Majesty’s Restauration he turn’d about, became a Latitudinarian,—Rector of
Bath, Prebendary of Worcester, and Chaplain to the King” (White Kennet, An
Historical Register, 1744, p. 931).
[26] See Dr. Ferris Greenslet’s Joseph Glanvill, A Study in English Thought
and Letters of the Seventeenth Century, New York, 1900, especially Chap. vi.
For a bibliography of Glanvill, see Emanuel Green, Bibliotheca
Somersetensis, Taunton (Eng.), 1902, I, 206 ff.
[27] More’s theories on the subject of apparitions, demons, and witches
may also be read, at considerable length, in his Antidote against Atheism,
Book iii, Chaps. 2-13 (Philosophical Writings, 2d ed., 1662, pp. 89 ff.); cf. the
Appendix to the Antidote, Chaps. 12-13 (pp. 181 ff.) and The Immortality of
the Soul, Chap. 16 (pp. 129 ff.).
[28] A Modest Enquiry into the Nature of Witchcraft, Boston, 1702.
[29] Dated 1697-8.
[30] P. 12.
[31] Meric Casaubon was born in 1599 and died in 1671. His learned,
lively, and vastly entertaining work, A Treatise concerning Enthusiasme, as it
is an Effect of Nature: but is mistaken by many for either Divine Inspiration,
or Diabolicall Possession, appeared in 1655, and in a “Second edition:
revised, and enlarged” in 1656. It shows an open mind and a temper rather
skeptical than credulous. Passages of interest in our present discussion may be
found on pp. 37-41, 44, 49, 94-95, 100, 118, 174 (Quakers), 286, of the
second edition. Of particular significance is the Doctor’s account of his visit
to a man who was thought to be possessed but whom he believed to be
suffering from some bodily distemper (pp. 97 ff.). Casaubon’s treatise (in two
parts) Of Credulity and Incredulity, in Things Natural, Civil, and Divine,
came out in 1668, and was reissued, with a new title-page (as above), in 1672.
A third part, Of Credulity and Incredulity in Things Divine and Spiritual,
appeared in 1670. Webster’s assault upon Casaubon in his Displaying of
Supposed Witchcraft was made in apparent ignorance of the fact that the
venerable scholar had been dead for some years (see p. 24, below).
[32] Compare Reginald Scot’s chapter “Of Theurgie, with a Confutation
thereof” (Discoverie of Witchcraft, book xv, chap. 42, 1584, p. 466, ed. 1665,
p. 280). See also Henry Hallywell, Melampronoea: or A Discourse of the
Polity and Kingdom of Darkness. Together with a Solution of the Chiefest
Objections brought against the Being of Witches, 1681, pp. 50-51.
[33] Cap. iv, §15, ed. Mosheim, 1773, I, 395-396.
[34] Sadducismus Triumphatus, ed. 1726, p. 336; see James Crossley’s
Introduction to Potts, Discovery of Witches in the County of Lancaster,
reprinted from the Edition of 1613 (Chetham Society, 1845), p. vi, note 2.
This experiment was twice tried as late as 1712, in the case of Jane Wenham,
by the Rev. Mr. Strutt, once in the presence of Sir Henry Chauncy, and again
in the presence of the Rev. Mr. Gardiner. Its ill success is recorded by a third
Anglican clergyman,—Mr. Francis Bragge (A Full and Impartial Account of
the Discovery of Sorcery and Witchcraft, Practis’d by Jane Wenham, London,
1712, pp. 11, 15).
Letter to Glanvill, Sept. 18, 1677, Works, ed. Birch, V, 244. Compare
[35]
Dr. Samuel Collins’s letter to Boyle, Sept. 1, 1663 (Boyle’s Works, V, 633-
634).
[36] In a letter to Glanvill (Works, V, 245).
[37] See Demonologie ou Traitte des Demons et Sorciers ... Par Fr.
Perreaud. Ensemble l’Antidemon de Mascon, ou Histoire Veritable de ce
qu’un Demon a fait & dit, il y a quelques années, en la maison dudit Sʳ.
Perreaud à Mascon. Geneva, 1653.
[38] Theological Works, ed. 1830, IV, 480-482.
[39] In his Ravillae Redivivus, reprinted in the Somers Tracts, 2d ed., VIII,
510 ff. (see especially pp. 546 ff.). Weir, who was unquestionably insane, was
executed in 1670.
[40] Diary and Correspondence of Samuel Pepys, London, 1885, IV, 275.
On elf-arrows cf. Pitcairn, Criminal Trials in Scotland, I, ii, 192, 198; III, 607,
609, 615; W. Henderson, Notes on the Folk-Lore of the Northern Counties,
1879, pp. 185 ff.
[41] Evelyn may have derived his information from Sir William Phips’s
letter to the home government (Oct. 14, 1692), as Dr. G. H. Moore suggests
(Final Notes on Witchcraft in Massachusetts, N. Y., 1885, p. 66). For the letter
see Goodell, Essex Institute Collections, 2d Series, I, ii, 86 ff. Phips’s second
letter (Feb. 21, 1692-3, to the Earl of Nottingham) is printed by Moore, pp. 90
ff.
[42] The remark, sometimes heard, that Calvinism was especially
responsible for witch trials is a loose assertion which has to reckon with the
fact that the last burning for witchcraft at Geneva took place in 1652 (see Paul
Ladame, Procès criminel de la dernière Sorcière brulée à Genève, Paris,
1888).
[43] Compare Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, Part I, section 2, member 1,
subsection 3:—“Many deny Witches at all, or if there be any, they can doe no
harme: of this opinion is Wierus, lib. 3. cap. 53, de præstig. dæm. Austin
Lerchemer, a Dutch writer, Biarmanus, Ewichius, Euwaldus, our countryman
Scot ... but on the contrary are most Lawyers, Diuines, Physitians,
Philosophers.”
Wier’s great work, De Praestigiis Dæmonum, was published in 1563,
[44]
and was afterwards much enlarged. It went through many editions.
[45] See the extraordinary list in William Drage, Daimonomageia. A Small
Treatise of Sicknesses and Diseases from Witchcraft, and Supernatural
Causes, 1665. Webster considers this subject at length in Chap. xii of his
Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, 1677, with a full discussion of van
Helmont’s views. Cf. Henry More, Antidote against Atheism, Chaps. 4-5
(Philosophical Writings, 2d ed., 1662, pp. 97 ff.).
[46] “Ea dæmonis subtilitate uelocitateque imperceptibili, ori ingesta,
nostris ad hæc oculis uel celeritate eius uictis, uel fascino delusis, uel
interiecto corpore aereo aut aliter motis eo intus uel foris uel utrinque
humoribus aut spiritu caligantibus.” De Præstigiis Dæmonum (Basileæ,
1568), iv, 2, pp. 352-353.
[47] Even Bekker (see p. 35, below), who approaches the subject from the
philosophical direction, and whose logical process is different from Wier’s, is
greatly indebted to him.
[48] Compare the fate of Bekker in 1692 (p. 39).
[49]A Treatise proving Spirits, Witches and Supernatural Operations,
1672, p. 35.
[50] The same, p. 46.
[51] Dæmonologie, Workes, 1616, p. 92. On Wier in general, see Carl Binz,
Doctor Johann Weyer, ein rheinischer Arst, der erste Bekämpfer des
Hexenwahns, Berlin, 1896.
[52] He expressly asserts his belief in their existence (A Discourse upon
Divels and Spirits, chap. 32, p. 540; cf. chap. 16, p. 514).
[53] Discoverie of Witchcraft, xiii, 22-34, ed. 1584, pp. 321 ff., ed. 1665,
pp. 181-201 (with cuts). Most of the tricks which Scot describes are identical
with feats of legerdemain that are the stock in trade of every modern juggler:
—“To throwe a peece of monie awaie, and to find it againe where you list” (p.
326); “To make a groat or a testor to sinke through a table, and to vanish out
of a handkercher very strangelie” (p. 327); “How to deliver out foure aces,
and to convert them into foure knaves” (p. 333); “To tell one without
confederacie what card he thinketh” (p. 334); “To burne a thred, and to make
it whole againe with the ashes thereof” (p. 341); “To cut off ones head, and to
laie it in a platter, &c.: which the jugglers call the decollation of John Baptist”
(p. 349). The picture of the apparatus required for the last-mentioned trick is
very curious indeed (p. 353). The references to Scot, unless the contrary is
stated, are to all the pages of the first (1584) edition, as reprinted by Dr.
Brinsley Nicholson (London, 1886).
[54] King James remarks, in the Preface to his Dæmonologie, that Scot “is
not ashamed in publike Print to deny, that there can be such a thing as Witch-
craft: and so maintaines the old errour of the Sadduces in denying of spirits”
(Workes, 1616, pp. 91-92).
[55] In what an orderly way one may proceed from an admission of the
doctrine of fallen angels to the final results of the witch dogma may be seen,
for instance, in Henry Hallywell’s Melampronoea: or A Discourse of the
Polity and Kingdom of Darkness, 1681. Hallywell had been a Fellow of
Christ’s College, Cambridge.
[56] See p. 9, above.
[57] P. 39. See Nicholson’s reprint of the 1584 edition, p. xlii.
[58] Page 46.
[59] Introduction to the Chetham Society reprint of Potts’s Discoverie of
Witches, pp. xxxviii-xxxix.
[60] Pages 202-215.
[61] P. 228. Perhaps Webster is merely “putting a case” here; but he
certainly seems to be making an admission, at least in theory.
[62] Page 230.
[63] Pages 294 ff.
 [64] Page 294.
[65] Pages 297-298.
[66] Pages 302-310.
[67] P. 308. On the astral spirit, see also pp. 312 ff.
[68] Page 310.
[69] Pages 10-11.
[70] See also pp. 267 ff.
[71] Page 73.
[72] Page 231.
[73] Pages 242-243.
[74] Page 244.
[75] Pages 245-246.
[76] Page 247.
[77] Page 260.
[78] Page 267.
[79]Note, however, that the upholders of the current beliefs on witchcraft
are also many times emphatic enough in similar cautionary remarks. A first-
rate example is the following characteristic passage from Dr. Casaubon,
whom Webster calls a “witchmonger”:—
“And indeed, that the denying of Witches, to them that content themselves
in the search of truth with a superficial view, is a very plausible cause; it
cannot be denied. For if any thing in the world, (as we know all things in the
world are) be liable to fraud, and imposture, and innocent mistake, through
weakness and simplicity; this subject of Witches and Spirits is.... How
ordinary is it to mistake natural melancholy (not to speak of other diseases)
for a Devil? And how much, too frequently, is both the disease increased, or
made incurable; and the mistake confirmed, by many ignorant Ministers, who
take every wild motion, or phansie, for a suggestion of the Devil? Whereas, in
such a case, it should be the care of wise friends, to apply themselves to the
Physician of the body, and not to entertain the other, (I speak it of natural
melancholy) who probably may do more hurt, than good; but as the learned
Naturalist doth allow, and advise? Excellent is the advice and counsel in this
kind, of the Author of the book de morbo Sacro attributed to Hippocrates,
which I could wish all men were bound to read, before they take upon them to
visit sick folks, that are troubled with melancholy diseases” (A Treatise
proving Spirits, etc., 1672, pp. 29-30: cf. p. 14, note 31, above).
[80] Pages 219, 220, 224.
[81] Saducismus Triumphatus, Part II, ed. 1682, p. 4. (ed. 1726, pp. 225-
226). Glanvill is here replying to Webster, whose book, it will be
remembered, appeared in 1677.
[82] Increase Mather’s copy is in the Harvard College Library.
[83] Lowell, New England Two Centuries Ago, Writings, Riverside edition,
II, 73.
[84] Leviathan, i, 2 (English Works, ed. Molesworth, III, 9). Compare
Hobbes’s Dialogue between a Philosopher and a Student of the Common Law
of England (English Works, VI, 96):—“L. I know not. Besides these crimes,
there is conjuration, witchcraft, sorcery and enchantment; which are capital
by the statute I James, c. 12.—P. But I desire not to discourse of that subject.
For though without doubt there is some great wickedness signified by those
crimes; yet I have ever found myself too dull to conceive the nature of them,
or how the devil hath power to do so many things which witches have been
accused of.” Wier is far more humane, as well as more reasonable. If one
holds, he writes, that witches are to be severely punished for their evil intent,
let it be remembered that there is a great difference between sane and insane
will. “Quod si quis contentiose uoluntatem seuerius puniendam defendat, is
primum distinguat inter uoluntatem hominis sani perfectam, quae in actum
uere dirigi coeperit: et inter uitiatae mentis sensum, uel (si uoles) corruptam
amentis uoluntatem: cui suo opere, quasi alterius esset, colludit diabolus, nec
alius insulse uolentem subsequitur effectus.” De Præstigiis Dæmonum, vi, 21,
ed. 1568, pp. 641-642.
[85] Table-Talk, 1689, p. 59 (the first edition). Selden died in 1654.
[86] Soldan, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, ed. Heppe, II, 243.
A Candle in the Dark: or, A Treatise concerning the Nature of Witches
[87]
& Witchcraft, 1656, p. 41.
[88] Sir Robert Filmer’s brief tract, An Advertisement to the Jury-men of
England, touching Witches, was occasioned, according to the Preface, by “the
late Execution of Witches at the Summer Assizes in Kent.” It was first
published in 1652, and may be found annexed to the Free-holders Grand
Inquest, 1679. The case which elicited Sir Robert’s little book is reported in A
Prodigious & Tragicall History of the Arraignment, Tryall, Confession, and
Condemnation of six Witches at Maidstone, in Kent, at the Assizes there held
in July, Fryday 30, this present year, 1652 (London, 1652, reprinted 1837).
[89] A. D. White, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology,
1896, I, 362.
[90] Wood, Athenæ Oxonienses, ed. Bliss, III, 1114.
[91] Dr. Hutchinson’s admirable work, An Historical Essay concerning
Witchcraft, which still remains one of the most valuable treatises on this
subject that we have, was published in 1718. It appeared in a second edition
in 1720, in which year he was appointed Bishop of Down and Connor.
[92] I have used a copy of the French translation,—Le Monde Enchanté,
Amsterdam, 1694. This was made by Bekker’s direction and revised by him.
Each of the four volumes has a separate dedication, and each dedication (in
the Harvard College copy) is authenticated by Bekker’s autograph signature.
[93] This concludes Bekker’s First Book.
[94] What precedes is, in substance, Bekker’s Book II.
[95] This is the substance of Bekker’s Third Book.
[96] “De Christelijke Synodus ... heeft, ... met eenparigheyd van stemmen,
den selven Dr. Bekker verklaart intolerabel als Leeraar in de Gereformeerde
Kerke; en vervolgens hem van sijn Predik-dienst geremoveert” (decree in W.
P. C. Knuttel, Balthasar Bekker de Bestrijder van het Bijgeloof, the Hague,
1906, p. 315).
[97] Knuttel, p. 319.
 [98] Knuttel, p. 357. Strictly speaking, it was not for his denial of modern
witchcraft that Bekker was punished, for it is in the last two books of his
treatise that he deals particularly with this subject, and these did not appear
until after he had been unfrocked. Still, his Second Book, which got him into
trouble, contains all the essentials. It denies the power of the devil and wicked
spirits to afflict men, and holds that the demoniacs of the New Testament
were neither possessed nor obsessed, but merely sufferers from disease. For a
full analysis of Bekker’s work and an account of the opposition which it
roused, see Knuttel, chap. v, pp. 188 ff.; for the ecclesiastical proceedings
against Bekker, see chap. vi, pp. 270 ff. The various editions and translations
of De Betoverde Weereld are enumerated by van der Linde in his Balthasar
Bekker, Bibliographie (the Hague, 1869), where may also be found a long list
of the books and pamphlets which the work called forth. There is a good
account of Bekker’s argument in Soldan’s Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, neu
bearbeitet von Dr. Heinrich Heppe (Stuttgart, 1880), II, 233 ff. See also
Roskoff, Geschichte des Teufels, Leipzig, 1869, II, 445 ff.
[99] Theologians took infinite pains to distinguish between miracles
(miracula), which could be wrought by divine power only, and the kind of
wonders (mira) which Satan worked. See, for example, William Perkins, A
Discourse of the Damned Art of Witchcraft, 1608, pp. 12 ff., 18 ff.; Del Rio,
Disquisitiones Magicæ, lib. ii, quæstio 7, ed. 1616, pp. 103 ff. Sir Robert
Filmer, in An Advertisement to the Jurymen of England, Touching Witches
(appended to The Free-holders Grand Inquest, 1679; cf. p. 34, note 88,
above), makes merry with such fine-spun distinctions. “Both [Perkins and Del
Rio],” he says, “seem to agree in this, that he had need be an admirable or
profound Philosopher, that can distinguish between a Wonder and a Miracle;
it would pose Aristotle himself, to tell us every thing that can be done by the
power of Nature, and what things cannot; for there be daily many things
found out, and daily more may be, which our Fore-fathers never knew to be
possible in Nature” (pp. 322-323). Cf. Calef, More Wonders of the Invisible
World, 1700, p. 35.
[100] Cf. Soldan, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, ed. Heppe, II, 243:—“Zu
derjenigen freieren Kritik der biblischen Schriften selbst sich zu erheben,
welche das Vorhandensein gewisser, aus den Begriffen der Zeit geschöpfter
dämonologischen Vorstellungen in der Bibel anerkennt, ohne daraus eine
bindende Norm für den Glauben herzuleiten,—diese war freilich erst einem
späteren Zeitalter vorbehalten. Bekker kannte, um seine sich ihm
aufdringende philosophische Ueberzeugung mit der Bibel zu versöhnen,
keinen andern Weg, als den der Üblichen Exegese, und daher kommt es, dass
diese nicht überall eine ungezwungene ist.” It is instructive to note the pains
which Sir Walter Scott takes, in his Second Letter on Demonology and
Witchcraft, to harmonise the Bible with his views on these subjects.
[101] To avoid all possibility of misapprehension I shall venture to express
my own feelings. The two men who appeal to me most in the whole affair of
witchcraft are Friedrich Spee, the Jesuit, and Balthasar Bekker, the
“intolerable” pastor of Amsterdam. But what I feel, and what all of us feel, is
not to the purpose. There has been too much feeling in modern discussions of
witchcraft already.
[102] Sigmund Riezler, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse in Bayern, Stuttgart,
1896, p. 143.
[103] Ibid.
 [104] Soldan, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, revised by Heppe, II, 37; cf.
G. L. Burr, The Fate of Dietrich Flade, 1891 (reprinted from the Papers of the
American Historical Association, V).
[105] Jean d’Espaignet and Pierre de Lancre, the special commissioners, are
said to have condemned more than 600 in four months (Soldan, ed. Heppe, II,
162; cf. Baissac, Les Grands Jours de la Sorcellerie, 1890, p. 401). I have no
certain evidence of the accuracy of these figures, for I have seen only one of
de Lancre’s two books, and I find in it no distinct statement of the number of
witches convicted. He makes various remarks, however, which seem to show
that 600 is no exaggeration. Thus he says that the Parliament of Bordeaux,
under whose authority he acted, condemned “an infinity” of sorcerers to death
in 1609 (Tableau de l’Inconstance des Mauvais Anges et Demons, Paris,
1613, p. 100). “On fait estat qu’il y a trente mille ames en ce pays de Labourt,
contant ceux qui sont en voyage sur mer, & que parmy tout ce peuple, il y a
bien peu de familles qui ne touchent au Sortilege par quelque bout” (p. 38).
The commission lasted from July to November (pp. 66, 456, 470); besides
those that the two commissioners tried during this period, they left behind
them so many witches and wizards that the prisons of Bordeaux were
crowded and it became necessary to lodge the defendants in the ruined
château du Hâ (pp. 144, 560). Cf. pp. 35 ff., 64, 92, 114, 546. The panic fear
that witchcraft excites is described by de Lancre in a striking passage:
—“Qu’il n’y ayt qu’vne seule sorciere dans vn grand village, dans peu de
temps vous voyez tant d’enfans perdus, tant de femmes enceintes perdãs leur
fruit, tant de haut mal donné à des pauures creatures, tant d’animaux perdus,
tant de fruicts gastes, que le foudre ni autre fleau du ciel ne sont rien en
comparaison” (pp. 543-544).
[106] An Account of what Happened in the Kingdom of Sweden, in the
Years 1669, 1670 and Upwards, translated from the German by Anthony
Horneck, and included in Glanvill’s Saducismus Triumphatus, ed. 1682 (ed.
1726, pp. 474 ff.). Horneck’s version is from a tract entitled, Translation ...
Der Königl. Herren Commissarien gehaltenes Protocol uber die entdeckte
Zauberey in dem Dorff Mohra und umbliegenden Orten, the Hague, 1670. Cf.
Thomas Wright, Narratives of Sorcery and Magic, II, 244 ff.; Soldan, ed.
Heppe, II, 175 ff.; Vilhelm Bang, Hexevæsen og Hexeforfølgelser især i
Danmark, Copenhagen, 1896, pp. 48 ff. This is what Mr. Upham calls Cotton
Mather’s “favorite Swedish case” (Salem Witchcraft and Cotton Mather,
Morrisania, 1869, p. 20). It was, in a manner, “Leonato’s Hero, your Hero,
every man’s Hero” toward the end of the seventeenth century, since it was one
of the most recent instances of witchcraft on a large scale. The good angel in
white who is one of the features of the Mohra case appears much earlier in
England: see Potts, Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches, 1613, Chetham
Society reprint, sig. L (a reference which may serve as a note to Mr. Upham’s
essay, just cited, p. 34).
[107]Frans Volk, Hexen in der Landvogtei Ortenau und Reichsstadt
Offenburg, Lahr, 1882, pp. 24-25, 58 ff.
[108] Scot, Discoverie of Witchcraft, 1584, p. 543; F. Hutchinson,
Historical Essay, 2d ed., p. 38; W. W., A True and Just Recorde, of the
Information [etc.] of all the Witches, taken at S. Oses (London, 1582). For
extracts from W. W.’s book I am indebted to Mr. Wallace Notestein, of Yale
University.
[109] F. Legge, The Scottish Review, XVIII, 261 ff.
 [110] Thomas Potts, The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie
of Lancaster (London, 1613), reprinted by the Chetham Society, 1845;
Thomas Wright, Narratives of Sorcery and Magic, Chap. xxiii.
[111] Whalley Lancashire, by Whitaker, pp. 213 ff.; Chetham Society
reprint of Potts, as above, pp. lix ff.; Wright, as above. Chap. xxiii; Heywood
and Brome’s play, The Late Lancashire Witches, 1634; Calendar of State
Papers, Domestic Series, 1634-1635, pp. 77-79, 98, 129-130, 141, 152;
Historical Manuscripts Commission, 10th Report, Appendix, Part IV, p. 433;
12th Report, Appendix, Part II, p. 53, cf. p. 77; Notes and Queries, 3d Series,
V, 259, 385.
[112] Nichols, History and Antiquities of the County of Leicester, II, 471.
[113] See pp. 7 and 58.
[114] Whitelocke’s Memorials, Dec. 13, 1649, ed. 1732, p. 434; Brand,
Popular Antiquities, ed. Hazlitt, III, 80; Ralph Gardner, England’s Grievance
Discovered, in Relation to the Coal-Trade, 1655 (reprinted, North Shields,
1849, Chap. 53, pp. 168 ff.).
[115] A Prodigious & Tragicall History of the Arraignment [etc.] of Six
Witches at Maidstone.... Digested by H. F. Gent, 1652 (reprinted in an
Account, etc., London, 1837).
[116] A True and Impartial Relation of the Informations against Three
Witches, 1682.
[117] Sir J. H. Lefroy, Memorials of the Discovery and Early Settlement of
the Bermudas or Somers Islands, II, 601 ff.
[118] A Full and True Relation of the Tryal (etc.) of Ann Foster, London,
1674 (Northampton, reprinted by Taylor & Son, 1878). Cf. W. Ruland,
Steirische Hexenprozesse, in Steinhausen’s Zeitschrift für Kulturgeschichte,
2. Ergänzungsheft, Weimar, 1898, pp. 46 ff.
[119] N. E. Hist. Gen. Register. XXIV, 382.
[120] Letter of Oct. 8, 1692, Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, V, 65. Compare,
on the whole question, the remarks of Professor Wendell in his interesting
paper, Were the Salem Witches Guiltless? (Historical Collections of the Essex
Institute, XXIX, republished in his Stelligeri and Other Essays concerning
America, New York, 1893) and in his Cotton Mather, pp. 93 ff.
[121] A long and curious list of cases of defamation may be seen in a
volume of Depositions and other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the County
of Durham, extending from 1311 to the Reign of Elisabeth, edited by James
Raine for the Surtees Society in 1845 (Publications, XXI). Thus, in 1566-67,
Margaret Lambert accuses John Lawson of saying “that she was a chermer”
(p. 84); about 1569 Margaret Reed is charged with calling Margaret Howhett
“a horse goodmother water wych” (p. 91); in 1572, Thomas Fewler deposed
that he “hard Elisabeth Anderson caull ... Anne Burden ‘crowket handyd
wytch.’ He saith the words was spoken audiently there; ther might many have
herd them, beinge spoken so neigh the cross and in the towne gait as they
were” (p. 247). So in 1691 Alice Bovill complained of a man who had said to
her, “Thou bewitched my stot” (North Riding Record Society, Publications,
IX, 6). See also Historical Manuscripts Commission, Report on Manuscripts
in Various Collections, I, 283; Lefroy, Bermudas or Somers Islands, II, 629
(no. 15).
 [122] See, for example, Mr. Noble’s edition of the Records of the Court of
Assistants, II, 43, 72, 85, 94, 95, 104, 131, 136,—all between 1633 and 1644.
[123] See Drake’s Annals of Witchcraft in New England; Noble’s Records,
as above, 1, 11, 31, 33, 159, 188, 228, 229, 233.
[124] “Quia vulgo creditum, multorum annorum continuatam sterilitatem à
strigibus et maleficis diabolicâ invidiâ causari; tota patria in extictionem
maleficarum insurrexit” (as quoted from the autograph MS. in the Trier Stadt-
Bibliothek by G. L. Burr, The Fate of Dietrich Flade, p. 51, Papers of the
American Historical Association, V).
[125] “Incredibile vulgi apud Germanos, & maxime (quod pudet dicere)
Catholicos superstitio, invidia, calumniæ, detractationes, susurrationes &
similia, quæ nec Magistratus punit, nee concionatores arguunt, suspicionem
magiæ primum excitant. Omnes divinaæ punitiones, quas in sacris literis
Deus minatus est, à Sagis sunt. Nihil jam amplius Deus facit aut natura, sed
Sagæ omnia. 2. Unde impetu omnes clamant ut igitur inquirat Magistratus in
Sagas, quas non nisi ipsi suis linguis tot fecerunt” (Cautio Criminalis, seu de
Processibus contra Sagas Liber, 2d ed., 1695, pp. 387-388; cf. Dubium xv, pp.
67-68, Dubium xxxiv, pp. 231-232). Spee’s book came out anonymously in
1631, and, unlike most works on this side of the question, had immediate
results. Spee had no doubt of the existence of witchcraft (Dubium i, pp. 1 ff.,
Dubium iii, pp. 7-8); his experience, however, had taught him that most of
those condemned were innocent.
[126] The case is reported in A True and Impartial Relation of the
Informations against Three Witches [etc.], 1682, which is reprinted in
Howell’s State Trials, VIII, 1017 ff.
[127] Autobiography, chap. x, ed. Jessopp, 1887, pp. 131-132. North gives a
similar account of the same trial, with some general observations of great
interest, in his Life of the Lord Keeper Guilford, I, 267-269 (ed. 1826). It is
not clear whether North was present at the trial or not. It is important to notice
that North wrote his biographies late in life and that his death did not take
place until 1736, the year in which the statute against witchcraft was repealed.
[128] North remarks that Guilford (then Francis North, Chief Justice of the
Common Pleas) “had really a concern upon him at what happened; which
was, that his brother Raymond’s passive behavior should let those poor
women die” (Life of the Lord Keeper Guilford, I, 267). Raymond was, to be
sure, the judge who presided at the trial, but Francis North cannot be allowed
to have all the credit which his brother Roger would give him, for he refused
to reprieve the convicted witches (see his letter, quoted at p. 34, above).
[129] The following pamphlets (all in the Harvard College Library)
appeared in London in 1712: (1) A Full and Impartial Account of the
Discovery of Sorcery and Witchcraft, practis’d by Jane Wenham of Walkerne
in Hertfordshire; (2) The Case of the Hertfordshire Witchcraft consider’d.
Being an Examination of a Book, entitl’d, A Full and Impartial Account
[etc.]; (3) The Impossibility of Witchcraft ... In which the Depositions against
Jane Wenham ... are Confuted and Expos’d; (4) The Belief of Witchcraft
Vindicated ... in Answer to a late Pamphlet, Intituled, The Impossibility of
Witchcraft. By G. R. A. M.; (5) A Defense of the Proceedings against Jane
Wenham. By Francis Bragge; (6) Witchcraft Farther Display’d; (7) A Full
Confutation of Witchcraft: more particularly of the Depositions against Jane
Wenham ... In a Letter from a Physician in Hertfordshire, to his Friend in
London. The first and fifth of these pamphlets are by Bragge, a Cambridge
graduate who gave evidence for the prosecution. See also Memoirs of
Literature, London, 1722, IV, 357; Wright, Narratives of Sorcery and
Witchcraft, II, 319 ff. Jane Wenham lived nearly twenty years after her trial;
she died in 1730 (Clutterbuck, History and Antiquities of the County of
Hertford, II, 461; W. B. Gerish, A Hertfordshire Witch, p. 10).
[130] I refer to such remarks as the following:—“As the devil lost his
empire among us in the last age, he exercised it with greater violence among
the Indian Pawwaws, and our New England colonists” (Richard Gough,
British Topography, 1780, II, 254, note ᵖ); “The colonists of [Massachusetts]
appear to have carried with them, in an exaggerated form, the superstitious
feelings with regard to witchcraft which then [at the time of the settlement]
prevailed in the mother country” (Introduction to the reprint of Cotton
Mather’s Wonders of the Invisible World, in the Library of Old Authors,
1862); “In the dark and dangerous forests of America the animistic instinct,
the original source of the superstition, operated so powerfully in Puritan
minds that Cotton Mather’s Wonders of the Invisible World and the Salem
persecution surpassed in credulity and malignity anything the mother country
could show” (Ferris Greenslet, Joseph Glanvill, New York, 1900, pp. 150-
151); “The new world, from the time of its settlement, has been a kind of
health resort for the worn-out delusions of the old.... For years prior to the
Salem excitement, European witchcraft had been prostrate on its dying bed,
under the watchful and apprehensive eyes of religion and of law; carried over
the ocean it arose to its feet, and threatened to depopulate New England”
(George M. Beard, The Psychology of the Salem Witchcraft Excitement, New
York, 1882, p. 1).
[131] Narratives of Sorcery and Magic, II, 284.
[132] Proceedings American Antiquarian Society, New Series, V, 267.
[133] F. Legge, Witchcraft in Scotland, in The Scottish Review, October,
1891, XVIII, 263.
[134] On modern savages as devil worshippers, see, for example, Henry
More, Divine Dialogues, 1668, I, 404 ff. (Dialogue iii, sections 15-16).
[135] Magnalia, book i, chap. i, §2, ed. 1853, I. 42; book vi, chap. vi, §3,
III, 436; Jesuit Relations, ed. Thwaites, I, 286; II, 76; VIII, 124, 126. See also
Thomas Morton, New English Canaan, 1637, chap. ix, ed. Adams, (Prince
Society), p. 150, with the references in Mr. Adams’s note. Cf. Hutchinson,
History of Massachusetts, chap. vi, ed. 1795, I, 419 ff.; Diary of Ezra Stiles,
June 13, 1773, ed. Dexter, I, 385-386.
[136] Mayhew’s letter of Oct. 22, 1652, in Eliot and Mayhew’s Tears of
Repentance, 1653 (Mass. Hist. Soc. Soc. Collections, 3d Series, IV, 203-206);
Gookin, Historical Collections of the Indians in New England (Mass. Hist.
Soc. Collections, I, 154). See the references in Mr. Adams’s note to Morton’s
New English Canaan, Prince Society edition, p. 152, and compare the
following places in the Eliot Tracts (as reprinted in the Mass. Hist. Soc.
Collections, 3d Series, IV),—pp. 17, 19-20, 39, 50-51, 55-57, 77, 82, 113-
116, 133-134, 156, 186-187. See, for the impression that Indian ceremonies
made on a devout man in 1745, David Brainerd’s Journal, Mirabilia Dei inter
Indicos, Philadelphia, [1746,] pp. 49-57:—“I sat,” writes Brainerd, “at a small
Distance, not more than Thirty Feet from them, (tho’ undiscover’d) with my
Bible in my Hand, resolving if possible to spoil their Sport, and prevent their
receiving any Answers from the infernal world” (p. 50).