|
|
PROBATIO DÆMONIALITATIS |
PROOF OF DEMONIALITY
|
| SUMMARIUM |
SUMMARY |
| 1. De probatione criminis Dæmonialitatis,
distinguendum est. |
1. Distinctions to be made in the proof of
the crime of Demoniality. |
| 2. Indicia probantia coitum Sagæ cum Diabolo. |
2. Signs proving the intercourse of a Witch
with the Devil. |
| 3. Requiritur confessio ipsius malefici ad
plenam probationem. |
3. The confession of the Sorcerer himself is
requisite for a full eviction. |
| 4. Historia de Moniali habente consuetudinem
cum Incubo. |
4. Tale of a Nun who had an intimacy
with an Incubus. |
| 5. Si adsint indicia visa in recitata historia,
potest ad torturam deveniri. |
5. If the indictment is supported by the
recitals of eye-witnesses, torture may be
resorted to. |
| 1. Quantum ad probationem hujus criminis
attinet, distinguendum est de Dæmonialitate,
puta, vel ejus, quæ a Sagis seu
Maleficis fit cum Diabolis; sive de ea, quæ
ab aliis fit cum Incubis. |
1. As regards the proof of that crime, a
distinction must be made of the kind of
Demoniality, to wit: whether it is that
which is practiced by Witches or Wizards
with the Devil, or that which other persons
perpetrate with Incubi. |
| 2. Quoad primam, probato crimine pacti
facti cum Diabolo, probata remanet Dæmonialitas
ex consequentia necessaria;
nam scopus tum Sagarum, tum Maleficorum
in ludis nocturnis, ultra convivia, et
choreas, est hujusmodi infamis congressus:
aliter, illius criminis nullus potest esse
testis, quia Diabolus, qui Sagæ visibilis
est, aliorum oculos effugit. Verum est,
quod aliquoties visæ sunt mulieres in sylvis,
agris, et nemoribus, supinæ jacentes,
ad umbilicum tenus denudatæ, et juxta
dispositionem actus venerei, divaricatis et
adductis cruribus, clunes agitare, prout
scribit Guacc., lib. 1, cap. 12, v. Sciendum
est sæpius, fol. 65. Tali casu emergeret
suspicio vehemens talis criminis,
dummodo esset aliunde adminiculata, et
crederem talem actum per testes sufficienter
probatum, sufficere Judici ad indagandam
tormentis veritatem; et hoc maxime,
si post aliqualem moram in illo actu, visus
fuisset a muliere elevari quasi fumus niger,
et tunc mulierem surgere, prout ibidem
scribit Guaccius; talis enim fumus,
aut umbra, Dæmonem fuisse concumbentem
cum fœmina inferre potest. Sicut etiam, si
mulier visa fuisset concumbere cum homine,
qui post actum de repente evanuit, ut non
semel accidisse idem auctor ibidem narrat. |
2. In the first case, the compact entered
into with the Devil being proved, the evidence
of Demoniality follows as a necessary
consequence; for, the purpose, both
of Witches and Wizards, in the nightly revels
that take place after feasting and
dancing, is none other but that infamous
intercourse; otherwise there can be no
witness of that crime, since the Devil, visible
to the Witch, escapes the sight of
others. Sometimes, it is true, women have
been seen in the woods, in the fields, in
the groves, lying on their backs, ad umbilicum
tenus nudatæ, et juxta dispositionem
actus venerei, their legs divaricatis et adductis,
clunes agitare, as is written by
Guaccius, book I, chap. 12, v. Sciendum
est sæpius, fol. 65. In such a case there
would be a very strong suspicion of such
a crime, if supported by other signs; and
I am inclined to believe that such action,
sufficiently proved by witnesses, would
justify the Judge in resorting to torture in
order to ascertain the truth; especially if,
shortly after that action, a sort of black
smoke had been seen to issue from the
woman, and she had been noticed to rise,
as is also written by Guaccius; for it might
be inferred that that smoke or shadow had
been the Devil himself, concumbens cum
fœmina. Likewise if, as has more than
once happened, according to the same author,
a woman had been seen concumbere
cum homine, who, the action over, suddenly
disappeared. |
| 3. Cæterum ad probandum concludenter
aliquem esse Maleficum, seu Maleficam,
requiritur propria confessio; nullus
enim haberi potest de hoc testis, nisi forte
sint alii Malefici, qui in judicio deponunt
de complicibus; sed quia socii criminis
sunt, eorum dictum non concludit, nec
etiam ad torturam sufficit, nisi alia existent
indicia, puta, sigillum Diaboli impressum
in eorum corpore, prout diximus
supra num. 23.; et in eorum domibus,
facta perquisitione, inveniant signa, ac
instrumenta artis diabolicæ, ut ossa mortuorum,
præsertim calvariam; crines
artificiose contextos; nodos plumarum
intricatos; alas, aut pedes, aut ossicula
vespertilionum, aut bufonum, aut serpentium;
ignotas seminum species; figuras
cereas; vasculos plenos incognito pulvere,
aut oleo, aut unguentis minime notis, etc.,
ut ordinarie contingit reperiri a Judicibus,
qui, accepta accusatione de hujusmodi
Sagis, ad capturam, et domus
visitationem deveniunt, ut scribit Delbene,
de Off. S. Inquis., par. 2. dub. 206,
num. 7. |
3. Moreover, in order to prove conclusively
that a person is a Wizard or a Witch,
the own confession of such person is requisite:
for there can be no witnesses to
the fact, unless perhaps other Sorcerers
giving evidence at the trial against their
accomplices; from their being confederates
in the crime, their statement is not conclusive
and does not justify the recourse
to torture, should not other indications be
forthcoming, such as the seal of the Devil
stamped on their body, as aforesaid, Nr 23,
or the finding in their dwelling, after a
search, of signs and instruments of the
diabolic art: for instance, bones and, especially,
a skull, hair artfully plaited, intricate
knots of feathers, wings, feet or
bones of bats, toads or serpents, unfamiliar
seeds, wax figures, vessels filled with
unknown powder, oil or ointments, etc., as
are usually detected by Judges who, upon
a charge being brought against Sorcerers,
proceed to their apprehension and the
search of their houses. |
| 4. Quantum vero ad probationem congressus
cum Incubo, par est difficultas;
non minus enim Incubus, ac alii Diaboli
effugiunt, quando volunt, visum aliorum,
ut videri se faciunt a sola amasia. Tamen
non raro accidit, quod etiam visi sint Incubi
modo sub una, modo sub alia specie
in actu carnali cum mulieribus. |
4. The proof of intimacy with an Incubus
offers the same difficulty; for, no less
than other Demons, the Incubus is, at
will, invisible to all but his mistress. Yet,
it has not seldom happened that Incubi
have allowed themselves to be surprised
in the act of carnal intercourse with women,
now in one shape, now in another. |
| In quodam Monasterio (nomen ejus et
urbis taceo, ne veterem ignominiam memoriæ
refricem) quædam fuit Monialis,
quæ cum alia Moniali, quæ cellam habebat
suæ contiguam, simultatem ex levibus causis,
ut assolet inter mulieres, maxime Religiosas,
habebat. Hæc sagax in observando
quascumque actiones Monialis sibi adversæ,
per plures dies vidit, quod ista in
diebus æstivis, statim a prandio non spatiabatur
per viridarium cum aliis, sed ab
iis sequestra, se retrahebat in cellam, quam
sera obserabat. Observatrix igitur æmula
curiositate investigans, quid tali tempore
illa facere posset, etiam ipsa in propriam
cellam se recipiebat; cæpit autem audire
submissam quasi duorum insimul colloquentium
vocem (quod facile erat, nam
cella parvo simplicis, scilicet lateris unius,
disterminio dividebatur), mox sonitum poppysmatum4,
concussionis lecti, gannitus,
ac anhelitus, quasi duorum concubentium;
unde aucta in æmula curiositate stetit in
observatione, ut sciret, quinam in illa cella
essent. Postquam autem per tres vices vidit,
nullam aliam Monialem egressam e
cella illa, præter æmulam, dominam cellæ,
suspicata est Monialem in camera absconditum
aliquem virum, clanculum introductum,
retinere; unde et rem detulit ad Abbatissam,
quæ consilio habito cum discretis,
voluit audire sonitus, et observare indicia
relata ab accusatrice, ne præcipitanter et
inconsiderate ageret. Abbatissa igitur cum
discretis se receperunt in cellam observatricis,
et audierunt strepitus, et voces,
quas accusatrix detulerat. Facta igitur
inquisitione, an ulla Monialium potuisset
secum in illa cella clausa esse, et reperto
quod non, Abbatissa cum discretis fuit ad
ostium cellæ clausæ; et pulsato frustra
pluries ostio, cum Monialis nec respondere,
nec aperire vellet, Abbatissa minata
est, se velle ostium prosterni facere, et
vecte aggredi opus fecit a quadam conversa.
Tunc aperuit ostium Monialis, et
facta perquisitione, nullus inventus est in
camera. Interrogata Monialis cum quonam
loqueretur, et de causa concussionis
lecti, anhelituum, etc., omnia negavit. |
In a Monastery (I mention neither its
name nor that of the town where it lies,
so as not to recall to memory a past scandal),
there was a Nun, who, about trifles,
as is usual with women and especially
with nuns, had quarrelled with one of her
mates who occupied a cell adjoining to
hers. Quick at observing all the doings of
her enemy, this neighbour noticed, several
days in succession, that instead of
walking with her companions in the garden
after dinner she retired to her cell,
where she locked herself in. Anxious to
know what she could be doing there all
that time, the inquisitive Nun betook herself
also to her cell. Soon she heard a
sound, as of two voices conversing in subdued
tones, which she could easily do,
since the two cells were divided but by a
slight partition), then a peculiar friction4,
the cracking of a bed, groans and sighs,
quasi duorum concumbentium; her curiosity
was raised to the highest pitch, and she redoubled
her attention in order to ascertain
who was in the cell. But having, three times
running, seen no other nun come out
but her rival, she suspected that a man
had been secretly introduced and was
kept hidden there. She went and reported
the thing to the Abbess, who, after holding
counsel with discreet persons, resolved
upon hearing the sounds and observing
the indications that had been denounced
her, so as to avoid any precipitate or inconsiderate
act. In consequence, the Abbess and
her confidents repaired to the cell of the
spy, and heard the voices and other noises
that had been described. An inquiry was
set on foot to make sure whether any of
the Nuns could be shut in with the other
one; and the result being in the negative,
the Abbess and her attendants went to the
door of the closed cell, and knocked repeatedly,
but to no purpose: the Nun
neither answered, nor opened. The Abbess
threatened to have the door broken in,
and even ordered a convert to force it
with a crow-bar. The Nun then opened
her door: a search was made and no one
found. Being asked with whom she had
been talking, and the why and wherefore
of the bed cracking, of the sighs, etc.,
she denied every thing. |
| Cum vero res perseveraret, accuratior,
ac curiosior reddita Monialis æmula perforavit
tabulas lacunaris, ut posset cellam
introspicere; et vidit elegantem quemdam
juvenem cum Moniali concumbentem, quem
etiam eodem modo ab aliis Monialibus videndum
curavit. Delata mox accusatione
ad Episcopum, ipsaque Moniali omnia
negante, tandem metu tormentorum comminatorum
adacta, confessa est se cum
Incubo consuetudinem habuisse. |
But, matters going on just the same as
before, the rival Nun, become more attentive
and more inquisitive than ever, contrived
to bore a hole through the partition,
so as to be able to see what was
going on inside the cell; and what should
she see but an elegant youth lying with
the Nun, and the sight of whom she took
care to let the others enjoy by the same
means. The charge was soon brought
before the bishop: the guilty Nun endeavoured
still to deny all; but, threatened
with the torture, she confessed having
had an intimacy with an Incubus. |
| 5. Quando igitur adessent talia indicia,
sicut in recitata historia intervenerunt,
posset utique in rigoroso examine rea
constitui; sine tamen ejus confessione, non
censendum est delictum plene probatum,
quantumvis a testibus visus fuisset congressus;
siquidem aliquando accidit, quod
Diabolus, ut infamiam alicui innocenti
pararet, præstigiose talem concubitum repræsentaverit.
Unde in his casibus debet
Judex Ecclesiasticus esse perfecte oculatus. |
5. When, therefore, indications are forthcoming,
such as those recited above, a
charge might be brought after a searching
inquiry; yet, without the confession of the
accused, the offence should not be regarded
as fully proved, even if the intercourse
were testified by eye-witnesses; for it sometimes
happens that, in order to undo an
innocent female, the Devil feigns such intercourse
by means of some delusion. In
those cases, the Ecclesiastical Judge must
consequently trust but his own eyes. |
|
|