Witches and other foul fiends
By F. P. GENT
With drawings by Jennifer Kent. (Coming Soon!)
OUR forefathers were quite convinced of the existence of witches and other foul fiends of the air. At certain times there would be a gathering of the clans and the noise of their flight to the meeting place could be distinctly heard in the air.
When they were assembled, the arch-demon himself conducted the service— a parody of Christian rites and ceremonies. The ritual included the saying of the Lord's Prayer backwards and invocations to the devil in mockery of the prayers in the church service. It was also thought that human sacrifices were offered in the Black Mass but this is doubtful. Probably the victim was a white cock or a stolen lamb.
Many parts of England had their own particular hobgoblin and nights were made fearsome by the dread of it. Suffolk was greatly afflicted with the presence of these unwelcome visitors. In my boyhood's days, 60 odd years ago, an old lady near Bury St. Edmunds stuffed her chimneys with paper and rags in the summer. She did this so that
dim, a mischievous imp fond of living in chimneys, should find no way into her house.
Woodbridge and its neighbourhood was haunted by another unpleasant creature called the Galley Trot. It had the power of becoming like a dog or bullock. But the most fearsome of all was the Suffolk Shock which sometimes appeared as a dog with eyes as big as saucers. One courageous man attempted to seize it but was severely bitten in the hand. The marks of its teeth on his thumb remained for life. So what greater proof of the reality of this unearthly visitant could be offered!
THOUSANDS of reputed witches were put to death in Europe between 1484 and 1782. In England some brought punishment upon themselves by declaring they had flown to the Witches' Sabbath on broomsticks. The last to suffer in this country was tried in 1722. Our laws against witchcraft were repealed in 1736, too late to save two Suffolk women accused of witchcraft in 1664.
At the Bury Assizes of that year it was related that one Rose Cullender had had part of her cottage accidentally knocked down by a farmer driving to his harvest field. She was naturally annoyed and said so in no uncertain terms. A quarrel followed and then some unfortunate things happened and the blame was laid on her shoulders. Three times, according to the farmer's evidence, the usually steady cart stuck in the gate through which there was ample room to pass. Some supernatural power seemed to be behind every effort to dislodge it. The strenuous labours of three stalwart farm workers brought on excessive nose bleeding. Another farmer gave evidence that, two years earlier, he too had knocked down a bit of Rose's cottage. No wonder she was angry at the second attack upon her premises. Terrible things happened as the result of her anger. His stock acted as though accursed. Pigs behaved in a most extraordinary manner, dancing and capering about until, big as they were, they died from exhaustion. Every horse he possessed was smitten with disease that ended fatally. His own body was over-run with lice and they were so numerous that he was forced to burn his clothes.
These astonishing charges were accepted as truth by Sir Matthew Hale, the judge, who in many respects was much in advance of the thought of his time. He believed in the existence of witches and their power to do harm. 'Every nation punished their crimes.' So poor Rose was sentenced to death aid was executed two days later with another victim.
The other reputed witch was Amy Duny who had been looking after a neighbour's baby whilst the mother went to market. Despite the fact that she had been forbidden to suckle the infant, she had done so. When scolded, she had put a curse on both mother and child. Soon after, the baby developed fits and the doctor advised that the baby's blanket should be hung up in the chimney corner during the day. When at night it was taken down and wrapped round the baby a great toad fell out into the fire. There was a loud noise and it disappeared. Next day, Amy's face was seen to be scorched.
Further witnesses deposed that Amy, upon some grievance, had cursed their children who promptly vomited bent pins and two penny nails. This form of sickness seemed to be the one usually associated with those bewitched. Though two lawyers present expressed dissatisfaction with this absurd evidence, their protests were of no avail and Amy Duny suffered the punishment of death.
MAIDENS were believed to pine away as waxen images representing them slowly melted before a fire. Others against whom the reputed witch had a grudge were smitten with illness or suffered agonising pain in the body at the spot where pins were stuck in.
Even today in some remote villages there is still a half-acknowledged suspicion of some quite innocent old ladies. Anyhow, it seems wise to keep on the right side of them. Offended, they might overlook with the evil eye anyone falling foul of them.
Is there any truth in these eerie stories of the past? Most people would utter a contemptuous 'no'. Yet at a recent conference of Modern Churchmen, an Oxford professor of logic declared his belief in haunted houses and apparitions. As an expert in matters psychical, he said: 'I think a lot of witchcraft was hocus-pocus but I suppose some of the witches had paranormal powers.'
*******************************************************************************
Shortly thereafter we see the following in the Letters to the Editor:
WITCHES AND OTHER FOUL FIENDS
Hardiman Scott, 5 Onslow Gardens, Muswell Hill, London, TV. 10
East Anglian (June 1956, Page 471)
I THINK that you in the title 'Witches and Other Foul Fiends' and Mr. Gent in the article itself (EAM March 56) have committed a most unfortunate libel against witches.
Mr. Gent doesn't always make his own position clear. He seems to doubt the truth or justice of allegations against Rose Cullender and Amy Duny but in his two opening paragraphs he says the familiar things for which there's little evidence.
That witches existed there's no doubt. They were often found among our aristocracy and educated classes. That they could develop paranormal powers there's little doubt. But that they persistently used these powers for evil there is every doubt. There must have been wicked witches, who used their powers for evil purposes, just as there were wicked people who were not witches. But there's certainly insufficient evidence to suggest that they should be bracketed with 'other foul fiends'. There's no real evidence that witch rites are a parody of Christian rites, that they included saying the Lord's Prayer backwards or that the Black Mass (whatever that is) was celebrated.
Witches exist today and hold their covens. But there's nothing to suggest that they're not perfectly respectable people. I know of no evidence that they cast evil spells. Their 'religion' is clearly pre-Christian. It has affinities with the Greek mysteries and there are rites which include various ritual dances. Dancing is used as a means of raising 'power'. A contemporary witch is on record as saying that witches worship the 'divine spirit of creation' and that their religion is a religion of love, pleasure and excitement'.
It is perhaps a pity that their past history of persecution still encourages them to maintain such great secrecy and, of course, it's not surprising that this secrecy creates suspicion. But whatever witches may or may not have done in the past, there's nothing to suggest that today they should not be afforded the liberal toleration that we accord to all minorities.
**********************************************************************************************************************
WITCHES —Hardiman Scott, 5 Onslow Gardens, London, N.10.
East Anglian (December 1956, Page 119)
OF course Miss Stella Jones is right (EAM June & Aug. 56). [Unfortunately I don't have that Issue! - Scott] There is nothing respectable 'about a creed manifestly dedicated to evil and to the working of harm against all people'. But the witch cult is not dedicated to evil and does not try to work harm against any people. If Miss Jones thinks so, then she's been misinformed.
The history of witchcraft is well documented and the authorities are readily available. I don't dispute that the black mass was said on the continent, any more than I dispute that, in the past, there must have been witches practising evil in this country. But evil wasn't their prerogative alone. And there is absolutely no doubt that countless innocent people, as well as witches practising their beliefs for good, perished among the thousands persecuted.
Furthermore, in judging wiches (good or bad) of the past some caution is needed because in the accounts of numerous witch trials that still exist we have only the cases for the prosecution. The cases for the defence haven't been preserved for the simple reason that they never existed. The accused weren't allowed a defence.
We may think witch beliefs are primitive but the fact that they are pre-Christian does not necessarily invalidate them. Today Miss Jones would be hard put to produce any evidence of evil practices by witch covens in this country. I won't deny that in recent times (and coinciding with the immigration of large numbers of West Indians) there may have been cases of certain evil practices—of so-called black magic and so-called witch rights—but it would be wrong to confuse these with genuine witch practices and they are as distasteful to witches as they are to Miss Jones and me.
I did remark in my first letter that it was a pity the past history of persecution still encouraged witches 'to maintain such great secrecy' but the tone of Miss Jones' letter makes me see why they do.
With drawings by Jennifer Kent. (Coming Soon!)
OUR forefathers were quite convinced of the existence of witches and other foul fiends of the air. At certain times there would be a gathering of the clans and the noise of their flight to the meeting place could be distinctly heard in the air.
When they were assembled, the arch-demon himself conducted the service— a parody of Christian rites and ceremonies. The ritual included the saying of the Lord's Prayer backwards and invocations to the devil in mockery of the prayers in the church service. It was also thought that human sacrifices were offered in the Black Mass but this is doubtful. Probably the victim was a white cock or a stolen lamb.
Many parts of England had their own particular hobgoblin and nights were made fearsome by the dread of it. Suffolk was greatly afflicted with the presence of these unwelcome visitors. In my boyhood's days, 60 odd years ago, an old lady near Bury St. Edmunds stuffed her chimneys with paper and rags in the summer. She did this so that
dim, a mischievous imp fond of living in chimneys, should find no way into her house.
Woodbridge and its neighbourhood was haunted by another unpleasant creature called the Galley Trot. It had the power of becoming like a dog or bullock. But the most fearsome of all was the Suffolk Shock which sometimes appeared as a dog with eyes as big as saucers. One courageous man attempted to seize it but was severely bitten in the hand. The marks of its teeth on his thumb remained for life. So what greater proof of the reality of this unearthly visitant could be offered!
THOUSANDS of reputed witches were put to death in Europe between 1484 and 1782. In England some brought punishment upon themselves by declaring they had flown to the Witches' Sabbath on broomsticks. The last to suffer in this country was tried in 1722. Our laws against witchcraft were repealed in 1736, too late to save two Suffolk women accused of witchcraft in 1664.
At the Bury Assizes of that year it was related that one Rose Cullender had had part of her cottage accidentally knocked down by a farmer driving to his harvest field. She was naturally annoyed and said so in no uncertain terms. A quarrel followed and then some unfortunate things happened and the blame was laid on her shoulders. Three times, according to the farmer's evidence, the usually steady cart stuck in the gate through which there was ample room to pass. Some supernatural power seemed to be behind every effort to dislodge it. The strenuous labours of three stalwart farm workers brought on excessive nose bleeding. Another farmer gave evidence that, two years earlier, he too had knocked down a bit of Rose's cottage. No wonder she was angry at the second attack upon her premises. Terrible things happened as the result of her anger. His stock acted as though accursed. Pigs behaved in a most extraordinary manner, dancing and capering about until, big as they were, they died from exhaustion. Every horse he possessed was smitten with disease that ended fatally. His own body was over-run with lice and they were so numerous that he was forced to burn his clothes.
These astonishing charges were accepted as truth by Sir Matthew Hale, the judge, who in many respects was much in advance of the thought of his time. He believed in the existence of witches and their power to do harm. 'Every nation punished their crimes.' So poor Rose was sentenced to death aid was executed two days later with another victim.
The other reputed witch was Amy Duny who had been looking after a neighbour's baby whilst the mother went to market. Despite the fact that she had been forbidden to suckle the infant, she had done so. When scolded, she had put a curse on both mother and child. Soon after, the baby developed fits and the doctor advised that the baby's blanket should be hung up in the chimney corner during the day. When at night it was taken down and wrapped round the baby a great toad fell out into the fire. There was a loud noise and it disappeared. Next day, Amy's face was seen to be scorched.
Further witnesses deposed that Amy, upon some grievance, had cursed their children who promptly vomited bent pins and two penny nails. This form of sickness seemed to be the one usually associated with those bewitched. Though two lawyers present expressed dissatisfaction with this absurd evidence, their protests were of no avail and Amy Duny suffered the punishment of death.
MAIDENS were believed to pine away as waxen images representing them slowly melted before a fire. Others against whom the reputed witch had a grudge were smitten with illness or suffered agonising pain in the body at the spot where pins were stuck in.
Even today in some remote villages there is still a half-acknowledged suspicion of some quite innocent old ladies. Anyhow, it seems wise to keep on the right side of them. Offended, they might overlook with the evil eye anyone falling foul of them.
Is there any truth in these eerie stories of the past? Most people would utter a contemptuous 'no'. Yet at a recent conference of Modern Churchmen, an Oxford professor of logic declared his belief in haunted houses and apparitions. As an expert in matters psychical, he said: 'I think a lot of witchcraft was hocus-pocus but I suppose some of the witches had paranormal powers.'
*******************************************************************************
Shortly thereafter we see the following in the Letters to the Editor:
WITCHES AND OTHER FOUL FIENDS
Hardiman Scott, 5 Onslow Gardens, Muswell Hill, London, TV. 10
East Anglian (June 1956, Page 471)
I THINK that you in the title 'Witches and Other Foul Fiends' and Mr. Gent in the article itself (EAM March 56) have committed a most unfortunate libel against witches.
Mr. Gent doesn't always make his own position clear. He seems to doubt the truth or justice of allegations against Rose Cullender and Amy Duny but in his two opening paragraphs he says the familiar things for which there's little evidence.
That witches existed there's no doubt. They were often found among our aristocracy and educated classes. That they could develop paranormal powers there's little doubt. But that they persistently used these powers for evil there is every doubt. There must have been wicked witches, who used their powers for evil purposes, just as there were wicked people who were not witches. But there's certainly insufficient evidence to suggest that they should be bracketed with 'other foul fiends'. There's no real evidence that witch rites are a parody of Christian rites, that they included saying the Lord's Prayer backwards or that the Black Mass (whatever that is) was celebrated.
Witches exist today and hold their covens. But there's nothing to suggest that they're not perfectly respectable people. I know of no evidence that they cast evil spells. Their 'religion' is clearly pre-Christian. It has affinities with the Greek mysteries and there are rites which include various ritual dances. Dancing is used as a means of raising 'power'. A contemporary witch is on record as saying that witches worship the 'divine spirit of creation' and that their religion is a religion of love, pleasure and excitement'.
It is perhaps a pity that their past history of persecution still encourages them to maintain such great secrecy and, of course, it's not surprising that this secrecy creates suspicion. But whatever witches may or may not have done in the past, there's nothing to suggest that today they should not be afforded the liberal toleration that we accord to all minorities.
**********************************************************************************************************************
WITCHES —Hardiman Scott, 5 Onslow Gardens, London, N.10.
East Anglian (December 1956, Page 119)
OF course Miss Stella Jones is right (EAM June & Aug. 56). [Unfortunately I don't have that Issue! - Scott] There is nothing respectable 'about a creed manifestly dedicated to evil and to the working of harm against all people'. But the witch cult is not dedicated to evil and does not try to work harm against any people. If Miss Jones thinks so, then she's been misinformed.
The history of witchcraft is well documented and the authorities are readily available. I don't dispute that the black mass was said on the continent, any more than I dispute that, in the past, there must have been witches practising evil in this country. But evil wasn't their prerogative alone. And there is absolutely no doubt that countless innocent people, as well as witches practising their beliefs for good, perished among the thousands persecuted.
Furthermore, in judging wiches (good or bad) of the past some caution is needed because in the accounts of numerous witch trials that still exist we have only the cases for the prosecution. The cases for the defence haven't been preserved for the simple reason that they never existed. The accused weren't allowed a defence.
We may think witch beliefs are primitive but the fact that they are pre-Christian does not necessarily invalidate them. Today Miss Jones would be hard put to produce any evidence of evil practices by witch covens in this country. I won't deny that in recent times (and coinciding with the immigration of large numbers of West Indians) there may have been cases of certain evil practices—of so-called black magic and so-called witch rights—but it would be wrong to confuse these with genuine witch practices and they are as distasteful to witches as they are to Miss Jones and me.
I did remark in my first letter that it was a pity the past history of persecution still encouraged witches 'to maintain such great secrecy' but the tone of Miss Jones' letter makes me see why they do.
posted by BissekArt at 3:16 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home