| Volume Thirty-Five | 1993 | |
RESEARCH conducted by social historians in the past few decades has revealed a rich fabric of religious belief and ritual in late medieval and early modern Europe. In concentrating on behavior and practice, as opposed to doctrine and dogma, these historians have shown that Christianity as understood by the masses was at times far removed from the liturgical and doctrinal controversies of the elite. An examination of the accounts of demon possession and of the treatises on demonology written in France in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries can tell us a great deal about the thoughts, beliefs and preoccupations of contemporary Christians. The impression left by many of these is that the majority were written in an attempt to suppress the unorthodox views of the masses . It should be recognized, however, that many of the Catholic elites defended certain beliefs which their Protestant counterparts regarded as superstitious. One cannot speak, therefore, simply of 'elite' versus 'popular' culture. 'Ritual, myth and magic' often merged imperceptibly with the beginnings of science, a field in which the elites predominated. What is certain is that a whole body of thought and belief which a few decades ago was often dismissed as unworthy of serious historical consideration has now been shown to be a fruitful area of research.
Historians working on the ecclesiastical history of France in
the early modern period are fortunate in that a rich collection of pamphlets
and demonological tracts has survived and has been made widely accessible
in a microfiche series. One of the earliest accounts in this series describes
a demon possession which took place at Laon in 1566. The testimony of
three eyewitnesses, the Dean of the Cathedral at Laon, one of the canons,
and the Royal notary of the city, was compiled by Jean Boulaese, professor
of Hebrew at the College De Montaigu in Paris.1
Boulaese's pamphlet, first published in 1573, provides the following
account. It begins in Vervins, a small town in Picardy, and concerns a
young girl, Nicole Obri, who was approximately sixteen years of age. She
was the daughter of a butcher and the wife of a tailor. On the afternoon of
3 November 1565, while kneeling on the grave of her maternal grandfather
in the local parish church, there suddenly appeared before her a man
standing upright but entombed. This spirit, who resembled her grandfather,
spoke to Nicole and informed her that he was
Page 34
Boulaese records that Nicole told her parents that her grandfather had appeared before her in order to exhort his descendants to make the amends necessary to secure the release of his soul from Purgatory. He told Nicole that his soul was detained there because he had died suddenly without having received the last rites nor having made arrangements for the fulfillment of the pilgrimages that he had vowed to complete during his lifetime. He demanded that his family have masses performed, that they give alms to the poor, and that they make the promised pilgrimages. These deeds, with the exception of the pilgrimage to St. James of Compostella, were accomplished, but Nicole once again began to exhibit certain behaviors which were regarded as signs of recurring possession. Upon the advice of some friends, the family summoned the local curate to try to conjure this spirit. When interrogated by the curate, the spirit responded that he was "le bon Ange, l'Ame de Joachim Vuillot," sent by God. Unsure of himself, the curate consulted a Dominican from the local priory, who immediately declared that the spirit was in fact an "Ange mauvais et Sathanique . . . un Diable." Finally, under the constraint of conjuration, the spirit revealed himself as Beelzebub and said that, in believing him, Nicole had allowed him to enter her body.3
As the Dominican, holding the consecrated host in front of Nicole's face, proceeded to exorcise this demon, she became "hideously horrible to see, frightful to hear [and] incredibly hard and stiff to the touch." Nicole then became mute, blind and deaf for unspecified periods of time. When the demon spoke, it accused spectators of various vices, sins and secrets which they had failed to confess to their priest.4 The monk succeeded in restoring Nicole's sight, speech and hearing by touching the afflicted parts of her body with a portion of the true Cross . Finally, at the end of the day, Nicole "received the only victorious remedy that is our Creator, Savior and Lord Jesus Christ in the consecrated Host." She at once became "holy of spirit and body, inflamed with devotion, and endowed with a gracious beauty that surpassed the natural." Boulaese added that this was not accomplished by the efforts of the Protestant ministers, for whom the demon said that it would do nothing because they were his servants.6 The next day, 24 January 1566, Nicole was taken to Laon to see the bishop. The remainder of the case involves an escalation of publicity and manipulation by the Catholic authorities, a subject which will be dealt with in more detail after an examination of some of the questions raised by the early stages of this particular case.
In his analysis of Boulaese's account, D. P. Walker dismissed
Nicole rather uncharitably as a fraud. In studying other contemporary
documents, he concluded that the origins of her "fits and delusions" could
be found in her medical history, though, as he insisted, "nothing in her
background can account for her really brilliant performances as a
demoniac." Walker believes that the beginnings of the story amount to "a
frustrated attempt to have a good possession."8
Similar notions can be found in some of the literature written in France
during this period. In the preface to the second edition (1605) of his work
III Livres des Spectres, first published in 1586, Pierre Le
Loyer, an Angevin lawyer, remarked that,
of all the common and familiar subjects of conversation that are
entered upon in company of things remote from nature and cut off
from the senses, there is none so ready to hand, none so usual as
that of visions of spirits, and whether what is said of them is true.
It is the topic which people most readily discuss and on which they
linger the longest because of the abundance of examples.9
Allowing for some exaggeration on the part of this author, who perhaps
overstated the importance of his subject, it is clear from these two examples
that Nicole's vision was not a mere aberration that can be passed off
unquestionably as an attempt to defraud. In addition, it should be noted that
both passages reveal that these views permeated all levels of the social
hierarchy and were not merely peasant superstitions.'
Lavater's purpose in writing his treatise was not simply to confirm the existence of visions and spirits, but primarily to prove that these apparitions were "not the souls of dead men, as some men have thought, but either good or evill Angels, or else some secrete and hid operations of God.''10 Le Loyer wrote his treatise in direct response to the challenge presented by Lavater's work. "I have so well proved," he insisted upon completion of his work, "by the Doctors of the Church, that whatever thing that Lavater and his may say to the contrary, nevertheless the truth is that there are Spectres of Souls as well as Spectres of Angels and Demons."11 These two authors are representative of the ghost controversy that raged during the second half of the sixteenth century. This controversy is merely one aspect of the polemical debates that arose out of the Protestant attack on the doctrine of Purgatory. Although not explicitly stated, it seems that it was implicit in the Catholic position, and evidently widely believed in European society, that departed souls could return to earth to solicit the help of their descendants. In an article on the subject of ghosts, Geoffrey Parrinder explains that, "in developing Christian doctrine theologians discussed the nature of angels, good spirits, bad spirits, the resurrection of the dead, heaven, hell and purgatory. But belief in ghosts and their possible return to earth was left indeterminate, neither accepted nor rejected."12
Protestant reformers in many parts of Europe launched a
savage attack on
Page 37
This confusion is further evinced by the actions of the parish curate and the friar from the local priory. The Dominican who came to observe Nicole's condition quickly disabused the family, as well as the ingenuous curate, of the idea that the souls of the dead might take possession of a human body. Such heresies were condemned in the exorcism manuals,14 so it was immediately determined that Nicole had been possessed by a demon. Boulaese's account contains all of the necessary indications of a true possession as established by the Catholic authorities. In the first stage, which has already been described, Nicole demonstrated knowledge of the secrets or unconfessed sins of others and reacted with violent revulsion to the consecrated host. When the exorcisms continued, at Laon and now conducted by the bishop, the other two conventional signs of possession appeared: superhuman strength and a knowledge of foreign tongues. Nicole had been restrained on a dais at the east end of the cathedral nave. When the bishop raised the host during the consecration, she miraculously broke free from those men holding her and leapt more than six feet in the air.16
From this point the exorcism becomes even more
conspicuously propagandistic. The eucharist occupies a central position in
this account, as the short title suggests, "La Victoire du Sacrement de
l'autel." At one point during the exorcism, the demon, acting through
Nicole, "looked as if it had wanted to speak to those who did not bow their
heads before the precious Body of our Savior and Lord Jesus
Christ,"17 as though a special rapport existed between the
demon
and the irreverent Protestants who refused to acknowledge the real presence
or
Page 38
It is significant that Boulaese emphasized the fact that Nicole's
proclivity to believe that the ghost was her grandfather was largely
responsible for the possession. This suggests that he was writing not only
to refute Protestant doctrine but also to correct the misguided views of an
unwary populace. Some of the contemporary pamphlets reveal that such
beliefs could often be outlandish. In 1596 Claude Prieur, a Franciscan from
Laval in Maine, published a tract entitled Dialogue de la Lycanthropie
ou transformation d 'homme en loups. One of the participants in the
Dialogue, who represents the extreme views against which the
author's work was directed, inquired: "Do you not believe in
metamorphosis, that man can assume another bodily form?"22 In response, Proteron, the disputant who relates the
author's position, embarked upon a lengthy discourse, in which he refuted
the widely-held notion that men often transformed themselves into wolves
and devoured women and children. William Monter has stated that "the
belief that sorcerers can transform themselves into animals is probably
nearly as universal in 'primitive' societies as is the belief in magical
healing. . .But popular belief and demonology differed somewhat about
werewolves."24 Again we see evidence of an attempt
to steer the overly credulous away from
Page 39
A SIMILAR attempt to combat what many among the elite
classes regarded as peasant superstition is evident in a French translation of
a book written by Jean Wier, physician to the Duke of Cleves. The French
work, published in 1569, was entitled Cinq Livres de l'Imposture et
Tromperie des Diables: Des Enchantements et Sorcelleries. Speaking
of certain diabolical arts practiced by magicians and prognosticators, the
author, Jacques Grevin, who practiced medicine in Paris, protested that
this plague . . . has remained too long among the Christians:
principally in the places where the name of the Gospel is still not
clearly understood, and where the truth of the divine service is
spoiled by . . . pagan ceremonies, and superstitions which without
any doubt, were invented by the finesse of the Devil, to deceive
men.25
He went on to say that certain priests and monks, who are ignorant and of
an "incomparable impudence," respond with deception to those who seek
them out in times of sickness and need.26 Grevin also
explained that the people most susceptible to the ruses of the devil "are
those who mistrust the Lord, the malicious, those who are curious about
illicit things, those who are poorly instructed in the Christian religion, the
envious, the malfaiteurs, the elderly who have almost lost their mental
faculties, and all manner of women."27 Equally
susceptible, he continued, are those who are "infested by the smoky vapors
of malancholy . . . from which proceed all sorts of fantastic
monsters."28 Finally, the author insisted that the primary cause
of
the wild imaginations of the people was fear. "Apparitions oftentimes
appear to little children, to women, to the fearful, to the delicate, and to the
sick who are incessantly tormented and persecuted by fear."29
Most of these conditions of susceptibility mentioned by Prieur
constitute what Robert Muchembled has described as the 'milieu magique'
of the sixteenth century. He stresses the ignorance of the rural masses, as
well as that of much of the rural clergy, with respect to Catholic dogma,
the sacraments and the ritual of the Mass. Along with this relative
ignorance went a pervasive fear of hell, damnation, and death. Plagues and
other scourges were attributed to the action of evil forces in the world and
to God's punishment of impenitent sinners.30
According to Muchembled, the sermons of this period were saturated with
"vocabulaire diabolique." But superstitious practices were not always
associated with such gloom and doom. Pierre Crespet, a Parisian prior
writing in 1590,
Page 40
Michel Marescot, the author of an account of another demon
possession, stated unequivocally at the outset of a work he wrote in 1599
that "excessive credulity is a vice proceeding from an imbecility of the
mind of man and often by the suggestion of an evil
spirit."34 He asserted that "faith is a sure and certain path to
arrive at truth, salvation and wisdom: excessive credulity is a path that
leads us precipitously toward falsehood, fraud, folly and
superstition."35 According to him, this difference between faith
and
credulity could best be demonstrated by the story of Marthe Brossier, a
twenty-two-year-old woman who lived in Romorantin, a village in the
province of Berry. Marescot referred to her as one who pretended to be
possessed ("une pretendue inspiritee"). He related in his account how
"several prelates, theologians and doctors, all recognizing by the Christian
faith that evil spirits enter into the bodies of humans, and that by the
command and word of God they are exorcised, have discovered by a
diligent observation of all the signs and actions the imposture and
dissimulation of this woman."36 He admitted,
however, that there were other monks, theologians and doctors who, "either
by credulity or in order to follow the opinion of the people",
Page 41
On 30 March 1599, having been summoned to l'aris, Marthe Brossier appeared before the bishop and his entourage and informed them that she was possessed by an evil spirit. Marescot, who was also present, addressed her in Latin in an attempt to obtain proof of her possession, but Marthe did not respond. Then she was taken to an absidial chapel, and, when they started to pray, Marthe began to turn somersaults, and her eyes rolled back into her head. Next some fragments of the true Cross were brought before her, but these seemed to have no noticeable effect. She did, however, question the bishop's ability to interrogate her effectively because he was not wearing his mitre. And when the cap of a theologian was presented to her, she rejected it wildly, "as if," Marescot scoffed, "a theologian's cap or bishop's mitre had more power and more divinity than relics of the true Cross." The verdict of all of those present was: "Rien du diable: plusieurs choses feintes: peu de la maladie."38
Several doctors from the University of Paris continued to claim, however, that Marthe had in fact been possessed . On 3 April 1599, they drafted a short tract entitled Rapport de Quelques Medecins de Paris sur le faict de Marthe Brossier, in which they testified that they had themselves witnessed, during the past two days, Marthe's strange behavior. They reported that Marthe had been seized repeatedly by convulsions and had responded to commands and interrogations in Greek, Latin and English.39 The doctors gave their medical reasons for refusing to believe that Marthe's behavior was caused by any physical malady and concluded that the behavior could not have been fraudulent because she evinced no reaction at having pins stuck into her hands and neck. Even more convincing, they reasoned, was the fact that neither any blood issued forth nor was any visible mark left behind after the pins had been retracted.40 Although the doctors did not witness it themselves, a certain monsieur de Saincte Genevieve had also seen Marthe jump more than four feet in the air while five or six men were attempting to hold her down. In the final analysis, the doctors were forced "by all the laws of discourse and of sciences to believe this girl, Demoniac, and the devil living within her."41
Even more interesting than the events of this case is the
controversy among various members of the elite classes which it sparked.
In the second half of the
Page 42
In the writings of Crespet, Boguet and Node, we can see the major elements of a type of propaganda that was not intended to serve as a vehicle of oppression of 'popular culture. ' On the contrary, this literature seems to have been directed at the skepticism of other members of the elite classes. It is in fact evident that one cannot speak of the 'elite class' as a single, coherent entity. As one historian has described the situation, "Protestantism aside, there was no monolithic orthodoxy upon which all Catholics agreed in every detail. The church in France lacked the machinery, even if it had the will, to impose a single set of views on all people."53
Jonathan Pearl has shown that at least some of the French
Catholic demonologists were concerned with both the blind credulity of the
masses and the skepticism of some of the elites. His views have been
particularly influenced by Pierre de Lancre's L'Incredulite et
Mescreance du Sortilege Plainement Convaincue (Paris, 1622), which
he cites at some length. He contends that de Lancre represents the middle
position between the two extremes of belief, because De Lancre argued that
We should avoid the extremes. It is not necessary to line up with the
Platonists who attribute everything to demons; but one must even
less hold the belief of the Pythagoreans who laugh at demons,
magicians, and witches . . . One must be a Christian and hold
Christian beliefs according to the Holy Scriptures and the doctrines
of the Holy Fathers and confirm these apparitions, not from stories
gathered from everywhere, but by visions of holy personages, by
Page 44
Although the subject of 'magic' as practiced by members of the elite
classes has not been dealt with in this essay, it should be recognized that the
meanings of such terms as 'myth', 'magic' and 'superstition' and just what
practices these words encompassed have varied significantly throughout
history. William Monter has stated that "throughout much of Protestant and
Catholic Europe, governments made defacto compromises with
learned magic during the sixteenth century, while condemning popular or
'superstitious' magic and executing witches for their
maleficia.56 Such a comment reminds us
that, in dealing with such topics, we inevitably run up against a great deal
of subjectivity and biased preconceptions, from those writing in the early
modern period as well as from historians of our own day. As demonstrated,
however, a widespread belief in ghosts, demons, witches, and other
phenomena often associated with occult magic permeated European society
in the sixteenth century. Many Catholics regarded the growth of
Protestantism as an insidious development that attested to the rapid diffusion
of evil forces in the world and provided proof that the final day of
judgement was imminent. Most Protestants, on the other hand, as well as
an emerging group of Catholic skeptics, regarded various diabolical
practices and beliefs as a mortal threat which had to be eradicated at any
cost. Thus, we should not dismiss the type of literature that has been
examined in this essay as the product of fanciful delusion. As Stuart Clark
has correctly pointed out,
to attribute the belief in demonic witchcraft to some determining
'social dysfunction' would not only beg philosophical questions
Page 45