Contents

Ridicule of witchcraft has always overshadowed that of ritual magic, but the anonymous Magical Vision, published in 1673, is a notable example of the latter. The purported author is a young lady who takes a nap after reading Dr. John Dee’s works, only to be whisked away on a flying broom to a terrifying magical conjuration. After a spirit riding on an eagle and a lynx appears, the conjurer introduces himself as Cornelius Agrippa, kept alive through demonically provided elixir. The author displays knowledge of many different operations of ritual magic present in our manuscript— divination with the sieve and shears, the acquisition of seeds on Midsummer Eve for magical purposes, the creation of wax images to harm enemies, and the use of the abracadabra charm to overcome fever.37

Despite these trends, responses to magical works could be complicated, with both practitioners and detractors taking different perspectives on the same work. For example, Meric Casaubon published John Dee’s accounts of working with spirits beginning on December 22, 1581, from the collection of Sir Thomas Cotton, as A True and Faithful Relation (1659). Casaubon claimed he did so out of pious motives, but John Webster later accused him of trying to insulate himself against charges of atheism while impugning Dee’s reputation.38 Casaubon succeeded in ensuring that Dee’s other accomplishments would be largely forgotten for centuries—and that magic would be subject to further mockery. Nonetheless, magicians took advantage of his publication, ignoring Casaubon’s rhetoric and embrace this hitherto unavailable magical material.39

Contents

Douce MS. 116 includes many passages from classic works of the period, both printed and manuscript: the Three Books of Occult Philosophy, its likely-spurious sequel the Fourth Book, the Heptameron, the Picatrix, the Hygromanteia, and the Arbatel. At least in some cases, these are not copied from the mid-seventeenth century English translations; they seem to be translations from the Latin texts made by another, with some passages left in Latin that were too difficult for the translator. Based on the basic errors made in the Latin elsewhere in the text, these translations were likely not the work of the scribe of Douce MS. 116. The material from the Three Books is more intriguing, as it includes both poorly copied material from the Latin edition and seals taken from the English language edition of 1651.40

37. Anonymous, A Magical Vision. 38. Whitby, John Dee’s Actions with Spirits: Volumes I and II: 22 December 1581 to 23 May 1583, 101–2;

Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, 8. 39. Asprem, Arguing with Angels, 31–32. 40. On variation among these seals, see Vârtejaru, “Planetary Characters in Agrippa.”

Elsewhere, the text shows that someone in the chain of transmission was interested in consolidating the work. For example, one passage brings together the descriptions of planetary spirits from the Fourth Book with the corresponding functions and winds from the Heptameron. Much of this material originally appeared together in the mid-sixteenth century Lucidarium Artis Nigromaticę, with an unknown editor later separating the sections between the Fourth Book and the Heptameron. The Douce MS. 116 text, however, seems to derive from the combination of Turner’s English translation of 1665 and an English-Latin Heptameron text. Our first copyist was part of a tradition in which scribes were inspired not only to reproduce the text, but also to incorporate changes they saw as improving it.41

One of the most prevalent sources is The Discouerie of Witchcraft, originally released by the gentleman, gardener, and engineer Reginald Scot. Scot’s position was that the witch trials were senseless prosecutions based on the same superstitious notions that had kept the Catholic Church’s influence strong before the Reformation. Toward this end, he reprinted many magical charms and ceremonies, often with mockery and sometimes alongside Catholic rituals. Our copyist takes many rituals out of the book, often omitting the Latin passages Scot has translated into English and the sections that display Scot’s scepticism or ridicule.

Although it includes considerable material from printed sources, our seventeenthcentury author also partook of manuscript sources. The work includes partial lists of the rings made in one of the twenty-eight mansions of the moon, pursuing a wide array of illusory purposes, previously only published as a Latin text.42 Our enterprising magician could heal others through a spirit named Escarioth, who may be acquired by being offered herbs and kept in a box. We also have a partially incoherent ritual to create a lead plate that will allow its owner to become invisible, involving looking at an unknown constellation. One significant item is a brief account on the nature of fairies, providing information not present or only hinted at in the published works of the period, along with charms to overcome the afflictions they cause.

Two manuscripts stand out with regard to similarities in material: British Library Sloane 3850 and National Library of Scotland GD 188/25/1/3. The material in these works does not appear in the same order as in Douce MS. 116, however, and enough omissions and variations appear that neither could be said to be a direct ancestor of this work. It does attest that the rituals within were in circulation in manuscript for quite some time before being recorded here.

The manuscript has several charms to ward off witchcraft, including a lengthy one targeted at a possessed or obsessed individual. Today we usually categorise bewitchment

41. Peterson, Elucidation, 3. 42. For an edition of the Latin text, see Boudet, “Annulorum.”

separately from possession, if we believe in either. In late seventeenth-century Britain, however, people often presented what we would describe as possession as proof of a witch’s magical attack.43 Symptoms might include fits, unnatural stiffness, hallucinations, mysterious swellings, vomiting pins and other objects, and objects flying through the air supernaturally.44 Clerics at the time distinguished between possession and obsession, in which a person was seriously tormented and tempted through demons acting externally, although the differences between the two conditions were not always clear.45 In 1604, the Church of England’s Convocation of Canterbury adopted Canon 72, which forbade exorcism without episcopal approval—and then never bestowed said approval thereafter in England.46 This left exorcism in the hands of ministers outside the Church, those within who chose to ignore these strictures, and those who used magical procedures to accomplish the same goals.47

If we accept a Worcestershire copyist for this manuscript, concerns with possession would have been a local preoccupation. Beginning in 1642, a poor Bewdley woman fell into violent fits for many years, displaying unnatural strength and foul language. Around 1646 to 1647, she was delivered, claiming to see a black dog depart from her, although she relapsed at least once thereafter.48 The faith healer Valentine Greatrakes visited Worcester in February 1666, where he supposedly witnessed and cured multiple episodes of possession in front of huge crowds.49 In these circumstances, it is unsurprising that a local magician might seek out rituals to resolve any future cases of possession.

The author also writes a final section of the manuscript upside down in comparison with the bulk of the text. This section includes a set of mundane recipes, with occasional instructions in cipher, for such purposes as creating different baits for fish, capturing birds, and restoring the taste, scent, or colour to wine. This sort of inversion, in which a book effectively has different material based on orientation, is typical for many domestic manuscripts of the late seventeenth century. The two orientations

43. Raiswell and Dendle, “Demon Possession in Anglo-Saxon and Early Modern England: Continuity and Evolution in Social Context,” 759–60. 44. Raiswell and Dendle, 755–56; C[hamberline], Lithobolia, A1–B2. 45. Walsh, “The Devil’s Power of Obsession,” 3; Raiswell and Dendle, “Demon Possession in Anglo-

Saxon and Early Modern England: Continuity and Evolution in Social Context,” 758. 46. Young, A History of Anglican Exorcism: Deliverance and Demonology in Church Ritual, 46–52. 47. Young, 53–75. 48. Almond, Demonic Possession and Exorcism in Early Modern England, 15; Baxter, The Certainty of the

Worlds of Spirits, 193–95. 49. Greatrakes, A Brief Account of Mr. Valentine Greatraks, 33.