Saints and Sinners:
Ritual Magic, Mystics and the Condemnation of Divine Visions in the Middle Ages
Karen Stark
MDVLGH11A
Magic in the Middle Ages
Dr. Sophie Page
10/01/2012
University College London
Medieval and Renaissance Studies
1
To be in close contact with God was a treasured and revered experience in medieval
Christianity and one reserved for the most holy in society. A vision was one of the most
direct ways of achieving such contact and could lead not only to personal spiritual guidance
and fulfilment but, if made public, guide the faith of the Christian community. As such,
visions of a purportedly divine nature, those that could be ascribed to God, the Virgin Mary,
the heavenly angels or the saints, could lead persons further down the path of righteousness,
but a vision proved to be false could mean the losing of souls to hell and damnation.1 This
discernment and condemnation of visions can be seen in the plethora of writings produced
during the 14th and 15th centuries concerning the visions of particularly female visionaries
and mystics, but vision condemnation predates this period in, among other instances, the
curious case of ritual magic texts. One of the primary goals of angelic ritual magic, that is,
magic that makes use of long and complex rituals for obtaining different benefits to the
practitioner through the conjuring of angels, could include the obtainment of visions.2 But
how could one discern licit and illicit vision and whom did the medieval church deem worthy
to make the distinction in these cases? I am comparing two seemingly very different
medieval fringe groups—the practitioners of ritual magic and the predominately female
mystic and visionary, but both groups claimed to have attained or be able to attain visions of
a divine nature. At times these methods of attainment overlapped—in particular through
ascetic practices such as fasting, prayer, and purity of mind and body—but the vehicles of
attainment were still essentially distinct. The visions of both groups were repeatedly analysed
and condemned, often by the same institutions or individuals, and often for essentially the
same reasons.3 The similarities and differences in the nature of these condemnations can
reveal much concerning the reception and connections (if any) of visions, magicians and
mystics as well as the development of thought and theology surrounding divine visions
within medieval Christianity.
Christianity inherited much from the classical definitions of vision as recorded in the
works of Aristotle, Artemidorus, Macrobius, and Calcidius, including the division between
the true visio, revelatio and oraculum to the false insomnium and visum.4 Christianity also
inherited the importance of visions, especially those directly from God, from the Jewish
tradition and such experience was featured prominently in the New Testament. Visions were
an essential aspect of Christianity in its early and formative years, but as time progressed the
ecclesiastical hierarchy and theologians increasingly restricted those worthy of ‘visionary
access’.5 Despite such restriction the numbers of individuals striving for or claiming to have
attained divine contact in the form of visions continued to rise. These individuals were not
only those already presumed to have a close relationship with God— monks, nuns, popes,
bishops—but also lay persons and even, as will be shown, practitioners of ritual magic.6
Angelic ritual magic had two major goals—the obtainment of knowledge and the
obtainment of visions. The latter features most prominently in three ritual magic texts—the
Ars Notoria, the Liber Juratas or Sworn Book of Honorius and the Liber Visionum. The goal
1
I use the terms vision and revelation interchangeably throughout this essay, however prophesy is considered
distinct. A vision or revelation may contain a prophesy, but both visions and prophesies can be experienced
separately.
2
I use the definition given by Claire Fanger in Fanger, Claire, ed., Conjuring Spirits: Texts and Traditions of
Medieval Ritual Magic (University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998), pp. vii-viii.
3
For the purposes of this essay I will use condemnation as an umbrella term to include censure, denouncement
and legal conviction.
4
Klaniczay, Gabor, “Dream Healing and Visions in Medieval Latin Miracle Accounts,” in The “Vision Thing”:
Studying Divine Intervention, ed. William A. Christian Jr. and Gabor Klaniczay (Budapest: Collegium Budapest
Series No. 18, 2009), p. 37.
5
Ibid., p. 38.
6
Ibid., 37-8.
2
of vision attainment is an interesting one when considering medieval ritual magic and its
reception. While ritual magic that explicitly invoked and bound demons and had maleficent
goals could be easily condemned, texts of angelic magic claimed no demonic influence,
incorporated orthodox prayers and devotional material, and claimed to have holy goals.7
These texts cause the intermingling of magic and religion that one sees in much magical
practice in the Middle Ages to become even more confused. Despite their efforts to appear
holy, all three texts were condemned.
The Ars Notoria or The Notary Art of Solomon is the earliest of the above texts,
thought to originate in the 13th c. or possibly earlier, and a major influence on the other two.
There are at least ten extant copies of this text ranging in date from 1300-1600, attesting to its
continued popularity through the Middle Ages.8 The text professes to detail the ‘Art of
Knowledge’ that was revealed to Solomon by God through an angel.9 Through lengthy
orations and prayers, the utterance of magical words and gazing upon certain images it claims
that one can come into contact with God and acquire all wisdom and knowledge. The term
vision is mentioned repeatedly throughout the Ars Notoria, in the context of divine and
human knowledge being revealed by God to the practitioner through visions or revelations.
The Ars Notoria was considered and often condemned by numerous theologians
including Michael Scot, Thomas Aquinas, Peter Abano, Giovanni da Fontana, Nichole
Oresme, James the Carthusian, Nionysius the Carthusian, Thomas Ebendorfer, Vincent of
Beauvais, Augustinus Triumphus and Trithemius.10 In the Summa Theologiae Aquinas
claimed that the Ars Notoria was ‘illegal…and ineffective’ due to the fact that it makes use of
certain images that are not instituted by God, but are signs recognised by demons who are by
their nature unable to enlighten the intellect.11 Condemnations occur even into the 16th c.
when in 1554 it was declared equivalent to necromancy in the indices of Milan and Venice.12
Despite continued condemnation of the work itself, few records of prosecution for owning or
using the text are known in comparison to the much greater number of prosecutions
associated with necromancy which could be linked to criminal acts.13
Such a prosecution can be linked to a text greatly influenced by the Ars Notoria, the
Liber Juratus. The text, which goes by many names, Liber Juratus Honorii, The Sworn Book
of Honorius and Liber Sacer or Liber Sacratus among them, is a book of ritual magic whose
primary goal is to attain a beatific vision through much the same methods outlined by the Ars
Notoria. The author calls himself Honorius of Thebes, son of Euclid, and introduces the book
with a fascinating prologue in which he claims that the Pope and other leading members of
the Catholic Church are led not by God, but by demonic forces that are causing the Church to
persecute magicians. Honorius and his fellow magicians, the true followers of God, hold a
council to deal with the issue and through the aid of God’s angel Hocroel, record the core of
their magic and teachings; the main body of the Liber Juratus is the result of this task.
Honorius freely admits that his work will be condemned by the Church. The author’s claim
of magic persecution could place the work somewhere during the papacy of Gregory IX
7
Fanger, Conjuring Spirits, p. viii.
8
Ibid., 14.
9
Anon, Ars Notoria, trans. J. Véronèse, L'Ars Notoria au Moyen Age. Introduction et édition critique (Florence:
Sismel, 2007).
10
For sources pertaining to these theologians see: Fanger, Conjuring Spirits, p. 30.
11
Aquinas, Summa, Secundae secunda, Quest. 96, Art. I.
12
See J.M. De Bujand, Index de Venise 1549, Venise et Milan 1554, Index des Livres Interdits, vol. III
(Sherbrooke: Centre d’Études de la Renaissance, 1987), pp. 412 and 434; Thorndike, HMES, VI, p. 146.
References from Fanger, Conjuring Spirits, 29-30.
13
Fanger, Conjuring Spirits, 15.
3
(1227-41) during which time such a campaign did take place.14 Another reference placing it
in the 13th c. is one made by William of Auvergne, Archbishop of Paris from 1228 to 1249.
William makes good on Honorius’ belief that the text will be condemned, twice mentioning it
in his De Legibus as an ‘accursed and execrable book’ and later further elaborating:
To this sort of idolatry belong those four figures which are called the Rings of
Solomon... a fifth... called the Seal of Solomon, and nine others... called the Nine
Scarabs. The most execrable consecrations and most detestable invocations, writings,
images in all these contain very evident impiety of idolatry. Let Christians not so
much as mention that unlawful image which is called the Idea of Solomon, nor that
book which is called Sacred and its works, nor the figure which is called Mandal or
Amandel and its works.15
A century later the book is mentioned in the trial of Etienne Pepin, a priest accused of
necromancy. Though his ownership of the text did not help his case, it was not for this that he
was brought to court. He had been accused of fashioning a wax figure of the bishop of Mende
and performing certain rites including inscribing demons names onto the figure.16 Such a case
could further strengthen the Church’s association of vision-oriented ritual magic texts with
the invocation of demons and possibly seditious behaviour.
This was certainly the case in condemnations of another ritual magic text, the Liber
Visionum or Liber florum celestis doctrine written between 1304 and 1317. Much context can
be drawn from the Liber Visionum thanks to the detailed autobiographical prologue included
by the author, a Benedictine monk called John from the monastery of Morigny. In the
prologue he recounts his experiences with the Ars Notoria, his subsequent rejection of the
text as wicked and evil, and a series of visions of the Virgin Mary witnessed by himself and
his young sister. John describes the purpose and method of the text thus:
Here begins the book of apparitions and visions of the blessed and undefiled and most
holy Virgin Mary... which Mary graciously obtained and revealed with the permission
of the supreme God. Here begins the book... for the knowing of all the arts. … taught
in this book by means of a very few easy prayers, conveyed through the revelation of
angels and the subtlety of their unheard words, and sometimes, according to the
merits of the operator, through the vision, apparition, consolation and help of the
undefiled virgin Mary, mother of God, in a short time, subtly, certainly and
marvelously, by Him and through Him in whom all things are.17
Though John condemns the Ars Notoria, his text is heavily influenced by it and the two
works are considered essentially equivalent in condemnations. This was certainly true in 14th
c. Paris when it was condemned to the flames, as recorded in the Grandes Chronique de
France, compiled during the 13th to 15th centuries:
And in this same year [1323], there was a monk of Morigny... who through his
curiosity and pride wanted to inspire and renew a condemned heresy and sorcery
14
Mathiesen, Robert, “A Thirteenth-Century Ritual to Attain the Beatific Vision from the Sworn Book of
Honorius of Thebes”, in Conjuring Spirits, ed. Fanger, pp. 146-7.
15
William of Auvergne, Opera Omnia (Paris: Pralard, 1674 [facsimile reprint, Frankfurt a/M: Minerva, 1963]),
vol. I, p. 70 and 89, trans. Mathiesen, “Beatific Vision,” in Conjuring Spirits, ed. Fanger, p. 146.
16
Falgairolle, Edmond, Un Envoutement en Gévaudan en l’année 1347 (Nîmes: Catélan, 1892).
17
Johannis de Moriginato, Prologus Libri Visionum, trans. and ed. Fanger, Claire, and Nicolas Watson, “The
Prologue to John of Morigny’s Liber Visionum,” Esoterica III (2001): 126.
4
called in Latin Ars Notoria, although he hoped to give it another name in title…one
had to name and invoke various little known names, which were firmly believed to be
the names of demons. … Nonetheless, this monk condemned this science, even
though he feigned that the blessed virgin Mary had appeared to him many times,
thereby inspiring him with knowledge. …if there were riches, honours or pleasures
one wanted to have, one could have them. And because the book promised these
things, and because one had to make invocations and write one’s name twice in the
book……the said book was justly condemned in Paris as false and evil, against the
Christian faith, and condemned to be burned and put in the fires.18
Condemnations of vision-oriented ritual magic often occur without reference to
specific texts. The great condemnation of magic by the faculty of theology at the University
of Paris in 1398 is one of the few condemnations to explicitly address the subject of visions
in ritual magic. The reference is clear but brief, ‘Twenty-eighth article, that by certain magic
arts we can reach the vision of the divine essence or of the holy spirits. An error’.19 Though
the 1277 condemnations of Etienne Tempier, Bishop of Paris, are in much the same spirit of
those that came over a century later, including reference to the censure of books on
necromancy and the invocation of demons, no mention of is made of ritual magic concerned
with visions.20 The specific reference of magic and visions in the 1398 condemnations may
be due to increased interest in the magic arts in schools and courts; hence there would be
more knowledge of what to condemn.21 Another possibility could be the growing interest in
the nature of visions that became especially prominent in the 14th c.
The beatific vision controversy of the 14th c. could be applied to ritual magic,
particularly to the Liber Juratus. Pope John XXII (1316-34) had preached that the dead
would not be able to attain the beatific vision until Judgement Day, contrary to the accepted
belief that it was attained immediately after death.22 The Pope’s beliefs were soon dismissed
as unorthodox and censured by the University of Paris. This doctrine was reiterated and
expounded upon by Jean Gerson (1363-1429), chancellor of the University of Paris.23
Though there are no records linking the Liber Juratus to these theological debates, it would
not be far-fetched to presume that a member of the clergy might condemn the Liber Juratus
making reference to the above.
In the form of the female visionary we have quite a different figure from the
practitioner of ritual magic, a member of the so-called ‘clerical underworld’.24 Those who
owned or used ritual magic texts such as those mentioned above were members of a very
specific part of society—men with a knowledge of Latin and Church doctrine, thus probably
18
For original text see, Anon, Les Grandes Chronique de France, vol. 9, ed. Jules Viard (Paris: Librarie
ancienne Honoré Champion, 1937), pp. 23-4, trans. Nicholas Watson, “John the Monk’s Book of Visions of the
Blessed and Undefiled Virgin Mary, Mother of God: Two Versions of a Newly Discovered Ritual Text,” in
Conjuring Spirits, ed. Fanger, p. 164.
19
University of Paris, “Magic Arts Condemned, Paris, 1398,” Chartularium universitatis Parisiensis, IV, 32-35,
trans. Lynn Thorndike, University Records and Life in the Middle Ages (NY: Columbia University Press, 1971),
p. 266.
20
Hollister, Warren C., Joe Leedom, Marc Meyer, and David Spear, Medieval Europe: A Short Sourcebook
(New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997), pp. 243-254.
21
Edward Peters suggests this in reference to the shift of condemnations from the 12th to 13th c., and I believe
this could be extended to the shift from the 13th to 14th c. condemnations. Peters, Edward, The Magician, the
Witch, and the Law (University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1978).
22
Williams, J., Life in the Middle Ages (Cambridge: University Press, 1954), p. 164.
23
For example, Gerson in a letter to his Navarrist friends, Gerson, J., ‘Ep. 06 an die Herren des Kollegs von
Navarra [Op. 6 / 476b]’, ed. Glorieux, Palémon, Jean Gerson, Œuvres complètes IX (L'œuvre doctrinale [423-
491]), (Paris: Desclée & Cie., 1973).
24
Kieckhefer, Richard, Magic in the Middle Age (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 151-175.
5
clergy, and operating in a private sphere for personal benefit (neglecting the rare case
mentioned in the Liber Visionum in which the sister of the author is mentioned as also
practicing the art). The visionaries that gained in popularity and prominence from the 12th to
15th centuries were predominately female, often illiterate laypersons, and were typically quite
public about their experiences, at times becoming leaders in their communities and beyond.
The texts discussed above were condemned by theologians and universities because they
professed unorthodox belief and behaviour and because the visions they claimed to be able to
produce were nothing more than demonic deception. It was on these grounds too that female
visionaries were judged and, sometimes, condemned.
Catherine of Siena (1347-1380) and Brigit of Sweden (1303-1373) were two of the
most well-known and influential mystics of the Middle Ages and the only two women of the
period who claimed divine visions and prophesies to be sainted.25 Though both were
canonized shortly after their respective deaths, so much controversy arose over the nature of
their visionary gifts that their canonizations were continuously impeded and both were
accused of being under demonic influence.26 Catherine’s hagiography is rife with defenses of
her visions against those who had doubted her sanctity or accused her of being demonically
inspired.27 The validity of her sanctity and visions was twice tested by high-ranking members
of the clergy, first in 1374 at the General Chapter meeting in Florence and two years later at
Avignon.28
Brigit of Sweden was also examined by members of the Church during her lifetime.
Pope John XXIII had reconfirmed Brigit’s canonization in 1415, and the Council of
Constance held later that year wished to address this among other Church matters. The
council invited Jean Gerson to speak on the matter. Gerson wrote three treatises on the
discernment of spirits, the process of evaluating if an individual is possessed or guided by
divine or demonic forces. His most well-known treatise, On the Testing of Spirits, was
written specifically to address the Council of Constance concerning Brigit. Gerson did not
overtly condemn Brigit of Sweden or her visions, but it is clear from his text that he was at
least skeptical and probably completely dismissive. In his eyes she possessed all the signs of
a false prophet that he had outlined in his previous work, On Distinguishing True from False
Revelations (1401). In this text Gerson seems not so much to offer a way to discern visions
but to condemn the visions and revelations of female mystics all together:
There are, however, others who take delight in following their own opinions and walk
in their own inventions…They vex themselves beyond measure with fasts; they
overextend their vigils; they tax and weaken their brains with excessive tears…Of
such persons I say that they will quickly fall for every demoniacal
illusion…Therefore, be suspicious of any unusual revelations such people may
pronounce.29
Also of note is Gerson’s mention of magicians in the text, ‘…so too lying angels try to
abrogate the authority of true and holy revelations through sophistical deeds and the trickery
of magicians…’ and, ‘But whoever considers carefully the evil practices of the magical arts
25
Caciola, N., Discerning Spirits: Divine and Demonic Possession in the Middle Ages (London: Cornell
University Press, 2003), p. 277.
26
Ibid.
27
Ibid., 280. For one such case see Raymond of Capua, Vita Maior Catharinae Senensis, in Acta Sanctorum,
quotquot toto orbe colunter, vel a Catholicis Scriptoribus celebrantur, ed. Société des Bollandistes (Brussels
and Antwerp, 1863-87), April 3: 933-43.
28
Caciola, Discerning Spirits, pp. 280-1.
29
Gerson, Jean, On Distinguishing True from False Revelations (1401), trans. B. P. McGuire, Jean Gerson
Early Works, (NY: Paulest Press, 1998), p. 343.
6
will easily realize that many of its practices require excessive fasting and other acts that are
intended for no other purpose than to disturb the mind.’30 Here Gerson compares the practices
of the mystic to those of the magician, both of which may lead to an unstable mind and
possibly demonic illusion.
However, Gerson does not discount the visionary altogether. He makes reference to
several men and women whose sanctity and visions he supported, including, surprisingly,
Joan of Arc. We might attribute the pronounced consideration of these visionaries to the fact
that their visions were often intrinsically political. Gerson would be more apt to support Joan
(1412-1431) and her visions; he too was a victim of the Burgundians. Brigit, whom he so
vehemently opposed, supported the English.31 Further, both Brigit and Catherine had urged
the Avignon Popes to return to Rome, a move that eventually led to the Great Schism.32 But
demonic accusations could go both ways; during her trial Joan of Arc was charged with
practicing divination, conjuring demons, and venerating and receiving visions from them.
The charges were later dropped and she was burned at the stake not as a magician or
sorceress, but as a heretic.33
Political motivations aside, Gerson’s treatises on discernment are part of a larger trend
during the period. Henry of Langenstein (1325-1397), professor of theology at the University
of Paris and later at the University of Vienna, had written a work on the discernment of
spirits in 1383. Gerson’s teacher Pierre d’Ailly had been influenced by Langenstein and also
wrote two such texts in 1395 and 1410-13, both entitled False Prophets.34 Only a few
centuries later, between the years 1436 and 1438, Dominican theologian Johannes Nider
completed his highly influential Formicarius, written to address some of the issues that arose
at the Council of Basel. The work consisted of five books:
Book 1: On the rare examples and deeds of good people.
Book 2: On possibly good visions.
Book 3: On false and illusory visions.
Book 4: On the righteous works of the perfect.
Book 5: On witches and their deceptions. 35
That two of the five books are concerned with visions, and especially the visions of
women, provides evidence that female visionaries were still a subject of controversy in the
15th c. Nider pushes the danger of demonic influence a step farther, dedicating his final book
to the dangers of witchcraft. There are instances throughout the book when visions and
witchcraft, though not always divine in nature, are intermingled, including that the belief that
certain women fly though the air with the goddess Diana did not occur in reality, but was a
vision.36
One the most significant and important works on witchcraft, the Malleus Maleficarum
of Heinrich Krämer and Jakob Sprenger, uses the Formicarius as one of its chief sources.37
Unlike the Formicarius, which spends a significant amount of time on the discernment of
30
Ibid., pp. 335, 346.
31
Caciola, Discerning Spirits, p. 310.
32
Ibid., p. 277.
33
Ibid., pp. 382-3.
34
Ibid., p. 284
35
Nider, J., Formicarius, N.p. (1516 or 1517); published by Johannes Knoblouch and Paul Götz, prologus,
unnumbered folio, trans. Caciola, Discerning Spirits, p. 316.
36
Nider, J., Formicarius 2.4, p. 200.
37
Klaniczay, G, ‘The Process of Trance, Heavenly and Diabolic Apparitions in Johannes Nider's Formicarius’,
ed. N. van Deusen, Procession, Performance, Liturgy, and Ritual (Ottawa: Claremont Cultural Studies, 2007),
p. 204.
7
visions, the Malleus Maleficarum is dedicated to the identification, powers, and judgement of
witches. Visions are not completely neglected, however, and reference is made to the
witches’ practice of calling on demons to bestow them with visions during their sleep.38
Eventually the vision aspect of demonically led women becomes an afterthought and the
actual, physical interaction between witches and the Devil and demons is brought to the
forefront.
Were fears and beliefs concerning vision attainment by magicians transferred to the
novel and, for some perhaps intimidating, female visionary and then twisted into the figure of
the witch? Possibly, but it would be presumptuous to carry this line of thinking too far. Gabor
Klaniczay suggests the idea that ritual magic could lead ‘to the new diabolical mythology of
the sabbath’ in his analysis of the Formicarius.39 However, he also makes the point that ‘the
people who dealt with the visions of the saints, their miracles and revelations, were the same
people who dealt with the mythology of the witch’s Sabbath. In the fifteenth century,
hagiography and demonology grew on the same tree’.40 It would be natural to see both divine
and demonic visions in a single work of a theologian. Turning back to the condemnations, we
find further blocks to such an evolution. Though theologians, scholars, and other high-
ranking members of the Church hierarchy may have condemned false visions of magicians
and self-professed visionaries for much the same reason, the mode of condemnation was
quite different. When the Ars Notoria, Liber Juratus, Liber Visionum or other such ritual
magic texts are mentioned and condemned, it is typically just a brief mention and not directed
towards certain individuals or cases. Condemnations of the false visions of mystics are
lengthy and detailed and often make reference to specific visionaries. Though both instances
of condemnation use biting language, a greater sense of danger and urgency can be felt in
those directed towards female visionaries. Practitioners of angelic ritual magic operated in a
private sphere where the only danger was to the practitioner’s own soul; a mystic might lead
whole cities, perhaps even the whole of Christendom, astray and were thus of more
immediate concern to the Church.
Though assessment of the credibility of such an evolution of vision perception as
outlined above would require deeper analysis of contemporary theological texts in addition to
a more critical comparison of magicians and mystics in reference to medieval demonology, it
is not an evolution that can be entirely discounted. Divine vision obtainment through angelic
ritual magic offered the Church a troubling bit of magic, one that purported pious goals
through pious means. But, making reference to the Church Fathers and its most respected
contemporary theologians and scholars, the Church succeeded in making a case for
condemnation, a case reiterated (albeit in much more detail) in the condemnations of female
visionary mystics. This body of theological work on the discernment of visions laid much of
the foundation for the Malleus Maleficarum and the witch craze was soon to follow. Even a
subconscious transference of thought deserves consideration.
38
Krämer, H. and J. Sprenger, Malleus Maleficarum, Part 1, Question XVI (1487).
39
Klaniczay, G. “The Process of Trance,” p. 247.
40
Ibid., 255-6.
8
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Anon, Ars Notoria, trans. J. Véronèse, L'Ars Notoria au Moyen Age. Introduction et édition
critique (Florence: Sismel, 2007).
Anon, Les Grandes Chronique de France, vol. 9, ed. Jules Viard (Paris: Librarie ancienne
Honoré Champion, 1937).
Aquinas, Thomas, Summa Contra Gentiles: Book Two: Creation, trans. James F. Anderson
(London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1992).
Augustine, The City of God against the Pagans, trans. R. W. Dyson (NY: Cambridge
University Press, 1998).
Eymeric, Nicholaus. “Nicholaus Eymeric: Heresy, Witchcraft, and the Inquisition, 1376.
Directorium Inquisitorium,” ed. Alan Charles Kors and Edward Peters, Witchcraft in
Europe, 1100-1700: A Documentary History (University Park, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1973), pp. 84-92.
Gerson, Jean, Ep. 06 an die Herren des Kollegs von Navarra [Op. 6 / 476b] (1400), ed.
Palémon Glorieux, Jean Gerson, Œuvres complètes IX L'œuvre doctrinale [423-491]
(Paris: Desclée & Cie., 1973).
Gerson, Jean, “On Distinguishing True from False Revelations (1401),” trans. B. P. McGuire,
Jean Gerson Early Works (NY: Paulest Press, 1998), pp. 334-364.
Honorius, Liber Iuratus Honorii, trans. Gösta Hedegård, Liber Iuratus Honorii: A Critical
Edition of the Latin Version of the Sworn Book of Honorius (Studia Latina
Stockholmiensia, 48) (Stockholm: Almquiest & Wiksell International, 2002).
Johannis de Moriginato, Prologus Libri Visionum, trans. and ed. Fanger, Claire, and Nicolas
Watson, “The Prologue to John of Morigny’s Liber Visionum,” Esoterica III (2001):
108-217.
Nider, J., Formicarius, N.p. (1516 or 1517); published by Johannes Knoblouch and Paul
Götz.
Pope John XXII, “Pope John XXII: Magic and the Inquisition, 1326. The Decretal Super
illius specula,” ed. Alan Charles Kors and Edward Peters, Witchcraft in Europe,
1100-1700: A Documentary History (University Park, PA: University of Pennsylvania
Press, 1973), pp. 82-3.
Raymond of Capua, Vita Maior Catharinae Senensis, in Acta Sanctorum, quotquot toto orbe
colunter, vel a Catholicis Scriptoribus celebrantur, ed. Société des Bollandistes
(Brussels and Antwerp, 1863-87), April 3: 853-959.
9
Kramer, Heinrich and James Sprenger, Malleus Maleficarum (1486), trans. Montague
Summers, The Malleus Maleficarum of Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger (NY:
Dover Publications, Inc., 1971).
Tempier, Etienne, Condemnation of 1277, ed. Warren C. Hollister, Joe Leedom, Marc Meyer,
and David Spear, Medieval Europe: A Short Sourcebook (NY: McGraw-Hill, 1997),
pp. 243-254.
University of Paris, “Magic Arts Condemned, Paris, 1398,” Chartularium universitatis
Parisiensis, IV, 32-35, trans. Lynn Thorndike, University Records and Life in the
Middle Ages (NY: Columbia University Press, 1971), pp. 261-6.
William of Auvergne, Opera Omnia, vol. I (Paris: Pralard, 1674 [facsimile reprint, Frankfurt
a/M: Minerva, 1963]).
Secondary Sources
Bailey, Michael David, “The Feminization of Magic and the Emerging Idea of the Female
Witch in the Late Middle Ages,” Essays in Medieval Studies 19 (2002): 120-134.
Bailey, Michael David, Battling Demons: Witchcraft, Heresy, and Reform in the Late Middle
Ages (University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003).
Bujand, J.M. De, Index de Venise 1549, Venise et Milan 1554, Index des Livres Interdits, vol.
III (Sherbrooke: Centre d’Études de la Renaissance, 1987).
Caciola, Nancy, Discerning Spirits: Divine and Demonic Possession in the Middle Ages,
(London: Cornell University Press, 2003).
Elliott, Dyan. Proving Woman: Female Spirituality and Inquisitional Culture in the Later
Middle Ages (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004).
Falgairolle, Edmond, Un Envoutement en Gévaudan en l’année 1347 (Nîmes: Catélan, 1892).
Fanger, Claire, ed., Conjuring Spirits: Texts and Traditions of Medieval Ritual Magic
(University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998).
Herzig, Tamar, “Witches, Saints, and Heretics: Heinrich Kramer’s Ties with Italian Women
Mystics,” Magic, Riutal, and Witchcraft 1 (2006): 24-55.
Hollister, Warren C., Joe Leedom, Marc Meyer, and David Spear, Medieval Europe: A
Short Sourcebook (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997), pp. 243-254.
Kieckhefer, Richard, “The Holy and the Unholy: Sainthood, Witchcraft, and Magic in Late
Medieval Europe,” Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 24 (1994): 355-85.
Kieckhefer, Richard, Forbidden Rites: A Necromancer’s Manual of the Fifteenth Century
(University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998).
10
Kieckhefer, Richard. Magic in the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2000).
Klaniczay, Gábor, “The Process of Trance, Heavenly and Diabolic Apparitions in Johannes
Nider's Formicarius,” in Procession, Performance, Liturgy, and Ritual, ed. by Nancy
van Deusen (Ottawa: Claremont Cultural Studies, 2007), 203-58.
Klaniczay, Gabor, “Dream Healing and Visions in Medieval Latin Miracle Accounts,” in The
“Vision Thing”: Studying Divine Intervention, ed. William A. Christian Jr. and Gabor
Klaniczay (Budapest: Collegium Budapest Series No. 18, 2009), 37-64.
Peters, Edward, The Magician, the Witch, and the Law (University Park, PA: The
Pennsylvania State University Press, 1978).
Thorndike, Lynn, History of Magic and Experimental Science, vols. 2-3 (London: Columbia
University Press, 1934).
Thorndike, Lynn, University Records and Life in the Middle Ages (NY: Columbia University
Press, 1971).
Tuczay, Christa, “Trance Prophets and Diviners in the Middle Ages,” in Communicating with
the Spirits, ed. Gábor Klaniczay and Éva Pócs (NY: Central European University
Press, 2006), pp. 215-233.
Williams, J., Life in the Middle Ages (Cambridge: University Press, 1954).
Woodward, Kenneth, Making Saints. Inside the Vatican: Who Becomes Saints, Who do Not,
and Why (London: Chatto & Windus, 1990).
