ing. The breaking of the skin was done by a "Nip" from the Devil's hand, which may mean that he inflicted it with a sharp instrument, for both in France and England we find that the witch was pricked with a pin[1] or a sharp bone.[2] These pricks, which were followed by effusion of blood, were often painful for many days or even weeks, and the Devil usually passed his hand over the broken skin.
There is one point as regards the Devil's marks which helps to disprove the hysteria-hallucination theory, and that is a certain kind of "teat" found on the bodies of some of the witches, as well male as female. All anatomists are aware that in the human being "throw-backs" to the animal ancestor sometimes occur. One of these throw-backs is a supernumerary nipple, which appears under the arms[3] or on the front of the body. These are not common, but again they are not very rare, and they occur in both sexes. In the account of the excrescences found on the witches it is clear that several are examples of polymastia[4]: so much so that the case of the witch Rose Cullender in Suffolk can[5] be exactly paralleled by a modern instance described by Williams[6]; the parallel is exact in all the details even down to the events which preceded the discovery of the nipple by the woman herself. It is interesting to note that in England witches who possessed natural marks such as these were considered inferior to those who were marked by pricking.[7]
- ↑ De Lancre, Tableau de l'Inconstance, p. 399, ed. 1613. Howell, State Trials, iv. 854.
- ↑ Webster, Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, pp. 347-9 (date 1633).
- ↑ Cp. Reg. Scot, Discoverie of Witchcraft, Bk. ii. ch, 5, ed. 1504: "If she have anie privie marke under hir arme pokes."
- ↑ Gerish, Relation of Mary Hall, p. 24. Howell, State Trials, vi. 696. Bower, Dr. Lamb Revived, p. 28, London, 1653.
- ↑ Howell, op. cit. vi. 696.
- ↑ Williams, Journal of Anatomy, xxv. p. 249.
- ↑ Webster, Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, p. 349.
