The traces of this art may be found in the works of the ancients. A festival was held annually, on Mount Soracta, in Etruria, at which the Hirpi, who lived not far from Rome, jumped through burning coals, and on this account had certain privileges granted them by the Roman Senate.
Women also, we are informed, were accustomed to walk over burning coals, at Cartabola, in Cappadocia, near the temple dedicated to Diana. Servius remarks, that the Hirpi did not trust to their sanctity so much as they did to the preparation of their feet for the operation!
With respect to the ordeal by fire, which it seems was performed in several ways, one was, that when persons were accused, they were obliged to prove their innocence by holding in their hands red-hot iron. This mode of exculpation, as it is called, was allowed only to weak persons, who were unfit to wield arms, and particularly to monks and ecclesiastics, to whom, for the sake of their security, the trial by single combat was forbidden. In Grupius' learned dissertation, in the German, p. 679, as quoted by Beckman, we read, that the trial itself took place in the church, under the inspection of the clergy; mass was celebrated at the same time; the defendant and the iron, were consecrated, by being sprinkled with holy water; the clergy made the iron hot themselves; and they used all these preparations, as jugglers do many motions, only to divert the attention of the spectators. It was necessary that the accused person should remain at least three days and three nights, under their immediate care, and continue as long after. They covered their hands both before and after the proof; sealed and unsealed the covering: the former, as they pretended, to prevent the hands from being prepared by art; and the latter to see if they were burnt.
Some artificial preparation was undoubtedly necessary, or why prescribe three days for the defendant, who, if they wished to make him appear innocent, had a certain preventive against the actual cautery? The three days allotted, after the trial, were requisite, in order to restore the hands to their natural state. The sacred sealing secured them from the examination of presumptuous unbelievers.
When the ordeal was abolished, it no longer was kept secret. In the 13th century, an account of it was published by a Dominican Monk, Albertus Magnus. In the work of this author, entitled, De Mirabilibus Mundi, he has given the receipt for the composition. It seems that it consisted in covering the hands with a kind of paste, and not by searing them. The sap of the althæa, or marsh mallow, the mucilaginous seeds of the fleabane, together with the white of an egg, were mixed, and by applying this mixture, the hands were as safe as if they had been secured by gloves. The use of this mixture, for the same purpose, may be traced back, it is said, to a pagan origin. In the Antigone of Sophocles, the guards, placed over the body of Polynicus, which had been carried away and buried, contrary to the orders of Creon, offered, in order to prove their innocence, to submit to any trial: "We will," said they, "take up red-hot iron in our hands, or walk through fire."
The ordeal, by heated ploughshares, was common in England. It seems, according to English History, that queen Emma had charges preferred against her, by Robert, archbishop of Canterbury, for consenting to the death of her son Alfred, and preparing poison for her son Edward, the Confessor. She claimed, by the law of the land, the ordeal, or trial, by burning ploughshares. She passed the nine ploughshares unhurt, which established her innocence, and caused the archbishop to fly the kingdom. The chief trials, by ordeal, appear to have been by fire, water, walking blindfold among heated ploughshares, and swallowing consecrated bread, which last was introduced about the time of pope Eugene. The custom was borrowed from the Mosaic law. An example of its practice occurs in the New Testament, in the story of Ananias and Sapphira; and the remembrance of it, as Blackstone remarks, still subsists among common people, as "May this morsel be my last;" "May I be choked if it is so," and the like; for it appears, that this ordeal was a piece of bread of about an ounce in weight, blessed by the priest, and given to the accused person, who was to try and swallow it, praying that it might choke him if he were guilty. The bible-ordeal, and the drowning-ordeal, are familiar to every one, degrading as they all must have been to human reason, and enlightened principles. Fox, in his Book of Martyrs, speaks of various ordeals, as well as the cruel deaths, and inhuman punishments inflicted, by the hand of bigotry, and fanaticism, under the cloak of religion, which were nothing more than a base and impious prostitution of its genuine principles.
Even among the modern Greeks, the same superstitious notions prevail. Almost every cavern about Athens has its particular virtues, and is celebrated for various things; and the offerings, made by Grecian women, to the destinies, in order to make them propitious to their conjugal speculations, are equally absurd. These offerings, by which they are to work a miracle, consist of a cup of honey and white almonds, a cake on a little napkin, and a vase of aromatic herbs, burning and exhaling an agreeable perfume. We are told, however, that those evil spirits, whose assistance is invoked, for vengeance and blood, are not regaled upon cakes and honey, but on a piece of a priest's cap, or a rag from his garment, which are considered as the most favourable ingredients for the perpetration of malice and revenge. When a person is hated, another absurd custom is used, which is supposed to be followed by dreadful results. It consists in placing before his door, a log of wood, burnt at one end, with some hairs twisted round it. "This curse," says Mr. Dodwell, in his Classical Tour, "was placed with due solemnity, at the door of the English agent, Speridion Logotheti, while I was at Athens; but he rendered it of no avail, by summoning a great number of priests, who easily destroyed the spell, by benediction, frankincense, and holy water!" This story is much in character with that of the exorcism of rats, caterpillars, flies, and other insects, an old ritual of the papal church, performed between the feasts of Easter and the Ascension. A priest who resided at Bononia, performed the ceremony. "I went," he says, "to exorcise the insects in that country, accompanied by a curate, who was a droll fellow, and laughed at the credulity of the people, while he pocketed their money." It appears, however, that in all superstitious ceremonies, fire, under some form, was a pre-requisite; but ecclesiastical fire-works we leave within the pales of the priesthood.
The author of the Dictionnaire de l'Industrie, vol. iii, speaks of a trick, performed with a loaded musket and ball, which, although apparently inconsistent, is nevertheless true, if we consider the action of gunpowder equal. This trick is stated to be the firing of a musket, loaded with ball, at a person, without wounding, or in any way injuring him.
By taking a ball of solid lead of a smaller size than the calibre of the musket, and placing it on the charge in a gun, and as much or nearly so of powder, over the ball, the effect we are assured is, that when the gun is fired, the ball will pass out without any very sensible force, and even drop a few yards from the gun, although the report will be as great as if the charge and ball had been used in the usual manner. This trick is often performed by jugglers, to the great astonishment of the spectators. The mode of catching a cannon ball is also of the same character.
The proper charge of powder for the cannon, is divided into two unequal portions, the lesser of which is placed in the gun as a charge; the ball is placed on it in the usual way, and the rest of the powder (by much the greater portion,) placed over the ball, the lesser quantity being not more than a twelfth part of the whole. A cannon, so charged, will not project the ball more than 20 yards, where it might be caught with safety.
Any person who has been in the custom of shooting, must have frequently observed, that when the shot happens to be mixed with the powder, its range is impeded; and, under similar circumstances, they have even been found only a few yards from the muzzle of the piece. This fact I have witnessed, although I confess I never once reflected on it.
As to the explanation of this phenomenon, it appears, that it can only be accounted for by referring to the action of two opposite forces, mutually repelling each other, added to that of the charge under the ball; hence, the reaction would be equal, if, under the same circumstances, both charges were alike situated: but the effect