CONTENTS.

The Introduction,[1]
Chap. I. The substance of the account given by the Abbé Boileau of his design in writing his Book: he seems upon the whole to have been of opinion that voluntary flagellations were no very antient practice,[17]
Chap. II. No persons, under the old Law, inflicted flagellations on themselves, with their own hands, or received the same from other persons,[27]
Chap. III. Voluntary flagellations were unknown to the first Christians,[39]
Chap. IV. The use of flagellations was known among the antient Heathens,[51]
Chap. V. The subject continued,[71]
Chap. VI. Flagellations of a religious and voluntary kind were practised among the antient Heathens,[79]
Chap. VII. Containing the most ingenious arguments of the Abbé Boileau. The practise of scourging one’s-self was unknown to the first Fathers of the Church; and also to the first Anchorites or Hermits,[102]
Chap. VIII. A few more of the Abbé Boileau’s arguments are introduced. Self-flagellations did not make a part of the duties prescribed in the first Monasteries. The only positive instances of flagellations suffered by Saints, or the Candidates for that title in the days we speak of, are those which the Devil has inflicted upon them,[118]
Chap. IX. Corrections of a flagellatory kind, inflicted by force, were however, though in very early times, the common method of correcting offences of a religious nature; and the power of inflicting them was possessed alike by Bishops, and the Heads of Monasteries,[131]
Chap. X. Strictness of certain Superiors of Convents, in exerting their power of flagellation. The same is abused by several of them,[147]
Chap. XI. Disciplines of the same wholesome kind have been prescribed for Novices and such persons as are intended to embrace the ecclesiastical Life,[158]
Chap. XII. The same discretionary powers of flagellation have been established in the Convents of Nuns, and lodged in the hands of the Abbesses, or Prioresses,[167]
Chap. XIII. The subject of voluntary flagellations among Christians, is at last introduced. That method of self-mortification appears to have been practised in very early times; but it does not seem to have been universally admitted before the years 1044 and 1056; which was the time Cardinal Damian wrote,[192]
Chap. XIV. The practice of self-flagellation meets with some opposition; but this is soon over-ruled by the fondness of the Public,[211]
Chap. XV. Another difficulty. Which is the best plight to be in, for receiving a discipline?[223]
Chap. XVI. Confessors at length assume a kind of flagellatory power over their Penitents. The abuses that arise from it,[227]
Chap. XVII. The Church at large also claims a power of publicly inflicting the discipline of flagellation. Instances of Kings and Princes who have submitted to it,[249]
Chap. XVIII. The glory of flagellations completed: they are made use of for curing Heresy,[258]
Chap. XIX. The subject of the merit of flagellations continued. Holy persons, though without any public authority, have used them occasionally to give weight to their admonitions,[260]
Chap. XX. The fondness of people for flagellations, gives rise to a number of incredible stories on that subject,[299]
Chap. XXI. A remarkable instance of a flagellation performed in honour of the Virgin Mary,[310]
Chap. XXII. Another story of a female Saint appeased by a flagellation,[317]
Chap. XXIII. Formation of the public procession of Flagellants. Different success they meet with in different Countries,[345]
Chap. XXIV. The last Chapter, in which the Abbé Boileau is personally introduced: he is of opinion that the lower discipline is contrary to decency, and the upper discipline is liable to bring defluxions on the eyes,[400]

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE

The character ſ (long-form s) has been replaced by the normal s.
The Greek ϛ (stigma) has been replaced by στ.

Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences within the text and consultation of external sources.

Some hyphens in words have been silently removed, some added, when a predominant preference was found in the original book.

Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text, and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained.

[Pg 4:] ‘I hvae not the’ replaced by ‘I have not the’.
[Pg 9:] ‘Sarbonne, and a dean’ replaced by ‘Sorbonne, and a dean’.
[Pg 22:] ‘I potively aver’ replaced by ‘I positively aver’.
[Pg 56:] ‘of the Trumvirs’ replaced by ‘of the Triumvirs’.
[Pg 61:] ‘at last so such’ replaced by ‘at last to such’.
[Pg 62:] ‘such a mnner that’ replaced by ‘such a manner that’.
[Pg 66 Fn [23]:] ‘uncontroubled power’ replaced by ‘uncontrouled power’.
[Pg 71:] missing anchor [24] placed after ‘chastisement.’.
[Pg 93 Fn [36]:] ‘of Chritianity; and persons of noble familities’ replaced by
‘of Christianity; and persons of noble families’.
[Pg 99 Fn [41]:] ‘see their appartments’ replaced by ‘see their apartments’.
[Pg 110:] ‘made it altother’ replaced by ‘made it altogether’.
[Pg 134:] ‘moveover recommended’ replaced by ‘moreover recommended’.
[Pg 139:] ‘or solliciting the’ replaced by ‘or soliciting the’.
[Pg 162 Fn [64]:] ‘the distieh made’ replaced by ‘the distich made’.
[Pg 167:] ‘inflicting disciciplines’ replaced by ‘inflicting disciplines’.
[Pg 177 Fn [67]:] ‘his sollicitations’ replaced by ‘his solicitations’.
[Pg 179 Fn [68]:] ‘new-papers, with’ replaced by ‘news-papers, with’.
[Pg 184 Fn [67]:] ‘receive an hearsay’ replaced by ‘receive on hearsay’.
[Pg 206 Fn [80]:] ‘Play of Mollere’ replaced by ‘Play of Molière’.
[Pg 210 Fn [82]:] ‘Smollet, Franklin’ replaced by ‘Smollett, Franklin’.
[Pg 223:] ‘from one anther’ replaced by ‘from one another’.
[Pg 224:] ‘over their growns’ replaced by ‘over their gowns’.
[Pg 245 Fn [94]:] ‘Charles Borommee’ replaced by ‘Charles Borrommee’.
[Pg 249:] ‘an indispensible act’ replaced by ‘an indispensable act’.
[Pg 250:] ‘forgiven his his sin’ replaced by ‘forgiven his sin’.
[Pg 284 Fn [102]:] ‘a flat noise’ replaced by ‘a flat nose’.
[Pg 287 Fn [102]:] ‘and expresly chosen’ replaced by ‘and expressly chosen’.
[Pg 289 Fn [102]:] ‘come expresly to’ replaced by ‘come expressly to’.
[Pg 298 Fn [102]:] ‘is no unpleassing’ replaced by ‘is no unpleasing’.
[Pg 301:] ‘he comfessed the’ replaced by ‘he confessed the’.
[Pg 318 Fn [111]:] ‘the fifth chapter’ replaced by ‘the sixth chapter’.
[Pg 319 Fn [111]:] ‘See p. 71’ replaced by ‘See p. 79’.
[Pg 319 Fn [111]:] ‘See p. 76, 77’ replaced by ‘See p. 85, 86’.
[Pg 325 Fn [111]:] ‘beardless strippling’ replaced by ‘beardless stripling’.
[Pg 333 Fn [111]:] ‘porper instruments’ replaced by ‘proper instruments’.
[Pg 337 Fn [111]:] ‘the falshood of’ replaced by ‘the falsehood of’.
[Pg 357:] ‘same manner it it was’ replaced by ‘same manner it was’.
[Pg 381 Fn [115]:] ‘bad him go home’ replaced by ‘bade him go home’.
[Pg 384 Fn [115]:] ‘them, Iay these’ replaced by ‘them, lay these’.
[Pg 402:] ‘at the learned’ replaced by ‘as the learned’.
Index:
[Pg 413:] ‘runs the grantlope’ replaced by ‘runs the gantelope’.
[Pg 414:] ‘Charles Borromeo’ replaced by ‘Charles Borromee’.
[Pg 422:] ‘Quixotte’ replaced by ‘Quixote’.
[Pg 424:] ‘indispensible step’ replaced by ‘indispensable step’.