FOOTNOTES:
[1] H. Cotton, Five Books of Maccabees, 1832, pp. ix-x.
[2] But Professor Haskins’ recent article in Isis on “Michael Scot and Frederick II” and my chapter on Michael Scot were written quite independently.
[3] Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion; quoted by Sir James Frazer, The Magic Art (1911), I, 426.
[4] That field has already been treated by Joseph Hansen, Zauberwahn, Inquisition und Hexenprozess im Mittelalter, 1900, and will be further illuminated by A History of Witchcraft in Europe, soon to be edited by Professor George L. Burr from H. C. Lea’s materials. See also a work just published by Miss M. A. Murray, The Witch-Cult in Western Europe, Oxford, 1921.
[5] Some of my scientific friends have urged me to begin with Aristotle, as being a much abler scientist than Pliny, but this would take us rather too far back in time and I have not felt equal to a treatment of the science of the genuine Aristotle per se, although in the course of this book I shall say something of his medieval influence and more especially of the Pseudo-Aristotle.
[6] Frazer has, of course, repeatedly made the point that modern science is an outgrowth from primitive magic. Carveth Read, The Origin of Man, 1920, in his chapter on “Magic and Science” contends that “in no case ... is Science derived from Magic” (p. 337), but this is mainly a logical and ideal distinction, since he admits that “for ages” science “is in the hands of wizards.”
[7] I am glad to see that other writers on magic are taking this view; for instance, E. Doutté, Magie et religion dans l’Afrique du Nord, Alger, 1909, p. 351.
[8] Golden Bough, 1894, I, 420. W. I. Thomas, “The Relation of the Medicine-Man to the Origin of the Professional Occupations” (reprinted in his Source Book for Social Origins, 4th edition, pp. 281-303), in which he disputes Herbert Spencer’s “thesis that the medicine-man is the source and origin of the learned and artistic occupations,” does not really conflict with Frazer’s statement, since for Thomas the medicine-man is a priest rather than a magician. Thomas remarks later in the same book (p. 437), “Furthermore, the whole attempt of the savage to control the outside world, so far as it contained a theory or a doctrine, was based on magic.”
[9] Chaldean Magic and Sorcery, 1878, p. 70.