[P. 267]. “Terque”, given in Wier, v, 21, § 1.
——— “Adveniat”, v, 21, § 6.
——— “Baccare”, v, 21, § 4.
[P. 269]. “To spoile a theefe”, v, 5, § 8. But the strange words are in Wier, “Droch, myrroch esenaroth”, and in the next set of unintelligible words “Eson ✠” is “✠ eson” and “age” is “ege”. He also explains more clearly, I think, that all these conjuring terms are to be thrice repeated.
[P. 270]. “Say three severall times”, v, 4, § 6, the final Amen and some ✠s being omitted.
——— “Charmes against a quotidian”, v, 8, § 7. With these differences, the three pieces, “the jejunus”, should “easdem tribus diebus edat”. Instead of Scot’s “Otherwises” we have “Si minus successerit, in pane missali scribitur: O febrem omni laude colendam: in altero, ... in tertio ... Si nec hic modus juverit, denuo in pane dicto toties pingatur: ... quem diebus, ut supra, mane absumat.” Whence it would seem that three massecakes were in each instance to be used, and not one divided into three, a thought probably suggested by the three pieces of apple.
——— “For ... agues intermittent.” The whole paragraph is in v, 8, § 7.
[P. 271]. “S. Barnard”, Wier i, 16, § 6.
——— “Take three consecrated ... Trinitie”, v, 4, § 2, “Recipe tres panes Missales”, etc.
[P. 272]. “In the yeere.” This paragraph is, with a little freeness of translation and a slight addition, both in the unimportant parts, from v, 4, § 5.