[2] The _Scepsis Scientifica_ was really _The Vanity of Dogmatising_ (1661) recast. [3] See, for example, the introductory essay by John Owen in his edition (London, 1885), of the _Scepsis Scientifica_, xxvii, xxix. See also _Sadducismus Triumphatus_ (citations are all from the edition of 1681), 7, 13. [4] So at least says Leslie Stephen, _Dict. Nat. Biog._ Glanvill himself, in _Essays on Several Important Subjects_ (1676), says that the sixth essay, "Philosophical Considerations against Modern Sadducism," had been printed four times already, _i. e._, before 1676. The edition of 1668 had been revised. [5] This edition was dedicated to Charles, Duke of Richmond and Lenox, since His Grace had been "pleased to commend the first and more imperfect Edition." [6] _Sadducismus Triumphatus_, Preface, F 3 verso, F 4; see also p. 10. In the second part see Preface, Aa 2--Aa 3. In several other places he has insisted upon this point. [7] See _ibid._, 9 ff., 18 ff., 21 ff., 34 ff. [8] _Ibid._, 32, 34. [9] _Ibid._, 11-13. [10] See, for example, _ibid._, 88-89. [11] _Ibid._, 25-27. [12] _Sadducismus Triumphatus_, 39. [13] _Ibid._, 52-53. [14] To the argument that witches are not mentioned in the New Testament he retorted that neither is North America (_ibid._, 82). [15] _Ibid._, 78. [16] Nevertheless he took up some of Scot's points. [17] _Sadducismus Triumphatus_, Preface. [18] _Sadducismus Triumphatus_, pt. ii, 3. [19] See _ibid._, pt. ii, Relation VIII. [20] _Scepsis Scientifica_ (ed. of 1885), 179. [21] London, 1668. It was reprinted in 1672 with the title _A Treatise proving Spirits, Witches, and Supernatural Operations by pregnant instances and evidences_. [22] See above, pp. 239-240. [23] _Of Credulity and Incredulity_, 29, 30. [24] He characterizes Reginald Scot as an illiterate wretch, but admits that he had never read him. It was Wierus whom he chiefly sought to confute. [25] He was given also to "strong and high tasted liquors." Anthony à Wood, _Athenae Oxonienses_ (London, 1691-1692; 3d ed., with additions, London, 1813-1820), ed. of 1813-1820, III, 11-14. [26] _The Question of Witchcraft Debated_ (London, 1669), 64. [27] 1670 (see above, p. 293). [28] _The Opinion of Witchcraft Vindicated. In an Answer to a Book Intituled The Question of Witchcraft Debated_ (London, 1670). [29] _A True Interpretation of the Witch of Endor_ (London, 1669). [30] "By a Pen neer the Convent of Eluthery." [31] London, 1676. [32] To Professor Burr I owe my knowledge of this ascription. The translator (the English Quaker, William Sewel, all his life a resident of Holland), calls him "N. Orchard, Predikant in Nieuw-Engeland." [33] See _Doctrine of Devils_, chaps. VII, VIII, and _cf._ Scot, _Discoverie of Witchcraft_, 512-514. [34] Glanvill had answered a somewhat similar argument, that the miracles of the Bible were wrought by the agency of the Devil.