Johann Fischart: "Daemonomania Magorum". A commentary on the German translation of the demonology of Bodin

这个项目的目的是提供一个综合的跨学科的评论约翰·菲斯图的“Daemonomania Magorum”（1581年第一版）。Fischart的书是法国法学家和政治哲学家让·博丹（Jean Bodin）的著作《d<s:1> monomanie des sorciers》（1580年第一版）的扩展译本。博丹的著作有近800页的篇幅，是关于巫术的学术论述，包括古典、中世纪和当代的资料，以及最近的女巫审判记录。Bodin的努力是针对内科医生Johann Weyer在其广受欢迎的著作《De praestigiis》（1563年第一版）中声称女巫应该被视为患有忧郁的患病女性的著作。Bodin和Fischart将法律、医学、神学、哲学和语言学知识纳入他们的论点，并参考了当代恶魔论的话语。Fischart的翻译受到特定忏悔和爱国利益的影响，他通过添加注释和较长的离题来调整法语来源。因此，Fischart的文本代表了近代早期欧洲的跨文化和跨学科的转变。因此，“Daemonomania Magorum”在最近的研究中还没有得到适当的评价。文本也不是在一个充分的语言学状态。我们的评论旨在为不同研究领域的读者提供一个跨学科的文本访问。如果没有注释，就很容易理解文本的论证，因为Bodin和Fischart的思想被许多离题的内容所掩盖。文本还要求现代读者对历史话语有广泛的了解。我们计划提供一个高度可参考的评论，它评估来源，使恶魔解释学易于理解。同时，本文也旨在展示菲斯图翻译的语言学生产力，并为进一步的解释提供提示。该项目可以基于初步工作，如我们的文本批评版和已经完成的部分评论。

This project aims to deliver a comprehensive interdisciplinary commentary on Johann Fischart s "Daemonomania Magorum" (first edition 1581). Fischart s book provides an extended translation of the "Démonomanie des sorciers" (first edition 1580) written by the French jurist and political philosopher Jean Bodin. Bodin s influential work spreads on nearly 800 pages the scholarly discourse on witchcraft including classical, medieval and contemporary sources as well as records of recent witch trials. Bodin s efforts are directed against the writings of the physician Johann Weyer, who claimed in his widely received book "De praestigiis" (first edition 1563) that witches are to be considered sick women suffering from melancholy. Bodin and Fischart include legal, medical, theological, philosophical and philological knowledge into their arguments and refer to the contemporary demonological discourse. Fischart s translation is influenced by specific confessional and patriotic interests, he adjusts the French source by adding remarks and longer digressions. Thus, Fischart s text represents transcultural and interdisciplinary transformations in early modern Europe. As such, the "Daemonomania Magorum" has not yet been properly appreciated by recent research. Neither is the text available in a sufficient philological state. Our commentary intends to offer an interdisciplinary access to the text for readers of different fields of research. Without a commentary it is all but easy to understand the argumentation of the text, since Bodin and Fischart s ideas are obscured by multiple digressions. The text also requests a wide knowledge of historic discourses from the modern reader. We plan to provide a highly consultable commentary, which evaluates the sources and makes demonological hermeneutics comprehensible. Also it is intended to show the philological productivity of Fischart s translation and give hints for further interpretation. The project can be based on preliminary works such as our critical edition of the text and already accomplished parts of the commentary.