When she approached the tomb containing the sacred bodies, the priest, according to custom, read the formula of exorcism over her head.  When he began to ask how and when the demon had entered her, she answered, not in the tongue of the barbarians, which alone the girl knew, but in the Roman tongue.  And when the priest was astonished and asked how she came to know Latin, when her parents, who stood by, were wholly ignorant of it, “Thou hast never seen my parents,” was the reply.  To this the priest, “Whence art thou, then, if these are not thy parents?” And the demon, by the mouth of the girl, “I am a follower and disciple of Satan, and for a long time I was gatekeeper (janitor) in hell; but for some years, along with eleven companions, I have ravaged the kingdom of the Franks.” (Cap. v. 49.)

He then goes on to tell how they blasted the crops and scattered pestilence among beasts and men, because of the prevalent wickedness of the people.[39]

The enumeration of all these iniquities, in oratorical style, takes up a whole octavo page; and at the end it is stated, “All these things the demon spoke in Latin by the mouth of the girl.”

And when the priest imperatively ordered him to come out, “I shall go,” said he, “not in obedience to you, but on account of the power of the saints, who do not allow me to remain any longer.”  And having said this, he threw the girl down on the floor and there compelled her to lie prostrate for a time, as though she slumbered.  After a little while, however, he going away, the girl, by the power of Christ and the merits of the blessed martyrs, as it were awaking from sleep, rose up quite well, to the astonishment of all present; nor after the demon had gone out was she able to speak Latin:  so that it was plain enough that it was not she who had spoken in that tongue, but the demon by her mouth.  (Cap. v. 51.)

If the “Historia Translationis” contained nothing more than has been laid before the reader, up to this time, disbelief in the miracles of which it gives so precise and full a record might well be regarded as hyper-scepticism.  It might fairly be said, Here you have a man, whose high character, acute intelligence, and large instruction are certified by eminent contemporaries; a man who stood high in the confidence of one of the greatest rulers of any age, and whose other works prove him to be an accurate and judicious narrator of ordinary events.  This man tells you, in language which bears the stamp of sincerity, of things which happened within his own knowledge, or within that of persons in whose veracity he has entire confidence, while he appeals to his sovereign and the court as witnesses of others; what possible ground can there be for disbelieving him?

Well, it is hard upon Eginhard to say so, but it is exactly the honesty and sincerity of the man which are his undoing as a witness to the miraculous.  He himself makes it quite obvious that when his profound piety comes on the stage, his good sense and even his perception of right and wrong, make their exit.  Let us go back to the point at which we left him, secretly perusing the letter of Deacon Deusdona.  As he tells us, its contents were