NOTES TO VOLUME SECOND. (continued 2)

Note T.

Popish accounts of Knox’s second marriage.—“Heaving laid aside al feir of the panis of hel, and regarding na thing the honestie of the warld, as ane bund sklave of the Devil, being kendillit with an unquenshible lust and ambition, he durst be sua bauld to enterpryse the sute of marriage with the maist honorabil ladie, my ladie Fleming, my lord duke’s eldest dochter, to the end that his seid, being of the blude royal, and gydit be thair father’s spirit, might have aspyrit to the croun. And because he receavit ane refusal, it is notoriouslie knawin how deidlie he haited the hail hous of the Hamiltonis.—And this maist honest refusal would nather stench his lust nor ambition; bot a lytel efter he did persew to have allyance with the honorabill hous of Ochiltrie of the kyng’s M. awin blude; Rydand thair with ane gret court, on ane trim gelding, nocht lyk ane prophet or ane auld decrepit priest, as he was, bot lyk as he had bene ane of the blude royal, with his bendes of taffetie feschnit with golden ringis, and precious stanes: And as is planelie reportit in the countrey, be sorcerie and witchcraft did sua allure that puir gentil woman, that scho could not leve without him; whilk appeiris to be of gret probabilitie, scho being ane damsel of nobel blud, and he ane auld decrepit creatur of maist bais degrie of onie that could be found in the countrey: Sua that sik ane nobil hous could not have degenerat sua far, except Johann kmnox had interposed the powar of his maister the Devil, quha as he transfiguris him self sumtymes in an angel of licht; sua he causit Johann kmnox appeir ane of the maist nobil and lustie men that could be found in the warld.” Nicol Burne’s Disputation, p. 143, 144. But the devil outwitted himself in his design of raising the progeny of the Reformer to the throne of Scotland, if we may believe another popish writer. “For as the common and constant brute of the people reported, as writeth Reginaldus [a most competent witness!] and others, it chanced not long after the marriage, that she [Knox’s wife] lying in her bed, and perceiving a blak, uglie, il‑favoured man busily talking with him in the same chamber, was sodainely amazed, that she took seikness and dyed;” [nor does the author want honourable witnesses to support this fact, for he immediately adds,] “as she revealed to two of her friends, being ladyes, come thither to visite her a little before her decease.” Father A. Baillie’s True Information, p. 41. It is unfortunate, however, for the credit of this “True Information,” that the Reformer’s wife not only lived to bear him several children, but survived him many years. James owed the safety of his crown to another cause. See above, p. 274.

Note U.

Of Christopher Goodman.—From the intimate and long friendship which subsisted between him and our Reformer, this divine deserves more particular notice in this work. The Goodmans were a family of respectability in Chester, and repeatedly held the office of magistrates in that city. In a pedigree of the family, preserved in the British Museum, “Adam Goodman a marchant, and Selay Linge,” have a son “Christoph. prcher.” Harl. MSS. No. 2038. 32. f. 99. During the reign of Edward VI. he read lectures on divinity in Oxford. Strype’s Annals, i. 124. At the accession of queen Mary, he retired first to Strasburg, and afterwards to Frankfort. When he was at Strasburg, he joined in a common letter, advising the exiles of Frankfort to alter as little as possible in the English service; but he became afterwards so much convinced of the propriety of alterations, and was so much offended at the conduct of the Coxian party, that he removed from Frankfort to Geneva, along with those who were of the same sentiments with himself, and was chosen by them joint minister with Knox. Troubles at Franckford, p. 22, 23, 54, 55, 59.

In 1558, he published the book which afterwards created him a great deal of trouble. Its title is, “How superior powers ought to be obeyed: of their subjects and wherein they may lawfully by God’s worde be disobeyed and resisted. Wherein also is declared the cause of all this present miserie in England, and the onely way to remedy the same. By Christopher Goodman. Printed at Geneva, by John Crispin, MDLVIII.” In this book he subscribed to the opinion respecting female government, which his colleague had published a few months before. He maintained that the power of kings and magistrates was limited, and that they might lawfully be resisted, deposed, and punished by their subjects, if they became tyrannical and wicked. These principles he applied particularly to the government of the English Mary. A copy of verses by William Kethe (who translated some of the Psalms into English metre) is added to the work, of which the following is a specimen:—

“Whom fury long fostered by suffrance and awe,

Have right rule subverted, and made will their law.

Whose pride how to temper, this truth will thee tell;

So as thou resist may’st, and yet not rebel.”

Goodman came to England in 1559, but he found queen Elizabeth so much displeased at his publication, that he kept himself private. Burnet, iii. Append. 274. On this account, and in compliance with the urgent request of our Reformer, he came to Scotland. When the lords of the congregation chose him one of the council for matters of religion, the earl of Arran endeavoured to appease the resentment which the English queen still entertained against him. Sadler, i. 510, 511, 532. In 1562, the earl of Warwick repeatedly interceded for him, and for his being recalled from Scotland; “of whom,” says he, “I have heard suche good commendation both of the lord James of Scotland and others, that it seemeth great pitie, that our countrye suld want so worthy and learned an instrument.” Forbes’s State Papers, ii. 235. Calvin urged Goodman not to leave Scotland until the Reformation was completely established. Epistolæ, p. 566. Hannoviæ, 1597. When he did return to his native country in 1565, it was with great difficulty that he was received into favour, notwithstanding the friends he had at court. He was obliged to make a recantation of the offensive doctrines in his publication. He protested and professed that “good and godly women may lawfully govern whole realms and nations;” but he qualified and explained, rather than recanted, what he had taught respecting the punishment of tyrants. Strype has inserted the document in his Annals, i. 126; but he has certainly placed it under the wrong year. Collier calls it “a lame recantation.” Eccl. Hist. ii. 440. In 1572, Goodman subscribed, in the presence of the queen’s ecclesiastical commissioners, a more ample protestation of his obedience to Elizabeth. Strype’s Annals, ii. 95, 96. He was also harassed on account of his non‑conformity to the English ceremonies. Life of Grindal, 170. Life of Parker, 325, 326. Knox corresponded with him after he left Scotland; and Calderwood has preserved a letter which he wrote to him in 1571, in which he alludes to the troubles which he understood his friend was exposed to. MS. ii. 270. Goodman accompanied Sir Henry Sidney to Ireland when he was sent to subdue the popish rebels in that country. Troubles at Franckford, p. 196. In 1580, he resided at Chester, from which he sent his salutations to Buchanan. Buchanani Epistolæ, 30, 31. Oper. edit. Rud. He died at Chester, in 1601, according to verses to his memory in Supplement. Goodman’s book was quoted, but for very different purposes, by Bancroft, (Dangerous Positions, b. ii. chap. i.) and by Milton, (Tenure of Magistrates: Prose Works by Symmons, vol. iii. p. 196.)

Goodman was not the only person belonging to the English church who published free sentiments respecting civil government. About the same time with his book, there appeared another work on that subject, entitled, “A Short Treatise of Politique Pouuer, and of the True Obedience which Subjectes owe to Kynges.” Its author was Dr John Ponet, bishop, first of Rochester, and afterwards of Winchester, under Edward VI. Ames, iii. 1594. He discusses the questions respecting the origin of political authority, its absolute or limited nature, the limits of obedience, and the deposition and punishment of tyrants. “This book,” says Strype, “was not over favourable to princes. Their rigors and persecutions, and the arbitrary proceedings with their peaceable subjects in those times, put them upon examining the extent of their power, which some were willing to curtail and straiten as much as they could.—This book was printed again in the year 1642, to serve the turn of those times.” Memorials of the Reformation, iii. 328, 329. In the second edition of the work, it is said to have been originally published in 1556. Collier (who was a keen Tory) calls it “a most pestilent discourse.” He wished to believe that bishop Ponet was not the author, but it is evident from what he says, that he could see no reason for departing from the common opinion. History, ii. 363. Ponet was a superior scholar. He read the Greek Lecture in the university of Cambridge about 1525, and was among the first who adopted the new method of pronouncing that language introduced by Sir Thomas Smith. He also wrote several books on mathematics and other subjects, which were greatly esteemed. Strype’s Life of Sir Thomas Smith, p. 26, 27. Ames, Typ. Antiq. i. 599. ii. 753, 1146. iii. 1587.

Note V.

The proceedings of the committee appointed to prepare overtures to the parliament, Dec. 1567, are to be found in Robertson’s Records of the Parliament of Scotland, and Act. Parl. Scot. vol. iii. Almost the only ecclesiastical propositions of the committee which were not adopted by the parliament, were such as related to the patrimony of the church. I shall extract one or two respecting the commonwealth, which did not obtain a parliamentary sanction. “Als it is thocht expedient that in na tymes cuming ony women salbe admittit to the publict autoritie of the realme, or function in publict government within ye same.” On the margin, opposite to this, is written, “Fund gude;” which is expressive, as I understand it, of the committee’s approbation of the motion. As Knox, at a period subsequent to this, declared from the pulpit that he had never “entreated that argument in publict or in privat” since his last arrival in Scotland, (Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 117,) it appears that this motion had been made by some other member of the committee. The late misconduct of queen Mary must have had a great effect in inclining them to give this advice. The 23d article does great honour to the enlightened views of the movers. It proposes that all hereditary jurisdictions throughout the kingdom should be abolished. On the margin is written, “Apprevit,” and farther down, “Supercedis.” A long time elapsed, before this measure, so necessary to the salutary administration of justice, was adopted in Scotland. The 30th article also is of great importance, as intended to prevent delay of justice, by shortening processes. The following was a proposed sumptuary law: “Item, that it be lauchfull to na wemen to weir abone yair estait except howris.” On the margin of this is written, “This act is verray gude.” Act. Parl. Scot. vol. iii. p. 38‒40. Robertson’s Rec. of Parl. p. 795, 798.

The ministers appointed on this committee, were “Maister Johne Spottiswood, Maister Johne Craig, Johne Knox, Maister Johne Row, and Maister David Lindsay.” It will be observed that our Reformer is the only one who has not “Maister” prefixed to his name. This title was expressive of an academical degree. It was commonly given in that age to Masters of Arts, as well as Doctors of Law, and in their subscriptions they put the letter M. or the word “Maister,” before their names.

Note W.

Remarks on Dr Robertson’s character of the Regent Murray.—I am not moved with the unfavourable representations which the partisans of Mary have given of Murray, nor am I surprised at the cold manner in which Mr Hume has spoken of him; but I confess that it pains me to think of the way in which Dr Robertson has drawn his character. The faint praise which he has bestowed on him, the doubt which he has thrown over his moral qualities, and the unqualified censures which he has pronounced upon some parts of his conduct, have, I am afraid, done more injury to the regent’s memory, than the exaggerated accounts of his adversaries. History of Scotland, vol. ii. 315, 316. Lond. 1809. Having said this much, it will be expected that I shall be more particular. In addition to those qualities which “even his enemies allow him to have possessed in an eminent degree,” Dr R. mentions his humanity, his distinguished patronage of learning, and impartial administration of justice. “Zealous for religion,” he adds, “to a degree which distinguished him even at a time when professions of that kind were not uncommon.” This is what every person must allow, but it certainly is far from doing justice to this part of the regent’s character. His professions of religion were uniformly supported in all the different situations in which he was placed; his strict regard to divine institutions was accompanied with the most correct and exemplary morals; his religious principle triumphed over a temptation which proved too powerful for almost all the protestant nobility. (See above, p. 290.) When there exist such proofs of sincerity, to withhold the tribute due to it is injurious not only to the individual, but to the general interests of religion. After bearing a decided testimony to the “disinterested passion for the liberty of his country,” which prompted Murray to oppose the pernicious system of the princes of Lorrain, and the “zeal and affection” with which he served Mary on her return to Scotland, the historian adds:—“But, on the other hand, his ambition was immoderate; and events happened that opened to him vast projects, which allured his enterprising genius, and led him to actions inconsistent with the duty of a subject.” That his ambition was “immoderate” does not, I think, appear from any evidence which has been produced. Dr R. has defended him from the charge as brought against him at an earlier period of his life, and we have met with facts that serve to corroborate the defence. (See vol. i. p. 443.) The “vast projects” that opened to him must be limited to the attainment of the regency; for I do not think that Dr R. ever for a moment gave credit to the ridiculous tale, that he designed to set aside the young king, and seat himself upon the throne. His acceptance of the regency cannot be pronounced “inconsistent with the duty of a subject,” without determining the question, Whether the nation was warranted, by the misconduct and crimes of Mary, to remove her from the government, and to crown her son. “Her boldest advocates,” says Mr Laing, “will not venture to assert, that, on the supposition of the fact being fully proved, that she was notoriously guilty of her husband’s murder, she was entitled to be restored.” History of Scotland, i. 137, second edition. Murray was fully satisfied of her guilt before he accepted the regency. Never was any person raised to such a high station with less evidence of his having ambitiously courted the preferment. Instead of remaining in the country to turn the embroiled state of affairs to his personal advantage, he, within two months after the murder of the king, left Scotland, not clandestinely, but after having asked and obtained leave. And whither did he retire? Not into England, to concert measures with that court, or the more easily to carry on a correspondence with the friends whom he had left behind him; but into France, where his motions could be watched by the friends of Mary. Ibid. p. 59‒61. The association for revenging the king’s murder, and for preserving the young prince, the surrender of Mary, and her imprisonment in Lochleven, followed so unexpectedly and so rapidly, that they could not have proceeded from his direction. Nay, there is positive evidence that the lords who had imprisoned Mary, so far from having acted in concert with Murray, were suspicious that he would counteract their designs. “As yet theys lordes wyll not suffer Mr Nycholas Elveston, sent from the L. of Murrey, to have access to the quene, nor to send my L. of Murrey’s letter unto her.” Throkmorton’s Letters to Cecil, and to Elizabeth, 16th July, 1567, apud Laing’s History of Scotland, ii. Append. No. 13, p. 121, 126. When he returned to Scotland, he found that the queen had executed formal deeds resigning the government, and appointing him regent during the minority of her son, and that the young prince was already crowned. Hume, vol. v. Note K.

“His treatment of the queen, to whose bounty he was so much indebted, was unbrotherly and ungrateful.” To the charge of ingratitude, I can only reply, by repeating what I have said in the text, that all the honours which she conferred on him were not too great a reward for the important services which he had rendered her. How often have persons been celebrated for sacrificing parental as well as brotherly affection to the public good! The probable reasons for Murray’s interview with the queen in Lochleven have been stated by Mr Laing. History, i. 119‒121. Were I to speak of what was incumbent on him as a christian brother with the view of bringing her to a just sense of the iniquity of her conduct, I would use language which, I am afraid, would not be understood by many readers, and which many professed christians seem to forget, when they talk on this subject. Any exertions which were necessary to save his sister’s life were not wanting on the part of Murray. To restore her to the government, or even, as matters then stood, to restore her to liberty, he was not bound by any ties either of a public or private kind. Had he amused her with the hopes of this, he might have escaped the charge of harshness, but his conduct would have been more unbrotherly.

“But he deceived and betrayed Norfolk with a baseness unworthy of a man of honour.” To this harsh censure I oppose the opinion of Mr Hume, who will not be suspected of partiality to the regent. “Particularly,” says he, in a letter to Dr Robertson, written after the publication of his History of Scotland, “I could almost undertake to convince you that the earl of Murray’s conduct with the duke of Norfolk was no way dishonourable.” Stewart’s Life of Robertson: History, i. 158. See also, in confirmation of this, “Part of a letter from the earl of Murray to L. B.,” inserted in vol. ii. Append. No. xxxiii.

“His elevation to such unexpected dignity [the reader will observe that it was unexpected] inspired him with new passions, with haughtiness and reserve: and instead of his natural manner, which was blunt and open, he affected the arts of dissimulation and refinement. Fond, towards the end of his life, of flattery, and impatient of advice, his creatures, by soothing his vanity, led him astray, while his ancient friends stood at a distance, and predicted his approaching fall.” Certainly the facts stated by Dr Robertson in the preceding part of his narrative, do not prepare the mind of his reader for these charges. The severity of the regent’s virtues had, indeed, been mentioned, and it had been asserted that his deportment had become distant and haughty. The authority of Sir James Melvil was referred to in support of this statement; and I am satisfied that it was upon his testimony chiefly that the historian proceeded, when he gave the above account of Murray’s conduct during the latter part of his life. I submit to the reader the following remarks on the degree of credit due to the authority of Melvil.

In the first place, there is every reason to think, either that Melvil’s Memoirs have been unfaithfully published by the editor, or that the narrative which the author of them has given of affairs, from the queen’s marriage with Bothwell to the death of the earl of Murray, is incorrect and unfaithful. I shall not take it upon me to determine which of these is the most probable supposition, but am of opinion that either the one or the other must be admitted. The charge which was brought against queen Mary of participation in the murder of her husband, with all the proofs produced in support of it, is suppressed, and studiously kept out of view in the Memoirs. There is not one word in them respecting the celebrated letters to Bothwell, although they formed the grand vindication of the regent and his friends. The same inference may be drawn from the ridiculous account given of the appearance made by the regent before the commissioners at York, when he presented the nameless accusation against Mary (Memoirs, 96, 97, Lond. 1683); an account which is completely discredited by the journals of both parties, and which neither Hume nor Robertson thought worthy of the slightest regard. It is observable, that Melvil could not be ignorant of the real transaction, as he was present at York; and that the design of this, as well as of the subsequent part of his narrative, is to represent the regent as weakly suffering himself to be duped and misled by designing and violent counsellors. Mr Laing has adverted to both of these things as discreditable to the Memoirs. History, ut supra, i. 118.—I shall produce only one other instance of the same kind. Speaking of the queen’s marriage with Bothwell, Melvil says: “I cannot tell how nor by what law he parted with his own wife, sister to the earl of Huntly.” Mem. 80. Is it credible, that one who was in the midst of the scene, and acquainted even with the secrets of state at that time, could be ignorant of that which was proclaimed to all the world? If it should be alleged that Melvil, writing in his old age, might have forgotten this glaring fact, (the excuse commonly made for his inaccuracies,) I am afraid that the apology will detract as much from the credibility of his Memoirs as the charge which it is brought to repel.

2. In estimating the degree of regard due to the censures which Melvil has passed on the regent’s conduct, we must keep in view the political course which he himself steered. Sir James appears to have been a man of amiable dispositions, whose mind was cultivated by the study of letters; but those who have carefully read his Memoirs must, I think, be convinced that his penetration was not great, and that his politics were undecided, temporizing, and inconsistent. He was always at court, and always tampering with those who were out of court. We find him exposing himself to danger by dissuading his mistress from marrying Bothwell, and yet countenancing the marriage by his presence; acting as an agent for those who had imprisoned the queen, and yet intriguing with those who wished to set her at liberty; carrying a common message from the king’s lords to the earl of Murray upon his return out of France, and yet secretly conveying another message tending to counteract the design of the former; supporting Murray in the regency, and yet trafficking with those who wished to undermine his authority. I do not call in question the goodness of his intentions in all this: I am willing to believe that a desire for the peace of the country, or attachment to the queen, induced him to go between, and labour to reconcile, the contending parties. But when parties are discordant—when their interests, or the objects at which they shoot, are diametrically opposite, to persevere in such attempts is preposterous, and cannot fail to foster and increase confusions. Who believes that the Hamiltons were disposed to join with the king’s party? or that the latter, when unassured of the assistance of England, were averse to a junction with the former? Yet Melvil asserts both of these things. Mem. 85, 86, 90. Who thinks that there was the smallest feasibility in what he proposed to the regent as “a present remedy for his preservation?” or believes that Maitland would have consented to go into France, and Kircaldy to deliver up the castle of Edinburgh? The regent heard him patiently; he respected the goodness of the man; but he saw that he was the dupe of Maitland’s artifices, and he followed his own superior judgment. For rejecting such advices as this (and not the religious proverbs, and political aphorisms, which he quoted to him from Solomon, Augustine, Isocrates, Plutarch, and Theopompus) has Melvil charged him with refusing the counsel of his oldest and wisest friends. Mem. 102‒104.

3. What were the errors committed by the regent which precipitated his fall? There are two referred to by Melvil; the imprisonment of the duke and lord Herries, and the accusation of Maitland and Balfour. Mem. 100, 101. In vindication of the former step, I have only to appeal to the narrative which Dr Robertson has given of that affair. Vol. ii. p. 266‒299. With respect to the latter, Sir James Balfour was “the most corrupt man of that age,” (ibid. p. 367,) and Maitland was at that time deeply engaged in intrigues against the regent, ibid. p. 307. There is not a doubt that both of them were accessory to the murder of Darnley, (Laing, i. 28, 135, ii. 22); they were arrested and accused at this time at the instance of Lennox, and in consequence of the recent confession of one of Bothwell’s servants; and Maitland was preserved by the queen’s friends assembling in arms for his rescue, which compelled the regent to adjourn his trial. Ibid. ii. 37. Appendix, No. 28, p. 298‒9.

4. Who were the unworthy favourites by whose flattery and evil counsel the regent was led astray? Dr Robertson mentions “captain Crawford, one of his creatures.” This is the same person whom he afterwards calls “captain Crawford of Jordanhill, a gallant and enterprising officer,” who distinguished himself so much by the surprise of the castle of Dumbarton. History, ii. 307, 331, comp. Laing, ii. 297, 298; and Douglas’s Baronage of Scotland, 429. Morton, Lindsay, Wishart of Pittarow, Macgill of Rankeillor, Pitcairn abbot of Dunfermline, Balnaves of Hallhill, and Wood of Tilliedavy, were among the regent’s counsellors.

5. Who were his old friends who lost his favour? They could be no other than Balfour, Maitland, Kircaldy, and Melvil himself. Of the two former I need not say a word. Kircaldy of Grange was a brave man, and had long been the intimate friend of the regent; but he was already corrupted by Maitland, and had secretly entered into his schemes for restoring the queen. Robertson, ii. 307. Of Melvil I have already spoken; nay, he himself testifies that the regent continued to the last to listen to his good advices. “The most part of these sentences, (says he,) drawn out of the Bible, I used to rehearse to him at several occasions, and he took better with these at my hands, who he knew had no by‑end, than if they had proceeded from the most learned philosopher. Therefore at his desire I promised to put them in writing, to give him them to keep in his pocket; but he was slain before I could meet with him.” Mem. 104. How this is to be reconciled with other assertions in the Memoirs, I leave others to determine. It required no great sagacity in the ancient friends of the regent to “predict his approaching fall,” when repeated attempts had already been made to assassinate him, and when some of them were privy to the conspiracy then forming against his life; and it says little for their ancient friendship, that they “stood at a distance,” and allowed it to be carried into execution.

There are three honourable testimonies to the excellence of the regent’s character, which must have weight with all candid persons. The first is that of the great historian De Thou. He not only examined the histories which both parties had published of the transactions in Scotland, which made so much noise through Europe, but he carefully conversed with the most intelligent and candid Scotsmen, papists and protestants, whom he had the opportunity of seeing in France. When that part of his history which embraced these events was in the press, he applied to his friend Camden for advice, acquainting him that he was greatly embarrassed, and apprehensive of displeasing King James, who, he understood, was incensed against Buchanan’s History. “I do not wish (says he) to incur the charge of imprudence or malignity from a certain personage who has honoured me with his letters, and encouraged me to publish the rest of my history with the same candour, and regard for truth.” Camden, in reply, exhorted him to study moderation, and told him the story which he had received from his master, imputing the disturbances in Scotland chiefly to the ambition of Murray. Durand, Histoire du XVI. Siecle, tom. vii. contenant la Vie de Monsieur De Thou, p. 226‒231. But notwithstanding the respect which he entertained for Camden, and the desire which he felt to please James, De Thou found himself obliged, by a sacred regard to truth, to reject the above imputation, and to adopt in the main the narrative of Buchanan. I shall quote, from his answer to Camden, the character which he draws of Murray. Having mentioned the accusation brought against him, of ambitiously and wickedly aiming at the crown, he says: “This is constantly denied by all the credible Scotsmen with whom I have had opportunity to converse, not even excepting those who otherwise were great enemies to Murray on a religious account; for they affirm, that, religion apart, HE WAS A MAN WITHOUT AMBITION, WITHOUT AVARICE, INCAPABLE OF DOING AN INJURY TO ANY ONE, DISTINGUISHED BY HIS VIRTUE, AFFABILITY, BENEFICENCE, AND INNOCENCE OF LIFE; and that, had it not been for him, those who tear his memory since his death would never have attained that authority which they now enjoy.”—“Res ipsa loquitur: nam demus, quod ab diversa tradentibus jactatur, Moravium ambitione ardentem scelerate regnum appetisse, quod tamen constanter negant omnes fide digni Scoti, quoscunque mihi alloqui contigit, etiam ii quibus alioqui Moravius ob religionis causam summe invisus erat; nam virum fuisse aiebant, extra religionis causam, ab omni ambitione, avaritia, et in quenquam injuria alienum, virtute, comitate, beneficentia, vitæ innocentia, præstantem; et qui nisi fuisset, eos, qui tantopere mortuum exagitant, hodie minime rerum potiturus fuisse.” Epistolæ de Nova Thuani Histor. Editione Paranda. p. 40, in tom. i. Thuani Histor. et tom. vii. cap. v. p. 5. Buckley, 1733.

A second testimony of a very strong kind in favour of the regent is that of archbishop Spotswood. He must have conversed with many who were personally acquainted with Murray; he knew the unfavourable sentiments which James entertained respecting him, which had been published in Camden’s Annals; and he had long enjoyed the favour of that monarch; yet, in his history, he has drawn the character of the regent in as flattering colours as Buchanan himself has done. The last testimony to which I shall appeal is the Vox Populi, strongly expressed by the title of The Good Regent, which it imposed on him, and by which his memory was handed down to posterity. Had he, elated by prosperity, become haughty and reserved, or, intoxicated with flattery, yielded himself up to unprincipled and avaricious favourites, the people must soon have felt the effects of the change, and would never have cherished his name with such enthusiastic gratitude and unmingled admiration.

Note X.

Inscription to the memory of the Regent Murray.—The regent’s monument is yet entire and in good order. It stands in that part of St Giles, now called the Old Church, (the former aisle having been taken into the body of the church when it was lately fitted up,) at the back of the pulpit, on the east side. At the top is the figure of an eagle, and below it “1570,” the date of the erection of the monument. In the middle is a brass plate, on which the following ornaments and inscriptions are engraved: The family arms, with the motto “Salus per Christum” (Salvation through Christ): On one side of the arms, a female figure with a cross and Bible, the word “Religio” above, and below “Pietas sine vindice luget” (Piety mourns without a defender); on the other side, another female figure, in a mourning posture, with the head reclining on the hand, the word “Justicia” above, and below “Jus exarmatum est” (Justice is disarmed.) Underneath is the following inscription, composed by Buchanan:

23 Janvarii 1569.

JACOBO · STOVARTO · MORAVIÆ · COMITI · SCOTIÆ · PROREGI · VIRO · ÆTATIS · SVÆ · LONGE · OPTIMO · AB · INIMICIS · OMNIS · MEMORIÆ · DETERRIMIS · EX · INSIDIIS · EXTINCTO · CEV · PATRI · COMMVNI · PATRIA · MOERENS · POSVIT ·

The verses in which Buchanan celebrated the regent are accessible to every scholar. The following lines are less known:

Jacobus Stuartus.

Moraviæ Comes, Prorex pro Jacobo vi. rem Scoticam feliciter gessit, puræ Religionis assertor acerrimus. Ab æmulis Limnuchi ex insidiis glande trajectus, magno omnium desiderio moritur ad d. xxiii. Januarii, Anno Christi 1570.

Ter tua dicturus cum dicere singula conor,

Ter numeri, et numeros destituere soni.

Nobilitas, animus, probitas, sapientia, virtus,

Consilium, imperium, pectora sancta, fides,

Cuncta mihi simul hæc instant certamine magno:

Ut sibi, sic certant viribus ista meis;

Ipsi adeo Aonides cum vellent dicere, cedunt

Sponte sua numeris, hæc, Buchanane, tuis.

Johannis Jonstoni Heroes, p. 31, 32

Lugduni Batavorum, 1603.

Knox, among others, warned the regent of the designs which his enemies had formed against his life. “When the Mr of Grahame (says Bannatyne) come and drew him to Dumbartane, he [Knox] plainlie said to the regent then, that it was onlie done for a trane be that meanis to cut him off, as it came to pas; also when he was in Stirveling, being returned from Dumbartane, he sent me to my ladie the regentis wyfe, tuo sundrie tymes, and desyrit her to signifie my lord her husband, that he suld not come to Lynlythgow. So that gif his counsall had bene followed, he had not died at that tyme. And my ladie the last tyme sent Mr Jhone Wood, to desyre him to avoid Lynlythgow. But God thought vs not worthy of sic a rewlare above vs, and also he wald thereby have the wickitnes of vthers knawin, whilk then was hid; and therefore did God then tak him fra us. But lat the Hamiltonis, the lard of Grange, with the rest of that factione, lay their compt and recken thair advantage and wining since.” Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 428, 429. The intrepidity of Murray prompted him to despise these prudential admonition, and defeated the precaution of his friends.

Mr Scott has, by a poetical license, introduced the Reformer as present at Linlithgow, to grace the regent’s fall.

From the wild border’s humbled side,

In haughty triumph marched he,

While Knox relax’d his bigot pride,

And smiled the traitorous pomp to see.

Ballads and Lyrical Pieces, p. 52. Edin. 1810.

Note Y.

Sentiments of Scottish Reformers on the difference between civil and ecclesiastical authority.—I may subjoin a few facts which ascertain the opinion of our reformers on this subject.—In common with other reformed churches, they allowed that civil rulers have a right to employ their authority for the reformation of religion within their dominions, especially when, as was universally the case under the papacy, religious abuses and corruptions affect the state as well as the church, and are interwoven with the civil constitution and administration; they allowed them a power of making laws for the support and advancement of religion; and they held that, where a reformed church existed, there might be a co‑operation between the civil and ecclesiastical authorities about certain objects which came under the cognizance of both, each of them acting within its own line, and with a view to the proper ends of its institution. But, on the other hand, they maintained that civil and ecclesiastical authority were essentially distinct, and they refused that civil rulers had a supremacy over the church as such, or a right to model her government and worship, and to assume to themselves the internal management of her affairs.

The Scottish reformers never ascribed or allowed to civil rulers the same authority in ecclesiastical matters which the English did. In particular, they resisted from the beginning the claim of ecclesiastical supremacy granted to the English monarchs. On the 7th July, 1568, “It was delatit and fund that Thomas Bassinden, printer in Edinburgh, imprintit an buik, intitulat The Fall of the Roman Kirk, naming our King and Soverane Supreme Head of the Primitive Kirk—The haill assemblie ordaint the said Thomas to call in agane all the foirsaidis buikis yat he hes sauld, and keip the rest unsauld, until he alter the forsaid title. Attour, the assemblie appoyntit Mr Alex. Arburthnot to revise the rest of the forsaid tractat, and report to the kirk quhat doctrine he findis thairin.” Buik of the Universall Kirk, p. 38, 39. The General Assembly were frequently occupied in settling the bounds between civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and in March 1570 arranged the objects which pertained to the latter under six heads; including, among other things, the judgment of doctrine, administration of divine ordinances, the election, examination, admission, suspension, &c., of ministers, and all cases of discipline. The following is the concluding article: “And because the conjunction of marriages pertaineth to the ministrie, the causis of adherents and divorcements aucht also to perteine to thame, as naturallie annexit thairto.” Buik of the Universall Kirk, p. 51. Actes of the General Assemblies, prefixed to the First and Second Booke of Discipline, printed in 1621, p. 3, 4.

On occasion of some encroachments made on the liberties of the church in 1571, John Erskine of Dun, superintendent of Angus and Mearns, addressed two letters to the regent Mar. They are written in a clear, spirited, and forcible style, contain an accurate statement of the essential distinction between civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and should be read by all who wish to know the early sentiments of the church of Scotland on this subject. See Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 279‒290.

It has always been a principle of the presbyterian church of Scotland, that the ministers of religion ought not to be distracted from the duties of their office by holding civil places. The first General Assembly (Dec. 1560) agreed to petition the Estates, to “remove ministers from civil offices, according to the canon law.” Buik of the Universall Kirk, p. 2. At the request of the regent Mar, the assembly, or convention, which met at Leith in January 1571‒2, allowed Mr Robert Pont, on account of his great knowledge of the laws, to act as a Lord of Session. Buik of the Universall Kirk, p. 54. But in March 1572‒3, the regent Morton having laid before them a proposal for appointing some ministers Lords of Session, the Assembly “votit throughout that naine was able nor apt to bear the saides twa charges.” They therefore prohibited any minister from accepting the place of a senator; from this inhibition they, however, excepted Pont. Ibid, p. 56. In 1584, Pont resigned his place as a Lord of Session, or rather was deprived of it, in consequence of the act of parliament passed that year, declaring that none of the ministers of God’s word and sacraments—“in time cuming sall in ony waies accept, use, or administrat ony place of judicature, in quhatsumever civil or criminal causes, nocht to be of the Colledge of Justice, Commissioners, Advocates, court Clerkes or Notaris in ony matteris (the making of testamentes onely excepted).” Skene’s Acts, fol. 59, b. Edinburgh, 1597. Lord Hailes’s Catalogue of the Lords of Session, p. 5, and note 34.

The name of Pont often occurs in the account of ecclesiastical transactions during the remainder of the sixteenth century. The writer of Additional Notes to Lord Hailes’s Catalogue of the Lords of Session, calls him by mistake, “the first presbyterian minister of the West Kirk,” p. 8. Edinburgh, 1798. William Harlaw preceded him in that situation, (Keith, 498,) and continued to hold it in August 1571. See Letter to him from the duke and Huntly, in Bannatyne’s Journal, 217. Pont was also commissioner of Murray, and provost of Trinity College, Edinburgh. Upon the death of the earl of March, James VI. offered him the bishopric of Caithness, but he declined accepting it. Keith’s Scottish Bishops, 129. He was the author of several publications, besides the sermons against Sacrilege, repeatedly mentioned.

The time of his death, and his age, appear from the following inscription on his tombstone, in St Cuthbert’s churchyard:

ILLE EGO, ROBERT⁹ PONTA‑ N⁹ IN HOC PROPE SACRO CHRISTI QUI FUERA‾‾ PASTOR GREGIS AUSPICE CHRISTO ÆTERNÆ HIC RECUBANS EX‑ SPECTO RESURGERE VITÆ. OBIIT DIE‾‾ ÆT 81, MEN‑ SIS 8 MAII, A. D. 1606.355

Note Z.

Particulars respecting Knox’s residence at St Andrews.—The following particulars are extracted from the MS. Diary of Mr James Melville. “Ther wer twa in St Androis wha war his aydant heirars, and wraitt his sermons, ane my condiscipule, Mr Andro Young, minister of Dumblane, who translated sum of them into Latin, and read thame in the hall of the collage insteid of his orations.” The other was a servant of Mr Robert Hamilton, but with what view he took notes Melville could not say. Diary, p. 28.—“Mr Knox wald sum tymes cum in, and repast him in our colleage yeard, and call ws schollars unto him and bliss ws, and exhort ws to knaw God, and his wark in our countrey, and stand be the guid caus, to use our tyme weill, and learn the guid instructiones and follow the guid example of our maisters. Our haill collag [St Leonard’s] maisters and schollars war sound and zelus for the guid caus, the uther twa colleges not sa.” p. 23. “This yeir in the moneth of July, Mr Jhone Davidsone, an of our regents, maid a pley at the marriage of Mr Jhone Colvin, quhilk I saw playit in Mr Knox presence, wharin, according to Mr Knox doctrine, the castle of Edinburgh was besieged, takin, and the captin, with ane or twa with him, hangit in effigie.” p. 24. This seems to have been an exercise among the students at the university. The following extract shows that the fine arts were not then uncultivated, and that the professors and students attended to them in their recreations. “I lernit singing and pleying on instrumentis passing weill, and wald gladlie spend tyme, whar the exercise thairof was within the collag; for twa or thrie of our condisciples pleyed fellin weill on the virginals, and another on the lute and githorn. Our regent had also the pinalds in his chalmer, and lernit sum thing, and I efter him.” Melville adds, that his fondness for music was, at one period, in danger of drawing away his attention from more important studies, but that he overcame the temptation, p. 25.

I may add an extract from the same Diary, relating an incident in the life of one who entertained a high respect for Knox, and afterwards became a distinguished minister in the church. “The ordor of four kirks to a minister, then maid by the erle of Morton, now maid regent, against the quilk Mr Johne Davidsone, an of the regents of our collag, made a buik called The Conference betwix the Clark and the Courtier; for the quhilk he was summoned befor the Justice Air at Haddington this winter (1573) the lest of our course, and banished the countrey.” p. 24. This dialogue, which is in verse, contains the following lines:

Had gude John Knox not yit bene deid,

It had not cum unto this heid:

Had thay myndit till sic ane steir,

He had maid hevin and eirth to heir.

The General Assembly, in October 1577, presented a supplication to the regent Morton, requesting him to allow Mr Davidson to return home from England. Buik of the Universall Kirk, p. 70. The editor of Davidson’s Poetical Remains (lately printed) has furnished some interesting information concerning the author. I am indebted to him for correcting a mistake into which I had fallen in the Life of Melville. Davidson returned to Scotland during the lifetime of the regent, though not until his fall. Hume of Godscroft, in his account of Morton’s behaviour before his execution, says, “There he embraced Mr John Davidson, and said to him, you wrote a book, for which I was angry with you; but I never meant any ill to you,—forgive me. Mr Davidson was so moved herewith, that he could not refrain from weeping.” History of the House of Douglas and Angus, ii. 279, 12mo.

Note AA.

Verses to the memory of Knox.—Beza has inserted no verses to the memory of our Reformer, in his Icones, id est, Veræ Imagines Virorum Doctrina simul et Pietate Illustrium, published by him in Latin, anno 1580. But of this work, a French version was published under the title of Les Vrais Pourtraits des Hommes Illustres en Pieté et Doctrine. Geneve, 1581, 4to. In this translation are inserted original verses on Knox, &c. Irving’s Memoirs of Buchanan, 234. Having never seen this translation, I cannot say whether the verses which it contains coincide with those which I am about to quote.

Jacobus Verheiden published “Præstantium aliquot Theologorum, qui Romæ Antichristum oppugnarunt, Effigies, quibus addita eorum Elogia, librorumque Catalogi. Hag. Comit. 1602.” A new edition of this was published by Fredericus Roth‑Scholtz, under the title of “Jacobi Verheidenii Hagæ‑Comitis Imagines et Elogia, &c. Hagæ‑Comitum, 1725.” In this work the following lines are placed under the portrait of Knox:—

Scottorum primum te Ecclesia, Cnoxe, docentem,

Audiit, auspiciis estque redacta tuis.

Nam te cælestis pietas super omnia traxit,

Atque Reformatæ Religionis amor.

To the account of his life and writings, in the same work, is added an Epigram in Greek and in Latin, which, according to a common practice in such compositions, consists of a play upon his name, and that of his country, in the way of contrast; representing Knox as driving the nocturnal crows, or scotican sophists, from Scotland. As the author informs us that the Batavian youth amused themselves in making these epigrams, and thinks that some of them will amuse the reader, I shall not withhold this specimen in both languages.

Νυκτερίδας, νυκτὸς κόρακας, καὶ νύκτα ἀφεγγῆ,

Ἄλλα τε λύγρ’ Ἠὼς φεύγει ἀλεξίκακος·

Ὅυτως μὲν ΚΝΟΞΟΣ Σκοτικοὺς δνοφερούς τε σοφιστὰς

Ἐν Σκοτίῃ πάτρῃ ἔκβαλε λαμπόμενος.

Nocturnos corvos, noctem obscuramque, volantes

Mures, Aurora et cetera dira fugat:

Sic Cnoxvs Scoticos simul obscurosque sophistas

Ex Scotica lucens ejicit hic patria.

Verheidenii Imagines et Elogia, p. 69, 70.

Hagæ‑Comitum, 1725.

Davidson’s Poem, and Johnston’s Verses, to the memory of Knox, will be found in the Supplement.

Note BB.

Popish account of Knox’s death.—The slanders propagated by the popish writers against our Reformer’s character have been stated in Note S. After the specimen there given, it will not be expected that I shall dwell upon the equally extravagant and incredible narratives which they circulated concerning the manner of his death. I shall, however, translate the substance of Archibald Hamilton’s account, the original picture from which so many copies were afterwards taken. “The opening of his mouth,” he says, “was drawn out to such a length of deformity, that his face resembled that of a dog, as his voice also did the barking of that animal. The voice failed from that tongue, which had been the cause of so much mischief, and his death, most grateful to his country, soon followed. In his last sickness, he was occupied not so much in meditating upon death, as in thinking upon civil and worldly affairs. When a number of his friends, who held him in the greatest veneration, were assembled in his chamber, and anxious to hear from him something tending to the confirmation of his former doctrine, and to their comfort, he, perceiving that his death approached, and that he could gain no more advantage by the pretext of religion, disclosed to them the mysteries of that Savoyan art (Sabaudicæ disciplinæ, magic) which he had hitherto kept secret; confessed the injustice of that authority which was then defended by arms against the exiled queen; and declared many things concerning her return, and the restoration of religion after his death. One of the company, who had taken the pen to record his dying sayings, thinking that he was in a delirium, desisted from writing, upon which Knox, with a stern countenance, and great asperity of language, began to upbraid him: ‘Thou good‑for‑nothing man! why dost thou leave off writing what my presaging mind foresees as about to happen in this kingdom? Dost thou distrust me? Dost thou not believe that all which I say shall most certainly happen? But that I may attest to thee and others how undoubted the things which I have just spoken are, go out all of you from me, and I will in a moment confirm them by a new and unheard‑of proof.’ They withdrew at length, though reluctantly, leaving only the lighted candles in the chamber, and soon returned, expecting to witness some prodigy, when they found the lights extinguished, and his dead body lying prostrate on the ground.” Hamilton adds, that the spectators, after recovering from their astonishment, replaced the dead body in the bed, and entered into an agreement to conceal what they had witnessed; but God, unwilling that such a document should be unknown, disclosed it, “both by the amanuensis himself, [Robertus Kambel a Pinkincleugh,] soon after taken off by a similar death, and by others who, although unwillingly, made clear confessions.” De Confusione Calvin. Sectæ apud Scotos, fol. 66, 67. Those who have not access to the work itself, will find the original words extracted, although with some slight inaccuracies, by Mackenzie. Lives of Scottish writers, iii, 131, 132. “All the rest of the Romish writers,” says Mackenzie, “insist upon such like ridiculous stories that are altogether improbable.” Hamilton’s fabrications gave occasion, however, to the publication of that minute and satisfactory narrative of the last illness and death of Knox, drawn up by one who waited on him all the time, and added by principal Smeton to the answer which he made to that virulent writer. See above, p. 219. Yet the popish writers continued to retail Hamilton’s story until a late period. It was published by Knot in his Protestancy Condemned, Doway 1654; and in The Politician’s Catechism, printed at Antwerp, 1658, “permissu superiorum.” Those who wish to see the variations which it had undergone by that time, and who have not met with these writings, may be satisfied by looking into Strype’s Life of Archbishop Parker, p. 367.

“The miserable, horrible, detestable, and execrable deaths” of Luther, Calvin, and other heretics of that time, are particularly recorded by James Laing, in the work to which I have repeatedly referred.

Note CC.

Knox’s stipend.—The General Assembly held in March 1573, passed the following act:—“The Assemblie, considering that the travels of umqll Johne Knox, merits favourablie to be remembrit in his posteritie, gives to Margaret Stewart, his relict, and hir thrie daughters of the said umqll Johne, the pension qlk he himselfe had in his tyme of the kirk, and that for the year aproachand and following his deceis, of the year of God 1573, to their education and support, extending to five hundreth merks money, twa ch. quhait, sax ch. beir, four ch. aittes.” Buik of the Universall Kirk, p. 56.

On the 25th of May, 1574, in an action “at the instance of Margaret Haldin, relict of umq^ll Mr Henry Fowlis of Colingtown, takesman and fermorar of the kirk of Haillis, aganis Margaret Stewart, relict of umq^ll Johnne Knox, minister, and Andro Ker of Fadounsyd, now hir spous for his entress, and Maister Adam Lethame, minister at the kirkis of Currie, Haillis, and Sanct Katherine of the hoppis;” setting forth that both these parties demanded from her, the said Margaret Halden, “the sowme of 1^c pundis w^t the kirkland of Currie, viz., the thrid of the personage of Currie, extending to lxiiij^li viij^s x^d and thrid pairt penny, and the rest extending to xxxv^li xi^s 1^d twa pairt penny, furth of the thrid of Dumfermling,—and she aucht not to be compellit to mak dowbill payment thairof.—The lordis of counsale desernis and ordanis the same Margaret Haldin to answer, obey, and mak payment to the said Margaret Stewart, relict foirsaid, and her bairnes, of the dewtie contenit in the said tak of the crop and yeir of God, 1^m v^c lxxiiij yeris, as pairtie fundin be the saidis lordis haveand maist ryt thairto, conforme to ane decreit given by the lordis of secreit counsale, of the dait the 25 day of Marche, the yeir of God 1^m v^c lxxiiij yeris, schawin and produced befoir the saidis lordis,” &c. Reg. of Decreets of Court of Session, vol. lvi. fo. 45.

On the 23d of May, 1569, in an action “at the instance of Allan Couttis, chalmerlain of the abbacy of Dumfermling, aganis Johne Knox, minister of Christes evengell, allegeing that the silver males victuall of certane landis and tiendis of the said abbacy of Dumfermling ar assignit to him in payment of his stipend of the crope and yeir of God 1^m v^c lxviij yeris,—and that the said complener, as chalmerlane foirsaid, is awand to him the sowme of twa hundreth and fiftie merkis, as for the silver maill of the landis assignit to him as said is, of the terme of Witsonday, the yeir of God foirsaid. The lordis of consale decernis the said Allane Cowtes to answer and obey the said Johne Knox of the said termes payment, as pairtie fundin by the said lordis havand maist right thairto, after the form and tenor of the assignation given and granted to him thairupon, of the dait the 21 day of September the yeir of God 1^m v^c lxviij yeris,” &c. Reg. of Decreets, vol. xlii. fo. 437.

The following extracts throw light on the subject of his stipend at an earlier period:—

“The Compt of Sir John Wyisharte of Pitarrow, Knycht Comptroller and Collector Generall of the Thredis of the Benefices of the Realme, 1564.

“And upown the first day of August, anno &c. lxiiij, delivered to Johne Knox, minister, at my lord comptrollaris command, in part of payment of his stipend, the soume of ane hundreth pundis, as his acquittance beris, j^{c li}.

“And mair deliverit to Margaret Fowles, Johne Knox servand, the x day of October, the soume of twentye pundis, xx^li.

“And upoune the xvij day of October, ȝeir abonewritten, to John Reid, servand to Johne Knox, the soume of fourtye pundis, xl^li.

“And mair, the ix day of Januar, ȝeir foirsaid, anno &c. deliverit to Robert Watsone, burges of Edinburgh, for Johnne Knox, the sowme of ane hundrethe pundis, as his acquittance therupoune beris, j^{c li}.

“And to Johnne Willock, the xviij day of September, ȝeir, &c. lxiiij, deliverit the soume of fouretye pundis at my lord comptrollaris command, in part of payment of his stipend, as his acquittance beris, xl^li.

“Alsua the comptare aucht to be discharged of the prices of six chalderis beir at twa merkis the boll, and four chalder aittis at xx^s the boll, coft be the comptare, and delivered to the said John Knox, minister, for the beir and aits allowit in his stipend of the lxiiij yeiris crop, quherof na allowance is tane be ony of the collectouris of befoir, extending in money to ij^c xxiiij^li.

“The Comp^t of Schir Williame Murray of Tullybardin, knight comptroller and collector generall of the thriddis of the benefices, &c. At Ed^r. Jan. 2, 1567, of crope 1566.

“And als the comptare aucht to be discharged of the soume of twa hundreth fourescoir twa pundis threttene schillingis four penneis, pait and deliverit be the comptare to Johne Knox, minister, for the half of his stipend of the cropp and ȝeir of God I^m v^c lxvj yeiris baith silver and victuall at command of my lord regentis precept, as the same and his acquittance producit upon compt proportis, ij^c lxxxij ^lib xiij^s iiij^d.

“And of the soume of ane hundreth thretty three pundis six schillinges aucht penneis pait be the comptare to William Stewart, Ross Herald, translater of sic werkis in the kirk as ar necessar for edifiing of the people, quherof he hes had allocatioun of ald be the appointment of the Buke of the modificatioun of the ministerie. j^c xxxiij^li vi^s viij^d.”

Note DD.

Of Knox’s descendants.—In the former editions of this work, it was stated that one of our Reformer’s daughters was married to Robert Pont, minister of St Cuthbert’s; but I have since ascertained that her husband was Zachary Pont, one of the sons of that minister. This appears from the following documents:

“Nov. 13. 1599.—Mr Zach. Pont, portioner of Schyresmilne, and Margaret Knox, his spouse,” inhibited by Bessie Colvill.

“11 Feb^y, 1602.—Said Mr Zach. Pont and spouse inhibited by Mr Johne Velsche, minister of Godis word at our bust of Kirckcudbryt, and Elizabethe Knox his spous.” Pont owes complainers 1000^m, as per contract between parties at Schyrismylne, 8 Apr. 1596. Reg^d in books of Session, 17 Nov. 1601. (Particular Register of Inhibitions, vol. v.)

“Marg. Knox, spous to Mr Zach. Pont, minister at Boar in Cathnes, w^t consent of Mr Joⁿ Ker, minister at Preston, and Mr Ja^s Knox, ane of the regents of the College of Edⁿ,” receives from Andro Lord Stewart of Vchiltrie, 1300 merks. (Gen. Reg. of Decreets, vol. cvii; 28 May, 1605.) There is a previous deed relating to the same transaction, which is signed by “Mr Joⁿ Ker, sone to umq^ll Andro Ker of Fadounside, witnes”. (Ibid. vol. civ; 13 Dec. 1664.)

The celebrated Dr Witherspoon, minister of Paisley, and afterwards president of the college of New Jersey, in America, was a descendant of our Reformer: and, according to the information of Dr Samuel Stanhope Smith, his son‑in‑law, and successor in the presidency, traced his line of descent through Mrs Welch.

I have been favoured with the following pedigree from Alexander Thomson, Esq. of Banchory, in Aberdeenshire. “John Knox, the celebrated Reformer, left three daughters, one of whom was married to a Mr Baillie of the Jerviswood family, and by him had a daughter, who was married to a Mr Kirkton of Edinburgh. By this marriage Mr Kirkton had a daughter, Margaret, who was married to Dr Andrew Skene in Aberdeen. Dr Skene left several children, the eldest of whom, Dr Andrew Skene, had by his wife, Miss Lumsden of Cushnie, several sons and daughters. One of these, Mary, was married to Andrew Thomson of Banchory, who had issue by her, Margaret, Andrew, and Alexander. Andrew married Miss Hamilton, daughter of Dr Hamilton, of Marischall College, Aberdeen, and by her had issue, Alexander, born June 21, 1798, and present proprietor of Banchory.” It is not uncommon for persons who happen to be of the same name with an individual who has attained celebrity, to claim a family relation to him upon very slender grounds. But in the present instance, not to mention the particularity of detail in the genealogical table, there is no ground to suspect that the tradition could have such an origin; as the name of Knox occurs only at the earliest stage of the supposed connexion. Perhaps one of the Reformer’s daughters was twice married; or, which I think more probable, it was one of his grand‑daughters who married a Mr Baillie of Jerviswood. Among the pictures at Mellerstain (now the seat of the ancient family of Jerviswood) is a portrait of captain Kirkton, an officer of the Royal Navy. And we know from other authorities, that Robert Baillie of Jerviswood, who was executed at Edinburgh in 1684, was brother‑in‑law to Mr James Kirkton, minister first at Merton, and afterwards in Edinburgh. Burnet’s Hist. of his own Times, ii. 157. Wodrow, i. 422.

Mr Thomson of Banchory possesses from his ancestors an antique watch; and the tradition in the family is, that this watch belonged to the Reformer, and was presented to him by queen Mary, at a time when she was anxious to cajole him into an approbation of her measures. On the brass‑plate of the inner case are the words, N. Forfaict à Paris. Professor Leslie, whose extensive acquaintance with the history of inventions is well known, after examining an accurate description of this time‑piece by Dr Knight of Aberdeen, says, “that the watch in question might have been the property of John Knox, is possible, and the tradition is in this case not improbable. At the same time it must be admitted, that pocket watches were extremely rare at that period, and probably confined for the most part to princes and the more opulent nobility.” He adds, “I have had the opportunity of inspecting an antique watch, through the politeness of Mr J. Scot, late chemist in Edinburgh, the lineal descendant of a Frenchman of the name of Massie, who, having attended queen Mary into Scotland, had received the relic from his mistress. It is a small round old watch, scarcely exceeding an inch in diameter, and made by Hubert in Rouen. It is precisely of the same structure, but without carving or other ornament, as the one with which that artful princess is said to have endeavoured to bribe our stern reformer.”

I have only to add, that no notice is taken of this relic and token of royal favour in the testament of John Knox, or in the inventory of his goods presented by his widow after his decease.

Note EE.

Of Knox’s History of the Reformation.—When they first formed themselves into an association to advance the reformation of religion, the protestants of Scotland, aware that their conduct would be misrepresented, appointed some of their number to commit their proceedings to writing. This laudable practice was continued by them, and the most important events connected with the progress of the Reformation were registered along with the resolutions adopted at their meetings. After they came to an open breach with the queen regent, and she had accused them of rebellious intentions both to their countrymen and to foreign nations, they resolved that a narrative of their proceedings should be drawn up from these records, and that it should be published to the world for their vindication. Preface to the Gentill Reidare, prefixed to Knox’s Historie, and Præfatio to the Secunde Booke of the Historie, p. 115, edit. 1732. The confusions produced by the civil war prevented them from executing this resolution at the time intended, and the object originally in view was in part answered by occasional proclamations which they had been obliged to make, and by answers which they had published to proclamations issued by the regent. The design was not, however, laid aside; and the person to whom the compilation was committed continued the narrative. The book which is placed second in the printed history was first composed. The third book was next composed, and contains a circumstantial account of the steps taken by the Congregation to obtain assistance from England, which it was judged imprudent to disclose when the former book was drawn up. It brings down the history to queen Mary’s arrival in Scotland. The book which occupies the first place in the printed history was composed after these, and intended as an introduction to them, bringing down the history from the first dawn of the Reformation in Scotland to 1558. See preface to the Gentill Reidare, ut supra. The publication being still delayed, the fourth book was added, which contains the history of ecclesiastical transactions from the arrival of Mary to the end of 1564. The first and fourth books were composed during the years 1566, 1567, and 1568. Historie, p. 86, 108, 282. Some additions were made to the fourth book so late as 1571. Ibid. p. 338. The fifth book in the printed history is not found in any of the ancient MSS. It was added by David Buchanan, but whether he published it from an old MS. or compiled it himself, cannot now be ascertained.

The history was composed by one person, (Preface, ut supra,) and there is no reason for doubting that Knox was the author. In a letter which he wrote on the 23d of October, 1559, he mentions the design of publishing it. Keith, Append. p. 30. The English ambassador, Randolph, says, in a letter to Cecil, dated Edinburgh, 23d September, 1560, “I have tawlked at large with Mr Knox concernynge hys historie. As mykle as ys wrytten thereof shall be sent to your honour, at the comynge of the Lords embassadors by Mr John Woode: He hath wrytten only one booke. If yow lyke that, he shall contynue the same, or adde onie more. He sayethe, that he must have farther helpe than is to be had in this countrie, for more assured knouledge of thyngs passed, than he hath hymself, or can com bye here: yt is a worke not to be neglected, and greatly to be wyshed that yt sholde be well handled.” Life of the Author, p. xliii., prefixed to Knox’s Historie, edit. 1732. From a letter written by Knox to Mr John Wood, and dated Feb. 14, 1568, it appears that he had come to the resolution of withholding the history from the public during his life. See Appendix. The important light in which he considered the work, appears from the way in which he expressed himself in April 1571, when he found that the state of his health would not permit him to finish it. “Lord, provyde for thy flocks trew pastouris; rease thou up the spretis of some to observe thy notable workis, faythfullie to commit the same to writ, that the prosperities [posterities] to come may praise thy holie name, for the great graces plentyfullie powred foorth upon this vnthankfull generatione. Jhone Knox trusting end of trawell.” Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 129. He did not, however, desist altogether from the prosecution of the work. It appears from two letters of Alexander Hay, clerk to the privy council, written in December 1571, that the Reformer had applied to him for papers to assist him in the continuation of his history. The papers which Hay proposed to send him related to the years 1567‒1571, a period which the printed history does not reach. Bannatyne, p. 294‒302.

The following petition, presented by Bannatyne to the first General Assembly which met after our Reformer’s death, with the act of Assembly relating to it, gives the most satisfactory information respecting the history. “Unto your Wisdoms humbly means and shows, I, your servitor Richard Bannatyne, servant to your unquhill most dearest brother John Knox of worthy memory: That where it is not unknown to your wisdoms, that he left to the kirk and town of Edinburgh his history, containing in effect the beginning and progress of Christ’s true religion, now of God’s great mercy established in this realm; wherein he hath continued and perfectly ended at the year of God 1564. So that of things done sinsyne, nothing be him is put in that form and order that he has put the former. Yet not the less there are certain scrolls and papers, and minuts of things left to me by him, to use at my pleasure, whereof a part were written and subscribed by his own hand, and another be mine at his command, which, if they were collected and gathered together, would make a sufficient declaration of the principal things that have occurred since the ending of his former history, at the year foresaid; and so should serve for stuff and matter, to any of understanding and ability in that kinde of exercise, that would apply themselves to make a history, even unto the day of his death. But for so meikle as the said scrolls are so intacked and mixed together, that if they should come in any hands not used nor accustomed with the same, as I have been, they should altogether lose and perish: And seeing also I am not able, on my own costs and expenses, to apply myself and spend my time to put them in order, which would consume a very long time; much less am I able to write them, and put them in register, as they require to be, without your wisdoms make some provision for the same: Wherefore I most humbly request your wisdoms, That I may have some reasonable pension appointed to me by your wisdoms discretion, that thereby I may be more able to await and attend upon the samine; lest these things, done by that servant of God dear to you all, should perish and decay, which they shall do indeed, if they be not put in register, which I will do willinglie, if your wisdoms would provide, as said is. And your wisdoms answer,” &c. To this supplication the Assembly gave the following answer:—“The Assembly accepted the said Richard’s offer, and request the kirk of Edinburgh, to provide and appoint some learned men, to support Richard Bannatyne, to put the said history, that is now in scrolls and papers, in good form, with aid of the said Richard. And because he is not able to await thereon, upon his own expences, appoints to him the sum of forty pounds, to be payed of the 1572 years crope, be the collectors under‑written, viz. the collector of Lothian, Fife, Angus, and the West, Galloway, and Murray, every one of them to pay six pound thirteen shillings four pennies of the said crope; and it shall be allowed to them in count, they bringing the said Richard’s acquittance thereupon.” Life of the Author, p. xliv. xlv. prefixed to Historie, edit. 1732. Book of Univ. Kirk, p. 56.

It is probable that the deficiency of the funds of the church prevented the publication of the history during Morton’s regency; and the change of politics after James assumed the reins of government into his own hands, precluded all hope of its being allowed to be printed in Scotland. An attempt was made to have it printed in England; but after the work had proceeded so far, the press was stopped. This appears from the following extract from Calderwood’s MSS. “February, 1586, Vaultrollier the printer took with him a copy of Mr Knox’s History to England, and printed twelve hundred of them; the stationers, at the archbishop’s command, seized them the 18 of February; it was thought that he would get leave to proceed again, because the council perceived that it would bring the queen of Scots in detestation.” Calderwood’s MS. apud Life of Knox, p. 45, prefixed to edition of Historie, Edinburgh, 1732. Bishop Bancroft also mentions it in the following terms, “If you ever meet with the History of the Church of Scotland penned by Mr Knox, and printed by Vaultrollier, read the pages quoted here in the margent.” Bancroft’s Survey, (originally printed in 1593,) republished in 1663, p. 37. Copies of this imperfect edition were allowed to go abroad, and are still to be met with. In 1644, David Buchanan published his edition of Knox’s History at London in folio, which was reprinted the same year at Edinburgh in quarto. The editor prefixed a preface concerning the antiquity of the Scots, and a Life of Knox, both of which were written by himself. He modernised the language of the history; but not satisfied with this, he also altered the narrative, by excluding some parts of it, and by making numerous interpolations. It appears from the passage formerly quoted from Milton, (see vol. i. p. 464,) that attempts were made to suppress, or at least to mutilate, this edition; but the passage is so obscure that we cannot learn from what quarter these attempts were made. At last, a genuine and complete edition of the history was printed in 1732, from a manuscript belonging to the university of Glasgow, compared with several other manuscripts of undoubted antiquity. Those who wish to know the great difference between this edition and that of David Buchanan, may consult Mr Wodrow’s letter, inserted at large in the Life of the Author, p. xlvi‒li. prefixed to the Historie, edit. 1732, and partially inserted in Nicolson’s Scottish Historical Library, p. 132‒141. Lond. 1736. All the editions of the history lately published are mere copies of Buchanan’s spurious and interpolated one.

This deduction of facts may serve to clear the subject of the History from the difficulties in which it has been involved. That Knox was the author of the first four books, as they are printed in the edition 1732, is beyond all reasonable doubt. After the publication of that edition, it is mere perverseness to endeavour to discredit the authenticity or genuineness of the History, by insisting on the alterations and interpolations of David Buchanan. To infer that he was not the author of the History from the difference between its style and that of his undoubted works, is quite conjectural. The historical and the didactic styles are different in themselves; and when we consider the intervals at which the history was composed, the numerous avocations which distracted the author’s attention, and the multiplicity of facts which it was requisite for him to collect and investigate, we will not be surprised to find this work inferior, in point of language and arrangement, to those tracts which he composed on single topics, and which, having the sentiments at his command, he was left at liberty to arrange and to adorn. The facts which I have produced tend also to corroborate the credibility of the History, as they evince that, however negligent as to points of inferior consideration, the author was most active and laborious in searching for materials, and in procuring, when it was at all possible, original and authentic documents. And such was his character for integrity, that I am persuaded there are few, if any, who believe that he would insert as a fact any thing of whose truth he was not fully convinced.

Note FF.

Catalogue of Knox’s writings.—The following catalogue of the Reformer’s works will, I trust, be found more correct and complete than any one which has hitherto appeared. The titles have been accurately copied from the books themselves, when I could possibly procure them, and at the end of each I have mentioned where a copy may be seen. For the titles of such as I have not seen, I have had recourse to the best authorities, as marked after each article. I have also noticed those of which there are copies in the MS. volume in my possession.

1. “An admonition, or warning, that the faithfull Christians in London, Newcastel, Berwycke, and others, may avoide God’s vengeance both in thys life and in the life to come. Compyled by the servaunt of God, John Knokes.” A cut of truth, poor woman, handcuffed and fastened in the stocks, with a halter about her neck, held by Tyrannye on the one hand, while Crueltye, with a cornered cap, is threatening her with a rod on the other. Beneath the cut, “The persecuted speaketh,

I fear not death, nor passe not for bands:

Only in God put I my whole trust,

For God will requyre my blod at your hands,

And this I know that once dye I must,

Only for Chryst, my lyfe if I give:

Death is no death, but a meane for to leyve.”

Under these verses in ancient writing “John Frythe boke Red and send yt agayne.” E, in eights. “From Wittonburge by Nicholas Dorcastor. Anno M.D.LIIII. the viii of May. Cum privilegio ad imprimendum solum.” W. H. (Ames by Herbert, p. 1576,) sixteens. Comp. Tanneri Bibliotheca Britannico‑Hibernica, p. 460. See above, vol. i. p. 136, note.

2. “A faythful admonition made by John Knox, unto the professours of God’s truthe in England, whereby thou mayest learne howe God wyll have his churche exercised with troubles, and how he defendeth it in the same. Esaie ix. After all this shall not the Lordes wrath ceasse, but yet shall hys hande be stretched out styll. Ibidem. Take hede that the Lorde roote thee not out both heade and tayle in one daye.”

On the back of title: “The epistle of a banyshed manne out of Leycestershire sometime one of the preachers of Goddes worde there, to the Christen reader wysheth health, deliveraunce, and felicitie.”

“Imprynted at Kalykow the 20 daye of Julii 1554. Cum gratia et privilegio ad Imprimendum solum.” French black letter, extends to I, and makes 63 leaves. Advocates’ Library. A copy of this in MS. Vol.

3. “A godly letter sent to the faythefull in London, Newcastell, Barwyke, and to all other within the realme of Englande, that love the coming of our Lord Jesus, by Jhon knox. Matth. x. He that continueth unto the ende shall be saved. Imprinted in Rome, before the Castel of S. Aungel, at the signe of Sainct Peter. In the moneth of July, in the yeare of our Lord 1554.” D, 28 leaves, Fr. black letter. Advocates’ Library. A copy in MS. Vol.

4. “A confession and declaratiō of praiers added thereunto, by Jhon Knox, minister of christes most sacred Evangely, upon the death of that moste famous king Edward the VI. kynge of Englande, Fraunce, and Ireland, in which confession, the sayde Jhon doth accuse no less hys owne offences, than the offences of others, to be the cause of the awaye takinge of that most godly prince, nowe raininge with Chryst whyle we abyde plagues for our unthāfulnesse. Imprinted in Rome, before the Castel of S. Aungel, at the signe of Sainct Peter. In the moneth of July, in the yeare of our Lorde, 1554.” C, 19 leaves. Fr. black letter. Advocates’ Library.

The “Confession” is inserted in vol. i. Note U. The “Declaration of Praiers” is in MS. Vol. See vol. i. Note N. Another edition was licensed in 1580. See Ames, p. 1146.

5. “The copie of a letter sent to the ladye Mary dowagire, regent of Scotland, by John Knox in the yeare 1556. Here is also a notable sermon, mayde by the sayde John Knox, wherein is evydentlye proved that the masse is and alwayes hath been abhominable before God, and Idolatrye. Scrutamini Scripturas.” H, extends to 64 leaves, 16mo. Black letter. No year or place of printing. A copy of this rare book, which belonged to the late Duke of Roxburghe, is now in the Advocates’ Library.

Ames (p. 1587) introduces this book as printed in 1556, but without alleging any authority; and (p. 1834) he speaks of the Sermon against the Mass as printed in 1550, for which he quotes T. Baker’s Maunsell, p. 101. Both the tracts contained in this book are in MS. Vol.

6. “Ane Exposition upon the syxth Psalme of Dauid, wherein is declared hys crosse, complayntes and prayers, moste necessarie too be red of all them, for their singular comforte, that vnder the banner of Christe are by Satan assaulted, and feele the heauye burthen of synne, with which they are oppressed. The paciente abydinge of the sore afflicted was neuer yet confounded.” Ends on the reverse of the last leaf of F. On G begins, “A comfortable Epistell sente to the afflicted church of Chryst, exhortynge thē to beare hys crosse with paciēce, lokyng euery houre for hys commynge agayne to the greate comfort and consolacion of hys chosen, with a prophecy of ye destruction of the wycked. Whereunto is joyned a most wholesome counsell, howe to behaue ourselues in the myddes of thys wycked generacion touching the daily exercise of Gods most holy and sacred worde. Wrytten by the man of God, J. K.”

A copy of this very rare collection of tracts, which also belonged to the late Duke of Roxburghe, is now in the Advocates’ Library. It wants two or three leaves at the close,—ending with I, 5. Black letter, 16mo. (All of these are in MS. Volume. The “wholesome counsell” is inserted in vol. i. Note Z.) In the same volume, and printed with the same type, are two tracts by “Gracious Menewe,” the first on “Auricular Confession,” and the second, “Of the Communion in both kyndes.” It has been conjectured that Knox wrote these under a fictitious name.

7. “The copie of a lettre delivered to the laidie Marie, Regent of Scotland, from Johne Knox minister of Goddes worde, in the yeare of our Lord 1556, and nowe augmented and explained by the author in the yeare of our Lord 1558.” Device: two arches, one narrow, the other broad; over the narrow one is a crown of laurel, over the broad one flames of fire, with this motto about them, “Enter in at the streit gate: for wide is the gate, and brode is the waye, that leadeth to destruction, Matth. vii.” Printed at Geneva, by James Pollain, and Antonie Rebul. M.D.LVIII. D, extends to 28 leaves. Rom. letter, 16mo. Advocates’ Library.

8. “The First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstruous Regement of Wemen. Veritas temporis filia. M.D.LVIII.” 56 leaves, Rom. letter. Advocates’ Library.

9. “The Appellation of Johne Knoxe from the cruell and most unjust sentence pronounced against him by the false bishoppes and clergie of Scotland, with his supplication and exhortation to the nobilitie, estates and cōmunalitie of the same realme. Printed at Geneva M.D.LVIII.” The appellation is addressed “To the nobilitie, and estates of Scotlād” only; the epistle, “To his beloved brethren the cōmunalitie of Scotlād,” annexed, begins at folio 47, and concludes at folio 59, “Be witnesse to my appellation.—From Geneva the 14 of July, 1558. Your brother to commaunde in godliness, John Knoxe.” On the back of which leaf begins: “An admonition to England and Scotland to call them to repentance, written by Antoni Gilby.” On the back of leaf 78, “Psalme of David xciiii turned into metre by W. Kethe,” ends on first page of folio 80—Rom. letter, 16mo. Advocates’ Library.

It is a mistake to suppose that “Antoni Gilby” was a fictitious name assumed by Knox. Gilby was a member of the English church at Geneva. (See vol. i. p. 187.) Ames mentions several publications by him. See also Tanneri Bibliotheca, p. 318.

10. “The copie of his [John Knox’s] epistle, sent unto Newcastle, and Barwick. [This was, perhaps, another edition of No. 3.] Also a brief exhortatione to Englande for the speedy embracing of Christes gospell, heretofore, by the tyranny of Mary, suppressed. Prin. at Geneva, 1559.” Maunsell, p. 65. With a catalogue of Martyrs, 16mo. Ames, p. 1600. Comp. Tanner, p. 460.

11. “An Answer to a great number of blasphemous cauillations written by an Anabaptist, and Adversarie to Gods eternal Predestination; and confuted by Iohn Knox, minister of Gods worde in Scotland: Wherein the Author so discouereth the craft and falshode of that sect, that the godly knowing that error, may be confirmed in the trueth by the euident worde of God. Prov. xxx. There is a generatiō that are pure in their own cōceit, and yet are not washed from their filthiness. Printed by Iohn Crespin, M.D.LX.” Rom. letter, 454 pages. Advocates’ Library. Another edition was licensed 1580; and it was again printed in 1591. See Ames, p. 1196, 1254, 1263.

12. “Heir followeth the coppie of the ressoning which was betuix the Abbote of Crossraguell and John Knox in Mayboil concerning the Masse, in the yeare of God, a thousand five hundreth thre scoir and two yeares. Apocalips xxii. For I protest, &c. Imprinted at Edinburgh by Robert Lekpreuik, and are to be solde at his hous, at the nether bow. Cum privilegio, 1563.” The running title is “The ressoning betwix Jo. Knox and the abbotte of Crossraguell.” In the library of Alexander Boswell, Esq. of Auchinleck. See above, p. 73.

13. “A sermon preached by John Knox, minister of Christ Jesus, in the publique audience of the church of Edenbrough, within the realme of Scotland, upon Sunday the 19 of August, 1565. For the which the said John Knoxe was inhibite preaching for a season, 1 Tim. iv. The time is come that men cannot abyde the sermon of veritie nor holsome doctrine. To this is adjoyned an exortation unto all the faithfull within the sayde realme, for the reliefe of such as faythfully trauayle in the preaching of Gods word. Written by the same John Knoxe, at the commandment of the ministrie aforesaid.” Consists of 49 leaves; and 11 more, “Of the superintendents to the faithful.” No name of place, nor printer. Sixteens. Ames, p. 1488‒89. Tanner, p. 460.

14. “To his loving brethren whome God ones gloriously gathered in the church of Edinburgh, and now are dispersed for tryall of our faith, &c. Johne Knox. Imprented at Striviling be Robert Lekpreuik. Anno Do. M.D.LXXI.” Rom. letter, 4 leaves, 16mo. Advocates’ Library.

15. “An Answer to a letter of a Jesuit named Tyrie, be Johne Knox. Proverbs xxvi. Answer not a foole according to his foolishness, least thou be lyke him: answer a foole according to his foolishness least he be wise in his owē cōseat.

“The contrarietie appearing at the first sight betwix thir twa sentēcis, stayit for a tyme baith heart to meditate and hand to wryte any thing, cōtrair that blasphemous letter. But when with better mynd, God gave me to considder, that whosoever opponis not him self bouldly to blasphemy and manifest leis, differis lytill fra tratouris: cloking and fostering, so far as in them ly, the treasoun of traitouris, and dampnable impietie of those, against whome Gods just vengeance mon burne without end, unless spedie repentāce follow: To quyet therefore my owne conscience, I put hande to the pen as followeth:—Imprentit at Sanctandrois be Robert Lekpruik, Anno Do. 1572.”

“Jhone Knox, the servand of Jesus Christ, now wearie of the world, and daylie luiking for the resolution of this my earthly tabernakle, to the faithful,” &c. 3 pages. Then a prayer in 3 pages, which concludes, “Now, Lord, put an end to my miserie. At Edinburgh the 12 day of Marche 1565.”—On next page begins “An Answer,” &c. At the end, “Of Edinburgh the 10 day of August, anno do. 1568.” Next, “To the Faithfull Reader”—ends “For as the worlde is wearie of me: so am I of it. Of Sanctandrois the 12 of Julii 1572. Johne Knox”—“Followeth the letter as it past from my hand at Diep the 20 Julii 1554. To his loving mother,” &c. (This letter is in MS. Vol.) In all 45 leaves. Rom. letter. Advocates’ Library.

16. “A Fort for the Afflicted. Wherein are ministred many notable and excellent remedies against the stormes of tribulation: Written chiefly for the comforte of Christes little flocke, which is the small number of the faithfull, by John Knoxe. John xvi. 23.” This is an exposition upon the 6th Psalm. It has prefixed, an epistle “To the Religious Reader, by Abr. Flemming.”—“To his beloved mother, J. K. sendeth greeting in the Lorde.” At the end is “A comfortable epistle sent to the afflicted churche of Christ, exhorting them to bear his crosse with patience, &c. Written at Deepe 31 May, 1554.” F 4, in eights. W. H. (Ames, p. 1118.) Tanner (p. 460) says it was printed “Lond. 1580.” This is another edition of the two first tracts described in No. 6.

17. Sermon on Ezekiel ix. 4, printed anno 1580. See a Catalogue of Writers on O. and N. Testament, p. 107. Lond. 1663.

18. “A Notable and Comfortable exposition of M. John Knoxes upon the fourth of Matthew, concerning the tentations of Christ. First had in the public church, and afterwards written for the comfort of certaine private friends, and now published in print for the benefit of all that fear God. At London printed by Robert Waldegrave for Thomas Man, dwelling in Paternoster Row, at the signe of the Talbot.” Advocates’ Library. In MS. Vol.

The words in Italics are supplied, the copy being torn in these places. The book is dedicated by “Johne Fielde,” the publisher, to the “vertuous and my very godly friend Mres Anne Provze of Exeter,” who was the widow of “M. Edward Derring,” a celebrated non‑conformist. Field was also a noted puritan. See Bancroft’s Dangerous Positions, b. iii. chap. 1‒5. Field had received the MS. from Mrs Prouze. At the end of the dedication is, “London the first day of the first moneth in the year 1583.” The book consists of 24 leaves.

19. “The Historie of the Church of Scotland.” Imperfect, beginning with page 17. “By these articles which God of his merciful providence causeth the enemies of his truth to keep in their registers, &c.” and ending with M m, p. 560. “For we judge it a thing most contrarious to reason, godlynes, and equitie, that the widow of the children and him who in;” being part of “the fift head” of the First Book of Discipline. 8vo. Advocates’ Library. This edition is very rare, and none of the copies which have been seen are more complete than that which has been just described. See above, p. 359.

It is unnecessary to give the title of David Buchanan’s edition, printed in 1644 at London, in folio, and reprinted the same year at Edinburgh in quarto.—The genuine and complete edition of the History was published in folio, under the following title:—

“The Historie of the Reformation of Religioun within the Realm of Scotland, conteining the manner and be quhat persons the lycht of Christis Evangell has bein manifested unto this realme, after that horribill and universal defection from the treuth, whiche has come by the means of that Romane Antichryst. Together with the Life of Johne Knoxe, the author, and several curious pieces wrote by him; particularly that most rare and scarce one entitled, The First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstruous Regiment of Women, and a large Index and Glossary. Taken from the original manuscript in the University Library of Glasgow, and compared with other ancient copies. Edinburgh: Printed by Robert Fleming and Company, 1732.” The life was written by Mr Matthew Crawfurd. See last Note.

Besides the above publications, which were all undoubtedly composed by our Reformer, there are others ascribed to him upon more dubious grounds. Bale, in his Scrip. Maj. Brit. post. pars. art. Knoxus, and Verheiden and Melchior Adam, upon his authority, appear, in several instances, to have given different names to the same tract. They mention among his printed works, “In Genesin Conciones.” We know that he preached sermons on Genesis at Franckfort, (see vol. i. 148,) and it is not unlikely that he continued to do so at Geneva. Perhaps Bale, hearing of these, might think that they were published. Bishop Tanner has enumerated among his works, “Exposition on Daniel, Malburg. M.D.XXIX. 8vo.” Bibliotheca, p. 460. As he mentions the place and year of printing, more credit is due to his account: but there is evidently a mistake in the year, for Knox had not at that time begun to write. It may however be an error of the press for a later year. We have seen (vol. ii. p. 192) that he preached on Daniel at St Andrews.

During the reign of queen Mary of England, a book was published, with this title, “The Huntyng of the Romysh Voulfe,” &c. Of this tract a new edition was printed in the beginning of Elizabeth’s reign, under the title of “The Hunting of the Fox and the Wolfe, because they make hauocke of the sheepe of Christ Jesus.” This edition is introduced with a preface by an anonymous author, “To al my faithful Brethren in Christ Jesu, and to all other that labour to weede out the weedes of poperie,” &c. The writer of the preface is very severe against the relics of popery retained in the worship of the church of England by the Act of Uniformity. “My good fathers and deare Brethren, who are first called to ye battel to strive for God’s glory and the edificatiō of his people, againste the Romish reliques, and rags of Antichriste, I doubt not but that you will courageouslye and constātly in Christ, rap at these rages of God’s enemies, and that you will by this occasiō race vp many as great enormities, that we al know and labour to race out al the dregs and remnāts of transformed poperie, that are crept into England, by too much lenitie of thē that will be named the Lords of the clergie,” &c. This preface has been ascribed to our Reformer. “So far,” says Herbert, “as one may be allowed to guess at the author by the style, &c. I am inclined to believe this address was written by John Knox, who for magnanimity, courage, and zeal for God’s glory, was at least equal to any of our reformers.” This surmise is in some measure supported by the cut of Truth, &c. at the end of this tract; the same as prefixed to that author’s Admonition or warning, &c, as p. 1576, except only the name of Sutleti being here given to the figure there inscribed Crueltye.” Herbert’s edition of Ames, p. 1605, 1606.

I have not introduced into this catalogue the Form of Excommunication, which was wholly, nor the Treatise of Fasting, which was chiefly, composed by Knox, nor any other of the public papers in which he had a hand, but which were published in the name of the General Assembly.

In an epistle to the reader, contained in his answer to Tyrie, Knox mentions that he had beside him a collection of letters which he had written to Mrs Bowes, and which the state of his health alone prevented him from publishing. It also appears from Field’s dedication prefixed to Knox’s Exposition of the fourth of Matthew, (see p. 240,) that a number of our Reformer’s manuscripts were in circulation in England as well as Scotland. I have in my possession a manuscript volume, containing tracts and letters written by him between 1550 and 1558. This is unquestionably the identical volume which formerly belonged to the Rev. Mr Wodrow, (author of the History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland,) and described under the name of the Quarto volume of MSS. in Crawfurd’s Life of Knox, p. 53, 54, prefixed to the edition of his Historie published in 1732. It consists of 518 pages, including the contents. On the leaf at the beginning of the volume is this title: “The epistles of Mr John Knox, worthy to be read because of the authority of the wryter, the solidity of the matter, and the comfortable Christian experience to be found therein. Edr. 22 feb. 1683. H. T. m. p.” Below, in a hand considerably older, are these words: “This booke belong’d somtyme to Margaret Stewart, widow to Mr Knox, afterwards married to the knight of fawdonesyde. Sister shee was to James Earl of Arran.” Then follow the six tracts described by Mr Crawfurd, in the place above referred to. At the beginning of the Letters, in a hand older than the former, and the same with that in which the Letters themselves are written, is this title: “Certane epistillis and letters of ye servand of God, Johne Knox, send from dyvers places to his friendis and familiaris in Jesus Chryst.” On the margin of the tracts are several short notes by the transcriber, referring to his own times, such as this, “our case at this day in Scotland, 1603.” This ascertains the date of their transcription; and I think it highly probable that they were copied by Mr John Welsh, a son‑in‑law of the Reformer, one of whose letters is inserted on some blank leaves in the middle of the volume. The letters have evidently been written by the same person (although the hand appears older); and, on the margin of a treatise at the end of them, “1603” occurs. Margaret Stewart, the Reformer’s relict, was alive about the end of the 16th century; but whether the manuscript in my possession belonged to her, or be considered as a transcript from hers, there can be no doubt of its antiquity and genuineness. I have found, upon examination, that all the six tracts in the beginning of the volume have been published; but as the manuscript is more correct than any of the printed editions which I have seen, I have generally followed it in the extracts which I have given from these tracts. The letters are forty‑three in number, besides the letter to the queen regent, the Discourse on the temptation of Christ, and the Additions to the Apology of the Parisian Protestants, which are inserted among them. Three of the letters also have been published, and are noticed in Nos. 6 and 15 of this Catalogue; the remainder, as far as I can learn, never appeared in print. They consist chiefly of religious advices to the friends with whom he corresponded; but a number of facts and allusions to his external circumstances are interspersed. Mr Wodrow possessed another volume of Knox’s MSS., in folio, which is described by Crawfurd, Life, p. 53, ut supra. It contains nothing additional to what I have mentioned in this Note.—In a letter, addressed to Mr Robert Durie, from Sedan, 24th May, 1616, Andrew Melville says: “I left with my lufing and faithful gossep, your father‑in‑law, Mr Knox’s letters. I wish them to be furthcuming.”