[P. 542]. His “white spirits”. Because in the 1623 folio Macbeth we have in iv, 1, Musicke and a Song. Blacke Spirits, &c., and because in Middleton’s Witch the words are given at length, it has been held that Middleton was either Shakespeare’s coadjutor, or his after interpolator, that these lines were his, and were first used in his Witch. But, according to most of Malone’s arguments—for one certainly is not sound—the Witch was some years later than Macbeth, as is also likely from Middleton’s age. And that it was later is in especial shown by a hitherto unnoticed passage in ii, 1:

“Some knights’ wives in town

Will have great hope upon his reformation,” etc.

For it is clear that this must have been written when the price and quality of knighthood had much come down, and its commonness increased beyond what it was in 1605. Secondly, it is an assumption, and a most unlikely one, that the Macbeth MS. intimation of the song was due to the players’ knowledge of it through the Witch. It presupposes that the supernumeraries who played the witches’ parts were the same in both plays. Also that the writers of the MS. knew that these would be the same, and would certainly remember the words: for a playhouse copy is either for the use of the prompter, or a text whence the players’ parts can be extracted. Moreover, the Witch had been, as the author himself tells us, “an ignorantly ill-fated labour”, in other words, a failure.

But in reference to the supposed right of Middleton to these lines, we now find, in 1584, when Middleton was a boy, that the first of the two lines—or, if one chooses, the first two of the four, the words being in each half phrase inverted, possibly to vary the too great sing-song of the sentence—was copied by Scot as part of a known series of rhyming lines. Shakespeare, who wrote later, has the “Black spirits”, etc.; Middleton, in his Witch, where we find passages taken verbatim and almost verbatim from Scot, has these and the other rhymes given by Scot very slightly altered in i, 2, and the “Black spirits”, etc., with “Mingle, mingle”, and some of the other rhymes in v, 2. Hence they are neither Shakespeare’s nor Middleton’s. Whose then are they? Scot gives them as from W. W.’s booklet on the Witches at St. Osees, Essex. But certainly the lines, nor any of them, are not in that booklet. These things, however, are there. Ursula Kempe’s little boy deposes, and she herself, on promise from the Justice, Brian Darcie, Esq., of favour being shown her—which promise, by the way, both in her case and that of others, was carried out by their being hanged—that she had two he- and two she-spirits, the shes being Tyffen, in the shape of a white lamb, and Pigine, black like a toad; the hes, Tittie, like a little grey cat, and Jacke, black like a cat. Nor are these merely thus mentioned by each, but the old woman specifies their doings through three or four of the earlier pages (A 3, v—A 8). Mother Bennet’s spirits were two, Suckin, like a black dog, and Lyerd, redde like a Lyon (B 3, etc., B 7). Besides these, but less prominently brought forward, were these. Mother Hunt had two little things like horses, one white and one black, kept in a pot amongst black and white wool (A 5, v and 6). Ales Hunt had also two spirits, one white and one black, like little colts, and named Jacke and Robbin (C 3). Marg. Sammon had a Tom and a Robyn, but these were like toads. H. Sellys, aged nine, deposes that his mother had two imps, one Herculus sothe hons [sic] or Jacke, black, and a he, who, in the night, and in the likeness of his sister, pulled his younger brother’s leg and otherwise hurt him so that he cried out; the second, Mercurie, a she and white (D v). Ales Baxter says that the cow while being milked was viciously unruly, and that something like a white cat struck at her heart, so that she became so weak that she could not stand, and being found leaning against a style, was carried home in a chair (D 4, v). Ales Mansfield had given her by Margaret Grevell (elsewhere Gravell)—for these imps seem to have been given away without will of their own, like brute beasts, and being hungry were fed on milk, beer, bread, oats, hay, straw, and especially a sup of blood sucked from the body—two he- and two she-spirits, named Robin, Jack, William, and Puppet, alias Mamet, like black cats (D 6). Mother Eustace also had three imps, like white, gray, and black cats. Annis Dowsing, aged seven, base daughter of Annis Herd, tells B. Darcie that her mother had six Avices or Blackbirds, black speckled with white or all black. Also six imps like cows, but “as big as rattes”, one of which, black and white, and named Crowe, had been given to her, while Donne [? Dun], another, was red and white (G. 4. v). I have, perhaps, overlengthened this tale through wishing to show that these imps, besides being hungry, generally took a white or black, and sometimes a red or grey, colour, and because these notings from this unique book and authentic record might be otherwise acceptable. So much do the names and the notice of the colours of the imps strike a reader, that Bishop Hutchinson, in his Historical Essay concerning Witchcraft, 1718, says, p. 29, “An account of them was written by Brian Darcie, with the Names and Colours of their spirits.” But here an end after the remarks. First, that the chief witnesses, and leaders up to these confessions, were their own children of from 6¾ to 9 years of age. Secondly, that these confessions were, as plainly as possible, first made by some and then followed by others through promises of favour, promises lyingly carried out to condemnation and death. Thirdly, that, as shown by such instances as “[she] desired to speake alone with me, the said Bryan Darcey, whereupon I went into my garden”, etc., and by the frequent use of “before mee”—the initials W. W. were either fictitious, or not improbably those of his clerk, and that the real author was Brian Darcie, Esq., Justice of the Peace, who desired to gain favour from his kinsman, Lord Darcie, to whom the book was dedicated, or possibly, through him and it, the notice of her Majesty, as a clever, zealous, and trustworthy seeker-out of these old-new things.

It need hardly be added that ballading was then a profession, and that its professors seized upon anything of interest,—an atrocious murder, the last words of the murderer (spoken or not), unusual floods or storms, the effects of lightning, the cruise of an adventurous vessel, shipwrecks, the story of a strange fish “in forme of a woman from the wast upward”, that appeared “forty thousand fathom above water [or otherwise], and sang as followeth”. How then should the condemnation of some sixteen old women for horrible crimes escape being “balletted”? It was new, rare, came home to all, and was in more senses than one deadly. The very rhymes in Scot prove it, for they could not be Scot’s own words, and they have the very rhythm, or rather lilt, of a ballad. On looking calmly, therefore, at the evidence, I am convinced that neither Shakespeare nor Middleton could have been the one who tacked together these rhymes between 1582 and 1584, but that Shakespeare did here, as he sometimes did, and notably in Ophelia’s madness, quote such lines as “Black spirits and white”, etc., because the words suited his scene of devilish enchantment, and gave it reality; while Middleton, in a Magical Tragi-Comedy, gave, with very slight variation, the whole of the words quoted by Scot.

I trust my reader will not merely excuse it when it regards Shakespeare and Macbeth, if I go a little out of my present road and add the few words following. As it has been held that Middleton wrote “Black spirits”, etc., so it has been supposed that the lines on the “Touching for the Evil” were interpolated by Middleton or some other, because negative evidence seemed to show that James did not take upon himself this custom till a date much later than 1605. Lately, however, Prof. S. R. Gardiner has discovered that James “touched” and was almost compelled to “touch” as early as 1603. Its efficacy had been believed in, and was set forth in books; so that the very assumption of this prerogative proved its efficacy, and thus proved his rightful heirship to the English crown,—a proof, I suspect, not lost sight of by the astute counsellors who counselled its adoption, nor by James himself. And I think that he must be blind who cannot see how this, added to the other evidence set forth in the play, and to the true, though somewhat, and of purpose, indirectly exposed intent of Macbeth, proved both James’s heirship and set forth the certain overthrow of all such devilishly contrived plots,—such as, to name but three, the attempt at the Carse of Gowrie; the plot in which Raleigh was, or was supposed to be, concerned; and lastly, the gunpowder plot—as would alter the predestinate decree of Heaven, that James I and VI should be King of Great Britain. Unless, too, I am much mistaken, the fears of James were the direct or indirect instigators of Shakespeare’s play, and the cause of that autograph letter to the poet, for which no shadow of a reason can otherwise be assigned.

For convenience’ sake I here include some notings illustrative of either Shakespeare’s indebtedness to Scot, or of those beliefs and forms of expression which led both to write as they did.

[P. 10]. “They can pull down the moon.” This belief, derived from classic times, is authority for Prospero’s “A witch ... so strong That could control the moon” (v, i). So also ii, 1, 174.

——— “Corne in the blade.” There is frequent reference to this in Scot, as here and at pp. A iiii, v, 49, 58, 63, 219, 221, 482, and elsewhere. But as Staunton saw, this is the nearest to Macbeth’s “though bladed corn be lodged” (iv, 1). Also, though this happens more or less in several of the instances, yet especially here, the context agrees with the thoughts and context-words of Macbeth.