Life of John Knox, Fifth Edition, Vol. 2 of 2 / Containing Illustrations of the History of the Reformation in Scotland

by Thomas M'Crie

Z

Zuinglius. His influence with the senate of Zurich, ii. [13]. Comparison between Knox and, ii. [260].

THE END.

EDINBURGH:
PRINTED BY BALLANTYNE AND COMPANY,
PAUL’S WORK, CANONGATE.

Footnotes.

[1] –	Knox, Historie, p. 236.
[2] –	“Ult. Mart. 1560. Margaret Aidnam askit God and the Congregatioun forgiveness of the adultery committed be her wt William Rantoun, publiclie in the paroche kirke of this town: John Knox beand at that tyme minister.” Records of the Kirk Session of St Andrews.
[3] –	Records of Town Council of Edinburgh, May 8, 1560.
[4] –	Knox, Historie, p. 238.
[5] –	Knox, Historie, p. 237.
[6] –	Beza, Vita Calvini. Melch. Adami Vitæ Exter. Theolog. p. 70, 88. Persons unfriendly to the government of the reformed churches, have represented the opposition made to Calvin and his brethren, as arising from their attempts to have their discipline established by human laws, and supported by civil penalties. This is an unfair representation of the case. “Neque enim consentaneum est,” says Calvin, “ut qui monitionibus nostris obtemperare noluerint, eos ad magistratum deferamus.” Institut. Christ. Relig. p. 434. Ludg. Batav. 1654. The dispute between him and his opponents turned on this question, Are ministers obliged to administer the sacraments to those whom they judge unworthy? Or, (which amounts to the same thing,) Are the decisions of the church‑court in such matters to be reviewed and reversed by the civil court? Melch. Adam. ut supra. And this will be found to have been the true state of the question in Scotland, in the greater part of the dissensions between the court and the church, after the establishment of the Reformation.
[7] –	Knox, Historie, p. 237, 256.
[8] –	The names of the ministers who composed the Confession of Faith, and the Book of Discipline, were John Winram, John Spotswood, John Douglas, John Row, and John Knox. Ibid. p. 256.
[9] –	Row, MS. Historie of the Kirk, p. 12, 16, 17. It is probable that the meeting of assembly by which the Book of Discipline was approved, was that which Knox calls a convention, held on the 5th of January, 1561. Historie, p. 261, 295. The first General Assembly appointed a meeting to be held at that time. Buik of the Universall Kirk, p. 3. MS. in Advocates’ Library. But there is no account of its proceedings in that or in any other register which I have had access to see. In the copy of the First Book of Discipline, published (by Calderwood, I believe) in 1621, p. 23, 70; and in Dunlop’s Confessions, vol. ii. p. 517, 605, it is said, that the order for compiling it was given on the 29th of April, 1560, and that it was finished by them on the 20th of May following. But, as the civil war was not then concluded, I have followed the account given by Knox, who says, that it was undertaken subsequently to the meeting of parliament in August that year. Historie, p. 256.
[10] –	In Dunlop’s Collect. of Confessions, ii. 436, the approbation of it is styled an act of secret council, 25th January, 1560, i.e. 1561.
[11] –	Knox, Historie, p. 256, 257, 295, 296. Keith, 496, 497. Dunlop, ii. 606–608.
[12] –	The General Assembly had, at different times, under their consideration the appointment of superintendents for Jedburgh, Dumfries, Aberdeen, and Banff; but came to no conclusion. Those actually appointed were, John Erskine of Dun for Angus; John Winram for Fife; John Spotswood for Lothian; John Willock for Glasgow; and John Carswell for Argyle. Keith’s Hist. p. 511, 512, 518–9. Carswell is not mentioned, among the superintendents, in a curious document recently printed; but it contains no list of the ministers in Argyle. Register of Ministers, Exhorters, and Readers, and of their Stipends, after the period of the Reformation, p. 1, 2, Edinburgh, 1830.
[13] –	Dunlop’s Confessions, ii. 524, 526, 545, 577, 638, 639.
[14] –	Dunlop, ii. 526. Imposition of hands was afterwards appointed to be used by the Second Book of Discipline. Ibid. 768–9.
[15] –	Knox, Historie, p. 263–266.
[16] –	For an illustration of some of these facts, see [Note A].
[17] –	First Book of Discipline, chap. vii. Dunlop, ii. 547–561.
[18] –	Knox mentions Lord Erskine, (afterwards Earl of Mar,) as one of the chief noblemen who refused to subscribe the discipline, and assigns two reasons for his refusal; first, “he hes a very Jesabell to his wife,” and second, “if the pure, the scullis, and the ministry of the kirk, had thair awin, his kitcheing wald want twa partes and mair of that quhilk he now injustly possesses.” Historie, p. 256. My Lady Mar’s passion for money was well known at that time, and is referred to in Lord Thirlstane’s “Admonitioun to my Lord of Mar Regent,” published in Ancient Scottish Poems from Maitland MS. p. 164. Lond. 1786: “Nor, to content thy marrow’s covatice, Put not thyself in perrell for to pereis.”
[19] –	Hess, Life of Zuingle, p. 201–207. Gerdes. i. 309.
[20] –	See [Note B].
[21] –	See vol. i. p. 321.
[22] –	Row’s MS. Historie, ut sup. p. 308, 356, 372. See also [Note C].
[23] –	See [Note D].
[24] –	Hume, History of England, vol. v. chap. 38, p. 51. Lond. 1807.
[25] –	Row’s MS. p. 372.
[26] –	See [Note E].
[27] –	Buik of the Universal Kirk, p. 2. MS. Adv. Lib. Keith, 498.
[28] –	See [Note F].
[29] –	Knox, Historie, p. 260.
[30] –	Preface to a Letter, added to An Answer to a Letter of a Jesuit, named Tyrie, he Johne Knox.—Sanctandrois—Anno Do. 1572.
[31] –	Calvini Epistolæ, p. 150: Oper. tom. ix. “Viduitas tua mihi, ut debet, tristis et acerba est. Uxorem nactus eras cui non reperiuntur passim similes,” &c. In a letter to Christopher Goodman, written at the same time, Calvin says, “Fratrem nostrum Knoxum, etsi non parum doleo suavissima uxore fuisse privatum, gaudeo tamen ejus morte non ita fuisse afflictum, quin strenue operam suam Christo et ecclesiæ impendat.” Ibid. Calvin had lost his own wife in 1549. Epistolæ et Responsa, p. 212–3, 225. Hanov. 1597.
[32] –	See [Note G].
[33] –	Knox, 257, 258. Buchanan, i. 326, 327. Spotswood, 150, 151. Keith, 154, 157.
[34] –	Knox, 260.
[35] –	Mr Hume’s letter, printed in the Life of Dr Robertson: History of Scotland, vol. i. 25. Lond. 1809. Anderson’s Collections, vol. iv. part i. p. 71, 72, 74, 79.
[36] –	“How sone that ever her French fillokes, fidlars, and utheris of that band, gat the hous alone, thair mycht be sene skipping not veray comelie for honest women. Her comune talk was in secrete, that sche saw nothing in Scotland but gravity, quhilk repugned altogidder to her nature, for sche was brocht up in joyeusetie.” Knox, Historie, p. 294.
[37] –	See [Note H].
[38] –	Knox, Historie, p. 284–287.
[39] –	See [Note I].
[40] –	Knox, Historie, p. 341.
[41] –	Knox, Historie, p. 282, 283, 285, 287.
[42] –	Several of the above considerations, along with others, are forcibly stated in a letter of Maitland to Cecil, written a short time before Queen Mary’s arrival in Scotland. Keith, App. 92–95. That sagacious, but supple politician was among the first to verify some of his own predictions. That such fears were very general in the nation appears also from a letter of Randolph. Robertson, Append. No. 5.
[43] –	Histoire du Calvinisme et celle du Papisme mises en Parellele; ou Apologie pour les Reformateurs, pour la Reformation, et pour les Reformez, tome i. p. 334. A Rotterdam, 1683, 4to. The affirmation of this writer is completely supported by the well‑known history of Henry IV. of France, (not to mention other instances,) whose recantation of Calvinism, although it smoothed his way to the throne, could not efface the indelible stigma of his former heresy, secure the affections of his Roman catholic subjects, or avert from his breast the consecrated poniard of the assassin.
[44] –	Randolph to Cecil, 9th Aug. 1561, apud Robertson’s Scotland, Appendix, No. 5, and Keith, p. 190. A letter of Maitland to Cecil, of the same date with the above, seems to refer to the same design; and I shall take the opportunity of correcting (what appears to me) an error in the transcription of this letter. “I wish to God,” says Maitland, “the first warre may be planely intended against them by Knox, for so shold it be manifest that the suppressing of religion was ment; but I fear more she will proceed tharunto by indirect means. And nothing for us so dangerouse as temporising.” Haynes, p. 367. This seems altogether unintelligible; but if the words which I have printed in Italics be transposed, and read thus, “by them against Knox,” they will make sense, and correspond with the strain of the letter, and with the fact mentioned by Randolph, in his letter to Cecil written on the same day. Maitland expresses his fears that Mary would have recourse to crafty measures for undermining their cause, instead of persevering in the design which she had avowed of prosecuting Knox.
[45] –	Knox, Historie, p. 269.
[46] –	Ibid. p. 262.
[47] –	Keith, 188.
[48] –	Knox, Historie, p. 287–292.
[49] –	Ibid. p. 292.
[50] –	Knox, Historie, p. 292. Keith, 197.
[51] –	Letter, Knox to Cecil, 7th October, 1561: Haynes, State Papers, p. 372.
[52]–	Randolph’s letter, in Keith, 188. In this letter, the ambassador states some circumstances as to the first interview between the queen and the Reformer, which are not mentioned in Knox’s History. He “knocked so hastily upon her heart, that he made her to weep, as well you know there be some of that sex that will do that as well for anger as for grief; though in this the lord James will disagree with me. He concluded so in the end with her, that he hath liberty to speak his conscience, [and] to give unto her such reverence as becometh the ministers of God unto the superior powers.”
[53] –	Haynes, 372. An epistolary correspondence was at this time maintained between secretary Cecil and our Reformer. Keith, 191, 192, 194. Robertson, Append. No. 5.
[54] –	Knox, Historie, p. 295–6.
[55] –	Keith, App. 175–179. Knox, 296–300.
[56] –	The privy council appointed certain persons to fix the sums which were to be appropriated to the court and to the ministry, and also the particular salaries which were to be allotted to individual ministers, according to the circumstances in which they were placed. The officers appointed for this purpose composed a board or court, under the privy council, and was called the court of modification.
[57] –	“So busie,” says he, “and circumspect wer the modificators, (because it was a new office, the terme must also be new,) that the ministers should not be over‑wantoun, that an hundred merks was sufficient to an single man, being a commone minister: thre hundreth merks was the hiest apoynted to any, except the superintendents and a few utheris.” Historie, 301. “Mr Knox is not at all here diminishing the sum,” says Keith; “for the original books of assignation to the ministers, which now ly before me, ascertain the truth of what he says,” p. 508. Wishart of Pittarrow, who was comptroller of the modification, pinched the ministers so much that it became a proverb—“The gude laird of Petarro was an ernest professour of Christ, bot the mekill devill receave the comptroller.” Sir John Wishart of Pittarrow, was appointed comptroller on the 1st of March, 1561. Reg. Sigil. Secr. lib. xxi. 5.
[58] –	Knox, Historie, p. 201–2.
[59] –	See Extracts from the Records of the Town Council in [Note K].
[60] –	Keith, p. 498.
[61] –	The form observed on that occasion, which was followed in the admission or ordination of all the superintendents and other ministers, is inserted at length in Knox’s Historie, p. 263–266; and in Dunlop’s Confessions, ii. 627–636.
[62] –	Knox, Historie, p. 270.
[63] –	Ibid. p. 328–9.
[64] –	See [Note L].
[65] –	Keith, 215.
[66] –	Knox, Historie, 305–308, and letter to Locke, 6th May, 1562, in Cald. MS. i. 755, 756. Spotswood, 184.
[67] –	Histoire des Martyrs, fol. 558, 559. Anno 1597.
[68] –	Knox, Historie, 308–311.
[69] –	St Cuthberts, or the West Church, was at that time (as it is at present) a distinct parish, of which William Harlow was minister. There was also a minister in Canongate or Holyroodhouse.
[70] –	Cald. MS. ii. 157.
[71] –	Records of Town Council, 26th October, 1561.
[72] –	Ibid. 10th April, 1562.
[73] –	The number of elders in the session of Edinburgh was twelve, and of deacons sixteen. Dunlop’s Confessions, ii. 638.
[74] –	Calderwood, apud Keith, 514.
[75] –	See [Note M].
[76] –	Row, MS. Historie of the Kirk, p. 47. Spotswood, p. 463–4. I have chiefly followed Row’s narrative. By comparing it with Spotswood’s, the reader will perceive that they differ in a few unimportant circumstances. Row mentions that he had his information from several persons who had heard Craig himself relate the story, and particularly from his widow, “dame Craig,” who survived her husband, and lived in Edinburgh until 1630. Mr John Craig, minister, his wife, Marion Small, and his eldest son, Mr William, are mentioned, under the date 16th August, 1594, in Burgh Sas. ix. 60.
[77] –	Keith, p. 226.
[78] –	Knox, Historie, p. 302.
[79] –	Keith, 230. Knox, 321.
[80] –	Knox, 316–318.
[81] –	The historian of the family of Gordon expressly says, that “her majesty thought, by the earle of Huntlie his power in the north, to get herselff fred from the hands of her bastard brother, James, earle of Morray;” and that “the earle of Huntlie (at the quein’s own desyre) did gather some forces, to get her out of the earle of Murraye’s power.” Genealogical History of the Earldom of Sutherland, by Sir Robert Gordon of Gordonstoun, p. 140, 141.
[82] –	Spotswood, 185.
[83] –	Knox, Historie, p. 316, 318.
[84] –	The Reasoning betwixt Jo. Knox and the abbote of Crossraguell, fol. 4. Edinburgh, 1563.
[85] –	Kennedy, Compendius Tractive, A, iiij.
[86] –	Ibid. D, vii.
[87] –	Keith, App. 195–199. Kennedy, in a letter to the archbishop of Glasgow, says, “Willock, and the rest of his counsell, labourit earnestlie to sie gif I wald admitt the scripture onlye juge, and, be that meines, to haif maid me contrarry to my awin buke; bot thair labouris wes in waist.—I held me evir fast at ane grounde.” And he triumphs, that he “draif the lymmar—to refuse the interpretation of the doctoris allegeit be him and all utheris, bot so far as he thocht they war agreable with the worde of God, quhilk was as rycht nocht.” Ibid. 193, 194.
[88] –	See [Note N].
[89] –	Without farther plea.
[90] –	Crawford’s Peerage of Scotland, p. 75.
[91] –	“Augustus 22—Monasterio Crucis regalis obitus Beati Quintini Kennedii abbatis, Comitis Cassilii fratris, qui admiranda constantia sex annis totis, cum hæresi nascente, et jam confirmata conflixit, ad extremum lento veneno consumptus, corruptoque sanguine excessit.” Dempsteri Menologium Scotorum, p. 20. Bononiæ, 1622.
[92] –	See Calendar, by “M. Adam King, profeseur of philosophie and Mathimatikis at Paris,” prefixed to a Scottish translation of Canisius’s Catechism, printed in 1587.
[93] –	Knox gives merely a general notice of this dispute in his Historie, p. 318. Keith, who was very industrious in collecting whatever referred to the ecclesiastical history of that period, could not obtain a copy of the printed disputation, and had heard of but one imperfect copy. History, App. 255. The only copy known to exist at present, is in the library of Alexander Boswell, Esq. of Auchinleck.—Since the publication of the first edition of this Life, Mr Boswell has printed a small impression of this unique, being an exact fac simile of the original edition, for the gratification of the curious.
[94] –	Lesley, apud Keith, p. 501. App. 223. Lesley speaks of a dispute between Knox and Wingate, but that historian is often incorrect in his details. The dispute between the doctors of Aberdeen and the ministers, which took place in the beginning of 1561, is mentioned by Knox, Historie, p. 261, 262. It would seem from a letter of Randolph, that there was a dispute in the end of 1561, between some of the ministers and a Parisian divine, who had accompanied the queen. Keith, 208. Wingate published at Antwerp, his “Buke of Fourscoir Three Questionis,” in 1563. Keith has reprinted this, along with his “Tractatis,” originally printed at Edinburgh. He calls them “very rare and much noted pieces.” History, App. 203. In point of argument or sentiment, they are certainly not noted; but they contain a strong proof of the extreme corruption which prevailed among the superior popish clergy, against which Wingate inveighs as keenly as any reformer. His second book concludes with this exclamation, “Och, for mair paper or pennyis!” Wingate translated several works of the Fathers into the Scottish language, some of which are mentioned by him in his Tractatis. Keith, App. 226, 227. He was made abbot of a Scottish monastery at Ratisbon. Mackenzie’s Lives, vol. iii. p. 149.
[95] –	See [Note O].
[96] –	Knox, Historie, p. 323, 324. Keith, 522.
[97] –	Keith, p. 538.
[98] –	Buik of the Universal Kirk, p. 23. Keith, 559, 560.
[99] –	Knox, Historie, p. 398.
[100] –	See [Note P].
[101] –	Comp. Knox, Historie, 327, with Keith, Append. 125.
[102] –	In Knox’s Historie, it is printed Cathenis, by mistake, instead of Athenis. The person referred to is Alexander Gordon, brother to George, earl of Huntly, who was slain at Corrichie in 1562. Scarcely any Scottish prelate ever occupied so many different sees, or occupied them for so short a time. He was bishop of Caithness, archbishop of Glasgow, bishop of the Isles, and bishop of Galloway. When he was deprived of the see of Glasgow, the pope, as a recompense, created him titular archbishop of Athens. Gordon’s Genealogical History of the Earldom of Sutherland, p. 111–12, 137, 290. Keith’s Scottish Bishops, p. 128, 153, 166, 175.
[103] –	Knox, Historie, p. 326–328.
[104] –	Knox, Historie, p. 327–329.
[105] –	Ibid. p. 330–334.
[106] –	Spotswood, 188. “We are very much obliged to the information of archbishop Spotswood” for this, says honest Keith. History, 240.
[107] –	Act. Parl. Scot. ii. 536–8. Knox, 331. Keith, 240.
[108] –	I have not been able to ascertain the time at which the acquaintance between the earl of Murray and the Reformer commenced. It was probably soon after Knox came into England, in the reign of Edward VI. A popish writer has mentioned their meeting, and grafted upon it the calumny, current among the party, that the earl had formed the ambitious project of wresting the crown from his sister, and placing it on his own head. “Johann Kmnox deceavit him,” says he, “in S. Paules kirk in Londone, bringand him in consait, that God had chosen him extraordinarilie as ane Josias, to be king of Scotland, to rute out idolatrie, and to plant the licht of the new evangel: quhair thay convenit in this manner, That the prior of St Androis, erl of Murray, sould mentene the new Elias againis the priestes of Baal, (for sua blasphemouslie he namit the priestes of Christ Jesus.) And the neu Elias sould fortifie the new Josias, be procuring the favour of the people againis Iesabel, blaspheming maist impudentlie the quenis M.” Nicol Burne’s Disputation, p. 156. Knox was at least better acquainted with scripture‑history than to make Josias contemporary with Elias and Jesabel.
[109] –	Knox, Historie, p. 331.
[110] –	Referring to the critical circumstances in which the lords of the Congregation had been situated at these places, when the queen regent threatened to attack them with superior forces. See vol. i. p. 260, 267, 277.
[111] –	See vol. i. p. 312–3.
[112] –	Knox, Historie, p. 332–334.
[113] –	These are the words of Mr Hume, who holds a distinguished place among the writers who have excited prejudices against our Reformer on the score of cruelty to Mary. The reader will find some remarks on the statements of that able but artful historian in [Note Q].
[114] –	See [Note R].
[115] –	See [Note S].
[116] –	Spotswood gives a different account of this affair, which has been adopted by several writers. He not only says that the protestants “forced the gates; but that some [of the papists] were taken and carried to prison, many escaped the back way with the priest himself.” History, p. 188. But he could not have the opportunity of being so well acquainted with the circumstances as Knox, whose account is totally irreconcilable with the archbishop’s. Knox expressly says, that, besides entering the chapel, and addressing the priest as above mentioned, “no farther was done or said.” Historie, p. 335, 336. Had some of the papists been carried to prison, he never could have given such an account as he has done, not only in his history, but also in his circular letter, which was produced at his trial, without any allegation that it contained an unfair or partial statement of facts.
[117] –	Knox, Historie, p. 336, 337.
[118] –	It has been doubted, whether this meeting acted as a court of judicature in trying Knox, or was called to determine whether he should be brought to a judicial trial. Dalyell’s Cursory Remarks, prefixed to Scottish Poems, vol. i. p. 72. The justice‑general, the lord advocate, and the other law‑lords, were present; but they had seats in the privy council. Upon the whole, I am inclined to think that this was an extraordinary meeting of the privy council, to which other noblemen, besides the counsellors, were called, to give the proceedings greater weight with the public. The object of the queen was, in the first place, to procure the imprisonment of Knox, after which she might proceed against him as she thought most prudent. Knox, Historie, p. 339, 340. Spotswood, p. 188.
[119] –	Knox, Historie, p. 238–343. Spotswood, p. 188. The account of the trial given by Calderwood, in his MS., has been compared with that of Knox, and exactly agrees with it.
[120] –	Keith, 248, 251.
[121] –	Sir Thomas Randolph, in a letter, dated 27th Feb. 1564, mentions “some unkindness between Murray and the queen, about Knox, whose parte he taketh.” Keith, 249.
[122] –	Keith, 527, 528. Knox, 344, 345.
[123] –	Randolph, in a letter to Cecil, 18th March, 1563/4, says:—“Knox askt in church to be marryed to Margrett Steward, the daughter of the Lord Ochiltre;” referring to the proclamation of banns. Keith, 251. Lord Ochiltree was descended from Robert, duke of Albany, second son of King Robert II. His father exchanged the lands and title of Evandale for those of Ochiltree. Douglas’s Peerage, 522. Crawfurd’s Renfrew, and Royal House of Stewart, by Semple, part i. p. 92–94. The second son of lord Ochiltree, and brother‑in‑law of the Reformer, was Sir James Stewart of Bothwellmuir, afterwards the infamous favourite of James VI. who created him Earl of Arran. Crawfurd, in his Officers of State, (p. 488,) has published a protestation which Arran made of his lineage, and title of priority to the duke of Lennox, his rival in James’s favour. The Reformer’s father‑in‑law was usually called the good lord Ochiltree; and was “a man rather borne to mak peace than to brag upon the calsey.” Knox’s Historie, p. 304.
[124] –	See [Note T].
[125] –	Robertson’s History of Scotland, vol. ii. 108. Lond. 1809.
[126] –	In a letter to the Council of Trent, dated 18th March 1563/4, Mary laments “that the situation of her affairs—hujus temporis tanta injuria,” did not permit her to send some of her prelates to that council; and assures them of her great and unalterable devotion to the Apostolic see—“nostra perpetua mente ac voluntate, in ejusdem sedis observantia et submissione.” In a letter, written Jan. 3d of the same year, she entreats the cardinal of Lorrain to assure the pope of her resolution to live and die a catholic. And on the last day of the same month, she writes to his holiness himself lamenting the damnable errors—“damnabili errori,” in which she found her subjects plunged, and informing him that her intention, from the time she left France, had uniformly been to re‑establish the ancient religion. MS. Letters, extracted from the Barberini Library, in Advoc. Lib. A. 2. 11.
[127] –	Robertson, Hist. of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 109.
[128] –	During the reign of Mary of England, the manner in which the protestants prayed for her, in their conventicles, was declared high treason. Act. Parl. 1, and 2, Philip and Mary, cap. 9. Nor did the psalms and prayers of the primitive Christians escape punishment under the “tolerant” emperor Julian. Works of the Reverend Samuel Johnston, p. 20–22. London, 1713.
[129] –	Men of no note.
[130] –	Servants of God, however.
[131] –	Craig, who was rather facile in his disposition, and apt to be moulded by those who were about him, seems afterwards to have recanted the principle which he maintained on this occasion. For I suppose he is the person who preached the sermon at Linlithgow, mentioned by Hume of Godscroft, in his History of the House of Douglas and Angus, ii. 383, 385. That historian has inserted some very ingenious observations on the subject, by way of strictures on the sermon.
[132] –	Knox, Historie, p. 348–366.
[133] –	This was an opinion generally entertained among the Reformers; and it was one ground (though not the only one, as we have seen, p. 25) upon which they vindicated the penal statutes against the mass and image worship. At the same time, while they laboured to restrain these evils, they discovered no disposition to proceed to capital punishment, even when it was completely in their power. I never read nor heard of an instance, in the time of our Reformer, of a person being put to death for performing any part of the Roman catholic worship. If the reason of this disconformity between their opinion and their practice be asked, I can only answer,—their aversion to blood. “God,” says our Reformer, addressing the popish princes who persecuted the protestants, “will not use his saintes and chosen children to punish you. For with them is alwaies mercie, yea, even althogh God have pronounced a curse and malediction; as in the history of Josua is plaine. But as ye have pronounced wrong and cruel judgment without mercie, so will he punish you by such as in whom there is no mercie.” Answer to the Cavillations of an Anabaptist, p. 449.
[134] –	The magistrates of Edinburgh, understanding that Mr Christopher Goodman was appointed to preach during the absence of their own ministers, directed a committee of their number to wait upon him, and to “offer him, in their names, all honourabill intertenment, and cause the stewart of Jhonne Knox house to keep table to him upoun the town’s expensis.” Records of Town Council for 23d Aug. 1564.
[135] –	Keith, 535, 537, 540.
[136] –	Knox, Historie, p. 368.
[137] –	Keith, p. 278, note (a.)
[138] –	Knox, p. 373.
[139] –	Keith, 279. Knox, 374, 378.
[140] –	Keith, 329. Robertson, ii. 125.
[141] –	Knox, 372, 374. Robertson, ii. 114, 120.
[142] –	Knox, 372.
[143] –	Ibid. 379. Keith, 309, 310. Append. 108–110.
[144] –	Knox, 368, 379, 386. Keith, 309, 310. Gordon’s Genealog. Hist. of the earldom of Sutherland, 143–4.
[145] –	Keith, 300, 304, 306.
[146] –	Robertson, ii. 131. Laing, History of Scotland.
[147] –	Knox, Historie, 382, 384, 386.
[148] –	Ibid. 388.
[149] –	Ibid. 373, 374.
[150] –	Knox, Historie, 377.
[151] –	Ibid. 376.
[152] –	Goodall says, that Knox was engaged with the Earl of Murray in a plot for seizing Darnley; but he has produced no evidence of his assertion. Life of Queen Mary, i. 207–209.
[153] –	Keith, 301–2.
[154] –	Sermon on Isa. xxvi. 13, 14: History of the Reformation, Edin. 1644, 4to. Append. p. 120, 128. Spotswood says, that Knox, in his sermon, (either doubting the king’s sincerity, or favouring the faction of the noblemen,) “fell upon him with a bitter reproof.” History, 191. But the archbishop does not seem to have read the sermon, which contains no reproof of the king, either bitter or mild. Indeed, the preacher appears, on that occasion, to have used less freedom than ordinary in the application. Strype, Annals, i. 527, 23d August, 1565.
[155] –	Preface to the Sermon, ut supra.
[156] –	Ibid. Records of Town Council. Knox, Historie, p. 381. Being called before the privy council, he wrote out the sermon, as exactly according to what he had preached as possible, and sent it to the press, to let the impartial see “upon how small occasions great offence is now taken.” At the end of it is this postscript:—“Lord, into thy hands I commend my spirit; for the terrible roaring of gunnes, and the noise of armour, do so pierce my heart, that my soul thirsteth to depart.” On the margin are these words:—“The castle of Edinburgh was shooting against the exiled for Christ Jesus’ sake.” Then follows the date at which the writing was finished. “The last day of August 1565, at four of the clock in the afternoon, written indigestly, but yet truly, so farre as memory would serve, of those things that in publike I spake on Sunday, August 19, for the which I was discharged to preach for a time. Be mercifull to thy flock, O Lord, and at thy pleasure put end to my misery. John Knox.”
[157] –	Spotswood, 191, 192. Keith, 546, 547. Keith calls in question the archbishop’s narrative; because Knox, in his history, does not say that the queen was present, and does not mention the prediction, although “fond enough to catch at and force such things upon his readers.” But Knox did not write this part of the history; the fifth book having been compiled after his death, and not being found in old MSS. See Advertisement, prefixed to the edition of his Historie, Edin. 1732. It must be confessed, however, that Spotswood’s account of this affair is inaccurate in a number of particulars. David Buchanan says, that the king had “cast the psalme booke in the fire,” which was the cause of Knox’s denunciation against him. Life of Knox, prefixed to History of the Reformation.
[158] –	Records of Town Council, 23d August, 1565. Keith, 547.
[159] –	Knox, Historie, p. 381.
[160] –	Ibid. p. 389.
[161] –	See [Note U].
[162] –	Keith, 562.
[163] –	Keith, 538.
[164] –	This appointment was laid upon him in June 1563. Keith, 525. He does not seem to have executed it till 1567; which is the date subjoined to a prayer at the end of the treatise. Then follows a postscript: “This booke is thought necessary and profitable for the church, and commanded to be printed by the Generall Assemblie.” The order for printing it seems to have been first given by the Assembly in 1568, and renewed in 1571. Psalmes in meeter, &c. (commonly called Knox’s Liturgy), printed by Andro Hart, A. 1611, p. 28, 67. Dunlop’s Confessions, ii. 705, 747.
[165] –	Treatise of Fasting, in Knox’s Liturgy, p. 157–160. edit. 1611; and in Dunlop’s Confessions, ii. 661–664.
[166] –	Robertson, Append. No. 14. Keith, Append. p. 165, 167. Knox, 389–391.
[167] –	The friars were so little esteemed, that they soon wearied of preaching. They boasted that they would dispute with the protestant ministers; but when the commissioners of the General Assembly waited on their majesties, and requested that this might be granted in their presence, the queen replied, that “sche wald not jeopard her religioun upon sick as were thare present; for sche knew weill enouch, that the protestants wer more learned.” Knox, Historie, p. 391.
[168] –	Keith, p. 326. Append. 167. Melvil’s Memoires, 63, 64. Robertson, Append. No. 14.
[169] –	Knox, 392, 394. Keith, Append. 126. The queen’s letter to the archbishop of Glasgow, apud Keith, 331. Goodall and Blackwood, apud Robertson, ii. 145. Lond. 1809.
[170] –	The noblemen wished to bring Rizzio to a public trial; but the king would not wait for this, and determined that he should be seized in the queen’s presence, although she was big with child, that he might upbraid her for the wrongs which he had suffered. Keith, App. 121, 122. Robertson, iii. 318. App. No. 15. Douglas of Lochleven, who was engaged in the combination against Rizzio, says that it was their purpose to have “punist him be order of justice; bot men proponit and God disponit udir wais, be sic extraordinar means, quhilk truly my aune hart aborit quhan I saw him; for I never consentit that he suld haiff been usit by [beside] justice, nather was it in ony nobellman his mind.” Speaking of Rizzio’s influence, Douglas says, “I causit offer to him, gif he wald stay the erle of Murray’s forfaltour, he suld haiff v thowsand pundis Scottis; his answer was, xx thowsand and that wer all alik; it wald not be.” MS. papers of the laird of Lochleven.
[171] –	King James VI. having found great fault with Knox for approving of the assassination of Rizzio, one of the ministers said, that “the slaughter of David [Rizzio], so far as it was the work of God, was allowed by Mr Knox, and not otherwise.” Cald. MS. ad ann. 1591. Knox himself does not, however, state this qualification, when he mentions the subject incidentally. Historie, 86. Robertson, ii. 161–2.
[172] –	Knox, Historie, 395. Answer to Tyrie, A.iiij.
[173] –	Letter from archbishop Grindal to Bullinger, 17th August, 1566: Strype’s Grindal, Append. 20. Letter from bishop Parkhurst, written in December 1566: Burnet’s Hist. of Reform. iii. Append. No. 91. In the Assembly which met in June this year, Craig desired that “John Carnes, who had read prayers and exhorted four years and more in Edinburgh, and had weill profited, might be joyned with him as colleague in the kirk of Edinburgh, in respect he was alone.” Keith, 560.
[174] –	Keith, 56.
[175] –	Ibid. 565, 566. Knox, 402, 403. Spotswood, 198, 199. The letter was subscribed by “John Davidson, for James Nicoldson, writer and clarke of the church of Edinborough.” Strype’s Life of Archbishop Parker, Append. p. 88.
[176] –	Speaking of England, he says, “And yet is sche that now rigneth over thame nether gude protestant, nor yet resolute papist; let the warld juge quhilk is the third.” Historie, p. 277. By comparing this with p. 269, it appears that it was written by him in 1567, and consequently after his return from England.
[177] –	Reg. Secr. Sig. lib. xxxv. f. 99. Laing’s History of Scotland, vol. i. 75, 76. 2d edit. This historian has refuted the charges of forgery which Whitaker had brought against Knox and Calderwood on this head. Ibid. p. 78, 79.
[178] –	Keith, p. 561, 562. The occurrence which had taken place helps to explain the coldness with which the Assembly received the information of these acts in their favour. Ibid. p. 563.
[179] –	Cald. MS. apud Keith, 566, 567.
[180] –	Ibid. 567–8.
[181] –	Those who wish to see the proof of these assertions, may consult Mr Hume’s History of the period, with the Notes; Dr Robertson’s, with his Dissertation; and especially Mr Laing’s Dissertation on the subject. This last writer has examined the point with great calmness, accuracy, and acuteness, has established the genuineness of the letters to Bothwell, and cleared the whole evidence from the objections and cavils of the fantastical Whitaker, a late author, who has equalled any of his predecessors in prejudice, and exceeded all of them in the illiberal and virulent abuse with which he has treated the most respectable of his opponents. The principal writers who in modern times have undertaken the defence of Mary, are Goodall, Tytler, Stuart, and Whitaker.
[182] –	Buik of the Universal Kirk, p. 85, 87, 103. Anderson’s Collections, ii. 278–283. Knox, 405, 406. Spotswood, 202, 203. Craig gave in a narrative and defence of his conduct to the General Assembly, 30th Dec. 1567; but it was not until the 6th July, 1569, that the Assembly overtook the formal consideration of that affair, when they declared that “he had done the dewtie of a faithfull minister.”
[183] –	Keith, 574, 577. Knox, 410.
[184] –	Keith, 581–583. Knox, 411. Spotswood, 209, 210.
[185] –	Knox, 412. Buchanan calls it luculentam concionem. Hist. lib. xviii. Oper. tom. i. p. 366.
[186] –	Cald. MS. ii. 67, 68. Anderson’s Collections, ii. 249. One author says that Knox was employed in putting the crown on the king’s head. “Diadema Joannis Knoxii manibus capiti regio impositum.” Archibaldus Simsonus, Annales Eccles. Scotican. p. 9. MS. in the possession of Thomas Thomson, Esq.
[187] –	Keith, 439. Keith expresses his surprise at Knox’s taking instruments in the name of the estates, as he “could properly belong to no estate at all.” Hist. p. 440. But the record does not say that he took instruments in the name of the estates. It is evident that he acted in the name of the church, which was considered as having an interest in the transaction, as by one clause of the coronation oath, the king engaged to maintain the reformed religion, and the privileges of the protestant church. Ibid. p. 438.
[188] –	Keith, 421, 422, 423. Throkmorton’s Letters, 14th and 18th July: Robertson, Append. No. 21. “The women,” says the ambassador, “be most furious and impudent against the queen, and yet the men be mad enough.”
[189] –	Cald. MS. ii. 73. Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 113.
[190] –	See [Note V].
[191] –	Act. Parl. Scot. iii. p. 14–25. Cald. MS. ad ann. 1567.
[192] –	Cald. ut supra. Keith, 585, 586.
[193] –	Dr Robertson says, that the regulation respecting the thirds, made by the parliament in December 1567, did not produce any considerable change in the situation of the clergy, and speaks of them as still “groaning under extreme poverty, unable to obtain any thing but fair words and liberal promises.” History of Scotland, ii. 250, 312. Lond. 1809. But the law which gave power to the collectors appointed by the church to uplift the thirds, and to pay the stipends, before any thing was allowed to the court, was certainly a very considerable benefit. The church herself viewed it in this light. Calderwood says, that “the ministers were now refreshed with the allowance made by the last parliament.” MS. ad ann. 1567. And the Assembly, in their letter inviting Willock to return from England, expressly say, “Our enemies, praised be God, are dashed; religion established; sufficient provision made for ministers,” &c. Keith, 590. The account which I have given in the text is, I think, supported by the register of the five general assemblies which were held during the regency of Murray.
[194] –	Letter from the Regent to the General Assembly, ult. June, 1569, in Appendix. Buik of Universal Kirk, p. 45–47.
[195] –	Cald. MS. ii. 108.
[196] –	Letter to John Wood, 14th of February, 1568; Cald. MS. ii. 91.
[197] –	Throkmorton to Elizabeth, 22d August, 1567; Keith, 450.
[198] –	Throkmorton’s letters of 14th, 16th, 18th, and 19th July, 1567: Robertson, Append. No. 21. Laing, ii. Append. No. 31, p. 125. Keith, p. 423. The protestation taken, at the coronation of James VI. by Arthur Hamilton of Meriton, in the name of the duke, is confined to the point of his succession to the crown, and does not allude in the slightest degree to the right of the queen. Keith, 437. Of the same strain was the protest which was intended to have been made at the parliament held in December 1567; a copy of which, and a minute of a conversation on the subject between the regent and Arthur Hamilton, are preserved among the Hamilton MSS.
[199] –	Buchanan. Oper. i. 346. Keith, 407.
[200] –	Spotswood, 216. Letter, Knox to Wood, 10th September, 1568, published in the Appendix.
[201] –	The Hist. of King James the Sext, p. 48. Birrel’s Diary, 17, in Dalyell’s Fragments of Scottish History. Laing, ii. 269. See also Letter, Knox to Wood, 10th September, 1568, ut supra.
[202] –	Hist. of King James the Sext, p. 43, 63.
[203] –	This story is related in very different ways. One account makes the revenge to turn solely upon the treatment of his wife, who, expecting to be allowed to remain in her house of “Woodislie,” was “uncourtouslie and unmercifullie put thairfra, all her gudis tane fra hir, and schoe left stark naked. The gentilwoman, quhat for grief of mynd and exceeding cald, that schoe had then contractit, conceaved sic madness as was almost incredible.” Historie of King James the Sext, p. 74. Spotswood’s account is different. He says, that Bothwellhaugh had redeemed his life by yielding up the lands of Woodhouselie, which were given to the Justice Clerk, and he refusing to part with them, Bothwellhaugh “made his quarrel to the regent, [i.e. revenged himself upon the regent,] who was most innocent, and had restored him to life and liberty.” Spotsw. History, p. 233. Crawfurd, in his Memoirs of the Affairs of Scotland, p. 140, 1st edit., says, that “Murray sent some officers to take possession of the house, who not only turned the gentlewoman out of doors, but,” &c. This is the authority which has been relied upon by all those writers who have charged the regent with cruelty in this transaction; yet it is now discovered that the interpolation of Murray’s name in this place is one of those forgeries by which that work is disgraced from beginning to end. Hist. of King James the Sext, preface, and p. 74.
[204] –	This is clear from many considerations. Within a few days after the regent’s assassination, his secretary, Mr John Wood, was murdered in Fife. Anderson’s Col. iii. 84. The house in which Bothwellhaugh concealed himself, while he committed the murder, belonged to the archbishop of St Andrews, who acknowledged that he was privy and accessory to the deed. Historie of King James the Sext, p. 117. The horse on which the murderer escaped belonged to John Hamilton, abbot of Arbroath, one of the duke’s sons. Cald. ad ann. 1570. He rode immediately to Hamilton, where he was “received with great applause.” Ibid. Nay, grounds are not wanting for strong suspicion, that Maitland, and even Kircaldy of Grange, who had long been the bosom friend of the regent, were acquainted with the conspiracy against his life. Ibid. Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 429. Buchan. i. 384.
[205] –	Cald. ut supra. Buchanani Oper. i. 385. Spotswood, 233.
[206] –	Bannatyne, p. 121. “To the thrid head” (his participation in the murder of the regent) the archbishop “answerit thus: That he not only knew thairof, and wald not stopp it, bot rather furtherit the deed thairof, quhilk he repentit, and askit God mercie for the same.” Hist. of James the Sext, p. 117. “Jhon Hamilton, bishop of Sanctandros, enemie to thy kirk and to the kingis autoritie, confessit at his daith of the knawledge of the erle of Morray regent’s murther, and that he myght haif stayit the same giff he plesit.” MS. Papers of the Laird of Lochleven. Yet an author, in the nineteenth century, can write of this deed in the following terms:—“The heiress of Woodhouselie fell a sacrifice to the corrupt tyranny of the regent Murray. Her husband, Hamilton of Bothwellhaugh, put the guilty tyrant to death, as ‘base‑born Murray rode through old Linlithgow’s crowded town.’” Chalmers’s Caledonia, ii. 571.
[207] –	Buchanan. Oper. i. 385.
[208] –	History, 234.
[209] –	See [Note W].
[210] –	Smetoni Responsio ad Hamiltonii Dialogum, p. 116.
[211] –	“Upon the 22 of Maii, the sherife of Linlithgow, the laird of Innerweek, James Hamilton of Bothelhaugh, and six others, were put to an assyse; their hands bound; and pardoned at the request of Mr Knox, whereof he sore repented; for Bothwelhaugh killed the regent shortlie after.” Cald. MS. ad ann. 1568.
[212] –	Cald. MS. ii. 150. He is said to have added this to his usual prayers after dinner and supper. But in a volume of Calderwood’s History, in the Advocates’ Library in Edinburgh, (which has been transcribed more early than any copy which I have seen,) these words are scored out; and it is introduced as the prayer which he offered up in public, on the day on which he was informed of the regent’s death.
[213] –	Great apprehensions of this were entertained by the regent’s friends. Bannatyne, 428, 9.
[214] –	Cald. MS. ad ann. 1570.
[215] –	Ibid. ii. 151–157.
[216] –	Spotswood, p. 234. Mackenzie labours to discredit the archbishop’s narrative of this affair. Lives of Scottish Writers, iii. 195, 196. But whatever opinion we may form about the prediction, it cannot be doubted that Spotswood had the best means of information respecting the facts which he relates. Nor has Mackenzie any other authority for what he says about the death of Maitland than the archbishop’s.
[217] –	Cald. MS. ii. 157.
[218] –	The inscription, engraved on brass, is yet preserved; and a copy of it will be found in [Note X]. But Buchanan has, in his History, reared to the regent “a monument more durable than brass,” which will preserve his memory as long as the language in which it is written shall continue to be understood, and as long as a picture taken from life shall be preferred to the representations of fancy or of prejudice. Nor has he neglected to celebrate him in his verses. Epigram. lib. ii. 29. iii. 7, 9, 18.
[219] –	Spotswood, 235.
[220] –	Cald. ut supra.
[221] –	A late author has very wantonly attempted to load the memory of this excellent man with a capital crime. He gives the following extract from the paper office, 22d April, 1590: “Twa men, the ane namyt Johnne Gibsone, Scottishman, preacher, and the other Johnne Willokis, now baith lying in prison at Leicester, were convicted by a jury of robbery.” The last of these convicts, says he, was “the reforming coadjutor of Knox.” Chalmers’s Life of Ruddiman, p. 307. What evidence has this author for saying so? Nothing but the sameness of the name! Just as if a person, on reading in the public papers of one George Chalmers who was convicted of a robbery, (no unlikely thing,) should immediately take it into his head that this was, and could be, no other than the author of the Life of Ruddiman, and Caledonia! It is evident that the second convict was no preacher, else this designation would have been added to his name, as well as to that of the first. It is probable that Willock, who was a preacher as early as 1540, was not alive in 1590: it is utterly incredible that he should then have been in a condition to act as a robber.—But it is paying too much regard to such a charge to bring exculpatory proof.
[222] –	In the copy of Cald. MS. belonging to the church of Scotland, the name is written Winfrid; but in the copy in the Advocates’ Library, it is Umfrede. The person meant is evidently Dr Laurence Humphrey (Umfredius), Professor of divinity, and Head of one of the colleges, in the University of Oxford. This learned man was a puritan, but enjoyed the patronage of Secretary Cecil. Strype’s Annals, i. 421, 430–432.
[223] –	Smetoni Respons. ad Hamilt. p. 116.
[224] –	Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 54. Cald. MS. ii. 206. Bannatyne says “the disorder was a kynd of apoplexia, called by the phisitiones resolutione;” probably a more gentle stroke of the disorder, attended with relaxation of the system.
[225] –	In 1556, Calvin was suddenly seized in the pulpit with a fever, which confined him to his bed for a considerable time, and from which it was not thought he would recover. On hearing this, the popish clergy of Noyon, his native city, met, and rather prematurely gave public thanks to God for his death. Melch. Adam, Vitæ Exter. Theol. p. 93.—“Plusieurs grands hommes (says Senebier) ont partagé cet honneur avec Calvin, et ont eu, comme lui, la satisfaction de connoitre la profonde estime qu’on avoit concue pour eux.” Histoire Litteraire de Geneve, tom. i. p. 228. Luther, having received in 1545 a copy of an account of his own death, printed at Naples, caused it to be reprinted, with this note:—“I, Doctor Martin Luther, attest that I received this frantic fable on this 21st of March, and am delighted beyond measure to understand that the devil and his spawn, the pope and papists, hate me so heartily.” Seckendorf, Hist. Lutheran. lib. iii. p. 581.
[226] –	Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 55.
[227] –	James Kircaldy of Grange was restored to his lands, &c., at the request and special desire of Henry II. of France, by letters under the signet and privy seal of queen Mary, dated at Paris, 26th February, 1556. William Kircaldy of Grange, son and heir to the former, was restored by letters dated the 13th of February, 1561. Reg. Secr. Sig. Lib. xxxi. f. 16.
[228] –	See vol. i. p. 75.
[229] –	Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 67–87.
[230] –	Crawford, in his Memoirs of Scotland, (p. 186, Edin. Anno 1706,) among other things disgraceful to our Reformers, says that they openly avowed, on this occasion, “That to pray for, or forgive our real or reputed enemies, was no part of a Christian’s duty.” It is sufficient to say, that there is not one word of this in the “authentick MS.” from which he professes that his Memoirs were “faithfully published.” See Historie and Life of King James the Sext, p. 113, 114. The public are under great obligations to Mr Malcolm Laing, for exposing this literary forgery, which had continued so long to impose upon our most acute and industrious historians.
[231] –	The accusation and defence may be seen at full length in Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 190–210.
[232] –	Bannatyne, p. 77.
[233] –	Letter to the Laird of Lochleven, in the Appendix.
[234] –	The lively interest which he continued to take in public affairs, is apparent from the letters of his correspondents. Captain Crawford of Jordanhill sent him, at his desire, a minute account of the taking of Dunbarton castle, with an inventory of the arms, ammunition, and provisions, which were found in it. Bannatyne, 123. There are also two letters to him from Alexander Hay, clerk of the privy council, informing him of the most important transactions in England, and on the continent. Ibid. 294–302.
[235] –	Bannatyne, 132–3, 145.
[236] –	Cald. MS. ad ann. 1572. Life prefixed to History, anno 1644.
[237] –	Bannatyne, 144–146.
[238] –	Ibid. Historie of King James the Sext, p. 123.
[239] –	Keith’s Scottish Bishops, 166. The principles upon which the bishop vindicated the authority of the queen, and the duty of praying for her in the pulpit, show the strong and universal opinion entertained of her guilt at that time. He did not venture to insinuate her innocence, although the town was full of armed men, who were enlisted under her banners. Bannatyne, 181, 182.
[240] –	Bannatyne, 144, 169,170. Hist. of King James the Sext, 123, 124. Knox’s Epistle to his Brethren of the Church of Edinburgh, now dispersed. Streveling, 1571.
[241] –	Bannatyne, 154, 240, 322.
[242] –	Bannatyne, 309, 310. “Gif this had been their first inventit lie,” says the same Richart, “I wald never have blackit paper for it.”
[243] –	See vol. i. p. 69.
[244] –	Bannatyne, 380–3. Goodall, after relating this story, attempts, but with his usual imbecility of argument, to deduce from it, that Murray had really conspired to murder Darnly, and that Knox was one of his accomplices. “They all talk of it,” says he, “as a known uncontroverted matter of fact. And Knox’s waving all prosecution, and hushing up the business, is more than a tacit acknowledgment that he was in that plot, and a subscriber.” Examination, i. 211. According to this doctrine, if a person shall rest satisfied with a private apology for a slander which a weak and irritable man had imprudently circulated to his prejudice, and if he shall decline a public prosecution, this must be regarded as good proof of his guilt, and of the truth of the report! With respect to Murray’s having conspired against Darnly at the time of his marriage, it is true that such a thing was reported; but it is not mentioned in the proceedings against that nobleman, nor is there the least allusion to it in any of the proclamations which the queen issued against him, although Murray publicly accused Darnly of a plot against his life. If the court had credited that report, and possessed any evidence of its truth, it will not be easy to account for this silence.
[245] –	Archibald Hamilton, a short time after this, left Scotland; and going to France, made a recantation of the protestant religion. As an evidence of the sincerity of his conversion to popery, he published De Confusione Calvinianæ Sectæ apud Scotos Dialogus; a book which I have frequently referred to, and which strikingly exemplifies the adage, Omnis apostata osor acerrimus sui ordinis. In the copious abuse of Knox with which it teems, we are reminded of the present quarrel. Thomas Smeton, principal of the university of Glasgow, published an elegant and masterly answer to this Dialogue. Hamilton replied in a work entitled, Calvinianæ Confusionis Demonstratio: Parisiis 1581. Of this treatise, which is rarer than his first, specimens will be found in the notes at the end of this volume.
[246] –	Hamiltonii Dialog. p. 61. Smetoni Responsio ad Hamiltonii Dialogum, p. 90, 91. Bannatyne, 383–385.
[247] –	Bannatyne, 364.
[248] –	Archbishop Spotswood is displeased that a bishop, and one of his predecessors in the see of St Andrews, should have suffered so disgraceful a punishment. History, p. 252. Even Dr Robertson seems to have felt the esprit de corps on this occasion. It is surprising that this accurate historian should say, that the accusations against Hamilton, as “accessory to the murder both of the king and regent were supported by no proof,” and that his enemies, by “imputing to him such odious crimes,” merely “sought some colour” for the sentence which they pronounced against him. History of Scotland, ii. 334. Hamilton confessed his accession to the regent’s murder. See above,[ p. 168]. As the record of the trial has not been preserved, we cannot determine what evidence was brought forward; but there are good grounds for believing that he was also concerned in the murder of the king. Keith, 447. Spotswood, 252.
[249] –	Dr Robertson seems to regret the failure of this expedition, and says that if Kircaldy’s plan had succeeded, it would have “restored peace to his country.” History of Scotland, ii. 339. It would certainly have given a very dangerous blow to the king’s party; but it is not easy to conceive how it could have produced a desirable or lasting peace, when we consider the dispositions of the great body of the nation, the situation of the queen, and the temper and views of her adherents.
[250] –	Bannatyne, 246, 250, 255, 257, 260, 285.
[251] –	See [Note Y].
[252] –	Ibid. 253, 278, 312, 367. Cald. MS. ii. 284, 295.
[253] –	Records of Privy Council, January 16, 1571. Cald. MS. ii. 310–325. Calderwood, De Reg. Eccl. Scotic. relatio, p. 8, anno 1618; and Epist. Philad. Vind. apud Altare Damasc. p. 727–729. Lugd. Batav. 1708. Petrie, part ii. p. 372–374.
[254] –	Buik of the Universal Kirk, p. 55. Matthew Crawfurd’s History of the Church of Scotland, MS. vol. i. p. 80.
[255] –	A tulchan is a calf’s skin stuffed with straw, set up to make the cow give her milk freely.
[256] –	Buik of the Universal Kirk, p. 53. Cald. MS. ii. 280, 281. Petrie, part ii. 370. Spotsw. 258. Collier says, that, in Knox’s letter to the Assembly at Stirling, “there are some passages not unbecoming a person of integrity and courage,” Hist. ii. 533. Those who are acquainted with the spirit of this historian, will think this high praise from such a quarter.
[257] –	See this Letter in the Appendix.
[258] –	One glaring instance of this had just taken place, in giving the bishopric of Ross to Lord Methven. Bannatyne, 366. Robertson’s History of Scotland, ii. 358, 359.
[259] –	I have read somewhere (though I cannot at present find my authority) that Robert Pont, when offered a bishopric, took the advice of the General Assembly as to accepting it, and professed his readiness to apply its funds to the support of the ministry within the diocese.
[260] –	Letter to Mr John Wood, Feb. 14, 1568, in the Appendix.
[261] –	In this letter, Beza commends Knox for establishing, not merely the purity of doctrine in the Scottish church, but also discipline and good order, without which the former could not be preserved for any time. Bezæ Epistol. Theol. ep. lxxxix. p. 344–355, edit. 1572.
[262] –	Meaning Edward VI. of England and his council. See vol. i. p. 101.
[263] –	Bannatyne, 321, 325, 375. Cald. MS. ii. 269, 338, 340. Douglas, after he was made bishop, was continued in his offices of rector of the university, and provost of St Mary’s college. James Melville says, that he was “a good upright‑hearted man, but ambitious and simple;” and that Knox spoke against him “bot sparinglie, because he loved the man.” MS. Diary, p. 27.
[264] –	Bannatyne, 331.
[265] –	Melville’s MS. Diary, p. 26.
[266] –	i.e. thrill.
[267] –	i.e. slowly and warily.
[268] –	i.e. arm‑pit.
[269] –	i.e. it appeared as if he would beat the pulpit in pieces.
[270] –	Melville’s Diary, p. 23, 28. It is not without reason that I have added the above explanation of some phrases in this extract, as the reader will perceive from the following version of it, by a modern French writer, in the Journal des Debats:—“A presbyterian fanatic, named Knox, stirred up the people by his violent preaching. Nothing proves the coarseness of that people so much, as the ascendency which such a madman possessed over them; old and broken down, and so helpless, as to be hardly able to crawl along, he was raised to his pulpit by two zealous disciples, where he began his sermon with a feeble voice, and slow action; but soon heating himself, by the force of his passion and hatred, he bestirred himself like a madman; he broke his pulpit, and jumped into the midst of his auditors, (sautoit au des auditeurs,) transported by his violent declamation, and words still more violent.” For this morceau I am indebted to the Editor of “The Poetical Remains of Mr John Davidson, Edinburgh, 1829.”
[271] –	See vol. i. p. 30.
[272] –	See [Note Z].
[273] –	Tyrie published a reply to this, under the title of “The Refutation of ane Answer made be Schir Johne Knox to ane Letter, send be James Tyrie to his vmquhyle brother. Set furth be James Tyrie, Parisiis, 1573. Cvm Privilegio.” H. fol. 57. 12mo. It includes Tyrie’s first letter, and Knox’s answer, but not the other papers originally printed along with that answer. “Mr Knox,” says Keith, “makes some good and solid observations, from which, in my opinion, the Jesuit [in his reply] has not handsomely extricated himself.” History, Append. p. 255.
[274] –	Tyrie, in his reply, scoffs at this amiable expression of piety; and in doing so, the Jesuit discovers that he was as great a stranger to conjugal and parental feelings, as he was to the rules of logic. “He [Knox] sais, that of tuay propositionis quhilkis ar verray trew, I collect ane conclusione maist false and repugnant to all veritie. Ane Dialectitian wald answer that Schir Johne Knox hes nocht weill considderit the rewlis of Dialectik, to affirme ane fals conclusion to follow of trew premissis. Bot becaus I knaw his greit occupationis, and sollicitude he hes of his wyf and childrine, that he culd nocht take tent to sic trifflis, I will pas this with silence.” Refutation, ut supra, fol. 4, a.
[275] –	Bannatyne, 364–369. Cald. ii. 355, 366.
[276] –	“Ane sermon prechit before the regent and nobilitie upon a part of the third chapter of Malachi [verses 7–12], in the kirk of Leith, at the time of the Generall Assemblie, on Sonday the 13 of Januarie. Anno Do. 1571. Be David Fergusone, minister of the evangell at Dunfermline. Imprentit at Sanctandrois, be Robert Lekpreuik. Anno Do. MDLXXII.” The dedication to the regent Mar is dated 20th August, 1572.
[277] –	Previous to the cessation of arms, the banished citizens (who had taken up their residence chiefly in Leith) entered into a solemn league, by which they engaged “in the fear of God the Father, of his Son our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holie Spirit, tackand to witness his holie name,” that they would, with their lives, lands, and goods, promote the gospel professed among them, maintain the authority of the king and regent, assist and concur with others against their enemies in the castle, defend one another if attacked, and submit any variances which might arise among themselves to brotherly arbitration, or to the judgment of the town‑council. Bannatyne, 361–364.
[278] –	Bannatyne, 370–373.
[279] –	Bannatyne, 372, 373.
[280] –	Bannatyne, p. 373, 385. Smetoni Respons. p. 117, 118.
[281] –	Ibid. 150, 370.
[282] –	Spotswood, 464. When informed that his majesty had made choice of Craig, the General Assembly, July 1580, “blessed the Lord, and praised the King for his zeal.” Row, Hist. of the Kirk, 47.
[283] –	Smetoni Respons. 118. Bannatyne, 370.
[284] –	Smeton, ut supra. Bannatyne, 372. James Melville thus describes Lawson:—“A man of singular learning, zeal, and eloquence, whom I never hard preache bot he meltit my hart with teares.” MS. Diary, 23. See also [note C], at the end of this volume.
[285] –	Bannatyne, 386.
[286] –	Memoires de Sully, tom. i. 16. Paris, 1664. Brantosme Memoires, apud Jurieu, Apologie pour la Reformation, tom. 420. Smetoni Respons. ad Hamilt. Dial. p. 117. Bannatyne’s Journal, p. 388–396.
[287] –	The papal bull for the jubilee may be seen in Strype’s Life of archbishop Parker. Append. No. 68, p. 108.
[288] –	The regent Mar issued a proclamation on this occasion, summoning a general convention of deputies from all parts of the kingdom, to deliberate on the measures proper to be adopted for defence against the cruel and treasonable conspiracies of the papists. Bannatyne, 397–401. Strype has inserted the preamble, and one of the articles, of a supplication presented by this convention to the regent and council. Annals, ii. 180, 181. This may be compared with the more full account of their proceedings, in Bannatyne, 406–411.
[289] –	Bannatyne, 401, 402.
[290] –	Smetoni Responsio, 118. The house which the Reformer possessed is situated near the bottom of the High Street, a little below the Fountain well. These three words are inscribed on the wall, ΘΕΟΣ, Deus, God.
[291] –	As it is unnecessary to repeat the quotations, the reader may be informed, once for all, that the account of the Reformer’s last illness and death is taken from the following authorities:—“Eximii viri Joannis Knoxii, Scoticanæ Ecclesiæ instauratoris, Vera extremæ vitæ et obitus Historia,” published by Thomas Smeton, principal of the university of Glasgow, at the end of his “Responsio ad Hamiltonii Dialogum. Edinburgi, apud Johannem Rosseum. Pro Henrico Charteris. Anno Do. 1579. Cum Privilegio Regali:”—“Journal of the Transactions in Scotland, (Annis) 1570–1573, by Richard Bannatyne, secretary to John Knox,” 413–429, edited from an authentic MS. by J. Graham Dalyell, Esq. Anno 1806:—Spotswood’s History, p. 265–267. Anno 1677: and Calderwood’s MS. History, ad ann. 1572; copy in Advocates’ Library, Edinburgh, transcribed anno 1634. The two first of these works contain the most ancient and authentic narratives, both being written at the time of the event, and by persons who were eye and ear witnesses of what they relate.
[292] –	This speech is translated from the Latin of Smeton, which accounts for the difference of style which the attentive reader must have remarked.
[293] –	After the castle surrendered, and Kircaldy was condemned to die, Lindsay attended him at his earnest desire, and received much satisfaction from conversation with him. When he was on the scaffold, he desired the minister to repeat Knox’s last words respecting him, and said that he hoped they would prove true. James Melville had this information from Lindsay. MS. Diary, p. 29, 30. See also Spotswood, 266, 272.
[294] –	Morton afterwards acknowledged that he did know of the murder; but excused himself for concealing it. “The quene,” he said, “was the doare thareof;” and as for the king, he was “sic a bairne, that there was nothing tauld him but he wald reveill it to hir agane.” Bannatyne, 494, 497.
[295] –	The regent Mar died on the 29th of October preceding. The nobility were at this time assembled at Edinburgh to choose his successor, and it was understood that Morton would be raised to that dignity. He was elected regent on the day of Knox’s death. Bannatyne, 411, 412, 427. The author of the Historie of King James the Sext says, that the regent died October 18, and adds, “efter him dyed Johne Knox in that same moneth,” p. 197. But he has mistaken the dates.
[296] –	Morton gave this account of his conference with the Reformer to the ministers who attended him before his execution. Being asked if he had not found Knox’s admonition true, he replied, “I have fand it indeid.” Morton’s Confession. Bannatyne, 508, 509.
[297] –	“Manum itaque, quasi nouas vires jamjam moriturus concipiens, cœlum versus erigit, duobusque emissis suspiriis, e mortali corpore emigrauit, citra vllum aut pedum aut aliarum partium corporis motum, vt potius dormire quam occidisse videretur.” Smetoni Responsio, p. 123.
[298] –	Cald. MS. ad ann. 1572. Bannatyne, 429. Spotswood, 267. The area of the Parliament Square was formerly the churchyard of St Giles. Some think that he was buried in one of the aisles of his own church. The place where the Reformer preached is that which is now called the Old Church. It has, however, undergone a great change since his time. The space now occupied by the pulpit and the greater part of the seats, was then an aisle; and the church was considerably more to the north of the building than at present. The small church fitted up for him a few weeks before his death is called, by Bannatyne, the Tolbooth. Whether it was exactly that part of the building now called the Tolbooth church I do not know.
[299] –	Some verses to the Reformer’s memory may be seen in [Note AA].
[300] –	See [Note BB].
[301] –	Senelier, Hist. Lit. de Geneve, i. 377.
[302] –	The reader should observe, that the word servant, or servitor, was then used with greater latitude than it is now, and in old writings often signifies the person whom we call by the more honourable names of clerk, secretary, or man of business. As the drawing of the principal ecclesiastical papers, and the compiling of the history of public proceedings, were committed to our Reformer, from the time of his last return to Scotland, he kept a person of this description in his family, and Bannatyne held the situation.
[303] –	Journal, 104, 105.
[304] –	i.e. labour.
[305] –	Bannatyne, 427, 429.
[306] –	Smetoni Resp. ad Hamilt. Dial. p. 95, 115.
[307] –	Calfhill’s Answere to the Treatise of the Crosse: Preface to the Readers, fol. 18, a. Lond. 1565. This writer was cousin to Toby Matthews, archbishop of York; and in the Convocation which met in 1562, sat as a representative of the clergy of London, and the canons of Oxford. Strype, Annals, i. 289, 292–3.
[308] –	See vol. i. 236, 387–8.
[309] –	Harborowe for faithful and Trewe Subjects, B. B. 2. C. C. 2. Strype’s Life of Aylmer, p. 238.
[310] –	Strype’s Life of Grindal, p. 19, 20.
[311] –	Burnet, vol. ii. Appendix, part iii. B. vi. p. 351, 352.
[312] –	In a dedication of Knox’s “Exposition of the Temptation of Christ,” John Field, the publisher, says: “If ever God shall vouchsafe the church so great a benefite; when his infinite letters, and sundry other treatises shall be gathered together, it shall appear what an excellent man he was, and what a wonderfull losse that church of Scotland susteined when that worthie man was taken from them.—If, by yourselfe or others, you can procure any other his writings or letters here at home, or abroad in Scotland, be a meane that we may receive them. It were great pittie that any the least of his writinges should be lost: for he evermore wrote both godly and diligently, in questions of divinitie, and also of church policie; and his letters being had togeather, would togeather set out an whole historie of the churches where he lived.”
[313] –	In a sermon preached by him at Paul’s Cross, before the Parliament of England, Feb. 9, 1588, on 1 John iv. 1, printed in 1588, and reprinted in 1636. He enlarged on the subject in two posterior treatises, the one entitled, “Dangerous Positions; or Scottish Genevating, and English Scottizing:” The other, “A Survey of the Pretended Holy Discipline.”
[314] –	John Davidson, minister first at Libberton, and afterwards at Prestonpans, answered Bancroft in a book entitled, “Dr Bancroft’s Rashnes in Rayling against the Church of Scotland;” printed at Edinburgh, 1590.
[315] –	Cald. MS. ad an. 1570; quarto copy in Advocates’ Library, vol. ii. p. 260, 261.
[316] –	De Thuani Histor. Successu apud Jacobum I. Mag. Brit. Regem: Thuani Hist. tom. vii. pars v. edit. Buckley, 1733. Laing’s Hist. of Scotland, i. 228–241. 2nd edit.
[317] –	History, 261.
[318] –	Whitaker’s Vindication of Queen Mary, passim. The same writer designs Buchanan “a serpent—daring calumniator—leviathan of slander—the second of all human forgers, and the first of all human slanderers.” Dr Robertson he calls “a disciple of the old school of slander—a liar—and one for whom bedlam is no bedlam.”
[319] –	See Extracts from his Letters to “Mrs Locke, 6th April, 1559,” and to “A Friend in England, 19th August, 1569;” published in the Appendix.
[320] –	Robertson, Hist. of Scotland.
[321] –	“Haud scio an unquam—magis ingenium in fragili et imbecillo corpusculo collocarit.” Smetoni Respons. ad Dialog. Hamilt. p. 115.
[322] –	A print of him, cut in wood, was inserted by Beza, in his Icones. There is another in Verheideni Imagines. See also Grainger’s Biographical History of England, i. 164.
[323] –	Henry Fowlis, apud Mackenzie’s Lives of Scottish Writers, ii. 132. The learned Fellow of Lincoln College had perhaps discovered that the magical virtue which the popish writers ascribed to Knox, resided in his beard.
[324] –	“Audivi mente captos hereticos Scotos eo etiam insaniæ aliquando venisse, quod sceleratissimi, atque omnium literarum imperitissimi nebulonis Knox, pessimi hæretici, qui omnes imagines sanctorum frangi præceperat, imaginem suam non tam fabricari passum fuisse, quam jam fabricatam non parum probasse.” Laingæus de Vita et Moribus Hæretic. p. 65–66. The same writer tells us, as a proof of Calvin’s vain‑glory, that he allowed his picture to be carried about on the necks of men and women, like that of a God; and that, when reminded that the picture of Christ was as precious as his, he returned a profane answer; “fertur eum hoc tantum respondisse, Qui huic rei invidet crepet medius.” Ibid.
[325] –	Letter to the Faithfull in London, Newcastell, and Barwick; in MS. Letters, p. 113.
[326] –	Bannatyne, 111, 112, 420, 421.
[327] –	See the Epistle to the Reader, prefixed to his Sermon, Append. to History, p. 113. Edin. 1644, 4to.
[328] –	Cicero de Divinat. lib. i. 4.
[329] –	This is acknowledged by one who had attempted this more frequently, and with greater acuteness, than any of them. “De tels faits, dont l’univers est tout plein, embarrassent plus les esprits forts qu’ils ne le temoignent.” Bayle, Dictionnaire, Art. Maldonat, Note G. What he says, elsewhere, of dreams, may be applied to this subject; “they contain infinitely less mystery than the multitude believe, and a little more than sceptics believe; and those who reject them wholly, give reason either to suspect their sincerity, or to charge them with prejudice and incapacity to discern the force of evidence.” Ibid. Art. Majus, Note D.
[330] –	“Setting aside these sorts of divination as extremely suspicious,” says a modern author, who was not addicted to enthusiastic notions, “there remain predictions by dreams, and by sudden impulses, upon persons who were not of the fraternity of impostors; these were allowed to be sometimes preternatural by many of the learned pagans, and cannot, I think, be disproved, and should not be totally rejected.” Dr Jortin’s Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. p. 93. See also p. 45, 77. Lond. 1805. The learned reader may also consult the epicrisis of Witsius on this question: the whole dissertation, intended chiefly to expose the opposite extreme, is well entitled to a perusal. Miscellanea Sacra, tom. i. p. 391.
[331] –	Newcourt’s Repert. Londin. ii. 154. Communications from Mr Thomas Baker, apud Life of Knox, prefixed to Historie of the Reformation, edit. 1732, p. xli. xlii.
[332] –	Melville’s MS. Diary, p. 39. See also [Note CC].
[333] –	Douglas’s Peerage of Scotland, p. 522.
[334] –	The Testament of John Knox, in the Appendix.
[335] –	He was the grandfather of Mr Robert Fleming, minister in London, and author of the well known Book, The Fulfilling of the Scriptures. But Mr Robert’s father was of a different marriage. Fleming’s Practical Discourse on the Death of King William, preface, p. 14. Lond. 1702.
[336] –	See [Note DD].
[337] –	Matthew Crawfurd’s History of the church of Scotland, MS. vol. i. 258–283. The Reformation of Religion in Scotland, written by Mr John Forbes, MS. p. 131–151. The copy of this last work, which is in my possession, was transcribed “ex Authoris autographo,” in the year 1726. The author was one of the condemned ministers. His narrative properly begins at the year 1580, but is chiefly occupied in detailing the transactions which preceded and followed the Assembly at Aberdeen.
[338] –	Row’s MS. Historie, p. 111, 122.
[339] –	“Very well; you shall be my minister.”
[340] –	History of Mr John Welch, p. 31–33. Edinburgh, 1703. Characteristics of Eminent Ministers, subjoined to Livingston’s Life: Art. John Welch. Mr Livingston received his account of the above transactions in France, from Lord Kenmure, who resided in Mr Welch’s house. The author of the History of Welch, says, that he received his information from the personal acquaintances of that minister. That work was drawn up by Mr James Kirkton, who married a descendant of Knox, and consequently a relation of Mrs Welch. See the article concerning Knox’s descendants in Additions. The Life of Welch contains an account of an extraordinary occurrence relating to the first Lord Castlestewart, (ancestor of Lord Castlereagh,) who, when a young man, lodged with Mr Welch in France.
[341] –	Asked.
[342] –	Enjoyed.
[343] –	Receive.
[344] –	I met with the account of this conversation in a MS. written by Mr Robert Traill, minister in London, entitled, “An Accompt of several passages in the lives of some eminent men in the nation, not recorded in any history.” It is inserted in the heart of a common‑place book, containing notes of sermons, &c, written by him when a student of divinity at St Andrews, between 1659 and 1663. He received the account from aged persons, and says, that the conference between King James and Mrs Welch “is current to this day in the mouths of many.” I have since seen the same story in Wodrow’s MS. Collections, vol. i. Life of Welch, p. 27, Bibl. Coll. Glass. James stood in great awe of Mr Welch, who often reproved him for his habit of profane swearing. If he had, at any time, been swearing in a public place, he would have turned round, and asked, if Welch was near. Traill’s MS. ut supra.
[345] –	Obituary of Robert Boyd of Trochrig, in Wodrow’s MS. Collections, vol. v. p. 145, 148. Bannatyne Miscellany, vol. i. p. 291, 295. See Mrs Welch’s Testament, in the Appendix.
[346] –	Preface to his Sermon, apud History, p. 113. Edin. 1644.
[347] –	Those who have not directed their attention to this point cannot easily conceive to what extent the translation of foreign theological books into our language was carried at that time. There was scarcely a book of any celebrity published in Latin by the continental reformers, that did not appear in an English version. Bibliographers, and the annalists of printing, are very defective in the information which they communicate on this branch.
[348] –	It is to this that Ninian Winget refers in one of his letters addressed to Knox. “Gif ye, throw curiositie of novationis, hes forzet our auld plane Scottis, quhilk zour mother lernit zow, in tymes coming I sall wrytt to zow my mynd in Latin, for I am nocht acquyntit with zour Southeroun.” Keith, Append. 254.
[349] –	Knox’s practical writings have been lately collected and reprinted. This, so far as it may have arisen, even indirectly, from what I have done in illustrating the events of his life, I regard as one of the most pleasing fruits of my labour; nor do I regret (though I did regret it) that the work has issued from the press of London, instead of Edinburgh.
[350] –	See [Note EE].
[351] –	See [Note FF]. It may be proper to notice that our Reformer’s writings had the honour of being marked in the Index Expurgatorius of Rome. “Joannes Chnoxus Scotus” occurs in Index Librorum Prohibitorum, p. 49. Rothomagi, 1625.
[352] –	In the page referred to, this is, by mistake, described as Note L.
[353] –	It is probable that the words which puzzled Hay should be read, and condemn your awin doinges.
[354] –	The Greek word is inserted with a pen.
[355] –	History of the Church and Parish of St Cuthbert, or West Kirk of Edinburgh, p. 38. Edin. 1829.
[356] –	The first five Nos. are religious letters; the rest contain historical matter.
[357] –	The following letters from Calderwood, have been corrected by comparing different copies. The style has evidently been modernized.
[358] –	He seems to refer here to his History of the Reformation.
[359] –	Referring, most probably, to his treatise against Female Government.
[360] –	“They were summoned,” or some such words, must be supplied here.
[361] –	There is a mistake here as to the date. Knox arrived on the 2d of May. See vol. i. p. 246, 256.
[362] –	Are we to infer from this that the protestant ministers had desisted from preaching while they were outlawed? I do not, indeed, recollect of an instance of any of them, except Knox, preaching during that time.
[363] –	See vol. i. p. 37, 38.
[364] –	soldiers.
[365] –	pressed, endeavoured.
[366] –	shift.
[367] –	grateful.
[368] –	excellent.
[369] –	royalty.
[370] –	changes situation.
[371] –	know a trick.
[372] –	juggle.
[373] –	acquainted, or (perhaps) crafty.
[374] –	feigned affair.
[375] –	butt, or mark.
[376] –	I regard nothing what worthless fellows, &c.
[377] –	language.
[378] –	the devil.
[379] –	ready.
[380] –	press, difficulty.
[381] –	extol.
[382] –	wicked.
[383] –	without.
[384] –	confederate.
[385] –	defend.
[386] –	enmity.
[387] –	plea, controversy.
[388] –	reckon in that rank.
[389] –	cherish.
[390] –	diligently.
[391] –	dragging.
[392] –	maimed, or disgraced.
[393] –	conceal.
[394] –	beat, or scourged.
[395] –	Sir Wink‑at‑vice, an allegorical character.
[396] –	described in this work.
[397] –	probably, waynd ane wee, i.e. swerve a little.
[398] –	curtail.
[399] –	a hotch‑potch.
[400] –	one thing.
[401] –	the hostility of strangers, and anger of relations.
[402] –	conceal the truth.
[403] –	anxiety.
[404] –	plainly tell.
[405] –	injure.
[406] –	run mad.
[407] –	without hinderance, when ye least think.
[408] –	barter.
[409] –	gainze signifies sometimes an engine for throwing weapons, and sometimes the weapon thrown.
[410] –	lay or song.
[411] –	shining, blazing.
[412] –	good fellow, bon vivant.
[413] –	thought nothing too much.
[414] –	ragamuffin, vagabond.
[415] –	fraternity, alluding to the fastings of the friars.
[416] –	treasure.
[417] –	attempts to meddle.
[418] –	smoke.
[419] –	above.
[420] –	trouble, contention.
[421] –	bugle‑horn.
[422] –	Thou knowest he loved thee above the rest.
[423] –	pull.
[424] –	repent.
[425] –	but shipwrecked without rescue.
[426] –	See vol. i. p. 28.
[427] –	See vol. i. 357.
[428] –	See vol. i. 356.
[429] –	See vol. i. p. 51, 67.
[430] –	See vol. i. p. 40.
[431] –	See vol. i. p. 41.
[432] –	See vol. i. p. 362, 364.
[433] –	Dundee.
[434] –	The name of Schir John Knox occurs as a witness to a deed concerning Rannelton Law, dated 8th March, 1541, and preserved in an old volume of Protocols, belonging to the burgh of Haddington. There is good reason to think that our Reformer is the person named in that deed, which, in this view, confirms the statement in vol. i. p. 12, that he was in priests’ orders before he left the church of Rome.
[435] –	See vol. i. p. 171. Vol. ii. [p. 178].
[436] –	See vol. ii. [p. 328].
[437] –	See vol. i. p. 174.
[438] –	I have not met elsewhere with any notice of Brebner or Bremner.
[439] –	i.e. of Montrose.
[440] –	See vol. i. p. 31, 410.
[441] –	See vol. ii. [p. 15].
[442] –	See vol. ii. [p. 213].
[443] –	See vol. ii. [p. 18].

Transcriber’s Notes.

The following corrections have been made in the text:
[1] –	‘add she’ replaced with ‘adds he’ (be assured,” adds he, “I sal)
[2] –	‘Leat’ replaced with ‘Lest’ (Lest that the rumours of)
[3] –	‘anwers’ replaced with ‘answers’ (His answers to Bancroft, ii. 241.)
[4] –	‘ii. 428’ replaced with ‘i. 277’ (Released, i. 277.)
[5] –	‘sermous’ replaced with ‘sermons’ (Attends Knox’s sermons, i. 177.)
[6] –	‘Note L’ replaced with ‘Note M’ (See Note M.)

---