(Sunday) A solemn fast and humiliation was kept throughout Scotland,
on account of backsliding from the Covenant, and the prevalence of
vice and godlessness; as also to entreat the favour of Heaven for the
parliamentary arms, and to pray for the filling of the king’s heart
with the love of reformation. A fast in those days was a reality.
In Old Aberdeen, the people entered the church at nine o’clock, and
continued hearing prayers and sermons till two. They might have then
dismissed for a space, but they sat still hearing ‘reading’ till the
commencement of afternoon service, which ended at six. Then the bell
rang for evening-prayers, which continued till seven. ‘Thus was the
people wearied with fasting and praying, under colour of zeal, whilk
rather appeared a plain mockery of God.’ On the ensuing Thursday, a
similar fast was kept, when the king and queen were prayed for, in a
manner, it may be suspected, for which their majesties would not be
duly thankful. ‘No prayer to confound the armies raised against him,
but rather prayer for their good success.’--_Spal._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: SEP.]
[Sidenote: 1644.]
Immediately after Montrose had gained his first victory at Tippermuir,
and while his army lay at Collace, in Perthshire, his adherent, Lord
Kilpont, eldest son of the Earl of Airth, lost his life in a lamentable
manner. His friend and associate in arms, James Stewart of Ardvoirlich,
had been incensed at some outrages committed on his lands by the Irish
auxiliaries under Alaster Macdonald or MacCol-keitoch, while they
were advancing to join Montrose. He had complained to Montrose, had
had a violent altercation with Alaster MacCol, and it had been found
necessary to place both him and MacCol under arrest. This step was
taken at the recommendation of Lord Kilpont. To pursue the narrative
of a descendant of Stewart: ‘Montrose, seeing the evil of such a feud
at such a critical time, effected a sort of reconciliation between
them, and forced them to shake hands in his presence; when it was said
that Ardvoirlich, who was a very powerful man, took such a hold of
Macdonald’s hand as to make the blood start from his fingers. Still, it
would appear, Ardvoirlich was by no means reconciled.
‘A few days after the battle of Tippermuir, when Montrose with his
army encamped at Collace, an entertainment was given by him to his
officers, in honour of the victory he had obtained, and Kilpont and
his comrade Ardvoirlich were of the party. After returning to their
quarters, Ardvoirlich, who seemed still to brood over his quarrel with
Macdonald, and being heated with drink, began to blame Lord Kilpont
for the part he had taken in preventing his obtaining redress, and
reflecting against Montrose for not allowing him what he considered
proper reparation. Kilpont of course defended the conduct of himself
and his relative Montrose, till their arguments came to high words;
and, finally, from the state they were both in, by an easy transition
to blows, when Ardvoirlich with his dirk struck Kilpont dead on the
spot. He immediately fled, and under cover of a thick mist escaped
pursuit, leaving his eldest son, Henry, who had been mortally wounded
at Tippermuir, on his death-bed.’[100]
[Sidenote: 1644.]
This story will be generally recognised as one which has supplied some
leading incidents in the _Legend of Montrose_. The present version of
it, more favourable in some features to Ardvoirlich than that which
occurs in Wishart’s _Life of Montrose_, was communicated to Sir Walter
Scott in 1830 by Robert Stewart of Ardvoirlich, who stated that it had
come to his father from a man who lived to a hundred years of age, the
great-grandson of the homicide laird by a natural son, who was present
with him at the time of the deplorable incident.[101]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: OCT.]
After the taking of Newcastle in this month by the Scottish Covenanting
army, ‘the pest’ came from that place[102] into Scotland, where it met
a field highly calculated for its diffusion. There had been dearth
the preceding year from deficient harvest, and since then, what with
the drawing away of men for the army, the grievance of a heavy excise
to support it, the incessant harassment of many districts by hostile
and plundering armies, and the extreme anxiety and distress of mind
occasioned by the civil war, assisted, doubtless, by the generally
depressing effect of incessant preachings, prayings, fastings, and
_thanksgivings_, by which the whole sunshine of life was, as it were,
squeezed out of the community--those vital powers which resist and beat
off disease must have been reduced to a point much below average. It
is not surprising, therefore, that the plague took deadly hold of the
country, and rapidly spread from Edinburgh to Borrowstounness, Kelso,
Perth, and other towns, all of which were grievously afflicted by it
during the next year.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1645.]
[Sidenote: 1645.]
Of the ecclesiastical discipline of this period, and its bearing upon
the habits of the people, we get a good idea from the Presbytery
Record of Strathbogie, which has been published by the Spalding Club.
The whole moral energy of the country appears as concentrated in
an effort to fix a certain code of theological views, including a
rigid observance of the Sabbath, the suppression of witchcraft, the
maintenance of a serious style of manners, and the extirpation of
popery.
A committee of the presbytery made periodical visits to the several
parishes, called the minister and chief parishioners before them, and
examined the parties separately as to each other’s spiritual condition
and religious practice. For example, at Rhynie, the minister, Henry
Ross, being removed, the elders were sworn and interrogated as to
his efficiency. They ‘all in ane voice deponed that concerning his
literature he was very weak, and gave them little or no comfort in his
ministry; but, as concerning his life, he was mended, and was blameless
now in his conversation.’ The elders being in their turn removed, the
minister was called in and examined regarding them. He ‘regretted that
the parishioners frequented not the church, nor assisted him in his
discipline, but despised him.’
To be absent any considerable number of times from church was
punishable; and if the parishioner proved contumacious, he was liable
to be excommunicated--a doom inferring a loss of all civil rights, and
a complete separation from human converse.[103] To refuse to take the
Covenant, or to have any dealings with the loyalist Huntly, brought
men into similar troubles. Old women using charms for healing, persons
‘kindling needfire’ for the cure of cattle,[104] or reserving a field
for the devil (the _Guidman’s Croft_), and females pilgrimising to holy
wells, according to old custom, were all vigorously proceeded against,
in obedience to repeated acts of the General Assembly for uprooting
of _all superstition_. Irregularities between the sexes, and even
quarrelling and scolding, had to be expiated in sackcloth before the
congregation. Drunkenness and swearing were also censured. In dealing
with these offences, an unsparing inquisition into domestic and family
matters was used, and no rank, age, or sex seems to have afforded the
subject any protection.
[Sidenote: 1645.]
As specimens of religious offences--a gentleman was prosecuted
for bringing home a millstone on a Sunday; another, for gathering
gooseberries in time of sermon. It was found regarding Patrick Wilson,
that he had sat up with a company drinking till after cockcrow,
consuming in all eleven pints--that is, about two dozen quart
bottles--of ale; he had struck a man, and railed in his drink at
several gentlemen of the parish. ‘The brethren ordained Patrick to
stand in sackcloth two Sabbaths, and pay four merks penalty.’
The Lady Frendraught,[105] who now lived at Kinnairdie, in the parish
of Aberchirder, is a conspicuous subject of the discipline of the
Strathbogie presbytery, on account of her being a papist. To leave
this inoffensive lady in the quiet exercise of her own religious forms
was not within the capabilities of the Christian charity of that day.
It is no over-statement of the case that this ecclesiastical body set
themselves to simply harass her out of her peculiar convictions--or
rather professions; for they seem to have been content when they could
effect an external conformity, and the horrible guilt of forcing a
fellow-creature into a mere hypocrisy, seems never to have been present
to their minds.
[Sidenote: 1645.]
So early as 1636, the synod had sent one of their number to deal with
her, and induce her to go to church; for a time she conformed. Two
years after, a similar visitation of the lady had become necessary; so
she and her daughter Elizabeth were summoned for ‘not hearing of the
word, and not communicating.’ What came of this does not appear; but in
1643, a deputation of ministers was sent to deal with her according to
the ordinance of the General Assembly, and to report her answer. It was
soon after reported that ‘she promised to hear the word, and desired a
time for further resolution.’ It was then agreed to give her some short
space to decide on becoming ‘a daily hearer,’ but ‘if she refused,
the process to go on against her.’ The poor lady once more promised
‘to hear the word, as she had done before,’ and it was resolved to
ask the advice of the General Assembly on the point. Years passed on,
without bringing her further than to agree to go to the church which
her husband frequented--which was out of the bounds of this presbytery.
What immediately happened after this does not appear; but, on the
presbytery resolving (January 1647) again to proceed against her
ladyship, it was reported that she was out of the country. A few months
later, the commissioners of the General Assembly ‘granted her liberty
to be ane ordinar hearer of the word at Forgue for a time.’ This,
however, did not stop the process. The lady was hunted into another
presbytery, where she seems to have kept them at bay for a little
while. In June 1648, Mr John Reidford reported that he had spoken
her, but ‘found no effect of his travels;’ he required further time.
Soon after, the same minister reported that on a second interview,
she expressed herself as ‘willing to hear the word in any kirk save
Aberchirder and such as are within the presbytery of Strathbogie.’ This
was not to be endured. She was immediately summoned as a contumacious
person. On the day of call, she ‘compeared not;’ and Mr John Reidford,
her parish minister, proceeded to give from his pulpit, on successive
Sundays, a series of three admonitions addressed to her; then, in
like manner, a series of three prayers. As her ladyship continued to
disregard all proceedings in her case, the presbytery prepared itself
to pass the awful doom of excommunication, when, behold! another
act of concession on her part stays all: she agrees to be present
at family worship in her own house--her husband was all this time
a leading Covenanter--and promised also to hear sermon; whereupon
the sentence was suspended for a time. In August 1649, the minister
Reidford reported that she had ‘keepit sermon at Innerkeithing the last
Lord’s day, and daily keepit family worship.’ This was not enough.
They instruct Reidford ‘to shew her that, if she did not conform in
all points, the sentence of excommunication would be pronounced before
the next assembly.’ Reidford soon after pleaded for her, that she had
heard three sermons; but the brethren ‘thought not that kind of hearing
satisfactory.’ They ordained him to put her to a decided test at once,
by offering her the Covenant: failing her subscribing that, Reidford
was to pronounce sentence.
[Sidenote: 1645.]
The lady, with the ingenuity of her sex, contrived once more to
put them off--she told Reidford she would take a thought about
it. Meanwhile, she amused them with hopes by continuing to attend
church; telling them ‘she was not fully satisfied for subscribing the
Covenant.’ But even female wit could not hold out for ever against such
a siege. In June 1650, after an incessant harassment of fourteen years,
she gave them ‘satisfaction’ by subscribing the Covenant, and thus
abjuring in words the faith she still held in her heart. Little more
than two years had elapsed, when the presbytery learned that she had
‘relapsed to popery,’ and appointed commissioners to confer with her on
the subject. It was found she was now obstinate in her original belief,
‘professing, moreover, that she repented of her former repentance
more than of any sin that ever she committed, and thought that she
had reason to repent all her lifetime for subscribing the National
Covenant and Solemn League and Covenant.’ Then took place a renewal
of the same tedious dealings with the lady, ending at last in 1654,
in a peremptory order for her excommunication. By that time, however,
excommunication had lost much of its terrors, as Cromwell, then master
of Scotland, would not allow the sentence to have any consequences in
respect of civil rights.
Many traits of barbarous manners occur in the record, shewing that the
clergy had somewhat rough materials to deal with, in their efforts
to build up a perfect system. Many offences of a violent, and even
sanguinary character, are noticed. There were also several persons
so far left to a wicked nature as to hold the dicta of the reverend
presbytery itself in contempt. For instance, John Tulloch, on being
summoned regarding an irregularity with Elspeth Gordon, answered, ‘the
devil a care cared he for their excommunication; excommunicate him the
morn [to-morrow] if they pleased.’ Three witnesses attested regarding
James Middleton, that, on his being rebuked by the minister, they heard
him say that ‘he cared not for him, nor any minister in Scotland;’ and
when the minister threatened to put him in the _jougs_, they heard
him say that ‘neither he nor the best minister within seven miles
durst do so much.’ One William Gordon, in Dumbennan parish, declined
(June 1652) the authority of the presbytery, in consideration of the
many sad experiences he had had of the usurpation of civil power by
the Presbyterian government, and its ‘tyrannous persecuting of men’s
consciences who, out of tender scruples, did differ from their opinions
in matters indifferent and circumstantial; as also, finding that the
greatest part of their prayer and preaching doth more tender the
advancement of their private interest and faction than the propagation
of the gospel; and seeing their frequent railing against the authority
and civil power which God hath set over us, whereby the people’s minds
are kept unsettled and averse from the cordial union of both nations,
which, by God’s great mercy, we are now like to enjoy.’ He declared
himself separate from them, and that he would ‘no more esteem of their
excommunication than they did formerly of the pope.’ On sentence
of excommunication being passed on this recusant, ‘he lookit very
frowardly, and uttered himself most proudly and maliciously.’
[Sidenote: 1645.]
The opinion of the royalist party regarding the general condition
of the nation at the time when the Covenanting spirit was at its
height is sketched by one of their number. ‘Seven years,’ says he,
‘had this terrible distemper of the unparalleled Covenant ruled, or
rather overruled this kingdom.... It was now grown to ane height, and
had cast this nation in a new mould, for the laws were rolled up in
oblivion, the College of Justice was discharged from sitting, and over
all the land the ordinary seats of justice were no more frequented,
only the private committees in every shire and county ordained what
they list, and must not be controlled, under pain of a fearful plunder.
Nor was it right or wrong that must be decided by these committees,
but grievous exactions and heavy subsidies, with new stents, almost
every quarter, of horse and foot levies.... The poor was not pitied nor
the rich respected; the good man was not remembered nor the virtuous
man rewarded: only the soldier was in esteem and enriched, who could
murder, kill, and oppress.’--_Pa. Gordon._
At the same time, the general expressions of the church of the day
involve heavy charges against the clergy themselves, partly founded
perhaps on actual offences in their case, and partly the result
merely of the disposition to think every grace of poor human nature
insufficient, in comparison with the ideal religious standard set up.
Thus we find the Commissioners of the General Assembly denouncing
‘the enormities and corruptions observed to be in the ministry,’ and
making out a list which is difficult to reconcile with our ideas of the
boasted golden age of the Scottish Presbyterian polity. There is ‘much
fruitless conversing in company,’ ‘great worldliness,’ ‘slighting of
God’s worship in families,’ ‘want of gravity in carriage and apparel,’
‘tippling and bearing company in untimeous drinking in taverns,’
‘discountenancing of the godly,’ even a want of decent observance of
the Sabbath. ‘There are also to be found amongst us [some] who use
small and minced oathes.’[106]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: FEB. 13.]
Notwithstanding the high pressure exercised by the kirk at this time
in matters of discipline, we have ample evidence that there were
many sad and pestilent escapes of human nature, occasioning infinite
distress to sessions, presbyteries, and assemblies. There was one old
popular institution, called the Penny Bridal, which has been under
notice before, as producing a suspicious amount of happiness among the
commonalty. The General Assembly now saw proper to launch a solemn act
against these merry assemblies, ordaining the presbyteries to put them
under the severest restrictions.[107]
[Sidenote: 1645.]
Two years after, February 7, 1647, the presbyteries of Haddington
and Dunbar are found taking measures for putting this act in force;
and from their proceedings, we incidentally learn how far the late
religious fervours were from decidedly reforming or purifying manners.
Multitudes exceeding twenty assembled on these occasions. The paying of
extravagant sums--sums exceeding 12_s._ for a man and 8_s._ for a woman
(that is, _one shilling_ and _eightpence_ respectively)--caused great
immoralities--‘piping and dancing before and after dinner or supper,’
drinking after dinner, and so forth. ‘Moreover, loose speeches, singing
of licentious songs, and profane minstrelling, in time of dinner or
supper, tends to great deboshry.’ ‘Through all which causes, penny
bridals, in our judgment, become seminaries of all profanation.’ They
therefore ordained that not above twenty persons should ever gather
on such occasions; that the men should never give above a shilling,
and the women eightpence; and that all piping, dancing, singing, and
loose speeches, should cease. To make sure that these rules should be
observed, it was further ordained that a pair about to marry and to
hold a penny bridal, should not have the ceremony performed till they
had lodged twenty pounds or other guarantee, to be forfeited in the
event of disobedience.[108]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: FEB. 27.]
The arrangements for the maintenance of a militia in Scotland were
fixed by the Estates. Each county and burgh was ordered to raise and
maintain a certain number of foot-soldiers (exclusive of horse),
according to their respective amounts of population, at £9 Scots per
month for each man. The lists are curious, as informing us of the
assumed comparative population of the several counties and burghs in
that age.
[Sidenote: 1645.]
COUNTIES.--Aberdeen, 727; Ayr, 674; Argyle, 323; Banff, 159; Berwick,
395; Bute, 51; Caithness, 105; Clackmannan, 58; Cromarty, 11;
Dumbarton, 137; Dumfries, 494; Edinburgh, 463; Elgin, 210; Fyfe,
738; Forfar, 556; Haddington, 376; Inverness, 464; Kincardine, 174;
Kinross, 16; Lanark, 598; Linlithgow, 194; Nairn, 35; Peebles, 182;
Perth, 889; Renfrew, 245; Roxburgh, 642; Selkirk, 142; Stirling, 282;
Sutherland, 47; Wigton and Kirkcudbright, 486. BURGHS.--Aberdeen, 160;
Aberbrothock, 10; Ayr, 41; Annan, 3; Anstruther Easter, 31; Anstruther
Wester, 6; Banff, 8; Brechin, 20; Burntisland, 16; Crail, 24; Cupar,
24; Culross, 12; Cullen, 4; Dumfries, 44; Dunbar, 12; Dumbarton,
12; Dunfermline, 12; Dundee, 186; Dysart, 30; Edinburgh, 574; Elgin,
20; Forfar, 6; Forres, 6; Galloway, 1; Glasgow, 110; Haddington, 36;
Jedburgh, 18; Inverkeithing, 10; Inverness, 40; Irvine, 23; Kilrenny,
3; Kinghorn, 14; Kirkcaldy, 46; Kirkcudbright, 20; Lanark, 16; Lauder,
5; Linlithgow, 30; Lochmaben, 3; Montrose, 53; Nairn, 4; North Berwick,
4; Peebles, 10; Perth, 110; Pittenweem, 15; Queensferry, 7; Renfrew,
10; Rothesay, 5; Rutherglen, 5; Sanquhar, 3; St Andrews, 60; Selkirk,
10; Stirling, 36; Tain, 12; Wigton, 15; Whithorn, 5.
The total number is, for counties, 9873; for burghs, 1879--total,
11,772. If we assume that the aim was to call out one soldier for every
sixty souls, the entire population would be 706,320. Edinburgh would
have 34,440 inhabitants; Glasgow and Perth, each 6600; Stirling and
Haddington, each 2160; Ayr, 2460; Dundee, 11,160; Inverness, 2400; St
Andrews, 3600; Dumfries, 2640; Montrose, 3180; &c.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: APR. 1.]
‘This day, Kelso, with the haill houses, corns, barns, barn-yards,
burnt by fire, caused by a clenging of ane of the houses thereof whilk
was infected with the plague.’--_Hope’s Diary._
The pest appears by this time to have reached Edinburgh. The Town
Council agreed (April 10) with Joannes Paulitius, M.D., that he should
visit the infected at a salary of eighty pounds Scots per month. A
great number of people affected by the malady were quartered in huts in
the King’s Park; others were kept at home; and for the relief of these,
the aid of the charitable was invoked from the pulpits. The session of
the Holyroodhouse or Canongate parish ordained (June 27) that ‘to avoid
contention in this fearful time,’ those who should die in the Park
‘shall be buried therein, and not within the church-yard, except they
mortified (being able to do so) somewhat _ad pios usus_, for the relief
of the other poor, being in extreme indigence.’
The Estates, then sitting in Edinburgh, were pleased (August 2) to
order five hundred bolls of meal to be given from the public magazine
‘for relief of the poor of Leith, which are sorely visited with the
pestilence.’--_Bal._
[Sidenote: 1645.]
Under the pressing exigencies caused by the epidemic, the Town Council
of Edinburgh came to the resolution (August 13) of liberating those
confined for debt in the Tolbooth, obtaining first the consent of
creditors. They retained, however, several political prisoners,
particularly the Earl of Crawford and Lord Ogilvie, who had signalised
themselves by their fidelity to the king. A few weeks after, Montrose
having at Kilsyth overthrown the last militia army that had been
mustered against him, came to Bothwell, and thence despatched a letter
to the Edinburgh magistrates, demanding the liberation of these
captives, under threats of fire and sword; and they then completed
their jail delivery. The marquis was solely prevented by the plague
from advancing and taking possession of the city.
Among the regulations established during the time of this pestilence
was one for preventing people from travelling into any district
suspected of being under the influence of the disease. We find it
proclaimed, for example, in the parish kirk of Humbie, August 10, ‘that
none presume, either masters or servants, men or women, to go out of
the bounds that they dwell, upon whatsomever errand or business, to any
suspected place, without special leave of the masters of the ground.’
If any transgressed this order, ‘they sall not be received back to
their own houses or dwellings, but their houses sall be locked and
closed up.’ No stranger could be received into a house without ‘liberty
from the masters of the ground and the kirk-session conjointly.’[109]
On this occurrence of the plague, a Scotch gentleman is found copying
and sending to a friend the following specific for the disease, an
invention of Dr Burgess:
‘Tak three mutchkins of Malvoysie, and ane handfull of red sage, and a
handfull of rue, and boil them till a mutchkin be wasted. Then strain
it, and set it over the fire again; then put thereinto ane pennyworth
of long pepper, half ane of ginger, and ane quarter of ane unce of
nutmegs, all beaten together; then let it boil a little, and put
thereto five pennyworth of Mithridate and two of treacle, and a quarter
of a mutchkin of the best Angelic water.
‘_Keep this all your life, above all bodily treasures._ Tak it always
warm, both morning and evening, ane half spoonfull if ye be in health,
and one or two if ye be infected; and sweat thereupon.
‘In all your plague-time, under God, trust to this; for there was never
man, woman, nor child, that this deceived.
‘This is not only for the common plague which is called the Sickness,
but also for the small-pox, missles, surfeat, and divers other
diseases.’[110]
[Sidenote: 1645.]
It is understood that those who died by the plague were usually
buried in places apart from churchyards, from an apprehension that
the infection might burst out and spread, if the graves should be
reopened. We find that the Estates ordained (August 4), ‘since that
it pleased God to call the Laird of Craigies of the pest, who was
lodged in the sheriff-clerk’s house, that these that are within the
house shall inter him in a remote place of the ordinary burial-place
of the town.’--_Bal._ In the parish of Cramond, there are four graves
of victims of the plague, in solitary situations; two of them at a
place called the Whinny Haugh, in King’s Cramond Park, marked with
small head-stones, on which are these inscriptions: ‘Here lies Janet
Dalmahoy, who deceased the 20th of October 1647,’ and ‘Here lies John
D----, who died the 20th of November 1647.’[111]
On this occasion, the pest lingered in the country for a considerable
time. It was in full force in Glasgow towards the close of 1646. The
infected were either shut up in their houses or sent out to a muir at
some distance from the town. ‘December 12, compeared the haill tacksmen
of the mill, ladles, tron, and brig,’ complaining to the Council that,
‘in respect of the sickness and visitation, they could get naething of
their duties.’ Graves of persons who were suspected of having died of
pest were ordered to be marked. The disease does not appear to have
entirely ceased in Glasgow till October 1647.--_M. of G._
[Sidenote: 1645.]
An anecdote illustrating the terrors inspired in private circles by
the plague, is related with regard to this occurrence of the disease,
in the memoir of the Stewarts of Coltness by Sir Archibald Stewart
Denham of Westshield, a gentleman born in 1683. Speaking of Sir Thomas
Stewart, he says: ‘A remarkable incident happened him in his youth,
when the pestilence broke out in Edinburgh in 1645. He with a son
of Westshield, a merchant apprentice, had gone to a public-house,
and received change of some money, and next day that house was shut
up, as infected with the plague. This gave a strong alarm at home.
James Denham was sent for, and both were strictly examined as to
every circumstance. Thomas had received the money in change, and so
frightened were all, that none would touch the pocket in which the
money was, but at a distance; and after the pocket was cut out, it was
with tongs cast in a fire, and both lads were shut up in a bed-chamber,
sequestrate from all company, and had victuals at proper times handed
into them. While they thus stood their quarantine, by strength of
imagination or power of fancy, some fiery spots broke out on their arms
and thighs, and they imagined no less than unavoidable death. They
mutually lamented; Thomas had more courage and Christian resignation
than his companion. “James,” said he, “let us trust in God and in the
family prayers, for Jesus’ sake, who, as he cures the plague of the
heart, can, if we are infected, cure the most noisome disease of the
body.” They both went to their knees, and joined in most solemn prayer,
had much spiritual comfort, and in a fortnight were set at liberty, and
the family retired to the country.’[112]
As far as appears, the plague did not visit Scotland after this time--a
circumstance the more remarkable, as it was so deadly in London in
1665, and even reappeared there in the ensuing year. In connection
with the plague, the tale of Bessie Bell and Mary Gray has obtained
a large currency in Scotland. According to a report on the subject,
communicated to the Antiquarian Society in 1781 by Major Barry of
Lednoch,[113] the incident took place in the year 1666; but this is
probably a mistake, arising from an assumption that the last great
pestilence of London was general over the country (1665 being further
mistaken for 1666). Major Barry says:
‘When I first came to Lednoch, I was shewn (in a part of my ground
called the Dronoch Haugh) a heap of stones almost covered with briers,
thorns, and fern, which they assured me was the burial-place of Bessie
Bell and Mary Gray.
[Sidenote: 1645.]
‘The tradition of the country relating to these ladies is, that Mary’s
father was Laird of Lednoch, and Bessie Bell’s of Kinvaid, a place in
this neighbourhood, and an intimate friendship subsisted between them:
that, while Miss Bell was on a visit to Miss Gray, the plague broke
out in the year 1666; in order to avoid which, they built themselves
a bower about three-quarters of a mile west from Lednoch House, in a
very retired and romantic place called Burn Braes, on the side of the
Beanchie Burn. Here they lived for some time; but the plague raging
with great fury, they caught the infection (it is said) from a young
gentleman who was in love with them both. He used to bring them their
provision. They died in this bower, and were buried in the Dronoch
Haugh, at the foot of a brae of the same name, and near to the bank of
the river Almond. The burial-place lies about half a mile west from
the present house of Lednoch [now called Lyndoch].’[114]
The major adds: ‘I have removed all the rubbish from this little spot
of classic ground, enclosed it with a wall, planted it round with
flowering shrubs, made up the grave double, and fixed a stone in the
wall, on which are engraved the names of Bessie Bell and Mary Gray.’
It will be found that while the plague raged in London in 1665,
Scotland was free of it; neither is there any notice of the malady
occurring in 1666, either in Lamont’s or Nicol’s Diary, where it could
not have failed to be mentioned if it had occurred. It therefore
seems necessary to place the story of Bessie Bell and Mary Gray under
1645.[115]
The sad fate of the two girls became the subject of a ballad, which
commenced thus:
‘Bessie Bell and Mary Gray,
They were twa bonnie lasses,
They biggit a bower on yon burn brae,
And theekit it ower wi’ rashes.’
The rest has been lost, except the concluding stanza:
‘They wadna lie in Methven kirk-yard,
Amang their gentle kin;
But they wad lie in Dronoch Haugh,
To beek fornent the sin.’[116]
[Sidenote: 1646.