General Monk coming down to Edinburgh to take command of the forces
against Glencairn and Kenmure, and to proclaim Oliver’s union of
Scotland and England, had a most honourable reception. ‘The provost
and bailies in their scarlet gowns met him at the Nether Bow Port, the
haill council in order going before them.’ After the proclamation, they
‘did convoy him to a sumptuous dinner and feast, prepared by the town
of Edinburgh for him and his special crowners [colonels]. This feast
was six days in preparing, _whereat the bailies of Edinburgh did stand
and serve the haill time of that dinner_.’ ‘There was great preparation
for firewarks, whilk was actit at the Mercat Cross betwixt nine and
twelve hours in the nicht, to the admiration of many people.’--_Nic._
Next day was proclaimed an act of _grace_, forfaulting the heirs of
the Duke of Hamilton and some score of other nobles, and imposing huge
fines upon sundry others; for example, £15,000 on the heirs of the Earl
of Buccleuch, £10,000 on the Earl of Panmure, £6000 on the Earl of
Roxburgh, £5000 on the Earl of Perth, and the latter sum and other sums
down to £1000 on upwards of fifty others, noblemen and gentlemen [these
sums being of sterling money].
If, as has been insinuated by cavalier writers, the Scotch nobles were
prompted in their joining the religious movement of 1637 by a fear
of the revocation of church-lands, they were now suffering a severe
punishment for their hypocrisy. Under the late exhausting wars, in
which they had incurred vast expenses, and the penal fines imposed on
them by Cromwell, they might well be described by a contemporary writer
as nearly all ‘wracked.’ Our authority sums them up in the following
terms:
[Sidenote: 1654.]
‘Dukes Hamilton, the one execute, the other slain; their [e]state
forfault[ed]; one part gifted to English sogers; the rest will not pay
the debt. Huntly execute; his sons all dead but the youngest; there is
more debt on the house nor the land can pay. Lennox is living, as a man
buried, in his house of Cobham. Douglas and his son Arran are quiet men
of no respect. Argyle almost drowned in debt, in friendship with the
English, but in hatred with the country. Chancellor Loudon lives like
an outlaw about Athole, his lands comprised for debt, under a general
very great disgrace. Marischal, Rothes, Eglintoun and his three sons,
Crawford, Lauderdale, and others, prisoners in England, and their lands
all either sequestrat or forfault[ed], and gifted to English sogers.
Balmerino suddenly dead, and his son, for public debt, comprisings,
and captions, keeps not the causey [that is, cannot appear in public].’
Landed proprietors, merchants, and indeed the entire community, were
now in a state of prostration in consequence of the wars. According
to the diarist Nicoll--‘The poverty of the land daily increased, by
reason of inlaik of trade and traffic, both by sea and land, the people
being poor and under cess, quarterings, and other burdens. Falsets
and dyvours [bankrupts] daily increased; sundry of good rank, nobles,
gentry, and burgesses, denuncit to the horn, their escheats taken,
their persons imprisoned, and deteinit therein till their death.
Bankrupts and broken men, through all parts of the nation, for fear of
caption and warding, were forced to flie to Glencairn and Kenmure, who
were now in arms against the English.’
In April of this year, an additional trouble and burden fell upon the
people, in consequence of the royalist insurrections, no person being
now allowed to travel from home without a pass, for which a shilling
sterling was charged. Scotland must have then been in much the same
condition as Hungary and Lombardy were under the Austrians after 1848.
* * * * *
The summer of this year was exceedingly fine, producing ripe peas and
cherries at the beginning of June, and yielding an early and abundant
harvest; so that the best oatmeal was only fourpence sterling per peck.
‘The lambs and fowls were also at ane exceeding cheap rate’ (_Nic._),
and it is also stated that, from the abundance of herrings in the west
seas, these fish were sold so low as twopence a hundred. Cheese was, in
the west country, at 2s. 6d. sterling per stone.--_Caldwell Papers._
This bounty of Providence is not spoken of by contemporary journalists
as abating in any degree the sufferings of the people--though these,
we cannot doubt, would have been much greater if there had been a
dearth. Just at this time, Nicoll returns to the subject of the general
distresses of the country. ‘Much people,’ he says, ‘were brought to
misery,’ and the land ‘groaned under its calamities and burdens.’
[Sidenote: 1654.]
Owing to the drought of the summer, the wells on which Edinburgh
depended for water ran dry, ‘sae that the inhabitants could not get
sufficient for ordering their meat.’ Nevertheless, ‘all the _west
country_ had more than ordinar abundance of rain and weet.’--_Nic._ The
same writer adds afterwards that the people of Edinburgh were obliged
to go a mile before they could get any clean water, ‘either for
brewing of ale, or for their pot meat.’
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JUNE.]
This seems to have been the time when the word TORIES, since so
notable, was introduced into our island. It had been first applied to
a set of predatory outlaws in Ireland. Thus becoming familiar as a
term for brigands, it naturally was applied to a number of irregular
soldiers connected with the insurgent army of the Earl of Glencairn,
who, according to Nicoll, lay in holes and other private places, and
robbed and spoiled all who fell into their hands, ‘_ofttimes with the
purse cutting the throat of the awner_.’ The English troops bestirred
themselves to capture these Tories, and in July, _eight_ were taken out
of the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, and as many out of the Canongate jail,
besides others from Perth and Dundee, and shipped at Leith to be taken
and sold as slaves in Barbadoes.--_Nic._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: SEP. 4.]
Andrew Hill, musician, was tried for the abduction of a young pupil,
Marion Foulis, daughter of Foulis of Ravelston. One of the many
specific charges against this base fellow was, that ‘he used sorceries
and enchantments--namely, roots and herbs--with which he boasted that
he could gain the affection of any woman he pleased, and which he used
towards the said Marion.’ The jury, while condemning him for the main
offence, acquitted him of sorcery, though finding that he had been
‘a foolish boaster of his skill in herbs and roots for captivating
women.’ While the judges delayed for fifteen days to pass doom upon the
culprit, he was ‘eaten of vermin in prison, and so died.’[170]
[Sidenote: 1654.]
It was surely a very perverse love of the supernatural which caused
our ancestors to surmise the use of sorcery whenever Cupid played any
extraordinary trick. At a later time, when the Earl of Rothes, his
majesty’s commissioner, defied scandal in going about openly with Lady
Anne Gordon, it was thought he had been bewitched by her. It was also
believed that the Duke of Monmouth was spell-bound to Lady Henrietta
Wentworth, the charm being lodged in that golden toothpick case which
he sent to her from the scaffold. The means, however, thought to be
most commonly employed was a _love-philter_. In 1682, James Aikenhead,
apothecary in Edinburgh, was pursued before the Privy Council for
‘selling poisonous and amorous drugs and philters, whereby a woman had
narrowly escaped with her life, had not Doctor Irving given her ane
antidote.’ On this occasion, the case being referred to the College of
Physicians, that sapient body pronounced that it was ‘not safe to give
such medicaments, without first taking their own advice.’--_Fount._
So lately as 1659, a Scotch gentleman is found communicating to a
friend a receipt for that _Powder of Sympathy_ which in a somewhat
earlier age in England was held as qualified for the cure of wounds. It
was in the following terms: ‘Take of asphodel Romano, and set it under
the sun in the canicular days till it become in white ashes, or like
white powder. That done, put it in a box. Then to apply: Take the blood
or matter of the wound, on a clean linen, and lay on a little of the
powder to the blood or matter; and keep the cloth in a box, where it
may neither get much cold nor much heat. This done, dress the wounded
person every day once, and keep always linen cloths above the wound.
But let no linen cloth which hath been used or worn by any woman come
near the powder or wounded person. Observe this secret, and keep it to
yourself.’[171]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: OCT.]
In the course of this month, a number of hares came into the city of
Edinburgh, even into its central parts, the High Street and Parliament
Close, ‘to the great admiration of many.’ ‘The like was never heard nor
seen before.’--_Nic._ This singular circumstance was probably in some
way a consequence of the dry nature of the season.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NOV.]
At this time commenced the series of alleged incidents constituting the
once famous history of the DEVIL OF GLENLUCE.
[Sidenote: 1654.]
A poor weaver, named Gilbert Campbell, at Glenluce in Galloway, had
given offence to a sturdy beggar, named Agnew, ‘a most wicked and
avowed atheist, for which he was hanged at Dumfries.’ The wretch went
away muttering that he would do the family a mischief. Whether before
or after Agnew’s death does not appear, the weaver and his family began
to be annoyed with whistling noises, and by petty acts of mischief--as
the mislaying and destroying of little articles, and the throwing of
stones and peats, all by unseen hands. Their clothes were sometimes
drawn from them as they lay in bed. At the suggestion of some
neighbours, Campbell sent away his children, and for the time peace
ensued. So it was, after all except Tom had been brought back, and _not
so after Tom had returned likewise_; but, to shew that this was a point
of indifference, when Tom had been again sent away in the keeping of
the minister of the parish, the annoyances recommenced. This lad, it
may be remarked, said he had heard a voice warning him not to go back
to his father’s house; and when he did return, he was ‘sore abused,’
and thus once more driven away.
[Sidenote: 1654.]
In February, the family began to hear a voice speak to them, but could
not tell whence it came. ‘They came at length in familiar discourse
with the foul thief, that they were no more afraid to keep up the
clash with him, than to speak with one another; in this they pleased
him well, for he desired no better than to have sacrifices offered to
him. The minister, hearing of this, went to the house upon the Tuesday,
being accompanied by some gentlemen; one James Bailie of Carphin,
Alexander Bailie of Dunragget, Mr Robert Hay, and a gentlewoman called
Mrs Douglas, with the minister’s wife, did accompany. At their first
coming in, the devil says: “_Quam literarum_ is good Latin.” These are
the first words of the Latin Rudiments, which scholars are taught when
they go to the grammar-school. He cries again: “A dog!” The minister,
thinking he had spoken it to him, said: “He took it not ill to be
reviled by Satan, since his Master had trodden that path before him.”
Answered Satan: “It was not you, sir, I spoke to; I meant the dog
there;” for there was a dog standing behind backs. This passing, they
all went to prayer; which being ended, they heard a voice speaking out
of the ground, from under the bed, in the proper country dialect, which
he did counterfeit exactly, saying: “Would you know the witches of
Glenluce? I will tell you them;” and so related four or five persons’
names that went under a bad report. The weaver informed the company
that one of them was dead long ago. The devil answered and said: “It
is true she is dead long ago, but her spirit is living with us in the
world.” The minister replied, saying (though it was not convenient to
speak to such an excommunicated and intercommuned person): “The Lord
rebuke thee, Satan, and put thee to silence; we are not to receive
information from thee, whatsoever name any person goes under; thou art
seeking but to seduce this family, for Satan’s kingdom is not divided
against itself.” After which, all went to prayer again, which being
ended--for during the time of prayer no noise or trouble was made,
except once that a loud fearful yell was heard at a distance, the
devil threatening and terrifying the lad Tom, who had come back that
day with the minister, “that if he did not depart out of the house,
he would set all on fire”--says the minister: “The Lord will preserve
the house, and the lad too, seeing he is one of the family, and had
God’s warrant to tarry in it.” The fiend answered: “He shall not get
liberty to tarry; he was once put out already, and shall not abide
here, though I should pursue him to the end of the world.” The minister
replied: “The Lord will stop thy malice against him.” And then they
all went to prayer again; which being ended, the devil said: “Give me
a spade and a shovel, and depart from the house for seven days, and I
will make a grave, and lie down in it, and shall trouble you no more.”
The goodman answered: “Not so much as a straw shall be given thee,
through God’s assistance, even though that would do it.” The minister
also added: “God shall remove thee in due time.” The spirit answered:
“I will not remove for you; I have my commission from Christ to tarry
and vex this family.” The minister answered: “A permission thou hast
indeed, but God will stop it in due time.” The devil replied: “I have,
sir, a commission, which perhaps will last longer than your own.” [The
minister died in the year 1655, in December.] The devil had told them
“that he had given his commission to Tom to keep.” The company inquired
at the lad, who said: “There was something put into his pocket, but it
did not tarry.”’
After a great deal of the like talk with the unseen tormentor, ending
with a declaration from him that he was an evil spirit come from the
bottomless pit to vex this house, and that Satan was his father, ‘there
appeared a naked hand, and an arm from the elbow down, beating upon
the floor till the house did shake again.’ This the minister attested,
and also that he heard the voice, saying: ‘Saw you that? It was not my
hand--it was _my father’s_; my hand is more black in the loof [palm].’
[Sidenote: 1654.]
Sinclair, who relates these things,[172] states that he received them
from a son of Campbell who was at Glasgow College with him. ‘I must
here insert,’ he adds, ‘what I heard from one of the ministers of
that presbytery, who were appointed to meet at the weaver’s house for
prayer and other exercises of that kind. When the day came, five only
met; but, before they went in, they stood a while in the croft, which
lies round about the house, consulting what to do. They resolved upon
two things: First, There should be no words of conjuration used, as
commanding him in the name of God to tell whence he was, or to depart
from the family, for which they thought they had no call from God;
Secondly, That when the devil spoke, none should answer him, but hold
on in their worshipping of God, and the duties they were called to.
When all of them had prayed by turns, and three of them had spoken a
word or two from the Scripture, they prayed again, and then ended,
without any disturbance. When that brother who informed me had gone
out, one Hugh Nisbit, one of the company, came running after him,
desiring him to come back, for he had begun to whistle. “No,” says the
other, “I tarried as long as God called me; but go in again I will
not.” After this, the said Gilbert suffered much loss, and had many sad
nights, not two nights in one week free; and thus it continued until
April. From April to July, he had some respite and ease; but after, he
was molested with new assaults. Even their victuals were so abused,
that the family was in hazard of starving; and that which they ate gave
them not their ordinary satisfaction they were wont to find.
[Sidenote: 1654.]
‘In this sore and sad affliction, Gilbert Campbell resolved to make
his address to the synod of presbyters, for advice and counsel what to
do, which was appointed to convene in October 1655--namely, Whether
to forsake the house or not? The synod, by their committee, appointed
to meet at Glenluce in February 1656, thought it fit that a solemn
humiliation should be kept through all the bounds of the synod; and,
among other causes, to request God in behalf of that afflicted family;
which being done carefully, the event was, that his trouble grew less
till April, and from April to August he was altogether free. About
which time the devil began with new assaults; and taking the ready
meat which was in the house, did sometimes hide it in holes by the
doorposts, and at other times hid it under the beds, and sometimes
among the bed-clothes, and under the linens, and at last did carry it
quite away, till nothing was left there save bread and water. This
minds me of a small passage in proof of what it said. The goodwife one
morning making pottage for the children’s breakfast, had the tree-plate
wherein the meal lay snatched from her quickly. “Well,” says she, “let
me have my plate again;” whereupon it came flying at her, without any
skaith done. It is like, if she had sought the meal too, she might
have got it; such is his civility when he is entreated; a small homage
will please him, ere he went. After this, he exercised his malice and
cruelty against all persons in the family, in wearying them in the
night-time, by stirring and moving through the house, so that they
had no rest for noise, which continued all the month of August after
this manner. After which time the devil grew yet worse, by roaring and
terrifying, by casting of stones, by striking them with staves on their
bed in the night-time. And (September 18) about midnight, he cried out
with a loud voice, “I shall burn the house.” And about three or four
nights after, he set one of the beds on fire, which was soon put out,
without any prejudice except the bed itself.’
Robert Baillie, writing to his friend Mr Spang at Rotterdam in 1659,
answers an inquiry of his correspondent regarding ‘the apparition
in Galloway,’ stating that it is ‘notourly known.’ He adds a short
narrative of the chief particulars, informing us that for a twelvemonth
the apparition had been silent.
It is the first, but not the only case of such spiritual visitations,
which is reported as occurring in Scotland during the seventeenth
century: another, which happened at Rerrick in the stewartry of
Kirkcudbright in 1695, attracted great attention. The Glenluce and
Rerrick spirits belong to a class familiar in Germany under the name
of _Poltergeist_. In Beaumont’s _Gleanings of Antiquities_, 1724,
the author quotes from Aventinus’s _Annals of Bavaria_ a case of
poltergeist resembling in many circumstances this Glenluce one. ‘This
pestilent and wicked genius, taking a human shape, gave answers,
discovered thefts, accused many of crimes, and set a mark of infamy on
them, stirred up discords and ill-will among them. By degrees, he set
fire to and burned down cottages, but was more troublesome to one man
than the rest,’ &c.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1655.