CHAPTER I.

CONDITION OF SCOTLAND TO THE END OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY.

PAGE

Scotland and Spain are very dissimilar in regard to loyalty 1

But are very similar in regard to superstition 4

The Scotch unite liberality in politics with illiberality in

religion. This is the largest and most important fact in their

history; and the rest of the Volume will be occupied in

investigating its causes 5

Influence of physical geography 5-7

Roman invasion of Scotland 7-9

Irish invasion of Scotland 9

Norwegian invasion of Scotland 11-12

English invasion of Scotland 12-17

The injury which these invasions inflicted upon Scotland

stopped the growth of towns, and thereby favoured the power of

the nobles 18

The power of the nobles was still further favoured by the

physical structure of the country 19-20

And by the weakness of the Crown 20-21

Hence their authority had, before the close of the fourteenth

century, become enormous. The Crown, completely overshadowed

by them, could derive no aid from the citizens, because, owing

to the circumstances just mentioned, there were no cities 21-23

For, industry was impossible, and the commonest arts were

unknown 23-26

Evidence of the scanty population of the Scotch towns 26-30

They were too feeble and insignificant to elect their own

magistrates 32-33

The municipal element being thus imperfect, the only ally,

which the Crown could possibly find, was the Church 34-35

Hence, a coalition between the kings and the clergy against

the nobles 34

The clergy were the only body who could withstand the nobles.

Causes of the great influence of the clergy 35-44

CHAPTER II.

CONDITION OF SCOTLAND IN THE FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES.

Early in the fifteenth century, the alliance between the Crown

and the Church against the nobles, became obvious 45

James I. attacked the nobles, and favoured the Church; hoping

thereby to establish the supremacy of the throne 46-47

But his policy failed, because it was opposed by the operation

of general causes 47-48

Besides failing, it produced his own destruction 49

Power of the Douglases, who were at the head of the southern

nobility 49-50

James II. murdered the chiefs of that family 51-52

The Crown, in its efforts against the nobles, was encouraged

by the clergy; and before the middle of the fifteenth century,

the Church and the aristocracy were completely estranged from

each other 52-54

James III., like James II. and James I., allied himself with

the clergy against the nobles 55-56

Their power, however, was too deeply rooted to be shaken; and

in 1488, they put the king to death 55

Still, and notwithstanding these successive failures,

James IV. followed the same policy as his predecessors 56

So did James V. Consequently the nobles imprisoned him, and

ejected the clergy from all offices in the state 57

In 1528, James V. escaped; the Crown and the Church regained

the ascendant, and the principal nobles were banished 58

From this moment, the nobles hated the Church more than ever.

Their hatred brought about the Reformation 58-59

Active measures of the government against the nobles 60-61

The nobles revenged themselves by becoming Reformers 62

James V., on the other hand, threw himself entirely into the

arms of the Church 62-63

As the nobles took the opposite side, and as the people had no

influence, the success or failure of the Reformation in

Scotland was simply a question of the success or failure of

the aristocratic power 65-68

In 1542, the nobles openly refused obedience to James V.; and

their treatment of him at this critical period of his life,

broke his heart 68-69

Directly he died, they regained authority. The clergy were

displaced, and measures favourable to Protestantism were

adopted 69-72

In 1546, Cardinal Beaton was assassinated, and Knox began

his career 74-75

Subsequent proceedings of Knox 76-77

While Knox was abroad, the nobles established the Reformation 78

He returned to Scotland in 1559, by which time the struggle

was nearly over 79

In 1559, the queen regent was deposed; the nobles became

supreme; and, in 1560, the Church was destroyed 80-84

Immediately this revolution was completed, the nobles and the

preachers began to quarrel about the wealth of the Church 84

The nobles, thinking that they ought to have it, took it into

their own hands 85-88

Thereupon, the Protestant preachers said that the nobles were

instigated by the devil 88-90

Morton, who was at the head of the nobility, became enraged at

the proceedings of the new clergy, and persecuted them 91-92

A complete rupture between the two classes 93

The clergy, finding themselves despised by the governing

class, united themselves heartily with the people, and

advocated democratic principles 93

In 1574, Melville became their leader. Under his auspices, that

great struggle began, which never stopped until, sixty years

later, it produced the rebellion against Charles I. 94

The first manifestations of this rebellious spirit was the

attack on the bishops 94

In 1575, the attack began. In 1580, episcopacy was abolished 96-97

But the nobles upheld that institution, because they loved

inequality for the same reasons which made the clergy love

equality 97-100

Struggle between the upper classes and the clergy respecting

episcopacy 100-103

In 1582, James VI. was imprisoned; and his captivity was

justified by the clergy, whose democratic principles were now

openly proclaimed 103-104

Violent language used by the clergy against the king and

against the nobles 104-109

Their leader, Melville, personally insulted the king, and they

were probably privy to the Gowrie conspiracy in 1600 110

Still, the clergy, notwithstanding the indecency of their

conduct, conferred the greatest of all boons upon Scotland, by

keeping alive and nurturing the spirit of liberty 111-114

CHAPTER III.

CONDITION OF SCOTLAND DURING THE SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES.

In 1603, the King of Scotland became also King of England, and

determined to use his new resources in curbing and chastising

the Scotch clergy 115-122

His cruel treatment of them 122-124

In 1610, James, backed by the power of England, forced

episcopacy upon Scotland. Courts of High Commission were also

set up 125-127

Tyrannical conduct of the bishops 127-129

Meanwhile, a reaction was preparing 129-132

In 1637, the reaction declared itself, and, in 1638, the

bishops were overthrown 132-133

The movement being essentially democratic, could not stop

there, but quickly spread from the Church to the State. In

1639, war was made upon Charles I. by the Scotch, who, having

defeated the king, sold him to the English, who executed him 134-136

The Scotch, before they would crown Charles II., compelled him

to humble himself, and to confess his own errors and the

errors of his family 136-137

But, after Charles II. mounted the throne of England, he

became powerful enough to triumph over the Scotch. He availed

himself of that power to oppress Scotland even more

grievously than his two predecessors had done 137-140

Happily, however, the spirit of liberty was strong enough to

baffle his attempts to establish a permanent despotism 140

Still, the crisis was terrible, and the people and their

clergy were exposed to every sort of outrage 141-146

Now, as before, the bishops aided the government in its

efforts to enslave Scotland. Being hated by the people, they

allied themselves with the Crown, and displayed the warmest

affection towards James II., during whose reign cruelties

were perpetrated worse than any previously known 147-150

In 1688, another reaction, in which the Scotch again freed

themselves from their oppressors 151

The only powerful friends of this bad government were the

Highlanders 151

Reasons which induced the Highlanders to rebel in favour of

the Stuarts 151-153

The Highland rebellions of 1715 and 1745 were not the result

of loyalty 153-159

After 1745, the Highlanders sank into complete insignificance,

and the progress of Scotland was uninterrupted 159

Beginning of the trading spirit 160-161

Connexion between the rising of the trading spirit and the

abolition, in 1748, of hereditary jurisdictions 161-162

The abolition of these jurisdictions was a symptom of the

declining power of the Scotch nobles, but not a cause of it 161

One cause of the decline of their power was the union with

England, in 1707 162-167

Another cause was the failure of the Rebellion of 1745 167

The nobles being thus weakened, were, in 1748, easily deprived

of their right of jurisdiction. In this way, they lost the

last emblem of their old authority 169-170

This great democratic and liberating movement was aided by the

growth of the mercantile and manufacturing classes 171-172

And their growth was itself assisted by the Union with England 172

Evidence of the rapid progress of the industrious classes in

the first half of the eighteenth century 173-183

During the same period, a new and splendid literature arose in

Scotland 183-184

But, unfortunately, this literature, notwithstanding its bold

and inquisitive spirit, was unable to diminish national

superstition 184-186

It is the business of the historian to ascertain the causes of

its failure. If he cannot do this, he cannot understand the

history of Scotland 186

The first and most essential quality of an historian, is a

clear perception of the great scientific doctrine of Law. But

whoever seeks to apply this doctrine to the whole course of

history, and to elucidate, by its aid, the march and theory of

affairs, is met by obstacles which no single mind can remove 186-190

CHAPTER IV.

AN EXAMINATION OF THE SCOTCH INTELLECT DURING THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.

The rest of the Volume will be occupied with a still closer

investigation of the double paradox presented by the history

of Scotland; namely, 1st, that the same people should be

liberal in politics, and illiberal in religion; and, 2nd, that

the free and sceptical literature which they produced in the

eighteenth century, should have been unable to lessen their

religious illiberality 191

Their religious illiberality was the result of the immense

power possessed by their clergy in the seventeenth century.

The causes of that power will be examined in the present

chapter 192

The failure of their literature in diminishing this

illiberality during the eighteenth century, was the result of

the peculiar method of the inquiry adopted by the Scotch

philosophers. The causes of the universal diffusion of that

method, the nature of the method, and the consequences of it,

will be examined in the next chapter, which will conclude the

Volume 192-193

Circumstances in the seventeenth century favourable to the

influence of the Scotch clergy 193-197

While the English war against Charles I. was essentially

political, the Scotch war against him was essentially

religious 197-200

Though this was the effect of Scotch superstition, it was also

a cause of its further progress 201-202

Hence, in the seventeenth century, secular interests were

neglected, and theological ones became supreme. Illustration

of this, from the zeal of the people to hear sermons of

inordinate frequency and of terrible length; so that they

passed the greater part of their lives in what were

erroneously termed religious exercises 203-206

The clergy availed themselves of these habits to extend and

consolidate their own authority 205-206

Their great engine of power was the Kirk-Session. Tyranny of

the Kirk-Sessions 206-210

Monstrous pretensions of the clergy 210-212

Cases in which it was believed that these pretensions were

upheld and vindicated by miracles 212-220

The clergy, becoming elated, indulge in language of

extraordinary arrogance 221-227

They asserted that miracles were wrought in their behalf, and

often on their persons 228-229

Effect of these proceedings upon the Scotch mind 230-232

The clergy, to intimidate the people, and bring them

completely under control, advocated horrible notions

concerning evil spirits and future punishments 232-243

With the same object they propounded notions more horrible

still, respecting the Deity, whom they represented as a cruel,

passionate, and sanguinary Being 245-252

They moreover declared that harmless and even praiseworthy

actions were sinful, and would provoke the Divine wrath 251-262

To prevent such imaginary sins, the clergy made arbitrary

regulations, and punished those who disobeyed them, sometimes

by flogging, and sometimes by branding with hot irons, and

sometimes in other ways 262-263

Specimens of the sins which the clergy invented 264-268

The result was, that all mirth, all innocent gaiety, all

demonstrations of happiness, and nearly all physical

enjoyments, were destroyed in Scotland 268-269

Hence, the national character was mutilated. For, the

pleasures of the body are, in our actual condition, as

essential a part of the great scheme of life, and are as

necessary to human affairs, as are the pleasures of the mind 269-271

But the clergy, by denouncing these pleasures of the senses,

do what they can, in every country, to diminish the total

amount of happiness of which humanity is susceptible, and

which it has a right to enjoy 271-275

In no Protestant country have the clergy pushed these narrow

and unsocial tenets so far as in Scotland 275-276

Indeed, in some respects, the Scotch clergy were more ascetic

than those of any branch of the Catholic Church, except the

Spanish; since they attempted to destroy the affections, and

to sever the holiest ties of domestic love 276-279

CHAPTER V.

AN EXAMINATION OF THE SCOTCH INTELLECT DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.

The Scotch philosophical literature of the eighteenth century,

was a reaction against the theological spirit of the

seventeenth 281

But the peculiarity of the philosophy which now arose, is

that, instead of being an inductive philosophy, it was a

deductive one 281-282

This is well worthy of notice; because the inductive method

being essentially anti-theological, it might have been

expected that the opponents of the theological spirit would

have followed that method 282-284

The truth, however, was, that the theological spirit had taken

such hold of the Scotch mind, that it was impossible for the

inductive method to gain a hearing 284-289

Hence, the secular philosophy of the eighteenth century,

though new in its results, was not new in the method by which

those results were obtained 289

In this respect, Scotland is similar to Germany, but

dissimilar to England 289-290

Summary of the most important distinctions between induction

and deduction 291

The whole of the Scotch philosophy, physical as well as

metaphysical, is deductive 291

Hutcheson's philosophy 292-304

Its results and tendency 292-299

Its method 299-304

Adam Smith's philosophy 304-330

His _Theory of Moral Sentiments_ and his _Wealth of

Nations_ are different parts of one subject. To understand

either, we must study both 304-305

His deductive method depended upon a suppression of premisses 304-309

Account of his _Theory of Moral Sentiments_ 309-314

Account of his _Wealth of Nations_ 314-330

Hume's philosophy 331-349

His want of imagination 331-332

Importance and novelty of his doctrines 333-337

His method was eminently deductive; and he, like Adam Smith,

cared little for experience 337-341

Hence, his injustice to Bacon, whose method was diametrically

opposed to his own 338-339

His _Natural History of Religion_ 342-348

Comparison between the method of this work, and the method

employed by Cudworth 348

Reid's philosophy 349-361

His timidity made him look at the practical tendency of

speculative doctrines, instead of confining himself to the

question of their truth or falsehood 349-354

But a philosopher should deem it his business to ascertain

new truths, without regard to their consequences 349-350

Reid attacked Hume's method, because he disliked the results

to which that method had led 354-355

And yet, in raising his own philosophy, he followed the very

same method himself 355-359

Estimate of the value of what Reid effected 359-360

Opposition between the method of Reid and that of Bacon 360-361

In physical philosophy, the deductive method was equally

prevalent in Scotland 361-seq.

The laws of heat 362

Indestructibility of force. Interchange of forces 362-365

Black's philosophy 367-377

His theory of latent heat prepared the way for subsequent

discoveries 367-371

His method was deductive, and does not come under any of the

rules of the Baconian philosophy 371-372

He reasoned from his principles speculatively, instead of

occupying himself with a long course of experiments 372-377

To do this was to indulge the imagination, which is deemed

dangerous by the inductive school of English physicists. But,

in the pursuit of truth, we need all our powers; and the

advance of physical science is retarded by our neglect of the

imaginative and emotional faculties 377-382

Black, therefore, did immense service by giving free scope, to

the imagination. The same plan was pursued by his successor,

Leslie 383

Leslie's philosophy of heat 383-388

He derived great aid from poetry 385

And was unjust to Bacon, whose inductive views he disliked 388

Hutton's geological philosophy 388-402

Fire and water are the two causes which have altered, and are

still altering, the crust of the earth. The supposition that

volcanic action was formerly more powerful than at present, is

quite consistent with the doctrines of an unbroken sequence of

events, and of the uniformity of natural laws 388-390

The action of fire and water on the crust of the earth, may be

studied deductively, by computing separately the probable

operation of each. Or they maybe studied inductively, by

observing their united effects, and rising from the effects to

the causes; while the deductive plan is to descend from the

causes to the effects 390-391

Of these two methods, the English followed the inductive; the

Scotch and Germans followed the deductive 391

English geology founded by William Smith 391-393

German geology founded by Werner 393-395

Scotch geology founded by Hutton 396

The English observed effects in order to ascertain causes. The

Germans, assuming water to be the cause, reasoned from it to

the effects. The Scotch, assuming heat to be the cause, made

its principles the first step in their argument 391-396

Reasons which made the Scotch geologists argue from the

principles of heat, instead of, like the German geologists,

arguing from the principles of water 396

Though Hutton founded the theory of metamorphic rocks, and

ascribed such immense importance to heat, he would not take

the trouble of examining a single region of active volcanos,

where he might have seen those very operations of nature,

respecting which he speculated 398

But, by a deductive application of the principles unfolded by

Black, he arrived at a conclusion concerning the consolidation

of strata by heat 399-400

That conclusion was entirely speculative, and unsupported by

experience 399

Though experiment might perhaps verify it, no one had yet made

the trial; and Hutton was too averse to the inductive method

to undertake the investigation himself 400-401

Sir James Hall afterwards took the matter up, and empirically

verified the great idea which Hutton had propounded 401-402

Watt's invention of the steam-engine, and discovery of the

composition of water 402-406

Contrast between the method by which he, as a Scotchman,

discovered the composition of water, and the opposite method

by which the Englishman, Cavendish, made the same discovery at

the same time 404-406

Nature of the evidence of the supposed difference between the

organic and inorganic world. Life is probably a property of

all matter 406-410

Assuming, however, for the purposes of classification, that

the organic world is fundamentally different from the

inorganic, we may divide organic science into physiology and

pathology 410-412

The two great Scotch pathologists are Cullen and John Hunter.

Hunter, having a larger mind than Cullen, was also a

physiologist 412

Account of Cullen's philosophy 413-427

His love of theory 413

Theory, though necessary in science, is dangerous in practice 414-416

Difference between the science of pathology and the art of

therapeutics 417-418

Comparison between the method of Cullen's pathology and the

method employed by Adam Smith 417-419

Cullen's theory of the solids 420-seq.

He refused to inquire into the truth of the principles from

which he argued 421-422

His conclusions, like his premisses, represent only a part of

the truth, and were extremely one-sided. Still, their value

is unquestionable, forming, as they did, a necessary part of

the general progress 423-424

His theory of fever 424-426

His nosology 426-427

The philosophy of John Hunter 428-458

His grandeur, and, unfortunately, his obscurity of language 428-430

In his mind, the inductive and deductive methods struggled for

mastery. Their conflict oppressed him. This is one of the

causes of the darkness of his thoughts and consequently of his

style 429-432

His natural disposition was towards deduction 432

But circumstances made him inductive, and he collected facts

with untiring industry 432-434

By this means he made a large number of curious physiological

discoveries 434-436

He traced the history of the red globules of the blood, and

arrived at the conclusion that their function is to strengthen

the system rather than to repair it 436-437

Long after his death, this inference was corroborated by the

progress of miscroscopical and chemical researches. It was

especially corroborated by Lecanu's comparison of the blood in

different sexes, and in different temperaments. 439

Hunter's inquiries concerning the movements of animals and

vegetables 439-441

He recognized the great truth that the sciences of the

inorganic world must be the foundation of those of the organic 443

His object was, to unite all the physical sciences, in order

to show that, the operations of nature being always uniform,

regularity prevails even amidst the greatest apparent

irregularity 443-444

Hence, aiming chiefly at a generalization of irregularities,

his favourite study was pathology 444

In his pathological inquiries, he took into account the

malformations of crystals 445

As a physiologist, he was equalled or excelled by Aristotle;

but as a pathologist, he is unrivalled for the grandeur of his

views 446-447

In pathology, his love of deduction was more obvious than in

physiology 447

His pathological speculations respecting the principles of

action and the principles of sympathy 448-452

But his English contemporaries, being eminently inductive, so

disliked his method, that he exercised scarcely any influence

over them 453

This is the more observable, because his discoveries

respecting disease have caused him to be recognized as the

founder of modern surgery, and the principal author of the

doctrines now taught in the medical profession 454-457

Such were the great results achieved by Scotchmen in the

eighteenth century. Difference between this splendid

literature and the wretched productions of the Scotch mind in

the seventeenth century. 458-460

Notwithstanding this difference, the deductive method was

supreme in both centuries 461

The deductive method strikes the senses less than the

inductive. Hence, induction being more accessible to average

understandings, is more popular than deduction. Hence, too,

the teachings of an inductive philosophy are more likely to

affect national character than the teaching of a deductive

philosophy 461-464

Theology forms the only exception to this rule 464-465

The Scotch literature of the eighteenth century, being

essentially deductive, was, on that account, unable to affect

the nation. It was, therefore, unable to weaken national

superstition 465-469

Superstition and religious illiberality still existing in

Scotland 469-471

The notions countenanced there respecting the origin of

epidemics. Correspondence which, in consequence of those

notions, took place, in 1853, between the Scotch Church and

the English Government 471-476

These superstitions are eminently irreligious, and are

everywhere becoming effaced, as physical science advances.

Nothing else can touch them. Hence the gradual liberation of

the human mind from the slavish and unmanly fears by which it

has long been oppressed 476-482

HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION IN ENGLAND.

CHAPTER I.

CONDITION OF SCOTLAND TO THE END OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY.

In the preceding view of the rise and decay of Spain, I have sought to

exhibit the successive steps by which what was formerly one of the

greatest nations of the earth, was broken, and cast down from its high

estate. As we look back on that scene, the picture is, indeed, striking.

A country rich in all natural productions, inhabited by a brave, a loyal,

and a religious people, removed, too, by its geographical position from

the hazards of European revolutions, did, by the operation of those

general causes which I have indicated, suddenly rise to unparalleled

grandeur; and then, without the occurrence of any new combination, but by

a mere continuance of the same causes, fall with an equal velocity. Yet,

these vicissitudes, strange and startling as they appear, were perfectly

regular. They were the legitimate consequence of a state of society, in

which the spirit of protection had reached its highest point, and in

which, every thing being done for the people, nothing was done by the

people. Whenever this happens, there may be great political progress, but

there can be no really national progress. There may be accessions of

territory, and vast increase of fame and of power. There may be

improvements in the practice of administration, in the management of

finances, in the organization of armies, in the art and theory of war, in

the tricks of diplomacy, and in those various contrivances by which one

nation is able to outwit and insult another. So far, however, from this

benefiting the people, it will injure them in two different ways. In the

first place, by increasing the reputation of the ruling classes, it

encourages that blind and servile respect which men are too apt to feel

for those who are above them, and which, wherever it has been generally

practised, has been found fatal to the highest qualities of the citizen,

and therefore to the permanent grandeur of the nation. And, in the second

place, it multiplies the resources of the executive government, and thus

renders the country unable, as well as unwilling, to correct the errors

of those who are at the head of affairs. Hence, in Spain, as in all

countries similarly circumstanced, it was at the very moment when things

were most prosperous at the surface, that they were most rotten at the

foundation. In presence of the most splendid political success, the

nation hastened to its downfall, and the crisis was fast approaching, in

which, the whole edifice being overturned, nothing would be left, except

a memorable warning of the consequences which must ensue, when the

people, giving themselves up to the passions of superstition and loyalty,

abdicate their own proper functions, forego their own responsibility,

renounce their highest duties, and degrade themselves into passive

instruments to serve the will of the Church and the throne.

Such is the great lesson taught by the history of Spain. From the history

of Scotland, we may gather another lesson, of a different, and yet of a

similar, kind. In Scotland, the progress of the nation has been very

slow, but, on the whole, very sure. The country is extremely barren; the

executive government has, with rare exceptions, been always weak; and the

people have never been burdened with those feelings of loyalty which

circumstances had forced upon the Spaniards. Certainly, the last charge

that will be brought against the Scotch, is that of superstitious

attachment to their princes.[1] We, in England, have not always been very

tender of the persons of our sovereigns, and we have occasionally

punished them with what some consider excessive severity. With this, we

have been frequently taunted by the more loyal nations of the Continent;

and, in Spain in particular, our conduct has excited the greatest

abhorrence. But, if we compare our history with that of our northern

neighbours, we must pronounce ourselves a meek and submissive people.[2]

There have been more rebellions in Scotland than in any other country;

and the rebellions have been very sanguinary, as well as very numerous.

The Scotch have made war upon most of their kings, and put to death many.

To mention their treatment of a single dynasty, they murdered James I.

and James III. They rebelled against James II. and James VII. They laid

hold of James V., and placed him in confinement. Mary, they immured in a

castle, and afterwards deposed. Her successor, James VI., they

imprisoned; they led him captive about the country, and on one occasion

attempted his life. Towards Charles I., they showed the greatest

animosity, and they were the first to restrain his mad career. Three

years before the English ventured to rise against that despotic prince,

the Scotch boldly took up arms, and made war on him. The service which

they then rendered to the cause of liberty it would be hard to overrate;

but the singular part of the transaction was, that having afterwards got

possession of the person of Charles, they sold him to the English for a

large sum of money, of which they, being very poor, had pressing need.

Such a sale is unparalleled in history; and although the Scotch might

have plausibly alleged that this was the only gain they had derived, or

ever could derive, from the existence of their hereditary prince, still

the event is one which stands alone; it was unprecedented; it has never

been imitated; and its occurrence is a striking symptom of the state of

public opinion, and of the feelings of the country in which it was

permitted.

[1] One of their own historians complacently says, 'but the Scots were

seldom distinguished for loyalty.' _Laing's History of Scotland_,

vol. iii. p. 199, edit. 1819. See also p. 366. To the same effect,

Brodie (_History of the British Empire_, Edinburgh, 1822, vol. i. p.

388): 'The little respect paid to royalty is conspicuous in every

page of Scottish history.' Or, as Wilkes expressed himself in the

House of Commons, 'Scotland seems, indeed, the natural _foyer_ of

rebellion, as Egypt is of the plague.' _Parliamentary History_, vol.

xix. p. 810, London, 1814; and Nimmo (_History of Stirlingshire_,

Edinburgh, 1777, p. 219): 'Never was any race of monarchs more

unfortunate than the Scottish. Their reigns were generally turbulent

and disastrous, and their own end often tragical.'

[2] Indeed, a well-known Scotchman of the seventeenth century,

scornfully says of the English, 'such is the obsequiousness, and

almost superstitious devotion of that nation towards their prince.'

_Baillie's Letters_, vol. i. p. 204, edit. Laing, Edinburgh, 1841.

This, however, was written in 1639, since which we have effectually

wiped off that reproach. On the other hand, an English writer of

the seventeenth century, indignantly, though with evident

exaggeration, imputes to the Scotch that 'forty of their kings have

been barbarously murdered by them; and half as many more have

either made away with themselves, for fear of their torturing of

them, or have died miserably in strait imprisonment.' _Account of

Scotland in_ 1670, in _Harleian Miscellany_, vol. vi. p. 140, edit.

Park, 4to, 1810. Compare two curious passages in _Shields' Hind let

loose_, 1687, pp. 8, 9, 15.

While, however, in regard to loyalty, the opposition between Scotland and

Spain is complete, there is, strange to say, the most striking similarity

between those countries in regard to superstition. Both nations have

allowed their clergy to exercise immense sway, and both have submitted

their actions, as well as their consciences, to the authority of the

Church. As a natural consequence, in both countries, intolerance has

been, and still is, a crying evil; and in matters of religion, a bigotry

is habitually displayed, discreditable indeed to Spain, but far more

discreditable to Scotland, which has produced many philosophers of the

highest eminence, who would willingly have taught the people better

things, but who have vainly attempted to remove from the national mind

that serious blemish which mars its beauty, and tends to neutralize its

many other admirable qualities.

Herein lies the apparent paradox, and the real difficulty, of Scotch

history. That knowledge should not have produced the effects which have

elsewhere followed it; that a bold and inquisitive literature should be

found in a grossly superstitious country, without diminishing its

superstition; that the people should constantly withstand their kings,

and as constantly succumb to their clergy; that while they are liberal in

politics, they should be illiberal in religion; and that, as a natural

consequence of all this, men who, in the visible and external department

of facts and of practical life, display a shrewdness and a boldness

rarely equalled, should nevertheless, in speculative life, and in matters

of theory, tremble like sheep before their pastors, and yield assent to

every absurdity they hear, provided their Church has sanctioned it; that

these discrepancies should coexist, seems at first sight a strange

contradiction, and is surely a phenomenon worthy of our careful study. To

indicate the causes of this anomaly, and to trace the results to which

the anomaly has led, will be the business of the remaining part of this

volume; and although the investigation will be somewhat lengthy, it will

not, I hope, be considered prolix, by those who recognise the importance

of the inquiry, and are aware how completely it has been neglected, even

by those who have written most fully on the history of the Scottish

nation.

In Scotland, as elsewhere, the course of events has been influenced by

its physical geography; and by this I mean, not only its own immediate

peculiarities, but also its relation to adjoining countries. It is close

to Ireland; it touches England; and by the contiguity of the Orkney and

Shetland Isles, it was eminently exposed to the attacks of that great

nation of pirates, which for centuries inhabited the Scandinavian

peninsula. Considered merely by itself, it is mountainous and sterile;

nature has interposed such obstacles, that it was long impossible to open

regular communications between its different parts, which, indeed, in

regard to the Highlands, was not effected till after the middle of the

eighteenth century.[3] Finally, and this, as we shall presently see, was

a matter of great importance, the most fertile land in Scotland is in the

south, and was, therefore, constantly ravaged by the English borderers.

Hence, the accumulation of wealth was hindered; the growth of towns was

discouraged, by the serious hazards to which they were liable; and it was

impossible to develop that municipal spirit, which might have existed, if

the districts most favoured by nature had been situated in the north of

Scotland, instead of in the south. If the actual state of things had been

reversed, so that the Highlands were in the south,[4] and the Lowlands in

the north, it can hardly be doubted, that, after the cessation in the

thirteenth century of the great Scandinavian invasions, the most fertile

parts of Scotland, being comparatively secure, would have been the seat

of towns, which the active spirit of the people would have caused to

prosper, and the prosperity of which would have introduced a new element

into Scotch affairs, and changed the course of Scotch history. This,

however, was not to be; and, as we have to deal with events as they

actually are, I will now endeavour to trace the consequences of the

physical peculiarities which have just been noticed; and by coördinating

their results, I will, so far as I am able, show their general meaning,

and the way in which they have shaped the national character.

[3] In England, the travelling was bad enough; in Scotland, it was far

worse. Morer, stating what he saw in 1689, says 'Stage-coaches they

have none; yet there are a few Hackney's at Edinburgh, which they

may hire into the country upon urgent occasions. The truth is, the

roads will hardly allow 'em those conveniences, which is the reason

that their gentry, men and women, chuse rather to use their horses.'

_Morer's Account of Scotland_, London, 1702, p. 24.

As to the northern parts, we have the following account, written in

Inverness, between 1726 and 1730. 'The Highlands are but little

known even to the inhabitants of the low country of Scotland, for

they have ever dreaded the difficulties and dangers of travelling

among the mountains; and, when some extraordinary occasion has

obliged any one of them to such a progress, he has, generally

speaking, made his testament before he set out, as though he were

entering upon a long and dangerous sea-voyage, wherein it was very

doubtful if he should ever return.' _Letters from a Gentleman in the

North of Scotland_, edit. London, 1815, vol. i. p. 4. Between 1720

and 1730, military roads were cut through parts of the Highlands,

but they were 'laid down by a practical soldier, and destined for

warlike purposes, with scarcely any view towards the ends for which

free and peaceful citizens open up a system of internal transit,'

_Burton's History of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 255. See also _Chalmers'

Caledonia_, vol. ii. p. 36. This is confirmed by the fact, that even

between Inverness and Edinburgh, 'until 1755, the mail was conveyed

by men on foot.' Account of Inverness-shire, in _M^cCulloch's

British Empire_, London, 1847, vol. i. p. 299; to which I may add,

that in _Anderson's Essay on the Highlands_, Edinburgh, 1827, pp.

119, 120, it is stated, that 'A postchaise was first seen in

Inverness itself in 1760, and was, for a considerable time, the only

four-wheeled carriage in the district.' As to the communications in

the country about Perth, see _Penny's Traditions of Perth_, pp. 131,

132, Perth, 1836; and as to those from Aberdeen to Inverness, and

from Aberdeen to Edinburgh, see _Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen_, vol.

ii. pp. 269, 270, London, 4to, 1818.

The history of the improvement of the roads during the latter half

of the eighteenth century, has never been written; but it is of the

greatest importance for its intellectual results, in causing

national fusion, as well as for its economical results, in helping

trade. Some idea may be formed of the extraordinary energy displayed

by Scotland in this matter, by comparing the following passages:

_Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. ii. pp. 494, 865, 939, vol. iii. pp.

599, 799; _Crawfurd's History of the Shire of Renfrew_, part ii. pp.

128, 160; _Irving's History of Dumbartonshire_, pp. 245, 246;

_Sinclair's Statistical Account of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 109, 210,

367, 430, 496; vol. ii. p. 498; vol. iii. pp. 331, 352, 353; vol.

iv. p. 313; vol. v. pp. 128, 234, 235, 315, 364, 365; vol. vi.

pp. 107, 154, 180, 458; vol. vii. pp. 135, 251, 275, 299, 417; vol.

viii. pp. 81, 243, 344, 345, 541; vol. ix. pp. 414, 530; vol. x.

pp. 221, 237, 238, 466, 618; vol. xi. pp. 127, 380, 418, 432, 522,

541; vol. xii. p. 59; vol. xiii. pp. 42, 141, 488, 542, 663; vol.

xiv. pp. 217, 227, 413, 443, 466, 506; vol. xv. pp. 54, 88, 276;

vol. xvi. p. 120; vol. xvii. pp. 5, 267, 297, 377, 533; vol. xviii.

p. 309; vol. xx. p. 156.

[4] I use the word Highlands, in the common, though improper, sense of

including all Scotland from the Pentland Firth to the beginning of

the mountains, a few miles north of Glasgow, Stirling, Perth, and

Dundee. All such distinctions are necessarily somewhat vague,

because the boundaries of nature are never clearly marked. Compare

_Macky's Scotland_, p. 124, London, 1732, with _Anderson's Guide to

the Highlands_, Edinburgh, 1847, pp. 17, 18.

The earliest fact with which we are acquainted respecting the history of

Scotland, is the Roman invasion under Agricola, late in the first

century. But neither his conquests, nor those of his successors, made

any permanent impression. The country was never really subjugated, and

nothing was effected except a military occupation, which, in spite of the

erection of numerous forts, walls, and ramparts, left the spirit of the

inhabitants unbroken. Even Severus, who, in the year 209, undertook the

last and most important expedition against Scotland, does not appear to

have penetrated beyond the Firth of Moray;[5] and directly he retired,

the natives were again in arms, and again independent. After this,

nothing was attempted upon a scale large enough to give a chance of

success. Indeed, the Romans, far from being equal to such an effort, were

themselves deteriorating. In their best days, their virtues were the

virtues of barbarians, and even those they were now about to lose. From

the beginning, their scheme of life was so one-sided and imperfect, that

the increase of wealth, which improves the civilization of really

civilized countries, was to the Romans an irreparable mischief; and they

were corrupted by luxury, instead of being refined by it. In our time, if

we compare the different nations of Europe, we find that the richest are

also the most powerful, the most humane, and the most happy. We live in

that advanced state of society, in which wealth is both the cause and the

effect of progress, while poverty is the fruitful parent of weakness, of

misery, and of crime. But the Romans, when they ceased to be poor, began

to be vicious. So unstable was the foundation of their greatness, that

the very results which their power produced, were fatal to the power

itself. Their empire gave them wealth, and their wealth overthrew their

empire. Their national character, notwithstanding its apparent strength,

was in truth of so frail a texture, that it was ruined by its own

development. As it grew, it dwarfed. Hence it was, that, in the third and

fourth centuries, their hold on mankind visibly slackened. Their

authority being undermined, other nations, of course, stepped in; so that

the inroads of those strange tribes which came pouring from the north,

and to whose appearance the final catastrophe is often ascribed, were at

best the occasion, but by no means the cause, of the fall of the Roman

Empire. Towards that great and salutary event, every thing had long been

pointing. The scourgers and oppressors of the world, whom a false and

ignorant sympathy has invested with noble qualities which they never

possessed, had now to look to themselves; and when, after receding on all

sides, they, in the middle of the fifth century, withdrew their forces

from the whole of Britain, they merely executed a movement, which a train

of circumstances, continued through several generations, had made

inevitable.

[5] Browne (_History of the Highlands_, vol. i. p. 33) says that 'he

traversed the whole of North Britain, from the wall of Antoninus to

the very extremity of the island.' The same thing is stated in

_Pennant's Scotland_, vol. i. p. 90. Neither of these writers quote

their authority for this; but they probably relied on a passage in

_Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum Historia_, lib. iv. p. 94. 'Neque tamen

desideratis quinquaginta millibus (ut scribit Dion) prius ab

inc[oe]pto destiterunt, quam ad finem insulæ penetrassent.' I

believe, however, that Scotch antiquaries are now agreed that this

is wrong, as Chalmers was one of the first to perceive. See his

_Caledonia_, vol. i. p. 187; a very valuable and learned, but

unhappily ill-arranged, book, and written in a style which is

absolutely afflicting. See also _Irving's History of

Dumbartonshire_, 4to, 1860, p. 14.

It is at this point that we begin to discern the operation of those

physical and geographical peculiarities which I have mentioned as

influencing the fortunes of Scotland. The Romans, gradually losing

ground, the proximity of Ireland caused repeated attacks from that

fertile island, whose rich soil and great natural advantages gave rise to

an exuberant, and therefore a restless, population. An overflow, which,

in civilized times, is an emigration, is, in barbarous times, an

invasion. Hence the Irish, or Scotti as they were termed, established

themselves by force of arms in the west of Scotland, and came into

collision with the Picts, who occupied the eastern part. A deadly

struggle ensued, which lasted four centuries after the withdrawal of the

Romans, and plunged the country into the greatest confusion. At length,

in the middle of the ninth century, Kenneth M'Alpine, king of the

Scotti, gained the upper hand, and reduced the Picts to complete

submission.[6] The country was now united under one rule; and the

conquerors, slowly absorbing the conquered, gave their name to the whole,

which, in the tenth century, received the appellation of Scotland.[7]

[6] The history of Scotland, in this period, is in great confusion, and

perhaps will never be recovered. For the statements made in the

text, I have chiefly used the following authorities: _Fordun's

Scotichronicon_, vol. i.; _Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum Historia_,

lib. v. pp. 121-132, and the beginning of the sixth book. Also

various parts of _Bede_; _Pinkerton's Enquiry into the Early History

of Scotland_; _Chalmers' Caledonia_; the first volume of _Browne's

History of the Highlands_; and, above all, Mr. Skene's acute and

learned work on the Highlanders. In the last-named book, the western

boundary of the Picts is traced with great ingenuity, though perhaps

with some uncertainty. _Skene's Highlanders of Scotland_, vol. i.

pp. 26-33, London, 1837.

[7] Here, again, we are involved in doubt; it being uncertain when the

name Scotia was first applied to Scotland. The date, therefore,

which I have given, is only intended as an approximative truth. In

arriving at it, I have compared the following different, and often

conflicting, passages: _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. i. p. 339.

_Browne's History of the Highlands_, vol. i. p. 34. _Pinkerton's

Enquiry into the Early History of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 253, 254,

vol. ii. pp. 151, 228, 237, 240. _Spottiswoode's History of the

Church of Scotland_, edit. Russell, 1851, vol. i. p. 16, note,

where, however, Pinkerton's authority is appealed to for an

assertion which he did not make. _Skene's Highlanders_, vol. i. pp.

45, 61, 244. _Anderson's Prize Essay on the Highlands_, p. 34.

But the kingdom was to have no rest. For, in the mean time,

circumstances, which it would be tedious to relate, had raised the

inhabitants of Norway to be the greatest maritime power in Europe. The

use which that nation of pirates made of their strength, forms another

and a very important link in the history of Scotland, and moreover

illustrates the immense weight, which, in an early period of society,

should be assigned to mere geographical considerations. The nearest land

to the centre of the long coast of Norway is the Shetland Isles, whence

it is an easy sail to the Orkneys. The northern pirates naturally seized

these small, but, to them, most useful islands, and, as naturally, made

them intermediate stations, from which they could conveniently pillage

the coasts of Scotland. Being constantly reinforced from Norway, they, in

the ninth and tenth centuries, advanced from the Orkneys, made permanent

settlements in Scotland itself, and occupied not only Caithness, but also

great part of Sutherland. Another body of them got possession of the

Western Islands; and as Skye is only separated from the mainland by a

very narrow channel, these pirates easily crossed over, and fixed

themselves in Western Ross.[8] From their new abodes, they waged

incessant and destructive war against every district within their reach;

and, keeping a large part of Scotland in constant alarm, they, for about

three centuries, prevented the possibility of its social improvement.

Indeed, that unhappy country was never free from the dangers of Norwegian

invasion, until the failure of the last great attack, in 1263, when Haco

left Norway with a prodigious armament, which he further strengthened by

reinforcements from the Orkneys and Hebrides. Scotland could offer but

little resistance. Haco, with his allies, sailed along the western coast

to the Mull of Kentire, wasted the country with fire and sword, took

Arran and Bute, entered the Firth of Clyde, suddenly fell upon Loch

Lomond, destroyed all the property on its shores and on its islands,

ravaged the whole county of Stirling, and threatened to descend with all

his force upon Ayrshire. Fortunately, the inclemency of the weather broke

up this great expedition, and scattered or destroyed the entire fleet.[9]

After its dispersal, the course of affairs in Norway prevented the

attempt from being renewed; and danger from that quarter being over, it

might have been hoped that Scotland would now enjoy peace, and would have

leisure to develop the natural resources which she possessed,

particularly those in the southern and more favoured districts.

[8] _Pinkerton's Enquiry into the Early History of Scotland_, vol. i.

pp. 136, 317, vol. ii. pp. 179, 298. _Skene's Highlanders_, vol. i.

pp. 90, 91, 94, 106, 114, 258, 259. _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. i.

pp. 340-347.

[9] _Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 38-54. The account in

_Hollinshead's Scottish Chronicle_, vol. i. pp. 399-403, ascribes

too much to the prowess of the Scotch, and too little to the

elements which dispersed the fleet. Compare _Irving's History of

Dumbartonshire_, second edition, 4to, 1860, pp. 48, 49.

This, however, was not to be. For, scarcely were the attacks from Norway

at an end, when those from England began. Early in the thirteenth

century, the lines of demarcation which separated Normans from Saxons,

were, in our country, becoming so obliterated, that in many cases it was

impossible to distinguish them.[10] By the middle of the same century,

the two races were fused into one powerful nation; and, as that nation

had a comparatively feeble neighbour, it was certain that the stronger

people would try to oppress the weaker.[11] In an ignorant and barbarous

age, military success is preferred to all other kinds of fame; and the

English, greedy for conquest, set their eyes upon Scotland, which they

were sure to invade at the first opportunity. That Scotland was near,

made it tempting; that it was believed to be defenceless, made the

temptation irresistible. In 1290, Edward I. determined to avail himself

of the confusion into which Scotland was thrown by disputes respecting

the succession of the crown. The intrigues which followed, need not be

related; it is enough to say, that, in 1296, the sword was drawn, and

Edward invaded a country which he had long desired to conquer. But he

little recked of the millions of treasure, and the hundreds of thousands

of lives, which were to be squandered, before that war was over.[12] The

contest that ensued was of unexampled length and severity; and in its sad

course, the Scotch, notwithstanding their heroic resistance, and the

victories they occasionally gained, had to endure every evil which could

be inflicted by their proud and insolent neighbour. The darling object of

the English, was to subjugate the Scotch; and if anything could increase

the disgrace of so base an enterprise, it would be that, having

undertaken it, they ignominiously failed.[13] The suffering, however, was

incalculable, and was aggravated by the important fact, that it was

precisely the most fertile part of Scotland which was most exposed to the

English ravages. This, as we shall presently see, produced some very

curious results on the national character; and for that reason, I will,

without entering into many details, give a slight summary of the more

immediate consequences of this long and sanguinary struggle.

[10] _Buckle's History of Civilization_, vol. ii. pp. 116, 117.

[11] In _Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 18, 'the early part

of the reign' of Alexander III. is indicated as the period in which

'the first approaches were made towards the great plan for the

reduction of Scotland, by the English.' Alexander III. came to the

throne in 1249. Earlier, the feeling was very different. Thus, late

in the twelfth century, 'the two nations, according to Fordun,

seemed one people; Englishmen travelling at pleasure through all

the corners of Scotland (?); and Scotchmen in like manner through

England.' _Ridpath's Border History_, p. 76. Compare _Dalrymple's

Annals of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 158. At that time, England, being

weak, was peaceably disposed.

[12] An old Scotch writer says, with some exaggeration, 'The year 1296,

at which tyme, the bloodyest and longest warr that ever was betwixt

two nationes fell out, and continued two hundreth and sextie years,

to the undoeing and ruineing of many noble families, with the

slaughter of a million of men.' _Somerville's Memorie of the

Somervilles_, vol. i. p. 61.

[13] See some just and biting remarks in _Hume's History of the House

of Douglas_, vol. i. p. 85.

In 1296, the English entered Berwick, the richest town Scotland

possessed, and not only destroyed all the property, but slew nearly all

the inhabitants.[14] They then marched on to Aberdeen and Elgin; and so

completely desolated the country, that the Scotch, flying to the

mountains, and stripped of their all, had no resource left but to wage

from their native fastnesses a war similar to that which their savage

ancestors, twelve centuries earlier, had conducted against the

Romans.[15] In 1298, the English again broke in, burnt Perth and St.

Andrews, and ravaged the whole territory south and west.[16] In 1310,

they invaded Scotland by the eastern march, and carrying off such

provisions as were left, caused so terrible a dearth, that the people

were forced to feed on horses and other carrion.[17] All over southern

Scotland, both east and west, the inhabitants were now reduced to a

horrible condition, being for the most part houseless and starved. In

1314, made desperate by their state, they rallied for a moment, and, in

the battle of Bannockburn, gloriously defeated their oppressors. But

their unrelenting enemy was at hand, and pressed them so hard, that, in

1322, Bruce, in order to baffle an English invasion, was obliged to lay

waste all the districts south of the Firth of Forth; the people taking

refuge, as before, in the mountains.[18] This time, therefore, when

Edward II. reached Edinburgh, he plundered nothing, because, the country

being a desert, there was nothing to plunder; but, on his return, he did

what he could, and meeting with some convents, which were the only signs

of life that he encountered, he fell upon them, robbed the monasteries of

Melrose and Holyrood, burnt the abbey of Dryburgh, and slew those monks

who, from age or disease, were unable to escape.[19] In 1336, the next

king, Edward III., equipped a numerous army, devastated the Lowlands,

and great part of the Highlands, and destroyed every thing he could find,

as far as Inverness.[20] In 1346, the English overran the districts of

Tweeddale, the Merse, Ettrick, Annandale, and Galloway;[21] and in 1355,

Edward, in a still more barbarous inroad, burnt every church, every

village, and every town he approached.[22] And scarcely were these

frightful losses somewhat repaired, when another storm burst upon the

devoted land. In 1385, Richard II. traversed the southern counties to

Aberdeen, scattering destruction on every side, and reducing to ashes the

cities of Edinburgh, Dunfermline, Perth, and Dundee.[23]

[14] 'Anno gratiæ MCCXCVI. tertio kalendas Aprilis, villa et castro de

Berevvico, per magnificum regem Angliæ Eadvvardum captis, omnes

ibidem inuentos Angli gladio occiderunt, paucis exceptis, qui ipsam

villam postmodum abiurar[=u]t.' _Flores Historiarum per Matthæum

Westmonasteriensem collecti_, Lond. 1570, folio, lib. ii. p. 403.

'Atque modo prædicto villâ captâ, civibus prostratis, rex Angliæ

prædictus nulli ætati parcens aut sexui, duobus diebus rivulis de

cruore occisorum fluentibus, septem millia et quingentas animas

promiscui sexûs jusserat, in sua tyrannide desæviens, trucidari.'

_Fordun's Scotichronicon, curâ Goodall_, Edinb. 1775, folio, vol.

ii. pp. 159, 160. 'Secutus Rex cum peditum copiis miserabilem omnis

generis cædem edit.' _Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum Historia_,

Abredoniæ, 1762, lib. viii. p. 200. 'They left not one creature

alive of the Scotish blood within all that toune.' _Hollinshead's

Scottish Chronicle_, Arbroath, 1805, 4to, vol. i. p. 418. In 1286,

that is, only ten years earlier, 'No other part of Scotland, in

point of commercial importance, came near to a comparison with

Berwick.' _Macpherson's Annals of Commerce_, London, 4to, 1805,

vol. i. p. 446. Such were the brutal crimes of our wretched and

ignorant ancestors.

[15] 'The Scots assembled in troops and companies, and betaking

themselves to the woods, mountains, and morasses, in which their

fathers had defended themselves against the Romans, prepared for a

general insurrection against the English power.' _Scott's History

of Scotland_, London, 1830, vol. i. p. 70. Elgin appears to have

been the most northern point of this expedition. See _Tytler's

History of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 119, and _Chalmers' Caledonia_,

vol. i. p. 657. The general results are summed up by Buchanan:

'Hanc stragem ex agrorum incultu consecuta est fames, et famem

pestis, unde major quàm è bello clades timebatur.' _Rerum

Scoticarum Historia_, lib. viii. p. 203.

[16] 'The army then advanced into Scotland by moderate marches, wasting

and destroying every thing on their way.' ... 'A party of Edward's

army, sent northwards, wasted the country, and burnt Perth and

Saint Andrews.' _Ridpath's Border History_, pp. 146, 147.

[17] 'The king entered Scotland by the eastern march with a great army.'

... 'There was this year so terrible a dearth and scarcity of

provisions in Scotland, arising from the havoc of war, that many

were obliged to feed on the flesh of horses and other carrion.'

_Ibid._ pp. 164, 165. See also _Fordun's Scotichronicon_, vol. ii.

pp. 242, 243. 'Quo anno, propter guerrarum discrimina, tanta erat

panis inopia et victualium caristia in Scotia, quòd in plerisque

locis, compellente famis necessitate, multi carnibus equorum et

aliorum pecorum immundorum vescebantur.'

[18] Bruce 'carefully laid the whole borders waste as far as the Firth

of Forth, removing the inhabitants to the mountains, with all their

effects of any value. When the English army entered, they found a

land of desolation, which famine seemed to guard.' _Scott's History

of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 145. See also _Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum

Historia_, lib. viii. p. 218.

[19] 'Eadwardus, rex Angliæ, intravit Scotiam cum magno exercitu equitum

et peditum, ac navium multitudine copiosa, duodecimo die mensis

Augusti, et usque villam de Edinburgh pervenit.' ... 'Spoliatis

tamen tunc in reditu Anglorum et prædatis monasteriis Sanctæ Crucis

de Edinburgh et de Melros, atque ad magnam desolationem perductis.

In ipso namque monasterio de Melros dominus Willelmus de Peblis,

ejusdem monasterii Prior, unus etiam monachus tunc infirmus, et duo

conversi cæci effecti, in dormitorio eorundem ab eisdem Anglis sunt

interfecti, et plures monachi lethaliter vulnerati. Corpus

Dominicum super magnum altare fuit projectum, ablatâ pixide

argenteâ in quâ erat repositum. Monasterium de Driburgh igne

penitùs consumptum est et in pulverem redactum. Ac _alia pia loca

quamplurima_ per prædicti regis violentiam ignis flamma consumpsit:

quod, Deo retribuente, eisdem in prosperum non cessit.' _Fordun's

Scotichronicon_, vol. ii. p. 278. 'In redeundo sacra juxta ac

prophana spoliata. Monasteria Driburgum et Mulrossia etiam cæsis

monachis infirmioribus, qui vel defectu virium, vel senectutis

fiducia soli remanserant, incensa,' _Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum

Historia_, lib. viii. p. 219.

[20] _Fordun's Scotichronicon_, vol. ii. pp. 322, 323. _Dalrymple's

Annals_, vol. ii. pp. 232, 447. _Scott's History of Scotland_,

vol. i. pp. 187, 188.

[21] _Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 451.

[22] _Dalrymple's Annals_, vol. ii. p. 288. _Fordun's Scotichronicon_,

vol. ii. pp. 352-354.

[23] 'Rex Angliæ, Richardus secundus ægrè ferens Scotos et Francos tam

atrociter terram suam deprædare, et municipia sua assilire et ad

terram prosternere, exercitum collegit grandem, et intravit

Scotiam, ætate tunc novemdecim annorum, in multitudine superba

progrediens, omnia circumquaque perdens, et nihil salvans; templa

Dei et sanctuaria religiosorum monasteria viz. Driburgh, Melros et

Newbottel, ac nobilem villam de Edinburgh, cum ecclesia Sancti

Ægidii ejusdem, voraci flammâ incineravit; et, destructione

permaximâ factâ per eum in Laudonia, ad propria sine damno

repatriavit' _Fordun's Scotichronicon_, vol. ii. p. 401. 'En ce

séjour que le roi Richard fit en Haindebourch les Anglois coururent

tout le pays d'environ et y firent moult de desrois; mais nullui

n'y trouvèrent; car tout avoient retrait ens ès forts, et ens ès

grands bois, et là chassé tout leur bétail.' ... 'Et ardirent les

Anglois la ville de Saint-Jean-Ston en Ecosse, où la rivière du Tay

cuert, et y a un bon port pour aller partout le monde; et puis la

ville de Dondie; et n'épargnoient abbayes ni moûtiers; tout

mettoient les Anglois en feu et en flambe; et coururent jusques à

Abredane les coureurs et l'avant-garde.' _Les Chroniques de

Froissart_, edit. Buchon, vol. ii. pp. 334, 335, Paris, 1835. See

also, on this ruffianly expedition, _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. ii.

pp. 592, 593, and _Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum Historia_, lib. ix.

p. 253: 'Nulli loco, neque sacro, neque profano, nulli homini, qui

modò militari esset ætate, parcebat.'

By these disasters, the practice of agriculture was every where

interrupted, and in many places ceased for several generations.[24] The

labourers either fled, or were murdered; and there being no one to till

the ground, some of the fairest parts of Scotland were turned into a

wilderness, overgrown with briers and thickets. Between the invasions, a

few of the inhabitants, taking courage, issued from the mountains, and

raised wretched huts in the place of their former abodes. But, even then,

they were pursued to their very doors by wolves, searching for food, and

maddened with hunger. If they escaped from these famished and ferocious

animals, they and their families were exposed to a danger still more

horrible. For, in those terrible days, when famine stalked abroad,

despair perverted the souls of men, and drove them to new crime. There

were cannibals in the land; and we have it on contemporary authority,

that a man and his wife, who were at length brought to justice, subsisted

during a considerable period on the bodies of children, whom they caught

alive in traps, devouring their flesh, and drinking their blood.[25]

[24] 'Agriculture was ruined; and the very necessaries of life were lost,

when the principal lords had scarcely a bed to lye on.' _Chalmers'

Caledonia_, vol. ii. p. 142. See also, in p. 867 of the same volume

of this learned work, some curious extracts from Scotch charters

and other sources, illustrating the horrible condition of the

country. And on the difficulty of obtaining food, compare _Fordun's

Scotichronicon_, vol. ii. pp. 242, 324; _Dalrymple's Annals_, vol.

i. p. 307, vol. ii. pp. 238, 330; and _Tytler's History of

Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 94.

[25] Notices of Scotch cannibals will be found in _Lindsay of

Pitscottie's Chronicles of Scotland_, edit. 1814, vol. i. p. 163;

and in _Hollinshead's Scottish Chronicle_, 4to, 1805, vol. ii. pp.

16, 99. In _Fordun's Scotichronicon_, vol. ii. p. 331, the

following horrible account is given: it refers to the neighbourhood

of Perth in the year 1339: 'Tota illa patria circumvicina eo

tempore in tantum fuit vastata, quòd non remansit quasi domus

inhabitata, sed feræ et cervi de montanis descendentes circa villam

sæpiùs venabantur. Tanta tunc temporis facta est caristia, et

victualium inopia, ut passim plebicula deficeret, et tanquam oves

herbas depascentes, in foveis mortua reperirentur. Prope illinc in

abditis latitabat quidam robustus rusticus, Crysticleik nomine, cum

viragine sua, qui mulierculis et pueris ac juvenibus insidiabantur,

et, tanquam lupi eos strangulantes, de ipsorum carnibus

victitabant.'

Thus the fourteenth century passed away. In the fifteenth century, the

devastations of the English became comparatively rare; and although the

borders were the scene of constant hostilities,[26] there is no instance,

since the year 1400, of any of our kings invading Scotland.[27] An end

being put to those murderous expeditions, which reduced the country to a

desert, Scotland drew breath, and began to recover her strength.[28] But,

though the material losses were gradually repaired; though the fields

were again cultivated, and the towns rebuilt, there were other

consequences, which were less easy to remedy, and from whose effects the

people long smarted. These were inordinate power of the nobles, and the

absence of the municipal spirit. The strength of the nobles, and the

weakness of the citizens, are the most important peculiarities of

Scotland during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; and they, as I am

about to show, were directly encouraged by the ravages committed by the

English troops. We shall, moreover, see that this combination of events

increased the authority of the clergy, weakened the influence of the

intellectual classes, and made superstition more prevalent than it would

otherwise have been. It is in this way, that in Scotland, as in all other

countries, every thing is linked together; nothing is casual or

accidental; and the whole march of affairs is governed by general causes,

which, owing to their largeness and remoteness, often escape attention,

but which, when once recognized, are found to be marked by a simplicity

and uniformity, which are the invariable characteristics of the highest

truths that the mind of man has reached.

[26] Even when the two nations were at peace, the borderers were at war.

See _Ridpath's Border History_, pp. 240, 308, 394; and for other

evidence of this chronic anarchy, compare _Hollinshead's Scottish

Chronicle_, vol. ii. p. 30. _Lesley's History of Scotland_, pp. 40,

52, 67. _Sadler's State Papers_, vol. i. pp. 300, 301, 444, 449.

_State Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII._, 4to, 1836, vol. iv. pp.

366, 370, 569, 570, vol. v. pp. 17, 18, 161. _Historie of James the

Sext_, pp. 21, 91, 146.

[27] In 1400, Henry IV. made 'the last invasion which an English monarch

ever conducted into Scotland.' _Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol.

ii. p. 406. It is said, however, that it was not till the reign of

Elizabeth than an English sovereign 'had the policy to disavow any

claim of sovereignty over Scotland.' _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. i.

p. 650.

[28] But very slowly. Pinkerton (_History of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 166,

167) says: 'The frequent wars between Scotland and England, since

the death of Alexander III., had occasioned to the former country

the loss of more than a century in the progress of civilization.

While in England, only the northern provinces were exposed to the

Scotish incursions, Scotland suffered in its most civilized

departments. It is apparent that in the reign of Alexander III.,

the kingdom was more abundant in the useful arts and manufactures,

than it was in the time of Robert III.'

The first circumstance favourable to the authority of the nobles, was the

structure of the country. Mountains, fens, lakes, and morasses, which

even the resources of modern art have only recently made accessible

supplied the great Scottish chieftains with retreats, in which they could

with impunity defy the power of the crown.[29] The poverty of the soil

also, made it difficult for armies to find means of subsistence; and from

this cause alone, the royal troops were often unable to pursue the

lawless and refractory barons.[30] During the fourteenth century,

Scotland was constantly ravaged by the English; and in the intervals of

their absence, it would have been a hopeless undertaking for any king to

try to repress such powerful subjects, since he would have had to march

through districts so devastated by the enemy, that they no longer yielded

the common necessaries of life. Besides this, the war with the English

lessened the authority of the crown, absolutely as well as relatively.

Its patrimony, lying in the south, was incessantly wasted by the

borderers, and before the middle of the fourteenth century, greatly

deteriorated in value.[31] In 1346, David II. fell into the hands of the

English, and during his captivity of eleven years, the nobles carried all

before them, and affected, says an historian, the style and title of

princes.[32] The longer the war with England continued, the more these

consequences were felt; so that before the close of the fourteenth

century, a few of the leading Scotch families had raised themselves to

such preëminence, that it was evident, either that a deadly struggle must

ensue between them and the crown, or else that the executive government

would have to abdicate its most essential functions, and leave the

country a prey to these headstrong and ferocious chiefs.[33]

[29] Owing to this, their castles were, by position, the strongest in

Europe; Germany alone excepted. Respecting their sites, which were

such as to make them in many instances almost unassailable, see

_Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. ii. pp. 122, 406, 407, 918, 919, vol.

iii. pp. 268, 269, 356-359, 864; _Pennant's Scotland_, vol. i. pp.

175, 177; _Sinclair's Scotland_, vol. iii. p. 169, vol. vii. p.

510, vol. xi. pp. 102, 212, 407, 408, vol. xii. pp. 25, 58, vol.

xiii. p. 598, vol. xv. p. 187, vol. xvi. p. 554, vol. xviii. p.

579, vol. xix. p. 474, vol. xx. pp. 56, 312; _Macky's Scotland_,

pp. 183, 297; and some good remarks in _Nimmo's History of

Stirlingshire_, p. 56. Neither England, nor France, nor Italy, nor

Spain, afforded such immense natural advantages to their

aristocracy.

[30] 'By retiring to his own castle, a mutinous baron could defy the

power of his sovereign, it being almost impracticable to lead an

army through a barren country, to places of difficult access to a

single man.' _History of Scotland_, book i. p. 59, in _Robertson's

Works_, edit. London, 1831. Notwithstanding the immense materials

which have been brought to light since the time of Robertson, his

_History of Scotland_ is still valuable; because he possessed a

grasp of mind which enabled him to embrace general views, that

escape ordinary compilers, however industrious they may be.

[31] 'The patrimony of the Crown had been seriously dilapidated during

the period of confusion which succeeded the battle of Durham,'

_Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 86.

[32] 'During the long captivity of David,' the nobles had been completely

insubordinate, and 'affected the style and title of princes,'

_Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 85. See also, on the

state of the barons under David II., _Skene's Highlanders_,

vol. ii. pp. 63-67.

[33] In 1299, 'a superior baron was in every respect a king in

miniature.' _Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 150. In

1377, 'the power of the barons had been decidedly increasing since

the days of Robert the First,' p. 332. And, by 1398, it had risen

still higher, p. 392.

At this crisis, the natural allies of the throne would have been the

citizens and free burgesses, who in most European countries were the

eager and resolute opponents of the nobles, whose licentious habits

interfered not only with their trade and manufactures, but also with

their personal liberty. Here again, however, the long war with England

was favourable to the aristocracy of Scotland. For, as the invaders

ravaged the southern parts of Scotland, which were also the only

tolerably fertile parts, it was impossible that towns should flourish in

the places which nature had appointed for them. There being no large

cities, there was no asylum for the citizens, and there could be no

municipal spirit. There being no municipal spirit, the crown was deprived

of that great resource, which enabled the English kings to curtail the

power of the nobles, and to punish a lawlessness which long impeded the

progress of society.

During the middle ages, the Scotch towns were so utterly insignificant,

that but few notices have been preserved of them; contemporary writers

concentrating their attention upon the proceedings of the nobles and

clergy. Respecting the people, who found shelter in such miserable cities

as then existed, our best accounts are very imperfect; it is, however,

certain that, during the long English wars, the inhabitants usually fled

at the approach of the invaders, and the wretched hovels in which they

lived were burned to the ground.[34] Hence the population acquired a

fluctuating and vagabond character, which prevented the formation of

settled habits of industry, and thus took away one reason which men have

for congregating together. This applied more especially to the southern

Lowlands; for the north, there were other evils equally threatening. The

ferocious Highlanders, who lived entirely by plunder, were constantly at

hand; and to them were not unfrequently added the freebooters of the

Western Isles. Any thing which bore even the semblance of wealth, was an

irresistible excitement to their cupidity. They could not know that a man

had property, without longing to steal it; and, next to stealing, their

greatest pleasure was to destroy.[35] Aberdeen and Inverness were

particularly exposed to their assaults; and twice during the fifteenth

century, Inverness was totally consumed by fire, besides having to pay at

other times a heavy ransom, to save itself from a similar fate.[36]

[34] On this burning of Scotch towns, which appears to have been the

invariable practice of our humane forefathers, see _Chalmers'

Caledonia_, vol. ii. pp. 592, 593; _Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen_,

vol. i. pp. 18, 27, 375, vol. ii. p. 304; _Mercer's History of

Dunfermline_, pp. 55, 66; _Sinclair's Scotland_, vol. v. p. 485,

vol. x. p. 584, vol. xix. p. 161; _Ridpath's Border History_,

pp. 147, 221, 265.

[35] A curious description of them is given in a Scotch statute, of the

year 1597. 'They hawe lykwayis throche thair barbarus inhumunitie

maid and presentlie makis the saidis hielandis and Iles qlk are

maist c[=o]modious in thame selwes alsueill be the ferteillitie of

the ground as be riche fischeingis altogidder vnproffitabill baithe

to thame selffis and to all vthuris his hienes liegis within this

realme; Thay nathair intertening onie ciuill or honest societie

amangis thame selffis neyther, zit admittit vtheris his hienesse

lieges to trafficque within thair boundis vithe saiftie of thair

liues and gudes; for remeid quhairof and that the saidis

inhabitantis of the saidis hilandeis and Iles may the better be

reduced to ane godlie, honest, and ciuill maner of living, it is

statute and ordanit,' &c. _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_,

vol. iv. p. 138, edit. folio, 1816.

These little peculiarities of the Highlanders remained in full

force until about the middle of the eighteenth century, as will

appear in the course of this history. But without anticipating what

will be narrated in a subsequent chapter, I will merely refer the

reader to two interesting passages in _Pennant's Scotland_, vol. i.

p. 154, and in _Heron's Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 218, 219; both of

which illustrate the state of things a little before 1745.

[36] Inverness was burned in 1429. _Gregory's History of the Western

Highlands_, p. 36; and again in 1455, _Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum

Historia_, lib. xi. p. 322. 'The greatest part' of it was also

burned in 1411. See _Anderson on the Highlands_, Edinb. 1827,

p. 82.

Aberdeen, being richer, was more tempting, but was likewise more

able to defend itself. Still, its burgh records supply curious

evidence of the constant fear in which the citizens lived, and of

the precautions which they took to ward off the attacks, sometimes

of the English, and sometimes of the clans. See the _Council

Register of Aberdeen_ (published by the Spalding Club, Aberdeen,

1844-1848, 4to), vol. i. pp. 8, 19, 60, 83, 197, 219, 232, 268,

vol. ii. p. 82. The last entry, which is dated July 31, 1593,

mentions 'the disordourit and lawles helandmen in Birss,

Glentanner, and their about, nocht onlie in the onmerciful

murthering of men and bairnis, bot in the maisterfull and violent

robbing and spulzeing of all the bestiall, guidis, and geir of a

gryt pairt of the inhabitantis of theas boundis, rasing of gryt

hairschip furth of the samen, being committit to ewous and nar this

burgh, within xx mylis theirunto, deuysit and ordanit for

preservation of this burgh and inhabitantis theirof, fra the

tyrannous invasion of the saidis hieland men, quha has na respect

to God nor man; that the haill inhabitantis of this burgh,

fensiball persones als weill onfrie as frie, salbe in reddiness

weill armit for the defence of this burgh, thair awin lyvis, gudis,

and geir, and resisting and repressing of the said heland men, as

occasioun salbe offered, at all tymes and houris as thay salbe

requirt and chargit.'

Even in 1668 we find complaints that Highlanders had forcibly

carried off women from Aberdeen or from its neighbourhood. _Records

of the Synod of Aberdeen_, p. 290. Other evidence of their attacks

in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, may be seen in

_Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen_, vol. i. p. 133; _Spalding's History

of the Troubles_, vol. i. pp. 25, 217; _Extracts from the

Presbytery Book of Strathbogie_, pp. 62, 73.

Such insecurity[37] both on the north and on the south, made peaceful

industry impossible in any part of Scotland. No where could a town be

built, without being in danger of immediate destruction. The consequence

was, that, during many centuries, there were no manufactures; there was

hardly any trade; and nearly all business was conducted by barter.[38]

Some of the commonest arts were unknown. The Scotch were unable to make

even the arms with which they fought. This, among such a warlike people,

would have been a very profitable labour; but they were so ignorant of

it, that, early in the fifteenth century, most of the armour which they

wore was manufactured abroad, as also were their spears, and even their

bows and arrows; and the heads of these weapons were entirely imported

from Flanders.[39] Indeed, the Flemish artizans supplied the Scotch with

ordinary farming implements, such as cart-wheels and wheel-barrows,

which, about the year 1475, used to be regularly shipped from the Low

Countries.[40] As to the arts which indicate a certain degree of

refinement, they were then, and long afterwards, quite out of the

question.[41] Until the seventeenth century, no glass was manufactured in

Scotland,[42] neither was any soap made there.[43] Even the higher class

of citizens would have deemed windows absurd in their wretched

abodes;[44] and as they were alike filthy in their persons as in their

houses, the demand for soap was too small to induce any one to attempt

its manufacture.[45] Other branches of industry were equally backward. In

1620, the art of tanning leather was for the first time introduced into

Scotland;[46] and it is stated, on apparently good authority, that no

paper was made there until about the middle of the eighteenth

century.[47]

[37] Even Perth ceased to be the capital of Scotland, because 'its

vicinity to the Highlands' made it dangerous for the sovereign to

reside there. _Lawson's Book of Perth_, p. xxxi.

[38] On the prevalence of barter and lack of specie, in Scotland, see the

_Spalding Club Miscellany_, vol. iv. pp. lvii.-lx., Aberdeen, 1849,

4to. In 1492, the treasury of Aberdeen was obliged to borrow 4_l._

16_s._ Scots. _Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen_, vol. i. p. 61.

Compare _Sinclair's Statistical Account of Scotland_, vol. x. p.

542. Fynes Moryson, who was in Scotland late in the sixteenth

century, says, 'the gentlemen reckon their revenues not by rents of

money, but by chauldrons of victuals.' _Moryson's Itinerary_, part

iii. p. 155, London, folio, 1617; a rare and extremely curious

book, which ought to be reprinted. A hundred years after Moryson

wrote, it was observed that, 'in England, the rents are paid in

money; in Scotland, they are, generally speaking, paid in kind, or

victual, as they call it.' _De Foe's History of the Union_, p. 130.

[39] In the reign of James I. (1424-1436), 'It appears that armour, nay

spears, and bows and arrows, were chiefly imported.' ... 'In

particular, the heads of arrows and of spears seem to have been

entirely imported from Flanders,' _Pinkerton's History of

Scotland_, vol. i. p. 163. We learn from Rymer's _F[oe]dera_, that,

in 1368, two Scotchmen having occasion to fight a duel, got their

armour from London. _Macpherson's Annals of Commerce_, vol. i.

p. 575.

[40] From the _Bibel of English Policy_, supposed to have been written in

the reign of Edward IV., we learn that 'the Scotish imports from

Flanders were mercery, but more haberdashery, cart-wheels, and

wheel-barrows,' _Pinkerton's History of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 408.

In _Mercer's History of Dunfermline_, p. 61, we are told that, in

the fifteenth century, 'Even in the best parts of Scotland, the

inhabitants could not manufacture the most necessary articles.

Flanders was the great mart in those times, and from Bruges

chiefly, the Scots imported even horse-shoes, harness, saddles,

bridles, cart-wheels, and wheel-barrows, besides all their mercery

and haberdashery.'

[41] Aberdeen was, for a long period, one of the most wealthy,

and, in some respects, the most advanced, of all the Scotch cities.

But it appears, from the council-registers of Aberdeen, that, 'in

the beginning of the sixteenth century, there was not a mechanic in

the town capable to execute the ordinary repairs of a clock,'

_Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen_, vol. i. p. 99. On the Scotch clocks

in the middle of the sixteenth century, compare Mr. Morley's

interesting _Life of Cardan_, London, 1854, vol. ii. p. 128. Cardan

was in Scotland in 1552.

[42] About 1619, Sir George Hay 'set up at the village of Wemyss, in

Fife, a small glass-work, being the first known to have existed

amongst us.' _Chambers' Annals_, vol. i. p. 506. See also p. 428.

[43] 'Before this time, soap was imported into Scotland from foreign

countries, chiefly from Flanders.' _Ibid._, vol. i. p. 507, under

the year 1619, where mention is made of the manufactory set up at

Leith. 'The sope-workes of Leith' are noticed in 1650, in

_Balfour's Annales_, vol. iv. p. 68.

[44] Ray, who visited Scotland in 1661, says, 'In the best Scottish

houses, even the king's palaces, the windows are not glazed

throughout, but the upper part only; the lower have two wooden

shuts or folds to open at pleasure and admit the fresh air.' ...

'The ordinary country-houses are pitiful cots, built of stone, and

covered with turves, having in them but one room, many of them no

chimneys, the windows very small holes and not glazed.' _Ray's

Itineraries_, p. 153, edited by Dr. Lankester, London, 1846. 'About

1752, the glass window was beginning to make its appearance in the

small farm-houses.' _Brown's History of Glasgow_, vol. ii. p. 265,

Edinburgh, 1797.

[45] In 1650, it was stated of the Scotch, that 'many of their women are

so sluttish, that they do not wash their linen above once a month,

nor their hands and faces above once a year.' _Whitelock's

Memorials_, p. 468, London, 1732, folio. Six or seven years after

this, a traveller in Scotland says, 'the linen they supplied us

with, were it not to boast of, was little or nothing different from

those female complexions that never washed their faces to retain

their christendom.' _Franck's Northern Memoirs_, edit. Edinburgh,

1821, p. 94. A celebrated Scotchman notices, in 1698, the uncleanly

habits of his countrymen, but gives a comical reason for them;

since, according to him, they were in a great measure caused by the

position of the capital. 'As the happy situation of London has been

the principal cause of the glory and riches of England, so the bad

situation of Edinburgh has been one great occasion of the poverty

and uncleanliness in which the greater part of the people of

Scotland live.' _Second Discourse on the Affairs of Scotland_, in

_Fletcher of Saltoun's Political Works_, p. 119, Glasgow, 1749.

Another Scotchman, among his reminiscences of the early part of the

eighteenth century, says, that 'table and body linen [were] seldom

shifted.' _Memoires by Sir Archibald Grant of Monymusk_, in

_Spalding Club Miscellany_, vol. ii. p. 100, Aberdeen, 1842, 4to.

Finally, we have positive proof that in some parts of Scotland,

even at the end of the eighteenth century, the people used, instead

of soap, a substitute too disgusting to mention. See the account

communicated by the Rev. William Leslie to Sir John Sinclair, in

_Sinclair's Statistical Account of Scotland_, vol. ix. p. 177,

Edinburgh, 1793.

[46] _Chambers' Annals_, vol. i. p. 512.

[47] A paper-mill was established near Edinburgh in 1675; but 'there is

reason to conclude this paper-mill was not continued, and that

paper-making was not successfully introduced into Scotland till the

middle of the succeeding century.' _Chambers' Annals_, vol. ii. p.

399. I have met with so many proofs of the great accuracy of this

valuable work, that I should be loath to question any statement

made by Mr. Chambers, when, as in this case, I have only my memory

to trust to. But I think that I have seen evidence of paper being

successfully manufactured in Scotland late in the seventeenth

century, though I cannot recall the passages. However, Arnot, in

his _History of Edinburgh_, p. 599, edit. 4to, says, 'About forty

years ago, printing or writing paper began to be manufactured in

Scotland. Before that, papers were imported from Holland, or

brought from England,' As Arnot's work was printed in 1788, this

coincides with Mr. Chambers' statement. I may add, that, at the end

of the eighteenth century, there were 'two paper-mills near Perth.'

_Heron's Journey through Scotland_, vol. i. p. 117, Perth, 1799;

and that, in 1751 and 1763, the two first paper-mills were erected

north of the Forth. _Sinclair's Statistical Account of Scotland_,

vol. ix. p. 593, vol. xvi. p. 373. Compare _Lettice's Letters from

Scotland in 1792_, p. 420.

In the midst of such general stagnation, the most flourishing towns were,

as may be easily supposed, very thinly peopled. Indeed, men had so little

to do, that if they had collected in large numbers, they must have

starved. Glasgow is one of the oldest cities in Scotland, and is said to

have been founded about the sixth century.[48] At all events, in the

twelfth century, it was, according to the measure of that age, a rich and

prosperous place, enjoying the privilege of holding both a market and a

fair.[49] It had also a municipal organization, and was governed by its

own provosts and baillies.[50] Yet, even this famous town had no kind of

trade before the fifteenth century, when the inhabitants began to cure

salmon, and export it.[51] That was the only branch of industry with

which Glasgow was acquainted. We need not, therefore, be surprised at

hearing, that so late as the middle of the fifteenth century, the entire

population did not exceed fifteen hundred persons, whose wealth consisted

of some small cattle, and a few acres of ill-cultivated land.[52]

[48] 'This city was founded about the sixth century.' _M'Ure's History of

Glasgow_, edit. 1830, p. 120. Compare _Denholm's History of

Glasgow_, p. 2, Glasgow, 1804.

[49] In 1172, a market was granted to Glasgow; and in 1190, a fair. See

the charters in the Appendix to _Gibson's History of Glasgow_, pp.

299, 302, Glasgow, 1777.

[50] 'By the sale of land made by Robert de Mythyngby to Mr. Reginald de

Irewyne, A.D. 1268, it is evident that the town was then governed

by provosts, aldermen, or wardens, and baillies, who seem to have

been independent of the bishop, and were possessed of a common

seal, distinct from the one made use of by the bishop and chapter.'

_Gibson's History of Glasgow_, p. 72.

[51] 'A Mr. William Elphinston is made mention of as the first promoter

of trade in Glasgow, so early as the year 1420; the trade which he

promoted was, in all probability, the curing and exporting of

salmon.' _Gibson's History of Glasgow_, p. 203. See also _M'Ure's

History of Glasgow_, p. 93.

[52] Gibson (_History of Glasgow_, p. 74), with every desire to take a

sanguine view of the early state of his own city, says, that, in

1450, the inhabitants 'might perhaps amount to fifteen hundred;'

and that 'their wealth consisted in a few burrow-roods very

ill-cultivated, and in some small cattle, which fed on their

commons.'

Other cities, though bearing a celebrated name, were equally backward at

a still more recent period. Dunfermline is associated with many historic

reminiscences; it was a favourite residence of Scotch kings, and many

Scotch parliaments have been held there.[53] Such events are supposed to

confer distinction; but the illusion vanishes, when we inquire more

minutely into the condition of the place where they happened. In spite of

the pomp of princes and legislators, Dunfermline, which at the end of the

fourteenth century was still a poor village, composed of wooden huts,[54]

had, by the beginning of the seventeenth century, advanced so slowly that

its whole population, including that of its wretched suburbs, did not

exceed one thousand persons.[55] For a Scotch town, that was a

considerable number. About the same time, Greenock, we are assured, was a

village consisting of a single row of cottages, tenanted by poor

fishermen.[56] Kilmarnock, which is now a great emporium of industry and

of wealth, contained, in 1668, between five and six hundred

inhabitants.[57] And, to come down still lower, even Paisley itself, in

the year 1700, possessed a population which, according to the highest

estimate, did not amount to three thousand.[58]

[53] 'Dunfermline continued to be a favourite royal residence as long as

the Scottish dynasty existed. Charles I. was born here; as also his

sister Elizabeth, afterwards Queen of Bohemia, from whom her

present Majesty is descended; and Charles II. paid a visit to this

ancient seat of royalty in 1650. The Scottish parliament was often

held in it.' _M'Culloch's Geographical Dictionary_, London, 1849,

vol. i. p. 723. Compare _Mercer's History of Dunfermline_, 1828,

pp. 56, 58, and _Chalmers' History of Dunfermline_, 1844, p. 264.

[54] In 1385, it was 'only a sorry wooden village, belonging to the

monastery.' _Mercer's History of Dunfermline_, p. 62.

[55] See 'Ms. Annals,' in _Chalmers' History of Dunfermline_, p. 327. In

1624, we learn from _Balfour's Annales_, edit. 1825, vol. ii. p.

99, that 'the quholl bodey of the towne, which did consist of 120

tenements, and 287 families was brunt and consumed.'

[56] 'Greenock, which is now one of the largest shipping towns in

Scotland, was, in the end of the sixteenth century, a mean fishing

village, consisting of a single row of thatched cottages, which was

inhabited by poor fishermen.' _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. iii.

p. 806, 4to, 1824.

[57] In May 1668, Kilmarnock was burnt; and 'the event is chiefly worthy

of notice as marking the smallness of Kilmarnock in those days,

when as yet, there was no such thing as manufacturing industry in

the country. A hundred and twenty families speaks to a population

of between five and six hundred.' _Chambers' Annals_, Edinburgh,

1858, vol. ii. p. 320. In 1658, their houses are described by an

eye-witness as 'little better than huts.' _Franck's Northern

Memoirs_, reprinted Edinburgh, 1821, p. 101.

[58] 'Betwixt two and three thousand souls,' _Denholm's History of

Glasgow_, p. 542, edit. Glasgow, 1804.

Aberdeen, the metropolis of the north, was looked up to as one of the

most influential of the Scotch towns, and was not a little envied during

the Middle Ages, for its power and importance. These, however, like all

other words, are relative, and mean different things at different

periods. Certainly, we shall not be much struck by the magnitude of that

city, when we learn, from calculations made from its tables of mortality,

that so late as 1572, it could only boast of about two thousand nine

hundred inhabitants.[59] Such a fact will dispel many a dream respecting

the old Scotch towns, particularly if we call to mind that it refers to a

date, when the anarchy of the Middle Ages was passing away, and Aberdeen

had for some time been improving. That city--if so miserable a collection

of persons deserves to be termed a city--was, nevertheless, one of the

most densely peopled places in Scotland. From the thirteenth century to

the close of the sixteenth, no where else were so many Scotchmen

assembled together, except in Perth, Edinburgh, and possibly in Saint

Andrews.[60] Respecting Saint Andrews, I have been unable to meet with

any precise information;[61] but of Perth and Edinburgh, some particulars

are preserved. Perth was long the capital of Scotland, and after losing

that preëminence, it was still reputed to be the second city in the

kingdom.[62] Its wealth was supposed to be astonishing; and every good

Scotchman was proud of it, as one of the chief ornaments of his

country.[63] But, according to an estimate recently made by a

considerable authority in these matters, its entire population, in the

year 1585, was under nine thousand.[64] This will surprise many readers;

though, considering the state of society at that time, the real wonder

is, not that there were so few, but that there were so many. For,

Edinburgh itself, notwithstanding the officials and numerous hangers-on,

which the presence of a court always brings, did not contain, late in the

fourteenth century, more than sixteen thousand persons.[65] Of their

general condition, a contemporary observer has left us some account.

Froissart, who visited Scotland, and records what he saw, as well as what

he heard, gives a lamentable picture of the state of affairs. The houses

in Edinburgh were mere huts, thatched with boughs; and were so slightly

put together, that when one of them was destroyed, it only took three

days to rebuild it. As to the people who inhabited these wretched hovels,

Froissart, who was by no means given to exaggeration, assures us, that

the French, unless they had seen them, could not have believed that such

destitution existed, and that now, for the first time, they understood

what poverty really was.[66]

[59] In 1572, the registers of Aberdeen show that seventy-two deaths

occurred in the year. An annual mortality of 1 in 40 would be a

very favourable estimate; indeed, rather too favourable,

considering the habits of the people at that time. However,

supposing it to be 1 in 40, the population would be 2880; and if,

as I make no doubt, the mortality was more than 1 in 40, the

population must of course have been less. Kennedy, in his valuable,

but very uncritical, work, conjectures that 'one fiftieth part of

the inhabitants had died annually;' though it is certain that there

was no town in Europe any thing like so healthy as that. On this

hypothesis, which is contradicted by every sort of statistical

evidence that has come down to us, the number would be 72 × 50 =

3600. See _Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen_, vol. i. p. 103, London,

1818, 4to.

[60] 'St. Andrews, Perth, and Aberdeen, appear to have been the three

most populous cities before the Reformation.' _Lawson's Roman

Catholic Church in Scotland_, 1836, p. 26. The same assertion is

made in _Lyon's History of St. Andrews_, 1843, vol. i. p. 2. But

neither of these writers appear to have made many researches on the

subject, or else they would not have supposed that Aberdeen was

larger than Edinburgh.

[61] I have carefully read the two histories of St. Andrews, by Dr.

Grierson and by Mr. Lyon, but have found nothing in them of any

value concerning the early history of that city. Mr. Lyon's work,

which is in two thick volumes, is unusually superficial, even for a

local history; and that is saying much.

[62] 'Of the thirteen parliaments held in the reign of King James I.,

eleven were held at Perth, one at Stirling, and one at Edinburgh.

The National Councils of the Scottish clergy were held there

uniformly till 1459. Though losing its pre-eminence by the

selection of Edinburgh as a capital, Perth has uniformly and

constantly maintained the second place in the order of burghs, and

its right to do so has been repeatedly and solemnly acknowledged.'

_Penny's Traditions of Perth_, Perth, 1836, p. 231. See also p.

305. It appears, however, from Froissart, that Edinburgh was deemed

the capital in the latter half of the fourteenth century.

[63] I find one instance of its being praised by a man who was not a

Scotchman. Alexander Necham 'takes notice of Perth in the following

distich, quoted in Camden's Britannia:

Transis ample Tai, per rura, per oppida, per Perth:

Regnum sustentant illius urbis opes.

Thus Englished in Bishop Gibson's Translations of Camden's Book:

'Great Tay, through Perth, through towns, through country flies:

Perth the whole kingdom with her wealth supplies.'

_Sinclair's Scotland_, vol. xviii. p. 511.

[64] 1427 × 6 = 8562, the computed population in 1584 and 1585, exclusive

of the extraordinary mortality caused by the plague. _Chambers'

Annals of Scotland_, 1858, vol. i. p. 158.

[65] 'The inhabitants of the capital, in the reign of Robert II., hardly

exceeded sixteen thousand.' _Pinkerton's History of Scotland_,

vol. i. p. 152.

[66] When the French arrived in Edinburgh, the Scotch said, '"Quel diable

les a mandés? Ne savons-nous pas bien faire notre guerre sans eux

aux Anglois? Nous ne ferons jà bonne besogne tant comme ils soient

avec nous. On leur dise que ils s'en revoisent, et que nous sommes

gens assez en Escosse pour parmaintenir notre guerre, et que point

nous ne voulons leur compagnie. Ils ne nous entendent point, ni

nous eux; nous ne savons parler ensemble; ils auront tantôt riflé

et mangé tout ce qui est en ce pays: ils nous feront plus de

contraires, de dépits, et de dommages, si nous les laissons

convenir, que les Anglois ne feroient si ils s'étoient embattus

entre nous sans ardoir. Et si les Anglois ardent nos maisons, que

peut il chaloir? Nous les aurons tantôt refaites à bon marché, nous

n'y mettons au refaire que trois jours, mais que nous ayons quatre

ou six estaches et de la ramée pour lier par dessus."'

'Ainsi disoient les Escots en Escosse à la venue des seigneurs de

France,' ... 'Et quand les Anglois y chevauchent ou que ils y vont,

ainsi que ils y ont été plusieurs fois, il convient que leurs

pourvéances, si ils veulent vivre, les suivent toujours au dos; car

on ne trouve rien sur le pays: à grand'peine y recuevre-l'en du fer

pour serrer les chevaux, ni du cuir pour faire harnois, selles ni

brides. Les choses toutes faites leur viennent par mer de Flandre,

et quand cela leur défaut, ils n'ont nulle chose. Quand ces barons

et ces chevaliers de France qui avoient appris ces beaux hôtels à

trouver, ces salles parées, ces chasteaux et ces bons mols lits

pour reposer, se virent et trouvèrent en celle povreté, si

commencèrent à rire et à dire: "En quel pays nous a ci amenés

l'amiral? Nous ne sçumes oncques que ce fût de povreté ni de dureté

fors maintenant."' _Les Chroniques de Froissart_, edit. Buchon,

Paris, 1835, vol. ii. pp. 314, 315. 'The hovels of the common

people were slight erections of turf, or twigs, which, as they were

often laid waste by war, were built merely for temporary

accommodation. Their towns consisted chiefly of wooden cottages,'

... 'Even as late as 1600, the houses of Edinburgh were chiefly

built of wood.' _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. i. p. 802. Another

account, written in 1670, says, 'The houses of the commonalty are

very mean, mudwall and thatch, the best; but the poorer sort live

in such miserable huts as never eye beheld.' ... 'In some parts,

where turf is plentiful, they build up little cabbins thereof, with

arched roofs of turf, without a stick of timber in it; when the

house is dry enough to burn, it serves them for fuel, and they

remove to another.' _Harleian Miscellany_, vol. vi. p. 139, 4to,

1810.

After this period, there was, no doubt, considerable improvement; but it

was very slow, and even late in the sixteenth century, skilled labour was

hardly known, and honest industry was universally despised.[67] It is

not, therefore, surprising, that the citizens, poor, miserable, and

ignorant, should frequently purchase the protection of some powerful

noble by yielding to him the little independence that they might have

retained.[68] Few of the Scotch towns ventured to elect their chief

magistrate from among their own people; but the usual course was, to

choose a neighbouring peer as provost or baillie.[69] Indeed, it often

happened that his office became hereditary, and was looked upon as the

vested right of some aristocratic family.[70] To the head of that family,

every thing gave way. His authority was so incontestable, that an injury

done even to one of his retainers was resented, as if it had been done to

himself.[71] The burgesses who were sent to parliament, were completely

dependent on the noble who ruled the town. Down to quite modern times,

there was in Scotland no real popular representation. The so-called

representatives were obliged to vote as they were ordered; they were, in

fact, delegates of the aristocracy; and as they possessed no chamber of

their own, they sat and deliberated in the midst of their powerful

masters, by whom they were openly intimidated.[72]

[67] 'Our manufactures were carried on by the meanest of the people, who

had small stocks, and were of no reputation. These were, for the

most part, workmen for home-consumpt, such as masons,

house-carpenters, armourers, blacksmiths, taylors, shoemakers, and

the like. Our weavers were few in number, and in the greatest

contempt, as their employments were more sedentary, and themselves

reckoned less fit for war, in which all were obliged to serve, when

the exigencies of the country demanded their attendance.' _The

Interest of Scotland Considered_, Edinburgh, 1733, p. 82. Pinkerton

(_History of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 392), referring to the Sloane

manuscripts, says, 'The author of an interesting memoir concerning

the state of Scotland about 1590, observes, that the husbandmen

were a kind of slaves, only holding their lands from year to year;

that the nobility being too numerous for the extent of the country,

there arose too great an inequality of rank and revenue; and there

was no middle station between a proud landholder and those who,

having no property to lose, were ready for any tumult. A rich

yeomanry, numerous merchants and tradesmen of property, and all the

denominations of the middle class, so important in a flourishing

society, were long to be confined to England.' Thirteen years

later, we are told that the manufactures of Scotland 'were confined

to a few of the coarsest nature, without which the poorest nations

are unable to subsist.' _Laing's History of Scotland_, vol. iii. p.

7, under the year 1603.

[68] Thus, for instance, 'the town of Dunbar naturally grew up under the

shelter of the castle of the same name.' ... 'Dunbar became the

town, in demesn, of the successive Earls of Dunbar and March,

partaking of their influences, whether unfortunate or happy.'

_Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. ii. p. 416. 'But when the regal

government became at any time feeble, these towns, unequal to their

own protection, placed themselves under the shelter of the most

powerful lord in their neighbourhood. Thus, the town of Elgyn found

it necessary, at various periods between the years 1389 and 1452,

to accept of many charters of protection, and discharges of taxes,

from the Earls of Moray, who held it in some species of vassalage.'

_Sinclair's Scotland_, vol. v. p. 3. Compare _Pinkerton's History

of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 396; and two letters, written in 1543 and

1544, by the magistrates of Aberdeen, to the Earl of Huntly, and

printed in the _Council Register of Aberdeen_, vol. i. pp. 190,

201, Aberdeen, 1844, 4to. They say to him, 'Ye haf our band as

protectour to wss.'

[69] _Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. iv. p. 225. See also p. 131;

and _Pinkerton's History of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 179. Sometimes

the nobles did not leave to the citizens even the appearance of a

free election, but fought it out among themselves. An instance of

this happened at Perth, in 1544, 'where a claim for the office of

provost was decided by arms, between Lord Ruthven on the one side,

supported by a numerous train of his vassals, and Lord Gray, with

Norman Leslie, master of Rothes, and Charteris of Kinfauns, on the

other.' _Tytler_, vol. iv. p. 323.

[70] For illustrations of this custom, see _Hollinshead's Scottish

Chronicle_, vol. ii. p. 230. _Brown's History of Glasgow_, vol. ii.

p. 154. _Denholm's History of Glasgow_, p. 249. _Mercer's History

of Dunfermline_, p. 83.

[71] 'An injury inflicted on the "man" of a nobleman was resented as

much as if he himself had been the injured party.' _Preface to the

Council Register of Aberdeen_, vol. i. p. xii.

[72] See, in _Macaulay's History of England_, vol. i. p. 93, 1st edit., a

spirited description of Scotland in 1639. 'The parliament of the

northern kingdom was a very different body from that which bore the

same name in England.' ... 'The three estates sat in one house. The

commissioners of the burghs were considered merely as retainers of

the great nobles,' &c. To come down much later, Lord Cockburn gives

a terrible account of the state of things in Scotland in 1794, the

year in which Jeffrey was called to the bar. 'There was then, in

this country, no popular representation, no emancipated burghs, no

effective rival of the established church, no independent press, no

free public meetings, and no better trial by jury, even in

political cases (except high treason), than what was consistent

with the circumstances, that the jurors were not sent into court

under any impartial rule, and that, when in court, those who were

to try the case were named by the presiding judge. The Scotch

representatives were only forty-five, of whom thirty were elected

for counties, and fifteen for towns. Both from its price and its

nature (being enveloped in feudal and technical absurdities), the

elective franchise in counties, where alone it existed, was far

above the reach of the whole lower, and of a great majority of the

middle, and of many even of the higher, ranks. There were probably

not above 1500 or 2000 county electors in all Scotland; a body not

too large to be held, hope included, in government's hands. The

return, therefore, of a single opposition member was never to be

expected.' ... 'Of the fifteen town members, Edinburgh returned

one. The other fourteen were produced by clusters of four or five

unconnected burghs electing each one delegate, and these four or

five delegates electing the representative. Whatever this system

may have been originally, it had grown, in reference to the people,

into as complete a mockery as if it had been invented for their

degradation. The people had nothing to do with it. It was all

managed by town-councils, of never more than thirty-three members;

and every town-council was self-elected, and consequently

perpetuated its own interests. The election of either the town or

the county member was a matter of such utter indifference to the

people, that they often only knew of it by the ringing of a bell,

or by seeing it mentioned next day in a newspaper; for the farce

was generally performed in an apartment from which, if convenient,

the public could be excluded, and never in the open air.'

_Cockburn's Life of Jeffrey_, Edinburgh, 1852, vol. i. pp. 74-76.

On the state of Scotch representation between this and the Reform

Bill, compare _Irving's History of Dumbartonshire_, 4to, 1860, pp.

275, 276, with _Moore's Memoirs_, edited by Lord John Russell, vol.

iv. p. 268, vol. vi. p. 163, London, 1853-4.

Under these circumstances, it would have been idle for the crown to have

expected aid from a body of men who themselves had no influence, and

whose scanty privileges existed only on sufferance. But there was another

class, which was extremely powerful, and to which the Scotch kings

naturally turned. That class was the clergy; and the interest which both

parties had in weakening the nobles, caused a coalition between the

church and the throne, against the aristocracy. During a long period, and

indeed until the latter half of the sixteenth century, the kings almost

invariably favoured the clergy, and increased their privileges in every

way they could. The Reformation dissolved this alliance, and gave rise to

new combinations, which I shall presently indicate. But while the

alliance lasted, it was of great use to the clergy, by imparting to their

claims a legitimate sanction, and making them appear the supporters of

order and of regular government. The result, however, clearly proved that

the nobles were more than equal to the confederacy which opposed them.

Indeed, looking at their enormous power, the only wonder is, that the

clergy could have prolonged the contest as they did; since they were not

actually overthrown until the year 1560. That the struggle should have

been so arduous, and should have extended over so considerable a period,

is what, on a superficial view, no one could have expected. The reason of

this, I shall now endeavour to explain; and I shall, I trust, succeed in

proving, that in Scotland there was a long train of general causes, which

secured to the spiritual classes immense influence, and which enabled

them, not only to do battle with the most powerful aristocracy in Europe,

but to rise up, after what seemed their final defeat, fresh and vigorous

as ever, and eventually to exercise, as Protestant preachers, an

authority nowise inferior to that which they had wielded as Catholic

priests.

Of all Protestant countries, Scotland is certainly the one where the

course of affairs has for the longest period been most favourable to the

interests of superstition. How these interests were encouraged during the

seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, I shall hereafter relate. At

present, I purpose to examine the causes of their early growth, and to

show the way in which they were not only connected with the Reformation,

but gave to that great event some peculiarities which are extremely

remarkable, and are diametrically opposed to what happened in England.

If the reader will bear in mind what I have elsewhere stated,[73] he will

remember that the two principal sources of superstition are ignorance and

danger; ignorance keeping men unacquainted with natural causes, and

danger making them recur to supernatural ones. Or, to express the same

proposition in other words, the feeling of veneration, which, under one

of its aspects, takes the form of superstition, is a product of wonder

and of fear;[74] and it is obvious that wonder is connected with

ignorance, and that fear is connected with danger.[75] Hence it is, that

whatever in any country increases the total amount of amazement, or

whatever in any country increases the total amount of peril, has a direct

tendency to increase the total amount of superstition, and therefore to

strengthen the hands of the priesthood.

[73] _History of Civilization_, vol. i. pp. 125-129, 373-380.

[74] _History of Civilization_, vol. ii. p. 171.

[75] We must discriminate between wonder and admiration. Wonder is the

product of ignorance; admiration is the product of knowledge.

Ignorance wonders at the supposed irregularities of nature; science

admires its uniformities. The earlier writers rarely attended to

this distinction, because they were misled by the etymology of the

word 'admiration.' The Romans were very superficial thinkers upon

all matters except jurisprudence; and their blundering use of

'admirari' gave rise to the error, so common among our old writers,

of 'I admire,' instead of 'I wonder.'

By applying these principles to Scotland, we shall be able to explain

several facts in the history of that country. In the first place the

features of its scenery offer a mark contrast to those of England, and

are much more likely, among an ignorant people, to suggest effective and

permanent superstitions. The storms and the mists, the darkened sky

flashed by frequent lightning, the peals of thunder reverberating from

mountain to mountain, and echoing on every side, the dangerous

hurricanes, the gusts sweeping the innumerable lakes with which the

country is studded, the rolling and impetuous torrent flooding the path

of the traveller and stopping his progress, are strangely different to

those safer and milder phenomena, among which the English people have

developed their prosperity, and built up their mighty cities. Even the

belief in witchcraft, one of the blackest superstitions which has ever

defaced the human mind, has been affected by these peculiarities; and it

has been well observed, that while, according to the old English creed,

the witch was a miserable and decrepit hag, the slave rather than the

mistress of the demons which haunted her, she, in Scotland, rose to the

dignity of a potent sorcerer, who mastered the evil spirit, and, forcing

it to do her will, spread among the people a far deeper and more lasting

terror.[76]

[76] 'Our Scottish witch is a far more frightful being than her

supernatural coadjutor on the south side of the Tweed. She

sometimes seems to rise from the proper sphere of the witch, who is

only the slave, into that of the sorcerer, who is master of the

demon.' ... 'In a people so far behind their neighbours in domestic

organization, poor and hardy, inhabiting a country of mountains,

torrents, and rocks, where cultivation was scanty, accustomed to

gloomy mists and wild storms, every impression must necessarily

assume a corresponding character. Superstitions, like funguses and

vermin, are existences peculiar to the spot where they appear, and

are governed by its physical accidents.' ... 'And thus it is that

the indications of witchcraft in Scotland are as different from

those of the superstition which in England receives the same name,

as the Grampian Mountains from Shooter's Hill or Kennington

Common.' _Burton's Criminal Trials in Scotland_, vol. i. pp.

240-243. This is admirably expressed, and exhausts the general view

of the subject. The relation between the superstition of the Scotch

and the physical aspects of their country is also touched upon,

though with much inferior ability, in _Brown's History of the

Highlands_, vol. i. p. 106, and in _Sinclair's Scotland_, vol. iv.

p. 560. Hume, in his _Commentaries on the Laws of Scotland_, vol.

ii. p. 556, has an interesting passage on the high pretensions of

Scotch witchcraft, which never degenerated, as in other countries,

into a mere attempt at deception, but always remained a sturdy and

deep-rooted belief. He says, 'For among the many trials for

witchcraft which fill the record, I have not observed that there is

even one which proceeds upon the notion of a vain or cheating art,

falsely used by an impostor to deceive the weak and credulous.'

Further information respecting Scotch witchcraft will be found in

_Mackenzie's Criminal Laws of Scotland_, Edinburgh, folio, 1699,

pp. 42-56; _Correspondence of Mrs. Grant of Laggan_, London, 1844,

vol. iii. pp. 186, 187; _Southey's Life of Bell_, London, 1844,

vol. i. p. 52; _Vernon Correspondence_, edited by James, London,

1841, vol. ii. p. 301; _Weld's History of the Royal Society_,

London, 1848, vol. i. p. 89; _Letters from a Gentleman in the North

of Scotland_, edit. 1815, vol. i. pp. 220, 221; _The Spottiswoode

Miscellany_, vol. ii. p. 41, Edinburgh, 1845; _Lyon's History of

St. Andrews_, Edinburgh, 1843, vol. ii. pp. 56, 57. The work of

James I., and that of Sir Walter Scott, need hardly be referred to,

as they are well known to every one who is interested in the

history of witchcraft; but Pitcairn's _Criminal Trials_, though

less read, are, in every respect, more valuable, on account of the

materials they contain for a study of this department of Scotch

superstition.

Similar results were produced by the incessant and sanguinary wars to

which Scotland was exposed, and especially by the cruel ravages of the

English in the fourteenth century. Whatever religion may be in the

ascendant, the influence of its ministers is invariably strengthened by a

long and dangerous war, the uncertainties of which perplex the minds of

men, and induce them, when natural resources are failing, to call on the

supernatural for help. On such occasions, the clergy rise in importance;

the churches are more than usually filled; and the priest, putting

himself forward as the exponent of the wishes of God, assumes the

language of authority, and either comforts the people under their losses

in a righteous cause, or else explains to them that those losses are sent

as a visitation for their sins, and as a warning that they have not been

sufficiently attentive to their religious duties; in other words, that

they have neglected rites and ceremonies, in the performance of which the

priest himself has a personal interest.

No wonder, therefore, that in the fourteenth century, when the sufferings

of Scotland were at their height, the clergy flourished more than ever;

so that as the country became poorer, the spiritual classes became richer

in proportion to the rest of the nation. Even in the fifteenth, and first

half of the sixteenth century, when industry began somewhat to advance,

we are assured that notwithstanding the improvement in the position of

laymen, the whole of their wealth put together, and including the

possessions of all ranks, was barely equal to the wealth of the

Church.[77] If the hierarchy were so rapacious and so successful during

a period of comparative security, it would be difficult to overrate the

enormous harvest they must have reaped in those earlier days, when danger

being much more imminent, hardly any one died without leaving something

to them; all being anxious to testify their respect towards those who

knew more than their fellows, and whose prayers could either avert

present evil, or secure future happiness.[78]

[77] Pinkerton (_History of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 414) says that, in the

reigns of James II. and James III., 'the wealth of the Church was

at least equivalent to that of all the lay interest.' See also

_Life of Spottiswoode_, p. liii., in vol. i. of his _History of the

Church of Scotland_. 'The numerous devices employed by

ecclesiastics, both secular and regular, for enriching the several

Foundations to which they were attached, had transferred into their

hands more than half of the territorial property of Scotland, or of

its annual produce.'

In regard to the first half of the sixteenth century, it is stated

by a high authority, that, just before the Reformation, 'the full

half of the wealth of the nation belonged to the clergy.' _M'Crie's

Life of Knox_, p. 10. And another writer says, 'If we take into

account the annual value of all these abbeys and monasteries, in

conjunction with the bishoprics, it will appear at once that the

Scottish Catholic hierarchy was more munificently endowed,

considering the extent and resources of the kingdom, than it was in

any other country in Europe.' _Lawson's Roman Catholic Church in

Scotland_, p. 22. See also, respecting the incomes of the Scotch

bishops, which, considering the poverty of the country, were truly

enormous, _Lyon's History of St. Andrews_, Edinburgh, 1843, vol. i.

pp. 97, 125.

[78] 'They could employ all the motives of fear and of hope, of terror

and of consolation, which operate most powerfully on the human

mind. They haunted the weak and the credulous; they besieged the

beds of the sick and of the dying; they suffered few to go out of

the world without leaving marks of their liberality to the Church,

and taught them to compound with the Almighty for their sins, by

bestowing riches upon those who called themselves his servants.'

_History of Scotland_, book ii. p. 89, in _Robertson's Works_,

London, 1831. It is interesting to observe the eagerness with which

the clergy of one persuasion expose the artifices of those of

another. By comparing their different statements, laymen gain an

insight into the entire scheme.

Another consequence of these protracted wars was, that a more than

ordinary proportion of the population embraced the ecclesiastical

profession, because in it alone there was some chance of safety: and the

monasteries in particular were crowded with persons who hoped, though

frequently in vain, to escape from the burnings and slaughterings to

which Scotland was exposed. When the country, in the fifteenth century,

began to recover from the effects of these ravages, the absence of

manufactures and of commerce, made the Church the best avenue to

wealth;[79] so that it was entered by peaceful men for the purpose of

security, and by ambitious men as the surest means of achieving

distinction.

[79] Pinkerton observes, under the year 1514, that 'ecclesiastical

dignities presented almost the only path to opulence.' _History of

Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 123.

Thus it was, that the want of great cities, and of that form of industry

which belongs to them, made the spiritual classes more numerous than they

would otherwise have been; and what is very observable is, that it not

only increased their number, but also increased the disposition of the

people to obey them. Agriculturists are naturally, and by the very

circumstances of their daily life, more superstitious than manufacturers,

because the events with which they deal are more mysterious, that is to

say, more difficult to generalize and predict.[80] Hence it is, that, as

a body, the inhabitants of agricultural districts pay greater respect to

the teachings of their clergy than the inhabitants of manufacturing

districts. The growth of cities has, therefore, been a main cause of the

decline of ecclesiastical power; and the fact that, until the eighteenth

century, Scotland had nothing worthy of being called a city, is one of

many circumstances which explain the prevalence of Scotch superstition,

and the inordinate influence of the Scotch clergy.

[80] _Buckle's History of Civilization_, vol. i. pp. 376-380.

To this, we must add another consideration of great moment. Partly from

the structure of the country, partly from the weakness of the Crown, and

partly from the necessity of being constantly in arms to repel foreign

invaders, the predatory habits incidental to an early state of society

were encouraged, and consequently the reign of ignorance was prolonged.

Little was studied, and nothing was known. Until the fifteenth century,

there was not even an university in Scotland, the first having been

founded at St. Andrews in 1412.[81] The nobles, when they were not making

war upon the enemy, occupied themselves in cutting each other's throats,

and stealing each other's cattle.[82] Such was their ignorance, that,

even late in the fourteenth century, there is said to be no instance of a

Scotch baron being able to sign his own name.[83] And as nothing

approaching to a middle class had been yet formed, we may from this gain

some idea of the amount of knowledge possessed by the people at

large.[84] Their minds must have been immersed in a darkness which we can

now barely conceive. No trades, or arts, being practised which required

skill, or dexterity, there was nothing to exercise their intellects. They

consequently remained so stupid and brutal, that an intelligent observer,

who visited Scotland in the year 1360, likens them to savages, so much

was he struck by their barbarism and their unsocial manners.[85] Another

writer, early in the fifteenth century, uses the same expression; and

classing them with the animals which they tended, he declares that

Scotland is fuller of savages than of cattle.[86]

[81] Arnot (_History of Edinburgh_, p. 386) says, that the University of

St. Andrews was founded in 1412; and the same thing is stated in

_Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen_, vol. ii. p. 83. Grierson, in his

_History of St. Andrews_, Cupar, 1838, p. 14, says, 'In 1410, the

city of St. Andrews first saw the establishment of its famous

university, the most ancient institution of the kind that exists in

Scotland;' but, at p. 144 of the same work, we are told, that the

charter, 'constituting and declaring it to be a university,' is

'dated at St. Andrews, the 27th of February, 1411.' See also

_Lyon's History of St. Andrews_, vol. i. pp. 203-206, vol. ii. p.

223. At all events, 'at the commencement of the fifteenth century,

no university existed in Scotland; and the youth who were desirous

of a liberal education were under the necessity of seeking it

abroad.' _M'Crie's Life of Melville_, vol. i. p. 211. The charter

granted by the Pope, confirming the university, reached Scotland in

1413. _Lawson's Roman Catholic Church in Scotland_, Edinburgh,

1836, p. 12.

[82] Those were times, when, as a Scotch lawyer delicately expresses

himself, 'thieving was not the peculiar habit of the low and

indigent, but often common to them with persons of rank and landed

estate.' _Hume's Commentaries on the Law of Scotland_, 4to, 1797,

vol. i. p. 126. The usual form of robbery being cattle-stealing, a

particular name was invented for it; see p. 148, where we learn

that it 'was distinguished by the name of Hership or Herdship,

being the driving away of numbers of cattle, or other bestial, by

the masterful force of armed people.'

[83] Tytler, who was a great patriot, and disposed to exaggerate the

merit of everything which was Scotch, does nevertheless allow that,

"from the accession of Alexander III. to the death of David II.

(_i.e._ in 1370), it would be impossible, I believe, to produce a

single instance of a Scottish baron who could sign his own name."

_Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. ii. pp. 239, 240. Early in the

sixteenth century, I find it casually mentioned, that 'David

Straiton, a cadet of the house of Laureston,' ... 'could not read.'

_Wodrow's Collections_, vol. i. pp. 5, 6. The famous chief, Walter

Scott of Harden, was married in 1567; and 'his marriage contract is

signed by a notary, because none of the parties could write their

names.' _Chambers' Annals_, vol. i. p. 46. Crawfurd (_History of

Renfrew_, part iii. p. 313) says: 'The modern practice of

subscribing names to writes of moment was not used in Scotland till

about the year 1540;' but he forgets to tell us why it was not

used. In 1564, Robert Scot of Thirlstane, 'ancestor of Lord

Napier,' could not sign his name. See _Pitcairn's Criminal Trials

in Scotland_, vol. iii. p. 394.

[84] A Scotchman, of considerable learning, says: 'Scotland was no less

ignorant and superstitious at the beginning of the fifteenth

century, than it was towards the close of the twelfth.'

_Dalrymple's Annals of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 428.

[85] 'Et sont ainsi comme gens sauvages qui ne se savent avoir ni de

nulli accointer.' _Les Chroniques de Froissart_, edit. Buchon,

Paris, 1835, vol. ii. p. 315.

[86] 'Plus pleine de sauvagine que de bestail.' _Hist. de Charles VI, par

Le Laboureur_, quoted in _Pinkerton's History of Scotland_, vol. i.

p. 149.

By this combination of events, and by this union of ignorance with

danger, the clergy had, in the fifteenth century, obtained more influence

in Scotland than in any other European country, Spain alone excepted. And

as the power of the nobles had increased quite as rapidly, it was natural

that the Crown, completely overshadowed by the great barons, should turn

for aid to the Church. During the fifteenth century, and part of the

sixteenth, this alliance was strictly preserved;[87] and the political

history of Scotland is the history of a struggle by the kings and the

clergy against the enormous authority of the nobles. The contest, after

lasting about a hundred and sixty years, was brought to a close in 1560,

by the triumph of the aristocracy, and the overthrow of the Church. With

such force, however, had the circumstance just narrated, engrained

superstition into the Scotch character, that the spiritual classes

quickly rallied, and, under their new name of Protestants, they became as

formidable as under their old name of Catholics. Forty-three years after

the establishment of the Reformation in Scotland, James VI. ascended the

throne of England, and was able to array the force of the southern

country against the refractory barons of the northern. From that moment

the Scotch aristocracy began to decline; and the equipoise to the clergy

being removed, the Church became so powerful, that, during the

seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it was the most effectual obstacle

to the progress of Scotland; and even now it exercises a sway which is

incomprehensible to those who have not carefully studied the whole chain

of its antecedents. To trace with minuteness the long course of affairs

which has led to this unfortunate result, would be incompatible with the

object of an Introduction, whose only aim it is to establish broad and

general principles. But, to bring the question clearly before the mind of

the reader, it will be necessary that I should give a slight sketch of

the relation which the nobles bore to the clergy in the fifteenth and

sixteenth centuries, and of the way in which their relative positions,

and their implacable hatred of each other, brought about the Reformation.

By this means, we shall perceive, that the great Protestant movement,

which, in other countries, was democratic, was in Scotland aristocratic.

We shall also see, that, in Scotland, the Reformation, not being the work

of the people, has never produced the effects which might have been

expected from it, and which it did produce in England. It is, indeed, but

too evident, that, while in England Protestantism has diminished

superstition, has weakened the clergy, has increased toleration, and, in

a word, has secured the triumph of secular interests over ecclesiastical

ones, its result in Scotland has been entirely different; and that, in

that country, the Church, changing its form, without altering its

spirit, not only cherished its ancient pretensions, but unhappily

retained its ancient power; and that, although that power is now

dwindling away, the Scotch preachers still exhibit, whenever they dare,

an insolent and domineering spirit, which shows how much real weakness

there yet lurks in the nation, where such extravagant claims are not

immediately silenced by the voice of loud and general ridicule.

[87] Occasionally, we find evidence of it earlier, but it was hardly

systematic. Compare _Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. i. p. 66,

with _Dalrymple's Annals_, vol. i. pp. 72, 110, 111, 194, vol. iii.

p. 296; _Nimmo's History of Stirlingshire_, p. 88; _Chalmers'

History of Dunfermline_, pp. 133, 134.

History of Civilization in England, Vol. 3 of 3 · 第 1 / 13 章