The True Story vs. Myth of Witchcraft. William Godwin
Читать онлайн книгу.
Father, the Sone, and The Halie Gost!
‘And when we took the frwit of the fishes from [the] fisheris, we went to the shore, before the boat wold com to it; and we wold say, on the shore syd, thrie seuerall tymes ower,
‘“The fisheris ar gon to the sea,
And they vill bring hom fishe to me;
They will bring them hom intill the boat,
Bot they sall get of thaim bot the smaller sort!”
So we either steall a fish, or buy a fish, or get a fish from them [for nowght] an or ma.90 And with that we haw all the fruit of the heall fishes in the boat; and the fishes that the fishermen thamselues will haw, will be bot froath &c.
‘The first woyag that ewer I went with the rest of owr Covens wes to Plewghlandis; and thair we shot an man betwixt the plewgh-stiltis, and he presentlie fell to the ground, wpon his neise and his mowth; and then the Divell gaw me an arrow, and cawsed me shoot an voman in that fieldis; quhilk I did, and she fell down dead. In Winter 1660, quhen Mr. Harie Forbes, Minister at Aulderne, was seik, we maid an bagg of the gallis, flesh, and guttis of toadis, pickles of bear,91 pairingis of the nailis of fingeris and toes, the liewer of ane hair, and bittis of clowtis. We steipit this all together, all night among watter, all haked92 throw uther. And whan we did put it among the water, Satan wes with ws, and learned ws the wordis following, to say thryse ower. They ar thus.
‘“He is lying in his bed,—he is lyeing seik and sair; Let him lye intill his bed two monethes and [thrie] dayes mair! 2li. Let him lye intill his bed—let him lye intill it seik and sore; Let him lye intill his bed, monthis two and thrie dayes mor! 3li. He sall lye intill his bed, he sall lye in it seik and sore; He sall lye intill his bed, two monethis and thrie dayes mor!”
‘Quhan we haid learned all these wordis from the Devill, as said is, we all fell down [wpon owr] kneis, with owr hear down ower owr showlderis and eyes, and owr handis lifted wp, and owr eyes [stedfastlie fixed wpon] the Divell; and said the forsaidis wordis thryse ower to the Divell, striktlie, against Maister Harie Forbes [his recowering from the said seiknes]. In the night tym we cam into Mr. Harie Forbes chalmer, quhair he lay, with owr handis all smeared [... out] of the bagg to swing it upon Mr. Harie, quhair he wes seik in his bed; and, in the day tyme [... ane of owr] nwmber, quho wes most familiar and intimat with him, to wring or swing the bagg wpon the said Mr. Harie, as we could not prevaill in the night tym against him; quhilk wes accordinglie done.’
‘Johne Taylor and his wyff, Bessie, and Margret Wilsones, and I, maid a pictur for the Laird of Parkis maill children. Johnne Taylor brought hom the clay in his plaid newk;93 his wyff sifted it; we poured in water in a cowg94 amongst it, and wrought it sor,95 and maid a pictor of it, lyk a child, als big as a pow. It vanted no mark of the imag of a bairn, eyes, nose, mouth, little lippies, and the hands of it folded down by its sydis. The vordis, quhan we maid it, ver thes:
‘“We put this water among this meall,
For long divining,96 and ill heall; We put it intill the fyr, To burn them up both stik and stour, That be burnt with our will, As any stikill97 on a kill!”
The Divell sitton on an blak kist. Ve wer al on owr kneyis, and owr hair about our eyes, looking on the Divell stedfastlie, and our handis lifted up to him, saying the vordes ower. And by this the bairnis died.’
Chapter XXII.
Early Witchcraft in Scotland—Lady Glamys—Bessie Dunlop—Lady Foulis—Numerous Cases.
Witchcraft in Scotland began early, for we hear of some dozen or more people being burnt at Edinburgh in 1479, for attempting to bewitch the King, James III., to death, by means of a waxen image. In the proclamation of 1510, for regulating the proceedings at circuit courts the judges are instructed to ask the question, ‘Gif thair be ony Wichecraift or Soffary wsit in ye realme?’ but it was not until the passing of the Act of 1563 that the regular persecution of these deluded people began.
The first recorded case of witchcraft that I can find in Pitcairn’s ‘Criminal Trials in Scotland,’ is that of Lady Glamys, where we read:
‘31 Jan. 1532. Jonet, Lady Glammys found John Drummond of Innerpeffery as surety for her appearance at the next Justice-aire of Forfar, to underly the law for art and part of the Intoxication of John, Lord Glammys, her husband.’
That considerable sympathy was felt with her is shown by the number of gentlemen who preferred being fined to giving evidence in her case. But this can scarcely be called a case of witchcraft. She was certainly accused of trying to poison her husband by means of charmed drinks, but the chief accusation brought against her at her trial in 1537, by the malice of her husband’s brother, was attempting to poison the King, a charge which she disposed of easily in her defence. Said she:
‘I am here accus’d for purposing to kill the King; and, to make my pretended crime appear more frightful, it is given out that the way was to be by poison. With what strange impudence can any accuse me of such wickedness who never saw any poison, nor know I anything about the preparation of it? Let them tell where I bought it, or who procur’d it for me? Or, though I had it, how could I use it, since I never come near the King’s person, his table, nor Palace? It is well known, that, since my last marriage with this unfortunate gentleman, I have liv’d in the country, at a great distance from the Court. What opportunity could I have to poison the King?’
But it was of no avail, she was to die, and this is her sentence:
‘For the quhilkis tressonable crimes, the said Jonet, Lady of Glammys hes foirfallit to oure souerane lord, hir life, hir landis, gudis movable and unmovable: And that scho sall be had to Castell hill of Edinburghe, and their BRYNT in ane fyre to the deid, as ane Traytour. And that I gif for Dome.’
An historian98 says: ‘She heard the sentence pronounced without the least signe of terrour or concern. On the day appointed for her Execution, she suffered on the Castle-Hill of Edinburgh, where she appear’d with so much beauty and little concern, that all the spectators were so deeply afflicted for her, that they burst out with tears and loud lamentations for her untimely end, and were so confident of her Innocence, that they design’d to rescue her. But the King’s Officers and Guards being present, hinder’d their attempting anything that way.’
The foregoing is evidently more a political case than one of witchcraft, the earliest of which existing in the records of the High Court of Justiciary in Scotland is June 26, 1563: ‘Agnes Mullikine, alias Bessie Boswell, in Dunfermeling, wes Banist and exilit for Witchcraft.’ The next is December 29, 1572: ‘Jonet Boyman, spous to Williame Steill, Delatit of diuerse crymes of Witchcraft. Convict and Brint.’
The next is most interesting, although it savours more of Elfland than of diablerie, and is dated November 8, 1576:
‘Elizabeth, or Bessie Dunlop, spous to Andro Jak in Lyne.99 Dilatit of the