The Covenanters in Selkirkshire. According to the OS name book, under ‘Prison Linns’ on the Baillie Burn by Ettrickbridge:

‘This Name is given to a Small Valley or piece of ground, Situated on the farm of Helmburn, traditionally assigned, as having been a place where the “Covenanters held their Congregational Meetings” about the time of King Charles the Second.’ (OS name book, Selkirkshire, Vol.7.)

Map of Prison Linns

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

Amid the flotsam of the Killing Times of 1685 are a few brief lines on a threatened drowning of a woman at Kirkcudbright. She never was drowned, but her remarkable story deserves to be told…

The case of Grizel Fullarton has striking parallels with the drowning of the two Wigtown martyrs, Margaret McLachlan and Margaret Wilson.

Grizel Fullarton was captured by Colonel James Douglas, who commissioned the court that initially sentenced the two Wigtown women to be drowned for refusing the abjuration oath in April, 1685, under powers awarded to him on 27 March.

The events of Fullarton’s case took place earlier in the same year in the same jurisdiction, Galloway, but under a slightly different set of judicial commissions. She was scheduled to face some of the same judges that went on to condemn the Wigtown women, but under their commission to press the abjuration oath in January, 1685.

Colonel Douglas, later Lieutenant-General to William of Orange.

Colonel Douglas had first arrived in Galloway with two hundred hand-picked men and a military commission to quell the rebels in mid January, 1685. He probably had the power to press the abjuration oath in the field under the powers granted to military officers to do so, but he did not have a judicial commission. However, following an assassination attempt on him at Caldons in Minnigaff parish on 23 January, the privy council ordered the Galloway commissioners to appoint Douglas as one of their number on 28 January. (RPCS, X, 114-15.)

Balmangan in Borgue parish

The story appears in Wodrow’s History under the year 1684:

‘I am sorry I can give so short accounts of the sufferings of John Corsan of Balmangan, in the parish of Borg[ue] in Galloway, last year [1683] and this [1684]. That gentleman was imprisoned for refusing the bond of regularity, and continued close prisoner nine months. He was fined in 6000 merks, and paid it every farthing, as a discharge, in his grandson’s hands at present, bears.

His lady [Grizel Fullarton] was imprisoned by colonel [James] Douglas, and, for refusing the abjuration [oath pressed in January, 1685], received an indictment; and it was given out, they designed to sentence her to be drowned within the sea mark, at the ferry of Kirkcudbright; but king Charles death [on 6 February, 1685] put a stop to this and some other processes of this kind.’ (Wodrow, History, IV, 172.)

Balmangan Tower © Chris Andrews and licensed for reuse.

John Corsan ‘of Balmangan’ lived at, or in the farm next to, Balmangan Tower in Borgue parish, Kirkcudbrightshire.

Map of Balmangan          Street View of Balmangan

Although he was styled ‘of Balmangan’, Corsan was involved in a complex series of land transactions involving the farm at Balmangan that are discussed in Alastair Livingston’s excellent post on ‘Parking Lairds’. A ‘John Carson of Balmangan’ (b.1665) who married a Margaret Blair (b.1692), was buried in Old Senwick churchyard in 1724.

Corson’s wife was not identified by Wodrow, but she was probably ‘Grizel Fullarton, good-wife of Balma[n]gan’ who appears on the published Fugitive Roll of May, 1684, for the ‘reset and harbour’ of fugitives from the Bothwell Rising. Her status on the fugitive roll as the ‘good-wife of Balmagan’, rather than the ‘lady’ described by Wodrow, probably more accurately reflects the complexity of their position in the social hierarchy of land ownership at that time.

When Grizel Fullarton was captured is not clear, but she was publically proclaimed a fugitive on 5 May, 1684. Her name does not appear in a list of those accused of reset and converse with fugitives in Borgue parish in October, 1684, which may indicate that she had fled the parish. Some of those named for reset lived close to Balmangan. Given her social status as a ‘good-wife’, Fullarton may have been close kin to Fullerton of Senwick, a forfeited laird who lived right next to Balmangan, or John Fullerton of Auchenhay, another forfeited laird in the parish.

Kirkcudbright Tolbooth © Chris Newman and licensed for reuse.

She was almost certainly imprisoned in Kirkcudbright Tolbooth. It was stormed by over a hundred armed Covenanters to release prisoners in mid December, 1684, but it appears that she was not in the Tolbooth at that time as she probably would have been rescued.

It was the attack on Kirkcudbright Tolbooth that brought Colonel Douglas to Galloway as John Graham of Claverhouse’s replacement in mid January. Wodrow tells us that she was ‘imprisoned by colonel Douglas’, but neglects to mention her fugitive status. At some point after her proclamation as a fugitive, she was plainly captured. If she taken was by Douglas, then it would have been in January, 1685, as that was when he arrived in Galloway.

Like the Wigtown women, Grizel Fullarton is said to have ‘refused’ the abjuration oath that renounced the Societies’ war of assassinations. In practice, Fullarton may only have avoided the pressing of the abjuration oath in her parish due to her fugitive status.

The oath was pressed in every parish and burgh in the shire in mid January and after refusing it, or evading before she was imprisoned, she would have received an indictment to appear before a forthcoming court presided over by at least some of the commissioners for Galloway. Alexander Gordon, viscount of Kenmure, was the delegated convenor of the court with four other commissioners, Robert Grierson of Lag, David Dunbar of Baldoon, Sir Godfrey McCulloch of Mireton and David Graham. Two of those commissioners, Lag and David Graham, certainly sat in the Wigtown court that sentenced the women to drown. As noted above, Colonel Douglas was also commissioned after 28 January.

The job of the court was to handle any cases of prisoners who refused the abjuration oath as well as to deal with any cases of nonconformity or those who had failed to do their duty in pressing the oath. A similar court which sat in Paisley for Renfrewshire, tried and executed James Algie and John Park on 3 February.

The date of the Paisley court is instructive, as it took place about two weeks after the parish lists for the Abjuration oath had been compiled and the oath began to be pressed. It would appear that the Paisley court had a relatively light caseload in comparison to the court which was meant to convene in Kirkcudbright. The latter covered a far larger shire, with more parishes to deal with and a far higher level of nonconformity, but did so with the same number of commissioners, six, one of whom was appointed late in the day. That almost certainly delayed the convening of a court in Kirkcudbright, as the commissioners had to press the oath in every parish and burgh in Galloway.

In the middle of pressing the oath, the Galloway commissioners also had to deal with the emergency situation caused by an assassination attempt on Douglas in which Captain Urquhart and two soldiers had died on 23 January. The privy council reacted to the murder of the King’s men by calling in a major operation to hunt down anyone who was in any way involved. With the privy council breathing down their necks over Caldons, the commissioners almost certainly diverted their resources and efforts away from the humdrum judicial process of dealing with the prisoners they already had for the abjuration oath.

It would appear that the Kirkcudbright court would have had to sit at a later date than the one in Paisley. That accords with Wodrow’s version of events, as when news of King Charles II’s death on 6 February arrived in Galloway, the commissioners judicial powers were immediately terminated with the result that no court could be held until new commissions were issued by King James VII. The king’s death ended the general pressing of the oath in the south-western shires before the process had reached completion, at least in Galloway. As a result, Grizel Fullarton may have been given some breathing space after her initial refusal to take the oath. She would have remained in prison unless she reconsidered and took the oath. As a ‘good-wife’ living near Kirkcudbright, Grizel Fullarton probably had powerful social contacts locally who were in a position to attempt to influence events in the nearby burgh, either by persuading her to step back from the brink, or to gently nudge the course of justice. The evidence suggests that she did have a change of heart, perhaps because of the fate that she was threatened with.

The Ferry of Kirkcudbright
Wodrow claims that ‘it was given out, they designed to sentence her to be drowned within the sea mark, at the ferry of Kirkcudbright’. When Wodrow states that ‘they designed to sentence her’, he slightly misleads his readers. The proclaimed sentence for women who refused the abjuration oath was drowning. Fullarton either knew, or became aware of the fact after indictment, that drowning was the legal sanction. She would almost certainly have known that her forthcoming trial would condemn her to death unless she took the oath before the trial commenced. She very little room for manoeuvre, either one took the oath, or one would be condemned at a trial.

Wodrow gave the credit for the failure to execute her to the providence of the death of Charles II.. However, the ambiguity of his narrative that never reaches what happened to her also hints that the threat of drowning which ‘was given out’ before her trial had the desired effect and led to her quickly taking the oath. In that respect, Fullarton’s case appears to have been different from the case of the two Wigtown women, as the latter only decided to take the abjuration oath after they were tried and condemned to drown. While Fullarton’s case was resolved at a local level in Kirkcudbright, the Wigtown case required royal clemency and the intervention of the privy council to prevent execution being carried out.

One fascinating feature of Wodrow’s account is how specific it is about where ‘they designed’ to conduct the threatened execution: ‘within the sea mark, at the ferry of Kirkcudbright’.

The ‘within the sea mark’ element was the same phrase used in the Wigtown case, where the women were supposed to be executed within the sea, tide or flood mark. In practice in Kirkcudbright, that meant that Fullerton was intended to be drowned on the sands below the high tide mark outside of the burgh.

The Kirkcudbright case also specifies the location as ‘at the ferry of Kirkcudbright’.

The ferry of Kirkcudbright crossed the tidal reaches of River Dee on the north side of the burgh. It was later replaced by a bridge further upstream.

On the Kirkcudbright bank the ferry landed to the north of the western end of what is now St Cuthbert Street. Today, the landscape has changed with the construction of a harbour that has filled in and advanced the earlier shoreline.

Street View of Kirkcudbright’s former ferry shore

Street View towards tidal sands from the bridge

The proposed use of the tidal sands as an execution ground was unusual. However, it is worth noting that in two other cases from the Killing Times, that of James Kirko who was summarily shot on the sands of Dumfries and the two Wigtown women, that their executions are said to have taken place on them.

All of those cases and the threatened execution of Fullarton took place at the head burghs of shires, the heart of royal authority in each locality. The choice of a tidal location for their execution was perhaps symbolic of their crimes. All of them were traitors who refused to renounce a war of assassinations against those who wielded royal authority. Grizel Fullarton avoided drowning, probably by accepting royal authority and taking the oath, but the others, as outcasts from the society they lived in, were banished to the very edge of the King’s realm and executed in the ebb and flow of the debatable land where sea meets land.

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

A remarkable document survives from the field preachings of the late 1670s. It is a list of baptisms conducted ‘in Fields and other places’ in Torphichen parish, Linlithgowshire, between 1675 and 1679.

One of the things that makes individual Covenanters of the 1680s and their children hard to trace is their withdrawal from the established church that produced records of births and marriages.

Among those who had children baptised were two individuals of particular significance, Edward Marshall, who was hanged in 1685, and George Hill, one of the leaders of the United Societies. A third name, Patrick Walker in Slamannan parish is probably Patrick Walker ‘in Drumcria’, aka. Drumclair. He may be the Patrick Walker who wrote the lives of Cameron, Cargill etc. Walker did know people in Torphichen parish and when captured was taken to nearby Linlithgow. A fourth name, that of John Davie (in Braehead?), Bathgate parish, may be close kin to the James Davie, a heritor in Bathgate parish, who was shot at a field preaching in the mid 1670s.

The list of baptisms was centred on Torphichen parish, but it also included individuals who had journeyed from other parishes. They came from the parishes of Bathgate, Livingston and Linlithgow, all in Linlithgowshire, Muiravonside and Slamannan parishes in Stirlingshire, and New Monkland parish in Lanarkshire.

It was included at the end of the Session Minute Book of Torphichen parish in Linlithgowshire of 1690-1702, which was printed in a collection by the Scottish Record Society in an A-Z format.

I have reordered the list by date to highlight any potential field preachings where baptisms took place in Torphichen parish between 1675 and 1679. Field preachings were generally held on a Sunday. The list probably ends in 1679 due to repression and the withdrawal of presbyterian ministers from field preaching. In the printed version, it resumes in 1687, when the toleration edicts of King James allowed moderate presbyterian ministers to preach.

‘LIST of the names of the Children baptized to the several Persons within the PARISH of TORPHICHEN, in Fields and other places, since Anno 1675.
1675-79.

Adie, William, a daughter Janet [Sunday] 28 Mar. 1675
Adie, William, a son John 28 Mar. 1675
Muir, Alexander, a son John 28 Mar. 1675
Shaw, Peter, a son Peter 28 Mar. 1675
Steill, John, a son Daniel 28 Mar. 1675

Anderson, William, a son John [Sunday] 2 May 1675
Forrest, William, a daughter Elizabeth 2 May 1675
Marshall, Thomas, a daughter Isabell 2 May 1675
M’Gabane, James, a son John 2 May 1675
Thomsone, David, a son William 2 May 1675
Thomson, John, a daughter Anna 2 May 1675

Stone, James, a son John [Sunday] 16 May 1675
Russall, Georg, a son John 16 May 1675

Tennent, James, a son James [Tuesday] 25 May 1675

Anderson, John, a daughter Mary [Sunday] 22 Aug. 1675
Hutchine, Matthew, a son Williame 22 Aug. 1675

Boik, Henry, a son James [Sunday] 24 Oct. 1675

Bell, John, a son Patrick [Sunday] 2 Jan. 1676

Gardner, Archibald, a son John [Saturday] 1 April 1676
Laremonth, John, a daughter Elizabeth 1 April 1676

Whyte, William, a son Michaell [Tuesday] 2 May 1676

Adie, William a daughter Helen July 1676
Marshall, John, a daughter Geills July 1676
Gardner, Bartholomew, a son William [Thursday] 20 July 1676
Marshall, Georg, a daughter Marion 20 July 1676

Marshall, Peter, a daughter Margaret [Sunday] 3 Sept. 1676

Anderson, John, a son John [Sunday] 24 Sept. 1676
C[h]ristie, Patrick, a daughter Joanet 24 Sept. 1676

Marshall, William, a son John [Thursday] 16 Nov. 1676
Walker, John, a son James 16 Nov. 1676

M’Clintock, Finlay, a daughter Anna [Tuesday] 16 Jan. 1677
Tennent, John, a daughter Agnes 16 Jan. 1677

Shaw, Thomas, a son Thomas [Saturday] 20 Jan. 1677

Orr, Gilbert, a daughter Margaret [Sunday] 4 Feb. 1677

Scot, Georg, a son Thomas [Tuesday] 6 Feb. 1677

Stone, James, a daughter Janet [Saturday] 10 Feb. 1677

Herroune, James, a son William [Tuesday] 20 Mar. 1677
Jack, William, a daughter Isabell 20 Mar. 1677
Laremonth, Robert, a son John 20 Mar. 1677
Marshell, Edward, in the parish of Marruineside, a daughter Margaret 20 Mar. 1677 [Fugitive ‘of Kae-moor’ (Kaemuir) in 1684. Executed 1685.]

Black, James, in Marruineside [i.e., Muiravonside], a son James [Sunday] 25 Mar. 1677
Gardner, John, a son John 25 Mar. 1677
Mair, Alexander, a son John 25 Mar. 1677
Shaw, Peter, a daughter Margaret 25 Mar. 1677

Clarlaw, George, in Linlithgow, a son John [Sunday] 8 April 1677
Stone, John, a son Robert 8 April 1677

Fisher, — , a daughter baptized — S.M. [Wednesday] 23 May 1677

Buneway, Peter, in Cathlaw [in Trophichen parish], a child baptized — S.M. [Tuesday] 26 June 1677

Adie, Robert, a son James [Sunday] 29 July 1677
Hill, George, in [New] Munkland, a daughter Katharine 29 July 1677
Salmond, John, a son Patrick 29 July 1677 [‘John Salmond in Kirkingshaw’?, now Birkenshaw]
Tait, John, a son James 29 July 1677
Taylor, Duncan, in Slamannan, a son George 29 July 1677
Walker, John, a daughter Margaret 29 July 1677

Inglis, Thomas, a child baptized — S.M. [Monday] 22 Oct. 1677

Chambers, Thomas, a son John [Sunday] 30 Dec. 1677
Lightbodie, John, a daughter Helen 30 Dec. 1677
Walker, Thomas, a son James 30 Dec. 1677

Leslie, Thomas, in Bathgate, a daughter Mary [Friday] 4 Jan. 1678
Miller, John, a son John 4 Jan. 1678

Donaldson, David, a son David [Sunday] 17 Feb. 1678
Nimmo, John, a son John 17 Feb. 1678
Shaw, Thomas, a daughter Margaret 17 Feb. 1678
Thomson, John, a daughter Margaret 17 Feb. 1678

Bryce, William, a son William [Sunday] 24 Feb. 1678
M’Culloch, John, a daughter Elizabeth 24 Feb. 1678
Marshall, James, a son James 24 Feb. 1678
Robert, Henry, a daughter Agnes 24 Feb. 1678

Marshall, John, a daughter Elizabeth [Wednesday] 17 April 1678
Potter, Heugh, a daughter Mary 17 April 1678

Laremonth, John a son John [Saturday] 18 May 1678

Broune, John, a son William [Sunday] 11 Aug. 1678 [Fugitive ‘in Barlornie’ [Bedlormie] Torphichen parish in 1684?]
Chambers, Alexander, a daughter Elizabeth 11 Aug. 1678
Thomson, Richard, a son Richard 11 Aug. 1678

Wilson, Mr. George, minister, a child baptized — S.M. [Wednesday] 30 Oct. 1678

Martine, George, a daughter Janet [Sunday] 24 Nov. 1678
Walker, John, a daughter Agnes 24 Nov. 1678

Bell, Alexander, a son Alexander [Sunday] 5 Jan. 1679
Bell, John, a daughter Christian 5 Jan. 1679
Calder, John, in Livingstone parish, a son Robert 5 Jan. 1679
Davie, John, in Bathgate parish, a daughter Janet 5 Jan. 1679 [Braehead. Possibly kin to James Davie d.1673?]
Jack, William, a son William 5 Jan. 1679
Marshall, Peter, a son James 5 Jan. 1679

[The marriage of John Davie appears to have taken place in April 1678: ‘Davie, John, in Bathgate parish and Janet Thomsone in this parish [Torphichen] p. 24 Mar. 1678, m. 16 April 1678.’ Their daughter, Janet, was baptised, probably at a field preaching, on 5 January, 1679. John Davie ‘in Braehead’, Bathgate parish, is recorded using the mort cloth of Torphichen parish on 27 March, 1702.]

Walker, Patrick, in Slamannan parish, a daughter Agnes. — — [Fugitive ‘in Drumcria’/Drumclair in 1684? Possibly the Patrick Walker?]’

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

The McMillanites were a fragment of the Society people that rejected the Revolution Settlement of 1689 to 1690. After many of the Society people rejoined the Church in 1690, some dissenters formed what could be called the “Continuing” Societies. From 1692 they issued declarations against the Revolution and held their own general meetings. They continued without an ordained presbyterian minister for over decade until the Rev John McMillan, who had been ejected from his charge at Balmaghie parish but refused to leave it, accepted a call to minister to the Society people in 1706.

His register of baptisms and marriages provides a good guide to where the McMillanites, as their opponents termed them, flourished. It may also point to areas where the Society people of the 1680s had support. There is an obvious flaw in using data from two decades after the events of the 1680s, but you don’t know if it reveals something unless you try it. It does highlight some intriguing connections between the two periods.

The list below is only from the first years of his ministry between 1706 to 1712 and only lists the locations in Eskdalemuir parish and Hutton parish where he conducted baptisms and marriages. Further posts will cover other areas.

‘At Kilburn’, [Eskdalemuir parish, Dumfriesshire,] 16 January, 1710.
Kilburn was a very remote farm by the Black Esk Water in Eskdalemuir parish. It now lies by the Black Esk Reservoir built in 1962.

Map of modern Kilburn               Street View (of modern Kilburn)

The old map, above, suggests that in c.1710 that Kilburn actually lay further east, on southern bank of the Kil Burn, rather than the west bank of the Black Esk, i.e., about here on the map below:

‘was baptized
David Jarden in the parish of Aplegirth, his eldest son John.
At the same place and on the same day, were married, Thomas M’Vittie and Jean Lawson, both in parish of Kirkmichaell.
John Carsell in Wamphrey parish and Janet Bettie in Kilpatrick Juxta.’

The “Covenanters” Grave at Winshiels © Bob Cowan and licensed for reuse.

‘At Windshields’, i.e., Winshiels, Hutton parish, Dumfriesshire, 17 January, 1710.
Winshields was where the Covenanter martyr, Andrew Hislop, was captured in 1685.

‘were married,
John Henry in Wamphrey parish and Jean Graham in Hutton parish.’

[Eskdalemuir parish, Dumfriesshire,] 10 March, 1711.
‘James Donaldson in parish of Eskdalemuir had a daughter baptized called Mary.’
[Dumfriesshire,] 11 March, 1711.
‘Robert Johnstoun in Applegirth a daughter named Elizabeth.
Matthew Short in the parish of Moffat a son named John.’

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

The records of the McMillanites, a fragment of the Society people that rejected the Revolution Settlement of 1689 to 1690, in Hoddam parish, Annandale, links them to a lost farm and Lourin Meg, a rock where field preachings are said to have been conducted.

Pellethill

‘At Pellethill’, Hoddom parish, Dumfriesshire, 6 October, 1707.
Aka ‘Pollet Hill’ or ‘Pallet Hill’. Pellethill lay between Hoddomtown and the bridge over the Annan.

Map of former location of Pellethill

Approximately here:

‘were married by the foresaid minister [John McMillan]: —
George Henderson [in Hoddom parish?] and Mary Glover;
Christopher Calvert [in Hoddom parish] and Janet Bell;
James Carsell and Agnes Graham.’

[Near Hoddom parish?, Dumfriesshire,] 5 May, 1708.
‘were baptized by the Rev. Mr. John M’Millan:—
Andrew Wells in Kilpatrick Juxta, his daughter Rebecka;
and on the next day [6 May], John Stinston, rather Stevenson, in the parish of Hoddam, his daughter Mary.’

At [Hoddom parish], 12 January, 1709.
‘To George Henderson in [parish of] Hoddam a [eldest] son called James, born October, 1708.
To Christopher Calvert a [eldest] daughter called Jean.’
[Also]
‘was baptized ab eodem ministro Evangelii:—James Knox in Cummertrees, his daughter Mary.’

Eskdale, Dumfriesshire, 5-6 December, 1709.

‘Eskdale, December 5 and 6, 1709—baptised 27.’

At Ecclefechan, [Hoddom parish, Dumfriesshire] 1 February, 1711.
Map of Ecclefechan

‘William Mattheson in Middlebie [or Lochmaben] had a daughter baptiz’d called Jonet.
Archibald Grieve in the parish of Lochmaben had a son baptiz’d Robert [born February 20, 1710].’
[Also]
‘[was baptized]
George Henderson in Hoddam had a daughter named Jonet [or Janet], born December 1, 1710 [or 1711].’

Lourin Meg

‘At Coldoons’, i.e., Cowdens, St Mungo parish, Dumfriesshire, 12 August, 1711.
Cowdens lies in the eastern spur St Mungo parish, Dumfriesshire, that protrudes into Hoddom parish. Today it lies on the east side of the M74. Nearby to the east is ‘Lourin Meg’, in Hoddom parish, a stone where the ‘Covenanters and early Dissenters preached’.

Map of Cowdens

‘John Stevenson [or Stinson, weaver] in Hoddam had a son named John.’

At Coldoons, i.e., Cowdens, St Mungo parish, Dumfriesshire, 4 May, 1712.
‘Andrew Wells in Kilpatrick Juxta, his son Joseph, aged 3 months;
David Jarden [in Applegirth] and Marion Laidly in Hutton parish, their son David, aged 18 weeks;
James Knox [in Cummertrees] and Marion Rodick their son David aged 6 months;
John Rodick [in Cummertrees] and Jean Bell their daughter Helen, aged one month.’

On the following day, McMillan was at Pellethill:

At Pellethill, Hoddam parish, Dumfriesshire, 5 May, 1712.
‘were married,
James Harkness and Agnes Stoddart;
Robert Walker and Margaret Frizell;
Alexander Henrie and Margaret Thomson;
William Black and Janet Bell;—John Bell caution for all.’

‘At Coldens’, i.e., Cowdens, St Mungo parish, Dumfriesshire, 17 August, 1712.
aka ‘Coldoons’. A double entry in original.
‘on the Lord’s Day were baptized,
John Forsyth and Bessie Smellie in Hoddam their son, Jacob, aged 1 month;
James M’Vitie and Margaret Aitken in Garrell parish their son James, 6 months;
John Mundell and Jean R in Torthorwald parish their daughter Mary, aged [?]’

For more on the Millanites, see here.

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

There is a gaping hole in the record of baptisms and marriages between 1706 and 1712 of the McMillanites, a fragment of the Society people that rejected the Revolution Settlement of 1689 to 1690. That hole is Galloway sized.

In the 1680s, Galloway was a stronghold for the Society people, but by c.1710, even after John McMillan the minister of Balmaghie had joined the Societies, only three events are recorded among the “Continuing” Society people in all of Galloway. Those three events also seem to have involved those who were not from Galloway.

That leaves a puzzle. Were McMillan’s baptisms among the Society people in Galloway recorded elsewhere, perhaps in Balmaghie parish? We know that some elements of the McMillanites split from their brethren and that other “Continuing” Society people did not join the McMillanites. Did the dissenting Galloway societies follow someone else, like John Hepburn the leader of the Hebronites, or not acknowledge McMillan’s ministry?

Craigmuie © Walter Baxter and licensed for reuse.

At Balmaghie, Kirkcudbrightshire, 13 October, 1707.
McMillan continued to minister in Balmaghie parish after he was deprived of his charge in the Church. Mundell may have been from Tinwald parish, Dumfriesshire.

‘were married ab eodem :— James Clerk and Agnes Mundel.’

At Craigmui, [i.e., Craigmuie, Balmaclellan parish, Kirkcudbrightshire,] October , 1709.
Craigmuie lies in Balmaclellan parish, Kirkcudbrightshire.

Map of Criagmuie

McMillan later married Mary Gordon (b.1681-d.1723), daughter of Alexander Gordon of Earlstoun (d.1726) and Lady Earlstoun (d.1696), and the widow of Edward Goldie of Craigmuie (d.1711). Mary Gordon had married Craigmuie in 1701.

‘To James Harkness in Juxta, two children brought out of Ireland, Robert, aged 10 years, and Mary, aged 4 years.’

James Harkness appears to have travelled to gain baptism for his two children.

At Balmaghie, Kirkcudbrightshire, 24 January, 1710.
‘were married,
John Newlands and Helen Lowrie, both in Kirkmaho parish.’

The last event listed before 1713, also appears to have involved participants from Dumfriesshire.

For more on the Millanites, see here.

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

The grave of John Mathieson that mentions John Kirkpatrick

“With reference to the sacrilegious destruction of the first tombstone erected over John Mathison’s grave, the following copy of a letter sent by the “General Meeting of the Societies,” that managed the affairs of the community who still adhered to the Covenanting Faith [in 1714], is still interesting:

“Mr. [John] Kirkpatrick [in Barburgh head],

We have received information from our friends in Nithsdale how you retaining your old malignity and enmity against the people of God have in pursuance there of adventured to run the risque of meddling with the monument of the dead, demolishing and breaking the gravestone of a sufferer for the cause of Christ which is highly criminal in the eyes of the law, and is more than your neck is worth, and deserves just severity as bringing to remembrance your old hatred, and the hand you had in his sufferings. And now ye seem to be longing for a visit for your old murthering actions, which if you would evite, we straitly charge and command you, upon your perill to repair that stone, by laying one upon the grave, fully as good as the former with the same precise motto as well engraven, and that you perform the work with all expedition, and if it be not done against May day first [1714], which is a sufficient time, we promise to pay you a visit, perhaps to your cost, and if you oblige us which to assure yourself that your old deeds will be remembered to purpose which to assure you of we have ordered this to be written in presence of our correspondence at Crawford-John, March 1, 1714, and subscribed in our name by Hu[gh]. Clerk, c[ler]k.” (Watson, Closeburn (Dumfriesshire) Reminiscent, Historic & Traditional (1901), 263-4.)

Kirkpartrick lived at Barburgh head, which lay near Barburgh Mill.

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

‘A great many People in the South were so opposite to the Union, that they conveened in Martial Order upon the 20 Day of November 1706, and burned the Printed Articles, &c. at the Cross of Dumfries, and caused Print an account of the same in a Paper, called, The burning of the Articles of the Union, &c. which the Parliament caused be burnt, so deaf were they to all the Cries given by the Inhabitants in their Addresses, which flowed not from disloyalty, but from sad Apprehensions that their ALL was at stake.’ (Hepburn & The Hebronites, Humble Pleadings, 255.)

The Hebronites who proclaimed the declaration, below, were a faction of the post-Revolution Society people, or Covenanters. They were led by a minister, John Hepburn. They were utterly scathing about the Scots who had conducted the Union negotiations and warned Parliament of armed resistance to oppose it.

An Account of the Burning of the Articles of the Union at Dumfries,

These are to Notifie to All Concerned, what are Our Reasons for, and Designs in the Burning of the Printed Articles of the Proposed Union with England, with the Names of the Scots Commissioners, Subscribers thereof; together with the Minute of the whole Treaty, betwixt them and the English Commissioners thereanent.

We have herein no Design against Her Majesty, nor against England, or any Englishman; neither against Our present Parliament, in their Acts or Actings, for the Interest, Safety and Sovereignty of this OUR NATIVE and ANCIENT NATION; But to Testifie Our Dissent from, Discontent with, and Protestation against the Twenty five Articles of the said Union, Subscribed by the foresaid Commissioners; as being Inconsistent with, and altogether prejudicial to, and utterly Destructive of the NATION’s Independency, Crown Rights, and Our Constitute Laws, both Sacred and Civil. We shall not here Condescend upon the particular Prejudices, that do, and will Redound to this Nation, if the said Union should be carried on, according to the Printed Articles: But refers the Reader to the Variety of Addresses, given in to the present Parliament, by all Ranks, from almost all Corners of this Nation, against the said Union: Only We must say, and Profess, That the Commissioners for this Nation, have been either Simple, Ignorant, or Treacherous, if not all three; when the Minuts of the Treaty betwixt the Commissioners of both Kingdoms are duely Considered; and when we compare their Dastardly Yieldings unto the Demands an proposals of the English Commissioners; who on the contrar, have Valiantly acquit themselves for the Interest and Safety of their Nation.

We acknowledge it is in the Power of the Present Parliament to give Remissions to the Subscribers of the foresaid Articles; and we heartily wish for good Agreement amongst all the Members of the Parliament, so as it may tend to the Safety and Preservation of both CHURCH and STATE, with all the Privileges belonging thereto, within the Kingdom of SCOTLAND.

But if the Subscribers of the foresaid Treaty of Union, with their Associats in Parliament, shall presume to carry on the said Union, by a Supream Power, over the Belly of the Generality of this Nation: Then and in that case; as we Judge, that the Consent of the Generality of the same, can only Divest them of their Sacred and Civil Libertys, Purchased and maintained by Our ANCESTORS with their Blood: So we Protest, whatever Ratification of the foresaid Union may pass in Parliament, contrar to Our Fundamental LAWS, LIBERTIES & PRIVILEGES, concerning Church & State, may not be binding upon the Nation, now nor at any time to come: And particularly we Protest against the Approbation of the first Article of the said Union, before the Privileges of this Nation centain’d in the other Articles have been adjusted and Secured: And so we earnestly Require, that the Representatives in Parliament, who are for Our Nation’s Privileges, would give timeous warning to all the Corners of the Kingdom; That we and our Posterity become not Tributary and Bond slaves to our Neighbours, without acquiting our Selves, as becomes Men and Christians. And we are Confident, that the Soldiers not in Martial power, have somuch of the Spirits of SCOTS MEN; that they are not Ambitious to be Dispose of, at the pleasure of another Nation: And we hereby Declare, that we have no Design against them in this matter.

This was publickly read from the mercat-cross of Dumfries, about one of the clock in the afternoon, the 20th day of November, 1706, with great solemnity, in the audience of many thousands the fire being surrounded by double squadrons of foot and horse, in martial order: And after the burning of the said books, (which were holden up, burning on the point of a pike, to the view of all the people, giving their consent by huzzas and chearful acclamations.) A Copy hereof was left affixed on the cross, as the testimony of the south part of this nation against the proposed Union, as moulded in the printed articles thereof; this we desire to be printed, and kept on record, Ad futuram rei memoriam [i.e., For future memory].’

For detailed images of the Declaration, see here.

Return to Homepage

Image © Copyright Dumfries & Galloway Council.

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

While he was a burgh commissioner in the Scottish Parliament before the Union, John Clerk, younger of Penicuik, encountered John Hepburn and the Hebronites at Sanquhar in 1705. Clerk was an enlightened man, but like most of the elite of his time he was highly dismissive of the 3,000 to 4,000 followers of Hepburn who were ‘most of the all the Cameronians in Scotland’. The Hebronites would later publicly oppose the Union and burn the articles of it at Dumfries:

‘In Aprile 1705 I resolved to make a visite to My Lord Galloway at his House in that country. I had the happiness of my Father’s company to the Lead hills, for he hapned to be appointed as a Ruling Elder to try, with a committee of Ministers, to reconcile one Mr. [John] Hepbume, a Cameronian Minister and his Followers [i.e., the Hebronites] to the Church of Scotland, from whose principles he had receded. I found afterward that this Committe had not been successful, for all the Cameronians were a wild, vain, and conceited sett of men. Instead of minding their business as Farmers or Manufacturers, they amused themselves chiefly with their own schismatick sholastick divinity and Acts of the General Assemblies. Mr. Hepburn flattered their absurdities by calling them the Remnant of God’s people, for the old Presbyterian forms of doctrine and discipline were laid down by them as standards in things agreeable to their own fancies. In other things they differed widely, as being pieces of necessary which they endeavoured to introduce. The meeting of the above mentioned Comitee was at Sanchar, and, as I was informed, thither came most of all the Cameronians in Scotland, to the number of 3 or 4000. Their disputes were managed in the Kirk, and I think much on the same way as most of the old General Councils.

N.B. The Cameronians were partly a Roguish, partly Enthusiastick set of men and women, who placed their Religion of meer trifles, or at best in hearing of discourses and sermons; such were always liked in proportion to their length, and none pleased save what were very long.’ (Clerk, Memoirs, 54-5.)

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

The veracity of the claims made John Ker of Kersland about his role as a spy in Union Crisis of 1706 to 1708 have been much debated. Whether he had the influence he maintained he had in his Memoirs in swaying the Hebronites and the Cameronians away from joining with the Jacobites to overthrow the Union is an open question. However, at a point later in the Memoirs, Kersland reproduced a letter that he states he received from Cameronian officers seeking payment of arrears for the services of themselves and Cameronian irregulars…

It is only a minor detail in Kersland’s account of his alleged dealings with the Cameronians, but it is one that can be checked. It appears that the officers concerned were probably all veterans of the Lord Angus’ Regiment raised from among Society people in early 1689, which fought at the Battle of Dunkeld and on the Continent. Kersland, it seems, did not fabricate the names of the Cameronian officers who subscribed the letter. That indicates that he probably did have dealings with the Cameronians in 1707 and early 1708. What those dealings were is another question, but clearly he was known to them and had made offers ‘in the Name of England’ to them.

Perhaps the most intriguing line in the whole Cameronian letter is ‘what can be expected from People thus abused, if the Pretender ever makes another Attempt?’

Kersland’s Memoirs:

‘I came to London, which was about the latter end of March 1709.

The Lord Treasurer, upon my Arrival, payed all Accompts due to myself [for his role as spy in the Union Crisis]; but to my Sorrow, could never prevail in the Matter of the Cameronian Arrears, not withstanding all that the good Duke of Queensberry, &c. could do, who did every thing in his Power to serve and oblige me, and used his Argument very often with the Treasurer for that end, and which I cannot in Honour and Gratitude to his Noble Memory forget gratefully to mention; he generously, always, remembring my good Services, and as generously forgetting the several Disobligations I had given him, in taking a Part with the Squadrone, &c. tho’ much to his Prejudice.

Next May, the following Letter from some of the Cameronian Officers, in behalf of the
whole, came to my Hand.

[Penpont 15 May, 1709.]

Honoured Sir, You may remember when the Pretender [James VIII] was upon our Coasts [in March 1708], what Promises you was pleased to make us in the Name of England, and, indeed, we shall never impute Non-Performance of them to any Neglect or Fault in you, but only to those concerned in the Government; you was Witness to our Zeal then, and our readiness to oppose the Pretender, had he landed: Be pleased to let us know if we are to expect the payment of our Arrears, or not.
England, who hath no Opportunity to know any thing of us, may probably despise us; but it is well known, that under the Conduct of your worthy Predecessors [e.g., Daniel Ker of Kersland], we durst look our Enemies in the Face, and defend ourselves in the Reigns of King Charles [II] and King James [VII]: But what can be expected from People thus abused, if the Pretender ever makes another Attempt? However, Sir, whether you Succeed in your Endeavours for us, or nor, we shall always have an Esteem and Affection for you; and a due Regard to the worthy Family [of Kerslands] you have the Honour to represent.
We add no more, but commit you to God’s Blessing and Keeping, and remain with all Sincerity and Respect, in our own, and our Friends Names,
Your most Humble Servants,

[Captain William] Harris, [Captain John] Matthewson,
[Captain James] Gilchrist, [Lieutenant John] Howartson [i.e., Hewatson],
[Lieutenant] Hutcheson, [?] Campbell.

This Letter made me stay in London to negotiate their Arrears, and that made the Difference I betwixt a certain great Man and me; for a change of the Ministry happening soon afterwards, the Treasurer and his Friends were very anxious to have me out of Town; because I knew abundance of Things they were willing to conceal:’ (Kersland, Memoirs, 68-69.)

I have given the ranks the officers held when the regiment was mustered in 1689.

Return to Homepage

Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

In 1706, the Society people of the Hebronites voiced their opposition to the Union…

‘But to leave this for a little, it will not be amiss to touch at the Incorporating Union of Scotland and England, which was about that time warmly agitat, and which was still disliked by the Godly in this Land, yea and by the generality of the Inhabitants, as a Treaty that would endanger our whole Civil and Sacred Interests. From the very time that this project was known to be really on foot, Mr. [John] H[epburn]. in his Sermons declared against it as being an open and undenyable breach of Covenant, and discovered from time to time the many Evils he discerned to be in it; and likeways not being content with speaking against it in the places where he Preached [>p250] he with us his Adherents in South and West [shires] Protested in manner following.

To His Grace, Her Majestie’s High Commissoner, [James Douglas, Duke of Queensberry,] and Honourable Estates of Parliament, The Humble Address of a Considerable Body of People in the South and Western Shires.

Sheweth
We undersubcribers being Commissionate and Appointed by many Christian Societies in the South and Western Shires of this Kingdom for the Effect following, considering how much the Union treated of at present, may be of dangerous Consequence to the Civil and Sacred Liberties and Concerns of this Nation; and how it is like, if carryed on, to involve the Nation in much Guilt.

While,

1mo. We Incorporat with a Nation deeply Guilty of many National Abominations, who have openly Broke and Burnt their Covenant with GOD, and League with Us, entered into in the Year 1643.

Are Sworn to the Maintainance of Abjured Prelacy, have their Publick and Established Worship horridly corrupted with Superstition and Idolatry; And their Doctrine dreadfully Leavened with Socinianism and Arminianism, Besides the most Gross and Deeply lamentable Profaneness that abounds among[s]t them. [>p251.]

2do. We would thereby bind up our Hands from Prosecuting the Ends of our League and Covenant, while Incorporating with them upon Terms quite Prejudicial thereunto, And such as whereby we could not but dishonour our GOD, and bring His Wrath upon us, on this Account; And hence for our parts, the Fear of GOD makes us abhore any thoughts of thus Imbodying with them, or of any Union whatsoever of that sort, without making this our joint Covenant the Primary and Fundamental Article thereof.

3tio. We can never for our Parts Own or Connive at the Civil Places of Church-Men, and that Bishops should have a Legislative Power, and Authority over us: Yea, We reckon the Title of Spiritual Lords, given to them as Blasphemous, The Lord CHRIST being the One only LORD in His Own House.

4to. It is an Extream Grievance to us, to think, That not only the Interest of the Church of England should be secured by an Oath of Abjuration, while that of ours is left to the Will and Discretion of the English in a British Parliament. But withal, for any thing we see or hear of as yet; Many in this Nation will be obliged to take the said Oath: Which considering the 2d. Act of Parliament, To which it refers, cannot be done, without both Inferring Guilt on our Part, Endangering our Church, and inevitably causing many Jealousies, Heart-burnings, and most grievous Ruptures amongst us.

5to. When we think how the Great GOD, who fixes the Bounds of Peoples Habitations, [>p252] has granted to us this Land; And by a very peculiar Providence has Preserved us as a FREE NATION, these 2000 Years, when many other Nations, Greater and Mightier than We have been Dispersed, and their Memory extinct; How unaccountable does it appear to us, that we should Destroy our Selves, and make a Voluntar surrender of our Liberties, Soveraignity, and Independency; And that when our GOD has so often interposed by a Marvellous Providence for our Deliverance and Defence, from the Encroachments and Invasions of Forreigners, and Injurious Neighbours! We should now distrust our PROTECTOR, and chuse England for the ground of our Confidence, our Shield and Stay, Which as we look upon as contrary to GOD’s Word. So l[ik]e wise to our SACRED COVENANTS, Whereby, according thereto, we are bound to maintain the Privilegesof our Parliaments, and Liberties of the Subjects.

6to. We cannot see what Security we can have for what ever is dear to us, that we need to have secured in case of an Incorporating Union with England, save only their bare Promise, who have broken the most Solemn Tyes of Sacred Engagements, and all Bonds of friendship, Confederacy and Neighbour hood, these Hundred Years bygone, to the estream hurt, & hazard both of our Church and State, and have even still, since ever we came under one Head with them, been in appearance seeking our Ruine. [>p253]

7mo. For any thing we can see, if this Union should go on, either we behooved to Ruine our Selves by submitting to a Toleration, destructive to our own Government and Discipline; or else to put our Honest Neighbours (some of the Dissenters) in England, in hazard of Losing theirs, since it will no doubt be pleaded, that the Dissenters in both Parts of the Nation should be equally dealt with; And yet for us we cannot without Horror think of the Sin, and sinful Consequences of a Toleration here.

8vo. Our Hearts do Tremble to think what bitter Fruits of Faction, Parties, and incurable Breaches the going into this Union may produce, and how easie an Access thro’ this and the great Ferment of the Nation it may make for the pretended King James the Eight to come to the Throne; At least we cannot understand how this Union can put a Bar thereupon, but rather have strong and not groundless Fears of its tending to the contrary – And as to the matter of Rents, and Irritation among these in our Bounds, We are very sure that they who have hitherto complained of the continuance, by Act of Parliament, of so many Prelatists in Churches, of the Connivance at others in Meeting houses, of Incroachments made on Assembles in their Adjournments and Dissolution; and otherwise also in the matters of Fasts and Oaths; And of the not duly Executing of good laws against Papists, Quakers, and [>p254] other Heretical and Profanely Scandalous Persons, will then have their Grievances greatly increased, and who knows what may be the Issue thereof.

9no. We cannot see how it can consist with this Union, to endeavour to bring to condign Punishment Malignants, or Enemies to Reformation, which is plain Duty in it self, and to which we stand Solemnly engaged by our Covenants; Yea, such being readied to take the Sacramental Test of England, are nearest to advancement, and no Scots man can be Advanced in England without it, whereas any Englishman may be in place of Trust in Scotland, how opposit soever to our Government.

Upon all which and many more such Weighty Reasons, we could offer, and are offered by others, who seek the welfare of the Church, and Kingdom, Tho we solemnly Protest and Profess, that we are not against an Union in the LORD, with England, And such as may be confident with the Liberty of our Nation, and with our sacred Covenants, and security of our Church; Yet we cannot but also Protest, Likeas hereby we do Protest, against this Union as Moulded in the Printed Articles; Neither do we judge our selves bound thereby, tho’ a prevailing Party in Parliament should conclude the same; But will stand by such Noble Patriots, with Life and Fortune, as are for the Maintainance and Defence of the Nations Independency and Freedom, and this Churches just Power, and proper Privilege, conform to our attained Reformation from 1638 to 1649. [>p255]

This in Name, of many Christian Societies United into a considerable Body of People, in the South and Western Shires of this Kingdom, is Subscribed this 12th day of November, 1706
BY
W[illiam]. Woodburn,
J[ohn]. Hepburn,
J. Thomson,
G[eorge]. Mitchel,
W. Lorimer,
W[illiam]. Harris,
J. Mulican,
J. Millar.’ (Humble Pleadings (1713), 248-55.)

The Hebronites’ ‘Humble Address’ was subscribed on Tuesday, 12 November, 1706, the same day that it was submitted to Parliament in Edinburgh. The minutes of Parliament record the submission of an ‘address of a body of people in the south and western shires, subscribed by Mr John Hepburn and another seven persons’ (RPS, M1706/10/20.)

The ‘Humble Address’ had been agreed to at an earlier general meeting, as the eight delegates who subscribed it were ‘Commissionate and Appointed by many Christian Societies in the South and Western Shires of this Kingdom’. The address was also submitted in the name ‘of many Christian Societies United into a considerable Body of People, in the South and Western Shires of this Kingdom’. In 1705, Clerk of Penicuik estimated the strength of the Hebronites at 3,000 to 4,000.

The eight subscribers were probably delegated by the general meeting to go to Edinburgh to take the pulse of the members of Parliament about the proposed Union, which was then being debated and had caused widespread disquiet among the People. The delegates almost certainly subscribed the document in Edinburgh.

Eight days later on 20 November, the Hebronites, in the classic mode of the Society people that usurped the theatre of royal authority, publicly burnt the articles of Union, a list of the Scottish commissioners who had negotiated it and issued a declaration against the Union at the mercat cross of Dumfries. The declaration was carefully framed to have widespread appeal among the opponents of Union. Rather than listing the specific, mainly religious, grievances of the Hebronites against the proposed Union found in the ‘Humble Address’, it grounded its appeal in the national and constitutional rhetoric found in the popular petitions submitted to Parliament against the Union.

The obvious next step after the declaration was to take up arms against the Union and descend on Edinburgh to raise Parliament. The declaration carried that threat: ‘we are Confident, that the Soldiers not in Martial power, have somuch of the Spirits of SCOTS MEN; that they are not Ambitious to be Dispose of, at the pleasure of another Nation: And we hereby Declare, that we have no Design against them in this matter.’ The Society people appear to have been relatively confident that the rank and file of the Scottish Army either were, or could be, persuaded not to oppose their designs.

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

In his diary of the Scottish Parliament during the Union debates, David Hume of Crossrig recorded Parliament’s reaction to the Society people’s burning of the articles of Union at Dumfries in November, 1706.

The Hebronites, or the 3,000 to 4,000 Society people led by the minister John Hepburn, had submitted a ‘Humble Address’ to Parliament detailing their objections to the Union on 12 November. However, in their declaration at Dumfries on 20 November they had made a far broader appeal to opponents of the Union and, accompanied by 540 foot and horse, threatened insurrection.

The Society people, or their forebears, had a long history of attempting to mount raids on Edinburgh to influence political events, e.g., the battle of Mauchline Moor and the Whiggamore Raid of 1648, the Pentland Rising of 1666, the Bothwell Rising of 1679 and in their defence of the Convention of Estates to secure the Revolution in 1689. How would Scotland’s elite respond in 1706?

Friday, 29 November:

‘The Chancellour told he was ordered by the Privy Council to lay before the Parliament, That my L[ord]. Commissioner [James Douglas, Duke of Queensberry] and others had received advice from the Magistrates of Glasgow, that they had been lately insulted by the mob, not so much by those of the town as those from the country, demanding money and arms; that the Town had suppressed them, and hoped to keep the peace there.

As also, there was advice from the Magistrats of Drumfries, that about 420 foot and 120 horse, commanded by one [‘Captain’ William] Harries, came to the town after the Town’s endeavours to resist them, but in vain, and there drew up and burnt the Articles of Treaty of the Union; which latter were read.

[The] proclamation they made was read [in Parliament], and it was moved, Some course might be thought upon for suppressing these insolences; and a proclamation was offered, mentioning the shire of Cluidsdale, and the neighbouring Shires to Drumfries.

The D[uke]. of Hamilton and M[arquis]. of Annandale opposed it, seing there was no special information against them. So the Commissioner [Queensberry] told, he had advice there was irregular meetings in Cluidsdale. Others condescended on Kirk of Shots, Lesmahago, and Stennhouse, where several letters unsubscribed were dropt, [to] require several parishes to meet and rendezvous, and be ready on a call with 10 dayes provision.

Then the proclamation was objected against for forbidding all assemblies in arms during this Session of Parliament. It was alledged to be a suspension, not a rescission of the Act of Security [of 1703], requiring the heritors, &c., to bring arms, and muster their men, at least once a month. It was further said, this could not be without an Act of Parliament, requiring two readings. The matter was adjusted, and the proclamation was amended, forbidding all assemblies in arms, contrary to [>p188] law, which was voted and approven. And an Act, suspending that clause of the Act of Security, of mustering during this Session of Parliament, was read, and marked A first reading. […]’

Saturday, 30 November, 1706:

‘After the Minutes, proceed to the Act suspending the clause of the Act of Security, during this Session of Parliament, […] There was some reasoning against it as not necessary; but it came to a vote, Approve the Act, which discharges all assembling in arms during this Session of Parliament [i.e., the last ever session of Parliament], under the pain of Treason: it carried, with few Noes, and some Mutes. D[uke of]. Ham[ilton]. was not present. D[uke of]. Athol was No, and [the earl of] Errol, Visc[ount]. Stormont, [William Cochrane of] Kilmaronnock, &c. The Proclamation and Act of Parliament sent to the Cross to be proclaimed [on Monday, 2 December].’ (Hume, A Diary of the Proceedings of Parliament, 187-8.)

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

On Saturday 30 November, 1706, Parliament responded to the tumults in Glasgow, the Society people’s declaration at Dumfries and letters organising an anti-Union rebellion in Lanarkshire, by ordering a proclamation that was probably proclaimed in Glasgow, Dumfries and Lanark on Monday 2 December:

‘A Proclamation
Against all Tumultuary and Irregular Meetings and Convocations of the Liedges.

ANNE, by the grace of God, Queen of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith: To Our Lyon King at Arms, and his Brethren, Heraulds, Pursevants. Macers, and Messengers at Arms, Our Sheriffs in that part, conjunctly and severally, specially constitute, greeting:

Forasmuch as, albeit the raising of Tumults, and making Convocations within Burgh, and the Riotous and Disorderly Assembling and continuing in Arms, thereby insulting the Magistrates, and hindering them in the Execution of their Office, and hindering of the Common Law, be contrary to sundry Laws and Acts of Parliament, as well as destructive of the ends of Government, and particularly to Parl. 14. cap. 77. Ja. 2. Ja. 4. Parl. 3. chap. 34. Ja. 6. Parl. 18. chap. 17. As also the rising in arm, convocating our Liedges in the open fields, and marching in formed bodies armed through the country, and entering into our Royal Burghs, boden in Fier of Weir, and entering into bonds, leagues, and associations, for prosecuting illegal and unwarrantable ends, be, by several Laws and Acts of Parliament, declared to be open and manifest Treason, and the Committers, Abettors, and Assistants in such Crimes and Practices, ought to be prosecuted, and may be punished as Traitors to her Majesty and her Government; and particularly by Parl. 2. Ja. 1st. chap. 37. Ja. 2. Parl. 6. chap. 14. Ja. 6. Parl. 12. chap. 144. Cha. 2. Parl. 1st. Session 1st. chap. 3.

Yet, nevertheless, We, and our Estates of Parliament, are certainly informed, that in several corners of the Realm, and particularly in our Burgh of Glasgow, and other places within the Sheriffdom of Lanerk, and in our Burgh of Dumfries, and other places adjacent, people have presumed, in manifest contempt of the foresaid Laws, to assemble themselves in open defiance of our Government, and with manifest design to overturn the same, by insulting the Magistrates, attacking and assaulting the houses of our peaceable subjects, continuing openly in arms, and marching in formed bodies through the country, and into our Burghs, and insolently burning, in the face of the sun, and presence of the Magistrates, the Articles of Treaty, betwixt our two Kingdoms, entered into by the authority of Parliament, and even after the said Articles had been presented to Us, and were under the consideration of Us and our Estates, presently sitting in Parliament, and some progress made thereupon; and such crimes and insolencies being no ways to be tolerated in any well-governed nation; but, on the contrary, ought to be condignly punished conform to the Laws above-mentioned, and other Acts of Parliament made thereanent, especially if persisted and continued in after our displeasure therewith shall be made known:

Therefore, We, with advice and consent of the Estates of Parliament, peremptorily require and command all and every person, who have assembled themselves in manner above-mentioned, to lay down their said arms, and disperse themselves, and peaceably and quietly to retire, and betake themselves to their several habitations and employments; and We, with advice foresaid, prohibit and discharge any assembling or convocating in arms in manner foresaid, under the pains contained in the Acts of Parliament above-mentioned, certifying all that shall be guilty, actors, abettors, or assistants, in convocating or assembling in arms, or those who shall convocate and commit these practices above-mentioned, shall be treated and pursued as open traitors, and the pains of Treason execute upon them accordingly:

And in case any of our people shall dare to be so presumptuous, after publication of the premisses, to assemble or continue in arms; We hereby require and command the Sheriffs of our several Shires, Stewarts of Stewartries, Baillies of Regallities and Baronies, Magistrates of Burghs, and other Officers of our Law, Officers of our Forces and Troops under their command, to pass upon, disperse, and subdue the said convocation, by open force, and all manner of violence, as enemies and open rebels to us and our Government:

And in case any slaughter, blood, bruises, or mutilation shall happen to be done and committed by our said Sheriffs, and Officers of our Forces, and other Magistrates foresaid, or persons under their command; We, with advice foresaid, do hereby fully remit, pardon, and indemnify the same, and discharge the prosecution thereof civilly or criminally in all time coming.

Our will is therefore, and we charge you, that ye pass to the Mercat cross of Edinburgh, and the Mercat-crosses of Dumfries, Lanerk, and Glasgow, and other places needful, and there make publication hereof, by open Proclamation of the premisses, that none pretend ignorance: And ordains these presents to be printed, and our Solicitors to send Copies hereof to the Magistrates of the respective Burghs above mentioned, for that effect. Extracted forth of the Records of Parliament, by
JA. MURRAY, Cls. Reg.

God Save the Queen.’

(Reproduced in Defoe, History of the Union, 658-9.)

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

After he arrived as an English spy in Scotland in October, 1706, Daniel Defoe lodged at the house of Mr. John Monro, her Majesty’s armourer, at the sign of the Half Moon by the Netherbow gate of Edinburgh.

His correspondence from that period with Robert Harley, England’s Northern Secretary, has been widely used by historians of the Union, as it mainly deals with the negotiations in the Scottish Parliament, the views the presbyterian ministers, his attempts to influence both people and the debates, and the actions of various mobs. However, it also makes reference to the Cameronian Society people and helps to put some of their actions into context.

On 5 November, 1706, he noted that ‘addresses are delivered in from several places and more preparing’ and that ‘are found in the cant of the old times, deploring the misery of Scotland for want of a further reformation and the security of the church and the Lord’s covenanted people, but when the names come to be examined they are all signed by known Jacobites and Episcopal men.’ (Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Portland, IV, 345.)

On 12 November, the Hebronites delivered a similar ‘humble address’ to Parliament that was subscribed by delegates from Society people.

The Societies’ delegation, including John Hepburn, was part of a wider gathering of people from across Scotland in Edinburgh. On 7 November, the Earl of Leven noted that ‘all is quiet here, although I cannot say it would be had we not guards within this city, for there is a very great confluence of people here in town, and the ferment is great amongst the mob.’ (Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Portland, IV, 346.)

In Defoe’s letter of 5 November he recorded disquiet among the rank and file of the Scottish Army over the impact of Union on them:

‘There has been a further expectation of a mob and some practices have been used to infect the soldiers, but [David Melville] the Earl of Leven[, the commander-in-chief of all Scottish forces and son of George, Lord Melville,]  called the [Foot] guards together today and made a speech to them. They had been possessed with a notion that they should be sent to the West Indies as soon as the Union was over. My Lord Leven, I hope, has re-established them and the proceeding since is more favourable.’ (Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Portland, IV, 345-6.)

On 13 November, Defoe considered the possibility of an insurrection and how loyal the army would be in the event of one:

‘if any insurrection happen, which I must acknowledge is not unlikely, I crave leave to say the few troops they have here are not to be depended upon; I have this confessed by men of the best judgment. The officers are good, but even the officers own they dare not answer for their men, and some of the wisest and most discerning men here wish two or three regiments of horse or dragoons were sent but near the borders, as silently as might be. All the forces this Government has to make a stand are not 2000 effective men, and of them I question whether 1500 could be drawn together.’ (Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Portland, IV, 350.)

John Dalrymple, Earl of Stair, also wrote to Harley on 26 November:

‘I acknowledge there’s great ground to believe the opposers are so bold and resolute that they will spare no means to obstruct the ratification of the treaty, and will take off foully some persons that may be most forward, or else raise the country in arms, towards which there are too many open steps made already.

We have all the encouragement we can wish from Her Majesty and her ministers there by their firmness to the measure, but I could wish to hear of your troops in the north of England and Ireland, for it encourages our enemies to think you have none near. And though the officers of our few forces are gentlemen of honour, yet the coutinets (sic) may be tainted with popular apprehensions, and the belief that after the Union they shall either be disbanded or sent to the plantations; and if the country should rise, they are few, exposed without help or hopes of relief. It is easier to stifle ill inclinations than to reduce open rebellion upon popular sentiments, therefore I long to hear of the [English] troops [on the Border];’ (Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Portland, IV, 359.)

The Hebronites’ printed declaration at Dumfries of 20 November questioned whether the rank and file soldiery were committed to the defence of Parliament.

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

In a letter at the height of the Union Crisis on 30 November, 1706, the English author and spy, Daniel Defoe, reports that he had sent an agent from Edinburgh to the West to dissuade Presbyterians from rising against the Treaty of Union. On the same day, the Scottish Parliament ordered a proclamation against those planning a rising.

On 30 November, 1706, Defoe wrote that

‘I had heard of the West countrymen’s resolutions [of Presbyterians potentially rising against Parliament to thereby end the Union negotiations] and purposed to have gone among them myself, but the Committee calling every day for me, I thought myself able to do more service here, and Mr. Pierce whom you know of offering himself, I sent him with my servant and horses, with some heads, of reasons if possible to open their eyes. He is very well known among them and very acceptable to their ministers who are the firebrands, and I hope may be serviceable to cool the people, if he escapes the first fury, but I confess myself in pain for him. He is sincerely zealous for the public, and will merit a pardon for what has passed, if he performs this service, whether he has success or no.’

Due to his mission, Pierce was probably in some danger from the anti-Union western Presbyterians. Who was the mysterious spy called Pierce?

According to Furbank, Owens, etc., in Defoe De-Attributions: Critique of J. R. Moore’s Checklist (1994), he was the English dissenter and broker, John Pierce. In May, 1704, Queen Anne offered a reward for the discovery of the author and printer of a subversive pamphlet called Legion’s Humble Address aka. ‘the Million Letter’, in which Pierce played a role:

‘On 8 June [1704, the diarist], Narcissus Lutterell reported that “Mr. Peirce, an exchange broker, abscond[s]; [… for ] handing it [Legion’s Address] to the presse”.

[… on 19 June [1704], the alleged printer of Legion’s Humble Address confirmed that] “one Pierce a Broker, formerly a Silkman” paid him about forty shillings, and going to Newcastle in the company of Pierce. […]

On 5 July [1704] an informer told [Robert Harley that] ‘John Pierce, “reputed author of the Million Letter”, was also in England, though the informer did not know where.

On 27 September [1704] Nathaniel Sammom, “ a tool of [Daniel] De Foe’s”, […] admitted receiving a bundle of papers from “one John Pearce”. […]

A newsletter dated London, 10 February 1705 […] reported that: “a person who is fled thither [i.e., to Edinburgh] from England for being author of Legion’s Address and goes by the borrowed name of Allen (though his true name is Pierce) with some others of his kidney kept the [anti-Royalist and pro-Republican] calves head feast [on the anniversary of the execution of Charles I on 30 January] at the house of one Fowler in the Cowgate [of Edinburgh]”. […]

A copy now in the National Library of Scotland, of A Dialogue between a Country-Man, and a Landwart School Master, concerning the Proceedings of the Parliament of England (Edinburgh, 1705) has a manuscript inscription in an old hand on its title-page: “By Peirce Alias Legion Alias Allen Alias etc.”

One of the copies of Legion’s Humble Address in the National Library of Scotland has the contemporary inscription: “This is the address for q[ui]ch Allan brock newgate prison and ffled to Scotland”.

In the Memorial of the Presbyterians (1706) reference is made to “one P—e, a Broker, (that was kept out of the Way for publishing and dispersing a half Sheet, which was wrote by D. D[e].F[[oe].)”.

[After Defoe’s letter of 30 November,] in The Review Review’d: In a Letter to the Prophet Daniel in Scotland, published probably in April 1707, Defoe was urged to “be civil to poor Jack Pearse, who you know was forc’d to travel Northward upon your Account”.

A letter from Robert Watts to A. Charlett of February 1708, quoted in Remarks and Collections of Thomas Hearne […] says: “The Author of … The Observator reviv’d was one Pearce an Exchange Broker some time concern’s in ye Paper call’d Legions Address & forc’d to fly on that Acc[oun]t into Holland.” (Furbank, Owens, etc., Defoe De-Attributions: Critique of J.R.Moore’s Checklist, 17-18.)

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

On 30 November, 1706, most of the members of the Scottish Parliament voted to strike down a law under which armed, Protestant Scots could legally muster for the defence of their Kingdom. The new act was squarely aimed at the Society people and their allies who had conducted armed protests against the Treaty of Union with England, which was then being voted on in Parliament, and that Scotland’s elite, with good reason based on intelligence, feared were about to mount a rising to raise Parliament and prevent Union.

This act cut the legal basis for popular resistance to the Union and declared those who took up arms in defence of Scottish sovereignty as “traitors”.

‘Act against all Musters and Rendezvouses during the present Session of Parliament [without her Majesty’s special command]

OUR Sovereign Lady, considering, that by the 3d act of the 2d session of this Parliament intituled, “Act for Security of the Kingdom,” it is statute and enacted, that the whole Protestant Heretors, and all the Burghs within the same, shall forthwith provide themselves with Fire-arms for all the Fencible-men, who are Protestants, within their respective Bounds; and the said Heretors and Burghs are thereby empowered and ordained, to discipline and exercise their Fencible-men once in the month at least; and also considering that the disorderly and seditious meetings and tumults, in some places in the country [i.e., in Dumfries, Glasgow etc.], do[es] make it necessary at this occasion to suspend the effect of the foresaid clause, during this Session of Parliament allennarly [i.e., only]:

Therefore, Her Majesty, with advice and consent of the Estates of Parliament, doth hereby suspend the effect of the foresaid clause, and that during this Session of Parliament allennarly [i.e., only].

And further her Majesty, with advice and consent foresaid, discharges and strictly prohibits the subjects of this Kingdom to meet and assemble together in arms after the publication hereof, upon any pretence whatsoever, during the space foresaid, without her Majesty’s special command, or express licence had or obtained thereto:

And requires and commands all the subjects of this Kingdom to retire to their own habitations and lawful employments; certifying such as shall do in the contrary that they shall be liable to the pains of High Treason, conform[ing] to the Laws and Acts of Parliament made against unlawful convocations risings in arms.’ (Printed in Defoe, History of the Union, 661; RPS, 1706/10/112.)

The act was followed by a proclamation at the mercat crosses of Dumfries, Lanark and Glasgow that was designed to make the point.

In the last session of the Scottish Parliament in early 1707, the period for the enforcement of this act was was extended on 21 February until 1 January 1708. (RPS, 1706/10/316.)

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

Daniel Defoe in Edinburgh to Robert Harley, English Northern Secretary, Wednesday 13 November, 1706:

‘At Dumfries they have burnt the Articles [of Union] in the market place, at Glasgow, they were about it, but the magistrates prevailed with them to forbear on promise to sign an address against it. It would amaze you [i.e., Harley], if I should give you the trouble of repeating the ridiculous notions people here have entertained against their own happiness, the libels, the absurdities, and the insults on that head are intolerable.

The High Commissioner [to Parliament, i.e., the Duke of Queensberry] has had letters sent to threaten him with pistol, dagger, and variety of assassination, and the unusual numbers of Highlanders [i.e., potential Jacobites] makes some people very uneasy here; there being more of them here now, than has been known.’ (Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Portland, IV, 349.)

For Defoe’s earlier letters from Edinburgh in the Union Crisis, see here.

For Defoe’s next secret letter of 16 November, see here.

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

As the Union Crisis mounted in Scotland, the English spy Daniel Defoe reported rumours that the Covenanters of the South and West were about to rise to raise Parliament and stop the Union. In Glasgow, the mob had made their opposition to Union clear. Defoe requested English troops on the Border…

Daniel Defoe in Edinburgh to Robert Harley, English Northern Secretary, Saturday 16 November, 1706:

In the Scottish ‘Parliament things go right enough [in the debates over the Treaty of Union], but really everywhere else the nation is in strange confusion, and the threatenings of the Church party are very high and plain. […] The lenity of the Government is taken as fear, and the Kirk [of Scotland] is stark mad that they have, as they say, no security and that their Articles are rejected.

The Cameronian [humble] address [to Parliament of 12 November], though of no great moment, I send because you should see some of the spirit, for though [Mr John] Hepburn that sends it is a mad man, that is mad in zeal, and has been deposed and disowned by the Kirk, yet they talk his very language now every day in their common discourse, and I dined to-day with a [presbyterian] minister who told me were the weather permitting they would have been at Edinburgh before now with 15,000 men.’ (Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Portland, IV, 351-2.)

Four days later on Wednesday 20 November, armed Covenanters declared against the Union at Dumfries.

Defoe’s letter also dealt with the tumults in Glasgow:

‘The rabble at Glasgow has driven the Provost out of the town, and he is fled hither [to Edinburgh]; the reason was he would not address [against the Union for the burgh]. They have sent up their Address and a great many [among the burgh elite] whose hands are to it have sent up letters to [the Earl of Seafield] the Lord Chancellor, that they were forced to sign it against their minds; yet the address was received and read, the Provost flying for his life. They have broken up his house and plundered or defaced his goods. […] They exercise their men and appear with arms and drums in Glasgow, and indeed those things tend to a strange conclusion. The next sitting of Parliament will enter on the main question, I mean the third article [creating the UK Parliament], and if it pass we shall see whether they dare make any disturbance or no.

I wish her Majesty would be pleased to have some [English] forces on the border, for if there is the least violence here all will be in blood; an appearance of some regiments on the border would at least encourage the troops here, who are not otherwise to be depended on.

You will excuse my presumption in offering anything that looks like direction; no doubt her Majesty will let nothing be wanting here to succour that interest which appears so hearty, and which if they are not supported will, if an accident happens, be sacrificed to all manner of the most barbarous insults.’ (Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Portland, IV, 352.)

For Defoe’s earlier letter of 13 November, see here.

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

‘Under the title of this paper, I do not think it foreign to my design, to speak of a man born in her majesty’s dominions, and relate an adventure in his life, so uncommon, that its doubtful whether the like has happened to any other of the human race. The person I speak of is Alexander Selkirk, whose name is familiar to men of curiosity, from the fame of his having lived four years and four months alone in the island of Juan Fernandez.

I had the pleasure frequently to converse with the man soon after his arrival in England, in the year 1711. It was matter of great curiosity to hear him, as he is a man of good sense, give an account of the different revolutions in his own mind in that long solitude. When we consider how painful absence from company, for the space of but one evening, is to the generality of mankind, we may have a sense how painful this necessary and constant solitude was to a man bred a sailor, and ever accustomed to enjoy and suffer, eat, drink, and sleep, and perform all offices of life, in fellowship and company.

He was put ashore from a leaky vessel, with the captain of which he had an irreconcilable difference; and he chose rather to take his fate in this place, than in a crazy vessel under a disagreeable commander. His portion were a sea-chest, his wearing-clothes and bedding, a firelock, a pound of gunpowder, a large quantity of bullets, a flint and steel, a few pounds of tobacco, an hatchet, a knife, a kettle, a bible and other books of devotion; together with pieces that concerned navigation, and his mathematical instruments.

Resentment against his officer, who had ill used him, made him look forward on this change of life as the more eligible one, till the instant in which he saw the vessel put off; at which moment his heart yearned within him, and melted at the parting with his comrades and all human society at once.

He had in provision for the sustenance of life, but the quantity of two meals, the island abounding only with wild goats, cats, and rats. He judged it most probable that he should find more immediate and easy relief, by finding shell fish on the shore, than seeking game with his gun. He accordingly found great quantities of turtles, whose flesh is extremely delicious, and of which he frequently ate very plentifully on his first arrival, till it grew disagreeable to his stomach, except in jellies.

The necessities of hunger and thirst were his greatest diversions from the reflections on his lonely condition. When those appetites were satisfied, the desire of society was as strong a call upon him, and he appeared to himself least necessitous, when he wanted every thing; for the supports of his body were easily attained; but the eager longings for seeing again the face of man, during the interval of craving bodily appetites, were hardly supportable.

He grew dejected, languid, and melancholy, scarce able to refrain from doing himself violence; till by degrees, by the force of reason, and frequent reading of the scriptures, and turning his thoughts upon the study of navigation, after the space of eighteen month he grew thoroughly reconciled to his condition.

When he had made this conquest, the vigour of his health, disengagement from the world, a constant cheerful serene sky, and a temperate air, made his life one continual feast, and his being much more joyful than it had before been irksome. He now, taking delight in everything, made the hut in which he lay, by ornaments which he cut down from a spacious wood, on the side of which it was situated, the most delicious bower, fanned with continual breezes and gentle aspirations of wind, that made his repose after the chace equal to the most sensual pleasures.

I forgot to observe, that, during the time of his dissatisfaction, monsters of the deep, which frequently lay on the shore, added to the terrors of his solitude; their dreadful howlings and voices seemed too terrible to be made for human ears: but, upon the recovery of his temper, he could with pleasure not only hear their voices, but approach the monsters themselves with great intrepidity. He speaks of sea-lions, whose jaws and tails were capable of seizing and breaking the limbs of a man, if he approached them; but at that time his spirits and life were so high, that he could act so regularly and unconcerned, that merely from being unruffled in himself, he killed them with the greatest ease imaginable: for observing, that though their jaws and tails were so terrible, yet the animals being mighty slow in working themselves round, he had nothing to do but place himself exactly opposite to their middle, and as close to them as possible, and he dispatched them with his hatchet at will.

The precaution which he took against want, in case of sickness, was to lame kids when very young, so as they might recover their health, but never be capable of speed. These he had in great numbers about his hut; and when he was himself in full vigour, he could take at full speed the swiftest goat running up a promontory, and never failed of catching them, but on a descent.

His habitation was extremely pestered with rats, which gnawed his clothes and feet when sleeping. To defend himself against them, he fed and tamed numbers of young kitlings, who lay about his bed, and preserved him from the enemy. When his clothes were quite worn out, he dried and tacked together the skins of goats, with which he clothed himself; and was inured to pass through woods, bushes, and brambles, with as much carelessness and precipitance as any other animal.

It happened once to him, that running on the summit of a hill, he made a stretch to seize a goat; with which under him, he fell down a precipice, and lay senseless for the space of three days, the length of which time he measured by the moon’s growth since his last observation. This manner of life grew so exquisitely pleasant, that he never had a moment heavy upon his hands; his nights were untroubled, and his days joyous, from the practice of temperance and exercise. It was his manner to use stated hours and places for exercises of devotion, which he performed aloud, in order to keep up the faculties of speech, and to utter himself with greater energy.

When I first saw him, I thought, if I had not been let into his character and story, I could have discerned that he had been much separated from company, from his aspect and gesture; there was a strong but cheerful seriousness in his look, and a certain disregard to the ordinary things about him, as if he had been sunk in thought.

When the ship, which brought him off the island, came in, he received them with the greatest indifference with relation to the prospect of going off with them, but with great satisfaction in an opportunity to refresh and help them. The man frequently bewailed his return to the world, which could not, he said, with all its enjoyments, restore him to the tranquillity of his solitude. Though I had frequently conversed with him, after a few months absence he met me in the street, and though he spoke to me, I could not recollect that I had seen him: familiar converse in this town had taken off the loneliness of his aspect, and quite altered the air of his face.

This plain man’s story is a memorable example, that he is happiest who confines his wants to natural necessities; and he that goes further in his desires, increases his wants in proportion to his acquisitions; or, to use his own expression, “I am now worth eight hundred pounds, but shall never be so happy as when I was not worth a farthing.”’

Published in ‘The Englishman’, No. 26, Dec. 3, 1713.

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine

While Daniel Defoe was an English spy was in Edinburgh at the heart of the Union Crisis of 1706 to 1708, the Scotsman, Alexander Selkirk, was marooned on the remote island of Más a Tierra.

Defoe would later turn Selkirk’s story into Robinson Crusoe in 1719. Before that, someone else wrote about meeting Selkirk in London in 1711.

An account of Selkirk’s rescue is found in Woodes Rogers, A Cruising Voyage Round the World: First to the South-seas (1712), which is clearly in part based on the ship’s log:

[Monday] Jan 31. [1709]
These 24 hours we had the Wind between the S. and S W by W. At seven this morning we made the Island of Juan Fernandez.; it bore W S W. dist. about 7 Ls. at Noon W by S. 6 Ls. We had a good Observ. Lat, 34. 10. S.

[Tuesday] February 1. [1709]
About two yesterday in the Afternoon we hoisted our Pinnace out; Capt. Dover with the Boats Crew went in her to go ashore, tho we could not be less than 4 Ls off. As soon as the Pinnace was gone, I went [from the Duke] on board the Duchess, who admir’d our Boat attempted going ashore at that distance from Land: ‘twas against my Inclination, but to oblige Capt. Dover I consented to let her go.

As soon as it was dark, we saw a Light ashore; our Boat was then about a League from the Island, and bore away for the Ships as soon as she saw the Lights. We put out Lights abroad for the Boat, tho some were of opinion the Lights we saw were our Boat Lights; but as Night came on, it appeared too large for that.

We fired one Quarter-Deck Gun and several Muskets, showing Lights; in our Mizen and Fore-Shrouds, that our Boat might find us, whilst we ply’d in the Lee of the Island. About two in the Morning our Boat came on board, having been two hours on board the Dutchess, that took ‘em up astern of us: we were glad they get well off because it begun to blow. We are all convinc’d the Light is on the shore, and design to make our Ships ready to engage, believing them to be French Ships at anchor, and we must either fight ‘em or want Water, &c.

[Wednesday] Febr. 2. [1709]
We stood on the back side along the South end of the Island, in order to lay in with the first Southerly Wind, which Capt. Dampier told us generally blows there all day long. In the Morning, being past the Island, we tack’d to lay it in close aboard the Land and about ten a clock open’d the South End of the Island, and ran close aboard the Land that begins to make the North-East side. The Flaws came heavy off shore, and we were forc’d to reef our Top-sails when we open’d the middle Bay, where we expected to find our Enemy, but saw all clear, and no Ships in that nor the other Bay next the N W. End[.] These two Bays are all that Ships ride in which recruit on this Island, but the middle Bay is by much the best. We guess’d there had been Ships there, but that they were gone on sight of us. We sent our Yall ashore about Noon, with Capt. [Thomas] Dover, Mr. Frye, and six men, all arm’d; mean while we and the Dutchess kept turning to get in, and such heavy Flaws came off the Land, that we were forced to let fly our Topsail-Sheet, keeping all Hands to stand by our Sails, for fear of the Wind’s carrying ‘em away: but when the Flaws were gone, we had little or no Wind. These Flaws proceeded from the Land, which is very high in the middle of the Island. Our Boat did not return, so we sent our Pinnace with the Men arm’d, to see what was the occasion of the Yall’s stay; for we were afraid that the Spaniards had a Garison there, and might have seiz’d ‘em. We put our a Signal for our Boat, and the Dutchess show’d a French Ensign. Immediately our Pinnace return’d from the shore, and brought abundance of Craw-fish, with a Man cloth’d in Goat-Skins, who look’d wilder than the first Owners of them.

Alexander Selkirk’s Cave

He had been on the Island four Years and four Months [i.e., since late 1704], being left there by Capt. Stradling in the Cinque-Ports; his Name was Alexander Selkirk a Scotch Man, who had been Master of the Cinque-Ports, a Ship that came here last with Capt. Dampier, who told me that this was the best Man in her; so I immediately agreed with him to be a Mate on board Our Ship, ‘Twas he that made the Fire last night when he saw our Ships, which he judg’d to be English.

During his stay here, he saw several Ships pass by, but only two came in to anchor. As he went to view them, he found ‘em to be Spaniards, and retir’d from ‘em; upon which they shot at him. Had they been French, he would have submitted; but chose to risque his dying alone on the Island, rather than fall into the hands of the Spaniards in these parts, because he apprehended they would murder him, or make a Slave of him in the Mines, for he fear’d they would spare no Stranger that might be capable of discovering the South-Sea. The Spaniards had landed, before he knew what they were, and they came so near him that he had much, ado to escape; for they not only shot at him, but pursued him into the Woods, where he climb’d to the top of a Tree, at the foot of which they made water, and kill’d several Goats just by, but went off again without discovering him.

He told us that he was born at Largo in the County of Fife in Scotland, and was bred a sailor from his Youth.

The reason of his being left here was a difference betwixt him and his Captain; which, together with the Ships being leaky, made him willing rather to stay here, than go along with him at first; and when he was at last willing, the Captain would not receive him. He had been in the Island before to wood and water, when two of the Ships Company were left upon it for six Months till the Ship return’d, being chas’d thence by two French South-Sea Ships.

He had with him his Clothes and Bedding; with a Firelock, some Powder, Bullets, and Tobacco; a Hatchet, a Knife, a Kettle, a Bible, some practical Pieces, and his Mathematical Instruments and Books. He diverted and provided for himself as well as he could; but for the first eight months had much ado to bear up against Melancholy, and the Terror of being left alone in such a desolate place. He built two Hutts with Piemento Trees, covered them with long Grass, and lin’d them with the Skins of Goats, which he kill’d with his Gun as he wanted, so long his Powder lasted, which was but a pound; and that being near spent, he got fire by rubbing two sticks of Piemento Wood together upon his knee.

In the lesser Hutt, at some distance from the other, he dress’d his Victuals, and in the larger he slept, and employ’d himself in reading, singing Psalms, and praying; so that he said he was a better Christian while in this Solitude than ever he was before, or than, he was afraid, he should ever be again.

At first he never eat any thing till Hunger constrained him, partly for grief, and partly for want of Bread and Salt; nor did he go to bed till he could watch no longer: the Piemento Wood, which burnt Very clear, serv’d him both for Firing and Candle; and refreshed him with its fragrant Smell.

He might have had Fish enough, but could not eat ‘em for want of Salt, because they occasion’d a Looseness; except Crawfish, which are there as large as our Lobsters, and Very good: These he sometimes boil’d, and at other times broil’d; as he did his Goats Flesh, of which he made very good Broth, for they are not so rank as ours: he kept an Account of 500 that he kill’d while there, and caught as many more, which he mark’d on the Ear and let go.

When his Powder fail’d, he took them by speed of foot; for his way of living and continual Exercise of walking and running, cleared him of all gross Humours, so that he ran with wonderful Swiftness thro the Woods and up the Rocks and Hills, as we perceiv’d when we employ’d him to catch Goats for us.

We had a Bull-Dog, which we sent with several of our nimblest Runners, to help him in catching Goats; but he distanc’d and tir’d both the Dog and the Men, catch’d the Goats, and brought ‘em to us on his back. He told us that his Agility in pursuing a Goat had once like to have cost him his Life; he pursu’d it with so much Eagerness that he catch’d hold of it on the brink of & Precipice, of which he was not aware, the Bushes having hid it from him; so that he fell with the Goat down the said Precipice a great height, and was so stun’d and bruis’d with the Fall, that he narrowly escaped with his Life, and when he came to his Senses, found the Goat dead under him. He lay there about 24 hours, and was scarce able to crawl to his Hutt, which Was about a mile distant, or to stir abroad again in ten days.

He came at last to relish his Meat well enough without Salt or Bread, and in the Season had plenty of good Turnips, which had been sow’d there by Capt. Dampier’s Men, and have now overspread some Acres of Ground. He had enough of good Cabbage from the Cabbage-Trees, and season’d his Meat with the Fruit of the Piemento Trees, which is the same as the Jamaica Pepper, and smells deliciously. He found there also a black Pepper call’d Malagita, which was very good to expel Wind, and against Griping of the Guts.

He soon wore out all his Shoes and Clothes by running thro the Woods; and at last being forced to shift without them, his Feet became so hard that he run every where without Annoyance: and it was some time before he could wear Shoes after we found him; for not being us’d to any so long, his Feet swell’d when he came first to wear ‘em again.

After he had conquered his Melancholy, he diverted himself sometimes by cutting his Name on the Trees, and the Time of his being left and Continuance there. He was at first much pester’d with Cats and Rats, that had bred in great numbers from some of each species which had got ashore from Ships that put in there to wood and water. The Rats gnaw’d his Feet and Clothes while asleep, which oblig’d him to cherish the Cats with his Goats-flesh; by which many of them became so tame, that they would lie about him in hundreds, and soon delivered him from the Rats.

He likewise tam’d some Kids, and to divert himself would now and then sing and dance with them and his Cats: so that by the Care of Providence and Vigour of his Youth, being now but about 30 years old, he came at last to conquer all the Inconveniences of his Solitude, and to be very easy. When his Clothes wore out, he made himself a Coat and Cap of Goat-Skins, which he stitch’d together with little Thongs of the same, that he cut with his Knife. He had no other Needle but a Nail; and when his Knife was wore to the back, he made others as well as he could of some Iron Hoops that were left ashore, which he beat thin and ground upon Stones.

Having some Linen Cloth by him, he sow’d himself Shirts with a Nail, and stitch’d ‘em with the Worsted of his old Stockings, which he pull’d out on purpose. He had his last Shirt on when we found him in the Island.

At his first coming on board us, he had so much forgot his Language for want of Use, that we could scarce understand him, for he seem’d to speak his words by halves. We offered him a Dram, but he would not touch it, having drank nothing but Water since his being there, and ‘twas some time before he could relish our Victuals.

He could give us an account of no other Product of the Island than what we have mentioned, except small black Plums, which are very good, but hard to come at, the Trees which bear ‘em growing son high Mountains and Rocks. Piemento Trees are plenty here, and we saw some of 60 foot high, and about two yards thick; and Cotton Trees higher, and near four fathom round in the Stock.

The Climate is so good, that the Trees and Grass are verdant all the Year. The Winter lasts no longer than June and July, and is not then severe, there being only a small Frost and a little Hail, but sometimes great Rains. The Heat of the Summer is equally moderate, and there’s not much Thunder or tempestuous Weather of any sort.

He saw no venomous or savage Creature on the Island, nor any other sort of Beast but Goats, &c. as above mention’d; the first of which had been put ashore here on purpose for a Breed by Juan Fernando a Spaniard, who settled there with some Families for a time, till the Continent of Chil began to submit to the Spaniards; which being more profitable, tempted them to quit this Island, which is capable of maintaining a good number of people, and of being made so strong that they could not be easily dislodg’d.

[…] We did not get to anchor till six at night, on Febr. 1. and then it fell calm: we row’d and tow’d into the Anchor-ground about a mile off shore, 45 fathom Water, clean Ground; the Current sets mostly along shore to the Southward. This Morning we clear’d up Ship, and bent our Sails, and got them ashore to mend, and make Tents for our sick Men. The Governour (tho we might as well have nam’d him the Absolute Monarch of the Island) for so we called Mr. Selkirk, caught us two Goats, which make excellent Broth, mix’d with Turnip-Tops and other Greens, for our sick Men, being 21 in all, but not above two that we account dangerous […]’

Return to Homepage

Additional Text © Copyright Dr Mark Jardine. All Rights Reserved. Please feel free link to this post on Facebook or other social networks or retweet it, but do not reblog in FULL without the express permission of the author @drmarkjardine