Chapter XXI (1)

_The Literature of the Reformation,
and the latter part of the Sixteenth Century._

IN the preceding pages an account was given of the pre-reformation literature of Scotland; in this chapter the class of writings more immediately associated with the revolution will be treated. In this connection, the writings of Sir David Lyndsay had more influence among the people in hastening on the Reformation than those of any other man of the age in Scotland. It is a singular and notable fact that Lyndsay was not interfered with, nor accused of heresy in the Church, though he made many bold attacks upon the priesthood and the corrupted doctrine of the Roman Church: probably it was his rank and position that saved him from the heresy hunters of the times. Whether he ever actually renounced his general adherence to the Roman Catholic faith is uncertain. His name, however, is always reckoned among those of the early adherents of the Scottish Reformation. His death took place before the reformed party in Scotland had assumed a distinct attitude toward the government of the kingdom, or had even formed themselves into an open congregation; but, if he cannot be exactly counted as one of the Protestant Reformers, we must at least regard him as a great power in preparing the national mind for the reception of the radical revolution, which triumphed in Scotland within a few years after his death.¹ In fact, Lyndsay was a real and worthy Reformer. He openly and bravely stood up and exposed the abuses of the government of his country, and held up to scorn the corruptions of the Church; he was not afraid to denounce the host of traditions, of puerile fancies, and inherited prejudices, which had been venerated for centuries; he felt keenly for the hard lot of the toiling mass of his countrymen, and the whole force of his nature and power over the language was thrown into his writings, with the aim of mitigating the suffering of the people. Having honestly faced the storm, he has had his reward in the grateful remembrance of succeeding generations.

¹ _Poetical Works_ of Sir D. Lyndsay, edited by Dr. Laing,
2 Volumes, 1871, _Memoir_, Volume I., pages 45‒50. “Had
Lyndsay survived for a few years beyond the actual term
of his life, we need scarcely doubt he would have joined
himself to the Lords of the Congregation in the abjuration
of Popery; but it cannot be said that, at any period of
his life, he had actually renounced his general adherence
to the Romish Faith.” Compare Dr. M‘Crie’s _Life of Knox_,
pages 17, 25, 324; 1855. “His poems were very famous among
his countrymen; but they were admired not so much for their
poetical charms as for their powerful help to the good
cause of the Reformation.”――Minto’s _Characteristics of the
English Poets_, pages 143‒144.

Little is known about the early days of Sir David Lyndsay of the Mount; but it appears that he was employed at the court of Scotland during the greater part of his life. For a period of nearly fifty years, excepting the short time that the Earl of Angus held James V. in captivity, Lyndsay seems to have been constantly engaged in various offices in the royal household. About the year 1529, he was appointed chief Herald, or Lyon King of Arms, as it is called, and he held this office till his death. In the latter part of the reign of James V. he was occasionally sent on foreign embassies in the service of the government. He died about the year 1555.¹

¹ Dr. Laing’s _Memoir_, pages 12‒22, 29, Chalmers’s Edition of
the Poetical Works of Sir D. Lyndsay, Volume I., pages 11‒14,
17, 36; 1806.

Lyndsay was not a great poet nor a man of very remarkable genius; all his works had practical aims, and were intended to produce moral results. He was well informed, familiar with the history of his own and other countries, and his writings are interspersed with many historical allusions. He had a fund of genuine humour, and his satire is often pungent and stinging; but his taste was rather coarse, which, however, was partly the fault of his age, and sprang out of the state of society. If his style had been pitched on a higher key, it is certain that his writings would not have been so popular, and that his influence as a reformer must have been greatly circumscribed. Some of Lyndsay’s productions were printed in his own lifetime, but it is uncertain if any of the existing early impressions had the advantage of his own revision when passing through the press.¹ The earliest collection of his writings extant is the edition which was published in France in 1558. From this date to the year 1614 there was no fewer than fourteen editions of his works published, including the two French and the three English ones. His writings were not only very popular among all ranks of the Scots; they were also well received in England and France, and were printed in Holland and in Ireland. It is reported that his poems were read by the children in the schools,² but there is little evidence of this; though for three or four generations his writings were to be found in almost every household throughout the kingdom.

¹ “Some of his works were undoubtedly circulated during
his own life in a printed form, but of the existing early
impressions, it cannot positively be asserted that any one
of them had the advantage of his own superintendence.” Dr.
Laing’s edition, Preface. Volume I., page 1.

² Chalmers said that Lyndsay’s poetical works were read in
the schools. _Works_ of Sir David Lyndsay, Volume I., pages
83‒91.

In the days of Lyndsay the orthography of the vernacular language was not definitely fixed, and the spelling of the same word is often varied in his writings. He sometimes makes violent changes in words to suit the necessity of his rhyme, and occasionally carries this so far as to obscure the sense. But he had a copious command of words, and used a great variety of all sorts of terms. His chief object was to instruct and to make himself intelligible to the common people; in his own words――

“Howbeit that divers devote cunning clerks
In Latine tongue has written sundrie books,
Our unlearned knows little of their works,
More than they do the ravying of the rooks.
Wherefore to colliers, carters, and to cooks,
To Jok and Thome my rhyme sall be directed,
With cunning men howbeit it will be lacked.”¹

¹ _Poetical Works_, Volume I., page 248, Dr. Laing’s edition;
see also pages 65‒66, 231. In those days it was common to
make apologetic prefaces for composing works in the vulgar
tongue; the great Chaucer deemed it needful to do this, also
Lydgate, Gavin Douglas, and the author of the _Complaynt
of Scotland_, as already mentioned; even in the reign of
Charles I., Abacue Bysett, in the preface to the _Rolment
of Courtes_, apologised for “using my awin natural Scottish
language.”

He went on to state that when the Romans held universal sway, “the ornate Latin was their proper lingo;” but if St. Jerome, who translated the Scriptures into Latin, had been born in Argyle, he assuredly would have written his books in Gaelic. He argues that all the books necessary for the commonweal and our salvation should be translated into the language of the people. His works are full of moral sentences and proverbial phrases, but many of his words are obsolete, and others which he freely used are regarded as profane slang; in fact, some of his expressions can only be characterised as swearing at large; on the whole, his language gives a sad impression of the state of society in pre-reformation times.

Lyndsay’s first poem, “The Dreme,” in which he began his attack upon the clergy and the Church, was written in 1528. It contains a deplorable picture of the religious orders. Pride had usurped the place of humility amongst them, sensual pleasure had banished chastity; the lords of religion were more absorbed in counting their money than in observing their rule and attending to their duty, as ambition had so utterly blinded them. In his _Complaynt_, written in 1529, and addressed to the King, Lindsay warns his royal master to keep his eyes upon the clergy, to cause them to perform their functions, to preach and to administer the sacraments according to the injunctions of Christ, to put aside their vain traditions by which the silly people were deluded, as in praying to graven images, and making superstitious pilgrimages, expressly against the Lord’s command. He recalls the examples of the kings of Israel, who were punished for assenting to idolatry, and then instances David and Solomon, who suffered no images to stand in the Temple, and their reward was heavenly bliss, which should also be granted to the King of Scotland if he followed in their footsteps.¹

¹ _Poetical Works_, Volume I., pages 39, 59‒60. All the
references are to Dr. Laing’s edition, unless otherwise
noted.

Lyndsay’s next production, “The Testament and Complaynt of the King’s Papyngo,” that is, the king’s parrot, was written in 1530. He brings out this bird to laugh at clerical persons and the attendants of the court, and uses his satirical faculty with much effect, ridiculing in turn the courtiers, flatterers, and clergy. One of the latter is made to reply in these words:――

“No marvell is, though we religious men
Degenerated be, and in our life confused:
But sing, and drink, none other craft we ken,
Our spiritual Fathers has us so abused:
Against our will, these swindlers been intrusted.

* * * * *

Great pleasure were to hear a bishop preach,
A Deane, or Doctor in Divinity,
An Abbot who could well his convent teach,
A Parson flowing in philosophy:
I tine my time, to wish what will not be;
Were not the preaching of the Begging Friars
Tint were the faith among the Seculars.
As for their preaching, said the parrot,
I them excuse, for why, they been so thrall
To Property, and her worthy daughters two,
Dame Riches, and fair lady Sensuall,
That may not use no pastime spirituall;
And in their habits, they take such delite,
They have renounced russat and raploch¹ white.”²

¹ A coarse woollen cloth.

² _Poetical Works_, Volume I., pages 99, 101. “The first
edition of this poem, and indeed of any of Lyndsay’s poems,
is that printed at London by John Byddell in the year 1538.”
Dr. Laing.

The “Supplication to the King, in Contemplation of Side Tails,” is an extremely curious commentary on the dress of the period. Lyndsay here directs his satire against the long trains and veiled faces of the ladies; but rarely lets slip an opportunity of having a fling at the clergy and the monastic orders, as the following lines bear witness:――

“But, I think most abuse,
To see men of religion,
Gar beir their tails throw the street,
That folks may behold their feet,
I trow Sanct Bernard nor Sanct Blais,
Gart never man beir up thair clais;
Peter, nor Paul, nor Sanct Andrew,
Gart nevir beir up thair tails, I trow,
But, I laugh best to see a Nun,
Gar beir her tails abone her bun,
For nothing else as I suppose,
But for to show her lily white hose:
In all thair rules they will not find,
Who should beir up their tails behind.”

To show the power of fashion, he asserts that even moorland Meg, who milked the ewes, will immediately counterfeit the queen’s dress, and have her kirtle with its tail wherever she goes. In summer when the streets are dry, the long tails of the ladies’ dresses raise such a dust, he says, that no one can walk near them without covering their mouth and nose and eyes, and many other rather comical effects of wearing long tails are noticed.¹

¹ _Poetical Works_, Volume I., pages 130‒135.

In the short poem “Kitteis Confession,” Lindsay directed his satire against auricular confession, and exposes this source of priestly influence with much pungency and some happy touches of humour. He pursued a similar end in “the Tragedie of the Cardinal,” but with less spirit and energy. To a rather general account of Cardinal Beaton’s life, and his end in the castle of St. Andrews, he adds an admonition and a warning to the bishops, and another to princes; the latter concludes with the following:――

“Wherefore I counsel every Christian king,
Within his realm to make reformation,
And suffer no more rogues to reign
Abuse Christ’s true congregation:
Failing thereof, I make narration,
That ye princes, and prelates, all at once,
Shall burnt be in hell, soul, blood, and bones.”¹

¹ _Poetical Works_, pages 136‒140, 157. The tragedy of “The
Cardinal” was printed at London in 1547. In the prologue
to this composition, Lyndsay referred to a work on
Boccaccio――“The Fall of Princes,” which was translated into
English by Lydgate, and published at London in 1494, and
again in 1527.

The most remarkable of all Lyndsay’s works is his play, “The Satire of the Three Estates.” It is a curious production, and in the history of dramatic literature comes under the class of what is called moralities or moral plays.¹ In its construction a number of real and allegorical characters are brought upon the scene, such as king humanitas, diligence, wantonness, good counsel, the bishop, the abbot, and the parson; the shoemaker and his wife, the tailor and his wife, the cottar and his wife, the old man, common theft, oppression, and many other mixed characters. Much ingenuity in the marshalling of these various characters is displayed in order to suit the action of the play; though it is hardly possible for such a multitudinous rally to exhibit a natural succession of incidents throughout so long a performance. The action of the play, however, is sustained with wonderful spirit, and occasionally with comic effect. The characters sometimes express themselves in very coarse and obscene language, and there is much of what would be called swearing, and would not be tolerated on the stage of the present day or anywhere else; yet, there is not the slightest reason to doubt that the “Satire of the Three Estates” is a pretty faithful representation of the state of society in Scotland in pre-reformation times.

¹ The full title is――“Ane Pleasant Satire of the Three Estates,
in Commendation of Virtue and Vituperation of Vice.”

The play, as its title imported, is a satire on the chief ranks of the kingdom. But, as usual with Lyndsay, the burden of his rhyme and the force of his lash falls upon the religious orders. He proceeds from point to point, and charges them with a catalogue of immoralities which is appalling. The bishops, with their lordly riches and immoral modes of life, are represented in the most glaring colours, as are also the abuses of their courts and the oppressions of the poor people. The pardoner and his ways of extorting money are handled with boldness and effect. It is forcibly shown that the priesthood had entirely neglected to instruct the people in the religion of Christ; and that most of the clergy were utterly ignorant of the Scriptures. It must be added that the language itself which imparts this information affords evidence of the fearful corruption of the nation: the profane swearing, the obscene words and phrases, the extreme licentiousness, and the lack of delicacy, which pervades the performance, all shows that there was great need for a reformation.

In the course of the play the abbot is called upon to tell how he has performed the duties of his office, and he replies in these words:

“Touching my office, I say to you plainly,
My monks and I, we live richt easily;
There is no monks, from Carrick to Crail,
That fairs better, and drinks more helsum ale.
My prior is a man of great devotion:
Therefore, daily, he gets a double portion.”

Next, the abbot is asked how he has kept his three vows, and returns this answer:――

“Indeed, richt well, till I got home my bulls,
In my abbey, when I was sure professor;
Then did I live, as did my predecessor.
My parmours are both as fat and fair,
As any wench intill the town of Ayr.
I send my sons to Paris to the schools,
I trust in God that they shall be no fools.
And all my daughters I have well provided.
Now judge ye if my office be well guided.”¹

¹ _Works_, Volume II., pages 263, 264. For evidence that the
monks lived luxuriously and drank large quantities of ale
and wine, see Mackintosh’s _History of Civilisation in
Scotland_, Volume I., pages 431, 433. New Ed., 1892.

On being asked whether he can preach, the Parson replies:――

“Though I preach not, I play at the caiche:¹
I wait there is not one among you all,
More fairly can play at the football;
And for the carts, the tables, and the dice,
Above all parsons, I may bear the prize.
Our round bonnets, we make them now four-nuicked,
Of richt fine stuff, if you list, come and luke it.
Of my office I have declared to thee;
Speir what ye please, ye get no more of me.”²

¹ A game of hand-ball.

² Lyndsay’s _Works_, Volume II., pages 264, 265.

There was no theatre at the time in Scotland, and the satire of the “Three Estates” was acted in the open air, upon the green. It was first played at Linlithgow, on the 6th of January, 1540, in the presence of the King and Queen, the ladies of the court, the bishops, and a great assemblage of the people. It was again acted at Cupar Fife, on the playfield, about the year 1552; and at Edinburgh in 1554, before the Queen Regent, the nobles, and a large gathering of the people. On the latter occasion the performance of the play began at nine in the morning and continued till six at night; but it appears from the play itself that there were short intervals, when the chief auditory retired for refreshments.¹

¹ _Works_, Volume I., pages 33‒35, Preface. Volume II., pages
346‒348, and Chalmers’s edition, Volume I., pages 356‒358.
Dr. Laing holds that there is no evidence that Lyndsay’s
play was acted at Cupar in 1535, as had been supposed by
Chalmers and others.

Some information respecting dramatic exhibitions of the period may be obtained from the records of Edinburgh. According to these, in June, 1554, the provost and council ordered the treasurer to pay the workmen, the merchants, the carters, and others, who furnished the gear to the convoy of the moirs to the abbey, and for the play which was acted the same day, the sum of thirty-seven pounds, sixteen shillings, and fourpence, “provided always that the master of work deliver to the dean of guild the hand-scene and canvass, to be kept to the behoof of the town.” On the 27th of the same month the treasurer was ordered to pay the sum of twenty-four pounds for the making of the playing place. On the 20th of July the town council ordered the payment of forty-two pounds, thirteen shillings, and fourpence, to complete the playfield “now building in the Greenside.” On the 18th of August the council directed that the twelve minstrels who passed before the convoy and the players on Sunday last should be paid forty shillings. The play-gear it seems belonged to the town, as the council ordered the treasurer to pay Walter Binning the sum of five pounds for making the play-gear, painting the hand-scene and the players’ faces, “provided always that the said Walter make the play-gear underwritten, forthcoming to the town, when required, and which he has now received――eight play-hats, a king’s crown, a mitre, a fool’s hood, a sceptre, a pair of angel-wings, two angel-hair, and a chaplet of triumph.”¹ On the occasion of Queen Mary’s marriage with the Dauphin of France in 1558, the magistrates of Edinburgh voted various sums of money for plays and triumphs;² and there are many indications that the people delighted in rude plays and pageants.

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume II., pages 193, 195,
196, 197, 198, 199.

² _Ibid._, Volume III., pages 26, 28. So different was the
progress of the drama in England and Scotland, that before
the year 1633 nineteen playhouses had been opened in London,
while on our side of the Border there was hardly one worth
the name of a theatre.――Percy’s _Essay on the Origin of the
English Stage_, page 151.

Sir David Lyndsay’s other works are “Squire Meldrum,” and “The Monarchy” or “A Dialogue between Experience and a Courtier of the miserable Estate of the World.” The first is a kind of rhymed tale of chivalry, though the hero of the story lived at the time, and Lyndsay reported that he received some of his information from the lips of the champion himself; and thus by a mixture of fact and romance, he has woven a long and pretty animated poem. The many exploits of the heroic squire are narrated with much energy throughout a performance extending to nearly two thousand lines.¹ In 1553 Lyndsay finished his longest work, the Monarchy, which extends to 6333 lines. In this work, his chief object seems to have been, to make use of the great events recorded in history for the purpose of illustrating general positions. After a review of the most notable events narrated by Moses, and of the four great ancient monarchies――Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans, of whose history he evinces some knowledge, he proceeds to handle the spiritual monarchy of the Pope. In this he was more in his element, and soon shows that none of the rulers of the ancient monarchies ever had such powerful armies to uphold their authority throughout their dominions, as the Pope of Rome actually commanded. He illustrated his view by referring to the cardinals, archbishops, and bishops, and the vast legions of priests, vicars, monks, friars, and nuns――all holding under the Pope, and mentioned the enormous privileges and powers which this army had obtained in every Christian kingdom. He then goes on to show that the Popes had abused their power, by corrupting religion, by enslaving and oppressing the people without mercy; and he lashes the occupant of the chair of St. Peter and all his hosts down to the begging friars on the street, and the pardoners that hawked the country selling salvation. Waxing bolder, he predicts the downfall of the temporal power of the Pope, and fixes the day of God’s judgment of the world to be――“in four hundred and forty-seven years” from the date when he wrote. This remarkable work concluded with these words:――

“And speed me home, with heart sighing full sore,
And entered in my Oritore.
I took paper, and there began to write
This misery, as ye have heard afore.
All gentle readers heartily I implore
For to excuse my rural rude indite,
Though Phareseis will have at me despite,
Who would not that their craftiness were kend:
Let God be Judge! And so I make an end.”²

¹ Much information about Squire Meldrum will be found in
Chalmers’s Notes to Lyndsay’s _Poems_, and in Dr. Laing’s
Notes, also in Pinkerton’s _Ancient Scottish Poems_, 1786,
and in his _Scottish Poems_, reprinted from scarce editions,
1792. The rhymed story itself was probably composed about
the year 1543.

² _Works_, Volume II., pages 104‒105. The three-volume Library
edition containing a complete text of Lyndsay’s works,
published about eighteen years ago, was enriched with the
curious information and the careful research of the late
Dr. Laing. Another work of a different character, may be
noticed――“The Register of Arms of the Scottish Nobility
and Gentry,” executed in the year 1542, under Lyndsay’s
direction, as Lyon Herald. The arms are carefully drawn, and
properly blazoned; indeed they are among the most creditable
products of Scottish art which now remain of that period. It
contains the arms of the Royal Family of Scotland; and the
arms in full blazonry of many of the ancient nobles, and the
shields and quarterings of 194 of the principal families in
the country. The original volume has been preserved in the
Advocates’ Library since 1698, having been acquired with
Balfour’s Manuscript Collections. A limited impression of
an exact facsimile of the original Register was published
at Edinburgh in 1821, by W. and D. Laing. In 1879, another
impression limited to 250 copies, was published by Mr.
Paterson, at Edinburgh, which was also edited by the late Dr.
Laing. There is a pretty full account of Sir David Lindsay,
in the first volume of the _Lives of the Lindsays_, by Lord
Lindsay; in Tytler’s _Lives of Scottish Worthies_, and other
sources easily accessible. In short, students that wish
to understand the state of Society in Scotland immediately
before the Reformation, must make themselves familiar with
the writings of Sir David Lyndsay of the Mount.

There were other writers of rhymes in Scotland, who attacked the abuses of Catholicism, though their names are not so well known as Sir David Lyndsay’s. Killor, a friar, who was burnt for heresy, is reported to have composed a tragedy on the crucifixion of Christ, in which the Catholic clergy was attacked. About the same time James Stewart, son of Lord Methven, wrote short poems and ballads satirising the priesthood. James Wedderburn, a poet of some note, the son of a merchant, was born in Dundee about the beginning of the sixteenth century. According to the Bannatyne manuscript, he was the author of three short poems, commencing respectively with the following lines:――“My love was ♦fals and full of flatterie,” “I think thir men are very fals and vain,” “O man, transformit and unnaturall.” It is also reported that he composed two dramatic pieces, which were acted at Dundee about the year 1540; in both of which the Catholic clergy were attacked, but these are now lost.¹ James Wedderburn and his brother Robert are the reputed authors of another and a very important production of the Reformation period. This is the curious collection known by the title of “The Gude and Godlie Ballads.”² It is true that this singular book may appear to modern taste as “only a tissue of blasphemy and absurdity;” but it is equally true that these rhymed parodies and ballads had a real influence upon the mind of the people in connection with the Reformation movement; and the historian is not at liberty to ignore anything which was conducive to that revolution, on the ground of its being unpleasant to existing notions of taste. The mixture of sacred and profane subjects was quite common in Catholic places of worship, both in Scotland and in other countries long before the Reformation.

♦ “falss” replaced with “fals”

¹ Calderwood, Volume I.; Dalzell’s _Cursory Remarks_, page 31;
Sibbald’s _Chronicle of Scottish Poetry_.

² The references are to the edition of 1868 edited by Dr.
Laing, unless otherwise noted. The original title of the
collection is――“A compendious Book of Psalms and Spiritual
Songs.” The earliest printed edition of it, yet discovered,
is that of 1578, but it appears from the title page that
there were earlier printed editions: it passed through
several editions in the later years of the sixteenth century
and the beginning of the seventeenth, but very few copies
of these early impressions are now known to exist. See Dr.
Laing’s Preface, pages 6‒7; Notes, pages 211‒215.

The collection naturally falls into three divisions: the first doctrinal, embracing a short Catechism, the Creed, and the Lord’s Prayer, which are repeated both in prose and in metre. The second part contains versions of twenty-two psalms, and a number of hymns mostly translations from the German. The third comprises secular songs, but they are parodied, or mixed up with religious opinions. During the Reformation era the practice of adopting rude popular songs along with their airs to sacred subjects was common in several countries. In Scotland, the initial line or the chorus of the ballads then popular among the people were transferred to hymns of devotion; this as may be seen in the collection of “Godly Ballads,” often resulted in an odd kind of parody.¹ Though the association of the coarsely profane and the sacred appears to be ridiculously out of character, it is, nevertheless, certain that compositions of this description had a powerful effect in contributing to the change of the religious opinions. From allusions which occur in them to the Queen Regent, the Pope, and the Priesthood, it is evident that some of them were written during the heat of the Reformation; and that ballads touching the Roman Catholic religion, were circulated among the people, appears from the national records.² Though these ballads were popular among the common people, who could easily appreciate words sung to popular airs, it is not probable, however, that many of the pieces in the collection had been printed in Scotland before the Reformation. It is hardly necessary to say, that the book was never authorised by the General Assembly, nor known to have been used in the public service of the Church.³

¹ The source of the song and the tune is seen in the well-known
lines――“Hay now, the day dawns,” which stands as the opening
words of one of the godly ballads. To give it a religious
turn it is put into the following connection:――

“Hay now, the day dawns,
Now Christ on us calls,
Now gladness on our waves,
Appears anone.
Now the word of God reigns,
Who is King of all Kings,
Now Christ’s flock sings
The night is near gone.”

The refrain “The night is near gone,” closes each stanza to
the end of the ballad. “Dunbar and Gavin Douglas, in the
reign of James IV., mention the tune, ‘now the day dawns,’
and ‘the jolly day now dawns,’ as one that was well known to
the common minstrels.” There are several versions of early
ballads which begin with the words, ‘the day dawns,’ and
close each stanza with――‘the night is near gone.’ Alexander
Montgomery, who wrote in the reign of James VI., composed
a short lyric poem which opened with, ‘haw the day dawns,’
and adopted the refrain――‘the night is near gone.’ The fine
plaintive air called ‘Hey tuttie tuitie,’ was from a very
early period sung with the foregoing words; but it is best
known from Burns’s address, ‘Scots wha hae wi’ Wallace
bled.’ Dr. Laing, Notes, page 256, page 168. Poems of A.
Montgomery, pages 219‒221, 314; 1821.

² See under pages 77, _et seq._; Dr. M‘Crie’s _Life of Knox_,
pages 323, 325; 1855.

³ _Godly Ballads_, Preface, pages 8‒9, 43, 47.

Touching the authorship of the “Godly Ballads” in the form that we now have them, little can be said with certainty. As indicated above, it has sometimes been attributed to James Wedderburn, while other early authorities attribute the collection to two brothers of his, John and Robert Wedderburn; all the three flourished in the second quarter of the century. The earliest reference to the book is by James Melville, in the year 1570 when speaking of his own education; he says that, at that time he first saw Wedderburn’s songs, and learned several of them by heart, with a great diversity of tunes. Melville does not mention Wedderburn’s Christian name; and although the Wedderburns may have translated some of the psalms, recast or composed some of the songs in this collection, there is no available information for distinctly assigning the contents of the book to the respective translators and authors. A number of the psalms were versified, printed, and circulated in England and in Scotland before the Reformation. In the former country Coverdale compiled a book of psalms and spiritual songs which was printed about the year 1539; and four of the psalms in this collection are almost verbatim with four of those in the book of “Godly Ballads;” and the presumption seems reasonable that they had been taken from Coverdale’s collection. The chief source of modern hymnology, however, is Germany. The Hussites in the fifteenth century had their devotional songs; Luther’s collection of hymns was published in 1524, and it was enlarged from time to time by himself and others. As these hymns were written in the vernacular tongue and many of them set to popular airs, they were admirably suited for private instruction as well as for public worship.¹ These hymns accompanied with the music which the people understood and loved, formed one of the strong points of the German Reformation. The poetic inspiration that glowed in the heart and stirred the soul of the German Reformer, joined with his sublime confidence, rang out in many of his popular hymns.²

¹ Dr. Laing’s Preface, pages 8‒25, 33‒39. Regarding the
variety and extent of German hymns, Dr. Laing in his preface
and notes to the “Godly Ballads,” gives a good deal of
information. He notices the collections of Dr. Wackerangel
and the Chevalier Bunsen; Miss C. Winkworth’s “Lyra
Germanica,” first and second series, 1859. As to more recent
works on German hymnology, he mentions “Hymns translated or
imitated from the German, by the Rev. George Walker,” 1860.
A Lecture by Professor Mitchell of St. Andrews, entitled,
“The Wedderburns, and their work on the Sacred Poetry of
the Scottish Reformation, in its historical relation to that
of Germany,” 1867. “The Scottish Reformation; a historical
sketch by Professor Lorimer,” see pages 27‒29, 60.

² In 1521 Charles the Fifth issued the first of a series of
enactments for extinguishing heresy in the Netherlands; and
in 1522 two monks were burned at the stake in Brussels. This
execution moved Luther to write a stirring hymn, of which
the following is one of the stanzas:――

“Quiet their ashes will not lie:
But scattered far and near,
Stream, dungeon, bolt, and grave defy,
Their foeman’s shame and fear.
Those whom alive the tyrant’s wrongs
To silence could subdue,
He must, when dead, let sing the songs
Which in all languages and tongues,
Resound the wide world through.”

Quoted by G. P. Fisher in his work, _The Reformation_, page
287; 1873.

A number of the spiritual songs in the collection of “Godly Ballads” are derived or founded upon German hymns of the Reformation period: others are merely modifications of the original songs current among the Scots at the time; while others are entirely of a satirical turn, directed against Roman Catholicism, and naturally sprang out of the struggle of the Reformation in Scotland. It is the two latter that are of most importance in connection with the subject in hand. In one of the spiritual songs the burden of a very old ballad is retained――“The wind blaws cauld.” It is found in the following connection:――

“The wind blaws cauld, furious and bauld,
This lang and mony a day――
But Christ’s mercy we man all die,
Or keep the cauld wind away.

* * * * *

Then be not wo, see that ye pray
To Peter, James, nor John,
Nor yet to Paul, to save your soul,
For power have they none.

Save Christ only, that died on tree,
He may both loose and bind:
In others more, if ye trust so,
On you blaws cauld the wind.”¹

¹ _Ibid._, pages 165, 166‒168, 158‒161, 184.

Another satirical ballad refers to events when the Protestants, under the name of “the Congregation,” had taken matters into their own hands, in the year 1559, and it retains the following refrain:――“Hay trix, tryme go trix, under the green-wood tree.” The drift of the effusion is directed against the Pope and all the religious orders, the cardinals, bishops, priests, abbots, and monks and nuns are each in turn severely handled, and charged with obscene immoralities.¹ The doctrines of Catholicism are also boldly, fearlessly, and effectively attacked in these rude ballads. Not a tenet of Romanism is spared. All are treated with scorn and contempt. Of the fire of purgatory, it is said, there is not left a spunk; and the reek, that was sold so dear, is said to have fallen into utter disrepute. The monks having long neglected to pray for the souls of the founders of the monasteries――“their souls were left to burn and biss” as they might. Touching the worship of saints, it is said:――“I wat St. Peter, nor St. Paul, nor yet any saint, can save your soul, though many lies make many brawl.” Relics, the adoration of images, indulgence, the mass, and other doctrines of Catholicism, are treated with sharp and bitter derision.² It is easy to understand the effect of this upon the mind of the people; and in connection with other influences the tone and spirit of these ballads and rhymes tended to intensify the Protestantism of the Scots.

¹ _Gude and Godly Ballads_, pages 166‒168. “‘The wind blaws
cauld.’ This is the burden of an English song in praise
of Christmas, entitled ‘A pleasant country ditty,’ merrily
showing how to drive the cold winter away.”――Dr. Laing,
Notes, page 255.

² _Ibid._, pages 163‒165, 167, 169‒173, 175‒177, 183‒186.

John Knox was more remarkable as a reformer and a preacher than as a writer and a thinker. He was aware of this himself, for he said that, “considering myself rather called of my God to instruct the ignorant, comfort the sorrowful, confirm the weak, and rebuke the proud, by tongue and living voice, in these most corrupt days, than to compose books for the age to come.” That he did his duty to his country and to society, as thus conceived by himself, is matter of history. Looking to his life and the important work which he so actively contributed to effect, the writings that he produced are surprising. His compositions it must be remembered were hastily prepared, under the pressure of many disquieting influences, or amid constant and exciting occupation.¹ Neither great elaboration nor the finer graces of style can be expected from him; yet, for all the unpropitious circumstances under which he laboured, his writings in the language of the people will compare favourably with those of any of his contemporaries in Britain. He had a good command of his mother tongue: his style is equally remarkable for strength, clearness, and vehemence. He never leaves any doubt about his meaning; as he held his opinions firmly, so he expressed them with all the force of his nature; his thoughts and judgments are thrown out, with a rapidity and animation which is striking and effective. He had a keen vein of humour in his constitution, and frequently adopted a strain of remark and expression of a grotesque and humorous character; and sometimes touches of sarcasm and bitter scorn occur in his compositions. His humour is often coarse and even vulgar; but this was partly the fault of his age, and partly a result of the kind of work that fell to him.

¹ _The Works of John Knox_, collected and edited by Dr. Laing,
Volume VI., page 229. Preface, pages 85, 89. This edition of
our national reformer’s writings in six volumes is a great
literary monument to his memory. It has placed his life
and work in a clearer and juster light. The learned editor
bestowed much and unusual care on the execution of his task;
and he deserves our warmest gratitude for his research, his
unwearying industry, and his devotion to the accomplishment
of a worthy object. Dr. Laing did his work in a manner that
cannot fail to command the respect of his countrymen, while
the principle of Protestantism retains a hold upon their
minds.

Knox’s works may be described as mostly admonitory and historical. In the department of theology itself he produced nothing, except a treatise on predestination. As a writer, he is best known by his History of the Reformation in Scotland. He began it in 1559, and finished the fourth book, bringing the narrative down to 1564, in 1566. He left a few marginal notes and materials for a continuation of the history, which were used by others after his death in compiling the fifth book, and also the volume of memorials published under the name of Richard Bannatyne. Many references have been made to his history in the preceding chapters of this work, and quotations given, which render any lengthy account of its contents and character unnecessary. Its historical value and general accuracy have now been fully recognised. When narrating events which happened under his own eyes, it could hardly be expected that he should always be able to refrain from bitter reflections on his opponents; but his humour for abusing them he has often carried to an extreme length. The only excuse for the coarse expressions and hard epithets which he hurls at their heads must be sought in the corrupt and immoral state of society, and the inflamed and enraged feelings of the people around him.

Knox’s admonitory writings consist of his public letters, such as the “Admonition to the Faithful in England,” “to the Godly,” “to the Professors of the Faith,” his “Letter to the Queen Regent,” “The First Blast of the Trumpet against the monstrous Regime of Women,” and others of a similar description. In this department he was particularly strong; he had a special faculty for scolding, and employed it with much effect. Many examples of this might be quoted from his writings. In his “Faithful Admonition to the Professors of God’s Truth in England,” which was printed and circulated in 1554, there are some passages touching Queen Mary and those at the head of the government of England, which are extremely vehement. “And, now, does she not manifestly show herself to be an open traitress to the imperial Crown of England, contrary to the just laws of the realm, to bring in a stranger, and make a proud Spaniard king? to the shame, dishonour, and the destruction of the nobility; to the spoil from them and theirs of their honours, lands, possessions, chief offices, and promotions; to the utter decay of the treasure, commodities, navy, and fortifications of the realm; to the abasing of the yeomanry, to the slavery of the commons, to the overthrow of Christianity, and God’s true religion, and, finally, to the utter subversion of the whole estate and commonwealth of England.”¹

¹ _Works_, Volume III., page 294, _et seq._

After the death of Queen Mary, Knox wrote, in 1559, “A brief Exhortation to England for the speedy embracing of the Gospel.” In this tract, which was printed at Geneva, he at once strikes the keynote and states what should be done: “Touching reformation of religion, you must at once so purge and expel all dregs of papistry, superstition, and idolatry, that thou, O England, must judge and hold execrable whatsoever God hath not sanctified unto thee by his word, or by the action of our master Christ Jesus. The glistening beauty of vain ceremonies, the keeping of things pertaining nothing to edification, by whomsoever they were invented, justified, or maintained, ought at once to be removed, and so trodden under the obedience of God’s word, that continually this sentence of thy God be present in thy heart and ready in thy mouth:――‘Not that which appears good in thy eyes, shalt thou do to the Lord thy God, but what the Lord thy God hath commanded thee, that shalt thou do: add nothing to it, diminish nothing from it.’”¹ He then proceeds at length to admonish and counsel them to embrace the gospel, and to cast aside the devices of men, and to rest only on the word of God.

¹ _Works_, Volume V., page 515, _et seq._

In the Reformer’s letter to the Queen Regent of Scotland in 1558, which was printed the same year, there are also some characteristic and important passages. The following is one:――“As Satan by craft hath corrupted the most holy ordinance of God’s precepts, I mean of the first table, in the place of the spiritual honouring of God, introducing men’s dreams, inventions, fantasies; so hath he, abusing the weakness of man, corrupted this precept of the second table, touching the honour which is due to parents, under whom are comprehended princes and teachers; for the devil hath so blinded the senses of many, that they cannot, or at the least, will not, learn what appertains to God, and what to Cæsar. But, because the Spirit of God hath said, ‘Honour the king,’ therefore whatsoever they command, be it right or wrong, must be obeyed. But heavy shall the judgment be which apprehends such blasphemers of God’s majesty, who dare be so hold as to affirm that God hath commanded any creature to be obeyed against himself. Against God it is, that for the commandment of any prince, be he never so potent, men shall commit idolatry, embrace a religion which God hath not approved by his word, or confirm by their silence wicked and blasphemous laws made against the honour of His Majesty. Men, I say, that do so, give no true obedience; but as they are apostates from God, so are they traitors to their princes, whom by flattery they confirm in rebelling against God.” After citing several examples from the Old Testament, he continues: “But, Madame, more profitable it is that the pestilent tumours be expelled with pain, than that they be nourished to the destruction of the body. The papistical religion is a moral pestilence, which shall assuredly bring to death eternal the bodies and souls from the which it is not purged in this life. And therefore take heed betimes, God calls upon you, beware that ye shut not yourself up.... I come to you in the name of the eternal God, and of Christ Jesus his Son, to whom the Father hath committed all power, whom he hath established Sovereign Judge over all flesh, before whose throne ye must make account with what reverence ye hear such as he sends. It shall not excuse you to say or to think, that ye doubt whether I be sent of God or not. I cry unto you, that the religion which the princes and the blinded papists maintain with fire and sword, is not the religion of Christ; that your proud prelates are none of Christ’s bishops. I admonish you that Christ’s flock is oppressed by them; and therefore I require, and that yet again, in the name of the Lord Jesus, that with impartiality I may be heard to preach, to reason, and to dispute, in that cause, which ye deny; ye declare yourself to bear no reverence to Christ, nor love to his true religion.”¹

¹ _Works_, Volume IV., pages 440‒443.

The Roman Catholic clergy did not show much energy in their writings, nor in their arguments in defence of their religion in England and Scotland; no very memorable effort of eloquence or argument was put forth within the Island during the progress of the Reformation. Those who desired to maintain the ancient worship unimpaired, staked the issue more upon the fire and sword principle than on reasoning and discussion; and they were wise in their generation, for when it came to this, the palmy days of a conservative priesthood were well-nigh past. There were a few, however, from the humbler ranks of the Roman Catholic clergy, that came forward and wrote in defence of their faith. Quintin Kennedy, the abbot of Crossraguel, ♦Ninian Winzet, a schoolmaster, and James Tyrie, a Scottish Jesuit, were the only controversialists on the Catholic side in Scotland, whose writings have been preserved.

♦ “Ninan” replaced with “Ninian”

Ninian Winzet was born in 1518, in the burgh of Renfrew. He received a liberal education, and was appointed schoolmaster of the Grammar School of Linlithgow about the year 1551. Winzet himself said, in 1562, that his happiest days were “spent in teaching of the Grammar School of Linlithgow about the space of ten years;” but, at the command of Dene Patrik Kinloquhy, preacher in Linlithgow, and of his superintendent, “when I, for denying only to subscribe their phantasy and factioun of faith, was expelled and shut out of that, my kindly town, and from my tender friends there, whose perpetual kindness I hoped that I had conquest.” The superintendent mentioned was John Spotiswoode, whose jurisdiction extended from Dunbar to Stirling; and it appears that Winzet then made a severe attack upon the creed of the Reformers. He was a priest as well as a schoolmaster, and he was one of the ablest and boldest defenders of Catholicism in Scotland. He held out vigorously, and addressed questions to Knox and other reformed preachers; as he had asked and received the permission of Queen Mary to address the Protestant leaders touching certain doctrines, order, and forms, approved by them. In the end of February, 1562, Winzet, as a first instalment, specially addressed three questions to John Knox and the reformed preachers of Scotland touching their vocation, which were stated thus:――“1. Is John Knox a lawful minister? Since we read, that none should take the honour of ministration of God’s Word and sacraments on him, except he be lawfully called thereto, either by God immediately, or by a man having power to promote thereto. 2. If John Knox be not a lawful bishop, how can they be lawfully ordained by him? If he cannot show himself a lawful bishop, how can ye superintendents or other inferior preachers, elected and ordained by him, not having power thereto, judge yourselves to be lawful ministers in the Church of God? 3. If John Knox and ye affirm yourselves lawful by reason of your science, and that ye are permitted always, if ye be not admitted by these Churches, whom ye serve, why have ye preached manifestly a great error and schism in your congregation, contending with tooth and nail, some lords and gentlemen to have greatly failed, administering your communion in bypast times to their own households and tenants, since the lords and gentlemen were men of science; by their own judgment, in that case, was permitted by their said servants to that office, who affirm themselves to be a Church of God?” Knox referred to these questions in his sermons, but he never sent a written rejoinder to Winzet. Three tractates of Winzet’s were published at Edinburgh on the 21st of May, 1562, in which the position of Knox was boldly assailed. He said:――“I exhort ye cause your prophet, John Knox, and your superintendent, John Spotiswoode, to impeach saints Hierome and Augustine as leading witnesses in the premises; and cause them deliver their answer in write, for these holy Fathers books are patent to us and them. And some of our faithful brethren have written several times to them both, and got no answer in write, but waste wind again. But peradventure, albeit, these two, your champions, dare not for shame answer in this matter, ye will appeal to the rest of your learned theologians of a great number in Scotland and Geneva. But to them we oppose all the Christian Catholics in Africa, Asia, and Europe.”