Delegations continued in the latter part of 1643 and into 1644 both to attend executions and give advice. In October one was sent to give advice at Anstruther Wester and attend executions in Crail.55 In January a delegation went to meet with judges at Pittenweem, give advice regarding Christian Dote in St. Monans, and attend the execution of Isobell Dairsie56 while in February another was sent to meet the judges at Silverdyke in relation to Margaret Myrton, to give advice regarding the watching of Christian Dote, as well as confronting some of those already suspected as witches.57 In July a delegation attended the execution of some witches in Pittenweem.58 The hunt continued throughout the year and into 1645, although the pace seems definitely to have shifted. By May of that year a suspect was imprisoned in St. Andrews whose last name was Sewis. The Synod’s recommendation was that she be put to the knowledge of an assize.59 In August, Jonet Wylie found herself accused in the parish of Largo.60 In November the bailies and clerk of Pittenweem asked the presbytery’s advice in the case of Christian Roch. Christian’s suspicious behaviour had been the subject of rumour and conjecture (a ‘fama clamora’) for over twenty years. She was accused as a witch by three individuals who had been executed as witches. Also, the hangman had examined her and found ‘two markes’ on her body. The difficulty seems to have been that Roch’s husband, Andro Strang, continued to fight to have her set free. Presbytery’s advice was that she remain imprisoned until ‘further tryell’.61 Roch remained incarcerated for a lengthy period. In October of 1645, Andro Strang continued to plead that his wife be released. The presbytery’s response, having seen the charges against her, was that she should be put to trial.62 The final case from this period involved Androw Carmichael, a warlock from the parish of Dunino, who was incarcerated at St. Andrews. In contrast to Christian Roch, he was set at liberty on caution to return again if called.63
The hunt that swept through this presbytery in the period from 1643 to 1645 was clearly significant. Accurate numbers of those involved are impossible to ascertain. Still, we know that five parishes were affected in 1643, six in 1644 and two parishes in 1645. Executions occurred in 1643 in Anstruther-Wester, Crail, and St. Andrews of at least six individuals. The next year saw Isobell Dairsie executed at Anstruther-Wester, and an unknown number executed at Pittenweem. The presbytery served as a clearinghouse for information as well as being actively involved in trying to bring the accused to confession (and one assumes, name other witches). While the presbytery records give an overall sketch of the hunt which occurred in this period, local records for Pittenweem flesh out further details not recorded in the minutes of the presbytery. Before turning to those records, brief mention should be made of an accusation which emerged as a result of the witch-hunt. On February 21, 1644 an accusation against Alexander Baton appeared before the Presbytery. Baton had been accused of committing adultery by Bessie Mason, one of the witches from Kilrenny, an act which she claimed was the first cause of her slide into witchcraft. Baton had promised to appear to answer the accusation, but went instead to Edinburgh and stayed there until his accuser had been burned. Baton was ordered to appear at the next presbytery meeting. The incident eventually came to the attention of the synod of Fife.64
The burgh records from Pittenweem make it clear that the witch-hunt was well on its way by the time presbytery became involved in August. It is also clear that John Melvin the minister of Pittenweem was very aware of what was occurring. An excerpt from the meeting of July 31, 1643 is worth quoting at length:
The quhilk day, for the better tryal of the witches presently apprehended, to the effect they may be the better watchit and preservit from information from their friends, it is ordanit that ane of the bailies or counsell sall ever be present at the taking off and putting on of the watches, three several times in the 24 hours, and sall injoyn the watches silence; and sall appoint the ablest man of the watch to command the watch until his return. The same day the bailies and clerk, or any twa of them, with concurrence of the minister, are ordainit to try and examine ye witches privately, and to keep their deposition secret, because heretofore, so soon as ever they did dilait any, presently the partie dilaittit got knowledge thereof, and thereby was presently obdurate, at least armit, for defence.65
There is a further reference to the watch from May of 1644, indicating that three constables and two watchmen were to be appointed every twenty-four hours. The number of watchmen and the isolation of the women and the demand for silence suggest that what was occurring was some form of waking or sleep deprivation. What is clear is that evidence was being gathered against incarcerated witches in such a manner that they were not to know or be able to defend themselves from that information.
Other information, including at least the names of the husbands and relations of those executed, can be found in the burgh records. An execution of an unspecified number of witches took place on August 8, 1643. Forty or fifty of the ‘ablest young men of the toune’ were put in arms for the execution.66 Expenses for the executions soon came due. John Dawson paid £40 (Scots) to the burgh for the expenses involved in the execution of his wife. Thomas Cook paid £5 sterling for the execution of his mother Margaret Horsbrugh. Similar amounts were paid by John Crombie, Archbald Wanderson and Thomas Wanderson all for the execution of their wives.67 In addition, a fine of fifty merks was levied on George Hedderick ‘being found guilty of giving evil advice’ to his mother-in-law Margaret Kingow, who was incarcerated as a suspected witch.68 It is not specified what kind of ‘evil advice’ Hedderick had given, but the fact that such a fine was levied, combined with the earlier attempts to isolate the suspects from their friends, makes it clear that every attempt was being made to produce confessions and executions.
Another source gives us a final glimpse into the events in St. Andrews Presbytery during this witch-hunt. The source is the confession of Agnes Wallace in Crail, who confessed to being a witch in October, 1643:
being in vard as ane vitch, vas demandit how long since sche entrit the Devillis service, sche ansuerit, that as sche thought about thrie or four and fourtie yeiris; for sche being as sche supposit, vea witchit be vmq Margaret Wood her mother . . .69
As has already been mentioned, a commission against Margaret Wood of Crail had been issued in 1621. Some of those implicated during the witch-hunt in 1643 were children of others previously accused as witches. At the same time, it should be noted that Agnes was not a young woman: she had, after all, been in the ‘Devillis service’ for forty-three or four years. It is unfortunate that the fragmentary evidence of this significant witch-hunt does not allow us to determine to what extent other suspects were similar to Agnes.
Later cases: 1650–1704
During the English occupation only one case, that of Maggie from St. Monans, is known. Maggie was accused of being in compact with the Devil and with doing many evil deeds. She was watched using a horn and goad in order to keep her awake in a successful attempt to get her to confess. Maggie was executed.70 The great witch-hunt which occurred a decade later following the Restoration, affected only the border parish of Forgan within the presbytery of St. Andrews. In 1662 commissions were obtained to put Elizabeth Clow and Jonnet Annand, both of whom had confessed their guilt, to trial.71 It seems reasonable, given the major hunt in Perth at the time and the fact that some of the same commissioners obtained other commissions to try witches in Perthshire,72 to suggest this hunt had only a peripheral connection with the rest of the presbytery. In 1664 a commission was granted to try Margaret Guthrie of Carnbee. Guthrie had already been imprisoned in the tolbooth in Anstruther Wester and was, according to the commission, suspected as guilty. Her commission includes the notation that her confession should be voluntary, ‘without any sort of torture or indirect meanes used to bring her to confession’.73 The same formula again appears in the commission taken out against Isobell Key of St. Andrews in September 1666. Isobell was a prisoner in the to
lbooth.74
A case which occurred in Crail in 1675 contained more information than was usually included in commissions. On July 21, 1675 Dr. Edwards the minister of Crail asked presbytery’s advice in the case of Geilles Robertsone who had been imprisoned in that burgh as a suspected witch. A delegation was established to speak to her, which reported in August, and again in September, that she had not confessed. Considering her ‘former confessions’ and the fact that her daughter and the sister of her son-in-law have all testified against her, this seemed remarkable to the members of presbytery. None of Geilles’ conversations were successful in clearing her name and she was considered to have been responsible for making at least one individual ill. The presbytery considered that there were sufficient grounds to gain a commission and appointed the minister to speak to the magistrates of the town. At this point, things bogged down. There were no actual magistrates in Crail. The presbytery’s response was to suggest ‘that it was a duetie incoment upon the honnest men of the toune to seik a commissioun, as is the use and custome in such caices quher ther is no magistrats’.75 Edwards claimed to have obeyed the presbytery, but there is no indication that a commission was being sought before Geillis Robertson died in prison in December.76
Summary
The final cases to appear in this presbytery are unique enough to be worthy of a discussion of their own in chapter 9. In 1701, Elizabeth Dick of the parish of Anstruther Easter was accused of witchcraft.77 Three years later a significant hunt occurred in Pittenweem. Suffice it for the moment to say that in the period 1704–05 accusations of witchcraft involving ten individuals occurred.78 While the witch-hunt in St. Andrews Presbytery was very lengthy, extending from 1563 into the early eighteenth century, there were really only three hunts, 1597 (before the national hunt), 1643–45, and a final panic in Pittenweem in 1704. The other incidents involved isolated suspects or a handful of accused. While there is evidence of torture being illegally applied in one instance, there is no evidence of judicial torture having been a factor. Indeed, there are several incidents where the more effective technique of ‘warding and watching’ was effectively used in order to obtain confessions. The role of church courts in hearing cases, passing along information and otherwise contributing to the witch-hunt was significant in this part of Fife.
Notes
1.
The Fasti, vol. 5, lists the parishes. Anstruther Easter was separated from Kilrenny in 1641. Cameron was divided from St. Andrews in 1646. Kingsbarns was ‘disjoined’ from Crail in 1632. Pittenweem did not officially become a parish until 1633, although there is a record of ministers serving from 1588 on. None of these alterations are significant for the geographical study of this area.
2.
The estimated population is from Jane Dawson, ‘’The Face of Ane Perfyt Reformed Kyrk’, 414.
3.
Cases 2219 and 2221. Chalmers, Domestic Annals, vol. 1, 60. Black, Calendar, 21.
4.
Chambers, Domestic Annals, vol. 1, 60. Stewart’s death is discussed in connection with that of a Frenchman who was hanged. It all depends on how one reads the reference: ‘and a Frenchman callit Paris, wha was ane of the devisers of the king’s death, was hangit in Sanctiandrois, and with him William Stewart, Lyon King of Arms, for divers points of witchcraft and necromancy.’ Does the ‘hangit’ refer to both men, or only Paris?
5.
Case 2220; for Dundee witches, 3087, SWHDB. –, Diurnal of Remarkable Occurrents (Edinburgh: Maitland Club, 1833), 145; Chambers, Domestic Annals, vol. 1, 60. Black, Calendar, 21.
6.
Cases 3035 and 3032 respectively. The SBSW lists Gilmore’s thesis in regard to both of these cases. Sharp was accused of being a witch in Kirkton’s History of the Church of Scotland 1660–79 (c. 1693), Ralph Stewart, ed. (Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen, 1992), 45. Adamson, also a minister and later an archbishop, was charged with being a consulter of witches and his case investigated by both Session and General Assembly. David Calderwood, The history of the Kirk in Scotland, III, Thomas Thomson, ed. (Edinburgh: Wodrow Society, 1849), 176. Kirkton also accused the episcopalian curate of Anstruther of being a witch (case 3034): ‘some suspect he medled with the devil, and he was known to have a brother that was a diabolick man.’ Kirkton, History, 108.
7.
Richard Bannatyne, Journal of the Transactions in Scotland during the contest between the adherents of Queen Mary and those of her Son (Edinburgh: J. Ballantyne, 1806), 339.
8.
Rev. C.J. Lyon, History of St. Andrews, Episcopal, Monastic, Academic and Civil, (Edinburgh: William Tait, 1843), 338. J. Melville, The autobiography and diary of Mr. James Melville, ed. Robert Pitcairn (Edinburgh: Wodrow Society), 1842. 46. Knox’s role in the matter was turned into a play entitled ‘God’s Law’ which was performed in St. Andrew’s during the summer of 1994.
9.
The Concise Scots Dictionary. Maira Robertson, ed. (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1987).
10.
Case 2223. Source: St. Andrews Kirk session records, 1559–1600 in St. Andrews University Library, Muniments department; David Hay Fleming, Register of the ministers and elders . . . vol. 1 (Edinburgh: Scottish History Society, 1889), 414. The date of this case has been corrected from 1575 to 1576. While the date of the minute does say 1575, this was obviously a scribal error because minutes for 1576 surround it on both sides.
11.
Ibid. The SBSW lists her fate as Miscellaneous.
12.
Case 2225. St. Andrews KS; Fleming, Register, 455.
13.
Case 3091. Smith, A Study and Annotated edition, 51. St. Andrews Presbytery minutes Vol. 1., 1586–1605, St. Andrews Muniments..
14.
Case 3092. Smith, 120.
15.
Kirk Session Records, St. Andrews Muniments department, Sept 10, 1595. Also, Fleming, Register, vol 2., 800.
16.
Stephanie Stevenson, Anstruther: A history (Edinburgh: John Donald, 1989), 117. She suggests Agnes Melville was the elder daughter of the late Andrew Melville, once reader at the church in Anstruther. Harry D. Watson, Kilrenny and Cellardyke (Edinburgh: John Donald, 1986), refers to Agnes as ‘the witch of Anstruther’, 37.
17.
Zeman is case 3093. Presbytery meeting of May 5, 1597. Smith, Annotated Edition, 221.
18.
May 19, 1597. Smith, Annotated Edition, 222.
19.
Ibid., May 26, 1597, 222.
20.
Ibid., June 2, 1597, 222–23.
21.
Ibid.
22.
Bettie or Beatrix Adie (3097) is mentioned twice by others. However, she is not included in the list of those given over to the assize by the June 9 meeting of presbytery. Meetings of June 9, June 16, Smith, Annotated Edition, 222–24.
23.
June 9, 1597. Beatrix Forgesoun (3096); Jonnet Foggow (1597); Jonet Willeamson (3097). As no other location is known for these individuals, it is assumed they were from Pittenweem. The sentence for those found guilty of consulting was passed on June 30, 1597. Ibid., 224. Graham, Uses of Reform, 304, refers to Fogow.
24.
‘Many Witches’ (2294) in the SBSW. Original source is the Calendar of State Papers, PPS, v2, 739. The Kirk Session records for St. Andrew’s do not list any cases of witchcraft from that parish. Kirk Session minutes, St. Andrews muniments.
25.
July 7, 1597. Smith, Annotated Edition, 224.
26.
July 21, 1597. Ibid., 228.
27.
Fritte Grutter (3099). As Grutter was obviously dead by this time, she was never brought to trial. One of the few other details we do know is that she was poor. She apparently received ‘toun almes’ even though the session apparently knew of her reputatio
n as a witch. October, 20, 1597. Smith, Annotated Edition, 242; also, October 6, 1597, 236.
28.
Ibid.
29.
August 3, 1597. Ibid., 229. Presbytery of St. Andrews, vol. 1, 82r.
30.
August 17, 1597. Ibid., 231.
31.
Fleming, Register, vol. 2, 800–01, footnote. Fleming makes the identification with Margaret Aitken.
32.
Patrick Stewart (3100); July 20, 1598, Presbytery of St. Andrews minutes, vol. 1, f 93r; Smith, Annotated Edition, 271: August 3, 1598, 273.
33.
July 13, 1598. Ibid., f 93r; Smith, Annotated Edition, 271; July 20, 1598, Ibid., f 93r; Smith, Annotated Edition, 272.
34.
This case goes back to Black’s Calendar. It is listed as 2312 in the SBSW. The date, however, is given as 1599, when the case appears a second time before the Presbytery. There is also some confusion as to which source is being cited. Black cites the source as the ‘Register of St. Andrews Presbytery’. The SBSW abbreviates this down to the ‘Reg. St. And. Pres.’ yet in the list of abbreviations, this abbreviation is said to refer to Selections from the minutes of the Presbyteries of St. Andrews and Cupar 1641–98, the Abbotsford Club volume which obviously covers a period far later. The printed source to look at is Smith, Annotated Edition, 283. October 6, 1598, Presbytery of St. Andrews Minutes, vol. 1, f95r.
Witches of Fife Page 10
