Book; and this portion remains very much in its original state, as may be inferred from these two passages.—In July 1559, while exposing "the craftyness of the Queen Regent," in desiring a private conference with the Earl of Argyle and Lord James Stewart, with the hope that she might be able to withdraw them from their confederates, we read, "And one of hir cheaf Counsale in those dayis, (and we fear but over inward with hir yit,) said," &c. See page 368 of this volume. This must necessarily have been written during the Queen Regent's life, or previously to June 1560. During the following month, after noticing the Earl of Arran's escape from France, and the imprisonment of his younger brother, Lord David Hamilton, it is stated, "For the same tyme, the said Frensche King, seing he could not have the Erle him self, gart put his youngar brother ... in strait prisoun, quhair he yitt remaneis, to witt, in the moneth of October, the yeir of God 1559." See page 383. In like manner, in a letter of intelligence, dated at Hamilton, 12th October 1559, and addressed to Cecil, Randolph says, "Since Nesbot went from hence, the Duke never harde out of Fraunce, nor newes of his son the Lord David."—(Sadler's State Papers, vol. i. p. 500.) We might have supposed that his restraint was not of long duration, as he is named among the hostages left in England, at the treaty of Berwick, 27th February 1559-60; a circumstance of which Knox could not have been ignorant, as he gives a copy of the confirmation of the treaty by the Duke of Chastelherault and the Lords of the Congregation; but it appears from one of the articles in the treaty of peace in July, that Lord David Hamilton, who was still a prisoner at Bois de St. Vincent, in France, then obtained liberty to return to Scotland; and he arrived at Edinburgh in October 1560. We are therefore warranted to infer that this portion of the Second Book of his History, must have been written towards the end of the year 1559.[Pg xxviii]

Knox himself in his general Preface, says, the intention was to have limited the period of the History from the year 1558, until the arrival of Queen Mary from France to assume the government in this country, in August 1561; thus extending the period originally prescribed beyond the actual attainment of the great object at which the Reformers aimed, in the overthrow of Popish superstition, and the establishment by civil authority of the Protestant faith, which was actually secured by the proceedings of the Parliament that met at Edinburgh on the 1st of August 1560. But he further informs us, that he was persuaded not only to add the First Book as an Introduction, but to continue the Narrative to a later period. This plan of extending the work he carried into effect in the year 1566, when the First and Fourth Books were chiefly written, and when there is reason to believe that he revised and enlarged the intermediate portion, at least by dividing it into two parts, as Books Second and Third. The Fourth Book extends to the year 1564; and he seems to intimate that he himself had no intention to continue the History to a later period; for alluding to the death of David Riccio, in March 1565-6, he says, "of whom we delay now farther to speik, becaus that his end will requyre the descriptioun of the whole, and referris it unto suche as God sall rayse up to do the same;" and a marginal note on this passage, written probably by Richard Bannatyne in 1571, says "This ves never done be this Authour."

Dr. MʻCrie states, that "the First and Fourth Books were composed during the years 1566, 1567, and 1568," and that "some additions were made to the Fourth Book so late as 1571." The only evidence to support this supposition, is founded upon the circumstance of some marginal notes having been added in those years, and introduced by subsequent transcribers, as belonging to the text. Whether the Fifth Book, published by David Buchanan in 1644, was actually written by the Reformer, will be considered in the preliminary notice to that Book. Meanwhile it may be remarked, that the Author himself whilst occasionally engaged in collecting materials for a continuation of his History, felt the necessity of delaying the publication; and in a letter addressed to Mr. John Wood, 14th February 1567-8, he expresses the resolution he had formed of withholding the work from the public during his own life.

MANUSCRIPT COPIES OF THE HISTORY.

ToC

The Manuscript of the History of the Reformation which has been followed in this edition, fully confirms the preceding statements regarding the period of its composition. It also serves to shew that no suppressions or alterations had been made by his friends, after his death, in these Four Books. Such an intention is alluded to, in a letter, dated from Stirling, 6th August 1572, and addressed to Randolph, by George Buchanan:—"As to Maister Knox, his Historie is in hys freindes handes, and thai ar in consultation to mitigat sum part the acerbite of certain wordis, and sum taunts wherein he has followit too muche sum of your Inglis writaris, as M. Hal. et suppilatorem ejus Graftone, &c." The Manuscript contains Four Books, transcribed by several hands, and at different intervals. Notwithstanding this diversity of hand-writing, there is every reason to believe that the most considerable part of the volume was written in the year 1566, although it is not improbable that in the Second and Third Books a portion of the original MS. of 1559 may have been retained. The marginal notes, which specify particular dates, chiefly refer to the years 1566, or 1567, and they leave no doubt in regard to the actual period when the bulk of the MS. was written, as those bearing the date 1567 are clearly posterior to the transcription of the pages where they occur. Some of these notes, as well as a number of minute corrections, are evidently in Knox's own hand; but the latter part of Book Fourth could not have been transcribed until the close of the year 1571. This is proved by the circumstance that the words, "Bot wnto this day, the 17. of December 1571," form an integral part of the text, near the foot of fol. 359, in "The Ressonyng betuix the Maister of Maxwell and John Knox." The whole of this section indeed is written somewhat hastily, like a scroll-copy, probably by Richard Bannatyne, his Secretary, from dictation; but whether it was merely rewritten in 1571, or first added in that year to complete Book Fourth, must be left to conjecture.

I.—Manuscript of 1566.—In the Editor's possession.

The accompanying leaf exhibits an accurate fac-simile of part of the first page of the MS; and it is worthy of notice, that in the Wodrow Miscellany, vol. i. p. 287, a fac-simile of a paper entitled "The Kirkis Testimonial, &c.," dated 26th December 1565, is evidently by the same hand.[4] It has the signatures of three of the Superintendents, Erskine of Dun, John Spottiswood, and John Wynram, as