rrections will be given in the next volume.
At fol. 249, four leaves are left blank to allow the form of "The
Election of the Superintendant" to be inserted; but this can be supplied
from either the Glasgow MS. or the early printed copies. A more
important omission would have been the First Book of Discipline, but
this the MS. fortunately contains, in a more genuine state than is
elsewhere preserved; and it will form no unimportant addition to the
next volume of the History.

The volume consists of 388 folios, chiefly written, as already stated,
in the year 1566. No trace of its earlier possessors can be discovered;
but the name of "Mr. Matthew Reid, Minister of North-Berwick" (from 1692
to 1729,) written on the first page, identifies it with a notice, which
is given by the Editor of the 1732 edition: "There is also a complete
MS. copy of the first four Books of this History belonging now to Mr.
Gavin Hamilton, Bookseller in Edinburgh, which formerly belonged to the
late Reverend Mr. Matthew Reid, Minister of the Gospel at North-Berwick;
it is written in a very old hand, the old spelling is kept, and I am
informed that it exactly agrees with the Glasgow MS., with which it was
collated, during the time this edition was a printing." (page liii.)

This MS., came into the possession of the Rev. John Jamieson, D.D.,
probably long before the publication of his Etymological Dictionary in
1808, where he mentions his having two MSS. of Knox's History, (this,
and the one marked No. VIII.) in his list of authorities; but neither of
them was known, and consequently had never been examined by Dr. M'Crie.
At the sale of Dr. Jamieson's library in 1839, both MSS. were purchased
by the Editor.

In the firm persuasion that this MS. must have been written not only
during the Reformer's life, but under his immediate inspection, and that
all the existing copies were derived from it, more or less directly, I
should have held it a most unprofitable labour to have collated the
other MSS., for no other purpose than to notice the endless variations,
omissions, and mistakes of later transcribers. The reader may think I
have paid too much regard in this respect to the various readings or
errors in Vautrollier's suppressed edition, and in the Glasgow
Manuscript; but these copies being the only ones referable to the
sixteenth century, are deserving of greater attention than those of a
more recent age, while the variations pointed out frequently se