Chapel of Mary at Orton

The Chapel of Mary of Grace at Orton is a site of considerable antiquity and has been made famous in northern Scotland because of the Holy Well that, to this day, flows beside it. The well itself was the popular resort for those who wished a cure from its waters and was renowned across the north and east of the country for its curative powers. Many flocked to the location on the first Sunday in May every year, even long after the days of the Roman Catholic Church had passed and, as we shall see, there are numerous entries in the parish records of churches up and down the country, condemning in no uncertain terms those who were drawn by its superstitious powers.

The Well itself is no mystery - it is a simple 'chalybeate spring' - although its location on the Haugh, at virtually the same elevation as the nearby river, is rather more remarkable. The water from a Chalybeate source is impregnated with salts of iron. For generations, that at Orton has been valued for both human and animal treatments and there are many tales from across the country of miraculous cures - of mange in horses, scrofula and ague in humans, etc.. Another most famous source of chalybeate water is that at Dorton Spa in Buckinghamshire, where mangy dogs and disesed cattle received cures from being washed in the water. Cheltenham Spa is another renowned chalybeate source as is the Dog Well at Malvern and the Holy Well that was within the bounds of Malvern Priory.¹ More locally, there were chalybeate springs at Rothes (the Minister's Well or St Lawrence's Well) {NGR NJ 271491} , and Tobar na Chailleach (Caird's Hill south of Keith) {NGR NJ 426476} .

Robertson wrote as late as 1891 that, "For more than half a century, the Kirk continued to launch her thunders against pilgrimages to some of the more famous shrines; and even so lately as 1775 the historian of Murray complained that, to 'the chapel of Our Lady of Grace' on the Spey, multitudes, even from the Western Isles, do still resort, and nothing short of violence can restrain their superstition. So obstinately did the ancient rites linger in the affection of the people, that the Parliament in 1581 had to forbid, by severe penalties, pilgrimages to chapels, wells, and crosses, church-wakes and holidays, singing of carols and lighting of bonfires."² What a wonderful thing the Second Reformation was!

At Orton, there are said to have been several containers each used for the administration of a different 'cure', but, in each case, it was said that to derive any benefit the pilgrim had to turn the container(s) they were about to use "thrice withershins" - three times counter-clockwise or against the sun - an obvious remnant of a more pagan history, which, as we shall see, allowed post-Reformation ministers to regale their congregations about superstitious practices.

What is most remarkable about the Lady Grace Well is not its great antiquity, but its utter resillience when faced with assaults from all sides as a consequence of the Second Reformation of 1560. For generations after the supposed removal of 'Popery' we can find numerous references in various presbytery and parish minutes, recounting the continuing superstitious habits of their congregations in going to "the well at Speyside." Robert Chambers remarks: "One of the chief places in vogue was the Chapel of Grace, on the western bank of the Spey, near Fochabers - a mere ruin, but held in great veneration, and resorted to by devout people from all parts of the north of Scotland. We hear of Lady Aboyne going to the chapel of Grace every year, being a journey of thirty Scotch miles, the last two of which she always performed on her bare feet. About the time of the National Covenant (1638), what remained of the Chapel of Grace was thrown down, with a view to putting a stop to the practice; but this seems to have been far from an effectual measure."³

Certain modern writers deny that there ever was a medieval chapel on this site.⁴ However, I believe that the evidence rests in favour of the older writers and the parish/presbytery records - both make repeated reference to a well and a chapel. If this is insufficient then we have the testimony of the architect who supervised the clearing of the site, in 1844, in preparation for the building of the Wharton-Duff mausoleum. Shaw records this evidence as follows, "In clearing out the foundations of Saint Mary's Chapel, among other objects, Mr T. Mackenzie, the architect, discovered a fragment of a stone of the Anglo-Norman style, which proved that the Chapel dated from 1066-1135."⁵ In the same work is recorded an inscription which was placed on the mausoleum. It reads: