In days of old . . . .

. . . . . . "Witches" could indicate the genitive . . . that is, the spelling is indicative of an attributive relationship of one noun to another noun; in this case the "Rune" has some relationship to a/the "Witch".

See the title page of the 1632 edtion of "Mr. William Shakespeares comedies, histories and tragedies, published according to the true originall copies" as an example, where the bard was named as "William Shakespear".

More recently, the apostrophe became a common way to show the ommission of the 'e' in the possessive although in the process "Shakespear" became "Shakespeare"

So I think the title is just archaic. Perhaps the invitation to "Hearken" in the title (instead of "listen", "observe", "notice", etc, using ones ears) would support this?

Poetry aside, and pedantry to the front, can you hearken to a rune? Be it a Witch's or anyone else's?

Of course, I could be talking bollocks. I often do.

The English language, eh?