FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTES1Glasgow, 1825.2Hemingford says, that there werefifty thousand slain, many drowned, andthree hundred thousand foottaken prisoners, besides a thousand horsemen.3Hist. Lib. iv. c. 15.4Appendix to Blair’s Relationes in the Library of the College of Glasgow.5Scottish Historical Library, p. 68. quarto ed.6In England, Thomas à Becket conceded to Henry II., that, in the event of a bondsman becoming a clerk, he should not receive orders without the consent of his lord; and further, if a man of holy church held any lay-fee, he must do the King’s service thereto attached, except in cases connected with the execution of criminals. SeeHearne’sGlossary to Langtoft’s Chronicle, vol. ii. p. 530.7Macpherson’s Annals of Commerce, vol. i. p. 324.8Fordun, vol. ii. lib. x. cap. 42.9Fordun, vol. ii. lib. x. cap. 42.—If we compare the following provisions of an act put forth by Edward I., with the above-mentioned enactment, some idea may be formed respecting the views entertained by the two British monarchs, on the subject of foreign commercial intercourse. “It is ordained, that no fishmonger shall have any partnership with a stranger who brings fish from sea to the city; but let them seek for fish in theirownships, and permit foreigners to bring it and sell, when they come in their own ships. Because, by such partnerships, they who are of the city, and have known the state of the city, and the defect of victuals, will hold the fish at a dearer rate than foreigners, who shall not have known it; and also, that they who are of the city, when they cannot sell, as they will lay it up in cellars, and sell itdearer than the strangers would do, if they came without partnership, and knew not where they might be harboured.”—Lambert’s Historical Survey of London, vol. i. p. 156, 157.10Fœdera, vol. i. p. 467.11Torfæi Orcades, lib. i. cap. 4.12Chron. of Lanercoste. See Macpherson’s Annals of Commerce, vol. i. p. 446. In 1282, the customs of England were farmed by Bonricini, Guidicon & Co. of Lucca, and the sum realized, from Easter 1281 till Easter 1282, netted 8411l.19s. 11½d. The money, it may be observed at this time, was the same in both countries.Madox, History of the Exchequer, c. 23. fo. 1.13The use of coal as fuel was very early known in Scotland. By a charter, dated in April 1291, William de Obervill granted liberty to the monks of Dunfermline, to dig coal for their own use in his lands of Pittencrieff, but upon no account to sell any, (Chart. in Statist. Account of Scotland, vol. xiii. p. 469.) By this restriction, it would seem that the proprietor not only set a value on the sale of coal, but also that the monks of those days were in the habit of improving their resources, by trafficking in temporal as well as in spiritual matters.14Ayloff’s Calendar, p. 88. Some idea may be formed of the injury which the trade of Scotland sustained by the long protracted and impoverishing warfare she had to maintain in support of her independence, from the circumstance of James I. being obliged, in 1430, to commission two citizens of London to send him the following articles for his own use: viz. 20 tuns of wine, 12 bows, 4 dozen yards of cloth of different colours, and 12 yards of scarlet, 20 yards of red worsted, 8 dozen pewter vessels, 1200 wooden bowls (or caps), packed in 4 barrels, 3 dozen coverels, a bason and font, 2 summer saddles, 1 hackney saddle, 1 woman’s saddle, with furniture, 2 portmanteaus, 4 yards of motley, 5 yards of morray, 5 yards of black cloth of Lyn, 12 yards kersey, 12 skins of red leather, and some trifling articles. These goods, shipped on board a vessel belonging to London, were secured by a royal order from being molested by English cruizers, but they were to pay the customary duties.Fœdera, vol. x. p. 470.15Rymer’s Coll. MS. vol. ii. p. 287.16This traffic was frequently interrupted by war; in time of peace, it was carried on to a considerable extent. The first notice that we have of its revival after the wars of Wallace and Bruce, occurs in a letter of safe-conduct granted 12th January 1359, to Andrew Murray and Alan Erskine, two Scottish drovers, with three horsemen and their servants for travelling through England, or the King’s foreign dominions, for a year, with horses, oxen, cows, and other goods and merchandise.—Fœdera, vol. vi. p. 114.17The greyhounds, “leporarii,” of Scotland were considered so superior, that the Duke of Berry, in France, thought it worth while to send his valet, and three other men, to procure some of them, and to obtain letters of safe-conduct from the King of England, to enable them to travel through his dominions on that business.—Fœdera, vol. vii. page 831.18By the chamberlain’s accounts, it appears that the 178 hogsheads cost 439l.16s. 8d. Sterling, while the 67 hogsheads and 1 pipe cost 373l.16s. 8d. Could this difference arise from the latter being of superior quality, or from the market being overstocked, in consequence of the expected demand? No doubt there were speculators in those days, as well as at present.19Wyntown, vol. i. p. 286.20Some fine specimens of these battle-axes may be seen in the museum at Inverness.21By the chamberlain’s accounts it appears, that in the reign of Alexander III., the King’sBalistarius, or keeper of the cross-bows for the Castle of Ayr, was allowed yearly two merks and a half.22P. 668.23Annals of Commerce, vol. i. p. 397 & 398.24Philosophical Transactions, vol. xxi. p. 230.25Macpherson’s Annals of Commerce, vol. i. p. 440.26The following proverb is still floating on the breath of tradition among the Highlanders—“Már thubhairt clag Scáin, an rud nach buin duit na buin da;” “As the bell of Scoon rang, what belongs not to you meddle not with.”27The name and labours of this priest have created a little perplexity among the learned. He appears to have made a sort of census of the kingdom, in which the names of the Bishops, Abbots, Priors, Parsons, Vicars, Abbesses, Earls, Barons, Knights, Freeholders, and Communities of cities and burghs, were registered. This roll, in which their rentals were stated, is known in Scottish history by the name of “Bagamont’s Roll,” and was always referred to in disputes respecting church property. For the purpose of a like assessment, Bagamont appears to have made a similar census in England. A copy of the Scotch roll, carried off most likely by Edward, along with the other documents, from Scone, was found in the Tower of London, and given to the world, by the more modern historians of England, as the “Homage Roll of Scotland,” under the cognomen of “Ragman’s Roll.” The disgrace which this document seems to infer, is pathetically bewailed by Abercromby. If he had turned to the learned Bishop of Carlisle’s Scottish Historical Library, p. 53, his grief might have been a little assuaged by the following passage:—“One of the most ancient repertories of the primitive state and rights of the Scottish church, is the old Book of the Taxation of Ecclesiastical Benefices, whereof Sir John Skene has given us the following account.A‘The Pape, in the time of KingBJames the Third, sent in this realm ane cardinal and legate, called Bagimont: quha did make ane taxation of all the rentals of the benefices, that the samin might be knawin to the Pape: to the effect, that, when any person came to Rome seikin Bulles, or right to ony benefice fra him, he might conform to the said rental as he pleased, sell the samin for sa meikle silver or gold as he thocht maist profitable.’ This is by no means exact, nor answerable to what we commonly have from that learned writer; for that very law ofCJames the Third, to which he refers, cites this taxation by the name of the ‘Provinciallis Buik, or the auld taxation of Bagimont;’ and shews, that in this King’s time, endeavours were used to raise the values of the livings above what they were rated at, to the advantage of the Court of Rome, and against ‘the common gude of the realme.’ This act was confirmed by his son and successor James the Fourth, who madeDthe crime capital in laymen, ordaining that all such should ‘tine their life and gudes.’ We are, therefore, still in the dark as to the true author of this ancient valuation; being certainly misinformed of the time wherein he lived, and (perhaps) knowing as little of his proper name. If I may be allowed to offer my conjecture, I should guess that this ecclesiastical survey is about the same age with that which was made (of the lands in England) by our Edward the First; and possibly the names ofERageman and Bagimont were heretofore one and the same. What this or the other means, or how both have been corrupted, let the nicer etymologists inquire.”ADe Verb. Sign. in voce Bagimont.BIt should be Alex.CVide Spotswood, lib. 2. p. 46. (3) Parl. 6. Ja. 3. Act 43.DParl. 4. St. 39.EVide D. Hen. Spelman. Gloss. in voce Rageman, and Repository of Records, p. 26. Had this candid and generally correct writer referred to Fordun, Book X. chap, xvii., he might have satisfied himself as to the date, origin, and nature of this roll, as well as the name and character of its author. The alteration of Bagimont to Rageman, is evidently an English corruption, which the writers of that country ought to be best able to explain. Ragman’s Roll, as a roll of vassalage to Edward, is unknown toancientEnglish and Scottish historians.28Hailes, 137, 138.29Hailes, 155, 156.30Vol. ii. p. 443 & 444.31Vol. ii. p. 187. 3d edition.32Chron. Melrose, p. 179.33Hoveden, fol. 420.34Fœdera, vol. i. p. 155.35Icelandic Chronicle.36Hailes, 188, 189.37This reply of Alexander has been noticed, by various historians, as an uncommon instance of the precocity of the Royal intellect. Lord Hailes speaks of it as displaying “prudence and resolution superior to his years.” Without detracting from the merits of Alexander, it might with more propriety be considered as merely the well-conned lesson given him by the watchful guardians of the independence of his crown, whom experience had taught to be prepared for the attempt.38The following quotation is from the work of a learned Englishman.“There is” (inter Poemata, M.S. D. R. Maithland, p.S. Pepys, Armig.) “a manuscript account ofRobertthe Third’s contest with ourHenrythe Fourth, upon the subject of Homage; in the conclusion whereof (after the wordFinis) is this inscription—TheRing(forReign)of the RoyRobert,made be DeanDavid Steill. In this the King ofEnglandsummonsRobertto do fealty atLondon.Eftir the richt ofBrutusKing,Quhilck had all Ingland in governing, &c.In return to which, ’tis affirm’d thatScotlandevir yit hes bene free,SinScota of Ægypttuick the see.It’s likewise observ’d, thatEnglanditself (having been four times conquer’d by theRomans,Saxons,Danes, andNormans) has little ground for such a challenge; and ought to remember how frequently she has miscarry’d in her adventures of that kind. In conclusion,Robertproposes the deciding this controversie by sixty against sixty (of the Royal blood of both kingdoms), forty against forty, or twenty against twenty: Or, ifHenryapproves it, that the two Kings themselves may end it in a single combat. In which last offer, are these remarkable lines.“I proffer me to prief on theAt we andScotlandyit are free,And of thePaipnothing we hauld,But of the Kirk our Faith of auld.”SeeNicholson’s Scottish Historical Library, p. 154, 155, 8vo. ed. and 43 of 4to.39Hailes, p. 243, 244.40Baliol, who, on the death of the Scottish Queen, assumed the title of “Hæres regni Scotiæ,” had engaged the powerful interest of the Bishop of Durham, by a grant of all the manors possessed by Alexander III. in Cumberland;—or, in the event of Edward refusing to sanction the grant, fifty manors in Scotland, in lieu of them. Had any of the other competitors been preferred, this grant must have fallen to the ground.—Original Charter in possession of Mr Astle, and published in his Account of the Seals of the Kings of Scotland, p. 22.It is more than probable that the influence and services of the Bishop of St Andrew’s had been secured by prospects perhaps equally advantageous.41In support of this claim, Dr Lingard has, with great industry, collected the evidence afforded by the ancient chronicles of England from Brutus downward. These fabrications of the cloisters, however, are contradicted by events, respecting the truth of which the historians of both countries are agreed. It is rather singular, that when John became theliegemanof the See of Rome, and, with the consent of his barons, surrenderedthe“KINGDOMS OF ENGLAND AND IRELAND TO BE HELD OF THE POPE IN FEE, FOR A THOUSAND MERKS,” that he should havetrickedhis Holiness out ofTHE KINGDOM OF SCOTLAND. Surely the example of Ananias was lost on the English monarch, when he thus trifled with the church, and kept back athirdofhiskingdoms. Dr Lingard does not inform his readers how the watchful guardian of “the Patrimony of St Peter” came to wink at so gross an imposition.After all that the learned Doctor has advanced on the subject, it is pretty plain, that the homage of England over Scotland is something like that which was extorted by St Dunstan from a certain potentate who shall be nameless. Though the saint compelled him to crypeccavi, in a manner that made a great noise in the world at the time, yet when he became relieved from the scrape, and had got his nose in order, hissaintshipfound hisvassalas troublesome and evil disposed as ever.42Hailes, p. 245, 246.43Langtoft, vol. ii. p. 248.44A family of the name of Waleis also existed in England, some of whom appear to have attained the highest civic honours in the city of London. We are informed by Stowe, that, in 1299, when part of the palace of Westminster, and the public buildings of the adjoining monastery, were destroyed by fire, a Parliament was held by Edward in the house of Henry Waleis, Mayor of London, at Stehenheth, “when crokards, pollards, and rosaries, coyned in foreign parts beyond seas, and uttered for sterlings, were cried down.” Henry Waleis was also Mayor in 1300; and a person of the same name is mentioned as having contributed largely to the building of “St Martyn’s Church, in the vintry of London;” he is also said to have filled the office of Mayor, during which time he built a prison, called the Tun, in Cornhill, for night-walkers. In 1296, when Edward granted the citizens of London the right of electing their chief magistrate, one William Waleis was called by the public voice to the civic chair.45Fordun says the name of the elder son wasAndrew, and thus speaks of him—“Cujus frater senior miles Andreas nomine, et militiæ cingulo succinctus.”46Hailes, p. 253.47This Gilbert de Umfraville, according to Dugdale, was descended from Robert de Umfraville, Knight of Tours, otherwise called Robert with the Beard, who was a kinsman of William the Conqueror. Having obtained a grant of the Scottish as well as the English inheritance of Ingram de Baliol, Umfraville became Earl of Angus, and was constituted governor of the castles of Dundee and Forfar. Justly considering that he held these fortresses in charge from the Scottish Regency, he could not surrender them to England, unless Edward and the Scottish Regency joined in an obligation to indemnify him. His demand was complied with; on which Lord Hailes remarks, that “he was the onlyScotsmanwho acted with integrity and spirit on this trial of national integrity and spirit.” But, unfortunately for even this solitary instance of integrity, Gilbert de Umfraville was anEnglishman, and, as his conduct showed, a prudent, cautious, circumspect man of the world, who wished to preserve his possessions in both countries, by standing fair with both governments. His request could not be objected to by either of the parties. The expenses he laid out in maintaining the castle were afterwards allowed him, in consequence of a precept sent by Edward to the Bishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, and the other guardians of the kingdom. In 22 Edward I. (according to Dugdale) he was summoned to Portsmouth, with horse and arms, to attend Edward on his expedition to France; and in 23 Edward I. he was summoned to Parliament, but not by the title of Earl of Angus, till 25 Edward I., at which time, says the above authority, “our lawyers of England were somewhat startled, and refused, in their briefs and instruments, to acknowledge him Earl, by reason that Angus was not within the kingdom of England, until he had openly produced the King’s warrant.”48Lord Hailes, in remarking on this anecdote, as told by Buchanan, says, “I suspect, however, that this is nothing more than an abridgement of Blind Harry in classical Latin. It may be remarked, by the way, that this is one of the most specious tales in the book, for it is characteristical.” The value of his Lordship’s “Historical Doubts” are now beginning to be appreciated. There are many tales equally specious, and equally characteristical, to be found in the book, which his natural acuteness would have found no difficulty in discovering, had he laid down the quill of the lawyer, when he took up the pen of the historian. Mr Tytler gives the story, and quotes Wyntown as one of his authorities. This is a mistake; Wyntown is silent on the subject; and I suspect the truth of it must rest on the evidence of the Minstrel, and traditions still current in the country, among which are the following:—“Edward I. thought Dundee of sufficient consequence to be occupied by an English garrison; and the illustrious Wallace (with his companions, John Blair, probably of the Balthayock family, and Sir Niel Campbell of Lochaw) is said by tradition to have received his education at Dundee school, and, in this situation, to have begun his exploits with the death of the son of the English Governor.”—Stat. Account, vol. viii. p. 212, 213.“There is a very respectable man in Longforgan (in Perthshire), of the name of Smith, a weaver, and the farmer of a few acres of land, who has in his possession a stone which is calledWallace’s Stone. It is what was formerly called in this country abear-stone, hollow like a large mortar, and was made use of to unhusk the bear or barley, as a preparative for the pot, with a large wooden mell, long before barley-mills were known. Its station was on one side of the door, and covered with a flat stone for a seat when not otherwise employed. Upon this stone Wallace sat on his way from Dundee, when he fled after killing the governor’s son, and was fed with bread and milk by the goodwife of the house, from whom the man who now lives there, and is the proprietor of the stone, is lineally descended; and here, his forbears (ancestors) have lived ever since, in nearly the same station and circumstances, for about five hundred years.”—Stat. Account, xix. 561, 562.49Hailes, p. 284.50Douglas’ Baronage, p. 456.51Quod tam Prælati quam Comites, Barones et alii nobiles,necnon universitates communitatesque notabilesdictiregniScotiæ, suas nobis super hoc patentes literas suis munitas sigillis quam citius fieri poterit destinabunt.—Fœdera, T. ii. p. 696.52Dugdale.53Wyntown thus quaintly describes the feelings of Edward, on being told of the loss of his fleet:—“Quhen the Kyng Edward of InglandHad herd of this deidfull Tythand,All breme he belyd in-to berth,And wrythyd all in wedand werth,Alsá kobbyd in his cropeAs he had ettin are Attyrcope.”Wyntown, vol. ii. p. 81.54Before the attack, Antony Bek, Bishop of Durham, joined the English army, with 140 knights, 500 horse, and 1000 foot, accompanied by the consecrated banners of St Cuthbert and St John of Beverley; the former carried by Henry de Horncester, a stout monk of Durham, and the latter by Gilbert de Grymmesby (so called by the English), a Scottish Vicar of Beverley College, born in the district of Kyle in Ayrshire,—who had spent a great part of his life in the service of Edward in France, where he had acted as a pursuivant. The banner of St Cuthbert accompanied the King only on extraordinary occasions. The following description of it may not be unacceptable.“This banner was fastened to a staff, five yards in length. All the pipes were of silver, to be sliven (slipt) on along the banner-staff; and on the uppermost pipe, on the height of it, was a little silver cross, and a goodly banner-cloth pertaining to it, and in the midst of the banner-cloth was a white velvet, half a yard square every way, and a cross of crimson velvet over it, and within the said white velvet was the holy relique, wherewith St Cuthbert covered the chalice when he said mass, and the residue of the banner-cloth was of crimson velvet, embroidered all over with gold and green silk most sumptuously. It was not carried out but on his anniversary, and some other principal festivals in procession. It was the clerk’s office to wait on it in his surplice, with a fair red-painted staff, having a fork or cleft at the upper end, which cleft was lined with soft silk, having a down under the silk to prevent it hurting or bruising the pipes of the banner, which were of silver, to take it down and raise it up again, by reason of the weightiness thereof. There were always four men to wait on it, besides the clerk, and divers who carried it. This last wore a strong girdle of white leather, to which the banner was fastened by two pieces of the same, having at each end of them a socket of horn to put the end of the banner-staff into.”—Hist. and Antiq. of Durham Abbey, p. 118, 120.By the Wardrobe Accounts, it appears that the monk who carried the banner of St Cuthbert into Scotland, was paid 1s. per day,—while he who carried that of St John was allowed 8½d., andone pennyper day to bring it back.55Knighton says there were 17,000 killed, and that rivulets of blood flowed through the city for two days. Langtoft informs us, that Edward was the first to enter the breach, which he did on his favourite horse, named “Bayard.” He has omitted to say, if “Bayard” wasa pale horse. This distinguishing trait seems only a-wanting, to render the description given of this “most pious and clementprince,” no unapt representation of the Grand Destroyer and last enemy of mankind.The only man of consequence who fell on the side of the English, was Sir Richard de Cornwall. He was killed by a quarrell, shot by a Flemish merchant from the “Red Hall.” This place was a fortified factory or store, occupied by a company of Flemings trading in Berwick, and held by them of the crown of Scotland, on condition of defending it against the English to the last extremity. Their knightly devoirs they bravely performed. The fortress held out the whole day against all the force the English could bring against it. At night it was set on fire, and the faithful little band of trading warriors perished in the flames.56Henry, Buke Fyrst, p. 10, 11.57Some accounts say that Sir Patrick Graham was the elder brother of the gallant Sir John.58Walter of Exeter.59Wyntown.60Stowe.61Vide Appendix to Tytler’s History of Scotland, vol. i.62The object of the greatest national importance, and of the most venerable antiquity, which he carried off on this occasion, was theLia-faile, called alsoClach na cineamhuinn(fatal stone), on which the Kings of Scotland, from the earliest ages of their monarchy, had been crowned. At the ceremony of their inauguration, aseanachaidh, or heraldic bard, clothed in a robe of sky-blue, stood before thelia-faile, and recited to the King, as he sat on it, the genealogy of the Kings of Scotland, from the foundation of their dynasty. The last performance of this ancient Celtic custom, was at the coronation of Alexander III. The person who officiated on that occasion, is said to have had on a scarlet robe. This, however, was not the colour used by the Celts, for that office. The person of the heraldic bard was sacred above all others, and he wore sky-blue as emblematic of peace. The early history of theLia-faileis involved in the obscurity of fable, and no small degree of sacredness has been attached to it from the connection it is supposed to have with the destinies of the Scots. The following Druidical Oracle, is considered as first giving currency to this belief.Cioniodh scuit saor an fine,Man ba breag an Faisdine.Mar a bh’ fhuighid an lia-fail,Dlighid flaitheas do ghabhail.Which Hector Boethius has thus rendered into Latin:Ne fallat fatum, Scoti quocunque locatumInvenient lapidem hunc, regnare tenentur ibidem.English Translations.Except old saws do feign,And wizards’ wits be blind,The Scots in place must reign,Where they this stone shall find.*****Consider, Scot, where’er you find this stone,If fates fail not (or lie not), there fix’d must be your throne.Another from Langtoft, vol. ii. p. 527.The Scottis sall bruke that realme, as natyve Ground,(Geif weirdis fayll nocht) quhair euir this chiar is found.That part of the history of theLia-failewhich is considered authentic, may soon be told.—It was at an early period brought from Ireland to Dunstaffnage; from thence to Scone, in 842, by Kenneth II.; and, lastly, to Westminster, in 1296. In the Wardrobe Account of Edward, for March 1299, there is the following entry of a payment to “Walter the painter, for a step to the foot of theNew Chair, in which the Stone of Scotlandwas placed, near the altar, before the shrine of St Edward, in Westminster Abbey, and to the carpenters and painters painting the said step; and the gold and colours to paint it with; and making a case to cover the said chair, L.1: 19: 7.”—Remarks on the Wardrobe Account, page xli. Walsingham says, that the use Edward put it to, was to serve as a chair for the celebrating priests at Westminster.In the treaty of peace between Robert Bruce and Edward III., there is a particular stipulation for the restoration of this Stone. The Londoners, however, had taken a fancy to it, and excited a commotion to prevent its removal; and Robert had no difficulty to persuade his people, to waive the performance of the agreement. Indeed, so deep-rooted has been the belief of the Scots in the augury attached to it, that many looked upon the accession of James to the British throne as the fulfilment of the prediction. Even in the present day, when there is so much anxiety evinced for the recovery of objects held in national estimation, we do not hear of any application being made to his Majesty for the restoration of theLia-faile. There is no doubt but many of those who witnessed the original aggression, would console themselves with the reflection, that the“Lang-shanked Southerone” had caught a Tartar.63The servility of the Scottish Barons was not always unrequited. By the Rotuli Scotiæ, 19 Edward I.et passim24, it appears he gave obligations of the following import.Annual Value.To the Bishop of Glasgow, lands ofL.100To James the Steward100To Patrick Earl of Dunbar100To John de Soulis100merks.To William Sinclair100To Patrick de Graham100To William de Soulis100Edward afterwards changed his plan, and gave these barons and prelates gratifications in money, or other value. But to John Comyn the King gave the enormous sum of L.1563: 14: 6½d.—Tytler’s Hist.vol. i. p. 99.64Prophetic announcements respecting him were also, at an after period, sent abroad by the Scottish clergy.—“Nam revelatione mirifica ostensum est fide dignioribus diversis, sanctissimum apostolum Andream, regni Scotiæ, protectorem et patronum, dicto Willielmo Wallace gladium cruentatum manu aliter commisisse, stricte sibi præcipiendo eo utrobique uti ad defensionem regni Anglicos propulsando.—Custos itaque effectus, misit manum suam ad fortia, Anglicos prosternens, Anglicatos reconcilians, oppressos relevans, et quotidianis incrementis proficiens.”M.S. Cuprensis.See Fordun’s Scotichronicon, vol. ii. p. 170.—This vision of St Andrew is also taken notice of by Blind Harry.—VideBuke Sewynd, v. 57.65“Riccardtoun is evidently a corruption of Richardtown. It is generally said to have been so called from a Sir Richard Wallace, who lived in the vicinity of the village, and who is said to have been uncle to the celebrated patriot Sir William Wallace. Of his house no vestige now remains. The place, however, where it stood is well known. The village of Riccardtown is within one mile of the market town of Kilmarnock.”—Stat. Acc.vol. vi. p. 117.66“Among other antiquities, there may be mentioned a place called Beg, above Allinton, where the brave Wallace lay in a species of rude fortification, with only fifty of his friends, yet obtained a complete victory over an English officer of the name of Fenwick, who had two hundred men under his command. This gallant hero, it is well known, had several places of retirement towards the head of this parish, and in the neighbourhood, some of which still retain his name to this day. Wallace-hill, in particular, an eminence near Galla-law, and a place called Wallace-Gill, in the parish of Loudoun, a hollow glen to which he probably retired for shelter, when pursued by his enemies.”—Stat. Acc.ii. 74.67Dugdale, vol. i. p. 266.68Froisart.69The ruins which are now called Crosby Castle, are situated in the district of Cunningham, within a short distance of the village of West Kilbride. They occupy part of the ground on which stood the old castle belonging to Sir Raynald Crawford. By the date on the wall, it seems to have undergone repairs in 1676. The present building has never been a place of great strength. From the ap *pearance of the ground, however, and other indications in the neighbourhood, the former castle must have been of a different character. On the edge of a deep precipitous glen, well adapted for concealment, it afforded every facility for eluding the pursuit of an enemy. A noisy brook dashes from rock to rock down the dark and well-wooded ravine, whose craggy sides must often have witnessed the meeting of Wallace and his associates.70The Charter of Wallace, by which Scrimgeor held the Constabulary of Dundee, is still in existence, and will be given in vol. ii. of this work. The seal affixed to the instrument is that of Baliol, and accompanies, as a frontispiece, the present volume.The peculiarities of a constable’s office, are thus enumerated inBray’s History of Surrey, vol. iii. p. 136. “In an instrument of William de Wickham, dated at Eshu, 19. January 1379, 3. Richard II., by which he appointed William de Wimbledon constable, the duty of his office is stated to be, to keep, govern, and oversee the castle, together with the manor, lordship, lands, franchises, liberties, parks, chases, warrens, &c. belonging to the same; also to hold the courts and to prosecute, challenge, claim, and defend all rights and franchises belonging to the bishop and church of Winchester within the said bailiwick.”

1Glasgow, 1825.

2Hemingford says, that there werefifty thousand slain, many drowned, andthree hundred thousand foottaken prisoners, besides a thousand horsemen.

3Hist. Lib. iv. c. 15.

4Appendix to Blair’s Relationes in the Library of the College of Glasgow.

5Scottish Historical Library, p. 68. quarto ed.

6In England, Thomas à Becket conceded to Henry II., that, in the event of a bondsman becoming a clerk, he should not receive orders without the consent of his lord; and further, if a man of holy church held any lay-fee, he must do the King’s service thereto attached, except in cases connected with the execution of criminals. SeeHearne’sGlossary to Langtoft’s Chronicle, vol. ii. p. 530.

7Macpherson’s Annals of Commerce, vol. i. p. 324.

8Fordun, vol. ii. lib. x. cap. 42.

9Fordun, vol. ii. lib. x. cap. 42.—If we compare the following provisions of an act put forth by Edward I., with the above-mentioned enactment, some idea may be formed respecting the views entertained by the two British monarchs, on the subject of foreign commercial intercourse. “It is ordained, that no fishmonger shall have any partnership with a stranger who brings fish from sea to the city; but let them seek for fish in theirownships, and permit foreigners to bring it and sell, when they come in their own ships. Because, by such partnerships, they who are of the city, and have known the state of the city, and the defect of victuals, will hold the fish at a dearer rate than foreigners, who shall not have known it; and also, that they who are of the city, when they cannot sell, as they will lay it up in cellars, and sell itdearer than the strangers would do, if they came without partnership, and knew not where they might be harboured.”—Lambert’s Historical Survey of London, vol. i. p. 156, 157.

10Fœdera, vol. i. p. 467.

11Torfæi Orcades, lib. i. cap. 4.

12Chron. of Lanercoste. See Macpherson’s Annals of Commerce, vol. i. p. 446. In 1282, the customs of England were farmed by Bonricini, Guidicon & Co. of Lucca, and the sum realized, from Easter 1281 till Easter 1282, netted 8411l.19s. 11½d. The money, it may be observed at this time, was the same in both countries.Madox, History of the Exchequer, c. 23. fo. 1.

13The use of coal as fuel was very early known in Scotland. By a charter, dated in April 1291, William de Obervill granted liberty to the monks of Dunfermline, to dig coal for their own use in his lands of Pittencrieff, but upon no account to sell any, (Chart. in Statist. Account of Scotland, vol. xiii. p. 469.) By this restriction, it would seem that the proprietor not only set a value on the sale of coal, but also that the monks of those days were in the habit of improving their resources, by trafficking in temporal as well as in spiritual matters.

14Ayloff’s Calendar, p. 88. Some idea may be formed of the injury which the trade of Scotland sustained by the long protracted and impoverishing warfare she had to maintain in support of her independence, from the circumstance of James I. being obliged, in 1430, to commission two citizens of London to send him the following articles for his own use: viz. 20 tuns of wine, 12 bows, 4 dozen yards of cloth of different colours, and 12 yards of scarlet, 20 yards of red worsted, 8 dozen pewter vessels, 1200 wooden bowls (or caps), packed in 4 barrels, 3 dozen coverels, a bason and font, 2 summer saddles, 1 hackney saddle, 1 woman’s saddle, with furniture, 2 portmanteaus, 4 yards of motley, 5 yards of morray, 5 yards of black cloth of Lyn, 12 yards kersey, 12 skins of red leather, and some trifling articles. These goods, shipped on board a vessel belonging to London, were secured by a royal order from being molested by English cruizers, but they were to pay the customary duties.Fœdera, vol. x. p. 470.

15Rymer’s Coll. MS. vol. ii. p. 287.

16This traffic was frequently interrupted by war; in time of peace, it was carried on to a considerable extent. The first notice that we have of its revival after the wars of Wallace and Bruce, occurs in a letter of safe-conduct granted 12th January 1359, to Andrew Murray and Alan Erskine, two Scottish drovers, with three horsemen and their servants for travelling through England, or the King’s foreign dominions, for a year, with horses, oxen, cows, and other goods and merchandise.—Fœdera, vol. vi. p. 114.

17The greyhounds, “leporarii,” of Scotland were considered so superior, that the Duke of Berry, in France, thought it worth while to send his valet, and three other men, to procure some of them, and to obtain letters of safe-conduct from the King of England, to enable them to travel through his dominions on that business.—Fœdera, vol. vii. page 831.

18By the chamberlain’s accounts, it appears that the 178 hogsheads cost 439l.16s. 8d. Sterling, while the 67 hogsheads and 1 pipe cost 373l.16s. 8d. Could this difference arise from the latter being of superior quality, or from the market being overstocked, in consequence of the expected demand? No doubt there were speculators in those days, as well as at present.

19Wyntown, vol. i. p. 286.

20Some fine specimens of these battle-axes may be seen in the museum at Inverness.

21By the chamberlain’s accounts it appears, that in the reign of Alexander III., the King’sBalistarius, or keeper of the cross-bows for the Castle of Ayr, was allowed yearly two merks and a half.

22P. 668.

23Annals of Commerce, vol. i. p. 397 & 398.

24Philosophical Transactions, vol. xxi. p. 230.

25Macpherson’s Annals of Commerce, vol. i. p. 440.

26The following proverb is still floating on the breath of tradition among the Highlanders—“Már thubhairt clag Scáin, an rud nach buin duit na buin da;” “As the bell of Scoon rang, what belongs not to you meddle not with.”

27The name and labours of this priest have created a little perplexity among the learned. He appears to have made a sort of census of the kingdom, in which the names of the Bishops, Abbots, Priors, Parsons, Vicars, Abbesses, Earls, Barons, Knights, Freeholders, and Communities of cities and burghs, were registered. This roll, in which their rentals were stated, is known in Scottish history by the name of “Bagamont’s Roll,” and was always referred to in disputes respecting church property. For the purpose of a like assessment, Bagamont appears to have made a similar census in England. A copy of the Scotch roll, carried off most likely by Edward, along with the other documents, from Scone, was found in the Tower of London, and given to the world, by the more modern historians of England, as the “Homage Roll of Scotland,” under the cognomen of “Ragman’s Roll.” The disgrace which this document seems to infer, is pathetically bewailed by Abercromby. If he had turned to the learned Bishop of Carlisle’s Scottish Historical Library, p. 53, his grief might have been a little assuaged by the following passage:—“One of the most ancient repertories of the primitive state and rights of the Scottish church, is the old Book of the Taxation of Ecclesiastical Benefices, whereof Sir John Skene has given us the following account.A‘The Pape, in the time of KingBJames the Third, sent in this realm ane cardinal and legate, called Bagimont: quha did make ane taxation of all the rentals of the benefices, that the samin might be knawin to the Pape: to the effect, that, when any person came to Rome seikin Bulles, or right to ony benefice fra him, he might conform to the said rental as he pleased, sell the samin for sa meikle silver or gold as he thocht maist profitable.’ This is by no means exact, nor answerable to what we commonly have from that learned writer; for that very law ofCJames the Third, to which he refers, cites this taxation by the name of the ‘Provinciallis Buik, or the auld taxation of Bagimont;’ and shews, that in this King’s time, endeavours were used to raise the values of the livings above what they were rated at, to the advantage of the Court of Rome, and against ‘the common gude of the realme.’ This act was confirmed by his son and successor James the Fourth, who madeDthe crime capital in laymen, ordaining that all such should ‘tine their life and gudes.’ We are, therefore, still in the dark as to the true author of this ancient valuation; being certainly misinformed of the time wherein he lived, and (perhaps) knowing as little of his proper name. If I may be allowed to offer my conjecture, I should guess that this ecclesiastical survey is about the same age with that which was made (of the lands in England) by our Edward the First; and possibly the names ofERageman and Bagimont were heretofore one and the same. What this or the other means, or how both have been corrupted, let the nicer etymologists inquire.”

ADe Verb. Sign. in voce Bagimont.BIt should be Alex.CVide Spotswood, lib. 2. p. 46. (3) Parl. 6. Ja. 3. Act 43.DParl. 4. St. 39.EVide D. Hen. Spelman. Gloss. in voce Rageman, and Repository of Records, p. 26. Had this candid and generally correct writer referred to Fordun, Book X. chap, xvii., he might have satisfied himself as to the date, origin, and nature of this roll, as well as the name and character of its author. The alteration of Bagimont to Rageman, is evidently an English corruption, which the writers of that country ought to be best able to explain. Ragman’s Roll, as a roll of vassalage to Edward, is unknown toancientEnglish and Scottish historians.

ADe Verb. Sign. in voce Bagimont.

BIt should be Alex.

CVide Spotswood, lib. 2. p. 46. (3) Parl. 6. Ja. 3. Act 43.

DParl. 4. St. 39.

EVide D. Hen. Spelman. Gloss. in voce Rageman, and Repository of Records, p. 26. Had this candid and generally correct writer referred to Fordun, Book X. chap, xvii., he might have satisfied himself as to the date, origin, and nature of this roll, as well as the name and character of its author. The alteration of Bagimont to Rageman, is evidently an English corruption, which the writers of that country ought to be best able to explain. Ragman’s Roll, as a roll of vassalage to Edward, is unknown toancientEnglish and Scottish historians.

28Hailes, 137, 138.

29Hailes, 155, 156.

30Vol. ii. p. 443 & 444.

31Vol. ii. p. 187. 3d edition.

32Chron. Melrose, p. 179.

33Hoveden, fol. 420.

34Fœdera, vol. i. p. 155.

35Icelandic Chronicle.

36Hailes, 188, 189.

37This reply of Alexander has been noticed, by various historians, as an uncommon instance of the precocity of the Royal intellect. Lord Hailes speaks of it as displaying “prudence and resolution superior to his years.” Without detracting from the merits of Alexander, it might with more propriety be considered as merely the well-conned lesson given him by the watchful guardians of the independence of his crown, whom experience had taught to be prepared for the attempt.

38The following quotation is from the work of a learned Englishman.“There is” (inter Poemata, M.S. D. R. Maithland, p.S. Pepys, Armig.) “a manuscript account ofRobertthe Third’s contest with ourHenrythe Fourth, upon the subject of Homage; in the conclusion whereof (after the wordFinis) is this inscription—TheRing(forReign)of the RoyRobert,made be DeanDavid Steill. In this the King ofEnglandsummonsRobertto do fealty atLondon.Eftir the richt ofBrutusKing,Quhilck had all Ingland in governing, &c.In return to which, ’tis affirm’d thatScotlandevir yit hes bene free,SinScota of Ægypttuick the see.It’s likewise observ’d, thatEnglanditself (having been four times conquer’d by theRomans,Saxons,Danes, andNormans) has little ground for such a challenge; and ought to remember how frequently she has miscarry’d in her adventures of that kind. In conclusion,Robertproposes the deciding this controversie by sixty against sixty (of the Royal blood of both kingdoms), forty against forty, or twenty against twenty: Or, ifHenryapproves it, that the two Kings themselves may end it in a single combat. In which last offer, are these remarkable lines.“I proffer me to prief on theAt we andScotlandyit are free,And of thePaipnothing we hauld,But of the Kirk our Faith of auld.”SeeNicholson’s Scottish Historical Library, p. 154, 155, 8vo. ed. and 43 of 4to.

38The following quotation is from the work of a learned Englishman.

“There is” (inter Poemata, M.S. D. R. Maithland, p.S. Pepys, Armig.) “a manuscript account ofRobertthe Third’s contest with ourHenrythe Fourth, upon the subject of Homage; in the conclusion whereof (after the wordFinis) is this inscription—TheRing(forReign)of the RoyRobert,made be DeanDavid Steill. In this the King ofEnglandsummonsRobertto do fealty atLondon.

Eftir the richt ofBrutusKing,Quhilck had all Ingland in governing, &c.

In return to which, ’tis affirm’d that

Scotlandevir yit hes bene free,SinScota of Ægypttuick the see.

It’s likewise observ’d, thatEnglanditself (having been four times conquer’d by theRomans,Saxons,Danes, andNormans) has little ground for such a challenge; and ought to remember how frequently she has miscarry’d in her adventures of that kind. In conclusion,Robertproposes the deciding this controversie by sixty against sixty (of the Royal blood of both kingdoms), forty against forty, or twenty against twenty: Or, ifHenryapproves it, that the two Kings themselves may end it in a single combat. In which last offer, are these remarkable lines.

“I proffer me to prief on theAt we andScotlandyit are free,And of thePaipnothing we hauld,But of the Kirk our Faith of auld.”

SeeNicholson’s Scottish Historical Library, p. 154, 155, 8vo. ed. and 43 of 4to.

39Hailes, p. 243, 244.

40Baliol, who, on the death of the Scottish Queen, assumed the title of “Hæres regni Scotiæ,” had engaged the powerful interest of the Bishop of Durham, by a grant of all the manors possessed by Alexander III. in Cumberland;—or, in the event of Edward refusing to sanction the grant, fifty manors in Scotland, in lieu of them. Had any of the other competitors been preferred, this grant must have fallen to the ground.—Original Charter in possession of Mr Astle, and published in his Account of the Seals of the Kings of Scotland, p. 22.It is more than probable that the influence and services of the Bishop of St Andrew’s had been secured by prospects perhaps equally advantageous.

41In support of this claim, Dr Lingard has, with great industry, collected the evidence afforded by the ancient chronicles of England from Brutus downward. These fabrications of the cloisters, however, are contradicted by events, respecting the truth of which the historians of both countries are agreed. It is rather singular, that when John became theliegemanof the See of Rome, and, with the consent of his barons, surrenderedthe“KINGDOMS OF ENGLAND AND IRELAND TO BE HELD OF THE POPE IN FEE, FOR A THOUSAND MERKS,” that he should havetrickedhis Holiness out ofTHE KINGDOM OF SCOTLAND. Surely the example of Ananias was lost on the English monarch, when he thus trifled with the church, and kept back athirdofhiskingdoms. Dr Lingard does not inform his readers how the watchful guardian of “the Patrimony of St Peter” came to wink at so gross an imposition.After all that the learned Doctor has advanced on the subject, it is pretty plain, that the homage of England over Scotland is something like that which was extorted by St Dunstan from a certain potentate who shall be nameless. Though the saint compelled him to crypeccavi, in a manner that made a great noise in the world at the time, yet when he became relieved from the scrape, and had got his nose in order, hissaintshipfound hisvassalas troublesome and evil disposed as ever.

After all that the learned Doctor has advanced on the subject, it is pretty plain, that the homage of England over Scotland is something like that which was extorted by St Dunstan from a certain potentate who shall be nameless. Though the saint compelled him to crypeccavi, in a manner that made a great noise in the world at the time, yet when he became relieved from the scrape, and had got his nose in order, hissaintshipfound hisvassalas troublesome and evil disposed as ever.

42Hailes, p. 245, 246.

43Langtoft, vol. ii. p. 248.

44A family of the name of Waleis also existed in England, some of whom appear to have attained the highest civic honours in the city of London. We are informed by Stowe, that, in 1299, when part of the palace of Westminster, and the public buildings of the adjoining monastery, were destroyed by fire, a Parliament was held by Edward in the house of Henry Waleis, Mayor of London, at Stehenheth, “when crokards, pollards, and rosaries, coyned in foreign parts beyond seas, and uttered for sterlings, were cried down.” Henry Waleis was also Mayor in 1300; and a person of the same name is mentioned as having contributed largely to the building of “St Martyn’s Church, in the vintry of London;” he is also said to have filled the office of Mayor, during which time he built a prison, called the Tun, in Cornhill, for night-walkers. In 1296, when Edward granted the citizens of London the right of electing their chief magistrate, one William Waleis was called by the public voice to the civic chair.

45Fordun says the name of the elder son wasAndrew, and thus speaks of him—“Cujus frater senior miles Andreas nomine, et militiæ cingulo succinctus.”

46Hailes, p. 253.

47This Gilbert de Umfraville, according to Dugdale, was descended from Robert de Umfraville, Knight of Tours, otherwise called Robert with the Beard, who was a kinsman of William the Conqueror. Having obtained a grant of the Scottish as well as the English inheritance of Ingram de Baliol, Umfraville became Earl of Angus, and was constituted governor of the castles of Dundee and Forfar. Justly considering that he held these fortresses in charge from the Scottish Regency, he could not surrender them to England, unless Edward and the Scottish Regency joined in an obligation to indemnify him. His demand was complied with; on which Lord Hailes remarks, that “he was the onlyScotsmanwho acted with integrity and spirit on this trial of national integrity and spirit.” But, unfortunately for even this solitary instance of integrity, Gilbert de Umfraville was anEnglishman, and, as his conduct showed, a prudent, cautious, circumspect man of the world, who wished to preserve his possessions in both countries, by standing fair with both governments. His request could not be objected to by either of the parties. The expenses he laid out in maintaining the castle were afterwards allowed him, in consequence of a precept sent by Edward to the Bishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, and the other guardians of the kingdom. In 22 Edward I. (according to Dugdale) he was summoned to Portsmouth, with horse and arms, to attend Edward on his expedition to France; and in 23 Edward I. he was summoned to Parliament, but not by the title of Earl of Angus, till 25 Edward I., at which time, says the above authority, “our lawyers of England were somewhat startled, and refused, in their briefs and instruments, to acknowledge him Earl, by reason that Angus was not within the kingdom of England, until he had openly produced the King’s warrant.”

48Lord Hailes, in remarking on this anecdote, as told by Buchanan, says, “I suspect, however, that this is nothing more than an abridgement of Blind Harry in classical Latin. It may be remarked, by the way, that this is one of the most specious tales in the book, for it is characteristical.” The value of his Lordship’s “Historical Doubts” are now beginning to be appreciated. There are many tales equally specious, and equally characteristical, to be found in the book, which his natural acuteness would have found no difficulty in discovering, had he laid down the quill of the lawyer, when he took up the pen of the historian. Mr Tytler gives the story, and quotes Wyntown as one of his authorities. This is a mistake; Wyntown is silent on the subject; and I suspect the truth of it must rest on the evidence of the Minstrel, and traditions still current in the country, among which are the following:—“Edward I. thought Dundee of sufficient consequence to be occupied by an English garrison; and the illustrious Wallace (with his companions, John Blair, probably of the Balthayock family, and Sir Niel Campbell of Lochaw) is said by tradition to have received his education at Dundee school, and, in this situation, to have begun his exploits with the death of the son of the English Governor.”—Stat. Account, vol. viii. p. 212, 213.“There is a very respectable man in Longforgan (in Perthshire), of the name of Smith, a weaver, and the farmer of a few acres of land, who has in his possession a stone which is calledWallace’s Stone. It is what was formerly called in this country abear-stone, hollow like a large mortar, and was made use of to unhusk the bear or barley, as a preparative for the pot, with a large wooden mell, long before barley-mills were known. Its station was on one side of the door, and covered with a flat stone for a seat when not otherwise employed. Upon this stone Wallace sat on his way from Dundee, when he fled after killing the governor’s son, and was fed with bread and milk by the goodwife of the house, from whom the man who now lives there, and is the proprietor of the stone, is lineally descended; and here, his forbears (ancestors) have lived ever since, in nearly the same station and circumstances, for about five hundred years.”—Stat. Account, xix. 561, 562.

“There is a very respectable man in Longforgan (in Perthshire), of the name of Smith, a weaver, and the farmer of a few acres of land, who has in his possession a stone which is calledWallace’s Stone. It is what was formerly called in this country abear-stone, hollow like a large mortar, and was made use of to unhusk the bear or barley, as a preparative for the pot, with a large wooden mell, long before barley-mills were known. Its station was on one side of the door, and covered with a flat stone for a seat when not otherwise employed. Upon this stone Wallace sat on his way from Dundee, when he fled after killing the governor’s son, and was fed with bread and milk by the goodwife of the house, from whom the man who now lives there, and is the proprietor of the stone, is lineally descended; and here, his forbears (ancestors) have lived ever since, in nearly the same station and circumstances, for about five hundred years.”—Stat. Account, xix. 561, 562.

49Hailes, p. 284.

50Douglas’ Baronage, p. 456.

51Quod tam Prælati quam Comites, Barones et alii nobiles,necnon universitates communitatesque notabilesdictiregniScotiæ, suas nobis super hoc patentes literas suis munitas sigillis quam citius fieri poterit destinabunt.—Fœdera, T. ii. p. 696.

52Dugdale.

53Wyntown thus quaintly describes the feelings of Edward, on being told of the loss of his fleet:—“Quhen the Kyng Edward of InglandHad herd of this deidfull Tythand,All breme he belyd in-to berth,And wrythyd all in wedand werth,Alsá kobbyd in his cropeAs he had ettin are Attyrcope.”Wyntown, vol. ii. p. 81.

53Wyntown thus quaintly describes the feelings of Edward, on being told of the loss of his fleet:—

“Quhen the Kyng Edward of InglandHad herd of this deidfull Tythand,All breme he belyd in-to berth,And wrythyd all in wedand werth,Alsá kobbyd in his cropeAs he had ettin are Attyrcope.”Wyntown, vol. ii. p. 81.

54Before the attack, Antony Bek, Bishop of Durham, joined the English army, with 140 knights, 500 horse, and 1000 foot, accompanied by the consecrated banners of St Cuthbert and St John of Beverley; the former carried by Henry de Horncester, a stout monk of Durham, and the latter by Gilbert de Grymmesby (so called by the English), a Scottish Vicar of Beverley College, born in the district of Kyle in Ayrshire,—who had spent a great part of his life in the service of Edward in France, where he had acted as a pursuivant. The banner of St Cuthbert accompanied the King only on extraordinary occasions. The following description of it may not be unacceptable.“This banner was fastened to a staff, five yards in length. All the pipes were of silver, to be sliven (slipt) on along the banner-staff; and on the uppermost pipe, on the height of it, was a little silver cross, and a goodly banner-cloth pertaining to it, and in the midst of the banner-cloth was a white velvet, half a yard square every way, and a cross of crimson velvet over it, and within the said white velvet was the holy relique, wherewith St Cuthbert covered the chalice when he said mass, and the residue of the banner-cloth was of crimson velvet, embroidered all over with gold and green silk most sumptuously. It was not carried out but on his anniversary, and some other principal festivals in procession. It was the clerk’s office to wait on it in his surplice, with a fair red-painted staff, having a fork or cleft at the upper end, which cleft was lined with soft silk, having a down under the silk to prevent it hurting or bruising the pipes of the banner, which were of silver, to take it down and raise it up again, by reason of the weightiness thereof. There were always four men to wait on it, besides the clerk, and divers who carried it. This last wore a strong girdle of white leather, to which the banner was fastened by two pieces of the same, having at each end of them a socket of horn to put the end of the banner-staff into.”—Hist. and Antiq. of Durham Abbey, p. 118, 120.By the Wardrobe Accounts, it appears that the monk who carried the banner of St Cuthbert into Scotland, was paid 1s. per day,—while he who carried that of St John was allowed 8½d., andone pennyper day to bring it back.

“This banner was fastened to a staff, five yards in length. All the pipes were of silver, to be sliven (slipt) on along the banner-staff; and on the uppermost pipe, on the height of it, was a little silver cross, and a goodly banner-cloth pertaining to it, and in the midst of the banner-cloth was a white velvet, half a yard square every way, and a cross of crimson velvet over it, and within the said white velvet was the holy relique, wherewith St Cuthbert covered the chalice when he said mass, and the residue of the banner-cloth was of crimson velvet, embroidered all over with gold and green silk most sumptuously. It was not carried out but on his anniversary, and some other principal festivals in procession. It was the clerk’s office to wait on it in his surplice, with a fair red-painted staff, having a fork or cleft at the upper end, which cleft was lined with soft silk, having a down under the silk to prevent it hurting or bruising the pipes of the banner, which were of silver, to take it down and raise it up again, by reason of the weightiness thereof. There were always four men to wait on it, besides the clerk, and divers who carried it. This last wore a strong girdle of white leather, to which the banner was fastened by two pieces of the same, having at each end of them a socket of horn to put the end of the banner-staff into.”—Hist. and Antiq. of Durham Abbey, p. 118, 120.

By the Wardrobe Accounts, it appears that the monk who carried the banner of St Cuthbert into Scotland, was paid 1s. per day,—while he who carried that of St John was allowed 8½d., andone pennyper day to bring it back.

55Knighton says there were 17,000 killed, and that rivulets of blood flowed through the city for two days. Langtoft informs us, that Edward was the first to enter the breach, which he did on his favourite horse, named “Bayard.” He has omitted to say, if “Bayard” wasa pale horse. This distinguishing trait seems only a-wanting, to render the description given of this “most pious and clementprince,” no unapt representation of the Grand Destroyer and last enemy of mankind.The only man of consequence who fell on the side of the English, was Sir Richard de Cornwall. He was killed by a quarrell, shot by a Flemish merchant from the “Red Hall.” This place was a fortified factory or store, occupied by a company of Flemings trading in Berwick, and held by them of the crown of Scotland, on condition of defending it against the English to the last extremity. Their knightly devoirs they bravely performed. The fortress held out the whole day against all the force the English could bring against it. At night it was set on fire, and the faithful little band of trading warriors perished in the flames.

The only man of consequence who fell on the side of the English, was Sir Richard de Cornwall. He was killed by a quarrell, shot by a Flemish merchant from the “Red Hall.” This place was a fortified factory or store, occupied by a company of Flemings trading in Berwick, and held by them of the crown of Scotland, on condition of defending it against the English to the last extremity. Their knightly devoirs they bravely performed. The fortress held out the whole day against all the force the English could bring against it. At night it was set on fire, and the faithful little band of trading warriors perished in the flames.

56Henry, Buke Fyrst, p. 10, 11.

57Some accounts say that Sir Patrick Graham was the elder brother of the gallant Sir John.

58Walter of Exeter.

59Wyntown.

60Stowe.

61Vide Appendix to Tytler’s History of Scotland, vol. i.

62The object of the greatest national importance, and of the most venerable antiquity, which he carried off on this occasion, was theLia-faile, called alsoClach na cineamhuinn(fatal stone), on which the Kings of Scotland, from the earliest ages of their monarchy, had been crowned. At the ceremony of their inauguration, aseanachaidh, or heraldic bard, clothed in a robe of sky-blue, stood before thelia-faile, and recited to the King, as he sat on it, the genealogy of the Kings of Scotland, from the foundation of their dynasty. The last performance of this ancient Celtic custom, was at the coronation of Alexander III. The person who officiated on that occasion, is said to have had on a scarlet robe. This, however, was not the colour used by the Celts, for that office. The person of the heraldic bard was sacred above all others, and he wore sky-blue as emblematic of peace. The early history of theLia-faileis involved in the obscurity of fable, and no small degree of sacredness has been attached to it from the connection it is supposed to have with the destinies of the Scots. The following Druidical Oracle, is considered as first giving currency to this belief.Cioniodh scuit saor an fine,Man ba breag an Faisdine.Mar a bh’ fhuighid an lia-fail,Dlighid flaitheas do ghabhail.Which Hector Boethius has thus rendered into Latin:Ne fallat fatum, Scoti quocunque locatumInvenient lapidem hunc, regnare tenentur ibidem.English Translations.Except old saws do feign,And wizards’ wits be blind,The Scots in place must reign,Where they this stone shall find.*****Consider, Scot, where’er you find this stone,If fates fail not (or lie not), there fix’d must be your throne.Another from Langtoft, vol. ii. p. 527.The Scottis sall bruke that realme, as natyve Ground,(Geif weirdis fayll nocht) quhair euir this chiar is found.That part of the history of theLia-failewhich is considered authentic, may soon be told.—It was at an early period brought from Ireland to Dunstaffnage; from thence to Scone, in 842, by Kenneth II.; and, lastly, to Westminster, in 1296. In the Wardrobe Account of Edward, for March 1299, there is the following entry of a payment to “Walter the painter, for a step to the foot of theNew Chair, in which the Stone of Scotlandwas placed, near the altar, before the shrine of St Edward, in Westminster Abbey, and to the carpenters and painters painting the said step; and the gold and colours to paint it with; and making a case to cover the said chair, L.1: 19: 7.”—Remarks on the Wardrobe Account, page xli. Walsingham says, that the use Edward put it to, was to serve as a chair for the celebrating priests at Westminster.In the treaty of peace between Robert Bruce and Edward III., there is a particular stipulation for the restoration of this Stone. The Londoners, however, had taken a fancy to it, and excited a commotion to prevent its removal; and Robert had no difficulty to persuade his people, to waive the performance of the agreement. Indeed, so deep-rooted has been the belief of the Scots in the augury attached to it, that many looked upon the accession of James to the British throne as the fulfilment of the prediction. Even in the present day, when there is so much anxiety evinced for the recovery of objects held in national estimation, we do not hear of any application being made to his Majesty for the restoration of theLia-faile. There is no doubt but many of those who witnessed the original aggression, would console themselves with the reflection, that the“Lang-shanked Southerone” had caught a Tartar.

Cioniodh scuit saor an fine,Man ba breag an Faisdine.Mar a bh’ fhuighid an lia-fail,Dlighid flaitheas do ghabhail.

Which Hector Boethius has thus rendered into Latin:

Ne fallat fatum, Scoti quocunque locatumInvenient lapidem hunc, regnare tenentur ibidem.

English Translations.

Except old saws do feign,And wizards’ wits be blind,The Scots in place must reign,Where they this stone shall find.

*****

Consider, Scot, where’er you find this stone,If fates fail not (or lie not), there fix’d must be your throne.

Another from Langtoft, vol. ii. p. 527.

The Scottis sall bruke that realme, as natyve Ground,(Geif weirdis fayll nocht) quhair euir this chiar is found.

That part of the history of theLia-failewhich is considered authentic, may soon be told.—It was at an early period brought from Ireland to Dunstaffnage; from thence to Scone, in 842, by Kenneth II.; and, lastly, to Westminster, in 1296. In the Wardrobe Account of Edward, for March 1299, there is the following entry of a payment to “Walter the painter, for a step to the foot of theNew Chair, in which the Stone of Scotlandwas placed, near the altar, before the shrine of St Edward, in Westminster Abbey, and to the carpenters and painters painting the said step; and the gold and colours to paint it with; and making a case to cover the said chair, L.1: 19: 7.”—Remarks on the Wardrobe Account, page xli. Walsingham says, that the use Edward put it to, was to serve as a chair for the celebrating priests at Westminster.

In the treaty of peace between Robert Bruce and Edward III., there is a particular stipulation for the restoration of this Stone. The Londoners, however, had taken a fancy to it, and excited a commotion to prevent its removal; and Robert had no difficulty to persuade his people, to waive the performance of the agreement. Indeed, so deep-rooted has been the belief of the Scots in the augury attached to it, that many looked upon the accession of James to the British throne as the fulfilment of the prediction. Even in the present day, when there is so much anxiety evinced for the recovery of objects held in national estimation, we do not hear of any application being made to his Majesty for the restoration of theLia-faile. There is no doubt but many of those who witnessed the original aggression, would console themselves with the reflection, that the“Lang-shanked Southerone” had caught a Tartar.

63The servility of the Scottish Barons was not always unrequited. By the Rotuli Scotiæ, 19 Edward I.et passim24, it appears he gave obligations of the following import.Annual Value.To the Bishop of Glasgow, lands ofL.100To James the Steward100To Patrick Earl of Dunbar100To John de Soulis100merks.To William Sinclair100To Patrick de Graham100To William de Soulis100Edward afterwards changed his plan, and gave these barons and prelates gratifications in money, or other value. But to John Comyn the King gave the enormous sum of L.1563: 14: 6½d.—Tytler’s Hist.vol. i. p. 99.

63The servility of the Scottish Barons was not always unrequited. By the Rotuli Scotiæ, 19 Edward I.et passim24, it appears he gave obligations of the following import.

Edward afterwards changed his plan, and gave these barons and prelates gratifications in money, or other value. But to John Comyn the King gave the enormous sum of L.1563: 14: 6½d.—Tytler’s Hist.vol. i. p. 99.

64Prophetic announcements respecting him were also, at an after period, sent abroad by the Scottish clergy.—“Nam revelatione mirifica ostensum est fide dignioribus diversis, sanctissimum apostolum Andream, regni Scotiæ, protectorem et patronum, dicto Willielmo Wallace gladium cruentatum manu aliter commisisse, stricte sibi præcipiendo eo utrobique uti ad defensionem regni Anglicos propulsando.—Custos itaque effectus, misit manum suam ad fortia, Anglicos prosternens, Anglicatos reconcilians, oppressos relevans, et quotidianis incrementis proficiens.”M.S. Cuprensis.See Fordun’s Scotichronicon, vol. ii. p. 170.—This vision of St Andrew is also taken notice of by Blind Harry.—VideBuke Sewynd, v. 57.

65“Riccardtoun is evidently a corruption of Richardtown. It is generally said to have been so called from a Sir Richard Wallace, who lived in the vicinity of the village, and who is said to have been uncle to the celebrated patriot Sir William Wallace. Of his house no vestige now remains. The place, however, where it stood is well known. The village of Riccardtown is within one mile of the market town of Kilmarnock.”—Stat. Acc.vol. vi. p. 117.

66“Among other antiquities, there may be mentioned a place called Beg, above Allinton, where the brave Wallace lay in a species of rude fortification, with only fifty of his friends, yet obtained a complete victory over an English officer of the name of Fenwick, who had two hundred men under his command. This gallant hero, it is well known, had several places of retirement towards the head of this parish, and in the neighbourhood, some of which still retain his name to this day. Wallace-hill, in particular, an eminence near Galla-law, and a place called Wallace-Gill, in the parish of Loudoun, a hollow glen to which he probably retired for shelter, when pursued by his enemies.”—Stat. Acc.ii. 74.

67Dugdale, vol. i. p. 266.

68Froisart.

69The ruins which are now called Crosby Castle, are situated in the district of Cunningham, within a short distance of the village of West Kilbride. They occupy part of the ground on which stood the old castle belonging to Sir Raynald Crawford. By the date on the wall, it seems to have undergone repairs in 1676. The present building has never been a place of great strength. From the ap *pearance of the ground, however, and other indications in the neighbourhood, the former castle must have been of a different character. On the edge of a deep precipitous glen, well adapted for concealment, it afforded every facility for eluding the pursuit of an enemy. A noisy brook dashes from rock to rock down the dark and well-wooded ravine, whose craggy sides must often have witnessed the meeting of Wallace and his associates.

70The Charter of Wallace, by which Scrimgeor held the Constabulary of Dundee, is still in existence, and will be given in vol. ii. of this work. The seal affixed to the instrument is that of Baliol, and accompanies, as a frontispiece, the present volume.The peculiarities of a constable’s office, are thus enumerated inBray’s History of Surrey, vol. iii. p. 136. “In an instrument of William de Wickham, dated at Eshu, 19. January 1379, 3. Richard II., by which he appointed William de Wimbledon constable, the duty of his office is stated to be, to keep, govern, and oversee the castle, together with the manor, lordship, lands, franchises, liberties, parks, chases, warrens, &c. belonging to the same; also to hold the courts and to prosecute, challenge, claim, and defend all rights and franchises belonging to the bishop and church of Winchester within the said bailiwick.”

The peculiarities of a constable’s office, are thus enumerated inBray’s History of Surrey, vol. iii. p. 136. “In an instrument of William de Wickham, dated at Eshu, 19. January 1379, 3. Richard II., by which he appointed William de Wimbledon constable, the duty of his office is stated to be, to keep, govern, and oversee the castle, together with the manor, lordship, lands, franchises, liberties, parks, chases, warrens, &c. belonging to the same; also to hold the courts and to prosecute, challenge, claim, and defend all rights and franchises belonging to the bishop and church of Winchester within the said bailiwick.”

Back to Index Next