“bynightertaleHe sleep namore than doth a nightingale.”(Prologue, 97, 98).
“bynightertaleHe sleep namore than doth a nightingale.”(Prologue, 97, 98).
“bynightertaleHe sleep namore than doth a nightingale.”
(Prologue, 97, 98).
501Upon the wattir.“On another mountain ... also on the river” (Le Bel, i. 65).
503on the morn.Barbour gives the Scots only two days in the first position opposite the English, not saying how long they had been already “liand” there, which Le Bel says was eight days. Le Bel says, further, that they left on the third, not the second, night, and that their departure was discovered on the morning of the fourth day (p. 65). If the English arrived on July 31 (cf.on 402), and Edward was at Stanhope on August 3 (cf.on 316), this would be right. Gray says the Scots shifted camp on the fourth night (Scala., p. 154). Fordun suggests only one position, the second (Gesta Annalia, cxl.).
513on othir half the wattir of Wer.Cf.Gesta Edwardiin note on 490. In Le Bel the river is still between the armies, (pp. 65, 66).
516Aucht dayis.Maxwell affirms that, in saying this, Barbour “either draws on his imagination, or has been misled by his informants” (Robert the Bruce, p. 314); and the chronology of the various writers is hard to reconcile. Gray gives six days for the second position (p. 154); Le Bel (Froissart) eighteen (68); Knighton fifteen (Leycestrensis Chron., i. 445); Hemingburgh says the Scots were besieged for fifteen days in Stanhope Park (ii., p. 298). But the author ofGesta Edwardiagrees with Barbour inassigning eight days (octo diebus dicursis, p. 97), and so does theLanercostwriter (p. 259) and Fordun (Gesta Annalia, cxl.). Yet Mr. Brown accuses Barbour, in fixing that term, of “always lauding his own side,” though these English chroniclers support him (The Wallace and The Bruce, p. 145). One document suggests that Edward was at Durham on August 5 (Bain, iii., No. 930), but dates and places on legal documents do not always signify what they suggest. The order from Durham was issued in the King’s name. Edward was still at Stanhope on August 7 (Calendar of Patent Rolls, Edward III.s. d.).
520-1ilk day justyng of Wer. And scrymming.“Every day skirmishing by those who wished to skirmish” (Le Bel, 67).Cf.throughout Froissart, ch. xviii.
527on the nynt day.“Thefirstnight that our lords were lodged upon this (second) mountain” (Le Bel, p. 67). InScala.apparently the third night (p. 155).
533V. hundreth.“Two hundred men-at-arms” (Le Bel, p. 67). “A few” (Lanercost, 260;Gesta Edw., 96).
534in the night.“About midnight” (Le Bel).
535so fer he raid.“He passed this river a good distance (bien loin) from our host” (Le Bel).
538slely can he ryd.“Wherefore no one perceived him” (Le Bel).
541hew rapys.See below on 561.
550no vachis.“He suddenly passed through the sentinels of the English” (Gesta Edw., pp. 96-7).
560He ruschit on thame hardely.He fell on the English host most boldly, crying: “Douglas! Douglas! you shall die all, lords of England” (Le Bel,ibid.). InFroissartit becomes “thieves of England” (Berners,Johnes), a version due, apparently, to Froissart’s later re-editing of his own work. In Lettenhove’s edition (1863) it is “’Glas, ’Glas” (i., p. 102). Knighton says that when Douglas was seen by some English he began to cry in English (Anglica voce), “‘No warde a seynt Jorge!’ as if he were an Englishman” (i. 445).
561doune he bare.Le Bel (Froissart) says Douglas got so far that “he cut two or three cords of the King’s tent.” “He penetrated (intravit) a great part of the army of the King, and came nearly to the King’s tent” (Lanercost, 260). “He passed through the midst of the English army” (Gesta Edwardi, 97).
565Thai stabbit, stekit, and thai slew.“They began, he and his company, to make a great attack. (À faire une grand envaïe et à coper et mehagnier gens et à abatre (car ce fus sus le point dou premier somme) et porterent grand damage a l’oost” (Froissartin Vatican MS., ed. Lettenhove, i., chap, xxxiii., p. 102. 1863).
567A felloun slauchtir.“Douglas and his company slew more than three hundred” (Le Bel). “Some he slew, some took captive” (Gesta Edw., p. 97). They “slew a great part of the people of the Earls” (Scala., p. 155).
568liand nakit.I.e., unarmoured. “And he slew or he seased ccc. men, some in their beddes, and some skant redy” (from Berner’sFroissart, but not in Johnes nor in any of the known editions ofFroissartnor inLe Bel; not, however, a very unusual exercise of the imagination). Barbour’s descriptive detail is evidently due to his information. “He gave very many a rude awakening” (plurimos terribiliter evigilavit.Gesta Edw., p. 97). “On his return he slew many in their amazement” (attonitos.Lanercost, 260).
577That lord, etc.I.e., “First one lord and then another was aroused.”
614cummyn ar thai.“He himself (Douglas) returned unhurt to his own army” (Gesta Edw., 97); “with very great difficulty” (Knighton, i. 445).
638ilk day growis.Edward was still summoning men to his host. Such a summons is dated at Stanhope, August 3 (Bain, No. 929).
639vattale has.Le Bel, on the contrary, says the English army was suffering severely from want of food, and that provisions were at a famine price (toudis avions nous paour de plus grand famine, pp. 66-68). The final Froissart does not have these passages, but suggests the same thing (p. 24). TheLanercostchronicler speaks of their failing victuals (p. 259).
644Sic as we haf.See notes on 405 and 735. Le Bel says the English expected the Scots would be forced by famine to make a night attack (p. 68;Froissart, Johnes, p. 24).
657A nycht.“One night.”
667thou mon heir out.“You can get out only here.”
712thai sall let thame trumpit ill.Evidently in allusion to line 680. “Trumpeting” seems to have been the prelude to any operation. Or the phrase may be in French idiom, introducing the verbtromper, to deceive, which, however, would be unusual for Barbour.
731blew hornys and fyres maid.Cf.note on 482.
735the nycht wes fallyn.According to Le Bel, a Scottish knight was that day captured, who, much against his will, informed them that in the morning the Scots lords had arranged that every man was to be armed at vespers (68), and that each was to follow the banner of Douglas wherever he should go, and that every man was to keep it secret; but the Scots knight did not know for certain what their purpose was. The English judged that the Scots, forced by unendurable famine, were about to make an attack on their host (p. 68). Next day it was found that the Scotshad departed “before midnight” (p. 69), “leaving the park by night” (Gesta Edw., p. 97). Certain allusions would lead us to infer that the English had, to some extent, got round the Scots. Le Bel declares that the Scots were thought to be planning an attempt to break through the English on two sides (brisier nostre ost à deux costés, pp. 68-9). TheLanercostwriter says the Scots got away to their own country “by moving round the army of the King” (circueundo regis exercitum versus Scotiam pertransirent, p. 259). They were surrounded, according to Knighton (i., 445).Cf.also extract 957 fromBainin note on 490, and lines 800, 801. Le Bel says that he and some “companions” had to cross the river next day to get to the Scottish encampment, where they found abundance of beef in various forms. The account in theScalacronicais simply that, the third night after the Douglas affair, the Scots broke camp and marched to their own country (Scala., p. 155). Several English chroniclers attribute the escape of the Scots to treachery on their own side (Murimuth, 53, 64;Knighton, i. 445;Gesta Edw., 97, etc.).
746summer.“Sumpter-horse,” as, with a different spelling, inWallace, iv. 53; “Thar tyrytsowmirso left thai in-to playne.”
766-7till consale, etc.“When the lords heard this they took counsel ... and said that to chase after the Scots would profit them nothing, for they could not be overtaken” (Le Bel, p. 69).
770Kyng Robert than.If so, Bruce must have hurried back from Ireland, for on July 12 he granted a truce of one year to the people of Ulster (Bain, iii. 922). This Irish campaign appears to have been a failure (ibid., 1191). These are our only allusions to it. InScala.it is said that it was the Earls who heard they were besieged (p. 155).
774tuenty thousand.“Five thousand” (Scala., p. 155).
776Marche and Angous.“Patrick, Earl of March, and John the Steward, who styled himself Earl of Angous” (Scala., p. 155). March (cf.note onBk.XI. 46) had joined the Scots some time before February, 1317 (Bain, iii. 536). Sir John Stewart of Boncle, or Bonkill, son of Sir Alexander (see onBk.IX. 692), was created Earl of Angus by Bruce (Scots Peerage, i. 169).
781the sammyn day.“The very day of their departure” (Scala., 155).
798Had vittale with thame.On the contrary, Gray declares that if they had had enough provisions they would have gone back; they were such fierce warriors (p. 155).
1Soyne eftir.“Not long after” (nec multum post.Gesta Edw., p. 97). It was “lately,” on September 22, 1327 (Northern Registers, p. 344).
5A gret host.“With a great army” (North. Reg., p. 344).
7to Norhame.Besieged Norham Castle (ibid.; alsoFœdera, iii., p. 975; andScala., p. 155). Robert himself was at Norham (Scala.). For this and next note,cf.Scotichronicon, ii., p. 288.
10Awnwyk.Alnwick. “Besieged the castle of Alnwick for more than fifteen days” (Gesta Edw., p. 97). Alnwick besieged by Moray and Douglas (Scala., 155).
15mony fair gud chevelry.At Alnwick “there were great jousts of war by formal agreement” (estoient grantz joustes de guere par covenaunt taille.Scala., p. 155).
23-25The landis of Northumberland ... gaf he.“And lands, it is claimed, within the kingdom of England, the said King Robert confers on certain of his followers, and causes charters to be prepared for the grantees” (North. Reg., p. 344;cf.“thai payit for the seliys fee”).
27raid he destroyand.The Scots “destroyed Northumberland almost entirely, except the castles, and remained there a long time” (Lanercost, p. 260).
31Ledaris of hym.“The Queen and Mortimer arranged everything” (la royne et le Mortimer le firent tout,Scala., 156). “By the evil advice of his mother and Roger, Lord of Mortimer” (Lanercost, p. 261); “his mother then ruled the whole kingdom” (ibid.).
33Send messyngers.The “messengers” (nuntios; inActs., messages) and procurators of the King of England were the Bishops of Lincoln and Norwich, Henry Percy, William of Ashby-de-la-Zouch (a Mortimer), and Geoffrey Scrope. The negotiations took place at Edinburgh, and were concluded March 17, 1328 (Gesta Edw., p. 98;Acts Parl. Scot., i., p. 124). A parliament at Northampton finally agreed to the treaty, May 4, 1328 (Exchequer Rolls, i. ciii.).
38fiff yheir ... scarsly.David Bruce was born on March 5, 1324.
39Johane ... of the Tour.Having been born in the Tower of London. “Johanam de Turre” (Lanercost, p. 261); “Johannam de Turribus” (Scotich., ii., p. 290).
43sevin yher.Born 1321.
44monymentis and lettrys ser.Especially theRagman Roll(Icelandic,ragmanr, a coward?), containing a list of the homages to Edward on August 28, 1296, at Berwick, by the churchmen, earls, barons, knights, burgesses, andwhole community of Scotland, as well as earlier submissions (Bain, ii. xxv., pp. 193-214;cf.alsoLanercost, p. 261;Knighton, i. 448-9;Scotichr., ii., p. 289;Baker, p. 103). Baker says the Roll was publicly burned at the marriage at Berwick (ibid.). The only copies of it that exist are in theTower Rolls(Bain,ibid.), with portions of the original instruments of homage; so that this stipulation was never carried out (Acts Parl. Scot., i., p. 19).
48all the clame.“Omnem clameum (sic) seu demandam” (Lanercost, p. 261).Cf.for terms of the “Relaxation of Superiority.”Fœdera, iv., p. 338; York, May 1, 1328.
53Fully xx thousand pund.Twenty thousand pounds sterling to be paid in three years (Acts Parl. Scot., i., p. 125). Fordun says 30,000 marks out of King Robert’s “mere goodwill,” in compensation for English losses (Gesta Annalia, cxli.). The last payment was in 1331 (Excheq. Rolls, cx.).
67for the mangery.TheExchequer Rolls, I, cxiv.-cxvii., contain a long list of purchases in the Low Countries for the household of the young people—food, furniture, utensils, etc.
73male es.Fr.mal aise, illness. According to Le Bel, Bruce was suffering from the “great sickness” (la grosse maladie) in 1327 (p. 48; see also 79). TheLanercostchronicler says it was leprosy (factus fuerat leprosus, p. 259). Johnes translates Froissart’s “grosse maladie” as leprosy (i. 18, 26).
79Cardross.On the Clyde, half way between Dumbarton and Helensburgh, acquired by the King in 1326 in exchange for other lands (Exchequer Rolls, I., cxix.).
83To Berwik.The marriage took place on Sunday, July 19, 1328 (Lanercost, p. 261); July 17 (Gesta Annalia, cxlii.).
85the Queyne and Mortymer.Edward III. himself was not present (Lanercost, p. 261).
125At that parliament.The arrangement as to the succession of the Steward and a possible regency were made in a parliament of 1318. Randolph was to be regent, and, failing him, Douglas (Acts Parl., i. 105). Barbour divides the regency; Fordun makes no mention of this (Gesta Annalia, cxxxix.).
*129Maid hym manrent and fewte.Some such ceremony in all likelihood did take place; Barbour’s statement is not to be rejected lightly. Le Bel (Froissart) says that when the King felt the approach of death he summoned his barons (see below), and charged them, on their fealty, to guard loyally the kingdom for his own David, and when he came of age obey him, and crown him King, and marry him suitably—in which last detail Le Bel is, of course, astray (p. 79;Johnes, i. 27).
151Till Cardross went.He had paid a visit to Galloway, and was at Glenluce on March 29, 1329.
158For the lordis.See note on 129.
167Lordingis.An alternative account of this speech and of the whole circumstances up to the death of Douglas is given by Le Bel (ch. xxv.), and adapted from him by Froissart (Johnes, i., ch. xx.). Divergencies or close parallels are noted as they occur. See on these Appendix, F. vi. Baker also has a brief account, citing, as a witness of the doings of Douglas in Spain, Thomas Livingstone, a Carmelite friar, at that time a civilian serving under his command in the Christian army (p. 104).
177my trespass.This sounds like a clerical interpretation;cf.Bk.II. 43-5 for a similar comment. InLe BelBruce opens with the remark that all knew that he had much to do in his time, and had suffered much to maintain the rights of this kingdom (as cited).
178my hert fyschit firmly was.“I made a vow which I have not accomplished and which weighs upon me” (Le Bel). “I vowed,” etc. (Baker, p. 105).
181to travell apon Goddis fayis.“To make war upon the enemies of our Lord and the adversaries of the Christian faith beyond the sea” (Le Bel). Froissart does not have the closing phrase. “That I would fight with my body against the enemies of Christ” (Baker, p. 105).
183-5the body may on na wis, etc.“Since my body is not able to go or accomplish that which the heart has so long desired, I wish to send the heart for the body to make satisfaction for me and my wish” (pour moy et pour mon vueil acquittier.Le Bel, 1904, I., chap. xv.); “to fulfil my vow” (pour mon voeu achever.Froissart); “Because alive I shall not be able”—i.e., to go (Baker, 105).
188cheis me ane.Le Bel and Baker represent Bruce as himself choosing Douglas for the mission; so, too, does Bower (Scotichr., ii., p. 300).
191-2On Goddis fayis, etc.Cf.above on line 181. Le Bel gives the commission differently and in fuller detail: “That you take my heart and have it embalmed, and take as much of my treasure as will seem good to you for performing the journey, for yourself and all those whom you will wish to bring with you; and that you will carry my heart to the Holy Sepulchre, where our Lord was buried, since the body is not able to go thither; and that you do it as magnificently (si grandement) and as well provided with all things and with attendance sufficient, as belongs to your estate; and wherever you come let it be known that you carry as a commission (comme message) the heart of the King of Scotland for the reason that his body cannot go thither.” In Johnes it is, fromFroissart, “you will deposit your charge at the Holy Sepulchre”; in Berners, “present my heart to the H.S.” The Vatican (final) MS. ofFroissart, however, has “that you carry (theheart) beyond the sea against the heathen (mescreans)and as far as to the Holy Sepulchre and leave it there, if you have the fortune to go so far” (si l’aventure poes avoir d’aler si avant, Lettenhove, I., chap. xxxviii., p. 119). Bain summarizes a Protection “for seven years,” given by Edward III. on September 1, 1329, for James Douglas, “on his way to the Holy Land with the heart of the late Robert K. of Scotland, in aid of the Christians against the Saracens” (No. 991); who also, on the same date, commends Douglas, on this mission, to Alfonso K. of Castile, Leon, etc. (990). In the Pope’s absolution for the ecclesiastical offence of mutilating a dead body, dated at Avignon, August 6, 1331, which, of course, proceeds on a narrative furnished from Scotland, it is explained that King Robert had expressly commanded that “his heart should be carried in battle against the Saracens” (in bello contra Saracenos portaretur), and that, in accordance with the wish of the King himself, it was carried by Douglas into Spain in battle against the said Saracens (Theiner,Vetera Monumenta, No. 498). Baker has it, “that you carry my heart against the enemies of the name of Christ to Gardiavia on the frontier” (ad fronterii Gardiaviam, p. 105). Later chroniclers distort the details somewhat, Bower alleging that the heart was to be buried in Jerusalem, and sending both Alfonso and Douglas to the Holy Land; referring the reader, nevertheless, to “Barbour’s Bruce” (“Barbarii Broisacus,”Scotichr., ii., p. 301); while theBook of Pluscardensimply paraphrases Bower, expanding the reference to the Bruce (legendam dicti excellentissimi principis in nostro vulgari compositam).Cf.also note in Brown’sWallace and Bruce, pp. 136-7, where, however, Mr. Brown’s hand is being forced by his theory. Doubtless Bruce’s words might be alternatively interpreted; but, from what we know of Douglas, we may conclude that he fulfilled his commission to the letter, and that Barbour is, so far, right. The VaticanFroissartshows us how, also, the confusion arose. Scott, in his final note onThe Abbot, prints a commendation (May 19, 1329) of Melrose Abbey by Bruce to his son David and his successors, in which he says that he has arranged that his heart should be buried there, but makes no mention of a prior destination. Edward I. also had “bequeathed” his heart to the Holy Sepulchre (Trivet, p. 413; Wright’sPolitical Songs, p. 247).
197greting.“All those who were there began to weep with much compassion” (Le Bel).
212his bounty.“I shall now die in peace, when I know that the most suitable man in my kingdom and the most worthy will perform that which I have not been able to perform” (Le Bel).
223-231 “Noble sire, a hundred thousand thanks for the great honour you do me, when you charge and entrust to me so noble and so great a thing and such a treasure; and I shall do very willingly what you command concerning your heart, doubt it not, to the best of my power” (Le Bel). In Baker, “I swear by the heart of Jesus Christ that I shall carry your heart as you have asked me and die fighting with the cursed enemies” (contra prædamnatos hostes moriturum, p. 105).
253he wes ded.June 7, 1339, aged fifty-four years and eleven months.
276all for his persoune.This, as may be gathered from all that here precedes, was fully the case. Le Bel, in his earliest reference (ch. i.), refers to him as “the noble King Robert the Bruce, who was King of Scots, and had given often so much trouble to the good King Edward, spoken of above” (Edward I.); and later says that from their exploits these two Kings were reputed “the two most worthy in the world” (p. 107). On the English side: “Indeed, I would speak of Lord Robert the Bruce with the greatest praise, did not the guilt of his homicide and the knowledge of his treason compel me to be silent,” and the writer drops into a couplet to the same effect (Vita Edw. Sec., p. 166). Baker is of the same mind; Bruce was “every inch a soldier” (per omnia militarem), save that he was disloyal to his natural lord, which no knight should be (p. 101).
286bawlmyt syne.According to Le Bel, the heart was taken out and embalmed (p. 81).
292solempnly erdit syne.“He was buried in the honourable manner that became him, according to the usage of the country” (Le Bel,ibid.). Froissart adds that “he lies in Dunfermline Abbey.” His skeleton was brought to light in digging in the Abbey in 1819, showing the breastbone sawn up to get at the heart. It is that of a man about six feet high. The mass of the wide, capacious head is to the rear, and the forehead is rather low; the marks of the muscles on the head and neck are very pronounced, and the cheekbones particularly strong and prominent. Four front teeth in the upper jaw are missing, three, apparently, as the result of a blow, the socket being much fractured. The lower jaw is exceptionally strong and deep. For full details seeArchæol. Scot., vol. ii., pp. 435-453. Thefair toumewas brought from Paris to Bruges, and thence, by England, to Dunfermline; the expense of this conveyance and of many other items in connection with the interment are to be found in theExchequer Rolls, vol. i.
318To schip till Berwik.“En Escoce” (Le Bel, i., p. 83); “Montrose,” adds Froissart (Lettenhove, I., chap. xxxix.)
324the Grunye of Spanyhe.Bain makes this comment, readingGrunyefrom E. “The ‘Grunye’ is probably Coruna, called by sailors the ‘Groyne.’ Mr. Skeat’s text makes the word ‘grund,’ taking no notice of the other reading” (iii., p. xxxvii, note). Le Bel takes Douglas first to Sluys in Flanders, making him hear in that port of the operations in Spain (p. 84). In Sluys, he says, he hoped to meet with some going to Jerusalem (p. 83).
326Sebell the Graunt.Seville the Grand, on the Guadalquiver. “First at the port of Valence (Valentia) la Grande” (Le Bel, 84). Seville was then the base of operations against the Moors.
336-7a fair company, And gold eneuch.According to Le Bel, Douglas had with him the knight-banneret and six others of the most distinguished men of his country. His plate was of silver (and gold, adds Froissart), and all of his own rank who visited him at Sluys were treated to two kinds of wine and two kinds of spices (ch. xvi.;Johnes, i., ch. xx.).
338The Kyng.Alphonso XI. of Castile and Leon, to whom Douglas had been commended by Edward III.; see note on 190. There was another Alphonso, IV. of Arragon, but he gave no assistance on this occasion (Mariana,Bk.xv., ch. x., p. 255).
361The Inglis knychtis.Prussia and Spain were the favourite resorts of English knights anxious to war against the infidels. Chaucer’s knight had been in both countries on this errand (Prologue, 53-56).
393Balmeryne.A Moorish kingdom in Africa; or, more correctly, of the reigning dynasty, the Banu-Marin. In Chaucer’sPrologueit is “Belmarye” (line 57); inFroissartthe name appears more correctly as Bellemarie (Johnes, ii., p. 484;Letten., I., p. 121, chap. xxxix.).
401The vaward.In Le Bel (Froissart) Douglas betakes himself to one of the wings “the better to do his business and display his power” (son effort, p. 84).
402the strangeris with him weir.So we gather also from Baker, whose informant served under Douglas.Cf.note on 167.
403mastir of Saint Jak.The Master, or head, of the Order of St. James.
407To mete their fayis.On March 25, 1330, atTebas de Hardales, a strong town in Granada (Mariana,Bk.xv., ch. x., p. 255). Fordun, however, dates the battle August 25 (cxliv.).
*421-32Bot ere they joyned, etc.See on these linesAppendixD.
431So fer chassit.The account inLe Belis to the effect that Douglas attacked prematurely, thinking that Alphonso was about to do so, and that he was being followed up. But Alphonso did not move for the reason, we learn fromMariana, that the frontal attack of Moorish cavalry wasbut a feint, and that the real attack, as the King said, was to be in the rear on the Christian camp (Le Bel, p. 84;Mariana, as cited). Alphonso was better acquainted than Douglas with the Moorish methods of fighting. Fordun’s narrative is that Douglas and his company were cut off by an ambuscade which, though superior in numbers, they readily attacked (Gesta Annalia, cxliv.).
440That relyit.I.e., the Moors rallied. It was their usual tactics to attempt to draw after them a body of the enemy in pursuit, and then surround the pursuers.
467ilkane war slayn thar.“Not a single one of them escaped, but they were all slain” (Le Bel, p. 84).
521the leill Fabricius.Roman consul, 278B.C.A traitor offered to poison Pyrrhus, but the Roman refused the proposal, and sent information to Pyrrhus (Plutarch).
585the kirk of Dowglas.St. Brides, Douglas.
587Schir Archibald his sone.Skeat, in his note on this passage, is all astray. He says that Douglas was never married, that he left only a natural son William, and that this Archibald was his third or youngest brother. But Sir William Fraser is of opinion that Sir James was married, though Sir Herbert Maxwell doubts, and certainly no record of it survives; but he was succeeded in the estates by William, while his brother Archibald “Tineman” (Loser) was killed at Halidon Hill in 1333. He, however, had another son, certainly illegitimate, the Archibald referred to here, who succeeded in 1388 as third Earl of Douglas, and died, after a varied career, in 1400 (Fraser’sDouglas Book, I., 188-9;Scalacronica; Maxwell’sHistory of the House of Douglas, i., p. 67 and 114-124;Acts Parl., i. 193-4;Reg. Mag. Sig., i., p. 177). Archibald was known as “the Grim.” Mr. Brown cites Fraser to the effect that Archibald erected the tomb “probably about the year 1390, after his succession as third Earl of Douglas” (Douglas Book, I., p. 181); and adds the proposition that he could not have done so before his succession, because, according to theBook of Pluscarden(1462), his friends “held him in small account because he was a bastard,” and because his succession to the estates was disputed (Acts Parl. Scot., i., p. 194;The Wallace and Bruce, pp. 154-5). Mr. Brown’s contention, therefore, is that the statement in the text could not have been penned by Barbour in 1375, and that it is not due to him, but to his redactor. The reasoning is not all conclusive; against the plain statement of Barbour there is only an assumption on Fraser’s part, and inferences on the part of Mr. Brown which are not necessarily contained in his premisses. Archibald was, no doubt, only a child when his father was killed; but he became Lord of Galloway in 1369, and Earl of Wigtown in 1372. What was thereto prevent his erecting a tomb for his distinguished father, except a delicacy of feeling on the side of the “legitimates,” which is rather modern than late mediæval? Archibald bought his earldom, built and endowed a hospital near Dumfries, erected Thrieve Castle, and had extensive lands in various parts of Scotland, so that he must have been a man of considerable wealth, besides being, as Warden, the most important figure on the Border. Who or what was then to prevent him honouring the congenial memory of his great father before 1375-6?
600Melros.Cf.note on 191-2.
604And held the pure weill to warrand.I.e., “And carefully guarded or looked after the interests of the poor.”
609poysonyt was he.Moray died at Musselburgh, July 20, 1332. Fordun says nothing of poisoning (Gesta Annalia, cxlvi.). But there appears to have been a popular story to this effect, to which, later, was added the detail that his poisoner was an English monk (Scotichr., ii., lib. xiii., ch. xix.). Moray died of the stone from which he suffered towards the close of his life; the rest Hailes considered “a silly popular tale” (Annals, vol. iii., App. 2).
It will be noticed that the conception of this battle, alike as to position and tactics, elaborated in the notes in strict conformity with Barbour, differs entirely from that now universally accepted. The engagements of the first day (Sunday) were the outcome of attempts to clear the two paths of approach to Stirling—that through the New Park, and the other on the level below St. Ninians. Both failed, and the means by which their failure was brought about determined the operations of the following day (Monday). This main engagement, however, it has been hitherto held, took place on the banks of the Burn, below or in the neighbourhood of Brock’s Brae, with the Burn separating the forces. This is pure misconception. There can be no doubt that the battle was fought on a position roughly at right angles to this—on “the playne,” “the hard feld,” or level ground east of St. Ninians, reaching back into the angle formed by the Forth and the Bannock. The main data for such a conclusion are these: (1) The English passed the night on the Carse, having crossed the Bannock; (2) the Scotsattackedearly next morning, and to do this “tuk the playne,” leaving their camp-followers in the Park, so that they astonished the English by their audacity; (3) in the rout many English were drowned in the Forth and in the Bannock; (4) Edward II., unable to get away, fled to the castle; (5) so did many of his men, as the castle “wes ner.” These facts, fully substantiated from both sides, are wholly inconsistent with a site of battle south of St. Ninians, and fix its position between the Forth and the Bannock. Barbour’s “pools” are the “polles” in which, according to Hemingburgh,[57]the English baggage was bogged and captured after the battle of Stirling Bridge. The English and French (and Irish) chroniclers invariably speak of the battle as that of “Stirling,” and Trokelowe calls it the Battle ofBannockmoor. For a full discussion of the matter, see my paper on “The Real Bannockburn” inProceedings of the Glasgow Archæological Society, 1908-1909.
Book XII.210-327
It is the privilege of early historians to equip their leading personages with speeches, and in its pertinent, practical character the speech here provided for King Robert is a good example of such—so good, indeed, as to suggest the probability that Barbour is working up some transmitted material. There is on record another speech attributed to Bruce, which formed part of a Latin poem on Bannockburn by Abbot Bernard of Arbroath, Bruce’s Chancellor, portions of which are quoted in theScotichronicon.[58]This speech consists of twenty-five hexameter lines, and is a rhetorical flourish on Scottish liberty, the miseries inflicted by the English on the country, and the hapless condition of “mother Church,” closing in strains of ecclesiastical exhortation. Moreover, it immediately precedes the opening of the battle, while Barbour’s version is of the evening before. In the latter a special interest attaches to lines 263-268 and 303-317, which may be compared with the following extracts from a speech by Alexander the Great inThe Vowes, one of the three romances which make up the ScottishBuik of Alexander, the translation of which from the French was probably the work of Barbour himself.[59]Alexander says:
“Be thay assailyeit hardely,And encountered egerly,The formest cumis ye sall se,The hindmest sall abased be.Forthy I pray ilk man that heNocht covetous na yarnand be,To tak na ryches that thay wald,Bot wyn of deidly fais the fald;Fra thay be winnin all wit ye weillThe gudis are ouris ever ilk deill;And I quyteclame yow utrelyBaith gold and silver halely,And all the riches that thaires is,The honour will I have I wis.”[60]
“Be thay assailyeit hardely,And encountered egerly,The formest cumis ye sall se,The hindmest sall abased be.Forthy I pray ilk man that heNocht covetous na yarnand be,To tak na ryches that thay wald,Bot wyn of deidly fais the fald;Fra thay be winnin all wit ye weillThe gudis are ouris ever ilk deill;And I quyteclame yow utrelyBaith gold and silver halely,And all the riches that thaires is,The honour will I have I wis.”[60]
“Be thay assailyeit hardely,And encountered egerly,The formest cumis ye sall se,The hindmest sall abased be.
Forthy I pray ilk man that heNocht covetous na yarnand be,To tak na ryches that thay wald,Bot wyn of deidly fais the fald;Fra thay be winnin all wit ye weillThe gudis are ouris ever ilk deill;And I quyteclame yow utrelyBaith gold and silver halely,And all the riches that thaires is,The honour will I have I wis.”[60]
To the same purport as these latter lines is a portion of a subsequent address;[61]and lines 325, 334 find a similar parallel in:
“Thus armit all the nicht thay lay,Quhile on the morne that it was day.”[62]
“Thus armit all the nicht thay lay,Quhile on the morne that it was day.”[62]
“Thus armit all the nicht thay lay,Quhile on the morne that it was day.”[62]
Of the cardinal sentiment in the speech, the origin is probably to be found in the familiar story of the Maccabees, referred to more than once inThe Bruce. Judas Maccabeus was one of the typical heroes of French romance, and had one metrical romance, at least, devoted to his career. And in 1 Maccabees, chap. iv., we have:
“17. (Judas) said to the people, Be not greedy of the spoils, inasmuch as there is a battle before us.
“18. And Gorgias and his host are here by us in the mountain; but stand ye now against our enemies, and overcome them, and after this ye may boldly take the spoils.”[63]
English:One hundred thousand men and ma.
Scots:Thretty thousand, and sum deill mare.
These figures have given rise to much discussion, without any very certain result. Yet official data are not wanting—sufficient, at least, to check what is only another example of the wild conjectures of mediæval chroniclers when dealing with numbers. Hemingburgh gives Wallace at Falkirk “about three hundred thousand men”[64]—rather more, probably, than the whole male population of Scotland. We need not be surprised, then, at how all such estimates shrink in the cold light of Exchequer figures.
Edward II. summoned all owing him military service,[65]which corroborates the statement of the author of theVita Edw. Sec.that “the King exacted from all the service due,”[66]as well as that of Barbour—“of England hale the chivalry.” The Earls of Lancaster, Warenne, Arundel, and Warwick did not attend, for a particular reason, but sent their contingents.[67]Now, byMr. Round’s calculations, the whole number of knights’ fees in England did not exceed 5,000;[68]Mr. Morris raises the figure to something short of 7,000.[69]The important point is, however, that in practice the assessment was only a nominal or conventional one. Thus Gloucester, with 455 fees, was assessed at ten knights.[70]Including all grades of horsemen, Mr. Morris puts “the maximum of the cavalry arm” at “about 8,000”; but, all things considered, no such number could ever take the field.[71]Edward I. had summoned his full feudal array (omnes sui fideles) for the Falkirk campaign, and Hemingburgh says that, when counted, it came to 3,000 men on armoured horses (Barbour’s “helit hors”), and more than 4,000 on unarmoured horses—say, roughly, 7,000 in all.[72]Mr. Morris, however, by a generous calculation from the rolls, arrives at 2,400 as the highest possible figure.[73]Now, it is to be noted that the author of theVita Edw. Sec., while lauding the size and magnificence of the host that went to Bannockburn, gives 2,000 men-at-arms as apparently the total of the cavalry, since he simply adds “a considerable body of footmen.”[74]On the whole, 3,000 to 4,000 English horse is a higher limit for Bannockburn, when we consider all the difficulties of sufficient armour, remounts, and forage. Mr. Morris thinks 10,000 “impossible,” though he is here calculating on yards of frontage on a site where the battle was not fought.[75]About 7,000 is Mr. Round’s free estimate, adopting Hemingburgh’s figure for Falkirk.[76]Bain accepts Barbour’s 3,000 heavy horsemen, and suggests 10,000 light horse, but proceeds on no data.[77]Mr. Oman calculates that “three thousand ‘equites coperti,’ men-at-arms on barded horses,” means, probably, 10,000 for the whole cavalry,[78]but this traverses his Falkirk figures. England never put, nor could maintain, on the field such a mounted force, to say nothing of the difficulty of handling and manœuvring it.
For the foot we have, fortunately, exact figures in theFœdera[79]—21,540 men all told, which would include the archers. Only the northern counties—but not all—and Wales are drawn upon, as those of the south would be for a French campaign.[80]Such had been the practice of Edward I., whose levies from thenorthern counties and Wales ranged from 29,400 foot in 1297 to 12,000 in 1301.[81]Mr. Morris contends that not till 1322 were infantry drawn from all England for a Scottish campaign (as cited), but in this he is wrong. It was done by a special vote of Parliament, and according to a prescribed form, as early as March, 1316, when every township, with some special exceptions, furnished one soldier,[82]and again in 1318.[83]These are clearly new and special arrangements, and there is thus no reason to believe that the list inFœdera, etc., is not complete, as Mr. Oman suggests, adding, accordingly, a southern contingent of about 30,000 men, though he doubts if “the extreme South” sent its full muster.[84]This is quite gratuitous. Lord Hailes, too, contended that the official records are imperfect, and that the numbers given by Barbour “are within the limits of probability.”[85]Bain’s authoritative reply is that, “as a rule, the writs were always enrolled, and the Patent Rolls of the time are not defective.”[86]This, however, is not always true, and Bain, applying this principle absolutely, is once, at least, led to a wrong conclusion.[87]
An important question now suggests itself, but no one has so far raised it: did the levies in these full numbers turn up? They are allotted in round figures: what proportion was actually furnished? That there would be some trouble in securing the conscripts is anticipated and provided for in severe measures for the contumacious.[88]This was usual, and even the strong hand of Edward I. could not prevent men from deserting after they had received their wages.[89]Here we have, also, a sufficient basis for an estimate. On May 12, 1301, Edward I. summoned for midsummer 12,000 men from nine of the counties included in the Bannockburn levy—York, as in that case, being assessed at 4,000.[90]On July 12 we have the numbers from these counties as they appear on the pay-roll, when it is stated that they had contributed in proportions which give only 5,501 all told; York having sent only 1,193, and Northumberland, assessed at 2,700, providing the largest proportion—2,019.[91]The numbers vary slightly on other days, but seem never to have exceeded, if they reached, 50 per cent. of the nominal levy. Mr. Morris works out the same result for the Caerlaverock Campaign of 1300.[92]There are no grounds for assuming that things went differently in 1314,and thus over 21,540 men are reduced by about half. It is quite a fair conclusion that not more than 12,000 English foot—which exceeds the proportion above—were actually present at Bannockburn.
For the foreign contingents no figures exist. Bain thinks they were not “more than a few thousands.”[93]The Gascon corps in the Falkirk army should have been 106 mounted men.[94]The Hainault and Flanders auxiliaries who shared in the campaign of 1327 amounted to 550 men-at-arms, and were an expensive item.[95]The Irish contingent which came to Edward I. in 1304 amounted at most, for a few weeks only, to 3,500 men,[96]but to merely 361 in the army of 1300.[97]
I would suggest, therefore, for the English army the following round numbers: 3,000 to 4,000 horse of all sorts, 12,000 English and Welsh foot, 3,000 (?) Irish, 1,500 (?) foreigners, or, in a lump sum, 20,000 men of all arms, to which must be added a crowd of non-combatants—servants, traders, and camp-followers generally. Bain (as cited) proposes 50,000; Round, 30,000; Oman, 60,000 to 70,000. I consider 18,000 to 20,000 the most probable range. With even the lower of these numbers, the English commanders in organization and commissariat would have rather more than they could manage.
Barbour’s figure for the Scottish army must be similarly reduced. More than 30,000 would be a huge proportion of the Scottish population of that time, especially as the whole does not seem to have been drawn upon, and of that, as Barbour insists, a good many were still hostile.[98]William the Lion was credited in 1173 with a national host of 1,000 armoured horsemen, and 30,000 unarmoured footmen,[99]and the latter unit is surely over the score. At Halidon Hill, 1333, the Scots are said to have had 1,174 knights and men-at-arms and 13,500 light-armed men or foot;[100]and this chronicler consistently exaggerates. Yet these figures represent a united kingdom. Forty thousand at Bannockburn is the estimate for the Scots of theVita Edw.writer, but the English writers, on their side, grossly overstate the numbers of the enemy, as witness what is said of Hemingburgh above. Bain’s figure of 15,000 to 16,000 is no doubt nearer the mark; “perhaps twenty-five thousand men in all” is Mr. Oman’s conjecture.[101]Possibly 6,000 to 7,000 is as near as we can go, adopting Barbour’s ratio, which gives a proportion of 1 to 3 of the English army. The non-combatants here, too, would be numerous. Up to this time Bruce’s men in the field could be numbered only in hundreds, so that as many thousandswould represent a very special effort. And note that after Murray’s success over Clifford nearly the whole Scots army gathered round him to see him and do him honour—a fact which is suggestive[102]as to its size.
Book XX.*421-*432
These lines are found only in Hart’s printed edition. Pinkerton thought there was “no reason to view them as an interpolation,” and Jamieson regarded their agreement with the account in theHowlat[103]“a strong presumption of authenticity.” By Skeat they were at first accepted as genuine, but afterwards, influenced by the reasoning on Barbour’s rhymes of P. Buss inAnglia,[104]he surrendered them as an interpolation. In the passage of twelve lines three rhymes occur, which are unusual—more strongly, impossible—for Barbour on the basis of his admitted work. These arebattell—tell,to be—de,ho—to. In the first case, Barbour, it is claimed, elsewhere always uses the “liquid” formbataill(battalyhe) to rhyme with another word of the same character asassaileortravaill(travailyhe).[105]In the second, he “never rhymesbewithde(correctlydey),” as Skeat puts it, forde(Icel.deyja) was still influenced by the terminal semi-guttural, giving it an “impure” sound, whereas “be,” with no ghostly after-sound, is quite “pure.” The final example brings together two different values of “o,” and, it may be added, in the four cases in which Barbour uses the word, it is in the formhoyne.[106]These rhyme-tests had also been applied to the same result by Mr. W. A. Craigie.[107]
With this conclusion Mr. Brown agrees, “although on slightly different grounds.”[108]Hart’s edition, of course, takes a place in his general scheme of redaction. But he would “hesitate to reject the lines on the rimes alone,” and “Thebe, detest” seems to him “quite untrustworthy.”[109]Skeat thinks it unanswerable.[110]Mr. Neilson pleads “that this canon begs the wholequestion of the text of the Bruce ... first you find your canon; then you edit out of your text all that is disconform.”[111]Arguing specially on its application toThe Legends of the Saints, he points out that “There are not a few metrical and other solecisms in the Bruce,” and that the “exceptionale-rhyme” is the stamp of transition.[112]It is to be observed also that Chaucer, Barbour’s contemporary, and more careful in such matters than he, rhymesho, y-doin theKnight’s Tale.[113]In theAlexanderoccurs thetell—battellrhyme.[114]On the whole, the test is perhaps not so conclusive—out of Germany—as Skeat imagines. Further, from the indubitable reference in theHowlatto theBruce, Neilson accepts the latter as the sole source of its digression, and the lines as therefore authentic.[115]
If, however, what has already been said of the passages from Hart hold good,[116]then this one must go with the rest. Fortunately, in this specific case that argument can be greatly strengthened, for the lines have never been tried by their relation to the context and their historic implications, and that obvious and indisputable test puts the question beyond doubt. They have but an outside connection with the narrative of Barbour, and otherwise are in flat contradiction thereto. So much is at once evident from the closing couplet: