194                                 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                   [Chap. VI.

CHAPTER VI.

DAVID THE SECOND.

1346—1370.

Upon the part of England, the policy
of Edward the Third towards Scotland
was different from that of his prede­
cessor. There was now no talk of con­
ferring the crown upon Baliol. The
persuasion in England seems to have
been that the battle of Durham, and
the acquisition of the Border provinces,
had decided its fate as a conquered
country. A conference upon the sub­
ject was appointed to be held at West­
minster, to which were summoned the
prelates and barons of the northern
provinces ; an English justiciary was
appointed for the new kingdom; and
the Barons Lucy, Dacre, and Umfra-
ville were directed to accept the fealty
of a people whom, with premature
triumph, they believed ready to sub­
mit to the yoke of England.¹

Whilst such was the course of events
in Scotland, the English king endea­
voured to strike a panic into the few
barons who remained to defend their
country, by the trial of the Earls of
Menteith and Fife, made prisoners at
the battle of Durham. Both were
found guilty of treason, on the ground
of their having risen in arms against
their liege lord, Edward the Third.
Menteith was executed, and his quar­
ters, in the savage spirit of the times,
parcelled over the kingdom ? The Earl
of Fife, after condemnation, had his
life spared, from his relationship to
Edward the First. These trials were
followed by the seizure of all ecclesi­
astical lands belonging to Churchmen
who were unfavourably disposed to
England, by the resumption into the
hands of the crown of all the estates
in that country which had been given

¹  Rotuli Scotiæ, 10th Dec. 20 Ed. III. vol.
i. p. 679. Ibid. vol. i. p. 684, 21 Ed. III.,
14th Feb. 1346. Ibid. vol. i. p. 687.

²  Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. p. 689, 6th March
1346-7 ; Ayloffe, p. 203.

to English subjects, and by the im­
position of additional duties on the
commodities exported from Berwick.
Edward’s object in all this was, in the
impoverished state of his exchequer,
to collect funds for payment of the
army which it was intended to lead
against Scotland. But, fortunately for
that country, a new war proved, at this
conjuncture, highly unpopular amongst
the English barons.³ Their sovereign,
notwithstanding all his efforts, was dis­
tressed for money, and engrossed with
his ambitious schemes in France. It
was at this time, when all looked so
dark and hopeless, that William, lord
Douglas, nephew of the Good Sir
James, who had been bred to arms in
the wars of France, returned to Scot­
land. In him the Steward soon found
an able assistant. Possessing the mili­
tary talents which seem to have been
then hereditary in the family, he soon
expelled the English from Douglasdale,
took possession of Ettrick Forest, and,
raising the men of Teviotdale, cleared
that district from the invaders.⁴

Edward’s desire of recruiting his
coffers, by the high ransom which he
knew must be paid for the Scottish
king, and the many noble prisoners
taken at Durham, induced him to post­
pone his projected invasion of Scot­
land,⁵ and to enter into negotiations,
which concluded in a truce.⁶ This
cessation of hostilities continued, by
means of successive prolongations, for
six years. But the liberty of the king
was a matter of more difficult arrange­
ment. After many conferences, which
were protracted from year to year, the
conditions demanded by Edward were

³ Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. p. 687.

⁴  Winton, vol. ii. pp. 269, 270.

⁵  Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. v. pp. 646, 647.

⁶ Rotuli Scotiæ, 15th April, 21 Edward III.,
p. 694.

1862.1                                               DAVID II.                                                   195

refused; and David revisited his do­
minions only upon his parole, having
left seven youths, of the noblest fami­
lies in the country, as hostages for his
return.¹

During his captivity, a dreadful visi­
tant had appeared in his dominions,
in the shape of a pestilence, more
rapidly destructive than any hitherto
known in modern times. This scourge
had already, for many years, been
carrying its ravages through Europe,
and it now at last reached Scotland.²
It is a remarkable fact that when
the great European pestilence of the
seventh century was at its height, the
Picts and Scots of Britain were the
only nations who did not suffer from
its ravages. But the exemption was
now at an end; and, owing to what­
ever causes, the calamity fell with as
deadly force on Scotland as on any
other part of Europe.³

Not long after David’s return, a
commissioner arrived from Edward,
who appears to have been intrusted
with a secret and important communi­
cation to the King of Scotland and
Lord William Douglas.⁴ Although,
from the brief and unsatisfactory
document which notices this transac­
tion, much mystery hangs over it,
yet enough is discoverable to throw a
deep shade upon the character of the
Scottish king. Worn out by the pros­
pect of a long captivity, rendered
doubly bitter by his recent taste of
the sweets of liberty, he had agreed
to sacrifice the independence of his
kingdom to his desire of freedom;
and there yet remain in the chapter­
house at Westminster two instru­
ments, in which David recognises the
King of England as his Lord Para­
mount, and consents to take the oaths
of homage.⁵

When the country was thus betrayed
by its king, we can scarcely wonder
that the fidelity of some of the nobles
began to waver. Many of the inferior
barons and prisoners who were taken

¹ Rymer, vol. v. pp. 724, 727.

² Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 347.

³ Macpherson’s Notes on Winton, vol. ii. p.
512. Fordun a Hearne, p. 1039.

⁴ Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. v. pp. 737, 738.

⁵ Ayloffe’s Calendars of Charters, p. 299.

at the battle of Durham by this time
had paid their ransom and returned
to Scotland, where they joined the
Steward and his friends in their oppo­
sition to Edward. But the prisoners
of highest rank and importance were
kept in durance, and amongst these
the Knight of Liddesdale. This leader,
deservedly illustrious by his military
talents and success, but cruel, selfish,
and ambitious, was a second time
seduced from his allegiance, and agreed
to purchase his liberty, at the expense
of becoming a retainer of Edward.
He consented to allow the English to
pass unmolested through his lands,
and neither openly nor secretly to
give assistance to his own country, or
to any other nation, against the King
of England; from whom, in return
for this desertion, he received a grant
of the territory of Liddesdale, besides
other lands in the interior of Annan-
dale.⁶ There seems to be strong pre­
sumptive ground to conclude, that the
secret intercourse, lately carried on
with England, related to these base
transactions, and that David had ex­
pected to procure the consent of his
people to his humiliating acknowledg­
ment of fealty to Edward. But the
nation would not listen to the proposal
for a moment. They longed, indeed,
for the presence of their king, and
were willing to make every sacrifice
for the payment of his ransom; but
they declared, with one voice, that
no consideration whatever should in­
duce them to renounce their independ­
ence, and David was reluctantly com­
pelled to return to his captivity in Eng­
land.⁷

The Scottish king and the Knight
of Liddesdale had expected to find in
Lord William Douglas a willing assist­
ant in their secret intrigues and nego­
tiations; but they were disappointed.
Douglas proved the steady enemy of
England, and aware of the base game
which had been played by Liddesdale,
he defeated it by breaking into Gallo­
way at the head of a powerful force,
and compelling the wavering barons

⁶ Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. v. p. 739. Rotuli
Scotiæ, 18th July, 26 Ed. III., vol. i. p. 753.

⁷  Knighton, p. 2603.

193                                    HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                      [Chap. VI.

of that wild and unsettled district to
renounce the English alliance, and to
swear fealty to the Scottish king.¹
At the same time, Roger Kirkpatrick
wrested from the English the import­
ant castles of Caerlaverock and Dal-
swinton, and preserved in its alle­
giance the territory of Niddesdale;
whilst the regent of the kingdom,
assisted by his son, afterwards king,
collected an army, and making his
head­quarters in Annandale, where
disaffection had chiefly spread, con­
trived to keep that district in tran­
quillity. The intrigues of the Knight
of Liddesdale were thus entirely
defeated. He had hoped to make
Annandale the central point from
which he was to commence his attack,
and to reduce the country under his
new master Edward ; but on his re­
turn from captivity, he found his
treachery discovered, and his schemes
entirely defeated.

Since the death of the Good Sir
James, the Douglases had looked to
the Knight of Liddesdale as their
head, and the chief power of that
family had centred in this baron.
But the murder of Ramsay, his loose
and fierce habits, and the stain thrown
upon him by consenting to become the
vassal of England, all contributed to
render him odious to his countrymen,
and to raise, in bright opposition to
his, the character of William, earl of
Douglas, his near kinsman. This seems
to have excited a deadly enmity be­
tween them, and other circumstances
contributed to increase the feeling.
The Earl of Douglas had expelled the
English from Liddesdale and Annan-
dale, and was in possession of the large
feudal estates of the family. On the
other hand, the Knight of Liddesdale,
during his treasonable intercourse with
England, obtained a grant of Hermi­
tage castle and the whole of Liddes-
dale from Edward; nor was he of a
temper to consent tamely to their
occupation. These causes, increased,
it is said, by a jealousy on the part
of the earl, who suspected his countess
of a partiality for his rival, led to an
atrocious murder. As Liddesdale was
¹ Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 356.

hunting in Ettrick Forest, he was
beset and cruelly slain by his kinsman,
at a spot called Galford.² The body
was carried to Lindin Kirk, a chapel in
the Forest, not far from Selkirk, where
it lay for some time. It was then
transported to Melrose, and buried
in that ancient abbey.³ The deed was
a dark and atrocious one, and conveys
a melancholy picture of the fierce and
lawless state of Scotland. But Lid-
desdale met with little sympathy : to
gratify his own private revenge, he
had been guilty of repeated murders;
and his late treaty with Edward had
cancelled all his former services to his
country.

Since the commencement of his
captivity, David had now made three
unsuccessful attempts to negotiate for
his liberty; ⁴ but many circumstances
stood between him and freedom. The
English king continued to confer on
Baliol, who lived under his protection,
the style of King of Scotland, and
refused to David his royal titles; ⁵ and
although it was evident that Edward’s
real intentions were to subdue Scot­
land for himself, while this nominal
monarch was merely employed as a
tool to be thrown aside at pleasure,
yet so long as his avowed purpose was
the restoration of Baliol, there was a
consistency in keeping his rival in
durance. On the other hand, what­
ever disposition there might be on the
part of the Scots to shut their eyes to
the failings of the son of Bruce, his
character had sunk in their estimation,
and he had deservedly become an
object of suspicion and distrust. The
brilliant and commanding talents of
Edward the Third had acquired a
strong influence over his mind ; he
had become attached to the country
and manners of his enemies, and, in
the absence of his queen, had formed

² Fordun a Hearne, p. 1041.

³  Hume’s Douglas and Angus, vol. i. p. 143.
Hume has quoted a single stanza of an old
ballad, made on this mournful occasion.

“ The Countess of Douglas out of her bower
And loudly there did she call, [she came,
It is for the Lord of Liddesdale
That I let the tears down fall^.”
4 In 1348, 1350, and 1353.
Rymer. vol. v. pp. 788, 791.

1353-5.]                                            DAVID II.                                                   197

an unworthy connexion with a lady of
the name of Mortimer. The return,
therefore, of David was an event
rather to be deprecated than desired
by the country. The Steward, with
the barons of his party, dreaded not
only the loss of his own personal con­
sequence, and the establishment on
the throne of a sovereign whom he
knew to be his enemy; but, what was
still more intolerable, they saw in it
the establishment of the superiority
of England, and the vassalage of their
own land. It is to this cause, as­
suredly, that we are to attribute the
coldness and reluctance with which
the negotiations proceeded. They
were, however, at length concluded
at Newcastle, in the month of July
1354, by a treaty, in which David’s
ransom was fixed at ninety thousand
marks,—an enormous sum for that
period; and it was stipulated that
this money was to be paid in nine
years, at the rate of ten thousand
marks annually.¹

The commissioners who conducted
the negotiations for this treaty were
the Bishops of St Andrews and
Brechin, along with Patrick Dunbar,
earl of March, one of the few Scottish
earls who had escaped captivity at the
battle of Durham; but, previous to
its ratification, Eugene de Garencieres,
who had already served in the Scottish
wars, arrived upon a mission from the
court of France, at the head of a body
of sixty knights, and bringing with
him a seasonable subsidy of French
gold, in the shape of forty thousand
moutons d’or, which were distributed
by him amongst the Scottish nobles.²

The coming of this ambassador pro­
duced a great change. The treaty of
ransom had been especially unpopular
with the patriotic party in Scotland,
as the sum stipulated was far too
heavy a drain upon the country. It
had not yet received the consent of
the regent, or the final ratification of
the states of the realm ; and Garen-
cieres found little difficulty in per­
suading them to give up all thoughts

¹ Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. v. p. 791^.
2 Winton, vol. ii. p. 271. Macpherson’s
Notes, p. 512. Leland’s Coll. vol. i. p. 004.

of peace, and to seize the earliest
opportunity of recommencing hostili­
ties. For the present, therefore, the
King of Scotland, who had seen him­
self on the point of regaining his
liberty, was remanded to the Tower;
and an invasion of England resolved
on as soon as the truce expired.³ Yet
the English themselves were the first
aggressors in a Border inroad, in which
they laid waste the extensive posses­
sions of the Earl of March.⁴

To revenge the insult, this noble­
man, along with the Earl of Douglas,
and a large body of men-at-arms, who
were reinforced by the French knights
and soldiers under the command of
Garencieres, marched towards the
Borders, and occupied a strong pass
near Nesbit Moor; where the hilly
country, and the tortuous nature of
the road, allowed them to form an
ambuscade. They then despatched
Sir William Ramsay of Dalhousie,
having four hundred men under his
banner, to cross the Tweed, and
plunder the village of Norham and
the adjacent country. It was the
constant policy of Edward to keep a
strong garrison in Norham castle.
Its vicinity to the Borders made it
one of the keys to England on the
East Marches; it was exposed to per­
petual attacks, and, in consequence,
became the general rendezvous of the
bravest and most stirring spirits in the
English service. Ramsay executed his
task of destruction with unsparing
fidelity; and, in his retreat, took care
to drive his booty past under the walls
of the castle. The insult, as was ex­
pected, brought out the whole English
garrison upon them, led by the con­
stable, Sir Thomas Grey and Sir James
Dacre. After a short resistance, Ram­
say fled to where the Scottish army lay
concealed; and the English pursuing,
suddenly found themselves, on turning
round the shoulder of a mountain, in
presence of the well-known banners of
Douglas. Retreat was now impossible
and resistance almost equally fruit­
less, for Douglas greatly outnumbered
the English; but it was the age of

³ Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. p. 779.
⁴ Fordun a Hearne, p. 1043.

198                                    HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                         [Chap. V.

chivalry, and the Constable of Norham
was a true disciple of the order.¹ Form­
ing his little band around him, he called
for his son, and made him a knight on
the field; he then commanded his
men-at-arms to dismount, and fight on
foot with the archers ; after which he
and his brother knights attacked the
Scots with the greatest courage, and
performed what, in the language of
those times, were denominated “ many
fair passes of arms.” In the end,
however, he was compelled to sur­
render to Douglas, along with his
son Dacre and the whole garrison.
After the fight there occurred a fierce
trait of feudal vengeance. One of the
French knights purchased from the
Scots some of their prisoners, and,
leading them to a remote spot on the
mountain, murdered them in cold
blood, declaring that he did this to
revenge the death of his father, who
had been slain by the English in their
wars in France.²

The city of Berwick, at this time
in the hands of Edward, and which
had long been the emporium of the
commerce of both kingdoms, became
the next object of attack. It was too
well fortified, however, to hold out the
least chance of success to an open as­
sault; but the Earls of Angus and
March having collected a strong naval
force, and favoured by a dark Novem­
ber night, ran their ships up the river
as far as the tide permitted, where,
disembarking, they proceeded silently
to the foot of the walls, and, in the
first dawn of the morning, stormed
the town by escalade, slew the captain,
Sir Alexander Ogle, with some Eng­
lish knights, and drove before them
multitudes of the defenceless citizens,
who, on the first alarm, had fled from
their beds and escaped, half naked and
in crowds, over the ramparts.³

The city, of which the Scots were
thus masters, communicated with the
castle of Berwick through a strong
fortalice, called the Douglas Tower;
and, by a desperate sally from this

¹ Winton, vol. ii. p. 276.

²  Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 350. Fordun
a Hearne, pp. 1043, 1044.

³  Fordun a Hearne, pp. 1044, 1045. Scala
Chron. in Leland’s Coll. p. 565.

outwork, Copland, the governor of
Northumberland, attempted to wrest
their conquest from the Scots; but he
was repulsed, and with such gallantly,
that the tower itself was carried and
garrisoned. Flushed with their suc­
cess, and enriched with an immense
booty, the Scots next attacked the
castle; its strength, however, resisted
all their efforts; and the Steward ar­
riving to inspect his conquest, found
that it would be impossible to keep
the town if, as was to be anticipated,
the garrison should be supported by
an English army. In such circum­
stances, to have dismantled the forti­
fications, and abandoned the city, would
have been the most politic course; but,
unwilling at once to renounce so high
a prize, he left in Berwick what troops
he could spare, and retired. Little
time, indeed, was given for the execu­
tion of any plan; for Edward, hearing
of the successes of the Scots, hastened
from Calais, stayed only three days in
his capital, and, attended by those
veteran and experienced officers who
had so well served him in his French
wars, laid siege to Berwick at the head
of a great army.⁴ At the same time,
the English fleet entered the river, and
the town was strictly invested on all
sides. Edward and his guards imme­
diately took possession of the castle;
and while Sir Walter Manny, a name
which the siege of Calais has made
famous, began a mine below the walls,
the king determined to storm the town
over the drawbridge which was thrown
from the castle to the Douglas Tower.
Against these formidable preparations
the small force left by the Steward
could not possibly contend; and the
garrison having capitulated, with safety
of life and limb, abandoned the town
to the enemy, and returned to Scot­
land.⁵

That fated country now lay open to
an army of eighty thousand men, com-

⁴ Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. v. p. 828. Robert
of Avesbury, p. 210. Fordun a Hearne, p.
1046.

⁵ Dr Lingard, vol. iv. p. 97, says, “ Berwick
was recovered by the sole terror of his ap­
proach.” This expression seems to me
unsupported either by the English or Scot­
tish historians. See Robert of Avesbury, p.
228.

1355-6.]                                           DAVID II. ’                                                  199

manded by the victor of Cressy. The
English fleet was ordered, without
delay, to sail round the coast, and
await him in the Forth; and the
king, breathing threats and vengeance
against his enemies, and irritated that
his career in France was perpetually
checked by his dangers at home, in­
vaded Scotland, with a determination
to subdue or utterly destroy the coun­
try.¹ At first everything seemed to
favour his project. Fatal and virulent
dissensions again broke out amongst
the Scottish nobles, excited, no doubt,
by the terror of confiscation and im­
prisonment, to which an unsuccessful
resistance to England necessarily sub­
jected them; and in addition to this,
an extraordinary event, which seemed
ominous of success, occurred upon the
arrival of Edward and his army at
Roxburgh. It had undoubtedly been
long in preparation; and one branch
of those secret negotiations which led
to it is probably to be seen in the
mysterious treaty, already noticed, be­
tween Prince Lionel and Henry Percy,
for the assistance of Edward Baliol.
That weak and unfortunate person
now presented himself before Edward;
and, with all the feudal ceremonies be­
coming so grave a transaction, for ever
resigned his kingdom of Scotland into
the hands of the English king, divest­
ing himself of his regalia, and laying
his crown at the feet of the monarch^.2
His declared motives for this pusil­
lanimous conduct are enumerated in
the various deeds and instruments
which passed upon the occasion; but
the real causes of the transaction are
not difficult to be discovered. It
needed little penetration to discern
that the retention of the royal name
and title by Baliol stood in the way of
the pacification of Scotland and the
negotiations for the ransom of the
king, and gave to the regent and the
barons of his party a power of work­
ing upon the popular feelings of the
nation; while the total resignation of

¹ Fordun a Goodal, p. 354.

² The English historian Knighton asserts
that Baliol delivered all right which he pos­
sessed in the crown of Scotland to Lionel, the
kins’s son. Knighton, p. 2611. Rymer, vol.
v. pp. 832, 843, inclusive.

the kingdom into the hands of Edward
afforded this prince some appearance
of justice in his present war ; and, in
case of a failure, a fairer prospect of
concluding a peace. Baliol himself
was a mere dependant of Edward’s :
for the last sixteen years he had been
supported by the money, and had lived
under the protection, of England ;³ he
was now an old man ; and he could not
entertain the slightest hope of subduing
the country, which he still affected to
consider as his own. In return for
this surrender of his crown, Edward
now agreed to settle upon him an an­
nuity of two thousand pounds; and,
when commanded to strip himself of
his unsubstantial honours, he at once
obeyed his master, and sunk into the
rank of a private baron. During one
part of his life, when he fought at
Dupplin, and took part with the dis­
inherited barons, he had shewn a con­
siderable talent for war; but this last
base act proved that he was unworthy
of the throne, from which he had
almost expelled the descendants of
Bruce. He died, not many years after
this event, in obscurity, and fortu­
nately for Scotland, without children.

Meanwhile Edward, who had thus
procured the donation of the kingdom
from Baliol, and extorted the acknow­
ledgment of homage from David, per­
suading himself that he had a just
quarrel, hastened his warlike prepara­
tions, and determined to invade the
country with a force against which all
resistance would be unavailing. The
present leaders of the Scots had not for­
gotten the lessons taught them by the
rashness of David; and they wisely
resolved to meet this invasion in the
manner pointed out by the wisdom of
Wallace, and the dying directions of
Bruce.

Orders were accordingly issued for
the inhabitants to drive away their
flocks and herds, and to convey all
their valuable property beyond the
Firth of Forth, into the castles, caverns,
and strongholds frequently used for
such purposes; to destroy and burn
the hay and forage which was not
readily transportable ; and to retreat
³ Rotuli scotiæ, vol. i. pp. 544, 546.

200                                   HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                        [Chap. VI

themselves, fully armed and equipped,
and ready for immediate action, into
the various well-known fastnesses,
wooded valleys, and mountain-passes,
from which they could watch the ope­
rations of the invading army.¹ It was
indispensable, however, to procure
time to carry these measures into exe­
cution ; and, for this purpose, the Earl
of Douglas sought the army of Edward,
which he found on its march from Rox­
burgh, and making a splendid appear­
ance. It was led by the king in person.
Before him, pre-eminently amid other
banners and pennons, was borne the
royal standard of Scotland.² The king’s
sons, John and Lionel, Dukes of Rich­
mond and Ulster, accompanied their
father; and on the arrival of Douglas,
when the army halted and encamped,
it covered an extent of twenty leagues.³
Douglas fortunately succeeded in pro­
curing a ten-days’ truce; during which
time he pretended to communicate
with the Steward and the nobles; and
amused Edward with hopes that his
title to the throne would be univer­
sally recognised. The messages, how­
ever, which passed between Douglas
and his friends related to designs the
very opposite of submission; and when
the trace was almost expired, the Scot­
tish earl, who had completely gained
his object, withdrew, and joined his
countrymen.

Enraged at being the dupe of so able
a negotiator, Edward, in extreme fury,
advanced through Berwickshire into
Lothian ; and, with a cruel and short-
sighted policy, gave orders for the
total devastation of the country.⁴
Every town, village, or hamlet, which
lay within the reach of his soldiers,
was given to the flames; and the march
of this prince, who has commonly
been reputed the model of a generous
and chivalrous conqueror, was to be
traced by the thick clouds of smoke
which hung over his army, and the
black desert which he left behind him.
In this indiscriminate vengeance, even

¹ Robert de Avesbury, p. 236.

² Ibid.

³ Ibid. Leland’s Coll. vol. i. p. 566^{.
4 “}Velut ursa raptis fœtibus in saltu
sœviens.”—Fordun a Hearne, p. 1047.

the churches and religious houses were
sacrilegiously plundered and cast down.
A noble abbey church at Haddington,
whose choir, lighted by the long-
shaped lantern windows, of graceful
proportion, went by the name of the
Lamp of Lothians, was entirely de­
stroyed ; and the adjoining monastery
of the Minorites, with the town itself,
razed to the ground.⁵

The severity which Edward had
exercised upon his march began now
to recoil upon himself; no forage was
to be had for the horses, and the mo­
ment a foraging party attempted to
leave the main army it was cut off by
the Scots, who rushed from their con­
cealment in the mountains and woods,
and gave no quarter. It was now the
month of January, and the winter
storms increased the distress of the
troops. Bread began to fail; for fif­
teen days the soldiers had drunk
nothing but water;⁶ and, instead of
being able to supply their wants by
plunder, the English found nothing
but empty stalls and deserted houses ;
not a hoof was to be seen, so well had
the orders of Douglas been obeyed.
It may be imagined how dreadfully
these privations were felt by an army
which included three thousand men-
at-arms, splendidly accoutred, both
man and horse, besides ten thousand
light-armed horse.⁷ The king, who
saw famine nearer every hour, now
looked impatiently for his fleet. It
was known that it had sailed from
Berwick, but no further intelligence
had arrived; and, after an anxious
halt of ten days at Haddington, Ed­
ward pushed on to Edinburgh with
the hope of meeting his victualling

⁵ Fordun a Hearne, p. 1048. Fordun a
Goodal, vol. ii. p. 354^.
6 Knighton, p. 2611.

⁷ According to Robert of Avesbury, pp. 235,
236, the numbers of Edward’s army were as
follows :—

3,000 homines armati, or men-at-arms,
that is, fully armed in steel, both
man and horse:
10,000 light-armed horse;
10,000 mounted archers ;
10,000 on foot;

----------

33,000.
The Scottish historians make the numbers
eighty thousand.

1356-7.]                                           DAVID II.                                                    201

ships at Leith. Instead, however, of
the long-expected supplies, certain
news arrived that the whole of the
English fleet, in its attempt to make
the Firth, had been dispersed and de­
stroyed ^;1 so that it was judged abso­
lutely necessary to retreat as speedily
as possible, in order to save the army
from absolute destruction. This order
for retreat became, as was to be ex­
pected, the signal for discipline to
cease and disorder to begin. Every
wood or mountain pass swarmed with
Scottish soldiers, who harassed the
rear with perpetual attacks; and, in
passing through the Forest of Melrose,
the king himself was nearly taken or
slain in an ambuscade which had been
laid for him.² He at length, however,
reached Carlisle in safety, dismissed
his barons, and returned to his capital;
from which he issued a pompous pro­
clamation, declaring it to be his will
to preserve untouched and inviolate
the ancient laws of Scotland : a singu­
lar declaration with regard to a coun­
try in which he could scarcely call a
single foot of ground his own.³ So
cruel in its execution, and so inglori­
ous in its result, was an expedition in
which Edward, at the head of an army
far greater than that which fought at
Cressy, had, for the fifth time, invaded
Scotland, declaring it to be his deter­
mined resolution to reduce it for ever
under his dominion. The expedition
of Edward, from the season in which
it took place, and the wasting of the
country by fire, was long afterwards
remembered by the name of the
“ Burnt Candlemas.”

So long as Scotland remained un-
conquered, it was evident that the
English monarch must be content to
have his ambitious efforts against
France perpetually crippled and im­
peded. He felt, accordingly, the para­
mount importance of concluding the
war in that country; and seems to have
imagined that, by an overwhelming
invasion, he could at once effect this
object, and be enabled to concentrate

¹ Fordun a Hearne, p. 1048. Robert of
Avesbury, p. 237.

² Knighton, p. 2611. Fordun a Hearne,
p. 1048.

³ Rotuli Scotiæ, p. 700.

his whole force against Philip. But
the result convinced him that the
Scots were further than ever from
being subdued; and that policy and
intrigue were at the present conjunc­
ture more likely to be successful. He
willingly, therefore, consented to a
truce, and resumed the negotiations
for the ransom of the king, and the
conclusion of a lasting peace between
the two countries.⁴

The Earl of Douglas, to whose exer­
tions the success of the last campaign
was mainly to be ascribed, seems to
have been one of those restless and
ardent spirits who languish unless in
actual service; and, accordingly, in­
stead of employing the breathing time
which was afforded him in healing the
wounds and recruiting the exhausted
strength of his country, he concluded
a Border truce with the English war­
den,⁵ and, accompanied by a numerous
body of knights and squires, passed
over to France, and fought in the me­
morable battle of Poictiers. Douglas
was received with high honour, and
knighted on the field by the King of
France. Amid the carnage of that
dreadful day he had the good fortune
to escape death or captivity; and,
cooled in his passion for foreign dis­
tinction, returned to Scotland,⁶ where
he resumed, along with the Stewards
and the rest of the nobility, his more
useful labours for his country.

Hitherto the negotiations for the
ransom and delivery of David had been
entirely abortive : they were now re­
newed, and proved successful. After
some preliminary conferences at Lon­
don, between the council of the King of
England and the Scottish commission­
ers, the final settlement of the treaty
was appointed to take place at Ber-
wick-upon-Tweed⁷ In the meantime

⁴  Rotuli Scotiæ, p. 791.

⁵  Rymer, vol. v. p. 809.

⁶ Fordun a Hearne, p. 1052.

⁷ Rymer, vol. v. p. 831. These conferences
for the ransom and liberation of David extend
through a period of ten years. They began
in January 1347-8, and were resumed almost
every year without success till the final treaty
in 1357. There are only three treaties noticed
by our historians; but the reader, by referring
to the following pages of the Rotuli Scotiæ,
vol. i., will find all the attempts at negotiation

202                                    HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                      [Chap. VI.

a parliament was held by the Steward,
as Governor of Scotland, at Edinburgh
on the 26th of September. Its consti­
tution and proceedings, as shewn in
authentic instruments preserved in the
Fœdera, are important. It appears
that, before the meeting of the three
estates, the prelates of Scotland assem­
bled their chapters, and appointed de­
legates to represent them in parlia­
ment, with full powers to deliberate
upon the ransom of the king, and to
bind them as fully as if they them­
selves had attended.¹ Afterwards,
however, it was judged more expe­
dient that the prelates should attend
in person; and accordingly we find
that, on the 26th of September, all
the bishops of Scotland assembled at
Edinburgh, and there met in parlia­
ment the lords and barons of the
realm, and the representatives of the
royal burghs. Each of the estates
then proceeded to elect certain com­
missioners of their own body to ap­
pear at Berwick and deliberate with
the delegates of the King of England
upon the ransom and liberation of
their sovereign. For this purpose the
clergy chose the Bishops of St An­
drews, Caithness, and Brechin.² To
these ecclesiastical delegates were
added the Earls of March, Angus, and
Sutherland, Sir Thomas de Moravia,
Sir William Livingston, and Sir Robert
Erskine, appointed by the regent and
the barons; and, lastly, the seven­
teen royal burghs chose eleven dele­
gates of their own number, and in­
trusted them with the most ample
powers.³ Such elections having taken
place, the commissioners of both coun­
tries repaired to Berwick-upon-Tweed
on the day appointed with great state.
Upon the part of England there came
the Primate of England, with the
Bishops of Durham and Carlisle, and
the Lords Percy, Neville, Scrope, and
Musgrave. The Scottish delegates
brought with them a numerous suite
of attendants. The train of the Bishop

minutely described in the original instru­
ments, pp. 709, 721, 722, 727, 740, 741, 745,
759, 766, 768, 773, 791, and 809, 811^.
1 Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. vi. pp. 39, 40.

²  Ibid. vol. vi. pp. 42, 43.

³  Ibid. vol. vi. pp. 44. 45.

of St Andrews alone consisted of thirty
knights, with their squires; that of
the other bishops and barons was
scarcely less splendid;⁴ and the arri­
val of the captive monarch himself,
escorted by the whole military army
of Northumberland, gave additional
solemnity to the scene of negotiation.⁵

The result of these conferences at
Berwick was the restoration of David
to his kingdom, after a captivity of
eleven years. The ransom finally
agreed on was a hundred thousand
pounds, equivalent to the sum of
twelve hundred thousand pounds of
modern money, to be paid by annual
instalments of four thousand pounds;
and, in security of this, twenty Scot­
tish youths, heirs of the first families
in the country, were delivered as host­
ages into the hands of the English
monarch.⁶ It was stipulated besides
that, from the principal nobles of the
kingdom, these should resort by turns
to England, there to remain until the
whole ransom was discharged; and, in
the event of failure at any of the
terms, the King of Scotland became
bound to return to his captivity. It
was also declared that, until payment
of the ransom, there should be a ten-
years’ truce between the kingdoms,
during which free commercial inter­
course by land and by sea was to take
place between both countries; no hos­
tile attempt of any nature was to be
made against the possessions of either,
and no subject of the one to be re­
ceived into the allegiance of the other:
a condition which Edward, when it
suited his own interests, made no
scruple of infringing.⁷ The stipula-

⁴ Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. vi. pp. 32, 33.

⁵ Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. p. 810.

⁶ Rymer, vol. vi. pp. 47, 48. The sum of
the ransom originally agreed on was 100,000
marks. Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. p. 812; but this
was altered by subsequent treaties. Mac-
pherson’s Notes to Winton, vol. ii. p. 512.

⁷ Rotuli Scotiæ, 3d March 1362-3. 37 Ed.
III. vol. i. p. 871. Bower, in his additions
to Fordun, has asserted that David agreed
to dismantle certain castles in Niddesdale,
which greatly annoyed the English; and that,
on his return to his dominions, he accordingly
destroyed the castles of Dalswinton, Dum­
fries, Morton, and Durisdeer, with nine others.
No such stipulation is to be found in the
treaty, (Rymer, vol. vi. p. 46,) and Fordun
himself makes no mention of it.

1357.]                                              DAVID II.                                                    203

tions of this famous treaty were un­
commonly favourable to England, and
reflect little credit on the diplomatic
talents of the Scottish commissioners.
The sum agreed on was oppressively
high; and it fell upon the country at
a period when it was in a low and ex­
hausted condition.

But the ransom itself was not the
only drain on the resources of the
country. The numerous unsuccessful
attempts at negotiation which pre­
ceded this final settlement had occa­
sioned many journeys of the Scottish
nobility to England, and such expedi­
tions brought along with them a heavy
expenditure. Besides this, the ransom
of the Scottish prisoners, taken in the
battle of Durham; their support, and
that of the king their master, for many
years in England; with the expense
occasioned by the residence of three
great nobles, and twenty young men
of the first rank, for so long a time in
another country, occasioned an exces­
sive expenditure. The possession, too,
of the hostages by England tended
greatly to cripple the power, and
neutralise the independent efforts of
her enemy; and the frequent inter­
course between the nobles of the
poorer and those of the richer
country gave Edward opportunities
of intrigue, which he by no means
neglected.

Meanwhile, the representatives of the
nobility, the bishops, and the burghs
of Scotland ratified the treaty;¹ and
David, released from captivity, re­
turned to Scotland, to receive the
enthusiastic welcome of his people.
But it was soon discovered that the
character and manners of the king had
been deteriorated by his residence in
England. His first public act was to
summon a parliament, to meet at
Scone, regarding which there is a little
anecdote preserved by a contemporary
historian, which throws a strong and
painful light upon his harsh disposi­
tion. In the progress to the hall
where the estates were to meet, crowds
of his people, who had not beheld
their king for eleven years, pressed
upon him, with rude, but flattering
¹ Rymer, vol. vi. pp. 52 to 56 inclusive.

ardour. The monarch, whose march
was thus affectionately interrupted,
became incensed, instead of being
gratified ; and, wresting a mace from
one of his attendants, threatened to
beat to the ground any who dared to
annoy him : a churlish action, which
shews how little cordiality could sub­
sist between such a prince and his
subjects, and prepares us for the un­
happy transactions that afterwards
made so deadly a breach between him
and his people.²

The proceedings of the parliament
itself may be imperfectly gathered
from a fragment which has been pre­
served; but the record of the names
of the clergy, nobility, and other mem­
bers who were present, which might
have thrown some light upon the
state of parties at the return of the
king, is unfortunately lost. The enor­
mous sum of the ransom, and the
mode in which the annual instalment
should be collected, appears to have
been the first subject which occupied
the attention of the great couucil.
The provisions upon this were impor­
tant, and illustrated the state of com­
merce in the country. It was resolved
that all the wool and wool-fells of the
kingdom should be given to the king,
at the rate of four marks for the sack
of wool, and the same sum for every
parcel of two hundred fleeces; and
it is probable that the king afterwards
exported these sacks and fleeces, at a
high profit, to foreign parts, or dis­
posed of them to foreign merchants
who resorted to Scotland.³ In the
next place, a minute and accurate
account of the rents and produce of
the lands of the realm, and a list of
the names of the proprietors, was ap­
pointed to be taken by certain sworn
commissioners appointed for the pur­
pose. From this account were specially
excepted white sheep, domestic horses,
oxen, and household furniture; but
so minute was the scrutiny, that the
names of all mechanics, tradesmen, and
artificers were directed to be taken,
with the purpose of ascertaining what

² Winton, vol. ii. p. 283^.
3 Robertson’s Parliamentary Records of
Scotland, pp. 96, 97.

204                                    HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                      [Chap. VI.

tax should be paid on the real value of
their property, and what sum each
person, of his own free will, might be
expected to contribute towards the
ransom of the king. Proclamation
was directed to be made throughout
the kingdom, that, during the term
within which such an account was to
be taken, no one should sell or export
any sheep or lambs. Officers were to
be stationed on the marches to pre­
vent such an occurrence; every hoof
or fleece which was carried off was to
be seized and forfeited to the king;
while the sheriffs of the counties, and
the barons and gentry, were directed
to use their utmost endeavour that
none should dare to refuse such taxa­
tion, or fraudulently attempt to escape,
by transferring themselves from one
part of the country to another. If any
of the sheriffs, tax-gatherers or their
officers, were found guilty of any
fraud, or unfaithful conduct; or, if
any individuals were discovered con­
cealing their property; all such de­
linquents were ordered to stand their
trial at the next Justice Ayre ; which,
it was appointed, should be held by
the king in person, that the royal pre­
sence might insure a more solemn
distribution of justice, and strike
terror into offenders. A provision was
next made that in each county there
should be good and sufficient sheriffs,
coroners, bailies, and inferior officers;
it was ordered that all lands, rents, or
customs, belonging originally to the
king, should be resumed, to whatever
persons they might have been granted,
in order that the whole royal lands
should continue untouched; and that
the kingdom, already burdened by the
king’s ransom, might be freed from
any additional tax for the mainte­
nance of the throne. The king was
required to renew that part of his
coronation oath by which he had
promised that he should not alienate
the crown lands, or dispose, without
mature advice, of any rents, wards,
or escheats belonging to the crown ;
and there was a prohibition against
exporting the sterling money out of
the realm, by any person whatever,
unless upon the payment to the ex­

chequer of half a mark for each
pound.¹

During the captivity of the sove­
reign, it appears that they who, at
various times, were at the head of
affairs had either appropriated to
themselves, or made donations to
their dependants, of various portions
of the crown lands; and it was there­
fore enacted, that all who had thus
rashly and presumptuously entered
into possession of any lands or ward­
ships belonging to the crown should,
under pain of imprisonment, be com­
pelled to restore them to the king.
The next article in the provisions of
this parliament is extremely obscure.
It was resolved “ that all the lands,
possessions, and goods of the homi­
cides, after the battle of Durham, who
have not yet bound themselves to
obey the law of the land, should be
placed in the hands of the king, until
they come under sufficient security to
obey the law; and that all pardons or
remissions granted to persons of this
description, by the governors of the
kingdom, during the absence of the
king, should not be ratified, unless at
the royal pleasure.” And it was also
provided that, if any person, after the
captivity of the sovereign, had resigned
to the regent any tenement which he
held of the crown in capite, which pro­
perty had been bestowed upon another
who had alienated it in whole or in
part without the royal permission, all
such tenements should again revert to
the crown.

The names of the nobles and barons
who sat in this parliament being lost,
we can only conjecture that some in­
dividuals had absented themselves,
from the idea that the disturbances
which they had excited during the
captivity of the king would be visited
with punishment. It is stated in the
Scala Chronicle, that soon after the
conflict at Durham the private feuds
amongst the nobility were carried to
a grievous height; and that the king­
dom was torn by homicides, rapine,
and private war, for which Fordun does
not hesitate indirectly to criminate the

¹ Robertson’s Parliamentary Records, pp.
93. 97.

1358.]                                               DAVID II.                                                    205

Steward.¹ It is certain, at least, from
the record of this parliament, that the
remissions or pardons granted to these
defaulters by the Steward, and those
in office under him, were recalled; and
that the king resented his conduct, in
interfering with the royal prerogative,
and bestowing lands held of the
crown upon his own creatures and
dependants.

For the present, however, there was
the appearance of tranquillity. The
treaty which had settled the ransom
received the approbation of the parlia­
ment; and Edward not only gave
orders for its strict fulfilment, but
sought by every method to ingratiate
himself with the prelates and the no­
bility of Scotland. His object in all
this became soon apparent. Aware,
from repeated experience, of the diffi­
culty of reducing this country by open
force, a deeper policy was adopted.
He had already gained an extraordi­
nary influence over the weak character
of the king, and had secretly prevailed
upon him to acknowledge the feudal
superiority of England. David being
without children, there existed a jea­
lousy between him and the Steward,
who had been nominated next heir to
the crown; and we may date from
this period the rise of a dark faction,
to which the Scottish king meanly
lent himself a party, and the object of
which was to intrude a son of Edward
the Third into the Scottish throne.
For some time, however, this conspir­
acy against the independence of the
nation was concealed, so that it is diffi­
cult to discover the details or the
principal agents ; but from the fre­
quent journeys of some of the Scottish
prelates and barons to the court of
En gland, from the secret and mysteri­
ous instructions under which they
acted, and the readiness with which
they were welcomed,² there arises a
strong presumption that this monarch
had gained them over to his interest.
The Earl of Angus, one of David’s
hostages, had private meetings with

¹ Fordun a Hearne, p. 1039. Leland’s
Coll. vol. i. p. 562.

² Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. pp. 814, 815, 31 Ed.
III. m. 4.

the King of England, and was de­
spatched to Scotland that he might
confer with his own sovereign upon
matters which shunned the light, and
did not appear as usual in the instru­
ments and passports.³ Within a short
period the Scottish queen, a sister of
Edward, made two visits to London,
for the purpose of treating with her
brother on certain matters which are
not specified in her safe-conduct. The
King of Scotland next sought the
English court in his own person; and
after his return, the Bishop of St
Andrews, the Earl of March, along
with the Earl of Douglas, Sir Robert
Erskine, and Sir William Livingstone,
were repeatedly employed in these
secret missions which at this period
took place between the two monarchs.⁴
These barons generally travelled with
a numerous suite of knights or
squires;⁵ and while their masters
were engaged in negotiation, the young
knights enjoyed their residence at a
court then the most chivalrous in
Europe, and were welcome guests in
the fetes and amusements which occu­
pied its warlike leisure. Large sums
of money were required for such em­
bassies; and the probability is, that
they were chiefly defrayed by the
English monarch, who looked for a
return in the feelings of gratitude and
obligation which he thus hoped to
create in the breasts of the Scottish
nobility. Nor were other methods of
conciliation neglected by this politic
prince. He encouraged the merchants
of Scotland to trade with England by
grants of protection and immunity,
which formed a striking contrast to
the spirit of jealousy and exclusion
with which they had lately been
treated.⁶

From the moment of David’s re­
turn, a complete change took place in

³ Rotuli Scotiæ, 31 Ed. III. m. 2, 25 Dec.
1357, vol. i. p. 818.

⁴  Ibid. 32 Ed. III. pp. 819, 821, 822.

⁵  Ibid. 32 Ed. III. p. 821. Willelmus de
Levyngeston. “Cum octo Equitibus de
Comitiva sua.” Sir Robert Erskine, with the
same number, p. 822. The Earl of March
travels to England, “ Cum viginti Equitibus
et eorum garcionibus,” p. 823.

⁶ Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. 32 Ed. III. pp. 822,
823.

206                                    HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                       [Chap. VI.

the commercial policy of England, and
the Scottish merchants were welcomed
with a liberality which, could we for­
get its probable object, was as generous
as it was beneficial to both countries.
At the same time the youth of Scot­
land were induced to frequent the
universities of Oxford and Cambridge,
by the ready kindness with which
the king gave them letters of protec­
tion;¹ and the religious, who wished
to make pilgrimages to the most cele­
brated shrines in England, found
none of those impediments to their
pious expeditions which had lately
existed.

At this moment, when designs ex­
isted against the independence of
Scotland, so dangerous in their nature,
and so artfully pursued, it was unfor­
tunate that a spirit of military adven­
ture carried many of its best soldiers
to the continental wars. Sir Thomas
Bisset and Sir Walter Moigne, with
Norman and Walter Lesley, previous
to David’s return, had left the coun­
try on an expedition to Prussia,² in
all probability to join the Teutonic
knights, who were engaged in a species
of crusade against the infidel Prus­
sians.³ Not long after, Sir William
Keith, marshal of Scotland, Sir Wil­
liam Sinclair, lord of Roslin, Sir Alex­
ander de Lindesay, Sir Robert Gilford,
and Sir Alexander Montgomery, each
with a train of sixty horse, and a
strong body of foot soldiers, passed
through England to the continent,
eager for distinction in foreign wars,
with which they had no concern, and
foolishly deserting their country when
it most required their services.⁴ Yet
this conduct was more pardonable than
that of the Earl of Mar, who entered
into the service of England, and with
a retinue of twenty-four knights and
their squires, passed over to France in
company with the English monarch
and his army.⁵ The example was in­
fectious ; and the love of enterprise,

¹ Rotuli Scotiæ, 32 Ed. III. vol. i. pp. 822,
825, 828.

²  Rymer, vol. v. p. 866.

³  Barnes’ Edward III. p. 669.

⁴ Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. 32 Ed. III. p. 830^.
5 Ibid. 33 Ed. III. p. 842. Rymer, vol. vi.
p. 119.

the renown of fighting under so illus­
trious a leader, and the hopes of
plunder, induced other soldiers to imi­
tate his example. Edward, therefore,
whose attempts to conquer Scotland
by force of arms had utterly failed,
seemed now to have fallen upon a
more fatal and successful mode of at­
tack. Many of the barons were
secretly in his interest; some had ac­
tually embraced his service; the king
himself was wholly at his devotion ;
the constant intercourse which he had
encouraged had softened, as he hoped,
and diluted, the bitterness of national
animosity; and the possession of his
twenty hostages had tied up the hands
of the principal barons of the land,
who in other circumstances would
have been at liberty to have acted
strenuously against him. Nothing
now remained but to develop the great
plan which all this artful preparation
was intended to foster and facilitate ;
but for this matters were not yet con­
sidered far enough advanced.

Meanwhile, David anxiously adopted
every method to collect the sums ne­
cessary for his ransom: nor can we
wonder at his activity when we re­
member that his liberty or his return
to the Tower depended on his success.
He had already paid the first ten thou­
sand marks ;⁶ and the Pope, at his ear­
nest request, consented that, for the
term of three years, he should levy a
tenth of all the ecclesiastical benefices
in Scotland, under the express condi­
tion that the clergy were, after this,
to be exempted from all further con­
tribution. Yet this stipulated immu­
nity was soon forgotten or disregarded
by the king; and in addition to the
tenth, the lands and temporalities of
all ecclesiastics, whether they held of
the king or of a subject, were com­
pelled to contribute in the same pro­
portion as the barons and free tenants
of the crown,—a measure violently
opposed by the Church, and which
must have lost to the king much of
his popularity with this important
body.⁷

⁶ Rotuli Scotiæ, 32 Ed. III. p. 827. 23d
June 1358^.
7 Fordun a Hearae, p. 1054.

1358-61.1                                DAVID II.                                        207

The period for the payment of the
second instalment of the ransom-money
to England now rapidly approached.
In Scotland, the difficulty of raising
money, owing to the exhausted and
disorganised state of the kingdom, was
excessive; and the king in despair, and
compelled by the influence of the party
of the Steward, which supported the
independence of the country, forgot
for a moment the intimate relations
which now bound him to Edward, and
opened a negotiation with the Regent
of France, in which he agreed to renew
the war with England, provided that
prince and his kingdom would assist
him with the money which he now
imperiously required. To these de­
mands the French plenipotentiaries
replied,¹ that in the present conjunc­
tion of affairs, when France was ex­
hausted with war, and the king and
many of the highest nobility in cap­
tivity, it was impossible to assist her
ancient ally so speedily or so effec­
tually as could be desired. They
agreed, however, to contribute the sum
of fifty thousand marks ² towards de­
fraying the ransom, under the condi­
tion that the Scots should renew the
war with England, and that there
should be a ratification of the former
treaty of alliance between France and
Scotland.

These stipulations upon the part of
the French were never fulfilled. An
army of a hundred thousand men, led
by Edward in person, passed over to
Calais a few months after the negotia­
tion,³ and France saw in the ranks of
her invaders many of the Scottish
barons who had become the tools of
England. Amongst those whom the
English king had seduced, was Tho­
mas, earl of Angus, one of the hostages
for David, a daring adventurer, who
had commissioned from the Flemings
four ships of war, with which he pro­
mised to meet Edward at Calais. But
on procuring his liberty, Angus forgot
his engagement; and, remaining in

¹ Traittez entre les Roys de France et les
Roys d’Escosse. MS. in Ad. Library, A. 3. 9.

² “ Cinquante mil marcs d’Esterhns, on la
valleur en or si comme il vault en Angleterre.”

³ Rotuli Scotiæ, 34 Ed. III. m. 4, pp.
840, 847.

Scotland, acted a principal part in the
commotions which then distracted the
country.⁴ Sir Thomas Bisset, Sir Wil­
liam of Tours, and Sir John Boron-
don, and probably many other Scottish
knights, accompanied Edward,⁵ but
had little opportunity of signalising
themselves; and after an inglorious
campaign, hostilities were concluded
by the celebrated treaty of Bretigny,
in which the two belligerent powers
consented to a mutual sacrifice of
allies. The French, naturally irritated,
agreed to renounce all alliances which
they had already formed with Scot­
land, and engaged, for the time to
come, to enter into no treaties with
that nation against the realm of Eng­
land ; and England, on her part, was
equally accommodating in her renun­
ciation of her Flemish allies.⁶ Such
conduct upon the part of the French
regent must have been highly mortify­
ing to the Steward and his friends, who
considered the continuance of a war
with England as the only certain
pledge for the preservation of the na­
tional liberty. On the other hand, the
confederacy, which had been gradually
gaining ground in favour of England,
and now included amongst its support­
ers the Scottish king himself and many
of his nobles, could not fail to be grati­
fied by a result which rendered a com­
plete reconciliation with Edward more
likely to occur, and thus paved the way
for the nearer development of their
secret designs, by which the Steward
would ultimately be prevented from
ascending the throne.

Whilst such was the course of events
in France, Scotland at home presented
a scene of complicated distress and
suffering. A dreadful inundation laid
the whole of the rich country of Lo­
thian under water. The clouds poured
down torrents such as had never before
been seen by the oldest inhabitants ;
and the rivers, breaking over their
banks with irresistible violence, de­
stroyed ramparts and bridges, tore up
the strongest oaks and forest trees by

⁴ Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 365^.
5 Rotuli Scotiæ, p. 840^.
6 Rymer, Fœdera, vol. vi. p. 192, Art. 31,
32, 33.

208                                     HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                      [Chap. VI.

the roots, and carried houses, barns,
and implements of husbandry, in one
undistinguished mass to the sea­shore.
The lighter wooden habitations of the
working-classes were swept from their
foundations; and the castles, churches,
and monasteries entirely surrounded
by water^.1 At length, it is said, a
nun, terror-struck by the anger of the
elements, snatched a small image of
the Virgin from a shrine in the church
of her monastery, and threatened aloud
to cast her into the stream, unless she
averted the impending calamity. The
flood had already touched the threshold
of the building, when it was suddenly
checked; and Bower assures us that
from that moment the obedient waters
returned within their accustomed
boundaries.²

Not long after this inundation, the
country was visited by another dread­
ful guest: the great pestilence, which
had carried away such multitudes in
1349,³ again broke out in Scotland,
with symptoms of equal virulence and
fatality. In one respect the present
calamity was different from the for­
mer. That of 1349 had fallen with
most severity upon the poorer classes,
but in this the rich and noble in the
land, equally with the meanest labour­
ers, were seized by the disease, and in
most instances fell victims to its ra­
vages. The deaths at last became so
numerous, and the crowds of the dead
and the dying so appalling, that David,
with his court, retreated to the north,
and at Kinross, in Moray, sought a
purer air and less lugubrious exhi­
bitions.⁴

On his return, a domestic tragedy
of a shocking nature awaited him.
His favourite mistress, Catherine Mor­
timer, whom he had loved during his
captivity, had afterwards accompanied
him into Scotland, and from some
causes not now discoverable, became
an object of jealousy and hatred to
the Earl of Angus and others of the
Scottish nobles. At their instigation,
two villains, named Hulle and Dewar,

¹  Fordun a Hearne, p. 1053.

²  Fordun a Goodal, vol ii. p. 362.

³ Winton, book viii. chap. xlv. vol. ii. p. 202^.
4 Fordun a Goodal, p. 365.

undertook to murder her ; and having
sought her residence under a pretence
that they came from the king with
instructions to bring her to court,
prevailed upon the unsuspecting vic­
tim to intrust herself to their guidance.
They travelled on horseback; and on
the desolate moor between Melrose
and Soutra, where her cries could
bring none to her assistance, Hulle
stabbed her with his dagger and de­
spatched her in an instant.⁵ David
instantly imprisoned the Earl of Angus
in Dumbarton castle, where he fell a
victim to the plague, and commanded
his unfortunate favourite to be buried
with all honour in the Abbey of New-
battle.

Towards the conclusion of the year
which was marked by this base mur­
der, a secret negotiation, regarding
the subject of which the public records
give us no certain information, took
place between Edward and the Scot­
tish king. The Bishops of St Andrews
and Breehin, with the Archdeacon of
Lothian, the Earls of March and Dou­
glas, Sir Robert Erskine, and Sir John
Preston, repaired, with a numerous
retinue, to the English court; but the
object of their mission is studiously
concealed. It is indeed exceedingly
difficult to understand or to unravel
the complicated intrigues and the
various factions which divided the
country at this period. The king him­
self was wholly in the interest and
under the government of Edward.
The Steward, on the other hand, to
whom the people affectionately looked
as his successor, and whose title to
the throne had been recognised by a
solemn act of the three estates of the
kingdom, was at the head of the party
which opposed the designs of England,
and strenuously defended the independ­
ence of the country. Many of the
nobles, seduced by the example of
their sovereign, and by the wealth of
England, had deserted to Edward;
many others, indignant at such treach­
ery, leagued themselves in the strictest
ties with the Steward : and between
these two parties there existed, we

⁵ Scala Chronicle, p. 196. Fordun a Goodal.
vol. ii. p. 365.

1361-3.]                                           DAVID II.                                                    209

may believe, the most deadly ani­
mosity. But we may, I think, trace
in the records of the times—for our
ancient historians give us no light on
the subject—another and more mode­
rate party, to whom Edward and David
did not discover their ultimate inten­
tions for the destruction of the inde­
pendence of Scotland as a separate
kingdom, but who hailed with joy,
and encouraged with patriotic eager­
ness, those pacific measures which were
employed to pave the way for their
darker designs. Nor is it difficult to
understand the feelings which gave
rise to such a party. A war of almost
unexampled length and animosity had
weakened and desolated the country.
Every branch of national prosperity
had been withered or destroyed by its
endurance; and it is easy to conceive
how welcome must have been the
breathing time of peace, and how
grateful those measures of free trade
and unfettered intercourse between
the two countries which Edward
adopted, from the moment of David’s
liberation till the period of his death.¹
It is quite possible to believe that
such men as the Earl of Douglas and
Sir Robert Erskine, the Bishops of St
Andrews and Brechin, with other pre­
lates and nobles, who were engaged in
perpetual secret negotiations with Ed­
ward, should have been amused with
propositions for a complete union and
a perpetual peace between the two
countries; while David himself, and
those traitors who were admitted into
the deeper parts of the plot, assisted
at their negotiations, sheltered them­
selves under their upright character,
and thus disarmed suspicion.

Meanwhile, under this change of mea­
sures, Scotland gradually improved;
and the people, unconscious of the
designs which threatened to bring
her down to the level of a province of
England, enjoyed the benefits and
blessings of peace. The country pre­
sented a stirring and busy scene. Mer­
chants from Perth, Aberdeen, Kirk-
caldy, Edinburgh, and the various
towns and royal burghs, commenced a
lucrative trade with England, and
¹ Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. pp. 859, 862.
VOL. I.

through that country with Flanders,
Zealand, France, and other parts of
the continent; wool, hides, sheep, and
lamb skins, cargoes of fish, herds of
cattle, horses, dogs of the chase, and
falcons, were exported; and in return,
grain, wine, salt, and spices of all
kinds ; mustard, peas, potashes, earth­
enware, woollen cloth; silver and gold
in bars, cups, vases, and spoons of the
same precious metals; swords, hel­
mets, cuirasses, bows and arrows, horse
furniture, and all sorts of warlike
accoutrements, were imported from
England, and from the French and
Flemish ports, into Scotland.²

Frequent and numerous parties of
rich merchants, with caravans laden
with their goods, and attended by com­
panies of horsemen and squires, for
the purposes of defence and security,
travelled from all parts of Scotland
into England and the continent.³ Ed­
ward furnished them with passports,
or safe-conducts ; and the preservation
of these instruments, amongst the
Scottish rolls in the Tower, furnishes
us with an authentic and curious
picture of the commerce of the times.
We find these passports granted to
bodies of fifty and sixty at a time;
each of the merchants being men of
such wealth and substance as to be
accompanied by a suite of four, five,
or six horsemen. In the year 1363,
passports were granted to forty-nine
Scottish merchants, who are accom­
panied by a body of eighty-seven
horsemen, and eighteen squires or
garcons; and the following year was
crowded with expeditions of the same
nature. - On one memorable occasion,
in the space of a single month, a party
of sixty-five merchants obtained safe-
conducts to travel through England,
for the purposes of trade; and their
warlike suite amounted to no less
than two hundred and thirty horse­
men.⁴

Besides this, the Scottish youth,
and many scholars of more advanced
years, crowded to the colleges of Eng-

² Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. pp. 760, 881, 891, 911,
925. Rymer, vol. vi. p 575.

³ Rotuli Scotiæ, vol. i. p. 876.
⁴Ibid. vol. i,pp, 885, 886.

0

210                                      HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                     [Chap. VI.

land;¹ numerous parties of pilgrims
travelled to the various shrines of
saints and martyrs, and were liberally
welcomed and protected; ² whilst, in
those Scottish districts which were
still in the hands of the English, Ed­
ward, by preserving to the inhabitants
their ancient customs and privileges,
endeavoured to overcome the national
antipathy, and conciliate the affections
of the people. Commissions were
granted to his various officers in Scot­
land, empowering them to receive the
homage and adherence of the Scots
who had hitherto refused to acknow­
ledge his authority; passports, and all
other means of indulgence and protec­
tion were withdrawn from such as
resisted, or became objects of suspi­
cion ; and every means was taken
to strengthen the few castles which
he possessed, and to give security to
the inhabitants of the extensive dis­
trict of Annandale, with other parts
of the country which were in the
hands of English subjects.³

During the course of the year 1362,
the Bishops of St Andrews and of
Brechin, Wardlaw, archdeacon of
Lothian, with Sir Robert Erskine and
Sir Norman Lesley, were engaged in
a secret mission to the court of Eng­
land; and a public negotiation was
commenced for a final peace between
the two countries, which appears not
to have led to any satisfactory result.⁴
The truce, however, was still strictly
preserved; the fears of an invasion of
England by the party opposed to
Edward had entirely subsided; and
the pacific intercourse between both
countries, by the constant resort of
those whom the purposes of trade,
or devotion, or pleasure, or business
carried from their homes, continued
as constant and uninterrupted as be­
fore.⁵ Meanwhile Joanna, queen of
Scotland, who had resided for some
time past at her brother’s court, was
seized with a mortal illness, and died
in Hertford castle.⁶ In the course of

¹ Rotuli Scotiæ, pp. 886, 891.

² Ibid. pp. 878-880.

³ Ibid. pp. 861, 872, 873, 875, 894.

⁴ Ibid. vol. i. pp. 862, 864^.
5 Ibid. pp. 859, 860, 865.

⁶ Walsingham, p. 179.

the former year, the only son of the
Earl of Sutherland, who was nephew
to the Scottish king, had been cut off
by the plague at Lincoln.⁷ Edward
Baliol lay also on his deathbed; and
these events were seized upon as a
proper opportunity to bring forward
that great plan which had been so long
maturing, and by which Edward the
Third persuaded himself that, in re­
turn for his flattering and indulgent
policy, he was to gain a kingdom.

Although the ramifications of the
conspiracy by which Edward and Da­
vid attempted to destroy the indepen­
dence of Scotland are exceedingly ob­
scure, enough, I think, has been point­
ed out to prove that it had been going
on for many years. We have seen that
the English king purchased from Baliol
the whole kingdom ; that David had
completely thrown himself into the
arms of England, and even actually
acknowledged the superiority of the
one crown over the other; and now
when, as was imagined, all obstacles
were removed, we are to witnegs the
open development and the utter dis­
comfiture of this extraordinary plot.
A parliament was summoned at Scone
in the month of March 1363 ;⁸ and
the king, after alluding to the late
negotiation for a final peace which had
taken place between the commissioners
of both countries, proceeded to explain
to the three estates the conditions
upon which Edward had agreed to
concede this inestimable blessing to
the country. He proposed, in the
event of his death, that the states of
the realm should choose one of the
sons of the King of England to fill
the Scottish throne; and he recom­
mended in the strongest manner that
such choice should fall upon Lionel,
the third son of that monarch,—a
prince in every respect well qualified,
he affirmed, to defend the liberty of
the kingdom. If this election was
agreed to, he was empowered, he said,
to disclaim, upon the part of the King
of England and his heirs, all future

⁷ Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 366. Edward
Baliol also died in 1363, at Doncaster.
Knighton, p. 2627.

⁸ 4th March 1363-4. Robertson’s Parlia­
mentary Records, p. 100.

1363.]                                              DAVID II.                                                   211

attempts to establish a right to the
kingdom of Scotland under any pre­
tence whatever; that grievous load of
ransom, which pressed so heavily upon
all classes of the country, would be
from that moment discharged;¹ and
he concluded by expressing his con­
viction that in no other way could a
safe and permanent peace be estab­
lished between the two nations.²

The estates of parliament stood
aghast at this base proposal, which
was received by an instantaneous burst
of deep and undissembled indignation.
It required, indeed, no little personal
intrepidity to name such terms to an
assembly of armed Scottish barons.
Their fathers and themselves had, for
more than sixty years, been engaged
in almost uninterrupted war against
the intolerable aggressions of England.
It was for the stability of the kingdom,
whose liberties were now attempted
to be so wantonly sacrificed, that Wal­
lace, and Douglas, and Randolph, and
Bruce had laboured and bled. By the
most solemn acts of the legislature,
and the oaths of the three estates,
taken with their hands on the holy
gospels, they were bound to keep the
throne for the descendants of their
deliverer; and it is not difficult to
imagine with what bitter feelings of
sorrow and mortification they must
have reflected that the first proposal
for the alteration of the succession
came from the only son of Robert
Bruce. In such circumstances, it re-
quired neither time nor deliberation
to give their answer. It was brief,
and perfectly unanimous, on the part
of the three estates, clergy, nobles,
and burgesses : “ We never,” said they,
“ will allow an Englishman to rule over
us; the proposition of the king is
foolish and improvident, for he ought
to have recollected that there exists
heirs to the throne, whose age and
virtues render them worthy of that
high station; and to whom the three

¹ Although this is not mentioned by Fordun
or Winton, I have inferred that the discharge
of the ransom was stipulated, from the terms
of the Parliamentary Record, and from the
sixth article of the subsequent secret treaty
at Westminster. Rymer, vol. vi. p. 426.

² Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 366.

estates are bound to adhere, by the
deeds of settlement, which have been
ratified by their own solemn oath.
Yet,” they added, “ they earnestly de­
sired peace; and, provided the royal
state, liberty, and separate independ­
ence of the kingdom were not infringed
upon, would willingly make every sacri­
fice to attain it.” ³

With this resolute answer the king
was deeply moved. His eyes flashed
with rage, and his gestures for a mo­
ment betrayed the conflict of anger
and disappointment which was passing
in his mind; but he repressed his feel­
ings, and, affecting to be satisfied,
passed on to other matters. It was
determined to open an immediate
negotiation with England, preparatory
to a final treaty of peace; and for this
purpose, Sir Robert Erskine, along
with Walter Wardlaw, the archdeacon
of Lothian, and Gilbert Armstrong,
were appointed commissioners by the
parliament. With regard to the ran­
som, the nobles declared that they
were ready cheerfully to suffer every
privation, for the payment of the whole
sum; and that they would use their
utmost exertion to prevent the truce
from being broken, as well as to
answer for the penalties already due
for its infringement, by that party
which was adverse to England.⁴ These

³ “ Cui breviter, et sine ulteriori delibera-
tione aut retractatione responsum fuit per uni-
versaliter singulos, et singulariter universos
de tribus statibus, Nunquam se velle consen-

TIRE ANGLICUM SUPER RE REGNARE.” Fordun

a Goodal, vol. ii. pp. 366, 367. Winton, vol.
ii. p. 294. Robertson’s Parl, Records, p. 100.

⁴ In the record of this important parlia­
ment, which is unfortunately in an extremely
mutilated state, there is some obscurity as to
the meaning of the words, “ Si que per partera
adversam pro commissis hactenus possent in-
fligi vel obiici.” I understand the “pars
adversa” to be the party of the Steward,
which was decidedly hostile to England, and
eager to break the truce. The whole “Re­
cord” of this famous parliament has been
printed by the late Mr Robertson, in that first
and interesting volume of the Records of the
Scottish Parliament, which, on account of
some defects in its arrangement, was can­
celled and withdrawn. A copy of this rare
work, which has been already quoted fre­
quently in the course of this volume, was,
many years ago, presented by Mr Thomson,
the present Deputy-Clerk-Register, to my
late father, Lord Woodhouselee; and to this

212                                    HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                      [Chap. VI.

expressions alluded, no doubt, to the
Steward and his friends, who, for some
time before this, must have been aware
of the practices of David against the
independence of the country, and his
secret intrigues with Edward.

The object of this daring plan,
which, there is reason to believe, had
been maturing during the whole course
of David’s captivity, was now avowed
in open parliament; and, if carried
into execution, it would have excluded
for ever from the throne of Scotland
the Steward, and all descendants of
Robert the Bruce. We are not, there­
fore, to wonder that the bare proposal
of such a scheme alarmed and agitated
the whole kingdom. It was instantly,
indeed, repelled and put down by the
strong hand of parliament, and appar­
ently given up by the king; but all
confidence between David and his
nobles was destroyed from this mo­
ment, and the effects of this mutual
suspicion became soon apparent.

The Steward, who had good reason
to suspect the sincerity of the king,
assembled his friends to deliberate
upon the course of proceedings which
it was deemed necessary to adopt; and
a very formidable league or conspiracy
was soon formed, which included
amongst its supporters a great majority
of the nobility. According to a com­
mon practice in that age, the lords
and barons who stood forward to sup­
port the succession entered into bonds
or agreements of mutual defence, which
were ratified by their oath and seal.¹
The Steward himself, with the Earl
of March, the Earl of Douglas, the
Steward’s two sons, John, Steward of
Kyle, Robert, Steward of Menteith, and
others of the most powerful nobility
in the country, openly proclaimed that
they would either compel the king to
renounce for ever his designs, and ad­
here to the succession, or would at
once banish him from the throne.² To
shew that these were not empty men­
aces, they instantly assembled their re­
tainers, and in great force traversed

unpublished record I am indebted for valu-
able assistance, in an attempt to explain one
of the darkest periods of Scottish history^.
1 Fordun a Hearne, p. 1057^{.          2} Ibid.

the country. The nobles who sup­
ported David were cast into prison,
their lands ravaged, their wealth, or
rather the wealth of their unfortunate
vassals and labourers, seized as legiti­
mate spoil; and the towns and trading
burghs, where those industrious mer­
cantile classes resided, who had no
wish to engage in political revolution,
were cruelly invaded and plundered.

The violence of these proceedings
gave to the cause of the king a tempo­
rary colour of justice; and of this his
personal courage, the only quality
which he inherited from his great
father, enabled him to take advantage.
He instantly issued a proclamation, in
which he commanded the rebels to lay
down their arms and return to their
allegiance as peaceable and faithful
subjects ; and summoned his barons
to arm themselves and their vassals in
defence of the insulted majesty of the
throne.³ To the body of the disin­
herited barons in England, whose
strength had, not long before, achieved
so rapid a revolution, in placing Baliol
on the throne, David confidently looked
for assistance. This party included
the Earl of Athole, the Lords Percy,
Beaumont, Talbot, and Ferrers, with
Godfrey de Ross, and a few other
powerful nobles. From them, and
from Edward himself, there is reason
to believe that the king received
prompt support both in men and
money; for it is certain that he was
able to collect a numerous army, and
to distribute amongst the soldiers far
larger sums for their pay and equip­
ment than the exhausted state of the
country and of his own coffers could
have afforded.⁴ The strong castles of
Roxburgh, Jedburgh, and Lochmaben,
with the Border districts around them,
comprehending Annandale, part of
Teviotdale, and the Merse,⁵ were in
the hands of the English, who com­
pelled their warlike population to
serve against the Steward; so that
David was enabled to advance instantly
against his enemies, with a force which

³ Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 367^.
4 Fordun a Hearne, p. 1058. Robertson’s
Parliamentary Records, p. 101^.
5 Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. vi. p. 426.

1363.]                                              DAVID II.                                                    213

it would have been folly in them to
attempt to resist. It was fortunate
that the two parties thus ranged in
deadly opposition against each other
were yet mutually afraid of pushing
matters into the extremities of a war.
The king knew that he was generally
unpopular, and that his attempt to
change the succession was regarded with
bitter hostility, not only by the nobles,
but by the whole body of the nation;
and he naturally dreaded to call these
feelings into more prominent action.¹
On the other hand, the Steward was
anxious, under such threatening cir­
cumstances, when his title to the crown
was proposed to be set aside, to con­
ciliate the affections of the people by
a pacific settlement of the differences
between himself and the sovereign.
These mutual feelings led to a treaty
which saved the country from a civil
war. On the approach of the royal
army, the Steward and the barons who
supported him agreed to lay down
their arms and submit to the clemency
of the king. The bonds and engage­
ments by which their party was
cemented were renounced and can­
celled in an assembly of the whole
nobility of Scotland, which was con­
voked on the 14th of May, at Inch-
murdach, a palace of the Bishop of St
Andrews,² where the Steward again
renewed his oath to David. He swore
upon the holy gospels that he would
henceforth continue faithful to the
king as his sovereign and liege lord ;
that to the utmost of his power he
would defend him from his enemies,
and support his servants and ministers
against every opposition; and this he
promised under the penalty of losing
all title to the throne of Scotland, of
forfeiting his lands and possessions for
ever, and of being accounted a perjured
and dishonoured knight.³

In return for this prompt submis­
sion, the Steward’s title in the succes­
sion was distinctly recognised, and the
earldom of Carrick conferred upon his
eldest son, afterwards Robert the

¹ Fordun a Hearne, p. 1058.

²  Macpherson’s Geographical Illustrations
of Scottish History, voce Inchmurdach.

³ Fordun a Goodal. vol. ii, p. 369.

Third. The Earls of March and Doug­
las, the sons of the Steward, and the
rest of the barons who had joined his
party, renewed their fealty at the same
time; and David had the satisfaction
to see a dangerous civil commotion
extinguished by his energetic prompti­
tude and decision. But this was only
a temporary ebullition of activity;
and, as if worn out by the exertion,
the king relapsed into his usual indo­
lence and love of pleasure.

It was at this critical time that he
met with Margaret Logy,⁴ a woman of
inferior birth but extraordinary beauty.
She was the daughter of one of the
lower barons, and related, in all pro­
bability, to that John de Logy who
had been executed for treason during
the latter part of the reign of Robert
Bruce. Of this lady David, ever the
slave of his passions, became deeply
enamoured; and, heedless of the con­
sequences, determined to possess him­
self of the object of his affection.
Overlooking, accordingly, in the ardour
of his pursuit, all difference of rank,
and despising the resentment of his
proud nobility, the king married this
fair unknown, and raised her to the
throne which had been filled by the
sister of Edward the Third. No step
could be more imprudent. The Stew­
ard, who, in the event of a son being
born of this alliance, would be ex­
cluded from the throne by a boy of
almost plebeian origin—the powerful
Earl of March, the haughty Douglas,
and the other grandees of the realm,
whose feudal power and territories
were almost kingly, felt themselves
aggrieved by this rash and unequal
alliance. Disgust and jealousy soon
arose between the queen and the no­
bility ; and such was the influence
which she at first possessed over the
fickle and impetuous monarch, that he
cast the Steward, with his son, Alex­
ander, lord of Badenoch, into prison;
and soon after, weary of his own king­
dom, and aware of his unpopularity,
obtained a safe conduct to travel into
England on a pilgrimage to the shrine

⁴ Fordun a Hearne, pp. 1059. 1010. Bower
(Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 370) says she
was the daughter of John Logy.

•214                                    HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.                        [Chap. VI.

of the Virgin at Walsingham.¹ His
fair queen, at the same time on the
like errand, accompanied by a train of
thirty knights, sought the shrine of St
Thomas of Canterbury; and Scotland,
deserted by her sovereign, and with
the nearest heir to the crown in a
dungeon, regarded with deep appre­
hension a state of things which, to the
most superficial eye, was full of danger.

It was not to be expected that a
prince of the talents and ambition of
Edward the Third should fail to take
advantage of these complicated diffi­
culties. A large part of the ransom
due by the King of Scotland was still
unpaid; and as the regular terms of
settlement had long been neglected,
the penalties incurred by such a fail­
ure increased the principal sum to an
overwhelming amount. The king’s
increasing unpopularity in Scotland
rendered it impossible for him to col­
lect the money which was required.
It was only by the kindness and suf­
ferance of Edward that he had not
been repeatedly remanded to his pri­
son in the Tower; and in a few years,
if this state of things continued, he
felt that he must lay down his royal
pomp, and, deserted by a people who
bore him neither love nor respect,
return to the condition of a captive.²
These reflections embittered his re­
pose : he determined to consent to
every sacrifice to get rid of a ransom
which made him a slave to Edward
and an abject suitor to his subjects;
and, under the influence of such feel­
ings, again engaged in a secret treaty
with England against the independ­
ence of his country.³

It will be recollected that the estates
of Scotland had already despatched the
Bishops of St Andrews and Brechin,
along with Sir Robert Erskine, the
Chamberlain of Scotland, to negotiate
a peace between the two countries ;⁴

¹ Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 380. This
author asserts that the Steward and his three
sons were kept in separate prisons. From
the Chamberlain’s Accounts, pp. 498, 524, the
fact seems to be as stated in the text.

² Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. vi. p. 48.

³ Ibid. p. 426.

⁴ Robertson’s Parliamentary Records, p.
100. Rotuli Scotiæ, 38 Ed. III. m. 6. 18th
July, vol. i. p. 884.

and to the result of this public em­
bassy we shall soon advert. In the
meantime, whilst these deliberations
proceeded, a secret conference was
held between the privy councillors of
David and Edward, and in presence of
both monarchs, at Westminster, on
the 26th of November 1363. The
names of the privy councillors are stu­
diously concealed ; but the real object
of this meeting was an attempt, upon
the part of Edward, to renew his de­
signs for the entire subjugation of
Scotland; but this was done with a
caution strongly indicating his sense
of the flame which the bare suspicion
of such a renewal would kindle in that
country. It was premised, in the first
passage of the record of this conference,
that everything now done was to be
regarded solely in the light of an ex­
periment ; and that the various stipu­
lations and conditions which it con­
tained were not to be considered as
finally agreed to either by one party
or the other, but simply as attempts
to bring about, under the blessing of
God, a lasting peace between the two
nations. The King of Scotland, who,
along with Edward, was personally pre­
sent whilst the various articles were
made the subject of debate, consented
that, in the event of his death without
heirs-male of his body, the King of Eng­
land and his heirs should succeed to the
throne of Scotland; upon which event
the town and castle of Berwick, with
the castles of Roxburgh, Jedburgh, and
Lochmaben, and all the lands occupied
by Robert the First at the time of his
death, and now in the hands of the
King of England, were to be delivered
up to Scotland; whilst the arrears of
the ransom, as well as all penalties
and obligations incurred by its non-
payment, were to be cancelled for ever.
These were the two principal arti­
cles in the conference; but a variety
of inferior stipulations were added, the
object of which was evidently to in­
duce the people of Scotland to sacrifice
the independent throne of their coun­
try, by the solemn manner in which
Edward agreed to preserve unimpaired
its ancient constitution, and the laws
and usages of the kingdom. It was

1363-4.]                                           DAVID II.                                                    215

agreed that the name and title of the
kingdom of Scotland should be pre­
served distinct and entire, and should
never be sunk in a union with Eng­
land; whilst, at the same time, it was
to remain, not in name only, but in
reality, entire, without injury by gift,
alienation, or division to any mortal,
such as it was in the days of Robert
the First. The kings of England were
henceforth to be crowned kings of
Scotland at Scone, upon the regal and
sacred stone-seat, which was to be im­
mediately conveyed thither from Eng­
land; and the ceremony was to be
performed by those Scottish prelates
who were deputed by the Church of
Rome to that office. All parliaments
regarding Scottish affairs were to be
held within that kingdom; and a
solemn oath was to be taken by the
English monarch that, as king of
Scotland, he would preserve inviolate
the rights and immunities of the holy
Scottish Church, and consent that she
should be subject neither to bishop
nor archbishop, but solely to the Pope.
In addition to all this, Edward engaged
faithfully that the subjects of Scotland
should never be called upon to answer
to any suit, except within the courts
of their own kingdom, and according
to their own laws. He promised that
no ecclesiastical benefices or dignities,
and no civil or military office, such as
that of chancellor, chamberlain, jus­
tice, sheriff, provost, bailie, governor
of town or castle, or other officer,
should be conferred on any, except
the true subjects of the kingdom of
Scotland; and that, in affairs touching
the weal of that realm, he would select
his councillors from the peers and lords
of Scotland alone. He engaged, also,
to maintain the prelates, earls, barons,
and free tenants of that country, in
their franchises and seignories, in their
estates, rents, possessions, and offices,
according to the terms of their charter;
and pledged his royal word to make no
revocation of any of the grants made
or confirmed by Robert Bruce, or his
son the present king.¹

With regard to an important branch
in the national prosperity—the com^-
1 Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. vi. p. 427.

merce of Scotland—it was declared
that the merchants of that realm
should fully and freely enjoy their
own privileges, without being com­
pelled to repair, for the sale of their
commodities, to Calais, or any other
staple, except at their own option; and
that they should pay half a mark to
the great custom upon each sack of
wool which they exported. The duty
on the exportation of English wool was
higher; and this article formed one of
those many devices by which Edward,
in his present projects, artfully endea­
voured to secure the good­will of the
rich burghers of Scotland,—a class of
men now rising into influence and con­
sideration. Nor were other baits for
popularity neglected by those who
framed this insidious treaty. To the
powerful Earl of Douglas it was held
out that he should be restored to the
estates in England which had been
possessed by his father and his uncle ;
—to the disinherited lords, the Earl
of Athole, the Barons Percy, Beau­
mont, and Ferrers, with the heirs of
Talbot, and all who claimed lands in
Scotland, either by the gift of David
when a prisoner, or on any other
ground, there was promised a full re­
storation to their estates, without
further trouble or challenge, The
clergy were attempted to be propi­
tiated by an article which promised
to every religious house or abbey the
restoration of the lands which had
been torn from them during the ex­
cesses and calamities of war; and to
the numerous and powerful body of
vassals, or military tenants, who formed
the strength of the nation, it was dis­
tinctly announced that, under the
change which was to give them a new
king, they were only to be bound by the
ancient and acknowledged laws of mili­
tary service, which compelled them to
serve under the banner of their lord
for forty days at their own expense;
but that afterwards, any further con­
tinuance with the host should entitle
them to receive pay according to their
state and quality. A general indem­
nity was offered to all Scott