|
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
Lettee A, page 41.
Site of the Battle of Harlaw.
In the manuscript geographical de scription of Scotland, collected by Mac farlane, and preserved in the Advocates’ Library, vol. i. p. 7, there is the follow ing minute description of the site of this battle: — “ Through this parish (the Chapel of Garioch, called formerly, Ca pella Beate Mariæ Virginie de Garryoch, Chart. Aberdon., p. 31) runs the king’s highway from Aberdeen to Inverness, and from Aberdeen to the high country. A large mile to the east of the church lies the field of an ancient battle, called the battle of Harlaw, from a country town of that name hard by. This town, and the field of battle, which lies along the king’s highway upon a moor, ex tending a short mile from SE. to NW., stands on the north-east side of the water of Ury, and a small distance therefrom. To the west of the field of battle, about half a mile, is a farmer’s house, called Legget’s Den, hard by, in which is a tomb, built in the form of a malt steep, of four large stones, covered with a broad stone above, where, as the country people generally report, Donald of the Isles lies buried, being slain in the battle, and therefore they call it commonly Donald’s tomb.” So far the MS. It is certain, however, that the Lord of the Isles was not slain. This may probably be the tomb of the chief of Maclean, or of Macintosh, both of whom fell in the battle. In the genea logical collections of the same industri- ous antiquary, (MS. Advocates’ Library, Jac. V. 4, 16, vol. i. p. 180,) we find a manuscript account of the family of Maclean, which informs us that kauch
lan Lubanich had, by M’Donald’s daugh ter, a son, called Eachin Rusidh ni Cath, or Hector Eufus Bellicosus. He com manded as lieutenant-general under the Earl of Ross at the battle of Harlaw in 1411, where he and Irvine of Drum, seeking out one another by their armo rial bearings on their shields, met and killed each other. He was married to a daughter of the Earl of Douglas.
Sir Walter Ogilvy, on 28th January 1426, founded a chaplainry in the parish church of St Mary of Uchterhouse, in which perpetual prayers were to be of fered up for the salvation of King James and his Queen Johanna; and for the souls of all who died in the battle of Harlaw. Diplom. Regior. Indices, vol. i. p. 97.
Lettee B, page 42.
The Retour of Andrew de Tullidiff, mentioned in the text, will be found in the MS. Cartulary of Aberdeen, pre served in the Advocates’ Library, folio 121. It is as follows :—
“ Inquisitio super tercia parte Ledintusche et Rothmais.
Hæc inquisitio facta fuit apud rane coram Willmo de Cadyhow Ballivo Reverendi in Christo patris, et Dni Gilberti Dei gracia Episcopi Aberdonen: dic martis, nono die mensis Maii anno 1413, per probos et fideles homines sub scriptos, viz., Robertum de Buthergask, Johannem Rous, Johannem Bisete, Ro bertum Malisei, Hugonem de Kyncavil, Duncanum de Curquhruny, Johannem Morison, Johm Yhung, Adam Johannis, Johannem Thomson, Johannem de Lo vask, Johannem Duncanson, Walterum Ranyson, et Johannem Thomson de
378 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
Petblayne. Qui magno sacramento ju rati dicunt, quod quondam Willmus de Tulidef latoris præsencium obiit vestitus et saysitus ut de feodo ad pacem et fidem Dni nostri regis, de tercia parte terrarum de Ledyntusche, et de Roth mais cum pertinenciis jacentium in schyra de Rane infra Yicecom. de Aber den. Et quod dictus Andreas est leg gitimus et propinquior heres ejusdem quondam Willmi patris sui de dicta tercia parte dictarum terrarum cum per tinenciis, et licet minoris ætatis existit tamen secundum quoddam statutum consilii generalis ex priviligio concesso hæredibus occisorum in bello de Hare law, pro defensione patriæ, est hac vice leggittime ætatis, et quod dicta tercia dictarum terrarum cum pertinenciis nunc valet per annum tres libras, et viginti denarios, et valuit tempore pacis quatuor libras,” &c, &c. The remain der of the deed is uninteresting.
Letter C, page 47. Battles of Baugè and Verneuil.
The exploits of the Scottish forces in France do not properly belong to the History of Scotland, and any reader who wishes for authentic information upon the subject will find it in Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. pp. 461, 463, and Monstrelet’s Chronicle, by Johnes, vols. v. and vi. There were three import ant battles in which the Scots auxiliaries were engaged. First, that of Baugè, in Anjou, fought on the 22d March 1421, in which they gained a signal victory over the Duke of Clarence, who was slain, along wifch the “flower of his chivalry and esquiredom,” to use the words of Monstrelet. Secondly, that of Crevant, which was disastrous to the Scots. And lastly, the great battle of Yerneuil, fought in 1424, in which John, duke of Bedford, commanded the English, and completely defeated the united army of the French and Scots.
There is a singular coincidence be tween the battle of Baugè and the battle of Stirling, in which Wallace defeated Surrey and Cressingham. The two armies, one commanded by the Duke of Clarence, and the other by the Earl of Buchan, were separated from each other by a rapid river, over which was thrown a narrow bridge. Buchan had despatched a party, under Sir Robert Stewart of Darnley, and the Sieur de Fontaine, to reconnoitre, and they coming suddenly upon the English, were driven back in
time to warn the Scottish general of the approach of Clarence. Fortunately, he had a short interval allowed him to draw up his army, whilst Sir Robert Stewart of Railston, and Sir Hugh Ken nedy, with a small advanced body, de fended the passage of the bridge, over which the Duke of Clarence, with his best officers, were eagerly forcing their way, having left the bulk of the English army to follow as they best could. The consequences were almost precisely the same as those which took place at Stir ling. Clarence, distinguished by his coronet of jewels over his helmet, and splendid armour, was first fiercely at tacked by John Carmichael, who shiver ed his lance on him; then wounded in the face by Sir William de Swynton; and lastly, felled to the earth and slain by the mace of the Earl of Buchan.1 His bravest knights and men-at-arms f ell along with him ; and the rest of the army, enraged at the disaster, and crowding over the bridge to avenge it, being thrown into complete disorder, as they arrived in detail, were slain or taken by the Scots. Monstrelet2 affirms that two or three thousand English were slain. Bower limits the number who fell to sixteen hundred and seventeen, and asserts that the Scots only lost twelve, and the French two men.3 It is well known that for this service Buchan was rewarded with the baton of Constable of France. After the battle, Sir Robert Stewart of Darnley bought Clarence’s jewelled coronet from a Scot tish soldier for 1000 angels.4
Having been thus successful at Baugè, the conduct of the Scots at Crevant, considering the circumstances under which the battle was fought, is inexpli- cable. On consulting Monstrelet,5 it will be found that the river Yonne separated the two armies, over which there was a bridge as at Baugè. The Scots occupied a hill near the river, with the town of Crevant, to which they had laid siege, in their rear. Over this bridge they suffered the whole English army to defile, to arrange their squares,
1 Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 461. This John, or, as he is called by Douglas, Sir John Carmichael, was ancestor to the noble family of Hyndford, now extinct. The family crest is still a shivered spear. Douglas, vol. i. p. 752.
2 Monstrelet, by Johnes, vol. v. p. 263.
3 Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 461.
4 Grough’s Sepulchral Monuments, vol. ii, p. 58.
5 Vol. vi. p. 48.
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 379
and to advance in firm order against them, when they might have pre-occu- pied the tête-du-pont, and attacked the enemy whilst they were in the act of passing the river. Either the circum stances of the battle have come down to us in a garbled and imperfect state, or it is the fate of the Scots to shut their eyes to the simplest lessons in military tactics,—lessons, too, which, it may be added, have often been written against them with sharp pens and bloody ink. The consequences at Crevant were fatal. They were attacked in the front by the Earls ôf Salisbury and Suffolk, and in the rear by a sortie from the town of Crevant, and completely defeated.1
The battle of Verneuil was still more disastrous, and so decisive, that it ap pears to have completely cooled all future desires upon the part of the Scots to send auxiliaries to France. The account given by Bower2 is, at first sight, confused and contradictory; but if the reader will compare it with Monstrelet, vol. vi. pp. 90, 94, it be comes clearer. It seems to have been lost by the Scots, in consequence of the unfortunate dissension between them and their allies the French, which pre vented one parfc of the army from co operating with the other; whilst on the side of the English, the steadiness of the archers, each of whom had a sharp double-pointed stake planted beforehim, defeatedthe charge of the Lombard cross- bowmen, although they were adrnirably armed and mounted.3
Letter D, page 49.
In this treaty for the relief of James the First, which is to be found in Ry mer’s Fœdera, vol. x. p. 307, the list which contains the names of the host ages is not a little curious, as there is added to the name of each baron a statement of his yearly income, pre senting us with an interesting picture of the comparative wealth of the mem bers of the Scottish aristocracy in 1423. The list is as f ollows :—
Thomas Comes Moraviæ, reddituatus et possessionatus ad M. marc.
Alexander Comes Crauffurdiæ, vel filius ejus et hæredes ad M. marc.
Willielmus Comes Angusiæ, ad vi C marc.
1 Monstrelet, vol. vi. pp. 48, 49.
2 Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 463.
3 Ibid.
Maletius Comes de Stratherne, ad v C marc.
Georgius Comes Marchiarum, vel filius ejus primogenitus acl viii C marc.
David filius primogenitus Comitis Atholiæ, vel filius ejus et hæres ad xii C marc.
Willielmuš Constabularius Scotiæ, vel filius et hæres ad viii. C marc.
Dominus Bobertus de Erskyn, ad M. marc.
Bobertus Marescallus Scotiæ, vel filius ejus et hæres ad viii C marc.
Walterus Dominus de Dr.ybtoun (Drylton) vel filius ejus et hæres ad viii C marc.
Johannes Dominus de Cetoun, miles vel filius ejus et hæres ad vi C marc.
Johannis de Montgomery, miles de Ardrossane, vel filius ejus et hæres ad vii C marc.
Alexander Dominus de Gordonne, ad iv C marc.
Malcolmus Dominus de Bygare, ad vi C marc.
Thomas Dominus de Yestyr, ad vi C marc.
Johannis Kennady de Carryk, ad v C marc.
Thomas Boyde de Kylmernok, vel filius ejus et hæres ad v C marc.
Patricius de Dounbarre Dominus de Canmok, vel filius ejus et hæres ad v C marc.
Jacobus Dominus de Dalketh, vel filius ejus primogenitus ad xv C marc.
Duncanus Dominus de Argill, ad xv C marc.4
Johannes Lyon de Glammis, ad vi C marc.
Letter E, page 60.
It is not easy to account for the high character of Albany, which is given both by Winton and by Bower. It is certain, because it is proved by his actions, which are established upon authentic evidence, that he was a crafty and sel fish usurper, whose hands were stained wifch the blood of the heir to the crown —yet he is spoken of by both these writers, not only without severity, but with enthusiastic praise. Indeed, Win fcon’s character of him might serve for the beau ideal of a perfect king. Vol. ii. p. 418.
Bower, though shorter, is equally complimentary, and throws in some fcouches which give individuality to the
4 It may be conjectured, that there is some error both here and in the preceding name.
380 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
picture. On one occasion, in the midst of the tumult of war, and the havoc of a Border raid, we find the governor re cognised by his soldiers as a collector of the relics of earlier ages, (Fordun a Goodal, vol. ii. p. 409,) and at another time a still finer picture is presented of Albany sitting on the ramparts of the castle of Edinburgh, and discoursing to his courtiers, in a clear moonlight night, on the system of the universe, and the causes of eclipses. I am sorry I have neglected to mark the page where this occurs, and cannot find it at the moment.
Letter F, page 69.
A curious instrument, which throws some light on the state of the Highlands in 1420, and gives an example of the mixture of Celtic and Norman names, is to be found in a MS. in the Adv. Lib., Jac. V. 4. 22, entitled Diploma- tum Collectio. It is as follows :—
“ John Touch, be the grace of God Bishop of Rosse; Dame Mary of ye Ile, Lady of the Yles and of Kosse ; Hu cheon Fraser, Lord of the Lovat; John Macloyde, Lerde of Glenelg; Angus Guthrason of the Ylis ; Schyr William Farquhar, Dean of Rosse; Walter of Douglas, Scheraff of Elgin; Walter of Innes, Lord of that ilke ; John Syncler, Lord of Deskford; John ye Ross, Lord of Kilravache ; John M’Ean of Arna murchan, with mony othyr,—Til al and syndry to the knawledge of the quhilkis thir present lettres sal to cum, gretyng in God ay listand. Syn it is needeful and meritabil to ber lele witness to suthfastness to your Universitie, we mak knawyn throche thir present lettres, that on Friday the sextent day of the moneth of August, ye yher of our Lord a thousand four hundreth and twenty yher, into the kyrke yharde of the Chanonry of Bossmarkyng, compeirit William the Grahame, the sone and the hayr umquhil of Henry the Grame. In presence of us, befor a nobil Lorde and a mychty, Thomas Earl of Moreff, his ovyr lord of his lands of the Barony of Kerdale, resignande of his awin free will, purly and symply, be fast and bas ton, intill the hands of the sayde Lorde the Erle,” &c. An entail of the lands follows, which is uninteresting.
At page 263 of the same volume, we find a charter granted by David II., in the 30th year of his reign, entitled, “ Carta remissionis Thomæ Man et multis aliis, act:onis et sectæ regiæ tum
pro homicidiis, combustionibus, furtis, rapinis,” &c,, in which the preponder- ance of Celtic names is very striking. The names are as follows :—“ Thomas Man, Bridan filii Fergusi, Martino More, Maldoveny Beg Maldowny- Macmarti- can, Cristino filio Duncani, Bridano Breath, Alexro Macronlet Adæ Molen dinario, Martini M’Coly, Fergusio Cleri co Donymore, Michaeli Merlsway, Bri dano M’Dor, Maldowny M’Robi, Colano M’Gilbride, Maldowny Macenewerker et Adæ Fovetour latoribus presencium, &c. Apud Perth, primo die Novemb regni xxx. quinto.
Letter G, page 92.
I am indebted for the communication of the following charter to the Bev. Mr Macgregor Stirling, a gentleman inti mately acquainted with the recondite sources of Scottish History:—
Apud Edinburgh, Aug. 15, 1451, a. r. 15.
Rex [Jacobus II.] confirmavit Bo berto Duncansoun de Strowane, et heredibus suis, terras de Strowane,— terras dimidicatis de Rannach,—terras de Glennerach,—terras de duobus Bo haspikis,—terras de Grannecht, cum lacu et insula lacus ejusdem,—terras de Carric,—terras de Innercadoune,—de Farnay,—de Disert, Faskel, de Kylkeve, —de Balnegarde, — et Balnefarc, — et terras de Glengary, cum foresta ejus dem, in comitatu Atholie, vic. de Perth, quas dictus Robertus, in eastrum [sic] Regium de Blar in Atholia personaliter resignavit, et quas rex in unam inte gram Baroniam de Strowane univit efc incorporavit (pro zelo, fauore, amore, quas rex gessit erga dictum Robertum pro captione nequissimi proditoris quon dam Roberti de Grahame, et pro ipsius Roberti Duncansoune gratuitis diligen- ciis et laboribus, circa captionem ejus dem sevissimi proditoris, diligentissime et cordialissime factis.)—Mag. Sig. iv. 227.
Letter H, page 132. Boece and the Story of the Bull's Head.
The story of the bull’s head being presented to the Douglases at the ban quet, as a signal for their death, ap pears, as far as I have discovered, for the first time, in Hector Boece, p. 363 : —" Gubernator, assentiente Cancellario, . . . amotis epulis, taurinum caput ap poni jubet. Id enim est apud nostrates
KÖTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 381
supplicii capitalis symbolum.“ Although this extraordinary circumstance is not found in the Auchinleck Chronicle, an almost contemporary authority, yet, had I found evidence of the truth of Boece’s assertion, that the production of a bull’s head was amongst our countrymen a well-known signal for the infliction of a capital punishment, I should have hesi tated before rejecting the appearance of this horrid emblem immediately pre vious to the seizure of the Douglases. The truth is, however, that the produc tion of such a dish as a bull’s head, or, according to the version of the tale given by a great writer,1 a black bull’s head, as an emblem of death, is not to be found in any former period of our history, or in any Celtic tradition of which I am aware. For this last asser tion, the non-existence of any Celtic or Highland tradition of date prior to Boece’s history, where this emblem is said to have been used, I rest not on my own judgment, for I regret much I am little read in Gaelic antiquities, but on the information of my friends, Mr Gregory, secretary to the Society of Antiquaries, and the Reverend Mr Macgregor Stirling, who are, perhaps, amongst the ablest of our Celtic anti quaries.2 After the time of Boece, whose work was extremely popular in Scotland, it is by no means improbable that the tale of the bull’s head should have been transplanted into Highland traditions. Accordingly I understand, from Mr Stirling, that Sir Duncan Campbell, the seventh laird of Glen urcha, on an occasion somewhat similar to the murder of the Douglases, is said to have produced a bull’s head at table, which caused his victims to start from
1 Sir Walter Scott’s History of Scotland, vol. i. p. 281.
2 Mr Gregory, I am happy to see, is about to publish "A History of the Western High lands and the Hebrides during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.” Hitherto, all that we know of the history of this most in teresting portion of the kingdom, is perplex- ing, vague, and traditionary. But, from the mass of authentic materials which the indus try of the secretary of the antiquaries has collected, a valuable work may at last be ex pected.
The able work alluded to in the above note appeared in 1836. Its author, in whom I lost a friend always ready to communicate infor mation out of his abundant stores, died in the course of the same year. He was the son of the celebrated Dr Gregory of Edinburgh—the direct descendant of a family long distin guished for hereditary talent of the highest kind.
the board and escape. Sir Duncan lived in the interval between 1560 and 1631.
Letter I, page 133.
George, Earl of Angus.
It is to be regretted that Godscroft, in his " History of the House of Douglas and Angus,” vol. i. p. 287, instead of his own interminable remarks and digres sions, had not given us the whole of the ancient ballad in which some indig nant minstrel expressed his abhorrence of the deed. One stanza only is pre served :—
“ Edinburgh Castle, Town and Tower, God grant thou sink for sin, And that even for the black dinner Earl Douglas gat therein.”
The late Lord Hailes, in his Remarks on the History of Scotland, chap. vii., satis factorily demonstrated “that Archi bald, third earl of Douglas, could not, according to the common opinion, have been a brother of James, second earl of Douglas, slain at Otterburn, andthat he did not succeed to the earldom in right of blood. “ He added— ’’ By what means, or under what pretext, George, earl of Angus, the undoubted younger brother of Earl James, was excluded from the succession, it is impossible at this dis tance of time to determine. During the course of almost a century the de scendants of Archibald, third earl of Douglas, continued too powerful for the peace of the crown, or for their own safety. At length, in 1488, the male line ended by the death of James, ninth earl of Douglas, and the honours of Douglas returned into the right channel of Angus.” A learned and, as it ap pears, conclusive solution of this diffi culty, appeared in a paper in the Scots Magazine for September 1814, where it is shewn that George, earl of Angus, con sidered by Lord Hailes, by Douglas, and all our genealogical writers, as the legi timate brother of James, earl of Douglas, was an illegitimate son of William, earl of Douglas, and as such had no title to succeed to the earldom. It is to be wished that the same acute antiquary, who has successfully solved this and many other genealogical difficulties, would bring his researches to bear upon some of those obscurer points in the his tory of the country, which are intimately connected with genealogy, and would derive from it important illustration. The hypothesis, for instance, upon
882 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
which I have ventured as to the causes which may have led to the trial and execution of “william, sixth earl of Douglas, and his brother David, in 1440, is an example of one of the sub jects upon which an intimate knowledge of genealogy might enable its possessor to do much for history.
Lettee K, page 133. Execution of the Douglases.
The Douglases, along with their un fortunate friend and adherent Malcolm Fleming, were beheaded, according to Gray’s MS., “ in vigilio Sancte Katerine Virginis—viz, xxiiii. die mensis Novem bris anno Domini Im iiiic XL. “ The date in the Extracta ex Yeteribus Chronicis Scotiæ agrees with this ; but it appears, from the following curious instrument, that Malcolm Fleming was executed, not at the same time as the Douglases, but on the fourth day thereafter:—In Dei nomine Amen. Per hoc presens publicum instrumentum cunctis pateat evidenter quod anno ab incarnacione Do mini, secundum computacionem Regni Scocie Mmo ccccmo xlmo mensis Januarii die vii. Indictione quarta Pontificatus Sanctissime in Xpo patris et Domini nostri, Domini Eugenii divina provi dentia Papæ quarti Anno xmo. In mei Notarii publici et testium subscripto- rum presencia personaliter constitut. Nobiles viri Walterus de Buchqwhanane et Thomas de Murhede scutiferi, ac pro curatores nobilis viri Roberti Flemyng scutiferi, filii et heredis Malcolmi Fle myng quondam Domini de Bigar, hab entes ad infrascripta potestaten et suffi ciens mandatum, ut meipso notario constabat per legitima documenta, acce dentes ad Crucem fori Burgi de Lithgw, coram Willmo de Howstoun deputato Vicecomitis ejusdem, procuratorio no mine dicti Roberti, falsaverunt quoddam judicium datum seu prelatum super Malcolmum Flemyng, patrem dicti Roberti, super montem Castri de Edyn burch, Secundum modum et formam, et propter racionem inferius scriptum, quarum tenor sequitur in wulgar.
We, Waltyr of Buchqwanane and Thomas of Murhede, speciale procura- tors and actournais, conjunctlyand seve rally, to Robert Flemying, son and ayr to Malcolm Flemying, sumtyme Lord of Bigar, sayis to thee, John of Blayr Dempstar, that the Doyme gyfiin out of thy mouth on Malcolm Flemying in a said Courte haldyn befor our soverane
Lorcl ye King on the Castle-hill of Edyn burch, on Mononday the acht and twenty day of the moneth of November the yere of our Lord Mmo ccccmo and fourty zeris sayande “ that he had forfat land, lyff. and gud as chete to the King, and tha yow gave for doyme ;" that doyme for said giffyn out of thy mouth is evyl, fals, and rotten in itself ; and here We, the foresaid Walter and Thomas, procura- tors to the said Robert for hym, and in his name, fals it, adnull it, and again cancel it in thy hand William of How ston Deput to the Sherray of Lithgow, and tharto a borch in thy hand; and for this cause the Courte was unlach full, the doyme unlachfull, unorderly gyffn, and agane our statut; f or had he been a common thef takyn redhand and haldyn twa Sonys, he sulde haff had his law dayis he askande them, as he dic before our Soverane Lord the King, anc be this resoune the doyme is evyll giffyn and weil agane said; and her we, the foresaid Walter and Thomas, procura- tors to the foresaid Robert, protests for ma resounys to be giffyn up be the said Robert, or be his procurators qwhar he acht, in lawfull tyme.
Dictum judicium sic ut premittitur falsatum et adnullatum dicti procurato- ris, nomine dicti Roberti, invenerunt plegium ad prosequendum dictas adnul laciones et falsaciones predicti judicii, in manu Roberti Nicholson serjandi domini nostri regis qui dictum plegium recepit. Postmodo vero dicti procura- tores offerebant falsacionem adnullacio- nem dicte judicii sub sigillo præfati Roberti Flemyng dicto Willelmo de Howstoun deputato dicti vicecomitis, qui recipere recusavit, dicendo quod recepcio Ejusdem pertinebat ad Justi ciarium, et non ad vicecomitum, et tunc ipsi procuratores continuo pubhce pro testati sunt, quod dicta recusacio nul lum prejudicium dicto Roberto Flemyng generaret in futurum. Super quibus omnibus et singulis præfati Walterus et Thomas procuratorio nomine ut supra a me notario publico infrascript sibi äeri pecierunt publicum instrumentum, seu publica instrumenta:
Acta fuerunt haec apud crucem ville de Lithgw hora qû decima ante meridiem Anno, die, mense, Indiccione et Ponti ficatu quibus supra, presentibus ibidem providis viris, Willelmo de Houston Deputato ut supra, Domino Willmo llane, Domino Johanne person, Pres byteris, Jacobo Forrest et Jacobo Fowlys publico notario cum multis aliis testi
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 383
bus, ad premissa vocatis specialiter et rogatis.
This instrument, which exhibits in a striking light the formal solemnity of feudal mannery, is printed from a copy communicated to me by my friend Thomas Thomson, Esq., Depute-clerk Register, and taken from the original in the archives of the Earldom of Wig town, preserved in the charter-chest of Admiral Fleming at Cumbernauld.
Letter L, page 141. Early Connexion between Scotland and the Hanse Towns.
The intercourse of Scotland with the Hanse towns and the commercial states of Flanders took place, as has been shewn in another part of this history, at a very early period. When that portion of the work was written, I was not aware of the existence of an interesting document on the subject of early Scot tish commerce, which had been included by Sartorius in his work on the origin of the league of the Hanse towns ; for the publication of which, after the death of the author, the world is in debted to the learned Dr Lappenberg of Hamburg; and to which my atten tion was first directed by Mr J. D. Carrick’s Life of Sir William Wallace, published in Constable’s Miscellany. The document is a letter from Wallace and Sir Andrew Moray, dated at Bad sington in Scotland, evidently a mis reading for Haddington, on the 11th of October 1297. It is as follows :—
“Andreas de Morauia et Willelmus Wallensis, duces exercitus regni Scotie et communitas eiusdem Regni, prouidis viris et discretis ac amicis dilectis, maioribus et communibus de Lubek et de Hamburg salutem et sincere dilec tionis semper incrementum. Nobis per fide dignos mercatores dicti regni Scotie est intimatum, quod vos vestri gratia, in omnibus causis et negociis, nos et ipsos mercatores tangentibus consulen- tes, auxiliantes et favorabiles estis, licet, nostra non precesserenfc merita, et ideo magis vobistenemur ad grates cum digna remuneracione, ad que vobis volumus obligari; rogantes vos, quatinus pre conizari facere velitis inter mercatores vestros, quod securum accessum ad omnes portus regni Scotie possint ha bere cum mercandiis suis, quia regnum Scotie, Deo regraciato, ab Anglorum potestate bello est recuperatum. Va lete. Datum apud Badsingtonam in
Scotia, undecimo die Octobris, Anno gracie, millesimo ducentesimo nonagesi- mo septimo. Rogamus vos insuper vt negocia Johannis Burnet, et Johannis Frere, mercatorum nostrorum promoueri dignemini, prout nos negocia mercato- rum vestrorum promovere velitis. Va lete dat: ut prius.”
The original letter, of which a tran script was communicated by Dr Lappen berg, the editor of Sartorius’s work, to Mr Carrick, through Mr Repp, one of the assistant librarians of the Faculty of Advocates, is still preserved among the archives of the Hanseatic city of Lubeck. “ It appears,” says Dr L. “ to be the oldest document existing relative to the intercourse of Hamburg and Lubeck, or other Hanseatic cities, with Scotland.” It is much to be wished that a correct fac-simile of it should be pro cured. The battle of Stirling, in which Wallace defeated Cressingham, was fought on the 3d of September 1297. A great dearth and famine then raged in Scotland, and Wallace led his army into England.1 The letter to the cities of Lubeck and Hamburg was evidently written on the march into Northumber- land, which corroborates the reading of Haddington, a town lying directly in the route of the army, for Badsington, a name unknown to Scottish topography. In Langtoft’s Chronicle, a high author ity, we meet with a corroboration of Wallace’s mission to Flanders, immedi ately after the battle of Stirling :—
After this bataile, the Scottis sent over the se A boye of ther rascaile, quaynt and dèguise2 To Flandres bad him fare, through burgh and cite,
Of Edward where he ware to bryng them cer teynte.3
It is probable thafc this boy or page, who was sent to spy out the motions of Edward, was the bearer of the letter to the cities of Lubeck and Hamburg. We possess now four original deeds granted by Wallace : The above letter to Lubeck and Hamburg—the protec tion to the monks of Hexham, dated the 8th of November 1297—the passport to the same monks—and the famous grant, published by Anderson in his Diplomata, plate xliv., to Alexander Skirmishur, of the office of Constable of the castle of Dundee, for his faithful service, in bearing the royal standard in the army of Scotland. It is curious to mark the progressive style used by Wallace in
1 Eordun a Goodal, vol. ii. pp. 171, 172.
2 Disguised. 3 Langtoft, vol. ii. p. 298.
384 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
these deeds. In the first, the letter to the Hanse Towns, dated 11th October 1297, it is simply commander of the army of Scotland, “ Dux exercitus regni Scotiæ.” In the second, dated 7th Nov ember 1297, he is “ Leader of the army of Scotland, in the name of an illustrious prince, Lord John, by the grace of God, King of Scotland, by the consent of the community of the same kingdom,”1 In the third, which is dated at Torphichen, the 29th March 1298, we no longer find Andrew Moray associated in the com mand of the army with Wallace ; his style is simply William Wallace, Guar dian of the Kingdom of Scotland, and leader of the armies of the same, in the name of an excellent prince, Lord John, by the grace of God, the illustrious King of Scotland.
With the exception of this valuable document, I am not aware that there exist any additional letters or charters relative to the early commerce between Scotland and the Hanse towns, till we arrive at the first quarter of the fifteenth century, during which repeated com plaints were made on the part of the associated cities, that the Scots had plundered their merchantmen. In con sequence of this they resorted to re prisals ; the members of the league were prohibited from all intercourse with the Scots ; and every possible method was adopted to persecute and oppress the merchants of this country, wherever the Hanseatic factories were established; for example, in Norway, and in Flan ders, to which the Scots resorted. It is ordered by a Hanse statute of the year 1412, that no member of the league should purchase of Scotsmen, either at Bruges or any other place, cloth either dressed or undressed, or manufactured from Scottish wool; whilst the mer chants of the Hanse communities who did not belong to the league, were forbid to sell such wares in the markets of the leagued towns. It would appear that these quarrels continued for upwards of ten years, as in 1418 the Compter at Bruges was enjoined, under pain of confiscation, to renounce commercial intercourse with the Scots, till all dif ferences were adjusted ; from which we may fairly conclude, that the Bruges market was the principal emporium of trade on both sides. A few years after this, in 1426, the prohibition of all trade with the Scots was renewed, un
1 Knighton, p. 2521. Apud Twysden x. Scriptores, vol. ii,
less they consented to an indemnification for damages already sustained. At a still later period, in 1445, it appears that the Bremeners had captured, amongst other vessels, a ship coming from Edinburgh, laden with a cargo of cloth and leather ; and in the course of the same year, a commission was issued by James the Second, to certain Scottish delegates, empowering them to enter into negotiations with the towns of Bremen, Lubeck, Hamburg,. Wismar, Stralsund and Kostock, regarding the termination of all such disputes. The original commission, which has never been printed in any English work, is preserved in the archives of the city of Bremen, and is to be found m a rare German pamphlet, or Thesis, which was discovered and communicated by Sir William Hamilton to Mr Thomson, to whom I am indebted for the use of it. It is as follows :—
" Jacobus Dei gratia Bex Scotorum. Universis ad quorum noticiam presentes literæ pervenerint, salutem. Sciatis quod nos ex matura deliberatione nostri parliamenti, de fide et legalitate delec torum, et fidelium nostrorum, Thome de Preston, scutiferi et familiaris nostri Johannis Jeffrason et Stephani Huntare, cumburgensium burgi nostri de Edin burgh, ac Andree Ireland, burgensis burgi nostri de Perth, plurimum confi dentes, ipsos, Thomam, Johannem, Ste phanum, ac Andream, nostros commis sarios, deputatos, et nuncios speciales fecimus, constituimus, et ordinavimus. Danteš et concedentes eisdem Thome, Johanni, Stephano, et Andree, et eorum, duobus, conjunctim, nostram plenariam potestatem et mandatum speciale ad comparendum coram nobilibus et cir cumspecte prudentie viris burgimastris, Scabinis et consulibus civitatum, vil larum, et oppidorum de Lubec, Bremen, Hamburg, Wismere, Trailsond, et Bos tock, seu ipsorum et aliorum, quorum interest commissariis et deputatis suf ficientem potestatem habentibus, ad communicandum, tractandum, concor dandum, componendum, appunctuan- dum, et finaliter concludendum, de et super spoliatione, bonorum restitutione, lesione et interfectione regni nostri Mer catorum per Bremenses anno revoluto in mare factorum, et perpetratorum, ac literas quittancie pro nobis et dictis nostris mercatoribus dandi et conce dendi, ac omnia alia, ac singula faciendi, gerendi et exercendi, que in premissis necessaria fuerint, seu opportuna. Ba
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 385
tum et gratum habentes, pro perpetuo habituri quicquid dicti nostri commissarii vel eorum duo conjunctim in premissis duxerint faciendum. Datum sub magno sigillo nostro apud Edynburgh, decimo quarto die mensis Augusti, anno domini millesimo quadragintesimo quadragesi- mo quinto, et regni nostri nono.”
In consequence of this commission, the following treaty, included in the same rare tract, was entered into on the 16th October 1445. It is drawn up in an ancient dialect of Low German, still spoken in those parts. Eor its trans lation—a work which I believe few scholars in this country could have per formed—I am indebted to the kindness and learning of my friend Mr Leith.
Letter of the Scottish ambassadors concerning the reconciliation of the town of bremen with the subjects of the kingdom of scot land, and the treating of the damage which they had occa sioned each other.
“We, John Jeffreson, Stephen Hunter, provost of Edinburgh, and Andrew Ire land, bailie of Perth, ambassadors and procurators plenipotentiary of our most gracious beloved master, the most illus trious prince and lord, James king of Scots, of the noble city of Edin burgh, and others of his towns and sub jects, acknowledge and make known openly in this letter, and give all to understand, who shall see it, or hear it read.
“ Since those of Bremen, in years but lately past, took on the sea, from the subjects of the afore-mentioned most powerful prince and lord, the King of Scots, our gracious beloved lord, a cer tain ship, laden with Scottish cloth, and in order that all capture, attack, and damage, which have happened to ships, people, or goods, wherever they have taken place, and that all other clamage which has happened to the kingdom of Scotland, and the subjects of the said kingdom, on the part of those of Bre men, or their people, up to the date of this letter, may be removed :
“And also, in order to compensate for, to diminish, and extinguish, any great and remarkable damage which they of Bremen have suffered and re ceived in former years and times, from the subjects of the afore-mentioned lord the king :
“Therefore, have we, the above vol. ii,
mentioned John, Stephen, and An drew, by the grace, full powers, and command of our afore-mentioned gra cious and beloved lord the king, a,nd others of his towns and subjects, pro curators plenipotentiary, (according to the contents of all their procuratories, together with that of his royal gracious majesty, sealed with all their seals, which we have delivered over to the afore-mentioned people of Bremen, and received answer,) negotiated, effected, and made conditions of a friendly treaty, with the honourable burger meister and counsellors of Bremen, in all power, and in the manner as here after is written.
“ Although the afore-mentioned peo ple of Bremen, in strict right, as also on account of the delay which has taken place, and also on account of the great damage which they have suffered in former years from the said kingdom, could not be bound, and were not bound, yet on account of their affection to, and to please the afore-mentioned, our most gracious lord, and his royal grace, and for the sake of peace, and an equitable treaty, the same people of Bremen, to compensate for the expense, wear, and great inconvenience, which then was occasioned, have given us, and do presently give a Butse,1 called the Rose, with anchors, tackling, and ropes, as she came out of the sea, and there unto forty measures of beer ; and there with shall all attack, damage, and hurt, which they of Bremen and their allies have done to the kingdom of Scotland, and the subjects of the said kingdom, up to the date of this letter, whether the damage may have been done to crews, goods, or ships, and wherever the damage may have been received, be declared to be compen sated for, acquitted, and completely forgiven.
“ And, in like manner also, shall all attack, damage, and hurt, which they of Bremen, in these years, have suf- fered from the kingdom of Scotland, and the subjects of the said kingdom, and particularly that which happened to one of their coggen2 which was lost
1 Butse, a particular kind of ship. Herving busses is a term frequently used in the Acts of Parliament.
2 Coggen, another kind of ship, of some particular build, used for warlike as well as for mercantile purposes. Kreyer and kreyger oan only be explained in the same general way.
386 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
in the Firth, and to a kreyer lost near Wytkopp, and to a kreyger lost near the Abbey of Arbroath, and other ships, which damage those of Bremen esti mated, and said they had suffered, to the amount of six thousand nobles, the same shall also be held acquitted and compensated for.
“ And we, the above-mentioned John, Stephen, and Andrew, procurators plenipotentiary, by power and grace of our gracious lord the king, his towns, and subjects, and according to the con tents of our procuratories, do acquit, and have acquitted all and each one of the afore-mentionecl persons of Bremen, and their allies, by power and might of this letter, of all the afore-mentioned damage and attacks, let it have hap pened when and where it will, and wherever it may have been received, in all time afore this, and will never revive the same complaints, either in spiritual or secular courts.
“ Furthermore is agreed, negotiated, and settled, that if it should be that the subjects and merchants of the above mentioned kingdom, should ship any of their goods in bottoms belonging to powers hostile to Bremen, and the pri vateers1 of Bremen should come up to them on the sea, so shall the above mentioned Scots and their goods be unmolested, with this difference—if it should be that enemy’s goods were in the ship, such goods shall they, on their oaths, deliver over to those of Bremen; and the ship, crew, and freight shall be held to ransom for a certain sum of gold, as they shall agree with the allies2 of those of Bremen, and these shall allow the ship, with the crew and the goods of the Scots, to sail away to their de stined market. And further, shall all the subjects and merchants of the above-mentioned most mighty prince ancl lord, the King of Scots, our most gracious and beloved master, as also those of Bremen and their merchants, visit, touch at, and make use of the ports and territory of the said kingdom of Scotland, and of the said town and territory of Bremen, with their mer chant vessels, velinqen,3 lifes, and merchandise, with security, and under good safe-conduct, and velichkeit,4 as they have been used to do in peace and love for long years before.
“For the greater authenticity and truth of this document, have we, John 1 Redliggere. 2 Vrunden. 3 Unknown. 4 Unknown.
Jeffreson, Stephen Hunter, and Andrew Ireland, ambassadors and procurators plenipotentiary, affixed our true seals to this letter.
“Given and written after the birth of Christ our Lord, fourteen hundred ycars, and thereafter in the fortieth and fifth, on the day of St Gall, the holy abbot, (d. 16 Oct.)”
Lettee M, page 161. James, ninth Earl of Douglas. As this authentic and interesting document has never been published, it may properly be included amongst the Notes and Illustrations of this his tory. It is taken from the manuscript volume preserved in the Library of the Faculty of Advocates at Edinburgh, entitled, “Sir Lewis Stewart’s Collec tions,” a 4, 7, p. 19.
Appoyntement betwixt James II. and James Earle Douglas. Be it kend till all men be thyr pre sent letters, me James, Earle of Doug las, to be halden and obleist, and be thir present letters, and the faith in my body, lelie ancl truelie binds and obliges me till our sovereane Lord James, be the grace of God, King of Scotland, that I shall fulfill, keep, and observe all and sundrie articles, and condeciones, and poyntis underwrittin. That is to say— in the first, I bind and oblige me till our said soverayne lord, that I shall never follow nor persew, directly nor indirectly, be law, or any other maner of way, any entrie in the lands of the earldome of Wigtone, with the pairti nents or any part of them, untill the tyme that I may obtaine speciall favour and leicence of oure soverayne Lady Mary, be the grace of God, Queen of Scotland, be letter and seal to be given and maid be hir to me thairupon. And in the samen wise, I bind and obliss me to our soverayne lord, that I shall never persew nor follow, directly nor indi rectlie, the lands of the lordshipe of Stewartoun, with the pertinents, or any pairt of them, the whilk wer whilum the Dutches of Turinies, until the time that I may obtaine our soverayne lord’s special licence, grace, and favour of en trie in the said lands; and alswa, I bind and oblidge me till our soverayne lord, to remitt and forgive, and be thir pre sent letters fullie remitts and forgives, for evermair, for me, my brother, and the Lord Hamiltoune, and our (enver
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 387
da,nce) all maner of rancour of heart, malicc, fede, malgre, and invy, the quhilk I or any of us ha,d, hes, or may have in tyme to come, till any of our said soverane lord’s lieges, for any ac tions, causes, or querrels bygane, and speciallie till all them that had arte or parte of the slaughter or deid of whylum William, Earle of Douglas, my brother, and shall take thay personnes in heart lines and friendship at the ordinance and advyce of our said soverayne lord.
And outter, I bind and obliss me till our said soverayne lord, that all the tenants and maillers being within my lands quatsomever, sall remane with thair tacks and maling quhile Whitson- day come a year, except them that oc cupies the grangis and steids whilk war in the hand of the said Earle William, my brother, for his own proper goods the tyme of his decease, and yet thay persones to remaine with thyr tacks, at our said soverayne lord’s will, of the said granges and steids while Whitson- day next to come; and alswa I bind and oblige me to our said soverayne lord to revock, and be thir present letters re vocks, all leagues and bands, if any hes been made be me in any tyme bygane, contrare to our said soverayne lord; ancl binds and obliss me, that I shall make na band, na ligg in tyme coming, quhilk sall be contrar til his hienes. Alswa I bind and obliss me till our said sove rayne lord, to remitt and forgive, and be thir present letters remitts and forgives till his hienes all maner of maills, goods spendit, taken, sould, or analied be him or his intromitters, in any manner of wayes before the xxii day of the moneth of July last bypast, before the makyng of thir present letters. And if any thing be tane of the good of Gallaway, I put me thairof, to our said soveraigne lady, the Queen’s will. Alswa I bind and ob lige me to our said soveraigne lord, that I shall maintaine, supplie, and defend the borders and the bordarars, and keep the trewes taken, or to be taken, at all my guidly power, and in als far as I aught to do as wardane or liegeman till him. Alswa I bind and oblidge me to doe to our said soverane lord, honor and worschip in als far as lyes in my power, I havand sic sovertie as I can be content of reasoun for safety of my life. Item, I oblige me that all harmes done, ancl guides taken under assurance be mandit and restored. In witness of the whilk thing, in fulfilling and keeping all and sundrie articles, poynts, and conditiones
beforr written in all manier of forme, force, and effect, as is aforsaid, all fraud and guile away put, I the said James, for me, my brother, and the Lord Hamiltoune, and all our pairts, (averdance,) to ther present letters sett my seall, and for the mair sickerness the haly evangillis twichit, hes given our bodily oath, and subscryved with my own hand at Douglas, the xxviii day of the month of Agust, the year of our Lord jm. four hundreth and feftie-twa years.
Sic subscribitur, James, Earle Douglas. James, Loed Hamiltone.
Sir Lewis Stewart does not say where the original is preserved ; but his trans cript is evidently much altered and mo dernised in the spelling.
Letteb N, page 165.
“ Eodem anno Comes Moraviæ frater Comitis de Dowglas cum fratre suo Comite de Ormont, et Johannes Doug las eorundem fratre intraverunt Anan derdaill et illam depredati sunt; et spolia ad matrem in Karleil portarunt, presentantes. Quibus (dominus) de Johnston cum cluceutis occurrit, et acriter inter illos pugnatum est. In quo conflictu dominus Comes Moraviæ occiditur, et caput ejus regi Jacobo pre sentabatur, sed rex animositatem viri commendabat, licet caput ignorabat. Occisus eciam fuit Comes de Ormont. Tunc convocato Parliamento annexæ erant illorum terræ, Coronæ regiæ, viz. Ettrick forest, tota Galvaia, Ballincreiff, Gifford, cum aliis multis dominiis Eor undem.”
The manuscript from which this ex tract is taken, and which has never been printed, is preserved in the Library of the University of Edinburgh. A. C. c. 26.
Letter 0, page 195. Hise of the Power of the Boyds.
The remarkable indenture quoted in the text is preserved amongst the arch ives of the earldom of Wigtown, in the charter-chest of Admiral Fleming at Cumbernauld.
As only twenty copies of it, printed for private circulation, exist, I am happy to render it more accessible to the Scot tish antiquary. It is as follows :—
“Yis indentour, mad at Striuelyn, the tend day of februar, the zer of God
388 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
a thousand four hundreth sixty and fyf zeris, betwyx honourable and worschip- ful lordis, yat is to say, Robert, Lord Flemyng on ye ta pairt, and Gilbert, Lord Kennedy and Sir Alexander Boid of Duchal, knight, on the todir pairt, yat yai ar fullelie accordit and appointit in maner and form as eftir follouis : Yat is to say, yat ye said lordis ar bundyn und oblist yaim selfis, yair kyn, friendis, and men, to stand in afald kendnes, supple, and defencs, ilk an til odir, in all yair caussis and querrell leifull and honest, movit and to be movit, for all ye dais of yair liffis, in contrery and aganis al maner of persones yat leiff or dee may ; yair allegiance til our soueran lord alanerly outan, excepand to the lord flemyng, his bandis mad of befoir, to ye Lord Levynston, and to yhe lorcl Hamilton, and, in lyk maner, excepand to the saidis lordis kennedy and Sir Alexander, yair bandis macl of befoir, til a reverend fadir in Crist, master patrik the graham, bischop of Sanc tander, ye Erle af Crawford, ye lord mungumer, the lord maxvel, the lord boid, the lord levynston, the lord ham ilton, and the lord Cathcart. Item, yat the said lord flemyng salbe of special service, and of cunsail to the kyng, als lang as the saidis lordis kenedy and Sir Alexancler ar speciall seruandis and of cunsail to ye kyng; the said lord flem yng kepand his band and kyndnes to the foirsaidis lord kennedey and Alexander, for al the foirsaid tym: And attour, the said lord flemyng is oblist yat he sal nodir wit, consent, nor assent, til, (avas,) nor tak away the kyngis person fra the saidis lord kenedy and Sir Alexander, nor fra na udyr yat yai leff, and ordanis to be doaris to yaim, and keparis in yair abcens; and gif the said lorcl flemyng getis, or may get, ony bit of sic thyng to be done in ony tym, he sal warn the saiclis lord kennedy and Sir Alexander, or yair doars in do tym, or let it to be done at all his power; and tak sic part as yai do, or on an of yaim for ye tymin, ye ganstandyng of yat mater, but fraucl and gil; and the said lord fleming sal adwis the kyng at al his pertly power wycht his gud cunsail, to be hertly and kyndly to the foirsaidis lord kenedy and Sir Alexander, to yair barnis and friendis, and yai at belang to yaim for ye tym. Item, giff yair happynis ony vakand to fall in the kyngis handis, at is a reson able and meit thyng for the said lord flemyngis seruice, yat he salbe furdirit yairto for his reward: and gif yair hap
pynis a large thyng to fal, sic as varct, releiff, marriage, or offis, at is meit for hym, the said lord flemyng sal haff it for a resonable compocicion befoir udir. Item, the saidis lord kennedy and Sir Alexander sal haff thom of Sumerwel and wat of twedy, in special mantenans, supple, and defencs, in all yair accionis, causs, and querrel, leful and honest, for the said lord flemyngis sak, and for yair seruis don and to be don, next yair awyn mastiris, yat yai wer to of befoir. And, at all and sundry thyngis abovn writtyn salbe lelily kepit, bot fraud and gil, ather of yhe pairtis hes geffyn till udiris, yair bodily aithis, the hali evan gelist tuychit, and enterchangable, set to yair selis, at day, yheir, and place abovn written.”
Letter P, p. 222, and Q, p. 227. Revolt of his Nobility against James the Third, in 1482. The history of this revolt of the nobles against James the Third, as it is found in the pages of Lesley and Buchanan, furnishes a striking example of the necessity of having access to the con temporary muniments and state papers of the period, as the materials from which historical truth must be derived. Les ley was a scholar and a man of talent— Buchanan a genius of the first rank of intellect; yet both have failed in their attempt to estimate the causes which led to the struggle between James and his barons; ancl it is not, perhaps, too much to say that the narrative of Buc hanan, where he treats of this period, is little else than a classical romance. The extent of Albany’s treasonable cor respondence with Edward the Eourth, his consent to sacrifice the independence of the kingdom, his actual assumption of the title of king, and the powerful party of the nobles by whom he Avas supported, are all of them facts un known to this historian, ancl which the publicationof the “Fœdera Angliæ“ first revealed to the world. Instead of these facts, which let us into the history of the proceedings of both parties in the state, and afford a pretty clear notion of the motives by which they were actu ated, we are presented by Buchanan with a series of vague ancl scandalous reports, calculated to blacken the me mory of the king, arising at first out of the falsehoods propagated by Albany and the nobles of his faction, against the monarch whom they had deter
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 389
mined to dethrone, increased by the credulous addifcions of the common peo ple, and invested by him with all the charms of style which his sweet and classic muse has so profusely scattered over his history. “ Hae quidem in acta publica causæ sunfc redactæ. Verum odium regis ob causam privatam con ceptum plus ei (i. e. Domino Crichtonio) nocuisse creditur. Erat Gulielmo uxor e nobile Dumbarorum familia nata, ab que insigni pulchritudine. Eam cum a rege maritus corruptam comperisset, cousilium temerarium quidem sed ab auimo amore ægro et injuria irritato non alienum suscepit. Minorem enim e regis sororibus, et ipsam quoque forma egregia et consuetudine fratris infamem, compressit, et ex ea Margaritam Crich tonium quæ non adeo pridem decessifc genuit.” B. xii. cli. For this compli cated tale, which throws the double guilt of adultery and incest upon the unfortunate monarch, there is no evi dence whatever ; and of the first part of it, the inaccuracy may be detected. William, third Lord Crichton, did not marry a daughter of the noble house of Dunbar. The Lady Janet Dunbar was his mother, not his wife. (Douglas’s Peerage, vol. i. p. 609. Crawford’s Ofli cers of State, p. 311. Sutherland case, by Lord Hailes, c. vi. p. 81.) On the other hand, it seems almost certain that William, third Lord Crichton, the asso ciate of Albany, of whom Buchanan is speaking, did marry Margaret, sister to James the Third ; but the dark asper sion of her previous connexion with her brother the king, is found, as far as I have yet seen, in no historian prior to Buchauan, not even in the credulous Boece, whose pages are sufficiently hos tile to James the Third, to induce us to believe that the story would not have been neglected. That the treaty of Albany with Edward the Fourth, and his assumption of the royal title, should have been unknown to Buchanan and Lesley, to whom all access to the ori ginal records was probably impossible at the time they wrote, is not extraor- dinary ; but it is singular that the cir cumstances illustrative of this period of our history should have escaped the notice of Mr Aikman, the latest trans lator of Buchanan. As to Lesley, the causes which he assigns for the hostility of the nobility to James and his favour ites, are his having suffered Cochrane to debase the current coin, by the issue of copper money, unmeet to have course
in the realm—the consequent dearth and famine throughout the country— his living secluded from his queen and his nobles, and his entertaining, in place of his royal consort, a mistress, named the Daisy—the slaughter of the Earl of Mar, his brother—and the banishment of the Duke of Albany. With regard to the first of these subjects of com plaint, the issue of a new copper coin, the fact is certain, and the discontent and distress which it occasioned cannot be doubted. In the short Chronicle at the end of Winton’s MS. Reg. 17, d. xx., printed by Pinkerton, Appendix, vol. i. p. 502, Hist. of Scotland, is the follow ing passage :—“ Thar was ane gret hun gyr and deid in Scotland, for the boll of meill was for four pounds; for thair was black cunye in the realm strikin and ordynit be King James the Thred, half pennys, and three penny pennys innumerabill, of copper. And thai yeid twa yier and mair : And als was gret weir betwix Scotland and England, and gret distruction thro the weiris was of corne and cattel. And thai twa thyngs causyt bayth hungar and derth, and mony puir folk deifc of hunger. And that samyn yeir, in the moneth of July, the Kyng of Scotland purposyt till haif passifc on gaitwart Lawdyr : and thar the Lords of Scotland held thair coun saill in the Kirk of Lawdyr, and cryit doune the black silver, and thai slew ane pairt of the Kyng’s housald ; and other part thai banysyt; and thai tuke the Kyng himself, and thai put hym in the Castell of Edinburgh in firm kepyng. . . . . And he was haldyn in the Castell of Edynburgh fra the Magda lyne day quhill Michaelmas. And than the wictall grew better chaip, for the boll that was for four pounds was than for xxii. sh. of quhyt silver. “ The circum stance of crying down the black money is corroborated by the act passed in the par liament of 1473, c. 12, “and as touching the plakkis and the new pennys, the lordis thinkis that the striking of thame be cessit. And they have the course that they now have unto the tyme that the fynance of them be knawin. And whether they halde five shillings fyne silver of the unce, as was ordainit by the King’s hieness, and promittet by the cunzeours.”1 So far the narrative of Lesley is supported by authentic evi dence, but that Cochrane was the ad viser of this depreciation of the current 1 Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, vol, ii. p. 105.
390 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
coin does not appear in any contem porary record; and the assertion of James’s attachment to a mistress, called the Daisy, who had withdrawn his affec tions from the queen, rests solely on the authority of the later and more popular historians.
Letter R, page 245.
Inventory of the Jewels and Money of James the Third. As the inventory referred to in the text is valuable, from the light which it throws upon the wealth and the man ners of Scotland at the close of the fifteenth century, I am sure the anti quarian, and I trust even the general reader, will be gratified by its insertion. It is extracted from the accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, and a fcw copies have been already printed, although not published, by Mr Thom son, to whom this volume is under re peated obligations, and who will not be displeased by its curious details being macle more generally accessible to the public.
inventare of ane parte of the gold and silver, cunyeit and uncunyeit, jowellis, and uther stuff, perten ing to umquhile oure soverane Lordis fader, that he had in de pois the tyme of his deceis, and that come to the handis of our soverane lord that now is.
m.cccc.lxxxviii.
Memorandum deliuerit be dene Ro bert hog channoune of halirudhouse to the thesaurar, tauld in presens of the chancellar, lord Lile, the prior of Sanc tandrois, in a pyne pig1 of tynn.
In the fyrst of angellis twa hundreth
four score & v angellis Item in ridaris nyne score and aucht
ridaris
Item in rialis of France fyfty and four Item in unicornis nyne hundrethe &
four score Item in demyis & Scottis crounis four
hundreth & tuenti Item in rose nobilis fyfti and four Item in Hari nobilis & salutis fourti &
ane
Item fyftene Flemis ridaris Item tuelf Lewis
1 Pyne Pig; pcrhaps our modern Scots ’’penny pig.”
Item in Franche crounis thre score and thre
Item in unkennyt2 golde —--thretti
pundis
Memorandum, be the command of the king, thar past to the castell to see the jowalis, silver money, & uther stuff, the xvii day of Junii, the yer of god one thousand four hundreth and eighty eight yeris, thir persouns under writtin. that is to say
The erle of Angus The erle of Ergile The bischope of Glasgw The lord Halis The lord Home
The knycht of Torfichane thesaurar
Memorandum, fund be the saidis pcr sonis in the blak kist, thre cofferis, a box, a cageat.3
Item funcl in the maist of the said cofiteris, lous & put in na thing, bot liand within the said coffyr, fyve hundreth, thre score ten rois nobilis, and ane angell noble
Item in a poik of canves, beand within the said coffre, of angell nobilis, sevin hundreth and fyfty angelis
Item in alitillpurs, within the said coifre, of quarteris of rois nobilis, sevin score nyne roi3 nobilis, a quarter of a nobill
Item in a little coffre, beand within the said coffre, of rois nobilis sevin hun dreth fyfty & thre nobilis
Item in a litill payntit coffre, beand within the said blak kist, of Henry nobilis a thousand thre hundreth, and sevintene nobillis
Item in ane uther coffre, beand within the said blak kist, a poik of canves, with demyis contenand aucht hun clreth, ane less
Item in a box, beand within the said blak kist, the grete bedis of gold, contenand six score twa beclis, ancl a knop
Item in the said box, a buke of gold
like ane tabell, and on the glasp of it,
four pcrlis, and a fare ruby Item in the said box the grete diamant,
with the diamantis sett about it Item in the said box, a thing of gold
with a top like a tunnele Item in the same box a stomok,4 & on
2 Gold of unknown denomination. 3 Cageat—casket, Jamieson, who quotes this inventovy. 4 Stomok—stomacher. Jamieson.
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 391
it set a hert, all of precious stains, & perle
Item in a trouch1 of cipre tre within the said box, a point maid of perle, contenand xxv perle with hornis of gold
Item twa tuthpikis of gold with a chenye, a perle, & erepike, a moist ball of gold, ane hert of gold, with uther small japis 2
Item in a round buste, within the said box, a cors of gold, with four stanis. Item a collar of gold, twa glassis with balme
Item in a litill paper, within the said box, ane uche, with a diamant, twa hornis, f our butonis horse nalis blak
Item ane uche 3 of gold, like a flour the lis, of diamantis & thre bedis of gold, a columbe of gold & twa rubeis.
Item in a cageat, beand within the said blak kist, a braid chenye, a ball of cristal
Item a purs maid of perle, in it a moist ball,4 a pyn5 of gold, a litill chenye of gold, a raggifc staff, a serpent toung sett
Item in the said cageat, a lifcill coffre of silver, oure gilt, with a litil salt fat6 and a cover
Item a mannach 7 of silver
Item in a small coffre, a chenye of golcl, a hert of gold, anamelit, a brassalet of gold, sett with precious stanis
Item a collar of gold maid with eli phantis and a grete hingar at it
Item sanct Michaell of gold with a perle on his spere
Item a quhissill8 of gold
Item a liour the lys of gold
Item a ryng with a turcas 9
Item a small cors with twa pecis of gold at it
Item a grete precious stane
Item a litil barrell maid of gold
Item twa berialis, and a grete bene
Item in a litill coffre, a grete serpcnt toung, set with gold, perle, & pre cious stanis, and twa small serpent toungis set in gold, and ane ymage of gold
Item in ane uther coffre, beand within the blak kyst, ane roll with ringis, ane with a grete saffer,10 ane emmor
1 Trouch—a deep long box.
2 Japis—playthings, trifles.
3 Uche—brooch. Not in Jamieson. 4 A moist ball—a musk ball.
5 Pyn—pin. 6 Saltfat—saltcellar.
7 Unknown ; perhaps a little man. Not in Jamieson. 8 Quhissill—whistle.
9 Turquois. 10 Sapphire.
ant,11 a stane of pillar, and ane uther ring
Item in the same coffre ane uther roll
with ringis, ane with a grete ruby, &
ufcher iiii ringis Item ane uther roll with ringis in it, of
thame, thre grete emmorantis, a ruby,
a diamant Item a roll of ringis, ane emmorant, a
topas, & a diamant Item ane uther roll of ringis, ane with a
grete turcas, and ane uther ring Itein a roll with sevin small ringis, dia
mantis, rubeis, & perle Item a roll with ringis, a turcas, a stane
of pillar, & a small ring Item a roll with ringis, a ruby, a dia
mant, twa uther ringis, a berial12 Item in ane uther small coffre, within
the said blak kyst, a chenye with ane
uche, in it a ruby, a diamant, maid
like a creill Item a brasselat of gold, with hede &
pendes13 of gold Item sanct Antonis cors, and in it a dia
mant, a ruby, and a grete perle Item a grete ring with a topas Item a wodward14 of gold with a dia
mant
item ane uche of gold, maid like a rose
of diamantis Item a kist of silver, in it a grete cors,
with stanis, a ryng, a berial hingand
at it
Item in it the grete cors of the chapell, sett with precious stanis
Memorandum, fundin in a banclit kist like a gardeviant,15 in the fyrst the grete chenye of gold, contenand sevin score sex linkis Item thre platis of silver Item tuelf salfatis Item fyftene discheis ouregilfc Item a grete gilt plate Item twa grete bassingis ouregilt Item four masaris,16 callit king llobert
the Brocis, with a cover Item a grete cok maid of silvcr Item the hede, of silver, of ane of the
coveris of masar Item a fare diaile Item twa kasis of knyffis Item a pare of auld knyffis
Item takin be the smyth that opinnifc the lokkis, in gold fourty demyis
11 Emerald. 12 Beryl.
13 Pendants. 14 Unknown.
15 Cabinet. Jamieson.
16 Drinking cups. An interesting item— four drinking cups of Robert the Bruce’s.
392 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
Item in Inglys grotis-xxiiii li. &
the said si’lver gevin agan to the ta karis of hym
Item ressavit in the cloissat of Davidis tour1 ane haly water fat of silver, twa boxis, a cageat tnme, a glas with rois water, a dosoune of torchis,2 king B,obert Brucis serk 3
Memorandum, gottin in the quenis kist, quhilk come fra Striveling, in a litill coffre within the same, In the fyrst a belt of crammassy4 hernessit with gold & braid
Item a braid belt of blak dammas, her
nessit with gold Item a small belt of claith of gold, her
nessit with gold Item a belt of gold, unhernessit Item twa bedis of gold Item a litill belt of gold, hernessit with
gold
Item in a box beand within the said kist, a collar of cassedonis, with a grete hingar of moist, twa rubeis, twa perlis contenand xxv small cassedonis set in gold
Item a chenye of gold maid in fassone of frere knottis,5 contenand fourti four knottis.
Item a pare of bedis of gold contenand
fyfti and sex bedis Item a grete cheyne of gold, contenand
of linkis thre score and a lynk Item ane uther cheyne of gold gretar,
contenand fifti and aucht linkis Item a frete6 of the quenis oure set
with grete perle, sett in fouris &
fouris
Item viii uchis of gold sett with stanis & perle
Item tuenti hingaris of gold set with rubeis
Item a collar of gold fassonit like roisis anamelit
Item a serpent toung, & ane unicorne
horne, set in gold Item a grete hingar of gold with a ruby Item a grete ruby set in gold Item a hingar with a diamant & a grete
perle
Item a diamant set in gold
Item a small chenye wt ane hingar set
1 David’s Tower, in the castle.
2 Unknown ; perhaps turquoises. 3 Perhaps his mail shirt.
4 Crimson.
5 Friar’s beads.
6 A large hoop or ring.
with diamantis in maner of . M.
and a grete perle Item a grete safer set in gold Item a hert of gold with a grete perle
at it
Item a small chenye with ane hingar of
rois & diamant Item ane hingar of gold with twa perle
without stanis Item in a clout nyne precious stanis
unsett
Item in a box in the said kist a collar of
gold, with nynetene diamantis Item a coller of rubeis, set with threis
of perle contcnand xxx perlis and xv
rubeis with ane hinger, a diamant,
and a grete perle Item ane ege of gold with four grete
diamantis pointit and xxviii grete
perlis about thame Item ane uther grete ege with viii rubeis
and xxxvi perlis grete
Item in the said kist of the quenis ane string of grete perle contenand fyfti & a perle, and stringis of small perle
Item twa lingattis7 of gold
Item sex pecis of the said chenye of gold frere knottis
Item twa grete ringis with saferis
Item twa ringis with turcacis
Item a ring with a paddokstane with a charnale8
Item a ring with a face
Item a signet & na thing in it
Item thre small ringis with rubeis
Item fyve ringis with diamantis
Item a cassit coller of gold, maid like suannis, set in gold, with xvi rubeis, and diamantis, and viii quhite suannis & set with double perle
Item a grete round ball, in maner of a chalfer, of silver ouregilt
Item a levare9 of silver ouregilt with a cover
Item a cop with a cover ouregilt & punchit
Item thre brokin gilt pecis of silver Item thre quhite pecis, a fut & a cover
of silver ouregilt Item a grete vice nail maid of silver Item twa brokin platis of silver and a
dische
Item in a gardeviant in the fyrst a grete
hosterage fedder10 Item a poik of lavender Item a buke with levis of golde with xiii
levis of gold fulye
7 Tngot. 8 A hinge. 9 Laver.
10 Ostrich feather.
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 393
Item a covering of variand purpir tarter, browdin with thrissillis & a unicorne Item a ruf & pendiclis of the same Item a pare of metingis1 for hunting Item the surples of the robe riall In ane uther gardeviant, in the fyrst a lamp of silver, a corperale with a cais. Item thre quhippis2 and twa bukis
Memorandum, gotten in a box quhilk was deliverifc be the countas of Athole, and tauld in presens of the chancellar, lord Lile, the prior of Sanctandrois & the thesaurar. In the fyrst in a purs of ledder within the said box thre hun dreth rois nobilis of the quhilkis thare is vii Hari nobilis
Item in the same purs of half rois no billis fyve hundreth hail rois nobilis, sextene rois nobillis
Item gottin in ane uther box, fra the said countas, the xxi day of Junii, in a canves poik, within the said box, tuelf hundreth & seven angel no bilis3
Item in ane uther purs, of ledder, beand in the same box, ane hundreth angelis
Item in the same purs, thre hundreth fyfti & sevin demyis
Memorandum, fund in a blak coffre quhilk was brocht be the abbot of Ar broth, in the first the grete sarpe4 of gold contenand xxv schaiffis with the fedder betuix Item a water pot of silver Item a pare of curale bedis, and a grete
muste ball Item a collar of cokkilschellis contenand
xxiiii schellis of gold Item a bane coffre, & in it a grete cors
of gold, with four precious stanis and
a chenye of gold Item a beid of cassedonne Item twa braid pecis of brynt silver
bullioune
Item in a leddering purs, beand in the said blak coffre, tuelf score & xvi salutis
Item in the same purs thretti & sex
Lewis and half nobilis Item in the same purs four score and
thre Franche crounis Item in the same purs fourtene score of
ducatis, and of thame gevin to the
erle of Angus fyve score and six
ducatis
Item in the said coffre, quhilk was
1 Hunting gloves. 2 Whip.
3 Thir boxis put in the thesaurhous in the grcte kist nerrest the windo. 4 Belt,
brocht be the said abbot, a litil cors with precious stanis
Item in a blak box brocht be the said abbot to the toune of Perth the xxvi day of Junii, in the first, lows in the said box, four thousand thre hundreth and fourti demyis
Item in a purs of ledder in the said box four hundreth tuenti & viii Lewis of gold, and in the same purs of ledder, of Franche crounis fyve hundreth thre score and sex. And of thame twa salutis and four Lewis
Item in a quhite coffre of irne deliverit be the said abbot, thre thousand, nyne hundreth, four score & viii an gelis
Memorandum, ressauit in Scone, be the thesaurar, in presens of the bischop of Glasgw, lord Lile, the prior of Sanct androis, Patrik Home, & lord Drum mond, the xxiii day of Junii, in Avereis box, lous, without ony purs, a thousand and thretti Hari nobilis
Item in a purs of ledder, within the said box, a thousand & twenti rois nobilis, and in the said purs fyfti & four Hari nobilis in half Hari nobilis Item a grete gugeoune5 of gold Item thare was a writ fund in the said box sayand, in hac boxa xii c Hari nobilis, et in eadem boxa, xi c rois nobilis
Thir ar the names of thame, that wist of the said box quhen it was in the myre
James Averi William Patonsone William Wallace
Item ressavit fra lang Patric Hume, & George of Touris, xvi skore of Hare nobelis, quhilkis tha had of a part of the money takin be the Cuntas of Atholl and Johne Steward
Item of the same some & money gevin to the said Patric for his reward - - - - fourti Hare nobilis
The Compt of schir William Knollis, lord saint Johnnis of Jerusalem, &c. thesaurar till our soverain lord maid afc Edinburgh the xxiiii day of Februar, the yer of god &c. nynte ane yeris . .
of all his ressait & expens fra the ferd day of the moneth of Junii in the yer of god &c. auchty and aucht yeris unto the day of this present compt
5 Unknown.
394 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
In the first he chargis him with viim vc lxxxxvii li iiii s in gold of sex thon sand thre hnndreth thretty a pece of angell nobillis ressavit be the comptar as is contenit in the beginning of this buke writtin with Johnne Tyriis hand, And with iic xvi li iiii s in gold of ane hundreth fourscore aucht Scottis ri daris, as is contenit in this sammyn buke
And with liiii li be fifty four Fraunce riallis of gold
And with viiic lxxxii li be nyne hun dreth fourscore unicornis
And with vic lxvi li xiiii s iiii d in ane thousand Scottis crownis
And with Jm iiic xxxiii li vi s viii d in tua thousand demyis ressauit and gevin for a merke the pece
And with iim lxix li iiii s in tua thousand nyne hundreth fifty sex demyis gevin the pece for fourtene schillingis
And with vim xix li ix s in thre thou sand thre hundreth fifty five rose nobillis and ane quarter, the quhilk wer gevin for thretty sex schillings thepece, except four hundreth that war gevin for thretty five schillings the pece
And with iiiim iiiic lxvi li viii s in tua thousand sevin hundreth tuenty nyne Hary nobillis gevin for thretty tua schillingis the pece
And with x li v s in fiftene Flemis ridaris fiftene schilling the pece
And with iiiic xxxii li in four hun dreth four score Lewis and halve rose nobillis gevin for auchtene schilling the pece
And with iiiic lxxxxiiii li iiii s in sevin hundreth sex Fraunce crounis gevin for fourtene schillingis the pece
And with xxx li in Duch gold
And with iic vi li viii s in tua hundreth fifty aucht salutis gevin for sextene schillingis the pece
And with ic xxxix li iiii s in ane hun dreth seviuty four ducatis gevin for sextene schiilingis the pece Summa of this charge xxiiiim vc xvii li x s
Letter,S, page 246. Margaret Drummond, mistress to
James IV. From a note of the Rev. Mr Mac gregor Stirling’s, in his valuable manu script collections on the chronology of the reign of James the Fourth, I am enabled to give some curious particulars
regarding this unfortunate favourite of James the Fourth. She was daughter of John, first Lord Drummond, and the king seems to have become attached to her at an early period. In his first par liament, 3d October 1488, she had an allowance for dresses, (mentioned in the text, p. 246.) She bore a daughter to the king in 1495, as it may be presumed from an entry in the Lord High Trea surer’s Books, which states that twenty one pounds seven shillings had been expended on the “ Lady Mergetis doch ter.” In Douglas’s Peerage, vol. i. p. 51, and vol. ii. p. 361, she is mentioned as having been poisoned in 1501. But she appears to have been alive on 24th June 1502, as in the Treasurer’s Books under that date is the following entry:— “ Item, the xxiiii day of Junii, the kyng wes in Drummonde gifnn to Mergrett Drummonde be the kingis commande, twenty-one pounds. Item, to her nuriss forty-one pounds.” It is possible, how ever, this may have been the king’s daughter, not his mistress. Great mys tery hangs over the death of this royal favourite, and the most minute account is to be found in a celebrated work where one would certainly little expect to meet an obscure portion of Scottish history— Moreri’s Dictionary. It is taken from a MS. history of the family of Drummond, composed in 1689. Speak ing of the first Lord Drummond—“ He had,” says this author, “ four daughters, one of whom, named Margaret, was so much beloved by James the Fourth, that he wished to marry her ; but as they were connected by blood, and a dispensation from the Pope was re quired, the impatient monarch con cluded a private marriage, from which clandestine union sprang a daughter, who became the wife of the Earl of Huntly. The dispensation having ar- rived, the king determined to celebrate his nuptials publicly; but the jealousy of some of the nobles against the house of Drummond suggested to them the cruel project of taking off Margaret by poison, in order that her family might not enjoy the glory of giving two queens to Scotland,” (Moreri sub voce l)rum mond.) It is certain that Margaret Drummond, with Euphemia Lady Fleming, and the Lady Sybilla, her sisters, clied suddenly at the same time, with symptoms exciting a strong sus picion of poison, which it was thought had been administered to them at breakfast. So far the story substan-
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 395
tially agrees with Moreri; but that the unfortunate lady fell a victim to the jealousy of the Scottish nobles, rests on no authentic evidence; nor does this explain why her two sisters, Lady Flemiflg and Lady Sybilla, should have shared her fate. The story tells more like some dreadful domestic tragedy, than a conspiracy of the aristocracy to prevent the king’s marriage to a com moner. Besides this, it is shewn by a deed preserved in the Fœdera, vol. xii. p. 787, that James, previous to the catastrophe of Margaret Drummond, had entered into an indenture, binding himself to marry the Princess Margaret of England,—a circumstance certainly not wholly disproving the story of her having fallen a victim to aristocratic jealousy, but rendering it more impro bable. If the dispensation for James’s marriage with Margaret Drummond had been procured, it is probable that it would have been discovered by Andrew Stewart during those investigations into the Papal records which he instituted at Rome on the subject of the great Doug las case, when he accidentally fell upon the documents which settled the long agitated question regarding the mar riage of Robert the Second to Elizabeth More. The three ladies thus united in death were interred together in the centre of the choir of the cathedral chnrch at Dunblane. Their grave was marked by three plain blue marble flags, which remained untouched till 1817, when they were removed to make way for some repairs on the parochial church into which the choir of the ancient cathedral had been transformed. Sir Walter Drummond, lord clerk-register, their paternal uncle, was, at the time of their death, Dean of Dunblane,—a circumstance, says Mr Stirling, which seems to have led to their interment there, the family having lately removed from Stobhall, their original seat on the banks of the Tay, to Drummond Castle, where they probably had no place of interment. An entry in the Treasurer’s Books, June 18, 1503, shews that the king’s daughter by Margaret Drum mond had some time before been re moved from Drummond Castle to the palace at Stirling :—“ Item to the nuriss that brocht the king’s dochter fra Drum myne to Strivilin, 3 lbs. 10 sh.” The child was brought up in Edinburgh castle under the name of the Lady Margaret; she married John, lord Gordon, son and heir-apparent of Alex
ander, earl of Huntly, (Mag. Sig. xv. 193.) 26th April 1510. In the Trea surer’s Books, under the 1st February 1502-3, is this entry:—“ltem te the priests of Edinburgh for to do dirge and saule messe for Mergratt Drummond, v lb.” Again, February 10, 1502-3. “ Item to the priests that sing in Dum blane for Margaret Drummond their quarters fee v lbs.” Entries similar to this are to be found in the Treasurer’s Books, as far as they are extant, down to the end of the reign, from which it ap pears that two priests were regularly employed to sing masses for her soul in Dunblane.
Lettee T, page 251. 8ir Andrew Wood of Largo. The connexion of this eminent per son with James the Third is illustrated by a charter under the great seal x. 87, dated 8th March 1482, which states that this monarch had taken into con sideration “ Gratuita et fidelia servicia sibi per familiarem servitorem suum Andkeam Wod commorante in Leith, tam per terram, quam per mare, in pace et in guerra, gratuiter impensà, in Regno Scotiæ et extra idem, et signanter con tra inimicos suos Angliæ, et dampnum per ipsum Andream inde sustenta, suam personam gravibus vitæ exponendo peri culis.” On this ground it proceeds to state that James granted to him and his heirs, hereditarily and in fee, the lands and village of Largo, in the sheriffdom of Fife. It is probable that Wood was originally a merchant trader of Leith, and that a genius for naval enterprise was drawn out and cherished by casual encounters with pirates in defence of his property; after which, his talents, as a brave ancl successful commander, becoming known to James the Third, this monarch gave him employment, not only in war and against his enemies of England, but in diplomatic negotiations. It has been stated in the text that the brilliant successes of Wood during the reign of James the Fourth were against Eng lish pirates. This fact seems established by a charter under the great seal xii. 304, 18th May 1491, in which James the Fourth grants to Andrew Wood a licence to build a castle at Largo with iron gates, on account of the great ser vices done and losses sustained by the said Andrew, and for the services which it was confidently hoped he would yet
393 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
render; and because the said Andrew had, at great personal expense, built certain houses and a fortalice, on the lands of Largo, by the hands of Eng lishmen captured by him, with the object of resisting and expelling pirates who had often invaded the kingdom, and attacked the lieges. The existence of a truce between the two kingdoms at the time when these actions of Wood are described as having taken place, neither throws any suspicion on the truth of this assertion, nor proves that Henry may not have privately encour aged the expedition of Stephen Bull against Wood. A truce existed be tween the kingdoms, and proposals for bringing about a final peace on the basis of a marriage between James and an English princess were actually under consideration, when Henry had bribed the Lord Bothwell and Sir Thomas Tod to seize the Scottish king and deliver him into his hands, (Rymer, vol. xii. p. 440.) Some of the items of this date, 1491, in the Treasurer’s Accounts, prove, in a very convincing manner, that James, in all probability in consequence of the advice and instructions of Andrew Wood, had begun to pay great atten tion to everything calculated to increase the naval strength of the kingdom. He built ships at his own expense, made experiments in sailing, studied the principle3 of navigation and gunnery, and attached to his service, by ample presents, such foreign captains and mariners as visited his dominions for the purposes of trade and commerce.
Letter U, page 264. Mons Meg. Popular as Mons Meg has been amongst the Scottish antiquaries of the nineteenth century, her celebrity, when she was carried by James the Fourth, July 10, 1489, to the siege of Dum barton, if we may judge from some of the items in the Treasurer’s Books, was of no inferior description. Thus, under that date we have this entry:—“ltem given to the gunners to drink-silver when they cartit Monss, by the King’s command, 18 shillings.” Mons, how ever, from her enormous size and weight, proved exceedingly unmanageable ; and after having been brought back from Dumbarton to Edinburgh, she enjoyed an interval of eight years’ inglorious repose. When James, however, in 1497, sat down before Norham, the
great gun was, with infinite labour and expense, conveyed to the siege, and some of the items regarding her trans port are amusing. The construction of a new cradle or carriage for her seems to have been a work of great labour. Thus, on July 24,1497, we have, “ Item to pynouris to bere ye trees to be Mons new cradill to her at St Leonards quhare scho lay, iii sh. vid ;" and again, July 28, “ Item for xiii stane of irne to mak graith to Monsis new cradill, and gavil okkis to ga with her, xxx sh. iiiid. " “ Item to vii wrights for twa dayis and a half ya maid Monsis cradill, xxiii sh. iiiid ." “ltem for xxiiii li of talloun [tallow] to Mons.” “ Item for viii elne of canwas to be Mons claiths to cover her." " Item for mare talloun to Mons. " “ Item to Sir Thomas Galbraith for paynting of Monsis claiths, xiiii sh.” “ Item to the Minstralis that playit before Mons doune the gait, xiiii sh.” The name of this celebrated gun, as stated in the Treasurer’s Accounts, is simply Mons. Drnmmond of Haw thornden is the first author who calls her Mons Meg. For these curious particu- lars I am indebted to the manuscript notes of the Rev. Mr Macgregor Stir ling.
Letter V, page 264. Perkin Warbeck. It is difficult to solve the problem whether James was a sincere believerin the reality of Warbeck’s pretensions. I am inclined to think that, from poli tical motives, he first entered into the intrigues with the Duchess of Burgundy, which commenced soon after Lambert Simnel’s defeat and capture—though without any steady conviction of the truth of Warbeck’s story—but that he became afterwards, on the arrival of this extraordinary person in Scotland, a con vert to his being a son of the Duke of York; and that he entertained the same opinion even when he found it necessary to advise his departure from Scotland. Of the residence of Warbeck in this country, the Treasurer’s Accounts fur nish some curious illustrations. It ap pears that Jamie Doig, a person whose name occurs frequently in the Trea surer’s Books, and who is embalmed in Dunbar’s Poems, “ tursed the arrass work,” or arranged the hanging and tapestry at Stirling, on the 20th Novem ber 1495, in contemplation of Prince Richard’s arrival, (Treasurer’s Books
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 397
under that date.) A person named David Caldwell received eighteen shil lings for the “ graithing“ or furnishing of his chamber in the town; and couriers were sent with letters to the Lords of Strathern and Athole, and to the Earl Marshal and the Barons of Angus, re quiring them to attend upon the meet ing of the King and Prince Richard in Saint Johnston, (Treasurer’s Book, sub anno 1495.) It is mentioned in the text that a tournament was held in honour of his arrival, and many entries in the Treasurer’s Books relate to it and to the preparations at the same time for the war against England. Thus, on the 9th September 1496. “ltem, for an elne, half a quarter, and a nail of double red taffety to the Duke of Zorkis banare —for the elne, xviii sh.—xxi sh. iiii d. Item, given for iic of gold party for the Duke of Zorkis banere, xxvii sh. vii d. 1tem, for iii quaris of a silver buke to the same banare, vi sh. Item, for half a book of gold party to ye Duke of Zorkis standart, xx sh. Item, for a book of fine gold for the king’s coat armour, iii lb. x sh. Item, to the Duke of York in his purse by the king’s com mand, xxxvi lb.” In the following en try we find mention of an “ indenture,” drawn up between James and the Duke of York, which is now unfortunately lost. " Item, given to Roland Robison (he was a French gunner or engineer, who had probably been in Warbeck’s service when at the court of Charles the Eighth) “for the red“ (settlement) “of the Inglismen to the sea, hke as is con tenit in an indenture made betwixt the king’s gude grace and the Duke of Zork, iic lb.”
It is probable that one of the condi tions entered into by James in this in denture was to pay to Warbeck a month ly pension of one hundred and twelve pounds. Thus, in the Treasurer’s Books, May 6, 1497, we find this entry. “ltem, to Roland Robison, for his Maisteris“ (“Zork “ on the margin) “monethis pen sioun, ic xii lb.” Again, June 7, 1497. “ Item, to Roland Robison and the Dean of Zork, for their Maisteris mone this pension, ic xii lb.” And again, June 27. ’ ’ Giffin to the Dean of Zork and Roland Robison for the Dukis (of Zorkis) monethlie pensioun to come in, ic xii lb.” This large allowance, which amounted to one thousand three hun dred and forty-four pounds yearly, was probably one great cause for James’s anxiety to see Warbeck out of the king
dom ; for, besides the pension to the Duke of York, it must be recollected that the king supported the whole body of his English attendants; and the en tries of payments to Roland Robison for “ redding," or settling, the Englishmen’s costs, are numerous. Warbeck, too, appears to have been extravagant; for notwithstanding his allowance, he had got into debt, and had pledged his brown horse, which he was forced to leave in the innkeeper’s hands, although thir teen shillings would have set him free. “ltem, giffin to the prothonotare to quit out the Duke of Zorkis brown horse that lay in wed in the toune, xiii sh. “ The same Books contain a minute detail of the victualling of the ship in which Warbeck, accompanied by his wife, Lady Catherine Gordon, quitted Scotland. The vessel was not only under the command, but was the pro perty of the afterwards celebrated Ro bert Bertoune. Amongst the stores were " twa tun and four pipes of wine, eight bolls of ait mele“ (oatmeal,) “ eighteen marts of beef, twenty-three muttons, and a hoghead of herring.” Andrew Bertoune, the brother of the captain, is mentioned as having furnished biscuit, cider, and beer for the voyage. The Duchess of York, by the king’s com mand, received three elns and a half of “rowane cannee,” to make her “ane see goune,” with two elne and a half of ryssilis black, to make her cloaks. It is well known that, after the execution of Warbeck in 1498, the extraordinary beauty and misfortunes of this lady in duced Henry the Seventh, whose dis position, although cautious, does not appear to have been either cold or un amiable, to treat her with kindness and humanity. The populace applied to her the epithet of the White Rose of Scot land. She was placed under the charge of the queen—received a pension—and afterwards married Sir Mathew Cradock of North Wales, ancestor of the Earls of Pembroke, (Stewart’s Genealogy, p. 65.) From an entry in the privy purse expenses of Henry the Seventh, pub- lished by Sir Harris Nicolas, (p. 115 part ii. of the Excerpta Historica,) she seems to have been taken on 15th Octo ber 1497.
Sir Mathew Cradock and the White Rose had an only daughter, Margaret, who married Sir Richard Herbert of Ewyas, natural son of William, first Earl of Pembroke, (Dugdale’s Baron- age, vol. ii. p. 255.) Theiv son William,
398 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
on the extinction of the legitimate male line of the Earls of Pembroke, was cre ated Earl of Pembroke by Edward the Sixth, (Dugdale’s Baronage, vol. ii. p. 258.)
Sir Mathew Cradock and the Lady Catherine, his wife, are interred in the old church at Swansea, in Glamorgan- shire, under a monument of the altar kincl, richly decorated, but now much mutilated and defaced—beneath which is this inscription :—
here lteth sir mathu cradock, knight, some time deputie unto the right honourable charles grie of worcet . . . in the county of gla morgan . . . mor . . chancellor of the same, steward of gower and kilvei, and my lady catherine his wif.1
“ Sir Edward Herbert of Ewyas is buried,” says Dugdale, (Baronage, vol. ii. p. 258,) “under a noble tomb at Bar gavenny, beside Margaret his wife.”
Letter X, page 294.
Battle of Flodden. It is difficult, from the conflicting account3 of historians, to arrive at the numbers of each army in the battle of Flodden ; and even more difficult to es timate the loss on both sides. That nearly a hundred thousand souls mus tered on the Borough-muir is extremely probable; but it is to be recollected, that of these a great many were wag goners, sutlers, servants, and camp-fol- lowers ; that the presence ot the king and the whole body of the nobles in ferred the attendance of more than the usual number of servants ; and that, owing to the delay in active operations, and the scarcity of provisions, the army was diminished by desertion previous to the battle. When this is considered, the estimate of thirty-five or forty thou sand men (the latter number is that of Dr Lingard) is probably pretty near the truth. On the side of the Ënglish, it is certain from the English contem porary account of the battle, that Sur rey's army was, at the lowest computa- tion, twenty-six thousand strong; and it is by no means improbable that this was rather a low estimate. The battle
1 Ree’s Beauties of England and Wales, vol. xviii. p. 725.
2 The rare contemporary tract reprinted by my friend, Mr Pitcairn, and entitled, “Batayle of Floddon-felde, called Brainston Moore,” thus commences:— “ The maner of th’ ad
began between four and five in the af ter noon of the 5th of September, and con tinued, according to an2 authentic con temporary chronicle, “within night,” that is some time after nightfall; all accounts agreeing that the combatants were only separated by darkness. It is a mistake in Lingard, therefore, to tell us it was decided in something more than an hour. From half-past four on the 5th of September, till after night fall, will give a continuance to the com bat of at least three hours. As to the loss sustained, the common estimate of ten thousand Scots is probably under the truth. After giving the names of the nobles and chiefs who were slain, the ancient chronicle already quoted observes, that over and above the said persons, eleven or twelve thousand of the Scots who were slain were viewed by my Lord Dacre,4 and on tho inscrip- tion on Surrey’s monument at Thetford, the number is seventeen thousand.5 But whilst this last, which may be consider- ed a eulogistic estimate, is yet perhaps not very far from the truth, it is evident that there is an endeavour on the part of the English historians to conceal their own loss, when they state it at fiiteen hundred men. Holinshed, who gives this, admits that the “victory was clearly bought on the side of the Eng lish,” and when it is considered that it was a fair stand up fight, which lasted with the utmost obstinacy for three hours—that no pursuit took place till next day—and that no quarter was given on either side, the assertion that only fifteen hundred English were slain, can not be believed. In noticing the very few Scottish prisoners taken, the ancient English account of the battle observes, “many other Scottish prisoners coulcl and might have been taken, but they were so vengeable and cruel in their fighting, that when Englishmen had the better of them, they would not save them, though it were that diverse Scottes offered great sumes of money for their lives. “ 6 Lord Thomas How ard, indeed, in his message to the king, had declared, that as he expected no
vauncyng of my lord of Surrey, tresourier and marshall of Englande, and levetenente gene rall of the north parties of the same, with xxvi M. towards the kynge of Scotts and his armye, vewed and nombred to an hundrede thousande men at the leest.”
3 Ibid. p. 12.
4 Batayle of Brainston Moore, p. 11.
5 Ridpath’s Border History, p. 491. 6 Batayle of Brainston Moore, p. 12.
NOTES AND ILLUSTBATIONS. 399
quarter himself he woulcl give none ; and this fierce resolution of the English admiral was probably rendered more intense in its operation by the silence of the Scottish king, who replied with courtesy to the cartel of Surrey, but did not condescend to send Howard an answer. With the exception of the Highlanders and Islemen, the Scots pre served good discipline. Their army, when first seen by Howard, was drawn up in five divisions : some in the form of squares, others in that of wedges, and they descended the hill on foot in good order, after the manner of the Germans, in perfect silence.1 Every man, for the most part, was armed with a keen and sharp spear, five yards in iength, and a target which he held before him. When their spears failed, they fought with great sharp swords, making little or no noise. The old ac count of the battle expressly states that few were slain by arrows, as the rain had damaged the English bows, but that most fell by the bills of the English- men; and yet the armorial device given as an augmentation to his arms to Sur rey, in commemoration of his victory— a demi-lion gules, transfixed with an arrow—seems to contradict this; whilst the impatience of the Highlanders, under Huntly and Lennox, has always been ascribed to the deadly discharge of the English bowmen. The English ar tillery were well served, and did con siderable execution; whilst the Scottish guns, injudiciously placed, and ill directed, fired over the heads of the enemy—a blunder probably to be as cribecl to the obstinacy of the king, who would not suffer them to play upon the English columns when they were pass ing the river. James thus lost the great advantage which might have been derived from the acknowledged excel lence in the make and calibre of the Scottish ordnance.
As the battle of Flodden is of much importance in tracing the military his tory of the country, I may notice an inaccuracy of Hume, which to the gene ral student might seem of little impor tance, but to the military reader it will not appear so. This historian informs 1 Original Gazette of the Battle of Flodden, MS. in herald’s office, printed by Pinkerton. —Appendix to 2d vol. No. X.—La battaile dud : Roy D’Escosse estoit divisee en cinq : battailles, Et chacun battaille loing l’un de l’autre environ un trait d’arc * * partie d’Eulx Estorent en quadrans, et autres en maniere de pointe.
us2 that Surrey, finding that the river Till prevented his attack, made a feint by marching to Berwick, as if he meant to enter Scotland; upon which James descended from his encampment, having fired his huts. “ On this Surrey,” says he, “took advantage of the smoke, and passed the river with his army, render ing a battle inevitable, for which both sicles prepared with tranquillity and order.” This, any one who will stucly the battle as it is given in this history, from contemporary records, will dis cover to be a misapprehension of the fact.
Letter Y, page 303.
Diurnal of Occurrents in Scotland.2— Authenticity of the First Part of this Work.
The frequent references in the text to the first part of this work, as an ori ginal and valuable authority, renders it necessary to explain the reasons which have led the author to form a different opinion of its authenticity from that given by its learned editor. In the Prefatory Notice to the volume, there is this sentence, “to those who are at all acquainted with the minute details of Scottish history in the sixteenth cen tury, a very slight perusal of the work will suggest that in its different parts it is of very unequal value. From the era of the battle of Flodden and the death of King James the Fourth, in the year 1513, at which it commences, down to the termination of the government of the Earl of Arran in 1553, its details, comparatively meagre and occasionally inaccurate, are obviously not recorded by a contemporary chronicler, but must have been derived from tradition and other inrperfect sources. Yet, even in this first and least valuable portion of the work, will be found many minute facts and notices that would be vainly looked for in the ordinary histories of the reign of King James the Fifth, and the first ten years of the reign of Queen Mary.”3 In pronouncing this first por tion of the Diurnal of Occurrents the work, not of a contemporary chronicler, but of some subsequent writer, deriving his materials from tradition, and other imperfect sources, the editor appears to me to have fallen into an error, which could scarcely have been avoided by one
1 Hume’s History, p. 292.
2 Published by the Bannatyne Club. 3 Preface, p. 1.
400 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
who compared the Diurnal of Occur rents with our earlier historians, Lesley and Buchanan, or even with the later volumes of Maitland. It not only is contradicted by them in some important particulars, but it contains events, and these not minute, but grave and mate rial facts, which are not to be found in either of these authors. These events, however, can be provecl to have occurred by evidence of which the authenticity is unimpeachable; and it is the disco very of their perfect truth which has in duced me to consider the greater por tion of the first part of the Chronicle, entitled the “ Diurnal of Occurrents in Scotland,” as the work of a contempo- rary, who wrote from his own know ledge, and not a compilation from tra ditionary sources. I say the greater portion, because such a character be longs not to the whole of the first part; and it seems probable that this valuable original matter has fallen into the hands of some later and ignorant compiler, who, preserving the purer ore, has in some places mixed it up with erroneous additions of his own.
To support these conclusions, let me give some proofs ; the years 1543, 1544, occurring in the Regency of Arran, form an obscure era in our history; and did we possess no other guides than the common historians, Lesley, Buchanan, or Maitland, we should be left in a maze of confusion and contradiction. The revolutions in state affairs are so sudden and so frequent during this period; the changes in the politics and the conduct of the different factions so rapid and so apparently contradictory, that without some more authentic assistants, the task of unravelling or explaining them would be hopeless. It is upon this period that the original correspondence in the State Paper Office throws a flood of clear and useful light, introducing us to the ac tors in these changes, not through any second-hand or suspected sources, but by supplying us with their original let ters to Henry the Eighth and his min isters. Now, to come from this obser vation to the work entitled the Diurnal of Occurrents. When it is found that it, and it only, contains various facts, demonstrated by these original letters to be true, and which sometimes are not mentioned, sometimes are positively contradicted by our general historians, such a circumstance must create a strong presumption in favour of its value and authenticity; that a work which stands
this severe test should have been, not a contemporary, but a later production, compiled from tradition, and imperfect sources, seems to me nearly impossible.
To take an example from the period already mentioned. In the year 1544, in the Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 33, we fincl this passage:—“Upon the thrid day of Junii, thare was ane general counsall haldin at Stirling, quhairat was all the nobelles of Scotland, exceptand the Erles of Lennox and Glencairn ; quhair the governor was dischargit of his auctorite; and maid proclamation through the realm, that na,ne obeyit him as gover nor; and als thair thei chesit thrie erlis, thrie lords, thrie bishops, thrie abbotes to be the secreit counsale; quhilk lastet not lang, for everie lord ded for his awin particular profit, and tuk na heid of the commonweill; but tholet the Inglismen and theivis to overrin this realm.” In the same chronicle, p. 34, is this sentence,—“ Upon the last day of Julii, thare was ane Parliament sould have been halden in Edinburgh; and the governor, with his complices furneist the town, and held it, becaus he gat word the queenis grace drowarie was cummit out of Striveling to the Parlia ment; becaus thai yet being in hir com pany was full of dissait, sho past to Stir ling with meikle ordinance and swa the Parliament was stayit.” Again, in the same chronicle, p. 36, we find this pas sage,—“ Upon the 5th day, (1544,) the governor held ane parliament in Edin burgh.—Upon the 12th of November, the queen’s grace drowrier [dowager] held ane parliament in Striveling, and thareafter the parties suld have met, and stayet in hope of aggreance, and the cardinal raid betwix them, quha come to Edinburgh and tuk the governor to Stirling with him, quhair gude aggre ance was made to be bund to hir grace, and twentee four Lordis counsall.” It will be at once perceived that these passages embody the history of an im portant revolution, which for nearly six months changed the whole face of af fairs in Scotland. In May 1544, Arran was the unchallenged governor of the kingclom ; in June, the queen-dowager arose against him, was joined by the whole body of the peers excepting Len nox and Glencairn, held a general coun cil at Stirling, in which he was dis charged from his office, made procla mation through the realm that none should obey him, and appointed a new secret council for the management of
NOTES AND ILLUSTKATiONS. 401
the affairs of the state. In July, as is shewn by the second extract, an attempt was made by Arran, who still claimed the name and authority of governor, to hold a parliament in Edinburgh; but the-queen-dowager advanced with great force to the city; the governor fortified it against her; she retreated to Stirling, and the parliament was delayed. Three months after this, in the beginning of November, Arran the governor assem bled a parliament at Edinburgh; the queen issued writs for a rival parlia ment, to be held on the 12th of the same month at Stirling; and the car dinal dreading the effects of this miser able disunion, acted as a peace-maker between the two parties, and at length brought them to an agreement.
Now, of these very important events, no notice whatever was to be found in our general historians ; nay, the tenor of their narratives seemed to contradict them; the question, therefore, at once came to the credibility of the Diurnal of Occurrents. In this dilemma I was delighted (the reader, who knows the satisfaction of resting, in researches of this nature, upon an authentic docu ment, will pardon the warmth of the expression) to meet with the following paper in the State-paper Office, which, it will be seen, completely corroborated the assertion of the Diurnal as to the deprivation of the governor. It is dated June 1544, and entitled, “Copy. —Agreement of the principal Scots nobility to support the authority of the queen-mother as regent of Scotland against the Earl of Arran, declared by this instrument to be deprived of his office.” This valuable paper in its en tire state will be given in the forth coming volume of State-papers relative to Scotland, published by Government. In the meantime, the following extract will be sufficient for my purpose. After stating the fact of a convention having been held at Stirling on the 3d of June, it proceeds thus to describe their delibe rations and proceedings. “After long and mature consultacion had, in the said matiers, by the space of iii. or iv. daies contynuall, fynally [they] fand that oon great part why inobedience hath ben within this realme, sithins the king’s grace’s, and that other incon veniences which have happened, was, and is in my lord governor, and his counsaile, that was chosen to have ben with him for the time : and for remedye herof in times commyng, and that per VOL. II.
fit obedience maie be to our soverain ladie’s aucthorite, [that] unite, concorde, and amitee maie be hadd among all our soverain ladie’s lieges, and speciallie among the great men ; and that they maie convent at all times to give their counsaile in all matiers concernyng the quene’s grace our soverain ladye, and her realme; ancl that justice maie be doon and executed among the lieges therof; and that resistance maie be made to our ennymies : They all, without variaunce, consulted and deliberated, that the quene’s grace, our soverain ladye’s mo ther, shulde be egall with him therin till; and that oon great counsaile, ad joyned with my lord governor in the using of th’ aucthoritie of governement in all times comyng, shulde be chosen, of xvi. persones — xii. of them the greatest erles ancl temporal lords of the realme, and iv. spiritual men, as in the deliveraunce mad therupon the vi.th daie of the saicle monith of Junii, is at more length conteyned. The whiche deliveraunce and counsaile was shewen and declared to my lorde Governor, be fore the quene’s grace and the whole lords, the saide vi.th daie of Junii. And the lords who devised the same, praied my lord governor that he wold consent therto, both for his owne weale and for the weale of our soverain ladye the quene, and of the whole realme, for divers causes and respects particularly appointed and declared; and specially, because the quene’s grace our soverain ladie’s mother is a noble ladye of highe linage and bludde, of great wisedome, ancl haile of lief, having the king of Ffrance, and the greattest nobles of that realme, and others about hyr, tendre kynsmen and friends, who will be the more readye to supporte the realme for defense of the same if hyr grace be well favoured and honored by the nobles therof, and holden in honor and dignitie; and also, because the whole nobles have theire special confi dence in hyr grace, and doo think them sure to convene in any place where hyr grace is present. My lord Governor tuke to be advised while the morne at even, viz. the vii.th daie of the saide monith, and then to give the answer. Attour, that same daie incontinent the saide de liveraunce and consultacion was shewen to the remanent of the lords, both pre lates, erles, lords, barons, and other noble men of the realme personallie present, who being all singularlie asked of theire opinion, declarecl, ilk man for 2 c
402 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
himselfe, that the saide deliveraunce and consultacion was good and for the common weale of this realme : and therfore affirmed the same. The which vii.th daie being bepast, and noon an swer made nor sent by my lorde Gover nor on the premises, and aftre diverse messages sent to him of the lords of Counsaile, and nothing reaported again but vayne delaies : The lords of Coun saile, upon the ix.th daie of the saide moneth, directed furth our soverain ladie's (letres) to require my saide lorde Governor to compare in the said Graye ffrers place of Striveling, where the said convencion is holden, upon the x.th daie of the said moneth, to accept and con sent to the saide ordinaunce and articles, and to concurre with the quene’s grace in th’ administration of the governement with th’ advise and counsaile of the lords; with certification, that if he faileth it, the lords wolde determyn him to be suspended from th’ adminis- tracion of his offices, and wolde provide howe the same shulde be used in time to coom while further remeadie weare founde therto, as in the saide letres di rected therupon more f ully is conteyned. A.t the which x.th daie of Junii the lords convented in the fratre of the said graie (Freers, and there consulted upon the matiers concerning the commonweale- fande, and awayted upon the coming of my lord governor, and upon his answer, i*or a x houres before noon while xii howers was stryken. And he neither conrpared by himself, nor sent his an swer to accept and consent to the said ordinaunces and statutes there. Than the lords gave theire decrete, decerning my lord Governor to be suspended, and suspending him from th' administration of his offices, while further remeadye weare funde therfor. And because of the urgent necessite of the realme, and invading of the same by our old enny mies of England, and for the furthe setting of our soverain ladie’s aucthorite, and perfit obedience to be had therto, unitie concord to be had among all them of this realme both great and smale without th’ administration of the go vernement weare put in soom persones hands most convenient therfor, the saide lords, without variaunce, have thought noo other persone more convenient ther to nor the quene’s grace our soverain ladie’s mother, for the good and urgent causes before expressed. And therefore have chosen hyr grace to use and min
ister in the saide office of governement, with th’ advise of the lords of counsaile conforme to the acts and ordinaunces made therupon of before, while further remedye be made herto. And hyr grace hath accept the same in and upon hyr to be used with th’ advise of the saide lords as said is. And bicause hir grace can not doo the same without she be starklie mainteyned and defended ther intyll, Therefore we archbishopps, bish opps, erles, lords, barons, abbotts, and others noble men whose names herafter subscribed, doo bynd and oblige us, and promitt by the faithes in our bodies, and have gyven our aithes herupon, that we shall maintein and defende the quene’s grace our soverain ladie’s mother in the using and administracion of th’ office of governement and th’ aucthorite in all things. And we shall gyve unto hyr our best counsaile in all things. And shall resist with our bodies and friends and our hole substance, to all them that will impugne or comen in the contrarie therof undre the payne of perjurie and infamye. And also ilk oon of us shall tak afalde part with others, without excus or fenzeing in this matier and defense therof. Undre the paine afor saide.
" Gawen of Glasgow.
Patrick Morvinen.
Willm of Dumblane.
E,o. Orchaden : Epis.
T. Commendator of Driburt, D. de Cuper, V. de Culros.
Archbald Erle of Anguss.
Erle Bothwile.
Willm Erle of Montross.
Willm Lord Sanchar.
Robart Maxwell.
George Erle of Huntlie.
G. Erle of Caslis.
Erle of Merschell.
John Erle of Mentieth.
Hew lord Somerwell.
George Duglass.
Erle of Murray.
Archd Erle of Argile.
George Erle of Erroll.
John lord Erskin.
Willm lord of Sanct Jonn.
Malcum lorde chalmerlane.
Hew lord Lovett.
Schir John Campbell of Cawder. Kgt.1”
This extract settles the point as to the 1 In the State-paper Office; now published for the first time.
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 403
correctness of the Diurnal in its narra tive of the revolution of the 3d of June. Next came the question regarding the rival parliaments, the meeting of the three estates at Edinburgh, by sum mons of the governor, on the 5th of November, and the meeting of the par liament at Stirling, by summons of the queen-regent, on the 12th of the same month : upon this point the correspond- ence in the State-paper Office was silent; but fortunately the evidence of the Acts of the Scottish parliament estab lishes the accuracy of the facts stated in the Diurnal of Occurrents. In the second volume of the Acts,p. 445, we find that the governor Arran held a parliament at Edinburgh on the 6th of November; and one of the acts then passed by the three estates is thus en titled :—“ Deliverance annulling ane Proclamation be the Queen’s Moder, and certain Lordis, of ane pretendit parliament, and of certane other pre tendit actis.” In turning to the act we find the whole narrative of the Diurnal thus fully corroborated. It states, that “the queen mother (I use the modern spelling) to our sovereign lady, with a part of lords and others our sovereign lady’s lieges, ill-advised, has caused proclaim a pretended parliament to be held at the burgh of Stirling, the 12th day of November, instant, with continu- ation of days, without any sufficient authority; " after this preamble, the decision of the three estates is thus given :—“the whole three estates of parliament, with the votes of many others, nobles, barons, and gentlemen, being present, has declared, and declares the said pretended parliament to be held at Stirling, as said is, and the pre tended summons raised against my lord Governor, in their manner, to have been and to be, from the beginning, of none avail, force, nor effect. And such like all pretended acts made at Stirling re garding the suspending of my lord Governor from the administration of his said office, and discharging him of his authority in their manner.” The evidence contained in this statute so clearly proves the accuracy of the Diur nal of Occurrents, that upon this point any other remark would be superfluous.
A second proof of the authenticity of the same work is to be found in the accuracy of the account there given of the intrigues of the Douglases and their treasonable correspondence with Eng
land, at a time when our general his torians know nothing of any such matters. Here the Diurnal of Occur rents maintains its character for truth, when examined by the severest of all tests, the original correspondence of the principal actors in the events. Of this I shall give a striking example. In the Diurnal, pp. 39, 40, is an account of that abortive invasion of the governor, (August 10, 1545,) in which he broke into England with an army of thirty thousand men, and again on the third day thereafter, the 13th of August, was compelled to return home. Now, on this occasion, the Diurnal ascribes the failure of the expedition, and the re treat and dispersion of the army, to the deceit and treachery of George Douglas and his party.1 The dispersion of the Scottish army is thus mentioned, p. 39 :—“ Upon the nynt [ninth] day of August, the governor with his company made their musters on Fawnrig Mure to the number of 30,000 men by [besides] the Frenchmen whilk [which] were 3000. And the same day at even they passed in England, and burnt Cornwall and Tilmouth, Edderslie, Brankston, with sendrie othere towns thereabouts, and there did no other thing to their lak and dishonour.” “Upon the tenth day of August, the said Scottis was pairted [divided] in three battles [battalia], in the vanguard the Earl of Angus, Mar shall, Errol, Glencairn, and Cassillis, Lords Gray, Glammes, and Yester; in the rereward Erles Huntly, Bothwell, Lords Ruthven, Drummond, Borth wick, Fleming, Home ; in the middle ward the Governor, with the body of the realme and Frenchmen, with twa wings, the ane [one] Lord Seton, the Laird of Bass, and many other gentle men, the other the Laird of Buccleugh,
1 The retreat from Coldingham is ascribed to the same cause, “ On the morne [morrow] the Scots without any skaith [harm] fled misorderlie. The Inglishmen persevand this. twa thousand of thame followit the chase to Cockburne quha durst not bide [stay] a strike. Of this hoste the Erle Angus had the wangaird [vanguard], there was with him the Erles of Cassillis, Glencairne, the Lords Somerville, Yester, the sheriff of Ayr, quha [who] did but feebly ; in the rear was the Earl of Bothwell, quha baid [abided] stiffly quhill [until] he might no more. George Douglas had tbe wyte [blame] hereof, for he said the Englishmen were ten thousand men, lyin within the said town : the invention |artifice] was saissit on chance by the Erle of Bothwell.”
404 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
with all Liddesdale and Teviotdale; and on this order theyraid [rode] in Eng land, and burnt Tweesdale, Grendonrig, the great tower, Newbigging, and Dudie, with the towers thereof ; and there was on the Pethrig of Englishmen 6000 [had] the Scots followed with speed, they had vanquished all the said Eng lishmen. TTpon the 13th day of Au- gust, the Scottish men come hame, through the deceit of George Douglas, and the vanguard, who would not pass again through his tyisting.”
Such is the history of this remark able invasion given in the Diurnal, and to this narrative the same observation may be applied which was already made regarding the revolution in 1544, namely, that such an explanation of the cause of its failure is new to Scottish history, and to be found in the Diurnal alone. We find no mention of any such thing in Lesley, Maitland, or Buchanan. How, then, are we to discover the truth upon this subject? Simply by going to the letters of the actors themselves, which describe these events, and are fortu nately accessible. In the Statepaper Office we find an original despatch from the Earl of Hertford and the Council of the north to Henry the Eighth, in which, after detailing the plan of his proposed invasion, he encloses a letter in cipher which he had received from George Douglas and the Earls of Angus, Cassillis, and Marshal. It may be well to give Hertford’s description of the mode in which this letter was conveyed to him, as it contains a curious illus tration of the extreme caution with which this secret correspondence be tween Henry the Eighth and the Doug lases was carried on. “ After this device of the said proclamation, one Thomas Forster, who was of late, by your majestie’s commandment, at the desire of the Earls of Angus and Cas sillis, George Douglas and others, sent to them into Scotland, came hither to me the said earl, and shewed me a let ter sent to him from one Sym Penango, servant to George Douglas, of such effect as your majesty may perceive by the same letter here enclosed; upon the sight whereof I willed the said Thomas Forster to go and speke with the said Penango according to his desire, with whom he hath been at the place ap poynted between them, where he re ceived of the said Penango a letter in eipher, sent him from George Douglas,
which we have deciphered, and send both the cipher and the decipher to your majesty herewith.”1 The letter here described not only establishes the fact of the general treasonable corre spondence between Henry and the Earls of Angus, Cassillis, Marshal, George Douglas, and others, which is men tioned in the “Diurnal,” but contains this remarkable passage relative to the expedition of Arran into England, on the 9th of August, and his return home on the 13th of the same month, which, in the same work, is ascribed to the de ceit of George Douglas and the van guard. “ Further, as to this last jour ney of ours, it was advised by the queen, cardinal, and this French capitaine, Lorges Montgomery. Huntly fortified this army at his power. Notwithstand- ing, at short, all that they devised was stopped by us that are the king's friends. Their whole intent was to have besieged the king’s houses, unto the time they had gotten bargain, but all was stopt, whereof they stood nothing content.”2 Now, looking to the passage above in the Diurnal, we find it there asserted that the expedition was ruined “ thro the deceit of George Douglas and the van guard.” We know, from the same work, that in the vanguard were the Earls of Angus, Cassillis, and Marshal, with others. The journey or invasion took place on the 10th of August, the retreat on the 13th, and here on the 25th of the same month, we have a letter from George Douglas and the Earls of Angus, Cassillis and Marshal, in which they declare to the Earl of Hertford, that the whole expedition was stopped by them, and claim credit for it with the English king. This coin cidence offers a fine example of the cor roboration of an ancient chronicle by the original correspondence of the times; and the learned editor of the Diurnal will readily allow thafc a work thus corroborated could not have been com piled from traditional and imperfect sources, but must have been the pro duction, not only of a contemporary writer, but of one minutely and ac curately informed in the history of the times. It is for this reason I have quoted it as an original authority, and have preferred any information it com municates to the vague, loose, and ima
1 Orig. State-Paper Office ; not before pub lished.
2 Ibid.
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 405
ginary details of the general historians of this period. Other instances might be given of the accuracy of the first part of the Diurnal when checked by the correspondence of the times, but my limits will not permit me. That there are occasional errors in the narrative is not to be disputed : but they may be chiefly traced, I think, to the ignorance or carelessness of the transcribers of the manuscript.
Letter Z, pages 361 and 362. Conspiracy of Lady Glammis.
That a noble matron, in the prime of life, and of great beauty, should be tried, condemned, and burnt, for an attempt to compass the king’s death by poison, and should also have the crime of witchcraft imputed to her by most of our historians, is an appalling event. In the absence of direct proof, Mr Pit cairn, in his notes upon the trial of Lady Glammis, has adopted the story told by Buchanan, (book xiv. c. 54,) and repeated by all following writers, with the exception of Pinkerton ; he pro nounces her innocent of the crimes laid to her charge, and a victim of James’s implacable hatred to the house of Doug las. The examination of the curious evidence which he has published has led me to form a different opinion. As to her being justly found guilty of treason, in assisting the Earl of Angus and George Douglas, in their attempts to “invade“ the king’s person, and re-establish their authority in Scotland, there seems to be no question. It was natural she should support her brothers; and had her offences been confined to this, although the act was undoubtedly treason, it is probable the sentence of death would have been exchanged for banishment or imprisonment. But a litfcle investiga- tion will convince us, I think, that the king was not so unjust and implacable as has been imagined, nor the lady the injured and innocent woman she has been represented. Let us look a little into her life.
She married, probably about the year 1521, John, sixth Lord Glammis. He died on the 8th of August 1528, in his thirty-seventh year; and, about four months after his death, (Dec. 1, 1528,) Lady Glammis was summoned, with Patrick Hume of Blacater, Hugh Ken nedy of Girvanmains, and Patrick Char teris, to answer before parliament for
having given assistance to the Earl of Augus in convocating the king’s lieges for the invasion of his majesty’s per son.1 These men were all bold and active partisans of the Douglases. On September 20, 1529, we find that Lady Glammis and Patrick Charteris of Cu thelgurdy, a person who, in the inter val, had been indicted to stand his trial for fire-raising and cow-lifting,2 ob tainecl a letter of licence to pass to parts beyond sea, on their pilgrimage, and other lawful business.3 Whether Pat rick and the lady had gone upon their pilgrimage, does not appear, but she dicl not interrupt her political intrigues, and seems to have been again not only summoned, but found guilfcy of treason; for, on July 1, 1531, we find that Gavin Hamilton got a gift from the crown of the escheat of all the goods heritable and movable, of Janet Lady Glammis, which had been forfeited on account of her intercommuning with our sove reign lord’s rebels, or for any other crimes.4
At this time she appears to have fled from justice, and we lose sight of her for some time ; but, on 31st January 1532, a far darker crime than caballing with rebels, or associating with fire raisers, was laid to her charge. She was summoned to stand her trial at the justice-ayre of Forfar, for the poison ing her husband Lord Glammis. The crimes of poisoning and witchcraft were then very commonly associated, as may be seen from many interesting trials in Mr Pitcairn’s Collections. The great dealers in poisons were witches, and the potency of their drugs was thought to be increased by the charms and in cantations with which they were con cocted : hence probably the mala fama against Lady Glammis, as a witch or sorceress. But however this may be, it is certain that, on February 2, ancl February 26, 1532, Lord Ruthven, Lord Oliphant, with the Lairds of Ardoch, Moncrieff, Tullibardine, and a great many other barons, to the number of twenty-eight, were fined for not appear ing to pass upon the Lady Glammis’ jury :5 and the imperfect and mutilated state of the criminal records of this period, unfortunately leaves us in the
1 Pitcairn, vol. i. p. 188.
2 Ibid. vol. i. p. 141.
3 Ibid. vol. i. p. 244.
4 Ibid. vol. i. p. 246.
5 Pitcairn’s Trials. vol, i. p. 153,
406 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
dark as to the future proceedings upon this trial. The probability seems to be, that she was either acquitted, or the charge dropped from want of evidence. If innocent, she was certainly most un fortunate ; for, on the 17th of July 1537, she was, for the fourth time, brought to trial, found guilty of having been art and part in the conspiring the death of the king by poison, and also for her having treasonably assisted Ar chibald, earl ofAngus, and George Doug las his brother, who were traitors and rebels. For this crime she was con demned to be burned at the stake, the common mode of death, as Mr Pitcairn informs us, for all females of rank in cases of treason and murder, and from which he plausibly conjectures, that the vulgar opinion of her having been burn ed for a witch may have partly arisen. Her son Lord Glammis, then only six teen years old, her husband Archibald Campbell, a priest, and a barber named John Lyon, were tried along with her. The witnesses, as was usual in this cruel age, being examined under the rack, or pynebaukis, Lord Glammis, on his own confession, was found guilty of conceal- ing the conspiracy, and imprisoned till the death of James the Fifth, when he was restored to his estates and honours, upon the ground, that, in fear of his life, and having the rack before his eyes, he had made a false confession.1 The long extracts given by Mr Pitcairn, from the histories of Scott, (not Sir Walter Scott,) Lesley, Hume of Godscroft, and the Genealogy of the house of Drum- mond, seem to me scarcely worthy of the place he has assigned them,2 and cannot be quoted as authentic evidence. Scott’s story is a mere repetition of Buchanan’s, with some ludicrous adcli tions of his own—as, where he tells us, Archibald Campbell, the husband of Lacly Glammis, commanded the third regiment in the king’s army. Lesley falls into blunders which Mr Pitcairn has detected ; Sir James Balfour re peats them; and as for David Hume of Godscroft, none accmainted with his his tory will trust him, when he stands un supported by other evidence. The only authentic, and, as l believe, contemporary account of the trials of the Master of For bes and Lady Glammis, is to be found in the following passage from the Diurnal of Occurrents,p. 22:—“ In this menetyme,
1 Pitcairn’s Trials, vol. i. p 327.
2 Ibid. vol. i. p. 244.
the Master of Forbes was accusit of tressone by the Laird of Lenturk, and was put in ward in the castell of Edin- burgh. In the said moneth of Julii, the Lacly Glammis, sister to Archibald, earl of Angus, was accusit for tressonne; her husband, Archibald Campbell of Skepnische; her son, the Lord Glammis, of sixteen yeares of age ; ane barbour John Lyon, and ane priest, all accusit in the tolbooth of Edinburgh. The said lady was condamnit to be brynt quhell deid : scho deet; ancl her hus band, sone, and the rest, ordanyt to remain in prisone in the castell of Edin burgh forsaid.3 —Upon the 13th day of July, the Master of Forbes was con victed for tressonne, and drawin, hangit, and heidit. "
That there is any ground on which we may conclude, that unprincipled witnesses were brought forward to give false testimony, upon which the jury were compelled to convict her, I can not admit; still less do I perceive the proceedings to have been characterised by any savage traces of unmanly revenge upon the part of the king. On the other hand, it appears clear, that at this time the Douglases, whose last hope of restoration had been desfcroyed, began to embrace desperate designs. “ The letters of Penman, their secret agent,” says Pinkerton (vol. ii. p. 350,) “ to Sir George Douglas, his employer, betray a malice, and designs the most horrid.” “ The king is crazed, and ill spoken of by his people.” “He has beggared all Scotland. " “ All are weary of him.” “James shall do the com mandment of the Douglases, God will ing." “ All hate him and say he must go down.” “His glass will soon run out.” These diabolical expressions against a prince in the vigour of early life, what can they insinuate but poison or the dagger ? Could they be ad dressed to a person who did not seal them with approbation? And could a more fit or secret agent than a sister be
3 We may infer, I thinlc, from the omission of any notice of the horrid fate of the husband of Lady Grlammis, who, some time after his imprisonment, was dashed to pieces on the rocks in attempting to escape from the castle of Edinburgh, that the Diurnal was written at the very time of his trial. It is hardly possible, if it had been a subsequent com pilation, that this circumstance, which ap pears in all our historians, would have been omitted. That the author was a Roman Catholic appears from a passage in p. l9.
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 407
cmployed to promote the interests of her family at any risk ?" If the reader will turn to Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials, p. 190, and read the names of the jury men who gave the verdict against her, he will scarcely admit the idea of her heing innocent; and it is worthy of notice, that instead of having the least appearance of its being a packed jury, some of the leading men amongst them were friends and near connexions of the Douglases. John earl of Athole, one of the jury, married Janet, a sister of that Master of Forbes who suffered for treason at the same time as Lady Glammis, and who was a supporter of the Douglases.— (Douglas Peerage, vol. i. p. 141.) Ro bert lord Maxwell, another of the jury, it is wcll known, was intimately con- nected with the Douglases. He mar ried a daughter of Douglas of Drum lanrig, (Douglas, vol. ii. p. 317,) and his daughter, Margaret Maxwell, was after wards married to Archibald, earl of An gus, brother to Lady Glammis. Wil liam, Master of Glencairn, a third jury man, was also nearly related to the Douglases, and constantly of their party. His mother was Marjory, a daughter of Archibald, fifth Earl of Angus, a sister of Gawin Douglas, the celebrated trans lator of Virgil, and a grandaunt of the Earl of Angus, and of Lady Glammis. Gilbert, earl of Cassillis, another of the jurymen, and the pupil of Buchanan, was also a firm partisan of the Doug lases. Are we to believe that these men violated their oaths, and found guilty, upon false evidence, an innocent and noble lacly, in whose favour they must have f elt a strong bias ?
Pinkerton, whilst he defends James on good grounds, too rashly pronounces the cases of the Master of Forbes and of Lady Glammis to have had no con nexion with each other. There is, I think, a strong presumption to the con trary. The similarity in the charges against them, the circumstance that hoth were apprehended, tried, and exe cuted within two days of each other— the Master of Forbes on Saturday the 14th of July, and Lady Glammis on Tuesday the 17th ; and the fact that the object of both appears to have been to procure the restoration of the Doug lases by compassing the death of the king, are striking circumstances, and look as if both plots had been coined in the same mint. The revealer of the conspiracy of Forbes was, as we learn
from the extract from the Diurnal of Occurrents, the Laird of Lenturk; and this gentleman, we find from Pitcairn, vol. i. p. 200, was Thomas Strachan. His son, John Strachan, was accused as being a participator in the Master of Forbes’s treason, and it is worthy of notice, that David Strachan, probably of the same family, was one of those apprehended at the same time that Lord Glammis the son, and Home of Wed derburn the brother-in-law of Lady Glammis, were imprisoned.1 David Strachan, whose piteous petition for liberation has been given by Pitcairn, vol. i. p. 206, is nowhere mentioned as having been concerned in the treason of the Lord Forbes. The presumption seems to be, that he was imprisoned for his participation in Lady Glammis’s plot, and this seems in some degree to connect the two conspiracies. But all this is conjectural.2 It was not till the 22d of August, about five weeks after Lady Glammis had suffered, that John Lyon, her accomplice, was tried and found guilty of imagining and conspir- ing the king’s death by poison ; ancl of using the same poison for the destruc- tion of the Earl of Rothes ; whilst, on the same day, Alexander Makke, who had sold the poison, knowing from Lyon for what purpose it was bought, was also tried and convicted. Lyon was be headed : and Makke had his ears cut off and was banished by a singular sen tence from all parts of Scotland, except the county of Aberdeen.3 Mr Pitcairn has drawn an inference for the innocence of Lady Glammis, from the fact that a number of lords and inferior barons suffered themselves to be fined rather than act as jurymen against her. This, however, one of his most noted cases, shews to be no proof. The Master of Forbes confessed on the scaffold that he was guilty of the murder of Seton of Meldrum ; yet when tried on the 27th of August 1530, Gordon of Achindown, Lyon of Colmelegy, and fifteen other barons and landed gentlemen, were fined
1 Sir Thomas Clifford’s Letter, quoted by Pitcairn, vol. i. p. 198.
2 Pitcairn, vol. i. p. 202* 203*.
3 John Strachan and Donald Mackay were accomplices with the Master of Forbes, in the murder of Seton of Meldrum. Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials, vol. i. p. 150-175: Alexan der Makke (Mackay) and David Strachan were accomplices with Lady Grlammis in her at tempt to poison the king.
403 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND.
for not appearing to pass on his assize. A refusal of this kind was in fact a proof of the power, not of the innocence of the party accused. In concluding this note, I may mention that Lord Glammis had made himself obnoxious to the Douglases, and may therefore have incurred the resentment of his high-spirited and determined consort,
by refusing to join them with his vas sals on the noted occasion, when they proceeded against the Border thieves, taking the young king along with them —(Pitcairn, vol. i. p. 136.) It was on this occasion that Scott of Buccleuch unsuccessfully attempted to rescue his sovereign from the captivity in which he was held.
end of vol. ii,
BALLANTYXE AND COMPANY, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
But first, if you want to come back to Scotland's History and Legends again, just add www.historyandlegends.com to your bookmarks or favorites now! Then you'll find it easy!
Also, please consider sharing our Scottish History and Legends website with your online friends.
Our Privacy Policy can be found at www.cholesterolcholestrol.com/privacypolicy.htm
Copyright © 2000-present Donald Urquhart. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our legal disclaimer.
|