CHAPTER XI.

ROBERT BRUCE JOINS THE STANDARD OF WALLACE.--PERCY AND CLIFFORD SENT TO

SUPPRESS THE INSURRECTION.--NIGHT SKIRMISH IN ANNANDALE.--DISAFFECTION

OF THE SCOTTISH NOBLES.--WALLACE RETIRES TO THE NORTH.--BATTLE OF

STIRLING BRIDGE.

The success of the insurrection excited by Wallace, has been attributed

by some English authors--and by Langtoft[104] in particular--to the

foolish parsimony of Cressingham, who had disgusted the English

soldiery by withholding their pay, at a time when their services

might have been of the greatest advantage. In consequence of this

unjust procedure, many of the yeomen and pages, finding little else

than danger to be met with in the service, deserted their posts, and

returned to their own country. Although the impolitic and avaricious

character of the English treasurer is a matter on which the authors of

both countries are agreed, the precipitation with which the garrisons

of the Usurper now retreated on the approach of the Scots, shows that

the severe examples which had already been made were not without their

effect.

While our hero was thus following up his plan for the emancipation

of his country, his standard was unexpectedly joined by the younger

Robert Bruce. This powerful baron, it seems, had incurred the suspicion

of the Warden of the Western Marches, who summoned him to attend at

Carlisle, on pretence of business relating to the kingdom. Afraid to

disobey, Bruce made his appearance, accompanied by a numerous retinue

of his followers, and was there obliged to make oath on the consecrated

host, and the sword of Thomas à Becket, that he would remain the

faithful vassal of the King of England. In order to prove his loyalty,

and do away with the mistrust attached to him, he made an inroad on

the estates of Sir William Douglas, who at the time was acting with

Wallace, and carried off his wife and children to one of his own

fortresses in Annandale. Having thus lulled the suspicions that had

been awakened, he next assembled his father’s vassals, and endeavoured

to persuade them to join him in attempting the deliverance of their

country. In this, however, he was disappointed: he therefore collected

his own retainers, and marched to the quarters of Wallace; consoling

himself with the reflection, that the Pope would easily absolve him

from his extorted oath.

The insurrection in Scotland had hitherto been regarded by Edward

more as the unconnected operations of banditti, than any thing like

an organized scheme for regaining the national independence. Having

most of the Scottish barons in his power from whom he thought he had

any thing to apprehend, and conceiving that their vassals would not

dare to move without the warrant of their superior,--he looked upon

the affair as one which the troops he had left behind were more than

sufficient to suppress. In this opinion he was confirmed both by the

English and the Scotch barons whom he had along with him. The latter,

either ignorant, or pretending ignorance of the talents and resources

of our hero, represented their presence as being absolutely necessary

before any formidable force could be brought into the field; and

Langtoft[105] charges the English barons with deceiving their sovereign

in the affair, and concealing from him the real state of the country.

It is a matter of notoriety, that about this time, Edward and his

nobles were not on the best of terms. Having now, as he thought, in

addition to Wales, insured the subjection and obedience of Scotland,

and remembering the facility with which, by the aid of 30,000 Scots

lent him by Alexander III., he overawed and suppressed the Earl of

Gloucester and those who took part with him; he began to assume towards

the English nobility an imperious and haughty demeanour, which both

alarmed their fears and excited their jealousy. The unprincipled

stretches of power which he had attempted since his triumphal entry

into London after his victories in Scotland, had also sown the seeds of

dissatisfaction among the inferior classes, who, no longer dazzled with

the splendour of his achievements over the freedom of their neighbours,

began to reflect on the encroachments which their ambitious sovereign

was making on their own.

When Edward, therefore, became fully apprised of the serious nature

of the revolt in Scotland, he paused in the midst of preparations

for an expedition to Flanders, and despatched orders to the Earl of

Surrey for the suppression and punishment of the insurgents. This

distinguished and powerful nobleman, the most efficient perhaps of all

Edward’s generals, was at that time residing in Northumberland for the

recovery of his health. Having associated with him in the command, his

nephew Lord Henry Percy, and Robert de Clifford, he sent them forward

with forty thousand foot and three hundred cavalry, a force which he

deemed sufficient to restore the country to the allegiance of his

master.[106]

While the troops under Percy and Clifford were on their march through

Annandale, their camp was attacked during the night by a body of Scots,

led on by Wallace and Douglas. The darkness prevented the English from

at first discovering the numbers of their assailants. Much confusion

in consequence ensued; and many were either killed or driven into the

adjacent morass. In this extremity, the English set fire to a number of

their own tents; and, by the light thus obtained, they were enabled to

form their ranks, and repulse the enemy, who were too inconsiderable

in number to attempt any thing beyond a surprise. Hence, it may be

inferred, that Bruce and his Annandale vassals were not engaged in the

affair.

The English army lost no time in following the tract of the Scots, who

retired towards those districts where the cause of national liberty

had gained the greatest ascendancy. On reaching the neighbourhood

of Irvine, the English commander found Wallace and the insurgent

barons encamped on a well chosen position, and able, from their

numbers, to have given battle, had they not been wofully enfeebled

by dissension. The feuds among them ran so high, that Sir Richard

Lundin, whose services had lately proved so useful, went over in

disgust to the enemy, declaring that “he would no longer remain with

a party at variance with itself.” His example was speedily followed

by others, most of whom, as they were the cause of the dissension,

could not assign the same reason for their conduct. Pride of birth,

and reluctance on the part of the higher barons to submit to the only

man among them who had talents[107] to meet the emergency, have been

assigned, with great probability, as the cause of this unfortunate

disagreement. The Steward of Scotland; his brother, the Knight of

Bonkill; Robert Bruce; William Douglas; Alexander de Lindsay; and

Wishart, Bishop of Glasgow, with their followers, were among those

who submitted to the enemy. The Bishop negociated the terms on which

they were to be admitted to the peace of their “Lord Paramount:”--an

acknowledgment of their errors, and hostages for their future

obedience, were the basis of the treaty; and a copy of the deed, to

which their seals were appended, was sent to Wallace, in expectation

of his following their example. The high-minded patriot, however,

entertaining views of a more elevated nature, treated this record of

their desertion of the liberties of their country with merited disdain.

At the head of his personal adherents, and a large body of the “_liberi

firmarii_,” or free yeomanry of Scotland, Wallace retired indignantly

towards the North. This latter class of men consisted of the tenants,

and descendants of tenants, of the crown and church-lands, or those who

occupied farms on the demesnes of the barons, for which they paid an

equivalent rent in money or produce. They had the privilege of removing

to whatever place they might think most desirable, and owed no military

service except to the King for the defence of the country. Among

them the independence of Scotland always found its most faithful and

stubborn supporters. These “liberi firmarii,” for so they are called in

the chartularies, and chamberlains’ accounts, were considered so useful

from their superior industry, and agricultural knowledge, that during

the minority of the Maid of Norway, a sum of money appears to have been

distributed among them as an inducement to remain on the crown lands

of Libertoun and Lawrence-town, which they were preparing to leave in

consequence of a mortality among their cattle. They formed a striking

contrast to the _cottars_ or _villeyns_, who were entirely subject,

both in body and means, to the will of the landholder, and were sold or

transferred along with the estate; and could be claimed or brought back

to it, if they removed, in the same manner as strayed cattle.[108]

These formed the bulk of the degraded horde who followed the banners of

the recreant barons, and whose servility, ignorance and ferocity, often

made them dangerous to the liberties of the country; while the former

class, along with the freemen of the boroughs, supplied the materials

from which Wallace recruited the ranks of his patriotic battalions.

Aware, from former experience, of the difficulty of bringing Wallace to

action if he were not so inclined, Percy and Clifford appear to have

withdrawn their forces, satisfied with having detached the aristocracy

from his standard; none remaining with our hero save the gallant Sir

Andrew Murray, Sir John Graham, and a few of his own personal friends.

But the system which Wallace had organised for the emancipation of his

country, was not liable to any material derangement, in consequence of

the defection of a few timid and interested barons. It is true, the

desertion of such men as Sir William Douglas must have occasioned him

considerable regret, being thereby prevented from meeting the enemy

openly in the field, with such an equality of force as would have

insured success. This feeling, however, did not retard his exertions,

but rather stimulated him to fresh undertakings; for we find that he

shortly afterwards surprised and garrisoned the Castle of Dunotter.

Tyber,[109] or Tibber, on the banks of the Nith, he also took and

destroyed. Forfar, Brechin and Montrose, were either taken, or deserted

by their garrisons on his approach. Aberdeen, which the enemy set on

fire, and then retreated to their ships, afterwards fell into his

hands. He then led his troops against the Castle of Dundee, and had

already made considerable progress in the siege of that strong-hold,

when he was apprised of the advance of an English army under the Earl

of Warren, and Cressingham the treasurer.

Edward, dissatisfied with the imperfect measures which had been taken

for the suppression of the Scottish revolt, and irritated by the

accounts which were daily received of the operations of the insurgents,

had despatched peremptory orders for Warren to proceed in person to

the North. He also directed his writs to the Bishop and Sheriff of

Aberdeenshire, commanding them to adopt strong and effectual means for

extinguishing the flame of rebellion within the boundaries of their

jurisdiction. They were likewise required to furnish whatever supplies

might be wanted by William de Warren[110] for the defence of the Castle

of Urquhart, a strong and extensive fortress on the banks of Loch

Ness, of which he was governor. Warren was also ordered to be at his

post, and fully prepared to meet any attempt of the enemy.

On learning the movements of the English, Wallace collected those of

the burgesses of Dundee who were able to bear arms, and, placing them

under the command of their townsman, Sir Alexander Scrymgeour, enjoined

them, at the peril of “lyf and lyme,”[111] to continue the siege. He

then retired, with his followers, who were now considerably increased,

to watch the motions of the advancing army.

In cases of invasion, a favourite plan adopted by the Scots for

the defence of their country, was to convey their cattle and other

valuables to the more inaccessible districts north of the Forth.

By this measure, they not only secured their own suppplies, but,

by depriving their enemies of the means of subsistence, compelled

them to an early retreat as the only resource against the miseries

of starvation. On the present occasion the usual precaution was not

omitted.[112]

The success which had attended our hero, since the affair of Irvine,

and the formidable character of the well-disciplined force which now

adhered to his banner, occasioned a wavering among a number of those

barons who had so shamefully submitted to the usurper. Their situation,

it must be allowed, had become one of great difficulty. The character

of Wallace was stern and decisive. The punishment he inflicted on

such offenders, they had reason to know was seldom mitigated by any

consideration for the high rank of the parties;[113] and the English

had repeatedly shown, that they were unable to protect the _serviles_

from the vengeance of their indignant countrymen. It was therefore with

no slight alarm that the party heard of the house of the Bishop of

Glasgow being attacked, and pillaged, and his family carried off they

knew not whither. The selection which Wallace had made of Wishart, as

an example to the others, had no doubt been suggested partly by the

ingratitude of that churchman, in deserting the cause, after having

been, by means of the patriots, so lately restored to his diocese; and

partly from his being so instrumental in the disgraceful negociation

with the enemy. The sacredness attached to his character, as a priest,

would speedily disappear before the heinous offence of assisting to

detach, in the hour of need, the swords of a Douglas, a Lundin, and

a Bruce, from the service of their country. Meanwhile the hostages

for their fidelity had been carelessly exacted; and when soon after

called for by Warren, (whose remiss conduct had so far incurred the

displeasure of Edward, that he sent Brian Fitz Alan to supersede him

as lieutenant), he found them more inclined for a new arrangement,

than willing to fulfil the terms of the former. They wished, in

particular, to introduce some stipulations respecting the liberty of

Scotland, a proposal no doubt made for the purpose of allaying in some

degree the indignation of their patriotic countrymen. The continued

obstinacy, and increasing power of Wallace, was made a pretext for

their non-compliance; and they could now with apparent justice decline

the final ratification of a deed of treason against the independence of

their country, when protection from the consequences was so extremely

uncertain.

In this dilemma the Steward and the Earl of Lennox sought permission

of Warren to open a communication with the leader of the Scots,

under pretext of bringing him over to the interests of Edward. In

consequence of this arrangement, these chiefs ventured to visit the

Scottish army, which, by this time, had reached the neighbourhood of

Stirling, and taken up a strong position near the bridge, where it

appeared determined to wait the approach of the English. The retiring

population had left little behind them that could be useful to the

enemy; all their cattle and provisions being now secured in the rear of

the protecting columns of their countrymen. This rendered the position

of Wallace still more valuable, prepared, as he was, in the event of a

defeat, to fall back to certain supplies, while his opponents would be

still farther removed from their resources.

But if feuds had rendered the Scots inert and submissive to the

enemy at Irvine, the councils of the English were now, in their turn,

distracted from the same cause. The mind of Warren appeared more

occupied in brooding over his late disgrace, than in attending to the

details of the campaign; while Cressingham,[114] a haughty, ambitious,

and imperious churchman, assumed additional importance on learning that

his colleague had incurred the royal displeasure. Conflicting measures,

supported by querulous and acrimonious language, engendered a dangerous

spirit of animosity between them. Cressingham, on the plea of economy,

ordered the disbanding of a body of eight thousand foot and three

hundred cavalry, commanded by Lord Henry Percy, a force which Warren

wished to retain as a reserve; and during the altercations which this

occasioned, the communications of the Steward and the Earl of Lennox

with the Scottish camp were injudiciously allowed to continue.

On the arrival, however, of the English in front of the position

occupied by the Scots, those noblemen returned. With well feigned

displeasure they announced their inability to make any pacific

impression on Wallace and his followers; and then took their leave, for

the alleged purpose of bringing up a number of their mounted vassals to

join the English, who were to defile along the bridge in the morning.

Five thousand foot and a body of Welsh archers had passed the bridge

before Warren had left his bed.[115] Whether this sluggishness on the

part of the English general arose from indisposition or chagrin, is not

explicitly stated. The troops, however, on finding that they were not

supported by the rest of the army, returned to their station. Warren,

who arose about an hour after,--feeling, perhaps, reluctant to attack

the Scots in their present position, and not deeming it prudent to

calculate on the recurrence of the same mistake which had given him so

easy a victory at Dunbar,--despatched two friars to make a last attempt

at pacification.

The answer returned was evidently intended to exasperate the English,

and bring them on headlong to the fray. After a bold declaration

of independence, a taunting allusion was made to the conquerors of

England. “We came not here,” said the intrepid assertor of Scotland’s

rights, “to negociate, but to fight; and were even your masters to come

and attack us, we are ready to meet them at our swords’ point, and show

them that our country is free.” Enraged at this stern and provoking

defiance, the English became clamorous to be led on.

A council of war being called, it was proposed by Cressingham that

the army should instantly cross the river and attack the Scots. In

this he was opposed by Sir Richard Lundin, who pointed out the many

difficulties they would have to encounter in attempting to defile along

a bridge, so narrow, in presence of so wary an enemy; and offered to

guide them to a ford not far distant, where they could pass with less

hazard. Cressingham,--either displeased at being contradicted,--or

not placing full reliance on the fidelity of Lundin, who had but

recently joined the English, told Warren,--who appeared to hesitate,

that, as treasurer of the King of England, he (Cressingham) could not

be answerable for squandering the money of his master in protracted

warfare with a handful of enemies, who,--in order to be defeated, had

only to be attacked, and would always be formidable,--provided they

were never brought to an engagement. Stung by the reproach conveyed in

these remarks, Warren gave orders for the troops to move onwards.

Sir Marmaduke Twenge, a knight belonging to the North-Riding of

Yorkshire, of much experience and distinguished personal prowess,

assisted Cressingham in leading the van. When nearly one half of the

English had cleared the bridge without opposition, an attempt was

made to dislodge the Scots from the ground they had chosen; and for

that purpose, Sir Marmaduke rather impatiently charged up-hill with

a body of heavy-armed cavalry. The consequence was, however, fatal

to the assailants, as the enemy, from their vantage-ground, drove

them headlong before them with their long spears. In the mean time,

the communication between the bridge and the van of the English army

was cut off by a masterly movement of a division of the Scots, who

afterwards kept up such an incessant discharge of arrows, darts,[116]

“gavelocks,” and other missiles, as completely interrupted the

progress of the enemy. Wallace contemplated, for a moment, the

success of his plan, and instantly rushed down to the attack with an

impetuosity which the scarcely formed battalions of the English were

ill prepared to withstand. Giving way to the shock, they fell into

irretrievable confusion, while the repeated charges of the compact

bodies of the Scottish spearmen were fast covering the ground with

the splendid wreck of the chivalry of England. The scene now became

animating beyond measure; and many of those who had defended the bridge

forsook their companions to join in the desperate _mêleé_. The passage

being thus left comparatively open, the royal standard of England,

displaying “_Three gold leopards courant, set on red_,” was advanced

to the cry of--“For God and St George!” attended by a strong body of

knights, who, with their triangular shields, defending themselves from

the missiles which still showered thick upon the bridge, rushed forward

to aid their fellow-combatants. The banner of Warren next appeared,

_chequered with gold and azure_, and followed by his numerous vassals.

The day, however, was too far gone to be retrieved, even by this

powerful assistance. Finding no room to form, they only increased the

confusion, and swelled the slaughter made by the Scottish spearmen,

before whose steady and overwhelming charges thousands were either

borne down or driven into the river.

While Warren, with inexpressible anxiety, beheld from the opposite bank

the destruction of the flower of his army, the Steward of Scotland

and the Earl of Lennox were seen approaching with a strong body of

horse; but, as might be expected, instead of joining the English,

they assisted their countrymen in pursuing and killing those who were

attempting to save themselves. Sir Marmaduke Twenge gallantly cut his

way to the bridge, and escaped.[117]

The panic now became general, and the face of the country was soon

covered with a confused mass of terrified fugitives, hurrying on to

avoid the swords of their conquerors, and increasing, as they fled,

the disorder of their retreat, by throwing away their arms and their

standards, in order to facilitate their flight.

Wallace having crossed the ford alluded to by Lundin, the pursuit

was followed up with the most destructive perseverance. The day of

retribution had arrived;--the butcheries of Berwick, the carnage

of Dunbar, with a long list of national indignities and personal

sufferings had now to be atoned for. Conscious of the provocation which

had roused to frenzy the vengeance of an infuriated people, Warren

turned with dismay from the scene of havoc, leaving twenty thousand

of his soldiers to manure the fields of those they had so lately

oppressed. Cressingham, the most detested of all the tools of Edward,

was among the number of the slain;--and when Wallace came up, a party

were employed in flaying the body. According to the MS. Chronicle of

Lanercost, he is said to have ordered only as much of the skin to be

taken off as would make a sword-belt; and his men, perhaps, imitating

his example, might have appropriated the rest. This, says a respectable

author,[118] is no doubt the origin of the tale told by Abercromby and

some other historians, of the Scots having used it as girths to their

horses. An order of this kind, given in the heat of the pursuit, was

perhaps never thought of afterwards; at least, we have no account of

Wallace ever wearing such an appendage. The circumstance, however,

shows the deep-rooted detestation with which the individual was

regarded.

Warren, who fled rapidly to Berwick, was most probably, like another

English general of more modern times, the first herald of his own

discomfiture. The consternation which his disaster occasioned among his

countrymen in Scotland was so great, that few or none would venture to

wait the approach of the enemy; but, abandoning their strongholds, they

hurried southward with the greatest precipitation, justly conceiving

that the terms they were likely to obtain from one who followed up his

victories with so much energy, were hardly worth staying for. The loss

on the part of the Scots was comparatively small; none of note having

fallen, save the brave Sir Andrew Murray of Bothwell.[119]

In this manner was Scotland once more restored to that liberty of which

she had been so unjustly deprived. Nor was the benefit conferred on the

country less, than the glory which redounded to her gallant liberator.

The brilliant and decisive victory at Stirling Bridge was gained on the

11th September 1297, exactly twelve months and eleven days from the

return of Edward to Berwick, after what he conceived to be the final

subjugation of the kingdom.

The state of Scotland in the early part of 1297, was such as might well

have extinguished the ardour of any mind possessed of less energy than

that of Wallace. He saw his country humbled and debased at the feet of

a tyrant, whose talents and power forbade every hope of emancipation,

while the boldest of her nobles dared not express a wish to be free.

His own indignant feelings blazed forth, and, with his kindling

enthusiasm, he breathed into his torpid and enslaved countrymen, the

breath as it were of a new existence. The regenerating influence of

his heroic example, was quickly caught by those whose bosoms still

beat responsive to the call of honour; and in the short space we have

mentioned, those banners which had lately waved over hecatombs of

butchered Scots, and had been paraded through the land with all the

triumphant arrogance of conquest, were now trampled under foot, and

the colossal power by which they were sustained, overthrown before

the virtuous indignation of a people determined to be free. When we

contemplate the might and the resources of Edward, who, in addition

to those of his own kingdom, had Ireland, Wales, and his Continental

possessions to depend upon; it is impossible not to feel impressed with

admiration at the greatness of that mind, which, with the fractions of

a divided and dispirited people, could form the idea of braving a force

so overwhelming: But when we find those plans which he had conceived

in the deep recesses of his woodland retreats, not only perseveringly

carried on against a tide of adverse circumstances--in defiance of the

aristocracy of his own country, and the opposition of secret and avowed

enemies--it may with truth be said, that, however highly he may have

been extolled, a tythe of his greatness has not yet been appreciated.

Much has been said of romance being mixed up with the accounts given

of him; but it would be difficult for any of those who delight in

_nibbling_ at great names, to point out any tradition respecting

Wallace, sufficiently romantic to outstrip the simple facts that stand

recorded of him in the authentic annals of British history.

Deserted by the barons at a time when he conceived he had united in

the sacred cause all that was noble, and all that was high minded in

the land, it required no common intrepidity to bear up against their

heartless and unseemly defection; and to recruit his ranks after so

serious a diminution, required talents of the highest order, and

exertions beyond the reach of ordinary men. This, however, he not

only accomplished, but also recovered a number of fortresses,--drove

the enemy from the North, and, with a numerous and gallant army, sat

down in a well-chosen position, to await the advance of the legions

of England,--all within two months of the disgraceful negociation at

Irvine.

After a victory achieved in the face of difficulties so formidable;

with what feelings must the hero of Stirling Bridge and the Scottish

aristocracy have regarded each other! The mighty force of him whom

they had acknowledged as their Lord Paramount, was now broken and

dispersed before the superior valour and steadiness of one whom they

had so rashly abandoned. In the rich harvest of laurels which had been

acquired, they had excluded themselves from all participation; and,

though conscious that they could not lay claim to a single leaf, they

were sensible that the heroism of their late companions would soon

be emblazoned through every country in Europe; while they had the

mortification to reflect, that the tale of their own pusillanimous

submission, would be held up as a counterpart to the gallantry of

those friends whom they had so shamefully forsaken in the road to

immortality.

APPENDIX.

A.

WALLACE’S TREE.--TORWOOD.

Page 179.

The following memoranda respecting this celebrated tree, will doubtless

be acceptable to the reader:[120]

“In Dunipace parish is the famous Torwood, in the middle of which

there are the remains of Wallace’s Tree, an oak, which, according to a

measurement when entire, was said to be about 12 feet diameter. To this

wood Wallace is said to have fled, and secreted himself in the body of

that tree, then hollow, after his defeat in the north.”--_Stat. Acc._

iii. 336.

“This oak is still dignified by the name of _Wallace’s Tree_. It stands

in the middle of a swampy moss, having a causeway round its ruins;

and its destruction has been much precipitated, by the veneration in

which the Scottish hero has been long held; numerous pieces have been

carried off, to be converted into various memorials of the Champion of

Scotland.”--_Kerr’s Hist. of Bruce_, i. 127.

“Wallace’s Oak, as it has been called for ages, still remains in the

Torwood near Stirling. The old tradition of the country bears, that Sir

William Wallace, after a lost battle, secreted himself in this tree,

and escaped the pursuit of his enemies. By this account, it behoved

then, that is, about 500 years ago, to have been a large tree. Whatever

may be its age, it certainly has in its ruins the appearance of greater

antiquity than what I have observed in any tree in Scotland.

“At a very remote period it has separated in the middle, and the one

half of it has mouldered entirely away. The other half remains, and is

in one place about twenty feet high. But what the tree was above this

height, is unknown. All the original part of the tree is putrid. Yet

one may perceive that the whole of it, from the head to the very bark,

has been red wood, and is so hard even in its putrid state as to admit

of a polish.

“In this ancient Torwood, it stands in a manner alone. For there are

no trees, nor any ruin of a tree, to be seen that is nearly coeval.

Compared to it, even the oldest of them is of a very modern date. The

memory of its having saved Wallace, has probably been the means of its

preservation, when all the rest of the wood at different times has been

destroyed. It has been immemorially held in veneration, and is still

viewed in that light.

“There is a peculiar sort of renovation of an old tree that sometimes

occurs, and has taken place in this. A young bark has shot upwards from

the root in several places, which has formed fresh branches towards the

top of the old trunk. This young bark has spread, and still spreads,

like a callus, over several parts of the old tree that are dead; and

particularly over a very large arm, which has had no bark on it in the

remembrance of the oldest person alive.

“The tree stands in carse land, in a deep wet clay-soil. The road

that passes by it in the wood is laid crossways with thick branches

of trees, to prevent carriages from sinking to the axles in wet

weather.”--_Essays on Natural History, by John Walker, D.D._ (1771.)

The ground on which this tree stood was elevated above the surrounding

level, which appears at one time to have been a sort of swamp.

Causeways of a rude construction led up to the oak on different

directions; and as the first formation of these causeways is beyond

the memory of the oldest inhabitants living, it proves that the

sheltering place of the Defender of Scotland must have been an object

of deep interest to his countrymen at a very early period. Although

this ancient memorial of Wallace measured, in the recollection of

people still living, 42 feet in circumference, not a vestige of it

is now to be discovered. The veneration with which it was regarded,

secured it from all human interference; and it was left to the winds

of heaven, and the hand of time, till it reached that state of decay

which indicated an approaching crisis. Its extinction was then hastened

by an anxiety on the part of visitors to possess some portion of it,

as a relict of one with whose name it had been so long associated;

and so far was this feeling carried, that, after the trunk had

disappeared, the ground was dug up to the extent of twelve feet round

it, in order to get at any fragment of the root that might chance to

remain. This grand search took place after the time was fixed for the

visit of George IV. to Scotland; and Mr Craig, an artist residing at

Helensburgh, of considerable taste in his profession, used a part of it

which had then been found, in the formation of a snuff-box, ingeniously

composed, besides, of various small pieces of wood, including portions

of “the Elderslie Oak,” “Queen Mary’s Yew,” the “Bush abune Traquair,”

and other celebrated inmates of the forest, which have been consecrated

by the historical and poetical Muse of Scotland. This elegant little

national gem was with much propriety presented to, and graciously

accepted by, his Majesty, during his residence in Scotland. Thus, after

a lapse of ages, the root of that oak which had preserved the houseless

patriot when outlawed by the enemies of his country, has, by a strange

vicissitude, been transplanted to the personal possession of the

legitimate descendant of that race of kings for whose right he so nobly

contended, and whose beloved representative now wields a sceptre over a

countless accumulation of subjects, and a dominion from which the sun

may be said never to withdraw his light.

The wood-cut which we are now about to introduce, shows the state

of the tree in 1789, at which time it measured twenty-four feet in

height. It is taken from a drawing with which the publishers have been

politely favoured by the family of the late Mr A. Kincaid, a gentleman

of literary attainments, to whom the public are indebted for a History

of Edinburgh, and some other meritorious publications; and who visited

the Torwood, and made the following sketch in the year above mentioned.

Although exhibiting the same general appearance as the drawing made

by Mr Nasmyth eighteen years earlier, which forms the vignette to this

volume, it will be observed that it was gradually hastening to decay;

and, as partially filling up a _hiatus_ in the history of the “august

vegetable,” we have much pleasure in presenting it to our readers.

[Illustration]

In the preceding year, at the depth of a foot from the surface, and

about 30 feet west of Wallace’s tree, the head of an ancient Scottish

spear was found, which was presented to the Society of Antiquaries of

Scotland, by Mr Alexander Kincaid. By the kindness of that learned

body, we are also enabled to give the following wood-cut of this

antique and once-powerful weapon. It measures 8 inches in length, and,

if not of higher antiquity, was probably one of those used in the fatal

conflict which took place in the Torwood between James III. and his

rebellious nobles in 1488.

[Illustration: Length 8 inches.]

B.

THE CRAWFURDS.

Page 193.

Crawfurd, is a corruption of two Celtic words _Crodh-Phort_, pronounced

_Cro-forst_, signifying _a sheltering place for cattle_, a designation

expressive of the general appearance of the parish of Crawford-John.

As every thing relating to so illustrious a character as Wallace is

important, the following pedigree, showing his maternal descent, will

doubtless be acceptable to many.

According to that accurate genealogist _George Crawfurd_, author of

the _Scottish Peerage_, and the _History of Renfrewshire_, and of the

_House of Stewart_, published more than 100 years ago, the Craufurds

are derived from Thorlongus, an Anglo-Danish chief, who, being expelled

from Northumberland by William the Conqueror, found an asylum in

Scotland, and, in particular, had a grant of land in the Merse from

Edgar, King of Scots, whose reign is included betwixt the year 1097 and

the 8th January 1106-7.

This appears from _Crawfurd’s_ MS. “History of the Craufurds,” in

the Advocates’ Library, and is corroborated by _Anderson_ in his

_Diplomata_, compiled at the desire of the Scots Parliament, who has

this notice of Thor-Longus:--“Hic vir nobilis et Anglus genere fuisse,

videtur ac forte idem qui _Thor_ in Libro vulgo dicto _Doomsday-Book_,

sæpius memoratus amplissimis suis prædiis in borealibus Angliæ partibus

sitis a Gullielmo Conquisitore erat exûtus.”

At what particular time his expulsion took place, does not precisely

appear; but it seems probable that it must have been betwixt the years

1069 and 1074, when, from the unsubmissive spirit of the Northumbrians,

they brought down on their own heads the most direful wrath of the

conqueror, who was so provoked with them, for joining their original

countrymen the Danes, who had at that time invaded England, (and whom,

for all his prowess, he was fain to buy off), that “he swore by the

splendour of God he would not leave a soul alive;” and so soon as he

found it in his power (the foreigners being now gone) to be avenged of

them, he ravaged their country in so merciless a manner, that for 60

miles together he did not leave a single house standing.--See _Rapin_,

vol. i. p. 172.

All this took place betwixt the years as above stated; and as they

were quite subdued by the last of these dates (1074), and as there

appeared to have been no more exterminating spoliation of this part of

the country afterwards during William’s reign, it seems to be a fair

conclusion, that this Anglo-Danish chief had found it necessary to fly,

and make his escape to Scotland during the interim mentioned. The era

of the _Doomsday-Book_ itself (1079), in which Thor is mentioned to

have been, before that time, deprived of his possessions, should be a

concluding evidence of the fact. That he obtained lands in Scotland

during the reign of King Edgar, appears distinctly from the following

writs, copied from the MS. History of Crawfurd, and which also are to

be found in the archives of the cathedral of Durham.

CHARTA THORLONGI.

Omnibus sanctæ matris Ecclesiæ filiis Thorlongus in Domino, salutem:

Sciatis quod Edgarus Dominus meus Rex Scottorum, dedit mihi Ednaham

desertam, quam ego, suo auxilio et mea propria pecunia inhabitavi,

et ecclesiam in honorem Sancti Cuthberti fabricavi, quam ecclesiam

cum una carrucata terræ, Deo et Sancto Cuthberto et monachis ejus in

perpetuum possidendum dedi; hanc igitur donationem feci pro anima

domini mei Regis Edgari, et pro animabus patris et matris illius, et

pro redemptione Lefwini patris mei dilectissimi, et pro meimet ipsius

tam corporis quam animæ salute, et siquis hanc meam donationem sancto

predicto et monachis sibi servientibus aliqua vi vel ingenio auferre

presumserit, auferat ab eo Deus omnipotens vitam Regni celestis, et cum

diabolo et angelis ejus pœnas sustinet eternas. Amen.

[Illustration]

EJUSDEM.

Domino suo charissmo David Comiti Thor, omnibusque suis, salutem:

Scias domine mi, quod Edgarus Rex frater vester dedit mihi Ednaham

desertam, quam ego suo auxilio et mea pecunia inhabitavi, et ecclesiam

a fundamentis fabricavi quam frater vester Rex in honorem Sancti

Cuthberti fecit, dedicavit, et una carrucata terræ eam dotavit. Hanc

eandem ecclesiam pro anima ejusdem domini mei Regis Edgari et patris

et matris vestri et pro salute vostra et Regis Alexandri et Mathildis

Reginæ, sancto predicto et monachis ejus dedi, unde vos precor sicut

dominum meum charissimum, ut pro animabus parentum vestrorum et pro

salute vivorum hanc donationem Sancto Cuthberto, et monachis sibi in

perpetuam servituris concedatis.

This historian deduces the Crawfurds from the above Thorlongus, in the

following order of succession:--

I. Thorlongus, who has charters as above in the reign of King Edgar

(_inter_ 1097 _et_ 1107), and whose seal in the first is quite entire,

had two sons; 1. Swane; 2. William, whose name appears in a charter by

William de Vetereponte, in the archives of Durham.

II. Swane, son of Thorlongus, whose name appears in several charters of

the same age, as in one by king Edgar to the monastery of Coldingham,

of the lands of Swinton; also in one of the reign of David I., as

possessing the Fishery at Fiswick, near Berwick, and others in these

archives.

III. Galfredus, son of Swane, also mentioned in these archives. He is

stated by Crawford to have had two sons; 1. Hugh, the next in this

line; 2. Reginaldus, of whom afterwards.

IV. Hugh, the eldest son of Galfredus, from whom came the Crawfords of

Crawford proper, as under.

V. Galfredus de Crawford, who is a witness to a charter of Roger,

Bishop of St Andrew’s, to the monastery of Kelso, in 1179, and died

about 1202.

VI. Reginald de Crawford, probably his son, is witness to a charter

of Richard le Bard to the same monastery, together with William, John

and Adam, his sons, in 1228. Of the first and third no other memorial

exists. The second,

VII. Sir John Crawfurd, his successor, is designated, _Dominus de eodem

miles_, in several donations. He died without male issue in 1248,

leaving two daughters, of whom the eldest was married to Archibald de

Douglas, ancestor of all the Douglases whose descent can be traced; and

the youngest was married to David de Lindsay of Wauchopedale, ancestor

of all the Lindsays in Scotland.

The last three are extracted from _Wood’s Peerage_, under the title

_Crawford_; and the authorities are stated on the margin. That these

ladies, the daughters of Sir John Crawfurd, were descended from Hugh,

No. IV., is distinctly mentioned by _Crawfurd_, in the MS. History of

the Crawfurds, as above. To return now to the second son of Galfredus,

No. III.

_Crawfurd_ further states, that Galfredus, No. III., as above, besides

Hugh, had another son,

IV. Reginald, with whom another portion of the barony of Craufurd

remained, and that from him descended his son,

V. John; and hence the distinction of this part of the barony into

Crawford-John. This John, he adds, is the first on record that used the

surname of Craufurd from his lands; and he is mentioned as a witness

to a charter by Arnold, Abbot of Kelso, in 1140. In the account of

Craufurd of Auchnames, in Renfrewshire, p. 365, it is stated, that Sir

Gregan Craufurd, ancestor of the Dalmagregan branch of Craufurds, was

a younger brother of Sir John Craufurd of Crawford-John; of course,

he must also have been a son of Reginald, No. IV. This point may

afterwards be more clearly verified. Suffice it here to say, that

this branch diverged into several, as those of Torringzean, Drongan,

Camlarg, Balquhanny, Liffnoris, &c. all either now extinct, or whose

history is very little known. They were distinguished by the stag’s

head in their armorial bearings, in allusion to their common ancestor

Sir Gregan’s having rescued David I. from the attack of a stag which

had unhorsed him. This exploit is said to have taken place near

Edinburgh, in 1127, which date corresponds not unfitly with the era of

his supposed brother, Sir John Craufurd of Crawford-John, who appears

as a witness, as above-mentioned, in 1140.

VI. Dominus Galfredus de Craufurd, is the next stated by Craufurd

the historian, in the succession in this line. He lived in the reign

of Malcolm IV. (_inter_ 1153 et 1165), and in that of his successor

William; and is a frequent witness to the donations of that prince to

the abbacy of Arbroath, particularly in 1179.

VII. Hugh de Craufurd appears to be the next in succession, though it

is more from probable conjecture than from precise evidence, that he is

reported to be the son of the preceding. But that this Hugh was father

of

VIII. Sir Reginald de Craufurd, sheriff of Ayrshire, Crawfurd has no

hesitation in affirming. This Sir Reginald, about the beginning of the

13th century, married the heiress of Loudoun, and from him all the

Crawfurds of that family, and their numerous cadets, are descended. It

would appear that he had four sons; 1. Hugh; 2. William; 3. John, from

whom is descended the Crawfordland family; and, 4. Adam.

IX. Hugh carried on the line of Loudoun. He had two sons; 1. Hugh; 2.

Reginald, who was the first of Kerse.

X. Hugh, the eldest son, was of Loudoun. He had a son, said to be

ancestor of the Baidland Craufurds, and a daughter, Margaret, who was

married to Sir Malcolm Wallace. She was the mother of the Guardian of

Scotland, Sir William Wallace, from whom the Bailies of Lamington are

maternally descended.--_Robertson’s “Ayrshire Families.”_

C.

THE BURNING OF THE BARNS OF AYR.

Page 201.

As this is one of those portions of our history on which Lord Hailes

has thought proper to be sceptical, the following remarks of the

learned Dr Jamieson[121] on the subject maybe satisfactory to the

reader. With respect to the date, it may, with great propriety, be

fixed about midsummer 1297.

“The story of the destruction of these buildings, and of the immediate

reason of it, is supported by the universal tradition of the country to

this day; and local tradition is often entitled to more regard than is

given to it by the fastidiousness of the learned. Whatever allowances

it may be necessary to make for subsequent exaggeration, it is not

easily conceivable, that an event should be connected with a particular

spot, during a succession of ages, without some foundation.

“Sir D. Dalrymple deems this story ‘inconsistent with probability.’

He objects to it, because it is said, ‘that Wallace, accompanied by

Sir John Graham, Sir John Menteth, and Alexander Scrymgeour, constable

of Dundee, went into the west of Scotland, to chastise the men of

Galloway, who had espoused the part of the Comyns, and of the English;’

and that, ‘_on the 28th August 1298_, they set fire to some granaries

in the neighbourhood of Ayr, and burned the English cantoned in

them.’--Annals, I. 255, N. Here he refers to the relations of Arnold

Blair and to Major, and produces three objections to the narrative. One

of these is, that ‘Comyn, the younger of Badenoch, was the only man

of the name of Comyn who had any interest in Galloway; and he was at

that time of Wallace’s party. The other two are; that ‘Sir John Graham

could have no share in the enterprise, for he was killed at Falkirk,

22d July 1298;’ and that ‘it is not probable that Wallace would have

undertaken such an enterprise immediately after the discomfiture at

Falkirk.’ Although it had been said by mistake, that Graham and Comyn

were present, this could not invalidate the whole relation, for we

often find that leading facts are faithfully narrated in a history,

when there are considerable mistakes as to the persons said to have

been engaged.

“But although our annalist refers both to Major and Blair, it is the

latter only who mentions either the design of the visit paid to the

west of Scotland, or the persons who are said to have been associates

in it. The whole of Sir David’s reasoning rests on the correctness

of a date, and of one given _only_ in the meagre remains ascribed

to Arnold Blair. If his date be accurate, the transaction at Ayr,

whatever it was, must have taken place thirty-seven days afterwards.

Had the learned writer exercised his usual acumen here--had he not been

resolved to throw discredit on this part of the history of Wallace--it

would have been most natural for him to have supposed, that this event

was post-dated by Blair. It seems, indeed, to have been long before

the battle of Falkirk. Blind Harry narrates the former in his Seventh,

the latter in his Eleventh Book. Sir David himself, after pushing the

argument from the date given by Blair as far as possible, virtually

gives it up, and makes the acknowledgment which he ought to have made

before. ‘I believe,’ he says, ‘that this story _took its rise_ from

the pillaging of the English quarters, about the time of the treaty of

Irvine, in 1297, which, as being an incident of little consequence, I

omitted in the course of this history.’ Here he refers to Hemingford,

T. I. p. 123.

“Hemingford says, that ‘many of the Scots and men of Galloway had, in

a hostile manner, made prey of their stores, having slain more than

five hundred men, with women and children.’ Whether he means to say

that this took place at Ayr, or at Irvine, seems doubtful. But here,

I think, we have the nucleus of the story. The _barns_, according to

the diction of Blind Harry, seem to have been merely ‘the English

quarters,’ erected by order of Edward for the accommodation of his

troops. Although denominated _barns_ by the Minstrel, and _horreas_ by

Arnold Blair, both writers seem to have used these terms with great

latitude, as equivalent to what are now called _barracks_. It is rather

surprising, that our learned annalist should view the loss of upwards

of five hundred men, besides women and children, with that of their

property, ‘as an incident of little consequence,’ in a great national

struggle.

“Major gives nearly the same account as Blair. Speaking of Wallace,

he says, ‘Anglorum insignes viros apud _horrea_ Aerie residentes

de nocte incendit, et qui a voraci flamma euaserunt ejus mucrone

occubuerunt.’--Fol. lxx.

“There is also far more unquestionable evidence as to the cause of

this severe retaliation, than is generally supposed. Lord Hailes has

still quoted Barbour as an historian of undoubted veracity. Speaking of

Crystal of Seton, he says--

“It wes gret sorow sekyrly,

That so worthy persoune as he

Suld on sic maner hangyt be.

Thusgate endyt his worthynes.

And off Crauford als Schyr Ranald wes,

And Schyr Bryce als the Blar,

_Hangyt in till a berne in Ar_.”

_The Bruce_, III. 260 v. &c.

“This tallies very well with the account given by the Minstrel.

“_Four thousand haill that nycht was in till Ayr.

In gret bernyss, biggyt with out the toun,

The justice lay, with mony bald barroun._”

_Wallace_, vii. 334.

“The testimony of the _Complaynt of Scotland_, a well-known national

work, written A. D. 1548, concurs. Speaking of the king of England, the

writer says:

“Ony of you that consentis til his fals conques of your cuntre, ye

sal be recompenssit as your forbears var at the blac perliament at

_the bernis of Ayre_, quhen kyng Eduard maid ane conuocatione of al

the nobillis of Scotland at the toune of Ayre, vndir culour of faitht

and concord, quha comperit at his instance, nocht heffand suspitione

of his tresonabil consait. Than thai beand in his subiectione vndir

culour of familiarite, he gart hang, cruelly and dishonestly, to

the nummer of sexten scoir of the maist nobillis of the cuntre, tua

and tua, ouer ane balk, the quhilk sextene scoir var cause that the

Inglismen conquest sa far vithtin your cuntre.”--_Compl. Scotl._ p. 144.

“The author refers to this as a fact universally acknowledged among his

countrymen, although, it must be recollected, no edition of the Life

of Wallace was printed for more than twenty years after this work was

written. He introduces it again, as a proof of treachery and cruelty,

which still continued to excite national feeling.

“Doubtles thai that ar participant of the cruel inuasione of Inglismen

contrar thar natyue cuntraye, ther cragges sal be put in ane mair

strait yoik nor the Samnetes did to the Romans, as Kyng Eduard did til

Scottis men at the blac parlament at _the bernis of Ayr_, quhen he gart

put the craggis of sexten scoir in faldomis of cordis, tua and tua,

ouer ane balk, of the maist principal of them,” &c.--_Ibid._ p. 159,

160.

D.

MEMOIR OF BISHOP ANTHONY BEK.

Page 205.

For the following biographical notice of this ecclesiastical warrior,

who, in ambition, power, and talents for political intrigue, may justly

be considered as the Cardinal Wolsey of his day, we are indebted to a

work of Nicholas Harris Nicolas, Esq., a name sufficient to recommend

it to all who have any taste for antiquarian research.

“Of the period of Bek’s birth we have no precise information. He was

a younger son of Walter Bek, Baron of Eresby; and in the 54th Henry

III. 1270, was signed with the cross on going to the Holy Land with

Prince Edward,[122] who nominated him one of the executors of his will,

which was dated at Acre in June 1272.[123] In 3rd Edward I. 1275, being

then a clerk, he was appointed Constable of the Tower of London;[124]

and was constituted Archdeacon of Durham as early as 1273.[125]

He was present in the Parliament at Westminster at the feast of St

Michael, 6th Edward I. 1278, when the King of Scotland did homage to

Edward;[126] and on the 9th July 1283, was elected Bishop of Durham.

The ceremony of his consecration was performed by the Archbishop of

York, in the presence of the King, on the 9th of January following;

but at his enthronization at Durham on Christmas eve, a dispute arose

between the official of the Archbishop of York and the Prior of Durham,

as to the right of performing the office, which the bishop-elect

terminated, by receiving the mitre from the hands of his brother,

Thomas Bek, Bishop of St David’s. On the festival of St John the

Evangelist, he presented the church with two pieces of rich embroidery,

wrought with the history of the Nativity.

“It is impossible to state even the principal occasions on which

Bishop Bek was conspicuous; it being perhaps sufficient to observe,

that scarcely a single event of any importance took place during the

reign of Edward the First, whether of war or diplomacy, but in which

he was concerned. Several facts might be mentioned which tend to

prove the influence that he at one time possessed over the mind of

his sovereign. According to Fordun, it was by his advice that Edward

supported the claim of Baliol instead of that of Bruce,[127] in

the competition for the crown of Scotland; and he was frequently a

mediator, not only between the King and his barons, but between his

Majesty and his children. The Prelate’s ambition was equal to his

resources; and both were evinced by the splendour of his equipage,

and the number of his followers. If his biographer,[128] from whom

Mr Surtees has derived a great part of his statements, may be

believed, the retinue with which he attended the King in his wars

amounted to twenty-six standard-bearers of his household;[129] one

hundred and forty knights, and five hundred horse; and one thousand

foot marched under the consecrated banner of St Cuthbert, which was

borne by Henry de Horncestre, a monk of Durham. The Bishop’s wealth

and power soon, however, excited the suspicion of the King; and the

process of ‘quo warranto’ was applied, with the view of reducing

them. His temporalities were seized, but he recovered them after

an appeal to Parliament; and his palatine rights were confirmed in

the most ample manner by the Justices Itinerant in 1293. From the

proceedings in Parliament in the 21st Edward I., it seems, that on

the Wednesday before the feast of St James the Apostle, in the 20th

Edward I., namely, on the 23d July 1292, at Derlyngton, and afterwards

at Alverton, and other places, the Archbishop of York had formerly

excommunicated the Bishop of Durham, he being then engaged in the

King’s service in the North; for which offence the Archbishop was

imprisoned, but pardoned on paying a fine of 4000 merks.[130] Bek’s

frequent quarrels with the Prior of Durham, whom he had of his own

authority deprived and ejected, soon afforded a pretext for the royal

interference; and a formidable attack was afterwards made upon his

possessions. About the same time he espoused the popular cause by

joining the Earl Marshal and the Earl of Hereford against the crown;

and when charged by the King with deserting his interests, he boldly

replied, ‘That the Earls laboured for the advantage and honour of the

sovereign and his realm, and therefore he stood with them, and not with

the King, against them.’ In the meanwhile he obeyed a second citation

to Rome, for having deprived the Prior, where he appeared with his

usual magnificence, and triumphed over his adversaries, by obtaining

from the Pontiff a confirmation of his visitorial superiority over the

convent. By quitting the realm without license, he exposed himself to

the enmity of the crown; and his vassals availed themselves of his

absence to urge their complaints. The Palatinate was seized into the

King’s hands; and, in July 1301, the temporalities of the see were

committed to the custody of Robert de Clifford. In the parliament in

the following year, having effected a reconciliation with his vassals,

and submitted to the King, the bishop obtained a restitution of his

temporalities. But Bek’s intractable spirit soon involved him in fresh

disputes with the Prior; and being accused of having infringed on the

dignity of the crown, by some instruments which he had obtained from

Rome, his temporalities were, in December 1305, once more seized; and

the King seems to have used every exertion, not only to humiliate the

haughty prelate, but to divest his see of some part of its extensive

territories. From this time until Edward’s demise, he continued under

the royal displeasure; but no sooner was Edward the Second on the

throne, than he added to his power and titles, by procuring the dignity

of King of the Isle of Man, together with ample restitution of what had

been arrested from him by the late monarch.

“It is here, however, necessary to refer to the notice of the Bishop in

the poem.” (See Siege of Carlaverock). Mr Surtees has evidently adopted

the translation given of it in the ‘Antiquarian Repertory,’ where the

words ‘uns plaitz’ are rendered ‘a wound,’ as he says, ‘the Bishop of

Durham is described in the roll of Carlaverock, as being absent from

the siege on account of a wound; whereas the passage is presumed to

have meant, that the Bishop was detained in England in consequence of

a treaty on some other public transaction. It appears that he then

sent the King one hundred and sixty men-at-arms; and at the battle of

Falkirk, he is stated to have led the second division of the English

army with thirty-nine banners.[131] In the 35th Edward I., being sent

to Rome with other Bishops and the Earl of Lincoln, to present some

vessels of gold to the Pope from the King, his Holiness conferred on

him the title of Patriarch of Jerusalem.[132] Thus, Mr Surtees remarks,

on receiving the sovereignty of the Isle of Man, ‘his haughty spirit

was gratified by the accumulated dignities of Bishop, Count Palatine,

Patriarch and King.’ The last political transaction of his life was his

union with the Earl of Lancaster, against Piers de Gaveston, in 1310;

and, on the 3d of March following, 1310-11, he expired at his manor of

Eltham in Kent.

The character of Anthony Bek is given with more elegance than truth in

the Poem. ‘The mirror of Christianity’ is an emphatic allusion to his

piety and virtue; and his wisdom, eloquence, temperance, justice and

chastity, are as forcibly pointed out, as the total absence of pride,

covetousness and envy, for which he is said to have been distinguished.

But this is rather a brilliant painting, than a true portrait; for, if

all the other qualities which are there ascribed to him be conceded, it

is impossible to consider that humility formed any part of his merits.

His latest biographer, Mr Surtees, has however described him with so

much discrimination and elegance, that his words are transferred to

these pages, because they form the most appropriate conclusion of this

sketch, and powerfully tend to redeem its many imperfections.

“‘The Palatine power reached its highest elevation under the splendid

pontificate of Anthony Bek. Surrounded by his officers of state, or

marching at the head of his troops, in peace or in war, he appeared as

the military chief of a powerful and independent franchise. The court

of Durham exhibited all the appendages of royalty; nobles addressed

the Palatine sovereign kneeling; and, instead of menial servants,

knights waited in his presence-chamber and at his table, bare-headed

and standing. Impatient of control, whilst he asserted an oppressive

superiority over the convent, and trampled on the rights of his

vassals, he jealously guarded his own Palatine franchise, and resisted

the encroachments of the crown when they trenched on the privileges of

the aristocracy.[133] When his pride or his patriotism had provoked

the displeasure of his sovereign, he met the storm with firmness; and

had the fortune or the address to emerge from disgrace and difficulty,

with added rank and influence. His high birth gave him a natural

claim to power; and he possessed every popular and splendid quality

which could command obedience, or excite admiration. His courage and

constancy were shown in the service of his sovereign. His liberality

knew no bounds; and he regarded no expense, however enormous, when

placed in competition with any object of pleasure or magnificence.[134]

Yet, in the midst of apparent profusion, he was too prudent ever to

feel the embarrassment of want. Surrounded by habitual luxury, his

personal temperance was as strict as it was singular; and his chastity

was exemplary, in an age of general corruption.[135] Not less an enemy

to sloth[136] than to intemperance, his leisure was devoted either to

splendid progresses[137] from one manor to another, or to the sports of

the field; and his activity and temperance preserved his faculties of

mind and body vigorous, under the approach of age and infirmity.

“‘In the munificence of his public works he rivalled the greatest

of his predecessors. Within the bishopric of Durham he founded the

colleges of Chester and Lanchester, erected towers at Gainford and

Coniscliff, and added to the buildings of Alnwick and Barnard Castles.

He gave Evenwood manor to the convent, and appropriated the vicarage

of Morpeth to the chapel which he had founded at Auckland.[138] In his

native county of Lincoln, he endowed Alvingham priory, and built a

castle at Somerton.[139] In Kent he erected the beautiful manor-house

of Eltham whose ruins still speak the taste and magnificence of its

founder. Notwithstanding the vast expenses incurred in these and

other works, in his contests with the crown and with his vassals, in

his foreign journeys, and in the continued and excessive charges of

his household, he died wealthier than any of his predecessors, leaving

immense treasures in the riches of the age; gallant horses, costly

robes, rich furniture, plate and jewels.’[140]

“Anthony Bek was the first prelate of Durham who was buried within

the walls of the cathedral. His predecessors had been restrained from

sepulture within the sacred edifice by a reverential awe for the body

of the holy confessor;[141] and on this occasion, from some motive of

superstition, the corpse was not allowed to enter the doors, although

a passage was broken through the wall[142] for its reception, near the

place of interment. The tomb was placed in the east transept, between

the altars of St Adrian and St Michael, close to the holy shrine. A

brass, long since destroyed, surrounded the ledge of the marble, and

bore the following inscription:

“Presul magnanimus Antonius hic jacet imus

Jerusalem strenuus Patriarcha fuit, quod opimus

Annis vicenis regnabit sex et j plenis

Mille trecentenis Christo moritur quoque denis.”

“The Bishop’s heirs were found, by the inquisition held after his

decease, to be his nephew, Robert de Willoughby, son of Alice his

eldest sister; and his nephew John de Harcourt, son of his second

sister Margaret.”

E.

EXPEDITION TO THE WEST HIGHLANDS.

Page 216.

In this account of the expedition to Loch-Awe, the statements, as the

reader will perceive, are all taken from the pages of the Minstrel.

The writer was induced to do so, not from the circumstance of Henry

being the only ancient author who has recorded the transaction, but

from the evidence of its truth, which may be found in the traditions

of the country where the conflict took place. These have already been

alluded to in the Introduction. It may not, however, be improper to

state, that “_Uagh Mhac Phadan_,” or M’Fadyan’s cave, can still be

pointed out by old Highlanders, who add, on the authority of tradition,

that the determination with which the Irish leader defended himself

was such, that his pursuers had to throw down bundles of burning furze

into the cave before he surrendered. The rock on which his head was

afterwards set up, still goes by the name of _Beinnean Mhac Phadan_,

the _Peak or Pinnacle of MacFadyan_. In short, the localities of the

country are so correctly described, particularly the scene of the

battle, which appears to have been on the comparatively open space

between _Crag-an-àradh_ and the rock of _Bradhir_ or _Brandir_, as it

is called, for the convenience of the English reader, that few who have

had an opportunity of contrasting the scenery with the account of the

Minstrel, can resist the impression of its being either the work, or

translated from the work, of an eyewitness. This, taken in connection

with the evidence afforded by the coins of Edward I., which from time

to time have been found about the ruins of Ardchattan priory, and which

have also been previously adverted to in the “Introduction,” ought to

be pretty conclusive as to the occurrence narrated.

This subject has already engaged the attention of a literary

gentleman[143] of talent and intelligence, who has handled the matter

with no small degree of acumen. The following extracts may therefore

be interesting to those readers who have not had opportunities for

personal investigation.

“Blind Harrie has very particularly related the circumstances of

MacPhadian’s proceedings; and his account so exactly coincides with the

tradition and topography of the district where the facts are said to

have been performed, that there can be little or no doubt of the truth

of his narration.

“Loch-Awe, upon the banks of which the scene of action took place, is

thirty-four miles in length. The north side is bounded by wide muirs

and inconsiderable hills, which occupy an extent of country from twelve

to twenty miles in breadth, and the whole of this space is enclosed as

by a circumvallation. Upon the north it is barred by Loch-Eitive, on

the south by Loch-Awe, and on the east by the deep and dreadful pass

of Brandir, through which an arm of the latter lake opens at about

four miles from its eastern extremity, and discharges the river Awe

into the former. The pass is about three miles in length; its east

side is bounded by the almost inaccessible steeps which form the base

of the vast and rugged mountain of Cruächan. The craigs rise in some

places almost perpendicularly from the water; and, for their chief

extent, show no space nor level at their feet, but a rough and narrow

edge of stony beach. Upon the whole of these cliffs grew a thick and

interwoven wood of all kinds of trees, both timber, dwarf, and coppice;

no track existed through the wilderness, but a winding path which

sometimes crept along the precipitous height, and sometimes descended

in a straight pass along the margin of the water. Near the extremity

of the defile, a narrow level opened between the water and the craig;

but a great part of this, as well as the preceding steeps, was formerly

enveloped in a thicket, which showed little facility to the feet of any

but the martins and the wild cats. Along the west side of the pass,

lies a wall of sheer and barren craigs: from behind they rise in rough,

uneven, and heathy declivities, out of the wide muir before mentioned,

between Loch-Eitive and Loch-Awe; but in front they terminate abruptly

in the most frightful precipices, which form the whole side of the

pass, and descend at one fall into the water which fills its trough. At

the north end of this barrier, and at the termination of the pass, lies

that part of the cliff which is called Craiganuni: at its foot the arm

of the lake gradually contracts its water to a very narrow space, and

at length terminates at two rocks (called the rocks of Brandir), which

form a straight channel, something resembling the lock of a canal. From

this outlet there is a continual descent toward Loch-Eitive, and from

hence the river Awe pours out its current in a furious stream, foaming

over a bed broken with holes, and cumbered with masses of granite and

whinstone.

“If ever there was a bridge near Craiganuni in ancient times, it

must have been at the rocks of Brandir. From the days of Wallace to

those of General Wade, there were never passages of this kind; but in

places of great necessity, too narrow for a boat, and too wide for a

leap, even then they were but an unsafe footway, formed of the trunk

of trees, placed transversely from rock to rock, unstripped of their

bark, and destitute of either plank or rail. For such a structure

there is no place in the neighbourhood of Craiganuni, but at the

rocks above-mentioned. In the lake, and on the river, the water is

far too wide; but, at the strait, the space is not greater than might

be crossed by a tall mountain pine, and the rocks on either side are

formed by nature like a pier. That this point was always a place of

passage, is rendered probable by its facility, and the use of recent

times. It is not long since it was the common gate of the country on

either side the river and the pass. The mode of crossing is yet in the

memory of people living, and was performed by a little currach moored

on either side the water, and a stout coble fixed across the stream

from bank to bank, by which the passengers drew themselves across,

in the manner still practised in places of the same nature. It is

no argument against the existence of a bridge in former times, that

the above method only existed in ours, rather than a passage of that

kind which might seem the more improved expedient. The contradiction

is sufficiently accounted for, by the decay of timber in the

neighbourhood. Of old, both oaks and firs of an immense size abounded

within a very inconsiderable distance; but it is now many years since

the destruction of the forests of Glen-Eitive and Glen-Urcha has

deprived the country of all the trees of a sufficient size to cross

the strait of Brandir; and it is probable, that the currach was not

introduced till the want of timber had disenabled the inhabitants of

the country from maintaining a bridge. It only further remains to be

noticed, that at some distance below the rock of Brandir there was

formerly a ford, which was used for cattle in the memory of people yet

living. From the narrowness of the passage, the force of the stream,

and the broken bed of the river, it was, however, a dangerous pass, and

could only be attempted with safety at leisure, and by experience.

“Such is the topography of the country in which, tradition says, that

Sir Niel Campbell made his retreat and refuge. It now remains to show,

what correspondence there is between its features, and the relation

given by Blind Harrie. The words of the Minstrel are as follows:

“Ye knycht Cambell maid gud defens for yi

Till _Craigunyn_ with thre hunder he zeid,

Yat strenth he held for all his[144] cruel deed,

Syne brak ye _bryg_ quhar yai mycht not out pass

Bot throuch a _furd_ quhar narow passage was

Abandounly Cambell agayne yaim baid

Fast upon _Avis_ yat was bathe deep and braid,

Makfadzan was apon ye toyir syd,

And yar on force behuffyt hym for to byd,

For at ye furd _he durst nocht_ entir out,

For gud Cambell mycht _set hym yan in dout_,

Mak Fadzane socht, and a small passage fond

Had he lasar he mycht pass off yat land

Betwix a roch and ye gret wattir syd

Bot four in frount na ma mycht gang or ryd.”

Book vii. Chap. iv. (Edin. Edit. 1758.)

The correspondence between the above description and the account which

I have before given of the topography of the Pass of Brandir, must be

evident to every examiner. But the identity of that place and the one

mentioned in the poem, is confirmed to a degree of certainty; first,

by the fact, that such a correspondence can be found in no other part

of the neighbouring districts; and, secondly, by the mention which is

made in the description of the poem, of names which _now_ exist in the

appellation of the place to which it is supposed to apply. ‘Avis’ is

well known to have been the ancient name of Loch Awe,[145] and is often

met with in old poems which make mention of that lake; and Cragunyn

is clearly but a mis-spelling of ‘Craiganuni,’ the name of the rocks

at the extremity of the Pass of Brandir. The error is merely owing to

the ignorance of the transcribers of the poem, who did not understand

Gaëlic orthography. Except by persons very competently masters of the

language of the country, there is scarcely a name in the Highlands more

correctly written at the present day.

“It is easy to show the solitude of the correspondence between Blind

Harry’s description of the position of Sir Niel, and the topography of

the Pass of Brandir. In the eighth line of the passage above quoted,

it is said, that when the Campbell had gained the craig to which he

retreated, he ‘baid’ (abode) fast upon Loch-Avis. From whence it is

plain, that this post was immediately above the shore of Loch-Awe. In

the brief notices of MacPhadian’s situation at the same period, it is

equally evident, that he was entangled in a narrow and dangerous pass,

bounded on one side by rocks, and on the other side by the lake. It is

expressly said that he was on the opposite side from the Campbells. The

water was then between them, and yet their positions were communicable

by a bridge and a ford. In the whole sixty-eight miles, which form the

circuit of Loch-Awe, there is not a spot where these circumstances

could have existed except in the Pass of Brandir. On no part of the

shore is there a pass of the nature and difficulty implied in Blind

Harry’s notices of MacPhadian’s embarrassment except there. Neither

is there any part of the lake which could be interposed between two

bodies of men, and yet rendered evadable by a bridge, except the arm

which terminates in the river Awe. In all other places the water is

from one to three miles wide, and does not contract into any stream

or inlet which could prolong its barrier sufficiently to prevent it

from being turned, and yet admit of its being evaded by a passage

of the nature above mentioned. But in the Pass of Brandir all these

particulars are identically to be traced. The narrowing of the lake to

an inconsiderable channel, and its prolongation into the river Awe, by

which the former might be interposed as a barrier, and yet evaded by

an immediate crossing; the bridge mentioned by Blind Harry as having

existed at the foot of Craigunyn, and the probability that one formerly

did exist in the corresponding spot of Craiganuni; the ford described

as having been the only remaining communication in the separating

water, its dangerous character, and the actual being of a pass of the

same nature, and the same relative position in the water of Awe, all

give the strongest evidence of the truth of the Minstrel’s relation,

and the application of the scene which he has described. Having then

established so much from the circumstances of the poem and the nature

of the country, we may draw a clear deduction of the proceedings and

motives of Sir Neil Campbell previous to his entering Craiganuni.

“Allowing that this spot was the place to which that chief retreated

from MacPhadian, it follows as a necessary consequence, from the

situation of the latter at the breaking of the bridge, that he must

have made his pursuit round the east end of Loch-Awe; and it will very

clearly appear, that he could not have chosen this direction, had

he not been enticed into it by a similar route in the flight of the

Campbell. The proof that MacPhadian did take the direction which I

have advanced, is sufficiently decisive. We are expressly told, that

when Sir Neil had gained Craiganuni, he was stopped in his pursuit

on the opposite, or _east_ side of the water beneath. Now, as he

possessed no vessels on Loch-Awe, he could not have gained this side

of the arm of the water which runs under Craiganuni, had he not come

to it by encircling the east end of the whole lake, which is only

four miles distant. The conviction of this fact leads decisively to

discover the march of Sir Neil. It is perfectly evident that he must

have entered the heights from the same side as that on which it is

apparent MacPhadian endeavoured to follow him; for, had he proceeded

to Craiganuni by the west end of the lake, or crossed the water any

where west of the Pass of Brandir, his enemy could have had no motive

in taking the eastern route. In the first instance, he would have

marched in an opposite direction to those whom he was pursuing; and

in the second, he would have taken a road, which, allowing it might

have been the shortest, would have placed between him and his enemy an

impassable barrier, and have entangled him in a strait and dangerous

labyrinth, where his numbers would have become useless, his attacks

impracticable, and his retreat dangerous. Among such difficulties,

it is not to be supposed that MacPhadian would voluntarily and

unnecessarily have hazarded his success and his safety; he could only,

therefore, have been enticed into them, by the allurement of pursuing

upon the footsteps of his enemies. The proceedings of Sir Neil are thus

reduced to a degree of certainty, and leave no alternative from the

circumstances which I have pointed out.

“He observed, that entered from the east, and having his enemy on

that side, Craiganuni was the most inaccessible and advantageous hold

in all Argyleshire; but that entered and attacked from the opposite

direction, all the securities of the place were converted into dangers.

Placed then on this quarter, it was only by a stratagem that he could

win the desired advantage; and in prosecution of its attainment, he

adopted the only plan which could have been unforeseen by his enemy,

and carried into execution with a certainty of success. At the approach

of MacPhadian into Nether Loch-Awe, he fled before him along the south

side, and towards the east end of the lake. Drawn after him by the

consciousness of superiority, and the facility of the pursuit, the

Irish Captain followed him with no thought but the eagerness of capture.

“The advantage, however, of Sir Neil in point of time, was sufficient

to prevent him from falling into his hands in the open district from

Inch-Connel to Glen-Urcha; and suddenly turning the head of the lake,

and circling towards the west, he dived down the Pass of Brandir,

crossed the water, broke down the bridge, ascended the height, and

threw between him and his pursuers, the craigs, the rivers, and the

lakes. It was then that the plan of the chief was seen in all its

superiority.

“Had he passed round the west end of the lake, or crossed it westward

of the Pass of Brandir, he would have entered that wide and open

country which I have before described,--a country every where

untenable, and so surrounded by natural barriers, that it would have

been almost impossible for him to have evacuated it under the closeness

of his pursuit. Craiganuni, which had been before him, would have been

not only totally unserviceable to him, from the direction in which he

entered; but its barriers, lying wholly in his rear, would have made

it the most dangerous situation. Had he been beset in the moors, the

multitude of his enemies had devoured him; had he been overtaken at the

craig, his flight would have been cut off by the gulf below; and those

who had fled from the sword would have been driven over the precipices,

and plunged into the water. Had he escaped these alternatives of ruin,

every hardship would have been presented to his retreat. The country

round the pass was wild and barren, even to horror and desolation; and

had he succeeded in gaining it with security, he must have pursued

his flight, hopeless of reinforcement and straitened for subsistence.

By the tactic upon which he acted, he not only avoided all the evils,

but converted the whole of their disadvantages to the inconvenience

of his enemy. The instant he had occupied Craiganuni, and broken

down the bridge over the mouth of the river, he was inaccessible on

every side, and possessed in his rear a tract of nearly three hundred

square miles, wholly open to his operations, but secured from his

enemies by the same barriers which rendered himself unapproachable.

In front, the depth of the water, and the precipices of the pass,

were an insurmountable barrier; on the north, Loch-Eitive continued

the line of circumvallation from the sea to Beann Starabh; and on the

south it was extended by Loch-Awe from Lorn to Glen-Urcha. Sir Niel

was thus encompassed by a formidable barrier of seventy-three miles in

circumference; and from the obstacles of this cordon, and the security

of the wide space in his rear, he could at pleasure have evacuated his

position under cover of the night, and have retreated, in unmolested

security, to Loch-Fine, from whence he might have proceeded in his

galleys to the coast of Airshire, and here joined himself with the

successful associates of the late victorious Wallace.

“I have said nothing of the ford through the Awe, by which there

was an approach to the position of Sir Niel, nor of the capability

of MacPhadian, to have passed Loch-Eitive by means of his fleet; of

the first, the enemy feared to avail himself from the danger of the

passage, and the want of discipline among his troops; and from the

second, he could have reaped little avail, since, in the consumption of

time necessary to have brought round these vessels from the sea, Sir

Niel might have abandoned his position, and in one night have made good

his retreat beyond Loch-Awe.

“Thus baffled and out-manœuvred, MacPhadian not only failed in his

object of offence, but found himself drawn into an intricate and

desolate labyrinth, where his multitude encumbered themselves; the want

of subsistence prevented him from remaining to blockade Sir Niel, and

his ignorance of the clues of the place made it difficult to extricate

himself by a retreat. In this exigence he was desirous of returning to

Nether Loch-Awe, where there was abundance of cattle and game for the

support of his men. At length he discovered a passage between the rocks

and the water; the way was only wide enough for four persons to pass

abreast; yet as they were not in danger of pursuit, they retired in

safety, and effected their march to the south side of the lake.[146]

“Here we must leave Mac-Phadian, and return to Duncan of Lorn. In his

youth the latter had been a school-companion of Wallace at Dundee;

and he now determined to resort to him, and make use of their old

acquaintance to prevail on the champion of Scotland to come to the

assistance of Sir Niel Campbell. As soon, therefore, as Mac-Phadian

had evacuated the Pass, Duncan descended from Craiganuni, and pursued

his way for the Low country, attended only by a single follower, named

Gillemichel. This faithful clansman was an aged man, but even in his

age was still famous for an uncommon speed of foot,[147] and on their

return performed good service for his master. When Duncan arrived in

the Low country he found the Wallace at Dundaff, with Sir John the

Græme. The patriot chieftain had just returned from the overthrow of

the English in the Barns of Air and the city of Glasgow; and besides

the friends and forces who had come to him upon those occasions, he

had been joined by Malcolm, Earl of Lennox, and Richard of Lundi, who

brought with them a considerable number of their followers. No sooner

had Wallace heard the tidings of Duncan MacDougall, than he resolved

to go to the aid of Sir Niel Campbell; and, assembling his force, he

instantly set out upon his march. He directed his course by Stirling,

either to gather increase of followers, or apprehensive of leaving

behind him an English garrison on the threshold of the Highlands. The

castle, however, was not a place to be taken in a day; and bent upon

the destruction of Mac-Phadian, Wallace would not delay his march to

pursue the siege in person, but, leaving the Earl of Lennox to carry

on that service, he determined to push forward his expedition into

Argyleshire. Having assembled his forces at the bridge of Stirling,

and found them to amount to two thousand men, ‘worthi and wycht,’ he

hastened forward on his way. Duncan of Lorn acted as his guide; and

while they pursued their march, he sent forward his man Gillemichel to

discover intelligence of the enemy. Blind Harrie proceeds to relate,

that as the army proceeded, it became fatigued with its march, that a

great part of the men and horses were incapable to continue their way

with that speed which the urgency of the expedition required. Upon this

Wallace determined to divide the weary from the strong, and to hasten

forward with the latter only, and surprise the enemy before they could

have the opportunity of choosing a position, where their superiority

of numbers could be displayed to its advantage. For this purpose he

divided his host into two bodies; the first, consisting of seven

hundred men, he chose to haste forward with himself; and the second,

which contained but five hundred, and which was spent with fatigue, he

left in the rear to follow as well as they might. Before they continued

their march Wallace again separated the first division into three

companies; the first, consisting of one hundred men, his own chosen

West country veterans, he led in person as the advance guard; the

second, of the same numbers, he committed to Sir John the Græme; and

the last, to the amount of five hundred, he gave to Richard of Lundi,

with whom he joined Wallace of Richardtown, his cousin. After this

disposition, the two grand divisions separated: that under the leading

of Wallace hastened forward on its march, and, crossing the mountain in

their front, lost sight of their feeble comrades. In Glen-Dochart they

were met by Gillemichel the scout; with him came Sir Niel Campbell,

who had escaped from Craiganuni, and at the head of his three hundred

clansmen had hastened to join the approaching aid of Wallace.

“In this part of Blind Harrie’s poem there is an error, which throws

some confusion upon the traces of the march of Wallace. It appears,

however, to have been the fault of the transcriber or reciter, and I

think may be satisfactorily explained. The mistake consists in the

contradiction of the name of the place where the host of Wallace

began to fail with fatigue, and of that in which it is said, that he

afterwards met Sir Niel Campbell. The words of the poem are thus:--

“Be our party was passit _Straithfulan_,

Ye small fute folk began to irk ilk ane.”

_Book vii._ l. 763.

To which it is subsequently said,

“In _Glendowchar_ yair spy met yaim agayne,

With lord Cambell,” &c.

_Ib._ l. 785.

“Straith-Phillan opens from the _west_ end of Glen-Dochart towards the

_north-west_; and consequently, as Wallace came from the _south-east_,

it must have been the second of the two places in the succession of

his march, and could not, as it stands in the poem, have been the

first. I shall presently show, that there is every evidence from

the narrative of the Minstrel, and the evidence of tradition, that

Wallace did not pass through Straith-Phillan in any part of his

march. The mention of the name, in this place, must therefore have

been an error altogether, arising either from the carelessness of the

transcriber, or from the confusion of two appellations, something

similar in import. I am inclined to lean to the latter opinion. At the

northern extremity of Straithearn, between the Glen and Loch-Earn,

the mountains form a little amphitheatre, in the middle of which

there is a small conical hill, once sacred to St Phillan, and still

called by his name. Near its summit was a holy spring, distinguished

also by the name of the apostle, and at its foot was a small cell of

religious, formed originally by his disciples. It appears to me highly

probable, that Wallace entered the Highlands by Straithearn; that it

was at St Phillan’s Hill that his men became fatigued; and that it was

this place which the reciter or transcriber of Blind Harrie’s poem

confounded with Straith-Phillan. This supposition is much supported by

the correspondence between the circumstances mentioned by the Minstrel,

respecting the march of Wallace, and the route between Straith-Earn and

Glen-Dochart. A few miles north of St Phillan’s Hill, the old and short

track of the country emerges from the level side of Loch-Earn, and,

passing over the transverse mountains at its extremity, enters into

Glen-Dochart, at the foot of Bean Mòr, and near the eastern extremity

of the lake.

“This was the common Pass used of old by the Highlanders, before the

construction of the roads. It is a wild and pathless track, but is

still used by shepherds, and is shorter than the modern ‘Rad mòr an

righ’[148] by some miles. The mention which Blind Harrie makes of the

march of Wallace, after the separation from his weary men, agrees very

much with this path, and its direction:--

“Yus Wallace ost began to tak ye hycht,

Our a montayne sone passit off yar sycht.

In Glendowchar yair spy met yaim agayne

With lord Cambell, yan was our folk rycht fayne.”

_Book vii._ l. 783.

“The correspondence is made still more near by the hint which is

given of the spot where the men of Wallace met Sir Niel Campbell. It

appears to have happened immediately upon their entering Glen-Dochart;

and, after having described the meeting of the two parties, when the

Minstrel tells us, that they resumed their march, he says--

“By Louthdochyr full sodynlye yaim drew.”

_Ib._ l. 792.

“From this it would appear, that Wallace entered the glen near the

extremity of the lake, and this is the exact point where the mountain

path enters from Loch-Earn.

“From this period of the poem to the conclusion of the episode of

MacPhadian, the relation of the Minstrel is clear and consistent;

and, by the aid of the tradition of the country, the route pursued by

Wallace may be well identified with the localities of its existent

topography. The oral account, handed down in Argyleshire, states, that

at the coming of Wallace, MacPhadian and his host were posted in the

northern extremity of the Pass of Brandir; and that they were there

attacked and overthrown by Sir William and the Campbells. It will

be found, that this account is much confirmed by the correspondence

between the nature of the country from Glen-Dochart to Loch-Awe, and

the particulars of the route described by Blind Harrie, as having

been pursued by Wallace from the latter place to the hold where he

encountered MacPhadian: it is still farther avouched by the exact

conformity between the description of the scene of battle in the

poem, and that marked as its site by the tradition. Immediately after

passing Loch-Dochart, and consequently leaving that glen, the Minstrel

describes the host of Wallace as entering a moss of such an extent and

difficulty, that it prevented the farther march of the horses, and

obliged the men to dismount and pursue their way on foot.

“Yan Wallace ost upon yair fute yai lycht,

Yair hors yai left yocht yai war neuir so wycht:

For moss and crag yai mycht na langer dre

Yan Wallace said quha gangs best let se.”

_Book vii._ l. 803.

“A short distance beyond the west end of Glen-Dochart, there is a

high and wide tract of moss and moor, called ‘The Churan Beag,’ which

occupies the most considerable extent of the space between Glen-Dochart

and Glen-Urcha, the entrance to Loch-Awe. It is difficult to conceive a

more desolate spot, nor one which could more correspond with the moss

noticed by Blind Harrie. Its whole extent is a vast waste of swamps,

gullies, and broken peat-bags; and its outlets and entrances are by

rugged and steep declivities, embarrassed with fragments of rocks, and

torn into vast chasms by the torrents which rise on the moss above.

Through this miserable region lies the shortest path from Glen-Dochart

to Glen-Urcha; and though impassable for horses, yet, in the olden

time, when these were little used by the Highlanders, it was the most

common thoroughfare between the above-mentioned places, and is still

used, on account of its brevity, by the shepherds of the country, and

foot-travellers who require expedition. It is several miles shorter

than the way by Straith-Phillan and Glen-Lochie; for this reason, and

also for its utter solitude, it is highly probable that it should

have been the route chosen by Wallace in preference to the other. In

addition to the proofs offered in its favour, by the correspondence of

its features with those of the road mentioned by Blind Harrie, there

is the negative confirmation, that no place of the same nature occurs

within the neighbourhood of Glen-Dochart, in any direction by which

it is probable that the march of Wallace could have been destined.

For this reason, it is, as I have before hinted, impossible that he

could have passed through Straith-Phillan; for in the whole way from

Glen-Dochart to Glen-Urcha by that road, there is neither moss nor

muir, but plain straith and narrow glen. From all these circumstances,

it seems very conclusive, that it was through the moss of ‘the Churan

Beag’ that Wallace took his march, after his junction with Sir Niel

Campbell in Glen-Dochart. But to return to the relation of the Minstrel.

“Previous to the entrance of Wallace upon the muir, he mentions that

Gillemichel had been again sent forward to reconnoitre the route. He

had not been long entered the moss, when he met a scout of MacPhadian,

doubtless sent to discover the approach of Wallace. At the appearance

of Gillemichel, the foeman fled; but his speed was not sufficient to

enable him to outstrip the fleet foot of his pursuer, and he was

overtaken and slain. Delivered from this danger of a discovery, the

host of Wallace effected their march through the Churan in perfect

secrecy, and reached the hold of MacPhadian before their approach

was even known. It may, perhaps, be remarked, that the paucity of

the Minstrel, in his relation of this part of the march of Wallace,

is inconsistent with the description of the country through which

tradition supposes it to have been made; since the poem makes no

mention of the progress of the expedition through the intermediate

space of ten miles, which lies between the Churan and the pass of

Brandir, but, from declaring Wallace’s delivery from the moss,

immediately proceeds to communicate his entrance to the hold, without

taking any notice of his arrival on the shore of Loch-Awe. But it is

to be observed, that, through the whole march of Wallace, it describes

those situations only, the circumstances of which affect the incidents

of the story. The space from the Churan being destitute of any feature

dangerous or advantageous, and the grand interest of the episode being

the hold of MacPhadian, the Minstrel appears to have been absorbed in

that object, and to have passed without regard the intervening way.

This is palpably the fact, by the certain evidence, that, wherever the

post of MacPhadian was situated, there was between its entrance and the

moss passed by Wallace, a space of water which has not been mentioned

by the Minstrel.

* * * * *

“Then Wallace said quha gangs best let se,

Throuchout ye moss deliverly yai zeid,

Syne tuk ye hauld quharof yai had maist dreid,

_Endlong ye schoir_ ay four in front yai past,” &c.

_Book vii. l._ 806.

“From this notice of the shore, it is here evident that Wallace arrived

on the banks of some water immediately previous to entering the

position of his enemy, and that Blind Harrie has neglected to mention

the circumstance. His omission of the mention of Loch-Awe in his

description of the march of Wallace, is therefore no objection that the

latter was not made in the route affirmed by tradition.

“From the arrival of Wallace in the hold of MacPhadian, the account of

Blind Harrie corresponds entirely with the accounts of the oral record,

and the nature of the pass of Brandir. The place in which the old

people of the country point out the site of the battle, is that narrow

stripe of open space which lies near the northern extremity of the

pass, between the foot of Cruächan and the narrowing of the lake to the

rock of Brandir. The Minstrel coincides with this account.

“Endlong ye schoir ay four in front yai past,

_Quhill yai within assemblyt at ye last._”

_Ib. l._ 810.

“From this narrowness of the column, and the number of Wallace’s men,

the whole host could not have entered within the pass, till the head

had arrived as far as the space before mentioned. The description of

the straitened situation of the position also agrees with the pass of

Brandir:

“Her is na gait to fle zone pepil can,

Bot rockis heich and wattir depe and wan.”

_Book vii. l._ 814.

“As soon as the men of Wallace arrived at the post of their enemies,

they fell upon them with the utmost fury. Their scout having been

slain, as before mentioned, MacPhadian’s followers were completely

surprised and taken at disarray. Undismayed, however, by this ill

fortune, they snatched up their arms, and rushed to defend the pass

with the boldest resolution. At the first onset, the Scots bore back

their enemies over five acres of ground; and Wallace, with his iron

mace, made a fearful havoc among the enemy. Encouraged, however,

by MacPhadian, the Irish came to the rescue; the battle thickened

with more stubborn fury; and for two hours was maintained, with such

obstinate eagerness on both sides, that neither party had any apparent

advantage; and, says the Minstrel, the fiercest found ‘eneuch’ of

fighting. At length the cause, and the valour of Wallace, prevailed.

The Irish gave way and fled; and the Scots of their party threw down

their arms, and, kneeling for mercy, Wallace commanded them to be

spared for their birth sake, but urged forward the pursuit upon the

Irish. Pent in by the rocks and the water, the latter had but little

hope in flight. Many were overtaken and slain as they endeavoured

to climb the craigs; and two thousand were driven into the lake and

drowned. MacPhadian, with fifteen men, fled to a cave, and hoped

to have concealed himself till the pursuit was over; but Duncan of

Lorn having discovered his retreat, pursued and slew him with his

companions; and having cut off the head of the leader, brought it to

Wallace, and set it upon a stone high in one of the craigs, as a trophy

of the victory.”

·.· Before the writer met with the work whence the preceding extract

is made, he entertained the belief that he was the first who had

studied the topography and tradition of this romantic district,

with a view of illustrating the labours of the Minstrel, and hence

bringing into notice a portion of our history hitherto overlooked by

all, save that ill-requited author. Under this impression, he was

arranging the materials he had collected, when he became aware of his

being anticipated by a more able hand. On comparing his notes with

the details of Mr Allan, the similarity of their views appeared too

striking to be supposed accidental; and unwilling to incur the charge

of appropriating to himself the merits of another, he has suppressed

his own observations, in deference to the ingenious author of the

“Bridal of Caölchairn.”

F.

MEMOIRS OF JOHN, EARL OF WARREN--LORD HENRY DE PERCY--AND LORD ROBERT

DE CLIFFORD.

I. WARREN.

Page 220.

It is presumed the writer will not be far wrong, if he anticipates a

little curiosity on the part of the reader, respecting the personal

history of so conspicuous a character as the conqueror of Dunbar; and

as our English neighbours consider it a matter of difficulty, for a

Scotsman to be impartial when the conduct of an enemy of his country

happens to be the subject of his investigation, we shall, without

either denying or admitting the truth of this allegation, endeavour to

escape from the charge, by giving the following biographical notice in

the elegant language of one of their own countrymen:[149]

“John Earl of Warren and Surrey was the son of William Earl of Warren

and Surrey, by his second wife, Maud, widow of Hugh Bigot, Earl of

Norfolk, and sister and coheiress of Anselm Marshal, Earl of Pembroke.

In 1240, being then five years of age, he succeeded his father in his

dignities. In 1247 he married Alice, daughter of Hugh le Brun, Count

of March, and uterine sister of King Henry the Third; and in the

following year, though he could not have been above thirteen years of

age, he is said to have attended the Parliament which met at London in

the octaves of the Purification. During the reign of Henry the Third,

he is stated to have filled those stations which, from his high rank,

naturally devolved upon him, and at the battle of Lewes he served in

the van of the royal army with Prince Edward; but, together with the

Earl of Pembroke, disgracefully deserted him at the commencement of the

action, and fled first to Pevensey Castle, and from thence to France.

Their flight is thus quaintly alluded to by Peter de Langtoft:[150]

“=The Erle of Warenne, I wote, he scaped over the se,

And Sir Hugh Bigote als with the Erle fled he.=

“In May following he returned, and claimed the restitution of his

possessions, which, notwithstanding his treachery to the Prince, the

rebellious Barons had declared to have been forfeited. The refusal of

his demand induced him once more to change sides, and he confederated

with the Earl of Gloucester for the restoration of the King’s power,

and was present with the royal forces at the battle of Evesham. Thus

his interest, rather than his honour, seems to have been his sole rule

of action; and unfortunately, such conduct was then far too general to

entail upon those who adopted it either punishment or reproach. In 1268

he had a dispute with Henry Earl of Lincoln; and about the same time

became involved in a serious affray with Alan Lord Zouche, relative to

some lands. This affair was attended with great violence; for, finding

that he must submit to the judgment of a court of law, he abused his

adversary and his son in the strongest terms, and then assaulted them

in such an outrageous manner in Westminster-Hall, that he nearly

killed the baron, and severely wounded his son. Neither his power nor

influence could save the Earl from the vengeance of the laws he had so

flagrantly violated; and, though he retired to his Castle at Ryegate,

he was closely pursued by Prince Edward with a strong force, and,

finding that opposition would be useless, he met the Prince on foot,

and implored the royal clemency with great humility. For his offence he

was fined ten thousand marks; but this sum was afterwards reduced to

eight thousand four hundred, and he was permitted to pay it by annual

instalments of two hundred marks each.

“Immediately after the solemnization of the funeral of Henry the Third

at Westminster, the Earl of Warren and the Earl of Gloucester proceeded

to the high altar, and swore fealty to his son and successor, King

Edward the First. In the 3d Edward I. he received that monarch at his

castle of Ryegate in so honourable a manner, upon his return from

Gascony, that Edward was induced to remit him one thousand marks of the

sum which he had been fined for the affair with Lord le Zouche.

“The next circumstance recorded of the Earl, is one in which that

proud and sturdy spirit for which he was celebrated, was displayed

in a manner so consonant to the feelings of the present day, that

this nobleman has always been a favourite character in English

biography; and the pencil was on one occasion employed to perpetuate

his independent conduct. After the enactment of the statute of _quo

warranto_, the Earl of Warren was, under its provisions, questioned by

what title he held his lands; to which inquiry, first unsheathing an

old sword, he is said to have replied, ‘Behold, my Lords, here is my

warranty. My ancestors coming into this land with William the Bastard,

did obtain their lands by the sword; and with the sword I am resolved

to defend them against whomsoever that shall endeavour to dispossess

me. For that King did not himself conquer the land and subdue it, but

our progenitors were sharers and assistants therein.’

“In the 23d Edward I., the Castle of Bamburgh was intrusted to his

custody; and, in the 24th Edward I., he commanded the forces sent to

reduce Dunbar Castle, which, after a siege of three days, surrendered

to him; and having met the Scotch army which came to its relief, he

defeated them on Friday the 27th April, and pursued them several miles

from the field of battle, when the enemy sustained a loss of 10,000

men. Soon after this event, the Earl was appointed Regent of Scotland;

and in the following year was constituted general of all the English

forces north of the Trent. But his previous good fortune now deserted

him; and his army sustained a signal overthrow at the battle of

Stirling, in September 1297.

“His misfortune did not, however, lessen him in Edward’s esteem, for he

was immediately afterwards reappointed to the command of the English

forces; and, in the 28th Edward I., was made Governor of Hope Castle,

in the county of Derby. In that year, also, he commanded the second

squadron at the siege of Carlaverock, at which time he must have been

about sixty-five years of age.

“In the 29th Edward I., the Earl was appointed, jointly with the Earl

of Warwick and others, to treat with the agents of the King of France,

relative to a peace between England and Scotland; and in the same year

he was a party to the letter from the barons to Pope Boniface VIII., in

which he is only styled “Comes Warenne,” though on his seal he is also

properly called Earl of Surrey.[151] On the 5th calends of October, 32

Edward I., i. e. 27th September 1304, being then, according to Peter de

Langtoft,[152] employed in Scotland, he died.

“The moneth of September yolden was Strivelyn,

Edward may remembre the travaille and the pyn.

With many grete encumbre of in hard stoure,

At Brustwick opon Humbre there he mad sojoure.

Sir Jon of Warenne that ilk tyme gan deie,

His body was redy then in grave for to leie,

After the enterment the King tok his way,

To the south,” &c.

“But according to the registry of the Priory of Lewes, the Earl died

that day at Kennington, having, says Dugdale, been Earl of Surrey no

less than fifty-four years; though, as he succeeded his father in 1240,

it is evident he must have borne that title sixty-four years. He was

buried in the midst of the pavement, in the quire of the Abbey of

Lewes, before the high altar, and the following epitaph was engraved

upon his tomb.

“=Vous qe passez on bouche close.

Priez pur cely ke cy repose:

En vie come vous estis jadis fu,

Et vous tiel serretz come je su.=

=Sire Johan Count de Gareyn gyst ycy.

Dieu de sa alme eit mercy:

Ky pur sa alme priera,

Trois mill jours de pardon avera.=”

“Of the subject of this article, but little that is favourable to his

memory can be said; though his faults, or more properly his vices,

were those of the age in which he lived. His treachery at the battle

of Lewes has, to apply the beautiful expression of a distinguished

statesman of the present day, ‘left indelible stains upon his

character, which all the laurels of’ Dunbar ‘cannot cover, nor its

blood wash away;’ whilst his subsequent conduct was invariably marked

by a turbulent and intractable spirit. Not only was he frequently

embroiled in disputes both with his compeers and his sovereign, but,

with almost unparalleled hardihood, he dared, in a court of justice,

to use personal violence towards a baron of the realm. That he should

acquire renown in the field, and consequently become possessed of the

King’s esteem, is perfectly consistent with that impetuous temper for

which he is celebrated. Bravery is, however, but one redeeming trait in

a picture, where all besides is dark and repulsive; and even the bold

answer relative to his right to his lands, when properly considered,

affords no room for praise; for the same resolute opposition to such

an inquiry would, there is no doubt, be as readily evinced to defend

any part of his property, if it had been acquired by the most flagrant

injustice on his part, instead of on that of his ancestors.

“A proof of the estimation in which the Earl was held by Edward the

First, is afforded, in Dugdale’s opinion, by the fact, that the King

issued precepts, directed to the Bishops of Canterbury and London, and

to several Abbots, commanding them to cause masses to be said for his

soul; but this testimony of the royal consideration might have arisen

from the near connection between the Earl and his Majesty, as is shown

by the annexed table:--

King John == Isabel, daughter, and heiress == Hugh le Brun,

| of Aymer, Count of | Count of March,

| Angoulesme. | 2d husband.

+----+ +---+

| |

King Henry III. == Alice == John Earl of

| | Warren.

+----------+ +

|

King Edward I.

|

+

“By the said Alice le Brun, who died on the 9th February 1291, the

Earl of Warren had issue, William, who died in his father’s lifetime,

leaving his wife _enceinte_ with John, his son and heir, who succeeded

his grandfather in his honours. Alianor, who married, first, Henry

Lord Percy, by whom she had Henry Lord Percy, spoken of in the poem,

(_i.e._ Caerlaverock Castle), as the Earl’s ‘nevou;’ and, secondly,

the son of a Scotch Baron; and Isabel, wife of John Baliol, King of

Scotland.”[153]

II. PERCY

“If the biographer of an ancient warrior,” says Mr Nicolas, “is in any

degree influenced by that enthusiasm which deeds of chivalrous courage

are calculated to excite, it is only by more than ordinary restraint

upon his feelings that he is enabled to relate them in the sober and

chastened language suitable to historical truth; and, perhaps, in no

instance is that caution so necessary as when any member of the house

of Percy is the subject of his pen. In the age to which Henry de Percy

belonged, as well as in a few succeeding centuries, that name was

synonymous with almost uncontrollable power, impetuous valour, and all

those stern military virtues which characterized the time; and the

difficulty of successfully detailing the career of an individual is

considerably increased, when, as in the case of this Baron, the merits

of his descendants have been sung, not only by rude contemporary bards,

but have been immortalized by the greatest dramatic genius that ever

existed.