they made gloves and other things out of it; or if they had hungered it,
by not giving it enough of alum, eggs, and other things. They sewed and
worked with bad thread, and assumed the position of masters when they
did not know the craft. The tailors made too much refuse and shreds
of men’s clothes, through haste and for lack of skill. They made men’s
garments otherwise than they were ordered; they sewed with bad thread,
and often failed to keep their appointments. They assumed the place of
masters before they had properly learned the craft; and “they worked on
holydays against the law of God.”
One of the points into which the Chamberlain had to inquire, referred
to the treatment of foreign merchants――“If there be any burgesses
who hardly treated foreign merchants, coming to the burghs with their
goods by sea or by land, by not keeping the laws nor making payments
to them as ought to be done, or doing any other injuries to them, by
reason of which such merchants wholly cease to come to the burghs and
ports, to the damage of our lord the King, and the manifest ruin of the
communities of burghs, on account of such hard treatment.”¹
¹ _Ancient Laws and Customs of the Burghs of Scotland_, pages
115‒124, 132‒150.
It appears that the matters treated in the Chamberlain’s court, and
the laws and customs indicated in the preceding pages, were carried
into practical operation, as the records of the burghs show. In 1434
the Town Council of Aberdeen enacted that no one should sell ale dearer
than fourpence or sixpence, as it should be fixed, under the penalty
of the confiscation of their brewing utensils, their ale, and exclusion
from the trade for a year and a day. The head court of the burgh of
Peebles in 1450 appointed four men to the office of ale tasters, and
other four men to fix the price of flesh, and such officials were
regularly appointed. In 1458 the head court at Peebles enacted that
any brewers who broke the fixed price of ale should be fined for the
first offence, one gallon of ale, for the second two gallons, and for
the third three gallons, and for the fourth offence eight shillings. In
1471 the local authorities of Peebles ordered that the best ale should
be sold at tenpence the gallon, or cheaper if the ale tasters deemed
it right, and the second quality of ale at eightpence the gallon, and
whosoever broke the price of the ale should be fined ten shillings.
The provost and the magistrates of Edinburgh in 1492 proclaimed that
no person in the burgh should sell ale dearer than twelvepence and
eightpence the gallon, under the penalties authorised by the statutes
of the burgh. In 1499 the local authorities of Edinburgh enacted that
no one should sell ale above sixteenpence the gallon under the penalty
of having the heads of their barrels knocked off and the ale divided.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., page 392; _Burgh
Records of Peebles_, pages 111, 121, 128, 138, 142, 152, 158,
166, _et seq._; _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I.,
pages 62, 75.
The price of wheat, meal, and bread were all fixed by the local
authorities of the burghs. In 1492 the assize of good citizens of
Edinburgh ordered that the price of wheat should be ten shillings and
sixpence the boll, “of good and sufficient stuff,” and the price of
malt eighteen shillings the load. The good men of the assize in Peebles
in 1462 statuted that whosoever broke the price of bread or ale, from
him should be taken twelvepence “for the buying of a clock.” At the
same time the authorities of this burgh enacted that whosoever bought
skins, wool, or white woollen cloth from unfreemen either in or out
of the burgh, from all citizens found guilty of this offence, there
should be taken sixpence to go to the clock. In 1434 the Town Council
of Aberdeen ordered that no baker should break the price and the weight
of the bread which the bailies had sanctioned; and whoever contravened
this, should for the first offence pay eight shillings, for the second
fifteen shillings, and for the third his bread should be confiscated,
his person put in the pillory, and excluded from his craft for a year
and a day. Every baker was obliged to have his own mark upon his bread
that it might be known, and any one who neglected to put his mark
on his loaves was fined eight shillings. At the same time fleshers,
convicted for breaking the price of beef and mutton, or selling flesh
before it was priced, were to be fined eight shillings for the first
and second offences; but in the case of a third offence, the flesh was
to be confiscated, and the offender excluded from his craft for a year
and a day.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., page 62; _Peebles_,
page 147; _Aberdeen_, page 147.
No retail dealer was permitted to buy goods before eleven o’clock,
under the penalty of confiscation, and neither man nor woman was
allowed to pass out of the burgh to buy anything before it was brought
to the market. Salmon fishers were not permitted to sell their fish
till they were shown in the market, nor to store them, but bring them
to the market the morning after they were caught, under a fine of ten
shillings. If the bailies and local authorities of the burghs neglected
to enforce these laws and statutes, then they should be reported
to the King or the Chamberlain, “and each of them fined ten pounds
without remission.” In 1441 the Town Council of Aberdeen, for the good
of the community, enacted that no flesher, nor any other man, should
be permitted to buy any kind of fish till they came to the market;
and that no one should, in the future, dare to purchase any sort of
fish, and raise a dearth on the citizens, till the height of the day
was passed, under the penalty of confiscating such fish, and a further
fine of eight shillings. The profit of a dealer in fish was regulated
in this way: if a fish cost him twelvepence, then he was allowed one
penny on it; if it exceeded twelvepence he was allowed twopence, and so
on, for each shilling a penny. At the same time it was enacted that no
man should buy more victuals than was necessary for his own house and
family; if any one bought victuals to retail, he should sell it openly
on the market-day. In 1442 the guild burgesses of Aberdeen enacted that
no person should give more than six shillings and eightpence for the
stone of wool; and if any one bought wool at a higher price, he was to
be fined forty shillings for the common good of the burgh; the price of
woolfells were fixed in a similar way.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., pages 391‒397.
Many of the statutes of the burghs were directed against a class of
persons usually called forestallers and regraters. These were the
persons who bought goods, cattle, and food, before the markets or the
appointed time for selling and buying, or who purchased goods, grain,
fish, and other things, and resold them at higher prices and profits
than were then lawful. In the burgh records of Aberdeen, in the year
1402, there is a list containing the names of ninety-five forestallers;
they were often denounced in the local statutes, and sometimes
severely punished.¹ Within the boundary of every royal burgh there
was a complete monopoly of manufacture and trade. Further, some of the
charters granted to the burgesses a monopoly of trade throughout the
neighbouring or surrounding country. Thus the trading privileges of
Rutherglen included the city of Glasgow; the monopoly of Inverkeithing
embraced the burghs of Kinross, Bruntisland, Kinghorn, and Dysart;
Perth had an exclusive privilege of trade and manufacture over
Perthshire; and Aberdeen, Inverness, and Edinburgh, had similar trade
privileges in their several counties.
¹ _Ibid._, pages 383‒385, 445, 402; _Burgh Records of
Edinburgh_, Volume I., pages 36, 97.
The acts and regulations indicated in the preceding pages were
generally enforced in the royal burghs in the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries. At Aberdeen, in 1443, Alexander Lammynton was fined for
selling flesh above the fixed price; and in 1492 three men were placed
in the pillory, their pecks were broken, and each of them fined eight
shillings for having pecks of too small measure. At Edinburgh, in
1495, twenty-two bakers in one day were convicted by a jury for buying
and regrating French flour; and on the 8th of January, 1499, fifty
“Browster Wives” were tried at once, and convicted for breaking the
statutes relating to the brewing and selling of ale.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., pages 398, 419;
_Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., pages 69, 75.
The burgesses of guild possessed a monopoly of commerce in the burghs
and outside of them. Acts of Parliament, the burgh laws of the kingdom,
and many local statutes of the various royal burghs, all proclaimed the
exclusive privilege of the guild brethren with regard to commerce. No
one was permitted to work at his craft and deal in merchandise of any
description. The guild were exclusively the commercial class, and they
assumed the chief offices and mainly exercised the ruling functions in
the royal burghs of Scotland; but the larger body of citizens naturally
began to form themselves gradually into separate associations, with a
distinct view to their own special interests. The craftsmen, however,
were not specially favoured by the Crown or the Parliament as the
burgesses of guild had been. The Crown and the Legislature frequently
interfered to protect the exclusive privileges of the guild burgesses,
but no early charter from the Crown or Act of Parliament has been
discovered legalising the incorporation of the craftsmen. In fact,
they seem to have risen into importance by their own energy. As we have
seen, they were subjected to a severe and exacting system of inspection
under the authority of the Great Chamberlain. At last, when Parliament
interfered with the craftsmen it was with the professed intention
of guarding the nation against their encroachment, a pretext often
groundlessly advanced by governments.
In 1424 Parliament passed an Act which enjoined that in every burgh
each separate craft should, with the advice of the town’s officers,
elect one of their own number to be deacon of their craft. The duties
of the deacons thus elected were to inspect the materials and the
workmanship of the craftsmen, “so that the people may not be scathed
by untrue craftsmen, as they have been in bygone times.” Whether
the deacons had exceeded the duties assigned to them or not, in 1426
Parliament declared that deacons of crafts should have no corrective
power over the other members of the craftsmen, except to inspect their
work once every fifteen days. The sworn bailies and council of every
burgh were ordered to fix the price of the materials of each craft
and consider the cost of the labour of the workmen, and then fix the
price of the articles produced, and proclaim it to the people. The
town councils were also commanded to fix the wages of craftsmen who
had to work on other men’s materials, such as wrights and masons. All
craftsmen who undertook more work than they could accomplish were to
be punished. In 1427 Parliament repealed the above Acts, which in some
degree had recognised the standing of the craftsmen, and then denounced
the action of the craftsmen as injurious to the people and the whole
nation, and therefore the craftsmen were prohibited from electing
deacons or holding meetings. This jealousy of the craftsmen continued
to manifest itself for more than another century, and till in some
measure the settlement of the different classes of the burghal
population was effected.
The Acts prohibiting all craftsmen from engaging in trade or dealing
in merchandise were repeated in the reign of James II., James III.,
and James IV. In 1459 the goldsmiths were recognised and treated as
an established fraternity in an Act of Parliament, but the body of
craftsmen were still regarded with suspicion by the Estates of the
realm. Parliament announced, in an Act passed in 1493, “that it was
clearly understood by the King and the three Estates, that the deacons
of the craftsmen in the burghs were extremely dangerous, and might
cause great trouble by the assembling and rising of the King’s subjects,
and by their statute-making against the commonweal for their own profit,
which deserved severe punishment. As those craftsmen assembled and
framed rules that they should have wages for holydays, or if not they
would not work; and when any of them began a job and left it unfinished,
then no one of his craft dare venture to complete it. Therefore, it was
enacted that all the functions of the deacons should cease for one year,
excepting the power to examine the materials and the quality of the
workmanship. Masons and wrights, and other craftsmen, who statuted that
they should have their wages for the holydays as for work days, and all
the makers of such statutes, should be indicted as common oppressors of
the people, and the justice-clerk should proceed thereupon and punish
them as oppressors; and likewise the makers of the rules that when one
man begins a job no one else can complete it, should all be punished as
common oppressors.”¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 8,
13, 14, 48, 234.
Still, in spite of this and other attempts to crush the fraternities
of craftsmen, the custom of incorporating them gradually came to be
introduced throughout the kingdom. The manner of effecting this was
pretty uniform, and consisted in granting letters under the seal of
the burgh court, called a “Seal of Cause.” There was some variation in
the tenor of these, as some of them expressly prohibited all persons
from working at the special trade but the freemen of the craft; they
all, however, gave the craft the privilege of admitting new members,
inspecting materials, making bye-laws, electing office-bearers, and
having a fund-box or common good. Of course, in all of them, there was
implied a strict monopoly within the limits of the burgh, as it stood
at the date of the grant.
As illustrative of this matter, and also of the common arts of life,
Edinburgh may be taken as a favourable example of the whole kingdom
in the latter half of the fifteenth century. In 1473 the provost
and council of Edinburgh granted a Seal of Cause to the hatmakers of
the burgh, in which it was stated, among other rules, that no master
hatmaker should take apprentices for a shorter period than seven years;
if, however, any of the craftsmen’s sons became apprenticed, they
should only be bound for three years. Further, the hatmakers considered
that it was very proper and profitable that no one of their craft
should, under any circumstances, sew, renew, or mend any old hats.
In 1475 the provost and council, and all the deacons of the craftsmen,
of Edinburgh granted a Seal of Cause to the masons and wrights――“For
the honour and the worship of St. John, and the augmentation of
divine service; and for the right ruling of these two crafts, equally
profitable to the workers and to all builders.” Among other rules in
this deed, no master was to be permitted to take apprentices for a
shorter term than seven years; and every apprentice at his entry should
pay half a mark to the altar of St. John in the church of St. Giles.
The same year the provost and council of Edinburgh granted a Seal of
Cause to the weavers――“For the honour and love of Almighty God, and his
mother the Virgin Mary, and St. Servanus, for supporting and upholding
of divine service, and the appareling of their altar of St. Servanus,
which was founded and upheld by them in St. Giles’ church, and for the
management of their work, the good rule and worship of the kingdom,
the common profit of the craftsmen, and divers other things.” In this
Seal of Cause it was stated that the weavers should elect their deacon
once a year, like the other craftsmen, and the deacon should rule the
craft, and all the men should obey him in all honest and lawful things
touching the craft. But the freemen of the craft who were burgesses
should elect the deacon, and no one else should have any voice therein.
No master should take apprentices for a shorter term than five years;
and every apprentice should pay at his entry five shillings to the
altar of St. Servanus. Every man and woman who worked at the craft
should give the priest his meat, and every week give a penny to the
altar, and each hired servant should give fourpence a year to the
altar. All those who disobeyed the deacon, and refused to abide by the
statutes of the craft, for each offence they should have to pay one
pound of wax. No woman should act as a master, or hold a workshop,
unless she be a freeman’s wife.
In 1483 the provost and council of Edinburgh granted a Seal of Cause to
the hammermen, in which were named the blacksmiths, goldsmiths, coiners,
saddlers, cutlers, bucklemakers, and armourers. There were a number of
very minute rules in this deed for the regulation and the profit of the
various crafts incorporated under it, and these all ran on the lines
of restriction already indicated. In 1488 the magistrates and council
of Edinburgh incorporated the fleshers, and the first rule in this
deed was a declaration to the effect that the deacon and the principal
masters of the craft in the burgh had, after mature consideration,
arrived at the conclusion that it was most expedient for the common
profit that all the unfreemen and boys should be expelled from the
craft, unless they either bound themselves as hired men or apprentices.
The coopers were incorporated in Edinburgh in 1500: and in the other
burghs of the kingdom the various classes of craftsmen began to be
incorporated much about the same time, or in some instances, a little
later than those of Edinburgh.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., pages 28‒34,
47‒55, 180‒183. An interesting and valuable _History of
the Incorporated Trades of Aberdeen_, by Mr. E. Bain, was
published in 1887; and in the records of other burghs much
information on the subject will be found.
One characteristic of the incorporation of the craftsmen which came
strikingly out, was their historic association with the prevailing
religion of the period. This side of the national life will be
subsequently treated.
Although it seems evident that the mechanical skill and the
manipulating power of the craftsmen of Scotland in the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries were not highly developed, still the persistent
efforts of industry, under unfavourable circumstances, were well
manifested throughout this period. It appears that the blacksmiths
were unskilful at shoeing horses. In 1478 it was stated in an Act of
Parliament that the smiths, through ignorance and drunkenness, hurted
and crippled men’s horses by shoeing them in the quick. Therefore it
was enacted that when a smith shod a horse into the quick he should
pay the cost of keeping the horse till his feet be healed, and find
the owner another to ride upon or labour, and if the horse be crippled
beyond recovery then the smith should pay the price of the horse to the
owner. In 1496 James IV. paid three shillings and fourpence for shoeing
two horses, and the following year he paid sixteenpence for shoeing
his grey horse in Brechin, and the same for shoeing his brown nag.
It appears that the Scotch kings of this period employed a number of
smiths and other craftsmen from time to time.¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., page 119;
_Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I.; _Exchequer
Rolls of Scotland_.
The principal cities and towns of the Church during this period were
St. Andrews, Glasgow, Paisley, Dunfermline, Arbroath, Brechin, Dunkeld,
Dunblane, Dornoch, and a few others. St. Andrews was the residence of
the metropolitan of Scotland, the chief religious centre, with a fine
cathedral, castle, many churches and religious houses, and the seat
of a university; it had also a considerable trade; and these together
rendered it one of the chief cities of the kingdom in the period under
review. It was then a comparatively populous and wealthy city.
In the latter part of the fifteenth century Glasgow was still a
small city, although her great cathedral, with its many altars,
the archbishop’s palace, convent, and hospital, and her university,
conferred influence and dignity on the town. Glasgow was under the
authority of the Archbishop, and the appointment of the magistrates
remained in his hand till the Reformation. In the fifteenth century
Glasgow had little trade, and had to maintain a struggle about her
privileges with Rutherglen, Renfrew, and Dumbarton.
Paisley rose into a thriving town under the shadow of the monastery
and the abbot. In 1488 James IV. erected Paisley into a free burgh of
barony, with the same privileges as the burghs of Arbroath, Dunfermline,
and Newburgh; it had two yearly markets, and the magistrates were to
be nominated by the abbot. Twelve years later the abbot made a grant of
the burgh to the provost, the bailies, and the community. The burgesses
had the right of taking stones from the abbot’s quarries, and if they
should win coal, then the abbot should have fuel from their pits.¹
¹ _Register of Paisley_, pages 263, 73.
Arbroath, as indicated by its custom, had a considerable foreign
trade in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. About the end of
the fourteenth century the abbot and the burgesses made a worthy
effort to render the harbour more secure for ships, and voluntarily
taxed themselves to accomplish the necessary work connected with this
improvement. The burgh continued to prosper, and the port and town
eventually rose to commercial and manufacturing importance.
Brechin has been repeatedly mentioned in its historic relation in
preceding pages. In the period under consideration Brechin was a
city with her cathedral and castle, and many historic associations.
Dunfermline was a favourite residence of the Scotch kings from Malcolm
Canmore onward to modern times; still, at the close of the fifteenth
century, except its religious buildings, it was a comparatively small
town, built of wooden houses.¹
¹ _Register of Arbroath_, Volume II., pages 40‒42; Chambers’
_History of Dunfermline_, page 327. In the fifteenth century
the shirt of St. Margaret, the queen of Malcolm III.,
Canmore, was preserved at Dunfermline as a highly cherished
relic. It was carried to Mary of Gueldres at the date
of the birth of James III.; and it was also brought from
Dunfermline at the time of the birth of James V. _Exchequer
Rolls._
Greenock, Kilmarnock, and other towns, were as yet hardly in embryo.
In short, the mineral resources of the country, coal and iron, had
scarcely yet been touched.
The defence of the country constantly engaged the attention of
government and consumed a large part of the nation’s energy. The
habits of the people, engendered by the pressure of external enemies,
and fed by internal commotions, had assumed warlike and military
characteristics. Even the citizens of the burghs were often commanded
to have their weapons ready, and kept beside them in their shops, to
face any sudden emergency or brawl which might arise on the streets.
They had to defend themselves against the attacks of external enemies,
to watch and ward the burgh, maintain order and uphold the honour of
the town.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., pages 8, 9; _Burgh
Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., pages 68, 72.
Many Acts of Parliament were passed touching the defence of the
kingdom, and ordering the sheriffs of the counties and the magistrates
of the burghs to hold “wapinschaws” of the fighting men of the realm
four times in the year; all those from sixteen to sixty years of age
were bound to muster as fighting men. The armour and weapons of the
different ranks of society were enumerated in an Act of Parliament in
1429, and again in the reign of James II. in 1456; and this matter also
engaged the attention of the parliaments of James III. and James IV.
The Act of 1429 enjoined that every man who had twenty pounds of yearly
income, or possessed a hundred pounds worth of moveable goods, should
be well horsed and fully armed. Those of lower rank, who had ten pounds
of yearly rent, or fifty pounds worth of moveable property, should
furnish themselves with a helmet and gorget, vambrace, breastplate,
greaves to cover the front of the thighs, and iron gauntlets. Every
yeoman worth twenty pounds, should arm himself with a doublet of fence,
an iron hat, a bow and a sheaf of arrows, a sword, buckler, and a knife.
Men worth ten pounds, should have a bow and a sheaf of arrows, a sword,
buckler, and a knife. All those who could not handle the bow should
have a good strong hat, a doublet of fence, a sword, a buckler, and
a good axe or else a pointed staff. Every burgess worth fifty pounds
was commanded to be completely armed as a gentleman ought to be; and
citizens worth twenty pounds, should arm themselves with a stout hat, a
doublet and habergeon, a bow and a sheaf of arrows, a sword, a buckler,
and a knife; those not bowmen should have a good axe and fencible
weapons. Severe penalties were to be inflicted on those entrusted with
the carrying out of the acts, if they neglected to comply with their
requirements.
Some of the armour and weapons mentioned above were imported. In 1425
parliament enacted that all merchants who passed to foreign countries
with their ships, besides their common cargoes, they should bring
home as much harness and armour, spear shafts and bow-strings, as
they possibly could. The spear was for long the favourite weapon of
the Scottish infantry. The length of the spear was from fifteen to
eighteen feet, and the Scots handled it with great skill and remarkable
effect. They were singularly deficient, however, in the use of the
bow, and owing to the marked superiority of the English in this arm,
the Scottish army often suffered severely. James I. and the succeeding
kings saw and understood this, and earnestly endeavoured to supersede
the spear in some measure by the bow; but all their efforts failed,
though many expedients were tried to induce the people to use the bow.
All the young men were commanded to learn the use of the bow, and butts
were ordered to be erected throughout the kingdom, especially in the
vicinity of the parish churches, and every man was enjoined to shoot
thrice. In 1457 a pair of butts were ordered to be erected at every
parish church, and shooting with the bow to be practised every Sunday.
It was then enjoined that each man should shoot at least six times,
under a fine of twopence on every man who was absent; and the fine
money was to be spent on drink amongst those who had attended the
shooting. Enactments were also passed which prohibited the national
games of football and of golf, with the object of promoting the
exercise of archery; but all these acts and devices were unavailing,
as the Scots never acquired an aptness in using the bow.
According to feudal usage the longest term of service which the King
could exact at any one time was forty days, and the more usual period
of service in the field was fifteen or twenty days. The feudal army
provided its own equipments and provisions, as indicated in a preceding
paragraph; thus the soldiers were the vassals of their respective lords
and chiefs, not the King’s men. Hence the curious social phenomena that
the royal authority usually waned in the times of war and increased
in the times of peace. The most daring acts of interference with the
powers of the Crown occurred on the array of the feudal army. The
command of the army belonged to the King, and the most experienced
of the nobles led the main divisions, usually four, the right and
left wings, the centre, and the reserve. The arrangement of the
sub-divisions and sections of the army seems to have been by clans,
in which the barons and chiefs acted as subordinate commanders and
officers, often by hereditary right. The pith of the Scottish army
always consisted of infantry, the Scots were never strong in cavalry;
though for quickness of movement the men were often mounted on small
hardy horses, which enabled them to march long distances in a short
time, and this suited the object of the raids into the north of England.
Each man furnished himself with a bag of oatmeal trussed to the saddle
of his horse, but they mainly trusted to the pillage of the enemy’s
country for food.
In actual battle, the distinctive tactics of the Scots was the
formation in deep battalions, usually circular, though sometimes
inclining to the oval or square forms according to the nature of the
ground and the position on which they were fighting. This compact
phalanx was admirably adapted for resisting cavalry charges, or any
form of attack at close quarters; but the deficiency of the Scottish
army was the want of a force to meet the English bowmen, who often
severely galled the ranks of the Scotch spearmen from a distance. So
the fate of a battle was frequently a mere question of time, as to how
long the circle of spearmen could endure the double attacks of showers
of arrows and cavalry charges. Still the intense national sentiment
and spirit of the Scots sustained them in fighting for centuries under
these unequal conditions.
About the middle of the fourteenth century cannon began to be used
in the attack and defence of fortified places, instead of the old
battering ram, sow, and other engines of destruction. James I. and
his successors directed their attention to the casting and forging of
cannon. In 1456 parliament enacted that “It was thought expedient that
the King should request certain of the great barons of the kingdom that
are of any might, to make carts of war, and in each cart two guns, and
each of them to have two chambers with the graith pertaining thereto,
and a cunning man to shoot them. If they have not skill to shoot them
now, they may learn or the time come when it will be necessary to
have them.” The great barons, however, did not furnish cannon for the
King’s use. Artillery was a branch which did not belong to the original
constitution of the feudal army; and therefore, all the expense
connected with the production of cannon, and the organisation and
equipment of an artillery force to take the field, fell entirely upon
the Kings themselves. The expense of the Crown for the artillery in the
year 1474 amounted to £753. In the latter part of the fifteenth century
there were two classes of guns used in Scotland: 1, guns of large
calibre for siege operations, mounted on carriages and usually drawn by
oxen; and the missiles discharged by these were mostly balls of stone
called “gun-stones.” 2, Guns of smaller calibre which were intended for
field operations, and were carried in gun-carts, two or more in each
cart; and the missiles discharged by these were usually balls of iron
or lead. But only a few of either of these guns were made in Scotland,
the greater part of them were imported.¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 8,
10, 18, 19, 45, 48, 100, 133, 164, 226; _Accounts of the
Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I., Preface, pages 217‒219.
The houses of the people still mostly consisted of small wooden
erections. The houses of the farmers, and also the trades-people of
the burghs and towns, were built of wood or other slight materials,
although they were not necessarily devoid of comfort. No remains of
burgh architecture of a domestic character earlier than the sixteenth
century now exist in Scotland.
Touching the actual number of the population of the nation in the
later part of the fifteenth century, we have no data to draw a certain
conclusion from; but the probable number though not the exact number
may be reasonably conjectured. From the strength of the army which on
the greatest emergencies assembled for the defence of the kingdom, it
may be inferred with some approach to probability that the population
of the country did not exceed 600,000. In the latter part of the
fourteenth century Edinburgh was said to have contained four thousand
small houses, which by a common mode of calculating, would make its
population about 17,000; and at the end of the fifteenth century its
inhabitants probably did not exceed 21,000. The population of Perth
was not above 7,000 or 8,000; Aberdeen perhaps had a population of from
4,000 to 5,000; Dundee somewhat fewer, and St. Andrews about 5,000.
The roads and highways throughout the country were still very bad. Many
acts relating to ferries were passed by parliament, but it seems they
were little regarded, and many complaints were made that the ferryman
charged double and triple fares from both rich and poor people. The
establishment of inns by the road-sides and in villages and towns
was encouraged by the Crown with the view of saving the monasteries
and the farmers from the extortions of unwelcome guests, namely,
troops of sorners, sturdy beggars, and other idle vagabonds, who
infested the country. In 1424 it was enacted that in all the burghs
and thoroughfares of the kingdom inns should be erected, with stabling
accommodation for horses, and rooms for riders and travellers, so
that men might there find bread and ale and other refreshments at a
reasonable price, according to the standard charges of the country. It
appeared that travellers in Scotland had been too long accustomed to
live at free quarters, and did not patronise the inns. The innkeepers,
therefore, complained to the King that travellers did not lodge at
the inns, but stayed with friends and acquaintances. The King and his
parliament then commanded that no one travelling through the country
either on foot or horseback dare to lodge anywhere else but at the
inns, except those with a large company, that is, the nobles, who
should be free to lodge with their friends, if they sent their servants
and horses to the inns.¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 6,
10, 89, 107, 119, _et seq._
With regard to sanitary provision the kingdom was in a wretched
condition. Swine were permitted to run freely upon the streets of
the burghs, and middens were allowed to lie on the thoroughfares
for weeks. In 1479 one man was appointed to mend the causeways and
clean the gutters for the whole burgh of Aberdeen, and he received one
penny from each householder as his wages; and in 1494 there was still
only one man for cleaning all the streets and lanes of the city. The
state of uncleanliness in which the people lived prepared them for the
ravages of disease and pestilence in every form, and so the nation was
frequently visited by the pest, which from time to time carried off
many of the inhabitants of the kingdom. The pestilence visited Scotland
seven times from 1348 to 1499, and in fact the country was hardly ever
free from it during this period. The disease of leprosy also prevailed
in Scotland, and regulations relating to it were passed by Parliament
in the reign of James I. Hospitals were erected on the outskirts of the
principal towns for the reception of those afflicted with this malady.
In the old burgh laws the leper folk were enjoined not to go from door
to door and beg, but to sit at the gates of the burghs and seek alms
from those that passed to and fro. At Stirling the leper hospital was
at the east end of the town.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I.; _Burgh Records of
Edinburgh_, Volume I.; _Burgh Records of Peebles_; _Acts
of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II. The History of
Leprosy in Scotland has been ably told by the late Professor
Simpson, and printed in the _Medical and Surgical Journal_
for October, 1841, and April, 1842.
During this period there was little or no medical knowledge in
Scotland. The only surgeons were the barbers, some of whom practised
“leechcraft.” In the fifteenth century blood-letting in the spring
season of the year was universal, and was believed to be highly
beneficial to the health, and to have a special efficacy against the
contagion of the plague and other epidemic disease. James IV. appears
to have taken much interest in surgical matters, and was himself
reputed to have been possessed of some medical knowledge and some skill
as a surgeon. Sometimes he bribed his servants to permit him to perform
on them such operations as blood-letting and drawing of teeth. There
was, however, some hope of improvement in this department, as we find
from the following reference to the salary of a medical professor in
King’s College, Aberdeen, in the year 1498:――“Uni medico in facultate
medicine, graduato et legenti in Universitate infra civitatem veterem
Aberdonensem noviter fundata, percipienti annuatim xii. libras et
vi. solidos.” In 1506 the barbers or surgeons of Edinburgh were
incorporated, and in their “Seal of Cause” it was provided “that no
person use or practice any of the points connected with the craft
of barbery and surgery within the burgh unless they were freemen and
burgesses, and after being examined and passed on the following points,
namely, that he knew anatomy, and the nature and complexion of every
member of the human body, and likewise all the veins of the same; that
he may make fly-botch well in due time, and also that he know in which
member the sign has domination for the time, for every man ought to
know the nature and substance of that on which he operates, or else he
is negligent. That we may have once a year a condemned man, after he is
dead, to anatomise upon, and whenever we have obtained experience each
will instruct the others, and we shall do suffrage for the soul.” It
was further provided that no apprentice or hired man should be admitted
into the craft unless he could read and write.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., page 102; _Exchequer
Rolls of Scotland_, Volume XI.; _Accounts of the Lord High
Treasurer_, Volume I.
Drinking of liquor seems to have been very common. In 1436 Parliament
ordered that no man should sit in a tavern drinking wine, ale, or beer,
in any of the burghs after the bell struck the hour of nine o’clock;
and if any persons were found in taverns or inns after that hour then
the bailies should imprison them in the King’s prison, and if the
local authorities neglected to perform this duty, they themselves
should be fined one shilling for each offence. The citizens of Aberdeen
and of other burghs spent considerable sums of money on wine given to
dignified persons. In 1453 the Countess of Huntly was presented with a
lagon of wine by the people of Aberdeen, and the bishop also received
a lagon; and at the feast of St. Nicholas various sums were spent for
wine to Lord Forbes, Lord Erskine, the Earl of Erroll, and the Abbot of
Arbroath.¹
¹ _Miscellany of the Old Spalding Club_, Volume V., pages
39, 40, 48; _Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of
Scotland_, Volume III., page 424, _et seq._
James IV. was unusually liberal in giving drink-money. In July, 1488,
he gave Mr. William Crichton two pounds for drink; and on the 3rd
of August he passed to Leith and saw the Danish ships, and gave the
sailors nine pounds for drink; and the same year he gave the masons
of the palace eighteen shillings “in drink silver,” and the following
year he gave a like sum for drink to the masons of Linlithgow working
at the palace. In 1489 the King gave the gunners who carted the
great cannon “Mons,” eighteen shillings “to drink-silver,” and to the
men who made the way at the Barwood for the great guns, he gave ten
shillings to drink. In October, 1491, he gave the masons of the palace
in drink-silver, two pounds and fourteen shillings, for the arching
of three vaults; and to the workmen who made the trenches eighteen
shillings for drink-silver, and to the shipmen ten shillings. In
1494 he gave the writers of the signet to their drink-silver eighteen
shillings, and to the wrights a similar sum. The man who made the case
to the King’s banner in 1496 got three shillings for drink-silver;
and the goldsmith who made the King’s case of gold to wear about his
neck, received eleven shillings and fourpence of drink-silver. In 1497
the dikers of the park of Falkland got ten shillings from the King
for drink-money, and to the workmen in the Castle of Edinburgh he gave
thirteen shillings and fourpence, and to the men who drew the ship nine
shillings.¹
¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I.
The chief festivals of the year during this period were Yule and Easter.
The festivities associated with Yule were continued over several weeks.
In the Scotch court Yule was held with much ceremonial circumstance
and merry-making. Early in the day the King, attended by his court
and heralds, went to high mass and made his offering; and at noon
in the hall the officers of arms and the trumpeters appeared before
the King and received their rewards, which consisted of small sums of
money. The sergeants of the town received a gratuity from the King,
and alms were given to the friars of Edinburgh and Linlithgow, and
James IV. frequently held his Christmas in the latter burgh. Mummings,
disguisings, and plays, always formed a part of the amusements, in
which professional players and minstrels often acted the leading parts.
An Abbot of Unreason was annually appointed in the King’s house, in the
houses of the nobles, and in the burghs, and these personages exercised
sway till the Yule holidays terminated. Cards and dice were among the
favourite amusements, and altogether the people at this season appear
to have enjoyed themselves.
Easter was also held with circumstance and ceremonial, and amusements
suitable to the season. On Easter morning the King took the sacrament
early in the chapel, and gave to the officiating priest an offering
which varied from eighteen shillings to twenty-four; thereafter he
attended high mass, and made his usual offering of eighteen shillings;
and at noon in the hall he gave the heralds and trumpeters their “Pasch
reward,” which usually amounted to a sum of from six to ten pounds
distributed amongst them. At the same season the King’s master cook
and the court cook received their “basin silver.” Minstrels, tellers
of tales, harpers, fiddlers, tabourers, and others who made pastime to
the King and the court, usually received gratuities of nine to eighteen
shillings each; the minstrels were always welcomed to the halls of the
nobles on festive occasions, as well as to the King’s court.¹
¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I., Preface,
pages 237‒246.
At this period the chief rural sports of the King and the nobles were
hunting and hawking. The Kings had forests, parks, and many hunting
ranges and seats; and the nobles also had hunting ranges and forests.
Throughout this period the Crown had extensive hunting grounds, and
falconry was also much practised in Scotland. The rights of the forest
and the hunting ranges were highly valued, and many acts concerning
them, and wild animals and birds, were passed by the Scotch legislature.
In 1424 James I. ordered the Justice Clerk to bring to justice stalkers
and their abettors who slay deer, and when any stalker was convicted of
slaying deer, roe, or doe, he was to be fined two pounds, and his
abettors ten pounds. An Act was passed in 1427, which prohibited the
killing of “partridges, plovers, blackcocks, greyhens, moorcocks,” and
such fowls, from the end of February to the month of August, under a
penalty of forty shillings; and similar statutes were passed in the
reigns of the three succeeding Kings. One of these Acts enjoined that
no person should destroy the nests or the eggs of the wild birds, which
were useful for the sustenance of man, “nor slay the birds in close
time, when they may not fly.” As already mentioned, Acts of Parliament
were passed in the fifteenth century, commanding the people to assemble
four times in the year to hunt and destroy the wolves; and every
man who at any time slew a wolf, was to receive one penny from every
householder of the parish in which the wolf was killed; and every one
who killed a fox and brought his head to the sheriff, baron, or bailie,
was to receive sixpence.¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 7,
15, 16, 51, 52, 107, 235, 251.
The outdoor amusements of the people were chiefly of an athletic
character, such as fencing, wrestling, running, and leaping, and the
games of football and golf. James IV. himself frequently played at
football and other field sports; and he entered into more familiar
intercourse with his people than any other King of the Stuart line.
Enactments for regulating the dress of the different classes of society
were passed in the reigns of James I. and James II. The Act of 1457
opened with an announcement that each class of the community had
impoverished itself by wearing too sumptuous clothing; both the men
and the women, especially in the burghs, had passed the limits of
discretion and allowance. These Acts therefore strictly prohibited the
wearing of all kinds of silk dresses by the people, except the nobles
and the magistracy. All other men and their wives and families were
commanded to dress themselves in a fashion corresponding with their
rank and condition; and which for the women should be “short kerchiefs
with little hoods to wear on their heads, such as were used in Flanders,
England, and in other countries; and no woman whatever should go to the
kirk or market with her face covered, so that she might not be known,
under the penalty of the confiscation of her kerchief and all her
head gear. As to her kirtle, which covered the body from the neck to
the feet, no woman should wear tails of unbecoming length, or furred
round the foot, except on the holydays. The commons, husbandmen, and
labourers were enjoined not to wear any other stuff on week days but
white or gray clothes, and on holydays light blue, green, or red;
and their wives the same colours, with kerchiefs of their own making;
and the cloth worn by these classes should not exceed the price of
fortypence per yard.”
An Act was passed in 1455 which regulated the official dress of the
upper classes. When they appeared in parliament they should have been
attired in the following style:――“The Earls to wear mantles of brown
grained cloth, open in front and furred with white stuff, and with the
same lined a handbreadth in front and reaching down to the belt, staid
with similar furring, and with little hoods upon the shoulders. The
Lords of Parliament to wear a mantle of red cloth, opening in front
to the right, and lined with silk or furred with crispy grey, green,
or purple stuff, and furred hoods of the same cloth on the shoulders.
The Commissioners of the Burghs should each have a pair of cloaks made
of blue cloth, open on the right shoulder and furred round the end,
and with furred hoods.” If any of these ranks appeared in parliament
or a general Council without their proper habiliments, they rendered
themselves liable to a penalty of ten pounds. All the advocates were
ordered to wear a tunic of green cloth, with the sleeves open like
a tabard, and if they appeared in parliament without this they were
liable to a fine of five pounds. Among the clergy, no one was permitted
to wear a scarlet gown or furred ♦marten, except the dignitaries in
cathedrals, college churches, a doctor, or a person with an income of
three hundred marks a year.¹
♦ “martin” replaced with “marten”
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 18,
43, 49, 100.
Touching the common articles of dress in use amongst the higher classes,
the gown in various styles was a common upper garment of the period.
The long gown was loose and reached to the feet, open in front, and
sometimes worn with a girdle. Some of them had sleeves, and some not,
as sleeves were often made as separate articles of dress, and thus
they could be used with different kinds of garments. The long gown took
four or five yards of broad cloth according to the size of those who
wore them. The short gown reached to the knee, and it was lined and
trimmed like the long gown, with various kinds of furs, such as marten,
minever, ermine, and lambskin. The doublet was a close fitting tunic,
and it was made of various kinds of cloth. The waistcoat was worn
under the doublet, and it was usually made of woollen cloth. The riding
or hunting coats were rather longer and fuller than the doublet. The
hose were tight-fitting pantaloons and usually reached to the ankles,
and they were fastened to the doublet or waistcoat by strings. There
were also short hose which reached to the knee, and were worn with
foot socks of cloth. The hose were made of woollen cloth of different
colours, but usually of the darker hues. Over these the tippet and the
cloak were worn. The tippet varied much in length at different times,
and it was made of various kinds of material. The cloaks worn in the
latter part of the fifteenth century were short and reached to the
haunches. James IV. had a cloak made of eighteen yards of velvet, lined
with satin and bordered with crimson satin, and it cost £110.
Bonnets, caps, and hats of various styles were worn. The bonnets were
usually made of black or scarlet cloth, and the price of them varied
from ten to eighteen shillings. Hats also varied in price from four
shillings to fourteen. Boots and shoes of various kinds were worn.
A pair of shoes cost one shilling, and a pair of pattens――shoes with
wooden soles――cost sixpence. French shoes cost four shillings, and a
pair of half-boots eight shillings.¹
¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I., Preface,
pages 168‒179.
Touching the domestic arrangements and the household goods and utensils
of the body of the people, there seems to be evidence of considerable
advancement during this period, notwithstanding the long war and all
the internal commotions and disturbances in the nation. Although it was
already stated that the houses of the rural population were of a small
and slight description, and that the greater part of the houses in the
burghs were built of wood and other light materials which were easily
procured, still their houses were better furnished than the state of
society would naturally have led us to conclude. Glass windows were in
general use in the houses of the nobles and the rich; as yet, however,
they were costly. In 1328 glass was put into the windows of the new
chamber which Robert I. had erected at his manor of Cardross; and in
1389 thirty pounds were paid for glass to the windows of the Abbey
of Paisley. In 1447 a quantity of glass was purchased for the repair
of the King’s chamber in Stirling Castle; and in 1501 nine pounds
were paid for glass to repair the windows of the Gray Friars Church in
Stirling. Still comparatively few of the houses of the people had glass
windows at the end of the fifteenth century. Grates were little used,
and bathrooms were rare even in the houses of the nobles.¹
¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland._
It seems curious that the legislature considered it necessary to pass
enactments for repressing extravagance in dress. If the people had been
very poor, then there could have been no need for such enactments; and
thus the historic interpretation appears to be that these sumptuary
acts indicate an advance in the civilisation of the people. In the
national records many notices of workers in gold and silver, of gold
chains, collars, signets, crosses, pins, rings, and other ornaments
and articles occur; and silver was more used in the form of seals,
beads, rings, book-clasps, belts garnished with silver, and many other
ornaments; and also as plate, silver basins, goblets, stoups, cups, and
spoons. Pearls were comparatively common.¹
¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_; _Acts of the Lords of Council_,
pages 9, 87, 98, 135, 176, 199, 220, 228, 287, 430; _Acts of
the Lords Auditors_, pages 14, 65, 55, 62, 67, 91, 129, 136,
146, 159.
The price of the staple necessaries of life in this period may be
briefly indicated. In 1330 the price of an ox was 8s. 7d., of a sheep
1s. 9½d., the chalder of oats £1 1s. 4d., the chalder of oatmeal £1
12s., and the chalder of wheat £1 16s. In 1372 the price of an ox was
4s. 11d., of a sheep 1s 2¼d., the chalder of oats £1, the chalder of
oatmeal £1 8s., and the chalder of wheat £2 1s. 4d. These prices varied
from time to time, but except in years of dearth they did not rise very
high. From the middle of the fifteenth century to its close the price
of oxen ran from 5s. to 18s. a head, sheep from 1s. 6d. to 3s., and
oatmeal from 4s. to 7s. per boll.¹
¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland._
A comparatively large number of the people lived on the land and
cultivated it, under various forms of tenure, and, as labourers, as has
been indicated in preceding pages. The wages of agricultural labourers
during this period has not been accurately ascertained, but it may
fairly be assumed that their wages were, for the most part, paid in
produce. Thus the agricultural labourers would usually have had a
supply of food, whatever else they might have lacked in the form of
money wages; and it seems probable that this class enjoyed a tolerably
comfortable life. No doubt there were exceptions, and the labourers
on some estates might have been much harder treated than those on
other lands; there were the Crown lands, the Church lands, the wide
possessions of the nobles, and the estates of the small barons,
on all which agricultural labourers were employed. It appears from
several distinct indications that after James I. assumed the reins of
government the labourers on the Crown lands obtained a considerable
improvement in their condition, as this able and enlightened prince
understood the source of wealth, and encouraged industry; while at the
same time he curbed the power of the nobles. One immediate result of
his action was that a large extent of lands was forfeited to the Crown,
and thus it was that a considerable number of agricultural labourers,
soon after his accession to power, found themselves under a juster and
wiser master than heretofore. The other grades of vassals, tenants,
and farmers, in the earldoms and lands which James I. annexed to
the Crown, also found themselves relieved from an oppressive form of
tyranny and anarchy, and they were permitted during his reign to follow
the ways of peace, order, and industry. On the Crown lands a practice
very generally prevailed of allowing tenants to occupy their holdings
rent free, either on account of some office, of which the rent was
considered as the fee, or as a reward for some important service
rendered to the nation. It also appears that tenancies thus occupied
were from time to time converted into feu-tenure or blanch holdings,
and the occupiers then received charters, and thus became Crown vassals
instead of tenants.¹ No doubt between the accession of James I. and
the end of the fifteenth century a number of the labourers on the
Crown lands became tenants and farmers under the Crown, and even some
of those whose ancestors were serfs in the thirteenth century might
have obtained feu-tenure and blanch holdings by charter from the Crown
before the close of the fifteenth century. It thus becomes manifest
that the right of the Kings of Scotland to forfeit the lands of
a disobedient and rebellious noble often had a most salutary and
beneficial tendency; although the historian must recognise that this
right of the Crown was sometimes unjustly, and even cruelly, exercised
by some of the Scotch kings, while at other times it was not exercised
when it should have been.
¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland._
In the latter part of the fifteenth century the wages of common
labourers were about one shilling a day. Masons, carpenters, smiths,
and quarrymen, when employed on special service received from nine
to ten shillings a week, and highly skilled artificers and workmen
sometimes received from three to five shillings per day. Shipwrights
engaged on work which had to be completed at a specified time, received
one shilling and sixpence per day; the weekly wages of a gunner, who
was also usually a smith or carpenter, were thirteen shillings and
fourpence a week. Workmen had two weeks of holidays at Christmas, and
nine or more other holidays during the year.¹
¹ _Ibid._ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I.
Turning to the custom of begging which prevailed, and the state of
crime in the nation, matters connected with the administration of
justice, and the means of prevention, detection, and punishment of
crime, will be considered. Beggars, thiggers, sorners, masterful
robbers, oppressors, and other vagabonds, were numerous in the country.
Begging under certain limits was authorised by Act of Parliament in
1424. This Act prohibited all persons between the age of fourteen years
and sixty years from begging, unless it was found that they could not
live by any other means; such helpless persons were to receive a token
from the sheriff of the district, and in burghs from the bailies, and
those thus provided with tokens were then allowed to beg; all other
idle persons were commanded by proclamation to betake themselves to
honest labour and earn their living by their own efforts, under the
penalty of burning on the cheek and banishment from the kingdom. This
Act was often re-enacted with additions, still the beggars continued
to multiply. In 1425 James I. passed another Act of Parliament, which
ordered the sheriffs and the bailies to make enquiry concerning all
the idle men in the respective bounds of their jurisdiction, and having
ascertained those who had nothing of their own to live upon, then such
men were to be arrested and kept till they found caution not to injure
the country, but they were to be allowed forty days to find masters or
to engage themselves at some lawful work. When the forty days had run,
if they were still idle, then the sheriffs were directed to re-arrest
them, and send them to the King, who should punish them as he thought
fit. It seems highly probable that James I. might have found employment
for some of these men as labourers on the Crown lands.
In the fifteenth century many Acts of Parliament were passed against
masterful beggars and sorners. The sorners and masterful beggars were
described, in an Act passed in 1449, as persons who travelled through
the country in bands, accompanied by horses and hounds, and lived at
free quarters on the people, and consumed the fruits of their industry
and destroyed the growing crops. The Act directed that the sheriffs
and other Crown officers, the barons, and the bailies in burghs, should
make inquisitions concerning these sorners and masterful beggars at
all their courts, and if any of them were found, then their horses and
hounds and their other goods were to be confiscated to the King, and
their persons imprisoned till the King announced what should be done
to them. The Crown officers were also ordered to make inquiry at every
court if there were any persons who pretended to be fools, or bards,
“and such like runners about;” and if any of these were found, then
they should be imprisoned and detained as long as they had anything of
their own to live upon; when that was consumed, then their ears should
be nailed to the trone and cut off, and themselves banished from the
country; and afterwards if they were found in the kingdom, then they
should be hanged. But this did not extinguish the sorners nor “the
runners about”; for six years later another Act was passed against them,
which ordered that whenever sorners were taken they should be delivered
to the sheriffs, and forthwith the King’s justiciary should execute
the law upon them as robbers and thieves; yet this seems to have been
ineffectual, for in 1457 it was ordered that an inquisition should
be made of the sorners, masterful beggars, feigned fools, and bards,
and that all those found, should be banished from the kingdom or sent
to the King. Still, in 1478, it was enacted that “for stanching the
sorners and masterful beggars who daily oppressed and harried the
King’s poor subjects, the Acts before passed should be put into sharp
execution, which was to say, that wherever sorners were captured
they should be delivered over to the sheriffs, and the law executed
upon them as on common thieves and robbers; and also that indictments
should be framed upon this class of crimes every year in the Justiciary
Circuit Courts, and that due punishment should follow accordingly.”¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 8,
11, 15, 36, 43‒45, 49‒51, 119, 251.
It was one of the sheriff’s duties to report and indict all persons
charged with crimes which came within the Justiciary’s jurisdiction.
The indictments were delivered to the Justice Clerk, and when he made
up his roll it was the duty of the coroner to arrest all the persons
named in it. Although there was a Justice Clerk and also a King’s
Advocate, there was as yet nothing which could be called a regular
system of public prosecution, as the right to prosecute belonged
to the injured person or his relatives. Besides the compensation to
the injured party, there was a fine due to the Crown, for which the
sheriff was held liable, not only for the cases tried in his own court,
but also for the fines and escheats of the Justiciary Circuit Courts.
Moreover, unhappily, the sheriffs of the period had many fiscal duties
to perform; they had to render accounts of all the casualties of lands
held by feudal tenures from the Crown, and often to render accounts of
the rents of Crown lands. Thus it happened that only a portion of their
time and attention could be devoted to their judicial functions either
in the criminal or civil departments. Then there were the anomalies of
all the separate jurisdictions connected with earldoms, baronies, and
regalities, as explained in preceding pages, which greatly hampered and
retarded all efforts to improve the administration of justice.
Murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and theft, were rather common
throughout the kingdom. Many Acts of Parliament were passed for
stanching and punishing these crimes, but they seem to have produced
little effect. When criminals were convicted, they were often pardoned,
and many remissions of crimes and of fines were given every year. In
1487 Parliament enacted that no remissions for the crimes of treason,
murder, rape, slaughter, violent reft, theft, and false coining, should
be granted for seven years. It appears that among the barons there was
a custom of selling thieves, that is, saving them from punishment under
certain conditions. In 1491 it was enacted that “when any man happens
to be slain in the kingdom then without delay, and as quickly as the
sheriff, steward, or bailie of regality can be informed thereof, either
by the party complainant or in any other way, he should immediately
pursue the slayer and raise the King’s horn on him, and raise the
people in his support, until the criminal be overtaken; and if he be
captured, he should be brought to the King, or else kept in custody
till the King has been informed, and returned an answer as to what
should be done thereon. If the murderer escape from the sheriffdom in
which the crime was committed, then the sheriff should send one of his
officers to the sheriff of the next county and inform him of this man
who is a fugitive from the law. Then that sheriff should immediately
pursue the criminal through his sheriffdom, and so on from sheriffdom
to sheriffdom till he be taken or driven out of the country. But when
the murderer had fled out of the royalty and into the regality, the
sheriff should immediately inform the lord of the regality and his
bailie, and they should pursue the criminal as the sheriffs had done;
and wherever the criminal chanced to be taken, the sheriff or the
bailie of the regality should send him to the next sheriff, and so
on from sheriff to sheriff till he be returned to the shire in which
the crime was committed, and there justice should be executed. When
any of the sheriffs or officers neglect their duties in cases of this
character, if they be hereditary they should forfeit their offices for
three years, but if they held their offices by appointment they should
lose them for ever.”¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 23,
176, 256, 225; _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_.
Thus we see that at the end of the fifteenth century the sheriff
and other Crown officers could not follow even a murderer through a
regality. The practical result was that a powerful lord of regality,
whenever it suited him, could screen from the hand of justice the
greatest criminal in the kingdom; and this, in fact, frequently
occurred. Many of the sheriffs held office by hereditary right, and the
feebleness of the Crown appears from the trifling penalties attached
to the malversation of hereditary officials. Criminals who had been
captured were sometimes imprisoned in the castles of the barons of
the district, who were held responsible for their escape. Lord Kennedy
refused, on two different occasions, to imprison four criminals in his
castles when required by the Crown officer to do so; for this he was
fined forty pounds, but his lordship never had to pay the fine as he
received a remission.
The Earl of Bothwell was Warden of the west and middle marches,
and also Lord of Liddesdale. In 1498, in a Justiciary Court held at
Jedburgh, Bothwell was fined £550 as pledges or bail for a number of
persons dwelling in Liddesdale, and in the Justiciary Court held in
1500 he was again fined a similar sum of £550, which made his total
liability to the Court £1,100. Now, this sum represented the bail
and fines of fifty criminals, whom Bothwell had enabled to escape by
becoming security for them. But did Bothwell actually pay this sum of
money to the Crown? No! the whole of it was remitted by letters under
the Privy Seal. The ground of the remission was stated to be “the good
services done by the Earl of Bothwell in many ways, and especially in
settling the district which the aforesaid persons and other undaunted
people inhabited.”¹ This is simply an example of what occurred more or
less frequently in every quarter of the kingdom.
¹ _The Sheriff Courts of Scotland_, by John D. Wilson, LL.D.,
Introduction; _Exchequer Rolls_, Volume V. and XI.
In the burghs criminal cases were mostly decided by a jury, which
varied in number from five to twenty. Their verdict settled the truth
of the assertions and averments of the parties to the action, and then
the judge applied the law to the fact. The adjustment of the issues
seems to have been pretty rapid. This system of burgh law is now
obsolete, though fragments of it, under more or less disguise, survived
till recently.
There were various modes of punishment, such as fines, banishment
from the town, burning on the cheek, cutting off the ear, and penance
performed in the church, were common forms of punishment. The forms
of torture were connected with the jougs and the branks, very old
instruments. The usual form of the jougs consisted of a flat iron
collar with distended loops, through which a padlock was put to secure
the culprit in his ignominious durance. The branks were somewhat like
a skeleton iron helmet with a gag, which entered the mouth and bridled
that unruly member, the tongue. They were chiefly used as an instrument
of ecclesiastical punishment, for the correction of female scolds,
and those convicted of slander and defamation. The branks seem to have
been used at a very early period, and sometimes might have been cruelly
applied.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., pages 24, 46, 319,
390, 402, 412; _Burgh Records of Peebles_, pages 127, 132,
146‒147, 164‒167; _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I.,
page 86.
As penance was frequently applied as a punishment for common offences,
an instance may be stated. In 1492 “Philip Whithede was fined in the
burgh court of Aberdeen for the wrongous disturbance of Thomas Bard,
and Thomas also was fined for the disturbance of Philip. Moreover, the
court ordered that Philip, on the following Sunday, should go to the
church in the time of high mass, with a candle of one pound weight of
wax in one hand, and his knife in the other hand, drawn, and holding
it by the point; and then in the church deliver his knife to Thomas
and ask of him forgiveness, and beseech the worthy men present to pray
that Thomas might remit the offence done to him; and then offer the wax
candle to the Holy Light at the altar.”
Assaults and fights were common in the burghs, and many bye-laws were
enacted to suppress them. In 1398 the town-sergeants of Aberdeen were
charged with rebellion, and the following year the bailies of the burgh
were charged with rebellion. In the latter year a man was fined for
cursing and beating a woman, and another man was fined for beating his
own wife. Many notices of persons breaking the peace of the burgh were
recorded; and cases were frequently postponed owing to the weakness
of the court, which meant the weakness of the law. A number of persons
were fined for speaking aloud and cursing in the burgh court without
licence; and one woman was banished from the town. About the year
1411 a list of thieves and receivers of stolen goods was drawn up,
and in it there were enumerated twenty-three persons, male and female.
Considering the comparative smallness of the population of Aberdeen at
that period, the number of known thieves in the burgh suggests a state
of crime much greater than prevails at present.
In 1436 the provost and bailies of Aberdeen assembled to consider how
they could most effectively punish and extinguish robbers. All the
citizens of the town, freemen and unfreemen, were then bound to assist
the magistrates and the officers of the city in the maintenance of
order, and to turn out immediately when the common bell was rung,
or any sudden affray happened on the streets, and when they knew or
apprehended any scath to the town impending, or any duels to be fought
in it, they should instantly warn the authorities. At this period there
were no regular police, but in times of threatening disturbance, or of
war in the neighbourhood, a number of the citizens were appointed as a
night watch for a time.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., pages 3, 4, 6, 8, 38,
60‒63, 68, 73, 373, 377‒379, 382, 392, 421, 422.
Touching social vice, illegitimacy was prevalent amongst the royal
family, the nobles, the clergy, and the people. Robert I., Robert II.,
Robert III., and James IV., had many natural children, and many of
the highest nobles had natural children. In the fifteenth century,
clandestine espousals and marriages were common among all classes
in Scotland; but “espousals, however secret, if followed by sexual
intercourse, might annul the subsequent marriage of either party
so long as the other was in life.” This sometimes led to much
heart-burning, serious crime, and strife; and this was especially the
case in the royal family of Stuart in the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries. The Crown was much weakened owing to the large number
of children which Robert II. had by his two wives, and his natural
sons and daughters. One form of irregular cohabitation was called
“Hand-fasted,” but not married. Early in the sixteenth century a
statute of Archbishop Forman enacted “that clandestine espousals
should be denounced, under the pain of excommunication, four times a
year in every church in his diocese.” This statute ordered the same
denunciation to be fulminated against those who after espousals lived
together as man and wife without celebrating marriage openly and in the
face of the church. Brothels were common in the burghs in the fifteenth
century.¹
¹ _Statuta Ecclesiæ Scoticanæ_, Volume I., pages 86, 87,
275‒277.
The castles of the thirteenth century were briefly noticed, and some
of them became associated with the struggle of Independence, and were
embalmed in the history of the nation. The square towers which were
erected in the latter part of the fourteenth century, but mostly in
the fifteenth century, were characteristic of the state of society. The
square towers of this period were stern keeps which rose storey above
storey to a considerable height, and each storey usually consisted of a
single apartment; the walls were very thick, and the entrance door was
placed high for security, and the window-openings narrow. The floors
of the apartments were strewed with bent, grass, or rushes mingled
with sweet herbs. Such were the abodes in which the barons and their
families and servants lived, and assembled together in the hall to take
their food and enjoy their drink. There were no separate apartments for
the women but their sleeping-rooms. The square tower usually contained
a dungeon in which the prisoners were kept, partly underground.
Although towards the end of the fifteenth century a few good
castellated edifices were erected, nearly another hundred years,
however, elapsed before a radical improvement was effected in the
dwellings of the Scotch nobles.
David II. in the latter part of his reign restored Edinburgh Castle,
and made extensive additions to it, including the great tower, which
was known as the Wellhouse Tower, and also the passage which formed
the communication between it and the castle. The buildings were kept
in repair and added to by succeeding kings, and thus it became a royal
residence as well as one of the chief strongholds of the kingdom. James
I. made considerable repairs on the castle and some additions. There
was a royal castle at Linlithgow in the twelfth century, and Edward I.
built a tower or peel there. Robert II. and Robert III. frequently
resided at Linlithgow, and small sums were expended on this residence
towards the close of the reign of the latter King. Shortly after the
return of James I., the town, the palace, and the nave of the church
of Linlithgow were destroyed by fire. James I. immediately commenced to
re-build the palace in a new form and style, and the work of building
and finishing the palace, and the park and fish ponds connected with
it, were going on during the greater part of his reign. He expended a
considerable sum of money on the works; and after his death the work
of completing the building of the palace proceeded till 1451, when it
appears the west side, and probably a part of the north side, were then
erected. In 1467 the work was resumed, and during the succeeding four
years a large sum of money was expended on it; and in 1468 the grounds
around the palace were extended. Between the years 1488 and 1496 the
south side of the palace seems to have been erected; and operations at
the palace went on into the succeeding century. There was a garden at
the palace and extensive grounds.
The erection of the quaint building in the Castle of Stirling known as
the palace, seems to have been commenced in 1496; and about the same
time a large kitchen garden was formed, perhaps in the valley on the
south side of the castle rock. The garden was well stocked with trees.
It appears that the south front of Falkland palace as it now stands,
was built in the early years of the sixteenth century. There were
extensive grounds around Falkland Castle in which deer were kept, and
there was also a garden.¹
¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_; _Accounts of the Lord High
Treasurer_, Volume I., Preface, pages 263‒267.
A considerable number of churches were built in the latter part of
the fourteenth century and in the following one. David II. built and
endowed the church of St. Monance in Fife. Most of the churches erected
in Scotland during this period were of the decorated flamboyant style,
and the polygonal apse was introduced from France. This class of
churches generally ran into the three-sided apse, and double doorways
with flattened heads which enclosed a pointed arch; battlements were
rare, and the corby-stepped gable and saddle-backed towers began to
appear before the close of the period. Portions of these decorated
churches still remain in Scotland, and specimens may be seen in
the nave of the Cathedral of Glasgow, the churches of Linlithgow,
Perth, Stirling, and others. In some of these churches the details
were admirably worked out, and the tracery of the windows very
fine. The most striking characteristic of this style was its surface
ornamentation, which was well calculated to arrest the eye of an
onlooker. The walls were covered with a profuse variety of embellished
devices, the stained glass glowed with variegated figures, and the
screens, founts, and altars, were all wonderfully posited for producing
effect. The whole accessories presented much artistic skill, a mastery
of design, details, and execution of a high order.
Very few specimens of the woodwork of the churches of this period now
exist, but some examples of the woodwork of the sixteenth century have
been preserved.
The flamboyant style, which was partly initiated in Scotland, was
excessive in its ornamentation. “Its essence seems to be elaborate and
minute ornament, and this continues till the forms and combinations are
sadly debased, and a strange mixture of Italianism jumbles with it. Its
combinations in the earlier part of the style, for richness, elaborate
ornament, and magnificent design, are admirable; and no one can
visit Rouen, where there are many churches still used, and others now
deserted, and contemplate leisurely the beautiful church of St. Maclou,
without feeling the beauty of the style, and also the value of that
fine stone which seems to have encouraged the flamboyant architects to
vie with each other in elaborate decoration. The portals of Abbeville,
Beauvais, Evreux, and St. Maclou at Rouen, parts of Caudebec Church,
and various others, are some of the finest specimens of this style.”¹
¹ _Rickman_; _The Ancient Church of Scotland_, by Walcott.
Many notices of the workmen engaged in the building of these churches
occur in the records, and some of them were a long time in process
of building. The Cathedral of Aberdeen was more than a hundred years
in building, and the choir of St. Nicholas more than half a century;
while many of the fines imposed by the bailies in the burgh court, were
ordered to be applied to the building of the same cathedral.
The Church still possessed extensive tracts of land which yielded a
large income, and considering the other sources of her revenue, such
as tithes, offerings, and the sums of money accruing from the Church
courts in the form of fees and fines; and recalling the fact that the
clergy were the best educated party in the kingdom, it seems that they
could not have failed to command power and influence in the nation. The
occasional efforts made by the Crown to limit the power of the Church
only showed its own weakness, and the Scottish Kings usually found
it more in harmony with their own interest to recognise and support
the claims and privileges of the Church. The attempts of the Crown to
recover the patronage of benefices failed, for at the Reformation, out
of nine hundred and forty benefices, six hundred and seventy-eight were
under the control of the Church.¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 83,
85, 99, 133, 141, 166, 173, 183, 209, 232, 237.
Originally the monasteries tended to advance the progress of the
country, as the monks for a long time took the lead in agricultural
improvement and in dairy produce; but the principles on which the
monasteries were established only harmonised with a comparative rude
stage of civilisation, and in the fifteenth century they showed signs
of decay. The chief religious houses in Scotland were very rich, and
they had for a long period absorbed the greater part of the revenue of
the parish churches. The result was that the religious instruction of
the people was neglected, while the abbots and monks were rolling in
wealth.
Instead of dealing with a number of religious houses and entering into
needless details, I will present a brief account of a typical monastery.
Such monasteries as Melrose, Kelso, Holyrood, Paisley, Arbroath,
Scone, and others, had each a greater or less number of parish
churches attached to them; and taking the monastery of Arbroath, which
was richly endowed, the working of the system can be realised. This
religious house had lands in various districts, besides upwards of
thirty parish churches. In the Highlands it had the church of Inverness,
the churches of Banff and Aberchirder in Banffshire, the church of
Fyvie in Buchan, Aberdeenshire, and churches in other places widely
apart and far from Arbroath. It was then the duty of the Abbot of
Arbroath to pay the vicars or pastors of these parishes, as they were
impropriated to the monastery; thus the proceeds of such benefices were
paid to the monastery, and the abbot might pay the vicars or not as he
thought fit. The practical operation and the results of such a system
can be easily realised.
The lands of the monastery of Arbroath and the benefices attached to
it, brought in a large quantity of grain, and great numbers of cattle,
sheep, swine, poultry, and fish, and other provisions of all kinds. In
1489 the annual consumption of this monastery stood thus:――30 chalders
of wheat, 40 chalders or 640 bolls of oatmeal, and 82 chalders of malt;
800 fat sheep, 180 head of fat cattle, a number of lambs, a quantity
of veal, and 24 swine; a large number of chickens and geese, and
immense quantities of butter, cheese, and eggs; 12,000 dried haddocks
and speldings, 1,500 ♦keelings, and about the same number of fresh
fish, besides 9 barrels of salmon; 6 gallons of honey, a quantity of
fruit, almonds, and raisins, and a large supply of wine and ale.¹ This
monastery was a very large establishment, as its massive ruins still
attest; yet it is somewhat difficult to understand how the monks and
inmates of the monastery could have consumed such an enormous amount
of food and drink, even after making an ample allowance for the visits
of the King and the lords of the realm, the archbishops, and others,
who occasionally sojourned at the establishment. It seems probable that
there was a considerable waste of the gifts of nature and of industry
in such establishments towards the close of the fifteenth century.
Several of the other monasteries were as rich as that of Arbroath,
perhaps one or two might have been even richer, so that at the period
under consideration it was a fair specimen of the great monasteries of
the kingdom.
♦ “kellings” replaced with “keelings”
¹ _Register of the Monastery of Arbroath_, Volume I., pages 3,
8, 31, 37, 41, 93, 212, 262‒263.
Nunneries were not numerous in Scotland, and were classed according
to their rule, like the monks. At Coldstream there was a convent of
Cistercian nuns, and a register of their house has been preserved.
There was another convent of the same order at Haddington, which
received forty shillings annually from the rents of the burgh. There
was a nunnery in the vicinity of Perth, one in Aberdeen, and a few in
other places.
The friars were a distinct class, and differed from the endowed monks
and regular canons. They were a somewhat later offspring of the Church
of Rome, having come to Scotland in the thirteenth century. The friars
professed the rule of poverty, and practised begging; according to
law they could not hold property, except their church and place of
residence, which might include gardens. Unlike the monks, the friars
usually settled in towns amid the busy haunts of men; they had no
vows of seclusion, and some of them were very active men, and attained
distinction as popular preachers.
The Dominicans were called “black friars” in Scotland from their dress;
and in other countries this order was entrusted with the inquiries
connected with the Inquisition, but it does not appear that they
exercised this function much in Scotland. They had a large house in
Edinburgh, which was frequently used for the assemblies of the National
Church. Their establishment at Glasgow was very extensive; and there
they had fine gardens and a cemetery. They had churches in Perth,
Aberdeen, and in other places. The Franciscans, or the grey friars,
professed to follow the strict rule of their order, which enjoined
chastity, poverty, obedience, and simple food. They had churches in
Glasgow, Lanark, Haddington, Ayr, Dundee, Perth, Elgin, and elsewhere.
Their establishment at Lanark was a large one; and in 1496 a meeting of
all the Franciscan brethren in Scotland was held in it. The Carmelites
were called white friars from their habit. They were very strict in
their rule of life, and had churches in Dundee, Irvine, Linlithgow,
Aberdeen, Banff, and other places.
Hospitals were pretty numerous, amounting to upwards of eighty, but
they were poorly endowed. They were intended for various purposes, such
as infirmaries for the sick and the aged, as hostels for pilgrims and
travellers, or homes for those afflicted with leprosy. They were placed
at the gates and in the vicinity of towns, at the river-side beside the
ferry-boat, and in the mountain passes. The foundation of an hospital
usually maintained a few brethren, who devoted themselves to the care
of the sick and the poor; and sometimes small grants of money from the
public revenue were given to them. Amid all the rudeness of the times
the poor and the infirm were not altogether neglected; but many abuses
prevailed in the hospitals, and Acts of Parliament were passed for
visiting and reforming them.¹
¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_; _Origines Parochiales
Scotiæ_, Volume I., pages 6, 463, 464, 120; _Burgh Records
of Peebles_, pages 146, 151, 170; _Acts of the Parliaments
of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 7, 16, 49, 86, 97;
♦Walcott’s _Ancient Church of Scotland_, pages 339‒342,
376‒383, 343‒348.
♦ “Wallcott’s” replaced with “Walcott’s”
It is quite evident that the body of the people were firmly attached
to the prevailing religious creed. They manifested their religious
feelings in many ways. As already indicated, the craftsmen were
closely associated with their special chapels, altars, and saints, and
contributed a part of their means to uphold and adorn their favourite
chapels and altars. Thus the special and personal form of their worship
greatly intensified their religious feelings, and it became engrained
into the very tissues of the nation’s life, and though time might
change its form, its spirit and force endured.
A few examples of the avowed motives which induced men to assign
property to the Church, may be presented. In 1321 Robert I. granted
the church of Kirkmacho to the monastery of Arbroath――“For the health
of his soul, and the souls of his ancestors and successors, Kings
of Scotland, and especially for the souls of those whose bodies rest
within the church and its cemetery.” In 1327 David Lindsay, Lord of
Crawford, granted to the monks of Newbottle a tract of land in the
territory of Crawford――“For the weal of his soul and the soul of Mary
his wife; and with all the escheats which belonged to the land and the
men dwelling on it: and transferred to the monks the right of pit and
gallows, sock and sak, tol and them, infangtheft, and all the rights
and the privileges which belonged to a baron’s court.” About the year
1358 Roger of Auldtion, a gentleman on the Borders, granted property
and lands to found a chantry in the church of St. James at Roxburgh.
His testament runs thus: “This is the form in which Roger of Auldtion
founded the chantry of his chaplain officiating at Roxburgh in the
church of Saint James; and this also is the form in which he ordained
all alms and pious deeds which he has done, or in future may do:――First,
namely, for the love of God, and the Blessed Virgin Mary, the mother of
the same, and of all the saints; and also for the weal of his own soul
and of the souls of Margaret and Felix, his successive wives, and for
the souls of all to whom he is beholden and indebted, and for the souls
of all against whom he has offended, and whose goods he has unjustly
had or possessed, and for the souls of all the faithful departed, that
the Lord may pardon them and bring them to eternal life. Amen.”¹
¹ _Register of Arbroath_, Volume I., pages 212‒213; _Origines
Parochiales Scotiæ_, Volume I., page 168; _Register of
Kelso_, pages 397, 370‒375.
The will of Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith, executed about 1390,
contains some very curious items. “He gave the half of all his free
goods for his funeral, and for masses and alms for the weal of his
soul; and also his best horse and his arms as a funeral offering
to the Vicar of Lasswade.... He bequeathed a chalice and missal to
the chapel of St. Nicholas of Dalkeith, a small sum of money for the
support of the fabric of St. Andrew, and a jewel of St. John, worth
forty marks, to the church of Newbottle. He gave for the building of
the church of Newbottle and the wages of the masons twenty-three pounds,
six shillings for the use of the refectory, and other sums to the monks
to pray for his soul. He left twenty pounds to the monks of Kelso ...
and legacies to the friar preachers of Edinburgh and Haddington.... His
robes of cloth of gold and silk and his furred robes were to be given
to the church of St. Duthac at Tain, the chapel of Dalkeith, and to
other churchmen.... He left his third best horse to the Monastery of
Newbottle, and vestments to each of the churches of Lasswade, Newlands,
and St. Fillans’ of Aberdour.” Sir James lived many years after he had
made this testament.
In 1349 Adam Urquhart of Inchrory, sheriff of Cromarty, granted five
marks annually from the rents of the lands of Inchrory, and a croft
called the Alehouse in the same territory, for a perpetual chaplain
officiating in the chapel of St. Mary at Inchrory――“to pray for the
souls of William Earl of Ross and his parents, and for his own soul and
the souls of his parents, and all the faithful departed.” Adam reserved
to his heirs the right of patronage, and of giving instructions to the
chaplain. In 1456 Alexander Sutherland of Dumbath bequeathed six marks
annually from the rents of the lands of Easter to a priest to celebrate
mass continually for his own soul and the soul of his wife in the
chantry of Ross; and of thirty trentals for his soul, he ordered eight
to be said at Ross, four in Tain, four in Fearn, and four in Dornoch.
He also left six marks to the chanter of Fearn for celebrating mass,
with a note of the requiem, and other sums for religious purposes.
In 1451 Robert Sutherland, the son and heir of John Sutherland of
Fors, granted to the chaplain of St. Andrew’s Chapel of Golspie forty
shillings annually from the rents of the town of Drommoy――“to pray for
me and the souls of my forefathers and successors.”¹
¹ Bannatyne’s _Miscellany_, Volume II.; _Origines Parochiales
Scotiæ_, Volume II., pages 239, 416, 436, 607, 843, 650.
In 1487 James III.――“for the weal of his own soul and the souls of
his ancestors and successors, Kings of Scotland, and all who had
contributed to the foundation, erected the church of St. Duthac of Tain
into a collegiate church for a provost, five canons, two deacons, a
sacrist, and three singing boys.” James II. had founded a chaplainry
at Tain, and endowed it from the lands of Dunscathe and the ferry of
Cromarty; and in the reign of James IV. a sum of five pounds a year was
paid to Sir Donald Rede, chaplain, appointed to sing for the soul of
James III. in St. Duthac’s Church. James IV. also paid for masses for
his own soul in St. Duthac’s Church.¹
¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_; _Registrum magni sigilli
regum Scotorum_, Book X., _n._ 109; _Accounts of the Lord
High Treasurer_, Volume I.
All classes of the people gave liberally to the Church, some for one
purpose and others for different purposes. In 1363 William Soreys, a
burgess of Elgin, granted property to the altar of the Blessed Virgin
Mary in the cathedral of Elgin――“for the safety of his own soul and the
souls of his ancestors and successors, and all the faithful departed.”
The same year William Pope, also a burgess of Elgin, granted the rents
of several crofts and portions of land in the vicinity of the city to
the Church, under the condition of praying for his own soul and the
souls of his kindred, and all the faithful deceased. In 1365 Richard,
son of John, burgess of Elgin, bequeathed one hundred shillings
sterling from the rents of Bortharum to the altar of the Blessed Virgin
Mary in the cathedral of Elgin――“for a perpetual celebration of mass
for his own soul and the soul of Eliza, his wife, and the souls of
John and Emma, his father and mother, and the souls of all the faithful
departed.” In 1495 George Spalding, a burgess of Dundee, “of his own
good mind, and in honour and love of God Almighty, and his mother the
blessed Virgin Mary, and all the saints of Heaven,” bequeathed through
the provost, bailies, council, and the community of the burgh, a
number of articles for adorning the Lady Church of Dundee. Among other
articles there were a great bell, a silver chalice gilted over, a new
mass book, a new ward stall for the vestments of the high altar, and
twenty shillings of annual rent. Very minute and curious conditions
were framed for carrying into effect the intention of the donor. It was
enjoined that the provost, the council, and the community of the burgh,
and their successors, should for ever cause the priest officiating at
the altar of the Lady Church to exhort all the people present to pray
for the soul of George Spalding, and the soul of his wife, and the
souls of their ancestors and successors. Further, there were directions
to go to his grave and his wife’s and then “say psalms and cast
holy water on them.” The documentary deed itself was written in the
vernacular, of which the following is a sample: “For the said George
hys sowll, hys wyf, and yar antecessowris and successowris.”¹
¹ _Register of the Diocese of Moray_, pages 312‒314; _Register
of the Diocese of Brechin_, Volume II., pages 316‒317.
The preceding examples were drawn from a class of documents which are
very numerous in the religious records of Scotland, and they cover a
period of nearly two centuries. It should be observed that the historic
value of these indications of the religion of the people consists
partly in its relation to the worship of ancestors, which prevailed
in prehistoric times. The most characteristic thought and sentiment in
these writings was “the souls of their ancestors, and the souls of all
the faithful departed.” It thus appears that the worship of ancestors,
though associated with other elements, still survived in Scotland.
Another important phase of the religious feeling of the people
manifested itself in the pilgrimages. Pilgrims sometimes travelled in
companies to places that were esteemed holy, and during the journey
they were under the special protection of the King’s peace. In the
fifteenth century Whithern, the shrine of St. Ninian, Tain, Dunfermline,
Scone, Paisley, and Melrose, were among the chief places of pilgrimage
in Scotland. In 1473 the Queen, accompanied by her husband James III.
and a suitable retinue, made a pilgrimage to the shrine of St. Ninian
at Whithern; and on this occasion ten pounds and ten shillings were
paid for livery gowns to six ladies of the Queen’s chamber, which
were made of grey cloth bought from David Gill at ten shillings per
yard; and the Queen’s riding gown for the pilgrimage was made of black
cloth, and cost six pounds and six shillings. James IV. had a habit of
going often on pilgrimage to the tombs, the shrines, and altars of the
saints throughout the kingdom. He often went to Whithern and usually
made offerings varying from ten to eighteen shillings. He also paid
considerable sums of money for masses; in 1497 he gave ten pounds to
the church of Whithern for ten trentals of masses. During his reign
he made offerings at the following sacred spots connected with St.
Ninian:――The outer kirk, the rood altar, the high altar, our lady’s
altar, the reliques, and at the feretrum in the outer kirk, so it
appears that the shrine――feretrum――in which the actual remains of
the saint were supposed to be kept, was placed in the outer kirk of
Whithern; and no doubt it was an object of extreme devotion to the
people. James IV. also made offerings at the Lady’s Kirk of Kyle,
and gave five pounds for five trentals of masses for his own soul;
in Glasgow he made offerings, and also paid for masses in our Lady’s
chapel at the end of the burgh of Dumfries, in the Cross Church of
Peebles, in St. James’ Chapel of the Craig of Stirling, in the chapel
of St. Mary at Perth, and in many other churches James made offerings
and paid for masses.
James IV. was born in Tain on the 17th of March 1473, and St. Duthac’s
Church of Tain was his great favourite place of pilgrimage. He made
many pilgrimages to this place, and always made offerings of ten
to eighteen shillings to St. Duthac’s Church, and he usually gave a
gratuity to the man who bore St. Duthac’s bell.¹
¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I.; _Origines
Parochiales Scotiæ_, Volume II., page 453.
On the great saint’s days processions were held and the day spent as a
holiday. The different classes in the burghs, the provost and bailies,
the burgesses, and the craftsmen, turned out and assembled at the
appointed place, and each class and craft, with their distinctive
emblems displayed, then formed into marching order and paraded the
streets, accompanied by music and shouts of joy and mirth. These
commemorative displays were performed with all the circumstance and
spirit which the nation could command; but it appears that these
rejoicings and processions sometimes terminated in a somewhat rough
fashion.
The shrines and the wells of the saints were regarded with much
devotion, while their relics were objects of extreme veneration, and
it was believed that they possessed marvellous virtues. The continuator
of Fordun, who wrote in the first half of the fifteenth century, gave
an account of a cross which was found when the church of Peebles was
founded in the reign of Alexander III.; and he then tells that, “In the
place where the cross was found frequent miracles were worked by it,
and are still worked, and multitudes of the people flocked thither, and
do still devoutly flock, making their oblations and vows to God.” The
relics of St. Fergus were preserved at Scone, where they performed many
famous miracles; and the bones of one of the arms of this saint were
preserved in the cathedral of Aberdeen. The relics of St. Fillan were
in great repute, especially his crosier, which was believed to possess
many rare virtues, the most singular of which was its power of tracing
stolen cattle and goods. James IV. had a relic of St. Duthac set in
silver, which was preserved for its miraculous power of healing.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Peebles_, pages 152, 156; _Acts of the
Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., page 97; _Origines
Parochiales Scotiæ_, Volume I. page 229; Pitcairn’s
_Criminal Trials_, Volume I.
The ideas concerning the sacredness of Sunday which subsequently
obtained currency, were totally unknown in Scotland in the fifteenth
century. Sports and amusements were openly and freely practised and
enjoyed, and shooting at the butts on Sunday in every parish of the
kingdom was commanded by Act of Parliament.
In closing this account of the social condition of the people during a
period of two centuries, the chief subjects touched on may be briefly
recapitulated. The chapter commenced with a statement touching the
origin, the development, and the peculiarities of parliament, and the
functions which it assumed and exercised. After a brief reference to
the law courts of the kingdom, subjects connected with the land were
taken up. It was stated that from the accession of David I. to the
termination of the War of Independence, the greater part of the land
of the country had changed owners many times, and that new families
had risen to power; but it was observed that Robert I. rather increased
than limited the feudal privileges of the nobles, and consequently
their power soon overshadowed the authority of the Crown, and they
became oppressive and anarchial. The state of the occupiers and the
tillers of the land was indicated; and a reference was then made to
the extent of the Crown lands in the fifteenth century, and the tenants
and occupiers of these lands. The condition of the labourers of the
land; and the causes of the emancipation of the bondmen and serfs were
treated. The burghs of the kingdom and the communities inhabiting them
were handled at length, and the custom, the revenue, the commerce,
and the coinage of the kingdom were noticed. The internal and every
day life of the burgh communities were then treated in detail, and
many interesting particulars and points were narrated, including the
incorporation of the different craftsmen of Edinburgh. A brief notice
of the burghs which belonged to the Church was presented. The military
characteristics of the people, their armour, weapons, and tactics, and
the introduction of cannon, were described. The probable number of the
population was indicated; and the state of the roads, the establishment
of inns, the sanitary condition, and the want of medical science, was
pointed out. Drinking customs, festivals, and the amusements of the
people were handled; the dress of the people, and of the different
ranks of society, sumptuary laws, and ornaments, were described. The
price of the staple articles of food during the period was indicated.
After careful consideration, I then made a statement touching the
condition of the tenants and the labourers on the Crown lands,
embracing the period from the return of James I. to the end of the
fifteenth century. Having indicating the wages of tradesmen and
labourers, the custom of begging, the state of crime, the defects in
the administration of justice, and the forms of punishment were handled
and explained. Social vice was touched on. The dwellings of the nobles,
royal palaces, and the church architecture of the period were briefly
treated. Monasteries, nunneries, the different orders of friars, and
the hospitals, were handled concisely; and finally, the religious
feeling and sentiments of the people were dealt with, and various forms
of their practical manifestation were presented.
CHAPTER XI.
_Literature of the Nation in the
Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries._
THE language of the people of Scotland at the commencement of the
fourteenth century was still Celtic over the greater part of the
country, although the Saxons or Angles had occupied a portion of the
country in the south from the sixth century onward, and had gradually
spread along the eastern coasts, and partly commingled with the
Celtic inhabitants, retaining, however, under slight variation, their
own speech and customs. North of the Tay the dialect of the Angles
was limited to a comparatively narrow strip along the east coast.
Originally the Lowland Scotch dialect was essentially similar to the
Anglo-Saxon speech of Northumbria, and the process of its introduction
and development on the north of the Tweed extended over a period of
seven centuries. In the fourteenth century this dialect was spoken from
the Humber to the Forth, and onward round the eastern seaboard toward
the Moray Firth. Hence it has sometimes been a matter of debate amongst
literary antiquaries, whether some of the early metrical romances, such
as “Sir Tristrem,” were written on the south or the north side of the
Tweed. For the twelfth and thirteenth centuries no writings have been
preserved in this dialect which could with certainty be claimed as the
compositions of writers living on the north side of the borders; but
a considerable number of words and phrases of the vernacular occur in
the early acts of the Scotch parliament, and in the ancient laws and
customs of the burghs, which indicate some of the characteristics of
the current dialect. As the Lowland people of Scotland were a mixed
race, so the Lowland Scotch language shows traces of contact with the
Celtic dialects of the country, and a number of Celtic words occur in
the common vocabulary of the Lowland Scotch. It was, however, mainly in
its ballad literature and poetry that the Lowland Scotch received real
Celtic characteristics; much of the charm, pathos, penetrating passion,
and chord of melancholy of its poetry, is derived from a Celtic source.
The earliest native songs, ballads, and tales of Britain were Celtic.
The Celts had their Finn and Ossian, and many other great heroes,
whose imaginary actions, deeds of valour, and feats of bravery, were
originated in prehistoric ages, and orally learned and transmitted
from generation to generation, with such additional variations as the
fine imagination of the Celts might figure in ideal forms to recall the
memory of their mighty leaders and departed ancestors. As century after
century passed, these heroes in some instances became invested with
more than mortal power; and thus the imagination of the poet had ample
scope for the creation of ideal attributes and characteristics.
In the early part of the sixteenth century the Dean of Lismore made
a collection of Gaelic poetry, and in 1862 a selection from his
collection was published under the title of _The Dean of Lismore’s
Book_. The pieces and fragments thus collected and published, appears
to belong to different periods. The fragments of Ossianic poetry which
were the common productions of the Celtic race, are the oldest in the
collection, while the other pieces mostly belonged to the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries. This Gaelic poetry has a glow and charm which
cannot be fully shown in an English translation. Celtic poetry usually
presents a fine sense of style, and the characteristics of heightened
expression, intense passion, piercing regret, and melancholy. The
subjects of most of these old fragments are associated with feats
of bravery and strength in battle, or feats and incidents connected
with the chase of the deer and the boar, and other wild animals. The
following presents a description of one of Ossian’s heroes:――
“His helmet close about the head
Of this brave and dauntless man;
His right arm bore a round black shield,
The surface of its back engraved;
A heavy, large, broad-bladed sword,
Tightly-bound, hung by his side.
He comes in attitude of fence,
As where we stood he swift approached;
Two javelins, with victory rich,
Rest on the shoulder of his shield;
For strength, for skill, for bravery,
Nowhere could his match be found:
A hero’s look――the eye of a king
Shone in that head of noblest mould,
Ruddy his face, his teeth pearl white;
No stream ran swifter than his steed,
Then did his steed bound on the shore,
And he in whom we saw no fear,
The well-formed warrior, then approached.
In rage, sustained by his great strength,
The maid he rudely bears away,
Though by Finn’s shoulder she had stood.
The son of Morne then hurled his spear,
With wonted force, as he bore off;
No gentle cast was that, in truth,
The hero’s shield was split in twain.
The wrathful Oscar then did shake
The red dyed belt from his right arm,
And killed the hero’s prancing steed,
A deed most worthy of great fame;
Then when the steed fell on the plain,
He on us turned in fiercest wrath,
And battle does, the onset mad,
With all our fifty warriors brave.
On the same side with me and Finn,
The fifty stood in front of him;
Yet though they oft stood firm in fight,
His arm did now them force to yield.
Two blows, and only two he gave,
With vigour to each sep’rate man,
When we were stretched upon the earth,
Each man of us with whom he fought.
* * * * *
Then did the manly Gaul advance,
The conquering hero to assail,
Whoe’er he was could see them then,
The struggle and the fight were fierce.
Then did Mac Morne slay with his arm
The King of Sorcha’s son, most strange;
Sad was the coming of the maid
Now that the brave in fight had fallen.”¹
¹ The Dean of Lismore’s Book, pages 22‒24.
This fragment presents clear description, strong passion, and
characteristic individuality. Both English and Scotch poetry and
literature were indebted to the mind and the genius of the Celtic race
for several of their most charming and attractive features. It has been
repeatedly stated by the most competent authorities that without the
Celtic genius England would never have produced a Shakespeare.¹ Further,
it has been recognised and admitted that English poetry received some
of its distinctive features of style from a Celtic source. “The Celt’s
quick feeling for what is noble and distinguished gave his poetry style;
his indomitable personality gave it pride and passion; his sensibility
and nervous exaltation gave it a better gift still, the gift of
rendering with wonderful felicity the magical charm of nature. The
forest solitude, the bubbling spring, the wild flowers, are everywhere
in romance. They have a mysterious life and grace there; they are
nature’s own children, and utter her secret in a way which makes them
something quite different from the wood, waters, and plants of Greek
and Latin poetry. Now, of this delicate magic, Celtic romance is so
prominent a mistress, that it seems impossible to believe the power
did not come into romance from the Celts.... Rhyme――the most striking
characteristic of our modern poetry as distinguished from that of the
ancients, and a main source, to our poetry, of its magic and charm,
of what we call the romantic element,――rhyme itself, all the weight
of evidence tends to show, comes into our poetry from the Celts.”²
The popular Celtic heroes were known to the early writers of Lowland
Scotch, and allusions to them occur in the writings of the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries; and thus Lowland Scotch literature is not
an isolated stream springing from one source, as it derived its form
and some of its most characteristic elements from the Celtic mind and
genius.
¹ Morley, and Matthew Arnold.
² M. Arnold, _The Study of Celtic Literature_, page 132. 1891.
The earliest compositions in the Scotch dialect or northern English
assumed the form of ballads or songs in rhyme, and they were common
long before it became customary to commit them to writing. The rhymed
form had taken such a hold of the national mind that our first three
historical writers, Barbour, Wyntoun, and blind Henry, all composed
their works in rhyme. The rhymed literature which preceded the long
chronicles of Barbour and Wyntoun consisted: 1, of ballads and songs
associated with historic incidents; and 2, short metrical tales, and
romances. The subjects of the first class were varied, and embraced
battles, personal encounters, feuds, domestic matters, and local
incidents. Some of the second class assumed a tragic character,
and many of them treated of incredible achievements and adventures;
the marvellous in various forms, such as the realms of fairyland,
spirits, ghosts, and other inhabitants of the supernatural regions,
were presented in these tales and romances. They mainly owe their
preservation to tradition, and the greater part of them have been
collected from oral recitation during the last two centuries; but
portions of early Scotch poetry and a number of ballads were collected
in the sixteenth century and preserved in the well-known manuscripts of
George Bannatyne, and Sir Richard Maitland. In 1507 a small collection
of popular poetry was printed at Edinburgh by Walter Chapman; and
the _Complaynt of Scotland_, which was published in 1549, gave a list
of stories and tales then popular, and a collection of ballads was
published about the time of the Reformation.
A collection by James Watson was issued in three parts――1706, 1707,
1710――which contained some pieces of ancient poetry. In 1724 Allan
Ramsay’s _Evergreen_ was published, which consisted mainly of extracts
from Bannatyne’s manuscript, with a few early ballads, including one
on the battle of Harlaw; and the same year he published the _Tea-Table
Miscellany_, which contained seven old ballads. Dr. Percy, Bishop of
Dromore, in 1755 gave the result of his researches to the public in his
well-known collection, entitled _Reliques of Ancient Poetry_; and seven
of the pieces printed by him have been claimed as Scotch productions.
In 1769 Herd published a collection of _Ancient and Modern Scottish
Songs, Ballads, etc._, in two volumes, and twenty ballads were printed
in it for the first time; a new edition of this collection was recently
issued. Pinkerton in 1781 published a volume entitled _Scottish Tragic
Ballads_; and _Select Scottish Ballads_ in two volumes in 1783; amongst
these he inserted twelve pieces of his own composition, and passed
them off as old ballads, but afterwards he admitted his offence. Joseph
Ritson published several collections of _Old Songs and Ballads_; and
in 1794 he issued a valuable collection of _Scottish Songs with Music_.
James Johnson, a music-seller in Edinburgh, published a work called the
_Scots Musical Museum_, 1787‒1803, which extended to six volumes, and
in these ten ancient ballads were for the first time printed.
In the year 1802 Sir Walter Scott’s first and second volumes of the
_Minstrelsy of the Scottish Borders_ appeared, and a third volume
followed in 1803. This work contained a great number of historic
and romantic ballads, many of which had not been before printed; and
it also presented in the form of introductions and notes a body of
exceedingly valuable, varied, curious, and interesting information,
touching the characteristics and the superstitions of the people, and
the work formed an invaluable contribution to the ballad literature
of Scotland. Robert Jamieson in 1806 published _Popular Ballads and
Songs_ in two volumes, and this meritorious work added sixteen ballads
to Scottish traditional poetry. In 1808 John Finlay issued a collection
of _Scottish Historical and Romantic Ballads_. Mr. Kinloch published a
collection of _Ancient Scottish Ballads_ in 1827, in which a number
of traditional pieces were, for the first time, printed. The same year
Motherwell’s _Ancient and Modern Minstrelsy_ appeared, accompanied
with a very valuable introduction and explanatory notes, which showed
considerable critical power and historic insight. A new edition of
this work was published in 1873. Peter Buchan, a faithful collector of
traditional ballads, published in 1828 _Ancient Ballads and Songs of
the North of Scotland_, hitherto unprinted, in two volumes; there are a
few historical ballads in this collection, but not of an early period.
Professor Aytoun published a good collection of _Scottish Ballads_
in two volumes; and a number of other collections have been issued,
which it is unnecessary to particularise. Various versions of many of
these traditionary ballads occur; the same story and incidents may be
presented in a somewhat different form in one district of the country
from that in which it appears in another district, and sometimes
different versions of a ballad may be found in the same locality. Some
ballads have two or three more verses in one version than in another,
though, excepting the additional verses, the versions may be nearly
similar.
A traditional character under the names of Thomas of Ercildoune, or
Thomas the Rhymer, was supposed to have been a writer of romance among
the people on the Borders, and he was for long recognised as a poet and
a prophet; but his life and writings seem to be involved in a haze of
mist. The date of his birth has not been ascertained, but it appears
that he attained the height of his reputation about 1283, and at this
time it was reported that he foretold the death of Alexander III. He
died before the end of the century. In 1804 Sir Walter Scott published
the _Romance of Sir Tristrem_, from a manuscript of the fourteenth
century, but it seems extremely doubtful if this be a work of Thomas
of Ercildoune. The quaint character of the language of the romance
indicates that it was an early production; but there seems to be no
ground for assigning it to Scotland more than to the north of England.
The style of _Sir Tristrem_ is brief and elliptical, and the rhymes
much complicated.
The ballad containing Thomas the Rhymer’s prophecies has been preserved
in three early manuscripts, which are all more or less incomplete.
The chief points and incidents of the piece may be presented thus:――On
a fine May morning Thomas was reclining at Huntly Bank, near Eildon
Hills, when he suddenly espied a lady of exquisite beauty, mounted on a
dapple-grey palfrey, and richly apparelled. Thomas thought she was the
Virgin Mary, and on finding that she was not the Queen of Heaven, he
made love to her, but she declared that to listen to his requests would
destroy all her beauty; but the Rhymer’s ardour could not be repressed,
and at last she was induced to alight, then at once all her beauty
vanished, which threw him into great amazement. She then told him
that he must leave the middle earth and go with her for a twelvemonth.
Accordingly they descended by a secret passage at Eildon Hill, and for
three dreary days Thomas heard nothing but the soughing of the flood.
At length they approached a fair herbary, well filled with flowers and
fruit, and enlivened by the chirping of a great variety of birds; and
Thomas, almost exhausted with hunger, then stretched his hand to snatch
some of the tempting fruit, but she warned him to desist under the pain
of being attainted by the fiend and falling into hell. She directed
him to lay his head in her lap, and she pointed out to him the way to
heaven, and to the palace of her own fairyland; and Thomas observed
that she had recovered her beauty and resumed her rich attire. When
they reached the palace it resounded with music and revelry. The scene
was exceedingly merry. “The harp and fiddle, the lute, and rebeck, were
playing, accompanied with every kind of minstrelsy; and knights were
dancing three and three with lovely ladies, fair and free, all bedecked
in rich array.” After Thomas had enjoyed this solace much longer than
he thought, the queen of the fairies intimated to him that she must
conduct him back to the Eildon tree. He was extremely reluctant to
leave this fine lady, but she then expressed her fear lest the fiend
of hell, who to-morrow was coming to claim his dues, should select him.
When they returned to the Eildon tree, he entreated her to grant to
him some token of their pleasant intimacy, and in compliance with his
request she gave him the tongue that would never lie. She then poured
forth a string of rather confused prophecies, in which allusions to
the events and personages of the Scottish wars of Edward III. may be
discerned.
Barbour and Wyntoun mention Thomas the Rhymer, and Bower noticed his
prediction of the death of Alexander III., and Mair said: “To this
Thomas our countrymen have ascribed many predictions, and the common
people of Britain yield no slight degree of credit to stories of
this kind, which I, for the most part, am accustomed to treat with
ridicule.” Metrical prophecies ascribed to Thomas the Rhymer were
current in the reigns of James V., Queen Mary, and James VI., and
they were collected and published in Latin and in English. At the
time of the Union of the Crowns Thomas reached the height of his fame.
Birrel, touching this point, said――“At this time all the whole commons
of Scotland that had read or understood, were daily speaking of and
expounding the prophecies of Thomas the Rhymer, and other prophecies
which were prophesied in old times.” John Colville, in a Latin oration
which was published at Paris in 1604, expressed his wonder at the
fulfilment of the prophecies of Thomas the Rhymer; the Earl of Stirling
alluded to this subject in one of his compositions, and Drummond
also mentioned it. With reference to the Rhymer’s prophecies Bishop
Spottiswoode said:――“Whence or how he had this knowledge can hardly
be affirmed, but sure it is that he did divine and answer truly many
things to come.”¹
¹ Barbour’s _Bruce_, page 25, Jamieson’s Edition; Wyntoun,
Volume II., page 157; _Scotichronicon_, Volume II., page 131;
Birrel’s _Diary_; Irving’s _History of Scottish Poetry_,
page 46.
The touching monody on the death of Alexander III., which has been
preserved in Wyntoun’s _Chronicle_, presents an early specimen of the
Scotch dialect. When Edward I., in 1296, approached to attack Berwick,
the citizens were reported to have derided him in these rude lines:――
“What wenys Kynge Edwarde, with his lang shankys,
To have wonne Berwyk, all our vnthankys;
Gaas pykes hym.”
From this time till the Battle of Bannockburn the heroic struggles of
the people afforded ample materials and incidents for historic ballads
and rhymes; and many ballads and stories in rhyme associated with
the name of Wallace and his deeds, were then composed in rude forms.
Wyntoun mentioned one of Wallace’s earliest achievements, which still
lives embodied in a ballad, and he also added that――“Of his good deeds
and manhood, great gests I have heard are made, but not so many I trow
as he in his day worked.” Barbour indicates that songs relating to the
War of Independence were common among the people in his time, but few
of these have been preserved; and it seems that the greater part of
them were gradually incorporated into the three metrical narratives
of Barbour, Wyntoun, and more especially Blind Henry’s _Wallace_,
for Mair explicitly stated that Henry’s _Wallace_ was composed from
the traditional stories and ballads current among the people. An
old English chronicler said that the Scots commemorated the national
triumph of Bannockburn in the following strains:――
“Maydins of Englande, sore may ye morne
For your lemmans ye have loste at Bannockysborne,
Wyth heue a low;
What wenyt the King of Englande
So soon to have wonne Scotlande,
Wyth a rumbylow.”
The narrator said that this song was for long afterwards sung by the
maidens and the minstrels of Scotland, to the reproof and disdain of
the English, with other songs which he considered it unnecessary to
particularise.
A spirited and graphic ballad on the Battle of Otterburn has been
preserved. The battle was fought in 1388, and the Scots were led by
the Earl of Douglas and the English by Henry Percy, the redoubtable
Hotspur. Douglas fell in the heat of the engagement, but the Scots
gained the battle:――
“When Percy with the Douglas met,
I wot he was fu’ fain;
They swakkit swords, and they twa swat,
Till the blude ran down like rain.
But Percy wi’ his gude braid sword,
That could sae sharply wound,
Has wounded Douglas on the brew,
That he fell to the ground.
And then he called his little foot-page,
And said――‘run speedilie
And fetch my ain dear sister’s son,
Sir Hugh Montgomerie.’
‘My nephew gude,’ the Douglas said,
‘What recks the death of ane,
Last night I dreamed a dreary dream,
And I ken the day’s thy ain.
My wound is deep, I fain would sleep;
Take thou the vanguard of the three,
And bury me by the bracken bush,
That grows on yonder lily lea.
O bury me by the bracken bush,
Beneath the blumin’ brier;
Let never living mortal ken,
That a kindly Scot lies here.’”¹
¹ Aytoun’s _Scottish Ballads_, Volume I., page 17.
The ballad on the Battle of Harlaw was probably written shortly after
the event. It is a dry narrative, without ornament of any kind, and
extends to 248 lines. But a much shorter traditional ballad on this
battle has been preserved, of which several versions were popular in
the North; and in the early part of the seventeenth century there was
a tune known under the name of the Battle of Harlaw.
The ballad entitled “Sir Patrick Spens” has been supposed to have
originated in connection with the marriage of James III. and the
Princess of Denmark. It presents some striking description, and some
very touching incidents:――
“They hadna sailed a league, a league,
A league but barely three,
When the lift grew dark, and the wind blew loud,
And gurly grew the sea.
The ankers brak, and the topmasts lap,
It was sic a deadly storm;
And the waves came o’er the broken ship,
Till a’ her sides were torn.
* * * * *
And mony was the feather bed
That floated on the faem,
And mony was the gude lord’s son
That never mair came hame.
The ladyes wrang their fingers white,
The maidens tore their hair,
A’ for the sake o’ their true loves――
For them they’ll see na mair.
O lang, lang may the ladyes sit,
Wi’ their gowd kaims in their hair,
A’ waiting for their ain dear lords,
For them they’ll see na mair.
Half ower, half ower to Aberdour,
It’s fifty fathom deep,
And there lies gude Sir Patrick Spens,
Wi’ the Scots lords at his feet.”