Gilnockie was undertaken by James at the instigation of Lord Maxwell, who
was then a ward in Edinburgh. It is certainly a somewhat suspicious
circumstance that three days after Armstrong's execution Maxwell received
from the King the gift of all the property, moveable and immoveable, which
pertained to "umquhill Johne Armstrang, bruther to Thomas Armstrang of
Mayngerton, and now perteining to our souverane lord be reason of eschete
throw justefying of the said umquhill Johnie to the deid for thift
committed be him."[85]
As might be expected, when all the circumstances were taken into
consideration, the execution of Armstrong and his followers produced a
profound sensation, and a deep and bitter feeling of resentment. It was
long believed by the peasantry of the district that, to mark the injustice
of the deed, the trees on which they were hanged, withered away. On purely
abstract grounds it may be argued that Armstrong and his men richly
deserved the punishment meted out to them, but this fact does not
exonerate the King from the charge of treachery and deceit which has
justly been brought against him. The measures he adopted to capture the
quarry were unworthy of a puissant monarch with eight thousand well armed
men under his command. He might well have paid more respect to the
principles of honour and fair play.
It is interesting to find that the version of Armstrong's capture and
execution given in the famous ballad agrees substantially with the
accounts of Pitscottie and Anderson. There, we are told, that the King
sent a "loving letter" to Armstrong, inviting him to a conference.
The King he wrytes a luving letter,
With his ain hand sae tenderly,
And he hath sent it to Johnie Armstrang,
To cum and speik with him speedily.
This communication evidently excited no suspicion, and extensive
preparations were at once made to extend to his Majesty a kind and hearty
welcome. It was even hoped that he might be induced to dine at Gilnockie!
The Eliots and Armstrangs did convene;
They were a gallant cumpanie--
"We'll ride and meet our lawful King,
And bring him safe to Gilnockie.
"Make kinnen[86] and capon ready, then,
And venison in great plentie;
We'll welcum here our royal King;
I hope he'll dine at Gilnockie!"
They ran their horse on the Langholme howm,
And brak their spears wi' mickle main;
The ladies lukit frae their lofty windows--
"God bring our men weel hame again!"
When Johnie cam before the King,
Wi' a' his men sae brave to see,
The King he movit his bonnet to him;
He ween'd he was a King as well as he.
According to the balladist, it would seem that Armstrong's ruin was
brought about by the princely style in which he appeared before his
sovereign. The King, highly displeased, turned away his head, and
exclaimed--
"Away, away, thou traitor strang!
Out o' my sight soon mayst thou be!
I grantit never a traitor's life,
And now I'll not begin wi' thee."
This unexpected outburst of indignation led Armstrong at once to realise
the perilous position in which he found himself placed. He now felt that,
if his life was to be spared, he must use every means in his power to
move the King to clemency. Consequently he promised to give him
"four-and-twenty milk white steeds," with as much good English gold "as
four of their braid backs dow[87] bear;" "four-and-twenty ganging mills,"
and "four-and-twenty sisters' sons" to fight for him; but all these
tempting offers were refused with disdain. As a last resource, he said--
"Grant me my life, my liege, my King!
And a brave gift I'll gie to thee--
All between here and Newcastle town
Sall pay their yeirly rent to thee."
This was no idle boast. So powerful had Armstrong become that, it is said,
he levied black-mail--(which is only another form of the word
"_black-meal_," so-called from the conditions under which it was
exacted)--over the greater part of Northumberland. But even the prospect
of increasing his revenue by accepting this tribute was not sufficient to
turn the King aside from his purpose. He was bent on Armstrong's
destruction, a fact which now became painfully evident to the eloquent and
generous suppliant. Enraged at the baseness of the King, he turned upon
him and gave vent to the pent up feelings of his heart--
"Ye lied, ye lied, now King," he says,
"Altho' a King and Prince ye be!
For I've luved naething in my life,
I weel dare say it, but honesty--
"Save a fat horse, and fair woman,
Twa bonny dogs to kill a deir,
But England suld have found me meal and mault,
Gif I had lived this hundred yeir!
"She suld have found me meal and mault,
And beef and mutton in a' plentie;
But never a Scots wyfe could have said,
That e'er I skaith'd her a puir flee.
"To seik het water beneith cauld ice,
Surely it is a greit folie--
I have asked grace at a graceless face,
But there is nane for my men and me![88]
"But had I kenn'd ere I cam frae hame,
How thou unkind wadst been to me!
I wad have keepit the Border side,
In spite of all thy force and thee.
"Wist England's King that I was ta'en,
O gin a blythe man he wad be!
For anes I slew his sister's son,
And on his briest bane brak a trie."
The balladist then proceeds to give a minute description of the dress worn
by the redoubtable freebooter on this occasion--of his girdle, embroidered
and bespangled with gold, and his hat, with its nine targets or tassels,
each worth three hundred pounds. All that he needed to make him a king was
"the sword of honour and the crown." But nothing can now avail.
"Farewell! my bonny Gilnock hall,
Where on Esk side thou standest stout!
Gif I had lived but seven yeirs mair,
I wad hae gilt thee round about."
John murdered was at Carlinrigg,
And all his gallant companie;
But Scotland's heart was ne'er sae wae,
To see sae mony brave men die.
It was a foul deed, foully done. The King was no doubt determined, as it
is said, to "make the rush bush keep the cow," and perhaps to a certain
extent he succeeded, as some time after this, Andrew Bell kept ten
thousand sheep in Ettrick Forest, and they were as safe as if they had
been pasturing in Fife or the Lothians. But the murder of Armstrong in no
way daunted the other members of that notable clan. Many of them took
refuge on the English side of the Border, and for years waged a successful
predatory warfare against their _quondam_ Scottish neighbours. In 1535,
for example, we find that "Christopher Armstrong, Archibald his son,
Ingram Armstrong, Railtoun, Robert and Archibald Armstrong there, John
Elwald, called _Lewis John_, William, son of Alexander Elwald, and Robert
Carutheris, servants to the laird of Mangerton; John Forrestare, called
_Schaikbuklar_, Ninian Gray his servant, Thomas Armstrong in Greneschelis,
_Lang Penman_, servant of one called _Dikkis Will_. Thomas Armstrong of
Mangerton, and Symeon Armstrong, called _Sim the Larde_" and several
others, were denounced rebels, and their whole goods escheated for not
underlying the law for having stolen from John Cockburn of Ormiston
seventy "drawand oxen" and thirty cows; and for art and part of
traitorously taking and carrying off three men-servants of the said John,
being the keepers of the said castle, and "detaining them against their
will for a certain space;" and further "for art and part of the Stouthreif
from them of their clothes, whingars, purses and certain money
therein."[89] Indeed the depredations of the clan after the execution of
Gilnockie were on the most extensive scale. On the 21st February, 1536,
Symon Armstrong was "convicted of art and part of the theft and
concealment of two oxen from the laird of Ormistone, furth of the lands of
Craik, and a black mare from Robert Scott of Howpaslot, furth of the lands
of Wolcleuche; committed during the time he was in the King's ward, about
Lammas 1535. _Item_, of art and part of the theft and concealment of five
score of cows and oxen from the said laird of Ormistone, stolen furth of
the said lands of Craik; committed by _Evil-willit Sandie_, and his
accomplices, in company with Thomas Armstrong, _alias Greneschelis_, and
Robert Carutheris, servants of the said Symon, and certain Englishmen, at
his command, common Thieves and Traitors, on July 27, 1535. _Item_, of art
and part of the traitorous _Fire-raising_ and _Burning of the Town of
Howpaslot_; And of art and part of the Theft and Concealment the same time
of sixty cows and oxen belonging to Robert Scott of Howpaslot and his
servants; committed by Alexander Armstrong, in company with Robert
Henderson, _alias Cheyswame_,[90] Thomas Armstrong, _alias_ Grenescheles,
his servants, and their accomplices, common Thieves and Traitors, of his
causing and assistance, during the time he was within the King's ward,
upon October 28, 1535. _Item_, of art and part of the theft and
concealment of certain sheep from John Hope and John Hall, the King's
shepherds, furth of the lands of Braidlee in the Forest; committed during
the time he was within the said ward. _Item_, for art and part of the
treasonable assistance given to Alexander Armestrang, called _Evil-willit
Sandy_, a sworn Englishman, and sundry other Englishmen his accomplices,
of the names of Armestrangis, Niksounis, and Crosaris, in their
treasonable acts. SENTENCE--To be drawn to the gallows and HANGED
thereupon: And that he shall forfeit his life, lands, possessions, and all
his goods, moveable and immoveable, to the King, to be disposed of at his
pleasure."[91] In the following month John Armstrong, _alias Jony of
Gutterholes_, and Christopher Henderson were hanged for "Common Herschip
and Stouthreif, Murder and Fire-raising." These items give but a faint
idea of the extent to which the Armstrongs carried on their depredations.
But, perhaps, a still more serious result of the unwise policy adopted by
James in his treatment of the Armstrongs, was the destruction of that
feeling of loyalty to the Scottish Crown, which had hitherto been, in some
measure at least, a characteristic of the Borderers. Henceforth not only
the Armstrongs, but many others besides, were ready to place their arms
and their lives at the service of the English government, and to take part
with their ancient foes in oppressing and despoiling their own countrymen.
In the battle of Ancrum Moor in 1546, there was a considerable contingent
of Scottish Borderers fighting under the standard of Lord Eure, and it was
only after the tide of war had turned in favour of the Scots that they
threw away the badge of foreign servitude and helped to complete the
victory. It maybe said that in acting thus they were moved simply by
considerations of personal advantage. Be this as it may, the incident
clearly shows that their attachment to King and country had been all but
completely destroyed. Had James acted with ordinary discretion and
foresight he might at once have secured the end he had in view, and at the
same time have won over to his side, and to the side of law and order, a
body of men whose crimes were due rather to the peculiarity of their
circumstances than to their own inherently evil dispositions. He had a
great opportunity, but he failed conspicuously to take advantage of it. He
learned, when it was too late, that force, when not wisely applied, may
produce greater evils than those it seeks to remedy.
XI.
THE CORBIE'S NEST.
"Where are ye gaun, ye mason lads,
Wi' a' your ladders, lang and hie?"
"We gang to berry a corbie's nest
That wons not far frae Woodhouselee."
KINMONT WILLIE.
The incidents in the predatory warfare so long carried on by the dwellers
on both sides of the Border were not all of a painful or tragic character.
The spirit of fun sometimes predominated over the more selfish and
aggressive instincts. There was a grim kind of humour characteristic of
the Border reiver. He certainly was not disposed to laugh on the slightest
provocation,--his calling was much too serious for that,--but when he once
relaxed, his mirth was not easily controlled. And, however degrading his
occupation may have been in its general tendency, there was often
displayed among the Border thieves, even among the very worst of them, a
spirit of the most splendid heroism, which helps to redeem the system from
the general contempt in which it is regarded by the moralist of modern
times. Many of the leaders were not only men of undaunted courage, but of
considerable military genius. In a later age, under other and happier
conditions, they would have won renown on many a well-fought battlefield.
They possessed the qualities, physical and moral, of which great soldiers
are made. The Bold Buccleuch, Little Jock Elliot, Johnie Armstrong of
Gilnockie, and his kinsman, Willie of Kinmont--not to mention other names
which readily occur to the mind in this connection--were men dowered by
nature with great courage and resource. They were strong of arm and
dauntless of heart. We do not seek to justify their deeds. These were
reprehensible enough, judged by almost any standard you may apply to them.
But just as some people find it impossible to smother a certain sneaking
kind of admiration of the Devil, so magnificently delineated in Milton's
"Paradise Lost"--a being who seems possessed of almost every quality save
that of consecrating his varied endowment to worthy ends--so in like
manner it is difficult to withhold a certain meed of admiration for some
of the "nobil thieves" whose names stand out prominently in, if they
cannot always be said to adorn, this long chapter of Border history. They
were undoubtedly men of ability, energy, and force of character, who would
have won their spurs in almost any contest into which they had chosen to
enter.
One of the most notable of this band was the famous Kinmont Willie,
renowned in Border song and story. He was an Armstrong, a descendant of
the laird of Gilnockie, whom James VI. put to death at Carlinrig in such
graceless fashion. He, like all his race, was a notorious freebooter. The
English Border, more especially the West and Middle Marches, suffered much
at his hands. He had a large and well armed following, and conducted his
marauding expeditions with an intrepidity and skill which created a
feeling of dismay among the subjects of his oppression. Nor did it matter
much to him where, or on whom, he raided. The King's treachery at
Carlinrig had destroyed--at least so far as the Armstrongs and their
friends were concerned--the last lingering spark of patriotism. Their hand
was now turned against every man, English and Scottish alike. They had
become pariahs, outcasts, whose only ambition was revenge. But bad as
Kinmont was, and his record is of the worst, it might be said of him, as
it was said of one of the greatest and best men Scotland has ever
produced, that "he never feared the face of man." He was always to the
front, dealing out hard blows; courting danger, but never dreaming of
defeat. He cared as little for the warden as for the meanest and most
defenceless subject of the realm. Scrope tells us, for example, that on
one occasion "certain goods were stolen by Scottish men from one of the
Johnstones, a kinsman of the laird Johnstone being warden, whereupon the
fray arose, and the warden himself, with his company and friends, pursued
the same. But Kinmont and his complices being in the way to resist them,
the warden and his company returned again to Annand, the which he taketh
in very yll parts."[92]
It was no doubt a sore point with the warden that he should be thus
interfered with in this masterful fashion, and one can readily sympathise
with him in his chagrin. Such an incident shows that Kinmont and his
friends were in a position to set the constituted authorities at defiance,
and conduct their reiving "without let or hindrance." The warden, however,
was not altogether free from blame for this state of matters. He seems to
have given the thieves every encouragement as long as they confined their
depredations to the English Border. Scrope, in a letter to Walsingham,
informs him that "as well in the tyme of my being with you, as also synce
my return home, manye and almost nightlie attemptates have been committed
in Bewcastle and elsewhere within this wardenrie, as well by the
Liddesdales as also by the West Wardenrie of Scotland, specially Kinmont,
his sonnes and complices; who ... are nevertheless at their pleasure
conversaunte and in company with the warden, and no part reprehended for
their doynges." Hunsdon, another English warden, even goes the length of
suggesting that the King himself (James VI.) privately encouraged Kinmont
in his evil doing. He says that four hundred horse came to "Hawden
brigges," and took up the town and burned divers houses, whereat the King
was very angry, "because it was done there--for he would have had it to be
done in some part of my wardenry. Since the taking up of Hawden brigg,
Will of Kinmont, who was the principal man who was at it, hath been with
the King in his cabinet above an hour, and at his departure the King gave
him 100 crowns, as littell as he hath. What justis wee are to looke for
att the King's hands lett her Majestie judge!"[93]
Thus encouraged by the warden and the King, it is not to be wondered at
that Kinmont should have thrown himself with great enthusiasm into the
work of harassing and plundering all who came within his power.
But his name might have remained in comparative obscurity, notwithstanding
his depredations, had it not been for an extraordinary incident which
occurred, and for which he was in no way directly responsible.
The dramatist has said that some men are born great, and that others have
greatness thrust upon them. We are not prepared to say that only the
latter part of the statement applies to the subject of our sketch, for,
despite his evil-doing, Kinmont was a man of much natural ability--ability
amounting almost to genius. But that he had "greatness thrust upon him"
will be readily conceded. His name will always remain associated with one
of the most thrilling incidents in Border history. The circumstance which
made him famous was this. He had been present at Dayholm, near
Kershopefoot, on the occasion of a day of truce, in the month of March, in
the year 1596. The business which called them together having been
finished, he was returning home, accompanied by a few of his friends,
along the banks of the Liddle, when he was suddenly attacked by a body of
two hundred English Borderers, led by Salkeld, the deputy of Lord Scrope,
the warden of the East March, chased for some miles, captured, tied to the
body of his horse and thus carried in triumph to Carlisle castle.
They band his legs beneath the steed,
They tied his hands behind his back;
They guarded him, fivesome on each side,
And they brought him ower the Liddel-rack.
They led him thro' the Liddel-rack,
And also through the Carlisle sands;
They brought him to Carlisle castell,
To be at my Lord Scrope's commands.
This proceeding was clearly in direct violation of Border law, which
guaranteed freedom from molestation to all who might be present at a
warden court, or day of truce, betwixt sunrise on the one day and sunrise
on the next. We can easily understand the overmastering desire of the
warden's deputy to lay Kinmont "by the heels," as he had long been
notorious for his depredations on the English Border, but it is incumbent
on the representatives of the law that they should honour it in their own
persons, and, however many crimes might be laid to the charge of the
famous freebooter, he was justly entitled to enjoy the freedom, which a
wise legal provision had secured, even to the greatest offenders. The
excuse given by Scrope for this manifest breach of Border law is an
exceedingly lame one. He says:--"How Kinmont was taken will appear by the
attestations of his takers, which, if true, 'it is held that Kinmont did
thereby break the assurance that daye taken, and for his offences ought to
be delivered to the officer against whom he offended, to be punished
according to discretion.' Another reason for detaining him is his
notorious enmity to this office, and the many outrages lately done by his
followers. He appertains not to Buccleuch, but dwells out of his office,
and was also taken beyond the limits of his charge, so Buccleuch makes the
matter a mere pretext to defer justice, 'and do further indignities.'"[94]
That Kinmont had broken the assurance taken at the warden court is an
assertion in support of which neither has "takers," nor Scrope give a
scintilla of proof. Had such a thing really happened, there surely would
have been no difficulty in establishing the fact; but this is not done, or
even attempted to be done, by those whose interest it was to prove the
accusation up to the hilt. The other reasons adduced for this
unwarrantable proceeding will not bear serious consideration. That Kinmont
bore no goodwill to Scrope or those associated with him in his office, may
be taken for granted; and that he and his friends and associates had been
guilty of many outrages on the English Border, goes without saying. But a
slight examination of the excuses will be sufficient to show that they are
mere subterfuges. The point in dispute is carefully left out of view by
the English warden. No doubt Kinmont richly deserved to suffer the utmost
penalty of the law on the ground of his misdemeanours; but he had been
present at the warden court, where he would never have gone had he not
felt sure that he was amply protected from arrest by the law to which we
have referred. It may be said that nearly every man present on that
occasion, irrespective of nationality, might have been apprehended on the
same general grounds. To use an expressive Scottish phrase--"they were all
tarred with the same stick." It was therefore a direct violation, not only
of the spirit, but of the letter of Border law, for Salkeld to take
Kinmont prisoner. Scrope was clearly in the wrong--a fact of which he
himself seems dimly conscious--as he displayed an amount of temper and
irritability in dealing with the case which seemed to indicate that he
felt the weakness of his position. On the other hand, the "rank reiver,"
who had been thus suddenly and unceremoniously "clapped in jail," accepted
the situation with a singular amount of philosophical indifference. He
felt sure that the deed would not go unavenged, that his friends, and he
had many of them, would leave no stone unturned in order to effect his
release. The balladist finely represents him as saying--
My hands are tied, but my tongue is free,
And whae will dare this deed avow?
Or answer by the Border law?
Or answer to the bold Buccleuch?
"Now haud thy tongue, thou rank reiver!
There's never a Scot shall set thee free;
Before ye cross my castle yate,
I vow ye shall take farewell o' me."
"Fear na ye that, my lord," quo' Willie;
"By the faith o' my body, Lord Scroope," he said,
"I never yet lodged in hostelrie,
But I paid my lawing before I gaed."
An account of what had happened was speedily conveyed to Branxholme, where
the Bold Buccleuch was residing. When he heard what had occurred he was
highly indignant. The picture drawn by the balladist is graphic in the
extreme. For intense realism it has rarely ever been surpassed--
He has ta'en the table wi' his hand,
He garr'd the red wine spring on hie--
"Now Christ's curse on my head," he said,
But avenged on Lord Scroope I'll be!
"O is my basnet a widow's curch?
Or my lance a wand o' the willow-tree?
Or my arm a ladye's lilye hand,
That an English lord should lightly me!
"And have they ta'en him, Kinmont Willie,
Against the truce of Border tide?
And forgotten that the bauld Buccleuch
Is Keeper here on the Scottish side?
"And have they e'en ta'en him, Kinmont Willie,
Withouten either dread or fear?
And forgotten that the bold Buccleuch
Can back a steed, or shake a spear?
"O were there war between the lands,
As well I wot that there is none,
I would slight Carlisle castell high,
Though it were builded of marble stone.
"I would set that castell in a low,
And sloken it with English blood!
There's never a man in Cumberland,
Should ken where Carlisle castell stood.
"But since nae war's between the lands,
And there is peace, and peace should be;
I'll neither harm English lad or lass,
And yet the Kinmont freed shall be!"