REIGN OF EDWARD I. (_concluded_).
Banishment of the Jews--Edward's Restorative Measures--Edward's
Continental Policy--Quarrel with France--Undeclared War--Edward
Outwitted by Philip--Re-conquest of Wales--The War with
France--Position of Balliol--He is placed under Restraint--Edward
Marches Northwards--Fall of Berwick--Battle of Dunbar--Submission
of Balliol and Scotland--Settlement of Scotland--Sir William
Wallace--He heads the National Rising--Robert Bruce joins
him--Submission of the Insurgents--Battle of Stirling
Bridge--Invasion of England--Edward Defeats Wallace at
Selkirk--Regency in Scotland--Oppression of the Clergy--The
Barons refuse to help Edward--The Expedition to Flanders--A
Constitutional Struggle--Peace with France--The Pope claims
Scotland--Defeat of the English--Edward's Vengeance--Capture
and Death of Wallace--Bruce takes his place--Death of
Comyn--Defeats of the Scots--Death of Edward--His Character and
Legislation--Sketch of the growth of the English Parliament.
The persecutions of the Jews, which had taken place at the beginning of
the reign of Edward, had little power to check the increase or destroy
the prosperity of that extraordinary people. Having no country; living
among strangers and enemies; deprived of all political standing, of all
legitimate objects of ambition, even of reasonable security for his
life, the Jew devoted those intellectual qualities, in which he was
seldom deficient, to the pursuit of the one agent of power within his
reach. Wealth alone could raise him from a condition of utter misery
and contempt, give him a certain standing and importance among his
fellow-men, and offer employment for his energies. If the favour of the
law was to be bought, the wealthy Jew might hope to buy it, while for the
poor there was no mercy. If he was derided and persecuted by the haughty
sons of a happier race, he returned scorn for scorn, and revenged himself
where he could by trading upon their necessities. If he became grovelling
and avaricious, absorbed in a mean and unworthy passion, perhaps the
fault should be ascribed less to him than to those whose unconquerable
prejudices isolated him in the midst of his kind, and condemned him to
the fate of Ishmael.
Thirteen years had passed since 300 men and women of the despised race
had been hanged in the streets of London, when Edward found himself again
in want of money; and this time he put in force a measure even more
arbitrary, and more in defiance of all law and justice, than before. He
ordered that every Jew in England, young or old, male or female, should
be seized on an appointed day, and cast into the dungeons of his castles.
Here they were confined until they had paid collectively a sum of £12,000
to the royal treasury. Not long afterwards further measures were taken
against them and this time, as it appeared, rather from a spirit of
fanatical cruelty than for the sake of gain. In the year 1290 the king
issued a proclamation, commanding all the Jews to quit the country within
two months, under the penalty of death. In spite of the cruelties they
had suffered, their numbers had rather increased than diminished, and
more than 16,000 persons were thus banished from the kingdom. They were
permitted to carry with them only so much money as would pay the cost of
their voyage, the rest of their goods and property being seized in the
king's name. There is no doubt that large sums of money were obtained
by the Crown in this barbarous fashion, and it may at first appear that
such was the object of the king in directing this wholesale banishment.
If so, it was certainly a short-sighted policy, inasmuch as the supplies
which repeated exactions had continued to force from the Jews would now
be permanently cut off.
[Illustration: EARL WARRENNE SHOWING HIS TITLE TO HIS ESTATES. (_See p._
337.)]
The mariners of the king's fleet proved ready agents of his tyrannous
commands, and perceiving how little apparent prospect the Jews could have
of redress for any injuries inflicted on them, the sailors in many cases
stole the little money which the proscribed people possessed, and even
drowned a number of them during the passage. The murderers, however, did
not entirely escape punishment, for the king was by no means desirous
that the royal example of plundering and slaying should be followed by
his subjects. Some of the sailors were arraigned, and suffered death as
the punishment of their misdeeds.
[Illustration: THE SAILORS' QUARREL NEAR BAYONNE. (_See p._ 338.)]
It is remarkable that, at the very time of these shameful proceedings
against the Jews, the king was engaged in enacting various admirable
laws for the protection of his Christian subjects, and the reforms thus
instituted were immediately put in force. Perversion of justice again
prevailed throughout the kingdom, insomuch that a few years later, when
all the judges were indicted for bribery, only two of the whole number
were pronounced innocent. The judges were compelled to pay heavy fines
as the result of their condemnation. Other measures taken by the king
for increasing his revenues proved less successful. Proceedings were
instituted for the recovery of portions of the royal domains of which
some of the barons had become possessed, and these nobles were required
to show the titles by which they held their lands; but the demand excited
such a determined resistance and such strong feelings of indignation,
that the king was compelled to desist. It is related that when the royal
commissioners presented themselves to Earl Warrenne, and required to see
the titles of his estates, the earl unsheathed his sword, and stretched
it out before them. "This," said he, "is the instrument by which I hold
my lands, and by it I mean to defend them! Our ancestors, who came to
this realm with William the Bastard, obtained their possessions by their
good swords. The conquest was not made by him alone, nor for himself
solely; our fathers bore their part, and were participants with him."
Such language was not to be mistaken, and Edward found it prudent to
leave the great barons alone.
The recent successes of the English king necessarily excited attention
and considerable alarm on the Continent. For a long time past the power
of England had been increasing year by year, and the conquest of Wales
and Scotland, which seemed to involve the union of the whole island
under one ruler, made that power still further to be dreaded. Everything
might be feared from a man of the character of Edward--ambitious, daring,
and unscrupulous, and with the whole force of Britain at his command.
The animosity between the French and English kings seldom slept long,
and on former occasions, when the Welsh or the Scots had been in arms
against the King of England, they had received secretly either aid or
encouragement from France. Now, however, Philip IV., surnamed the Fair,
the reigning monarch of that country, adopted a different policy; and,
without attempting to revive the waning patriotism of the Scottish
nobles, he determined to avail himself of the moment when Edward was
engaged in the north to attack the English territories on the Continent.
Edward, however, was not unprepared for these hostile demonstrations;
and, while directing his arms in other quarters, he had not neglected,
by all those arts familiar to the state policy of the time, to protect
himself against the probable designs of the French monarch. The Count
of Savoy, one of the most powerful vassals of France, had been won to
the side of Edward by gifts and promises, and similar means had secured
the goodwill of the Emperor of Germany. Edward also allied himself with
the Count of Bar by giving him his daughter Margaret in marriage. Other
measures are said to have been employed by him; and the disaffection of
a number of the subjects of Philip is referred by French writers to the
influence of the King of England.
Such was the position of affairs when a matter, apparently of the
least possible importance, led to an outbreak of hostilities between
the two countries. Some English and Norman sailors met together at a
watering-place near to Bayonne, and a quarrel took place as to which
party should fill their casks first. One of the English sailors struck
a Norman with his fist; the Norman drew a knife, and attempted to stab
his assailant, who immediately closed with him, and in the scuffle the
Norman was killed. The Englishman was carried out of danger by his
shipmates; and when the Normans demanded satisfaction for the injury,
the authorities of Bayonne, which city was in possession of the English,
are said to have refused the request. The Normans, baffled in their
vengeance, put to sea; and having met with a small vessel belonging to
the English, they captured it. There was on board a merchant of Bayonne,
whom they hung up to the yard-arm with a dog tied to his feet.
Such a proceeding was necessarily followed by retaliation on the part
of the English, and the Normans were made to pay dearly for the savage
act they had committed. The mariners of the Cinque Ports attacked them
continually in the Channel, and every Norman who fell into their hands
was butchered. Before long the sailors of other nations began to take
part in this irregular warfare, the French and the Genoese taking the
side of the Normans, and the mariners of Ireland and Holland ranking
themselves on the side of the English. Many bloody encounters took
place between the opposite parties, without any interference from
their governments, the latter remaining passive spectators of these
proceedings. The Normans, having collected a fleet of about 200 vessels,
of different sizes, made a descent upon the coast of Gascony, hanged
a number of sailors whom they took prisoners, and carried off large
quantities of stores, with which they returned to St. Malo, in Brittany.
No sooner were they safely at anchor than an English fleet appeared at
the mouth of the harbour. The sailors of the Cinque Ports, with only
about eighty ships, had set out to meet the enemy. The Normans accepted
the challenge to decide the matter by a pitched battle, which was fought,
by mutual agreement, at a spot on the coast. The result of the battle
was decisive in favour of the English, who took the Norman ships and
massacred all on board, no quarter being given in any case. The two
nations might thus be said to have been at war for some time before
their rulers took any part in the matter. The effect of this battle was
to excite to the utmost the vindictive feelings of the French and their
desire for vengeance. Philip, who was himself enraged at the result of
the engagement, perceived that the time was come when the people would
hail with delight the declaration of war with England, and when such a
war might be undertaken with the best chance of success.
Philip assumed the right to punish the English king, who, as Duke of
Aquitaine, might be said to be a vassal of the French Crown. Officers
sent by Philip attempted to seize some of the English lands, but they
were driven back by the troops in possession. He then summoned the "Duke
of Aquitaine" to appear before his suzerain after the feast of Christmas.
Edward considered it prudent not wholly to disregard this summons, and he
sent his brother Edmund to arrange terms with Philip. On this occasion it
would appear that Edward, influenced by the ties of blood, made choice of
a bad instrument. The negotiation terminated by an agreement on the part
of Edmund to surrender Gascony to the French king for a period of forty
days, as a satisfaction for his wounded honour, receiving the promise of
Philip that it should be faithfully given up at the expiration of that
time.
The French king now declared himself satisfied; but when the forty days
were over, and Edward demanded restitution of Gascony, he received
the refusal which was to be anticipated. Philip now assumed a bolder
front, declared that Edward had not fulfilled the duties of a vassal,
and summoned him once more, as Duke of Aquitaine, to appear before his
peers. The summons being disregarded, he declared him contumacious, and
condemned him to the loss of all his estates in France. This declaration
was immediately followed by active measures, while Edward, on his part,
prepared for war with all his customary energy. He formally renounced
his vassalage to the French Crown, and assembled a powerful fleet at
Portsmouth. For several weeks the winds were contrary, and during that
time the impatient monarch was compelled to remain in a condition of
inactivity.
Meanwhile the Welsh, who probably were incited by Philip, broke out into
insurrection, took possession of many castles and towns on their borders,
and slaughtered great numbers of the English. Edward immediately led the
larger part of his army into Wales, having first sent a body of troops
into Gascony, and commanded his powerful fleet to attack and plunder the
French coast. A number of sanguinary sea-fights took place between the
French and English, and in nearly every instance the French were defeated
with heavy loss.
The campaign of Edward in Wales was by no means brief or unattended
with danger. The mountaineers once more distinguished themselves by an
obstinate resistance, and the rigours of winter approached to add to the
privations and difficulties of the royal troops. Several months passed
away before the Welsh were again reduced to submission. Madoc, their
leader, the foremost and best man in this new struggle for liberty, was
at length compelled to surrender, and he, and some of the most dangerous
chiefs, were cast into dungeons for life. Thus, after the country had
been again ravaged, and the homes of great numbers of the people laid
in ashes, the rebellion was quelled. The story which has long been
current respecting the hanging of the Welsh bards by Edward, rests on
no contemporary authority, and therefore must be rejected as devoid of
truth. There is no question that the king was capable of that, or any
other savage act by which vengeance for the past or advantage for the
future could be obtained; but it is the business of history to illustrate
a man's character by his actions, and not to deduce from that character
a confirmation of doubtful statements.
No sooner was the submission of the Welsh complete than the position
of affairs in Scotland again demanded Edward's presence, and compelled
him to relinquish his intention of crossing the Channel in person. The
nobles of Guienne had lately declared themselves in his favour, and
thither the king despatched a small body of troops under the command of
his brother Edmund. Soon after landing Edmund died, and the command fell
upon the Earl of Lincoln, who attacked the French towns and fortresses
with success, driving out the whole of the French garrisons. This state
of things, however, was soon afterwards reversed. The towns were retaken
by the forces of Philip, and his uncle, the Count of Artois, at the head
of a well-appointed and numerous army, defeated the English in several
engagements, and ultimately drove them out of the country, with the
exception of a few towns on the coast. Reprisals took place, and the
whole seaboard of Brittany was plundered by the English fleet, which
inflicted great damage upon the inhabitants, and punished them with an
indiscriminating cruelty. The French, with their allies, made similar
attempts on this side of the Channel; and on one occasion they landed at
Dover, and sacked the town while the male inhabitants were absent. The
men of Dover returned to find many of their wives and children murdered,
and they overtook the marauders before they could reach their ships, and
slew several hundreds of them.
The policy of Edward towards Scotland had been insulting and imperious
to a degree which can hardly be considered judicious. The king whom he
had raised to the throne was thwarted in every assumption of independent
sovereignty, and was made to feel that his oath of vassalage was no form,
but a galling and bitter reality. Complaints against the government
of Balliol were never wanting from his disaffected subjects, and
these readily obtained the ear of Edward, who lost no opportunity of
summoning the Scottish king to appear before him, and answer the charge
of maladministration. It appears that when Balliol submitted to these
demands, and presented himself in the English courts, Edward treated him
with consideration; but when the Scottish monarch attempted to assert
his independence, he was checked by measures of the utmost rigour. The
submission of Balliol to his imperious master was complete, and although
he at length was goaded to offer some resistance, this tardy show of
spirit tends little to redeem his character from the unfavourable light
in which it is viewed by history. Apologists for this degraded king have
not been wanting, and have attempted to paint him as a man possessed
of lofty qualities, who erred rather from overestimating his strength
than from weakness or pusillanimity. His contemporaries among his own
countrymen thought otherwise, and gave him a nickname, attributing to him
an utter want of energy and ability. Posterity has generally concurred
in this opinion, and the name of John Balliol has been inscribed on the
least honourable page of Scottish history.
While proceedings were pending against Balliol for the resistance which
he had at length displayed, Philip of France seized upon the province
of Guienne, and war was declared between France and England. Edward
now summoned Balliol and the chiefs of the Scottish nobility to render
him assistance against his enemies, and to attend him with their armed
vassals. But the insolent and overbearing policy which he had lately
exhibited had roused the national pride of the Scots. They paid no regard
to his summons, and, instead of arming their vassals in his service, they
assembled a Parliament at Scone. The Parliament commenced its proceedings
by dismissing all Englishmen from the Scottish court; and being thus
relieved from the presence of spies on their measures, they determined
to declare war against Edward, and to enter into negotiations with the
French king, which resulted in a treaty of alliance. The English barons
who held estates in Scotland were banished from their lands, and the few
Scottish nobles who still remained faithful to Edward were proceeded
against in the same manner. Among these was Robert Bruce, Lord of
Annandale, whose broad lands were thus temporarily lost to him, and were
given to John Comyn, Earl of Buchan.
Such proceedings as these excited the indignation of Edward, who sought
for the instrument through whom he might counteract their tendencies.
Such an instrument appeared in the younger Bruce, son of the competitor
for the crown, to whom Edward now showed great favour, regretting his
decision in favour of Balliol, and expressing his determination to place
Bruce on the throne. In consequence of these promises, Bruce and his
son, with other nobles of their party, renewed the oath of homage to the
English king. The weak and vacillating character of Balliol was clearly
displayed at this critical moment. He made little or no attempt to quell
the rising storm; and the dominant party in the Scottish Parliament,
fearing a submission on his part, excluded him from the functions of
government, and placed the management of affairs in the hands of twelve
of the leading nobles. The council began the exercise of authority with
bold and patriotic measures. They formally threw off their allegiance to
Edward, concluded a treaty of marriage between the eldest son of Balliol
and the niece of Philip of France, and finally assembled an army, with
which they marched against Carlisle, and ravaged Cumberland with great
cruelty. The attack upon that city proved unsuccessful, and the Scottish
army was split up into factions, whom the bond of a common love for
liberty with difficulty held together.
Edward had now prepared himself for the signal vengeance which he
meditated. He collected an army of 30,000 foot and 4,000 horse, and was
presently joined by 1,000 foot and 500 horse under the command of Anthony
Beck, Bishop of Durham. This warlike prelate rode beside the king at the
head of the troops, and with the sacred standards of St. John of Beverley
and St. Cuthbert of Durham elevated above them, they marched towards
Scotland. Balliol had been already summoned to attend at Newcastle as
vassal of the English crown. Edward waited a few days for his appearance,
and then crossed the Tweed, and led his army along the Scottish side to
the town of Berwick, which was then in the hands of the Scots.
Berwick was at that time a place of great importance, celebrated for its
wealth and the power of its merchants, and thus its capture offered to
Edward other temptations than the prospect of revenge. He, however, made
some show of clemency by proposing terms of accommodation. These being
refused, a simultaneous attack was made upon the town by the English
fleet and the troops of the king. The attack by sea was repulsed, with
the loss of three ships, which were burnt by the townspeople; but the
onslaught of the land forces bore down all opposition. Berwick possessed
a castle of great strength, but the town itself was defended only by a
dike. Over this outwork Edward led his troops in person, and, mounted on
his war-horse, was the first to enter the town. The example stimulated
the courage of his soldiery, and within a short time the town was in
their hands.
[Illustration: THE CORONATION CHAIR AND "STONE OF DESTINY," WESTMINSTER
ABBEY. (_See p._ 342.)]
The scene that ensued was characterised by deeds of horror which are a
deep reproach to the manhood of the age, and an indelible stain upon the
manhood of him who directed them. Seventeen thousand persons were put to
the sword, without distinction of age or sex. The young and the innocent,
the aged and the helpless, were mingled in the same slaughter with the
strong man who resisted to the death. For two days the carnage was
continued, until the dead were piled up before the doors of the houses,
and the streets ran with blood. From the cruelty of man the wretched
inhabitants sought the protection of God, and, flocking to the churches,
they flung themselves in terror before the altars. But the sanctuary
was speedily violated by their enemies; the shelter of the sacred
walls availed them nothing, and they were cut down by hundreds where
they knelt. It is related that a party of Flemish merchants defended
themselves in their factory--a building of great strength--against the
whole English army, until the assailants, exasperated by the opposition
they encountered, set fire to the factory, and burnt it, with its brave
defenders, to the ground.
Such was the terrible lesson which Edward was capable of giving to those
who opposed him. The massacre of Berwick took place on Good Friday,
the 30th of March, 1296, and on the 5th of April the Abbot of Arbroath
arrived at the town, attended by three monks. Undismayed by the ruthless
character of the king, the abbot appeared before him, and delivered to
him Balliol's formal renunciation of his homage. "What! is the traitor
capable of such madness?" the king exclaimed. "If, then, he will not come
to us, we will go to him."
The castle of Dunbar was one of the strongest and most important
fortresses of Scotland. Patrick, Earl of Dunbar, was at this time
fighting against his countrymen in the English army; but his countess,
who held the castle, and whose hatred of the English was intense, entered
into a treaty with the Scottish leaders to deliver it up to them. The
offer was speedily taken advantage of, and the Earls of Ross, Atholl, and
Monteith, with other powerful chiefs, and a body of thirty-one knights,
and a number of foot, took possession of the castle. Having driven out
the few soldiers who refused to join their standard, they prepared to
maintain, at all hazards, the strong position which they had obtained.
Aware of the importance of this movement, Edward dispatched Earl Warrenne
with 10,000 foot and 1,000 horse, to recover the castle. When the earl
summoned the garrison to surrender, they agreed to do so, provided they
were not relieved within three days. Meanwhile, the whole Scottish army
was advancing upon the English, and having reached the high ground above
Dunbar, took up a strong position there. Forty thousand foot and 1,500
horse were ranged in formidable array upon the hills, and the garrison of
the castle jeered and insulted the English from the walls, as though they
were already beaten. The relative positions and numbers of the two armies
were such that nothing but the headlong precipitancy of the Scots could
have lost them the victory. Undismayed by the number of the enemy, Earl
Warrenne advanced to meet them, and while passing through a narrow valley
his troops fell for a short time into confusion. The Scots perceived
this, and believing that the English were taking to flight, they
abandoned their position, and rushed down upon their foes with shouts
of triumph. Meanwhile the English leader had restored order among his
troops, and the Scots found themselves, not among masses of fugitives,
but face to face with a compact body of tried and well-appointed
soldiers. They were driven back in the utmost disorder, and the earl
gained a complete victory, which for a time decided the fate of Scotland.
Ten thousand men were left dead on the field, and the greater number of
the leaders were taken prisoners. This battle was fought on the 28th
of April, and on the following day King Edward appeared on the scene in
person, and the castle then surrendered.
Edward proceeded with his customary energy to complete the subjugation
of the kingdom. He passed through the country, and took possession
of the castles of Roxburgh, Dumbarton, and Jedburgh. Having received
reinforcements, he advanced to Edinburgh, which fortress surrendered to
him after a siege of eight days. At Stirling he was joined by the Earl of
Ulster, with 30,000 men, and passed on to Perth, where for a few days he
sheathed the sword and occupied himself with the ceremonies of religion.
While the English army were keeping the feast of John the Baptist, new
messengers arrived from Balliol, who now sued for peace. Edward would
not condescend to treat with the fallen monarch in person, but sent to
him the Bishop of Durham, who communicated to him the pleasure of the
English king. The terms offered were such as never ought to have been
accepted. Balliol was required to submit himself absolutely to the mercy
of the conqueror, and to renounce his kingly state under circumstances
of the utmost humiliation. In the presence of an assembly of bishops and
nobles the King of Scotland was stripped of crown and sceptre, and was
compelled, with a white rod in his hand, to perform a feudal penance. The
date of this disgraceful transaction was the 7th of July, 1296. Balliol
placed his son Edward in the king's hands as a hostage, and the youth,
with his father, was sent to England, where both remained for three years
imprisoned in the Tower.
Edward continued his victorious course through Scotland, encountering no
opposition. From Perth he proceeded by way of Aberdeen to Elgin. On his
return to Berwick he visited the ancient abbey of Scone, and removed from
it the "famous and fatal stone" upon which for ages past the Scottish
kings had been crowned. This stone with the regalia of Scotland, was
placed by Edward in Westminster Abbey, as a memorial of the conquest of
Scotland. Within a year that conquest had been entirely wrested from him;
but the stone still remains at Westminster, little worn by the lapse of
six centuries.
After the battle of Dunbar, the elder Bruce reminded Edward of his
promise to place him on the Scottish throne. The king--who fulfilled his
promises only when it suited him--replied angrily, "Have I nothing to
do but to conquer kingdoms for thee?" Instead of placing Bruce on the
throne, Edward directed him, with his son, the younger Bruce, to receive
to the king's peace the inhabitants of his own estate of Carrick and
Annandale. Such was the degrading office in which the young Robert Bruce,
the future restorer of his country's freedom, was at this time employed.
Edward now occupied himself in a settlement of the affairs of the
kingdom; and the measures which he took for that purpose were in
themselves politic and just. The forfeited estates of the clergy were
restored, many of the civil functionaries of Balliol were retained in
office, and the governors of districts in most cases were permitted to
exercise authority as before. Some Englishmen were, however, placed in
command of castles and districts to the south, and the supreme authority
was vested in three persons--John of Warrenne, Earl of Surrey, governor;
Hugh de Cressingham, treasurer; and William Ormsby, justiciary.
The independence of Scotland now appeared to be completely destroyed, the
great nobles were reduced to a state of submission, if not of servility,
and the power of the King of England was firmly rooted throughout the
country. But a change was at hand, and the slumbering fires of patriotism
were soon to be kindled into a blaze. The man who was destined to rouse
his countrymen from their apathy, and work out the freedom of his native
land, was at this time engaged in roaming the hills of Renfrewshire at
the head of a petty band of marauders. He was that Sir William Wallace,
famed through succeeding ages in song and story but of whom history can
offer few details worthy of reliance. The family of Wallace was ancient,
and might be termed gentle, but was neither rich nor noble. He was the
son of Sir Malcolm Wallace, of Elderslie, in Renfrewshire. In those
stormy times bodily strength and valour in the field were the first
qualities necessary to success. The strength of Wallace is described as
having been prodigious. His size was gigantic, and as he grew towards
manhood there were few men who could meet him in single combat. He was a
man of violent passions, and a strong hatred of the English, which was
evinced by him in early life, was fostered by those with whom he came in
contact.
So the Scots took up arms once more. The great chiefs, indeed, hung back
from the movement, and maintained their condition of supineness and
inactivity, but the inferior nobility and the people no longer suffered
themselves to be restrained. Incited by their hatred of the English,
the peasants formed themselves into armed bands, which infested the
highways, and attacked any of their enemies whom they could surprise in
detached parties. Edward devoted large sums of money to repressing these
disorders, but without success; and now there appeared on the scene
the extraordinary individual whose energies, first excited by personal
injuries, were afterwards devoted to his country, with efforts not less
than heroic.
We first read of Wallace as engaged in a quarrel in the town of Lanark
with some English officers who had insulted him. Bloodshed ensued, and he
would probably have lost his life in the streets but for the interference
of his mistress, to whose house he fled, and with whose assistance he
escaped. It is stated that Hislop, the English sheriff, attacked the
house, and, in a spirit of brutal and unmanly vengeance, seized the
unhappy lady, and put her to death. Wallace, having heard the news, threw
himself upon the sheriff, and slew him. For this deed he was proclaimed
a traitor, and he left his home to seek a retreat among the mountain
fastnesses. Here he was soon joined by a few desperate men, who naturally
acknowledged the strongest as their chief, and then, under his guidance,
made successful attacks upon straggling parties of English. His name soon
became famous, and numbers of men of different classes flocked to his
standard. The halo of romance with which this hero was speedily invested
by the people, the continued and galling acts of tyranny on the part of
the English, and the desire of revenge, all tended to recruit the ranks
of the mountain chieftain. Among the first men of note who joined him was
Sir William Douglas, the former commander of the garrison of Berwick,
who, at the sack of that town, had been permitted to march out with
military honours. He now brought a force consisting of the whole of his
vassals to the army of Wallace. At this time Ormsby, the justiciary, was
holding court at Scone. Thither Wallace led his troops, and surprised the
justiciary, who escaped with difficulty, leaving a rich booty behind him.
The Scots now openly ravaged the country, plundering and slaying all
the English who fell into their power. Wallace was cruel and merciless
in war, and through the records of that time we look in vain for any of
those acts of humanity which were inculcated by the laws of chivalry, and
occasionally practised by men who sought the reputation of accomplished
knights. The same ruthless barbarity characterised the mode of warfare
on both sides, and Scots or English, in passing through the country,
marked their course by a trail of blood.
[Illustration: THE ABBOT OF ARBROATH BEFORE KING EDWARD. (_See p._ 342.)]
The conduct of the younger Bruce, who afterwards displayed, as Robert I.,
such distinguished abilities, was at this time uncertain, and the reverse
of energetic. Edward, however, dreaded the rebellion of a chief who
possessed such great estates and influence, and, having summoned him to
Carlisle, compelled him to make oath, on the sword of Thomas Becket, that
he would continue faithful. As a proof of his fidelity, he was required
to ravage the lands of Sir William Douglas, whose wife and children he
seized and carried into Annandale. Having thus quelled suspicion, the
young chief, who was then twenty-two years old, called together his
father's vassals, spoke of his recent oath as having been extorted by
force, and as being therefore of no weight, and urged them to follow him
against the oppressors of their country. They refused to do so in the
absence of his father, and Bruce then collected his own retainers, and
proceeded to join Wallace.
The news of the rising of the Scots was brought to Edward as he was about
to embark for Flanders. He immediately issued orders for the collecting
of an army, which was placed under the command of Sir Henry Percy and Sir
Robert Clifford. These distinguished commanders advanced, at the head of
40,000 men, to meet the forces of the patriots, which were already in a
condition of disorganisation. The Scots were without any acknowledged
leader, and although Wallace, as the prime mover of the revolt, as
well as by his superior qualities, was the most worthy to assume that
position, the higher nobility who were with him refused to act under
the orders of a man whom they regarded as their inferior. Under such
circumstances as these, combined movements were impossible, and all the
advantages of discipline, which, equally with prudence, may be said to
be the better part of valour, were on the side of the enemy. The English
leaders proposed to negotiate, and after a short deliberation, the chief
associates of Wallace laid down their arms, and once more gave in their
submission to Edward. Among those who did so were Bruce, Sir William
Douglas the Steward of Scotland, the Bishop of Glasgow, Sir Alexander
Lindsay, and Sir Richard Lundin. The document signed by them is dated at
Irvine, on the 9th of July. One man alone, of all the higher Scottish
nobility, remained to uphold the honour of his order, and preserved his
duty to his country. This was Sir Andrew Moray of Bothwell. Undaunted by
the disaffection of his powerful companions, Wallace still held together
a strong band of men, who, poorer and more patriotic, disapproved of the
pusillanimity of their chiefs; and with these he retreated for a time
into the mountains.
[Illustration: THE ABBEY CRAIG AND WALLACE MONUMENT, NEAR STIRLING, WITH
THE OCHIL HILLS.
(_From a Photograph by Messrs. G. W. Wilson and Co., Aberdeen._)]
Several months elapsed, during which Edward appears to have made no
attempt to molest the Scottish insurgents. Meanwhile the fame of Wallace
was extended throughout the country, and vast numbers of the people
flocked to his standard. Knighton, an old English historian, asserts that
the whole of the lower orders already regarded Wallace as the future
deliverer of their country, and that amidst the surrounding dangers they
gathered new hope and courage from his undaunted brow. It is stated
also that many of the nobility repented of oaths weakly or unwillingly
taken, and that their hearts were with the cause of the man whom they
had refused to obey. Wallace renewed offensive operations with largely
increased forces, and drove the English from the castles of Brechin,
Forfar, Montrose, and other fortresses to the north of the Forth. He
was engaged in a siege of the castle of Dundee when he received news of
the advance of the English. Raising the siege, he marched his forces,
consisting of 40,000 men, in haste to Stirling, where he arrived before
the English army. Wallace took up a favourable position on the banks of
the Forth, a portion of his troops being concealed by the hills. The Earl
of Surrey, in command of 50,000 foot and 1,000 horse, soon afterwards
appeared on the other side of the river. On observing the strong position
of Wallace, the earl thought it prudent to negotiate with him, and to
this end sent messengers to him proposing to treat. The reply of Wallace
was bold and decided. "Return," he said, "to those who sent you, and say
that we are not here to waste words, but to maintain our rights, and give
freedom to Scotland: let them advance, and we will meet them beard to
beard."
The English were exasperated by this bold defiance, and importuned
their leader to accept the challenge offered to him. Cressingham, the
treasurer, a weak and hot-tempered man, joined his expostulations
with the others, protesting against a delay which would increase the
expenditure of the public money. The earl, though an able general, who
must have perceived the danger of an attack against the position before
him, was prevailed upon by such representations as these to yield his own
better judgment, and lead his impatient troops to the destruction which
awaited them.
Early on the morning of the 11th of September the English began their
passage across the narrow wooden bridge which was the only means of
communication with the opposite bank of the river. It is evident that a
large force would occupy many hours in crossing the river by this means,
and during that time they must lie in a great measure at the mercy of a
determined enemy. Wallace did not neglect the opportunity thus afforded
him. He suffered the English to transport about one-half of their forces,
and then took possession of one end of the bridge, thus effectually
cutting off their further advance. He then surrounded the body of the
enemy who were thus separated, threw them into confusion, and gained
a bloody victory. Many thousands of the English fell by the sword or
perished in the water, and among the dead was the treasurer, Cressingham.
This man, during his administration had made himself peculiarly obnoxious
to the Scottish people, and they now revenged themselves after a
barbarous fashion, by stripping the skin from the dead body of their
enemy, and cutting it into small pieces to be worn as the North American
Indian of a later day carried the scalp of his fallen foe.
The Earl of Surrey had not crossed the river, and as soon as he perceived
that the destruction of his troops was inevitable, he caused as many
of them as could be collected to occupy the castle of Stirling, and
then took horse and rode at full speed to Berwick. Among the Scots the
loss was comparatively small, and the only man of note who fell was the
patriotic Sir Andrew Moray of Bothwell. The result of this victory was
no less than the restoration of the country to freedom. Wallace pushed
his success without delay, and wherever he went his progress was almost
without opposition. The castles of Edinburgh, Berwick, Dundee, and
Roxburgh at once surrendered, and within a short time the rest of the
Scottish strongholds submitted to the victor, so that there was not a
fortress in the country remaining in the possession of the English king.
A few months later a famine arose in Scotland and, driven in some measure
by the want of supplies, Wallace invaded England. He remained for awhile
in Cumberland, and on his return an assembly of the nobility was held
at the Forest Kirk, in Selkirkshire. It is generally understood to have
been at this time that Wallace was invested with the title of guardian or
governor of the kingdom of Scotland and commander of its army.
It is worthy of remark that the name of Balliol was retained in this
instrument, and the appointment of Wallace was declared to be made with
the authority of King John, whose legitimate right to the crown appears
to have been universally recognised.
At this time Edward was still in Flanders, engaged in a war with Philip
of France, which had followed the seizure of Guienne. A treaty of peace
having been at length agreed to, Philip endeavoured to influence Edward
in favour of the Scots, and to include them also in the amnesty. But the
English king would listen to no such proposals. His conquest had been
suddenly wrested from him, and he was intent on vengeance. He issued
letters to the barons of the kingdom, commanding that the whole military
force of the realm should be assembled at York on the 14th of January,
1298.
The immense army thus collected together, and numbering 100,000 foot and
4,000 horse, was placed under the Earl of Surrey, who led it as far as
Berwick. On his arrival there, the earl received the king's direction not
to proceed until he himself should be there to take the command.
Edward landed in England in March, and again summoned the barons, with
all the forces at their command, to meet him at York at the approaching
feast of Pentecost. A still more numerous army than before was thus
organised, and the king placed himself at its head, and marched
triumphantly towards the north. Having reached Roxburgh, he proceeded
thence along the coast, attended by a fleet which had been dispatched
to furnish the army with supplies. During this part of his course he
encountered no opposition, saw no enemy, and the few habitations which
were to be found along the route had been deserted by their inhabitants.
The Scottish patriots were gathered together among the mountains, and
the great and noble of the land once more ranged themselves beneath
the standard of Wallace. Among them was Robert Bruce, who now finally
declared himself on the side of freedom. With a cool judgment, which
merited a more fortunate issue, Wallace for a time avoided coming into
collision with the enemy, whose overwhelming numbers threatened to crush
him in an open conflict. He hung upon the flank of the English army
unseen, but close at hand, ready to take advantage of any opportunity
of inflicting damage upon it. The march of Edward was not unattended
with difficulties. The scanty resources of the country were wholly
insufficient to afford sustenance for his troops, and the store-ships
were detained and driven about by contrary winds. A quarrel also took
place between the English and Welsh soldiers under his command; and
the latter, to the number of 40,000, showed a disposition to desert,
and go over to the Scots. "Let my enemies," said Edward, "go and join
my enemies. One day I will chastise them all." Meanwhile, the ships
still failed to arrive, and the scarcity of provisions seemed likely to
approach a famine. Edward was about to retreat to Edinburgh, when he
learned that the Scottish army was encamped not far off in the wood of
Falkirk. The news is said to have been brought to the king privately by
two of the Scottish nobles, the Earls of Dunbar and Angus. He immediately
determined to go forth to meet the insurgents, and on that night the
royal army lay in the fields. Edward himself, sleeping beside his horse,
received a kick from the animal, which broke two of his ribs. The news
soon spread through the camp that the king had been killed, and a state
of confusion ensued which threatened the complete demoralisation of the
troops. Edward, however, restored discipline among them by mounting his
horse, and riding at their head, regardless of the pain he endured.
The English army began its march at dawn on the 22nd of July, 1298.
Within a short time the enemy were observed to have taken up a
position in a field which lay at the side of some rising ground in the
neighbourhood of Falkirk. The force under the command of Wallace was
greatly inferior to that opposed to him; but he had posted his troops
with great judgment, and for a long time the Scottish infantry repelled
the furious attacks directed against them. Not so the cavalry, of whom
Wallace possessed no more than 1,000. These did not even attempt to
resist the superior numbers of the enemy, but, without striking a blow,
they turned and fled from the field. Cowardice is certainly not the
characteristic of the race to which these men belonged, and therefore
their flight can only be attributed to treason on the part of their
leaders. Be the cause what it might, the loss of this division speedily
decided the fate of the day, and the heroic resistance of the infantry
was rendered totally unavailing. The Scots at length gave way before
the repeated charges of heavy cavalry, and the victory of the king was
complete. Little or no quarter seems to have been asked or given, for we
are told that 15,000 Scots were left dead upon the field.
Wallace effected his escape with a remnant of his army, and fell back on
Stirling. The English followed fast on his steps; but when they arrived
at that place he was gone, and the town was a heap of smouldering ruins.
St. Andrews and Perth were afterwards also burnt to the ground; the
first by the English, and the latter by the inhabitants themselves. As
the king passed through the country, he laid waste the villages and the
cultivated fields with fire and sword. But the land was poor, and not all
the activity of the marauding forces could procure the necessaries of
life for so large a body of men. Edward was compelled to retreat, and in
the month of September he quitted Scotland, having regained possession
only of the southern part of the country.
For several years after the signal defeat he sustained at Falkirk we hear
no more of Wallace. He resigned the office of guardian of the kingdom,
and, in an assembly of the barons, William Lamberton, Bishop of St.
Andrews, John Comyn the younger, John de Soulis, and Robert Bruce, Earl
of Carrick, were appointed guardians in his stead. The new appointments
were made, like the old, in the name of Balliol, although that dethroned
monarch was then a prisoner in London. It would appear that bitter feuds
of long standing were buried in the arrangement by which Bruce and Comyn
consented to act together in the name of the man who had successfully
rivalled both of them in the contest for the crown. The events of the
after life of John Balliol may be told in a few words. In the year 1299
the Pope Boniface VIII. interceded in his behalf, and the fallen king was
liberated from his confinement, and conveyed to the estate of Bailleul,
in Normandy, from which his ancestors took their name. There he passed
the rest of his days in retirement, scarcely remembering his former high
position, and little heeding the important events which were deciding the
destinies of his country. He died in the year 1314.
Meanwhile, events of some importance had been going on in England.
Allusion has already been made to the heavy burdens entailed upon the
English people by the repeated wars of their king. In addition to these
causes of complaint, the clergy were oppressed by the officers of the
crown, who seized their stores and ransacked their granaries for supplies
for the king's troops. At length they applied for aid to the Pope; but
the only result of the application was to make their condition still more
miserable. The Pope granted them a bull, known as "Clericis laicos,"
directing that the Church revenues should not be devoted to secular
purposes without the permission of the Holy See. Such defiance Edward
could not be expected to endure. But at this time Boniface was himself
in a position of difficulty, and the bull being opposed in France, he
was compelled within a year to issue another, which virtually restored
matters to their former position, and removed the papal protection from
the goods of the Church. Acting upon the authority of the first bull,
some of the English clergy refused to satisfy the demands of the king,
who then took the extraordinary course of outlawing the whole body. The
whole of the property of bishops, abbots, and inferior clergy was seized,
insomuch that in many cases they were left without bread to eat or a bed
to lie upon.
Meanwhile, the preparations for the French expedition were being pushed
on. In February, 1297, Edward was engaged in collecting two armies to
proceed, the one into Flanders, and the other to Guienne, when the Earl
of Hereford, the constable of England, and the Earl of Norfolk, the
marshal, who had been required to quit the country with their armed
vassals, directly refused to obey. The king addressed the marshal, and
swore by the everlasting God that he should either go or hang; and the
earl repeated the oath, and swore that he would neither go nor hang.
With these words the two barons quitted the royal presence together, and
1,500 knights immediately followed them. The king thus found himself
deserted by his court, and he knew that at such a moment his crown, or
even his life, was in imminent danger. With that ability for which he was
distinguished, he occupied himself in quelling the storm. He employed all
his art to conciliate the clergy, and having in some degree succeeded,
he nobly threw himself upon the goodwill of the people. He mounted a
platform in front of Westminster Hall, attended only by his son, the
Prince of Wales, the Earl of Warwick, and the Archbishop of Canterbury,
and addressed the people assembled below him. After a pathetic allusion
to the dangers he was about to encounter for his subjects, and
expressing a hope that, in the event of his death, they would preserve
the succession to his son, the stern warrior-king shed tears before his
audience; the archbishop also wept; and the people, overcome by these
extraordinary demonstrations, rent the air with shouts of loyalty. The
earls still refusing to obey the king, he appointed other officers in
their place, and induced the nobles who were with him to make him a money
grant.
Edward now appointed the Archbishop of Canterbury to the head of the
council of regency, and proceeded to embark on his expedition to
Flanders. At Winchester he was met by a deputation, who, in the name
of the lords spiritual and temporal of England, tendered him a formal
remonstrance. The nobles denied their liability to accompany the king to
Flanders, in which country their fathers had never borne arms for the
kings of England; and said, moreover, that their means were so reduced
by the royal exactions, they could not, if they would, obey his command.
They also designated the expedition as unnecessary and impolitic while
affairs in Scotland remained in such a critical position. The king made
no direct reply to the address, and feeling himself secure in the loyalty
of the people, he left the nobles to their discontent, and set sail for
Flanders.
[Illustration: REVOLT OF THE BARONS AGAINST THE KING. (_See p._ 348.)]
It is necessary here to relate the circumstances which led to the
expedition in question. The chief was naturally the occupation of
Gascony; but there were subsidiary causes. In the year 1294 Edward had
concluded a treaty of marriage between his son Edward and Philippa,
the daughter of Guy, Count of Flanders. This union was opposed to the
interests of the King of France, who exerted every means in his power to
prevent it. Having in vain attempted to do so by a course of intrigues,
Philip sent to invite the count to meet him at Corbeil, for the purpose
of consulting on matters of importance. The old man, whose character was
honest and unsuspicious, presented himself at the time appointed, when
his person, with that of his wife, was seized by the orders of Philip,
who conveyed them prisoners to Paris. This unknightly act of treachery
excited general indignation throughout Europe, and the Pope having
remonstrated with the king, he was obliged to set the count at liberty.
Before doing so, however, he compelled him to make oath that he would
abandon the alliance with England, and, in pledge of the fulfilment
of the vow, Philippa was required to be sent to Paris as a hostage.
These demands having been reluctantly complied with, the old Count took
a tender farewell of his child, who was then only twelve years old,
and returned to his own dominions. An appeal which he addressed to
the Pope for the recovery of his daughter was answered by a threat of
excommunication against Philip; but that unscrupulous monarch retained
possession of his hostage, in defiance of the thunders of the Church.
It was at this time that the Count entered into a coalition which had
been recently formed by Edward, and included the Emperor of Germany, the
Archduke of Austria, the Duke of Brabant, and the Count of Bar.
Such were the circumstances under which Edward entered on the expedition
which terminated with so little success to the English arms. He landed
at Sluys in the month of August, and immediately on his arrival quarrels
broke out among the sailors of the fleet, who came from different
seaports, and between whom there had been long-standing feuds. Such
was the extent to which these animosities were carried, that a regular
engagement took place between the mariners of Yarmouth and those of the
Cinque Ports, and twenty-five ships belonging to the former were burnt.
It is related that, during the conflict, three of their largest ships,
one of which carried the royal treasure, were taken possession of and
conveyed out to sea.
While such was the condition of the British navy at this period, the
land troops were occupied with similar quarrels and disorders. Among the
allies of Edward there was little more unity. The cities of Flanders,
rivals in wealth and power, regarded each other with a jealousy which
threatened the most serious dissensions. Among the various factions were
some who adhered to Philip of France, and their numbers were greatly
increased when that king marched into the country at the head of an
imposing force of 60,000 men. The French gained a victory over the
Flemings at Furnes, and obtained possession of a number of their chief
towns.
Damme had been occupied by Philip, who was compelled to retire before
the English forces, and Edward then advanced into the country, making an
unsuccessful attack on Bruges, and going into winter quarters at Ghent.
Here the most deadly quarrels broke out between the English troops and
the townspeople; and in a riot which took place in the town 700 of the
English were killed. Every effort was made by the king and Count Guy to
repress these tumults; but the feud continued without abatement, and
effectually prevented any combined movements against the enemy.
Such was the position of affairs in the winter of 1297, when proposals
for a truce having been made by Philip, they were readily accepted, and
the English king returned to his own country. Edward had spent large
sums of money in this expedition, which had ended in a manner wholly
unworthy of his fame and his resources. But the humiliation of the king
had not been confined to the non-success of his arms; he was compelled
to give his assent to various reforms introduced by his barons, and to
add confirmations of those charters which checked the abuse of arbitrary
power. Early in the preceding year the constable of the kingdom, with
the earl marshal and many other of the nobles, interposed in defence of
the privileges of Parliament, and forbade the officers of the exchequer,
in the names of the barons of the kingdom, to collect certain taxes
which had been laid on by the king without the consent of the national
representatives. The citizens of London were allied with the barons in
this measure, and Edward found himself at length compelled to submit.
From the city of Ghent, where he was then staying, he sent instructions
to this effect to the council of regency, some of whom were known to
favour the demands of Parliament; and at the same place he granted a new
confirmation of the two charters, and also of an important enactment, by
which it was declared that no impost should be levied without the consent
of the peers spiritual and temporal, the knights burgesses, and other
freemen of the realm.
Such concessions as these were not made by Edward without great
reluctance, and his annoyance at the restrictions thus placed upon him
was clearly shown soon after his return to England. His barons, however,
were determined that the statutes should not be evaded, and a Parliament
having been summoned at York, the king was called upon to give a solemn
ratification of the charters he had granted. Edward excused himself at
that time under the plea that he was on his way to chastise the Scots;
but he gave his promise to do what was desired of him on his return,
and the Bishop of Durham and three barons made oath in his name to that
effect.
On his return from Scotland, Edward met his parliament, which was
assembled in March, 1299, at Westminster. He now endeavoured by every
means in his power to gain time, and when closely pressed, he quitted
London, as it were by stealth. The barons, however, were not to be
thus defeated, and having followed him, and urged the fulfilment of
his solemn obligations Edward found himself compelled to assent. By
an extraordinary act of craft, however, he took measures to evade the
provisions of the document by adding a clause at the end, "saving the
rights of the crown," which destroyed the value of the concession, and
subverted the meaning of what had gone before. The cunning of the king
had, in this instance, overreached itself. With few exceptions, the
barons rose up in indignation, and quitted the assembly and the city,
with their retainers. Edward now proposed, as he had done before, to
secure the goodwill of the people; and to this end he directed the
sheriffs of London to call a meeting of the citizens, and to read to
them the new confirmation of the charters. The people assembled in large
numbers in St. Paul's Churchyard, and listened attentively. It appears
that they possessed more intelligence than the king gave them credit
for, since, after having applauded the earlier clauses, they no sooner
heard the last, than they gave every demonstration of indignation, and
proved that they fully comprehended its unworthy purport. The king now
perceived that the country was unanimously against him; and having called
his Parliament once more together, he threw out the obnoxious clause, and
granted all the concessions that had been demanded. There was, in fact,
no alternative, if Edward desired to maintain his position and authority.
Four years later, the king sent to the reigning Pope, Clement V., to
request a dispensation absolving him from the oaths he had taken, and to
which he said he had been driven by a traitorous conspiracy. The Pope,
however, evaded the request; and when the further solicitations of Edward
failed to produce a more decided effect, he found himself compelled to
respect those grants which he had made law.
Philip the Fair, who was inferior to Edward in warlike accomplishments,
was his equal in craft and cruelty. After the English king quitted
Flanders, in 1297, he had no opportunity of conducting further measures
of importance in that country, which during the succeeding years was
overrun by the French troops. In the year 1302 the Flemings rose against
their oppressors, and gained a complete victory over them at Courtrai.
That the "rabble of Flemings," as the French called them, should thus
overcome the chivalry of France, was a disgrace not to be endured; but
while the nobles were panting for a knightly vengeance, their king was
planning a safer and bloodier retaliation. For some time previously
Edward had determined to abandon his ally, the Count of Flanders, and
to regain possession of Guienne from the King of France by treaty. The
Pope was now appealed to, and he proposed an alliance of marriage between
the two kings. Edward, who was now a widower, was to marry Margaret,
the sister of Philip, and the Prince of Wales was to marry Isabella,
the daughter of the French king. Such an alliance had already been
contemplated with satisfaction by the negotiators. It is true that there
were difficulties in the way. Edward had sworn solemnly to marry his son
to Philippa, daughter of the Count of Flanders; he had also pledged his
honour that he would never make truce with the French king without the
entire concurrence of his ally. But these obstacles served only to delay
the progress of the negotiations for a few months. Edward broke off his
solemn engagements abroad as readily as he threw aside his oaths at home;
and in September, 1299, the double marriage took place, the son being
contracted to Isabella by proxy at the same time that his father was
married to Margaret.
A peace between France and England necessarily attended the conclusion
of this alliance; and it was agreed that injuries remaining unredressed
on either side should be compensated for, and that the possession of
Guienne should be settled by negotiation; pending which, Philip gave
several towns in Gascony to be held as security by the Pope. In these
arrangements the French king entirely disregarded his alliance with the
Scots; and neither in this treaty, nor at its subsequent ratification,
were they in any way mentioned. On the 20th of May, 1301, the treaty
was formally concluded. Edward regained possession of the province of
Guienne, and, in return, he gave up the Flemings into the hands of their
enraged enemies. A few months later, the French barbarously revenged
themselves for their former defeat at Courtrai, by attacking the Flemish
peasants of the district of Lille, and putting them to death in what
was a massacre rather than a battle. A year previously, Count Guy of
Flanders had fallen into the hands of Philip, by whom the noble old man
was subjected to cruelty, which soon resulted in his death. He died in
his prison at Compiègne at the age of eighty-one.
Having concluded peace with France, Edward immediately turned his
attention to Scotland. Notwithstanding the decisive victory of Falkirk,
and the apparent surrender of the cause by Wallace, the subjugation of
that country was far from being effected. There still existed in every
quarter a determined spirit of hostility to the English, kept alive
by the memory of the recent defeats, and not less so of the preceding
triumphs. In 1300 the king made an incursion into Annandale, which he
laid waste, and received the speedy submission of Galloway. The Scots,
who were making zealous efforts to secure assistance from foreign courts,
thought it prudent to make a truce, which was ratified in November at
Dumfries, and was to continue in force till the summer of the following
year. Their applications, however, to the Continental courts received but
little encouragement. Philip of France, as was to be expected after so
recent a pacification with the English monarch, rejected their suit. The
only person who seems to have responded to their appeal was Pope Boniface
VIII. He wrote a letter to Edward, entreating him to put an end to his
ravages and oppressions in Scotland, and adducing a great number of
historical proofs of the ancient and unquestionable independence of that
kingdom--proofs with which, no doubt, the Scottish envoys had taken care
to supply him. With a singular inconsistency, however, the Pope concluded
his letter by asserting that Scotland was, in reality, a fief of the Holy
See. This claim, never before heard of, and in utter contradiction to the
whole tenor of the Papal brief, called forth the most earnest reply from
Edward, who set about and constructed a catalogue of sovereign claims on
Scotland, from the fabled age of Brutus, the Trojan, who, he asserted,
founded the British monarchy in the days of Eli and Samuel, down to those
of King Arthur, the hero of romance rather than of history; concluding
with the full and absolute homage done by William of Scotland to Henry
II. of England; taking care to omit all mention of the formal abolition
of that deed by Richard Cœur-de-Lion, who had frankly pronounced it
an extorted one, and therefore invalid. This royal epistle was seconded
by a very spirited remonstrance from 104 barons, assembled by the king's
command at Lincoln, who proudly maintained the temporal independence of
both the kingdoms of Scotland and England of the see of Rome; declaring
that they had sworn to defend the king's prerogatives, and that at no
time would they permit them to be questioned.
[Illustration: PENNY OF EDWARD I.]
[Illustration: GROAT OF EDWARD I.]
[Illustration: HALFPENNY OF EDWARD I.]
These, or other arguments which do not appear on the face of history,
produced a very sudden revulsion in the Papal mind. Boniface soon after
wrote to the Scots, exhorting them to cease their opposition to "his
dearly beloved one in Christ," King Edward, and to seek forgiveness from
God for their resistance to his claims. Edward, thus sanctioned, again
advanced into Scotland in the summer of 1301, when he found the country
laid waste before him by the politic Scots, and was obliged to take up
his quarters, on the approach of winter, in Linlithgow, where he built
a castle and kept his Christmas. Another truce was entered into the
following spring, and the king then left John Segrave as his lieutenant
in Scotland, at the head of an army of 20,000 men. Early in the year
1303, the Scots having appointed John Comyn regent of the kingdom, he,
with Sir Simon Fraser, not contented with maintaining the independence of
the northern parts, descended into the southern counties, which Edward
imagined were wholly in his power. His general, John Segrave, marched out
to repulse them; and on the morning of the 24th of February, near Roslin,
he came up with them. He had divided his army into three sections: the
first division, being suddenly attacked by Comyn and Sir Simon Fraser,
was speedily routed and, in its flight, coming in contact with the second
division, threw that also into confusion. This division however, made
a stout resistance, but was eventually beaten, whereupon it fell back
on the third division and communicated its disorder to it; so that the
whole force was completely put to flight, and pursued with heavy loss.
The English commander himself was taken prisoner, being dangerously
wounded in the very first encounter. Sixteen knights and thirty esquires
were found amongst the captives, including the brother and the son of
the general. It is reported that the Scots were compelled to slaughter
a great number of their prisoners, in order to engage with safety the
successive bands that they came up with. They boasted of thus achieving
three victories in one day. The _éclat_ of this brilliant action turned
the popular tide at once in their favour. The people everywhere came
forward to assist them. The regent very soon made himself master of all
the fortresses in the south, and once more the country was lost to the
English.
[Illustration: DUNFERMLINE ABBEY AND CHURCH.]
This sudden and complete prostration of all his ambitious hopes, and
reversal of his victories, effectually aroused the martial king. He
assembled a great army, supported by a formidable fleet; and by rapid
marches, at the head of his hosts, he appeared before Roxburgh on the
21st of May, and reached Edinburgh on the 4th of June. His progress was
marked by the most terrible devastation. He came upon the devoted country
like a lion exasperated by wounds of the hunters. No foe could be found
able to resist him, and he ravaged the open country, and laid in ruins
the towns and villages, his fleet supplying his destroying forces with
abundant provisions.
Having made a short pause in Edinburgh, to leave all secure there, he
again advanced, with desolating speed and vengeance, through Linlithgow
and Clackmannan to Perth, and thence to Aberdeen, and so on to Moray.
He posted himself in the strong fortress of Lochendorb, situated on an
island in the midst of a Morayshire loch; and there he remained till
the autumn, employed in subduing and receiving the homage of the great
Highland chiefs. "Tradition," says Tytler, "still connects the ruins of
Lochendorb, after the lapse of more than five hundred years, with the
name of the great English king."
On his return southward Edward met with a stout resistance from the
strong castle of Brechin, defended by Sir Thomas Maule, which was only
compelled to open its gates to the conqueror after the death of its
valiant commander. The king took up his quarters for the winter at
Dunfermline. He was careful this time not to withdraw to England, even
during the inactivity of the winter, nor to trust the important charge
of the kingdom's safety to any deputy. His soldiers are said to have
amused themselves during this time in destroying the magnificent abbey
of the Benedictines; "a building," says Matthew of Westminster, "so
spacious, that three kings, with all their retinues, might have been
conveniently lodged there." The remains of this noble abbey, including
the parish church, still attest its original splendour; and the Scots
regarded it with high veneration as the resting-place of no less than
eight of their ancient kings, and five of their queens.
The last remains of the army of Scotland assembled to defend the castle
of Stirling, that being the only stronghold which now remained in
Scottish hands; but they were speedily dispersed by the English cavalry.
Soon after this, Comyn, the regent and chief commander of the forces,
came in and made his submission to the royal commissioners at Strathorde
in Fifeshire; and his example was followed by all the nobility. These,
with a few exceptions, as Wishart, Bishop of Glasgow, Sir John Foulis the
Steward, and a few others, were allowed to retain their lives and lands
subject only to such penalties and terms of banishment as the king might
choose to impose. During Lent a Parliament was held at St. Andrews when
Sir William Wallace, Sir Simon Fraser, and the governor of Stirling, were
summoned to surrender themselves on penalty of outlawry, if failing to
appear. All these persons, not even excepting Fraser, accepted the terms
offered to them. The brave Sir William only refused to put himself into
the power of the English king, except on a written guarantee of life and
estate, signed and sealed by the monarch himself; and his caution was
at once justified by the event, for the king, on hearing this, cursed
Wallace and all who supported him, and set a reward of 300 marks upon his
head. The great patriot had for a time escaped from the snare, and once
more retreated to his hiding-places in the forest of Dunfermline.
Edward now turned his whole attention to the reduction of the castle
of Stirling. This royal fortress, placed like an eagle's eyrie on its
precipitous rock, was defended by one of the most stout-hearted men of
Scotland, Sir William Oliphant, with the insignificant garrison of 140
men; yet, for about three months, that is, from the 22nd of April to the
20th of July, did they withstand the whole force of the English king.
Edward directed all the operations against it in person, and brought
a number of engines which threw immense stones and darts upon it. He
sent to England to collect all kinds of missiles, which were discharged
against the place; but it was not yielded till the garrison was reduced
to the extremity of famine, and the building to a mass of ruins. The
brave defenders were then compelled to surrender at discretion, for
the ruthless conqueror would grant no other terms, and were obliged to
solicit pardon and their lives on their knees--all circumstances of deep
humiliation. Their lives were given them, but they were sent to the Tower
of London and other dungeons. On marching out, it was found that thirteen
ladies, wives and sisters of the gallant officers, had shared the perils
and hardships of the siege.
Stirling reduced, there wanted only one other surrender to complete the
triumph of Edward--that of Wallace, the man who has made his name and the
noblest patriotism synonymous to all time. Edward made every exertion,
and offered high rewards for his apprehension. One Haliburton, a soldier
of the late garrison of Stirling, so far showed his unworthiness to share
in the glory of the late siege as to lend himself to this base purpose.
Sir William was surprised and conveyed to the castle of Dumbarton, and
thence carried to London in chains as a traitor, though he had never
acknowledged Edward as his sovereign, and owed him no fealty. In Stowe,
the London annalist, we can still perceive the sensation which the
arrival of this famous warrior as a captive created in the metropolis.
Crowds were assembled to gaze on him. He was conducted on horseback to
Westminster by Sir John Segrave, late governor of Scotland, by the mayor,
sheriffs, and aldermen of London, accompanied by other gentlemen; and in
Westminster Hall he was insulted by being crowned with laurel when placed
at the bar, because he had been reported to have said that he ought to
be crowned there. He was condemned as a traitor, and executed, with
every circumstance of ignominy, at the Elms in West Smithfield, on the
23rd of August, 1305. To this place he was drawn at the tails of horses;
and, after being hanged on the gallows, while he yet breathed his bowels
were taken out and burnt before his face. His head was then struck off
and his body divided into quarters, one of which was sent to be exposed
at Newcastle, another at Berwick, a third at Perth, and the fourth at
Aberdeen; his head being stuck on a pole on London Bridge. So much did
they in that day fail to realise the everlasting infamy attendant on
the unworthy treatment of the noble ones of our race--the intrepid
defenders of the liberties of their country. The barbarous policy of the
English king produced the very results which he sought to prevent. The
whole Scottish nation resented with inexpressible indignation the inhuman
outrage perpetrated on their hero. Everywhere the people burned with fury
against England, and were ready to rise at the call of another patriot.
[Illustration: THE TRIAL OF SIR WILLIAM WALLACE.
FROM THE PICTURE BY DANIEL MACLISE, R.A. IN THE GUILDHALL GALLERY.
(BY PERMISSION OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF LONDON).]
Such a man was not long in presenting himself. Robert Bruce had not
forgotten the words of fire which Wallace had addressed to him across
the Carron, as he was in slow and reluctant retreat from the battle of
Falkirk. He remembered how he had called upon him to come forth from
crouching to the tyrant; to come forth from servile submission to a
glorious independence; to remember the royalty of his birth, the dignity
of his family, the genius and the energies which God and Nature had
conferred upon him, and the profound responsibility which these had
laid him under to his country. He recalled the majestic figure of that
illustrious man as he bade him behold the glorious prize which Heaven
itself had set before him, the most glorious which could possibly be
awarded to man--that of ending the sufferings of his country; that of
converting its groans, its tears of blood and shame, into cries of
exultation, and of placing his native land on the firm basis of perfect
independence.
The last spur was now given to the spirit of Bruce. The words of Wallace
to him were become so many sacred commands. Wallace had declared that he
himself lived only to defend the liberties of his people; and he prayed
that his life might terminate when he was reduced to wear the chains
of the tyrant. He had been compelled to wear them by treason, and he
had perished in his greatness. No indignities, no humiliations, could
pluck from him the immortality of the martyr--the beautiful halo of a
nation's homage. The die was cast for Robert Bruce. The spirit of Wallace
had fallen upon him; henceforth he must spurn the blandishments of the
English king, and tread the same path to death or victory.
And, indeed, Bruce had much to risk as well as to aspire to. His father
had remained to the last attached to the English interests. On his death,
in 1304, Edward had fully invested him with all his hereditary rights,
titles, and estates, both in England and Scotland. He had all that the
most ambitious nobleman could desire, short of the crown itself. The host
of conflicting and, for the most part, unworthy competitors for the
Scottish sceptre had afforded him at least plausible ground for standing
aloof and leaning towards the English power which held them in check.
He had accordingly been honoured when other of the greatest men of the
realm had been fined, mulcted, and punished. He had been entrusted with
considerable commands; amongst others, with the important fortress of
Kildrummie, in Aberdeenshire. But now things were come to such a pitch
between the English king and his country that there could be no longer
any wavering in the bosom of a true man. Edward appeared resolved to
reduce Scotland to the condition of a conquered province. If he set up a
nominal king in place of Balliol, it would be Comyn, whom he regarded as
a traitor. It was time to reveal himself as his country's champion.
Edward having once more finished his work of subjugation, and all
Scotland lying prostrate at his feet, he now set to work about the
serious task of so modelling the government and administration of the
country that it should most completely remain in his grasp as a permanent
portion of the realm. For this purpose he appointed a council, so-called,
of the Scottish nation. This was to consist of two bishops, two abbots,
two earls, two barons, and two representatives of the boroughs, who
were to assemble in London, and to sit in conjunction with twenty
commissioners of the English Parliament, to frame a constitution for the
conquered territory. But this council, as was intended, carried things
with a high hand against the people of Scotland. It cleared away all the
Scottish laws and customs at a sweep, and substituted English ones in
their stead. It destroyed all ancient monuments which perpetuated the
spirit of nationality. Whatever histories or records had escaped the
former search of the king were now ruthlessly destroyed; and the work of
utterly rooting out the Scottish name and institutions was going on, when
the whole was suddenly brought to a stand by a fresh and more determined
insurrection.
[Illustration: WALLACE ON HIS WAY TO WESTMINSTER HALL. (_See p._ 354.)]
The resolve of Bruce to throw off all disguise and declare himself openly
for his country had been accelerated by the treason of Comyn, and six
months had scarcely passed over the bloody relics of Wallace when the
Scots were up in arms again, round the champion he had himself invoked
to assume that post. In June, 1305--two months before the execution of
Wallace--it appears that Bruce had made a secret compact with William
de Lamberton, the Bishop of St. Andrews, of mutual aid and support.
This contract, still preserved in the "Annals" of Lord Hailes, had for
its ultimate object the claims of Bruce on the crown. Comyn had come by
some means to the knowledge of this league; had pretended to join in
it; but had betrayed it to the king. Bruce was marked for due vengeance
by Edward, who only waited for an opportunity also to seize his three
brothers, resident in Scotland. But through the friendship of the Earl of
Gloucester, the son-in-law of the king, Bruce was apprised of his danger,
the earl sending him a pair of gilt spurs, and twelve silver pennies,
under pretence that he had borrowed them of him. Bruce caught the meaning
of the device, and resolved to escape at once. To this purpose, tradition
says, he had his horse shod backwards so as to deceive those who might
attempt to trace his route, for the ground was then covered with snow.
Bruce arrived safely in a few days at his castle of Lochmaben, in
Annandale, the chief seat of his family; and here he found, fortunately,
a great number of the Scottish nobility assembled, and in the midst of
them no other than John Comyn, his professed friend, but treacherous,
secret foe. If he had wanted any evidences of the perfidy of this man,
he had them now in his pocket; for on the way from town he had met a
courier bearing letters from Comyn to King Edward, urging the absolute
necessity of Bruce's instant death or imprisonment. This man he slew, on
the principle "that dead men tell no tales, and carry no messages"; and
the fatal secret now in his possession presents us with a certain clue to
the motive of a much more startling act which he perpetrated soon after.
[Illustration: CAPTURE OF BRUCE'S WIFE AND DAUGHTER AT TAIN. (_See p._
358.)]
These legends were probably invented to clear the fair fame of Bruce.
All that is certainly known is that the two men met at Dumfries, that
Bruce demanded a conference, and that he followed Comyn, after the party
had gone, into the cloisters of the Minorites, and ran him through the
body. Hurrying from the convent, he cried "To horse!" and Sir Roger
Kirkpatrick, one of his attendants, seeing him greatly agitated, demanded
whether the traitor was slain. "I doubt so," replied Bruce. "You doubt!"
exclaimed Kirkpatrick; "I will make sure;" and so saying, he rushed
into the monastery, stabbed the Comyn to the heart, and killed also
his kinsman, Sir Robert Comyn, who strove to defend him. From this
circumstance the Kirkpatrick family adopted the crest of a bloody hand
holding a dagger, and the motto, "I mak sicker" ("I make sure").
The die was now cast. There was no retreat, no reconciliation after
that terrible deed. Bruce called his staunchest friends hastily around
him; they were few, but devoted spirits. The Bishops of St. Andrews and
Glasgow, the Abbot of Scone, the four brothers of Bruce, his nephew,
Thomas Randolph, his brother-in-law Christopher Seton, and some ten or
twelve young men, gathered at the call. Bruce flew in various directions,
exciting his countrymen to arms. He attacked and defeated the English,
took some of their forts, and drove them from the open country.
Edward, on receiving this news, at once prepared to take signal vengeance
on the insurgents, and this time to give the nation such a castigation
as should effectually quell its spirit. Not waiting for his own slower
movements, he sent on Aylmer de Valence, the Earl of Pembroke, with a
small army, to check the spread of the disaffection. He met with Bruce
near Methven, in Perthshire, on the 19th of June, and, surprising the
Scottish forces, put them utterly to the rout. Bruce was three times
unhorsed in the battle, and escaped with the greatest danger. His
friends the Earl of Athol, Simon Fraser, and Sir Christopher Seton, were
taken prisoners and executed. Amongst the prisoners was also his nephew
Randolph. His wife and his daughter Marjory, having left the fortress
of Kildrummie, were seized by the Earl of Ross in the sanctuary of St.
Duthac at Tain; the knights who attended them were put to death, and they
themselves were sent to England, where they remained prisoners eight
years. His brother Nigel, much beloved by the people, was compelled to
surrender Kildrummie, and was also hanged and afterwards beheaded at
Berwick, with many other knights and gentlemen. He himself with great
difficulty made his escape into the mountains of Athol, with about five
hundred followers, the sole remnant of the army with which he had hoped
to redeem Scotland. For many months he and this little band wandered
amongst the hills in the utmost wretchedness, destitute of shelter,
and often of food. A price was set upon their heads; their enemies,
the Comyns, infuriated by the slaughter of their chief, and now in the
ascendant as allies of England, pursued them with vindictive rage,
driving them farther and farther into the labyrinth of the hills. On
reaching the borders of Argyll, they encountered the Lord of Lorn, who
had married an aunt of the Comyn, at the head of 1,000 men who occupied
a narrow defile. A desperate conflict took place, and Bruce and his
followers narrowly escaped extermination. Finally, Bruce found means to
pass over to Carrick.
Whatever was the momentary despondency and misery of Bruce, he issued
forth early in the spring of 1307, in order to make one more effort for
the expulsion of the English. His followers amounted only to 300; and he
was nearly betrayed by the unexplained lighting of a fire upon a hill,
the very signal which he had agreed upon if it were safe to approach.
As he drew near the landing-place, he was met by the information that
the English were in full possession of Carrick, and Lord Percy, with a
strong garrison, held Turnberry Castle. Bruce was thunderstruck at the
intelligence; but making a sudden attack on a party of English that lay
close at hand, he created a momentary panic, and, under advantage of
that, made good his retreat into the mountains. The war became desultory
and undecided; and two of Bruce's brothers, Thomas and Alexander, as
they were bringing over a band of Irish adventurers to his assistance,
were taken prisoners by Duncan M'Dowal, a chief of Galloway, and being
conducted to King Edward, were instantly ordered for execution.
Fortune still continued to pursue Bruce. He could only preserve himself
by hiding in the hills and wastes of Galloway, till, on the 10th of
May, he succeeded at Loudon Hill in completely defeating the Earl of
Pembroke. Three days after, he again defeated the English under the Earl
of Gloucester, and pursuing them to the castle of Ayr there besieged them.
Meantime, Edward had been advancing by slow marches northward. Though
it is not distinctly stated by the historians, there is little doubt
that his health was giving way when he first received at Winchester
the news of the Scottish rising. He had immediately sent off the Earl
of Pembroke, and prepared to follow himself. He knighted his son, the
Prince of Wales, with great ceremony, preparatory to his taking part in
the expedition, who, in turn, knighted, on the 22nd of May, 270 young
men of noble family. At the feast given on this occasion, in the Palace
of Westminster, Edward made a solemn vow to God to avenge the death of
Comyn, and punish the insurgent Scots; and at this time he conjured his
son, and the whole company, in the event of his death, to keep his body
unburied until this vow was accomplished. Thus he had the probability of
death in his thoughts at the outset of this expedition, and he advanced
in it with the tardiness of a sick man. It was the commencement of July
when he arrived at Carlisle, where the news of Bruce's fresh successes,
and the defeat and close besiegement of his generals, had the effect of
rousing his irritable temperament to a desperate effort. He threw aside
the litter in which he had hitherto travelled, mounted his horse, and
having reached, on the 7th of July, the village of Burgh-by-Sands, he
sank completely exhausted, with his latest breath, and with a tenacity
of purpose characteristic of the man, enjoining his successor, through
the ministers who surrounded him, never to cease his efforts till he had
thoroughly subjugated Scotland.
Thus terminated the remarkable career of this truly great man, in the
sixty-ninth year of his age, and the thirty-fifth of his reign. Since the
days of Richard I. there had been no martial monarch of equal bravery and
ability; since those of Henry II. none who had the same genius for civil
administration and the framing of laws and institutions which gave not
only a character to his own times, but to the ages which came after him.
Hume does not hesitate to assert that "the enterprises of this prince,
and the projects which he formed and brought near to a conclusion, were
more prudent, more regularly conducted, and more advantageous to the
solid interests of his kingdom, than those which were undertaken in any
reign, either of his ancestors or successors." However we may be disposed
to modify this praise in regard to what Edward actually carried out,
there can be no question that his perception of the vast advantages which
would result to every part of the island from its consolidation into one
kingdom was evidence of a great and comprehensive genius; and the ardour,
based on an indomitable spirit of perseverance, with which he pursued
that great end, is equal evidence of a mind, not only of the clearest
acumen, but of the loftiest qualities of human nature. He succeeded in
winning to the English nation, and amalgamating with it for ever, the
principality of Wales; and if he failed in effecting the annexation of
Scotland, it was only through being actuated more by the military spirit
of the times than by those moral and political influences which later
generations have discovered to be the most effectual. It was beyond the
intellectual horizon of the age to aim at the union of the kingdoms
by the careful demonstration of the greater mutual advantages, and of
the infinitely expanded capabilities of glory and power to Britain as a
whole, which were applied successfully four centuries afterwards.
By seeking to accomplish the union of England and Scotland by the forces
most familiar to the spirit of that era--that is, by the power of arms
and numerical ascendency--his scheme, grand and beneficent in itself,
necessarily failed. The plan was premature; it existed in the nature of
things, but it lacked that philosophical regard to national character and
feeling, and that tone of mutual forbearance, which it required centuries
yet to ripen. The rude idea of bearing down a brave and high-spirited
people by armed power and arbitrary will could not but irritate those
on whom the attempt was made; and it then became a question of moral
forces, and of the natural defences of the country, whether it should
succeed. It succeeded in Wales, though after a brave resistance, because
there was no proportion between the extent and the physical resources of
the two countries. It failed in Scotland, because the areas of the two
contending kingdoms, though greatly unequal, were yet more approximate;
and because the martial qualities and spirit of proud independence had
been long fostered in Scotland by the arduous contests of different clans
and parties. The Scots were a hardy and an heroically brave people,
with their magnificent mountains at their back; and, in their struggles
with the ponderous power of England, discovered an invincible vigour,
not only of resistance, but of resilience. Though hurled violently to
the earth time after time, they rose, Antæus-like, as if with augmented
strength and freshness. While the two nations, therefore, heated by
contest and the savage warfare of that age, learned to hate one another
with a vigorous and long-continuing hatred, they learned also to know
each other's strength, and inwardly to respect it. Therefore, after the
battle of Bannockburn, English dreams of the subjugation of Scotland
began to wane, and though there still were many bloody wars between the
two nations, there ceased to exist on each side the hope of conquest by
mere force of arms.
In these conflicts, good as well as evil was elicited, and the bravery
and spirit of dominion which distinguish united Great Britain no doubt
draw a large amount of their life from the mutual struggles and rivalries
of the two peoples. In the very attempts, therefore, of Edward to add
Scotland to the kingdom by force, as he did Wales, he may be said to
have laid the foundation of much of the common greatness of the nation;
but from incidental causes arising out of his military attempts, both
in Scotland and France, and still more from his directly constructive
talent and wisdom, we owe to him much which we are apt to lose sight
of in the blaze of his wars and expeditions. He was as remarkable for
his sturdy maintenance of the laws as for his military ambition. Simple
and frugal himself, he was ever ready to support useful enterprises. He
was liberal of his treasures on such occasions. Easy and affable to his
courtiers and dependents, he was yet severe in restraining licence and
punishing offenders. His fine person and skill in military exercises made
him popular with the people, when he did not press too heavily on them
by his expensive wars; and thus, relying on his sense of justice, they
were not backward in expressing their opinions, as we have seen. Though
he was extremely cruel to the Jews--a feature of his character springing
from the prejudices of his age--and often forgot the magnanimity of a
great monarch in his resentment against those who successfully thwarted
his plans, as in the case of Sir William Wallace and others, his sense of
justice in his calmer moments and in his peaceful pursuits was so great,
that he not only encouraged an honourable administration of the laws, but
corrected and amended them, and added so many new ones, in accordance
with the progress of society, that he has been termed the English
Justinian. Sir Edward Coke, in his "Institutes," says that the statutes
passed in his reign were so numerous and excellent that they actually
deserved the name of establishments, being more constant, standing, and
durable than any made from his reign to the time of that great lawyer;
and Sir Matthew Hale pays him the like compliment, declaring that down to
his own day they had scarcely received any addition.
Edward I. was the greatest of our mediæval lawgivers, and has been well
called by Bishop Stubbs "the definer of the English constitution."
Following in the steps of Henry II., he aimed at giving equal security
to all, to humble the great nobles and the great churchmen, and to
elevate the third estate of the realm--the commons--as a counterpoise
to the other two. The spirit of his legislation can best be seen in
the provisions of the most important statutes of the reign. That known
as the First Statute of Westminster, passed by his first Parliament in
1275, revived and re-established the former laws and customs of the land.
It is, says Bishop Stubbs, "almost a code in itself." Common right
was to be done to all, without respect of persons; elections were to
be free; and the provisions of the Great Charter concerning excessive
fines, abuses of wardship, excessive demands for feudal aids, and so
forth, were re-enacted. The Statute of Winchester, passed in 1285, was
a complement to the Assize of Arms of Henry II., and, besides ordering
and defining what kind of arms each class of the people should bear for
the defence of the land, made admirable arrangements for the indictment
and pursuit of felons and robbers, the policing of the walled towns, and
the clearing of the edges of public roads to prevent them from becoming
the lurking-places of highwaymen. The Statute, known, from its opening
words, as that of _Quia Emptores_, passed in 1290, enacted that in all
future transfers of land the tenant should hold, not from the alienor,
but from his superior lord. It thus played into the hands of the king,
who was the landlord _par excellence_, and established a numerous class
of independent gentry, holding their estates directly from the crown. The
second Statute of Westminster, called that _De donis conditionalibus_,
established the power of entail, and stopped the life-tenant from
alienating an estate at his will. Another important statute of the reign
was that of mortmain, or _De Religiosis_, passed in 1279. This was a
distinct blow at the Church, which had gained great wealth by the custom
which prevailed of giving property to the Church, and receiving it back
again as a tenant of the Church. It was then said to pass into a dead
hand--"in mortuam manum"--and the lay over-lord was deprived of his
feudal dues. This practice was now forbidden under penalty of forfeiture
to the next superior lord, and if he failed to insist upon his right
within a year, the right passed to _his_ over-lord, and so on to the king.
Edward's chief title, however, to the admiration and affection of
posterity is that of the creator of the House of Commons. He has a
formidable rival in Simon de Montfort; but it has been cogently pointed
out that Simon's important Parliament of 1265, though perfect in its
elements, was in reality a packed assembly, only the supporters of the
existing government being summoned to attend it. It is unnecessary to
say that neither Edward nor De Montfort created their assemblies at a
stroke; they merely added the finishing touches to institutions which
had been gradually growing to maturity, and which had their roots far
back in the past. Of the machinery of the Anglo-Saxon polity, by far the
most complete, and the only part that could be said to be in any sense
of the word representative, was that which existed locally--the courts
of the hundred and the shire. The witena-gemot was, in its latter days,
at all events, a council of magnates and royal officers, and to trace
any analogy or direct continuity between it and the House of Commons
is misleading in the extreme. It played, however, an important part
in the history of the House of Lords. William I., true to the policy
of representing himself as the legitimate successor of the Confessor,
made no very violent changes in the institutions of his new dominions.
The witena-gemot was continued, under the name of the Great Council.
Sometimes these assemblies were really national, as, for instance, in
1086 and 1116, when all landowners were summoned of whomsoever they held
land; but as a rule they were composed of the great territorial nobles,
both laymen and ecclesiastics. The power of these bodies, however, in the
presence of such despotic monarchs as William and his sons, was little
more than formal, and the convocation of such unwieldy gatherings as
fully attended councils must have been, gradually became an expedient to
which recourse was had on special occasions only.
[Illustration: SOUTH TRANSEPT, WESTMINSTER ABBEY.]
By the time of Henry II. the elements of the Council had grown to
be completely modified. The accepted usage of his reign was to
summon the whole body of tenants holding directly from the crown
(the tenants-in-chief); but except on special occasions, none but
the magnates, the bishops, earls, and royal officers--"the greater
barons"--were likely to attend. The Council gradually acquired
organisation. We learn from Magna Charta that the "greater barons"
received special summonses, addressed to them individually, while
the "lesser barons" were summoned by a general writ, addressed to the
sheriffs of each county. As a rule, the latter probably found that the
trouble and expense of attendance were greater than their legislative
zeal. This was the assembly that gave us the Great Charter, and in
which during the reign of Henry III. the opposition to the royal will
gained consistency and purpose under Simon de Montfort. The offshoots
of the Great Council are important. The _Curia Regis_, or king's court,
originally a committee of the Great Council, became first a small circle
of confidential advisers, and then developed, under Henry I., into a high
court of justice, with its two courts of the Exchequer and the King's
Bench. The necessity of a more intimate body of ministers to advise the
king upon knotty points continued, and by a process, which is exceedingly
obscure, the _Royal Council_, known also as the "Perpetual" or "Ordinary"
Council, was brought into being. Its chief feature was its permanence,
and its importance dates from the minority of Henry III. It was in this
body that the unpopular foreign advisers exercised their influence, and
against which the majority of the Great Council fought. It continued to
grow in importance until it developed into that powerful body, the _Privy
Council_, of the era of the sovereigns of the House of Lancaster.
While the Great Council and the Royal Council were acquiring strength
and authority, the idea of popular representation by means of organised
estates was gradually assuming shape. The election of a few to represent
the wants and aspirations of the many was by no means unknown in
Anglo-Saxon times. It was, for instance, the custom of the reeve and four
best men of each township to attend the county court; but there was no
such body as a representative national deliberative body in existence.
Parliament, in the words of Bishop Stubbs, is "the concentration of all
the constituents of the shiremote in a central assembly." The Great
Council contained the higher clergy and the baronage; the work was
obviously to be completed by the addition of the lower clergy and the
commons. Taxation was the spur which roused the nation to political
life. It was felt, as the old legal maxim had it, that "what touched
all should be allowed of all." The royal wants rapidly necessitated new
sources of revenue, and so money was raised from personal property, or
"movables." The first of these taxes was the Saladin tithe, imposed in
1188, and it soon became evident that the methods in vogue to obtain
the consent of the taxed--such as the selection of a body of twelve men
bound by oath, from the community of each shire to treat with the king
or his representative--were slow and uncertain. Accordingly an important
step was taken in 1213 when the Great Councils are found to contain other
than their usual elements, one summoned to St. Albans being attended by
men chosen from the towns, that to Oxford by men chosen from the shires.
Again, in 1254, the sheriffs were directed to see that their several
shires returned two knights, to settle what aid they were willing to give
to the king; and similar instances occur during the intervening years,
both sides being anxious to strengthen their case by an appeal to popular
sympathy. The first instance of a combination of the representatives
of the towns with those of the counties is Simon de Montfort's famous
Parliament of 1265, which was attended by one hundred and seventeen
dignified clergymen, twenty-three lay nobles, two men summoned from
each shire through the sheriff, and two men summoned from each city
and borough. It cannot, however, as we have seen, be regarded as a
perfect Parliament. During the next thirty years there are many recorded
instances of these immature assemblies. For instance, in 1282, there were
two provincial Parliaments--one at York, and one at Northampton--in which
the lower clergy and the commons were represented, but from which the lay
nobility were absent. Again the gathering at Acton Burnell, held to see
that David of Wales was tried, contained no clergy, and representatives
only of twenty-one cities and boroughs. At last, in 1295, Edward I.,
surrounded by difficulties and vexations, resolved to throw himself
upon the united nation. In October he issued writs for an assembly,
which was a complete image of the nation, and in November it met. It was
composed of ninety-seven of the greater clergy, the bishops, abbots, and
priors; sixty-five earls and barons; thirty-nine judges and proctors,
representing the lower clergy; and representatives of the counties,
cities, and boroughs, summoned through the sheriff. It is most probable
that the representatives of the shire were elected in the full county
court, while the proceedings in the case of borough members seem to
have been extremely various. No details exist of the earlier elections,
except in the case of the city of London, and when we come to later times
freedom of election had become seriously impaired through royal and
aristocratic influence and the political lethargy of the citizens.
It was some time before the new deliberative body exercised all the
powers which had belonged to its predecessor, the Grand Council. One
of them, indeed--the judicial--it has taken care never to assume, and
it was some time before the commons had any share in legislation.
Summoned primarily for purposes of taxation, they at first confined
themselves to that important function. In other respects the magnates
were summoned, _ad tractandum_, to treat; the commons, _ad consulendum
et consentiendum_, for their counsel and consent--that is, they were
regarded as having inferior privileges. Nor were the elements of the
Parliament at first by any means fixed. It seemed possible in the reign
of Edward I. that there would be sub-estates of merchants and lawyers,
as well as the three great estates of clergy, nobles, and commons; but
these abnormal bodies soon ceased to have a separate existence. Nor was
it clear how the line of cleavage would lie. The knights of the shire
showed a disposition to coalesce with the barons, the representatives
of the towns forming a second body, and the clergy a third. Eventually,
however, the knights of the shire threw in their lot with the town
members; the upper clergy formed a joint estate with the barons, of
lords spiritual and temporal; while the lower clergy, following an
unwise policy of isolation, preferred to tax themselves in convocation,
and withdrew altogether from Parliament. The House of Lords, originally
consisting simply of lay magnates, who received special writs of summons
when their services were required, was rapidly converted into an assembly
of the hereditary counsellors of the crown, whose title, created by
royal patent, remained secure to them and their heirs for ever. This
process took less than fifty years; and Parliaments, being summoned with
regularity, became an essential feature in the constitution, and acquired
a formidable defence of privilege.
All these circumstances marked the reign of Edward I. as one of the most
important in our history. The organic principles which he introduced into
the constitution struck deep and indestructible roots there, and have, by
their permanent and progressive operation, made us in a great measure, as
a nation, what we are.
Edward had a numerous family by his two wives, but a great many of his
children died in their infancy. By his first wife, Eleanor of Castile,
Edward, his heir and successor, was the only son, out of four, who
survived him. Of eleven daughters by the same queen, four only appear
to have lived. Joan was married, first to the Earl of Gloucester, and
after his death to Ralph de Monthermer. Margaret married John, Duke of
Brabant. Elizabeth married, first John, Count of Holland; and secondly,
the Earl of Hereford. By his second wife, Margaret of France, Edward had
a daughter who died in infancy, and two sons--Thomas, created Earl of
Norfolk and Mareschal of England; and Edmund, made Earl of Kent by his
brother, Edward II.