Robert Mylne, Wryter in Ed[r .], 1709: Advocates Library. Mr Macmath,
who has come to my aid here, writes: “So far as I can make out, this
catalogue contains no MSS. It is in two divisions: 1st, Printed Books;
2d, Pamphlets. The following is in the second division, and I
understand the reference to be, year of publication, volume, or bundle
of pamphlets, number of piece in bundle or volume:
“Harlaw The Battle yrof An: 1411 ... 1668, 79, 5.”
Mylne died in 1747, at the age, it is said, of 103 or 105: [Maidment],
A Book of Scotish Pasquils, p. 423.
Footnote 184:
He talks like a canny packman:
I wist nocht quha was fae or freind;
Yet quietly I did me carrie,
. . . . . . .
And thair I had nae tyme to tairie,
For bissiness in Aberdene.
Footnote 185:
So with The Battle of Balrinnes and The Haughs of Cromdale. The first
line of The Battle of Balrinnes is, ‘Betuixt Dunother and Aberdein.’
Footnote 186:
Not only were these long and affectionately remembered, but their
heirs were exempted from certain feudal taxes, because the defeat of
the Celts was regarded as a national deliverance: Burton’s History,
II, 394.
Footnote 187:
A macaronic ascribed to Drummond of Hawthornden.
Interea ante alios dux piperlarius heros
Præcedens, magnamque gestans cum burdine pipam,
Incipit Harlai cunctis sonare Batellum.
(Poems, Maitland Club, p. 413, after the first
dated edition of 1684.)
Footnote 188:
3^2. Away and away and away, #e#, #f#, #i#, #k#. 12^1. The first that
fired it was the French, #f#, #g#, #h#. 12^4. were forced to flee,
#f#, #i#, #m# (first to flee, #e#). 14^3. in all French land, #e#,
#f#, #g#, (in our) #h#, #m#. Etc.
Footnote 189:
English balls again in #m#, tennis-balls in #i#, #k#.
Footnote 190:
Whose work was printed in 1850, ed. Benjamin Williams. I am for the
most part using Sir Harris Nicolas’s excellent History of the Battle
of Agincourt, 2d ed., 1832, here; see pp. 8–13, 301 f.
Footnote 191:
Nicolas, p. 302 f, slightly corrected; much the same in another copy
of the poem, _ib._, Appendix, p. 69 #f.# The jest in Henry’s reply is
carried out in detail when he comes to Harfleur, _ib._, pp. 308–310.
Footnote 192:
Nicolas, p. 10, as corrected by Hales and Furnivall, II, 161, and in
one word emended by me. By several of the above writers the Dauphin
Louis is called Charles, through confusion with his father or his
younger brother.
Footnote 193:
The gifts are a whip (σκῦτος), a ball, and a casket of gold. In Julius
Valerius’s version, Müller, as above, σκῦτος is rendered habena, whip
or reins; in Leo’s Historia de Preliis, ed. Landgraf, p. 54, we have
virga for habena; in Lamprecht’s Alexander, Weismann, I, 74,
1296–1301, the habena is a pair of shoe-strings. The French romance,
Michelant, p. 52, 25 ff, to make sure, gives us both rod (verge) and
reins; the English Alexander, Weber, I, 75, 1726–28, has a top, a
scourge, and a small purse of gold. Weber has noticed the similarity
of the stories, Romances, III, 299, and he remarks that in ‘The Famous
Victories of Henry Fifth’ a carpet is sent with the tun of
tennis-balls, to intimate that the prince is fitter for carpet than
camp.
Footnote 194:
Cheshire, Lancashire, and _the Earl of_ Derby are made to carry off
the honors in ballad-histories of Bosworth and Flodden: see the
appendix to No 168. Perhaps the hand of some minstrel of the same clan
as the author or authors of those eulogies may be seen in this
passage.
Footnote 195:
Henry of Monmouth, or Memoirs of the Life and Character of Henry the
Fifth, II, 121, 197. Jewitt, Derbyshire Ballads, p. 2, says that there
is a tradition in the Peak of Derby that Henry V would take no married
man or widow’s son, when recruiting for Agincourt; but he goes on to
say that the ballad is not unfrequently sung by the hardy sons of the
Peak, which adequately accounts for the tradition.
Footnote 196:
_Cf._ #g# 6 and ‘Lord Bateman,’ 14, II, 508.
Footnote 197:
Vol. cxiii, fol. 14, Bodleian Library: cited (p. 303 f.) in Beamont’s
Annals of the Lords of Warrington, Chetham Society, 1872, where may be
found the fullest investigation yet attempted of this obscure matter.
I have freely and thankfully used chapters 17–19 of that highly
interesting work.
Footnote 198:
For Lord Grey’s making the suit void, and his lady’s resolution to be
buried near Sir John, see Beamont, p. 319 f, pp. 297–99.
Footnote 199:
Beamont, p. 304.
Footnote 200:
Pennant, in the second half of the last century, heard that both Sir
Thomas and his lady were murdered in his house by assassins, who, in
the night, crossed the moat in leathern boats. Again, Sir Peter Legh,
simply, was said to have slain Sir Thomas Butler. Sir Thomas died
quietly in his bed, and Sir Peter, who had turned priest, administered
ghostly consolations to him not long before his decease.
Footnote 201:
See Beamont, p. 308; and also p. 296 for another hypothesis.
Footnote 202:
Beamont, pp. 259, 321.
Footnote 203:
These are duly interpreted in Hales and Furnivall.
Footnote 204:
Lord Strange’s hair-breadth escape is, however, perhaps apocryphal:
see Croston, County Families of Lancashire and Cheshire, 1887, p. 25
f.
Footnote 205:
#B# begins vilely, but does not go on so ill. The forty merchants
coming ‘with fifty sail’ to King Henry on a mountain top, 3^{1,2},
requires to be taken indulgently.
Footnote 206:
“God’s curse on his hartt,’ saide William,
‘Thys day thy cote dyd on;
If it had ben no better then myne,
It had gone nere thy bone.’
(Vol. iii, 23, st. 27.)
Footnote 207:
An approach to sense may be had by reading ‘either in hach-bord or in
hull,’ that is, by striking with his beam either the side or the body
of the vessel; but I do not think so well of this change as to venture
it.
Footnote 208:
The letters granted to the Bartons authorized them to seize all
Portuguese ships till repaid 12,000 ducats of Portugal. Pinkerton,
whose excellent account, everywhere justified by documents, I have
been indebted to above, remarks: “The justice of letters of reprisal
after an interval of thirty years may be much doubted. At any rate,
one prize was sufficient for the injury, and the continuance of their
captures, and the repeated demands of our kings, even so late as 1540,
cannot be vindicated. Nay, these reprisals on Portugal were found so
lucrative that, in 1543, Arran, the regent, gave similar letters to
John Barton, grandson of the first John. In 1563 Mary formally revoked
the letters of marque to the Bartons, because they had been abused
into piracy.” Pinkerton’s History of Scotland, II, 60 f, 70.
Footnote 209:
Robert was skipper of the Great Michael, a ship two hundred and forty
feet long, with sides ten feet thick, and said to be larger and
stronger than any vessel in the navy of England or of France.
Footnote 210:
A mistake of Edmund for Edward and an anticipation. Sir Edward Howard
was not made admiral till the next year. Edmund was his younger
brother. Lesley has Edmund again; Stowe has Edward.
Footnote 211:
Britanus. “Breton, whom our chroniclers call Barton,” says Lord
Herbert of Cherbury, Life of Henry VIII, 1649, p. 15.
Footnote 212:
Another anticipation. Sir Thomas Howard became admiral only after his
brother Edward’s death, in 1513. The expedition of the Howards against
Barton appears to have been a private one, though with the consent of
the king.
Footnote 213:
The commissioners met, and “the wrongs done unto Scotland many ways,
specially of the slaughter of Andrew Barton and taking of his ships,
were conferred,” but the commissioners of England would not consent to
make any redress or restitution till after a certain date when they
expected to know the issue of their king’s invasion of France.
Hereupon a herald was sent to King Henry in France, with a letter from
King James, rehearsing the great wrongs and unkindnesses done to
himself and his lieges, and among these the slaughter of Andrew Barton
by Henry’s own command, though he had done no offence to him or his
lieges; and no satisfaction being obtained, the herald, according to
his instructions, “denounced war to the king of England,” August,
1513. (Lesley, pp. 87–91.)
Footnote 214:
#B# 63^3, “Lord Howard shall Earl Bury hight.” Admiral Thomas Howard,
for his good service at Flodden and elsewhere, was created Earl of
Surrey in 1514. Bury is, one would suppose, a corruption of Surrey,
and if so, Surrey may have been the reading of earlier copies, and
perhaps Thomas again, instead of Charles.
Footnote 215:
By reading midwinter in #A# 17^3 this difficulty would be removed.
Footnote 216:
These beams, Henry Hunt intimates in 32, would be dangerous to
boarders, which is conceivable should they chance to hit the right
heads; but they are evidently meant to be dropped on the adversary’s
vessel, and this by a process which is not distinctly described, and
was, I fear, not perfectly grasped by the minstrel. The veriest
landsman must think that a magazine of heavy timbers stowed in either
castle (there is an upper and a lower in the pictures of Henry VII’s
Great Harry and of Henry VIII’s Grace de Dieu, and the lower is well
up the mast) would not be favorable to sailing; but this is a minor
difficulty. Stones and fire-balls were sometimes thrown from the
topcastle, which, properly, should be a stage at the very tip of the
mast, as we find it in old prints: see Nicolas’s History of the Royal
Navy, II, 170. Stones and iron bars thrown from the high decks of
Spanish ships did much harm to the English in a fight in 1372:
Froissart, Buchon, V, 276. An intelligible way of operating the
ancient “dolphins,” heavy masses of metal dropped from the end of a
yard, is suggested in Graser, De veterum re navali, 1864, p. 82 f.
Footnote 217:
A better, but defective, copy is in the second volume of Chetham
Miscellanies, edited by Dr J. Robson, 1855.
Footnote 218:
Harleian MS. No 3526, date of about 1636; a printed copy of 1664, from
which the poem was edited by Weber, Edinburgh, 1808; a printed copy of
1755–62, from a different source, excellently edited by Charles A.
Federer, Manchester, 1884. See further this last, pp. 134–37.
Footnote 219:
Articles of the bataill betwix the Kinge of Scottes and the Erle of
Surrey in Brankstone Feld, the 9 day of September: State Papers, vol.
iv, King Henry the Eighth, Part iv, p. 2, 1836.
Footnote 220:
Hall’s Chronicle, p. 564.
Footnote 221:
Who are celebrated also in three other pieces, ‘Scottish Field,’
‘Bosworth Field,’ and ‘Lady Bessie:’ Percy MS., Hales and Furnivall,
I, 212, III, 235, 321.
Footnote 222:
“He never loved thee, for thy uncle [that is, Sir William Stanley]
slew his father” [the Duke of Norfolk]; which, however, is not true.
Footnote 223:
Sir Ralph Egerton is made marshal in st. 91; but this Rowland is
really Ralph over again. Ralph was knighted at Tournay, and was
granted the manor of Ridley in February of the next year.
Footnote 224:
“Where they lay a long time, and left the town as they found it:”
Hall, p. 861.
Footnote 225:
‘Where got thou these targits, Jony,
That hings so low down by thy knee?’
‘I got them, cukel king, in the field,
Where thow and thy men durst not come see.’
Footnote 226:
This copy I have in MS. and have not noted, neither can I remember,
how I came by it, but it is probably a transcript from recent print.
It diverges from the ordinary text more than any that I have seen.
After 17 comes this stanza (cf. ‘Robin Hood rescuing Three Squires,’
No 140, #B# 29):
They took the gallows frae the slack,
An there they set it on a plain,
An there they hanged Johnnie Armstrong,
Wi fifty of his warlike men.
18–20, 23 are wanting. A “pretty little boy,” in what corresponds to
21, 22, says, ‘Johnnie Armstrong you’ll never see,’ and the lady ends
the ballad with:
If that be true, my pretty little boy,
Aye the news you tell to me,
You’ll be the heir to a’my lands,
You an your young son after thee.
Footnote 227:
A tract on the extreme western border, beginning between the mouths of
the Sark and Esk and stretching north and east eight miles, with a
greatest breadth of four miles. The particulars of the boundaries are
given from an old roll in Nicolson and Burn’s Westmorland and
Cumberland, I, xvi, and as follows by Mr T. J. Carlyle, The Debateable
Land, Dumfries, 1868, p. 1: “bounded on the west by the Sark and
Pingleburn, on the north by the Irvine burn, Tarras, and Reygill, on
the east by the Mereburn, Liddal, and Esk, and on the south by the
Solway Frith.” The land was parted between England and Scotland in
1552, with no great gain to good order for the half century
succeeding.
Footnote 228:
It has been maintained that there was a Gilnockie tower on the eastern
side of the Esk, a very little lower than the Hollows tower. “We can
also inform our readers that Giltknock Hall was situate on a small
rocky island on the river Esk below the Langholm, the remains of which
are to be seen:” Crito in the Edinburgh Evening Courant, March 8,
1773. “Many vestiges of strongholds can be traced within the parish,
although there is only one, near the new bridge already described,
that makes an appearance at this point, its walls being yet entire:”
Statistical Account of Canoby, Sinclair, XIV, 420.
Sir John Sinclair, 1795, says, in a note to this last passage, that
the spot of ground at the east end of “the new bridge” is, “indeed,
called to this day, Gill-knocky, but it does not exhibit the smallest
vestige of mason-work.” Mr. T. J. Carlyle, The Debateable Land, p. 17,
gives us to understand that the foundations of the tower were
excavated and removed when the bridge was built; but this does not
appear to be convincingly made out.
Footnote 229:
The History of Liddesdale, Eskdale, Ewesdale, Wauchopedale, and The
Debateable Land, by Robert Bruce Armstrong, 1883, pp 177 f, 227 f,
245, 259 f; Appendix, pp. xxvi, xxxi.
Footnote 230:
The Cronicles of Scotland, etc., edited by J. G. Dalyell, 1814, II,
341 ff. (partially modernized, for more comfortable reading).
Footnote 231:
Wherein, if this be true, John differed much from Sym.
Footnote 232:
Rerum Scoticarum Historia, 1582, fol. 163 b, 164.
Footnote 233:
History of Scotland, Bannatyne Club, 1830, p. 143.
Footnote 234:
Anderson’s History, MS., Advocates Library, I, fol. 153 f. Anderson
flourished about 1618–35. He gives the year both as 1527 and 1528.
Cited by Armstrong, History of Liddesdale, etc., p. 274 f. For what
immediately follows, Armstrong, pp. 273, 279.
Footnote 235:
A place two miles north of Mosspaul, on the road from Langholm to
Hawick.
Footnote 236:
Scott remarks that the “common people of the high parts of Teviotdale,
Liddesdale, and the country adjacent, hold the memory of Johnie
Armstrong in very high respect.” “They affirm, also,” he adds, “that
one of his attendants broke through the king’s guard, and carried to
Gilnockie Tower the news of the bloody catastrophe:” but that is in
the English ballad, #B# 20.
Footnote 237:
Dr Hill Burton has made a slight slip here, III, 146, ed. 1863;
compare Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials, I, 154.
Footnote 238:
He lived in the West March, if that helps to an explanation.
Footnote 239:
Found also in one copy of Hugh the Græme, Buchan’s MSS, I, 63, st. 15.
Borrowed by Sir Walter Scott in The Lay of the Last Minstrel, Canto I,
ix.
Footnote 240:
See many cases in Liebrecht, Zur Volkskunde, p. 210 f, to which may be
added: Milà, Romancerillo, No 243, pp. 219–21; Briz, II, 222; Amador
de los Rios, Historia de la Lit. Esp., VII, 449; El Folk-Lore Andaluz,
1882, pp. 41, 77; Almeida-Garrett, II, 56, note; Nigra, C. P. del
Piemonte, No I, E-I, N, O; ‘Le serpent vert,’ Poésies p. de la France,
MS., III, fol. 126, 508, now printed by Rolland, III, 10; Kolberg,
Pieśni ludu polskiego, No 18, p. 208; Luzel, I, 81, II, 357, 515;
Brewer, Dictionary of Miracles, pp. 205, 355 f.; Gaidoz, and others,
Mélusine, IV, 228 ff., 272 ff., 298, 323 f., 405.
Footnote 241:
Grundtvig, No 84, ‘Hustru og Mands Moder,’ is not so good a case,
though a boy just born announces that he will revenge his mother,
because the boy is born nine years old; II, 412, #D# 30, #E# 18. This
again in Kristensen, I, 202 f, No 74, #B# 12, #C# 11, and II, 113 ff,
No 35, #A# 18, #B# 14, #C# 11. The stanza cited by Dr Prior, I, 37,
from ‘Hammen von Reystett,’ Wunderhorn, 1808, II, 179, is hardly to
the purpose.
Footnote 242:
Jamieson cites the first two verses in The Scots Magazine, October,
1803, and says: Of this affecting composition I have two copies, both
imperfect, but they will make a pretty good and consistent whole
between them.
Footnote 243:
Burnet; Rapin-Thoyras, 1724, V, 401.
Footnote 244:
W. Patten, The Expedicion into Scotlande, etc., reprinted in Dalyell’s
Fragments of Scottish History, pp. 51, 66.
Footnote 245:
Deceivin, Abbey, are of course savin misunderstood. One of the
reciters of #D# (4^2) gave ‘saving.’
Footnote 246:
History of the Reformation, Knox’s Works, ed. Laing, II, 415 f. Knox
continues: “But yet was not the court purged of whores and whoredom,
which was the fountain of such enormities; for it was well known that
shame hasted marriage betwix John Semple, called the Dancer, and Mary
Livingston, surnamed the Lusty. What bruit the Maries and the rest of
the dancers of the court had, the ballads of that age did witness,
which we for modesty’s sake omit.” This Mary Livingston is one of the
Four Marys, but, as already said, is mentioned in version #F# only of
our ballad.
Footnote 247:
“In this set of the ballad” [#D#], says Motherwell, “from its direct
allusion to the use of the savin tree, a clue is perhaps afforded for
tracing how the poor mediciner mentioned by Knox should be implicated
in the crime of Mary Hamilton.” Maidment goes further: “The reference
to the use of the savin tree in Motherwell induces a strong suspicion
that the lover was a mediciner.” Maidment should have remembered that
there is a popular pharmacopœia quite independent of the professional.
No apothecary prescribes in ‘Tam Lin.’
Footnote 248:
In an extract from Gordon’s History of Peter the Great, Aberdeen,
1755, II, 308 f.
Footnote 249:
‘Maid-of-Honor Hamilton,’ by M. I. Semefsky, in Slovo i Dyelo (Word
and Deed), 1885, St Petersburg, 3d edition, p. 187. I am indebted to
Professor Vinogradof, of the University of Moscow, for pointing out
this paper, and to Miss Isabel Florence Hapgood for a summary of its
contents.
Footnote 250:
The parentage of these was not ascertained. Some accounts make Mary
Hamilton to have been Peter’s mistress: for example [J. B. Schérer’s],
Anecdotes intéressantes et secrètes de la cour de Russie, London,
1792, II, 272 ff. See also Mélanges de Littérature, etc., par
François-Louis, comte d’Escherny, Paris, 1811, I, 7 f. (The white gown
with black ribbons is here.)
Footnote 251:
“Hamilton, imperturbable, niait. Menzikoff engagea l’empereur à faire
une perquisition dans les coffres d’Hamilton, ou l’on trouva le corps
du délit, l’arrière-faix et du linge ensanglanté.” Schérer, Anecdotes,
p. 274.
Footnote 252:
Bedford and Randolph to the Council, Wright’s Queen Elizabeth, etc.,
p. 227; Burton, History of Scotland, IV, 145.
Footnote 253:
Ruthven’s Relation, p. 30 f, London, 1699.
Footnote 254:
The Historie of King James the Sext, p. 6; Diurnal of Occurrents, p.
105 f; Tytler’s History, VII, 83.
Footnote 255:
To save appearances, we may understand “old copies” to mean copies
restored or brought nearer to what is imagined to have been the
original form. The variations will be given in notes as _pièces
justificatives_.
Footnote 256:
Sir Cuthbert Sharp, Memorials of the Rebellion of 1569, p. 202; a
collection of many original papers pertaining to this rising, with
much subsidiary information. But the story should be read in the
eighteenth chapter of Mr Froude’s Reign of Elizabeth. Both works have
been used here _passim_; Froude in the edition of New York, 1870.
Footnote 257:
Northumberland, on being asked how much money he spent in the quarrel,
says, “about one hundred and twenty pound.” The Queen’s proclamation,
Nov. 24, declares that the earls were two persons as ill chosen for
the reformation of any great matters as any could lie in the realm,
for they were both in poverty, etc. Sharp, pp. 208, 66; also 290.
Footnote 258:
Sharp, p. 113.
Footnote 259:
The dun-bull of the Nevilles is given in Sharp, p. 87, and _one_
greyhound’s head, with what may pass for a golden collar, at p. 316;
the _three_ dogs are not warranted. Percy’s half-moon is improperly
mixed up with the banner of the five wounds in 31.
Footnote 260:
Sharp, pp. 92, 95, 97 f.
Footnote 261:
Sharp, pp. 114 f, 118. “My lord Regent convened with Martin Eliot that
he should betray Thomas, Earl of Northumberland, who was fled in
Liddesdale out of England for refuge, in this manner: that is to say,
the said Martin caused Heckie Armstrong desire my lord of
Northumberland to come and speak with him under trust, and caused the
said earl believe that, after speaking, if my lord Regent would pursue
him, that he and his friends should take plain part with the Earl of
Northumberland. And when the said earl came with the same Heckie
Armstrong to speak the said Martin, he caused certain light-horsemen
of my lord Regent’s, with others his friends, to lie at await, and
when they should see the said earl and the said Martin speaking
together, that they should come and take the said earl; and so as was
devised, so came to pass.” Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 154.
Footnote 262:
From a letter of January 6, we learn that the Earl of Northumberland
was then in Edinburgh, attended by James Swyno, William Burton, and
others. James Swyno is apparently the chamberlain of the ballad.
Sharp, p. 139.
Footnote 263:
Lord Hunsdon, Sharp, p. 125.
Footnote 264:
Sharp, pp. 324–29. To whom the money went, if to anybody besides
William Douglas, we are not distinctly told. Tytler intimates that
Morton had a share: “this base and avaricious man sold his unhappy
prisoner to Elizabeth,” VII, 395. There was baseness enough without
the addition of avarice: “The Earl of Northumberland was rendered to
the Queen of England, forth of the castle of Lochleven, by a certain
condition made betwix her and the Earl of Morton for gold.... And
indeed this was unthankfully remembered, for when Morton was banisht
from Scotland he found no such kind man to him in England as this earl
was.” Historie of King James the Sext, p. 106 f. Sir Richard Maitland,
who spares Morton and Lochleven no epithets in his spirited invective
against those who delivered the Earl of Northumberland, says that they
“of his bluide resavit the pygrall pryce,” but does not charge Morton
with an act of ingratitude.
Footnote 265:
Stanza 43 is corrupted.
Footnote 266:
Kirkpatrick Sharpe’s Historical Account of Witchcraft in Scotland, pp.
38–54, ed. 1884.
Footnote 267:
Rochholz, Schweizersagen aus dem Aargau, II, 162; Grimm, Deutsche
Mythologie, p. 783 f, ed. 1876, and Saxo Grammaticus (p. 34, ed 1576,
Holder, p. 66), quoted by Grimm. These citations are furnished by
Liebrecht, Göttingen Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1868, p. 1899, who finds
hydromancy in st. 26, where, however, all that seems to be meant is
that the mother would let her daughter see _from_ Lochleven what was
doing in London. Of dactyliomancy proper there is something in Delrio,
IV, ii, 6, 4, 5, p. 547, ed. 1624.
Footnote 268:
Sharp’s Memorials, pp. 138, 142, 298 ff, 346 ff.
Footnote 269:
The most favorable interpretation has been given to ‘Now hath
Armstrong taken.’ The meaning is rather, perhaps, that Armstrong has
detained Neville and his followers.
Footnote 270:
71^3. ‘spekest soe litle.’
Footnote 271:
This is the date given me. It is very near to that of the event.
Footnote 272:
Lieut.-Col. H. W. Lumsden has very kindly allowed me a discretional
use of an unpublished paper of his upon the historical basis of this
ballad, and I freely avail myself of his aid, all responsibility
remaining, of course, with me.
Footnote 273:
The Historie of King James the Sext, p. 95 ff. The History of the
Feuds and Conflicts among the Clans, etc., p. 51 ff, in Miscellanea
Scotica, vol. I. Diurnal of Occurrents, pp. 251, 253, 255.
Footnote 274:
Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 255. What place is meant by Carrigill here
is of no present consequence, since it was Towie that was burnt. Many
writers, as Tytler, VII, 367, following Crawfurd’s spurious Memoirs,
p. 240, 1706, make the number that perished in the house
_thirty_-seven.
Footnote 275:
Journal of the Transactions in Scotland during the contest between the
adherents of Queen Mary and those of her son, 1570, 1571, 1572, 1573,
p. 302 f., Edinburgh, 1806.
Footnote 276: