NOTES ON WALLACE.

NOTES ON THE FIRST BOOK.

Of auld linnage, &c. Edit. 1594; olde, 1620; old, 1648, 1673, and 1714.

But both the rhyme and sense point out the word in Roman characters as an error of the copier. It also disagrees with all the copies I have seen, except that of 1714.

This is obviously another error, and opposed to all the copies.

It is homage in all the copies, except that of Perth.

All the copies before that of 1714 connect this with v. 140;—

The editor of the first edition I have seen might have overlooked the six intervening lines, by fixing his eye on the conclusion of v. 134, which closes with the same words as that of v. 140—of Scotland. But the sense requires these lines; as no office was given to Bruce, but merely his heritage.

“Riccartoun is evidently a corruption of Richardtoun. It is generally supposed to have been so called from a Sir Richard Wallace, who lived in the vicinity of the village, and who is said to have been uncle to the celebrated patriot, Sir William Wallace. Of his house no vestige now remains; the place, however, where it stood is well known. The village of Riccartoun is within one English mile of the market-place of Kilmarnock.” V. Riccartoun, Stat. Acc. V. 117.

In Edit. 1594,—ane ackwart straik him gaif.

This is followed by subsequent editions. The line, as it stands in MS., is both clumsy and nonsensical. But perhaps Blind Harry used this for athwart; as it occurs in the same sense, II. 109.

Of the deid, Edit. 1594. Of the deed, Edit. 1620.

This is more in character, than to suppose that Wallace, after so chivalrous an achievement, should run to his uncle, and tell him in what terror he was for the vengeance of the English. The term here used, indeed, seems to reduplicate on the phrase which occurs v. 434, “this worthi werk.”

NOTES ON THE SECOND BOOK.

This is most probably for abandounly; signifying, “without regard to danger,” as it is indeed explained in the following line. In Edit. 1594, it is rendered,—All but abaissing; 1620 and 1648, abasing.

A sting signifies a pole; but this sasteing must have been something fixed in a larger poille or pole. Norw. sjaastang is explained, “a pole wherewith skins are taken off or laid on smoky vents.” Sjaa itself signifies the skin taken from the stomachs of animals, of which parchment is made. V. Hallager Ordsamling. But as Scottish say signifies a water bucket, this may refer to the pole used for carrying it. The following definition might seem to throw light on this singular term. “So or soa, a tub with two ears to carry on a stang.” Ray’s Collection of North Country Words. The term was most probably pronounced saysting; as a, in our old writers, must often have been sounded ai.

In MS. it is,—Prophesye out Scotland is left, &c.

As this has no meaning, I have altered it, according to the reading of Edit. 1594, 1620, and 1648:

In editions Cellinus. In MS. the initial letter is wanting, as is generally the case in MSS. which were afterwards to be illuminated. But from the copies it appears probable that it was C. This name is certainly given figuratively, or in reference to some jailor, celebrated in the romances then in vogue. Or could the Minstrel allude to Celaeno, one of the fabled harpies? If so, Cellinus would perhaps be the original reading.

This passage has been strangely misunderstood. So early as 1594 it had been made to bear quite a different meaning:—

This error has been followed in subsequent editions. In Edit. Perth, 1790, it is, in to the ayle; although it had been properly given, in to the Faile, Edit. 1714.

This was a cell or priory of the Cluniacenses in Kyle, Ayrshire, depending on Paisley. Spottiswoode writes it Feale. “Our history,” he says, “only remarks, that the prior of this place was one of those who hindred the castle of Dumbarton from being surrendered to the English, anno 1544, in opposition to the Earl of Lenox, then governor of it.” But besides this curious passage, which shows that it was an ancient foundation; it may be added, that “the right of the patronage of the kirk of Fale, in the county of Ayr,” is given to James de Lindsay, apparently the ancestor of the Earls of Crawford, in a charter by Robert II. Registr. Mag. Sigill. p. 172. N. 13. The miln of Faill, and the crofthead of Fail, in the lordship of Failfurd, are mentioned in a retour regarding William Wallace, heir of William Wallace, minister of Failfurd, A. 1617. Inquis. Retour. Ayr, N. 162.

In Edit. 1594, 1620, 1714, and Perth, it is that man; in 1648 and 1673, this man; either of which would immediately refer to Thomas of Ercildon. But thar, i.e. their man, respects the servant of the religious fraternity of Faile, as appears from v. 299, which cannot respect True Thomas;

NOTES ON THE THIRD BOOK.

Instead of And fra the tyme, read, Ay fra the tyme, as in MS.

It is remarkable that in all the copies, without exception, as far as I know, it is somer or summer weid, or weed. Of what use could this have been to Wallace, when in “sodeyn stryff?” The term is the same with E. sure, i.e. secure armour, although light.

I have pointed this passage according to what seems the sense. Having so many enemies, when he was accidentally “in a crowd, he muffled up his face,” that his features might not be recognised. Hamilton of Gilbertfield, although in many instances he has given an air of ridicule to this ancient poem, by the grossness of his phraseology, seems to have hit the true sense here, which is totally lost by the mode of punctuation in most of the editions. He renders it;—

Scurriours, Edit. 1620. In that of Perth, thowrrouris; but in MS. it may be read tkowrrouris, t or c being put for s. We have skouriouris, IV. 431.

“Among other antiquities there may be mentioned, a place called Beg, above Allinton, where the brave Wallace lay in a species of rude fortification with only fifty of his friends, yet obtained a complete victory over an English officer of the name of Fenwick, who had two hundred men under his command. This gallant hero, it is well known, had several places of retirement towards the head of this parish and in the neighbourhood, some of which retain his name unto this day; Wallace-hill in particular, an eminence near the Galla-law, and a place called Wallace-Gill, in the parish of Loudoun, a hollow glen, to which he probably retired for shelter when pursued by his enemies.” P. of Galston. Stat. Acc. II. 74.

The Minstrel, it has been said by Lord Hailes, “always speaks of Aymer de Valloins, Earl of Pembroke, as a false Scottish knight.” Annals, I. 245. But, as Kerr has observed, although he designs him “a false traitor,” &c. his country is no where mentioned; unless this should be viewed as implied in what is said, B. VII. 1097, concerning his forsaking “his awne land for euirmar.” Kerr views this, however, as referable to his quitting Bothwell, the heritage of Moray, which had been given to Valloins. V. Hist. Bruce, I. 115.

NOTES ON THE FOURTH BOOK.

In MS. that Hesilden; but I have followed the judicious alteration made in Edit. 1714. In that of 1594 it is completely changed:

This is adopted by Hart, Edit. 1620.

Hesilden is evidently a local name, and must be the same place that is now called Hezilton-head, a farm, situated on high ground, in the parish of Mearns, on the direct road from Ayr to Glasgow, about nine miles to the south-west of the latter. This appears unquestionable, from the necessity under which Sir Ranald Crawfurd was laid, in consequence of his sumpter-horse being carried off by the English, of sleeping that night at Mearns, v. 70.

In MS. her, which is followed by Edit. 1714. But I prefer der or deir, the reading of 1594, signifying “injury, loss.” In Edit. 1620, deare.

It is the same as given by Hart.

The phrase “folowit him of,” signifies, pursued him for. It frequently occurs in this sense in our old statutes.

Strang here signifies, “strange; persons with whom he was not acquainted.”

Thocht they were strangers, &c. Edit. 1594. Though they were strangers, 1620.

It is Lekkie in all the editions; which is still the name of the place, (V. Stat. Acc. XVIII. 98. 116.) and was so in the time of Robert Bruce. Robertson’s Ind. 8, 90.

“A little southward of the village there is a conical height called the Kier-hill, which is evidently artificial, and seems to have been a military work. There are remains of a ditch or rampart of a circular form, which proves that it is not of Roman origin. It is probably of later date, and appears to have been the place from which Sir William Wallace sallied forth on the night when he took by surprise the Peel of Gargunnock.” Stat. Acc. XVIII. 116, 117.

I have retained the word as in MS. although it is secret in all the copies. Perhaps it might be from O. Fr. en secré.

In MS. wpon Wallace. But the reading of Edit. 1594 is preferable; especially as they did not then know that their enemy was Wallace. Perhaps it might originally be, “wpon the wallis,” whence the blunder might easily be made, as the word would be read as two syllables.

In MS. we find all as the last word in the preceding line, and drall here. But the error has arisen from the resemblance of w to ll.

In MS. Gargyll. But it is Cargill, Edit. 1594; and this must be the true reading, Shortwoodshaw being in the parish of Cargill. V. Stat. Acc. XIII. 532. This is evidently spoken of as the same with Cargyll-wood.

NOTES ON THE FIFTH BOOK.

Gilderland, Edit. 1594; Gelderland, 1620, 1648, 1673, &c., also 1714. But this must be Gillesland or Gilsland, a barony in Cumberland. The Minstrel having said that the hound was bred here, immediately speaks of her being used to track in Esk and Liddisdale, in the vicinity of Cumberland. So late as the reign of James I. of England, there is an order dated A. 1616, that no less than nine bloodhounds should be kept on the Border, upon Esk, and other places mentioned. V. Pennant’s Tour, 1772; I. 77, II. 397.

Bellenden, after Boece, gives a particular description of these bloodhounds, which agrees with the facts mentioned above, and has considerable interest.

“The thrid kynd is mair than ony rache. Red hewit or ellis blak with small spraingis of spottis, and ar callit be the peple sleuthhundis. Thir doggis hes sa meruellous wit, that thai serche theuis, and followis on thaym allanerlie be sent of the guddis that ar tane away. And nocht allanerlie fyndis the theif, bot inuadis hym with gret cruelté. And thocht the theuis oftymes cors the watter, quhair thai pas, to caus the hound to tyne the sent of thaym and the guddis, yit he serchis heir and thair with sic deligence, that be his fut he fyndis baith the trace of the theiff and the guddis. The meruellous nature of thir houndis wil haue na faith with vncouth peple. Howbeit the samyn ar rycht frequent and ryfe on the bordouris of Ingland and Scotland. Attour it is statute be the lawis of the bordouris, he that denyis entres to the sleuthound in tyme of chace and serching of guddis, sal be haldin participant with the cryme and thift committit.” Discription of Albion, chap. XI.

This extract throws light on a passage in The Bruce, where the king is made to refer to the vulgar idea as to the means necessary for making the blood-hound lose his scent; although the statement given by Boece opposes the opinion which had been generally received.

John Hardyng has given a curious account of the means used by Edward I. for taking Bruce, similar to that here said to have been employed against Wallace.

In the stanza immediately following he indeed ascribes the death of Edward to his disappointment, in never being able to get our king into his hands:—

This appears to have been the head of the ancient family of Heron, who held Ford Castle in Northumberland. In the reign of Henry III. it was in possession of Sir William Heron, who was governor of the castles of Bamborough, Pickering, and Scarborough, lord warden of the forests north of Trent, and sheriff of Northumberland for eleven successive years. V. Hutchinson’s Northumb. II. 19. This castle has attracted much attention, as having been the scene of the enchantments of its fair mistress, by means of which our infatuated James IV. was disarmed before the fatal battle of Flodden; and it has acquired additional celebrity from the no less bewitching Muse of the author of Marmion.

This is Dalreoch, on the south bank of the Earn, four or five miles west from Forteviot. A bridge across the Earn is called that of Dalreoch. By the forss seems to be meant ford. V. Etym. Dict. in vo.

“In Dunipace parish is the famous Torwood, in the middle of which there are the remains of Wallace’s Tree, an oak which, according to a measurement, when entire, was said to be about twelve feet diameter. To this wood Wallace is said to have fled, and secreted himself in the body of that tree, then hollow, after his defeat in the north.” Stat. Acc. III. 336.

This “is still dignified by the name of Wallace’s Tree. It stands in the middle of a swampy moss, having a causeway round its ruins; and its destruction has been much precipitated by the veneration in which the Scottish hero has been long held, numerous pieces having been carried off, to [be] convert[ed] into various memorials of the champion of Scotland.” Kerr’s Hist. Bruce, I. 127.

In MS. it is Qwenys ferry; but the word first written has been scraped out, and Qwenys substituted on the head margent above it. The term deleted seems to have been erd; most probably written by mistake for Airth, in a copy which may have been taken from recitation. The term Qwenys indeed is apparently in the same hand with the rest of the MS.; but the transcriber, thinking only of erd as signifying the earth, had indulged the idea that it must be an error. As the companions of Wallace were on their way to Dunipace in quest of him, to have gone from Gask to Queensferry would have been to take a very circuitous course without any apparent necessity. Airth is the reading of editions 1594, 1620, 1648, and 1673. In Edit. 1714 it is Queens-ferry, as would seem on the authority of the MS.

The castle of Dundaff, of which there are still some remains, was situated in Stirlingshire, near the source of Carron. This old knight, by some called David, by others John, was proprietor not only of Dundaff, but of the lands of Strathblane and Strathcarron. V. Nimmo’s Stirlingshire, p. 358. A fabulous antiquity has been ascribed to this family; it having been asserted that the wall of Antonine vulgarly received the name of Graham’s Dike, because in a very early period of our history it was penetrated by a valorous chief, from whom those of this celebrated name had their origin. We have no written evidence of the existence of this family before the reign of David I., when William de Grahame appears as witness to the charter of the foundation of Holyrood-house. Sir J. Dalrymple’s Coll. p. 397. From it originated many distinguished families, as that of Montrose, Menteith, Fintry, Balgowan, &c. It was the son of this “agyt knycht” who was the faithful friend of Wallace, and who fell at the battle of Falkirk.

By misapprehension, in all the printed copies, word; as if the question were, “What intelligence is there concerning him?” But the meaning is, “What became of him?”

i. e. “Where there is great anxiety of mind, it prevents the carrying on of war in the wisest” or “most proper manner.”

The meaning is lost in Edit. 1594,—

Edit. 1620.

That is, “I know the character and descent of this lady; but being a stranger to my former sweetheart, at Perth, I lost my stake.” Hyr in v. 655 is opposed to this in the preceding line.

I prefer this to Torhed, Edit. 1714 and Perth. It agrees equally well with the MS.; and it is that of 1594 and of the other old editions. Besides, I find Corheid given as the name of a property in Annandale, belonging to the Johnstouns, Inquis. Retorn. A. 1608, N. 63; but no such place as Torheid in Dumfries-shire.

In the parish of Kirkmichael, county of Dumfries, there is “a small fort in the Knock Wood, called Wallace’s House, said to have been thrown up by Sir William Wallace, after he had slain Sir Hugh of Moreland and five of his men, at a place still named, from that event, the sax corses, i. e. the six corpses.” Stat. Acc. I. 63. It has been ingeniously remarked, that “the sax corses more probably signify six crosses, in allusion to some religious monument so decorated.” Kerr’s Hist. Bruce, I. 125.

This, it appears, was the ancestor of the Kirkpatricks of Closeburne, who appear on record so early as the year 1141. Alexander II. grants a confirmation charter of Closeburne to one of this name, A. 1332, which is still in the possession of the family.

Kirkpatrick Sharpe of Hoddam is a descendant of the Closeburne family in the fourth generation; the name of Sharpe having been added, as attached, by the deed of the possessor, to the estate of Hoddam.

This was the ancestor of the Marquisses of Annandale.

NOTES ON THE SIXTH BOOK.

In MS., wtast; Edit. 1594, &c. octaues of Februar; octaves, Edit. 1714.

In Edit. 1594, l. 14, it is thus given,—

In Edit. 1620,—Caneittis, &c.; in that of 1714, Famous. In MS. it may be read either Famus or Faunis. Although I cannot make sense of the line, there seems to be an allusion to the Fawns of heathen mythology; as the illiterate Minstrel might allude to the Nymphs in the term Nympheus.

After ver. 72, a whole stanza is found in Edit. 1594 and 1620, which does not appear in MS.

I hesitate very much as to the authenticity of this stanza. It would not of itself be a sufficient proof that it is wanting in MS., because we meet with similar deficiences; but it does not tally well with the stanza preceding, which speaks only of a child, that is, most probably, one to the exclusion of others. As little does it agree with the stanza immediately following in the copies which have adopted it; for it begins with these words;—

For this supposes either that there was but one young lady referred to, or that she, who is previously mentioned as having been married to Squire Shaw, had no family.

It has been said, that Wallace “left no legitimate issue; but had a natural daughter, who married Sir William Baillie of Hoprig, the progenitor of the Baillies of Lammington.” Caledonia, I. 579. From the reference here made in a foot-note to Crawfurd’s Hist. Renfrew, 61, and Ruddiman’s Index Dipl. Scotiæ, 121, one might have supposed that these writers had brought some proof of the illegitimacy of this daughter. But it does not appear that the idea of illegitimacy had once entered into the mind of Crawfurd. He merely says of Wallace: “He left issue only one daughter, who was married to Sir William Baillie of Hoprig,” &c.; adding, “the lands of Elderslee returned to the family of Craigie.” Ruddiman merely says; “Reliquisse unam filiam Willelmus dicitur, quam uxorem duxit D. Willelmus Baillie de Hoprig,” &c.

The only thing that has the semblance of a proof that Wallace was not married, is what follows in the same note. “The estate of Ellerslie went to the Wallaces of Ricardton, as his nearest male heirs.” But their being male heirs might be the reason of their inheriting this property. Besides, it does not seem fully ascertained, whether our illustrious champion was ever personally vested in these lands. It is admitted by the author of Caledonia, in a preceding note, p. 578, that “both Wyntoun and Harry concur in speaking of the great Wallace as the second son of Sir Malcolm.” Lord Hailes says: “He was the younger son of a gentleman in the neighbourhood of Paisley. Such is the opinion generally received.” Annals, I. 245. It must be admitted, however, that Bower, in his continuation of Fordun, says that “Andrew, the elder brother of William, and honoured with the order of knighthood, being guilefully slain by the English, William succeeded to a sufficient patrimony in lands for his state, which he left to be held by his posterity.” Scotichron. II. Lib. xi. c. 28.

Unless we should suppose the Minstrel determined to lie in the face of evidence, his appeal, in the passage quoted, to his auctor, shews the general belief of the country at the time of his writing, and even during the life of Mr. John Blair, to whom he seems to appeal, that Wallace was married. Now, it is well known that Blair was the bosom friend and the faithful associate of Wallace; and, being a priest, it may reasonably be conjectured that he was the person who celebrated the marriage.

Pinkerton remarks, “that the murder of Wallace’s wife, which seems the first cause which excited him to arms,” (he means, most probably, after remaining for several months in peace,) “was committed at Lanark by Heselrig or Hislop, governor of the castle” of Lanark, “whom Wallace after slew. See Fordun, XI. 28. Henry the Minstrel in this instance accords with history, and with tradition; a large cave in Cartland Craigs near Lanark, where Henry says that Wallace lurked, being called Wallace’s Cave to this day. It is remarkable that Sir D. Dalrymple should have omitted this important circumstance, for which Fordun [Bower, his continuator,] was surely good authority.” The Bruce, II. 20, N.

The “important circumstance” referred to must be that of Wallace having slain the governor of the castle of Lanark; for Bower does not say that the reason of this was the murder of the wife of Wallace. But undoubtedly this was a remarkable omission on the part of our learned and accurate annalist.

I do not say, that the account given by Bower of the slaughter of Hesilgir, or, as he calls him, Hesliope, amounts to a proof of the marriage of Wallace, or even certainly intimates the reason of the deed; but it authenticates the fact of Wallace having been at Lanark at this time, and renders it highly probable that he had met with some special excitement. According to the testimony of Bower, it was from this time forward that he openly appeared as the avenger of the wrongs of his country.

The memory of Wallace is still so fresh in the town of Lanark, that the inhabitants point out the place where he was wont to lodge.

“Tradition tells that the house where Wallace resided was at the head of the Castlegate, opposite the church, where a new house has lately been erected. It also acquaints us, that a private vaulted archway led from this house to Cartlane Craigs, but seemingly without the smallest probability.” P. Lanark, Stat. Acc. XV. 33.

In MS. ver. 79 is;

The following line, as printed in the text, which is the concluding one of the stanza, is totally omitted. Most probably it had been wanting in the MS. from which Ramsay copied; as he seems to have altered the three last words of ver. 79, so as apparently to complete the sense, by transferring the language, which obviously regards Wallace, to his wife. I have given the reading of Edit. 1594. It is the same in Hart’s, with a slight change of the orthography.

It is thus given in Edit. 1594 and 1620;

Fr. Dieu garde, a salutation, God save you.

As the former salutation consists of a ridiculous mixture of French and Scottish, this seems to be composed of Scottish and Gaelic. Gud deyn is evidently for “Good evening.” Dawch Lard may signify lazy laird. The latter words have been viewed as Gaelic, l’ail, luibh, beannach a De, “if you please, God bless you!” V. Etym. Dict. vo. Dawch.

Bot Grymmysbé, i.e. by no other name; and this, it appears, was a nickname, from his gray or grim complexion.

This is the mode in which Ramsay gives the name of Biggar, a village in Lanarkshire. “There is a tradition of a battle having been fought at the east end of the town, between the Scots, under the command of Sir William Wallace, and the English army, who were said to be 60,000 strong, wherein a great slaughter was made on both sides, especially among the latter.” Stat. Acc. P. Biggar, I. 336.

It is Schir Hew, Edit. 1594 and 1620; the same in that of 1714. But in Edit. 1648, it is, as here, Fehew. In MS. Schyr hew seems to have been first written, and afterwards deleted, the letter s or f being left singly, with a blank before hew. But in ver. 397, it is clearly Fehew; as also in B. VIII. 1010, 1067, 1081, where the fate of this squire is referred to. Whether such a person ever existed, I can find no trace in the Fœdera, or in any history of that period. For the honour of Wallace, it may well be supposed that the whole story is fabulous.

This denotes Annandale. But it seems to be an error of the copier, for Ananderdaill, the more ancient designation of this district, watered by the river Annan.

In Edit. 1594, 1620, 1714, and Perth 1790;

This passage does not seem to have been hitherto given intelligibly, in any one edition. Towrnbery has still been viewed as the name of the person who was “captain of Ayr.” But this deprives the passage of any reasonable meaning. How could this supposed person be “captain of Ayr” with Lord Percy, who had the charge of the whole district? Thus, also, these words, “to tak his consaill haill,” according to the construction, apply equally well to Wallace and his troops, as to the supposed “captain of Ayr.” But Turnbery is the name of a place, particularly mentioned in The Bruce, V. Note, III. 829. The line must have been written as given in this edition. At Aire is the reading, Edit. 1648 and 1673; and what has been rendered that, in MS. may be read thar, i.e., their. This shews the reason why the Scots did not hurry on, but went sobyrly to Turnbery. They had learned that their captain, the captain of those who had the defence of “Turnbery castle,” as it is denominated by Barbour, was at Ayr with Lord Percy, to take his advice about the state of public matters.

This is Cumnock, in Ayrshire, whence two parishes now take their name.

In Edit. 1594 and 1648;—to na prince of your kin.

Instead of Sufferyt, it is Assouerit, i.e. assured, having security, Edit. 1594 and 1620; and ridiculously, All ordered, Edit. 1648 and 1673. Soueryt is adopted, Edit. 1714. This term is more adapted to the sense than that of MS., as illustrated by the words that follow, expressive of Wallace’s strict adherence to any safe conduct given by him.

In MS. it is “nocht in wayne;” which contradicts the obvious design of the language of Wallace. In Edit. 1594 and 1620;

It seems most probable, that in the more ancient MS. whence Ramsay took his copy, bot had been written indistinctly, and read by Ramsay as not, the contraction for nocht.

NOTES TO THE SEVENTH BOOK.

Here the Minstrel introduces his account of the savage transaction ascribed to Edward I., in causing the greatest part of the barons of the west of Scotland to be hanged, without trial, under the semblance of peace; and of the vengeance taken by Wallace, in what has been usually called “the burning of the Barns of Ayr.”

Before examining this account, I may observe, that instead of For gret bernys, as in MS., Edit. 1594 reads, Four greit barnis; and that of 1620, to the same purpose, Foure greit barnes. Perhaps I ought to have adopted this reading, especially as the conjunction for, with which ver. 25 commences, does not seem necessary as marking the connection with the words preceding.

The story of the destruction of these buildings, and of the immediate reason of it, is supported by the universal tradition of the country to this day; and local tradition is often entitled to more regard than is given to it by the fastidiousness of the learned. Whatever allowances it may be necessary to make for subsequent exaggeration, it is not easily conceivable that an event should be connected with a particular spot, during a succession of ages, without some foundation.

Sir D. Dalrymple deems this story “inconsistent with probability.” He objects to it, because it is said “that Wallace, accompanied by Sir John Graham, Sir John Menteth, and Alexander Scrymgeour, constable of Dundee, went into the west of Scotland to chastise the men of Galloway, who had espoused the part of the Comyns and of the English;” and that, “on the 28th August 1298, they set fire to some granaries in the neighbourhood of Ayr, and burned the English cantoned in them.” Annals, I. 255, N. Here he refers to the relations of Arnold Blair, and to Major, and produces three objections to the narrative. One of these is, that “Comyn, the younger of Badenoch was the only man of the name of Comyn who had any interest in Galloway, and he was at that time of Wallace’s party.” The other two are; that “Sir John Graham could have no share in the enterprize, for he was killed at Falkirk, 22d July, 1298;” and that “it is not probable that Wallace would have undertaken such an enterprize immediately after the discomfiture at Falkirk.” Although it had been said by mistake that Graham and Comyn were present, this could not invalidate the whole relation; for we often find that leading facts are faithfully narrated in a history, when there are considerable mistakes as to the persons said to have been engaged.

But although our annalist refers both to Major and Blair, it is the latter only who mentions either the design of the visit paid to the west of Scotland, or the persons who are said to have been associates in it. The whole of Sir David’s reasoning rests on the correctness of a date, and of one given only in the meagre remains ascribed to Arnold Blair. If his date be accurate, the transaction at Ayr, whatever it was, must have taken place thirty-seven days afterwards. Had the learned writer exercised his usual acumen here, had he not been resolved to throw discredit on this part of the history of Wallace; it would have been most natural for him to have supposed that this event was post-dated by Blair. It seems, indeed, to have been long before the battle of Falkirk. Blind Harry narrates the former in his Seventh, the latter in his Eleventh Book. Sir David himself, after pushing the argument from the date given by Blair as far as possible, virtually gives it up, and makes the acknowledgment which he ought to have made before. “I believe,” he says, “that this story took its rise from the pillaging of the English quarters, about the time of the treaty of Irvine, in 1297, which, as being an incident of little consequence, I omitted in the course of this history.” Here he refers to Hemingford, T. I. p. 123.

Hemingford says, that “many of the Scots and men of Galloway had in a hostile manner made prey of their stores, having slain more than five hundred men, with women and children.” Whether he means to say that this took place at Ayr, or at Irvine, seems doubtful. But here, I think, we have the nucleus of the story. The barns, according to the diction of Blind Harry, seem to have been merely “the English quarters,” erected by order of Edward for the accommodation of his troops. Although denominated barns by the Minstrel, and horreas by Arnold Blair, both writers seem to have used these terms with great latitude, as equivalent to what are now called barracks. It is rather surprising, that our learned annalist should view the loss of upwards of five hundred men, besides women and children, with that of their property, “as an incident of little consequence,” in a great national struggle.

Major gives nearly the same account with that of Blair. Speaking of Wallace, he says: “Anglorum insignes viros apud horrea Aerie residentes de nocte incendit, et qui a voraci, flamma euaserunt ejus mucrone occubuerunt.” Fol. LXX.

There is also far more unquestionable evidence as to the cause of this severe retaliation than is generally supposed. Lord Hailes has still quoted Barbour as an historian of undoubted veracity. Speaking of Crystal of Seton, he says:—

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

The testimony of the Complaynt of Scotland, a well known national work, written A. 1548, concurs. Speaking of the king of England, the writer says:

“Ony of you that consentis til his fals conques of your cuntre, ye sal be recompenssit as your forbears var at the blac perliament at the bernis of Ayre, quhen kyng Eduard maid ane conuocatione of al the nobillis of Scotland at the toune of Ayre, vndir culour of faitht and concord, quha comperit at his instance, nocht heffand suspitione of his tresonabil consait. Than thai beand in his subiectione vndir culour of familiarite, he gart hang, cruelly and dishonestly, to the nummer of sexten scoir of the maist nobillis of the cuntre, tua and tua ouer ane balk, the quhilk sextene scoir var cause that the Inglismen conquest sa far vithtin your cuntre.” Compl. Scotl. p. 144.

The author refers to this as a fact universally acknowledged among his countrymen, although, it must be recollected, no edition of the Life of Wallace was printed for more than twenty years after this work was written. He introduces it again, as a proof of treachery and cruelty, which still continued to excite national feeling.

“Doubtles thai that ar participant of the cruel inuasione of Inglis men contrar thar natyue cuntreye, ther craggis sal be put in ane mair strait yoik nor the Samnetes did to the Romans, as kyng Eduard did til Scottis men at the blac parlament at the bernis of Ayr, quhen he gart put the craggis of sexten scoir in faldomis of cordis, tua and tua, ouer ane balk, of the maist principal of them,” &c. Ibid. p. 159, 160.

Schir Ranald is Sir Reginald Craufurd of Loudoun, maternal uncle to Wallace. He was heritable sheriff of the county of Ayr. The granddaughter, the heiress of the property, was married to Sir Duncan Campbell, the son of Sir Donald of Redcastle, from whom the noble family of Loudoun is descended. Reginaldus de Craveford is one of the persons chosen on the part of Robert Bruce to judge between him and John Baliol, as to their respective claims, A. 1292. V. Fœdera, II. 555. But whether this was the Ranald here mentioned, or his father, who was then alive, is doubtful; because our author gives the name of Ranald to his father, while others call him Hugh. John and Hugh de Craufurd are mentioned in two rescripts of Edward I., as barons received under his protection, A. 1255. Ibid. I. 559. 567.

Schyr Bryss the Blayr was the ancestor of the Blairs of that ilk in Ayrshire. There was a Bryce Blair of Blair in the seventeenth century; whence it appears that this ancient christian name was retained in the family. V. Crawfurd’s Renfrew, p. 203. Nisbet, I. 211.

It deserves observation, that these are the two persons particularly named by Barbour, among those who suffered that cruel martyrdom for liberty which was inflicted by the English tyrant. Syr Brice is the reading of Edit. 1594 and 1620: and I am now convinced that the name ought to have stood Bryce in the Bruce, B. III. ver. 265; as it is corrected in the extract made in the preceding Note. But I was misled by the appearance of the letter y in the MS., which differs so much from its usual form, as at first view to resemble u.

Sir D. Dalrymple remarks; “Barbour says that Sir Brice Blair was executed in company with Sir Reginald Crawfurd; but he erroneously supposes this to have happened in Scotland.” Ann. II. 19, N. Kerr follows him in this assertion. Hist. Bruce, I. 284.

But our worthy senator is so averse to give credit to anything that tends to confirm what he calls “the famous story of the Barns of Air,” that he prefers the single testimony of Matthew of Westminster to that of Barbour; not to mention the later but concurrent one of the Minstrel. The English historian says that Reginald de Crawfurd, with Thomas and Alexander de Brus, “brothers of the pseudo-king,” having been defeated and taken prisoners, were presented to Edward at Carlisle, “wounded and half-dead, and that he immediately ordered their execution;” and that “to this their heads bare witness, being placed on the castle and gates” of that city. Hist. p. 458.

It is surprising, however, that the difference of the dates did not make Sir David hesitate to oppose the united testimony of our oldest Scottish writers on this point; especially as the account given by Matthew of Westminster is, by his own confession, at variance with that of Robert of Langtoft. The butchery at Ayr is said to have taken place, A. 1298; this at Carlisle in the year 1306–7, about nine years after. The fact seems to be, that the Reginald he refers to was the son of the other Reginald who had suffered in “the blac parlament” at Ayr. It was he who left a daughter, his only child and heir, who, as is mentioned above, was married to Sir Duncan Campbell. V. Nisbet’s Ragm. Roll. p. 18.

Worthi occurs in the line; but this word being under-doted, gentill appears on the margent. The latter is the reading of Edit. 1594, and of 1620. This person seems to have been one of the family now represented by the Earl of Eglinton. One of this family had the same christian name in the reign of James IV. V. Nisbet, I. 375.

All the editions have Boyd. It appears, however, from ver. 287, that Boyd was left in the town:

Besides, the name Byrd occurs B. VIII. 233, where the person thus denominated is conjoined with Boyde:

In Edit. 1594, 1620, and 1648, this is Baird, apparently the ancestor of the Bairds of Newbyth, descended from Baird of Auchmedden, a very ancient family. To this family, as proprietors in Lanarkshire, Fergus, John, and Robert Bard, mentioned in Ragman Roll, are supposed to have belonged. V. Nisbet’s Rem. p. 42. 46. Robert de Boyd was ancestor of the family of Kilmarnock.

This refers to the knights of St. John then made at Rhodes.

This, if not from O. Fr. ensuairé, wound up, lapt in, may be equivalent to ensured; as the Minstrel uses sufferance for souerance or assurance.

To Craghumyre, Edit. 1594, 1620, 1648, and 1673. Cragunyn, 1714; Crage Vyum, Edit. Perth. As this is connected with Lochow, it may be Crage Ewan in Lochdochart, as laid down in Bleau’s Atlas.

This is obviously the word in MS. But I suspect that it is an error for Awfe, which occurs in Edit. 1594, 1620, 1648, and 1673. It is undoubtedly the river Awe that is meant, whence the name of Lochawe or Lochow.

In MS. it is lyff, apparently denoting life, which would render the passage self-contradictory. In Edit. 1594 and 1620, leiue; 1648, leave. The meaning is; “Duncan asked permission of Wallace to pursue Macfadyane.”

The term is not ancestré in MS. but may be read imcrasé, imtrasé, uncrasé, or untrasé. But as neither of these give any known sense, I have retained the word which occurs in all the editions. The only word that seems to have any resemblance is O. Fr. entraisser (s’,) s’animer, s’exciter; Gl. Roquefort.

Edit. 1594, rais; i.e. as in Edit. 1648, race; which is a more natural mode of expression.

Ruthuen, Edit. 1594, i. e. Ruthven, the ancestor of the unfortunate family of Gowrie. As it is said that Wallace made him captain and hereditary sheriff of Perth, it deserves observation that his descendants for several generations seem almost exclusively to have possessed authority in that town. V. Cant’s Hist. Perth, vol. II.

This is Cromartie, Edit. 1594, &c.

This refers to the battle of Stirling-bridge. He is called Kirkinghame in editions. But the person meant was Cressingham, an ecclesiastic, who was the king’s treasurer, “a pompous and haughty man,” says Hemingford, who hurried on the battle in opposition to the counsel of Lundie and others. Hist. p. 118. 127. 129.

It is Iedbrugh in Edit. 1594 and 1620. The name of this place assumes a great variety of forms; Gedword, Geddeworde, Gedewrde, Geddewerde, Gedworth, Gedeworth, Gedewurth, Gedewrze; Jedworth, Jedwurth, Jedword, Jedwort, Jedewrth, Jedwod, Jeddeburch. V. Macpherson’s Geogr. Illustr. The latter is merely the modern name. The vulgar, and indeed almost universal, pronunciation, q. Jethart, points out what was the original designation. Here were two monasteries, one of them founded so late as A. 1513; the other was established in the year 1147. Another place, not far distant, retains the name of Auld Jedworth. According to Simeon of Durham, these two Jedworths were built by Ecgred, bishop of Lindisfarn, about the year 840. Dec. Script. 13. 28. 119. 121. Simeon writes it Geddeword.

The name, it has been conjectured, might be traced to the Gadeni, a tribe who anciently inhabited the whole tract of country that lies between Northumberland and the river Tiviot. Stat. Acc. I. 1. But the Gadeni have been placed, with far more probability, in Dunbartonshire. V. Pinkerton’s Enquiry, I. p. 35. 224. 320. It is obvious, that the name of the place is formed from that of the stream, which probably claims a British origin. Gwyth signifies a channel or drain. But whatever might be the origin of Ged, or Jed, Ecgred having chosen this river as the seat of his mansion, had given it a name by adding the Saxon term weorth, or worth, denoting a possession, or hamlet; Fundus, praedium; vicus; Lye. In the same manner the names of many places in England have been formed; as Wortham, Worthington, Wandesworth, Kenelworth, &c. Old German wart, and Alemannic werts, signify locus.

NOTES ON THE EIGHTH BOOK.

That Corspatrick, Earl of Dunbar, used this provoking language, appears highly probable; as it is certain from other documents that, “when summoned by the guardian of Scotland, to attend a convention at Perth,” he “contemptuously refused. Blind Harrie is supported by the Tower Records.” Caledonia, II. 246.

I need scarcely say, that the earl had given Wallace this contemptuous designation, as being a native of the district of Kyle in Ayrshire.

In MS. schapin; but undoubtedly from inadvertency. It had perhaps been written schaym.

Edit. 1594,—Cokholme; followed by 1620, and other editions. But Macpherson says that Gorkhelm, here mentioned, is “in Etrik forest.” Geogr. Illustr.

In Edit. 1594, wraik, i. e. wreck. Perhaps this is the true reading. As in MS., it may signify, “to be deficient,” or “wanting,” as used for vaik. Here we have the double negative, common in Scottish.

In Edit. 1594, Brokis feild; Edit. 1648, Browes. D. Macpherson refers to Browis-feld as in Teviotdale. Geogr. Illustr.

“Richard de Lundie, Lundin, or London, was a powerful baron in the shire of Fife. He brought five hundred men to Wallace’s aid in the encounter with Macfadyan near Craigmore, in Perthshire.—Lundie, having become dissatisfied with some of the Scottish leaders, was on the side of the English in the battle of Stirling Bridge, September 11, 1297.

“In a charter by King William the Lion to the town of Perth, 1210, one of the witnesses is Robert de London, the king’s son. This natural son of the king had married the heiress of Lundin in Fife, and from her lands took his surname. Richard was their lineal descendant.

“In 1679, the family of Lundie, because of their descent, obtained liberty to bear the royal arms of Scotland. Afterwards the heiress married John Drummond, Earl of Melfort,” second son of James, Earl of Perth. This family is now represented by the Hon. R. P. Burrel Drummond of Perth.

I have extracted the greatest part of this note from those added to the Perth Edit. of Wallace, by my worthy friend the late Reverend James Scott of Perth, well known as an accurate and indefatigable antiquary. V. also Nisbet, I. p. 64. 107.

Hew the Hay seems to be the same person who afterwards married a sister of King Robert the Bruce, the widow of Laurence Lord Abernethy. He was descended from William Hay of Errol, and was ancestor to the family of Tweeddale. V. Nisbet, I. 182. He is designed Hay of Locharret, or Lochquharret, county of Edinburgh. The ancient orthography was Lochuswerword, Locherworn. Sir James Dalrymple’s Coll. Pref. 76; also Locherward, Ind. Chart. I. 26,—16. 9. 13.

In MS. mydlen. This I have explained as signifying middle, or denoting lands lying in the interior of a county or district. V. Etym. Dict. But I have here adopted the reading of Edit. 1594. Wallace being represented as at this time in Yorkshire, this is probably the honour or town of Middleham in the northern part of this county. In Bleau’s Atlas, it is written Midlam. It afterwards belonged to the Nevilles, who were Earls of Richmond.

In editions Brutus: i. e. he who is called the Brute.

In Edit. 1594, ver. 1438 is thus given;

This might at first view seem to correspond better with the preceding line, as signifying the determination of Wallace to make no retaliation on the female sex for the treachery of men; but as the author perhaps refers back to what is said in v. 1435, as to the king breaking any truce, made by women, as soon as he found it convenient, and then proceeds to declare that he would make no war on them, I have retained the verse as it is in MS. Thus, it expresses a determination that Edward should have no opportunity of acting so treacherous a part.

In Edit. 1594, Auane. The place is the same mentioned before, v. 1170, Sanct Awbawnys, i. e. St Albans. If we might suppose the Tantonie bell to be a corruption of “St Antony’s bell,” we could easily account for the introduction of the letter T here, as an abbreviation for Sanct.

In Edit. 1594;—

Ayris is the word in MS. This may be an erratum for ayr, in singular, as Bruce is thus designed, v. 1342—our ayr, i.e. “heir of our kingdom.” But I have retained it in plural, as by ayris the Minstrel might not only mean the king, but the heirs of noble families, then kept prisoners in England; as Randell, Lorn, Bowehane, &c. mentioned in connexion.

In Edit. 1594,—Lenox, vulgarly pronounced Lennoss. The mention of Dunbertane immediately after shows that this district is meant. V. Note on the Bruce, B. II. 40.

It is undoubtedly a problematical question, whether Wallace ever was in France. Some, among whom we must reckon our historian Major, think that this is improbable. The Minstrel, it must be acknowledged, has interspersed so much fable in his narrative, as to bring discredit even on what might otherwise have been readily admitted as fact. It seems unlikely that Wallace should have left his native country twice; and the exploits ascribed to him while in France must generally be rejected, especially those said to have been performed by him in Guienne; because it is incredible that, if he had done so much injury to the English in their recent conquests there, not the slightest notice should have been taken of this by any of their historians. But I do not see the same reason for deeming it improbable that he should ever have been in France.

1. From the great intercourse between Scotland and France, as well as from the great celebrity of the achievements of our hero, it seems very natural to suppose that Philip King of France should express an earnest desire to see him, and even send him an invitation to this purpose; and not less so, that while his hands were tied up, during a truce or peace with Edward, he should take the opportunity of gratifying his curiosity, in visiting that kingdom to which so many of his countrymen had been accustomed to resort, as one that had been long in a state of amity and alliance with their own. He might be the more disposed to a temporary change of place, from the envy which his valorous deeds had excited among the nobles of Scotland.

2. The story concerning the capture of Sir Thomas Charteris of Longueville is in so far supported by the known fact that there was a race of this name at Kinfauns; and that a two-handed sword is still shown in the castle of Kinfauns, which tradition has uniformly ascribed to this Longueville. Henry Adamson, in his Muse’s Threnodie, speaking of this castle, describes it as the place,—

3. In the Scotichronicon it is said, that “after the battle of Roslin, Wallace, having gone on board a ship, sought to France;” that “he acquired great fame there from the dangers to which he had been exposed, not only from pirates while at sea, but afterwards from the English in France; and that this is attested by certain songs in France as well as in Scotland.” The author goes so far as to assert, that Philip had applied to Edward for a truce between him and the Scots, that Philip might have a pretence for retaining Wallace for some time longer in France. Lib. XI. c. 34. MSS. Cupr. et Perth.

4. It is worthy of remark, that Major, after having mustered up several arguments against the probability of Wallace having ever been in France, at once seems to throw them all aside as of little weight, and in conclusion speaks like a man who had hitherto reasoned against his own secret convictions, acknowledging that he is unwilling expressly to deny that Wallace had been there. He closes the account with these remarkable words: Nolo tamen ob has ratiunculas constanter inficias ire ipsum oras Galliæ visitasse. Hist. Fol. LXXIV, a.

It would appear most probable, that the Charterises of Amisfield, now represented by the Earl of Wemyss and March, were connected with those of Kinfauns; from the similarity of their armorial bearings, if not also from their possession of Elcho, in the immediate vicinity of the latter. There was, however, one family of rank of this name settled in Scotland before the time assigned for the arrival of Longueville. Andrew de Charteris, who is said to have been the ancestor of the Amisfield family, swore fealty to Edward, A. 1296, and William de Charteris in 1306. V. Nisbet, Rem. Ragm. Roll, II. 23. Fœdera, II. 1015.

Neirest but weir, &c. Edit. 1594. This makes nonsense of the passage, and has been an early alteration. Wallace did not go nearest to Perth, but went to the town itself. The meaning must be, “In the earliest part of spring.” V. Veir, Etym. Dict.

NOTES ON THE NINTH BOOK.

In Edit. 1594, it is;

The language is defective as in MS. But began is scarcely the term that we could suppose the Minstrel to use. He would more probably have said;

I have therefore adhered to the reading of MS. borrowing the word in brackets in the next verse, from the edition quoted above.

The passage, as here given from the MS., is evidently deficient in sense. It is given more intelligibly in Edit. 1594.

In Edit. 1594, and 1648;

A Brankstewat seems an error for All Brankstewat. Both in MS. and in editions, the name has been evidently corrupted. I suspect that it ought to be Branthwaite. For the Skeltons were a family of considerable antiquity in Cumberland. John de Skelton was knight of the shire in the reign of Edward II. Armathwaite was the designation of their property. But Richard Skelton, sheriff of Cumberland, in the reign of Henry VI., lived at Branthwaite. Brankistnahait, and Brankistewat, have been originally Brankisthwaite. Thwaite forms the termination of many local names in the north of England. Grose explains it; “The shelving part of the side of a mountain.” Hutchinson’s account corresponds: “Down the river of Dudden stands the manor of Thwaites, between the river and the mountains, and the ancient seat of Joseph Thwaites of Ulnerigg, Esq., and the place being a stony mountainous country, is not everywhere altogether fit for tillage, meadow, and pasture. But in several parts and pieces, as they are marked by nature, differing in form and quality of soil, or otherwise, by the inhabitants inclosed from the barren wastes of the fells; such pieces of land are now, and were of old, called Thwaites in most places of the shire, sometimes with addition of their quality, as Brackenthwaite, of ferns; Swithwaite, of rushes; Stonythwaite, of stones; Brentwaite, of its steepness; Brunthwaite, of burnt with the sun, &c.” Hist. of Cumberland, I. 531, 532. 494.

I do not find any similar term in AS. conveying the idea of a stony place. The signification has perhaps been originally more general, as denoting any place separated from another, as are those “inclosed from wastes;” from thweot-an, exscindere, q. “a place cut off” from another.

This is understood as referring to the ancestor of the Guthries of Guthrie; and it is a strong presumption of the justness of the idea, that Arbroath is the harbour most contiguous to the seat of this ancient family. He is afterwards in different passages designed “the gud Guthré,” a character which, from all that I have seen, appears to have descended to his posterity.

Birnane, Edit. 1594. This is evidently Birname wood, that has derived such celebrity from its connection with the history of Macbeth.

“The hill of Birnam, rendered classic ground by the magic pen of Shakespeare, rises with a rude and striking magnificence to an elevation higher than that of the Sidla hills in Forfarshire, opposite to it. A round mount at the bottom of Birnam hill in the south-east, is worthy of remark. It is faced with steep oaks [q. rocks?] except for a few yards where it was fortified by art. This eminence has been known for time immemorial, by the names of Court-hill, and Duncan’s-hill, and is believed to have been on some occasions occupied by the unfortunate Scottish king of that name. It looks full in the face, at the distance of about twelve miles, the celebrated Dunsinan-hill, the seat and fortress of Macbeth.” Stat. Acc. VII. 355. 374.

The reading in MS. is, Freschly thai ferd. But to this no meaning can be attached. I have therefore given it as in the editions. But I suspect that there has been some corruption of the original here, as fled is introduced in the next line.

This, I suppose, must be the place now called Ardargie, in the Ochil Hills, parish of Forgandenny, Perthshire.

“All round this monastery [Lindores, Fife,] was Earn-side-wood, where Wallace defeated the English. It was anciently four miles in length, and three in breadth; now there is nothing but some few shrubs to the east of the abbey.” Sibbald’s Hist. Fife, P. iv. sect. 9. p. 406.

It is added in a note: “Of this wood no vestige remains. The place where it is said to have grown lies along the shore of the Frith, a considerable way below the junction of the Tay and the Earn. The name seems to countenance the tradition, that the Earn alone once flowed by the bottom of the hills of Fife, and did not unite for several miles below this with the Tay, whose course was then along the foot of the hills, forming the northern boundary of the Carse of Gowrie, which lying thus betwixt two rivers, was frequently overflowed, and only became habitable, when, in a great inundation, the Tay burst into the Earn, where they now join.”

In A. Blair’s Relationes, this battle is said to have been fought on the 12th of June 1298.

Macpherson thinks that this is perhaps the same with Portnebaryan, mentioned by Wyntoun, q. “the haven of bread;” arran signifying bread in Gaelic, and barra in Welsh, Cornish, and Armoric. V. Geogr. Illustrations. Shall we add another supposition,—that Portnebaryan had been the ancient name of Port-on-craigs, a ferry to the eastward of Woodhaven. The latter still retains its ancient name. It lies opposite to Dundee.

The whole passage to ver. 1057, Thai worthi Scottis, &c. is wanting in Edit. 1594, and subsequent editions. Both verses, 1049 and 1057, beginning in a similar manner, the intermediate ones must have been overlooked by some transcriber for the press. In MS. ver. 1050 is; The cruell strakis, &c. But as the sense requires it, I have substituted with, as in Edit. 1714, followed by that of Perth, 1790.

According to Henry, his son John Comyn, younger of Badenoch, served himself heir to this envy; as he attributes to him, in a special manner, the loss of the battle of Falkirk. But the account which he gives of this battle disagrees with that of the English writers, who give not the slightest hint of such variance among the chieftains, as, had it really taken place, could not have been totally unknown to their opponents.

William, one of this family, was Chancellor to King David I., and in the year 1140, by the grant of the Empress Maud, was made Bishop of Durham. Crawfurd’s Officers, p. 7. So powerful did it become, that in the reign of Alexander III. there were three earls and one lord of this name, besides thirty knights of landed property. Nisbet, I. 367.

I need scarcely say that Comyn was competitor with the elder Bruce for the crown, as boasting the same blood. This ancient and honourable family is now represented by Sir William Cumyn Gordon, of Altyre and Gordonstown, Baronet.

It is Erth also in Edit. 1594; Airth in that of 1620, and those of a later age.

“The tower at Airth was built before Sir William Wallace’s time. This tower is in good repair; it makes part of the house of Airth, and bears the name of Wallace’s Tower.” Stat. Acc. III. 493, 494.

Alexander de Airth, or Erth, is one of those whose names are recorded in the Ragman Roll. V. Nisbet, Rem. p. 23.

“The Erths of that ilk were once a very considerable family in this shire, being proprietors of Airth, Elphingstone, Carnock, and Plean. We find Adam de Erth mentioned among the commissioners who were appointed, in 1248, to ratify an agreement with England, concerning the regulations called the Border-laws. Bernard de Erth, who was probably a son of this Adam, married before 1271, one of the three daughters and co-heiresses of Finlaus de Campsie, a cadet of the family of Lennox.” Nimmo’s Stirlingshire, p. 516, 517. In the reign of James I. the eldest daughter of William Airth married “a son of the ancient family of Clackmannan, who thereupon came into possession of the lands of Airth. The family of Erth, like others, took their sirname from their lands; but it is now quite extinct in this country.” Ibid.

In editions it is Falkland. But this being so distant from the earl’s district, and from Dunbarton, where Wallace was immediately before, it must be an error. Macpherson places Faslan near the head of the Gairloch, above Roseneath, Dunbartonshire. V. Hist. Map of Scotl. In the passage, ver. 1514, Wallace and his party are said indeed to take their course thither from Roseneath, now a well known seat of the noble family of Argyle.

This exactly tallies with the account given by Godscroft. V. p. 20.

In editions Ferres. On this head Godscroft says; “His next wife was an English lady called Ferrar, or Ferrais, of which name we find the Earls of Darbie to have beene in the dayes of King Henry the Third.” Hist. Dougl. p. 16. In the Fœdera they are designed De Ferrariis.

Sauquhair, Edit. 1594. But here, and in the rest of the narrative, I have replaced what must have been the original term, as in Edit. 1620 and 1648, Sanquhair. “The wattyr of Craw,” ver. 1606, must be the rivulet now called Crawick, which falls into the Nith. V. Stat. Acc. VI. 451. There we are informed, that “the old castle of Sanquhair had been a building of considerable magnitude and extent;” and that “it is said to have been for some time in the possession of the English in the reign of Edward I., and to have been recaptured by Sir William Douglas,” as is here related. Ibid. p. 460, N.

This, in editions, is rendered Eskdaill. But this is undoubtedly a mistake. Housdaill is evidently the asperated pronunciation of the name of that district called Eusdaill, as being watered by the river Ewes, which joins the Esk at Langholm. V. Bleau’s Atlas, p. 47. This seems to have been the ancestor of the Marquisses of Annandale.

“The vestiges of Tiber’s castle, which has been a large building, are to be seen on the banks of the Nith. A small part of the wall next the river remains. Fosses are visible, and some entrenchments where it was most accessible. It is supposed that the barony of Tiber is named from Tiber, or Tiberius. There is a Roman encampment too. The English had a garrison in this castle in the time of Sir William Wallace, who took it by surprise.” Stat. Acc. P. of Penpont, I. 209.

NOTES ON THE TENTH BOOK.

I have hesitated whether this be not an erratum for half or halff, frequently used by our old writers in the sense of quarter; but have retained the term as in MS. Edit. 1594 has,—

If hald be the original term, it may lead us to the sense of the common termination in vulgar language, as in Southilt, Wessilt. V. Eassilt, Etym. Dict. Thus it might be resolved, “Hald,” or hold, “to the south of Falkirk.” Isl. halld-a signifies, viam dirigere; Haldorsoni Lex.

Innerauyn, Edit. 1594; Inneravin, Edit. 1648. More properly Inveravon, a village near the mouth of the river Avon in Stirlingshire, a little to the south of Kinneil. V. Nimmo’s Map of Stirlingshire. The rhyme requires that this should be pronounced as a word of four syllables.

It is not improbable that there might be, in that age, some dreaded English pirate, denominated perhaps from Lynne in Norfolk, especially as it is said that his ship was not seen by Wallace and his companions till they were opposite to the mouth of the Humber. But I have not met with any historical traces of him.

Although the essential term, bukis, has been omitted by Ramsay, the MS. alone makes sense of the passage. Hart’s emendation is equal in absurdity with the reading of Edit. 1594. By the Salysbery oyss, I need scarcely say, those missals are meant which were formed secundum usum Sarisburiensem. This agrees with the account given by Bellenden.

“He brint all the Cronikles of Scotland, with all maner of bukis als weill of deuyne seruyce as of othir materis; to that fyne that the memorye of Scottis suld peris. He gart the Scottis wryte bukis efter the vse of Sarum, and constranit thaym to say efter that vse.” Cronikle, Fol. CCIX, a. Libros sacros Anglico ritu conscribi jussit. Boeth.

It appears that this knight belonged to the county of Ross; and it has been conjectured that he was a son or brother of the Earl of Ross, who was at this time a prisoner in England. V. Notes to Perth Edit. p. 25, 26. In Edit. 1594 and 1620, it is in both places Clement.

NOTES ON THE ELEVENTH BOOK.

This is given according to Edit. 1594, &c. In MS. it is gyhyt. But this must certainly be an error; unless we should suppose it to be from AS. gehyd, “tectus, abditus, absconditus, hid, hidden, covered.” Somner.

We have here one proof, among many in our old national works, of the danger of editors rashly venturing to change the language. In Edit. 1594, it is;—

The editor had supposed that seyn apon, being an obsolete phrase in his time, must of necessity be improper. He had not known that it is very ancient, being pure Anglo-Saxon. The verb is used in a neuter sense; and seyn apon signifies beheld, looked upon. Thus on se-on is, intueri, aspicere in. On that wundor seon; Istud miraculum intueri.

This is the ancestor of the ancient house of Dundas of that ilk. Helias, or as here written Elyss, seems to have been a common name in this family. The first on record is Helias, son of Uchtred, who got the lands of Dundas, A. 1124, in the reign of Alexander I. One of the same christian name appears as witness to a charter in the reign of Alexander II. Serle de Dundas, probably the father of our Elyss, is mentioned in Ragman Roll. V. Nisbet’s Remarks, p. 34, 35, and Heraldry, I. 275.

“He was probably a descendant of the family of Scott of Balweary in Fife.” This “family continued till the reign of Charles I.,” and “is now represented by the Scotts of Ancrum, in Roxburghshire.” Notes to Edit. Perth, p. 49.

The account given of the treachery of Menteth is one of these points on which Sir D. Dalrymple shews his historical scepticism. He introduces it in language calculated to inspire doubt into the mind of the reader; observing that “the popular tradition is, that his friend Sir John Menteth betrayed him to the English.” Annals, I. 281. It is rather strange that he should express himself in this manner, at the very moment that he quotes the Scotichronicon on the margent; as if this venerable record, when a modern should be disposed to adopt a theory irreconcileable with its testimony, were entitled to no higher regard than is due to “popular tradition.”

He adds; “Sir John Menteth was of high birth, a son of Walter Stewart Earl of Menteth.” I can perceive no force in this remark, unless it be meant to imply that there never has been an instance of a man of noble blood acting the part of a traitor. On the same ground we might quarrel with all the evidence given of the conspiracies formed against Robert Bruce; and even call in question the murder of that amiable and accomplished prince James I.

But “at this time,” we are told, “the important fortress of Dumbarton was committed to his [Menteth’s] charge by Edward.” Here, it would seem, the learned writer fights the poor Minstrel with his own weapons. For I find no evidence of this fact in the Fœdera, Hemingford, or the Decem Scriptores; and Lord Hailes has referred to no authority; so that there is reason to suspect, to use his own language, that he here “copies” what “is said by Blind Harry, whom no historian but Sir Robert Sibbald will venture to quote.” If Harry’s narrative be received as authority, it is but justice to receive his testimony as he gives it. Now, in the preceding part of his work, he represents Menteth as holding the castle of Dunbarton at least with the consent of Wallace, while acknowledged as governor of Scotland. It would appear, indeed, that the whole district of the Lennox had been entrusted to him.

But even at this time there was something dubious in the conduct of Menteth. While he retained the castle, the English held the town under Edward.

It is perfectly conceivable, that, although it was known to Wallace that Menteth had some secret understanding with the English, this artful man might persuade him that he only wished an opportunity of wreaking the national vengeance on them, or at least of more effectively serving the interest of Wallace when he saw the proper time. Although Wallace had been assured that Menteth had taken an oath of fealty to Edward, he would have had no more reason for distrusting him than for distrusting by far the greatest part of the nobility and landholders of Scotland, who, as they believed, from the necessity of despair had submitted to the usurper.

John de Menteth is designed by Arnold Blair immanis proditor; and the writer proceeds to curse him as if with bell, book, and candle. Relationes, p. 8.

Sir David aims another blow at this account in the following words: “That he had ever any intercourse of friendship or familiarity with Wallace, I have yet to learn.” But the truth is, the worthy judge does not seem disposed to learn this. It is difficult to say what evidence will satisfy him. The incidental hints, in the preceding part of the poem, in regard to Wallace’s connection with Menteth, all perfectly agree with the mournful termination. Such confidence had he in him, according to the Minstrel, that he not only resided in Dunbarton castle for two months, while Menteth had the charge of it, but gave orders for building “a house of stone” there, apparently that he might enjoy his society.

But independently of the testimony of Blind Harry, Bower expressly asserts the co-operation of Menteth with Wallace, Graham, and Scrymgeour, in the suppression of the rebellious men of Galloway. In hoc ipso anno [1298], viz., xxviii die mensis Augusti, dominus Wallas Scotiæ custos, cum Johanne Grhame, et Johanne de Menteith, militibus, necnon Alexandro Scrimzeour constabulario villæ de Dundee, et vexillario Scotiæ, cum quinquagentis militibus armatis, rebelles Gallovidiensis punierunt, qui regis Angliæ et Cuminorum partibus sine aliquo jure steterunt. These words, which seem to be a quotation in the Relationes of Blair from the Scotichronicon, are not found in the MSS. from which Goodall gave his edition. They appear to have formed the commencement of the xxxii. chapter of the eleventh book, one of the two chapters here said to be wanting. Now this, whether it be the language of Bower, or of Blair, could not have been borrowed from the Minstrel, for the circumstance is overlooked by him. It seems to refer to that period of the history of Wallace, in which he is said to have made a circuit through Galloway and Carrick.

It is to be observed, that John Major expressly affirms the treachery of Menteth, as acting in concert with Aymer de Valloins, Earl of Pembroke. He says that Menteth was considered as his most intimate friend;—ipsi Vallaceo putatus amicissimus. Hist. Fol. LXXIII. Now, although he rejects many of the transactions recited by Blind Harry “as false,” so far is he from insinuating the slightest hesitation as to this business, that he formally starts an objection as to the imprudence of Wallace in not being more careful of his person, and answers it by remarking, that “no enemy is more dangerous than a domestic one.” He differs from the Minstrel, in saying that Wallace was “captured in the city of Glasgow.”

It may be added, that Bower expressly asserts that Wallace, “suspecting no evil, was fraudulently and treacherously seized at Glasgow by Lord John de Menteth.” Scotichron. XII. 8. Bower again refers to the treacherous conduct of Menteth towards Wallace when afterwards relating a similar plan which he had laid for taking King Robert Bruce prisoner, under pretence of delivering up to him the castle of Dunbarton, on condition of his receiving a hereditary right to the lieutenancy of the Lennox. V. Lib. xii. c. 16. 17. Vol. II. 243. These two chapters are not in all the MSS., but are found in those of Cupar, Perth, and Dunblane. Now, Bower was born A. 1385. Ibid. II. 401. The date assigned to the Scotichronicon, as published with his continuation, is 1447, and that to the Minstrel’s poem 1470. V. Pinkerton’s Maitland Poems, Intr. LXXXVI. LXXXIX. It is therefore impossible that Bower could have borrowed the account given of Menteth from Blind Harry. Bower was born, indeed, only eighty or eighty-one years after the fact referred to; and, considering the elevation of the character of Wallace, and the great attachment of his countrymen even to this day, as well as the multitude of his enemies, it is totally inconceivable that a whole nation, learned and unlearned, should concur in imputing this crime to one man without the most valid reasons.

Wyntown finished his Cronykil A. 1418. He, it is generally believed, was born little more than fifty years after the butchery of our magnanimous patriot. Sir D. Dalrymple could not, one would suppose, reasonably object to his testimony. Let us hear it.

I shall only add an important proof from the Lanercost MS., referred to in the Preliminary Remarks. “Captus fuit Willelmus Waleis per unum Scottum, scilicet per dominum Johannem de Mentiphe, et usque London ad Regem adductus, et adjudicatum fuit quod traheretur, et suspenderetur, et decollaretur, et membratim divideretur, et quod viscera ejus comburentur, quod factum est; et suspensum est caput ejus super pontem London, armus autem dexter super pontem Novi Castri super Tynam, et armus sinister apud Berwicum, pes autem dexter apud Villam Sanctis Johannis, et pes sinister apud Aberden.” Fol. 211. Mentiphe is obviously an erratum for Mentithe.

i. e. Only one house, where he was wont to conceal himself, while waiting for Bruce.

“At Robroystone, in this parish, [Cadder, Lanarkshire] on the 11th September 1305, Sir William Wallace was betrayed and apprehended by Sir John Monteath, a favourite of King Edward I. of England. After he was overpowered, and before his hands were bound, it is said he threw his sword into Robroystone Loch. An oaken couple or joist, which made part of the barn in which the Scottish hero was taken, is still to be seen in this neighbourhood, and may yet last for ages.” Stat. Acc. VIII. 481, 482.

In Edit. 1620, these lines are thus varied:—

Osauold must be Osuald, the King of Northumbria, who, having embraced Christianity, was slain by Penda the pagan king of Mercia. Bed. Hist. Eccl. III. 9. Eng. Martyrol. p. 213, 214. Edmunt is St Edmund, King of the East Angles, barbarously slain by the Danes of Northumbria for confessing Christ. Martyrol. p. 319. Eduuard seems to be St Edward, King of the West Saxons, slain at the instigation of his step-mother. Ibid. p. 72. Thomas is most probably the well-known Thomas a Becket.

Wyntown informs us that even in his day, long before that of the Minstrel, various works were written recording the deeds of Wallace; but he concludes that these fell short of the truth, as to their extent at least.

The character given to Wallace, by Andro Hart, is worthy of being preserved:

“This was the end of this worthy man’s life, who, for high spirit in enterprising dangers, for fortitude in execution, comparable in deed to the most famous chiftains amongst the ancients, for loue to his natiue countrey second to none, he onely free, the rest slaues,—could neither bee bought with benefites, nor compelled by force to leaue the publike cause which he had once profest; whose death appeared more to be lamented, that being inuincible, to his enemy he was betrayed by his familiar, that in no case should have done so.” Pref. to Life of Wallace, p. 14.

Such is the affectionate remembrance of this illustrious defender of the liberties of Scotland, that his name is retained in many other places besides those mentioned in the preceding Notes.

On the hill of “Couthboanlaw, now by corruption called Quothquanlaw,—the common people, to this day, point out with much fond admiration, Wallace’s Chair, where he had his abode, and held conferences with his followers, before the battle of Biggar. The chair is a large rough stone, scooped in the middle.” P. Libberton, Lanarkshire, Stat. Acc. II. 235. This is called Quodquen in a charter of the Duke of Albany. Robertson’s Ind. 167, 21.

In the town of Ayr they still point out the ancient tower[B] in which Wallace was imprisoned, and so cruelly treated, that he was at length thrown down from the battlements as dead. Common tradition gives the same account of this barbarous conduct as the Minstrel has done:

The building still bears his name, and appears to be the very same as it was in his time. It has been more fully brought into notice by the allusion of a poet, who, whatever were his defects, had power to stamp a deathless name on the subject of his muse, although it had not been otherwise entitled to this distinction.

“In one of the hills above Wandel mill there is Wallace’s Camp, so called from that great Scotch warrior, who encamped here.” The walls of the castle of Lamington “still remain some stories high, very thick and strong. It was built by a laird of Lamington, of the ancient and honourable name of Baillie, with whom the aforesaid Sir William Wallace was allied by marriage; in proof of which, and as a piece of curiosity, Wallace’s chair is now in Bonnington, in the possession of Lady Ross Baillie, the representative of the family of Lamington, being removed from the tower of that place. The chair is remarkably broad and stout.” P. of Lamington, Stat. Acc. VI. 557, 558. V. Note on B. VI. 47, above, p. 374, &c.

I have seen this chair at Bonnington, which is of oak, the posts of it at least, and otherwise corresponding with the description given in the Statistical Account. I am informed that there is a rock in the Pap Craig, a part of Tinto, which is still called Wallace’s Chair; and that another in the parish of Symington bears the same name, in a place called the Castlehill.