diff options
Diffstat (limited to '15955-h/15955-h.htm')
| -rw-r--r-- | 15955-h/15955-h.htm | 7844 |
1 files changed, 7844 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/15955-h/15955-h.htm b/15955-h/15955-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a7acb28 --- /dev/null +++ b/15955-h/15955-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,7844 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html + PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> +<html> +<head> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" /> +<title>A Short History of Scotland</title> + <style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[ XML blockout */ +<!-- + P { margin-top: .75em; + margin-bottom: .75em; + } + H1, H2 { + text-align: center; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + } + H3, H4 { + text-align: left; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 1em; + } + BODY{margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + .blkquot {margin-left: 4em; margin-right: 4em;} /* block indent */ + // --> + /* XML end ]]>*/ + </style> +</head> +<body> +<h2> +<a href="#startoftext">A Short History of Scotland, by Andrew Lang</a> +</h2> +<pre> +The Project Gutenberg eBook, A Short History of Scotland, by Andrew Lang + + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + + + + +Title: A Short History of Scotland + + +Author: Andrew Lang + +Release Date: May 31, 2005 [eBook #15955] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII) + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A SHORT HISTORY OF SCOTLAND*** +</pre> +<p><a name="startoftext"></a></p> +<p>Transcribed from the 1911 William Blackwood and Sons edition by David +Price, email ccx074@coventry.ac.uk</p> +<h1>A SHORT HISTORY OF SCOTLAND</h1> +<h2>CHAPTER I. SCOTLAND AND THE ROMANS.</h2> +<p>If we could see in a magic mirror the country now called Scotland +as it was when the Romans under Agricola (81 A.D.) crossed the Border, +we should recognise little but the familiar hills and mountains. +The rivers, in the plains, overflowed their present banks; dense forests +of oak and pine, haunted by great red deer, elks, and boars, covered +land that has long been arable. There were lakes and lagoons where +for centuries there have been fields of corn. On the oldest sites +of our towns were groups of huts made of clay and wattle, and dominated, +perhaps, by the large stockaded house of the tribal prince. In +the lochs, natural islands, or artificial islets made of piles (crannogs), +afforded standing-ground and protection to villages, if indeed these +lake-dwellings are earlier in Scotland than the age of war that followed +the withdrawal of the Romans.</p> +<p>The natives were far beyond the savage stage of culture. They +lived in an age of iron tools and weapons and of wheeled vehicles; and +were in what is called the Late Celtic condition of art and culture, +familiar to us from beautiful objects in bronze work, more commonly +found in Ireland than in Scotland, and from the oldest Irish romances +and poems.</p> +<p>In these “epics” the manners much resemble those described +by Homer. Like his heroes, the men in the Cuchullain sagas fight +from light chariots, drawn by two ponies, and we know that so fought +the tribes in Scotland encountered by Agricola the Roman General (81-85 +A.D.) It is even said in the Irish epics that Cuchullain learned +his chariotry in <i>Alba</i>—that is, in our Scotland. <a name="citation2"></a><a href="#footnote2">{2}</a> +The warriors had “mighty limbs and flaming hair,” says Tacitus. +Their weapons were heavy iron swords, in bronze sheaths beautifully +decorated, and iron-headed spears; they had large round bronze-studded +shields, and battle-axes. The dress consisted of two upper garments: +first, the smock, of linen or other fabric—in battle, often of +tanned hides of animals,—and the mantle, or plaid, with its brooch. +Golden torques and heavy gold bracelets were worn by the chiefs; the +women had bronze ornaments with brightly coloured enamelled decoration.</p> +<p>Agriculture was practised, and corn was ground in the circular querns +of stone, of which the use so long survived. The women span and +wove the gay smocks and darker cloaks of the warriors.</p> +<p>Of the religion, we only know that it was a form of polytheism; that +sacrifices were made, and that Druids existed; they were soothsayers, +magicians, perhaps priests, and were attendant on kings.</p> +<p>Such were the people in Alba whom we can dimly descry around Agricola’s +fortified frontier between the firths of Forth and Clyde, about 81-82 +A.D. When Agricola pushed north of the Forth and Tay he still +met men who had considerable knowledge of the art of war. In his +battle at Mons Graupius (perhaps at the junction of Isla and Tay), his +cavalry had the better of the native chariotry in the plain; and the +native infantry, descending from their position on the heights, were +attacked by his horsemen in their attempt to assail his rear. +But they were swift of foot, the woods sheltered and the hills defended +them. He made no more effectual pursuit than Cumberland did at +Culloden.</p> +<p>Agricola was recalled by Domitian after seven years’ warfare, +and his garrisons did not long hold their forts on his lines or frontier, +which stretched across the country from Forth to Clyde; roughly speaking, +from Graham’s Dyke, east of Borrowstounnis on the Firth of Forth, +to Old Kilpatrick on Clyde. The region is now full of coal-mines, +foundries, and villages; but excavations at Bar Hill, Castlecary, and +Roughcastle disclose traces of Agricola’s works, with their earthen +ramparts. The Roman station at Camelon, north-west of Falkirk, +was connected with the southern passes of the Highland hills by a road +with a chain of forts. The remains of Roman pottery at Camelon +are of the first century.</p> +<p>Two generations after Agricola, about 140-145, the Roman Governor, +Lollius Urbicus, refortified the line of Forth to Clyde with a wall +of sods and a ditch, and forts much larger than those constructed by +Agricola. His line, “the Antonine Vallum,” had its +works on commanding ridges; and fire-signals, in case of attack by the +natives, flashed the news “from one sea to the other sea,” +while the troops of occupation could be provisioned from the Roman fleet. +Judging by the coins found by the excavators, the line was abandoned +about 190, and the forts were wrecked and dismantled, perhaps by the +retreating Romans.</p> +<p>After the retreat from the Antonine Vallum, about 190, we hear of +the vigorous “unrest” of the Meatæ and Caledonians; +the latter people are said, on very poor authority, to have been little +better than savages. Against them Severus (208) made an expedition +indefinitely far to the north, but the enemy shunned a general engagement, +cut off small detachments, and caused the Romans terrible losses in +this march to a non-existent Moscow.</p> +<p>Not till 306 do we hear of the Picts, about whom there is infinite +learning but little knowledge. They must have spoken Gaelic by +Severus’s time (208), whatever their original language; and were +long recognised in Galloway, where the hill and river names are Gaelic.</p> +<p>The later years of the Romans, who abandoned Britain in 410, were +perturbed by attacks of the Scoti (Scots) from Ireland, and it is to +a settlement in Argyll of “Dalriadic” Scots from Ireland +about 500 A.D. that our country owes the name of Scotland.</p> +<p>Rome has left traces of her presence on Scottish soil—vestiges +of the forts and vallum wall between the firths; a station rich in antiquities +under the Eildons at Newstead; another, Ardoch, near Sheriffmuir; a +third near Solway Moss (Birrenswark); and others less extensive, with +some roads extending towards the Moray Firth; and a villa at Musselburgh, +found in the reign of James VI. <a name="citation4"></a><a href="#footnote4">{4}</a></p> +<h2>CHAPTER II. CHRISTIANITY—THE RIVAL KINGDOMS.</h2> +<p>To the Scots, through St Columba, who, about 563, settled in Iona, +and converted the Picts as far north as Inverness, we owe the introduction +of Christianity, for though the Roman Church of St Ninian (397), at +Whithern in Galloway, left embers of the faith not extinct near Glasgow, +St Kentigern’s country, till Columba’s time, the rites of +Christian Scotland were partly of the Celtic Irish type, even after +St Wilfrid’s victory at the Synod of Whitby (664).</p> +<p>St Columba himself was of the royal line in Ulster, was learned, +as learning was then reckoned, and, if he had previously been turbulent, +he now desired to spread the Gospel. With twelve companions he +settled in Iona, established his cloister of cells, and journeyed to +Inverness, the capital of Pictland. Here his miracles overcame +the magic of the King’s druids; and his Majesty, Brude, came into +the fold, his people following him. Columba was no less of a diplomatist +than of an evangelist. In a crystal he saw revealed the name of +the rightful king of the Dalriad Scots in Argyll—namely, Aidan—and +in 575, at Drumceat in North Ireland, he procured the recognition of +Aidan, and brought the King of the Picts also to confess Aidan’s +independent royalty.</p> +<p>In the ‘Life of Columba,’ by Adamnan, we get a clear +and complete view of everyday existence in the Highlands during that +age. We are among the red deer, and the salmon, and the cattle +in the hills, among the second-sighted men, too, of whom Columba was +far the foremost. We see the saint’s inkpot upset by a clumsy +but enthusiastic convert; we even make acquaintance with the old white +pony of the monastery, who mourned when St Columba was dying; while +among secular men we observe the differences in rank, measured by degrees +of wealth in cattle. Many centuries elapse before, in Froissart, +we find a picture of Scotland so distinct as that painted by Adamnan.</p> +<p>The discipline of St Columba was of the monastic model. There +were settlements of clerics in fortified villages; the clerics were +a kind of monks, with more regard for abbots than for their many bishops, +and with peculiar tonsures, and a peculiar way of reckoning the date +of Easter. Each missionary was popularly called a Saint, and the +<i>Kil</i>, or cell, of many a Celtic missionary survives in hundreds +of place-names.</p> +<p>The salt-water Loch Leven in Argyll was on the west the south frontier +of “Pictland,” which, on the east, included all the country +north of the Firth of Forth. From Loch Leven south to Kintyre, +a large cantle, including the isles, was the land of the Scots from +Ireland, the Dalriadic kingdom. The south-west, from Dumbarton, +including our modern Cumberland and Westmorland, was named Strathclyde, +and was peopled by British folk, speaking an ancient form of Welsh. +On the east, from Ettrick forest into Lothian, the land was part of +the early English kingdom of Bernicia; here the invading Angles were +already settled—though river-names here remain Gaelic, and hill-names +are often either Gaelic or Welsh. The great Northern Pictland +was divided into seven provinces, or sub-kingdoms, while there was an +over-King, or Ardrigh, with his capital at Inverness and, later, in +Angus or Forfarshire. The country about Edinburgh was partly English, +partly Cymric or Welsh. The south-west corner, Galloway, was called +Pictish, and was peopled by Gaelic-speaking tribes.</p> +<p>In the course of time and events the dynasty of the Argyll Scoti +from Ireland gave its name to Scotland, while the English element gave +its language to the Lowlands; it was adopted by the Celtic kings of +the whole country and became dominant, while the Celtic speech withdrew +into the hills of the north and northwest.</p> +<p>The nation was thus evolved out of alien and hostile elements, Irish, +Pictish, Gaelic, Cymric, English, and on the northern and western shores, +Scandinavian.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER III. EARLY WARS OF RACES.</h2> +<p>In a work of this scope, it is impossible to describe all the wars +between the petty kingdoms peopled by races of various languages, which +occupied Scotland. In 603, in the wild moors at Degsastane, between +the Liddel burn and the passes of the Upper Tyne, the English Aethelfrith +of Deira, with an army of the still pagan ancestors of the Borderers, +utterly defeated Aidan, King of Argyll, with the Christian converted +Scots. Henceforth, for more than a century, the English between +Forth and Humber feared neither Scot of the west nor Pict of the north.</p> +<p>On the death of Aethelfrith (617), the Christian west and north exercised +their influences; one of Aethelfrith’s exiled sons married a Pictish +princess, and became father of a Pictish king, another, Oswald, was +baptised at Iona; and the new king of the northern English of Lothian, +Edwin, was converted by Paullinus (627), and held Edinburgh as his capital. +Later, after an age of war and ruin, Oswald, the convert of Iona, restored +Christianity in northern England; and, after his fall, his brother, +Oswiu, consolidated the north English. In 685 Oswiu’s son +Egfrith crossed the Forth and invaded Pictland with a Northumbrian army, +but was routed with great loss, and was slain at Nectan’s Mere, +in Forfarshire. Thenceforth, till 761, the Picts were dominant, +as against Scots and north English, Angus MacFergus being then their +leader (731-761).</p> +<p>Now the invaders and settlers from Scandinavia, the Northmen on the +west coast, ravaged the Christian Scots of the west, and burned Iona: +finally, in 844-860, Kenneth MacAlpine of Kintyre, a Scot of Dalriada +on the paternal, a Pict on the mother’s side, defeated the Picts +and obtained their throne. By Pictish law the crown descended +in the maternal line, which probably facilitated the coronation of Kenneth. +To the Scots and “to all Europe” he was a Scot; to the Picts, +as son of a royal Pictish mother, he was a Pict. With him, at +all events, Scots and Picts were interfused, and there began the <i>Scottish</i> +dynasty, supplanting the Pictish, though it is only in popular tales +that the Picts were exterminated.</p> +<p>Owing to pressure from the Northmen sea-rovers in the west, the capital +and the seat of the chief bishop, under Kenneth MacAlpine (844-860), +were moved eastwards from Iona to Scone, near Perth, and after an interval +at Dunkeld, to St Andrews in Fife.</p> +<p>The line of Kenneth MacAlpine, though disturbed by quarrels over +the succession, and by Northmen in the west, north, and east, none the +less in some way “held a good grip o’ the gear” against +Vikings, English of Lothian, and Welsh of Strathclyde. In consequence +of a marriage with a Welsh princess of Strathclyde, or Cumberland, a +Scottish prince, Donald, brother of Constantine II., became king of +that realm (908), and his branch of the family of MacAlpin held Cumbria +for a century.</p> +<h3>ENGLISH CLAIMS OVER SCOTLAND.</h3> +<p>In 924 the first claim by an English king, Edward, to the over-lordship +of Scotland appears in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. The entry contains +a manifest error, and the topic causes war between modern historians, +English and Scottish. In fact, there are several such entries +of Scottish acceptance of English suzerainty under Constantine II., +and later, but they all end in the statement, “this held not long.” +The “submission” of Malcolm I. to Edmund (945) is not a +submission but an alliance; the old English word for “fellow-worker,” +or “ally,” designates Malcolm as fellow-worker with Edward +of England.</p> +<p>This word (midwyrhta) was translated <i>fidelis</i> (one who gives +fealty) in the Latin of English chroniclers two centuries later, but +Malcolm I. held Cumberland as an ally, not as a subject prince of England. +In 1092 an English chronicle represents Malcolm III. as holding Cumberland +“by conquest.”</p> +<p>The main fact is that out of these and similar dim transactions arose +the claims of Edward I. to the over-lordship of Scotland,—claims +that were urged by Queen Elizabeth’s minister, Cecil, in 1568, +and were boldly denied by Maitland of Lethington. From these misty +pretensions came the centuries of war that made the hardy character +of the folk of Scotland. <a name="citation10"></a><a href="#footnote10">{10}</a></p> +<h3>THE SCOTTISH ACQUISITION OF LOTHIAN.</h3> +<p>We cannot pretend within our scope to follow chronologically “the +fightings and flockings of kites and crows,” in “a wolf-age, +a war-age,” when the Northmen from all Scandinavian lands, and +the Danes, who had acquired much of Ireland, were flying at the throat +of England and hanging on the flanks of Scotland; while the Britons +of Strathclyde struck in, and the Scottish kings again and again raided +or sought to occupy the fertile region of Lothian between Forth and +Tweed. If the dynasty of MacAlpin could win rich Lothian, with +its English-speaking folk, they were “made men,” they held +the granary of the North. By degrees and by methods not clearly +defined they did win the Castle of the Maidens, the acropolis of Dunedin, +Edinburgh; and fifty years later, in some way, apparently by the sword, +at the battle of Carham (1018), in which a Scottish king of Cumberland +fought by his side, Malcolm II. took possession of Lothian, the whole +south-east region, by this time entirely anglified, and this was the +greatest step in the making of Scotland. The Celtic dynasty now +held the most fertile district between Forth and Tweed, a district already +English in blood and speech, the centre and focus of the English civilisation +accepted by the Celtic kings. Under this Malcolm, too, his grandson, +Duncan, became ruler of Strathclyde—that is, practically, of Cumberland.</p> +<p>Malcolm is said to have been murdered at haunted Glamis, in Forfarshire, +in 1034; the room where he died is pointed out by legend in the ancient +castle. His rightful heir, by the strange system of the Scots, +should have been, not his own grandson, Duncan, but the grandson of +Kenneth III. The rule was that the crown went alternately to a +descendant of the House of Constantine (863-877), son of Kenneth MacAlpine, +and to a descendant of Constantine’s brother, Aodh (877-888). +These alternations went on till the crowning of Malcolm II. (1005-1034), +and then ceased, for Malcolm II. had slain the unnamed male heir of +the House of Aodh, a son of Boedhe, in order to open the succession +to his own grandson, “the gracious Duncan.” Boedhe +had left a daughter, Gruach; she had by the Mormaor, or under-king of +the province of Murray, a son, Lulach. On the death of the Mormaor +she married Macbeth, and when Macbeth slew Duncan (1040), he was removing +a usurper—as he understood it—and he ruled in the name of +his stepson, Lulach. The power of Duncan had been weakened by +repeated defeats at the hands of the Northmen under Thorfinn. +In 1057 Macbeth was slain in battle at Lumphanan, in Aberdeenshire, +and Malcolm Canmore, son of Duncan, after returning from England, whither +he had fled from Macbeth, succeeded to the throne. But he and +his descendants for long were opposed by the House of Murray, descendants +of Lulach, who himself had died in 1058.</p> +<p>The world will always believe Shakespeare’s version of these +events, and suppose the gracious Duncan to have been a venerable old +man, and Macbeth an ambitious Thane, with a bloodthirsty wife, he himself +being urged on by the predictions of witches. He was, in fact, +Mormaor of Murray, and upheld the claims of his stepson Lulach, who +was son of a daughter of the wrongfully extruded House of Aodh.</p> +<p>Malcolm Canmore, Duncan’s grandson, on the other hand, represented +the European custom of direct lineal succession against the ancient +Scots’ mode.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER IV. MALCOLM CANMORE—NORMAN CONQUEST.</h2> +<p>The reign of Malcolm Canmore (1057-1093) brought Scotland into closer +connection with western Europe and western Christianity. The Norman +Conquest (1066) increased the tendency of the English-speaking people +of Lothian to acquiesce in the rule of a Celtic king, rather than in +that of the adventurers who followed William of Normandy. Norman +operations did not at first reach Cumberland, which Malcolm held; and, +on the death of his Norse wife, the widow of Duncan’s foe, Thorfinn +(she left a son, Duncan), Malcolm allied himself with the English Royal +House by marrying Margaret, sister of Eadgar Ætheling, then engaged +in the hopeless effort to rescue northern England from the Normans. +The dates are confused: Malcolm may have won the beautiful sister of +Edgar, rightful king of England, in 1068, or at the time (1070) of his +raid, said to have been of savage ferocity, into Northumberland, and +his yet more cruel reprisals for Gospatric’s harrying of Cumberland. +In either case, St Margaret’s biographer, who had lived at her +Court, whether or not he was her Confessor, Turgot, represents the Saint +as subduing the savagery of Malcolm, who passed wakeful nights in weeping +for his sins. A lover of books, which Malcolm could not read, +an expert in “the delicate, and gracious, and bright works of +women,” Margaret brought her own gentleness and courtesy among +a rude people, built the abbey church of Dunfermline, and presented +the churches with many beautiful golden reliquaries and fine sacramental +plate.</p> +<p>In 1072, to avenge a raid of Malcolm (1070), the Conqueror, with +an army and a fleet, came to Abernethy on Tay, where Malcolm, in exchange +for English manors, “became his man” <i>for them</i>, and +handed over his son Duncan as a hostage for peace. The English +view is that Malcolm became William’s “man for all that +he had”—or for all south of Tay.</p> +<p>After various raidings of northern England, and after the death of +the Conqueror, Malcolm renewed, in Lothian, the treaty of Abernethy, +being secured in his twelve English manors (1091). William Rufus +then took and fortified Carlisle, seized part of Malcolm’s lands +in Cumberland, and summoned him to Gloucester, where the two Kings, +after all, quarrelled and did not meet. No sooner had Malcolm +returned home than he led an army into Northumberland, where he was +defeated and slain, near Alnwick (Nov. 13, 1093). His son Edward +fell with him, and his wife, St Margaret, died in Edinburgh Castle: +her body, under cloud of night, was carried through the host of rebel +Celts and buried at Dunfermline.</p> +<p>Margaret, a beautiful and saintly Englishwoman, had been the ruling +spirit of the reign in domestic and ecclesiastical affairs. She +had civilised the Court, in matters of costume at least; she had read +books to the devoted Malcolm, who could not read; and he had been her +interpreter in her discussions with the Celtic-speaking clergy, whose +ideas of ritual differed from her own. The famous Culdees, originally +ascetic hermits, had before this day united in groups living under canonical +rules, and, according to English observers, had ceased to be bachelors. +Masses are said to have been celebrated by them in some “barbarous +rite”; Saturday was Sabbath; on Sunday men worked. Lent +began, not on Ash Wednesday, but on the Monday following. We have +no clearer account of the Culdee peculiarities that St Margaret reformed. +The hereditary tenure of benefices by lay protectors she did not reform, +but she restored the ruined cells of Iona, and established <i>hospitia</i> +for pilgrims. She was decidedly unpopular with her Celtic subjects, +who now made a struggle against English influences.</p> +<p>In the year of her death died Fothadh, the last Celtic bishop of +St Andrews, and the Celtic clergy were gradually superseded and replaced +by monks of English name, English speech, and English ideas—or +rather the ideas of western Europe. Scotland, under Margaret’s +influence, became more Catholic; the celibacy of the clergy was more +strictly enforced (it had almost lapsed), but it will be observed throughout +that, of all western Europe, Scotland was least overawed by Rome. +Yet for centuries the Scottish Church was, in a peculiar degree, “the +daughter of Rome,” for not till about 1470 had she a Metropolitan, +the Archbishop of St Andrews.</p> +<p>On the deaths, in one year, of Malcolm, Margaret, and Fothadh, the +last Celtic bishop of St Andrews, the see for many years was vacant +or merely filled by transient bishops. York and Canterbury were +at feud for their superiority over the Scottish Church; and the other +sees were not constituted and provided with bishops till the years 1115 +(Glasgow), 1150,—Argyll not having a bishop till 1200. In +the absence of a Metropolitan, episcopal elections had to be confirmed +at Rome, which would grant no Metropolitan, but forbade the Archbishop +of York to claim a superiority which would have implied, or prepared +the way for, English superiority over Scotland. Meanwhile the +expenses and delays of appeals from bishops direct to Rome did not stimulate +the affection of the Scottish “daughter of Rome.” +The rights of the chapters of the Cathedrals to elect their bishops, +and other appointments to ecclesiastical offices, in course of time +were transferred to the Pope, who negotiated with the king, and thus +all manner of jobbery increased, the nobles influencing the king in +favour of their own needy younger sons, and the Pope being amenable +to various secular persuasions, so that in every way the relations of +Scotland with the Holy Father were anomalous and irksome.</p> +<p>Scotland was, indeed, a country predestined to much ill fortune, +to tribulations against which human foresight could erect no defence. +But the marriage of the Celtic Malcolm with the English Margaret, and +the friendly arrival of great nobles from the south, enabled Scotland +to receive the new ideas of feudal law in pacific fashion. They +were not violently forced upon the English-speaking people of Lothian.</p> +<h3>DYNASTY OF MALCOLM.</h3> +<p>On the death of Malcolm the contest for the Crown lay between his +brother, Donald Ban, supported by the Celts; his son Duncan by his first +wife, a Norse woman (Duncan being then a hostage at the English Court, +who was backed by William Rufus); and thirdly, Malcolm’s eldest +son by Margaret, Eadmund, the favourite with the anglicised south of +the country. Donald Ban, after a brief period of power, was driven +out by Duncan (1094); Duncan was then slain by the Celts (1094). +Donald was next restored, north of Forth, Eadmund ruling in the south, +but was dispossessed and blinded by Malcolm’s son Eadgar, who +reigned for ten years (1097-1107), while Eadmund died in an English +cloister. Eadgar had trouble enough on all sides, but the process +of anglicising continued, under himself, and later, under his brother, +Alexander I., who ruled north of Forth and Clyde; while the youngest +brother, David, held Lothian and Cumberland, with the title of Earl. +The sister of those sons of Malcolm, Eadgyth (Matilda), married Henry +I. of England in 1100. There seemed a chance that, north of Clyde +and Forth, there would be a Celtic kingdom; while Lothian and Cumbria +would be merged in England. Alexander was mainly engaged in fighting +the Moray claimants of his crown in the north and in planting his religious +houses, notably St Andrews, with English Augustinian canons from York. +Canterbury and York contended for ecclesiastical superiority over Scotland; +after various adventures, Robert, the prior of the Augustinians at Scone, +was made Bishop of St Andrews, being consecrated by Canterbury, in 1124; +while York consecrated David’s bishop in Glasgow. Thanks +to the quarrels of the sees of York and Canterbury, the Scottish clergy +managed to secure their ecclesiastical independence from either English +see; and became, finally, the most useful combatants in the long struggle +for the independence of the nation. Rome, on the whole, backed +that cause. The Scottish Catholic churchmen, in fact, pursued +the old patriotic policy of resistance to England till the years just +preceding the Reformation, when the people leaned to the reformed doctrines, +and when Scottish national freedom was endangered more by France than +by England.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER V. DAVID I. AND HIS TIMES.</h2> +<p>With the death of Alexander I. (April 25, 1124) and the accession +of his brother, David I., the deliberate Royal policy of introducing +into Scotland English law and English institutions, as modified by the +Norman rulers, was fulfilled. David, before Alexander’s +death, was Earl of the most English part of Lothian, the country held +by Scottish kings, and Cumbria; and resided much at the court of his +brother-in-law, Henry I. He associated, when Earl, with nobles +of Anglo-Norman race and language, such as Moreville, Umfraville, Somerville, +Gospatric, Bruce, Balliol, and others; men with a stake in both countries, +England and Scotland. On coming to the throne, David endowed these +men with charters of lands in Scotland. With him came a cadet +of the great Anglo-Breton House of FitzAlan, who obtained the hereditary +office of Seneschal or <i>Steward</i> of Scotland. His patronymic, +FitzAlan, merged in Stewart (later Stuart), and the family cognizance, +the <i>fesse chequy</i> in azure and argent, represents the Board of +Exchequer. The earliest Stewart holdings of land were mainly in +Renfrewshire; those of the Bruces were in Annandale. These two +Anglo-Norman houses between them were to found the Stewart dynasty.</p> +<p>The wife of David, Matilda, widow of Simon de St Liz, was heiress +of Waltheof, sometime the Conqueror’s Earl in Northumberland; +and to gain, through that connection, Northumberland for himself was +the chief aim of David’s foreign policy,—an aim fertile +in contentions.</p> +<p>We have not space to disentangle the intricacies of David’s +first great domestic struggles; briefly, there was eternal dispeace +caused by the Celts, headed by claimants to the throne, the MacHeths, +representing the rights of Lulach, the ward of Macbeth. <a name="citation20"></a><a href="#footnote20">{20}</a> +In 1130 the Celts were defeated, and their leader, Angus, Earl of Moray, +fell in fight near the North Esk in Forfarshire. His brother, +Malcolm, by aid of David’s Anglo-Norman friends, was taken and +imprisoned in Roxburgh Castle. The result of this rising was that +David declared the great and ancient Celtic Earldom of Moray—the +home of his dynastic Celtic rivals—forfeit to the Crown. +He planted the region with English, Anglo-Norman, and Lowland landholders, +a great step in the anglicisation of his kingdom. Thereafter, +for several centuries, the strength of the Celts lay in the west in +Moidart, Knoydart, Morar, Mamore, Lochaber, and Kintyre, and in the +western islands, which fell into the hands of “the sons of Somerled,” +the Macdonalds.</p> +<p>In 1135-1136, on the death of Henry I., David, backing his own niece, +Matilda, as Queen of England in opposition to Stephen, crossed the Border +in arms, but was bought off. His son Henry received the Honour +of Huntingdom, with the Castle of Carlisle, and a vague promise of consideration +of his claim to Northumberland. In 1138, after a disturbed interval, +David led the whole force of his realm, from Orkney to Galloway, into +Yorkshire. His Anglo-Norman friends, the Balliols and Bruces, +with the Archbishop of York, now opposed him and his son Prince Henry. +On August 22, 1138, at Cowton Moor, near Northallerton, was fought the +great battle, named from the huge English sacred banner, “The +Battle of the Standard.”</p> +<p>In a military sense, the fact that here the men-at-arms and knights +of England fought as dismounted infantry, their horses being held apart +in reserve, is notable as preluding to the similar English tactics in +their French wars of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.</p> +<p>Thus arrayed, the English received the impetuous charge of the wild +Galloway men, not in armour, who claimed the right to form the van, +and broke through the first line only to die beneath the spears of the +second. But Prince David with his heavy cavalry scattered the +force opposed to him, and stampeded the horses of the English that were +held in reserve. This should have been fatal to the English, but +Henry, like Rupert at Marston Moor, pursued too far, and the discipline +of the Scots was broken by the cry that their King had fallen, and they +fled. David fought his way to Carlisle in a series of rearguard +actions, and at Carlisle was joined by Prince Henry with the remnant +of his men-at-arms. It was no decisive victory for England.</p> +<p>In the following year (1139) David got what he wanted. His +son Henry, by peaceful arrangement, received the Earldom of Northumberland, +without the two strong places, Bamborough and Newcastle.</p> +<p>Through the anarchic weakness of Stephen’s reign, Scotland +advanced in strength and civilisation despite a Celtic rising headed +by a strange pretender to the rights of the MacHeths, a “brother +Wimund”; but all went with the death of David’s son, Prince +Henry, in 1152. Of the prince’s three sons, the eldest, +Malcolm, was but ten years old; next came his brothers William (“the +Lion”) and little David, Earl of Huntingdon. From this David’s +daughters descended the chief claimants to the Scottish throne in 1292—namely, +Balliol, Bruce, and Comyn: the last also was descended, in the female +line, from King Donald Ban, son of Malcolm Canmore.</p> +<p>David had done all that man might do to settle the crown on his grandson +Malcolm; his success meant that standing curse of Scotland, “Woe +to the kingdom whose king is a child,”—when, in a year, +David died at Carlisle (May 24, 1153).</p> +<h3>SCOTLAND BECOMES FEUDAL.</h3> +<p>The result of the domestic policy of David was to bring all accessible +territory under the social and political system of western Europe, “the +Feudal System.” Its principles had been perfectly familiar +to Celtic Scotland, but had rested on a body of traditional customs +(as in Homeric Greece), rather than on written laws and charters signed +and sealed. Among the Celts the local tribe had been, theoretically, +the sole source of property in land. In proportion as they were +near of kin to the recognised tribal chief, families held lands by a +tenure of three generations; but if they managed to acquire abundance +of oxen, which they let out to poorer men for rents in kind and labour, +they were apt to turn the lands which they held only temporarily, “in +possession,” into real permanent <i>property</i>. The poorer +tribesmen paid rent in labour or “services,” also in supplies +of food and manure.</p> +<p>The Celtic tenants also paid military service to their superiors. +The remotest kinsmen of each lord of land, poor as they might be, were +valued for their swords, and were billeted on the unfree or servile +tenants, who gave them free quarters.</p> +<p>In the feudal system of western Europe these old traditional customs +had long been modified and stereotyped by written charters. The +King gave gifts of land to his kinsmen or officers, who were bound to +be “faithful” (<i>fideles</i>); in return the inferior did +homage, while he received protection. From grade to grade of rank +and wealth each inferior did homage to and received protection from +his superior, who was also his judge. In this process, what had +been the Celtic tribe became the new “thanage”; the Celtic +king (<i>righ</i>) of the tribe became the thane; the province or group +of tribes (say Moray) became the earldom; the Celtic Mormaer of the +province became the earl; and the Crown appointed <i>vice-comites</i>, +sub-earls, that is sheriffs, who administered the King’s justice +in the earldom.</p> +<p>But there were regions, notably the west Highlands and isles, where +the new system penetrated slowly and with difficulty through a mountainous +and almost townless land. The law, and written leases, “came +slowly up that way.”</p> +<p>Under David, where his rule extended, society was divided broadly +into three classes—Nobles, Free, Unfree. All holders of +“a Knight’s fee,” or part of one, holding by <i>free</i> +service, hereditarily, and by charter, constituted the <i>communitas</i> +of the realm (we are to hear of the <i>communitas</i> later), and were +free, noble, or gentle,—men of coat armour. The “ignoble,” +“not noble,” men with no charter from the Crown, or Earl, +Thane, or Church, were, if lease-holders, though not “noble,” +still “free.” Beneath them were the “unfree” +<i>nativi</i>, sold or given with the soil.</p> +<p>The old Celtic landholders were not expropriated, as a rule, except +where Celtic risings, in Galloway and Moray, were put down, and the +lands were left in the King’s hands. Often, when we find +territorial surnames of families, “<i>de</i>” “of” +this place or that,—the lords are really of Celtic blood with +Celtic names; disguised under territorial titles; and finally disused. +But in Galloway and Ayrshire the ruling Celtic name, Kennedy, remains +Celtic, while the true Highlands of the west and northwest retained +their native magnates. Thus the Anglicisation, except in very +rebellious regions, was gradual. There was much less expropriation +of the Celt than disguising of the Celt under new family names and regulation +of the Celt under written charters and leases.</p> +<h3>CHURCH LANDS.</h3> +<p>David I. was, according to James VI., nearly five centuries later, +“a sair saint for the Crown.” He gave Crown-lands +in the southern lowlands to the religious orders with their priories +and abbeys; for example, Holyrood, Melrose, Jedburgh, Kelso, and Dryburgh—centres +of learning and art and of skilled agriculture. Probably the best +service of the regular clergy to the State was its orderliness and attention +to agriculture, for the monasteries did not, as in England, produce +many careful chroniclers and historians.</p> +<p>Each abbey had its lands divided into baronies, captained by a lay +“Church baron” to lead its levies in war. The civil +centre of the barony was the great farm or grange, with its mill, for +in the thirteenth century the Lowlands had water-mills which to the +west Highlands were scarcely known in 1745, when the Highland husbandmen +were still using the primitive hand-quern of two circular stones. +Near the mill was a hamlet of some forty cottages; each head of a family +had a holding of eight or nine acres and pasturage for two cows, and +paid a small money rent and many arduous services to the Abbey.</p> +<p>The tenure of these cottars was, and under lay landlords long remained, +extremely precarious; but the tenure of the “bonnet laird” +(<i>hosbernus</i>) was hereditary. Below even the free cottars +were the unfree serfs or <i>nativi</i>, who were handed over, with the +lands they tilled, to the abbeys by benefactors: the Church was forward +in emancipating these serfs; nor were lay landlords backward, for the +freed man was useful as a spear-man in war.</p> +<p>We have only to look at the many now ruined abbeys of the Border +to see the extent of civilisation under David I., and the relatively +peaceful condition, then, of that region which later became the cockpit +of the English wars, and the home of the raiding clans, Scotts, Elliots, +and Armstrongs, Bells, Nixons, Robsons, and Croziers.</p> +<h3>THE BURGHS.</h3> +<p>David and his son and successor, William the Lion, introduced a stable +middle and urban class by fostering, confirming, and regulating the +rights, privileges, and duties of the already existing free towns. +These became <i>burghs</i>, royal, seignorial, or ecclesiastical. +In origin the towns may have been settlements that grew up under the +shelter of a military castle. Their fairs, markets, rights of +trading, internal organisation, and primitive police, were now, mainly +under William the Lion, David’s successor, regulated by charters; +the burghers obtained the right to elect their own magistrates, and +held their own burgh-courts; all was done after the English model. +As the State had its “good men” (<i>probi homines</i>), +who formed its recognised “community,” so had the borough. +Not by any means all dwellers in a burgh were free burghers; these free +burghers had to do service in guarding the royal castle—later +this was commuted for a payment in money. Though with power to +elect their own chief magistrate, the burghers commonly took as Provost +the head of some friendly local noble family, in which the office was +apt to become practically hereditary. The noble was the leader +and protector of the town. As to police, the burghers, each in +his turn, provided men to keep watch and ward from curfew bell to cock-crow. +Each ward in the town had its own elected Bailie. Each burgh had +exclusive rights of trading in its area, and of taking toll on merchants +coming within its <i>Octroi</i>. An association of four burghs, +Berwick, Roxburgh, Edinburgh, and Stirling, was the root of the existing +“Convention of Burghs.”</p> +<h3>JUSTICE.</h3> +<p>In early societies, justice is, in many respects, an affair to be +settled between the kindreds of the plaintiff, so to speak, and the +defendant. A man is wounded, killed, robbed, wronged in any way; +his kin retaliate on the offender and <i>his</i> kindred. The +blood-feud, the taking of blood for blood, endured for centuries in +Scotland after the peace of the whole realm became, under David I., +“the King’s peace.” Homicides, for example, +were very frequently pardoned by Royal grace, but “the pardon +was of no avail unless it had been issued with the full knowledge of +the kin of the slaughtered man, who otherwise retained their <i>legal</i> +right of vengeance on the homicide.” They might accept pecuniary +compensation, the blood-fine, or they might not, as in Homer’s +time. <a name="citation27"></a><a href="#footnote27">{27}</a> +At all events, under David, offences became offences against the King, +not merely against this or that kindred. David introduced the +“Judgment of the Country” or <i>Visnet del Pais</i> for +the settlement of pleas. Every free man, in his degree, was “tried +by his peers,” but the old ordeal by fire and Trial by Combat +or duel were not abolished. Nor did “compurgation” +cease wholly till Queen Mary’s reign. A powerful man, when +accused, was then attended at his trial by hosts of armed backers. +Men so unlike each other as Knox, Bothwell, and Lethington took advantage +of this usage. All lords had their own Courts, but murder, rape, +arson, and robbery could now only be tried in the royal Courts; these +were “The Four Pleas of the Crown.”</p> +<h3>THE COURTS.</h3> +<p>As there was no fixed capital, the King’s Court, in David’s +time, followed the King in his annual circuits through his realm, between +Dumfries and Inverness. Later, the regions of Scotia (north of +Forth), Lothian, and the lawless realm of Galloway, had their Grand +Justiciaries, who held the Four Pleas. The other pleas were heard +in “Courts of Royalty” and by earls, bishops, abbots, down +to the baron, with his “right of pit and gallows.” +At such courts, by a law of 1180, the Sheriff of the shire, or an agent +of his, ought to be present; so that royal and central justice was extending +itself over the minor local courts. But if the sheriff or his +sergeant did not attend when summoned, local justice took its course.</p> +<p>The process initiated by David’s son, William the Lion, was +very slowly substituting the royal authority, the royal sheriffs of +shires, juries, and witnesses, for the wild justice of revenge; and +trial by ordeal, and trial by combat. But hereditary jurisdictions +of nobles and gentry were not wholly abolished till after the battle +of Culloden! Where Abbots held courts, their procedure, in civil +cases, was based on laws sanctioned by popes and general councils. +But, alas! the Abbot might give just judgment; to execute it, we know +from a curious instance, was not within his power, if the offender laughed +at a sentence of excommunication.</p> +<p>David and his successors, till the end of the thirteenth century, +made Scotland a more civilised and kept it a much less disturbed country +than it was to remain during the long war of Independence, while the +beautiful abbeys with their churches and schools attested a high stage +of art and education.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER VI. MALCOLM THE MAIDEN.</h2> +<p>The prominent facts in the brief reign of David’s son Malcolm +the Maiden, crowned (1153) at the age of eleven, were, first, a Celtic +rising by Donald, a son of Malcolm MacHeth (now a prisoner in Roxburgh +Castle), and a nephew of the famous Somerled Macgillebride of Argyll. +Somerled won from the Norse the Isle of Man and the Southern Hebrides; +from his sons descend the great Macdonald Lords of the Isles, always +the leaders of the long Celtic resistance to the central authority in +Scotland. Again, Malcolm resigned to Henry II. of England the +northern counties held by David I.; and died after subduing Galloway, +and (on the death of Somerled, said to have been assassinated) the tribes +of the isles in 1165.</p> +<h3>WILLIAM THE LION.</h3> +<p>Ambition to recover the northern English counties revealed itself +in the overtures of William the Lion,—Malcolm’s brother +and successor,—for an alliance between Scotland and France. +“The auld Alliance” now dawned, with rich promise of good +and evil. In hopes of French aid, William invaded Northumberland, +later laid siege to Carlisle, and on July 13, 1174, was surprised in +a morning mist and captured at Alnwick. Scotland was now kingless; +Galloway rebelled, and William, taken a captive to Falaise in Normandy, +surrendered absolutely the independence of his country, which, for fifteen +years, really was a fief of England. When William was allowed +to go home, it was to fight the Celts of Galloway, and subdue the pretensions, +in Moray, of the MacWilliams, descendants of William, son of Duncan, +son of Malcolm Canmore.</p> +<p>During William’s reign (1188) Pope Clement III. decided that +the Scottish Church was subject, not to York or Canterbury, but to Rome. +Seven years earlier, defending his own candidate for the see of St Andrews +against the chosen of the Pope, William had been excommunicated, and +his country and he had unconcernedly taken the issue of an Interdict. +The Pope was too far away, and William feared him no more than Robert +Bruce was to do.</p> +<p>By 1188, William refused to pay to Henry II. a “Saladin Tithe” +for a crusade, and in 1189 he bought from Richard I., who needed money +for a crusade, the abrogation of the Treaty of Falaise. He was +still disturbed by Celts in Galloway and the north, he still hankered +after Northumberland, but, after preparations for war, he paid a fine +and drifted into friendship with King John, who entertained his little +daughters royally, and knighted his son Alexander. William died +on December 4, 1214. He was buried at the Abbey of Arbroath, founded +by him in honour of St Thomas of Canterbury, who had worked a strange +posthumous miracle in Scotland. William was succeeded by his son, +Alexander II. (1214-1249).</p> +<h3>ALEXANDER II.</h3> +<p>Under this Prince, who successfully put down the usual northern risings, +the old suit about the claims to Northumberland was finally abandoned +for a trifling compensation (1237). Alexander had married Joanna, +daughter of King John, and his brother-in-law, Henry III., did not press +his demand for homage for Scotland. The usual Celtic pretenders +to the throne were for ever crushed. Argyll became a sheriffdom, +Galloway was brought into order, and Alexander, who died in the Isle +of Kerrera in the bay of Oban (1249), well deserved his title of “a +King of Peace.” He was buried in Melrose Abbey. In +his reign the clergy were allowed to hold Provincial or Synodal Councils +without the presence of a papal Legate (1225), and the Dominicans and +Franciscans appeared in Scotland.</p> +<h3>ALEXANDER III.</h3> +<p>The term King of Peace was also applied to Alexander III., son of +the second wife of Alexander II., Marie de Coucy. Alexander came +to the throne (1249) at the age of eight. As a child he was taken +and held (like James II., James III., James V., and James VI.) by contending +factions of the nobles, Henry of England intervening. In 1251 +he wedded another child, Margaret, daughter of Henry III. of England, +but Henry neither forced a claim to hold Scotland during the boy’s +minority (his right if Scotland were his fief), nor in other respects +pressed his advantage. In February 1261-1262 a girl was born to +Alexander at Windsor; she was Margaret, later wife of Eric of Norway. +Her daughter, on the death of Alexander III. (March 19, 1286), was the +sole direct descendant in the male line.</p> +<p>After the birth of this heiress, Alexander won from Norway the isles +of the western coast of Scotland in which Norse chieftains had long +held sway. They complained to Hakon of Norway concerning raids +made on them by the Earl of Ross, a Celtic potentate. Alexander’s +envoys to Hakon were detained, and in 1263, Hakon, with a great fleet, +sailed through the islands. A storm blew most of his Armada to +shore near Largs, where his men were defeated by the Scots. Hakon +collected his ships, sailed north, and (December 15) died at Kirkwall. +Alexander now brought the island princes, including the Lord of Man, +into subjection; and by Treaty, in 1266, placed them under the Crown. +In 1275 Benemund de Vicci (called Bagimont), at a council in Perth, +compelled the clergy to pay a tithe for a crusade, the Pope insisting +that the money should be assessed on the true value of benefices—that +is, on “Bagimont’s Roll,”—thenceforth recognised +as the basis of clerical taxation. In 1278 Edward I. laboured +to extract from Alexander an acknowledgment that he was England’s +vassal. Edward signally failed; but a palpably false account of +Alexander’s homage was fabricated, and dated September 29, 1278. +This was not the only forgery by which England was wont to back her +claims.</p> +<p>A series of bereavements (1281-1283) deprived Alexander of all his +children save his little grandchild, “the Maid of Norway.” +She was recognised by a great national assembly at Scone as heiress +of the throne; and Alexander had no issue by his second wife, a daughter +of the Comte de Dreux. On the night of March 19, 1285, while Alexander +was riding from Edinburgh to visit his bride at Kinghorn, his horse +slipped over a cliff and the rider was slain.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER VII. ENCROACHMENTS OF EDWARD I.—WALLACE.</h2> +<p>The Estates of Scotland met at Scone (April 11, 1286) and swore loyalty +to their child queen, “the Maid of Norway,” granddaughter +of Alexander III. Six guardians of the kingdom were appointed +on April 11, 1286. They were the Bishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, +two Comyns (Buchan and Badenoch), the Earl of Fife, and Lord James, +the Steward of Scotland. No Bruce or Baliol was among the Custodians. +Instantly a “band,” or covenant, was made by the Bruces, +Earls of Annandale and Carrick, to support their claims (failing the +Maid) to the throne; and there were acts of war on their part against +another probable candidate, John Balliol. Edward (like Henry VIII. +in the case of Mary Stuart) moved for the marriage of the infant queen +to his son. A Treaty safeguarding all Scottish liberties as against +England was made by clerical influences at Birgham (July 18, 1290), +but by October 7 news of the death of the young queen reached Scotland: +she had perished during her voyage from Norway. Private war now +broke out between the Bruces and Balliols; and the party of Balliol +appealed to Edward, through Fraser, Bishop of St Andrews, asking the +English king to prevent civil war, and recommending Balliol as a person +to be carefully treated. Next the Seven Earls, alleging some dim +elective right, recommended Bruce, and appealed to Edward as their legal +superior.</p> +<p>Edward came to Norham-on-Tweed in May 1291, proclaimed himself Lord +Paramount, and was accepted as such by the twelve candidates for the +Crown (June 3). The great nobles thus, to serve their ambitions, +betrayed their country: <i>the communitas</i> (whatever that term may +here mean) made a futile protest.</p> +<p>As lord among his vassals, Edward heard the pleadings and evidence +in autumn 1292; and out of the descendants, in the female line, of David +Earl of Huntingdon, youngest son of David I., he finally (November 17, +1292) preferred John Balliol (<i>great-grandson</i> of the earl through +his eldest daughter) to Bruce the Old, grandfather of the famous Robert +Bruce, and <i>grandson</i> of Earl David’s second daughter. +The decision, according to our ideas, was just; no modern court could +set it aside. But Balliol was an unpopular weakling—“an +empty tabard,” the people said—and Edward at once subjected +him, king as he was, to all the humiliations of a petty vassal. +He was summoned into his Lord’s Court on the score of the bills +of tradesmen. If Edward’s deliberate policy was to goad +Balliol into resistance and then conquer Scotland absolutely, in the +first of these aims he succeeded.</p> +<p>In 1294 Balliol was summoned, with his Peers, to attend Edward in +Gascony. Balliol, by advice of a council (1295), sought a French +alliance and a French marriage for his son, named Edward; he gave the +Annandale lands of his enemy Robert Bruce (father of the king to be) +to Comyn, Earl of Buchan. He besieged Carlisle, while Edward took +Berwick, massacred the people, and captured Sir William Douglas, father +of the good Lord James.</p> +<p>In the war which followed, Edward broke down resistance by a sanguinary +victory at Dunbar, captured John Comyn of Badenoch (the Red Comyn), +received from Balliol (July 7, 1296) the surrender of his royal claims, +and took the oaths of the Steward of Scotland and the Bruces, father +and son. He carried to Westminster the Black Rood of St Margaret +and the famous stone of Scone, a relic of the early Irish dynasty of +the Scots; as far north as Elgin he rode, receiving the oaths of all +persons of note and influence—except William Wallace. <i>His</i> +name does not appear in the list of submissions called “The Ragman’s +Roll.” Between April and October 1296 the country was subjugated; +the castles were garrisoned by Englishmen. But by January 1297, +Edward’s governor, Warenne, Earl of Surrey, and Ormsby, his Chief +Justice, found the country in an uproar, and at midsummer 1297 the levies +of the northern counties of England were ordered to put down the disorders.</p> +<h3>THE YEAR OF WALLACE.</h3> +<p>In May the <i>commune</i> of Scotland (whatever the term may here +mean) had chosen Wallace as their leader; probably this younger son +of Sir Malcolm Wallace of Elderslie, in Renfrewshire, had already been +distinguished for his success in skirmishes against the English, as +well as for strength and courage. <a name="citation36"></a><a href="#footnote36">{36}</a> +The popular account of his early adventures given in the poem by Blind +Harry (1490?) is of no historical value. His men destroyed the +English at Lanark (May 1297); he was abetted by Wishart, Bishop of Glasgow, +and the Steward; but by July 7, Percy and Clifford, leading the English +army, admitted the Steward, Robert Bruce (the future king), and Wishart +to the English peace at Irvine in Ayrshire. But the North was +up under Sir Andrew Murray, and “that thief Wallace” (to +quote an English contemporary) left the siege of Dundee Castle which +he was conducting to face Warenne on the north bank of the Forth. +On September 11, the English, under Warenne, manœuvred vaguely +at Stirling Bridge, and were caught on the flank by Wallace’s +army before they could deploy on the northern side of the river. +They were cut to pieces, Cressingham was slain, and Warenne galloped +to Berwick, while the Scots harried Northumberland with great ferocity, +which Wallace seems to have been willing but not often able to control. +By the end of March 1298 he appears with Andrew Murray as Guardian of +the Kingdom for the exiled Balliol. This attitude must have aroused +the jealousy of the nobles, and especially of Robert Bruce, who aimed +at securing the crown, and who, after several changes of side, by June +1298 was busy in Edward’s service in Galloway.</p> +<p>Edward then crossed the Border with a great army of perhaps 40,000 +men, met the spearmen of Wallace in their serried phalanxes at Falkirk, +broke the “schiltrom” or clump of spears by the arrows of +his archers; slaughtered the archers of Ettrick Forest; scattered the +mounted nobles, and avenged the rout of Stirling (July 22, 1298). +The country remained unsubdued, but its leaders were at odds among themselves, +and Wallace had retired to France, probably to ask for aid; he may also +conceivably have visited Rome. The Bishop of St Andrews, Lamberton, +with Bruce and the Red Comyn—deadly rivals—were Guardians +of the Kingdom in 1299. But in June 1300, Edward, undeterred by +remonstrances from the Pope, entered Scotland; an armistice, however, +was accorded to the Holy Father, and the war, in which the Scots scored +a victory at Roslin in February 1293, dragged on from summer to summer +till July 1304. In these years Bruce alternately served Edward +and conspired against him; the intricacies of his perfidy are deplorable.</p> +<p>Bruce served Edward during the siege of Stirling, then the central +key of the country. On its surrender Edward admitted all men to +his peace, on condition of oaths of fealty, except “Messire Williame +le Waleys.” Men of the noblest Scottish names stooped to +pursue the hero: he was taken near Glasgow, and handed over to Sir John +Menteith, a Stewart, and son of the Earl of Menteith. As Sheriff +of Dumbartonshire, Menteith had no choice but to send the hero in bonds +to England. But, if Menteith desired to escape the disgrace with +which tradition brands his name, he ought to have refused the English +blood-price for the capture of Wallace. He made no such refusal. +As an outlaw, Wallace was hanged at London; his limbs, like those of +the great Montrose, were impaled on the gates of various towns.</p> +<p>What we really know about the chief popular hero of his country, +from documents and chronicles, is fragmentary; and it is hard to find +anything trustworthy in Blind Harry’s rhyming “Wallace” +(1490), plagiarised as it is from Barbour’s earlier poem (1370) +on Bruce. <a name="citation38"></a><a href="#footnote38">{38}</a> +But Wallace was truly brave, disinterested, and indomitable. Alone +among the leaders he never turned his coat, never swore and broke oaths +to Edward. He arises from obscurity, like Jeanne d’Arc; +like her, he is greatly victorious; like her, he awakens a whole people; +like her, he is deserted, and is unlawfully put to death; while his +limbs, like her ashes, are scattered by the English. The ravens +had not pyked his bones bare before the Scots were up again for freedom.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER VIII. BRUCE AND THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE.</h2> +<p>The position towards France of Edward I. made it really more desirable +for him that Scotland should be independent and friendly, than half +subdued and hostile to his rule. While she was hostile, England, +in attacking France, always left an enemy in her rear. But Edward +supposed that by clemency to all the Scottish leaders except Wallace, +by giving them great appointments and trusting them fully, and by calling +them to his Parliament in London, he could combine England and Scotland +in affectionate union. He repaired the ruins of war in Scotland; +he began to study her laws and customs; he hastily ran up for her a +new constitution, and appointed his nephew, John of Brittany, as governor. +But he had overlooked two facts: the Scottish clergy, from the highest +to the lowest, were irreconcilably opposed to union with England; and +the greatest and most warlike of the Scottish nobles, if not patriotic, +were fickle and insatiably ambitious. It is hard to reckon how +often Robert Bruce had turned his coat, and how often the Bishop of +St Andrews had taken the oath to Edward. Both men were in Edward’s +favour in June 1304, but in that month they made against him a treasonable +secret covenant. Through 1305 Bruce prospered in Edward’s +service, on February 10, 1306, Edward was conferring on him a new favour, +little guessing that Bruce, after some negotiation with his old rival, +the Red Comyn, had slain him (an uncle of his was also butchered) before +the high altar of the Church of the Franciscans in Dumfries. Apparently +Bruce had tried to enlist Comyn in his conspiracy, and had found him +recalcitrant, or feared that he would be treacherous (February 10, 1306).</p> +<p>The sacrilegious homicide made it impossible for Bruce again to waver. +He could not hope for pardon; he must be victorious or share the fate +of Wallace. He summoned his adherents, including young James Douglas, +received the support of the Bishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, hurried +to Scone, and there was hastily crowned with a slight coronet, in the +presence of but two earls and three bishops.</p> +<p>Edward made vast warlike preparations and forswore leniency, while +Bruce, under papal excommunication, which he slighted, collected a few +nobles, such as Lennox, Atholl, Errol, and a brother of the chief of +the Frazers. Other chiefs, kinsmen of the slain Comyn, among them +Macdowal of Argyll, banded to avenge the victim; Bruce’s little +force was defeated at Methven Wood, near Perth, by Aymer de Valence, +and prisoners of all ranks were hanged as traitors, while two bishops +were placed in irons. Bruce took to the heather, pursued by the +Macdowals no less than by the English; his queen was captured, his brother +Nigel was executed; he cut his way to the wild west coast, aided only +by Sir Nial Campbell of Loch Awe, who thus founded the fortune of his +house, and by the Macdonalds, under Angus Og of Islay. He wintered +in the isle of Rathlin (some think he even went to Norway), and in spring, +after surprising the English garrison in his own castle of Turnberry, +he roamed, now lonely, now with a mobile little force, in Galloway, +always evading and sometimes defeating his English pursuers. At +Loch Trool and at London Hill (Drumclog) he dealt them heavy blows, +while on June 7, 1307, his great enemy Edward died at Borough-on-Sands, +leaving the crown and the war to the weakling Edward II.</p> +<p>Fortune had turned. We cannot follow Bruce through his campaign +in the north, where he ruined the country of the Comyns (1308), and +through the victories in Galloway of his hard-fighting brother Edward. +With enemies on every side, Bruce took them in detail; early in March +1309 he routed the Macdowals at the west end of the Pass of Brander. +Edward II. was involved in disputes with his own barons, and Bruce was +recognised by his country’s Church in 1310 and aided by his great +lieutenants, Sir James Douglas and Thomas Randolph, Earl of Murray. +By August 1311 Bruce was carrying the war into England, sacking Durham +and Chester, failing at Carlisle, but in January 1313, capturing Perth. +In summer, Edward Bruce, in the spirit of chivalry, gave to Stirling +Castle (Randolph had taken Edinburgh Castle) a set day, Midsummer Day +1314, to be relieved or to surrender; and Bruce kept tryst with Edward +II. and his English and Irish levies, and all his adventurous chivalry +from France, Hainault, Bretagne, Gascony, and Aquitaine. All the +world knows the story of the first battle, the Scottish Quatre Bras; +the success of Randolph on the right; the slaying of Bohun when Bruce +broke his battle-axe. Next day Bruce’s position was strong; +beneath the towers of Stirling the Bannockburn protected his front; +morasses only to be crossed by narrow paths impeded the English advance. +Edward Bruce commanded the right wing; Randolph the centre; Douglas +and the Steward the left; Bruce the reserve, the Islesmen. His +strength lay in his spearmen’s “dark impenetrable wood”; +his archers were ill-trained; of horse he had but a handful under Keith, +the Marischal. But the heavy English cavalry could not break the +squares of spears; Keith cut up the archers of England; the main body +could not deploy, and the slow, relentless advance of the whole Scottish +line covered the plain with the dying and the flying. A panic +arose, caused by the sight of an approaching cloud of camp-followers +on the Gillie’s hill; Edward fled, and hundreds of noble prisoners, +with all the waggons and supplies of England, fell into the hands of +the Scots. In eight strenuous years the generalship of Bruce and +his war-leaders, the resolution of the people, hardened by the cruelties +of Edward, the sermons of the clergy, and the utter incompetence of +Edward II., had redeemed a desperate chance. From a fief of England, +Scotland had become an indomitable nation.</p> +<h3>LATER DAYS OF BRUCE.</h3> +<p>Bruce continued to prosper, despite an ill-advised attempt to win +Ireland, in which Edward Bruce fell (1318.) This left the succession, +if Bruce had no male issue, to the children of his daughter, Marjory, +and her husband, the Steward. In 1318 Scotland recovered Berwick, +in 1319 routed the English at Mytton-on-Swale. In a Parliament +at Aberbrothock (April 6, 1320) the Scots announced to the Pope, who +had been interfering, that, while a hundred of them survive, they will +never yield to England. In October 1322 Bruce utterly routed the +English at Byland Abbey, in the heart of Yorkshire, and chased Edward +II. into York. In March 1324 a son was born to Bruce named David; +on May 4, 1328, by the Treaty of Northampton, the independence of Scotland +was recognised. In July the infant David married Joanna, daughter +of Edward II.</p> +<p>On June 7, 1329, Bruce died and was buried at Dunfermline; his heart, +by his order, was carried by Douglas towards the Holy Land, and when +Douglas fell in a battle with the Moors in Spain, the heart was brought +back by Sir Simon Lockhart of the Lee. The later career of Bruce, +after he had been excommunicated, is that of the foremost knight and +most sagacious man of action who ever wore the crown of Scotland. +The staunchness with which the clergy and estates disregarded papal +fulminations (indeed under William the Lion they had treated an interdict +as waste-paper) indicated a kind of protestant tendency to independence +of the Holy See.</p> +<p>Bruce’s inclusion of representatives of the Burghs in the first +regular Scottish Parliament (at Cambuskenneth in 1326) was a great step +forward in the constitutional existence of the country. The king, +in Scotland, was expected to “live of his own,” but in 1326 +the expenses of the war with England compelled Bruce to seek permission +for taxation.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER IX. DECADENCE AND DISASTERS—REIGN OF DAVID II.</h2> +<p>The heroic generation of Scotland was passing off the stage. +The King was a child. The forfeiture by Bruce of the lands of +hostile or treacherous lords, and his bestowal of the estates on his +partisans, had made the disinherited nobles the enemies of Scotland, +and had fed too full the House of Douglas. As the star of Scotland +was thus clouded—she had no strong man for a King during the next +ninety years—the sun of England rose red and glorious under a +warrior like Edward III. The Scottish nobles in many cases ceased +to be true to their proud boast that they would never submit to England. +A very brief summary of the wretched reign of David II. must here suffice.</p> +<p>First, the son of John Balliol, Edward, went to the English Court, +and thither thronged the disinherited and forfeited lords, arranging +a raid to recover their lands. Edward III., of course, connived +at their preparations.</p> +<p>After Randolph’s death (July 20, 1332), when Mar—a sister’s +son of Bruce—was Regent, the disinherited lords, under Balliol, +invaded Scotland, and Mar, with young Randolph, Menteith, and a bastard +of Bruce, “Robert of Carrick,” leading a very great host, +fell under the shafts of the English archers of Umfraville, Wake, the +English Earl of Atholl, Talbot, Ferrers, and Zouche, at Dupplin, on +the Earn (August 12, 1332). Rolled up by arrows loosed on the +flanks of their charging columns, they fell, and their dead bodies lay +in heaps as tall as a lance.</p> +<p>On September 24, Edward Balliol was crowned King at Scone. +Later, Andrew Murray, perhaps a son of the Murray who had been Wallace’s +companion-in-arms, was taken, and Balliol acknowledged Edward III. as +his liege-lord at Roxburgh. In December the second son of Randolph, +with Archibald, the new Regent, brother of the great Black Douglas, +drove Balliol, flying in his shirt, from Annan across the Border. +He returned, and was opposed by this Archibald Douglas, called Tineman, +the Unlucky, and on July 19, 1333, Tineman suffered, at Halidon Hill, +near Berwick, a defeat as terrible as Flodden; Berwick, too, was lost, +practically for ever, Tineman fell, and Sir William Douglas, the Knight +of Liddesdale, was a prisoner. These Scots defeats were always +due to rash frontal attacks on strong positions, the assailants passing +between lines of English bowmen who loosed into their flanks. +The boy king, David, was carried to France (1334) for safety, while +Balliol delivered to Edward Berwick and the chief southern counties, +including that of Edinburgh, with their castles.</p> +<p>There followed internal wars between Balliol’s partisans, while +the patriots were led by young Randolph, by the young Steward, by Sir +Andrew Murray, and the wavering and cruel Douglas, called the Knight +of Liddesdale, now returned from captivity. In the desperate state +of things, with Balliol and Edward ravaging Scotland at will, none showed +more resolution than Bruce’s sister, who held Kildrummie Castle; +and Randolph’s daughter, “Black Agnes,” who commanded +that of Dunbar. By vast gifts Balliol won over John, Lord of the +Isles. The Celts turned to the English party; Edward III. harried +the province of Moray, but, in 1337, he began to undo his successes +by formally claiming the crown of France: France and Scotland together +could always throw off the English yoke.</p> +<p>Thus diverted from Scotland, Edward lost strength there while he +warred with Scotland’s ally: in 1341 the Douglas, Knight of Liddesdale, +recovered Edinburgh Castle by a romantic surprise. But David returned +home in 1341, a boy of eighteen, full of the foibles of chivalry, rash, +sensual, extravagant, who at once gave deadly offence to the Knight +of Liddesdale by preferring to him, as sheriff of Teviotdale, the brave +Sir Alexander Ramsay, who had driven the English from the siege of Dunbar +Castle. Douglas threw Ramsay into Hermitage Castle in Liddesdale +and starved him to death.</p> +<p>In 1343 the Knight began to intrigue traitorously with Edward III.; +after a truce, David led his whole force into England, where his rash +chivalry caused his utter defeat at Neville’s Cross, near Durham +(October 17, 1346). He was taken, as was the Bishop of St Andrews; +his ransom became the central question between England and Scotland. +In 1353 Douglas, Knight of Liddesdale, was slain at Williamshope on +Yarrow by his godson, William, Lord Douglas: the fact is commemorated +in a fragment of perhaps our oldest narrative Border ballad. French +men-at-arms now helped the Scots to recover Berwick, merely to lose +it again in 1356; in 1357 David was set free: his ransom, 100,000 merks, +was to be paid by instalment. The country was heavily taxed, but +the full sum was never paid. Meanwhile the Steward had been Regent; +between him, the heir of the Crown failing issue to David, and the King, +jealousies arose. David was suspected of betraying the kingdom +to England; in October 1363 he and the Earl of Douglas visited London +and made a treaty adopting a son of Edward as king on David’s +demise, and on his ransom being remitted, but in March 1364 his Estates +rejected the proposal, to which Douglas had assented. Till 1369 +all was poverty and internal disunion; the feud, to be so often renewed, +of the Douglas and the Steward raged. David was made contemptible +by a second marriage with Margaret Logie, but the war with France drove +Edward III. to accept a fourteen years’ truce with Scotland. +On February 22, 1371, David died in Edinburgh Castle, being succeeded, +without opposition, by the Steward, Robert II., son of Walter, and of +Marjorie, daughter of Robert Bruce. This Robert II., somewhat +outworn by many years of honourable war in his country’s cause, +and the father of a family, by Elizabeth Mure of Rowallan, which could +hardly be rendered legitimate by any number of Papal dispensations, +<i>was the first of the Royal Stewart line</i>. In him a cadet +branch of the English FitzAlans, themselves of a very ancient Breton +stock, blossomed into Royalty.</p> +<h3>PARLIAMENT AND THE CROWN.</h3> +<p>With the coming of a dynasty which endured for three centuries, we +must sketch the relations, in Scotland, of Crown and Parliament till +the days of the Covenant and the Revolution of 1688. Scotland +had but little of the constitutional evolution so conspicuous in the +history of England. The reason is that while the English kings, +with their fiefs and wars in France, had constantly to be asking their +parliaments for money, and while Parliament first exacted the redress +of grievances, in Scotland the king was expected “to live of his +own” on the revenue of crown-lands, rents, feudal aids, fines +exacted in Courts of Law, and duties on merchandise. No “tenths” +or “fifteenths” were exacted from clergy and people. +There could be no “constitutional resistance” when the Crown +made no unconstitutional demands.</p> +<p>In Scotland the germ of Parliament is the King’s court of vassals +of the Crown. To the assemblies, held now in one place, now in +another, would usually come the vassals of the district, with such officers +of state as the Chancellor, the Chamberlain, the Steward, the Constable +or Commander-in-Chief, the Justiciar, and the Marischal, and such Bishops, +Abbots, Priors, Earls, Barons, and tenants-in-chief as chose to attend. +At these meetings public business was done, charters were granted, and +statutes were passed; assent was made to such feudal aids as money for +the king’s ransom in the case of William the Lion. In 1295 +the seals of six Royal burghs are appended to the record of a negotiation; +in 1326 burgesses, as we saw, were consulted by Bruce on questions of +finance.</p> +<p>The misfortunes and extravagance of David II. had to be paid for, +and Parliament interfered with the Royal prerogative in coinage and +currency, directed the administration of justice, dictated terms of +peace with England, called to account even hereditary officers of the +Crown (such as the Steward, Constable, and Marischal), controlled the +King’s expenditure (or tried to do so), and denounced the execution +of Royal warrants against the Statutes and common form of law. +They summarily rejected David’s attempt to alter the succession +of the Crown.</p> +<p>At the same time, as attendance of multitudes during protracted Parliaments +was irksome and expensive, arose the habit of intrusting business to +a mere “Committee of Articles,” later “The Lords of +the Articles,” selected in varying ways from the Three Estates—Spiritual, +Noble, and Commons. These Committees saved the members of Parliament +from the trouble and expense of attendance, but obviously tended to +become an abuse, being selected and packed to carry out the designs +of the Crown or of the party of nobles in power. All members, +of whatever Estate, sat together in the same chamber. There were +no elected Knights of the Shires, no representative system.</p> +<p>The reign of David II. saw two Scottish authors or three, whose works +are extant. Barbour wrote the chivalrous rhymed epic-chronicle +‘The Brus’; Wyntoun, an unpoetic rhymed “cronykil”; +and “Hucheoun of the Awle Ryal” produced works of more genius, +if all that he is credited with be his own.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER X. EARLY STEWART KINGS: ROBERT II. (1371-1390).</h2> +<p>Robert II. was crowned at Scone on March 26, 1371. He was elderly, +jovial, pacific, and had little to fear from England when the deaths +of Edward III. and the Black Prince left the crown to the infant Richard +II. There was fighting against isolated English castles within +the Scottish border, to amuse the warlike Douglases and Percies, and +there were truces, irregular and ill kept. In 1384 great English +and Scottish raids were made, and gentlemen of France, who came over +for sport, were scurvily entertained, and (1385) saw more plundering +than honest fighting under James, Earl of Douglas, who merely showed +them an army that, under Richard II., burned Melrose Abbey and fired +Edinburgh, Perth, and Dundee. Edinburgh was a town of 400 houses. +Richard insisted that not more than a third of his huge force should +be English Borderers, who had no idea of hitting their Scottish neighbours, +fathers-in-law and brothers-in-law, too hard. The one famous fight, +that of Otterburn (August 15, 1388), was a great and joyous passage +of arms by moonlight. The Douglas fell, the Percy was led captive +away; the survivors gained advancement in renown and the hearty applause +of the chivalrous chronicler, Froissart. The oldest ballads extant +on this affair were current in 1550, and show traces of the reading +of Froissart and the English chroniclers.</p> +<p>In 1390 died Robert II. Only his youth was glorious. +The reign of his son, Robert III. (crowned August 14, 1390), was that +of a weakling who let power fall into the hands of his brother, the +Duke of Albany, or his son David, Duke of Rothesay, who held the reins +after the Parliament (a Parliament that bitterly blamed the Government) +of January 1399. (With these two princes the title of Duke first +appears in Scotland.) The follies of young David alienated all: +he broke his betrothal to the daughter of the Earl of March; March retired +to England, becoming the man of Henry IV.; and though Rothesay wedded +the daughter of the Earl of Douglas, he was arrested by Albany and Douglas +and was starved to death (or died of dysentery) in Falkland Castle (1402). +The Highlanders had been in anarchy throughout the reign; their blood +was let in the great clan duel of thirty against thirty, on the Inch +of Perth, in 1396. Probably clans Cameron and Chattan were the +combatants.</p> +<p>On Rothesay’s death Albany was Governor, while Douglas was +taken prisoner in the great Border defeat of Homildon Hill, not far +from Flodden. But then (1403) came the alliance of Douglas with +Percy; Percy’s quarrel with Henry IV. and their defeat; and Hotspur’s +death, Douglas’s capture at Shrewsbury. Between Shakespeare, +in “Henry IV.,” and Scott, in ‘The Fair Maid of Perth,’ +the most notable events in the reign of Robert III. are immortalised. +The King’s last misfortune was the capture by the English at sea, +on the way to France, of his son James in February-March 1406. <a name="citation52"></a><a href="#footnote52">{52}</a> +On April 4, 1406, Robert went to his rest, one of the most unhappy of +the fated princes of his line.</p> +<h3>THE REGENCY OF ALBANY.</h3> +<p>The Regency of Albany, uncle of the captured James, lasted for fourteen +years, ending with his death in 1420. He occasionally negotiated +for his king’s release, but more successfully for that of his +son Murdoch. That James suspected Albany’s ambition, and +was irritated by his conduct, appears in his letters, written in Scots, +to Albany and to Douglas, released in 1408, and now free in Scotland. +The letters are of 1416.</p> +<p>The most important points to note during James’s English captivity +are the lawlessness and oppression which prevailed in Scotland, and +the beginning of Lollard heresies, nascent Protestantism, nascent Socialism, +even “free love.” The Parliament of 1399, which had +inveighed against the laxity of Government under Robert II., also demanded +the extirpation of heresies, in accordance with the Coronation Oath. +One Resby, a heretical English priest, was arraigned and burned at Perth +in 1407, under Laurence of Lindores, the Dominican Inquisitor into heresies, +who himself was active in promoting Scotland’s oldest University, +St Andrews. The foundation was by Henry Wardlaw, Bishop of St +Andrews, by virtue of a bull from the anti-pope Benedict XIII., of February +1414. Lollard ideas were not suppressed; the chronicler, Bower, +speaks of their existence in 1445; they sprang from envy of the wealth, +and indignation against the corruptions of the clergy, and the embers +of Lollardism in Kyle were not cold when, under James V., the flame +of the Reformation was rekindled.</p> +<p>The Celtic North, never quiet, made its last united effort in 1411, +when Donald, Lord of the Isles, who was in touch with the English Government, +claimed the earldom of Ross, in right of his wife, as against the Earl +of Buchan, a son of Albany; mustered all the wild clans of the west +and the isles at Ardtornish Castle on the Sound of Mull; marched through +Ross to Dingwall; defeated the great northern clan of Mackay, and was +hurrying to sack Aberdeen when he was met by Alexander Stewart, Earl +of Mar, the gentry of the northern Lowlands, mounted knights, and the +burgesses of the towns, some eighteen miles from Aberdeen, at Harlaw. +There was a pitched battle with great slaughter, but the Celts had no +cavalry, and the end was that Donald withdrew to his fastnesses. +The event is commemorated by an old literary ballad, and in Elspeth’s +ballad in Scott’s novel, ‘The Antiquary.’</p> +<p>In the year of Albany’s death, at a great age (1420), in compliance +with the prayer of Charles VII. of France, the Earl of Buchan, Archibald, +Douglas’s eldest son, and Sir John Stewart of Derneley, led a +force of some 7000 to 10,000 men to war for France. Henry V. then +compelled the captive James I. to join him, and (1421) at Baugé +Bridge the Scots, with the famed La Hire, routed the army of Henry’s +brother, the Duke of Clarence, who, with 2000 of the English, fell in +the action. The victory was fruitless; at Crevant (1423) the Scots +were defeated; at Verneuil (1424) they were almost exterminated. +None the less the remnant, with fresh levies, continued to war for their +old ally, and, under Sir Hugh Kennedy and others, suffered at Rouvray +(February 1429), and were with the victorious French at Orleans (May +1429) under the leadership of Jeanne d’Arc. The combination +of Scots and French, at the last push, always saved the independence +of both kingdoms.</p> +<p>The character of Albany, who, under his father, Robert III., and +during the captivity of James I., ruled Scotland so long, is enigmatic. +He is well spoken of by the contemporary Wyntoun, author of a chronicle +in rhyme; and in the Latin of Wyntoun’s continuator, Bower. +He kept on friendly terms with the Douglases, he was popular in so far +as he was averse to imposing taxation; and perhaps the anarchy and oppression +which preceded the return of James I. to Scotland were due not to the +weakness of Albany but to that of his son and successor, Murdoch, and +to the iniquities of Murdoch’s sons.</p> +<p>The death of Henry V. (1422) and the ambition of Cardinal Beaufort, +determined to wed his niece Jane Beaufort to a crowned king, may have +been among the motives which led the English Government (their own king, +Henry VI., being a child) to set free the royal captive (1424).</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XI. JAMES I.</h2> +<p>On March 28, 1424, James I. was released, on a ransom of £40,000, +and after his marriage with Jane Beaufort, grand-daughter of John of +Gaunt, son of Edward III. The story of their wooing (of course +in the allegorical manner of the age, and with poetical conventions +in place of actual details) is told in James’s poem, “The +King’s Quair,” a beautiful composition in the school of +Chaucer, of which literary scepticism has vainly tried to rob the royal +author. James was the ablest and not the most scrupulous of the +Stuarts. His captivity had given him an English education, a belief +in order, and in English parliamentary methods, and a fiery determination +to put down the oppression of the nobles. “If God gives +me but a dog’s life,” he said, “I will make the key +keep the castle and the bracken bush keep the cow.” Before +his first Parliament, in May 1424, James arrested Murdoch’s eldest +son, Sir Walter Fleming of Cumbernauld, and the younger Boyd of Kilmarnock. +The Parliament left a Committee of the Estates (“The Lords of +the Articles”) to carry out the royal policy. Taxes for +the payment of James’s ransom were imposed; to impose them was +easy, “passive resistance” was easier; the money was never +paid, and James’s noble hostages languished in England. +He next arrested the old Earl of Lennox, and Sir Robert Graham of the +Kincardine family, later his murderer.</p> +<p>These were causes of unpopularity. During a new Parliament +(1425) James imprisoned the new Duke of Albany (Murdoch) and his son +Alexander, and seized their castles. <a name="citation57"></a><a href="#footnote57">{57}</a> +The Albanys and Lennox were executed; their estates were forfeited; +but resentment dogged a king who was too fierce and too hurried a reformer, +perhaps too cruel an avenger of his own wrongs.</p> +<p>Our knowledge of the events of his reign is vague; but a king of +Scotland could never, with safety, treat any of his nobles as criminals; +the whole order was concerned to prevent or avenge severity of justice.</p> +<p>At a Parliament in Inverness (1427) he seized the greatest of the +Highland magnates whom he had summoned; they were hanged or imprisoned, +and, after resistance, Alastair, the new Lord of the Isles, did penance +at Holyrood, before being immured in Tantallon Castle. His cousin, +Donald Balloch, defeated Mar at Inverlochy (where Montrose later routed +Argyll) (1431). Not long afterwards Donald fled to Ireland, whence +a head, said to be his, was sent to James, but Donald lived to fight +another day.</p> +<p>Without a standing army to garrison the inaccessible Highlands, the +Crown could neither preserve peace in those regions nor promote justice. +The system of violent and perfidious punishments merely threw the Celts +into the arms of England.</p> +<p>Execution itself was less terrible to the nobles than the forfeiting +of their lands and the disinheriting of their families. None the +less, James (1425-1427) seized the lands of the late Earl of Lennox, +made Malise Graham surrender the earldom of Strathearn in exchange for +the barren title of Earl of Menteith, and sent the sufferer as a hostage +into England. The Earl of March, son of the Earl who, under Robert +III., had gone over to the English cause, was imprisoned and stripped +of his ancient domains on the Eastern Border; and James, disinheriting +Lord Erskine, annexed the earldom of Mar to the Crown.</p> +<p>In a Parliament at Perth (March 1428) James permitted the minor barons +and freeholders to abstain from these costly assemblies on the condition +of sending two “wise men” to represent each sheriffdom: +a Speaker was to be elected, and the shires were to pay the expenses +of the wise men. But the measure was unpopular, and in practice +lapsed. Excellent laws were passed, but were not enforced.</p> +<p>In July-November 1428 a marriage was arranged between Margaret the +infant daughter of James and the son (later Louis XI.) of the still +uncrowned Dauphin, Charles VIII. of France. Charles announced +to his subjects early in 1429 that an army of 6000 Scots was to land +in France; that James himself, if necessary, would follow; but Jeanne +d’Arc declared that there was no help from Scotland, none save +from God and herself. She was right: no sooner had she won her +victories at Orleans, Jargeau, Pathay, and elsewhere (May-June 1429) +than James made a truce with England which enabled Cardinal Beaufort +to throw his large force of anti-Hussite crusaders into France, where +they secured Normandy. The Scots in France, nevertheless, fought +under the Maid in her last successful action, at Lagny (April 1430).</p> +<p>An heir to the Crown, James, was born in October 1430, while the +King was at strife with the Pope, and asserting for King and Parliament +power over the Provincial Councils of the Church. An interdict +was threatened, James menaced the rich and lax religious orders with +secular reformation; settled the Carthusians at Perth, to show an example +of holy living; and pursued his severities against many of his nobles.</p> +<p>His treatment of the Earl of Strathearn (despoiled and sent as a +hostage to England) aroused the wrath of the Earl’s uncle, Robert +Graham, who bearded James in Parliament, was confiscated, fled across +the Highland line, and, on February 20, 1437, aided, it is said by the +old Earl of Atholl (a grandson of Robert II. by his second marriage), +led a force against the King in the monastery of the Black Friars at +Perth, surprised him, and butchered him. The energy of his Queen +brought the murderers, and Atholl himself, to die under unspeakable +torments.</p> +<p>James’s reforms were hurried, violent, and, as a rule, incapable +of surviving the anarchy of his son’s minority: his new Court +of Session, sitting in judgment thrice a-year, was his most fortunate +innovation.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XII. JAMES II.</h2> +<p>Scone, with its sacred stone, being so near Perth and the Highlands, +was perilous, and the coronation of James II. was therefore held at +Holyrood (March 25, 1437). The child, who was but seven years +of age, was bandied to and fro like a shuttlecock between rival adventurers. +The Earl of Douglas (Archibald, fifth Earl, died 1439) took no leading +part in the strife of factions: one of them led by Sir William Crichton, +who held the important post of Commander of Edinburgh Castle; the other +by Sir Alexander Livingstone of Callendar.</p> +<p>The great old Houses had been shaken by the severities of James I., +at least for the time. In a Government of factions influenced +by private greed, there was no important difference in policy, and we +need not follow the transference of the royal person from Crichton in +Edinburgh to Livingstone in Stirling Castle; the coalitions between +these worthies, the battles between the Boyds of Kilmarnock and the +Stewarts, who had to avenge Stewart of Derneley, Constable of the Scottish +contingent in France, who was slain by Sir Thomas Boyd. The queen-mother +married Sir James Stewart, the Black Knight of Lorne, and (August 3, +1439) she was captured by Livingstone, while her husband, in the mysterious +words of the chronicler, was “put in a pitt and bollit.” +In a month Jane Beaufort gave Livingstone an amnesty; he, not the Stewart +family, not the queen-mother, now held James.</p> +<p>To all this the new young Earl of Douglas, a boy of eighteen, tacitly +assented. He was the most powerful and wealthiest subject in Scotland; +in France he was Duc de Touraine; he was descended in lawful wedlock +from Robert II.; “he micht ha’e been the king,” as +the ballad says of the bonny Earl of Moray. But he held proudly +aloof from both Livingstone and Crichton, who were stealing the king +alternately: they then combined, invited Douglas to Edinburgh Castle, +with his brother David, and served up the ominous bull’s head +at that “black dinner” recorded in a ballad fragment. <a name="citation61"></a><a href="#footnote61">{61}</a> +They decapitated the two Douglas boys; the earldom fell to their granduncle, +James the Fat, and presently, on <i>his</i> death (1443), to young William +Douglas, after which “bands,” or illegal covenants, between +the various leaders of factions, led to private wars of shifting fortune. +Kennedy, Bishop of St Andrews, opposed the Douglas party, now strong +both in lands newly acquired, till (July 3, 1449) James married Mary +of Gueldres, imprisoned the Livingstones, and relied on the Bishop of +St Andrews and the clergy. While Douglas was visiting Rome in +1450, the Livingstones had been forfeited, and Crichton became Chancellor.</p> +<h3>FALL OF THE BLACK DOUGLASES.</h3> +<p>The Douglases, through a royal marriage of an ancestor to a daughter +of the more legitimate marriage of Robert II., had a kind of claim to +the throne which they never put forward. The country was thus +spared dynastic wars, like those of the White and Red Roses in England; +but, none the less, the Douglases were too rich and powerful for subjects.</p> +<p>The Earl at the moment held Galloway and Annandale, two of his brothers +were Earls of Moray and Ormond; in October 1448, Ormond had distinguished +himself by defeating and taking Percy, urging a raid into Scotland, +at a bloody battle on the Water of Sark, near Gretna.</p> +<p>During the Earl of Douglas’s absence in Rome, James had put +down some of his unruly retainers, and even after his return (1451) +had persevered in this course. Later in the year Douglas resigned, +and received back his lands, a not uncommon formula showing submission +on the vassal’s favour on the lord’s part, as when Charles +VII., at the request of Jeanne d’Arc, made this resignation to +God!</p> +<p>Douglas, however, was suspected of intriguing with England and with +the Lord of the Isles, while he had a secret covenant or “band” +with the Earls of Crawford and Ross. If all this were true, he +was planning a most dangerous enterprise.</p> +<p>He was invited to Stirling to meet the king under a safe-conduct, +and there (February 22, 1452) was dirked by his king at the sacred table +of hospitality.</p> +<p>Whether this crime was premeditated or merely passionate is unknown, +as in the case of Bruce’s murder of the Red Comyn before the high +altar. Parliament absolved James on slender grounds. James, +the brother of the slain earl, publicly defied his king, gave his allegiance +to Henry VI. of England, withdrew it, intrigued, and, after his brothers +had been routed at Arkinholm, near Langholm (May 18, 1455), fled to +England. His House was proclaimed traitorous; their wide lands +in southern and south-western Scotland were forfeited and redistributed, +the Scotts of Buccleuch profiting largely in the long-run. The +leader of the Royal forces at Arkinholm, near Langholm, was another +Douglas, one of “the Red Douglases,” the Earl of Angus; +and till the execution of the Earl of Morton, under James VI., the Red +Douglases were as powerful, turbulent, and treacherous as the Black +Douglases had been in their day. When attacked and defeated, these +Douglases, red or black, always allied themselves with England and with +the Lords of the Isles, the hereditary foes of the royal authority.</p> +<p>Meanwhile Edward IV. wrote of the Scots as “his rebels of Scotland,” +and in the alternations of fortune between the Houses of York and Lancaster, +James held with Henry VI. When Henry was defeated and taken at +Northampton (July 10, 1460), James besieged Roxburgh Castle, an English +hold on the Border, and (August 3, 1460) was slain by the explosion +of a great bombard.</p> +<p>James was but thirty years of age at his death. By the dagger, +by the law, and by the aid of the Red Douglases, he had ruined his most +powerful nobles—and his own reputation. His early training, +like that of James VI., was received while he was in the hands of the +most treacherous, bloody, and unscrupulous of mankind; later, he met +them with their own weapons. The foundation of the University +of Glasgow (1451), and the building and endowment of St Salvator’s +College in St Andrews, by Bishop Kennedy, are the most permanent proofs +of advancing culture in the reign of James.</p> +<p>Many laws of excellent tendency, including sumptuary laws, which +suggest the existence of unexpected wealth and luxury, were passed; +but such laws were never firmly and regularly enforced. By one +rule, which does seem to have been carried out, no poisons were to be +imported: Scottish chemical science was incapable of manufacturing them. +Much later, under James VI., we find a parcel of arsenic, to be used +for political purposes, successfully stopped at Leith.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XIII. JAMES III.</h2> +<p>James II. left three sons; the eldest, James III., aged nine, was +crowned at Kelso (August 10, 1460); his brothers, bearing the titles +of Albany and Mar, were not to be his supports. His mother, Mary +of Gueldres, had the charge of the boys, and, as she was won over by +her uncle, Philip of Burgundy, to the cause of the House of York, while +Kennedy and the Earl of Angus stood for the House of Lancaster, there +was strife between them and the queen-mother and nobles. Kennedy +relied on France (Louis XL), and his opponents on England.</p> +<p>The battle of Towton (March 30, 1461) drove Henry VI. and his queen +across the Border, where Kennedy entertained the melancholy exile in +the Castle of St Andrews. The grateful Henry restored Berwick +to the Scots, who could not hold it long. In June 1461, while +the Scots were failing to take Carlisle, Edward IV. was crowned, and +sent his adherent, the exiled Earl of Douglas, to treat for an alliance +with the Celts, under John, Lord of the Isles, and that Donald Balloch +who was falsely believed to have long before been slain in Ireland.</p> +<p>It is curious to think of the Lord of the Isles dealing as an independent +prince, through a renegade Douglas, with the English king. A treaty +was made at John’s Castle of Ardtornish—now a shell of crumbling +stone on the sea-shore of the Morvern side of the Sound of Mull—with +the English monarch at Westminster. The Highland chiefs promise +allegiance to Edward, and, if successful, the Celts are to recover the +ancient kingdom from Caithness to the Forth, while Douglas is to be +all-powerful from the Forth to the Border!</p> +<p>But other intrigues prevailed. The queen-mother and her son, +in the most friendly manner, met the kingmaker Warwick at Dumfries, +and again at Carlisle, and Douglas was disgraced by Edward, though restored +to favour when Bishop Kennedy declined to treat with Edward’s +commissioners. The Treaty of England with Douglas and the Celts +was then ratified; but Douglas, advancing in front of Edward’s +army to the Border, met old Bishop Kennedy in helmet and corslet, and +was defeated. Louis XI., however, now deserted the Red for the +White Rose. Kennedy followed his example; and peace was made between +England and Scotland in October 1464. Kennedy died in the summer +of 1465.</p> +<p>There followed the usual struggles between confederations of the +nobles, and, in July 1466, James was seized, being then aged fourteen, +by the party of the Boyds, Flemings, and Kennedys, aided by Hepburn +of Hailes (ancestor of the turbulent Earl of Bothwell), and by the head +of the Border House of Cessford, Andrew Ker.</p> +<p>It was a repetition of the struggles of Livingstone and Crichton, +and now the great Border lairds begin to take their place in history. +Boyd made himself Governor to the king, his son married the king’s +eldest sister, Mary, and became Earl of Arran. But brief was the +triumph of the Boyds. In 1469 James married Margaret of Norway; +Orkney and Shetland were her dower; but while Arran negotiated the affair +abroad, at home the fall of his house was arranged. Boyd fled +the country; the king’s sister, divorced from young Arran, married +the Lord Hamilton; and his family, who were Lords of Cadzow under Robert +Bruce, and had been allies of the Black Douglases till their fall, became +the nearest heirs of the royal Stewarts, if that family were extinct. +The Hamiltons, the wealthiest house in Scotland, never produced a man +of great ability, but their nearness to the throne and their ambition +were storm-centres in the time of Mary Stuart and James VI., and even +as late as the Union in 1707.</p> +<p>The fortunes of a nephew of Bishop Kennedy, Patrick Graham, Kennedy’s +successor as Bishop of St Andrews, now perplex the historian. +Graham dealt for himself with the Pope, obtained the rank of Archbishop +for the Bishop of St Andrews (1472), and thus offended the king and +country, always jealous of interference from Rome. But he was +reported on as more or less insane by a Papal Nuncio, and was deposed. +Had he been defending (as used to be said) the right of election of +Bishop for the Canons against the greed of the nobles, the Nuncio might +not have taken an unfavourable view of his intellect. In any case, +whether the clergy, backed by Rome, elected their bishops, or whether +the king and nobles made their profit out of the Church appointments, +jobbery was the universal rule. Ecclesiastical corruption and, +as a rule, ignorance, were attaining their lowest level. <a name="citation67"></a><a href="#footnote67">{67}</a> +By 1476 the Lord of the Isles, the Celtic ally of Edward IV., was reduced +by Argyll, Huntly, and Crawford, and lost the sheriffdom of Inverness, +and the earldom of Ross, which was attached to the Crown (1476). +His treaty of Ardtornish had come to light. But his bastard, Angus +Og, filled the north and west with fire and tumult from Ross to Tobermory +(1480-1490), while James’s devotion to the arts—a thing +intolerable—and to the society of low-born favourites, especially +Thomas Cockburn, “a stone-cutter,” prepared the sorrows +and the end of his reign.</p> +<p>The intrigues which follow, and the truth about the character of +James, are exceedingly obscure. We have no Scottish chronicle +written at the time; the later histories, by Ferrerius, an Italian, +and, much later, by Queen Mary’s Bishop Lesley, and by George +Buchanan, are full of rumours and contradictions, while the State Papers +and Treaties of England merely prove the extreme treachery of James’s +brother Albany, and no evidence tells us how James contrived to get +the better of the traitor. James’s brothers Albany and Mar +were popular; were good horsemen, men of their hands, and Cochrane is +accused of persuading James to arrest Mar on a charge of treason and +black magic. Many witches are said to have been burned: perhaps +the only such case before the Reformation. However it fell out—all +is obscure—Mar died in prison; while Albany, also a prisoner on +charges of treasonable intrigues with the inveterate Earl of Douglas, +in the English interest, escaped to France.</p> +<p>Douglas (1482) brought him to England, where he swore allegiance +to Edward IV., under whom, like Edward Balliol, he would hold Scotland +if crowned. He was advancing on the Border with Edward’s +support and with the Duke of Gloucester (Richard III.), and James had +gone to Lauder to encounter him, when the Earl of Angus headed a conspiracy +of nobles, such as Huntly, Lennox, and Buchan, seized Cochrane and other +favourites of James, and hanged them over Lauder Bridge. The most +tangible grievance was the increasing debasement of the coinage. +James was immured at Edinburgh, but, by a compromise, Albany was restored +to rank and estates. Meanwhile Gloucester captured Berwick, never +to be recovered by Scotland. In 1483 Albany renewed, with many +of the nobles, his intrigues with Edward for the betrayal of Scotland. +In some unknown way James separated Albany from his confederates Atholl, +Buchan, and Angus; Albany went to England, betrayed the Castle of Dunbar +to England, and was only checked in his treasons by the death of Edward +IV. (April 9, 1483), after which a full Parliament (July 7, 1483) condemned +him and forfeited him in his absence. On July 22, 1484, he invaded +Scotland with his ally, Douglas; they were routed at Lochmaben, Douglas +was taken, and, by singular clemency, was merely placed in seclusion +in the Monastery of Lindores, while Albany, escaping to France, perished +in a tournament, leaving a descendant, who later, in the minority of +James V., makes a figure in history.</p> +<p>The death of Richard III. (August 18, 1485) and the accession of +the prudent Henry VII. gave James a moment of safety. He turned +his attention to the Church, and determined to prosecute for treason +such Scottish clerics as purchased benefices through Rome. He +negotiated for three English marriages, including that of his son James, +Duke of Rothesay, to a daughter of Edward IV.; he also negotiated for +the recovery of Berwick, taken by Gloucester during Albany’s invasion +of 1482. After his death, and before it, James was accused, for +these reasons, of disloyal dealings with England; and such nobles as +Angus, up to the neck as they were in treason and rebellion, raised +a party against him on the score that he was acting as they did. +The almost aimless treachery of the Douglases, Red or Black, endured +for centuries from the reign of David II. to that of James VI. +Many nobles had received no amnesty for the outrage of Lauder Bridge; +their hopes turned to the heir of the Crown, James, Duke of Rothesay. +We see them offering peace for an indemnity in a Parliament of October +1487; the Estates refused all such pardons for a space of seven years; +the king’s party was manifestly the stronger. He was not +to be intimidated; he offended Home and the Humes by annexing the Priory +of Coldingham (which they regarded as their own) to the Royal Chapel +at Stirling. The inveterate Angus, with others, induced Prince +James to join them under arms. James took the Chancellorship from +Argyll and sent envoys to England.</p> +<p>The rebels, proclaiming the prince as king, intrigued with Henry +VII.; James was driven across the Forth, and was supported in the north +by his uncle, Atholl, and by Huntly, Crawford, and Lord Lindsay of the +Byres, Errol, Glamis, Forbes, and Tullibardine, and the chivalry of +Angus and Strathtay. Attempts at pacification failed; Stirling +Castle was betrayed to the rebels, and James’s host, swollen by +the loyal burgesses of the towns, met the Border spears of Home and +Hepburn, the Galloway men, and the levies of Angus at Sauchie Burn, +near Bannockburn.</p> +<p>In some way not understood, James, riding without a single knight +or squire, fell from his horse, which had apparently run away with him, +at Beaton’s Mill, and was slain in bed, it was rumoured, by a +priest, feigned or false, who heard his confession. The obscurity +of his reign hangs darkest over his death, and the virulent Buchanan +slandered him in his grave. Under his reign, Henryson, the greatest +of the Chaucerian school in Scotland, produced his admirable poems. +Many other poets whose works are lost were flourishing; and <i>The Wallace</i>, +that elaborate plagiarism from Barbour’s ‘The Brus,’ +was composed, and attributed to Blind Harry, a paid minstrel about the +Court. <a name="citation71"></a><a href="#footnote71">{71}</a></p> +<h2>CHAPTER XIV. JAMES IV.</h2> +<p>The new king, with Angus for his Governor, Argyll for his Chancellor, +and with the Kers and Hepburns in office, was crowned at Scone about +June 25, 1488. He was nearly seventeen, no child, but energetic +in business as in pleasure, though lifelong remorse for his rebellion +gnawed at his heart. He promptly put down a rebellion of the late +king’s friends and of the late king’s foe, Lennox, then +strong in the possession of Dumbarton Castle, which, as it commands +the sea-entrance by Clyde, is of great importance in the reign of Mary +and James VI. James III. must have paid attention to the navy, +which, under Sir Andrew Wood, already faced English pirates triumphantly. +James IV. spent much money on his fleet, buying timber from France, +for he was determined to make Scotland a power of weight in Europe. +But at the pinch his navy vanished like a mist.</p> +<p>Spanish envoys and envoys from the Duchess of Burgundy visited James +in 1488-1489; he was in close relations with France and Denmark, and +caused anxieties to the first Tudor king, Henry VII., who kept up the +Douglas alliance with Angus, and bought over Scottish politicians. +While James, as his account-books show, was playing cards with Angus, +that traitor was also negotiating the sale of Hermitage Castle, the +main hold of the Middle Border, to England. He was detected, and +the castle was intrusted to a Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell; it was still +held by Queen Mary’s Bothwell in 1567. The Hepburns rose +to the earldom of Bothwell on the death of Ramsay, a favourite of James +III., who (1491) had arranged to kidnap James IV. with his brother, +and hand them over to Henry VII., for £277, 13s. 4d.! Nothing +came of this, and a truce with England was arranged in 1491. Through +four reigns, till James VI. came to the English throne, the Tudor policy +was to buy Scottish traitors, and attempt to secure the person of the +Scottish monarch.</p> +<p>Meanwhile, the Church was rent by jealousies between the holder of +the newly-created Archbishop of Glasgow (1491) and the Archbishop of +St Andrews, and disturbed by the Lollards, in the region which was later +the centre of the fiercest Covenanters,—Kyle in Ayrshire. +But James laughed away the charges against the heretics (1494), whose +views were, on many points, those of John Knox. In 1493-1495 James +dealt in the usual way with the Highlanders and “the wicked blood +of the Isles”: some were hanged, some imprisoned, some became +sureties for the peacefulness of their clans. In 1495, by way +of tit-for-tat against English schemes, James began to back the claims +of Perkin Warbeck, pretending to be Richard, Duke of York, escaped from +the assassins employed by Richard III. Perkin, whoever he was, +had probably been intriguing between Ireland and Burgundy since 1488. +He was welcomed by James at Stirling in November 1495, and was wedded +to the king’s cousin, Catherine Gordon, daughter of the Earl of +Huntly, now supreme in the north. Rejecting a daughter of England, +and Spanish efforts at pacification, James prepared to invade England +in Perkin’s cause; the scheme was sold by Ramsay, the would-be +kidnapper, and came to no more than a useless raid of September 1496, +followed by a futile attempt and a retreat in July 1497. The Spanish +envoy, de Ayala, negotiated a seven-years’ truce in September, +after Perkin had failed and been taken at Taunton.</p> +<p>The Celts had again risen while James was busy in the Border; he +put them down, and made Argyll Lieutenant of the Isles. Between +the Campbells and the Huntly Gordons, as custodians of the peace, the +fighting clans were expected to be more orderly. On the other +hand, a son of Angus Og, himself usually reckoned a bastard of the Lord +of the Isles, gave much trouble. Angus had married a daughter +of the Argyll of his day; their son, Donald Dubh, was kidnapped (or, +rather, his mother was kidnapped before his birth) for Argyll; he now +escaped, and in 1503, found allies among the chiefs, did much scathe, +was taken in 1506, but was as active as ever forty years later.</p> +<p>The central source of these endless Highland feuds was the family +of the Macdonalds, Lords of the Isles, claiming the earldom of Ross, +resisting the Lowland influences and those of the Gordons and Campbells +(Huntly and Argyll), and seeking aid from England. With the capture +of Donald Dubh (1506) the Highlanders became for the while comparatively +quiescent; under Lennox and Argyll they suffered in the defeat of Flodden.</p> +<p>From 1497 to 1503 Henry VII. was negotiating for the marriage of +James to his daughter Margaret Tudor; the marriage was celebrated on +August 8, 1503, and a century later the great grandson of Margaret, +James VI. came to the English throne. But marriage does not make +friendship. There had existed since 1491 a secret alliance by +which Scotland was bound to defend France if attacked by England. +Henry’s negotiations for the kidnapping of James were of April +of the same year. Margaret, the young queen, after her marriage, +was soon involved in bitter quarrels over her dowry with her own family; +the slaying of a Sir Robert Ker, Warden of the Marches, by a Heron in +a Border fray (1508), left an unhealed sore, as England would not give +up Heron and his accomplice. Henry VII. had been pacific, but +his death, in 1509, left James to face his hostile brother-in-law, the +fiery young Henry VIII.</p> +<p>In 1511 the Holy League under the Pope, against France, imperilled +James’s French ally. He began to build great ships of war; +his sea-captain, Barton, pirating about, was defeated and slain by ships +under two of the Howards, sons of the Earl of Surrey (August 1511). +James remonstrated, Henry was firm, and the Border feud of Ker and Heron +was festering; moreover, Henry was a party to the League against France, +and France was urging James to attack England. He saw, and wrote +to the King of Denmark, that, if France were down, the turn of Scotland +to fall would follow. In March 1513, an English diplomatist, West, +found James in a wild mood, distraught “like a fey man.”</p> +<p>Chivalry, and even national safety, called him to war; while his +old remorse drove him into a religious retreat, and he was on hostile +terms with the Pope. On May 24th, in a letter to Henry, he made +a last attempt to obtain a truce, but on June 30th Henry invaded France. +The French queen despatched to James, as to her true knight, a letter +and a ring. He sent his fleet to sea; it vanished like a dream. +He challenged Henry through a herald on July 26th, and, in face of strange +and evil omens, summoned the whole force of his kingdom, crossed the +Border on August 22nd, took Norham Castle on Tweed, with the holds of +Eital, Chillingham, and Ford, which he made his headquarters, and awaited +the approach of Surrey and the levies of the Stanleys. On September +5th he demolished Ford Castle, and took position on the crest of Flodden +Edge, with the deep and sluggish water of Till at its feet. Surrey, +commanding an army all but destitute of supplies, outmanœuvred +James, led his men unseen behind a range of hills to a position where, +if he could maintain himself, he was upon James’s line of communications, +and thence marched against him to Branxton Ridge, under Flodden Edge.</p> +<p>James was ignorant of Surrey’s movement till he saw the approach +of his standards. In place of retaining his position, he hurled +his force down to Branxton, his gunners could not manage their new French +ordnance, and though Home with the Border spears and Huntly had a success +on the right, the Borderers made no more efforts, and, on the left, +the Celts fled swiftly after the fall of Lennox and Argyll. In +the centre Crawford and Rothes were slain, and James, with the steady +spearmen of his command, drove straight at Surrey. James, as the +Spaniard Ayala said, “was no general: he was a fighting man.” +He was outflanked by the Admiral (Howard) and Dacre; his force was surrounded +by charging horse and foot, and rained on by arrows. But</p> +<blockquote><p>“The stubborn spearmen still made good<br /> +Their dark impenetrable wood,”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>when James rushed from the ranks, hewed his way to within a lance’s +length of Surrey (so Surrey writes), and died, riddled with arrows, +his neck gashed by a bill-stroke, his left hand almost sundered from +his body. Night fell on the unbroken Scottish phalanx, but when +dawn arrived only a force of Border prickers was hovering on the fringes +of the field. Thirteen dead earls lay in a ring about their master; +there too lay his natural son, the young Archbishop of St Andrews, and +the Bishops of Caithness and the Isles. Scarce a noble or gentle +house of the Lowlands but reckons an ancestor slain at Flodden.</p> +<p>Surrey did not pursue his victory, which was won, despite sore lack +of supplies, by his clever tactics, by the superior discipline of his +men, by their marching powers, and by the glorious rashness of the Scottish +king. It is easy, and it is customary, to blame James’s +adherence to the French alliance as if it were born of a foolish chivalry. +But he had passed through long stress of mind concerning this matter. +If he rejected the allurements of France, if France were overwhelmed, +he knew well that the turn of Scotland would come soon. The ambitions +and the claims of Henry VIII. were those of the first Edwards. +England was bent on the conquest of Scotland at the earliest opportunity, +and through the entire Tudor period England was the home and her monarch +the ally of every domestic foe and traitor to the Scottish Crown.</p> +<p>Scotland, under James, had much prospered in wealth and even in comfort. +Ayala might flatter in some degree, but he attests the great increase +in comfort and in wealth.</p> +<p>In 1495 Bishop Elphinstone founded the University of Aberdeen, while +(1496) Parliament decreed a course of school and college for the sons +of barons and freeholders of competent estate. Prior Hepburn founded +the College of St Leonard’s in the University of St Andrews; and +in 1507 Chepman received a royal patent as a printer. Meanwhile +Dunbar, reckoned by some the chief poet of Scotland before Burns, was +already denouncing the luxury and vice of the clergy, though his own +life set them a bad example. But with Dunbar, Henryson, and others, +Scotland had a school of poets much superior to any that England had +reared since the death of Chaucer. Scotland now enjoyed her brief +glimpse of the Revival of Learning; and James, like Charles II., fostered +the early movements of chemistry and physical science. But Flodden +ruined all, and the country, under the long minority of James V., was +robbed and distracted by English intrigues; by the follies and loves +of Margaret Tudor; by actual warfare between rival candidates for ecclesiastical +place; by the ambitions and treasons of the Douglases and other nobles; +and by the arrival from France of the son of Albany, that rebel brother +of James III.</p> +<p>The truth of the saying, “Woe to the kingdom whose king is +a child,” was never more bitterly proved than in Scotland between +the day of Flodden and the day of the return of Mary Stuart from France +(1513-1561). James V. was not only a child and fatherless; he +had a mother whose passions and passionate changes in love resembled +those of her brother Henry VIII. Consequently, when the inevitable +problem arose, was Scotland during the minority to side with England +or with France? the queen-mother wavered ceaselessly between the party +of her brother, the English king, and the party of France; while Henry +VIII. could not be trusted, and the policy of France in regard to England +did not permit her to offer any stable support to the cause of Scottish +independence. The great nobles changed sides constantly, each +“fighting for his own hand,” and for the spoils of a Church +in which benefices were struggled for and sold like stocks in the Exchange.</p> +<p>The question, Was Scotland to ally herself with England or with France? +later came to mean, Was Scotland to break with Rome or to cling to Rome? +Owing mainly to the selfish and unscrupulous perfidy of Henry VIII., +James V. was condemned, as the least of two evils, to adopt the Catholic +side in the great religious revolution; while the statesmanship of the +Beatons, Archbishops of St Andrews, preserved Scotland from English +domination, thereby preventing the country from adopting Henry’s +Church, the Anglican, and giving Calvinism and Presbyterianism the opportunity +which was resolutely taken and held.</p> +<p>The real issue of the complex faction fight during James’s +minority was thus of the most essential importance; but the constant +shiftings of parties and persons cannot be dealt with fully in our space. +James’s mother had a natural claim to the guardianship of her +son, and was left Regent by the will of James IV., but she was the sister +of Scotland’s enemy, Henry VIII. Beaton, Archbishop of Glasgow +(later of St Andrews), with the Earl of Arran (now the title of the +Hamiltons), Huntly, and Angus were to advise the queen till the arrival +of Albany (son of the brother of James III.), who was summoned from +France. Albany, of course, stood for the French alliance, but +when the queen-mother (August 6, 1514) married the new young Earl of +Angus, the grandson and successor of the aged traitor, “Bell the +Cat,” the earl began to carry on the usual unpatriotic policy +of his house. The appointment to the see of St Andrews was competed +for by the Poet Gawain Douglas, uncle of the new Earl of Angus; and +himself of the English party; by Hepburn, Prior of St Andrews, who fortified +the Abbey; and by Forman, Bishop of Moray, a partisan of France, and +a man accused of having induced James IV. to declare war against England.</p> +<p>After long and scandalous intrigues, Forman obtained the see. +Albany was Regent for a while, and at intervals he repaired to France; +he was in the favour of the queen-mother when later she quarrelled with +her husband, Angus. At one moment, Margaret and Angus fled to +England where was born her daughter Margaret, later Lady Lennox and +mother of Henry Darnley.</p> +<p>Angus, with Home, now recrossed the Border (1516), and was reconciled +to Albany; against all unity in Scotland Henry intrigued, bribing with +a free hand, his main object being to get Albany sent out of the country. +In early autumn, 1516, Home, the leader of the Borderers at Flodden, +and his brother were executed for treason; in June, 1517, Albany went +to seek aid and counsel in France; when the queen-mother returned from +England to Scotland, where, if she retained any influence, she might +be useful to her brother’s schemes. But, contrary to Henry’s +interests, in this year Albany renewed the old alliance with France; +while, in 1518, the queen-mother desired to divorce Angus. But +Angus was a serviceable tool of Henry, who prevented his sister from +having her way; and now the heads of the parties in the distracted country +were Arran, chief of the Hamiltons, and Beaton, Archbishop of Glasgow, +standing for France; and Angus representing the English party.</p> +<p>Their forces met at Edinburgh in the street battle of “Cleanse +the Causeway,” wherein the Archbishop of Glasgow wore armour, +and the Douglases beat the Hamiltons out of the town (April 30, 1520). +Albany returned (1521), but the nobles would not join with him in an +English war (1522). Again he went to France, while Surrey devastated +the Scottish Border (1523). Albany returned while Surrey was burning +Jedburgh, was once more deserted by the Scottish forces on the Tweed, +and left the country for ever in 1524. Angus now returned from +England; but the queen-mother cast her affections on young Henry Stewart +(Lord Methven), while Angus got possession of the boy king (June 1526) +and held him, a reluctant ward, in the English interest.</p> +<p>Lennox was now the chief foe of Arran, and Angus, with whom Arran +had coalesced; and Lennox desired to deliver James out of Angus’s +hands. On July 26, 1526, not far from Melrose, Walter Scott of +Buccleuch attacked the forces guarding the prince; among them was Ker +of Cessford, who was slain by an Elliot when Buccleuch’s men rallied +at the rock called “Turn Again.” Hence sprang a long-enduring +blood-feud of Scotts and Kers; but Angus retained the prince, and in +a later fight in the cause of James’s delivery, Lennox was slain +by the Hamiltons, near Linlithgow. The spring of 1528 was marked +by the burning of a Hamilton, Patrick, Abbot of Ferne, at St Andrews, +for his Lutheran opinions. Angus had been making futile attacks +on the Border thieves, mainly the Armstrongs, who now became very prominent +and picturesque robbers. He meant to carry James with him on one +of these expeditions; but in June 1528 the young king escaped from Edinburgh +Castle, and rode to Stirling, where he was welcomed by his mother and +her partisans. Among them were Arran, Argyll, Moray, Bothwell, +and other nobles, with Maxwell and the Laird of Buccleuch, Sir Walter +Scott. Angus and his kin were forfeited; he was driven across +the Border in November, to work what mischief he might against his country; +he did not return till the death of James V. Meanwhile James was +at peace with his uncle, Henry VIII. He (1529-1530) attempted +to bring the Border into his peace, and hanged Johnnie Armstrong of +Gilnockie, with circumstances of treachery, says the ballad,—as +a ballad-maker was certain to say.</p> +<p>Campbells, Macleans, and Macdonalds had all this while been burning +each other’s lands, and cutting each other’s throats. +James visited them, and partly quieted them, incarcerating the Earl +of Argyll.</p> +<p>Bothwell and Angus now conspired together to crown Henry VIII. in +Edinburgh; but, in May 1534, a treaty of peace was made, to last till +the death of either monarch and a year longer.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XV. JAMES V. AND THE REFORMATION.</h2> +<p>The new times were at the door. In 1425 the Scottish Parliament +had forbidden Lutheran books to be imported. But they were, of +course, smuggled in; and the seed of religious revolution fell on minds +disgusted by the greed and anarchy of the clerical fighters and jobbers +of benefices.</p> +<p>James V., after he had shaken off the Douglases and become “a +free king,” had to deal with a political and religious situation, +out of which we may say in the Scots phrase, “there was no outgait.” +His was the dilemma of his father before Flodden. How, against +the perfidious ambition, the force in war, and the purchasing powers +of Henry VIII., was James to preserve the national independence of Scotland? +His problem was even harder than that of his father, because when Henry +broke with Rome and robbed the religious houses a large minority, at +least, of the Scottish nobles, gentry, and middle classes were, so far, +heartily on the anti-Roman side. They were tired of Rome, tired +of the profligacy, ignorance, and insatiable greed of the ecclesiastical +dignitaries who, too often, were reckless cadets of the noble families. +Many Scots had read the Lutheran books and disbelieved in transubstantiation; +thought that money paid for prayers to the dead was money wasted; preferred +a married and preaching to a celibate and licentious clergy who celebrated +Mass; were convinced that saintly images were idols, that saintly miracles +were impostures. Above all, the nobles coveted the lands of the +Church, the spoils of the religious houses.</p> +<p>In Scotland, as elsewhere, the causes of the religious revolution +were many. The wealth and luxury of the higher clergy, and of +the dwellers in the abbeys, had long been the butt of satire and of +the fiercer indignation of the people. Benefices, great and small, +were jobbed on every side between the popes, the kings, and the great +nobles. Ignorant and profligate cadets of the great houses were +appointed to high ecclesiastical offices, while the minor clergy were +inconceivably ignorant just at the moment when the new critical learning, +with knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, was revolutionising the study of +the sacred books. The celibacy of the clergy had become a mere +farce; and they got dispensations enabling them to obtain ecclesiastical +livings for their bastards. The kings set the worst example: both +James IV. and James V. secured the richest abbeys, and, in the case +of James IV., the Primacy, for their bastard sons. All these abuses +were of old standing. “Early in the thirteenth century certain +of the abbots of Jedburgh, supported by their chapters, had granted +certain of their appropriate churches to priests with a right of succession +to their sons” (see ‘The Mediæval Church in Scotland,’ +by the late Bishop Dowden, chap. xix. Mac-Lehose, 1910.) +Oppressive customs by which “the upmost claith,” or a pecuniary +equivalent, was extorted as a kind of death-duty by the clergy, were +sanctioned by excommunication: no grievance was more bitterly felt by +the poor. The once-dreaded curses on evil-doers became a popular +jest: purgatory was a mere excuse for getting money for masses.</p> +<p>In short, the whole mediæval system was morally rotten; the +statements drawn up by councils which made vain attempts to check the +stereotyped abuses are as candid and copious concerning all these things +as the satires of Sir David Lyndsay.</p> +<p>Then came disbelief in mediæval dogmas: the Lutheran and other +heretical books were secretly purchased and their contents assimilated. +Intercession of saints, images, pilgrimages, the doctrine of the Eucharist, +all fell into contempt.</p> +<p>As early as February 1428, as we have seen, the first Scottish martyr +for evangelical religion, Patrick Hamilton, was burned at St Andrews. +This sufferer was the son of a bastard of that Lord Hamilton who married +the sister of James III. As was usual, he obtained, when a little +boy, an abbey, that of Ferne in Ross-shire. He drew the revenues, +but did not wear the costume of his place; in fact, he was an example +of the ordinary abuses. Educated at Paris and Louvain, he came +in contact with the criticism of Erasmus and the Lutheran controversy. +He next read at St Andrews, and he married. Suspected of heresy +in 1427, he retired to Germany; he wrote theses called ‘Patrick’s +Places,’ which were reckoned heretical; he was arrested, was offered +by Archbishop Beaton a chance to escape, disdained it, and was burned +with unusual cruelty,—as a rule, heretics in Scotland were strangled +before burning. There were other similar cases, nor could James +interfere—he was bound by his Coronation Oath; again, he found +in the bishops his best diplomatists, and they, of course, were all +for the French alliance, in the cause of the independence of their country +and Church as against Henry VIII.</p> +<p>Thus James, in justifiable dread of the unscrupulous ambition of +Henry VIII., could not run the English course, could not accept the +varying creeds which Henry, who was his own Pope, put forward as his +spirit moved him. James was thus inevitably committed to the losing +cause—the cause of Catholicism and of France—while the intelligence +no less than the avarice of his nobles and gentry ran the English course.</p> +<p>James had practically no choice. In 1536 Henry proposed a meeting +with James “as far within England as possible.” Knowing, +as we do, that Henry was making repeated attempts to have James kidnapped +and Archbishop Beaton also, we are surprised that James was apparently +delighted at the hope of an interview with his uncle—in England. +Henry declined to explain why he desired a meeting when James put the +question to his envoy. James said, in effect, that he must act +by advice of his Council, which, so far as it was clerical, opposed +the scheme. Henry justified the views of the Council, later, when +James, returning from a visit to France, asked permission to pass through +England. “It is the king’s honour not to receive the +King of Scots in his realm except as a vassal, for there never came +King of Scots into England in peaceful manner otherwise.” +Certain it is that, however James might enter England, he would leave +it only as a vassal. Nevertheless his Council, especially his +clergy, are blamed for embroiling James with Henry by dissuading him +from meeting his uncle in England. Manifestly they had no choice. +Henry had shown his hand too often.</p> +<p>At this time James, by Margaret Erskine, became the father of James, +later the Regent Moray. Strange tragedies would never have occurred +had the king first married Margaret Erskine, who, by 1536, was the wife +of Douglas of Loch Leven. He is said to have wished for her a +divorce that he might marry her; this could not be: he visited France, +and on New Year’s Day, 1537, wedded Madeline, daughter of Francis +I. Six months later she died in Scotland.</p> +<p>Marriage for the king was necessary, and David Beaton, later Cardinal +Beaton and Archbishop of St Andrews, obtained for his lord a lady coveted +by Henry VIII., Mary, of the great Catholic house of Lorraine, widow +of the Duc de Longueville, and sister of the popular and ambitious Guises. +The pair were wedded on June 10, 1538; there was fresh offence to Henry +and a closer tie to the Catholic cause. The appointment of Cardinal +Beaton (1539) to the see of St Andrews, in succession to his uncle, +gave James a servant of high ecclesiastical rank, great subtlety, and +indomitable resolution, but remote from chastity of life and from clemency +to heretics. Martyrdoms became more frequent, and George Buchanan, +who had been tutor of James’s son by Margaret Erskine, thought +well to open a window in a house where he was confined, walk out, and +depart to the Continent. Meanwhile Henry, no less than Beaton, +was busily burning his own martyrs. In 1539 Henry renewed his +intercourse with James, attempting to shake his faith in David Beaton, +and to make him rob his Church. James replied that he preferred +to try to reform it; and he enjoyed, in 1540, Sir David Lyndsay’s +satirical play on the vices of the clergy, and, indeed, of all orders +of men. In 1540 James ratified the College of Justice, the fifteen +Lords of Session, sitting as judges in Edinburgh.</p> +<p>In 1541 the idea of a meeting between James and Henry was again mooted, +and Henry actually went to York, where James did not appear. Henry, +who had expected him, was furious. In August 1542, on a futile +pretext, he sent Norfolk with a great force to harry the Border. +The English had the worse at the battle of Hadden Rig; negotiations +followed; Henry proclaimed that Scottish kings had always been vassals +of England, and horrified his Council by openly proposing to kidnap +James. Henry’s forces were now wrecking an abbey and killing +women on the Border. James tried to retaliate, but his levies +(October 31) at Fala Moor declined to follow him across the Border: +they remembered Flodden, moreover they could not risk the person of +a childless king. James prepared, however, for a raid on a great +scale on the western Border, but the fact had been divulged by Sir George +Douglas, Angus’s brother, and had also been sold to Dacre, cheap, +by another Scot. The English despatches prove that Wharton had +full time for preparation, and led a competent force of horse, which, +near Arthuret, charged on the right flank of the Scots, who slowly retreated, +till they were entangled between the Esk and a morass, and lost their +formation and their artillery, with 1200 men: a few were slain, most +were drowned or were taken prisoners. The raid was no secret of +the king and the priests, as Knox absurdly states; nobles of the Reforming +no less than of the Catholic party were engaged; the English had full +warning and a force of 3000 men, not of 400 farmers; the Scots were +beaten through their own ignorance of the ground in which they had been +burning and plundering. As to confusion caused by the claim of +Oliver Sinclair to be commander, it is not corroborated by contemporary +despatches, though Sir George Douglas reports James’s lament for +the conduct of his favourite, “Fled Oliver! fled Oliver!” +The misfortune broke the heart of James. He went to Edinburgh, +did some business, retired for a week to Linlithgow, <a name="citation89"></a><a href="#footnote89">{89}</a> +where his queen was awaiting her delivery, and thence went to Falkland, +and died of nothing more specific than shame, grief, and despair. +He lived to hear of the birth of his daughter, Mary (December 8, 1542). +“It came with a lass and it will go with a lass,” he is +said to have muttered.</p> +<p>On December 14th James passed away, broken by his impossible task, +lost in the bewildering paths from which there was no outgait.</p> +<p>James was personally popular for his gaiety and his adventures while +he wandered in disguise. Humorous poems are attributed to him. +A man of greater genius than his might have failed when confronted by +a tyrant so wealthy, ambitious, cruel, and destitute of honour as Henry +VIII.; constantly engaged with James’s traitors in efforts to +seize or slay him and his advisers. It is an easy thing to attack +James because he would not trust Henry, a man who ruined all that did +trust to his seeming favour.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XVI. THE MINORITY OF MARY STUART.</h2> +<p>When James died, Henry VIII. seemed to hold in his hand all the winning +cards in the game of which Scotland was the stake. He held Angus +and his brother George Douglas; when he slipped them they would again +wield the whole force of their House in the interests of England and +of Henry’s religion. Moreover, he held many noble prisoners +taken at Solway—Glencairn, Maxwell, Cassilis, Fleming, Grey, and +others,—and all of these, save Sir George Douglas, “have +not sticked,” says Henry himself, “to take upon them to +set the crown of Scotland on our head.” Henry’s object +was to get “the child, the person of the Cardinal, and of such +as be chief hindrances to our purpose, and also the chief holds and +fortresses into our hands.” By sheer brigandage the Reformer +king hoped to succeed where the Edwards had failed. He took the +oaths of his prisoners, making them swear to secure for him the child, +Beaton, and the castles, and later released them to do his bidding.</p> +<p>Henry’s failure was due to the genius and resolution of Cardinal +Beaton, heading the Catholic party.</p> +<p>What occurred in Scotland on James’s death is obscure. +Later, Beaton was said to have made the dying king’s hand subscribe +a blank paper filled up by appointment of Beaton himself as one of a +Regency Council of four or five. There is no evidence for the +tale. What actually occurred was the proclamation of the Earls +of Arran, Argyll, Huntly, Moray, and of Beaton as Regents (December +19, 1542). Arran, the chief of the Hamiltons, was, we know, unless +ousted by Henry VIII., the next heir to the throne after the new-born +Mary. He was a good-hearted man, but the weakest of mortals, and +his constant veerings from the Catholic and national to the English +and reforming side were probably caused by his knowledge of his very +doubtful legitimacy. Either party could bring up the doubt; Beaton, +having the ear of the Pope, could be specially dangerous, but so could +the opposite party if once firmly seated in office. Arran, in +any case, presently ousted the Archbishop of Glasgow from the Chancellorship +and gave the seals to Beaton—the man whom he presently accused +of a shameless forgery of James’s will. <a name="citation91"></a><a href="#footnote91">{91}</a></p> +<p>The Regency soon came into Arran’s own hands: the Solway Moss +prisoners, learning this as they journeyed north, began to repent of +their oaths of treachery, especially as their oaths were known or suspected +in Scotland. George Douglas prevailed on Arran to seize and imprison +Beaton till he answered certain charges; but no charges were ever made +public, none were produced. The clergy refused to christen or +bury during his captivity. Parliament met (March 12, 1543), and +still there was silence as to the nature of the accusations against +Beaton; and by March 22 George Douglas himself released the Cardinal +(of course for a consideration) and carried him to his own strong castle +of St Andrews.</p> +<p>Parliament permitted the reading but forbade the discussion of the +Bible in English. Arran was posing as a kind of Protestant. +Ambassadors were sent to Henry to negotiate a marriage between his son +Edward and the baby Queen; but Scotland would not give up a fortress, +would never resign her independence, would not place Mary in Henry’s +hands, would never submit to any but a native ruler.</p> +<p>The airy castle of Henry’s hopes fell into dust, built as it +was on the oaths of traitors. Love of such a religion as Henry +professed, retaining the Mass and making free use of the stake and the +gibbet, was not, even to Protestants, so attractive as to make them +run the English course and submit to the English Lord Paramount. +Some time was needed to make Scots, whatever their religious opinions, +lick the English rod. But the scale was soon to turn; for every +reforming sermon was apt to produce the harrying of religious houses, +and every punishment of the robbers was persecution intolerable against +which men sought English protection.</p> +<p>Henry VIII. now turned to Arran for support. To Arran he offered +the hand of his daughter, the Princess Elizabeth, who should later marry +the heir of the Hamiltons. But by mid-April Arran was under the +influence of his bastard brother, the Abbot of Paisley (later Archbishop +Hamilton). The Earl of Lennox, a Stuart, and Keeper of Dumbarton +Castle, arrived from France. He was hostile to Arran; for, if +Arran were illegitimate, Lennox was next heir to the crown after Mary: +he was thus, for the moment, the ally of Beaton against Arran. +George Douglas visited Henry, and returned with his terms—Mary +to be handed over to England at the age of ten, and to marry Prince +Edward at twelve; Arran (by a prior arrangement) was to receive Scotland +north of Forth, an auxiliary English army, and the hand of Elizabeth +for his son. To the English contingent Arran preferred £5000 +in ready money—that was his price.</p> +<p>Sadleyr, Henry’s envoy, saw Mary of Guise, and saw her little +daughter unclothed; he admired the child, but could not disentangle +the cross-webs of intrigue. The national party—the Catholic +party—was strongest, because least disunited. When the Scottish +ambassadors who went to Henry in spring returned (July 21), the national +party seized Mary and carried her to Stirling, where they offered Arran +a meeting, and (he said) the child queen’s hand for his son. +But Arran’s own partisans, Glencairn and Cassilis, told Sadleyr +that he fabled freely. Representatives of both parties accepted +Henry’s terms, but delayed the ratification. Henry insisted +that it should be ratified by August 24, but on August 16 he seized +six Scottish merchant ships. Though the Treaty was ratified on +August 25, Arran was compelled to insist on compensation for the ships, +but on August 28 he proclaimed Beaton a traitor. In the beginning +of September Arran favoured the wrecking of the Franciscan monastery +in Edinburgh; and at Dundee the mob, moved by sermons from the celebrated +martyr George Wishart, did sack the houses of the Franciscans and the +Dominicans; Beaton’s Abbey of Arbroath and the Abbey of Lindores +were also plundered. Clearly it was believed that Beaton was down, +and that church-pillage was authorised by Arran. Yet on September +3 Arran joined hands with Beaton! The Cardinal, by threatening +to disprove Arran’s legitimacy and ruin his hopes of the crown, +or in some other way, had dominated the waverer, while Henry (August +29) was mobilising an army of 20,000 men for the invasion of Scotland. +On September 9 Mary was crowned at Stirling. But Beaton could +not hold both Arran and his rival Lennox, who committed an act of disgraceful +treachery. With Glencairn he seized large supplies of money and +stores sent by France to Dumbarton Castle. In 1544 he fled to +England and to the protection of Henry, and married Margaret, daughter +of Angus and Margaret Tudor, widow of James IV. He became the +father of Darnley, Mary’s husband in later years, and the fortunes +of Scotland were fatally involved in the feud between the Lennox Stewarts +and the House of Hamilton.</p> +<p>Meanwhile (November 1543) Arran and Beaton together broke and persecuted +the abbey robbers of Perthshire and Angus, making “martyrs” +and incurring, on Beaton’s part, fatal feuds with Leslies, Greys, +Learmonths, and Kirkcaldys. Parliament (December 11) declared +the treaty with England void; the party of the Douglases, equally suspected +by Henry and by Beaton, was crushed, and George Douglas was held a hostage, +still betraying his country in letters to England. Martyrs were +burned in Perth and Dundee, which merely infuriated the populace. +In April 1544, while Henry was giving the most cruel orders to his army +of invasion, one Wishart visited him with offers, which were accepted, +for the murder of the Cardinal. <a name="citation94"></a><a href="#footnote94">{94}</a> +Early in May the English army under Hertford took Leith, “raised +a jolly fire,” says Hertford, in Edinburgh; he burned the towns +on his line of march, and retired.</p> +<p>On May 17 Lennox and Glencairn sold themselves to Henry; for ample +rewards they were to secure the teaching of God’s word “as +the mere and only foundation whence proceeds all truth and honour”! +Arran defeated Glencairn when he attempted his godly task, and Lennox +was driven back into England.</p> +<p>In June Mary of Guise fell into the hands of nobles led by Angus, +while the Fife, Perthshire, and Angus lairds, lately Beaton’s +deadly foes, came into the Cardinal’s party. With him and +Arran, in November, were banded the Protestants who were to be his murderers, +while the Douglases, in December, were cleared by Parliament of all +their offences, and Henry offered 3000 crowns for their “trapping.” +Angus, in February 1545, protested that he loved Henry “best of +all men,” and would make Lennox Governor of Scotland, while Wharton, +for Henry, was trying to kidnap Angus. Enraged by the English +desecration of his ancestors’ graves at Melrose Abbey, Angus united +with Arran, Norman Leslie, and Buccleuch to annihilate an English force +at Ancrum Moor, where Henry’s men lost 800 slain and 2000 prisoners. +The loyalty of Angus to his country was now, by innocents like Arran, +thought assured. The plot for Beaton’s murder was in 1545 +negotiated between Henry and Cassilis, backed by George Douglas; and +Crichton of Brunston, as before, was engaged, a godly laird in Lothian. +In August the Douglases boast that, as Henry’s friends, they have +frustrated an invasion of England with a large French contingent, which +they pretended to lead, while they secured its failure. Meanwhile, +after forty years, Donald Dubh, and all the great western chiefs, none +of whom could write, renewed the alliance of 1463 with England, calling +themselves “auld enemies of Scotland.” Their religious +predilections, however, were not Protestant. They promised to +destroy or reduce half of Scotland, and hailed Lennox as Governor, as +in Angus’s offer to Henry in spring 1545. Lennox did make +an attempt against Dumbarton in November with Donald Dubh. They +failed, and Donald died, without legitimate issue, at Drogheda. +The Macleans, Macleods, and Macneils then came into the national party.</p> +<p>In September 1545 Hertford, with an English force, destroyed the +religious houses at Melrose, Kelso, Dryburgh, and Jedburgh. <a name="citation96"></a><a href="#footnote96">{96}</a> +Meanwhile the two Douglases skulked with the murderous traitor Cassilis +in Ayrshire, and Henry tried to induce French deserters from the Scottish +flag to murder Beaton and Arran.</p> +<p>Beaton could scarcely escape for ever from so many plots. His +capture, in January 1546, of George Wishart, an eminently learned and +virtuous Protestant preacher, and an intimate associate of the murderous, +double-dyed traitor Brunston and of other Lothian pietists of the English +party; and his burning of Wishart at St Andrews, on March 1, 1546, sealed +the Cardinal’s doom. On May 29th he was surprised in his +castle of St Andrews and slain by his former ally, Norman Leslie, Master +of Rothes, with Kirkcaldy of Grange, and James Melville who seems to +have dealt the final stab after preaching at his powerless victim. +They insulted the corpse, and held St Andrews Castle against all comers.</p> +<p>How gallant a fight Beaton had waged against adversaries how many +and multifarious, how murderous, self-seeking, treacherous, and hypocritical, +we have seen. He maintained the independence of Scotland against +the most recklessly unscrupulous of assailants, though probably he was +rather bent on defending the lost cause of a Church entirely and intolerably +corrupt.</p> +<p>The two causes were at the moment inseparable, and, whatever we may +think of the Church of Rome, it was not more bloodily inclined than +the Church of which Henry was Pope, while it was less illogical, not +being the creature of a secular tyrant. If Henry and his party +had won their game, the Church of Scotland would have been Henry’s +Church—would have been Anglican. Thus it was Beaton who, +by defeating Henry, made Presbyterian Calvinism possible in Scotland.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XVII. REGENCY OF ARRAN.</h2> +<p>The death of Cardinal Beaton left Scotland and the Church without +a skilled and resolute defender. His successor in the see, Archbishop +Hamilton, a half-brother of the Regent, was more licentious than the +Cardinal (who seems to have been constant to Mariotte Ogilvy), and had +little of his political genius. The murderers, with others of +their party, held St Andrews Castle, strong in its new fortifications, +which the queen-mother and Arran, the Regent, were unable to reduce. +Receiving supplies from England by sea, and abetted by Henry VIII., +the murderers were in treaty with him to work all his will, while some +nobles, like Argyll and Huntly, wavered; though the Douglases now renounced +their compact with England, and their promise to give the child queen +in marriage to Henry’s son. At the end of November, despairing +of success in the siege, Arran asked France to send men and ships to +take St Andrews Castle from the assassins, who, in December, obtained +an armistice. They would surrender, they said, when they got a +pardon for their guilt from the Pope; but they begged Henry VIII. to +move the Emperor to move the Pope to give no pardon! The remission, +none the less, arrived early in April 1547, but was mocked at by the +garrison of the castle. <a name="citation99"></a><a href="#footnote99">{99}</a></p> +<p>The garrison and inmates of the castle presently welcomed the arrival +of John Knox and some of his pupils. Knox (born in Haddington, +1513-1515?), a priest and notary, had borne a two-handed sword and been +of the body-guard of Wishart. He was now invited by John Rough, +the chaplain, to take on him the office of preacher, which he did, weeping, +so strong was his sense of the solemnity of his duties. He also +preached and disputed with feeble clerical opponents in the town. +The congregation in the castle, though devout, were ruffianly in their +lives, nor did he spare rebukes to his flock.</p> +<p>Before Knox arrived, Henry VIII. and Francis II. had died; the successor +of Francis, Henri II., sent to Scotland Monsieur d’Oysel, who +became the right-hand man of Mary of Guise in the Government. +Meanwhile the advance of an English force against the Border, where +they occupied Langholm, caused Arran to lead thither the national levies. +But this gave no great relief to the besieged in the castle of St Andrews. +In mid-July a well-equipped French fleet swept up the east coast; men +were landed with guns; French artillery was planted on the cathedral +roof and the steeple of St Salvator’s College, and poured a plunging +fire into the castle. In a day or two, on the last of July, the +garrison surrendered. Knox, with many of his associates, was placed +in the galleys and carried captive to France. On one occasion +the galleys were within sight of St Andrews, and the Reformer predicted +(so he says) that he would again preach there—as he did, to some +purpose.</p> +<p>But the castle had not fallen before the English party among the +nobles had arranged to betray Scottish fortresses to England; and to +lead 2000 Scottish “favourers of the Word of God” to fight +under the flag of St George against their country. An English +host of 15,000 was assembled, and marched north accompanied by a fleet. +On the 9th of September 1547 the leader, Somerset, found the Scottish +army occupying a well-chosen position near Musselburgh: on their left +lay the Firth, on their front a marsh and the river Esk. But next +day the Scots, as when Cromwell defeated them at Dunbar, left an impregnable +position in their eagerness to cut Somerset off from his ships, and +were routed with great slaughter in the battle of Pinkie. Somerset +made no great use of his victory: he took and held Broughty Castle on +Tay, fortified Inchcolme in the Firth of Forth, and devastated Holyrood. +Mischief he did, to little purpose.</p> +<p>The child queen was conveyed to an isle in the loch of Menteith, +where she was safe, and her marriage with the Dauphin was negotiated. +In June 1548 a large French force under the Sieur d’Essé +arrived, and later captured Haddington, held by the English, while, +despite some Franco-Scottish successes in the field, Mary was sent with +her Four Maries to France, where she landed in August, the only passenger +who had not been sea-sick! By April 1550 the English made peace, +abandoning all their holds in Scotland. The great essential prize, +the child queen, had escaped them.</p> +<p>The clergy burned a martyr in 1550; in 1549 they had passed measures +for their own reformation: too late and futile was the scheme. +Early in 1549 Knox returned from France to England, where he was minister +at Berwick and at Newcastle, a chaplain of the child Edward VI., and +a successful opponent of Cranmer as regards kneeling at the celebration +of the Holy Communion. He refused a bishopric, foreseeing trouble +under Mary Tudor, from whom he fled to the Continent. In 1550-51 +Mary of Guise, visiting France, procured for Arran the Duchy of Châtelherault, +and for his eldest son the command of the Scottish Archer Guard, and, +by way of exchange, in 1554 took from him the Regency, surrounding herself +with French advisers, notably De Roubay and d’Oysel.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XVIII. REGENCY OF MARY OF GUISE.</h2> +<p>In England, on the death of Edward VI., Catholicism rejoiced in the +accession of Mary Tudor, which, by driving Scottish Protestant refugees +back into their own country, strengthened there the party of revolt +against the Church, while the queen-mother’s preference of French +over Scottish advisers, and her small force of trained French soldiers +in garrisons, caused even the Scottish Catholics to hold France in fear +and suspicion. The French counsellors (1556) urged increased taxation +for purposes of national defence against England; but the nobles would +rather be invaded every year than tolerate a standing army in place +of their old irregular feudal levies. Their own independence of +the Crown was dearer to the nobles and gentry than safety from their +old enemy. They might have reflected that a standing army of Scots, +officered by themselves, would be a check on the French soldiers in +garrison.</p> +<p>Perplexed and opposed by the great clan of Hamilton, whose chief, +Arran, was nearest heir to the crown, Mary of Guise was now anxious +to conciliate the Protestants, and there was a “blink,” +as the Covenanters later said,—a lull in persecution.</p> +<p>After Knox’s release from the French galleys in 1549, he had +played, as we saw, a considerable part in the affairs of the English +Church, and in the making of the second Prayer-Book of Edward VI., but +had fled abroad on the accession of Mary Tudor. From Dieppe he +had sent a tract to England, praying God to stir up some Phineas or +Jehu to shed the blood of “abominable idolaters,”—obviously +of Mary of England and Philip of Spain. On earlier occasions he +had followed Calvin in deprecating such sanguinary measures. The +Scot, after a stormy period of quarrels with Anglican refugees in Frankfort, +moved to Geneva, where the city was under a despotism of preachers and +of Calvin. Here Knox found the model of Church government which, +in a form if possible more extreme, he later planted in Scotland.</p> +<p>There, in 1549-52, the Church, under Archbishop Hamilton, Beaton’s +successor, had been confessing her iniquities in Provincial Councils, +and attempting to purify herself on the lines of the tolerant and charitable +Catechism issued by the Archbishop in 1552. Apparently a <i>modus +vivendi</i> was being sought, and Protestants were inclined to think +that they might be “occasional conformists” and attend Mass +without being false to their convictions. But in this brief lull +Knox came over to Scotland at the end of harvest, in 1555. On +this point of occasional conformity he was fixed. The Mass was +idolatry, and idolatry, by the law of God, was a capital offence. +Idolaters must be converted or exterminated; they were no better than +Amalekites.</p> +<p>This was the central rock of Knox’s position: tolerance was +impossible. He remained in Scotland, preaching and administering +the Sacrament in the Genevan way, till June 1556. He associated +with the future leaders of the religious revolution: Erskine of Dun, +Lord Lorne (in 1558, fifth Earl of Argyll), James Stewart, bastard of +James V., and lay Prior of St Andrews, and of Macon in France; and the +Earl of Glencairn. William Maitland of Lethington, “the +flower of the wits of Scotland,” was to Knox a less congenial +acquaintance. Not till May 1556 was Knox summoned to trial in +Edinburgh, but he had a strong backing of the laity, as was the custom +in Scotland, where justice was overawed by armed gatherings, and no +trial was held. By July 1556 he was in France, on his way to Geneva.</p> +<p>The fruits of Knox’s labours followed him, in March 1557, in +the shape of a letter, signed by Glencairn, Lorne, Lord Erskine, and +James Stewart, Mary’s bastard brother. They prayed Knox +to return. They were ready “to jeopardy lives and goods +in the forward setting of the glory of God.” This has all +the air of risking civil war. Knox was not eager. It was +October before he reached Dieppe on his homeward way. Meanwhile +there had been hostilities between England and Scotland (as ally of +France, then at odds with Philip of Spain, consort King of England), +and there were Protestant tumults in Edinburgh. Knox had scruples +as to raising civil war by preaching at home. The Scottish nobles +had no zeal for the English war; but Knox, who received at Dieppe discouraging +letters from unknown correspondents, did not cross the sea. He +remained at Dieppe, preaching, till the spring of 1558.</p> +<p>In Knox’s absence even James Stewart and Erskine of Dun agreed +to hurry on the marriage between Mary, Queen of Scots, and Francis, +Dauphin of France, a feeble boy, younger than herself. Their faces +are pitiably young as represented in their coronation medal.</p> +<p>While negotiations for the marriage were begun in October, on December +3, 1557, a godly “band” or covenant for mutual aid was signed +by Argyll (then near his death, in 1558); his son, Lorne; the Earl of +Morton (son of the traitor, Sir George Douglas); Glencairn; and Erskine +of Dun, one of the commissioners who were to visit France for the Royal +marriage. They vow to risk their lives against “the Congregation +of Satan” (the Church), and in defence of faithful Protestant +preachers. They will establish “the blessed Word of God +and His Congregation,” and henceforth the Protestant party was +commonly styled “The Congregation.”</p> +<p>Parliament (November 29, 1557) had accepted the French marriage, +all the ancient liberties of Scotland being secured, and the right to +the throne, if Mary died without issue, being confirmed to the House +of Hamilton, not to the Dauphin. The marriage-contract (April +19, 1558) did ratify these just demands; but, on April 4, Mary had been +induced to sign them all away to France, leaving Scotland and her own +claims to the English crown to the French king.</p> +<p>The marriage was celebrated on April 24, 1558. In that week +the last Protestant martyr, Walter Milne, an aged priest and a married +man, was burned for heresy at St Andrews. This only increased +the zeal of the Congregation.</p> +<p>Among the Protestant preachers then in Scotland, of whom Willock, +an Englishman, seems to have been the most reasonable, a certain Paul +Methuen, a baker, was prominent. He had been summoned (July 28) +to stand his trial for heresy, but his backing of friends was considerable, +and they came before Mary of Guise in armour and with a bullying demeanour. +She tried to temporise, and on September 3 a great riot broke out in +Edinburgh, the image of St Giles was broken, and the mob violently assaulted +a procession of priests. The country was seething with discontent, +and the death of Mary Tudor (November 17, 1558), with the accession +of the Protestant Elizabeth, encouraged the Congregation. Mary +of Guise made large concessions: only she desired that there should +be no public meetings in the capital. On January 1, 1559, church +doors were placarded with “The Beggars’ Warning.” +The Beggars (really the Brethren in their name) claimed the wealth of +the religious orders. Threats were pronounced, revolution was +menaced at a given date, Whitsunday, and the threats were fulfilled.</p> +<p>All this was the result of a plan, not of accident. Mary of +Guise was intending to visit France, not longing to burn heretics. +But she fell into the worst of health, and her recovery was doubted, +in April 1559. Willock and Methuen had been summoned to trial +(February 2, 1559), for their preachings were always apt to lead to +violence on the part of their hearers. The summons was again postponed +in deference to renewed menaces: a Convention had met at Edinburgh to +seek for some remedy, and the last Provincial Council of the Scottish +Church (March 1559) had considered vainly some proposals by moderate +Catholics for internal reform. <a name="citation106"></a><a href="#footnote106">{106}</a></p> +<p>Again the preachers were summoned to Stirling for May 10, but just +a week earlier Knox arrived in Scotland. The leader of the French +Protestant preachers, Morel, expressed to Calvin his fear that Knox +“may fill Scotland with his madness.” Now was his +opportunity: the Regent was weak and ill; the Congregation was in great +force; England was at least not unfavourable to its cause. From +Dundee Knox marched with many gentlemen—unarmed, he says—accompanying +the preachers to Perth: Erskine of Dun went as an envoy to the Regent +at Stirling; she is accused by Knox of treacherous dealing (other contemporary +Protestant evidence says nothing of treachery); at all events, on May +10 the preachers were outlawed for non-appearance to stand their trial. +The Brethren, “the whole multitude with their preachers,” +says Knox, who were in Perth were infuriated, and, after a sermon from +the Reformer, wrecked the church, sacked the monasteries, and, says +Knox, denounced death against any priest who celebrated Mass (a circumstance +usually ignored by our historians), at the same time protesting, “We +require nothing but liberty of conscience”!</p> +<p>On May 31 a composition was made between the Regent and the insurgents, +whom Argyll and James Stewart promised to join if the Regent broke the +conditions. Henceforth the pretext that she had broken faith was +made whenever it seemed convenient, while the Congregation permitted +itself a godly liberty in construing the terms of treaties. A +“band” was signed for “the destruction of idolatry” +by Argyll, James Stewart, Glencairn, and others; and the Brethren scattered +from Perth, breaking down altars and “idols” on their way +home. Mary of Guise had promised not to leave a French garrison +in Perth. She did leave some Scots in French pay, and on this +slim pretext of her treachery, Argyll and James Stewart proclaimed the +Regent perfidious, deserted her cause, and joined the crusade against +“idolatry.”</p> +<h3>NOTE.</h3> +<p>It is far from my purpose to represent Mary of Guise as a kind of +stainless Una with a milk-white lamb. I am apt to believe that +she caused to be forged a letter, which she attributed to Arran. +See my ‘John Knox and the Reformation,’ pp. 280, 281, where +the evidence is discussed. But the critical student of Knox’s +chapters on these events, generally accepted as historical evidence, +cannot but perceive his personal hatred of Mary of Guise, whether shown +in thinly veiled hints that Cardinal Beaton was her paramour; or in +charges of treacherous breach of promise, which rest primarily on his +word. Again, that “the Brethren” wrecked the religious +houses of Perth is what he reports to a lady, Mrs Locke; that “the +rascal multitude” was guilty is the tale he tells “to all +Europe” in his History. I have done my best to compare Knox’s +stories with contemporary documents, including his own letters. +These documents throw a lurid light on his versions of events, as given +in this part of his History, which is merely a partisan pamphlet of +autumn 1559. The evidence is criticised in my ‘John Knox +and the Reformation,’ pp. 107-157 (1905). Unhappily the +letter of Mary of Guise to Henri II., after the outbreak at Perth, is +missing from the archives of France.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XIX. THE GREAT PILLAGE.</h2> +<p>The revolution was now under weigh, and as it had begun so it continued. +There was practically no resistance by the Catholic nobility and gentry: +in the Lowlands, apparently, almost all were of the new persuasion. +The Duc de Châtelherault might hesitate while his son, the Protestant +Earl of Arran, who had been in France as Captain of the Scots Guard, +was escaping into Switzerland, and thence to England; but, on Arran’s +arrival there, the Hamiltons saw their chance of succeeding to the crown +in place of the Catholic Mary. The Regent had but a small body +of professional French soldiers. But the other side could not +keep their feudal levies in the field, and they could not coin the supplies +of church plate which must have fallen into their hands, until they +had seized the Mint at Edinburgh, so money was scarce with them. +It was plain to Knox and Kirkcaldy of Grange, and it soon became obvious +to Maitland of Lethington, who, of course, forsook the Regent, that +aid from England must be sought,—aid in money, and if possible +in men and ships.</p> +<p>Meanwhile the reformers dealt with the ecclesiastical buildings of +St Andrews as they had done at Perth, Knox urging them on by his sermons. +We may presume that the boys broke the windows and images with a sanctified +joy. A mutilated head of the Redeemer has been found in a <i>latrine</i> +of the monastic buildings. As Commendator, or lay Prior, James +Stewart may have secured the golden sheath of the arm-bone of the Apostle, +presented by Edward I., and the other precious things, the sacred plate +of the Church in a fane which had been the Delphi of Scotland. +Lethington appears to have obtained most of the portable property of +St Salvator’s College except that beautiful monument of idolatry, +the great silver mace presented by Kennedy, the Founder, work of a Parisian +silversmith, in 1461: this, with maces of rude native work, escaped +the spoilers. The monastery of the Franciscans is now levelled +with the earth; of the Dominicans’ chapel a small fragment remains. +Of the residential part of the abbey a house was left: when the lead +had been stripped from the roof of the church it became a quarry.</p> +<p>“All churchmen’s goods were spoiled and reft from them +. . . for every man for the most part that could get anything pertaining +to any churchmen thought the same well-won gear,” says a contemporary +Diary. Arran himself, when he arrived in Scotland, robbed a priest +of all that he had, for which Châtelherault made compensation.</p> +<p>By the middle of June the Regent was compelled to remove almost all +her French soldiers out of Fife. Perth was evacuated. The +abbey of Scone and the palace were sacked. The Congregation entered +Edinburgh: they seem to have found the monasteries already swept bare, +but they seized Holyrood, and the stamps at the Mint. The Regent +proclaimed that this was flat rebellion, and that the rebels were intriguing +with England.</p> +<p>Knox denied it, in the first part of his History (in origin a contemporary +tract written in the autumn), but the charge was true, and Knox and +Kirkcaldy were, since June, the negotiators. Already his party +were offering Arran (the heir of the crown after Mary) as a husband +for Elizabeth, who saw him but rejected his suit. Arran’s +father, Châtelherault, later openly deserted the Regent (July +1). The death of Henri II., wounded in a tournament, did not accelerate +the arrival of French reinforcements for the Regent. The weaker +Brethren, however, waxed weary; money was scarce, and on July 24, the +Congregation evacuated Edinburgh and Leith, after a treaty which they +misrepresented, broke, and accused the Regent of breaking. <a name="citation111a"></a><a href="#footnote111a">{111a}</a></p> +<p>Knox visited England, about August 1, but felt dissatisfied with +his qualification for diplomacy. Nothing, so far, was gained from +Elizabeth, save a secret supply of £3000. On the other hand, +fresh French forces arrived at Leith: the place was fortified; the Regent +was again accused of perfidy by the perfidious; and on October 21 the +Congregation proclaimed her deposition on the alleged authority of her +daughter, now Queen of France, whose seal they forged and used in their +documents. One Cokky was the forger; he saw Arran use the seal +on public papers. <a name="citation111b"></a><a href="#footnote111b">{111b}</a> +Cokky had made a die for the coins of the Congregation—a crown +of thorns, with the words <i>Verbum Dei</i>. Leith, manned by +French soldiers, was, till in the summer of 1560 it surrendered to the +Congregation and their English allies, the centre of Catholic resistance.</p> +<p>In November the Congregation, after a severe defeat, fled in grief +from Edinburgh to Stirling, where Knox reanimated them, and they sent +Lethington to England to crave assistance. Lethington, who had +been in the service of the Regent, is henceforth the central figure +of every intrigue. Witty, eloquent, subtle, he was indispensable, +and he had one great ruling motive, to unite the crowns and peoples +of England and Scotland. Unfortunately he loved the crafty exercise +of his dominion over men’s minds for its own sake, and when, in +some inscrutable way, he entered the clumsy plot to murder Darnley, +and knew that Mary could prove his guilt, his shiftings and changes +puzzle historians. In Scotland he was called Michael Wily, that +is, Macchiavelli, and “the necessary evil.”</p> +<p>In his mission to England Lethington was successful. By December +21 the English diplomatist, Sadleyr, informed Arran that a fleet was +on its way to aid the Congregation, who were sacking Paisley Abbey, +and issuing proclamations in the names of Francis and Mary. The +fleet arrived while the French were about to seize St Andrews (January +23, 1560), and the French plans were ruined. The Regent, who was +dying, found shelter in Edinburgh Castle, which stood neutral. +On February 27, 1560, at Berwick, the Congregation entered into a regular +league with England, Elizabeth appearing as Protectress of Scotland, +while the marriage of Mary and Francis endured.</p> +<p>Meanwhile, owing to the Huguenot disturbances in France (such as +the Tumult of Amboise, directed against the lives of Mary’s uncles +the Cardinal and Duc de Guise), Mary and Francis could not help the +Regent, and Huntly, a Catholic, presently, as if in fear of the western +clans, joined the Congregation. Mary of Guise had found the great +northern chief treacherous, and had disgraced him, and untrustworthy +he continued to be. On May 7 the garrison of Leith defeated with +heavy loss an Anglo-Scottish attack on the walls; but on June 16 the +Regent made a good end, in peace with all men. She saw Châtelherault, +James Stewart, and the Earl Marischal; she listened patiently to the +preacher Willock; she bade farewell to all, and died, a notable woman, +crushed by an impossible task. The garrison of Leith, meanwhile, +was starving on rats and horseflesh: negotiations began, and ended in +the Treaty of Edinburgh (July 6, 1560).</p> +<p>This Treaty, as between Mary, Queen of France and Scotland, on one +hand, and England on the other, was never ratified by Mary Stuart: she +appears to have thought that one clause implied her abandonment of all +her claims to the English succession, typified by her quartering of +the Royal English arms on her own shield. Thus there never was +nor could be amity between her and her sister and her foe, Elizabeth, +who was justly aggrieved by her assumption of the English arms, while +Elizabeth quartered the arms of France. Again, the ratification +of the Treaty as regarded Mary’s rebels depended on their fulfilling +certain clauses which, in fact, they instantly violated.</p> +<p>Preachers were planted in the larger town, some of which had already +secured their services; Knox took Edinburgh. “Superintendents,”—by +no means bishops—were appointed, an order which soon ceased to +exist in the Kirk: their duties were to wander about in their provinces, +superintending and preaching. By request of the Convention (which +was crowded by persons not used to attend), some preachers drew up, +in four days, a Confession of Faith, on the lines of Calvin’s +rule at Geneva: this was approved and passed on August 17. The +makers of the document profess their readiness to satisfy any critic +of any point “from the mouth of God” (out of the Bible), +but the pace was so good that either no criticism was offered or it +was very rapidly “satisfied.” On August 24 four acts +were passed in which the authority of “The Bishop of Rome” +was repudiated. All previous legislation, not consistent with +the new Confession, was rescinded. Against celebrants and attendants +of the Mass were threatened (1) confiscation and corporal punishment; +(2) exile; and (3) for the third offence, Death. The death sentence +is not known to have been carried out in more than one or two cases. +(Prof. Hume-Brown writes that “the penalties attached to the breach +of these enactments” (namely, the abjuration of Papal jurisdiction, +the condemnation of all practices and doctrines contrary to the new +creed, and of the celebration of Mass in Scotland) “were those +approved and sanctioned by the example of every country in Christendom.” +But not, surely, for the same offences, such as “the saying or +hearing of Mass”?—’ History of Scotland,’ ii. +71, 72: 1902.) Suits in ecclesiastical were removed into secular +courts (August 29).</p> +<p>In the Confession the theology was that of Calvin. Civil rulers +were admitted to be of divine institution, their duty is to “suppress +idolatry,” and they are not to be resisted “when doing that +which pertains to their charge.” But a Catholic ruler, like +Mary, or a tolerant ruler, as James VI. would fain have been, apparently +may be resisted for his tolerance. Resisted James was, as we shall +see, whenever he attempted to be lenient to Catholics.</p> +<p>The Book of Discipline, by Knox and other preachers, never was ratified +by the Estates, as the Confession of Faith had been. It made admirable +provisions for the payment of preachers and teachers, for the Universities, +and for the poor; but somebody, probably Lethington, spoke of the proposals +as “devout imaginations.” The Book of Discipline approved +of what was later accepted by the General Assembly, The Book of Common +Order in Public Worship. This book was not a stereotyped Liturgy, +but it was a kind of guide to the ministers in public prayers: the minister +may repeat the prayers, or “say something like in effect.” +On the whole, he prayed “as the Spirit moved him,” and he +really seems to have been regarded as inspired; his prayers were frequently +political addresses. To silence these the infatuated policy of +Charles I. thrust the Laudian Liturgy on the nation.</p> +<p>The preachers were to be chosen by popular election, after examination +in knowledge and as to morals. There was to be no ordination “by +laying on of hands.” “Seeing the miracle is ceased, +the using of the ceremony we deem not necessary”; but, if the +preachers were inspired, the miracle had not ceased, and the ceremony +was soon reinstated. Contrary to Genevan practice, such festivals +as Christmas and Easter were abolished. The Scottish Sabbath was +established in great majesty. One “rag of Rome” was +retained, clerical excommunication—the Sword of Church Discipline. +It was the cutting off from Christ of the excommunicated, who were handed +over to the devil, and it was attended by civil penalties equivalent +to universal boycotting, practical outlawry, and followed by hell fire: +“which sentence, lawfully pronounced on earth, is ratified in +heaven.” The strength of the preachers lay in this terrible +weapon, borrowed from the armoury of Rome.</p> +<p>Private morals were watched by the elders, and offenders were judged +in kirk-sessions. Witchcraft, Sabbath desecration, and sexual +laxities were the most prominent and popular sins. The mainstay +of the system is the idea that the Bible is literally inspired; that +the preachers are the perhaps inspired interpreters of the Bible, and +that the country must imitate the old Hebrew persecution of “idolaters,” +that is, mainly Catholics. All this meant a theocracy of preachers +elected by the populace, and governing the nation by their General Assembly +in which nobles and other laymen sat as elders. These peculiar +institutions came hot from Geneva, and the country could never have +been blessed with them, as we have observed, but for that instrument +of Providence, Cardinal Beaton. Had he disposed of himself and +Scotland to Henry VIII. (who would not have tolerated Presbyterian claims +for an hour), Scotland would not have received the Genevan discipline, +and the Kirk would have groaned under bishops.</p> +<p>The Reformation supplied Scotland with a class of preachers who were +pure in their lives, who were not accessible to bribes (a virtue in +which they stood almost alone), who were firm in their faith, and soon +had learning enough to defend it; who were constant in their parish +work, and of whom many were credited with prophetic and healing powers. +They could exorcise ghosts from houses, devils from men possessed.</p> +<p>The baldness of the services, the stern nature of the creed, were +congenial to the people. The drawbacks were the intolerance, the +spiritual pretensions of the preachers to interference in secular affairs, +and the superstition which credited men like Knox, and later, Bruce, +with the gifts of prophecy and other miraculous workings, and insisted +on the burning of witches and warlocks, whereof the writer knows scarcely +an instance in Scotland before the Reformation.</p> +<p>The pulpit may be said to have discharged the functions of the press +(a press which was all on one side). When, in 1562, Ninian Winzet, +a Catholic priest and ex-schoolmaster, was printing a controversial +tractate addressed to Knox, the magistrates seized the manuscript at +the printer’s house, and the author was fortunate in making his +escape. The nature of the Confession of Faith, and of the claims +of the ministers to interfere in secular affairs, with divine authority, +was certain to cause war between the Crown and the Kirk. That +war, whether open and armed, or a conflict in words, endured till, in +1690, the weapon of excommunication with civil penalties was quietly +removed from the ecclesiastical armoury. Such were the results +of a religious revolution hurriedly effected.</p> +<p>The Lords now sent an embassy to Elizabeth about the time of the +death of Amy Robsart, and while Amy’s husband, Robert Dudley, +was very dear to the English queen, to urge, vainly, her marriage with +Arran. On December 5, 1560, Francis II. died, leaving Mary Stuart +a mere dowager; while her kinsmen, the Guises, lost power, which fell +into the unfriendly hands of Catherine de Medici. At once Arran, +who made Knox his confidant, began to woo Mary with a letter and a ring. +Her reply perhaps increased his tendency to madness, which soon became +open and incurable by the science of the day.</p> +<p>Here we must try to sketch Mary, <i>la, Reine blanche</i>, in her +white royal mourning. Her education had been that of the learned +ladies of her age; she had some knowledge of Latin, and knew French +and Italian. French was to her almost a mother-tongue, but not +quite; she had retained her Scots, and her attempts to write English +are, at first, curiously imperfect. She had lived in a profligate +Court, but she was not the wanton of hostile slanders. She had +all the guile of statesmanship, said the English envoy, Randolph; and +she long exercised great patience under daily insults to her religion +and provocations from Elizabeth. She was generous, pitiful, naturally +honourable, and most loyal to all who served her. But her passions, +whether of love or hate, once roused, were tyrannical. In person +she was tall, like her mother, and graceful, with beautiful hands. +Her face was somewhat long, the nose long and straight, the lips and +chin beautifully moulded, the eyebrows very slender, the eyes of a reddish +brown, long and narrow. Her hair was russet, drawn back from a +lofty brow; her smile was captivating; she was rather fascinating than +beautiful; her courage and her love of courage in others were universally +confessed. <a name="citation118"></a><a href="#footnote118">{118}</a></p> +<p>In January, 1561, the Estates of Scotland ordered James Stuart, Mary’s +natural brother, to visit her in France. In spring she met him, +and an envoy from Huntly (Lesley, later Bishop of Ross), who represented +the Catholic party, and asked Mary to land in Aberdeen, and march south +at the head of the Gordons and certain northern clans. The proposal +came from noblemen of Perthshire, Angus, and the north, whose forces +could not have faced a Lowland army. Mary, who had learned from +her mother that Huntly was treacherous, preferred to take her chance +with her brother, who, returning by way of England, moved Elizabeth +to recognise the Scottish queen as her heir. But Elizabeth would +never settle the succession, and, as Mary refused to ratify the Treaty +of Edinburgh, forbade her to travel home through England.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XX. MARY IN SCOTLAND.</h2> +<p>On August 19, 1561, in a dense fog, and almost unexpected and unwelcomed, +Mary landed in Leith. She had told the English ambassador to France +that she would constrain none of her subjects in religion, and hoped +to be unconstrained. Her first act was to pardon some artisans, +under censure for a Robin Hood frolic: her motive, says Knox, was her +knowledge that they had acted “in despite of religion.”</p> +<p>The Lord James had stipulated that she might have her Mass in her +private chapel. Her priest was mobbed by the godly; on the following +Sunday Knox denounced her Mass, and had his first interview with her +later. In vain she spoke of her conscience; Knox said that it +was unenlightened. Lethington wished that he would “deal +more gently with a young princess unpersuaded.” There were +three or four later interviews, but Knox, strengthened by a marriage +with a girl of sixteen, daughter of Lord Ochiltree, a Stewart, was proof +against the queen’s fascination. In spite of insults to +her faith offered even at pageants of welcome, Mary kept her temper, +and, for long, cast in her lot with Lethington and her brother, whose +hope was to reconcile her with Elizabeth.</p> +<p>The Court was gay with riotous young French nobles, well mated with +Bothwell, who, though a Protestant, had sided with Mary of Guise during +the brawls of 1559. He was now a man of twenty-seven, profligate, +reckless, a conqueror of hearts, a speaker of French, a ruffian, and +well educated.</p> +<p>In December it was arranged that the old bishops and other high clerics +should keep two-thirds of their revenues, the other third to be divided +between the preachers and the queen, “between God and the devil,” +says Knox. Thenceforth there was a rift between the preachers +and the politicians, Lethington and Lord James (now Earl of Mar), on +whom Mary leaned. The new Earl of Mar was furtively created Earl +of Murray and enjoyed the gift after the overthrow of Huntly.</p> +<p>In January 1562 Mary asked for an interview with Elizabeth. +Certainly Lethington hoped that Elizabeth “would be able to do +much with Mary in religion,” meaning that, if Mary’s claims +to succeed Elizabeth were granted, she might turn Anglican. The +request for a meeting, dallied with but never granted, occupied diplomatists, +while, at home, Arran (March 31) accused Bothwell of training him into +a plot to seize Mary’s person. Arran probably told truth, +but he now went mad; Bothwell was imprisoned in the castle till his +escape to England in August 1562. Lethington, in June, was negotiating +for Mary’s interview with Elizabeth; Knox bitterly opposed it; +the preachers feared that the queen would turn Anglican, and bishops +might be let loose in Scotland. The masques for Mary’s reception +were actually being organised, when, in July, Elizabeth, on the pretext +of persecutions by the Guises in France, broke off the negotiations.</p> +<p>The rest of the year was occupied by an affair of which the origins +are obscure. Mary, with her brother and Lethington, made a progress +into the north, were affronted by and attacked Huntly, who died suddenly +(October 28) at the fight of Corrichie; seized a son of his, who was +executed (November 2), and spoiled his castle which contained much of +the property of the Church of Aberdeen. Mary’s motives for +destroying her chief Catholic subject are not certainly known. +Her brother, Lord James, in February made Earl of Mar, now received +the lands and title of Earl of Murray. At some date in this year +Knox preached against Mary because she gave a dance. He chose +to connect her dance with some attack on the Huguenots in France. +According to ‘The Book of Discipline’ he should have remonstrated +privately, as Mary told him. The dates are inextricable. +(See my ‘John Knox and the Reformation,’ pp. 215-218.) +Till the spring of 1565 the main business was the question of the queen’s +marriage. This continued to divide the ruling Protestant nobles +from the preachers. Knox dreaded an alliance with Spain, a marriage +with Don Carlos. But Elizabeth, to waste time, offered Mary the +hand of Lord Robert Dudley (Leicester), and, strange as it appears, +Mary would probably have accepted him, as late as 1565, for Elizabeth +let it be understood that to marry a Catholic prince would be the signal +for war, while Mary hoped that, if she accepted Elizabeth’s favourite, +Dudley, she would be acknowledged as Elizabeth’s heiress. +Mary was young, and showed little knowledge of the nature of woman.</p> +<p>In 1563 came the affair of Châtelard, a French minor poet, +a Huguenot apparently, who, whether in mere fatuity or to discredit +Mary, hid himself under her bed at Holyrood, and again at Burntisland. +Mary had listened to his rhymes, had danced with him, and smiled on +him, but Châtelard went too far. He was decapitated in the +market street of St Andrews (Feb. 22, 1563). It is clear, if we +may trust Knox’s account, singularly unlike Brantôme’s, +that Châtelard was a Huguenot.</p> +<p>About Easter priests were locked up in Ayrshire, the centre of Presbyterian +fanaticism, for celebrating Mass. This was in accordance with +law, and to soften Knox the girl queen tried her personal influence. +He resisted “the devil”; Mary yielded, and allowed Archbishop +Hamilton and some fifty other clerics to be placed “in prison +courteous.” The Estates, which met on May 27 for the first +time since the queen landed, were mollified, but were as far as ever +from passing the Book of Discipline. They did pass a law condemning +witches to death, a source of unspeakable cruelties. Knox and +Murray now ceased to be on terms till their common interests brought +them together in 1565.</p> +<p>In June 1563 Elizabeth requested Mary to permit the return to Scotland +of Lennox (the traitor to the national cause and to Cardinal Beaton, +and the rival of the Hamiltons for the succession to the thrones), apparently +for the very purpose of entangling Mary in a marriage with Lennox’s +son Darnley, and then thwarting it. (It was not Mary who asked +Elizabeth to send Lennox.) Knox’s favourite candidate was +Lord Robert Dudley: despite his notorious character he sometimes favoured +the English Puritans. When Holyrood had been invaded by a mob +who, in Mary’s absence in autumn 1563, broke up the Catholic attendants +on Mass (such attendance, in Mary’s absence, was illegal), and +when both parties were summoned to trial, Knox called together the godly. +The Council cleared him of the charge of making an unlawful convocation +(they might want to make one, any day, themselves), and he was supported +by the General Assembly. Similar conduct of the preachers thirty +years later gave James VI. the opportunity to triumph over the Kirk.</p> +<p>In June 1564 there was still discord between the Kirk and the Lords, +and, in a long argument with Lethington, Knox maintained the right of +the godly to imitate the slayings of idolaters by Phineas and Jehu: +the doctrine bore blood-red fruits among the later Covenanters. +Elizabeth, in May 1564, in vain asked Mary to withdraw the permission +(previously asked for by her) to allow Lennox to visit Scotland and +plead for the restitution of his lands. The objection to Lennox’s +appearance had come, through Randolph, from Knox. “You may +cause us to take the Lord Darnley,” wrote Kirkcaldy to Cecil, +to stop Elizabeth’s systems of delays; and Sir James Melville, +after going on a mission to Elizabeth, warned Mary that she would never +part with her minion, now Earl of Leicester.</p> +<p>Lennox, in autumn 1564, arrived and was restored to his estates, +while Leicester and Cecil worked for the sending of his son Darnley +to Scotland. Leicester had no desire to desert Elizabeth’s +Court and his chance of touching her maiden heart.</p> +<p>The intrigues of Cecil, Leicester, and Elizabeth resemble rather +a chapter in a novel than a page in history. Elizabeth notoriously +hated and, when she could, thwarted all marriages. She desired +that Mary should never marry: a union with a Catholic prince she vetoed, +threatening war; and Leicester she offered merely “to drive time.” +But Mary, evasively tempted by hints, later withdrawn, of her recognition +as Elizabeth’s successor, was, till the end of March 1565, encouraged +by Randolph, the English ambassador at her Court, to remain in hope +of wedding Leicester.</p> +<p>Randolph himself was not in the secret of the English intrigue, which +was to slip Darnley at Mary. He came (February 1565): Cecil and +Leicester had “used earnest means” to ensure his coming. +On March 17 Mary was informed that she would never be recognised as +Elizabeth’s successor till events should occur which never could +occur. On receiving this news Mary wept; she also was indignant +at the long and humiliating series of Elizabeth’s treacheries. +Her patience broke down; she turned to Darnley, thereby, as the English +intriguers designed, breaking up the concord of her nobles. To +marry Darnley involved the feud of the Hamiltons, and the return of +Murray (whom Darnley had offended), of Châtelherault, Argyll, +and many other nobles to the party of Knox and the preachers. +Leicester would have been welcome to Knox; Darnley was a Catholic, if +anything, and a weak passionate young fool. Mary, in the clash +of interests, was a lost woman, as Randolph truly said, with sincere +pity. Her long endurance, her attempts to “run the English +course,” were wasted.</p> +<p>David Riccio, who came to Scotland as a musician in 1561, was now +high in her and in Darnley’s favour. Murray was accused +of a conspiracy to seize Darnley and Lennox; the godly began to organise +an armed force (June 1565); Mary summoned from exile Bothwell, a man +of the sword. On July 29th she married Darnley, and on August +6th Murray, who had refused to appear to answer the charges of treason +brought against him, though a safe-conduct was offered, was outlawed +and proclaimed a rebel, while Huntly’s son, Lord George, was to +be restored to his estates. Thus everything seemed to indicate +that Mary had been exasperated into breaking with the party of moderation, +the party of Murray and Lethington, and been driven into courses where +her support, if any, must come from France and Rome. Yet she married +without waiting for the necessary dispensation from the Pope. +Her policy was henceforth influenced by her favour to Riccio, and by +the jealous and arrogant temper of her husband. Mary well knew +that Elizabeth had sent money to her rebels, whom she now pursued all +through the south of Scotland; they fled from Edinburgh, where the valiant +Brethren, brave enough in throwing stones at pilloried priests, refused +to join them; and despite the feuds in her own camp, where Bothwell +and Darnley were already on the worst terms, Mary drove the rebel lords +across the Border at Carlisle on October 8.</p> +<p>Mary seemed triumphant, but the men with her—Lethington, and +Morton the Chancellor—were disaffected; Darnley was mutinous: +he thought himself neglected; he and his father resented Mary’s +leniency to Châtelherault, who had submitted and been sent to +France; all parties hated Riccio. There was to be a Parliament +early in March 1566. In February Mary sent the Bishop of Dunblane +to Rome to ask for a subsidy; she intended to reintroduce the Spiritual +Estate into the House as electors of the Lords of the Articles, “tending +to have done some good anent the restoring of the old religion.” +The Nuncio who was to have brought the Pope’s money later insisted +that Mary should take the heads of Murray, Argyle, Morton, and Lethington! +Whether she aimed at securing more than tolerance for Catholics is uncertain; +but the Parliament, in which the exiled Lords were to be forfeited, +was never held. The other nobles would never permit such a measure.</p> +<p>George Douglas, a stirring cadet of the great House was exciting +Darnley’s jealousy of Riccio, but already Randolph (February 5, +1566) had written to Cecil that “the wisest were aiming at putting +all in hazard” to restore the exiled Lords. The nobles, +in the last resort, would all stand by each other: there was now a Douglas +plot of the old sort to bring back the exiles; and Darnley, with his +jealous desire to murder Riccio, was but the cat’s-paw to light +the train and explode Mary and her Government. Ruthven, whom Mary +had always distrusted, came into the conspiracy. Through Randolph +all was known in England. “Bands” were drawn up, signed +by Argyll (safe in his own hills), Murray, Glencairn, Rothes, Boyd, +Ochiltree (the father of Knox’s young wife), and Darnley. +His name was put forward; his rights and succession were secured against +the Hamiltons; Protestantism, too, was to be defended. Many Douglases, +many of the Lothian gentry, were in the plot. Murray was to arrive +from England as soon as Riccio had been slain and Mary had been seized.</p> +<p>Randolph knew all and reported to Elizabeth’s ministers.</p> +<p>The plan worked with mechanical precision. On March 9 Morton +and his company occupied Holyrood, going up the great staircase about +eight at night; while Darnley and Ruthven, a dying man, entered the +queen’s supper-room by a privy stair. Morton’s men +burst in, Riccio was dragged forth, and died under forty daggers. +Bothwell, Atholl, and Huntly, partisans of Mary, escaped from the palace; +with them Mary managed to communicate on the morrow, when she also held +talk with Murray, who had returned with the other exiles. She +had worked on the fears and passions of Darnley; by promises of amnesty +the Lords were induced to withdraw their guards next day, and in the +following night, by a secret passage, and through the tombs of kings, +Mary and Darnley reached the horses brought by Arthur Erskine.</p> +<p>It was a long dark ride to Dunbar, but there Mary was safe. +She pardoned and won over Glencairn, whom she liked, and Rothes; Bothwell +and Huntly joined her with a sufficient force, Ruthven and Morton fled +to Berwick (Ruthven was to die in England), and Knox hastened into Kyle +in Ayrshire. Darnley, who declared his own innocence and betrayed +his accomplices, was now equally hated and despised by his late allies +and by the queen and Murray,—indeed, by all men, chiefly by Morton +and Argyll. Lethington was in hiding; but he was indispensable, +and in September was reconciled to Mary.</p> +<p>On June 19, in Edinburgh Castle, she bore her child, later James +VI.; on her recovery Darnley was insolent, and was the more detested, +while Bothwell was high in favour. In October most of the Lords +signed, with Murray, a band for setting Darnley aside—<i>not</i> +for his murder. He is said to have denounced Mary to Spain, France, +and Rome for neglecting Catholic interests. In mid-October Mary +was seriously ill at Jedburgh, where Bothwell, wounded in an encounter +with a Border reiver, was welcomed, while Darnley, coldly received, +went to his father’s house on the Forth. On her recovery +Mary resided in the last days of November at Craigmillar Castle, near +Edinburgh. Here Murray, Argyll, Bothwell, Huntly, and Lethington +held counsel with her as to Darnley. Lethington said that “a +way would be found,” a way that Parliament would approve, while +Murray would “look through his fingers.” Lennox believed +that the plan was to arrest Darnley on some charge, and slay him if +he resisted.</p> +<p>At Stirling (December 17), when the young prince was baptised with +Catholic rites, Darnley did not appear; he sulked in his own rooms. +A week later, the exiles guilty of Riccio’s murder were recalled, +among them Morton; and Darnley, finding all his enemies about to be +united, went to Glasgow, where he fell ill of smallpox. Mary offered +a visit (she had had the malady as a child), and was rudely rebuffed +(January 1-13, 1567), but she was with him by January 21. From +Glasgow, at this time, was written the long and fatal letter to Bothwell, +which places Mary’s guilt in luring Darnley to his death beyond +doubt, if we accept the letters as authentic. <a name="citation129"></a><a href="#footnote129">{129}</a></p> +<p>Darnley was carried in a litter to the lonely house of Kirk o’ +Field, on the south wall of Edinburgh. Here Mary attended him +in his sickness. On Sunday morning, February 9, Murray left Edinburgh +for Fife. In the night of Sunday 9-Monday 10, the house where +Darnley lay was blown up by gunpowder, and he, with an attendant, was +found dead in the garden: how he was slain is not known.</p> +<p>That Bothwell, in accordance with a band signed by himself, Huntly, +Argyll, and Lethington, and aided by some Border ruffians, laid and +exploded the powder is certain. Morton was apprised by Lethington +and Bothwell of the plot, but refused to join it without Mary’s +written commission, which he did not obtain. Against the queen +there is no trustworthy direct evidence (if we distrust her alleged +letters to Bothwell), but her conduct in protecting and marrying Bothwell +(who was really in love with his wife) shows that she did not disapprove. +The trial of Bothwell was a farce; Mary’s abduction by him (April +24) and retreat with him to Dunbar was collusive. She married +Bothwell on May 15. Her nobles, many of whom had signed a document +urging her to marry Bothwell, rose against her; on June 15, 1567, she +surrendered to them at Carberry Hill, while they, several of them deep +in the murder plot, were not sorry to let Bothwell escape to Dunbar. +After some piratical adventures, being pursued by Kirkcaldy he made +his way to Denmark, where he died a prisoner.</p> +<p>Mary, first carried to Edinburgh and there insulted by the populace, +was next hurried to Lochleven Castle. Her alleged letters to Bothwell +were betrayed to the Lords (June 21), probably through Sir James Balfour, +who commanded in Edinburgh Castle. Perhaps Murray (who had left +for France before the marriage to Bothwell), perhaps fear of Elizabeth, +or human pity, induced her captors, contrary to the counsel of Lethington, +to spare her life, when she had signed her abdication, while they crowned +her infant son. Murray accepted the Regency; a Parliament in December +established the Kirk; acquitted themselves of rebellion; and announced +that they had proof of Mary’s guilt in her own writing. +Her romantic escape from Lochleven (May 2, 1568) gave her but an hour +of freedom. Defeated on her march to Dumbarton Castle in the battle +of Langside Hill, she lost heart and fled to the coast of Galloway; +on May 16 crossed the Solway to Workington in Cumberland; and in a few +days was Elizabeth’s prisoner in Carlisle Castle.</p> +<p>Mary had hitherto been a convinced but not a very obedient daughter +of the Church; for example, it appears that she married Darnley before +the arrival of the Pope’s dispensation. At this moment Philip +of Spain, the French envoy to Scotland, and the French Court had no +faith in her innocence of Darnley’s death; and the Pope said “he +knew not which of these ladies were the better”—Mary or +Elizabeth. But from this time, while a captive in England, Mary +was the centre of the hopes of English Catholics: in miniatures she +appears as queen, quartering the English arms; she might further the +ends of Spain, of France, of Rome, of English rebels, while her existence +was a nightmare to the Protestants of Scotland and a peril to Elizabeth.</p> +<p>After Mary’s flight, Murray was, as has been said, Regent for +the crowned baby James. In his council were the sensual, brutal, +but vigorous Morton, with Mar, later himself Regent, a man of milder +nature; Glencairn; Ruthven, whom Mary detested—he had tried to +make unwelcome love to her at Lochleven; and “the necessary evil,” +Lethington. How a man so wily became a party to the murder of +Darnley cannot be known: now he began to perceive that, if Mary were +restored, as he believed that she would be, his only safety lay in securing +her gratitude by secret services.</p> +<p>On the other side were the Hamiltons with their ablest man, the Archbishop; +the Border spears who were loyal to Bothwell; and two of the conspirators +in the murder of Darnley, Argyll and Huntly; with Fleming and Herries, +who were much attached to Mary. The two parties, influenced by +Elizabeth, did not now come to blows, but awaited the results of English +inquiries into Mary’s guilt, and of Elizabeth’s consequent +action.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXI. MINORITY OF JAMES VI.</h2> +<p>“Let none of them escape” was Elizabeth’s message +to the gaolers of Mary and her companions at Carlisle. The unhappy +queen prayed to see her in whose hospitality she had confided, or to +be allowed to depart free. Elizabeth’s policy was to lead +her into consenting to reply to her subjects’ accusations, and +Mary drifted into the shuffling English inquiries at York in October, +while she was lodged at Bolton Castle. Murray, George Buchanan, +Lethington (now distrusted by Murray), and Morton produced, for Norfolk +and other English Commissioners at York, copies, at least, of the incriminating +letters which horrified the Duke of Norfolk. Yet, probably through +the guile of Lethington, he changed his mind, and became a suitor for +Mary’s hand. He bade her refuse compromise, whereas compromise +was Lethington’s hope: a full and free inquiry would reveal his +own guilt in Darnley’s murder. The inquiry was shifted to +London in December, Mary always being refused permission to appear and +speak for herself; nay, she was not allowed even to see the letters +which she was accused of having written. Her own Commissioners, +Lord Herries and Bishop Lesley, who (as Mary knew in Herries’s +case) had no faith in her innocence, showed their want of confidence +by proposing a compromise; this was not admitted. Morton explained +how he got the silver casket with the fatal letters, poems to Bothwell, +and other papers; they were read in translations, English and Scots; +handwritings were compared, with no known result; evidence was heard, +and Elizabeth, at last, merely decided—that she could not admit +Mary to her presence. The English Lords agreed, “as the +case does now stand,” and presently many of them were supporting +Norfolk in his desire to marry the accused. Murray was told (January +10, 1669) that he had proved nothing which could make Elizabeth “take +any evil opinion of the queen, her good sister,” nevertheless, +Elizabeth would support him in his government of Scotland, while declining +to recognise James VI. as king.</p> +<p>All compromises Mary now utterly refused: she would live and die +a queen. Henceforth the tangled intrigues cannot be disengaged +in a work of this scope. Elizabeth made various proposals to Mary, +all involving her resignation as queen, or at least the suspension of +her rights. Mary refused to listen; her party in Scotland, led +by Châtelherault, Herries, Huntly, and Argyll, did not venture +to meet Murray and his party in war, and was counselled by Lethington, +who still, in semblance, was of Murray’s faction. Lethington +was convinced that, sooner or later, Mary would return; and he did not +wish to incur “her <i>particular</i> ill-will.” He +knew that Mary, as she said, “had that in black and white which +would hang him” for the murder of Darnley. Now Lethington, +Huntly, and Argyll were daunted, without stroke of sword, by Murray, +and a Convention to discuss messages from Elizabeth and Mary met at +Perth (July 25-28, 1569), and refused to allow the annulment of her +marriage with Bothwell, though previously they had insisted on its annulment. +Presently Lethington was publicly accused of Darnley’s murder +by Crawford, a retainer of Lennox; was imprisoned, but was released +by Kirkcaldy, commander in Edinburgh Castle, which henceforth became +the fortress of Mary’s cause.</p> +<p>The secret of Norfolk’s plan to marry the Scottish queen now +reached Elizabeth, making her more hostile to Mary; an insurrection +in the North broke out; the Earl of Northumberland was driven into Scotland, +was betrayed by Hecky Armstrong, and imprisoned at Loch Leven. +Murray offered to hand over Northumberland to Elizabeth in exchange +for Mary, her life to be guaranteed by hostages, but, on January 23, +1570, Murray was shot by Hamilton of Bothwellhaugh from a window of +a house in Linlithgow belonging to Archbishop Hamilton. The murderer +escaped and joined his clan. During his brief regency, Murray +had practically detached Huntly and Argyll from armed support of Mary’s +cause; he had reduced the Border to temporary quiet by the free use +of the gibbet; but he had not ventured to face Lethington’s friends +and bring him to trial: if he had, many others would have been compromised. +Murray was sly and avaricious, but, had he been legitimate, Scotland +would have been well governed under his vigour and caution.</p> +<h3>REGENCIES OF LENNOX, MAR, AND MORTON.</h3> +<p>Randolph was now sent to Edinburgh to make peace between Mary’s +party and her foes impossible. He succeeded; the parties took +up arms, and Sussex ravaged the Border in revenge of a raid by Buccleuch. +On May 14, Lennox, with an English force, was sent north: he devastated +the Hamilton country; was made Regent in July; and, in April 1571, had +his revenge on Archbishop Hamilton, who was taken at the capture, by +Crawford, of Dumbarton Castle, held by Lord Fleming, a post of vital +moment to the Marians; and was hanged at Stirling for complicity in +the slaying of Murray. George Buchanan, Mary’s old tutor, +took advantage of these facts to publish quite a fresh account of Darnley’s +murder: the guilt of the Hamiltons now made that of Bothwell almost +invisible!</p> +<p>Edinburgh Castle, under Kirkcaldy with Lethington, held out; Knox +reluctantly retired from Edinburgh to St Andrews, where he was unpopular; +but many of Mary’s Lords deserted her, and though Lennox was shot +(September 4) in an attack by Buccleuch and Ker of Ferniehirst on Stirling +Castle, where he was holding a Parliament, he was succeeded by Mar, +who was inspired by Morton, a far stronger man. Presently the +discovery of a plot between Mary, Norfolk, the English Catholics, and +Spain, caused the Duke’s execution, and more severe incarceration +for Mary.</p> +<p>In Scotland there was no chance of peace. Morton and his associates +would not resign the lands of the Hamiltons, Lethington, and Kirkcaldy; +Lethington knew that no amnesty would cover his guilt (though he had +been nominally cleared) in the slaying of Darnley. One after the +other of Mary’s adherents made their peace; but Kirkcaldy and +Lethington, in Edinburgh Castle, seemed safe while money and supplies +held out. Knox had prophesied that Kirkcaldy would be hanged, +but did not live to see his desire on his enemy, or on Mary, whom Elizabeth +was about to hand over to Mar for instant execution. Knox died +on November 24, 1572; Mar, the Regent, had predeceased him by a month, +leaving Morton in power. On May 28, 1573, the castle, attacked +by guns and engineers from England, and cut off from water, struck its +flag. The brave Kirkcaldy was hanged; Lethington, who had long +been moribund, escaped by an opportune death. The best soldier +in Scotland and the most modern of her wits thus perished together. +Concerning Knox, the opinions of his contemporaries differed. +By his own account the leaders of his party deemed him “too extreme,” +and David Hume finds his ferocious delight in chronicling the murders +of his foes “rather amusing,” though sad! Quarrels +of religion apart, Knox was a very good-hearted man; but where religion +was concerned, his temper was remote from the Christian. He was +a perfect agitator; he knew no tolerance, he spared no violence of language, +and in diplomacy, when he diplomatised, he was no more scrupulous than +another. Admirably vigorous and personal as literature, his History +needs constant correction from documents. While to his secretary, +Bannatyne, Knox seemed “a man of God, the light of Scotland, the +mirror of godliness”; many silent, douce folk among whom he laboured +probably agreed in the allegation quoted by a diarist of the day, that +Knox “had, as was alleged, the most part of the blame of all the +sorrows of Scotland since the slaughter of the late Cardinal.”</p> +<p>In these years of violence, of “the Douglas wars” as +they were called, two new tendencies may be observed. In January +1572, Morton induced an assembly of preachers at Leith to accept one +of his clan, John Douglas, as Archbishop of St Andrews: other bishops +were appointed, called <i>Tulchan</i> bishops, from the <i>tulchan</i> +or effigy of a calf employed to induce cows to yield their milk. +The Church revenues were drawn through these unapostolic prelates, and +came into the hands of the State, or at least of Morton. With +these bishops, superintendents co-existed, but not for long. “The +horns of the mitre” already began to peer above Presbyterian parity, +and Morton is said to have remarked that there would never be peace +in Scotland till some preachers were hanged. In fact, there never +was peace between Kirk and State till a deplorable number of preachers +were hanged by the Governments of Charles II. and James II.</p> +<p>A meeting of preachers in Edinburgh, after the Bartholomew massacre, +in the autumn of 1572, demanded that “it shall be lawful to all +the subjects in this realm to invade them and every one of them to the +death.” The persons to be “invaded to the death” +are recalcitrant Catholics, “grit or small,” persisting +in remaining in Scotland. <a name="citation137"></a><a href="#footnote137">{137}</a></p> +<p>The alarmed demands of the preachers were merely disregarded by the +Privy Council. The ruling nobles, as Bishop Lesley says, would +never gratify the preachers by carrying out the bloody penal Acts to +their full extent against Catholics. There was no expulsion of +all Catholics who dared to stay; no popular massacre of all who declined +to go. While Morton was in power he kept the preachers well in +hand. He did worse: he starved the ministers, and thrust into +the best livings wanton young gentlemen, of whom his kinsman, Archibald +Douglas, an accomplice in Darnley’s death and a trebly-dyed traitor, +was the worst. But in 1575, the great Andrew Melville, an erudite +scholar and a most determined person, began to protest against the very +name of bishop in the Kirk; and in Adamson, made by Morton successor +of John Douglas at St Andrews, Melville found a mark and a victim. +In economics, as an English diplomatist wrote to Cecil in November 1572, +the country, despite the civil war, was thriving; “the noblemen’s +great credit decaying, . . . the ministry and religion increaseth, and +the desire in them to prevent the practice of the Papists.” +The Englishman, in November, may refer to the petition for persecution +of October 20, 1572.</p> +<p>The death of old Châtelherault now left the headship of the +Hamiltons in more resolute hands; Morton was confronted by opposition +from Argyll, Atholl, Buchan, and Mar; and Morton, in 1576-1577, made +approaches to Mary. When the young James VI. came to his majority +Morton’s enemies would charge him with his guilty foreknowledge, +through Both well, of Darnley’s murder, so he made advances to +Mary in hope of an amnesty. She suspected a trap and held aloof.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXII. REIGN OF JAMES VI.</h2> +<p>On March 4, 1578, a strong band of nobles, led by Argyll, presented +so firm a front that Morton resigned the Regency; but in April 1578, +a Douglas plot, backed by Angus and Morton, secured for the Earl of +Mar the command of Stirling Castle and custody of the King; in June +1578, after an appearance of civil war, Morton was as strong as ever. +After dining with him, in April 1579, Atholl, the main hope of Mary +in Scotland, died suddenly, and suspicion of poison fell on his host. +But Morton’s ensuing success in expelling from Scotland the Hamilton +leaders, Lord Claude and Arbroath, brought down his own doom. +With them Sir James Balfour, deep in the secrets of Darnley’s +death, was exiled; he opened a correspondence with Mary, and presently +procured for her “a contented revenge” on Morton.</p> +<p>Two new characters in the long intrigue of vengeance now come on +the scene. Both were Stewarts, and as such were concerned in the +feud against the Hamiltons. The first was a cousin of Darnley, +brought up in France, namely Esme Stuart d’Aubigny, son of John, +a brother of Lennox. He had all the accomplishments likely to +charm the boy king, now in his fourteenth year.</p> +<p>James had hitherto been sternly educated by George Buchanan, more +mildly by Peter Young. Buchanan and others had not quite succeeded +in bringing him to scorn and hate his mother; Lady Mar, who was very +kind to him, had exercised a gentler influence. The boy had read +much, had hunted yet more eagerly, and had learned dissimulation and +distrust, so natural to a child weak and ungainly in body and the conscious +centre of the intrigues of violent men. A favourite of his was +James Stewart, son of Lord Ochiltree, and brother-in-law of John Knox. +Stewart was Captain of the Guard, a man of learning, who had been in +foreign service; he was skilled in all bodily feats, was ambitious, +reckless, and resolute, and no friend of the preachers. The two +Stewarts, d’Aubigny and the Captain, became allies.</p> +<p>In a Parliament at Edinburgh (November 1579) their foes, the chiefs +of the Hamiltons, were forfeited (they had been driven to seek shelter +with Elizabeth), while d’Aubigny got their lands and the key of +Scotland, Dumbarton Castle, on the estuary of Clyde. The Kirk, +regarding d’Aubigny, now Earl of Lennox, despite his Protestant +professions, as a Papist or an atheist, had little joy in Morton, who +was denounced in a printed placard as guilty in Darnley’s murder: +Sir James Balfour could show his signature to the band to slay Darnley, +signed by Huntly, Bothwell, Argyll, and Lethington. This was not +true. Balfour knew much, was himself involved, but had not the +band to show, or did not dare to produce it.</p> +<p>To strengthen himself, Lennox was reconciled to the Kirk; to help +the Hamiltons, Elizabeth sent Bowes to intrigue against Lennox, who +was conspiring in Mary’s interest, or in that of the Guises, or +in his own. When Lennox succeeded in getting Dumbarton Castle, +an open door for France, into his power, Bowes was urged by Elizabeth +to join with Morton and “lay violent hands” on Lennox (August +31, 1580), but in a month Elizabeth cancelled her orders.</p> +<p>Bowes was recalled; Morton, to whom English aid had been promised, +was left to take his chances. Morton had warning from Lord Robert +Stewart, Mary’s half-brother, to fly the country, for Sir James +Balfour, with his information, had landed. On December 31, 1580, +Captain Stewart accused Morton, in presence of the Council, of complicity +in Darnley’s murder. He was put in ward; Elizabeth threatened +war; the preachers stormed against Lennox; a plot to murder him (a Douglas +plot) and to seize James was discovered; Randolph, who now represented +Elizabeth, was fired at, and fled to Berwick; James Stewart was created +Earl of Arran. In March 1581 the king and Lennox tried to propitiate +the preachers by signing a negative Covenant against Rome, later made +into a precedent for the famous Covenant of 1638. On June 1 Morton +was tried for guilty foreknowledge of Darnley’s death. He +was executed deservedly, and his head was stuck on a spike of the Tolbooth. +The death of this avaricious, licentious, and resolute though unamiable +Protestant was a heavy blow to the preachers and their party, and a +crook in the lot of Elizabeth.</p> +<h3>THE WAR OF KIRK AND KING.</h3> +<p>The next twenty years were occupied with the strife of Kirk and King, +whence arose “all the cumber of Scotland” till 1689. +The preachers, led by the learned and turbulent Andrew Melville, had +an ever-present terror of a restoration of Catholicism, the creed of +a number of the nobles and of an unknown proportion of the people. +The Reformation of 1559-1560 had been met by no Catholic resistance; +we might suppose that the enormous majority of the people were Protestants, +though the reverse has been asserted. But whatever the theological +preferences of the country may have been, the justifiable fear of practical +annexation by France had overpowered all other considerations. +By 1580 it does not seem that there was any good reason for the Protestant +nervousness, even if some northern counties and northern and Border +peers preferred Catholicism. The king himself, a firm believer +in his own theological learning and acuteness, was thoroughly Protestant.</p> +<p>But the preachers would scarcely allow him to remain a Protestant. +Their claims, as formulated by Andrew Melville, were inconsistent with +the right of the State to be mistress in her own house. In a General +Assembly at Glasgow (1581) Presbyteries were established; Episcopacy +was condemned; the Kirk claimed for herself a separate jurisdiction, +uninvadable by the State. Elizabeth, though for State reasons +she usually backed the Presbyterians against James, also warned him +of “a sect of dangerous consequence, which would have no king +but a presbytery.” The Kirk, with her sword of excommunication, +and with the inspired violence of the political sermons and prayers, +invaded the secular authority whenever and wherever she pleased, and +supported the preachers in their claims to be tried first, when accused +of treasonable libels, in their own ecclesiastical courts. These +were certain to acquit them.</p> +<p>James, if not pressed in this fashion, had no particular reason for +desiring Episcopal government of the Kirk, but being so pressed he saw +no refuge save in bishops. Meanwhile his chief advisers—d’Aubigny, +now Duke of Lennox, and James Stewart, the destroyer of Morton, now, +to the prejudice of the Hamiltons, Earl of Arran—were men whose +private life, at least in Arran’s case, was scandalous. +If Arran were a Protestant, he was impatient of the rule of the pulpiteers; +and Lennox was working, if not sincerely in Mary’s interests, +certainly in his own and for those of the Catholic House of Guise. +At the same time he favoured the king’s Episcopal schemes, and, +late in 1581, appointed a preacher named Montgomery to the recently +vacant Archbishopric of Glasgow, while he himself, like Morton, drew +most of the revenues. Hence arose tumults, and, late in 1581 and +in 1582, priestly and Jesuit emissaries went and came, intriguing for +a Catholic rising, to be supported by a large foreign force which they +had not the slightest chance of obtaining from any quarter. Archbishop +Montgomery was excommunicated by the Kirk, and James, as we saw, had +signed “A Negative Confession” (1581).</p> +<p>In 1582 Elizabeth was backing the exiled Presbyterian Earl of Angus +and the Earl of Gowrie (Ruthven), while Lennox was contemplating a <i>coup +d’état</i> in Edinburgh (August 27). Gowrie, with +the connivance of England, struck the first blow. He, Mar, and +their accomplices captured James at Ruthven Castle, near Perth (August +23, “the Raid of Ruthven”), with the approval of the General +Assembly of the Kirk. It was a Douglas plot managed by Angus and +Elizabeth. James Stewart of the Guard (now Earl of Arran) was +made prisoner; Lennox fled the country. In October 1582, in a +Parliament at Holyrood, the conspirators passed Acts indemnifying themselves, +and the General Assembly approved them. These Acts were rescinded +later, and James had learned for life his hatred of the Presbyterians +who had treacherously seized and insulted their king. <a name="citation144"></a><a href="#footnote144">{144}</a></p> +<p>In May 1583 Lennox died in Paris, leaving an heir. On June +27 James made his escape, “a free king,” to the castle of +St Andrews: he proclaimed an amnesty and feigned reconciliation with +his captor, the Earl of Gowrie, chief of the house so hateful to Mary—the +Ruthvens. At the same time James placed himself in friendly relations +with his kinsfolk, the Guises, the terror of Protestants. He had +already been suspected, on account of Lennox, as inclined to Rome: in +fact, he was always a Protestant, but baited on every side—by +England, by the Kirk, by a faction of his nobles: he intrigued for allies +in every direction.</p> +<p>The secret history of his intrigues has never been written. +We find the persecuted and astute lad either in communication with Rome, +or represented by shady adventurers as employing them to establish such +communications. At one time, as has been recently discovered, +a young man giving himself out as James’s bastard brother (a son +of Darnley begotten in England) was professing to bear letters from +James to the Pope. He was arrested on the Continent, and James +could not be brought either to avow or disclaim his kinsman!</p> +<p>A new Lennox, son of the last, was created a duke; a new Bothwell, +Francis Stewart (nephew of Mary’s Bothwell), began to rival his +uncle in turbulence. Knowing that Anglo-Scottish plots to capture +him again were being woven daily by Angus and others, James, in February +1584, wrote a friendly and compromising letter to the Pope. In +April, Arran (James Stewart) crushed a conspiracy by seizing Gowrie +at Dundee, and then routing a force with which Mar and Angus had entered +Scotland. Gowrie, confessing his guilt as a conspirator, was executed +at Stirling (May 2, 1584), leaving, of course, his feud to his widow +and son. The chief preachers fled; Andrew Melville was already +in exile, with several others, in England. Melville, in February, +had been charged with preaching seditious sermons, had brandished a +Hebrew Bible at the Privy Council, had refused secular jurisdiction +and appealed to a spiritual court, by which he was certain to be acquitted. +Henceforward, when charged with uttering treasonable libels from the +pulpit, the preachers were wont to appeal, in the first instance, to +a court of their own cloth, and on this point James in the long-run +triumphed over the Kirk.</p> +<p>In a Parliament of May 18, 1584, such declinature of royal jurisdiction +was, by “The Black Acts,” made treason: Episcopacy was established; +the heirs of Gowrie were disinherited; Angus, Mar, and other rebels +were forfeited. But such forfeitures never held long in Scotland.</p> +<p>In August 1584 a new turn was given to James’s policy by Arran, +who was Protestant, if anything, in belief, and hoped to win over Elizabeth, +the harbourer of all enemies of James. Arran’s instrument +was the beautiful young Master of Gray, in France a Catholic, a partisan +of Mary, and leagued with the Guises. He was sent to persuade +Elizabeth to banish James’s exiled rebels, but, like a Lethington +on a smaller scale, he set himself to obtain the restoration of these +lords as against Arran, while he gratified Elizabeth by betraying to +her the secrets of Mary. This man was the adoring friend of the +flower of chivalry, Sir Philip Sidney!</p> +<p>As against Arran the plot succeeded. Making Berwick, on English +soil, their base, in November 1585 the exiles, lay and secular, backed +by England, returned, captured James at Stirling, and drove Arran to +lurk about the country, till, many years after, Douglas of Parkhead +met and slew him, avenging Morton; and, when opportunity offered, Douglas +was himself slain by an avenging Stewart at the Cross of Edinburgh. +The age reeked with such blood feuds, of which the preachers could not +cure their fiery flocks.</p> +<p>In December 1585 Parliament restored Gowrie’s forfeited family +to their own (henceforth they were constantly conspiring against James), +and the exiled preachers returned to their manses and pulpits. +But bishops were not abolished, though the Kirk, through the Synod of +Fife, excommunicated the Archbishop of St Andrews, Adamson, who replied +in kind. He was charged with witchcraft, and in the long-run was +dragged down and reduced to poverty, being accused of dealings with +witches—and hares!</p> +<p>In July 1586 England and Scotland formed an alliance, and Elizabeth +promised to make James an allowance of £4000 a-year. This, +it may be feared, was the blood-price of James’s mother: from +her son, and any hope of aid from her son, Mary was now cut off. +Walsingham laid the snares into which she fell, deliberately providing +for her means of communication with Babington and his company, and deciphering +and copying the letters which passed through the channel which he had +contrived. A trifle of forgery was also done by his agent, Phelipps. +Mary, knowing herself deserted by her son, was determined, as James +knew, to disinherit him. For this reason, and for the £4000, +he made no strong protest against her trial. One of his agents +in London—the wretched accomplice in his father’s murder, +Archibald Douglas—was consenting to her execution. James +himself thought that strict imprisonment was the best course; but the +Presbyterian Angus declared that Mary “could not be blamed if +she had caused the Queen of England’s throat to be cut for detaining +her so unjustly imprisoned.” The natural man within us entirely +agrees with Angus!</p> +<p>A mission was sent from Holyrood, including James’s handsome +new favourite, the Master of Gray, with his cousin, Logan of Restalrig, +who sold the Master to Walsingham. The envoys were to beg for +Mary’s life. The Master had previously betrayed her; but +he was not wholly lost, and in London he did his best, contrary to what +is commonly stated, to secure her life. He thus incurred the enmity +of his former allies in the English Court, and, as he had foreseen, +he was ruined in Scotland—his <i>previous</i> letters, hostile +to Mary, being betrayed by his aforesaid cousin, Logan of Restalrig.</p> +<p>On February 8, 1567, ended the lifelong tragedy of Mary Stuart. +The woman whom Elizabeth vainly moved Amyas Paulet to murder was publicly +decapitated at Fotheringay. James vowed that he would not accept +from Elizabeth “the price of his mother’s blood.” +But despite the fury of his nobles James sat still and took the money, +at most some £4000 annually,—when he could get it.</p> +<p>During the next fifteen years the reign of James, and his struggle +for freedom from the Kirk, was perturbed by a long series of intrigues +of which the details are too obscure and complex for presentation here. +His chief Minister was now John Maitland, a brother of Lethington, and +as versatile, unscrupulous, and intelligent as the rest of that House. +Maitland had actually been present, as Lethington’s representative, +at the tragedy of the Kirk-o’-Field. He was Protestant, +and favoured the party of England. In the State the chief parties +were the Presbyterian nobles, the majority of the gentry or lairds, +and the preachers on one side; and the great Catholic families of Huntly, +Morton (the title being now held by a Maxwell), Errol, and Crawford +on the other. Bothwell (a sister’s son of Mary’s Bothwell) +flitted meteor-like, more Catholic than anything else, but always plotting +to seize James’s person; and in this he was backed by the widow +of Gowrie and the preachers, and encouraged by Elizabeth. In her +fear that James would join the Catholic nobles, whom the preachers eternally +urged him to persecute, Elizabeth smiled on the Protestant plots—thereby, +of course, fostering any inclination which James may have felt to seek +Catholic aid at home and abroad. The plots of Mary were perpetually +confused by intrigues of priestly emissaries, who interfered with the +schemes of Spain and mixed in the interests of the Guises.</p> +<p>A fact which proved to be of the highest importance was the passing, +in July 1587, of an Act by which much of the ecclesiastical property +of the ancient Church was attached to the Crown, to be employed in providing +for the maintenance of the clergy. But James used much of it in +making temporal lordships: for example, at the time of the mysterious +Gowrie Conspiracy (August 1600), we find that the Earl of Gowrie had +obtained the Church lands of the Abbey of Scone, which his brother, +the Master of Ruthven, desired. With the large revenues now at +his disposal James could buy the support of the baronage, who, after +the execution in 1584 of the Earl of Gowrie (the father of the Gowrie +of the conspiracy of 1600), are not found leading and siding with the +ministers in a resolute way. By 1600 young Gowrie was the only +hope of the preachers, and probably James’s ability to enrich +the nobles helped to make them stand aloof. Meanwhile, fears and +hopes of the success of the Spanish Armada held the minds of the Protestants +and of the Catholic earls. “In this world-wolter,” +as James said, no Scot moved for Spain except that Lord Maxwell who +had first received and then been deprived of the Earldom of Morton. +James advanced against him in Dumfriesshire and caused his flight. +As for the Armada, many ships drifted north round Scotland, and one +great vessel, blown up in Tobermory Bay by Lachlan Maclean of Duart, +still invites the attention of treasure-hunters (1911).</p> +<h3>THE CATHOLIC EARLS.</h3> +<p>Early in 1589 Elizabeth became mistress of some letters which proved +that the Catholic earls, Huntly and Errol, were intriguing with Spain. +The offence was lightly passed over, but when the earls, with Crawford +and Montrose, drew to a head in the north, James, with much more than +his usual spirit, headed the army which advanced against them: they +fled from him near Aberdeen, surrendered, and were for a brief time +imprisoned. As nobody knows how Fortune’s wheel may turn, +and as James, hard pressed by the preachers, could neglect no chance +of support, he would never gratify the Kirk by crushing the Catholic +earls, by temperament he was no persecutor. His calculated leniency +caused him years of trouble.</p> +<p>Meanwhile James, after issuing a grotesque proclamation about the +causes of his spirited resolve, sailed in October to woo a sea-king’s +daughter over the foam, the Princess Anne of Denmark. After happy +months passed, he wrote, “in drinking and driving ower,” +he returned with his bride in May 1590.</p> +<p>The General Assembly then ordered prayers for the Puritans oppressed +in England; none the less Elizabeth, the oppressor, continued to patronise +the plots of the Puritans of Scotland. They now lent their approval +to the foe of James’s minister, Maitland, namely, the wild Francis +Stewart, Earl of Bothwell, a sister’s son of Mary’s Bothwell. +This young man had the engaging quality of gay and absolute recklessness; +he was dear to ladies and the wild young gentry of Lothian and the Borders; +he broke prisons, released friends, dealt with wizards, aided by Lady +Gowrie stole into Holyrood, his ruling ambition being to capture the +king. The preachers prayed for “sanctified plagues” +against James, and regarded Bothwell favourably as a sanctified plague.</p> +<p>A strange conspiracy within Clan Campbell, in which Huntly and Maitland +were implicated, now led to the murder, among others, of the bonny Earl +of Murray by Huntly in partnership with Maitland (February 1592).</p> +<p>James was accused of having instigated this crime, from suspicion +of Murray as a partner in the wild enterprises of Bothwell, and was +so hard pressed by sermons that, in the early summer of 1592, he allowed +the Black Acts to be abrogated, and “the Charter of the liberties +of the Kirk” to be passed. One of these liberties was to +persecute Catholics in accordance with the penal Acts of 1560. +The Kirk was almost an <i>imperium in imperio</i>, but was still prohibited +from appointing the time and place of its own General Assemblies without +Royal assent. This weak point in their defences enabled James +to vanquish them, but, in June, Bothwell attacked him in the Palace +of Falkland and put him in considerable peril.</p> +<p>The end of 1592 and the opening of 1593 were remarkable for the discovery +of “The Spanish Blanks,” papers addressed to Philip of Spain, +signed by Huntly, the new Earl of Angus, and Errol, to be filled up +with an oral message requesting military aid for Scottish Catholics. +Such proceedings make our historians hold up obtesting hands against +the perfidy of idolaters. But clearly, if Knox and the congregation +were acting rightly when they besought the aid of England against Mary +of Guise, then Errol and Huntly are not to blame for inviting Spain +to free them from persecution. Some inkling of the scheme had +reached James, and a paper in which he weighed the pros and cons is +in existence. His suspected understanding with the Catholic earls, +whom he merely did not wish to estrange hopelessly, was punished by +a sanctified plague. On July 24, 1593, by aid of the late Earl +Gowrie’s daughter, Bothwell entered Holyrood, seized the king, +extorted his own terms, went and amazed the Dean of Durham by his narrative +of the adventure, and seemed to have the connivance of Elizabeth. +But in September James found himself in a position to repudiate his +forced engagement. Bothwell now allied himself with the Catholic +earls, and, as a Catholic, had no longer the prayers of the preachers. +James ordered levies to attack the earls, while Argyll led his clan +and the Macleans against Huntly, only to be defeated by the Gordon horse +at the battle of Glenrinnes (October 3). Huntly and his allies, +however, dared not encounter King James and Andrew Melville, who marched +together against them, and they were obliged to fly to the Continent. +Bothwell, with his retainer, Colville, continued, with Cecil’s +connivance, to make desperate plots for seizing James; indeed, Cecil +was intriguing with them and other desperadoes even after 1600. +Throughout all the Tudor period, from Henry VII. to 1601, England was +engaged in a series of conspiracies against the persons of the princes +of Scotland. The Catholics of the south of Scotland now lost Lord +Maxwell, slain by a “Lockerby Lick” in a great clan battle +with the Johnstones at Dryfe Sands.</p> +<p>In 1595, James’s minister, John Maitland, brother of Lethington, +died, and early in 1596 an organisation called “the Octavians” +was made to regulate the distracted finance of the country. On +April 13, 1596, Walter Scott of Buccleuch made himself an everlasting +name by the bloodless rescue of Kinmont Willie, an Armstrong reiver, +from the Castle of Carlisle, where he was illegally held by Lord Scrope. +The period was notable for the endless raids by the clans on both sides +of the Border, celebrated in ballads.</p> +<p>James had determined to recall the exiled Catholic earls, undeterred +by the eloquence of “the last of all our sincere Assemblies,” +held with deep emotion in March 1596. The earls came home; in +September at Falkland Palace Andrew Melville seized James by the sleeve, +called him “God’s silly vassal,” and warned him that +Christ and his Kirk were the king’s overlords. Soon afterwards +Mr David Black of St Andrews spoke against Elizabeth in a sermon which +caused diplomatic remonstrances. Black would be tried, in the +first instance, only by a Spiritual Court of his brethren. There +was a long struggle, the ministers appointed a kind of standing Committee +of Safety; James issued a proclamation dissolving it, and, on December +17, inflammatory sermons led a deputation to try to visit James, who +was with the Lords of Session in the Tolbooth. Whether under an +alarm of a Popish plot or not, the crowd became so fierce and menacing +that the great Lachlan Maclean of Duart rode to Stirling to bring up +Argyll in the king’s defence with such forces as he could muster. +The king retired to Linlithgow; the Rev. Mr Bruce, a famous preacher +credited with powers of prophecy, in vain appealed to the Duke of Hamilton +to lead the godly. By threatening to withdraw the Court and Courts +of Justice from Edinburgh James brought the citizens to their knees, +and was able to take order with the preachers.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXIII. THE GOWRIE CONSPIRACY.</h2> +<p>James, in reducing the Kirk, relied as much on his cunning and “kingcraft” +as on his prerogative. He summoned a Convention of preachers and +of the Estates to Perth at the end of February 1597, and thither he +brought many ministers from the north, men unlike the zealots of Lothian +and the Lowlands. He persuaded them to vote themselves a General +Assembly; and they admitted his right to propose modifications in Church +government, to forbid unusual convocations (as in Edinburgh during the +autumn of 1596); they were not to preach against Acts of Parliament +or of Council, nor appoint preachers in the great towns without the +Royal assent, and were not to attack individuals from the pulpit. +An attempt was to be made to convert the Catholic lords. A General +Assembly at Dundee in May ratified these decisions, to the wrath of +Andrew Melville, and the Catholic earls were more or less reconciled +to the Kirk, which at this period had not one supporter among the nobility. +James had made large grants of Church lands among the noblesse, and +they abstained from their wonted conspiracies for a while. The +king occupied himself much in encouraging the persecution of witches, +but even that did not endear him to the preachers.</p> +<p>In the Assembly of March 1598 certain ministers were allowed to sit +and vote in Parliament. In 1598-1599 a privately printed book +by James, the ‘Basilicon Doron,’ came to the knowledge of +the clergy: it revealed his opinions on the right of kings to rule the +Church, and on the tendency of the preachers to introduce a democracy +“with themselves as Tribunes of the People,” a very fair +definition of their policy. It was to stop them that he gradually +introduced a bastard kind of bishops, police to keep the pulpiteers +in order. They were refusing, in face of the king’s licence, +to permit a company of English players to act in Edinburgh, for they +took various powers into their hands.</p> +<p>Meanwhile James’s relations with England, where Elizabeth saw +with dismay his victory over her allies, his clergy, were unfriendly. +Plots were encouraged against him, but it is not probable that England +was aware of the famous and mysterious conspiracy of the young Earl +of Gowrie, who was warmly welcomed by Elizabeth on his return from Padua, +by way of Paris. He had been summoned by Bruce, James’s +chief clerical adversary, and the Kirk had high hopes of the son of +the man of the Raid of Ruthven. He led the opposition to taxation +for national defence in a convention of June-July 1600. On August +5, in his own house at Perth, where James, summoned thither by Gowrie’s +younger brother, had dined with him, Gowrie and his brother were slain +by John Ramsay, a page to the king.</p> +<p>This affair was mysterious. The preachers, and especially Bruce, +refused to accept James’s own account of the events, at first, +and this was not surprising. Gowrie was their one hope among the +peers, and the story which James told is so strange that nothing could +be stranger or less credible except the various and manifestly mendacious +versions of the Gowrie party. <a name="citation156"></a><a href="#footnote156">{156}</a></p> +<p>James’s version of the occurrences must be as much as possible +condensed, and there is no room for the corroborating evidence of Lennox +and others. As the king was leaving Falkland to hunt a buck early +on August 5, the Master of Ruthven, who had ridden over from his brother’s +house in Perth, accosted him. The Master declared that he had +on the previous evening arrested a man carrying a pot of gold; had said +nothing to Gowrie; had locked up the man and his gold in a room, and +now wished James to come instantly and examine the fellow. The +king’s curiosity and cupidity were less powerful than his love +of sport: he would first kill his buck. During the chase James +told the story to Lennox, who corroborated. Ruthven sent a companion +to inform his brother; none the less, when the king, with a considerable +following, did appear at Gowrie’s house, no preparation for his +reception had been made.</p> +<p>The Master was now in a quandary: he had no prisoner and no pot of +gold. During dinner Gowrie was very nervous; after it James and +the Master slipped upstairs together while Gowrie took the gentlemen +into the garden to eat cherries. Ruthven finally led James into +a turret off the long gallery; he locked the door, and pointing to a +man in armour with a dagger, said that he “had the king at his +will.” The man, however, fell a-trembling, James made a +speech, and the Master went to seek Gowrie, locking the door behind +him. At or about this moment, as was fully attested, Cranstoun, +a retainer of Gowrie, reported to him and the gentlemen that the king +had ridden away. They all rushed to the gate, where the porter, +to whom Gowrie gave the lie, swore that the king had not left the place. +The gentlemen going to the stables passed under the turret-window, whence +appeared the king, red in the face, bellowing “treason!” +The gentlemen, with Lennox, rushed upstairs, and through the gallery, +but could not force open the door giving on the turret. But young +Ramsay had run up a narrow stair in the tower, burst open the turret-door +opening on the stair, found James struggling with the Master, wounded +the Master, and pushed him downstairs. In the confusion, while +the king’s falcon flew wildly about the turret till James set +his foot on its chain, the man with the dagger vanished. The Master +was slain by two of James’s attendants; the Earl, rushing with +four or five men up the turret-stair, fell in fight by Ramsay’s +rapier.</p> +<p>Lennox and his company now broke through the door between the gallery +and the turret, and all was over except a riotous assemblage of the +town’s folk. The man with the dagger had fled: he later +came in and gave himself up; he was Gowrie’s steward; his name +was Henderson; it was he who rode with the Master to Falkland and back +to Perth to warn Gowrie of James’s approach. He confessed +that Gowrie had then bidden him put on armour, on a false pretence, +and the Master had stationed him in the turret. The fact that +Henderson had arrived (from Falkland) at Gowrie’s house by half-past +ten was amply proved, yet Gowrie had made no preparations for the royal +visit. If Henderson was not the man in the turret, his sudden +and secret flight from Perth is unexplained. Moreover, Robert +Oliphant, M.A., said, in private talk, that the part of the man in the +turret had, some time earlier, been offered to him by Gowrie; he refused +and left the Earl’s service. It is manifest that James could +not have arranged this set of circumstances: the thing is impossible. +Therefore the two Ruthvens plotted to get him into their hands early +in the day; and, when he arrived late, with a considerable train, they +endeavoured to send these gentlemen after the king, by averring that +he had ridden homewards. The dead Ruthvens with their house were +forfeited.</p> +<p>Among the preachers who refused publicly to accept James’s +account of the events in Gowrie’s house on August 5, Mr Bruce +was the most eminent and the most obstinate. He had, on the day +after the famous riot of December 1596, written to Hamilton asking him +to countenance, as a chief nobleman, “the godly barons and others +who had convened themselves,” at that time, in the cause of the +Kirk. Bruce admitted that he knew Hamilton to be ambitious, but +Hamilton’s ambition did not induce him to appear as captain of +a new congregation. The chief need of the ministers’ party +was a leader among the great nobles. Now, in 1593, the young Earl +of Gowrie had leagued himself with the madcap Bothwell. In April +1594, Gowrie, Bothwell, and Atholl had addressed the Kirk, asking her +to favour and direct their enterprise. Bothwell made an armed +demonstration and failed; Gowrie then went abroad, to Padua and Rome, +and, apparently in 1600, Mr Bruce sailed to France, “for the calling,” +he says, “of the Master of Gowrie”—he clearly means +“the Earl of Gowrie.” The Earl came, wove his plot, +and perished. Mr Bruce, therefore, was averse to accepting James’s +account of the affair at Gowrie House. After a long series of +negotiations Bruce was exiled north of Tay.</p> +<h3>UNION OF THE CROWNS.</h3> +<p>In 1600 James imposed three bishops on the Kirk. Early in 1601 +broke out Essex’s rebellion of one day against Elizabeth, a futile +attempt to imitate Scottish methods as exhibited in the many raids against +James. Essex had been intriguing with the Scottish king, but to +what extent James knew of and encouraged his enterprise is unknown. +He was on ill terms with Cecil, who, in 1601, was dealing with several +men that intended no good to James. Cecil is said to have received +a sufficient warning as to how James, on ascending the English throne, +would treat him; and he came to terms, secretly, with Mar and Kinloss, +the king’s envoys to Elizabeth. Their correspondence is +extant, and proves that Cecil, at last, was “running the Scottish +course,” and making smooth the way for James’s accession. +(The correspondence begins in June 1601.)</p> +<p>Very early on Thursday, March 24, 1603, Elizabeth went to her account, +and James received the news from Sir Robert Carey, who reached Holyrood +on the Saturday night, March 26. James entered London on May 6, +and England was free from the fear of many years concerning a war for +the succession. The Catholics hoped for lenient usage: disappointment +led some desperate men to engage in the Gunpowder Plot. James +was not more satisfactory to the Puritans.</p> +<p>Encouraged by the fulsome adulation which grew up under the Tudor +dynasty, and free from dread of personal danger, James henceforth governed +Scotland “with the pen,” as he said, through the Privy Council. +This method of ruling the ancient kingdom endured till the Union of +1707, and was fraught with many dangers. The king was no longer +in touch with his subjects. His best action was the establishment +of a small force of mounted constabulary which did more to put down +the eternal homicides, robberies, and family feuds than all the sermons +could achieve.</p> +<p>The persons most notable in the Privy Council were Seton (later Lord +Dunfermline), Hume, created Earl of Dunbar, and the king’s advocate, +Thomas Hamilton, later Earl of Haddington. Bishops, with Spottiswoode, +the historian, Archbishop of Glasgow, sat in the Privy Council, and +their progressive elevation, as hateful to the nobles as to the Kirk, +was among the causes of the civil war under Charles I. By craft +and by illegal measures James continued to depress the Kirk. A +General Assembly, proclaimed by James for July 1604 in Aberdeen, was +prorogued; again, unconstitutionally, it was prorogued in July 1605. +Nineteen ministers, disobeying a royal order, appeared and constituted +the Assembly. Joined by ten others, they kept open the right of +way. James insisted that the Council should prosecute them: they, +by fixing a new date for an Assembly, without royal consent; and James, +by letting years pass without an Assembly, broke the charter of the +Kirk of 1592.</p> +<p>The preachers, when summoned to the trial, declined the jurisdiction. +This was violently construed as treason, and a jury, threatened by the +legal officers with secular, and by the preachers with future spiritual +punishment, by a small majority condemned some of the ministers (January +1606). This roused the wrath of all classes. James wished +for more prosecutions; the Council, in terror, prevailed on him to desist. +He continued to grant no Assemblies till 1608, and would not allow “caveats” +(limiting the powers of Bishops) to be enforced. He summoned (1606) +the two Melvilles, Andrew and his nephew James, to London, where Andrew +bullied in his own violent style, and was, quite illegally, first imprisoned +and then banished to France.</p> +<p>In December 1606 a convention of preachers was persuaded to allow +the appointment of “constant Moderators” to keep the presbyteries +in order; and then James recognised the convention as a General Assembly. +Suspected ministers were confined to their parishes or locked up in +Blackness Castle. In 1608 a General Assembly was permitted the +pleasure of excommunicating Huntly. In 1610 an Assembly established +Episcopacy, and no excommunications not ratified by the Bishop were +allowed: the only comfort of the godly was the violent persecution of +Catholics, who were nosed out by the “constant Moderators,” +excommunicated if they refused to conform, confiscated, and banished.</p> +<p>James could succeed in these measures, but his plan for uniting the +two kingdoms into one, Great Britain, though supported by the wisdom +and eloquence of Bacon, was frustrated by the jealousies of both peoples. +Persons born after James’s accession (the <i>post nati</i>) were, +however, admitted to equal privileges in either kingdom (1608). +In 1610 James had two of his bishops, and Spottiswoode, consecrated +by three English bishops, but he did not yet venture to interfere with +the forms of Presbyterian public worship.</p> +<p>In 1610 James established two Courts of High Commission (in 1615 +united in one Court) to try offences in morals and religion. The +Archbishops presided, laity and clergy formed the body of the Court, +and it was regarded as vexatious and tyrannical. The same terms, +to be sure, would now be applied to the interference of preachers and +presbyteries with private life and opinion. By 1612 the king had +established Episcopacy, which, for one reason or another, became equally +hateful to the nobles, the gentry, and the populace. James’s +motives were motives of police. Long experience had taught him +the inconveniences of presbyterial government as it then existed in +Scotland.</p> +<p>To a Church organised in the presbyterian manner, as it has been +practised since 1689, James had, originally at least, no objection. +But the combination of “presbyterian Hildebrandism” with +factions of the turbulent <i>noblesse</i>; the alliance of the Power +of the Keys with the sword and lance, was inconsistent with the freedom +of the State and of the individual. “The absolutism of James,” +says Professor Hume Brown, “was forced upon him in large degree +by the excessive claims of the Presbyterian clergy.”</p> +<p>Meanwhile the thievish Border clans, especially the Armstrongs, were +assailed by hangings and banishments, and Ulster was planted by Scottish +settlers, willing or reluctant, attracted by promise of lands, or planted +out, that they might not give trouble on the Border.</p> +<p>Persecution of Catholics was violent, and in spring 1615 Father Ogilvie +was hanged after very cruel treatment directed by Archbishop Spottiswoode. +In this year the two ecclesiastical Courts of High Commission were fused +into one, and an Assembly was coerced into passing what James called +“Hotch-potch resolutions” about changes in public worship. +James wanted greater changes, but deferred them till he visited Scotland +in 1617, when he was attended by the luckless figure of Laud, who went +to a funeral—in a surplice! James had many personal bickerings +with preachers, but his five main points, “The Articles of Perth” +(of these the most detested were: (1) Communicants must kneel, not sit, +at the Communion; (4) Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost must be observed; +and (5) Confirmation must be introduced), were accepted by an Assembly +in 1618. They could not be enforced, but were sanctioned by Parliament +in 1621. The day was called Black Saturday, and omens were drawn +by both parties from a thunderstorm which occurred at the time of the +ratification of the Articles of Perth by Parliament in Edinburgh (August +4, 1621).</p> +<p>By enforcing these Articles James passed the limit of his subjects’ +endurance. In their opinion, as in Knox’s, to kneel at the +celebration of the Holy Communion was an act of idolatry, was “Baal +worship,” and no pressure could compel them to kneel. The +three great festivals of the Christian Church, whether Roman, Genevan, +or Lutheran, had no certain warrant in Holy Scripture, but were rather +repugnant to the Word of God. The king did not live to see the +bloodshed and misery caused by his reckless assault on the liberties +and consciences of his subjects; he died on March 27, 1625, just before +the Easter season in which it was intended to enforce his decrees.</p> +<p>The ungainliness of James’s person, his lack of courage on +certain occasions (he was by no means a constant coward), and the feebleness +of his limbs might be attributed to pre-natal influences; he was injured +before he was born by the sufferings of his mother at the time of Riccio’s +murder. His deep dissimulation he learnt in his bitter childhood +and harassed youth. His ingenious mind was trained to pedantry; +he did nothing worse, and nothing more congenial to the cruel superstitions +of his age, than in his encouragement of witch trials and witch burnings +promoted by the Scottish clergy down to the early part of the eighteenth +century.</p> +<p>His plantation of Ulster by Scottish settlers has greatly affected +history down to our own times, while the most permanent result of the +awards by which he stimulated the colonisation of Nova Scotia has been +the creation of hereditary knighthoods or baronetcies.</p> +<p>His encouragement of learning left its mark in the foundation of +the Town’s College of Edinburgh, on the site of Kirk-o’-Field, +the scene of his father’s murder.</p> +<p>The south-western Highlands, from Lochaber to Islay and Cantyre, +were, in his reign, the scene of constant clan feuds and repressions, +resulting in the fall of the Macdonalds, and the rise of the Campbell +chief, Argyll, to the perilous power later wielded by the Marquis against +Charles I. Many of the sons of the dispossessed Macdonalds, driven +into Ireland, were to constitute the nucleus of the army of Montrose. +In the Orkneys and Shetlands the constant turbulence of Earl Patrick +and his family ended in the annexation of the islands to the Crown (1612), +and the Earl’s execution (1615).</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXIV. CHARLES I.</h2> +<p>The reign of Charles I. opened with every sign of the tempests which +were to follow. England and Scotland were both seething with religious +fears and hatreds. Both parties in England, Puritans and Anglicans, +could be satisfied with nothing less than complete domination. +In England the extreme Puritans, with their yearning after the Genevan +presbyterian discipline, had been threatening civil war even under Elizabeth. +James had treated them with a high hand and a proud heart. Under +Charles, wedded to a “Jezebel,” a Catholic wife, Henrietta +Maria, the Puritan hatred of such prelates as Laud expressed itself +in threats of murder; while heavy fines and cruel mutilations were inflicted +by the party in power. The Protestant panic, the fear of a violent +restoration of Catholicism in Scotland, never slumbered. In Scotland +Catholics were at this time bitterly persecuted, and believed that a +presbyterian general massacre of them all was being organised. +By the people the Anglican bishops and the prayer-book were as much +detested as priests and the Mass. When Charles placed six prelates +on his Privy Council, and recognised the Archbishop of St Andrews, Spottiswoode, +as first in precedence among his subjects, the nobles were angry and +jealous. Charles would not do away with the infatuated Articles +of Perth. James, as he used to say, had “governed Scotland +by the pen” through his Privy Council. Charles knew much +less than James of the temper of the Scots, among whom he had never +come since his infancy, and <i>his</i> Privy Council with six bishops +was apt to be even more than commonly subservient.</p> +<p>In Scotland as in England the expenses of national defence were a +cause of anger; and the mismanagement of military affairs by the king’s +favourite, Buckingham, increased the irritation. It was brought +to a head in Scotland by the “Act of Revocation,” under +which all Church lands and Crown lands bestowed since 1542 were to be +restored to the Crown. This Act once more united in opposition +the nobles and the preachers; since 1596 they had not been in harmony. +In 1587, as we saw, James VI. had annexed much of the old ecclesiastical +property to the Crown; but he had granted most of it to nobles and barons +as “temporal lordships.” Now, by Charles, the temporal +lords who held such lands were menaced, the judges (“Lords of +Session”) who would have defended their interests were removed +from the Privy Council (March 1626), and, in August, the temporal lords +remonstrated with the king through deputations.</p> +<p>In fact, they took little harm—redeeming their holdings at +the rate of ten years’ purchase. The main result was that +landowners were empowered to buy the tithes on their own lands from +the multitude of “titulars of tithes” (1629) who had rapaciously +and oppressively extorted these tenths of the harvest every year. +The ministers had a safe provision at last, secured on the tithes, in +Scotland styled “teinds,” but this did not reconcile most +of them to bishops and to the Articles of Perth. Several of the +bishops were, in fact, “latitudinarian” or “Arminian” +in doctrine, wanderers from the severity of Knox and Calvin. With +them began, perhaps, the “Moderatism” which later invaded +the Kirk; though their ideal slumbered during the civil war, to awaken +again, with the teaching of Archbishop Leighton, under the Restoration. +Meanwhile the nobles and gentry had been alarmed and mulcted, and were +ready to join hands with the Kirk in its day of resistance.</p> +<p>In June 1633 Charles at last visited his ancient kingdom, accompanied +by Laud. His subjects were alarmed and horrified by the sight +of prelates in lawn sleeves, candles in chapel, and even a tapestry +showing the crucifixion. To this the bishops are said to have +bowed,—plain idolatry. In the Parliament of June 18 the +eight representatives of each Estate, who were practically all-powerful +as Lords of the Articles, were chosen, not from each Estate by its own +members, but on a method instituted, or rather revived, by James VI. +in 1609. The nobles made the choice from the bishops, the bishops +from the nobles, and the elected sixteen from the barons and burghers. +The twenty-four were all thus episcopally minded: they drew up the bills, +and the bills were voted on without debate. The grant of supply +made in these circumstances was liberal, and James’s ecclesiastical +legislation, including the sanction of the “rags of Rome” +worn by the bishops, was ratified. Remonstrances from the ministers +of the old Kirk party were disregarded; and—the thin end of the +wedge—the English Liturgy was introduced in the Royal Chapel of +Holyrood and in that of St Salvator’s College, St Andrews, where +it has been read once, on a funeral occasion, in recent years.</p> +<p>In 1634-35, on the information of Archbishop Spottiswoode, Lord Balmerino +was tried for treason because he possessed a supplication or petition +which the Lords of the minority, in the late Parliament, had drawn up +but had not presented. He was found guilty, but spared: the proceeding +showed of what nature the bishops were, and alienated and alarmed the +populace and the nobles and gentry. A remonstrance in a manly +spirit by Drummond of Hawthornden, the poet, was disregarded.</p> +<p>In 1635 Charles authorised a Book of Canons, heralding the imposition +of a Liturgy, which scarcely varied, and when it varied was thought +to differ for the worse, from that of the Church of England. By +these canons, the most nakedly despotic of innovations, the preachers +could not use their sword of excommunication without the assent of the +Bishops. James VI. had ever regarded with horror and dread the +licence of “conceived prayers,” spoken by the minister, +and believed to be extemporary or directly inspired. There is +an old story that one minister prayed that James might break his leg: +certainly prayers for “sanctified plagues” on that prince +were publicly offered, at the will of the minister. Even a very +firm Presbyterian, the Laird of Brodie, when he had once heard the Anglican +service in London, confided to his journal that he had suffered much +from the nonsense of “conceived prayers.” They were +a dangerous weapon, in Charles’s opinion: he was determined to +abolish them, rather that he might be free from the agitation of the +pulpit than for reasons of ritual, and to proclaim his own headship +of the Kirk of “King Christ.”</p> +<p>This, in the opinion of the great majority of the preachers and populace, +was flat blasphemy, an assumption of “the Crown Honours of Christ.” +The Liturgy was “an ill-mumbled Mass,” the Mass was idolatry, +and idolatry was a capital offence. However strange these convictions +may appear, they were essential parts of the national belief. +Yet, with the most extreme folly, Charles, acting like Henry VIII. as +his own Pope, thrust the canons and this Liturgy upon the Kirk and country. +No sentimental arguments can palliate such open tyranny.</p> +<p>The Liturgy was to be used in St Giles’ Church, the town kirk +of Edinburgh (cleansed and restored by Charles himself), on July 23, +1637. The result was a furious brawl, begun by the women, of all +presbyterians the fiercest, and, it was said, by men disguised as women. +A gentleman was struck on the ear by a woman for the offence of saying +“Amen,” and the famous Jenny Geddes is traditionally reported +to have thrown her stool at the Dean’s head. The service +was interrupted, the Bishop was the mark of stones, and “the Bishops’ +War,” the Civil War, began in this brawl. James VI., being +on the spot, had thoroughly quieted Edinburgh after a more serious riot, +on December 17, 1596. But Charles was far away; the city had not +to fear the loss of the Court and its custom, as on the earlier occasion +(the removal of the Council to Linlithgow in October 1637 was a trifle), +and the Council had to face a storm of petitions from all classes of +the community. Their prayer was that the Liturgy should be withdrawn. +From the country, multitudes of all classes flocked into Edinburgh and +formed themselves into a committee of public safety, “The Four +Tables,” containing sixteen persons.</p> +<p>The Tables now demanded the removal of the bishops from the Privy +Council (December 21, 1637). The question was: Who were to govern +the country, the Council or the Tables? The logic of the Presbyterians +was not always consistent. The king must not force the Liturgy +on them, but later, their quarrel with him was that he would not, at +their desire, force the absence of the Liturgy on England. If +the king had the right to inflict Presbyterianism on England, he had +the right to thrust the Liturgy on Scotland: of course he had neither +one right nor the other. On February 19, 1638, Charles’s +proclamation, refusing the prayers of the supplication of December, +was read at Stirling. Nobles and people replied with protestations +to every royal proclamation. Foremost on the popular side was +the young Earl of Montrose: “you will not rest,” said Rothes, +a more sober leader, “till you be lifted up above the lave in +three fathoms of rope.” Rothes was a true prophet; but Montrose +did not die for the cause that did “his green unknowing youth +engage.”</p> +<p>The Presbyterians now desired yearly General Assemblies (of which +James VI. had unlawfully robbed the Kirk); the enforcement of an old +brief-lived system of restrictions (<i>caveats</i>) on the bishops; +the abolition of the Articles of Perth; and, as always, of the Liturgy. +If he granted all this Charles might have had trouble with the preachers, +as James VI. had of old. Yet the demands were constitutional; +and in Charles’s position he would have done well to assent. +He was obstinate in refusal.</p> +<p>The Scots now “fell upon the consideration of a band of union +to be made legally,” says Rothes, their leader, the chief of the +House of Leslie (the family of Norman Leslie, the slayer of Cardinal +Beaton). Now a “band” of this kind could not, by old +Scots law, be legally made; such bands, like those for the murder of +Riccio and of Darnley, and for many other enterprises, were not smiled +upon by the law. But, in 1581, as we saw, James VI. had signed +a covenant against popery; its tenor was imitated in that of 1638, and +there was added “a general band for the maintenance of true religion” +(Presbyterianism) “<i>and of the King’s person</i>.” +That part of the band was scarcely kept when the Covenanting army surrendered +Charles to the English. They had vowed, in their band, to “stand +to the defence of our dread Sovereign the King’s Majesty, his +person and authority.” They kept this vow by hanging men +who held the king’s commission. The words as to defending +the king’s authority were followed by “in the defence and +preservation of the aforesaid true religion.” This appears +to mean that only a presbyterian king is to be defended. In any +case the preachers assumed the right to interpret the Covenant, which +finally led to the conquest of Scotland by Cromwell. As the Covenant +was made between God and the Covenanters, on ancient Hebrew precedent +it was declared to be binding on all succeeding generations. Had +Scotland resisted tyranny without this would-be biblical pettifogging +Covenant, her condition would have been the more gracious. The +signing of the band began at Edinburgh in Greyfriars’ Churchyard +on February 28, 1638.</p> +<p>This Covenant was a most potent instrument for the day, but the fruits +thereof were blood and tears and desolation: for fifty-one years common-sense +did not come to her own again. In 1689 the Covenant was silently +dropped, when the Kirk was restored.</p> +<p>This two-edged insatiable sword was drawn: great multitudes signed +with enthusiasm, and they who would not sign were, of course, persecuted. +As they said, “it looked not like a thing approved of God, which +was begun and carried on with fury and madness, and obtruded on people +with threatenings, tearing of clothes, and drawing of blood.” +Resistance to the king—if need were, armed resistance—was +necessary, was laudable, but the terms of the Covenant were, in the +highest degree impolitic and unstatesmanlike. The country was +handed over to the preachers; the Scots, as their great leader Argyll +was to discover, were “distracted men in distracted times.”</p> +<p>Charles wavered and sent down the Marquis of Hamilton to represent +his waverings. The Marquis was as unsettled as his predecessor, +Arran, in the minority of Queen Mary. He dared not promulgate +the proclamations; he dared not risk civil war; he knew that Charles, +who said he was ready, was unprepared in his mutinous English kingdom. +He granted, at last, a General Assembly and a free Parliament, and produced +another Covenant, “the King’s Covenant,” which of +course failed to thwart that of the country.</p> +<p>The Assembly, at Glasgow (November 21, 1638), including noblemen +and gentlemen as elders, was necessarily revolutionary, and needlessly +riotous and profane. It arraigned and condemned the bishops in +their absence. Hamilton, as Royal Commissioner, dissolved the +Assembly, which continued to sit. The meeting was in the Cathedral, +where, says a sincere Covenanter, Baillie, whose letters are a valuable +source, “our rascals, without shame, in great numbers, made din +and clamour.” All the unconstitutional ecclesiastical legislation +of the last forty years was rescinded,—as all the new presbyterian +legislation was to be rescinded at the Restoration. Some bishops +were excommunicated, the rest were deposed. The press was put +under the censorship of the fanatical lawyer, Johnston of Waristoun, +clerk of the Assembly.</p> +<p>On December 20 the Assembly, which sat on after Hamilton dissolved +it, broke up. Among the Covenanters were to be reckoned the Earl +of Argyll (later the only Marquis of his House), and the Earl, later +Marquis, of Montrose. They did not stand long together. +The Scottish Revolution produced no man at once great and successful, +but, in Montrose, it had one man of genius who gave his life for honour’s +sake; in Argyll, an astute man, not physically courageous, whose “timidity +in the field was equalled by his timidity in the Council,” says +Mr Gardiner.</p> +<p>In spring (1639) war began. Charles was to move in force on +the Border; the fleet was to watch the coasts; Hamilton, with some 5000 +men, was to join hands with Huntly (both men were wavering and incompetent); +Antrim, from north Ireland, was to attack and contain Argyll; Ruthven +was to hold Edinburgh Castle. But Alexander Leslie took that castle +for the Covenanters; they took Dumbarton; they fortified Leith; Argyll +ravaged Huntly’s lands; Montrose and Leslie occupied Aberdeen; +and their party, in circumstances supposed to be discreditable to Montrose, +carried Huntly to Edinburgh. (The evidence is confused. +Was Huntly unwilling to go? Charles (York, April 23, 1639) calls +him “feeble and false.” Mr Gardiner says that, in +this case, and in this alone, Montrose stooped to a mean action.) +Hamilton merely dawdled and did nothing: Montrose had entered Aberdeen +(June 19), and then came news of negotiations between the king and the +Covenanters.</p> +<p>As Charles approached from the south, Alexander Leslie, a Continental +veteran (very many of the Covenant’s officers were Dugald Dalgettys +from the foreign wars), occupied Dunse Law, with a numerous army in +great difficulties as to supplies. “A natural mind might +despair,” wrote Waristoun, who “was brought low before God +indeed.” Leslie was in a strait; but, on the other side, +so was Charles, for a reconnaissance of Leslie’s position was +repulsed; the king lacked money and supplies; neither side was of a +high fighting heart; and offers to negotiate came from the king, informally. +The Scots sent in “a supplication,” and on June 18 signed +a treaty which was a mere futile truce. There were to be a new +Assembly, and a new Parliament in August and September.</p> +<p>Charles should have fought: if he fell he would fall with honour; +and if he survived defeat “all England behoved to have risen in +revenge,” says the Covenanting letter-writer, Baillie, later Principal +of Glasgow University. The Covenanters at this time could not +have invaded England, could not have supported themselves if they did, +and were far from being harmonious among themselves. The defeat +of Charles at this moment would have aroused English pride and united +the country. Charles set out from Berwick for London on July 29, +leaving many fresh causes of quarrel behind him.</p> +<p>Charles supposed that he was merely “giving way for the present” +when he accepted the ratification by the new Assembly of all the Acts +of that of 1638. He never had a later chance to recover his ground. +The new Assembly made the Privy Council pass an Act rendering signature +of the Covenant compulsory on all men: “the new freedom is worse +than the old slavery,” a looker-on remarked. The Parliament +discussed the method of electing the Lords of the Articles—a method +which, in fact, though of prime importance, had varied and continued +to vary in practice. Argyll protested that the constitutional +course was for each Estate to elect its own members. Montrose +was already suspected of being influenced by Charles. Charles +refused to call Episcopacy unlawful, or to rescind the old Acts establishing +it. Traquair, as Commissioner, dissolved the Parliament; later +Charles refused to meet envoys sent from Scotland, who were actually +trying, as their party also tried, to gain French mediation or assistance,—help +from “idolaters”!</p> +<p>In spring 1640 the Scots, by an instrument called “The Blind +Band,” imposed taxation for military purposes; while Charles in +England called The Short Parliament to provide Supply. The Parliament +refused and was prorogued; words used by Strafford about the use of +the army in Ireland to suppress Scotland were hoarded up against him. +The Scots Parliament, though the king had prorogued it, met in June, +despite the opposition of Montrose. The Parliament, when it ceased +to meet, appointed a Standing Committee of some forty members of all +ranks, including Montrose and his friends Lord Napier and Stirling of +Keir. Argyll refused to be a member, but acted on a commission +of fire and sword “to root out of the country” the northern +recusants against the Covenant. It was now that Argyll burned +Lord Ogilvy’s Bonny House of Airlie and Forthes; the cattle were +driven into his own country; all this against, and perhaps in consequence +of, the intercession of Ogilvy’s friend and neighbour, Montrose.</p> +<p>Meanwhile the Scots were intriguing with discontented English peers, +who could only give sympathy; Saville, however, forged a letter from +six of them inviting a Scottish invasion. There was a movement +for making Argyll practically Dictator in the North; Montrose thwarted +it, and in August, while Charles with a reluctant and disorderly force +was marching on York Montrose at Cumbernauld, the house of the Earl +of Wigtoun made a secret band with the Earls Marischal, Wigtoun, Home, +Atholl, Mar, Perth, Boyd, Galloway, and others, for their mutual defence +against the scheme of dictatorship for Argyll. On August 20 Montrose, +the foremost, forded Tweed, and led his regiment into England. +On August 30, almost unopposed, the Scots entered Newcastle, having +routed a force which met them at Newburn-on-Tyne.</p> +<p>They again pressed their demands on the king; simultaneously twelve +English peers petitioned for a parliament and the trial of the king’s +Ministers. Charles gave way. At Ripon Scottish and English +commissioners met; the Scots received “brotherly assistance” +in money and supplies (a daily £850), and stayed where they were; +while the Long Parliament met in November, and in April 1641 condemned +the great Strafford: Laud soon shared his doom. On August 10 the +demands of the Scots were granted: as a sympathetic historian writes, +they had lived for a year at free quarters, “and recrossed the +Border with the handsome sum of £200,000 to their credit.”</p> +<p>During the absence of the army the Kirk exhibited symptoms not favourable +to its own peace. Amateur theologians held private religious gatherings, +which, it was feared, tended towards the heresy of the English Independents +and to the “break up of the whole Kirk,” some of whose representatives +forbade these conventicles, while “the rigid sort” asserted +that the conventiclers “were esteemed the godly of the land.” +An Act of the General Assembly was passed against the meetings; we observe +that here are the beginnings of strife between the most godly and the +rather moderately pious.</p> +<p>The secret of Montrose’s Cumbernauld band had come to light +after November 1640: nothing worse, at the moment, befell than the burning +of the band by the Committee of Estates, to whom Argyll referred the +matter. On May 21, 1641, the Committee was disturbed, for Montrose +was collecting evidence as to the words and deeds of Argyll when he +used his commission of fire and sword at the Bonny House of Airlie and +in other places. Montrose had spoken of the matter to a preacher, +he to another, and the news reached the Committee. Montrose had +learned from a prisoner of Argyll, Stewart the younger of Ladywell, +that Argyll had held counsels to discuss the deposition of the king. +Ladywell produced to the Committee his written statement that Argyll +had spoken before him of these consultations of lawyers and divines. +He was placed in the castle, and was so worked on that he “cleared” +Argyll and confessed that, advised by Montrose, he had reported Argyll’s +remarks to the king. Papers with hints and names in cypher were +found in possession of the messenger.</p> +<p>The whole affair is enigmatic; in any case Ladywell was hanged for +“leasing-making” (spreading false reports), an offence not +previously capital, and Montrose with his friends was imprisoned in +the castle. Doubtless he had meant to accuse Argyll before Parliament +of treason. On July 27, 1641, being arraigned before Parliament, +he said, “My resolution is to carry with me fidelity and honour +to the grave.” He lay in prison when the king, vainly hoping +for support against the English Parliament, visited Edinburgh (August +14-November 17, 1641).</p> +<p>Charles was now servile to his Scottish Parliament, accepting an +Act by which it must consent to his nominations of officers of State. +Hamilton with his brother, Lanark, had courted the alliance and lived +in the intimacy of Argyll. On October 12 Charles told the House +“a very strange story.” On the previous day Hamilton +had asked leave to retire from Court, in fear of his enemies. +On the day of the king’s speaking, Hamilton, Argyll, and Lanark +had actually retired. On October 22, from their retreat, the brothers +said that they had heard of a conspiracy, by nobles and others in the +king’s favour, to cut their throats. The evidence is very +confused and contradictory: Hamilton and Argyll were said to have collected +a force of 5000 men in the town, and, on October 5, such a gathering +was denounced in a proclamation. Charles in vain asked for a public +inquiry into the affair before the whole House. He now raised +some of his opponents a step in the peerage: Argyll became a marquis, +and Montrose was released from prison. On October 28 Charles announced +the untoward news of an Irish rising and massacre. He was, of +course, accused of having caused it, and the massacre was in turn the +cause of, or pretext for, the shooting and hanging of Irish prisoners—men +and women—in Scotland during the civil war. On November +18 he left Scotland for ever.</p> +<p>The events in England of the spring in 1642, the attempted arrest +of the five members (January 4), the retreat of the queen to France, +Charles’s retiral to York, indicated civil war, and the king set +up his standard at Nottingham on August 22. The Covenanters had +received from Charles all that they asked; they had no quarrel with +him, but they argued that if he were victorious in England he would +use his strength and withdraw his concessions to Scotland.</p> +<p>Sir Walter Scott “leaves it to casuists to decide whether one +contracting party is justified in breaking a solemn treaty upon the +suspicion that in future contingencies it might be infringed by the +other.” He suggests that to the needy nobles and Dugald +Dalgettys of the Covenant “the good pay and free quarters” +and “handsome sums” of England were an irresistible temptation, +while the preachers thought they would be allowed to set up “the +golden candlestick” of presbytery in England (‘Legend of +Montrose,’ chapter i.) Of the two the preachers were the +more grievously disappointed.</p> +<p>A General Assembly of July-August 1642 was, as usual, concerned with +politics, for politics and religion were inextricably intermixed. +The Assembly appointed a Standing Commission to represent it, and the +powers of the Commission were of so high a strain that “to some +it is terrible already,” says the Covenanting letter-writer Baillie. +A letter from the Kirk was carried to the English Parliament which acquiesced +in the abolition of Episcopacy. In November 1642 the English Parliament, +unsuccessful in war, appealed to Scotland for armed aid; in December +Charles took the same course.</p> +<p>The Commission of the General Assembly, and the body of administrators +called Conservators of the Peace, overpowered the Privy Council, put +down a petition of Montrose’s party (who declared that they were +bound by the Covenant to defend the king), and would obviously arm on +the side of the English Parliament if England would adopt Presbyterian +government. They held a Convention of the Estates (June 22, 1643); +they discovered a Popish plot for an attack on Argyll’s country +by the Macdonalds in Ireland, once driven from Kintyre by the Campbells, +and now to be led by young Colkitto. While thus excited, they +received in the General Assembly (August 7) a deputation from the English +Parliament; and now was framed a new band between the English Parliament +and Scotland. It was an alliance, “The Solemn League and +Covenant,” by which Episcopacy was to be abolished and religion +established “according to the Word of God.” To the +Covenanters this phrase meant that England would establish Presbyterianism, +but they were disappointed. The ideas of the Independents, such +as Cromwell, were almost as much opposed to presbytery as to episcopacy, +and though the Covenanters took the pay and fought the battles of the +Parliament against their king, they never received what they had meant +to stipulate for,—the establishment of presbytery in England. +Far from that, Cromwell, like James VI., was to deprive them of their +ecclesiastical palladium, the General Assembly.</p> +<p>Foreseeing nothing, the Scots were delighted when the English accepted +the new band. Their army, under Alexander Leslie (Earl of Leven), +now too old for his post, crossed Tweed in January 1644. They +might never have crossed had Charles, in the autumn of 1643, listened +to Montrose and allowed him to attack the Covenanters in Scotland. +In December 1643, Hamilton and Lanark, who had opposed Montrose’s +views and confirmed the king in his waverings, came to him at Oxford. +Montrose refused to serve with them, rather he would go abroad; and +Hamilton was imprisoned on charges of treason: in fact, he had been +double-minded, inconstant, and incompetent. Montrose’s scheme +implied clan warfare, the use of exiled Macdonalds, who were Catholics, +against the Campbells. The obvious objections were very strong; +but “needs must when the devil drives”: the Hanoverian kings +employed foreign soldiers against their subjects in 1715 and 1745; but +the Macdonalds were subjects of King Charles.</p> +<p>Hamilton’s brother, Lanark, escaped, and now frankly joined +the Covenanters. Montrose was promoted to a Marquisate, and received +the Royal Commission as Lieutenant-General (February 1644), which alienated +old Huntly, chief of the Gordons, who now and again divided and paralysed +that gallant clan. Montrose rode north, where, in February 1644, +old Leslie, with twenty regiments of foot, three thousand horse, and +many guns, was besieging Newcastle. With him was the prototype +of Scott’s Dugald Dalgetty, Sir James Turner, who records examples +of Leslie’s senile incompetency. Leslie, at least, forced +the Marquis of Newcastle to a retreat, and a movement of Montrose on +Dumfries was paralysed by the cowardice or imbecility of the Scottish +magnates on the western Border. He returned, took Morpeth, was +summoned by Prince Rupert, and reached him the day after the disaster +of Marston Moor (July 2, 1644), from which Buccleuch’s Covenanting +regiment ran without stroke of sword, while Alexander Leslie also fled, +carrying news of his own defeat. It appears that the Scottish +horse, under David Leslie, were at Marston Moor, as always, the pick +of their army.</p> +<p>Rupert took over Montrose’s men, and the great Marquis, disguised +as a groom, rode hard to the house of a kinsman, near Tay, between Perth +and Dunkeld. Alone and comfortless, in a little wood, Montrose +met a man who was carrying the Fiery Cross, and summoning the country +to resist the Irish Scots of Alastair Macdonald (Colkitto), who had +landed with a force of 1500 musketeers in Argyll, and was believed to +be descending on Atholl, pursued by Seaforth and Argyll, and faced by +the men of Badenoch. The two armies <a name="citation181"></a><a href="#footnote181">{181}</a> +were confronting each other when Montrose, in plaid and kilt, approached +Colkitto and showed him his commission. Instantly the two opposed +forces combined into one, and with 2500 men, some armed with bows and +arrows, and others having only one charge for each musket, Montrose +began his year of victories.</p> +<p>The temptation to describe in detail his extraordinary series of +successes and of unexampled marches over snow-clad and pathless mountains +must be resisted. The mobility and daring of Montrose’s +irregular and capricious levies, with his own versatile military genius +and the heroic valour of Colkitto, enabled him to defeat a large Covenanting +force at Tippermuir, near Perth: here he had but his 2500 men (September +1); to repeat his victory at Aberdeen <a name="citation182"></a><a href="#footnote182">{182}</a> +(September 13), to evade and discourage Argyll, who retired to Inveraray; +to winter in and ravage Argyll’s country, and to turn on his tracks +from a northern retreat and destroy the Campbells at Inverlochy, where +Argyll looked on from his galley (February 2, 1645).</p> +<p>General Baillie, a trained soldier, took the command of the Covenanting +levies and regular troops (“Red coats”), and nearly surprised +Montrose in Dundee. By a retreat showing even more genius than +his victories, he escaped, appeared on the north-east coast, and scattered +a Covenanting force under Hurry, at Auldearn, near Inverness (May 9, +1645).</p> +<p>Such victories as Montrose’s were more than counterbalanced +by Cromwell’s defeat of Rupert and Charles at Naseby (June 14, +1645); while presbytery suffered a blow from Cromwell’s demand, +that the English Parliament should grant “freedom of conscience,” +not for Anglican or Catholic, of course, but for religions non-Presbyterian. +The “bloody sectaries,” as the Presbyterians called Cromwell’s +Independents, were now masters of the field: never would the blue banner +of the Covenant be set up south of Tweed.</p> +<p>Meanwhile General Baillie marched against Montrose, who outmanœuvred +him all over the eastern Highlands, and finally gave him battle at Alford +on the Don. Montrose had not here Colkitto and the western clans, +but his Gordon horse, his Irish, the Farquharsons, and the Badenoch +men were triumphantly successful. Unfortunately, Lord Gordon was +slain: he alone could bring out and lead the clan of Huntly. Only +by joining hands with Charles could Montrose do anything decisive. +The king, hoping for no more than a death in the field “with honour +and a good conscience,” pushed as far north as Doncaster, where +he was between Poyntz’s army and a great cavalry force, led by +David Leslie, from Hereford, to launch against Montrose. The hero +snatched a final victory. He had but a hundred horse, but he had +Colkitto and the flower of the fighting clans, including the invincible +Macleans. Baillie, in command of new levies of some 10,000 men, +was thwarted by a committee of Argyll and other noble amateurs. +He met the enemy south of Forth, at Kilsyth, between Stirling and Glasgow. +The fiery Argyll made Baillie desert an admirable position—Montrose +was on the plain, Baillie was on the heights—and expose his flank +by a march across Montrose’s front. The Macleans and Macdonalds, +on the lower slope of the hill, without orders, saw their chance, and +racing up a difficult glen, plunged into the Covenanting flank. +Meanwhile the more advanced part of the Covenanting force were driving +back some Gordons from a hill on Montrose’s left, who were rescued +by a desperate charge of Aboyne’s handful of horse among the red +coats; Airlie charged with the Ogilvies; the advanced force of the Covenant +was routed, and the Macleans and Macdonalds completed the work they +had begun (August 15). Few of the unmounted Covenanters escaped +from Kilsyth; and Argyll, taking boat in the Forth, hurried to Newcastle, +where David Leslie, coming north, obtained infantry regiments to back +his 4000 cavalry.</p> +<p>In a year Montrose, with forces so irregular and so apt to go home +after every battle, had actually cleared militant Covenanters out of +Scotland. But the end had come. He would not permit the +sack of Glasgow. Three thousand clansmen left him; Colkitto went +away to harry Kintyre. Aboyne and the Gordons rode home on some +private pique; and Montrose relied on men whom he had already proved +to be broken reeds, the Homes and Kers (Roxburgh) of the Border, and +the futile and timid Traquair. When he came among them they forsook +him and fled; on September 10, at Kelso, Sir Robert Spottiswoode recognised +the desertion and the danger.</p> +<p>Meanwhile Leslie, with an overpowering force of seasoned soldiers, +horse and foot, marched with Argyll, not to Edinburgh, but down Gala +to Tweed; while Montrose had withdrawn from Kelso, up Ettrick to Philiphaugh, +on the left of Ettrick, within a mile of Selkirk. He had but 500 +Irish, who entrenched themselves, and an uncertain number of mounted +Border lairds with their servants and tenants. Charteris of Hempsfield, +who had been scouting, reported that Leslie was but two or three miles +distant, at Sunderland Hall, where Tweed and Ettrick meet; but the news +was not carried to Montrose, who lay at Selkirk. At breakfast, +on September 13, Montrose learned that Leslie was attacking. What +followed is uncertain in its details. A so-called “contemporary +ballad” is incredibly impossible in its anachronisms, and is modern. +In this egregious doggerel we are told that a veteran who had fought +at Solway Moss a century earlier, and at “cursed Dunbar” +a few years later (or under Edward I.?), advised Leslie to make a turning +movement behind Linglie Hill. This is not evidence. Though +Leslie may have made such a movement, he describes his victory as very +easy: and so it should have been, as Montrose had only the remnant of +his Antrim men and a rabble of reluctant Border recruits.</p> +<p>A news letter from Haddington, of September 16, represents the Cavaliers +as making a good fight. The mounted Border lairds galloped away. +Most of the Irish fell fighting: the rest were massacred, whether after +promise of quarter or not is disputed. <i>Their captured women +were hanged in cold blood some months later</i>. Montrose, the +Napiers, and some forty horse either cut their way through or evaded +Leslie’s overpowering cavalry, and galloped across the hills of +Yarrow to the Tweed. He had lost only the remnant of his Scoto-Irish; +but the Gordons, when Montrose was presently menacing Glasgow, were +held back by Huntly, and Colkitto pursued his private adventures. +Montrose had been deserted by the clans, and lured to ruin by the perfidious +promises of the Border lords and lairds. The aim of his strategy +had been to relieve the Royalists of England by a diversion that would +deprive the Parliamentarians of their paid Scottish allies, and what +man might do Montrose had done.</p> +<p>After his first victory Montrose, an excommunicated man, fought under +an offer of £1500 for his murder, and the Covenanters welcomed +the assassin of his friend, Lord Kilpont.</p> +<p>The result of Montrose’s victories was hostility between the +Covenanting army in England and the English, who regarded them as expensive +and inefficient. Indeed, they seldom, save for the command of +David Leslie, displayed military qualities, and later, were invariably +defeated when they encountered the English under Cromwell and Lambert.</p> +<p>Montrose never slew a prisoner, but the Convention at St Andrews, +in November 1645, sentenced to death their Cavalier prisoners (Lord +Ogilvy escaped disguised in his sister’s dress), and they ordered +the hanging of captives and of the women who had accompanied the Irish. +“It was certain of the clergy who pressed for the extremest measures.” +<a name="citation186a"></a><a href="#footnote186a">{186a}</a> +They had revived the barbarous belief, retained in the law of ancient +Greece, that the land had been polluted by, and must be cleansed by, +blood, under penalty of divine wrath. As even the Covenanting +Baillie wrote, “to this day no man in England has been executed +for bearing arms against the Parliament.” The preachers +argued that to keep the promises of quarter which had been given to +the prisoners was “<i>to violate the oath of the Covenant</i>.” +<a name="citation186b"></a><a href="#footnote186b">{186b}</a></p> +<p>The prime object of the English opponents of the king was now “to +hustle the Scots out of England.” <a name="citation187"></a><a href="#footnote187">{187}</a> +Meanwhile Charles, not captured but hopeless, was negotiating with all +the parties, and ready to yield on every point except that of forcing +presbytery on England—a matter which, said Montereuil, the French +ambassador, “did not concern them but their neighbours.” +Charles finally trusted the Scots with his person, and the question +is, had he or had he not assurance that he would be well received? +If he had any assurance it was merely verbal, “a shadow of a security,” +wrote Montereuil. Charles was valuable to the Scots only as a +pledge for the payment of their arrears of wages. There was much +chicanery and shuffling on both sides, and probably there were misconceptions +on both sides. A letter of Montereuil (April 26, 1646) convinced +Charles that he might trust the Scots; they verbally promised “safety, +honour, and conscience,” but refused to sign a copy of their words. +Charles trusted them, rode out of Oxford, joined them at Southwell, +and, says Sir James Turner, who was present, was commanded by Lothian +to sign the Covenant, and “barbarously used.” They +took Charles to Newcastle, denying their assurance to him. “With +unblushing falsehood,” says Mr Gardiner, they in other respects +lied to the English Parliament. On May 19 Charles bade Montrose +leave the country, which he succeeded in doing, despite the treacherous +endeavours of his enemies to detain him till his day of safety (August +31) was passed.</p> +<p>The Scots of the army were in a quandary. The preachers, their +masters, would not permit them to bring to Scotland an uncovenanted +king. They could not stay penniless in England. For £200,000 +down and a promise, never kept, of a similar sum later, they left Charles +in English hands, with some assurances for his safety, and early in +February 1647 crossed Tweed with their thirty-six cartloads of money. +The act was hateful to very many Scots, but the Estates, under the command +of the preachers, had refused to let the king, while uncovenanted, cross +into his native kingdom, and to bring him meant war with England. +But <i>that</i> must ensue in any case. The hope of making England +presbyterian, as under the Solemn League and Covenant, had already perished.</p> +<p>Leslie, with the part of the army still kept up, chased Colkitto, +and, at Dunavertie, under the influence of Nevoy, a preacher, put 300 +Irish prisoners to the sword.</p> +<p>The parties in Scotland were now: (1) the Kirk, Argyll, the two Leslies, +and most of the Commons; (2) Hamilton, Lanark, and Lauderdale, who had +no longer anything to fear, as regards their estates, from Charles or +from bishops, and who were ashamed of his surrender to the English; +(3) Royalists in general. With Charles (December 27, 1647) in +his prison at Carisbrooke, Lauderdale, Loudoun, and Lanark made a secret +treaty, <i>The Engagement</i>, which they buried in the garden, for +if it were discovered the Independents of the army would have attacked +Scotland.</p> +<p>An Assembly of the Scots Estates on March 3, 1648, had a large majority +of nobles, gentry, and many burgesses in favour of aiding the captive +king; on the other side Argyll was backed by the omnipotent Commission +of the General Assembly, and by the full force of prayers and sermons. +The letter-writer, Baillie, now deemed “that it were for the good +of the world that churchmen did meddle with ecclesiastical affairs only.” +The Engagers insisted on establishing presbytery in England, which neither +satisfied the Kirk nor the Cavaliers and Independents. Nothing +more futile could have been devised.</p> +<p>The Estates, in May, began to raise an army; the preachers denounced +them: there was a battle between armed communicants of the preachers’ +party and the soldiers of the State at Mauchline. Invading England +on July 8, Hamilton had Lambert and Cromwell to face him, and left Argyll, +the preachers, and their “slashing communicants” in his +rear. Lanark had vainly urged that the west country fanatics should +be crushed before the Border was crossed. By a march worthy of +Montrose across the fells into Lanarkshire, Cromwell reached Preston; +cut in between the northern parts of Hamilton’s army; defeated +the English Royalists and Langdale, and cut to pieces or captured the +Scots, disunited as their generals were, at Wigan and Warrington (August +17-19). Hamilton was taken and was decapitated later. The +force that recrossed the Border consisted of such mounted men as escaped, +with the detachment of Monro which had not joined Hamilton.</p> +<p>The godly in Scotland rejoiced at the defeat of their army: the levies +of the western shires of Ayr, Renfrew, and Lanark occupied Edinburgh: +Argyll and the Kirk party were masters, and when Cromwell arrived in +Edinburgh early in October he was entertained at dinner by Argyll. +The left wing of the Covenant was now allied with the Independents—the +deadly foes of presbytery! To the ordinary mind this looks like +a new breach of the Covenant, that impossible treaty with Omnipotence. +Charles had written that the divisions of parties were probably “God’s +way to punish them for their many rebellions and perfidies.” +The punishment was now beginning in earnest, and the alliance of extreme +Covenanters with “bloody sectaries” could not be maintained. +Yet historians admire the statesmanship of Argyll!</p> +<p>If the edge which the sword of the Covenant turned against the English +enemies of presbytery were blunted, the edge that smote Covenanters +less extreme than Argyll and the preachers was whetted afresh. +In the Estates of January 5, 1649, Argyll, whose party had a large majority, +and the fanatical Johnston of Waristoun (who made private covenants +with Jehovah) demanded disenabling Acts against all who had in any degree +been tainted by the <i>Engagement</i> for the rescue of the king. +The Engagers were divided into four “Classes,” who were +rendered incapable by “The Act of Classes” of holding any +office, civil or military. This Act deprived the country of the +services of thousands of men, just at the moment when the English army, +the Independents, Argyll’s allies, were holding the Trial of Charles +I.; and, in defiance of timid remonstrances from the Scottish Commissioners +in England, cut off “that comely head” (January 30, 1649), +which meant war with Scotland.</p> +<h3>SCOTLAND AND CHARLES II.</h3> +<p>This was certain, for, on February 5, on the news of the deed done +at Whitehall, the Estates proclaimed Charles II. as Scottish King—if +he took the Covenant. By an ingenious intrigue Argyll allowed +Lauderdale and Lanark, whom the Estates had intended to arrest, to escape +to Holland, where Charles was residing, and their business was to bring +that uncovenanted prince to sign the Covenant, and to overcome the influence +of Montrose, who, with Clarendon, of course resisted such a trebly dishonourable +act of perjured hypocrisy. During the whole struggle, since Montrose +took the king’s side, he had been thwarted by the Hamiltons. +They invariably wavered: now they were for a futile policy of dishonour, +in which they involved their young king, Argyll, and Scotland. +Montrose stood for honour and no Covenant; Argyll, the Hamiltons, Lauderdale, +and the majority of the preachers stood for the Covenant with dishonour +and perjury; the left wing of the preachers stood for the Covenant, +but not for its dishonourable and foresworn acceptance by Charles.</p> +<p>As a Covenanter, Charles II. would be the official foe of the English +Independents and army; Scotland would need every sword in the kingdom, +and the kingdom’s best general, Montrose, yet the Act of Classes, +under the dictation of the preachers, rejected every man tainted with +participation in or approval of the Engagement—or of neglecting +family prayers!</p> +<p>Charles, in fact, began (February 22) by appointing Montrose his +Lieutenant-Governor and Captain-General in Scotland, though Lauderdale +and Lanark “abate not an ace of their damned Covenant in all their +discourses,” wrote Hyde. The dispute between Montrose, on +the side of honour, and that of Lanark, Lauderdale, and other Scottish +envoys, ended as—given the character of Charles II. and his destitution—it +must end. Charles (January 22, 1650) despatched Montrose to fight +for him in Scotland, and sent him the Garter. Montrose knew his +doom: he replied, “With the more alacrity shall I abandon still +my life to search my death for the interests of your Majesty’s +honour and service.” He searched his death, and soon he +found it.</p> +<p>On May 1, Charles, by the Treaty of Breda, vowed to sign the Covenant; +a week earlier Montrose, not joined by the Mackenzies, had been defeated +by Strachan at Carbisdale, on the south of the Kyle, opposite Invershin, +in Sutherlandshire. He was presently captured, and crowned a glorious +life of honour by a more glorious death on the gibbet (May 21). +He had kept his promise; he had searched his death; he had loyally defended, +like Jeanne d’Arc, a disloyal king; he had “carried fidelity +and honour with him to the grave.” His body was mutilated, +his limbs were exposed,—they now lie in St Giles’ Church, +Edinburgh, where is his beautiful monument.</p> +<p>Montrose’s last words to Charles (March 26, from Kirkwall) +implored that Prince “to be just to himself,”—not +to perjure himself by signing the Covenant. The voice of honour +is not always that of worldly wisdom, but events proved that Charles +and Scotland could have lost nothing and must have gained much had the +king listened to Montrose. He submitted, we saw, to commissioners +sent to him from Scotland. Says one of these gentlemen, “<i>He</i> +. . . sinfully complied with what <i>we</i> most sinfully pressed upon +him, . . . <i>our</i> sin was more than <i>his</i>.”</p> +<p>While his subjects in Scotland were executing his loyal servants +taken prisoners in Montrose’s last defeat, Charles crossed the +sea, signing the Covenants on board ship, and landed at the mouth of +Spey. What he gained by his dishonour was the guilt of perjury; +and the consequent distrust of the wilder but more honest Covenanters, +who knew that he had perjured himself, and deemed his reception a cause +of divine wrath and disastrous judgments. Next he was separated +from most of his false friends, who had urged him to his guilt, and +from all Royalists; and he was not allowed to be with his army, which +the preachers kept “purging” of all who did not come up +to their standard of sanctity.</p> +<p>Their hopeful scheme was to propitiate the Deity and avert wrath +by purging out officers of experience, while filling up their places +with godly but incompetent novices in war, “ministers’ sons, +clerks, and such other sanctified creatures.” This final +and fatal absurdity was the result of playing at being the Israel described +in the early historic books of the Old Testament, a policy initiated +by Knox in spite of the humorous protests of Lethington.</p> +<p>For the surer purging of that Achan, Charles, and to conciliate the +party who deemed him the greatest cause of wrath of all, the king had +to sign a false and disgraceful declaration that he was “afflicted +in spirit before God because of the impieties of his father and mother”! +He was helpless in the hands of Argyll, David Leslie, and the rest: +he knew they would desert him if he did not sign, and he yielded (August +16). Meanwhile Cromwell, with Lambert, Monk, 16,000 foot and horse, +and a victualling fleet, had reached Musselburgh, near Edinburgh, by +July 28.</p> +<p>David Leslie very artfully evaded every attempt to force a fight, +but hung about him in all his movements. Cromwell was obliged +to retreat for lack of supplies in a devastated country, and on September +1 reached Dunbar by the coast road. Leslie, marching parallel +along the hill-ridges, occupied Doonhill and secured a long, deep, and +steep ravine, “the Peaths,” near Cockburnspath, barring +Cromwell’s line of march. On September 2 the controlling +clerical Committee was still busily purging and depleting the Scottish +army. The night of September 2-3 was very wet, the officers deserted +their regiments to take shelter. Says Leslie himself, “We +might as easily have beaten them as we did James Graham at Philiphaugh, +if the officers had stayed by their own troops and regiments.” +Several witnesses, and Cromwell himself, asserted that, owing to the +insistence of the preachers, Leslie moved his men to the lower slopes +on the afternoon of September 2. “The Lord hath delivered +them into our hands,” Cromwell is reported to have said. +They now occupied a position where the banks of the lower Broxburn were +flat and assailable, not steep and forming a strong natural moat, as +on the higher level. All night Cromwell rode along and among his +regiments of horse, biting his lip till the blood ran down his chin. +Leslie thought to surprise Cromwell; Cromwell surprised Leslie, crossed +the Broxburn on the low level, before dawn, and drove into the Scots +who were all unready, the matches of their muskets being wet and unlighted. +The centre made a good stand, but a flank charge by English cavalry +cut up the Scots foot, and Leslie fled with the nobles, gentry, and +mounted men. In killed, wounded, and prisoners the Scots are said +to have lost 14,000 men, a manifest exaggeration. It was an utter +defeat.</p> +<p>“Surely,” wrote Cromwell, “it is probable the Kirk +has done her do.” The Kirk thought not; purging must go +on, “nobody must blame the Covenant.” Neglect of family +prayers was selected as one cause of the defeat! Strachan and +Ker, two extreme whigamores of the left wing of the godly, went to raise +a western force that would neither acknowledge Charles nor join Cromwell, +who now took Edinburgh Castle. Charles was reduced by Argyll to +make to him the most slavish promises, including the payment of £40,000, +the part of the price of Charles I. which Argyll had not yet touched.</p> +<p>On October 4 Charles made “the Start”; he fled to the +Royalists of Angus,—Ogilvy and Airlie: he was caught, brought +back, and preached at. Then came fighting between the Royalists +and the Estates. Middleton, a good soldier, Atholl, and others, +declared that they must and would fight for Scotland, though they were +purged out by the preachers. The Estates (November 4) gave them +an indemnity. On this point the Kirk split into twain: the wilder +men, led by the Rev. James Guthrie, refused reconciliation (the Remonstrants); +the less fanatical would consent to it, on terms (the Resolutioners). +The Committee of Estates dared to resist the Remonstrants: even the +Commissioners of the General Assembly “cannot be against the raising +of all fencible persons,”—and at last adopted the attitude +of all sensible persons. By May 21, 1651, the Estates rescinded +the insane Act of Classes, but the strife between clerical Remonstrants +and Resolutioners persisted till after the Restoration, the <i>Remonstrants</i> +being later named <i>Protesters</i>.</p> +<p>Charles had been crowned at Scone on January 1, again signing the +Covenants. Leslie now occupied Stirling, avoiding an engagement. +In July, while a General Assembly saw the strife of the two sects, came +news that Lambert had crossed the Forth at Queensferry, and defeated +a Scots force at Inverkeithing, where the Macleans fell almost to a +man; Monk captured a number of the General Assembly, and, as Cromwell, +moving to Perth, could now assail Leslie and the main Scottish force +at Stirling, they, by a desperate resolution, with 4000 horse and 9000 +foot, invaded England by the west marches, “laughing,” says +one of them, “at the ridiculousness of our own condition.” +On September 1 Monk stormed and sacked Dundee as Montrose sacked Aberdeen, +but if he made a massacre like that by Edward I. at Berwick, history +is lenient to the crime.</p> +<p>On August 22 Charles, with his army, reached Worcester, whither Cromwell +marched with a force twice as great as that of the king. Worcester +was a Sedan: Charles could neither hold it nor, though he charged gallantly, +could he break through Cromwell’s lines. Before nightfall +on September 3 Charles was a fugitive: he had no army; Hamilton was +slain, Middleton and David Leslie with thousands more were prisoners. +Monk had already captured, at Alyth (August 28), the whole of the Government, +the Committee of Estates, and had also caught some preachers, including +James Sharp, later Archbishop of St Andrews. England had conquered +Scotland at last, after twelve years of government by preachers acting +as interpreters of the Covenant between Scotland and Jehovah.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXV. CONQUERED SCOTLAND.</h2> +<p>During the nine years of the English military occupation of Scotland +everything was merely provisional; nothing decisive could occur. +In the first place (October 1651), eight English Commissioners, including +three soldiers, Monk, Lambert, and Deane, undertook the administration +of the conquered country. They announced tolerance in religion +(except for Catholicism and Anglicanism, of course), and during their +occupation the English never wavered on a point so odious to the Kirk. +The English rulers also, as much as they could, protected the women +and men whom the lairds and preachers smelled out and tortured and burned +for witchcraft. By way of compensation for the expenses of war +all the estates of men who had sided with Charles were confiscated. +Taxation also was heavy. On four several occasions attempts were +made to establish the Union of the two countries; Scotland, finally, +was to return thirty members to sit in the English Parliament. +But as that Parliament, under Cromwell, was subject to strange and sudden +changes, and as the Scottish representatives were usually men sold to +the English side, the experiment was not promising. In its first +stage it collapsed with Cromwell’s dismissal of the Long Parliament +on April 20, 1653. Argyll meanwhile had submitted, retaining his +estates (August 1652); but of five garrisons in his country three were +recaptured, not without his goodwill, by the Highlanders; and in these +events began Monk’s aversion, finally fatal, to the Marquis as +a man whom none could trust, and in whom finally nobody trusted.</p> +<p>An English Commission of Justice, established in May 1652, was confessedly +more fair and impartial than any Scotland had known, which was explained +by the fact that the English judges “were kinless loons.” +Northern cavaliers were relieved by Monk’s forbidding civil magistrates +to outlaw and plunder persons lying under Presbyterian excommunication, +and sanitary measures did something to remove from Edinburgh the ancient +reproach of filth, for the time. While the Protesters and Resolutioners +kept up their quarrel, the Protesters claiming to be the only genuine +representatives of Kirk and Covenant, the General Assembly of the Resolutioners +was broken up (July 21, 1653) by Lilburne, with a few soldiers, and +henceforth the Kirk, having no General Assembly, was less capable of +promoting civil broils. Lilburne suspected that the Assembly was +in touch with new stirrings towards a rising in the Highlands, to lead +which Charles had, in 1652, promised to send Middleton, who had escaped +from an English prison, as general. It was always hard to find +any one under whom the great chiefs would serve, and Glencairn, with +Kenmure, was unable to check their jealousies.</p> +<p>Charles heard that Argyll would appear in arms for the Crown, when +he deemed the occasion good; meanwhile his heir, Lord Lorne, would join +the rising. He did so in July 1653, under the curse of Argyll, +who, by letters to Lilburne and Monk, and by giving useful information +to the English, fatally committed himself as treasonable to the Royal +cause. Examples of his conduct were known to Glencairn, who communicated +them to Charles.</p> +<p>At the end of February 1654 Middleton arrived in Sutherland to head +the insurrection: but Monk chased the small and disunited force from +county to county, and in July Morgan defeated and scattered its remnants +at Loch Garry, just south of Dalnaspidal. The Armstrongs and other +Border clans, who had been moss-trooping in their ancient way, were +also reduced, and new fortresses and garrisons bridled the fighting +clans of the west. With Cromwell as protector in 1654, Free Trade +with England was offered to the Scots with reduced taxation: an attempt +to legislate for the Union failed. In 1655-1656 a Council of State +and a Commission of Justice included two or three Scottish members, +and burghs were allowed to elect magistrates who would swear loyalty +to Cromwell. Cromwell died on the day of his fortunate star (September +3, 1658), and twenty-one members for Scotland sat in Richard Cromwell’s +Parliament. When that was dissolved, and when the Rump was reinstated, +a new Bill of Union was introduced, and, by reason of the provisions +for religious toleration (a thing absolutely impious in Presbyterian +eyes), was delayed till (October 1659) the Rump was sent to its account. +Conventions of Burghs and Shires were now held by Monk, who, leading +his army of occupation south in January 1660, left the Resolutioners +and Protesters standing at gaze, as hostile as ever, awaiting what thing +should befall. Both parties still cherished the Covenants, and +so long as these documents were held to be for ever binding on all generations, +so long as the king’s authority was to be resisted in defence +of these treaties with Omnipotence, it was plain that in Scotland there +could neither be content nor peace. For twenty-eight years, during +a generation of profligacy and turmoil, cruelty and corruption, the +Kirk and country were to reap what they had sown in 1638.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXVI. THE RESTORATION.</h2> +<p>There was “dancing and derray” in Scotland among the +laity when the king came to his own again. The darkest page in +the national history seemed to have been turned; the conquering English +were gone with their abominable tolerance, their craze for soap and +water, their aversion to witch-burnings. The nobles and gentry +would recover their lands and compensation for their losses; there would +be offices to win, and “the spoils of office.”</p> +<p>It seems that in Scotland none of the lessons of misfortune had been +learned. Since January the chiefs of the milder party of preachers, +the Resolutioners,—they who had been reconciled with the Engagers,—were +employing the Rev. James Sharp, who had been a prisoner in England, +as their agent with Monk, with Lauderdale, in April, with Charles in +Holland, and, again, in London. Sharp was no fanatic. From +the first he assured his brethren, Douglas of Edinburgh, Baillie, and +the rest, that there was no chance for “rigid Presbyterianism.” +They could conceive of no Presbyterianism which was not rigid, in the +manner of Andrew Melville, to whom his king was “Christ’s +silly vassal.” Sharp warned them early that in face of the +irreconcilable Protesters, “moderate Episcopacy” would be +preferred; and Douglas himself assured Sharp that the new generation +in Scotland “bore a heart-hatred to the Covenant,” and are +“wearied of the yoke of presbyterial government.”</p> +<p>This was true: the ruling classes had seen too much of presbyterial +government, and would prefer bishops as long as they were not pampered +and all-powerful. On the other hand the lesser gentry, still more +their godly wives, the farmers and burgesses, and the preachers, regarded +the very shadow of Episcopacy as a breach of the Covenant and an insult +to the Almighty. The Covenanters had forced the Covenant on the +consciences of thousands, from the king downwards, who in soul and conscience +loathed it. They were to drink of the same cup—Episcopacy +was to be forced on them by fines and imprisonments. Scotland, +her people and rulers were moving in a vicious circle. The Resolutioners +admitted that to allow the Protesters to have any hand in affairs was +“to breed continual distemper and disorders,” and Baillie +was for banishing the leaders of the Protesters, irreconcilables like +the Rev. James Guthrie, to the Orkney islands. But the Resolutioners, +on the other hand, were no less eager to stop the use of the liturgy +in Charles’s own household, and to persecute every sort of Catholic, +Dissenter, Sectary, and Quaker in Scotland. Meanwhile Argyll, +in debt, despised on all sides, and yet dreaded, was holding a great +open-air Communion meeting of Protesters at Paisley, in the heart of +the wildest Covenanting region (May 27, 1660). He was still dangerous; +he was trying to make himself trusted by the Protesters, who were opposed +to Charles. It may be doubted if any great potentate in Scotland +except the Marquis wished to revive the constitutional triumphs of Argyll’s +party in the last Parliament of Charles I. Charles now named his +Privy Council and Ministers without waiting for parliamentary assent—though +his first Parliament would have assented to anything. He chose +only his late supporters: Glencairn who raised his standard in 1653; +Rothes, a humorous and not a cruel voluptuary; and, as Secretary for +Scotland in London, Lauderdale, who had urged him to take the Covenant, +and who for twenty years was to be his buffoon, his favourite, and his +wavering and unscrupulous adviser. Among these greedy and treacherous +profligates there would, had he survived, have been no place for Montrose.</p> +<p>In defiance of warnings from omens, second-sighted men, and sensible +men, Argyll left the safe sanctuary of his mountains and sea-straits, +and betook himself to London, “a fey man.” Most of +his past was covered by an Act of Indemnity, but not his doings in 1653. +He was arrested before he saw the king’s face (July 8, 1660), +and lay in the Tower till, in December, he was taken to be tried for +treason in Scotland.</p> +<p>Sharp’s friends were anxious to interfere in favour of establishing +Presbyterianism in England; he told them that the hope was vain; he +repeatedly asked for leave to return home, and, while an English preacher +assured Charles that the rout of Worcester had been God’s vengeance +for his taking of the Covenant, Sharp (June 25) told his Resolutioners +that “the Protesters’ doom is dight.”</p> +<p>Administration in Scotland was intrusted to the Committee of Estates +whom Monk (1650) had captured at Alyth, and with them Glencairn, as +Chancellor, entered Edinburgh on August 22. Next day, while the +Committee was busy, James Guthrie and some Protester preachers met, +and, in the old way, drew up a “supplication.” They +denounced religious toleration, and asked for the establishment of Presbytery +in England, and the filling of all offices with Covenanters. They +were all arrested and accused of attempting to “rekindle civil +war,” which would assuredly have followed had their prayer been +accepted. Next year Guthrie was hanged. But ten days after +his arrest Sharp had brought down a letter of Charles to the Edinburgh +Presbytery, promising to “protect and preserve the government +of the Church of Scotland as it is established by law.” +Had the words run “as it may be established by law” (in +Parliament) it would not have been a dishonourable quibble—as +it was.</p> +<p>Parliament opened on New Year’s Day 1661, with Middleton as +Commissioner. In the words of Sir George Mackenzie, then a very +young advocate and man of letters, “never was Parliament so obsequious.” +The king was declared “supreme Governor over all persons and in +all causes” (a blow at Kirk judicature), and all Acts between +1633 and 1661 were rescinded, just as thirty years of ecclesiastical +legislation had been rescinded by the Covenanters. A sum of £40,000 +yearly was settled on the king. Argyll was tried, was defended +by young George Mackenzie, and, when he seemed safe, his doom was fixed +by the arrival of a Campbell from London bearing some of his letters +to Lilburne and Monk (1653-1655) which the Indemnity of 1651 did not +cover. He died, by the axe (not the rope, like Montrose), with +dignity and courage.</p> +<p>The question of Church government in Scotland was left to Charles +and his advisers. The problem presented to the Government of the +Restoration by the Kirk was much more difficult and complicated than +historians usually suppose. The pretensions which the preachers +had inherited from Knox and Andrew Melville were practically incompatible, +as had been proved, with the existence of the State. In the southern +and western shires,—such as those of Dumfries, Galloway, Ayr, +Renfrew, and Lanark,—the forces which attacked the Engagers had +been mustered; these shires had backed Strachan and Ker and Guthrie +in the agitation against the king, the Estates, and the less violent +clergy, after Dunbar. But without Argyll, and with no probable +noble leaders, they could do little harm; they had done none under the +English occupation, which abolished the General Assembly. To have +restored the Assembly, or rather two Assemblies—that of the Protesters +and that of the Resolutionists,—would certainly have been perilous. +Probably the wisest plan would have been to grant a General Assembly, +to meet <i>after</i> the session of Parliament; not, as had been the +custom, to meet before it and influence or coerce the Estates. +Had that measure proved perilous to peace it need not have been repeated,—the +Kirk might have been left in the state to which the English had reduced +it.</p> +<p>This measure would not have so much infuriated the devout as did +the introduction of “black prelacy,” and the ejection of +some 300 adored ministers, chiefly in the south-west, and “the +making of a desert first, and then peopling it with owls and satyrs” +(the curates), as Archbishop Leighton described the action of 1663. +There ensued the finings of all who would not attend the ministrations +of “owls and satyrs,”—a grievance which produced two +rebellions (1666 and 1679) and a doctrine of anarchism, and was only +worn down by eternal and cruel persecutions.</p> +<p>By violence the Restoration achieved its aim: the Revolution of 1688 +entered into the results; it was a bitter moment in the evolution of +Scotland—a moment that need never have existed. Episcopacy +was restored, four bishops were consecrated, and Sharp accepted (as +might have long been foreseen) the See of St Andrews. He was henceforth +reckoned a Judas, and assuredly he had ruined his character for honour: +he became a puppet of Government, despised by his masters, loathed by +the rest of Scotland.</p> +<p>In May-September 1662, Parliament ratified the change to Episcopacy. +It seems to have been thought that few preachers except the Protesters +would be recalcitrant, refuse collation from bishops, and leave their +manses. In point of fact, though they were allowed to consult +their consciences till February 1663, nearly 300 ministers preferred +their consciences to their livings. They remained centres of the +devotion of their flocks, and the “curates,” hastily gathered, +who took their places, were stigmatised as ignorant and profligate, +while, as they were resisted, rabbled, and daily insulted, the country +was full of disorder.</p> +<p>The Government thus mortally offended the devout classes, though +no attempt was made to introduce a liturgy. In the churches the +services were exactly, or almost exactly, what they had been; but excommunications +could now only be done by sanction of the bishops. Witch-burnings, +in spite of the opposition of George Mackenzie and the Council, were +soon as common as under the Covenant. Oaths declaring it unlawful +to enter into Covenants or take up arms against the king were imposed +on all persons in office.</p> +<p>Middleton, of his own authority, now proposed the ostracism, by parliamentary +ballot, of twelve persons reckoned dangerous. Lauderdale was mainly +aimed at (it is a pity that the bullet did not find its billet), with +Crawford, Cassilis, Tweeddale, Lothian, and other peers who did not +approve of the recent measures. But Lauderdale, in London, seeing +Charles daily, won his favour; Middleton was recalled (March 1663), +and Lauderdale entered freely on his wavering, unscrupulous, corrupt, +and disastrous period of power.</p> +<p>The Parliament of June 1663, meeting under Rothes, was packed by +the least constitutional method of choosing the Lords of the Articles. +Waristoun was brought from France, tried, and hanged, “expressing +more fear than I ever saw,” wrote Lauderdale, whose Act “against +Separation and Disobedience to Ecclesiastical Authority” fined +abstainers from services in their parish churches. In 1664, Sharp, +who was despised by Lauderdale and Glencairn, obtained the erection +of that old grievance—a Court of High Commission, including bishops, +to punish nonconformists. Sir James Turner was intrusted with +the task of dragooning them, by fining and the quartering of soldiers +on those who would not attend the curates and would keep conventicles. +Turner was naturally clement and good-natured, but wine often deprived +him of his wits, and his soldiery behaved brutally. Their excesses +increased discontent, and war with Holland (1664) gave them hopes of +a Dutch ally. Conventicles became common; they had an organisation +of scouts and sentinels. The malcontents intrigued with Holland +in 1666, and schemed to capture the three Keys of the Kingdom—the +castles of Stirling, Dumbarton, and Edinburgh. The States-General +promised, when this was done, to send ammunition and 150,000 gulden +(July 1666).</p> +<p>When rebellion did break out it had no foreign aid, and a casual +origin. In the south-west Turner commanded but seventy soldiers, +scattered all about the country. On November 14 some of them mishandled +an old man in the clachan of Dalry, on the Ken. A soldier was +shot in revenge (Mackenzie speaks as if a conventicle was going on in +the neighbourhood); people gathered in arms, with the Laird of Corsack, +young Maxwell of Monreith, and M‘Lennan; caught Turner, undressed, +in Dumfries, and carried him with them as they “went conventicling +about,” as Mackenzie writes, holding prayer-meetings, led by Wallace, +an old soldier of the Covenant. At Lanark they renewed the Covenant. +Dalziel of Binns, who had learned war in Russia, led a pursuing force. +The rebels were disappointed in hopes of Dutch or native help at Edinburgh; +they turned, when within three miles of the town, into the passes of +the Pentland Hills, and at Bullion Green, on November 28, displayed +fine soldierly qualities and courage, but fled, broken, at nightfall. +The soldiers and countryfolk, who were unsympathetic, took a number +of prisoners, preachers and laymen, on whom the Council, under the presidency +of Sharp, exercised a cruelty bred of terror. The prisoners were +defended by George Mackenzie: it has been strangely stated that he was +Lord Advocate, and persecuted them! Fifteen rebels were hanged: +the use of torture to extract information was a return, under Fletcher, +the King’s Advocate, to a practice of Scottish law which had been +almost in abeyance since 1638—except, of course, in the case of +witches. Turner vainly tried to save from the Boot <a name="citation208"></a><a href="#footnote208">{208}</a> +the Laird of Corsack, who had protected his life from the fanatics. +“The executioner favoured Mr Mackail,” says the Rev. Mr +Kirkton, himself a sufferer later. This Mr Mackail, when a lad +of twenty-one (1662), had already denounced the rulers, in a sermon, +as on the moral level of Haman and Judas.</p> +<p>It is entirely untrue that Sharp concealed a letter from the king +commanding that no blood should be shed (Charles detested hanging people). +If any one concealed his letter, it was Burnet, Archbishop of Glasgow. +Dalziel now sent Ballantyne to supersede Turner and to exceed him in +ferocity; and Bellenden and Tweeddale wrote to Lauderdale deprecating +the cruelties and rapacity of the reaction, and avowing contempt of +Sharp. He was “snibbed,” confined to his diocese, +and “cast down, yea, lower than the dust,” wrote Rothes +to Lauderdale. He was held to have exaggerated in his reports +the forces of the spirit of revolt; but Tweeddale, Sir Robert Murray, +and Kincardine found when in power that matters were really much more +serious than they had supposed. In the disturbed districts—mainly +the old Strathclyde and Pictish Galloway—the conformist ministers +were perpetually threatened, insulted, and robbed.</p> +<p>According to a sympathetic historian, “on the day when Charles +should abolish bishops and permit free General Assemblies, the western +Whigs would become his law-abiding subjects; but till that day they +would be irreconcilable.” But a Government is not always +well advised in yielding to violence. Moreover, when Government +had deserted its clergy, and had granted free General Assemblies, the +two Covenants would re-arise, and the pretensions of the clergy to dominate +the State would be revived. Lauderdale drifted into a policy of +alternate “Indulgences” or tolerations, and of repression, +which had the desired effect, at the maximum of cost to justice and +decency. Before England drove James II. from the throne, but a +small remnant of fanatics were in active resistance, and the Covenants +had ceased to be dangerous.</p> +<p>A scheme of partial toleration was mooted in 1667, and Rothes was +removed from his practical dictatorship, while Turner was made the scapegoat +of Rothes, Sharp, and Dalziel. The result of the scheme of toleration +was an increase in disorder. Bishop Leighton had a plan for abolishing +all but a shadow of Episcopacy; but the temper of the recalcitrants +displayed itself in a book, ‘Naphtali,’ advocating the right +of the godly to murder their oppressors. This work contained provocations +to anarchism, and, in Knox’s spirit, encouraged any Phinehas conscious +of a “call” from Heaven to do justice on such persons as +he found guilty of troubling the godly.</p> +<p>Fired by such Christian doctrines, on July 11, 1668, one Mitchell—“a +preacher of the Gospel, and a youth of much zeal and piety,” says +Wodrow the historian—shot at Sharp, wounded the Bishop of Orkney +in the street of Edinburgh, and escaped. This event delayed the +project of conciliation, but in July 1669 the first Indulgence was promulgated. +On making certain concessions, outed ministers were to be restored. +Two-and-forty came in, including the Resolutioner Douglas, in 1660 the +correspondent of Sharp. The Indulgence allowed the indulged to +reject Episcopal collation; but while brethren exiled in Holland denounced +the scheme (these brethren, led by Mr MacWard, opposed all attempts +at reconciliation), it also offended the Archbishops, who issued a Remonstrance. +Sharp was silenced; Burnet of Glasgow was superseded, and the see was +given to the saintly but unpractical Leighton. By 1670 conventiclers +met in arms, and “a clanking Act,” as Lauderdale called +it, menaced them with death: Charles II. resented but did not rescind +it. In fact, the disorders and attacks on conformist ministers +were of a violence much overlooked by our historians. In 1672 +a second Indulgence split the Kirk into factions—the exiles in +Holland maintaining that preachers who accepted it should be held men +unholy, false brethren. But the Indulged increased in numbers, +and finally in influence.</p> +<p>To such a man as Leighton the whole quarrel seemed “a scuffle +of drunken men in the dark.” An Englishman entering a Scottish +church at this time found no sort of liturgy; prayers and sermons were +what the minister chose to make them—in fact, there was no persecution +for religion, says Sir George Mackenzie. But if men thought even +a shadow of Episcopacy an offence to Omnipotence, and the king’s +authority in ecclesiastical cases a usurping of “the Crown Honours +of Christ”; if they consequently broke the law by attending armed +conventicles and assailing conformist preachers, and then were fined +or imprisoned,—from their point of view they were being persecuted +for their religion. Meanwhile they bullied and “rabbled” +the “curates” for <i>their</i> religion: such was Leighton’s +“drunken scuffle in the dark.”</p> +<p>In 1672 Lauderdale married the rapacious and tyrannical daughter +of Will Murray—of old the whipping-boy of Charles I., later a +disreputable intriguer. Lauderdale’s own ferocity of temper +and his greed had created so much dislike that in the Parliament of +1673 he was met by a constitutional opposition headed by the Duke of +Hamilton, and with Sir George Mackenzie as its orator. Lauderdale +consented to withdraw monopolies on salt, tobacco, and brandy; to other +grievances he would not listen (the distresses of the Kirk were not +brought forward), and he dissolved the Parliament. The opposition +tried to get at him through the English Commons, who brought against +him charges like those which were fatal to Strafford. They failed; +and Lauderdale, holding seven offices himself, while his brother Haltoun +was Master of the Mint, ruled through a kind of clique of kinsmen and +creatures.</p> +<p>Leighton, in despair, resigned his see: the irreconcilables of the +Kirk had crowned him with insults. The Kirk, he said, “abounded +in furious zeal and endless debates about the empty name and shadow +of a difference in government, in the meanwhile not having of solemn +and orderly public worship as much as a shadow.”</p> +<p>Wodrow, the historian of the sufferings of the Kirk, declares that +through the riotous proceedings of the religious malcontents “the +country resembled war as much as peace.” But an Act of Council +of 1677 bidding landowners sign a bond for the peaceable behaviour of +all on their lands was refused obedience by many western lairds. +They could not enforce order, they said: hence it seemed to follow that +there was much disorder. Those who refused were, by a stretch +of the law of “law-burrows,” bound over to keep the peace +of the Government. Lauderdale, having nothing that we would call +a police, little money, and a small insufficient force of regulars, +called in “the Highland Host,” the retainers of Atholl, +Glenorchy, Mar, Moray, and Airlie, and other northern lords, and quartered +them on the disturbed districts for a month. They were then sent +home bearing their spoils (February 1678). Atholl and Perth (later +to be the Catholic minister of James II.) now went over to “the +Party,” the opposition, Hamilton’s party; Hamilton and others +rode to London to complain against Lauderdale, but he, aided by the +silver tongue of Mackenzie, who had changed sides, won over Charles, +and Lauderdale’s assailants were helpless.</p> +<p>Great unpopularity and disgrace were achieved by the treatment of +the pious Mitchell, who, we have seen, missed Sharp and shot the Bishop +of Orkney in 1668. In 1674 he was taken, and confessed before +the Council, after receiving from Rothes, then Chancellor, assurance +of his life: this with Lauderdale’s consent. But when brought +before the judges, he retracted his confession. He was kept a +prisoner on the Bass Rock; in 1676 was tortured; in January 1678 was +again tried. Haltoun (who in a letter of 1674 had mentioned the +assurance of life), Rothes, Sharp, and Lauderdale, all swore that, to +their memory, no assurance had been given in 1674. Mitchell’s +counsel asked to be allowed to examine the Register of the Council, +but, for some invisible technical reasons, the Lords of the Justiciary +refused; the request, they said, came too late. Mackenzie prosecuted; +he had been Mitchell’s counsel in 1674, and it is impossible to +follow the reasoning by which he justifies the condemnation and hanging +of Mitchell in January 1678. Sharp was supposed to have urged +Mitchell’s trial, and to have perjured himself, which is far from +certain. Though Mitchell was guilty, the manner of his taking +off was flagrantly unjust and most discreditable to all concerned.</p> +<p>Huge armed conventicles, and others led by Welsh, a preacher, marched +about through the country in December 1678 to May 1679. In April +1679 two soldiers were murdered while in bed; next day John Graham of +Claverhouse, who had served under the Prince of Orange with credit, +and now comes upon the scene, reported that Welsh was organising an +armed rebellion, and that the peasants were seizing the weapons of the +militia. Balfour of Kinloch (Burley) and Robert Hamilton, a laird +in Fife, were the leaders of that extreme sect which was feared as much +by the indulged preachers as by the curates, and, on May 2, 1679, Balfour, +with Hackstoun of Rathillet (who merely looked on), and other pious +desperadoes, passed half an hour in clumsily hacking Sharp to death, +in the presence of his daughter, at Magus Moor near St Andrews.</p> +<p>The slayers, says one of them, thanked the Lord “for leading +them by His Holy Spirit in every step they stepped in that matter,” +and it is obvious that mere argument was unavailing with gentlemen who +cherished such opinions. In the portraits of Sharp we see a face +of refined goodness which makes the physiognomist distrust his art. +From very early times Cromwell had styled Sharp “Sharp of that +ilk.” He was subtle, he had no fanaticism, he warned his +brethren in 1660 of the impossibility of restoring their old authority +and discipline. But when he accepted an archbishopric he sold +his honour; his servility to Charles and Lauderdale was disgusting; +fear made him cruel; his conduct at Mitchell’s last trial is, +at best, ambiguous; and the hatred in which he was held is proved by +the falsehoods which his enemies told about his private life and his +sorceries.</p> +<p>The murderers crossed the country, joined the armed fanatics of the +west, under Robert Hamilton, and on Restoration Day (May 29) burned +Acts of the Government at Rutherglen. Claverhouse rode out of +Glasgow with a small force, to inquire into this proceeding; met the +armed insurgents in a strong position defended by marshes and small +lochs; sent to Lord Ross at Glasgow for reinforcements which did not +arrive; and has himself told how he was defeated, pursued, and driven +back into Glasgow. “This may be accounted the beginning +of the rebellion in my opinion.”</p> +<p>Hamilton shot with his own hand one of the prisoners, and reckoned +the sparing of the others “one of our first steppings aside.” +Men so conscientious as Hamilton were rare in his party, which was ruined +presently by its own distracted counsels.</p> +<p>The forces of the victors of Drumclog were swollen by their success, +but they were repulsed with loss in an attack on Glasgow. The +commands of Ross and Claverhouse were then withdrawn to Stirling, and +when Livingstone joined them at Larbert, the whole army mustered but +1800 men—so weak were the regulars. The militia was raised, +and the king sent down his illegitimate son, Monmouth, husband of the +heiress of Buccleuch, at the head of several regiments of redcoats. +Argyll was not of service; he was engaged in private war with the Macleans, +who refused an appeal for help from the rebels. They, in Glasgow +and at Hamilton, were quarrelling over the Indulgence: the extremists +called Mr Welsh’s party “rotten-hearted”—Welsh +would not reject the king’s authority—the Welshites were +the more numerous. On June 22 the Clyde, at Bothwell Bridge, separated +the rebels—whose preachers were inveighing against each other—from +Monmouth’s army. Monmouth refused to negotiate till the +others laid down their arms, and after a brief artillery duel, the Royal +infantry carried the bridge, and the rest of the affair was pursuit +by the cavalry. The rival Covenanting leaders, Russel, one of +Sharp’s murderers, and Ure, give varying accounts of the affair, +and each party blames the other. The rebel force is reckoned at +from five to seven thousand, the Royal army was of 2300 according to +Russel. “Some hundreds” of the Covenanters fell, and +“many hundreds,” the Privy Council reported, were taken.</p> +<p>The battle of Bothwell Bridge severed the extremists, Robert Hamilton, +Richard Cameron and Cargill, the famous preachers, and the rest, from +the majority of the Covenanters. They dwindled to the “Remnant,” +growing the fiercer as their numbers decreased. Only two ministers +were hanged; hundreds of prisoners were banished, like Cromwell’s +prisoners after Dunbar, to the American colonies. Of these some +two hundred were drowned in the wreck of their vessel off the Orkneys. +The main body were penned up in Greyfriars Churchyard; many escaped; +more signed a promise to remain peaceful, and shun conventicles. +There was more of cruel carelessness than of the deliberate cruelty +displayed in the massacres and hangings of women after Philiphaugh and +Dunaverty. But the avaricious and corrupt rulers, after 1679, +headed by James, Duke of York (Lauderdale being removed), made the rising +of Bothwell Bridge the pretext for fining and ruining hundreds of persons, +especially lairds, who were accused of helping or harbouring rebels. +The officials were rapacious for their own profit. The records +of scores of trials prosecuted for the sake of spoil, and disgraced +by torture and injustice, make miserable reading. Between the +trials of the accused and the struggle with the small minority of extremists +led by Richard Cameron and the aged Mr Cargill, the history of the country +is monotonously wretched. It was in prosecuting lairds and peasants +and preachers that Sir George Mackenzie, by nature a lenient man and +a lover of literature, gained the name of “the bluidy advocate.”</p> +<p>Cameron and his followers rode about after issuing the wildest manifestoes, +as at Sanquhar in the shire of Dumfries (June 22, 1680). Bruce +of Earlshall was sent with a party of horse to pursue, and, in the wild +marshes of Airs Moss, in Ayrshire, Cameron “fell praying and fighting”; +while Hackstoun of Rathillet, less fortunate, was taken, and the murder +of Sharp was avenged on him with unspeakable cruelties. The Remnant +now formed itself into organised and armed societies; their conduct +made them feared and detested by the majority of the preachers, who +longed for a quiet life, not for the establishment of a Mosaic commonwealth, +and “the execution of righteous judgments” on “malignants.” +Cargill was now the leader of the Remnant, and Cargill, in a conventicle +at Torwood, of his own authority excommunicated the king, the Duke of +York, Lauderdale, Rothes, Dalziel, and Mackenzie, whom he accused of +leniency to witches, among other sins. The Government apparently +thought that excommunication, to the mind of Cargill and his adherents, +meant outlawry, and that outlawry might mean the assassination of the +excommunicated. Cargill was hunted, and (July 12, 1681) was captured +by “wild Bonshaw.” It was believed by his party that +the decision to execute Cargill was carried by the vote of Argyll, in +the Privy Council, and that Cargill told Rothes (who had signed the +Covenant with him in their youth) that Rothes would be the first to +die. Rothes died on July 26, Cargill was hanged on July 27.</p> +<p>On the following day James, Duke of York, as Royal Commissioner, +opened the first Parliament since 1673-74. James secured an Act +making the right of succession to the Crown independent of differences +of religion; he, of course, was a Catholic. The Test Act was also +passed, a thing so self-contradictory in its terms that any man might +take it whose sense of humour overcame his sense of honour. Many +refused, including a number of the conformist ministers. Argyll +took the Test “as far as it is consistent with itself and with +the Protestant religion.”</p> +<p>Argyll, the son of the executed Marquis, had recovered his lands, +and acquired the title of Earl mainly through the help of Lauderdale. +During the religious troubles from 1660 onwards he had taken no great +part, but had sided with the Government, and approved of the torture +of preachers. But what ruined him now (though the facts have been +little noticed) was his disregard of the claims of his creditors, and +his obtaining the lands of the Macleans in Mull and Morven, in discharge +of an enormous debt of the Maclean chief to the Marquis, executed in +1661. The Macleans had vainly attempted to prove that the debt +was vastly inflated by familiar processes, and had resisted in arms +the invasion of the Campbells. They had friends in Seaforth, the +Mackenzies, and in the Earl of Errol and other nobles.</p> +<p>These men, especially Mackenzie of Tarbet, an astute intriguer, seized +their chance when Argyll took the Test “with a qualification,” +and though, at first, he satisfied and was reconciled to the Duke of +York, they won over the Duke, accused Argyll to the king, brought him +before a jury, and had him condemned of treason and incarcerated. +The object may have been to intimidate him, and destroy his almost royal +power in the west and the islands. In any case, after a trial +for treason, in which one vote settled his doom, he escaped in disguise +as a footman (perhaps by collusion, as was suspected), fled to England, +conspired there with Scottish exiles and a Covenanting refugee, Mr Veitch, +and, as Charles would not allow him to be searched for, he easily escaped +to Holland. (For details, see my book, ‘Sir George Mackenzie.’)</p> +<p>It was, in fact, clan hatred that dragged down Argyll. His +condemnation was an infamous perversion of justice, but as Charles would +not allow him to be captured in London, it is most improbable that he +would have permitted the unjust capital sentence to be carried out. +The escape was probably collusive, and the sole result of these intricate +iniquities was to create for the Government an enemy who would have +been dangerous if he had been trusted by the extreme Presbyterians. +In England no less than in Scotland the supreme and odious injustice +of Argyll’s trial excited general indignation. The Earl +of Aberdeen (Gordon of Haddo) was now Chancellor, and Queensberry was +Treasurer for a while; both were intrigued against at Court by the Earl +of Perth and his brother, later Lord Melfort, and probably by far the +worst of all the knaves of the Restoration.</p> +<p>Increasing outrages by the Remnant, now headed by the Rev. Mr James +Renwick, a very young man, led to more furious repression, especially +as in 1683 Government detected a double plot—the wilder English +aim being to raise the rabble and to take or slay Charles and his brother +at the Rye House; while the more respectable conspirators, English and +Scots, were believed to be acquainted with, though not engaged in, this +design. The Rev. Mr Carstares was going and coming between Argyll +and the exiles in Holland and the intriguers at home. They intended +as usual first to surprise Edinburgh Castle. In England Algernon +Sidney, Lord Russell, and others were arrested, while Baillie of Jerviswoode +and Carstares were apprehended—Carstares in England. He +was sent to Scotland, where he could be tortured. The trial of +Jerviswoode was if possible more unjust than even the common run of +these affairs, and he was executed (December 24, 1684).</p> +<p>The conspiracy was, in fact, a very serious affair: Carstares was +confessedly aware of its criminal aspect, and was in the closest confidence +of the ministers of William of Orange. What his dealings were +with them in later years he would never divulge. But it is clear +that if the plotters slew Charles and James, the hour had struck for +the Dutch deliverer’s appearance. If we describe the Rye +House Plot as aiming merely at “the exclusion of the Duke of York +from the throne,” we shut our eyes to evidence and make ourselves +incapable of understanding the events. There were plotters of +every degree and rank, and they were intriguing with Argyll, and, through +Carstares who knew, though he refused a part in the murder plot, were +in touch at once with Argyll and the intimates of William of Orange.</p> +<p>Meanwhile “the hill men,” the adherents of Renwick, in +October 1684, declared a war of assassination against their opponents, +and announced that they would try malignants in courts of their own. +Their manifesto (“The Apologetical Declaration”) caused +an extraordinary measure of repression. A test—the abjuration +of the <i>criminal</i> parts of Renwick’s declaration—was +to be offered by military authority to all and sundry. Refusal +to abjure entailed military execution. The test was only obnoxious +to sincere fanatics; but among them must have been hundreds of persons +who had no criminal designs, and merely deemed it a point of honour +not to “homologate” any act of a Government which was corrupt, +prelatic, and unholy.</p> +<p>Later victims of this view of duty were Margaret Lauchleson and Margaret +Wilson—an old woman and a young girl—cruelly drowned by +the local authorities at Wigtown (May 1685). A myth represents +Claverhouse as having been present. The shooting of John Brown, +“the Christian Carrier,” by Claverhouse in the previous +week was an affair of another character. Claverhouse did not exceed +his orders, and ammunition and treasonable papers were in Brown’s +possession; he was also sheltering a red-handed rebel. Brown was +not shot merely “because he was a Nonconformist,” nor was +he shot by the hand of Claverhouse.</p> +<p>These incidents of “the killing time” were in the reign +of James II.; Charles II. had died, to the sincere grief of most of +his subjects, on February 2, 1685. “Lecherous and treacherous” +as he was, he was humorous and good-humoured. The expected invasion +of Scotland by Argyll, of England by Monmouth, did not encourage the +Government to use respective lenity in the Covenanting region, from +Lanarkshire to Galloway.</p> +<p>Argyll, who sailed from Holland on May 2, had a council of Lowlanders +who thwarted him. His interests were in his own principality, +but he found it occupied by Atholl and his clansmen, and the cadets +of his own House as a rule would not rally to him. The Lowlanders +with him, Sir Patrick Hume, Sir John Cochrane, and the rest, wished +to move south and join hands with the Remnant in the west and in Galloway; +but the Remnant distrusted the sudden religious zeal of Argyll, and +were cowed by Claverhouse. The coasts were watched by Government +vessels of war, and when, after vain movements round about his own castle, +Inveraray, Argyll was obliged by his Lowlanders to move on Glasgow, +he was checked at every turn; the leaders, weary and lost in the marshes, +scattered from Kilpatrick on Clyde; Argyll crossed the river, and was +captured by servants of Sir John Shaw of Greenock. He was not +put to trial nor to torture; he was executed on the verdict of 1681. +About 200 suspected persons were lodged by Government in Dunottar Castle +at the time and treated with abominable cruelty.</p> +<p>The Covenanters were now effectually put down, though Renwick was +not taken and hanged till 1688. The preachers were anxious for +peace and quiet, and were bitterly hostile to Renwick. The Covenant +was a dead letter as far as power to do mischief was concerned. +It was not persecution of the Kirk, but demand for toleration of Catholics +and a manifest desire to restore the Church, that in two years lost +James his kingdoms.</p> +<p>On April 29, 1686, James’s message to the Scots Parliament +asked toleration for “our innocent subjects” the Catholics. +He had substituted Perth’s brother, now entitled Earl of Melfort, +for Queensberry; Perth was now Chancellor; both men had adopted their +king’s religion, and the infamous Melfort can hardly be supposed +to have done so honestly. Their families lost all in the event +except their faith. With the request for toleration James sent +promises of free trade with England, and he asked for no supplies. +Perth had introduced Catholic vestments and furnishings in Holyrood +chapel, which provoked a No Popery riot. Parliament would not +permit toleration; James removed many of the Council and filled their +places with Catholics. Sir George Mackenzie’s conscience +“dirled”; he refused to vote for toleration and he lost +the Lord Advocateship, being superseded by Sir James Dalrymple, an old +Covenanting opponent of Claverhouse in Galloway.</p> +<p>In August James, by prerogative, did what the Estates would not do, +and he deprived the Archbishop of Glasgow and the Bishop of Dunkeld +of their Sees: though a Catholic, he was the king-pope of a Protestant +church! In a decree of July 1687 he extended toleration to the +Kirk, and a meeting of preachers at Edinburgh expressed “a deep +sense of your Majesty’s gracious and surprising favour.” +The Kirk was indeed broken, and, when the Revolution came, was at last +ready for a compromise from which the Covenants were omitted. +On February 17, 1688, Mr Renwick was hanged at Edinburgh: he had been +prosecuted by Dalrymple. On the same day Mackenzie superseded +Dalrymple as Lord Advocate.</p> +<p>After the birth of the White Rose Prince of Wales (June 10, 1688), +Scotland, like England, apprehended that a Catholic king would be followed +by a Catholic son. The various contradictory lies about the child’s +birth flourished, all the more because James ventured to select the +magistrates of the royal burghs. It became certain that the Prince +of Orange would invade, and Melfort madly withdrew the regular troops, +with Claverhouse (now Viscount Dundee) to aid in resisting William in +England, though Balcarres proposed a safer way of holding down the English +northern counties by volunteers, the Highland clans, and new levies. +Thus the Privy Council in Scotland were left at the mercy of the populace.</p> +<p>Of the Scottish army in England all were disbanded when James fled +to France, except a handful of cavalry, whom Dundee kept with him. +Perth fled from Edinburgh, but was taken and held a prisoner for four +years; the town train-band, with the mob and some Cameronians, took +Holyrood, slaying such of the guard as they did not imprison; “many +died of their wounds and hunger.” The chapel and Catholic +houses were sacked, and gangs of the armed Cameronian societies went +about in the south-west, rabbling, robbing, and driving away ministers +of the Episcopalian sort. Atholl was in power in Edinburgh; in +London, where James’s Scots friends met, the Duke of Hamilton +was made President of Council, and power was left till the assembling +of a Convention at Edinburgh (March 1689) in the hands of William.</p> +<p>In Edinburgh Castle the wavering Duke of Gordon was induced to remain +by Dundee and Balcarres; while Dundee proposed to call a Jacobite convention +in Stirling. Melfort induced James to send a letter contrary to +the desires of his party; Atholl, who had promised to join them, broke +away; the life of Dundee was threatened by the fanatics, and on March +18, seeing his party headless and heartless, Dundee rode north, going +“wherever might lead him the shade of Montrose.”</p> +<p>Mackay now brought to Edinburgh regiments from Holland, which overawed +the Jacobites, and he secured for William the key of the north, the +castle of Stirling. With Hamilton as President, the Convention, +with only four adverse votes, declared against James and his son; and +Hamilton (April 3) proclaimed at the cross the reign of William and +Mary. The claim of rights was passed and declared Episcopacy intolerable. +Balcarres was thrown into prison: on May 11 William took the Coronation +oath for Scotland, merely protesting that he would not “root out +heretics,” as the oath enjoined.</p> +<p>This was “the end o’ an auld sang,” the end of +the Stuart dynasty, and of the equally “divine rights” of +kings and of preachers.</p> +<p>In a sketch it is impossible to convey any idea of the sufferings +of Scotland, at least of Covenanting Scotland, under the Restoration. +There was contest, unrest, and dragoonings, and the quartering of a +brutal and licentious soldiery on suspected persons. Law, especially +since 1679, had been twisted for the conviction of persons whom the +administration desired to rob. The greed and corruption of the +rulers, from Lauderdale, his wife, and his brother Haltoun, to Perth +and his brother, the Earl of Melfort, whose very title was the name +of an unjustly confiscated estate, is almost inconceivable. <a name="citation225"></a><a href="#footnote225">{225}</a> +Few of the foremost men in power, except Sir George Mackenzie and Claverhouse, +were free from personal profligacy of every sort. Claverhouse +has left on record his aversion to severities against the peasantry; +he was for prosecuting such gentry as the Dalrymples. As constable +of Dundee he refused to inflict capital punishment on petty offenders, +and Mackenzie went as far as he dared in opposing the ferocities of +the inquisition of witches. But in cases of alleged treason Mackenzie +knew no mercy.</p> +<p>Torture, legal in Scotland, was used with barbarism unprecedented +there after each plot or rising, to extract secrets which, save in one +or two cases like that of Carstares, the victims did not possess. +They were peasants, preachers, and a few country gentlemen: the nobles +had no inclination to suffer for the cause of the Covenants. The +Covenants continued to be the idols of the societies of Cameronians, +and of many preachers who were no longer inclined to die for these documents,—the +expression of such strange doctrines, the causes of so many sorrows +and of so many martyrdoms. However little we may sympathise with +the doctrines, none the less the sufferers were idealists, and, no less +than Montrose, preferred honour to life.</p> +<p>With all its sins, the Restoration so far pulverised the pretensions +which, since 1560, the preachers had made, that William of Orange was +not obliged to renew the conflict with the spiritual sons of Knox and +Andrew Melville.</p> +<p>This fact is not so generally recognised as it might be. It +is therefore proper to quote the corroborative opinion of the learned +Historiographer-Royal of Scotland, Professor Hume Brown. “By +concession and repression the once mighty force of Scottish Presbyterianism +had been broken. Most deadly of the weapons in the accomplishment +of this result had been the three Acts of Indulgence which had successively +cut so deep into the ranks of uniformity. In succumbing to the +threats and promises of the Government, the Indulged ministers had undoubtedly +compromised the fundamental principles of Presbyterianism. . . . +The compliance of these ministers was, in truth, the first and necessary +step towards that religious and political compromise which the force +of circumstances was gradually imposing on the Scottish people,” +and “the example of the Indulged ministers, who composed the great +mass of the Presbyterian clergy, was of the most potent effect in substituting +the idea of toleration for that of the religious absolutism of Knox +and Melville.” <a name="citation226"></a><a href="#footnote226">{226}</a></p> +<p>It may be added that the pretensions of Knox and Melville and all +their followers were no essential part of Presbyterial Church government, +but were merely the continuation or survival of the clerical claims +of apostolic authority, as enforced by such popes as Hildebrand and +such martyrs as St Thomas of Canterbury.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXVII. WILLIAM AND MARY.</h2> +<p>While Claverhouse hovered in the north the Convention (declared to +be a Parliament by William on June 5) took on, for the first time in +Scotland since the reign of Charles I, the aspect of an English Parliament, +and demanded English constitutional freedom of debate. The Secretary +in Scotland was William, Earl of Melville; that hereditary waverer, +the Duke of Hamilton, was Royal Commissioner; but some official supporters +of William, especially Sir James and Sir John Dalrymple, were criticised +and thwarted by “the club” of more extreme Liberals. +They were led by the Lowland ally who had vexed Argyll, Hume of Polwarth; +and by Montgomery of Skelmorley, who, disappointed in his desire of +place, soon engaged in a Jacobite plot.</p> +<p>The club wished to hasten the grant of Parliamentary liberties which +William was anxious not to give; and to take vengeance on officials +such as Sir James Dalrymple, and his son, Sir John, now Lord Advocate, +as he had been under James II. To these two men, foes of Claverhouse, +William clung while he could. The council obtained, but did not +need to use, permission to torture Jacobite prisoners, “Cavaliers” +as at this time they were styled; but Chieseley of Dalry, who murdered +Sir George Lockhart, President of the College of Justice, was tortured.</p> +<p>The advanced Liberal Acts which were passed did not receive the touch +of the sceptre from Hamilton, William’s Commissioner: thus they +were “vetoed,” and of no effect. The old packed committee, +“The Lords of the Articles,” was denounced as a grievance; +the king was to be permitted to appoint no officers of State without +Parliament’s approbation. Hamilton offered compromises, +for William clung to “the Articles”; but he abandoned them +in the following year, and thenceforth till the Union (1707) the Scottish +was “a Free Parliament.” Various measures of legislation +for the Kirk-—some to emancipate it as in its palmy days, some +to keep it from meddling in politics—were proposed; some measures +to abolish, some to retain lay patronage of livings, were mooted. +The advanced party for a while put a stop to the appointment of judges, +but in August came news of the Viscount Dundee in the north which terrified +parliamentary politicians.</p> +<p>Edinburgh Castle had been tamely yielded by the Duke of Gordon; Balcarres, +the associate of Dundee, had been imprisoned; but Dundee himself, after +being declared a rebel, in April raised the standard of King James. +As against him the Whigs relied on Mackay, a brave officer who had been +in Dutch service, and now commanded regiments of the Scots Brigade of +Holland. Mackay pursued Dundee, as Baillie had pursued Montrose, +through the north: at Inverness, Dundee picked up some Macdonalds under +Keppoch, but Keppoch was not satisfactory, being something of a freebooter. +The Viscount now rode to the centre of his hopes, to the Macdonalds +of Glengarry, the Camerons of Lochiel, and the Macleans who had been +robbed of their lands by the Earl of Argyll, executed in 1685. +Dundee summoned them to Lochiel’s house on Loch Arkaig for May +18; he visited Atholl and Badenoch; found a few mounted men as recruits +at Dundee; returned through the wilds to Lochaber, and sent round that +old summons to a rising, the Fiery Cross, charred and dipped in a goat’s +blood.</p> +<p>Much time was spent in preliminary manœuvring and sparring +between Mackay, now reinforced by English regulars, and Dundee, who +for a time disbanded his levies, while Mackay went to receive fresh +forces and to consult the Government at Edinburgh. He decided +to march to the west and bridle the clans by erecting a strong fort +at Inverlochy, where Montrose routed Argyll. A stronghold at Inverlochy +menaced the Macdonalds to the north, and the Camerons in Lochaber, and, +southwards, the Stewarts in Appin. But to reach Inverlochy Mackay +had to march up the Tay, past Blair Atholl, and so westward through +very wild mountainous country. To oppose him Dundee had collected +4000 of the clansmen, and awaited ammunition and men from James, then +in Ireland. By the advice of the great Lochiel, a man over seventy +but miraculously athletic, Dundee decided to let the clans fight in +their old way,—a rush, a volley at close quarters, and then the +claymore. By June 28 Dundee had received no aid from James,—of +money “we have not twenty pounds”; and he was between the +Earl of Argyll (son of the martyr of 1685) and Mackay with his 4000 +foot and eight troops of horse.</p> +<p>On July 23 Dundee seized the castle of Blair Atholl, which had been +the base of Montrose in his campaigns, and was the key of the country +between the Tay and Lochaber. The Atholl clans, Murrays and Stewarts, +breaking away from the son of their chief, the fickle Marquis of Atholl, +were led by Stewart of Ballechin, but did not swell Dundee’s force +at the moment. From James Dundee now received but a battalion +of half-starved Irishmen, under the futile General Cannon.</p> +<p>On July 27, at Blair, Dundee learned that Mackay’s force had +already entered the steep and narrow pass of Killiecrankie, where the +road skirted the brawling waters of the Garry. Dundee had not +time to defend the pass; he marched his men from Blair, keeping the +heights, while Mackay emerged from the gorge, and let his forces rest +on the wide level haugh beside the Garry, under the house of Runraurie, +now called Urrard, with the deep and rapid river in their rear. +On this haugh the tourist sees the tall standing stone which, since +1735 at least, has been known as “Dundee’s stone.” +From the haugh rises a steep acclivity, leading to the plateau where +the house of Runraurie stood. Mackay feared that Dundee would +occupy this plateau, and that the fire thence would break up his own +men on the haugh below. He therefore seized the plateau, which +was an unfortunate manœuvre. He was so superior in numbers +that both of his wings extended beyond Dundee’s, who had but forty +ill-horsed gentlemen by way of cavalry. After distracting Mackay +by movements along the heights, as if to cut off his communications +with the south, Dundee, who had resisted the prayers of the chiefs that +he would be sparing of his person, gave the word to charge as the sun +sank behind the western hills. Rushing down hill, under heavy +fire and losing many men, the clans, when they came to the shock, swept +the enemy from the plateau, drove them over the declivity, forced many +to attempt crossing the Garry, where they were drowned, and followed, +slaying, through the pass. Half of Hastings’ regiment, untouched +by the Highland charge, and all of Leven’s men, stood their ground, +and were standing there when sixteen of Dundee’s horse returned +from the pursuit. Mackay, who had lost his army, stole across +the Garry with this remnant and made for Stirling. He knew not +that Dundee lay on the field, dying in the arms of Victory. Precisely +when and in what manner Dundee was slain is unknown; there is even a +fair presumption, from letters of the English Government, that he was +murdered by two men sent from England on some very secret mission. +When last seen by his men, Dundee was plunged in the battle smoke, sword +in hand, in advance of his horse.</p> +<p>When the Whigs—terrified by the defeat and expecting Dundee +at Stirling with the clans and the cavaliers of the Lowlands—heard +of his fall, their sorrow was changed into rejoicing. The cause +of King James was mortally wounded by the death of “the glory +of the Grahams,” who alone could lead and keep together a Highland +host. Deprived of his leadership and distrustful of his successor, +General Cannon, the clans gradually left the Royal Standard. The +Cameronian regiment, recruited from the young men of the organised societies, +had been ordered to occupy Dunkeld. Here they were left isolated, +“in the air,” by Mackay or his subordinates, and on August +21 these raw recruits, under Colonel Cleland, who had fought at Drumclog, +had to receive the attack of the Highlanders. Cleland had fortified +the Abbey church and the “castle,” and his Cameronians fired +from behind walls and from loopholes with such success that Cannon called +off the clansmen, or could not bring them to a second attack: both versions +are given. Cleland fell in the fight; the clans disbanded, and +Mackay occupied the castle of Blair.</p> +<p>Three weeks later the Cameronians, being unpaid, mutinied; and Ross, +Annandale, and Polwarth, urging their demands for constitutional rights, +threw the Lowlands into a ferment. Crawford, whose manner of speech +was sanctimonious, was evicting from their parishes ministers who remained +true to Episcopacy, and would not pray for William and Mary. Polwarth +now went to London with an address to these Sovereigns framed by “the +Club,” the party of liberty. But the other leaders of that +party, Annandale, Ross, and Montgomery of Skelmorley, all of them eager +for place and office, entered into a conspiracy of intrigue with the +Jacobites for James’s restoration. In February 1690 the +Club was distracted; and to Melville, as Commissioner in the Scottish +Parliament, William gave orders that the Acts for re-establishing Presbytery +and abolishing lay patronage of livings were to be passed. Montgomery +was obliged to bid yet higher for the favour of the more extreme preachers +and devotees,—but he failed. In April the Lords of the Articles +were abolished at last, and freedom of parliamentary debate was thus +secured. The Westminster Confession was reinstated, and in May, +after the last remnants of a Jacobite force in the north had been surprised +and scattered or captured by Sir Thomas Livingstone at Cromdale Haugh +(May 1), the alliance of Jacobites and of the Club broke down, and the +leaders of the Club saved themselves by playing the part of informers.</p> +<p>The new Act regarding the Kirk permitted the holding of Synods and +General Assemblies, to be summoned by permission of William or of the +Privy Council, with a Royal Commissioner present to restrain the preachers +from meddling, as a body, with secular politics. The Kirk was +to be organised by the “Sixty Bishops,” the survivors of +the ministers ejected in 1663. The benefices of ejected Episcopalian +conformists were declared to be vacant. Lay patronage was annulled: +the congregations had the right to approve or disapprove of presentees. +But the Kirk was deprived of her old weapon, the attachment of civil +penalties (that is practical outlawry) to her sentences of excommunication +(July 19, 1690). The Covenant was silently dropped.</p> +<p>Thus ended, practically, the war between Kirk and State which had +raged for nearly a hundred and twenty years. The cruel torturing +of Nevile Payne, an English Jacobite taken in Scotland, showed that +the new sovereigns and Privy Council retained the passions and methods +of the old, but this was the last occasion of judicial torture for political +offences in Scotland. Payne was silent, but was illegally imprisoned +till his death.</p> +<p>The proceedings of the restored General Assembly were awaited with +anxiety by the Government. The extremists of the Remnant, the +“Cameronians,” sent deputies to the Kirk. They were +opposed to acknowledging sovereigns who were “the head of the +Prelatics” in England, and they, not being supported by the Assembly, +remained apart from the Kirk and true to the Covenants.</p> +<p>Much had passed which William disliked—the abolition of patronage, +the persecution of Episcopalians—and Melville, in 1691, was removed +by the king from the Commissionership.</p> +<p>The Highlands were still unsettled. In June 1691 Breadalbane, +at heart a Jacobite, attempted to appease the chiefs by promises of +money in settlement of various feuds, especially that of the dispossessed +Macleans against the occupant of their lands, Argyll. Breadalbane +was known by Hill, the commander of Fort William at Inverlochy, to be +dealing between the clans and James, as well as between William and +the clans. William, then campaigning in Flanders, was informed +of this fact, thought it of no importance, and accepted a truce from +July 1 to October 1 with Buchan, who commanded such feeble forces as +still stood for James in the north. At the same time William threatened +the clans, in the usual terms, with “fire and sword,” if +the chiefs did not take the oaths to his Government by January 1, 1692. +Money and titles under the rank of earldoms were to be offered to Macdonald +of Sleat, Maclean of Dowart, Lochiel, Glengarry, and Clanranald, if +they would come in. All declined the bait—if Breadalbane +really fished with it. It is plain, contrary to Lord Macaulay’s +statement, that Sir John Dalrymple, William’s trusted man for +Scotland, at this time hoped for Breadalbane’s success in pacifying +the clans. But Dalrymple, by December 1691, wrote, “I think +the Clan Donell must be rooted out, and Lochiel.” He could +not mean that he hoped to massacre so large a part of the population. +He probably meant by “punitive expeditions” in the modern +phrase—by “fire and sword,” in the style current then—to +break up the recalcitrants. Meanwhile it was Dalrymple’s +hope to settle ancient quarrels about the “superiorities” +of Argyll over the Camerons, and the question of compensation for the +lands reft by the Argyll family from the Macleans.</p> +<p>Before December 31, in fear of “fire and sword,” the +chiefs submitted, except the greatest, Glengarry, and the least in power, +MacIan or Macdonald, with his narrow realm of Glencoe, whence his men +were used to plunder the cattle of their powerful neighbour, Breadalbane. +Dalrymple now desired not peace, but the sword. By January 9, +1692, Dalrymple, in London, heard that Glencoe had come in (he had accidentally +failed to come in by January 1), and Dalrymple was “sorry.” +By January 11 Dalrymple knew that Glencoe had not taken the oath before +January 1, and rejoiced in the chance to “root out that damnable +sect.” In fact, in the end of December Glencoe had gone +to Fort William to take the oaths before Colonel Hill, but found that +he must do so before the Sheriff of the shire at remote Inveraray. +Various accidents of weather delayed him; the Sheriff also was not at +Inveraray when Glencoe arrived, but administered the oaths on January +6. The document was taken to Edinburgh, where Lord Stair, Dalrymple’s +father, and others caused it to be deleted. Glengarry was still +unsworn, but Glengarry was too strong to be “rooted out”; +William ordered his commanding officer, Livingstone, “to extirpate +that sect of thieves,” the Glencoe men (January 16). On +the same day Dalrymple sent down orders to hem in the MacIans, and to +guard all the passes, by land or water, from their glen. Of the +actual <i>method</i> of massacre employed Dalrymple may have been ignorant; +but orders “from Court” to “spare none,” and +to take no prisoners, were received by Livingstone on January 23.</p> +<p>On February 1, Campbell of Glenlyon, with 120 men, was hospitably +received by MacIan, whose son, Alexander, had married Glenlyon’s +niece. On February 12, Hill sent 400 of his Inverlochy garrison +to Glencoe to join hands with 400 of Argyll’s regiment, under +Major Duncanson. These troops were to guard the southern passes +out of Glencoe, while Hamilton was to sweep the passes from the north.</p> +<p>At 5 A.M. on February 13 the soldier-guests of MacIan began to slay +and plunder. Men, women, and children were shot or bayoneted, +1000 head of cattle were driven away; but Hamilton arrived too late. +Though the aged chief had been shot at once, his sons took to the hills, +and the greater part of the population escaped with their lives, thanks +to Hamilton’s dilatoriness. “All I regret is that +any of the sect got away,” wrote Dalrymple on March 5, “and +there is necessity to prosecute them to the utmost.” News +had already reached London “that they are murdered in their beds.” +The newspapers, however, were silenced, and the story was first given +to Europe in April by the ‘Paris Gazette.’ The crime +was unprecedented: it had no precedent, admits of no apology. +Many an expedition of “fire and sword” had occurred, but +never had there been a midnight massacre “under trust” of +hosts by guests. King William, on March 6, went off to his glorious +wars on the Continent, probably hoping to hear that the fugitive MacIans +were still being “prosecuted”—if, indeed, he thought +of them at all. But by October they were received into his peace.</p> +<p>William was more troubled by the General Assembly, which refused +to take oaths of allegiance to him and his wife, and actually appointed +a date for an Assembly without his consent. When he gave it, it +was on condition that the members should take the oaths of allegiance. +They refused: it was the old deadlock, but William at the last moment +withdrew from the imposition of oaths of allegiance—moved, it +is said, by Mr Carstares, “Cardinal Carstares,” who had +been privy to the Rye House Plot. Under Queen Anne, however, the +conscientious preachers were compelled to take the oaths like mere laymen.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXVIII. DARIEN.</h2> +<p>The Scottish Parliament of May-July 1695, held while William was +abroad, saw the beginning of evils for Scotland. The affair of +Glencoe was examined into by a Commission, headed by Tweeddale, William’s +Commissioner: several Judges sat in it. Their report cleared William +himself: Dalrymple, it was found, had “exceeded his instructions.” +Hill was exonerated. Hamilton, who commanded the detachment that +arrived too late, fled the country. William was asked to send +home for trial Duncanson and other butchers who were with his army. +The king was also invited to deal with Dalrymple as he thought fit. +He thought fit to give Dalrymple an indemnity, and made him Viscount +Stair, with a grant of money, but did not retain him in office. +He did not send the subaltern butchers home for trial. Many years +later, in 1745, the MacIans insisted on acting as guards of the house +and family of the descendant of Campbell of Glenlyon, the guest and +murderer of the chief of Glencoe.</p> +<p>Perhaps by way of a sop to the Scots, William allowed an Act for +the Establishment of a Scottish East India Company to be passed on June +20, 1695. He afterwards protested that in this matter he had been +“badly served,” probably meaning “misinformed.” +The result was the Darien Expedition, a great financial disaster for +Scotland, and a terrible grievance. Hitherto since the Union of +the Crowns all Scottish efforts to found trading companies, as in England, +had been wrecked on English jealousy: there had always been, and to +this new East India Company there was, a rival, a pre-existing English +company. Scottish Acts for protection of home industries were +met by English retaliation in a war of tariffs. Scotland had prohibited +the exportation of her raw materials, such as wool, but was cut off +from English and other foreign markets for her cloths. The Scots +were more successful in secret and unlegalised trading with their kinsmen +in the American colonies.</p> +<p>The Scottish East India Company’s aim was to sell Scottish +goods in many places, India for example; and it was secretly meant to +found a factory and central mart on the isthmus of Panama. For +these ends capital was withdrawn from the new and unsuccessful manufacturing +companies. The great scheme was the idea of William Paterson (born +1658), the far-travelled and financially-speculative son of a farmer +in Dumfriesshire. He was the “projector,” or one of +the projectors, of the Bank of England of 1694, investing £2000. +He kept the Darien part of his scheme for an East India Company in the +background, and it seems that William, when he granted a patent to that +company, knew nothing of this design to settle in or near the Panama +isthmus, which was quite clearly within the Spanish sphere of influence. +When the philosopher John Locke heard of the scheme, he wished England +to steal the idea and seize a port in Darien: it thus appears that he +too was unaware that to do so was to inflict an insult and injury on +Spain. There is reason to suppose that the grant of the patent +to the East India Company was obtained by bribing some Scottish politician +or politicians unnamed, though one name is not beyond probable conjecture.</p> +<p>In any case Paterson admitted English capitalists, who took up half +of the shares, as the Act of Patent permitted them to do. By December +William was writing that he “had been ill-served by some of my +Ministers.” He had no notice of the details of the Act of +Patent till he had returned to England, and found English capitalists +and the English Parliament in a fury. The Act committed William +to interposing his authority if the ships of the company were detained +by foreign powers, and gave the adventurers leave to take “reparation” +by force from their assailants (this they later did when they captured +in the Firth of Forth an English vessel, the <i>Worcester</i>).</p> +<p>On the opening of the books of the new company in London (October +1695) there had been a panic, and a fall of twenty points in the shares +of the English East India Company. The English Parliament had +addressed William in opposition to the Scots Company. The English +subscribers of half the paid up capital were terrorised, and sold out. +Later, Hamburg investments were cancelled through William’s influence. +All lowland Scotland hurried to invest—in the dark—for the +Darien part of the scheme was practically a secret: it was vaguely announced +that there was to be a settlement somewhere, “in Africa or the +Indies, or both.” Materials of trade, such as wigs, combs, +Bibles, fish-hooks, and kid-gloves, were accumulated. Offices +were built—later used as an asylum for pauper lunatics.</p> +<p>When, in July 1697, the secret of Panama came out, the English Council +of Trade examined Dampier, the voyager, and (September) announced that +the territory had never been Spain’s, and that England ought to +anticipate Scotland by seizing Golden Island and the port on the mainland.</p> +<p>In July 1698 the Council of the intended Scots colony was elected, +bought three ships and two tenders, and despatched 1200 settlers with +two preachers, but with most inadequate provisions, and flour as bad +as that paid to Assynt for the person of Montrose. On October +30, in the Gulf of Darien they found natives who spoke Spanish; they +learned that the nearest gold mines were in Spanish hands, and that +the chiefs were carrying Spanish insignia of office. By February +1699 the Scots and Spaniards were exchanging shots. Presently +a Scottish ship, cruising in search of supplies, was seized by the Spanish +at Carthagena; the men lay in irons at Seville till 1700. Spain +complained to William, and the Scots seized a merchant ship. The +English Governor of Jamaica forbade his people, by virtue of a letter +addressed by the English Government to all the colonies, to grant supplies +to the starving Scots, most of whom sailed away from the colony in June, +and suffered terrible things by sea and land. Paterson returned +to Scotland. A new expedition which left Leith on May 12, 1699, +found at Darien some Scots in two ships, and remained on the scene, +distracted by quarrels, till February 1700, when Campbell of Fonab, +sent with provisions in the <i>Speedy Return</i> from Scotland, arrived +to find the Spaniards assailing the adventurers. He cleared the +Spaniards out of their fort in fifteen minutes, but the Colonial Council +learned that Spain was launching a small but adequate armada against +them. After an honourable resistance the garrison capitulated, +and marched out with colours flying (March 30). This occurred +just when Scotland was celebrating the arrival of the news of Fonab’s +gallant feat of arms.</p> +<p>At home the country was full of discontent: William’s agent +at Hamburg had prevented foreigners from investing in the Scots company. +English colonists had been forbidden to aid the Scottish adventurers. +Two hundred thousand pounds, several ships, and many lives had been +lost. “It is very like 1641,” wrote an onlooker, so +fierce were the passions that raged against William. The news +of the surrender of the colonists increased the indignation. The +king refused (November 1700) to gratify the Estates by regarding the +Darien colony as a legal enterprise. To do so was to incur war +with Spain and the anger of his English subjects. Yet the colony +had been legally founded in accordance with the terms of the Act of +Patent. While the Scots dwelt on this fact, William replied that +the colony being extinct, circumstances were altered. The Estates +voted that Darien <i>was</i> a lawful colony, and (1701) in an address +to the Crown demanded compensation for the nation’s financial +losses. William replied with expressions of sympathy and hopes +that the two kingdoms would consider a scheme of Union. A Bill +for Union brought in through the English Lords was rejected by the English +Commons.</p> +<p>There was hardly an alternative between Union and War between the +two nations. War there would have been had the exiled Prince of +Wales been brought up as a Presbyterian. His father James VII. +died a few months before William III. passed away on March 7, 1702. +Louis XIV. acknowledged James, Prince of Wales, as James III. of England +and Ireland and VIII, of Scotland; and Anne, the boy’s aunt, ascended +the throne. As a Stuart she was not unwelcome to the Jacobites, +who hoped for various chances, as Anne was believed to be friendly to +her nephew.</p> +<p>In 1701 was passed an Act for preventing wrongous imprisonment and +against undue delay in trials. But Nevile Payne continued to be +untried and illegally imprisoned. Offenders, generally, could +“run their letters” and protest, if kept in durance untried +for sixty days.</p> +<p>The Revolution of 1688-89, with William’s very reluctant concessions, +had placed Scotland in entirely new relations with England. Scotland +could now no longer be “governed by the pen” from London; +Parliament could no longer be bridled and led, at English will, by the +Lords of the Articles. As the religious mainspring of Scottish +political life, the domination of the preachers had been weakened by +the new settlement of the Kirk; as the country was now set on commercial +enterprises, which England everywhere thwarted, it was plain that the +two kingdoms could not live together on the existing terms. Union +there must be, or conquest, as under Cromwell; yet an English war of +conquest was impossible, because it was impossible for Scotland to resist. +Never would the country renew, as in the old days, the alliance of France, +for a French alliance meant the acceptance by Scotland of a Catholic +king.</p> +<p>England, on her side, if Union came, was accepting a partner with +very poor material resources. As regards agriculture, for example, +vast regions were untilled, or tilled only in the straths and fertile +spots by the hardy clansmen, who could not raise oats enough for their +own subsistence, and periodically endured famines. In “the +ill years” of William, years of untoward weather, distress had +been extreme. In the fertile Lowlands that old grievance, insecurity +of tenure, and the raising of rents in proportion to improvements made +by the tenants, had baffled agriculture. Enclosures were necessary +for the protection of the crops, but even if tenants or landlords had +the energy or capital to make enclosures, the neighbours destroyed them +under cloud of night. The old labour-services were still extorted; +the tenant’s time and strength were not his own. Land was +exhausted by absence of fallows and lack of manure. The country +was undrained, lochs and morasses covered what is now fertile land, +and hillsides now in pasture were under the plough. The once prosperous +linen trade had suffered from the war of tariffs.</p> +<p>The life of the burghs, political and municipal and trading, was +little advanced on the mediæval model. The independent Scot +steadily resisted instruction from foreign and English craftsmen in +most of the mechanical arts. Laws for the encouragement of trades +were passed and bore little fruit. Companies were founded and +were ruined by English tariffs and English competition. The most +energetic of the population went abroad, here they prospered in commerce +and in military service, while an enormous class of beggars lived on +the hospitality of their neighbours at home. In such conditions +of inequality it was plain that, if there was to be a Union, the adjustment +of proportions of taxation and of representation in Parliament would +require very delicate handling, while the differences of Church Government +were certain to cause jealousies and opposition.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXIX. PRELIMINARIES TO THE UNION.</h2> +<p>The Scottish Parliament was not dissolved at William’s death, +nor did it meet at the time when, legally, it ought to have met. +Anne, in a message, expressed hopes that it would assent to Union, and +promised to concur in any reasonable scheme for compensating the losers +by the Darien scheme. When Parliament met, Queensberry, being +Commissioner, soon found it necessary (June 30, 1702) to adjourn. +New officers of State were then appointed, and there was a futile meeting +between English and Scottish Commissioners chosen by the Queen to consider +the Union.</p> +<p>Then came a General Election (1703), which gave birth to the last +Scottish Parliament. The Commissioner, Queensberry, and the other +officers of State, “the Court party,” were of course for +Union; among them was prominent that wavering Earl of Mar who was so +active in promoting the Union, and later precipitated the Jacobite rising +of 1715. There were in Parliament the party of Courtiers, friends +of England and Union; the party of Cavaliers, that is Jacobites; and +the Country party, led by the Duke of Hamilton, who was in touch with +the Jacobites, but was quite untrustworthy, and much suspected of desiring +the Crown of Scotland for himself.</p> +<p>Queensberry cozened the Cavaliers—by promises of tolerating +their Episcopalian religion—into voting a Bill recognising Anne, +and then broke his promise. The Bill for tolerating worship as +practised by the Episcopalians was dropped; for the Commissioner of +the General Assembly of the Kirk declared that such toleration was “the +establishment of iniquity by law.”</p> +<p>Queensberry’s one aim was to get Supply voted, for war with +France had begun. But the Country and the Cavalier parties refused +Supply till an Act of Security for religion, liberty, law, and trade +should be passed. The majority decided that, on the death of Anne, +the Estates should name as king of Scotland a Protestant representative +of the House of Stewart, who should not be the successor to the English +crown, save under conditions guaranteeing Scotland as a sovereign state, +with frequent Parliaments, and security for Scottish navigation, colonies, +trade, and religion (the Act of Security).</p> +<p>It was also decided that landholders and the burghs should drill +and arm their tenants and dependants—if Protestant. Queensberry +refused to pass this Act of Security; Supply, on the other side, was +denied, and after a stormy scene Queensberry prorogued Parliament (September +16, 1703).</p> +<p>In the excitement, Atholl had deserted the Court party and voted +with the majority. He had a great Highland following, he might +throw it on the Jacobite side, and the infamous intriguer, Simon Frazer +(the Lord Lovat of 1745), came over from France and betrayed to Queensberry +a real or a feigned intrigue of Atholl with France and with the Ministers +of James VIII., called “The Pretender.”</p> +<p>Atholl was the enemy of Frazer, a canting, astute, and unscrupulous +ruffian. Queensberry conceived that in a letter given to him by +Lovat he had irrefutable evidence against Atholl as a conspirator, and +he allowed Lovat to return to France, where he was promptly imprisoned +as a traitor. Atholl convinced Anne of his own innocence, and +Queensberry fell under ridicule and suspicion, lost his office of Commissioner, +and was superseded by Tweeddale. In England the whole complex +affair of Lovat’s revelations was known as “The Scottish +Plot”; Hamilton was involved, or feared he might be involved, +and therefore favoured the new proposals of the Courtiers and English +party for placing limits on the prerogative of Anne’s successor, +whoever he might be.</p> +<p>In the Estates (July 1704), after months passed in constitutional +chicanery, the last year’s Act of Security was passed and touched +with the sceptre; and the House voted Supply for six months. But +owing to a fierce dispute on private business—namely, the raising +of the question, “Who were the persons accused in England of being +engaged in the ‘Scottish Plot’?”—no hint of +listening to proposals for Union was uttered. Who could propose, +as Commissioners to arrange Union, men who were involved—or in +England had been accused of being involved—in the plot? +Scotland had not yet consented that whoever succeeded Anne in England +should also succeed in Scotland. They retained a means of putting +pressure on England, the threat of having a separate king; they had +made and were making military preparations (drill once a-month!), and +England took up the gauntlet. The menacing attitude of Scotland +was debated on with much heat in the English Upper House (November 29), +and a Bill passed by the Commons declared the retaliatory measures which +England was ready to adopt.</p> +<p>It was at once proved that England could put a much harder pinch +on Scotland than Scotland could inflict on England. Scottish drovers +were no longer to sell cattle south of the Border, Scottish ships trading +with France were to be seized, Scottish coals and linen were to be excluded, +and regiments of regular troops were to be sent to the Border if Scotland +did not accept the Hanoverian succession before Christmas 1705. +If it came to war, Scotland could expect no help from her ancient ally, +France, unless she raised the standard of King James. As he was +a Catholic, the Kirk would prohibit this measure, so it was perfectly +clear to every plain man that Scotland must accept the Union and make +the best bargain she could.</p> +<p>In spring 1705 the new Duke of Argyll, “Red John of the Battles,” +a man of the sword and an accomplished orator, was made Commissioner, +and, of course, favoured the Union, as did Queensberry and the other +officers of State. Friction between the two countries arose in +spring, when an Edinburgh jury convicted, and the mob insisted on the +execution of, an English Captain Green, whose ship, the <i>Worcester</i>, +had been seized in the Forth by Roderick Mackenzie, Secretary of the +Scottish East India Company. Green was supposed to have captured +and destroyed a ship of the Company’s, the <i>Speedy Return</i>, +which never did return. It was not proved that this ship had been +Green’s victim, but that he had committed acts of piracy is certain. +The hanging of Green increased the animosity of the sister kingdoms.</p> +<p>When Parliament met, June 28, 1705, it was a parliament of groups. +Tweeddale and others, turned out of office in favour of Argyll’s +Government, formed the Flying Squadron (<i>Squadrone volante</i>), voting +in whatever way would most annoy the Government. Argyll opened +by proposing, as did the Queen’s Message, the instant discussion +of the Union (July 3). The House preferred to deliberate on anything +else, and the leader of the Jacobites or Cavaliers, Lockhart of Carnwath, +a very able sardonic man, saw that this was, for Jacobite ends, a tactical +error. The more time was expended the more chance had Queensberry +to win votes for the Union. Fletcher of Saltoun, an independent +and eloquent patriot and republican, wasted time by impossible proposals. +Hamilton brought forward, and by only two votes lost, a proposal which +England would never have dreamed of accepting. Canny Jacobites, +however, abstained from voting, and thence Lockhart dates the ruin of +his country. Supply, at all events, was granted, and on that Argyll +adjourned. The queen was to select Commissioners of both countries +to negotiate the Treaty of Union; among the Commissioners Lockhart was +the only Cavalier, and he was merely to watch the case in the Jacobite +interest.</p> +<p>The meetings of the two sets of Commissioners began at Whitehall +on April 16. It was arranged that all proposals, modifications, +and results should pass in writing, and secrecy was to be complete.</p> +<p>The Scots desired Union with Home Rule, with a separate Parliament. +The English would negotiate only on the lines that the Union was to +be complete, “incorporating,” with one Parliament for both +peoples. By April 25, 1706, the Scots Commissioners saw that on +this point they must acquiesce; the defeat of the French at Ramilies +(May 23) proved that, even if they could have leaned on the French, +France was a broken reed. International reciprocity in trade, +complete freedom of trade at home and abroad, they did obtain.</p> +<p>As England, thanks to William III. with his incessant Continental +wars, had already a great National debt, of which Scotland owed nothing, +and as taxation in England was high, while Scottish taxes under the +Union would rise to the same level, and to compensate for the Darien +losses, the English granted a pecuniary “Equivalent” (May +10). They also did not raise the Scottish taxes on windows, lights, +coal, malt, and salt to the English level, that of war-taxation. +The Equivalent was to purchase the Scottish shares in the East India +Company, with interest at five per cent up to May 1, 1707. That +grievance of the shareholders was thus healed, what public debt Scotland +owed was to be paid (the Equivalent was about £400,000), and any +part of the money unspent was to be given to improve fisheries and manufactures.</p> +<p>The number of Scottish members of the British Parliament was fixed +at forty-five. On this point the Scots felt that they were hardly +used; the number of their elected representatives of peers in the Lords +was sixteen. Scotland retained her Courts of Law; the feudal jurisdictions +which gave to Argyll and others almost princely powers were retained, +and Scottish procedure in trials continued to vary much from the English +model. Appeals from the Court of Session had previously been brought +before the Parliament of Scotland; henceforth they were to be heard +by the Judges, Scots and English, in the British House of Lords. +On July 23, 1706, the treaty was completed; on October 3 the Scottish +Parliament met to debate on it, with Queensberry as Commissioner. +Harley, the English Minister, sent down the author of ‘Robinson +Crusoe’ to watch, spy, argue, persuade, and secretly report, and +De Foe’s letters contain the history of the session.</p> +<p>The parties in Parliament were thus variously disposed: the Cavaliers, +including Hamilton, had been approached by Louis XIV. and King James +(the Pretender), but had not committed themselves. Queensberry +always knew every risky step taken by Hamilton, who began to take several, +but in each case received a friendly warning which he dared not disregard. +At the opposite pole, the Cameronians and other extreme Presbyterians +loathed the Union, and at last (November-December) a scheme for the +Cameronians and the clans of Angus and Perthshire to meet in arms in +Edinburgh and clear out the Parliament caused much alarm. But +Hamilton, before the arrangement came to a head, was terrorised, and +the intentions of the Cameronians, as far as their records prove, had +never been officially ratified by their leaders. <a name="citation250"></a><a href="#footnote250">{250}</a> +There was plenty of popular rioting during the session, but Argyll rode +into Edinburgh at the head of the Horse Guards, and Leven held all the +gates with drafts from the garrison of the castle. The Commissioners +of the General Assembly made protests on various points, but were pacified +after the security of the Kirk had been guaranteed. Finally, Hamilton +prepared a parliamentary mine, which would have blown the Treaty of +Union sky-high, but on the night when he should have appeared in the +House and set the match to his petard—he had toothache! +This was the third occasion on which he had deserted the Cavaliers; +the Opposition fell to pieces. The <i>Squadrone volante</i> and +the majority of the peers supported the Bill, which was passed. +On January 16, 1707, the Treaty of Union was touched with the sceptre, +“and there is the end of an auld sang,” said Seafield. +In May 1707 a solemn service was held at St Paul’s to commemorate +the Union.</p> +<p>There was much friction in the first year of the Union over excisemen +and tax-collectors: smuggling began to be a recognised profession. +Meanwhile, since 1707, a Colonel Hooke had been acting in Scotland, +nominally in Jacobite, really rather in French interests. Hooke’s +intrigues were in part betrayed by De Foe’s agent, Ker of Kersland, +an amusingly impudent knave, and were thwarted by jealousies of Argyll +and Hamilton. By deceptive promises (for he was himself deceived +into expecting the aid of the Ulster Protestants) Hooke induced Louis +XIV. to send five men-of-war, twenty-one frigates, and only two transports, +to land James in Scotland (March 1708). The equinoctial gales +and the severe illness of James, who insisted on sailing, delayed the +start; the men on the outlook for the fleet were intoxicated, and Forbin, +the French commander, observing English ships of war coming towards +the Firth of Forth, fled, refusing James’s urgent entreaties to +be landed anywhere on the coast (March 24). It was believed that +had he landed only with a valet the discontented country would have +risen for their native king.</p> +<p>In Parliament (1710-1711) the Cavalier Scottish members, by Tory +support, secured the release from prison of a Rev. Mr Greenshields, +an Episcopalian who prayed for Queen Anne, indeed, but had used the +liturgy. The preachers were also galled by the imposition on them +of an abjuration oath, compelling them to pray for prelatical Queen +Anne. Lay patronage of livings was also restored (1712) after +many vicissitudes, and this thorn rankled in the Kirk, causing ever-widening +strife for more than a century.</p> +<p>The imposition of a malt tax produced so much discontent that even +Argyll, with all the Scottish members of Parliament, was eager for the +repeal of the Act of Union, and proposed it in the House of Peers, when +it was defeated by a small majority. In 1712, when about to start +on a mission to France, Hamilton was slain in a duel by Lord Mohun. +According to a statement of Lockhart’s, “Cavaliers were +to look for the best” from Hamilton’s mission: it is fairly +clear that he was to bring over James in disguise to England, as in +Thackeray’s novel, ‘Esmond.’ But the sword of +Mohun broke the Jacobite plans. Other hopes expired when Bolingbroke +and Harley quarrelled, and Queen Anne died (August 1, 1714). “The +best cause in Europe was lost,” cried Bishop Atterbury, “for +want of spirit.” He would have proclaimed James as king, +but no man supported him, and the Elector of Hanover, George I., peacefully +accepted the throne.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXX. GEORGE I.</h2> +<p>For a year the Scottish Jacobites, and Bolingbroke, who fled to France +and became James’s Minister, mismanaged the affairs of that most +unfortunate of princes. By February 1715 the Earl of Mar, who +had been distrusted and disgraced by George I., was arranging with the +clans for a rising, while aid from Charles XII. of Sweden was expected +from March to August 1715. It is notable that Charles had invited +Dean Swift to visit his Court, when Swift was allied with Bolingbroke +and Oxford. From the author of ‘Gulliver’ Charles +no doubt hoped to get a trustworthy account of their policy. The +fated rising of 1715 was occasioned by the Duke of Berwick’s advice +to James that he must set forth to Scotland or lose his honour. +The prince therefore, acting hastily on news which, two or three days +later, proved to be false, in a letter to Mar fixed August 10 for a +rising. The orders were at once countermanded, when news proving +their futility was received, but James’s messenger, Allan Cameron, +was detained on the road, and Mar, not waiting for James’s answer +to his own last despatch advising delay, left London for Scotland without +a commission; on August 27 held an Assembly of the chiefs, and, <i>still +without a commission from James</i>, raised the standard of the king +on September 6. <a name="citation254a"></a><a href="#footnote254a">{254a}</a></p> +<p>The folly of Mar was consummate. He knew that Ormonde, the +hope of the English Jacobites, had deserted his post and had fled to +France.</p> +<p>Meanwhile Louis XIV. was dying; he died on August 30, and the Regent +d’Orléans, at the utmost, would only connive at, not assist, +James’s enterprise.</p> +<p>Everything was contrary, everywhere was ignorance and confusion. +Lord John Drummond’s hopeful scheme for seizing Edinburgh Castle +(September 8) was quieted <i>pulveris exigui jactu</i>, “the gentlemen +were powdering their hair”—drinking at a tavern—and +bungled the business. The folly of Government offered a chance: +in Scotland they had but 2000 regulars at Stirling, where “Forth +bridles the wild Highlandman.” Mar, who promptly occupied +Perth, though he had some 12,000 broadswords, continued till the end +to make Perth his headquarters. A Montrose, a Dundee, even a Prince +Charles, would have “masked” Argyll at Stirling and seized +Edinburgh. In October 21-November 3, Berwick, while urging James +to sail, absolutely refused to accompany him. The plans of Ormonde +for a descent on England were betrayed by Colonel Maclean, in French +service (November 4). In disguise and narrowly escaping from murderous +agents of Stair (British ambassador to France) on his road, <a name="citation254b"></a><a href="#footnote254b">{254b}</a> +James journeyed to St Malo (November 8).</p> +<p>In Scotland the Macgregors made a futile attempt on Dumbarton Castle, +while Glengarry and the Macleans advanced on Inveraray Castle, negotiated +with Argyll’s brother, the Earl of Islay, and marched back to +Strathfillan. In Northumberland Forster and Derwentwater, with +some Catholic fox-hunters, in Galloway the pacific Viscount Kenmure, +cruised vaguely about and joined forces. Mackintosh of Borlum, +by a well-concealed movement, carried a Highland detachment of 1600 +men across the Firth of Forth by boats (October 12-13), with orders +to join Forster and Kenmure and arouse the Border. But on approaching +Edinburgh Mackintosh found Argyll with 500 dragoons ready to welcome +him; Mar took no advantage of Argyll’s absence from Stirling, +and Mackintosh, when Argyll returned thither, joined Kenmure and Forster, +occupied Kelso, and marched into Lancashire. The Jacobite forces +were pitifully ill-supplied, they had very little ammunition (the great +charge against Bolingbroke was that he sent none from France), they +seem to have had no idea that powder could be made by the art of man; +they were torn by jealousies, and dispirited by their observation of +Mar’s incompetence.</p> +<p>We cannot pursue in detail the story of the futile campaign. +On November 12 the mixed Highland, Lowland, and English command found +itself cooped up in Preston, and after a very gallant defence of the +town the English leaders surrendered to the king’s mercy, after +arranging an armistice which made it impossible for Mackintosh to cut +his way through the English ranks and retreat to the north. About +1600 prisoners were taken. Derwentwater and Kenmure were later +executed. Forster and Nithsdale made escapes; Charles Wogan, a +kinsman of the chivalrous Wogan of 1650, and Mackintosh, with six others, +forced their way out of Newgate prison on the night before their trial. +Wogan was to make himself heard of again. Mar had thrown away +his Highlanders, with little ammunition and without orders, on a perfectly +aimless and hopeless enterprise.</p> +<p>Meanwhile he himself, at Perth, had been doing nothing, while in +the north, Simon Frazer (Lord Lovat) escaped from his French prison, +raised his clan and took the castle of Inverness for King George. +He thus earned a pardon for his private and public crimes, and he lived +to ruin the Jacobite cause and lose his own head in 1745-46.</p> +<p>While the north, Ross-shire and Inverness, were daunted and thwarted +by the success of Lovat, Mar led his whole force from Perth to Dunblane, +apparently in search of a ford over Forth. His Frazers and many +of his Gordons deserted on November 11; on November 12 Mar, at Ardoch +(the site of an old Roman camp), learned that Argyll was marching through +Dunblane to meet him. Next day Mar’s force occupied the +crest of rising ground on the wide swell of Sheriffmuir: his left was +all disorderly; horse mixed with foot; his right, with the fighting +clans, was well ordered, but the nature of the ground hid the two wings +of the army from each other. On the right the Macdonalds and Macleans +saw Clanranald fall, and on Glengarry’s cry, “Vengeance +to-day!” they charged with the claymore and swept away the regulars +of Argyll as at Killiecrankie and Prestonpans. But, as the clans +pursued and slew, their officers whispered that their own centre and +left were broken and flying. Argyll had driven them to Allan Water; +his force, returning, came within close range of the victorious right +of Mar. “Oh, for one hour of Dundee!” cried Gordon +of Glenbucket, but neither party advanced to the shock. Argyll +retired safely to Dunblane, while Mar deserted his guns and powder-carts, +and hurried to Perth. He had lost the gallant young Earl of Strathmore +and the brave Clanranald; on Argyll’s side his brother Islay was +wounded, and the Earl of Forfar was slain. Though it was a drawn +battle, it proved that Mar could not move: his forces began to scatter; +Huntly was said to have behaved ill. It was known that Dutch auxiliaries +were to reinforce Argyll, and men began to try to make terms of surrender. +Huntly rode off to his own country, and on December 22 (old style) James +landed at Peterhead.</p> +<p>James had no lack of personal courage. He had charged again +and again at Malplaquet with the Household cavalry of Louis XIV., and +he had encountered great dangers of assassination on his way to St Malo. +But constant adversity had made him despondent and resigned, while he +saw facts as they really were with a sad lucidity. When he arrived +in his kingdom the Whig clans of the north had daunted Seaforth’s +Mackenzies, while in the south Argyll, with his Dutch and other fresh +reinforcements, had driven Mar’s men out of Fife. Writing +to Bolingbroke, James described the situation. Mar, with scarcely +any ammunition, was facing Argyll with 11,000 men; the north was held +in force by the Whig clans, Mackays, Rosses, Munroes, and Frazers; deep +snow alone delayed the advance of Argyll, now stimulated by the hostile +Cadogan, Marlborough’s favourite, and it was perfectly plain that +all was lost.</p> +<p>For the head of James £100,000 was offered by Hanoverian chivalry: +he was suffering from fever and ague; the Spanish gold that had at last +been sent to him was lost at sea off Dundee, and it is no wonder that +James, never gay, presented to his troops a disconsolate and discouraging +aspect.</p> +<p>On January 29 his army evacuated Perth; James wept at the order to +burn the villages on Argyll’s line of march, and made a futile +effort to compensate the people injured. From Montrose (February +3-14) he wrote for aid to the French Regent, but next day, urged by +Mar, and unknown to his army, he, with Mar, set sail for France. +This evasion was doubtless caused by a circumstance unusual in warfare: +there was a price of £100,000 on James’s head, moreover +his force had not one day’s supply of powder. Marshal Keith +(brother of the Earl Marischal who retreated to the isles) says that +perhaps one day’s supply of powder might be found at Aberdeen. +Nevertheless the fighting clans were eager to meet Argyll, and would +have sold their lives at a high price. They scattered to their +western fastnesses. The main political result, apart from executions +and the passing of forfeited estates into the management of that noted +economist, Sir Richard Steele, and other commissioners, was—the +disgrace of Argyll. He, who with a petty force had saved Scotland, +was represented by Cadogan and by his political enemies as dilatory +and disaffected! The Duke lost all his posts, and in 1716 (when +James had hopes from Sweden) Islay, Argyll’s brother, was negotiating +with Jacobite agents. James was creating him a peer of England!</p> +<p>In Scotland much indignation was aroused by the sending of Scottish +prisoners of war out of the kingdom for trial—namely, to Carlisle—and +by other severities. The Union had never been more unpopular: +the country looked on itself as conquered, and had no means of resistance, +for James, now residing at Avignon, was a Catholic, and any insults +and injuries from England were more tolerable than a restored nationality +with a Catholic king.</p> +<p>Into the Jacobite hopes and intrigues, the eternal web which from +1689 to 1763 was ever being woven and broken, it is impossible here +to enter, though, in the now published Stuart Papers, the details are +well known. James was driven from Avignon to Italy, to Spain, +finally to live a pensioner at Rome. The luckless attempt of the +Earl Marischal, Keith, his brother, and Lord George Murray, brother +of the Duke of Atholl, to invade Scotland on the west with a small Spanish +force, was crushed on June 10, 1719, in the pass of Glenshiel.</p> +<p>Two or three months later, James, returning from Spain, married the +fair and hapless Princess Clementina Sobieska, whom Charles Wogan, in +an enterprise truly romantic, had rescued from prison at Innspruck and +conveyed across the Alps. From this wedding, made wretched by +the disappointment of the bride with her melancholy lord,—always +busied with political secrets from which she was excluded,—was +born, on December 31, 1720, Charles Edward Stuart: from his infancy +the hope of the Jacobite party; from his cradle surrounded by the intrigues, +the jealousies, the adulations of an exiled Court, and the quarrels +of Protestants and Catholics, Irish, Scottish, and English. Thus, +among changes of tutors and ministers, as the discovery or suspicion +of treachery, the bigotry of Clementina, and the pressure of other necessities +might permit, was that child reared whose name, at least, has received +the crown of Scottish affection and innumerable tributes of Scottish +song.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXXI. THE ARGATHELIANS AND THE SQUADRONE.</h2> +<p>Leaving the fortunes of the Jacobite party at their lowest ebb, and +turning to the domestic politics of Scotland, after 1719, we find that +if it be happiness to have no history, Scotland had much reason to be +content. There was but a dull personal strife between the faction +of Argyll and his brother Islay (called the “Argathelians,” +from the Latinised <i>Argathelia</i>, or Argyll), and the other faction +known, since the Union, as the <i>Squadrone volante</i>, or Flying Squadron, +who professed to be patriotically independent. As to Argyll, he +had done all that man might do for George I. But, as we saw, the +reports of Cadogan and the jealousy of George (who is said to have deemed +Argyll too friendly with his detested heir) caused the disgrace of the +Duke in 1716, and the <i>Squadrone</i> held the spoils of office. +But in February-April 1719 George reversed his policy, heaped Argyll +with favours, made him, as Duke of Greenwich, a peer of England, and +gave him the High Stewardship of the Household.</p> +<p>At this time all the sixteen representative peers of Scotland favoured, +for various reasons of their own, a proposed Peerage Bill. The +Prince of Wales might, when he came to the throne, swamp the Lords by +large new creations in his own interest, and the Bill laid down that, +henceforth, not more than six peers, exclusive of members of the Royal +Family, should be created by any sovereign; while in place of sixteen +<i>representative</i> Scotland should have twenty-five <i>permanent</i> +peers. From his new hatred of the Prince of Wales, Argyll favoured +the Bill, as did the others of the sixteen of the moment, because they +would be among the permanencies. The Scottish Jacobite peers (not +representatives) and the Commons of both countries opposed the Bill. +The election of a Scottish representative peer at this juncture led +to negotiations between Argyll and Lockhart as leader of the suffering +Jacobites, but terms were not arrived at; the Government secured a large +Whig majority in a general election (1722), and Walpole began his long +tenure of office.</p> +<h3>ENCLOSURE RIOTS.</h3> +<p>In 1724 there were some popular discontents. Enclosures, as +we saw, had scarcely been known in Scotland; when they were made, men, +women, and children took pleasure in destroying them under cloud of +night. Enclosures might keep a man’s cattle on his own ground, +keep other men’s off it, and secure for the farmer his own manure. +That good Jacobite, Mackintosh of Borlum, who in 1715 led the Highlanders +to Preston, in 1729 wrote a book recommending enclosures and plantations. +But when, in 1724, the lairds of Galloway and Dumfriesshire anticipated +and acted on his plan, which in this case involved evictions of very +indolent and ruinous farmers, the tenants rose. Multitudes of +“Levellers” destroyed the loose stone dykes and slaughtered +cattle. They had already been passive resisters of rent; the military +were called in; women were in the forefront of the brawls, which were +not quieted till the middle of 1725, when Lord Stair made an effort +to introduce manufactures.</p> +<h3>MALT RIOTS.</h3> +<p>Other disturbances began in a resolution of the House of Commons, +at the end of 1724, <i>not</i> to impose a Malt Tax equal to that of +England (this had been successfully resisted in 1713), but to levy an +additional sixpence on every barrel of ale, and to remove the bounties +on exported grain. At the Union Scotland had, for the time, been +exempted from the Malt Tax, specially devised to meet the expenses of +the French war of that date. Now, in 1724-1725, Scotland was up +in arms to resist the attempt “to rob a poor man of his beer.” +But Walpole could put force on the Scottish Members of Parliament,—“a +parcel of low people that could not subsist,” says Lockhart, “without +their board wages.” Walpole threatened to withdraw the ten +guineas hitherto paid weekly by Government to those legislators. +He offered to drop the sixpence on beer and put threepence on every +bushel of malt, a half of the English tax. On June 23, 1725, the +tax was to be exacted. The consequence was an attack on the military +by the mob of Glasgow, who wrecked the house of their Member in Parliament, +Campbell of Shawfield. Some of the assailants were shot: General +Wade and the Lord Advocate, Forbes of Culloden, marched a force on Glasgow, +the magistrates of the town were imprisoned but released on bail, while +in Edinburgh the master brewers, ordered by the Court of Session to +raise the price of their ale, struck for a week; some were imprisoned, +others were threatened or cajoled and deserted their Union. The +one result was that the chief of the Squadrone, the Duke of Roxburgh, +lost his Secretaryship for Scotland, and Argyll’s brother, Islay, +with the resolute Forbes of Culloden, became practically the governors +of the country. The Secretaryship, indeed, was for a time abolished, +but Islay practically wielded the power that had so long been in the +hands of the Secretary as agent of the Court.</p> +<h3>THE HIGHLANDS.</h3> +<p>The clans had not been disarmed after 1715, moreover 6000 muskets +had been brought in during the affair that ended at Glenshiel in 1719. +General Wade was commissioned in 1724 to examine and report on the Highlands: +Lovat had already sent in a report. He pointed out that Lowlanders +paid blackmail for protection to Highland raiders, and that independent +companies of Highlanders, paid by Government, had been useful, but were +broken up in 1717. What Lovat wanted was a company and pay for +himself. Wade represented the force of the clans as about 22,000 +claymores, half Whig (the extreme north and the Campbells), half Jacobite. +The commandants of forts should have independent companies: cavalry +should be quartered between Inverness and Perth, and Quarter Sessions +should be held at Fort William and Ruthven in Badenoch. In 1725 +Wade disarmed Seaforth’s clan, the Mackenzies, easily, for Seaforth, +then in exile, was on bad terms with James, and wished to come home +with a pardon. Glengarry, Clanranald, Glencoe, Appin, Lochiel, +Clan Vourich, and the Gordons affected submission—but only handed +over two thousand rusty weapons of every sort. Lovat did obtain +an independent company, later withdrawn—with results. The +clans were by no means disarmed, but Wade did, from 1725 to 1736, construct +his famous military roads and bridges, interconnecting the forts.</p> +<p>The death of George I. (June 11, 1727) induced James to hurry to +Lorraine and communicate with Lockhart. But there was nothing +to be done. Clementina had discredited her husband, even in Scotland, +much more in England, by her hysterical complaints, and her hatred of +every man employed by James inflamed the petty jealousies and feuds +among the exiles of his Court. No man whom he could select would +have been approved of by the party.</p> +<p>To the bishops of the persecuted Episcopalian remnant, quarrelling +over details of ritual called “the Usages,” James vainly +recommended “forbearance in love.” Lockhart, disgusted +with the clergy, and siding with Clementina against her husband, believed +that some of the wrangling churchmen betrayed the channel of his communications +with his king (1727). Islay gave Lockhart a hint to disappear, +and he sailed from Scotland for Holland on April 8, 1727.</p> +<p>Since James dismissed Bolingbroke, every one of his Ministers was +suspected, by one faction or another of the party, as a traitor. +Atterbury denounced Mar, Lockhart denounced Hay (titular Earl of Inverness), +Clementina told feminine tales for which even the angry Lockhart could +find no evidence. James was the butt of every slanderous tongue; +but absolutely nothing against his moral character, or his efforts to +do his best, or his tolerance and lack of suspiciousness, can be wrung +from documents. <a name="citation264"></a><a href="#footnote264">{264}</a></p> +<p>By 1734 the elder of James’s two sons, Prince Charles, was +old enough to show courage and to thrust himself under fire in the siege +of Gaeta, where his cousin, the Duc de Liria, was besieging the Imperialists. +He won golden opinions from the army, but was already too strong for +his tutors—Murray and Sir Thomas Sheridan. He had both Protestant +and Catholic governors; between them he learned to spell execrably in +three languages, and sat loose to Catholic doctrines. In January +1735 died his mother, who had found refuge from her troubles in devotion. +The grief of James and of the boys was acute.</p> +<p>In 1736 Lovat was looking towards the rising sun of Prince Charles; +was accused by a witness of enabling John Roy Stewart, Jacobite and +poet, to break prison at Inverness, and of sending by him a message +of devotion to James, from whom he expected a dukedom. Lovat therefore +lost his sheriffship and his independent company, and tried to attach +himself to Argyll, when the affair of the Porteous Riot caused a coldness +between Argyll and the English Government (1736-1737).</p> +<h3>THE PORTEOUS RIOT.</h3> +<p>The affair of Porteous is so admirably well described in ‘The +Heart of Mid-Lothian,’ and recent research <a name="citation265"></a><a href="#footnote265">{265}</a> +has thrown so little light on the mystery (if mystery there were), that +a brief summary of the tale may suffice.</p> +<p>In the spring of 1736 two noted smugglers, Wilson and Robertson, +were condemned to death. They had, while in prison, managed to +widen the space between the window-bars of their cell, and would have +escaped; but Wilson, a very stoutly built man, went first and stuck +in the aperture, so that Robertson had no chance. The pair determined +to attack their guards in church, where, as usual, they were to be paraded +and preached at on the Sunday preceding their execution. Robertson +leaped up and fled, with the full sympathy of a large and interested +congregation, while Wilson grasped a guard with each hand and a third +with his teeth. Thus Robertson got clean away—to Holland, +it was said,—while Wilson was to be hanged on April 14. +The acting lieutenant of the Town Guard—an unpopular body, mainly +Highlanders—was John Porteous, famous as a golfer, but, by the +account of his enemies, notorious as a brutal and callous ruffian. +The crowd in the Grassmarket was great, but there was no attempt at +a rescue. The mob, however, threw large stones at the Guard, who +fired, killing or wounding, as usual, harmless spectators. The +case for Porteous, as reported in ‘The State Trials,’ was +that the attack was dangerous; that the plan was to cut down and resuscitate +Wilson; that Porteous did not order, but tried to prevent, the firing; +and that neither at first nor in a later skirmish at the West Bow did +he fire himself. There was much “cross swearing” at +the trial of Porteous (July 20); the jury found him guilty, and he was +sentenced to be hanged on September 8. A petition from him to +Queen Caroline (George II. was abroad) drew attention to palpable discrepancies +in the hostile evidence. Both parties in Parliament backed his +application, and on August 28 a delay of justice for six weeks was granted.</p> +<p>Indignation was intense. An intended attack on the Tolbooth, +where Porteous lay, had been matter of rumour three days earlier: the +prisoner should have been placed in the Castle. At 10 P.M. on +the night of September 7 the magistrates heard that boys were beating +a drum, and ordered the Town Guard under arms; but the mob, who had +already secured the town’s gates, disarmed the veterans. +Mr Lindsay, lately Provost, escaped by the Potter Row gate (near the +old fatal Kirk-o’-Field), and warned General Moyle in the Castle. +But Moyle could not introduce soldiers without a warrant. Before +a warrant could arrive the mob had burned down the door of the Tolbooth, +captured Porteous—who was hiding up the chimney,—carried +him to the Grassmarket, and hanged him to a dyer’s pole. +The only apparent sign that persons of rank above that of the mob were +concerned, was the leaving of a guinea in a shop whence they took the +necessary rope. The magistrates had been guilty of gross negligence. +The mob was merely a resolute mob; but Islay, in London, suspected that +the political foes of the Government were engaged, or that the Cameronians, +who had been renewing the Covenants, were concerned.</p> +<p>Islay hurried to Edinburgh, where no evidence could be extracted. +“The High Flyers of our Scottish Church,” he wrote, “have +made this infamous murder a point of conscience. . . . All the +lower rank of the people who have distinguished themselves by the pretensions +of superior sanctity speak of this murder as the hand of God doing justice.” +They went by the precedent of the murder of Archbishop Sharp, it appears. +In the Lords (February 1737) a Bill was passed for disabling the Provost—one +Wilson—for public employment, destroying the Town Charter, abolishing +the Town Guard, and throwing down the gate of the Nether Bow. +Argyll opposed the Bill; in the Commons all Scottish members were against +it; Walpole gave way. Wilson was dismissed, and a fine of £2000 +was levied and presented to the widow of Porteous. An Act commanding +preachers to read monthly for a year, in church, a proclamation bidding +their hearers aid the cause of justice against the murderers, was an +insult to the Kirk, from an Assembly containing bishops. It is +said that at least half of the ministers disobeyed with impunity. +It was impossible, of course, to evict half of the preachers in the +country.</p> +<p>Argyll now went into opposition against Walpole, and, at least, listened +to Keith—later the great Field-Marshal of Frederick the Great, +and brother of the exiled Earl Marischal.</p> +<p>In 1737 the Jacobites began to stir again: a committee of five Chiefs +and Lords was formed to manage their affairs. John Murray of Broughton +went to Rome, and lost his heart to Prince Charles—now a tall +handsome lad of seventeen, with large brown eyes, and, when he pleased, +a very attractive manner. To Murray, more than to any other man, +was due the Rising of 1745.</p> +<p>Meanwhile, in secular affairs, Scotland showed nothing more remarkable +than the increasing dislike, strengthened by Argyll, of Walpole’s +Government.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXXII. THE FIRST SECESSION.</h2> +<p>For long we have heard little of the Kirk, which between 1720 and +1740 passed through a cycle of internal storms. She had been little +vexed, either during her years of triumph or defeat, by heresy or schism. +But now the doctrines of Antoinette Bourignon, a French lady mystic, +reached Scotland, and won the sympathies of some students of divinity—including +the Rev. John Simson, of an old clerical family which had been notorious +since the Reformation for the turbulence of its members. In 1714, +and again in 1717, Mr Simson was acquitted by the Assembly on the charges +of being a Jesuit, a Socinian, and an Arminian, but was warned against +“a tendency to attribute too much to natural reason.” +In 1726-29 he was accused of minimising the doctrines of the creed of +St Athanasius, and tending to the Arian heresy,—“lately +raked out of hell,” said the Kirk-session of Portmoak (1725), +addressing the sympathetic Presbytery of Kirkcaldy. At the Assembly +of 1726 that Presbytery, with others, assailed Mr Simson, who was in +bad health, and “could talk of nothing but the Council of Nice.” +A committee, including Mar’s brother, Lord Grange (who took such +strong measures with his wife, Lady Grange, forcibly translating her +to the isle of St Kilda), inquired into the views of Mr Simson’s +own Presbytery—that of Glasgow. This Presbytery cross-examined +Mr Simson’s pupils, and Mr Simson observed that the proceedings +were “an unfruitful work of darkness.” Moreover, Mr +Simson was of the party of the <i>Squadrone</i>, while his assailants +were Argathelians. A large majority of the Assembly gave the verdict +that Mr Simson was a heretic. Finally, though in 1728 his answers +to questions would have satisfied good St Athanasius, Mr Simson found +himself in the ideal position of being released from his academic duties +but confirmed in his salary. The lenient good-nature of this decision, +with some other grievances, set fire to a mine which blew the Kirk in +twain.</p> +<p>The Presbytery of Auchterarder had set up a kind of “standard” +of their own—“The Auchterarder Creed”—which +included this formula: “It is not sound or orthodox to teach that +we must forsake sin in order to our coming to Christ, and instating +us in Covenant with God.” The General Assembly condemned +this part of the Creed of Auchterarder. The Rev. Mr Hog, looking +for weapons in defence of Auchterarder, republished part of a forgotten +book of 1646, ‘The Marrow of Modern Divinity.’ The +work appears to have been written by a speculative hairdresser, an Independent. +A copy of the Marrow was found by the famous Mr Boston of Ettrick in +the cottage of a parishioner. From the Marrow he sucked much advantage: +its doctrines were grateful to the sympathisers with Auchterarder, and +the republication of the book rent the Kirk.</p> +<p>In 1720 a Committee of the General Assembly condemned a set of propositions +in the Marrow as tending to Antinomianism (the doctrine that the saints +cannot sin, professed by Trusty Tompkins in ‘Woodstock’). +But—as in the case of the five condemned propositions of Jansenius—the +Auchterarder party denied that the heresies could be found in the Marrow.</p> +<p>It was the old quarrel between Faith and Works. The clerical +petitioners in favour of the Marrow were rebuked by the Assembly (May +21, 1722); they protested: against a merely human majority in the Assembly +they appealed to “The Word of God,” to which the majority +also appealed; and there was a period of passion, but schism had not +yet arrived.</p> +<p>The five or six friends of the Marrow really disliked moral preaching, +as opposed to weekly discourses on the legal technicalities of justification, +sanctification, and adoption. They were also opposed to the working +of the Act which, in 1712, restored lay patronage. If the Assembly +enforced the law of the land in this matter (and it did), the Assembly +sinned against the divine right of congregations to elect their own +preachers. Men of this way of thinking were led by the Rev. Mr +Ebenezer Erskine, a poet who, in 1714, addressed an Ode to George I. +He therein denounced “subverting patronage” and</p> +<blockquote><p> “the woful +dubious Abjuration<br /> +Which gave the clergy ground for speculation.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>But a Jacobite song struck the same note—</p> +<blockquote><p>“Let not the Abjuration<br /> +Impose upon the nation!”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>and George was deaf to the muse of Mr Erskine.</p> +<p>In 1732, 1733, Mr Erskine, in sermons concerning patronage, offended +the Assembly; would not apologise, appeared (to a lay reader) to claim +direct inspiration, and with three other brethren constituted himself +and them into a Presbytery. Among their causes of separation (or +rather of deciding that the Kirk had separated from them) was the salary +of Emeritus Professor Simson. The new Presbytery declared that +the Covenants were still and were eternally binding on Scotland; in +fact, these preachers were “platonically” for going back +to the old ecclesiastical claims, with the old war of Church and State. +They naturally denounced the Act of 1736, which abolished the burning +of witches. After a period of long-suffering patience and conciliatory +efforts, in 1740 the Assembly deposed the Seceders.</p> +<p>In 1747 a party among the Seceders excommunicated Mr Erskine and +his brother; one of those who handed Mr Erskine over to Satan (if the +old formula were retained) was his son-in-law.</p> +<p>The feuds of Burghers and Antiburghers (persons who were ready to +take or refused to take the Burgess oath), New Lights and Old Lights, +lasted very long and had evil consequences. As the populace love +the headiest doctrines, they preferred preachers in proportion as they +leaned towards the Marrow, while lay patrons preferred candidates of +the opposite views. The Assembly must either keep the law and +back the patrons, or break the law and cease to be a State Church. +The corruption of patronage was often notorious on one side; on the +other the desirability of burning witches and the belief in the eternity +of the Covenants were articles of faith; and such articles were not +to the taste of the “Moderates,” educated clergymen of the +new school. Thus arose the war of “High Flyers” and +“Moderates” within the Kirk,—a war conducing to the +great Disruption of 1843, in which gallant little Auchterarder was again +in the foremost line.</p> +<h2>CHAPTER XXXIII. THE LAST JACOBITE RISING.</h2> +<p>While the Kirk was vainly striving to assuage the tempers of Mr Erskine +and his friends, the Jacobites were preparing to fish in troubled waters. +In 1739 Walpole was forced to declare war against Spain, and Walpole +had previously sounded James as to his own chances of being trusted +by that exiled prince. James thought that Walpole was merely angling +for information. Meanwhile Jacobite affairs were managed by two +rivals, Macgregor (calling himself Drummond) of Balhaldy and Murray +of Broughton. The sanguine Balhaldy induced France to suppose +that the Jacobites in England and Scotland were much more united, powerful, +and ready for action than they really were, when Argyll left office +in 1742, while Walpole fell from power, Carteret and the Duke of Newcastle +succeeding. In 1743 Murray found that France, though now at war +with England over the Spanish Succession, was holding aloof from the +Jacobite cause, though plied with flourishing and fabulous reports from +Balhaldy and the Jacobite Lord Sempill. But, in December 1743, +on the strength of alleged Jacobite energy in England, Balhaldy obtained +leave from France to visit Rome and bring Prince Charles. The +Prince had kept himself in training for war and was eager. Taking +leave of his father for the last time, Charles drove out of Rome on +January 9, 1744; evaded, in disguise, every trap that was set for him, +and landed at Antibes, reaching Paris on February 10. Louis did +not receive him openly, if he received him at all; the Prince lurked +at Gravelines in disguise, with the Earl Marischal, while winds and +waves half ruined, and the approach of a British fleet drove into port, +a French fleet of invasion under Roqueville (March 6, 7, 1744).</p> +<p>The Prince wrote to Sempill that he was ready and willing to sail +for Scotland in an open boat. In July 1744 he told Murray that +he would come next summer “if he had no other companion than his +valet.” He nearly kept his word; nor did Murray resolutely +oppose his will. At the end of May 1745 Murray’s servant +brought a letter from the Prince; “fall back, fall edge,” +he would land in the Highlands in July. Lochiel regretted the +decision, but said that, as a man of honour, he would join his Prince +if he arrived.</p> +<p>On July 2 the Prince left Nantes in the <i>Dutillet</i> (usually +styled <i>La Doutelle</i>). He brought some money (he had pawned +the Sobieski rubies), some arms, Tullibardine, his Governor Sheridan, +Parson Kelly, the titular Duke of Atholl, Sir John Macdonald, a banker, +Sullivan, and one Buchanan—the Seven Men of Moidart.</p> +<p>On July 20 his consort, <i>The Elizabeth</i>, fought <i>The Lion</i> +(Captain Brett) off the Lizard; both antagonists were crippled. +On [July 22/August 2] Charles passed the night on the little isle of +Eriskay; appealed vainly to Macleod and Macdonald of Sleat; was urged, +at Kinlochmoidart, by the Macdonalds, to return to France, but swept +them off their feet by his resolution; and with Lochiel and the Macdonalds +raised the standard at the head of Glenfinnan on August [19/30].</p> +<p>The English Government had already offered £30,000 for the +Prince’s head. The clans had nothing to gain; they held +that they had honour to preserve; they remembered Montrose; they put +it to the touch, and followed Prince Charlie.</p> +<p>The strength of the Prince’s force was, first, the Macdonalds. +On August 16 Keppoch had cut off two companies of the Royal Scots near +Loch Lochy. But the chief of Glengarry was old and wavering; young +Glengarry, captured on his way from France, could not be with his clan; +his young brother Æneas led till his accidental death after the +battle of Falkirk.</p> +<p>Of the Camerons it is enough to say that their leader was the gentle +Lochiel, and that they were worthy of their chief. The Macphersons +came in rather late, under Cluny. The Frazers were held back by +the crafty Lovat, whose double-dealing, with the abstention of Macleod +(who was sworn to the cause) and of Macdonald of Sleat, ruined the enterprise. +Clan Chattan was headed by the beautiful Lady Mackintosh, whose husband +adhered to King George. Of the dispossessed Macleans, some 250 +were gathered (under Maclean of Drimnin), and of that resolute band +some fifty survived Culloden. These western clans (including 220 +Stewarts of Appin under Ardshiel) were the steel point of Charles’s +weapon; to them should be added the Macgregors under James Mor, son +of Rob Roy, a shifty character but a hero in fight.</p> +<p>To resist these clans, the earliest to join, Sir John Cope, commanding +in Scotland, had about an equal force of all arms, say 2500 to 3000 +men, scattered in all quarters, and with very few field-pieces. +Tweeddale, holding the revived office of Secretary for Scotland, was +on the worst terms, as leader of the <i>Squadrone</i>, with his Argathelian +rival, Islay, now (through the recent death of his brother, Red Ian +of the Battles) Duke of Argyll. Scottish Whigs were not encouraged +to arm.</p> +<p>The Prince marched south, while Cope, who had concentrated at Stirling, +marched north to intercept him. At Dalnacardoch he learned that +Charles was advancing to meet him in Corryarrick Pass (here came in +Ardshiel, Glencoe, and a Glengarry reinforcement). At Dalwhinnie, +Cope found that the clans held the pass, which is very defensible. +He dared not face them, and moved by Ruthven in Badenoch to Inverness, +where he vainly expected to be met by the great Whig clans of the north.</p> +<p>Joined now by Cluny, Charles moved on that old base of Montrose, +the Castle of Blair of Atholl, where the exiled duke (commonly called +Marquis of Tullibardine) was received with enthusiasm. In the +mid-region between Highland and Lowland, the ladies, Lady Lude and the +rest, simply forced their sons, brothers, and lovers into arms. +While Charles danced and made friends, and tasted his first pine-apple +at Blair, James Mor took the fort of Inversnaid. At Perth (September +4-10) Charles was joined by the Duke of Perth, the Ogilvys under Lord +Ogilvy, some Drummonds under Lord Strathallan, the Oliphants of Gask, +and 200 Robertsons of Struan. Lord George Murray, brother of the +Duke of Atholl, who had been out in 1715, out in 1719, and later was +<i>un reconcilié</i>, came in, and with him came Discord. +He had dealt as a friend and ally with Cope at Crieff; his loyalty to +either side was thus not unnaturally dubious; he was suspected by Murray +of Broughton; envied by Sullivan, a soldier of some experience; and +though he was loyal to the last,—the best organiser, and the most +daring leader,—Charles never trusted him, and his temper was always +crossing that of the Prince.</p> +<p>The race for Edinburgh now began, Cope bringing his troops by sea +from Aberdeen, and Charles doing what Mar, in 1715, had never ventured. +He crossed the Forth by the fords of Frew, six miles above Stirling, +passed within gunshot of the castle, and now there was no force between +him and Edinburgh save the demoralised dragoons of Colonel Gardiner. +The sole use of the dragoons was, wherever they came, to let the world +know that the clans were at their heels. On September 16 Charles +reached Corstorphine, and Gardiner’s dragoons fell back on Coltbridge.</p> +<p>On the previous day the town had been terribly perturbed. The +old walls, never sound, were dilapidated, and commanded by houses on +the outside. Volunteers were scarce, and knew not how to load +a musket. On Sunday, September 15, during sermon-time, “The +bells were rung backwards, the drums they were beat,” the volunteers, +being told to march against the clans, listened to the voices of mothers +and aunts and of their own hearts, and melted like a mist. Hamilton’s +dragoons and ninety of the late Porteous’s Town Guard sallied +forth, joining Gardiner’s men at Coltbridge. A few of the +mounted Jacobite gentry, such as Lord Elcho, eldest son of the Earl +of Wemyss, trotted up to inspect the dragoons, who fled and drew bridle +only at Musselburgh, six miles east of Edinburgh.</p> +<p>The magistrates treated through a caddie or street-messenger with +the Prince. He demanded surrender, the bailies went and came, +in a hackney coach, between Charles’s quarters, Gray’s Mill, +and Edinburgh, but on their return about 3 A.M. Lochiel with the Camerons +rushed in when the Nether Bow gate was opened to admit the cab of the +magistrates. Murray had guided the clan round by Merchiston. +At noon Charles entered “that unhappy palace of his race,” +Holyrood; and King James was proclaimed at Edinburgh Cross, while the +beautiful Mrs Murray, mounted, distributed white cockades. Edinburgh +provided but few volunteers, though the ladies tried to “force +them out.”</p> +<p>Meanwhile Cope was landing his men at Dunbar; from Mr John Home (author +of ‘Douglas, a Tragedy’) he learnt that Charles’s +force was under 2000 strong. He himself had, counting the dragoons, +an almost equal strength, with six field-pieces manned by sailors.</p> +<p>On September 20 Cope advanced from Haddington, while Charles, with +all the carriages he could collect for ambulance duty, set forth from +his camp at Duddingston Loch, under Arthur’s Seat. Cope +took the low road near the sea, while Charles took the high road, holding +the ridge, till from Birsley brae he beheld Cope on the low level plain, +between Seaton and Prestonpans. The manœuvres of the clans +forced Cope to change his front, but wherever he went, his men were +more or less cooped up and confined to the defensive, with the park +wall on their rear.</p> +<p>Meanwhile Mr Anderson of Whitburgh, a local sportsman who had shot +ducks in the morass on Cope’s left, brought to Charles news of +a practicable path through that marsh. Even so, the path was wet +as high as the knee, says Ker of Graden, who had reconnoitred the British +under fire. He was a Roxburghshire laird, and there was with the +Prince no better officer.</p> +<p>In the grey dawn the clans waded through the marsh and leaped the +ditch; Charles was forced to come with the second line fifty yards behind +the first. The Macdonalds held the right, as they said they had +done at Bannockburn; the Camerons and Macgregors were on the left they +“cast their plaids, drew their blades,” and, after enduring +an irregular fire, swept the red-coat ranks away; “they ran like +rabets,” wrote Charles in a genuine letter to James. Gardiner +was cut down, his entire troop having fled, while he was directing a +small force of foot which stood its ground. Charles stated his +losses at a hundred killed and wounded, all by gunshot. Only two +of the six field-pieces were discharged, by Colonel Whitefoord, who +was captured. Friends and foes agree in saying that the Prince +devoted himself to the care of the wounded of both sides. Lord +George Murray states Cope’s losses, killed, wounded, and taken, +at 3000, Murray, at under 1000.</p> +<p>The Prince would fain have marched on England, but his force was +thinned by desertions, and English reinforcements would have been landed +in his rear. For a month he had to hold court in Edinburgh, adored +by the ladies to whom he behaved with a coldness of which Charles II. +would not have approved. “These are my beauties,” +he said, pointing to a burly-bearded Highland sentry. He “requisitioned” +public money, and such horses and fodder as he could procure; but to +spare the townsfolk from the guns of the castle he was obliged to withdraw +his blockade. He sent messengers to France, asking for aid, but +received little, though the Marquis Boyer d’Eguilles was granted +as a kind of representative of Louis XV. His envoys to Sleat and +Macleod sped ill, and Lovat only dallied, France only hesitated, while +Dutch and English regiments landed in the Thames and marched to join +General Wade at Newcastle. Charles himself received reinforcements +amounting to some 1500 men, under Lord Ogilvy, old Lord Pitsligo, the +Master of Strathallan (Drummond), the brave Lord Balmerino, and the +Viscount Dundee. A treaty of alliance with France, made at Fontainebleau, +neutralised, under the Treaty of Tournay, 6000 Dutch who might not, +by that treaty, fight against the ally of France.</p> +<p>The Prince entertained no illusions. Without French forces, +he told D’Eguilles, “I cannot resist English, Dutch, Hessians, +and Swiss.” On October [15/26] he wrote his last extant +letter from Scotland to King James. He puts his force at 8000 +(more truly 6000), with 300 horse. “With these, as matters +stand, I shal have one decisive stroke for’t, but iff the French” +(do not?) “land, perhaps none. . . . As matters stand I +must either conquer or perish in a little while.”</p> +<p>Defeated in the heart of England, and with a prize of £30,000 +offered for his head, he could not hope to escape. A victory for +him would mean a landing of French troops, and his invasion of England +had for its aim to force the hand of France. Her troops, with +Prince Henry among them, dallied at Dunkirk till Christmas, and were +then dispersed, while the Duke of Cumberland arrived in England from +Flanders on October 19.</p> +<p>On October 30 the Prince held a council of war. French supplies +and guns had been landed at Stonehaven, and news came that 6000 French +were ready at Dunkirk: at Dunkirk they were, but they never were ready. +The news probably decided Charles to cross the Border; while it appears +that his men preferred to be content with simply making Scotland again +an independent kingdom, with a Catholic king. But to do this, +with French aid, was to return to the state of things under Mary of +Guise!</p> +<p>The Prince, judging correctly, wished to deal his “decisive +stroke” near home, at the old and now futile Wade in Northumberland. +A victory would have disheartened England, and left Newcastle open to +France. If Charles were defeated, his own escape by sea, in a +country where he had many well-wishers, was possible, and the clans +would have retreated through the Cheviots. Lord George Murray +insisted on a march by the western road, Lancashire being expected to +rise and join the Prince. But this plan left Wade, with a superior +force, on Charles’s flank! The one difficulty, that of holding +a bridge, say Kelso Bridge, over Tweed, was not insuperable. Rivers +could not stop the Highlanders. Macdonald of Morar thought Charles +the best general in the army, and to the layman, considering the necessity +for an <i>instant</i> stroke, and the advantages of the east, as regards +France, the Prince’s strategy appears better than Lord George’s. +But Lord George had his way.</p> +<p>On October 31, Charles, reinforced by Cluny with 400 Macphersons, +concentrated at Dalkeith. On November 1, the less trusted part +of his force, under Tullibardine, with the Atholl men, moved south by +Peebles and Moffat to Lockerbie, menacing Carlisle; while the Prince, +Lord George, and the fighting clans marched to Kelso—a feint to +deceive Wade. The main body then moved by Jedburgh, up Rule Water +and down through Liddesdale, joining hands with Tullibardine on November +9, and bivouacking within two miles of Carlisle. On the 10th the +Atholl men went to work at the trenches; on the 11th the army moved +seven miles towards Newcastle, hoping to discuss Wade at Brampton on +hilly ground. But Wade did not gratify them by arriving.</p> +<p>On the 13th the Atholl men were kept at their spade-work, and Lord +George in dudgeon resigned his command (November 14), but at night Carlisle +surrendered, Murray and Perth negotiating. Lord George expressed +his anger and jealousy to his brother, Tullibardine, but Perth resigned +his command to pacify his rival. Wade feebly tried to cross country, +failed, and went back to Newcastle. On November 10, with some +4500 men (there had been many desertions), the march through Lancashire +was decreed. Save for Mr Townley and two Vaughans, the Catholics +did not stir. Charles marched on foot in the van; he was a trained +pedestrian; the townspeople stared at him and his Highlanders, but only +at Manchester (November 29-30) had he a welcome, enlisting about 150 +doomed men. On November 27 Cumberland took over command at Lichfield; +his foot were distributed between Tamworth and Stafford; his cavalry +was at Newcastle-under-Lyme. Lord George was moving on Derby, +but learning Cumberland’s dispositions he led a column to Congleton, +inducing Cumberland to concentrate at Lichfield, while he himself, by +way of Leek and Ashburn, joined the Prince at Derby.</p> +<p>The army was in the highest spirits. The Duke of Richmond on +the other side wrote from Lichfield (December 5), “If the enemy +please to cut us off from the main army, they may; and also, if they +please to give us the slip and march to London, I fear they may, before +even this <i>avant garde</i> can come up with them; . . . there is no +pass to defend, . . . the camp at Finchley is confined to paper plans”—and +Wales was ready to join the Prince! Lord George did not know what +Richmond knew. Despite the entreaties of the Prince, his Council +decided to retreat. On December 6 the clans, uttering cries of +rage, were set with their faces to the north.</p> +<p>The Prince was now an altered man. Full of distrust, he marched +not with Lord George in the rear, he rode in the van.</p> +<p>Meanwhile Lord John Drummond, who, on November 22, had landed at +Montrose with 800 French soldiers, was ordered by Charles to advance +with large Highland levies now collected and meet him as he moved north. +Lord John disobeyed orders (received about December 18). Expecting +his advance, Charles most unhappily left the Manchester men and others +to hold Carlisle, to which he would return. Cumberland took them +all,—many were hanged.</p> +<p>In the north, Lord Lewis Gordon routed Macleod at Inverurie (December +23), and defeated his effort to secure Aberdeen. Admirably commanded +by Lord George, and behaving admirably for an irregular retreating force, +the army reached Penrith on December 18, and at Clifton, Lord George +and Cluny defeated Cumberland’s dragoons in a rearguard action.</p> +<p>On December 19 Carlisle was reached, and, as we saw, a force was +left to guard the castle; all were taken. On December 20 the army +forded the flooded Esk; the ladies, of whom several had been with them, +rode it on their horses: the men waded breast-high, as, had there been +need, they would have forded Tweed if the eastern route had been chosen, +and if retreat had been necessary. Cumberland returned to London +on January 5, and Horace Walpole no longer dreaded “a rebellion +that runs away.” By different routes Charles and Lord George +met (December 26) at Hamilton Palace. Charles stayed a night at +Dumfries. Dumfries was hostile, and was fined; Glasgow was also +disaffected, the ladies were unfriendly. At Glasgow, Charles heard +that Seaforth, chief of the Mackenzies, was aiding the Hanoverians in +the north, combining with the great Whig clans, with Macleod, the Munroes, +Lord Loudoun commanding some 2000 men, and the Mackays of Sutherland +and Caithness.</p> +<p>Meanwhile Lord John Drummond, Strathallan, and Lord Lewis Gordon, +with Lord Macleod, were concentrating to meet the Prince at Stirling, +the purpose being the hopeless one of capturing the castle, the key +of the north. With weak artillery, and a futile and foolish French +engineer officer to direct the siege, they had no chance of success. +The Prince, in bad health, stayed (January 4-10) at Sir Hugh Paterson’s +place, Bannockburn House.</p> +<p>At Stirling, with his northern reinforcements, Charles may have had +some seven or eight thousand men wherewith to meet General Hawley (a +veteran of Sheriffmuir) advancing from Edinburgh. Hawley encamped +at Falkirk, and while the Atholl men were deserting by scores, Lord +George skilfully deceived him, arrived on the Falkirk moor unobserved, +and held the ridge above Hawley’s position, while the General +was lunching with Lady Kilmarnock. In the first line of the Prince’s +force the Macdonalds held the right wing, the Camerons (whom the great +Wolfe describes as the bravest of the brave) held the left; with Stewarts +of Appin, Frazers, and Macphersons in the centre. In the second +line were the Atholl men, Lord Lewis Gordon’s levies, and Lord +Ogilvy’s. The Lowland horse and Drummond’s French +details were in the rear. The ground was made up of eminences +and ravines, so that in the second line the various bodies were invisible +to each other, as at Sheriffmuir—with similar results. When +Hawley found that he had been surprised he arrayed his thirteen battalions +of regulars and 1000 men of Argyll on the plain, with three regiments +of dragoons, by whose charge he expected to sweep away Charles’s +right wing; behind his cavalry were the luckless militia of Glasgow +and the Lothians. In all, he had from 10,000 to 12,000 men against, +perhaps, 7000 at most, for 1200 of Charles’s force were left to +contain Blakeney in Stirling Castle. Both sides, on account of +the heavy roads, failed to bring forward their guns.</p> +<p>Hawley then advanced his cavalry up hill: their left faced Keppoch’s +Macdonalds; their right faced the Frazers, under the Master of Lovat, +in Charles’s centre. Hawley then launched his cavalry, which +were met at close range by the reserved fire of the Macdonalds and Frazers. +Through the mist and rain the townsfolk, looking on, saw in five minutes +“the break in the battle.” Hamilton’s and Ligonier’s +cavalry turned and fled, Cobham’s wheeled and rode across the +Highland left under fire, while the Macdonalds and Frazers pursuing +the cavalry found themselves among the Glasgow militia, whom they followed, +slaying. Lord George had no pipers to sound the recall; they had +flung their pipes to their gillies and gone in with the claymore.</p> +<p>Thus the Prince’s right, far beyond his front, were lost in +the tempest; while his left had discharged their muskets at Cobham’s +Horse, and could not load again, their powder being drenched with rain. +They received the fire of Hawley’s right, and charged with the +claymore, but were outflanked and enfiladed by some battalions drawn +up <i>en potence</i>. Many of the second line had blindly followed +the first: the rest shunned the action; Hawley’s officers led +away some regiments in an orderly retreat; night fell; no man knew what +had really occurred till young Gask and young Strathallan, with the +French and Atholl men, ventured into Falkirk, and found Hawley’s +camp deserted. The darkness, the rain, the nature of the ground, +and the clans’ want of discipline, prevented the annihilation +of Hawley’s army; while the behaviour of his cavalry showed that +the Prince might have defeated Cumberland’s advanced force beyond +Derby with the greatest ease, as the Duke of Richmond had anticipated.</p> +<p>Perhaps the right course now was to advance on Edinburgh, but the +hopeless siege of Stirling Castle was continued—Charles perhaps +hoping much from Hawley’s captured guns.</p> +<p>The accidental shooting of young Æneas Macdonnell, second son +of Glengarry, by a Clanranald man, begat a kind of blood feud between +the clans, and the unhappy cause of the accident had to be shot. +Lochgarry, writing to young Glengarry after Culloden, says that “there +was a general desertion in the whole army,” and this was the view +of the chiefs, who, on news of Cumberland’s approach, told Charles +(January 29) that the army was depleted and resistance impossible.</p> +<p>The chiefs were mistaken in point of fact: a review at Crieff later +showed that even then only 1000 men were missing. As at Derby, +and with right on his side, Charles insisted on meeting Cumberland. +He did well, his men were flushed with victory, had sufficient supplies, +were to encounter an army not yet encouraged by a refusal to face it, +and, if defeated had the gates of the hills open behind them. +In a very temperately written memorial Charles placed these ideas before +the chiefs. “Having told you my thoughts, I am too sensible +of what you have already ventured and done for me, not to yield to your +unanimous resolution if you persist.”</p> +<p>Lord George, Lovat, Lochgarry, Keppoch, Ardshiel, and Cluny did persist; +the fatal die was cast; and the men who—well fed and confident—might +have routed Cumberland, fled in confusion rather than retreated,—to +be ruined later, when, starving, out-wearied, and with many of their +best forces absent, they staggered his army at Culloden. Charles +had told the chiefs, “I can see nothing but ruin and destruction +to us in case we should retreat.” <a name="citation287"></a><a href="#footnote287">{287}</a></p> +<p>This retreat embittered Charles’s feelings against Lord George, +who may have been mistaken—who, indeed, at Crieff, seems to have +recognised his error (February 5); but he had taken his part, and during +the campaign, henceforth, as at Culloden, distinguished himself by every +virtue of a soldier.</p> +<p>After the retreat Lord George moved on Aberdeen; Charles to Blair +in Atholl; thence to Moy, the house of Lady Mackintosh, where a blacksmith +and four or five men ingeniously scattered Loudoun and the Macleods, +advancing to take him by a night surprise. This was the famous +Rout of Moy.</p> +<p>Charles next (February 20) took Inverness Castle, and Loudoun was +driven into Sutherland, and cut off by Lord George’s dispositions +from any chance of joining hands with Cumberland. The Duke had +now 5000 Hessian soldiers at his disposal: these he would not have commanded +had the Prince’s army met him near Stirling.</p> +<p>Charles was now at or near Inverness: he lost, through illness, the +services of Murray, whose successor, Hay, was impotent as an officer +of Commissariat. A gallant movement of Lord George into Atholl, +where he surprised all Cumberland’s posts, but was foiled by the +resistance of his brother’s castle, was interrupted by a recall +to the north, and, on April 2, he retreated to the line of the Spey. +Forbes of Culloden and Macleod had been driven to take refuge in Skye; +but 1500 men of the Prince’s best had been sent into Sutherland, +when Cumberland arrived at Nairn (April 14), and Charles concentrated +his starving forces on Culloden Moor. The Macphersons, the Frazers, +the 1500 Macdonalds, and others in Sutherland were absent on various +duties when “the wicked day of destiny” approached.</p> +<p>The men on Culloden Moor, a flat waste unsuited to the tactics of +the clans, had but one biscuit apiece on the eve of the battle. +Lord George “did not like the ground,” and proposed to surprise +by a night attack Cumberland’s force at Nairn. The Prince +eagerly agreed, and, according to him, Clanranald’s advanced men +were in touch with Cumberland’s outposts before Lord George convinced +the Prince that retreat was necessary. The advance was lagging; +the way had been missed in the dark; dawn was at hand. There are +other versions: in any case the hungry men were so outworn that many +are said to have slept through next day’s battle.</p> +<p>A great mistake was made next day, if Lochgarry, who commanded the +Macdonalds of Glengarry, and Maxwell of Kirkconnel are correct in saying +that Lord George insisted on placing his Atholl men on the right wing. +The Macdonalds had an old claim to the right wing, but as far as research +enlightens us, their failure on this fatal day was not due to jealous +anger. The battle might have been avoided, but to retreat was +to lose Inverness and all chance of supplies. On the Highland +right was the water of Nairn, and they were guarded by a wall which +the Campbells pulled down, enabling Cumberland’s cavalry to take +them in flank. Cumberland had about 9000 men, including the Campbells. +Charles, according to his muster-master, had 5000; of horse he had but +a handful.</p> +<p>The battle began with an artillery duel, during which the clans lost +heavily, while their few guns were useless, and their right flank was +exposed by the breaking down of the protecting wall. After some +unexplained and dangerous delay, Lord George gave the word to charge, +in face of a blinding tempest of sleet, and himself went in, as did +Lochiel, claymore in hand. But though the order was conveyed by +Ker of Graden first to the Macdonalds on the left, as they had to charge +over a wider space of ground, the Camerons, Clan Chattan, and Macleans +came first to the shock. “Nothing could be more desperate +than their attack, or more properly received,” says Whitefoord. +The assailants were enfiladed by Wolfe’s regiment, which moved +up and took position at right angles, like the fifty-second on the flank +of the last charge of the French Guard at Waterloo. The Highland +right broke through Barrel’s regiment, swept over the guns, and +died on the bayonets of the second line. They had thrown down +their muskets after one fire, and, says Cumberland, stood “and +threw stones for at least a minute or two before their total rout began.” +Probably the fall of Lochiel, who was wounded and carried out of action, +determined the flight. Meanwhile the left, the Macdonalds, menaced +on the flank by cavalry, were plied at a hundred yards by grape. +They saw their leaders, the gallant Keppoch and Macdonnell of Scothouse, +with many others, fall under the grape-shot: they saw the right wing +broken, and they did not come to the shock. If we may believe +four sworn witnesses in a court of justice (July 24, 1752), whose testimony +was accepted as the basis of a judicial decreet (January 10, 1756), +<a name="citation290"></a><a href="#footnote290">{290}</a> Keppoch was +wounded while giving his orders to some of his men not to outrun the +line in advancing, and was shot dead as a friend was supporting him. +When all retreated they passed the dead body of Keppoch.</p> +<p>The tradition constantly given in various forms that Keppoch charged +alone, “deserted by the children of his clan,” is worthless +if sworn evidence may be trusted.</p> +<p>As for the unhappy Charles, by the evidence of Sir Robert Strange, +who was with him, he had “ridden along the line to the right animating +the soldiers,” and “endeavoured to rally the soldiers, who, +annoyed by the enemy’s fire, were beginning to quit the field.” +He “was got off the field when the men in general were betaking +themselves precipitately to flight; nor was there any possibility of +their being rallied.” Yorke, an English officer, says that +the Prince did not leave the field till after the retreat of the second +line.</p> +<p>So far the Prince’s conduct was honourable and worthy of his +name. But presently, on the advice of his Irish entourage, Sullivan +and Sheridan, who always suggested suspicions, and doubtless not forgetting +the great price on his head, he took his own way towards the west coast +in place of joining Lord George and the remnant with him at Ruthven +in Badenoch. On April 26 he sailed from Borradale in a boat, and +began that course of wanderings and hairbreadth escapes in which only +the loyalty of Highland hearts enabled him at last to escape the ships +that watched the isles and the troops that netted the hills.</p> +<p>Some years later General Wolfe, then residing at Inverness, reviewed +the occurrences, and made up his mind that the battle had been a dangerous +risk for Cumberland, while the pursuit (though ruthlessly cruel) was +inefficient.</p> +<p>Despite Cumberland’s insistent orders to give no quarter (orders +justified by the absolutely false pretext that Prince Charles had set +the example), Lochgarry reported that the army had not lost more than +a thousand men. Fire and sword and torture, the destruction of +tilled lands, and even of the shell-fish on the shore, did not break +the spirit of the Highlanders. Many bands held out in arms, and +Lochgarry was only prevented by the Prince’s command from laying +an ambush for Cumberland. The Campbells and the Macleods under +their recreant chief, the Whig Macdonalds under Sir Alexander of Sleat, +ravaged the lands of the Jacobite clansmen; but the spies of Albemarle, +who now commanded in Scotland, reported the Macleans, the Grants of +Glenmoriston, with the Macphersons, Glengarry’s men, and Lochiel’s +Camerons, as all eager “to do it again” if France would +only help.</p> +<p>But France was helpless, and when Lochiel sailed for France with +the Prince only Cluny remained, hunted like a partridge in the mountains, +to keep up the spirit of the Cause. Old Lovat met a long-deserved +death by the executioner’s axe, though it needed the evidence +of Murray of Broughton, turned informer, to convict that fox. +Kilmarnock and Balmerino also were executed; the good and brave Duke +of Perth died on his way to France; the aged Tullibardine in the Tower; +many gallant gentlemen were hanged; Lord George escaped, and is the +ancestor of the present Duke of Atholl; many gentlemen took French service; +others fought in other alien armies; three or four in the Highlands +or abroad took the wages of spies upon the Prince. The £30,000 +of French gold, buried near Loch Arkaig, caused endless feuds, kinsman +denouncing kinsman. The secrets of the years 1746-1760 are to +be sought in the Cumberland and Stuart MSS. in Windsor Castle and the +Record Office.</p> +<p>Legislation, intended to scotch the snake of Jacobitism, began with +religious persecution. The Episcopalian clergy had no reason to +love triumphant Presbyterianism, and actively, or in sympathy, were +favourers of the exiled dynasty. Episcopalian chapels, sometimes +mere rooms in private houses, were burned, or their humble furniture +was destroyed. All Episcopalian ministers were bidden to take +the oath and pray for King George by September 1746, or suffer for the +second offence transportation for life to the American colonies. +Later, the orders conferred by Scottish bishops were made of no avail. +Only with great difficulty and danger could parents obtain the rite +of baptism for their children. Very little is said in our histories +about the sufferings of the Episcopalians when it was their turn to +be under the harrow. They were not violent, they murdered no Moderator +of the General Assembly. Other measures were the Disarming Act, +the prohibition to wear the Highland dress, and the abolition of “hereditable +jurisdictions,” and the chief’s right to call out his clansmen +in arms. Compensation in money was paid, from £21,000 to +the Duke of Argyll to £13, 6s. 8d. to the clerks of the Registrar +of Aberbrothock. The whole sum was £152,237, 15s. 4d.</p> +<p>In 1754 an Act “annexed the forfeited estates of the Jacobites +who had been out (or many of them) inalienably to the Crown.” +The estates were restored in 1784; meanwhile the profits were to be +used for the improvement of the Highlands. If submissive tenants +received better terms and larger leases than of old, Jacobite tenants +were evicted for not being punctual with rent. Therefore, on May +14, 1752, some person unknown shot Campbell of Glenure, who was about +evicting the tenants on the lands of Lochiel and Stewart of Ardshiel +in Appin. Campbell rode down from Fort William to Ballachulish +ferry, and when he had crossed it said, “I am safe now I am out +of my mother’s country.” But as he drove along the +old road through the wood of Lettermore, perhaps a mile and a half south +of Ballachulish House, the fatal shot was fired. For this crime +James Stewart of the Glens was tried by a Campbell jury at Inveraray, +with the Duke on the bench, and was, of course, convicted, and hanged +on the top of a knoll above Ballachulish ferry. James was innocent, +but Allan Breck Stewart was certainly an accomplice of the man with +the gun, which, by the way, was the property neither of James Stewart +nor of Stewart of Fasnacloich. The murderer was anxious to save +James by avowing the deed, but his kinsfolk, saying, “They will +only hang both James and you,” bound him hand and foot and locked +him up in the kitchen on the day of James’s execution. <a name="citation293"></a><a href="#footnote293">{293}</a> +Allan lay for some weeks at the house of a kinsman in Rannoch, and escaped +to France, where he had a fight with James Mor Macgregor, then a spy +in the service of the Duke of Newcastle.</p> +<p>This murder of “the Red Fox” caused all the more excitement, +and is all the better remembered in Lochaber and Glencoe, because agrarian +violence in revenge for eviction has scarcely another example in the +history of the Highlands.</p> +<h2>CONCLUSION.</h2> +<p>Space does not permit an account of the assimilation of Scotland +to England in the years between the Forty-five and our own time: moreover, +the history of this age cannot well be written without a dangerously +close approach to many “burning questions” of our day. +The History of the Highlands, from 1752 to the emigrations witnessed +by Dr Johnson (1760-1780), and of the later evictions in the interests +of sheep farms and deer forests, has never been studied as it ought +to be in the rich manuscript materials which are easily accessible. +The great literary Renaissance of Scotland, from 1745 to the death of +Sir Walter Scott; the years of Hume, a pioneer in philosophy and in +history, and of the Rev. Principal Robertson (with him and Hume, Gibbon +professed, very modestly, that he did not rank); the times of Adam Smith, +of Burns, and of Sir Walter, not to speak of the Rev. John Home, that +foremost tragic poet, may be studied in many a history of literature. +According to Voltaire, Scotland led the world in all studies, from metaphysics +to gardening. We think of Watt, and add engineering.</p> +<p>The brief and inglorious administration of the Earl of Bute at once +gave openings in the public service to Scots of ability, and excited +that English hatred of these northern rivals which glows in Churchill’s +‘Satires,’ while this English jealousy aroused that Scottish +hatred of England which is the one passion that disturbs the placid +letters of David Hume.</p> +<p>The later alliance of Pitt with Henry Dundas made Dundas far more +powerful than any Secretary for Scotland had been since Lauderdale, +and confirmed the connection of Scotland with the services in India. +But, politically, Scotland, till the Reform Bill, had scarcely a recognisable +existence. The electorate was tiny, and great landholders controlled +the votes, whether genuine or created by legal fiction—“faggot +votes.” Municipal administration in the late eighteenth +and early nineteenth centuries was terribly corrupt, and reform was +demanded, but the French Revolution, producing associations of Friends +of the People, who were prosecuted and grievously punished in trials +for sedition, did not afford a fortunate moment for peaceful reforms.</p> +<p>But early in the nineteenth century Jeffrey, editor of ‘The +Edinburgh Review,’ made it the organ of Liberalism, and no less +potent in England than in Scotland; while Scott, on the Tory side, led +a following of Scottish penmen across the Border in the service of ‘The +Quarterly Review.’ With ‘Blackwood’s Magazine’ +and Wilson, Hogg, and Lockhart; with Jeffrey and ‘The Edinburgh,’ +the Scottish metropolis almost rivalled London as the literary capital.</p> +<p>About 1818 Lockhart recognised the superiority of the Whig wits in +literature; but against them all Scott is a more than sufficient set-off. +The years of stress between Waterloo (1815) and the Reform Bill (1832) +made Radicalism (fostered by economic causes, the enormous commercial +and industrial growth, and the unequal distribution of its rewards) +perhaps even more pronounced north than south of the Tweed. In +1820 “the Radical war” led to actual encounters between +the yeomanry and the people. The ruffianism of the Tory paper +‘The Beacon’ caused one fatal duel, and was within an inch +of leading to another, in which a person of the very highest consequence +would have “gone on the sod.” For the Reform Bill +the mass of Scottish opinion, so long not really represented at all, +was as eager as for the Covenant. So triumphant was the first +Whig or Radical majority under the new system, that Jeffrey, the Whig +pontiff, perceived that the real struggle was to be “between property +and no property,” between Capital and Socialism. This circumstance +had always been perfectly clear to Scott and the Tories.</p> +<p>The watchword of the eighteenth century in literature, religion, +and politics had been “no enthusiasm.” But throughout +the century, since 1740, “enthusiasm,” “the return +to nature,” had gradually conquered till the rise of the Romantic +school with Coleridge and Scott. In religion the enthusiastic +movement of the Wesleys had altered the face of the Church in England, +while in Scotland the “Moderates” had lost position, and +“zeal” or enthusiasm pervaded the Kirk. The question +of lay patronage of livings had passed through many phases since Knox +wrote, “It pertaineth to the people, and to every several congregation, +to elect their minister.” In 1833, immediately after the +passing of the Reform Bill, the return to the primitive Knoxian rule +was advocated by the “Evangelical” or “High Flying” +opponents of the Moderates. Dr Chalmers, a most eloquent person, +whom Scott regarded as truly a man of genius, was the leader of the +movement. The Veto Act, by which the votes of a majority of heads +of families were to be fatal to the claims of a patron’s presentee, +had been passed by the General Assembly; it was contrary to Queen Anne’s +Patronage Act of 1711,—a measure carried, contrary to Harley’s +policy, by a coalition of English Churchmen and Scottish Jacobite members +of Parliament. The rejection, under the Veto Act, of a presentee +by the church of Auchterarder, was declared illegal by the Court of +Session and the judges in the House of Lords (May 1839); the Strathbogie +imbroglio, “with two Presbyteries, one taking its orders from +the Court of Session, the other from the General Assembly” (1837-1841), +brought the Assembly into direct conflict with the law of the land. +Dr Chalmers would not allow the spiritual claims of the Kirk to be suppressed +by the State. “King Christ’s Crown Honours” +were once more in question. On May 18, 1843, the followers of +the principles of Knox and Andrew Melville marched out of the Assembly +into Tanfield Hall, and made Dr Chalmers Moderator, and themselves “The +Free Church of Scotland.” In 1847 the hitherto separated +synods of various dissenting bodies came together as United Presbyterians, +and in 1902 they united with the Free Church as “the United Free +Church,” while a small minority, mainly Highland, of the former +Free Church, now retains that title, and apparently represents Knoxian +ideals. Thus the Knoxian ideals have modified, even to this day, +the ecclesiastical life of Scotland, while the Church of James I., never +by persecution extinguished (<i>nec tamen consumebatur</i>), has continued +to exist and develop, perhaps more in consequence of love of the Liturgy +than from any other cause.</p> +<p>Meanwhile, and not least in the United Free Church, extreme tenacity +of dogma has yielded place to very advanced Biblical criticism; and +Knox, could he revisit Scotland with all his old opinions, might not +be wholly satisfied by the changes wrought in the course of more than +three centuries. The Scottish universities, discouraged and almost +destitute of pious benefactors since the end of the sixteenth century, +have profited by the increase of wealth and a comparatively recent outburst +of generosity. They always provided the cheapest, and now they +provide the cheapest and most efficient education that is offered by +any homes of learning of mediæval foundation.</p> +<h2>FOOTNOTES</h2> +<p><a name="footnote2"></a><a href="#citation2">{2}</a> A good +example of these Celtic romances is ‘The Tain Bo Cualgne.’</p> +<p><a name="footnote4"></a><a href="#citation4">{4}</a> The best +account of Roman military life in Scotland, from the time of Agricola +to the invasion by Lollius Urbicus (140-158 A.D.), may be studied in +Mr Curie’s ‘A Roman Frontier Post and Its People’ +(Maclehose, Glasgow, 1911). The relics, weapons, arms, pottery, +and armour of Roman men, and the ornaments of the native women, are +here beautifully reproduced. Dr Macdonald’s excellent work, +‘The Roman Wall in Scotland’ (Maclehose, 1911), is also +most interesting and instructive.</p> +<p><a name="footnote10"></a><a href="#citation10">{10}</a> For +the Claims of Supremacy see Appendix C. to vol. i. of my ‘History +of Scotland,’ pp. 496-499.</p> +<p><a name="footnote20"></a><a href="#citation20">{20}</a> Lord +Reay, according to the latest book on Scottish peerages, represents +these MacHeths or Mackays.</p> +<p><a name="footnote27"></a><a href="#citation27">{27}</a> ‘Iliad,’ +xviii. 496-500.</p> +<p><a name="footnote36"></a><a href="#citation36">{36}</a> As +Waleys was then an English as much as a Scottish name, I see no reason +for identifying the William le Waleys, outlawed for bilking a poor woman +who kept a beer house (Perth, June-August, 1296), with the great historical +hero of Scotland.</p> +<p><a name="footnote38"></a><a href="#citation38">{38}</a> See +Dr Neilson on “Blind Harry’s Wallace,” in ‘Essays +and Studies by Members of the English Association,’ p. 85 ff. +(Oxford, 1910.)</p> +<p><a name="footnote52"></a><a href="#citation52">{52}</a> The +precise date is disputed.</p> +<p><a name="footnote57"></a><a href="#citation57">{57}</a> By +a blunder which Sir James Ramsay corrected, history has accused James +of arresting his “whole House of Lords”!</p> +<p><a name="footnote61"></a><a href="#citation61">{61}</a> The +ballad fragments on the Knight of Liddesdale’s slaying, and on +“the black dinner,” are preserved in Hume of Godscroft’s +‘History of he House of Douglas,’ written early in the seventeenth +century.</p> +<p><a name="footnote67"></a><a href="#citation67">{67}</a> The +works of Messrs Herkless and Hannay on the Bishops of St Andrews may +be consulted.</p> +<p><a name="footnote71"></a><a href="#citation71">{71}</a> See +p. 38, note 1.</p> +<p><a name="footnote89"></a><a href="#citation89">{89}</a> Knox +gives another account. Our evidence is from a household book of +expenses, <i>Liber Emptorum</i>, in MS.</p> +<p><a name="footnote91"></a><a href="#citation91">{91}</a> As +to the story of forgery, see a full discussion in the author’s +‘History of Scotland,’ i. 460-467. 1900.</p> +<p><a name="footnote94"></a><a href="#citation94">{94}</a> There +is no proof that this man was the preacher George Wishart, later burned.</p> +<p><a name="footnote96"></a><a href="#citation96">{96}</a> A curious +controversy is constantly revived in this matter. It is urged +that Knox’s mobs did not destroy the abbey churches of Kelso, +Melrose, Dryburgh, Roxburgh, and Coldingham: that was done by Hertford’s +army. If so, they merely deprived the Knoxian brethren of the +pleasures of destruction which they enjoyed almost everywhere else. +The English, if guilty, left at Melrose, Jedburgh, Coldingham, and Kelso +more beautiful remains of mediæval architecture than the Reformers +were wont to spare.</p> +<p><a name="footnote99"></a><a href="#citation99">{99}</a> This +part of our history is usually and erroneously told as given by Knox, +writing fifteen years later. He needs to be corrected by the letters +and despatches of the day, which prove that the Reformer’s memory, +though picturesque, had, in the course of fifteen years, become untrustworthy. +He is the chief source of the usual version of Solway Moss.</p> +<p><a name="footnote106"></a><a href="#citation106">{106}</a> +The dates and sequence of events are perplexing. In ‘John +Knox and the Reformation’ (pp. 86-95) I have shown the difficulties.</p> +<p><a name="footnote111a"></a><a href="#citation111a">{111a}</a> +The details of these proceedings and the evidence for them may be found +in the author’s book, ‘John Knox and the Reformation,’ +pp. 135-141. Cf. also my ‘History of Scotland,’ ii. +58-60.</p> +<p><a name="footnote111b"></a><a href="#citation111b">{111b}</a> +See ‘Affaires Etrangères: Angleterre,’ xv. 131-153. +MS.</p> +<p><a name="footnote118"></a><a href="#citation118">{118}</a> +Mary’s one good portrait is that owned by Lord Leven and Melville.</p> +<p><a name="footnote129"></a><a href="#citation129">{129}</a> +I have no longer any personal doubt that Mary wrote the lost French +original of this letter, usually numbered II. in the Casket Letters +(see my paper, “The Casket Letters,” in ‘The Scottish +Historical Review,’ vol. v., No. 17, pp. 1-12). The arguments +tending to suggest that parts of the letter are forged (see my ‘Mystery +of Mary Stuart’) are (I now believe) unavailing.</p> +<p><a name="footnote137"></a><a href="#citation137">{137}</a> +I can construe in no other sense the verbose “article.” +It may be read in Dr Hay Fleming’s ‘Reformation in Scotland,’ +pp. 449, 450, with sufficient commentary, pp. 450-453.</p> +<p><a name="footnote144"></a><a href="#citation144">{144}</a> +It appears that there was both a plot by Lennox, after the Raid of Ruthven, +to seize James—“preaching will be of no avail to convert +him,” his mother wrote; and also an English plot, rejected by +Gowrie, to poison both James and Mary! For the former, see Professor +Hume Brown, ‘History of Scotland,’ vol. ii. p. 289; for +the latter, see my ‘History of Scotland,’ vol. ii. pp. 286, +287, with the authorities in each case.</p> +<p><a name="footnote156"></a><a href="#citation156">{156}</a> +Of these versions, that long lost one which was sent to England has +been published for the first time, with the previously unnoticed incident +of Robert Oliphant, in the author’s ‘James VI. and the Gowrie +Mystery.’ Here it is also demonstrated that all the treasonable +letters attributed in 1606-1608 to Logan were forged by Logan’s +solicitor, George Sprot, though the principal letter seems to me to +be a copy of an authentic original. That all, <i>as they stand</i>, +are forgeries is the unanimous opinion of experts. See the whole +of the documents in the author’s ‘Confessions of George +Sprot.’ Roxburghe Club.</p> +<p><a name="footnote181"></a><a href="#citation181">{181}</a> +Colkitto’s men and the Badenoch contingent.</p> +<p><a name="footnote182"></a><a href="#citation182">{182}</a> +Much has been made of cruelties at Aberdeen. Montrose sent in +a drummer, asking the Provost to remove the old men, women, and children. +The drummer was shot, as, at Perth, Montrose’s friend, Kilpont, +had been murdered. The enemy were pursued through the town. +Spalding names 115 townsmen slain in the whole battle and pursuit. +Women were slain if they were heard to mourn their men—not a very +probable story. Not one woman is named. The Burgh Records +mention no women slain. Baillie says “the town was well +plundered.” Jaffray, who fled from the fight as fast as +his horse could carry him, says that women and children were slain. +See my ‘History of Scotland,’ vol. iii. pp. 126-128.</p> +<p><a name="footnote186a"></a><a href="#citation186a">{186a}</a> +Craig-Brown, ‘History of Selkirkshire,’ vol. i. pp. 190, +193. ‘Act. Parl. Scot.,’ vol. vi. pt. i. p. 492.</p> +<p><a name="footnote186b"></a><a href="#citation186b">{186b}</a> +‘Act. Parl. Scot.,’ vol. vi. pt. i. p. 514.</p> +<p><a name="footnote187"></a><a href="#citation187">{187}</a> +Hume Brown, vol. ii. p. 339.</p> +<p><a name="footnote208"></a><a href="#citation208">{208}</a> +The Boot was an old French and Scottish implement. It was a framework +into which the human leg was inserted; wedges were then driven between +the leg and the framework.</p> +<p><a name="footnote225"></a><a href="#citation225">{225}</a> +Many disgusting details may be read in the author’s ‘Life +of Sir George Mackenzie.’</p> +<p><a name="footnote226"></a><a href="#citation226">{226}</a> +Hume Brown, ii. 414, 415.</p> +<p><a name="footnote250"></a><a href="#citation250">{250}</a> +Dr Hay Fleming finds no mention of this affair in the Minutes of the +Societies.</p> +<p><a name="footnote254a"></a><a href="#citation254a">{254a}</a> +All this is made clear from the letters of the date in the Stuart Papers +(Historical Manuscript Commission).</p> +<p><a name="footnote254b"></a><a href="#citation254b">{254b}</a> +In addition to Saint Simon’s narrative we have the documentary +evidence taken in a French inquiry.</p> +<p><a name="footnote264"></a><a href="#citation264">{264}</a> +See ‘The King over the Water,’ by Alice Shield and A. Lang. +Thackeray’s King James, in ‘Esmond,’ is very amusing +but absolutely false to history.</p> +<p><a name="footnote265"></a><a href="#citation265">{265}</a> +‘The Porteous Trial,’ by Mr Roughead, W.S.</p> +<p><a name="footnote287"></a><a href="#citation287">{287}</a> +See the author’s ‘History of Scotland,’ iv. 446-500, +where the evidence is examined.</p> +<p><a name="footnote290"></a><a href="#citation290">{290}</a> +‘Register of Decreets,’ vol. 482.</p> +<p><a name="footnote293"></a><a href="#citation293">{293}</a> +Tradition in Glencoe.</p> +<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A SHORT HISTORY OF SCOTLAND***</p> +<pre> + + +***** This file should be named 15955-h.htm or 15955-h.zip****** + + +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: +https://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/1/5/9/5/15955 + + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +https://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at https://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at https://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit https://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including including checks, online payments and credit card +donations. To donate, please visit: +https://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + https://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + +</pre></body> +</html> |