BOOK XIII.
32 tynt the suet. “Lost their lives.” The phrase in this sense occurs also in the Wallace: “The Scottis on fute gert mony loiss the suete” (The Wallace, Jamieson’s edition, Bk. xii., line 194).
36 slew fire. “Struck out fire.” Also in Wallace, iv. 285: “slew fyr on flint.” Cf. from The Buik of Alexander: “thare dyntis, That kest fyre as man dois flyntis” (p. 236, line 24).
51 the archeris war perelous. Baker says that the archers were not given a suitable position, as in his time, being placed behind the first line instead of on the wings (cf. note on Bk. XII. 537, and below lines 102-5, and note on 104). “Some,” he adds, “shot upwards so that their arrows fell fruitlessly (incassum) on the helmets of their adversaries; those who shot straight wounded a few Scots in the breast, but more English in the back” (Chron., pp. 57-58). At Falkirk (1298), after the failure of the first attack by the horsemen, Edward I. brought up his archers to play on the Scottish masses till these were broken, and then charged and dispersed them. Bruce anticipated this manœuvre, and made provision for it (see note on 98).
61 Robert of Keth. The Kethes or Keiths took their name from the barony of Keith, in Lothian. This Robert was still in the English service on May 23, 1308 (Bain, iii. 44), yet his name appears among those present at Bruce’s Parliament of March 16, 1309, as Robert de Kethe, Marshall (Acts Parl. Scot., i., p. 99). Elsewhere he is said to have joined Bruce at Christmas, 1308 (Bain, No. 245). He received from Bruce the office of Earl Marshall as its holders, one of the branches of the “Mareschals,” were adherents of England, and continued to be (Bain, iii., p. lxviii).
68 at a syde. “On one side,” as in line 163, “in-till a front.” This movement is too vaguely described to be located exactly. Most probably it was to the left of the three “battles” now engaged (English right), on ground presently occupied by Bruce with his own division.
98 nakit. “Without defensive armour,” as in Bk. VII. 330. The two previous lines mean that the Scottish horsemen did not have to stop a stroke or hold against a blow; i.e., the archers offered no resistance. Bruce’s intention, we may gather from lines 58-60, was so to harass the archers on the flank as to occupy them with their own defence and restrain their shooting. The attack, however, was so successfully pushed home that the archers were wholly scattered.
104 thair awne folk had no space. We gather that the archers had taken up a position on the right front of the main body, where they blocked the advance of the horsemen directly behind. These received the flying archers with blows, and pushed forward to take their place. The Lanercost chronicler says the battle began with a skirmish between the opposing archers, and that the Scots archers were driven back. This, again, suggests that the archers were somewhere in front. Mr. Oman follows Baker in placing them behind the first line. See note on 51.
132 on a syde. See above on 68.
162 All four the battelis. The Vita Edw. Sec. (p. 203) and the Chron. de Lanercost (p. 225) divide the Scots into three battles (turmas, acies), the usual medieval arrangement. The latter also gives Robert the rear division, as here.
175 in ane schiltrum all. Gray says that the “battles” of the English were crowded close together (entassez estoint), and could not repeat their attacks upon the Scots (remuerent devers eaux), as their horses were impaled by the pikes (p. 142). In the Lanercost chronicle we read that the English behind (sequentes) “were not able to reach the Scots because of the interposition of the first line, nor in any way to help themselves” (p. 224). The English, indeed, were too many to be manœuvred according to the simple tactics of the day, and were, in addition, crowded on too narrow a front. There was no generalship. These were Bruce’s chief advantages. He was protected by the hill and wood behind from being surrounded (cf. note on Bk. XI. 300). Besides, his rapid and successive advance prevented the English from developing any such intention. They could not well deploy among the “pools” and marshes.
183 quyntis. “Quyntis is merely the French cointises, signifying finery or quaint attire” (Skeat); generally, ornamental attachments to the armour. E reads quhytys, and H coates, so that we may have to do with the “white” surcoats. In viii. 232 Barbour speaks of hauberks “quhit as flour.”
208 the Scottis archeris. The effective part played by the Scottish archers is usually overlooked.
283 quhen the King of England saw his men fle. The English writers make no mention of the appearance of the camp-followers. They date the break-up from the failure of Gloucester’s attack with the van. As those behind, says the Lanercost chronicler, could not get forward (see note on 275), nothing remained but to take measures for flight (pp. 225-6). The front line had fallen back only to add to the confusion (cf. line 170, etc.). “When those who were with the King saw the Earl’s division smashed up (contritum) and their friends making ready to fly, they said it was dangerous to stay longer,” etc. (Vita Edw. Sec., p. 205). Gray says the King went much against his will (as Barbour reports one version in line 298), and that he knocked over with his mace the Scots that were catching at his charger’s housings (Scala., p. 142). Trokelowe affirms that he laid about him “like a lion,” and brandished a sword dripping with blood (Annales, p. 86).
297 By the renyhe. “Those who had been assigned to the King’s rein were drawing the King forward by the rein out of the plain (hors du chaumpe) towards the castle” (Scala., p. 142).
307 I cheis heir to byde and de. In Vita Edw. Sec. it is said he hastened to assist the Earl of Gloucester when he saw him fall, and perished with him, “thinking it more honourable to perish with such a man than to escape death by flight” (p. 204). Cf. also Scala.: “I have never been accustomed to fly” (p. 143).
321 thrid best knycht. See note on Bk. XI. 174. He is highly spoken of by both Baston and the Vita Edw. writer. According to Bruce’s English eulogist in the Scotichronicon, the other two were Bruce himself and the Emperor Henry (lib. xiii., ch. xvi.).
328-9 fra ... the King Wes fled, wes nane that durst abyde. “When the King’s banner is seen to depart the whole army quickly disperses” (Vita Edw. Sec., p. 205).
335 Fled to the wattir of Forth. On no hypothesis other than that the battle was fought on the plain between the Forth and the Bannock can this fact be explained. Of the fact itself there is no question. The Lanercost chronicler, in his Versus, says: “Forth swallowed up many well furnished with arms and horses” (p. 227). They were probably seeking for a ford.
337 And Bannokburn. “The folk in the English rear fell back upon the ditch (fosse) of Bannockburn, one tumbling over the other” (Scala., p. 142). “Another unfortunate thing happened to the English, because, since a little before they had crossed a great ditch into which the tide flows—Bannockburn by name—and now in confusion wished to retire, many knights and others, on account of the pressure, fell into it with their horses (cf. Barbour, line 338), and some with great difficulty got out, and many were quite unable to clear themselves of the ditch; and on this account Bannockburn was on English lips for many years to come” (Lanercost, 226). In Vita Edw. also mention is made of a “certain ditch” (fovea) which “swallowed up (absorbuit) many,” and where a great part perished (p. 205). The Bannock turns sharply north near the English rear, but the description in Barbour and the reference above to the tide with the inclusion of the Forth, indicate the part nearer the mouth.
341 laddis, etc. I.e., the camp-followers.
352 Of slyk. In Chron. de Lanercost (p. 226) “Bannock’s mud” (Bannoke limus). Edmund de Malolacu (Mauley), Edward’s steward, met his death “in a certain slimy hollow” (in quodam antro lutoso. Flores Historiarum, iii., p. 159).
363 Philip the Mowbray said. Different interpretations were put upon Mowbray’s action, but the fact and the quite satisfactory reason given by Barbour are borne out by the English chroniclers. “When the King comes to the castle, thinking he will find refuge there, he is repulsed like an enemy; the bridge is drawn up and the gate closed. On this account the keeper of the castle was believed by many to be not unacquainted with treason, and yet he was seen that very day in his armour on the field, as it were ready to fight for the King. However, I neither acquit nor accuse the keeper of treason, but confess that in the providence of God the King of England did not enter the castle, because if he had then been admitted he could not have failed to be captured” (Vita Edw. Sec., p. 205). In Gesta Edw. de Carnarvon the Governor is wrongly called Alexander de Mowbray, and the account is: “The foresaid keeper, knowing that his supplies were not sufficient for himself and his men, and also fearing that Robert Bruce, having got the victory, would attack and capture the castle, did not wish to expose his King of England to such great danger, and, preferring to incur misunderstanding, refused on this account to open the castle of the King” (p. 47). The castle was surrendered, and Mowbray entered the service of Bruce.
379 the Rownde Tabill. Usually and quite wrongly identified with the King’s Knot—i.e., garden—a regular mound below the castle rock. It is mentioned by Sir David Lindsay in the sixteenth century. In 1302 Edward I. had a “Round Table” (la table rounde) ordained (ordinari) at Falkirk (Ann. Lond., p. 104). To “hold a Round Table” was a sporting function among knights; here some sort of building may be referred to, like that described by Murimuth (1344), intended to be built for the purpose at Windsor (Chronicle, p. 155). Probably, in that case, it was only of Barbour’s own time. I incline, however, to the belief, from its associations in Lindsay’s verse, that it was a natural feature—the circular crags enclosing the western division of the modern King’s Park. It would thus be a place-name, like “Arthur’s Seat.”
380 the Park enveronyt thai. Gray says the King was taken round the Torwood and by the plains of Lothian (Lownesse, p. 143).
381 held in hy. The Lanercost chronicler says that they had “as guide a Scottish knight who knew by what route they could escape” (p. 227).
409 wes tane in. The Lanercost chronicler writes that Hereford and those with him were making for Carlisle when they were captured at Bothwell Castle: “For the sheriff, the keeper of the castle, who up to that time had held the castle for the King of England, seeing that his countrymen had been victorious in the war, suffered the more noble of them who had come there to enter the castle as if to have a safe retreat, and when they entered seized them,” afterwards surrendering them to Bruce (p. 228). In the anonymous chronicle used by Stevenson we have a similar account. Hereford and a few nobles were allowed to enter the castle, where they found themselves in custody. The rest remained outside the walls, and were suddenly set on by the Scots, who slew them, except a few who surrendered (Illustrations of Scottish History, p. 2). Barbour says three-fourths were taken or slain (416). In Ann. Lond. Hereford is said to have been accompanied by a thousand men-at-arms (p. 231). The Lanercost estimate is 600 horse and 1,000 foot, Umfraville being of the company (ibid.). Walsingham gives the total of earls, barons, and baronets captured and slain as 154; of clerics and squires an excessive number (Historia Angl., i., p. 154). The name of the keeper was Gilbertson as in E; he appears on record as “Fitz-Gilbert” (Bain, iii. No. 243, etc.). He joined Bruce and was the ancestor of the great Hamilton family. Bothwell Castle is on the Clyde.
417 Moris de Berclay. In Vita Edw. (p. 206) he is among those captured at Bothwell. According to the Lanercost historian, it was Pembroke (Valence) who fled “on foot” with the Welshmen, and escaped (p. 228). In Ann. Lond. de Valence is said to have fled nudis pedibus (bare-footed); that is, apparently, he removed his foot and leg armour (p. 230).
456 Thai dispendit haly that day, In spoulyheing. The author of Vita Edw. declares that it was the preoccupation of the Scots with the plunder that allowed many English to escape. In his precise way, he estimates that the valuable equipment which fell to the Scots was worth £200,000 (p. 206), or at the ratio of 1:15 about £3,000,000 present day (cf. note on 667-8).
463 spuris rede. I.e., gilt or gold spurs worn only by knights. The 700 pairs of C would give us 700 knights slain; E’s 200 is probably nearer the truth. In Ann. Lond., (p. 231) we get a list of thirty-seven knights slain at “the battle of Stirling.” Of the foot and squires, it is said, the most part (maxima pars) was not slain. Baker says about 300 men-at-arms (viri militares) were among the slain (57). Bower gives 200 knights slain besides Gloucester (Scotich. Goodall, edition 1759, ii., p. 250). Walsingham, from his MS. source, fixes the number of knights and squires who fell at 700 (Historia Anglicana, p. 141); Capgrave the lords, barons, and knights slain and captured at 154. More than 500 were reported dead who were afterwards found to be captives (Chronicle, p. 180) and had to be ransomed (Vita Edw., p. 206). Fabyan gives forty-two noblemen slain, and sixty-seven knights and baronets, while twelve “men of name” were taken prisoner (New Chronicles, p. 420).
466 Gilbert of Clar. About twenty-three years of age (Ann. Lond., p. 231). He fell in the first charge (Vita Edw.; Baker). Baker says the Scots would have gladly taken him alive for ransom had they known who he was, but that he did not wear his surcoat (toga) with his coat of arms (p. 57). Cf. lines 510-11. That men callit, says Barbour, having in mind Ralph de Monthermer, his step-father who had previously borne the title.
468 Payne Typtot. Paganus Typetot (Vita Edw.) or Tybetot (Ann. Lond.). “Paganus Typetoft,” or “Typetot,” is the name in Chron. de Lanercost.
472 Wilyhame Vepownt. Sir William de Vepont (Veteriponte) was a Scotsman in the service of England till 1312, having been imprisoned on capture during the Comyn resistance in 1302. He was under Valence in Ayr in 1307 (Bain, ii., Nos. 1,283, 1,294; iii., No. 263). Walter the Ros was serving England in Linlithgow in 1312 (Bain, iii., p. 411).
486 at rebours. I.e., treated badly, held “in great dislike” (Skeat). See Glossary. Edward had a son, Alexander, by Isabella of Atholl (Exchq. Rolls, II. cxxxii.).
489-90 Erll Davy of Adell. Lord Hailes did not know “what judgment to form of this story,” in view of the fact that sentence of forfeiture was not passed against Atholl till 1323 (Annales, ii. 58 note). But his lands were forfeited by October, 1314, and granted to Sir Neil Campbell (Robertson’s Index, p. 26; ii. Scots Peerage), and he, then being in England, received three manors from Edward II. “till he recovers his Scottish possessions” (Bain, iii., p. 75). Atholl’s career is, however, puzzling. His wife was Johanna, daughter of the murdered Comyn of Badenoch. Up till 1312 he is a supporter of England, and in December of that year even seems to have sat in the English Parliament. But in the previous October he is among those present in Bruce’s Parliament at Inverness (Acta. Parl. Scot., vol. i., 103); next appears as Constable of Scotland, and, early in 1313, is a witness to charters to the Abbey of Arbroath (Scots Peerage). Then comes a blank till October, 1314, as above. There is thus room for Barbour’s story: Atholl did give a short-lived support to the national cause, and a forfeiture of his lands did follow soon after Bannockburn. He remained an active adherent of England till his death, January, 1327.
495 Wilyhame of Herth. Apparently William Mareschal of Erth (Bain, iii. 343; cf. note on 61). Sir William de Erth was a supporter of Comyn in the Barons’ War, and capitulated with him and others at Strathorde on February 9, 1304 (Bain, ii., No. 1,741). William de Erth, knight, was alive in 1333 (Bain, iii. 1,099). Erth, or Airth, is on the east of Stirlingshire, on the Forth.
510 somdeill anoyit. Cf. note on 466.
512 till a kirk he gert hym be Brocht. John de Trokelowe says that Bruce sent the bodies of Gloucester and Clifford to King Edward while at Berwick, to be buried as he wished, and this without demanding any payment as ransom (Annales, p. 87).
523 Betung in C is certainly wrong; E gives the correct form Twenge. Marmaduke de Twenge appears on the list in Foedera and elsewhere. He was the hero of Stirling Bridge (1297), who cut his way back over the bridge.
531 trete hym curtasly. Trokelowe says that Bruce caused his noble prisoners to be treated so becomingly and courteously (decenter ac civiliter) “that the hearts of many who were opposed to him he turned, in a wonderful way, to feeling an affection for him” (Annales, p. 87).
544 become of his dwelling. “Became one of his company,” as in Bk. IV. 481, where Bruce says of Douglas and his men in Arran: “Thai ar all of my duelling.”
553 Lowrens = Lawrence. Probably the same Sir Lawrence de Abernethy who in 1338 had provisions sent him by Edward III. for the Castle of Hawthornden. He was thus “Inglis man” again (Bain, iii., p. 235, No. 1,291).
578-85 He convoyit thame so narrowly, etc. “Some, however, lagging in the flight, were slain by the Scots, who followed them swiftly (velociter)” (Chron. de Lanercost, p. 227). “The King escaped with great trouble” (a graunt payn, Scala., p. 143).
587 Wynchburch. On the road from Linlithgow to Edinburgh.
592 so feill. According to the Lanercost historian, the King was accompanied by many knights and footmen (p. 227).
612 Erll Patrik. Of March. See note on Bk. XI. 46. “Patrick Earl of March received him honourably, etc., for at that time he was his man” (soun homager. Scala., 143.).
615-16 A bate, etc. “When he came thither (Dunbar) he embarked on a ship, and with his own company put in at Berwick” (Vita Edw. Sec., p. 205). “Thence the King went by sea to Berwick and afterwards to the south” (Scala., 143). “At Dunbar the King, with his special friends, embarked on a boat (scapham) for Berwick” (Lanercost, p. 227). Barbour says they landed at Bamborough on the coast of Yorkshire, and in line 645 gives the number who thus accompanied the King as seventeen.
619-21 The laiff, etc. “The others (see above), not having a ship, come (to Berwick) by land” (Vita Edw. Sec., p. 205). The King, says the Lanercost writer, left all the others to their fate, who, however, came safe and sound to England (p. 228).
631 The Kyng eschapit. According to Baker, “no mortal ingenuity, neither the swiftness of the horses nor the cover on the way (involucra locorum) could have kept the King from capture by the Scots,” had not Christ Himself, at the intercession of His Mother, brought him out of Scottish territory, as both the King and his companions afterwards confessed. In his peril Edward vowed to found a monastery dedicated to the “Mother of God,” where twenty-four friars might study theology (Baker, p. 58); and, in fulfilment thereof, established Oriel College at Oxford (Hailes, ii. 57 note).
667-8 The castell and the towrys ... doune gert he myne. Stirling Castle thus lay in ruins till 1336-7, when it was rebuilt for Edward III. “after the conquest,” probably on the old plan. Stone walls and towers were erected, a “peel” of wood, to the north the walls (parietes) of which were plastered over, and various inner buildings for the garrison, etc., also of wood daubed with mortar and roofed with turf (Bain, iii., pp. 364-8). The rebuilding and repairs cost £280, equal to about £4,000 now (Bain, lviii.).
687 The Erll wes changit. In Vita Edw. Sec. (pp. 208-9) is recorded the exchange of the Earl for the wife of Bruce and other Scottish captives, including the Bishop of Glasgow. On October 2, 1314, “Robert, Bishop of Glasgow, the Countess Carrick, wife of Robert de Brus, with his sister and daughter and Donald de Mar,” were at Carlisle Castle, “to be taken thence to a place arranged by the Earl of Essex and Hereford and the Sheriff” (Bain, iii., No. 393). Mar is, no doubt, the “young earl” referred to in the Vita Edw., which says further that Edward gave to his sister, Hereford’s wife, all the Scottish captives since the time of Edward I.—fifteen and more—to procure the release of her husband (p. 208).
697 Davy. David II. (June 7, 1329 to February 22, 1371). He scarcely deserved Barbour’s epithet “worthy.”
702 Fif yheir. In 1375 Robert was in the fifth year of his reign; he would not have “passit” it till February 22, 1376. He was born March 2, 1316, and in 1375 was in his sixtieth year. The year in Scotland, however, began on March 25, so that Barbour’s cross-dating really stands for what we should call the early spring of 1376. He was then engaged on The Bruce.
705-6 the gud King Robert. I.e., Robert I. the Bruce, dead forty-six years. It is curious to find this elaborate dating “of the compyling of this book” here, and not at the end. Evidently the mention of the marriage of the Steward, the reigning King’s father, is Barbour’s cue. There is no reason to suppose that this was a subsequent insertion, and we may conclude that the poem was completed somewhat later.
736 our-raid all Northumbirland. “They (the Scots) plundered the northern bounds of England as far as Richmond and returned, devastating the country with fire and carrying off with them many captives” (Gesta Edwardi, p. 47). Cf. Barbour, lines following. On July 1, 1314, the Bishop of Durham writes the King regarding Scottish preparations for an invasion of England, of which he has heard. On October 7, 1314, the Prior and Convent of Durham pay the Earl of Murray eight hundred marks to secure the bishopric immunity from invasion for a stated period (Letters from Northern Registers, Nos. cxliv., cxlix.). According to the Lanercost chronicler, the Scots entered by Berwick, and burned almost all Northumberland, spared Durham for a monetary consideration, penetrated to the Tees and to Richmond, and returned, via Lanercost, with a great body of cattle and captives (pp. 228, 229).