With the mynystir, quhilk was a worthi man:
He wsyt offt to that religiouss place.—V. 288.
This passage has been strangely misunderstood. So early as 1594 it had been made to bear quite a different meaning:—
Thomas Rymour withouttin faill was than
With the minister, &c.
This error has been followed in subsequent editions. In Edit. Perth, 1790, it is, in to the ayle; although it had been properly given, in to the Faile, Edit. 1714.
This was a cell or priory of the Cluniacenses in Kyle, Ayrshire, depending on Paisley. Spottiswoode writes it Feale. “Our history,” he says, “only remarks, that the prior of this place was one of those who hindred the castle of Dumbarton from being surrendered to the English, anno 1544, in opposition to the Earl of Lenox, then governor of it.” But besides this curious passage, which shows that it was an ancient foundation; it may be added, that “the right of the patronage of the kirk of Fale, in the county of Ayr,” is given to James de Lindsay, apparently the ancestor of the Earls of Crawford, in a charter by Robert II. Registr. Mag. Sigill. p. 172. N. 13. The miln of Faill, and the crofthead of Fail, in the lordship of Failfurd, are mentioned in a retour regarding William Wallace, heir of William Wallace, minister of Failfurd, A. 1617. Inquis. Retour. Ayr, N. 162.
Thar man that day had in the merket bene.—V. 297.
In Edit. 1594, 1620, 1714, and Perth, it is that man; in 1648 and 1673, this man; either of which would immediately refer to Thomas of Ercildon. But thar, i.e. their man, respects the servant of the religious fraternity of Faile, as appears from v. 299, which cannot respect True Thomas;
His mastyr speryt, quhat tithingis at he saw.