The only thing that has the semblance of a proof that Wallace was not married, is what follows in the same note. “The estate of Ellerslie went to the Wallaces of Ricardton, as his nearest male heirs.” But their being male heirs might be the reason of their inheriting this property. Besides, it does not seem fully ascertained, whether our illustrious champion was ever personally vested in these lands. It is admitted by the author of Caledonia, in a preceding note, p. 578, that “both Wyntoun and Harry concur in speaking of the great Wallace as the second son of Sir Malcolm.” Lord Hailes says: “He was the younger son of a gentleman in the neighbourhood of Paisley. Such is the opinion generally received.” Annals, I. 245. It must be admitted, however, that Bower, in his continuation of Fordun, says that “Andrew, the elder brother of William, and honoured with the order of knighthood, being guilefully slain by the English, William succeeded to a sufficient patrimony in lands for his state, which he left to be held by his posterity.” Scotichron. II. Lib. xi. c. 28.
Unless we should suppose the Minstrel determined to lie in the face of evidence, his appeal, in the passage quoted, to his auctor, shews the general belief of the country at the time of his writing, and even during the life of Mr. John Blair, to whom he seems to appeal, that Wallace was married. Now, it is well known that Blair was the bosom friend and the faithful associate of Wallace; and, being a priest, it may reasonably be conjectured that he was the person who celebrated the marriage.
Pinkerton remarks, “that the murder of Wallace’s wife, which seems the first cause which excited him to arms,” (he means, most probably, after remaining for several months in peace,) “was committed at Lanark by Heselrig or Hislop, governor of the castle” of Lanark, “whom Wallace after slew. See Fordun, XI. 28. Henry the Minstrel in this instance accords with history, and with tradition; a large cave in Cartland Craigs near Lanark, where Henry says that Wallace lurked, being called Wallace’s Cave to this day. It is remarkable that Sir D. Dalrymple should have omitted this important circumstance, for which Fordun [Bower, his continuator,] was surely good authority.” The Bruce, II. 20, N.
The “important circumstance” referred to must be that of Wallace having slain the governor of the castle of Lanark; for Bower does not say that the reason of this was the murder of the wife of Wallace. But undoubtedly this was a remarkable omission on the part of our learned and accurate annalist.
I do not say, that the account given by Bower of the slaughter of Hesilgir, or, as he calls him, Hesliope, amounts to a proof of the marriage of Wallace, or even certainly intimates the reason of the deed; but it authenticates the fact of Wallace having been at Lanark at this time, and renders it highly probable that he had met with some special excitement. According to the testimony of Bower, it was from this time forward that he openly appeared as the avenger of the wrongs of his country.
The memory of Wallace is still so fresh in the town of Lanark, that the inhabitants point out the place where he was wont to lodge.
“Tradition tells that the house where Wallace resided was at the head of the Castlegate, opposite the church, where a new house has lately been erected. It also acquaints us, that a private vaulted archway led from this house to Cartlane Craigs, but seemingly without the smallest probability.” P. Lanark, Stat. Acc. XV. 33.
And thai oft syss feill causis till him wrocht,
Fra that tyme furth, quhilk mowit [hym sa sar,
That neuir in warld out of his mind was brocht.]—V. 78.