The Bruce

by John Barbour

40 lay desolat. Barbour, it may be from considerations of space or symmetry, or as a Bruce partisan, omits all mention of the child-Queen Margaret (1286-1290); Bruce “the Competitor,” indeed, held that his claim was superior to hers, and on Alexander’s death started a rising apparently against the succession of a female contrary to the ancient customs of the country. In his pleadings before Edward he claims to be “higher in degree and more worthy in blood” even than she (Palgrave, pp. 30-31). To the reign of Balliol (1292-1296) there is reference later; but no notice is taken of the rising under Wallace (1297-1298) nor of the Barons’ War (1299-1304); the former was carried on in the name of King John, and the latter was mainly a Comyn affair. Robert Bruce (King) took a fitful share in both operations on the national side, but ended as an active partisan of Edward I. (but see note on 611).

49 sum wald haiff the Balleol king. The active heads of his party were Sir John Comyn of Badenoch and William Fraser, Bishop of St. Andrews, two of the Guardians (Palgrave, p. 18). These two had assumed the control of the government (p. 16).

51 eldest systir was. The direct line of William the Lyon having failed, recourse was had to that of his brother, David Earl of Huntingdon. David’s only son died without issue. His eldest daughter, Margaret, was the mother of Devorgoil, or Devorgilla, mother of John Balliol who was thus the great-grandson of the Earl, and of the senior female branch. David’s second daughter, Isabella, had married Robert Bruce of Annandale father of the Competitor, who was thus the son of the second daughter, as Devorgilla was the daughter of the first.

54 in als nere degree. The legal phraseology used throughout by Barbour corresponds with the pleadings submitted by Bruce. These (Anglo-French) are given in full by Palgrave in his Documents and Records, vol. i.; the Latin version from the Great Roll, printed in Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. i., is only a notarial summary. Barbour, however, does not put the issue clearly. In the “branch collaterale” (en lyne collateral) of Earl David, Bruce was “in als nere degre” (aussi pres en degre) as Devorgilla. But Devorgilla was dead before the vacancy in the throne occurred; she had never been vested in the succession, and thus had no rights to transmit to her son (cf. 59, 60). The heritage, therefore, on the death of its possessor, came by law to him who was then nearest in blood—that is, to Bruce, as grandson of Earl David; for John Balliol, as great-grandson, was a degree further away (qe en Sire Roberd de Brus meilleur dreyt deit reposer qe est plus procheyn du saunk qe en Sire Johan de Balliol qe est en plus loyngteyn degree.—Palgrave, p. 34, § 8). Though modern historians have scouted Bruce’s plea, it was quite sound for the Middle Ages. Bruce himself cites a contemporary case in Castile, where a younger brother was, by the law of the Visigoths—i.e., their version of Roman law—preferred to the son of the elder.

58 nocht to lawer feys lik. Balliol urged that the same law applied to kingdoms as to earldoms, and that thus a kingdom should pass to the next heir by seniority, “without any regard to nearness of degree” (Palgrave, 27, § 3). To this Bruce replies that kings are above the laws, and that the right to a kingdom should not be judged by common law, nor by laws applying to subjects and subject fiefs (29, § 5; 27, § 3), but by “the laws by which kings reign,” the “law of nations” (dreit naturel, 25, § 5); and he therefore appeals to Edward as “his Emperor” to judge accordingly (29, § 6), on the analogy of the German or Holy Roman Emperor, who was, in theory, the superior of Christian kings in temporal matters (cf. on 153). Balliol rebuts this with the further contention that the issue is not one of “imperial law,” since “the kingdom of Scotland is held of the Crown of England and of no Empire”; and that it would be to the prejudice of Edward’s Crown rights (en prejudice de la coroune notre Seigneur le Roi) if he judged the matter in his Court by imperial law (p. 43). Bruce, it will be observed, takes higher ground than Balliol, and presents a special interpretation of the (alleged) overlordship, on which see further note on 153. The distinction may seem over-refined to modern minds, but to the medieval mind, with its own “imperial” idea, it was both real and important. Bruce had other pleas in support of his main position, but on these Barbour does not touch (cf. on 153).

61 in lyne evyn descendand. The correct reading is fixed by the legal phrase, en la dreyte lyne descendant (Palgrave, p. 31, § 2).

62 Thai bar ... on hand. Skeat says that “to bear on hand often signified to ‘assert strongly,’” and interprets it here as, “They asserted.” But this is meaningless in the present context, and the correct significance is as in Chaucer, “For he bar hir on honde of trecherye” (Complaynt of Faire Anelida, line 158); and in Troilus (1154-1155), “She bar him on honde that this was don for malice”: hence, here “accused” in the sense of “controverted,” on the lines laid down in 59-64. The weaker sense is probably seen in Prologue of the W. of B.’s Tale, 380, 575, etc.

67 Erle off Carryk. The Competitor was not Earl; it was his son, father of King Robert, who married the widowed Countess of Carrick.

71-5. thai all concordyt. “The nobles, by unanimous consent, decreed among themselves to send serious (solemnes) messages to Edward King of England that in this cause he should be their higher judge” (Fordun, Gesta Annalia, lxx.). The parties were at bitter variance, and there was no other authority strong enough to enforce a decision (ibid.). In fact, civil war was impending. On this account, Bishop Fraser of St. Andrews had already written to Edward on the matter (October, 1290). From this letter we gather that Balliol was about to approach Edward on his own behalf. The “Seven Earls” appealed in support of their own rights to elect a king (Palgrave, p. 14). Bruce submitted his claim to Edward, as against the guardians, who favoured Balliol (ibid., pp. 17, 18). Hemingburgh says that the Guardians of Scotland, fearing a popular outbreak, by the advice of the magnates sent to the King of England, that in a matter of such great doubt they might have the benefit of his advice (ejus consilio fruerentur, ii., p. 31).