The above is one of the few books I purchased when I was in Holland some thirty years ago; and as I have quoted enough for the purpose of
identification, I may conclude with asking some of your Dutch correspondents, whether the tract, in this or in any other edition, is of considerable rarity with them? In England I never saw a copy of it but that in my possession. I may add that every paragraph is separately numbered from 1 to 110, as if the production were one of importance to which more particular reference might be made than even by the pagination.
The Hermit of Holyport.
THE BLACK ROOD OF SCOTLAND.
(Vol. ii., pp. 308. 409.)
I am not satisfied with what W. S. G. has written on this subject; and as I feel interested in it, perhaps I cannot bring out my doubts better than in the following Queries.
1. Instead of this famous cross being destined by St. Margaret for Dunfermline, was it not transmitted by her as an heir-loom to her sons? Fordun, lib. v. cap. lv. "Quasi munus hæreditarium transmisit ad filios." Hailes (Annals, sub anno 1093) distinguishes the cross which Margaret gifted to Dunfermline from the Black Rood of Scotland; and it is found in the possession of her son David I., in his last illness. He died at Carlisle, 24th May, 1153. (Fordun, ut supra.)
2. Is not W. S. G. mistaken when, in speaking of this cross being seized by Edward I. in the Castle of Edinburgh in 1292, he says it is in a list of muniments, &c., found "in quadam cista in dormitorio S. Crucis." instead of in a list following, "et in thesauria castri de Edinburgh inventa fuerunt ornamenta subscripta?" (Ayloffe's Calendars, p. 827.; Robertson's Index, Introd. xiii.)
3. When W. S. G. says that this cross was not held in the same superstitious reverence as the Black Stone of Scone, and that Miss Strickland is mistaken when she says that it was seized by King Edward, and restored at the peace of 1327, what does he make of the following authorities?—