Robert the Bruce and the struggle for Scottish independence/Invasion and Counter-Invasion

by Herbert Maxwell

⁠
Sir Walter the Steward.⁠	Sir Thomas Gray of Hetoun.

CHAPTER XII.

INVASION AND COUNTER-INVASION.

A.D. 1319-1322.

NORHAM Castle, a border fortress of great strength and importance on the south bank of the Tweed, was held for the English during eleven stormy years by Sir Thomas Gray of Heton. The son of that knight tells us, in his Scalacronica, that it would be tedious to recount all the exploits and hardships of which it was the scene. The stories he does permit himself to tell are of a sort that make one regret his reticence. Here is one of them.

Sir William Marmion, a knight of Lincolnshire, was feasting with some other knights and ladies, when there was brought to him from his lady-love a gilt helmet and crest, together with her commands that he should take her gift to the most perilous place in Britain, and there make it famous. It was decided by the company present, to whom Marmion referred the question, that there was no place like Norham for feats of chivalry; and thither, accordingly, Sir William took his way. He had not long to wait for adventure, for just as he was sitting down to dinner at noon, on the fourth day after his arrival, appeared Sir Alexander de Moubray^[1] with some other knights and 160 men-at-arms. Sir Thomas Gray had already formed up his garrison, for defence, when he noticed Marmion on foot, shining with gold and silver—tout relusaunt dor et dargent—and wearing his gold helmet.

"Sir knight," said Sir Thomas, "you have come hither a knight errant to make famous your helmet. It is more fitting that chivalry be done on horseback than on foot, where that is possible; therefore mount your charger. See! there is the enemy; set spurs to your horse and charge among them. I renounce God if I do not rescue you dead or alive, or perish in the attempt."

Marmion did not blanch. He mounted a splendid war-horse—vn bel destreir—and charged alone against the Scots. Wounded, he was thrown to the ground and was at the point of being slain, when Gray, charging on foot with all his men, rescued the knight as he had pledged himself to do. Then the ladies in the castle led their horses out to Sir Thomas and his men, who mounted and rode in pursuit of the flying Scots, killing many of them and taking fifty valuable horses—cheualx de pris. It is to be hoped that Marmion earned his lady's favour, in spite of the injuries he received. It is recorded that the Scots "made shipwreck of his features"—ly naufrerent hu visage.

In the spring of 1319, King Edward, having composed for the time his quarrel with the Earl of Lancaster,^[2] resumed preparations for the recapture of Berwick. He issued orders for the muster of a powerful army at Newcastle on July 24th. The pay-sheets, preserved in the Tower, furnish exact information of the strength of the land forces, amounting to 120 cross-bowmen, 1520 archers, 3000 English foot and 2400 Welsh, and 1040 hobelars (light horse); in all, 8080 men.^[3] Besides these, there must be reckoned the King's bodyguard, as well as the numerous knights and their personal retinues, bringing the total to at least 12,000 of all ranks. The unlucky Earl of Pembroke was there; also Umfraville, Earl of Angus, and such well-known captains as Sir Anthony de Lucy, Sir Andrew de Harcla (who had regained his liberty), and Sir Hugh de Lowther. Of the numbers on board the fleet no record has been preserved. To help King Edward to defray the expense of this expedition, the Pope authorised the Archbishop of York to advance to him £2505 14s. 1d. out of the funds collected for the crusade^[4]—significant evidence of the eagerness of his Holiness for the success of the English arms.

King Robert had committed the custody of war-worn Berwick into the capable hands of Walter the Steward, who had diligently strengthened the defences, and provisioned the castle against all emergency. The English army invested the town, forming entrenchments round their own lines, and filling the harbour with their ships. On September 7th a general assault took place. The city walls, in spite of the great strategic value of this place, were so low, says Barbour, that a spearman on the top could strike an assailant outside in the face with his weapon. The garrison, therefore, had a busy time throwing down the scaling-ladders of the enemy. In the afternoon a vessel was towed up the river on the flood tide, as far as the bridge-house, and an attempt was made to make her fast to the wall. She carried a fall-bridge, whereby it was intended to enter the town. But she was kept at bay till, with the falling tide, she took the ground, when the garrison made a sortie and set her on fire. The fighting went on all day, until towards evening the English were recalled to their lines, and nothing further was attempted for five days.

The Scots in Berwick found a most valuable assistant in the person of one John Crab, a Flemish engineer. Barbour says that he was one of the prisoners taken in the English ship burnt at the bridge, but this is disproved by a correspondence which took place earlier in the same year between King Edward and the Count of Flanders, of which Crab was the subject. He had, it seems, committed some acts of piracy on English shipping, and the Count assured Edward that if he could catch the fellow, he would break him on the wheel.^[5] To the Scots, however, he proved the means of saving Berwick. The English employed themselves in constructing a huge engine called the Sow, moving, like a modern fire-escape, on wheels, and devised to land a storming party on the top of the walls and at the same time as it conveyed a mining party to the bottom. To match this, Crab made a crane—a kind of catapult—also on wheels, by means of which not only heavy stones but burning faggots could be discharged on the Sow.

At dawn on September 13th the English trumpets sounded the advance; the mighty Sow crawled forward to the walls, the protecting crane rolled along the ramparts to meet it, while storming parties clambered the defences at different points.

It was a moment of critical anxiety.

Crab was warned that if he failed to disable the Sow he should be put to death instantly. Thus set on his mettle, the crafty Fleming caused a large stone to be put in his engine. Taking a careful aim, he touched the trigger, releasing the missile, which flew hurtling over the Sow, and fell harmlessly behind it.^[6] The enemy inside the monster loudly cheered. The Sow continued to approach. Crab's next shot fell short, and the Sow was touching the wall before a third could be made ready. This time the engineer took better aim. The great stone crashed into the frame-work of the machine; the inmates tumbled out in confusion. It was the turn of the Scots to cheer now. "Your Sow has farrowed!" they cried, and Crab piled blazing material on the disabled engine, whereby it was soon reduced to ashes.

No sooner had that danger been disposed of than need arose for Crab's crane at another part of the defences. An English ship, with her fortified tops full of men, drew close under the wall; but a well directed shot from the crane brought down her top hamper, and with it all the sharp-shooters posted therein.

All this time Sir Walter the Steward was riding about from point to point, superintending the defence. Of his bodyguard, originally one hundred strong, only one man-at-arms remained with him: the rest had been detached for service on the ramparts as occasion arose. Word was brought to Sir Walter that the English had forced a barricade outside the Mary Gate, and were about to fire the gate itself. He called out the reserve from the castle, where there had been no fighting, and drew them up behind the threatened gate. Then, causing the gate to be thrown open suddenly, he and his men dashed through the fire and fell upon the English with such fury that they gave way. Night came at last, to put an end to a long day of hard fighting, the Scots having made good their defence.

Notwithstanding the successful repulse of the enemy, the Steward must have been forced in the end to yield through famine, for the King of Scots was not strong enough to attack the English trenches and relieve the beleaguered town. But Robert was not going to leave his brave son-in-law to his fate. He had already taken measures to create a diversion by invading England. Douglas and Moray crossed the west Marshes, with the design, as Walsingham says, of taking prisoner the Queen of England, then living in York, and holding her as a hostage for the safety of Berwick. In this they did not succeed, but they overran Yorkshire, even as far as the suburbs of York itself.

Warlike Archbishop Melton did his best. He collected all the forces the neighbourhood could furnish, ecclesiastics as well as laymen, and met the Scots at Myton-on-Swale, on September 20th. The result was as might have been expected: the trained veterans of Douglas and Moray put the motley crowd to flight at the first onset. The Archbishop's levies made such a poor show of resistance that men, in derision, called that affair the Chapter of Myton. So heavy were the Archbishop's losses, that he had to issue a plaintive appeal to thirty-one abbeys and priories in the north for pecuniary help. His servants stupidly had taken his plate to Myton with the troops, where it fell into the hands of the Scots, together with all his carriages and other movables.^[7]

But the most important result of this spirited foray was its effect on the besiegers of Berwick. The strategy of the King of Scots was justified by its complete success. King Edward could not allow a victorious army to career at will through his dominions. Whether there be truth or not in the allegations of fresh dissensions between Lancaster and le Despenser, the fact that the siege of Berwick was raised on or before September 24th is established by the pay-roll of the army, above referred to, coming to an end on that day, when the bulk of the forces were paid off.

It was now more than thirteen years since Robert de Brus, an excommunicated assassin and proclaimed rebel, had been crowned King of Scots, and then had to fly from the pursuit of the whole armed force of both kingdoms. Now, the whole of Scotland owned him as King; he possessed every inch of its soil; his so-called Overlord had been driven twice across the Border, after bringing all the power at his command, military, diplomatic, and spiritual, to bear on the subjugation of the smaller and weaker country. Beaten, disheartened and distracted by the feuds of his barons, Edward seemed finally brought to his knees, and sent commissioners to treat for peace. The embassage consisted of the Bishop of Ely, the Earl of Pembroke (it must have been a bitter duty for him to discharge!), Hugh le Despenser the younger, and Bartholemew de Badlesmere.^[8] To confer with these King Robert appointed five plenipotentiaries—no bishop, perhaps because he was lying under the ban of the Church—Sir William de Soulis, Sir Robert de Keith, Sir Roger de Kirkpatrick, Sir Alexander de Seton, and Sir William de Montfichet.^[9] Terms of truce were agreed to between the commissioners on December 21, 1319, and ratified by King Robert at Berwick on the following day.^[10] It was to endure for two years from St. Thomas's Day, King Robert undertaking on his part, to erect no new fortresses within the shires of Berwick, Roxburgh, and Dumfries; while King Edward consented to deliver Harbottle Castle to the Scots, or else to destroy it.^[11]

Meanwhile the Pope continued to act vigorously in Edward's interest, probably not having foreseen the speedy collapse of the latest invasion of Scotland. In October, 1319, he issued fresh instructions for the excommunication of the much-execrated King of Scots, unmindful, apparently, of the fact that the more curses had been heaped on the Bruce, the more constantly fortune had smiled on his arms. This new sentence was not put into immediate execution, for, on January 8, 1320, the Pope summoned "the noble man Robert de Brus, governing the Kingdom of Scotland,"^[12] to appear, with the prelates of Scotland, at his court at Avignon.

To this summons King Robert paid no attention, because, although it was accompanied by a safe conduct, it was not addressed to him as King. Therefore the Archbishop of York and the Bishop of London and Carlisle received the papal mandate to publish the sentence of excommunication without further delay, coupled with the injunction that Bruce was on no account to be released from it, until he should be at the point of death.^[13] A few months later, on July 20, 1320, the Bishops of St. Andrews, Dunkeld, Aberdeen, and Moray were also excommunicated for contumacy, forasmuch as they, too, had neglected the Pope's summons to Avignon. But in the meantime the Pope had received his answer from the Scottish nation. The laymen in Parliament at Arbroath had drawn up and forwarded their celebrated letter to John XXII.

The preamble of this document recites the mythical origin of the Scots from Scythia and Spain, and claims for Scotland the special favour of the See of Rome, as being under the patronage of St. Andrew, the brother of St. Peter. Then the practical case for Scotland is set forth in clear and eloquent terms.

"We continued to enjoy peace and liberty, with the protection of the Papal See, until Edward, the late King of England, in the guise of a friend and ally, invaded and oppressed our nation, at that time without a head, unpracticed in war and suspecting no evil. The wrongs which we suffered under the tyranny of Edward are beyond description, and, indeed, they would appear incredible to all but those who actually felt them. He wasted our country, imprisoned our prelates, burnt our religious places, spoiled our ecclesiastics, and slew our people, without discrimination of age, sex, or rank. Through favour of Him who woundeth and maketh whole, we have been freed from so great and innumerable calamities by the valour of our Lord and Sovereign Robert. He, like another Joshua or a Judas Maccabeus, gladly endured toils, distresses, the extremity of want, and every peril, to rescue his people and inheritance out of the hands of the enemy. The divine Providence, that legal succession which we will constantly maintain, and our due and unanimous consent, have made him our Chief and King. To him, in defence of our liberty, we are bound to adhere, as well of right as by reason of his deserts; and to him we will in all things adhere, for through him salvation has been wrought to all our people. Should he abandon our cause, or aim at reducing us or our kingdom under the dominion of the English, we will instantly strive to expel him as a common enemy, the subverter of our rights and his own, and we will choose another king to rule and protect us: for, while there exists a hundred of us, we will never submit to England. We fight not for glory, wealth, or honour, but for that liberty which no virtuous man shall survive.

"Wherefore we most earnestly beseech your Holiness, as the Vicegerent of Him who giveth equal measure unto all, and with whom there is no distinction, either of persons or of nations, that you would behold with a fatherly eye the tribulations and distresses brought upon us by the English, and that you would admonish Edward to content himself with his own dominions, esteemed in former times enough for seven kings, and allow us Scotsmen, who dwell in a poor and remote corner, and who seek for nought but our own, to remain in peace. In order to procure that peace, we are ready to do anything that is consistent with our national interests.

"Herein it behoves you, Holy Father, to interpose. You behold with what cruelty the Heathen rages against the Christians for the chastisement of their sins, and that the boundaries of Christendom are daily contracted. How must your memory suffer in after ages should the Church be diminished in glory, or receive reproach under your administration.

"Rouse, therefore, the Christian princes, and call them to the rescue of Palestine. They pretend that wars with their neighbours hinder that enterprise, but the true cause of hindrance is that, in subduing their weaker neighbours, they look for less opposition and more immediate profit. Every one knows and we now declare it unto you and to all Christendom, that our King and we are willing to undertake the holy expedition, if Edward will permit us to depart in peace.

"Should you, however, give too credulous ear to the reports of our enemies, distrust the sincerity of our professions and persist in favouring the English, to our destruction, we hold you guilty in the sight of the Most High, of the loss of lives, the perdition of souls and all the other miserable consequences which may ensue from war between the two contending nations.

"Ever ready, like dutiful children, to yield all fit obedience to you, as God's Vicegerent, we commit our cause to the protection of the Supreme King and Judge: we cast our cares on Him, and we steadily trust that He will inspire us with valour and bring our enemies to nought."

The absence of all reference in this memorable document to the church and clergy of Scotland is perfectly intelligible. For ecclesiastics to have any hand in such plain speaking would have been to proclaim a schism within the Church of Rome and thus greatly to strengthen the position of England in the standing dispute.

Advantage was taken of the truce to negotiate the exchange or ransom of prisoners on both sides. Mention may be made of a bargain for the release of one Peter Warde as being rather out of the common, and showing what a long start the Northumbrian coal fields had obtained over those of Scotland. On May 19th, King Edward issued his warrant to the mayor and bailiffs of Newcastle, empowering them to ship 1000 chalders of sea-coal for the ransom of the said Peter, but not one chalder more under any pretext.^[14]

The Scottish Parliament met again at Scone in August 1320, for the despatch of business of a very pressing and painful kind. King Edward's agents had succeeded in sapping the loyalty of some of King Robert's trusted barons, and a serious conspiracy had been discovered, having, as is supposed, the object of setting William de Soulis on the throne of Scotland, probably on condition of his acknowledging the suzerainty of the King of England.^[15]

A good deal of mystery still hangs over this plot and the means of its timely exposure. Fordun, whose notes on this subject are fuller than on most others of the time, says the conspiracy was betrayed to the King by the Countess of Strathearn. Barbour states that it was revealed by a lady—"as I herd say"—but mentions no name. Sir Thomas Gray, however, names Muryoch (Murdoch) de Menteith as the informer. Now this Murdoch was in the service of England from 1311^[16] till 1317^[17]; he may have been employed as an agent of King Edward to negociate with the malcontent Scottish barons, and have betrayed them all to King Robert. He certainly entered the Scottish service, and remained in it till his death at Dupplin in 1332, or at Halidon Hill in 1333. Be all this as it may, the result of the trial before the Scone Parliament spread such a horror through all the land, that it was known thereafter as the Black Parliament.

De Soulis, who when arrested at Berwick had a retinue of 360 squires clad in his liveries, "outane^[18] knichtis that war joly," was condemned to imprisonment for life in Dunbarton Castle. A similar sentence was passed on the Countess of Strathearn, which seems to show that she was not the person who revealed the plot. Sir Gilbert de Malesherbe, Sir John de Logie, and Richard Brown, suffered death as traitors. Roger de Moubray died during the trial, but he was found guilty, and his body was condemned to be drawn, hanged, and beheaded. The King, however, remitted this sentence and allowed his remains to receive honourable burial—a favour better understood and appreciated in the days of chivalry than it might be in modern times. Sir Eustace de Maxwell of Caerlaverock, Sir Walter de Barclay, sheriff of Aberdeen, Sir Patrick Graham, Hamelin de Troupe, and Eustace de Rattray, all of whom were arraigned on the charge of high treason, were acquitted. But the fate which, of all others, most deeply moved the popular compassion was that of Sir David de Brechin, the King's brother-in-law.^[19] It seems that the conspirators, after exacting an oath of secrecy from him, had imparted to him their project; he disapproved of the plot, and would not join in it, but neither would he sully his knightly honour by betraying it. Such, at least, is Barbour's explanation of a perplexing case; which, if it be the true one, leaves one to wonder why the brave Sir David, with a long record of valuable service at his credit, should have been drawn and hanged, while the chief conspirator, de Soulis, escaped the gallows.

Barbour, however, is not an infallible authority on this affair. He tries to make out that Sir Ingelram de Umfraville, who was taken prisoner at Bannockburn, had been released on doing fealty to King Robert, but was so deeply affected by the fate of his friend de Brechin that he begged and obtained permission to return to England. This is inconsistent with the fact that, on April 20th, four months before de Brechin's trial, King Edward issued a safe conduct in favour of Sir Ingelram, to enable him to pass through England beyond the seas with a chaplain, 12 squires, 4 vallets, and 24 grooms;^[20] and further, that on January 26, 1321, five months after the trial, Edward issued another warrant, restoring Sir Ingelram to his possessions in England, "as he had escaped from imprisonment in Scotland, and shown that he had never left his allegiance."^[21]

The manifesto addressed by the Scottish barons to the Pope had not failed to make some impression on him, if we may judge from the tenour of a letter which he now addressed to King Edward, directing him to make a lasting peace with Scotland. In this letter he referred to Robert as Regentem regni Scotiæ (Regent of the Kingdom of Scotland), which was a marked advance on the term gubernantem which he had used earlier in the year. At the same time he excused himself for having received Sir Edward de Mambuisson and Sir Adam de Gordon, sent as ambassadors from the King of Scots to sue for the repeal of the sentence of excommunication. Edward complied so far as to appoint the Archbishop of York and three others as commissioners to treat with the Scots for a permanent peace, and on September 15th, ordered them to proceed to Carlisle for that purpose.^[22] But the English Court was far from resigning hopes of creating disaffection among the subjects of King Robert. On November 17th, King Edward gave authority to the Earl of Athol, Sir Andrew de Harcla, and others, to receive to his peace, as secretly as possible, those Scots who felt their consciences troubled by the Papal excommunication,^[23] and on December 11th he empowered the Archbishop of York to release all such persons from excommunication. Nothing could prove more distinctly the unscrupulous use of spiritual powers by the highest authorities in the Church for purely temporal and political ends.

The proffered indulgence had but a limited effect. On May 11, 1321, five persons were proclaimed so absolved; on February 27th Sir Alexander de Moubray, with 12 "gentifs" (gentry) and 17 servants were received to King Edward's peace,^[24] and Sir William de Mohaut and a few others followed later. We know that in this course de Moubray was acting out of resentment for the fate of his kinsman who had been implicated in the de Soulis conspiracy; personal motives may have prompted others to do the like; while there were sure to be a few timid spirits who shrank from encountering the wrath of the Church, and embraced the first chance of reconciliation with her. But as a whole the Scottish nation did not waver in loyalty to their King.

Desultory negotiations for a durable peace were carried on through the summer of 1321, the last formal attempt being the mission of John of Brittany, Earl of Richmond, to treat with the Scots at Newcastle-on-Tyne. But Edward's terms were inconsistent with the absolute independence of Scotland, and proceedings, often renewed, were as often broken off. Christmastide drew near, when the truce would come to an end, and a permanent settlement was as far off as ever, when the rebellion of the Earl of Lancaster plunged England into civil war and withdrew the unhappy Edward's attention from Scottish affairs. A secret treaty between Douglas and Lancaster had been drafted, of which the terms were fully set forth in a paper afterwards found on the person of the Earl of Hereford, who was slain at the battle of Boroughbridge, March 15, 1322. This treaty bound the King of Scots, Moray, and Douglas to assist Lancaster, who is referred to in the document as King Arthur, at all times in England, Wales, or Scotland, without claiming any share in his conquests. Lancaster, on his part, engaged never to fight against the Scots, and to do all in his power to secure a durable peace on the basis of Scottish independence, so soon as his own work should be accomplished.^[25]

The agreement never was ratified. Lancaster wrote to Douglas, requesting him to fix a meeting at which "we may adjust all the points of our alliance, and agree to live and die together." The letter, which Douglas ought to have received on February 7th, did not come into his hands till the 17th. Those ten days probably decided the fate of the English monarchy. Had Moray and Douglas united their forces with those of Lancaster, and, which was still more needful, brought their trenchant judgment and great military experience to the aid of that vacillating prince, the disaster which overtook him at Boroughbridge, where he was totally defeated by Sir Andrew de Harcla, might have been exchanged for victory, and the fate of Edward II. accelerated by a couple of years. As it happened, the operations of the Scots leaders were conducted without concert with English allies. It was a bitter, hard winter, "distressing men and killing nearly all animals."^[26] No sooner had the truce expired at Christmas, than the weary, wasteful work of slaughter began again. Moray, Douglas, and Walter the Steward—a well-tried trio of comrades-in-arms—entered the bishopric of Durham early in January. Moray took up his quarters at Dermington, but the other two pressed on to Yorkshire, wringing a heavy subsidy from the district of Richmond as the price of exemption from harsh treatment.

The execution of Lancaster on March 22d, and the complete collapse of the rebellion, left King Edward once more free to turn his attention to the Scottish war. "Give yourself no further solicitude," he wrote to the Pope, "about a truce with the Scots; the exigencies of my affairs inclined me formerly to listen to such proposals, but now I am resolved to establish peace by force of arms."^[27] But before he could take the field, the Scots were again in force on the English side of the Border, having crossed the West March in two bodies, one under King Robert himself,^[28] the other under under Douglas and Moray. They penetrated eighty miles into England, passing south of Preston; and on their return they invested Carlisle for five days.

Harcla, the governor, who had been created Earl of Carlisle for his defeat and capture of the Earl of Lancaster, was too cautious to venture from behind his defences; and the Scots were allowed to return to their own country with much booty on July 24th, the day before that appointed for the muster of the English army at Newcastle.

It behoved the King of Scots now to look to the safety of his own dominions. It was not his policy to risk another trial of strength with England; faithful to his favourite tactics he moved northward, causing every head of cattle, every sack of corn, every bale of goods, to be driven and carried out of Edward's line of march. It is in masterly, though unobtrusive, details like this that the genius of a great strategist may be recognised, as surely as in brilliant manœuvres and dashing victories. Having made these preparations, King Robert retired beyond the Forth, stationed himself at Culross and awaited developments.

The English began their march in the first days of August, 1322. On the 5th of that month they were at Gosford in East Lothian.^[29] So faithfully had King Robert's instructions been carried out, that all that the English foraging parties could bring in was one cow from Tranent, too lame for the owner to drive away. "The dearest beef I ever saw," dryly observed the Earl of Warenne.^[30] An unfavourable wind kept the fleet from entering the Firth with supplies; the troops began to suffer from disease and famine; total starvation was not far off, and, after lying three days in Edinburgh and Leith, Edward was forced to order a retreat. Then was the moment for Bruce to strike in. Douglas was sent to hang on the rear guard of the dispirited host, and defeated the English light horse in a brisk encounter near Melrose. But he was not strong enough to prevent the invaders doing a vast amount of mischief. Holyrood and Melrose Abbeys were sacked; the prior of Melrose with another monk and two lay brethren were slain in defending their property, and the beautiful monastery of Dryburgh was burnt to the ground. All this was fair reprisal, no doubt, for similar senseless outrages committed by the Scots in their raids during the spring and summer.

Widespread as the desolation had been on both sides of the Border during these months, the year was not to close without further mischief. King Robert crossed the Solway with a large force on October 1st, and, after wasting the valley of the Eden, turned eastward into Durham. Another party of Scots besieged Bamborough Castle in Northumberland. Sir Roger de Horsley, the former governor of Berwick, bought off the besiegers, for which he was severely reprimanded by King Edward. This was, said the King, to Sir Roger's "dishonour and shame, seeing that he had the stronger force,"^[31] a condition of success which King Edward himself had found, on more occasions than one, to be not altogether infallible.

Norham Castle was also beset at this time, not, as Lord Hailes says, with "a numerous army," but, as the governor, Sir Thomas Gray, wrote to King Edward, by 100 men-at-arms and 100 hobelars.^[32]

But King Robert abandoned all attempts for these minor prizes in favour of a far richer one that seemed almost within his grasp. King Edward lay at Biland Abbey in Yorkshire, and thither the Bruce, concentrating all available force, marched at high speed. On October 14th he found the English, under the Earl of Richmond, strongly posted on a ridge between Biland and Rievaulx, commanding a narrow pass which led to King Edward's quarters. A council of war was held by the Scottish leaders. Douglas undertook to carry the entrance to the pass, which was held by Sir Thomas Uchtred and Sir Ralph de Cobham, and the King consented to his attacking at once. The Earl of Moray, ever a friendly rival of the Douglas in feats of chivalry, and jealous of the distinction thus afforded to him, left his own division and joined Douglas as a volunteer. De Cobham was reputed the best knight of his day in England, and his position was almost impregnable from attack in front. Great stones were rolled down the slopes, making havoc in the Scottish ranks, and the English archers kept up a hot fire. It seemed to King Robert that Douglas had undertaken something beyond his strength; so he sent forward the Highlanders and Islesmen to his support. These active fellows scaled the crags on either side of the pass, meaning to take de Cobham on the flanks. But on arriving at the top, they found themselves face to face with the main body under Richmond. Without a moment's hesitation the Highlanders formed for the attack, and charged the English so impetuously that these broke and fled. It was a wonderful performance, and one not easily to be understood by those who know of what stuff English soldiers are made. Sir Thomas Gray describes his countrymen as behaving before the Scots like hares before greyhounds.^[33]

Richmond was taken prisoner, and with him Henri de Sully, Grand Butler of France, and other French knights of renown. King Edward escaped to York, but all his baggage fell into the hands of the victors. Walter the Steward pursued him as far as the gates of York, and waited there till the evening, to see if any would come out and do battle with him; but he waited in vain; none would take up his challenge.

When Richmond was brought before him, the King of Scots departed from his habitual courtesy towards his prisoners. The Earl, it seems, had incurred Robert's special displeasure by making insulting remarks on some former occasion.

"Wert thou not such a caitiff," said the King, "thou shouldest pay dearly for what thou hast said."

The French knights, on the other hand, were most graciously received. The King told them that he perfectly understood their position; he did not interpret it as inconsistent with the friendship between Scotland and France that they should be in arms against him, because, finding themselves in England when fighting was going on, it was clear that their chivalry would not suffer them to keep aloof. Three of them, Robert and William Bertram and Elias Anilage, had surrendered with their squires to Douglas, who therefore was entitled to the ransom, estimated at 4400 marks. But King Robert, anxious, no doubt from motives of policy, to gratify a powerful ally, announced that he would send the French knights, free of ransom, in a present to his royal brother of France.^[34]

The King of Scots prudently refrained from making any attempt on the strong city of York, but contented himself by harrying all the surrounding country, carrying his arms as far as Beverley in the East Riding, from which town he exacted a heavy indemnity. The archiepiscopal registers bear their testimony to the great losses sustained by the religious houses, and to the consequent dispersion of several convents of nuns. Finally, about Christmastide, the Scots withdrew from the third invasion of of England undertaken during the year 1322.

1. Brother of Sir Philip, killed at Dundalk. Afterwards he went over to the English side, on the conviction of Roger de Moubray of high treason, in August, 1320, and received King Edward's pardon.—Bain, iii., 136, 435.
2. Raine, 290.
3. Bain, iii., 125. The pay from August 1st to September 24th amounted to £3048 3s. The Earl of Lancaster had been summoned with 2000 men, but his name does not appear on the pay-sheet. Barbour, however, says he was present at the siege.
4. Raine, 310.
5. Bain, iii., 126. This must be the same individual mentioned in Scalacronica as having been taken and killed by the elder Gray between Norham and Berwick. "Thomas de Gray fist tuer en le Yarforde, Cryn, vn Flemyng, vn amirail de la mere, vn robbour, qi grant meistre estoit od Robert de Bruys."

6. "In hy he gert draw the cleket
   And smertly swappit out the stane,
   That even out our the Sow is gane,
   And behind hir ane litil we
   It fell."
   —The Brus, cxxx., 86.

7. Raine, 295.
8. Bain, iii., 129.
9. The name Montfichet has assumed the homely disguise of Mushat in modern Scots.
10. Bain, iii., 129.
11. Ibid., 131. It was dismantled.
12. Nobilem virum, Robertum de Brus, regnum Scotiæ gubernantem.
13. Papal Letters, ad annum.
14. Bain, iii., 132.
15. William was grandson of Nicolas de Soulis, one of the Competitors in 1292.
16. Bain, iii., 39.
17. Ibid., 103.
18. Besides.
19. Lord Hailes calls him the King's nephew, but there does not seem to have been more than one Sir David de Brechin.
20. Bain, iii., 131. This was cancelled for one in October following.
21. Ibid., 136.
22. Bain., iii, 133
23. Ibid., 134.
24. Ibid., 137.
25. Fædera, ii., 479.
26. Fordun, cxxxvi.
27. Hailes, ii., 126.
28. Lanercost, 246.
29. Bain, iii., 142.
30. The Brus, cxxxiv., 73. "A sarcastical and ill-timed reflection," observes Hailes, with less than his usual urbanity. There is Edward's own authority confirming the accounts given by Barbour and Fordun of the extreme scarcity. On September 17th he wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury, begging him to send money in haste, for "he had found neither man nor beast in the Lothians, and intended to winter on the Border for its safety" (Bain, iii., 144.)
31. Bain, iii., 145.
32. Ibid.
33. Com du leuer deuant leuereres.—Scalacronica, 150.
34. This was not vicarious generosity on the part of Robert. By a subsequent grant of lands he made good to Douglas what he had lost in the ransom of the Frenchmen. The deed conveying these lands is known in the Douglas archives as the Emerald Charter. After setting forth that the grant was made in partial redemption of the King's debt to Douglas for the liberation of his prisoners, it continues "and in order that this charter may have perpetual effect, we, in our own person and with our own hand, have placed on the hand of the said James de Douglas a ring, with a stone called an emeraude, in token of sasine and perpetual endurance to the said James and his heirs for ever" (The Douglas Book, i., 155; iii., ii).