Robert the Bruce and the struggle for Scottish independence/The Campaign of Weardale and Conclusion of Peace

by Herbert Maxwell

⁠
Thomas, Earl of Moray.⁠	Sir James de Douglas.

CHAPTER XIV.

THE CAMPAIGN OF WEARDALE AND CONCLUSION OF PEACE.

A.D. 1327-1328.

THE melancholy reign of Edward II. of England was brought to a close by his abdication or deposal on January 24, 1327. His son, a boy of fifteen, was crowned as Edward III. at Westminster on February 9th.

The subsequent sufferings of this unhappy monarch, his cruel treatment when in prison and the revolting manner in which he was done to death, are matters which have no bearing on the course of events in Scotland. It is not for Scotsmen to deplore the character of the second Edward as a ruler, seeing that his incapacity in council and his unreadiness in the field contributed almost as much to the success of the struggle for independence, as did the valour and resolution of Robert the Bruce, his captains and his people. Sir Thomas Gray, in pronouncing the following brief elegy upon Edward II., was probably repeating all that his father, who personally knew the King well, had told him in his favour: "he was prudent, gentle and amiable in conversation, but maladroit in action."^[1]

The immediate effect of the revolution in England on the prospects of peace between that country and Scotland was disastrous, though there is hopeless discrepancy in the accounts given by different historians regarding the circumstances which brought about a renewal of hostilities.

On the one hand, there is the unimpeachable testimony of authentic documents to the fact that on February 15th, three weeks after his accession, Edward III. appointed Henry de Percy, Ralph de Neville, Roger Heron, William Riddel, and Gilbert de Boroughdon, to maintain the truce made by the late King with Robert de Brus and his "fautours"; at the same time empowering Percy to receive to his peace all Scotsmen who should desire to come.^[2] Further, on March 4th, the Abbot de Rievaulx and Ivo de Aldburgh were empowered to treat for peace with Robert de Brus, and to swear that their King would keep the truce meanwhile. Lastly, on March 6th, King Edward formally confirmed the truce made by his father.

On the other hand, the chronicler of Lanercost, usually veracious though greatly prejudiced against the Scots, circumstantially declares that Norham Castle was besieged on the very day of Edward's coronation, but that the assailants were repulsed by Robert de Manners, the constable, with a loss of nine or ten killed, and five prisoners, who were severely wounded. Either this must have been a local fray by a party of private marauders, or the friar, writing at a very confusing time, has confounded the dates.

The fact, however, remains that it was the Scots who broke the truce. Barbour explains that King Robert had applied in vain for redress on account of various acts of piracy committed by Englishmen on Scottish shipping, and that therefore he sent openly to King Edward renouncing the truce. Fordun bluntly avers that the bad faith of the English had become apparent. Probably each nation was suspicious of the other. The movement of Scottish troops towards the Border may have been no more than a precautionary measure, but it was interpreted, not unnaturally, as a hostile act. The English King's council were advised that the Scots intended instant invasion, unless peace were conceded on the only terms acceptable to them. Consequently, the English barons were summoned to meet their King at Newcastle on April 5th, where preparations on a large scale were made for the invasion of Scotland. The city of London, says the author of the Pauline Annals, sent one hundred well equipped volunteers—mera voluntate—by purely free will. But in addition to native troops, the young King of England secured the services of 2500 German cavalry under John of Hainault,^[3] for which he agreed to pay the enormous sum of £14,000.

And now once more the bale-fires flared along the Border heights; once more the Border farmers were summoned from peaceful toil, to reap a bloodier harvest than they had sown. Moray and Douglas entered England by the western march on June 15th. Froissart has given the following description of the light cavalry, of which the Scottish army was chiefly composed on this expedition:

"The Scots are bold, hardy, and much inured to war. When they make their invasions into England, they march from 20 to 24 miles without halting, as well by night as by day; for they are all on horseback, except the camp-followers, who are on foot. The knights and squires are well mounted on large bay horses, the common people on little nags. They bring no carriages with them on account of the mountains they have to pass in Northumberland: neither do they carry with them any provisions of bread or wine; for their habits of sobriety are such in time of war that they will live for a long time on flesh half-sodden, without bread, and drink the river water without wine. They have therefore no occasion for pots or pans, for they dress the flesh of their cattle in the skins, after they have taken them off; and being sure to find plenty of cattle in the country which they invade, they carry none with them. Under the flap of his saddle each man carries a broad plate of metal; behind the saddle, a little bag of oatmeal; when they have eaten too much of the sodden flesh, and their stomachs appear weak and empty, they place this plate over the fire, mix their oatmeal with water, and, when the plate is heated, they put a little of the paste upon it and make a thin cake, like a cracknel or biscuit, which they eat to warm their stomachs.^[4] In this manner the Scots entered England, destroying and burning everything as they passed. Their army consisted of 4000 men at arms, knights, and esquires, well mounted; besides 20,000 men,^[5] bold and hardy, armed after the manner of their country, and mounted upon little hackneys, that are never tied up or dressed, but turned immediately after the day's march to pasture on the heath or in the fields. This army was commanded by two valiant captains. The King of Scotland himself, who had been very brave, yet being old and labouring under a leprosy, appointed for one that gallant prince so renowned in arms, the Earl of Moray.... The other was Sir James Douglas, esteemed the bravest and most enterprising Knight in the two Kingdoms."

Set against this the reference by Holinshed to the contrast between the soldiery of the two nations, and it is not difficult to realise what led the Scots in later years to nickname their hereditary foes the "pock-puddings."

"Bicause the English souldiers of this armie were cloathed all in cotes and hoods embrodered with floures and branches verie seemlie, and vsed to nourish their beards, the Scots in derision thereof made a rime, which they fastened vpon the church doores of saint Peter-toward-Stangate, conteining this that followeth:

Longe beardes, hartelesse,
Paynted hoodes, witlesse,
Gaie cotes, gracelesse,
Make Englande thriftlesse."

These gay coats were the liveries of the great feudal barons, with whom it was a point of honour to excel in the splendour of their retinues; but many years of enforced economy had taught the Scots lords to despise, or at least to dispense with, such magnificence. The troops, however, thus described were drawn from the midland and southern

counties. The English Border riders were quite as hardy as the Scots.

Young Donald of Mar, who had been brought up at the English Court, but had lately joined his kinsman King Robert, rode with the Scottish host. Shortly before Midsummer Day they marched through Northumberland into Weardale, meeting with scarcely any opposition, and wasting all as they went. Then they turned into Westmorland, and we catch a glimpse of them in a letter received by the King of England, who lay at Durham. It was written by his uncle, the Earl of Kent, on July 4th, telling him that "on this Friday," just as he was going to bed—q jeo devoi cochier—came news that the Scots were at Appleby, and that he and his troops had remained under arms all night watching for them. He begged to be excused from attending the King's muster, as he must watch the invaders. He had ordered all the empty houses in the district to be set on fire, so as to warn the people to be on the alert—a simple and effective system of telegraphy, but costly withal.

On receiving this news, King Edward ordered up reinforcements from York, and set out to intercept the Scots. He had no doubt a very large army under his command, but the estimates given by different historians, varying from 50,000 to 100,000, must be far beyond the mark. The very greatness of Edward's host put him at a disadvantage in attempting to overtake his nimble foe. Reconnoitring parties ran the risk of being cut to pieces if they came up with the Scots and heavily armed troops could not move fast enough to be effective. So the English army lay at Haydon Bridge on the Tyne till after July 26th, suffering severely from want of supplies and showing serious signs of mutiny. Moreover, the weather had broken; the Tyne was swollen by heavy rains, and the army, lying part on one bank, part on the other, could not be united.

The Scots were faring well, in spite of the storm. A letter, indeed, addressed to King Edward on July 26th, expresses the anonoymous writer's satisfaction because the invaders have been "forclos," by the aid of God, from re-entering their own land; but, so far from being in difficulties, or desiring to return to Scotland, Douglas and Moray, after raiding Coquetdale, were securely encamped on the banks of the Wear.

The King of England offered the reward of knighthood and a landed estate worth one hundred pounds to any one who should bring him within sight of the enemy, where they could be approached on hard ground.^[6] Many knights and esquires, therefore, swam the river and rode over the country, seeking to earn the guerdon.

As soon as the Tyne was fordable, Edward crossed the river at Haltwhistle, and the whole English army marched through the hills in a southerly direction. On the fourth day Thomas de Rokeby, an esquire who had set out in quest of the Scots, rode into camp with the desired information. He had fallen in with the enemy and been taken prisoner; but so soon as he frankly told them his errand, he was set free, and told to make haste and tell his master that Moray and Douglas had been waiting eight days for him, and were eager to do battle. Rokeby guided his friends to the Scottish position, a steep hill on the further or south bank of the Wear.^[7]

When the two armies were near each other, Moray sent out Douglas to reconnoitre, remaining himself in command of the camp. Douglas brought back word that the English were in great strength, and were advancing in seven divisions.

"We shall give them battle," exclaimed Moray, "though they were many times as strong."

"Praised be God!" replied Douglas, "that we have such a daring commander, but, by St. Bride! if you follow my advice, you will not engage unless we have the advantage. There is no dishonour in stratagem, seeing we are so few against so many."

Luckily the Earl of Moray, who held the chief command in virtue of his kinship to the King of Scots, was not so hot-headed as to overrule the counsel of his experienced lieutenant. Throughout the long story of the War of Independence, there is never a trace of anything but generous knightly rivalry between these two great soldiers—the right and left hands of their King.

The English sent forth heralds, offering to allow the Scots to cross the river unmolested, so as to do fair battle on the plain; or, if they preferred it, that the English should cross without opposition, and fight on the south side. Both proposals were declined. The Scots sent back a message to say that as they had come without leave of the King of England and his lords, so now they intended to choose their own time to return. It is said that on hearing this taunt, John of Hainault and some English knights were eager to cross the stream and attack the Scots without parley, but that the jealousy about precedence prevented anything being done. It was decided therefore that the position of the Scots was impregnable, and preparations were made for starving them out.

For two or three days the two armies lay facing each other; but the tedium was relieved by sundry dashing deeds of arms. One morning, a thousand English archers, supported by a body of men-at-arms, were sent out to harass the Scots by a flank attack. Douglas, observing the movement, placed a body of cavalry in ambush under his youngest brother, Archibald, and the young Earl of Mar. Then, with a cloak thrown over his armour, he rode to and fro between the advancing archers and the Scottish flank, luring them gradually towards the ambuscade. An English squire, Robert of Ogle, recognising Douglas, galloped forward to warn the archers of their danger. But it was too late: Douglas gave the signal: the concealed horsemen swept down, scattering the sharpshooters along the hillside, cutting some down, spearing others, and driving the rest across the river. Sir William Erskine, having received knighthood that very morning, used his new gilt spurs to such purpose that, charging far ahead of his men, he was taken prisoner. So many English, however, fell into the hands of the Scots, that his exchange was easily arranged.

On another occasion the English very nearly succeeded in tempting the Scots from their entrenchments. A large body having been sent round by night to occupy a wooded valley in rear of Moray's position, the English made a feint of attacking him in front. The Scots had already begun to move down to meet them on the slopes, when scouts brought word to Douglas that his rear was threatened. Instantly he ordered the troops back to their original ground, and fortunately he was able to enforce the order; for had the two armies once engaged, the concealed force would have occupied the camp in rear of the Scots, who could not have failed to be overpowered by sheer weight of numbers.

That same night the Scots tricked their powerful enemy to some purpose. Leaving their camp-fires burning brightly, they silently decamped. The English awoke to find the hill deserted, and the Scots still more strongly posted than before, on a thickly wooded height about two miles distant. Edward moved along the river and encamped at Stanhope, opposite their new position.

Barbour here either draws on his imagination, or has been misled by his informants. He says that the two armies lay opposite one another for eight days, and that sharp skirmishing went on daily. Sir Thomas Gray, also, says that six days were spent thus; but examination of the records proves, by the dates on various papers, that Froissart was right in his statement that it was on the first night in the new encampment, probably August 3d, that Douglas made his famous camisade.

Selecting 200 horsemen of the best, he crossed the river at some distance from the camps, and rode towards the English lines. On approaching an outpost he cried "Ha! St. George! no watch here!" and was mistaken for an officer going his rounds. Then he led his party into the camp at a gallop, cutting the tent ropes as they passed and killing every man who stood in their way. Douglas pressed on straight to the royal pavilion, where, had it not been for the devotion of the chaplain and other attendants, who sacrificed their own lives to save the King, Edward would assuredly have perished. As it was, he had a full narrow escape. But the alarm had been raised: the whole camp was astir, and Douglas, sounding a preconcerted note on his horn, drew off his men with the loss of very few.^[8]

Returning to his own quarters, Douglas found the Scots all under arms. Moray asked him what he had been doing and how he had fared.

"Sir," answered Douglas, with Johnsonian brevity, "we have drawn blood."

"Had we all gone there," observed Moray, "we should have defeated them completely."

To which Douglas made answer that, in his opinion, the small party he had with him was quite enough to risk in such an adventure. Then Moray began to urge Douglas once more to consent to a pitched battle. What follows in Barbour's poem may not, indeed, be an unvarnished record of the facts, but it is too lively to be passed over in silence. Douglas advised his chief to treat the English as a fox treated a certain fisherman. Returning one night from his nets, this fisherman found that a fox had entered his cottage and was eating a salmon. Placing himself in the doorway the man drew a sword to kill the thief withal. The fox, perceiving that the door was the only outlet, was perplexed what to do. The fisherman's cloak lay on the bed; the cunning beast seized it and drew it across the fire, whereupon the owner, when he saw his good cloak burning, ran forward to save it, leaving the door unguarded, of which the fox took advantage to make his escape.

"Now," said Douglas, "we Scots are the fox and the King of England is the fisherman. He stands in the door and will not let us return to our own land. But not only did the fisherman lose his salmon: his mantle was burnt and the fox escaped. I have caused a way of escape to be spied out for us; even if it be somewhat wet, we shall not lose so much as a single page in taking it."

All next day, Aug. 4th,^[9] a great show of preparation was kept up in the Scottish camp. A Scottish soldier, having purposely allowed himself to be taken prisoner, told the English that orders had been issued by Moray that all were to be under arms at a given hour after sunset. Determined not to be surprised again, the English remained on the alert all night, awaiting attack. In the morning, two Scottish trumpeters who had been left to blow deceptive calls during the darkness, were brought in prisoners. They reported that the Scots had decamped again, and were on the march towards the Border. At first this story was disbelieved, and the English, suspecting a ruse, remained in order of battle for several hours; but at length their scouts returned, and confirmed the exasperating truth that the enemy had given them the slip for the second time. Their escape—"sumdele wat," as Douglas had premised—had been made across a great morass lying in rear of their position. Over this a roadway of branches, strong enough to bear horses, had been laid, and was taken up by the rear-guard, in order to prevent pursuit.

The Scots had not marched many miles on their retreat before they fell in with the Earl of March and John the Steward, coming to their assistance with 5000 men; for there had been great anxiety in Scotland about the prolonged absence of Moray and Douglas.

As for the boy King of England, he shed tears of vexation at the issue of his mighty preparations.^[10] His great armament was disbanded at York on August 15th. The German heavy cavalry under John of Hainault, on which so much store had been set and for which so large a price had to be paid, were obliged to buy remounts at York, for their warhorses had foundered or died under the severities of a few weeks in the open.

Attempts have been made by some of the English chroniclers to account for the failure of Edward III.'s first campaign by making a charge of treachery against Mortimer, whom they accuse of having taken a bribe of £20,000 to let the Scots escape; but, as Lord Hailes points out, this, had it been true, certainly would have formed one of the counts in the subsequent indictment of Mortimer. He was, indeed, charged on his trial with having embezzled money paid by the Scots, but that was a sum stipulated for under the treaty of 1328, the year following the campaign of Weardale. Froissart would have been sure to hear, and equally sure to make mention, of any underhand transactions between Mortimer and Moray; but he never hints at any cause for the failure of the English at Stanhope, except that they were fairly outgeneralled.

During the autumn of 1327 one of the few Scottish barons who remained in the English interest went to his rest, namely Sir Dougall Macdouall of Galloway. He had petitioned Edward II. for the grant of certain lands in Ireland, to compensate him for those he had lost in Scotland, and was told in reply to go and serve the King in Ireland and he would be rewarded according to his "bon port."^[11] He went there, accordingly, in 1316, with his kinsman, John of Lorn,^[12] and seems to have given satisfaction, for he received an annuity, and, in 1326, the year before his death, a grant of lands in Cumberland and Yorkshire.

The action of the King of Scots during the campaign of Weardale has been greatly misunderstood until quite lately. It has been generally believed that his ill health condemned him to repose, while his lieutenants were carrying on the war. Nearly all historians say that he was suffering from leprosy; and so, no doubt, he was, or from a painful disease which went by that name. Now, however, the researches of Mr. Bain in the Public Record Office have brought to light two documents which prove beyond question that, so far from being inactive, King Robert planned and conducted an expedition into Ireland, in order to create a diversion in favour of his generals in the north of England.^[13]

Of the incidents and course of this campaign there is, unfortunately, no record. No allusion to it has been noticed in any of the Irish annals; neither does Barbour, the chief panegyrist of the Bruce, make mention of it, whence it may be assumed that, if it ever came to the knowledge of the poet, the facts were not of a kind to add lustre to the memory of his hero.

The two authentic references to the expedition are these: First, an instrument whereby, on July 12, 1327, King Robert, being then at Glendun in Antrim, grants truce for a year to Henry de Maundeville, the English seneschal of Ulster, and his people, on condition of their delivering 100 "cendres" of wheat and the like quantity of barley in the haven of Wlringfirth.^[14] Second, a letter written about the year 1335 by John le fitz William Jordan, and addressed to Edward III., wherein the writer claims reward for good service done in 1327, when Sir Robert de Bruys was baulked of his design on arriving in Ireland, by treachery—par faux covine—on the part of the Irish, as shown in a return laid before the King and Council in 1332, when £50 a year had been granted to him for life.^[15] From this it may be inferred that King Robert was disappointed in the expectation he had been led to form of a fresh rising of the Ulstermen against their English rulers, and that fitz William in thwarting his purpose, had rendered service sufficiently valuable to deserve such a large pension.

Robert, however, returned to Scotland in time to take an active part in operations on the Border. He divided the Scottish army into three corps, one of which laid siege to that object of envy, Norham Castle, where Sir Robert de Manners made a good defence. Moray and Douglas marched through Northumberland to Alnwick Castle, which they besieged ineffectively; though the occasion was one, says Sir Thomas Gray, of many formal combats according to the strict rules of chivalry—par couenant taille. The third corps was led by King Robert in person, and careered unchecked through parts of Northumberland and Durham, seeking what they might devour, which, by this time, must have been little enough. The natives of this district, left to their own resources, bought a truce to last till Pentecost, 1328.

Moray and Douglas drew off from Alnwick, finding it too strong for them, and joined their forces to those lying near Berwick. No sooner did he see the country clear of Scots, than Henry de Percy rode forth on a foray in Teviotdale. Hearing of this, Douglas determined to intercept him on his return, and barred the road to Alnwick. Percy, however, by a night march managed to avoid him, and made good his return to his own castle.^[16]

By this short autumn campaign the long series of the Bruce's victories was brought to a close.

The English Parliament had been summoned to meet at Lincoln to take measures for carrying on the Scottish war. But the military resources of England were at a low ebb; funds were not forthcoming even to pay the foreign auxiliaries in the late campaign in Weardale. Moreover, the barons were quarrelling among themselves, and the authority of the young monarch, who was under the management of his mother and Mortimer, was far from secure. The debates in Parliament took a turn which can have been little expected in Scotland, and it was resolved to make overtures for a renewal of the truce.

It has been mentioned above that the Scots have been generally accused of having been the first to break the last truce concluded with Edward II., and that there is good reason to suppose that they actually did so. But the Lincoln Parliament must have been satisfied that they had not done so without justification, else it would have been folly to attempt another treaty with a monarch and a people so little to be trusted. For King Robert's action in re-opening hostilities there must have been grounds, unknown to us, but recognised as valid by the English council. A lawyer called John de Denoun was sent to King Robert, then busy at the siege of Norham Castle, with proposals for the marriage of Princess Johanna, sister of Edward III., to Prince David, the heir of Scotland. This was a dramatic interruption of the labours of war. Of course it meant peace—such peace as King Robert had always been ready to accept—peace with honour. It meant that for which torrents of blood had flowed, for which tens of thousands of homesteads had been given to the flames, for which the industry and commerce of both countries had been squandered for more than a generation. It meant that, at the moment when it was least looked for, the independence of Scotland was to be admitted by the only ruler who questioned it, and that she was to gain at length the management of her own affairs without foreign interference. The whole weary controversy, which, but for the resolution and devotion of the slaughtered Wallace, might have gone by default against the nation more than thirty years before, was about to be solved suddenly and laid to perpetual rest.

Denoun's overtures being most favourably received by the King of Scots, he and Henry de Percy were appointed King Edward's plenipotentiaries for reviving the thirteen years' truce, or, if possible, arranging a permanent peace between the nations. Warlike operations were suspended at once, and, other plenipotentiaries having been appointed, preliminary articles were drawn up at Newcastle on November 23d, Douglas and Mortimer acting as the principal commissioners on either side.

On December 10, 1327, Edward III. issued summons to his Parliament to meet at York on February 8th following, to deliberate on the terms to be submitted to the commissioners. A temporary truce was concluded on January 25, 1328, and one hundred Scots received safe-conducts to pass to York to attend the deliberations, King Edward instructing his officials to treat them with proper respect.

The Scots, being undoubtedly in the stronger position of the two nations, were able to insist, as a preliminary to all other conditions, that the English claim to superiority should be absolutely renounced. This was enacted at York on March 1st, King Edward "willed and consented, that the said kingdom, according to its ancient boundaries observed in the days of Alexander III., should remain unto Robert King of Scots, his heirs and successors, free and divided from the Kingdom of England, without any subjection, right of service, claim or demand whatever; and that all writings which might have been executed at any time to the contrary should be held as void and of no effect."^[17]

In the Chronicle of Lanercost this concession is attributed, in the first place, to the evil counsel—pessimo consilio—of the Queen Dowager of England and of Mortimer, who undoubtedly directed the national policy during the boyhood of the King; and, in the second place, to the arrival, while Parliament was sitting, of the news that Charles, King of France and Navarre, was dead. Edward III. claimed to be nearest heir to his throne, and wished to have the Scottish quarrel off his hands, so that he might be free to vindicate his title.

The chief obstacle to amicable relations having been thus removed, the remaining articles of the peace were easily agreed to. The York Parliament was prorogued and met again at Northampton, where the final treaty was arranged. Of this, neither the original nor any transcript has been preserved, but Lord Hailes drew up the following summary of its provisions, collected "from a careful examination of public instruments and of the writings of ancient historians":

1. There shall be a perpetual peace between the two kingdoms of England and Scotland.

2. The stone on which the Kings of Scotland were wont to sit at the time of their coronation shall be restored to the Scots.

3. The King of England engages to employ his good offices at the Papal Court for obtaining the revocation of all spiritual processes depending before the Holy See against the King of Scots or against his kingdom or subjects.

4. For these causes and in order to make reparation for the ravages committed in England by the Scots, the King of Scots shall pay 30,000 marks (£20,000) to the King of England, to be paid at the rate of 10,000 marks annually on St. John's day.^[18]

5. Restitution shall be made of the possessions belonging to ecclesiastics in either kingdom, whereof they may have been deprived during the war.

6. But there shall not be any restitution made of inheritances which have fallen into the hands of the King of England or of the King of Scots, by reason of the war between the two nations, or through the forfeiture of previous possessors.

7. But Thomas Lord Wake of Liddel, Henry de Beaumont Earl of Buchan,^[19] and Henry de Percy^[20] shall be restored to their lordships, lands and estates, whereof the King of Scots, by reason of the war between the two nations, had taken possession.

8. Johanna, sister of the King of England, shall be given in marriage to David, the son and heir of the King of Scots.

9. The King of Scots shall provide the Princess Johanna in a jointure of £2000 yearly, secured on lands and rents, according to a reasonable estimation.^[21]

10. If either of the parties fail in performing the conditions of this treaty, he shall pay 2000 pounds of silver into the Papal treasury.

Perhaps the first point in these articles to strike the mind of the modern reader is the evidence of the enormous political power of the Church of Rome, notwithstanding the adversity which had overtaken the Pope, and driven him to take refuge for many years at Avignon. Ecclesiastics of the stamp of Anthony Beck, Bishop of Durham, William de Lamberton, Bishop of St. Andrews, and William de Melton, Archbishop of York, took the field as readily and as fully armed as any layman; and that not only in defence of the possessions of the Church, but often as generals of an invading army. Yet they were not to be held subject to the vicissitudes of war, but were to receive back their lands on the restoration of peace, an advantage refused to legitimate men of the sword. Then the uneasiness of King Robert and his people, owing to the repeated exercise against him of bell, book and candle, is apparent in the third article of this treaty. It is true that the solemn curses of the Church had proved singularly ineffective as regards the temporal affairs of Scotland. The louder and deeper the execrations, the more brightly fortune had smiled on the Scottish arms; and the greater the favour shown by the Pope to the English cause, the more hopelessly it became rent by internal dissensions, while the object of these denunciations had continued to receive such heart-whole service from his barons and people as has seldom been the lot of any monarch. Truly it seemed as if in this quarrel the Church had made a grievous blunder and chosen the wrong side.

Nevertheless it was an age of deep, if superstitious faith, and the old King of Scots still, perhaps, thought of that far off day when the altar-steps of Greyfriars church had dripped with the life blood of the Red Comyn. Sacrilege and murder under trust had left a stain which it would take all the favour of Mother Church to wash out of the record, and, notwithstanding that his own soul had already received absolution for that deed from Bishop Wishart, what evils might not be entailed on the Scottish people whom he loved, and on his son in whom so many hopes had their centre, unless they too were reconciled with the spiritual powers. No, the Church was still, and was to remain for two centuries more, the strongest political force in Europe, and no treaty could be satisfactory unless it were drawn to secure her favour.

Finally, the Papal Court was duly alive to its own interest, and, forasmuch as instances were not unknown where "perpetual peace" had been swallowed up in war, almost before the ink of the signatures had dried, it was common prudence to insert the tenth and last article, which secured a solid advantage to God's Vicegerent in the event of anything going wrong.

Notice may be made of the exceptions to the stipulations that the subjects of either King should not re-possess the lands which they had held of the other King before the war, for in the end these proved fatal to the maintenance of peace. These exceptions were all made in favour of English barons. It is true that a year later, May 12, 1329, Sir James Douglas received back his ancient possession of Fawdon in Northumberland, and all the other lands in England forfeited by his father William de Douglas, but this was a special act of favour (de gratia nostra speciali) by King Edward.^[22] The reason for exempting Percy, Wake, Beaumont and de la Touche from the loss of their lands in Scotland, is said by Sir Thomas Gray to have been that these lords would not agree to the treaty unless this were done, "de quoy," says he, "puis enavoient grant mal."

Besides the above articles mentioned by Lord Hailes, provision was made for returning to the Scots the celebrated Ragman Roll, in which the Scots landowners had done fealty to Edward I. and the bit of the true Cross which the Scots called the Black Rood.^[23] Lord Hailes inserts, as the second article in the treaty, a stipulation for the return to Scotland of the Coronation Stone, founding on a writ which he quotes, issued by Edward III. on July 1, 1328, to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, directing them to deliver it to the Sheriffs of London, who were to carry it to the Queen-Mother, because his council had agreed at the Parliament of Northampton that it should be sent to Scotland. It is, however, stated distinctly in the chronicle of Lanercost that the people of London—Londinenses—would on no account agree to part with this stone, and, as a matter of fact, they never have done so.

The conditions of peace were submitted to King Robert's Parliament assembled in Edinburgh in March, 1328, and approved by them.

1. Il fust sagis, douce et amyable en parole; mais mesoerous en fait.—Scalacronica, 151.
2. Bain, iii., 165.
3. Brother of the Count of Hainault. His real title was Lord of Beaumont. He had been serving lately in the war of Queen Isabella of England with her son, Edward II.
4. An exact description of oatcake as still made in Scotland.
5. These figures must be taken with the usual reserve. Barbour is more likely to be right in mentioning 10,000 "guid men." Sir T. Gray says that "restoit ge poy des gentz"—they were only a few in number—compared, that is, to the English army.
6. En lieu dur et secke.—Fædera.
7. Barbour distinctly says the Scots were on the north bank and the English on the opposite side of the river. But the dates of Edward's correspondence show that he was at Stanhope, on the north bank, on August 3d (Bain, iii., 168).
8. Froissart.
9. I have altered the dates given by Lord Hailes in conformity with King Edward's movements as attested in the Records, to which Lord Hailes had not access. But it is possible that Edward betook himself to Durham immediately after the camisade, leaving his army in their camp at Stanhope.
10. Le roy, vn innocent, plora des oils.—Scalacronica, 155.
11. Bain, iii., 157.
12. Bain, iii., 92.
13. Ibid., Introduction.
14. The Norse name for Larne Lough. Bain, iii., 167.
15. Ibid., 216.
16. Sir Thomas Gray, who, as a Northumberland knight and a near neighbour to Percy, must have known all about this affair, presents it in the light of a rout rather than a forced march—"taunt estoient lez Engles mescharnis en le hour de guer" (Scalacronica, 155).
17. Hailes, ii., 157.
18. The anniversary of the battle of Bannockburn.
19. An heir parcener of the deceased Earl of Buchan in right of his wife.
20. The lands of Henry de Balliol in Galloway and Angus had been bought by de Percy.
21. Per rationabilem extentam (Foedera) that is, according to a new inquest and valuation of the Crown lands, which had greatly fallen in value during the war.
22. Fœdera.
23. Lanercost, 261.