CHAPTER III.

THE ENGLISH ARMY ADVANCE TO LINLITHGOW.--BATTLE OF FALKIRK, FROM THE ACCOUNTS GIVEN BY ENGLISH AND SCOTTISH WRITERS.--MISCELLANEOUS TRANSACTIONS.

Day broke on the army of England moving onward to Linlithgow in one long and variegated column. To those whom sanctity of character, or local situation, enabled to await its approach, the spectacle, which was now at hand, must have been fearfully interesting. Since the days of the Romans, the present army was perhaps the largest that had traversed the plains of Scotland. Many alterations had been introduced about this time into Europe by the crusaders; and Edward, who was no inapt scholar in the military art, had, during his residence in Palestine, and his expeditions to France, availed himself of every invention that came under his observation. His army, therefore, might justly be considered as the most perfect in discipline, equipment, and feudal splendour, that Christendom could boast of at the time. As it approached, it seemed to lengthen,--the interminable array issuing, as it were, from some inexhaustible source on the verge of the horizon: Its glittering mazes occasionally appearing and disappearing among the inequalities of the road, might be aptly compared to the undulating movements of one of those enormous serpents that figure in the pages of romance, some of whose coils are at times seen while its extremities are concealed amid the darkness of the den from whence it is represented as issuing forth. Most of the inhabitants fled before the unwelcome intruders, except a few Carmelite friars, who stopped to gaze on the warlike pageant.

The confused hum of this living mass increased as it advanced, till the deserted walls of Linlithgow resounded to the braying of clarions, the thundering of kettle-drums, and the prancing of war-steeds in flowing caparisons, bestrode by warriors mailed to the teeth, having long two-handed swords depending from their girdles, while their right hands held lances, and their left supported triangular shields painted with the various devices of their families.

Henry de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln,[19] and Humphry de Bohun, Earl of Hereford, and Constable of England, led the first division. The second was under the charge of Bishop Bek, who, having executed the commission Edward had sent him by John Fitz-Marmaduke, next appeared in this portentous march, attended by thirty-nine banners; for this proud ecclesiastic spared no expense to render his retinue as magnificent as possible. In the third division under the command of the King, besides the royal standard (_three leopards courant_), there waved, the sacred banner of St John of Beverley, that of St George (_white with a red cross_), that of St Edmond, King of the West-Saxons, (_blue with three gold crowns_), that of St Edward the Confessor, (_blue, with a cross fleury between five martlets, gold_), and also the ominous standard of Henry III., by the unfurling of which the army were apprised of the vicinity of the enemy, and the certainty of an approaching battle. This gorgeous emblem of war was never displayed, except to announce a positive intention to fight: it was formed of red satin, bearing a dragon embroidered in gold, having sapphire eyes, and the tongue ingeniously contrived to seem continually moving.[20]

Amongst those who followed the royal banner, was Brian Fitz-Alan,[21] the late Governor of Scotland, attended by his vassals, and those Scots who still ventured to oppose the liberties of their country. Of the latter, we find Brian le Jay, preceptor of the Scottish Templars, who probably joined Edward at Torphichen. What number of knights accompanied him to the field in this formidable crusade against the freedom of that people who fostered them, cannot now be ascertained; we may, however, venture to include _John de Sautre, “Maister de la Chivalerie de Templi en Ecosse.”_

The immense multitude of Welsh collected by Edward, as being better acquainted with mountain warfare, were dispersed among the different divisions of the forces. Being mostly archers, and clothed in white tunics, they were easily distinguished from the other troops.

Tradition asserts, that this grand army took a whole day to deploy through the town of Linlithgow. This perhaps may be true respecting the parties escorting the heavy war-engines, suttlers attending the camp, and other stragglers; but the advanced guard of the English came in sight of the Scottish outposts early in the day. The latter occupied the ridge of a hill; and as the English marched up to attack them, a thick mist intervened, and prevented the intended rencounter.

When the day cleared up, the Scottish army was discovered in the distance, taking up their positions, and preparing for battle. Their numbers did not exceed 30,000--not a third part of the force opposed to them; and aware of the immense advantages which Edward possessed, and extremely averse to risk the safety of the country on the issue of a single battle, the Guardian would gladly have protracted the warfare, by retiring farther to the north. Divisions, however, prevailed among the leaders of the Scots; and, before they could agree on the measures necessary to be adopted, the near approach of the English, and the great superiority of the latter in cavalry, rendered retreat extremely hazardous.

The Scottish army, which consisted principally of spearmen or lancers, was arranged in four divisions or schiltrons. Those in the centre held their long spears perpendicular, and stood ready to fill up a vacancy, while each intervening rank gradually sloped their weapons till they came to a level. The front rank kneeling, and the whole closely wedged together, presented to the enemy the appearance of four enormous, impenetrable porcupines, the space between each being filled up with archers.

Edward, on seeing these dispositions for battle, hesitated to give orders for the attack, and proposed that his followers should pitch their tents, and allow the soldiers and horses time for rest and refreshment. This was opposed by his officers, as being unsafe in their present situation,--a small rivulet only intervening between the two armies. “What, then, would you advise?” exclaimed Edward. “An immediate advance!” was the reply; “the field and the victory will be our’s.”--“In God’s name, then, let it be so!” said the King.

The Earls of Lincoln and Hereford, accordingly, led the first squadron to the attack. Their progress, however, was retarded by an extensive morass, which covered the front of the Scots, and obliged their enemies to make a circuit to the west. While thus employed, the powerful squadron under the Bishop of Durham managed to get in front of the enemy. Bek, however, on observing the formidable appearance of his opponents, wished to delay the charge till supported by the column under the command of the King. “Stick to thy mass, Bishop,” said Ralf Basset of Drayton, “and teach us not what to do in the face of an enemy.”--“On, then,” said Bek, “Set on, in your own way; we are all soldiers to-day, and bound to do our duty.” Instantly they rushed forward, and soon became engaged with the first schiltron, which was almost simultaneously attacked on the opposite quarter by the first division which had cleared the morass. The cavalry of the Scots, and a large body of the vassals of John Cumyn, immediately wheeled about, and left the field without awaiting the attack. The schiltrons of spearmen, however, stood firm, and repulsed all the efforts of their numerous and heavy-armed assailants, who recoiled again and again from before the mass of spears which their enemies presented. Baffled in their attack, the cavalry of Edward charged upon the archers, who, less able to stand their ground against the weight of their mail-clad adversaries, gave way. In the confusion, Sir John Stewart of Bonkill, brother to the Steward of Scotland, was thrown to the ground, while attempting to rally his vassals, the archers of Selkirk; and though many of them rushed forward to his assistance, their exertions were in vain:--their gallant leader fell, surrounded by the bodies of his faithful tenantry.

Though heavy squadrons of cavalry were continually pushed forward against the Scottish spearmen, still the latter maintained their ranks, and displayed such admirable discipline and stubborn resolution, that Edward, convinced of the inability of breaking their array, suspended the charges of his horsemen, and ordered all his archers and slingers to advance.[22]

Langtoft thus describes the conduct and appearance of the Scottish infantry.

“Ther formast conrey, ther bakkis togidere sette, Ther speres poynt ouer poynt, so sare & o thikke & fast togidere joynt, to se it was ferlike. Als a castelle thei stode, that were walled with stone, Thei wende no man of blode thorgh tham suld haf gone Ther folk was so mykelle, so stalworth & so clene, Ther foyntes forward prikelle, nonhut wild thei wene, That if alle Inglond fro Berwik vnto Kent, The folk therin men fond had bien thider sent, Stength suld non haf had, to perte tham thorgh oute, So wer thei set sad with poyntes rounde aboute.”

_Vol. ii. p. 304, 305._

The formation of these Scottish schiltrons was admirably adapted for defence; and had they been supplied with a sufficient body of cavalry to have protected them from the assaults of the archers, they might have kept their ground, in defiance of every effort of the enemy. But, deserted by their own cavalry, they now stood helplessly exposed to a storm of missiles which assailed them in all directions; for though those in the centre bravely pressed forward to fill up the chasms in front, cloud after cloud of arrows, mingled with stones, continued to descend among their ranks with increasing and deadly effect, till the ground was encumbered around them; while their former assailants sat with their horses on the rein, ready to burst in upon them at the first opening that would offer. The Scots at last became unsteady, under the incessant and murderous discharge of the English artillery. The cavalry then dashed forward, and breaking in upon their ranks, completed the confusion.

Wallace now saw that retreat was the only expedient left by which he could save the remnant of his countrymen; and having, with incredible efforts, rallied a number of his most determined adherents, he attacked the foremost of the pursuers, and by that means covered the retreat of the fugitives. Amongst the slain, Brian le Jay[23] is particularly mentioned. The death of this Templar, which took place in Callender wood, damped the ardour of his companions, and enabled the Scots to make good their retreat. In this sanguinary conflict, 15,000 Scots are said to have been left on the field; the most distinguished of whom were Sir John Graham of Dundalk, Sir John Stewart of Bonkill, and MacDuff, grand-uncle to the Earl of Fife. The extent of the English loss, from the stubborn opposition of their enemies, must also have been considerable. After the battle, Wallace fell back on Stirling, which he burnt, in order to prevent it from falling into the hands of the English.

Respecting this battle, Scottish authors give a very different account from the preceding, which is chiefly taken from the pages of English historians. According to the former, the envy of the nobles towards Wallace, and the dissensions incident thereto, were the chief, if not the sole occasion of the disaster. The Scottish army, say they, consisted of three divisions of ten thousand men each, under the command of Sir John Cumyn, Lord of Badenoch, chief of the powerful clan of that name; Sir John Stewart, brother to the Lord of Bute, who, in addition to his own tenantry, headed those of his absent brother; and Sir William Wallace,--three of the most powerful men in the country, the two former from their birth and influence, the latter from the great fame acquired by his military achievements. On the brink of the engagement, an imprudent and unfortunate disagreement arose among the leaders. Stewart insisted upon taking command of the army, being, as he conceived, entitled to that honour, as the representative of his brother, who was Lord High Steward of Scotland; Cumyn claiming it, in his own right, on account of high birth, and near relationship to the crown; and Wallace, as Guardian of the kingdom, refused to admit the pretensions of either to a command which he, as representative of their absent sovereign, conceived himself every way entitled to, even though he had not earned that honour by former services. Stewart, in the heat of the altercation, is said to have upbraided Wallace with the lowness of his birth, and charged him with encroaching on the rights of the nobility, which reminded him, he said, “of the owl in the fable, who, having borrowed a feather from one bird, and a feather from another, became vain of his plumage, and endeavoured to lord it over his betters. The application is not difficult,” continued he; “for, if every nobleman in Scotland were to claim his part of those vassals which now follow your banners, your own personal retainers would make but a sorry appearance in support of your high-flown pretensions.” Wallace heard, with stern composure, those ill-timed remarks of the haughty chieftain. “I am not ignorant,” said he, “of the source whence this insulting language has proceeded; and since you, my Lord, condescend to utter their sentiments, you may be also induced to imitate their example: and even this,” glancing a look of indignation at Cumyn, “I am not altogether unprepared for. Your fable of the owl is not quite applicable; for I always showed myself in the face of day, asserting the liberty and independence of my country, while some others, like owls, courted concealment, and were too much afraid of losing their _roosts_, to leave them for such a cause. As to my followers, I wish no man to follow me who is not sound at the heart in the cause of his country; and either at the head or in the ranks of these, I will always consider it my glory to be found. In the mean time, till it appear who are entitled to that character, I will make an alteration in my position.” Having thus spoken, he removed those under his command to a strong position on the face of a hill immediately behind.

Edward, as if aware of the feud that thus existed in the Scottish camp, and though suffering from the effects of his late accident, ordered the Earl of Hereford, Constable of England, to advance with a body of thirty thousand men, to attack the division under Cumyn; who, on seeing them approach, turned his banners, and marched off the field, leaving Stewart and his Brandanes (as the inhabitants of Bute were then called), and the archers of Selkirk, his immediate vassals, exposed to all the fury of the charge. They sustained it with the firmest resolution; but the great mass of assailants against whom they were engaged, left them little chance of success. Stewart, in the early part of the battle, while giving orders to a body of archers, was thrown from his horse and slain. His followers, however, far from being discouraged by the loss of their chief, continued the conflict with the greatest bravery. Macduff, with a great part of his retainers, were cut off, in their endeavours to retrieve the fortunes of the day, yet numbers forced their way through the ranks of the English, and joined the division under Wallace. This was observed by Edward, who, impatient at the resistance he had already met with, ordered Robert Bruce and the Bishop of Durham to advance with the forces under their command. While Wallace was engaged in securing the retreat of his unfortunate countrymen, Bruce made a circuit round the hill which he occupied, and gaining the ascent, obliged him to quit his position, and endeavour to force his way through the enemy beneath. The charge of this fresh body of Scots, composed of the stoutest and best disciplined warriors in the country, was but ill sustained by the division they attacked, which, giving way before their impetuous descent, was thrown into confusion; and Wallace, availing himself of their disorder, directed his troops to cross the Carron, and occupy a post which commanded the ford. In the meantime, with a small but choice body of his friends, he kept in the rear, and continued to charge and repulse those that were most forward in the pursuit. In one of these efforts, Wallace advanced alone from the midst of his little band, and, with a single blow, slew Sir Brian le Jay, a knight templar[24] of high military renown, who had shown himself most active in harassing the retreating Scots. This action rendered the others more cautious in their approaches. Sir John Graham, however, giving way to a gallant but imprudent ardour, advanced too far amongst the enemy, where he was surrounded and slain; and Wallace, after repeated endeavours to revenge the death of his friend, rejoined his followers. This he effected with great difficulty, from the influx of the tide, and the weakness of his horse, which is said to have been so worn out with the fatigues of the day, and the wounds it had received, that the noble animal expired as soon as it had placed its master beyond the reach of his pursuers. By the attention of his trusty follower Kerlé, who stood an anxious spectator on the danger of his chief, Wallace was furnished with a fresh horse; and the two friends, as they moved slowly along the banks of the river, were gazing with silent and sorrowful interest on the scene of carnage they had left, when Bruce, from the opposite bank, having recognised the Guardian, raised his voice, and requested an interview. This was readily granted, and the warriors approached each other from opposite sides of the river, at a place narrow, deep and rocky. When on the margin of the stream, Wallace waved his hand, to repress the curiosity of his followers, while he eyed his misled countryman with stern, but dignified composure. Bruce felt awed by the majestic appearance and deportment of the patriot, and his voice, though loud, became tremulous as he thus addressed him:--“I am surprised, Sir William, that you should entertain thoughts, as it is believed you do, of attaining to the crown of Scotland; and that, with this chimerical object in view, you should thus continue to expose yourself to so many dangers. It is not easy, you find, to resist the King of England, who is one of the greatest princes in the world. And were you even successful in your attempts, are you so vain as to imagine, that the Scots will ever suffer you to be their King?” The Guardian did not allow him to say more. “No,” replied he, “my thoughts never soared so high, nor do I intend to usurp a crown I very well know my birth can give me no right to, and my services can never merit. I only mean to deliver my country from oppression and slavery, and to support a just cause, which you have abandoned. You, my lord, whose right may entitle you to be King, ought to protect the kingdom; ’tis because you do it not, that I must, and will, while I breathe, endeavour the defence of that country I was born to serve, and for which, if Providence will have it so, to die. As for you, who, in place of exerting your talents to turn the tide of battle in your country’s favour, choose rather to live a slave, if with safety to your life and fortune, than free, with the hazard of losing the latter, you may remain in possession of what you so much value, while the hollow praises of our enemies may blind you to the enormity of your conduct; but remember, my lord, they whom you are thus aiding to bind the yoke of slavery on the necks of your countrymen, will not long consider that conduct praise-worthy in you, which they would condemn as infamous in themselves; and if they are successful in rivetting our chains, you will find your reward in the well-earned contempt of the oppressor, and the hearty execrations of the oppressed. Pause, therefore, and reflect; if you have but the heart to claim the crown, you may win it with glory, and wear it with justice. I can do neither; but what I can I will--live and die a free born man.” These generous sentiments, uttered in a clear, manly, and determined tone of voice, came home to the heart of Bruce, with all the sternness of deserved reproof; and he was about to reply, when the ringing of harness, followed by the appearance of a number of helmets, over-topping the ridge of a neighbouring hillock, made it prudent to break off the conference.

Such are the particulars of this memorable battle, as related, with some trifling variations, by most of, if not by all, our old Scottish historians. As modern commentators, however, consider themselves justified in denying some of the material points; particularly the feud among the leaders--the presence of Bruce in the engagement--and, consequently, his conference with Wallace, we shall in this place devote a few pages to their consideration.

These objections are chiefly founded on the authority of Hemingford and Trevit, two English monks, who are said to have had their information from eye-witnesses. This may be all true; but when we find one of them (Hemingford) asserting, that “_fifty thousand Scots were slain in the battle, many drowned, three hundred thousand foot taken prisoners, besides a thousand horse_,” we may reasonably suppose the possibility of the _eye-witnesses_ being so much occupied in counting their killed and captured enemies, that matters of such comparatively trifling importance may not have had the requisite share of their attention. Lord Hailes, however, lends the weight of his highly respectable name in support of those who deny the truth of this portion of our national annals, and thus expresses himself on the points in question: “It would be tedious and unprofitable to recite all that has been said on this subject by our own writers, from Fordun to Abercrombie, how Wallace, Stewart, and Comyn quarrelled on the punctilio of leading the van of an army, which stood on the defensive; how Stewart compared Wallace to an owl, with borrowed feathers; how the Scottish leaders, busied in this frivolous altercation, had no leisure to form their army; how Comyn traitorously withdrew with ten thousand men; how Wallace, from resentment, followed his example; how, by such disastrous incidents, the Scottish army was enfeebled, and Stewart and his party abandoned to destruction. Our histories abound in trash of this kind. There is scarcely one of our writers who has not produced an invective against Comyn, or an apology for Wallace, or a lamentation for the deserted Stewart. What dissensions may have prevailed among the Scottish commanders, it is impossible to know. It appears not to me, that their dissensions had any influence on their conduct in the day of battle. The truth seems to be this:--The English cavalry greatly exceeded the Scotch in numbers--were infinitely better equipped, and more adroit. The Scottish cavalry were intimidated and fled:--Had they remained in the field, they might have preserved their honour, but never could have turned the chance of that day. It was natural, however, for such of their party as survived the engagement, to impute the disaster to the defection of the cavalry:--National pride would ascribe their flight to treachery rather than to pusillanimity. It is not improbable, that Comyn commanded the cavalry; hence a report may have spread, that Comyn betrayed his country: the report has been embellished by each successive relation. When men are seized with a panic, their commander _must_ of necessity, or _will_ from prudence, accompany them in their flight. Earl Warren fled with his army from Stirling to Berwick, yet Edward did not punish him as a traitor or a coward.

“The tale of Comyn’s treachery and Wallace’s ill-timed resentment, may have gained credit, because it is a pretty tale, and not improbable in itself; but it always amazes me that the story of the _congress_ of Bruce and Wallace, after the battle of Falkirk, should have gained credit. I lay aside the full evidence which we now possess, ‘that Bruce was not at that time of the English party, nor present at the battle’--for it must be admitted, that our historians knew nothing of those circumstances which demonstrate the impossibility of the _congress_--but the wonder is, that men of sound judgment should not have seen the absurdity of a long conversation between the commander of a flying army, and one of the leaders of a victorious army. When Fordun told the story, he placed ‘a narrow but inaccessible glen’ between the speakers. Later historians have substituted the river Carron, in place of an inaccessible glen; and they make Bruce and Wallace talk across the river like two young declaimers from the pulpits in a school of rhetoric.”

With all due deference to his Lordship, we conceive that the strength of his first objection lies chiefly in adhering too literally to the words “_leading the van_,” made use of by some of our old writers; others, who mention the quarrel, do not so express themselves. Now, we do not see any thing so improbable in a discussion arising among these chiefs, who considered themselves independent of each other, about who should have the supreme command in directing the operations of the day, which, we presume, is all that is to be understood in this instance by “_leading the van_.” The obvious advantage of having a commander-in-chief in so momentous an occasion, could not have escaped the merest tyro in military tactics; and that no person was appointed to this office, even his Lordship does not deny. That Wallace, from past services, as well as from being Guardian of the kingdom, had reason to consider himself entitled to this distinction, cannot be disputed; and it is not likely, from the talents and foresight he had displayed on former occasions, that he would have come to the field against so powerful and so experienced an adversary, without having previously formed some plan for conducting the operations of the day, so as to counteract the great superiority of force, which the English monarch had brought into the field. The thwarting of his plans, by the envy and hauteur of his colleagues, affords a plain and obvious solution of his conduct; and his resignation of the Guardianship after the battle, (which his Lordship does not deny,) very strongly corroborates the account given by our Scottish historians, of the treatment which he received on the field; and this treatment must have been attended with circumstances which convinced him of the utter hopelessness of his being able to direct the resources of the country to advantage. Strong indeed must have been the reasons which induced this brave, intrepid, and prudent pilot, to relinquish the helm of affairs at so critical a juncture. That an unfortunate animosity existed, we have the most ample testimony; and though his Lordship conceives it to have been so very trifling in its nature, as not to influence the parties in the discharge of their duty, yet we have respectable and incontrovertible evidence that it not only did so, but was the principal, if not the sole cause of the disasters which overwhelmed the country. Wyntown thus expresses himself, on the occasion:

“For dyspyt and gret inwy The Comynys Kyn all hályly Fyrst left the Feld; and, as behowyd, Syne Willame Walayis hym remowyd: For he persáwyd gret malys Agayne hym scharpyd mony wys.”

And again,

“Before than couth ná man say, Ná nevyr wes sene befor that day, Sá hále wencust the Scottis men: Ná it had noucht fallyn then, Had noucht Falshed and Inwy Devysyd theme sá syndryly.”

Here there is no national pride interfering, to conceal the extent of the discomfiture of the Scots; and it is surprising his Lordship should conceive, that any one would think it necessary to invent what he calls a “_pretty tale_,” for the purpose of soothing the national feelings. Thirty thousand Scots, we presume, may be defeated by ninety or a hundred thousand English, without being _very_ much disgraced by the affair; whereas the English authorities may have been silent on circumstances which tended to diminish the glory of their victory, even had they come to their knowledge.

That Cumyn commanded the cavalry is merely a conjecture of his Lordship; but allowing it to have been the case, we conceive there is a material difference between a leader joining in the general flight of his army, and one riding off with part of the forces, and leaving the rest to stand the brunt of the engagement. If Warren had acted so, we presume he would either have been punished as a traitor, or cashiered as a coward. That Cumyn was afterwards elected one of the regents of the kingdom, affords no satisfactory evidence of his having acted correctly. He was at the head of the only entire body of troops in the country, and his faction unbroken--of course, there could be no opposition to his election. And the wonder is, considering the ambition of the man, that under these circumstances he was not appointed sole regent, in place of sharing a divided authority, as will be seen in the sequel, with one who was his inferior in birth, talents, and influence.

We cannot see any great improbability of the “_congress_” (as his Lordship calls it) having taken place in the manner described, provided that _Bruce was present_. Wallace had already secured his troops from immediate pursuit. Bruce might think it a favourable opportunity to palliate his conduct at Irvine; and Wallace, who was seldom afraid to come in juxtaposition with any one, might have been easily induced to stand when he hailed him. His Lordship’s objection is founded chiefly on the length of the conversation. Now, if any one will peruse it, even in the most verbose of our historians, he will find that it could not have occupied more than five minutes, which certainly cannot be called “a long conversation,” or at least so long as to afford any thing like a plausible objection to its occurrence. As to Fordun having placed “a narrow inaccessible glen” between the parties, it does not in the least affect the credibility of the account. Few glens are to be found in Scotland, without a river or stream of some description running through them; and in speaking of any of these, it is no uncommon thing for one person to allude to the glen, and another to the river or stream so connected with it.

That all our ancient authors should agree in the circumstance of Bruce being present at the battle, is very singular, provided he was not there. How they should all be in this state of ignorance is rather unaccountable, considering the facility they had of informing themselves; as some of them must have written from authority, if not of eye-witnesses, at least of those who derived their accounts from such. It is not at all probable that Bruce, who is universally acknowledged to have been a monarch of great political sagacity, would have allowed a tale, so likely to injure him in the opinion of his subjects, to get into general circulation, while the contrary statement, _if true_, would have tended to exalt him in their estimation. There appear so many irreconcilable circumstances involved in the belief of this opinion, that we feel much inclined to suspect some little discrepancy in the evidence to which his Lordship so confidently alludes,[25] more particularly as Wyntowne, whose authority is highly appreciated by all writers, is so very pointed in asserting the presence of Bruce in the English army. The words are,

“Bot yhit the lele Scottis men, That in that feld ware feychtand then, To-gyddyr stwd sá fermly Strykand before thame manlykly, Swá that náne thare thyrl thame mycht, Bot Robert the Brows than wyth a slycht, (_He thare wes wyth this King Edwart, Set he oure Kyng wes eftyrwart_) Wyth Schyre Anton the Bek a wyly man, Of Durame Byschape he wes than, A-bowt ane hill a well fere way Owt of that stowre than prikyd thay; Behynd bakkis alsá fast Thare thai come on, and layid on fast; Swá made thai the dyscumfytowre.”

Here our author, not satisfied with stating, that “Robert de Brows” was with “_King Edwart_;” but, in order to establish the identity of the person, and guard against his being confounded with the elder Robert Bruce, or any other of the same name, he says expressly,

“_Set he oure Kyng wes eftyrwart._”

If Bruce was at this time on the side of the patriots, as his Lordship says, it is singular that he did not appear among them on this eventful day, in a manner becoming his birth, talents, and great territorial influence. When all the chiefs of the party had collected their followers for a grand national struggle, Bruce is represented as employed in guarding, what his Lordship, for the sake of _effect_, calls the “important castle of Ayr,” which, it seems in those days, “_kept the communication open with Galloway, Argyllshire, and the Isles_.”[26] Had the possession of this “important castle” been of any use to an army stationed between Linlithgow and Falkirk, it certainly could have been defended by a person of less consequence than Bruce, whose military talents and numerous vassals would have been of infinitely greater service in the field. When Wallace was straining every nerve to collect the strength of the country, to oppose the formidable invaders, and with his utmost efforts could not muster more than 30,000 soldiers, can it be supposed, that he would have failed to summon to the standard of liberty a baron of such influence as the Earl of Carrick, if he thought there were a chance of the summons being obeyed?

Though his Lordship asserts that Bruce had deserted the cause of Edward, yet he does not attempt to show that any communication took place between him and the Scottish army; nor by what authority he assumed the defence of the castle of Ayr, which was a fortress at that time belonging to the Crown. If Hemingford, on whose authority his Lordship chiefly relies, could have gone so egregiously astray from every thing like probability in the account he gives of the casualties of the battle, we may, without injustice, receive his testimony on this, or on any other subject, with suspicion; particularly when it goes to contradict historians of acknowledged veracity, who had opportunities of being at least equally well informed on the subject as himself. It has been advanced by the learned annalist, in evidence of the truth of Hemingford’s statement, that lands and castles belonging to Bruce were plundered and taken by the English army. By a parity of reasoning, if these lands and castles had been exempt from the general outrage, it would have proved that Bruce was in the interest of England; and the Guardian and Barons of Scotland would thereby have stood convicted of the unparalleled folly of allowing lands to be occupied, and castles to be held, in the very centre of the country, by the open and declared partisan of their enemy. That the title of Bruce to his Scottish estates was in abeyance, and his castles garrisoned for the safety of the commonwealth of Scotland, is the most probable state of the affair. When the half-famished soldiers of Edward, therefore, pillaged the lands, and attacked the castles of Bruce, they did what their King, under such circumstances, neither could nor would restrain, whether his vassal had renounced his allegiance or not. This conduct on the part of the English, therefore, can afford no evidence whatever of Bruce being at the time “in arms against England.”

These observations the writer has thought it expedient to make, in support of the relation given of the battle of Falkirk by the ancient historians of Scotland. As the talents, however, which Lord Hailes has displayed in his researches into Scottish history, are held by the public in high, and in many instances, deserved estimation; and though it is with reluctance that we differ from one whose opinions in general are entitled to credit; yet, as we find him in this instance at variance with most of our ancient Scottish authorities, we have thought it our duty to endeavour to lay both sides of the question fairly before the reader, in order that he may be able to form his own opinion of the matter.