CHAPTER VI.

LATER HISTORY.

In the times when the King of Scots’ capital was Edinburgh, a royal visit to Stirling was an occurrence of an ordinary kind. Preparations were made in the interior of the castle for the housing of the Court, but naturally the sovereign’s arrival was not regarded as an event of historic importance. After the Union of the Crowns, however, when the royal family was domiciled in England, and the people in the north had grown unaccustomed to the sight of a monarch’s pomp, a visit of the King to his ancient castle was eagerly looked forward to by the inhabitants of Stirling, and elaborate preparations were undertaken for his reception both within and without the building.

King Charles I. was a native of Scotland, but he left his fatherland when a child of tender years, and although he was anxious to travel north with James when that monarch obeyed what he called his salmon-like instinct, not until 1633 did Charles set foot again upon Scottish soil. Each year after his accession to the throne his northern subjects had expected his arrival, but time after time their sanguine hopes had been doomed to disappointment. In November, 1631, the Privy Council believed that Charles’s promised visit was at length near at hand. Not only were the royal apartments at Stirling made ready for the King, but, in order that he might enjoy the sport his father loved, the hunting of hares was strictly forbidden within eight miles of the castle. At last, when Charles had finally made up his mind to venture into Scotland, the Privy Council reissued the decree regarding the protection of ground game.[74] The townspeople of Stirling, however, were to have but poor reward for their long and patient waiting. During his Scottish visit in 1633, the King passed two nights in the castle in the beginning of July, as he journeyed from Edinburgh to Fife and Perth, and when a few days later he returned to the Scottish capital he avoided the detour by the Old Bridge of Forth and crossed the Firth in a storm.[75]

The outbreak of the Great Civil War brought Stirling Castle again to the front. The Covenanting party being dominant at the time, Parliament decreed in 1640 that the fortresses should be placed in the charge of trusty natives of Scotland, although the Earl of Mar was not deprived of his heritable right to the custody of the castle.[76] In this year Archibald, Earl of Argyll, while endeavouring to force the Covenant on the Highlanders of Central Scotland, seized the Earl of Atholl in his camp in Strathtay and sent him prisoner to Stirling Castle.[77] After a brief stay in the fortress, however, the nobleman was conveyed to the capital, where an agreement was entered into by which he recovered his freedom.

In 1644 the great Marquis of Montrose began his brilliant series of military successes. Not only did the Highland clans rise, as always, for the House of Stewart, but a considerable body of Scoto-Irish troops had landed in the west to support the King’s cause. After the Covenanters’ defeat at Tippermuir the Government began to be seriously alarmed, and Sir Archibald Primrose, Clerk to the Privy Council, was ordered to write to Livingstone of Westquarter, urging him to look well after the town, castle and bridge of Stirling, in case the Irish soldiers should take their route that way.[78] The castle, however, though garrisoned and prepared, did not figure in the wars of Montrose; for the Marquis turned northwards after Tippermuir, and when he eventually descended on the Lowlands he crossed the Forth by the Fords of Frew and not by Stirling Bridge.

Although the “Great Marquis” suffered death for his devotion to the King, the cause for which he laid down his life was not lost in his native country. In 1650 Charles II., a young man of twenty, landed at the mouth of the Spey, and although England at the time was under the Protectorate, the youthful adventurer was crowned King of Scots. In the end of July he spent some nights in Stirling Castle, delighting the townsfolk with his courtly manners and reminding the old inhabitants of the splendid days that had gone. Charles was the last of a long line of monarchs to take up residence within the old walls. A few months later Holburne, the captain of the castle, was suspected of being a Royalist only by pretence, and of having held treacherous communications with some of the agents of Oliver Cromwell. The officer obeyed the summons to appear before the Parliament of Perth, and there he succeeded in clearing himself of the charge which his enemies had brought up against him.[79]

Young King Charles did not long enjoy the ancient crown of his fathers. Cromwell’s victories of Dunbar and Worcester made the continuance of the monarchy impossible, although all the Scottish strongholds did not at once surrender to the rule of the Protector. Under the governorship of Colonel William Conyngham--who as an undoubted Royalist had been placed in Holburne’s position--the garrison of Stirling Castle determined to hold the fortress for the King. This defiance brought General Monk to the gates, with over five thousand men, on August 6th, 1651. The day after his arrival he ordered his soldiers to raise earthen platforms for mounting his guns. One of these batteries was erected in the churchyard, whence for three days a fire was kept up, causing considerable damage to the castle. At the same time Colonel Conyngham’s ordnance played hard upon the graveyard platform: a cannonade that has left its traces on the church to the present day. On the fourteenth of the month, owing to a mutiny in the garrison, the governor sent out a letter to Monk desiring a treaty of surrender, although two days before, not foreseeing this contingency, he had told the besiegers that he would hold the fortress as long as he could.[80]

It was agreed that the castle should be handed over to Monk, that the prisoners in the building should be released, and that the garrison should be allowed to march out. Also that noblemen, gentlemen and inhabitants of the town, whose goods were in the castle, should have liberty to transport their property to other places.[81] Forty pieces of ordnance and twenty-six barrels of powder, along with a large number of barrels of beef and beer and many vessels of claret, fell into the hands of the besiegers. The spoils of the castle included also two coaches, the Earl of Mar’s coronet and his robes of Parliament, and some of the King’s hangings. The national records which had been preserved in the fortress were sent to the Tower of London. Some were returned to Scotland a few years later; others were lost at sea shortly after the Restoration.

Colonel Reade was left by General Monk in charge of Stirling Castle; and in his plan for the defence of Scotland, which he laid before the Protector in 1657, Monk proposed to garrison Stirling with thirteen companies of foot and a regiment of horse.[82] The Erskines’ right to the custody of the fortress was overlooked by Oliver Cromwell, but after the Restoration, in 1661, Parliament granted to John, Earl of Mar and his heirs male, the governorship of the castle with its parks and pasturage and their rents and duties.[83] Quarter of a century later King James VII., angry at Earl Charles’s opposition to his plans for the relief of Roman Catholics, deprived the nobleman of part of his hereditary right; but when William of Orange ascended the throne the keeping of the castle, with all the privileges attached to the office, was again entrusted to the family of Mar.

During the reign of Charles II. Stirling Castle was notable as a prison. All kinds of offenders--persons convicted of treason, holders of unlawful conventicles, disturbers of the public peace--were placed in ward in the fortress. One of these prisoners was Patrick Gillespie, who as a staunch supporter of Cromwell, had been made Principal of Glasgow University. On Charles’s return he craved pardon through his wife for his anti-monarchical conduct, but in September, 1660, he was confined in Stirling Castle,[84] although in March of the following year he was released from a rigorous captivity.

Sir Patrick Hume of Polwarth was another of Charles II.’s distinguished prisoners. In 1673 he had spoken “with abundance of freedom and plainness” against the Duke of Lauderdale’s policy;[85] and two years later he petitioned against and refused to pay for the support of, the garrison which was stationed in his shire in order to curb the Covenanters. Consequently, in 1675-6, he was compelled to spend some months in Stirling Castle, and a year or two later he was warded there again, though his wife was allowed to be with him.

Although Charles II. never saw Stirling after his Restoration, his brother James, the heir-presumptive, visited the castle in 1681. During the time of his sojourn in Scotland he resided chiefly at Holyroodhouse, but his interest in Linlithgow and Stirling was such that he determined to make a progress to those ancient seats in the early days of February. The weather, indeed, had been uncommonly mild, but on the 3rd of the month, when the Duke of Albany and York set forth from Holyrood, accompanied by John Churchill, afterwards the famous Duke of Marlborough, the ground was covered with a heavy coat of snow. James arrived at Stirling that evening, and passed the night, not, as would have been appropriate, in the palace of his fathers, but in Argyll’s Lodging on the Castle Hill. Next day he was conducted round the royal fortress after the great guns had fired a salute and the Earl of Mar, with the garrison under arms, had received him at the gate. The Duke examined all the important rooms in the Palace and inspected the castle walls; he expressed his admiration for the buildings and for the situation of the fortress, as well as for the extensive prospect of the windings of the river and the country through which it meandered. He remarked that he had been told a great deal about that noble seat, but that it much exceeded all that he had heard of it. “It was,” His Highness said, “inherent and natural to all the Royal Family for many years past to have a particular kindness for Strivling.” As James departed from the castle the guns again sounded a salute. Next day he travelled back to Holyrood.[86]

Coming events do not always cast their shadows before. As the heir-presumptive to the British throne walked round the castle with Mar he did not foresee that soon, as King, he would curtail the privileges which the Earl enjoyed as governor of Stirling, and that the hereditary office would be fully restored by the supporters of the man who was to tear his crown from his brow. Nor could he picture to himself his grandson, a disinherited prince, striving to recover this bulwark of the north from the servants of an alien sovereign.

Rivers winding in rich valleys were favourite scenes with James. When an exile in France he used to enjoy the view of the Seine from the terrace of St. Germain, partly because of its intrinsic beauty and partly because it reminded him of the prospect of the Thames from Richmond Hill. Doubtless his thoughts often travelled to Scotland too, and the Seine must sometimes have brought to his mind the tortuous river that he once admired from the ramparts of Stirling Castle.

As the Restoration sent Patrick Gillespie into captivity at Stirling, so the Revolution brought the fourth Earl of Perth a prisoner into the castle. Earl James had been one of Scotland’s leading men under the last Stewart king; but the days of his prosperity were brought to a close with the flight of his sovereign in 1688, and as he had espoused the Roman Catholic faith and had profited by the King’s dispensing power, he had only punishment to expect at the hands of his political opponents. After an attempt to flee the country he was thrown into Stirling Castle, where he lay a prisoner till 1693. At first the Earl was somewhat harshly treated, but on his Countess’s petitioning against his want of privacy the Estates agreed to relieve him of the constant attendance of his guards.[87]

Although Queen Anne never saw Stirling Castle, her name is associated with the fortifications that were constructed outside the gateway which James IV. had built. This addition consists of massive embrasured walls with outlook turrets, and an archway bearing the initials A. R. surmounted by a crown. The probability, however, is that the battery existed before the time of Anne, but that during her reign it was repaired and strengthened, an extra protection being the fosse. Thus the castle was fortified for the Jacobite rebellion that was yearly expected and dreaded, but that did not break out until 1715, a year after the death of the Queen.

On the accession of George I., John, Earl of Mar, being suspected of having Jacobite sympathies, was deprived of the governorship of Stirling Castle. Since that time the office of hereditary keeper has never been revived. The new King’s prompt action not unnaturally strengthened the Jacobite predilections of the Earl, who awaited a favourable opportunity of raising the standard of James VIII.

In Mar’s insurrection of 1715, as in former days, Stirling, with its bridge and castle, was a valuable military post. King George’s Government lost little time in concentrating forces upon it, in order to prevent the Highland Jacobites from joining their friends in the south. In the end of August the royal army under General Wightman encamped in the Park and secured the castle and the bridge. The Duke of Argyll, to whom the supreme command of the forces was given, arrived at Stirling on the 17th September, and before long found himself at the head of nearly four thousand men.

The insurgents proposed to cross the Forth by detaching a portion of their army for the apparent purpose of effecting a passage at Stirling, and by sending their main body by the upper fords while the Royalists were engaged at the bridge. Argyll, however, having heard of his enemies’ intentions, determined to take the initiative. Marching out of Stirling on November 12th, he blocked the Highlanders’ way at Sheriffmuir, where on the following day an indecisive battle was fought. The right wing of each army was successful, and both sides claimed the victory, but as Mar was prevented from crossing the Forth the advantage really lay with Argyll. During the absence of the army at Sheriffmuir the town and castle of Stirling were garrisoned by five hundred volunteers from Glasgow, who had camped for nearly two months in the Park with Wightman’s regular troops.

The next appearance of Stirling Castle in history is during the Rebellion of the Forty-five, although not until after the retreat from Derby did the enemy come before its gates. True, in September, 1745, the Highlanders passed so close to the castle that guns were fired from the battlements, but Charles was pushing on rapidly to Edinburgh and had no mind for a siege by the way. It was on the 6th of January, 1746, that the Highland army appeared again in the neighbourhood of Stirling. Charles Edward took up residence in Bannockburn House, while his soldiers camped in the vicinity, and on the same day the town of Stirling was summoned to surrender. Seeing no prospect of holding out against the dreaded mountaineers, the citizens capitulated on the 8th of the month, but the castle garrison under General Blakeney prepared to resist to the last extremity. To Charles’s demand for the delivery of the fortress the General proudly replied that His Royal Highness must have a bad opinion of him to think him capable of surrendering the castle in such a cowardly manner.[88]

An engineer of the name of Grant had arranged to erect batteries in the old churchyard, as it occupied a high piece of ground, commanding the entrance to the castle. The citizens, however, objected to this plan, as General Blakeney’s guns would have reduced their town to ruins. Charles therefore ordered the Frenchman, Mirabelle de Gordon, whom the soldiers ironically called Mr. Admirable, to undertake the siege operations. Mirabelle, according to the Chevalier Johnstone, had little knowledge of engineering and was totally destitute of judgment, discernment and commonsense; but because he was a French engineer, decorated with an order, it was supposed he was a person of experience, talents and capacity. The Frenchman began to dig trenches on the Gowan Hills, at a place where the solid rock was only fifteen inches below the surface of the ground, so that bags filled with wool and earth had to be brought from a distance to afford some sort of cover. The battery after all did little damage to the castle, and when Blakeney’s guns were turned upon it Mirabelle’s men were slaughtered in great numbers, and the position had soon to be abandoned.[89]

This ill-conducted siege was an unsuccessful enterprise, but it gave to Charles’s Highlanders their victory at Falkirk. History never repeats itself, but sometimes it nearly does so. As Edward II. had marched to Bannockburn in order to relieve the Castle of Stirling, so General Hawley advanced by the same route from Edinburgh for the purpose of saving the same ancient stronghold from falling into the hands of Bruce’s descendant. Charles left the Duke of Perth with over a thousand men to continue the blockade while the rest of the army barred the way near Bannockburn, as King Robert had done long before; but finding that Hawley was in no haste to attack, Charles quitted the field of happy omen and advanced to unpropitious Falkirk. The memory of Wallace’s defeat, however, did not oppress the eager Highlanders, for they routed the Government troops in a storm of wind and rain, and drove them back on Linlithgow. After this victory Charles returned to Stirling to proceed with the siege of the castle, and twice on the day of his arrival the garrison was summoned to surrender. Blakeney, however, answered that he had always been looked upon as a man of honour, and that the rebels should find that he would die so.[90] In their desperation a number of Highlanders tried to scale the castle rock, but they were driven back with heavy loss of life in their daring attempt to imitate the feats of medieval warriors. The chiefs at length saw the hopelessness of the undertaking, and with difficulty managed to persuade their Prince--who at times was bravely exposing himself to the fire of the garrison’s guns--to withdraw his troops to the Highland hills. On February 1st the army began its disorderly retreat, taking the road to the Fords of Frew, for Blakeney had some time before destroyed the south arch of the old Bridge of Forth, and next day the Duke of Cumberland, who had superseded Hawley, entered and occupied Stirling town.

To many people the history of Scotland seems to cease with the suppression of the Rebellion of Forty-five. This idea doubtless takes its rise from the fact that no battle has been fought on Scottish soil since the Jacobites were vanquished by Cumberland. Up to that point strife and bloodshed are so characteristic of the nation’s history, that the important half-centuries that have elapsed since Culloden are apt to be considered as having no connection with the story that began in the early ages and ended when “Prince Charlie” took ship at Lochnanuagh. Yet because royalty has forsaken its former seat, and because in times of peace a fortress cannot play a glorious part, the retiral of the Highlanders in 1746 does mark the close of Stirling Castle’s long and noble history.

Since that time the building has been used as barracks and has become a recruiting depot for the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. Once or twice in the course of the nineteenth century its former days were recalled. In 1820, Hardie and Baird, two prominent leaders in the “Radical War,” were imprisoned in the castle before their execution, like Archbishop Hamilton and other political offenders in the times of the Stewart kings. On the 13th of September, 1842, the pleasanter days of the past were brought to mind when the presence of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert within the walls revived the old associations of royalty. Seventeen years later their son, the Prince of Wales, inspected the ancient building where his ancestors had lodged, and from the spot where his mother had surveyed the scene, he admired the view which kings have enjoyed of the Vale of Menteith and the Highland hills. To Queen Victoria and her son thoughts must have occurred similar to those which passed through the mind of James, Duke of Albany and York, when he observed that it was inherent and natural to all the Royal Family to have a particular kindness for Stirling.