|
|
|
|
|
|
|
title page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
previous page
next page |
|
|
|
Page 155:-
|
addendum
Border Histroy
|
|
THE BORDER - HISTORY.
HAVING now traversed that part of the country I proposed, I
shall mention a few particulars relating to the
border-service, which may not be unentertaining to some of
my readers.
|
Debatable Land
|
|
There was a certain tract of land between the two kingdoms,
claimed by both, and inhabited by a set of robbers, without
any government or laws; it was like an enter-common
between two lordships, and what Blackstone in his
commentaries calls Common per cause of Vicinage.
|
border laws
border service
|
|
King Edward * the I. residing some time in
Cumberland, hearing daily complaints, and perceiving the
mischiefs done by this lawless banditti, made a distinct law
for them, (after having effected the sovereignty of
Scotland) and appointed Robert de Clifford, Lord of
Westmorland, the Governor or Lord-Warden of the Marches, as
they were then and afterwards called. The lords of manors
were bound to serve him themselves for their lands, and to
furnish him with a stipulated number of armed men; some with
horses, others on foot, at their own expence. From this
seems to have arisen the heriot service; for a male tenant
dying and leaving a widow, was obliged to let the lord have
the best horse the tenant died possessed of; if possessed of
two tenements, two horses, and so on, one horse (if he had
so many) for every tenement. This certainly was meant to
excuse her going to the wars, for where no widow was, no
heriot was paid: In this sort of land daughters are not
co-heiresses, but the eldest has the whole, and formerly the
lord had the liberty of marrying her to whom he pleased,
provided he was a man stout of body, and able to bear arms.
Since the union of the two kingdoms, wardship has ceased,
but heriot-custom continues, and the lords now take the best
live
|
|
good;
|
|
* One would suppose that Edward the I. had no
occasion to have appointed a Lord Warden of the Marches,
when (according to both the English and Scots historians,)
the whole kingdom of Scotland had submitted to him, and John
Baliol the then King of Scotland, for ever quitted his
claim. Hector Boetius says, that John Cummin brought Baliol,
void of all kingly habiliments, with a white rod in his
hand, to Edward, unto whom he resigned his whole right that
he had or might have to the crown of Scotland; all his
nobles did the same, and took the oaths of allegiance;
whereupon Edward destroyed all their records, and took away
the marble chair, crown, sceptre, and cloth of state, and
sent them to Westminster. Yet such bold and warlike men as
the borderers could not be at rest; for we read that William
Wallace of Cragie, a private man (by some called a Robber)
begun a rebellion, and to him went several clans, who drove
the Justicar, William de Ormsby, out of Scotland, and
gained many victories over the Earl of Warren and others. In
those times, it was usual for the leaders of an army to
harrangue their men before a battle: Wallace endeavoured to
conform to this custom, but all that he could say to his men
at the battle of Falkirk was, "I have brought you to the
King, hop gif ye can." Boetius says, "in this battle
were slain 70,000 Scots," (an incredible number!) Wallace
himself escaped, and made head against King Edward for six
years afterwards; he was at last taken by treachery and put
to death. So vain and superstitious was Edward, that he
ordered his son to carry his skeleton with him when he
fought against the Scots, as he would then be invincible; it
does not, however, appear that Edward's magic was
infallible, for at the battle of Bannockburn the English
were defeated with a great slaughter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
next page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
