The Bruce
_Bain_, ii., No. 478, and _Palgrave_, pp. xcvii-cxv (see next note).
153 _to Robert the Bruys said he._ Palgrave points out that Bruce
was the first to appeal to Edward as overlord, in conjunction
with the “Seven Earls” with whom he was acting; all submitting
themselves--relatives, friends, adherents, lands and goods--to the
protection of the King and Crown of England (pp. xlviii, 15, 18). In
this he finds nothing inconsistent with the speech here attributed to
Bruce, which he takes, not from Barbour, but from Fordun, who gives the
same account as Barbour of Edward’s offer and Bruce’s reply (_Gesta_,
lxxii.). For Palgrave regards the original historic supremacy as a
vague imperial relation, to which Edward tried to give a narrow feudal
precision (p. xliii). Bruce, he says, could properly regard himself “as
the _Laensman_ of the Monarch who represented the Bretwald, the Emperor
or Basileus of Albion, or of Britain, and not the vassal of the King of
England and Duke of Normandy” (p. xlix). Bruce, indeed, in one section
of his pleadings addresses Edward as “his Sovereign Lord and his
Emperor” (p. 29, § 6), but his pleading was against the purely feudal
relationship (see on 58), the holding “_in cheyff_” (154), which would
allow Edward the _dominium_ or ownership of Scotland, as contrasted
with the _suzerainty_, which would grant a power of control. Edward
insisted on the former.
169 _Assentyt till him._ After a delay of three weeks (June 2-3, 1292),
nine of the Competitors made full acknowledgment of the supremacy of
the King of England; the others acquiesced on August 3 (_Bain_, ii.
483, 507). The issue was finally narrowed down to a consideration of
the respective claims of Balliol and Bruce. Barbour is misleading.
171 _He was king._ Judgment in favour of Balliol was given on November
17, 1292, at Berwick. Balliol resigned “his kingdom and people to” the
King of England on July 7, 1296, “a litill quhile,” three years and
seven months after.
173 _For litill enchesone._ Balliol was treated as an ordinary vassal,
and finally summoned, with the Scottish magnates, to attend Edward on
an expedition into France (June 29, 1294). Balliol, however, made a
treaty with King Philip IV. In October he wrote Edward renouncing “the
homage extorted from him by violence” (_Bain_, ii., No. 722). This was
followed up by a raid into England in the spring of 1296. Meantime the
government had been taken out of Balliol’s hands, and was administered
by twelve Scottish barons and prelates.
189 _And stuffyt all._ The list of castles and towns committed to
Englishmen and Scottish supporters of Edward is given in _Bain_,
ii., No. 853. Gray says Edward took possession of all the castles of
Scotland (_Scala._, p. 123).
193 _He maid off Inglis nation._ The offices of Governor, Treasurer,
and Justiciar, as well as minor ones, were filled by Englishmen. Some
of the appointments of Sheriffs, etc., are given in _Bain_ as above,
and in Stevenson’s _Historical Documents_, II., pp. 90, 91. Barbour
overstates the case.
194 _That worthyt than sa ryth felloune._ Gray says that the revolt of
the conquered territories in Scotland under Robert Bruce was in great
measure due to “the bad government of the ministers of the King, who
governed them with too great harshness for their own personal gain”
(_qi trop asprement lez governoient pur singuler profit._--_Scala._, p.
140).
250 _in disputacioun._ For the “disputations” of clerks, _cf._ Chaucer,
_Nun’s Priest’s Tale_ and _Franklin’s Tale_, 162.
259 _I leve all the solucioun._ As Mr. Neilson has pointed out (_An
English Miscellany_, p. 383), this is a quite serious reference to a
class of questions discussed by ecclesiastical lawyers. A whole book
(ix.) is devoted to the _Redditio Debiti Conjugali_ in the volume by
Thomas Sanchez, one of the Salamanca doctors (_De Sto. Matrimonii
Sacramento_; Venice, 1625). Chaucer’s _Wife of Bath_ has some
characteristic remarks on the same subject:
“Why sholde men elles in hir bookes sette
That man shal yelde to hys wyf hire dette?”
(_Prologue_ to _Tale_, 129, 130. _Cf._ also 154, 155).
282 _Put in presoun Sir Wilyham was._ Sir William Douglas, “the bold”
(_le Hardi_), joined Bruce and the other lords who followed Wallace in
rising, and formed a camp at Irvine in July, 1297. When these submitted
and surrendered, Douglas, for not fulfilling his terms of surrender,
was confined in Berwick Castle. Thence he was taken to the Tower, where
he died before January, 1299. His Scottish lands were given to Sir
Robert de Clifford (_cf._ lines 285-7).
293 _that hym ne dred._ _Cf._ note on _Bk._ XX. 514.
313 _James of Douglas._ “James is, in general, dissyllabic in Barbour”
(Skeat).
323 _will off wane._ See glossary, and note on _Bk._ II. 471.
339 _Erle off Artayis._ This is probably the Count Robert of Artois,
who was a friend of Queen Isabella and her son Edward III. He was
driven from France (_Le Bel_, i., chap. xix., and notes in ed. 1904).
He wandered from place to place, after quarrelling with King Philip,
for three years; then crossed to England, disguised as a merchant
(1334), which fact Barbour probably has here in his mind (_Mémoires de
l’Académie Royale_, vol. x., p. 635. Paris, 1733).
343 _Catone sayis._ Dionysius Cato, a writer of the fourth century.
The reference is to his line, “To pretend foolishness is, at times,
the highest wisdom” (_Stultitiam simulare loco prudentia summa est._
_Disticha de Moribus_, Bk. ii. xviii; Ed. Amsterdam, 1754, p. 178).
346 _then come._ See on 282.
354 _the byschop._ William Lamberton. Edward sent to the Pope a lengthy
list of charges against Lamberton, who had broken his most solemn oaths
of fealty and shared in the “rebellions” against him. He had, when
Chancellor of Glasgow, supported Wallace, and had himself chosen Bishop
of St. Andrews, on Fraser’s death, without Edward’s consent. Then,
with other lords, he went to France to do all the mischief he could
there against Edward, and sent letters of encouragement to Wallace.
After the suppression of the rising, he again submitted and took the
oaths (see on 412), and was made chief of the Guardians of Scotland. He
was suspected of complicity in the murder of Comyn (see on 611), and
immediately supported Bruce. Arrested after Methven, he was imprisoned
with Bishop Wishart of Glasgow, though not guilty of so many perjuries
as he. These two bishops (with the other Scottish clergy), were the
principal “abettors and maintainers” of Bruce’s rising (_Palgrave_, pp.
331-340; also _Bain_, ii., as indexed). Lamberton was released in 1308,
on giving securities for good behaviour and swearing fealty to Edward
II. (_Bain_, iii., No. 50). Thereafter he acted as a negotiator between
England and Scotland (_Bain_, iii.). He was excommunicated, and was one
of the four bishops (St. Andrews, Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Moray) summoned by
the Pope in 1319 to answer for their support of Bruce (_Lanercost_, p.
423). He died some time before June, 1329 (_Bain_, iii., p. 316).
356 _forouth him to scher._ So did Chaucer’s Squire: “And carf biforn
his fader at the table” (_Prologue_, 100).
381-2. _But he wes nocht so fayr, etc._ _Cf._ of Porrus, in the
_Alexander_:
“Bot he was nocht so fare suthly,
That men _need_ speke of him gretly,
For he was broun red in visage” (p. 176).
399 _And wlyspit alsua._ Guido delle Colonne says that Hector
“stammered a little in his speech” (_parum vero erat balbutiens in
loquela._ See on 525): and so in the _Gest. Hystoriale_ of Hector, “a
little he stotid” (stammered) (line 3881).
403 _Till Ector._ In the _Alexander_ that monarch is the incomparable
hero:
“Bot Alexander I tak beforne,
To him I mak na man compeir” (p. 110).
406 _lovyt._ “praised” (see Glossary).
412 _Byschop Wylyhame._ Lamberton, as Edward says, went to him at
Stirling on May 4, 1304, and again took the oath of fealty, receiving
from Edward’s hands the temporality of his bishopric (_Palgrave_, p.
334). “Strevellyne,” with several variations of spelling, is the usual
form in contemporary records.
429 _my fay feloune._ See on 282.
455 _thaim thai._ “Thaim” refers to the Scots; “thai” to the English.
Barbour is particularly careless in the use of this pronoun. In 458
“thai” is again the English, who were sometimes rather more (“erar
may”) in proportion; in 460 “thaim” is the Scots.
466 _in the Bibill._ The deeds of the Jewish patriots, as recorded in
the apocryphal Books of the Maccabees, were, of course, included in
the Vulgate Bible of the Church. The rising of the Maccabees and their
supporters against the over-rule of the Seleucids in the latter half
of the second century B.C. was, for the medieval writers, the prime
example of a national uprising against foreign dominance. (See also
_Bks._ II. 330; XIV. 313.)
477 _I spak of ayr._ Here Barbour appears to refer to the Competitor,
last mentioned in line 153, thereby confusing him with his grandson
Robert the King. Much grave reproof has accordingly been wasted upon
the poet. According to Maxwell, the poem “has been almost irretrievably
discredited as a chronicle by a monstrous liberty which the author
takes in rolling three personages” (Competitor, Robert “the elder,” and
the King) “into one ideal hero” (_Robert the Bruce_, p. 6). Mr. Brown
accuses Barbour of having “deliberately and consciously perpetrated the
fabrication” of making his hero a trinity of these three (_The Wallace
and Bruce Restudied_, p. 93). Barbour, it is to be observed, at worst
only combines two, grandson and grandfather--he says nothing of the
intermediate Robert; unless we force what is said in line 67 to this
sense. One chronicler alone distinctly achieves the feat of making the
three one person--Geoffrey Baker of Swinbroke (pp. 100-1)--but so far
he has escaped censure, and no one rejects his work on that account.
Surely in Barbour’s case it is but a striking case of his frequent
carelessness of reference (see on 445). He started with King Robert,
his subject, in line 25, and it is not too much to ask that “I spak
of ayr” goes back to that point. This is a simpler way out than that
inconsistently taken by Mr. Brown, who argues that, after all, the
reading is probably wrong, and proposes to restore “the original”
from Wyntoun’s lines, a paraphrase of Barbour (p. 95). Wyntoun was
not deceived, nor was anyone likely to be. Barbour had nothing to
gain by purposeless perversity, not even a literary point as has been
suggested, for the “Romance” proper begins at line 445, and for it
there is but one Robert.
478 _swa forfayr._ “Going to ruin.” _Cf._ _Gest. Hystoriale_, “Fele
folk _forfaren_,” ready to perish (1438). Modern Scots in sense of
“neglected,” as in Thom’s _Mitherless Bairn_; “sairly _forfairn_.”
485 _Said till him._ Gray gives a similar account of the alternative
proposals here made, putting them, however, into the mouth of Robert
Bruce, who, with him, takes the initiative, and stating that they
were made upon the occasion of the meeting in the Greyfriars Church,
where Comyn refused to listen to them. It must be remembered that
Barbour admits the existence of various accounts. Gray supplies also
the significant motive: “for now is the old age of the present English
King” (_qar ore est temps en veillesce de cesty roy Engles_, p. 130).
Bruce, in this account, speaks of the land being in servitude to the
English by fault of Balliol, “who suffered his right and his freedom
of the kingdom to be lost” (_qe son droit et la fraunchise du realme
ad lesse perdre_, p. 129). The account in Fordun gives Bruce the
initiative in making the offer on the ride from Stirling, and dates it
1304 (_Gesta Annalia_, cxiii.). See note on _Bk._ II. 35.
525-6 _Dares ... and Dytis._ These two represented to the medieval mind