The Bruce
so that their arrows fell fruitlessly (_incassum_) on the helmets of
their adversaries; those who shot straight wounded a few Scots in the
breast, but more English in the back” (_Chron._, pp. 57-58). At Falkirk
(1298), after the failure of the first attack by the horsemen, Edward
I. brought up his archers to play on the Scottish masses till these
were broken, and then charged and dispersed them. Bruce anticipated
this manœuvre, and made provision for it (see note on 98).
61 _Robert of Keth._ The Kethes or Keiths took their name from the
barony of Keith, in Lothian. This Robert was still in the English
service on May 23, 1308 (_Bain_, iii. 44), yet his name appears among
those present at Bruce’s Parliament of March 16, 1309, as Robert de
Kethe, Marshall (_Acts Parl. Scot._, i., p. 99). Elsewhere he is said
to have joined Bruce at Christmas, 1308 (_Bain_, No. 245). He received
from Bruce the office of Earl Marshall as its holders, one of the
branches of the “Mareschals,” were adherents of England, and continued
to be (_Bain_, iii., p. lxviii).
68 _at a syde._ “On one side,” as in line 163, “in-till a front.” This
movement is too vaguely described to be located exactly. Most probably
it was to the left of the three “battles” now engaged (English right),
on ground presently occupied by Bruce with his own division.
98 _nakit._ “Without defensive armour,” as in _Bk._ VII. 330. The
two previous lines mean that the Scottish horsemen did not have to
stop a stroke or hold against a blow; _i.e._, the archers offered no
resistance. Bruce’s intention, we may gather from lines 58-60, was
so to harass the archers on the flank as to occupy them with their
own defence and restrain their shooting. The attack, however, was so
successfully pushed home that the archers were wholly scattered.
104 _thair awne folk had no space._ We gather that the archers had
taken up a position on the right front of the main body, where they
blocked the advance of the horsemen directly behind. These received the
flying archers with blows, and pushed forward to take their place. The
_Lanercost_ chronicler says the battle began with a skirmish between
the opposing archers, and that the Scots archers were driven back.
This, again, suggests that the archers were somewhere in front. Mr.
Oman follows Baker in placing them behind the first line. See note on
51.
132 _on a syde._ See above on 68.
162 _All four the battelis._ The _Vita Edw. Sec._ (p. 203) and the
_Chron. de Lanercost_ (p. 225) divide the Scots into three battles
(_turmas_, _acies_), the usual medieval arrangement. The latter also
gives Robert the rear division, as here.
175 _in ane schiltrum all._ Gray says that the “battles” of the English
were crowded close together (_entassez estoint_), and could not repeat
their attacks upon the Scots (_remuerent devers eaux_), as their horses
were impaled by the pikes (p. 142). In the _Lanercost_ chronicle we
read that the English behind (_sequentes_) “were not able to reach
the Scots because of the interposition of the first line, nor in any
way to help themselves” (p. 224). The English, indeed, were too many
to be manœuvred according to the simple tactics of the day, and were,
in addition, crowded on too narrow a front. There was no generalship.
These were Bruce’s chief advantages. He was protected by the hill
and wood behind from being surrounded (_cf._ note on _Bk._ XI. 300).
Besides, his rapid and successive advance prevented the English from
developing any such intention. They could not well deploy among the
“pools” and marshes.
183 _quyntis._ “_Quyntis_ is merely the French _cointises_, signifying
finery or _quaint_ attire” (Skeat); generally, ornamental attachments
to the armour. E reads _quhytys_, and H _coates_, so that we may
have to do with the “white” surcoats. In viii. 232 Barbour speaks of
hauberks “quhit as flour.”
208 _the Scottis archeris._ The effective part played by the Scottish
archers is usually overlooked.
283 _quhen the King of England saw his men fle._ The English writers
make no mention of the appearance of the camp-followers. They date the
break-up from the failure of Gloucester’s attack with the van. As those
behind, says the _Lanercost_ chronicler, could not get forward (see
note on 275), nothing remained but to take measures for flight (pp.
225-6). The front line had fallen back only to add to the confusion
(_cf._ line 170, etc.). “When those who were with the King saw the
Earl’s division smashed up (_contritum_) and their friends making
ready to fly, they said it was dangerous to stay longer,” etc. (_Vita
Edw. Sec._, p. 205). Gray says the King went much against his will (as
Barbour reports one version in line 298), and that he knocked over
with his mace the Scots that were catching at his charger’s housings
(_Scala._, p. 142). Trokelowe affirms that he laid about him “like a
lion,” and brandished a sword dripping with blood (_Annales_, p. 86).
297 _By the renyhe._ “Those who had been assigned to the King’s rein
were drawing the King forward by the rein out of the plain (_hors du
chaumpe_) towards the castle” (_Scala._, p. 142).
307 _I cheis heir to byde and de._ In _Vita Edw. Sec._ it is said he
hastened to assist the Earl of Gloucester when he saw him fall, and
perished with him, “thinking it more honourable to perish with such a
man than to escape death by flight” (p. 204). _Cf._ also _Scala._: “I
have never been accustomed to fly” (p. 143).
321 _thrid best knycht._ See note on _Bk._ XI. 174. He is highly spoken
of by both Baston and the _Vita Edw._ writer. According to Bruce’s
English eulogist in the _Scotichronicon_, the other two were Bruce
himself and the Emperor Henry (lib. xiii., ch. xvi.).
328-9 _fra ... the King Wes fled, wes nane that durst abyde._ “When
the King’s banner is seen to depart the whole army quickly disperses”
(_Vita Edw. Sec._, p. 205).
335 _Fled to the wattir of Forth._ On no hypothesis other than that
the battle was fought on the plain between the Forth and the Bannock
can this fact be explained. Of the fact itself there is no question.
The _Lanercost_ chronicler, in his _Versus_, says: “Forth swallowed up
many well furnished with arms and horses” (p. 227). They were probably
seeking for a ford.
337 _And Bannokburn._ “The folk in the English rear fell back upon the
ditch (_fosse_) of Bannockburn, one tumbling over the other” (_Scala._,
p. 142). “Another unfortunate thing happened to the English, because,
since a little before they had crossed a great ditch into which the
tide flows--Bannockburn by name--and now in confusion wished to retire,
many knights and others, on account of the pressure, fell into it with
their horses (_cf._ Barbour, line 338), and some with great difficulty
got out, and many were quite unable to clear themselves of the ditch;
and on this account Bannockburn was on English lips for many years to
come” (_Lanercost_, 226). In _Vita Edw._ also mention is made of a
“certain ditch” (_fovea_) which “swallowed up (_absorbuit_) many,” and
where a great part perished (p. 205). The Bannock turns sharply north
near the English rear, but the description in Barbour and the reference
above to the tide with the inclusion of the Forth, indicate the part
nearer the mouth.
341 _laddis_, etc. _I.e._, the camp-followers.
352 _Of slyk._ In _Chron. de Lanercost_ (p. 226) “Bannock’s mud”
(_Bannoke limus_). Edmund de Malolacu (Mauley), Edward’s steward,
met his death “in a certain slimy hollow” (_in quodam antro lutoso._
_Flores Historiarum_, iii., p. 159).
363 _Philip the Mowbray said._ Different interpretations were put
upon Mowbray’s action, but the fact and the quite satisfactory reason
given by Barbour are borne out by the English chroniclers. “When the
King comes to the castle, thinking he will find refuge there, he is
repulsed like an enemy; the bridge is drawn up and the gate closed. On
this account the keeper of the castle was believed by many to be not
unacquainted with treason, and yet he was seen that very day in his
armour on the field, as it were ready to fight for the King. However,
I neither acquit nor accuse the keeper of treason, but confess that in
the providence of God the King of England did not enter the castle,
because if he had then been admitted he could not have failed to be
captured” (_Vita Edw. Sec._, p. 205). In _Gesta Edw. de Carnarvon_ the
Governor is wrongly called Alexander de Mowbray, and the account is:
“The foresaid keeper, knowing that his supplies were not sufficient
for himself and his men, and also fearing that Robert Bruce, having
got the victory, would attack and capture the castle, did not wish to
expose his King of England to such great danger, and, preferring to
incur misunderstanding, refused on this account to open the castle of
the King” (p. 47). The castle was surrendered, and Mowbray entered the
service of Bruce.
379 _the Rownde Tabill._ Usually and quite wrongly identified with
the King’s Knot--_i.e._, garden--a regular mound below the castle
rock. It is mentioned by Sir David Lindsay in the sixteenth century.
In 1302 Edward I. had a “Round Table” (_la table rounde_) ordained
(_ordinari_) at Falkirk (_Ann. Lond._, p. 104). To “hold a Round Table”
was a sporting function among knights; here some sort of building may
be referred to, like that described by Murimuth (1344), intended to be
built for the purpose at Windsor (_Chronicle_, p. 155). Probably, in
that case, it was only of Barbour’s own time. I incline, however, to
the belief, from its associations in Lindsay’s verse, that it was a
natural feature--the circular crags enclosing the western division of
the modern King’s Park. It would thus be a place-name, like “Arthur’s
Seat.”
380 _the Park enveronyt thai._ Gray says the King was taken round the
Torwood and by the plains of Lothian (Lownesse, p. 143).
381 _held in hy._ The _Lanercost_ chronicler says that they had “as
guide a Scottish knight who knew by what route they could escape” (p.
227).
409 _wes tane in._ The _Lanercost_ chronicler writes that Hereford and
those with him were making for Carlisle when they were captured at
Bothwell Castle: “For the sheriff, the keeper of the castle, who up
to that time had held the castle for the King of England, seeing that
his countrymen had been victorious in the war, suffered the more noble
of them who had come there to enter the castle as if to have a safe
retreat, and when they entered seized them,” afterwards surrendering
them to Bruce (p. 228). In the anonymous chronicle used by Stevenson
we have a similar account. Hereford and a few nobles were allowed to
enter the castle, where they found themselves in custody. The rest
remained outside the walls, and were suddenly set on by the Scots, who
slew them, except a few who surrendered (_Illustrations of Scottish
History_, p. 2). Barbour says three-fourths were taken or slain (416).
In _Ann. Lond._ Hereford is said to have been accompanied by a thousand
men-at-arms (p. 231). The _Lanercost_ estimate is 600 horse and 1,000
foot, Umfraville being of the company (_ibid._). Walsingham gives the
total of earls, barons, and baronets captured and slain as 154; of
clerics and squires an excessive number (_Historia Angl._, i., p. 154).
The name of the keeper was Gilbertson as in E; he appears on record as
“Fitz-Gilbert” (_Bain_, iii. No. 243, etc.). He joined Bruce and was
the ancestor of the great Hamilton family. Bothwell Castle is on the
Clyde.
417 _Moris de Berclay._ In _Vita Edw._ (p. 206) he is among those
captured at Bothwell. According to the _Lanercost_ historian, it was
Pembroke (Valence) who fled “on foot” with the Welshmen, and escaped
(p. 228). In _Ann. Lond._ de Valence is said to have fled _nudis
pedibus_ (bare-footed); that is, apparently, he removed his foot and