Chapter I: Preface

The Literature of Scotland, during the Fifteenth Century, is entitled to a much greater share of attention than it has hitherto received; more especially, as it is a period in which the contemporary Literature of England is comparatively so devoid of interest. Among the persons who then flourished, and to whom but a scanty share of justice has been awarded, we may reckon Sir GILBERT HAY, KNIGHT. Dunbar the Scotish Poet,[1] who adorned the reign of James the Fourth, in his "Lament for the Death of the Makars" or Poets, includes the name of Hay; so likewise does Sir David Lyndesay, in the reign of James the Fifth; but no other writer seems to have been aware that such an author had ever existed, until we reach the year 1722, when there appeared the Third Volume of "The Lives and Characters of the most Eminent Writers of the Scots Nation, &c. By GEORGE MACKENZIE, M. D."[2]

This volume, the last which the author lived to publish,[3] commences with "The Life of SIR GILBERT HAY, Chamberlain to Charles VI. King of France." It extends to eight folio pages, and furnishes a suitable specimen of Mackenzie's mode of constructing biography. It commences with the following paragraphs:--

"The HAYES are said to have their first rise from a very noble and
heroick action, about the year of our Lord 980, in the reign of Kenneth
III., as we have shown in the Life of that Prince, in the second volume
of this Work, pag. 60. But whatever truth be in this, it is certain
that this is one of the most noble and ancient Families in Scotland,
and that ever since the reign of King Robert Bruce, they have been Lord
High Constables of Scotland: That Prince, for the faithful service and
loyalty of Robert Lord Hay, declar'd them heritable Constables of
Scotland, about the year 1310.

"From this noble and Ancient Family our author was descended, of whom I
have no other account to give, but that he was born in the North of
Scotland, brought up at the University of Aberdeen, where, after he had
finished the course of his studies in Philosophy, he commenced Master
of Arts, went over to France, where he studied the Laws, and was
Batchelor of the Canon Law, and for his great merit, obtained the
honour of Knighthood, and was made Chamberlain to Charles VI. King of
France; upon whose death he returned to Scotland, and was in great
favour and esteem with William Earl of Orkney, and Lord High Chancellor
of Scotland, at whose desire he translated, from the French into Scots,
Dr Bonnet's Book of Battles in the Year of our Lord 1456.

"As for our Author, 'tis probable that he died towards the latter end
of the 14th century; and from his performance it appears that he was
well seen in the Civil, Canon, and Military Laws; and had he not been a
person of singular merit and worth, he had not raised himself to the
dignities that he attain'd to."

These paragraphs contain the whole biographical portion of the "Life," contained in his eight folio pages,--the Author's practice being that of introducing some extraneous matter suggested by, but not connected with the subject of the biography. But in the passages quoted the Author's usual carelessness or ignorance is very apparent. His statements of matters of fact, indeed, are never to be relied upon, being seldom confirmed, and often contradicted by better authorities, and instead of a work of National importance, deserving the liberal patronage it received, it is altogether worthless. Thus Mackenzie might have known, that if Hay was "brought up," and "commenced Master of Arts," at a University in Scotland, it could not have been at Aberdeen, which was not founded until the year 1494; and that if Hay was Chamberlain to a King of France, it could not have been Charles the Sixth, whose reign extended from the year 1380 to 1422. The concluding notice of the supposed time of Hay's death, "towards the latter end of the 14th century," is obviously a clerical error for the 15th century. Instead, however, of favouring the reader with an abridged history of the Kings of France, or some other discursive topic, Dr Mackenzie has in this instance deviated from his ordinary practice, and given a careful and detailed analysis of a Manuscript volume in his own possession, containing three works translated from the French by Sir Gilbert Hay; and this may be instanced as one of the few actual contributions to the Literary History of Scotland, contained in his three folio volumes. It may here be quoted, omitting a somewhat confused and inaccurate account of the original author Honorè Bonnor or Bonnet, Prior of Sallon.

"The first Book (he says,) contains 10 Chapters, wherein the Author
gives the definition of War, according to the Doctors of Civil and
Canon Law, and shows that it had its first rise in Heaven betwixt God
and his rebellious Angels; then he treats of the bypast persecutions of
the Church by way of commentary upon S. John's Vision of the five
Angels in the Revelation, and speaking of the fourth Angel, he
acknowledges, That there was a woman that was chosen Pope and that she
was an English woman: And after Leon, says our translator, "was chosen
a woman Pape, not wittand that she was a woman, the quhilk was of
England born."

"The second Book contains 18 Chapters, wherein he treats of the
destruction of the Four great Empires of the World: The Babylonian
begun in the east, in the time of Abraham; the Carthaginian begun in
the time of the Judges; the Macedonian begun in the time of the
Maccabees; and that of the Roman begun in the time of Achan King of
Judea: But he more particularly insists upon the Roman Empire, and
shews when the city of Rome was first founded, when they begun their
Government by Kings, Senators, Consuls, and Emperors, and of their most
memorable or remarkable actions, of the actions of Alexander the Great,
and the destruction of the Carthaginian Empire; and concludes with an
account of the first rise of government or jurisdiction amongst men,
and who were the first Governors or Judges.

"The third Book contains 10 Chapters, wherein he treats of the
lawfulness of making of War, and if it be possible for mankind to live
without it; how men know when they are justly compell'd to make war;
what the marks of true valour and cowardice are; what punishment is due
to those that leave the army, without asking permission of their
commanders, or fight the enemy, without the orders of their commanders.

"The fourth Book contains 155 Chapters, wherein he treats of the lawful
Grounds of War, especially amongst Christians against the Turks, and
all Infidels; whether the Emperor can lawfully declare War against the
Pope and the Church, and whether the Pope may make War against him;
concerning the Duties of Knights, and for what reasons they ought to be
punished; concerning the Duties of Generals, and if, when they are
taken in battle, they ought to lose their lives or not; whether
strength or force be a moral, cardinal, or natural virtue; whether
Prisoners that are taken in War belong to those that take them, or to
the Princes to whom the armies in which they are taken belongs; whether
Vassals should serve in the army upon their own or their Prince's
expences; if a Baron be obliged to serve his King but only in his own
wars; whether two Barons having war against one another, their men are
obliged to assist either of them till they receive orders from their
King and respective Lords; whether we are bound to defend our
neighbours with arms and men when invaded by others, and what the
persons are that are obliged to defend one another, and particularly
how the vassal is obliged to defend his Lord, the son his father, by
the law of Justice; whether he is more bound to defend his father or
natural Prince; whether a Clergyman is bound most to assist his father
or his Bishop, when a war is declared betwixt them; whether men may
make a defensive war for their temporal goods lawfully conquish'd;
whether Priests and Clerks may defend their goods by force of arms;
whether arms lent and lost in the field of battle ought to be restored;
whether arms and horses hired and lost in battle ought to be restored;
whether a Knight being robbed in his King's service, he or his King
ought to pursue the robbers; whether a man that goes to the wars
uncharg'd ought to take wages; whether a Knight serving a King
uncharg'd, may lawfully ask wages of him; whether, when the King of
Spain sends assistance to the King of France, he ought to ask wages of
him; whether a man that goes to the wars out of vain glory, ought to
ask wages by the law of Arms; whether a Captain that is robbed obeying
his Lord's commands, his Lord ought to restore him his goods or not;
whether a man going to the wars for covetousness and robbery, ought to
demand wages; whether a Priest or Clergyman may lawfully go to the war
or not, concerning the time that men ought to be paid their wages that
go to the wars; whether a Warriour that obtains leave to divert and
recreat himself for some time, should receive wages for that time;
whether a Knight that has taken wages of a King for a year's service,
and after three months goes to the service of another Prince, ought to
receive wages for the time that he has served; whether a Soldier that
has been paid by a Prince for a year's service, may substitute another
in his place; whether a Captain may send any of his men away, after he
has mustered them in the fields before his Prince; whether a Soldier
falling sick in the wars may lawfully ask his wages for all the time
that he had been sick; how the goods or spoil that is gained by the
army ought to be parted amongst the Soldiers; whether a man may
lawfully keep what he takes from a robber that was designed to rob him
on the highway; of the lawfulness of the war that is made betwixt two
cities that hold of no Sovereign; whether a man may kill a prisoner
that delivers himself voluntarly; whether by the Law of Arms, a man may
take a ransom of gold or money from his prisoner; whether in a war
betwixt England and France, the French may lawfully seize upon the
goods of the English husbandmen, and detain their persons prisoners;
whether one King may overcome another King lawfully by craft and
subtilty; whether it be lawful to fight upon a holyday; whether, when
one man wrongs another, he may lawfully recover his own by war or
force, before he pursues him legally; whether a Knight that dies in
battle, in his Prince's service, is sure of his salvation; whether the
righteous or sinners are the most powerful in battle; why there are so
many wars in the world; whether one that is taken prisoner, and sworn
to keep prison, may lawfully break it, and make his escape, if he finds
occasion; whether one that is taken prisoner, and put in a close dark
room, and makes his escape, may be said to break prison? Whether a man
that's promised safe conduct from one place to another, but has
neglected to capitulate for his safe return, may be lawfully detained
prisoner? Whether a man that has safe conduct promised to him and his
attendants, can bring alongst with him a greater man than he himself
is? If a man be taken prisoner upon another's safe conduct, whether he
that had the safe conduct be obliged to relieve him upon his own
charges? If a man having liberty to go out of prison, on condition that
he should return upon such a day, re-enters again into the prison,
fails in the day, how he should be punished? Whether it be lawful for
one Prince to refuse another, with whom he is at peace, passage thorow
his country? Whether Churchmen should pay taxes, tributes, and
impositions to Secular Kings and Princes? If the Church should make war
against the Jews? If a man may defend his wife by force of arms? If a
brother may defend his brother by force of arms? When a Baron is a
vassal to two Lords of different countries, that have both of them war,
whom of them he ought to serve? When a Baron is a vassal to two Lords
that make war upon one another, whom of them he ought to obey? When a
man is a burgess in two cities that make war against one another, which
of them he ought to obey? Whether a man that is in bondage or in
slavery be obliged to go to the wars with his lord and master? Whether
a man may be compelled to go to the wars? If one man fairly wounds
another, and he wounds him again, whether he ought to be punished for
the same? If a bondman or slave kills another by his master's command,
whether he ought to be punished for the same? Whether a bondman or
slave may defend himself against his lord and master that designs to
kill him? Whether a Monk may defend himself against his Abbot who
designs to kill him? Whether the son may lawfully defend himself
against the father who designs to kill him? Whether a man may lawfully
defend himself against his judge? Whether a man, being banished the
realm, and returning again without permission, when people set upon him
to take him, if he ought to defend himself? Whether a Priest that is
assaulted carrying the Lord's Body (or the Sacrament) alongst with him,
ought to lay it down and defend himself? If a man that is innocent
ought to be punished by way of reprisal for the guilty? And how Princes
ought to behave themselves in the cases of reprisals? How reprisals
should be made against a city that owes allegiance to no Sovereign? If
all lords or masters may make reprisals? How and for what reason it may
be said that the King of France is no ways subject to the Emperor?
Whether the King of England be in any manner of way subject to the
Empire? Whether reprisals can be granted to a Burgess that's living at
Paris, and robbed in his return to Paris, for recovering the money or
goods that he has been deprived of in another Prince's dominions?
Whether an English student at the University of Paris may be detained
prisoner when a war is declared betwixt the two Nations? Whether a
servant should enjoy the privileges that his master has? Whether an
Englishman coming to Paris to visit his son, student at that
University, in time of war, may be detain'd prisoner? Whether an
Englishman coming to visit his brother at the University may be
detained prisoner? Whether a student may be imprisoned by way of
reprisal? Whether a mad man may be detained and ransomed in the wars?
Whether a mad man returning to his senses may be detained prisoner?
Whether by the law of arms an old man may be detained prisoner? Whether
by the law of arms a child may be taken and detained prisoner? Whether
by the law of arms a blind man may be detained prisoner? Whether an
Ambassador coming to visit a King may lead any of his enemies thorow
his country? Whether a Bishop may be taken and detained prisoner?
Whether any Churchman may be taken by way of reprisal? Whether pilgrims
may be made prisoners by the law of arms? What things in time of war
have safe conduct, without liberty asked at the Prince? Whether, in
time of war, the ass and the ox is free? Whether the husbandman's
servant enjoys, by the law of arms, the same privilege with himself?
Whether, in time of war, it be lawful to build castles and walled
towns? How they ought to be punished that breaks the safe conduct or
assurance of a Prince? Whether a great Lord, or any in a meaner
dignity, ought to trust in a safe conduct? Whether a Christian King may
lawfully give a safe conduct to a Saracen King or any other Infidel
Prince? Whether, if two Lords make peace, and the one breaks it, the
other ought to break it likewise? Whether it be better to fight
fasting, or before meat or after meat? Whether battle ought to be set
before ladies? And if Queen Jonat of Naples had right in her war
against Lewis King of Sicily?

"Then he proves that duelling is against all manner of laws; yet he
gives seventeen different cases, wherein by the laws of Lombardy 'tis
lawful. Then he treats of those who fight for their principles in
duels, and how far that is lawful: Then of the form and oath that is
taken by those that fight in lists or combats; Whether a man that is
superannuate may substitute another to fight for him in battle? If any
of the company breaks his sword, if another should be given unto him?
If the Lord or Judge cannot discern on the first day who has the
advantage in the field; if he be obliged to return on the second day,
and enter the lists as before, which of the parties ought to begin the
fight? If he that is overcome ought to pay the other the damages, tho'
the King should pardon them? If a man is overcome in duelling, if he
may be afterwards accused in law? Whether, if the company pleases, they
may fight in plain field, without barriers? How they should be punished
that owns their crime, and is openly overcome? Whether, when one Knight
chalenges another, he may be allowed to repent and recall his chalenge?

"Then our Author treats of arms and banners in general and
particularly, and proceeds to the answering of the following Questions:
If a man at his own pleasure may make choice of another man's coat of
arms? If a German finds a Frenchman in the field bearing the same coat
of arms with him, if he ought to appeal him to a combat? How they ought
to be punished that assume the arms of others?

"Then he treats of all the different colours us'd in Herauldry, and of
all the different rules and conditions that are to be observed in
fighting of duels: And concludes with the duties incumbent upon
Emperors, Kings, and Princes; which he ends with these words:

"EXPLICIT LIBER BELLORUM, SED POTIUS DOLORUM, UT RECITAT DOCTOR IN
PLURIBUS.

"Next to this follows our Author's translation of Dr Bonet's Book of
Chevalry or Knighthood, which contains eight Chapters: In the first
Chapter he tells us, how that a Batchelor, Squire of Honour, travelling
to the Coronation of a great Prince, with an intention to take upon him
the Order of Knighthood, he went astray in a wilderness, where he
happened to light upon a hermitage, in which lived an old and venerable
Knight, that had forsaken the world for the love of God; and how this
old Knight taught the Squire all the points of honour, and all that
belonged to the duty of a Knight, which is the subject matter of all
the following Chapters; where in the second Chapter, he, the old Knight
shows, how he ought to receive that high Order, and how he ought first
to be instructed in every thing that belongs to it. The third contains
all the duties of a Knight. The fourth contains their form of
examination, and how he ought to be examined before he receives the
Order. The fifth contains directions for him at the receiving of the
Order, and the form of giving it. In the sixth is explained the
signification of the Arms of Knighthood. In the seventh he shows the
many advantages that Knights have above others by this honourable
Order; and the last shows the great respect that ought to be shown to
all that Order,--ending with these words,

"EXPLICIT L'ORDRE DE CHEVALRIE.

"After this follows our Author's translation of Dr Bonet's Book of
Government of Princes, which is a translation of Aristotle's Politics,
and contains 40 Chapters, with a Prologue, shewing into how many
languages it had been translated, and how it was first found in the
Temple of the Sun, built by Esculapius. Then follows a translation of
King Alexander the Great's letter to Aristotle, after his conquest of
Persia, with Aristotle's answer, and two other letters of King
Alexander's and Aristotle's."

The Manuscript, of which the preceding was an analysis, is not mentioned in any more recent work, and as it could not be traced in any public repository, it was considered to be irrecoverably lost. But in the "Catalogue of the Library at Abbotsford," printed in 1838, at page 232, there occurs the following title:--

"_Here begynnys the buke call't the Buke of the Law of Armys, the quhilk was compilit be a notable man, Doctour in Decrees, callit Bennet, prioure of Sallan, &c._ MS. _fol._"

This title attracted the notice of MR LAING, Secretary of the Bannatyne Club, who conjectured it might prove to be a copy of the work described by Mackenzie. To ascertain this point, he made an application for the use of the volume, through ISAAC BAYLEY, Esq.; which being courteously granted, it was no difficult matter to perceive that this was the identical Manuscript which Dr George Mackenzie had possessed. As the volume itself furnishes no indication on this head, we can only conjecture that it may have fallen into Sir Walter Scott's hands, either by purchase at a sale, or as a present from some of his friends. But we may conclude, that had Sir Walter been aware of the peculiar interest and curiosity of the volume, he would have pointed it out, and some use of it have been made during the latter period of his life.

The Manuscript in question is a large folio of 132 leaves,[4] on lombard paper, written in a very distinct hand, about the end of the 15th century. It is in the original wooden boards, in perfect preservation, and contains, repeated in different parts of the volume, autograph signatures of "W. Sanclair of Roislin," "Oliver Sinclar of Rosling, knycht," and "W. Sanclair of Roislin, knecht."

It consists of three distinct works:--

I. THE BUKE OF BATAILLES.
II. THE BUKE OF THE ORDER OF KNYGHTHEDE.
III. THE BUKE OF THE GOVERNANCE OF PRINCES.

To have published the entire volume was considered to be altogether inexpedient, on account of its great extent. Yet not wishing it to remain in comparative obscurity, I readily acceded to Mr Laing's suggestion, in selecting the second of these Works, which forms a distinct treatise by itself, as my contribution to the objects of the ABBOTSFORD CLUB; at the same time subjoining in the Appendix such Specimens of the two other Works as should satisfy all reasonable curiosity. In this way, I hope that whatever is really valuable or interesting in the MS. has been put into an accessible shape, in order to exhibit and preserve from casual destruction ONE OF THE EARLIEST EXISTING SPECIMENS of Scotish prose composition.

A brief account of the Originals may here be given, before endeavouring to throw some light on the life and character of the Translator.