Chapter IX: Narrative to the Battle of Flodden

JAMES I. was succeeded by his son, a boy of seven years of age, who was crowned at Edinburgh in the monastery of Holyrood on the 25th of March, 1437, under the title of James II. The custody and care of the young prince was entrusted to his mother, while the Earl of Douglas was appointed Lieutenant of the kingdom. As the Government of the late King had been extremely hostile to the nobles, they naturally regarded his death with feelings of satisfaction. The tendency of his policy had been to render the institutions and the laws of the kingdom effective, but his presence and energy being gone, the Government soon relapsed. During the minority the factions of the nobles struggled to kidnap the King, and in this contest for power Sir William Crichton, the Chancellor, and Governor of Edinburgh Castle, and Sir Alexander Livingston of Callender, became prominent actors. The Queen, with her son, had taken refuge in the Castle of Edinburgh, but Sir William Crichton isolated the boy from his mother and made him almost a prisoner. Then the Queen outwitted him and conveyed her son to Stirling Castle, which Sir Alexander Livingston commanded. This move intensified the rivalry between Crichton and Livingston; while the contests of the rival factions increased the disorder of society. Fortunately England was not then in a position to harass Scotland, and a truce was concluded to continue for nine years.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 31,
32, 55.

In 1439 the Queen married Sir James Stewart, son of Sir James Stewart of Innermeath and Lorne, called the Black Knight of Lorne, with the hope of strengthening her position; but Livingston imprisoned them both, and kept the young prince a captive in Stirling Castle. The Earl of Douglas, the Lieutenant of the kingdom, died in 1439, and his son, a youth of seventeen years, succeeded to the earldom. He soon assumed an arrogant attitude, kept a host of retainers, and scorned to appear at court or parliament. The factions of Livingston and Crichton saw that the Earl must be crushed; as they were unable to attack him in the field, they resolved to allure him into a trap. They invited the Earl to visit the young King in Edinburgh Castle. The Earl and his brother proceeded there, and were received with much show of respect; but in a few days after their arrival, they were both beheaded; and the Earl’s chief adviser, Malcolm Fleming, was also executed. Although Douglas was slain, his earldom was not forfeited to the Crown; for the Government was unable to seize the possessions of the head of the Douglas family; the adherents of the chief were numerous and strongly attached to him. This blow, however, stunned the family. A portion of the estates of the earldom reverted to a sister of the murdered Earl, while his grand-uncle, James Douglas, succeeded to the title and the greater part of the lands; but the French possessions of the house, which were limited to male heirs in the direct line of descent, reverted to the Crown of France. This Earl was known in history as James the Fat, and he died in 1443. He was succeeded by his son, William, a man of energy and ambition. His power soon became enormous and inconsistent with order, while the kingdom presented a scene of turmoil.¹

¹ Pitscottie; Buchanan’s _History of Scotland_, Book XI.,
Chapters xvi., xvii.; _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_,
Volume II., page 33.

Crichton and Livingston were unable to offer effective resistance to Douglas. To make himself complete master of the kingdom he sought admittance to the King’s presence at Stirling Castle, and Livingston, who had the custody of the Prince, granted the request. Livingston and Douglas then became friends, and Crichton saw with dismay that he was undone. Douglas pretended to be greatly pleased with the favour which the young King had graciously shown him, and then he assumed the title and power of Lieutenant-General of the kingdom, called a parliament, and summoned Crichton and his adherents to appear and answer to a charge of high treason. Crichton, instead of obeying the summons, mustered his followers, plundered the lands of Douglas, then retired into the Castle of Edinburgh, and defied his enemies; but they afterwards came to terms with him.¹

¹ ♦_Auchinleck Chronicles_, page 36; Lesley’s _History of
Scotland_, page 17; Pitscottie.

♦ “Auclinleck” replaced with “Auchinleck”

The Earl of Douglas divorced his wife, then married his cousin, the “Fair Maid of Galloway,” and thus reunited the domains of his house. His power rapidly increased, and a struggle with the Crown became inevitable. He strengthened himself by coalitions with other nobles, and entered into a bond of alliance and mutual defence with the Earls of Crawford and Ross. When Douglas desired the assistance of the knights and gentry, and persons in his own neighbourhood, he summoned them to attend the meetings at which he presided; and if any of them failed to appear he soon brought them to obedience, and taught them a lesson which would be remembered.

In 1449 James II. married a daughter of the Duke of Gueldres, and began to show some energy and ability; but he mainly relied on the counsel of Crichton the Chancellor, and Bishop Kennedy. The King had not the command of a force which could venture to attack Douglas openly in the field, and so the faction of the Livingstons was first crushed. They had enriched themselves during the King’s minority, but they and their active associates were now seized and imprisoned. The head of the house, an old man, was granted his life, but his property was forfeited to the Crown, and his son, and several others were executed.¹

¹ Pitscottie; Balfour’s _Annals of Scotland_, Volume I.,
page 173.

The parliament which crushed the Livingstons passed a number of Acts and re-enacted others of the reign of James I., which were mostly directed to the re-establishment of order. It was enacted that if any man “commit treason against the King’s person or majesty, or wage war against him, or lay violent hands upon him, whether young or old, and all who reset, sustain, or advise any one convicted of treason, should be punished as rebels. Those who rebel against the King should be punished, according to the extent of their rebellion, by the sanction of the Three Estates. Those who openly revolted and made war upon the people, the King ought immediately to proceed against them with all the force of the kingdom, and inflict condign ♦punishment upon them.” When men of such power committed robbery and theft that the Justiciary was unsafe to hold his court, or put the law in force against these masterful evil-doers, then in such cases, he should inform the King, who, with the advice of his council, will devise a remedy. That these great criminals may not have the chance of escaping from justice, the Justice Clerk was enjoined not to reveal his action to any one whatever, or in any way to alter the form of the process which was given to him, under the penalty of forfeiting his office and his goods. It was enacted that the justiciaries, the justices, chamberlains, and other officers, in their progresses through the kingdom, should travel with a small train, and not oppress the people by their retinues.¹

♦ “puuishment” replaced with “punishment”

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
33‒37.

Douglas continued to hold a haughty attitude towards the King, and kept up communications with the leaders of parties in England and political personages abroad. In 1450 he proceeded on a pilgrimage to Rome, attended by a train of his retainers, passed through France, where he was joined by his brother, and thence to Rome. During his absence some of his vassals had caused disturbance, and were punished by the command of the King. He returned to Scotland in 1451.

The King and his advisers were unwilling to attack Douglas, as they were doubtful of the issue of the struggle that would ensue. As the vassals of Douglas’s allies, the Earls of Ross and Crawford, and his own vassals, and those of his kindred were numerous, and seeing that the Earl of Ross was also Lord of the Isles, Douglas and his allies could have mustered an army probably more numerous than any force which the King could command. In these circumstances it was resolved to try the effect of a personal interview; and in February 1452, Douglas was invited to visit the King at Stirling Castle, and he complied. Douglas proceeded to Stirling with a small retinue, and was received by the King with respect. He dined and supped with the royal party; and then the King took him aside to an inner room, where they entered into a private conversation. One matter after another was touched on, till the question of Douglas’s bonds with the Earls of Crawford and Ross was broached. Their talk waxed hot, the King insisted that Douglas must break these secret bonds, but he declined to desert his allies. At last the King exclaimed, “This shall,” and instantly drew his dagger and twice stabbed his guest. The nobles at hand rushed upon the bleeding man and killed him outright. There can be no justification or palliation of this murder; perhaps it was unpremeditated, as there was no preparation made to meet its consequences.

The rash act of the King hastened the crisis, and civil war raged from the borders to Inverness. The murdered Earl had four brothers then in Stirling, and they immediately met with other friends of the family and recognised James, the eldest brother, as his successor to the earldom. They agreed to meet at Stirling on the 25th of March. Having mustered their followers they met accordingly, proclaimed James II. a perjured man, and then pillaged and burned the town of Stirling. The struggle was desperate, and for some time the King was hard and sorely pressed on every side. He appointed the Earl of Huntly Lieutenant-General of the kingdom, and entrusted to him the task of suppressing the rebellion of the Earls of Crawford and Ross. Huntly mustered a strong army from the valley of the Deveron, Strathbogie, and the north, and marched southward towards Stirling. But the Earl of Crawford was prepared to oppose his advance, and had taken up a position near Brechin. On the 18th of May, 1452, Huntly, at the head of the loyal army, attacked Crawford, and after a fierce and severe battle, completely defeated him, when he fled to his castle of Finhaven. Two of Huntly’s brothers, Gordon of Methlic, ancestor of the Earl of Aberdeen, and many of his men were slain. One of Crawford’s brothers, and many of his chief supporters fell upon the field.

Huntly returned to chastise the Earl of Moray, who had invaded and wasted Strathbogie. He crossed the Spey, advanced into Moray, and destroyed that part of the city of Elgin which belonged to the adherents of the Earl of Moray. Thus the rebellion was subdued in the north, but in the south and other parts of the country the war raged with intense fury. The Earl of Crawford, infuriated by his defeat at Brechin, wasted the lands, and destroyed the houses of the King’s adherents in Angus; while the new Earl of Douglas and his brothers, assisted by their numerous vassals, defied and scorned the King’s authority, and wasted and burned the country. At last the Earl of Angus, a member of the Douglas tribe, joined the King’s standard. His kinsmen looked on this as an unpardonable crime, and attacked his possessions with extreme ferocity. Sir John Douglas of Dalkeith also adhered to the King, and his kinsmen besieged his castle of Dalkeith, and having failed to take it, they burned the town and the villages in the neighbourhood.¹

¹ Pitscottie; _Auchinleck Chronicles_, pages 46‒48; Buchanan’s
_History of Scotland_, Book XI., Chapters 37, 38. Though
John, Earl of Ross and Lord of the Isles was in league with
Douglas and Crawford, it appears that he did not engage
much in the rebellion. _Historical Records of the Family of
Lesley_, Volume I., page 88.

After many fruitless efforts, the King mustered an army which numbered nearly thirty thousand men, on a moor near Edinburgh. At the head of this force he advanced against the Earl of Douglas, and proceeded through Peeblesshire, Selkirk Forest, Dumfries, and Galloway. When the royal army appeared before Douglas Castle the Earl parleyed, and peace was concluded on the 24th of August, 1452. Douglas agreed to renounce his claim to the earldom of Wigton and the lands of Stewarton, and to abandon all quarrels arising out of recent events, and all illegal bonds. Shortly after the Earl of Crawford submitted to the King, and was pardoned.

But it soon became apparent that the struggle was not finally terminated. Douglas obtained a papal dispensation for his marriage with the Fair Maid of Galloway, the widow of his late brother, and thus once more united the extensive territories of the family. He entered into communication with the Yorkish party in England, and conspired to overthrow the Government and the Stuart dynasty. An appeal to arms again became necessary. The King raised an army, and the castle of Abercorn was besieged; Douglas advanced with a strong force to relieve his castle, and a battle seemed to be imminent. At this critical moment many of Douglas’s adherents, including Lord Hamilton, deserted his standard, and consequently he was unable to offer battle to the besieging army, and retired, while his castle of Abercorn was captured. The King, then, at the head of a strong army, marched into the lands of his enemy, attacked and reduced Douglas Castle, and subdued his territories. Douglas made his last stand at Arkinholm, in the summer of 1455, but he was defeated by the royal troops under the Earl of Angus; the Earl of Moray, one of Douglas’s brothers, was slain, and the Earl of Ormond, his other brother, was taken prisoner. The Earl of Douglas himself fled to England.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
75, 77; _Auchinleck Chronicles_, page 53.

Parliament assembled at Edinburgh on the 9th of June, 1455, and proceeded to deal with the estates and offices of the Douglas family. The Earl of Douglas, his mother, Countess of Douglas, the Earl of Moray, his slain brother, and John Douglas of Balveny, were declared traitors, and their lands and titles forfeited to the Crown, and other three of the adherents of the Earl of Douglas were forfeited. Acts were then passed which aimed at securing these forfeited lands and castles to the Crown. It was enacted that certain lordships and castles should for ever remain in possession of the Crown, and be given to no person whatever. “If it should happen that James II. or any of his successors alienated any of the castles and lordships belonging to the Crown, it shall not be valid, as it shall always be lawful for the reigning King to retake these castles and lands whenever he thinks fit, without any process of law whatever.” This enactment was not well observed, but several of the succeeding kings occasionally put it into practical operation. Acts were passed which aimed at the restriction of hereditary offices, and the jurisdiction and powers associated with regalities. All the regalities which had fallen to the Crown were to be annexed to it, and no new ones were to be granted without the consent of Parliament. The hereditary Wardenship of the Marches was to be abolished. In 1457 a Parliament, which assembled at Edinburgh, passed many Acts and commanded all the sheriffs of the kingdom, and the commissioners of the burghs to obtain copies of all the statutes of this Parliament from the Register Clerk, and then to proclaim them through all the counties and towns of the realm.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
41‒43, 52, 75.

The raids on the Borders were continued, and had become habitual. The Scots, however, had still the object in view of driving the English out of the castle of Roxburgh, and retaking Berwick. The English had held this ancient stronghold for upwards of a century. In the summer of 1460 the King mustered a force, and having provided cannon and war-engines, marched southward to the attack. This castle, however, was built on a strong position, and the garrison made a determined and vigorous defence. The King was actively urging on the siege, and he was extremely eager to observe the effect of the cannon which were brought to bear upon the castle. One of the great guns, which were purchased in Flanders, was placed in position, and when it was discharged some of the wedges, which were used to tighten the iron hoops, were driven out, and one of them struck and killed the King. Thus fell James II., on 3rd of August, 1460, in the thirtieth year of his age and the twenty-fourth of his reign. But the siege was continued; and the Queen, with her son, appeared upon the scene. The castle was taken, and having been more serviceable to the enemy than to Scotland it was levelled with the ground.¹

¹ _Extracta ex variis chronicis Scotiæ_, page 243; Mair’s
_History of Scotland_, page 325.

James II. was succeeded by his son, a boy of nine years of age, who was crowned at Kelso on the 10th of August, 1460, under the title of James III. The care of the young prince mainly devolved upon his mother, Mary of Gueldres. The Earl of Angus was appointed Lieutenant-General of the kingdom, and James Kennedy, Bishop of St. Andrews, was for several years the leading man in the Government. Kennedy was the friend and trusted adviser of the late King, and he continued to serve the nation. The wars of York and Lancaster were then distracting England; and Henry VI., after his crushing defeat at Towton on the 29th of March, 1461, fled into Scotland, and was hospitably received. In return for the kindness shown to him by the Government, he surrendered Berwick to the Scots, which act for a time threatened to involve the nation in a war with England. But this was avoided by a truce which left Berwick in the possession of the Scots, on the condition that they should immediately cease to assist Henry VI. On the 16th of November, 1463, Mary of Gueldres, the mother of the Queen, died, and Bishop Kennedy encouraged a policy of peace. The Earl of Angus had died also, leaving a son, who was too young to succeed him in his public position. Unhappily, Bishop Kennedy died in 1465, and his death was lamented by all the peaceful people of the kingdom as a public calamity.¹ He had rendered great service to the State and his country, and was a wise, moderate, and upright man.

¹ Mair’s _History of Scotland_, page 326; Buchanan’s _History
of Scotland_, Book XII., Chapters 20‒23; _Accounts of the
Lord High Treasurer of Scotland_, Volume I., Preface, pages
37‒40.

After the death of Kennedy, the plotting and the characteristic practice of the restless nobles recommenced. The King, then in his fourteenth year, was made the tool of a faction of the nobles, whose sole object was their own aggrandisement. Lord Boyd and his sons entered into a bond with a number of other nobles in a conspiracy to seize the young King, and rule the kingdom in their own interest. This bond contained the names of Robert, Lord Boyd, Sir Alexander Boyd, the Earl of Crawford, Lord Hamilton, Lord Livingston, Lord Maxwell, Lord Montgomery, Lord Fleming, Lord Kennedy, the Bishop of St. Andrews, and others, and was signed on the 10th day of February, 1466. On the 9th of July, 1466, while Lord Livingston, the Chamberlain, was holding his court at Linlithgow with the King, Lord Boyd and a number of his associates entered the court and requested the King to accompany them to Edinburgh, with which request he at once complied. The party held a Parliament, and passed an Act in which the King was made to say that he willingly accompanied Lord Boyd and the knights from Linlithgow to Edinburgh, and that anything connected with this matter which could possibly be construed into an offence, His Majesty King James III. freely pardoned. Lord Boyd was appointed guardian of the King’s person, governor of the royal castles, and High Justiciary of the kingdom. Thus he at once became supreme, and his family and relations speedily acquired large tracts of territory, titles, and honours. In 1467 his eldest son, Sir Thomas Boyd, was created Earl of Arran, and was married to the King’s sister.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., page 185;
Crawford’s _Officers of State_, page 473; _Douglas Peerage_,
Volume II., page 32.

The relations between the Crowns of Denmark and Scotland demanded the attention of the government. It was stated in a preceding chapter that the Western Islands were ceded to Scotland in 1266, and the payment of an annual rent of 100 marks was one of the terms of the treaty. This had not been regularly paid, and the arrears amounted to a considerable sum. A marriage was proposed between James III. and the Princess Margaret of Denmark; and Boyd, the Earl of Arran, the bishops of Glasgow and Orkney, and other commissioners, proceeded to Denmark to negotiate with King Christian I. The Scotch commissioners concluded a treaty with the Danish King, in which he agreed to abandon his claim for the arrears of rent on the Western Islands, to endow his daughter with 60,000 florins, of which he proposed to pay 10,000 before she departed to Scotland, and to secure the remaining 50,000 on the Orkney Islands. But, on further reflection, he proposed to give the bride 2000 florins for her immediate use, and secure the balance on the Shetland Islands. The treaty thus adjusted was accepted; and, as the money was never paid, the Orkney and Shetland Islands ultimately became incorporated with Scotland.

In July 1469, the Princess Margaret of Denmark landed at Leith, and was heartily welcomed by a great assemblage of the people. Shortly after, the royal marriage was celebrated amid rejoicing throughout the nation.

During the Earl of Arran’s absence from the country, his enemies had undermined his power and influence. When he returned with the King’s bride, he found himself utterly deserted; and he immediately fled with his wife to Denmark. But he was soon deprived of his royal wife by a divorce. She afterwards married Lord Hamilton, and by this alliance his descendants became in the succeeding century the nearest heirs to the Crown of Scotland.

As the Boyds had risen rapidly to power and wealth, so their fall was equally swift and complete. Parliament assembled at Edinburgh on the 22nd of November, 1469, and the Boyds were summoned to appear and answer to a charge of high treason. The charge of treason was the seizure of the King’s person at Linlithgow. Old Robert Boyd, the Justiciary and the head of the family, fled to England, where he shortly afterwards died; but his brother, Sir Alexander, was tried, condemned, and executed on the Castle Hill of Edinburgh. Thomas, the Earl of Arran, wandered as an exile in Germany, France, and England, and died at Antwerp about the year 1473. The extent of the lands which they had unjustly seized in the short day of their power, is well shown by the local names in the act of their forfeiture. The lordship and the castle of Kilmarnock were the hereditary possessions of the family; but the list in the Act contained the earldom of Carrick, the lordship of Bute, the castle of Rothesay, the lordship of Arran, the lordship of Cowal, the lordship of Stewarton, the barony of Renfrew, the land and castle of Dundonald, and several others.¹ The case of the Boyds is not an isolated phenomenon in the history of Scotland, as a similar policy was pursued by the nobles whenever they had an opportunity; and this was one of the chief sources of their endless feuds, and the social disorder of the kingdom.

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
90, 186; _Officers of State_, page 316.

The legislation of the parliament of 1469, touching the social order of the kingdom, shows that the administration of justice was in a deplorable state. It was stated that the sheriffs and other judges had failed to perform their executive duties, or to protect the poor people from oppression. “Therefore, it was enacted that in every quarter of the kingdom, any person who had a case, should first make his complaint to the local sheriff, steward, justice, or the magistrates in burghs, and ask redress and justice: and if he obtains justice duly ministered and executed, then he must rest content. But when the judge declines to act, and will not administer justice, then the complainant should proceed to the King and his council, take letters and summon the offender, and also the judge; and if the judge be found guilty, he will be punished and dismissed from his office for a long or short period at the discretion of the King and his council; and he shall have to pay the expenses of the complainant, and the King shall cause justice to be administered to the complainant.” Murder and crimes of violence had been extremely numerous during the King’s minority, while it was stated that many persons committed crimes, and trusted to secure immunity by taking refuge in the sanctuaries and remaining there, safe from pursuit. To remedy this state of matters, it was enacted that officers of justice should have power to seize such criminals, that they might be tried before a jury, and punished according to their guilt.

The King had reached his twentieth year; but his education had been sadly neglected, and he showed little capacity in the government of the kingdom. In 1470 he made a progress through the northern part of the country with his Queen; and on the 17th of March, 1473, an heir to the throne was born. James III. was peacefully inclined, but lacked the energy of character necessary to control the nobles. A truce with England was concluded in October 1474, to continue for seventeen years; but Edward IV. was not really friendly to Scotland. He harboured the Earl of Douglas, and entered into negotiations with John, Earl of Ross and Lord of the Isles, with whom he also concluded a treaty.

When the terms of this treaty became known to the Government, the Earl of Ross was summoned to appear before a parliament in Edinburgh to answer several charges of treason; but he failed to appear, and a sentence of forfeiture was passed against him in 1475. Preparations were then made to invade his territories and reduce him to subjection; but he tendered his submission and surrendered himself to the King. The earldom of Ross was annexed to the Crown; but the rest of his lands, excepting Cantyre and Knapdale, were restored to him by royal charter; he was also created a peer of parliament under the title of Lord of the Isles.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., page 108,
_et seq._

James III. was not a vigorous ruler, while he seems to have incurred the enmity of the nobles. He entertained a man called Doctor Andres, an astrologer, gave him sums of money, and in 1474 a French gown for his services. It was said that this astrologer told the King that his life was in imminent danger from his own kindred. The King employed and associated with persons of humble position; one Robert Cochrane, a mason, became a special favourite; Robert Rogers, a musician; and James Homil, a tailor, were the King’s favourites. Homil received an annual pension of £20. The King’s brothers, the Duke of Albany, and the Earl of Mar, were robust and active men, and more in harmony with the characteristics of the nobles than the King. From whatever cause, the King imagined that his brothers were his enemies, and the Earl of Mar was imprisoned in the castle of Craigmillar, where he died; and it was rumoured that the King had caused him to be murdered. Albany was imprisoned in the castle of Edinburgh; but in April 1479, he escaped and fled to France. Returning to England, in 1482 he entered into a treaty with Edward IV. By this treaty he agreed to recognise the feudal superiority of the King of England, who was then to give the Crown of Scotland to him under the title of Alexander IV. Albany promised to render homage to his feudal lord whenever he was put in possession of the kingdom, also to support England, to abandon the old alliance with France, to surrender to the English the town and castle of Berwick, the castle of Lochmaben, and the districts of Liddesdale, Annandale, and Eskdale.¹ To enter into a compact of this nature with the enemy of the kingdom was a crime which the nation could not permit; although Albany simply presented another illustration of a characteristic weakness of the Stuart dynasty, namely, enmity amongst the members of the royal family.

¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland_, Volume
I., pages 7, 13, 15, 18, 23‒6, 55; Pitscottie; _Acts of
the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 125‒132;
_Fœdera_, Volume XII., page 156.

The old Earl of Douglas was still alive, and being a retainer of Edward IV., he and several other Scotch nobles joined Albany’s conspiracy. England thus assumed a menacing attitude towards Scotland. Parliament met in March, 1482, to deliberate on the state of affairs which had arisen. In the record of the proceedings Edward IV. was termed a usurper and a robber, “who had broken faith with Scotland, and invaded it, robbed, burned, and destroyed the property of the King’s subjects. And it was well known that this usurper, from his enormous avarice and false love of conquest, neither fearing God nor the effusion of Christian blood, nor remembering that he was obliged and sworn to keep the truce, but casting his fidelity and honour to the winds, he has determinedly resolved to continue this war, which he has caused and begun, and with all his power to invade, and so far as he can, conquer this kingdom. Those present in Parliament therefore promised to support the King to the utmost of their power, and to defend him and the kingdom as their forefathers had always done.” It was resolved to muster the whole force of the country to resist the usurper Edward, “and if he shall come in person, then he shall be resisted by our King in person, and with the body of the people, who will live or die in his defence.”¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
138‒139.

In July, 1482, a strong army assembled on the Boroughmoor, near Edinburgh; and Cochrane, who had assumed the title of Earl of Mar, was appointed to command the artillery. The army, with the King in person, marched toward the Border, but when it reached Lauder a tragic action happened. The nobles, headed by the Earl of Angus, met in a church, and after some discussion they resolved to seize the King and to sweep off his favourites. While they were considering how to execute their resolution a knock was heard at the door; it was Cochrane with a message from the King. The Earl of Angus instantly seized and pulled the gold chain from Cochrane’s neck, saying that “a rope would befit him better.” “My lords,” said he, “is it jest or earnest?” He was told that it was earnest, and was quickly bound and placed under guard. A party of the nobles, who were despatched to the royal tent, instantly seized the King’s musician, Rogers, and the rest of his favourites. These were then led, along with Cochrane, to the Bridge of Lauder, where they were all hanged. After these cruel executions the nobles disbanded the army, returned to the capital with the King, and imprisoned him in the castle of Edinburgh; and thus left the southern quarter of the kingdom a prey to the enemy.¹

¹ Buchanan’s _History of Scotland_, Book XII., Chapter 46;
Lesley’s _History of Scotland_, page 48; Pitscottie.

The English retook Berwick, which henceforth remained in their possession. The English army, accompanied by the Duke of Albany, advanced to Edinburgh with the intention of placing him on the throne of Scotland. When Albany’s aim was discovered, it was seen that the people would not submit to his scheme without a severe struggle. The unhappy and captive King had still some loyal and powerful adherents, including the Earl of Huntly, the representative of the house which saved the crown of James II. By the efforts of these and the citizens of Edinburgh, the King was released from prison,¹ and a partial reconciliation between him and Albany was effected, on the ground that Albany should return to his allegiance and be restored to his estates. For a short time Albany attempted to rule the kingdom.

¹ On the 16th of November, 1482, the King granted a charter
to the citizens of Edinburgh, which constituted the
provost-sheriff within the boundaries of the burgh for ever;
and another charter which confirmed to the citizens of the
burgh the customs of the port of Leith, for assisting in
his deliverance from prison. _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_,
Volume I., page 43, 332.

On the 2nd of December, 1482, a Parliament met at Edinburgh, which was under the control of Albany. A number of Acts were passed, in one of which the King was made to express his warm thanks to his brother for delivering him from imprisonment; and the unhappy King was also forced to entreat Albany to accept the office of Lieutenant-General of the Kingdom. Albany further received a grant of the Earldom of Mar as a reward for his great services to the State. Thus Albany was virtually placed in supreme power.

But he continued his intrigues with the English Government, and entered into new plots and engagements. When his treason became known his position was untenable, and he was forced to retire to England; but, before he departed, he placed the castle of Dunbar in the hands of the English. Edward IV. died on the 9th of April, 1483, and this event, and those which followed in England, upset Albany’s schemes. A Parliament met at Edinburgh on the 24th of June, 1483, to which Albany was summoned to appear and answer to a charge of treason; as he failed to appear, his estates were forfeited to the Crown, and also the lands of his chief adherents. Albany afterwards crossed the English Channel, and finally settled in France.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
142‒152.

A party of the nobles, chiefly connected with the southern part of the kingdom, still continued to plot against the King with the intention of dethroning him, and for the ensuing five years the Government and the country were in an unsettled state. Truces for short periods were concluded with England, and in 1485 the league with France was renewed. Although Parliaments were assembled and many Acts passed touching the disorder of the kingdom, the holding of courts, and the repression of crime, the affairs of the Church, the currency of the kingdom, commerce, and the herring-fishery, still the conspiracy against the King was proceeding. Queen Margaret died at Stirling in 1486, and she left three children――Prince James, the heir to the throne; John, who received the title of Earl of Mar; and the Duke of Ross, who was born in March, 1476, and educated under George Schaw, Abbot of Paisley; he was appointed Archbishop of St. Andrews in 1497, Chancellor of the kingdom in 1502, and died in 1503. The year following the death of his Queen, James III. opened communication with Henry VII. with a view to a marriage with the widow of Edward IV.; but the hapless King of Scots soon had other work to engage his attention.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
165‒184; _Fœdera_, Volume VII., pages 236, _et seq._;
_Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland_, Volume I.,
Preface, page 64.

The conspiracy of the nobles against the King was matured. It had occurred to them that the King’s son, a youth of sixteen years of age, would serve their purpose, and the southern nobles induced him to join them, and rise in rebellion against his own father. They mustered their followers and advanced upon Edinburgh, where the King was then staying. James crossed the Forth and passed into the northern counties, which were loyal, and there a strong army rallied round him. He then marched southward, and came in sight of the rebellious nobles at Blackness, in West Lothian, where the Earl of Buchan attacked and drove back the advance wing of the insurgent army. A pacification was arranged in May, 1488, and the King disbanded his army and returned to Edinburgh, as the nobles had promised to return to their allegiance, to maintain the rights of the Crown, and the peace of the kingdom.

But the disaffected nobles remained in arms, with the young Prince at their head, whom they used as their tool. The hapless King again mustered an army, and advanced towards Stirling to secure the passage of the Forth, but the gates of the castle were closed against him, as the Governor had joined the insurgent nobles. On the 11th of June, 1488, the two armies approached each other at a small brook called Sauchie Burn, about a mile from the field of Bannockburn. An engagement ensued, and though the royal troops were outnumbered, the action was long and fiercely contested. The King, in retiring from the field, was thrown from his horse, and some of the rebels came up and killed him. Thus fell James III., in the thirty-seventh year of his age, and the twenty-eighth of his reign, another victim to the ambition of a reckless aristocracy.¹

¹ Pitscottie, pages 133‒143; Buchanan, Book XII., Chapter 61;
_Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., page 184.

The victorious nobles passed the night on the field of battle, and on the following morning proceeded to Linlithgow; and that day, the 12th of June, the prince issued a proclamation, and granted a commission to William Hepburn, as Clerk of Council and Register. The dominant party immediately seized the Government and the royal treasure, divided the chief offices among themselves, and placed the royal castles in the hands of their own adherents. On the 25th of June the Prince was crowned at Scone, with the usual circumstance and ceremony, under the title of James IV.; and the faction who had raised him to the throne pampered his youthful passions and propensities. Theatrical farces, dances, and masked balls, were got up for his special amusement, and in this way the nobles degraded the character of the young King.¹

¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland_, Volume I.,
pages 79‒87, 276, 277, 280, 288, 293, 304, _et seq._

The party of the nobles who had attained the ascendancy exerted themselves to the utmost to secure their position. They appointed an embassy to proceed to the English courts, headed by the Archbishop of St. Andrews, and the Bishops of Glasgow and Aberdeen, but Henry VII. had not much confidence in the new Government. They obtained, however, a renewal of the truce between the two kingdoms. At home they acted with surprising energy; the supporters of the late King, including the Earl of Buchan, Lord Forbes, Lord Bothwell, Sir Alexander Dunbar, and others, were summoned to appear before Parliament and answer to a charge of treason. Parliament met at Edinburgh on the 6th of October, 1488, and proceeded to consider the position of those who had been summoned for treason. The Earl of Buchan appeared, and tendered his submission to the King, and he was pardoned and restored to favour. None of the others cited appeared, and consequently their possessions were placed at the disposal of Parliament; and Lord Bothwell, John Ross, the late King’s advocate, and others, were forfeited. Ross’s lands were given to Patrick Home of Fast Castle; and the lordships of Bothwell and Crichton were formed into the Earldom of Bothwell and given to Patrick Hepburn, Lord Hailes, who was then created Earl of Bothwell, as a reward for his service to his country at Sauchie Burn. The leading members of this Parliament having succeeded so far, proceeded to investigate the causes of the recent rebellion. After carefully examining the whole matter, they unanimously came to the conclusion “that the slaughter committed in the field near Stirling, where the King’s father happened to be slain, and others of his barons, was solely to be ascribed to the offences, falsehood, and deceit practiced by him and his wicked counsellors before the battle. Therefore our King that now is, and the true lords and barons who were with him in the same field, were innocent, quit, and free, of the said slaughters, battle, and pursuit, and did not cause or occasion them.” To this statement the leading nobles of the party, some of the bishops and burgesses, affixed their seals, in order that copies of it might be sent to the Pope, the Kings of France, Denmark, Spain, and other foreign powers.

Some concessions were granted to the supporters of the late King and their kindred. It was enacted that the heirs of those who had fallen in arms against the King at the battle near Stirling, should be allowed to succeed to their estates, notwithstanding the legal difficulty that their predecessors were slain when in open rebellion. The goods belonging to the poor and unlanded people, which had been seized during the recent struggle, were to be restored to them; and that castles and lands, which had been plundered and occupied by either party, were to be delivered to their owners.¹ Still, there were murmurs amongst the people concerning the hard fate of the late King. In 1489 the Earls of Lennox and Huntly, Lord Forbes, and others, rose in arms against the party in power; but after a short struggle, they were defeated, and the rising extinguished. The dominant faction then ran its course; and James IV. gradually assumed his proper functions, and became an active prince. Yet a parliament which met at Edinburgh on the 6th of February, 1492, found it necessary to allay “the heavy murmurs of the people concerning the death and slaughter of our sovereign lord’s father, whom God absolve, King James III., that those who slew him should be punished as they deserved to be.” A reward of a hundred marks of land was then offered to any one who should reveal the perpetrators of the deed;² but the reward was never claimed.

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 199,
201‒205, 209‒211, 269.

² _Ibid._, pages 223, 230.

Parliament assembled at Edinburgh in May 1493, and proceeded to pass enactments touching the Church. All those who had pleas depending in the Court of Rome were commanded to cease their litigation in that Court, and bring their pleas before the courts of the kingdom, where justice should be administered to them. Acts were passed which aimed at withdrawing the appointment to the benefices of the monasteries from the Court of Rome. The rights and the privileges of the Archbishops of St. Andrews and Glasgow were confirmed. The doom of treason was to be pronounced against every one who attempted to take the King’s rights of patronage to the Court of Rome. Yet it appears that this was not effective, for in 1496 parliament renewed the former Acts, and passed a new one, which runs thus:――“For the honour of the kingdom and the good of the community, and for averting innumerable evils daily incurred upon the kingdom and the people through the exorbitant cost and expense of churchmen, by their purchasing at the Court of Rome benefices and elections contrary to the Acts of Parliament. Also by purchasing and bringing in of novelties and innovations into the Church without the advice of the King, distraining the kingdom of money, and putting the King and patrons out of their possessions. Hereafter, all those who go out of the realm on such business, without a license from the King, shall be proclaimed rebels and put to the King’s horn.”¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
232, 237.

This parliament directed its attention to the state of the Highlands, and it was alleged that since 1475 repeated attempts had been made in the name of John, Lord of the Isles, to recover the earldom of Ross, which was then held by the King’s brother. Therefore the title and the estates of the aged Lord of the Isles were forfeited to the Crown. Shortly after he surrendered to the King, and retired to the monastery of Paisley, where he died in 1498, and was interred in the tomb of his royal relative, King Robert III.

After the surrender of the Lord of the Isles, preparations were made for an expedition into the Highlands and Islands with the aim of establishing the royal authority. Towards the end of the summer of 1493 the King proceeded to the Isles, and received the submission of several of the chiefs. In the spring of the following year the King again visited the Isles, and repaired and garrisoned the castle of Tarbert as a base of operations. He reduced the castle of Dunaverty in Cantyre, garrisoned it, and then returned to Stirling in August. It seems that James IV. did not adopt an effective mode of governing the Highlands and Islands, though he was active and moved about rapidly, he followed no defined and clear line of government. In autumn he proceeded with the Northern Circuit Courts, and was in Inverness on the 6th of October, and in Elgin at the end of the month; thence he passed to Banff and Aberdeen, and then returned south. Starting from Edinburgh early in February 1495, he followed the Southern Circuit Courts to Lanark, Peebles, Selkirk, Jedburgh, Dumfries, and Ayr. In May he was at the castle of Mingarry, in Ardnamurchan, and a number of the local chiefs rendered submission to him, including the chief of Clanranald, and Ewen, son of Alan of Lochiel, Captain of the clan Cameron. But James returned to Glasgow before the end of June; what have been called his expeditions to the Highlands and Islands were merely flying visits.¹ Still, it seems that the King and his government had a good opportunity, after the surrender of the Lord of the Isles, for improving the government of the Celtic people, and if they had been reasonably treated and properly ruled, they would have soon settled into a state of comparative quietness and order under the Crown. Unfortunately the King and his government, after a time, divested themselves of their functions and responsibilities to govern the Celtic people of the Highlands and Islands, and assigned this duty to local and interested nobles.

¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland_, Volume I.;
Gregory’s _History of the Western Highlands and Isles of
Scotland_.

The head of the Campbells, who had then attained the rank of Earl of Argyle, practised a policy of encroachment on the small proprietors and clans in his ♦neighbourhood. In the year 1502 all the charters which had been granted by the King to the vassals during the last five years were summarily recalled. The Earl of Argyle was appointed the King’s Lieutenant, and empowered to let on lease for a term of three years the whole lordship of the Isles. Argyle immediately proceeded to evict the proprietors and their tenants from their lands and houses: and the lands were appropriated by Argyle himself, and a few of the King’s favourites. The natural result followed; the evicted people rose in rebellion. As the Earl of Argyle had obtained the functions of a King in the Western Highlands and Islands, so in the beginning of the sixteenth century Alexander, third Earl of Huntly, was appointed Sheriff of Inverness, Ross, Sutherland, and Caithness; and also keeper of the Castle of Inverness, to which office there was a large extent of land attached. Huntly had territories in Badenoch and Lochaber, and the strong castle of Ruthven, although the centre of his power lay in Strathbogie, in the counties of Aberdeen and Banff. These two Earls and their successors, for upwards of a century may be said to have ruled the Highlands and Islands of Scotland; and each earl within his region often caused disorder, and committed many acts of aggression and injustice upon the Celtic people.

♦ “neighbourhoood” replaced with “neighbourhood”

When a Government renders its subjects landless and homeless, rebellion is likely to be the result. After causing a rising of this nature the King summoned a parliament, which met at Edinburgh in March, 1503. This parliament and the King then proclaimed that――“If any one should apprehend and bring to the King, Maclean of Lochbuy, great Macleod of Lewis, or MacNeil of Barra, they shall receive the half of these rebels’ lands; and if they capture and bring to the King any other head-men, or any Highland man whatever connected with the rebellion, they shall be rewarded therefor according to the value of the land and the goods of the persons taken.”¹ Such severe measures only served to incite the people to rebellion; and it was only after a struggle of three years that it was extinguished. The Earls of Argyle and Huntly, with the sanction of the King, assumed and exercised the functions of local and despotic rulers.

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages
240‒250.

In the reign of James IV. the relations of Scotland became more interwoven with the other kingdoms of Europe, and she then really entered the field of European politics. Scotland had diplomatic communications with the Kings of France, Spain, the Pope, and other powers. James IV. had a fondness for excitement and adventure, and a feature of romance in his character, while his feelings and emotions were excessively strong, as manifested in various forms. He was not an adept in diplomacy; in that sphere of action he was apt to be duped, and an instance of this may be narrated. Perkin Warbeck, a son of a Florentine Jew, was persuaded by the Duchess of Burgundy, a sister of Richard III. of England, to personate her nephew Richard, a brother of Edward V. This character, accompanied by six hundred men, attempted to land at Kent in July, 1495, but he was repulsed, and one hundred and fifty of his followers were captured and executed. The adventurer next made an effort to obtain a footing in Ireland, but he failed. Undaunted by these failures, Perkin pursued his mission, and with his retinue he arrived at Stirling on the 20th of November, 1495. He was at once received by James IV. as “Prince Richard of England,” and was conducted to apartments which had been prepared for him in Stirling. Immediately letters were despatched to the lords and nobles of Athole and Strathern, and to Earl Marischal and the barons of Angus, commanding them to meet the King and the Prince at Perth; that they might have the honour of being presented to Prince Richard. As it was intended to wage war in support of the claims of this noble Prince, letters were sent to the sheriffs ordering wappenschaws to be held throughout the kingdom. Perkin soon became a great favourite of the King; and he was married to the King’s cousin, Lady Gordon, a daughter of the Earl of Huntly, a personal allowance of £1,200 a year being granted to him, while his followers were quartered and maintained among the burghs. Perkin moved through the kingdom in the style of a prince, staying at Perth, Falkland Palace, Stirling, Linlithgow, Edinburgh, and other places, for short or long periods as suited his pleasure.

The King having resolved to support the claim of Perkin Warbeck to the throne of England, ordered the crown vassals to muster at Lauder. The artillery stored at the King’s work in Leith, the castle of Edinburgh, and the Abbey of Holyrood, was inspected and put in order. Parties of workmen were sent to the woods of Melrose and of Irneside to make carts, wheels, and all the requisite timber appliances, while the King’s forge was used for preparing the necessary ironwork. New tents were made for the King, and a banner of red and blue taffeta for Perkin, who had now assumed the title of Duke of York. The preparations for the invasion of England were completed on the 12th of September, 1496. John Sandilands of Hillhouse, who had charge of the artillery, was ready to advance. The master-gunners were mostly foreigners, the rest were craftsmen, smiths, carpenters, and quarrymen, who were also trained to work the guns. Before starting the bellman was thrice sent through Edinburgh calling for workmen to engage for wages, and one hundred and forty-three carters, with one hundred and ninety-six horses, were hired for fourteen days’ service at a shilling a day for each man or horse, for the conveyance of the guns, carts, tents, and other war materials, “and seventy-six men with spades and mattocks to clear a way for the artillery.” On the 14th the King and the Duke of York made their offerings in Holyrood, and ordered a trental of masses for the success of the undertaking, and then marched southward. The Scots crossed the Border and entered Northumberland; the Duke of York then issued a manifesto to his subjects, declaring that he had come to deliver them from the usurpation and tyranny of Henry VII.; but the English showed no signs of enthusiasm for a new King introduced by a Scotch army. The King and his army plundered Northumberland, and returned to Scotland. On the 8th of October the King and the Duke had returned to Edinburgh.

After this inglorious and utter failure, Perkin’s followers soon fell away. James IV. at last discovering that the cause of Perkin was unpopular among the Scotch people, resolved to send him away. A ship called the _Cuckoo_ was equipped at Ayr, and stored with provisions, which consisted of seventeen carcases of beef and twenty-three of mutton, four tuns of wine, ten pipes of ale, two pipes of cider and beer, two thousand biscuits, eight bolls of oatmeal, a hogshead of herring, twelve ♦keeling, and six stone of cheese, and there was also a store of peats, coal, and one hundred candles. In the middle of July, 1497, Perkin, his wife, and about thirty attendants, sailed from the port of Ayr, under the care of Robert Barton, a skilful mariner, and on the 26th of July he arrived at Cork, where he was coldly received; thence he sailed with three small ships for Cornwall, and landed at Whitsand Bay on the 7th of September. He assumed the title of Richard IV. and raised his standard. About three thousand men joined him, and he attacked Exeter; but he was captured on the 5th of October and carried to London. He was first placed in the stocks at Westminster, and then imprisoned in the Tower. Having plotted with the Earl of Warwick to escape from the Tower, and killed a lieutenant, he was hanged at Tyburn on the 28th of November, 1499. Thus ended the career of Perkin Warbeck.¹

♦ “keling” replaced with “keeling”

¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland_, Volume I.,
Preface, pages 126‒128, 139‒142, _et seq._; _Exchequer
Rolls of Scotland_, Volume XI. I have stated above that
this impostor was a son of a Florentine Jew, but according
to Perkin’s own confession he was a native of Tournay in
Flanders.

After Warbeck’s departure great preparations were made for a raid into England. A strong force was mustered at Melrose, and the artillery was put in order at Edinburgh and Leith, and a large number of gunners, men, oxen and horses, were hired to convey the guns and war materials. But the only result of these preparations was an unsuccessful siege of the castle of Norham, and the usual plundering. On the 30th of September, 1497, a truce for seven years was concluded between the two kingdoms, which was subsequently extended to continue during the lives of the two Kings.

James IV. was an exceedingly popular King, as he was constantly moving through the kingdom on pilgrimages, or with the circuit courts, and was often seen by all classes of his subjects in every quarter of the country. He was open-handed with his money, and in his movements through the kingdom always paid even for the smallest services. In July, 1496, Don Pedro de Ayala, the Spanish Ambassador, arrived in Scotland; he was an able and accomplished man of the world, and having proceeded to the Scottish court, as the representative of the greatest power in Europe, he found the King of Scots to be an attractive character. The Spanish Ambassador said: “When I arrived he was keeping a lady with great state in a castle. He visited her from time to time. Afterwards he sent her to the house of her father, who is a knight, and married her.” This lady was Margaret Drummond, the youngest daughter of John Lord of Drummond, and she was then living in Stirling Castle. For the year 1496 the records contain considerable sums of money which were paid to defray her expenses while she was residing in Stirling, and in Linlithgow. She returned home in the spring of 1497, and that year she bore a daughter to the King. This child in due time became the wife of John Lord Gordon, and thus she was the mother of the fourth Earl of Huntly.¹ The sad tragedy which befell Margaret Drummond and her two sisters occurred in 1502. While residing at Drummond Castle the three sisters, after partaking of breakfast, died in extreme pain, there being a strong suspicion that they had been poisoned.

¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland_, Volume I.;
_Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_, Volume XII.

At an early age James IV. formed an intimacy with Margaret, or Mariot, Boyd, a daughter of Archibald Boyd of Bonshaw, and by this lady the King had a son, who was born about the year 1491. This son of James IV., on the death of his uncle, the Duke of Ross and Archbishop of St. Andrews, in 1503, was appointed to the primacy, which he held for ten years. He was slain at the Battle of Flodden. James IV. formed another illicit intimacy with Janet Kennedy, a daughter of Lord John Kennedy, and by her he had a son, who was born about the year 1500, and named James Stewart. In 1501 Janet Kennedy retired with her infant son to the castle of Darnaway in Moray, and there the child was brought up as Earl of Moray.¹

¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_, Volume XII.

Some of the obstacles to the King’s projected marriage having been removed, as indicated in the preceding paragraphs, negotiations were opened in June 1499, to treat for his marriage with the Princess Margaret, daughter of Henry VII. The negotiations proceeded smoothly, but, as James and Margaret were within the prohibited degrees of relationship, Henry VII., in July, 1500, had to obtain a papal dispensation which removed this impediment to the marriage. In November 1501, Henry VII. empowered the Earl of Surrey, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishop of Winchester, to treat with the Earl of Bothwell, the Archbishop of Glasgow, and the Bishop of Moray, on all the matters connected with the proposed marriage. They immediately entered on their arduous task, and before the end of January 1502, they framed three treaties:――one sanctioning the marriage between the Princess and the King of Scotland; another for a perpetual peace between the two kingdoms; and the other providing for the preservation of order on the marches of the two countries. In the marriage treaty it was stipulated that the Princess should be conveyed to Scotland, at her father’s expense, and delivered to those appointed to receive her at Lamberton Church in Lammermoor, on or before the 1st of September, 1503; and that the marriage should be solemnised within fifteen days thereafter. Immediately after the marriage the Queen should obtain seisin of all the lands, castles, and possessions, which had in past times formed the jointure of Queen dowagers; and if the rents of these possessions be below £2000 sterling, additional lands should be assigned to her. The Queen should be allowed twenty-four English servants, also Scotch retainers, and her husband should, at his own cost, maintain her in a style befitting her rank as a Queen’s daughter and a King’s consort, and provide her with a yearly allowance of 500 marks sterling. Her dowry, amounting to £10,000 sterling, was to be paid by her father in three instalments, £3,333 on the marriage day, and the remainder within three years; and if the Queen died without issue within this period, then James IV. should have no right to the unpaid balance. The treaties were duly ratified, and Lord Dacre, Sir Thomas Darcy, Sir Henry Babington, and other commissioners were sent from England to see that the contemplated arrangements touching the jointure lands, and the punishment of offenders on the marches, were carried into effect.¹

¹ _Fœdera_; _Calender of Documents relating to Scotland_,
Volume IV., pages 332‒336, _et seq._; _Exchequer Rolls_,
Volume XII., page 185.

On the 12th of July James IV. promised to Henry VII. not to renew his league with France “till he consults with him, or is further advised.” James also promised to pay suitable wages to Queen Margaret’s English attendants.

Under the care of the Earl of Surrey the young Princess commenced her journey to Scotland in the beginning of August, accompanied by a retinue which increased as it advanced northward. The Earl of Morton and a number of Scotch nobles proceeded to Lamberton Church and received the Princess, and James joined the party at Newbottle. The marriage was celebrated on the 8th of August, 1503, in the church of Holyrood, amid great rejoicing and magnificent display. Exactly one hundred years later, the issue of this marriage united the Crowns of England and Scotland.

It has been already mentioned that the relations of Scotland with foreign powers had assumed some importance. Henry VII., as we have seen above, had exacted a promise from his son-in-law that he would not renew his league with France without consulting him; but Louis XII. of France despatched Bernard Stuart, Lord of Aubigny, as his ambassador to the Scottish King. James received him with the utmost respect, and placed him in the most honourable seat at his own table. Subsequently Pope Julius II. sent an ambassador to the Court of Scotland, who presented to James IV. a consecrated hat and sword as a special mark of the Holy Father’s regard for him. The object of the Pope was to detach the King from his alliance with France, but he utterly failed. Shortly after, an embassy from the King of France arrived in Scotland, with the object of inducing the King to join the ♦Cambray League, which had been formed in 1508 against the Republic of Venice. It appears that Henry VII. had some suspicion of his son-in-law, for, on the 12th of December, 1508, he issued instructions to the Captain of Berwick, in which it was stated that “if the Scots threatened an invasion or besieged the town, the garrison of the castle should be increased to six-hundred-and-thirty men.”¹

♦ “Cambary” replaced with “Cambray”

¹ Pinkerton’s _History of Scotland_, Volume II.; _Calender of
Documents relating to Scotland_, Volume IV., page 351.

Henry VII. died on the 21st of April 1509, and it may be said with truth that by his death Scotland lost a friend and an unusually quiet neighbour. His son, Henry VIII., who succeeded to the throne of England, was a different personage, and not long after his accession the old strife was renewed.

James IV. took an interest in shipbuilding, and in his reign Scotland attained some importance as a naval power. Although there were no war ships, strictly speaking, as the same ships were used for both commerce and war, according to the exigence of circumstances. Still, in a limited sense, it might be said that the King possessed a navy. The King’s most distinguished captains were Sir Andrew Wood and the Bartons, while the ships which won distinction, the _Yellow Carvel_, the _Flower_, and others, were simply armed merchantmen.

At this period the distinction between honest trading and piracy was not clearly drawn, and it was alleged that the Scottish captains sometimes indulged in piratical exploits. Owing to the complaints of English merchants against the Scotch captain, Andrew Barton, Lord Thomas Howard and Sir Edward Howard, with two men-of-war, attacked Barton’s ship, the _Lion_, and a small sloop called the _Pirwen_, in the Downs. After a long and severe fight Barton was killed, and his ships detained as prizes. James IV. immediately sent a herald to demand satisfaction, but Henry VIII. replied that the destruction of pirates was no infringement of their treaty. Other causes of quarrel soon arose.

Henry VIII. resolved to engage in a war against France, the ally of Scotland. Ambassadors from the Pope, Spain, and England, arrived in Scotland for the purpose of persuading James IV. to join in the war against France; but all their efforts proved in vain. James IV. declined to abandon his old ally, and resolved to assist France by an invasion of England. Attempts were made to dissuade the King from engaging in a war with England, but he had formed his resolution, and determined to adhere to it and abide the issue. In the summer of 1513 he ordered the whole feudal force of the kingdom to muster on the Borough Moor, near Edinburgh; and on the appointed day a large army assembled. The King placed himself at the head of his army and marched southward. On the 22nd of August he crossed the Tweed and encamped on the banks of the Till. There he passed an Act, which ordered that the heirs of all who fell in this war should be free from the feudal burdens of “ward, relief, and marriage,” whatever their age might be. The army marched along the side of the Tweed, and besieged the castle of Norham, which was captured on the 29th of August. Valuable time was lost in taking the border castles of Wark, Etal, and Ford, which gave the enemy an opportunity of mustering his forces and advancing against the Scots. The English army, under the Earl of Surrey, was advancing northward, and messages passed between him and James IV. Although James was brave and determined, as general of an army he had no qualifications whatever; his idea of leadership was simply to make a stand-up fight.

On receiving intelligence of the approach of the English army, the Scots quitted their encampment and took up a strong position upon Flodden Hill. When Surrey observed the position of the Scots, he did not deem it wise to attack them then. He passed the Till on the 8th of September, and marched in a north-westerly direction till near the confluence of the Till and the Tweed, and then recrossed the Till at Twisel Bridge. By this movement Surrey placed his army between the Scots and their own country. He then drew up his army in battle array on the left bank of the Till. When the Scots saw that they were outgeneraled, they set fire to the tents of their encampment, descended from the Hill of Flodden and took possession of the neighbouring height of Brankston, towards which the enemy was advancing from the opposite direction.

The opposing armies were nearly equal in numbers, each numbered about thirty thousand men. The English advanced in four divisions, and the centre of their line of battle was commanded by the Earl of Surrey. The left wing of the Scots was commanded by the Earl of Huntly and Lord Home, and the right wing by the Earls of Argyle and Lennox, and the King in person and on foot led the centre. At four in the afternoon of the 9th of September 1513, the battle commenced with cannonading on both sides; the English artillery was better served than the Scotch, and did considerable execution in the ranks of the latter. Huntly and Home with the left wing of the Scots attacked the English vanguard and drove it back in disorder; but the English reserve then advanced and kept Huntly in check. After a long and severe struggle, in which the Earls of Lennox, Argyle, Crawford, Montrose, and many others were slain, the right and left wings of the Scots were completely routed. Meantime, the King and the Earl of Surrey were wrestling in a fierce hand-to-hand combat in the centre. The King placed himself in front of his spearmen and fought with the utmost fury and bravery, and the English ranks were repeatedly broken and Surrey’s standard threatened. At last the King and his division were completely surrounded by the enemy; still the Scots fought in a circle with their spears extended and repelled their assailants――

“The stubborn spearmen still made good,
Their dark impenetrable wood,
Each stepping where his comrade stood,
The instant that he fell.
No thought was there of dastard flight,
Link’d in the serried phalanx tight;
Groom fought like noble, squire like knight,
As fearlessly and well.”¹

At length the King himself fell mortally wounded in the head within a spear’s length of the Earl of Surrey; yet the Scots continued to fight till night put an end to the contest. Surrey then withdrew his forces, for he was uncertain of the issue of the battle as the Scottish centre remained unbroken; but when day dawned, it was seen that the Scots had retired from the field, and left their artillery standing on the side of the hill.

¹ Scott’s _Marmion_.

The loss of the Scots on Flodden field was lamentable. Upwards of eight thousand men were slain, including the King and his son, the Archbishop of St. Andrews; twelve Earls, Lennox, Argyle, Athole, Erroll, Crawford, Morton, Montrose, Bothwell, Caithness, Cassilis, and Rothes; five eldest sons of peers; fifteen lords and chiefs of clans; the Bishop of Caithness, the Abbots of Inchaffray and Kilwinning, and the Dean of Glasgow, and La Motte, the French ambassador. Indeed there were scarcely a single family of note in the kingdom but had lost some of its members. The English lost about five thousand men, and Surrey disbanded the remainder of his army. The body of James IV. was found by Lord Dacre among the slain; and it was embalmed and subsequently placed in the monastery of Sheen in Surrey.