Chapter X (3)

As illustrative of this matter, and also of the common arts of life, Edinburgh may be taken as a favourable example of the whole kingdom in the latter half of the fifteenth century. In 1473 the provost and council of Edinburgh granted a Seal of Cause to the hatmakers of the burgh, in which it was stated, among other rules, that no master hatmaker should take apprentices for a shorter period than seven years; if, however, any of the craftsmen’s sons became apprenticed, they should only be bound for three years. Further, the hatmakers considered that it was very proper and profitable that no one of their craft should, under any circumstances, sew, renew, or mend any old hats.

In 1475 the provost and council, and all the deacons of the craftsmen, of Edinburgh granted a Seal of Cause to the masons and wrights――“For the honour and the worship of St. John, and the augmentation of divine service; and for the right ruling of these two crafts, equally profitable to the workers and to all builders.” Among other rules in this deed, no master was to be permitted to take apprentices for a shorter term than seven years; and every apprentice at his entry should pay half a mark to the altar of St. John in the church of St. Giles. The same year the provost and council of Edinburgh granted a Seal of Cause to the weavers――“For the honour and love of Almighty God, and his mother the Virgin Mary, and St. Servanus, for supporting and upholding of divine service, and the appareling of their altar of St. Servanus, which was founded and upheld by them in St. Giles’ church, and for the management of their work, the good rule and worship of the kingdom, the common profit of the craftsmen, and divers other things.” In this Seal of Cause it was stated that the weavers should elect their deacon once a year, like the other craftsmen, and the deacon should rule the craft, and all the men should obey him in all honest and lawful things touching the craft. But the freemen of the craft who were burgesses should elect the deacon, and no one else should have any voice therein. No master should take apprentices for a shorter term than five years; and every apprentice should pay at his entry five shillings to the altar of St. Servanus. Every man and woman who worked at the craft should give the priest his meat, and every week give a penny to the altar, and each hired servant should give fourpence a year to the altar. All those who disobeyed the deacon, and refused to abide by the statutes of the craft, for each offence they should have to pay one pound of wax. No woman should act as a master, or hold a workshop, unless she be a freeman’s wife.

In 1483 the provost and council of Edinburgh granted a Seal of Cause to the hammermen, in which were named the blacksmiths, goldsmiths, coiners, saddlers, cutlers, bucklemakers, and armourers. There were a number of very minute rules in this deed for the regulation and the profit of the various crafts incorporated under it, and these all ran on the lines of restriction already indicated. In 1488 the magistrates and council of Edinburgh incorporated the fleshers, and the first rule in this deed was a declaration to the effect that the deacon and the principal masters of the craft in the burgh had, after mature consideration, arrived at the conclusion that it was most expedient for the common profit that all the unfreemen and boys should be expelled from the craft, unless they either bound themselves as hired men or apprentices. The coopers were incorporated in Edinburgh in 1500: and in the other burghs of the kingdom the various classes of craftsmen began to be incorporated much about the same time, or in some instances, a little later than those of Edinburgh.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., pages 28‒34,
47‒55, 180‒183. An interesting and valuable _History of
the Incorporated Trades of Aberdeen_, by Mr. E. Bain, was
published in 1887; and in the records of other burghs much
information on the subject will be found.

One characteristic of the incorporation of the craftsmen which came strikingly out, was their historic association with the prevailing religion of the period. This side of the national life will be subsequently treated.

Although it seems evident that the mechanical skill and the manipulating power of the craftsmen of Scotland in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries were not highly developed, still the persistent efforts of industry, under unfavourable circumstances, were well manifested throughout this period. It appears that the blacksmiths were unskilful at shoeing horses. In 1478 it was stated in an Act of Parliament that the smiths, through ignorance and drunkenness, hurted and crippled men’s horses by shoeing them in the quick. Therefore it was enacted that when a smith shod a horse into the quick he should pay the cost of keeping the horse till his feet be healed, and find the owner another to ride upon or labour, and if the horse be crippled beyond recovery then the smith should pay the price of the horse to the owner. In 1496 James IV. paid three shillings and fourpence for shoeing two horses, and the following year he paid sixteenpence for shoeing his grey horse in Brechin, and the same for shoeing his brown nag. It appears that the Scotch kings of this period employed a number of smiths and other craftsmen from time to time.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., page 119;
_Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I.; _Exchequer
Rolls of Scotland_.

The principal cities and towns of the Church during this period were St. Andrews, Glasgow, Paisley, Dunfermline, Arbroath, Brechin, Dunkeld, Dunblane, Dornoch, and a few others. St. Andrews was the residence of the metropolitan of Scotland, the chief religious centre, with a fine cathedral, castle, many churches and religious houses, and the seat of a university; it had also a considerable trade; and these together rendered it one of the chief cities of the kingdom in the period under review. It was then a comparatively populous and wealthy city.

In the latter part of the fifteenth century Glasgow was still a small city, although her great cathedral, with its many altars, the archbishop’s palace, convent, and hospital, and her university, conferred influence and dignity on the town. Glasgow was under the authority of the Archbishop, and the appointment of the magistrates remained in his hand till the Reformation. In the fifteenth century Glasgow had little trade, and had to maintain a struggle about her privileges with Rutherglen, Renfrew, and Dumbarton.

Paisley rose into a thriving town under the shadow of the monastery and the abbot. In 1488 James IV. erected Paisley into a free burgh of barony, with the same privileges as the burghs of Arbroath, Dunfermline, and Newburgh; it had two yearly markets, and the magistrates were to be nominated by the abbot. Twelve years later the abbot made a grant of the burgh to the provost, the bailies, and the community. The burgesses had the right of taking stones from the abbot’s quarries, and if they should win coal, then the abbot should have fuel from their pits.¹

¹ _Register of Paisley_, pages 263, 73.

Arbroath, as indicated by its custom, had a considerable foreign trade in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. About the end of the fourteenth century the abbot and the burgesses made a worthy effort to render the harbour more secure for ships, and voluntarily taxed themselves to accomplish the necessary work connected with this improvement. The burgh continued to prosper, and the port and town eventually rose to commercial and manufacturing importance.

Brechin has been repeatedly mentioned in its historic relation in preceding pages. In the period under consideration Brechin was a city with her cathedral and castle, and many historic associations. Dunfermline was a favourite residence of the Scotch kings from Malcolm Canmore onward to modern times; still, at the close of the fifteenth century, except its religious buildings, it was a comparatively small town, built of wooden houses.¹

¹ _Register of Arbroath_, Volume II., pages 40‒42; Chambers’
_History of Dunfermline_, page 327. In the fifteenth century
the shirt of St. Margaret, the queen of Malcolm III.,
Canmore, was preserved at Dunfermline as a highly cherished
relic. It was carried to Mary of Gueldres at the date
of the birth of James III.; and it was also brought from
Dunfermline at the time of the birth of James V. _Exchequer
Rolls._

Greenock, Kilmarnock, and other towns, were as yet hardly in embryo. In short, the mineral resources of the country, coal and iron, had scarcely yet been touched.

The defence of the country constantly engaged the attention of government and consumed a large part of the nation’s energy. The habits of the people, engendered by the pressure of external enemies, and fed by internal commotions, had assumed warlike and military characteristics. Even the citizens of the burghs were often commanded to have their weapons ready, and kept beside them in their shops, to face any sudden emergency or brawl which might arise on the streets. They had to defend themselves against the attacks of external enemies, to watch and ward the burgh, maintain order and uphold the honour of the town.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., pages 8, 9; _Burgh
Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., pages 68, 72.

Many Acts of Parliament were passed touching the defence of the kingdom, and ordering the sheriffs of the counties and the magistrates of the burghs to hold “wapinschaws” of the fighting men of the realm four times in the year; all those from sixteen to sixty years of age were bound to muster as fighting men. The armour and weapons of the different ranks of society were enumerated in an Act of Parliament in 1429, and again in the reign of James II. in 1456; and this matter also engaged the attention of the parliaments of James III. and James IV. The Act of 1429 enjoined that every man who had twenty pounds of yearly income, or possessed a hundred pounds worth of moveable goods, should be well horsed and fully armed. Those of lower rank, who had ten pounds of yearly rent, or fifty pounds worth of moveable property, should furnish themselves with a helmet and gorget, vambrace, breastplate, greaves to cover the front of the thighs, and iron gauntlets. Every yeoman worth twenty pounds, should arm himself with a doublet of fence, an iron hat, a bow and a sheaf of arrows, a sword, buckler, and a knife. Men worth ten pounds, should have a bow and a sheaf of arrows, a sword, buckler, and a knife. All those who could not handle the bow should have a good strong hat, a doublet of fence, a sword, a buckler, and a good axe or else a pointed staff. Every burgess worth fifty pounds was commanded to be completely armed as a gentleman ought to be; and citizens worth twenty pounds, should arm themselves with a stout hat, a doublet and habergeon, a bow and a sheaf of arrows, a sword, a buckler, and a knife; those not bowmen should have a good axe and fencible weapons. Severe penalties were to be inflicted on those entrusted with the carrying out of the acts, if they neglected to comply with their requirements.

Some of the armour and weapons mentioned above were imported. In 1425 parliament enacted that all merchants who passed to foreign countries with their ships, besides their common cargoes, they should bring home as much harness and armour, spear shafts and bow-strings, as they possibly could. The spear was for long the favourite weapon of the Scottish infantry. The length of the spear was from fifteen to eighteen feet, and the Scots handled it with great skill and remarkable effect. They were singularly deficient, however, in the use of the bow, and owing to the marked superiority of the English in this arm, the Scottish army often suffered severely. James I. and the succeeding kings saw and understood this, and earnestly endeavoured to supersede the spear in some measure by the bow; but all their efforts failed, though many expedients were tried to induce the people to use the bow. All the young men were commanded to learn the use of the bow, and butts were ordered to be erected throughout the kingdom, especially in the vicinity of the parish churches, and every man was enjoined to shoot thrice. In 1457 a pair of butts were ordered to be erected at every parish church, and shooting with the bow to be practised every Sunday. It was then enjoined that each man should shoot at least six times, under a fine of twopence on every man who was absent; and the fine money was to be spent on drink amongst those who had attended the shooting. Enactments were also passed which prohibited the national games of football and of golf, with the object of promoting the exercise of archery; but all these acts and devices were unavailing, as the Scots never acquired an aptness in using the bow.

According to feudal usage the longest term of service which the King could exact at any one time was forty days, and the more usual period of service in the field was fifteen or twenty days. The feudal army provided its own equipments and provisions, as indicated in a preceding paragraph; thus the soldiers were the vassals of their respective lords and chiefs, not the King’s men. Hence the curious social phenomena that the royal authority usually waned in the times of war and increased in the times of peace. The most daring acts of interference with the powers of the Crown occurred on the array of the feudal army. The command of the army belonged to the King, and the most experienced of the nobles led the main divisions, usually four, the right and left wings, the centre, and the reserve. The arrangement of the sub-divisions and sections of the army seems to have been by clans, in which the barons and chiefs acted as subordinate commanders and officers, often by hereditary right. The pith of the Scottish army always consisted of infantry, the Scots were never strong in cavalry; though for quickness of movement the men were often mounted on small hardy horses, which enabled them to march long distances in a short time, and this suited the object of the raids into the north of England. Each man furnished himself with a bag of oatmeal trussed to the saddle of his horse, but they mainly trusted to the pillage of the enemy’s country for food.

In actual battle, the distinctive tactics of the Scots was the formation in deep battalions, usually circular, though sometimes inclining to the oval or square forms according to the nature of the ground and the position on which they were fighting. This compact phalanx was admirably adapted for resisting cavalry charges, or any form of attack at close quarters; but the deficiency of the Scottish army was the want of a force to meet the English bowmen, who often severely galled the ranks of the Scotch spearmen from a distance. So the fate of a battle was frequently a mere question of time, as to how long the circle of spearmen could endure the double attacks of showers of arrows and cavalry charges. Still the intense national sentiment and spirit of the Scots sustained them in fighting for centuries under these unequal conditions.

About the middle of the fourteenth century cannon began to be used in the attack and defence of fortified places, instead of the old battering ram, sow, and other engines of destruction. James I. and his successors directed their attention to the casting and forging of cannon. In 1456 parliament enacted that “It was thought expedient that the King should request certain of the great barons of the kingdom that are of any might, to make carts of war, and in each cart two guns, and each of them to have two chambers with the graith pertaining thereto, and a cunning man to shoot them. If they have not skill to shoot them now, they may learn or the time come when it will be necessary to have them.” The great barons, however, did not furnish cannon for the King’s use. Artillery was a branch which did not belong to the original constitution of the feudal army; and therefore, all the expense connected with the production of cannon, and the organisation and equipment of an artillery force to take the field, fell entirely upon the Kings themselves. The expense of the Crown for the artillery in the year 1474 amounted to £753. In the latter part of the fifteenth century there were two classes of guns used in Scotland: 1, guns of large calibre for siege operations, mounted on carriages and usually drawn by oxen; and the missiles discharged by these were mostly balls of stone called “gun-stones.” 2, Guns of smaller calibre which were intended for field operations, and were carried in gun-carts, two or more in each cart; and the missiles discharged by these were usually balls of iron or lead. But only a few of either of these guns were made in Scotland, the greater part of them were imported.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 8,
10, 18, 19, 45, 48, 100, 133, 164, 226; _Accounts of the
Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I., Preface, pages 217‒219.

The houses of the people still mostly consisted of small wooden erections. The houses of the farmers, and also the trades-people of the burghs and towns, were built of wood or other slight materials, although they were not necessarily devoid of comfort. No remains of burgh architecture of a domestic character earlier than the sixteenth century now exist in Scotland.

Touching the actual number of the population of the nation in the later part of the fifteenth century, we have no data to draw a certain conclusion from; but the probable number though not the exact number may be reasonably conjectured. From the strength of the army which on the greatest emergencies assembled for the defence of the kingdom, it may be inferred with some approach to probability that the population of the country did not exceed 600,000. In the latter part of the fourteenth century Edinburgh was said to have contained four thousand small houses, which by a common mode of calculating, would make its population about 17,000; and at the end of the fifteenth century its inhabitants probably did not exceed 21,000. The population of Perth was not above 7,000 or 8,000; Aberdeen perhaps had a population of from 4,000 to 5,000; Dundee somewhat fewer, and St. Andrews about 5,000.

The roads and highways throughout the country were still very bad. Many acts relating to ferries were passed by parliament, but it seems they were little regarded, and many complaints were made that the ferryman charged double and triple fares from both rich and poor people. The establishment of inns by the road-sides and in villages and towns was encouraged by the Crown with the view of saving the monasteries and the farmers from the extortions of unwelcome guests, namely, troops of sorners, sturdy beggars, and other idle vagabonds, who infested the country. In 1424 it was enacted that in all the burghs and thoroughfares of the kingdom inns should be erected, with stabling accommodation for horses, and rooms for riders and travellers, so that men might there find bread and ale and other refreshments at a reasonable price, according to the standard charges of the country. It appeared that travellers in Scotland had been too long accustomed to live at free quarters, and did not patronise the inns. The innkeepers, therefore, complained to the King that travellers did not lodge at the inns, but stayed with friends and acquaintances. The King and his parliament then commanded that no one travelling through the country either on foot or horseback dare to lodge anywhere else but at the inns, except those with a large company, that is, the nobles, who should be free to lodge with their friends, if they sent their servants and horses to the inns.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 6,
10, 89, 107, 119, _et seq._

With regard to sanitary provision the kingdom was in a wretched condition. Swine were permitted to run freely upon the streets of the burghs, and middens were allowed to lie on the thoroughfares for weeks. In 1479 one man was appointed to mend the causeways and clean the gutters for the whole burgh of Aberdeen, and he received one penny from each householder as his wages; and in 1494 there was still only one man for cleaning all the streets and lanes of the city. The state of uncleanliness in which the people lived prepared them for the ravages of disease and pestilence in every form, and so the nation was frequently visited by the pest, which from time to time carried off many of the inhabitants of the kingdom. The pestilence visited Scotland seven times from 1348 to 1499, and in fact the country was hardly ever free from it during this period. The disease of leprosy also prevailed in Scotland, and regulations relating to it were passed by Parliament in the reign of James I. Hospitals were erected on the outskirts of the principal towns for the reception of those afflicted with this malady. In the old burgh laws the leper folk were enjoined not to go from door to door and beg, but to sit at the gates of the burghs and seek alms from those that passed to and fro. At Stirling the leper hospital was at the east end of the town.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I.; _Burgh Records of
Edinburgh_, Volume I.; _Burgh Records of Peebles_; _Acts
of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II. The History of
Leprosy in Scotland has been ably told by the late Professor
Simpson, and printed in the _Medical and Surgical Journal_
for October, 1841, and April, 1842.

During this period there was little or no medical knowledge in Scotland. The only surgeons were the barbers, some of whom practised “leechcraft.” In the fifteenth century blood-letting in the spring season of the year was universal, and was believed to be highly beneficial to the health, and to have a special efficacy against the contagion of the plague and other epidemic disease. James IV. appears to have taken much interest in surgical matters, and was himself reputed to have been possessed of some medical knowledge and some skill as a surgeon. Sometimes he bribed his servants to permit him to perform on them such operations as blood-letting and drawing of teeth. There was, however, some hope of improvement in this department, as we find from the following reference to the salary of a medical professor in King’s College, Aberdeen, in the year 1498:――“Uni medico in facultate medicine, graduato et legenti in Universitate infra civitatem veterem Aberdonensem noviter fundata, percipienti annuatim xii. libras et vi. solidos.” In 1506 the barbers or surgeons of Edinburgh were incorporated, and in their “Seal of Cause” it was provided “that no person use or practice any of the points connected with the craft of barbery and surgery within the burgh unless they were freemen and burgesses, and after being examined and passed on the following points, namely, that he knew anatomy, and the nature and complexion of every member of the human body, and likewise all the veins of the same; that he may make fly-botch well in due time, and also that he know in which member the sign has domination for the time, for every man ought to know the nature and substance of that on which he operates, or else he is negligent. That we may have once a year a condemned man, after he is dead, to anatomise upon, and whenever we have obtained experience each will instruct the others, and we shall do suffrage for the soul.” It was further provided that no apprentice or hired man should be admitted into the craft unless he could read and write.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., page 102; _Exchequer
Rolls of Scotland_, Volume XI.; _Accounts of the Lord High
Treasurer_, Volume I.

Drinking of liquor seems to have been very common. In 1436 Parliament ordered that no man should sit in a tavern drinking wine, ale, or beer, in any of the burghs after the bell struck the hour of nine o’clock; and if any persons were found in taverns or inns after that hour then the bailies should imprison them in the King’s prison, and if the local authorities neglected to perform this duty, they themselves should be fined one shilling for each offence. The citizens of Aberdeen and of other burghs spent considerable sums of money on wine given to dignified persons. In 1453 the Countess of Huntly was presented with a lagon of wine by the people of Aberdeen, and the bishop also received a lagon; and at the feast of St. Nicholas various sums were spent for wine to Lord Forbes, Lord Erskine, the Earl of Erroll, and the Abbot of Arbroath.¹

¹ _Miscellany of the Old Spalding Club_, Volume V., pages
39, 40, 48; _Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of
Scotland_, Volume III., page 424, _et seq._

James IV. was unusually liberal in giving drink-money. In July, 1488, he gave Mr. William Crichton two pounds for drink; and on the 3rd of August he passed to Leith and saw the Danish ships, and gave the sailors nine pounds for drink; and the same year he gave the masons of the palace eighteen shillings “in drink silver,” and the following year he gave a like sum for drink to the masons of Linlithgow working at the palace. In 1489 the King gave the gunners who carted the great cannon “Mons,” eighteen shillings “to drink-silver,” and to the men who made the way at the Barwood for the great guns, he gave ten shillings to drink. In October, 1491, he gave the masons of the palace in drink-silver, two pounds and fourteen shillings, for the arching of three vaults; and to the workmen who made the trenches eighteen shillings for drink-silver, and to the shipmen ten shillings. In 1494 he gave the writers of the signet to their drink-silver eighteen shillings, and to the wrights a similar sum. The man who made the case to the King’s banner in 1496 got three shillings for drink-silver; and the goldsmith who made the King’s case of gold to wear about his neck, received eleven shillings and fourpence of drink-silver. In 1497 the dikers of the park of Falkland got ten shillings from the King for drink-money, and to the workmen in the Castle of Edinburgh he gave thirteen shillings and fourpence, and to the men who drew the ship nine shillings.¹

¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I.

The chief festivals of the year during this period were Yule and Easter. The festivities associated with Yule were continued over several weeks. In the Scotch court Yule was held with much ceremonial circumstance and merry-making. Early in the day the King, attended by his court and heralds, went to high mass and made his offering; and at noon in the hall the officers of arms and the trumpeters appeared before the King and received their rewards, which consisted of small sums of money. The sergeants of the town received a gratuity from the King, and alms were given to the friars of Edinburgh and Linlithgow, and James IV. frequently held his Christmas in the latter burgh. Mummings, disguisings, and plays, always formed a part of the amusements, in which professional players and minstrels often acted the leading parts. An Abbot of Unreason was annually appointed in the King’s house, in the houses of the nobles, and in the burghs, and these personages exercised sway till the Yule holidays terminated. Cards and dice were among the favourite amusements, and altogether the people at this season appear to have enjoyed themselves.

Easter was also held with circumstance and ceremonial, and amusements suitable to the season. On Easter morning the King took the sacrament early in the chapel, and gave to the officiating priest an offering which varied from eighteen shillings to twenty-four; thereafter he attended high mass, and made his usual offering of eighteen shillings; and at noon in the hall he gave the heralds and trumpeters their “Pasch reward,” which usually amounted to a sum of from six to ten pounds distributed amongst them. At the same season the King’s master cook and the court cook received their “basin silver.” Minstrels, tellers of tales, harpers, fiddlers, tabourers, and others who made pastime to the King and the court, usually received gratuities of nine to eighteen shillings each; the minstrels were always welcomed to the halls of the nobles on festive occasions, as well as to the King’s court.¹

¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I., Preface,
pages 237‒246.

At this period the chief rural sports of the King and the nobles were hunting and hawking. The Kings had forests, parks, and many hunting ranges and seats; and the nobles also had hunting ranges and forests. Throughout this period the Crown had extensive hunting grounds, and falconry was also much practised in Scotland. The rights of the forest and the hunting ranges were highly valued, and many acts concerning them, and wild animals and birds, were passed by the Scotch legislature. In 1424 James I. ordered the Justice Clerk to bring to justice stalkers and their abettors who slay deer, and when any stalker was convicted of slaying deer, roe, or doe, he was to be fined two pounds, and his abettors ten pounds. An Act was passed in 1427, which prohibited the killing of “partridges, plovers, blackcocks, greyhens, moorcocks,” and such fowls, from the end of February to the month of August, under a penalty of forty shillings; and similar statutes were passed in the reigns of the three succeeding Kings. One of these Acts enjoined that no person should destroy the nests or the eggs of the wild birds, which were useful for the sustenance of man, “nor slay the birds in close time, when they may not fly.” As already mentioned, Acts of Parliament were passed in the fifteenth century, commanding the people to assemble four times in the year to hunt and destroy the wolves; and every man who at any time slew a wolf, was to receive one penny from every householder of the parish in which the wolf was killed; and every one who killed a fox and brought his head to the sheriff, baron, or bailie, was to receive sixpence.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 7,
15, 16, 51, 52, 107, 235, 251.

The outdoor amusements of the people were chiefly of an athletic character, such as fencing, wrestling, running, and leaping, and the games of football and golf. James IV. himself frequently played at football and other field sports; and he entered into more familiar intercourse with his people than any other King of the Stuart line.

Enactments for regulating the dress of the different classes of society were passed in the reigns of James I. and James II. The Act of 1457 opened with an announcement that each class of the community had impoverished itself by wearing too sumptuous clothing; both the men and the women, especially in the burghs, had passed the limits of discretion and allowance. These Acts therefore strictly prohibited the wearing of all kinds of silk dresses by the people, except the nobles and the magistracy. All other men and their wives and families were commanded to dress themselves in a fashion corresponding with their rank and condition; and which for the women should be “short kerchiefs with little hoods to wear on their heads, such as were used in Flanders, England, and in other countries; and no woman whatever should go to the kirk or market with her face covered, so that she might not be known, under the penalty of the confiscation of her kerchief and all her head gear. As to her kirtle, which covered the body from the neck to the feet, no woman should wear tails of unbecoming length, or furred round the foot, except on the holydays. The commons, husbandmen, and labourers were enjoined not to wear any other stuff on week days but white or gray clothes, and on holydays light blue, green, or red; and their wives the same colours, with kerchiefs of their own making; and the cloth worn by these classes should not exceed the price of fortypence per yard.”

An Act was passed in 1455 which regulated the official dress of the upper classes. When they appeared in parliament they should have been attired in the following style:――“The Earls to wear mantles of brown grained cloth, open in front and furred with white stuff, and with the same lined a handbreadth in front and reaching down to the belt, staid with similar furring, and with little hoods upon the shoulders. The Lords of Parliament to wear a mantle of red cloth, opening in front to the right, and lined with silk or furred with crispy grey, green, or purple stuff, and furred hoods of the same cloth on the shoulders. The Commissioners of the Burghs should each have a pair of cloaks made of blue cloth, open on the right shoulder and furred round the end, and with furred hoods.” If any of these ranks appeared in parliament or a general Council without their proper habiliments, they rendered themselves liable to a penalty of ten pounds. All the advocates were ordered to wear a tunic of green cloth, with the sleeves open like a tabard, and if they appeared in parliament without this they were liable to a fine of five pounds. Among the clergy, no one was permitted to wear a scarlet gown or furred ♦marten, except the dignitaries in cathedrals, college churches, a doctor, or a person with an income of three hundred marks a year.¹

♦ “martin” replaced with “marten”

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 18,
43, 49, 100.

Touching the common articles of dress in use amongst the higher classes, the gown in various styles was a common upper garment of the period. The long gown was loose and reached to the feet, open in front, and sometimes worn with a girdle. Some of them had sleeves, and some not, as sleeves were often made as separate articles of dress, and thus they could be used with different kinds of garments. The long gown took four or five yards of broad cloth according to the size of those who wore them. The short gown reached to the knee, and it was lined and trimmed like the long gown, with various kinds of furs, such as marten, minever, ermine, and lambskin. The doublet was a close fitting tunic, and it was made of various kinds of cloth. The waistcoat was worn under the doublet, and it was usually made of woollen cloth. The riding or hunting coats were rather longer and fuller than the doublet. The hose were tight-fitting pantaloons and usually reached to the ankles, and they were fastened to the doublet or waistcoat by strings. There were also short hose which reached to the knee, and were worn with foot socks of cloth. The hose were made of woollen cloth of different colours, but usually of the darker hues. Over these the tippet and the cloak were worn. The tippet varied much in length at different times, and it was made of various kinds of material. The cloaks worn in the latter part of the fifteenth century were short and reached to the haunches. James IV. had a cloak made of eighteen yards of velvet, lined with satin and bordered with crimson satin, and it cost £110.

Bonnets, caps, and hats of various styles were worn. The bonnets were usually made of black or scarlet cloth, and the price of them varied from ten to eighteen shillings. Hats also varied in price from four shillings to fourteen. Boots and shoes of various kinds were worn. A pair of shoes cost one shilling, and a pair of pattens――shoes with wooden soles――cost sixpence. French shoes cost four shillings, and a pair of half-boots eight shillings.¹

¹ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I., Preface,
pages 168‒179.

Touching the domestic arrangements and the household goods and utensils of the body of the people, there seems to be evidence of considerable advancement during this period, notwithstanding the long war and all the internal commotions and disturbances in the nation. Although it was already stated that the houses of the rural population were of a small and slight description, and that the greater part of the houses in the burghs were built of wood and other light materials which were easily procured, still their houses were better furnished than the state of society would naturally have led us to conclude. Glass windows were in general use in the houses of the nobles and the rich; as yet, however, they were costly. In 1328 glass was put into the windows of the new chamber which Robert I. had erected at his manor of Cardross; and in 1389 thirty pounds were paid for glass to the windows of the Abbey of Paisley. In 1447 a quantity of glass was purchased for the repair of the King’s chamber in Stirling Castle; and in 1501 nine pounds were paid for glass to repair the windows of the Gray Friars Church in Stirling. Still comparatively few of the houses of the people had glass windows at the end of the fifteenth century. Grates were little used, and bathrooms were rare even in the houses of the nobles.¹

¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland._

It seems curious that the legislature considered it necessary to pass enactments for repressing extravagance in dress. If the people had been very poor, then there could have been no need for such enactments; and thus the historic interpretation appears to be that these sumptuary acts indicate an advance in the civilisation of the people. In the national records many notices of workers in gold and silver, of gold chains, collars, signets, crosses, pins, rings, and other ornaments and articles occur; and silver was more used in the form of seals, beads, rings, book-clasps, belts garnished with silver, and many other ornaments; and also as plate, silver basins, goblets, stoups, cups, and spoons. Pearls were comparatively common.¹

¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_; _Acts of the Lords of Council_,
pages 9, 87, 98, 135, 176, 199, 220, 228, 287, 430; _Acts of
the Lords Auditors_, pages 14, 65, 55, 62, 67, 91, 129, 136,
146, 159.

The price of the staple necessaries of life in this period may be briefly indicated. In 1330 the price of an ox was 8s. 7d., of a sheep 1s. 9½d., the chalder of oats £1 1s. 4d., the chalder of oatmeal £1 12s., and the chalder of wheat £1 16s. In 1372 the price of an ox was 4s. 11d., of a sheep 1s 2¼d., the chalder of oats £1, the chalder of oatmeal £1 8s., and the chalder of wheat £2 1s. 4d. These prices varied from time to time, but except in years of dearth they did not rise very high. From the middle of the fifteenth century to its close the price of oxen ran from 5s. to 18s. a head, sheep from 1s. 6d. to 3s., and oatmeal from 4s. to 7s. per boll.¹

¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland._

A comparatively large number of the people lived on the land and cultivated it, under various forms of tenure, and, as labourers, as has been indicated in preceding pages. The wages of agricultural labourers during this period has not been accurately ascertained, but it may fairly be assumed that their wages were, for the most part, paid in produce. Thus the agricultural labourers would usually have had a supply of food, whatever else they might have lacked in the form of money wages; and it seems probable that this class enjoyed a tolerably comfortable life. No doubt there were exceptions, and the labourers on some estates might have been much harder treated than those on other lands; there were the Crown lands, the Church lands, the wide possessions of the nobles, and the estates of the small barons, on all which agricultural labourers were employed. It appears from several distinct indications that after James I. assumed the reins of government the labourers on the Crown lands obtained a considerable improvement in their condition, as this able and enlightened prince understood the source of wealth, and encouraged industry; while at the same time he curbed the power of the nobles. One immediate result of his action was that a large extent of lands was forfeited to the Crown, and thus it was that a considerable number of agricultural labourers, soon after his accession to power, found themselves under a juster and wiser master than heretofore. The other grades of vassals, tenants, and farmers, in the earldoms and lands which James I. annexed to the Crown, also found themselves relieved from an oppressive form of tyranny and anarchy, and they were permitted during his reign to follow the ways of peace, order, and industry. On the Crown lands a practice very generally prevailed of allowing tenants to occupy their holdings rent free, either on account of some office, of which the rent was considered as the fee, or as a reward for some important service rendered to the nation. It also appears that tenancies thus occupied were from time to time converted into feu-tenure or blanch holdings, and the occupiers then received charters, and thus became Crown vassals instead of tenants.¹ No doubt between the accession of James I. and the end of the fifteenth century a number of the labourers on the Crown lands became tenants and farmers under the Crown, and even some of those whose ancestors were serfs in the thirteenth century might have obtained feu-tenure and blanch holdings by charter from the Crown before the close of the fifteenth century. It thus becomes manifest that the right of the Kings of Scotland to forfeit the lands of a disobedient and rebellious noble often had a most salutary and beneficial tendency; although the historian must recognise that this right of the Crown was sometimes unjustly, and even cruelly, exercised by some of the Scotch kings, while at other times it was not exercised when it should have been.

¹ _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland._

In the latter part of the fifteenth century the wages of common labourers were about one shilling a day. Masons, carpenters, smiths, and quarrymen, when employed on special service received from nine to ten shillings a week, and highly skilled artificers and workmen sometimes received from three to five shillings per day. Shipwrights engaged on work which had to be completed at a specified time, received one shilling and sixpence per day; the weekly wages of a gunner, who was also usually a smith or carpenter, were thirteen shillings and fourpence a week. Workmen had two weeks of holidays at Christmas, and nine or more other holidays during the year.¹

¹ _Ibid._ _Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer_, Volume I.

Turning to the custom of begging which prevailed, and the state of crime in the nation, matters connected with the administration of justice, and the means of prevention, detection, and punishment of crime, will be considered. Beggars, thiggers, sorners, masterful robbers, oppressors, and other vagabonds, were numerous in the country. Begging under certain limits was authorised by Act of Parliament in 1424. This Act prohibited all persons between the age of fourteen years and sixty years from begging, unless it was found that they could not live by any other means; such helpless persons were to receive a token from the sheriff of the district, and in burghs from the bailies, and those thus provided with tokens were then allowed to beg; all other idle persons were commanded by proclamation to betake themselves to honest labour and earn their living by their own efforts, under the penalty of burning on the cheek and banishment from the kingdom. This Act was often re-enacted with additions, still the beggars continued to multiply. In 1425 James I. passed another Act of Parliament, which ordered the sheriffs and the bailies to make enquiry concerning all the idle men in the respective bounds of their jurisdiction, and having ascertained those who had nothing of their own to live upon, then such men were to be arrested and kept till they found caution not to injure the country, but they were to be allowed forty days to find masters or to engage themselves at some lawful work. When the forty days had run, if they were still idle, then the sheriffs were directed to re-arrest them, and send them to the King, who should punish them as he thought fit. It seems highly probable that James I. might have found employment for some of these men as labourers on the Crown lands.

In the fifteenth century many Acts of Parliament were passed against masterful beggars and sorners. The sorners and masterful beggars were described, in an Act passed in 1449, as persons who travelled through the country in bands, accompanied by horses and hounds, and lived at free quarters on the people, and consumed the fruits of their industry and destroyed the growing crops. The Act directed that the sheriffs and other Crown officers, the barons, and the bailies in burghs, should make inquisitions concerning these sorners and masterful beggars at all their courts, and if any of them were found, then their horses and hounds and their other goods were to be confiscated to the King, and their persons imprisoned till the King announced what should be done to them. The Crown officers were also ordered to make inquiry at every court if there were any persons who pretended to be fools, or bards, “and such like runners about;” and if any of these were found, then they should be imprisoned and detained as long as they had anything of their own to live upon; when that was consumed, then their ears should be nailed to the trone and cut off, and themselves banished from the country; and afterwards if they were found in the kingdom, then they should be hanged. But this did not extinguish the sorners nor “the runners about”; for six years later another Act was passed against them, which ordered that whenever sorners were taken they should be delivered to the sheriffs, and forthwith the King’s justiciary should execute the law upon them as robbers and thieves; yet this seems to have been ineffectual, for in 1457 it was ordered that an inquisition should be made of the sorners, masterful beggars, feigned fools, and bards, and that all those found, should be banished from the kingdom or sent to the King. Still, in 1478, it was enacted that “for stanching the sorners and masterful beggars who daily oppressed and harried the King’s poor subjects, the Acts before passed should be put into sharp execution, which was to say, that wherever sorners were captured they should be delivered over to the sheriffs, and the law executed upon them as on common thieves and robbers; and also that indictments should be framed upon this class of crimes every year in the Justiciary Circuit Courts, and that due punishment should follow accordingly.”¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 8,
11, 15, 36, 43‒45, 49‒51, 119, 251.

It was one of the sheriff’s duties to report and indict all persons charged with crimes which came within the Justiciary’s jurisdiction. The indictments were delivered to the Justice Clerk, and when he made up his roll it was the duty of the coroner to arrest all the persons named in it. Although there was a Justice Clerk and also a King’s Advocate, there was as yet nothing which could be called a regular system of public prosecution, as the right to prosecute belonged to the injured person or his relatives. Besides the compensation to the injured party, there was a fine due to the Crown, for which the sheriff was held liable, not only for the cases tried in his own court, but also for the fines and escheats of the Justiciary Circuit Courts. Moreover, unhappily, the sheriffs of the period had many fiscal duties to perform; they had to render accounts of all the casualties of lands held by feudal tenures from the Crown, and often to render accounts of the rents of Crown lands. Thus it happened that only a portion of their time and attention could be devoted to their judicial functions either in the criminal or civil departments. Then there were the anomalies of all the separate jurisdictions connected with earldoms, baronies, and regalities, as explained in preceding pages, which greatly hampered and retarded all efforts to improve the administration of justice.

Murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and theft, were rather common throughout the kingdom. Many Acts of Parliament were passed for stanching and punishing these crimes, but they seem to have produced little effect. When criminals were convicted, they were often pardoned, and many remissions of crimes and of fines were given every year. In 1487 Parliament enacted that no remissions for the crimes of treason, murder, rape, slaughter, violent reft, theft, and false coining, should be granted for seven years. It appears that among the barons there was a custom of selling thieves, that is, saving them from punishment under certain conditions. In 1491 it was enacted that “when any man happens to be slain in the kingdom then without delay, and as quickly as the sheriff, steward, or bailie of regality can be informed thereof, either by the party complainant or in any other way, he should immediately pursue the slayer and raise the King’s horn on him, and raise the people in his support, until the criminal be overtaken; and if he be captured, he should be brought to the King, or else kept in custody till the King has been informed, and returned an answer as to what should be done thereon. If the murderer escape from the sheriffdom in which the crime was committed, then the sheriff should send one of his officers to the sheriff of the next county and inform him of this man who is a fugitive from the law. Then that sheriff should immediately pursue the criminal through his sheriffdom, and so on from sheriffdom to sheriffdom till he be taken or driven out of the country. But when the murderer had fled out of the royalty and into the regality, the sheriff should immediately inform the lord of the regality and his bailie, and they should pursue the criminal as the sheriffs had done; and wherever the criminal chanced to be taken, the sheriff or the bailie of the regality should send him to the next sheriff, and so on from sheriff to sheriff till he be returned to the shire in which the crime was committed, and there justice should be executed. When any of the sheriffs or officers neglect their duties in cases of this character, if they be hereditary they should forfeit their offices for three years, but if they held their offices by appointment they should lose them for ever.”¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume II., pages 23,
176, 256, 225; _Exchequer Rolls of Scotland_.

Thus we see that at the end of the fifteenth century the sheriff and other Crown officers could not follow even a murderer through a regality. The practical result was that a powerful lord of regality, whenever it suited him, could screen from the hand of justice the greatest criminal in the kingdom; and this, in fact, frequently occurred. Many of the sheriffs held office by hereditary right, and the feebleness of the Crown appears from the trifling penalties attached to the malversation of hereditary officials. Criminals who had been captured were sometimes imprisoned in the castles of the barons of the district, who were held responsible for their escape. Lord Kennedy refused, on two different occasions, to imprison four criminals in his castles when required by the Crown officer to do so; for this he was fined forty pounds, but his lordship never had to pay the fine as he received a remission.