Andrew Lang.

A history of Scotland from the Roman occupation (Volume 2) online

. (page 3 of 60)
Online LibraryAndrew LangA history of Scotland from the Roman occupation (Volume 2) → online text (page 3 of 60)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


setters forth of God's work." ^ Arran, in Edinburgh, was unpopular:
"the wives" (anticipating Jenny Geddes) "were like to have stoned
him to death." 2^ Doubtless they blamed him for the slaughter of
their husbands and sons at Pinkie. Fife, Angus, and Dundee called
out, Dudley says, for Bibles and Testaments. " Yet," writes a spy,
"it makes one sore to see these gentlemen feigning themselves
favourers of 'The Word of God,' more for your pleasure than for
God's sake." Hypocrisy that sickens a spy must be odious indeed.
The next really important move in the game was the arrival of a
large French force, under Andre de Montalembert, Sieur d'Esse, in
June 1548. This was the result of many petitions by the queen-
mother. The winter after Pinkie fight, and the spring, had seen
Argyll besiege Broughty Castle, and withdraw, promising to aid
the English marriage, for a bribe of 1000 crowns.*" Broughty
Castle, under Sir Andrew Dudley, had gallantly held out, and in
February (21-27) a double invasion by Grey of Wilton in the
east, and Lennox and Wharton in the west, had been ruined by a
defeat inflicted on Wharton by Angus and Lord Maxwell. Grey
later destroyed Sir George Douglas's house at Dalkeith, and took
his son, the Master of Morton. He also fortified Haddington
strongly, that being the chief object of his invasion, and it was at the
abbey outside Haddington (July 7, 1548) that Parliament accepted
the hand of the Dauphin for Mary, carefully securing Scottish inde-
pendence. Dunbar was now placed in French keeping, but Mary
of Guise exaggerated when she declared that the Estates "would



MARY LANDS IN FRANCE (1548). T3

put everything into the hands of the King of France." ^^ That
was what France desired in vain, and soon it became apparent that
jealousy of French domination would throw Scotland into the arms
of England.

Mary had won the consent of Angus, Douglas, and Cassilis by
the usual means. Arran had already been compensated by the
Duchy of Chatelherault (February 8, 1548). Huntly and Argyll
received the Order of St Michael.'*^ Yet both in March 1549
will be found negotiating with England " to the end they may
compel the French King to return the young Queen to Scotland,"
and undertaking to favour her English marriage.*^ Meanwhile the
robberies and oppressions by the French soldiery, which led to
bloodshed between them and their allies, increased the jealousy
of French designs. After much scathe on either side, Haddington
was relieved, and the siege broken up in the middle of August. By
that date, leaving Dumbarton with her four child friends, the four
Maries, on August 2, Mary was safely landed on the friendly French
shores (August 13). Somerset retorted by again setting up the
claims of Edward I.^ The wars took a character of ferocity. Arran
refused quarter to any Scot taken in arms for England.*^ Somerset
retorted by a general refusal of quarter. The Scots were all rebels
to " their superior and sovereign lord, the King's Majesty of Eng-
land." Poor as they were, the Scots purchased English prisoners
from French captors, and then tortured them to death. *^ Mary of
Guise had often to complain of the excesses of the French. They
seize farmhouses, and use the furniture for firewood. " Our peasants
have no property, and never remain more than five or six years on a
holding," a singular fact, but strongly corroborated.*'^ Knox, who
never omitted a chance of describing a grimly humorous situation,
chronicles a great tumult in October 1548. On a trifling quarrel a
riot arose in Edinburgh. The Provost and others were slain by the
French. D'Esse, d'Oysel, and the queen - mother composed the
strife by promising that the French would do a great feat of arms.
They nearly surprised Haddington, when one of the besieged,
shouting " Ware before ! " to warn his own party, then struggling
with the French at the East Port, fired two large pieces of artillery.
These pierced the French ranks, cannoned off the wall of the church
back into the assailing party, thence cannoned back through them
again, off the wall of St Catherine's Chapel, back to the church wall
again, and so on, " so often that there fell more than a hundred of



14 PEACE (1550).

the French at those two shots only."^^ The incident is not men-
tioned in strictly contemporary accounts. Though the large force
under Shrewsbury not only relieved Haddington, but was rewarded
by the capture of Dundee and other successes, the Scots cut off
a raiding party in Fife. Huntly returned to Scotland — according to
Lesley, by escaping while his jailers were busy at cards at Morpeth.*^
De Selve's despatches are full of suspicions of Huntly's perfidy
and double-dealing. Was he a patriot ? Was he a traitor Scot ?
Probably he took each part by turns.

The Scots captured Hume Castle, and were reinforced by French
soldiers under De Termes. Mary of Guise describes this leader as
possessing, in the gout and a pretty young wife, quite enough to
provide him with occupation.^° Nevertheless, a force of French and
Scots cut off and captured Sir John Wilford, the courageous captain
of the English garrison in Haddington. Jedburgh and Ferniehirst
were won on the Border, Inchcolm was recovered, and domestic
discords broke out in England. Somerset had offended by what
was called avarice and insolence : his lenity to agrarian insurrec-
tion made him suspected by the nobles. Warwick, having put
down a rising in Norfolk, appeared as the rival of the Protector,
who secured the person of Edward VI., but presently yielded to
force or fear. The victor of Pinkie was conducted to the Tower ;
but his successful rivals were unable to retain the English hold on
Boulogne. The Scots and French had already taken Broughty
Castle and Eauder ; the English were compelled to make peace
in March-April 1550, and to abandon Boulogne and all their holds
in Scotland. ^^ The eight years' war had again demonstrated that
England, when divided by domestic strife, and opposed by both
France and Scotland, could never overpower her northern vassal.
The clergy marked their opportunity by burning one Adam Wallace
as a heretic.^-

That this execution was as impolitic as cruel is obvious. " The
common people" had now opportunities of reading and hearing the
Scriptures. From these they could draw no conclusions except
that the Christian doctrine, as exhibited in practice by priests as
profligate as Hamilton, and by peers as treacherous as Angus,
Huntly, and Argyll, was not the doctrine of Christ. Mere cruelty
did not shock the populace. For a hundred and fifty years they
were to behold the burning of witches without remorse or pity. But
they feared and hated witches, whereas men like Wallace neither



MARTYRDOM OF ADAM WALLACE. 1 5

had injured nor could injure them. While the English were occu-
pying parts of Scotland, no Scot had suffered for his opinions. The
people would therefore infer that England was a Power less cruel to
the innocent than France. All this made in favour of the Reforma-
tion. It is true that Protestantism in England was also keenly
engaged in burnings and persecutions. The Act of Uniformity was
being enforced by Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, Parker, Cecil, and
others. Champneys, a priest who denied the divinity of Christ ;
Patton, a tanner ; Thumb, a butcher ; and Ashton, another Uni-
tarian priest, were all tried : they all, unlike Wallace, abjured — they
all burnt their faggots and saved their lives. But Joan Bocher was
tried for similar opinions before Cranmer, Latimer, and others, was
condemned, and, despite the tears of Edward VL, was burned in the
year following the martyrdom of Wallace, as was Von Parris, a
Dutch Unitarian. ^^ In this matter of persecution there was then
nothing to choose between England and Scotland, Hamilton and
Latimer ; they merely burned different sets of people. Yet a point
so notorious is usually overlooked by historians of the Scottish
Reformation. The true difference came out later. Persecutors as
they were, the Presbyterians did not burn^ and scarcely ever executed,
either Catholics or Unitarians as such.

Denunciations of heresy had been made the year before Wallace's
death, in a Provincial Council of 1549. Every ordinary in his
diocese, every abbot and prior, was to make inquisition of heresy.
Among the heresies noted, Unitarianism does not appear. For some
reason it never was popular in Scotland. In the same Council the
Church tried to put her own house in order. Priests were to dismiss
their concubines. The medical advice of Jerome Cardan to the
Archbishop of St Andrews proves that the Archbishop did not obey
his own rule. Monasteries were to be visited and reformed : bishops
were not to keep drunkards, pimps, gamblers (Lyndsay accuses Beaton
of very high play), and buffoons in their establishments. There were
other restrictions on a Church which, by its own confession, needed
them badly. On the evangelical side, the Protestant teachers, like
Adam Wallace (and unlike the ruffians and aristocrats of the party),
were usually men of unblemished life. This contrast made a direct
and natural appeal to the populace. Thus the Reformation gathered
and grew, while the love of sheer destruction of " idols," or works of
sacred art, and the pleasures of plunder, made a constant appeal to
the passions of Knox's "rascal multitude.'"



l6 MARY OF GUISE TO BE REGENT.

The approaching day of doom had been hastened even before
Wallace's death. In February or March 1549 Knox was released
from the galleys, by April 7 he was in England. His fellow-captives
of the castle garrison were set free by July 1550. Presently Knox
was a licensed preacher at Berwick ; there he abode for two years, *
for as many in Newcastle, and then was a year in London.^* From
Berwick his doctrine might readily be heard by Scots within easy
distance of the Border.

Only one ingredient in the Medea's caldron of Revolution was
quiescent, and that ingredient Mary of Guise stirred into activity.
Leaving Scotland in September 1550, she visited France. Her pro-
fessed object was to see her daughter. Her real aim was, by the aid
of her kinsmen, the Guises, and the French Court, to obtain the
regency for herself, and to oust Arran, who, to distinguish him from
his son. Earl of Arran, must now be called Duke of Chatelherault.
She was accompanied, says the ' Diurnal of Occurrents ' ({\'hich mis-
dates her departure, making it August instead of September 8), by
Lord James Stuart, Queen Mary's natural brother, and many other
nobles and clergy. She was received "as a goddess," and her com-
panions were bribed, or magnificently entertained, according as we
follow Lesley or the Venetian Minister. The letters of Mason, the
English Ambassador to France, prove, or allege, that her stay with
her kinsmen was not altogether happy. She arrived on September
25. Her nobles at once squabbled about their lodgings. The
ambassador was gouty, and wished to return home "and die among
Christian men." This disposition makes his temper crabbed. He
announces that the French wish to appoint a French Governor of
Scotland, to which the Scots will not agree. On January 28, 1551,
the English Council sent to Mason a secret agent, recommended by
the scheming Balnaves. He arrived on February 24, but was very
timid, and provided, as a substitute for himself, young Kirkcaldy of
Grange, who henceforth was deep in what may be euphemistically
styled "secret service." His cypher name was "Corax." Mason
suspected a French war on England ; " it is already half concluded to
send away the Queen of Scots with all convenient speed, and with
her 300 or 400 men-at-arms and 10,000 foot."^^ Mary of Guise is
hostile to England, and " is in this Court made a goddess." Yet the
Scots (March 18) were grown home-sick. "The Scots mislike the
yoke that foolishly they have put their head in" (April 22). By
April 28 one Stuart was charged with an attempt to poison the young



THE REGENCY OF MARY OF GUISE (1554)- 17

Queen of Scotland. He was an archer of the Scots Guard, but, we '
may hope, he was not known to " Corax." ^^ He had been one of
the Castilians ; Hke Knox he had rowed in the galleys. Mason re-
ported his escape to Ireland (April 29). He was captured, and
brought to Angers on June 5. Whether he was hanged, as Lesley
says, or not, Dumas furnishes him with later adventures in the novel
called ' L'Horoscope.'

Mary of Guise's return was said to be delayed by an intrigue of
the French king with Lady Fleming, one of her suite. She arrived
in England on October 2 2 : she had an interview with Edward VI.,
who is said to have pressed his own suit for the hand of her daughter.
By the end of November Mary of Guise was in Scotland again. Dur-
ing the queen-dowager's stay in France Henry II. had sent the Bishop
of Ross and other envoys to Chatelherault, hinting broadly that he
wished Mary of Guise to assume the Regency.^'^ The emissaries
found the Duke very reluctant to acquiesce. Nor did the change
at once take place. The queen-mother and Arran visited the North
(where the captain of Clanchattan had a year before been executed
by Huntly), and inflicted various penalties on unruly Celts. In the
South the blood-feud for Ker of Cessford had caused the death of
Buccleuch in Edinburgh, when

"startled burghers fled, afar.
The furies of the Border war." ^^

This "unhappy accident" the Kers professed to deplore. The
queen-mother soothed the various discords, and, secretly tampering
with the nobles, undermined the power of Chatelherault.^^ The
dowager's party proved the stronger. In a Parliament at Edinburgh
on April 12, 1554, Chatelherault resigned the Regency to his rival.
Says Knox, "A crown was put on her head, as seemly a sight (if
men had eyes) as to put a saddle upon the back oiane unrewly kow." ^^
Arran received an approval of his conduct in the Regency, a general
amnesty for his actions, and a general acknowledgment of his finan-
cial rectitude. ^^

There was to be "a new world." The death of Edward VI., in
July 1553, the accession of Mary Tudor, the consequent persecu-
tions and returns to Scotland of Protestant Scottish refugees, and the
conduct of Mary of Guise in selecting French and deposing Scottish
Ministers, all worked to a single end. Scotland had ever detested
the tenure of power by foreigners : Knox arrived to blow the

VOL. II. E



l8 NOTES.

smouldering embers of Protestantism ; and the circumstances that
seemed to favour the CathoHc cause resulted speedily in its down-
fall. " Bloody Mary " might ally herself with Spain : Mary of Guise
might serve her own ambitious House : both might seem defenders
of the Faith, but reaction was inevitable, and the Church was
foredoomed.



NOTES TO CHAPTER I.

' That Henry asserted the feudal claims of Edward I. has been denied. The
reader may consult the copious evidence for the fact in Mr Pollard's article on
Somerset and Scotland, in the 'English Historical Review,' July 1898, pp. 464-
472. At first Somerset kept the claims in the background.

^ Privy Council Register, i. 27 ; Bain, Calendar of Scottish Papers, i. 34.

^ Knox, i. 180.

* Privy Council, i. 57 ; Laing's Knox, i. 180, note 4.

^ Privy Council, i. 22-27. ^ Act. Pari., ii. 466-480.

^ Pollard, 'English Historical Review,' ut supra. Correspondance Politique
de Odet de Selve, pp. 53, 54, 93. Paris : Alcan, 188S.

8 Thorpe's Calendar, i. 59. ^ De Selve, 53, 54, 143.

^•^ Odet de Selve, Correspondance Politique, pp. 66, 78, 86 ; Privy Council,
i. 43. ^^ Privy Council, i. 52-54.

^- Knox appears to date this at the end of January 1547 (i. 182, 183). Com-
pare Tytler, vi. 8 (1837), citing State Paper for December 17, and Thorpe, i. 60;
Privy Council, i. 57, 58. Writing from memory, Knox was often incoriect in his
dates, and in this and other cases, his error helps his argument that Arran was
treacherous.

^^ Knox, i. 183.

'■* Proceedings, Scot. Society of Antiquaries, 1862, iii. 58.

'^ See Hume Brown, Life of John Knox, i. 59.

^* Hume Brown, Knox, i. 94.

" Knox, i. 201. Knox declares that "so blessed were his labours," yet (i. 204)
he denounced the "corrupt life" of his converts.

18 Thorpe, i. 61.

13 State Papers, Domestic, Addenda, 1547-1565, p. 323.

^^ Stewart of Cardonald, a spy, to Wharton. Calendar of Scottish Papers, i. 4.

21 Knox, i. 203.

2'' Knox, i. 205, 206 ; Buchanan, xv. 45. Lesley says the terms asked were that
the garrison should be salvi atm fortunis ; but the terms granted were that, subject
to the will of the King of France, the men only should go forth unharmed, soli
hotnines integri discederent (Lesley, p. 461 ; Rome, 1578). If Knox's account of
the terms is correct, they were not kept. Possibly Knox confused the terms asked
for with the terms actually obtained. Mr Hume Brown ('Life of Knox,' i. 80)
says that Buchanan's evidence confirms Knox's. The words of Buchanan, " in-
columitatem modo pacti," seem to me to mean that they were merely promised
their bare lives. Compare the use of incolumitas by Ctesar, De Bello Civili,
iii, 28, and Tytler, vi. 17, note i (1837).



NOTES. 19

23 Calendar of Scottish Papers, i. 10.

^ Calendar, i. lO, 14. -^ De Salve, pp. 16S-170.

2^ Calendar, i. II-14. De Selve gives similar numbers.

27 Calendar, i. 15, 16, 17, 18. "* Calendar, i. 16; August 31, 1547.

2'' The account of the expedition is mainly from Patten's Diary, in Dalyell's
' Fragments of Scottish History ' (179S).

^0 Buchanan, fol. 180 ; Pitscottie, xxii. 10. For another report, Tytler, vi.
25, 26.

31 Calendar, i. 19, 20. ^^ Thorpe, i. 66.

33 De Selve, "among the Savages" (p. 204, September 17).

3* Hay Fleming, Mary, Queen of Scots, pp. 191, 192.

35 Calendar, i. 25. October 25. Thorpe, p. 69; Calendar, i. 31, 32.

36 Calendar, i. 37, 38. Longniddry asks for money.

3''' Calendar, i. 30. ^^ Calendar, i. 33.

3'' Calendar, i. 34. '"' Calendar, i. 71.

^' Teulet, 'Relations Politiques,' i. 179; Act. Pari., ii. 481.

■*" Knox, i. 217. *^ Calendar, i. 173. I74-

■*-' December 1548 (Calendar, i. 170, 171). *® Calendar, i. 175, 176.

■*6 Beaugue, ' Ilistoire de la Guerre d'Ecosse,' Maitland Club, p. 104.

^7 Teulet, i. ' Relations Politiques,' p. 201 (1862). '^^ Knox, i. 222, 223.

4» Lesley, p. 475.

5" November 29, 1549. (Teulet, i. 210, 211. Marie to the Cardinal de Guise.)

5^ Foedera, xv. 211-217 ; Privy Council Register, i. 85-87.

'- Knox, i. 237-241.

We may compare, as to this martyr, the contemporary account in Foxe,
where the conduct and language of the Court ara not (as by Knox) described as
violent. The accused is not addressed as "false traitor," "heretic," "knave,"
and so forth. Wallace is described by Knox as " a simple man, without great
learning, but one that was zealous in godliness, and of an upright life." He
was much in the company of the wife of Ormistoun, himself then banished as a
traitor. Through the last three years of war he and Brunston had been constant
agents of Somerset. Wallace was apprehended at Lord Seton's house, Wyntoun,
near Haddington, and his trial took place before Arran, Huntly, Glencairn (son of
the "godly" Earl, recently dead), "and divers others besides the Bishops and
their rabble." The scene was "the Kirk of the Black Thieves, otherwise
Friars," the Dominicans. Accused of preaching, Wallace denied the fact : he
had only "given exhortation," and read the Scriptures "in privy places."
According to Knox, Wallace in his defence styled the Bishops "dumb dogs, and
unsavoury salt." The charges against him were read. He was accused of
christening his own child, of denying Purgatory and the efficacy of prayer to
saints and for the dead. He admitted the charges, and denounced the mass as
"abomination before God." He was condemned, and burned on the Castle
Hill. Turning to Foxe's account, we see that Argyll — "Justice" — and Angus
were present, and the whole " Senate." Glencairn is not named ; Knox, how-
ever, says that he made a kind of protest to " the Bishop of Orkney and others
that sat near him. " Knox and Foxe agree in stating that Wallace appealed to
the Bible as his judge. He was not, if we follow Foxe, burned on the day of his
condemnation, as Knox declares ; the intervening day was passed in attempts to
argue or tease him into recantation. He did not, as in Knox, insult the Bishops
as "dumb dogs," or Foxe omits the fact. He appears to have been strangled
before the burning. Foxe's account is from "testimonies and letters brought



20 NOTES.

from Scotland in 1550." (Laing's Knox, i. 543-550.) In both versions Wallace
calls the mass an "abomination" or "abominable." Foxe declares that, as
Wallace went to the stake, "the common people said, 'God have mercy upon
him.'"

" Lingard, v. 159 (1855). " Knox. ii. 2S0.

^' February* 23. Foreign Calendar, Edward VI., p. 75. (Edited by TurnbuU,
1861.)

^ Teulet, i. 249-260 (Bannatyne Club). Foreign Calendar, Edward VI., pp.
97, 121, 126. Compare Hay Fleming, Mary, Queen of Scots, p. 200, note 15.

^ Lesley, p. 486. ^^ Privy Council Register, i. 109, 152.

•'^ Lesley, p. 477. *• Knox, i. 242.

°^ Act. Pari., ii. 602-604.

The Absoldtion and the Siege.

At this point it seems desirable to say something about the trustworthiness of
Knox's History. He was in the castle, a trusted adviser ; he ought to have
known what occurred. But he asserts that the galleys appeared on " the penult
day of June." Eight days earlier, he avers, the Government had shown the
Castilians a copy of the papal absolution, "containing . . . this clause, J?e-
niittimiis irremissibile''' — that is, "we remit the crime that cannot be remitted."
The garrison thought that this was not a trustworthy absolution, and declined to
give up the castle. Yet we know that the absolution arrived early in April. As
Knox is fond of charging his adversaries with treachery, it is needful to note the
facts. The absolution did not arrive eight days before "the penult of June." On
April 2 James Stuart of Cardonald, as we saw, reported to Wharton that M. de
Combas, a French diplomatist, had already brought the document. On April 24 de
Selve wrote that he suspected that the Castilians had refused the absolution carried
by de Combas. Cardonald avers that before April 2 the Castilians were declaring
that they would rather have a boll of wheat than all the Pope's remissions, " and
so in no way can he" (Arran) "have St Andrews, albeit they have not declared
him plainly, but allege against him fault in himself, for not keeping of his
promise." In describing the coming of the French ships, Knox remarks, "This
treasonable mean had the Governor, the Bishop, the Queen, and Monsieur Dosele
under the Appointment drawn." Now Arran asked for French aid on November
26, long before the " Appointment " of December 17 (Privy Council Register, i.
54). There seems to be no treachery on Arran's part. Apparently, however,
it was fair for the Castilians to engage English aid, and even to ask Henry, to
move the Emperor, to urge the Pope to refuse the requested absolution.

In short, the Castilians never meant to keep their promise : never meant to
surrender the castle on their own stipulated terms — the receipt of a papal ab-
solution. Yet their ally, Knox, accuses the governor of treachery (Knox, i. 203 ;
Calendar, i. 4, 5 ; de Selve, p. 134).

As to the siege of the castle by the French galleons, Knox makes it begin on
June 30. After two days' fire from the ships, " the castle handled them so that
Sancta Barbara [the gunner's goddess] helped them nothing." One galleon was
nearly wrecked, the rest retired to Dundee, and, on Arran's arrival from the
Border, the castle was invested on the land side. This was on July 19. For the
first twenty days the castle "had many prosperous chances," but Knox warned
the garrison that their corrupt life could not escape God's punishment, and that
their walls would be but eggshells. On July 31, after a heavy fire, the castle



NOTES. 21

surrendered (Knox, i. 204, 205). It appears that there is some error or confusion
in Knox's account of this famous siege of the castle, of which he was an eye-
witness. The ' Diurnal of Occurrents ' places the arrival of Strozzi and his fleet
on July 24. In State Papers Domestic, Addenda, Edward VI., No. 23, July 13,
1547, Lord Eure writes to Somerset from Berwick that a number of galleons
have passed that town towards Scotland. He again mentions them as French
galleons on July 14. De Selve had the news from Somerset on July 16. On
July 23 he learned that the galleons were investing the castle. On August 2
Somerset had news that a galleon had been destroyed by the bursting of a gun,



Online LibraryAndrew LangA history of Scotland from the Roman occupation (Volume 2) → online text (page 3 of 60)