1,82 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Charles River Editors
- Kategorie: Sachliteratur, Reportagen, Biografien
- Sprache: Englisch
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Seitenzahl: 742
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018
Ähnliche
THE LIFE AND ACTS OF SIR WILLIAM WALLACE
Henry the Minstrel
Translated by John Jamieson
PAPHOS PUBLISHERS
Thank you for reading. In the event that you appreciate this book, please consider sharing the good word(s) by leaving a review, or connect with the author.
This book is a work of nonfiction and is intended to be factually accurate.
All rights reserved. Aside from brief quotations for media coverage and reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced or distributed in any form without the author’s permission. Thank you for supporting authors and a diverse, creative culture by purchasing this book and complying with copyright laws.
Copyright © 2015 by Henry the Minstrel
Interior design by Pronoun
Distribution by Pronoun
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PRELIMINARY REMARKS, CHIEFLY REGARDING THE LIFE OF THE AUTHOR, AND CHARACTER OF THE WORK.
WALLACE.
BUKE FYRST.
BUKE SECUND.
BUKE THRYD.
BUKE FEYRD.
BUKE FYFTE.
BUKE SEXT.
BUKE SEWYND.
BUKE AUCHT.
BUKE NYNTE.
BUKE TEND.
BUKE ELEUENTH.
NOTES ON WALLACE.
FOOTNOTES
THE LIFE AND ACTS OF Sir William Wallace
By Henry the Minstrel
GLASGOW:
MAURICE OGLE & CO.
1869.
PRELIMINARY REMARKS, CHIEFLY REGARDING THE LIFE OF THE AUTHOR, AND CHARACTER OF THE WORK.
SO LITTLE IS KNOWN, WITH respect to Henry the Minstrel, that I can scarcely pretend to add any thing to the meagre account which has been given of him by former writers. As we cannot certainly fix the time, we can form no conjecture even as to the place, of his birth. Almost all that can be viewed as an historical record concerning him, is that with which we are supplied by Major. Integrum librum, he says, Guillelmi Vallacei Henricus, a natiuitate luminibus captus, meae infantiae tempore cudit; et quæ vulgo dicebantur, carmine vulgari, in quo peritus erat, conscripsit; (ego autem talibus scriptis solum in parte fidem impertior); qui historiarum recitatione coram principibus victum et vestitum quo dignus erat nactus est. Hist. Lib. IV. c. 15. “Henry, who was blind from his birth, in the time of my infancy composed the whole Book of William Wallace; and committed to writing in vulgar poetry, in which he was well skilled, the things that were commonly related of him. For my own part, I give only partial credit to writings of this description. By the recitation of these, however, in the presence of men of the highest rank, he procured, as he indeed deserved, food and raiment.”
This account, as it merely respects the recitation of his poem, is not inconsistent with what Henry himself says, when he asserts his independence in the composition of it, and declares that the motive by which he was chiefly actuated, was a patriotic desire to preserve the memory of the illustrious deeds of Wallace from oblivion.
All worthi men at redys this rurall dyt,
Blaym nocht the buk, set I be wnperfyt.
I suld hawe thank, sen I nocht trawaill spard;
For my laubour na man hecht me reward;
Na charge I had off king nor othir lord;
Gret harm I thocht his gud deid suld be smord.
I haiff said her ner as the process gais;
And fenyeid nocht for frendschip nor for fais.
Costis herfor was no man bond to me;
In this sentence I had na will to be, &c.
Wallace, B. XI. v. 1432.
Mr. Pinkerton has given 1470 as the date when it may be supposed that Henry appeared in the character of an author. It is generally admitted, indeed, that Major was born in the year 1469. Henry, by reason of his blindness, could not himself have written his poetical effusions; and it may reasonably be supposed, from his dependent and ambulatory mode of life, that he could not employ an amanuensis properly qualified for the task. Hence may we account for the obscurity, and even for the apparent absurdity, of some passages in his work. Bating these imperfections, his descriptions are often so vivid, and his images so just, that he undoubtedly ranks higher, as a poetical writer, than either Barbour or Wyntown, who had all the advantages of a liberal education, such, at least, as the times could afford.
Mr. Pinkerton has thus expressed his sentiments concerning this work: “It has great merit for the age, and is eminently curious. The language in a few places is not sense. When, by altering a word or two, the sense may be restored, attention to this will not only be allowable, but laudable in any proper editor; especially when we consider the singularity of the case, and that the poem is very good sense everywhere, save in perhaps a dozen lines at most.” List of Scotish Poets, xc.
The late elegant author of Specimens of Early English Poets has remarked; “That a man born blind should excel in any science is extraordinary, though by no means without example; but that he should become an excellent poet, is almost miraculous; because the soul of poetry is description. Perhaps, therefore, it may be easily assumed, that Henry was not inferior in point of genius either to Barbour or Chaucer, nor indeed to any poet of any age or country.” Ellis’s Spec. Vol. I. p. 354.
As the venerable Minstrel could not himself have written his poem, succeeding ages have never had it in their power to view him in his proper character. It is unquestionable, however, that he has not, in any edition hitherto published, appeared to such advantage as he might have done. Almost every editor, from the time of Andro Hart downward, used the same unpardonable liberty with his work as with that of Barbour, in attempting to render it more intelligible, by substituting for terms, which had become obsolete, or were going into desuetude, others more generally known. Thus, from gross misapprehension, the very sense of the poet was often lost. Even the edition of Perth, A. 1790, which professes to be an exact transcript from the MS., is still more inaccurate than that of the year 1714.
Although, from his disastrous circumstances, the principal fountain of knowledge was shut up to poor Henry, it is evident that he had made trial of every other within his reach. Knowing the facts of his blindness, itinerary life, and oral publication of his poetry, the generality of readers, it may be presumed, have previously formed a contemptuous idea of the author, as if he had been a common ballad-singer, and have either read his book under the influence of this prepossession, or thrown it aside as unworthy of their attention. But it should be recollected, that the rank of a bard or minstrel was once very high among our forefathers; and that, although it had considerably fallen in repute by the time that Henry flourished, he did nothing that was deemed unworthy of the character when at its highest elevation. The language of Major has, it would appear, been understood according to the prejudices of our own time, not according to the sense which it must still have borne even in that age in which Henry lived, notwithstanding the Act of James II. A. 1449, against “bardis, or vthirs siclyke rinnaris about.” Acts, Parl. X. c. 21. “He procured food and raiment by the recitation of his compositions.” Is this any thing different from what was invariably accounted the privilege of minstrels? Did Henry recite his poetry to the vulgar; did he stroll through cities, towns, or villages with this view? Not a hint of this kind is given; the very reverse is implied in the specification made by the historian. He recited his compositions “in vulgar poetry” indeed, but it was coram principibus, “in the presence of princes,” or “men of the highest rank.” Major uses the most honourable term that he could select, to show that even the most exalted in the kingdom did not deem themselves degraded by admitting the Minstrel into their presence, or by listening to his poetical narrative. He indeed says; Quæ vulgo dicebantur, carmine vulgari, in quo peritus est, conscripsit; but he does not mean by this to affix a stigma on Henry’s style of writing. The use of the term vulgari, if not merely a paronomasia on the preceding one vulgo, can signify nothing more than that Henry did not write, as he himself did, in the language of the learned, which would have been lost even on men of the highest rank in that age. He does not mean to say that the diction of the Minstrel was low, and thus adapted merely to the vulgar; for then men of all ranks spoke in the same manner: but that his work, as being a collection of what was commonly related in Scotland concerning Wallace, was composed in the vernacular tongue. When he uses the phrase, in quo peritus est, he is not to be understood as uttering so gross a solecism, as to say that Henry was well skilled in the language of the lower classes, but that he was an adept in Scottish poetry; for it is evident that in quo more immediately refers to carmine. He designs to throw as little discredit on him by the phrase, victum et vestitum nactus est. For all that he could mean to assert by it is, that as the tables of the great were open to him, where, in former times at least, a minstrel had the prerogative of an honourable seat, he had also, by established custom from time immemorial, as good a right to claim the raiment allotted to his vocation as the baron had to exact military service from his vassals. Hence, when speaking of this procurement, he qualifies his language by the following insertion,—quo dignus erat; applicable not merely to the hereditary claim of minstrels, but to the peculiar merit of Henry as sustaining this character.
I will not pretend to exculpate Henry from the charge of credulity. Far more, however, has been said as to his ignorance than can be well supported. We have no other standard of the measure of his knowledge than his own work; and this, there is every reason to think, much disfigured by unavoidable corruptions. But even judging from this, we have sufficient evidence that, from his early years, he must diligently have used all the means of information which were properly within his reach. He seems to have been pretty well acquainted with that kind of history which was commonly read in that period. He alludes to the history of Hector, of Alexander the Great, of Julius Cæsar, Book VIII. 845, 886, 961, &c., and to that of Charlemagne, whose army, at Ronceval in Navarre, being betrayed by Ganelon, was defeated by the Saracens, Book VIII. 1256. XI. 837. V. Dict. de Trevoux, vo. Rouncevaux. With the romances that were most popular in that age he was perhaps as well acquainted as Barbour. He seems to have been familiar with that of Alexander; as, like the latter, he refers to Gaudifer, Book X. 342. V. Note on The Bruce, B. II. 468.
His acquaintance with the popular romances is perhaps still more apparent from his style of writing. As it abounds, much more than that of Barbour, with poetical allusions to the face of nature, which the poor Minstrel had never beheld, to the change of the seasons, to the supposed influence of the planets or of the constellations; it is more richly strewed with the more peculiar phraseology of the writers of romance; whence a stranger to our chronology might be induced to view the Life of Wallace as of an older date than The Bruce, although nearly a century later. We meet with a variety of terms or phrases in Wallace, which, from the difference of his habits, do not seem to have been familiar with the good Archdeacon of Aberdeen, as frekis, frekis on fold; bane and lyre; brycht, and frely of fassoun, for a fair maid, &c. &c.
It is necessary to observe, that the Minstrel’s mode of expression is often very elliptical. In order to understand his meaning, the reader must therefore recollect, that he very commonly omits the pronouns, whether personal or relative. This, to those who are not familiar with the ancient style, has given him an air of absurdity, and has induced the idea of his being far more illiterate than we can reasonably suppose him to have been. Let us take an example or two among many.
The defendouris, was off sa fell defens,
Kepyt thar toun with strenth and excellens.—B. VIII. 803.
The principal assertion is not, that the defenders were powerful in defence; but that they, being so powerful in defence, guarded their town well. The reader must supply quha, or who, after defendouris.
The mar, kepyt the port of that willage,
Wallace knew weill, and send him his message.—B. IV. 359.
“Wallace was well acquainted with the mayor, who kept the port of that village.”
The only means that occurred to me for rendering the sense of such elliptical passages more obvious, was to throw in a comma; as, after The mar, in the passage quoted.
It cannot be denied that the feelings of the reader are often harrowed up by the coarse description which the Minstrel gives of the warlike deeds of his hero, and by the delight which he seems to take in those merciless scenes in which the English were the immediate sufferers. But great allowance must be made for him, not merely from the barbarism of the time in which he wrote, and from his want of such opportunities of refinement as even Barbour enjoyed, but from the soreness which every thorough Scotchman still felt, in consequence of the unpardonable treachery, violence, and ferocity of Edward the First, and of those employed under him, and the disgraceful stigma they had endeavoured to fix on a nation that had been always independent and always extremely jealous of its liberty. If the manners of the age do not form a sufficient apology for the cruelty ascribed to Wallace himself; it should be recollected that Scotland had no other chance of liberation from the usurpation of Edward than by the diminution of the number of the invaders, and that it was impossible for a few partisans to retain prisoners. Old Wyntown honestly defends Wallace on the grounds of the provocation given to him, and of his owing the English nothing.
In all Ingland thare wes noucht thane
As Willame Walays swa lele a mane.
Quhat he dyd agayne that natyown,
Thai made hym prowocatyown:
Na to thame oblyst nevyr wes he
In fayth, falowschype, na lawté:
For in hys tyme, I hard well say,
That fykkil thai ware all tyme of fay.
Cronykil, B. VIII. c. 20, v. 9.
There is a prayer at the beginning of the poem, which had been prefixed by the transcriber. It is thus given in Perth edition, Notes, p. 1.
Jesu, salvator! ex Jussu mihi exponere, ad
Finem dignum, prædictum Librum, atque benign-um.
The first line has been injured in the binding of the MS.; but it would seem that it should rather be read thus:
Jhesu saluator, tu sis michi auxiliator,
Ad finem dignum librum perduc atque benignum.
In all the editions of this work which I have seen, it is divided into twelve books; which are subdivided into chapters or sections, with rubrics prefixed, pointing out the principal matter of each division. I have observed the plan of the MS., which confines the work to eleven books, without any rubrics. Some, indeed, are marked on the margent; but evidently in a different hand-writing, by some early proprietor of the MS.
Mr Pinkerton has said; “The first and best edition I have yet seen is, imprentit at Edinburgh, be Robert Lekprevik, at the expensis of Henrie Charteris; and ar to be sauld in his buith, on the north syde of the gait abone the throne [trone?] Anno Do. MD. LXX. 4to. black letter. A fine copy of this edition is in the British Museum among Queen Elizabeth’s books: this has no title-page; but the second title is, The Actis and Deidis of the illuster and vailyeand Campioun Schir William Wallace, Knicht of Ellerslie.” List of Scotish Poets, xc, xci.
This edition I have never had an opportunity of inspecting. The oldest that I have seen, after every possible inquiry, is an imperfect one in quarto, formerly the property of Mr George Paton, of the Customs here, now in my possession. It wants the title-page, part of the first leaf, and the last sheet, which must have contained about fifteen pages, besides being imperfect in one or two other places. The title, printed on page first, seems to have been the same with the second title of Edit. 1570, with this difference, that in mine Wallace is denominated “the maist illuster,” &c. Besides that of 1570, Mr Pinkerton mentions only another edition in 4to, Edin. 1594. I have therefore ventured to quote this as the edition of that year.
Dr Mackenzie seems either to have been unacquainted with any prior edition, or to have preferred this to that of 1570; although, from his known character as a writer, it is most probable that he had never compared the editions to which he refers. “This book,” he says, “being highly esteem’d amongst the vulgar, has had many impressions; but the best are these, viz. that printed in the year 1594, and Andrew Hart’s, in the year 1620, both printed at Edinburgh, and that at Glasgow in the year, 1699.” &c.
Besides the edition of 1594, I have compared the MS. with Hart’s, 1620; and with one printed by Gedeon Lithgow, Edinburgh, 1648, which I have not seen mentioned by any writer. It is a neat edition, in small 8vo, black letter, pp. 343, in the square form of our more early publications. It has an introduction, entitled The Printer to the Reader, considerably larger than that prefixed to Hart’s, as it extends to nineteen pages. This contains an abridgment of the History of Scotland from the portentous death of Alexander III. A. 1285, to the year 1318. I have also consulted the Edinburgh edition of 1673, printed by Andrew Anderson, in twelves, pp. 252. This is considerably inferior in execution to the one last mentioned, although it seems to have been taken from it, with some slight changes of the orthography. The introduction to the former is reprinted verbatim; but there is added, after the Table of Contents, a poetical address of “Scrimger to Wallace, by reason of the false Menteith captive at London,” and the reply of “Wallace to Scrimger, his Baner-man.” The following page contains a curious wood-cut of Wallace in armour, with his bow and quiver.
Mr Pinkerton mentions also editions at Edinburgh 1601, Aberdeen 1630, and Glasgow 1665, in 8vo. He adds; “There are many editions of the present [eighteenth] century, but bad. The very worst is that of Edinburgh, 1758, 4to., which the printer very expertly reduced to modern spelling, and printed in black letter, and in quarto; being exactly, in every point, the very plan which he ought not to have followed. The same sagacious personage gave Barbour’s Poem in the same way; and neither selling, (how could they?) the booksellers sometimes tear out the title, and palm them upon the ignorant as old impressions.” List of Scot. Poets, ut sup.
This is the edition which is here quoted in the Notes as that of 1714. For I have been assured, on good authority, that this edition, as well as that of The Bruce, was printed by Robert Freebairn, printer to his Majesty, in the year 1714 or 1715; but that, as he engaged in the rebellion in the year last mentioned, before the work was ready for publication, they were suffered to lie in a bookseller’s ware-house till A. 1758, when they were published, either without titles, or with titles bearing the false date of this year. As to the merit of these editions, I am under the necessity of differing from Mr Pinkerton. To me, the editions printed by Freebairn appear more correct than any of the preceding ones, and his Wallace even preferable to the Perth edition, A. 1790; as, bating the liberty used with regard to the orthography, they, in a great variety of instances, give the sense of the original writers more accurately, having evidently been collated with the MSS. of The Bruce and Wallace in the Advocates’ Library.
I flattered myself, that I might have had it in my power to have enriched this work by some valuable communications from the British Museum. Although, through the good offices of the Earl of Aberdeen, one of the trustees of this national repository, search has been made, nothing of importance has been discovered in regard to this period of our history. Henry Ellis, Esq. of the Museum, who, in the most obliging manner, offered every assistance in his power, has in a letter addressed to his Lordship, furnished two extracts from MSS., which have a claim to attention, at least as matters of curiosity. I shall take the liberty of communicating them in his own language:—
“I find nothing in the King’s, the Cottonian, or the Harleian Collections; but among the Donation Manuscripts, No. 4934, (in the first volume of Francis Peck’s Collections for a Supplement to Dugdale’s Monasticon), is a transcript of ‘Prioris Alnwicensis de Bello Scotico apud Dumbarr, tempore Regis Edwardi I. Dictamen, sive Rithmus Latinus quo de Willielmo Wallace, Scotico illo Robin Whood, plura, sed invidiose, canit.’ It is somewhat in the manner of Walter de Mapes, as your Lordship will perceive by the following specimens; and consists of sixty stanzas.
1.
‘Ludere volentibus ludens paro Liram,
De Mundi malitia Rem demonstro miram;
Nil quod nocet, refero; Rem gestam requiram:
Scribo novam Satiram, set sic ne seminet Iram.
}
Morus.
46.
Falsus Dux Fallacie convocavit Cetum,
(Sciensque abierit Rex noster trans Fretum)
Cremare Northumbriam statuit Decretum:
Sepe videmus, ait, post Gaudia rumpere Fletum.
}
Omer us.
47.
Luge nunc, Northumbria nimis desolata,
Facta es ut vidua Filiis orbata!
Vescy, Morley, Summerville, Bertram sunt in Fata!
O quibus, O quantis, O qualibet es viduata!
}
Ovid.
Omer.
48.
In te, cum sis vidua, cunei Scotorum
Redigunt in cinerea prædia proborum;
Willelmus de Wallia dux est indoctorum,
Gaudia stultorum cumulant augmenta dolorum.
}
Cart.
49.
Ad Augmenta Sceleris actenus patrati,
Alnewyk dant ignibus viri scelerati;
Circumquaque cursitant velut insensati:
Electi pauci sunt, multi vero vocati.’
}
Veritas Evangelica.
“The above are the chief allusions in the poem to historical facts.
“There is another manuscript in the same collection, No. 1226, without a title-page, but apparently a composition of the time of King Charles the First, principally relating to the period of Scottish history in question. The work is divided into two books, and as it is possible that Dr Jamieson may know what it is from its contents, I will trouble your Lordship with the heads of the different chapters, the numbers of which are irregular.
‘Of the strif and debate that chanced betweine Robert de Bruce and John Ballioll, and how Edward Longshanks inwadit Scotland.’ Chap. 1.
‘Of the walliant deadis of Williame Wallace, in the defence of his Contrie.’ Chap. 2.
‘How Williame Wallace past to St Johnstone, and of the strange Combattis he had withe Englismen in that Jornay.’ Chap. 3.
‘How William Wallace past in the sowthe Contrie and wone Lowmabane, and of his ficht with Englis men in the way, and how he tuik the Castell of Craford.’ Chap. 4.
‘How the Englismen mowrdrit the gentill woman his wife,’ &c. Chap. 5.
‘How the Englishemen bound trwis withe Wallace,’ &c. Chap. 6.
‘How William Wallace slew Mackfadyean and his hoill armye,’ &c. Chap. 7.
‘Of the most famous battell at Estirwilling Brige’ &c. Chap. 8.
‘Of the famous Jornay and Wictories that William Wallace had into England,’ &c. Chap. 9.
‘How William Wallace past into France,’ &c. Chap. 10.
‘Of the great Wictories that Sr William Wallace had after he come forthe of France.’ Chap. 11.
‘How the Lord Steward encowntred King Edward,’ &c. Chap. 12.
“The second part of the work begins,
‘Of the most famous Wictories that the Lord Fraser had against the Englishmen.’ Chap. 1.
‘Of the great Wictorie Sr William Wallace obtained in France, and of his returne againe into Scotland.’ Chap. 2.
‘How Sr William Wallace slew yong Botler,’ &c. Chap. 3.
‘How Sr William Wallace beseaged St Johnston.’ Chap. 4.
‘How Sr William Wallace was betrayed by the false Menteithe.’ Chap. 5.
‘Of the famos raigne of King Robert de Bruise.’ Chap. 6.
‘How King Edward 3 of England inwadit Scotland, and was expellet again.’ Chap. 7.
“Several chapters follow, ‘Of Love,’ ‘The politick Law,’ &c.”
He also mentions a volume in the Cotton Library, marked Claud. D. VII. in which the 13th article is a chronicle written, or rather compiled, with additions, by a Canon of Lanercost priory, illustrative of the ravages in Cumberland towards the latter end of the reign of Edward the First. Several extracts having been made from this for the use of Mr Lysons, he found them extremely valuable, and containing more for his purpose than could be found in print.
Being anxious to bring forward every authentic information that I could possibly collect concerning Wallace, I lately transmitted to Mr Ellis a few queries, especially regarding the Lanercost MS., which had occurred to me in consequence of his former obliging communication; and, while I feel myself deeply indebted to him for the trouble he has taken, and for the promptness of his reply, I cannot pretend to give the substance of it in any language so appropriate as that which he has himself used.
“I must tell you that the Chronicle of Lanercost is a manuscript of peculiar intricacy in its contractions. The first mention which I find in it of William Wallace is in 1297, fol. 208 b. ‘Vix sex mensium tempus elapsum extitit a gravi sacramento supradicto quo se Albanacti fidelitati ac subjectioni Regis Anglorum astrinxerant, cum rediviva perfidorum malitia ad alias versutias ingenium acuit. Nam presul Ecclesiæ Glascuensis proprio agnomine dictus Robertus Wyscardus, semper in proditione primus, cum senescallo primæ’ (the word primæ is dotted under as if to be erased.) ‘terræ nomine Jacobo, novam sibi finxerunt audaciam, quinimo novam proditionis famam, fidem Regi præstitam manifeste infringere non audentes, quendam virum sanguincum Wills. Waleis, qui prius fuerat in Scotia princeps latronum, contra Regem insurgere fecerunt et Papam in sui adjutorium congregare.’
“Then follows the battle of Stirling, in which the notice of the slain contains the following anecdote: ‘Inter quos cedidit thesaurarius Angliæ Hugo de Kersyngham, de cujus corio ab occipite usque ad talum Wills. Waleis latam corrigiam sum fecit, ut inde sibi faceret cingulum ensis sui.’ The subsequent entrance of the Scots into Northumberland is of course noticed, but generally, and without any mention of Wallace’s name. The mention of the retreat of the English to Berwick opens the account of transactions under the year 1298. It is there said, ‘Wills. Waleis non tenuit eis fidem.’
“The Chronicle next mentions, that Edward having settled a truce with the King of France returned, and collecting his army, marched towards Scotland. ‘In festo autem beatæ Mariæ Magdalenæ occurrerunt ei Scoti apud Faukirk cum toto robore suo, duce eorum Willelmo Waleis superius nominato.’ The defeat is then detailed in few words. Some wretched Latin verses follow, of which I give you the only specimen concerning Wallace, viz.—
‘Sub duce de genere gens Scotia degeneravit,
Quæ famam temere foedusque fidem violavit.
Postquam Willelmus Wallen̄s nobilitavit,
Nobilitas prorsus Scottorum degeneravit.’
“Such are the scanty materials relating to Wallace’s history in the Chronicle of Lanercost.
“In 1306, fol. 211 b, we read, ‘Dominus autem Symon Freser Scottus adductus London, prius fuit tractus, postea suspensus, tertio decapitatus, et caput ejus positum super pontem London juxta caput Willelmi Waleis.’ In the same year the Earl of Athol’s head (Comes de Athetel) was placed above that of William Wallace; and in 1307 it is said, ‘In die autem sancto Paschæ Dungallus factus est miles, et infra eandem septimanam captus est dominus Johannes Waleis et ad Regem apud Karl. adductus, qui misit eum London ut ubi caperet idem judicium quod prius acceperat frater suus Willelmus.’” Fol. 212.
We have a similar account in the St Albans Chronicle.
“How Johne, that was Wyllyam Waleys brother, was put to dethe.
“As the gretteste masteyrs of Scotlonde were thus doon to euyll dethe, and destroyed for theyr falsnesse, Johan. that was Wyllyam Waleys brother, was take and doon vnto deth, as Syr Johan erle of Alethes [Athol] was.” Sign. q. vi. b. Edit. 1502.
This account, as regarding Johannes Waleis, must certainly be viewed as a mistake of the writers of these Chronicles. It has originated, perhaps, from the circumstance of two brothers of Robert Bruce, Thomas and Alexander, being made prisoners by Macdowal at Lochrian in Galloway, 9th February, 1306–7, and carried to Edward at Carlisle, who ordered them to instant execution. Or it may respect Sir Reginald Crawfurd, the cousin of Wallace, who was made prisoner with them, and subjected to the same fate. Matthew of Westminster says that their heads were placed on the gates of Carlisle. V. Dalrymple’s Annals, II. 19.
The other queries were;—If, from any of the MSS. in the British Museum, there is ground to suppose that Wallace had ever fought with King Edward in England? If any thing occurs that might have given rise to the story, told by Henry, of an interview with the English queen? If there is any hint as to Wallace having opposed the English in Guienne? If there is any proof that Sir John Menteith was concerned in delivering up Wallace to the English? And if it appears that Menteith acted in concert with Aymer de Valence? To these Mr Ellis gives the following answer:—
“Except at the battle of Falkirk, I see no reason to think that Wallace was ever personally opposed to Edward the First; certainly not during his incursion in 1297, as Edward was then in France. The story of his meeting the queen at St Albans must be a fiction. It is too singular a circumstance, if it had happened, to remain totally unnoticed in any of the English annals. I can find no mention of Wallace’s being in Guienne. I think it was not likely that he should be found there. Scotland and the Border gave him full employ for his short career. No concert is at all noticed in the Lanercost MS. between Aymer de Valence and Sir John Menteith.”
His important communication, in regard to the concern that Menteith himself had in the base transactions referred to, will be found among the proofs which I have collected on this subject, in the Note on Book XI. ver. 948, p. 402.
Having made some inquiries as to the manuscript No. 1226, formerly mentioned, and suggested that, from its orthography, it seems to claim a date prior to the age of Charles the First; Mr Ellis has favoured me with the following reply:—
“The manuscript in the same collection, Num. 1226, is entirely in prose. It occupies about a hundred leaves in small quarto; but is not paged. From the orthography, the manuscript may be somewhat older than I had supposed. It certainly is not before the time of James the First. I think you are correct in supposing it a copy from Henry the Minstrel. In an address ‘To the moist cortews Reader,’ the author says, ‘al thoche this famous historie hathe beine republished heir to foir by hime which deserws great thankis for so worthie a work, yit the gathering of the said historie in a smaller compass may gif moir content vnto some readers,’ &c. From another passage it should seem that additions are interspersed; but evidently without either distinction or authorities.”
Mr Ellis also informs me, that the only old edition of Wallace, in the Museum, besides that of 1570, is the one printed at Aberdeen, in 1630, small octavo.
WALLACE.
BUKE FYRST.
Our antecessowris, that we suld of reide,
And hald in mynde thar nobille worthi deid,
We lat ourslide, throw werray sleuthfulnes;
And castis ws euir till vthir besynes.
Till honour ennymys is our haile entent,
It has beyne seyne in thir tymys bywent;
Our ald ennemys cummyn of Saxonys blud,
That neuyr yeit to Scotland wald do gud,
Bot euir on fors, and contrar haile thair will,
Quhow gret kyndnes thar has beyne kyth thaim till.
It is weyle knawyne on mony diuerss syde,
How thai haff wrocht in to thair mychty pryde,
To hald Scotlande at wndyr euirmar.
Bot God abuff has maid thar mycht to par:
Yhit we suld thynk one our bearis befor.
Of thair parablyss as now I say no mor.
We reide of ane rycht famouss of renowne,
Of worthi blude that ryngis in this regioune:
And hensfurth I will my process hald
Of Wilyham Wallas yhe haf hard beyne tald.
His forbearis quha likis till wndrestand,
Of hale lynage, and trew lyne of Scotland,
Schir Ranald Crawfurd, rycht schirreff of Ayr:
So in hys tyme he had a dochter fayr,
And yonge Schir Ranald schirreff of that toune,
His systir fair, off gud fame and ranoune:
Malcom Wallas hir gat in mariage,
That Elrislé than had in heretage,
Auchinbothe, and othir syndry place;
The secund O he was of gud Wallace:
The quhilk Wallas fully worthely at wrocht,
Quhen Waltyr hyr of Waillis fra Warayn socht.
Quha likis till haif mar knawlage in that part,
Go reid the rycht lyne of the fyrst Stewart.
Bot Malcom gat wpon this lady brycht
Schir Malcom Wallas, a full gentill knycht,
And Wilyame als, as Conus cornykle beris on hand;
Quhilk eftir was the reskew of Scotland.
Quhen it was lost with tresoune and falsness,
Our set be fais, he fred it weyle throu grace.
Quhen Alexander our worthi king had lorn,
Be awentur, his liff besid Kyngorn,
Thre yer in pess the realm stude desolate;
Quharfor thair raiss a full grewous debate.
Our prynce Dawy, the erle of Huntyntoun,
Thre dochtrys had that war of gret ranoun;
Off quhilk thre com Bruce, Balyoune, and Hastyng:
Twa of the thre desyryt to be kyng.
Balyoune clamyt of fyrst gre lynialy;
And Bruce fyrst male of the secund gre by.
To Paryss than, and in Ingland thai send,
Off this gret striff how thai suld haif ane end.
Foly it was, forsuth it happynnyt sa,
Succour to sek of thar alde mortale fa.
Eduuarde Langschankis had new begune hys wer
Apon Gaskone, fell awfull in effer:
Thai landis thane he clamde as heretage.
Fra tyme that he had semblit his barnage,
And herd tell weyle Scotland stude in sic cace,
He thocht till hym to mak it playn conquace.
Till Noram kirk he come with outyn mar,
The consell than of Scotland meit hym thar.
Full sutailly he chargit thaim in bandoune,
As thar our lord, till hald of hym the croun.
Byschope Robert, in his tyme full worthi,
Off Glaskow lord, he said that “we deny
“Ony our lord, bot the gret God abuff.”
The king was wrath, and maid hym to ramuff.
Couatus Balyoune folowid on hym fast:
Till hald of hym he grantyt at the last.
In contrar rycht, a king he maid hym thar;
Quhar throuch Scotland rapentyt syne full sar.
To Balyoune yhit our lordis wald nocht consent.
Eduuard past south, and gert set his parliment:
He callyt Balyoune till ansuer for Scotland.
The wyss lordis gert hym sone brek that band.
Ane abbot past, and gaif our this legiance.
King Eduuard than it tuk in gret greuance.
His ost he rasd, and come to Werk on Twede;
Bot for to fecht, as than he had gret drede.
To Corspatryk of Dunbar sone he send,
His consell ast, for he [the] contré kend:
And he was brocht in presence to the king.
Be suttale band thai cordyt of this thing.
Erle Patrik than till Berweik couth persew;
Ressawide he was and trastyt werray trew.
The king folowid with his host of ranoun;
Eftir mydnycht at rest wes all the toun.
Corspatryk raiss, the keyis weile he knew,
Leit breggis doun, and portculess thai drew;
Set wp yettis syne, couth his baner schaw;
The ost was war, and towart hym thai draw.
Eduuard entrit, and gert sla hastely,
Of man and wiff, sewyn thousand and fyfty,
And barnys als: be this fals awentur,
Of trew Scottis chapyt na creatur.
A captayne thair this fals Eduuard maid:
Towart Dunbar, without restyng thai raid;
Quhar gaderyt was gret power of Scotland,
Agayne Eduuard in bataill thocht to stand.
Thir four erllis was entrit in that place,
Of Mar, Menteith, Adell, Ross, wpon cace.
In that castell the erle gert hald thaim in,
At to thar men with out thai mycht nocht wyn;
Na thai to thaim supplëyng for to ma.
The battaillis than to giddyr fast thai ga.
Full gret slauchtyr, at pitté was to se,
Off trew Scottis oursett with sutelté.
Erle Patrik than, quhen fechtyng was fellast,
Till our fa turnd, and harmyng did ws mast.
Is nayne in warld, at scaithis ma do mar,
Than weile trastyt in borne familiar.
Our men was slayne with outyn redemptioune;
Throuch thar dedis all tynt was this regioune.
King Eduuard past and Corspatrik to Scwne;
And thar he gat homage of Scotland swne:
For nane was left the realme for to defend.
For Jhon the Balyoune to Munross than he send,
And putt hym doune for euir of this kynrik:
Than Eduuarde self was callit a roy full ryk.
The croune he tuk apon that sammyne stane
At Gadalos send with his sone fra Spane,
Quhen Iber Scot fyrst in till Irland come.
At Canemor syne king Fergus has it nome;
Brocht it till Scwne, and stapill maid it thar,
Quhar kingis was cround aucht hundyr yer and thar,
Befor the tyme at king Eduuard it fand.
This jowell he gert turss in till Ingland;
In Lwnd it sett till witness of this thing;
Be conquest than of Scotland cald hym king.
Quhar that stayne is, Scottis suld mastir be:
God chess the tyme Margretis ayr till see!
Sewyn scor thai led off the gretast that thai fand
Off ayris with thaim, and Bruce, out of Scotland.
Eduuard gayf hym his faderis heretage;
Bot he thocht ay till hald hym in thrillage.
Baith Blatok Mur was his and Huntyntoun;
Till erle Patrik thai gaif full gret gardoun.
For the frendschipe king Eduuard with hym fand,
Protector haile he maid hym of Scotland.
That office than he brukyt bot schort tyme.
I may nocht now putt all thair deid in ryme;
Off cornikle quhat suld I tary lang?
To Wallace agayne now breiffly will I gange.
Scotland was lost quhen he was bot a child,
And our set throuch with our ennemyss wilde.
His fadyr Malcom in the Lennox fled;
His eldest sone thedir he with hym led.
Hys modyr fled with him fra Elrislé,
Till Gowry past, and duelt in Kilspyndé.
The knycht hir fadyr thedyr he thaim sent
Till his wncle, that with full gud entent
In Gowry duelt, and had gud lewyng thar;
Ane agyt man, the quhilk resawyt thaim far.
In till Dundé Wallace to scule thai send,
Quhill he of witt full worthely was kend.
Thus he conteynde in till hys tendyr age;
In armys syne did mony hie waslage,
Quhen Saxons blude into this realm cummyng,
Wyrkand the will of Eduuard that fals king,
Mony gret wrang thai wrocht in this regioune,
Distroyed our lordys, and brak thar byggynnys doun.
Both wiffis, wedowis, thai tuk all at thair will,
Nonnys, madyns, quham thai likit to spill.
King Herodis part thai playit in to Scotland,
Off yong childer that thai befor thaim fand.
The byschoprykis, that war of gretast waile,
Thai tuk in hand of thar archbyschops haile:
No for the Pape thai wald no kyrkis forber,
Bot gryppyt all be wiolence of wer.
Glaskow thai gaif, as it our weile was kend,
To dyocye in Duram to commend.
Small benifice that wald thai nocht persew,
And for the richt full worthy clerkis thai slew;
Hangitt barrownnys and wroucht full mekill cayr:
It was weylle knawyn, in the Bernys of Ayr,
Auchtene score putt to that dispitfull dede:
Bot God abowyn has send ws sum ramede.
The remembrance is forthir in the taile.
I will folow apon my process haile.
Willyham Wallace, or he was man of armys,
Gret pitté thocht that Scotland tuk sic harmys.
Mekill dolour it did hym in hys mynde;
For he was wyss, rycht worthy, wicht and kynd:
In Gowry duelt still with this worthy man.
As he encressyt, and witt haboundyt than,
In till hys hart he had full mekill cayr,
He saw the Sothroun multipliand mayr;
And to hym self offt wald he mak his mayne.
Off his gud kyne thai had slane mony ane.
Yhit he was than semly, stark and bald;
And he of age was bot auchtene yer auld.
Wapynnys he bur, outhir gud suerd or knyff;
For he with thaim hapnyt richt offt in stryff.
Quhar he fand ane without the othir presance,
Eftir to Scottis that did no mor grewance;
To cut his throit, or steik hym sodanlye,
He wayndyt nocht, fand he thaim fawely.
Syndry wayntyt, bot nane wyst be quhat way;
For all to him thar couth na man thaim say.
Sad of contenance he was bathe auld and ying,
Litill of spech, wyss, curtass and benyng.
Wpon a day to Dundé he was send;
Off cruelness full litill thai him kend.
The constable a felloun man of wer,
That to the Scottis did full mekill der,
Selbye he hecht, dispitfull and owtrage.
A sone he had ner twenty yer of age:
Into the toun he wsyt euerlik day;
Thre men or four thar went with him to play;
A hely schrew, wanton in his entent.
Wallace he saw, and towart him he went;
Liklé he was, richt byge and weyle beseyne,
In till a gyde of gudly ganand greyne.
He callyt on hym, and said; “Thou Scot, abyde;
“Quha dewill the grathis in so gay a gyde?
“Ane Ersche mantill it war thi kynd to wer;
“A Scottis thewtill wndyr thi belt to ber;
“Rouch rewlyngis apon thi harlot fete.
“Gyff me thi knyff; quhat dois thi ger so mete?”
Till him he yeid, his knyff to tak him fra.
Fast by the collar Wallace couth him ta;
Wndyr his hand the knyff he bradit owt,
For all his men that semblyt him about:
Bot help him selff he wsyt of no remede;
With out reskew he stekyt him to dede.
The squier fell: of him thar was na mar.
His men folowid on Wallace wondyr sar:
The press was thik, and cummerit thaim full fast.
Wallace was spedy, and gretlye als agast;
The bludy knyff bar drawin in his hand,
He sparyt nane that he befor him fand.
He knew the hous his eyme had lugit in;
Thedir he fled, for owt he mycht nocht wyn.
The gude wyff than within the closs saw he;
And, “Help,” he cryit, “for him that deit on tre;
“The yong captane has fallyn with me at stryff.”
In at the dur he went with this gud wiff.
A roussat goun of hir awn scho him gaif
Apon his weyd, at coueryt all the layff;
A soudly courche our hed and nek leit fall;
A wowyn quhyt hatt scho brassit on with all;
For thai suld nocht lang tary at that in;
Gaiff him a rok, syn set him doun to spyn.
The Sothroun socht quhar Wallace was in drede;
Thai wyst nocht weylle at quhat yett he in yeide.
In that same houss thai socht him beselye;
Bot he sat still, and span full conandly,
As of his tym, for he nocht leryt lang.
Thai left him swa, and furth thar gait can gang,
With hewy cheyr and sorowfull in thocht:
Mar witt of him as than get couth thai nocht.
The Inglis men, all thus in barrat boune,
Bade byrne all Scottis that war in to that toun.
Yhit this gud wiff held Wallace till the nycht,
Maid him gud cher, syne put hym out with slycht.
Throw a dyrk garth scho gydyt him furth fast;
In cowart went and vp the wattyr past;
Forbure the gate for wachis that war thar.
His modyr bade in till a gret dispar.
Quhen scho him saw scho thankit hewynnis queyn,
And said; “Der sone, this lang quhar has thow beyne?”
He tald his modyr of his sodane cass.
Than wepyt scho, and said full oft, ‘Allas!
‘Or that thow cessis thow will be slayne with all.’
“Modyr,” he said, “God reuller is of all.
“Unsouerable are thir pepille of Ingland;
“Part of thar ire me think we suld gaynstand.”
His eme wist weyle that he the squier slew;
For dreid thar of in gret langour he grew.
This passit our, quhill diueris dayis war gane:
That gud man dred or Wallace suld be tane:
For Suthroun ar full sutaille euirilk man.
A gret dyttay for Scottis thai ordand than;
Be the lawdayis in Dundé set ane ayr:
Than Wallace wald na langar soiorne thar.
His modyr graithit hir in pilgrame weid;
Hym[selff] disgysyt syne glaidlye with hir yeid;
A schort swerd wndyr his weid priualé.
In all that land full mony fays had he.
Baith on thar fute, with thaim may tuk thai nocht.
Quha sperd, scho said to Sanct Margret thai socht,
Quha serwit hir. Full gret frendschipe thai fand
With Sothroun folk: for scho was of Ingland.
Besyd Landoris the ferrye our thai past
Syn throw the Ochell sped thaim wondyr fast.
In Dunfermlyn thai lugyt all that nycht.
Apon the morn, quhen that the day was brycht,
With gentill wemen hapnyt thaim to pass,
Off Ingland born, in Lithquhow wounnand was.
The captans wiff, in pilgramage had beyne,
Fra scho thaim mett, and had yong Wallace sene,
Gud cher thaim maid; for he was wondyr fayr,
Nocht large of tong, weille taucht and debonayr.
Furth tawkand thus of materis that was wrocht,
Quhill south our Forth with hyr son scho thaim brocht.
In to Lithkow thai wald nocht tary lang;
Thar leyff thai tuk, to Dunypace couth gang.
Thar duelt his eyme, a man of gret richess.
This mychty persone, hecht to name Wallas,
Maid thaim gud cher, and was a full kynd man,
Welcummyt thaim fair, and to thaim tald he than,
Dide him to witt, the land was all on ster;
Trettyt thaim weyle, and said; “My sone so der,
“Thi modyr and thow rycht heir with me sall bide,
“Quhill better be, for chance at may betyde.”
Wallace ansuerd, said; ‘Westermar we will:
‘Our kyne ar slayne, and that me likis ill;
‘And othir worthi mony in that art:
‘Will God I leiffe, we sall ws wreke on part.’
The persone sicht, and said; “My sone so fre,
“I cannot witt how that radress may be.”
Quhat suld I spek of frustir? as this tyd,
For gyft of gud with him he wald nocht bide.
His modyr and he till Elrislé thai went.
Vpon the morn scho for hir brothyr sent,
In Corsby duelt and schirreff was of Ayr.
Hyr fadyr was dede, a lang tyme leyffyt had thar;
Hyr husband als at Lowdoun-hill was slayn.
Hyr eldest sone, that mekill was of mayn,
Schir Malcom Wallas was his nayme but less,
His houch senons thai cuttyt in that press;
On kneis he faucht, felle Inglismen he slew;
Till hym thar socht may fechtaris than anew;
On athyr side with speris bar him doun;
Thar stekit thai that gud knycht of renoun.
On to my taile I left. At Elrislé
Schir Ranald come son till his sistyr fre,
Welcummyt thaim hayme, and sperd of hir entent.
Scho prayde he wald to the lord Persye went,
So yrk of wer scho couth no forthir fle,
To purchess pes, in rest at scho mycht be.
Schyr Ranald had the Perseys protectioune,
As for all part to tak the remissioune.
He gert wrytt ane till his systir that tyde.
In that respyt Wallas wald nocht abyde:
Hys modyr kyst, scho wepyt with hart sar,
His leyff he tuk, syne with his eyme couth far.
Yonge he was, and to Sothroun rycht sauage;
Gret rowme thai had, dispitfull and wtrage.
Schir Ranald weylle durst nocht hald Wallas thar;
For gret perell he wyst apperand war:
For thai had haile the strenthis of Scotland;
Quhat thai wald do durst few agayne thaim stand.
Schyrreff he was, and wsyt thaim amang;
Full sar he dred or Wallas suld tak wrang:
For he and thai couth neuir weyle accord.
He gat a blaw, thocht he war lad or lord,
That proferryt him ony lychtlynes;
Bot thai raparyt our mekill to that place.
Als Ingliss clerkis in prophecyss thai fand,
How a Wallace suld putt thaim of Scotland.
Schir Ranald knew weill a mar quiet sted,
Quhar Wilyham mycht be bettir fra thair fede,
With his wncle Wallas of Ricardtoun,
Schir Richard hecht, that gud knycht off renoun.
Thai landis hayle than was his heretage,
Bot blynd he was, (so hapnyt throw curage,
Be Ingliss men that dois ws mekill der;
In his rysyng he worthi was in wer.)
Throuch hurt of waynys, and mystyrit of blud.
Yeit he was wiss, and of his conseil gud.
In Feuiryer Wallas was to him send;
In Aperill fra him he bownd to wend.
Bot gud serwice he dide him with plesance,
As in that place was worthi to awance.
So on a tym he desyrit to play.
In Aperill the thre and twenty day,
Till Erewyn wattir fysche to tak he went;
Sic fantasye fell in his entent.
To leide his net, a child furth with him yeid;
But he, or nowne, was in a fellowne dreid.
His suerd he left, so did he neuir agayne;
It dide him gud, supposs he sufferyt payne.
Off that labour as than he was nocht sle:
Happy he was, tuk fysche haboundanlé.
Or of the day ten houris our couth pass,
Ridand thar come, ner by quhar Wallace wass,
The lorde Persye, was captane than off Ayr;
Fra thine he turnde and couth to Glaskow fair.
Part of the court had Wallace labour seyne,
Till him raid fyve cled in to ganand greyne,
And said sone; “Scot, Martyns fysche we wald hawe.”
Wallace meklye agayne ansuer him gawe;
‘It war resone, me think, yhe suld haif part:
‘Waith suld be delt, in all place, with fre hart.’
He bad his child, “Gyff thaim of our waithyng.”
The Sothroun said; ‘As now of thi delyng
‘We will nocht tak, thow wald giff ws our small.’
He lychtyt doun, and fra the child tuk all.
Wallas said than; “Gentill men gif ye be,
“Leiff ws sum part, we pray for cheryté.
“Ane agyt knycht serwis our lady to day;
“Gud frend, leiff part and tak nocht all away.”
‘Thow sall haiff leiff to fysche, and tak the ma,
‘All this forsuth sall in our flyttyng ga.
‘We serff a lord; thir fysche sall till him gang.’
Wallace ansuerd, said; “Thow art in the wrang.”
‘Quham thowis thow, Scot? in faith thow serwis a blaw.’
Till him he ran, and out a suerd can draw.
Willyham was wa he had na wappynis thar,
Bot the poutstaff, the quhilk in hand he bar.
Wallas with it fast on the cheik him tuk
Wyth so gud will, quhill of his feit he schuk.
The suerd flaw fra him a fur breid on the land.
Wallas was glad, and hynt it sone in hand;
And with the swerd awkwart he him gawe
Wndyr the hat, his crage in sondre drawe.
Be that the layff lychtyt about Wallas;
He had no helpe, only bot Goddis grace.
On athir side full fast on him thai dange;
Gret perell was giff thai had lestyt lang.
Apone the hede in gret ire he strak ane;
The scherand suerd glaid to the colar bane.
Ane othir on the arme he hitt so hardely,
Quhill hand and suerd bathe on the feld can ly.
The tothir twa fled to thar hors agayne;
He stekit him was last apon the playne.
Thre slew he thar, twa fled with all thair mycht
Eftir thar lord; bot he was out of sycht,
Takand the mure, or he and thai couth twyne.
Till him thai raid onon, or thai wald blyne,
And cryit; “Lord, abide; your men ar martyrit doun
“Rycht cruelly, her in this fals regioun.
“Fyve of our court her at the wattir baid,
“Fysche for to bryng, thocht it na profyt maid.
“We ar chapyt, bot in feyld slayne are thre.”
The lord speryt; ‘How mony mycht thai be?’
“We saw bot ane that has discumfyst ws all.”
Than leuch he lowde, and said; ‘Foule mot yow fall;
‘Sen ane yow all has putt to confusioun.
‘Quha menys it maist, the dewyll of hell him droun;
‘This day for me, in faith, he beis nocht socht.’
Quhen Wallas thus this worthi werk had wrocht,
Thar horss he tuk, and ger that lewyt was thar;
Gaif our that crafft, he yeid to fysche no mar;
Went till his eyme, and tauld him of this dede.
And he for wo weyle ner worthit to weide;
And said; “Sone, thir tythingis syttis me sor;
“And be it knawin, thow may tak scaith tharfor.”
‘Wncle,’ he said, ‘I will no langar byde;
‘Thir Southland horss latt se gif I can ride.’
Than bot a child, him serwice for to mak,
Hys emys sonnys he wald nocht with him tak.
This gude knycht said; “Deyr cusyng, pray I the,
“Quhen thow wanttis gud, cum fech ynewch fra me.”
Syluir and gold he gert on to him geyff.
Wallace inclynys, and gudely tuk his leyff.
EXPLICIT LIBER PRIMUS,
ET INCIPIT SECUNDUS.
BUKE SECUND.
Yong Wallace fulfillit of hie curage;
In pryss of armys desirous and sauage;
Thi waslage may neuir be forlorn,
Thi deidis are knawin, thocht that the warld had suorn:
For thi haile mynde, labour and besynes,
Was set in wer, and werray rychtwisnes;
And felloune loss of thi deyr worthi kyn.
The rancour more remaynde thi mynd with in.
It was his lyff, and maist part of his fude,
To se thaim sched the byrnand Sothroun blude.
Till Auchincruff with outyn mar he raid,
And bot schort tyme in pess at he thar baid.
Thar duelt a Wallas, welcummyt him full weill;
Thocht Ingliss men thar of had litill feille.
Bathe meite and drynk at his wille he had thar.
In Laglyne wode, quhen that he maid repayr,
This gentill man was full oft his resett;
With stuff of houshald strestely he thaim bett.
So he desirit the toune of Air to se,
His child with him; as than na man had he.
Ay next the wode Wallace gert leiff his horss;
Syne on his feit yeid to the merkat corss.
The Persye was in the castell of Ayr
With Ingliss men, gret nowmber and repayr:
Our all ye toune rewlyng on thair awne wiss,
Till mony Scot thai did full gret suppriss.
Aboundandely Wallace amang thaim yeid;
The rage of youth maid him to haf no dreid.
A churll thai had, that felloune byrdyngis bar;
Excedandlye he wald lyft mekill mar
Than ony twa that thai amang thaim fand;
And als be wss a sport he tuk in hand:
He bar a sasteing in a boustous poille:
On his braid bak of ony wald he thoile,
Bot for a grot, als fast as he mycht draw.
Quhen Wallas herd spek of that mery saw,
