Two English spies, Robert
Constable and Francis Haugh, have given interesting descriptions of the
way of life at Ferniehirst about 1570. Constable found, in addition to
the Kerrs, "many guests of divers factions, some outlaws of
England, some of Scotland, some neighbours thereabout" drinking ale
and playing at cards for "plack" and "hardheads",
and discussing the possibility of rescuing Mary Queen of Scots from her
English captivity, as well as the Earls of Northumberland and
Westmorland if the Regent handed them over to Elizabeth. Haugh actually
met Westmorland, and missed seeing Lady Northumberland (after she had
been rescued from the Liddesdale outlaws) by a few hours. It seems the
Regent in fact did try to search Ferniehirst, in order to capture the
Earls and hand them over to the English Queen, but his men felt this was
a dishonourable enterprise, and all deserted him, or "slid from
him" as Haugh puts it. Ferniehirst and Westmorland both trusted him
and Westmorland actually asked him to take a message to Lady Westmorland
asking her to send "one of her best jewels as a token to My Lady
Cane of Farnhyrst, and the fairest Gelding she could get, to the
Laird". Haugh evidently felt a bad conscience about his mission,
for he wrote to William Cecil (Elizabeth’s chief minister, to whom he
made his report) "Sir, although this is a traitorous kind of
service that I have waded in, to trap those who trust in me, as Judas
did Christ, yet if it benefit the state, I am willing to continue."
The more men a Chief or
"hedesman" (whether a lord, a knight, or untitled) actually
kept or could call out, the more clout he carried and also the longer he
was likely to live — and some of the Kerrs in particular were
relatively long-lived by the standards of those times. Hence there was
an obvious incentive to maintain more men than the land could
economically support, especially with farming methods rather more
primitive than they are today. All these men had to be fed, along with
their wives and children — and again the Kerrs had a surprisingly low
infant mortality by medieval standards as well as quite large families.
The result, as Godfrey Watson puts it in "The Border Reivers"
was that they played a constant game of musical chairs with one another’s
sheep, cows and horses; and if they did not possess a castle or
"peel tower", Borderers generally lived in expendable shacks,
replaced within a matter of hours after a raid by neighbours or
Englishmen. If such a raid seemed imminent, they did not attempt to
defend their homes, but took refuge within the nearest castle or tower,
or dispersed into the extensive woods with as many of their livestock as
they could, and replenished their losses afterwards by carrying out a
raid of their own. The English side being less heavily wooded, the
Northumbrians were more vulnerable to raids, but it so happens that
Scottish Borderers spent as much time raiding one another, and pursuing
feuds that could last for generations, as in lifting English cattle. But
livestock lost during a raid were sometimes recaptured almost at once,
in a "hot trod", since raiders on their way home were stowed
down by the sheep and cows they were driving ahead of them, while their
pursuers could go as fast as their horses would take them over the
rugged terrain. If they were overtaken, they might be cut down where
they stood or slept, drowned in the nearest available burn, or taken as
prisoners for hanging or exchange at the next opportunity.
Life was held relatively
cheap — violent deaths were after all necessary to keep the population
in rough balance with local resources (whether legitimate or stolen),
and killing a man was a less serious offence than breaking one’s word.
On the other hand, Borderers generally refrained from killing women,
except by accident in the course of burning a shack.
Such approximate order as
existed was maintained by the Scottish kings on their own side and by
the Wardens of the Marches on both sides: the English kings seldom
ventured beyond York except in actual war, and not often even then,
since they feared their own magnates (with good reason) at least as much
as they feared the Scots. On each side there was a Warden of the
Marches, responsible for the whole frontier, and Wardens of the East,
Middle and West Marches, each responsible for one sector, but possibly
also holding down the top job (Home did so frequently, Ferniehirst
occasionally). The Wardens were usually great landowners on the Scottish
side (Home in the East, Ker of Cessford or Kerr of Ferniehirst in the
Centre and Maxwell in the West), because their job was crucial to
Scotland’s defence, this country having little depth as compared with
England, and it was imperative that they should have a substantial force
under their immediate and personal command. On the English side they
were non-local knights (except for Sir John Forster) as the King felt he
could more easily control them and more safely trust them then he could
rely on his own Northern Lords.
The Wardens responsible
on either side for each sector, or "March", met, traditionally
on the Border itself or very close to it, at more or less regular
intervals. On those days, the chronic state of undeclared war was
officially suspended and Scots and English took the opportunity to
drink, socialise and trade while their leaders resolved disputes about
stolen property, exchanged captured criminals, or hanged them on the
spot.
The game of musical
chairs was brought to an abrupt end by the Union of Crowns in 1603.
Defence against England, now ruled by the King of Scots who had migrated
there, could no longer justify the presence of a large number of armed
and generally lawless men, or at least the King no longer saw a need to
be defended against himself, and a ruthless pruning operation was
therefore carried out in the first decade of the century. Hundreds of
reivers were executed, some being fried afterwards to establish that
they were in fact guilty — this being the procedure known as Jethart
Justice. Hundreds more were sent as colonists to Ulster or as soldiers
to English-held towns in the Netherlands, or to assist James’ daughter
and her husband in Bohemia.
The Kerrs had generally
taken the side of (Scottish) authority, at least in principle, during
the three centuries of chronic war; hence we did not suffer much in the
pacification process, but the leaders of the family switched their
talents from raiding, feuding and rough justice to administration,
regular soldiering and even to literature and scholarship, something for
which the Borders had not been noted since the days of Duns Scotus and
Thomas the Rhymer of Earlston, For these purposes, Newbattle Abbey, an
hour’s ride from Edinburgh, was better suited than Ferniehirst, which
therefore ceased to be their principal seat.
FOOTNOTES
1 .The King of Scots was himself
an earl in England, and did homage to the King of England for his
English lands. The English king often chose to interpret this homage for
Scotland itself, and the Wars of Independence were fought over this
issue. Balliol received the Scottish Crown by the arbitration award of
Norham (1292) and did homage for Scotland to Edward I, thinking the
duties involved would be fairly nominal Edward however asserted his
authority to the full, and beyond, and BalIioI then withdrew his
allegiance, whereupon Edward invaded Scotland, sacked Berwick and
massacred its population and asserted direct rule. The state of chronic
warfare on the Border dates from this massacre: it began to die down
after the Raid of Redeswire (1575) and was finally extinguished after
the Scottish foray into Cumbria known as "Ill Week" (April
1603) during the brief "interregnum" while James VI was moving
down to London to assume his throne as James I.
2.Known as the Treaty of
Northampton in English history. It was in fad negotiated in Edinburgh,
where Robert I signed it, while Edward III affixed his seal to it in
Northampton.
3.Neither country had a
"capital" in the modern sense until at least half-way through
the period we are considering. Both kings moved about within a
"heartland" which contained much or most of the country’s
wealth as well as its administrative services, such as they were, and
each governed his kingdom from wherever he happened to be at the time,
calling Parliament when and where it suited him. James IV’s last
Parliament actually met on English soil, a few days before Flodden.
However, this heartland and the
Border area overlapped in Scotland, whereas in England they were a clear
150 miles apart (the distance from Leicester to Durham). Hence the King
of Scots was under more constant threat both from his own lords and from
the national enemy than the King of England. If we accept that James V,
still a young man, died from intense depression following the military
disaster of Solway Moss, no Sovereign of Scots died a natural death in
his own country after Robert III (1401), James VI having moved to the
greater safety of England, from which he could rule Scotland "by
the stroke of a pen".
But it should be noted that
several Kings of England also died violent deaths during the same period
(1300-1500 approx.) Edward II, Richard II, Henry VI, Edward V and
Richard III the first four being murdered while the last fell at
Bosworth.
4.This was not such an irrational
system as it seems to us today. Most of the condemned men had committed
crimes of some kind, even if they were not the ones "proved"
against them; they were hanged on their whole record rather than for any
one offence, and their surviving victims were less afraid to give
evidence against them once they were safely dead than while they lived
and could take revenge.
5.James’ daughter, Elizabeth,
married Frederick, the Elector Palatine, who was one of the princes
entitled to vote in the election of the "Holy Roman" (German)
Emperor. Frederick was himself elected King of Bohemia, the western part
of present-day Czechoslovakia, but was expelled from it, and from his
own lands around Heidelberg, by the Emperor’s armies. This was the
start of the Thirty Years’ War (1618-48), which inflicted greater
damage on Germany than either of the World Wars inflicted on any country
— not so much through the actual fighting, but because the armies on
both sides ate everything in sight, including the seed-corn, and thus
starved out the population of the areas through which they passed. Their
daughter Sophia married the Elector of Hanover; she was the mother of
George I and the ancestor of the present Royal Family, there being no
proven legitimate descendants of James VI & I in the male line,
after the death of Henry Cardinal York (Bonnie Prince Charlie’s
brother). From time to time various theories have been floated about
secret marriages by Charles II or by Bonnie Prince Charlie, and claims
have been asserted — though not vigorously pursued — on that basis;
but nobody has come up with any firm evidence to substantiate them.