When Alexander III was killed, on the 19th March, 1285-86, the relations
between England and Scotland were such that Edward I was amply justified
in looking forward to a permanent union. Since the ill-fated invasion of
William the Lion in 1174, there had been no serious warfare between the
two countries, and in recent years they had become more and more
friendly in their dealings with each other. The late king had married
Edward's sister, Margaret, and the child-queen was her grand-daughter;
Alexander and Margaret had been present at the English King's coronation
in 1274; and, in addition to these personal connections, Scotland had
found England a friend in its great final struggle with the Danes. The
misfortunes which had overtaken Scotland in the premature deaths[41] of
Alexander and his three children might yet prove a very real blessing,
if they prepared the way for the creation of a great island kingdom,
which should be at once free and united. The little Margaret, the Maid
of Norway, Edward's grand-niece, had been acknowledged heir to the
throne of her grandfather, in February, 1283-84, and on his death her
succession was admitted. The Great Council met at Scone in April, 1286,
and appointed six Guardians of the Kingdom. It was no easy task which
was entrusted to them, for the claim of a child and a foreigner could
not but be disputed by the barons who stood nearest to the throne. The
only rival who attempted to rebel was Robert Bruce of Annandale, who had
been promised the succession by Alexander II, and had been disappointed
of the fulfilment of his hopes by the birth of the late king in 1241.
The deaths of two of the guardians added to the difficulties of the
situation, and it was with something like relief that the Scots heard
that Eric of Norway, the father of their queen, wished to come to an
arrangement with Edward of England, in whose power he lay. The result of
Eric's negotiations with Edward was that a conference met at Salisbury
in 1289, and was attended, on Edward's invitation, by four Scottish
representatives, who included Robert Bruce and three of the guardians.
Such were the troubles of the country that the Scots willingly acceded
to Edward's proposals, which gave him an interest in the government of
Scotland, and they heard with delight that he contemplated the marriage
of their little queen to his son Edward, then two years of age. The
English king was assured of the satisfaction which such a marriage would
give to Scotland, and the result was that, by the Treaty of Brigham, in
1290, the marriage was duly arranged. Edward had previously obtained the
necessary dispensation from the pope.
The eagerness with which the
Scots welcomed the proposal of marriage was
sufficient evidence that
the time had come for carrying out Edward's
statesmanlike scheme, but
the conditions which were annexed to it should
have warned him that
there were limits to the Scottish compliance with
his wishes. Scotland
was not in any way to be absorbed by England,
although the crowns would
be united in the persons of Edward and
Margaret. Edward wisely made no
attempt to force Scotland into any more
complete union, although he
could not but expect that the union of the
crowns would prepare the way
for a union of the kingdoms. He certainly
interpreted in the widest
sense the rights given him by the treaty of
Brigham, but when the Scots
objected to his demand that all Scottish
castles should be placed in
his power, he gave way without rousing
further suspicion or
indignation. Hitherto, his policy had been
characterized by the great
sagacity which he had shown in his conduct of
English affairs; it is
impossible to refuse either to sympathize with
his ideals or to admire
the tact he displayed in his negotiations with
Scotland. His
considerateness extended even to the little Maid of
Norway, for whose
benefit he victualled, with raisins and other fruit,
the "large ship"
which he sent to conduct her to England. But the large
ship returned to
England with a message from King Eric that he would not
entrust his
daughter to an English vessel. The patient Edward sent it
back again,
and it was probably in it that the child set sail in
September, 1290.
Some weeks later, Bishop Fraser of St. Andrews, one of
the guardians,
and a supporter of the English interest, wrote to Edward
that he had
heard a "sorrowful rumour" regarding the queen.[42] The
rumour proved
to be well-founded; in circumstances which are unknown to
us, the poor
girl-queen died on her voyage, and her death proved a fatal
blow to the
work on which Edward had been engaged for the last four
years.
Of the thirteen[43] competitors who put forward claims to the crown,
only three need be here mentioned. They were each descended from David,
Earl of Huntingdon, brother of William the Lion and grandson of David I.
The claimant who, according to the strict rules of primogeniture, had
the best right was John Balliol, the grandson of Margaret, the eldest
daughter of Earl David. His most formidable opponent was Robert Bruce of
Annandale, the son of Earl David's second daughter, Isabella, who based
his candidature on the fact that he was the grandson, whereas Balliol
was the great-grandson, of the Earl of Huntingdon, through whom both the
rivals claimed. The third, John Hastings, was the grandson of David's
youngest daughter, Ada. Bishop Fraser, in the letter to which we have
already referred, urged Edward I to interfere in favour of John Balliol,
who might be employed to further English interests in Scotland. The
English king thereupon decided to put forward a definite claim to be
lord paramount, and, in virtue of that right, to decide the disputed
succession.
Since Richard I had restored his independence to
William the Lion, in1189, the question of the overlordship had lain
almost entirely dormant. On John's succession, William had done homage
"saving his own right",
but whether the homage was for Scotland or
solely for his English fiefs
was not clear. His successor, Alexander
II, aided Louis of France against the infant Henry III, and, after the
battle of Lincoln, came to
an agreement with the regent, by which he
did homage to Henry III, but
only for the earldom of Huntingdon and his
other possessions in Henry's
kingdom. After the fall of Hubert de
Burgh, Henry used his influence
with Pope Gregory IX, who looked upon
the English king as a valuable
ally in the great struggle with
Frederick II, to persuade the pope to
order the King of Scots to
acknowledge Henry as his overlord (1234).
Alexander refused to comply
with the papal injunction, and the matter
was not definitely settled.
Henry made no attempt to enforce his claim,
and merely came to an
agreement with Alexander regarding the English
possessions of the
Scottish king (1236). During the minority of
Alexander III, when Henry
was, for two years, the real ruler of Scotland
(1255-1257), he
described himself not as lord paramount, but as chief
adviser of the
Scottish king. Lastly, when, in 1278, Alexander III took
a solemn oath
of homage to Edward at Westminster, he, according to the
Scottish
account of the affair, made an equally solemn avowal that to
God alone
was his homage due for the kingdom of Scotland, and Edward had
accepted
the homage thus rendered.
It is thus clear that Edward regarded the
claim of the overlordship as a
"trump card" to be played only in
special circumstances, and these
appeared now to have arisen. The death
of the Maid of Norway had deprived him of his right to interfere in the
affairs of Scotland, and had destroyed his hopes of a marriage
alliance. It seemed to him that
all hope of carrying out his Scottish
policy had vanished, unless he
could take advantage of the helpless
condition of the country to obtain
a full and final recognition of a
claim which had been denied for
exactly a hundred years. At first it
seemed as if the scheme were to
prove satisfactory. The Norman nobles
who claimed the throne declared,
after some hesitation, their
willingness to acknowledge Edward's claim
to be lord paramount, and the
English king was therefore arbiter of the
situation. He now obtained
what he had asked in vain in the preceding
year--the delivery into
English hands of all Scottish strongholds (June,
1291). Edward delayed
his decision till the 17th November, 1292, when,
after much disputation
regarding legal precedents, and many
consultations with Scottish
commissioners and the English Parliament, he
finally adjudged the crown
to John Balliol. It cannot be argued that the
decision was unfair; but
Edward was fortunate in finding that the
candidate whose hereditary
claim was strongest was also the man most
fitted to occupy the position
of a vassal king. The new monarch made a
full and indisputable
acknowledgment of his position as Edward's liege,
and the great seal of
the kingdom of Scotland was publicly destroyed in
token of the position
of vassalage in which the country now stood. Of
what followed it is
difficult to speak with any certainty. Balliol
occupied the throne for
three and a half years, and was engaged, during
the whole of that
period, in disputes with his superior. The details
need not detain us.
Edward claimed to be final judge in all Scottish
cases; he summoned
Balliol to his court to plead against one of the
Scottish king's own
vassals, and to receive instructions with regard to
the raising of
money for Edward's needs. It may fairly be said that
Edward's treatment
of Balliol does give grounds for the view of Scottish
historians that
the English king was determined, from the first, to goad
his wretched
vassal into rebellion in order to give him an opportunity
of absorbing
the country in his English kingdom. On the other hand, it
may be argued
that, if this was Edward's aim, he was singularly
unfortunate in the
time he chose for forcing a crisis. He was at war
with Philip IV of
France; Madoc was raising his Welsh rebellion; and
Edward's seizure of
wool had created much indignation among his own
subjects. However this
may be, it is certain that Balliol, rankling with
a sense of injustice
caused by the ignominy which Edward had heaped upon
him, and rendered
desperate by the complaints of his own subjects,
decided, by the advice
of the Great Council, to disown his allegiance to
the King of England,
and to enter upon an alliance with France. It is
noteworthy that the
policy of the French alliance, as an anti-English
movement, which
became the watchword of the patriotic party in Scotland,
was
inaugurated by John Balliol. The Scots commenced hostilities by some
predatory incursions into the northern counties of England in 1295-96.
Whether or not Edward was waiting for the opportunity thus given him,
he certainly took full advantage of it. Undisturbed by his numerous
difficulties, he marched northwards to the town of Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Tradition tells that he was exasperated by insults showered upon him by
the inhabitants, but the story cannot go far to excuse the massacre
which followed the capture of the town. After more than a century of
peace, the first important act of war was marked by a brutality which
was a fitting prelude to more than two centuries of fierce and bloody
fighting. On Edward's policy of "Thorough," as exemplified at Berwick,
must rest, to some extent, the responsibility for the unnecessary
ferocity which distinguished the Scottish War of Independence. It was,
from a military stand-point, a complete and immediate success;
politically, it was unquestionably a failure. From Berwick-on-Tweed
Edward marched to Dunbar, cheered by the formal announcement of
Balliol's renunciation of his allegiance. He easily defeated the Scots
at Dunbar, in April, 1296, and continued an undisturbed progress through
Scotland, the castles of Dunbar, Roxburgh, Edinburgh, and Stirling
falling into his hands. Balliol determined to submit, and, on the 7th
July, 1296, he met Edward in the churchyard of Stracathro, near Brechin,
and formally resigned his office into the hands of his overlord. Balliol
was imprisoned in England for three years, but, in July, 1299, he was
permitted to go to his estate of Bailleul, in Normandy, where he
survived till April, 1313.
Edward now treated Scotland as a
conquered country under his own
immediate rule. He continued his
progress, by Aberdeen, Banff, and
Cullen, to Elgin, whence, in July,
1296, he marched southwards by Scone,
whence he carried off the Stone
of Fate, which is now part of the
Coronation Chair in Westminster
Abbey. He also despoiled Scotland of
many of its early records, which
might serve to remind his new subjects
of their forfeited independence.
He did not at once determine the new
constitution of the country, but
left it under a military occupation,
with John de Warrenne, Earl of
Surrey, as Governor, Hugh de Cressingham
as Treasurer, and William
Ormsby as Justiciar. All castles and other
strong places were in
English hands, and Edward regarded his conquest as
assured.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 41: David, the youngest child of Alexander and
Margaret of England, died in June, 1281; Alexander, his older brother,
in January,1283-84; and their sister, Margaret, Queen of Norway, in
April, 1283.Neither Alexander nor David left any issue, and the little
daughter ofthe Queen of Norway was only about three years old when her
grandfather, Alexander III, was killed.]
[Footnote 42: Nat. MSS.
i. 36, No. LXX.]
[Footnote 43: Cf. Table, App. C.]
|