84

had been yet formed, we may from this gain some idea of the amount of knowledge possessed by the people at large.8 Their minds must have been immersed in a darkness which we can now barely conceive. No trades, or arts, being practised which required skill, or dexterity, there was nothing to exercise their intellects. They consequently remained so stupid and brutal, that an intelligent observer, who visited Scotland in the year 1360, likens them to savages, so much was he struck by their barbarism and their unsocial manners.85 Another writer, early in the fifteenth century, uses the same expression; and, classing them with the animals which they tended, he declares that Scotland is fuller of savages than of cattle.86

By this combination of events, and by this union of ignorance with danger, the clergy had, in the fifteenth century, obtained more influence in Scotland than in any other European country, Spain alone excepted. And as the power of the nobles had increased quite as rapidly, it was natural that the crown, completely overshadowed by the great barons, should turn for aid to the Church. During the fifteenth century, and part of the sixteenth, this alliance was strictly preserved;87 and the political Early in the sixteenth century, I find it casually mentioned, that "David Straiton, a cadet of the house of Laureston," "could not read." Wodrow's Collections, vol. i. pp. 5, 6. The famous chief, Walter Scott of Harden, was married in 1567; and "his marriage contract is signed by a notary, because none of the parties could write their names." Chambers' Annals, vol. i. p. 46. Crawfurd (History of Renfrew, part iii. p. 313) says: "the modern practice of subscribing names to writes of moment was not used in Scotland till about the year 1540;" but he forgets to tell us why it was not used. In 1564, Robert Scot of Thirlstane, "ancestor of Lord Napier," could not sign his name. See Pitcairn's Criminal Trials in Scotland, vol. iii. p. 394.

A Scotchman, of considerable learning, says: Scotland was no less ignorant and superstitious at the beginning of the fifteenth century, than it was towards the close of the twelfth." Dalrymple's Annals of Scotland, vol. i. p. 428.

85 66 "Et sont ainsi comme gens sauvages qui ne se savent avoir ni de nulli accointer. Les Chroniques de Froissart, edit. Buchon, Paris, 1835, vol. ii. p. 315.

86" Plus pleine de sauvagine que de bestail." Hist. de Charles VI, par Le Laboureur, quoted in Pinkerton's History of Scotland, vol. i. p. 149.

87 Occasionally, we find evidence of it earlier, but it was hardly system

history of Scotland is the history of a struggle by the kings and the clergy against the enormous authority of the nobles. The contest, after lasting about a hundred and sixty years, was brought to a close in 1560, by the triumph of the aristocracy, and the overthrow of the Church. With such force, however, had the circumstance just narrated, engrained superstition into the Scotch character, that the spiritual classes quickly rallied, and, under their new name of Protestants, they became as formidable as under their old name of Catholics. Forty-three years after the establishment of the Reformation in Scotland, James VI. ascended the throne of England, and was able to array the force of the southern country against the refractory barons of the northern. From that moment the Scotch aristocracy began to decline; and, the equipoise to the clergy being removed, the Church became so powerful, that, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it was the most effectual obstacle to the progress of Scotland; and even now it exercises a sway which is incomprehensible to those who have not carefully studied the whole chain of its antecedents. To trace with minuteness the long course of affairs which has led to this unfortunate result, would be incompatible with the object of an Introduction, whose only aim it is to establish broad and general principles. But, to bring the question clearly before the mind of the reader, it will be necessary, that I should give a slight sketch of the relation which the nobles bore to the clergy in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and of the way in which their relative position, and their implacable hatred of each other, brought about the Reformation. By this means, we shall perceive, that the great Protestant movement, which, in other countries, was democratic, was, in Scotland, aristocratic. We shall also see, that, in Scotland, the Reformation, not being the work of the people, has never produced the effects which might have

atic. Compare Tytler's History of Scotland, vol. i. p. 66, with Dalrymple's Annals, vol. i. pp. 72, 110, 111, 194, vol. iii. p. 296; Nimmo's History of Stirlingshire, p. 88; Chalmers' History of Dunfermline, pp. 133, 134.

been expected from it, and which it did produce in England. It is, indeed, but too evident, that, while in England, Protestantism has diminished superstition, has weakened the clergy, has increased toleration, and, in a word, has secured the triumph of secular interests over ecclesiastical ones, its result in Scotland has been entirely different; and that, in that country, the Church, changing its form, without altering its spirit, not only cherished its ancient pretensions, but unhappily retained its ancient power; and that, although that power is now dwindling away, the Scotch preachers still exhibit, whenever they dare, an insolent and domineering spirit, which shows how much real weakness there yet lurks in the nation, where such extravagant claims are not immediately silenced by the voice of loud and general ridicule.

CHAPTER III.

CONDITION OF SCOTLAND IN THE FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES.

EARLY in the fifteenth century, the alliance between the Crown and the Church, and the determination of that alliance to overthrow the nobles, became manifest. Indications of this may be traced in the policy of Albany, who was Regent from 1406 to 1419, and who made it his principal object to encourage and strengthen the clergy. He also dealt the first great blow upon which any government had ventured against the aristocracy. Donald, who was one of the most powerful of the Scottish chieftains, and who, indeed, by the possession of the Western Isles, was almost an independent prince, had seized the earldom of Ross, which, if he could have retained, would have enabled him to set the Crown at defiance. Albany, backed by the Church, marched into his territories, in 1411, forced him to renounce the earldom, to make personal submission, and to give hostages for his future conduct.2 So vigorous a proceeding on the part of the executive, was extremely unusual in Scotland; and it was the first of a series of aggressions, which ended in the Crown obtaining for itself, not only

"The Church was eminently favoured by Albany." Pinkerton's History of Scotland, vol. i. p. 86. But Pinkerton misunderstands his policy in regard to the nobles.

2 Skene's Highlanders, vol. ii. pp. 72-74; Browne's History of the Highlands, vol. i. p. 162, vol. iv. pp. 435, 436.

3 Chalmers (Caledonia, vol. i. pp. 826, 827), referring to the state of things before Albany, says, "There is not a trace of any attempt by Robert II. to limit the power of the nobles, whatever he may have added, by his improvident grants, to their independence. He appears not to have attempted to raise the royal prerogative from the debasement, in which the imprudence and misfortunes of David II. had left it." And, of his suc

Ross, but also the Western Isles. The policy inaugurated by Albany, was followed up with still greater energy by James I. In 1424, this bold and active prince procured an enactment, obliging many of the nobles to show their charters, in order that it might be ascertained what lands they held, which had formerly belonged to the Crown. And, to conciliate the affections of the clergy, he, in 1425, issued a commission, authorizing the Bishop of Saint Andrews to restore to the Church whatever had been alienated from it; while he at the same time directed that the justiciaries should assist in enforcing execution of the decree. This occurred in June; and what shows that it was part of a general scheme is, that in the preceding spring, the king suddenly arrested, in the parliament assembled at Perth, upwards of twenty of the principal nobles, put four of them to death, and confiscated several of their estates. Two years afterwards, he, with equal perfidy, summoned the Highland chiefs to meet him at cessor, Robert III., "So mild a prince, and so weak a man, was not very likely to make any attempt upon the power of others, when he could scarcely support his own."

In 1476, "the Earldom of Ross was inalienably annexed to the Crown; and a great blow was thus struck at the power and grandeur of a family which had so repeatedly disturbed the tranquillity of Scotland." Gregory's History of the Western Highlands, Edinburgh, 1836, p. 50. In 1493, "John, fourth and last Lord of the Isles, was forfeited, and deprived of his title and estates." Ibid. p. 58.

5 As those who held crown lands were legally, though not in reality, the king's tenants, the act declared, that "gif it like the king, he may ger sumonde all and sindry his tenand at lauchfull day and place to schawe thar chartis." The Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 4, § 9, edit. folio, 1814.

"On the 8th June 1425, James issued a commission to Henry, bishop of St. Andrews, authorising him to resume all alienations from the Church, with power of anathema, and orders to all justiciaries to assist. This curious paper is preserved in Harl. Ms. 4637, vol. iii. f. 189." Pinkerton's History of Scotland, vol. i. p. 116. Archbishop Spottiswoode, delighted with his policy, calls him a "good king," and says that he built for the Carthusians " a beautiful monastery at Perth, bestowing large revenues upon the same." Spottiswoode's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 113. And Keith assures us that, on one occasion, James I. went so far as to give to one of the bishops "a silver cross, in which was contained a bit of the wooden cross, on which the apostle St. Andrew had been crucified." Keith's Catalogue of Scotch Bishops, Edinburgh, 1755, 4to, p. 67. Compare Balfour's Annales, vol. i. pp. 153-156, with Pinkerton's History, vol. i. pp. 113-115. Between these two authorities there is a slight, but unimportant, discrepancy.