BORDER REIVERS, Uncategorized

CLAN CARRUTHERS – BORDER REIVERS-STEEL BONNET AND LANCE

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS                              PROMPTUS ET FIDELIS

 

coatofarms header-2

 

STEEL BONNET AND LANCE

The Border Reiver was a specialist, and needed special equipment, the most important part of which was his horse. “They reckon it a great disgrace for anyone to make a journey on foot,” wrote Leslie, and Froissart had noted two centuries earlier how the Scots at war “are all a-horseback . . . the common people on little hackneys and geldings.” The Border horses, called hobblers or hobbys, were small and active, and trained to cross the most difficult and boggy country, “and to get over where our footmen could scarce dare to follow.”

Such precious animals naturally attracted legislation, particularly in England, where horses were in short supply. In the late 1500s their export to Scotland was strictly banned; Hunsdon “condemde sundry” for this treason in 1587, and complained that English gentlemen were involved in the illicit trade. It was a well-broken law in both directions, for Scotland had banned horse export twenty years earlier, with no great success.

border-reivers-l_tcm4-565625

The Scots had long been noted horse-breeders, so much so that legislation was occasionally passed to restrain production. By statute of 1214 every Scot of property must own at least one horse, and in 1327 the country could put 20,000 cavalry into the field. Export to England at that time was highly profitable, and was carried on even by men of rank. The Stuart kings imported from Hungary, Poland, and Spain to improve the breed, and there emerged the small, swift unusually hardy mounts which in James IV’s time were reputed to be able to cover as much as 150 miles in a day. They must have been short miles.

However, even allowing for exaggeration, such horses were ideal all-purpose mounts both for peace-time raiders and war-time light cavalry. They enabled the Border riders to muster and move men at high speed over remarkable distances. A leader like young Buccleuch could raise 2000 horse at short notice, able to strike faster and at far greater range than would have seemed credible to an ordinary cavalry commander; between sixty and eighty miles a day seems to have been within their capability. In addition, the horses were cheap to buy and easy to maintain: there is evidence that they did not even need shoeing.

The Border rider, as he sat his hobbler, was a most workmanlike figure, far more streamlined than the ordinary cavalryman of his time. His appearance was “base and beggarly” by military standards, and this applied to the lords as well as to the lowly. “All clad a lyke in jackes cooverd with whyte leather, dooblettes of the same or of fustian, and most commonly all white hosen,” Patten noted after Pinkie (1547). “Not one with either cheine, brooch, ryng or garment of silke that I coold see. . . . This vilnes of port was the caus that so many of their great men and gentlemen wear kyld and so fewe saved. The outwarde sheaw . . . whearby a stranger might discern a villain from a gentleman, was not amoong them to be seen.”

On his head the rider wore the steel bonnet, which in the early part of the century was usually the salade hat, basically a metal bowl with or without a peak, or the burgonet, a rather more stylish helmet which, in its lightest form, was open and peaked. These head-pieces, many of which would be home-made by local smiths, were gradually replaced in Elizabethan times by the morion, with its curved brim, comb, and occasional ear pieces.

Over his shirt the rider might wear a mail coat, but the more normal garment was the jack, a quilted coat of stout leather sewn with plates of metal or horn for added protection. It was far lighter than armour, and almost as effective against cuts and thrusts; backs and breasts of steel might be worn by the wealthier Borderers, but for horsemen whose chief aim was to travel light they were a mixed blessing. The Scots Borderers were officially recognised by the Privy Council as “licht horsemen” who were not obliged to serve in heavy armour during war; the English Borderers, when employed on campaigns, were similarly used as scouts and “prickers”.

Leather boots and breeches completed the clothing, which was without badges except in war-time, when the riders wore kerchiefs tied round their arms as signs of recognition, as well as the crosses of St George or St Andrew, according to their nationality—or their allegiance. Embroidered letters attached to their caps were also used for war-time identification. (There was a suspicion in the English Army in the 1540s that the English March riders used these identifying signs not only to be known to each other, but “that thei used them for collusion, and rather bycaus thei might be knowen to th’enemie, as the enemies are knowen to them, for thei have their markes too, and so in conflict either each to spare other, or gently each to take other. Indede men have becen mooved the rather to thinke so, bycaus sum of their crosses—the English red cross—were so narrow, and so singly set on, that a puff of wynde might blowed them from their breasts.”)

This light and serviceable costume, so suitable for the cut-and-run activities of its wearer, reflected also the changing military patterns of the day. The sixteenth century saw a revolution in warfare; it was the bridge between the medieval knights and men-at-arms, with their heavy armour and weapons, and the age of firepower.

Gunpowder had come into its own, and when it was discovered that mail did not stop a bullet, the whole concept of protective equipment changed. Long leather boots took the place of greaves, plate gave way to the reinforced coat, and the knight’s casque to the open helmet.

The great change, of course, was in missile weapons. For two centuries England’s military thinking had been dominated by one of the most lethal hand weapons in the history of warfare: the six-foot long bow with which the English peasant had mastered the powers of chivalry. Naturally, England was reluctant to change from this proven battle-winner, and in this as in most other military developments she lagged behind the Continent, even under such a war-conscious monarch as Henry VIII.

The hand-gun v. long bow controversy, which reached a climax in Elizabeth’s reign, was a bitter one. The bow school, apart from their sentimental reasons, urged the efficiency of the archer who could despatch twelve shots a minute into a man-sized target at 200 paces (practice at shorter ranges was actually forbidden in Henry’s time); against this the new arquebus could fire only ten to twelve shots an hour when Elizabeth came to the throne, although the rate had risen to thirty-five to forty by 1600. An arquebus was unsuitable in wet weather, it was cumbersome, and it cost 30s. (A bow cost about 6s 8d, with arrows). The Earl of Sussex, on the Border in 1569, demanded archers, not “ill-furnished harquebusiers”, and local opinion seems to have supported him; the tenants of Home Cultram, as late as 1596, rejected calivers as too expensive.

But the fire-arms lobby, which included such influential figures as the veteran Sir Roger Williams, eventually got their way; in the 1560s the majority of English infantry carried the long bow, but by 1600 it was virtually obsolete in the country as a whole. On the Border, however, where a light, rapid-fire weapon was needed, the bow lived longer; in Leith Ward, Cumberland, in 1580, the muster roll showed over 800 bowmen to nine arquebusiers, and in the 1583 muster the English West March counted 2500 archers, with no mention of fire-arms. Hundreds of hand-guns with ammunition were sent to Berwick in 1592, but the powder was unreliable, and as for the guns, “when they were shot in, some of them brake, and hurte divers mennes hands.” In the same year Richard Lowther asked only for bows for the defence of Carlisle.

Middle March Clans-v2

Like the local peasant infantry, the Border riders also used the bow, but there is increasing mention as the century progresses of their carrying arquebuses, the light pieces called calivers, and the dag, the heavy hand-gun which was the rough equivalent of the modern large-calibre pistol.

The principal close-quarter weapons of the Border foot soldier were the bill, the long cleaver-cum-pike which had lasted through the Middle Ages, the spear, and a local arm called the Jedburgh axe, with a distinctive round cutting edge. Swords are seldom mentioned in the English muster rolls, but the March riders of both sides certainly carried them, occasionally with small shields.

However, in peace or war, the rider’s favourite weapon was the lance. These were sometimes over thirteen feet long, but usually must have been shorter. They were used couched, for thrusting, and also for throwing. Camden describes the Borderers on horseback spearing salmon in the Solway; anyone who has tried to spear fish on foot will appreciate the expertise required to do it from the saddle.

Eure pronounced on this Border skill without qualification: he found the March riders better at handling lances on horseback than Yorkshiremen, and “better prickers in a chase as knowing the mosses, more nimble on foot.”

This then was the Borderer’s armoury, for war-time campaign or peace-time raid. So if one mounts the reiver on his hobbler, with steel cap, jack, lance, cutting-sword, dagger, and hand-gun, he is fully equipped and ready to be pointed at the target—farm, village or grazing herd, peel tower or sheiling. This, quite literally, was his day’s work.

Preserving Our Past, Recording Our Present, Informing Our Future

Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan Int Society LLC

carrothersclan@gmail.com   CARRUTHERSCLAN1@GMAIL.COM

cropped-wider-banner-green.jpg

 

You can find us on facebook at :

https://www.facebook.com/carrutherscarrothers.pat.9

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClan/

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClanLLC

 

Disclaimer Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan International Society CCIS LLC

 

 

BORDER REIVERS, Uncategorized

CLAN CARRUTHERS – LANG SANDY OF ROWANBURN

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS                            PROMPTUS ET FIDELIS

coatofarms header-2

 

LANG SANDY OF ROWANBURN

 

For many years a wooden statue of Alexander Armstrong has stood in the Scottish Borders village of Rowanburn; up to 1552 Rowanburn was part of the notorious Debateable Land, one of the most dangerous places in Europe. The Debateable Land was a small area of the English Scottish Border country that belonged to neither country but which was contested by both.

Lang-Sandy-was-one-of-the-Border-Reivers-who-Murdered-Sir-John-Carmichael
Lang-Sandy-of-Rowanburn-Canonbie-Scottish-Borders

Known as ‘Lang (Long) Sandy’ because of his prodigious height, he was executed in 1606 because of his involvement in the murder of Sir John Carmichael, Scottish West March Warden, in 1600.

The wooden statue has succumbed to age and the elements, its very framework rotting. Recently a magnificent stone replacement was commissioned. That now stands in pride of place where the ‘old’ wooden Sandy once reigned supreme.

Lang-Sandy-Armstrong-hailed-from-Rowanburn
The-2011-Stone-Statue-of-Lang-Sandy-Armstrong

So what to do with the original wooden Sandy? Consign him to the fire or endeavour to preserve him? Give him peace and rest after the long years he has stood sentinel in the centre of the lovely village of Rowanburn, guarding the ground in front of where his formidable fortified  tower home once stood?
Refuge for the ‘old boy’ was the clamour from the lovers of Border Reiver history. After some deliberation it was agreed that Sandy should be looked after, nurtured, and spend his last days and dotage indoors. The Clan Armstrong Museum (see http://www.armstrongclan.org.uk/) in Langholm just over the hills to the west of Rowanburn, was the obvious place to ‘retire’ the great Scottish Reiver.

Accordingly Lang Sandy was removed from his watch over Rowanburn, laid on his back and transported to Langholm to spend the next few weeks prostrate outside the door of the Clan Armstrong Museum.

At the end of January I, with three burly mechanics from my place of work, descended on Ewesdale and Langholm – our goal – the Clan Armstrong Trust and defenceless Lang Sandy. Armed with jacks and lifting gear we soon had the great Scottish Border Reiver through the door of the museum.

Now he stands sentinel there, looking towards the scant remains of Langholm castle, ever watchful of the English rogues who forage north and head west at this point, bent on raiding Annandale.

Sandy will soon get a make-over. Once re-juvenated, he will be a superb attraction for the Armstrong museum and fit and strong to contest any raid into Langholm and Ewesdale.

 

Preserving Our Past, Recording Our Present, Informing Our Future

Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan Society Int CCIS

carruthersclan1@gmail.com      carrothersclan@gmail.com

WIDER BANNER Green

 

TOM MOSS SCOTLAND

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS   BORDER REIVER HISTORIAN

 

You can find us on facebook at :

https://www.facebook.com/carrutherscarrothers.pat.9

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClan/

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClanLLC

 

Disclaimer Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan International Society CCIS L
BORDER REIVERS, Uncategorized

CLAN CARRUTHERS – BORDER REIVERS – ENGLISH AND SCOTS

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS                                 PROMPTUS ET FIDELIS

coatofarms header-2

 

BORDER REIVERS – ENGLISH AND SCOTS – SAME OR DIFFERENT SOCIAL GROUPS

 

Now and again I come across interesting, sometimes fascinating articles, about the Border Reivers. Recently my wanderings around the Web led me to a paper entitled ‘The Laws of Lawlessness’ by Peter Leeson, Professor for the Study of Capitalism at George Mason University, Virginia, U.S.A.

In an introduction to his paper Professor Leeson summarises the basis of his premise that, ‘according to conventional wisdom, self-governance cannot facilitate order between the members of different social groups’.

It is as well to know at this stage that he considered the people of the Anglo-Scottish borderlands in the 16th century. By different social groups he means the English and Scottish Border Reivers . By self-governance he is referring to the Leges Marchiarum, the Laws of the Borders.

For this post I am not immediately concerned with Professor Leeson’s hypothesis about the Border Laws. Rather I would like to consider his premise that the Border Reivers of England and Scotland were two different social groups.

Border Reivers at Langholm Castle
(Courtesy of Bill Ewart, Local Artist, Langholm)

He states:  ‘The Border people belonged to two social groups at constant war with one another. These people pillaged and plundered one another as a way of life they called ‘reiving’.

‘Within groups, shared norms, beliefs, knowledge and social affiliations create the cohesiveness and information flow required to effectively monitor and punish dishonest group members. Between groups, in contrast, (our Border Reivers, north and south of the Border Line) there is no such cohesiveness or automatic information flow… As a result violent conflicts flourish…’

There is no doubt that violent conflict flourished but was it because the Reivers were from two different social groups?

Perhaps we should consider other writers who had a life-long interest in the history of the Border Reivers.

In the ‘Steel Bonnets’ by George MacDonald Fraser, there is a section of a chapter, ‘The People of the Marches’ entitled ‘Hands Across the Border’.

Fraser introduces this with a paragraph from ‘The Complaynt of Scotland’. This book, printed anonymously in 1549 outlines the war of words between England and Scotland. A little of the paragraph will suffice:-

‘for ther hes been grit (great) familiaritie, and conventions and makying of merchandries, on the boidours, this lang tyme betwixt Inglis (English) and Scottis men, bayth (both) in pace (peace) and weir (war)…

‘Great familiarity on the Borders this long time’ would seem to convey a different impression to that conveyed by Professor Leeson of the situation that pertained between the people north and south of the English Scottish Border in the times of the Border Reivers.

MacDonald Fraser introduces this section of the chapter by informing us that one of the most difficult aspects of the March Warden’s responsibility was created by the ‘international character of the Borderers’. He states that cross border marriage were numerous and that ‘there was considerable fraternisation and co-operation between the Scots and English along the frontier, socially, commercially and criminally’.

Thomas Musgrave, an English Border official, even went as far as to say that, ‘our lawless people, that will be Scottishe when they will, and English at their pleasure’.

During the second half of the 16th century (the period under review by Peter Leeson) many Scots settled on the English side of the Border. The Scots and English could not be conveniently placed into two separate groups, suitably divided, subject to a Border Line.

 

The English Scottish Border Line

MacDonald Fraser tells us that the Borderers used the frontier as and when it suited them because English and Scots Borderers had everything in common apart from nationality ‘as we have seen they belonged to the same small, self-contained unique world, lived by the same rules, and shared the same inheritance’.

John Carey, writing to the Privy Council in London was to say, ‘there is too great familiarity and intercourse between our English and Scottish Borders. The gentleman of both countries cross into either at their pleasure, feast and making merry with their friends, overthrowing the Warden’s authority and all Border Law’.

The crux of Peter Leeson’s paper is that here we have two different social groups answerable to the same law, the Leges Marchiarum, the Border Laws and that they worked, were successful. Thus, he tells us:-

‘This paper argues that self-governance can do this. To investigate my hypothesis, I examine the Anglo-Scottish borderlands in the sixteenth century. The border people belonged to two social groups at constant war with one another. These people pillaged and plundered one another as a way of life they called “reiving.”

To regulate this system of intergroup banditry and prevent it from degenerating into chaos, border inhabitants developed a decentralized system of cross-border criminal law called the Leges Marchiarum. These laws of lawlessness governed all aspects of cross-border interaction and spawned novel institutions of their enforcement. The Leges Marchiarum and its institutions of enforcement created a decentralized legal order that governed intergroup relations between hostiles along the border’.

Given the argument on both sides is it true to say that the Border Reivers of England and Scotland belonged to two different ‘social groups’?

Border Reivers
(Courtesy of Bill Ewart, Local Artist, Langholm)

Were they the same people divided by a Border Line created for convenience, to put people in parcels, to facilitate an administration that would be a long time coming?

For me, the jury is still out. There is a lot to research yet.

Sources:

The Steel Bonnets by George MacDonald Fraser.

 

Preserving Our Past, Recording Our Present, Informing Our Future

Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan Society Int CCIS

carruthersclan1@gmail.com      carrothersclan@gmail.com

WIDER BANNER Green

 

TOM MOSS SCOTLAND

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS   BORDER REIVER HISTORIAN

 

You can find us on facebook at :

https://www.facebook.com/carrutherscarrothers.pat.9

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClan/

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClanLLC

 

Disclaimer Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan International Society CCIS L
BORDER REIVERS, Uncategorized

CLAN CARRUTHERS – BORDER REIVERS – WHEN DID THEY RAID

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS                           PROMPTUS ET FIDELIS

coatofarms header-2

 

BORDER REIVERS – WHEN DID THEY RAID

 

It is a misconception that the age and times of the Border Reiver had a beginning following the ‘Sack of Berwick’ in 1296 and the subsequent invasion of Scotland by Edward 1 of England. This is a date which seems to figure highly in the thoughts of some who write about the Border Reivers. Some 19th century writers, clearly seeking finite times to periods or aspects of history have helped to perpetuate this mistaken belief.

 

Edward 1 Monument, Burgh by Sands, Cumbria, England

It is true that the people who lived in the Border lands inhabited a buffer zone between two of the most aggressive nations in history and it would not be an exaggeration to say that the Scots would suffer intolerable loss for their birthright as marauding English armies, moving north and living off the land they encountered, would leave them bereft of crop and beast.

There is no doubt, although there is little or no documentation to corroborate it, that following the invasion of Scotland, when Edward 1 was happy that he held the whip hand over the Scottish monarchy and its lords, and that the last footfall of the English army had been heard in the Scottish Borders, that the Scots would strike south into England seeking an exacting revenge.

In the ‘Steel Bonnets’ subtitle ‘The Story of the Anglo-Scottish Border Reivers’, the author, George MacDonald Fraser has this to say about the ‘Sack of Berwick’ in 1296 in which at least two contemporary historians tell us that Edward 1 butchered everyone, population they tell us of 17,000: it is unlikely that Scottish Reivers three centuries later were galloping south thinking ‘remember Berwick’. He goes on to say that the effects of the massacre of Berwick have been overstated (the advent of the Border Reiver) but yet it was another strong link in Anglo-Scottish hostility.

Just another few facts! The population of Berwick in 1296 was probably about 500, Edward 1 allowed women and children to leave before he was first over the walls into the town and Berwick, Scottish in 1296, has been English since the early 1480’s.

But was this really the moment when the Borderer became the Border Reiver? True, it was a momentous time, but had not both peoples of the lands of the Borders experienced all of this before?

Border Reivers at Langholm Castle, Dumfriesshire, Scotland

The Border Line between the two countries had been agreed and ratified some sixty years earlier and national identity recognised by treaty if not in the hearts of men.

The Border Laws of 1248 and 1249 resulted from the differences that still existed between the people who inhabited both sides of the newly formed Border Line. Thus fifty years before ‘Berwick’ there was confrontation as little by little a parcel of land to the north or south was violently contested by the folk of both countries. It is obvious from the Border Law that theft, maiming and murder existed. They were clearly set in place in an attempt to combat the burgeoning crime.

Border Line between England and Scotland

Early in the ‘Dark Ages’, that time from the end of the Roman Occupation, the domination of the British tribes and the coming to British shores of the Anglo-Saxons for which we have little recorded history, there is still evidence that the people who inherited the lands which would eventually become the English Scottish Borders suffered great loss both in life and livelihood. Could this have been the time when the folk began to put reliance in the family before allegiance to any other man, when to hold body and soul together, every man became the prey of the other?

In 573 a great battle between the Christians of Strathclyde/Cumbria  and the British (Brythonic) pagans took place at Arfderydd. The Christians led possibly by Ryderch Hael overcame the pagan armies whose leader was Gwenddoleu ap Ceido. Gwenddoleu was killed in the battle.

Arthuret Church, Longtown, Cumbria, England

Arfdeydd was known in later times as Arthuret, now Longtown in north Cumbria, just south of the notorious Debateable Land of the Border Reiving times.

In 603 a great battle took place at Degsastan between the Christians of Strathclyde/Cumbria and the pagan Angles of Northumbria. Degsatan was more than likely Dawston Rig (Hudshouse Rig) in upper Liddesdale ( Armstrong, Elliot, Croser Reiving country of later times). Ethelfrith of Northumbria was successful in this encounter.

In both these battles it was the policy of the combatants to rid the land of the local people before battle commenced. The locals were ‘cleared’, their crops and beasts stolen to feed an army on the move.

There is documented proof that this did happen before the battle of Degsastan (see footnote).

So even in these early times the people who were the antecedants of the Border Reivers suffered great loss and penury at the hands of ‘foreign’ armies.

In more modern times, in the 10th, 11th and 12thcenturies the English Borderers suffered at the hands of the Scots at every opportunity the latter had to invade Cumbria and Northumbria, the two northernmost English counties abutting the modern Border Line.

Scotland, often granted the lands of Cumbria and Northumbria by the English, were just as likely to lose them on a change of monarch or new agreement between the two countries. They invaded many times to assert their perceived rights and it was the Border folk who suffered.

1296 might have been a defining moment which brought to documented history the advent of the Border Reiver. Yet the history of previous times , back to the Dark Ages , throws light on a people who inhabited  the same regions as the Reivers  being subjected to all forms of atrocities. In the aftermath of hunger and loss would it not be natural to retaliate and eke out survival at any cost?

Was the Borderer a Reiver centuries before 1296?

Footnote.

In his Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation, the Venerable Bede writing in about 730 tells us that Ethelfrith ‘cleared’ the land before the Battle of Degsastan.

Degsastan means Daystone. Daw as in Dawston Burn in upper Liddesdale means Day. For some reason this site is not acceptable to the academics. However none, as far as I am aware, put up a convincing argument for any other place for the Battle of Degsastan.

 

Preserving Our Past, Recording Our Present, Informing Our Future

Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan Society Int CCIS

carruthersclan1@gmail.com      carrothersclan@gmail.com

WIDER BANNER Green

 

TOM MOSS SCOTLAND

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS   BORDER REIVER HISTORIAN

 

You can find us on facebook at :

https://www.facebook.com/carrutherscarrothers.pat.9

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClan/

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClanLLC

 

Disclaimer Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan International Society CCIS L
BORDER REIVERS, Uncategorized

CLAN CARRUTHERS – BORDER REIVERS -ARCHIE ARMSTRONG

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS                              PROMPTUS ET FIDELIS

coatofarms header-2

 

BORDER REIVER – FAMED ARCHIE ARMSTRONG – COURT JESTER AND SHEEP STEELER

 

According to contemporary knowledge, Archie Armstrong of Stubholm died in 1672 yet he was Court Jester to James 1 of England who reigned from 1603 to 1625.

Stubholm, Langholm

I am not the world’s best mathematician but, am often told, I have a liking for dates, especially historical dates. With me, they seem to stick without a deal of effort to remember them.

Blessing or blight? I am not sure!

When James V1 of Scotland succeeded to the English throne and became monarch of both countries, we are told, Archie Armstrong was appointed Court Jester, a powerful role in the hands of the Stuart monarchs.

Thus, sixty-nine years before his supposed demise, he was granted a major role in the royal household of James. It is , however, worth noting, that in the early 17th century, the life span of  man was hardly touching three score and ten years!

Interesting to say the least, but I shall not dwell on it.

Archie Armstrong kept his position on the accession of Charles 1 who reigned from 1625 to 1649. Liked by the monarchs, under their patronage he amassed a considerable wealth. In fact he was so rich that he considered himself of equal standing to the royal courtiers including those of the Church. In time he became careless of his acerbic witticisms, of which he was a past master. He did not baulk at offending those who knew they were superior to him.

He became hated and despised by the monarch’s followers- tolerated only because he was a favourite of the king.

He was banished from the Court of Charles 1 after a particularly acid play on words which embarrassed and attempted to disgrace Archbishop Laud. William Laud, who would end his days when his head was separated from his body, was Archbishop of Canterbury and thus England’s most eminent churchman.

On saying grace in Whitehall at which Laud was present, Archie, as part of the devotion, pronounced ‘Great praise be given to God and little laud to the Devil’. On the surface meaning little praise to the Devil but, sarcastically, that Archbishop Laud should go to the Devil.

As Laud was one of the king’s trusted advisors especially on matters of religion, Archie’s twisted remark was the last straw. He was dismissed as Court Jester.

Archie eventually retired to his homelands in the Border country, and was, on his death, whatever the year, buried in the churchyard of Arthuret Church in Longtown, Cumbria. His burial place is reputed to be next to the ancient cross which adorns the cemetery of this quite magnificent church.

Arthuret Church, Longtown, Cumbria

So what has all this, interesting as it may be, to do with the Border Reivers?

Well, it is said, that this same Archie Armstrong of Stubholm, Langholm, Dumfriesshire, Scottish Borders, was, in his youth, long before his rise and fall from grace at the Court of the Stuart monarchs, a sheep rustler, a Border Reiver of some renown.

Nebless Clem at Stubholm
(Looking for Inspiration?)

It is said that, among other raids, he once stole a sheep but was caught in the act (‘in the deede doinge’) and pursued by the unfortunate shepherd who was the loser.

Archie, being of that rare breed who saw humour in even the most dire of circumstances, quick thinking, killed the sheep and dropped it in the cradle that bedecked the inglenook of Stubholm. When the herd burst into Archie’s house, sure that, at after a long pursuit, he was about to confront the thief, he found Archie calmly rocking the cradle whilst endeavouring to sing a sweet lullaby. There was no sign of the sheep that was so precious to him and his master.

The herd accused Archie of the theft. The latter was eloquent in his response as recorded at the time and later in the ‘Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border’ by Sir Walter Scott.

“Your sheep for warlds I wad na take;    (worlds)

Deil ha’ me if I’m leein’!                            (Devil have me if I’m lieing)

But haud your tongues for mercy’s sake,

The bairn’s just at the deein’.                     (The child is just about to go to sleep)

“If e’er I did sae fause a feat,                   (If ever I did so false an action)

As thin my neebor’s faulds,                     (As steal from my neighbours sheep pens)

May I be doomed the flesh to eat

This vera cradle halds!                             (This very cradle holds)

“But gin ye reck na what I swear,          (But if you don’t believe me)

Go search the biggin thorow,                 (Search the whole place)

And if ye find ae trotter there,

Then hang me up the morrow.”

And Archie didna break his aith,           (Archie did not break his oath)

He ate the cradled sheep;

I trow he was na very laith                     (I think he wasn’t very loathe)

Siccan a vow to keep.                             ( such a vow to keep)

And aft sinsyne to England’s king         (and after when he was at the court of the English king)

The story he has told;

And aye when he gan rock and sing,    (and when Archie would relate the story)

Charlie his sides wad hold.                    (Charles 1, king of England, would split his sides with laughter)

And so the story of Archie Armstrong of Stubholm enriches the varied tapestry of the history of the Border Reivers.

 

Preserving Our Past, Recording Our Present, Informing Our Future

Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan Society Int CCIS

carruthersclan1@gmail.com      carrothersclan@gmail.com

WIDER BANNER Green

 

TOM MOSS SCOTLAND

CLAN CARRUTHERS INT SOCIETY CCIS   BORDER REIVER HISTORIAN

 

You can find us on facebook at :

https://www.facebook.com/carrutherscarrothers.pat.9

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClan/

https://www.facebook.com/CarruthersClanLLC

 

Disclaimer Ancient and Honorable Carruthers Clan International Society CCIS L