ow
called Scotland, lying south of the Clyde and Forth. But to refute this
pretension at once, we need only consider, that if these territories
were held in fee of the English kings, there would, by the nature of the
feudal law as established in England, have been continual appeals from
them to the courts of the lord paramount; contrary to all the histories
and records of that age. We find that, as soon as Edward really
established his superiority, appeals immediately commenced from all
parts of Scotland: and that king, in his writ to the king's bench,
considers them as a necessary consequence of the feudal tenure. Such
large territories also would have supplied a considerable part of the
English armies, which never could have escaped all the historians. Not
to mention that there is not any instance of a Scotch prisoner of
war being tried as a rebel, in the frequent hostilities between the
kingdoms, where the Scottish armies were chiefly filled from the
southern counties.
Mr. Carte's notion with regard to Galloway, which comprehends, in the
language of that age, or rather in that of the preceding, most of the
south-west counties of Scotland; his notion, I say, rests on so slight a
foundation, that it scarcely merits being refuted. He will have it, (and
merely because he will have it,) that the Cumberland, yielded by King
Edmund to Malcolm I., meant not only the county in England of that name,
but all the territory northwards to the Clyde. But the case of Lothian
deserves some more consideration.
It is certain that, in very ancient language, Scotland means only the
country north of the Friths of Clyde and Forth. I shall not make a
parade of literature to prove it; because I do not find that this point
is disputed by the Scots themselves. The southern country was divided
into Galloway and Lothian; and the latter comprehended all the
south-east counties. This territory was certainly a part of the ancient
kingdom of Northumberland, and was entirely peopled by Saxons, who
afterwards received a great mixture of Danes among them. It appears from
all the English histories, that the whole kingdom of Northumberland paid
very little obedience to the Anglo-Saxon monarchs, who governed after
the dissolution of the heptarchy; and the northern and remote parts of
it seem to have fallen into a kind of anarchy, sometimes pillaged by
the Danes, sometimes joining them in their ravages upon other parts
of England. The kings of Scotland
|