the county, prefaced the ballad of the Sutors of Selkirk,’ in the Minstrelsy of the Scottish Borders,' with a narrative of the tradition connecting the old flag with Flodden, as also with a defence of the tradition as against certain detractors of his time.

The story of the Selkirk Flodden flag' is first told in a document known as the Hodge MS.,' dated 1722, and preserved in the Advocates' Library, Edinburgh. Further, the Rev. Mr. Robertson, who was parish minister of Selkirk in the end of last century, furnished to the Old Statistical 'Account of Scotland' what appears to be an independent narrative, written about 1790. Then we have the account from the pen of Sir Walter Scott, published in 1802; and, about twenty-four years later, still another, by Robert Chambers, in his 'Picture of Scotland.' Scott, as having gathered his version of the legend on the spot, is on this and every other account to be taken as its best narrator. Referring to the battle of Flodden Field, he says:

'The ancient and received tradition of the burgh of Selkirk affirms that the citizens of that town distinguished themselves by their gallantry on that disastrous occasion. Eighty in number, and headed by their town-clerk, they joined their monarch on his entrance into England. James, pleased with the appearance of this gallant troop, knighted their leader, William Brydone, upon the field of battle, from which few of the men of Selkirk were destined to return. They distinguished themselves in the conflict, and were almost all slain. The few survivors, on their return home, found, by the side of Lady-wood Edge, the corpse of a female, wife to one of their fallen comrades, with a child sucking at her breast. In memory of this latter event, continues the tradition, the present arms of the burgh bear a female, holding a child in her arms, and seated on a sarcophagus, decorated with the Scottish lion; in the background a wood.'

Scott then proceeds to quote from Mr. Robertson's 'Statistical Account' what is there said of the few trophies which still 'survive the rust of time and the effects of negligence," brought by the men of Selkirk from Flodden.

'A standard,' says Mr. Robertson, the appearance of which bespeaks its antiquity, is still carried annually (on the day of riding their common) by the corporation of weavers, by a member of which it was taken from the English in the field of Flodden.* It may be added

* Robert Chambers thus describes the flag or standard as he saw it about 1825: 'It is of green silk, fringed round with pale silk twist, about four feet long, and tapering towards the extremity most remote from the staff. Some armorial bearings, such as an eagle and a serpent, were once visible upon it, but scarcely a lineament can be discerned

that the sword of William Brydone, the town-clerk, who led the citizens to battle (and who is said to have been knighted for his valour), is still [in 1790] in the possession of John Brydone, a citizen of Selkirk, his lineal descendant.'

Such, in brief, are the main elements of the tradition.

.

A hitherto unpublished item in the Flodden episode is an extremely interesting minute of the Inquisitio,' or Inquest, as the Burgh Council was then styled, drawn up only five weeks before the battle, and making reference to the king's order calling upon the burgesses of Selkirk to join the royal army. Mr. Craig-Brown gives the first part of the minute thus:

1513, August 2.-Finds and ordains all neighbours and indwellers to be abulzeit (furnished) for war, after the tenor of the King's letters produced at last wapinschawing, to give their monsteris (demonstration) and shewing thereof in the Bog before the Bailies on Wednesday, St. Laurence day (10th August). And that all indwellers, for the weal of the town and country, having servant-men and children, that they be produced at wapinschawing in best way they can, with ane spear, lance, and bow. And sae bein he will nocht of coft (not buy) and free find himself weapons as said is, that his master furnish him thereof of his coft, the said weapons to remain with him after the waypassing of his servant. To be fulfilled under the unlaw of 8s.' (Vol. ii. p. 21.)

6

There is much obscurity in this passage, especially in the third sentence of it. Monsteris' is a doubtful word; while 'nocht of coft and free,' and 'of his coft,' are impossible phrases. Coft' is the preterite of the Scotch verb to coff, that is, to buy; but the word was never used as a substantive. Fortunately, the volume contains a traced facsimile of the original handwriting of the passage, and from it we are able to correct these mistakes. The original entry has evidently been drafted hurriedly, as there are some obvious verbal repetitions; while the portion which we print in italics within brackets has been partially erased by the writer of it. The whole reads as follows:

That the Inquest fyndis and ordaines all nychtburis and indwelleris

amidst the tatters to which it is now reduced.' (Picture of Scotland, i. 146.) Mr. Craig-Brown thinks the Rev. Mr. Robertson's statement that the flag was brought to Selkirk by one of the corporation of weavers is falsified by the fact that the Selkirk Weavers' Corporation 'did not exist until a hundred years after the battle.' This seems to be a frivolous objection. In ancient usage, trades are frequently spoken of as guilds, corporations, or the like, though not perhaps 'incorporated' in any technical sense.

to be abbulzeit for were (war) eftere the tenor of the Kingis letteris that was producit the last wapynschawin, to geiff thair moustaris (musters) and schawin thairof in the boig (? burgh) befor the balzeis one (on) Woddynesdaye Sanct Lorence day nixt to cum. And that all Indwellaris, for weill of the toun and the contrecht (country), hawand servandmen and cheldern, that thai have and be producit in wappynschawin in the best way he can, with ane spere launch and bow. [Sa beand his master for the tyme woll nocht find him thir said wapnes, that this said servand of his fe and his awin proper cost perwaye (purvey) himself of the same. And quhat gudman or Indweller that failzies (fails) thairin, to paye viij shillings in unlaw.] And sa beand the servand woll nocht of cost and fee fynd himself wapnes as said is, that his master furnish him thairof of his (the master's) cost, and the said wappon to ramane with him efter the way passing of his servand. This to be completit under the pain of vnlaw of viij shillings.'

6

The monsteris,' and 'coft and free,' and 'of his coft,' thus disappear. The last two mistakes might have been prevented by reading the corresponding words in the erased passage: of his fee and his own proper cost.' This erased passage has otherwise an interesting historical significance. It would appear that, as between master and servant, the Inquest had at first intended to place the onus of finding weapons on the servant; but probably after discussion, and considering that it would be difficult in the short time at their disposal to enforce their order against the poorer man, they have the passage struck out, and the onus transferred to the servant's master, whose property, however, the weapons shall be should his servant leave him.

Coming to the Flodden tradition itself, Mr. Craig-Brown proceeds to consider it in a hostile spirit, and with a flippancy of tone which is far from being in the best taste. He is of opinion that the whole story is a fabrication,' 'accepted by the credulous,' and the falsehoods' of which it is almost 'superfluous' to expose. His first object is to discredit the writer of the Hodge MS.; but in this endeavour he is not quite fair to that writer. It is surely a non sequitur to say that on the veracious narrative' of the Hodge MS., written in 1722, hang all the lies and 'stories' of this tradition, when until now that narrative has apparently never been in print; at least, Mr. Craig-Brown himself admits that the first printed account of the tradition was that of the parish minister, written in 1790. Still further, the writer of that manuscript makes a singular statement as to the king having likeways granted to the 'burgh liberty to make incorporations, and particularly one

' of the sutors, and appointed the deacon to provide each 'newly admitted burgess with a maid [for wife], if the burgess ' require it.' In dealing with this statement Mr. Craig-Brown says:

'It is of course unnecessary to refute with evidence or argument Hodge's extraordinary account of James the Fifth's dealings with the ancient burgh. The marvellous stipulation by which the honourable craft of sutors was converted into a sort of matrimonial agency for the supply of bachelor burgesses with wives, is in one sense of service. It enables us to know for certain that Hodge was either imposed upon by a man who combined the faculty of lying with a keen sense of humour, or was such a man himself.' (Vol. ii. p. 26.)

Very probably the writer of the Hodge MS. is wrong in saying that such an appointment was due to royal authority; but that he did not speak altogether without book, and that there really may have been some such usage in the ancient burgh, is a not impossible inference from what Mr. CraigBrown himself adduces. On p. 33 is printed what he very properly terms' a remarkable entry' in the Burgh Records, of date June 27, 1527, according to which one Roland Hamilton gets an order from the Inquest, or Burgh Council, ordaining James Tait and his wife to keep their maiden 'surely to Martinmas,' until the said Roland, who leaves his sword as a pledge, shall return, bringing a relic,' and claiming the maiden for his wife. If he do not meet his engagement, he is to lose his claim to the sword;' and if the parents, on the other hand, do not keep their maiden,' they are to underlie the sum [i.e. value] of the sword.' From the curious bearing this incident has upon the abovequoted statement from the Hodge MS., we should be disposed to regard the writer of that manuscript as one who honestly endeavoured to gather up and place on record the traditions of the locality in the shape in which these were current in his own day.

But Mr. Craig-Brown's principal argument as to the falsity of the tradition is to be found in his assertion that a priest named William Brydone was town-clerk of the burgh at the time of the battle, and that some one, seeing the priestly appellation of Sir' before his name and not understanding its significance, had invented the whole story' in order to account for the title.' 'It is altogether beyond 'doubt,' he further says, that one William Brydone was 'town-clerk of Selkirk at or near the time of Flodden' (p. 27). The qualification at or near the time of Flodden' is fatal to Mr. Craig-Brown's theory. It begs the whole

question. The priest, Sir William Brydone, was either town-clerk in the autumn of 1513, or he was not; the author's theory hinges wholly on that a fact which he has neglected to prove.

But the assumption that the town-clerk was a priest may be set aside. Even that part of the story which relates to the knighting of the Selkirk leader is not absolutely essential to the general credibility of the tradition which tells how the old flag was brought from Flodden. At the same time it is not necessary to hold that no such honour was conferred because there is not now extant any written record of it; since, during the many assaults upon the town in the years immediately following the great battle, many of the burgh documents were, as the king's charters testify, lost or destroyed. The Brydones, moreover, were a numerous sept in Selkirk and the district, and any qualified layman of that name may at the time in question have been town-clerk of the burgh, and so have led the citizens to Flodden; for the office of town-clerk could only be held by one who was a notary, or otherwise a man of education, and that in those days among laymen indicated a high social position.

The Flodden story, as a whole, according to Mr. CraigBrown, bears one well-known mark of invention-it is hopelessly contradictory.' But the fact that the story as told in an unpublished document of 1722 should agree in the main with the independent narrative written by the parish minister seventy years later, might rather be taken as a proof that both writers had derived their information from a common source-namely, the oral tradition of the place. Had the story been nothing more than an invention, the inventors would have taken care that their accounts tallied with each other. The very discrepancies in these different versions are presumptive evidence that the story is not a modern invention, but a tradition current for generations in the neighbourhood. Its variations are indicative, not of fabrication, but of long descent by oral transmission. Sir Walter Scott's defence of the Selkirk tradition may therefore be regarded as still holding good.

The modern flourishing town of Selkirk, though retaining the name and site of the ancient burgh, has lost all the external marks of burghal antiquity. Its castle and walls, its ports of exit and entry, its churches and chapels and places of ancient resort, have all disappeared. There is hardly a link, save the historic, between the county town of Selkirk under Queen Victoria and the old Forest township