IN this third part of a short series on the ancient history of the Scottish Borders, we have reached the time when the line of the Border between Scotland and England began to be solidified.
King David I had created the great Borders Abbeys and revolutionised the governance of Scotland by bringing in sheriffs and burghs, while the feudalism he introduced changed the way that every Scot including Borderers owed their allegiance to their lord and ultimately the Crown. His successors continued the process of altering Scotland, and it began to be realised that there needed to be some way of defining what was Scotland and Scottish and what was England and English – no-one seriously challenged the right of Scotland to a separate existence.
But where to put that Border? There was no fence or wall, not least because the kingdoms of England and Scotland were at odds over who owned what.
Scottish kings asserted their rights over Cumbria and Northumbria and raided these and other parts of northern England. English kings such as John claimed lands deep into what is now the Scottish Borders. The disputes, the military actions and the raids raged on, and by the beginning of the 13th century, England was in the ascendancy – though not supremacy – over both Scotland and Wales. The English, Scottish and Welsh leaders did get together for one world-famous event, the signing of Magna Carta in 1215.
READ MORE: UK suspends some arms exports to Israel amid war crime fears
Though arguably the most fundamental document in English history, it is often forgotten that Magna Carta featured all of the British Isles with Scotland and Wales having their own chapters.
Let the official UK Parliament website take up the story: “Magna Carta is a British document. People from all parts of the British Isles came to Runnymede to advise King John and approve the document. Magna Carta contains important chapters that deal with the grievances of Welsh rulers and the King of Scotland.
“There are many possible explanations for how the Welsh and Scottish chapters got into Magna Carta. The most likely explanation is that the Welsh rulers and the King of Scotland allied with the baronial rebels before Magna Carta, and the concessions they secured were their reward. The Crowland chronicler, the best-informed contemporary historian, refers to such an alliance.
“The Welsh and the Scots had every reason to join the rebels. John had achieved greater dominance over Wales and Scotland than any previous English king had managed. In 1211, he forced Llywelyn Fawr, Prince of North Wales, to surrender a large part of north-east Wales, and give him hostages, including his son, Gruffydd, who was about 13, as security. Other Welsh rulers suffered in similar ways.
“In 1209, John forced King William of Scotland to hand over his daughters, Margaret and Isabella. One was to be married to John’s son and heir and the other to an English baron. This undertaking was not fulfilled.
“William also had to give 13 hostages as security for peace. King Alexander II, William’s son, wanted redress for this in the charter. He also wanted the 25 barons appointed to enforce the charter to sit in judgment on the long-standing Scottish claim to Cumberland, Westmorland and Northumberland. Later in 1215, the 25 barons judged in Alexander’s favour.”
Facing the revolt of his barons, King John went to war against them, during which the Scottish forces joined the barons and fought all the way to the English Channel, though John’s forces also came north and sacked Berwick-upon-Tweed and Roxburgh. The signing of Magna Carta at Runnymede did not resolve the Borders issue and John promptly died the following year. It was not until well into the reign of John’s successor King Henry III that a solution was found.
Alexander II and Henry III believed in diplomacy and indeed the former married the latter’s sister Joan in a dynastic marriage. In 1237, the two kings met at York and drew up the Treaty which bears that city’s name.
Many historians play down the significance of the Treaty of York, but I think it is hugely important because in effect it set the Border once and for all. Here’s a translation of part of the Treaty which was written in Latin: “The King of Scotland quitclaims to the King of England his hereditary rights to the counties of Northumberland, Cumberland, and Westmorland; quitclaims 15,000 marks of silver paid by King William to King John for certain conventions not observed by the latter; and frees Henry from agreements regarding marriages between Henry and Richard, and Alexander’s sisters Margaret, Isabella, and Marjory.
“The King of England grants the King of Scotland certain lands within Northumberland and Cumberland, to be held by him and his successor kings of Scotland in feudal tenure with certain rights exempting them from obligations common in feudal relationships, and with the Scottish Steward sitting in Justice regarding certain issues that may arise, and these, too, are hereditary to the King of Scotland’s heirs, and regarding these the King of Scotland shall not be answerable to an English court of law in any suit.”
The Treaty made it clear that Alexander would do homage to John for the lands he now held in England, which included Penrith, but not for his kingdom of Scotland with the Border now defined.
Taking out those three named “land” territories automatically set the Border on the Tweed and Solway Firth line, and it has more or less remained so ever since.
Alexander II died in July 1249, and was buried in Melrose Abbey. His son Alexander III was just seven and though he was crowned at Scone a week after his father’s death, the boy king needed regents to rule for him. They arranged for Alexander to marry Margaret, daughter of King Henry III of England, and also drew up a remarkable treaty to deal with the issue of the Border.
There was a traditional way of settling cross-border disputes, but Henry III wanted a proper legal system and thus the “Laws of the Marches” were promulgated – marches being an old word derived from French for boundaries.
A conference of six Scottish and six English knights met to draw up the laws and most importantly they confirmed the line of the Border as agreed in the Treaty of York 12 years earlier. Henry III approved the laws and his regents signed on Alexander’s behalf.
In his book The Borders: A History from Earliest Times, Alistair Moffat writes: “Recognising that an open frontier between two different jurisdictions would lead to a need for agreed procedures and joint action on disputes between their subjects, the Scots and English kings co-operated to create a legal apparatus different from those administered from London and Edinburgh. Traditional meeting places along the line of the frontier were to witness regular courts where cases were heard and judgements made.”
The effect of the laws was immediate and hugely positive for the Scottish Border. Farmers finally had protection for their land and products, trade massively increased and towns developed and grew prosperous.
In a recent conversation with a friend, he put the question to me as to why some villages became towns and why some towns grew bigger than others. As I think I showed in my series on the ancient towns of Scotland, many ancient towns in Scotland developed along the same lines – they had royal patronage, they occupied strategic locations and they grew up around religious institutions and/or castles. A more interesting question to me is why some towns survived and others did not. Roxburgh, as I showed last week, being an example of a town, indeed a royal burgh, which just disappeared.
Two of those ancient towns which did survive in the Borders were Berwick and Peebles. Berwick was a sizeable township at the mouth of the River Tweed long before King David I made it one of his first royal burghs, and it had both a castle and a church and, most importantly, it became a port, the most substantial in Scotland.
David also made Berwick one of the four sheriffdoms in the Borders, the others being Selkirk, Roxburgh and Peebles.
By the end of the 12th century, Berwick was arguably the most important burgh in the country, and it was probably there that the “Laws of the Burghs” were compiled. David I had begun the legislative process but it was during the long reign of William the Lion (r. 1165-1214) that these laws were codified and adopted by the growing number of burghs across Scotland.
The laws stipulated the formation of courts and councils comprised of “worthy men”, usually people who had land and decent income, who in turn elected a “worthy provost” – a term which is still in use today.
In the Borders, markets and burgh privileges encouraged trade, and thus a mercantile class developed, usually becoming burgesses. The authorities in each town were often comprised of merchant-burgesses and in Berwick that was certainly the case by the early 13th century when the burgh set out its own laws. Growing wealthy on the export of wool from the Borders and the import of wine and other goods, Berwick was so rich that the town was able to give King Alexander II the cash for dowries for his two daughters, in return for more privileges that only increased Berwick’s advantages over other towns.
Berwick went further in enshrining its rights and privileges. Moffat explains: “In 1249, the Statutes of the Guild of Burgesses were drawn up and the entry fee set at 40 shillings so that only the wealthy could join. The Statutes sorted out rights and privileges and chief amongst them concerned the wool trade. A virtual monopoly of the lucrative business was assured when they decreed that only a guild-brother (and, of course,) stranger merchants might deal in wool, hides and finished cloth.”
The royal burgh was well on the way to fabulous prosperity and I will show in a future column how its wealth and strategic location on the Border made Berwick become the most fought-over town in Scotland.
Peebles was another seat of a David I sheriffdom and its ancient history is very instructive. The name comes from the Brythonic for “place of tents” which shows why the town became established as a place through which people travelled in very ancient times. These travellers included the Romans, as there is evidence of their occupation of an area then known as Tweedvale or Tweeddale, while the ancient natives of the region constructed hill forts, the outlines of which can be seen around the nearby Lyne Water.
Situated at the confluence of the River Tweed and the Eddlestone Water, Peebles grew because of its strategic importance and royal patronage. It also had a church which some say dated back to the 600s, but the township was only really absorbed into Scotland when Alba took over the Kingdom of Strathclyde in the early 11th century.
David I established a castle there and then made Peebles a royal burgh in 1152. Again, if you believe that a royal residence makes a place the capital of a country, then Peebles has a claim to be a former capital as kings of Scots often stayed at Peebles, principally to go hunting in the Ettrick Forest. William the Lion ranked Peebles alongside Edinburgh in terms of justice courts, and by 1286, Peebles was so important in the administration of the Scottish Borders that it had two sheriffs.
Both Berwick and Peebles were involved in the Wars of Independence, and next week I’ll show how those long conflicts impacted on the Scottish Borders.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel