|
Barns of Ayr
BARNS OF AYR, an encampment, or military
building, held by the English forces in the reign of Edward I., on the
south-east side of the town of Ayr, celebrated in history for the
fearful revenge which Wallace executed upon the garrison then in
possession of the place, for the treacherous seizure and putting to
death of Sir Reginald Crawford, Sir Bryce Blair, and Sir Hugh
Montgomerie. Dr. Jamieson, in his notes to 'Wallace,' says: "The story
of the destruction of these buildings, and of the immediate reason of
it, is supported by the universal tradition of the country to this
day; and local tradition is often entitled to more regard than is
given to it by the fastidiousness of the learned. Whatever allowances
it may be necessary to make for subsequent exaggeration, it is not
easily conceivable, that an event should be connected with a
particular spot, during a succession of ages, without some foundation.
Sir D. Dalrymple deems this story 'inconsistent with probability.' He
objects to it, because it is said, 'that Wallace, accompanied by Sir
John Graham, Sir John Menteith, and Alexander Scrymgeour, constable of
Dundee, went into the west of Scotland, to chastise the men of
Galloway, who had espoused the part of the Comyns, and of the
English;' and that, 'on the 28th August, 1208, they set fire to some
granaries in the neighbourhood of Ayr, and burned the English cantoned
in them.' — Annals, I. 255, N. Here he refers to the relations of
Arnold Blair and to Major, and produces three objections to the
narrative. One of these is, that 'Comyn, the younger of Badenoch, was
the only man of the name of Comyn who had any interest in Galloway ;
and he was at that time of Wallace's party.' The other two are; that
'Sir John Graham could have no share in the enterprise, for he was
killed at Falkirk, 22nd July, 1298; and that 'it is not probable that
Wallace would have undertaken such an enterprise immediately after the
discomfeiture at Falkirk.' Although it had been said by mistake, that
Graham and Comyn were present, this could not invalidate the whole
relation, for we often find that leading facts are faithfully narrated
in a history, when there are considerable mistakes as to the persons
said to have been engaged. But although our annalist refers both to
Major and Blair, it is the latter only who mentions either the design
of the visit paid to the west of Scotland, or the persons who are said
to have been associates in it. The whole of Sir David's reasoning
rests on the correctness of a date, and of one given only in the
meagre remains ascribed to Arnold Blair. If his date be accurate, the
transaction at Ayr, whatever it was, must have taken place
thirty-seven days afterwards. Had the learned writer exercised his
usual acumen here — had he not been resolved to throw discredit on
this part of the history of Wallace — it would have been most natural
for him to have supposed, that this event was post-dated by Blair. It
seems, indeed, to have been long before the battle of Falkirk. Blind
Harry narrates the former in his Seventh, the latter in his Eleventh
Book. Sir David himself, after pushing the argument from the date
given by Blair as far as possible, virtually gives it up, and makes
the acknowledgment which he ought to have made before. 'I believe,' he
says, 'that this story took its rise from the pillaging of the English
quarters, about the time of the treaty of Irvine, in 1297, which, as
being an incident of little consequence, I omitted in the course of
this history.' Here he refers to Hemingford, T. I. p.123. Hemingford
says, that 'many of the Scots and men of Galloway had, in a hostile
manner, made prey of their stores, having slain more than five hundred
men, with women and children.' Whether he means to say that this took
place at Ayr, or at Irvine, seems doubtful. But here, I think, we have
the nucleus of the story. The barns, according to the diction of Blind
Harry, seem to have been merely the English quarters,' erected by
order of Edward for the accommodation of his troops. Although
denominated barns by the Minstrel, and horreas by Arnold Blair, both
writers seem to have used these terms with great latitude, as
equivalent to what are now called barracks. It is rather surprising,
that our learned annalist should view the loss of upwards of five
hundred men, besides women and children, with that of their property,
'as an incident of little consequence, 'in a great national struggle.
Major gives nearly the same account as Blair. Speaking of Wallace, he
says, 'Anglorum insignes viros apud horrea Aerie residentes de nocte
incendit, et qui a voraciflamma evaserunt ejus mucrone
occubuerunt.'__Fol.lxx. There is also far more unquestionable evidence
as to the cause of this severe retaliation, - than is generally
supposed. Lord Hailes has still quoted Barbour as an historian of
undoubted veracity. Speaking of Crystal of Seton, he says—It wes gret
sorow sekyrly,That so worthy persoune as heSuld on sic maner hangyt
be.Thusgate endyt his worthynes.And off Crauford als Schyr Ranald
wes.And Schyr Bryce als the Blar,Hangyt in till a berne in Ar.'The
Bruce, III.260 v. &e.This tallies very well with the account given by
the Minstrel.'Four thousand haill that nycht was in till Ayr. In gret
bernyss, biggyt with out the toun,The justice lay, with mony bald
barroun.'Wallace, vii. 334.Miss Baillie has made good use of this
incident in the life of Wallace, in her 'Metrical Legend.'
|
