It is presumed the writer will not be far wrong, if he anticipates a little curiosity on the part of the reader, respecting the personal history of so conspicuous a character as the conqueror of Dunbar; and as our English neighbours consider it a matter of difficulty, for a Scotsman to be impartial when the conduct of an enemy of his country happens to be the subject of his investigation, we shall, without either denying or admitting the truth of this allegation, endeavour to escape from the charge, by giving the following biographical notice in the elegant language of one of their own countrymen:149
“John Earl of Warren and Surrey was the son of William Earl of Warren and Surrey, by his second wife, Maud, widow of Hugh Bigot, Earl of Norfolk, and sister and coheiress of Anselm Marshal, Earl of Pembroke. In 1240, being then five years of age, he succeeded his father in his dignities. In 1247 he married Alice, daughter of Hugh le Brun, Count of March, and uterine sister of King Henry the Third; and in the following year, though he could not have been above thirteen years of age, he is said to have attended the Parliament which met at London in the octaves of the Purification. During the reign of Henry the Third, he is stated to have filled those stations which, from his high rank, naturally devolved upon him, and at the battle of Lewes he served in the van of the royal army with Prince Edward; but, together with the Earl of Pembroke, disgracefully deserted him at the commencement of the action, and fled first to Pevensey Castle, and from thence to France. Their flight is thus quaintly alluded to by Peter de Langtoft:150
“In May following he returned, and claimed the restitution of his possessions, which, notwithstanding his treachery to the Prince, the rebellious Barons had declared to have been forfeited. The refusal of his demand induced him once more to change sides, and he confederated with the Earl of Gloucester for the restoration of the King’s power, and was present with the royal forces at the battle of Evesham. Thus his interest, rather than his honour, seems to have been his sole rule of action; and unfortunately, such conduct was then far too general to entail upon those who adopted it either punishment or reproach. In 1268 he had a dispute with Henry Earl of Lincoln; and about the same time became involved in a serious affray with Alan Lord Zouche, relative to some lands. This affair was attended with great violence; for, finding that he must submit to the judgment of a court of law, he abused his adversary and his son in the strongest terms, and then assaulted them in such an outrageous manner in Westminster-Hall, that he nearly killed the baron, and severely wounded his son. Neither his power nor influence could save the Earl from the vengeance of the laws he had so flagrantly violated; and, though he retired to his Castle at Ryegate, he was closely pursued by Prince Edward with a strong force, and, finding that opposition would be useless, he met the Prince on foot, and implored the royal clemency with great humility. For his offence he was fined ten thousand marks; but this sum was afterwards reduced to eight thousand four hundred, and he was permitted to pay it by annual instalments of two hundred marks each.
“Immediately after the solemnization of the funeral of Henry the Third at Westminster, the Earl of Warren and the Earl of Gloucester proceeded to the high altar, and swore fealty to his son and successor, King Edward the First. In the 3d Edward I. he received that monarch at his castle of Ryegate in so honourable a manner, upon his return from Gascony, that Edward was induced to remit him one thousand marks of the sum which he had been fined for the affair with Lord le Zouche.
“The next circumstance recorded of the Earl, is one in which that proud and sturdy spirit for which he was celebrated, was displayed in a manner so consonant to the feelings of the present day, that this nobleman has always been a favourite character in English biography; and the pencil was on one occasion employed to perpetuate his independent conduct. After the enactment of the statute of quo warranto, the Earl of Warren was, under its provisions, questioned by what title he held his lands; to which inquiry, first unsheathing an old sword, he is said to have replied, ‘Behold, my Lords, here is my warranty. My ancestors coming into this land with William the Bastard, did obtain their lands by the sword; and with the sword I am resolved to defend them against whomsoever that shall endeavour to dispossess me. For that King did not himself conquer the land and subdue it, but our progenitors were sharers and assistants therein.’
“In the 23d Edward I., the Castle of Bamburgh was intrusted to his custody; and, in the 24th Edward I., he commanded the forces sent to reduce Dunbar Castle, which, after a siege of three days, surrendered to him; and having met the Scotch army which came to its relief, he defeated them on Friday the 27th April, and pursued them several miles from the field of battle, when the enemy sustained a loss of 10,000 men. Soon after this event, the Earl was appointed Regent of Scotland; and in the following year was constituted general of all the English forces north of the Trent. But his previous good fortune now deserted him; and his army sustained a signal overthrow at the battle of Stirling, in September 1297.
“His misfortune did not, however, lessen him in Edward’s esteem, for he was immediately afterwards reappointed to the command of the English forces; and, in the 28th Edward I., was made Governor of Hope Castle, in the county of Derby. In that year, also, he commanded the second squadron at the siege of Carlaverock, at which time he must have been about sixty-five years of age.
“In the 29th Edward I., the Earl was appointed, jointly with the Earl of Warwick and others, to treat with the agents of the King of France, relative to a peace between England and Scotland; and in the same year he was a party to the letter from the barons to Pope Boniface VIII., in which he is only styled “Comes Warenne,” though on his seal he is also properly called Earl of Surrey.151 On the 5th calends of October, 32 Edward I., i. e. 27th September 1304, being then, according to Peter de Langtoft,152 employed in Scotland, he died.
“But according to the registry of the Priory of Lewes, the Earl died that day at Kennington, having, says Dugdale, been Earl of Surrey no less than fifty-four years; though, as he succeeded his father in 1240, it is evident he must have borne that title sixty-four years. He was buried in the midst of the pavement, in the quire of the Abbey of Lewes, before the high altar, and the following epitaph was engraved upon his tomb.
“Of the subject of this article, but little that is favourable to his memory can be said; though his faults, or more properly his vices, were those of the age in which he lived. His treachery at the battle of Lewes has, to apply the beautiful expression of a distinguished statesman of the present day, ‘left indelible stains upon his character, which all the laurels of’ Dunbar ‘cannot cover, nor its blood wash away;’ whilst his subsequent conduct was invariably marked by a turbulent and intractable spirit. Not only was he frequently embroiled in disputes both with his compeers and his sovereign, but, with almost unparalleled hardihood, he dared, in a court of justice, to use personal violence towards a baron of the realm. That he should acquire renown in the field, and consequently become possessed of the King’s esteem, is perfectly consistent with that impetuous temper for which he is celebrated. Bravery is, however, but one redeeming trait in a picture, where all besides is dark and repulsive; and even the bold answer relative to his right to his lands, when properly considered, affords no room for praise; for the same resolute opposition to such an inquiry would, there is no doubt, be as readily evinced to defend any part of his property, if it had been acquired by the most flagrant injustice on his part, instead of on that of his ancestors.
“A proof of the estimation in which the Earl was held by Edward the First, is afforded, in Dugdale’s opinion, by the fact, that the King issued precepts, directed to the Bishops of Canterbury and London, and to several Abbots, commanding them to cause masses to be said for his soul; but this testimony of the royal consideration might have arisen from the near connection between the Earl and his Majesty, as is shown by the annexed table:—
“By the said Alice le Brun, who died on the 9th February 1291, the Earl of Warren had issue, William, who died in his father’s lifetime, leaving his wife enceinte with John, his son and heir, who succeeded his grandfather in his honours. Alianor, who married, first, Henry Lord Percy, by whom she had Henry Lord Percy, spoken of in the poem, (i.e. Caerlaverock Castle), as the Earl’s ‘nevou;’ and, secondly, the son of a Scotch Baron; and Isabel, wife of John Baliol, King of Scotland.”153
“If the biographer of an ancient warrior,” says Mr Nicolas, “is in any degree influenced by that enthusiasm which deeds of chivalrous courage are calculated to excite, it is only by more than ordinary restraint upon his feelings that he is enabled to relate them in the sober and chastened language suitable to historical truth; and, perhaps, in no instance is that caution so necessary as when any member of the house of Percy is the subject of his pen. In the age to which Henry de Percy belonged, as well as in a few succeeding centuries, that name was synonymous with almost uncontrollable power, impetuous valour, and all those stern military virtues which characterized the time; and the difficulty of successfully detailing the career of an individual is considerably increased, when, as in the case of this Baron, the merits of his descendants have been sung, not only by rude contemporary bards, but have been immortalized by the greatest dramatic genius that ever existed.
“Henry de Percy was the third son of Henry Lord Percy, by Eleanor, daughter of John Earl of Warren and Earl of Surrey, and succeeded to the barony upon the death of his brother John de Percy, who died under age soon after the year 1272, at which time he appears to have been very young. The first circumstance recorded of him is, that, in the 15th Edward I., being then in ward, on the King’s expedition into Wales, he was acquitted of 120l. required from him for scutage. In the 22d Edward I. 1294, he made proof of his age, obtained livery of his lands, and was summoned to attend the King into Gascony; and in March 1296, having accompanied Edward in his invasion of Scotland, he received the honour of knighthood before Berwick. He was present at the battle of Dunbar, and was soon afterwards appointed Governor of Galloway and Aire in Scotland; and in 1297, being with Lord Robert Clifford, commander for the King of England in the eastern parts of Scotland, they were appointed to receive Margery, daughter of Robert Brus Earl of Carreck, as an hostage for his fidelity to Edward. About the same time he was sent by the Earl Warren, then General of all the English army beyond the Trent, with the forces at Carlisle into Scotland; and having entered Annandale with 300 men-at-arms, and 40,000 foot, about the 10th August he proceeded to Aire, where he endeavoured to persuade the inhabitants of Galloway to submit. Finding that a party of Scots were on their route to oppose him, he marched towards them; but from the inferiority of their numbers, they surrendered upon condition of being pardoned.
“In the 26th Edward I., Lord Percy was again in the wars of Scotland, in which year he obtained a grant of the lands forfeited by Ingelrom de Umfreville; and in the following year he was present at the siege of Carlaverock—a fact unnoticed by either of the writers just mentioned—when he must have been about forty-two years of age. The poet alludes to his determined hostility against the Scots, which feeling appears to have been inherited by his descendants, and describes him as the ‘nevou’ of the Earl Warren, which, like the word ‘nepos,’ seems to have been used for grandson as well as nephew, he being the son of Eleanor, the daughter of that nobleman. In February, 28th Edward I., 1301, he was a party to the letter from the Barons to Pope Boniface, wherein he is styled ‘Lord of Topclive;’ and in the 34th Edward I., was again sent into Scotland, to oppose Robert Bruce, against whom he valiantly defended Kenteir. In the 35th Edward I., he was a party to the treaty of peace with Scotland.
“On the accession of Edward the Second, he was, in common with the other peers of the realm, summoned to attend that monarch’s coronation; and in the 3d Edward II., he purchased the celebrated castle of Alnwick, which is now possessed by his representative the Duke of Northumberland. In the 5th Edward II., he succeeded John de Segrave, as Constable of Nottingham Castle, and Justice of the Forests beyond the Trent, and about the same period was constituted Governor of Scarborough and Bamburgh Castles. From a writ tested on the 14th September, 1309, it appears that he was then Constable of the Castle of York, and in that and the preceding years he was again in the wars of Scotland.
“Lord Percy distinguished himself by his enmity to Piers de Gaveston, and it is perhaps just to consider that his hostility arose from patriotic motives; but there is a suspicion attached to his behaviour towards the unhappy favourite, which the biassed historian of the house of Percy has rather increased than lessened, by his laboured attempt to remove. It appears that Gaveston was besieged in Scarborough Castle by the Earl of Pembroke; that he surrendered upon condition that his life and person should be secured; and that both the Earl and Percy solemnly pledged themselves to that effect. Through a false reliance, however, on the Earl’s honour, by Percy, as Collins relates it, the promise was speedily broken, and Gaveston perished on the scaffold at Warwick Castle. This is a version of the tale, which so partial a biographer as that writer uniformly shows himself, would naturally give; but although the impossibility of ascertaining the real merits of the case render it unjust to pass a positive censure upon Percy’s conduct, it is at least equally unfair to conclude that the whole shame of the transaction belongs to his colleague, and that his only error arose from a misplaced confidence. Certain, however, it is, that the King considered him guilty of Gaveston’s death, for he issued special precepts, tested on the 30th and 31st July, 1312, for his apprehension, and for the siezure of all his lands, tenements, and chattels. Towards the end of that year, however, Percy was included in the treaty between the King and the barons; and on making his submission his offence was pardoned, and his lands restored to him. The acquittance of the King to Thomas Earl of Lancaster, Guy Earl of Warwick, Robert de Clifford, and this Baron, of the jewels and horses that belonged to Gaveston, dated on the 6th February, 1313, 6. Edw. II., by which he acknowledges to have received from them the articles therein mentioned, by the hands of Humphrey Earl of Hereford, is still preserved. The document is highly curious; and with the hope of relieving the dullness of this memoir, the following interesting extracts from it are introduced:
‘Un anel d’or, od un saphir, lequel seint Dunstan forga de ses mayns.
Une boiste d’argent en d’orrez pur porter eynz un anel entour le col de un homme.
Une grant rubi hors d’or, que fust trove sur sire Piers de Gavaston quant il fust pris; le pris de mille livres.
Trois granz rubis en aneaux, une amiraude, un diamaund de grant pris, en une boiste d’argent enamille, que fust trove sur le dit Pierres quant il fust pris.
Deux seaux un grant e un petit; e un petit seal une clief pendaunte, un esterling plie, et un calcedoyne; les queux furent trovez en la burse quant il fuit pris.
En un cofre, lie de feer, une mirour d’argent enamaille; un pigne; un priket, que fust donné au Roi par la Countesse de Bar à Gant.
Un coronal d’or od diverse perie, pris de cent mars.
Un chapelet d’argent garnis de diverse perie, pris de doze soutz.
En un autre cofre, un grant pot d’argent od trois peiz pur chaufer eawe, que poise sis livres quinze soutz dis deners.
Trois plates d’argent por especierie, e poisent quatre livres.
Deux plates d’argent pur fruit, des armes de roy d’Engleterre, que poisent sessant dis oit souz quatre deners.
Une burse de drap d’or ove deux pierres de Jerlm’ dedenz.
Un mors d’argent od quatre botons d’orrez, od deux lions pur chaq’e de cuir.
Un veil seal entaille, e un pere de Calcedoine. Trois furchesces d’argent pur mangier poires.
Une ceinture de fil de argent blank.
Une chapelet de Paris, pris de sis souz oit deners.
En un sak un bacenet burny od surcils.
En autre saak une peire de treppes des armes de dit Pieres.
Deux cotes de velvet pur plates coverir.
Une Nouche pur palefrei, des armes du Roy.
Quatre chemises et trois brais de Gascoigne orfresez.
Une veille banere des armes le dit Piers.
Quarant un destres et coucers e un palefrei.
Noef Somers. Duze chivaus charetters.
Deux charettes od tut le herneis.’154
“Great part of Gaveston’s plate was marked with an eagle, and several articles of jewellery were in that form, his arms being, Vert, six eagles displayed, Or.
“The little that remains to be said of this Baron, may be related in a very few words. In 1313 he received letters of safe conduct from the King, for all his dominions; in June in the following year he was present at the fatal battle of Bannockburn, and was regularly summoned to parliament from the 6th February, 27th Edward I. 1299, to the 29th July, 8th Edward II. 1314. He died in 1315, and was buried in the Abbey of Fountains in Yorkshire; and by Eleanor his wife, daughter of John Earl of Arundel, who survived him, he left issue. Henry his eldest son, then aged sixteen years; and William, who was made a Knight of the Bath, 20th Edward II. and died in 1355.”
Siege of Carlaverock.
“Robert de Clifford was the eldest son of Roger de Clifford, who was accidently slain between Snowden and Anglesey in 1280. He was born about Easter, April, 1274, and in the 14th Edward I., 1286, he succeeded his grandfather in his baronial honours, being then twelve years of age. In the 13th Edward I., he was found to be one of the heirs of Ralph de Gaugy, and paid 100l. for his relief; after which, the next circumstance which has been found recorded of him is, that he was summoned to attend the King, with horse and arms, on his expedition beyond the sea on the 4th May, 25th Edward I. 1297; and on the 26th September following, he was ordered to be at Carlisle, similarly equipped, to serve against the Scots, at the ensuing Feast of Pentecost; but Dugdale asserts, that he was present at the battle of Dunbar, in 24th Edward I.; that in the 25th Edward I., he was sent with a hundred men-at-arms and twenty-thousand foot from Carlisle to plunder in Scotland; and that, after much slaughter, he returned with considerable booty on Christmas eve. In that year he was also appointed Justice of all the King’s forests beyond the Trent; in 26th Edward I., he was made governor of Nottingham Castle; and on the 27th Edward I., being constituted the King’s Lieutenant and Captain-General in the counties of Cumberland, Westmoreland and Lancaster, and throughout Annandale and the Marches of Scotland, he was joined in commission with the Bishop of Durham and others, to consider of the means of garrisoning the castles in that kingdom, and for guarding the marches. Clifford was again summoned to the Scottish wars on the 7th May, 27th Edward I., 1299, and received his first writ to parliament on the 29th December in the same year.
“As Clifford did not attain his majority till 1295, he consequently could not have been above twenty-five when he was thus honoured with his sovereign’s confidence,—a fact which speaks forcibly in his praise. It was at this period of his life that he was noticed in the poem;155 and as his conduct at Carlaverock is wholly passed over by his former biographer, it claims especial regard in this memoir. After stating that he served in the third squadron, which was led by the King in person, and extolling Clifford’s valour, descent and prudence, the writer adds, that if he were a young maiden, he would bestow on him his heart and person, in consideration of his renown. During the siege, we are told that he particularly distinguished himself, and was rewarded by being appointed Governor of the Castle when it surrendered; in consequence of which, his banner was placed on its battlements. Clifford was a party to the letter from the Barons to Pope Boniface, in the 29th Edward I., February 1301, in which he is described as “Castellanus de Appelby;” and, in the 34th Edward I., in recompense for his numerous services, he obtained a grant of the borough of Hartlepole, and of all the lands of Robert de Brus. In the same year, he was sent with Aymer de Valence against the said Robert, who had then assumed the title of King of Scotland; about which time the lands of Christopher de Seyton were granted to him. Clifford attended the deathbed of the King in 1307, and received the dying monarch’s injunctions to prevent the return of Gaveston into the realm. In the 1st Edward II., he was again made Governor of Nottingham Castle, and constituted Earl Marshal of England; and, on the 31st January 1308, he joined several other Lords in an engagement to support the title and honour of the young King with their lives and fortunes. In the 2d Edward II. he was constituted Warden of the Marches of Scotland, and soon afterwards Governor of that kingdom; and on the 17th March 1309–10, was one of the Peers selected to regulate the royal household. Several valuable grants of lands were bestowed upon him in the 3d and 4th Edward II., in consideration of his merits; and he was again summoned to serve in Scotland, in the 4th Edward II. In the 6th Edward II. he was joined in commission with the Earl of Hereford and others, to continue a treaty begun at Margate with the Count of Eureux and the Bishop of Poitou, upon some important affairs. On the 6th February 1313, he received an acquittance from the King, for the jewels, horses, &c. belonging to Piers de Gaveston; and he firmly adhered to Thomas Earl of Lancaster, against the unfortunate favourite, for his agency in whose death he afterwards procured the royal pardon.
“Lord Clifford was regularly summoned to parliament from the 29th December, 28th Edward I. 1299, to the 26th November, 7th Edward II. 1313; and he terminated his career in a manner strictly consistent with his life, for he fell in the battle of Bannockburn, on the 25th June 1314, at the early age of forty years. His body was sent to King Edward at Berwick, and is supposed to have been buried at Shapp Abbey, in Westmoreland.
“Clifford married Maud, daughter, and eventually coheir of Thomas de Clare, steward of Waltham-Forest, son of Thomas, younger son of Richard de Clare, Earl of Gloucester and Hertford, by whom, who survived him, and remarried Robert, Baron Welles, he had issue Roger, his successor in the barony, then aged fifteen years, but who died, S. P. in 1337; Robert, brother and heir of Roger, and, according to some pedigrees, two other sons, John and Andrew; and a daughter, Idonea, the wife of Henry Lord Clifford.
“From Robert de Clifford, the second son of the subject of this article, descended the baronial line of Clifford, which, in the reign of Henry the Eighth, was elevated to the earldom of Cumberland. The barony of Clifford is now possessed by Edward Southwell, the present Lord de Clifford, the abeyance having been terminated in favour of his Lordship’s father in 1776.”156