Comments in refutation of pretensions advanced for the first time, and statements in a recent work "The Stirlings of Keir and their family papers"

COREIGENDA ET ADDENDA.
* History,
vol. ii. Part
ii. p. 233.
2 Ibid., vol.
i. Part ii.
p. 357.
8 Iljid.
^Abbreviatio
Rotuloi-uni
Originalium
in curia
Scaccarii,
vol. ii. p.
3.51.
5 Vol. i.
Part ii.
p. 359.
6 Ibid., pp.
362-3.
7 See Expos.,
p. 209.
8 Hi.stoi7,
vol. i. Part
ii. p. 357.
a See Keir
Perform-
ance, tit
supra.
>» See Scoto-
chronicon,
edit. Goodal,
vol. ii. p. 329.
11 See Mac-
pherson's
Edit., vol.
ii. p. 227.
12 Rot. Scot.,
vol. i. p.
382.
Barbara de Swinburne figures in Hodgson as eldest daughter and co-heiress cf her distin-
guished family in 1327,^ and, he adds, was succeeded by Sir John de Strivehn, certainly her spouse,
from whom her property descended to the Middletons of Belsay. He has explicitly stated that
the knight died without issue ^ — of course, by either of his wives, Barbara or Joan, the last of
whom survived him; and represents the preceding John de Middleton and Christian his wife
as taking Belsay and otlier parts of his property by what we would call a singular title,'*
under a special destination ; but he seems not to be borne out by his evidence here. He
infers that he had died childless in 1374; because, by an authority he adduces from an English
record,'* Edward III. is there proved, owing to such conceived reason, to have granted his lands
of Flasfieat in Yorkshire to Sir John de Surry. This, however, could not be, seeing it is legally
established by Wallis, and elsewhere even admitted by Hodgson, that the knight did not die
till 1378, the true year of his death ; and the authority in question only imports a grant
to Surry of Flaxfleat, which it states, " Johannes de Strivelin, chivaler, tenet (thus at the
moment) ad terminum vile," without the least notice of his death as its inductive cause, that must
have been in virtue of a transaction between the parties. Added to the above, Hodgson ^ further
informs us that the " Tower of Belsay 'was the residence of John de Middleton, chevalier, in
the reign of Henry V. ; and as it has the arms of Middleton impaUnij Strirelin (which, it
is to be regretted, he does not describe), I think it probable (he says) that it was built by
him and Christian hisioife, in the time of Edward III." These are the material persons who
have been noticed, and hence Christian, from such impalement of her arms, evidently as John's
wife, being a de Strirelin, must, instead of a stranger, have either been Sir John Stirling's
daughter (as has been represented), or a near relative — supported, too, by his grants and de-
volutions of his projierty in her favour. Be this as it may, Hodgson'' has legally established
that the lady by the said John left issue John Middleton, who, by an inquisition in 1397, was
found to be their heir.
Upon the whole, the matter here requires some more elucidation — it thus not being quite
clear, as stated in the Exposition,' that Sir Jolin left by Barbara Swinburne, his first wife,
" female descendants, who continued his line;" and it being entirely English, may be best left
to tlie study and scrutiny of an English antiquary, having access to the proper English
records. " That he (the knight, in the mean time, contenting ourselves with this closing
quotation from Hodgson)* resided much in the county {Xorthumhcrlandshire) is plain, from the
figuring of his name as a witness to charters ; and the high consideration in which he was
holden may be inferred from his generally standing at the head of lists of witnesses."
Abstracting from his treason, he certainly was a distinguished, and probably meritorious
person, besides his unimpeached descent (there being nothing of the burgess in it) ; " and his
rank as an English baron, he was employed by Edward III. in Continental warfare, and
intrusted by that monarch with the most important posts and commands in Scotland, where
he acquired considerable fame. In particular, he gallantly measured swords with Sir William
Douglas of Lidisdale, " the flower of chivalry," as he was pre-eminently styled, who, however,
in 1338, as Fordun'" transmits, though not until after " dirum etiam conjlictmn apud Craggia
de Cra^gm, cepitfSLC devicit dominum Johanncm de Strivelin;" as also his " quingentos Strive-
linos " — a victory, doubtless, that gave additional laurels to the former. Winton, in his
account of the battle," states that Douglas then
" Fawclit wylli Jbon of Slryvelyne,
Tliat wes of Eifjpnburch Cniiitrnie,
And tuk hym thare wyth wekil payne ;"
which identifies him with our Sir John, the Scoto-Anglo knight, who, shortly before, in 1335, had
obtained from his now liege lord, Edward III., " officium Vicecomitatus de Edeneiurr/he
cum pertinentiis ac castruni nostrum ibidem custodiendi quamdiu nobis placuerit," '- of
course Edinburgh Castle, in a manner the key of the kingdom, of which he hence was keeper
or captain. How he was Uberated, after the "direful" battle at the Craigs of Craggin in
1338, or how his capture can be othei-wise verified, is unknown.
255, 256, Pedigree marked No. II. — " Sir John de Striveling, Kngt., Lord of Carse and Alva," is
made here the father of Marjory, married in 1357 to John Menteith, ancestor of the Men-
teiths of Carse; but this is erroneous, there having been, as can be legally proved, intermediate
generations to Marjory ; and such intimation is merely given because introduced into the Keir
work, for the entirety of whose statements, as the writer has pointedly intimated, he is of course
not answerable.