St Peter’s Chair at Rome. St Paul and Thirty-six Companions in Egypt. St Prisca, virgin and martyr, about 275. St Deicolus, abbot, 7th century. St Ulfrid, bishop and martyr, 1028.
Born. – Dr. John GIllies, historian, 1747.
Died. – Archangelo Corelli, 1713; Sir John Pringle, 1782.
On this Day in Other Sources.
HAMILTON’S CHANGE IN FORTUNE.
The town of Hamilton, stands at no great distance from the Palace. It is the seat of the Sheriff Court, and the residence of a Sheriff Substitute for the middle ward of Lanarkshire. In 1456, it was erected into a burgh of barony, and in 1548 into a royal burgh. In consequence of the resignation of its rights and privileges as a royal burgh, it was on 18th January 1668, erected into a burgh of regality, by a charter of Charles II. in favour of Anne, Duchess of Hamilton, and this charter was ratified by Parliament in 1669.
– Select Views, pp.39-46.
MACGREGOR OF GLENSTRAE HANGED WITH 11 FRIENDS.
Some time after, the Earl of Argyll sent a message to Macgregor, desiring him to come and confer with him, under promise to let him go free if they should not come to an agreement. He ‘came with the Earl of Argyll to Edinburgh’ (January 9, 1604), ‘with eighteen mae of his friends.’ The remainder of the transaction is narrated by the diarist Birrel. Macgregor ‘was convoyit to Berwick by the guard, conform to the earl’s promise; for he promised to put him out of Scots grund. Sae he keepit ane Hielandman’s promise, in respect he sent the guard to convoy him out of Scots grund; but they were not directed to part with him, but to fetch him back again. The 18 of January , he came at even again to Edinburgh, and upon the 20 day, he was hangit at the Cross, and eleven mae of his friends and name, upon ane gallows; himself being chief, he was hangit his awn height above the rest of his friends.’
– Domestic Annals, pp.177-227.
EAR NAILED TO POST FOR FORGERY.
Taken seriatim, the records of the Tolbooth contain volumes of entries made in the following brief fashion:-
1728, Oct. 25. – John Gibson; forging a declaration, 18th January, 1727. His lug nailed to the Tron, and dismissed.
– Old and New Edinburgh, pp.123-138.
“THE WALLACE AND BRUCE DESIGNS.
January 14, 1889.
SIR, – Having read with interest your description of the designs which have been brought forward for the projected memorial to Wallace and Bruce, may I offer a remark on detail which, there is no reason to believe, is open to criticism?
You mention that in one of the designs Wallace is represented with “his great double-handed sword grasped by the right hand.” Now, I am aware that a two-handed sword exists which goes by the name of “Wallace’s sword,” but I believe that it can be shown that, notwithstanding the firm belief and reverence with which that ancient weapon is regarded, it has been ante-dated by a century at least. To assign a two-handed sword to the time of Wallace and Bruce is clearly an anachronism. Such a style of weapon was then unknown. It will, I believe, be found on examination that the fourteenth century was far advanced before it was introduced.
Our principal authorities for the dates of ancient arms and armour are, after the Bayeux tapestry, monumental effigies, ancient sculptures on and in churches, &c.; and the illuminations of ancient manuscripts, some of which, as for instance the beautiful copies of Froissart in the British Museum – they dating, however, from the end of the fourteenth century – afford many valuable examples. I believe that among none of these can contemporary authority be found for the existence of the two-handed sword in the days of Wallace and Bruce, nor for some decades thereafter. A single-handed sword, with a cross guard and broad blade, rather short in proportion to its width, appears to have been the weapon wielded by the contemporaries of our favourite heroes, and, no doubt, by themselves also. – I am, &c.
– Newspaper Article [Friday 18 January 1889, p.7, Scotsman] related to Scots Lore, pp.280-282.