Remove ads
Border reivers were raiders along the Anglo-Scottish border. They included both Scottish and English people, and they raided the entire border country without regard to their victims' nationality. They operated in a culture of legalised raiding and feuding.[1] Their heyday was in the last hundred years of their existence, during the time of the House of Stuart in the Kingdom of Scotland and the House of Tudor in the Kingdom of England.
 | This article possibly contains original research. (October 2023) |
 |
The term "Border Reiver" is an exonym and anachronistic term used to describe the raiders and bandits who operated along the Anglo-Scottish Border during the late Middle Ages and early modern period. The reivers, as we understand today, emerged in textual and archaeological evidence sometime between 1350 and 1450,[2][3] with their activities reaching their height in the 16th century during the Tudor period in England and the late Stewart period in Scotland.[4] They were infamous for raiding, eliciting protection money ('blackmail'), cattle rustling, and lawlessness, often operating within a framework of legally sanctioned violence. Many crimes, such as theft and feuding, were treated with less severity due to the ancient customs and culture of the Borderlands, which had evolved over centuries to tolerate and even codify such practices.[1]
Although less well-known than Highlanders in Scotland—whom they met and defeated in battle on occasion[5]—the Border Reivers played a significant role in shaping Anglo-Scottish relations.[6] Their activities were a major factor in ongoing tensions between the two kingdoms, and their raids often had international repercussions.[7] There is an emerging historical debate over how great their threat and the extent to which their raids were state-directed rather than purely opportunistic.[3][8][4]
The culture of the Border Reivers—characterised by honour, close family bonds, and self-defence—has been said to influence the culture of the Upland South in the United States. Many Borderers migrated as families to America, where their values are thought to have contributed significantly to the region's social structure and political ideologies, with echoes of their influence persisting even today.[9][10][11]
Remove ads
Reive, a noun meaning raid, comes from the Middle English (Scots) reifen. The verb reave meaning "plunder, rob", a closely related word, comes from the Middle English reven. There also exists a Northumbrian and Scots verb reifen. All three derive from Old English rēafian which means "to rob, plunder, pillage".[12] Variants of these words were used in the Borders in the later Middle Ages.[13] The corresponding verb in Dutch is "(be)roven", and "(be)rauben" in German.
The earliest use of the combined term "border reiver" appears to be by Sir Walter Scott in his anthology Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border.[14] George Ridpath (1716?–1772), the author of posthumously published The Border-History of England and Scotland, deduced from the earliest times to the union of the two crowns (London, 1776), referred not to 'border reivers' but only to banditti.[15]
Remove ads
Scotland and England were frequently at war during the late Middle Ages. During these wars, the livelihood of the people on the Borders was devastated by the contending armies. Even when the countries were not formally at war, tension remained high, and royal authority in either or both kingdoms was often weak, particularly in remote locations. The difficulty and uncertainties of basic human survival meant that communities and/or people kindred to each other would seek security through group strength and cunning. They would attempt to improve their livelihoods at their nominal enemies' expense, enemies who were frequently also just trying to survive. Loyalty to a feeble or distant monarch and reliance on the effectiveness of the law usually made people a target for depredations rather than conferring any security.
There were other factors which may have promoted a predatory mode of living in parts of the Borders. A system of partible inheritance is evident in some parts of the English side of the Borders in the sixteenth century. By contrast to primogeniture, this meant that land was divided equally among all sons following a father's death; it could mean that the inheriting generation held insufficient land on which to survive.[16][2]
Governance, culture and territorality of the Anglo-Scottish frontier
The Anglo-Scottish borders were shaped by centuries of territorial disputes, cultural integration, and overlapping systems of governance, resulting in one of the most administratively complex regions of medieval Britain.
The traditional narrative places the Battle of Carham in 1018 as a pivotal moment when Scottish forces secured control over Lothian, marking a fundamental shift in the northern boundary of England.[7] However, this interpretation is subject to debate. Some historians question whether the 'loss' of Lothian to Scotland can be definitively dated to 1018, with a range of alternative timelines proposed.[7]
Contemporary evidence suggests the gradual establishment of Scottish authority over the Borders, marked by the consolidation of continuous royal control around the same time as the Norman Conquest, West Lothian and Midlothian likely dates between Máel Coluim III’s accession in 1058 and the death of his son Edgar in 1107. East Lothian saw consolidation under Máel Coluim III by 1093, with Edgar firmly establishing authority by 1107. Berwickshire (Merse) was under Máel Coluim III’s rule, with Edgar solidifying control around 1100. Teviotdale (Roxburghshire) and Tweeddale fell under continuous Scottish control from 1113 during David I’s tenure. Annandale came under Robert de Brus, 1st Lord of Annandale between 1113 and 1124 as a vassal of David I. [17] It may be that following the Norman Conquest, both kingdoms may have carved up the what remained of semi-independent Earldom of Bamburgh to form the border on the east of the along the Tweed.[17]
The period also began the Normanisation of the Scottish nobility, which introduced new complexities brought in by David I of Scotland.[18] It is possible that independent Norman lordships lay in South West Scotland at the freyed western end of the Borders.[17]
Following the Norman Conquest, the Anglo-Scottish border in the west remained unclear. William Rufus, son of William the Conqueror, expelled Dolfin, a descendant of the Anglo-Saxon Earls of Northumbria, from Cumberland and fortified Carlisle to secure the region.[19] However, during the period of civil war known as The Anarchy (1135–1153), David I of Scotland exploited the instability and advanced southward into northern England. In the Second Treaty of Durham (1139), King Stephen granted the Earldom of Northumbria—encompassing Carlisle, Cumberland, Westmorland, and Lancashire north of the Ribble—to David's son, Prince Henry. These territories were later reclaimed, and David's successor, Malcolm IV, was forced to cede them. Since then, the Anglo-Scottish border has remained largely unchanged, with only minor adjustments.[20]
Complex and dual identities
Land ownership and governance in the Anglo-Scottish border region during the 12th and 13th centuries were shaped by a highly mixed population, but the ruling elite was predominantly composed of Norman, Flemish, and Breton incomers.
These newcomers were granted lands and titles as knights or lords, establishing castles and controlling large demesnes. Some of these demesnes crossed the unclear boundary between England and Scotland during the War of Scottish Independence, and this later contributed to tensions and disputes over land ownership and jurisdiction. While the majority of the population were probably local inhabitants—whether Early Scots/Northumbrian in the east, Brythonic-speaking - until the 12th century[21] - in the west, or Gaelic in the far south-west Scotland—these communities would have been governed primarily by the newly established ruling class.[22]
The integration of these groups under predominantly Norman, Flemish, and Breton lords across the border introduced a dual identity and a new layer of governance that often clashed with local traditions, further complicating loyalties and creating a fragmented political landscape.[18]
The case of Alexander Mason highlights the challenges of nationality and jurisdiction in the Anglo-Scottish borderlands. In 1441, Mason, described as a Scot but a sometime resident of Northumberland, was accused of murdering Lawrence Grey in England. His dual identity complicated legal proceedings, as questions of nationality and jurisdiction caused delays lasting several years. Mason ultimately secured a royal pardon in 1449 by swearing allegiance to the English crown.[23]
The Wars of Scottish Independence played a key role in this transformation of the Borders, fostering and forcing a growing sense of national belonging that extended across social, cultural and linguistic groups.[18][24] However, alongside this burgeoning national identity, a shared border identity also emerged, rooted in the unique cultural and legal practices of the region. This shared identity coexisted with a lingering sense of Otherness,[25][26] as the borders remained distinct from the centralised identities of both nations, shaped by their unique history and violent reputation, and the persistent influence of local loyalties.[22][26]
Disputed territory
Efforts to define the Anglo-Scottish border often proved contentious and inconclusive. By 1245, territorial disputes remained unresolved, as demonstrated in a case involving Hugh de Bolbec, a Northumbrian knight. A meeting near Carham on the Tweed attempted to establish "the true and ancient marches between the two kingdoms". Six knights from each side were appointed to walk the border line, but the Scottish and English representatives disagreed at every step. A second attempt expanded the parties to twelve knights per side, with additional servants and men-at-arms processing through the Tweed Valley, but it too ended without agreement.[8][7]
A third effort involved 48 knights, who swore an oath to trace the border. The English knights proposed a line running from the confluence of Reddenburn and the Tweed, south to Tres Karras and Hopperichlawe (now lost), and then to Whitelaw Hill in the Cheviot Hills. However, the Scottish knights opposed this perambulation with threats, and tensions escalated. Lacking further resources to continue, the English knights unilaterally declared the defined line to be "the true and ancient marches and divisions", despite the lack of mutual agreement.[8]
Throughout the period, various territories remained disputed due to unresolved claims, particularly lands referred to as threiplands (Scots for "disputed lands").[27] While many of these areas were smaller tracts of contested ground, some, like the Debatable Lands, were far more significant. This expansive area, which lay between the rivers Esk and Sark, was the subject of contention until 1552, when its status was finally settled.[7][8] Originally referred to as the "Batable Land"—a term derived from its use as fertile grazing ground—the territory was notable for an agreement allowing both English and Scottish borderers to graze cattle during the day, despite prohibitions on permanent settlement.[8][7]
Berwick-upon-Tweed, a strategically important town on the Anglo-Scottish border, changed hands multiple times during the medieval period, reflecting its contested status between England and Scotland. The town was alternately controlled by each kingdom, with significant captures in 1174, 1296, and 1318, among others. Its turbulent history culminated in 1482 when it was seized by Richard, Duke of Gloucester (later Richard III), and thereafter remained under English administration. Berwick's frequent exchanges highlight its role as both a prize of war and a continued focal point of Anglo-Scottish tensions.[28]
The Anglo-Scottish border was not fully demarcated until the mid-19th century, when the Ordnance Survey mapped the area in detail. Even as late as this period, some lands, such as Kirkholm Common, were still considered by locals to be threipland. Locals regarded it as shared communal ground, with its historical status as contested land lingering in local tradition.[29]
Other disputed areas were resolved through less formal means. The Ba Green (or Ba' Green or Ball Green) near Wark and Coldstream, a Scottish tract of land that curiously lies on the English side of the River Tweed, is one such example. This threipland became the subject of an annual game of football, whose result determined temporary control of the land. Over time, Coldstream's growing population allowed it to field far more players than Wark, leading to the land being informally absorbed into Scotland.[30]
Overlapping powers: judicial, religious, and secular authority
The Anglo-Scottish Borders were marked by overlapping systems of administration and law, creating a patchwork of competing jurisdictions. On the English side, noble families, ecclesiastical authorities, and state officials held varying degrees of power, often clashing over jurisdiction. Secular liberties like Tynedale and Redesdale operated semi-independently, granting local lords significant autonomy to enforce laws and defend their territories. Religious influence was prominent in Hexhamshire, governed by the Archbishops of York, and in the County Palatine of Durham (which included the exclaves of Norhamshire and Islandshire on the frontier), ruled by the Prince Bishops, who held powers comparable to those of a king, including raising armies and collecting taxes. The Earls of Northumberland, based in Alnwick, were another major force, holding substantial military and administrative influence over northern England.[31] The legal framework of the region was equally fragmented, with March law addressing cross-border disputes and raids,[32] while state law and ecclesiastical law functioned in parallel. Disputes often arose between Wardens of the Marches, Keepers of the liberties, and local sheriffs, reflecting the constant struggle to impose order in this turbulent region.[32]
A similar system of overlapping jurisdictions existed on the Scottish side, though their liberties, known as regalities, generally lacked the level of autonomy or legal power seen in England.[31] Despite these differences, both nations faced persistent challenges in governing the borderlands, where local power dynamics frequently overruled central authority.[18]
Remove ads
Hen Ogledd
The pervasive tradition of cattle raiding and endemic violence in the Border region appears to have roots that extend deep into its history, suggesting that such practices have long been an intrinsic part of the area's cultural and social fabric. The earliest references to such behaviour appear in the Old Welsh (Hen Ogledd) poems attributed to bards such as Taliesin, Aneirin, and Llywarch Hen, which describe battles and raids in the early medieval period of what is now the Anglo-Scottish Borders. These poetic accounts hint at a long-standing culture of raiding and conflict in the northern British territories.[33]
I roared, my breast full of tumult,
Lance on my shoulder, shield in my hand,
When Goddeu and Rheged were ranged for war,
I saw a man who was raiding cattle -
Famous dragon, unique trampler.[34]
Modern genetic studies support the idea of continuity in the Borders region, showing that its population clusters separately from both broader Scottish and English genetic groups. This distinction aligns with the historical role of the Borders as a cultural and geographical transitional zone and is consistent with the region's heritage, tracing back to the Brythonic-speaking kingdoms of Gododdin and Rheged.[35]
'The ancient laws and customs of the land'
Laws of the Marches, or Leges Marchiarum, first formally codified in 1249, offers a significant insight into the long-standing legal and social structures designed to manage the unique challenges of the Anglo-Scottish Border. This legal framework addressed not only diplomatic relations between England and Scotland but also sought to regulate banditry, cross-border smuggling, and feuding. Its provisions included the return of fugitives, the recovery of debts, and the production of accused parties at designated trysting places along the border, such as Reddenburn near Kelso.[7] These trysting places served as neutral meeting points for resolving disputes under the framework of March law.[3]
The formulation of March law followed a meeting in 1248 between six English knights and six Scottish knights, and the resulting code was formally promulgated the following year.[32] Between 1249 and 1596, the laws of the marches were reviewed and recodified on at least eight occasions, reflecting their enduring importance in managing Border relations.[7] The legal traditions referenced in these codes draw upon "the ancient laws and customs of the land," and some of the language, such as "handwasil" and "manbote," suggests Anglo-Saxon origins. The document itself refers to the laws as originating "from a time which memory does not exist," implying that aspects of March law may predate the Norman Conquest. However, the extent to which these laws derive from pre-Norman customs remains a topic of scholarly debate.[32]
Schavaldours
Source:[36]
An earlier rendition of banditry may have been the bands of armed men who first appeared on the Borders in the early 14th century, then known as the Schavaldours (also spelled shavaldour, shavaldor, or shavaldor) during the unstable rule of Edward II of England. The term was first recorded in 1313, when Richard de Kellawe, then Bishop of Durham, requested to be excused from levying any money from the goods of the parson of Whickham, citing the damage caused by "Schavadours and plunderers." The Schavaldours, like the later (and anachronistically named) Border reivers, were often pressed into service during cross-border wars, such as those in 1350.[37]
The problem of banditry grew worse following Edward II's loss at the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314 and appeared to further worsen after a severe famine in 1315–1317 and a failed campaign in 1322.[37] The anarchy that followed created conditions where both organised and independent bands of Scottish armed men, along with opportunistic English bands, raided as far as Yorkshire, devastating the land not only through plunder but also widespread burning.[2]
Among the English raiders were known Schavaldours, some of whom were led by local nobility, including the Lilburns, Swinburnes, de Eures, and Middletons, while others consisted of mercenaries or former soldiers, such as the infamous Jack le Irish.[37] Different branches of English Border noble families, for example the aforementioned Swinburnes, often found themselves fighting on opposing sides, some due to land ownership in Scotland, others opportunistically, and some because they held genuine Scottish sympathies. The violence was not only international but also intranational and intrafamilial, adding further complexity to the chaos of the time.[2]
While the term 'Schalvadours' disappears from records by the late 14th century, the violence and lawlessness that characterised the Border region continued for centuries.[37]
Remove ads
The emergence of what we now understand as 'Border reivers' can be traced to sometime between the end of the First War of Scottish Independence and around the end of the Wars of the Roses, though the development of fortified self-defence measures appears to have commenced earlier in England during the 14th century, particularly at the height of the Wars of Independence.[2][3]
Elaborate nicknames, for which the border reivers were known, emerged early: the earliest known example is "Out with the sword" John Turnbull, who flourished around the turn of the 15th century.[22][38] He was a member of the powerful Turnbull family in Minto in the borders, and he earned his nickname for his reputation of being quick to escalate arguments into violence. Remarkably, John Turnbull's nickname is perhaps the only surviving example of an early 15th-century border reiver nickname.[38]
Around the same time, the liberties of Tynedale and Redesdale were undergoing significant changes that would shape the emergence of surnames as a defining feature of border society. During Edward III's reign, the men of these liberties were granted immunity from land confiscation.[2] This was not a continuation of earlier practices like March law, but a deliberate concession by Edward III, designed to secure their loyalty and military support during his campaigns in Scotland. At the same time, there were longstanding complaints to the Keepers of the Liberties about their failure to hand over criminals to the courts, as the liberties often provided sanctuary for raiders and fugitives. What had long operated as a de facto arrangement of protection for certain individuals appears to have been formalised into a de jure status through Edward II's policy.[39]
The Wars of Independence had a profound impact on the Borders, leading to the displacement and decline of numerous local gentry families. Many dynasties and minor landed families disappeared, some due to the violence, instability, and lawlessness that plagued the Anglo-Scottish border during this period. Others may have abandoned their holdings in search of security in more tranquil areas further south.[39]
This process was exacerbated in the aftermath of key events such as the Battle of Bannockburn (1314), when the English crown, weakened by internal instability, could no longer effectively defend northern England. Orders for a scorched earth retreat, leaving large tracts of land as wasteland, were issued to deny the advancing Scots critical resources and to slow their progress. This was ignored by many Surnames who then joined in the plunder. The border regions, distant from the central government and often regarded as peripheral, were effectively abandoned, reflecting both the strategic necessity of withdrawal and the indifference of southern authorities to the region’s fate.[39]
A similar pattern occurred on the Scottish side of the border, where the landed gentry also experienced significant decline. The shared history of upheaval on both sides of the border underscores the profound destabilization caused by these prolonged conflicts.[39]
The widespread banditry and raiding during the Wars of Independence, along with the decline of local gentry, may have necessitated the rise of an unofficial aristocracy. Heidsmen—heads of surnames—emerged to fill the void, providing leadership, direction, and defence in a region plagued by instability and conflict.
This immunity, combined with the destabilising effects of gavelkind—a system of inheritance that divided land equally among male heirs—led to the gradual impoverishment of many border families and near abandonment of the borders, forcing them to seek other means of survival, often through smuggling and raiding. The growing prominence of surnames in the liberties during this period reflected the rise of family identities tied to raiding and feuding, with leading figures or "heidsmen" representing these powerful groups. The immunity granted by King Edward allowed these families to operate almost with impunity, as they were shielded from confiscation or meaningful retribution. Although the immunity was later officially rescinded, its implementation within the liberties appears to have been almost entirely absent. A lack of enforcement allowed the raiding culture to flourish, entrenching the fragmented and combative nature of the borderlands during the years leading to the emergence of the infamous Tudor surnames.[39]
Following the defeat of Edward Balliol at the Battle of Halidon Hill in 1333, the Kingdom of England expanded its territory to include much of southern Scotland, and deprioritised the governance and defence of the traditional Anglo-Scottish Border region. The assumption was that the "new" border further north, as dictated by the Treaty of Newcastle (1334), would eliminate the need to maintain the old border systems, such as March law and its associated offices. However, this miscalculation left the original border region increasingly lawless, as local governance systems were abandoned, and the territory to the north remained de facto under Scottish resistance and control. This vacuum of authority contributed to the instability and lawlessness of the borderlands.[32]
David II's reign was marked by continued conflict with England during the Second War of Scottish Independence. In 1346, David II was captured by English forces at the Battle of Neville's Cross and held prisoner in England for 11 years.
His release was secured in 1357 through an agreement made in Berwick, which required Scotland to pay a massive ransom of 100,000 marks (£66,666 13s 4d) over ten years. Despite efforts to rebuild his authority upon returning to Scotland, David's reign remained plagued by internal divisions, financial difficulties, and periodic clashes with England. This Treaty of Berwick marked the official end of the Wars of Scottish Independence, but it did not end the raiding and lawlessness along the border. By thene, such practices had become deeply ingrained in the culture and livelihood of the borderers, and persisted despite the formal cessation of hostilities between the two kingdoms.
Remove ads
From 1357 to the Wars of the Roses
Between the end of the Wars of Scottish Independence (1357) and the Battle of Flodden (1513)[5] there were intermittent peace agreements and an uneasy balance of power between England and Scotland. While no major wars erupted, the Anglo-Scottish border remained a hotspot for raiding, feuding, and political tensions.[7] Barely had ink dried in 1357 before the Warden of the West March Thomas de Lucy was accused on one occasion of imprisoning Scots for the purpose of ransom. And on another occasion, with collusion with the men of Eskdale, there was a theft of several thousand animals and £20,[1] in excess of £16,792 today.[40]
Although there were long-term truces after the Wars of Scottish Independence and relatively few official cross-border raids, the proliferation of more humble fortified structures such as bastle houses and pele towers across the Anglo-Scottish borderland underscores the enduring instability of the region; they responded to persistent threats of raiding and violence, which continued even during periods of nominal peace.[41]
Raiding continued as a persistent feature of the borderlands, punctuating periods of truce. These ranged from smaller skirmishes to occasional large-scale raids, such as the Battle of Otterburn (1388) and Homildon Hill (1402), which occasionally escalated into significant but localised conflicts. Both kingdoms sought to maintain periods of relative calm through truce agreements and diplomatic efforts, though these efforts were often fragile and difficult to enforce in the contested border regions.[4]
It was during this time we see the emergence of English border magnates like the Nevilles, Cliffords, and Dacres, as well as an emergent lower gentry such as the Musgraves, Herons, Scropes, and later still, the Eures, Mitfords, Ogles, and Moresbys, who would come to fill key positions along the English Borders, including Sheriff, Justice of the Peace, March Wardens, Keepers of Tynedale and Redesdale, Captains of Berwick and Carlisle, and other vital military and administrative roles responsible for the defence and governance of this volatile frontier region.[42] It's important to note the Border gentry were few in number and much poorer compared with other parts of England.[25]
The Percy family, Earls of Northumberland, played a significant role in the conflicts that destabilised England. The Percys first rebelled against King Henry IV during the early 15th century, joining forces with Owain Glyndŵr and Edmund Mortimer in the Tripartite Indenture, a plan to divide England and Wales between them. Led by Sir Henry "Hotspur" Percy, the rebellion culminated in the Battle of Shrewsbury (1403), where Hotspur was killed.[7]
Despite two further rebellions, the 2nd Earl of Northumberland was restored as Warden of the Marches by Henry V. During this period, the Percy family consolidated their power in the north, notably absorbing the liberty of Redesdale from the Umfraville to Tailboys vassals in 1436, following the extinction of the Umfraville line.[2] Despite this growing authority and the responsibilities of the Wardenship, reports of "numerous robbers and felons called Intakers [receivers of stolen goods] and Outputters [smugglers]" continued to trouble the region.[2]
The Wars of the Roses
During the Wars of the Roses, the Percy family expanded their influence in the eastern regions, while the Neville family grew in power in Cumbria, fostering a bitter rivalry. The two families supported opposing factions in the conflict, with the Nevilles aligning more successfully with the Yorkist cause. This strategic advantage allowed the Nevilles to claim the Percy earldom in 1463 following the Percys’ poor choice of allegiance.
During the Wars of the Roses, southern English communities viewed northern Borderers as a constant threat. The campaigns of 1460–61 were seen by figures like Abbot Whethamstede as a northern rebellion, with chroniclers describing northerners as a “plague of locusts” feared for robbery and devastation, particularly in London.[43] This perception of the north as a militarized and hostile frontier region reinforced southern anxieties about the Borderers.[25]
Despite the ongoing civil war between the houses of Lancaster and York, truces with Scotland were maintained and periodically renewed. A 40-year truce was agreed upon in 1479.[44]
However, despite the agreement, raiding resumed the following year. During the so-called 'Gloucester'a War', The Earl of Angus led a deep raid into the East March, prompting a retaliatory campaign by Richard, Duke of Gloucester, who launched a raid into Scotland.[45] This outbreak of violence was short-lived, concluding by 1484. [44]
This brief conflict was significant for one key reason: it marked the final time Berwick-upon-Tweed changed hands, solidifying English control over the strategic town. Additionally, it saw the Duke of Albany cede control over much of South West Scotland, although this concession proved short-lived, with the territory returning to Scottish hands not long after.[44]
Remove ads
The last hundred years is often regarded as the heyday of the Border reivers, characterised by persistent raiding, feuding, and lawlessness perhaps the worst the Borders had seen. It was the period we see the end of the liberties of Redesdale and Tynedale and the end of the Debatable Land. The era also saw the end of the militarised border. The Union of the Crowns in 1603, when James VI of Scotland succeeded to the English throne as James I, marked the end of centuries of conflict between the two kingdoms.[46]
Henry VII and James IV
Henry VII and James IV were initially cordial, encouraged the Border courts and reminded the Border magnates of their obligation to maintain truce.[47]
However, despite this initial cordiality and relative peace along the Borders, the period soon saw growing tensions and rivalry between the two monarchs and an increase in banditry, as the fragile truces often proved difficult to enforce.[47]
In 1495, the pretender to the English crown, Perkin Warbeck became a guest of James IV and raids resumed on both sides of the Border with renewed intensity, disrupting the fragile peace established earlier. [47] In the following year, Perkin Warbeck led a small-scale invasion of England, attempting to capitalise on the ongoing tensions between England and Scotland. The invasion, however, was poorly supported and ultimately failed to achieve any significant objectives.[48]
Seven years later, Hob the King (Halbert Elliot) and Dand the Man (Andrew Elliot) rode out from Liddesdale and brazenly stole 180 sheep from the Lammermuir Hills—well within sight of the city of Edinburgh—demonstrating that Borderers had little hesitation in raiding their own countrymen when it suited them.[7]
A particularly notable intra-national warfare episode occurred during just preceding the death of Henry VII in 1509, when a dispute over harbour dues between the municipality of Newcastle and the Prior of Tynemouth escalated into outright violence. The Prior, assembling a company of 500 armed men from liberties of Tynedale and Redesdale - equipped with spears, swords, bows, and arrows - ordered them to attack Newcastle. Over the course of six days, the raiders killed around 100 inhabitants and effectively laid siege to the city. The inhabitants of Newcastle, fearing for their lives, were forced to remain within the city walls, unable to retaliate.[49][50] [51] [52]
Henry VIII, James IV, and the Battle of Flodden
The marriage of Margaret Tudor, Henry VIII's elder sister, to James IV of Scotland in 1503 was a pivotal moment in Anglo-Scottish relations, formalised under the Treaty of Perpetual Peace. Intended to secure lasting harmony between the two kingdoms, the treaty was undermined by tensions over England's perceived overlordship, with Henry VIII repeatedly antagonising his brother-in-law, James IV. Notably, Henry refused to pay Margaret's dowry, a slight that James saw as deeply disrespectful.[53]
The Killing of Robert Ker
Sometime between 1500,[49] 1501,[49] 1503,[54][49] 1508,[49][55] 1509[56]or 1511,[57] John "the Bastard" Heron, the illegitimate son of a minor Border lord, murdered Robert Ker of Cessford, Warden of the Middle March,[57] a prominent Scottish noble and close ally of King James IV. This murder was likely part of an ongoing feud between the prominent Border families of Ker and Heron, reflecting the endemic violence and rivalries of the Anglo-Scottish Border region.[49] Such an act of violence during a March Day - a formal meeting intended to resolve cross-border disputes - was exceptionally rare, if not unprecedented, in the later medieval period. Assisted by his co-conspirators Lilburn and Starhed,[58] Heron escalated the volatile feud. Lilburn was killed on the spot during the incident, while Starhed fled but was later tracked to the city of York and murdered in apparent retaliation.[57]
This murder became a long-standing grievance for James IV, who regarded it as an egregious insult to both his authority and the peace between England and Scotland that John "the Bastard" Heron had not only murdered a warden but was currently free in England.[59][48] It was directly referenced in a letter of complaint sent by James to Henry VIII, received around 11th August 1513 while Henry was at camp before the Battle of the Spurs.[60] This unresolved grievance, alongside other provocations, compounded the already fraught Anglo-Scottish tensions, contributing to the outbreak of war and culminating in the Battle of Flodden.
Flodden and the Borders
The defeat of the Scottish forces at the Battle of Flodden, on 9 September 1513, is often regarded as a pivotal moment in the late history of the Anglo-Scottish Borders. Among the fallen were James IV and a significant portion of Scotland's nobility and clergy, an Archbishop, a bishop, 21 earls, 14 lords, and at least 300 of the lower gentry.[61] In total, perhaps as many as 8,000 Scottish troops perished, including several French captains who had joined the campaign in support of the Auld Alliance. The impact was devastating, leaving Scotland bereft of much of its leadership and military strength, a loss later immortalized in the lament The Flowers of the Forest, which mourns the fallen at Flodden.[62][63]
It marks the beginning of the best-known period of Border Reiver activity. While raiding and feuding had long been part of life in the region, the 16th century is frequently the starting point for many accounts of their history, reflecting its prominence in popular narratives.[64][65][66]
The Ill Raid
On the 9th August 1513, Alexander, Third Lord Home, conducted a substantial raid into England with a force estimated at 4,000 to 7,000 men.[67] Known as the "Ill Raid,"[55] this incursion succeeded in securing significant plunder. Whilst returning the Scottish forces were ambushed by 1,000 longbowmen led by Sir William Bulmer,[67] who had mobilized from the Palatine of Durham's Norhamshire exclave. In the ensuing confrontation, 500 Scots were killed, and another 400 were captured, including Lord Home's own brother.[67]
Border reivers and the Battle of Flodden
On the 18th August, Catherine of Aragon, Queen of England, signed an official pardon for John "the Bastard" Heron, for his murder of Robert Ker of Cessford, a Scottish Warden of the Middle March.[62] Heron later played a crucial role in the battle, guiding the English army under the Earl of Surrey to a strategic position north of the Scottish forces and reportedly witnessing the burning of his family’s castle en route.[68]
On the English left, Thomas Dacre, 2nd Baron Dacre, then Lord Warden of the Marches, commanded a force of light horsemen, which included contingents from Tynemouthshire and Bamburghshire. These groups were reportedly feuding throughout the march to the battlefield. Among Dacre’s forces was also a band of fifty outlaws led by John Heron.[68]
During the battle, the forces of Alexander Home, 3rd Lord Home on the Scottish right, composed of both Highlanders and Border light horse—including Giles Musgrave, an English outlaw and traitor—nearly broke through the English line. Home’s troops exploited a breakdown in cohesion among men from Cheshire, who, under sustained pressure—including heavy cannon fire—panicked and began to retreat.[68]
This retreat left Lord Howard isolated and surrounded, with the collapse of the English left appearing imminent. At this critical moment, John Heron and his band of outlaws launched a decisive counterattack that rescued Howard and stabilized the position, preventing a total collapse. Later stories say that neither Border reivers on each side made any real attempt to fight. Home’s forces subsequently withdrew, critically weakening the Scottish effort. Some accounts suggest that Home’s withdrawal may have been influenced by an agreement or coercion involving Dacre, as Home’s brother was being held captive by the English[69][62] or he may have chosen to save himself.[70]
An example of the mercurial and opportunistic nature of Border society occurred during the Battle of Flodden. While the armies clashed, men from Teviotdale in Scotland and Tynedale in England collaborated to raid and despoil the English wagon train.[71]
By the late evening of 9 September 1513, many of Scotland’s leading men lay dead on English soil, their loss devastating the kingdom’s leadership. Among the few surviving magnates were aforementioned Home. The body of King James IV was discovered on the battlefield and later sent south by Dacre as proof of the catastrophic defeat.[69][62]
Remove ads
The heyday of the Border Reivers began in the aftermath of the Battle of Flodden in 1513, as the devastation of Scotland’s leadership and the instability of the Anglo-Scottish Borderlands led to an era of intensified raiding and lawlessness. This period saw significant events, such as the division of the Debatable Land and the ultimate suppression of banditry with the Union of the Crowns in 1603.[72] [70][7]
After Flodden
Almost immediately after the Battle of Flodden, riders from Scotland launched raids, burning four towns in England. In response, Dacre led punitive judicial raids, devastating towns such as Annan and razing villages and buildings across Teviotdale, Liddesdale, and Ewesdale, while seizing 4,000 head of cattle. [70]
Dacre, reportedly acting under the direction of Cardinal Wolsey and King Henry VIII, paid Scottish surnames to conduct raids into Scotland while simultaneously entertaining factions opposed to the Angus regency. Far from attempting to control the Borders, Dacre was orchestrating chaos to undermine Scottish stability. Ironically, a joint Maxwell-Irvine force of 400 men raided the Debatable Land and lifted 700 cattle from his tenants. When Dacre lodged a complaint, the Maxwell heidsman reportedly replied that the cattle had been taken "orderly, according to the customs of the Borders."[70]
Settling the Debatable Land
About the same time, the Armstrongs and Grahams broke with generations of Border customs by settling the Debatable Land, a territory long regarded as neutral and lawless. This encroachment was first tacitly acknowledged by the Scottish government in 1517. In the same year, Dacre permitted loyal Scottish Grahams to establish themselves in the southern end of the Debatable Land, further eroding its status as a no-man's-land between the two kingdoms.[73]
This policy of tolerating settlement in the Debatable Land had no remedial effect on banditry in the Anglo-Scottish borderlands, where criminality persisted unabated. The Armstrongs only increased in danger, their activities posing an even greater threat to the borderlands.[74]
Remove ads
The reivers were both English and Scottish and raided both sides of the border impartially, so long as the people they raided had no powerful protectors and no connection to their own kin. Their activities, although usually within a day's ride of the border, extended both north and south of their main haunts. English raiders were reported to have hit the outskirts of Edinburgh, and Scottish raids were reported to have reached as far south as Lancashire and Yorkshire. The main raiding season ran through the early winter months, when the nights were longest and the cattle and horses fat from having spent the summer grazing. The numbers involved in a raid might range from a few dozen to organised campaigns involving up to three thousand riders.[75]
When raiding, or riding, as it was termed, the reivers rode light on hardy nags or ponies renowned for the ability to pick their way over the boggy moss lands (see: Galloway pony, Hobelar). The original dress of a shepherd's plaid was later replaced by light armour such as brigandines or jacks of plate (a type of sleeveless doublet into which small plates of steel were stitched), and metal helmets such as burgonets or morions; hence their nickname of the "steel bonnets". They were armed with light lances and small shields, and sometimes also with longbows, or light crossbows, known as "latches", or later on in their history with one or more pistols. They invariably also carried swords and dirks.
Border reivers were sometimes in demand as mercenary soldiers, owing to their recognised skills as light cavalry. Reivers sometimes served in English or Scottish armies in the Low Countries and in Ireland, often to avoid having harsher penalties enacted upon themselves and their families. Reivers fighting as levied soldiers played important roles in the battles at Flodden and Solway Moss. After meeting one reiver (the Bold Buccleugh), Queen Elizabeth I is quoted as having said that "with ten thousand such men, James VI could shake any throne in Europe."
These borderers proved difficult to control, however, within larger national armies. They were already in the habit of claiming any nationality or none, depending on who was asking and where they perceived the individual advantage to be. Many had relatives on both sides of Scottish-English conflicts despite prevailing laws against international marriage. They could be badly behaved in camp, seeing fellow soldiers as sources of plunder. As warriors more loyal to clans than to nations, their commitment to the work was always in doubt. At battles such as Ancrum Moor in Scotland in 1545, borderers changed sides in mid-combat to curry favour with the likely victors. At the Battle of Pinkie Cleugh in 1547, an observer (William Patten) noticed Scottish and English borderers chatting with each other, then putting on a spirited show of combat once they knew they had been spotted.[76]
The inhabitants of the Borders had to live in a state of constant alert, and for self-protection, they built fortified tower houses.
In the very worst periods of warfare, people were unable to construct more than crude turf cabins, the destruction of which would be little loss. When times allowed, however, they built houses designed as much for defence as shelter. The bastle house was a stout two-storeyed building. The lower floor was used to keep the most valuable livestock and horses. The upper storey housed the people, and often could be reached only by an external ladder which was pulled up at night or if danger threatened. The stone walls were up to 3 feet (0.9 m) thick, and the roof was of slate or stone tiles. Only narrow arrow slits provided light and ventilation.[77] Such dwellings could not be set on fire, and while they could be captured, for example by smoking out the defenders with fires of damp straw or using scaling ladders to reach the roof, they were usually not worth the time and effort.
Peel towers (also spelled pele towers) were usually three-storeyed buildings, constructed specifically for defensive purposes by the authorities, or for prestigious individuals such as the heads of clans. Smailholm Tower is one of many surviving peel towers. Like bastle houses, they were very strongly constructed for defence. If necessary, they could be temporarily abandoned and stuffed full of smouldering turf to prevent an enemy (such as a government army) destroying them with gunpowder.[78]
Peel towers and bastle houses were often surrounded by a stone wall known as a barmkin, inside which cattle and other livestock were kept overnight.
A special body of law, known as March law or Border law, developed in the region.[79] Under border law, a person who had been raided had the right to mount a counter-raid within six days, even across the border, to recover his goods. This "hot trod" had to proceed with "hound and horne, hew and cry",[80] making a racket and carrying a piece of burning turf on a spear point to openly announce their purpose, to distinguish themselves from unlawful raiders proceeding covertly. They might use a sleuth hound (also known as a "slew dogge") to follow raiders' tracks. These dogs were valuable, and part of the established forces (on the English side of the border, at least).[81] Any person meeting this counter-raid was required to ride along and offer such help as he could, on pain of being considered complicit with the raiders. The "cold trod" mounted after six days required official sanction. Officers such as the Deputy Warden of the English West March had the specific duty of "following the trod".[82]
Both sides of the border were divided into Marches, each under a march warden. The march wardens' various duties included the maintenance of patrols, watches and garrisons to deter raiding from the other kingdom. On occasion, march wardens could make warden roades to recover loot, and to make a point to raiders and officials.
The march wardens also had the duty of maintaining such justice and equity as was possible. The respective kingdoms' march wardens would meet at appointed times along the border itself to settle claims against people on their side of the border by people from the other kingdom. These occasions, known as "Days of Truce", were much like fairs, with entertainment and much socialising. For reivers it was an opportunity to meet (lawfully) with relatives or friends normally separated by the border. It was not unknown for violence to break out even at such truce days.
March wardens (and the lesser officers such as keepers of fortified places) were rarely effective at maintaining the law. The Scottish wardens were usually borderers themselves, and were complicit in raiding. They almost invariably showed favour to their own kindred, which caused jealousy and even hatred among other Scottish border families. Many English officers were from southern counties in England and often could not command the loyalty or respect of their locally recruited subordinates or the local population. Local officers such as Sir John Forster, who was Warden of the Middle March for almost 35 years, became quite as well known for venality as his most notorious Scottish counterparts.[83]
By the death of Elizabeth I of England, things had come to such a pitch along the border that the English government considered re-fortifying and rebuilding Hadrian's Wall.[84] When Elizabeth died, there was an especially violent outbreak of raiding known as "Ill Week", resulting from the convenient belief that the laws of a kingdom were suspended between the death of a sovereign and the proclamation of the successor.[85] Upon his accession to the English throne, James VI of Scotland (who became James I of England) moved hard against the reivers, abolishing border law and the very term "Borders" in favour of "Middle Shires", and dealing out stern justice to reivers.
Legislation
In 1606 an act (4 Jas. 1. c. 1) to assist the recent Union of the Crowns was enacted; it was long titled An act for the utter abolition of all memory of hostility, and the dependence thereof, between England and Scotland, and for repressing of occasions of disorders, and disorders in time to come. The act repealed nine English laws enacted over the previous centuries and considered hostile to Scotland; the repeal became effective when 13 Scottish laws considered hostile to England had been repealed.[86] Three years later an act (7 Jas. 1. c. 1) dealing with criminal law in the border region was enacted; it was long titled An act for the better execution of justice, and suppressing of criminal offenders, in the north parts of the kingdom of England. To deal with cross-border flight, the act allowed the trial of an Englishman in Scotland if the felony was committed there, and he was later arrested in England; it became effective after a similar act had been passed in Scotland.[87]
Following the Restoration and long-running lawlessness by Moss troopers nearly six decades later, parliament passed the Moss Troopers Act 1662 (14 Cha. 2. c. 22) for the border area; it was long titled An Act for preventing of Theft and Rapine upon the Northern Borders of England. Section seven of the act revives both previous acts passed under James I.[88] With the 1662 act about to expire, the sixth session of Cavalier Parliament passed the Moss Troopers Act 1666 (18 & 19 Cha. 2. c. 3), long titled An Act to continue a former Act for preventing of Thefte and Rapine upon the Northerne Borders of England. Under section two of the act, the benefit of clergy was taken away from those convicted (generally meaning a death sentence), or otherwise, the notorious thieves and spoil-takers in Northumberland or Cumberland were to be transported to America, "there to remaine and not to returne".[89][90]
Generally associated with several historic events of the period, as well as continuing lawlessness, or the consideration of insufficient government control to prevent "theft and rapine upon the northern borders of England", these acts were repeatedly continued over the next 80 years. The initial acts include the Moss Trooper Act 1677 (29 & 30 Cha. 2. c. 2),[91] the Moss Trooper Act 1685 (1 Ja. 2. c. 14),[91] the Moss Trooper Act 1695 (7 & 8 Will. 3. c. 17),[92] the Moss Trooper Act 1700 (12 & 13 Will. 3. c. 6),[93] and the Moss Trooper Act 1712 (12 Ann. c. 10).[94] Starting in 1732, although the 'Moss trooper' short title was dropped, the enforcement acts were continued by other variously named acts, most of which continued the established descriptive phrase "for preventing theft and rapine upon the northern borders of England", as the first item included. These later acts include the Perpetuation of Various Laws Act 1732 (6 Geo. 2. c. 37),[95] the Universities (Wine Licences) Act 1743 (17 Geo. 2. c. 40),[96] and the Continuance of Laws Act 1750 (24 Geo. 2. c. 57),[97] which continued previous acts until 1 September 1757 "and from thence to the end of the then next session of parliament".
A variety of terms describe the Border families, such as the "Riding Surnames" and the "Graynes" thereof.[98] This can be equated to the system of the Highland Clans and their septs. e.g. Clan Donald and Clan MacDonald of Sleat, can be compared with the Scotts of Buccleuch and the Scotts of Harden and elsewhere. Both Border Graynes and Highland septs, however, had the essential feature of patriarchal leadership by the chief of the name, and had territories in which most of their kindred lived. Border families did practice customs similar to those of the Gaels, such as tutorship when an heir who was a minor succeeded to the chiefship, and giving bonds of manrent.
In an Act of the Scottish Parliament of 1587 there is the description of the "Chiftanis and chieffis of all clannis ... duelland in the hielands or bordouris" – thus using the words 'clan' and 'chief' to describe both Highland and Lowland families. The act goes on to list the various Border clans. Later, Sir George MacKenzie of Rosehaugh, the Lord Advocate (Attorney General), writing in 1680 said "By the term 'chief' we call the representative of the family from the word chef or head and in the Irish (Gaelic) with us the chief of the family is called the head of the clan". Thus, the words chief or head, and clan or family, are interchangeable. It is therefore possible to talk of the MacDonald family or the Maxwell clan. The idea that Highlanders should be listed as clans while the Lowlanders are listed as families originated as a 19th-century convention.[99]
Surnames in the Marches of Scotland (1587)
In 1587 the Parliament of Scotland passed a statute: "For the quieting and keping in obiedince of the disorderit subjectis inhabitantis of the borders hielands and Ilis."[100] Attached to the statute was a Roll of surnames from both the Borders and Highlands. The Borders portion listed 17 'clannis' with a Chief and their associated Marches:
Middle March
West March
- Scott, Bates, Little, Thompson, Glendenning, Irving, Bell, Carruthers, Graham, Johnstone, Jardine, Moffat, and Latimer.
Of the Border Clans or Graynes listed on this roll, Elliot, Carruthers, Scott, Irvine, Graham, Johnstone, Jardine and Moffat are registered with the Court of Lord Lyon in Edinburgh as Scottish Clans (with a Chief), others such as Armstrong, Little and Bell are armigerous clans with no Chief, while such as Clan Blackadder, also an armigerous clan in the Middle Ages, later died out or lost their lands, and are unregistered with the Lyon Court.
The historic riding surnames recorded by George MacDonald Fraser in The Steel Bonnets (London: Harvill, 1989)[101] are:
East March
Middle March
- Scotland: Burns, Kerr, Young, Pringle, Davison, Gilchrist, Tait of East Teviotdale. Scott, Oliver, Turnbull, Rutherford of West Teviotdale. Armstrong, Croser, Elliot, Nixon, Douglas, Laidlaw, Routledge, Turner, Henderson of Liddesdale.
- England: Anderson, Potts, Reed, Hall, Hedley of Redesdale. Charlton, Robson, Dodd, Dodds, Milburn, Yarrow, Stapleton of Tynedale. Also Fenwick, Ogle, Heron, Witherington, Medford (later Mitford), Collingwood, Carnaby, Shaftoe, Ridley, Stokoe, Stamper, Wilkinson, Hunter, Huntley, Thompson, Jamieson.
West March
- Scotland: Bell, Irvine, Irving, Johnstone, Maxwell, Carlisle, Beattie, Little, Carruthers, Glendenning, Routledge, Moffat.
- England: Graham, Hetherington, Musgrave, Storey, Lowther, Curwen, Salkeld, Dacre, Harden, Hodgson, Routledge, Tailor, Noble.
Relationships between the Border clans varied from uneasy alliance to open, deadly feud. It took little to start a feud; a chance quarrel or misuse of office was sufficient. Feuds might continue for years until patched up in the face of invasion from the other kingdoms or when the outbreak of other feuds caused alliances to shift. The border was easily destabilised if Graynes from opposite sides of the border were at feud. Feuds also provided ready excuse for particularly murderous raids or pursuits.
Riders did not wear identifying tartans. The tradition of family tartans dates from the Victorian era and was inspired by the novels of Sir Walter Scott. The typical dress of reivers included Jack of plate, steel bonnets (helmets), and riding boots.
The Border reivers are well-known for their distinctive and often colorful nicknames, which likely emerged due to the widespread use of common surnames and first names such as John, Jock, or Will among the Border clans. These nicknames served as a practical means to distinguish individuals in a society where shared names were prevalent.[4][7]
These monikers often reflected a strong emphasis on lineage and close kinship, adhering to patterns of patrilineal descent, such as Dick's Davy,[4] Rowy's Will[4] and Will’s Jock Graham.[7] Sometimes this was extended to three names Gibb's Geordie's Francis could be matrilineal like Bessie's Andrew.[7]
Physical traits or injuries inspired other nicknames, such as Jock "Half-Lugs" (Half-ears) Elliot,[4] "Sweet Milk" (beautiful)[7],"Fingerless" Will Nelson,[7] "Nebless" (Noseless) Clem Crozier[7] or "Gleed John" (gleed meaning blind or partially blind) [7] or "Wynking Will."[4]
Nicknames like Jock "a God's Name" Elliot,[4] "Skinabake",[4] "As-it-Looks"[7] or Archie "Fire-the-Brays,"[4] cannot be easily be explained.
Others, like "Buggerback," "The Lady Elliot," "The Lady Scott," "The Lady Kerr," "Bang-tail," and "Sym 'the Lady'," remain subjects of speculation. These names may have reflected an alternative sexuality - as we understand it today or held layered meanings tied to identity, humor, or camaraderie within the close-knit, often male-dominated culture of the Border Reivers.[4][7]
The reivers were romanticised by writers such as Sir Walter Scott (Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border), although he also used the term Moss-trooper, which refers to seventeenth-century borderland brigands. Scott was himself a native of the borders, writing down histories which had been passed on in folk tradition or ballad.
English poet William Wordsworth's verse play The Borderers features border reivers (but does not use this term).[102]
The stories of legendary border reivers like Kinmont Willie Armstrong were often retold in folk-song as Border ballads. There are also local legends, such as the "Dish of Spurs" which would be served to a border chieftain of the Charltons to remind him that the larder was empty and it was time to raid again. Scottish author Nigel Tranter revisited these themes in his historical and contemporary novels. Scottish Border poet, and Australian bush balladeer, Will H. Ogilvie (1869–1963) wrote several poems about the reivers, including "The reiver's heart" (1903), "The raiders" (1904), "Whaup o' the rede: a ballad of the border raiders" (1909), "Kirkhope Tower" (1913), and "Ho! for the blades of Harden". The Steel Bonnets (1971) by George MacDonald Fraser (1925–2008) describes life in the Anglo-Scottish border marches in the heyday of the border reivers.
The names of the Reiver families are still very much apparent among the inhabitants of the Scottish Borders, Northumbria and Cumbria today. Reiving families (particularly those large or brutal enough to carry significant influence) have left the local population passionate about their territory on both sides of the Border. Newspapers have described the local cross-border rugby fixtures as 'annual re-runs of the bloody Battle of Otterburn'.[citation needed] Despite this there has been much cross-border migration since the Pacification of the Borders, and families that were once Scots now identify themselves as English and vice versa.
Hawick in Scotland holds an annual Reivers' festival as do the Schomberg Society in Kilkeel, Northern Ireland (the two often co-operate). The summer festival in the Borders town of Duns is headed by the "Reiver" and "Reiver's Lass", a young man and young woman elected from the inhabitants of the town and surrounding area. The Ulster-Scots Agency's first two leaflets from the 'Scots Legacy' series feature the story of the historic Ulster tartan and the origins of the kilt and the Border Reivers.
Borderers (particularly those banished by James VI of Scotland) took part in the plantation of Ulster, becoming the people known as Ulster-Scots (Scotch-Irish in America). Reiver descendants can be found throughout Ulster.[citation needed]
Border surnames can also be found throughout the major areas of Scotch-Irish settlement in the United States, and particularly in the Appalachian region. The historian David Hackett Fischer (1989) has shown in detail how the Anglo-Scottish border culture became rooted in parts of the United States, especially the Upland South. Author George MacDonald Fraser wryly observed or imagined Border traits and names among controversial people in modern American history: Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon, among others. It is also noted that, in 1969, a descendant of the Borderers, Neil Armstrong, was the first person to set foot on the Moon. In 1972 Armstrong was made a freeman of the town of Langholm in Scotland, the home of his ancestors.
The artist Gordon Young created a public art work in Carlisle: Cursing Stone and Reiver Pavement, a nod to Gavin Dunbar, the Archbishop of Glasgow's 1525 Monition of Cursing. Names of Reiver families are set into the paving of a walkway which connects Tullie House Museum to Carlisle Castle under a main road, and part of the bishop's curse is displayed on a 14-ton granite boulder.[103]
- Debatable Lands
- History of Northumberland
- The Borderers (television series)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
Remove ads