IN THE BATTLE OF OTTERBOURNE.

Ver. 101. Mentaye.] At the time of this battle the Earldom of Menteith was possessed by Robert Stewart, Earl of Fife, third son of K. Robert II., who, according to Buchanan, commanded the Scots that entered by Carlisle. But our minstrel had probably an eye to the family of Graham, who had this earldom when the ballad was written. See Douglas's Peerage of Scotland, 1764, fol.

Ver. 103. Huntleye.] This shews this ballad was not composed before 1449; for in that year Alexander Lord of Gordon and Huntley, was created Earl of Huntley, by K. James II.

Ver. 105. Bowghan.] The Earl of Buchan at that time was Alexander Stewart, fourth son of K. Robert II.

Ver. 107. Jhonstone-Maxwell.] These two families of Johnstone Lord of Johnston, and Maxwell Lord of Maxwell, were always very powerful on the borders. Of the former family was Johnston Marquis of Annandale: of the latter was Maxwell Earl of Nithsdale. I cannot find that any chief of this family was named Sir Hugh; but Sir Herbert Maxwell was about this time much distinguished. (See Doug.) This might have been originally written Sir H. Maxwell, and by transcribers converted into Sir Hugh. So above, in No. I. v. 90. Richard is contracted into Ric.

Ver. 109. Swintone.] i. e. The Laird of Swintone; a small village within the Scottish border, 3 miles from Norham. This family still subsists, and is very ancient.

Ver. 111. Scotte.] The illustrious family of Scot, ancestors of the Duke of Buccleugh, always made a great figure on the borders. Sir Walter Scot was at the head of this family when the battle was fought; but his great-grandson, Sir David Scot, was the hero of that house when the ballad was written.

Ibid. Stewarde.] The person here designed was probably Sir Walter Stewart, Lord of Dalswinton and Gairlies, who was eminent at that time. (See Doug.) From him is descended the present Earl of Galloway.

Ver. 112. Agurstonne.] The seat of this family was sometimes subject to the kings of Scotland. Thus Richardus Haggerstoun, miles, is one of the Scottish knights who signed a treaty with the English in 1249, temp. Hen. III. (Nicholson, p..2, note).—It was the fate of many parts of Northumberland often to change their masters, according as the Scottish or English arms prevailed.

Ver. 129. Murrey.] The person here meant was probably Sir Charles Murray of Cockpoole, who flourished at that time, and was ancestor of the Murrays sometime Earls of Annandale. See Doug. Peerage.

Ver. 139. Fitz-hughe.] Dugdale (in his Baron. v. i. p. 403) informs us that John, son of Henry Lord Fitzhugh, was killed at the battle of Otterbourne. This was a Northumberland family. Vid. Dugd. p. 403, col. 1, and Nicholson, pp. 33, 60.

Ver. 141. Harbotle.] Harbottle is a village upon the river Coquet, about 10 m. west of Rothbury. The family of Harbottle was once considerable in Northumberland. (See Fuller, pp. 312, 313.) A daughter of Guischard Harbottle, Esq., married Sir Thomas Percy, Knt., son of Henry the fifth,and father of Thomas seventh, Earls of Northumberland.

III.

THE JEW'S DAUGHTER,

A SCOTTISH Ballad,

S founded upon the supposed practice of the Jews in crucifying or otherwise murdering Christian children, out of hatred to the religion of their parents: a practice which has been always alledged in excuse for the cruelties exercised upon that wretched people, but which probably never happened in a single instance. For, if we consider, on the one hand, the ignorance and superstition of the times when such stories took their rise, the virulent prejudices of the monks who record them, and the eagerness with which they would be catched up by the barbarous populace as a pretence for plunder; on the other hand, the great danger incurred by the perpetrators, and the inadequate motives they could have to excite them to a crime of so much horror; we may reasonably conclude the whole charge to be groundless and malicious.

The following ballad is probably built upon some Italian legend, and bears a great resemblance to the Prioresse's Tale in Chaucer : the poet seems also to have had an eye to the known story of Hugh of Lincoln, a child said to have been there murdered by the Jews in the reign of Henry III. The conclusion of this ballad appears to be wanting: what it probably contained may be seen

in Chaucer. As for Mirryland Toun, it is probably a corruption of Milan (called by the Dutch Meylandt) Town: the Pa is evidently the river Po; although the Adige, not the Po, runs through Milan.

Printed from a MS. copy sent from Scotland.

[This ballad, which is also known under the title of Sir Hugh of Lincoln, was at one time so widely popular that it is preserved in six different versions, besides fragments, and has originated a literature of its own. Mons. Francisque Michel discovered a NormanFrench version in the Royal Library at Paris, which is supposed to date back to the period when the murder of Sir Hugh was to have been committed. This was first published in the year 1834 under the title, "Hugues de Lincoln: Recueil de Ballades Anglo-Normande et Ecossoises relatives au meurtre de cet enfant commis par les Juifs en MCCLV." les Juifs en MCCLV." The Rev. Dr. A. Hume communicated a very full paper on the subject of the tradition to the Literary and Philosophical Society of Liverpool, on November 13, 1848, which is published in the Proceedings (No. 5), and Mr. J. O. Halliwell printed, in 1849, a small volume containing "Ballads and Poems respecting Hugh of Lincoln." In the Athenæum for Dec. 15, 1849, there is a condemnatory review of Dr. Hume's work, to which the reviewer has added some valuable information of his own. Percy's remark that Mirryland town is a corruption of Milan town, and Pa of the river Po, seems far-fetched, as there is no reason for supposing that the ballad was in any way connected with Italy. Jamieson's version reads Merry Lincoln, and in Motherwell's the scene is changed to Maitland town. some parts of England the ballad has degenerated into a sort of nursery rhyme, the Northamptonshire version reading "Merry Scotland," and the Shropshire one," Merry-cock land." Mr. J. H. Dixon suggests mere-land town, from the mere or fen lakes, and reads wa' for Pa'. (Notes and Queries, 3rd Series, vol. ix. p. 30, note.)

In

Miss Agnes Strickland communicated the following lines obtained from oral tradition at Godalming, in Surrey, to Mr. Halliwell, who printed them in his tract:

"He toss'd the ball so high, so high,

He toss'd the ball so low;

He toss'd the ball in the Jew's garden,
And the Jews were all below.

"Oh! then out came the Jew's daughter,

She was dressèd all in green:

'Come hither, come hither, my sweet pretty fellow,
And fetch your ball again.'

The tradition upon which this ballad is founded-that the Jews use human blood in their preparation for the Passover, and are in the habit of kidnapping and butchering Christian children for the purpose is very widely spread and of great antiquity. Eisenmenger* refers to a case which occurred at Inmestar, in Syria, so early as the year 419, but the earliest case recorded as having occurred in Europe is that of William of Norwich, in 1137. The following is a translation from a passage in the Peterborough Chronicle (which ends with the death of Stephen and the accession of Henry the Second), relating to this remarkable superstition: "Now we will say something of what happened in King Stephen's time. In his time the Jews of Norwich bought a Christian child before Easter, and tortured him with all the same torturing that our Lord was tortured. And on Good Friday (lang fridæi) they hanged him on a cross, for our Lord's love; and afterwards buried him. They thought (wenden) that it should be concealed, but our Lord showed that he was a holy martyr (mr), and the monks took him and buried him solemnly in the monastery (minst). And he maketh through our Lord wonderful and manifold miracles. And he was called Saint William." Mr. Earle, in his note to this passage,† says that "S. William seems to have retained his celebrity down to the time of the Reformation, at least in Norfolk. In Loddon church, which is advanced perpendicular of about 1500, there is a painting of his crucifixion on a panel of the roodscreen, still in fair preservation."

St. William's fame, however, was eclipsed in other parts of England by that of Sir Hugh of Lincoln, whose death was celebrated by historians and poets. Henry III. being often in want of money, was glad to take any opportunity of extorting it from the unfortunate Jews, and in 1255 his exchequer particularly required replenishing on account of the expected arrival in England of his son Edward's newly married wife, Eleanor of Castile. In this year a young boy was murdered, and, opportunely for the king, the crime was charged to the Jews. It was asserted that the child had been stolen, fattened on bread and milk for ten days, and crucified with all the cruelties and insults of Christ's passion, in the presence of all the Jews in England, who had been summoned to Lincoln for the purpose. The supposed criminals were brought to justice, and the king's commission for the trial, and the warrant to sell the goods of the several Jews who were found guilty, are still preserved. The Jew into whose house the child had gone to play, tempted by the promise of his life, made a full confession, and threw the guilt upon his brethren. Ninety-one Jews of Lin

[* Entdecktes Judenthum, vol. ii. p. 220.

Two of the Saxon Chronicles Parallel, 1865, p. 371.]

coln were sent to London as accomplices, and thrown into dungeons. Eighteen of the richest were hanged on a gallows, and twenty more imprisoned in the Tower of London. The king was enriched by the spoils, and the clergy of Lincoln did not lose their opportunity, for the minster was made famous by the possession of the martyr's tomb. Dean Milman, in relating these circumstances, says: "Great part of the story refutes itself, but I have already admitted the possibility that among the ignorant and fanatic Jews there might be some who, exasperated by the constant repetition of the charge, might brood over it so long, as at length to be tempted to its perpetration."* Any such explanation as this, however, does not seem necessary, for the wide-spread existence of the superstition goes far to prove the entire falsehood at least of the later cases, and the story of Sir Hugh was but a revival of that of St. William. It is worth mentioning, in passing, that this calumny was in fact a recoil upon the Jews themselves of a weapon they had used against the Christians. As early as the third century they affirmed that Christians in celebrating their mysteries used to kill a child and eat its flesh. Pagans probably learnt the calumny from the Jews, and also charged the Christians with eating children.

The whole proceedings in the case of Sir Hugh are chronicled by Matthew Paris, who was in high favour with Henry III., and from his pages the account is transferred to the Chronicles of Grafton, Fabyan, and Holinshed. Chaucer most probably consulted the same source when he included the story in his Canterbury Tales, although he shifts the scene to Asia, and makes his Prioress say, when ending her tale with a reference to Sir Hugh:

"O younge Hughe of Lyncoln; slayn also
With cursed Jewes (as it is notable,

For it nys but a litel while ago)."

Tyrwhitt, in his edition of Chaucer, notes that he found in the first four months of the Acta Sanctorum of Bollandus the names of five children canonized as having been murdered by the Jews, and he supposes that the remaining eight months would furnish at least as many more. Tyrwhitt accepts Percy's interpretation of Mirryland as a corruption of the name of Milan, and under this erroneous impression he suggests that the real occasion of the ballad may have been the murder of the boy Simon, at Trent, in 1475.†

[* History of the Jews, ed. 1863, vol. iii. p. 249.

+ Mr. Hales points out to me the following reference to the superstition in Marlowe's Jew of Malta, act iii. :—