Early Firearm theid san r influenc militare th n eo y domestid an c architectur Bordere th f eo s by Alastair M. T. Maxwell-Irving

introductioe Th firearmsf no theid ,an r subsequent development througt no agese hd th di , by itself produce any dramatic changes in the evolution of Border architecture; there were much greater socia politicad an l l influence t worka s . Nevertheles weaponw ne e - slowld sth in sdi t ybu evitably make their influence felt t firsa , tfor e onl th f additiona mo n yi l defence againse us e th t of artillery from outside, later in the provision of gun-loops and shot-holes built into the enceinte more wallth f eso important strongholds finallgenerad e th an , n yi l provisio their froe nfo us rm within the towers (and other 'houses') themselves. The absence of any such provision proves little numbea f o e f circumstanceso ron y an r o nothingt o e earlyo t couli to : du r lates e o a ,, db a , building date; lac locaf ko l freeston necessare th r efo y dressings simple ;th e povert ownee th f yo r or tenant; or the known reluctance, or refusal, of certain families and certain localities to adopt the new weapons. On the other hand, where a legacy of provision for- firearms does survive, either in military or domestic architecture, it can be of great value in dating the work as a whole; while in the case of the lesser Border towers, it can also advance our knowledge of the Borderers as military tacticians and their surprisingly diverse attitudes towards the need for defending their givehomey an n t a sperio timef dwhao d an , t form that defence should tak e- fro mpassiva e retrea 'housa o t t f fence'eo , armepointsl al t da . Muc f thiho s depended coursef o , , upon their relationships with their neighbours. But before we can fully understand the later alterations carried out to the great tower-castles of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, both to cater for and to counter firearms, or appreciate the slo steadt wbu y acceptanc advantagee th f limitationeo d an s- weapons thesf w o s- ene d an , consequene th t desirabilit providinf yo their froge fo rus m withi latee nth r towers sixteente th f o h Unioe centuryCrowne th th o f t somr n o p 1603fo n s u i , ed timan , e thereafter firss i t ,ti neccessary to consider the progressive development and use of the weapons themselves.

The discovery of gunpowder adventthe cannonof and e historTh f firearmyo s dates bac somo kt e time aroun 100D dA 0 whe e Chinesnth e first discovere dformula r gunpowderafo . Quickly appreciatin militare gth y potentia f theio l r dis- covery, they had evolved rockets and incendiary weapons before the end of the eleventh century; and from thence to cannon was but a short step. Gunpowder is subsequently reputed to have been brought to Europe by Arab scholars early in the thirteenth century. Certainly its existence was recorded in 1249 by the early English scientist Roger Bacon. It is next mentioned at the turn of the fourteenth century, when a Latin manuscript makes a direct reference to its manufacture in the west. By that time it had clearly become well established, for in the mid-1320s the earliest MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARM | S19 3 record f cannoo s n appear suddenly almosd an , t simultaneously thren i , e widely separated parts of Europe.

Earliest forms of cannon 132n I 6documena publishes twa Florencdn i e authorisin manufacture gth brasf eo s cannon irod an nterritory'e ballth r sfo same s th defence en i yea d firse th ran , t illustratio cannoa f no n appear Englisn a n si h manuscript. Althoug exampleo hn earlo s f ydata so e hav t beee- ye nre covere thesn di e countries handgua , same th ef n o bulbou s shap similad an e r perioe th s da English illustration has been discovered in Sweden. These latter weapons fired metal arrows or arrow-bolts, missiles based on those in daily use with the familiar longbows and cross-bows, t whollbu y unsuite explosive th o dt e principle. t lonHoweverno gs beforwa t i , vasea t improve- ment was effected by producing a tubular barrel, with a reasonably consistent bore, while the hopelessly erratic arrow-like missiles were replaced by balls of iron, stone and lead. Even then a very lon gelapso t tims eewa before they becam l accurateal mentioo t t ea t numerouno e , nth s other technical problems involved.

Records earlyof ordnance fieldthe in Fortunatel r absence (o earle e yth yus f firearm o ) s muci s h better documented thae nth details of their construction. In Scotland, for example, there is no mention of firearms amongst the detailed list of equipment with which Bruce's parliament of 1318 decreed every Scotsman should be equipped for war. The first record of their use in Britain is in fact in 1327, when Edward Ill's forces use novee dth l 'craky f werso ' agains Scotse th t . King Edwar sais di havo dt e used ordnance siegagaie th Berwicf et 133o ny a b 8 d 1333gunn kan i knowe , sar havo nt e e beeus n i in ships Englise Th . h used them siege agai th f Stirlin et o n a 1342n gi . Although they were still vastly inferior to the older, well-tried siege weapons, by the middle of the century they were being produce whola dn i e rang sizef etypeso d san , from large cannon mounte heavn do y carriages earlo t y form handgunf t thio sa s timwa t eI . tha greate th t siege r gunbombardo , , first made its appearance. But whilst the enthusiastic royal patrons of ordnance were forging ahead with ambitious new ideas reao t littln ye lr eo understandins , a ther s ewa science th f go e involved. Accidents from burst barrel deate s th occurre Kinf whicf ho o oftent o o e d to g h r le Jameon ,d fa I durinsI g siege th Roxburgf eo accurace 1460n h i gunTh e . th sf y o als o remained deplorable exampler .Fo t ,i is on record that, at the siege of Ypres in 1383, two cannon fired 450 rounds between them with- t injurinou a singlg e man! Perhap extremn a s s thiwa se case. Nevertheles e psychologicath s l effect (on both sides) was still far greater than the material one. This was dramatically demon- strated during Henry IV's siege of Berwick in 1405, when the first shot fired by his great bombard made suc htremendoua s impact tha garrisoe th t frightenes nwa d into immediate surrender.

Flemish expertise e FlemisTh h quickly demonstrate dremarkabla e aptitud sciencer thiw efo ne s , untiy b l the beginning of the fifteenth century they had established themselves as the foremost experts in both the manufacture and operation of ordnance. Indeed, whether as overseers of the various royal gun-foundries in Europe, or as gunners in the field, they maintained a near-monopoly. For more than a century the largest successful guns continued to be cast in Flanders itself. James I brought a great brass bombard from there in 1440, and this was soon followed by others, includin famoue gth s 'Mons Meg', 'The Great Iron Murderer', that recurs frequentln yi 194 | PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 subsequent Scottish history and is now proudly preserved at Edinburgh Castle. Thereafter refer- ence artillero st y become increasingly frequen Scottisn i t h royal records.

'Mons Meg' The first certain reference to Mons Meg itself was during the siege of Threave Castle in 1455, when this giant bombard and other ordnance were dragged all the way from Edinburgh finally to end the Black Douglases' rebellion against the crown. This famous Flemish cannon, one of the largest ever made, was clearly a force to be reckoned with. During a salute from Edinburgh Castl 153n ei stons 9it e sho f oveI0 bo t weigh50 r recoveres wa t d from som mileo etw s away e compareb ; thin ca s d wit e contemporarth h y medium cannon r culverino , e moyane, which could fire a 9 Ib shot 2,500 yards, or even a mid-twentieth-century field gun, which has a range of from 3,000-11,000 yards (depending upon the charge).

Difficulty transportationof These huge guns were very cumbersome and unwieldy, necessitating large and very solid carriages for their support and a team of horses to move them. In some instances it was easier transporo t t the separats ma e parts thed an n, reassemble them wherever they were required. Bu eithen i t r case their movemen majoa s rwa tt surprising ordealno s i t I . , therefore learo t , n thaheaviese th t t artiller onls ywa y moved consideres whewa t ni d strategically essentiald An . althoug retrieves h wa Mon g dsMe from Threave soon afte 145e th r 5 siege, wer 'twe eth o great guns' there, tha convota cart n sens te sf twa y o fro m Edinburg fetco ht 1512n hi , same relicth f eso siege?

High cost middlBe fifteente yth th f eo h centur cose heavyyf th o t ordnanc becomins ewa gfinanciaa l embarrassmen crowne th o t . Accordingl appean ya mad s wa l145n ei greatese somo 6t th f eo t barons to make their own carts of war, with two guns and two chambers, and to provide a gunner operato t e them. Materials also became increasingly scarc thao e s 147 n i t t 4becami e necessary to send out messengers to obtain metal suitable for guns and clay for their moulds. This is the earliest direct evidenc gunf eo s being cas Scotlandn ti mai,o whertw n e ordnanceth e works were being established at the royal castles of Stirling and Edinburgh.

Artillery for siege work Throughout the fourteenth century and during a major part of the fifteenth century artillery was used almost exclusively for siege work; and whether the objective was a solitary castle or a fortified town, the operations were normally mounted on a massive scale that permitted the slow and clumsy weapons to be set up and brought into use more or less at leisure. At this time there reao isn l evidenc ordnancf eo e being use open di n battle; this developmen comeo t t i t s ye a , s twa necessitated more versatil mobild ean e field guns. Even when such weapon finalld sdi y appear, they almost invariablabandonee b even e hast o a fiel t th e f d o n tth dyi y n ha retrea do handia t- - t unknowno p ca n even today t FloddenA . r examplefo , Scote th , s coul t hopd no retriev o et e their guns. Clearly those strongholds that stood high up on naturally strong sites or were defended by elaborate earthworks presented somethin problema f go tha.n Wha gu tneedes coula s wa t dwa achieve elevation in the same way as the old siege catapults, and the designers of cannon were soon putting their ingenuity to work to produce a cannon with the same versatility. An inter- MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS | 195 esting picture of a walled town under siege c 1480 illustrates one way in which the problem was overcome e besiegerTh . e showar s n usin cannono gtw e smalleth : r one, whica stump s hha y 1 barrel fastened to three heavy planks lying on the ground, is of no special interest; but the larger one in the foreground, even allowing for the usual artist's licence, shows a highly ornamental cannon, whose elevation could be adjusted about a central pivot on the barrel and then rigidly abouf o secure e t on twentn di y position bute th tt enda s g wit.pe ha

Castle design slow to be influenced But while all this energy and ingenuity were being devoted to the use of artillery against fortified sites, what measures were being sitetakee th st na themselve threatcounteo w st ne e ?rth The immediate changes were certainly not obvious. Presumably the architects considered that the already substantial walls and strong outer defences were equal to the challenge; and as their confidenc s generallwa e y prove justifiede b havn o dt ca et i ,afforde d little consolatioe th o nt master f ordnancso theid ean r enthusiastic patrons. Gradually, however, wit developmene hth t of more powerful and more sophisticated artillery, there was a shift of emphasis in the design greae oth f t royal castles e officiath , l military strongholds walle Th . s were lowere furthed dan r strengthened, while still later there were instance muraf so l chamber outee th n rsi curtains being filled in solid to eliminate points of weakness. 2

Effect upon the great Border towers attitude e occupantTh th f greae eo th f to s Border tower-houses r tower-castleso , e th f o , fourteent fifteentd han h centurie thio st s for warfarf mo primarils passivf ewa o e yon e resistance. Like the great fortresses, the towers relied principally upon the massiveness of their walls and strong outer defences for protection. But after the turn of the fifteenth century there was also a new awareness of the importance to be attached to the choice of site, especially in view of the operational characteristic cannof so n compared wit oldee hth r weapons longeo wist i N .s o et rwa erect a stronghold in a position like that of Drum,3 where a convenient hillside gave artillery complete command over it; instead it was expedient to choose a site, either sufficiently defended by morasse wated san kee o t r gune safa pth t esa distanc e- whic possibls hwa e partn eth i f so Mers Westerd ean n Marche , moror se- commonly elevaten a n i , d position strongls thawa t y defended by nature on at least two sides and could be adequately fortified on the others. Not surprisingly the best sites had already been occupied for centuries. In the event of these passive defences failin deteo gt enemye th r , the nsurprisingla y effective, active defence coul carriee db d on at close quarters from the timber hoardings or parapets, using such long-established weapons as arrows and stones. There was no provision for the use of firearms in their defence this early; maie th n weapo defendere longbowth e f th n o t remaines i d wa s an , welo ds l int sixteente oth h century, and still had its faithful adherents over a century later. While the military fortresses were being specially modified to contend with the new siege weapons, the owners of tower-houses made little attempt to follow their example. Apart from relatively minor improvements in their construction and domestic facilities, the towers continued to remain literally lofty and almost stubbornly aloof. Their first minor concession to artillery was the re-introduction of a strengthened wall-base to resist heavy siege cannon should the need arise. Just as the great Norman castles had a batter at the base of their main

Shows ChroniquesLe n i d'Angleterre Britise th n i h A thirteent h century towe n Aberdeenshirei r , 1 Museum. 3 originally a royal hunting lodge, and probably the

e.g. at Tantallon in 1529. oldest tower-house as such in existence. 2 19 | 6PROCEEDING S OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 wall o resist s t underminin early gb y siege devices a numbe e mid-fifteenth-centuro s th , f o r y towers, such as Cessford and Comlongon, and also some of the lesser towers of a century later incorporated a splayed plinth course seemingly to resist the powerful impact of cannon shot1 Perhaps one reason for the towers' apparent indifference to artillery was that these more or less private strongholds were not expected to resist a major onslaught involving heavy siege artillery; no national army normally either needed or was prepared to waste such effort against them; and the likelihood of these lesser strongholds coming under siege diminished with their size and their owner's importance nationally. The great siege of Threave in 1455 was exceptional, but so were circumstancese th .coule Whaon do n tforese t thia e s tim somewhae f changeo th s ewa t ironic situation that was to arise at Cessford in 1523 (p 198), when that great tower, alone save for its own defences, was able to hold at bay the whole might of Surrey's army - in effect the same army thaannihilated ha t Scote dth t Floddesa n onl yearn yte s earlier hardls i t I . y surprising, therefore, that, when in practice it was considered expedient or necessary to take possession of these strongholds mors wa et ,i easil y achieve guily db 'persuasion'r eo factn .I , subsequent history was to show that many towers and castles were easily taken by subterfuge, while a direct frontal attac mors kwa e likel culminato yt completa n ei e impasse. t untino s l afte middlwa e fifteent e t th rI th f eo h century tha Scote th t s made provisior nfo the use of firearms in the defence of their Border strongholds, and even then it was to remain a rare featur r anotheefo year0 8 r r more so earlies e Th . t exampl Bordere t Threaveth a n s ei swa , where gun-loop shot-holed san s were liberally curtaidistributew ne e n th wal corned n di an l r towers erected soon after the 1455 siege (p 204). However, no such provision was made in the toweothey an rt a itselBorde r no f r tower during this curtai centuryw ne e nroyae walTh .th t la l castle of Newark, for example, which is well furnished with shot-holes and flanking towers, is clearl t earlieyno r tha mid-sixteente nth h centur 205)p y( .

Coastal Borderand castles strengthened with artillery In 1481 steps were taken to strengthen with 'artillery' the defence of coastal and Border castles, including Home, Edrington, 'and speciall e Hermitagth y e mosn i tha s i t danger'.

Whatever form these defences took, therobviouo n s ei s sig f theno t mHermitagea , wherl eal 2 the surviving provisions for firearms date from 1540, when Lord Maxwell had the large, splayed gun-loops inserted into the tower's walls and probably also constructed at the same time the sixteenth-century gun-mount to the west of the tower. The gun-loops (or oversized shot-holes) are the largest in the Borders and the only ones large enough to have possibly been intended for use .with small cannon rather tha more nth e usual hand-gun fina s ei t distinctioni s- . There are, however, similar examples further north. 1 The exact reason for these plinth courses will, no r uncertaio n foundations. Certainl t couli ya e b d doubt, always remain an arguable point; different plausible explanation in some instances, especially explanations may suit different circumstances. t Cessfora d Cockburnspathan d , where there ar e Comlongon is one of the earliest towers in the serie f sucso h courses buttressine wallse th gt th Bu . country, and certainly the earliest in the Borders, to feature is not found in many towers with obviously have such reinforcement. This feature, which precarious foundations, suc s Lochaha r Towen i r became fairly common among the Irving and Arm- Nithsdale, whic progressivels hha y subsided inte oth strong tower f Kirtledalo s Eskdald ean ecentura y Moss d beean ,n buttressed, unti e winth l g finally late comparativelt bu r y rare elsewher e- onl feya w collapsed as recently as 1969; yet it is found in dozen examples are known - is often explained as a classic local examples such as Bonshaw and Hollows, means of distributing the weight of the walls on soft bot f whicho foundee har cliffn d o f soli o s d rock. 2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. 11, p. 133. MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS | 197

Roxburgh Castle Compared with their enemies across the Border, the Scots were very slow to adopt cannon for defence: the English, on the other hand, were quick to appreciate its value. At the immensely strong fortress of Roxburgh, which they held during most of its active life, artillery and gun- powder were supplie garrisoe th o dt earls n1383a c agais d ya an ; 1417n i , after Commissioners sen surveo t decayee yth d ruin previoue sth s yeacomplained rha d that ther neithes ewa r artillery r munitionno defences Scote it take th d r d sha sfo nan , advantag thif eo s shortcomin launco gt h an attack, new artillery was hastily brought from London. Still later, when the castle was rebuilt on a reduced scale in 1547, artillery was to play a major role. There were gun-loops to cover the great north ditch a smalle, entrancW S re eas ditce th tth e n sideho gatewayd an , wels a ,s a l substantia platformgun l s behin curtaidthe nnort walleasthe hand ts on sides.1

Scottish artillery sixteenththe in century Althoug Englise hth indisputabld hha y superior ordnance durin fourteente gth h century, the Scots had easily overtaken them in quality, if not quantity, by the end of the following century, faca doubo tn thas t wa tlargel Scotland'o t e ydu s close ties wit continene hth t under 'The Auld Alliance' and other mutually beneficial treaties and 'understandings'. By 1496 reference is made to bombards, a brass gun, serpentines and culverines in the royal arsenal, while the royal work- shops were busily engaged making gun-carts, ammunition-carts, limbers, wheels and stone shot. Englise Th h nevertheless remained undismayed after learning tha y frosp t m thea nough d yha o t feare ordnancTh . t thaea t timreportes ewa havo dt e comprise gread2 t curtalds falcons0 1 , , 30 iron cart-guns, 16 close-carts for spears, and the various items of ammunition. Artillery was successfully used in putting down a rebellion in the Western Isles in 1503-4; and in 1508 there are detailed references to gun-casting in Scotland - though by no means with complete success. Whatever contemp Scottise th Englise r th t fo hav hy d ordnanchma eha vera s 1496yn ei wa t i , different story afte tragie th r c battl Floddef eo 1513n i , whe Eare nth Surref admi o lo t d n yi tha proua d boast thacapturee th t d Scots guns were king''longen largerow d ss an r hi n ' i tha y nan arsenal. An English inventory of this 'marvelous and great ordnance of guns' lists 17 cannons, comprisin greag5 t curtalle largr s(o e cannon) grea,2 t culverines grea6 , t serpentine culveriner s(o s moyane - medium), and 4 sacres (or culverines pikmoyane - small), with divers lesser ordnance. n connectioI n wit e transportatiohth f thino s artillery e Lorth , d High Treasurer's Accounts record tha canno2 t n were drawoxe6 3 ny nb each smal4 , l culverine oxe6 1 ny b s6 each d an , smaller pieces by 8 oxen each, while a crane was taken to mount the guns on their carriages. Gun stones were carried in baskets by 28 horses, and there were at least 12 carts of gunpowder.2 Thereafter heavy artillery continues to be mentioned until the middle of the century; but at the same time, far from fulfilling the early fourteenth-century prophesy that this dreadful weapon would quickly destroy mankind , a growinther s ewa g awarenes e disadvantageth f so s inefficacd an thif yo s mod warfaref eo growinA . g realisatio practicae th f no l limitation thesf so e heavy guns, the ordeal of moving them about, and the rapidly increasing use of hand firearms, severa leo dt ef artillery o curtailmen e us practicae A . th n i t l compromis reachede b o t d . eha Some cannons continue havo dt defence e th thei n i fortressesf rfieleo e d useth dan n s i t else bu , - where they almost disappeared fro scenee mth . 1 See RCAM, Inventory for the County of Roxburgh for a plan, fig 518, and further details, pp 409-10. 1 The Scottish Castle, Stewart H Cruden, pp 209-10. 198 | PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71

Border towers under siege Against this background interestins i t i , promineno tw learo gt w nho t Border towers fared when brought under siege in the sixteenth century, and the part played by cannon and other firearms during those sieges e firsTh t. concern se Borders th Cessford f o e ' greateson , t early tower-house castles, which came under siege in 1523; the second, Bonshaw, one of the most importan - tthoug forgottet hof n- lesse r tower-houses, whic similarls hwa y confronted some 60 years later. Cessfor s besiege n Engliswa da y b d h force unde e Ear f th Surrero l d Loran y d Dacre, supported by 11 cannon, lesser ordnance, archers, scaling ladders and other siege weapons. stage culverineo on etw t A s were sent roun opeo blockea dt p nu d window thin i sd thean , y succeeded - but, as it happened, to no ultimate purpose - while in the meantime the defenders were inflicting heavy losses among the English with the 'iron guns of the castle and stones cast down upon them'. The castle was finally surrendered due to a misunderstanding when the absent laird returned homeofficias hi n I . l report afterwards, Surrey said tha doubtee th d whether castle th e could ever have been take force. y ineffectivenese nb Th heavye th f o s artiller f thiyo s

period against such massiv thickn i ebee 6 d wallin t )f ha n3 clearl1 g1 o t (fro t f y2 mdemonstrated1 , whil outee eth r earthworks doub o alonen hile d th tl an ,beyond presented ha , smalo dn l obstacle. same Th e stor repeates yi d elsewher Scotlann ei d around this time 152n I . 8siega Tantallof eo n Castle was called off after 20 days, when two cannon and a host of various smaller guns had failed to achieve any success; and in 1547 a similar siege at St Andrews Castle proved equally abortive. Bonshaw becam objece eth f Loro t d Maxwell's attention durin gsuddea n flare-us hi n pi feud wit Johnstone hth s earl n 1585yi . Afte Maxwelle th r taked burned ha s nan d Lochwood Castle, the seat of Sir John Johnston of that Ilk, the new Warden of the Western Marches, John- ston was forced to flee for safety to Bonshaw Tower, the seat of his chief allies, the Irvings. Lord Maxwell followed, bringing his cannon and other ordnance, and 'so battered the Castell with

artillerie thahouse almoss th t ewa t gotten' interestinn A . enlightenind gan g picture emerges:2 Bonshaw Tower, described only two months later by the English Warden, Lord Scrope, as 'one strongese ofth t bowse thaf so t border', sixteenth-centurya s wa , 'lesser' tower-house, with walls up to 5 ft 9 in thick and stron3 g outer defences for which no details are now available. Yet, in chronicler'e spitth f eo s accoun 'almoss t thawa t i t t gotten' spitn i f severad eo an , l unsuccessful pleas by Johnston for the English Warden's intervention, the tower survived not only this siege by Maxwell's artillery, but no less than three more attacks from him within the following 10 avai o monthswitd n seriouo an o lht n l al , s damage being sustaine towere th , althoug y dSo b . h the cannon employed would undoubtedly have been of the smaller kind, Bonshaw had ably demonstrated that, when put to the test, these lesser towers did have the ability to hold their own against the lesser artillery which might be used against them.

The earliest handguns In the meantime, while heavy ordnance was receiving pride of place in the sphere of fire- arms, handguns remained very much in the background. Indeed, during the major part of the fourteenth century, little attention appears to have been paid to them. The earliest known example, which was found in Sweden, has been ascribed to the second 1 'I was very glad of the same appointment for in Marches, Lord Maxwell had been supplied with maner I sawe not howe it wolde have been won if ordnance by the crown to assist him in the pursuance they within wold have contynued their offices deffending'hi f o . . Durin earlien ga r ter s Wardem a Westere th f no n Calendar of Border Papers, 184p . 2 3 MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS | 199 quarter of the fourteenth century, but apart from its diminutive size there is nothing to distinguish it from the bulbous cannon shown in the Oxford manuscript of 1326 (p 193); and certainly therotheo n s ei r known recor handgua f d o earl o s f y datena centuryo e th .f Towardo d , en e sth however, handgun begidid s comnto e into their own; their potential contributio coma nas - plementary weapon was beginning to be appreciated, whilst improvements in manufacturing techniques made their production a worthwhile proposition. Their popularity was by no means universal amont bu , g their patrons they wer becomo et e- ver y slowl majoa y- r influenced an ; it is to them far more than to artillery that the Border towers were eventually to owe some major changes in their design and, to some extent, their very existence. The handguns in production at the end of the fourteenth century were still very crude. They comprised no more than a simple barrel of very small bore, cast in either brass or iron, whic clampes h wa pole-lik a o dt e woode nfirino stockn t g ye mechanis . s Thera s ewa m - jus a t simple touch-hole whico t , hane hon d applie tapere dth r 'match'o , , use ignitionr dfo , while eth other held the gun. A fifteenth-century picture (of uncertain date) of a siege in progress shows several of the assailants using guns of this type at close range; there is also one large trestle- mounted cannon and an abundance of conventional archers. 1 Later improvements Clearly one of the armourers' first priorities in improving the design was to devise an integral firing mechanism couln gu hele thao db e s ,d th t with both hands, thereby achieving much better control generally. The first such mechanism to appear was the simple 'matchlock', in which an S-shaped lever, pivoted in the middle, was fixed on the side of the barrel. By operating lowee th r par thif o t s lever r 'trigger'o , saltpetrd an matc,a w s to euppe e wa f fixehth o d t dren a brought down on to the touch-hole. Although elementary in itself, and in spite of numerous subsequent variations and refinements, this basic principle was to remain the standard method of firing all handguns until the invention of the percussion cap many centuries later. With the introductio thif no s mechanism handgue t th las, a td evolvenha d int oshapa ford ean m thas i t comparable wit conventionae hth l rifle shotgund an s f todayso . For nearly a century the matchlock mechanism remained dominant, before, with the decline in emphasis on cannons and the rapidly increasing ascendancy of handguns, the armourers' ingenuit t lasa s t directeywa earnesn di t toward e smalleth s r firearms. Froe th ture mf th no sixteenth century, innovation l kindal f sso bega appeao nt r with great rapidit y- althoug e hth majority brought with them new technical problems that were often not overcome until many years, even centuries, later. Leaving aside for the moment the whole range of early developments that fell withi populae nth r contemporary designatio f 'arquebusno 'hakbut'd firinan ' w ne g a , mechanism known as the 'wheel-lock' appeared soon after 1500; and about 20 years later the first pistols appeared utilising this mechanism t abouA . same th t e tim more eth e familiar 'flint- lock' mechanis m laso r mant thafo s t ywa t centuries also mad debuts eit . Riflin tries s gwa da earl s 1500ya t faile bu r lac, f fo dsuitablko e bullets. Experiments were also carrie t witdou h breech-loading guns, but this was never much of a success either before the introduction of the modern-type cartridg nineteente th n ei h century importane On . t reaso r thinfo s innovatios nwa deplorable speeo t th p du y slow rat firef eo , whic quotes hi Crudeny db havins 2a g been estimated at 10 to 12 arrows a minute for the longbow, 2 to 3 bolts a minute for the crossbow (surely a very optimistic figur mosr efo t models?) commoballe 7 mer a hour th o n d t r s a e6 fo an , n hakbut no t- a very comforting thought in a tight situation, especially if one bears in mind that the one-ounce 1 Firearms, by H L Blackmore. 2 The Scottish Castle, p 219. 200 | PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 bal bots lase l fireth twa h y lesdb s effectiv lesd sean accurate tha missilee nth s discharge eithey db r kind of bow. Not only was it necessary to allow the ordinary gun's barrel to cool down before reloading breece th t hbu , loading e addesysteth d dm ha advantag f usineo gseriea f boxeo s s ready charged with powder, which could be clamped into the breech in quick succession. McGibbo Rossd nan 1 refesmala o t r l canno f thino s kin t Branxholmeda thas t f 6 wa t s wa t i ; long and had a bore of 2^ in. In practice, however, the idea did not become popular, princi- pally because such a gun lacked the advantage of manoeuvrability that was so essential for any handgun. Another innovation that mad ebriea f appearanc ecenture attemp n latea th s n ri ywa t at a repeater action.

'Arquebuses' and 'hakbuts' mose th r Bt yfa importan t development fro originae mth l handgu ranga s technif neo wa - cally unostentatious guns that generally camknowe b o e t 'arquebuses' s na , 'hakbuts' eventud an , - ally 'muskets'. These were the guns of the common soldier and the types commonly found along the Scottish Border after about 1540, and to a lesser extent during the preceding 50 years or more. Althoug origin hi namee nth s relate specifio dt c varietie f gunso practicn i , e ther complets ewa e confusion in nomenclature -just as in the term 'pele' as applied to towers - so that by 1500 the term 'hakbut' and 'arquebus' were in common usage for most handguns, and by the end of the century the comparatively new term 'musket' had likewise superseded them. Some time aroun middl e fifteente dth th f eo h addes centurywa dg beneatlu a , barrele hth s of largee somth f ero handguns. This enabled hookethee b mo t d ove supporra t (ofte woodena n sill) to take the shock of the recoil, and led to the derivation of the term 'arquebus' or 'harquebus' Continente onth 'hakbutd an , 'hagbutr o ' Englandn i ' describo t , e suc hguna gooA . d example of a hakbut dating from c 1470 is illustrated in the Encyclopaedia of Firearms,2 where a simple handgu barres it s lnha clampe iron stoce a th ny kb o bandt d whil fittes i iro n eg a dnlu inte oth undersid stock'e th f eo s front endsimilad an ; r guns f betteo , r finis t otherwishbu differento en , were still being manufacture Germann di y1510c ;locy neithean k d mechanismrha same Th . e reference work, however, clearly illustrates the common misuse of the term 'arquebus' in re- producing a catalogue-type picture of some very ornate 'arquebuses' drawn c 1500; all are in fact basically similar, matchlock handguns, not one of which has a lug fitted. Not long after this time, reference 'hakbut-meno st 'hakbuttersr o ' ' carrying 'arquebuses' 'arquebusiersd ,an ' carrying 'hakbuts', become increasingly common clearld an , ye genera refeth o t r l rang f handgunseo . One possible reason for the confusion in terminology may be that the same basic components were assembled in a variety of ways depending upon whether the gun was to be used in the defence of a stronghold (from a parapet or shot-hole), on foot in the field, or even on horseback. It is also worth noting that there seem havo st e bee ncompleta e absenc alternativy an f eo e name.

Handguns become established Bordersthe in The hakbut, or arquebus, was not generally known in Scotland until well into the sixteenth century. A royal command for military service drawn up in 1496 refers to bows, spears and axes, but there is no mention of firearms. The first mention of handguns appears in the Treasurer's Accounts for 1513, and thereafter reference to them becomes increasingly frequent, until by 1541 stoce th k hel Edinburgt da h Castle alone included 413 hakbut culverines8 d san , with gunpowder, bullets, etc. 1 Castellated Domesticand Architecture Scotland,of 206p vo , 4 l. 2 Edited by H L Peterson, London, 1964. MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS | 201 generalls i t I tha yy hakbue trusa th t o et t becam efairla y common, everyday weapon from about 1540perioe thid th s san ;i d from whic incorporatioe hth shot-holef no fortificatione th n si s of Border towers and other strongholds began to become widespread - although, as already mentioned, there were isolated examples dating back some 80 or more years earlier. It is, however, interestin noto gt e tha e 1540th t s were year f transitioo s r firearmnfo Scotlandn i s , when they were to appear in abundance on one occasion and not on another. It may well be that it was their widespreaContinentae th y b e dus l auxiliaries serving wit Scote hth s armie t thisa s time, coupled with the state of virtually open war existing between England and Scotland, which hastened the change. After the battle of Pinkie in 1547, the English historian Patten records of the Scots army: 'Hakbutters have they few or none . . . they come to the field well furnished all with jack and skull (-cap), dagger, buckler, and swords all notably broad and thin, of exceeding good temper universalld an , mado ys sliceo et , thaneveI nons w a t goodo sa re s thino s ,t har i kI o dt devise a better; hereto every man his pike and a great kerchief wrapped twice or thrice about his neck, not for cold, but for cutting'.1 But by early in 1549, when the Scots decided to recover Ferniehirst from the English, an advance0party of the French auxiliaries included '200 arque- busiers', while the defenders also included arquebusiers among their garrison. However, the French eventually surrounded the castle 'so that no man dared show his face' while they forced breac a keep'e th n hi s walls.2 middl e Bcenturye yth th f eo , whe npeaca e treat agrees ywa d betweekingdomso tw e nth , hand firearms were firmly establishe widesprean i d dan t thia ds usetimwa t eI . that parliament ordained that every Borderer should be armed with a hakbut, sword, dagger, spear (6 ells long - in)6 1 t 8f , Jedburgh-staff, buckler, jacleg-armour.d kan Handguns were very muc evidenchn i e

"agai 157n ni 0 wav whew f Englisne eo na h invasions broke out whed 3 ;an nformaa l complaint was lodged in Dumfries in 1583 against a band of Border rebels, there are no surprises to be found among their weapons. The complaint declared that the rebels were 'all boding in fear of war, with jacks, spears, steel bonnets, Jeddard staves, long culverines, dagger pistolsd san , prohibitee b o dt

borne, worn, used, or shot with, as well by our Acts of Parliament as by our Acts of Secret Council'. 4

Muskets The musket, when it first appeared in the middle of the sixteenth century, was a quite distinctive weapon. With a long barrel, and weighing some 20 pounds, it was more of a hand- cannon, which could onl f somusee o yb d e ai witsuppor e hth t (usuall yU-shapea d stirrun po a wooden pole) addition I . thio nt s considerable inconvenience musketeee th , carro t d y ha r ready prepared powder charges (which were kep wooden ti n cylinders) fina , e powde primingr rfo , leae th d d shot likd an othel eal .An r early handguns they were entirel mercweathere e th th t yf ya o ; rai r damno p rendered them useless. Accidents during loading were also common facn I . t they were by no means a qualified success. Nevertheless, in spite of these handicaps, they had the advantage beinf so g both chea easd pmakean o y t , required little maintenance could an , d inflict heavy casualties in close combat. But whilst the musket was a clearly identifiable weapon when it first appeared, by the end of the century muskets and arquebuses (a name now more common that hakbut) had become merged into another common group of weapons, whose names were interchanged at random. e popula 'musketw Th muca ne s e r hwa th for' lighte f mo r weapon , o survivt whic s hwa e 1 Transactions of the Hawick Archaeological Society, 2 THAS, 1910-'The History of Ferniehirst Castle', 1906-'Historical Notes relating to Branxholme', by G Watson. Armstrong3 Borderland, ArmstrongA W y . b 50 ,p LockhartE byW . ne 4 Dumfries Sheriff Court Book, 1577-83. 20 | 2PROCEEDING S OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 thereafter, almost unchanged, as the standard handgun in everyday military service until well int nineteente oth h century.

Architectural provision for defensive firearms Having described briefly, but fairly comprehensively, the various firearms that existed Bordee th f o r a durintower-houseer e progressivge th th d an , e developments that took place during that time muse considew on , no t greaten ri militare r th detai w yho l 'architects theid an ' r patrons made provision for the use of these weapons in the defence of their strongholds. Which castles merited, or could afford, the employment of cannon; and why was one tower strongly de- fended by a whole battery of shot-holes, while a contemporary one nearby had no such provision t alla ? Whe gun-loopsd ndi portn shot-holed gu , san s first appear; what form thed sdi y taked ,an why; and how effective were they? These are all important questions, which must be considered in some detail when analysing tower-house architecture, for, especiall laten yi r years, they form an integral part of the history and development of that architecture and of the life and times . that influenced it. Little provision for defensive cannon Cannon as such did not play an important part in the life of the Border tower. Indeed, leaving asid e greath e t tower-castle e earlth yf e grea o sth perio td garrisonean d d enceinte castles that survived as national strongholds, artillery rarely made an appearance in the life of the lesser towers, and on the few occasions when it did it was almost invariably small cannon operated in a very perfunctory manner. As regards the larger towers and other strongholds, the position meano n y b s s cleari . Canno certainls nwa y used against them t Threava s a , 1455n ei , Roxburgh in 1460, and Cessford in 1523, as well as on many other occasions both at these strongholds and elsewher middl e seventeent e righth th n untip f i e u o Civite r th l Wa l h century t evidencBu . f eo cannon being used in their defence is less forthcoming. Mention has already been made of the order issue 148n di 1 under which various stronghold nationaf so l importance strengthwere b o et - ened with artillery. Both Home and Hermitage were included, but in neither instance is there positivy an e evidence lef shoo t t w what works were carriet thia e t sonls th time dou t wa ya t I . key fortress of Roxburgh that gun batteries are known to have been installed from an early date, undethis d directiosan e wa rth Englishe th f no . Hermitage Castle onle Th y other certain evidenc provisiof eo cannor nfo t Hermitagea s ni , where, durine gth sixteenth century, a gun-mount was formed outside the tower and gun-loops were inserted within the lower walls of the tower itself. The latter were the work of Lord Maxwell, who repaired and strengthened the castle in 1540. They have every appearance of being typical sixteenth- century oval shot-holes, wit usuae hth l splayed oval openin outsidee th n go circulaa , r holr efo gun-barree th centree muraa th d n li an ,l reces accessibilitr sfo insidee th n yo . Basically, these ear features typical of the shot-holes belonging to the second half of the sixteenth century; but at Hermitage their unusually large size, which necessitated their fabrication from many large well-cut ashlar blocks, including eve nkeystona e ove outside rth e opening (pi 24a), together with locatioe th somf no thef inserteee o mon e (sucfirst-flood dth ol s int ha e oth r entrance) (pi 24b), s fairli y conclusive evidence that som t leasa e t were intende wite us h r carriage-mountedfo d cannon and not handguns. At no other tower in the Borders are there remains that can so con- vincingly be ascribed for use with cannon - although most outer works at the various sites have long since disappeared. MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS [; 203

'Gun-loops', 'gun ports' 'shot-holes'and The difference between 'gun-loops', gun ports' and 'shot-holes' is largely academic, and even then one has only to refer to the writings of a handful of experts to realise that there is no general f theso agreemene e us terms e th theorn I n .i t ygun-looa breaca s pi walla n hi , splayed either horizontally or vertically (rarely in both directions), into which the muzzle of either a cannon or large handgun could be inserted to give an angle of covering fire, while a shot-hole was merely an aperture through which the muzzle of a handgun could be inserted for the same general purpose; but whilst there can be no argument about the designation of extreme examples of either kind, there is absolutely no dividing line between them as one passes through the whole Borden rangei d an ,r parlanc l termeeal the e ydar 'shot-holes worke e sixteentth th f n i o s' h centur laterd y an fac tern e I . th tm 'gun-loop', which some feel should more correctl appliee yb d to the splayed shot-holes so common in the later towers, is rarely used in this context in the Borders. 'Gun port mora s i ' e general term use somy db e writers, particularly when referrine th o gt larger, early shot-hole latere th d , splayesan expression a s di oneso to nt ;i rarely use r applid(o - cable) in the Borders.

The earliest shot-holes firse Th t shot-hole s sucsa h appeared secon e earlth n yi fourteente d th hal f o f h century, when, with the advent of smaller, more easily handled firearms, it soon became desirable to be able to use them from within existing fortifications. As a natural corollary of the long established arrow-slits, which wida n i ,e variet decorativf yo functionad ean l shapes (accordin whime th o gt s of individual masons) served ha , d their fortresses faithfull somr yfo e three centuries earliese th , t shot-holes were formed quite simpl enlarginy yb lowee gth rslite endtakth o st muzzle f so eth e oguna f , whilslie th trese f aboveth o t e continue usee b r sighting do fo dt wels a ,providins a l g an outlet for the powder-smoke. A few of the thirteenth-century cross and vertical slits already circulad ha r opening t theisa r extremities t theibu , r symmetr ford yan m distinguish them from later conversions.1 Although these 'converted' shot-holes were clearl ya success , they never became common as such, perhaps because of structural difficulties, and were much rarer in England than on the Continent. The general principle, however, quickly became widespread in newly-built gun ports and shot-holes, and survived at least until the end of the fifteenth century, instancew fe a another n i sfo d years0 an r5 . 'Inverted key-hole' portsgun The 'inverted key-hole' type of gun port is found in England throughout the second half of fourteente th h century t seemingl bu ,t cros Bordeno e sth d ydi r into Scotland unti middle th l f eo the following century. In essence these shot-holes were little different to the converted arrow-slits from which they derived, excep aperturn t gu tha e th te assumed greater importanc slie th t d ean above rather less, sufficient only for sighting. In addition, they were positioned in the fortifi- cation t pointsa s much better earle suiteth yo dt firearm s- generall y lower, wit morha e hori- zontal trajectory. The hole at the base was commonly about 6 in in diameter. Although only the stonework now survives, many of these early shot-holes contained a wooden support for the gun, eithe sila s l ra int o whic hspikeda , rowlock-type supporn ,gu t coul insertede db simplr ,o a s ya bloc tako k hoot e e th earlf ko y arquebuses fea wn .I instances slotstilmasonre y seee th l b s ma n i y where these blocks were secured. 1 e.g. Both Kenilwort n 124hi d eve e lat0an th ne castle of Raglan c 1470 had cross arrow-slits with a roundel at the end of each arm. 204 | PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71

Shot-holes appear Scotlandin By the time shot-holes did appear in Scotland, they had taken on a number of distinct form t Threav- ssuca s ha e (infra). Nevertheless they wer remaio et rarna e featur Scottisn ei h defence r som fo syear 0 e8 r moreso more Th . e common early form, whic founs hi t severada l strongholds in Central Scotland, was no more than the typical, long, slit window of the period, with a shot-hole incorporated in the base; and it is only from the form of the masonry that these shot-holes can be identified as an original feature and not a later insertion. This particular type - the elongated, inverted key-hole - is often shown in late fifteenth-century drawings of fortifi- cations from both Channel e sideth f so varianA . t thai f to t also appear similan so r drawingf so same th e periodEnglise th n wels o h a , s drawina l Castlemilf go k (Dumfriesshire) mad 1547n ei , 1 shows a vertical slit with a central aperture; this was in practice a rare form of arrow-slit dating fro thirteente mth h century, therevidencd o n an s ei eves e tharwa t insertei t shot-holea s da . 2

FIG 1 Threave Castle, ground-floor plan (after McGibbon and Ross) Earliest shot-holes in the Borders The earliest positively identifiable gun-loops and shot-holes in the Borders are those in the new curtain wall at Threave (fig 1). Fairly reliably dated to the restorations carried out there Transactionse 1Se Dumfriesshiree th f o Galloway& 2 n Therexampla s i e t Trematoa e 1250c ( n n )i Natural History Antiquarian& Society, 196 7- Cornwall. "The Platte of Castlemilk, 1547', by M Merriman. MAXWELL-IKYING: EARLY FIREARMS | 205 soon after 1455, these compris eranga f verticaeo l gun-slits space t frequenda t intervals along entire th e lengt f eacho h (surviving) wall, backe shot-holey b p drue du th mn si towere th t sa angles. It is fairly clear from the overall conformation of the former slits, which are splayed out towards the rear with high sills, that they were designed for use with guns and not bows. This leaves ope questioe nth whao t f no t extent anyf slii ,e th t, window latee th rn si grea t towerf so the fifteenth century were designed with a view to their possible use in defence. The entrance at Cessford is doubly covered by slit windows, while the basement windows at Spedlins are unique for their perio beindn i grount ga d level; whils lattee tth r would have been more wit e suiteus h r dfo longbows, at least one of the defensive slits at Cessford (the one at the foot of the stair, into which one has to climb up and along) might have permitted the use of a gun, but definitely excluded othey an r for weaponf mo . The shot-holes in Threave's corner towers are 'ports' of two kinds (pi 23a). Those on the second storey were the relatively common, inverted key-hole type, while the lowest storey was equipped with the somewhat enigmatic 'dumb-bell' openings - of which more later (p 214). 'Armed' curtain walls The outer defences at the great tower-castles have now mostly disappeared. However, apart from Threave's fifteenth-century curtain ,othe e theron res i notable exceptio Bordere th n i s o curtaifa n wall enceinte,r o , speciall yfirearmf o designe e us defence n si e cateo dth t r rfo . This t Newarkisa , enclosinwherw ne ea g walerecte s middl e sixteente lwa th th n df i e o h centuro yt replac earliern ea , more extensive one. t incorporateI numbesa featuref ro speciaf so l interest, notably the combination of large,1 outward-looking shot-holes in the main walls (pi 21 a) with small, inverted key-hole type, pisto l flankine holeth n si g tower provido t s e protective cross-firt a e close range. The shot-holes themselves will be dealt with under more appropriate headings later (pp 206-8). The fundamental difference between the curtain wall of one of the great early towers and e correspondinth lessee th g f ro barmki towertheie n i on y rt la sna circumstances formee th : r wa fortifiesa d enclosure, housin just gno t animal t als sbu ostron a g military garrison wels a ,s a l providing a place of refuge for the local countryfolk in time of war; while the latter was just a strong enclosur owner'e th r efo s livestock, importan way n t tsmall enougow bu , s t shoulI it . n hi d also pointee b t tha barmkie dou th t lessea f no r tower very rarely provided additional defencn o e more thasideso ntw . perhaps i t I interesf so t thia t s stag noto et time e th tha e y greae somb t th f te o norther n castles, suc Braemas ha Corgarffd an r , re-garrisonecame b o et eighteente th n di h centurye th , wheel of development in defensive curtain walls had to some extent turned full circle, certainly as far as the shot-holes themselves were concerned. There the new curtain walls were built on a multi-point star plan, such that every walfulls ylwa covere counterparts it y db , whil nowe eth - almost-traditional shot-holes were superseded by new gun 'windows', reminiscent of the early gun-loops at Threave (but larger) and, like them, splayed on the inner side only, thereby elimin- ating 'funnelling' whilst retaining greater manoeuverability than ever before for the defending musketeers. But in comparing this highly sophisticated, late development with earlier works in the Borders muse on , t bea minn i r d tha militare th t y architectoved ha late e r e threth ag rf so e centurie experiencf so drao et w upon wels a ,caterin s a l garrisonr gfo s whose numerical strength was only comparable with those who had been available at such great official fortresses as Newark, Cessford, Hermitage, etc t woulI . unreasonable db equatd an y etr theso et e man e worksth -d an , power available at them, with the defences of an ordinary Border tower. 1 RCAMS, Inventory of Selkirkshire, 1957, fi. g24 20 | 6PROCEEDING S OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71

The wide-mouthed shot-hole sixteente Earlth n yi h centur forw f shot-holmne o ya e first appeared upo Scottise nth h scene. This was the widely splayed, horizontal shot-hole (or gun-loop), which is most commonly found at ground-floor level. The exact date of its inception is uncertain, but it was not until c 1540 tha t realli t y bega mako nt presencs eit e felt popularits it , y coinciding wit rapie hth d introduction of hakbuts and other handguns into fairly general everyday usage. It soon became widespread, and by the end of the century was a common sight throughout the Borders and elsewhere in the country. Although it remained a style peculiar to Scotland, it was generally considered well suited to its purpose; and it continued to serve as the standard defence for forti- fied house buils s t Lesliuntiwa a t lase e Aberdeenshirth ln on et i 1661.n ei 1 In order to achieve a maximum field of fire with a minimum weakening of the wall above, thes shot-holew ene s wer constructeo es d that their narrowest part centre r 'throat'th o , n i e s ,wa of the wall, with the openings splayed out on either side (fig 2). The throat itself was a carefully cut sandstone block, usually varying in thickness from 4 to 6 in, which had to serve as the gun rest, as well as leaving sufficient space for sighting; there were no wooden supports in this type of shot-hole. Normally the block was pierced by a circular hole. This was commonly about 4^- in in diameter, though there was no uniformity, and sizes varied from 1\ in at Drumelzier (groun t Timpendea a t Hillslaa n i n i d6 3 flooro p t d t Hoddonina an ) (pn i i 7 25cd d an an ) Lochhouse. The throa2 t in Hillslap's southern shot-hole is unique of its type in being decorated outee th n r o face with four chamfered facets (pi 24d) outee th ; r openin als s gt i highe ose r than usual circulae Th . r apertur , howevereis meano n y b ,s universal numbea d an , f othero r shapes are found - horizontal ovals at Blanerne (10 by 4^ in) and Bonshaw (7 by 4 in) (pi 24c), U-rests at Drumcoltran (4£ in) and Dryhope (6f in), an inverted U-rest at Hollows (4^ in) and crude square openings at Auchenskeoch, whilst at Barnhills (5 in) the construction is such that no separate throat blocks were employed t Newarka d an ; , althoug shot-holee hth s alon maie gth n curtain walls have circular openings (3 5o ^t £ in) ,rathee thosth n ei r cramped southerd nan eastern flanking towers have miniature inverted key-holes (6 by 3£ in) for use with pistols or some other small handguns (pi 26a). Outsid throate eth constructioe th , almoss ni t invariabl yplaina , shallow splay, termi- natinwall-face th t ga eithen ei commoe th r n oval openin , morgor e rarely rectangulaa , r aper- ture. With the exception of the great 'constructed' loops at Hermitage (p 202), the former type was made from two sandstone slabs, cut away to present a splayed slit with rounded ends. The rectangular aperture othee th n r o ,hand normalls wa , y forme usiny db g fla te sil slabth l r sfo and lintel, with separate stones for the intervening splays. The only known exception was at Evelaw, wher lese remainineo th s ruinoutw e th f gso shot-holes show mads thawa et i t jus t like the common oval opening, except that in this instance the ends were cut square. Apart from Eve- law, the rectangular opening is found in Eskdale (Auchenrivock, Hollows and Langholm ) and 3 Kirtledale (Blackethouse, Bonshaw, Ecclefechan, Stapleton and Woodhouse), where it had no 4 rivals, and at a few isolated towers widely scattered elsewhere - such as Auchenskeoch (where it was suited to the local granite), Branxholme, Drumcoltran (greywacke), Drumelzier (at ground 1 Cruden's The Scottish Castle, p 220. gunners and men of his own' - Calendar of Border 2 At Hoddom each throat block has been made in Papers, p 184. two halves, divided horizontally becausd an s , it f eo 4 Otherwise known as the new 'Kirkconnel', beside excessive thicknes foo1 s- t — eve bloce nth k itself the modern Kirkconnel Hall. It took its name from, splayee b o t t eac da d hha fac s permio t eha e th t and succeeded, an older Kirkconnel Tower that required degree of swivel. stood 3^ miles furthee th r w eas no whan i te ar t 158n 3I 5 Lord Maxwel reportes wa l havo dt e taken ground f Springkelo s n Irvina l s Housegwa t I . 'the hous Langholf eo m hat..d .han placed therein stronghold, not to be confused with the Maxwells' tower of Kirkconnell near New Abbey - see p 216. SKT10K

NEWARK DKfHOPE. BONSHAW H1LLSLAP

-SfiCZ&W

Q BB I $ GtXEHOUSZ, VfOODttOUSE UltLS ZOC&AR.

10123*56789 1O £XA.MPL£S OF SHOT-HOLES SCKLS. H-HH——I——I——I——I——I——I——1——I——I——I f££t

FI G2 Outer wall-fac lefn eo t | PROCEEDING 8 20 THF SO E SOCIETY, 1970-71 level, but oval at higher levels), Dryhope (greywacke), Hillslap, Hoddom (in Annandale, but nea Kirtledalee rth group Langshad )an w (greywacke). e inneth n r O side, ther usualls ewa yrectangulaa r spla f ratheo y r more generous pro- portions, thoug arrangemene hth t seem havo st e been largely dictate thicknese th e y dth b f so earliee wallsth n I r. towers, wher walle eth s were commonl t thickf usualle 6 on ,o t y5 only finds the shallow splay tha o gunnee s stan,o t th t d d rha som t behinf e 3 e throadth whicn o t h the muzzle of his necessarily long gun was supported (pi 25d); but as the thickness of the walls was reduced finde increasingln on ,a s y larger innee recesth e throatn r o sth sid f eo , allowing the gunner much greater freedo handline th weapon s mn i hi f glimitatione o Th . s imposea y db wall's thicknes s weli s l illustrate t Newarkda , wher maie eth n curtain shot-hole e splayear s d eacthrougy hwa t walls f h5 , whilst flankine thosth n ei g towers, wher walle eth onle sar y 2t £f thick, hav esquarea d innee recesth rn so sid e (pi 26a). Other example squaref so d inner recesses are at Lochar and in the stair tower at Blanerne, where the shot-hole beside the entrance has had havo t innes eit r recess offse tako t t e accoun curvature th stair-welle f o tth f eo . Normalll yal these shot-holes are roofed with flat slabs, but an exception is found at Branxholme, where the quite eccentric corner towers have walls varying in thickness from 4 to 7 ft. Although neither tower now retains a complete shot-hole (they have been closed up), the inner recesses of the semi- ruinous 'Tentyfoot' tower still possess their unique, original relieving arches.

Degree of cover provided In considering the shot-holes of these towers in such detail - and they are a feature of especial importance — it is worth considering the cover that they provided in individual cases and its relationship to the thickness of the respective walls. One would, for instance, expect to find thae thicketh t e wal e narroweth r th l e angleth r , purely from structural considerations; and although there is a recognisable trend in this direction, it is by no means as marked as might be expected therd mane an , ear y notable exceptions readile b n yca t appreciate.I d tha completf ti e give e plaia b o o nt covet n s keeprwa t wouli , necessare db shot-holee th r yfo eacn so h sido et cove rinstanc o 90°n n i :this eha s been effectedunique th t ebu , D-plan additio wese d th en tt na of Littledean (pi 21b) has been carefully designed to provide two levels of shot-holes facing risine th g groun than do t side, eac f whicho h comprises five shot-holes witsplay° a h36 n (i s 6 ft thick wall) to give complete cover on that side, whilst the other sides are protected by natural riversid eotheo cliffsn t rA .t towe beei s n ha rpossibl provido et e such complete cover without the use of flanking towers. e stronges th e lesse r Bth yfa f ro t towers (even without taking into accoun formee th t r outer defences, whic knowe har havo nt e been substantial Bonshas )wa Kirtledalwn i e (pi 22a) (se thic198)p n ei 9 k t ,f basemen wher5 e eth t wall piercee ar s shot-holey b d s wit ha spla y (p° oi 53 f24c) ,nort e excepth hn o tside , where r somfo , e reason longe o than s i t r apparent, the angle was reduced to 33° (fig 3). These outer openings are in fact so wide (up to 4 ft 5 in) sourca thas i t amazemenf i teo t tha outee th t r lintels have born wale eth l above withoud ai e th t of relieving arches. In addition there was a smaller shot-hole at the foot of the stair-well (pi 25a) to cover the door (a feature peculiar to the Irvings' keep-plan towers), whilst at parapet level the shot-holes themselves were defended on the north, south and west sides, and the entrance door- way on the east side, by machicolations within the corbelled-out parapet wall: the parapet itself runs around all four sides of the wall-head without interruption. n otheI r towers with such thick wall e coveth s r provide s approximateldi s followya s (although the angle is sometimes less on one or more sides): Hoddom, 44° (for each of two thicn i 6 k t shot-hole f eas8 te walth n si l only :shot-holeo n ther e e otheth ear n r o ssides) ; MAXWELL-FRYING: EARLY FIREARMS 209

FI G3 Bonsha w Tower, ground-floor plan (scale 1:96) Branxholme, 36° (in walls varying widely in thickness up to 7 ft, as well as being quite erratically orientated); Lochhouse ft)6 ( ; ° in)8 Stapleton t 28 ,f ; Newar5 ( ° 47 , k curtai nft)5 ( wall ;° 25 , soute th n hi t ° walf 38 4 ( l d an wall) d ft)5 ft ( en ;° 5 s( Dryhopee 34 Hollowsth d n i an ° ° 23 , 45 , in)6 t f . t 4 Thi ( Woodhouseno d ° in)in)8 s 3 si an t 21 ;f ;d 4 ( Barnhills an ° ° 30 29 , d an , ° 55°40 , a complete record, but it does give some idea of the protection afforded. By comparison, the similarly splayed, rectangular gun-loops inserted at three levels into the NE drum tower of Caerlaverock's great gatehouse durin secone gth sixteentde halth f fo h century same th e- period - have angles of fire varying from 35° to 46°, through walls 5 ft thick. With later towers, where walls are thinner and defence with shot-holes was in general no longer taken seriously enough in the Borders to merit careful planning, shot-holes are rarer t grouna d morleve e tend b an lo ed t showy than useful. Some corresponding figures are: Oak- in)4 t f in); 3 Blanernewood 4 t ( f ; ° 4 ft)Fisher's( 4 33 ( , ° ; ft)4 ° ( 36 ;, ° 49 Hillslap d 70 , an ° 60 ,

in)3 t 1f . Drumelzier Amisfield2 in)6 ( t ° f ; Lochar75 3 Corbetd ( ft) 3 o ( an ° t n ; o ° ° ,40 , 40 65 ,, Othe1 r Border towers with splayed (oval) shot-holes, and mentionet whicno e har d elsewher thien i s paper, Burnheae ar Lantond dan . 21 | 0PROCEEDING S OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 the other hand, provides unique examples of two special features as regards shot-holes, but these will be dealt with presently. problee On m thainherens desige twa th n splayef ti n o d shot-hole thas 'funnelling'f o stwa . Thiexactls swa y wha tere th tm implies, namely thashoy r arroan to t w falling withi perie nth - meter of the not-inconsiderable outer opening would, by the very shape of the splay, stand a good chanc beinf eo g guided throug 'throat'e hth , with disastrous consequence anyonr sfo n eo the other side. Little attempt seems to have been made to overcome this handicap in Border towers - unless the revival of the 'dumb-bell' shot-hole (p 214), with its central constriction, was aimed at trying to reduce this danger - but at the nearby castle of Drochil (c 1578) the outer splays were deliberately 'stepped preveno t ' t just suc occurrencen ha . Indeed, this lac concerf ko n wat confine Borderse sno th o dt r throughou fo , countre th t standare yth d oval splay survived right to the end. In later Border towers, however, the basement shot-hole is found to be lacking favourn i t rapidlI . y disappeared fro scenee mth , whils smallee th t r shot-hole t highesa r levels were retaine mucr dfo h longe copo rt e wit minoy han r emergency that might genera n arisei d ;an l lattee th r type, being situate relativeln di y thin section wall f splaye s o innee th wa , rn d o sid e only, leaving a minimum aperture in the outer wall-face.

Splayed shot-holes \. above ground level 'Ther some ear e instances where splayed shot-holes hav t beeeno n confine basemene th o dt t leve earln li y works althougd ,an reasoe t alwayhth no sames ne i usuallsth s i t ,i y readily apparent.

10 10 20 I—1-+- H— BARNfflLLS

FIG 4 MAXWELL-IKYING: EARLY FIREARMS 211

FIG 5 Basement

Mentio alreads nha y beelevelo ntw shot-holef so e mad th f eo Littledean'n si s D-wing; this swa to provide cover over the rapidly rising ground on that side. The same reasoning is found at the very ruinous tower of Fulton, where two shot-holes face west from the unvaulted ground floor, norte whilth hn e o side, wher groune eth d rise meeo st steea t p hillside beyond onle e th , yon (surviving) is at first-floor level. At Dryhope, on the other hand, there are no shot-holes con- fronting the rapidly rising hillside to the north: instead, the builder has enclosed the tower's entrance withi barmkie nth than no t sidrelied ean d upo parapee nth t walk finas abovhi lr efo defence. Barnhills likewis shot-holo n uphile s th eha n leo side (fi. g4) With most barmkin walls now totally absent, and even their locations usually lost, it is impossibl certaie b o e t som n i e instances whether a bold showin shot-holef go higa t sha level was a means of firing over the walls, the provision of back-up fire power, or just a method of increasin range ghinderinth d ean would-by gan e aggressor t LocharA . r examplefo , towee th , r was liberally equipped with splayed shot-holes bot t groundha second-flood -an r levels, whilst additional flanking cove provides entrance rwa th r largera dfo y eb , unsplayed shot-hole th n eo first floor. Corbet, also, which appears fro excessivels mit y small siz havo et e bee ndefensiva e corner tower in a courtyard plan rather than a dwelling-house, has an abundance of shot-holes levelo tw st a (pi 22V). Another exampl multi-storef eo 1 y shot-hole seee b t Fisher'ny a sma s Tower, 1 Cf. Branxholme and Cowdenknowes. 212 | PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 Darnick, where, although the original building was altered almost beyond recognition by addi- tion alterationd san s durin seventeente gth eighteentd han h centuries ease th , t wall still retains certain original features of interest. These include two splayed shot-holes, one on the ground floor and the other on its own (i.e. not beneath a window) to the right of the old hall fireplace above. This defensive strength make interestingn a s comparison wit e apparentlhth y almost passive resistance offereadjacene th y db t Darnick Tower (infra). reasonine Buth f i t g behin lase dth t three arrangement littla s si e uncertain Tweediee th , s intentio Drumelziet na crystas ri l clear. Some time durin lattee gth sixteentre parth f to h century, this Upper Tweeddale clanwero wh e, notoriou r theisfo r feuding mod f lifeeo , deeme- de t di sirabl indeef i essentiat e- dno provido t - l e their chief seat with wha facn i t t amountea o dt small gun-battery. Thihouses swa d withi tower ntalw a ne l , which they attache extreme th o dt e SW corne theif ro r existing house althougd 1;an h smal plann li , appendagthiw sne e could boast leso n s than four floor splayef so d shot-hole fous eacn sit i f rh o walls t grounA . d level they were lese oth fs usual rectangular patternothere th commoe t th s f bu ,wer o l neal oval type, except tha thin i t s instance they were inserted beneath grilled windows,2 unconsciously anticipatine gth wa whicn yi h shot-holes were subsequentl Bordere th phase e n b i 220)p t o ys( t dou . t DarnicA Buckholmd kan , however emphasie th , reverseds swa formee th : r tower sports solitara y splayed shot-hole beneat second-flooe hth r window flankin entrancee gth , while Buck- holm also possesse shot-holee on t sbu , rather inexplicably tucked awa cornea basee n yth i f -ro men - texcep cornea s t thawa r t unprotecteti barmkine th y db . Smailholm othee th rn o hand, , was basically too early in date to be equipped with shot-holes, although a lone, inverted key-hole one covering the entrance doorway from the first-floor vestibule above it could in fact be original. solitare Th y splayed shot-hol wese th e garrelatee ta n higi wals th rp f hwa tu o laddition s wa t ;i inserte provido dt e some extra protectio barmkie th r nfo n gatewa higd yan h ground approaching than o tt i side onle th , y ready mean accesf so thio st s naturally strong site.

Shot-holes inserted Amisfieldat perhaps i t I s appropriat t thiea s poin consideo t lowee rth r shot-hole t Amisfielsa d Tower, for they are a unique and most interesting insertion in work dating from the same general, early period as Smailholm. Although Amisfiel quits di e justifiably recognise ultimate th s da e architectural achievement developmene inth simple th f eo t tower-house pla n- suc h north-eastern tower Craigievas sa r belongin differena o gt t impressioe clasth s- publishee th n l giveal n dni book Scottisn o s h architecture that Amisfiel buils unita s d wa a toweta , r that arose fro groune mth reaco dt s hit highest point, the watch turret on the east gable, all around the year 1600 is quite erroneous. Ther doubo n s ei t whatever tha entire th t e basemen lowed an t halre parth l f wallso t , together with the straight, wide, mural stair connecting them, belong to the early period just mentioned, sommorr o 0 e6 years befor presene eth t superstructur builts thid ewa s;an convictio fulls nywa endorse sucy db h eminent authoritie ReiC dR lat e r andeth D s sa , latterly Dougla W lat e r ,eth D s Simpson. Not only are the two styles totally unrelated and quite distinct, but in some places in the oute3 r wall the division between the two building periods is readily visible to an experienced eyspitn gooa e(i f eo d attemp t matchina t masonre gth homogeneoun a o yt s whole). This si particularly true along the north wall, where a few incomplete courses of ashlar divide the rubble work; in the west wall, where the rubble work just perceptibly changes its character; in the south

1 RCAMS, Inventory f Peeblesshire,o 1967, vol u, 2 RCAMS, Inventory f Peeblesshire,o 1967, vo, II l 236g fi . fig 234. 3 Amisfield Papers. MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS 213 wall, where the lower part of a possible first-floor entrance may still be traced above the lower lessea o t roned extenquoine an ; th n ti s (alway featursa e worth speciaf yo l note) furthef .I r proof were needed carefua , l geometric surveoverale th f yo l basement pla reveales nha dstructura o es deceptively erratic in its angles and measurements as to be surveyor's veritable nightmare (or challenge!), a classic example of early sixteenth-century unconcern for architectural niceties (in striking contrast to the superb quality of the work c 1600), indeed almost comparable with Neidpath in its eccentricity and not as shown on the conveniently squared-off plans previously published. 1 This early basemen vaultea s wa t d chamber with walls averagine th n o n gi abou8 t f 4 t west, north and east sides, and 7 ft 9 in to 10 ft 6 in on the south side, where the guardroom and mural stair were respectively housed t eac therd A . hen e wer finelo etw y splayed slit 'windows', with an additional, widely splayed one high up at the east end for illumination. This unusually generous supply of openings for a basement was further augmented by a single one in the north wall and anothe soute th hn ri walsunka f o l , vaulted recesn i s 3 (averagin t f widn 6 i y 4 e b t f g7 deep, and only 4 ft 9 in high) formed under the stair. When at some later date (possibly before the 1600 rebuilding) a Charteris laird wished to incorporate splayed shot-holes int walle oth thif so s basement exceedingln a , y difficult tass kwa

10 FESf 20 —I— AMISFIELD BASEMENT— £A.IULy C£N.T. FIG 6 RCAMS, Inventory for Peeblesshire, p 243 ff. 1 214 | PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 achieved by the simple expedient of a novel compromise (fig 6). It is, however, noted that this was only done on the south and east sides, leaving the other two sides untouched. But then the position of the barmkin is not known.1 It was not unusual in many of the later towers for shot- incorporateholee b o st d int fabrie oth c largely ever o , n solely showr samfo ,e Th . e could alse ob said of some earlier fortifications where the 'show' was intended to be psychological rather than ornamental; and this was partly the case at Amisfield, for typical, oval-splayed, shot-hole openings were inserted int outee oth r wall-face wher lowee eth r easter southere n th slits d froe ,an e nmon th stair undercroft, emerged (pi 25b) rectangulae th ; r outee splath guardrooe rn yi parth f o t m window, however, appear originale potentiay b an o st o T . l aggresso impressioe th r n givey nb these four splay thas swa t they provided fire cover overespectively° 30 r angled an ° f 41°so 36 ,, whils facmaximun e i t th t m possible angl firf eo e throug slitverd s e ol th s ywa e y smallhb th d an , time throat block beed sha n inserted fro correspondingls inside mth wa t ei y reduce mera o dt e in)4 onls i t f t . yI 3 ( fro ° existence mth 20 e d th an f e) o in easn 6 i t f 9 t t 4 wall)f ( ° 5 e 10 , th 6n °(i throa t trouble blocksth d ean , take thein ni r installation certaie b n n,ca thathae on tt these shot-holes, however restricted, were modified for actual use, and not just for show. The psycho- logical effect upon an invading force of being confronted by such apparently lethal-looking shot-holes and live shot of unknown capability should not be underestimated. How could an enem aware yb theif eo r severe practical limitations, eveneglectee h f ni defence dth e from higher levels (se 221)p e ?

'Dumb-belV shot-holes 'dumb-belle Th ' shaped shot-holes present somethin mysterya f go onee t ThreavTh .sa e verticale ar expertd an , onln sca y assume that thei rt purel designo s y nwa functiona l (pi 23a). The suggestion that the upper hole was to permit quicker clearing of the smoke is unconvincing. This for shot-holf mo rars ewa indee earls it n ydi days thed an t ,ndisappearei d completelr yfo over a century. It finally reappeared late in the sixteenth century; but this time it was resurrected formw ne .a n i Remains of these later dumb-bell holes are found at Amisfield, Hills, Greenknowe, Fernie- hirst and Bonshaw: at the first two towers they are clearly intended as decorative, shot-hole type slit windows solitara ,t Amisfiela e yon d servin hall'e gth s close garderobe, while Hills sha no less than three, one for each garderobe and a third in the wheel-stair at a level in between, ease th tal n wall;i l t Greenknowa esimilaa r ston s beeeha n incorporated, horizontally this wing'e th f timeso nortp , to nea 2he th walr l during modern restoration work t Ferniehirsa ; a t large opening t rathecu , r crudely verticallt fro stoneo se mlargee tw d th rounsan E n yS ,i d tower, also appears to have been re-used (especially in view of the present castle's date and history); anmore dth e carefull t bloccu y t Bonshaka w (pi 26d), whic recentls hwa y recovered froe mth adjacene footh f o t t cliffbees ha ,n identifie belongins da somo gt e restoration work carriet dou on the outer defences there c 1570-85.3

Dalswinton Castle t DalswintoA n Borderalone th thiy n ei ss ma revive d styl f shot-holeo e stil seee b lsitu, n i where it has the added distinction of providing the only known instance of the Z-plan of defence being employed strictly within the Border area - the nearest comparable examples being at 1 There has been a low lean-to added on the north 2 The lower two are now obscured by the abutment sid t soma e e e woulperiodon late e t dth bu ,rexpecf o houset .thi o st TDGAS,3 196 7- 'A recently discoverehave beend laterShot-hol. e Bloc t Bonshaka w Tower' Maxwell-IrvingA y b , . MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARM5 21 | S Auchenskeoch (late sixteenth century Eastern )i n Gallowa Drochid yan Peebles 1578W c ( l N n )i - shire. This late tower-house appear havo st e been buil tseventeent e earlth n yi h century supero t - castld sedol e enearby.th Very surprisingly grounw buils lo i t n ,i d to overlooke hillockso tw y db . Althoug largelw hno y ruinous t doei , s retain several feature f especiao s l interest, most notably an elaborate subterranean basement and the NW corner tower, which houses both the entrance and the (main) wheel stair (fig 7). It is this latter feature that clearly illustrates how the Z-plan of defence was used in practice, with the splayed shot-holes positioned to give a fairly good degree of protection to the house as a whole, each diametrically opposed corner tower being designe groune house coveth o d t halth e d f dean ron fo beyond. One very fine shot-hole survives unaltered beside, and facing north from, the entrance doorwa angl° 35 yfire.f e o a (p s i Ther26c)ha presumabl s t I .e wa y another such shot-hole facing west, where a window has subsequently been broken out. A further two similar shot-holes surviv ease soutd th an t n he i tower e sideth f arrangeo so s , d that they give good flanking cover alon outside nortge th westh d f han eo t hous e wallth f eso respectively. Unfortunatel paro yn t of the SE corner tower now survives above ground level, but a similar arrangement of shot-holes there would have complete basie dth c defences, coverin soute geasth d han t walle wels th sa s a l ground immediately beyond. t wil I appreciatee b l d that these shot-holes only covered about halgroune fth d over which an enemy could advanc e- roughl same yth e proportio majorite th n i f 'keep-shaped o ys na ' towersgreae th t t advantag ;bu fac e th t n thai y te la thes e shot-holes were onlclosn i reaf e yo e lus combat, when they gave full protectio e building'th o nt s main walls, whilst further defence could be effected from the parapet or other defences at higher levels. In addition, the corner tower Z-plaf so n castles were themselves almost invariably both covere backed furthey dan b p du r defences in the main block itself, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not the case at Dalswinton too. All the shot-holes at Dalswinton are of the horizontal, dumb-bell type. There is nothing unusual in their arrangement, nor in the cover provided, but why were they enlarged at each end, both on the inside as well as the outside, to form the dumb-bell shape? There are two possi- bilities. Either it was an ornamental embellishment - a comparatively rare concession amongst the Borders during the troubled years of the 1570s, if, as believed, this style was first revived in Bordere th s that earlmor, or yenlargee- e onllikelys th t ya wa t di , ends tha largee tth r handguns could in fact be used.1 The latter explanation is further supported when one considers the limiting dimensions involved: at the inner end of these shot-holes the enlarged portions are 4 to 4^ in in diameter, openin outesome o t th t t erga ou 6facen ^i , whil centrae eth l constrictio onls ni y some deep2o n 2t i f , adequat sightinr efo t barelsmallese gth bu t y bu sufficien t y handgunan r fo t t sa close range. By comparison, the average throat size in the more conventional shot-holes is about 4iin.

The 'crosslet' shot-hole Continene th n O originae th t l cross for f shot-holmo e (derived fro crose mth s arrow-slit) survived as a diminutive crosslet;2 but its sudden, isolated appearance in Aberdeenshire during

At Tolquhon (c 1595) in Aberdeenshire, the entrance House of Schivas this effect was carried yet another 1 gateway is flanked by two, dumb-bell type shot- stage further. holes, with a third enlargement in the centre. These 2 The superb, late fifteenth-century castle of Man- thoughe ar havo t e been designed partl ye witey n ha sanare n Spaii ss somha n e fine examples it n i s decorationo t , while other, more conventional shot- curtain wall, althoug thin i h s case shot-holeth e s holes provide maie dth nearbne th defence t a y d an ; are surmounte doubly db e crosslets. 216 I PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71

DA.ISWWT'OJV 7tW£X FIG? the last decade of the fifteenth century was wholly unexpected,1 when, in 1491, crosslet style shot-holes were incorporate castlw f Ravenscraigne e o e th n di , near Peterhead. althougd 2An h solitara s wa y t t forgotteni instanceno s wa t .i , Hal centura f y later quitw , thisno e archaicy b , , typ shot-holf eo resurrectes ewa locae th ly dmaster-masonsb doubo ,n aesthetimucs s it ta r hfo c qualitie practicas it s sa l value. However t nevei , r became common therd onle an , ear y about half a dozen examples known in the country, mostly dating from just after the middle of the sixteenth century. Only one is outside the Aberdeenshire area. This interesting exceptio founs ni t Kirkconnela d l Tower, Abbeneaw Ne rEastern yi n Galloway, where one, small, crosslet shot-hole is set in the outer wall-face on each side of the basement and then splayed inwards through the 4 ft 7 in thick wall (pi 27a). The shot-holes themselve higeacn e i sar 1 h h2 overall crosn i ,1 wits1 armn ha ; e bot wideth n i h d 4 slit an ,e sar lower aperture is 5J in in diameter. This tower was almost certainly built as a plain, rectangular keep, to which the present stair wing was added in the seventeenth century - as was also done at many other towers. It would be hard to put an exact date to the original work, but it probably belongs to the third quarter of the sixteenth century when, c 1560-80, a number of Aberdeen- shire influence thaf o s t period appea havo rt e been brough Wese th to t March. 3 Absence of shot-holes There are a number of areas and individual towers where shot-holes are conspicuously absent. There are several reasons for this. Firstly, many more towers than is generally believed 1similaA largea rn o formr t scale beebu d , ha n, earlier datin previousld gha y arisen becausa f o e employed at Hurstmonceux in the south of England known connection between Aberdeenshire and the

in the middle of the century. Western Marc that ha t time. Durin yeare gth s 1544- Cruden'2 s The Scottish Castle, pp 212-15. It was 3 ft 1546, John Brown, the last abbot of Sweetheart hign 9i h overall, wit h2shot-holea n i . (New) Abbey busils ,wa y engaged upon extensiv- ere 3 storation s abbe worfinaa hi t n yka i l attempo t t Another notable exampl so-callee th s ei d 'Crusader sav t froei fate mth e thaunderminins wa t e th l gal Stone t Bonshawa ' pendana , tentrance bosth n si e religious establishments at the hands of the Reform- vestibule beautifully carved with the sacred mono- ation o overseT . e this wor engagee kh da master - gram 'I.H.S.' a featur, e also foun Aberdeenn i d - mason from Aberdeenshire; and it was he who - shire around this time. It had previously been erroneously, as it now appears - had been presumed ascribed to the late 1540s, but on a reassessment to have been responsible for these incidental works e overaloth f l architectural evidenc morw no e s i e reasonably expecte o belone 1570st d th e o gt Th . exhibitin gnorthera n influence. MAXWELL-IKYING: EARLY FIREARMS | 217 have lower fabric which belongs to an earlier period than the present, rebuilt superstructure, and which pre-date generae sth l introductio f shot-holesno instancn A . s alreadeha y been citet da Amisfield. In these earlier works, the vaulted basement, which is usually the only part to have survived moro n d e thaha , n very small slit window provido st e some ventilatio modicua d nan m of light, without in any way weakening the tower or permitting an enemy to fire it by feeding combustible material intbasemene oth populaa - t r ruse-de-guerre wit Englishe hth . Another reason for the absence of shot-holes is found in the small, lonely, and isolated towers that are tucked away amongs hillse fror th tusuae fa ,m th l route invadinf so g armie marauderd san s- towers suc Woolandslees ha , Manorhead Kinnelheadd an , mand an , y anothe reprerw thano -s ti sentemoro n y edb tha ngrass-coverea d hea f rubblepo . They usually belonge relativelo dt y insignificant individuals, who are unlikely to have possessed firearms or been subjected to a major t havattack meane caseno y whoed th d an acquirinf an ,di , sn o ,i necessare gth y freestone for architectural refinements, however minor. morA e significant reasoabsence th r nshot-holef fo eo initian a s ls wa distrus thin i t s form of defence in certain areas (e.g. Parts of Nithsdale) and among certain families. Nor was the reasoning of this minority of lairds, who were often persons of some consequence, altogether ill-founded. As already stated (p 199), and in spite of some two centuries of development, no handgun was yet capable of matching a bow in either accuracy or rate of fire; and the latter were fro e t suiteus m no r dthesfo e towers except fro mparapea t walk. Furthermor onls ha o y t e eon conside layoue th typicara f o t l towe realizo t r extreme eth e limitation f thesso e fine-looking new feature practicen si . Som earle t t allleastth ea yno f , o f shot-holei , s either opened directly on to one or other of the outer defences, or else looked out across some naturally defensive chasm, thao s t unti enemn a l overcomd yha firse eth t lin f defenceo confronted ean towee th d r itself they were of no use whatever, except as a morale booster; and by that time the enemy was often closo theuser to e eb fo mdo t effectively maie th , n defence havin carriee b o gt d on fro parapee mth t above with any weapons available. This should not, however, be interpreted as an indication that these shot-holes were a rather useless, popular gimmick; but that appears to be the light in which their detractor themw sa s . Certainly thetheid yha r shortcomings t thesbu , e were gradually counteracte variouy db s improvement thein si r positionin Z-plae g- suc th s hna already referred to at Dalswinton (p 214) and multi-level gun batteries (pp 211-12) - although in the Border area, where strongholds were generall greatef yo r moment than elsewhere, improvements were notice- ably slower to take effect, and were by no means always logically thought out. One reason for the apparent resistance to change was dictated by the unsettled state of Border life, which gave the towers' owners little opportunit r rebuildinyfo r improvementgo s forces unleswa t di s upon them morA . e obvious reason, though, stemmed fro vere mth y existenc multitude th f eo f eo small towers in the area. In their sixteenth-century way of life, all but the poorest families built for themselves a small, fortified tower-house, and any thought of something more elaborate was out of the question: they had neither the manpower nor the means either to erect or to de- fen strongeda r structure this i st I . socia historicad an l l backgroun ordinare th o dt y 'Border tower' that make t quitsi e unrealistiequatd an defences y eit tr o ct s with largere thosth f eo , more sophisticated, and more peacable, tower-houses of the Lowlands and the NE counties. Another fact worth emphasisin gstrengte agaith s nwa h inheren thesn i t e towers. Mention has already been made of two strong towers that successfully withstood sieges (p 198). But there was probably no time when the defiant strength of an average tower was better demonstrated than in the famous, triple 'siege' of Stapleton in 1626. Although not a siege in the true sense, inasmuch as Sir John Charteris of Amisfield was commissioned to recover the property for its rightful owner without serious damage, this conventional 'keep-plan' tower, whics hwa 21 | 8PROCEEDING S OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 defended by four main shot-holes, an additional smaller one beside the entrance, and the parapet above, was successfully held by two rebels and a handful of retainers for more than six months before the increasingly vast, official force - it eventually numbered 4 earls, 2 lords, 3 knights, and 7 lairds, with all their forces - was able to eject them.

Overall defensive plan The majority of Border towers equipped with shot-holes date from the second half of the sixteenth century, the greatest number probably belonging to the middle years of this period. When built on the rectangular, or 'keep', plan, the most normal arrangement was one shot-hole on each side of the basement, with the occasional provision of an additional shot-hole beside the entrance (e.g. Bonshaw, Robgill and Stapleton). With towers on the L-plan, however, the arrangement was less consistent - although the majority have been so altered that complete details are no longer available. Hillslap (1585) and Evelaw would appear to be typical examples where there were apparently no shot-holes in the wing, but one in each face of the main block, the one in the re-entrant angle serving to cover the entrance. Greenknowe (1581), on the other hand, has a guardroom in the wing, which is equipped with a single shot-hole facing east across courtyare th whero dt e outbuildings formerly stood, whil onle eth y provisio r firearmnfo w lo s maie inth n bloc largea s ki , splayed, slit window coverin entrance g th re-entran e th n ei t angle. Elshieshields, too, has but a single round shot-hole, splayed only on the inside, to flank the entrance;

FI G8 Hillsla p Tower, ground-floor plan) (scal96 : e1 MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS | 219 t Langshaa d an wrathea r crude, splayed shot-hol situates ewa d besid originae eth l entrancn ei maie th n block's portio re-entrane th f no t angle. Mentio alreads nha y been unusuallmade th f eo y strong defence provide T-plae th t da n towe f Locharo r , whic apparentls hwa y either rebuilr o t restored in 1622; and there has also been reference to other towers where, for one reason or another, a more elaborate system of defence has been employed within the structures of the towers themselves ultimate .Th e developmen basin ti c tower-house defenc compares a e- d with domestic comfort - is generally considered to have been the Z-plan. The only true example of this arrange- ment withi Bordere t nDalswintonth a s swa , where little enoug remainw hno s (supra). evee Th n more dilapidated remains of the castle of Auchenskeoch in Galloway and the much grander remains at Drochil in Peeblesshire are also on the Z-plan; but both are outside the territory generally associated wite BordershTh Borded an ' r history.

Barmkins and gatehouses A stronger initial defence would have been provided if shot-holes had also been incorpo- barmkie rateth n di n wall r normallfo , t leasya sideo towera tw f t so were enclosed withis nit courtyard and unable to contribute much to the latter's defence. There is, however, no evidence among the few surviving remains of these walls to suggest that any such provision existed. Indeed, enough remains at Buckholm to indicate that there were probably no apertures within the wall, while the gateway had to rely for its defence upon the effectiveness of the strong iron yett and reinforcing drawbar. A similar arrangement appears to have existed at Hills, except that in this instanc gatewae eth lates ywa r either altere rebuilr do incorporato t gatehousea e overheade th , architectural styl f whiceo h suggest datsa esixteente latth n ei h century (reputedly 1598), some 30 years afte towee th r r itsel otheo builts n t fwa r A . lesser Bordertowee originan th a n ri n sca l barmkin wal identifiee b l d that survive pary wall-heao an t n si d heightt thes a tower o t etw Ye . s alone one finds a fairly obvious explanation for this omission - even though the towers themselves onln ca y manag reae eon l shot-hole between them! In times of trouble all the local horses and cattle were herded into the barmkin for safety. This was the enclosure's prime raison d'etre, when it became a seething mass of frightened animals, often far too many to be housed within the stables and other outbuildings. To try and man open shot-holes at ground level in such a situation was out of the question. The only alterna- defence carro th t s tivn yo e ewa fro mhighea r level juss thid tsan wa , what they did t bot.A h Buckholm and Hills the remains of an open parapet walk may still be seen, whilst elsewhere in Scotland there are several small tower-houses that retain much more complete barmkin walls, whicf o same l buile th al har en o tprinciple wer bettew y Fe e.an r equippe defencer dfo , although exception foune sar t Mainda Fintrf so y (1562 Angun )i Muchalld san s (1619 Kincardineshire.n )i 1 Ground-level defence of barmkins, however, was not altogether unknown, but it does seem havo t e been restricte gatehouseo dt s where these existed t BonshawA . instancer fo , dumbe th , - bell shot-hole block already referre (o dpt 214) must have come from som outee parth f ro t defences, and 'the outer gate of the fortalice' is referred to in a deed of 1582. Lag is also known to have had a gatehouse, although it now lies in a heap of rubble around the remains of the gate- way, but an old engraving of it when it was less ruinous2 shows no evidence of defence from below. The gatehouse at Hills, on the other hand, does appear to have been manned from two levels.

1 Mains of Fintry has an unusually high curtain wall arrow-slits in the same position): Muchalls was with rounde cornersth t a s a semi-circula, r turret less ambitious, with corner roundparapee th n i s t corbelle t ove gatewae dou th r y incorporatin shot-holed an g bot ht grouns a d leve eithen o l re sidth f eo shot-hole d machicolationsan s e uniquth d ean , gateway. featur f shot-holeo e s builne 2 t Historical intmerlone e oth th f o s Families f Dumfriesshire,o LC y b embattled parapet (reminiscent of early medieval Johnstone, p 75. 220 | PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 The guardroom itself is built out over the gateway on projecting piers (2 ft 4 in wide); it incor- porates two, small, inverted key-hole type shot-holediametern i n i outes hign 3 it i y n 5 hs)i rb ( wall (pi 26b). In addition, there have been crosslet shot- or spy-holes in the north side of this gateway, bot grount ha guardrooe th dn i leve d mlan t enougabove fille bu latte w e , dno in h .Th s ri remains of the lower one (with a wall recess behind it) to indicate that it must have been intended just showr no tfo d , an eve e fonus r though, bein blocket clea w insidee w no g no th r s ho i n dt o i , contrives wa e us practice dn i s it t does.I , however, seem probable that these were only spy-holes, as the guardroom has a 'window' of similar shape in its inner wall.1 Later trends By the end of the sixteenth century basement shot-holes were beginning to go out of fashion in the Borders. There were exceptions, but with the anticipation of more peaceful times ahead, followed by the Union of the Crowns in 1603, these were very few and soon ceased altogether. same th t e A time, however, local feudin deepla d gan y inbred distrus one'f o t s neighbours, often proliferated builan p u t d over many generations ,forgotte e coulb t dno n overnight thao s , t there was a period of perhaps half a century during which the legacy of the shot-hole, and what it represente Bordererse th o dt , continue liv Thi . o dfounsmale t s eon th s wa n dli windo turred wan t shot-holes that were incorporated in new works during the last two decades of the sixteenth and earl yseventeente parth f o t h centuries. Unlike the earlier splayed shot-holes in window breasts, which unashamedly challenged intruders fro e windowmth f suco s h tower s Drumelziesa d Darnickfors w an rm ne wa e th , generall a compromisy e between ornamentatio d utilityan n , wite emphasith h s sometimes sometimed an y tendin otherwa e e schangth e gon Th . e represente intermediatn da e e stagth n ei withdrawal from fortificatio peacefuo nt l domesticityl otheal n ri aspects a t architecturef bu ; so , one cannot dra har y fasd wan d an t lin nexte betweeth stage d : on shot-holeean y nan f botso h types co-existed in the same towers over a period of at least 20 years. While some towers omitted lowee th r shot-hole earln a t ysa .date, other straditionsd helol e d fasth o t , stubbornly maintaining an outward appearance of great strength (perhaps with good cause) long after their neighbours progressed ha greateo dt r domestic comforts. Nisbet Hous Berwickshirn ei outstandinn a s ei g example in the latter category - not least because an existing castle was actually pulled down to make room for it. Although not built until c 1630, this large mansion has the most spectacular array of splayed shot-holes in the Borders: they are liberally distributed at every level from the basement to the wall-head, in the main walls, wings, stair towers, and turrets, sometimes in window breasts and elsewhere on their own. Some are of the conventional oval shape, but others have an additional downward splay, presenting the appearance of the letter 'T'. Even later at Traquair, the square NW corner turret, which was not added until 1642, rather surprisingly incorporates an unusual form of shot-hole that first appeared further north towards the end of the previous century (pi 28d). It is a form of double splay, in some respects similar to the hori- zontal dumb-bell typ f shot-holeeo t appeari d turret'e an ,eac n th si f ho s rounded cornero st face outwards beyon onln housee ca y dth e conjecturOn . e tha revivas tit t suca l hlata e dated an , in an otherwise almost undefended house,2 was a precautionary measure associated with the contemporary Civil War. 1 Because of the gateway's obvious restoration or 2 The oldest part of the house is a small tower, built rebuilding in more recent times, it is now impossible in the 1490s before shot-holes had come into vogue; to determine the exact details of the original and although a licence was issued for its extension structure. In the altered work some of the moulded and fortification in 1512, there is no evidence that stones of the archway have been re-arranged, the this work was carried out. The central block was draw-bar holes have disappeared wroughe th d an ,t e mid-sixteentaddeth n i d h centurye onlth y t bu , iron gates are replacements. apertures in the basement of this work are ventila- MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS 221

Purely functional turret shot-holes connection I trendw nshoule ne wit on ,e hth d bea minn i r d that, whil changeovee eth o t r fewer lesd san , spectacular, opening largels swa y dictate anticipatioe th y db mora f no e peaceful future, the reduction in their size was made possible partly by thinner walls and partly by a vast improvemen qualite th performancd n ti yan smallee th f eo r firearms. Thi particularls si y apparent when one considers the very small, purely functional shot-holes that are found high up in some corner turrets and watch towers. These first appeared in the Borders some time c 1580 and survived for about a quarter of a century. But unlike the semi-decorative new shot-holes (infra) which appeared around the same time, and owed their origin largely to the same circumstances, the purely functional ones were quite distinctive. They made no attempt to be decorative: on the contrary, although they were slightly splayed on the inner side to serve their purpose, the opening presente outee th n rdi wall-face, angled steeply downwards eithe flano rt mai e kth n walls from stair or corner turrets, or to cover neighbouring ground from an even higher vantage point, was invariably a very small aperture, usually of rectangular section, that was almost invisible from the ground far below. Typical examples are found in the corner turrets at Greenknowe (1581), Amisfield (1600) (wher e apparentlth e y small slite mosar s t deceptiv n actualli e y measuring 2 ft by 2\ in and 1 ft by 4 in at the lower and higher levels respectively), and Spedlins (1605), opee th nn i round d an t Bemersydsa e (1581) lattee Th . r case, however unusuas i , thatn i l , whilst the rounds on the south front are plain, those on the north side each have a shallow central embrasure, beneath which an additional round shot-hole has been included to face straight t horizontally.ou 1 Elshieshields, on the other hand, retains no evidence of having been provided with turret shot-holes. t firs2A t this seems surprising, bearin minn gi same builds th thaey wa b t master t i t - maso lateo nwh r rebuilt nearby Amisfield answee th t rbu , her watch-turrete eth appearn i e li o st . This latter feature, which served as an open look-out at the tower's highest point, incorporates same th e typ f miniatureo e shot-hole immediately belo mouldes wit d copineaste th ,n go sout h and west sides, providing a substantial degree of cover over the surrounding ground (pi 27c). By comparison, the covered watch-tower at Amisfield, perched within the east gable, was less well appointed so far as firearms were concerned. Relying upon the turrets for the main high- level defence, this look-out post was well equipped with small windows (that could have been used in defence if the need arose), provision for a temporary platform over the stair-head on the north sideeved an ,nsmala l fireplac sentry'e th r efo s comfort onle th y t shot-holbu e ; on s ewa small one, som fee4 e6 t abov (originale eth ) ground level, angled dow coveo nt ease th r t sidf eo towere th , which received less cover tha othee nth r sides fro turretse mth .

tion slits. It was not until a further addition wa sfirearms.of use RCAMSforthe -See , Inventoryfor made some 30 years later that shot-holes were Peeblesshire, 31p 1 ff. actually included in the fabric; but because of 1 The two parapets at this tower are reputed to have numerous subsequent modifications, we cannot now been altere 1690n di , althoug actuae hth l fabrid can tell how extensive these defences were, the only mouldings appear to be original.- See THAS, 1926 - surviving evidence being a partially filled-in 'Bemersyde Tower', by J P Allison. splayed shot-hole in a window-breast beside the new 2 entrance. It is, however, not without significance The three, very small apertures distributed around that, when further additions were mad n 1599i e , wall-heae th eacf do h corner turret have never been satisfactorily explained. Their disposition would incorporating corner turrets with their own shot- tend to suggest an active defensive role; but on holes (see p 223), the new windows which were closer examination, their location unnecessarily high inserted into the west wall of the earlier basement at turree th p t u walls f norma,o welt ou l l reachd an , the same time did not, apparently, include provision the form of the openings themselves, with no down- ward splay, would rather suggest otherwise. 22 | 2PROCEEDING S OF THE SOCIETY, 1970-71 High-level defence Hoddomat uniquA e varian n high-levei t l defenc e massives founi eth t a d , late sixteenth-century tower of Hoddom, seat of the powerful Lords Herries. Here, in addition to the familiar open parapet walk with corner rounds, which runs aroun wall-heae dth maie th nf d o bloc k before communicating with the higher wing through doorways at each end, and which, with or without crenellations, was normally considered perfectly adequate protection for defenders at this level, buildee th r clearly deemed further measures necessary. These too fore kth shot-holef m o s within the parapet wall itself, backed up by machicolated projections in the middle of the north and east walls and over the entrance doorway in the re-entrant angle, the machicolations being boldly corbelle t beyon dadjacene ou th line f dth eo t walls remarkable Th . e feature aboue th t shot-holes here is that, instead of being situated within the corner turrets - as at Bemersyde (supra) and other towers further north - they are built into the main parapet walls immediately adjacent on either side, facing straight outwards, and with no structural downward splay and very little cover to either side (pi 28a). Yet there is no doubt that their purpose was solely utili- tarian, their very existence being virtually invisible from below. On the other hand, their justificatio effectivenesd nan s mus consideree b t d very dubious, whil possibilite eth y that they were used solely as spy-holes is even less likely. The apertures are all rectangular in shape, but vary in size. A typical example (in the NE corner) opens out from 4 in wide on the outside to insidee th n o 11, witn £i hunifora m heigh foo 1 thicn i f to t9 k througt f wall1 e .hth Decorative 'shot-holes' in late work Unlike the purely functional types just described, the majority of the new, less aggressive shot-holes too fore smala kth f m o l circular aperture outee th n ri , wala fac f r turreto eo l , that was commonly embellished with some form of decoration, such as a hollow-moulded surround; or they might be opened out either partially or wholly to some other shape, like the popular quatrefoil. Window somn i s e stair turret garderobed an s s also followe e samth d e decorative style, so that often one cannot be certain whether they were intended to be merely a reflection of the new style of shot-hole (or vice-versa), or to serve a dual role in an emergency. A classic exampl f thieo founs i s t Oakwooa d d (1602), wher e seconeth d flooa r y garderobb t li s ewa small circular window, wit hhollow-mouldea d surround, tha identicas i t shot-holee th o t l n si some of the window breasts on the same floor. Other decorative shapes employed for these 'windows' included vertical dumb-bell openings at Amisfield and Hills; also a quatrefoil and a cross at Amisfield (1600); and both lancet and circular shapes lighting the wheel-stair at Four- merkland (1590). A less ambiguous example was found at Hutton, where a large house was added to the old tower in 1573. In this instance, a quatrefoil shot-hole at the foot of the main stair not only served to protect the new entrance, but also had to provide much of the illumination for the entrance vestibule.1 Shot-holes in window breasts were not particularly common in the Borders. Mention has already been mad f thoseo t Oakwoodea , whic foune har d beneat e maihth n windowe th f o s principal second floor chamber (pi 27d). An early example of a plain hole may be seen (blocked towerE N t nortCowdenknowese d a th ol n he i walth ) f up o l t wha originalla s , wa t y first-floor this levela st courtyar;bu d corner towe Corbetf r(c 211 ,p bees )ha n completely altered internally, largely as the result of its new role of main entrance to the adjacent mansion, its original features have been largely destroyed. Similar unadorned examples are found beneath the turret windows t Ferniehirsa t (1598), flankin thiwallse n i gth st instanc;bu e the supplementee yar additionay db l 1 These features were regrettably removed when Domestic Architecture f Scotland,o r vo , 19fo 4 l, 3f extensive alterations were carried out by the late details of the former arrangement, owner e McGibbose ; d Rossan n , Castellatedd an MAXWELL-IRVING: EARLY FIREARMS | 223 holes with quatrefoil mouldings facin t frogou m betwee windowse nth , whil e rouneth d holes beneath the small stair windows have moulded surrounds similar to those at Oakwood (pi 28c). Other examples of the latter form are found at Greenknowe (1581), where two such holes are situate staie th rn di turre t betwee firssecone d nth an t d floor coveo t s re-entrane th r t wallsd an ; at Isle (1587), where a single window looks out from the middle of each of the two turrets, while moulded circular shot-holes to one side cover the most vulnerable approaches from the W and NW (pi 28b). Corner turrets also surviv t Fourmerklanea d (1590 Barjard )an g (1590's)s a t bu ; both have their upper parts completely rebuilt in restoration, no defensive features survive. Apart from the 1642 turret at Traquair already mentioned, there are two more, round turrets on the west front, both of which date from 1599. Of these, the one to the SW still retains a pair of circular shot-holes with hollow-moulded surrounds lookin t frogou m betwee flankine nth g window reversaa more s- th f e o lusua l arrangement, where windows loo whilt kou e shot-holes cover the •walls. Besides the 'decorative' openings already mentioned at Fourmerkland, there is a rather enigmatic shot-hol tower'e th waln e W i t second-floo sa N l rdiamete n i level 6s n i e £i t th I . t a r outer face, and opens out through the 2 ft 8 in thick wall to 2 ft 4 in high by 1 ft 3 in wide on insidee th han e hars i on .t accepd o i dWhilst e th n t o ttha t this substantial aperture, whics hha vera y narrow splay (22°) whicd an , h faces away fro mose mth t likely directio attacky an f no , was the only true shot-hole in the tower, on the other hand it does cover some of the firmest neighbouring ground, and was also on a side that was probably not contained within the barmkin. Furthermore, it is wholly unconvincing as a window, decorative or otherwise, especially as there is an original, conventional window further alon same gth e inevitabl s i wall. e On y drawe th o nt conclusion, therefore, that this feature was indeed intende1d primarily as a shot-hole, similar to the diametern i n i 'extra8 ( e ) coverin'on entrance gth Lochat ea r (p 211), whic mosht i t closely resembles. Ornamental 'shot-holes'' at Fairnielee Finally, before leaving the diminutive forms of semi-ornamental shot-holes, mention must be made of the house of Fairnielee, near Selkirk. Representing one of the earliest 'architect- designed' mansion-houses in the Borders, apparently built around the turn of the seventeenth century (the dat uncertain)s ei designes wa t i , d throughou unite on , s wita t accene hth t entirely upon space, comfort and symmetry. Yet it could not completely forsake the styles and ornament periode ofth almosd an , t inevitably includeds corne wa front r W S r No .e turret th f o t eac sa d hen purpose th f theseo e turrets forgotten. Whilst they wer doubo en t designe mucs da r theihfo r aesthetic appearanc s anythinea g else, with decorative corbe offsed an l t courses, they never- theless still included beneath the windows small, almost insignificant 'shot-holes' in the style of e periodth , wit e samhth e quatrefoil mouldin e wall-facth s founn i go s a n eFerniehirst'i d s turrets. The only difference at Fairnielee is that these shot-holes never penetrated the wall; they were there solel s externaya l decoration ultimatee th , littla f i ,e premature ,e disstagth -n ei appearance of the shot-hole from dwelling-houses.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The writer gratefully acknowledges the assistance of the various owners (and custodians) of all the tower-houses and other fortified sites within the Scottish Borders, who, by granting him unrestricted accespropertiee th o st thein si r care, publi privater co whethed an , r mentioned

notr o , have made this brie t comprehensivfbu e survey possible. Thi1 s tower was restored and slightly modified over a not thought that any original features of importance century ago, but from the available evidence it is were destroyed as a result. Of SCOTLAMD

"

FIG 9 Map of principal Border castles and towers