The above is all learned enough; but his lordship has stopped short in his explanation, and left his readers as much in the dark, as any of his predecessors, respecting the meaning or propriety of such a phrase in the mouth of a general, on the commencement of a great battle. Some of our readers perhaps require to be told that _schiltron_ means a body of men drawn up in a circle.[105] The war-dance of the Scots and other northern nations, as is well known, was performed round a large fire. Each warrior’s hand was firmly clasped in that of his neighbour. Their motion was at first slow, and gradually increased, till their rapidity almost rivalled the velocity of the whirlwind. When arrived at this state of fury, if any luckless wight slipped his hold, or otherwise became unsteady, the impetus which he and his fellows had acquired, pitched him headlong amid the flames, when his endeavours to extricate himself from the blaze, and regain his place, formed the chief sport of his companions. To render the schiltron the most formidable figure for defensive operations, steadiness was all that was requisite. When Wallace, therefore, on the rapid advance of the English, addressed his soldiers in the manner alluded to, he gave utterance to the happiest thought, in the fewest words, that perhaps ever presented itself to the mind of genius in a case of emergency. The striking similarity between their form of battle and their favourite dance, was apparent to all; and the impending conflict became instantly stript of its terrors, by a playful allusion to an amusement with which they were familiar, while it flashed upon their minds with all the conviction of experience, that on the preservation of their ranks their safety depended. The behaviour of the schiltrons on that fatal day showed that they understood the address of their leader better than any of its subsequent commentators. R. WALLACE’S DESCENDANTS. Page 167. Wallace appears to have left a daughter, whose legitimacy has been called in question, but on very slender grounds. In Chalmers’s Caledonia, vol. i. p. 579, we find the following passage:--“It has been said that Wallace left no legitimate issue; but he had a natural daughter, who married Sir William Baillie of Hoprig, the progenitor of the Baillies of Lamington.” It has never been disputed, that the lady by whom Wallace had this daughter was the heiress of Lamington, in right of her father, Sir Hew de Bradfute; it would therefore have been satisfactory, if the learned author above mentioned had explained how the Baillies of Hoprig came to the possession of Lamington. If the daughter of Wallace was legitimate their succession appears the natural consequence of the marriage of Sir William Baillie; if not, the manner in which they became possessed of that property requires elucidation. That Wallace and the heiress of Lamington were lawfully married, is asserted by Henry, who draws the following picture of their connubial happiness:--