[81] Walsingham, (p. 366.) says, that the Earl of Dunbar came in and turned the scale in favor of the Scots. Nothing of this is mentioned by Froissart, who had his account of the battle from the Douglas family, at whose castle he resided some time. If it be said that their account was probably a prejudiced one, the same objection may be raised against that of Walsingham. The Douglas' always spoke of their victory with true chivalric modesty; for they declared that it was the consequence of the exhausted state of the English after the march from Newcastle. [82] Froissart, vol. ii. c. 146. Buchanan, lib. 9. p. 173, &c. [83] Monstrelet, vol. i. c. 9, &c. Rymer, Foedera, vol. viii. p. 310, 311. [84] This Archibald Douglas, Earl of Galloway, called the Grim, was an illegitimate son of a good Sir James Douglas, and the successor in the earldom of Douglas to the Earl James who fell at Otterbourn. Archibald had been taken prisoner by Hotspur at the battle of Holmedon Hill; and Percy agreed, that if he would fight with him as valiantly against Henry IV. as he had fought during that battle, he would give him his liberty free of ransom-money. Douglas, as a soldier and an enemy of the English king, had no objection to these terms, and therefore he fought at the battle of Shrewsbury. Buchanan, book 10. [85] Well, indeed, might the Scottish knight say, "Another king! they grow like Hydras' heads: I am the Douglas, fatal to all those That wear these colours on them." Shakspeare, Henry IV, Part I. act v. scene 4. [86] Otterbourne, p. 239. 244. Walsingham, p. 410, &c. Hall, folio 22. I mean not to say, however, that his conduct was without precedent, for at the great battle of Poictiers nineteen French knights were arrayed like King John.