enaced violently the Scotch barons,
and forced them to compliance, at least to silence.

** Rymer, vol. ii. p. 548. previously to his pronouncing
sentence, required their acknowledgment of his superiority.

It is evident from the genealogy of the royal family of Scotland, that
there could only be two questions about the succession--that between
Baliol and Bruce on the one hand, and Lord Hastings on the other,
concerning the partition of the crown: and that between Baliol and
Bruce themselves concerning the preference of their respective titles,
supposing the kingdom indivisible: yet there appeared on this occasion
no less than nine claimants besides; John Comyn or Cummin, lord of
Badenoch, Florence, earl of Holland, Patric Dunbar, earl of March,
William de Vescey, Robert de Pynkeni, Nicholas de Soules, Patric
Galythly, Roger de Mandeville, Robert de Ross; not to mention the king
of Norway, who claimed as heir to his daughter Margaret.[*] Some of
these competitors were descended from more remote branches of the royal
family; others were even sprung from illegitimate children; and as none
of them had the least pretence of right, it is natural to conjecture
that Edward had secretly encouraged them to appear in the list of
claimants, that he might sow the more division among the Scottish
nobility, make the cause appear the more intricate, and be able to
choose, among a great number, the most obsequious candidate.

But he found them all equally obsequious on this occasion.[**] Robert
Bruce was the first that acknowledged Edward's right of superiority over
Scotland; and he had so far foreseen the king's pretensions, that even
in his petition, where he set forth his claim to the crown, he had
previously applied to him as liege lord of the kingdom; a step which was
not taken by any of the other competitors.[***] They all, however, with
seeming willingness, made a like acknowledgment when required; though
Baliol, lest he should give offence to the Scottish nation, had taken
care to be absent during the first days; and he was the last that
recognized the king's title.[****]

* Walsing. p. 58.

** Rymer, vol. ii. p. 529, 545. Walsing. p. 56. Heming.
vol. i. 33, 34. Trivet, p. 260. M. West. p. 415.

*** Rymer, vol. ii. p. 577, 578, 579.

**** Rymer, vol. ii. p. 546.

Edward next deliberated concerning the method of proceeding in the
discussion of this great controversy. He gave order