Skip to main content

Full text of "The red book of Menteith. [With plates, including portraits, facsimiles and genealogical tables.]"

See other formats

— . — 

Ge*.  I  Me*\ 




Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

National  Library  of  Scotland 




o.  2f..*zC..+ 







>    ■■♦*    < 

The  Two  Volumes  cure  forwarded  to  you 



32  Castle  Street^  Edinburgh. 


Contents  of  (Hoiume  -first. 


TITLE-PAGE — Doorway  of  Priory  of  Inchmahome. 



THE  RED  BOOK  OF  MENTEITH,  ....         v-xvi 



THE  MENTEITH  EARLS  OF  MENTEITH,  .  .        1-288 






PEDIGREE  of  the  Menteith  Earls  of  Menteith,  . 
,,  Menteiths  of  Rusky,  Kerse,  etc., 

„  Graham  Earls  of  Menteith, 

,,  Drummonds  of  Blair-Drummond, 


Doune  Castle,     .......    471-496 

The  Castle  of  Talla,     ......    497-505 

Duke  Murdach's  Island  and  Tower,    ....    505-506 

THE  PRIORY  OF  INCHMAHOME,  ....    507-552 

vol.  I.  1 





The  Drummonds  of  Blair-Drummond,  etc.  : —  .         betiveen  470  and  471 

Sir  Patrick  Drummond,  brother  of  Henry,  first  of  Gairdrum, 
Lord  Conservator  of  the  Scots'  privileges  at  Campvere,  1650. 
He  was  knighted  before  1640.  He  was  the  second  son  of 
Andrew,  second  son  of  George  Drummond,  first  of  Blair  in 
the  Stormont.     This  picture  marked,  'Nolens  Parui,  1634.' 

Anna  Murray,  Lady  Halket,  daughter  of  ■  Robert  Murray, 
Provost  of  Eton  and  Preceptor  to  King  Charles  the  First, 
and  Jean  Drummond,  daughter  of  George,  second  of  Blair 
in  the  Stormont. 

George  Drummond,  fifth  of  Blair  in  the  Stormont,  and  first  of 
Blair-Drummond  in  Menteith.  From  painting  by  Sir  John 

James  Drummond,  second  of  Blair-Drummond. 

Jean  Carre,  his  wife. 

George  Drummond,  third  of  Blair-Drummond. 

Lady  Jane  Grey,  his  first  wife.  From  painting  believed  to  be  by 
J.  Davison. 

Frances  Moray  of  Abercairny,  his  second  wife,  afterwards  Lady 
Erskine  of  Tony. 

Agatha  Drummond,  heiress  of  Blair-Drummond. 

Henry  Home,  Lord  Kames.  From  a  painting  by  P.  W.  P.  Martin. 

George  Home-Drummond,  sixth  of  Blair-Drummond.  From 
painting  by  H.  P.  Danloux,  1798. 

Janet  Jardine,  his  wife,  daughter  of  the  Rev.  John  Jardine,  D.D., 
Dean  of  the  Chapel  Royal.  She  died  at  Leamington,  War- 
wickshire, 30th  January  1840.  From  painting  by  H.  P. 
Danloux,  1798. 


Illustrations  in  Volume  First — Portraits — continued. 

Henry  Home-Drummond,  seventh  of  Blair-Drummond,  in  the 
robes  of  a  B.C.L.  of  Oxford.  From  painting  by  Sir  Henry 
Raeburn,  1816. 

Christian  Moray  of  Abercairny,  his  wife,  born  24th  November 
1779,  died  1864.  From  a  painting  by  Sir  Henry  Raeburn, 

George  Stirling  Home-Drummond,  eighth  of  Blair-Drummond. 

Mary  Hay,  his  first  wife.  From  a  miniature  by  Signor  Pietracola 
of  Naples  in  1843. 

Kalitza-Janet-Erskine-Christian  Hay,  his  second  wife.  From 
painting,  in  1872,  by  the  Hon.  Henry  R.  Graves,  third  son 
of  Thomas  North,  second  Baron  Graves. 

Charles  Stirling  Home-Drummond-Moray,  ninth  of  Blair- 
Drummond.     From  painting  by  J.  M.  Barclay,  R.S.A.,  1857. 

Lady  Anne  Georgina  Douglas,  his  wife,  and  William  Augustus 
Home-Drummond-Moray,  their  second  son.  From  painting 
by  R.  Buckner,  1857. 

Henry  Edward  Stirling  Home-Drummond-Moray,  younger 
of  Blair-Drummond. 

Lady  Georgina  Emily  Lucy  Seymour,  his  wife. 

Anne  Home-Drummond,  Dowager-Duchess  of  Athole.  From  an 
engraving  of  the  original  portrait  by  Sir  Francis  Grant. 

William  Graham,  seventh  Earl  of  Menteith.  From  an 
engraving  of  the  original  portrait  by  Jameson,  at 
Taymouth  Castle,      ..... 

Henry  Erskine,  Fiar  of  Cardross,  last  Prior  of 
Inchmahome.  From  an  engraving  of  the  original 
portrait  by  Jameson,  in  the  Earl  of  Buchan's 
Collection,     ......  548  and  549 

between  330  and  331 


Illustrations  in  Volume  First — continued. 

Doorway  of  Priory  of  Inchmahome — Title-page. 
Blair-Drummond,      ...... 

Effigy  of  Sir  John  Drummond,  in  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome, 
Letter  by  Bishop  William  Fraser  about  the  death  of  the 

Maid  of  Norway,  ..... 

Monument  to  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  his 

Countess  Mary,  in  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome, 
Official  Seal  of  Robert,  first  Duke  of  Albany, 
Doune  Castle  in  Menteith,  .... 
Castle  of  Ilantullo,  in  the  Lake  of  Menteith, 
Priory  of  Inchmahome,  in  Lake  of  Menteith — -South  Side, 
Priory  of  Inchmahome — North  Side, 

between  xxiv  and  xxv 
xl  and  xli 

7  2  and  7  3 

74  and  75 
238  and  239 
472  and  473 
498  and  499 
506  and  507 
508  and  509 

III.— ARMORIAL  SEALS,  etc      Woodcuts  of- 

Sir  Edmund  Hastings,  Lord  of  Inchmahome, 

Alexander  Comyn,  Lord  of  Buchan, 

Sir  John  Comyn,  son  of  the  Earl  of  Buchan  [circa  1280], 

Sir  John  Comyn,  circa  1285, 

Walter  Stewart,  fifth  Earl  of  Menteith,  1292, 

Alexander,  sixth  Earl  of  Menteith,  . 

Robert,  Duke  of  Albany, 

William  Graham,  seventh  Earl  of  Menteith, 

Signature  of  same  Earl, 

Sir  John  Menteith,  .... 

xliv,  xlvi 

S  U  M  M  A  R  Y 




I.  The  ancient  Earldom  of  Menteith. 

The  District  of  Menteith  :  extent  of  the  ancient  and  later  Earldoms,  . 
Sketch  of  the  history  of  the  successive  Earls  of  Menteith, 

The  Muniments  of  the  later  Earldom  of  Menteith,         .... 
Biographical  Sketch  of  the  late  Mr.  George  Home-Drummond  of  Blair-Drummond, 
Biographical  Sketch  of  his  father,  the  late  Mr.  Henry  Home-Drummond, 
Original  Charters  of  the  Earldom  and  of  the  Priory  of  Tnchmahome,     . 
Correspondence  by  Sir  Thomas  Hope,  naming  his  successor  as  Lord  Advocate, 
John  Grahame  of  Claverhouse :  his  letters  and  scholarship, 










II.  Early  connection  of  the  Drummonds  with  Menteith,  and  the  Armorial 
Bearings  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith  and  the  Drummonds. 

Charters  by  the  Earls  of  Menteith  to  the  Drummonds, 

The  Drummonds  and  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome  :  their  first  burial-place, 

The  seal  of  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  in  1301,  and  its  relation  to  the  Drummond  arms, 

Origin  of  the  three  bars  wavy  as  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith, 

The  assumption  of  the  same  arms  by  the  Drummonds, 

III.  The  origin  of  the  Drummonds  and  their  Royal  Alliances. 

Lord  Strathallan's  history  of  the  Drummonds,  .... 

Alleged  descent  of  the  family  from  the  Hungarian  Prince  Maurice, 

Other  histories  of  the  family,  by  Mr.  Malcolm  and  Mr.  Henry  Drummond, 

More  reliable  explanation  of  the  origin  of  the  family  of  Drummond,     . 

Origin  of  the  name :  examination  of  the  evidence  of  ancient  charters, . 

Connection  between  the  family  of  Drummond  and  the  lands  of  that  name  in  the  Lennox, 

King  James  the  Fourth  and  Margaret  Drummond  :  tragic  death  of  her  and  two  sisters, 

Erection  of  the  barony  of  Drummond  by  King  James  the  Fifth  in  1542, 

VOL.  I.  2 









'  lxi 


Alienation  of  barony  from  the  Drummonds  to  Menteith  and  Montrose, 
Services  of  John,  first  Lord  Drummond  :  erection  of  Drummond  Castle,  1491, 
Royal  alliances  and  distinguished  members  of  the  House  of  Drummond, 
Royal  visitors  to  Menteith  :  King  Robert  Bruce  ;  Queen  Mary  ;  Queen  Victoria, 
Rob  Roy  Macgregor  :  his  feud  with  and  declaration  against  the  Duke  of  Montrose, 
Ancient  symbol  of  holding  of  the  barony  of  Leny,  a  small  silver  sword, 
Sir  John  Menteith  :  Doune  Castle  :  Lordship  of  Cardross  and  the  Erskines,  . 
Inchmahome,  Dryburgh,  and  Cambuskenneth  :   "  Leabhar  dearg  "  of  Menteith, 
The  Exchequer  Rolls  :  Robert  Stewart  created  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith, 
Further  evidence  as  to  the  Peerages  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  and  female  descent, 
Sir  John  Menteith,  Lady  Elene  of  Mar,  and  Joanna,  Countess  of  Strathern,    . 
Sir  John  Moray  of  Bothwell,  first  husband  of  Margaret,  Countess  of  Menteith, 
Princess  Jean  Stewart  and  her  two  husbands,  Sir  John  Keith  and  Sir  John  Lyon, 
Historical  documents  printed  in  preface  to  recent  volume  of  the  Exchequer  Rolls, 


















Menteith  an  earldom  in  the  twelfth  century,       .... 
References  to  probable  Earls  of  Menteith  before  King  David  the  First, 

I. — GILCHRIST,  first  Earl  of  Menteith. 

Is  a  witness  to  various  charters  of  King  Malcolm  the  Fourth  and  William  the  Lion, 
Had  jurisdiction  over  Kintyre  and  Cowal  in  Argyll,      .... 

II.— MURETHACH  or  MURDACH,  second  Earl  of  Menteith. 

Witness  to  a  convention  in  1201  between  the  Prior  of  St.  Andrews  and  the  Culdees,    . 

III. — MAURICE  Senior  and  MAURICE  Junior,  Earls  of  Menteith. 

Dispute  as  to  succession  to  the  earldom  :  amicable  arrangement  between  them,  .  7 

Maurice  junior  receives  the  earldom,  1213  :   lands  given  to  Maurice  senior,        .  .  8 

Is  one  of  the  seven  Earls  of  Scotland  at  the  enthronement  of  King  Alexander  II.,  1214,  9 

His  death,  circa  1230  :  his  two  daughters,  Isabella  and  Mary,  .  .  .  .10 


IV.— ISABELLA,  Countess  of  Menteith,  and  WALTER  COMYN,  Earl 
of  Menteith,  her  first  Husband.     1231-1258. 

The  family  of  the  Comyns  :  their  rise  and  influence  in  Scotland, 
Birth  and  first  notices  of  Walter  Comyn  :   his  frequent  attendance  at  Court, 
Was  Lord  Clerk  Register,  1225  :  acquisition  of  the  lordship  of  Badenoeh,  1228, 
His  marriage  to  Lady  Isabella  Menteith,  and  becoming  Earl  of  Menteith,  1231, 
Head  of  the  "Patriotic"  party  in  Scotland  :  proceedings  against  the  Bissets,  1241, 
Castles  of  Hermitage  and  Dalswinton  built  by  Walter  Comyn,  . 
His  conduct  at  the  coronation  of  King  Alexander  the  Third  in  1249,     . 
Attendance  at  the  King's  marriage  at  York  in  1251  :  becomes  head  of  the  Regency, 
AlanDurward  secures  the  person  of  the  young  King :  triumph  of  the  English  party,  1255, 
Excommunication  of  the  English  Regents  :  the  Patriotic  party  regain  power,  1257, 
Treaty  with  Llewellyn,  Prince  of  Wales  :  Cessation  of  civil  discords  in  Scotland, 
The  Earl's  death,  November  1258,  ...... 

Foundation  by  this  Earl  of  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome,  123S  :  his  children, 




ISABELLA,  Countess  of  Menteith,  and  SIR  JOHN  RUSSELL,  Knight, 
her  second  Husband.     1258-circa  1273. 

Dissatisfaction  of  Scottish  nobles  with  her  second  marriage  :  her  imprisonment,  .         36 

Her  efforts  to  regain  the  earldom  :  Papal  bull  narrating  proceedings,  1264,       .  .         38 

Death  of  the  Countess,  circa  1273  :  Sir  John  R,ussell :  inquiry  as  to  his  family,  .         44 

Kirkintilloch,  her  first  Husband.     1273-1291. 

Lady  Isabella,  the  daughter  of  Walter  Comyn,  marries  her  cousin,        .  .  .46 

Claims  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  1273:  the  earldom  divided,  1285,        .  .  .47 

Death  of  her  first  husband,  1291  :  Lady  Isabella  not  the  daughter  of  Sir  John  Russell,         49 

Inchmahome,  her  second  Husband.     1292-1314. 

Lady  Isabella  bestowed  in  marriage  on  Sir  Edmund  Hastings,  circa  1293,  .  .         52 

Descent  of  the  Hastings  family,  and  their  possessions  in  Scotland,         .  .  .54 

Sir  Edmund's  armorial  seal  in  1301  that  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,     .  .  .57 

Sir  Edmund  Hastings  keeper  of  Berwick-on-Tweed, 

Barbarous  imprisonment  of  Isabella,  Countess  of  Buchan,  in  Berwick  Castle, 



VI.— MARY,  Countess  of  Menteith,  and  WALTER  STEWART,  fifth 
Earl  of  Menteith,  her  Husband.     1258-1295. 

Parentage  of  Countess  Mary  and  of  Walter  Stewart :  they  obtain  the  earldom,  1258, 
He  sides  with  the  English  party :  Edinburgh  Castle  taken  by  stratagem,  1255, 
Grants  to  Paisley  Abbey,  the  previous  burial-place  of  the  Stewarts, 
The  battle  of  Largs  and  subjugation  of  the  Western  Isles,  1263, 
Sheriff  of  County  of  Ayr  :  preparations  for  Norwegian  invasion, 
Sheriff  of  Dumbarton,  1271:  inquest  on  female  succession, 

Negotiates  for  the  marriage  of  the  Princess  Margaret  to  Eric,  King  of  Norway,  1281, 
Death  of  King  Alexander  the  Third,  1284  :  accession  of  the  "  Maid  of  Norway," 
The  Earl  of  Menteith  a  party  to  the  treaty  with  England  for  her  marriage,  1289, 
Death  of  the  Maid  of  Norway,  1 290,  and  competition  for  the  Crown,    . 
Deaths  of  the  Countess  Mary  (before  1286)  and  of  Walter  Stewart,  circa  1295, 
Their  monument  in  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome  :  their  children, 


VII.— ALEXANDER,  sixth  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  LADY  MATILDA 
his  Wife.     Circa  1 29 5 -circa  1304. 

The  sons  of  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  adopt  name  of  Menteith, 
Alexander  joins  Bruce's  party  :  swears  fealty  to  King  Edward  the  First,  1291, 
Present  at  the  siege  of  Berwick  and  battle  of  Dunbar :  is  taken  prisoner, 
Short  imprisonment  in  the  Tower  of  London  :  not  put  to  death  but  liberated, 
Swears  fealty  to  Edward  at  Berwick-on-Tweed,  1296  :  terms  of  oath,  . 
Appointed  guardian  of  the  estates  of  Alexander  of  Argyll  and  his  son  John,  1296, 
Summoned  to  assist  Brian  Fitz-Alan,  Governor  of  Scotland,  against  Wallace,  1297, 
His  death,  circa  1304  :  burial-place  in  Abbey  of  Cambuskenneth  :  his  children, 


VIII. — ALAN,  seventh  Earl  of  Menteith.     Circa  1304-1306. 

Birth  :  becomes  surety  for  his  father  :  goes  to  Flanders,  1296,  .  .  .  .90 

Succeeds  to  the  earldom,  circa  1304  :  joins  Bruce  :  taken  prisoner  at  Methven,  1306,  .         91 
Captivity  and  death  in  England,  circa  1306  :  his  daughter  Mary,  .  .  .94 


IX. — MURDACH,  eighth  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  ALTCE  his 
Countess.     1318-1332. 

Obtains  the  earldom  of  Menteith  by  arrangement  during  his  niece's  minority, 
The  earldom  in  ward  :  Sir  John  Menteith  appointed  guardian,  . 
Grants  to  Earl  Murdach  from  King  Robert  the  Bruce :  the  Soulis  conspiracy, 
Death  of  Bruce  and  regency  of  Randolph,  Earl  of  Moray  :  Edward  BalioL 
Death  of  Earl  Murdach  at  battle  of  Dupplin,  1332  :  his  Countess  Alice, 



X. — LADY  MARY  MENTEITH,  Countess  of  Menteith,  and  her  Husband, 
SIR  JOHN  GRAHAM,  ninth  Earl  of  Menteith.     1332-1360. 

Her  birth,  before  1306  :  claims  the  earldom,  circa  1332, 

Marries  Sir  John  Graham,  1334  :  Papal  dispensation  granted  to  them,  . 

The  Earl  of  Menteith  present  at  the  battle  of  Durham,  1346  :  his  gallant  conduct, 

Is  taken  prisoner,  sentenced,  and  put  to  death  by  King  Edward  the  Third,  1346, 

Feuds  between  the  Menteiths  and  Drummonds  :  final  arrangement  of  these,  1360, 

The  Countess  grants  lands  in  Argyll  to  the  Campbells  :  her  death,  circa  1362,  . 


XI.— LADY  MARGARET  GRAHAM,  Countess  of  Menteith,  and  her 
four  Husbands.     1334-circa  1380. 

Her  birth,  circa  1334  :  her  four  marriages  and  five  Papal  dispensations, 
Her  first  husband,  Sir  John  Moray  of  Both  well,  Panitarius  of  Scotland,  1348, 
Her  second  husband,  Thomas,  Earl  of  Mar,  1352  :  divorced  from  him, . 
Her  third  husband,  John  Drummond  of  Concraig,  circa  1359, 
Her  fourth  husband,  Sir  Robert  Stewart,  afterwards  Earl  of  Menteith,  1361, 
Becomes  Countess  of  Fife  and  Menteith:  her  death,  circa  1380, 


XII.— SIR  ROBERT  STEWART,  tenth  Earl  of  Menteith,  afterwards  Earl 
of  Fife,  Duke  of  Albany,  Governor  of  Scotland,  etc.     1339-1420. 

His  parentage,  birth,  and  marriage  to  the  Countess  of  Menteith,  1339-1361,     .  131-133 

Becomes  Lord  of  Menteith :  charged  to  keep  order  in  the  earldom  and  his  other  lands,  1361,  134 
Lawsuit  between  Douglas  and  Menteith  about  terce  due  to  the  Countess  of  Menteith,  .  135 
Created  Earl  of  Menteith  and  also  Earl  of  Fife,  1371  :  agreement  with  Isabella  of  Fife,  136 
Curious  matrimonial  contract  between  Philippa  of  Moubray  and  Bertold  of  Loen,  .       138 

Marriage  arranged  between  the  families  of  Menteith  and  Moubray,  1372,  .  .       140 

Is  made  Keeper  of  Stirling  Castle  :  provided  for  in  succession  to  the  Crown,  1373, 

Obtains  supplies  from  England  :  grants  of  land  :  accompanies  the  King  in  circuits, 

Is  made  Lord  Chamberlain  of  Scotland,  13S2  :  Sir  John  Lyon  :  death  of  first  wife, 

Marries  Lady  Muriella  Keith  :  the  privilege  of  Clan  Macduff :  dispute  as  to  lands  of  Log; 

Visit  of  French  army  to  Scotland,  and  joint  invasion  of  England,  1385, 

Battle  of  Otterburn  and  death  of  Douglas,  1388  :  proceedings  as  to  Tantallon  Castle, 

The  Eai-1  appointed  Governor  of  Scotland,  1388  :  provision  for  salary  of  the  office, 

Again  invades  England,  1389  :  truce  with  England  and  France, 

Financial  transactions  with  King  Robert  the  Third  :  Parliament  at  Scone,  1391, 

Sir  Thomas  Erskine's  complaint :  alliance  between  Lennox  and  Menteith,  1392, 

Pensions  received  by  the  Earl  :  expenses  in  the  Highlands  and  other  parts,  1397, 

Creation  of  Dukes  of  Rothesay  and  Albany,  28th  April  1398,    . 

Duke  of  Rothesay  appointed  lieutenant  of  the  kingdom,  1399  :  charges  against  Albany. 

Beneficial  legislation,  1401  :  letter  by  Rothesay  to  Henry  the  Fourth, 

Rothesay's  excesses  :  his  imprisonment  and  death,  1402  :  his  character, 

Albany  and  Douglas  charged  with  his  murder  :  their  innocence  and  public  acquittal, 

Albany  again  chosen  Governor,  1402  :  preparations  for  war  with  England, 

Battle  of  Homildon  Hill,  1402  :  siege  of  Cocklaws  and  relief  by  Albany,  1403, 

See  of  St.  Andrews  :  the  Duke's  onerous  duties  :  difficulties  with  the  Treasury, 

Sir  Murdach  Stewart's  captivity  :  correspondence  thereanent,    . 

Capture  of  Prince  James  and  death  of  King  Robert  the  Third,  1406, 

The  Earl  of  Northumberland  and  Lord  Bardolph  in  Scotland  :  their  deaths  in  England 

Death  of  David  Fleming  :  wrongful  accusation  of  Albany, 

Albany  is  chosen  Regent  :  Embassies  to  England  for  release  of  King  James,  1407-1414, 

Henry  the  Fifth's  refusals  to  liberate  King  James  or  Sir  Murdach  Stewart, 

Albany  becomes  Earl  of  Buchan  :   English  jealousy  of  his  title  of  Governor, 

Negotiations  with  England,  and  correspondence  between  Henry  and  Albany,  1407, 

Jedburgh  Castle  demolished  :  taxation  therefor  opposed  by  Albany,  1409, 

Alliances  of  Albany  and  Douglas,  1409-10  :  the  latter  freed  from  captivity  in  England. 

Capture  of  Fast  Castle  by  Patrick  Dunbar  :  renewed  overtures  for  peace, 

St.  Andrews  University  founded  :  the  Lord  of  the  Isles  claims  the  earldom  of  Ross, 

Albany  at  Doune  Castle  :  marriage  of  John,  Earl  of  Buchan,  son  of  Albany, 

Sir  Murdach  Stewart  exchanged  for  Henry  Percy  :  proposals  to  ransom  King  James. 

Albany's  popularity  as  Regent :  a  benefactor  of  the  Church  and  protector  of  its  privileges 

His  arbitration  as  to  Irvine  Moor  :  the  "foul  raid  :"  the  Council  of  Constance, 

King  Richard  the  Second  of  England  :  the  Scottish  army  in  France, 

Death  of  Albany,  3d  September  1420 :  opinions  of  historians  as  to  his  character, 

His  second  Duchess  :  his  children,  ...... 


,  147 


XIII.— SIR  MURDACH  STEWART,  second  Duke  of  Albany,  Earl  of 
Fife,  and  eleventh  Earl  of  Menteith,  1362-1425.  LADY  ISA- 
BELLA, Countess  of  Lennox,  his  Duchess,  1392-1460. 

His  birth,  circa  1362  :  is  Justiciar  north  of  the  Forth,  1389  :  his  marriage,  1392, 
Terms  of  marriage-contract :  Prince  Robert  Stewart,  second  son  of  the  King,    . 
Sir  Murdach  is  taken  prisoner  at  Homildon,  1402  :  negotiations  for  his  release, 
Instructions  and  arrangements  for  his  liberation,  1415  :  ransom  of  £10,000, 
Escape  and  recapture  :  exchanged  for  Sir  Henry  Percy, 

Acts  as  his  father's  lieutenant :  succeeds  to  his  titles  :  is  elected  Governor,  1420, 
His  other  offices  and  pensions  :   agreement  with  Alexander  Stewart,  Earl  of  Mar, 
Archibald,  Earl  of  Douglas,  endeavours  to  obtain  King  James's  release,  1421,  . 
Charters  granted  by  Duke  Murdach  :  his  regard  to  the  King's  interests, 
Arrangements  for  the  King's  liberation,  1424  :  arrest  of  Sir  Walter  Stewart,     . 
Coronation  of  King  James  the  First :  heavy  taxation  :  inquiry  as  to  crown  lands, 
Harsh  measures  towards  the  nobility  :  arrest  of  Duke  Murdach,  with  other  noblemen, 
Execution  of  the  Duke  and  his  sons,  1425  :  probable  reasons  for  their  fate, 
Popular  feeling  :  Isabella,  Duchess  of  Albany  :   children  of  Duke  Murdach, 
Subsequent  history  of  the  dignity  of  Duke  of  Albany,    .... 




Discovery  of  letters  of  King  James  the  First,  circa  1416,  relative  to  his  release,  .  283 

Correspondence  with  Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  and  other  noblemen,       .  .  .  2S4 

Letter  to  the  burgh  of  Perth  :  the  King's  impression  as  to  his  release,  .  .  .  287 


I. — MALISE  GRAHAM,  first  Earl  of  Menteith. 


MARION,  his  Countess. 

The  family  of  Graham  :  distinguished  descent  of  Malise,  Earl  of  Strathern, 
Seizure  of  earldoms  by  King  James  First  :  Earl  Malise  deprived  of  Strathern,  . 
Created  Earl  of  Menteith,  1427  :  becomes  a  hostage  in  England  :  released,  1453, 
Port  of  Menteith  made  a  burgh  of  barony,  1466  :  the  battle  of  Sauchie,  1488,  . 
Death  of  Earl  Malise,  circa  1490  :  his  Countess  Marion, 
The  children  of  Earl  Malise  :  the  Grahams  of  Boquhaple, 



II. — ALEXANDER  GRAHAM,  second  Earl  of  Menteith,  and 
MARGARET  BUCHANAN,  his  Countess.     1490-1537. 


Question  as  to  his  parentage  :  succeeds  Lis  grandfather  in  the  earldom,  circa  1490,        .  302 

Litigatiou  as  to  the  lands  of  Kilbride  :  their  recovery  by  Earl  Alexander,  .  .  304 

Agreement  with  Earl  of  Montrose  about  Kilpont :  charters  to  his  brother  Henry,         .  306 

His  death,  circa  1537  :  his  children  :  the  Grahams  of  Gartur,    ....  308 

III.— WILLIAM  GRAHAM,  third  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  MARGARET 
MOUBRAY,  his  Countess.     1537-1544. 

His  marriage,  1521  :  redemption  of  lands  and  additions  to  earldom,      .  .  .       309 

Present  in  Parliament :  killed  by  the  tutor  of  Appin  at  Tobanareal,  1543,        .  .       310 

His  children  :  the  Grahams  of  Gartmore  :  alliance  with  Argyll  family,  .  .311 

IV. — JOHN  GRAHAM,  fourth  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  MARION 
SETON,  his  Countess.     1544-1564. 

Retoured  heir  to  his  father  in  1546  :  accompanies  Queen  Mary  to  France,  1550,  .       317 

Joins  the  Lords  of  the  Congregation,  1559  :  proposal  for  marriage  of  Queen  Elizabeth,         319 
His  death,  circa  1564  :  his  children  :  the  Grahams  of  Rednoch,  .  .  .       320 

V.— WILLIAM  GRAHAM,  fifth  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  MARGARET 
DOUGLAS  (of  Drumlanrig),  his  Countess.     1564-1579. 

Commissioner  to  receive  demission  of  Queen  Mary  and  inaugurate  King  James  Sixth,  .  323 

Terms  of  his  marriage-contract,  1571  :  is  infeft  in  earldom  while  still  under  age,  .  324 

Receives  various  commissions  against  the  Highlanders,  1574  :  a  privy  Councillor,  .  326 

Feud  between  Menteith  and  Lecky :  his  death,  1579  :  his  children,       .  .  .  326 

VI.— JOHN  GRAHAM,  sixth  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  MARY 
CAMPBELL  (of  Glenorchy),  his  Countess.     1579-1598. 

His  long  minority  :  his  marriage,  1587  :  lawsuit  with  Dowager  Countess,  1587-1591,    .       328 
His  death,  1598:  his  children,   ........       330 

VII. — WILLIAM    GRAHAM,     seventh     Earl    of    Menteith,     Earl  of 

Strathern,  and  first  Earl  of  Airth.     LADY  AGNES  GRAY,  his 
Countess.     1598-1661. 


His  birth  :  long  minority :  dispensation  for  his  infeftment,         .  .  .  .331 

His  marriage,  1612  :  examination  of  his  Charter-chest :   acquisition  of  lands,      .  .  332 

Commissions  of  justiciary,  1621  :  King  James  Sixth  and  the  "earth  dogges,"  .  .  334 

His  interest  in  Church  matters  :   made  a  Privy  Councillor,  1626,             .              .  .  336 

Appointed  President  of  Privy  Council,  and  Justice-General  of  Scotland,  1628,  .  .  338 

A  member  of  Privy  Council  of  England  :  in  high  confidence  at  Court,  1630,      .  .  340 

Relations  with  Sir  Thomas  Hope  :  Claims  the  earldom  of  Strathern,  1029,         .  .  341 

Renounces  the  annexed  Strathern  lands  in  favour  of  King  Charles  the  First,     .  .  343 

Receives  ratification  of  title  of  Earl  of  Strathern  with  grants  of  money,  1631,   .  .  345 

Acquisition  of  Drummond  and  Airth :  jealousies  against  the  Earl,          .              .  .  348 

Statements  made  against  him  to  the  King,  1632  :  Charles  demands  proofs,         .  .  350 

Opinions  of  the  Advocates  sent  to  his  Majesty  :   Sir  John  Scot  at  Court,             .  .  352 

The  Earl  charged  with  boasting  "he  had  the  reddest  blood  in  Scotland,"            .  .  355 

Couduct  of  Sir  Thomas  Hope,  King's  Advocate  :  his  advice  to  the  Earl,              .  .  356 

Counsel  advise  reduction  and  cancellation  of  the  Strathern  titles  :  their  reasons,  .  358 

The  Earl  is  created  Earl  of  Airth  :  the  patent  for  the  new  title,  .  .  .361 

Decree  given  by  Lords  of  Session  for  Reduction  of  Strathern  Pietour,    .             .  .  363 

Unjust  character  of  the  whole  proceedings:   letter  by  John,  Earl  of  Traquair,   .  .  365 

The  Earl's  enemies  not  satisfied  :  he  is  charged  with  treason,  1633,       .              .  .  366 

Defends  himself  to  his  Majesty  :  Commission  appointed  for  his  trial,     .              .  .  368 

Depositions  of  Sir  James  Skene  and  other  informers,  reported  to  King,                .  .  372 

The  Earl  denies  the  accusations  against  him  :  submits  to  the  King,  1633,          .  .  374 

He  demits  his  offices,  and  is  confined  within  the  bounds  of  his  own  earldom,     .  .  377 

Beset  by  creditors,  becomes  insolvent :   "not  a  penny"  from  the  Exchequer,    .  .  379 

Takes  active  part  against  the  Macgregors  :  captures  brother  of  Gilderoy,  1636,  .  382 

Is  again  received  into  the  royal  favour  :  opposes  the  Covenant,                .              .  .  383 

Assassination  of  his  son  Lord  Kilpont :  the  King's  debt  to  the  Earl,      .              .  .  385 

Passing  of  his  estate  to  creditors  :   dispersion  of  lands  of  Kilbride,  Airth,  etc.,  .  .  387 

Losses  during  civil  war  :  burning  of  Aberfoyle  by  General  Monck,  1654,           .  .  3S8 

His  death,  1661  :  his  Countess  and  her  management :  his  children,        .              .  .  390 

JOHN  GRAHAM,  Lord  Kilpont,  eldest  son  of  William,  seventh  Earl 
of  Menteith.     LADY  MARY  KEITH,  Lady  Kilpont.     1613-1644. 

His  birth,  circa  1613  :  his  marriage,  1632  :  assists  his  father  as  Justiciar  of  Menteith,  .        395 
In  command  of  the  troops  in  Glenalmond  to  repel  Montrose  and  the  Irish,  .  .        396 

VOL.  I.  3 



Joins  the  Marquis  of  Montrose,  1644,  and  is  killed  in  his  camp  at  Kirk  of  Collace,        .  397 

Conflicting  accounts  of  his  assassination  :  Wishart :  the  Ardvoirlich  tradition,               .  398 

His  murderer,  James  Stewart  of  Ardvoirlich,  pardoned  by  Committee  of  Estates,  1645,  401 

Feud  between  the  Grahams  and  the  Stewarts,  on  account  of  death  of  Lord  Kilpont,     .  403 

Early  history  of  the  assassin  :  petition  against  him  by  Lord  Kilpont's  son,  1660,           .  404 

Effect  of  Lord  Kilpont's  death  on  his  wife  :  their  children,         ....  406 

VIII.— WILLIAM  GRAHAM,  eighth  and  last  Earl  or  Menteith,  and 
second  and  last  Earl  of  Airth.  ANNE  HEWES  and  KATHERINE 
BRUCE  of  Blairhall,  his  first  and  second  Countesses.    1661-1694. 

His  birth,  circa  1634  :  obligation  by  his  grandfather,  .....  407 
Assumes  title  of  Lord  Kilpont:  succeeds  as  Earl  of  Airth  and  Menteith,  1661,  .       408 

State  of  his  affairs  :  claims  money  from  King  Charles  Second,  but  without  success,  .  409 
Petitions  for  compensations  of  losses  during  the  Commonwealth,  .  .  .411 

Marriage  to  his  first  Countess  :  is  divorced  from  her,  .  .  .  .413 

His  second  Countess  :  curious  domestic  contract :  she  leaves  Talla  and  the  frogs,  .       414 

Contrivance  to  get  her  to  return  :  his  appearances  in  public,      .  .  .  .416 

Summoned  to  attend  on  militia  :  energy  against  conventicles,  ....  418 
Is  thanked  by  the  King  and  Privy  Council  for  his  services,  ....  420 
Recommends  Claverhonse  as  a  suitor  for  the  hand  of  his  cousin  Helen  Graham,  .       422 

Entail  of  the  earldom,  1680 :  protests  against  separation  of  Menteith  dignities  and  estates,  423 
Proposals  to  his  uncle  Sir  James  Graham  for  clearing  off  debts,  and  new  entail,  16S3, .  425 
Death  of  his  second  Countess  :  his  own  death,  1694  :  last  disposition  of  his  affairs,  .  428 
Dispersion  of  Menteith  Muniments :  later  history  of  title  of  Airth,        .  .  .       430 

SIR  JOHN  MENTEITH  and  his  relations  with  Sir  William  Wallace. 

Circa  1260-circa  1325. 

Parentage  of  Sir  John  Menteith  :  traditions  regarding  his  betrayal  of  Wallace, 

Statements  of  historians  regarding  his  relations  to  Sir  William  Wallace, 

First  authentic  historical  notices  of  Sir  John  Menteith  :  at  battle  of  Dunbar,  1296, 

Liberation  from  imprisonment  in  England,  1297  :  goes  to  Flanders, 

His  return  :  takes  part  with  the  patriots  in  Scotland  :  Lord  of  Knapdale,  1301, 

A  negotiator  for  peace  :  defeat  of  Sir  John  Corny n's  party,  1303, 

Submission  by  Sir  John  Comyn  to  King  Edward  First :  position  of  Wallace,     . 

Sir  John  Menteith  appointed  Governor  of  Dumbarton  :   Edward's  temper  "fulle  grim,' 

Capitulation  of  Stirling  Castle  :  submission  of  Scottish  nobles, 

Stipulations  as  to  Sir  William  Wallace  :  efforts  for  his  capture 

Sir  John  Menteith's  share  in  the  matter  :  his  reward  of  £100,   . 




Is  one  of  the  representatives  of  Scotland  in  the  Union  Parliament,  1305, 
Receives  from  King  Edward  the  earldom  of  Lennox  :  death  of  King  Edward  First, 
Coronation  of  King  Robert  Bruce  :  Sir  John  Menteith  adheres  to  him, 
Signs  letter  to  the  Pope,  1320  :  Treats  for  peace  with  England,  1323, 
His  decease  :  his  descendants  :  the  Menteiths  of  Kerse,  Rusky,  etc., 
His  daughter  Joanna,  Countess  of  Strathern,  and  her  four  husbands, 

Pedigree  of  the  Menteith  Earls  of  Menteith,  .    . 

Pedigree  of  the  Menteiths  of  Rusky,  Kerse,  etc.,  . 
Pedigree  of  the  Graham  Earls  of  Menteith, 

Pedigree  of  the  Drhmmonds  of  Blair-Drummond,  . 



This  Castle  the  principal  messuage  of  the  ancient  earldom  of  Menteith, 

Sir  Walter  Scott's  regard  for  its  "banner'd  towers :"  general  description  of  the  Castle 

Traditions  as  to  its  origin :  Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  the  true  builder, 

Favourite  residence  of  the  Dukes  of  Albany  :  a  royal  residence, 

The  dowry  of  successive  Scottish  Queens  :  occasional  residence  of  Queen  Margaret, 

The  keepers  of  the  Castle  :  Sir  William  Edmonstone  of  Duntreath  and  his  sons, 

Sir  James  Stewart  of  Beath  supersedes  William  Edmonstone  of  Duntreath, 

Feud  with  the  latter  :  Sir  James  Stewart  killed  by  Edmonstones,  1544, 

Sir  James  succeeded  by  his  son  :  the  latter  created  Lord  Donne  :  sketch  of  his  life, 

The  Castle  a  State  prison  :  names  of  various  distinguished  captives, 

Doune  occupied  by  the  Jacobites,  1745  :  building  of  the  Bridge  of  Teith, 

John  Home,  author  of  "  Douglas,"  warded  in  Doune  :  his  escape  by  blanket  ropes,  1745, 

Views  of  the  Castle,      ......... 


Various  designations  of  this  Castle  :  no  records  of  its  founder,  . 

The  chief  residence  of  the  Graham  Earls,  and  principal  messuage  of  their  earldom, 

Description  of  the  buildings  and  furnishings  of  the  Castle :  the  Earl's  wardrobe, 

Other  islands  and  buildings  in  the  Lake  of  Menteith  :  the  antlered  chestnut,     . 

Queen  Mary's  garden  :  her  visit  to  Menteith  :   sheltered  in  Inchmahome,  1547, 

Scenery  of  Lake  of  Menteith  :   "gay  Coldon's  feathered  steep  :"  Bandarroch,  etc., 

Duke  Murdaeh's  Island  and  Tower  in  Loch-Ard  :  Isle  of  St.  Malloch,    . 

Other  residences  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith  :  Kilbride  Castle,  Rusky  Tower,  etc., 











The  Priory  founded  by  Walter  Comyn  in  1238  :  present  state  of  the  ruins,        .             .  507 

Burial-place  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith  :  monuments  in  the  choir  :  Queen  Mary's  bedroom,  508 


The  island  served  by  a  parson,  1210  :  Adam  and  Maurice,  priors,  1296  and  1305,          .  511 

First  visit  of  King  Bobert  the  Bruce  :  submission  of  Malise,  Earl  of  Strathern,              .  513 

Second  aud  third  visits  to  Inchmahome  :  charter  to  monks  of  Arbroath,             .             .  515 

Ghristin,  third  known  prior,  1330-135S  :  grants  to  him  by  King  David  the  Second,      .  517 

Prior  David,  circa  1490  :  the  lands  and  kirk  of  Leny  :  Prior  Andrew,  1526-1530,         .  520 


Eobekt  Erskine,  1531-1547. 

Assists  in  education  of  George  Buchanan  :  a  Menteith  and  Argyll  marriage,      .             .  522 

Bobert  Erskine  a  favourite  of  Queen  Mary's  :  his  death  at  the  battle  of  Pinkie,             .  524 

John  Erskine,  Commendator,  1548-1555. 

The  "  King  of  Kippen"  and  the  King  of  Scotland  :  the  "King  of  the  moors,"               .  525 

John  Erskine  created  Earl  of  Mar  :  chosen  Regent  and  guardian  of  King  James  Sixth,  527 

David  Erskine,  Commendator,  1555-1608. 

His  parentage  :   Commendator  of  Dryburgh  and  Archdean  of  Brechin,   .              .              .  528 

Appoints  John,  Lord  Erskine,  bailie  of  the  Priory  :  grants  several  charters,      .             .  529 

Sits  in  Parliament,  1560  :  commissioner  to  the  Borders  :  a  Privy  Councillor,     .             .  532 

Question  as  to  the  "  thirds"  of  Priory  lands,      ......  534 

Attendance  onKing  James  the  Sixth:  Disputes  in  the  Erskine  family:  their  reconciliation,  536 

Prior  David  a  Councillor  under  Begent  Morton,  157S  :  joins  the  Baid  of  Buthven,  1579,  541 

He  is  forfeited  and  the  Priory  given  to  Henry  Stewart  of  Doune,            .              .              .  542 
Home  of  Argaty  executed  for  corresponding  with  Prior  David  while  in  exile,    .             .543 

Forfeiture  of  Dryburgh  Abbey  :  act  of  indemnity  :  David  Erskine  restored,      .              .  544 

His  demission  and  death  :  provision  for  his  widow,  Margaret  Haldane,                .              .  546 

Henry  Erskine,  Commendator,  1608-1628. 

Provided  to  the  Priory  :  his  parents,  John,  Earl  of  Mar,  and  Lady  Mary  Stewart,         .  547 

Became  fiar  of  Cardross  :  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome  included  in  the  lordship  of  Cardross,  548 

Terms  of  the  Act  of  Parliament  erecting  the  lordship,  1606,       ....  550 

The  Abbacies  of  Dryburgh  and  Cambuskenneth  also  part  of  the  lordship  of  Cardross,    .  551 

Death  of  Henry  Erskine  :  peerage  of  Cardross  now  held  by  the  Earl  of  Buchan,             .  552 

%ty  men  Book  of  2®tnttity. 



THE  "  varied  realms  of  fair  Menteith "  are  situated  chiefly  in  the 
south-west  of  the  county  of  Perth,  and  partly  in  the  county  of 
Stirling.  The  parishes  of  Port  of  Menteith,  Aberfoyle,  Callander  and  Leny, 
Kincardine,  Kilmadock,  Lecropt,  Dunblane,  Logie,  and  parts  of  Kippen, 
are  included  in  the  district  known  as  Menteith.  Sir  Walter  Scott,  who 
frequently  visited  it,  has  immortalised  Loch  Katrine,  the  Trossaehs,  and 
the  lakes  and  mountains  of  Menteith  in  "  The  Lady  of  the  Lake,"  while 
Aberfoyle,  Loch  Ard,  and  other  portions  forming  the  country  of  the 
Macgregor,  are  celebrated  in  the  fascinating  pages  of  "  Eob  Eoy."  The 
great  novelist's  magic  hand,  in  "  A  Legend  of  Montrose,"  has  described 
other  parts  of  the  district,  and  related  the  tragic  fate  of  the  young  heir 
of  the  earldom,  John  Graham,  Lord  Kilpont,  killed  by  a  comrade  in  the 
camp  of  his  kinsman  Montrose. 

This  attractive  country,  in  the  twelfth  century,  gave  name  to  an  earldom 
which  probably  was  erected  as  early  as  any  of  the  other  ancient  earldoms 
into  which  Scotland  was  then  divided.  The  first  Earls  of  Menteith  appear  to 
have  taken  their  surname,  as  well  as  their  title  of  Earl,  from  the  district, 

vol.  i.  a 


the  vale  of  the  river  Teith.1  Gilchrist  is  the  first  known  Earl  of  Menteith. 
As  the  owner  of  this  extensive  and  valuable  earldom,  he  must  have  been  a 
nobleman  of  great  power  and  influence  ;  and,  indeed,  those  ancient  Earls  of 
Scotland,  wielding  almost  sovereign  power  over  extensive  territories,  have 
been  called  monarchs  in  miniature.  The  charter  of  creation  of  his  earldom 
is  not  known  to  exist,  and  in  the  absence  of  any  other  authentic  evidence, 
it  can  only  be  conjectured  that  the  ancient  earldom  included  the  larger 
portion  of  the  district  now  known  as  Menteith.  The  later  earldom,  which 
was  created  by  King  James  the  First  in  the  fifteenth  century  in  favour 
of  Malise  Graham,  formerly  Earl  of  Strathern,  did  not  include  all  the  lands 
of  the  original  earldom  which  had  been  forfeited  by  Murdach  Duke  of 
Albany  as  Earl  of  Menteith ;  on  the  contrary,  the  charter  of  creation  of 
the  new  territorial  earldom  of  Menteith  reserved  to  the  king  the  other 
portions  of  it  in  these  terms — "  Ceteras  autem  terras,  que  de  dicto  comitatu 
ante  banc  nostram  concessionem  ab  antiquo  fuerant  et  que  in  presenti 
carta  nostra  non  continentur,  per  expressum  nobis  et  successoribus  nostris 
[imperpe]tuum  tenore  presencium  reseruamus."2  Among  the  places  thus 
reserved  was  the  Castle  of  Doune,  which  was  the  principal  messuage  of 
the  ancient  earldom  at  the  time  of  the  forfeiture. 

The  direct  male  line  of  the  original  Earls  of  Menteith  failed  at  an  early 
date.  Only  three  of  them  are  known  who  inherited  the  earldom,  Gilchrist, 
Murdach,  and  Maurice.     The  two  daughters  of  Maurice  the  third  Earl,  his 

1  The    Highlanders    called   the   Teith   in  being  protected  by  high  mountains  and  woods 

Gaelic  Taiclie,  and  in  the  patent  of  Strathern  along  its  banks. 

by    King    Charles    the    First    to    William,  2  Original  Charter  at  Buchanan,  printed  in 

seventh  Earl  of  Menteith,   dated  31st  July  Minutes  of  Evidence  in  Airth  Peerage,  p.  7  ; 

1631,  the  grantee  is  described  as   "Comes  also  in  History  of  the  Earldoms  of  Strathern, 

Taiehife  lie  Menteith."     The  Teith  is  known  Menteith,  and  Airth,  by  Sir  Harris  Nicolas, 

in   the  district  as  the  "  warm   river,"  from  Appendix,  p.  xvi. 


only  children,  were  his  co-heiresses,  and  by  their  marriages  the  territorial 
earldom  was  carried  successively  into  the  great  families  of  Comyn  and 
Stewart,  while  the  respective  husbands  of  these  ladies  obtained  the  personal 
dignity  of  Earls  of  Menteith,  either  in  right  of  their  wives  or  by  special 

The  Earls  of  Menteith,  like  their  neighbours  the  Earls  of  Lennox  and 
Strathern,  were  an  unfortunate  race.  Almost  from  the  first  their  earldom  was 
the  cause  of  unnatural  strife  and  keen  legal  contentions.  Brother  disputed 
with  brother,  and  sister  with  sister,  in  successive  generations,  regarding  their 
rights  to  it.  Although  the  "  Isle  of  Rest "  was  situated  in  the  domains  of 
the  ancient  Earls  of  Menteith,  it  did  not  prove  symbolical  of  quiet  enjoy- 
ment of  their  possessions.  The  direct  male  line  of  the  Menteiths,  Earls  of 
Menteith,  ended,  as  we  have  said,  in  the  third  known  generation.  In  the 
next  generation  the  two  daughters,  and  also  a  grand-daughter  of  Earl 
Maurice,  had  long-continued  contentions  about  their  rights  to  the  earldom. 
One  of  these  daughters,  Lady  Isabella,  married  Walter  Comyn  of  Badenoch ; 
and  on  account  of  dark  suspicions  as  to  the  manner  of  his  death,  and  her 
second  marriage  to  Sir  John  Bussell,  an  English  knight,  who  was  called 
"ignoble,"  she  was  dispossessed  of  the  earldom.  Her  brother-in-law,  Walter 
Stewart,  the  husband  of  her  younger  sister,  Lady  Mary,  then  obtained  it, 
and  a  long  litigation  with  him  ensued,  which  ultimately  resulted  in  a  parti- 
tion of  the  territory.  The  only  child  of  Countess  Isabella  was  a  daughter, 
whose  rightful  claim  to  the  earldom  was  disputed.  Walter  Stewart  was  the 
first  Earl  of  Menteith  of  his  name.  He  was  the  father  of  Alexander,  Earl 
of  Menteith,  who  was  dispossessed  of  the  earldom  by  the  English ;  and  it 
was  for  a  time  divided  between  Sir  John  Hastings,  the  competitor  for  the 
Crown  of  Scotland,  and  his  brother,  Sir  Edmund  Hastings,  who  married  Lady 
Isabella  Comyn.     The  successful  termination  of  the  War  of  Independence 


at  the  battle  of  Bannockburn  restored  the  earldom  to  the  Stewarts,  and  it 
was  reunited  under  the  younger  son  of  Alexander,  Murdach,  the  eighth  Earl, 
who  enjoyed  the  title  after  the  death  of  his  brother  Alan,  the  seventh  Earl. 
The  male  line  of  the  Stewart  Earls  failed  in  the  fourth  generation,  when 
•Lady  Mary,  the  daughter  and  heiress  of  Alan,  carried  the  earldom  by 
marriage  to  Sir  John  Graham,  a  gallant  warrior,  who  did  not  long  enjoy 
it,  being  cruelly  put  to  death  by  the  English  after  the  battle  of  Durham. 
Their  daughter  and  heiress,  Lady  Margaret  Graham,  married  in  succession 
four  husbands,  Sir  John  Moray  Lord  of  Bothwell,  Thomas  thirteenth  Earl  of 
Mar,  Sir  John  Drummond  of  Concraig,  and  Sir  Bobert  Stewart.  Her  fourth 
husband,  Sir  Bobert  Stewart,  after  the  death  of  the  Countess  Mary,  was 
created  Earl  of  Menteith,  afterwards  Earl  of  Fife  and  Duke  of  Albany, 
and  became  Begent  of  Scotland.  Their  son,  Murdach  Earl  of  Menteith  and 
second  Duke  of  Albany,  succeeded  his  father  as  Begent  of  Scotland;  and 
the  sad  fate  of  himself  and  his  family  at  the  hands  of  King  James  the  First  is 
matter  of  history.    The  earldom  of  Menteith  was  then  forfeited  to  the  Crown. 

The  Graham  Earls  of  Menteith,  who  acquired  the  earldom  as  diminished 
by  King  James  the  First,  enjoyed  it  for  nine  generations — upwards  of  two 
centuries  and  a  half.  The  most  conspicuous  of  this  line  was  William 
Graham,  the  seventh  Earl,  who  was  a  distinguished  statesman  in  the  reign  of 
King  Charles  the  First.  He  attained  a  high  political  position  as  Earl  of 
Menteith,  being  made  Justice-General  of  Scotland  and  President  of  the 
Privy  Council.  He  also  laid  claim  to  and  obtained  the  earldom  of  Strathern, 
as  the  lineal  heir  of  Prince  David,  son  of  King  Bobert  the  Second.  But  this 
claim,  and  an  alleged  rash  boast  that  he  had  the  reddest  blood  in  Scotland, 
and  a  better  right  to  the  Crown  than  the  King  himself,  so  alarmed  Charles 
the  First  that  he  revoked  the  grant  of  Strathern,  even  sought  to  suppress  in 


part  his  title  of  Menteith  by  a  new  title  of  Earl  of  Airth,  and  deprived  him 
of  all  his  high  judicial  offices.  The  eldest  son  and  heir-apparent  of  that  Earl, 
John  Lord  Kilpont,  was  killed  by  James  Stewart  of  Ardvoirlich  while 
they  were  fellow-officers  in  the  army  of  Montrose  at  the  Kirk  of  Collace 
shortly  after  the  battle  of  Tippermuir.  The  only  son  of  Lord  Kilpont 
succeeded  his  grandfather  as  eighth  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  died  in  1694, 
without  issue.  Since  that  time  the  titles  of  Earl  of  Menteith  and  Airth 
have  lain  dormant,  with  the  exception  of  the  occasional  illegal  assumption  of 
the  title  of  Menteith  by  William  Graham,  who  was  known  as  the  "  Beggar 
Earl."  His  history  has  a  touch  of  the  romantic.  At  an  election  of  Peers 
on  12th  October  1744,  being  then  a  student  of  medicine,  he  answered  to 
the  title  of  Earl  of  Menteith,  in  respect  of  his  being  executor  confirmed  to 
"William  the  last  Earl  of  Menteith  and  Airth,  who  died  in  1694.1  He  also 
voted  at  several  subsequent  elections.2  William  Graham  was  the  direct  heir, 
through  his  mother,  of  Lady  Elizabeth  Graham,  sister  and  co-heiress  of  the 
last  Earl  William,  by  her  husband,  Sir  William  Graham  of  Gartmore,  and 
also  through  her  was  a  descendant  of  King  Eobert  the  Second,  by  his  marriage 
with  Euphemia  Eoss ;  but  his  great  lineage  did  not  save  this  unfortunate 
claimant  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  from  lunacy  and  poverty.  Elections 
of  Peers  he  shunned  as  much  as  he  had  formerly  resorted  to  them,  and  on 
the  eve  of  an  election  he  would  escape  from  Edinburgh  with  his  "bags 
and  wallets,"  lest  his  presence  as  a  Peer  might  have  the  effect  of  con- 
cussing the  election.  The  end  of  the  "  Beggar  Earl "  was  indeed  deplorable. 
He  died  through  penury  and  exhaustion  in  1783,  on  the  roadside,  near 
Bonhill,  in  the  Lennox,  when  plying  his  vocation  among  the  neighbouring 

1  Robertson's  Peerage  Proceedings,  p.  243.  2  Ibid.  pp.  255,  273,  275,  277,  290. 

3  Riddell's  Peerage  Law,  pp.  646-7. 



Another  claimant  of  the  earldom,  and  a  co-heir  of  Menteith  with  the 
unfortunate  "  Beggar  Earl,"  was  the  celebrated  Captain  Barclay  Allardice  of 
Ury  and  Allardice,  in  right  of  his  ancestress,  Lady  Mary  Graham  or  Allar- 
dice, who  was  a  co-heiress  of  Menteith.  After  the  death  of  Captain  Barclay 
Allardice,  his  only  surviving  child,  Margaret  Barclay  Allardice,  claimed 
the  earldom  of  Airth  as  heiress  of  the  last  Graham  Earl  of  Menteith.  Her 
claim  was  opposed  by  Mr.  Graham  of  Gartmore,  as  the  heir-male  of  the 
Graham  Earls  of  Menteith ;  but  as  no  final  decision  has  yet  been  pronounced, 
the  dignity  still  remains  dormant. 

Such  is  a  brief  history  of  the  successive  Earls  of  Menteith.  The  eighth 
and  last  Earl  having  no  children,  conveyed  the  territorial  earldom  to  his 
chief,  James  the  third  Marquis  of  Montrose.  It  was  intended  that  the 
Peerage  of  Menteith  should  also  be  conveyed  with  the  landed  earldom,  but 
the  Crown  refused  its  sanction.  He  left  his  personal  estate  to  his  nephew, 
Sir  John  Graham  of  Gartmore. 

The  Menteith  Muniments  were  kept  in  the  time  of  the  seventh  Earl  in 
his  island  residence  of  Talk,  in  the  Lake  of  Menteith.  In  an  inventory  of 
them  made  in  the  year  1618,  the  Earl  noted  that  there  was  the  number 
of  "  tua  hundreth  wrettis  of  the  earldome  of  Monteith  lying  lows  in  the 
Chartour-kist,  not  in  invitour."1  On  the  death  of  the  last  Earl,  his  muni- 
ments relating  to  the  territorial  earldom  were  inherited  by  the  Marquis  of 
Montrose,  and  Sir  John  Graham  obtained  the  papers  relating  to  the  personal 
estate.  The  portion  preserved  in  the  Montrose  Charter-room  at  Buchanan 
was  first  brought  under  my  notice  when  engaged  on  behalf  of  the  late  Duke 
of  Montrose  investigating  the  claim  made  in  the  year  1850  by  the  late  Earl  of 
Crawford  to  a  Dukedom  of  Montrose,  which  was  alleged  to  have  been  created 

1  Original  Inventory  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 


in  favour  of  his  ancestor  in  the  year  1488.  The  other  portion,  which  is  pre- 
served at  Gartmore,  subsequently  became  known  to  me  while  investigating 
the  claim  of  the  late  Mr.  Graham  of  Gartmore  to  the  earldom  of  Menteith. 

The  two  collections  of  Menteith  Muniments  preserved  at  Buchanan  and 
Gartmore  consist  of  charters  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  and  the  correspondence 
of  the  seventh  Earl  with  King  Charles  the  First,  Sir  William  Alexander, 
afterwards  Earl  of  Stirling,  as  secretary  of  state,  and  the  famous  lawyer,  Sir 
Thomas  Hope,  lord  advocate;  also  the  letters  of  John  Graham  of  Claverhouse, 
afterwards  Viscount  of  Dundee,  in  reference  to  his  proposed  marriage  with 
Helen  or  Eleanor  Graham,  the  cousin  and  supposed  heiress  of  the  last  Earl  of 
Menteith,  and  the  inheritance  by  Claverhouse  of  his  earldom.  Both  the  Duke 
of  Montrose  and  Mr.  Graham  of  Gartmore  readily  gave  consent  that  the 
Menteith  Muniments  in  their  respective  repositories  should  be  formed  into  a 
book  similar  to  that  on  "  The  Lennox,"  which  was  mainly  compiled  from  the 
Lennox  and  Darnley  Muniments  at  Buchanan.  The  late  Mr.  George  Stirling 
Home-Drummond  of  Blair-Drummond  undertook  the  expense  of  printing  the 
Menteith  book,  and  confided  to  me  the  task  of  editing  the  work.  The 
undertaking  upon  the  part  of  that  gentleman  was  very  appropriate.  From 
early  times  and  in  various  ways  the  Drummond  and  Menteith  families  have 
been  closely  allied,  as  will  be  seen  in  the  course  of  this  work.  The 
final  resting-place  of  a  distinguished  Drummond  in  the  fourteenth  century 
was  in  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome,  in  the  Lake  of  Menteith,  where  the  tomb- 
stone of  Sir  John  Drumrnond  is  still  preserved  alongside  the  monumental 
stone  of  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  his  Countess.  The  Drummond 
ancestors  of  Mr.  Home-Drummond  have  long  been  proprietors  of  a  large  and 
beautiful  estate  in  Menteith,  and  his  great-grandfather,  Lord  Karnes,  as 
husband  of  the  heiress  of  Blair-Drummond,  made  a  marvellous  improvement 
in  a   large   tract  of  land   by   the   reclamation   of   Blair-Drummond   Moss. 


Emulating  the  other  improvements  on  the  estate  made  by  his  ancestors,  the 
late  Mr.  George  Horne-Drumrnond  reared  a  noble  mansion  on  a  commanding 
situation  to  the  north  of  the  former  house  of  Blair-Drummond.  The  new 
castle  is  one  of  the  largest  in  Menteith,  and  will  always  be  a  monument  to 
the  good  taste  of  the  late  owner.  From  its  elevated  position  it  is  even  a 
more  prominent  object  than  the  neighbouring  castle  of  Doune,  which  was 
erected  by  Eobert  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith  and  Duke  of  Albany. 

Mr.  Home-Drummond  unhappily  did  not  live  to  see  the  book  on  Menteith 
completed,  having  died  during  its  progress,  in  which  he  took  much  interest. 
On  his  death  the  following  appropriate  notice  of  him  was  written  by  an 
old  and  valued  friend,  the  late  Sir  William  Stirling-Maxwell  of  Keir,  who 
himself  was  a  distinguished  man  of  Menteith : — 

"  Mr.  Home-Drummond  of  Blair-Drummond,  who  died  at  the  Alexandra 
Hotel,  Hyde  Park  Corner,  on  Saturday,  3d  June,  will  be  deeply  regretted  by 
a  large  circle  of  friends  and  neighbours.  Eldest  son  of  the  late  Henry  Home- 
Drummond  of  Blair-Drummond,  who  represented  Stirlingshire  in  Parliament 
from  1820  to  1830,  and  Perthshire  from  1841  to  1852,  was  for  many  years 
Vice-Lieutenant  of  Perthshire,  and  a  leading  member  of  the  Conservative 
party  in  Scotland.  He  was  born  on  the  1st  of  March  1813.  He  received  his 
education  at  the  New  Academy  at  Edinburgh,  and  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford, 
where  he  graduated  in  or  about  1834.  An  excellent  scholar,  he  inherited 
much  of  the  ability  and  the  literary  taste  of  his  father  and  his  great-grand- 
father, Henry  Home  of  Karnes,  well  known  as  an  eminent  judge  and  author, 
and  as  the  far-sighted  agriculturist  whose  plans,  steadily  pursued  for  fifty 
years,  turned  the  wilderness  of  Blair-Drummond  Moss  into  a  fair  expanse  of 
smiling  farms.  After  leaving  college,  Mr.  George  Home-Drummond  spent  a 
considerable  number  of  years  in  European  travel,  and  made  himself  master 
of  the  languages  and  literature  of  France  and  Italy.    During  the  lifetime  of 

-ff  .■'■< 

i  ,  %>.*     %  '''ikm% 

8fa»     <4i  it.. 



his  father,  his  home  was  for  some  years  at  Ardoch,  in  Perthshire,  an  estate 
to  which  he  succeeded  at  the  death  of  his  maternal  uncle,  William  Moray 
Stirling  of  Ardoch  and  Abercairny,  and  on  which  he  made  considerable 
improvements.  In  1867  he  succeeded  to  his  large  patrimonial  estate  of 
Blair-Drummond,  and  soon  afterwards  commenced  the  noble  mansion  there, 
which  was  only  finished  in  1874,  and  which  is  one  of  the  most  important  and 
successful  of  the  recently-erected  country  houses  in  Perthshire.  The  site 
chosen  was  a  finely-wooded  eminence  to  the  west  of  the  old  house, 
commanding  magnificent  views,  eastward,  of  the  vale  of  Stirling,  and, 
westward,  of  the  rich  scenery  which  is  bounded  by  the  Grampians. 

"  Mr.  Drummond  was  throughout  the  greater  part  of  his  life  a  diligent  and 
judicious  collector  of  books,  and  his  library,  both  as  regards  its  contents  and 
the  lofty  galleried  apartment  in  which  they  are  displayed,  is  amongst  the  most 
considerable  in  Scotland.  A  student  as  well  as  a  collector,  he  read  the  books 
which  he  bought,  and  his  mind  was  as  well  stored  as  his  shelves.  Few  men 
were  better  acquainted  with  almost  all  departments  of  general  literature,  and 
more  able  to  settle,  offhand,  any  point  of  controversy,  from  the  resources  of 
a  singularly  strong  and  accurate  memory.  Historical  and  antiquarian 
research,  especially  relating  to  his  own  country,  was  his  favourite  pursuit, 
and  he  had  accumulated  a  considerable  mass  of  notes  and  papers  relating  to 
the  earldom  of  Menteith.  These  papers  he  placed  some  years  ago  in  the 
hands  of  Mr.  William  Fraser,  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  they  will  ere  long 
form  part  of  an  historical  volume  on  that  interesting  district,  with  which  Mr. 
Drummond  was  connected  both  by  the  ties  of  property  and  by  his  maternal 
descent  from  Sir  John  Drummond,  who  lies  buried  in  the  aisle  of  the  Priory 
of  Inchmahome.  Endowed  with  a  fine  taste  for  art,  cultivated  by  travel  and 
research,  Mr.  Drummond  enriched  his  family  mansion  with  many  acquisitions, 
to  which  his  successors  at  Blair-Drummond  will  in  after-days  point  as  their 

vol.  I.  b 


most  cherished  heirlooms.  His  intimate  friends  will  acknowledge  that  he 
has  left  behind  him  few  more  instructive  and  agreeable  companions ;  and 
many  will  grieve  to  think  that  his  pleasant  face  and  exhilarating  and 
contagious  laugh  will  be  seen  and  heard  no  more  amongst  them.  Of  a  retiring- 
disposition,  he  shrank  from  what  are  called  public  appearances,  and  he 
therefore  took  no  prominent  part  in  public  affairs,  though  he  was  exact  in 
the  discharge  of  his  local  duties  as  an  extensive  proprietor  of  land.  During 
his  whole  life  he  was  a  steady  supporter  of  the  Conservative  party,  and  the 
esteem  in  which  he  was  held  by  his  tenantry  and  neighbours  enabled  him  to 
maintain  in  the  county  politics  of  Perth  and  Stirling  his  own  quiet  share  of 
that  influence  with  which  the  sagacity  and  services  of  his  father  had  invested 
the  Drurnmond  family.  He  was  twice  married — first,  in  1840,  to  Mary, 
eldest  daughter  of  the  late  Mr.  Hay  of  Dunse  Castle,  whose  death  at  a  very 
advanced  age  we  lately  recorded ;  and  secondly,  in  1863,  to  Kali tza,  eldest 
daughter  of  Mr.  Eobert  Hay  of  Linplum,  who  survives  him.  Leaving  no 
cbildren  by  either  marriage,  he  is  succeeded  by  his  brother,  Mr.  Charles  Home- 
Drummond  Moray  of  Abercairny,  who  thus  unites  the  estates  of  the  old 
Berwickshire  stock  of  the  Homes  of  Karnes  to  those  of  three  old  and  esteemed 
families  in  the  county  of  Perth — the  Drummonds  of  Blair-Druminond,  the 
Stirlings  of  Ardoch,  and  the  Morays  of  Abercairny."1 

As  the  successor  of  his  brother,  the  present  Mr.  Charles  Stirling-Home- 
Drummond  Moray  of  Blair-Drummond  and  Abercairny  generously  undertook 
to  complete  this  work  in  fulfilment  of  the  wishes  of  his  brother. 

The  father  of  these  gentlemen,  the  late  Mr.  Henry  Home-Drummond  of 
Blair-Drummond,  did  great  public  service  in   various  ways  to  the  county 

1  Edinburgh  Courant,  8th  June  1876.  The 
funeral  of  Mr.  George  Home-Drummond  took 
place   on   the   following   day.     His    remains 

were  interred  in  the  family  burial-place  at 
the  Church  of  Kincardine  in  Menteith. 


of  Perth,  which  he  represented  in  Parliament  for  many  years.  Through  his 
marriage  with  Miss  Christian  Moray,  elder  daughter  of  Colonel  Charles 
Moray  of  Ahercairny,  and  Anne  Stirling,  eldest  daughter  and  heiress  of 
Sir  William  Stirling,  fourth  baronet  of  Ardoch,  his  sons  have  inherited  the 
estates  of  Ahercairny  and  Ardoch  ;  and  Mr.  Drummond  Moray,  the  present 
proprietor  of  these  estates,  is  a  large  landowner  in  Strathern  as  well  as 
in  Menteith.  On  the  death  of  Mr.  Henry  Home-Drummond  on  12th 
September  1867,  the  following  tribute  to  his  memory  appeared  in  a  contem- 
porary journal : — 

"  The  late  Mr.  Home-Drummond  of  Blair-Drumruond,  whose  death  was 
intimated  in  our  columns  a  few  days  ago,  deserves  that  a  fuller  tribute  should 
be  paid  to  his  memory  than  we  were  able  at  the  moment  to  offer.  Although 
he  had  for  years  before  his  death  retired  from  public  life,  and  to  many  of  our 
younger  readers  he  may  have  been  known  merely  as  the  respected  proprietor 
of  large  patrimonial  estates  in  the  counties  of  Perth,  Stirling,  and  Berwick, 
yet  he  had  other  and  higher  claims  on  the  respect  of  his  countrymen. 

"  Mr.  Home-Drummond  was  born  in  1783.  His  father  was  the  son  of  the 
celebrated  Lord  Karnes,  a  man  of  singularly  varied  powers,  and  who,  while 
greatly  distinguished  in  the  fields  of  criticism  and  philosophy,  was  also 
eminent  at  once  as  a  lawyer  and  a  judge.  His  mother  was  a  daughter  of  the 
Eev.  Dr.  Jardine,  one  of  the  ministers  of  Edinburgh,  who  belonged  to  the 
ancient  family  of  Applegirth,  in  Annandale.  Of  this  lady  Lord  Karnes  said, 
with  characteristic  terseness,  '  that  she  never  spoke  when  she  ought  to  have 
preserved  silence,  and  never  was  silent  when  she  ought  to  have  spoken.' 
Her  son  inherited  largely  the  excellent  discretion  of  his  mother.  He  received 
his  early  education  at  the  High  School  of  Edinburgh,  where  he  greatly  dis- 
tinguished himself  as  a  classical  scholar,  and  afterwards  studied  at  Oxford, 
where  he  took  his  degree  of  LL.B.     He  was  a  close  student,  and  carefully 


cultivated  his  excellent  natural  powers.  He  married  Miss  C.  Moray  of 
Abercairny,  who  predeceased  him  by  a  few  years. 

"  If  the  biography  of  Mr.  Home-Drummond  were  written,  it  might  fitly  be 
arranged  under  the  several  heads  of  his  character  as  a  lawyer,  a  Member  of 
Parliament  and  legislator ;  a  vice-lieutenant  and  magistrate  of  the  county ; 
and  as  a  country  gentleman,  and  an  ardent  cultivator  and  improver  of  his 
paternal  estates.  He  was  admitted  a  member  of  the  Faculty  of  Advocates  in 
1S08.  In  1812  the  Lord  Advocate  of  the  day  appointed  him  one  of  his 
deputes,  and  under  the  two  succeeding  Lord  Advocates  (Maconochie,  after- 
wards Lord  Meadowbank,  and  Sir  William  Eae)  he  was  continued  in  office, 
and  was  entrusted  with  the  conduct  of  a  large  part  of  the  criminal  business  of 
Scotland,  at  a  time  when  the  management  of  this  department  required  great 
courage  and  consummate  skill.  In  this  sphere  he  eminently  distinguished 
himself  in  the  remarkable  State  trials  for  sedition  that  occurred  in  1817  and 
the  three  subsequent  years.  The  Scotch  bar  never  was  stronger  than  at  that 
time.  There  were  giants  in  those  days,  but  Mr.  Home-Drummond  proved 
himself  able  to  cope  with  them,  and  never  left  the  lists  without  vindicating 
his  position.  His  mind  was  of  a  peculiarly  judicial  cast,  and  there  can  be 
little  doubt,  had  he  prosecuted  his  profession,  that  from  his  intellectual 
powers  and  his  persevering  habits  of  application,  he  would  have  gained  the 
highest  honours;  but  in  1821  he  resigned  his  official  appointment,  and 
relinquished  his  general  practice  at  the  bar. 

"  Mr.  Home-Drummond  entered  Parliament  in  1821  as  member  for  Stirling- 
shire, defeating  Sir  C.  Edmonstone  by  a  small  majority.  In  the  general 
election  of  1826  he  was  unanimously  re-elected  for  Stirlingshire.  In  1840 
he  contested  the  county  of  Perth  against  Mr.  G.  D.  Stewart,  defeating  his 
opponent  by  the  large  majority  of  458.  The  victory  was  so  complete  that 
his  opponents  fled  the  field,  and  he  was  without  opposition  re-elected  in  1842, 


and  again  in  1847.  In  1852  lie  gave  way  in  a  graceful  speech  at  Perth  in 
favour  of  his  friend  and  neighbour,  Mr.  Stirling  of  Keir.  Mr.  Home- 
Drummond's  politics  were  Conservative,  but  Ms  conservatism  was  of  a 
comprehensive  and  generous  type.  He  was  never  an  extreme  party  man, 
and  he  never  wielded  his  political  creed  as  an  instrument  of  personal 
aggrandisement.  Had  he  done  so,  the  peerage  might  have  been  within  his 
reach.  The  following  philosophical  exposition  of  his  political  views,  delivered 
on  the  occasion  of  his  second  election  for  Stirlingshire  in  1826,  is  remarkable. 
It  might  almost  seem  as  if  by  a  prophetic  insight  he  had  anticipated  the  present 
epoch.  '  We  live  in  times  of  a  very  peculiar  description,  when  many  things 
are  in  a  state  of  alteration  and  transition ;  and  though  there  never  was  a 
time  in  which  caution  and  prudence  were  more  necessary  in  steering  the 
vessel  of  the  State,  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  sound  policy  seemed  (to  him)  to 
require  that  we  should  not  strive  to  live  in  times  that  had  gone  by,  but 
rather  seek  to  accommodate  ourselves,  painful  as  the  effort  may  occasionally 
be,  to  the  changes  which  are  constantly  passing  around  us,  and  which  we 
have  no  more  power  to  stop  than  we  have  to  arrest  the  heavenly  bodies  in 
their  course,  that  move  by  the  same  eternal  laws  of  nature  and  providence. 
He  could  most  sincerely  assure  them  that  he  spoke  from  no  love  of  change ; 
but  that,  on  the  contrary,  he  believed,  if  his  mind  and  his  motives  were 
analysed,  he  was  in  more  danger  of  being  convicted  of  dread  of  innovation. 
Witnessing  the  progress  of  the  human  mind  in  the  present  age,  rapid  beyond 
all  former  precedent  and  example,  and  desiring  to  transmit  unimpaired  to 
posterity  the  blessings  of  the  British  Constitution,  he  was  anxious  to  prepare, 
ere  it  became  too  late,  for  the  changes  that  time  and  circumstances  impe- 
riously require.  These  reflections  naturally  brought  vividly  to  his  recollection 
the  impressive  language  which  he  lately  heard,  and  that  still  sounded  in  his 
ears,  "  That  if  we  obstinately  persist  in  rejecting  all  improvement  because  it 


is  innovation,  the  time  will  most  assuredly  soon  come  when  we  shall  have 
innovation,  whether  we  will  or  not,  when  it  is  no  longer  improvement." ' 

"  Mr.  H.  Drummond  achieved  an  honourable  reputation  as  a  Member  of 
Parliament  and  as  a  legislator.  He  devoted  hiinself  assiduously  to  his 
Parliamentary  duties.  He  was  commonly  considered  to  be  a  Peelite,  and  at 
all  events  he  was  intimately  associated  with  the  late  Sir  Eobert  Peel  in  the 
management  of  Scottish  business  in  Parliament.  While  he  sat  in  Parliament, 
scarcely  any  statutes  relating  to  Scotland  were  passed  without  his  advice  and 
assistance ;  and  there  are  several  important  statutes  with  which  he  was  more 
especially  connected,  and  which  he  had  really  the  merit  of  carrying  through 
the  House  of  Commons.  We  may  mention,  among  others,  the  General 
Turnpike  and  Statute  Labour  Acts,  the  Salmon  Fishery  Act,  19  Geo.  IV., 
cap.  391,  and  the  Eecovery  of  Small  Debts  Act.  These  statutes  indicate  no 
ordinary  legislative  ability,  and  prove  the  truly  statesmanlike  character  of  their 
framer.  Mr.  H.  Drummond  was  especially  interested  in  the  last-named 
statute,  and  he  might  well  wish  his  name  to  be  associated  with  it,  for  it  was 
the  means  of  conferring  on  his  poorer  countrymen  many  great  benefits.  At 
the  various  county  meetings  over  which  he  presided,  and  the  deliberations 
of  which  he  largely  directed,  Mr.  H.  Drummond  showed  his  legal  attainments, 
his  varied  knowledge,  his  excellent  business  habits,  and  his  courtesy  and  tact, 
all  which  contributed  to  make  him  facile  2^'inceps  in  such  an  arena.  He  not 
only  ruled  with  a  wise  hand,  but  his  compeers  felt  that  the  place  of  authority 
was  rightly  due  to  him.  He  discharged  all  his  duties  as  a  country  gentleman 
in  an  admirable  manner,  and  as  an  improver  and  embellisher  of  his  own 
estates,  his  skill,  enterprise,  and  success  have  been  remarkable.  It  was  Lord 
Kames  who  originated  the  idea  of  floating  away  the  superincumbent  moss 
to  the  Forth  from  the  rich  alluvial  substratum  that  underlies  '  Blair- 
Drummond  Moss ;'  but  it  was  his  son  and  grandson  who  carried  out  and 


consummated  the  singular  enterprise,  and  who  thereby  converted  a  wide 
expanse  of  heath-covered  waste  into  a  fertile  plain. 

"  No  country  gentleman  ever  better  deserved  or  more  largely  enjoyed  the 
respect  of  his  tenantry.  .  He  was  strictly  just  and  honourable  in  his 
intercourse  with  them.  He  was  easy  of  access,  and  lived  among  them. 
Each-rents  he  knew  to  be  not  only  ruin  to  the  tenantry,  but  folly  on  the  part 
of  the  landlord.  But  he  was  too  ardent  and  skilful  an  improver  himself  to 
respect  the  indolent  and  ignorant  cultivator.  In  the  best  sense  of  the  word, 
he  M'as  a  liberal  landlord,  and  his  numerous  tenantry  and  dependents  lived 
peaceably  and  prosperously  under  his  wise  and  benignant  rule.  The  private 
circle  is  sacred,  but  within  it  Mr.  H.  Drummond's  mild  virtues  shed  an 
unspeakable  charm.  Mr.  H.  Drummond's  family  all  survived  him.  Mr.  G. 
Stirling  Home-Drummond  of  Ardoch  succeeds  to  the  paternal  estates,  and 
will  readily  receive,  as  from  his  honourable  and  amiable  character  he  is 
entitled  to  possess,  the  affectionate  respect  of  his  neighbours,  tenantry,  and 
dependents.  The  second  son,  Mr.  C.  Home-Urummond  Moray,  succeeded  to 
the  Abercairny  estates,  and  is  deservedly  a  most  popular  country  gentleman. 
The  only  daughter  of  the  late  Mr.  H.  Drummond  is  the  Dowager-Duchess  of 
Athole.  It  is  unnecessary  to  say,  for  it  is  universally  known,  how  admirably 
this  noble  lady  has  discharged,  and  continues  to  discharge,  all  the  duties  of 
her  elevated  station,  or  to  advert  to  the  remarkable  place  which  she  holds  in 
the  affections  of  her  Majesty  the  Queen.  He  belonged  to  the  last  generation. 
He  died  at  the  ripe  age  of  eighty-four.  At  this  moment  we  know  not  that 
we  could  find  many  men  who  have  stronger  or  more  varied  claims  on  the 
respect  of  their  countrymen  than  the  late  Henry  Home-Drummond  of 
Blair- Drummond." 1 

Of  the  marriage  of  the  late  Mr.  Henry  Home-Drummond  and  the  heiress 
1  Edinburgh  Courant,  16th  September  1S67. 


of  Abercairny  and  Ardoch  there  was  issue  two  sons  and  one  daughter.  In  the 
previous  generation  the  children  were  also  two  sons  and  one  daughter.  In 
the  present  generation  the  children  are  also  two  sons  and  one  daughter.  In 
all  these  cases  the  birth  of  the  daughter  occurred  between  the  births  of  the 
sons.  The  daughter  of  the  late  Mr.  Henry  Home-Drummond  is  Anne, 
Duchess  of  Athole,  who  by  her  marriage  with  the  late  Duke  of  Athole  closely 
connected  another  large  district  of  the  county  of  Perth  with  those  previously 
in  possession  of  the  family. 

The  charters  relating  to  the  Earls  and  earldom  of  Menteith,  printed  in 
the  second  volume  of  this  work,  will  be  found  very  interesting.  They 
commence  with  a  charter  by  King  William  the  Lion  in  the  twelfth  century. 
The  other  charters  have  special  reference  to  the  families  of  Menteith,  Corny n, 
Stewart,  Hastings,  and  Graham,  who  successively  held  that  earldom.  The 
charters  also  elucidate  many  points  which  have  hitherto  been  involved 
in  obscurity.  The  heiresses  of  Menteith,  with  their  intermarriages,  are  one 
by  one  distinguished  and  established  on  a  historical  footing.  The  distin- 
guished House  of  Drummond,  though  divested  of  the  royal  Hungarian  descent 
hitherto  claimed  for  it,  now  appears  in  its  true  light  without  in  the  least 
derogating  from  the  illustrious  position  it  has  so  long  held. 

An  agreement  in  1371  between  Eobert  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  after- 
wards Earl  of  Fife  and  Duke  of  Albany,  and  Isabel  Countess  of  Fife,  is 
now  printed  from  the  original.  Previous  imperfect  prints  had  puzzled  and 
misled  even  that  acute  historical  critic,  Lord  Hailes. 

Attention  may  also  be  directed  to  the  Papal  Bulls  and  other  documents 
relating  to  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome,  which,  with  one  exception,  have 
never  before  been  published.  These  documents  will  be  welcome  information 
about   a  religious  house  in  which  two    illustrious    Sovereigns  of   Scotland, 


King  Eobert  the  Bruce  and  Queen  Mary,  respectively  found  shelter  in  the 
troublous  times  of  their  chequered  reigns,  and  of  which  John  Erskine, 
afterwards  Lord  Erskine,  Earl  of  Mar  and  Eegent  of  Scotland,  was  for  some 
years  the  Erior  or  Commendator.  It  was  from  Eobert  Erskine,  his  immediate 
predecessor  in  office,  that  the  learned  George  Buchanan  and  his  brothers, 
when  young,  received  assistance  by  a  grant  of  the  lands  of  the  Priory. 

The  documents  now  printed  not  only  amply  support  the  conclusions  in 
the  text  as  to  the  ancient  Earls  and  earldom  of  Menteith,  and  the  numerous 
interesting  points  arising  from  that  subject,  but  also  form  a  valuable  contri- 
bution to  Scottish  history  at  a  period  which  hitherto  has  yielded  but  Kttle 
to  the  historian. 

Not  the  least  interesting  portion  of  the  collection  of  original  documents 
in  the  second  volume  of  this  work  will  be  found  in  the  correspondence 
addressed  to  William  Graham,  seventh  Earl  of  Menteith,  which  has  never 
before  been  printed.  The  correspondence  has  been  arranged  into  three 
divisions :  Eoyal  Letters,  State  and  Official  Letters,  and  Family  and  Domestic 
Letters.  The  chief  part  of  the  Eoyal  Letters  were  written  by  King  Charles 
the  First,  many  of  them  being  holograph,  and  all  tend  to  show  the  high  confi- 
dence which  that  monarch  placed  in  the  Earl  previous  to  his  unfortunate  claim 
to  the  ancient  earldom  of  Strathern.  The  latter  is  addressed  as  Chief-Justice 
of  Scotland,  President  of  the  Privy  Council,  and  as  filling  other  high  offices.  He 
receives  many  special  and  confidential  instructions,  such  as  against  certain 
persons  for  harbouring  Jesuits ;  as  to  the  precedency  of  the  newly  created  Nova 
Scotia  Baronets ;  as  to  the  dues  of  the  Crown ;  to  ascertain  the  qualifications 
of  certain  persons  seeking  titles  of  honour ;  and  other  matters  nearly  affecting 
the  King's  interest.  He  also  receives  advice  of  a  more  personal  nature,  as  in 
one  letter  the  King  desires  him  in  particular,  as  Fresident  of  the  Council,  to 
be  present  at,  and  to  countenance  the  administration  of  the  communion, 

vol.  I.  c 


which  had  been  interrupted  by  the  turbulence  of  certain  persons.  Much 
power  also  is  placed  in  the  Earl's  hands  as  to  dealing  with  individuals.  On 
one  occasion  he  is  authorised  to  accept  probable  presumptions  of  guilt  as 
sufficient  to  inflict  condign  punishment  on  the  rebels  of  the  Borders.  He 
receives  full  power  to  compel  Lord  Napier  of  Merchiston,  then  Treasurer- 
Depute,  to  resign  his  office,  and  failing  his  doing  so,  to  bring  him  to  trial. 
Instructions  are  given,  under  the  King's  own  hand,  not  to  bring  Lord 
Ochiltrie  to  his  trial,  as  he  was  not  likely  to  receive  such  a  sentence  as  his 
Majesty  desired ;  and  also  to  interfere  in  the  choice  of  a  Provost  for  the  city 
of  Edinburgh,  to  prevent  any  "  unconforme  "  man  filling  the  post  during  the 
King's  intended  visit  to  Scotland.  And  even  after  the  Earl  fell  under  the 
King's  displeasure,  when  the  resistance  to  the  royal  schemes  began  in 
Scotland  in  1638,  we  find  his  Majesty  writing  to  the  Earl  of  Airth,  as  one 
of  his  most  reliable  supporters.  The  Earl  continued  to  receive  special  thanks 
from  his  Majesty  for  the  opposition  shown  by  himself  and  his  son,  Lord 
Kinpont,  to  the  Covenanters. 

Among  the  State  and  Official  Letters,  the  principal  are  those  from  Sir 
Thomas  Hamilton,  afterwards  Earl  of  Haddington,  Sir  "William  Alexander 
of  Menstrie  the  poet,  first  Earl  of  Stirling,  and  Sir  Thomas  Hope,  Lord 
Advocate.  The  letters  of  the  Earl  of  Haddington  and  Sir  Thomas  Hope 
refer  chiefly  to  proceedings  in  the  Scotch  Privy  Council,  although  the  latter 
was  also  interested  in  the  Earl  of  Menteith's  private  affairs.  Sir  Thomas 
in  his  correspondence  with  the  Earl,  in  whom  the  patronage  of  Scotland 
was  then  vested,  was  very  urgent  for  the  appointment  of  one  of  his  sons  as 
a  Lord  of  Session.  The  repeated  appeals  which  the  learned  Lord  Advocate 
made  are  earnest  and  plaintive,  and  his  invectives  against  a  competitor 
are  very  severe.  He  also  expressed  his  mind  very  freely  on  public  men, 
remarking  in  one  letter  that  Lord  Traquair   wrote  a  passage   as   false   as 


the  devil  I1  The  letters  of  Sir  Thomas  Hope  form  the  largest  collection 
of  his  correspondence  hitherto  printed.  As  illustrative  of  his  character  up 
to  the  close  of  his  life,  we  are  permitted  to  print,  from  the  collections  of 
his  descendant,  the  Earl  of  Hopetoun,  the  following  recommendation  of  a 
successor  in  his  office  of  Lord  Advocate,  which  Sir  Thomas  Hope  wrote 
shortly  before  his  death  : — 

I,  Sir  Thomas  Hope  of  Craighall,  his  Majestie's  Aduocat,  taking  to  consideratiovm 
the  calamitous  estait  of  the  kingdome,  and  how  necessarie  it  is  that  (in  cace  of  my 
decease)  one  be  provydit  to  my  place  quho  is  not  only  indevit  with  giftis  and  abilities 
answerabill  to  the  place  of  his  Majestie's  Aduocat,  but  also  with  the  love  and  affectioun 
to  Godis  treuth,  power  and  puritie  thairoff,  and  to  the  liberties  of  the  kingdome,  and 
trusting  that  my  desyre  and  judgement  herein  salbe  acceptabill  to  his  sacred  Majestie 
and  to  the  Estates,  I  do  heirby  declair  that  my  oblischement  caryis  me  in  the  first  place 
to  my  cousing,  Mr.  Thomas  Nicollsoun,  in  respect  of  the  band  of  blood  betuix  him  and 
me,  and  of  the  memorie  of  his  worthie  father,  and  befoir  him  of  his  thryis  worthie 
vncle  my  maister,  vnder  quhom  I  lernit  not  only  my  calling  as  a  citizen,  but  my  calling 
as  a  Christian  ;  but  if  he,  ather  out  off  modestie  or  vtherwayes,  sail  declyne  the  place 
till  the  Lord  mak  him  more  rype,  I  think  Sir  Archibald  Jonstoun  of  Wariston  the 
fittest  persoun  for  my  place,  both  for  abilitie,  civill  and  spirituall,  without  exceptioun. 
And  this  I  attest  in  sinceritie  vnder  my  hand  at  Craighall,  23  February  1646. 

SK  Thomas  Hope.2 

The  correspondence  gives  interesting  glimpses  of  political  and  party 
movements  of  the  time,  which,  however,  need  not  specially  be  referred  to  here. 
Sir  William  Alexander's  letters  are  written  chiefly  in  his  capacity  of  Secretary 
of  State,  and  give  the  aspect  of  political  affairs  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
Court,  while  they  are  almost  wholly  silent  as  to  his  special  scheme  for  the 
colonisation  of  Nova  Scotia. 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  142. 

2  Sir  Archibald  Johnston  succeeded  Sir  Thomas  Hope  as  Lord  Advocate. 


The  family  and  domestic  letters  will  amply  repay  perusal,  especially  those 
of  the  celebrated  John  Grahame  of  Claverhouse,  afterwards  Viscount  of 
Dundee,  who  wrote  passionate  love  letters  about  the  heiress  of  Menteith, 
and  was  much  chagrined  when  his  suit  was  unsuccessful.  He  strongly  urged 
the  last  Earl  of  Menteith  to  prefer  him  to  his  rival,  the  Marquis  of  Montrose. 
Claverhouse  professed  great  friendship  for  the  Earl  of  Menteith:  "Provyd 
me,"  he  says/"  treues  and  a  good  bleu  bonet,  and  there  shall  be  no  treuse 
trustier  than  myne." '  In  another  letter,  Claverhouse  warmly  resents  calum- 
nies against  himself.  He  adds  that  "  Labe  has  made  me  in  love  with  the 
Yles  of  Menteith." 2  His  letters  are  ten  in  number,  several  of  them  of 
considerable  length. 

The  late  Mr.  Mark  Napier,  in  his  "  Memoirs  of  Dundee,"  printed  sixty- 
four  letters  by  Claverhouse,  which  he  says  is  the  whole  of  his  epistolary 
correspondence  that  he  could  discover  to  be  extant.3  Of  these  sixty-four 
letters,  forty  are  said  to  be  printed  for  the  first  time  from  the  Queensberry 
Papers,  among  the  archives  of  the  Duke  of  Buccleuch.4  In  the  first  volume 
of  his  "  Memoirs  of  Dundee,"  published  in  1859,  Mr.  Napier  explains  that  the 
late  Mr.  Charles  Kirkpatrick  Sharpe,  who  had  written  a  Memoir  of  Dundee, 
recommended  him  to  search  the  Queensberry  archives  for  materials  about 
Dundee.  The  Duke  of  Buccleuch  had  himself  arranged  the  Queensberry 
correspondence  into  a  series  of  volumes  bound  and  lettered,  which  greatly 
lightened  the  labour  of  Mr.  Napier's  consultation  of  them,  as  he  explains 
in  his  preface.  From  the  collection  so  communicated  to  him  he  says  lie 
extracted  the  forty  letters  of  Dundee,  which  he  printed  in  his  first  and  two 
subsequent  volumes. 

To  another  ducal  collection,  that  of  His  Grace  of  Montrose  at  Buchanan, 

1  Vol.  ii.  p.  187.  3  Memoirs  of  Dundee,  vol.  ii.  p.  9. 

*  Ibid.  p.  200.  lIbid.  p.  11. 


Mr.  Napier  had  also  access,  from  which  he  extracted  his  chief  materials 
for  his  Memoirs  of  Montrose.  The  correspondence  at  Buchanan  not  being  so 
well  arranged  as  the  Queensberry  correspondence,  and  requiring  careful 
search  for  their  discovery,  the  interesting  letters  of  Claverhouse  escaped 
the  notice  of  Mr.  Napier.  They  were  discovered  by  the  writer  hereof  after 
the  Memoirs  of  Dundee  were  published,  and  are  now  printed  in  this  collection 
for  the  first  time. 

A  question  has  been  agitated  in  reference  to  the  scholarship  of  Dundee  : 
Sir  Walter  Scott  said  that  he  spelt  like  a  chambermaid,  while  Lord  Macaulay 
averred  that  the  spelling  of  Dundee  was  like  that  of  a  washerwoman.  Mr. 
Napier  combats  these  statements,  but  in  printing  the  forty  letters  of  Dundee 
he  has  modernised  the  spelling  in  every  letter.  If  the  alterations  had  been 
on  a  limited  extent,  Mr.  Napier  might  have  been  justified  in  modernising  the 
orthography.  But  where  the  al'erations  occur  so  frequently,  Mr.  Napier's 
operations  on  the  correspondence  are  calculated  to  mislead  the  reader. 
Indeed,  so  entirely  were  reviewers  misled  by  Mr.  Napier's  print  of  the  letters, 
that  they  remarked  on  the  contradiction  which  was  given  to  Lord  Macaulay's 
opinion  of  Dundee  as  a  letter  writer. 

As  evidence  of  the  difference  between  the  letters  to  the  Duke  of  Queens- 
berry  as  penned  by  Claverhouse,  and  the  same  as  edited  by  Mr.  Napier,  the 
following,  taken  at  random,  are  subjoined : — 

Original  Letter. 
Kilkoubri,  Apryl  the  1.  1682. 
My  Lord, — I  am  very  happy  in  this  busi- 
niss  of  this  contry  and  I  hop  the  deuk  will 
have  no  raison  to  blame  your  Lordship  for 
advysing  him  to  send  the  forces  hither  for 
this  contry  now  is  in  parfait  peace,  all  who 
wer  in  the  rebellion  are  ether  seased,  gon 
out  of  the  contry,  or  treating  their  peace,  and 

Mr.  Napier's  version. 
Kirkcudbright,  April  the  1st,  1682. 
My  Lord, — I  am  very  happy  in  this  busi- 
ness of  this  country  and  I  hope  the  Duke 
will  have  no  reason  to  blame  your  Lordship 
for  advising  him  to  send  the  forces  hither. 
For  this  country  now  is  in  perfect  peace  ;  all 
who  were  in  the  rebellion  are  either  seized, 
gone   out   of  the   country  or  treating  their 


they  have  alraidy  so  conformed  as  to  going 
to  the  church  that  it  is  beyond  my  expection. 
In  Dumfries  not  only  almost  all  the  men  ar  com 
but  the  woemen  have  givin  obedience,  and 
Earngray  Welshes  owen  parish  have  for  the 
most  pairt  conformed  and  so  it  is  over  all  the 
contry  so  that  if  I  be  suffered  to  stay  any 
tyme  here  I  doe  expect  to  see  this  the  best 
setled  pairt  of  the  kingdom  on  this  seyd  tay 
and  if  those  dragoons  wer  fix't  which  I  wrot 
your  Lordship  about  I  might  promise  for  the 
continuance  of  it.  .  .  ." 1 

peace  ;  and  they  have  already  so  conformed 
as  to  going  to  the  Church  that  it  is  beyond 
my  expectation.  In  Dumfries  not  only  almost 
all  the  men  are  come  but  the  women  have 
given  obedience  ;  and  Irongray,  Welsh's  own 
parish,  have  for  the  most  part  conformed  ; 
and  so  it  is  over  all  the  country.  So  that  if 
I  be  suffered  to  stay  any  time  here,  I  do 
expect  to  see  this  the  best  settled  part  of  the 
Kingdom  on  this  side  the  Tay.  And  if  those 
dragoons  were  fixed  which  I  wrote  your 
Lordship  about  I  might  promise  for  the  con- 
tinuance of  it.  .  .  ." 1 

"London,  Apryll  the  10.  1683. 
"  My  Lord, — I  delayed  giving  any  answer 
to  yours  of  the  29  of  March  wating  for  ane 
oportunity  to  speak  with  the  deuk  or  raither 
to  see  if  he  would  say  any  thing  to  me  con- 
cerning your  Lordship  but  having  yesterday 
recaived  yours  of  the  thrid  of  Apryl  I  thoght 
not  fit  to  delay  it  any  longer  I  went  imediatly 
to  the  deuk  who  gave  me  occasion  to  speak 
to  him  at  full  lenth  first  I  shoued  him  that 
peaper  about  the  feu  dutys  which  he  raid  all 
over.  ...  I  raid  som  pairts  of  your  leters  I 
thoght  propre  for  severall  subjects  to  the 
Deuk.  He  aproved  of  what  was  don  desyrs 
your  Lordship  to  goe  on  and  looks  on  it  as 
good  service.  .  .  ."2 

London,  April  the  10th,  1683. 
Mr  Lord, — I  delayed  giving  any  answer  to 
yours  of  the  29th  of  March,  waiting  for  an 
opportunity  to  speak  with  the  Duke,  or 
rather  to  see  if  he  would  say  any  thing  to  me 
concerning  your  Lordship.  But  having  yester- 
day received  yours  of  the  3d  of  April,  I  thought 
not  fit  to  delay  it  any  longer.  I  went  imme- 
diately to  the  Duke  who  gave  me  occasion 
to  speak  to  him  at  full  length.  First  I 
showed  him  that  paper  about  the  feu  duties 
which  he  read  all  over.  ...  I  read  some 
parts  of  your  letters,  I  thought  proper  for 
several  subjects,  to  the  Duke.  He  approved 
of  what  was  done,  desires  your  Lordship  to 
so  on  and  looks  on  it  as  good  service.  .  .  ."  -' 

Stranraer  Mairch  the  13. 
My  Lord, — I  am   sorry  that   their  comes 
such  alarums  from  the  West.     I  can  hardly 

1  Original  Letter  at  Drumlanrig. 
°  Ibid. 

Stranraer,  March  the  13.  1682. 
My  Lord: — I  am  sorry  that  there  comes 
such  alarms  from  the  West.     I  can  hardly 

1  Memoirs  of  Dundee,  vol.  ii.  p.  272. 

2  Ibid.  p.  332. 


believe  that  things  ar  com  that  lenth  yet.  I 
am  seur  there  is  not  the  least  apearance  here 
as  yet  and  if  anything  give  them  couradge  it 
will  be  the  retyring  of  the  forces.  I  think  it 
is  very  just  we  should  be  on  our  gaird  and  I 
am  resolved  to  keep  closser  tho'  I  should  loss 
the  movibles  and  take  feu  prisoners.  I  was 
just  begining  to  send  out  many  pairtys,  fynd- 
ing  the  rebels  becom  secur  and  the  contry 
so  quyet  in  all  apearance,  I  sent  out  a  pairty 
with  my  tutor  Labe  three  nights  agoe.  The 
first  night  he  tuke  Drumbui  and  on  Mkclellen 
and  that  great  villain  Mkclorg  the  smith  at 
Menegaff  that  made  all  the  elikys  and  after 
whom  the  forces  has  troted  so  often,  it  cost 
me  both  paines  and  mony  to  knou  hou  to 
fynd  him.  I  am  resolved  to  hang  him  for  it 
is  necessary  I  make  som  exemple  of  severity 
least  rebellion  be  thoght  cheap  here,  there 
can  not  be  alyve  a  mor  wiked  fellow.  .  .  ."' 

believe  that  things  are  come  that  length 
yet.  I  am  sure  there  is  not  the  least  appear- 
ance here  as  yet ;  and  if  anything  give  them 
courage,  it  will  be  the  retiring  of  the  forces. 
I  think  it  is  very  just  we  should  be  on  our 
guard,  and  I  am  resolved  to  keep  closer, 
though  I  should  lose  the  moveables  and  take 
few  prisoners.  I  am  just  beginning  to  send 
out  many  parties  finding  the  rebels  become 
secure  and  the  country  so  quiet  in  all  appear- 
ance. I  sent  out  a  party  with  my  [brothr 
Dave  f]  three  nights  ago.  The  first  night  he 
took  Drumbui  and  one  Inkcldlan  and  that 
great  villain  M'Clorg,  the  smith  at  Minnigaff 
that  made  all  the  elikys,  and  after  whom  the 
forces  have  trotted  so  often.  It  cost  me  both 
pains  and  money  to  know  how  to  find  him  ; 
I  am  resolved  to  hang  him  ;  for  it  is  neces- 
sary I  make  some  example  of  severity  least 
rebellion  be  thought  cheap  here.  There  can- 
not be  alive  a  more  wicked  fellow.  .  .  ." 2 

In  the  present  collection  the  letters  are  printed  exactly  as  they  are 
written  in  the  original,  without  modernising  the  spelling.  Eeaders  are  thus 
enabled  to  form  an  opinion  for  themselves  on  the  charges  of  illiterateness 
alleged  against  Dundee  by  the  two  eminent  writers  referred  to. 

1  Original  at  Drumlanrig. 

2  Memoirs  of  Dundee,  vol.  ii.  p.  270. 





LONG-  anterior  to  their  present  connection  with  Menteith,  the  Drummond 
family  were  associated  with  that  earldom.  They  held  various  lands 
in  the  territory  of  Menteith  under  the  Earls  of  Menteith  as  their  feudal 
superiors.  In  the  collection  of  charters  printed  in  this  work,  there  is 
one  by  Murdach  Earl  of  Menteith,  son  of  Earl  Alexander,  without  date, 
but  probably  made  about  the  year  1330,  in  favour  of  Gilbert  of  Drummond, 
of  the  lands  of  Boquhapple,  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  which  were  to 
be  held  by  him  of  the  Earl  for  homage  and  service.  The  charter  contains 
very  special  provisions  as  to  the  holding  and  succession  of  the  lands.  It 
is  provided  that  if  Gilbert  of  Drummond  should  predecease  Matilda  his 
spouse,  the  latter  was  to  enjoy  the  lands  for  her  life,  and  if  Gilbert  should 
die  without  sons,  the  lands,  after  the  decease  of  Matilda,  were  to  be  inherited 
by  Ellen,  the  daughter  of  Gilbert,  and  her  sons;  and  failing  Ellen,  then 
her  sisters  Elizabeth,  Johanna,  and  Annabella,  and  their  sons,  should  suc- 
cessively inherit  the  lands ;  and  failing  all  of  them,  then  the  heirs  of 
Gilbert  of  Drummond.  That  charter  was  witnessed  chiefly  by  Menteiths 
and  Drummonds.1 

The   late   Mr.    Henry   Drummond,   in   his   History  of  the   Drummond 
Family,  states  that  Gilbert  Drummond  was  the  second  son  of  Sir  Malcolm 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  227. 


EFFIGY      OF        SIR       JOHN       DRUMMOND, 
IN       THE        PRIORY       OF       INCHMAHOME 


Drummond,  and  that  Gilbert  received  from  his  father  a  grant  of  the  barony 
of  Boquhapple,  which  had  been  granted  to  his  ancestor  by  Murdoch  Earl  of 
Menteith,  who  lived  in  the  reign  of  David  the  First.  But  Mr.  Drummond 
has  obviously  mistaken  the  date  of  the  grant  of  Boquhapple,  when  he 
describes  it  as  having  been  made  in  the  reign  of  King  David  the  First, 
instead  of  in  that  of  King  David  the  Second,  which  makes  a  difference  of 
fully  two  centuries. 

Sir  John  Drummond,  the  elder  brother  of  Gilbert  Drummond  of 
Boquhapple,  appears  to  have  been  a  liberal  benefactor  to  the  Priory  of 
Inchmahome.  Amongst  the  lands  which  belonged  to  the  Priory  was 
Cardross  in  Menteith,  which  tradition  says  was  granted  by  Sir  John  or  his 
father  to  the  Priory.  Two  of  the  four  chapels  which  were  dependent  on  the 
Priory  stood  on  the  lands  of  the  Drummonds.  The  chapel  at  Chapel- 
laroch,  which  was  dedicated  to  the  Virgin,  was  in  the  barony  of  Drummond, 
and  the  ruins  of  it  were  standing  so  late  as  the  year  1724.  The  chapel  of 
Boquhapple  was  on  the  property  of  the  Drummonds.  These  chapels  show 
the  close  connection  of  the  family  with  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome,  in  which 
is  the  first  known  burial-place  of  the  Drummonds.  Sir  John  Drummond, 
who  is  said  to  have  died  about  the  year  1300,  was  buried  near  the  high  altar, 
and  a  flat  tombstone  which  was  placed  over  his  grave  is  still  in  tolerable 
preservation.  A  drawing  of  the  effigy  of  Sir  John  in  armour,  and  of  the 
inscription  as  carved  on  the  stone,  are  here  given.  It  represents  in  indented 
lines  a  warrior,  accompanied  by  the  tutelary  Saint  Colmocus,  with  Saint 
Michael  and  the  dragon ;  in  the  right  hand  of  the  warrior  is  a  long  spear,  on 
his  left  side  a  sword,  and  on  his  left  arm  is  placed  his  shield  with  the  well- 
known  armorial  bearings  of  the  bars  wavy,  which  is  the  earliest  instance  of 
these  having  been  borne  by  a  Drummond.  Around  the  edges  of  the  stone 
is  the  following  legend  in  elevated  letters:  — 

vol.  i.  d 

xlii  Silt  EDMUND  HASTINGS. 

Jfohantus  ii£  grtittuib  filths  Jftolqalmi  hz  gttmuri) :  bib.  .  .  .  eoVo&t  antmas 

£orum  a  pma  et  art)  .  .  . 

[John  of  Drumrnond,  son  of  Malcolm  of  Drummond :  his  widow  that 
she  might  loose  their  souls  from  punishment  and  the  sting,  etc.] 

This  stone  shows  that  the  Priory  was  dedicated  to  St.  Michael  and  St. 
Colmoc,  whose  figures  are  represented.  St.  Michael's  fair  or  festival  was 
formerly  held  on  the  shores  of  the  lake,  near  to  the  parish  church  of  Port-of- 
Menteith,  and  was  discontinued  only  within  the  memory  of  persons  still  alive. 

Another  and  earlier  connection  between  the  Drummond  family  and 
Menteith  appears  incidentally  from  certain  documents  relating  to  Sir 
Edmund  Hastings,  the  second  husband  of  Lady  Isabella  Comyn,  only 
daughter  of  "Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  Isabella  Countess  of 
Menteith  his  wife.  The  history  of  Countess  Isabella  and  her  husband  will 
be  given  in  a  subsequent  chapter,  but  it  may  be  in  part  conveniently 
anticipated  here.  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  was  the  younger  brother  of  John 
Hastings,  Baron  of  Abergaveny,  one  of  the  competitors  for  the  Crown 
of  Scotland  after  the  death  of  King  Alexander  the  Third.  John  Hastings 
opposed  the  claims  of  Bruce  and  Baliol,  and  claimed  the  Crown  for 
himself,  and  in  this  he  was  assisted  by  his  brother,  Sir  Edmund ;  but 
after  the  settlement  by  King  Edward  the  First  in  favour  of  Baliol,  the 
two  Hastings  brothers  appear  to  have  acted  with  the  latter.  Sir  Edmund 
Hastings  had  by  this  time,  through  his  marriage  with  Lady  Isabella 
Comyn,  become  proprietor  of  that  portion  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  which 
was  adjudged  to  that  lady.  His  residence  at  Menteith  brought  him  into 
contact  with  his  neighbour  John  of  Drummond,  and  when  at  the  battle 
of  Dunbar  the  latter  had  the  misfortune  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  King 
Edward  the  Eirst,  Sir  Edmund  Hastings,  in  order  to  obtain  his  release, 
became  surety  for  him.     John  of  Drummond  had  been  incarcerated  in  the 


castle  of  Wisbeach  in  England,  but  on  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  offering 
himself  as  security,  and  on  the  further  condition  that  he  would  accompany 
King  Edward  to  France,  he  was  set  at  liberty.  The  writ  for  his  liberation  is 
dated  in  the  month  of  August  1297.1 

Another  alleged  connection  between  the  Drummonds  and  Menteith  in  the 
year  1301  calls  for  a  more  detailed  explanation,  as  it  necessitated  a  more 
searching  investigation  into  the  facts.  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  having  married 
Lady  Isabella  Comyn,  after  the  death  of  William  Comyn,  her  first  husband, 
was  in  her  right  legally  entitled  to  that  portion  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith 
which  was  awarded  to  the  Comyns  through  their  descent  from  Isabella 
Countess  of  Menteith,  the  elder  sister  of  Mary  Countess  of  Menteith. 

After  his  marriage  with  Lady  Isabella  Comyn,  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  was 
one  of  the  Barons  of  England  who  addressed  the  famous  letter  to  Pope  Boniface 
in  the  year  1301.  That  letter  is  still  preserved  in  duplicate  in  the  Public 
Record  Office,  London.  These  duplicates  were  formerly  preserved  in  the 
Treasury  of  the  Eeceipt  of  the  Exchequer,  Westminster,  from  which  they  were 
removed  to  the  new  Public  Record  Office  after  it  was  built.  From  a  recent 
personal  inspection  of  these  duplicates  of  the  letter  and  the  seals,  as  well  as 
of  drawings  which  were  made  of  the  seals  by  Augustus  Vincent,  Windsor 
Herald,  in  1624,  and  by  John  Bradshaw,  Windsor  Herald,  in  1629,  the  writer 
is  enabled  to  give  an  explanation  of  the  present  state  of  the  original  seals 
appended  to  the  letter,  as  well  as  of  the  several  drawings  which  have  been 
made  of  them  officially,  and  which  were  published  by  the  Society  of  Anti- 
quaries, London,  in  1729.  The  collection  of  seals  appended  to  the  letter  as  a 
whole  is  perhaps  the  finest  ever  appended  to  any  single  document.  Though 
now  nearly  six  hundred  years  old,  the  greater  number  of  the  seals  are  still  in 
excellent  preservation,  the  engraving  of  them  being  remarkably  fine,  and  as 

1  Eymer's  Foedera,  vol.  i.  p.  872. 



a  rule  uninjured.  The  duplicate  seals  of  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  are  inferior 
to  the  others  in  the  quality  of  the  wax,  being  very  soft  and  friable,  while  the 
others  are  generally  very  hard.  Owing  to  so  many  seals  being  hung  upon  each 
silk  string  attached  to  the  letter,  and  rubbing  against  each  other,  and  from  all 
the  seals  being  enclosed  in  a  box  without  any  packing  to  protect  them  from 

injury,  it  is  not  surprising  to  find  the  legend  on  one  of  the  duplicate  seals 
of  Edmund  Hastings  all  worn  off  with  the  exception  of  part  of  two  letters 
at  the  lower  left-hand  side,  while  on  the  other  duplicate  mere  fragments  only 

These  seals  have  now  very  much 

of  the  letters  of  the  legend  now  remain. 


the  appearance  of  the  drawing  of  one  of  them  given  in  Mr.  Henry  Drum- 
mond's  book  on  the  Drummonds  in  1846,  an  engraving  of  which  is  given 
on  the  opposite  page. 

So  early  as  the  year  1624,  we  have  evidence  that  this  very  valuable 
collection  of  armorial  seals  had  attracted  the  attention  of  the  officers  of  the 
College  of  Arms,  and  Augustus  Vincent,  Windsor  Herald,  a  well-known 
member  of  the  College,  made  a  drawing  on  vellum  of  the  whole  of  the  seals. 
These  drawings  are  still  preserved  as  part  of  the  Eecords  of  the  College  of 
Arms.  At  the  end  of  his  drawings  he  wrote  the  following  certificate : — 
"  All  these  seales  were  fastened  to  the  said  charter  or  letter  with  silke  strings, 
with  divers  seales  upon  one  string,  and  upon  the  backe  of  the  writing  right 
over  against  every  labell  or  string  were  written  the  names  of  those  whose 
seales  depended  thereon.  Copied  the  21st  of  October,  anno  Domini  1624. 
— (Signed)  Aug.  Vincent,  Windesor." 

Augustus  Vincent  died  in  1625,  the  year  following  that  in  which  he 
completed  the  drawings  of  the  seals.  His  successor  in  office  as  Windsor 
Herald  was  John  Bradshaw.  At  the  desire  of  Thomas  Earl  of  Arundel  and 
Surrey,  Earl  Marshal  of  England,  he,  in  the  month  of  November  1629, 
made  a  new  drawing  of  the  seals,  and  carefully  collated  them  with  the 
originals.  The  Society  of  Antiquaries  of  London  in  the  year  1729  engraved 
the  seals,  and  also  the  letter  to  which  they  are  appended,  in  a  series  of 
six  large  folio  plates,  to  which  is  subjoined  this  docquet — "  These  plates 
were  drawn  and  engrav'd  from  two  authentick  transcripts  (taken  from 
the  original)  which  are  now  preserv'd  in  the  Herald's  Office,  London.  That 
original  not  being  now  to  be  found."  The  plates  were  published  in  the 
"  Vetusta  Monumenta,"  vol.  i.  London,  1747. 

In  Plate  D  of  the  plates,  the  seal  of  Edmund  Hastings  is  given,  contain- 
ing the  bars  wavy  of  six,  with  ornamental  foliage  on  either  side  of  the  shield, 



and  a  lizard  at  the  top,  which  is  not  an  uncommon  device  either  at  the  top 
or  the  side  in  other  seals  of  the  same  period.  The  legend  around  the  seal  is 
also  c;iven : — 

"  <S  .  ffiiuttbttbt .  pasting .  GTcmitaib  .  Jrtetuiii." 

A  drawing  of  the  seal  is  here  given  exactly  as  in  that  plate. 

At  a  long  interval  after  the  publication  of  the  seals  in  1747,  another 
learned  antiquary,  Sir  Nicholas  Harris  Nicolas,  made  a  critical  examina- 
tion of  the  whole  of  the  seals,  and  his  valuable  report  was  given  in  the 
form  of  a  letter  to  Sir  Henry  Ellis,  secretary  of  the  Society  of  Antiquaries 
of  London,  dated  15th  April  1825.  The  letter  is  printed  in  the 
Archseologia  of  that  Society,  vol.  xxi.  pp.  192-231.  Sir  Harris  deals  in 
succession  with  each  of  these  important  seals  and  their  legends,  and  he 
describes   the   seal  of  Edmund    de    Hastings,   Lord  of  Enchimchelmok,  as 


containing  a  shield  charged  with  barry  of  six.  wavy,  which  is  inscribed, 
"  S  .  Edmvndi  .  Hasting  .  Cornitatv  .  Meiietei,"  but  adds  that  the  legend  is 
now  very  imperfect. 

It  is  thus  proved  by  the  drawings  of  the  seal  in  1624  and  1629,  the 
engravings  by  the  Society  of  Antiquaries  in  1729,  their  publication  in  1747, 
and  the  inspection  and  report  of  Sir  Harris  Nicolas  in  1825,  that  the  seal  of 
Edmund  Hastings  contained  the  legend  now  quoted  up  to  that  comparatively 
recent  date.  Mr.  Drummond  in  giving  an  engraving  of  the  seal  as  at  the  date 
of  his  work  in  1846,  by  which  time  the  legend  was  almost  entirely  rubbed 
off,  assumed  from  the  bars  wavy  that  it  was  a  purely  Drummond  seal.  He 
apparently  overlooked  the  fact  that  both  duplicates  of  the  seal  originally 
contained  a  very  distinct  legend  that  it  was  the  seal  of  Edmund  Hastings 
and  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith. 

There  is  yet  a  further  explanation  to  be  given  with  reference  to  this 
remarkable  seal.  In  the  body  of  the  letter  Edmund  Hastings  is  named  and 
designated  "  Edinundus  de  Hasting,  Dominus  de  Enchimeholmok."  Sir  Harris 
Nicolas,  in  his  remarks  on  the  seals  attached  to  the  letter  to  the  Pope,  says 
that  it  is  impossible  to  explain  the  cause  of  the  coat  on  the  seal  of  six  bars, 
being  so  materially  at  variance  with  that  which  is  assigned  to  him.  The 
place  of  which  he  describes  himself  was  probably  St.  David's  in  Wales,  in 
which  province  he  had  large  possessions. J 

Sir  Harris  Nicolas  was  puzzled  with  the  long-sounding  designation  of 
Enchimeholmok,  and  even  if  he  could  have  disposed  of  it  by  placing  it  in 
Wales,  as  he  suggested,  he  did  not  account  for  the  legend  bearing  that  the 
seal  was  that  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith.  The  designation  in  the  body  of 
the  letter,  which  clearly  relates  to  Inchemacolmoc  or  Inchmahome,  and  the 
legend  originally  on  the  seal,  appear  to  be  conclusive  that  Sir  Edmund 
1  Archseologia,  vol.  xxi.  pp.  192-231. 

xlviii  ORIGIN  OF  THE  "BARS  WAVY." 

Hastings  was  using  a  territorial  designation  and  an  armorial  seal  applicable 
to  the  property  of  his  wife  Isabella  Comyn,  who  was  at  the  time  in 
possession  of  that  portion  of  the  earldom  which  was  adjudged  to  her  as  the 
daughter  of  the  elder  co-heiress.  The  armorial  bearings  of  the  original 
Earls  of  Menteith  are  stated  by  Mr.  Eiddell  to  be  unknown,  although  he 
throws  out  a  hint  that  the  Hastings  seal  may  contain  them.  But  this  was 
only  indicated  in  the  form  of  a  query,  and  not  followed  out  to  any  conclusion. 
Mr.  Henry  Drummond,  on  the  other  hand,  is  mistaken  in  making  it  a 
purely  Drummond  seal,  as  such  a  supposition  is  a  plain  contradiction  to 
the  seal  itself.  The  bars  wavy  are  no  doubt  the  well-known  cognisance 
of  the  Drummonds.  But  as  the  legend  originally  on  the  seal  declared 
it  to  be  that  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  it  could  not  be  the  seal  of  any 
Drummond.  A  Drummond  might  have  borne  the  same  or  similar  armorial 
charges,  but  no  Drummond  could  encircle  his  seal  with  the  legend  that 
it  was  the  seal  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  as  no  Drummond  was  ever  in 
actual  possession  of,  or  even  claimed  any  legal  right  to  that  earldom.  The 
seal  now  noticed  is  clearly  that  of  Edmund  Hastings  in  right  of  his  wife, 
and  it  shows  that  her  arms,  as  heiress  of  Menteith,  were  barry  of  six, 
wavy.  As  the  Drummonds  were  vassals  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith  from  an 
early  period,  it  is  probable  that  they  had  adopted  the  arms  of  their  feudal 
superiors.  This  seal  thus  affords  evidence,  which  has  long  been  desiderated, 
of  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  Menteith  Earls  of  Menteith,  and  also  as  to 
the  true  origin  of  the  Drummond  arms. 

In  granting  or  adopting  arms  it  was  usual  to  give  or  take  some  marks  to 
show  the  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  district  or  family,  and  it  was 
very  appropriate  for  the  original  Earls  of  Menteith  to  assume  as  their  arms 
three  bars  wavy,  in  reference  to  three  rivers  which  formed  distinguishing 
features  in  the  earldom.     The  rivers  Teith  and  Forth  rise  in  and  wind  through 


the  district  for  many  miles,  and  the  river  Allan  also  flows  through  a  portion 
of  Menteith  to  join  the  Forth.  These  three  well-known  rivers  form  peculiar 
features  of  Menteith,  and  one  of  them,  the  Teith,  gives  name  to  the  entire 
district,  from  which  the  name  of  the  earldom  itself  was  derived. 

From  an  early  period  the  Earls  of  Menteith  were  owners  of  Knap- 
dale  in  the  county  of  Argyll,  and  of  Arran  in  the  Isle  of  Bute.  In  the 
reigns  of  King  David  the  First  (1124-1153),  and  again  of  King  "William 
the  Lion  (1165-1214),  the  Earl  of  Menteith  was  appointed  to  have 
jurisdiction  over  Kintyre  and  Cowal.1  In  a  charter  by  John  of  Menteith 
to  Gillespie  Campbell  of  Lochow,  dated  29th  November  1353,  the  granter 
is  designated  Lord  of  Knapdale  and  of  Arran.2  Knapdale  is  connected 
with  a  part  of  the  ocean  in  which  waves  rise  to  a  great  height,  as  well 
as  produce  a  great  noise.  Mr.  Archibald  Campbell,  minister  of  the 
parish  of  North  Knapdale  in  1793,  gives  a  very  graphic  account  of 
the  fury  of  the  sea  at  Knapdale.  He  says,  "Between  the  islands  and 
the  mainland  the  tide  runs  with  a  velocity  incredible  to  a  stranger. 
Between  Jura  and  Scarba  the  space  is  about  one  mile  over.  In  this 
narrow  strait  three  currents,  formed  by  the  islands  and  mainland,  meet  a 
fourth,  which  sets  in  from  the  ocean  ;  the  conflux  is  dreadful,  and  spurns  all 
description  :  even  the  genius  of  Milton  could  not  paint  the  horror  of  the  scene. 
At  the  distance  of  twelve  miles  a  most  dreadful  noise,  as  if  all  the  infernal 
powers  had  been  let  loose,  is  heard.  By  the  conflict  of  these  inanimate  heroes, 
who  will  not  yield,  though  fighting  twice  a  day  since  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  an  eddy  is  formed  which  would  swallow  up  the  largest  ship  of  the  line. 
But  at  full  tide  these  combatants  take  a  little  rest,  and  when  they  are  asleep 
the  smallest  bark  may  pass  with  impunity.    This  gulf  is  called  Coryvreckan.''s 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  372.  2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  235. 

3  Statistical  Account  of  Scotland,  1793,  vol.  vi.  p.  260. 
VOL.  I.  e 


Besides  Knapdale  and  Arran,  the  Earls  of  Menteith  were  owners  of  lands 
in  Kintyre  and  Cowal.  These  two  districts  were  dependent  upon  the 
earldom  of  Menteith  before  the  district  of  Argyll  was  erected  into  a 
sheriffdom.  The  Campbells  of  Argyll  acquired  the  barony  of  Kilmun  and 
other  lands  in  Cowal  from  Mary  Countess  of  Menteith,  the  daughter  and 
heiress  of  Alan  Earl  of  Menteith.  Two  charters  granted  by  her  to  her 
beloved  cousin  Archibald  Campbell,  son  of  Sir  Colin  Campbell  of  Lochow, 
without  date,  but  probably  granted  about  the  year  1360,  and  not  now  known 
to  exist,  are  described  as  part  of  the  Argyll  Muniments  in  the  year  1700; 
and  on  the  4th  of  May  1407,  Eobert  Duke  of  Albany,  as  Earl  of  Menteith, 
granted  a  charter  to  Colin  Campbell  of  Lochow  of  the  lands  of  Strathackie  in 
Cowal,  which  were  held  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith  as  superiors.  These  charters 
show  that  the  Earls  of  Menteith  owned  lands  in  Kintyre  and  Cowal  which 
were  also  surrounded  by  the  sea,  as  well  as  in  Knapdale  and  Arran. 

Those  families  who  are  connected  with  islands  generally  have  in  their 
armorial  bearings  a  token  of  such  connection.  The  Lords  of  the  Isles,  the 
Lords  of  Lome,  the  Earls  of  Orkney  and  Caithness,  all  bear  galleys  on  their 
shields,  betokening  their  close  connection  with  the  ocean  and  islands. 
In  the  Heraldic  MS.  of  Sir  David  Lindsay,  Lyon,  in  1542,  the  arms  of 
Menteith  of  Carse,  descended  from  the  Earls  of  Menteith,  contain  in  the 
second  and  third  quarters  a  lymphad  sable,  evidently  in  allusion  to  the 
ancient  Menteith  inheritances  of  Knapdale  and  Arran.  Even  as  late  as  the 
seventeenth  century  the  lymphad  was  taken  as  a  crest  by  a  Menteith  cadet. 

As  other  great  territorial  magnates  assumed  armorial  bearings  with  special 
reference  to  distinguishing  features  of  their  territories,  it  is  reasonable  to  infer 
that  the  Menteith  Earls  of  Menteith  followed  the  prevailing  practice,  and 
assumed  the  bars  wavy  in  reference  both  to  the  rivers  and  lakes  in  their  Low- 
land possessions,  and  to  the  ocean  waves  around  their  Highland  territories. 


In  the  neighbouring  earldoms  of  Lennox  and  Strathern,  and  in  the  other 
great  earldoms  of  Scotland,  it  was  a  frequent  practice  of  the  feudal  vassals  to 
assume  the  armorial  bearings  of  their  superiors  with  proper  differences, 
and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith  the  same 
practice  obtained.  Owing  to  the  brief  and  very  early  period  during  which 
the  original  or  Menteith  Earls  of  Menteith  flourished,  instances  of  the 
practice  within  Menteith  have  not  hitherto  been  traced.  But  the  seal 
of  Edmund  Hastings,  bearing  the  legend  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  which 
we  have  just  described,  is  of  itself  sufficient  evidence  that  the  bars  wavy 
were  the  proper  arms  of  that  earldom,  and  that  the  Drummonds,  as  the 
feudal  vassals  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith,  according  to  a  very  common  practice 
in  other  earldoms,  adopted  similar  arms.  This  is  a  simple  and  natural 
explanation  of  the  origin  of  the  Drummond  arms,  and  is  better  authenticated 
than  the  alleged  grant  of  bars  wavy  to  the  apocryphal  Prince  of  Hungary  as 
the  captain  of  the  vessel  which  brought  the  Princess  Margaret  to  Scotland 
in  the  time  of  King  Malcolm  Canmore. 

In  corroboration  of  this  opinion,  reference  may  be  made  to  the  seal  of 
Alexander,  sixth  Earl  of  Menteith,  about  the  year  1296.  He  was  the 
eldest  son  of  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  Mary  his  Countess. 
The  seal  of  Earl  Alexander  is  described  as  a  shield  charged  with  a  fess 
invected  surmounted  by  another  fess  cheque  (Laing's  Scottish  Seals,  vol.  i. 
p.  129).  The  supposed  invected  fess  is  in  reality  three  bars  wavy,  repre- 
senting the  arms  of  the  mother,  while  the  fess  cheque  surmounting  them 
is  the  armorial  bearing  of  the  father  of  Alexander. 

The  suggestion  now  made  for  the  first  time  as  to  the  origin  of  the 
Drummond  arms  will  be  corroborated  by  an  inquiry  into  the  origin  of  the 
Drummond  family. 



THE  Drummond  family  have  been  amply  provided  with  historians,  the 
Honourable  William  Drummond,  first  Viscount  of  Strathallan,  Mr. 
David  Malcolm,  and  Mr.  Henry  Drummond,  having  in  succession  devoted 
themselves  to  the  subject.  These  authors  were  all  men  of  learning,  and 
their  works  contain  valuable  information  regarding  this  distinguished  house ; 
but  their  histories  are  all  equally  unfortunate  in  ascribing  to  the  famdy 
what  must  be  considered  an  apocryphal  origin.  So  bent  were  these  writers 
on  establishing  the  alleged  descent  from  Maurice,  the  Hungarian  gentleman 
or  prince  as  he  came  to  be  called,  that  they  overlooked  a  true  royal  alliance 
of  the  house  of  Drummond  with  a  King  of  Scotland ;  for  instead  of  furnishing 
one  Scottish  Queen,  the  family  produced  two,  Margaret  and  Annabella 
Drummond,  the  respective  Queens  of  King  David  Bruce  and  King  Eobert 
the  Third. 

Lord  Strathallan's  history  was  written  in  the  year  1681,  and  remained 
in  manuscript  till  the  year  1831,  when  one  hundred  copies  were  printed  in 
quarto  form  for  private  circulation.  In  the  preface  to  the  printed  work  it 
is  explained  by  the  editor,  that  the  author  enjoyed  the  best  advantages  for 
the  prosecution  of  his  labours,  not  only  in  obtaining  the  use  of  the  several 
accounts  drawn  up  by  previous  writers,  but  in  having  free  access  to  original 
papers,  and  to  every  other  source  of  information  regarding  the  collateral 
branches  of  a  family  to  which  he  himself  was  nearly  related,  and  of  which 
he  became  so  distinguished  an  ornament. 

On  the  title-page  of  his  work  Lord  Strathallan  professes  to  have  given  a 


true  account  of  the  original  extraction,  deduced  from  the  first  of  the  name  of 
Drunimond,  "  ane  Hungarian  gentleman,"  and  describes  himself,  not  by  his 
own  name,  but  as  "  a  friend  to  virtue  and  the  family."  He  states  that 
Edgar  Atheling,  heir  to  the  crown  of  England,  on  the  Norman  conquest  of 
England  in  1066,  being  apprehensive  of  danger  to  himself,  took  shipping 
with  his  mother  Agatha  and  his  two  sisters,  Margaret  and  Christiana,  to 
escape  to  Hungary ;  but  they  were  driven  by  a  storm  to  land  upon  the  north 
side  of  the  Firth  of  Forth,  in  a  harbour  near  to  Queensferry,  since  called  St. 
Margaret's  Hope,  from  the  name  of  Prince  Edgar's  sister  Margaret.  The 
royal  refugees  were  carried  to  the  neighbouring  Court  of  King  Malcolm 
Canmore  at  Dunfermline,  where  Malcolm  and  Margaret  were  soon  afterwards 
married.  In  the  train  of  the  English  royal  family,  it  is  alleged,  there  was  a 
Hungarian,  who  was  noticed  for  his  skilful  conduct  of  the  vessel  in  the 
dangerous  sea  voyage.  He  was  rewarded  by  King  Malcolm  with  lands, 
offices,  a  coat-of-arms,  and  called  Drummond ;  "  and  so  it  seems  this 
Hungarian  gentleman  got  his  name  either  from  the  office,  as  being  captaine, 
director,  or  admiral  to  Prince  Edgar  and  his  company,  for  Dromont  or 
Dromond  in  divers  nationes  was  the  name  of  a  ship  of  a  swift  course,  and 
the  captaine  thereof  was  called  Dromont  or  Dromoner.  .  .    "1 

The  author  being  uncertain  of  his  position,  adds  an  alternative  in  these 
terms :  "  Or  otherwayes  the  occasion  of  the  name  was  from  the  tempest  they 
endured  at  sea ;  for  Drummond,  v$ap  mont,  made  up  of  the  compound  vScop 
and  mont,  signifying  high  hills  of  waters ;  or  Drummond  from  Drum,  which 
in  our  ancient  language  is  a  height,  and  in  Latin,  Dorsum,  a  rigging  or  back, 
and  und  or  ond,  from  the  Latin  unda  a  wave ;  and  to  this  the  bars  called 
unds,  as  they  are  blazoned  in  the  Drummond  armes,  not  only  agrees,  but 
retaine  ane  exact  resemblance."2 

1  House  of  Drummond,  p.  14.  2  Ibid.  p.  15. 


The  author  further  states  that  the  first  lands  given  to  that  Hungarian 
hy  King  Malcolm  Canmore  lay  in  Dumbartonshire,  and  included  the  parish 
of  Drurnmond  in  Lennox,  which  can  be  instructed,  he  says,  "  by  old  wryttes 
yet  extant."  "These  wryttes,"  he  remarks,  "were  extant  in  1680,  but  were 
lost  when  Drummond  Castle  was  besieged  by  the  rebels  under  Cromwell  and 
demolished  in  1689." x  The  Hungarian  Drummond,  it  is  added,  was  also 
made  heritable  Thane  of  Lennox,  and  was  killed  at  the  battle  of  Alnwick. 
Lord  Strathallan  remarks  that,  "  It  is  very  probable  this  Hungarian 
Drummond's  propper  name  was  Maurice,  albeit  some  say  John,  for  it  is 
originally  a  Dutch  name,  and  wrytten  Mauritz.  .  .  .  But  the  records  of  that, 
as  also  whom  he  married,  and  what  children  he  left,  are  inlackeing,  and 
thereby  the  names  of  the  two  heads  of  the  family  who  immediately  followed 
him  are  not  so  certaine  as  the  rest  of  the  generations."2  The  earliest 
genealogist  of  the  Drummonds,  and  himself  a  member  of  the  family,  thus 
fixes  their  founder  as  a  Hungarian  gentleman  of  the  name  of  Maurice  or  John. 

Lord  Strathallan  quotes  a  letter  which  was  written  by  David,  second 
Lord  Drummond,  in  the  year  1519,  to  a  gentleman  in  Madeira,  who,  after 
his  immediate  ancestors  had  assumed  another  surname,  adopted  that  of 
Drummond.3  Lord  Drummond  obtained  a  birth-brief  from  the  Privy 
Council  of  Scotland,  in  which  and  in  his  letter  the  tradition  of  the  descent 
from  the  Hungarian  is  set  forth.  Lord  Drummond  was  then  in  his  minority. 
Lord  Strathallan  says  he  was  "very  young,"4  and  his  own  testimony  could 
not  be  of  much  value,  as  his  father  and  grandfather  both  died  young  men, 
and  never  inherited  the  dignity  of  Lord  Drummond.  Colin  Earl  of  Argyll, 
who  was  asked  to  sign  the  birth-brief,  declined  to  do  so,  on  the   twofold 

1  Lord  Strathallan's  chronology  is  here  at  2  House  of  Drummond,  pp.  18.  19. 

fault    in   attributing    these    proceedings    to  3  Ibid.  pp.  93,  21,  25,  26. 

Cromwell  long  after  his  death.  4  Ibid.  p.  169. 


ground  that  he  denied  the  accuracy  of  the  alleged  Hungarian  descent,  and 
maintained  that  the  Drummonds  were  descended  from  his  own  house. 

Mr.  Malcolm,  in  his  History  of  the  Drummonds,  follows  the  previous 
history  of  Lord  Strathallan  as  to  the  Hungarian  gentleman,  but  in 
addition  advances  him  to  the  position  of  a  royal  Prince  of  Hungary,  as  the 
son  of  George,  a  younger  son  of  Andrew  King  of  Hungary.  Mr.  Malcolm 
also  excels  Lord  Strathallan  by  finding  a  wife  for  Maurice,  who,  he  says, 
as  a  mark  of  Queen  Margaret's  esteem,  received  in  marriage  one  of  her 
maids-of-honour,  and  from  their  children  all  the  families  of  Drummond  are 
descended,1  as  he  proceeds  to  show  generation  by  generation. 

Lord  Strathallan  and  Mr.  Malcolm  also  agree  in  their  histories  when  they 
state  that  contemporary  with  Maurice  Drummond  was  Walter,  first  Lord 
High  Steward  of  Scotland,  the  son  of  Pleance,  son  of  Banquo,  Thane  of 
Lochaber.  This  fabulous  origin  of  the  Stewart  family  was  long  believed 
even  more  firmly  than  the  existence  of  the  royal  Hungarian  Drummond, 
till  finally  exploded  in  recent  times.  No  writer  would  now  think  of  quoting 
Fleance  and  Banquo  as  the  ancestors  of  the  Stewarts. 

The  third  and  latest  historian  of  the  Drummonds  was  Mr.  Henry  Drum- 
mond. He  was  a  distinguished  member  of  the  house,  and  his  splendidly 
illustrated  work  on  the  family,  which  forms  a  portion  of  his  book  of 
"  Noble  British  Families,"  is  a  monument  of  his  liberality  and  taste.2  Mr. 
Drummond  follows  the  two  previous  authors  in  ascribing  the  origin  of 
the  family  to  Maurice,  whose  pedigree  he  deduces  as  a  Prince  of  Hungary, 
being,  as  Mr.  Drummond  says,  son  of  George,  youngest  son  of  Andrew, 
King  of  Hungary,  and  his  Queen  Agmunda.  The  mother  of  Maurice  was 
called  Agatha,  daughter  to  Gundolf,  Baron  of  Podiebradie,  in  Bavaria. 

1  Malcolm's  History,  p.  13.  account  of  each  family  included  in  his  great 

2  Mr.  Drummond  told  the  author  that  the       work  cost  him  £1000. 



Each  succeeding  history  improves  upon  the  original  tradition  of  the 
descent  from  the  Hungarian  Prince.  But  the  writers  were  all  unable  to  quote 
a  single  authentic  proof  of  the  existence  of  Maurice,  the  royal  Hungarian, 
who  in  reality  is  a  mere  myth.  Lord  Strathallan  calls  him  a  Hungarian 
gentleman,  Mr.  Malcolm  raises  him  to  a  Prince,  and  Mr.  Henry  Drummond 
gives  his  royal  pedigree  in  Hungary  for  many  generations  anterior  to  his 
coming  to  Scotland  in  106 6.1 

A  much  simpler  and  more  probably  authentic  explanation  of  the  origin 
of  the  family  name  of  Drummond  is  afforded  by  the  features  of  the  country 
in  which  we  find  the  earliest  persons  of  the  name.  The  word  Drummond, 
Drymen,  or  Drummin,  is  used  as  a  local  name  in  several  counties  of  Scotland, 
as  in  Aberdeen,  Banff,  Elgin,  Forfar,  Inverness,  Perth,  and  Boss.  All  these 
places,  as  well  as  the  barony  of  Drummond  or  Drymen  in  the  county  of 
Stirling,  which  originally  was  a  portion  of  the  Lennox  or  Dumbartonshire, 
have  doubtless  been  named,  their  geographical  character  being  similar  in 
each  locality,  from  the  Celtic  word  Druim,  a  ridge  or  knoll. 

Among  those  who  lived  at  the  period  when  surnames  were  being  adopted, 
in  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries,  was  one  Malcolm  of  Drummond, 
called  also,  as  appears  in  the  Cartulary  of  Lennox,  Malcolm  Beg,  or  Little 

1  A  recent  writer  on  the  connection  of  the 
Drummonds  with  Menteith  gives  a  splendid 
climax  to  the  Hungarian  hero,  who  is  also 
called  the  young  "  Hanoverian,"  and  to  his 
naval  exploit.  After  describing  very  minutely 
three  waves,  and  three  exactly,  of  a  peculiarly 
rolling  and  hissing  kind,  the  writer  adds  : — 
"The  frail  bark  creaked  from  stem  to  stern 
and  drifted  fast  ashore.  He  sprang  amid  the 
angry  tide,  and  was  rolled  ashore  ;  and  with 
the  grasp  of  despair,  clutching  the  rock,  and 

dragging  himself  up  on  to  the  crags,  he  landed 
England's  Princess  and  Scotland's  Queen 
safe  on  land.  He  took  the  three  waves  for 
his  coat-of-arms."  The  earliest  historians  of 
the  Drummonds  were  proud  that  the  Hun- 
garian had  saved  the  Princess  Margaret  from 
shipwreck  by  his  nautical  skill.  But  the 
later  writer  adds  to  an  actual  shipwreck  the 
horrors  of  a  narrow  escape  from  drowning  of 
the  Princess  by  three  "  hissing  "  waves,  which 
became  historic  and  heraldic. 


Malcolm.  He  and  a  brother  named  Gilbert  appear  as  witnesses  to  the  charters 
of  Maldouen,  third  Earl  of  Lennox,  from  1225  to  1270.  But  Malcolm  of 
Drummond,  as  we  also  learn  from  the  same  Cartulary,  was  simply  a  chamber- 
lain to  the  Earl  of  Lennox,  who  had  many  officers  in  his  earldom,  including 
the  "  Judex  de  Levenax,"  the  "  Coronator,"  the  "  Tosheagor  "  or  "Toshash- 
daroch,"  the  "  Camerarius,"  the  "  Senescallus,"  and  the  "  Bacularius,"  the  last 
three  corresponding  to  the  chamberlain,  steward,  and  usher. 

Quoting  an  old  genealogical  work,  Mr.  Henry  Drummond  shows  that 
none  of  the  Hungarians  and  English  who  accompanied  Queen  Margaret 
received  grants  of  land  so  extensive  as  those  conferred  on  Prince  Maurice. 
Mr.  Drummond  speaks  of  this  conduct  in  a  King  so  prudent  and  wary  as 
Malcolm  Canmore,  as  only  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  relationship  of  Maurice 
to  the  Queen,  and  his  superior  rank  to  that  of  the  other  settlers.  Mr. 
Drummond  also  states  that  Maurice  was  made  hereditary  Thane  or  Seneschal 
of  Lennox,  and  that  his  estates  reached  from  the  shores  of  the  Gareloch  in 
Argyllshire  across  the  counties  of  Dumbarton  and  Stirling  into  Perthshire. 
They  consisted  of  the  parish  of  Drymen,  Koseneath,  Cardross,  Auchindon, 
Muithlaw,  Kippen,  Causlie,  and  Pinwick  in  Lennox,  and  Pinlarick  in 

When  these  statements  are  tested  by  actual  facts,  as  disclosed  by 
charters,  their  error  is  very  apparent.  There  is  no  evidence  of  any  kind  that 
any  one  of  the  family  of  Drummond  ever  held  the  office  of  Thane  of  Lennox. 
The  first  legal  evidence  on  record  refers  to  Malcolm  Drummond  Beg  as 
Chamberlain  of  Lennox.  The  only  piece  of  evidence  in  this  connection 
worthy  of  consideration,  quoted  by  Mr.  Drummond,  is  a  charter  printed  in 
the  Cartulary  of  Lennox.  In  this  charter,  Robert  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith, 
in  the  year  1400,  confers  upon  Duncan  Earl  of  Lennox  the  office  of  Coronator  of 
the  Lennox,  which  office  heritably  belonged  "  ad  dominum  de  Drummonde." 

vol.  i.  / 


Mr.  Drummond  quotes  this  as  a  proof  that  his  ancestors  were  heritable 
coronators  of  the  Lennox.  But  the  charter  only  proves  that  the  office 
belonged  to  the  Laird  of  Drummond  previous  to  1400  ;  it  does  not  show  who 
the  Laird  of  Drummond  was,  and  he  certainly  was  not  the  ancestor  of  the 
Lords  Drummond,  because  at  that  date,  1400,  they  were  not  Lairds  of 
Drummond,  nor  had  they  any  connection  with  the  lands  of  that  name  in 
the  Lennox,  for  nearly  a  century  afterwards. 

This  is  proved  from  the  most  authentic  sources,  for  whatever  other 
writs  were  lost  in  Drummond  Castle  as  alleged,  those  relating  to  the  lands 
and  barony  of  Drummond  or  Drymen  have  been  preserved ;  and  from  the 
detail  which  follows,  it  will  be  seen  that  instead  of  Prince  Maurice  of 
Hungary  receiving  these  lands  from  King  Malcolm  Canmore  in  1070,  as 
tradition  states,  the  lands  belonged  to  the  Crown  previous  to  the  year  1489, 
when  for  the  first  time  they  were  let  on  lease  to  John,  first  Lord  Drummond, 
and  afterwards  granted  to  him  in  feu-farm.  They  were  only  held  by  his 
successors  until  the  year  1630,  and  thus  were  in  the  Drummond  family  for 
less  than  a  century  and  a  half. 

Before  treating  of  these  charters  in  detail,  it  may  be  well  to  recur  to 
the  suggestion  that  the  family  name  of  Drummond  arose  from  its  earliest 
members  being  resident  on,  or  in  possession  of,  lands  bearing  that  name. 
Here,  again,  however,  there  is  no  authentic  proof  of  the  alleged  royal  descent 
of  the  house.  Instead  of  Prince  Maurice  the  Hungarian  and  his  descendants 
enjoying  for  many  generations  the  possession  of  the  thanedom  of  the 
Lennox,  including  the  lands  of  Drymen,  the  earliest  charter  to  the  family 
of  any  lands  bearing  a  similar  name,  is  a  charter  in  1362,  by  Piobert  Steward 
of  Scotland,  Earl  of  Strathern,  to  Maurice  of  Drummond,  of  the  dominical 
lands  or  mains  of  Drommane  and  Tulychravin,  in  the  earldom  of  Strathern.1 

1  Original  at  Drummond  Castle. 


Maurice  Drummond  was  only  a  younger  son  of  the  house  of  Drummond, 
and  it  is  doubtful  if  he  ever  entered  into  possession  of  these  lands,  since  in 
1380  we  find  the  secretary  of  the  Earl  of  Strathern  rendering  an  account 
for  the  earldom  to  the  Crown,  in  which  he  debits  himself  with  rents  received 
from  Maurice  of  Drummond  of  the  lands  of  Freden,  "  Gaske  comitis," 
Blarenarow,  and  Glenlechnarne,1  while  no  mention  is  made  of  the  Mains  of 
Drommane  and  Tulycbravin,  or  any  other  lands  in  the  earldom  as  per- 
taining to  him.  But  whether  Maurice  of  Drummond  then  entered  into 
possession  or  not,  it  is  clear  from  the  description  of  the  lands  that  they 
did  not  belong  to  the  family  of  Drummond  previous  to  the  grant  of  1362, 
but  were  part  of  the  possessions  of  the  Earl  of  Strathern,  who,  in  the 
charter  of  that  date,  calls  them  his  lands — "  nostras  terras,"  and  they  were 
then  gifted  by  him  for  the  first  time  to  Maurice  of  Drummond. 

Following  out  the  connection  between  the  family  of  Drummond  and  the 
lands  and  barony  of  that  name  in  the  Lennox,  it  is  found  to  be  so  different 
from  the  traditional  account  as  to  be  worth  stating  in  some  detail,  as  deduced 
from  the  original  charters  still  preserved. 

It  is  true  that  Maurice  of  Drummond,  as  stated,  had  an  early  charter  of 
lands  called  Drommane  or  Drymen  and  Tullichravin  ;  but  independently  of 
the  want  of  evidence  as  to  his  actual  possession  of  them,  it  is  to  be  noted 
that  they  are  wholly  distinct  from  the  lands  and  lordship  of  Drummond 
afterwards  acquired.     The  history  of  the  latter  is  as  follows  : — ■ 

In  the  years  1451  and  1486,  the  lands  of  Drummond,  as  part  of  the 
earldom  of  Menteith,  are  entered  in  the  Exchequer  Eolls  as  the  property 
respectively  of  King  James  the  Second  and  King  James  the  Third,  and  the 
rent  of  £40  was  accounted  for  them  and  paid  into  the  Exchequer.  During 
the  wars  between  the  last-named  sovereign  and  his  son  the  Prince  of  Scot- 

1   Exchequer  Rolls  of  Scotland,  vol.  iii.  p.  36. 


land,  afterwards  King  James  the  Fourth,  he  made  a  grant  of  the  lands  of 
Drummond  and  Duchray,  in  1488,  to  Alexander  Lord  Kilmaurs,  who  was 
also  in  the  grant  created  Earl  of  Glencairn.  Although  John  Lord  Drum- 
mond, who  was  previously  known  as  of  Cargill,  and  had  his  residence  at 
Stohhall,  received  his  peerage  from  James  the  Third  in  the  year  1487,  just 
before  the  commencement  of  the  war,  he  did  not  hesitate  to  join  the  party 
of  the  Prince,  and  rendered  him  valuable  services  in  the  struggle.  In  the 
year  following  the  accession  of  King  James  the  Fourth  to  the  throne,  he 
granted  a  lease,  on  6th  June  1489,  in  favour  of  John  Lord  Drummond,  of 
the  crown  lands  of  Drummond,  in  the  shire  of  Stirling,  the  grant  to  the  Earl 
of  Glencairn  having  been  annulled  shortly  before.  It  is  stated  in  the  lease 
that  the  lands  had  been  formerly  possessed  by  the  deceased  Andrew  Lord 
Avandale,  and  Alexander  Stewart  of  Avandale.  The  lease  was  to  endure 
for  five  years,  and  Lord  Drummond  was  to  use  the  office  of  bailiary  in  all 
things  pertaining  to  the  lands.1 

On  the  expiration  of  that  lease,  King  James  the  Fourth  made  a  perpetual 
grant  of  the  lands  to  John  Lord  Drummond,  by  a  charter  under  the  Great 
Seal,  dated  31st  January  1495.  The  charter  bears  that  the  grant  was  made 
for  the  good  and  faithful  services  rendered  by  Lord  Drummond,  and  for  the 
love  and  favour  which  the  King  had  for  him.  The  lands  are  described  as  the 
lands  and  lordship  of  Drummond,  with  the  woods  of  the  same,  situated  in  the 
lordship  of  Menteith  and  sheriffdom  of  Stirling.  The  lands  were  to  be  held 
in  free  barony  and  forestry.2  After  attaining  the  age  of  twenty-five  years, 
King  James  the  Fourth  granted  a  new  charter  to  Lord  Drummond  of  the  lands 
and  barony  of  Drummond,  to  be  held  in  free  barony  and  forestry.3 

Although  no  castle  or  chief  messuage  is  mentioned  in  these  grants,  it 

1  Original  Lease  at  Buchanan.  2  Original  Charter  at  Drummond  Castle. 

3  Original  Charter  at  Drummond  Castle. 


appears  from  the  infeftinent  which  followed  upon  them  that  such  a  place 
then  existed,  as  the  instrument  of  infeftment  bears  that  the  Sheriff  of  Stirling 
appeared  at  the  principal  or  capital  messuage  of  Drummond,  and  there  gave 
sasine  to  Lord  Drummond.1 

The  love  and  favour  which  the  King  bore  to  Lord  Drummond,  as  expressed 
in  the  charter,  was  not  confined  to  his  Lordship,  but  extended  to  his  eldest 
daughter,  Margaret  Drummond,  who,  it  is  said  by  the  family  historian,  under 
a  promise  of  marriage,  had  a  daughter  to  the  King,  called  Margaret  Stewart. 
It  appears  from  the  accounts  of  the  High  Treasurer  that  the  King  was  a 
visitor  at  Drymen,  and  that  Lord  Drummond  made  presents  of  roe-deer  to 
his  Majesty.  According  to  the  family  historians,  the  King  wished  to  marry 
Margaret  Drummond ;  and  if  that  marriage  had  been  celebrated,  the  family 
would  have  had  the  honour  of  furnishing  three  Queens  to  the  Kings  of  Scot- 
land, as  they  had  previously  given  two.  Objections,  however,  against  the 
marriage  were  raised  by  the  nobility,  who  desired  a  union  with  a  daughter  of 
the  King  of  England,  to  procure  peace  between  the  two  nations,  and  by  the 
clergy,  who  considered  that  the  marriage  would  be  unlawful,  being  within 
the  forbidden  degrees.  The  tragic  end  of  Margaret  Drummond  and  her  two 
sisters,  Lilias  and  Sybilla,  is  told  in  the  history  of  the  family,  all  the  three 
having  been  supposed  to  be  victims  of  poison. 

John,  first  Lord  Drummond,  survived  to  an  advanced  age.  His  son  and 
grandson  both  predeceased  him,  and  he  was  succeeded  in  his  lands  of 
Drummond  by  his  great-grandson,  David,  second  Lord,  who  obtained  a  precept 
from  King  James  the  Fifth  for  infefting  him  in  the  lordship  of  Drummond 
on  22d  September  1525.2 

Before  infeftment  was  expede  on  that  precept,  a  difficulty  was  raised  as 

1  Sasine  at  Drummond  Castle.     The  castle  on   Drummond  was   called  Drumwhastle,   or 
Drumnacaistal,  the  Ridge  of  the  Castle.  2  Precept  at  Drummond  Castle. 


to  the  right  of  David,  second  Lord  Drunimond,  to  succeed  to  John,  the  first 
Lord,  on  the  ground  that  the  latter  had  been  forfeited,  in  the  year  1515,  for 
using  personal  violence  to  Sir  William  Cumyng  of  Inverallochy,  knight,  then 
Lyon  King-of-Arms.  The  encounter  between  Lord  Drummond  and  the  Lyon 
is  thus  described  in  the  History  of  the  Drummonds  by  Lord  Strathallan : — 

"  John  Lord  Drummond  was  a  great  promoter  of  the  match  betwixt  his 
own  grandchild,  Archibald  Earle  of  Angus,  and  the  widdow  Queen  of  King- 
James  the  Fourth,  Margaret  Teudores ;  for  he  caused  his  own  brother,  Master 
Walter  Drummond's  sone,  Mr.  John  Drummond,  Dean  of  Dunblane  and 
person  of  Kinnowl,  solemnise  the  matrimonial  bond  in  the  Kirk  of  Kinnowl 
in  the  year  1514.  Bot  this  marriage  begot  such  jealousie  in  the  rulers  of  the 
State,  that  the  Earle  of  Angus  was  cited  to  appear  before  the  Councel,  and  Sir 
William  Cummin  of  Inneralochy,  knight,  Lyon  King-at-Armes,  appointed  to 
deliver  the  charge ;  in  doing  whereof  he  seemed  to  the  Lord  Drummond  to 
have  approached  the  Earle  with  more  boldness  than  discretion,  for  which  he 
gave  the  Lyon  a  box  on  the  ear ;  whereof  he  complained  to  John  Duke  of 
Albany,  then  newly  made  Governor  to  King  James  the  Fifth,  and  the 
Governor,  to  give  ane  example  of  his  justice  at  his  first  entry  to  his  new 
office,  caused  imprison  the  Lord  Drummond's  person  in  the  Castle  of  Black- 
ness, and  forfault  his  estate  to  the  Crown  for  his  rashness.  Bot  the  Duke, 
considering  after  information  what  a  fyne  man  the  Lord  was,  and  how 
strongly  allyed  with  most  of  the  great  families  in  the  nation,  was  well  pleased 
that  the  Queen-mother  and  Three  Estates  of  Parliament  should  interceed  for 
him ;  so  he  was  soone  restored  to  his  libbertie  and  fortune." 1 

After  granting  the  precept  of  22d  September  1525,  negotiations  seem  to 
have  been  entered  into  between  King  James  the  Fifth  and  David  Lord 
Drummond  with  reference  to  the  forfeiture  of  John,  first  Lord  Drummond ; 
1  History  of  the  House  of  Drummond,  pp.  135-G. 


and  on  the  5th  of  January  1535,  the  King  entered  into  an  obligation  to  infeft 
Lord  Drummond  in  all  the  lands  which  had  belonged  to  his  great-grand- 
father, John,  the  first  Lord. 

The  obligation  by  the  King  narrates  that  the  lands  of  Lord  Drummond 
were  in  the  King's  hands  by  reason  of  escheat  and  forfeiture  through  the 
accusation  made  against  John  Lord  Drummond  for  the  treasonable  and 
violent  putting  of  hands  on  the  King's  officer,  then  called  Lyon  King-of- 
Arms,  and  other  points  of  treason  then  imputed  to  him,  when  he  put  himself 
in  the  will  of  John  Duke  of  Albany,  then  governor,  as  the  acts  and  process 
led  in  the  Parliament  of  16th  July  1515  at  more  length  bear.  The  King 
promised  to  infeft  David  Lord  Drummond  in  all  the  lands,  excepting  Inner- 
peffrey,  Foirdow,  Aucterarder,  Dalquhinzie,  and  Glencoyth,  with  the  patronage 
of  the  provostry  and  chaplainry  of  Innerpeffry,  which  were  to  be  given  by 
the  King  to  John  Drummond  of  Innerpeffry,  and  to  the  King's  sister, 
Margaret  Lady  Gordon,  his  spouse,  in  conjunct  infeftment.1  The  obligation 
contains  a  provision  that  David  Lord  Drummond  shall  marry  and  have  to 
wife  Margaret  Stewart,2  daughter  to  the  King's  sister,  Margaret  Lady  Gordon, 
and  infeft  her  in  the  lands  and  barony  of  Cargill.  It  also  contains  other 
provisions,  and  is  dated  at  Stirling  Castle,  5th  January  1535. 3 

Two  months  thereafter,  on  5th  March  1535,  the  King  subscribed  a  signa- 
ture ordaining  a  charter  to  be  made  under  the  Great  Seal  in  favour  of  David 
Lord  Drummond,  of  the  lands  and  lordship  of  Drummond  in  the  shire  of 
Stirling,  extending  in  the  King's  rental  to  £40.  The  quaequiclmn  clause 
bears  that  the  lands  were  in  the  King's  hands  by  reason  of  escheat  and 

1  Lady  Gordon  was  Lady  Margaret  Stewart,  Alexander  Duke  of  Albany),  and  Lady  Mar- 
the  daughter  of  King  James  the  Fourth  by  garet  Stewart,  formerly  Lady  Gordon,  his 
Margaret  Drummond,  as  before  mentioned.  spouse.      The    marriage   arranged  was  after - 

2  This  Margaret  Stewart  was  daughter  of  wards  celebrated  with  Lord  Drummond. 
Alexander  Stewart,  Bishop  of  Moray  (sou  of  3  Original  at  Drummond  Castle. 


forfeiture  through  accusation  made  against  the  late  John  Lord  Drummond 
for  the  treasonable  and  violent  putting  of  hands  on  the  deceased  William 
Cuniyng  of  Inverallochy,  knight,  then  Lyon  King-of-Arms,  for  which  Lord 
Drummond  was  forfeited  on  16th  July  1515.1  In  this  signature  appear 
also  for  the  first  time  in  a  Crown  grant  the  lands  of  Blanrowar  and 
Glenlithorne  before  mentioned,  as  in  the  possession  of  Maurice  of  Drummond 
in  1380,  and  which  are  described  as  lying  in  the  stewartry  of  Strathern 
and  sheriffdom  of  Perth. 

A  new  signature  was  granted  by  King  James  the  Fifth  in  the  year  1541, 
in  favour  of  David  Lord  Drummond,  for  a  charter  under  the  Great  Seal  to 
him  of  the  lands  and  barony  of  Drummond,  described  as  lying  in  the  lordship 
of  Menteith  and  shire  of  Stirling.  This  signature  refers  to  the  forfeiture  of 
John,  first  Lord  Drummond,  for  the  alleged  striking  of  the  Lyon  King-of- 
Arms,  and  it  declares  that  his  Lordship  neither  "  tint  nor  forfault "  his  life 
nor  heritage,  chiefly  because  he  was  not  accused  of  striking  the  Lyon,  nor 
doing  any  violence  to  him  in  the  execution  of  his  office,  and  the  King 
thereby  ratified  the  restitution  of  John  Lord  Drummond  to  his  lands, 
dignities,  offices,  and  heritages,  made  by  John  Duke  of  Albany  as  Governor.2 

In  this  signature,  and  in  the  charter  of  date  25th  October  1542  which 
followed  thereon,  in  which  for  the  first  time  the  possessions  of  Lord 
Drummond  are  united,  created,  and  incorporated  into  a  free  barony,  "  to  be 
callit  in  all  tymes  to  cum  the  barony  of  Drummen,"  the  enumeration  of  the 
lands  is  worthy  of  notice. 

The  lands  first  named  in  the  charter  are  the  forty  merk  lands  of  old  extent 
of  Ouchterarder,  followed  in  their  order  by  the  five-pound  land  of  old  extent  of 
Drummen,  with  castle,  fortalice,  mansion,  and  manor-place  thereof,  the  lands 
of  Tullychthrawin,  and  others,  while  the  lands  of  Drummond  are  described 

1  Original  at  Drummond  Castle.  2  Ibid. 



last  as  the  feu-farm  lands  and  barony  of  Drurnmond  and  others,  lying  in  the 
lordship  of  Menteith  and  shire  of  Stirling.  The  principal  messuage  of  the 
united  barony  is  appointed  to  be  the  principal  castle,  fortalice,  and  manor 
of  the  foresaid  lands  and  barony  of  Drummen  now  built  or  to  be  built. 

The  most  positive  proof  of  the  distinction  between  the  old  and  new- 
possessions  of  Drummond  in  Stirlingshire  and  Drommane  in  Strathern,  is 
afforded  by  the  instrument  of  infeftment  narrating  the  infeftment  of  David 
Lord  Drummond  as  heir  of  his  great-grandfather  in  the  lands  and  barony  of 
Drummond,  which  instrument  bears  date  1st  and  2d  November  1542.1 

This  document  shows  that  there  were  at  least  two  separate  infeftments 
given,  the  first  of  the  feu- farm  lands  and  barony  of  Drummond,  and  the  lands 
of  Blanrowar  and  Glenlithorne,  by  the  Sheriff  of  Stirling ;  and  the  second, 
of  the  lands  and  barony  of  Drummen,  namely,  the  five-pound  lands  of  old 
extent  of  the  lands  of  Drummen,  with  castle,  fortalice,  etc.,  the  lands  of 
Tullichrawin  and  others,  by  the  Sheriff  of  Perth. 

Queen  Mary  of  Guise  was  provided  by  King  James  the  Fifth  in  the  lands 
of  Drummond  as  part  of  her  jointure  lands,  and  she  granted,  on  2 2d 
November  1544,  a  discharge  under  her  own  hand  for  the  feu-duties  of  these 
lands,  which  are  there  stated  to  lie  within  the  Queen's  lordship  of  Menteith. 
On  the  5th  March  1574,  King  James  the  Sixth,  with  consent  of  James  Earl 
of  Morton  as  Regent,  granted  a  discharge  to  Patrick  Lord  Drummond  of  the 
feu-duties  of  the  lands  of  Drummond,  which  are  stated  to  lie  in  the  Lennox. 
That  discharge  is  granted  on  the  narrative  that  the  lands  had  been  for  a  long 
time  bypast  harried  by  sorners  and  oppressors,  wherethrough  Lord  Drummond 
was  more  superexpended  in  the  defence  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  lands  against 
reivers  and  oppressors  nor  the  profit  thereof  had  redounded  to  him  or  his  pre- 
decessors for  many  years  bypast.     The  King  therefore  authorises  the  auditors 

1  Original  at  Drummond  Castle. 
VOL.  I.  g 


of  the  Exchequer  to  allow  in  his  accounts  the  feu-maills  of  the  lands  of  Drum- 
mond  to  the  Chamberlain  of  Menteith,  in  whose  bounds  the  said  lands  lie. 

Another  sasine  in  favour  of  James  Drummond,  son  and  heir  of  Patrick 
Lord  Drummond,  in  the  said  lands,  bears  that  infeftment  was  given  of  the 
lands  of  Drummond,  on  the  ground  of  the  same  at  Chapellaroch,  on  the  3d, 
and  afterwards  of  the  lands  of  Auchtermuthil,  at  the  fortalice  or  castle  of 
Drymen,  on  the  7th  November  1587. 

Other  distinct  proofs  might  be  given  from  the  original  charters  of  the 
lands,  but  these  are  sufficient  to  show  that  whatever  lands  in  the  Lennox  the 
earlier  members  of  the  house  of  Drummond  might  have  held,  such  certainly 
did  not  comprehend  the  lands  bearing  their  own  name.  Further,  it  is  shown 
that  the  earliest  possession  by  any  member  of  the  family  of  lands  bearing  a 
name  resembling  Drummond  was  in  the  earldom  of  Strathern,  and  consisted 
at  the  best  of  lands  of  comparatively  small  extent. 

The  lands  of  Drummond  descended  to  John,  Earl  of  Perth,  who  sold  them 
to  William,  Earl  of  Strathern  and  Menteith,  by  disposition  dated  17th 
November  1631.  They  are  described  as  the  lands  and  barony  of  Drummond, 
alias  Drymen,  with  woods,  forests,  etc.,  all  lying  locally  and  naturally  within 
the  parish  of  Drymen,  lordship  of  Menteith,  and  shire  of  Stirling.  The  Earl 
of  Perth  obliged  himself  to  enter  the  Earl  of  Strathern  and  Menteith  into 
the  actual  possession  of  the  manor-place  of  Drummond,  and  to  deliver  to 
him  the  keys  thereof,  and  it  is  declared  to  be  lawful  to  the  Earl  of  Strathern, 
his  Countess  and  others,  servants,  in  their  names,  to  enter  to  possession  of 
the  manor-place  of  Drummond  without  any  process  of  ejection.1 

The  Earl  of  Perth  also  granted  a  charter  to  the  Earl  of  Strathern  and 
Menteith  of  the  lands  of  Drummond  or  Drymen,  with  tower,  fortalice,  and 
manor-place  of  the  same ;  and  on  the  procuratory  contained  in  that  dispo- 
1  Original  Disposition  at  Drummond  Castle. 



sition,  a  charter  by  King  Charles  the  First  was  expede  under  the  Great  Seal, 
in  favour  of  William,  Earl  of  Strathern  and  Menteith,  and  Lady  Agnes  Gray 
his  spouse,  of  the  lands  and  barony  of  Drummond  or  Drymen,  in  the  lordship 
of  Menteith,  dated  26th  November  1631,  and  the  Earl  of  Strathern  and  his 
Countess  were  infeft  in  the  barony  on  21st  February  1632.  The  instrument 
bears  that  infeftment  was  given  at  the  manor  of  Drummond,  and  before  the 
door  (januam)  of  the  same. 

The  lands  descended  to  William,  the  eighth  and  last  Earl  of  Menteith, 
from  his  grandfather,  William,  Earl  of  Strathern  and  Menteith.  The  eighth 
Earl  entailed  them  upon  James,  Marquis  of  Montrose,  and  they  have  since 
then  formed  part  of  the  Montrose  estates. 

The  lands  of  Eosneath,  in  the  shire  of  Dumbarton,  are  also  claimed  as 
having  been  granted  by  King  Malcolm  Canmore  to  the  alleged  Hungarian 
Prince ;  but  this,  like  the  former  statement,  is  a  mistake.  The  lands  of 
Eosneath  were  acquired  by  the  Drummond  family  from  the  Menteiths,  and 
soon  restored.  By  charter  dated  31st  March  1372,  King  Eobert  the  Second 
confirmed  the  grant  which  was  made  by  Mary  Countess  of  Menteith  to  John 
of  Drummond,  of  the  lands  of  Eosneath,  and  also  the  grant  of  these  lands 
which  Sir  John  of  Drummond,  deceased,  had  made  to  Sir  Alexander  Menteith, 
knight,  in  terms  of  an  agreement,  dated  17th  May  1360,  as  to  compensation 
for  the  slaughter  of  Walter,  Malcolm,  and  William  Menteiths.1  Tbe  lands 
of  Eosneath  were  thus  only  for  a  short  time  in  possession  of  the  Drummonds, 
on  a  title  derived  from  Mary  Countess  of  Menteith. 

Lord  Strathallan  had  access  to  the  Drummond  Writs,  which  he  frequently 
quotes  to  show  that  Maurice  the  Hungarian  had  in  property  the  parish  of 
Drummond  in  Lennox,  and  how  these  lands  had  been  alienated  from  the 
possession   of   the   posterity   of  this   Hungarian  by  his  successors.     After 

1  Original  Agreement  at  Drummond  Castle. 


enumerating  the  gifting  of  several  Drummond  possessions,  Lord  Strathallan 
adds,  "  And  John  Earle  of  Perth  sold  his  lands  of  Drummond  in  Monteith  to 
William  Earle  of  Monteith,  but  about  fifty  yeares  agoe."1  This  statement 
implies  that  these  lands  had  all  along  been  in  the  possession  of  the  Hungarian 
Prince  and  his  descendants,  while  the  "  old  wrytts  "  referred  to  by  Lord 
Strathallan  prove  the  comparatively  recent  acquisition  of  the  lands  of 
Drummond  by  the  first  Lord  Drummond  in  1489. 

If  the  alleged  grants  of  the  other  lands  to  Maurice  of  Hungary  were 
investigated  in  the  same  close  way  that  those  of  Drummond  and  Kosneath 
have  now  been  examined,  it  would  no  doubt  be  found  that  such  acquisitions 
were  equally  recent.  There  is  no  evidence  whatever  of  such  a  person  as 
Prince  Maurice  having  ever  been  connected  with  the  lands  and  barony  of 
Drummond,  or  with  any  of  the  other  lands  said  to  have  been  granted  to  him, 
or,  indeed,  with  any  part  of  Scotland. 

As  already  noticed,  John,  first  Lord  Drummond,  performed  important 
services  to  King  James  the  Fourth  at  the  time  of  his  succession  to  his  father, 
King  James  the  Third.  After  the  fatal  battle  of  Sauchieburn,  the  Earl  of 
Lennox  attempted  to  rally  the  adherents  of  the  late  King ;  but  by  an  energetic 
night  attack  Lord  Drummond  routed  the  insurgents,  not  far  from  the  lands 
of  Drummond.  It  was  very  natural  that  on  his  creation  as  a  Peer  he  should 
wish  to  have  a  territorial  barony  corresponding  in  name  to  his  dignity.  He 
at  first  received  a  lease  of  the  lands  of  Drummond  from  King  James  the 
Fourth,  and  on  the  expiration  of  the  lease,  at  the  end  of  five  years,  he 
obtained  a  heritable  grant  of  the  lands.  His  family  were  founding  a  great 
Highland  Clan,  and  he  no  doubt  wished  that  the  lands  which  bore  the  same 
name  as  himself,  and  his  dignity  of  Drummond,  should  be  erected  into  a 
barony  in  his  favour,  to   give  him  the  position  of  "The  Drummond,"  or 

1  Drummond  History,  p.  16. 


"  Drunimond  of  that  Ilk,"  which  to  a  chief  of  a  Highland  clan  was  as  honour- 
able as  the  new  dignity  of  a  Lord  of  Parliament.  It  was  about  the  same  time 
with  the  acquisition  of  the  lands  of  Drummond,  in  the  shire  of  Stirling,  that 
he  also  acquired  from  his  cadet,  Maurice  Drummond,  the  lands  of  Concraig. 
In  the  year  1491,  Lord  Drummond  received  from  King  James  the  Fourth  a 
licence  to  build  a  fortified  castle  on  Concraig.  A  castle  was  soon  afterwards 
erected,  and  in  honour  of  his  name  and  peerage  he  called  it  Drummond 
Castle.  The  first  Lord  Drummond  died  there  in  1519,  aged  upwards  of 
eighty  years.  The  castle  still  stands,  but  it  is  now  only  partially  inhabited. 
A  modern  building,  called  also  Drummond  Castle,  and  adjoining  the  original 
castle,  has  long  been  the  mansion-house  of  the  Drummond  family. 

To  return  to  the  first  authentic  persons  of  the  name  of  Drummond  in 
relation  to  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  family,  there  is  no  proof  that  Malcolm 
Drummond  Beg  ever  assumed  the  arms  of  the  Earls  of  Lennox,  as  he  was 
only  an  official  and  not  a  feudal  vassal  under  them.  His  descendants, 
however,  or  persons  bearing  the  same  name  of  Drummond,  acquired  in  1330, 
the  lands  of  Buchchoppill,  or  Boquhapple,  in  Menteith,  as  is  shown  by  a 
charter  by  Murdach  Earl  of  Menteith  to  Gilbert  of  Drummond.1  This  charter, 
which  is  granted  for  homage  and  service,  shows  that  the  Drummonds  thus 
were  or  became  feudal  vassals  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith,  which  adds  force  to 
the  presumption  already  stated,  that  having  no  previous  armorial  bearings 
of  their  own,  they  adopted,  according  to  the  usual  practice,  the  arms  of  the 
earldom  of  Menteith.  This  circumstance  has  hitherto  escaped  observation  by 
the  historians  of  the  Drummonds,  as  much  as  the  other  important  fact  of 
Margaret  Drummond  having  been  the  Queen  of  King  David  Bruce. 

The  subject  of  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  Drummonds  is  not  here 
discussed  for  the  first  time.      The  late  Mr.  John  Pdddell  investigated   the 

1  Original  at  Blair- Drummond  ;   vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  227. 


subject  very  carefully,  and  his  conclusion  is  thus  stated :  As  to  "  the 
Hungarian  or  Atheling  origin  of  the  arms  of  Drummond,  I  need  hardly  add 
it  is  too  absurd  and  fabulous  to  claim  a  moment's  attention." l 

Although  the  Drummonds  were  thus  at  an  early  date  feudal  vassals 
of  the  Earls  of  Menteith,  their  respective  positions  in  the  course  of  time 
became  changed.  The  vassals  prospered  and  flourished,  while  the  overlords, 
by  royal  jealousies  and  unjust  forfeitures,  lost  at  once  both  their  great  influ- 
ence and  extensive  territories.  The  Drummonds,  by  fortunate  alliances  with 
heiresses,  and  by  two  royal  marriages  of  ladies  of  the  house,  extended  their 
wealth  and  influence  throughout  Menteith  and  Strathern.  The  descendants 
of  the  original  Earls  of  Menteith  do  not  now  own  an  acre  of  the  ancient 
earldom,  while  the  Drummonds  possess  large  estates  within  its  territory. 

As  showing  the  grandeur  of  the  Drummonds,  Mr.  Henry  Drummond  says 
that  they  have  furnished  Dukes  of  Roxburgh,  Perth  and  Melfort,  a  Marquis 
of  Forth,  Earls  of  Mar,2  Perth  and  Ker,  Viscounts  Strathallan,  Barons  Drum- 
mond, Inchaffray,  Maderty,  Cromlix  and  Stobhall,  Knights  of  the  Garter,  St. 
Louis,  Golden  Fleece,  and  Thistle,  Ambassador,  Queen  of  Scotland,  Duchesses 
of  Albany  and  Athole,  Countesses  of  Menteith,  Montrose,  Eglinton,  Mar, 
Rothes,  Tulibardine,  Dunfermline,  Roxburgh,  Winton,  Sutherland,  Balcarres, 
Crawford,  Arran,  Errol,  Marischal,  Kinnoul,  Hyndford,  Effingham,  Macquary 
in  France  and  Castle  Blanche  in  Spain,  Baronesses  Fleming,  Elphinstone, 
Livingstone,  Willoughby,  Hervey,  Oliphant,  Rollo  and  Kinclaven. 

To  that  long  list  of  distinguished  names  the  author  might  have  added 
another,  Margaret  Drummond,  sometime  Logie,  the  second  Queen  of  King 
David  Bruce. 

1  Riddell's  Peerage  Law,  1842,  p.  1000,  note. 

2  This  is  a  mistake.     Malcolm  Druinmoncl  was  only  Lord  of  Mar,  never  Earl. 

ROYAL   VISITS  TO  ME  NT E  IT  II.  lxxi 

From  early  times  and  in  various  ways,  the  district  of  Menteith  has 
been  frequently  favoured  with  the  presence  of  the  Scottish  sovereigns.  King 
Robert  the  Bruce  was  at  least  on  three  occasions  at  Inchmahome.  After 
the  forfeiture  of  the  earldom  by  King  James  the  First,  he  and  his  immediate 
successors  on  the  throne  made  the  castle  of  Doune  one  of  the  royal  residences, 
and  enjoyed  the  advantages  derived  from  the  acquisition  of  that  portion 
of  the  earldom  which  was  permanently  reserved  to  the  Crown.  Queen 
Margaret,  the  wife  of  King  James  the  Fourth,  was  provided  to  the  lordship 
of  Menteith  as  part  of  her  jointure  lands.  After  the  death  of  the  King,  and 
after  her  third  marriage  to  Henry  Stewart,  Lord  Methven,  the  Queen  made 
the  castle  of  Doune  in  Menteith  one  of  her  residences.  Her  son,  King  James 
the  Fifth,  during  his  frequent  residences  in  Stirling  Castle,  must  have  made 
several  visits  to  Menteith  as  the  "  Goodman  of  Ballangeich,"  and  one  occasion 
is  noticed  of  his  surprising  his  neighbour  the  "  King  of  Kippen  "  with  a  visit 
while  at  dinner.  In  Menteith,  too,  Mary  Queen  of  Scots,  when  a  child  of 
four  years  of  age,  found  safety  and  repose  when  these  could  not  be  afforded 
by  the  royal  palaces  or  fortresses.  Her  son  King  James  the  Sixth,  at 
Cardross  in  Menteith,  visited  John,  Earl  of  Mar,  his  former  fellow-pupil  under 
George  Buchanan,  and  King  Charles  the  Second  was  also  a  visitor  to  the  lake 
in  February  1651,  on  the  10th  of  which  month  he  granted,  at  Portend,  a 
warrant  in  favour  of  William,  first  Earl  of  Airth,  for  payment  of  an  old  debt 
of  upwards  of  £7000,  owing  by  King  Charles  the  First.1 

During  the  Commonwealth  the  officers  of  Cromwell  paid  a  visit  to 
Menteith  about  the  year  1654,  which  was  not  so  pleasant  as  those  made  by 
the  sovereigns,  as  General  Monck  did  much  damage  in  the  parish  of  Aberfoyle 
by  burning  houses  and  woods.  At  a  later  period  Prince  Charles  Edward, 
when  prosecuting  his  father's  pretensions  to  the  throne  of  his  ancestors  in  the 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  tins  work,  p.  69. 


year  1745,  was  in  Menteith  for  some  time;  and  the  principal  stronghold  he 
had  in  Scotland  was  Doune  Castle,  which  was  captured  and  held  by  his 
officers.  On  the  13th  September  of  that  year  Charles  left  Dunblane,  and 
crossing  the  Ford  of  the  Frews  on  the  Forth,  proceeded  to  Leckie  House, 
where  he  slept  that  night.  As  the  Prince  passed  within  a  mile  of  Stirling 
Castle,  cannon  shots  were  fired  at  him,  but  he  escaped  without  harm. 

Her  Majesty  the  Queen,  in  the  autumn  of  the  year  1869,  sojourned  for 
several  weeks  at  Invertrossach,  near  Loch  Katrine,  during  which  time  she 
visited  the  Lake  of  Menteith. 

The  beautiful  scenery  of  this  district  has  had  attractions  for  more  than 
one  literary  celebrity.  Sir  "Walter  Scott's  predilection  for  it  has  already  been 
adverted  to,  and  Eobert  Burns,  during  a  tour  through  his  native  country  in 
1787,  visited  Ochtertyre,  on  the  river  Teith,  as  the  guest  of  Mr.  Eamsay  the 
classical  scholar,  with  whom  the  poet  afterwards  corresponded. 

Any  record  of  the  personages  who  figured  in  Menteith  would  be  incomplete 
without  some  notice  of  the  famous  freebooter  Eob  Eoy  Macgregor.  In  the 
earlier  part  of  his  career  he  appears  to  have  led  an  honest  life  and  to  have  had 
friendly  relations  with  the  Duke  of  Montrose,  under  whom  he  was  a  tenant- 
farmer.  Up  to  the  year  1712  he  acted  in  the  capacity  of  a  dealer  in  cattle, 
but  about  that  time  he  fell  into  legal  difficulties  with  his  patron  the  Duke. 
Driven  from  his  former  home  and  occupation,  and  declared  an  outlaw, 
Eob  Eoy  commenced  the  course  of  life  which  has  rendered  him  famous  in 
history.  The  entire  district  of  Menteith  was  at  his  mercy,  and  the  lesser 
proprietors  and  tenants  found  themselves  obliged  to  pay  Mm  an  annual 
tribute,  in  order  to  protect  themselves  from  his  depredations.  His  principal 
quarrel  lay  with  the  Duke  of  Montrose,  whose  chamberlains  experienced 
the  disagreeable  consequences  of  his  presence  while  they  were  engaged 
collecting   the   rents   on   the  ducal   estate.     On  one   such  occasion,  indeed, 


Macgregor  actually  kidnapped  a  chamberlain  with  his  cash.  At  other  times 
Macgregor  set  the  Duke  and  the  law  at  emphatic  defiance,  while  the  nature 
of  the  country  and  the  character  of  Eob  rendered  it  difficult  to  capture  him. 
On  several  occasions  he  challenged  the  Duke  of  Montrose  to  settle  their 
quarrel  by  single  combat.  One  such  challenge  must  be  well  known,  as 
it  is  given  by  Sir  Walter  Scott  in  his  Introduction  to  "  Eob  Eoy."  At 
another  time  he  emitted  the  following  declaration : — 

To  all  lovers  of  honour  and  honesty. 

Honour  and  conscience  urges  me  to  detect  the  assassins  of  our  countrey  and 
countreymen,  whose  unbounded  malice  prest  me  to  be  the  instrument  of  matchless 
villany,  by  endeavouring  to  make  me  a  false  evidence  against  a  person  of  distinction, 
whose  greatest  crime  known  to  me  was  that  he  broke  the  party  I  was  unfortunately 
of.  This  proposal  was  handed  to  me  first  by  Graham  of  Killearn,  from  his  master  the 
Duke  of  Montrose,  with  the  valuable  offers  of  life  and  fortune,  etc.,  which  I  could 
not  entertain  but  with  the  utmost  horrour.  Lord  Ormiston,  who  trysted  me  to  the 
bridge  of  Cramond,  was  no  less  sollicitous  on  the  same  subject,  which  I  modestly 
shifted  till  I  gott  out  of  his  clutches,  fearing  his  justice  would  be  no  check  on  his 
tyranny.  To  make  up  the  triumvirat  in  this  bloody  conspiracy,  his  Grace  the  Duke 
of  Atholl  resolved  to  outstrip  the  other  two,  if  possible,  who,  having  coy-duk'd  me  into 
his  conversation,  immediately  committed  me  to  prison,  which  was  contrary  to  the 
parole  of  honour  given  me  by  my  Lord  Edward  in  the  Duke's  name  and  his  own,  who 
was  privy  to  all  that  pass'd  betwixt  us.  The  reason  why  the  promise  was  broke 
to  me  was,  because  I  boldly  refused  to  bear  false  witness  against  the  Duke  of  Argyle. 
It  must  be  owned,  if  just  Providence  had  not  helped  me  to  escape  the  barbarity  of  these 
monstrous  proposals,  my  fate  had  certainly  been  most  deplorable,  for  I  would  be 
undobtedly  committed  to  some  stinking  dungeon,  where  I  must  choose  either  to  rot,  dye, 
or  be  damn'd.  But  since  I  cannot  purchase  the  sweet  offers  of  life,  liberty,  and  treasure 
at  their  high  price,  I  advise  the  triumvirate  to  find  out  one  of  their  own  kidney,  who, 
I  'le  engadge,  will  be  a  fitt  tooll  for  any  cruell  or  cowardly  interprise.      To  narrate  all 

VOL.  I.  A 


particulars  made  towards  this  foull  plot,  and  the  persecution  I  suffered  by  the  Duke  of 
Montrose's  means,  before  and  after  I  submitted  to  the  Government,  would  take  up  too 
much  time.  Were  the  Duke  of  Montrose  and  I  left  alone  to  debate  our  own  private 
quarrell,  which,  in  my  opinion,  ought  to  be  done,  I  would  shew  the  world  how  little 
he  would  signify  to  serve  either  King  or  countrey.  But  I  hereby  solemnly  declare 
what  I  have  said  in  this  is  positive  truth,  and  that  these  were  the  only  persons 
deterr'd  me  many  times  since  my  first  submission  to  throw  myself  over  again  into  the 
King's  mercy,  and  I  can  prove  most  of  it  by  witnesses. 

Eob  Roy  McGrigor. 
Bawhidder,  June  25th,  1717.1 

AVith  the  greater  number  of  his  immediate  neighbours  Eob  Eoy  appears 
to  have  been  on  good  terms,  or  perhaps  they  considered  it  prudent  to  main- 
tain friendly  relations  with  him,  notwithstanding  his  occasional  attacks  on 
their  property.  Several  of  his  letters  are  printed  in  this  work,  which  show 
his  peaceable  character  before  his  ejection  from  his  homestead  at  Craigroyston, 
and  a  facsimile  of  one  of  these  is  given.  Eob  Eoy  died  in  December  1734, 
and  the  inventory  of  his  effects,  as  given  up  by  his  widow,  Mary  Mac- 
gregor  or  Campbell,  is  also  printed.2 

An  early  and  somewhat  unique  symbol  of  feudal  holding  of  an  estate  in 
Menteith  merits  some  notice  here.  It  is  a  little  silver  sword,  of  about  two 
inches  and  a  half  in  length,  said  to  have  been  given  to  an  ancestor  of  the 
family  of  Leny  in  Menteith  by  King  Culen.  It  is  referred  to  in  a  charter 
by  King  Alexander  the  Second,  granting  the  lands  of  Leny  to  Alan  and 
Margaret  of  Leny  in  1227.3  The  sword  was  preserved  at  Arnprior  in  the 
year  1743,  but  on  the  forfeiture  of  the  Laird  of  Arnprior  for  his  share  in  the 
rising  of  1 745,  the  little  sword  was  delivered  to  the  Commissioners  on  Forfeited 

1  Original  in  Charter-chest  of  the  Duke  of  -  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  450. 

Montrose.  3  Hailes's  Annals,  vol.  iii.  p.  377. 


Estates.  The  sword  was  afterwards  restored  to  the  family  along  with  the 
estates.  Mr.  Grose  made  a  drawing  of  it  in  the  year  1789,  and  an  engraving 
of  it  appears  in  the  Archseologia  in  1792.1  Unfortunately  the  sword  has 
since  been  lost.  A  translation  of  the  charter  by  King  Alexander  the  Second 
may  be  here  given : — 

Alexander,  by  the  grace  of  God,  King  of  Scots,  to  all  good  men  of  his  whole  land, 
greeting.  Know  ye  that  we  have  given,  granted,  and  by  this  our  charter  have  con- 
firmed to  Alan  of  Leny  and  Margaret  of  Leny,  daughter  of  the  late  Gillespie  of  Leny, 
knight,  the  lands  of  that  ilk,  within  the  sheriffdom  of  Perth,  which  formerly  pertained 
to  the  said  Blargaret,  but  which  she,  led  neither  by  force  nor  fear,  but  of  her  own 
free  will,  resigned  to  us  at  Scone,  by  staff  and  baton  :  To  be  held  and  possessed  by 
them  and  their  heirs  as  freely  and  quietly  as  the  said  Margaret  held  or  possessed  them 
before  this  resignation,  by  virtue  of  a  little  sword,  which  King  Culen  formerly  gave  by 
way  of  symbol  to  Gillespie  Moir  her  predecessor,  for  his  singular  service,  rendering  thence 
to  us  and  our  heirs  the  service  due  and  wont.  In  testimony  of  which  thing  we  have 
caused  our  great  seal  to  be  appended.  Witnesses,  Gilbert  Bishop  of  Dunkeld,  Walter, 
son  of  Alan,  Steward,  Justiciar  of  Scotland,  William  .  .  .  John  of  Bail  .  .  .  McPeid 
.   .  .   Schau,  fifth  October,  the  thirteenth  year  of  our  reign. 

In  addition  to  the  Memoirs  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith,  ancient  and  modern, 
a  chapter  has  been  subjoined  on  Sir  John  Menteith  and  his  relations  with 
the  Scottish  patriot  Sir  William  Wallace.  A  subsequent  chapter  deals  with 
the  residences  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith,  and  the  history  of  their  greatest 
castle,  that  of  Doune  in  Menteith,  has  been  given  from  the  date  of  its  founda- 
tion by  Eobert,  Duke  of  Albany,  to  its  acquisition  by  the  ancestors  of  the 
present  Earl  of  Moray.  The  Priory  of  Inchmahome  is  treated  in  as  exhaustive 
a  manner  as  the  materials  obtained  would  permit.  From  its  foundation  by 
Walter  Comyn  till  its  erection  into  the  lordship  of  Cardross,  its  successive 
priors  and  commendators  have  been  traced,  as  far  as  possible,  and  a  life  of 

1  Vol.  xi.  p.  45. 


David  Erskine,  its  last  prior  and  commendator,  is  given  at  considerable 
length.  David  Erskine  was  also  Commendator  of  the  Abbey  of  Dryburgh, 
and  in  that  character  he  is  best  known  in  history.  The  Cartulary  of 
Dryburgh  was  printed  by  the  late  Mr.  Spottiswoode  of  Spottiswoode,  as  a 
presentation  to  the  Bannatyne  Club,  in  the  year  1847.  The  present  writer 
assisted  the  late  Mr.  Cosmo  Innes  in  the  editing  of  that  work.  The  Erskines 
were  also  closely  connected,  as  commendators  and  otherwise,  with  the  Abbey 
of  Cambuskenneth,  the  Cartulary  of  which  was  also  edited  by  the  writer  in  the 
year  1872,  as  a  presentation  by  the  Marquis  of  Bute  to  the  Grampian  Club. 
These  three  religious  houses,  Inchmahome,  Dryburgh,  and  Cambuskenneth, 
with  the  lands  which  belonged  to  them,  were  erected  into  the  lordship  of 
Cardross,  in  favour  of  John,  second  Earl  of  Mar,  and  the  writer  has  thus  had 
to  treat  of  the  ancient  history  of  all  the  several  parts  of  that  lordship.  In 
addition  to  those  labours  connected  with  the  Erskine  family,  he  has,  in  another 
capacity  relating  to  the  Mar  Peerage,  had  devolved  upon  him  the  task  of 
making  long  and  laborious  investigations  for  the  head  of  the  House  of  Erskine 
in  the  prosecution  of  his  successful  Claim  to  the  peerage  of  Mar. 

A  "  Leabhar  dearg  "  or  "  Bed  Book  "  was  used  by  many  of  the  Highland 
families  in  which  to  record  such  things  as  they  wished  to  commemorate. 
According  to  tradition  the  original  Earls  of  Menteith  possessed  such  a 
volume,  the  opening  of  which  was  fraught  with  risk  to  the  inquisitive  owner. 
It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  opening  of  the  present  "  Bed  Book  of  Menteith," 
if  it  do  not  impart  instruction  and  interest  to  the  reader,  will  at  least  be 
free  from  the  perils  of  its  mythical  predecessor. 


Edinburgh,  32  Castle  Street, 
December  1880. 


Since  the  foregoing  and  the  Memoirs  of  the  two  Dukes  of  Albany  were 
in  type,  there  have  been  published  two  volumes  of  the  Exchequer  Eolls  of 
Scotland,  extending  over  the  period  embraced  in  the  lives  of  those  two  royal 
Dukes.  In  his  prefaces  to  these  valuable  Eolls,  the  learned  editor  has  done 
much  to  elucidate  many  historical,  genealogical,  and  heraldic  questions,  parti- 
cularly in  his  chapter  on  the  "  Stewart  Genealogy."  He  has,  however,  failed 
to  throw  light  on  several  points  connected  with  Menteith,  as  to  which  we 
hope  he  will  be  pleased  to  receive  a  supplement  to  his  information,  as  the 
result  of  our  more  extended  investigations. 

Eobert  Stewart,  the  third  son  of  King  Eobert  the  Second,  is  stated  to  have 
been  "  Earl  of  Menteith  by  marriage,  and  of  Fife  by  inheritance  from  the 
Countess  Isobel." 1  The  latter  part  of  the  statement  may  admit  of  argument, 
for  while  in  the  indenture  between  the  Countess  Isobel  and  Eobert,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  in  1371,  now  for  the  first  time  correctly  printed  in  the  present 
work  from  the  original  indenture,2  in  terms  of  which  he  obtained  the  earldom 
of  Fife,  there  is  reference  to  a  former  entail  of  the  lands,  nothing  is  said  of 
the  dignity,  and  the  presumption  is  that  he  was  specially  created  Earl  of  Fife 
by  his  father.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  statement  that  Sir  Eobert  Stewart 
was,  or  became  Earl  of  Menteith  "  by  marriage  "  with  Lady  Margaret  Graham, 
the  daughter  of  Sir  John  Graham,  is  erroneous,  as  Sir  Eobert  nowhere  holds 
that  dignity  until  after  his  father's  accession.  In  1364,  three  years  after  his 
marriage,  he  is  styled  in  the  Exchequer  Eolls  simply  Eobert  Stewart  of 
Menteith.3  The  records  of  Parliament  show  that  in  1367  4  and  1368,5  he  was 
present  in  Parliament  as  Lord  of  Menteith  only,  and  it  is  not  until  the  day 

1  Exchequer  Eolls,  vol.  ii.  p.  lxxxi.  4  Acts   of  the   Parliaments   of    Scotland, 

2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  277.  vol.  i.  p.  501. 

3  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  ii.  p.  166.  5  Ibid.  p.  505. 


after  his  father's  coronation  that  he  pays  homage  as  Earl.1  From  his  influen- 
tial position  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  if  Sir  Eobert  Stewart  had  really  been 
entitled  to  the  dignity  of  Earl  of  Menteith  through  the  courtesy  of  his  wife, 
it  would  have  been  accorded  to  him  soon  after  his  marriage.  But  there  is 
evidence  that  he  continued  a  commoner  for  several  years,  and  until  the 
coronation  of  his  father  as  King  Eobert  the  Second.  From  and  after  that 
ceremony  he  was  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  the  inference  clearly  is  that  he  became 
so  by  special  creation  on  that  occasion. 

This  fact  goes  entirely  against  the  theory  broached  in  these  prefaces  to 
the  Exchequer  Rolls  as  to  female  descent  in  peerages.  The  same  may  be 
said  of  a  former  Menteith  marriage,  on  which  some  light  is  thrown  from  a 
statement  by  the  late  Mr.  Eiddell.  Walter  Comyn,  who  married  the  elder 
co-heiress  of  Maurice,  third  Earl  of  Menteith,  in  1231,  is  after  the  marriage 
styled  Earl  of  Menteith.  It  has  been  doubted  whether  he  did  not  receive 
the  dignity  by  courtesy  of  his  wife,  but  Mr.  Eiddell  quotes  an  old  roll  or 
inventory  of  charters  by  Alexander  u.,2  as  containing  a  charter  by  that 
monarch  "  Walteri  Cumyng  de  comitatu  de  Menteithe,"  which  goes  far  to 
establish  the  fact  that  the  dignity  was  conferred  upon  him,  as  upon  Sir 
Eobert  Stewart,  by  a  special  creation. 

The  editor  of  the  Exchequer  Eolls  assumes  that  the  husband  of  the  lady 
Elene  of  Mar,  daughter  of  Gratney,  Earl  of  Mar,  was  the  famous  Sir  John 
Menteith,  the  reputed  betrayer  of  Wallace.  In  this  he  follows  the  late  Mr. 
Eiddell,  who  states  that  Sir  John  and  the  husband  of  Lady  Elene  of  Mar  were 
one  and  the  same  person.3  This  view  is  refuted,  however,  by  the  authorities 
quoted  both  by  Mr.  Eiddell  and  the  editor  of  the  Exchequer  Eolls.    Mr.  Eiddell 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  545. 

2  Peerage  and  Consistorial  Law-,  p.  1050. 

z  Tracts.  Legal  and  Historical,  1835,  p.  1-49. 


founds  on  a  charter  of  1359,  preserved  in  the  records  of  Parliament,1  granted  by 
King  David  the  Second  to  Sir  John  Menteith,  the  son  of  Lady  Elene  of  Mar, 
reconveying  to  him  the  lands  of  Strathgartney,  which  had  been  taken  by  the 
King  from  the  same  Sir  John  in  1344.  These  lands  are  in  that  charter  stated 
to  have  been  granted  by  King  Eobert  the  Bruce  to  Sir  John  Menteith  and 
Lady  Elene  of  Mar  in  free  marriage.  But  a  missing  charter  of  King  Eobert 
the  Bruce,  referred  to  in  the  Exchequer  Rolls2  as  proving  the  above,  though 
the  full  significance  of  the  entry  has  been  overlooked,  designs  the  grantee,  the 
husband  of  Lady  Elene  of  Mar,  as  "  John  Monteith,  son  to  John  Monteith." 
There  is  thus  evidence  that  there  were  in  succession  to  each  other  three 
persons  who  bore  the  name  and  designation  of  Sir  John  Menteith,  and  that 
Lady  Elene  of  Mar  was  the  wife  of  the  second  Sir  John  Menteith,  who  was 
not  the  famous  Sir  John,  but  his  son. 

Although  in  the  prefaces  to  the  Exchequer  Bolls  it  is  nowhere  distinctly 
stated  that  the  reputed  betrayer  of  "Wallace  and  the  husband  of  Lady  Elene 
of  Mar  were  one  and  the  same  person,  it  is  affirmed  that  Joanna  of  Menteith, 
Countess  of  Strathern,  was  the  daughter  of  Sir  John  Menteith  and  Lady 
Elene  of  Mar.3  That  Joanna  of  Strathern  was  the  daughter  of  the  first 
Sir  John  Menteith  is  proved  from  authentic  evidence,4  and  has  never  been 
disputed,  but  it  is  a  mistake  to  say  that  she  was  the  daughter  of  Lady  Elene 
of  Mar.  As  we  have  shown,  Lady  Elene  was  not  the  wife  of  the  first  Sir 
John  Menteith,  and  even  if  she  had  been  she  could  not  have  been  the  mother 
of  Joanna  of  Strathern.  For  if  it  be  the  case,  as  stated  in  the  Exchequer 
Rolls,  that  Joanna  was  the  wife  of  Earl  Malise  of   Strathern,  the  father 

1  Acts    of   the    Parliaments    of    Scotland,  3  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  ii.  p.  ci,  note, 

vol.  i.  p.  524. 

-  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  ii.  p.  lvi ;  Robert-  4  Robertson's   Index   of   Missing  Charters, 

son's  Index,  p.  23,  No.  6.  p.  18,  No.  69  ;  vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  230. 


of  the  Earl  Malise  whose  wife  was  implicated  in  the  Soulis  conspiracy 
in  13201  (and  this  statement  is  also  made  by  other  authorities),  then  she 
must  have  been  married  some  time  before  that  event.  But  from  various  data 
it  may  be  shown  that  Lady  Elene  of  Mar,  even  if  married  in  1320,  could 
not  then  have  had  a  marriageable  daughter.  Supposing  that  Gratney,  Earl 
of  Mar,  married  Lady  Christian  Bruce,  the  mother  of  Lady  Elene,  in  1292,2 
and  allowing  for  the  birth  of  their  son  Donald  in  or  about  1293,  it  will 
be  seen  that  Lady  Elene  in  1320  must  have  been  at  the  utmost  little 
more  than  twenty-five  years  of  age.  It  is  probable  that  she  was  even 
younger,  and  also  that  she  was  not  married  until  after  that  date.  The  lands 
of  Strathgartney,  as  is  stated  in  the  charter  by  King  David  the  Second 
before  referred  to,  were  granted  to  her  and  her  husband  in  free  marriage, 
thus  suggesting  that  these  lands  were  her  wedding-gift  from  her  uncle,  King 
Kobert  the  Bruce.  But  these  lands  were  taken  from  Sir  John  Logie  only 
about  1320,  and  it  is  probable  therefore  that  the  marriage  of  Lady  Elene 
of  Mar  did  not  take  place  until  that  year  at  least. 

Another  Menteith  marriage  which  is  mentioned  in  the  preface  to  the 
last  published  volume  of  the  Exchequer  Bolls  may  also  be  here  adverted  to. 
The  editor  conjectures  that  Sir  John  Moray,  the  first  husband  of  Lady 
Margaret  Graham,  styled  Countess  of  Menteith,  must  have  been  Sir  John 
Moray  of  Bothwell.3  This  conjecture  is  well  founded,  but  the  evidence  which 
completes  the  proof  desiderated  has  been  overlooked.  This  is  furnished 
by  a  charter  of  certain  lands  in  the  barony  of  Avach,  granted  by  Muriella, 
widow  of  Sir  William  Bose  of  Kilravock,  with  consent  of  her  overlord, 
Sir  John  Moray  of  Bothwell,  whom  she  also  styles  "  Earl  of  Menteith 
and  Banitarius  of  Scotland."4 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  ii.  p.  ci,  note.  4  Rose     of     Kilravock     (Spalding     Club), 

2  Ibid.  vol.  iv.  p.  clxxvi,  note.         3  Ibid.  p.  116. 


In  the  same  volume,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  much  research  has 
been  brought  to  bear  on  the  elucidation  of  the  "Stewart  genealogy"  from 
King  Eobert  the  Second.1  In  one  important  case,  however,  the  result  is 
somewhat  misleading.  The  editor  states  that  a  daughter  of  King  Eobert  the 
Second,  whose  name  he  is  unable  to  give,  seems  to  have  married  Sir  John 
of  Keith,  eldest  son  of  William  of  Keith,  Marischal.2  In  a  subsequent  page 
he  represents  another  daughter  of  the  King,  Lady  Jean,  as  having  married 
John  Lyon  of  Glamis.3  This  marriage  took  place  at  first  without  consent  of 
King  Eobert  the  Second,  and  the  editor  of  the  Exchequer  Bolls  refers  to 
and  states  the  terms  of  a  remission  in  the  Glamis  Charter-chest,4  granted 
by  the  King,  with  consent  of  his  sons,  to  his  daughter  Jean  and  Sir  John 
Lyon  for  their  marriage.  But  the  fact  has  been  entirely  overlooked  that  this 
document  proves  that  the  daughter  of  unknown  name,  the  wife  of  Sir  John 
Keith,  and  Lady  Jean,  the  wife  of  Sir  John  Lyon,  were  one  and  the  same 
princess.  In  the  remission  she  is  designed  Johanna  of  Keith,  being  then  the 
widow  of  Sir  John  Keith,  her  first  husband.  The  original  remission  has 
been  carefully  preserved  at  Glamis,  and  by  the  permission  of  the  Earl  of 
Strathmore,  who  is  the  descendant  and  representative  of  the  marriage  of  the 
Frincess  Jean  Stewart  with  his  ancestor  Sir  John  Lyon,  we  are  enabled 
to  print  the  document  in  this  work  from  the  original. 

An  indenture,  which  was  entered  into  between  Eobert,  Duke  of  Albany, 
and  Archibald,  fourth  Earl  of  Douglas,  on  the  20th  of  June  1409,  has  been 
printed  in  the  Appendix  to  the  preface  of  the  fourth  volume  of  the 
Exchequer  Rolls,6  accompanied  by  the  statement  that  it  "has  hitherto 
escaped  notice."6  We  think  it  right  to  explain  that  the  bond  was  first  printed 
in  the  present  work  from  a  copy  of  the  original  in  Her  Majesty's  General 

1  Vol.  iv.  p.  cliii,  et  seq.  3  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  p.  clxiv.         5  Vol.  iv.  p.  ceix. 

2  Ibid.  p.  clxii.  *  Ibid.  vol.  iii.  p.  lii,  note.  6  Ibid.  p.  lvi,  note  1. 

VOL.  I.  i 


Eegister  House,  specially  made  for  that  purpose,  and  was  actually  printed 
as  part  of  this  work  before  it  appeared  in  the  Exchequer  Eolls.  In  so  far 
as  we  are  concerned,  there  was  no  oversight  of  such  an  important  indenture, 
although  the  print  of  it  in  the  Exchequer  Eolls,  while  last  made,  was 
accidentally  first  published. 

In  the  same  way  the  documents  relating  to  the  marriage  of  Janet 
Stewart,  eldest  daughter  of  Eobert,  Duke  of  Albany,  and  David  de  Loen, 
which  are  referred  to  in  the  Exchequer  Eolls,1  were,  along  with  other  relative 
important  documents,  printed  in  this  work  from  the  originals  in  the  General 
Eegister  House  long  anterior  to  the  publication  of  the  Eolls. 

The  letters  of  King  James  the  First  now  printed  in  this  work  for  the  first 
time,  are  referred  to  in  the  preface  to  the  Exchequer  Eolls2  as  preserved  in 
the  General  Eegister  House.  But  the  existence  of  these  letters  was  not 
known  to  the  editor  of  the  Eolls  till  after  they  were  brought  to  light  again 
in  November  last,  as  explained  in  the  preamble  to  them  in  this  work.3 

In  the  controversy  about  Macaulay's  denunciation  of  John  Graham  of 
Claverhouse,  the  brilliant  historian  was  much  taken  to  task  by  Professor 
Aytoun  and  other  critics  for  his  mistake  in  calling  him  James  instead  of  John 
Graham,  thus  showing,  it  was  said,  ignorance  of  the  very  name  of  the  man 
whom  he  denounced.  The  editor  of  the  Eolls  has  fallen  into  a  similar  mistake 
as  to  the  name  of  the  author  of  a  well-known  law  work  which  he  quotes, 
Steuart's  answers  to  "Dirleton's  Doubts."  The  author  was  the  celebrated 
Sir  James  Steuart  of  Goodtrees,  but  the  editor  calls  him  Sir  John  Steuart.4 
While  noticing  this  slip,  occurring  amidst  much  that  is  accurate,  we  readily 
pardon  it  as  a  specimen  of  mistakes  to  which  authors  and  editors  are  alike 

1  Vol.  iv.  pp.  clxxxiv,  elxxxv.  3  Page  283,  postea. 

2  Ibid.  p.  lxxviii.  4  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  p.  clxxx. 

%%i  i&efc  Boofc  of  j^entettl). 



OF  these  original  Earls  of  Menteith  very  little  can  now  be  traced.  No 
charter  or  instrument  of  creation  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  is  known 
to  exist,  and  the  feudal  investitures  of  the  earldom  from  its  commencement, 
and  for  several  centuries  thereafter,  have  long  since  been  dispersed.  Menteith 
was  one  of  the  provinces  into  which  Scotland  was  anciently  divided,  and 
during  the  Celtic  period  it  was  probably  governed  by  Mormaors,  like  the 
other  provinces  of  Scotland.  In  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century  this 
province  was  placed  under  the  government  of  an  Earl,  and  the  earldom  of 
Menteith  is  therefore  probably  as  old  as  any  of  the  other  ancient  territorial 
dignities,  the  history  of  which  is  lost  in  antiquity.  But  though  the  early 
feudal  investitures  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  have  not  been  preserved, 
there  are  notices  of  it  in  the  records  of  Parliament,  the  Cartularies  of 
the  religious  houses,  and  in  other  authentic  documents,  which  are  sufficient 
to  show  the  existence  of  the  dignity  in  the  time  of  King  David  the 
First,  who  reigned  from  1124  to  1153,  and  it  is  possible  that  the  earldom 
may  have  existed  in  the  time  of  his  father,  King  Alexander  the  First,  who 
reigned  from  1107  to  1124.  At  all  events  there  is  evidence  of  the  existence 
of  an  Earl  of  Menteith  in. the  reign  of  King  David,  as  in  a  Statute,  not 
VOL.  I.  A 


found  in  the  treatise  of  Ranulph  de  Glanvil,  but  given  in  the  Kegiam 
Majestatem,  and  which  is  commonly  attributed  to  King  David  the  First,  the 
Earl  of  Menteith  is  mentioned  as  having  jurisdiction  over  the  districts  of 
Kintyre  and  Cowal,  in  Argyll.1  A  similar  statement  occurs  in  the  laws  of 
King  William  the  Lion,  who  reigned  from  1165  to  1214.  In  the  third 
chapter  of  the  Assizes  of  that  King,  the  same  Statute,  there  called  the  law  of 
"  Claremathane,"  is  laid  down  as  King  David  had  already  established  it,  and 
in  reference  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  it  is  appointed  that 
if  any  man  is  challenged  "  gif  his  warrand  be  wonnande  in  Kyntyre  or  in 
Cowalle,  in  that  ilk  manner,  the  Erl  of  Meneteth  sail  send  his  men  with  hym 
that  is  callyt  to  ber  witnes  to  the  forsayd  assise." 2 

In  the  Cartulary  of  Scone  the  foundation  charter  by  King  Alexander  the 
First,  in  or  about  the  year  1114,  is  witnessed  by  "Beth  Comes;"3  and  in 
another  charter,  by  the  same  King  Alexander  to  the  Church  of  Scone,  granted 
probably  soon  after  the  foundation  charter,  two  of  the  witnesses  named  in 
the  testing-clause  are  Eeth  Earl  and  Malis  Earl.4  In  the  Carhilary  of 
Dunfermline,  the  charter  of  confirmation  by  King  David  the  First  to  the 
Church  of  Dunfermline,  granted  probably  soon  after  the  King's  accession  in 
1124,  contains  the  names  of  a  number  of  witnesses,  bishops  and  Earls,  including 
Malis  Earl,  Rothery  Earl,  and  Madeth  Earl.5  In  another  charter  by  the  same 
King  David  to  the  Church  of  Dunfermline,  the  witnesses  are  chiefly  bishops 
and  Earls,  among  others  Madeth  Earl,  Malis  Earl,  and  Head  Earl.6 

Sir  James  Daliymple,  in  his  Collections  on  Scottish  History,  refers  to  the 
witnesses  in  King  David's  original  charter  to  Dunfermline,  and  suggests 
that  either  Beth  or  Head  was  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  though  he  offers  no 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliament  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  4  Liber  Ecclesie  de  Scon,  p.  4. 

p.  603.  2  Ibid.  p.  372.  6  Registrum  de  Dunfermelyn,  p.  4. 

s  Liber  Ecclesie  de  Scon,  p.  2.  °  Ibid.  p.  16. 


authority  for  his  conjecture,  and  neither  of  these  names  has  been  identified 
as  that  of  an  Earl  of  Menteith.1  But,  as  before  remarked,  it  is  quite 
possible  that  the  earldom  existed  in  the  time  of  Alexander,  and  it  is  equally 
possible  that  Sir  James  may  be  right  in  his  conjecture. 

In  works  on  the  Peerage  of  Scotland,  Murdach  is  usually  said  to  have 
been  the  first  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  to  have  lived  in  the  reign  of  King  David 
the  First.  As  an  authority  for  this  statement,  reference  is  made  to  the 
Cartulary  of  Dunfermline,  in  which  it  is  alleged  that  Murdach  is  mentioned. 
But  a  careful  examination  of  that  Cartulary  as  printed  for  the  members 
of  the  Bannatyne  Club  in  the  year  1842,  has  failed  to  discover  the  name  of 
Earl  Murdach  either  in  the  text  or  in  the  index.  As  already  shown,  there 
is  an  Earl  Madeth  mentioned,  without  any  territorial  designation,  as  one  of 
the  witnesses  in  the  confirmation  charter,  and  also  in  another  charter  by 
King  David  the  First  to  the  church  of  Dunfermline ;  and  the  name  of 
Madeth  may  have  been  misread  in  the  manuscript  of  the  original  Cartulary 
as  that  of  Murdach.  There  was  an  Earl  Murdach  of  Menteitb  in  the  reign 
of  King  William  the  Lion.  But  he  was  not  the  first  Earl,  as  he  inherited 
after  Gilchrist  Earl  of  Menteith,  who  was  Earl  in  the  time  of  King  William 
the  Lion,  as  well  as  of  his  brother  King  Malcolm  the  Fourth,  and  probably 
in  that  of  King  David  the  First.  The  name  of  Murdach  has  thus  been 
misplaced  in  the  Peerage  books,  although  there  may  have  been  an  Earl 
Murdach  before  Earl  Gilchrist,  as  there  certainly  was  an  Earl  Murdach  after 
him.  But  of  the  existence  of  an  Earl  Murdach  before  Earl  Gilchrist  no 
evidence  has  been  obtained. 

1  Collections,  p.  392. 

Circa  1150 — circa  1180. 

This  is  the  first  Earl  of  Menteith  whose  Christian  name  has  heen  ascer- 
tained on  strictly  legal  evidence,  but  beyond  the  name,  little  else  is  known  of 
the  history  of  Earl  Gilchrist.  As  the  owner  of  an  extensive  earldom,  partly 
in  the  Lowlands  of  Scotland  and  partly  in  the  Highlands  of  Argyll,  exercising 
jurisdiction  over  large  districts,  Earl  Gilchrist  must  have  possessed  much 
power  and  influence.  But  all  trace  of  his  existence  has  disappeared,  save 
a  few  scanty  references  to  him  as  a  witness  to  royal  or  other  charters.  In 
the  charter  by  King  Malcolm  the  Fourth  to  the  Abbey  of  Scone,  granted  in 
the  eleventh  year  of  his  reign,  1164,  "  Gilleerist  Comite  de  Meniteith"  is 
named  as  one  of  the  witnesses.1  That  charter  provided  for  the  restoration  of 
the  Abbey  of  Scone,  which  had  been  destroyed  by  fire,  and  narrates  that  the 
Abbey  is  situated  in  the  chief  seat  of  government — "  In  principali  sede  regni 
nostri."  The  learned  editor  of  the  Maitland  Club  edition  of  the  Cartulary 
states  that  the  precise  meaning  of  that  expression  is  very  doubtful.  He 
remarks  that  it  is  difficult  to  understand  how  Scone  could  be  reckoned  the 
principal  seat  of  government,  except  perhaps  from  some  traditional  and 
half-fabulous  story  of  the  Moothill,  joined  to  the  real  evidence  of  the 
existence  of  the  fatal  chair  of  coronation.2 

Gilchrist  Earl  of  Menteith  survived  King  Malcolm  the  Fourth  for  at 
least  ten  years,  as  he  is  named  as  one  of  the  witnesses  in  a  charter  granted 
by  King  William  the  Lion  to  the  church  of  St.  Kentigern  and  Jocelin  bishop 
of  Glasgow,  of  the  burgh  of  Glasgow.     The  charter  was  granted  at  Traquair, 

1  Liber  Ecclesie  de  Scon,  p.  8.  2  Ibid.  p.  xiv. 


in  Tweeddale,  which  -was  one  of  the  hunting  seats  of  King  William.  It 
is  without  a  date  or  regnal  year ;  but  as  Bishop  Jocelin  was  consecrated  in 
1175,  it  is  ascertained  from  that  fact  and  the  names  of  the  other  witnesses, 
that  the  charter  had  been  made  between  that  year  and  the  year  1178.  It 
was  under  King  William  that  free  burghs  in  Scotland  commenced;  and  the 
grant  to  the  bishop  of  the  burgh  of  Glasgow  secured  privileges  for  the  town 
which  had  then  been  built  around  the  Cathedral,  with  the  right  of  holding  a 
market  on  Thursdays,  and  other  rights  and  customs  as  in  the  royal  burghs.1 

Gilchrist  is  apparently  the  Earl  of  Menteith  who  is  referred  to  without 
Christian  name,  in  the  laws  of  King  William  the  Lion,  as  having  jurisdiction 
over  Kintyre  and  Cowal;  and  it  is  possible,  if  the  law  of  "  Claremathane," 
quoted  in  the  Eegiam  Majestatem  of  King  David  the  First,  was  made  in  the 
latter  years  of  his  reign,  that  Gilchrist  may  also  have  been  the  Earl  of 
Menteith  therein  referred  to  as  having  then  similar  jurisdiction,  though  it 
may  have  been  his  unknown  predecessor  in  the  earldom. 

It  is  said  that  Earl  Gilchrist  had  a  daughter,  Eva,  who  was  the  Countess 
of  Alwyn,  second  Earl  of  Lennox,  who  flourished  between  the  years  1155- 
1225.  Gilchrist  was  the  name  of  one  of  their  sons.  He  obtained  the  lands 
of  Arrochar  from  his  brother  Maldouen,  third  Earl  of  Lennox,  and  was  the 
ancestor  of  the  Highland  clan  which  bears  the  name  of  Macfarlane.2  But 
no  direct  evidence  has  been  obtained  of  the  marriage  of  Earl  Gilchrist,  or  of 
any  children  born  to  him.  He  was  succeeded  in  the  earldom  by  Murdach, 
who  is  the  second  known  Earl. 

1  Registruin  Episcopatus  Glasguensis,  vol.  i.  p.  36. 

2  The  Lennox,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  i.  p.  207. 


Circa  11  SO— 1213. 

The  second  Earl  of  Menteith  whose  name  has  been  ascertained  is 
Murethach  or  Murdach.  No  evidence  of  relationship  between  him  and 
Earl  Gilchrist,  his  immediate  predecessor  in  the  earldom,  has  been  discovered. 
But,  according  to  chronology,  Murdach  probably  was  the  son  of  Gilchrist, 
and  the  immediate  inheritor  of  the  earldom,  although  at  that  early  date 
mere  possession  of  the  territorial  earldom  would  give  right  to  the  dignity. 

Murethach,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  one  of  the  witnesses  to  an  agreement 
made  in  the  year  1199  or  1200,  between  Gilbert,  prior,  and  the  canons  of  St. 
Andrews,  and  the  Culdees  of  that  place,  respecting  certain  teinds,  which 
were  in  dispute  between  them.  The  prior  and  canons  thereby  granted  to 
the  Culdees  the  teinds  of  their  lands  of  Kingask,  Kinnakelle  with  Fetsporgin 
and  Betkennin,  Lethin  with  Kinninis,  Kernis  with  Cambrun,  the  rest  being 
retained  in  the  hands  of  the  canons  for  marriages,  purifications,  oblations, 
baptisms,  and  burials,  those  of  the  Culdees  being  excepted,  who  might 
bury  where  they  chose.  The  Culdees  were  to  have  all  the  teinds  and 
revenues  of  Kilglassin,  except  baptisms  and  burials,  inasmuch  as  the  Culdees 
had  given  to  the  canons  the  lands  of  Tristirum  in  perpetuity,  freely  and 
quietly,  as  the  Culdees  themselves  had  held  that  town.1 

From  this  agreement  it  appears  that  Earl  Murdach  succeeded  to  the 
earldom  between  the  years  1180  and  1200,  towards  the  end  of  the  reign  of 
King  William  the  Lion.  He  died  during  the  reign  of  that  sovereign,  before 
the  year  1213. 

1  Registrum  Prioratus  Sancti  Andrew,  p.  318. 


!:U3— 1230. 

On  the  death  of  Murdach,  the  second  known  Earl  of  Menteith,  in  or 
shortly  before  the  year  1213,  two  brothers  appeared  as  competitors  for  the 
earldom,  both  bearing  the  name  of  Maurice,  and  distinguished  by  the 
appellations  of  senior  and  junior.  It  has  not  been  ascertained  from  any 
of  the  Menteith  Muniments  now  preserved,  or  from  other  records,  who  was 
the  father  of  these  two  competing  brothers.  It  is  probable,  from  their 
appearance  and  claim  immediately  after  the  death  of  Earl  Murdach,  that 
they  were  his  sons ;  that  although  Maurice  senior  was  in  possession  of  the 
earldom,  there  may  have  been  a  question  as  to  his  legitimacy;  and  that 
Maurice  junior,  as  the  legitimate  son  of  Earl  Murdach,  laid  claim  to  it. 
This  litigation,  although  amicably  settled  by  King  William  in  favour  of  the 
younger  Maurice,  was  the  first  of  a  series  of  contentions  in  reference  to 
the  earldom. 

It  is  owing  to  similar  strife  in  the  succeeding  generation  that  the  history 
of  this  amicable  arrangement  between  Maurice  senior  and  Maurice  junior  in 
1213  has  been  preserved.  When  Isabella  Countess  of  Menteith,  the  daughter 
of  Earl  Maurice  junior,  was  banished  to  England,  she  applied  to  King  Henry 
the  Third  for  support  in  her  claim  for  re-possession  of  the  earldom  of 
Menteith.  On  20th  September  1261,  King  Henry  granted  at  Windsor  an 
inspeximus,  by  which  he  certified  that  he  had  seen  a  charter  by  Alexander, 
son  of  the  King  of  Scotland,  and  others,  being  an  amicable  convention 
made  between  Maurice  Earl  of  Menteith  and  Maurice  junior,  his  brother, 
as  to  their  dispute   regarding  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  which  the   latter 


claimed  as  his  right  and  heritage.  Earl  Maurice  thereby  resigned  the 
earldom  in  the  hands  of  King  William,  who  gave  it  to  Maurice  junior  as 
his  right.  The  elder  brother  was  to  hold  by  bailiary  of  the  King  for  life 
the  two  towns,  namely,  Muyline  and  Eadenoche,  and  the  lands  of  Turn  and 
Cattlyne,  Brathuly  and  Cambuswelhe,  which  Maurice  junior  surrendered  to 
the  King  for  that  purpose,  to  revert  to  him  again  on  his  brother's  death. 
Maurice  junior  also  delivered  to  his  brother,  for  the  marriage  of  his 
daughters,  the  lands  of  Savelime,  Mestrym,  Kenelton,  and  Stradlochlem. 
This  agreement  was  made  at  Edinburgh  on  the  6th  of  December  1213,  in 
presence  of  Sir  Alexander,  son  of  the  King,  Gilbert  and  Malcolm,  Earls  of 
Strathern  and  Fife,  and  many  other  witnesses.1 

At  the  same  time  King  Henry  granted  another  inspeximus,  certifying  that 
he  had  seen  a  charter  by  William  King  of  Scotland,  confirming  the  amicable 
arrangement  made  in  his  full  court  at  Edinburgh  between  the  two  brothers 
concerning  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  which  the  King  thereby  granted  to 
Maurice  junior  on  the  resignation  of  Maurice  senior,  dated  7th  December 

According  to  the  arrangement  made  by  King  William,  Maurice  senior 
resigned  the  title  of  Earl  and  the  earldom,  and  held  the  lands  assigned  to 
him,  in  bailiary  of  the  King.  He  appears  to  have  left  no  male  heirs.  Mr. 
Eiddell  refers  to  the  existence  of  a  Malcolm  Earl  of  Menteith  in  1237,  and 
suggests  that  he  might  have  been  the  son  of  Maurice  senior.  He  says, 
"  cotemporary  with  Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith  in  right  of  Isabella 
Countess  of  Menteith,  there  is  Malcolm  Earl  of  Menteith,  perhaps  the  repre- 
sentative of  Maurice,  senior."  This,  he  remarks,  is  "  very  surprising,"  and  an 
additional  proof  "  of  the  perpetual  strife  or  contention  that  reigned  in  the 
succession  of  this  earldom."  As  evidence  he  cites  a  treaty  of  peace  made 
1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  No.  7,  p.  214.  *  Ibid.  No.  8,  p.  215. 


between  Alexander  King  of  Scotland  and  Henry  King  of  England  at  York 
in  1237.1  But  Mr.  Eiddell  has  misread  the  names  of  the  Scottish  Earls  who 
were  parties  to  that  treaty.2  The  Earl  Malcolm  referred  to  in  the  Foedera 
is  Malcolm,  Earl  of  Fife,  and  not  a  second  Earl  of  Menteith  of  the  name  of 
Malcolm,  whose  existence  nowhere  appears.  Malcolm,  Earl  of  Fife,  is  known 
to  have  been  present  there,  as  well  as  Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith. 
Fife  being  the  senior  Earl  of  Scotland,  "  Comitem  Maucolmum"  sufficiently 
identified  him.  Malcolm,  Earl  of  Fife,  was  also  present  at  a  subsequent 
treaty  in  1244.3  To  the  same  treaty  of  1237  another  Scottish  Earl  is  a 
subscribing  party,  "  Comite  Patricio,"  evidently  Patrick,  Earl  of  Dunbar, 
which  shows  that  no  more  precise  designation  was  necessary  for  such  a 
well-known  Earl  as  Malcolm,  Earl  of  Fife,  whose  predecessors  as  well  as 
himself  were  frequently  styled  simply  Earl,  as  Earl  Duncan,  etc. 

In  terms  of  the  amicable  arrangement  between  the  two  brothers,  Maurice 
junior  inherited  the  earldom,  and  appears  as  Earl  of  Menteith  in  several 
charters.  In  a  charter  of  confirmation  by  King  William  the  Lion  to  the 
church  of  Dunfermline  of  the  church  of  Mouline,  he  was  a  witness  under 
the  name  and  designation  of  "  Comite  Mauri cio  de  Meneteth."4 

Earl  Maurice  was  one  of  the  seven  Earls  of  Scotland  present  at  the 
enthronement  of  King  Alexander  the  Second  at  Scone.  Previous  to  the  death 
of  King  William  the  Lion,  his  son  had  been  accepted  by  the  bishops  and 
nobles  as  their  future  King,  and  early  in  the  morning  of  the  5th  of  December 
1214,  the  day  after  the  death  of  King  William,  the  Earls  of  Fife,  Strathern, 
Athole,  Angus,  Menteith,  Buchan,  and  Lothian  (Gospatric  of  Dunbar),  with 
William  Malvoisin,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  took  Alexander,  then  a  youth  of 

1  Remarks  on  Scotch  Peerage  Law,  by  Mr.  John  Riddell,  1833,  p.  151. 

2  Rymer's  Foadera,  vol.  i.  p.  234.  3  Hid.  p.  257. 
4  Registrum  de  Dunfermelyn,  p.  34. 

VOL.  I.  B 


sixteen  and  a  half  years,  and,  carrying  him  to  Scone,  elevated  him  to  be 
King,  in  the  presence  of  God  and  men,  with  more  grandeur  and  glory  than 
any  former  monarch,  and  amid  the  general  acclamations  of  those  assembled. 
On  the  fourth  day  thereafter,  the  young  King  with  his  Court  met  the  body 
of  his  father  at  Perth,  and  accompanied  it  to  the  monastery  of  Arbroath, 
before  the  high  altar  of  which  it  was  buried  on  the  10th  of  December.1 

In  a  charter  by  King  Alexander  the  Second  to  the  Abbey  of  Paisley,  Earl 
Maurice  is  a  witness.2     He  held  the  office  of  Sheriff  of  Stirling.3 

The  name  of  the  Countess  of  Earl  Maurice  has  not  been  ascertained,  nor 
the  time  of  his  death,  which  must  have  taken  place  before  the  year  1231, 
when  his  son-in-law,  Walter  Comyn,  had  the  title  of  Earl  of  Menteith.  From 
the  year  1213  Earl  Maurice  possessed  the  earldom  uninterruptedly  for  about 
seventeen  years,  supposing  his  death  to  have  taken  place  in  the  year  1230. 
He  had  no  sons,  as  his  two  daughters,  the  Ladies  Isabella  and  Mary,  and 
their  respective  husbands,  successively  inherited  the  territorial  earldom  and 
dignities  of  Menteith.  These  ladies  and  their  husbands,  Walter  Comyn  and 
Walter  Stewart,  who  were  both  distinguished  in  the  history  of  Scotland,  may 
be  said  to  have  commenced  a  series  of  romances  connected  with  their  claims 
to  the  earldom  of  Menteith.  Their  history  has  not  hitherto  been  fully 
unfolded,  and  it  has  required  a  vast  amount  of  investigation  and  research  to 
disentangle  the  subject  from  the  involved  state  in  which  it  had  been  placed 
by  peerage  writers,  who,  in  the  latest  editions  of  their  works,  were  unable  to 
state  even  the  Christian  names  of  these  great  heiresses. 

1  Fordun,  ed.  1871,  vol.  i.  pp.  280,  281.  to  the  Abbey  of  Cambuskenneth,   dated  at 

'  Registrum  de  Passelet,  p.  214.  Clackmannan,  27th  March  1226. — [Cartulary 

3  Charter  by  King  Alexander  the  Second       of  Cambuskenneth,  p.  176.] 


WALTER  COMYN,  EAEL  OF  MENTEITH,  her  first  Husband, 



Walter  Comyn,  Lord  of  Badenoch,  was  one  of  the  most  distinguished 
Earls  who  ever  held  the  title  of  Menteith,  even  more  so  than  his  own 
brother-in-law,  Walter  Stewart,  and  scarcely  less  illustrious  than  the  two 
royal  Dukes  of  Albany,  Robert  and  Murdach,  who  afterwards  successively 
inherited  that  title.  Walter  Comyn  was  the  second  son,  by  his  first  marriage, 
of  William  Comyn,  who,  on  his  second  marriage  with  the  Countess  of  Buchan, 
became  or  was  created  Earl  of  Buchan. 

The  great  house  of  Comyn  was  descended  from  Richard,  the  surviving 
nephew  of  William  Comyn,  who  is  known  as  the  warlike  Chancellor  of  King 
David  the  First.  The  Comyns  came  to  Scotland  in  the  twelfth  century  from 
Northumberland,  and  rose  rapidly  to  be  the  leading  family  in  the  country. 
During  the  time  of  King  Alexander  the  Third  there  were  three  Earls  of 
the  name  of  Comyn  in  Scotland,  the  Earl  of  Buchan,  the  Earl  of  Menteith, 
and  the  Earl  of  Athole,  and  there  was  also  one  great  feudal  baron,  Comyn 
Lord  of  Strathbogie,  with  thirty  knights,  all  possessing  lands.  Walter,  Earl 
of  Menteith,  was  also  Lord  of  Badenoch  and  Lochaber,  and  other  extensive 
districts  in  the  Highlands,  and  he  made  treaties  with  princes  as  a  prince 
himself.  One  such  compact  with  Llewellyn  of  Wales  is  preserved  in  Eymer's 
Fcedera,1  and  is  referred  to  afterwards.  The  Comyns  originally  came  from 
France  with  William  the  Conqueror  in  1066,  by  whom  Robert  de  Comyn  was 
created  Earl  of  Northumberland.  The  younger  son  of  Robert  de  Comyn  was 
William,  who  became  Chancellor  of  King  David  the  First,  and  William's  grand- 

1  Eymer's  Foedera,  vol.  i.  p.  370. 


nephew,  Richard,  commonly  called  his  nephew,  was  the  father  of  William  Earl 
of  Buchan,  who  again  was  the  father  of  the  subject  of  this  memoir. 

Wyntoun's  account  of  the  origin  of  the  name  is  more  amusing  than 
authentic.  He  relates  that  three  brothers  came  from  Normandy  with  King 
Richard  the  First  of  England,  the  youngest  of  whom,  named  William,  made 
his  way  into  Scotland  and  commended  himself  to  King  William  the  Lion 
by  the  comeliness  of  his  person.  The  King  of  Scotland  made  him  keeper 
of  his  chamber  door.     Wyntoun  then  states — 

Na  langage  cowth  he  spek  clerly, 
Bot  his  awyn  langage  of  Normawndy  ; 
Nevyrtheles  yhit  quhen  he 
Oppynyd  the  dure  til  mak  entre, 
Cwm  in,  cwm  in,  he  wald  ay, 
As  he  herd  othir  abowt  hym,  say, 
Be  that  oys  than  othir  men 
Willame  Cwm-in  cald  hym  then.1 

After  relating  the  marriage  of  this  William  Cumin,  he  refers  to  the  birth 
and  greatness  of  Walter,  whom  he  makes  grandson  to  this  first  Comyn  : — 

This  Willame  Cwmyn  eftyr  that, 
A  swne  cald  Wilyame  Cumyn  gat. 
That  Willame  Cwmyn  gat  swnnys  twa  ; 
Rychard  and  Waltyre  cald  war  thd. 
Bathe  thai  twa  ware  mychty  men ; 
Erie  of  Monteth  wes  Waltyr  then. 
This  Waltyr  wes  mychty  eftyr  that, 
And  gret  landys  be  conqwest  gat.2 

Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith,  at  the  time  of  his  death  in  1258,  was 
reputed  to   be   of  great  age.      Previously  to  his   marriage   with   Isabella 
Countess   of  Menteith,  which  took  place  in  the  end  of  the  year  1230  or 
1  Wyntoun's  Cronykil,  vol.  ii.  pp.  53,  54.  2  Ibid.  p.  54. 



beginning  of  the  year  1231,  he  was  much  about  the  Court  both  of  King 
William  the  Lion  and  King  Alexander  the  Second.  This  is  proved  by  his 
name  being  mentioned  as  a  witness  in  many  of  the  royal  charters,  and 
by  his  presence  at  many  important  State  arrangements. 

Walter  Comyn  may  have  been  one  of  the  hostages  for  the  payment  of  the 
15,000  marks  which  King  William  the  Lion  agreed  to  pay  to  King  John 
of  England  in  1209,  when  the  latter  had  massed  his  troops  on  the  Scottish 
border.  King  William  had  prepared  for  the  struggle,  but  thought  it  better 
to  make  a  compromise  than  to  risk  the  fortunes  of  war,  and  so  consented, 
amongst  other  conditions,  to  the  payment  of  this  sum  for  the  King  of  Eng- 
land's goodwill,  and  the  confirmation  of  the  fiefs  and  privileges  which  he  held 
from  King  John.  The  money  was  to  be  paid  within  two  years,  but  when 
the  half  of  the  amount  was  paid  in  the  following  year,  King  John  remitted 
the  other  half,  and  the  hostages  would  consequently  be  released  at  that  time. 
One  of  these  hostages  was  a  son  of  William  Comyn.1  If  it  was  his  second  son 
Walter,  after  his  return  he  frequently  attended  at  Court,  and  witnessed  several 
charters  by  King  William  between  the  years  1211  and  1214.  His  name 
appears  in  two  charters  by  that  King  to  the  Monastery  of  Arbroath,  the  one 
granted  at  Selkirk  on  25th  February,2  and  the  other  granted  at  Traquair 
on  the  19th  of  January.3  During  the  reign  of  King  Alexander  the  Second 
he  attended  the  Court  of  that  sovereign,  and  witnessed  many  charters 
by  him. 

In  the  year  1220  he  accompanied  King  Alexander  to  York,  where  the 
King  of  Scotland  met  King  Henry  the  Third  of  England,  and  arrangements 
were  made  respecting  the  marriage  of  King  Alexander.  On  the  15th  of 
June  in  that  year  both  sovereigns  exchanged  mutual  assurances,  which  were 

1  Rotuli  Literarum  Clausarum,  vol.  i.  p.  137. 

2  Registrum  Vetus  de  Aberbrothoe,  p.  8. 

Ibid.  p.  21. 


witnessed  and  sworn  to  by  their  respective  nobles  and  barons.  King  Henry 
promised  that  he  would  give  either  his  elder  sister  Joanna,  or  failing  her, 
his  younger  sister  Isabella,  to  Alexander  King  of  Scots  in  marriage,  and  also 
that  he  would  procure  the  honourable  marriage  of  King  Alexander's  two 
sisters,  the  Princesses  Margaret  and  Isabella,  in  England  within  the  space  of 
a  year,  or  restore  them  to  Scotland  safely  within  a  month  after  the  lapse  of 
that  term.  On  the  other  hand,  King  Alexander  solemnly  swore  to  marry 
one  or  other  of  the  sisters  of  King  Henry,  and  amongst  the  names  of  the 
nobles  and  barons  who  pledged  themselves  by  oath  to  observe  the  engage- 
ments of  their  King  we  find  that  of  Walter  Comyn.1  The  sequel  shows  that 
King  Alexander  married  the  elder  sister  of  the  English  King.2  In  1223 
Walter  Comyn  was  with  King  Alexander  at  Selkirk,  and  witnessed  the  con- 
firmation of  an  agreement  between  the  Abbeys  of  Holyrood  and  Newbattle 
on  the  29th  of  May.3  Later  on  in  the  same  year,  he  witnessed  three  charters 
\>y  the  King  to  the  Monastery  of  Arbroath,  granted  at  Forfar  in  October 
and  December;4  and  in  September  of  the  following  year,  1224,  he,  along 
with  Maurice  Earl  of  Menteith,  his  future  father-in-law,  witnessed  a  royal 
confirmation  of  a  gift  by  Maldouen  Earl  of  Lennox  to  the  Abbey  of  Paisley 
of  a  yair  on  the  river  Leven.5 

An  interesting  fact,  hitherto  unrecognised,  appears  in  a  deed  executed  in 
1225.  In  an  agreement  between  Andrew,  Bishop  of  Moray,  and  Eobert  Hod 
and  Matilda  his  spouse,  respecting  the  lands  of  Lamanbrid,  witnessed  by 
some  of  the  King's  Council  among  others,  Walter  Comyn  is  described  as 
"  Clerico  domini  Eegis,"6  which  was  then  the  designation  of  the  Lord  Clerk 
Eegister.     The  published  list  of  the  holders  of  this  ancient  office  is  defective 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  161.  4  Registrum  de  Aberbrothoc,  pp.  76,  77,  81. 

2  Ibid.  p.  1 65.  5  Eegistrum  Monasterii  de  Passelet,  p.  214. 

3  Registrum  de  Neubotle,  p.  4S  6  Registrum  Moraviense,  p.  461. 


for  this  early  period ;  but  this  fact  will  supply  one  of  the  blanks  due  to  the 
great  scarcity  of  the  authentic  information  necessary  for  the  history  of  the 
times  of  the  early  Scottish  Kings. 

On  13th"  August  1225,  Walter  Comyn  was  with  King  Alexander  the 
Second  at  Cluny,  and  witnessed  a  charter  of  confirmation  to  the  church  of 
Inchaffray  of  the  teinds  of  Auchterarder  -,1  and  on  12th  February  1226  he 
witnessed  a  confirmation  by  the  King  at  Scone  to  the  church  of  Kinloss,2  and 
again  at  the  same  place,  in  September  1227,  a  confirmation  to  the  Abbey  of 
Dunfermline.3  In  April  1228  he  witnessed  the  confirmation  by  the  King  at 
Musselburgh  of  two  charters  by  the  Earls  of  Lennox  to  Eobert  Hertford,4  and 
on  the  8th  of  July  the  same  year,  attested  the  confirmation  by  the  King  at 
Aberdeen  of  a  treaty  between  the  Abbey  of  Holyrood  and  Engeramus  de 
Baliol.5  Alexander  was  at  Kinross  on  the  25th  of  May  1229,  as  he  there 
confirmed  a  gift  by  Malcolm  Earl  of  Fife  to  the  church  of  Scone  of  the 
church  of  Eedgorton,  and  to  this  confirmation  Walter  Comyn  was  a  witness,6 
and  also  to  another  confirmation  granted  by  the  King  at  Belford  to  the  Abbey 
of  Melrose,  on  the  1 8th  March  of  the  same  year.7 

An  unsuccessful  rising  in  1228  on  the  part  of  Gillescop  M°William,  then 
Baron  of  Badenoch,  led  to  his  own  destruction  and  that  of  his  two  sons, 
and  the  lands  of  Badenoch,  which  formed  part  of  the  estates  of  the  rebel, 
were  forfeited  to  the  Crown.  King  Alexander  had  himself  proceeded  against 
his  rebellious  subject,  but  had  failed  to  reduce  him  to  allegiance.  In  the 
following  year,  1229,  William  Comyn,  Earl  of  Buchan  and  Great  Justiciar 
of  Scotland,  with  the  aid  of  his  numerous  vassals,  dispersed  the  insurgents, 

1  Liber  Insule  Missarum,  p.  12.  s  Munimenta  Sancte  Crucis,  p.  60. 

2  Registrum  Moraviense,  p.  459. 

„  _     .  ,    _      ,         ,  ,  „  Liber  Eeclesie  de  Scone,  p.  45. 

s  Registrum  de  Duniernielyn,  p.  43. 

4  Registrum  Monasterii  de  Passelet,  pp.  214,  215.  "  Liber  de  Melros,  vol.  i.  p.  1S4. 


and  sent  the  heads  of  their  leader  and  his  two  sons  to  the  King.  It  seems 
very  probable  that  the  Earl  of  Buchan  obtained  at  this  time  the  lands  of 
Badenoch  for  his  younger  son  Walter,  who  is  mentioned  in  the  Cartulary  of 
Moray  as  Lord  of  Badenoch.  This  fact  seems  to  have  been  overlooked  by 
historians,  who  have  hitherto  considered  John  Corny n,  the  grand-nephew 
of  Walter,  as  the  first  Lord  of  Badenoch.  This,  however,  is  a  mistake,  as 
appears  from  several  deeds  executed  by  Walter  Comyn  as  Lord  of  Badenoch. 
In  one  agreement  between  him  and  Andrew,  Bishop  of  Moray,  which  must  have 
been  arranged  before  his  marriage,  as  in  the  deed  he  is  simply  styled  Sir  Walter 
Comyn,  he  grants  several  portions  of  the  territory  of  Badenoch  to  the  bishop.1 
In  another  arrangement  made  betwixt  him  and  the  same  bishop  in  the  year 
1234,  shortly  after  his  marriage,  he  is  styled  Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith.2 
Shortly  after  his  acquisition  of  the  lordship  of  Badenoch  in  1229  or 
1230,  Walter  Comyn  married  the  Lady  Isabella,  elder  daughter  and  heiress 
of  Maurice,  third  Earl  of  Menteith.  As  formerly  remarked,  the  marriage 
was  celebrated  in  the  end  of  the  year  1230  or  beginning  of  1231.  He 
was  witness  to  a  charter  by  King  Alexander  the  Second  at  Kincardine, 
confirming  a  gift  by  Maldouen  Earl  of  Lennox  to  the  Church  of  St.  Thomas 
the  Martyr  at  Arbroath,  of  four  oxen  yearly  for  the  welfare  of  the  soul  of 
the  late  King  William,  etc.,  on  the  9th  of  January  1231,  in  which  he  is 
designated  simply  Walter  Comyn.3  On  the  3d  of  February  in  the  same 
year,  he  witnessed  a  gift  by  the  King  at  Clackmannan  of  the  lands  of 
Cultrach  and  Balmerino  to  the  Abbey  of  Balmerino,  in  which  he  is  styled 
Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith.4  The  charter  and  gift  now  quoted,  the 
one  without  the  title  of  Earl  and  the  other  with  it,  show  that  his  marriage 
had  been  celebrated  in  the  course  of  the  interval  of  three  weeks  which 

1  Registrum  Moraviense,  p.  83.  3  Registrum  Vetus  de  Aberbrothoc,  p.  95. 

2  Ibid.  p.  98.  4  Liber  de  Balmerinach,  p.  4. 



elapsed  between  the  dates  of  these  two  deeds.  No  written  instrument  being 
now  extant  showing  the  investiture  of  Walter  Comyn  in  the  dignity  of  Earl 
of  Menteith,  it  is  impossible  to  say,  with  anything  like  certainty,  if  he 
enjoyed  the  title  by  courtesy  through  his  wife,  or  by  being  created  Earl 
of  Menteith  in  his  own  right. 

After  his  marriage  he  witnessed  many  charters  by  the  King,  and  from 
the  date  of  that  event  is  almost  invariably  described  as  Earl  of  Menteith. 
His  importance  was  greatly  increased  by  his  marriage,  and  the  acquisition 
of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  with  his  other  possessions,  rendered  him  one 
of  the  most  powerful  of  the  Scottish  nobles.  He  not  unfrequently  takes 
the  seniority  among  the  attesting  witnesses  to  royal  confirmations  and 
grants.  King  Alexander  the  Second  evidently  esteemed  him  as  a  wise  and 
prudent  counsellor,  and  kept  him  much  at  his  Court.  In  1233  he  was  with 
the  King  at  Traquair,  and  attested  a  confirmation  of  lands  by  the  King  to 
the  Abbey  of  Melrose.1  On  the  11th  of  June  1234  he  was  at  Scone,2  on 
the  13th  of  October  1235  at  Cadzow,  whence  the  King  addressed  a  letter  to 
the  Bishop  of  Glasgow,3  and  on  the  25th  December  of  the  same  year  he  was 
at  St.  Andrews,  when  the  King  granted  a  charter  of  the  lands  of  Tarvays  to 
the  Abbey  of  Balmerino.*  In  the  following  year,  1236,  he  witnessed  a 
charter  by  the  King  to  Eichard  of  Moray,  granted  on  the  23d  of  July  at 
Torres;5  and  on  the  27th  December,  at  Stirling,  he  witnessed  a  gift  by  the 
King  to  the  Abbey  of  Dunfermline  of  the  lands  of  Dolar,6  which  was 
followed  on  20th  October  1237  by  a  grant  of  the  forest  of  Dolar7  when  the 
King  was  at  Scone,  also  attended  by  the  Earl  of  Menteith.    A  short  time 

1  Liber  de  Melros,  vol.  i.  p.  222. 

2  Liber  Ecclesie  de  Scon,  p.  41. 

3  Registrum   Episeopatus    Glasguensis,    p. 

VOL.  I. 

4  Liber  de  Baltnerinoeh,  p.  61. 

5  Eegistrum  Moravienae,  p.  464. 

0  Registrum  de  Dunfermelyn,  p.  43. 
7  Ibid.  p.  43. 



afterwards  he  was  at  Edinburgh  Castle  with  the  King,  who,  while  there, 
granted  four  merks  out  of  his  lordship  of  Cadzow  for  the  support  of  a  deacon 
and  subdeacon  of  Glasgow.  The  grant  is  dated  8th  February  1237,  and  is 
attested  by  Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith.1 

At  this  period  Scotland  was  divided  into  two  great  parties,  the  National 
or  Patriotic  party,  who  made  it  their  chief  aim  to  preserve  the  independence 
of  Scotland,  and  a  party  who  were  supposed  to  further  the  interests  of  the 
English  Kings.  Walter  Comyn  steadily  allied  himself  with  the  Patriotic 
party,  and  took  a  leading  part  in  all  the  important  transactions  of  the 

After  the  death  of  his  father,  the  Earl  of  Buchan,  in  1233,  the  Earl  of 
Menteith  rapidly  rose  to  be  the  most  influential  nobleman  in  Scotland.  At 
this  time  he  is  described  by  Fordun  as  a  man  prudent  in  counsel,  valiant  in 
battle,  whose  foresight  had  been  attained  by  long  experience.  He  was  the 
head  of  a  large  and  powerful  family,  the  chief  of  numerous  vassals, 
possessed  of  high  talents,  and  of  a  strong  love  of  his  country,  which  enabled 
him  to  direct  the  great  power  thus  lying  in  his  hands  for  what  he  considered 
the  interest  of  Scotland.  At  a  time  when  the  Kings  of  England  were 
endeavouring  to  reduce  Scotland  to  a  state  of  vassalage  to  the  English  crown, 
the  patriotism  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith  was  devoted  to  the  preservation  of 
the  liberties  of  his  country.  Neither  his  counsel  nor  his  presence  were 
withheld  when  required  in  her  service.  Accordingly  we  find  him  at  York 
in  September  1237,  when  a  treaty  of  peace  was  entered  into  between  the 
Scottish  and  English  Kings,  over  the  long  disputed  claims  of  both  to  the 
northern  provinces  of  England,  and  he  undertook,  along  with  other  Scottish 
nobles,  to  maintain  that  treaty.2 

Not  long   afterwards   a   private   family  feud   nearly  involved   the   two 

1  Eegistrum  Episcopatus  Glasguensis,  p.  144.  2  Eymer's  Foedera,  vol.  i.  p.  234. 


countries  in  war,  though  but  for  the  part  taken  in  it  by  the  Earl  of  Menteith 
it  need  not  have  been  noticed  here.  The  circumstances,  however,  show  the 
vigilance  which,  as  chief  of  the  National  party,  he  displayed  to  protect  and 
avenge  his  friends.  At  a  tournament  held  near  Haddington  in  1241,  Sir 
Walter  Bisset,  a  knight  of  Norman  descent,  and  brother  of  William,  Lord  of 
Aboyne,  was  overthrown  by  Patrick  of  Galloway,  Earl  of  Athole.  This  defeat 
seems  to  have  rankled  in  Bisset's  breast,  and  when  his  youthful  antagonist, 
with  two  attendants,  was  burnt  to  death  in  the  house  in  which  he  slept  at 
Haddington  on  the  night  after  the  tournament,  he  was  suspected  to  have 
been  the  murderer.  The  sad  fate  of  this  young  and  promising  nobleman,  who 
is  said  to  have  been  warned  of  his  danger  by  the  wife  of  his  enemy,  roused 
the  fury  of  his  party.  They  denounced  the  Bissets,  and  openly  charged 
William,  Lord  of  Aboyne,  with  abetting  the  bloody  doings  of  bis  kinsman. 
In  vain  Bisset  protested  his  innocence.  The  Queen  even  pleaded  for  him, 
and  offered  to  prove  that  he  was  in  attendance  on  her  at  Forfar  on  the  night 
of  the  murder,  and  William,  Lord  of  Aboyne,  bestirred  himself  to  get  the  actual 
murderers  excommunicated.  "  His  cognisances  had  been  recognised  in  the 
town  of  Haddington ;  his  retainers  had  been  seen  during  the  night  of  the 
fire ;  and  these  were  sufficient  proofs  of  guilt  in  the  eyes  of  Walter  the  Earl 
of  Menteith,  and  John  the  Bed  Comyn,  his  nephew,  to  justify  their  harrying 
the  lands  of  the  obnoxious  baron,  who  sought  shelter  from  their  attacks 
within  the  walls  of  his  castle  of  Aboyne." 1  The  Bissets  were  banished  from 
the  country,  and  with  difficulty  escaped  with  their  lives.  Sir  Walter  Bisset 
went  to  England,  and  incited  Henry  the  Third  to  war  with  Scotland,  on  the 
pretext  that  Alexander  had  wrongfully  deprived  him  of  his  lands  without  his 
consent  as  the  Lord  Paramount  of  Scotland.  So  effectually  did  he  plead  his 
cause  that  war  was  decided  on  by  Henry.  In  1244  both  Kings  prepared 
1  Robertson's  Early  Kings,  vol.  ii.  p.  35- 


their  armies.  Alexander  marched  into  Northumberland,  and  Henry  concen- 
trated his  forces  at  Newcastle.  But  before  any  engagement  took  place  the 
English  barons  persuaded  the  King  to  make  peace.  An  agreement  was 
entered  into  between  the  two  Kings  on  the  14th  August  1244,  which  was 
signed  by  them  and  several  of  the  English  and  Scottish  nobles  and  barons, 
among  whom  Walter  Comyn  appears  as  one  of  those  who  guaranteed  this 

Henry  had  urged  against  Alexander,  amongst  his  reasons  for  the  war, 
that  Walter  Comyn  and  other  Scottish  lords  had  built  two  castles  in 
Liddesdale  and  Galloway,  to  the  prejudice  of  the  rights  of  the  English  Crown, 
and  to  the  detriment  of  the  English  lieges.  One  of  these  two  castles  was  the 
great  stronghold  of  Hermitage  in  Liddesdale,  which  was  erected  by  the  Earl 
of  Menteith  in  or  about  the  year  1244.  It  became  the  property  of  the  family, 
of  Soulis,  who  at  that  time  shared  the  fortunes  of  the  National  party.  Upon 
their  forfeiture  it  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  Douglases,  and  Archibald, 
sixth  Earl  of  Angus,  exchanged  Hermitage  Castle  with  Hepburn  Earl  of 
Bothwell  for  the  castle  and  lordship  of  Bothwell.  It  was  to  the  Castle  of 
Hermitage  that  Queen  Mary  rode  from  Jedburgh  to  inquire  for  her  favourite 
Bothwell,  when  wounded  by  a  mosstrooper,  by  which  journey  she  brought 
upon  herself  a  severe  fever.  Francis  Stewart,  Earl  of  Bothwell,  the  nephew 
of  James  Earl  of  Bothwell,  had  possession  of  the  Castle  of  Hermitage  for 
some  time,  until  upon  his  forfeiture  it  fell  to  the  first  Earl  of  Buccleuch. 

The  other  castle  in  Galloway  which  Walter  Comyn  was  blamed  for 
building,  was  probably  Dalswinton,  long  known  as  Comyn's  Castle,  from 
beino-  one  of  the  chief  residences  of  that  family.  Sir  John  Comyn,  Lord  of 
Galloway,  commonly  known  as  the  Bed  Comyn,  dwelt  here  during  the 
eventful  period   of  the  wars   of  succession  which  arose  on  the  death   of 

1  Rymer's  Fuedera,  vol.  i.  p.  257. 


Alexander  the  Third,  and  he  took  an  active  and  important  part  in  the  affairs 
of  the  kingdom.  After  Wallace  resigned  the  office  of  Governor  of  Scotland, 
Comyn  was  chosen  one  of  the  Eegents,  and  on  account  of  the  power  of  the 
family  which  he  represented,  was  looked  up  to  as  the  head  of  the  Begency. 
Sir  John  Comyn  was  the  grandnephew  of  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  being 
the  son  of  John  Comyn,  known  as  the  Black  Comyn,  and  grandson  of  Sir 
John  Comyn,  younger  brother  of  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith.  His  father 
having  married  Marjorie,  the  sister  of  John  Baliol,  Sir  John  Comyn  was 
Baliol's  nephew,  and  thus  became  a  competitor  for  the  Scottish  crown  with 
Bobert  Bruce  after  the  degradation  of  Baliol.  Bruce  had  also  been  elected 
one  of  the  Scottish  Eegents,  and  in  order  to  free  their  country  from  the 
claims  of  King  Edward  the  First,  Comyn  and  Bruce  entered  into  a  secret 
agreement,  whereby  Comyn  waived  his  pretensions  to  the  crown,  and  agreed 
to  assist  Bruce.  On  this  understanding  Bruce  repaired  to  the  Court  of  the 
English  King,  but  while  there  was  betrayed  by  Comyn  to  Edward,  and 
compelled  to  escape  for  his  life.  On  returning  to  Scotland,  Bobert  Bruce 
learned  the  treachery  of  his  co-regent,  and  having  met  him  in  Dumfries,  he 
remonstrated  with  him  on  his  treasonable  conduct.  Their  meeting  took  place 
within  the  precincts  of  the  Franciscan  Church  of  the  Minorites  in  Dumfries. 
But  few  words  passed  between  the  disputants.  Comyn  denied  the  charge 
made  against  him  in  such  terms  as  to  irritate  his  opponent,  and  the  next 
instant  Bruce's  dagger  had  pierced  his  heart.  By  that  deed  Bruce  dealt  the 
death-blow  to  the  power  of  the  Comyns  in  Scotland.  They  sank  in  influ- 
ence as  Bruce  gained  in  strength,  and  they  never  afterwards  regained  the 
prestige  which  had  been  brought  to  the  family  by  the  wisdom  and  prowess 
of  the  great  Earl  of  Menteith. 

The  Castle  of  Dalswinton  is  said  to  have  been  burned  by  Bruce  after  the 
murder  of  John  Comyn  at  Dumfries  in  1305,  but  it  was  frequently  afterwards 


used  as  a  stronghold  by  both  Scottish  and  English  troops,  as  it  alternately  fell 
into  the  hands  of  either.  In  1309  it  was  in  the  hands  of  the  English,1  and 
in  1313  again  in  those  of  the  Scots.2  It  was  a  garrison  of  the  English  in 
1348,  and  King  Edward  the  Third  gave  instructions  to  Adomar  of  Athol 
[Atheles],  his  Sheriff  of  Dumfries  at  the  time,  to  repair  the  castle.3  It  was 
stormed  by  Eoger  of  Kirkpatrick  in  1356,4  and  was  one  of  the  four  castles 
which  David  the  Second  was  suspected  of  having  in  a  private  treaty  with 
Edward  the  Third  engaged  to  demolish  on  his  restoration  to  his  throne  in 
1357.5  Fordun  relates  that  thirteen  castles  were  destroyed,  and  that  they 
for  the  most  part  remained  unbuilt  even  in  the  reign  of  King  Eobert  the 
Second.6  In  1792  Allan  Cunningham  saw  part  of  the  walls  of  the  old 
castle  of  Dalswinton  still  standing ;  in  some  places  he  says  they  were  twelve, 
and  in  one  place  fourteen  feet  thick,  and  pieces  of  burnt  wood  still  clinging 
to  them.7 

In  1246  the  Earl  of  Menteith  was  with  the  King  at  Selkirk,  and  wit- 
nessed a  charter  of  confirmation,  dated  the  26th  May,  by  Alexander  to  the 
doorkeeper  of  Melrose  Abbey  of  a  half  camcate  of  land  in  Edinham.s 
On  the  1 2th  of  November  of  the  same  3rear,  Alexander,  while  at  Edinburgh, 
confirmed  a  charter  by  Roger  de  Quincey  to  the  Abbey  of  Scone  of  lands 
in  Perth ;  and  the  name  of  Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith,  being  in  the 
charter  as  a  witness,  shows  that  he  was  present  with  the  King  on  that 
occasion.9  In  the  following  November  King  Alexander  was  at  Holyrood, 
and  confirmed  a  gift  of  pasture  by  the  Earl  of  Dunbar  to  the  Abbey  of 
Melrose,  to  which  the  Earl  of  Menteith  is  also  a  witness.10 

1  Eotuli  Scotise,  vol.  i.  p.  SO.  6  Fordun,  lib.  xiv.  cap.  18. 

2  Fordun,  lib.  xiii.  cap.  19.  7  New  Statistical  Account,  vol.  iv.  p.  59. 

3  Kotuli  Scotise,  vol.  i.  p.  713.  s  Liber  de  Meh-os,  vol.  i.  p.  216. 

4  Fordun,  lib.  xiv.  cap.  15.  8  Liber  Ecclesie  de  Scon,  p.  51. 
6  Ibid.  cap.  18.  10  Liber  de  Melros,  vol.  i.  p.  205. 



The  events  which  followed  on  the  death  of  King  Alexander  the  Second 
in  1249,  and  the  accession  of  his  young  son  Alexander  the  Third  to  the 
throne,  show  that  Walter  Comyn  was,  as  the  old  historian  says,  the  most  able, 
wise,  and  powerful  nobleman  of  his  time.  Alexander  the  Third  was  only 
in  his  eighth  year  when  his  father  died,  and  within  five  days  after  that  event 
he  went  to  Scone  with  the  Estates  of  the  realm  to  be  crowned.  Before  the 
proceedings  commenced,  objections  were  made  and  doubts  expressed,  chiefly 
by  the  party  favourable  to  the  King  of  England,  as  to  whether  the  ceremony 
ought  to  be  performed.  The  day  was  said  to  be  inauspicious ;  but  Fordun 
states  this  was  said,  not  because  the  day  was  inauspicious  [asgyptiacus],  but 
because  Alan  Durward  desired,  with  his  own  hand,  to  invest  the  King  with 
the  knightly  sword.  It  was  urged  as  unprecedented  and  premature  to  crown 
the  King  before  he  became  a  knight.  These  objections  are  alleged  to  have 
been  made  by  those  favourable  to  the  English  King.  But  Walter  Comyn, 
Earl  of  Menteith,  with  an  honourable  anxiety  to  watch  over  the  interests  of 
Ms  deceased  master's  child,  warmly  expostulated  against  the  projected 
postponement.1  He  remembered  the  late  protest  of  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
and  was  aware  that  the  King  of  England  was  intriguing  at  Borne  to 
obstruct  the  coronation.2  Menteith  is  reported  by  Fordun  to  have  replied 
to  the  arguments  of  the  objectors  in  the  following  strain : — That  he  had  seen 
a  king  consecrated  who  was  not  yet  a  knight,  and  had  many  a  time  heard 
of  kings  being  consecrated  who  had  not  previously  been  knighted ;  further, 
that  a  country  without  a  king  was,  beyond  doubt,  like  a  ship  amid  the 
waves  of  the  sea  without  rower  or  steersman.  He  had  always  loved  King- 
Alexander  of  pious  memory,  now  deceased,  and  this  boy  also  for  his  father's 
sake.  So  he  moved  that  this  boy  be  raised  to  the  throne  as  quickly 
as  possible,  seeing  it  is  always  hurtful  to  put  off  what  may  be  done  at 
1  Robertson's  Early  Kings,  vol.  ii.  p.  53.  "-  Chalmers's  Caledonia,  vol.  i.  p.  639. 


once.1  By  this  speech  Walter  Comyn  overcame  the  scruples  of  a  number  of 
the  opposing  nobles,  and  so  far  silenced  the  objections  of  the  rest  that  the 
Bishops  of  St.  Andrews  and  Dunkeld,  and  the  Abbot  of  Scone,  as  well  as 
the  nobles  and  the  whole  clergy  and  people,  with  one  voice  gave  their 
consent  to  the  coronation.  David  of  Bernham,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews, 
remarked  that  William  Rufus  had  been  knighted  by  Lanfrane,  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  and  it  was  now  arranged  that  the  Bishop  should  both  gird 
the  sword  of  state  upon  the  youthful  monarch  and  crown  him,  which  was 
done  accordingly. 

It  was  no  mere  factious  motive  which  impelled  the  Earl  of  Menteith  to 
this  step.  He  was  justly  afraid  of  the  undue  exercise  of  English  influence, 
and  that  Henry  would  eagerly  seize  a  favourable  opportunity  to  advance 
his  own  pretensions  to  the  Scottish  crown.  As  it  was,  the  English  King- 
endeavoured  to  get  the  Pope  to  annul  the  coronation  of  King  Alexander 
the  Third,  on  the  pretence  that  he  was  his  feudal  superior,  but  without 
effect.  In  addition  to  thus  securing  his  country  from  the  attempts  of  foreign 
kingcraft,  the  Earl  of  Menteith  also  maintained  its  internal  peace.  By 
his  prompt  and  energetic  counsel  he  united  the  divided  nobles,  and  as 
Chalmers  remarks,  "  The  bold  baron  of  Menteith  deserves  lasting  praise 
for  having  thus  exploded  a  scruple  which  might  have  involved  an  irascible 
nation  in  civil  war."  2 

Frustrated  in  his  plans  by  the  sagacity  of  Menteith,  Henry  yet  sought 
in  another  way  to  obtain  an  interest  in  the  management  of  the  affairs  of 
Scotland.  Soon  after  the  inauguration  of  King  Alexander  the  Third,  he 
required  the  fulfilment  of  one  of  the  conditions  of  the  Treaty  of  Newcastle, 
by  which  Alexander  was  contracted  in  marriage  to  the  Princess  Margaret, 
Henry's  eldest  daughter.     The  Scottish  nobles  admitted  the  justice  of  his 

1  Fordun,  edition  1872,  vol.  ii.  p.  289.  2  Chalmers's  Caledonia,  vol.  i.  p.  639. 


claim,  and  the  marriage  was  arranged  to  take  place  at  York,  the  northern 

capital  of  England,  on  the  25th  of  December  1251.     On  that  day  Alexander 

was  girded  with  the  belt  of  knighthood  by  his  destined  father-in-law,  and  on 

the  following  day  he  was  married  to  the  Princess  Margaret  of  England,  in  the 

midst  of  great  magnificence  and  splendour.     Alexander  afterwards  performed 

the  usual  homage  for  the  fiefs  which  he  held  from  the  English  crown,  and 

thereupon  Henry  pressed  his  claims  to  receive  homage  for  the  kingdom  of 

Scotland.     With  a  spirit   and   prudence   far   beyond  his   years,  Alexander 

replied    that    he   had    come   at   the   request   of  the   English   King   for   a 

peaceful  and  an  honourable  purpose,  to  celebrate  a  marriage,  and  not  to 

give  an   answer  to  a   question  of  such   importance,  about  which   he   had 

not  even  had  time  to  consult  his  Council.1 

The  Earl  of  Menteith  was,  of  course,  present  with  the  Scottish  Court  at 

York,  and  before  the  conclusion  of  the  festivities  became  one  of  the  King 

of  Scotland's  first  councillors.     This  was  brought  about  in  the  following  way. 

Alan   Durward,   who   had    been   foremost  in   opposing  the   coronation   of 

Alexander  at  Scone,  was  accused  by  the  Earls  of  Menteith  and  Mar  of  a 

design    against   the   Scottish   crown.      Durward   held  the   office   of    High 

Justiciar,  and  in  that  capacity  was  the  chief  councillor  of  the  King.     His 

wife  was  a  natural  sister  of  King  Alexander  the  Third,  and  the  two  Earls 

accused  him  of  having  petitioned  the  Pope  for  her  legitimation,  by  which, 

if  he  had  been  successful,  and  the  King  had  died  without  heirs,  his  children 

would  have  succeeded  to  the  throne.     The  Scottish  Chancellor,  Robert,  Abbot 

of  Dunfermline,  had  aided  Durward's  attempts,  and  on  the  conspiracy  being 

denounced  both  fled  from  York.     Upon  this,  with  Henry's  assistance,  new 

guardians  were  appointed  for  Alexander,  at  the  head  of  whom  were  the 

Earls  of  Menteith  and  Mar. 

1  Robertson's  Early  Kings,  vol.  ii.  p.  59. 
VOL.  I.  D 


Menteith  was  now  at  the  zenith  of  his  power.  He  was  the  chief  of  his 
party,  of  which  two  barons,  Eobert  de  Eos  and  John  de  Baliol,  had  the  name 
of  Eegents.  Fordun  states  that  at  this  time  the  King's  councillors  were 
but  so  many  kings,  and  complains  much  of  the  oppressions  practised  by 
them  upon  the  people.  They  are  said  to  have  kept  Alexander  and  his  Queen 
in  Edinburgh  Castle,  of  which  usage  the  latter  complained  to  her  father, 
Henry  King  of  England.  She  described  her  place  of  residence  as  "  a  dismal 
and  solitary  fortress,  exposed  to  the  unhealthy  air  from  off  the  sea ;"  that 
she  was  forbidden  to  change  her  residence,  was  deprived  of  her  proper 
attendants,  and  even  denied  the  society  of  her  own  husband.1  These 
grievances  were  probably  exaggerated  by  the  royal  lady,  as  she  may  have 
become  weary  of  the  constraint  which  the  Eegents  thought  it  necessary 
to  use  lest  the  opposite  party,  which  was  also  very  powerful,  should  obtain 
possession  of  their  charges. 

From  authentic  records,  however,  we  learn  that  the  young  King  was 
not  so  straitly  kept  in  one  place  as  the  information  supplied  to  the  English 
King  would  lead  us  to  infer.  Owing  to  Alexander's  youth,  the  welfare  of 
the  kingdom  required  that  his  guardians  should  jealously  watch  that  no 
undue  advantage  should  be  taken  of  his  inexperience.  He  was  at  Linlithgow 
on  the  21st  of  April  1252,  and  issued  a  mandate  to  his  sheriffs  and  bailies, 
which  was  witnessed  by  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  William  Earl  of  Mar,  chamber- 
lain, and  Alexander  Stewart.2  Again,  on  the  8th  of  June,  the  same  year, 
he  was  at  Newbattle,  and  confirmed  a  grant  to  the  Abbey  of  Melrose  of  the 
meadow  of  Farningdun,  to  which  the  Earl  of  Menteith  is  a  witness.3  On  the 
17th  of  September  in  the  following  year  he  was  at  Stirling  with  his  Council; 
and  in  their  presence,  Emma,  daughter  and  heiress  of  the  late  Gilbert  of 

1  Robertson's  Early  Kings,  vol.  ii.  p.  62.  2  Fragraeuta  Sooto-Monastica,  p.  xlii. 

3  Liber  de  Melros,  vol.  i.  p.  300. 


Smythetun,  resigned  and  restored  the  lands  of  Smythetun  to  the  Abbey  of 
Dunfermline,  upon  which  the  Council  drew  up  a  formal  consent  and 
testimony,  and  the  Earl  of  Menteith  ranks  first  among  the  nobles.1  The 
young  King  appears  next  at  St.  Andrews,  where  he  confirms  a  charter  by 
Malcolm  Earl  of  Fife  to  David  of  Graham,  on  the  27th  of  December  1253, 
to  which  deed  Menteith  is  also  a  witness  ;2  and  on  the  4th  of  February 
following,  at  Edinburgh  Castle,  Alexander  granted  to  the  Abbey  of  Dun- 
fermline an  immunity  from  all  their  debts,  etc.,  also  witnessed  by  Walter 
Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteitli.3 

King  Henry,  however,  sympathised  with  the  complaints  of  his  daughter, 
the  young  Queen  of  Scotland,  as  to  the  manner  in  which  it  was  alleged  she 
was  treated.  He  instituted  inquiries  into  the  matter,  and  Durward,  who  had 
accompanied  the  English  King  to  France,  and  by  his  great  military  skill 
ingratiated  himself  into  Henry's  favour,  eagerly  seized  the  opportunity  thus 
afforded  of  procuring  the  downfall  of  the  Comyns.  In  1255  Durward 
returned  to  Scotland,  and  laid  his  plans  so  carefully  that  by  a  clever 
stratagem  he  succeeded  in  obtaining  possession  of  Edinburgh  Castle,  and 
with  it  the  persons  of  the  youthful  King  and  Queen.  The  Comyns,  thus 
taken  unawares,  strove  to  retrieve  this  disaster,  but  it  was  too  late.  The 
stronghold  was  in  the  possession  of  their  foes,  and  King  Henry  was 
approaching  the  Borders  with  his  army.  Menteith  was  obliged  to  submit  to 
overwhelming  odds.  For  greater  security  Durward's  party  removed  the  King 
and  Queen  to  Eoxburgh  Castle,  where  they  met  the  English  King,  through 
whose  influence  the  former  Regents  and  Councillors  were  supplanted  by 
others  more  favourable  to  the  English  supremacy.  Tytler  says  that  "  Henry 
assumed  to  himself  the  title  of  '  principal  counsellor  to  the  illustrious  King 

1  Registrum  de  Dunfermelyn,  pp.  49,  50.  2  The  Lennox,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  ii.  p.  15. 

3  Registrum  de  Dunfermelyn,  p.  51. 


of  Scotland;'  and  that  in  the  instruments  drawn  up  on  this  occasion  some 
provisions  were  inserted  which  were  loudly  complained  of  as  derogatory  to 
the  dignity  of  the  kingdom  ;  the  ahettors  of  England  were  stigmatised  as 
conspirators  who  were  equally  obnoxious  to  prelates,  barons  and  burgesses ; 
and  the  Bishop  of  Glasgow,  the  Bishop-elect  of  St.  Andrews,  the  Chancellor, 
and  the  Earl  of  Menteith  indignantly  refused  to  affix  their  seals  to  a  deed 
which,  as  they  asserted,  compromised  the  liberties  of  the  country."1  The 
Chronicle  of  Melrose  calls  the  deed  a  "  nefandissimum  scriptum  ;"2  and 
Wyntoun3  says — 

"  Thare  wes  made  swylk  ordynans, 
That  wes  gret  grefe  and  displeasans 
Till  of  Scotland  ye  thre  Statis, 
Burgens,  Barownys,  and  Prelatis." 

The  new  Begents  were  entirely  indebted  to  the  English  King  for  their 

success,  for  the  feeling  of  the  whole  nation  was  evidently  against  them  ;  and 

Tytler  remarks  that  although  the  ambition  of  the  Comyns  may  have  given 

some  plausible  colour  to  the  designs  of  their  enemies,  yet  the  new  measures 

were   generally  and  justly  unpopular;    and   they  soon   came   to   an   end. 

As  soon  as  the  new  Begents  had  strengthened  themselves  in  their  offices, 

they  summoned  their  predecessors  to  give  an  account  of  their  proceedings. 

The  National  party,  however,  refused  to  acknowledge  the  new  Government, 

and  a  state  of  anarchy  was  the  result.     The  new  Begents  tried  to  coerce 

and  persecute  their  rivals,  and  as  they  could  not  reach  the  nobles,  they 

discharged  their  vengeance  upon  Gamelin,  the  bishop-elect  of  St.  Andrews, 

who  had  formerly  been  Chancellor.     On  the  see  of  St.  Andrews  becoming 

vacant  by  the  death  of  David  of  Bernham,  Gamelin  sought  to  obtain  it; 

1  Tytler's  History,  vol.  i.  p.  28.  2  Chronica  de  Mailros,  p.  181. 

3  Macpherson's  edition,  book  vn.  chap.  x. 


but  Abel,  the  Archdeacon  of  St.  Andrews,  obtained  it  from  the  Pope  for 
himself.  On  his  death,  after  a  very  short  tenure  of  office,  Gamelin  was 
elected  without  opposition ;  but  the  Eegents  strenuously  opposed  his  occupa- 
tion of  the  see,  and  on  his  being  consecrated  by  the  Bishop  of  Glasgow, 
they  outlawed  him  and  confiscated  the  revenues.  Gamelin  hastened  to 
Borne,  induced  the  Pope  to  listen  to  his  appeal,  and  was  successful  in 
obtaining  from  him  a  decision  in  his  favour  against  the  Scottish  Eegents. 
They  yielded  so  far  as  to  allow  the  bishop  to  possess  his  benefice,  on 
condition  of  his  paying  a  large  fine.  This  Gamelin  refused  to  do,  and 
without  further  delay  they  banished  him  and  retained  possession  of  his 
revenues.  Again  the  bishop  betook  himself  to  Borne,  and  this  time  the 
Pope  appointed  the  Bishop  of  Dunblane  and  the  Abbots  of  Melrose  and 
Jedburgh  to  excommunicate  the  recalcitrant  Eegents  unless  they  yielded. 
The  sentence  was  duly  announced  in  every  church  and  chapel  throughout 
Scotland;  but  as  the  Eegents  paid  no  attention  to  it,  they  were  adjudged 
contumacious,  and  solemnly  excommunicated  by  name  in  the  Abbey  Church 
of  Cambuskenneth  by  the  Bishop  of  Dunblane  and  the  Abbots  of  Jedburgh 
and  Melrose,  and  the  ceremony  was  afterwards  repeated  "by  bell  and 
candle  "  in  every  chapel  in  the  kingdom. 

The  National  party  considered  this  too  good  an  opportunity  to  be  missed, 
and  although  arrangements  had  been  proceeding  for  a  compromise  between 
the  rival  factions,  and  even  the  very  day  fixed  for  settling  the  terms  of  it,  all 
thoughts  of  such  a  measure  were  abandoned.  The  Comyns  mustered  their 
full  strength,  and  supported  by  a  knowledge  of  the  popularity  of  their  party, 
resolved  by  a  bold  stratagem  to  reinstate  themselves  in  the  government. 
During  the  regency  of  Durward  and  his  coadjutors  King  Alexander  had  paid 
a  visit  to  the  Court  of  his  father-in-law,  but  had  now  returned  to  Scotland, 
and  was  holding  his  Court  for  the  time  at  Kinross.     Menteith  determined 


to  obtain  possession  of  the  King's  person,  and  on  the  night  of  the  28th 
October  1257,  under  cover  of  the  darkness,  Alexander  was  seized  in 
bed,  and  conveyed  with  his  Queen  before  morning  to  Stirling  Castle. 
"  Menteith,"  says  Robertson,1  "  justified  his  conduct  by  maintaining  that  he 
had  not  overstepped  the  duty  of  a  loyal  subject  in  rescuing  the  person  of  his 
sovereign  from  the  hands  of  excommunicated  traitors,  who,  if  they  had  been 
permitted  to  proceed  in  their  nefarious  career,  would  have  brought  an 
interdict  upon  the  entire  kingdom.  He  blamed  the  King  for  receding  from 
the  promise  of  his  early  youth,  and  for  pursuing  a  line  of  conduct  most 
injurious  to  the  interests  of  his  kingdom,  by  promoting  aliens  and  foreigners 
in  preference  to  his  own  native  subjects ;  whilst  he  openly  charged  Queen 
Margaret  with  an  undue  leaning  towards  the  interests  of  her  father,  whom 
she  had  stimulated  to  bring  a  hostile  army  against  her  husband's  country, 
thus  causing  irreparable  mischief,  and  entailing  ruin  upon  Robert  de  Ros, 
the  most  eminent  baron  of  the  north." 

Lord  Hailes  appears  to  have  fallen  into  an  error  in  reference  to  Robert 
de  Ros.  His  Lordship  represents  that  the  Comyns  vented  their  vengeance 
on  him.  "  Already  punished  in  England  as  the  enemy  of  the  Queen,  he  was 
now  punished  in  Scotland  as  her  partisan,  and  all  his  goods  were  confiscated." 
This  appears  strange  conduct  towards  a  former  friend  and  ally ;  but  Lord 
Hailes  has  misrepresented  the  case  of  Ros  by  misreading  the  words  of 
Matthew  Paris,  "  as  if  the  ruin  of  de  Ros  was  imputable  to  the  Comyns  for 
his  subsequent  espousal  of  the  Queen's  cause,  whereas  the  historian  (Matthew 
Paris)  evidently  alludes  to  the  loss  of  de  Ros's  great  English  fiefs,  forfeited 
by  Henry.  De  Ros  had  no  opportunity  of  becoming  a  partisan  of  the 
Queen  of  Scotland,  for  he  was  thrown  into  prison,  and  even  his  life  was 
in  danger." 2 

1  Scotland  under  ber  Early  Kings,  vol.  ii.  p.  72.  -  Ibid.  p.  73. 


Menteith's  success  was  complete :  the  opposing  faction  were  utterly 
discomfited,  and  Durward  fled  to  England.  Most  of  the  barons  who  had 
assisted  him  followed  his  example,  and  as  it  was  likely  that  the  King  of 
England  would  espouse  their  cause,  the  Comyns  lost  no  time  in  strengthening 
their  position  by  entering  into  an  alliance  offensive  and  defensive  with  the 
Welsh,  who  were  then  at  variance  with  England.  The  treaty  was  entered  into 
on  the  18th  of  March  1258  by  a  number  of  the  Scottish  nobles,  with  Walter 
Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith,  at  their  head,  while  among  the  others  were  Alexander 
Comyn,  Earl  of  Buchan,  Justiciar  of  Scotland,  William,  Earl  of  Mar,  William, 
Earl  of  Ross,  John  Comyn,  Justiciar  of  Galloway,  and  Aymer  de  Maxwell, 
Chamberlain  of  Scotland ;  on  the  Welsh  side  was  Llewellyn,  son  of  Griffin, 
Prince  of  Wales,  with  a  number  of  his  magnates.  The  agreement  by  the 
Scottish  nobles  was  made  without  the  consent  of  King  Alexander,  but  it  was 
conditional  on  his  pleasure,  and  they  promised,  so  far  as  lay  in  their  power, 
to  induce  him  to  observe  the  obligation.  They  bound  themselves  not  to 
permit  any  force  to  leave  Scotland  for  the  purpose  of  assisting  the  King  of 
England  against  the  Welsh,  but,  on  the  contrary,  were  to  assist  the  latter 
with  help  and  counsel ;  and  in  addition  to  this,  commercial  relations  were 
established  between  the  two  countries.  Welsh  traders  were  to  be  at  liberty 
to  come  and  go  and  vend  their  wares  as  they  pleased,  and  Scottish  traders 
were  to  be  encouraged  to  go  to  Wales.1 

It  was  not  the  desire  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith  and  his  friends  that  the 
nation  should  be  involved  in  war  with  England,  nor,  if  possible,  any  longer 
tormented  with  intestine  turmoil.  They  accordingly  assented  to  a  meeting  to 
be  held  at  Jedburgh,  with  envoys  sent  by  the  King  of  England  for  the  purpose 
of  effecting  a  coalition,  but  at  the  same  time  took  the  precaution  to  have 
a  large  number  of  their  followers  at  hand  in  Jedwood  Eorest,  as  they  knew 

1  Piymer's  Foedera,  vol.  i.  p.  370. 


that  the  English  had  a  considerahle  force  at  Norham,  and  would  endeavour 
to  seize  the  person  of  Alexander  if  it  were  possible.  The  strength  of  the 
Scots  proved  amply  sufficient  to  defeat  any  such  intention.  Menteith  acted 
prudently  and  moderately,  and  at  the  conclusion  of  the  conference,  which 
lasted  three  weeks,  Alexander's  Council  consisted  of  the  Queen-mother,  Mary 
de  Couci,  and  her  second  husband  John  de  Brienne,  and  four  of  the  leaders 
of  either  party,  namely,  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  the  Earls  of  Menteith, 
Buchan,  and  Mar,  Alexander  Stewart,  Alan  Durward,  Eobert  of  Manners, 
and  Gilbert  of  Hay.  The  great  offices  of  the  State,  however,  remained  with 
the  Comyns,  and  consequently  they  were  the  party  really  in  power. 
"With  this  arrangement  King  Henry  expressed  himself  satisfied,1  and  the 
internal  discords  of  Scotland  gradually  ceased  from  the  date  of  this 

The  struggle  against  English  interference,  so  nobly  and  successfully 
conducted  by  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  although  attended  with  much  misery, 
rapine,  and  bloodshed  throughout  the  country,  was  almost  concluded  when 
he  died.  His  death,  which  occurred  in  November  1258,  was  both  sudden 
and  unexpected.  Henry  learned  the  news,  apparently  with  satisfaction, 
while  he  was  at  St.  Albans,  "  that  a  stumbling  charger  had  at  length  released 
him  from  the  ablest  and  most  consistent  opponent  of  his  policy  amongst  the 
Scottish  Begents;  for  Menteith  had  been  crushed  by  the  fall  of  his  horse, 
and  the  aged  Earl  never  recovered  from  the  shock."2  Such  was  the  cause 
of  his  death  as  reported  in  England,  but  in  Scotland  it  was  rumoured  that 
his  Countess  had  poisoned  him ;  and  her  conduct  in  remarrying  almost 
immediately  afterwards,  and  choosing  an  obscure  Englishman  for  her 
husband,  gave  some  colour  to  the  story.  By  the  death  of  this  Earl  of  Menteith 
Scotland  lost  a  patriot  and  a  statesman  who  never  wavered  in  his  endeavours 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  378.  2  Robertson's  Early  Kings,  vol.  ii.  p.  79. 


to  establish  her  independence,  and  the  National  party  lost  a  leader  "whose 
courage  and  energy  were  the  soul  of  their  councils." 

The  death  of  Menteith  revived  the  hopes  of  the  English  monarch  that  he 
might  yet  be  able  to  obtain  Scotland,  and  he  soon  afterwards  despatched  an 
ambassador  in  the  person  of  William  de  Horton,  a  monk  of  St.  Albans, 
to  request  the  presence  of  King  Alexander  and  his  Queen  at  London  to  treat 
of  important  State  matters,  which,  however,  were  not  allowed  to  transpire  in 
the  Scottish  Parliament.  But  Menteith's  spirit  had  not  ceased  to  exert  an 
influence  upon  his  countrymen,  although  he  was  no  longer  personally  among 
them,  and  the  fruits  of  his  long  and  devoted  struggles  to  maintain  the 
independence  of  his  country  were  manifested  in  the  cautious  manner  in 
which  the  Scottish  Parliament  acted  in  regard  to  the  proposals  of  the 
English  King.  They  had  become  extremely  jealous  of  the  interference 
of  England,  and  before  they  consented  to  the  absence  of  the  King  from 
Scotland,  they  despatched  a  secret  embassy  to  the  English  Court,  to  state  the 
conditions  on  which  alone  they  would  yield  to  the  wishes  of  the  English  King. 

Historians  have  recounted  some  of  the  prominent  incidents  in  the  life  of 
this  Earl  of  Menteith.  But  they  have  generally  omitted  to  allude  to  one 
important  event  in  his  life,  the  founding  of  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome 
on  the  island  of  that  name  in  the  Lake  of  Menteith.  The  original  charter 
or  warrant  for  the  erection  of  the  Priory  is  dated  16th  June  1238.  It  was 
thus  about  eight  years  after  his  marriage  with  the  Countess  that  Walter 
Comyn  commenced  the  foundation  of  the  Priory,  which  for  upwards  of 
three  centuries  flourished  as  a  religious  house,  and  the  ruins  of  which  still 
form  so  picturesque  a  monument  on  their  beautiful  island.  The  founda- 
tion attests  the  piety  and  generosity  of  this  patriotic  Scotchman.  The 
document  which  authorises  the  building  of  the  Priory  by  the  Earl  of  Menteith 
contains  a  mandate  by  Pope  Gregory  for  the  renovation  and  support  of  the 

VOL.  I.  E 


church  of  Dunblane,  in  which  it  is  appointed  that  the  fourth  part  of  the 
teinds  of  the  churches  of  the  diocese  of  Dunblane  should  be  given  for 
the  support  of  the  church  of  Dunblane  and  its  bishop.  A  dispute  seems  to 
have  arisen  between  the  Earl  and  the  Bishop.  In  his  "  Scotland  under 
her  Early  Kings,"  Robertson  says,  "  When  the  Pope  granted  to  the  Bishop 
a  fourth  of  the  tithes  of  the  whole  diocese  for  the  support  of  himself,  a  dean, 
and  canons,  the  Bishop  seems  to  have  abandoned  '  all  right  of  pension  out  of 
the  lands  or  churches  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith,'  who  was  permitted  to  found 
a  house  for  regular  canons  at  Inchniahomoc,  making  over  the  church  of 
Kippen  to  found  a  canonry  in  Dunblane  Cathedral,  and  the  church  of 
Callander  for  the  Bishop  himself.  This  arrangement  wears  very  much  the 
appearance  of  a  compromise,  as  if,  at  the  revival  of  the  see,  David  had 
assigned  the  earldoms  of  Strathearn  and  Menteith  to  the  Bishop  as  his 
diocese,  neither  of  the  Earls,  in  the  first  instance,  resigning  the  church  lands 
in  their  possession  until  the  Earl  of  Menteith  waived  all  claim  to  the  patron- 
age of  the  see  in  return  for  the  permission  to  found  the  family  Priory  of 
Inch  Mahomoc ;  whilst  the  Bishop  waived  all  further  claim  upon  the 
earldom  of  Menteith  in  return  for  the  churches  of  Kippen  and  Callander." 1 

The  grave  of  this  great  Scotchman  is  not  known.  Tradition  states  that 
the  ancient  burial-place  of  the  Earls  of  Menteith  was  at  Kippen.  But  this 
Earl  had  by  his  new  foundation  superseded  Kippen  as  a  place  of  sepulture, 
and  it  may  be  inferred  that  his  remains  would  find  a  resting-place  in  that 
Priory  which  his  piety  had  reared  in  the  beautiful  "  Isle  of  Rest,"  where 
the  ashes  of  his  brother-in-law,  another  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  his 
Countess  are  said  to  repose. 

Both  Chalmers  and  Mrs.  Gumming  Bruce  say  that  Walter  Corny  n  died 
without  issue  by  his  wife  Isabella.     He  appears,  however,  to  have  had  a  son 

1  Early  Kings,  vol.  i.  p.  336,  note. 


Henry,  who,  as  son  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  is  mentioned  as  a  witness  to 
a  charter  by  Maldouen  Earl  of  Lennox,  granted  about  1250,  restoring  to 
Maldouen,  Dean  of  Luss,  and  Gillemore  his  son,  certain  lands  of  Luss.1  He 
probably  predeceased  his  father,  as  no  mention  is  made  of  him  after  the 
latter's  death.  The  Earl  certainly  left  a  daughter,  Isabella  Comyn.  His 
estates  of  Badenoch  may  have  been  inherited  by  his  nephew  and  heir- 
male,  William,  the  son  of  Sir  John  Comyn,  his  brother  ;  and  the  earldom  of 
Menteith  should  have  been  inherited  by  his  daughter,  Isabella  Comyn. 
But  owing  to  the  proceedings  of  her  mother,  who  survived  her  husband, 
the  earldom  was  transferred  to  Lady  Mary,  the  younger  sister  of  Isabella 
Countess  of  Menteith,  and  her  husband,  Walter  Stewart,  as  hereinafter 
explained  in  the  Memoir  of  the  Countess  Mary. 

1  The  Lennox,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  ii.  p.  405. 

Seal  of  Alexander  Comyn,  Lord  of  Buchan. 



SIR  JOHN  RUSSELL,  Knight,  her  second  Husband. 

1258— Circa  1273. 

THE  history  of  this  lady  after  the  death  of  her  first  husband,  Walter 
Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith,  as  well  as  the  history  of  her  daughter,  Lady 
Isabella  Comyn,  illustrates  the  misfortunes  which  in  those  days  frequently 
attended  the  succession  of  an  heiress  to  a  great  territorial  estate. 

The  grave  had  not  long  closed  over  the  Countess's  first  husband,  the 
Earl  of  Menteith,  when  she  married  Sir  John  Russell,  an  English  knight 
of  somewhat  obscure  origin.  This  marriage  was  very  unpopular,  and 
fraught  with  disaster  to  the  parties  themselves  as  well  as  to  the  earldom 
of  Menteith.  The  intelligence  of  the  event  was  received  with  indignation, 
alike  by  the  family  of  her  late  husband  and  the  Scottish  nobility.  It 
is  probable  that  some  of  the  latter  had  themselves  hoped  to  receive  the 
hand  of  the  Countess  in  marriage,  and  with  her  the  large  domains  which 
constituted  the  earldom.  Their  chagrin  at  seeing  an  Englishman  gain  the 
prize  was  none  the  less  keen  because  of  the  slight  thus  shown  to  their 
own  addresses  by  the  Countess,  and  there  seems  little  doubt  that  the 
charge  of  poisoning  her  late  husband,  which  was  brought  against  the 
unfortunate  lady,  originated  among  the  nobles.  This  accusation,  if  it  had 
been  true,  was  a  very  grave  one,  for  the  life  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith  at  such 
a  time  was  valuable  to  Scotland.  As  head  of  the  Regency,  he  was  King  in 
all  but  the  name,  while  his  many  services  to  his  country  had  brought  him 
into  high  favour  and  popularity.  His  party,  who  were  then  in  power,  seem 
to  have  entertained  the  charge ;  and  though  it  was  never  substantiated  by 


proof,  they  made  it  a  pretext  for  throwing  both  her'and  her  second  husband 
into  prison  and  confiscating  the  earldom.  Prominent  amongst  those  who 
wished  to  dispossess  the  Countess  was  Sir  John  Comyn,  younger  brother  of 
Walter  Comyn,  late  Earl  of  Menteith.  Sir  John's  son,  William  Comyn, 
having  married  his  cousin,  Lady  Isabella  Comyn,  only  daughter  of  Earl 
Walter,  he  claimed  the  earldom  on  behalf  of  William  Comyn  and  his  wife. 
But  the  claim  was  unsuccessful,  for  Walter  Stewart,  a  brother  of  Alexander 
the  High  Steward  of  Scotland,  one  of  the  Eegents,  having  married  Lady 
Mary,  younger  sister  of  Isabella  Countess  of  Menteith,  taking  advantage 
of  the  unhappy  position  of  his  sister-in-law,  also  laid  claim  to  the  earldom. 
Favoured  no  doubt  by  the  influence  of  his  brother,  the  High  Steward,  and 
the  other  members  of  that  powerful  family,  Walter  Stewart  succeeded,  with 
the  authority  of  Parliament,  in  obtaining  the  earldom,1  and  was  thereafter 
known  as  Earl  of  Menteith. 

Meanwhile  the  Countess  Isabella  and  her  second  husband  were  deprived 
of  all  power  and  authority  over  the  earldom  of  Menteith.  The  Countess, 
indeed,  was  detained  in  prison  by  the  Eegents  and  the  party  acting  for  her 
brother-in-law.  Apparently  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  her  release,  and 
probably  before  being  deprived  of  the  whole  earldom,  she  was  induced  to 
make,  with  the  consent  of  her  second  husband,  a  grant  of  part  of  it,  being  a 
twenty  pound  land  in  Aberfoyle.  The  grant  was  made  in  favour  of  Sir  Hugh 
of  Abernethy,  and  was  witnessed  by  two  of  the  Eegents,  Alexander  Comyn, 
Earl  of  Buchan,  and  William  Earl  of  Mar.-  On  being  afterwards  set  at 
liberty,  the  Countess,  unwilling  and  unable  to  bear  the  taunts  and  insults 
of  her  adversaries,  and  having  received  a  sum  of  money,  quitted  her  native 
country,  and  retired  with  her  husband  to  England. 

1  Forduu,  Lib.  x.  cap.  11.  lithographed  from  the  original  in  the  Douglas 

'-'  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  213.     Printed  and       Charter-chest. 



Chafing  under  the  injustice  of  the  enforced  banishment  from  her  own 
country  and.  the  deprivation  of  her  earldom,  the  despoiled  Countess,  in 
her  retirement,  put  forth  what  efforts  she  could  to  regain  possession  of 
her  ancestral  domains.  She  went  to  the  Court  of  King  Henry  the  Third 
of  England  at  Windsor,  made  known  her  case  to  him,  and  showed  the 
convention  made  between  her  father,  Maurice  junior,  and  her  uncle,  Maurice 
senior,  by  which  the  earldom  had  been  given  to  her  father,  with  the  charter 
by  which  King  William  the  Lion  confirmed  the  earldom  to  her  father,  in 
terms  of  the  convention,  both  of  which  writs  King  Henry  certified  to  be  true 
and  authentic  evidents  of  her  right.1  More  he  could  not  do,  as  his  jurisdic- 
tion did  not  extend  beyond  the  Borders.  Aided  by  these  documents,  the 
Countess  next  appealed  to  Pope  Urban  the  Fourth,  complaining  of  the  injuries 
which  had  been  done  to  her,  and  that  she  had  been  unjustly  deprived 
of  her  inheritance.  The  Pope  listened  favourably  to  her  complaints,  and 
sent  a  nuncio,  one  Pontius,  to  York,  with  special  powers  to  make  inquiry 
into  the  alleged  wrongs  of  the  Countess.  This  legate,  when  he  came,  cited 
Walter  Stewart,  as  the  possessor  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  with  the  bishops, 
abbots,  and  almost  the  whole  nobility  of  Scotland,  to  give  testimony  in  the 
case.  Such  proceedings,  says  Fordun,2  were  contrary  to  the  privileges  of 
the  King  and  of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland.  King  Alexander  the  Third 
resented  the  action  of  this  nuncio  as  oppressive  to  himself,  and  also  to  his 
subjects,  in  citing  them  to  appear  and  answer  in  judgment  beyond  the 
limits  of  the  kingdom.  He  declared  himself  ready  to  judge  the  case 
according  to  the  laws  of  his  own  realm,  but  refused  to  allow  himself  or 
his  kingdom  to  be  oppressed  in  this  manner.  He  therefore  appealed 
from  the  Pope's  legate  to  the  Pope  himself,  who,  seeing  that  nothing  was 
to  be  gained  from  this  action,  considered  it  prudent  to  remit  the  case  to 
1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  214.  -  Fordun,  Lib.  x.  c.  14. 


several  bishops  in  Scotland,  and  to  leave  it  in  their  hands.  This  he  did  by  a 
somewhat  lengthy  letter  to  the  Bishops  of  St.  Andrews  and  Aberdeen,  and 
the  Abbot  of  Dunfermline,  of  which,  on  account  of  its  importance,  a 
translation  is  here  given. 

"  Urban,  etc.,  to  our  venerable  brethren,  [Gamelin]  of  St.  Andrews  and 
[Richard]  of  Aberdeen,  bishops,  and  to  our  beloved  son,  [Matthew]  Abbot 
of  Dunfermline,  of  the  diocese  of  St.  Andrews,  greeting,  etc.  It  has  been 
declared  before  us,  on  behalf  of  our  very  dear  son  in  Christ,  [Alexander,] 
illustrious  King  of  Scotland,  that  when  a  noble  man,  Walter  Bulloc  (Stewart), 
and  a  noble  woman,  Mary  Countess  of  Menteith,  bis  wife,  had  brought  an 
action  before  the  said  King  against  a  noble  man,  John  Bussel,  of  the  diocese 
of  Ely,  and  a  noble  woman,  Isabella  his  spouse,  for  intenting  petitory  and 
possessory  rights  concerning  the  earldom  of  Menteith  in  the  kingdom  of 
Scotland,  which  each  party  declared  they  ought  to  hold  in  fee  from  the  said 
King,  and  anent  which  Walter  and  Mary  foresaid  complained  that  the  saids 
John  and  Isabella  wronged  them,  the  said  King  having  heard  what  the 
parties  wished  to  lay  before  him  concerning  their  possessory  rights,  his  own 
petitory  right  being  held  in  suspense,  and  having  understood  the  merits  of 
the  case,  the  order  of  law  being  observed,  he,  in  presence  of  the  foresaid 
John  Bussel  and  Isabella,  adjudged  the  possession  of  the  said  earldom,  with 
its  rights  and  pertinents,  to  Walter  and  Mary,  by  a  definitive  sentence,  the 
rights  of  either  party  over  the  property  of  the  said  earldom  being  nevertheless 

"  But  we  were  afterwards  informed  that,  although  a  marriage  was  latelv 
celebrated  between  the  foresaid  John  and  Isabella,  with  the  consent  of  the 
King  himself  in  that  realm,  according  to  the  custom  there,  and  that  certain 
noble  men,  the  Earls  of  Mar,  Buchan,  and  Strathern,  Alan  Durward,  and 
others  their  vassals,  had  taken  an  oath  of  fidelity  to  them,   nevertheless 


the  said  Earls  and  Alan,  with  certain  noble  men,  Malcolm,  Earl  of  Fife, 
John  Comyn,  Alexander  Oviot,  and  also  Alan,  called  the  son  of  the  Earl, 
Hugh  of  Berkeley,  David  of  Graham,  David  of  Lochar,  Beginald  called  the 
Chen,  Hugh  of  Abernethy,  and  Freskin  of  Minteve  (Moray),  with  others 
their  accomplices  of  the  said  kingdom,  because  the  said  John  Comyn  and 
his  associates  maliciously  and  falsely  charged  the  saids  John  Eussel  and 
Isabella  his  wife,  though  vowed  crusaders  (crucesignatis),  with  having  killed 
the  late  Walter  Comyn,  formerly  husband  of  the  said  Isabella,  by  wickedly 
administering  poison  to  him,  had  hastily  caused  that  husband  and  wife  to  be 
taken  and  detained  captives  until  they  were  compelled  by  violence  and  the 
fear  of  what  should  happen  if  they  resisted,  to  give  to  the  Earls  and  Alan 
aforesaid  certain  annual  rents,  lands,  and  possessions  belonging  to  themselves, 
the  earldom  of  Menteith  with  all  its  rights  and  pertinents,  with  the  right  also 
which  they  exercised  therein,  to  be  renounced  by  their  letters-patent,  and  to 
grant  the  earldom  itself  to  the  foresaid  John  Comyn  and  his  heirs,  to  be 
possessed  by  them  for  ever.  And  notwithstanding  this,  [the  said  John  and 
Isabella  were  forced]  to  take  an  oatli  that  they  would  depart  out  of  the  king- 
dom, and  in  no  wise  return  thither  unless  they  had  first  betaken  themselves 
to  parts  beyond  the  sea  and  had  been  recalled  by  John  Comyn,  and  that 
they  should  not  be  able  to  return  to  the  said  kingdom  upon  such  recall  unless 
they  had  a  mind  to  clear  themselves  from  the  charge  of  the  murder  of  the 
foresaid  Walter  Comyn,  by  seven  barons  of  the  said  realm,  or  more,  their  Peers, 
according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  the  said  John  Comyn,  and  until  they  had 
delivered  a  noble  man,  Eobert  Eussel,  brother  of  the  said  John  Eussel,  to 
the  foresaid  John  Comyn  as  a  hostage,  to  be  detained  by  him  until  they 
should  resign  the  charters  of  the  foresaid  earldom  and  its  pertinents  to  the 
said  John  Comyn  in  perpetuity.  To  such  information  it  was  added  that 
John  Comyn,  the  earls  and  others  above  mentioned,  in  opposition  to  the 


foresaid  John  Eussel  and  Isabella,  while  detained  in  prison,  and  undefended 
by  the  authority  of  the  King,  while  as  yet  a  minor,  on  this  account,  though 
it  was  not  proved  that  they  had  committed  the  foresaid  crime,  had  procured 
the  foresaid  earldom,  which  they  (John  and  Isabella)  had  been  compelled 
to  renounce,  as  above  related,  to  be  decerned  away  from  them,  and  had 
caused  the  said  Walter  Bulloc,  pretending  concerning  the  said  earldom 
and  its  pertinents  that  the  said  Mary  his  wife  was  the  heiress  of  the  same, 
to  be  invested  therein  contrary  to  justice ;  and  notwithstanding  this,  the 
[said  Earls]  had  compelled  the  said  Isabella  wholly  to  renounce  her  dowry, 
and  forced  the  said  John  Eussel  to  consent  to  this  renunciation  :  And  thus 
the  foresaid  vowed  crusaders  (crucesignati)  had  incurred  heavy  losses  and 
expenses,  and  the  fulfilment  of  their  vow  was  hindered. 

"  Wherefore  we  by  our  letters  gave  commandment  to  our  beloved  son 
Pontius  Nicolas,  our  chaplain,  Provost  of  the  Church  of  Mont  Cenis,  that  he 
should  proceed  to  the  said  earldom,  or  to  the  said  kingdom  if  he  could  safety 
do  so,  otherwise  to  pass  personally  to  parts  adjacent  to  the  said  kingdom, 
and  to  summon  those  who  should  be  summoned,  with  power  to  him  that  if, 
on  more  diligent  inquiry  into  the  truth  of  these  things,  quietly  and  without 
the  bustle  of  courts,  it  should  so  appear,  then  he  should,  notwithstanding  the 
gift,  grant,  resignation,  renunciations,  letters,  oath  and  judgment  foresaids, 
cause  the  said  earldom,  with  all  its  rights  and  pertinents,  and  the  said  rents, 
lands,  possessions,  and  dowry,  and  all  other  the  foresaid  goods  in  such  wise 
seized  by  the  said  nobles,  to  be  restored  to  the  said  crusaders  (crucesignati), 
and  also  procure  them  satisfaction  for  the  losses  and  expenses  which  they 
had  incurred  on  this  account,  coercing  to  that  end  by  ecclesiastical  censure 
contradicters  of  our  authority. 

"The  foresaid  Provost,  however,  exceeding  the  terms  of  our  mandate,  though 
he  could  safely  have  reached  the  foresaid  kingdom,  yet  aspiring,  as  the  eveDt 

VOL.  I.  F 


shows,  to  aggrieve  the  said  King  and  kingdom,  cited  the  King  himself,  and 
several  prelates  and  earls,  barons  and  nobles,  and  others  of  that  realm,  to 
his  presence  without  the  said  kingdom,  and  unduly  adjudged  the  earldom, 
lands,  possessions,  and  goods  foresaid  to  John  Kussel  and  Isabella  his  wife  ; 
and  because  many  bishops  and  other  prelates,  earls,  barons,  nobles  and 
others  of  the  said  earldom  objected  to  him  that  they  ought  not  to  be  called 
for  this  matter  out  of  the  kingdom,  being  unwilling  to  plead  or  to  obey  him 
in  that  place,  as  indeed  they  were  not  bound  to  do,  he  promulgated  various 
sentences  of  excommunication,  suspension,  and  interdict,  and  caused  the 
whole  foresaid  kingdom  to  be  placed  under  ecclesiastical  interdict,  to  the 
prejudice  and  grievance  of  the  King  and  others  foresaid.  Wherefore  the 
foresaid  King  sought  that  the  process  of  the  said  Provost,  so  far  as  it 
had  gone,  might  be  revoked,  that  Pontius  be  interdicted  from  interfering- 
further  in  this  cause,  and  that  the  foresaid  sentence  of  interdict  should 
be  recalled. 

"  But  because,  as  we  have  otherwise  learned  that  out  of  this  procedure  of 
the  said  chaplain  grievous  scandal  has  arisen  amongst  the  prelates,  nobles, 
and  other  persons  of  that  realm,  we,  who  warmly  embrace  the  said  kingdom 
in  the  arms  of  affection,  on  account  of  the  sincere  devotion  which  its  King 
and  inhabitants  bear  towards  Eome,  and  are  known  to  have  hitherto  borne 
towards  the  Church,  in  this  matter  desiring,  as  by  the  office  of  apostleship 
laid  upon  us  we  are  bound  to  provide  for  the  dispensation  of  justice  without 
injury,  that  this  scandal  may  be  removed,  and  the  imminent  dangers  to  souls 
arising  therefrom  may  be  obviated,  remit  to  your  discretion  that  after  calling 
those  who  require  to  be  called,  and  hearing  what  is  to  be  said  on  both  sides, 
you  decree  in  this  matter  according  to  justice,  appeal  being  postponed,  and 
cause  your  decree  to  be  strictly  observed  on  pain  of  ecclesiastical  censure, 
provided  that  you  presume  not  to  intermeddle  with  those  things  which  belong 


to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  said  King,  and  are  not  matters  for  an  ecclesiastical 
court.  This  you  shall  do,  notwithstanding  any  letters  prejudging  truth  and 
justice  which  have  been  obtained  from  the  apostolic  see.  And  you  may 
by  ecclesiastical  censure  compel  witnesses  to  attest  the  truth.  If,  however, 
all  of  you  cannot  be  present  at  the  execution  of  these  commands,  two  of  you 
shall  make  it  your  care  to  observe  them.  Given  at  Eome,  2d  January,  in 
the  third  year  of  our  pontificate  (1264)."1 

Thus  the  Pope  himself  was  baffled  to  allay  the  commotion  raised  by 
this  second  contention  about  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  which  on  this 
occasion  threatened  most  serious  consequences.  As  it  was,  the  proceedings 
culminated  in  Scotland  being  laid  under  interdict.  One  cannot  but 
admire,  however,  the  spirit  of  sturdy  independence  displayed,  not  only  by 
King  Alexander  the  Third  and  his  nobles,  but  even  by  the  Scottish  clergy, 
in  opposition  to  the  insolent  attempts  of  the  Papal  nuncio  to  treat  Scotland 
as  if  it  were  a  petty  Italian  village.  Their  stern  refusal  threw  the  Pope 
into  the  dilemma  of  either  carrying  out  the  interdict,  or  giving  up  the 
contest,  and  he  chose  the  latter  alternative  by  referring  the  matter  to  the 
judgment  of  the  Scottish  prelates  mentioned  in  the  document,  with  full 
power  to  bring  the  question  to  a  speedy  conclusion  and  to  enforce  their 
decision,  but  warning  them  withal  not  to  encroach  on  what  pertained  to 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  King. 

It  does  not  appear  that  any  advantage  resulted  to  the  Countess  from  this 
recommittal  of  her  case.  It  was  too  evidently  a  matter  for  King  Alexander's 
own  prerogative  for  the  bishops  to  risk  the  raising  of  the  question,  and  it  was 
allowed  to  subside.  The  Countess  herself  deemed  it  useless  to  pursue  her 
claim  further  at  the  Scottish  Court,  and  so  forbore.  Meanwhile  the  earldom 
and  title  remained  in  the  possession  of  Walter  Stewart,  who  had  already  for 
1  Tbeiner's  Vetera  Momimeuta,  p.  93,  No.  ccxxxvii. 


some  years  acted  as  Earl  of  Menteith.  In  the  year  1262  he  confirmed  a 
grant  of  the  Church  of  St.  Colmanel,  in  Kintyre,  to  the  Abbey  of  Paisley,  and 
in  the  deed  styles  himself  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith.1 

As  nothing  more  is  known  of  the  Countess,  who  was  now  advanced  in 
life,  it  may  be  presumed  that  she  ended  her  days  in  exile  in  England,  it  is 
thought  about  the  year  1273,  and  that  she  was  buried  among  the  ancestors 
of  her  second  husband,  Sir  John  Eussell. 

Who  this  Englishman  was  has  never  been  clearly  ascertained.  Buchanan, 
following  Boece,  calls  him  "  ignoble  ;"  but  there  is  some  probability  that  he 
was  the  John  Eussell  who,  at  York,  on  15th  June  1220,  swore,  with  several 
powerful  English  barons,  on  behalf  of  King  Henry  the  Third,  to  do  all  in 
their  power  to  promote  the  marriage  of  King  Alexander  the  Second  with  the 
Princess  Joan,  the  eldest  sister  of  the  English  King,  and  failing  her,  with  her 
younger  sister,  the  Princess  Isabella.2  On  this  occasion  Walter  Comyn 
was  also  present  at  York,  and  performed  a  similar  service  for  the  Scottish 
monarch.3  If  this  be  so,  Sir  John  Russell  was  probably  the  same  person 
who  is  mentioned  in  an  agreement  between  King  Henry  the  Third  and  his 
aunt  Berengaria,  Queen  of  the  late  King  Richard  the  First,  respecting  her 
dowry,  made  at  London  in  the  month  of  July  the  same  year,  1220,  as  "  our 
seneschal,"  whom  the  King  caused  to  swear  that  he  would  observe  and 
defend  that  arrangement,4  and  assist  in  the  fulfilment  of  its  conditions. 

It  is  possible  that  this  John  Russell  may  have  been  a  member  of  the  dis- 
tinguished family  of  Russell,  afterwards  Dukes  of  Bedford.  The  first  known 
member  of  that  family  appears  to  have  been  John  Russell,  who,  in  the  year  1 202, 
being  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  John,  gave  fifty  marks  for  licence  to 
marry  the  sister  of  Daun  Bardolf.     Kingston  Russell,  in  the  county  of  Dorset, 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  216.  3  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  161. 

2  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  160.  i  Ibid.  p.  162. 


was  the  property  of  the  Eussells,  who,  according  to  an  old  record  in  the  time  of 
King  Henry  the  Third,  held  the  lands  by  grand  serjeantry,  on  condition  that 
they  should  present  a  cup  of  beer  to  the  King  on  the  four  principal  feasts  of 
the  year.  That  John  Eussell  was  said  to  be  a  son  of  Eobert  Eussell,  and 
Constable  of  Corfe  Castle,  in  the  county  of  Dorset,  in  the  year  1221,  and  from 
him  the  Bedford  Eussells  appear  to  derive  their  descent.  No  mention  is 
made  in  the  account  of  the  Eussells  of  Bedford  of  the  marriage  of  Sir  John 
Eussell  and  the  Countess  of  Menteith.  If  the  John  Eussell  of  1202  and 
1221,  who  is  said  to  be  the  ancestor  of  the  Bedford  Eussells,  had  been  the 
husband  of  the  Countess  of  Menteith,  it  is  probable  that  some  notice  of  the 
marriage  would  have  appeared  in  the  accounts  of  the  Bedford  family ; 
although  as  there  does  not  appear  to  have  been  any  issue  of  the  Countess's 
second  marriage,  it  may  have  dropped  out  of  sight,  especially  as  their 
descent  would  be  derived  from  a  previous  marriage  of  Sir  John.  If  the 
husband  of  the  Countess  of  Menteith  was  not  the  direct  ancestor  of  the 
Bedford  family  he  was  probably  a  member  of  it,  as  the  Christian  name  of 
John  was  common  even  at  that  early  date  in  the  family,  has  always  been 
so,  and  in  modern  times  has  been  borne  by  distinguished  members  of  it, 
both  Dukes  and  Earls.1 

1  When   the   writer  was   at    the   Lake    of  of  the   Countess  of   Menteith   and   Sir  John 

Menteith  in  the  summer  of  187S,  he  had  the  Russell,  the  alleged  ignoble  English  knight, 

pleasure  of  meeting  at  Loehend,  under  the  It  was  quite  new  to  him,  and  some  amuse- 

hospitable   roof   of    Admiral    Erskine,    Lord  ment  was    occasionally  created  by  reference 

Edward  Russell,  another  admiral,  who  was  to  his  supposed  ignoble  ancestor. 
much  interested  in  the  story  of  the  marriage 






LADY  ISABELLA  COMYN,  the  only  surviving  child  of  Walter  Comyn, 
Earl  of  Menteith,  and  Isabella  his  Countess,  after  the  death  of  her 
father,  shared  the  misfortunes  which  overtook  her  mother  on  her  marriage 
with  Sir  John  Russell.  After  the  death  of  her  mother,  Lady  Isabella 
maintained  her  claim  as  the  true  heir  to  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  which, 
as  previously  stated,  had  been  given  by  the  King  and  Parliament  to 
Walter  Stewart,  the  husband  of  her  aunt,  Lady  Mary. 

By  a  family  arrangement,  Lady  Isabella  Comyn  married  her  cousin, 
William  Comyn  of  Kirkintilloch,  who  became  chief  of  the  great  Comyn 
family  after  the  death  of  his  father,  John  Comyn,  younger  brother  of 
Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith.  The  precise  date  of  the  marriage  has 
not  been  ascertained.  But  it  was  previous  to  the  year  1273,  as  in  that  year 
the  question  of  the  right  to  the  earldom  of  Menteith  was  raised  on  behalf 
of  William  Comyn,  the  husband  of  Lady  Isabella. 

Sir  John  Comyn,  the  father  of  William,  was  one  of  the  most  powerful 
barons  of  Scotland  during  the  minority  of  King  Alexander  the  Third.  On 
the  death  of  his  brother  Walter,  Sir  John  became  the  chief  of  the  family  of 
Comyn,  and  one  of  the  regents  of  Scotland.  He  was  one  of  the  magnates 
of  Scotland  to  whom  King  Henry  the  Third  of  England  promised,  in 
the    event    of    the    death    of    King   Alexander,    to    deliver   up  the    infant 


Princess  Margaret  of  Scotland,  if  her  mother  Queen  Margaret  should  die 
while  at  the  English  Court.1  It  was  this  Sir  John  Comyn  who,  while  the 
Countess  Isabella  was  in  prison  after  her  marriage  with  Sir  John  Russell, 
compelled  her  to  renounce  the  earldom  in  his  favour.  Sir  John  Comyn 
belonged  to  the  National  party,  but  the  opposite  party  were  successful  in 
obtaining  it  for  one  of  themselves,  Walter  Stewart,  who  was  permitted  to 
enjoy  it  till  1273,  when  Sir  John  Comyn  revived  the  question  of  the  earldom 
of  Menteith  on  behalf  of  his  son,  William  Comyn,  and  his  wife  Isabella,  the 
heiress ;  and  by  instituting  proceedings  at  York,  sought  to  regain  possession 
of  the  earldom  from  Walter  Stewart  and  his  wife,  Lady  Mary.  The  claim 
must  have  been  vigorously  prosecuted,  as  the  historian  Fordun  describes  it 
as  a  great  litigation,  and  he  mentions  the  wife  of  William  Comyn  as  the 
daughter  of  the  former  Countess,  and  the  true  heir.2  But  the  result  of  this 
new  suit  was  as  unsuccessful  as  when  the  Countess  herself  and  her  second 
husband,  Sir  John  Russell,  first  made  the  claim  in  the  year  1262.  King 
Alexander  steadfastly  refused  to  permit  a  claim  which  referred  to  an 
earldom  within  his  own  kingdom  to  be  prosecuted  in  England,  or  anywhere 
else,  before  foreign  judges. 

Walter  Stewart  and  his  Countess  retained  possession  of  the  entire 
earldom  for  twelve  years  more,  until  1285,  when  a  settlement  of  the  question 
was  made  by  King  Alexander  and  his  Parliament  at  Scone.  It  was  then 
decided  that  the  earldom  of  Menteith  should  be  divided  into  two  portions, 
one-half  to  be  retained  by  Walter  Stewart,  including  the  principal  messuage 
or  castle,  along  with  the  title  of  Earl,  as  the  dignity  was  usually  attached 
to  it,  while  the  other  half  was  erected  into  a  free  barony,  and  given  to 
William  Comyn,  in  right  of  his  wife.  Thus  the  dignity  of  Earl  of  Menteith 
was  lost  to  the  Comyns,  although  they  still  held  half  of  the  lands  in  the 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  402.  -  Fordun,  Goodall's  edition,  vol.  ii.  p.  120. 


person  of  the  husband  of  Lady  Isabella.      The  settlement  made  by  King 
Alexander  is  thus  recorded  by  Wyntoun  :— 

A  thowsand  twa  hundyr  foure  scor  and  fyve 

Ylieris  ivi  borne  wes  God  of  lyve 

Alysandyr  the  Thryd,  oure  Kyng, 

Gert  mak  at  Scone  a  gret  gadryng 

The  sextene  day  eftyr  Pasce. 

Quhen  thare  the  Statis  gadryd  was, 

Willame  Comyn  than  of  Lawch, 

The  Lordis  brodyr  of  the  Badonauche, 

The  erldwme  of  Monteth  began 

Before  the  Kyng  for  to  pled  than. 

The  Kyng  than  of  his  cownsale 

Made  this  delyverans  thare  fynale  ; 

That  erldwme  to  be  delt  in  twa 

Partis,  and  the  tane  of  th& 

Wyth  the  chemys1  assygnyd  he 

Til  Walter  Stwart :  the  lave  to  be 

Made  als  gud  in  all  profyt  ; 

Schyre  Willame  Comyn  till  hawe  that  qwyt, 

Til  hald  it  in  fre  barony 

Besyd  the  erldwme  all  qwytly.2 

The  portions  which  formed  the  earldom  and  the  barony  respectively  have 
not  been  ascertained,  as  no  record  of  the  proceedings  appears  to  have  been 
preserved,  and  the  separation  then  made  seems  not  to  have  continued  for 

1  Macpherson,  in  his    excellent  edition  of  into  the  same  misreading.     He  assumes  that 
Wyntoun's  Chronicle,  has  printed  "themys"  "themys"  implies  the  serfs  on  the  estate, 
instead  of  "chemys,"  meaning  the  chief  mes- 
suage.    Lord  Hailes  also,  in   his    Sutherland  2  Wyntoun,  Macpherson's  edition,   vol.   i. 
Peerage  Case,  chapter  v.  §  4,  p.  17,  has  fallen  p.  397. 


any  length  of  time.  On  the  death  of  Lady  Isabella  Comyn  or  Hastings 
without  issue,  the  baronial  portion  of  Menteith  probably  descended  to  her 
cousin,  Murdach,  Earl  of  Menteith,  the  grandson  of  Lady  Mary,  Countess  of 
Menteith,  and  the  nearest  heir,  who  in  that  character,  would  inherit  the 
barony,  and  thus  reunite  both  portions  into  which  the  earldom  was  divided 
on  the  compromise. 

William  Comyn,  Lord  of  Kirkintilloch,  was  one  of  the  Barons  who 
attended  the  Convention  at  Brigham  on  the  Friday  after  the  Feast  of  St. 
Gregory  (18th  March)  in  the  year  1289,  and  he  subscribed  the  letter  of  the 
Communitas  of  Scotland  prepared  at  that  meeting  to  be  sent  to  King  Edward 
the  First  of  England  respecting  the  marriage  of  that  King's  eldest  son  with 
Margaret  the  Maid  of  Norway.1  On  the  15th  January  1291,  Edward  granted 
the  keepership  of  the  forest  of  Traquair  and  Selkirk  to  William,  son  of  John 
Comyn,  to  be  held  by  the  grantee  at  the  King's  pleasure.2 

These  documents  show  that  William  Comyn  was  alive  until  January 
1291;  but  his  death  without  issue  by  his  wife  the  heiress  of  Menteith, 
before  the  2d  of  June  of  that  year,  is  instructed  by  the  claim  which  was 
made  on  that  date  by  John  Comyn,  his  next  younger  brother,  as  one  of 
the  competitors  for  the  crown  of  Scotland.3  In  that  claim  John  Comyn 
states  that  William,  his  elder  brother,  died  without  heirs  of  his  body. 

The  accomplished  authoress  of  "  The  Braces  and  the  Cumyns  "4  states 
that  Lady  Isabella  Comyn  was  not  the  daughter  of  Walter  Comyn,  Earl 
of  Menteith,  by  Isabella  his  Countess,  but  of  the  Countess  by  her  second 
marriage  with  Sir  John  Russell.5  There  is  no  ground,  however,  for  such  a 
theory.     Lady  Isabella  is  expressly  called  by  the  surname  of  Comyn  in  a 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  730.  3  Eymer's  Fiedera,  vol.  i.  p.  755. 

2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  221.  4  Mrs.  Camming  Bruce. 

5  The  Bruces  and  the  Cumyns,  p.  404. 
VOL.  I.  G 


contemporary  legal  document,  which  of  itself  is  sufficient  evidence.1  In  no 
instance  is  she  ever  called  Isabella  Eussell,  which  would  have  been  the  case 
if  she  had  been  the  daughter  of  the  Countess  and  Sir  John  Eussell. 

If  it  is  further  borne  in  mind  that  Lady  Isabella  was  married  before 
1273,  when  the  claim  to  the  earldom  was  prosecuted  by  her  husband  and  his 
father  on  her  behalf,  it  will  be  evident  that  she  could  scarcely  have  been  the 
daughter  of  Sir  John  Russell,  the  advanced  age  of  the  Countess  of  Menteith 
being  also  considered.  It  is,  moreover,  probable  that  Lady  Isabella  was 
married  to  her  cousin  William  Comyn  before  the  death  of  the  Earl  of 
Menteith  her  father,  and  that  this  was  the  cause  of  the  strong  measures 
employed  by  Sir  John  Comyn,  the  father  of  William,  to  wrest  the  earldom 
from  the  aged  Countess.  Indeed,  Mrs.  Cumming  Bruce  herself  alleges  that 
it  was  intended  that  William  should  become  Earl  of  Menteith.2 

That  Lady  Isabella  was  not  the  heiress  to  the  lands  of  Badenoch  pos- 
sessed by  Walter  Comyn  is  not  sufficient  proof  that  he  was  not  her  father. 
He  could  not  have  foreseen  the  disasters  which  befell  his  Countess  and 
daughter  after  his  decease,  and  he  would  probably  consider  Lady  Isabella 
sufficiently  provided  for  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  which  would  fall  to  her 
on  his  own  and  her  mother's  death.  He  may  thus  have  disposed  of  the 
lordship  of  Badenoch  to  his  nephew  John,  the  Black  Comyn,  afterwards  a 
regent  and  a  competitor  for  the  Scottish  crown,  although  the  latter  is  not 
named  in  contemporary  documents  as  Lord  of  Badenoch  until  after  the 
death  of  his  brother  William.  It  added  to  the  strength  of  the  Comyn 
family  to  have  among  their  members  as  many  landed  proprietors  as 
possible,  and  the  Earl  of  Menteith  was  one  who  would  do  his  utmost  to 
preserve  and  strengthen  family  influence.  It  may  also  have  been  the  case 
that  the  lordship  of  Badenoch  was  granted  to  the  Comyns  with  a  limitation 
1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  221.  a  The  Bruces  and  the  Cumyns,  p.  407. 



to  heirs-male.  Badenoch  was  acquired  as  a  reward  for  deeds  of  valour 
done  by  Walter  Comyn  and  his  father  William  Comyn,  and  being  a 
turbulent  district  of  the  country,  but  recently  brought  under  subjection, 
it  was  scarcely  meet  that  its  control  should  be  put  into  the  hands  of  a  young- 
lady  at  such  a  time. 

Seal  of  Sir  Jolin  Comyn,  son  of  the  Earl  of  Buclian,  circa  1280. 

Seal  of  Sir  John  Comyn,  circa  1285. 





BY  the  death  of  her  first  husband  in  1291,  the  gift  of  Lady  Isabella 
Comyn's  marriage  fell  to  the  disposal  of  the  Crown.  The  unhappy 
death  of  King  Alexander  the  Third  at  Kinghorn  had  left  Scotland  without 
a  sovereign;  and  King  Edward  the  Eirst  of  England,  as  pretended  Lord 
Paramount,  was  practically  governing  Scotland.  To  him  the  claims  of  all 
the  aspirants  to  the  vacant  crown  had  been  submitted  as  arbiter,  and  he  had 
obliged  the  claimants  themselves  to  swear  fealty  to  him  as  his  vassals. 
Towards  the  end  of  the  year  1292,  the  claims  of  John  Baliol  were  preferred 
by  Edward  to  those  of  the  other  competitors  for  the  throne  of  Scotland,  and 
he  was  vested  in  it  as  a  vassal  of  the  English  King. 

Among  his  first  acts  as  King  of  Scotland,  Baliol  sought  to  secure  the 
marriage  of  Lady  Isabella  Comyn  for  his  own  disposal,  and  to  this  end  he 
obtained  from  her  an  assurance  on  oath  that  she  would  not  marry  without 
his  consent.  King  Edward,  however,  was  exercising  his  assumed  prerogative 
of  Lord  Paramount  by  bestowing  grants  of  lands  in  Scotland  upon  his  own 
followers,  making  as  many  of  them  as  he  could  sheriffs  and  officers  through- 
out that  country,  that  he  might  the  better  retain  his  hold  upon  it,  and  had 
intended  the  hand  of  Lady  Isabella  Comyn  for  one  of  his  English  knights, 
Sir  Edmund  Hastings.     He  therefore,  on  the  5th  January  1293,  directed,  a 


mandate  to  John  Baliol,  King  of  Scotland,  which,  while  it  shows  the  King's 
purpose,  has  also  an  important  bearing  as  valuable  evidence  of  the  marriage 
of  William  and  Isabella  Comyn.  The  mandate  narrates  that  when  Edward 
himself  held  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  he  would  have  given  the  marriage 
of  Isabella  Comyn,  relict  of  William  Comyn,  to  Sir  Edmund  Hastings,  and 
directs  Baliol  to  absolve  Lady  Isabella  from  the  oath  which  he  had  extorted 
from  her  that  she  would  not  marry  without  his  consent.1 

Baliol  was  not  in  a  position  to  refuse  compliance  with  this  demand  of 
Edward's,  and  accordingly  the  marriage  of  Lady  Isabella  Comyn  with  Sir 
Edmund  Hastings  took  place,  probably  in  the  same  year.  On  the  14th  of 
March  1306,  she,  as  "Domina  Isabella  uxor  Domini  Edmundi  de  Hastings," 
did  homage  to  Edward  the  First,  probably  at  Lanercost,  where  Edward 
then  lay,  for  a  portion  of  her  estates  in  the  counties  of  Forfar  and  Stirling.2 
Whatever  rights  were  inherited  by  Isabella  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith  were 
enjoyed  by  her  and  her  second  husband  conjointly.  The  title  of  Countess 
was  not  allowed  to  her,  having  been  given  to  her  aunt  Lady  Maiy,  the 
Avife  of  Walter  Stewart,  and  the  dignities  of  the  earldom  had  descended  to 
their  eldest  son  Alexander  and  his  son  Alan. 

It  was  about  this  time,  and  while  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  held  the  one-half 
of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  that  the  course  of  events  brought  the  other  half 
into  the  possession  of  his  elder  brother  Sir  John.  Alan,  Earl  of  Menteith, 
was  one  of  the  adherents  of  Robert  the  Bruce,  and  for  his  attachment  to  him 
was,  when  taken  after  the  battle  of  Methven  in  1306,  imprisoned  by  King 
Edward,  and  his  portion  of  the  earldom  was  granted  to  Sir  John  Hastings. 
The  two  brothers,  John  and  Edmund  Hastings,  thus  held,  at  the  same  time, 
the  entire  earldom  of  Menteith  between  them.  Sir  John,  by  a  special  grant, 
held  one  portion,  and  Sir  Edmund  held  the  other  by  his  marriage  with  the 
1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  221.  2  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  995. 


heiress,  though  neither  of  them  received  the  title  of  Earl  of  Menteith,  as 
King  Edward  would  not  wish  to  offend  the  one  brother  by  granting  the 
dignity  to  the  other. 

Sir  Edmund  Hastings,  the  second  husband  of  Lady  Isabella  Comyn,  was  a 
younger  brother  of  Sir  John  Hastings,  one  of  the  competitors  for  the  crown 
of  Scotland.  Although  Englishmen  and  loyal  knights  of  King  Edward  the 
First,  they  were  of  Scottish  royal  extraction  as  descendants  of  the  Princess 
Ada,  third  daughter  of  David  Earl  of  Huntingdon,  brother  of  King  William 
the  Lion.1  Ada  married  Henry  of  Hastings,  and  left  a  son  Henry,  the  father 
of  John  and  Edmund.2  The  elder  brother  John  having  been  born  about 
the  year  1251,  it  is  probable  that  Sir  Edmund's  birth  took  place  within 
a  few  years  later.     He  would  thus  become  of  age  about  1276.3 

Though  connected  with  Scotland  by  blood,  and  holding  large  possessions 
there,  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  was  more  attached  to  England,  and  during  the 
whole  of  his  life  was  a  constant  supporter  of  King  Edward.  He  was 
especially  active  in  his  assistance  when  that  King  was  attempting  the 
subjugation  of  Scotland,  so  that  his  name  occurs  frequently  in  the  annals 
of  the  time.  His  valour  won  him  especial  favours  from  the  English  King, 
among  which  was  the  hand  of  the  heiress  of  Menteith;  and  he  received 
several  additional  grants  of  lands  during  Edward's  usurpation  of  the 
superiority  of  Scotland,  before  and  during  the  reign  of  Baliol. 

King  Edward  exercised  his  assumed  power  in  an  arbitrary  spirit,  by 
placing  English  governors  in  the  Scottish  fortresses,  and  by  giving  grants  of 
land  to  his  own  English  favourites,  which  acts  the  Scots  resented  on  every 
favourable  opportunity.  On  an  outbreak  of  hostilities  between  England  and 
Erance,  the  Scottish  nobles  forced  Baliol  to  throw  off  the  supremacy  of 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  776.  3  Siege    of    Carlaverock,    by    Sir    Harris 

2  Fordun,  ed.  Hearae,  vol.  iv.  p.  964.  Nicolas,  p.  299. 


Edward,  and  at  the  same  time  dismissed  all  Englishmen  from  the  Scottish 
Court,  seized  upon  the  estates  held  by  English  barons  in  Scotland,  and 
banished  their  proprietors.  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  was  one  of  the  latter. 
After  defeating  the  Scottish  army  at  Dunbar  in  the  year  1296,  Edward 
granted  letters  to  those  who  had  been  thus  banished.  They  were  directed 
to  the  sheriffs  of  the  various  counties  in  which  lay  the  lands  they  had 
formerly  received ;  and  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  carried  missives  addressed  to 
the  Sheriffs  of  Stirling,  Edinburgh,  Perth,  Angus,  and  Aberdeen,  directing 
them  to  restore  his  lands  which  had  been  escheated.  These  letters  are 
dated  8th  September  1296.1 

Some  of  the  lands  thus  restored  had  been  in  the  possession  of  the 
Hastings  family  for  a  considerable  time,  and  were  not  new  favours  from 
King  Edward.  The  members  of  that  family  who  settled  in  Scotland  in  the 
reign  of  King  William  the  Lion  acquired  from  that  King  the  Manor  of 
Dun2  and  the  lands  of  Kingoldrum  ;3  and  a  later  member,  by  marrying  the 
daughter  of  Henry  Earl  of  Athole,  acquired  the  earldom  of  Athole,  and  became 
Earl  in  right  of  his  wife.4  Some  of  these  lands  seem  to  have  descended  to 
Sir  Edmund  Hastings.  He  certainly  had  the  lands  of  Brothertown  and  land 
in  Innerbervie,  both  in  the  county  of  Kincardine,5  as  well  as  certain  lands  in 
Dundee.6  Sir  Edmund  was  one  of  the  barons  of  England,  and  must  also 
have  had  considerable  possessions  in  that  country.  In  a  memorandum  which 
narrates  that  he  had  become  surety  for  John  Drummond  of  Scotland,  who 
had  been  taken  prisoner  at  the  battle  of  Dunbar,  he  is  designed  Edmund 
of  Hastings  of  the  county  of  Suffolk.7     John  Drummond  had  been  confined 

1  Rotuli  Scotia?,  vol.  i.  p.  30.  4  Chronica  de  Mailros,  p.  155. 

-  Caledonia,  vol.  i.  p.  592.  5  Robertson's  Index,  p.  1. 

3  Registrant  vetus  de  Aberbrothoe,  p.  87.  °  Ibid.  p.  26. 

7  Ptymer's  Ftedera,  vol.  i.  p.  872. 


in  the  prison  of  the  castle  of  Wisbeach,  and  was  to  be  released  on  the 
bond  of  Sir  Edrunnd  Hastings,  with  the  condition  that  he  would  serve  King- 
Edward  in  his  war  with  France.  This  incident  is  important,  as  showing  the 
connection  of  the  families  of  Menteith  and  Drummond,  and  has  already  been 
adverted  to  in  the  Introduction  to  this  work. 

The  appearance  of  Wallace  as  the  patriotic  asserter  of  the  independence 
of  Scotland  proved  disastrous  to  the  peaceful  enjoyment  by  the  English  of 
their  restored  estates  in  Scotland.  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  was  probably 
among  the  first  who  suffered,  as  an  attack  on  the  Lennox  and  the  adjacent 
lands  was  one  of  the  early  exploits  of  Wallace.  Sir  Edmund  Hastings 
and  his  wife  may  have  retired  to  his  estates  in  England,  as  the  continued 
success  of  Wallace's  persistent  attacks  upon  the  English  in  Scotland  would 
deprive  him  of  all  comfort  in  his  beautiful  Menteith  residence.  It  is, 
however,  more  likely  that  he  was  obliged  to  take  the  field,  as  the  frequency 
with  which  summonses  were  at  this  time  issued  by  Edward  for  the  mustering 
of  his  troops  to  proceed  against  the  Scots,  sufficiently  attests  the  difficulty 
he  had  in  counteracting  the  exertions  of  Wallace. 

On  26th  September  1298,  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  was  summoned  by  letter 
from  King  Edward  to  attend  a  muster  of  his  troops  at  Carlisle  in  the  follow- 
ing May  for  service  against  the  Scots.  He  was  requested  to  bring  arms  and 
horses  with  him.1  This  meeting  was  afterwards  adjourned  to  the  2d  of 
August,2  and  another  letter,  attested  by  Edward  at  Canterbury  on  1 6th  July, 
discharged  the  meeting  altogether,  on  account  of  his  own  inability  to  be 
present  through  the  hindrance  of  some  arduous  business  ;  but  the  same  letter 
warned  the  barons  to  be  ready  at  forty  days'  notice  to  obey  his  summons.3 
Sir  Edmund  Hastings  was  again  recpiested  to  provide  arms  and  horses,  and  to 

1  Kymer's  FceJera,  vol.  i.  p.  899.  3  Palgrave's   Parliamentary  Writs,   vol.   i. 

2  Ibkl.  i>.  909.  p.  322. 


come  with  them  to  York  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Martins  (11th  November),  1299.1 
On  the  29th  of  December  of  that  year  he  was  summoned  by  letter  from 
Edward,  then  at  Berwick-on-Tweed,  to  attend  Parliament  on  the  6th  of 
March  1300  ;2  and  on  the  following  day,  the  30th  December,  from  the  same 
town,  Edward  declared  his  intention  of  firmly  and  energetically  repressing 
the  perfidious  and  wicked  rebellion  among  the  Scots,  and  called  Sir  Edmund 
Hastings  to  Carlisle,  on  the  24th  of  June  1300.3  This  summons  the  latter 
obeyed,  for  we  find  him  enrolled  among  the  knights  present  at  Carlaverock, 
when  it  was  taken  by  Edward  on  the  10th  or  11th  of  July  1300.  Sir 
Edmund  is  described  by  the  author  of  "  The  Siege  of  Carlaverock,"  who  is 
supposed  to  have  been  Walter  of  Exeter,  a  Franciscan  friar,  as  the  variant 
brother  of  Sir  John  of  Hastings,  who  could  not  fail  of  those  honours  which 
he  took  so  much  pains  to  acquire.4 

The  English  Parliament  was  summoned  to  meet  at  Lincoln  on  the  20th 
January  1301,  and  during  its  session  the  famous  letter  by  the  Earls  and 
Barons  of  England  to  Pope  Boniface  was  written  and  sealed  by  them.  This 
letter  is  preserved  in  duplicate  in  the  Public  Record  Office,  London.  Sir 
Edmund  Hastings  was  present  at  this  Parliament,  and  appears  in  the  letter 
as  one  of  the  Barons.  He  is  designated  "  Dominus  de  Enchimchelmok,"  and 
the  legend  on  his  seal  is — 

"  <S.  (Eimrtmiii  ^pasting  (Hmratatb  JEmstei." 

These  designations  plainly  show  that  this  Edmund  Hastings  was  Lord  of 
Inchmahome  or  Inchemacolmoc,  as  it  was  sometimes  called,  and  that  he  used 
the  seal  of  arms  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  to  which  he  was  entitled  in 
right  of  his  wife,  the  heiress. 

1  Palgrave's  Parliamentary  Writs,  vol.  i.  p.  324.  2  Ibid.  p.  82.  3  Ibid.  p.  327. 

i  The  Siege  of  Carlaverock,  by  Sir  Harris  Nicolas,  p.  57. 

VOL.  I.  H 


His  designation  and  his  armorial  seal  puzzled  the  late  Sir  Harris 
Nicolas,  who  in  describing  the  seals  attached  to  the  letter,  presumed  that 
Enchimchelmok  was  a  place  in  "  St.  David's,  in  Wales."  That,  however, 
was  a  mistake,  arising  from  Sir  Harris  being  unaware  of  Sir  Edmund's  con- 
nection with  the  earldom,  and  misunderstanding  his  real  position  as  husband 
of  the  heiress  of  Menteith.  The  cognisance  on  the  seal  of  Sir  Edmund 
Hastings  as  used  by  him  in  the  letter  to  the  Pope  has  already  been  explained 
in  the  Introduction,  and  it  is  unnecessary  to  repeat  here  the  observations 
there  made  upon  it. 

During  the  next  ten  years  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  received  repeated  sum- 
monses to  attend  Edward  the  First  and,  after  his  death,  Edward  the  Second, 
in  their  incursions  into  Scotland.  At  other  times  he  was  commanded  to 
attend  Parliament  as  a  Baron  of  the  English  realm,  but  on  such  occasions  it 
was  frequently  deemed  prudent  to  grant  him  a  dispensation  from  attendance, 
and  to  keep  him  in  Scotland,  where  he  was  stated  to  be  carrying  on  the  war 
against  the  Scots.1 

In  the  year  1312  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  was  appointed  by  King  Edward 
the  Second  to  the  important  office  of  keeper  of  the  town  of  Berwick-on- 
Tweed,  the  key  of  Scotland.  In  that  capacity  he  received  a  letter  from  the 
English  King,  dated  the  28th  of  April  1312,  in  which  he  is  also  called 
Constable  of  his  Majesty's  Castle  of  Berwick,  instructing  him  to  release 
Isabella,  wife  of  John,  late  Earl  of  Buchan.2  The  barbarous  and  cruel 
imprisonment  of  this  lady  in  an  open  cage,  in  the  town  of  Berwick,  for  the 
patriotic  act  of  placing  the  crown  on  the  head  of  King  Robert  the  Bruce  six 
years  before,  is  a  stain  upon  the  humanity  of  the  English  monarch  who 
inflicted  such  a  punishment.    Again,  on  the  3d  May,  William  of  Bevercote, 

1  Rotuli  Scotise,  vol.  i.  p.  52 ;  Palgrave's  Parliamentary  Writs,  vol.  i.  passim. 
-  Eymer's  Foedera,  vol.  ii.  p.  209. 


Chancellor  of  Scotland,  was  commanded  to  pay  out  of  the  customs  of  the  Port 
of  Berwick  certain  sums  due  to  Sir  Edmund  Hastings.1  He  was  superseded 
in  his  office  of  keeper  of  the  town  of  Berwick  on  the  30th  of  November 

1313,  when  a  letter  was  addressed  to  him  by  King  Edward  the  Second, 
directing  him  to  hand  over  the  custody  of  the  town  to  his  successor,  Badulph 
the  son  of  William.2 

The  last  notice  of  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  upon  record  occurs  in  a  writ 
issued   by  King  Edward  the  Second  at  Berwick-on-Tweed   on    30th  June 

1314,  a  few  days  after  the  battle  of  Bannockburn.  He  was  one  of  upwards 
of  three  hundred  who  were  summoned  to  assemble  with  all  the  forces  they 
could  command,  at  Newcastle-on-Tyne  on  the  15th  August,  for  the  purpose 
of  repelling  the  attacks  of  the  Scottish  army  on  the  Borders.3  Where  and 
how  Sir  Edmund  died  is  not  known,  but  he  certainly  never  got  the  oppor- 
tunity of  returning  to  the  island  home  of  which  he  could  once  boast  that  he 
was  lord. 

No  notice  of  Lady  Isabella  Comyn  is  found  after  the  year  1306,  when 
she  performed  homage  to  King  Edward  the  First,  and  whether  she  predeceased 
or  survived  her  second  husband  has  not  been  ascertained.  She  is  not  known 
to  have  left  any  children  by  either  of  her  husbands,  and  with  her  ended  the 
connection  of  the  great  family  of  Comyn  with  the  earldom  of  Menteith. 
Her  portion  of  the  earldom  was  probably  bestowed  by  King  Eobert  the  Bruce 
on  her  cousin  and  nearest  heir,  Murdach,  younger  brother  of  Alan,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  who  had  suffered  much  from  the  Edwards  for  his  attachment  to 
Bruce,  as  will  appear  in  the  memoir  of  him  given  in  a  subsequent  chapter 
of  this  work. 

1  Rotuli  Scotia;,  vol.  i.  p.  110.  3  Palgrave'a  Parliamentary  Writs,  vol.  ii. 

2  Ibid.  p.  114.  Div.  II.  p.  429. 






125S— 1295. 

rnHE  Lady  Mary  Menteith  was  the  younger  of  the  two  daughters  of 
~L  Maurice,  Earl  of  Menteith.  As  already  shown,  Lady  Mary  and  her 
husband,  Walter  Stewart,  obtained  the  dignity  and  the  earldom  of 

Walter  Stewart,  popularly  called  Bailloch,  Bullock,  or  The  Freckled, 
was  the  third  son  of  Walter,  the  third  High  Steward  of  Scotland.  Before 
Walter  Stewart  obtained  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  after  which  his  position 
made  him  a  very  prominent  person  in  the  history  of  Scotland,  his  name 
appears  in  several  charters  and  documents  of  the  reign  of  King  Alexander 
the  Second.  In  a  charter  by  Patrick,  Earl  of  Dunbar,  to  the  church  of 
Melrose  of  lands  in  Hassington,  dated  at  Berwick,  18th  April,  in  the  thirty- 
fourth  year  of  the  King's  reign  (1248),1  one  of  the  witnesses  is  Walter, 
son  of  Walter  the  Steward. 

Along  with  his  brother  Alexander,  the  High  Steward,  who  was  called 
the  Scottish  Hardyknute,  and  several  others,  Walter  Stewart  accompanied 

1  Liber  de  Melros,  vol.  i.  pp.  210-214. 


King  Louis  the  Ninth  of  France,  called  St.  Louis,  to  the  Holy  War  in  the 
years  1248  and  1249,  when  they  rendered  valuable  service  in  Egypt. 
On  his  return,  after  the  death  of  King  Alexander  the  Second  in  1249, 
and  the  accession  of  his  son  King  Alexander  the  Third,  he  found  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland  divided  into  two  powerful  factions,  who  struggled 
with  each  other  for  the  supremacy.  Walter  Stewart  sided  with  the 
party  which  favoured  the  interests  of  the  King  of  England,  but  this 
may  have  been  more  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  the  powerful  Comyn 
family  in  check  than  for  furthering  the  claims  of  the  English  Kings  on 
Scotland ;  and  it  is  very  likely  that  this  was  the  real  reason  for  Walter 
Stewart's  position  during  the  minority  of  Alexander  the  Third,  for  in 
the  latter  part  of  that  King's  reign,  and  after  his  death,  he  proved  him- 
self as  true  a  friend  to  the  national  interests  of  his  country  as  any  of  her 
other  nobles. 

In  1255,  Henry  the  Third  of  England,  in  answer  to  the  complaints  of  his 
daughter  the  Queen  of  Scotland,  sent  several  Barons  to  Scotland  to  learn 
through  them  how  matters  really  stood ;  and  he  commissioned  them  by  letters 
to  receive  into  his  protection  a  number  of  the  Scottish  nobles,  one  of  whom 
was  Walter  Stewart.1  With  the  assistance  of  these  the  English  delegates 
contrived  by  a  clever  stratagem  to  gain  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh  from  the 
Comyn  party,  and  along  with  it  the  persons  of  Alexander  and  the  Queen, 
who  were  residing  there.  Walter  Comyn,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  at  that  time 
governor  of  the  Castle,2  but  was  probably  absent  making  arrangements  for  a 
proposed  conference  with  the  opposite  party  when  it  was  taken  by  them. 
Alan  Durward  had  a  short  time  previously  returned  to  Scotland,  and  his 
presence  threatened  the  renewal  of  disturbances  in  the  realm ;  when,  therefore, 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  320. 

2  Buchanan's  History  of  Scotland,  Aikmau's  edition,  vol.  i.  p.  379. 


he  proposed  that  his  party  should  meet  with  the  ruling  faction,  they  readily 
agreed  to  a  conference  at  Stirling  on  an  early  date.  The  Comyns  set  about 
the  arrangements  for  the  conference  in  good  faith,  but  the  others,  pleased 
at  throwing  their  opponents  off  their  guard,  proceeded  to  carry  out  their 
schemes.  Two  horsemen  appeared  at  the  gate  of  Edinburgh  Castle,  who 
represented  themselves  to  be  vassals  of  Eobert  de  Eos,  one  of  the  Eegents, 
and  sought  admittance.  No  suspicion  was  entertained  of  their  identity,  and 
they  were  without  hesitation  received  within  the  walls.  The  Queen,  however, 
recognising  the  new  comers  as  two  of  her  father's  friends,  the  Earl  of 
Gloucester  and  John  Maunsell,  provost  of  Beverley,  welcomed  their  arrival 
with  joy.  Meanwhile  the  pretended  followers  of  Eobert  de  Eos  continued  to 
arrive  in  twos  and  threes,  and  gradually  became  numerous  enough  to  eject 
the  former  defenders  of  the  fortress.  The  Comyns  made  an  attempt  to  regain 
the  stronghold  which  contained  so  important  a  treasure  as  the  King  and 
Queen,  but  their  opponents  were  prepared  for  resistance,  and  the  King 
of  England  himself  was  advancing  with  his  army  to  the  Borders.  This 
rendered  the  attempt  hopeless,  and  the  Eegents  suffered  themselves  to  be 
superseded  by  others,  chosen  chiefly  from  among  those  Barons  whom  Henry 
King  of  England  had  taken  into  his  protection.  Walter  Stewart  was  not 
at  this  time  admitted  to  a  share  in  the  government,  although  his  elder 
brother  Alexander  was. 

Walter  Stewart,  like  his  father  and  other  members  of  the  Stewart  family, 
was  a  liberal  benefactor  to  the  churches  of  Paisley  and  Kilwinning.  Paisley 
Abbey  was  the  burial-place  of  the  Stewart  family  previously.1  Under  the 
name  and  designation  of  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  he  witnessed 
at  Paisley,  on  Palm  Sunday,  17th  April  1261,  a  charter  by  Dufgal,  son 
of  Syfyn,   to   the  Abbey  of  Paisley,  of  the  patronage  of  the   church   of 

1  Eegistrum  Monasterii  de  Passelet,  p.  121. 


Kilcolmanel  in  Kintyre.1  This  Dugall  M°Swine  shortly  afterwards  granted 
the  lands  of  Skipnish,  Kedeslatt,  and  others  to  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  by  a  charter,  dated  Wednesday,  twenty  days  after  St.  Hilary's 
Feast,  1262.  The  lands  were  to  be  held  of  the  said  Dugall  with  the  privilege 
of  a  free  barony,  with  sock,  sack,  tholl,  thame,  and  infangtheiff,  and  for 
service  to  the  King  of  two  parts  of  a  soldier  in  his  Majesty's  armies,  and  that 
for  all  other  service  and  duty  to  be  exacted  forth  of  the  said  lands.2  Having 
thus  become  the  holder  of  these  lands,  the  Earl  of  Menteith  confirmed  the 
grant  of  the  patronage  of  the  church  of  Kilcolmanel  by  Dugall  McSwine  to 
the  Monastery  of  Paisley,  by  a  charter  dated  also  in  the  year  1262.  The 
reason  for  confirming  this  grant  is  stated  to  be,  that  since  Dufgal  had 
given  the  right  of  patronage  of  the  church  of  Kilcolmanel  to  the  monks  of 
Paisley,  he  had  given  the  land  of  Schypinche  on  which  the  church  stood 
to  the  Earl  of  Menteith ;  and  the  chapel  of  St.  Columba,  also  given  to  the 
monks  of  Paisley,  was  in  close  proximity  to  the  Castle  of  Schypinche.3 
Walter  Earl  of  Menteith,  for  the  welfare  of  his  own  soul,  the  soul  of  his 
wife,  and  the  souls  of  his  predecessors  and  successors,  also  granted  to 
the  monastery  of  St.  Mary  and  St.  Wynnin  of  Kilwinning  his  right  of 
patronage  in  the  parish  church  of  St.  Charmaig  in  Knapdale,  with  the 
chapels  of  St,  Mary  in  Knapdale  and  St.  Michael  in  Inverlussa,  with 
three  penny  lands  in  Eiventos  annexed  to  the  said  church,  in  the  diocese 
of  Argyll.4 

In  the  year  1263  the  Earl  was  employed  on  a  special  service  in  reference 
to  the  Western  Isles  of  Scotland.  These  islands  had  been  ceded  to  Norway 
in  the  reign  of  Malcolm  Canmore,  which  cession  was  confirmed  by  King 

1  Registrum  Monasterii  de  Passelet,  p.  121.  3  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  216. 

4  Theiner's   Vetera    Monumenta,   p.    24S, 
-  Argyll  Inventory,  vol.  i.  p.  295.  No.  cccclxxxviii. 


Edgar,  and  they  had  now  been  held  by  the  Kings  of  Norway  for  a  considerable 
time  as  parts  of  their  dominions.  An  attempt  was  made  by  King  Alexander 
the  Second  to  recover  the  Isles  for  Scotland  by  negotiations  with  the 
Norwegians,  but  these  failing,  he  had  recourse  to  arms,  and  it  was  in  the 
endeavour  to  carry  out  this  enterprise  that  he  was  seized  with  fatal  indisposi- 
tion, and  died  at  Kerrera,  an  island  on  the  west  coast  of  Argyllshire,  in  the 
year  1249.  On  arriving  at  maturity,  King  Alexander  the  Third  pursued 
the  policy  of  his  father  with  respect  to  the  Hebrides,  and  reopened  negotia- 
tions with  Norway  for  their  reannexation  to  Scotland.  These  overtures  were 
no  more  successful  than  those  formerly  made  by  his  father.  Meanwhile 
complaints  were  continually  made  to  Haco  King  of  Norway  by  his  depen- 
dants in  the  Isles  of  incessant  raids  upon  them  by  the  chiefs  of  Western 
Scotland,  against  whom  they  desired  his  protection.  These  repeated  com- 
plaints incensed  Haco,  and  he  determined  to  put  a  stop  to  the  causes  which 
gave  rise  to  them.  He  assembled  an  immense  fleet,  the  magnitude  of  which 
excited  terror  in  the  minds  even  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  north-east  coast  of 
England.  Gathering  strength  to  his  already  imposing  naval  armament  by  the 
accessions  of  his  vassals  as  he  came,  Haco  swept  through  the  Pentland  Firth 
round  the  north  of  Scotland,  and  proceeding  down  past  the  Western  Isles, 
reached  the  Firth  of  Clyde.  Alexander  endeavoured  by  negotiation  to  avert 
the  threatened  contest,  and  succeeded  in  delaying  active  hostilities  until  the 
approach  of  winter.  At  length  the  Norwegian  King,  perceiving  no  advantage 
to  accrue  from  his  delay,  resolved  to  wait  no  longer,  and  despatched  a  number 
of  his  ships  to  ravage  the  coasts,  while  he  himself  remained  in  the  Clyde. 
On  the  evening  of  the  1st  of  October  1263  a  violent  storm  arose,  which 
caused  much  havoc  among  Haco's  ships,  ten  of  which  sarjk  in  Loch  Long,  five 
were  driven  ashore  on  the  Ayrshire  coast,  and  many  more  were  considerably 
damaged  by  the  combined  force  of  wind  and  waves.     The  Scottish  army  was 


mustered  at  Largs,  under  the  command  of  Alexander,  the  High  Steward  of 
Scotland,  ably  supported  by  his  brother,  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  now 
came  their  time  for  action.  Beacons  blazed  along  the  coast,  and  the  Scotch 
peasantry  nocked  to  the  spot  with  such  arms  as  they  had.  During  the  whole 
of  the  following  day  a  desperate  struggle  was  maintained  along  the  shore, 
in  which  the  Norwegians  were  driven  to  their  boats,  and  only  at  nightfall 
succeeded  in  embarking  what  remained  of  their  disintegrated  and  dispirited 

Although  the  battle  of  Largs  cannot  be  called  a  great  battle  in  respect 
of  the  numbers  engaged,  yet  its  results  entitle  it  to  an  honourable 
place  in  history ;  and  the  excellent  spirit  and  bravery  of  the  Scottish  army, 
influenced  by  the  valour  and  courage  of  the  Stewarts,  was  the  means  of 
establishing  the  supremacy  of  Scotland  over  the  Western  Isles.  Haco  with- 
drew from  the  Clyde,  returning  by  the  way  he  came  to  Orkney,  where  he 
was  seized  with  mortal  illness,  and  died  at  Kirkwall  six  weeks  after  his 
defeat  at  Largs. 

Walter  Stewart  was  now  despatched  along  with  other  nobles  to  reduce 
the  chieftains  of  the  Western  Isles  to  the  allegiance  of  King  Alexander.1 
Their  subjugation  was  finally  accomplished,  and  they  were  punished  in 
various  ways  for  their  participation  in  the  attack  of  the  Norwegian  King. 
Afterwards,  on  receiving  a  sum  of  money,  the  successor  of  Haco  was  pre- 
vailed upon  to  relinquish  all  further  claim  upon  the  Isles. 

While  engaged  in  the  work  of  subduing  the  islanders,  Walter  Stewart 
was  assisted  by  Colin  Fitzgerald,  one  of  the  ancestors  of  the  noble  House  of 
Cromartie,  who  also  fought  with  the  Earl  of  Menteith  at  Largs.  He  was  left 
by  the  Earl  to  command  the  fort  then  built  at  Kintail,  and  in  1266  he 
received  from  King  Alexander  a  charter  of  the  lands  of  Kintail  for  his 
1  The  Earls  of  Cromartie,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  ii.  pp.  463,  509. 

VOL.  I. 


services.     To  this  charter,  dated  at   Kincardine,   on   the    9th   of  January, 
Walter  Stewart  is  a  witness.1 

During  the  time  of  Haco's  invasion,  and  for  some  time  afterwards,  Walter 
Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  Sheriff  of  the  county  of  Ayr.2  Part  of  his 
official  account  rendered  in  the  Exchequer  during  his  period  of  office  has  been 
preserved  by  Thomas,  first  Earl  of  Haddington,  one  of  the  ablest  Scottish 
lawyers  of  the  seventeenth  century.  The  entries  in  that  account  are 
particularly  interesting,  as  showing  the  preparations  made  at  Ayr  for  the 
expected  visit  of  Haco.  The  following  payments  were  made : — To  expenses 
of  messengers  watching  the  movements  of  Haco,  King  of  Norway,  on  three 
different  occasions,  twenty-four  shillings  and  eightpence  halfpenny;  to 
expenses  of  an  hostage,  namely,  the  son  of  Angus,  son  of  Dovenald,  that  is, 
of  Alexander,  afterwards  Lord  of  the  Isles,  with  his  nurse  and  another 
servant-maid  for  twenty-six  weeks,  seventy-nine  shillings  and  tenpence ;  for 
four  men  watching  the  ships  of  the  King  for  twenty-three  weeks,  sixteen 
shillings  and  tenpence  halfpenny.  The  Earl  asks  that  the  customs  on  eleven 
score  stones  of  iron,  which  had  been  imported  and  made  into  one  thousand 
seven  hundred  and  seventy  cross-bow  bolts,  should  be  allocated  to  him.  He 
further  seeks  repayment  of  sixty  pounds,  fifteen  shillings  and  eightpence, 
which  had  been  expended  by  him  in  the  construction  of  ships  for  the  King 
at  Ayr ;  and  of  seven  marks  spent  in  the  cutting,  manufacture,  and  carriage 
of  ten  score  oars.  In  like  manner  he  seeks  reimbursement  of  the  expenses 
of  six  score  retainers,  whom  he  kept  in  the  castle  of  Ayr  for  three  weeks, 
through  failure  on  the  part  of  the  burgesses,  who  ought,  the  Earl  adds,  to 
have  entered  into  the  castle  for  its  defence  at  the  command  of  the  Kiug. 
This,  he  alleges,  they  were  unwilling  to  do,  and  it  is  requested  that  if  their 

1  The  Earls  of  Cromartie,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  i.  p.  xi. 

2  The  Exchequer  Rolls  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  5. 


neglect  be  proven,  they  ought  to  be  made  to  pay  the  expenses  of  the  said 
retainers,  if  not,  the  Earl  will  pay  them. 

There  is  also  a  memorandum  in  this  account  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith  as 
Sheriff  of  Ayr,  that  the  Earl  had  the  son  of  Gilaverianus,  farmer  of  the 
Cumbraes,  as  a  hostage  for  the  payment  of  a  fine  of  fourscore  cows,  incurred 
by  the  said  Gilaverianus  to  the  King. 

This  Earl  of  Menteith  was  also  Sheriff  of  Dumbarton  in  the  year  1271. 
On  the  24th  of  April  of  that  year,  King  Alexander  the  Third  issued  a 
mandate  or  brieve  of  inquisition,  addressed  to  Walter  Earl  of  Menteith, 
Sheriff  of  Dumbarton,  to  inquire  if  Mary,  Ellen,  and  Forveleth,  daughters  of 
the  late  Finlay  of  Campsie,  were  the  lawful  heirs  of  the  deceased  Dufgal, 
brother  of  Maldoven  Earl  of  Lennox.  The  Earl  of  Menteith  returned  the 
brieve  with  the  verdict  that  the  three  ladies  were  the  heirs  of  Dufgal  their 
grandfather.  The  inquest  was  held  at  Dumbarton  on  the  Friday  before  the 
Feast  of  St.  Dunstan  the  Archbishop  (15th  May),  1271.1  That  inquest  was 
strongly  urged  by  Lord  Hailes  in  the  Sutherland  Peerage  Case  as  a  proof 
that,  in  the  thirteenth  century,  female  succession  was  established  in  the  law 
and  practice  of  Scotland.2 

Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  witness  to  a  charter  by  Thomas  de 
Cragyn  confirming  a  grant  of  the  church  of  Cragyn  to  the  monastery  of 
Paisley,  dated  at  Paisley  on  the  Monday  before  the  Feast  of  Saint  Lucy 
the  Virgin  (the  13th  of  December),  1272.  In  this  charter  the  granter  says, 
In  testimony  whereof,  because  my  seal  is  not  authentic,  for  the  sake  of 
greater  testimony  I  have  caused  the  present  writing  to  be  strengthened  at 
my  instance  with  the  seal  of  Sir  Alexander,  Steward  of  Scotland,  together 
with  my  own  seal. 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  217. 

2  Additional  Case  in  Sutherland  Peerage,  chap.  i.  pp.  6,  7- 


In  the  following  year  the  contest  arose  with  the  family  of  Comyn  ahout 
Walter  Stewart's  right  to  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  but  owing  to  the  irregular 
proceedings  of  the  Corny ns  in  trying  to  get  the  matter  settled  outside  the 
kingdom,  nothing  was  effected  by  them,  and  the  earldom  remained  in  the 
possession  of  Walter  Stewart  and  his  wife,  Lady  Mary  Menteith. 

In  1281,  less  than  twenty  years  after  the  battle  of  Largs,  the  Earl  of  Men- 
teith played  an  active  part  in  matters  arising  out  of  the  amicable  relations 
restored  between  the  kingdoms  of  Scotland  and  Norway.  In  that  year  a 
marriage  was  arranged  between  Eric,  King  of  Norway,  then  in  his  fourteenth 
year,  and  the  Princess  Margaret,  only  daughter  of  King  Alexander  the  Third 
and  his  late  Queen,  Princess  Margaret,  daughter  of  King  Henry  the  Third  of 
England.  The  terms  of  the  marriage- contract  were  arranged  between  King 
Alexander  and  the  representatives  of  King  Eric  at  Eoxburgh,  on  the  25th  of 
July  1281.  To  this  deed  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  a  witness,  and  he 
undertook,  upon  oath,  to  see  that  its  stipulations  were  carried  out.  The  Princess 
Margaret,  then  in  her  twenty-first  year,  left  Scotland  on  the  12th  of  August, 
accompanied  by  the  Earl  and  Countess  of  Menteith,  with  other  nobles  and 
attendants,  and  reached  Norway  on  the  evening  of  the  1 4th.  After  witnessing 
the  marriage  and  coronation  of  the  Princess,  Walter  Stewart  and  his  Countess 
returned  to  Scotland.  Two  ships  left  the  Norwegian  coast,  one  containing  the 
nobles,  including  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  the  other  bearing  a  number  of  ecclesi- 
astics, among  whom  was  the  Abbot  of  Balmerino.  Only  the  former  vessel, 
however,  reached  Scotland ;  the  ship  containing  the  clergy  sank  on  the  way.1 

The  Queen  of  Norway  died  in  1283,  leaving  an  infant  daughter  Margaret, 
popularly  called  "  The  Maiden  of  Norway."  King  Alexander,  now  bereft 
of  all  his  children,  as  his  only  surviving  son  Alexander  had  lately  died, 
summoned  a  council  of  all  his  nobles  at  Scone  on  the  5th  of  February  1283, 

1  Liber  Pluscardensis,  p.  108. 


and  exacted  from  them  a  declaration  on  oath,  that  in  the  event  of  his  dying 
without  further  issue,  male  or  female,  or  in  the  event  of  there  being  no  issue 
of  his  son,  who  had  married  the  Lady  Margaret  of  Flanders,  they  would 
acknowledge  his  grand-daughter,  the  Maiden  of  Norway,  as  their  rightful 
sovereign.  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  present  at  this  Parliament,  and 
gave  his  promise  with  the  rest,  many  of  the  barons  appending  their  seals  to 
the  formal  document  which  was  drawn  up.1 

On  the  1st  of  July  in  the  following  year,  1284,  King  Alexander  was  at 
Stirling,  where  he  granted  a  charter  to  the  Abbey  of  Newbattle.  Walter,  Earl 
of  Menteith,  was  present  at  the  time,  and  witnessed  the  deed.2  In  the  same 
year  King  Alexander  was  married  to  his  second  wife,  Joleta,  a  daughter  of 
the  Count  de  Dreux,  probably  in  the  hope  of  preserving  the  lineal  succession 
of  the  crown  in  his  own  heirs.  But  by  his  untimely  death  from  falling  over 
a  cliff  near  Kinghorn,  whilst  riding  in  the  dusk  of  the  evening  of  the  16th 
March  1285,  the  Scottish  throne  became  vacant,  and  by  the  entire  failure 
of  heirs  of  the  King's  own  body,  the  regal  succession  fell  to  his  daughter's 
daughter,  Margaret,  the  Maid  of  Norway.  She  was  scarce  three  years  of 
age,  and  a  regency  of  six  noblemen  and  bishops  was  therefore  appointed  to 
superintend  the  affairs  of  the  kingdom  until  she  should  be  able  to  assume 
the  reins  of  government. 

During  the  infancy  of  the  Queen,  the  interests  of  those  who  in  the  event 
of  her  death  might  hope  to  succeed  to  the  crown,  naturally  led  them  to 
provide  for  such  an  emergency.  Of  such  aspirants  the  two  chief  were  Bruce 
and  Baliol,  and  the  friends  of  either  began  to  gather  around  him  whom  they 
intended  to  support  if  the  Princess  should  die  during  the  regency.  The 
Regents  themselves  were  divided  in  interest,  and  so  hot  did  the  jealousies 
and  contentions  of  the  two  parties  become,  that  frequent  hostilities  arose. 
1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  424.  2  Chartulary  of  Neubotle,  p.  32. 



Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  along  with  Ms  nephew,  James  the  High 
Steward,  one  of  the  Eegents,  favoured  the  claims  of  Bruce,  and  together  with 
the  latter  and  other  powerful  nobles,  whose  influence  extended  over  the  whole 
of  the  west  and  south  of  Scotland,  met  at  Brace's  castle  of  Turnberry  in 
Carrick,  and  entered  into  a  bond  for  mutual  defence,  by  which  they  covenanted 
to  adhere  to  and  take  part  with  one  another  against  all  opposers,  saving 
their  allegiance  to  the  King  of  England  and  to  him  who  should  obtain  the 
throne  of  Scotland  by  right  of  descent  from  the  late  King  Alexander.  In 
this  they  were  joined  by  two  powerful  English  noblemen,  Thomas  de  Clare, 
brother  of  Gilbert  Earl  of  Gloucester,  a  nephew  of  Brace's  wife,  and 
Richard  de  Burgh,  Earl  of  Ulster.1 

In  1289  Walter  Stewart  was  again  Sheriff  of  Dumbarton.2  In  the  same 
year  negotiations  were  entered  into  between  Eric  King  of  Norway  and 
Edward  the  First,  King  of  England,  for  the  marriage  of  the  Maid  of  Norway 
with  Prince  Edward,  eldest  son  of  the  King  of  England.  As  soon  as  this 
became  known  in  Scotland  it  was  hailed  with  satisfaction,  and  a  meeting  of 
the  Estates  was  held  at  Brigham,  a  Border  hamlet  near  Coldstream,  in 
Berwickshire,  on  1 7th  March,  from  which  a  letter,  signed  by  the  whole  of  the 
Communitas  of  Scotland,  was  sent  to  Edward,  declaring  the  joy  with  which 
they  learned  the  news  of  the  proposed  alliance,  and  promising  their  hearty 
concurrence  and  support,  provided  the  liberties  of  their  kingdom  were 
respected.  The  Eegents  also  on  the  same  day  wrote  another  letter,  addressed 
to  King  Eric,  intimating  to  him  their  consent  to  the  marriage,  and  requesting 
his  furtherance  of  the  proposals.  In  all  these  arrangements  Walter,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  took  an  active  part,  and  his  name  appears  among  the  Earls  who 
joined  in  the  letter  to  Edward.3     At  the  same  Parliament  was  confirmed 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  219.  •  Exchequer  Rolls  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  49. 

3  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  730. 


the  treaty  of  Salisbury,  by  which  it  was  arranged  that  the  young  Queen 
should  be  brought  to  Scotland  or  England,  and  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was 
among  those  who  consented  to  this.1  By  all  parties  the  alliance  of  the  heiress 
of  Scotland  to  the  Prince  of  England  was  anxiously  looked  for  in  the  hope 
that  it  would  terminate  the  baneful  distractions  into  which  the  country  had 
been  thrown  by  the  contentions  of  the  claimants  for  the  throne.  On  the 
other  hand,  Edward  eagerly  accepted  the  proposals  which  came  to  him  both 
from  Norway  and  Scotland.  He  had  already  procured  from  the  Pope  a 
dispensation  for  the  marriage,  and  on  receiving  the  letter  from  the  Scotch 
Communitas  at  Brigham,  appointed  commissioners  to  meet  with  the  Estates 
of  Scotland  at  the  same  place  on  18th  July  1290.  At  that  meeting  the 
marriage  was  finally  arranged,  and  the  terms  of  the  treaty  were  such  as 
fully  provided  security  for  the  future  independence  of  Scotland.  The 
spirit  which,  amid  all  their  variance,  led  the  Scottish  nobles  to  unite  for 
securing  the  maintenance  of  the  rights  and  liberties  of  their  country  is 
admirable,  and  adds  keenness  to  the  regret  with  which  the  fact  must  be 
viewed,  that  the  strivings  of  their  personal  ambition  at  a  later  date  all  but 
sacrificed  their  country  to  the  covetous  spirit  of  the  English  sovereign. 
Edward  the  First  had  scarcely  signed  the  treaty  before  he  attempted  to 
break  it  by  appointing  governors  of  his  own  in  Scotland,  and  demanding 
that  the  strongholds  of  that  kingdom  should  be  put  under  his  charge. 

Sir  Michael  Scott  of  Balwearie  and  Sir  David  Wemyss  of  Wemyss,  both 
of  the  county  of  Fife,  were  appointed  commissioners  to  conduct  the  young- 
Queen  from  Norway  to  her  own  kingdom.  Her  arrival  was  looked  forward 
to  with  great  joy.  The  infant  Princess  was  the  symbol  of  a  happily 
arranged  union,  and  the  promise  of  an  enduring  peace  between  two  rival 
nations.  But  all  these  hopes  were  disappointed.  While  on  her  voyage  to 
1  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  129. 


Scotland  the  poor  child  became  very  sick,  and  was  landed  at  Orkney, 
where  she  died  in  the  end  of  September  or  beginning  of  October  1290. 
In  a  letter,  dated  at  Leuchars,  7th  October  1290,  from  William  Fraser, 
Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  one  of  the  Eegents  of  Scotland,  to  King  Edward 
the  First,  he  refers  to  the  lamentable  rumour  spread  among  the  people  of 
the  death  of  their  Queen.  The  bishop  adds  that  he  had  heard  that  the  Queen 
was  recovering,  but  was  still  weak.  In  that  letter,  of  which  a  facsimile  is 
here  given,  there  are  indications  of  the  keen  and  disastrous  competition  which 
was  to  follow  on  the  death  of  the  Queen.  The  movements  of  Bruce  and 
Baliol,  the  two  most  prominent  competitors,  are  referred  to  by  the  bishop. 
Bruce,  the  bishop  says,  had  already  a  large  following,  and  he  counsels  Edward 
to  be  very  cautious  in  his  promises  to  Baliol,  should  the  latter  apply  to  him.1 

To  avert  a  civil  war,  the  rival  claimants  to  the  throne  agreed  to  submit 
their  claims  to  the  arbitration  of  King  Edward  the  First  of  England. 
Edward  accepted  the  office  with  eagerness,  and  soon  declared  his  determina- 
tion to  be  acknowledged  as  Lord  Paramount  of  Scotland,  or  to  effect  its 
conquest  by  force.  This  demand  was  first  made  at  a  conference  with 
the  clergy  and  nobility  of  Scotland  at  Norham,  on  10th  May  1291,  and 
took  them  by  surprise.  They  craved  delay,  and  obtained  three  weeks, 
during  which  time  Edward  bribed  some  of  them  by  presents  of  money,  and 
others  by  inducing  them  also  to  become  competitors.  He  was  successful 
in  producing  further  dissensions  by  thus  rousing  private  personal  ambition. 
No  fewer  than  thirteen  competitors  appeared  as  claimants  of  the  Scottish 
crown,  and  all  of  them  agreed  to  acknowledge  the  superiority  of  Edward 
over  Scotland. 

From  his  prominent  position  among  the  nobles  of  Scotland,  the  Earl  of 

'  Original  Letter  in  Public  Record  Office,       lithographed  in  "The  Frasers  of  Philorth,"  by 
London;  Royal  Letters,  No.  1.302  ;  printed  and       Alexander  Lord  Saltoun,  1879,  vol.  ii.  p.  195. 

FUJI  i  n«|  i ._  , . 

unfit  i  H  ii  i 

I  i!  «  «  * 






I    5  <j    iff  I    I 

Ivl  J  4   i  il  *§ 

Mi OJ^t 

.^4-  t  i  tq 




<  *  •  Ld  1 1  ? 





Menteith  was  necessarily  involved  in  all  these  negotiations  about  the  succes- 
sion, and  was  nominated  by  Bruce  as  one  of  his  forty  commissioners.1  Other 
forty  were  chosen  by  Baliol  and  his  party,  and  twenty-four  were  added  by 
Edward.  The  whole  one  hundred  and  four  were  then  empowered  by  Edward 
to  investigate  and  report  on  the  rival  claims ;  but  before  their  session  began, 
the  kingdom  of  Scotland  was  formally  made  over  to  Edward,  and  fealty 
sworn  to  him  by  the  Barons  and  many  other  subjects.  Walter,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  took  the  oath  of  fealty,  and  performed  homage  to  Edward  on  1 3th 
June  1292.  The  commissioners  met  at  Berwick  on  the  2d  of  August  and 
soon  disposed  of  most  of  the  claims,  the  number  being  finally  restricted  to 
those  of  Bruce  and  Baliol,  who  both  argued  their  respective  rights  at  great 
length,  and  at  last  the  report  was  laid  before  the  King,  and  his  decision 
requested.  Edward  pronounced  in  favour  of  Baliol,  and  the  Earl  of  Menteith 
was  present  at  Norham  on  the  20th  of  November,  when  Baliol  again  swore 
fealty  to  Edward  as  his  liegeman.2  Baliol  was  then  crowned  at  St.  Andrews, 
and  afterwards  proceeded  to  Newcastle-on-Tyne,  and  once  more  paid  homage 
to  Edward.3  On  this  occasion  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  present,  or  to  have  taken  any  part  in  the  proceedings  following 
on  Baliol's  coronation. 

In  the  same  year,  1292,  the  land  of  Knapdale,  which  belonged  to  the  Earl 
of  Menteith,  was  incorporated  with  other  lands  in  the  sheriffdom  of  Lorn, 
and  placed  under  the  jurisdiction  of  Alexander  of  Argyll.* 

The  indignities  suffered  at  the  hands  of  the  haughty  Edward  by  Baliol 
and  his  subjects  so  exasperated  the  latter,  that  when  Edward  himself 
was  dealt  with  in  a  similar  manner  by  Philip,  King  of  France,  and  a 
war   between   France   and    England   was   imminent,   the    Scottish    nobles 

1  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  i.  p.  767.  2  Ibid.  p.  7S1.  3  Ibid.  p.  7S2. 

4  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  447. 
VOL.  I.  K 


seized  the  opportunity  to  cast  off  their  allegiance  to  the  English  King, 
and  induced  Baliol  to  do  the  same.  Edward,  on  determining  to  prosecute 
a  war  with  France,  issued  letters  to  Baliol  and  the  Scottish  Earls,  com- 
manding their  presence  at  London  on  1st  September  1294,  with  arms 
and  horses  ready  to  cross  the  sea.  By  another  letter  the  day  of  meeting 
was  postponed  to  the  30th  September,  and  the  place  of  meeting  changed 
to  Portsmouth.  Copies  of  both  letters,  dated  respectively  29th  June 
and  17th  August  1294,  were  addressed  to  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith.  These 
summonses  were  treated  with  contempt  by  the  Scottish  nobles,  who,  after 
dismissing  all  Englishmen  from  Baliol's  Court  and  from  places  of  power  and 
trust,  obliging  many  of  them  to  leave  the  country,  sought  an  alliance  with 
France,  and  prepared  for  war  against  Edward.  Twelve  Peers  were  chosen  as 
a  council  to  assist  Baliol  in  the  government  of  the  kingdom,  and,  lest  his 
courage  should  give  way,  he  was  kept  secure  in  one  of  his  own  castles. 

Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  seems  to  have  died  in  this  or  the 
following  year.  He  is  thought  by  some  historians  to  have  fought  at  the 
battle  of  Dunbar,  and  to  have  been  taken  prisoner  by  Edward,  who  is  said 
to  have  first  sent  him  to  the  Tower  of  London  and  then  put  him  to  death. 
An  Earl  of  Menteith  did  take  part  in  the  engagement  at  Dunbar,  and  was 
sent  as  a  prisoner  to  the  Tower  of  London;  but  that  Earl,  there  is  good 
reason  to  believe,  was  Alexander,  the  son  of  Walter  Stewart. 

In  the  Appendix  to  his  "  Annals  of  Scotland,"  Lord  Hailes  devotes  a 
chapter  to  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith.  He  says,  "  Our  later  historians 
unanimously  assert  that  after  the  surrender  of  Dunbar  Edward  I.  put  the 
Earl  of  Menteith  to  death.  I  once  believed  what  I  now  must  number  among 
the  legends  of  Scotland."  After  quoting  the  passages  from  Fordun,  Boece, 
Bellenden,  Lesley,  and  Buchanan  on  the  subject,  Lord  Hailes  remarks, 
"  Enough  has  been  said  to  prove  that  our  historians  talk  at  random  concerning 




I     o 

-i  >- 

S  ° 

ce  a. 






HER  DEATH.  75 

the  cruelty  which  Edward  displayed  at  the  surrender  of  Dunbar,  and  that 
they  either  copy,  misunderstand,  or  pervert  the  meaning  of  each  other."1 

Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  predeceased  by  his  Countess  Mary.  This 
appears  from  the  grant  made  by  him  to  the  monastery  of  Kilwinning,  which 
is  for  the  weal  of  his  own  soul  and  the  soul  of  Lady  Mary,  Countess  of 
Menteith,  sometime  his  spouse,  and  the  souls  of  his  predecessors  and  suc- 
cessors.2 It  is  probable  that  she  was  dead  before  1286,  when  Walter,  Earl 
of  Menteith,  with  Alexander  his  son,  and  Matilda,  the  wife  of  Alexander, 
granted  the  church  of  Kippen  to  the  Abbey  of  Cambuskenneth,  in  order 
to  secure  a  place  of  sepulture  for  themselves  in  the  Abbey,  as  she  is 
not  mentioned  along  with  her  husband  in  making  the  gift,  and  unless 
she  had  already  been  dead,  there  seems  no  ground  for  the  omission.  The 
former  Earls  of  Menteith,  according  to  tradition,  had  their  burial-place  in 
the  church  of  Kippen,  which  was  situated  within  the  earldom,  and  their 
own  Stewart  ancestors  lay  in  the  cloisters  of  Paisley  Abbey,  but  the  Stewart 
Earls  of  Menteith  may  have  considered  Cambuskenneth  more  worthy  of  the 
dignity  of  the  family  than  the  church  of  Kippen.  Yet  it  does  not  seem 
that  either  Walter  Stewart  or  his  Countess  were  buried  in-  the  Abbey  of 
Cambuskenneth.  The  sepulchre  of  both  was  probably  near  the  high  altar  of 
the  Priory  of  Inchmahome,  in  the  lake  of  Menteith.  A  monument  which 
was  erected  to  their  memory  is  still  preserved  in  the  centre  of  the  choir  of 
the  Priory,  a  representation  of  which  is  here  given.  The  figures  are  seven 
feet  long,  and  in  full  relief. 

"  The  steel-clad  Stewart,  Red-Cross  knight, 

Menteith  his  Countess,  fair  and  bright, 

Here  live  in  sculptured  stone."3 

1  Annals,  vol.  iii.  p.  42,  Appendix  No.  v.  3  The  Priory  of  Inchmahome,  by  Rev.  William 

2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  220.  Macgregor  Stirling,  p.  8. 



The  shield  of  Walter  Stewart  bears  the  well-known  fess  cheque1  of  the 
Stewart  family,  and  a  label  of  five  points  to  show  his  position  as  a  younger 
son  of  the  High  Steward.  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  thus  continued  his 
own  paternal  coat  of  Stewart  after  he  became  Earl  of  Menteith,  instead  of 
adopting  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith.  His  own  family 
arms  were  assumed  from  the  dignified  office  of  Steward,  while  the  Menteith 
arms  proper  had  not  been  so  long  in  use  and  were  not  so  well  known.  In 
continuing  his  own  arms,  Earl  Walter  showed  fairness  to  the  line  of  the 
elder  sister,  Countess  Isabella,  by  whom  the  earldom  was  claimed,  and  the 
armorial  bearings  of  which  were  actually  used  by  Sir  Edmund  Hastings, 
the  second  husband  of  Lady  Isabella  Comyn. 

An  engraving  of  the  seal  of  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Menteith,  is  here 
given  from  the  original  in  the  Public  Record  Office,  appended  to  a  document 
dated  1292. 

By  his  Countess  Mary,  Walter  Stewart  left  two  sons :  — 

1.  Alexander,  who  succeeded  him  in  the  earldom. 

2.  Sir  John  Menteith  of  Eusky,  chiefly  remembered  for  the  part  he 

took  in  the  capture  of  Wallace,  and  for  delivering  him  to  Edward 
King  of  England. 



LADY  MATILDA  his  Wife. 
Circa  1295— circa  1304. 

ALEXANDER  and  John,  the  two  sons  of  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  and  Mary  his  Countess,  dropped  the  surname  of  Stewart 
and  assumed  that  of  Menteith.  Descending  from  a  younger  son  of  the 
third  High  Steward,  one  who,  by  the  acquisition  of  the  earldom  and 
dignity  of  Earl  of  Menteith,  had  raised  himself  to  an  independent  position, 
they  wished  to  retain  their  connection  with  the  noble  family  of  Stewart, 
soon  to  become  a  royal  house,  while  they  also  maintained  the  influential 
position  of  Earls  of  Menteith. 

Previous  to  1295  Alexander,  the  eldest  son  of  Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  is  simply  known  as  Alexander  of  Menteith.  He  is  said  by  the 
peerage  writers  to  have  been  present  with  his  father  at  the  Parliament 
assembled  by  King  Alexander  the  Third  at  Scone  on  5th  February  1283, 
when  the  King  obtained  the  assurances  of  his  nobles  that  they  would  receive 
and  support  the  Maid  of  Norway  as  their  rightful  Queen,  fading  male  heirs 
of  the  King  himself  or  of  his  son  Alexander.  His  name,  however,  does  not 
occur  in  the  list  of  those  present,  and  as  the  reference  adduced  in  support  of 
the  statement  points  to  a  later  date,  there  is  no  evidence  that  he  took  part 
in  the  proceedings  of  that  Parliament.  Alexander  of  Menteith  probably 
married  about  this  time,  as  his  wife  Matilda  is  named  with  her  husband  and 


his  father,  Walter,  Earl  of  Menteith,  as  granting  the  church  of  Kippen  to 
the  Abbey  of  Cambuskenneth,  to  secure  for  themselves  a  place  of  burial  in 
the  abbey.  This  grant  is  said,  according  to  Duncan  Stewart,  to  have  been 
made  in  1286.1 

In  that  year  Alexander  joined  with  his  father  and  brother  in  the  mutual 
bond  entered  into  by  Bruce's  party  at  Turnberry.2  He  was  present  at  Brigham 
in  1289,  when  the  Estates  of  Scotland  met  there  and  addressed  a  letter  to 
Edward  King  of  England,  respecting  the  proposed  marriage  of  their  Queen 
and  his  eldest  son.  In  that  letter  he  appears  simply  as  "Alisaundre  de 

In  the  account  rendered  by  Sir  Walter  de  Langetone,  keeper  of  King- 
Edward  the  First's  wardrobe,  of  stores  provided  at  Berwick  by  that  King  for 
the  affairs  of  Scotland,  there  occurs  a  curious  entry.  In  accounting  for  the 
disposal  of  a  supply  of  wheat  which  had  passed  through  his  hands,  Sir 
Walter  de  Langetone  refers  to  loss  in  wheat  delivered  to  Alexander  of 
Menteith  of  Scotland  in  three  "  seudris "  (chalders),  containing  twelve 
quarters  by  English  measure,  the  price  of  the  "seudra"  being  thirty-two 
shillings ;  sum  total,  four  pounds  sixteen  shillings,  which  money  could  not  be 
uplifted  from  the  foresaid  Alexander,  because  nothing  was  found  by  which 
he  could  be  distrained  for  the  foresaid  debt,  twelve  quarters  of  wheat.4 

Having  accompanied  his  father  to  Norham  in  1291  for  the  settlement  of 
the  Scottish  succession,  Alexander  of  Menteith,  son  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith, 
in  June  of  that  year,  swore  fealty  to  King  Edward  the  First  of  England, 
acknowledging  him  as  overlord  of  Scotland.5 

1  History  of  the  Stewarts,  p.  208.  4  Historical    Documents,    Scotland,  vol.  i. 

2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  219.  p.  209. 

3  Acts    of    the   Parliaments   of   Scotland, 

vol.  i.  p.  441.  5  Kymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  772. 


In  the  following  year  Alexander  of  Menteith  was  appointed  by  John 
Baliol,  King  of  Scotland,  guardian  of  the  lands  of  Alexander  of  Abemethy. 
These  lands  Alexander  of  Menteith  was  to  keep  safely,  under  pain  of  forfeiture, 
until  Alexander  of  Abernethy  came  of  age,  when  all  rents  and  profits  of  the 
lands  were  to  be  accounted  for  to  him,  or,  in  the  event  of  his  death,  to  his 

Alexander  succeeded  to  the  earldom  of  Menteith  on  the  death  of  his 
father,  probably  about  1295,  and  as  Earl  he  took  an  active  part  in  the  stirring 
events  of  those  times.  Already  the  Scottish  nobles  had  forced  Baliol  to  throw 
off  the  English  yoke,  and  surrounding  him  with  a  council  of  themselves,  kept 
him  aloof  from  English  influence.  To  recover  Scotland  Edward  had  recourse 
to  his  old  tactics  of  disguising  his  true  intentions,  and  by  promising  favour  to 
Bruce,  sowed  the  seeds  of  dissension  again  among  the  Scots.  He  himself 
advanced  with  his  army  on  Berwick,  and  distinguished  himself  in  its  capture 
by  the  cruelty,  rapacity,  and  bloodshed  which  he  encouraged.  Berwick  fell  on 
the  30th  of  March  1296,  and  Edward  remained  nearly  a  month  in  the  town.2 
The  Scots,  stung  to  madness  by  the  insolence  and  cruelty  of  the  English 
King,  flew  to  arms,  and  seven  of  the  Scottish  Earls,  among  whom  were 
Menteith,  Athole,  and  Boss,  collected  their  forces,  and  ravaged  the  English 
districts  of  Bedesdale  and  Tynedale,  fiercely  retaliating  the  outrages  com- 
mitted upon  the  unoffending  inhabitants  of  Berwick.3  They  afterwards 
threw  themselves  into  the  Castle  of  Dunbar,  which  was  at  this  time  in  the 
possession  of  the  English.  Patrick,  the  Earl  of  Dunbar,  was  fighting  in 
the  army  of  Edward ;  but  his  Countess  disliked  the  English,  and  secretly 
assisted  the  Scottish  leaders  in  the  capture  of  the  fortress.     Here  the  Scots 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  447. 
-  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  25. 
3  Chronicon  de  Lanercost,  p.  174. 


strengthened  themselves,  and  sent  word  to  their  friends  to  hasten  to  their 
succour.  On  hearing  of  the  loss  of  the  Castle  of  Dunbar,  Edward  at  once 
despatched  the  Earl  of  Surrey  with  a  strong  force  to  regain  it.  On  his 
arrival  Surrey  commenced  a  siege,  and  the  garrison,  who  were  comparatively 
few  in  number,  agreed  to  capitulate  if  not  relieved  within  three  days. 
Before  the  expiry  of  that  term  the  Scottish  army  had  assembled  in  large 
numbers  at  Dunbar,  and  the  garrison  were  jubilant  at  the  prospect  of  an 
English  defeat.  The  Scots  took  up  a  strong  position  on  a  rising  ground,  and 
had  every  prospect  of  success,  but  for  an  unhappy  mistake.  The  English 
occupied  a  less  advantageous  position,  and  were  obliged  to  execute  some 
manoeuvres,  which  the  Scots  interpreted  as  a  confusion  in  their  ranks,  and 
leaving  their  position  on  the  hill,  they  rushed  down  upon  the  English  in 
the  valley,  who  were  drawn  up  in  compact  order,  ready  to  receive  them. 
The  Scots  now  realised  their  error,  but  it  was  too  late  to  retrieve  the 
unfortunate  charge,  and  a  terrible  carnage  and  rout  began.  Although  superior 
in  numbers,  the  Scots  were  utterly  defeated.  According  to  a  manuscript 
account  of  the  fourteenth  century,  "  ten  thousand  and  fifty-five,  by  right 
reckoning,"  were  left  dead  upon  the  field,1  and  large  numbers  were  taken 
prisoners.  Many  fled  to  the  Castle  of  Dunbar  for  refuge,  but  on  the 
following  day  it  surrendered  to  Edward,  who  had  come  up  with  the  rest 
of  his  army.  Many  of  the  Scottish  nobility  were  taken  and  sent  to  various 
prisons  throughout  England.  The  Earls  of  Menteitb,  Athole,  and  Eoss,  with 
other  prisoners  of  rank,  were  sent  in  chains  to  London,  and  consigned  to  the 
Tower,  the  Constable  of  the  Tower  receiving  strict  injunctions  to  keep  them 
with  all  safety.2  In  the  accounts  of  King  Edward's  keeper  of  the  wardrobe 
respecting  the  affairs  of  Scotland,  there  is  an  entry  bearing  on  the  expenses 
of  the  capture  of  the  three  Earls  of  Eoss,  Athole,  and  Menteith,  and  other 
1  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  26.  '-  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  841. 


Scotch  prisoners  taken  in  the  Castle  of  Dunbar,  and  of  conveying  them  to 
clivers  places  of  security  in  England,  which  amounted  to  £2083,  17s.  7d.1 

The  Earl  of  Menteith's  imprisonment  was  of  short  duration.  Popular 
tradition,  adopted  by  some  historians,  records  that  the  three  Earls  who  were 
committed  to  the  Tower  were  put  to  death  by  Edward  in  a  cruel  manner. 
This  is,  however,  a  mistake ;  both  the  Earls  of  Ross  and  Athole  were  liberated 
in  the  following  year,  on  agreeing  to  serve  Edward  against  the  French,2  and 
support  from  their  lands  was  granted  by  Edward  to  their  Countesses  while 
they  were  in  prison.3  To  the  Earl  of  Menteith  much  greater  clemency  was 
shown,  and  he  could  not  have  been  in  prison  longer  than  two  or  three  months 
at  most.  This  may  have  been  owing  to  the  influence  of  Bruce  and  Patrick, 
Earl  of  Dunbar,  both  of  whom  were  at  that  time  in  favour  with  Edward ; 
and  as  they  also  were  parties  to  the  mutual  bond  of  defence  entered  into  in 
1286  at  Turnberry,  they  may  have  used  their  efforts  to  procure  Menteith's 

After  his  victory  at  Dunbar,  Edward  made  an  extensive  journey  through 
Scotland,  to  secure  the  submission  of  the  principal  towns  and  castles. 
Travelling  by  Pioxburgh  and  Jedburgh  he  came  to  Newbattle  Abbey,  and 
entered  Edinburgh  on  the  6th  of  June,  where  the  taking  of  the  Castle 
detained  him  a  few  days.  Then  proceeding  by  Linlithgow  and  Stirling, 
Edward  reached  Perth  on  the  21st  June,  whence  he  proceeded  by  Cluny  and 
Kinclaven  to  Eorfar  and  Montrose,  at  which  latter  place,  on  the  10th 
July,  he  received  the  submission  of  Baliol  and  a  number  of  the  nobility. 
Afterwards  he  went  to  Aberdeen,  and  thence  by  Banff  and  Cullen,  reaching 
Elgin  on  the  26th  of  July,4  where  he  remained  for  two  days.     While  there 

1  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.   ii.  3  Rotuli  Scotia?,  vol.  i.  p.  28. 

p.  19.  4  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.   ii. 

"  Rotuli  Scotia;,  vol.  i.  p.  44.  pp.  27-29. 

VOL.  I.  L 


the  following  instrument  was  drawn  up,  and  as  it  throws  considerable  light 
on  the  question  as  to  whether  it  was  Alexander  Earl  of  Menteith  or  his 
father  Walter  Stewart  who  fought  at  Dunbar  and  was  sent  by  Edward  to 
the  Tower  of  London,  a  translation  of  the  document  is  given : — 

To  all  those  who  shall  see  or  hear  these  letters,  Alexander  Earl  of 
Menteith,  greeting.  As  my  dear  Lord  Edward,  by  the  grace  of  God,  King 
of  England,  Lord  of  Ireland  and  Duke  of  Aquitaine,  has  of  his  special 
favour  delivered  my  body  from  his  prison,  in  which  I  was  for  my  late 
transgression  in  bearing  arms  against  him  and  otherwise,  and  has  likewise 
restored  to  me  the  earldom  of  Menteith  with  its  pertinents,  together  with  all 
the  other  lands  which  are  held  of  him  in  chief,  and  ought  to  be,  that  is  to 
say,  those  for  which  I  have  done  homage  to  Sir  John  Baliol,  lately  King  of 
Scotland,  to  be  held  at  the  pleasure  of  my  lord  the  King  of  England 
aforesaid,  also  as  I  wholly  forfeited  them  to  him  by  my  acts  of  trespass 
foresaid,  I  acknowledge  by  these  my  letters  that  I  have  received  from  the 
said  King  of  England  my  earldom  with  its  pertinents,  together  with  its  other 
vassalages,  to  hold  at  his  pleasure  as  is  before  mentioned :  Wherefore  I 
promise,  for  myself  and  my  heirs,  upon  pain  of  body  and  goods,  as  far  as  we 
can  incur  the  same,  that  we  shall  serve  him  well  and  loyally  against  all 
mortals  whenever  we  shall  be  required  or  warned  by  him  or  his  heirs,  and 
that  we  shall  never  know  anything  to  their  hurt  without  hindering  it  to  the 
best  of  our  power,  and  letting  them  know  of  it;  and  loyally  to  keep  and 
observe  these  things  I  oblige  myself  and  my  heirs,  and  all  our  goods,  what- 
ever we  can  forfeit;  moreover,  I  have  sworn  upon  the  holy  gospels.  In 
witness  whereof,  I  have  caused  make  these  letters-patent,  sealed  with  my 
seal.     Given  at  Elgin,  in  Moray,  the  27th  day  of  July  [1296].1 

This  was  probably  prepared  in  anticipation  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith's 
1  Ragman  Rolls,  pp.  103,  104. 


consenting  to  it.  He  may  still  at  this  time  have  been  in  the  Tower,  and 
have  been  released  on  agreeing  to  the  terms  of  these  letters-patent.  He  is 
indeed  said,  in  the  preamble  of  the  letters,  to  have  come  of  his  own  free  will 
to  the  King  of  England,  at  Elgin,  and  willingly  to  have  renounced  the  treaty 
made  with  the  King  of  France,  in  so  far  as  he  was  concerned  therein,  and 
to  have  sworn  fealty  to  Edward  in  due  form.1  But  considering  the  recent 
committal  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith  to  the  Tower,  the  great  distance  between 
London  and  Elgin,  and  the  difficulties  and  inconveniences  of  travelling  in 
those  times,  it  is  unlikely  that  the  Earl  of  Menteith  was  personally  present 
at  the  preparation  of  the  letters.  Edward  was  now  at  the  extremity  of  his 
journey  northwards  in  Scotland,  and  he  began  his  return  on  the  29th  of  July 
travelling  by  Kincardine-O'Neil  to  Brechin,  which  he  reached  on  the  4th  of 
August ;  and  after  passing  through  Dundee,  Perth,  St.  Andrews,  Markinch, 
and  Dunfermline,  he  reached  Stirling  on  the  14th  of  August,  and  passing 
through  Edinburgh  returned  on  the  2  2d  of  August  to  Berwick,  where 
he  held  a  Parliament,  and  received  the  submission  of  the  Scottish  nobles, 
bishops,  and  others.  The  Earl  of  Menteith  is  distinctly  said  to  have 
appeared  personally  before  Edward  at  Berwick,  very  probably  on  his  way 
home  from  London  after  his  release  from  the  Tower,  and  he  swore  fealty  to 
Edward,  along  with  many  others.  A  further  reason  for  concluding  that  the 
Earl  of  Menteith  was  not  personally  present  at  Elgin  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  Alexander  of  Argyll  is  also  one  of  the  number  for  whom  letters-patent 
were  prepared  at  Elgin,  yet  on  the  10th  of  September  he  is  still  said  to  be 
detained  in  prison,  and  his  lands  were  placed  under  the  care  of  the  Earl  of 
Menteith.  For  some  reason  he  had  not  yielded  to  the  terms  proposed  to 
him  by  Edward  at  that  time,  but  he  was  set  at  liberty  in  the  following  year.2 
Eeverting  to  the  opinion  expressed  by  Lord  Hailes  that  it  was  not  Walter 
1  Ragman  Rolls,  p.  103.  2  Rotuli  Scotia;,  vol.  i.  pp.  31,  40. 


Stewart  who  was  present  at  Dunbar,  but  his  sou  Alexander,  the  documents 
now  referred  to  show  that  he  is  correct.  The  same  evidence  goes  to  confirm 
what  Lord  Hailes  chiefly  contended  for,  that  the  popular  tradition  of  the  Earl 
of  Menteith's  being  cruelly  put  to  death  by  Edward  was  wholly  mythical, 
and  probably  arose  through  historians  confusing  the  fate  which  Sir  John 
Graham,  a  later  Earl  of  Menteith,  suffered  at  the  hands  of  Edward  the  Third 
of  England,  with  that  of  the  Earl  whom  they  supposed,  also  erroneously,  to 
be  Walter  Stewart. 

Lord  Hailes,  however,  is  wrong  in  his  statement  that  Alexander  Earl  of 
Menteith  engaged  to  serve  Edward  in  his  foreign  wars.  The  mistake  arises 
from  the  general  references  made  to  the  Scottish  prisoners  by  the  English 
historians.  They  speak  of  them  generally  as  being  released  on  condition  of 
serving  Edward  in  France,  and  in  the  case  of  most  of  the  Scottish  prisoners 
this  was  true.  But  in  a  number  of  instances  exceptions  were  made.  Those 
who  were  released  before  Edward  left  Scotland  had  no  such  condition 
proposed  to  them.  They  were  only  required  to  deliver  their  sons  to  the 
English  King  as  hostages,  and  to  swear  fealty,  and  the  Earl  of  Menteith  was 
among  the  first  to  obtain  this  clemency  from  Edward. 

The  Earl  of  Menteith  took  the  oath  of  fealty  to  Edward  at  Berwick  on 
the  28th  of  August  1296,  along  with  a  number  of  other  nobles  and  knights 
who  had  been  liberated.  He  is  represented  as  repeating  the  terms  of  the 
letters-patent  prepared  at  Elgin,  and  also  as  joining  in  the  following 
declaration : — 

And  since  we  all  and  each  of  us  for  himself  have  clone  homage  to  our 
Lord  the  King  aforesaid  in  these  words,  "  I  become  your  liegeman  of  life 
and  limb  and  worldly  honour  against  all  persons  who  live  or  die  may,"  and 
the  same  King  our  Lord  received  them  in  this  form — "  We  receive  this  for 
the  lands  of  which  you  are  at  present  seised,  saving  our  right  and  the  right 


of  others,  and  excepting  the  lands  which  John  Baliol,  who  was  King  of 
Scotland,  gave  you  since  we  granted  the  kingdom  of  Scotland  to  him,  and 
excepting  also  those  lands  which  we  have  seised  before  you  came  to  our 
peace ;"  besides  this,  we  all  and  each  of  us  for  himself  have  done  fealty  to 
our  Lord  the  King  aforesaid  in  these  words,  "  I  shall  be  true  aud  leal,  and 
shall  keep  faith  and  loyalty  to  King  Edward,  King  of  England,  and  to  his 
heirs  of  life  and  limb  and  earthly  honour  against  all  persons  who  may  live  or 
die,  and  I  shall  never  bear  arms  for  any  one,  nor  give  counsel  nor  aid  against 
him,  nor  against  his  heirs,  in  any  case  that  may  happen ;  and  I  will  truly 
acknowledge  and  truly  perform  the  services  which  pertain  to  the  tenements 
which  I  claim  to  hold  of  him.  So  may  God  and  the  saints  help  me."  In 
testimony  whereof  we  have  caused  these  letters-patent  to  be  made,  sealed 
with  our  seals.1 

It  does  not  appear  that  any  of  the  lands  pertaining  to  the  earldom  of 
Menteith  were  retained  by  Edward,  or  otherwise  disposed  of  by  him.  On 
the  contrary,  it  would  seem  from  the  letters  made  at  Elgin  that  the  earldom 
was  restored  to  Earl  Alexander  intact. 

On  obtaining  Iris  liberty  the  Earl  of  Menteith  left  two  of  his  sons,  Alan 
and  Peter,  in  the  hands  of  the  English  King  as  hostages  for  the  fulfilment  of 
his  allegiance.2 

On  the  same  day  that  he  swore  fealty  to  Edward,  the  Earl  of  Menteith 
formally  recognised  a  debt  due  by  him  and  his  ward  Alexander  of  Abernethy 
to  Henry  Percy.  A  deed  was  drawn  up  in  presence  of  the  King,  of  which 
the  following  is  a  translation  : — 

Alexander,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  Alexander  of  Abernethy  have  recognised 
(each  of  them  being  liable  for  the  whole)  that  they  owe  one  hundred  marks 
to  Henry  of  Percy,  of  which  they  will  pay  to  him  one-half  at  the  Feast  of 

1  Ragman  Rolls,  pp.  119,  120.  2  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  138. 


St.  Martin  next  to  come,  and  the  other  half  at  the  Feast  of  Pentecost  next 
following.  And  if  they  do  not,  they  agree  for  themselves  and  their  heirs 
that  the  money  foresaid  shall  be  uplifted  from  their  lands  and  chattels  in 
the  earldom  of  Menteith  and  elsewhere,  to  whosesoever  hands  these  presents 
shall  come.  Attested  by  the  King  at  Berwick-upon-Tweed,  the  28th  day  of 

On  the  10th  of  September  Alexander,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  directed  by 
Edward  to  take  under  his  charge  the  lands,  islands,  and  castles  of  Alexander 
of  Argyll  and  John  his  son,  and  to  become  security  for  them.  He  was 
also  instructed  to  provide  for  the  sustenance  of  the  wife  and  family  of 
Alexander  of  Argyll  till  the  latter  should  be  liberated,  and  till  his  eldest 
son  John  should  come  to  the  King's  peace.  For  his  intromissions  with  the 
estate  of  Alexander  of  Argyll,  the  Earl  of  Menteith  was  to  be  responsible 
to  the  King  of  England's  exchequer  at  Berwick.2  The  dependencies  of 
Argyll  were  also  instructed  to  recognise  the  Earl  of  Menteith  as  the  guardian 
appointed  by  the  King. 

Soon  after  this  King  Edward  returned  to  England,  only  to  find  that  after 
all  his  toil  and  labour  the  old  spirit  of  independence  was  still  alive  and  at 
work  in  Scotland.  The  fire  had  only  been  partially  extinguished,  and  needed 
but  the  stimulus  of  English  oppression  to  rekindle  its  flame  and  cause 
it  to  burn  more  intensely  than  before.  That  illustrious  hero  of  Scottish 
independence,  William  Wallace,  now  appeared  as  the  champion  of  his 
country's  liberties,  and  already  by  his  intrepid  valour  and  persevering  energy 
bad  turned  the  tide  in  favour  of  the  Scots.  At  first  with  but  a  handful 
of  brave  and  desperate  men  around  him,  he  executed  great  havoc  amongst 
the  English  garrisons  throughout  the  country.  He  was  afterwards  joined  by 
Sir  William  Douglas,  and  his  followers  gradually  increased  as  his  continued 
1  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  82.  2  Kotuli  Scotise,  vol.  i.  p.  31. 


successes  inspired  their  hopes.  The  nobles  for  the  most  part  were  deterred 
from  joining  with  Wallace  by  their  oaths  to  the  English  King,  while  not  a 
few  of  them  were  still  in  English  prisons,  but  almost  all  their  followers  were 
with  him.  The  continual  harassings  by  Wallace  at  last  roused  the  English 
to  retaliate,  and  gathering  their  forces  together  they  determined  to  crush  their 
tormentor.  Wallace  was  prepared  for  them,  and  on  the  11th  of  September 
1297  the  battle  of  Stirling  was  fought,  resulting  in  the  entire  defeat  of  the 
English  and  the  complete  emancipation  of  Scotland  for  the  time  from  the 
English  rule.  Even  Berwick  was  abandoned  by  the  English  in  their  terror 
at  Wallace's  approach. 

Whether  the  Earl  of  Menteith  took  part  in  the  proceedings  of  Wallace  is 
not  known.  He  seems  to  have  been  in  England  in  the  month  of  June,  as  on 
the  1 1th  of  that  month  he  received  a  safe-conduct  from  Edward  for  a  journey 
to  Scotland.1  He  must  therefore  have  been  in  Scotland  when  the  battle  of 
Stirling  was  fought,  and  may  have  taken  part  in  it. 

The  news  of  this  blow  to  their  supremacy  in  Scotland  aroused  the  English 
Government  to  action,  and  in  the  absence  of  Edward  in  Flanders  letters  were 
despatched  in  his  name  to  several  of  the  Scottish  nobles,  requiring  their  aid 
in  the  suppression  of  what  was  termed  the  rebellion  in  Scotland.  One  such 
letter  was  addressed  to  Alexander  Earl  of  Menteith,  attested  by  Edward,  son 
of  the  Xing,  at  St.  Paul's,  London,  on  26th  September  1297,  in  which,  after 
specially  thanking  the  Earl  for  his  fidelity  to  him  in  the  past,  he  informs 
him  that  the  guardianship  of  Scotland  had  been  committed  to  Brian  Fitz- 
Alan,  and  enjoins  him  to  continue  in  his  loyalty,  proceeding  from  good  to 
better,  and  to  assist  the  Governor  of  Scotland  with  arms,  horses,  and  in 
every  other  way  possible  for  the  suppression  of  the  rebellion,  so  often  as 
required  by  the  foresaid  Brian  Fitz-Alan.- 

1  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  175.  -  Rotuli  Scotia;,  p.  50. 


But  the  kingdom  was  now  in  the  possession  of  Wallace,  who  by  common 
consent  had  been  elected  Governor  of  Scotland  in  name  of  King  John,  and 
the  summons  by  the  English  Government  was  neglected.  Wallace  did  not 
long  enjoy  the  office  of  Governor,  as  after  his  defeat  at  Falkirk  in  July  1298, 
which  was  partly  occasioned  by  the  treachery  of  some  and  the  desertion  of 
others  of  the  nobility  who  were  jealous  of  his  power,  he  demitted  his  office 
and  retired  from  the  scene  of  his  patriotic  labours. 

In  the  course  of  the  struggles  for  independence  continued  by  the  Scots 
against  Edward  many  battles  were  fought,  and  campaigns  were  begun  and 
ended  only  to  be  followed  by  others.  In  these  the  Earl  of  Menteith  must 
have  taken  part,  but  the  name  of  Alexander  does  not  occur.  In  1303,  when 
Edward  again  invaded  Scotland,  he  gave  the  command  of  one  of  the  divisions 
of  his  army  to  his  eldest  son,  Edward  Prince  of  Wales,  and  sent  him  into  the 
west  of  Scotland,  while  he  himself  proceeded  northwards;  and  the  Earl  of 
Menteith,  with  the  Earl  of  Strathern  and  certain  knights,  was  commanded 
to  meet  the  Prince  on  the  day  when  the  latter  should  come  to  Dunfermline.1 
But  whether  this  Earl  was  Alexander  or  his  son  Alan  there  is  no  direct 
evidence  to  show.  The  exact  manner  and  time  of  the  death  of  this  Earl  of 
Menteith,  like  that  of  his  father  Walter,  is  thus  unknown,  but  he  must  have 
been  dead  before  1306,  as  at  that  date  his  son  Alan  is  named  as  Earl.  As 
previously  stated,  Alexander  and  his  Countess  Matilda  provided  a  burial- 
place  for  themselves  in  the  Abbey  of  Cambuskenneth,  and  there  probably 
they  were  buried,  but  no  record  is  known  to  exist  to  attest  the  certainty 
of  this. 

By  his  Countess  Matilda,  whose  surname  is  unknown,  Earl  Alexander 
left  four  sons : — 

1  Palgrave's  Historical  Documents,  vol.  i.  p.  284. 


1 .  Alan,  who  succeeded  him  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith. 

2.  Peter,  who  along  with  his  brother  Alan  was  taken  to  England  as  a 

hostage  for  his   father's  fidelity,  and   accompanied  Edward  the 
First  to  Flanders.1 

3.  Murdach,  who  was  the  eighth  Earl  of  Menteith,  having  succeeded 

his  brother  Alan. 

4.  Alexander  of  Menteith,  who  witnessed  a  charter  by  Murdach,  and 

is  designated  in  it  "  our  brother." 2 

This  seal  of  Alexander,  Earl  of  Menteith,  has  already  been  described  in 
the  Introduction,  as  bearing  three  bars  wavy  surmounted  by  a  fess  cheque, 
being  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  parents  of  Earl  Alexander. 

1  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  pp.  138-141.         '-  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  229. 

VOL.  I.  M 


Circa  1304—1306. 

ALAN,  the  eldest  son  of  Alexander,  sixth  Earl  of  Menteith,  succeeded  to 
the  earldom  at  a  critical  period  in  the  history  of  Scotland,  and  took 
an  active  part  in  the  struggle  by  which  the  liberties  of  his  country  were 
maintained.  It  is  no  marvel  if  in  the  troubles  of  these  times  his  enjoyment 
of  the  earldom  was  very  short. 

Alan  may  have  been  born  about  the  year  1280.  He  would  be  but  a 
youth  when,  on  his  father's  release  from  the  Tower  of  London,  he,  with  his 
younger  brother  Peter,  was  left  in  the  hands  of  King  Edward  the  First  as 
a  pledge  for  his  father's  fidelity.  The  two  youths  accompanied  the  King  on 
his  return  to  London  in  the  latter  part  of  1296,  and  on  the  outbreak  of 
hostilities  with  the  King  of  France  in  the  following  year  they  were  equipped 
by  Edward,  and  went  with  him  to  Flanders  as  squires  of  his  household.  In 
the  accounts  of  the  keeper  of  King  Edward's  wardrobe  for  1296-7,  there  are 
several  entries  of  payments  for  armour,  clothing,  and  horses  bought  for  them. 

On  the  23d  of  July  1297,  there  was  paid  £27,  7s.  4d.  for  two  long- 
soldiers'  cloaks,  two  soft  woollen  under-tunics,  two  pairs  of  arm-plates,  one 
coat  of  mail  and  one  habergeon,  two  light  helmets,  two  iron  caps,  two  pairs 
of  thigh-pieces,  two  pairs  of  soft  hose,  two  throat-pieces,  two  pairs  of  mail- 
gauntlets,  and  two  shields  bought  for  Alan  and  Peter,  sons  of  the  Earl  of 
Menteith,  by  the  command  of  King  Edward,  and  given  to  them  as  a  gift  from 
the  King  for  the  war  with  France,  which  they  received  at  Westminster. 

On  the  21st  of  August  following  Alan  was  presented  with  a  horse  which 
cost  twenty  marks,  and  Peter  his  brother  received  a  white  horse  which  cost 
ten  pounds,  both  being  gifts  from  King  Edward  for  their  use  in  the  French 


war.  These  were  received  by  them  at  Winchelsea.  In  November  they 
received  money  for  their  journey  to  Flanders,  and  while  at  La  Neylande 
twenty  shillings  were  paid  for  a  winter  garment  for  Alan.1  Both  Alan  and 
Peter  thus  served  with  Edward  in  the  French  campaign  of  1297;  but 
whether  Peter  returned  to  England  with  Alan  is  uncertain,  as  these  are  the 
only  notices  of  him  which  have  been  found. 

Alan  succeeded  to  the  earldom  on  the  death  of  his  father,  which  took 
place  either  in  1303  or  soon  thereafter.  He  must  have  been  Earl  in  1303, 
if  it  were  he  who  was  commanded  to  meet  Prince  Edward  of  England  on 
his  arrival  at  Dunfermline.  But  it  may  have  been  his  father  Alexander,  as 
the  Christian  name  of  the  Earl  is  not  given.  If  the  latter  conjecture  be 
correct,  Earl  Alexander  must  have  died  shortly  afterwards,  and  Alan  pro- 
bably obtained  the  earldom  in  1304. 

Duncan,  Earl  of  Fife,  made  an  entail  of  his  earldom  in  favour  of  Alan, 
Earl  of  Menteith.2  Alan  himself  never  obtained  possession  of  the  earldom  of 
Fife,  but  by  virtue  of  that  entail,  and  a  subsequent  deed  made  by  Isabel 
Countess  of  Fife,  it  fell  to  Eobert  Stewart,  son  of  King  Eobert  the  Second, 
who  married  Earl  Alan's  grand-daughter,  the  Countess  Margaret.  Through 
this  marriage  and  the  entail  of  the  earldom  of  Fife,  Eobert  became  Earl  of 
Fife  and  Menteith. 

Alan,  Earl  of  Menteith,  granted  the  lands  of  Thome  in  Menteith  to  Sir 
Walter  of  Aikenhead,  knight.3  The  charter  being  undated,  the  exact  time 
of  this  grant  is  uncertain,  but  it  was  probably  made  in  1305  or  1306,  and  was 
only  for  life,  as  the  lands  afterwards  reverted  to  the  earldom,  and  were  given 
by  Murdach,  Earl  of  Menteith,  to  his  kinsman  Walter  of  Menteith.4 

The  Earl    of   Menteith   joined   Eobert  the  Bruce,  when,  after   slaying 

1  Historical  Documents,  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  pp.  138-142. 

2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  251.  3  Ibid.  p.  223.  4  Ibid.  p.  225. 


his  rival  John  Comyn  in  the  church  at  Dumfries,  Bruce  determined 
on  the  bold  step  of  asserting  his  right  to  the  throne  of  Scotland,  and 
of  freeing  his  country  from  English  oppression.  Having  gone  to  Scone, 
Bruce  was  there  crowned,  on  the  27th  March  1306,  by  Bobert  Wishart, 
Bishop  of  Glasgow,  and  two  days  later  he  was  placed  in  the  regal  chair  by 
Isabella,  Countess  of  Buehan,  daughter  of  Duncan,  Earl  of  Fife,  her  brother 
the  Earl  of  Fife  being  then  in  the  English  interest.  Very  few  of  the  Scottish 
nobles  were  present  to  greet  the  new-made  King ;  the  majority  of  them  pre- 
ferring to  wait  the  issue  of  this  new  attempt  rather  than  subject  the  country 
and  themselves  to  the  horrors  of  another  English  invasion.  Several  of  them, 
especially  the  Comyns,  who  were  yet  sufficiently  powerful  to  exercise  great 
control  in  Scottish  affairs,  and  who  resented  the  slaughter  of  their  kinsman, 
endeavoured  to  thwart  Bruce's  schemes ;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
these  discords  were  greatly  the  cause  of  the  difficulties  which  beset  King 
Bobert  the  First  in  the  beginning  of  his  reign.  He  had  no  slight  task  before 
him;  but,  undaunted  by  its  magnitude,  Bruce  at  once  took  the  field,  and 
directed  his  efforts  to  clear  the  country  of  its  English  oppressors.  He  seized 
several  towns  and  castles  where  English  garrisons  lay,  and  either  imprisoned 
the  officials  of  the  English  King  or  compelled  them  to  depart  across  the  Borders. 
On  intelligence  being  conveyed  to  Edward  that  all  his  labours  in  Scotland 
had  again  been  rendered  fruitless,  he  was  roused  to  fury.  It  had  been  the 
aim  of  his  whole  life  to  add  Scotland  to  England,  and  he  could  not  brook 
that  in  his  old  age  it  should  be  torn  from  his  grasp.  He  despatched  two 
armies  to  Scotland  under  the  command  of  the  Prince  of  Wales  and  the 
Earl  of  Pembroke.  Pembroke's  army  proceeded  to  Perth ;  thither  also  Bruce 
led  Ms  small  army,  and  there  he  challenged  the  English  general  to  single 
combat.  The  challenge  was  accepted,  but  as  the  fight  was  deferred  till  the 
following  day,  Bruce  withdrew  to  the  wood  of  Methven  adjoining  the  city, 


where  he  encamped  with  his  soldiers.  Belying  on  the  literal  performance 
of  the  English  general's  word,  and  not  suspecting  any  attack,  King  Bobert 
appears  to  have  kept  too  careless  a  watch,  and  permitted  many  of  his  soldiers 
to  forage  over  the  country.  The  rest  were  at  work  preparing  supper,  when 
the  camp  was  suddenly  attacked  by  Pembroke's  forces,  and  before  the 
Scottish  army  could  form  themselves  into  battle  array  a  rout  began.  Many 
of  Bruce's  followers  were  slain,  a  large  number  were  taken  prisoners,  and  the 
King  himself  only  escaped  by  flight  after  several  deadly  encounters. 

The  Earl  of  Menteith  was  one  of  the  captives,  and  would  have  been 
put  to  death  if  Pembroke  had  carried  out  the  commands  his  royal  master 
gave  on  learning  the  result  of  the  battle.  The  lives  of  the  prisoners  were 
spared,  but  their  lands  were  confiscated,  and  their  persons  sent  to  various 
prisons  in  England.  Alan,  "  who,"  the  mandate  adds, "  was  Earl  of  Menteith," 
was  committed  to  the  custody  of  Sir  John  Hastings,  to  be  placed  in  the 
latter's  own  Castle  of  Bergaveny  or  elsewhere.1  At  the  same  time  the 
portion  of  the  earldom  which  belonged  to  him  was  granted  to  Sir  John 
Hastings.  He  was  the  elder  brother  of  that  Sir  Edmund  Hastings  who 
married  Lady  Isabella  Comyn,  and  was  in  possession  of  the  other  portion 
of  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  as  stated  in  a  previous  chapter. 

Malise,  Earl  of  Strathern,  who  was  also  on  the  side  of  Bruce,  escaped  for 
the  time.  It  was,  however,  provided  that,  when  he  should  surrender  himself 
or  be  taken,  he  should  share  the  fate  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  he  was 
afterwards  incarcerated  in  England.  He  presented  a  memorial  to  Edward 
endeavouring  to  excuse  his  being  found  with  Bruce.  In  that  memorial  he 
relates  how  unwilling  he  had  been  to  acknowledge  Bruce,  and  that  though 
repeatedly  sent  for  to  pay  the  required  homage,  he  had  refused  to  do  so,  and 
had  only  consented  to  an  interview  on  obtaining  letters  of  safe-conduct; 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  i.  p.  995. 



that  Bruce  having  got  the  Earl  of  Strathern  into  his  power,  had  conveyed 
him  to  Inchmahome,  where,  however,  he  still  refused  the  required  homage ; 
that  Sir  Eobert  Boyd  had  then  advised  the  King  to  take  off  the  Earl's  head 
and  grant  his  lands  to  others,  upon  hearing  which  Strathern  had  yielded, 
acknowledged  Bruce  as  his  King,  and  performed  homage ;  that  he  was 
afterwards  summoned  by  Bruce  to  proceed  with  him  in  his  expedition 
against  Perth,  but  instead  of  complying  with  the  summons,  had  written  to 
Sir  Aymer  de  Valence,  Earl  of  Pembroke,  Edward's  governor  at  Perth,  that 
he  was  ready  to  come  to  his  assistance ;  that  Bruce  was  at  Pertli  before 
Strathern's  arrival,  and  on  his  approach  sent  for  him,  but  he  had  refused 
to  come  without  hostages  being  given  for  his  safety,  which  being  granted 
in  the  persons  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith  and  Walter  of  Moray,  the  Earl  of 
Strathern  had  a  conference  with  Bruce ;  that  forfeiture  was  threatened  unless 
he  fought  against  Sir  Aymer  de  Valence,  but  the  Earl  of  Strathern  had  said 
he  would  not  bear  arms  nor  assist  with  advice  to  the  injury  of  Edward  or 
his  people,  whereupon  he  had  returned  and  restored  the  hostages.1 

Alan  Earl  of  Menteith  is  said  to  have  died  in  England  during  his  impri- 
sonment.2 It  is  not  known  whom  he  married,  but  he  left  a  daughter,  Lady 
Mary,  who  was  styled  Countess  of  Menteith,  and  married  Sir  John  Graham. 
According  to  Duncan  Stewart  he  also  left  a  son  under  age,  who  died  without 
issue,  probably  before  the  restoration  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  after  the 
battle  of  Bannockburn,  by  which  time  Sir  John  Hastings  and  Sir  Edmund 
Hastings  had  been  deprived  of  it.  It  then  passed  into  the  hands  of  Sir 
John  Menteith,  the  uncle  of  Alan,  who  held  it  as  guardian  until  Murdach, 
a  younger  brother  of  Alan's,  succeeded  to  the  earldom  and  dignity. 

Palgrave's  Historical  Documents,  vol.  i.  p.  319. 

-  History  of  the  Stewarts,  p.  208. 





ALICE  his  Countess. 

HE  precise  position  of  this  Murdach  in  relation  to  the  earldom  of 
Menteith  has  given  rise  to  doubts  and  difficulties  on  the  part  of  the. 
Peerage  writers  in  dealing  with  him.  Tradition  refers  to  him  as  the  next 
Earl  after  Alan,  but  Alan  was  known  to  have  left  no  male  heir  who  succeeded 
him  in  the  earldom,  and  it  should  therefore  have  devolved  on  his  daughter, 
the  Lady  Mary,  as  in  former  failures  of  heirs-male  it  had  descended  to  the 
female  heirs.  What,  then,  was  the  exact  relationship  of  Earl  Murdach  to 
Earl  Alan  ?  Murdach  himself  answers  this  question  in  a  charter  which  he 
granted  to  his  kinsman,  Walter,  son  of  Sir  John  Menteith.  He  there  desig- 
nates himself  Murdach,  Earl  of  Menteith,  son  of  Sir  Alexander,  formerly  Earl 
of  Menteith,  which  proves  him  to  have  been  the  brother  of  Earl  Alan.  Yet 
some  explanation  is  desirable  as  to  how  he  succeeded  to  the  earldom  in 
preference  to  his  niece  Lady  Mary,  the  only  daughter  of  Alan,  after  the 
repeated  instances  of  the  inheritance  of  the  earldom  by  females.  On  the 
death  of  her  father,  Lady  Mary  was  very  young,  and  was  therefore  taken 
charge  of  by  the  Crown  as  a  ward.  This  appears  from  the  reply  by  the 
Parliament  of  Scotland  to  a  letter  from  the  King  of  France  in  the  year  1308, 
in  which  it  is  stated  that  the  heir  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  is  in  ward.1 
Lady  Mary  was  not  of  sufficient  age  to  assume  the  care  of  the  earldom, 
and  it  had  not  on  former  occasions  prospered  in  the  hands  of  heiresses.  By 
1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  459. 


a  family  arrangement  the  earldom  was  for  the  time  transferred  to  Murdach, 
the  uncle,  to  revert  again  to  Mary,  in  the  event  of  her  marriage,  or  of  her 
uncle's  death  without  male  issue.  That  it  really  was  restored  to  Mary  is 
shown  in  the  sequel. 

Another  feature  in  the  case  should  not  wholly  be  lost  sight  of.  The 
guardianship  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  was  at  this  time  in  the  hands  of 
Sir  John  Menteith  of  Eusky,  younger  brother  of  Earl  Alexander,  and  uncle 
of  Earls  Alan  and  Murdach.  This  strengthens  the  theory  of  Lady  Mary 
being  in  her  nonage  when  the  restoration  of  the  earldom  took  place  after 
the  successful  attempts  of  King  Eobert  the  First  to  regain  his  crown  and 
kingdom,  and  that  the  King,  recognising  the  loyalty  of  Earl  Alan,  and  his 
consequent  sufferings,  appointed  Sir  John  Menteith  guardian  of  the  earldom 
on  behalf  of  Lady  Mary  Menteith.  It  would,  therefore,  probably  be  by  Sir 
John's  instrumentality  that  the  arrangement  was  made,  whereby  Murdach 
was  permitted  to  assume  the  title  of  Earl,  while,  at  the  same  time,  Sir  John, 
by  the  King's  appointment,  retained  the  office  of  guardian,  for  so  he  styles 
himself  in  the  letter  from  the  Scottish  Barons  to  the  Pope  in  1320.1 

At  the  time  of  Earl  Alan's  death  the  earldom  of  Menteith  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  two  English  brothers,  Sir  John  and  Sir  Edmund  Hastings. 
But  the  battle  of  Bannockburn,  in  1314,  must  have  terminated  their 
connection  with  the  earldom.  Indeed,  this  connection  was  ignored  by  the 
Scots,  who,  as  formerly  mentioned,  considered  that  the  heir  of  the  earldom 
of  Menteith  was  in  ward.  It  seems  probable,  too,  that  the  two  halves  of 
the  earldom  were  again  united  in  one,  and  that  Murdach  became  possessed 
of  the  whole  territorial  earldom  of  Menteith. 

The  first  mention  of  Murdach  as  Earl  of  Menteith  is  upon  his  appearance 
in  a  Parliament  held  by  King  Eobert  the  First  at  Scone  in  1318,  where  he 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  474. 


witnessed  a  deed  by  the  King  on  the  18th  December  of  that  year.1  From 
King  Eobert,  Murdach  received  several  grants  of  lands,  but  the  charters, 
although  they  appear  in  the  index  to  the  Missing  Charters  of  King  Eobert's 
reign,  have  long  since  been  lost.  He  received,  between  1314  and  1329,  the 
baronies  of  Barnbougle  and  Dalmeny,  forfeited  by  Eoger  of  Moubray,  and  the 
lands  of  Gilmerton  in  the  county  of  Edinburgh,  which  had  been  forfeited  by 
William  of  Soulis.2  He  also  received  the  lands  of  Eothiemay,  in  Banffshire, 
in  free  barony,  and  by  another  charter  the  half  barony  of  Eothiemay  ;3  and 
by  another  charter  from  King  Eobert,  the  lands  which  belonged  to  William 
Ferrar,  in  the  shire  of  Fife.4 

In  an  anonymous  Latin  chronicle  of  events  connected  with  Scotland 
during  the  reign  of  King  Edward  the  Second,  quoted  by  Stevenson,5  the 
following  passage  occurs: — "About  this  year  (1320)  William  of  Soulis, 
Patrick  of  Graham,  David  of  Wemyss,  Philip  Moubray,  Alexander  Moubray, 
Murdach  of  Menteith,  and  many  other  nobles  of  Scotland,  conspired  against 
King  Eobert,  but  were  betrayed  by  the  foresaid  Murdach,  and  certain  of 
them  were  drawn  and  hanged.  Alexander  Moubray  fled  into  England.  On 
account  of  this  service  Murdach  was  made  Earl  of  Menteith."  This  account 
of  how  Murdach  obtained  the  earldom  is  not  sufficiently  authentic  to  warrant 
its  acceptance.  He  was  certainly  Earl  in  the  year  1318,  or  two  years  anterior 
to  the  event  which  the  chronicle  says  was  the  cause  of  his  receiving  the 
earldom.  King  Eobert  the  Bruce  made  many  grants  of  land  in  his  readjust- 
ment of  the  kingdom  after  the  expulsion  of  the  English,  and  the  grants  to 
Earl  Murdach,  although  part  of  the  forfeited  possessions  of  the  conspirators, 

1  Acta  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  478.  4  Robertson's  Index,  p.  19. 

2  Robertson's  Index,  pp.  11,  21. 

3  Registrum  Episcopatus  Aberdonensis,  vol.  i.  5  Illustrations  of  Scottish  History, 
p.  157;  Robertson's  Index,  pp.  16,  20.                              pp.  9,  10. 

VOL.  I.  N 


are  rather  a  proof  of  the  fidelity  with  which  Murdach,  Earl  of  Menteith, 
had  stood  by  his  sovereign  in  his  time  of  need.  He  received  further  gifts 
from  King  Eobert  in  the  last  year  of  his  reign,  1329,  as  appears  from  the 
accounts  of  Eeginald  More  for  that  year,  who  mentions  that  he  gave  four 
chalders  of  wheat  to  the  Earl  of  Menteith  as  a  gift  from  the  King,  and  from 
those  of  Eobert  of  Peebles,  Chancellor  of  Scotland,  who  gave  to  Sir  Murdach, 
Earl  of  Menteith,  as  a  gift  from  the  King,  by  various  letters,  £33,  6s.  Sd.1 

In  the  following  year  Earl  Murdach  gave  his  niece,  Lady  Mary,  whom 
he  designated  his  kinswoman  and  the  only  daughter  of  the  late  Alan  Earl 
of  Menteith,  the  lands  of  Aberfoil,  Drongary,  Buchliven,  Cumlacht,  and 
Buchapil,  and  ten  marks  of  the  land  which  is  called  Cath-leine-Mushet.2 
During  his  tenure  of  the  earldom  Murdach  granted  the  lands  of  Thome  to  Sir 
Walter  of  Menteith,  eldest  son  of  Sir  John  Menteith.  The  lands  of  Thome 
formed  part  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith.  To  Gilbert  of  Drummond  he  gave, 
for  homage  and  service,  all  the  western  half  of  the  town  of  Buchchoppill ;  and 
to  Eobert  of  Logi,  also  for  homage  and  service,  he  gave  the  lands  of  Easter 
Brocculi,  both  of  which  pertained  formerly  to  the  earldom.3 

The  death  of  King  Eobert  the  Bruce,  while  his  son  David  was  but  a 
youth,  again  placed  Scotland  under  the  control  of  a  regency.  Eandolph,  Earl 
of  Moray,  was  the  first  Eegent,  but  he  died  suddenly,  it  was  suspected  by 
poison,  while  making  active  preparations  for  repelling  a  threatened  invasion 
by  certain  powerful  English  Barons.  In  his  stead  Donald,  Earl  of  Mar,  was 
chosen  Eegent,  but  he  was  unsuccessful  in  conducting  the  military  operations 
which  the  attempts  of  Edward  Baliol  on  the  Scottish  crown  now  rendered 
necessary.  Baliol  had  seized  the  opportunity  afforded  by  the  death  of  King 
Eobert  for  asserting  his  own  claims  to  the  crown,  and  had  put  himself  at  the 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  i.  pp.  179,  210.  2  Duncan  Stewart's  History,  p.  208. 

3  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  pp.  227-230. 


head  of  several  Barons  who  had  been  disinherited  by  Bruce  for  adhering  to 
the  English  King.  Two  English  Barons  also  leagued  themselves  with  Baliol. 
The  invasion  was  accomplished  by  their  effecting  a  landing  at  Ivinghorn  in 
Fifeshire,  while  Mar  lay  with  a  large  army  at  a  distance  without  attempting 
to  oppose  it.  Baliol  pressed  forward  to  Dunfermline,  thence  to  Strathern, 
receiving  large  reinforcements  in  his  progress.  He  found  the  Earl  of  Mar 
prepared  to  meet  him  with  his  army  drawn  up  on  Dupplin  Moor,  near  Perth, 
while  the  Earl  of  March,  with  another  army,  threatened  his  flank  from 
Auchterarder.  Mar  seems  to  have  given  up  all  attempt  at  discipline  amongst 
his  soldiers  ;  no  watch  was  kept,  and  they  were  permitted  to  spend  the  night 
in  feasting  and  intemperance,  even  in  the  close  presence  of  the  enemy.  On 
the  other  hand,  Baliol  was  thoroughly  on  the  alert,  and,  guided  by  Andrew 
Murray  of  Tullibardine,  who  knew  the  country,  attacked  the  camp  of  the 
Earl  of  Mar  during  the  night,  when  most  of  his  soldiers  were  heavy  with 
sleep  and  wine.  A  terrible  carnage  ensued,  and  must  have  ended  in  the 
total  rout  of  the  Scottish  army  had  not  Bandolph,  Earl  of  Moray,  son  of 
the  late  Regent,  and  Murdach,  Earl  of  Menteith,  with  Bobert  Bruce  and 
Alexander  Eraser,  hastily  rallied  their  men  and  driven  back  the  English 
soldiers.  By  this  time  morn  was  breaking,  and  Mar  might  have  redeemed 
the  first  loss  by  crushing  the  entire  force  of  Baliol,  which  stood  revealed  as 
scarce  a  tenth  of  the  number  of  his  own.  The  brilliant  charge  of  Menteith 
and  his  friends  afforded  opportunity,  if  it  had  been  taken,  for  the  formation 
of  the  main  body,  as  any  ordinary  caution  on  Mar's  part  could  not  have 
failed  to  secure  an  easy  victory.  But,  regardless  of  all  order  and  discipline, 
he  fairly  hurled  his  soldiers,  in  a  mixed  mass  of  infantry  and  horse,  at 
Baliol's  small  band,  and  such  was  the  impetuosity  of  their  onset  that  his 
troops  trod  each  other  down,  and  numbers  of  them  were  suffocated  in  the 
inextricable   confusion.      The   English,  on   the   other   hand,   stood  firm  in 


their  ranks,  and  hewed  down  those  of  their  opponents  who  reached  them. 
Mar  himself  was  amongst  the  slain,  and  here  also  fell  Murdach,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  with  two  of  his  brave  comrades,  the  Earl  of  Moray  and  Alexander 
Fraser.  This  battle  of  Dupplin  took  place  on  the  12th  April  1332.  Some 
have  thought  that  the  Earl  of  Menteith  survived  the  battle,  and  fell  in 
the  following  year  at  Habdon  Hill.  But  Wyntoun  mentions  distinctly 
Murdach's  death  at  Dupplin,1  and  says  nothing  about  his  being  at  Halidon. 
In  this  Wyntoun  is  supported  by  Walsingham,2  Fordun,3  the  historians  of 
Lanercost,4  the  chroniclers  of  Pluscarden,5  and  others. 

Murdach,  Earl  of  Menteith,  is  nowhere  stated  to  have  been  married,  or  to 
have  left  any  children ;  but  there  is  strong  reason  for  believing  that  the  Alice, 
Countess  of  Menteith,  who  is  mentioned  as  a  recipient  of  King  Edward  the 
Third's  bounty,  was  the  wife  of  Earl  Murdach.  After  his  death  she  had  retired 
to  England,  somewhere  near  the  Borders,  and  seems  to  have  petitioned  the 
English  King  for  assistance,  or  her  case  had  been  represented  to  him  as  one 
of  necessity.  On  20th  May  1335,  he  wrote  to  his  treasurer  sympathising 
with  the  Countess,  as  having  come  to  his  allegiance  and  dwelling  in  England, 
and  ordered  him  to  pay  her  twenty-six  shillings  and  eightpence  every  seven 
months.  On  the  24th  September  of  the  same  year,  while  Edward  was  at 
Edinburgh,  he  instructed  his  treasurer  and  chancellor  to  pay  ten  marks  to 
Alice,  Countess  of  Menteith,  in  payment  of  her  expenses ;  and  on  the  2  7th  of 
January  following,  Bobert  de  Tong,  receiver  of  the  King's  victuals  at  Berwick, 
was  commanded  to  supply  victuals  to  the  Countess  to  the  value  of  ten 
marks,  and  at  the  same  time  her  pension  was  reduced  to  ten  shillings  every 
seven  months.     It  was  again  raised  to  the  former  sum,  and  confirmed  to  her 

1  Chronicle,  vol.  ii.  pp.  152,  153.  4  Cbronicon,  p.  268. 

2  Historia,  p.  113. 

3  Seotichronicon,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  305.  6  Liber  Pluscardensis,  p.  266. 



for  life  by  an  order  of  King  Edward's,  dated  12th  July  1339,  and  forty 
shillings  of  arrears  were  to  be  paid  her  by  his  command  of  20th  August 
the  same  year.  But  the  grant  of  the  pension  for  life  was  recalled  in  the 
following  year,  and  was  made  to  depend  on  the  pleasure  of  the  King,  the 
mandate,  which  is  dated  20th  February,  confirming  the  payment  of  certain 

In  the  injunction  to  Eobert  de  Tong,  his  officer  at  Berwick-on-Tweed, 
King  Edward  states  as  a  reason  for  his  command,  that  Countess  Alice  was 
not  permitted  to  receive  anything  from  her  estates  and  goods.2  This  helps 
to  corroborate  the  theory  of  the  agreement  made  between  Murdach  and  his 
niece  Mary,  whereby  the  latter  was  to  receive  back  the  earldom,  either  on 
Murdach's  death  or  on  the  occasion  of  her  marriage  or  coming  of  age.  On 
Murdach's  death,  therefore,  the  earldom  must  have  been  reclaimed  by  Mary, 
and  Alice,  unwilling  or  unable  to  retain  her  position,  would  be  compelled  to 
leave  the  country;  and  as  her  nearest  refuge,  she  placed  ^herself  under  the 
protection  of  the  English  King.  Edward,  in  granting  her  the  sustenance  he 
did,  very  probably  thought  that  Scotland  would  soon  be  in  his  own  power, 
when  he  would  be  able  to  recover,  with  ample  interest,  the  sums  bestowed  on 
the  Countess,  and  for  which  he  held  her  receipts.  Of  the  Countess  herself 
we  learn  no  more  after  1340.  Further  than  that  her  name  Avas  Alice,  there 
is  no  record  as  to  who  she  was  or  from  what  family  she  was  descended. 

1  Rotuli  Scotia?,  vol.  i.  pp.  346,  399,  570,  572  ;  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  ii.  pp.  922,  931,  1113. 

2  Ibid.  p.  399. 






LADY  MARY  MENTEITH  was  the  only  daughter  of  Alan,  seventh  Earl 
of  Menteith.  The  exact  date  of  her  birth  has  not  been  ascertained,  but 
as  her  father  died  in  the  year  1306,  she  must  have  been  born  before  or  about 
that  time.  Her  early  years  were  not  spent  in  the  paternal  home,  as  on  her 
father's  capture  and  death  the  earldom  of  Menteith  had  passed  into  the 
possession  of  the  English.  Lady  Mary  may  have  been  brought  up  at  Rvisky, 
the  residence  of  her  granduncle,  Sir  John  Menteith,  who  at  that  time  was 
a  partisan  of  the  English  King.  This  appears  the  more  likely,  as  she  during 
her  after-life  showed  great  interest  in  Sir  John's  family,  and  also  as  he,  after 
his  reconciliation  with  King  Robert  the  Bruce,  was  made  guardian  of  the 

While  Lady  Mary  was  still  under  age,  an  agreement  was  entered  into  by 
which  her  uncle  Murdach  obtained  the  earldom,  and  held  it  until  his  death 
in  1332.     This  agreement  has  been  referred  to  in  the  preceding  Memoir. 

At  the  time  of  her  uncle  Earl  Murdach's  death,  Lady  Mary  must  have 
reached  mature  age,  and  it  may  be  supposed  she  at  once  claimed  the  earldom. 
Shortly  afterwards  she  married  Sir  John  Graham,  one  of  a  family  whose 
gallant  deeds  and  devoted  loyalty  have  rendered  their  name  famous  in  history. 
As  the  Lady  Mary  and  the  knight  were  related  to  each  other  within  the 
forbidden  degrees,  their  union  was  illegal  according  to  ecclesiastical  law. 
Application  was  therefore  made  on  their  behalf  to  Pope  John  the  Twenty- 


second,  and  on  the  1st  of  May  1334  he  granted  a  dispensation  for  celebrating 
a  new  marriage.1     A  translation  of  the  papal  document  is  here  given  : — 

John,  etc.  To  our  venerable  brother,  [Maurice]  Bishop  of  Dunblane,  greeting. 
The  circumspect  benignity  of  the  apostolic  see,  sometimes  tempering  rigour  with 
kindness,  graciously  and  mercifully  permits  what  the  severity  of  the  law  denies,  as  that 
appears  to  be  healthfully  expedient  in  the  Lord,  regard  being  had  to  the  quality  of 
persons,  places,  and  times.  Forasmuch  as  on  behalf  of  a  beloved  son,  a  noble  man, 
Sir  John  Graham,  and  of  a  beloved  daughter  in  Christ,  a  noble  woman,  Mary  of 
Menteith,  of  your  diocese,  there  has  been  presented  to  us  a  petition,  narrating  that 
they,  long  desiring  to  be  united  in  matrimony,  though  they  knew  that  they  were 
related  in  the  fourth  degree  of  consanguinity,  yet  induced  by  certain  sure  and  real 
causes  which  have  been  stated  to  us,  have  solemnly  contracted  marriage,  otherwise 
lawful,  in  face  of  holy  kirk,  and  have  since  consummated  the  same  ;  seeing  also,  as 
they  assert,  that  very  many  scandals  and  evils  might  arise  if  a  separation  of  this 
marriage  should  be  made,  they  have  humbly  petitioned  us  that  we  would,  of  our 
apostolic  kindness,  mercifully  deign  to  provide  to  them  the  blessings  of  absolution  from 
the  sentence  of  excommunication  which  they  have  hereby  incurred,  and  of  dispensation. 
We,  therefore,  who  desire  the  salvation  of  souls  and  the  increase  of  peace  and  quiet  to 
every  one,  willing  also  to  obviate  scandals  and  evils  of  this  nature,  do,  by  apostolic 
letters,  command  you,  brother,  that  if  it  be  so,  and  if  it  seem  to  you  expedient  that 
the  said  dispensation  be  granted,  with  which  we  burden  your  conscience,  the  foresaid 
knight  and  Mary  having  been  separated  for  such  time  as  shall  seem  right  to  you,  you 
may,  according  to  the  forms  of  the  Church,  absolve  them  from  the  sentence  of 
excommunication  which  on  the  foresaid  account  they  are  known  to  have  incurred,  it 
being  among  other  things  enjoined  on  them  by  an  oath  that  they  shall  not  again 
commit  the  same  offence,  nor  afford  help,  counsel,  or  favour  to  any  committing  the 
like  ;  and  a  salutary  penance,  and  other  things  which  shall  of  right  have  been  enjoined, 
having  been  imposed  upon  the  said  John  and  Mary,  finally,  by  the  aforesaid  authority 
you  may  dispense  with  the  same,  so  that,  such  impediment  notwithstanding,  they  may 

1  Tkeinei-'s  Vetera  Monumenta,  p.  262,  Xo.  dxv. 


contract  a  new  marriage,  and  lawfully  abide  therein,  declaring  that  the  offspring 
conceived  and  to  be  conceived  of  the  said  marriage  shall  be  legitimate.  Given  at 
Avignon,  the  first  of  May,  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  our  pontificate  [1334]. 

It  has  not  been  ascertained  from  what  family  of  the  Grahams  this  Sir 
John  Graham  was  descended.  It  is  probable  that  he  was  the  younger  son  of 
an  ancestor  of  the  family  of  Montrose,  Sir  Patrick  Graham  of  Kincardine,  who 
was  killed  at  Dunbar  in  1296.  The  papal  dispensation  informs  us  that  he 
was  related  to  the  Countess  of  Menteith  in  the  fourth  degree,  but  this 
furnishes  only  a  vague  idea  of  what  the  relationship  really  was.  There  were 
intermarriages  between  the  families  of  Graham  and  Strathern,  and  between 
Strathern  and  Menteith,  of  which  we  have  historical  record ;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  other  matrimonial  alliances  may  have  taken  place  of  which  we  have 
no  intimation,  bringing  the  parties  within  the  forbidden  degrees.  Were  it 
possible  now  to  obtain  the  terms  of  the  petition  presented  to  the  Pope  for 
this  dispensation,  the  exact  state  of  the  relationship  might  appear,  but  as  it 
is,  the  question  must  be  left  to  conjecture. 

As  the  dispensation  was  granted  in  1334,  the  Countess  and  Sir  John 
Graham  must  have  been  married  before  that  year ;  but  they  were  no  doubt 
remarried  on  the  arrival  of  the  dispensation,  and  the  expiry  of  the  sentence 
of  penance  which  the  Bishop  of  Dunblane  was  enjoined  to  impose.  Sir  John 
Graham  became  Earl  of  Menteith,  apparently  by  courtesy  through  his  wife ; 
but  as  to  this  no  evidence  has  been  preserved.  He  held  the  title  for  twelve 
years.  As  Earl  of  Menteith  he  witnessed  a  charter  by  Eobert  the  Steward 
of  Scotland  to  William  of  Douglas  of  the  lands  of  Bondigiston,  Drumcross, 
and  Bernes.1 

While  Sir  John  Graham  was  Earl  of  Menteith,  the  barony  of  Barnbougle, 
which  King  Eobert  the  Bruce  had  bestowed  on  Earl  Murdach,  after  the 
1  Registrum  Honoris  de  Morton,  vol.  ii.  p.  35. 


forfeiture  of  Boger  of  Moubray,  passed  again  from  the  Menteith  family, 
and  after  remaining  in  the  hands  of  King  David  the  Second  for  a  number 
of  years,  was  bestowed  by  him  upon  Sir  Bartholomew  of  Loen  and  his 
wife  Philippa  of  Moubray.  It  would  appear  from  King  David's  charter 
that  Sir  John  Graham  and  Mary,  Earl  and  Countess  of  Menteith,  were 
due  the  King  two  thousand  marks  sterling,  for  marriage  and  relief,  and 
that  they  had  resigned  the  barony  of  Barnbougle  with  all  right  and  claim 
which  they  had  therein,  before  the  King  in  Council,  at  Perth  on  the  3d  of 
May  1346,  in  return  for  an  acquittance  and  remission  sought  and  obtained 
from  him  for  that  sum.  It  is  provided  in  the  charter  that  if  any  heirs 
of  the  Earl  and  Countess  of  Menteith  should  at  any  future  time  challenge 
their  renunciation  or  this  gift  by  the  King,  such  heirs  were  to  pay  to  Sir 
Bartholomew  and  his  spouse  Philippa,  or  their  heirs,  the  sum  of  two  thousand 
marks  before  entering  on  any  litigation ;  and  as  a  warrandice,  the  holders  of 
the  barony  were  to  have  right  to  distrain  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  with 
all  goods  found  therein,  and  to  apply  the  same  to  their  own  use  until  the 
money  was  paid.  This  they  might  do  without  obtaining  a  licence  from  the 
King  or  his  heirs.1 

Towards  the  close  of  the  year  1346,  the  Earl  of  Menteith  accompanied 
his  sovereign,  King  David  the  Second,  to  the  north  of  England.  David  had 
not  long  returned  from  the  French  Court,  whither  he  had  been  sent  by  the 
Estates  of  Scotland  until  the  country  had  been  rendered  more  safe  for  his 
reception,  and  when  Philip,  King  of  Prance,  was  being  hardly  pressed  in  the 
war  waged  against  him  by  Edward  the  Third  of  England,  King  David  resolved 
to  give  assistance  to  Prance  by  creating  a  diversion  in  England.  He  accord- 
ingly collected  an  army  at  Perth,  and  marched  to  the  Borders,  where  he 
reduced  several  strongholds  occupied  by  the  English,  and  wasted  part  of  their 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  247. 

VOL.  I.  0 


territory.  Afterwards,  in  opposition  to  the  warnings  and  remonstrances  of 
Sir  William  Douglas,  the  chivalrous  knight  of  Liddesdale,  who  knew  by 
experience  the  strength  of  the  northern  English  Barons,  David  led  his  army 
across  the  Border,  and  encamped  in  the  vicinity  of  the  town  of  Durham. 
Meanwhile  the  English  had  gathered  together  what  forces  they  could,  and 
a  large  body  of  soldiers  which  had  been  collected  to  embark  for  the 
Continent  was  sent  to  the  north.  The  neighbouring  prelates,  too,  brought 
their  retainers,  and  a  considerable  army  was  raised,  which  advanced  to  meet 
the  invading  troops  of  the  Scottish  King. 

The  presence  of  the  English  army  was  unknown  to  the  Scottish  leaders 
until  the  knight  of  Liddesdale,  while  on  a  foraging  expedition,  accidentally 
came  upon  them  on  the  morning  of  the  1 7th  October.  Douglas,  taken  by 
surprise,  retreated  to  the  main  body,  with  considerable  loss,  and  the  Scottish 
army  was  hastily  disposed  in  order  of  battle  to  resist  the  English,  who  were 
now  advancing  upon  them.  Unhappily,  however,  King  David's  position  was 
ill  chosen,  as  it  permitted  the  English  to  get  close  to  the  Scots  without 
being  seen.  The  English  archers  were  almost  within  bowshot,  when  the 
Earl  of  Menteith,  observing  the  danger,  strongly  urged  the  King  to  send  a 
body  of  cavalry  to  charge  the  bowmen  in  flank.  His  advice  was  disregarded, 
and  as  the  danger  grew  more  imminent,  and  the  archers  were  about  to  shoot, 
he  cried,  "  Give  me  but  an  hundred  horse,  and  I  engage  to  disperse  them  all, 
so  we  shall  be  able  to  fight  more  securely."  His  appeal  being  still  unheeded, 
the  Earl  hastily  leaped  on  his  horse,  and  followed  by  his  own  retainers, 
rushed  upon  the  advancing  archers.  But  the  first  flight  of  arrows  had 
already  sped,  and  the  gallant  Graham  was  too  feebly  supported  to  effect  the 
dispersion  of  the  bowmen.  He  fought  bravely  but  vainly  against  odds,  and 
was  compelled  to  retreat  at  considerable  risk  and  without  his  horse,,  which 
had  been  killed  under  him.     King  David's  unfortunate  refusal  of  the  Earl's 


request  helped  to  insure  the  disastrous  defeat  of  the  Scots.  A  cavalry 
engagement  with  the  bowmen  would  have  given  the  King  time  to  complete 
the  disposition  of  his  troops,  but  as  it  was,  the  galling  fire  of  the  arrows 
rendered  that  more  difficult,  and  before  the  Scots  were  ready  the  English 
horsemen  and  footmen  were  upon  them.  Their  divisions  were  broken  up 
and  scattered,  thousands  of  the  Scottish  soldiers  were  laid  dead  and  dying  on 
the  field,  and  many  of  David's  barons  and  nobles  were  made  prisoners.  The 
battle,  after  three  hours'  fighting,  was  terminated  by  the  capture  of  the 
Scottish  King  himself.  The  Earl  of  Menteith,  also,  was  amongst  the 
prisoners,  having  fought  hard  in  what  he  must  have  felt  to  be  a  useless 
struggle,  since  the  first  opportunity  was  lost.  The  Earl's  gallant  conduct 
in  this  battle  is  graphically  described  by  Wyntoun  in  the  following  lines : — 

The  Inglis  archerys  conie  so  nere, 

That  wyh  to  thame  welle  nere  myeht  thai. 

Than  gud  Schyre  Jhone  the  Gr£me  can  say 
To  the  Kyng,  "  Gettis  me,  but  ma, 
Ane  hundyre  on  hors  wyth  me  to  gd. 
And  all  yhone  archerys  skayle  sail  I  : 
Swa.  sail  we  fecht  mare  sykkerly." 
Thus  spak  he,  bot  he  mycht  get  nine. 
His  hors  in  by  than  has  he  tane, 
And  hym  allane  amang  thame  ride, 
And  rwdly  rowme  about  hym  made. 
Qwhen  he  a  qwhile  had  prekyd  thare, 
And  sum  off  thame  had  gert  sow  sare, 
He  to  the  battaylis  rade  agayne. 
Sa  fell  it,  thai  his  hors  hes  slayne.1 

The  chronicler  adds  that  Menteith  was  taken  with  other  Scottish  Earls. 

1  Wyntoun's  Cronykil,  vol.  ii.  p.  202. 


Along  with  King  David  and  the  other  prisoners  the  Earl  was  conveyed  to 
London,  and  incarcerated  in  the  Tower  by  order  of  King  Edward  the  Third, 
who  at  that  time  was  absent  in  France  conducting  the  siege  of  Calais.  The 
order  was  dated  8th  December  1346.  Thomas  d'Everwyk  (York)  was  named 
custodier  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  promise  was  made  that  he  should  be 
indemnified  for  his  charges.  On  the  2 2d  February  following,  Edward  and 
his  Council  at  Calais  issued  an  order  to  Galfrid  of  Wychingham,  Mayor  of 
London,  and  other  three  with  him,  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  Earls  of  Menteith 
and  Fife.  The  former  was  charged  with  breach  of  his  oath  of  fidelity  made  to 
the  King  of  England,  of  whose  Council  he  had  been  a  member,  and  both  with 
breach  of  allegiance  sworn  to  Edward  Baliol,  by  rising  in  arms.  The  Earls 
were  also  charged  with  causing  the  bloodshed  and  destruction  consequent  upon 
the  war.  Along  with  this  order,  and  bearing  the  same  date,  was  transmitted 
a  schedule  of  the  judgment  which  the  English  King  and  his  Council  had 
decided  should  be  the  finding  of  the  court,  that  the  Earls  should  be  convicted 
of  being  traitors,  and  as  such  attainted,  drawn,  hanged,  beheaded,  and  their 
bodies  quartered,  their  heads  placed  on  London  Bridge,  and  the  quarters  of 
their  bodies  sent  to  the  four  principal  towns  of  the  north — York,  Newcastle- 
upon-Tyne,  Carlisle,  and  Berwick — to  be  there  hung  in  chains  for  an  example 
and  terror  to  traitors.  It  was  further  ordered  that  this  sentence  should  be 
executed  on  Sir  John  Graham,  Earl  of  Menteith,  but  that  Duncan,  Earl  of  Fife, 
should  for  the  present  be  spared  because  of  his  blood  relationship  to  the 
King.1  On  22d  February  the  King  granted  the  order  at  Calais ;  a  few  days 
thereafter  the  court  sat  and  gave  decree  in  terms  of  his  Majesty's  remit, 
and  before  the  6th  of  March  the  sentence  had  been  carried  out  in  all  its 
ghastly  cruelty.  On  that  day  orders  were  issued  in  the  King  of  England's 
name  for  the  disposal  of  Menteith's  remains,  and  two  days  afterwards 
1  Eymer's  Fiedera,  vol.  iii.  p.  108. 


Edward's  treasurer  and  the  Barons  of  the  Exchequer  received  orders  to  pay 
the  expenses  incurred  in  the  trial  and  execution.1 

Thus  died  Sir  John  Graham,  Earl  of  Menteith.  Condemned  as  a 
traitor  by  a  foreign  King,  he  was  such  a  traitor  as  was  Sir  "William 
Wallace,  who  died  in  the  defence  of  his  country's  independence.  One 
of  the  many  Scotchmen  who  perished  in  the  fatal  grasp  of  the  Edwards 
of  England,  the  bravery  displayed  by  Sir  John  Graham  at  the  battle  of 
Durham,  his  consistent  and  courageous  devotion  to  the  cause  of  his  country, 
and  his  final  martyrdom,  embalm  his  memory  in  the  annals  of  the  Earls 
of  Menteith. 

After  this  tragic  termination  of  her  husband's  career,  the  Countess  Mary 
possessed  the  earldom  of  Menteith  for  a  considerable  time,  during  which 
hostilities  arose  among  the  neighbouring  families  of  Menteith,  Drummond, 
and  Campbell  of  Argyll,  which  proved  fatal  to  members  of  both  the  houses  of 
Menteith  and  Drummond.  The  Menteiths  especially  suffered  severely,  no 
fewer  than  three  brothers  having  been  slain,  with  a  number  of  their  followers. 
At  length  King  David  the  Second  interposed,  and  persuaded  the  parties  to 
come  to  an  amicable  agreement.  The  agreement  is  printed  among  the 
charters  in  the  second  volume.2 

It  was  entered  into  on  Sunday  the  17th  of  May  1360,  on  the  banks  of 
the  Forth,  near  Stirling,  in  presence  of  Sir  Eobert  Erskine  and  Sir  Hugh 
Eglinton,  justiciars  of  Scotland,  accompanied  by  Sir  Patrick  Graham  and 
many  other  noblemen  and  gentlemen.  On  the  one  side  was  John  of 
Drummond,  and  on  the  other  side  were  John  and  Alexander,  brothers  of  the 
late  Walter  Menteith.  The  enmities  and  discords  which  had  sprung  up 
between  these  families  were  finally  put  to  rest  by  the  following  arrangements. 

1  Eymer's  Foedera,  vol.  iii.  p.  110  ;  Rotuli  Scotite,  vol.  i.  pp.  6S9,  690. 

2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  239. 


To  compensate  for  the  slaughter  of  Walter,  Malcolm,  and  William,  brothers 
of  John  and  Alexander  Menteith,  and  their  men  and  adherents,  slain  by 
John  of  Drummond  and  his  men  or  adherents,  as  also  for  all  injuries  done 
by  John  of  Drummond,  Maurice  his  brother,  and  Walter  of  Moray,  or  others 
his  men  and  adherents,  to  the  brothers  or  their  friends  up  to  the  date  of 
this  agreement,  John  of  Drummond  granted  the  lands  of  Eosneath  in  the 
earldom  of  Lennox  to  Sir  Alexander  Menteith  and  his  heirs.  It  was  specially 
provided  that  though  in  the  charter  mention  was  made  of  homage  and 
service,  according  to  common  form,  yet  Sir  Alexander  Menteith  should  not 
be  required  to  perform  any  service  except  suit  and  homage.  It  was  also 
agreed  that  if  Sir  Alexander  Menteith  should  prefer  his  late  brother  Walter's 
nearest  heir  to  succeed  him  in  the  lands  of  Eosneath  rather  than  his  own 
children,  that  heir  should  be  entitled  to  the  lands. 

The  lands  of  Eosneath  had  been  granted  by  Countess  Mary  in  her 
widowhood  to  John  of  Drummond,  and  they  were  only  now  restored  to  the 
family  of  Menteith.  The  charter  by  John  of  Drummond  to  Sir  Alexander 
Menteith  was  confirmed  by  Walter  of  Fasselane,  Earl  of  Lennox,  and  after- 
wards by  King  Eobert  the  Second  at  St.  Andrews,  on  30th  March  1372. 
In  the  royal  confirmation  it  was  provided  that  the  lands  should  be  held 
by  the  said  Alexander  and  his  heirs,  as  freely  and  quietly  as  they  had 
been  held  under  the  charter  or  letter  of  the  deceased  Countess  of  Men- 
teith by  the  deceased  John  of  Drummond,  and  other  writs  following 

In   the   agreement   John   of    Drummond   became    security   for   himself 

and  his  heirs,  his  brother  Maurice,  Walter  of  Moray,  and  all  others  his 

friends,  relatives,  and   adherents  for  whom   he  could   be   responsible,  that 

no   further   harm    should    be   done   by   them   to   the    Menteiths   or   their 

1  Eegistrum  Magni  Sigilli,  pp.  113,  114. 


friends,  and  that  no  animosity  should  be  kept  up  by  them  for  any  wrongs 
they  had  received. 

John  of  Drummond  also  became  security  that  Gillespie  and  Kessan, 
called  Macghilecharrick,  Donald  son  of  Gilbert,  Duncan  son  of  Nigel,  and  all 
others  who  had  been  present  at  the  murder  of  Brice  the  procurator,  should 
be  unmolested  by  him  or  those  for  whom  he  was  surety  on  account  of  that 
murder,  or  any  other  irregularities  committed  by  them.  If,  however,  any 
other  kinsmen  of  the  said  Brice  chose  to  prosecute  for  his  death,  it  should 
be  quite  open  to  them  to  do  so  in  form  of  law.1  In  the  same  manner, 
Finlay  son  of  Ay  was  assured  by  Sir  John  that  no  harm  should  be  done 
to  him  by  any  of  his  friends  on  account  of  anything  he  had  clone. 

On  the  other  hand,  John  and  Alexander  Menteith  pledged  themselves  to 
remain  in  cordial  friendship  with  John  of  Drummond  and  his  party.  In 
addition,  Walter  of  Buchanan,  nephew  of  the  late  Walter  Menteith,  firmly 
bound  himself  by  oath,  that  he,  his  heirs  and  dependants,  would  faithfully 
observe  this  treaty. 

The  Menteiths  were  unable  to  give  security  for  Gillespie  Campbell  and 
his  son  Colin  or  their  adherents,  but  they  obliged  themselves  that  if  the 
Campbells  rebelled  against  John  of  Drummond,  they  would  defend  him 
with  all  their  might,  and  as  often  as  there  should  be  occasion.  They  further 
obliged  themselves  that  so  soon  as  the  true  and  nearest  heir  of  the  late 
Walter  Menteith  came  of  lawful  age,  they  would  cause  him  to  make,  at  his 
own  trouble  and  expense,  letters  under  his  seal,  in  all  points  similar  to  the 
present,  and  deliver  them  to  John  of  Drummond  and  his  heirs.  In  the 
event  of  this  not  being  done,  the  lands  of  Bosneath  were  to  revert  to  John 
of  Drummond  and  his  heirs  irredeemably,  and  the  Menteiths  were  to  be  in 

1  Brice  Drummond  is  said  to  have  been  a  cousin  of  John  of  Drummond,   and  to  have 
been  slain  in  1330.     Malcolm's  Memoir,  p.  29. 


the  position  in  which  they  were  before  the  making  of  this  agreement.  If 
by  any  rashness  or  deceit  the  Menteiths  should  slay  or  procure  the  death  of 
John  of  Drumniond,  or  any  of  his  friends  or  men,  for  any  cause  arising  prior 
to  this  compact,  he  who  committed  or  favoured  the  commission  of  such  a 
deed  was  to  be  shunned  in  every  court  and  assembly  as  infamous,  and  to 
be  deprived  of  all  knightly  honours.  So  should  it  be  done  also  to  any  who 
failed  to  take  part  with  John  of  Drummond  and  his  friends  in  the  defence  of 
this  treaty,  and  specially  if  Sir  Alexander  Menteith  neglected  to  do  so,  the 
lauds  of  Rosneath  were  to  be  restored  to  John  of  Drummond  and  his  heirs  for 
ever.  Finally,  both  parties,  laying  aside  every  suspicion  and  dissimulation, 
bound  themselves  to  each  other  sincerely  to  maintain  in  all  time  to  come 
these  bonds  of  mutual  love,  as  if  there  had  never  been  any  dissension 
between  them.  To  complete  their  agreement,  John  of  Drummond,  Maurice 
his  brother,  and  Walter  of  Moray,  on  the  one  part,  and  John  and  Sir 
Alexander  Menteith  and  Walter  of  Buchanan,  on  the  other,  personally  and 
severally,  gave  their  oaths  by  touching  the  gospels. 

Moreover,  Robert,  High  Steward  of  Scotland,  Earl  of  Strathern,  for  himself 
and  his  heirs,  as  the  principal  relative  of  both  parties,  the  Earls  of  Douglas 
and  Angus,  and  Sir  John  Menteith  of  Arran,  dismissed  all  enmity  which  they 
had  against  John  of  Drummond  and  his  friends  for  the  slaughter  of  Walter, 
Malcolm,  and  William  Menteith,  their  kinsmen ;  and  at  the  instance  of  the 
brothers,  as  well  as  for  the  sake  of  concord,  they  promised  to  refrain  from 
further  pursuit  of  the  quarrel.  This  treaty  of  peace  they  confirmed  in  all 
points  as  laudable,  acceptable,  and  thoroughly  useful ;  and  they  undertook 
that  if  either  of  the  parties  infringed  the  same,  they  would  rise  together 
against  that  party  with  their  power  and  counsel.  For  greater  evidence  of  all 
the  premises,  duplicates  of  the  agreement  were  made,  one  for  either  party, 
and  the  said  Lords  caused  their  seals  to  be  appended  to  them.     To  the 


duplicate  remaining  with  John  of  Drummond,  John  and  Alexander  Menteith 
and  Walter  of  Buchanan  appended  their  seals ;  and  to  the  one  remaining  in 
the  hands  of  John  and  Alexander  Menteith,  John  of  Drummond,  his  brother 
Maurice,  and  Walter  of  Moray  appended  their  seals.  '  An  additional  clause 
provided  that  if  John  Menteith  or  his  nephew  Walter  should  be  moved  by 
any  cause  or  resentment  for  prior  events  to  seek  the  death  of  John  of 
Drummond  or  any  of  his  friends,  or  if  they  should  not  assist  them  against 
any  of  their  party  who  should  perpetrate  such  a  crime,  on  the  fact  being 
proved,  the  lands  of  Kosneath  should  revert  in  perpetuity  to  John  of 
Drummond  and  his  heirs,  as  before  provided  in  regard  to  Sir  Alexander 

This  indenture  reveals  in  plain  terms  the  insecure  state  in  which  the 
early  feudal  customs  placed  life  and  property  in  the  time  of  the  early  Stewart 
Kings,  while  it  also  informs  us  of  the  means  by  which  the  fierce  feuds, 
which  from  jealousy  and  other  causes  not  ^infrequently  broke  out  between 
neighbouring  families,  were  met  and  overcome.  Such  contentions  were 
often  difficult  to  quell,  and  too  frequently  lasted  until  one  or  both  sides  had 
paid  the  cost  in  their  best  blood.  Once  begun,  they  were  seldom  confined  to 
the  families  in  which  they  originated,  and  in  the  present  instance  the 
Campbells  of  Argyll  and  others  had  become  involved.  Matters  had  thus 
assumed  an  aspect  sufficiently  grave  to  require  the  prompt  interference  of 
the  royal  authority,  and  it  is  gratifying  to  find  that  in  this  case  the  concilia- 
tory measures  proposed  were  successful  in  securing  a  lasting  harmony 
between  the  two  families  of  Menteith  and  Drummond. 

It  was  evidently  with  reluctance,  however,  that  John  of  Drummond 
parted  with  the  lands  of  Eosneath,  but  they  never  reverted  to  him  or  his 
heirs.  By  the  charter  of  King  Bobert  the  Second  before  mentioned,  they 
were  confirmed  to  Sir  Alexander  Menteith  in  1372.     In  1455  the  lands  were 

VOL.  I.  P 


annexed  to  the  crown  along  with  the  castle  of  Dumbarton,1  and  Colin,  first 
Earl  of  Argyll,  Chancellor  of  Scotland,  received  them  by  a  charter  under  the 
Great  Seal  on  9th  January  1489.2  Rosneath  is  now  the  property  of  the 
Duke  of  Argyll,  as  the  representative  of  the  Chancellor. 

The  Countess  Mary  took  an  active  part  in  the  settlement  of  these 
family  feuds.  She  made  large  grants  out  of  her  own  earldom  of  Menteith, 
presumably  for  the  purpose  of  securing  the  acquiescence  and  support  of 
Gillespie  Campbell  and  his  son  Colin  to  the  agreement.  It  was  a  considerable 
sacrifice  to  make,  but  as  the  Campbells  were  independent  of  both  parties  to 
the  agreement,  it  was  the  only  way  in  which  they  could  be  won  over.  By 
one  charter  the  Countess  granted  to  Archibald  or  Gillespie  Campbell,  son  to 
Sir  Colin  Campbell  of  Lochaw,  all  her  lands  of  Kilniun  in  Cowal,  to  be  held 
of  herself  and  her  heirs,  feu,  for  payment  of  a  pair  of  Parisian  gloves  at  the 
fair  of  Glasgow,  if  the  same  were  asked.3  By  another  charter  Mary,  Countess 
of  Menteith,  granted  to  the  same  Archibald  Campbell  all  the  lands  within 
the  barony  of  Cowal  which  she  held  of  the  Steward  of  Scotland,  to  wit,  the 
lands  of  Keanlochkilmun,  Correikmore,  Stronvonag,  Correntie,  Bernicemore, 
and  Stronnahunseon,  to  be  held  of  the  Countess  and  her  heirs,  feu,  for 
payment  of  a  silver  penny  at  the  fair  of  Glasgow,  if  it  were  asked.4  Of  these 
charters,  neither  bears  the  date  or  place  at  which  it  was  granted,  but  the 
latter  was  confirmed  by  King  David  the  Second  on  25th  May  1360,  and  the 
former  on  11th  October  1361.5 

The  Countess  Mary  further  exerted  herself  in  the  matter  of  the  agreement 
so  much,  that  a  marriage  had  been  arranged  and  had  actually  taken  place, 
prior  to  the  date  of  the  agreement,  between  her  daughter,  Lady  Margaret 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  3  Argyll  Inventory,  vol.  i.  p.  323. 
p.  42.                                                                                 4  Ibid.  p.  323. 

2  Argyll  Charters.  5  Ibid.  p.  324. 

HER  DEATH.  115 

Graham,  and  John  Drurnmond.  This  marriage  is  distinctly  stated  to  have 
heen  arranged  in  the  interests  of  peace. 

Lady  Margaret  Graham  was,  so  far  as  is  known,  the  sole  issue  of  the 
marriage  between  Mary,  Countess  of  Menteith,  and  Sir  John  Graham. 
Being  the  heiress  to  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  she  was  the  object  of  much 
attention  from  the  Earls  and  Barons  of  Scotland,  and  a  lady  of  many 
marriages.     Her  romantic  career  is  noticed  in  the  following  chapter. 

The  last  we  hear  of  the  Countess  Mary  is  in  the  arrangement  of  her 
daughter's  fourth  marriage  with  Bobert  Stewart,  son  of  the  High  Steward. 
In  the  dispensation  granted  by  the  Bope  on  9th  September  1361  for  this 
marriage,  mention  is  made  of  an  agreement  between  their  parents.  The  only 
surviving  parent  of  the  lady  was  her  mother  the  Countess  Mary,  and  Bobert 
Stewart  was  the  third  son  by  Elizabeth  Mure  of  Bobert  Stewart,  Earl  of 
Strathern,  afterwards  King  Bobert  the  Second. 

The  Countess  Mary  died  probably  soon  after  this.  The  precise  date  of 
her  death  has  not  been  ascertained,  but  it  must  have  been  prior  to  1372,  as 
in  the  charter  of  confirmation,  dated  in  that  year,  by  King  Bobert  the  Second 
to  Sir  Alexander  Menteith  of  the  lands  of  Bosneath,  she  is  mentioned  as 
deceased.  The  actual  place  of  her  sepulchre  is  also  unknown,  but  it  was 
probably  in  the  family  burial-place  in  the  Briory  of  Inchmahome,  or  in  the 
Abbey  of  Cambuskenneth. 








OF  FIFE,  afterwards  DUKE   OF  ALBANY   and   GOVERNOR 

1334— circa  1380. 

LADY  MAEGAEET  GEAHAM  was  the  only  daughter  of  the  heroic 
Sir  John  Graham,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  his  Countess  Lady  Mary 
Menteith,  and  being  also  their  only  child  she  inherited  the  earldom,  before  or 
about  the  year  1360. 

The  history  of  this  heiress  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  is  both  interesting 
and  romantic.  She  was  four  times  married,  and  she  received  five  dis- 
pensations from  the  Pope  to  enable  her  to  enter  into  her  successive 
matrimonial  alliances.  Two  of  these  marriages  occurred  before  Lady 
Margaret  had  attained  the  age  of  twenty  years.  From  her  second  husband, 
Thomas,  Earl  of  Mar,  she  was  unjustly  divorced.  Her  third  marriage,  which 
was  made  for  the  sake  of  healing  the  fierce  feuds  between  the  Menteiths  and 
Drummonds,  caused  her  to  incur  ecclesiastical  censure,  and  by  her  fourth 
marriage  she  carried  the  earldom  of  Menteith  back  to  the  race  of  her  maternal 
ancestors  the  Stewarts.  Her  fourth  husband,  Eobert  Stewart,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  became  also  Earl  of  Fife,  then  the  premier  earldom  of  Scotland, 
and  Lady  Ma.rgaret  thus  became  the  senior  Countess  in  the  realm.     She, 


however,  did  not  survive  to  be  Duchess  of  Albany,  as  she  predeceased  her 
husband  before  he  was  created  Duke  of  Albany  in  1398. 

Lady  Margaret  Graham  was  born  probably  before  1334,  the  year  in 
which  the  dispensation  was  granted  to  her  parents  for  a  new  celebration  of 
their  marriage,  as  reference  is  made  in  that  writ  to  the  children  already 
born.  She  was  brought  up  by  her  parents  under  the  ancestral  roof,  which 
is  supposed  to  have  been  the  castle  of  Doune  or  Talla.  When  her  father 
left  his  home  to  follow  the  standard  of  King  David  into  England,  from  which 
expedition  he  never  returned,  Lady  Margaret  was  little  more  than  twelve 
years  of  age. 

The  death  of  her  father  had  an  important  bearing  on  the  destinies  of  the 
young  heiress,  and  led  to  events  which  might  not  have  taken  place  had 
he  lived.  Deprived  of  her  natural  protector,  even  though  her  mother  still 
lived,  she  was  at  the  mercy  of  circumstances,  and  exposed  to  the  schemes 
of  intriguers,  who  were  never  wanting  when  so  great  an  earldom  was  to 
be  acquired  by  marriage.  To  escape  their  schemes,  and  following  the 
custom  then  in  vogue  of  early  marriages  of  heiresses,  it  was  arranged  during 
the  year  1348,  while  as  yet  Lady  Margaret  had  only  attained  her  fourteenth 
year,  that  a  marriage  should  be  celebrated  between  her  and  Sir  John 
Moray,  Lord  of  Bothwell.  The  proposals  for  the  union  were  favourably 
received  at  Court.  One  obstacle,  however,  stood  in  the  way;  the  con- 
tracting parties  were  related  to  each  other  within  the  forbidden  degrees,  and 
to  remove  that  impediment  recourse  was  had  by  petition  to  the  supreme 
pontiff  for  a  dispensation.  The  Queen  of  Scotland  interested  herself  in 
the  marriage  to  such  an  extent  that  her  Majesty  presented  a  separate  petition 
to  the  Pope  to  induce  him  to  grant  the  necessary  dispensation.  The  result 
in  such  circumstances  could  not  be  doubtful.  Pope  Clement  the  Sixth  gave 
the   necessary  apostolic   authority  to   the  Bishop  of  Moray  to  permit  the 



marriage  of  Sir  John  Moray  and  Lady  Margaret.  What  the  relationship 
was  which  delayed  the  marriage  it  is  difficult  now  to  discover ;  the  dis- 
pensation merely  states  that  the  parties  were  descended  from  the  same 
family,  hut  their  parentage  cannot  be  traced  with  certainty.  The  difficulty 
was  overcome,  and  the  marriage  duly  celebrated.  A  translation  of  the  papal 
.  dispensation  is  subjoined : — 

Clement,  etc.  To  our  venerable  brother,  [John]  Bishop  of  Moray,  greeting,  etc. 
A  petition  on  behalf  of  our  beloved  son  a  noble  young  man,  John  of  Moray,  and  our 
beloved  daughter  in  Christ,  a  noble  woman,  Margaret  of  Graham,  a  damsel,  daughter  of 
our  beloved  son,  a  noble  man,  John  of  Graham,  Earl  of  Menteith,  who  belong  to  your 
diocese  and  the  diocese  of  Dunblane,  has  lately  been  laid  before  us,  representing  that 
the  said  John  of  Moray  and  Margaret  desire  to  be  united  together  in  matrimony  ;  but 
because  through  descent  from  the  same  family  they  happen  to  be  related  within  the 
fourth  degree  of  consanguinity,  they  cannot  contract  this  marriage  without  obtaining 
our  apostolic  dispensation  in  the  matter ;  wherefore,  on  their  behalf,  humble 
supplication  has  been  made  to  us  that  we  would  vouchsafe  to  provide  for  them  by 
the  ready  benefit  of  a  dispensation  :  We,  therefore,  yielding  to  the  supplications  of 
our  very  dear  daughter  in  Christ,  [Joanna,]  illustrious  queen  of  Scotland,  humbly 
entreating  us  concerning  this  matter,  and  to  those  of  John  of  Moray  and  Margaret 
foresaid,  and  for  certain  causes  explained  to  us,  do,  by  apostolic  letters,  command  you, 
brother,  that  if  it  is  so,  you  may,  by  our  authority,  grant  a  dispensation,  so  that 
notwithstanding  the  impediment  which  has  arisen  out  of  this  consanguinity,  the  said 
John  of  Moray  and  Margaret  may  be  free  to  contract  marriage,  and  after  it  shall  have 
been  contracted,  lawfully  to  abide  therein ;  declaring  that  the  offspring  to  be 
conceived  of  the  said  marriage  shall  be  legitimate.  Given  at  Avignon,  the  21st 
November,  in  the  seventh  year  of  our  pontificate  (1348).1 

Sir  John  Moray  was  the  eldest  son  of  Sir  Andrew  Moray  of  Bothwell  in 
Clydesdale,  a  brave  and  resolute  warrior,  who  was  for  some  time  Eegent  of 

1   Theiner's  Vetera  Monunienta,  p.  290,  No.  dlxxxix. 


Scotland  during  the  minority  of  King  David  the  Second.  On  the  death  of  his 
father  in  1338,  Sir  John  became  Lord  of  Bothwell,  and  succeeded  to  the 
hereditary  office  of  panetarius  or  chief  butler  of  Scotland,  which  had  been 
conferred  on  the  family  of  the  Morays  of  Bothwell  by  King  Alexander  the 
Third.  After  his  marriage  with  Lady  Margaret  Graham,  Sir  John  received 
one  hundred  marks  sterling  from  Master  John  of  Inverness,  chancellor  of  the 
church  of  Moray,  who  desired  to  found  a  chaplainry  in  that  church  for  the 
weal  of  his  own  soul  and  the  soul  of  Sir  Andrew  Moray  of  good  memory. 
In  return  Sir  John  Moray  obliged  himself  and  his  heirs  to  pay  to  the  founder 
of  the  chaplainry  and  his  assignees  an  annual  rent  of  eight  marks  from  the 
dues  of  his  lands  of  Artrelly  and  Croy,  or  if  the  money  could  not  be  uplifted 
from  these  lands,  it  might  be  taken  from  any  lands  which  he  held  from  the 
bishop  and  church  of  Moray,  with  consent  of  the  bishop  and  his  chapter. 
This  charter  was  granted  by  Sir  John  Moray  at  Elgin,  on  the  11th  of  April 

Master  John  of  Inverness  thereupon,  on  20th  April,  by  a  formal  deed, 
apportioned  the  eight  marks  in  the  following  manner :  Six  marks  annually 
to  the  chaplain  who  should  perform  masses  for  his  soul,  the  souls  of  his 
father  and  mother,  the  soul  of  Sir  Andrew  Moray,  the  father  of  Sir  John, 
and  the  souls  of  all  the  faithful  departed,  at  the  altar  of  the  holy  cross  in 
the  church  of  the  Holy  Trinity  at  Elgin ;  two  shillings  and  eightpence  to  the 
treasurer  to  provide  bread,  wine,  and  wax  for  the  officiating  chaplain;  ten 
shillings  to  be  distributed  annually  on  the  granter's  anniversary,  and  ten 
shillings  on  the  anniversary  of  Sir  Andrew  Moray,  to  those  chaplains  and 
vicars  who  were  personally  present  at  their  funeral  obsequies,  but  entirely 
excluding  those  who  were  absent  or  who  did  not  come  in  time ;  two  shillings 
for  the  lighting  of  the  holy  cross,  and  two  shillings  for  the  lighting  of  the 

1  Registrum  Moraviense,  p.  296. 


blessed  Virgin  Mary,  so  that  the  church  and  keepers  of  the  lights  should  be 
bound  to  place  four  lighted  wax  candles  round  the  tomb  of  Sir  Andrew  Moray 
when  they  celebrated  year  by  year  his  funeral  obsequies  on  his  anniversary.1 

In  a  charter  granted  by  Muriella  of  Doune,  widow  of  Sir  William  Eose  of 
Kilravock,  and  daughter  of  the  late  Andrew  of  Doune,  to  her  second  son 
Andrew  of  Eose,  of  her  part  of  the  lands  of  Killayne  and  Pitfure,  within 
the  barony  of  Avach,  she  states  that  the  grant  is  made  with  assent, 
consent,  and  licence  of  a  noble  man,  her  overlord,  John  of  Moray,  Lord  of 
Bothwell  and  of  Avach ;  and  in  a  duplicate  of  the  same  charter  she  styles 
Sir  John  Moray  "Earl  of  Menteith  and  Panitarius  of  Scotland."2  It  is 
somewhat  difficult  to  understand  how  Sir  John  came  to  bear  the  title  of  Earl 
of  Menteith,  seeing  that  Lady  Mary  Menteith,  the  mother  of  Lady  Margaret 
Graham,  was  still  alive  and  bearing  the  title  of  Countess  of  Menteith. 
Perhaps  it  was  merely  accorded  to  him  as  a  courtesy  title  by  his  dependants 
on  account  of  his  marriage  with  the  heiress  of  Menteith,  for  he  is  not  styled 
Earl  of  Menteith  in  any  of  the  public  documents  of  the  time.  Had  it  been 
the  usual  custom  on  marrying  titled  heiresses  for  the  husbands  at  once  to 
assume  the  title,  we  should  have  expected  the  succeeding  husbands  of  Lady 
Margaret  to  be  styled  Earls  of  Menteith  likewise.  Of  this,  however,  there  is 
no  evidence;  but  the  fact  of  Sir  John  Moray  being  so  designated  in  that 
charter  proves  that  he  was  the  husband  of  Lady  Margaret  Graham. 

It  is  also  interesting  to  note  that  Lady  Margaret  Graham  assumed  the 
surname  of  her  husband  as  well  as  the  title  of  Countess  of  Menteith.  King- 
David  the  Second  confirmed  at  Scone,  on  12th  November  1362,  an  undated 
charter  by  Margaret  of  Moravia,  Countess  of  Menteith,  to  John  Drummond 
of  Concraig,  of  the  lands  of  Aberfoyle,  lying  within  the  earldom  of  Menteith.3 

1  Registrum  Moraviense,  p.  298.  2  Rose  of  Kilravock,  p.  116. 

3  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  246. 


Sir  John  Moray  died  either  towards  the  close  of  the  year  1351,  or  in  the 
beginning  of  the  following  year.  As  he  left  no  children  by  his  wife,  Lady 
Margaret  Graham,  he  was  succeeded  by  his  younger  brother,  Thomas  Moray 
of  Bothwell. 

The  hand  of  Lady  Margaret  was  soon  afterwards  sought  in  marriage  by 
Thomas  Earl  of  Mar.  He  was  the  last  male  heir  of  the  very  ancient  race 
of  Mar,  Earls  of  Mar,  and  is  commonly  called  the  thirteenth  Earl.  As  in 
the  former  marriage,  there  existed  some  blood  relationship,  now  untraceable, 
between  Lady  Margaret  and  the  Earl  of  Mar,  which  delayed  their  union  until 
the  Church  could  dispense  with  the  impediment.  But  the  Earl,  eager  for 
an  alliance  with  the  heiress  of  so  ancient  an  earldom  as  Menteith,  made 
personal  application  to  Borne  for  the  removal  of  all  hindrances.  The  Earl's 
petition  to  Bope  Clement  the  Sixth  appears  to  have  set  forth  that  he  could 
not  readily  find  in  all  Scotland  any  other  match  so  becoming  his  rank.  The 
Bope  granted  the  prayer  of  the  petition  by  a  formal  dispensation  for  the 
marriage,  of  which  the  following  is  a  translation : — 

Clement,  etc.  Unto  a  beloved  son,  a  noble  man,  Thomas  Earl  of  Mar,  and  a 
beloved  daughter  in  Christ,  Margaret,  widow  of  the  late  John  of  Moray,  of  the  diocese 
of  Aberdeen,  greeting.  The  watchful  providence  of  the  apostolic  see,  tempering 
at  times  the  rigour  of  justice  with  kindness,  with  gracious  benignity  permits  what  the 
institutes  of  the  sacred  canons  forbid,  regard  being  had  to  the  quality  of  the  persons 
and  the  times,  as  may  appear  usefully  expedient  in  the  Lord.  Forasmuch  as  your 
petition  laid  before  us  showed  that  you,  son  Earl,  cannot  readily  find  in  all  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland,  whence  you  are  sprung,  any  woman  but  thee,  daughter  Margaret, 
with  whom  you  may  marry  as  becomes  your  rank,  and  that  you  accordingly  desire  to 
be  united  in  marriage,  but  because  you  are  related  in  the  third  and  fourth  degrees  of 
affinity,  you  cannot  conveniently  nor  lawfully  fulfil  this  your  desire  without  obtaining  the 
apostolic  dispensation  thereupon  ;  wherefore  you  have  humbly  besought  us  that  we  would 
graciously  vouchsafe  to  provide  thereanent  by  a  suitable  dispensation  :  We,  therefore, 
VOL.  I.  Q 


for  these  and  certain  other  causes  explained  to  us,  yielding  to  these  supplications,  do, 
by  apostolic  authority,  and  by  a  special  gift  of  grace,  by  the  tenor  of  these  presents, 
dispense,  that  ye  may,  notwithstanding  the  impediment  arising  from  this  consanguinity, 
be  free  to  contract  marriage,  and  after  it  shall  have  been  contracted,  to  abide  lawfully 
therein,  declaring  that  the  offspring  to  be  conceived  of  this  marriage  shall  be 
legitimate.  Therefore  let  no  man  whatever  break  this  page  of  our  dispensation,  or 
oppose  it  by  rash  daring,  but  if  any  one  presume  to  attempt  this  let  him  know  that  he 
will  incur  the  wrath  of  Almighty  God  and  the  blessed  apostles  Peter  and  Paul. 
Given  at  Avignon,  15th  August,  in  the  eleventh  year  of  our  pontificate  (1352). a 

There  exists  in  the  archives  of  the  Vatican  at  Eome  the  record  of  another 
dispensation  for  the  marriage  of  Thomas  Earl  of  Mar  with  Lady  Margaret 
Graham,  which  was  granted,  two  years  later,  hy  Pope  Innocent  the  Sixth,  the 
successor  of  Pope  Clement,  to  John  Eait,  Bishop  of  Aberdeen.  It  bears  that 
Lady  Margaret  and  the  Earl,  although  related  within  the  forbidden  degrees, 
had  married  without  having  obtained  a  dispensation,  and  this  was  now 
granted  in  order  to  legalise  the  marriage.  No  notice  is  taken  of  the  previous 
dispensation  procured  directly  by  the  Earl  of  Mar,  which  may  possibly  have 
been  lost  on  its  way  from  Eome  to  Scotland.  In  such  case  the  Earl  of  Mar, 
after  waiting  some  time,  may  have  proceeded  to  consummate  the  marriage, 
and  afterwards  on  its  being  declared  to  be  ecclesiastically  unlawful,  he  may 
have  taken  the  ordinary  means  to  get  it  legalised.  It  would  also  seem  that 
the  Pope  must  have  overlooked  the  dispensation  granted  by  his  predecessor. 
A  translation  of  this  dispensation,  of  which  a  copy  has  been  procured  from 
the  register  of  Pope  Innocent  the  Sixth,2  is  here  given  : — 

To  [our]  venerable  brother,  John,  Bishop  of  Aberdeen,  greeting,  etc.  The  petition 
lately  shown  to  us  on  behalf  of  a  beloved  son,  a  noble  man,  Thomas,  Earl  of  Mar,  and 
a  beloved  daughter  in  Christ,  a  noble  woman,  Margaret,  daughter  of  the  late  John, 

1  Theiner's  Vetera  Monumenta,  p.  300,  No.  dot.  2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  237. 


Earl  of  Menteith,  represented  that  they,  some  time  ago,  unaware  of  the  existence  of 
any  impediment  to  their  being  lawfully  married,  publicly  contracted  marriage  per  verba 
de  jn'esenti  in  face  of  the  church,  no  one  opposing  them,  and  afterwards  consummated 
the  same  ;  but  that  subsequently  it  came  to  their  knowledge  that  they  were  related  to 
each  other  in  the  fourth  degree,  for  which  reason  they  could  not  remain  in  their  married 
state  without  obtaining  an  apostolic  dispensation.  Wherefore,  humble  supplication 
having  been  made  to  us  on  behalf  of  the  said  Thomas  and  Margaret  that  we  would  of 
[our]  apostolic  charity  deign  in  this  matter  to  provide  them  with  the  benefit  of  a 
fitting  dispensation,  we,  who  seek  the  salvation  of  souls,  yielding  to  the  prayers  of 
both  the  foresaid  Thomas  and  Margaret,  do,  by  apostolic  writs,  for  certain  causes 
explained  to  us  on  their  behalf,  command  and  commit  to  you,  brother,  from  whom  we 
receive  obedience  in  the  Lord,  that  if  it  is  so  with  the  said  Thomas  and  Margaret,  you 
may,  by  our  authority,  grant  a  dispensation,  in  order  that  they  may  be  able  lawfully  to 
abide  in  the  said  marriage  notwithstanding  the  impediment  which  has  arisen  from  the 
said  consanguinity,  declaring  the  offspring  conceived  and  to  be  conceived  of  this 
marriage  to  be  legitimate.  Given  at  Villa  Nova,  in  the  diocese  of  Avignon,  29  th  May, 
in  the  second  year  [of  our  pontificate],  1354. 

The  affection  of  the  Earl  of  Mar  for  the  young  heiress  of  Menteith,  so 
strongly  manifested  before  marriage,  does  not  appear  to  have  lasted  after  their 
union.  On  the  contrary,  he  soon  after  procured  a  divorce,  and  his  conduct 
in  doing  so  is  reprobated  in  very  strong  terms  by  a  contemporary  historian, 
who  attributes  the  act  to  diabolical  instigation,  and  alleges  that  the  reasons 
given  for  the  divorce  were  utterly  untrue  and  mere  pretences.1  The  true 
reason  for  this  action  is  no  doubt  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Earl  of 
Mar,  naturally  desirous  of  having  children  of  his  own  to  succeed  to  his  old 
and  historical  earldom  of  Mar,  and  finding  himself  disappointed  in  this  after 
his  union  with  Lady  Margaret  Graham,  as  it  is  recorded  that  there  were  no 

1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  150  : —  diabolo,  per  exquaesitos  colores  et  rationes 
"  Thomam  comitem  de  Marr,  qui  desponsavit  minus  veras,  sine  prole  inter  eos  habita 
lieredem  de  Meneteth  ;  sed  postea   instijjante       divortium  procuravit." 



children  of  the  marriage,  separated  himself  from  her,  in  the  hope  that  by  a 
new  matrimonial  alliance  he  might  yet  have  an  heir.  He  afterwards  married 
Lady  Margaret  Stewart,  Countess  of  Angus,  who  was  the  eldest  daughter 
and  heiress  of  Thomas  Stewart,  second  Earl  of  Angus.  But  he  was  again 
disappointed,  and  died  without  issue  in  1377. 

Thus  while  yet  scarce  more  than  twenty  years  of  age,  Lady  Margaret 
Graham  had  already  met  with  many  misfortunes.  After  her  divorce 
from  the  Earl  of  Mar,  she  returned  to  the  paternal  roof  to  share  with  her 
mother,  the  Countess  of  Menteith,  the  more  hospitable  retirement  of  her 
home.  Events,  however,  were  taking  place  which  were  to  bring  her  another 
husband ;  deadly  feuds  existed  between  the  families  of  Menteith,  Drummond, 
and  others  around,  property  was  destroyed,  and  three  of  the  sons  of  Sir 
John  Menteith  of  Eusky  had  been  slain  along  with  their  men.  We  have 
already  seen  how  the  Countess  Mary  bestirred  herself  to  procure  a  final  and 
lasting  peace  between  all  parties,  and  how  her  daughter  Lady  Margaret 
also  bore  her  share  in  the  settlement  by  consenting  to  espouse  the  chief  of 
the  Drummonds.  In  prospect  of  this  third  marriage,  the  Countess  appears 
to  have  resigned  the  earldom  of  Menteith  in  favour  of  her  daughter. 

John  Drummond  of  Concraig  was  the  eldest  son  of  Sir  Malcolm 
Drummond,  who  is  said  to  have  fallen  at  the  battle  of  Durham  in  1346. 
John  Drummond  had  been  previously  married  to  Lady  Mary  of  Montifex, 
eldest  daughter  of  Sir  William  of  Montifex,  and  had  several  children  by  her, 
among  whom  was  the  illustrious  Annabella  Drummond,  the  beautiful  Queen 
of  King  Eobert  the  Third.  Lady  Annabella  was  married  to  John  Stewart 
in  1357,  and  it  was  after  this  near  alliance  with  the  crown  that  King 
David  the  Second  persuaded  John  Drummond  to  bring  the  feuds  between 
him  and  the  Menteiths  to  a  peaceful  termination.  He  gave  up  the  lands  of 
Eosneath  in  Dumbartonshire,  and  was  promised  in  return  other  lands  in 


Perthshire  and  the  office  of  Abthane  of  Dull  in  Athole.  The  formal 
agreement,  as  previously  shown,  was  drawn  up  on  17th  May  1360;  but 
John  Drummond  and  the  young  Countess  of  Menteith  were  married  at  least 
in  1359,  as  apparently  by  the  beginning  of  1360  a  child  had  been  born  of 
the  marriage.  It  was  now  ascertained  that  the  marriage  had  been  irregular, 
owing  to  John  Drummond  and  the  Countess  being  related  within  the  for- 
bidden degrees,  and  recourse  was  had  to  the  Pope  for  a  dispensation.  Thus 
was  the  Lady  Margaret  a  fourth  time  made  the  subject  of  petition  to  the 
Pope  in  reference  to  her  marriage.  As  on  this  occasion  there  had  been  a 
transgression  of  the  law,  a  substantial  penance  was  imposed  upon  John 
Drummond  and  the  Countess,  who  were  required  to  construct  an  altar  in 
Dunblane  Cathedral,  and  provide  annually  to  the  extent  of  ten  marks  for 
the  services  thereof,  besides  books,  furnishings,  and  other  necessaries.  They 
were  also  enjoined  to  give  two  poor  maidens  in  marriage,  and  to  endow  each 
of  them  with  five  marks  of  silver.  The  dispensation  is  interesting,  and  a 
translation  of  it  is  here  given : — 

Innocent,  etc.  To  our  venerable  brother,  [Walter  ?]  Bishop  of  Dunblane,  greeting, 
etc.  The  order  of  the  petition  presented  to  us  on  behalf  of  a  noble  young  man,  John 
of  Drummond,  and  a  noble  woman,  Margaret,  Countess  of  Menteith,  belonging  to  your 
diocese,  narrated  that  they,  being  for  a  long  time  past  desirous  of  allaying  and  setting 
at  rest  the  grievous  contentions  and  enmities  which  for  some  time  have  existed  between 
the  said  John  and  the  kinsmen  and  friends  of  the  said  Margaret  at  the  instigation  of 
the  enemy  of  the  human  race,  from  which  burnings,  homicides,  and  many  other  evils 
have  ensued,  desiring  also  to  obviate  more  grievous  dangers  and  ills  which  they  feared 
were  likely  to  arise  therefrom,  and  to  procure  a  bond  of  peace  between  them,  the  Lord 
granting  it,  and  knowing  that  they  were  related  in  the  fourth  degree  of  consanguinity, 
they  have  in  face  of  the  Church  contracted  marriage  together  of  which  they  have 
begotten  offspring.  But  seeing,  as  the  said  petition  related,  that  if  a  divorce  were  to 
take  place  between  them,  great  scandals,  dissensions,  wars,  enmities,  murders,  and  other 


possible  evils  might  very  probably  threaten  them  and  their  kinsmen  and  friends,  and 
be  very  damaging  as  it  were  to  the  whole  kingdom  of  Scotland,  we  have  on  their 
behalf  been  humbly  besought  that  we  would  of  our  apostolic  benignity  vouchsafe  to 
absolve  them  from  the  sentence  of  excommunication  imposed  by  the  canon  [law]  which 
they  have  incurred  by  this  procedure,  and  to  provide  to  them  the  benefit  of  a  ready 
dispensation  thereanent.  We,  therefore,  who  cheerfully  procure  for  the  faithful  of 
Christ  the  benefits  of  salvation  and  peace,  striving  as  much  as  we  may  in  the  Lord  to 
prevent  such  scandals,  dissensions,  wars,  enmities,  murders  and  other  evils,  and  to 
consult  the  welfare  of  their  souls,  yielding  to  the  petitions  of  the  said  John  and 
Margaret,  do,  by  apostolic  letters,  command  and  commit  to  you,  brother,  in  whom  we 
repose  special  confidence,  that  if  it  is  so,  you  may  absolve  the  foresaid  John  and 
Margaret  from  the  sentence  of  excommunication  according  to  the  forms  of  the  Church, 
and  they,  having  been  separated  for  such  time  as  shall  seem  good  to  you  in  your  dis- 
cretion, shall  be  enjoined  upon  oath  not  to  commit  the  like  again,  nor  to  afford  counsel, 
aid,  or  favour  to  any  doing  the  like  ;  and  that  if  by  virtue  of  these  presents  you  happen 
to  dispense  with  these  things,  they,  within  the  space  of  two  years,  shall  cause  to  be 
constructed,  or  choose  from  among  those  already  constructed,  in  your  church  of 
Dunblane,  one  altar,  and  of  their  own  goods  endow  the  same  to  the  value  of  ten  marks 
of  silver  of  annual  and  perpetual  rent,  and  with  books,  furnishings,  a  house  and  other 
things  necessary  to  the  service  of  the  said  altar ;  and  this  notwithstanding,  let  them, 
within  the  above-mentioned  term,  give  in  marriage  two  poor  maidens,  and  dower  each 
of  them  with  the  value  of  five  marks  of  silver  ;  and  if  it  seem  expedient  to  you  that 
such  a  dispensation  be  granted  in  other  things  which  shall  of  right  have  been  enjoined, 
as  to  which  we  burden  your  conscience,  you  may,  by  apostolic  authority,  grant  dispen- 
sation, that,  notwithstanding  the  impediment  which  arose  from  the  said  consanguinity, 
they  may  be  free  to  contract  marriage,  and  after  it  shall  have  been  contracted,  to 
abide  lawfully  therein  decerning  the  offspring  conceived  and  to  be  conceived  of  the  said 
marriage  to  be  legitimate.  But  we  will  that  the  foresaid  altar  and  benefice  may  be 
conferred  only  on  a  priest  who  ought  to  be  present  in  the  said  church  during  divine 
service  and  in  canonical  hours,  and  celebrate  divine  service  on  the  said  altar,  of  which 
altar  or  benefice    the  right  of  patronage  ought  to  belong  in  perpetuity   to  the  said 


noble  persons  and  their  heirs,  but  the  visitation  [thereof]  to  you  and  your  successors, 
who  shall  be  for  the  time  Bishops  of  Dunblane.  Given  at  Avignon,  the  29  th  of 
April,  in  the  eighth  year  of  our  pontificate,  1360.1 

John  Drummond  did  not  long  survive  his  marriage  with  the  Countess 
of  Menteith.  He  died  probably  in  1360,  as  is  evident  from  Lady  Margaret's 
being  married  again  in  1361.  Notice  is  taken  in  the  dispensation  of  a  child 
which  the  Countess  had  borne  to  John  Drummond,  but  it  has  not  been 
ascertained  whether  it  survived  or  died  young.  Provision,  however,  was 
made  for  it  in  the  charter  which,  as  before  stated,  was  confirmed  by  King 
David  on  12th  November  1362.  That  charter  has  no  date,  but  in  it  Lady 
Margaret,  there  designed  Margaret  of  Moray,  Countess  of  Menteith,  makes 
a  grant  of  the  lands  of  Aberfoyle  to  John  Drummond  of  Concraig,  and  to 
the  children  begotten  between  him  and  her,  and  to  the  heirs  of  the  children. 

The  fourth  and  last  marriage  of  Lady  Margaret  Graham,  Countess  of 
Menteith,  took  place  in  the  year  1361  with  Robert  Stewart,  third  son  by 
Elizabeth  Mure  of  Eobert  Stewart,  Earl  of  Strathern,  afterwards  King  Robert 
the  Second  of  Scotland.  The  marriage  was  arranged  between  Lady  Mary, 
Countess  of  Menteith,  the  mother  of  the  bride,  and  the  parents  of  Robert 
Stewart,  and  formed  the  subject  of  a  contract  between  them.  The  Countess 
Margaret  and  Robert  Stewart,  however,  were  hindered  from  the  immediate 
accomplishment  of  this  project  by  ties  of  blood  relationship,  and  once  more 
tire  case  of  Lady  Margaret  was  laid  before  the  Pope  by  a  petition,  in  which 
he  was  besought,  for  the  furtherance  of  the  welfare  of  the  kingdom  of 
Scotland,  and  especially  for  the  weal  of  the  earldoms  of  Strathern  and 
Menteith,  as  well  the  clergy  as  the  laity  thereof,  to  grant  dispensation  for 
the  marriage.  The  Pope  gave  the  required  permission  on  condition  that 
Robert  Stewart  and  the  Countess  of  Menteith  should  found  a  chapel  in  the 
1  Thehier's  Vetera  Monumenta,  p.  315,  No.  dcxl. 


city  or  diocese  of  Dunblane,  and  endow  it  with  an  annual  rent  of  twelve 

In  the  case  of  this  marriage  the  relationships  were  complicated  by  the 
Countess's  former  marriages,  for  in  addition  to  the  parties  themselves  being 
related  in  the  fourth  degree,  Eobert  Stewart  was  said  to  be  connected  with 
Sir  John  Moray  and  Thomas,  Earl  of  Mar,  the  first  and  second  husbands  of 
the  Countess.  To  the  former  he  was  related  on  both  sides,  by  both  father 
and  mother,  and  the  connection  establishes  more  firmly  the  identity  of  Sir 
John  Moray  of  Bothwell  as  the  husband  of  the  Countess.  Eobert  Stewart's 
father,  the  Earl  of  Strathern,  was  the  son  of  Walter,  High  Steward  of 
Scotland,  and  Lady  Marjory  Bruce,  daughter  of  King  Eobert  the  First.  Sir 
Andrew  Moray  of  Bothwell,  the  father  of  Sir  John,  married  Lady  Christian 
Bruce,  the  sister  of  King  Eobert.  Sir  John  Moray  of  Bothwell  and  Lady 
Marjory  Bruce,  the  grandmother  of  Eobert  Stewart,  were  therefore  cousins. 
What  relationship  Elizabeth  Mure,  the  mother  of  Eobert  Stewart,  bore  to  Sir 
John  Moray  is  not  known,  but  that  a  connection  existed  is  evident  from  the 
terms  of  the  dispensation.    The  Mures  of  Eowallan  were  an  Ayrshire  family. 

To  Thomas,  Earl  of  Mar,  Eobert  Stewart  was  said  to  be  related  in  the 
fourth  degree,  or  on  one  side  only.  This  probably  refers  to  the  marriage  of 
Lady  Christian  Bruce  with  Gratney,  Earl  of  Mar,  the  grandfather  of  Earl 
Thomas.  He  was  her  first  husband ;  Sir  Andrew  Moray  of  Bothwell  was 
her  third. 

The  following  is  a  translation  of  the  dispensation  by  the  Pope : — 

Innocent,  etc.  To  our  venerable  brother,  [Walter  ?]  Bishop  of  Dunblane,  greeting, 
etc.  A  petition  presented  to  us  on  behalf  of  a  beloved  son,  a  noble  man,  Robert,  son 
of  a  beloved  son,  a  noble  man,  Robert,  Earl  of  Strathern,  and  a  beloved  daughter  in 
Christ,  a  noble  woman,  Blargaret,  Countess  of  Menteith,  of  the  diocese  of  Dunblane, 
narrated  that  a  treaty  was  lately  made  between  their  parents  for  securing  the  common 


weal  and  safety  of  the  whole  realm  of  Scotland,  in  which  the  city  and  diocese  of 
Dunblane  are  situated,  by  contracting  marriage  between  the  son  Robert  and  the 
Countess  foresaid,  but  because  the  son  Robert  and  the  Countess  foresaid  are  related  in 
the  fourth  degree  of  consanguinity,  and  moreover,  because  the  said  son  Robert  is 
related  to  the  late  John  of  Moray  in  the  first  degree,  and  to  the  late  Thomas,  Earl  of 
Mar,  husbands  of  the  said  Countess,  in  the  fourth  degree,  that  is  to  say,  to  John  on 
both  sides,  and  Thomas,  Earl  foresaid,  only  on  one  side,  he  cannot  implement  such 
treaty  without  obtaining  an  apostolic  dispensation  thereanent.  But  seeing  that,  as  the 
said  petition  subjoins,  unless  the  treaty  be  carried  out,  it  might  be  truly  feared  that  all 
manner  of  dangers  would  threaten  the  earldoms  of  Strathern  and  Menteith  of  your 
said  diocese,  as  well  the  clergy  as  the  people,  we  have  been  humbly  besought,  on  behalf 
of  the  said  Robert  the  son  and  the  Countess,  that  we  would  mercifully  vouchsafe  to 
provide  the  suitable  favour  of  a  dispensation  for  this.  We,  therefore,  who  fervently 
seek  the  peace  and  quiet  of  the  faithful  in  all  places,  and  provide  against  both  evils 
and  dangers  as  much  as  we  are  able  in  the  Lord,  yielding  to  these  supplications, 
commit  to,  and  by  these  apostolic  writs  command  you,  brother,  that  if  it  is  so,  you  may 
by  our  authority  grant  a  dispensation  to  the  said  Robert  the  son  and  the  Countess, 
who  majr,  notwithstanding  the  impediment  arising  from  the  foresaid  affinity  and 
consanguinity,  contract  marriage  together,  and,  after  it  shall  have  been  contracted, 
abide  lawfully  therein,  declaring  the  offspring  to  be  conceived  of  such  marriage 
legitimate  :  Provided  that  Robert  the  son  and  the  Countess  foresaid,  within  one  year, 
to  be  reckoned  from  the  date  of  granting  the  dispensation,  shall  found  and  cause  to  be 
constructed  in  the  city  or  diocese  of  Dunblane  one  chapel  to  the  honour  of  God,  and 
decently  endow  the  same  with  an  annual  rent  of  twelve  marks  of  silver  for  one 
perpetual  chaplain  to  serve  the  Lord  there.  Given  at  Avignon,  the  9  th  September,  in 
the  ninth  year  of  our  pontificate  (130 1).1 

Lady  Margaret,  Countess  of  Menteith,  was  accordingly  married  to  Eobert 
Stewart,  who  thereafter  was  styled  Lord  of  Menteith,  and  on  his  father's 
accession  to  the  crown  was  created  Earl  of  Menteith.     When  he  acquired, 

1  Theiner's  Vetera  Monumenta,  p.  317,  No.  dcxlv. 
VOL.  I.  R 


in  1371,  the  ancient  earldom  of  Fife,  Lady  Margaret  was  still  alive,  and  shared 
with  her  husband  the  honours  of  the  two  earldoms,  as  Countess  of  Fife  and 
Menteith ;  and  at  the  same  time,  by  the  accession  of  the  Earl  of  Strathern  to 
the  throne,  she  was  the  daughter-in-law  of  the  King  of  Scotland.  It 
was,  however,  reserved  to  her  successor  to  share  the  higher  honours  of 
her  husband  as  Duke  of  Albany,  but  his  honours  and  estates  devolved  on 
Murdach,  second  Duke,  the  son  of  Countess  Margaret. 

The  exact  date  of  the  Countess's  death  is  not  known,  but  it  appears  to 
have  been  about  the  year  1380,  as  John,  Earl  of  Buchan,  the  eldest  son  of 
Lady  Muriella  Keith,  the  second  wife  of  Eobert,  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith, 
had  reached  man's  estate  by  the  year  1406.  At  the  time  of  her  death  the 
Countess  Margaret  would  be  about  forty-six  years  of  age. 

Genealogists  generally  state  that  Earl  Kobert  had  one  son  and  five 
daughters  by  his  first  wife,  Margaret,  Countess  of  Menteith.  It  is  certain 
that  Murdach,  who  succeeded  his  father,  was  her  son,  and  that  Lady  Janet 
Stewart,  a  daughter  hitherto  overlooked  by  genealogists,  who  was  contracted 
in  marriage  to  David  of  Loen  on  20th  July  1372,1  was  her  daughter;  but 
absolute  proof  has  not  been  obtained  that  the  Countess  Margaret  was  the 
mother  of  all  the  other  five  daughters.  The  names  of  all  the  children  of 
Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  will  be  found  at  the  end  of  his  Memoir. 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  25S. 





ALTHOUGH  it  was  only  for  a  brief  period  that  the  earldom  of  Menteith 
-  gave  to  Sir  Robert  Stewart  the  exclusive  designation  by  which  he 
was  at  first  known  among  the  barons  of  Scotland,  he  was,  during  the  greater 
part  of  his  long  life,  the  owner  and  lord  of  that  earldom.  Its  fortunes 
were  therefore  bound  up  with  his,  and  it  is  proper,  on  that  account,  that 
some  notice  should  be  taken  of  this  illustrious  nobleman.  The  higher,  and 
perhaps  in  the  case  of  the  earldom  of  Fife,  more  ancient  dignities  to  which 
Sir  Robert  Stewart  afterwards  attained,  rather  eclipsed  his  connection 
with  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  and  he  is  less  known  in  history  as  Earl  of 
Menteith  than  as  Earl  of  Fife  and  Duke  of  Albany. 

Various  other  considerations  render  it  highly  desirable  that  the  life  of  this 
Earl  of  Menteith  should  be  inquired  into  with  as  great  minuteness  as  the 
annals  of  the  time  in  which  he  lived  will  permit.  The  high  position  which 
he  occupied  in  the  Scottish  Court,  the  influence  he  wielded  in  the  disposal 
of  State  affairs  as  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  Duke  of  Albany,  and  Governor 
of  Scotland,  as  well  as  his  near  relationship  to  the  four  monarchs  who  reigned 
during  his  long  life,  all  tended  to  make  him  more  of  a  sovereign  than  a 
subject.  The  story  of  his  life  embraces  the  history  of  Scotland  for  nearly 
eighty  years  of  an  eventful  period.     In  his  time  the  dynasty  of  the  Bruces 


came  to  an  end,  and  was  replaced  by  that  of  the  Stewarts,  of  which  he 
himself  was  for  long  the  mainstay.  A  prince  and  statesman  of  snch 
prominence  could  not  fail  to  secure  a  high  place  in  history,  and  to  have  his 
character  variously  estimated  by  historians.  Contemporary  writers,  to  whom 
he  was  well  known,  have  extolled  his  character  as  one  of  great  excellence, 
while  later  writers,  both  of  history  and  romance,  have  not  hesitated  to  make 
his  vices  more  than  counterbalance  his  virtues. 

The  most  untoward  events  in  his  long  administration  of  the  royal 
authority  were  the  death  of  his  eldest  nephew,  David,  Duke  of  Eothesay 
and  Prince  of  Scotland,  and  the  long  captivity  of  his  youngest  nephew, 
Prince  James,  afterwards  King  James  the  First.  Of  the  death  of  Eothesay, 
both  the  Duke  of  Albany  and  the  Earl  of  Douglas  were  openly  accused, 
but  after  full  investigation  were  both  acquitted  by  the  King  and  Parliament. 

A  conviction  that  the  character  of  this  distinguished  prince  has  been 
misapprehended  in  many  important  particulars,  has  led  to  the  full,  if 
somewhat  protracted,  details  which  form  this  Memoir.  They  are  given 
that  the  reader  may  judge  for  himself  of  the  true  character  of  Albany. 

Sir  Eobert  Stewart,  as  formerly  stated,  was  the  third  son  of  Eobert 
Stewart,  Earl  of  Strathern,  afterwards  King  Eobert  the  Second,  by  his  wife 
Elizabeth  More,  daughter  of  Sir  Adam  More,  knight,  of  Eowallau.  He  has 
been  commonly  considered  as  the  second  son  of  the  Earl  of  Strathern,  but 
this  is  a  mistake.  The  first  son  was  John,  who  was  created  Earl  of  Carrick, 
and  afterwards  succeeded  his  father  on  the  throne  of  Scotland  as  King 
Eobert  the  Third ;  the  second  was  Walter,  who  by  his  marriage  with  Lady 
Isabella,  styled  Countess  of  Fife,  became  Lord  of  Fife,  but  died  about  the 
year  1362,  while  yet  a  young  man.  A  charter  was  granted  by  David  the 
Second  to  Eobert,  High  Steward  of  Scotland,  of  the  lands  of  Kintyre,  with 
the  advocation  of  the  kirks   thereof  in  fee ;  and  to  John  Stewart,  his  son 


by  Elizabeth  More,  and  failing  John,  to  Walter  his  second  brother.1  Walter 
Stewart,  Lord  of  Fife,  in  the  year  13G2,  received  from  the  Chamberlain, 
by  command  of  the  King,  the  sum  of  £6,  13s.  4d.2  On  account  of  his  early 
death  Walter  Stewart  had  not  the  same  opportunities  of  distinguishing 
himself  as  his  brothers,  and  has  thus  been  overlooked  by  historians,  who 
have  given  to  Eobert  the  position  of  second  son,  while  in  reality  lie  was 
the  third. 

Sir  Eobert  Stewart  was  born  in  1339.  His  father,  who  was  hereditary 
High  Steward  of  Scotland,  had  been  appointed  sole  governor  of  the  realm 
after  the  death  of  Sir  Andrew  Moray  in  the  previous  year,  1338,  when  the 
country  was  again  struggling  for  liberty.  Of  Sir  Eobert  we  find  nothing  on 
record  before  he  had  reached  his  twenty-second  year,  but  it  is  probable  that 
as  soon  as  he  was  able  to  bear  arms  he  accompanied  his  father  in  some 
of  his  excursions  against  the  English. 

He  married  Lady  Margaret  Graham,  styled  Countess  of  Menteith,  in 
the  year  1361.  The  arrangements  for  the  marriage  have  already  been 
related  in  the  preceding  Memoir.  After  his  marriage  Sir  Eobert  became 
Lord  of  Menteith,  and  was  known  by  that  designation  among  the  barons 
of  Scotland.  His  position  was  one  of  power  and  influence,  and  according 
to  the  feudal  customs  of  those  times,  he  entered  into  leagues  and  bonds, 
offensive  and  defensive,  with  neighbouring  barons.  One  such  bond  had 
been  made  by  him  with  his  father  the  High  Steward,  as  appears  from  the 
renunciation  by  the  latter  of  all  such  bonds  and  leagues,  when  he  swore 
allegiance  to  King  David  on  14th  May  1363,  at  Inchmurdach.3  In  the 
year  1364  Eobert  Stewart  of  Menteith  received  £10  from  the  Chamberlain 
by  gift  of  the   King.4       The   Lord    of  Menteith   was    one   of   the   barons 

1  Robertson's  Index,  p.  60.  3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  369. 

2  Chamberlain  Accounts,  vol.  i.  p.  396.  4  Chamberlain  Accounts,  vol.  i.  p.  411. 


elected  by  the  three  Estates  of  the  realm  to  hold  a  Parliament  at  Scone 
on  the  27th  of  September  1367,  where  the  ways  and  means  of  paying  the 
remaining  portion  of  the  redemption  money  of  King  David  the  Second 
were  discussed.  He  was  also  present  in  the  Parliaments  held  at  Scone  and 
Perth  in  1368  and  1369.1 

The  turbulent  spirit  of  the  Highlanders  was  then,  and  for  long  afterwards, 
a  source  of  great  perplexity  and  annoyance  to  both  King  and  Parliament. 
On  two  occasions,  at  the  Parliaments  of  June  1368  and  March  following,  the 
Lord  of  Menteith  was  charged  by  King  David  in  person  to  stand  to  his 
allegiance  and  further  the  peace  of  the  realm  by  maintaining  order  in  the 
earldom  of  Menteith,  and  any  other  lands  of  which  he  was  superior.  His 
father  the  High  Steward,  and  his  brother,  John,  Lord  of  Kyle,  were  charged 
by  the  King  in  like  manner  at  the  same  time,  and  all  promised  obedience 
to  his  wishes.2  The  reason  for  this  demand  on  them  was  not  any 
disaffection  on  their  part,  or  on  the  part  of  their  vassals,  but  the  relationship 
in  which  they  stood  to  John,  Lord  of  the  Isles,  who,  with  some  other 
Highland  chiefs,  was  in  open  rebellion  against  the  King,  and  refused 
to  allow  his  people  to  pay  their  share  of  the  heavy  public  burdens.  The 
Lord  of  the  Isles  was  the  brother-in-law  of  the  Lord  of  Menteith,  having 
married  his  sister,  Lady  Margaret  Stewart,  a  daughter  of  the  Earl  of 
Strathern ;  and  it  was  on  account  of  this  relationship,  as  well  as  the 
contiguity  of  the  lands  of  Menteith,  Strathern,  and  Kyle,  that  the  lords 
of  these  lands  were  looked  to  by  the  King  as  having  it  in  their  power  to 
pacify  or  restrain  the  recalcitrant  Lord  of  the  Isles. 

In  the  Parliament  of  1368  a  case  was  brought  judicially  under  the  notice 
of  the  King,  in  which  the  opposing  parties  were  the  Lord  of  Menteith  and 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  pp.  501-506. 

2  Ibid.  pp.  503,  507. 


Sir  Archibald  Douglas.  The  Lord  of  Menteith  complained  to  the  King  that 
Sir  Archibald  Douglas  was  withholding  a  terce  which  was  due  to  his  wife 
from  lands  held  by  Sir  Archibald,  and  requested  that  the  King  would  cause 
right  and  justice  to  be  done.  Sir  Archibald,  he  said,  had  promised,  in  the 
hearing  of  his  Majesty,  when  they  were  lately  at  Aberdeen,  to  be  present 
at  this  Parliament  and  arrange  the  matter.  The  King  put  the  question  to 
Sir  Archibald  Douglas,  who  replied  that  he  was  willing  and  prepared  to  do 
whatever  he  was  rightfully  and  reasonably  bound  to  perform,  or  had  promised 
to  his  Majesty ;  but  he  did  not  believe  that  he  was  under  legal  obligation 
to  do  what  was  required  of  him  in  this  Parliament,  or  that  he  had  promised 
to  do  so.  Still,  he  added,  if  it  was  his  Majesty's  pleasure,  or  if  the  order 
and  form  of  law  or  the  custom  of  the  realm  required  it  to  be  arranged  at 
this  time,  he  was  willing  to  agree,  notwithstanding  the  shortness  of  the  time. 
The  Lord  of  Menteith  reiterated  what  he  had  said,  that  Sir  Archibald  had 
obliged  himself  to  settle  the  question  in  this  Parliament.  The  issue  was 
that  the  King,  after  consulting  with  those  who  had  been  present  with  him 
at  Aberdeen  at  the  time  when  the  promise  was  alleged  to  have  been  made, 
decided  that  Sir  Archibald  had  only  promised  to  be  present  "at  this  Parlia- 
ment in  connection  with  this  affair,  if  he  was  legally  required  to  be  present. 
The  King  refused  to  enter  further  into  the  case,  as  it  was  a  question  of 
common  law,  and  the  parties  were  instructed  to  pursue  and  defend  the 
cause  in  other  courts,  according  to  the  usual  forms.  This  decision  was 
ordered  to  be  recorded.1  The  dispute  appears  to  have  been  afterwards 
amicably  settled.  It  is  the  only  instance  on  record  of  any  disagreement 
between  the  Eegent  and  the  house  of  Douglas,  who  were  ever  afterwards 
sworn  friends. 

Sir  Robert  Stewart  witnessed  several  charters  as  Lord  of  Menteith.     Two 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  505. 


of  these,  granted  by  his  father,  are  printed,  one  bearing  the  date  1 6th  October 
1369  ;J  the  other  is  undated.2 

The  death  of  King  David  the  Second  on  22d  February  1371,  without 
children,  left  the  throne  to  his  nephew,  the  High  Steward,  who  was  crowned 
at  Scone  on  the  26th  of  March  following.  On  the  same  day  on  which  his 
father  was  crowned,  Sir  Eobert  appears  to  have  been  created  Eakl  of 
Menteith,  as  on  the  day  after  the  coronation,  Sir  Eobert  Stewart,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  was  one  of  the  nobles  who  performed  homage  and  swore  fealty  to 
King  Eobert  the  Second.3  Sir  Eobert  might  have  obtained  the  title  earlier 
but  for  the  late  King's  jealousy  against  his  father. 

Three  days  after  his  creation  as  Earl  of  Menteith,  on  the  30th  of  March 
1371,  an  agreement  was  made  between  him  and  Lady  Isabella,  styled 
Countess  of  Fife,  in  which  the  latter  recognised  the  Earl  as  her  true  and 
lawful  heir-apparent,  by  virtue  both  of  the  entail  made  by  her  father,  Sir 
Duncan,  Earl  of  Fife,  in  favour  of  Alan,  Earl  of  Menteith,  grandfather  of 
Margaret,  Countess  of  Menteith,  the  wife  of  Earl  Eobert,  and  of  the  entail 
made  by  Lady  Isabella  herself  and  her  late  husband,  Walter  Stewart,  elder 
brother  of  Sir  Eobert,  in  his  favour.  The  Countess  of  Fife  had  married 
four  husbands  in  succession,  who  were  all  dead,  and  she  had  no  living  child 
to  claim  the  earldom.  In  these  circumstances  influence  had  been  brought 
to  bear  on  the  Countess  which  compelled  her  to  resign  the  earldom  in  favour 
of  other  persons  than  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  she  now  sought  his  aid  to 
recover  it  for  her.  She  promised,  on  the  earldom  being  restored,  to  resign 
it  immediately  into  the  hands  of  the  King  for  a  grant  to  the  Earl  of  Menteith. 

Sir  Eobert  Sibbald,  in  his  History  of  Fife,  printed  a  copy  of  this  indenture, 
in  which  he  erroneously  calls  Walter  Stewart  the  son  of  Eobert,  Earl  of 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  250. 

2  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  561.  3  Ibid.  p.  545. 


Menteith,  instead  of  the  brother.  This  inaccurate  description  of  Walter 
Stewart  was  adopted  by  Lord  Hailes,  when  arguing  in  the  Sutherland  Peerage 
Case  that  titles  of  honour  were  descendible  to  females.1  The  original  inden- 
ture, however,  has  now  been  printed,2  and  conclusively  shows  that  Lord 
Hailes  had  been  misled  by  Sibbald. 

Success  attended  the  efforts  of  the  Earl  of  Menteith.  The  earldom  of 
Fife  was  recovered,  resigned  by  the  Countess  of  Fife,  and  bestowed  by  King 
Eobert  the  Second  upon  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  presumably  on  the  conditions 
agreed  to  in  the  indenture.  No  direct  evidence  has  been  obtained  to  show 
that  these  steps  were  duly  and  formally  attended  to,  but  that  they  had  really 
taken  place  is  evident  from  the  Earl  of  Menteith's  being  present  with  the 
King  at  Scone  on  the  6th  of  March  1372,  and  witnessing  a  charter  under 
the  style  and  designation  of  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.3  From  the  date  of 
the  making  of  the  indenture  with  the  Countess  of  Fife  up  to  the  4th  of 
December  1371,  when  he  witnessed  at  Dundonald,  as  Earl  of  Menteith, 
the  confirmation  by  the  King  of  a  gift  by  John  Kennedy  of  Dunure  to  the 
Chapter  of  Glasgow,  of  a  chapel  and  three  chaplainries  in  the  parish  of 
Maybole,4  he  frequently  witnessed  charters  by  his  father  at  Scone,  St. 
Andrews,  and  Edinburgh,  and  invariably  as  Earl  of  Menteith  only.  This 
shows  that  the  title  of  Earl  of  Fife  must  have  been  acquired  by  him  sub- 
sequent to  4th  December  1371,  but  before  the  6th  of  the  following  March, 
after  which  date  he  is  always  designed  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  the  title 
of  Fife  having  precedence  as  the  older  dignity.  Under  this  title,  he 
granted  to  Sir  Eobert  Stewart  of  Schanbothy  the  lands  of  Gerpot  and  Cragy, 
with  the  third  part  of  the  lands  of  Kulbak,  in  the  barony  of  Leuchars,  in 

1  Sutherland  Peerage  Case,  p.  24,  note.  3  Acts   of    the   Parliaments    of    Scotland, 

vol.  xii.  p.  IS. 
-  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  251.  4  Registrum  Glasguense,  p.  289. 

VOL.  I.  S 


Fife,  and  the  charter  was  confirmed  by  the  King  his  father,  at  Perth,  on 
20th  December  1372.1 

Ten  or  eleven  years  after  the  marriage  of  Sir  Eobert  Stewart  and  Lady 
Margaret  Graham,  the  families  of  Menteith  and  Moubray  were  brought  into 
contact  for  the  second  time,  and  on  this  occasion  under  more  auspicious 
circumstances  than  formerly.  The  first  known  connection  was  in  the  reign 
of  King  Eobert  the  Bruce,  when  Eoger  of  Moubray  was  forfeited  for  treason, 
and  his  barony  of  Barnbougle  given  to  Murdach,  Earl  of  Menteith.  The 
barony,  however,  was  surrendered  by  Sir  John  Graham  and  Lady  Mary, 
Earl  and  Countess  of  Menteith,  to  King  David  the  Second,  in  return  for 
an  acquittance  for  two  thousand  marks  due  by  them  to  the  Crown  in 
respect  of  their  marriage,2  and  in  1361  that  King  restored  it  to  the  family 
of  Moubray  in  the  person  of  Philippa  of  Moubray  and  her  husband,  Sir 
Bartholomew  of  Loen. 

The  history  of  this  lady  is  somewhat  romantic.  She  appears  to  have 
been  contracted  to  one  husband,  Bertold  of  Lon,  but  afterwards  to  have 
married  a  second,  Thomas  of  Weston,  while  the  former  was  alive.  In  the 
year  1343  the  question  arose  as  to  which  of  these  was  her  proper  husband, 
and  two  notarial  instruments,  drawn  up  in  that  year,  inform  us  that  the 
decision  was  in  favour  of  the  claim  of  Bertold  of  Lon  to  that  position. 

The  first  of  these  instruments  narrates  that  on  the '30th  of  October  1343, 
Mr.  John  Feuere,  as  procurator  for  Bertold  of  Lon  and  Philippa  of  Moubray, 
appeared  before  a  notary  and  witnesses  in  the  parish  church  of  St.  Mary 
Magdalene,  in  Milk  Street,  London,  and  earnestly  inquired  at  two  priests 
then  and  there  present,  namely,  John,  called  of  Pont,  London,  and  John 
of  Evesham,  if  they  or  either  of  them  were  aware  of  a  contract  of  marriage 
entered  into  at  any  time  between  the  said  Bertold  and  Philippa.     John  of 

1  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  99.  -  Page  105,  supra. 


Pont  replied  expressly  that  he  saw,  heard,  and  was  personally  present 
when  Bertold,  in  the  house  of  John  of  Weston,  citizen  and  draper,  Thames 
Street,  London,  on  Wednesday,  the  octave  after  the  Feast  of  St.  John  the 
Baptist  (1st  July)  1338,  contracted  marriage  with  Philippa,  in  these  words  : 
"  I,  Bertold  of  Lon,  take  thee,  Philippa  of  Moubray,  as  my  wife  for  all  the 
time  of  my  life,  and  to  this  I  plight  thee  my  troth."  Philippa  also  imme- 
diately replied  to  Bertold  in  these  words :  "  And  I,  Philippa  of  Moubray, 
take  thee,  Bertold  of  Lon,  as  my  husband  for  all  the  time  of  my  life, 
and  to  this  I  plight  thee  my  troth."  John  of  Evesham  testified  that  the 
said  Philippa,  when  seriously  ill  and  despairing  of  life,  confessed  to  him, 
as  having  at  that  time  the  care  of  her  soul,  for  the  exoneration  of  her 
conscience,  that  she  had  no  right  to  Thomas  of  Weston,  her  pretended 
husband,  because  she  had  first  contracted  marriage  with  the  said  Bertold  of 
Lon;  and  that  at  that  time  he  solemnly  enjoined  the  said  Philippa,  for 
the  safety  of  her  soul,  utterly  to  disown  Thomas  of  Weston,  her  pretended 
husband,  and  cleave  to  the  said  Bertold  as  her  lawful  husband. 

The  second  notarial  instrument  relates  that  on  18th  December  1343,  at 
the  parish  church  of  All  Hallows,  in  the  Bopery,  London,  letters  from  the 
Archdeacon  of  London  were  read,  instructing  the  rector  of  that  church  to 
declare  the  marriage-contract  between  Thomas  of  Weston  and  Philippa  of 
Moubray  null  and  void,  and  that  between  Bertold  of  Lon  and  the  said 
Philippa  valid  and  lawful,  and  also  to  procure  the  marriage  of  the  two  last- 
named  persons  in  the  face  of  the  church,  after  thirty  days  from  the  date  of 
the  letters.1 

After  their  marriage,  Sir  Bartholomew  of  Loen  and  his  wife  Philippa 
returned  to  Scotland,  and  were  received  into  the  favour  of  Kin"  David  the 

9  *  O 

Second,  from  whom,  as  stated,  they  received  the  barony  of  Barnbougle.     A 
1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  pp.  232-234. 


son  was  born  to  them,  and  it  was  proposed  that  he  should  have  to  wife 
Janet  Stewart,  perhaps  the  eldest  daughter  of  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith 
and  his  Countess,  Lady  Margaret,  and  at  this  time  only  eight  or  nine  years 
of  age.  Their  parents  entered  into  an  indenture  at  Edinburgh,  on  21st  July 
1372,  in  which  it  was  arranged  that  David,  son  and  heir  to  Sir  Bertold  and 
Lady  Philippa,  should  marry  Janet  Stewart,  daughter  of  Sir  Eobert  Stewart, 
Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  and  Lady  Margaret  his  spouse.  Sir  Bertold  and 
Lady  Philippa  were  to  provide  for  their  honourable  maintenance  when 
married,  and  David  and  Janet,  or  the  survivor  of  them,  and  the  children  to 
be  lawfully,  begotten  between  them  were  to  be  their  heirs,  but  failing  them, 
the  estate  was  to  revert  to  the  lawful  heirs  of  Lady  Philippa.  If  David 
should  happen  to  die  during  the  life  of  his  parents,  they  became  bound  to 
provide  for  Janet  a  forty  pound  land,  with  pertinents,  within  the  barony  of 
Earnbougle,  for  her  maintenance  during  her  life.  Moreover,  if  after  the 
completion  of  the  marriage,  both  David  and  his  parents  died  and  Janet 
survived,  she  was  to  hold  the  whole  of  the  barony  and  possessions  of  Sir 
Bertold  and  Philippa,  but  on  her  death  these  were  immediately  to  revert  to 
the  heirs  of  the  foresaid  Philippa.  The  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  for  his 
part,  promised  to  assist  Sir  Bertold  with  all  his  counsel  and  help,  and  to 
further  the  recovery  by  Sir  Bertold  of  all  lands  to  which,  in  right  of  his 
wife,  he  could  by  hereditary  right  lay  claim  in  any  part  of  Scotland.1 

This  last  condition  was  the  subject  of  a  special  bond  of  maintenance, 
made  by  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  to  Sir  Bertold  of  Loen,  a  few  years 
later  at  Stirling,  on  25th  November  1375,  in  which  the  Earl  made  the 
additional  promise  to  maintain  him  against  all  men,  except  the  King,  his 
own  brothers,  the  Earl  of  Douglas  and  his  son  Sir  James,  Sir  Archibald 
Douglas,  and  his  own  cause.2 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  25S.  2  Ibid.  p.  260. 

THE  EARL  AS  KEEPER  OF  STIRLING  CASTLE,  1373.         141 

King  Eobert  the  Second  had  great  confidence  in  the  abilities  and  tact 
of  his  son  the  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  frequently  employed  him  in  the 
management  of  State  affairs,  even  at  this  early  stage  of  his  reign. 
Along  with  his  elder  brother,  John,  Earl  of  Carrick,  he  was  deputed  to 
preside  at  the  courts  of  redress  frequently  held  on  the  Marches  during  the 
fourteen  years'  truce  between  Scotland  and  England.1  The  two  brothers 
are  said  to  have  presided  on  alternate  days.  These  Courts  were  rendered 
necessary  by  the  depredations  of  the  Borderers  on  both  sides,  which  were 
generally  carried  on  in  defiance  of  all  truces. 

The  custody  of  the  Castle  of  Stirling  was  committed  by  the  King 
to  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  by  a  charter  dated  7th  February  1373. 
For  its  maintenance  the  Earl  was  to  receive  the  fourteen  chalders  of 
corn  and  the  twelve  chalders  of  oatmeal  due  from  the  lands  of  Both- 
kennar  in  Stirlingshire,  as  well  as  two  hundred  marks  annually  from 
the  Lord  Chamberlain.  The  money  was  to  be  raised  from  the  lands, 
farms,  and  annual  rents  belonging  to  the  Crown  in  the  shire,  with  the 
wards,  reliefs,  marriages,  fines,  and  escheats  which  might ,  happen,  all  which 
were  made  over  to  the  Earl  on  the  express  condition  that  they  should  be 
accounted  for  to  the  Lord  Chamberlain.  If  the  income  from  these  sources 
exceeded  the  sum  of  two  hundred  marks,  the  surplus  was  to  be  paid  to  the 
Treasury ;  if  it  proved  deficient,  the  Lord  Chamberlain  was  bound  to  pay 
the  balance.  The  office  of  keeper  was  made  hereditary  to  the  Earl  and  his 
lawful  heirs-male,  and  it  embraced  the  power  of  appointing  and  dismissing 
the  constable  and  janitors  of  the  castle.2  During  his  term  of  office,  which 
continued  until  his  death  in  1420,  the  castle  underwent  considerable  repairs 
and  improvements,  and  additions  were  made  to  the  munitions  of  defence.3 

1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  3S3.  3  Exchequer  Rolls,   vol.  ii.   pp.   437-621  ; 

2  P^egistruru  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  125.  vol.  iii.  pp.  654-702. 


The  arrangement  about  the  payment  of  the  two  hundred  marks  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  successful,  and  another  was  made,  probably  about  the 
year  1379,  by  which  the  fee  was  paid  direct  from  the  Treasury. 

On  the  same  day  on  which  he  received  the  custody  of  Stirling  Castle, 
the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  entered  into  an  agreement  with  Sir  Eobert 
Erskine,  by  which  the  Earl  became  bound  to  be  a  good  lord,  and  a  faithful, 
kind,  and  affectionate  friend  to  Sir  Eobert  Erskine,  his  brother,  and  their 
heirs.  This  was  solemnly  sworn  to  by  the  Earl  in  presence  of  his  father 
at  Perth,  and  the  agreement  was  sealed  with  the  King's  privy  seal,  and  the 
seals  of  the  Earls  of  Carrick  and  Eife  and  Menteith.1 

Although  King  Eobert  the  Second  had  already,  by  a  formal  Act  of 
Parliament,  secured  the  succession  of  his  eldest  son,  John,  Earl  of  Carrick, 
and  his  heirs,  to  the  throne,  he  yet  deemed  it  necessary  to  guard  against 
the  possible  failure  of  his  line  through  the  death  of  the  Earl  of  Carrick 
or  failure  of  heirs.  For  this  purpose  a  Grand  Council  or  Parliament  was 
summoned  to  meet  at  Scone  on  the  4th  of  April  1373.  By  this  Council 
it  was  ordained  that,  failing  the  King's  eldest  son  and  his  heirs,  the 
succession  should  devolve  on  Sir  Eobert  Stewart,  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith, 
the  second  surviving  son  of  the  King  by  his  first  wife,  and  his  heirs.  In 
the  event  of  his  failure,  the  Crown  was  to  be  inherited  by  the  King's 
other  sons.  To  this  ordinance  a  very  formal  and  solemn  assent  was  given 
by  the  whole  nobility,  clergy,  and  Parliament,  and  a  great  concourse  of  the 
clergy  and  people,  after  the  statute  was  explained  to  them,  gave  their 
consent  in  front  of  the  great  altar  at  Scone,  by  lifting  up  their  hands.2 

In  June  of  the  same  year,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  was  at 
Aberdeen  with  the  King,   and   while  there  witnessed  the   royal  confirma- 

1  Original  in  the  Charter-chest  of  the  Earl  2  Acts   of    the   Parliaments   of    Scotland, 

of  Mar  and  Kellie.  vol.  i.  p.  549. 


tiou  of  a  grant  by  Walter  of  Menteith  of  Petmacaldore  to  the  parish  church 
of  St.  Devenick  of  Methlick  of  a  piece  of  land.  The  charter  is  dated  the 
16th  of  June  1373.1 

It  was  a  common  custom  at  that  time,  when  the  state  of  affairs 
between  the  two  countries  permitted,  for  Scottish  noblemen  to  send  their 
servants,  or  employ  merchants  to  go,  into  England  to  purchase  malt  for  them. 
Application  had  to  be  made  in  the  first  place  to  the  English  Government, 
who  granted  the  required  permission  if  they  saw  fit.  Such  licences  were 
occasionally  obtained  by  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.  One  from  King 
Edward  the  Third  on  8th  August  1375,  empowered  John  Young  of  Lin- 
lithgow, one  of  the  Earl's  squires,  to  go  into  the  county  of  Lincoln,  and 
purchase  there  for  ready  money  three  hundred  quarters  of  malt,  which  he 
was  to  convey  to  the  Port  of  Barton-upon-Humber,  and  ship  to  Scotland 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  Earl  and  his  family.2 

Three  years  later,  in  April  1378,  we  find  the  Earl  of  Douglas  associated 
with  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  in  a  like  transaction,  and  obtaining 
permission  from  Eichard  the  Second  of  England  for  two  of  their 
servants  to  purchase  for  them  divers  pewter  vessels,  worsteds,  chairs, 
cages,  stoups,  and  leather  bottles  for  their  own  use  in  Scotland.  The 
goods  were  to  be  shipped  from  the  Port  of  London.3  And  at  a  later  period, 
in  January  1383,  one  Malcolm  Forsyth  was  commissioned  to  purchase 
for  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  eight  hundred  quarters  of  malt,  half  of 
which  was  to  be  procured  in  Lincolnshire,  and  the  other  half  in  the  counties 
of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk.4 

Eobert,  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  obtained  from  the  King  a  gift  of  the 
baronies  of  Kedhall  in  Midlothian,   and  Glendochart   in  Perthshire,  by  a 

1  Registrum  Episeopatus  Aberdonensis,  2  Rotuli  Scotia;,  vol.  i.  p.  971. 

vol.  i.  p.  114.  3  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  p.  7.  4  Ibid.  p.  47. 


charter  dated  at  Methven,  2 2d  January  1376.  These  two  baronies  formerly 
belonged  to  Alexander  of  Menzies,  and  in  the  beginning  of  the  year  13741 
were  let  by  him  in  liferent  to  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  with  the 
exception  of  certain  lands ;  but  Alexander  of  Menzies  having  resigned  both  the 
baronies  into  the  King's  hands,  they  were  at  this  time  granted  by  the  latter 
to  his  son  Earl  Eobert,  and  his  heirs  in  fee.2  Two  months  later  the  King 
also  bestowed  on  him,  by  a  charter  dated  at  Perth  19th  March  1376,  the 
lands  of  Lethberdschelis,  in  the  constabulary  of  Linlithgow,  which  had 
belonged  to  Adam  of  Argent,  but  which  had  been  resigned  by  him  into  the 
hands  of  Kin"  Eobert  the  Second.3  About  this  time  also,  or  during  the 
year  1376,  Earl  Eobert  executed  a  deed  of  excambion,  whereby  he  gave  his 
castle  and  all  his  lands  in  the  barony  of  Leuchars,  in  Fifeshire,  to  Sir 
William  Eamsay  of  Colluthy,  in  exchange  for  the  lands  of  Balnefery, 
Mundolo,  Balnageth,  and  Tarres,  in  Inverness-shire.  In  addition  to  these 
lands,  Sir  William  Eamsay  agreed  to  render  three  suits  yearly  at  the  Earl 
of  Fife  and  Menteith's  court  at  the  Mathelaw,  and  a  pair  of  gilt  spurs,  if 
asked,  at  the  feast  of  the  Nativity  of  John  the  Baptist.4 

The  Earl  also  held  lands  in  the  earldom  of  Lennox.  This  appears  from 
a  charter  granted  by  him  to  Sir  Patrick  of  Graham,  of  a  half  carucate 
of  the  land  of  Achynrosse,  in  that  earldom.  The  charter  was  confirmed  by 
King  Eobert  the  Second  at  Perth,  on  the  13th  of  June  1377.6 

During  the  next  five  years  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  accompanied 
his  father  the  King  in  his  royal  progresses  through  different  parts  of  the 
country.  One  circuit  was  accomplished  by  the  middle  of  the  year  1378, 
when  we    find   the   Court   at   Dundee,   Kindrocht,   Dunkeld,   Stirling,  and 

1  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  101.  4  History     of     the     Carnegies     Earls      of 

2  Ibid.  p.  128.  .Southesk,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  ii.  p.  490. 

3  Ibid.  p.  130.  5  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  154. 


Edinburgh  successively,  and  a  return  made  to  Perth  by  way  of  Dunfermline. 
At  other  times  Inverness  and  Aberdeen  were  visited,  with  several  of  the  inter- 
vening towns.  In  the  course  of  these  royal  progresses  charters  were  granted 
and  confirmed,  and  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  frequently  appears  as  a 
witness.  In  the  month  of  October  1380  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  was, 
along  with  the  poet  Sir  John  Barbour,  Archdeacon  of  Aberdeen,  and  others,  at 
Kintore,  the  manor  of  Sir  William  of  Keith,  the  Marischal  of  Scotland. 

The  office  of  High  Chamberlain  of  Scotland  having  become  vacant 
through  the  death  of  Sir  John  Lyon  of  Glamis,  who  was  slain  by  Sir  James 
Lindsay,  Lord  of  Crawford,  on  4th  November  1382,1  King  Eobert  the 
Second  bestowed  it  on  his  son,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.  Sir  John 
Lyon  had  been  a  favourite  of  King  Eobert,  who,  by  a  charter  dated  18th 
March  1372,  bestowed  upon  him  the  Thanage  of  Glamis.2  This  gift  was 
confirmed  by  a  charter  granted  at  Edinburgh,  on  7th  January  1373-4,  by 
John,  Earl  of  Carrick,  Eobert,  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  and  Alexander,  Lord 
of  Badenoch,  in  which  they  narrate  their  father's  gift,  and  promise  for  them- 
selves and  their  heirs  never  to  revoke  it,  to  whatever  state  or  even  regal 
dignity  any  of  them  might  attain,  but  that  they  would  rather  renew  the  gift 
as  often  as  there  should  be  necessity,  or  the  said  John  should  require  them.3 

After  receiving  the  honour  of  knighthood,  Sir  John  Lyon  became  a 
member  of  the  royal  family  through  his  marriage  with  the  Lady  Jean 
Stewart,  daughter  of  King  Eobert  the  Second.  Lady  Jean  or  Johanna  was 
the  widow  of  Sir  John  Keith,  eldest  son  of  Sir  William  Keith,  marischal  of 
Scotland,  a  fact  hitherto  unrecognised  by  genealogists.  He  died  about  the 
year  1374,  leaving  her  with  one  son,  Eobert,  who  died  young.  A  few  years 
later  she  formed  a  private  matrimonial  alliance  with  Sir  John  Lyon.     Their 

1  Exchequer  llolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  657.  2  Eegistrurn  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  90. 

3  Original  Charter  at  Glamis  Castle. 
VOL.  I.  T 


marriage  was  afterwards  acknowledged  by  King  Eobert,  with  consent  of  his 
sons,  the  Earls  of  Carrick,  Fife  and  Menteith,  and  Alexander,  Lord  of 
Badenoch,  as  appears  from  a  letter  under  the  Great  Seal,  given  at  Dundonald 
on  10th  May  1378.1  In  that  letter,  the  King,  after  narrating  the  marriage 
of  Jobn  Lyon  and  Johanna  of  Keith,  declares  that  he  retains  no  displeasure 
against  either,  and  being  expressly  desirous  that  no  blame  may  be  imputed 
to  them,  he  forbids  any  one  to  bring  any  accusation,  judicial  or  otherwise, 
against  them,  or  in  any  way  to  impeach  their  good  fame,  under  pain  of 
forfeiture.  In  the  same  year  Sir  John  Lyon  was  made  Chamberlain  of 
Scotland,  and  held  it  until  his  death,  as  stated  above. 

The  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  held  the  office  for  upwards  of  twenty  years, 
until,  in  1408,  he  devolved  it  upon  John,  Earl  of  Buchan,  his  eldest,  son 
by  his  second  Countess.  No  one  dignified  this  office  more  than  did  the  Earl 
of  Fife  and  Menteith,  for,  notwithstanding  the  high  honours  which  from 
time  to  time  were  conferred  upon  him,  he  retained  the  post  and  faithfully 
performed  its  duties.  In  1389  he  obtained  the  assistance  of  two  deputies, 
Patrick  of  Lumley,  who  was  appointed  Chamberlain-Depute  south  of  the 
Forth,  and  Sir  Walter  of  Tulach,  Chamberlain-Depute  north  of  the  Forth. 
After  the  death  of  the  former,  Sir  Adam  and  Sir  John  Forster  successively 
held  the  office  of  depute,  and  when  Sir  Walter  of  Tulach  died,  no  less  a 
personage  than  David,  Earl  of  Crawford,  was  appointed  as  his  successor.2 
As  Chamberlain  of  Scotland,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  received  a 
mandate  from  the  King,  dated  at  Edinburgh,  6th  January  1383,  to  pay 
annually  to  his  half-brother,  John,  Earl  of  Moray,  the  sum  of  £100  sterling, 
from  the  great  customs  of  the  burghs  of  Elgin  and  Forres.3  The  fee  for  the 
office  of  Chamberlain  during  the  Earl's  tenure  was  £200  yearly. 

1  Original  at  Glamis  Castle.  '-  Excheqxier  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  liv. 

3  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  172. 


About  this  time  the  Earl's  first  wife,  Lady  Margaret  Graham,  must  have 
died.  He  married,  as  his  second  wife,  Muriella,  daughter  of  Sir  William 
Keith,  Marischal  of  Scotland,  whose  eldest  son,  as  we  have  seen,  had  reached 
maturity  in  or  before  the  year  1408. 

As  Earl  of  Fife,  Earl  Eobert  relaxed  somewhat  the  ancient  privilege 
peculiar  to  that  earldom,  known  as  the  law  of  the  Clan  Macduff,  by  which 
any  one  who  had  slain  a  man  suddenly,  was  entitled,  on  payment  of  a  fine 
of  cattle,  to  a  complete  remission,  if  he  could  prove  that  he  was  related 
within  the  ninth  degree  to  the  original  Thane  Macduff.  Such  a  privilege,  it 
is  to  be  feared,  was  too  commonly  taken  advantage  of  for  the  satisfaction  of 
private  or  personal  revenge ;  and  when  King  Eobert  the  Second,  in  the 
month  of  November  1384,  passed  an  ordinance  for  the  better  regulation  of 
the  northern  parts  of  Scotland,  the  Earl  of  Fife  voluntarily  came  under 
obligation  personally  to  observe  this  law,  and  to  see  that  it  was  respected  by 
all  within  his  bounds.  He,  however,  protested  for  the  free  use  of  his  right, 
though  he  promised  not  to  exercise  it  in  prejudice  of  the  ordinance  which 
had  been  issued.1 

At  a  Council  held  at  Glasgow  in  the  month  of  September  1384,'2  the  Earl 
of  Fife  and  Menteith  was  present.  In  the  month  of  February  following  he 
formed  a  member  of  the  Court  at  Arnele,  and  witnessed  the  confirmation 
there  by  his  father,  on  the  28  th,  of  a  charter  by  Sir  William  Keith,  Marischal 
of  Scotland,  to  a  chaplain  in  the  choir  of  the  Cathedral  Church  of  Aberdeen.3 
At  Stirling,  on  the  20th  March  1385,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  granted 
to  Sir  William  Stewart,  for  homage  and  service,  the  lands  of  Great  and  Little 
Jargarw,  in  the  barony  of  Logierait  in  Perthshire,  which  lands  had  formerly 
belonged  to  Lady  Margaret  Stewart,  daughter  and  heiress  of  the  late  Thomas 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  551. 

2  Ibid.  p.  565.  3  Registrum  Aberdonense,  vol.  i.  p.  129. 


Stewart,  Earl  of  Angus,  but  had  been  resigned  by  her  into  the  hands  of  the 
Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.1 

A  dispute  having  arisen  between  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  and  John 
of  Logy,  in  which  the  latter  called  in  question  the  right  of  the  Earl  to  the 
possession  of  the  lands  of  Logy  and  Stragartney,  the  matter  was  referred  to 
the  arbitration  of  Andrew  Mercer,  Lord  of  Meikleour.  These  lands  had 
belonged  to  Sir  John  Logy,  who  was  executed  for  taking  part  in  the  con- 
spiracy of  William  of  Soulis  against  King  Eobert  the  Bruce,  while  his  estates 
were  forfeited  to  the  Crown.  The  lands  of  Logy  seem  to  have  been  given  to 
the  Earl  of  Douglas,2  while  those  of  Stragartney  were  bestowed  on  Sir  John 
of  Menteith  and  Elene  of  Mar  his  spouse.3  Notwithstanding  the  possession 
of  Stragartney  by  Sir  John  of  Menteith,  David  the  Second  issued  a  pre- 
cept for  infefting  John  of  Logy,  the  son  of  the  late  Sir  John  Logy,  in  these 
lands  ;4  but  afterwards,  on  being  informed  by  his  Council  of  the  reasons  for 
Sir  John  Logy's  forfeiture,  he  recalled  the  infeftment,  and  restored  Stragartney 
to  Sir  John  of  Menteith.5  Not  long  after  the  King's  marriage  to  Margaret 
of  Logy,  John  of  Logy  received  from  him  the  lands  of  Logy  by  a  new 
grant.  How  they,  with  the  lands  of  Stragartney,  came  to  be  in  the 
possession  of  Sir  Eobert  Stewart,  does  not  appear,  but  that  they  were,  is 
evident  from  the  indenture  of  arbitration  drawn  up  at  the  instance  of  Andrew 
Mercer.6  The  Lord  of  Meikleour,  after  hearing  the  parties,  adjudged  that 
the  lands  belonged  to  John  of  Logy,  and  the  Earl,  having  agreed  to  abide 
by  the  decision  of  the  arbiter,  at  once  transferred  the  lands  to  him  with 
due  formalities.      The  agreement  and  decision  were  made  known  to  King 

1  Original  in  the  Douglas  Charter-chest.  4  The  Red  Book  of  Grandtully,  by  William 

Fraser,  vol.  i.  p.  127. 

2  Robertsoll's  Index>  P"  31-  5  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  238. 

3  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  23S.  6  Ibid.  p.  260. 

THEY  ARE  RESIGNED  BY  THE  EARL,  1387.  149 

Eobert  the  Second,  and  affirmed  in  presence  of  the  Court  by  the  Earl  of 
Fife  and  Menteith  and  John  of  Logy.  The  resignation  by  the  former  in 
favour  of  the  latter  was  made  within  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  on  "Whit- 
sunday 1387,  and  was  attested  by  John,  Earl  of  Carrick,  in  a  letter  dated 
5th  May  1389.1  The  King  afterwards  confirmed  the  lands  of  Logy  to  John 
of  Logy ;  and  when  the  men  of  Stragartney  were  inclined  to  demur  to  the 
claims  made  upon  them  by  their  new  lord,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith 
wrote  to  them,  that  although  he  had  formerly  prohibited  them  from  obeying 
John  of  Logy,  their  lord,  before  the  latter  had  made  good  his  claims  to  the 
lands,  they  should  now  serve  him  as  their  lawful  lord.2  This  arrangement 
between  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  and  John  of  Logy  was  sacredly  kept 
by  both  parties.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  John  of  Logy  was  Chamberlain 
to  the  Duke  of  Eotkesay  while  he  was  Earl  of  Carrick.3 

In  the  year  1385,  Scotland  was  visited  by  a  French  army  under  the 
command  of  John  de  Vienne,  Admiral  of  France,  who  brought  with  him 
fifty  thousand  francs  in  gold,  and  a  large  number  of  suits  of  armour.  These 
were  sent  over  by  the  King  of  France,  who  wished  to  carry  on  his  war 
with  England  by  attacking  it  from  the  Scottish  borders,  and  hoped  to 
be  assisted  by  the  Scots.  With  some  reluctance  King  Eobert  the  Second 
agreed  to  the  proposals  made  by  the  French  admiral,  and  the  Scottish  army, 
under  the  command  of  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  accompanied  the 
French  to  the  Borders.  When  they  had  laid  siege  to  Eoxburgh  Castle,  a 
question  arose  whether  in  the  event  of  its  capture  the  castle  should  belong  to 
the  French  King  or  to  the  Scots.  The  latter  would  by  no  means  entertain 
the  claim  put  forward  by  the  French,  that  the  castle  should  belong  to  their 
king,  and  the   siege   was   therefore   abandoned.      Meanwhile   the   English 

1  Antiquities     of    Aberdeenshire,     vol.     iii.  2  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  265. 

p.  133,  footnote.  3  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  pp.  325-353. 


King,  apprised  of  what  was  taking  place,  had  reached  the  Borders  at  the 
head  of  a  large  and  well-disciplined  army,  to  which  the  French  troops 
would  have  given  battle  had  they  not  been  restrained  by  their  allies. 
The  Scottish  leaders  knew  they  could  not  risk  the  contest,  and  prudently 
retired  into  their  own  country,  leaving  Richard  to  follow,  which  he  did, 
devastating  the  country  as  he  passed,  and  penetrating  to  Edinburgh, 
reduced  it  to  ashes.  The  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  on  the  other  hand, 
led  the  Scottish  army  into  Cumberland,  and  retaliated  by  laying  waste  part 
of  that  district ;  and  as  the.  English  retreated,  the  allied  Scottish  and  French 
army  returned  to  the  capital.  The  expedition  had  been  an  unfavourable 
one  for  the  French  troops,  and  on  their  return,  aided  by  the  Scots,  with 
whom  they  were  in  no  favour,  they  re-embarked  for  their  own  land, 
disgusted  and  in  worse  plight  than  when  they  came.  But  before  John  de 
Vienne  was  permitted  to  depart  he  had  to  distribute  the  fifty  thousand 
francs  which  were  brought  to  Scotland,  of  which  the  King  received  10,000, 
the  Earl  of  Carrick  5500,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  3000,  the  Earl 
of  Douglas  7500,  and  other  nobles  various  sums.1 

After  the  withdrawal  of  the  French  the  Earl  of  Menteith  assembled  an 
army  of  about  thirty  thousand  men,  and  accompanied  by  James,  Earl  of 
Douglas,  Sir  Archibald  Douglas,  Lord  of  Galloway,  and  other  nobles,  made  a 
descent  upon  a  part  of  Cumberland  which  had  escaped  invasion  since  the 
time  of  King  Robert  the  Bruce.  Unopposed  in  their  progress,  the  Scots 
penetrated  to  Cockermouth,  where  amongst  the  plunder,  the  collection  of 
which  is  said  to  have  occupied  three  days,  was  found  a  very  ancient  charter, 
to  which  was  affixed  a  large  wax  seal.  The  peculiarity  of  this  charter  was 
its  brevity,  its  entire  contents,  as  translated  by  Bower,  being — 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  vii.  p.  485. 


"  1,  King  Adelstane,  giffys  here  to  Paulan,  Oddarn  and  Eoddam,  als  gude 
and  als  fair  as  evir  thai  myn  war :  and  tharto  witnes  Maid  my  wyf." l 

The  brevity  of  this  charter  must  have  favourably  impressed  the  Earl, 
for  the  historian  adds  that  afterwards,  when  he  became  Duke  of  Albany 
and  Governor  of  Scotland,  and  prolix  obligations  or  charters  were  read 
by  those  pleading  before  him  in  Court,  he  was  wont  to  say  that  greater 
confidence  and  trust  were  preserved  in  former  days,  when  writs  were  made 
so  compendious,  than  now,  when,  by  lengthy  documents,  our  new  lawyers 
confused  their  deeds  by  frivolous  exceptions  and  tedious  ambiguities.2 

The  success  of  this  expedition  was  complete,  and  a  meed  of  praise  is 
bestowed  on  the  Scottish  leader  by  the  poet  Wyntoun,  who  says  that  the 
Scots  were  well  and  wisely  led : — 

The  Erie  of  Fyfe  welle  prysyd  wes 

Of  governyng  and  gret  besynes, 

And  als  of  gud  cumpany, 

Swa  that  the  yhowng  chewalry 

Of  that  rowte  mare  wilful  ware 

To  ryde  wyth  hym,  than  thai  war  are.3 

For  a  short  time  after  this  there  was  no  engagement  with  the  English 
which  called  for  the  skill  of  the  Earl,  and  he  is  found  present  at  the  Court  of 
his  father  in  various  places  in  Scotland,  at  Methven,  Glasgow,  Linlithgow, 
Kilwinning,  Scone,  and  Edinburgh.  At  the  last-named  town,  on  12th  May 
1388,  as  Chamberlain  of  Scotland,  he  granted  a  charter  to  the  Abbey  of 
Holyrood,  confirming  a  charter  by  David  the  First,  founder  of  the  Abbey, 
by  which  it  had  exemption  from  all  tolls  and  customs  throughout  the  whole 
kingdom,4  a  privilege  which  was  taken  advantage  of  by  the  monks  of  Melrose. 

1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  403.         3  Wyntoun's  Crouykil,  Maepherson's  ed.  vol.  ii.  p.  332. 
-  Ibid.  *  Charters  of  Holyrood,  p.  100. 

152  BATTLE  OF  OTTERBURN,  1388. 

la  the  summer  of  the  year  1388,  another  invasion  of  England  was 
determined  on  hy  the  Scots,  who  assembled  in  strong  force  near  Jedburgh, 
under  the  command  of  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.  "While  the  Scottish 
leaders  were  consulting  as  to  the  course  to  be  pursued,  an  English  spy  was 
taken,  and  influenced  by  information  obtained  from  him,  the  Earl  divided  his 
army  into  two  unequal  portions.  The  smaller  part  was  commanded  by  the 
young  and  valiant  James,  second  Earl  of  Douglas  and  Mar,  whose  instruc- 
tions were  to  create  a  diversion  in  favour  of  the  larger  army  led  by  the 
Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.  This  was  rendered  necessary  by  the  fact  that 
the  English  army  lay  at  a  distance,  waiting  to  see  what  direction  the  Scottish 
army  intended  to  take.  The  plan  was  entirely  successful;  the  Earl  of 
Douglas,  with  his  small  force,  so  completely  engaged  the  attention  of  the 
English  leaders,  that  the  larger  body  of  troops,  under  the  command  of  the 
Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  entered  England  by  Carlisle  unobserved  by  the 
English  army,  and  after  committing  great  havoc,  returned  to  Scotland  without 
encountering  any  opposition.  The  chief  interest  of  this  incursion,  however, 
lay  in  the  daring  exploits  of  Douglas  in  the  east  of  England  and  in  face 
of  the  large  English  army.  His  untimely  death  on  the  field  of  Otterburn 
spread  a  deep  gloom  over  the  victorious  army  on  its  homeward  journey, 
even  though  they  brought  with  them  Percy  himself  as  a  prisoner. 

One  of  the  castles  of  this  renowned  Earl  of  Douglas  was  Tantallon,  in  the 
barony  of  North  Berwick,  which  he  held  for  homage  and  service  from  the 
Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.  The  superiority  of  the  lands  of  North  Berwick 
and  the  Castle  of  Tantallon  belonged  to  Earl  Kobert,  and  on  the  death  of 
Douglas,  as  his  vassal,  he  ought  to  have  gone  personally  to  receive  or 
recognosce  the  tenandry  and  castle.  Public  business,  however,  was  pressing, 
and  in  a  Parliament  held  at  Linlithgow,  on  the  18th  August  1388,  the 
Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  sought  advice  and  direction  from  the  King  and 


Parliament.  His  tenant,  he  said,  in  the  barony  and  castle  of  North  Berwick 
had  died,  and  if  he  should  require  to  go  personally  to  receive  or  recognosce 
this  tenandry  with  the  castle,  while  the  defence  of  the  realm,  at  present 
disquieted  with  war,  required  his  care  and  attention,  omission  of  which 
would  be  hazardous  to  the  State,  the  journey  would  be  a  grievous  labour  to 
himself,  and  unprofitable  and  expensive  both  to  him  and  the  country.  After 
consultation,  the  Parliament  issued  a  special  decree  that  he  should  and  ought 
lawfully  to  enjoy  and  use  the  barony,  entry  or  exit,  with  its  fortalice  or 
castle  as  a  tenandry  held  of  him,  until  the  true  heirs  of  James  Earl  of  Douglas 
should  have  made  out  their  right  and  title  to  them  in  clue  form  of  law.  It 
was  also  ordained  by  the  Parliament  that  the  King  should  issue  letters  com- 
manding the  free  tenants  and  inhabitants  of  North  Berwick,  together  with 
the  Keeper  and  Constable  of  the  Castle  of  Tantallon,  to  answer  to  the  Earl  of 
Eife  and  Menteith,  as  their  Lord  Superior  in  the  meantime.'1  In  accordance 
with  this  resolution  of  Parliament,  King  Eobert  the  Second,  on  the  same  1 8th 
August,  wrote  to  the  free  tenants  of  the  barony  of  North  Berwick,  and  the 
Keeper  and  Constable  of  the  Castle  of  Tantallon,  to  obey  the  Earl  of  Fife  and 
Menteith,  and  to  deliver  up  the  castle  into  the  Earl's  hands.2  When,  how- 
ever, the  Earl,  in  the  close  of  this  year,  became  Guardian  of  Scotland,  special 
care  was  taken  that  the  claims  of  the  heirs  of  James  Earl  of  Douglas  should 
be  duly  respected,  if  made ;  and  as  they  would  then  require  to  be  preferred 
before  the  Guardian's  own  Court,  a  special  Act  of  Parliament  was  enacted, 
by  which  the  King  should  be  able  to  interpose  his  authority  on  any  undue 
impediment  being  thrown  in  their  way.3 

The  name  of  the  Constable  of  Tantallon  Castle  at  that  time  was  Alan  of 
Lauder,  as  appears  in  a  commission  or  order  made  under  the  King's  Privy 
Seal,  and  dated  7th  January  1389,  in  which  he  is  enjoined  to  make  the  castle 
1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  555.  2  Ibid.  p.  565.         3  Ibid.  p.  556. 

VOL.  I.  U 


free  to  the  Earl.1  Earl  Robert  seems  at  this  time  to  have  paid  a  visit  to  the 
fortress,  and  found  that  it  was  the  temporary  dwelling-place  of  Lady  Margaret 
Stewart,  Countess  of  Mar  and  Angus.  The  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  treated 
this  lady  kindly,  and  evinced  his  love  and  friendship  for  her  family;  for 
by  a  formal  deed,  dated  at  Tantallon  the  20th  January  1389,  he  gave  her 
liberty  to  remain  in  the  castle  as  long  as  she  chose,  while  it  remained  in 
his  hands,  to  enjoy  all  her  former  privileges  unrestrained,  and  to  remove 
with  her  family  and  servants  when  she  chose.  He  promised  that  she 
should  not  be  disturbed  by  him,  or  any  one  through  him,  and  obliged  him- 
self by  oath  to  maintain  her,  her  men,  her  lands,  and  all  her  possessions, 
against  any  that  would  wrong  them,  in  as  tender  a  manner  as  if  they  were 
his  own  property.2 

King  Eobert  the  Second,  by  reason  of  his  advanced  age,  becoming- 
unequal  to  the  weighty  duties  of  the  government,  and  his  eldest  son,  John, 
Earl  of  Carrick,  being  incapacitated  by  infirmity  from  relieving  him  of  them, 
the  hopes  of  the  Parliament  and  people  of  Scotland  turned  to  the  Earl  of 
Fife  and  Menteith,  whose  abilities  and  services  had  already  commanded  their 
respect.  In  a  council  held  at  Edinburgh  on  the  1st  December  1388,  the  King 
personally  submitted  the  case  to  the  three  Estates,  as  having  already  been 
considered  and  agreed  to  by  his  General  Council.  They,  after  much  consulta- 
tion, also  consented  that  the  Earl  should  be  made  Guardian  of  the  kingdom 
under  the  King,  his  eldest  son,  John,  Earl  of  Carrick,  and  the  eldest  son  and 
heir  of  the  latter,  yet  with  the  authority  of  the  King,  for  the  administration  of 
justice  and  conservation  of  the  laws  within  the  realm,  and  its  defence  against 
all  enemies.  The  King  thereupon  admitted  him  to  the  office  of  Guardian,  and 
instructed  the  Chancellor  to  prepare  his  commission,  which  should  continue 

1  Historical  Manuscripts  Commissioners'  Report,  vol.  v.  p.  611. 
-  Original  in  Douglas  Charter-chest. 

PROTECTS  THE  PRIVILEGES  OF  TEE  CHURCH,   1389.         155 

until  the  recovery  of  the  Earl  of  Carrick  from  his  weakness,  or  until  the 
latter's  eldest  son  should  be  able  to  assume  the  government.1  On  the  11th 
April  following,  the  Earl  was  granted  the  sum  of  one  thousand  marks 
annually  for  the  support  of  the  office.2  The  Earl  was  also  Chamberlain 
of  Scotland,  and  on  that  account  a  clause  is  added  prohibiting  him  from 
applying  more  than  the  above-mentioned  sum  for  the  expenses  of  this  office 
of  Guardian.  A  precept,  which  was  issued  at  Edinburgh  on  26th  May  1389, 
commences,  "  Robert  Erie  of  Fyf  and  of  Meuteth,  Wardane  and  Charnbhiayn 
of  Scotland."  It  was  addressed  to  the  collectors  of  the  great  customs  of  the 
Burghs  of  Edinburgh,  Haddington,  and  Dunbar,  and  informed  them  that  by 
virtue  of  a  charter  of  King  David,  confirmed  by  King  Robert  the  Second,  the 
Abbey  of  Melrose  was  entitled  to  import  and  export  goods  duty  free,  and 
therefore  forbids  them  to  ask  or  receive  dues  from  those  belonging  to  that 
abbey.3  This  precept  was  duly  respected,  as  a  memorandum  by  the 
custumars  of  Linlithgow  in  their  account  for  the  year  1403-4,  states  that 
by  command  of  the  Duke  of  Albany  fifteen  sacks  of  wool  belonging  to 
Melrose  had  been  passed  without  the  exaction  of  custom,  by  reason  of  the 
gift  of  alms  to  the  Abbey.4 

After  his  visit  to  Tantallon,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  went  to 
Montrose,  where  he  was  on  the  26th  of  January  1389,  and  attested  the  con- 
firmation of  a  charter  by  Patrick  of  Graham,  Lord  of  Kincardine,  to  his 
son,  Patrick  of  Graham,  of  the  lands  of  Kinpont  and  Illieston.5 

During  the  year  1389  the  Earl  led  another  Scottish  army  into  the  north 
of  England.  He  was  provoked  by  the  taunts  of  the  Earl  Marshal  of 
England,   who,    ever   since   the   defeat   of    the   English   at    Otterburn   and 

1  Acts   of    the  Parliaments   of    Scotland,  3  Liber  de  Melros,  vol.  ii.  p.  449. 

vol.  i.  p.  555.  4  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  593. 

a  Ibid.  p.  557.  5  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  265. 


capture  of  Percy,  had  derided  the  Scots,  and  boasted  that  if  they  would 
meet  him  in  a  fair  field,  even  though  the  Scots  were  twice  as  numerous 
as  the  English,  he  would  fight  them.  It  was  nothing  uncommon  for 
Border  warfare  to  be  waged  on  such  chivalrous  terms,  but  on  this  occasion 
the  Governor  thought  the  dignity  of  the  kingdom  insulted.  He  therefore 
assembled  a  considerable  army,  and  accompanied  by  Sir  Archibald  Douglas 
and  other  nobles,  proceeded  across  the  Borders  to  meet  the  Earl  Marshal  of 
England.  When  the  armies  met,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  challenged 
the  Earl  Marshal  to  make  good  his  boasting,  but  the  latter  declined  to 
venture  a  battle,  and  keeping  close  in  his  entrenchments,  replied  that  he 
was  not  at  liberty  to  risk  the  lives  of  the  lieges  of  the  King  of  England. 
After  waiting  for  some  time  without  any  movement  taking  place  on  the  part 
of  the  English,  the  Scots  returned  home,  wasting  that  part  of  England 
through  which  they  passed.1 

Subsequent  to  this  invasion,  in  the  same  year,  the  French  and  English  had 
agreed  at  Boulogne  upon  a  three  years'  truce,  and  both  parties  consenting  to 
invite  the  Scots  to  become  a  party  to  it,  each  sent  two  Commissioners  to  King 
Eobert  at  Dunfermline.  They  first  went  to  Sir  Archibald  Douglas  to  obtain 
his  influence  towards  the  success  of  their  mission,  but  he  replied  that  he 
had  little  or  nothing  to  say  in  the  matter,  which  really  belonged  to  the  King 
and  the  Warden.  The  Commissioners  next  betook  themselves  to  the 
Warden,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  who  in  his  turn  disclaimed  any 
power  to  make  peace  or  war,  and  said  that  all  was  in  the  King's  will.  On 
at  last  coming  to  the  King  himself,  they  succeeded  in  persuading  him  to  join 
the  Treaty  ;2  and  it  seems  to  have  been  faithfully  kept  by  the  three  nations. 
In  connection  with  this  visit  the  following  entry  occurs  in  the  Chamberlain's 
Accounts : — 

1  Wyntoun'a  Cronykil,  vol.  ii.  p.  345.  2  Ibid.  pp.  34(3-348. 

GOVERNOR  UNDER  KING  ROBERT  THE  THIRD,   1390.         157 

Paid  for  wine,  spices,  and  cloth  bought  for  the  King's  expenses  at  Dunfermline, 
when  the  French  and  English  ambassadors  came  to  him,  £19,  lis.  lOd.1 

Soon  after  this  the  King,  by  a  charter  dated  12th  August  1389,  bestowed 
on  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  the  lauds  of  Coule  and  Onele,2  and 
by  another  charter,  of  the  same  date,  the  barony  of  Strathurde,  with  the 
lands  of  Strabravne,  Dysfer,  and  Twefer,  and  the  loch  of  Tay,  with  the 
island,  all  in  Perthshire.3  All  these  lands  had  formed  part  of  the  posses- 
sions of  Isabella,  Countess  of  Fife,  but  were  resigned  by  her  at  Dunfermline 
the  same  day  on  which  they  were  granted  to  the  Earl  of  Fife  and 
Menteith.  The  Earl  afterwards  accompanied  his  father  to  Dundee  and 
Aberdeen,  thence  to  Perth  and  Linlithgow ;  and  after  visiting  Arnelle, 
where  the  Earl  was  with  the  King  for  a  few  days  at  the  end  of  March 
1390,4  the  King  betook  himself  to  his  castle  of  Dundonald  in  Ayrshire, 
where  he  died  on  the  19th  of  April  1390.5 

After  the  accession  of  his  elder  brother,  John,  Earl  of  Carrick,  to  the 
throne  as  King  Eobert  the  Third,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  still  con- 
tinued in  the  office  of  Governor,  and  performed  the  active  part  of  those 
duties  which  should  have  devolved  on  the  Sovereign. 

Indeed,  his  elder  brother,  before  he  became  King,  as  well  as  his  father, 
seems  frequently  to  have  sought  advice  and  assistance  from  Earl  Eobert. 
One  such  occasion  was  the  marriage  of  Archibald,  afterwards  fourth  Earl 
of  Douglas,  to  Margaret,  daughter  of  the  Earl  of  Carrick,  when  the  marriage- 
contract  was  drawn  up  between  John,  Earl  of  Carrick,  and  Eobert,  Earl  of 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  699.  *  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  pp.  177-180. 

-  Historical    Manuscript     Commissioners' 
Report,  vol.  v.  p.  626.  =  Forchm,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  414 ;   Wyu- 

3  The  Red  Book  of  Grandtully,  by  William       toun's  Cronykil,  vol.  ii.  p.  349. 
Fraser,  vol.  i.  p.  191. 


Fife  and  Menteith,  on  the  one  part,  and  Archibald,  third  Earl  of  Douglas, 
on  the  other.  Earl  Eobert  seems  to  have  advanced  a  considerable  sum  of 
money  to  his  brother  on  this  occasion,  which  was  not  repaid  by  the  year 
1394,  as  in  the  Lord  Chamberlain's  Account,  rendered  on  26th  March  of 
that  year,  a  sum  of  £748  is  admitted  to  be  due  by  the  King,  the  letters 
of  obligation  having  been  granted  while  he  was  Earl  of  Carrick.  In  this 
account  Earl  Robert's  receipt  is  obtained  for  £523,  Os.  2d.,  and  a  former 
payment  of  £101,  3s.  6d.  is  noted  as  having  been  made  in  the  year  1392, 
which  left  still  owing  £123,  16s.  4d.1  In  the  following  year's  account  the 
subject  again  occupies  a  place  in  the  report  by  the  auditors,  who  express 
themselves  as  not  satisfied  with  the  demand  made  at  that  time  upon  the 
Exchequer  for  the  balance ;  and  while  they  pay  the  sum  to  the  Earl  of  Fife 
and  Menteith,  they  add  the  following — 

"  Memorandum,  that  while  the  Earl  of  Fife  has  allocation  of  £123,  16s.  4d.,  a  sum 
due  him  by  the  King  by  reason  of  a  certain  contract  of  marriage  between  the  said  King 
and  the  said  Earl  on  the  one  part,  and  the  Earl  of  Douglas  on  the  other,  yet 
because  it  appears  to  the  auditors  that  the  sum  now  allocated  is  not  due,  it  has  been 
determined  between  them  respecting  the  account,  that  the  said  Earl  of  Fife  shall 
exhibit  his  charter,  which  he  holds  from  the  King,  made  hereanent,  and  that  when  the 
charter  has  been  inspected  and  the  rolls  of  accounts,  with  other  evidents,  declaration 
should  be  made  in  the  hearing  of  the  King  ;  and  should  it  be  found  that  the  allocation 
or  payment  is  not  due  as  before  mentioned,  he  shall  be  bound  to  restore  that  sum  to 
the  King,  or  allow  the  payment  of  it  as  due  at  the  next  auditing  or  accounting  between 
them  ;  which  the  said  Earl  promised  effectually  to  do."  2 

It  does  appear,  on  an  examination  of  the  account  rendered  on  26th  March 
1394,  as  if  the  claim  had  then  been  settled,  for  the  Earl  of  Fife  received 
in   supplement   of  the  payment   of  the   sum   due   to   him   by   the   King's 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  Hi.  p.  343.  2  Ibid.  p.  377. 


letters  of  obligation,  £98,  9s.,  and  it  is  added  that  he  took  allocation 
of  twenty  marks  due  from  the  lands  of  Cragroth,  in  supplement  of  the 
payment  of  the  sum  due  him  by  the  King,  which  he  holds  is  fully  paid.1 
But  the  two  sums  here  mentioned  do  not  amount  to  the  balance  of  the 
money  formerly  mentioned  as  due,  and  this  reference  in  the  same  account  is 
therefore  probably  to  an  entirely  different  obligation. 

There  is  also  mention  made  in  the  account  rendered  on  7th  April 
1395  of  another  obligation,  given  in  the  form  of  letters  under  the  Great  Seal, 
and  granted  by  King  Eobert  the  Third  when  he  was  Earl  of  Carrick,  on 
account  of  which  Earl  Eobert  received  payment  of  204  marks,  or  £136, 
and  expressed  himself  satisfied  up  to  next  Easter.2  This  obligation 
probably  has  reference  to  a  grant  by  King  Eobert  to  his  brother,  the 
Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  in  connection  with  the  lands  of  the  abthanery 
of  Dull,  whence  the  Earl  drew  annually  at  Easter  the  hereditary  annuity 
of  204  marks.3  The  Earl  seems  to  have  made  good  his  claim  to  the  balance, 
as  nothing  further  occurs  respecting  it  in  subsequent  accounts. 

For  a  time  the  country  had  rest  from  war,  and  the  Earl  was  chiefly 
engaged  with  the  meetings  of  Council  and  Parliament,  which  were  frequently 
held  during  the  earlier  years  of  King  Eobert  the  Third's  reign,  and  at 
different  places  throughout  the  country,  where  charters  were  granted  or 
confirmed  by  the  King.  He  was  present  at  Scone  on  the  18th  of  March 
1391,  and  attested  a  notarial  instrument  which  was  prepared  on  the  occasion 
of  a  petition  by  Sir  Thomas  Erskine  to  the  King.4  In  this  document  the 
King  is  represented  as  sitting  in  full  parliament  on  a  hill  to  the  north  of  the 
Abbey  of  Scone,  beyond  the  cemetery,  when  Sir  Thomas  Erskine  approached, 
and  after  informing  the  King  that  he  had  heard  that  a  contract  had  been 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  349.  4  Acta    of    the    Parliaments    of    Scotland, 

2  Ibid.  p.  372.  3  Ibid.  p.  427,  etc.  vol.  i.  p.  578. 


made  between  Sir  Malcolm  Drummond  and  Sir  John  Swinton  regarding 
the  lands  of  Mar  and  Garioch,  to  which  Sir  Malcolm's  wife  was  the  true 
and  lawful  heir,  but  failing  her,  Sir  Thomas  Erskine's  wife  was  the  next 
heir  to  one-half  of  the  earldom,  petitioned  that  if  any  such  agreement  had 
been  made  in  prejudice  of  the  right  of  his  wife,  his  Majesty  would  not 
confirm  it.  The  King  replied  that  the  request  was  a  reasonable  one,  and 
Avould  be  granted.  The  complaint  of  Sir  Thomas  Erskine  and  the  reply  of 
the  King  are  as  follows  : — 

"My  Lorde  the  kyng,  it  is  done  me  til  vndirstand  that  tliare  is  a  certane  contract 
made  bytwene  Sir  Malcolme  of  Dromonde  and  Sir  Johne  of  Swyntone  apone  the 
landis  of  the  erledome  of  Marre  and  the  lordshipe  of  Garvyauch,  of  the  quhilkes 
erldonie  and  lordshipe  Issabelle,  the  said  Sir  Malcolm's  wyf,  is  verray  and  lauchfulle 
ayre  ;  and  failliand  of  the  ayrez  of  hir  body,  the  half  of  the  fornemmyt  erldome  and 
lordshipe  perteignys  to  my  wyfe  of  richt  of  heretage  :  Tharefore  I  require  yow 
for  Goddis  sake,  as  my  lorde  and  my  kyng,  as  lauchful  actornay  to  my  saide  wyfe, 
that  in  case  gif  ony  sic  contract  be  made  in  preiudice  of  my  saide  wyfe  of  that 
at  audit  of  richt  and  of  lauch  perteigne  til  hir  in  fee  and  heritage,  failliand  of 
the  saide  Issabelle  as  is  before  saide,  that  yhe  grant  na  confirmacioun  thare 
apone  in  hurtyng  of  the  commone  lauch  of  the  kynryk  and  of  my  wyvis  richt, 
swa  that  sic  contract,  gif  ony  be,  make  na  preiudice  no  hurtyng  to  my  fornemmyt 
wife  of  that  at  scho  audit  to  succede  to  as  lauchful  ayre.  To  the  qwhilk  our 
lorde  the  kyng  answerit,  saiand  that  he  had  wed  herd  and  vndirstand  his  request, 
and  said  that  hym  thocht  his  request  was  resounable,  and  said  als  that  it  suld 
nocht  be  his  will  in  that  case,  no  in  nane  othir,  oucht  to  do  or  to  conferme  that  suld 
ryn  ony  man  in  preiudice  of  thair  heritage  attour  the  commone  lauch,  and  namely 
in  oucht  at  rynyt  the  said  Sir  Thomas  or  his  wyfe  in  sic  manere  :  Apon  the  qwhilk 
our  lorde  the  kynges  grant  the  said  Sir  Thomas,  and  als  apone  his  saide  request, 
requerit  me,  notare  before  said,  to  make  hym  ane  Instrument."  : 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  57S. 


On  the  17th  of  February  1392,  a  meeting  took  place  between  the  Earl 
of  Fife  and  Menteith  and  Duncan,  Earl  of  Lennox,  at  Inchmurrin,  the 
island  residence  of  the  latter  in  Loch  Lomond,  the  result  of  which  was  an 
agreement  between  the  two  Earls  that  Sir  Murdoch  Stewart,  eldest  son 
of  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  should  marry  Lady  Isabella,  eldest 
daughter  of  the  Earl  of  Lennox.  It  was  provided  that  the  earldom  of 
Lennox  should  be  resigned  into  the  King's  hands,  and  a  new  grant  obtained 
in  favour  of  Earl  Duncan  and  any  heirs-male  which  he  might  have ;  failing 
whom,  the  earldom  was  to  descend  to  Sir  Murdoch  Stewart  and  Lady 
Isabella.  The  marriage  took  place  shortly  afterwards.1  The  Earl  of  Fife 
and  Menteith  was  justiciar  of  the  shires  of  Stirling  and  Dumbarton,  and 
one  condition  of  the  contract  was  that  Duncan,  Earl  of  Lennox,  should  be 
made  substitute  and  depute  to  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  in  the  lands 
comprising  the  lordship  of  Lennox,  and  have  a  third  part  of  the  profits  of 
the  justiciary  of  that  lordship.2  It  must  have  been  in  compliance  with 
this  article  of  the  agreement  that  on  the  6th  March  1401,  at  Stirling,  the 
Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  granted  to  Duncan,  Earl  of  Lennox,  and  his  heirs, 
under  the  form  of  entail  between  him  and  Murdoch  Stewart  the  Duke's 
son  and  heir,  the  office  of  crowner  (coronator)  of  the  entire  earldom  of  the 
Lennox,  with  all  the  fees  and  emoluments  belonging  of  right  to  that  office, 
with  power  to  appoint  deputies  and  servants  at  pleasure,  which  office,  it  is 
added  in  the  deed  of  appointment,  belonged,  with  its  pertinents,  heritably  to 
the  Lord  or  Laird  (Dominus)  of  Drummond.3 

King  Eobert  the  Third,  although  a  mild  and  just  Prince,  lacked  the 
strength  of  character  and  martial  vigour  of  both  his  father  and  brother. 
He  saw  in  the  independent  nobility  by  which  he  was  surrounded,  those 

1  The  Lennox,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  i.  p.  24S.  2  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  p.  44. 

3  Cartularium  de  LeveDax,  p.  95. 
VOL.  I.  X 

162         PEXSIOXS  FOR  RETINUE  TO  EARL  OF  GARRIGK,   1393. 

elements  of  discord  which  might  at  any  tune  break  loose  and  threaten  the 
stability  of  his  throne.  Owing  to  lameness  caused  by  a  kick  from  a  horse, 
he  was  personally  incapable  of  great  activity,  and  perhaps  in  the  hope  of 
securing  some  support  should  the  hour  of  need  arrive,  he  bestowed  pensions 
on  several  of  the  nobles  and  knights.  His  brother,  the  Earl  of  Fife  and 
Menteith,  was  one  of  these.  By  a  charter,  dated  8th  February  1393,  he  was 
granted  the  sum  of  two  hundred  marks  yearly  (£133,  6s.  8d.  Scots)  for 
homage  and  service,  and  for  retinue  to  the  eldest  son  of  the  King,  David 
Stewart,  Earl  of  Carrick,  or  in  the  event  of  his  death,  to  Sir  Eobert  Stewart, 
his  second  son.  The  money  was  to  be  uplifted  from  the  customs  of  the 
burghs  of  Linlithgow  and  Cupar,  and  in  case  of  deficiency,  the  sum  was  to 
be  completed  from  the  Treasury.1 

During  the  year  1395  the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith  seems  to  have  been 
employed  in  some  business  at  Linlithgow  concerning  the  castle  of  Calder, 
which  he  had  undertaken  at  the  King's  command  and  instructions.  What 
the  service  was  we  are  not  informed  in  the  memorandum  annexed  by  the 
Exchequer  Auditors  to  the  Chamberlain's  account,  rendered  on  27  th  April 
1396,  which  only  relates  the  fact,  and  minutes  that  the  Earl  begged  that  it 
might  be  reduced  to  writing  that  he  had  sought,  and  that  he  ought  to  have, 
for  reasons  stated  by  him,  allocation  of  £30,  Is.  8d.  sterling,  which  he 
had  expended  in  the  above  piece  of  service.2 

In  that  or  the  following  year,  Earl  Eobert  negotiated  a  loan  with  his 
brother  the  King,  in  virtue  of  which  the  Earl  obtained  the  sum  of 
£583,  17s.  7d.  In  return  the  Earl  granted  his  letters  obligatory,  promising  to 
repay  the  money  at  certain  terms  within  three  years.  The  letters  obligatory, 
it  is  added,  are  to  remain  with  the  King  in  the  coffers  in  his  chamber.3 

The  deplorable  state  of  matters  in  the  northern  parts  of  Scotland  called 

1  Registrant  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  213.         2  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  404.         3  Ibid. 


urgently  for  the  interference  of  the  Government,  and  in  1397  the  Earl  of 
Fife  and  Menteith,  along  with  Prince  David,  Earl  of  Carrick,  now  in  his 
twentieth  year,  was  despatched  to  compose  the  differences  existing  there. 
The  account  of  William  Chalmer  and  Eobert  Davidson,  customars  of 
Aberdeen  in  that  year,  contains  a  payment  of  £51,  16s.  to  the  expenses  of 
the  Earl  of  Fife,  and  of  £40  to  the  Earl  of  Carrick.1  The  sums  of  money 
were  not  paid  to  the  respective  Earls,  hut  to  Walter  of  Tulach,  chamber- 
lain-depute north  of  the  Forth,  who  in  his  account,  rendered  on  the  2d  of 
May  1398,  has  the  sum  of  £59,  19s.  Gd.  allowed  for  the  expenses  of 
the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.  In  a  note  he  added  that  this  sum  had 
not  been  paid  until  the  King  was  consulted,  and  the  matter  arranged 
between  him  and  his  brother.  The  Earl  had  fallen  considerably  in  arrears 
with  his  accounts,  and  was  in  debt  to  the  Treasury.  They  were  therefore 
unwilling  to  pay  more  to  him  until  the  King,  Prince  David,  the  Earl 
himself,  and  the  Privy  Council  had  conferred  together  and  come  to  an 
understanding.  The  auditors  reported  that  the  Earl  was  due  no  less 
than  £930,  19s.  7d.  Two  years  later  the  amount  of  debt  was  reduced  by 
various  ways  to  £471,  17s.  3d.,  which  the  King,  with  the  advice  of  his 
Council,  taking  into  consideration  the  expenses  and  labours  of  the  Earl 
(now  Duke  of  Albany),  and  for  other  causes,  remitted  to  him,  so  that  matters 
were  now  equal  between  them.2 

On  the  28th  of  April  1398,  during  a  meeting  of  the  Parliament  at  Scone, 
the  King  created  his  son  David,  then  Earl  of  Carrick  and  Athole,  Duke 
of  Eothesay,  and  his  brother  Eobert,  then  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  Duke 
of  Albany.3  The  title  of  Eothesay  was  taken  from  the  ancient  royal 
castle  of  that  name   in  the  island  of  Bute,  and  the  title  of  Albany  was 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  442.  2  Ibid.  pp.  461,  513. 

3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  422. 


supposed  to  be  taken  from  the  country  between  the  Forth  and  the  Spey, 
or  Scotland  proper.1 

The  services  which  took  place  at  the  investiture  of  the  Dukes  on  the 
Sunday  in  the  Church  of  the  Monastery  of  St.  Michael  at  Scone,  were  con- 
ducted with  great  pomp  and  ceremony.  The  King  himself  invested  them 
with  furred  mantles  and  caps,  and  with  the  rest  of  the  insignia,  suitable 
and  customary  for  Dukes.  Walter  Trail,  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews, 
celebrated  mass  and  preached  before  the  King  and  Queen.2  The  proceed- 
ings are  said  to  have  been  prolonged  through  fifteen  days.3  This  was 
the  first  appearance  of  the  title  of  Duke  in  Scotland,  and  its  introduction 
is  said  to  have  been  occasioned  by  a  claim  of  precedency  made  by  the 
Duke  of  Lancaster  over  the  Earls  of  Carrick  and  Fife  and  Menteith,  at  a 
meeting  of  Scottish  and  English  commissioners  at  Haudenstank,  on  the 
Borders,  near  Kelso,  in  the  preceding  month.* 

Pinkerton,  in  mentioning  the  creation  of  the  two  Dukes,  displays  his  usual 
animus  against  Albany.  He  says  that  the  heir-apparent  of  the  kingdom  was 
created  Duke  of  Bothesay,  a  miserable  hamlet  in  the  Isle  of  Bute,  while  the 
whole  island  would  not  have  afforded  a  territorial  title  to  a  baron ;  and  the 
Earl  of  Fife  had  the  real  style  of  heir-apparent  in  the  title  of  Duke  of  Albany, 
or  of  all  Scotland  north  of  the  Firths  of  Clyde  and  Forth.6 

Pinkerton  cites  the  creation  of  Albany  as  another  proof  of  his  insatiable 

ambition.     But  that  historian  misrepresents  the  origin  of  the  title  of  Bothesay, 

which  was  taken  from  a  great  and  historical  castle,  at  that  time  the  favourite 

residence  of  the  kings,  and  where  Bobert  the  Third  both  lived  and  died. 

1  Macpherson  says  that  the  ducal  title  of  2  Eegistrum  Moraviense,  p.  382. 

Albany  was  totally  unconnected  with  terri-  3  Liber  PluscardensiSi  p,  330. 

tory,  for  it  is  Scotland  itself  or   nothing. — 

P_  ,  .     ,  Tin  i-  c    a    u>  1-   tt-  *  Eymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  35. 

[Geographical  Illustrations   of    Scottish  His- 
tory, 1796.]  5  History  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  52. 

DUKE  OF  ROTHESAY  THE  KING'S  LIEUTENANT,   1399.        165 

The  title  of  Rothesay  was  thus  very  appropriate  for  the  heir  to  the  throne, 
and  it  has  since  continued  to  be  one  of  the  titles  of  the  Princes  of 
Scotland.  The  title  of  Albany  was  somewhat  sentimental,  and  did  not 
represent  any  well-defined  territory.  If,  along  with  the  personal  title  of 
Duke,  Albany  had  received  the  extensive  territory  indicated  by  Pinkerton  as 
included  in  the  name,  there  might  have  been  some  ground  for  charging  him 
with  ambition ;  but  there  is  no  evidence  that  he  received  in  the  supposed 
country  of  Albany  even  a  single  acre  along  with  the  title. 

The  Parliament  which  met  at  Perth  in  the  month  of  January  1399 
appointed  the  Duke  of  Eothesay  as  the  King's  Lieutenant  throughout  the 
whole  country  for  three  years.  For  his  guidance  and  assistance  a  select 
council  was  named,  having  at  its  head  the  Duke  of  Albany.  The  appoint- 
ment of  a  lieutenant  was  not  a  supersession  of  the  Duke  of  Albany  in 
his  office  of  Guardian  of  Scotland,  as  he  does  not  appear  to  have  held  that 
office  after  the  year  1392.  At  all  events,  the  payments  of  his  salary  as 
Guardian  ceased  in  that  year. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  much  confusion  and  crime  prevailed  at  this  time 
in  the  country,  and  that  some  steps  were  necessary  for  the  preservation  of 
order  and  the  better  protection  of  life  and  property.  But  to  attribute  this 
state  of  affairs  to  the  wilful  mismanagement  of  the  Duke  of  Albany,  who  is 
said  "  to  have  prostituted  his  office  of  Governor  to  his  own  selfish  designs, 
and  purchased  the  support  of  the  nobles  by  offering  them  an  immunity  for 
their  offences," 1  is  rather  an  exaggeration  of  the  reasons  assigned  in  Parliament 
by  those  who  desired  the  appointment  of  the  Prince.  The  only  mention 
made  of  the  Duke  of  Albany  is  as  a  wise  and  loyal  councillor.  As  stated, 
he  was  no  longer  Governor,  and  the  Parliament,  in  deploring  the  state  of 
misgovernment  in  the  country,  laid  the  blame  heavily  upon  the  King. 

1  Tytler,  vol.  ii.  p.  394. 



Whereas,  the  Act  of  Parliament  says,  it  is  our  judgment  that  the  misgovern- 
ment  of  the  realm  and  default  in  the  administration  of  the  common  law  should 
be  imputed  to  the  King  and  his  officers ;  and  if  therefore  it  is  the  pleasure  of 
our  lord  the  King  to  excuse  his  own  failures,  it  is  in  his  power  to  summon  his 
officers  to  whom  he  has  given  commission  and  accuse  them  before  his  Council, 
who  on  hearing  their  reply  would  be  ready  to  judge  as  to  their  mismanage- 
ment, for  no  man  ought  to  be  condemned  before  he  be  called  and  accused. 

Since,  the  Act  proceeds,  it  is  well  seen  and  known  that  our- lord  the  king, 
for  sickness  of  his  person,  cannot  travel  to  govern  the  realm,  or  to  restrain 
trespassers  and  rebels,  it  appears  to  the  Council  most  expedient  that  the 
Duke  of  Eothesay  be  the  King's  Lieutenant  generally  through  all  the 
country  for  the  space  of  three  years,  having  full  power  and  commission  of 
the  King  to  govern  the  land  in  all  things  as  the  Kins;  should  do  in  his 
person  if  he  were  present ;  that  is  to  say,  to  punish  trespassers,  to  restrain 
trespasses,  and  to  treat  and  remit  with  the  conditions  after  following ;  that 
is  to  say,  that  he  be  obliged  by  his  letters,  and  sworn,  to  govern  his  person 
and  the  office  committed  to  him  with  the  Parliament,  and  in  their  absence, 
with  the  Council  of  wise  and  loyal  men,  of  whom  the  names  are : — In  the 
first,  the  Duke  of  Albany,  the  Lord  of  Brechin,  the  Bishops  of  Andristoun 
(St.  Andrews),  Glasgow,  and  Aberdeen,  the  Earls  of  Douglas,  Boss,  Moray, 
and  Crawford,  the  Lord  of  Dalkeith,  Sir  Thomas  Hay,  Constable ;  Sir  William 
Keith,  Marischal;  Sir  Thomas  Erskine,  Sir  Patrick  Graham,  Sir  John 
Livingstone,  Sir  William  Stewart,  Sir  John  Eamorgny,  Adam  Forester,  the 
Abbot  of  Holyrood,  the  Archdean  of  Lothian,  and  Mr.  Walter  Forester  :  the 
which  Parliament  and  special  Council  shall  be  obliged  by  their  letters,  and 
sworn  to  give  him  faithful  counsel  for  the  common  profit,  not  having  an  eye 
to  feed  any  friendship,  etc.1 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  572. 

LETTER  BY  DUKE  OF  ROTHESAY,  c.    1400. 


There  is  nothing  in  the  Act  to  show  dissatisfaction  with  the  Duke  of 
Albany's  discharge  of  any  business  intrusted  to  him,  and  it  can  scarcely  be 
doubted  that  although  no  longer  Guardian,  some  of  the  weightiest  parts  of  the 
government  would  devolve  on  him.  He  was  in  the  full  confidence  of  the 
Parliament,  which  placed  him  at  the  head  of  the  Council  appointed  to 
assist  the  Duke  of  Eothesay  both  at  home  and  in  foreign  affairs.1  After 
the  recent  elevation  of  Prince  David  to  the  title  of  Duke  of  Eothesay,  there 
would  be  a  desire  on  the  part  of  all  to  raise  him  still  higher,  so  that  when 
the  Parliament  decided  that  a  Lieutenant  was  needed,  it  was  agreed  that  the 
Prince  should  be  appointed,  as  it  were  on  trial,  for  a  period  of  three  years. 
There  is  every  probability  that  the  Duke  of  Albany  was  as  sincere  in 
wishing  the  Prince's  success  as  any  of  the  nobles ;  at  all  events,  there  is 
no  evidence  to  warrant  the  imputation  of  the  base  motives  of  which  he  is 
accused  in  connection  with  this,  and,  indeed,  almost  every  matter  in  which 
lie  was  engaged. 

The  Duke  of  Eothesay  had  talents  for  government,  and  had  even  before 
this  been  employed  in  the  work  of  the  State  both  on  the  Borders  and  in 
the  Highlands.  A  letter  by  Eothesay  is  still  preserved  in  the  British 
Museum,  which  he  had  probably  sent  to  King  Henry  the  Fourth  of  England 
during  that  period.  It  is  dated  from  Melrose,  and  is  interesting  as  a 
memento  of  this  ill-fated  Prince.  A  translation  of  the  original,  which  is  in 
Latin,  is  here  given  : — 

High  and  mighty  Prince,  my  most  dear  and  loved  cousin,  as  to  the  matter  of 
which  you  and  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews  have  spoken,  I  have  heard  and  seen  what 
you  have  advised  in  that  matter,  and  will  report  it  to  the  King,  my  lord,  and, 
according  to  what  shall  seem  good  to  him,  will  proceed  in  the  advancement  of  the 
business,  by  the  help  of  God,  in  the  manner  you  have  proposed,  or  otherwise,  at  the 
1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  573. 


time  contained  in  your  writing,  or  sooner  if  it  can  well  be.  High  and  mighty  Prince, 
if  there  be  anything  for  your  pleasure  that  I  can  do,  courteously  please  to  tell  me  ; 
and  may  the  Almighty  God  have  you  in  his  most  holy  keeping.  Written  at  Melrose, 
the  17th  day  of  March. 

David,  eldest  son  of  the  King  of  Scotland,  Earl  of  Carrick.1 

That  the  Prince  was  brave  is  not  disputed,  and  there  is  reason  to  believe 
he  was  to  some  extent  desirous  of  filling  his  high  post  honourably.  This  is 
proved  by  his  conduct  during  the  English  invasion  of  the  following  year, 
when  King  Henry  the  Fourth  of  England  revived  the  old  claim  of  his 
predecessors  in  the  English  throne  to  be  Lords  Paramount  of  Scotland,  and 
gave  instructions  to  his  Border  Earls  to  seduce  as  many  of  the  Scottish 
people  from  their  allegiance  to  their  sovereign  as  possible.2  His  summons 
to  the  Scottish  Court  to  acknowledge  him  as  their  overlord  being  treated 
with  due  contempt,  he  led  a  large  army  into  Scotland  and  laid  siege  to 
Edinburgh  Castle.  The  castle  was  then  held  by  the  Duke  of  Rothesay 
and  his  brother-in-law,  Archibald,  Earl  of  Douglas,  who  were  determined 
to  resist  to  the  last.  To  assist  them  the  Duke  of  Albany  assembled  a 
considerable  army,  and  proceeded  to  Calder  Moor,  where  he  encamped  to 
await  the  issue  of  events.  A  historian  relates  that  some  jealousies  or 
misunderstandings  existed  between  the  Dukes  of  Albany  and  Eothesay, 
which  prevented  the  former  from  approaching  nearer  to  the  city.3  But  by 
waiting,  a  combat  was  avoided,  as  the  English,  running  short  of  provi- 
sions, and  learning  that  a  rebellion  had  broken  out  in  Wales,  retraced 
their  steps  without  accomplishing  their  object.  This  invasion  took  place 
in  the  month  of  August  1400.4 

Whatever  coolness  there  may  have  been  at  this  period  between  the  uncle 

1  National  mss.  of  Scotland,  Part  II.  No.  51.  3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  430. 

2  Rotuli  SeotiaB,  vol.  ii.  p.  161.  *  Kymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  158. 


and  nephew,  a  few  months  later  they  seem  to  have  both  been  present  at  a 
Parliament  held  at  Scone  on  21st  February  1401,1  when  various  measures 
were  passed  tending  to  benefit  the  realm.  Weak  as  the  government  of  Scot- 
land during  the  reign  of  King  Eobert  the  Third  certainly  was,  it  is  interesting 
to  note  almost  the  first  attempts  at  a  legislation  tending  to  render  property 
more  secure,  and  to  check  the  grasping  violence  of  the  feudal  barons,  who 
often  took  advantage  of  their  power  to  resume  lands  illegally  from  their 
vassals.  This  abuse,  which  interrupted  both  the  agricultural  and  commercial 
improvement  of  the  country,  it  was  striven  to  redress  by  strict  legislation  in 
regard  to  brieves  of  inquests  for  services  of  heirs,  and  by  special  regulations 
as  to  the  legal  relations  between  a  vassal  and  his  overlord.  The  question  of 
succession  to  younger  brothers  was  also  settled.  The  King's  lieutenants  and 
other  judges  were  specially  commanded  to  hear  and  do  speedy  justice  on  the 
complaints  of  churchmen,  widows,  orphans,  and  pupils  or  minors,  a  class  of 
persons  who  were  peculiarly  liable  to  suffer  from  the  strong  hand.  Other  enact- 
ments of  a  similar  character  were  made,  and  whatever  share  either  of  the  two 
royal  Dukes  had  in  promoting  these  beneficial  measures,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
they  could  not  have  been  passed  without  the  consent  of  the  Duke  of  Albany, 
himself  the  lord  of  two  earldoms,  and  the  head  of  the  Council  of  State. 

The  tenor  of  these  Acts  passed  during  his  lieutenancy  seems  to  throw  a 
darker  shade  upon  the  conduct  of  the  Duke  of  Eothesay,  who,  whatever  his 
talents  for  government  may  have  been,  abused  to  an  alarming  extent  the 
too  absolute  powers  placed  in  his  hands.  He  forced  the  provincial  customs 
officers  to  supply  him  with  money,  and  when  they  refused,  he  took  it  from 
them  by  force,  in  one  case  seizing  and  detaining  the  person  of  the  officer 
until  he  paid  the  sum  demanded.  His  private  conduct  was  scandalous,  and 
ultimately  proved  dangerous  to  the  State.     Although  engaged  to  be  married 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  pp.  575,  576. 
VOL.  I.  Y 


to  the  daughter  of  George  Dunbar,  Earl  of  March,  he  slighted  her,  and  for  the 
sake  of  a  larger  dowry  married  Marjory  Douglas,  the  daughter  of  Archibald, 
third  Earl  of  Douglas,  which  gave  great  offence  to  the  Earl  of  March,  and 
was  the  occasion  of  war  with  England,  whither  that  Earl,  after  casting  off 
his  allegiance  to  Kins;  Eobert  the  Third,  betook  himself.  Before  leaving 
his  castle,  the  Earl  of  March  wrote  the  following  letter  to  King  Henry  the 
Fourth  of  England.  It  shows  the  depth  of  resentment  to  which  Eothesay's 
act  gave  rise : — 

Excellent,  mychty,  and  noble  Prince,  likis  yhour  realte,  to  wit,  that  I  am  gretly 
wrangit  be  the  Due  of  Kothesay,  the  quhilk  spousit  my  douchter,  and  now  agayn  hys 
oblisyng  to  me,  made  be  hys  lettre  and  his  seal  and  agaynes  the  law  of  halikirc, 
spouses  aue  other  wif,  as  it  ys  said,  of  the  quhilk  wrangis  and  defowle  to  me  and  my 
douchter  in  swilk  manere  done,  I,  as  ane  of  yhour  poer  kyn,  gif  it  likis  yhow,  requeris 
yhow  of  help  and  suppowell  fore  swilk  honest  seruice  as  I  may  do  efter  my  power  to 
yhour  noble  lordship  and  to  yhour  lande  ;  fore  tretee  of  the  quhilk  matere  will  yhe 
dedeyn  to  charge  the  Lord  the  Eournivalle,  ore  the  Erie  of  Westmerland  at  yhour 
likyng,  to  the  Marche  with  swilk  gudely  haste  as  yhow  likis,  qware  that  I  may  haue 
spekyng  with  quhilk  of  thaim  that  yhe  will  send,  and  schew  hym  clerly  myne  entent, 
the  quhilk  I  darre  nocht  discouer  to  nane  other  bot  tyll  ane  of  thaim  be  cause  of  kyn, 
and  the  grete  lewtee  that  I  traist  in  thaim,  and  as  I  suppose  yhe  traist  in  thaim,  on 
the  tother  part  :  Alsa,  noble  Prince,  will  yhe  dedeyn  to  graunt  and  to  send  me  yhour 
saufconduyt,  endurand  quliill  the  fest  of  the  natiuitie  of  Seint  John  the  Baptist,  fore  a 
hundreth  knichtis  and  squiers,  and  seruantz,  gudes,  hors  and  hernais,  als  wele  within 
wallit  town  as  with  owt,  or  in  qwat  other  resonable  manere  that  yhow  likis,  fore 
trauaillyng  and  dwellyng  within  yhour  land  gif  I  hafe  myster.  And,  excellent 
Prince,  syn  that  I  clayme  to  be  of  kyn  till  yhow,  and  it  peraventour  nocht  knawen  on 
yhour  parte,  I  schew  it  to  yhour  lordschip  be  this  my  lettre  that  gif  Dame  Alice  the 
Bowmount  was  yhour  graunde  dame,  dame  Mariory  Comyne,  hyrre  full  sister,  was  my 
graunde  dame  on  the  tother  syde,  sa  that  I  am  bot  of  the  feirde  degre  of  kyn  tyll  yhow, 
the  quhilk  in  aide  tyme  was  callit  neire  ;  and  syn  I  am  in  swilk  degre  tyll  yhow,  I 



requere  yhow,  as  be  way  of  tendirness  thare  of,  and  fore  my  seruice  in  manere  as  I  hafe 

before  writyn,  that  yhe  will  vouchesauf  tyll    help   me   and  suppowell  me  tyll  gete 

amendes  of  the  wrangis  and  the  defowle  that  ys  done  me,  sendand  tyll  me  gif  yhow 

likis  yhour  answere  of  this,  with  all  gudely  haste  :  And,  noble  Prince,  mervaile  yhe 

nocht  that  I  write  my  lettres  in  Englis,  fore  that  ys  mare  clere  to  myne  vnderstandyng 

than  Latyne  ore  Fraunche.     Excellent,  mychty,  and  noble  Prince,  the  haly  Trinite  hafe 

yhow  euermare  in  kepyng.     Writyn  at  my  castell  of  Dunbarr,  the  xviii  day  of  Feuerer 


Le  Count  de  la  Marche  Descoce. 

An  tresexcellent,  trespuissant,  et  tresnoble  Prince  le  Roy  Dengleterre.1 

The  King  of  England  granted  the  safe-conduct  craved  by  the  Earl  on 
the  8th  of  March  following,  and  four  days  later  issued  instructions  to 
Ealph,  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  and  the  Abbot  of  Alnwick,  to  meet  with 
the  Earl  of  March  and  negotiate  matters,2  the  result  of  which  was  that 
he  was  received  by  the  English  King,  and  afterwards  served  him  faithfully 
for  some  years  against  his  own  countrymen.  One  result  of  this  secession 
was  the  invasion  of  Scotland  above  referred  to. 

Unhappily  also  for  the  Prince,  the  death,  in  the  year  1401,  of  his  mother, 
Queen  Anabella  Drummond,  who  had  in  some  degree  checked  his  licen- 
tiousness and  folly,  loosed  the  last  bond  of  restraint;  and,  spurning  the 
warnings  of  his  Council,  he  plunged  anew  into  the  depths  of  his  former 
courses,  whereupon  the  Council  informed  the  King  of  his  conduct.  The 
term  of  three  years  for  which  the  Prince  had  been  appointed  had  now 
expired,  and  the  King,  in  his  own  helplessness  and  decrepitude,  wrote  to 
his  brother  the  Duke  of  Albany,  as  Governor  of  the  kingdom,  to  arrest 
the  Prince  and  keep  him  in  custody  for  a  time,  until,  chastised  by  the 
rod  of  discipline,  he  should  learn  to  demean  himself  better.3     Sir  William 

1  National  mss.  of  Scotland,  Part  II.  No.  53.  2  Eotuli  Scotiav,  vol.  ii.  p.  153. 

3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  431. 



Lindsay  of  Eossie  and  Sir  John  Eamorgny,  two  Councillors  of  the  King's 
household,  were  the  messengers  and  bearers  of  the  letter  from  the  King 
to  his  brother  Albany.  Both  of  these  knights  were  said  to  have  had  a 
grudge  against  the  Prince,  the  former  because  the  Prince  had  plighted  his 
troth  to  his  sister  Euphemia  of  Lindsay,  but  had  abandoned  her  in  the 
same  way  as  he  had  done  the  daughter  of  the  Earl  of  March.  Sir  John 
Eamorgny,  who  was  held  in  high  estimation  as  a  councillor  both  to  the 
King  and  the  Prince,  was  a  bold  and  eloquent  man,  learned  in  the  law,  and 
was  the  King's  prolocutor  in  difficult  cases.  He  was  a  pensioned  retainer 
of  the  Duke  of  Eothesay,  and  for  a  time  acted  as  his  Chamberlain ;  even 
the  Queen  employed  his  services,  and  on  two  occasions  he  was  intrusted 
with  the  conduct  of  negotiations  in  France  and  in  England.1  Yet  he,  it 
was  said,  had  first  of  all  suggested  to  the  Duke  of  Eothesay  to  lay  hands 
on  his  uncle  Albany,  and  put  him  to  death  when  occasion  offered.  The 
Prince,  to  his  credit,  spurned  the  diabolical  suggestion.  Sir  John  Eamorgny 
afterwards,  it  was  said,  suggested  to  the  Duke  of  Albany  to  take  the 
Prince's  life,  for  if  he  did  not,  he  added,  the  Duke  of  Eothesay  intended  to 
take  his. 

These  two  knights  are  said  to  have  proposed  to  the  King  the  course  to 
be  taken,  and  after  the  King  had  given  instructions  to  his  brother,  they 
counselled  the  Prince  to  take  possession  of  the  castle  of  St.  Andrews,  as 
the  Bishop  of  that  see  had  lately  died,  and  to  hold  it  for  his  father  until 
the  appointment  of  a  successor.  The  Prince,  acting  on  their  advice,  set 
out  with  a  sniaU  retinue  for  St.  Andrews ;  but  while  he  was  on  the  way, 
and  between  the  towns  of  Nydie  and  Strathtyrum,  they  arrested  him,  and 
conveyed  him  by  force  to  the  castle  of  St.  Andrews.  Here  he  was  detained 
until  information  had  been  conveyed   to   the   Duke   of  Albany,   who   was 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  pp.  445-701. 

HIS  DEATH,   1402. 


then  with  the  Council  at  Culross.  The  Council  were  acquainted  with 
what  had  taken  place,  and  after  consultation  as  to  what  should  be  done, 
the  Duke  of  Albany,  together  with  the  Prince's  brother-in-law,  Archibald, 
Earl  of  Douglas,  repaired  to  St.  Andrews,  and  with  a  party  of  soldiers 
conveyed  the  Prince  to  Falkland  Tower.  The  Prince  during  the  journey 
to  Falkland  was  scarcely  treated  with  the  honour  due  to  his  rank,  being 
set  on  a  baggage-horse,  with  a  rough  russet  cloak  thrown  over  his  shoulders 
on  account  of  the  cold  and  heavy  rain.  In  Falkland  he  was  placed  in 
an  "  honourable  apartment,"  and  intrusted  to  the  care  of  John  Wright, 
constable  of  the  castle,  and  another  retainer,  John  Selkirk.  During 
his  confinement  there  the  unfortunate  Prince  died  from  dysentery  on  the 
26th  March  1402,  and  was  buried  in  Lindores  Abbey.  Some  said  that  his 
death  was  caused  by  starvation. 

The  disease  of  dysentery,  which  was  the  reputed  cause  of  Eothesay's 
death,  became  very  prevalent  towards  the  end  of  the  regency  of  Duke  Piobert, 
and  in  the  beginning  of  the  regency  of  his  son,  Duke  Murdach.  It  was 
popularly  called  the  "Quhew."1  Many  persons  of  all  ranks  were  cut  off 
by  that  fatal  malady.  Among  these  were  Henry  Sinclair,  Earl  of  Orkney, 
James  Douglas,  Lord  of  Dalkeith,  and  George  Dunbar,  Earl  of  March,  who 
was  one  of  the  most  fortunate  warriors  of  his  age. 

The  Duke  of  Albany  has  been  ostentatiously  charged  by  certain  modern 
historians  with  the  murder  of  his  nephew,  having  the  Earl  of  Douglas  as  an 
accomplice.  But  this  grave  charge  is  not  only  not  proven,  but  the  case  is 
long  since  a  res  judicata,  having  been  decided  after  a  formal  trial  by  the 
highest  court  in  the  nation,  by  whom  the  accused  were  openly  acquitted. 

1  Pordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  460.  Only  "  ferd  mortalyte,"  meaning  the  fourth  plague 
a  year  or  two  before  the  death  of  Rothesay  or  pestilence.  [Old  Chronicle  MS.,  Pieg.  17 
an  old  chronicler  records  that  there  was  the        D.  xx,  as  quoted  by  Pinkerton,  vol.  i.  p.  502.] 


The  death  of  the  Prince  is  stated  in  an  authoritative  document,  to  be  after- 
wards referred  to,  as  entirely  owing  to  natural  causes ;  while  the  only  his- 
torian of  the  age  who  notices  with  any  detail  the  circumstances  of  his  death, 
states  that  dysentery  was  the  cause.  Nor  was  this  by  any  means  an  unlikely 
cause.  All  admit  the  debauchery  and  excesses  of  the  prince,  a  course  of 
life  which,  at  his  years,  could  only  be  expected  to  have  its  natural  issue  in 
a  premature  death.  The  circumstances  of  his  capture,  and  his  exposure  to 
the  inclemency  of  the  weather,  would  tend  to  foster  the  germs  of  such  a 
disease,  which  no  doubt  was  fatally  accelerated  by  compulsory  confinement 
and  its  attendant  grief  to  a  high-spirited  youth.  Eothesay's  conduct  had  so 
scandalised  the  nation  that  restraint  was  a  necessity.  His  guardians,  Alban}r 
and  Douglas,  who  were  so  appointed  for  the  public  good,  were  not  responsible 
for  its  results. 

In  "  The  Fair  Maid  of  Perth,"  Eothesay,  his  father  the  King,  and  his  uncle 
Albany,  afforded  excellent  subjects  for  the  splendid  powers  of  Sir  Walter 
Scott.  His  portrait  of  King  Eobert  the  Third  is  drawn  with  a  masterly 
hand,  a  fine  mixture  of  reality  and  romance.  In  the  dialogue  between 
Eothesay  and  Sir  John  Eamorgny,  who  is  represented  as  one  of  the  prince's 
profligate  associates,  the  novelist  thus  makes  Eothesay  describe  himself: — 

"  I  think  I  know  your  cast  of  morals,  Sir  John  ;  you  are  weary  of  merry 
folly, — the  churchmen  call  it  vice, — and  long  for  a  little  serious  crime.  A 
murder  now,  or  a  massacre,  would  enhance  the  flavour  of  debauch,  as  the 
taste  of  the  olive  gives  zest  to  wine.  But  my  worst  acts  are  but  merry 
malice  ;  I  have  no  relish  for  the  bloody  trade,  and  abhor  to  see  or  hear  of  its 
being  acted  even  on  the  meanest  caitiff.  Should  I  ever  fill  the  throne,  I 
suppose,  like  my  father  before  me,  I  must  drop  my  own  name,  and  be  dubbed 
Eobert  in  honour  of  the  Bruce — well,  an'  if  it  be  so — every  Scots  lad  shall 
have  his  flagon  in  one  hand,  and  the  other  around  his  lass's  neck,  and 


manhood  shall  be  tried  by  kisses  and  bumpers,  not  by  dirks  and  dourlachs ; 
and  they  shall  write  on  my  grave,  '  Here  lies  Eobert,  fourth  of  his  name.  He 
won  not  battles  like  Eobert  the  First.  He  rose  not  from  a  count  to  a  kins; 
like  Eobert  the  Second.  He  founded  not  churches  like  Eobert  the  Third,  but 
was  contented  to  live  and  die  king  of  good  fellows  !'  Of  all  my  two  centuries 
of  ancestors,  I  would  only  emulate  the  fame  of 

'  Old  King  Coul 
Who  had  a  brown  bowl.'" 

Albany  has  been  represented  as  ambitious,  and  that  to  further  his  own 
ends  he  compassed  the  death  of  his  nephew.  If  so,  it  has  been  left  to  later 
historians  to  discover  the  fact,  as  contemporary  historians  not  only  do  not 
accuse  Albany  of  the  murder  of  Eothesay,  but  give  him  a  very  flattering 
character,  altogether  inconsistent  with  his  having  been  guilty  of  such  an 
odious  crime.  Such  a  crime,  too,  is  all  the  more  improbable  when  the  Earl  of 
Douglas  is  accused  as  an  accomplice,  whose  own  advancement  and  that  of 
his  family  would  have  been  better  secured  by  the  succession  of  his  brother- 
in-law  to  the  Crown  than  by  his  death. 

In  the  time  of  Eothesay  the  alliances  between  the  royal  house  of  Stewart 
and  the  noble  house  of  Douglas  were  very  close.  Eothesay  had  married 
Marjory  Douglas,  daughter  of  Archibald,  third  Earl  of  Douglas ;  and  her 
brother,  Archibald,  the  fourth  Earl,  was  married  to  the  Princess  Margaret, 
the  eldest  sister  of  Eothesay.  Eothesay  and  Douglas  were  thus  doubly 
brothers-in-law.  The  Princess  Mary,  the  second  sister  of  Eothesay,  was 
married  to  George  Douglas,  first  Earl  of  Angus,  cousin  of  the  Earl  of  Douglas, 
while  the  Princess  Elizabeth,  the  youngest  sister  of  Eothesay,  was  married 
to  James  Douglas,  Lord  of  Dalkeith.  The  three  sisters  of  Eothesay  were 
thus  married  to  the  representatives  of  the  three  Douglas  families  of  Douglas, 
Angus,  and  Dalkeith. 


The  Earl  of  Douglas,  as  well  as  his  cousins  of  Angus  and  Dalkeith,  had 
thus  every  motive  to  preserve  the  life  of  Rothesay,  and  when  the  Earl  of 
Douglas  was  charged  along  with  Albany  as  the  murderer  of  the  Prince,  it 
is  not  surprising  that  the  charge  utterly  broke  down,  and  that  the  accused 
received  an  ample  exculpation.  Indeed,  all  the  romance  which  novelists, 
founding  upon  the  fables  of  Boece,  have  woven  round  the  untimely  death  of 
this  ill-fated  Prince,  vanish  before  the  light  furnished  by  the  legal  evidence 
bearing  upon  the  case,  as  well  as  the  testimony  of  contemporary  historians. 

The  death  of  his  son  was  a  severe  blow  to  the  infirm  King,  who  beheld 
the  hopes  he  had  cherished  all  shattered,  and  to  a  great  extent  by  his  own 
over-indulgence  to  the  Prince.  The  peculiar  circumstances  in  which  the 
death  of  Kothesay  had  occurred  stirred  the  popular  mind  to  a  feeling  of 
mournful  regret  for  the  sprightly  but  profligate  Prince.  Eumours  were 
raised  of  foul  play  on  the  part  of  the  Duke  of  Albany  and  Earl  of  Douglas 
towards  Eothesay.  The  suspicion  got  abroad,  and  probably  at  the  request 
of  the  accused  it  was  made  the  subject  of  a  judicial  investigation  by 
the  Parliament  which  met  at  Edinburgh  on  the  16th  of  May  1402  and 
following  days,  when  Albany  and  Douglas  were  declared  to  have  been  un- 
justly suspected.  To  set  the  matter  finally  at  rest,  the  King  himself,  on 
the  20th  May  1402,  caused  letters  to  be  prepared  under  the  Great  Seal, 
which  embodied  the  result  of  the  investigation  by  the  Parliament.  The 
letters  recited  that  the  Duke  of  Albany  and  Earl  of  Douglas  had  caused 
the  Duke  of  Eothesay  to  be  arrested  and  placed  in  the  castle  of  St.  Andrews, 
afterwards  at  Falkland,  where  he  is  known  to  have  departed  this  life  by 
Divine  Providence,  and  not  otherwise.  The  document  proceeds  to  relate 
that  the  Duke  and  Earl  compeared  before  the  Parliament,  and  on  being 
accused  before  the  King  and  questioned  by  him,  admitted  that  they  had 
arrested   the   Duke   of  Eothesay,  and  that  he   had  died  in  their  custody. 


Their  reasons  for  the  arrest,  which  were   said   to  be  concerned  with   the 

public  welfare,  they  intimated  privately  to  the  King,  who  did  not  think 

fit  to  make  them  known  in  the  present  circumstances.     All  things  being 

taken  into  consideration,   and   deliberately   and   gravely   discussed   by  the 

Parliament,  the  King  openly  and  publicly  declared  in  Parliament  that  his 

brother  Eobert,  and  his  son-in-law  Archibald,  were  innocent  and  free  of 

the  charge  of  treason,  and  from  every  charge  of  blame,  rancour,  or  injury 

which  might  be  imputed  to  them  in  connection  with  this  event.     The  King 

further   declares   that  whatever   indignation   or   offence   he   had   conceived 

against   them   in   this   matter,   he   now   voluntarily,   from   his  own  certain 

knowledge,    and    in    accordance ,  with    the   judgment  of    this    Parliament, 

renounced,  and  wished  it  to  be  considered  annihilated  for  ever ;  and  he  ends 

the  declaration  by  strictly  forbidding  all  his  subjects,  whatever  their  state 

or  condition,  to  detract,  by  word  or  deed,  from  the  good  fame  of  the  Duke 

and  Earl.1 

After  the  investigation  thus  made  by  the  Parliament,  and  their  decision, 

as  well  as  that  of  the  father  of  the  Prince  himself;  considering  also  the 

facts  stated  by  the  historians  of  the  time,  that  the  Prince  was  taken  by 

command  of  his  father,   and   only  placed   in   ward   at  Falkland   after   the 

Council  had   agreed   that   it   should   be   so ;   and   further,  considering   the 

great   attachment   of  the   Duke   of  Albany   to   his   brother   King   Eobert, 

and  the  high  character  which  is  given  to  him  by  his  contemporaries,  he 

must  be  freed  from  the  imputation  of  causing  the  death  of  his  nephew  the 

Duke  of  Pothesay.     There  is  not  a  shadow  of  anything  like  proof  to  show 

that  he  was  guilty  of  such  a  crime;  none  of  the  attendant  circumstances 

can  be  legitimately  construed  as   pointing  to  his   guilt.      Albany  did  but 

his  duty  to  his  country,  his  King,  and  the  Prince  himself,  by  putting  him 

1  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  5S2. 
VOL.  1.  Z 


under  the  restraint  which  his  own  father  authorised,  but  was  himself  too 
weak  to  impose,  and  it  is  a  great  injustice  to  the  memory  of  this  famous 
Regent  to  affirm  that  because  the  Prince  died  under  his  roof  he  was  guilty 
of  his  murder.  No  less  is  it  a  most  unworthy  slur  against  the  Scottisli 
nobility  to  insinuate  that  though  they  believed  the  Duke  of  Albany  guilty, 
they  were  afraid  to  raise  their  voice  against  him.  This  accords  ill  with  the 
known  disposition  of  the  noblemen  of  that  age,  who,  if  they  were  in  some 
respects  rude,  had  at  least  something  of  rough  honesty  at  a  time  when 
refined  diplomacy  had  less  place.  Nor  was  the  Duke  of  Albany  the 
overbearing  tyrant  which  he  is  represented  to  be,  for  from  the  Exchequer 
Bolls  we  find  that  the  Duke  was  frequently  taken  to  task  by  the 
Exchequer  Auditors,  and  money  refused  to  him  by  them.  Was  it  likely 
that  the  proud  nobility  could  be  more  easily  intimidated  than  these  officers 
of  the  Crown,  who  were  probably  appointed  by  Albany  himself  as  Kegent  ? 
Those  who  have  defamed  the  memory  of  the  Duke  ought  at  least  to  have 
founded  on  facts  which  might  stand  the  light  of  research ;  but  not  a  single 
fact  has  been  produced  to  prove  that  Albany  was  guilty  of  the  murder  of 

The   Duke  of  Albany   had   taken   advantage    of   a    short   truce   which 
followed  the  retreat  of  the  English  from  Edinburgh  to  obtain  from  England 

DO  o 

renewed  supplies  of  grain  and  malt.  On  his  behalf  two  merchants  obtained 
a  safe-conduct  from  the  King  of  England  to  enable  them  to  purchase 
an  hundred  quarters  of  each  of  these  commodities  and  convey  them  to 
Scotland.  At  the  same  time,  and  bearing  the  same  date  as  the  safe-conduct 
for  the  merchants,  11th  February  1401,  permission  was  obtained  for  John  of 
Cornton,  chaplain  to  the  Duke  of  Albany,  Henry  of  Wedale,  John  Portere, 
Richard  Johnesone,  Nicholas  of  the  Hall,  and  John  Levenax,  with  six 
servants,  to  proceed  to  different  parts  of  England  on  the  business  of  the  Duke 


of  Albany.1  Another  safe-conduct  was  granted  on  the  1st  September,  the 
same  year,  at  the  special  request  of  the  Duke,  for  six  of  his  retainers,  Henry 
of  Wedall,  William  Ydil,  Bichard  Johanson,  John  of  the  Chamber,  John 
Porter,  and  John  of  Levenax,  and  six  servants,  to  procure  two  sets  of  armour 
from  London  for  the  Duke's  own  use,  also  twelve  hogsheads  of  wine  and 
four  hundred  quarters  of  grain.2 

Duke  Eobert  was  appealed  to  by  the  burghers  of  Perth  and  Dundee  to 
act  as  arbiter  in  a  dispute  between  them  as  to  their  rights  to  purchase  the 
cargoes  of  ships  trading  on  a  venture  and  entering  the  Firth  of  Tay.  The 
burgesses  of  Perth  laid  claim  to  this  as  an  exclusive  right,  averring  that  no 
such  ship  should  discharge  her  merchandise  before  reaching  the  Bridge  of 
Tay.  Against  this  the  Dundee  burgesses  stoutly  reclaimed,  stating  that  they 
had  a  free  haven  for  all  such  ships.  Both  burghs  bound  themselves  to  receive 
the  award  as  final.  At  the  meeting  of  Council  the  procurators  of  both  burghs 
were  present,  and  the  burgesses  of  Dundee  were  successful  in  obtaining  a 
decree  authorising  them  to  buy  any  ships  on  trading  ventures  that  were  willing 
to  put  in  at  their  port,  notwithstanding  the  claims  made  by  Perth.  In  the 
award,  which  was  given  in  the  Friars'  Church  of  Edinburgh,  on  19th  May 
1402,  the  Duke  only  designs  himself  Chamberlain  of  Scotland.  There  were 
with  him  twTo  bishops,  a  number  of  knights,  and  others  to  form  a  Council.3 

It  would  appear,  however,  that  on  the  expiry  of  the  Duke  of  Eothesay's 
period  of  lieutenancy,  the  Duke  of  Albany  was  again  created  governor  of  the 
realm  under  his  brother  the  King.  He  began  by  taking  steps  to  avenge  the 
inroads  which  the  English,  under  the  leadership  of  the  Percies  and  the  Earl 
of  March,  had  been  making  since  the  departure  of  the  latter  from  Scotland. 
Humours  of  an  intended  invasion  by  the  Duke  of  Albany  and  Earl  of  Douglas 

1   Rotuli  Scotise,  vol.  ii.  p.  156.  3  Charters,   etc.,  relating  to  the  Burgh  of 

-  Ibid.  p.  159.  Dundee,  p.  IS. 


reached  Westminster.  The  King  of  England  instructed  his  northern  sheriffs 
to  prepare  for  the  fray,  by  letters  dated  23d  May  1402.1  The  only  conflict 
that  then  followed  was  that  at  Nesbit  Moor  on  22d  June,  where  a  small  body 
of  the  Scots,  under  the  command  of  Sir  Patrick  Hepburn  of  Hailes,  was 
vanquished  by  March  and  Percy.2  To  revenge  this  defeat  the  Earl  of  Douglas 
collected  his  forces,  and  requested  the  counsel  and  help  of  the  Governor,  as 
he  was  desirous,  if  he  consented,  of  invading  England.  The  Duke  of  Albany 
approved  of  the  Earl's  purpose,  and  sent  along  with  him  his  son  Murdach, 
Master  of  Fife,  and  the  Earls  of  Angus  and  Moray.  Having  mustered  an 
army  of  about  ten  thousand  men,  they  entered  England  and  ravaged  the 
country  as  far  as  Neweastle-on-Tyne,  but  on  their  return  were  intercepted  by 
Percy,  who,  counselled  by  the  Earl  of  March,  had  delayed  his  attack  till  the 
Scots,  laden  with  booty,  had  commenced  their  retreat.  On  observing  the 
English  posted  in  front  of  him,  the  Earl  of  Douglas  drew  up  his  troops  in  a 
compact  phalanx  on  an  eminence  called  Homildon  Hill,  a  disposition  which 
proved  fatal  to  the  Scots,  as  it  exposed  them  to  the  shafts  of  the  English 
bowmen.  Great  slaughter  was  made  by  the  arrows  among  the  troops  of 
Douglas  before  they  could  strike  a  blow  in  return,  and  when,  maddened  by 
the  galling  fire,  they  broke  their  ranks  and  rushed  forward  to  meet  the 
enemy,  it  was  at  a  great  disadvantage.  They  were  entirely  defeated,  many 
prisoners  being  taken,  among  whom  was  Murdach  Stewart,  the  eldest  son  of 
the  Duke  of  Albany.  The  Earls  of  Douglas,  Moray,  and  Angus,  and  a  great 
number  of  noblemen,  were  also  taken,  and  on  receiving  news  of  the  victory, 
the  King  of  England  sent  special  instructions  to  the  Earl  of  Northumberland, 
and  the  two  leaders  of  the  English  troops,  that  none  of  the  prisoners,  what- 
ever their  rank  or  station,  were  to  be  released  on  ransom.3 

1  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  257.  'z  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  433. 

3  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  278. 

SIEGE  OF  COCKLAWS,  1403.  181 

After  his  victories  at  iSTesbit  Moor  and  Homilclon,  Percy  proposed  to  the 
Earl  of  March  that  they  should  lay  waste  the  whole  of  the  south  of  Scotland, 
beginning  at  the  Marches  at  least  as  far  north  as  the  Firth  of  Forth,  or 
Scottish  Sea  as  it  was  then  called.  On  March  consenting,  their  united  forces 
laid  siege  to  the  Castle  of  Cocklaws  in  Teviotdale,  which  was  commanded 
by  John  Greenlaw,  its  captain.  The  fortalice  sustained  the  siege  bravely, 
until  the  captain,  seeing  no  hope  of  succour,  agreed  to  capitulate,  unless 
relieved  by  the  King  or  Governor  in  six  weeks.  The  terms  were  agreed 
to,  and  Percy  withdrew  from  the  siege.  Meanwhile,  John  Gledstanes  of 
that  Ilk,  who  was  lord  of  the  castle,  bore  the  tidings  of  the  siege  and  treaty 
to  the  King,  then  at  Buchan,  who  sent  him  with  letters  to  the  Duke  of 
Albany  at  Falkland,  instructing  him  to  call  a  council  and  consult  what  was 
to  be  done.  The  Duke,  on  hearing  the  tidings,  was  amazed,  and  blamed 
the  stupidity  of  the  captain,  but  forbade  him  upon  pain  of  death  to  imple- 
ment the  treaty.  He  commanded  him  to  persevere  in  holding  out  the  castle, 
in  the  hope  that  it  would  be  relieved,  and  he  would  soon  inform  him  as  to 
what  was  finally  to  be  done.  As  the  shortness  of  the  time  did  not  permit 
the  convocation  of  Parliament,  the  Governor  wrote  to  the  more  sagacious 
prelates  and  magnates  in  the  neighbourhood  to  meet  with  him  at  Falkland, 
and  advise  what  was  to  be  done.  At  the  conference  all  expressed  the  opinion 
that  the  fortress  should  be  given  up  to  the  English,  as  it  did  not  seem  worth 
while  imperilling  the  safety  of  the  kingdom  on  its  account.  On  hearing  this, 
the  Duke,  not  a  little  indignant,  arose  in  their  midst,  and  pointing  to 
his  page,  Patrick  of  Kinbuck,  who  was  standing  at  a  distance,  exclaimed 
warmly,  "  I  vow  to  God  and  St.  Fillan  that  if  in  life  I  shall  be  there  on 
the  appointed  day,  although  none  but  my  boy  Pate  should  accompany  me."1 

1  St.  Fillan  appears  to  have  been  the  patron       there  was  a  chapel  dedicated  to  that  saint, 
saint    of    Albany.      In    his  Castle    of    Doune       and  on  the  banks  of  the  river  Teith,  a  short 


All  were  astonished  at  the  warmth  of  the  Duke,  and  with  tears  of  joy 
replied,  "  May  God  confirm  this  your  purpose,  and  those  of  us  who  are 
soldiers,  placing  our  trust  in  the  Most  High,  shall  not  he  wanting  in  this 
important  business."  The  Governor  immediately  afterwards  assembled 
an  army  and  proceeded  to  Cocklaws ;  but  before  coming  thither,  he,  among 
other  achievements,  took  the  Castle  of  Innerwick  in  East  Lothian,  and  razed 
it  to  the  ground. 

Percy  had  departed  from  Cocklaws  soon  after  the  making  of  the  treaty 
with  its  captain,  as  his  real  purpose  in  raising  his  forces  seems  to  have  been 
to  contest  the  right  of  Henry  the  Fourth  of  England  to  the  throne.  An 
extensive  insurrection  had  been  planned,  but  some  of  the  conspirators 
withdrew  from  the  plot,  and  the  English  King,  having  received  timely 
information,  met  the  troops  of  Percy  at  Shrewsbury.  In  the  engagement 
which  followed  Percy  was  killed,  and  the  news  of  his  death  was  intimated  to 
the  Duke  of  Albany  on  his  arrival  at  Cocklaws.  He  thereupon  invested  the 
fortress  with  his  army,  and  having  intimated  the  tidings  withdrew,  and 
immediately  afterwards  dismissed  it.1  The  army  led  by  the  Duke  is  said  to 
have  consisted  of  fifty  thousand  horse  and  almost  as  many  foot  soldiers, 
among  whom  there  seems  to  have  been  an  impression  that  there  was  an 
understanding  between  Percy  and  the  Governor.  However,  the  Duke  of 
Albany  by  this  movement  prevented  any  claim  which  England  might 
afterwards  have  made  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  treaty  made  between  Percy 
and  the  captain  of  Cocklaws.  Soon  afterwards  a  truce  was  arranged  between 
England  and  France,  and  on  a  suggestion  being  made  that  Scotland  as  the 
ally  of  France  might  be  included,  the  King  of  England  commenced  negotia- 

way  below  the  Castle  of  Doune,   there  was       within  and  without  the  Castle  of  Doune. 

another  chapel  dedicated  to  the  same  saint. 

They  were   called  the  chapels  of  St.   Fillan  '  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  pp.  435-4S8. 



tions  for  peace,  with  the  result  that  a  truce  between  England  and  Scotland 
was  also  agreed  to.1 

When  Walter  Trail,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  died,  Thomas  Stewart, 
Archdeacon  of  St.  Andrews,  a  brother  of  King  Eobert  and  the  Duke  of 
Albany,  was  chosen  bishop-elect  in  his  place ;  but  before  his  appointment 
was  confirmed  by  the  Pope,  he  was  prevailed  upon  by  Albany  to  decline  the 
office.  It  appears  that  Walter  of  Denniston,  parson  of  Kincardine  O'jSTeil, 
had  occupied  the  Castle  of  Dumbarton  in  the  year  1399,  and  still  held  it  in 
1402,  and  would  not  render  it  to  the  King  unless  he  was  promised  the  see 
of  St.  Andrews.  To  avoid  anything  like  civil  strife,  the  Duke  of  Albany,  as 
remarked,  procured  his  election  by  prevailing  on  his  brother  to  resign,  so  that 
the  parson  might  obtain  it.  Walter  of  Denniston  thereupon  gave  up  the 
castle,  and  obtained  the  bishopric,  but  did  not  long  enjoy  it,  as  he  died  in  the 
end  of  the  same  year.2  The  castle  was  afterwards  in  the  hands  of  the  King, 
who  held  his  Court  there  in  the  close  of  the  year  1403.3 

The  Duke  of  Albany  continued  to  attend  to  the  duties  of  his  office 
as  the  King's  lieutenant,4  and  is  generally  found  at  the  court  of  his 
royal  brother,  now  at  Linlithgow,  now  at  Eothesay,  at  Perth,  and  other 

So  many  were  the  duties  of  the  Duke  at  this  time  that  all  of  them 
could  not  be  attended  to  by  him  in  person.  Some  were  deputed  to  others, 
and  some  were  left  undone.  In  1403,  when  the  first  year  of  Albany's 
lieutenancy  since  the  death  of  the  Duke  of  Eothesay  had  expired,  there  was 
a  deficiency  in  the  exchequer,  and  the  fee  for  the  office  had  not  been  paid  ; 
whereupon  the  Duke  complained  and  protested  for  its  payment,  both  for  the 
past  year  and  for  the  future,  according  to  the  resolution  of  the  King  and 

1  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  viii.  pp.  3 IS,  303. 

2  Wyntotm's  Cronykil,  vol.  ii.  pp.  389-399. 

3  Antiquities  of  Aberdeen,  vol.  ii.  p.  140. 

4  ReL'istrnm  Aberdonense,  vol.  i.  p.  209. 


Parliament.  He  explained  that  for  a  whole  year  he  had  laboured  and 
incurred  expenses  in  the  discharge  of  this  office  of  lieutenant,  but  as  he  had 
not  held  the  Statute  Courts,  he  had  not  been  able  to  levy  any  fees.  Some  of 
these  courts  he  had  assigned  to  deputies,  and  at  the  instance  of  his  Privy 
Council  had  delayed  others,  and  there  were  no  other  sources  of  royal  income 
from  which  he  could  uplift  his  fee.1  The  sum  of  £182,  0s.  6|-d.  was  paid 
to  him  in  the  following  year  in  part  payment  of  his  services  as  the  King's 
lieutenant,  but  strictly  on  condition  that  he  should  produce  at  next 
auditing  of  Exchequer  an  account  of  his  fees  for  holding  Statute  Courts, 
and  all  other  fees  of  his  office.2  The  Duke  was  also  himself  frequently 
engaged  in  the  work  of  the  auditors  of  the  Treasury,  and  received  several 
payments  on  that  account.3  He  also  discharged  part  of  the  duties 
pertaining  to  the  office  of  his  son  Murdach,  who  had  been  created  justiciar 
north  of  the  Forth,  but  was  at  that  time  a  prisoner  in  England.  For 
holding  five  ayres  between  the  9th  of  July  1404  and  the  27th  March  1406, 
the  Duke  of  Albany  received  a  payment  of  £100.  In  the  absence  of  his 
son  Murdach,  the  Duke  protested  for  the  payment  of  400  marks  of  arrears 
of  pension  due  to  him  by  the  custumars  of  Aberdeen.4 

Both  the  Duke  of  Albany  and  the  King  were  naturally  desirous  for 
the  restoration  of  Murdach  Stewart  and  the  Earl  of  Douglas,  also  a  prisoner 
in  England,  and  Sir  David  Fleming  and  Sir  William  Murehead  were  sent 
there  as  commissioners  to  negotiate  for  their  release,  and  to  arrange  a  peace 
between  the  kingdoms.  The  King  of  England  met  the  wishes  of  King 
Pobert  by  appointing  commissioners  on  his  own  side  to  confer  with  those 
of  the  Scots,5  and  a  truce  was  entered  into,  to  last  until  the  following  Easter,6 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  589.  4  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  G45. 

2  Ibid.  p.  610.  5  Rotuli  Scotias,  vol.  ii.  p.  167. 

3  Ibid.  pp.  644-64".  c  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  363. 


but  no  progress  was  made  towards  releasing  the  prisoners.  Another  com- 
missioner, Eothesay  Herald,  King-of-Arms,  seems  to  have  been  despatched 
to  the  English  Court  some  time  afterwards  with  a  letter  from  the  Duke 
of  Albany,  and  to  have  obtained  for  Murdach  Stewart  the  privilege  of  being 
kept  at  the  Court  of  King  Henry  the  Fourth,  to  which  arrangement,  although 
it  would  in  due  time  increase  the  amount  of  ransom  by  the  greater  expense 
of  residence,  the  Duke  of  Albany  agreed.  Eothesay  Herald  was  again  sent 
to  Westminster  with  another  letter  from  the  Duke,  who  thanks  the  King 
of  England  for  his  consideration  to  his  son,  and  refers  to  the  bearer  for  an  ex- 
planation why  the  day  appointed  for  conferring  anent  a  truce  had  not  been  kept. 
This  reference  fixes  the  date  of  the  letter  as  the  year  1404.1  The  original 
letter  in  Latin  is  in  the  British  Museum.     The  following  is  a  translation : — 

Most  Excellent  Prince, — I  believe  it  is  sufficiently  known  to  your  Highness  how 
I  lately  wrote  to  you  by  Eothesay  Herald,  King-of-Arms,  that  I  was  most  willing  that 
you  should  keep  my  son,  Murdach  Stewart,  your  kinsman,  if  it  please  you,  with  you  in 
your  honourable  court,  and  that  I  would  rather  have  a  conference  with  yourself  upon 
his  release  than  with  any  of  your  subjects.  And  now  I  have  learned  by  messengers, 
that  after  he  came  to  your  honourable  presence  you  caused  him  to  be  treated 
honourably,  and  with  favour,  for  which  I  now  thank  your  excellency  from  my  heart, 
requesting  your  excellency  to  continue  the  same  good  treatment  towards  him  in  future. 
Moreover,  most  excellent  Prince,  your  letters  last  presented  to  me  by  the  said  Rothesay 
I  have  received  thankfully  as  was  meet,  and  have  fully  understood  the  credence  given 
to  him  by  you,  how  graciously  you  replied  with  regard  to  the  release  of  my  foresaid 
son,  that  if  I  should  send  any  of  my  people  to  your  royal  Majesty  concerning  the  same 
and  other  business  interesting  me,  you  would,  on  their  arrival,  act  so  kindly  and 
graciously  in  these  matters,  that  I  should  have  reason  to  be  content.  I  also  return 
thanks  as  much  as  I  can  to  your  royal  Highness,  both  for  your  favourable  audience  and 
for  the  kind  conference  held  with  the  said  Rothesay  on  different  occasions,  on  my  part, 

1  Kymer's  Fcerlera,  vol.  viii.  pp.  345,  34S. 
VOL.  I.  2  A 


about  the  foresaid  matters  and  others  most  tenderly  touching  the  state  of  both 
kingdoms,  as  you  know,  and  that  you  'would  have  him  excused  if  you  please,  for  that 
he  has  not  yet  come  to  your  Majesty  as  he  promised  to  you,  as  I  am  given  to  understand 
that  by  a  certain  cause  he  had  been  prevented,  as  he  can  clearly  explain  to  you  by  word 
of  mouth  ;  and  him  I  thought  fit  at  present  specially  to  commission  to  your  Majesty 
upon  certain  matters  touching  my  said  son,  and  divers  other  things  which  have  been 
previously  spoken  of  between  you  and  him,  and  also  to  intimate  to  your  Highness  how 
that  last  day  on  the  Marches,  in  the  month  of  February  last  past,  assigned  for  holding 
a  conference  between  the  commissioners  of  my  dread  sovereign  the  King  and  your 
commissioners,  by  reason  of  an  unforeseen  accident  failed  and  miscarried,  as  the  said 
Rothesay  by  word  of  mouth  can  more  fully  explain  to  you.  To  whom,  in  what  he  has 
to  say  concerning  the  said  matters  and  others  on  my  part,  kindly  deign  to  give  audience 
and  firm  credence.  And  if  there  be  anything  useful  to  be  done  in  these  parts,  be 
pleased  to  inform  me  of  the  same  by  the  said  King-of-Arms  or  other  messengers,  and  I 
will  willingly  perform  them  to  the  best  of  my  power.  May  the  Most  High  be  pleased 
to  preserve  your  royal  Majesty  for  the  peace  and  quiet  of  your  people.  Written  at  our 
Manor  of  Falkland,  the  second  day  of  the  month  of  June  (1404). 
Your  kinsman,  if  it  please  you, 

Robert,  Duke  of  Albany, 
Brother-german  of  the  King  of  Scotland,  and  his  Lieutenant-General. 

To  the  most  excellent  and  most  serene  Prince,  Lord  Henry,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
King  of  the  English.1 

Communications  of  an  epistolary  nature  seem  to  have  been  at  that 
time  more  frequent  between  the  two  kingdoms  than  the  scanty  number  of 
manuscripts  now  preserved  would  indicate.  From  the  same  source  we 
obtain  another  letter  by  the  Duke  of  Albany,  as  the  King's  lieutenant,  on  a 
matter  which  employed  the  pens  of  not  only  the  Duke,  but  the  King  himself, 
the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  the  Earl  of  Crawford,  and  David  Fleming,2  while 
1  National  mss.  of  Scotland,  Part  II.  No.  57.  "  Ibid.  No.  56. 

BREACH  OF  TRUCE  BY  ENGLAND,   1405.  187 

Commissioners  were  also  sent  to  make  verbal  explanations.     A  translation 

of  this  letter,1  which  was  written  in  the  beginning  of  the  year  1405,  is  also 

here  given  : — 

Most  Illustrious  Prince  and  Lord, — May  it  please  your  serene  Highness  to  know 

that  in  these  days  last  bygone,  namely,  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  month  of  December, 

some  of  your  lieges,  with  an  armed  barge,  attacked,  took,  and  carried  off  with  them  a 

certain  ship  coming  from  the  parts  of  Flanders  laden  with  divers  goods  and  effects  to  the 

city  of  St.  Andrews,  worth  and  appraised  by  the  common  estimation  of  trustworthy 

merchants  at  one  thousand  pounds  of  sterlings  and  upwards,  within  the  bounds  of  the 

rivers  and  territory  of  my  Lord  the  King,  and  landed  at  the  port  of  Halyeland  in  your 

kingdom,  with  the  said  goods  and  ship,  contrary  to  the  truce  last  agreed  on  and  entered 

into  and  sworn  on  both  sides  by  you  and  my  Lord  the  King  ;  and  since  my  Lord  the 

King  always  is  and  has  been  in  the  intention  of  keeping  the  said  truce  unimpaired  and 

undisturbed  both  by  him  and  his  people,  he  is  confident  that  you  ought  to  do  the  same 

in  all  respects,  because  by  the  grace  of  God,  not  the  smallest  offence  shall  be  wrought 

against  the  effect  of  the  foresaid  truce  by  my  said  Lord  or  his  subjects  as  far  as  in  them 

lies.     I  therefore  beg  and  entreat  your  serene  Highness,  as  earnestly  as  I  can,  to  be 

pleased  to  cause  the  said  ship  with  its  goods  to  be  restored  and  made  good,  so  that  in 

this  matter  the  honour  of  your  royal  Majesty  may  be  preserved  unhurt.     Upon  which 

my  Lord  the  King  also  writes  to  your  serene  Highness  more  fully  and  at  length.      But, 

most  serene  Prince  and  Lord,  for  furnishing  further  and  fuller  information  to  you  in  the 

premises,  there  goes  to  the  presence  of  your  serene  Highness,  Thomas  Ra,  citizen  of 

St.  Andrews,  with  certain  others  joined  with  him,  whom  deign  to  receive  very  graciously 

on  our  recommendation,  and  aid  them  in  the  successful  and  desired  recovery  of  the  said 

goods  and  ship  by  your  opportune  royal  favours.      May  the  Most  High  preserve  your 

royal  Majesty  through  happier  times.      Written  at  Stirling,  the  tenth  day  of  January 


Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  Earl  of  Fife  and  of  Menteith, 

Brother-germau  of  the  King  of  Scotland,  and  his  Lieutenant-General. 

To  the  most  excellent  Lord  Henry. 

1  National  MRS.  of  Scotland,  Part  II.  No.  55. 

188  DEATH  OF  KING  ROBERT  THE  THIRD,   1406. 

Grief  for  the  death  of  his  eldest  son  had  told  heavily  on  the  feeble  mind 
of  Eobert  the  Third,  but  his  spirit  was  utterly  broken  by  a  disaster  which  now 
befell  his  only  surviving  son,  Prince  James,  a  youth  of  fourteen  years,  and 
an  object  of  much  solicitude  to  him.  James  had  been  placed  under  the  care 
of  Henry  Wardlaw,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  a  learned  and  judicious  prelate, 
and  had  for  his  companion  Henry  Percy,  son  of  the  Percy  slain  at  Shrews- 
bury, a  lad  about  the  same  age  as  himself.  The  fears  of  the  King  for  his 
son's  safety,  and  his  desire  to  secure  for  him  as  perfect  an  education  as 
possible,  led  him  to  send  James  to  the  French  Court.  On  his  way  to  France, 
the  Prince,  with  his  guardian  and  attendants,  was  taken  by  an  English  vessel 
off  Flamborough  Head,  and  conveyed  to  the  King  at  London,  where  he  was 
placed  in  the  Tower.  The  unfortunate  Eobert  received  the  news  of  his  son's 
capture  while  sitting  at  supper  in  his  castle  of  Eothesay  in  Bute,  and  was 
so  affected  with  the  disaster  that  he  rejected  all  food,  refused  to  be  comforted, 
and,  sinking  under  his  grief,  died  on  the  4th  of  April  1406.1 

The  Earl  of  Northumberland  and  his  grandson  Henry  Percy  had,  after 
the  failure  of  the  conspiracy  against  King  Henry  the  Fourth  of  England, 
betaken  themselves  for  safety  to  the  Castle  of  St.  Andrews,  where  they,  witli 
another  English  nobleman,  Lord  Bardolph,  were  kindly  entertained.  One 
historian  asserts  that  the  Duke  of  Albany,  in  order  to  procure  the  release 
of  his  son  Murdach  and  the  Earl  of  Douglas,  resolved  to  deliver  up  the 
Earl  of  Northumberland  and  Lord  Bardolph  to  the  King  of  England,  and 
adds  that  the  base  project  was  only  accidentally  discovered  by  Sir  David 
Fleming,  who  revealed  it  to  the  two  noblemen,  and  counselled  flight.2 
Although  no  authority  is  given  for  the  assertion,  it  affords  occasion  to  the 
historian  again  to  denounce  the  Duke  of  Albany's  treachery.  So  prejudiced 
is  this  author  against  Albany,  that  he  charges  him  with  almost  every  evil 
1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  439.  2  Tytler's  History  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  451. 



which  happened  in  his  time.  Even  a  Lollard  could  not  be  taken  to  the  stake 
but  the  Duke  of  Albany  is  held  to  have  incited  the  clergy  to  the  cruel  deed, 
although  churchmen  scarcely  required  the  State  to  stir  them  up  to  this 
work.1  Wyntoun's  account  of  how  the  Earl  of  Northumberland  and  Lord 
Bardolph  met  their  fate  is  ignored  by  this  historian,  for  the  reason,  perhaps, 
that  the  share  assigned  to  Albany  in  the  matter  does  not  accord  with  his 
own  notions  of  the  Duke's  character.  Wyntoun  relates  that  the  old  Earl 
of  Northumberland,  when  he  could  no  longer  find  safety  by  remaining  in 
England,  sought  it  by  travelling  in  France,  and  afterwards  in  Scotland,  where 
he  was  honourably  received  by  the  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews.  On  the  invitation 
of  Albany,  Northumberland  and  Bardolph  removed  from  St.  Andrews  to 
Perth,  so  that  being  farther  from  the  sea  they  might  be  less  liable  to  the 
dangers  of  capture.  While  they  remained  in  Perth  they  were  kindly  treated 
by  the  Duke ;  and  when  letters  came  from  England,  inviting  them  back  to 
their  own  country,  he  strongly  advised  them  not  to  go,  but  to  remain  where 
they  were  for  some  time  longer,  as  he  suspected  it  was  a  stratagem  to  entrap 
them.  They,  however,  resolved  to  go,  as  they  did  not  think  any  Englishman 
north  of  York  would  seek  to  injure  them.  Albany  put  no  obstacle  in  their 
way.  They  went,  and  were  put  to  death  by  Kichard  Eukby,  one  of  the 
vassals  of  the  Earl  of  Northumberland,  who  had  sent  the  invitations,  and 
after  their  death  he  cut  off  their  heads,  and  sent  them  to  the  King  of 
England.2     The  account  given  by  Fordun  is  to  the  same  effect.3 

Walsingham,  it  is  true,  narrates  the  story  somewhat  differently.  He 
says  that  the  Earl  of  Northumberland  and  Lord  Bardolph,  on  their  flight 
from  England,  were  received  by  Sir  David  Fleming  into  Berwick,  but 
afterwards  escaped  from  Scotland  on  being  warned  by  the  latter  that  the 

1  Tytler's   History   of    Scotland,    vol. 
pp.  23,  24. 

2  Wyntoun's  Cronykil,  vol  ii.  pp.  410,  411. 

3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  441. 


Scots  were  conspiring  to  hand  them  over  to  King  Henry  in  exchange  for 
certain  prisoners,  whom  he  does  not  name.  On  this  account,  he  adds,  Sir 
David  Fleming  was  slain  by  the  Scots,  and  the  Scots  themselves  were 
provoked  to  civil  war,  so  that  by  reason  of  the  weakness  caused  by  this 
discord  they  were  compelled  to  seek  annual  truces  from  England.  One  such 
truce  having  been  agreed  to  by  land,  the  Scots  sent  the  son  and  heir  of 
their  King  by  sea  to  France,  etc.1 

But  Walsingham's  statement  may  justly  be  dismissed  on  account  of  its 
inaccuracies.  There  is  no  evidence  of  any  civil  strife  in  Scotland  following 
on  the  death  of  Sir  David  Fleming — nothing  beyond  the  single  battle  in 
which  he  met  his  fate.  No  truces  whatever  were  made  with  England  on 
account  of  such  contention.  The  death  of  Fleming  did  not  occur  until 
Prince  James  had  set  sail  for  France,  as  that  knight  had  accompanied  him 
to  the  ship  at  North  Berwick.  The  truce  under  cover  of  which  the  Prince 
was  despatched  was  one  very  near  its  term  of  expiry,  and  embraced  both  sea 
and  land,  as  is  evident  from  the  treaty  itself,2  and  the  remonstrance  made  by 
the  Scots  immediately  after  the  capture  of  the  Prince  against  its  infraction  by 
sea.3  As  to  the  warning  said  to  have  been  given  to  the  two  English  Lords 
by  Sir  David  Fleming,  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  Earl  of  Northumber- 
land fled  for  his  life  from  the  Scottish  Court,  and  yet  left  his  grandson  and 
heir  there  to  be  honourably  maintained  and  educated  for  so  many  years. 

The  death  of  Sir  David  Fleming  is  attributed  by  some  modern  historians 
to  the  malignant  resentment  of  the  Duke  of  Albany  against  Fleming,  for 
his  reputed  assistance  in  the  escape  of  Northumberland  and  the  Prince, 
although,  if  that  were  true  in  the  case  of  the  latter,  he  unwittingly  co-oper- 
ated in  facilitating  what  one  suggests  was  a  concerted  plot  between  Albany 

1  Walsingham,  ed.  1574,  p.  41".  2  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  363. 

3  Ibid.  p.  450. 


and  the  English  King  for  the  capture  of  the  Prince.  Yet  Fleming  was 
allied  to  the  Duke  of  Albany  by  the  marriage  of  his  son  Sir  Malcolm 
Fleming  and  Lady  Elizabeth  Stewart,  Albany's  daughter,  and  was  moreover 
held  in  the  highest  repute  by  both  King  Eobert  and  the  Duke,  and 
employed  by  them  in  the  most  weighty  concerns  of  the  State.  Proof  is 
needed  for  the  assertion  that  Albany  caused  Fleming  to  be  put  to  death, 
but  none  is  afforded.  Both  Wyntoun  and  Bower  record  the  circumstances 
of  Fleming's  death,  yet  nowhere  is  the  remotest  hint  given  of  Albany's  con- 
nection with  it;  and  the  language  of  the  latter  historian  plainly  indicates 
its  cause  to  have  been  a  private  quarrel  betwixt  Sir  Alexander  Seton,  who 
afterwards  became  Lord  of  Gordon,  and  Sir  David  Fleming.  After  stating 
the  fact  of  Sir  David's  convoying  the  Prince  to  the  Bass,  and  that  there 
was  with  him  a  strong  party  of  the  chiefs  of  the  Lothians,  he  adds  that 
in  returning  he  was  pursued  by  Sir  James  Douglas,  second  son  of  the  Earl 
of  Douglas,  and  overtaken  at  Langhirdmanstone  Moor,  where,  after  a  severe 
battle,  he  was  slain  on  the  14th  of  February  1406.  Divers  nobles  and 
knights  were  taken,  but  they  were  afterwards  released.  Sir  James  Douglas 
was  instigated  to  the  deed  by  Sir  Alexander  Seton.1 

The  Duke  of  Albany  is  altogether  misrepresented  by  those  writers  who 
present  him  to  posterity  as  a  man  of  unscrupulous  ambition,  who  rejoiced 
in  the  miseries  of  others  when  they  helped  forward  his  own  aims,  and  was 
deterred  by  no  crime,  if  its  perpetration  could  only  secure  their  accomplish- 
ment. Had  the  character  of  Albany  been  that  given  him  by  popular  writers 
of  our  own  day,  he  could  never  have  retained  the  confidence  and  good-will 
of  the  nobility,  the  churchmen,  and  the  general  community  of  Scotland,  as 
lie  did  for  a  length  of  time  far  exceeding  that  of  any  other  Governor  who 
swayed  the  destinies  of  the  country 

1  Fordun,  a  Goorlall,  vol.  ii.  p.  439. 


Shortly  after  the  death  of  Eobert  the  Third,  in  the  month  of  June  1406, 
the  Three  Estates  of  the  realm  met  in  Parliament,  at  Perth,  and  declared 
Prince  James  to  be  their  true  and  lawful  Kino-  notwithstanding  that  he 
was  detained  in  England  an  unwilling  captive.  By  an  ordinance  of  this 
same  Parliament,  Albany  was  chosen  Governor  of  the  entire  kingdom.  In 
that  same  month  he  was  asked  by  some  Prussian  merchants  to  inquire 
into  a  wanton  attack  by  an  English  war-ship  upon  two  trading  vessels 
which  were  loading  at  the  port  of  Blackness,  in  the  Firth  of  Forth,  so  far 
back  as  the  year  1402.  After  inquiry  he  issued  an  instrument  drawn  up  in 
Latin,  of  which  the  following  is  a  translation  : — 

Eobert,  Duke  of  Albany,  Earl  of  Fife  and  of  Menteitb,  guardian  and  governor 
of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  to  all  to  whose  knowledge  these  present  letters  shall 
come,  greeting  in  the  Lord.  The  laws  claim,  and  reason  persuades,  that  it  is  pious 
and  meritorious  to  bear  testimony  to  the  truth,  that  the  way  of  injury  may  be  thereby 
shut  up  to  evildoers,  and  the  path  of  truth  shine  with  due  light.  Hence  it  is  that 
we,  on  the  special  request  made  to  me  by  letter  by  prudent  and  discreet  men,  the 
councillors  of  the  city  of  Dantzic,  and  others,  merchants  of  the  parts  of  Prussia, 
have  caused  true,  faithful,  and  diligent  information  to  be  taken  upon  oath  of 
trustworthy  men,  from  which  information  it  is  manifestly  known  to  us  that  on  the 
feast  of  the  nativity  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1402,  a  certain 
English  admiral,  namely,  Lord  of  le  Grey  of  Godenoy  (Codnor),  with  a  ship,  equipped 
with  men  of  arms  in  great  numbers  for  war,  came  within  the  Firth  in  the  kingdom 
of  Scotland  as  far  as  the  harbour  commonly  called  of  Blackness,  and  there  hostilely 
attacked  two  ships  laden  with  fine  wheat  meal  and  other  merchandise,  of  which  the 
masters  were  Nicholas  Rotermont  and  Bernard  Johnson  ;  one  of  these  the  foresaid 
Englishmen  took  the  same  night,  namely,  the  ship  of  Rotermont  of  Bremen,  with  the 
sailors  and  the  merchandise  then  in  it,  and  in  the  morning  burned,  near  the  foresaid 
harbour,  the  other  ship  belonging  to  the  foresaid  Bernard,  the  ship  being  first  emptied 
by  them  of  all  goods  and  merchandise,  and  the  sailors  being  either  slain  or  drowned 
in  the  sea.      The  masters  of  the  ships  or  their  men  never  afforded  any  aid,  assistance, 


or  defence  to  the  Scots  against  the  English  unless  by  lawfully  pursuing  their  merchandise. 
And  this  we  make  known  by  the  tenor  of  the  present  letters  to  all  whom  it  concerns, 
or  whom  this  present  matter  touches,  or  may  touch  in  future.  To  which,  for  the 
sake  of  testimony,  we  have  commanded  the  seal  of  our  office  to  be  appended,  at  the 
town  of  Perth,  the  28th  day  of  the  month  of  June,  the  year  of  God  1406. ' 

Among  the  first  acts  of  the  Governor  was  the  opening  of  negotiations 
with  Henry  the  Fourth  of  England  by  the  despatch  of  Bothesay,  King- 
of-Arms,  as  commissioner  for  the  King  and  kingdom  of  Scotland,  to 
the  English  Court,  to  treat  of  the  infractions  of  the  truce  upon  the  sea,2 
and  no  doubt,  as  Crawford  says,  with  special  reference  to  Prince  James's 
capture,  to  inquire  under  what  pretence  of  justice  or  law  he  came  to  be 
taken  in  the  time  of  a  truce.3  Whatever  the  result  of  his  mission  was,  a 
large  and  influential  embassy,  consisting  of  the  Lord  Chancellor  of  Scotland, 
Gilbert,  Bishop  of  Aberdeen,  Eobert,  Bishop  of  Dunkeld,  Sir  David  Lindsay 
Earl  of  Crawford,  Sir  Alexander  Stewart  Earl  of  Mar,  William  Graham  of 
Kincardine,  and  a  hundred  horsemen,  was  sent  into  England  in  the  month 
of  December  of  the  same  year,4  which,  as  it  surpassed  in  dignity  the 
embassies  usually  sent  on  the  subject  of  a  truce,  it  is  natural  to  suppose 
must  have  had  some  much  more  weighty  trust.  That  could  only  be 
negotiations  for  the  liberation  of  their  King;  and  so  it  is  stated  in  the 
account  rendered  by  the  executors  of  the  late  Sir  David  Lindsay,  Earl  of 
Crawford,  chamberlain-depute,  at  Perth,  on  16th  March  1407  : — 

For  the  expenses  of  the  commissioners  sent  into  England  on  the  common  business 
of  the  realm,  about  the  death  of  the  King,  and  afterwards  for  the  liberation  of  the  son 
and  heir  of  our  late  King,  £120.r> 

1   Enclosure  in  a  communication  by  English  3  Officers  of  State,  p.  303. 

commissioners  to  Rupert,  King  of  the  Romans, 
in  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum. 

-  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  450.  5  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  8. 

VOL.  I.  2  B 

Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  461. 


The  only  result  attained,  so  far  as  known,  by  this  embassage,  was 
a  prolongation  of  the  truce  for  another  year.  But  the  fact  of  these 
negotiations  taking  place  proves  the  falseness  of  the  imputations  made 
against  Albany,  who,  while  stigmatised  as  a  usurper  of  the  supreme  power, 
is  represented  as  glorying  in  the  captivity  of  the  Prince,  and  wickedly 
refusing  to  take  any  steps  for  his  release.  On  the  contrary,  the  Duke 
sought  the  restoration  of  Prince  James,  and  availed  himself  of  every 
opportunity  that  offered  for  that  purpose.     This  is  amply  proved  by  facts. 

In  the  Chamberlain's  account  rendered  at  Perth  on  the  20th  May  1409 
from  the  27th  March  1408,  there  occurs  the  following  entry,  which  shows 
that  between  these  two  dates  negotiations  for  the  Prince's  release  had 
been  going  on  : — 

By  payment  made  to  the  Earl  of  Orkney  for  his  labour  in  the  business  of  his 
highness  Prince  James,  son  of  our  King,  at  present  in  England,  £20.* 

Again,  betwixt  the  21st  July  1410  and  the  12th  June  1412,  another 
embassy  had  been  in  England  on  the  same  business.  The  names  of  the 
commissioners  were  John  Stewart,  Lord  of  Lorn,  Master  Eobert  of  Lany, 
Provost  of  St.  Andrews,  and  Sir  John  of  Busby,  Canon  of  Moray,  and  they 
are  mentioned  as  having  been  sent  in  embassage  to  the  King  of  England  to 
treat  for  the  liberation  of  the  King  and  Sir  Murdach  the  Duke's  son.  For 
their  expenses  they  received  £130.2 

These  negotiations  were  frequently  interrupted  by  the  outbreak  of 
hostilities,  but  when,  in  the  early  summer  of  1412,  the  King  of  England 
agreed  to  a  truce  between  the  two  countries,  which  was  to  extend  to  the 
close  of  the  year  1418,3  Albany  at  once  resumed  his  efforts  for  the  release  of 
James.  On  the  1 6th  April  1413,  Henry  received  into  his  safe-conduct  the 
following  persons  as  commissioners  from  the  Duke  of  Albany,  viz.,  Walter, 
1  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  27.       "  Ibid.  p.  48.       3  Eymer'a  Fcedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  737. 

ON  BEHALF  OF  KING  JAMES,  1409-1414.  195 

Bishop  of  Brechin,  William,  Lord  of  Graham,  Alexander  Ogilvy,  Sheriff  of 
Angus,  Master  Robert  of  Lany,  Licentiate  in  Decreets,  and  John  of  Weniyss, 
with  an  escort  of  thirty  persons.  To  these  were  added,  by  separate  safe- 
conducts,  William  Douglas  of  Drumlanrig,  John  of  Dunkeld,  Gilbert  Scott, 
and  John  Sinclair,  with  a  following  of  twenty  persons.  Their  business  was 
to  treat  concerning  the  liberation  of  the  King  of  Scotland  (super  deliberatione 
Begis  Scotife).1  This  embassy  is  proved  to  have  been  in  communication 
with  the  King  of  England,  from  the  renewed  grants  of  safe-conducts  to  Sir 
William  Douglas,  Lord  of  Drumlanrig,  Alexander  Descheles,  and  John  of 
Welles,  who  are  mentioned  as  having  been  lately  in  the  King's  presence, 
treating  with  him  about  the  King  of  Scotland.2  The  following  entry  in  the 
Chamberlain's  account  for  the  year  beginning  12th  June  1412,  and  ending  5th 
July  1413,  probably  in  connection  with  this  same  embassy,  is  interesting:— 

And  for  the  expenses  of  the  Lord  of  Graham  and  Master  Bobert  of  Lany, 
Brovost  of  St.  Andrews,  ambassadors  of  the  realm  passing  into  England  for 
the  deliverance  of  the  King,  by  command  of  the  Lord  Governor,  because  that 
William  of  Borthwick,  junior,  had  carried  off  by  force  more  than  one 
hundred  nobles  from  those  entrusted  with  the  ordained  expenses  of  the 
foresaid  ambassadors,  £50.3 

Notwithstanding  the  unsuccessful  efforts  of  these  commissioners  to  effect 
the  release  of  the  King,  the  attempt  was  not  given  up.  Again,  in  the  account 
of  the  following  year,  between  the  5th  July  1413  and  the  27th  June  1414, 
there  occur  in  the  same  record  these  two  entries  : — 

To  a  herald  going  thrice  into  England  for  safe-conducts  of  ambassadors  sent  into 
England  to  the  King,  £20. 

And  to  Master  Eobert  of  Lany  and  Sir  Eobert  of  Maxwell,  sent  into  England  for 
the  deliverance  of  our  Lord  the  King,  j£120.4 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  ix.  pp.  5,  6.  3  Chamberlain  Bolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  58. 

-'  Ibid.  p.  79.  4  Ibid.  pp.  66,  67. 


The  letter  appointing  these  two  commissioners  to  this  embass}r,  and 
the  instructions  given  to  them  for  their  direction  in  the  negotiations,  have 
both  been  preserved.  They  are  written  in  Latin,  and  the  following  is  a 
translation : — 

Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  Earl  of  Fife  and  of  Menteith,  and  Governor  of  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland,  to  all  to  whose  knowledge  the  present  letters  shall  come, 
greeting  in  the  Lord.  Know  your  university  that  we,  fully  confiding  in  the  fidelity, 
circumspection,  and  industry  of  our  beloved  and  faithful  Eobert  of  Maxwel  of 
Caldorewod,  knight,  our  cousin,  and  Master  Robert  of  Lany,  Provost  of  St.  Andrews, 
Licentiate  in  Decreets,  have  made,  constituted,  and  ordained,  and  by  these  presents  do, 
alike  of  our  certain  knowledge  and  deliberate  counsel,  make,  constitute,  and  ordain 
them,  our  and  the  said  kingdom's  ambassadors,  commissioners,  and  special  messengers, 
giving  and  granting  to  them  full,  free,  and  general  power  to  appear  in  the  presence 
of  the  most  serene  Prince,  Henry,  King  of  England,  our  adversary,  and  to  treat,  agree, 
and  conclude  with  him,  or  his  commissioners  whomsoever  having  sufficient  power  from 
him,  respecting  the  liberation  of  the  illustrious  Prince  James,  son  of  my  late  Lord  the 
King,  and  concerning  a  general  or  particular  truce,  both  by  land  and  sea,  to  be  taken 
and  confirmed  between  us,  the  foresaid  kingdom  of  Scotland,  the  lieges,  subjects,  and 
confederates  of  the  same,  on  the  one  part,  and  our  said  adversary,  his  kingdom,  his 
lieges,  subjects,  and  confederates,  on  the  other,  such  and  to  endure  for  so  long  a  time  as 
to  our  said  commissioners  shall  seem  expedient ;  and  to  ask  and  receive  in  our  name 
from  the  said  King  of  England,  his  oath  upon  the  confirmation  and  conservation  of  the 
present  truce  between  the  most  excellent  prince  the  Lord  King  of  France  and  himself, 
their  kingdoms  and  dominions,  subjects  and  confederates,  which  was  last  taken  and 
entered  into  by  their  said  commissioners  of  both  nations  :  Which  truce,  for  ourselves 
and  the  said  kingdom  of  Scotland,  lieges  and  subjects  of  the  same,  we  have  accepted, 
and  by  the  tenor  of  these  presents  do  accept.  Also  to  ask  and  receive  from  the  said 
King  of  England,  or  his  deputies  or  commissioners,  reformation  of  all  and  sundry 
attempts  against  the  form  of  truce  taken  and  confirmed  in  times  past  between  the 
kingdoms  of  Scotland  and  England  ;  and  generally  to  do,  transact,  agree,  and  conclude 



upon  all  and  every  other  thing  which  may  be  necessary  or  in  any  way  helpful  anent 
the  premises,  even  if  they  require  a  more  special  mandate  ;  promising  that  we  shall 
perpetually  hold  valid,  satisfactory,  stable,  and  sure,  whatever  our  said  commissioners 
shall  think  fit  to  do  in  the  premises  or  in  any  one  of  them.  Given  under  the  testimony 
of  our  Great  Seal  at  Falkland,  the  22d  day  of  the  month  of  May,  the  year  of  our 
Lord  one  thousand  four  hundred  and  fourteen,  and  of  our  government  the  ninth  year.1 

The  instructions  are  as  follows : — 

These  are  the  articles  with  which  Sir  Eobert  Maxwell  of  Calderwood  and 
Master  Robert  of  Lany,  Provost  of  St.  Andrews,  ambassadors  and  commissioners  of  an 
excellent  prince,  the  Lord  Duke  of  Albany,  Governor  of  Scotland,  are  burdened  to 
propose  to  the  most  excellent  and  potent  prince  Lord  Henry,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
most  illustrious  King  of  England  [57th  May,  2d  year  of  Henry  the  Fifth,  i.e.  1414]. 

First,  To  notify  to  the  Lord  King  foresaid,  that  the  said  Governor,  for  himself 
and  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  has  accejrted  the  truce  lately  made  and  entered  into 
by  the  Commissioners  of  France  and  England  as  confirmed  by  the  Kings,  which  also 
for  himself  and  the  kingdom  of  Scotland  he  is  prepared  to  confirm. 

Likewise,  to  provide,  treat,  and  agree  with  the  foresaid  Lord  King  for  the  freedom 
and  deliverance  of  the  most  serene  Prince  the  Lord  King  of  Scotland,  who  was  taken 
and  arrested  on  the  sea  while  a  youth  in  time  of  truce,  and  has  now  been  detained  for 
many  years. 

Also,  to  treat  and  agree  about  the  redemption  of  a  noble  man,  Sir  Murdach,  son  of 
the  Governor  above  mentioned. 

Also,  to  treat  and  provide  respecting  a  further  and  longer  truce  or  cessation  of 
warfare  for  the  welfare  of  both  kingdoms,  with  the  Lord's  assistance. 

Also,  to  make  provision  for  a  remedy  for  attempts  made  in  times  of  truce,  and 
how  hereafter  the  truce  may  and  ought  to  be  inviolably  observed,  and  transgressors  of 
both  kingdoms  punished. 

Also,  to  require  the  said  Lord  King  that  he  vouchsafe  that  the  said  truce  be  ratified, 
if  he  so  please,  by  oath,  as  the  Governor  is  prepared  to  swear  when  he  shall  be  required 

1  Original  in  Cottoniaa  library,  British  Museum.  -  Ibid. 


Another  journey  was  undertaken  by  these  two  ambassadors  in  the 
following  year  for  this  same  purpose,  £50  being  again  allowed  for  their 
expenses  ;  and,  in  addition  to  them,  others  seem  to  have  been  from  time  to 
time  engaged  in  the  business.  Sir  William  of  Coekburn,  one  of  the  custumars 
of  Haddington,  was,  in  1414,  due  on  his  account  £67,  10s.  3d.,  which  the 
Governor,  of  his  favour  and  by  counsel  of  the  auditors,  remitted  on  account 
of  his  great  labours  in  England  on  behalf  of  King  James,  and  for  the  defence 
of  the  kingdom  in  the  time  of  war.1 

In  fact,  no  efforts  were  spared  to  procure  the  release  of  James  from  the 
captivity  in  which  he  had  so  unjustly  been  detained.  All  the  embassies  sent 
by  the  Duke  of  Albany  to  the  English  Court  are  not  likely  to  have  been 
recorded,  and  besides  those  mentioned,  others  are  chronicled,  without  state- 
ment of  their  object  being  made  in  the  documents  which  relate  the  facts.  But 
enough  have  been  quoted  to  show  both  the  sincerity  and  the  activity  of  the 
now  aged  Governor  in  seeking  the  restoration  of  his  nephew.  These  efforts 
were  still  unsuccessful,  but  the  want  of  success  is  not  chargeable  to  Albany. 
He  had  striven  for  a  longer  period  to  procure  the  return  of  his  own  son,  in 
which  surely  his  sincerity  will  not  be  questioned,  and  until  now  he  had  been 
as  unsuccessful  as  in  the  case  of  James.  Murdach  was  an  important  State 
prisoner,  even  more  so  than  his  fellow-prisoner  the  Earl  of  Douglas,  whose 
release  had  been  accomplished  sooner;  but  the  King  of  Scotland  was  far 
more  important  than  either  or  both,  in  the  eyes  of  the  English  King — too 
precious  in  his  present  position  to  be  readily  restored. 

Yet  King  Henry  the  Fifth  was  at  last  prevailed  upon  to  come  to  terms. 

Hostilities  had  broken  out  in  spite  of  the  six  years'  truce  which  had  been 

made,  and  on  their  subsidence  the  English  King  relented  somewhat,  and 

liberated  several  of  the  imprisoned  Scottish  nobility,  of  whom  he  had  yet  a 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  pp.  198,  223. 

PROPOSAL  FOR  HIS  RANSOM,  1416.  199 

considerable  number.  At  that  time  another  embassy,  consisting  of  John  of 
Hailes,  Abbot  of  Balmerino,  Sir  John  Forrester  of  Corstorphine,  and  Walter 
Ogilvy,  with  a  retinue  of  forty  horsemen,  was  sent  to  England  with 
instructions  either  to  procure  the  release  of  King  James,  or  if  Henry  would 
not  consent  to  that,  at  least  to  obtain  leave  for  him  to  visit  Scotland  on 
parole.  The  safe-conduct  for  this  embassy  was  granted  on  26th  April  141 6.1 
Henry  so  far  met  the  wishes  of  Albany,  as  expressed  by  his  commissioners, 
that  he  appointed  Thomas,  Bishop  of  Durham,  Henry,  Earl  of  Northum- 
berland, and  Balph,  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  to  receive  hostages  and  obligations 
to  the  extent  of  100,000  marks  for  the  return  of  James.2  The  commission 
to  these  nobles  was  granted  on  the  8th  December  of  the  same  year,  and  on 
the  same  clay  safe-conducts  were  also  made  out  for  the  chief  of  the  Scottish 
nobility,  along  with  the  Bishops  of  Aberdeen  and  Glasgow,  to  come  to  King 
James  in  England.3  But  these  negotiations  also  came  to  no  practical  result, 
as  the  arrangement  was  never  carried  out. 

No  doubt  in  thus  seeking  the  release  of  James  on  parole,  the  commis- 
sioners would  refer  as  a  precedent  to  the  former  case  of  King  David  the 
Second  having  been  allowed  to  visit  his  kingdom  on  like  terms.  But  the 
mention  of  such  an  event  was  not  likely  to  facilitate  the  wished-for 
liberation,  as  the  English  would  remember  that  the  ransom  of  David  had 
never  been  fully  paid,  and  they  had  not  much  reason  to  expect  that  in  the 
unimproved  condition  of  Scottish  finance  they  would  have  more  success  in 
the  case  of  James.  To  the  Scots,  the  prospects  of  having  another  such 
ransom  to  provide  would  be  anything  but  pleasant,  and  it  would  seem  that 
so  long  as  Albany  was  spared  to  manage  the  affairs  of  the  realm,  they  were 
not  extremely  desirous  of  incurring  such  another  load  of  debt.  The  King 
was  still  young,  and  they  probably  hoped  that  something  would  turn  up  by 
1  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  341.  -  Ibid.  p.  417.  3  Ibid.  p.  419. 

200  ALBANY  EARL  OF  BUCHAN,  1406. 

which  they  might  ohtain  his  restoration  on  easier  terms,  which,  indeed,  in  a 
manner  quite  unexpected,  was  eventually  the  case. 

The  arrangement  of  1416  is  said  by  some  historians  to  have  originated  not 
with  Albany,  who  is  at  the  same  time  accused  for  permitting  the  young  King 
to  remain  so  long  in  exile,  but  with  those  of  the  nobility  who  had  returned 
from  England,  and  were  successful  in  spite  of  the  alleged  disloyal  inactivity 
of  the  Duke.1     A  glance  at  the  real  facts  is  fatal  to  all  such  conjectures. 

For  the  sake  of  connection  we  have  considered  this  question  fully  here,  at 
the  expense  of  the  clue  order  of  the  occurrences  in  the  life  of  the  Duke  of 
Albany — to  these  we  now  return. 

An  early  act  of  the  Governor's  was  the  renewal  of  the  treaty  between 
Scotland  and  France,  to  effect  which  he  sent  envoys  to  the  Court  of  Charles 
the  Sixth,  where  it  was  readily  ratified  in  the  month  of  February  1407.2 

On  the  death  in  1394, without  lawful  issue,  of  his  brother, Alexander,  Earl  of 
Buchan,  popularly  known  as  "  the  Wolf  of  Badenoch,"  the  earldom  of  Buchan 
was  inherited  by  Albany  as  his  brother's  heir ;  and  he,  by  a  charter  dated  20th 
September  1406,  granted  the  earldom  to  John  Stewart,  his  eldest  son  by  Lady 
Muriella  Keith.3  John  thereupon  became  Lord  of  Buchan,  and  was  created 
Earl  by  his  father  about  1408.  To  this  son  Albany  committed  his  office  of 
Lord  Chamberlain  of  Scotland,  by  a  charter  dated  12th  March  1407,  which 
allowed  him  a  fee  of  300  marks  and  one  deputy,4  although  it  would  seem  that 
the  Duke  himself  received  yearly  up  to  1414  the  annual  fee  for  that  office  ;  if 
so,  it  was  probably  by  arrangement  with  his  son  the  Earl  of  Buchan.5 

The  King  of  England  seems  to  have  objected  to  the  Duke  of  Albany 
being  called  Governor  of  Scotland,  and  to  have  protested  against  the  title 

1  Tytler,  vol.  iii.  p.  40.  3  Sutherland  Peerage  Case,  p.  28. 

-  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  4  Eegistrum  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  227. 

vol.  xii.  p.  21.  5  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  pp.  26,  39,  59,  67. 



to  the  messengers  of  the  Duke  when  at  the  English  Court,  and  hence  arose  the 
epithet  of  "  Pretended  Governor  of  Scotland,"  which  is  found  in  one  or  two  of 
the  documents  relating  to  negotiations  between  Scotland  and  England  in  the 
year  1407.  Whether  Henry  the  Fourth  was  moved  to  this  by  a  feeling  of 
resentment  at  that  epithet  having  been  applied  to  his  own  claim  to  be  King 
of  England  on  his  accession  to  the  English  throne  when  King  Richard  the 
Second  was  deposed,1  or  from  a  fear  that  the  claim  of  James  to  the  Scottish 
Throne  was  not  duly  respected,  does  not  appear.  The  protest  was  altogether 
uncalled  for,  and  was  not  followed  up  by  King  Henry. 

During  this  year  a  considerable  amount  of  negotiation  took  place  between 
the  two  kingdoms.  A  truce  had  been  agreed  upon  in  the  previous  year  to 
continue  till  Easter  of  1407  (March  27th),  and  application  seems  to  have  been 
made  by  the  Duke  of  Albany  for  its  prolongation.  The  King  of  England 
referred  the  matter  for  consideration  to  some  of  the  English  bishops,  and  they 
returned  answer  to  the  King  in  a  letter  dated  2d  March.  Of  that  letter, 
which  is  in  French,  the  following  is  a  translation  : — 

Most  dread  and  our  Sovereign  Lord, — I  commend  me  to  your  high  royal 
Majesty,  whom  may  it  please  to  know,  that  by  commandment  of  your  gracious  letters 
addressed  to  your  humble  bedesmen,  the  Bishop  of  London,  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  and 
me,  your  most  humble  servant,  we  have  met  together  to  consult  about  the  business 
touching  the  commission  and  instructions  to  be  drawn  up  and  given  to  your  special 
commissioners  to  treat  respecting  the  prorogation  of  the  truce  ;  and  we  have  seen  the 
letters  of  the  very  reverend  father  in  God,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  your 
Chancellor,  in  which  he  has  given  answer  to  your  very  honourable  letters  lately  sent 
to  him,  so  we,  having  regard  to  certain  special  points  in  your  said  letters,  according 
as  it  seems  to  us  and  your  said  Chancellor,  have  signified  and  declared,  and  in  terms 

1  In  a  communication  by  King  Charles  the  refers  to  the  King  of  England  as  "  the  Duke 

Sixth  of  France  to  King  Robert  the  Third  of  of  Lancaster,    calling  himself   King  of  Eng- 

Scotland,  about    the    year   1400,   the  former  land." — [Report  on  Foedera,  App.  D.  p.  69.] 
VOL.  I.  2  C 


of  his  said  reply,  have  charged,  on  the  part  of  your  Highness,  Syinon  Gaunstede,  one 

of  the  directors  of  your  Chancery,  to  prepare  two  kinds  of  commissions,  the  one  of 

which  gives  power  to  your  commissioners  to  treat   and   agree  about   the  renewal  of 

the  truce  with  the  commissioners  of  the  Duke  of  Albany,  Governor  of  the  kingdom  of 

Scotland,  as  on  behalf  of  Scotland  ;  and  the  other  gives  power  to  your  commissioners 

to  treat  and  agree  upon  the  said  renewal  with  the  commissioners  of  Scotland,  having 

sufficient  and  like  power  on  their  part  as  your  commissioners  have  on  theirs. 

And  because  we  doubt  that  by  some  of  your  commissions  the  said  Duke  may  take 

advantage  of  the  name  and  right  of  Governor  of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  in  defiance 

of  the  protestation  recently  made  on  your  part  in  presence  of  the  messengers  of  the 

said  Duke,  it  seems  in  our  humble  opinion  to  be  expedient  to  await  the  coming  of  your 

said  Chancellor  to  London,  which  will  be  on  Monday  or  Tuesday  next  at  latest,  as  is 

said,  without  proceeding  further  in  this  matter  ;  and  that  the  letters  under  your  Privy 

Seal  addressed  to  the  said  Duke  and  to  our  most  honoured  Lord  John,  your  son,  and  to 

your  most  honoured  brother,  the  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  do  not  pass  in  the  meantime, 

but  yet  that  letters  under  your  signet  should  be  sent  to  your  said  son  and  brother,  to 

cause  prorogue  the  truce  between  the  Marchers  :  also  as  we  think  well  that  this  be 

done  by  virtue  of  your  commandment  given  to  your  foresaid  sou  at  his  departure  from 

your  high  presence,  seeing  that  since  the  wardens  of  the  Marches  on  both  sides  can 

arrange  particular  truces  for  a  month,  more  or  less,  in  the  way  they  have  formerly 

done  ...   no  danger  can  happen  for  the  time.     Which  our  simple   advice,    saving 

always  your  high  discretion,  the  said  Bishops  have  charged  me  in  their  absence  to 

make  known  to  your  Highness.      May  the  Blessed  Trinity  always  keep  you  in  most 

happy  life,  prosperity,  and  health  of  body,  for  the  safety  of  your  people.      Written  at 

Loudon,  Wednesday,  in  haste.1  „       ,       , ,  ,  ,    . 

Your  humble  servant  and  bedesman, 


To  the  King,  our  most  dread  and  Sovereign  Lord.2 

In  the  meantime  Henry  wrote  to  Albany,  saying  that  his  Council  were 
then  absent,  but  that  the  truce  might  be  prolonged  if  arrangements  could 

1  2d  March,  8th  year  of  King  Henry  the  2  Original   in    Cottonian   Library,    British 

Fourth,  added  in  a  later  hand.  Museum. 



be  made.  On  receiving  this  information,  the  Duke  of  Albany  assembled 
his  Council,  and  in  reply  sent  the  letter,  in  Latin,  of  which  the  following 
is  a  translation  : — 

Most  Serene  Prince, — For  the  kind  reception  of  our  letters,  and  the  gracious 
audience  vouchsafed  by  your  Highness  to  our  ambassadors,  the  bearers  of  these  letters, 
namely,  our  beloved  councillors,  Sir  William  Graham  of  Kincardine,  and  Sir  John 
Stewart  of  Lorn,  knights,  we  return  your  Highness  our  most  hearty  thanks. 

We  have  received  with  grateful  affection  from  our  ambassadors,  on  their  return  to 
us  from  your  presence,  the  letter  of  your  Highness,  which,  among  other  things, 
intimates  that  on  account  of  the  absence  of  your  Council,  and  for  other  causes  expressed 
in  your  said  letters,  you  were  unable  to  give  the  answer  desired  by  them  in  your 
presence  on  our  behalf,  unless  they  should  wish  ...  to  direct  ;  especially  as  the 
matters  proposed  by  them  were  arduous,  and  concerned  the  state,  welfare,  and  honour 
of  the  kingdoms  of  Scotland  and  England.  Which  being  duly  considered,  it  seems 
expedient  to  you  (if  it  should  also  be  our  pleasure),  as  your  said  letters  contain,  that  in 
the  fear  of  Almighty  God,  for  the  tranquillity  of  the  kingdoms  .  .  .  and  for  avoiding  the 
effusion  of  Christian  blood  between  the  kingdoms,  the  truce  now  existing  between  the 
foresaid  kingdoms,  which  endures  to  the  Feast  of  Pasch  next  to  come,1  to  another  term 
more  .  .  .  might  be  amicably  renewed,  that  meanwhile  the  treaty  upon  the  foregoing 
and  other  matters  mutually  affecting  us  may  be  more  effectually  kept  and  .  .  .  More- 
over, as  to  (our)  will  (respecting)  the  renewal  of  the  truce  .  .  .  fifteenth  day  of  the 
Purification  of  St.  Mary2  bypast,  you  now  desire  to  be  fully  informed  by  our  letters. 

Concerning  which,  most  serene  Prince,  on  account  of  the  (shortness)  of  the  time 
.  .  .  and  the  entry  of  the  said  commissioners  to  our  presence,  and  also  on  account  of 
the  absence  of  the  Lords  from  our  Council  and  kingdom,  we  could  not  conveniently 
.  .  .  Whereupon,  your  said  letter  having  been  more  fully  understood,  we  caused  the 
Council  of  the  kingdom  to  be  assembled  in  our  presence  for  deliberation  on  their 
contents  ...  to  endure  to  the  Feast  of  Pasch,8  the  year  following  the  expiry  of  the 
said  truce,  in  the  same  manner,  form,  and  effect  as  the  said  last  truce  w  as  made  and 

Easter.  27th  March  1407 

16th  Februar 

3  15th  April  140S. 

204  RENEWAL  OF  THE  TRUCE,    1407. 

confirmed  at  Kelso  .  .  .  special  commissioners  of  both  parties,  with  all  possible  speed, 
before'  the  expiry  of  the  said  truce,  for  the  avoiding  of  those  mishaps  which  might  arise 
from  the  delay  of  this  renewal  beyond  the  forementioned  period,  notwithstanding  the 
great  and  insufferable  losses,  grievances,  and  injuries  repeatedly  inflicted  and  perpetrated 
by  your  subjects,  both  by  sea  and  land,  upon  the  inhabitants  of  Scotland  (in  violation 
of  the  forementioned  truce). 

Concerning  which  we  cannot  obtain  any  reformation  or  redress  from  you  or  your 
subjects,  although  .  .  .  you  and  they  have  been  many  times  required  with  effect,  both 
in  the  Marches  of  the  kingdoms  in  your  province  and  elsewhere. 

Besides,  most  serene  Prince,  it  seems  expedient  to  us  and  our  Council,  and  highly 
necessary  for  the  welfare  and  quiet  of  both  kingdoms,  that  some  certain  day  of  truce 
in  the  Marches  of  the  said  kingdoms  should  be  appointed,  where  certain  ambassadors 
and  commissioners  of  noble  estate,  with  a  sufficient  commission  on  behalf  of  either 
kingdom,  might  meet  to  treat  and  agree  upon  a  perpetual  peace  to  be  maintained 
by  the  grace  of  God,  or  at  least  for  a  long  truce,  with  reparation  and  due  redress 
of  all  and  sundry  losses,  grievance,  and  injuries,  and  all  other  attempts  on  both 
sides  against  the  present  and  past  truces,  howsoever  and  by  whomsoever  perpetrated 
or  to  be  perpetrated  ;  and,  if  it  please  you,  it  is  agreeable  to  us  and  to  our  Council 
of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  that  such  a  day  be  appointed  in  the  week  following 
the  Feast  of  St.  Peter,  which  is  called  "  Lammasday,"1  next  to  come,  in  the  Marches 
at  Hawdenstank  :  And  you  will  be  pleased  to  inform  us  what  you  shall  deem 
meet  to  do  in  this  behalf  by  your  letters  as  speedily  as  possible  by  the  bearer  of  these 
our  letters. 

May  the  Most  High  preserve  your  Highness  in  a  lengthened  peace,  for  the  peace 
and  quiet  of  all  his  people. 

Written  at  the  town  of  Perth,  the  second  day  of  the  month  of  March  (1407). 
Robert,  son  of  the  King  of  Scotland,  Duke  of  Albany, 
Earl  of  Fife  and  of  Menteith,  and  Governor  of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland. 

To  the  Most  Serene  Prince  Henry,  by  the  grace  of  God,  King  of  England.2 

1  1st  August.  Museum.     A  paper   document,  much   muti- 

2  Original  in  Cottonian  Library,    British       iated. 

KING  HENRY'S  REPLY,   1407. 


To  which  the  King  of  England  responded  in  the  following  letter  in  Latin, 
of  which  a  translation  is  here  given : — 

Henry,  by  the  grace  of  God,  etc.,  to  the  Duke  of  Albany,  etc.,  greeting,  and  increase 
of  sincere  love.  Eeplying  in  a  friendly  manner  to  our  letters  which  we  lately  sent 
your  Excellency,  among  other  things  you  wrote  that  after  consideration  of  the  causes 
expressed  in  your  said  letters,  it  was  agreeable  to  you  and  the  Council  of  the  kingdom 
of  Scotland  assembled  thereanent,  that  the  present  truce,  which  lasts  till  the  feast  of 
Easter,  should  be  continued  or  renewed,  to  endure  until  the  feast  of  Easter  in  the 
following  year,  in  the  same  manner,  form,  and  effect  as  the  last  truce  made  and 
confirmed  at  Kelso  ;  and  that  the  said  renewal  .  .  .  special  Commissioners  on  both 
sides  with  all  possible  speed  before  the  expiry  of  the  said  truce,  for  avoiding  of  any 
damages  which  might  arise  from  the  delay  of  such  renewal  beyond  the  forementioned 

Moreover,  it  seems  expedient  to  you  and  your  Council,  and  highly  necessary  to  the 
welfare  and  peace  of  both  kingdoms,  as  you  have  written,  that  a  certain  day  should  be 
appointed  on  the  Marches  of  the  said  kingdoms  where  certain  ambassadors  and 
commissioners  of  noble  rank,  with  sufficient  commissions  on  the  part  of  either 
kingdom  to  treat  and  agree  upon  a  perpetual  peace,  to  be  obtained  by  the  grace  of 
God,  or  at  least  a  long  truce,  together  with  reparation  and  a  due  reformation  of  all  and 
sundry  losses,  grievances,  and  injuries  and  other  attempts  on  both  sides  against  the 
present  and  former  truces.  And,  provided  that  it  were  agreeable  to  us,  you  and  the 
Council  of  the  said  kingdom  of  Scotland  it  seems  are  content  that  such  day  should  be 
appointed  the  week  next  after  the  feast  of  St.  Peter,  which  is  called  Lammas  Day, 
next  following,  on  the  Marches  at  Haudenstank,  of  which  you  desire  to  be  speedily 
informed  by  our  letters. 

Wherefore,  your  Excellence  will  be  pleased  to  know  that  when  we  received  your 
said  letters  on  the  18th  day  of  this  month  of  March,  and  not  before,  the  Lords  of 
our  Council,  and  especially  our  Chancellor  of  England,  being  absent  at  the  present  time, 
and  not  to  return  until  the  fifteenth  day  of  Easter  l  next  to  come,  we  were  unable,  in 

1    10th  April  1407. 


consequence  of  the  shortness  of  the  time,  to  send  our  commissioners  against  the  said 
feast  of  Easter 1  for  the  foresaid  renovation.  But  it  being  our  sincere  desire,  as  it  is 
also  yours,  that  on  account  of  the  fear  of  God,  to  avoid  the  shedding  of  Christian  blood, 
that  the  blessings  of  peace  and  tranquillity  may  be  preserved  between  the  kingdoms,  we 
shall  ordain,  as  we  are  able  in  good  manner,  all  pretence  beiug  laid  aside,  that  certain 
commissioners  of  ours,  namely,  Ralph  Euer,  Robert  Umfrevil,  and  John  Miteford, 
knights,  shall  proceed  to  the  parts  of  the  Marches  foresaid,  furnished  with  sufficient 
power,  namely,  to  treat  and  agree  upon  a  truce  to  continue  for  a  year  in  the  same 
manner  and  form  (as  we  thought  good  more  fully  to  unfold  our  mind  to  our  and  your 
kinsman,  the  Earl  of  Douglas,  before  his  departure  from  our  country,  as  that  Earl, 
when  he  arrives,  can  relate  to  your  Highness  in  our  name  by  word  of  mouth),  and 
to  treat  and  agree  with  the  deputies  of  the  said  kingdom  of  Scotland  upon  a  certain 
day  and  place,  at  which  the  ambassadors  and  commissioners  of  noble  rank  on  both 
sides  shall  be  bound  to  meet  for  establishing  a  final  peace,  or  otherwise  a  long  truce, 
together  with  reparations  and  reformations  of  attempts  on  both  sides,  so  that,  on  our 
part,  God  willing,  no  failure  shall  be  found,  but  that  such  a  conclusion  shall  be  arrived 
at  in  the  premises,  which  parties  on  both  sides  .  .  .  Because  in  following  the  doctrine 
of  the  apostle  "to  follow  peace  with  all  men,"  we  are  stirred  up  to  show  our  love  to 
the  Author  of  Peace.  Moreover,  desiring  also  that  although  ...  in  a  suitable  time, 
namely,  before  the  expiry  of  the  former  truce  at  the  feast  of  Pasch  now  instant,  they 
were  not  able  to  meet  on  account  of  the  shortness  of  the  time  of  this  truce,  nevertheless 
on  both  parts  are  preserved  ...  we  write  at  present  to  our  dearest  son  John,  our 
Constable  of  England,  and  to  our  dearest  brother  the  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  keepers  of 
the  Marches  on  our  part  .  .  .  that  they  may  cause  such  truce,  even  after  the  expiry 
of  the  same,  to  be  faithfully  kept  by  our  lieges,  fully  trusting  that  you  will  cause  the 
like  to  be  done  on  your  part. 

Given,  etc.,  xxii.  [day  of  March]. 

Indorsed  :  Copy  of  a  letter  directed  to  the  Duke  of  Albany.2 

i  27th  March.  Cottonian    Library,    British    Museum,    much 

2  Contemporaneous  Draft  on  vellum  in  the       mutilated. 

RUMOURS  OF  WAR,   1407. 


Arrangements  were  accordingly  made  for  the  meeting  proposed  to  be 
held  on  Lammas  Day,  at  least  on  the  English  side,  as  Henry,  by  a  mandate 
issued  on  8th  July  1407,1  empowered  his  son  John,  Constable  of  England, 
and  Warden  of  the  East  Marches,  to  negotiate  a  truce  which  should  continue 
till  next  Easter.2  This  either  had  not  satisfied  the  Scots,  or  the  Border 
depredations  by  the  English  had  become  too  much  for  the  patience  of  Albany, 
as  we  find  him  meditating  an  invasion  of  England  at  the  head  of  a  large 
army.  On  the  8th  of  September  1407,  Henry  wrote  to  the  Sheriffs  of  some 
of  the  northern  counties  of  England  to  be  prepared  to  meet  him  with  all  the 
strength  of  their  respective  shires,  and  accompany  him  wherever  it  might  be 
necessary,  and  tells  them  that  he  had  most  certain  information  from  sure 
and  trustworthy  sources  that  "  Eobert,  Duke  of  Albany,  pretended  Governor 
of  Scotland,  our  common  adversary  and  enemy,  was  proposing  to  invade  the 
kingdom  of  England  with  no  mean  multitude  and  power  of  the  Scots  and 
other  enemies,  against  the  form  of  the  present  truce  entered  into  between 
us  and  the  kingdom  of  Scotland."3  But  it  does  not  appear  that  pacific 
relations  were  really  interrupted  between  the  two  nations,  as  shortly  after- 
wards letters  were  again  passing  betwixt  the  Governor  and  the  King.  The 
following  is  a  translation  of  one,  written  in  Latin,  from  Albany  to  Henry, 
about  two  months  after  this  attack  was  expected.  It  is  dated  the  4th  of 
November : — 

Most  Excellent  Peince, — We  received  gladly  some  time  ago  the  letter  of  your 
Highness,  along  with  your  safe-conduct  granted  to  certain  persons  of  our  Council, 
presented  to  us  by  Leicester  (King) -of- Arms,  and  have  fully  understood  all  that  is 
contained  in  them  according  to  their  order. 

1  This  and  some  other  documents  relating 
to  the  same  period  are  misdated  in  the 
Foedera.     The  year  1405  should  be  1407. 

'-  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  403. 
3  Ibid.  p.  414. 

208  LETTER  BY  ALBANY  TO  HENRY,   1407. 

Concerning  which,  as  they  touch  closely  the  (welfare)  of  both  kingdoms,  we  send 
to  your  presence,  without  delay,  certain  of  the  persons  named  in  the  said  safe-conduct 
who  are  more  fully  acquainted  with  our  intention,  and  who,  on  their  arrival,  will  more 
intimately  inform  you  concerning  the  same  than  we  can  presently  do  by  writing  of 
letters.  .  .  .  Most  excellent  Prince,  on  the  return  lately  of  our  dearest  nephew,  the 
Earl  of  Mar,  to  our  presence,  we  learned  the  numerous  courtesies  and  favours  which  as 
often  as  possible  you  conferred  on  him  and  his  in  displaying  their  martial  accomplish- 
ments on  this  occasion  in  your  noble  presence,  for  which  with  all  our  heart  we  thank 
you  .  .  .  the  treatment  heretofore  in  manifold  ways  bestowed  upon  our  son, 
Murdach  Stewart,  and  our  cousin  the  Earl  of  Douglas,  (we  desire)  your  Majesty  to 
continue  towards  them  in  the  future. 

Moreover,  if  there  is  anything  in  these  parts  which  we  can  do  for  your  pleasure 
certify  (us  thereof),  and  we  shall  accomplish  the  same  to  your  satisfaction,  saving 
always  our  state. 

May  the  Most  High  long  preserve  your  Excellency,  and  grant  you  felicity  and  peace. 

Written  at  the  town  of  Perth,  the  4th  day  of  the  month  of  November  (1407). 
Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  Earl  of  Fife  and  of  Menteith, 
and  Governor  of  the  Kingdom  of  Scotland. 

To  the  Most  Excellent  Prince  and  Lord,  Henry,  by  the  Grace  of  God,  King  of 

The  continuation  of  the  truces  between  England  and  Scotland  was  never 
very  certain,  and  when  they  were  observed  by  the  Borderers,  it  was  often  with 
a  bad  grace.  In  1409,  on  the  expiry  of  a  year's  truce,  the  Castle  of  Jedburgh 
was  taken  from  the  English,  and  was  ordered  to  be  levelled  with  the  ground. 
The  task  was  no  easy  one,  as  the  mortar  with  which  it  was  built  had  become 
as  hard  as  the  stone  itself.  At  a  meeting  of  Parliament  at  Perth,  it  was 
proposed  that  the  expense  should  be  met  by  levying  a  tax  of  twopence  on 
every  home  in  the  country ;  but  this  Albany  strongly  opposed,  saying  that 

1  Original  in  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum. 



taxes  bad  never  been  imposed  during  the  period  of  bis  governorship,  neither 
should  he  levy  them  now,  as  the  poor  would  curse  him  who  introduced  such 
an  abuse,  and  be  instructed  the  expenses  of  the  demolishing  of  the  castle 
to  be  paid  out  of  the  royal  customs.  This  procedure  added  greatly  to  his 
popularity.1  Yet  it  is  noteworthy  that  in  this  very  year  the  Treasury  was 
due  a  large  sum  of  money  to  the  Duke  for  arrears  of  the  salary  of  bis  office 
as  Governor.  The  Lord  Chamberlain,  in  bis  account  rendered  at  Perth  on 
the  20th  May  1409,  reported  a  balance  of  £1492,  19s.  9d.,  which  sum,  he 
added,  had  been  paid  to  his  father  the  Governor,  as  part  of  his  fee  for  the 
office  of  Governor  of  the  kingdom  for  previous  years,  and  also  for  the  year 
of  this  account.  And  thus,  he  says,  he  has  received  for  the  fee  of  his  office 
during  the  past  three  years,  since  the  death  of  the  King  his  brother,  only 
£2466,  8s.  5d.,  leaving  as  the  complement  of  the  £3000  not  paid  to  him  for 
the  three  years  last  past,  namely,  1406,  1407,  and  1408,  or  the  year  of  this 
account,  the  sum  of  £533,  lis.  7d.  In  addition  to  this,  Albany  himself 
protested  that  although  he  had  incurred  heavy  expenses,  and  laboured  much 
before  the  death  of  the  King  in  his  office  as  the  Lieutenant  of  the  King,  he 
had  not  been  paid  the  fee  appointed  to  him  by  the  King  and  Parliament ;  and 
he  accordingly  asked  that  payment  should  be  made  to  him  early  when  time 
and  opportunity  afforded,  and  the  royal  revenues  were  more  abundant.2  In 
the  previous  year,  1408,  the  Duke  granted  £20,  being  the  relief  of  the  lands 
of  Garthgunnok  in  Stirlingshire,  pertaining  to  John  Normaville,  towards  the 
making  of  the  bridge  of  Stirling,  for  the  soul  of  our  late  lord  King.3 

1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  444.  Two 
entries  in  the  Exchequer  Accounts  concerning 
this  business  are  interesting.  For  guarding 
the  masons  employed  in  the  demolition  of  the 
castle,  James  Douglas,  brother  of  the  Earl,  re- 
ceived £20,  and  Robert  of  Hawick,  employed 
VOL.  I. 

about  the  same  work  and  the  building  of  the 
King's  kitchen  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh, 
received  a  similar  sum. — [Exchequer  Rolls, 
vol.  iv.  pp.  115,  117.] 

2  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  pp.  28,  29. 

3  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  p.  68. 

2  D 


The  Earl  of  Douglas  had  returned  to  Scotland  in  the  year  1408,  having 
with  great  difficulty  obtained  leave  only  to  visit  his  native  land.  It  required 
years  of  prolonged  negotiations,  and  it  was  not  until  twelve  Scottish  noblemen 
had  consented  to  become  hostages  for  him  during  his  absence,  that  the  King 
of  England  permitted  him  to  return.1  In  the  same  year,  George  Dunbar, 
Earl  of  March,  was  restored  to  his  earldom  by  the  good  offices  of  Walter 
Haliburton,  Lord  of  Dirleton,  who  effected  his  reconciliation  with  the 
Governor.  The  consent  of  the  Earl  of  Douglas  was  obtained  by  his  receiving 
the  Castle  of  Lochmaben  and  lordship  of  Annandale  in  recompense  for  the 
Castle  of  Dunbar,  which  he  had  occupied  on  March's  flight  into  England.2 
Haliburton,  by  whom  this  reconciliation  was  brought  about,  had  become  the 
son-in-law  of  the  Duke  of  Albany,  by  marrying  his  daughter,  Isabella,  Dowager 
Countess  of  Boss.3  For  his  services  on  that  occasion  Haliburton  received 
hereditary  possession  of  a  forty  pound  land  in  the  town  of  Brigham,  in  the 
county  of  Berwick.4 

Shortly  afterwards,  in  June  1409,  the  Duke  of  Albany  and  Archibald, 
Earl  of  Douglas,  while  the  latter  was  still  only  on  his  parole  from  imprison- 
ment in  England,  entered  into  a  bond  for  mutual  assistance  and  support, 
in  which  both  agreed  to  defend  each  other  against  all  their  opponents, 
their  allegiance  to  their  sovereign,  King  James,  alone  excepted.  The  one 
was  to  inform  the  other  of  anything  prejudicial  to  him  which  might  come 
to  his  knowledge ;  in  the  event  of  their  disagreeing,  provision  was  made 
for   an   amicable  settlement  by  means  of  the  arbitration  of  a  council  of 

1  Rotuli    Scotise,    pp.    182-186.      Original  daughter  of  Archibald,  third  Earl  of  Douglas, 
Indenture  in  Douglas  Charter-chest.  and  widow  of  David,  Duke  of  Rothesay.    She 

2  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  444.  survived  till  about  theyear  1420. — [Exchequer 

3  Ibid.  Another  Walter  Haliburton  married,  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  594;  iv.  p.  343.] 
about   the  year  1403,   Lady  Mary  Douglas,  4  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  444. 


seven  persons  chosen  by  both;  if  a  question  of  fee  and  heritage  arose, 
and  the  award  of  the  council  proved  out  of  harmony  with  the  opinions  of 
the  parties,  the  cause  was  to  be  settled  by  reference  to  the  law  ("  in  lufely 
manere  as  the  lach  will") ;  in  case  of  discord  or  slaughter  among  their 
followers,  and  failure  of  their  lords  to  bring  about  an  arrangement,  they 
promised  to  fall  from  them  and  refer  the  matter  to  the  law  of  the  laud ;  they 
further  agreed,  that  if  any  of  their  sons  or  grandsons,  or  of  their  brothers, 
should  cause  riot  or  disturbance  in  the  country,  or  should  rebel  against  or 
disobey  either  the  Duke  or  the  Earl  against  reason,  the  one  should  assist  the 
other,  either  personally,  or  by  one  of  his  two  eldest  sons,  with  all  their  power, 
to  suppress  such  rebellion.  It  was  further  agreed  that  if  it  happened  the  said 
Lord  the  Duke  to  grow  in  time  to  come  to  the  estate  of  king,  that  this  bond, 
as  touching  equal  fellowship  and  estate,  should  then  expire,  but  that  all 
kindness  should  be  kept  betwixt  them  in  time  to  come ;  and  a  clause  in  the 
indenture  gave  two  of  the  grandsons  of  the  Duke  of  Albany,  Eobert  Stewart 
of  Fife  and  Walter  Stewart  of  the  Lennox,  and  two  sons  of  the  Earl  of  Douglas, 
Archibald  and  James,  both  of  whom  were  at  this  time  in  Durham  as  hostages 
for  then-  father,  the  option  of  being  included  in  the  bond  with  their  fathers.1 

The  relations  between  Albany  and  Douglas,  ever  warm  and  close,  were 
drawn  yet  closer  by  a  matrimonial  alliance,  John  Stewart,  Earl  of  Buchan, 
the  second  son  of  the  Duke,  marrying  Lady  Elizabeth  Douglas,  daughter  of 
the  Earl.  An  indenture  between  Albany  and  Douglas,  with  this  as  its  object, 
was  made  at  Perth  on  21st  July  1410.2 

The  release  of  the  Earl  of  Douglas  on  parole  was  only  to  extend  till  Easter 

1409,  but  the  month  of  January  following  had  arrived,  and  yet  he  showed  no 

disposition  to  re-enter  into  the  ward  of  the  King  of  England.     This  gave 

occasion  to  a  remonstrance  by  the  latter,  which  was  sent  to  Albany  by 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  277.  "  Ibid.  p.  2S1. 


the  hands  of  Edmund  Bugge,  one  of  the  King's  squires.  His  instructions 
were  as  follows  : — 

Instruction  geven  to  Emond  Bugge,  squier  of  the  chambre  of  our  soverain  lord 
the  Kynge,  sent  by  the  same  our  lord  the  Kynge  toward  the  Due  of  Albanie,  for  to 
shewe  hym  the  matires  that  folweth. 

First,  al  thow  that  Archibaud  Erl  of  Douglas,  as  it  is  notoirly  knowen,  and  he 
hym  self,  as  trewe  knyght,  may  noght  withseye  it,  be  prisoner  to  our  forsaid  lord  the 
Kynge,  and  for  some  ehargeant  nedes  touchyng  his  estat,  by  hym  shewed  to  the 
forseid  our  lord  the  Kynge,  at  his  greet  instance  and  pursuyte,  yn  conservacioun  of 
hys  estat,  were  licenced  to  goo  in  to  Scotland  vpon  certain  seuretee,  yeven  to  the 
Kynge  owr  forseid  soverain  lord,  as  wel  by  lettres  of  the  same  Erl  sealed  of  hys  amies, 
as  by  oth  and  in  other  manere,  for  to  have  be  retourned  and  entred  agayn  at  feste  of 
Pasque  last  passed  yn  to  the  Castel  of  Durem,  yn  and  to  the  warde  of  Sir  Johan  of 
Lancastre,  sone  to  our  forsaid  lord  the  Kynge,  other  elles  to  the  same  our  lord  the 
Kynge  yn  what  place  he  were  at  that  tyme  withoute  fraude  or  mal  engin.  Nerethe- 
les,  the  forsaid  Erl  hath  noght  maked  nor  perfourmed  that  entree  atte  forseide  feste, 
nother  after  hider  to,  althow  that  to  do  it  he  hath  be  duely  requered. 

And  for  so  myche  our  forseid  soverain  lord  the  Kynge,  willyngge  and  dessiryngge 
the  honeur  of  the  ordre  of  knigghthood  be  kept  in  alle  sides,  requereth  the  forsaid 
Due,  yn  conservacioun  of  the  honeur  of  the  foreseid  ordre  of  knyghthood,  that  he 
lette  noght  ne  yeve  no  lettyngge  to  the  forseid  Erl  of  Douglas,  prisoner  to  our 
forseid  soverein  lord  the  Kynge,  to  come,  entre  and  tourne  agayn  to  hym  as  his 
trewe  prisoner,  as  he  is  holden,  bote  that  the  same  Due  consaille  and  excite  the 
forseid  Erl  to  doo  it  effectuelly,  as  a  trewe  prisoner  aghte  doo,  withoute  fraude  or  mal 

Also,  seththe  the  forseide  Due  hath  writen  to  the  forseid  our  soverein  lord  the 
Kynge,  desiryngge  and  prayngge  the  deliverance  of  Mordake  of  Fyfe,  sone  and  heir  to 
the  same  Due,  it  liketh  wel  to  our  forseide  lord  the  Kynge,  atte  instance  and  priere 
of  the  forsaid  Due,  that  the  forsaide  Mordake,  his  sone  and  heir,  be  delivred  by 
raunceon  of  fifty  thousand  marke,  to  be  payed  in  cas  that  oure  forsaid  lord  the  Kynge 
take  eny  moneye  for  hym. 


And  yn  cas  that  the  forsaid  Duo  wil  noght  assente  to  the  paiement  of  swich  a 
somme  in  manere  forsaid,  thenne  it  may  discretly  be  asked  of  hym,  yf  he  wil  fynde 
any  weyes  thorgh  whiche  our  forsaide  lord  the  Kynge  may  be  moeved  and  induced 
to  condescende  to  the  deliverance  of  the  forseid  Mordake  his  prisoner.  And  yn  this 
caas,  it  wole  lyke  wel  oure  forseid  lord  the  Kynge  here  hem  and  condescende  to  alle 
weyes  resonable  in  fulfillyngge  of  the  desir  of  the  same  Due  in  that  partie,  so  that  it 
be  to  the  comun  good  of  bothe  royaumes  of  Engelond  and  Scotland. 

And  if  it  happe  that  the  forseyde  Due  wil  desire,  for  the  commoditee  and  comim 
profit,  and  for  the  good  and  tranquillitee  of  the  forsaid  royaumes  of  England  and 
Scotland,  and  ofe  the  subgettes  of  the  same,  that  ferme  pees,  other  longe  and  good 
trieues,  as  wel  by  see  as  by  lande  may  be  accorded  and  stablisshed,  thenne  we  may 
there  opon  certifie  the  Kynge  our  soverein  lord  forsaid. 

And  if  peraventure  the  same  Due  wil  holde  hym  coy  and  no  thynge  touche  of 
such  weyes  of  pees  other  long  trieues,  thenne  may  the  forsaid  Emond  Bugge  of  his 
propre  mocion  discretly  touche  of  swiche  weyes  of  pees  or  longe  trieues  as  is  above  seyd, 
and  yf  by  that  mocion  and  touchyngge  the  forseid  Emond  may  fele  the  forseide  Due  be 
ther  of  right  desirous  and  assentynge  to  eny  of  swiche  weyes,  thenne  it  may  be  seide 
to  the  forsaid  Due,  that  if  swich  pees  or  trieues  be  taken,  they  may  be  so  good  and  so 
expedient  for  bothe  roiaumes  and  the  comun  profit  of  the  same,  that  our  forsaid  lord 
the  Kynge  shal  mowe  by  that  the  bettre  be  enclyned  to  the  deliverance  of  the  forsaid 
Mordake  for  litel  or  right  noght  takynge  for  his  raunceon,  so  that  the  same  Due  make 
the  forsaid  Erl  entre  agayn  as  prisoner  as  he  is  holden. 

Also  ther  as  the  herault  of  the  same  Due  cleped  Albany  hath  moeved  amonges 
othir  thyngges  to  our  forsaid  lord  the  Kynge  of  contract  of  matrimonie  to  be  maked 
betwixt  my  Lord  John,  sone  to  our  forseyed  lord  the  Kynge,  and  a  doughter  of  the 
forsaid  Due  ;  If  that  be  proceded  of  the  mocion  and  desir  of  the  same  Due  or  noo,  it 
is  unknowen  to  our  soverein  lord  the  Kynge  forsaid. 

And  therfore  our  same  lord  soverein  the  Kynge  wyl  that  the  forseyd  Emond 
enfourme  the  forseyde  Due  ofe  and  opon  the  same  matire  moeved  by  his  forsaid 
heraud.  And  in  caas  that  the  mocion  of  that  same  matire  have  proceded  ofe  the 
wettyngge    and    desir    of   the    forsaid    Due,    thenne    wil  the  same    Due    certifie  his 


wille  to  our  forsaid  lord  the  Kynge  by  his  lettres  by  the  forseyd  Emond.  Whereopou 
the  same  our  soverein  lord  the  Kynge,  deliberation  had,  wol  yeve  ther  opon  so 
effectuel  answere  to  the  forseid  Due,  that  therofe,  by  the  grace  of  God,  he  shal  be 
content  of  resoun. 

In  witnesse  of  which  thynge  oure  forsaide  soverain  lord  the  Kynge  hath  do  set  to 
this  present  instructioun  his  prive  seal  and  his  signet  also.  Writen  at  Westmonster, 
the  xxv  day  of  Januer,  the  yeer  of  the  regne  of  the  same  our  lord  the  Kynge 

The  Earl  of  Douglas  did  not  return  to  Ms  captivity  in  England,  as  lie 
succeeded  in  raising  the  money  required  for  his  ransom,  and  in  this  way 
fulfilled  the  requirements  of  knighthood.2  The  son  of  the  Duke,  Sir  Murdach 
Stewart,  had  to  remain  in  captivity,  as  the  50,000  marks  demanded  for 
his  ransom  could  not  be  procured,  and  no  other  honourable  mode  of 
release  presented  itself  to  the  Duke,  as  he  was  evidently  not  inclined  to 
place  the  nation  at  any  disadvantage  in  its  relations  with  England  for  his 
own  gratification. 

The  instructions  of  this  commissioner  bring  to  light  a  somewhat  surprising 
motion  for  the  union  of  the  royal  houses  of  Stewart  and  Lancaster,  in  the 
persons  of  John,  son  of  the  King  of  England,  and  a  daughter  of  the  Duke  of 
Albany.  Whether  it  had  been  part  of  the  Duke's  instructions  to  his  herald 
does  not  appear.  The  King  of  England  expresses  his  doubts  as  to  that,  and 
desires  to  be  better  informed  by  letters  from  the  Duke  himself  on  the  subject. 
But  here  the  matter  ends,  as  no  other  document  is  known  which  relates  the 
result  of  the  mission  of  Edmund  Bugge  in  this  particular. 

He  was,  at  all  events,  successful  in  procuring  that  there  should  be  a 
prolongation  of  the  peace  between  the  two  countries,  and  after  his  return  a 

1  Original  in  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum. 

2  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  7. 

CAPTURE  OF  FAST  CASTLE,   1410.  215 

truce,  to  continue  till  21st  May  1411,  was  arranged  at  Hawdenstank  on  the 
21st  April,  between  the  commissioners  appointed  by  the  King  of  England 
and  Governor  of  Scotland.  Albany  was  satisfied  with  the  truce  proposed  by 
his  commissioners,  and  on  the  6th  May  wrote  from  Falkland  Castle  to  King- 
Henry  the  Fourth,  intimating  his  entire  acquiescence  with  the  arrangement, 
which  was  that,  on  the  last  day  of  the  month  of  May,  letters  of  certification 
should  be  made  and  despatched  by  King  Henry  at  Kelso,  and  the  Duke  at 
Berwick,  and  declaring  that  if  the  truce  was  accepted,  it  would  be  firmly 
maintained  and  observed  by  him  and  the  people  of  Scotland,  in  all  form 
and  effect,  as  the  truce  of  the  previous  year.1 

Instead  of  accepting  the  truce  on  the  last  day  of  the  month  of  May,  as 
arranged,  King  Henry  on  that  day  appointed  commissioners  to  meet  with 
others  to  be  appointed  by  the  Scots  on  the  17th  of  June,  to  procure  a  truce 
lasting  only  till  the  feast  of  All  Saints  (1st  November).  This  appears  to 
have  been  resented  by  the  Scots,  as  tidings  reached  the  English  Court  in  the 
beginning  of  July,  that  an  invasion  of  England  was  intended  by  a  consider- 
able body  of  the  Scots  within  a  short  time ;  and  Henry  issued  letters  on 
the  5th  to  a  large  number  of  knights  and  others  to  resist  any  such  attack.2 
About  this  time  Fast  Castle,  an  almost  impregnable  fortress  on  the  rocky 
coast  of  Berwickshire,  was  taken  from  the  English  by  the  skill  and  bravery 
of  Patrick  Dunbar,  a  son  of  the  Earl  of  March,3 — a  happy  result  of  the 
reconciliation  of  Albany  with  March  and  his  family,  who  had  hitherto  held 
out  the  Scottish  castles  for  the  English  against  their  own  countrymen.  It 
was  but  a  few  years  previously  that  George  Dunbar,  another  son  of  the  Earl, 
had  maintained  the  fortress  of  Colbrandspath  for  King  Henry  against  the 

1  Eymer's  Foedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  635.  3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  444. 

2  Ibid.  p.  640.  4  Eymer's  Foedera,  vol.  viii.  p.  410. 

216  PROPOSALS  FOR  PEACE,  1410. 

Before  the  close  of  the  year  matters  had  again  become  smoother,  and 
overtures  were  made  for  the  making  of  another  truce.  The  same  commis- 
sioner, Edmund  Bugge,  was  sent  to  the  Governor,  who  wrote  to  Henry 
on  the  2d  of  October,  proposing  a  meeting  between  commissioners  of 
the  two  nations;  and  in  reply  received  a  letter,  of  which  the  following  is  a 
translation : — 

Henry,  etc.,  to  the  noble  and  mighty  Prince,  the  Duke  of  Albany,  our  most 
dear  cousin,  greeting  and  love.  Noble  Prince,  our  most  dear  cousin.-  -Returning  lately 
to  our  presence,  our  well-beloved  esquire,  Edmund  Bugge,  presented  to  us  on  your 
behalf  your  letters  written  at  Edinburgh,  the  second  day  of  October  last  past, 
containing,  among  other  things,  that  for  the  common  profit  of  the  two  realms,  and  for 
the  avoiding  of  the  irreparable  damages  which  by  the  waging  of  war  would  be  likely 
to  ensue  (which  God  avert),  it  is  your  intention  and  will  that  commissioners  of  high 
and  noble  estate  on  each  side,  provided  with  sufficient  powers  for  the  causes  expressed 
in  our  letters,  presented  to  you  by  our  said  esquire,  should  meet  at  Haddenstank  on 
Monday,  the  tenth  day  of  February  next  coming,  always  reserving  our  willingness  to 
consent ;  whereof,  and  of  our  pleasure  as  to  other  matters,  you  desire  to  be  certified 
by  our  letters,  at  the  Abbey  of  Kelso,  on  the  Feast  of  St.  Andrew  next  coming. 

Whereupon,  noble  Prince,  our  most  dear  cousin,  be  pleased  to  know  that  it  is 
our  intention,  and  that  herein  we  are  well  inclined  to  cause  to  be  sent  at  the  day  and 
place  above  expressed,  our  commissioners  of  such  rank  as  your  said  letters  make 
mention.  But  by  reason  of  other  most  important  concerns,  to  which  it  is  highly 
necessary  to  have,  in  haste,  the  advice  of  the  highest  and  wisest  of  our  realm,  we 
cannot  well  provide  for  the  presence  of  men  of  such  rank.  On  which  account  we 
have  ordained  to  send  to  you  at  Kelso,  on  the  27th  day  of  January  next  coming,  our 
dear  and  trusty  knight,  Richard  Redmayne,  and  our  beloved  clerk,  Master  Richard 
Holm,  canon  of  York,  to  meet  there,  at  that  time,  with  commissioners  of  like  rank  of 
your  side,  to  lay  down  distinctly  the  tenor  of  such  treaties  as  shall  be  likely  to  be 
kept  and  maintained,  and  also  the  rank  of  the  grand  commissioners  on  the  one  part, 
and  on  the  other,  and  the  day  and  place  at  which  they  might  meet  on  the  March,  for 


making  a  final  treaty  of  peace,  or  a  long  truce  between  the  two  realms,  according  to 
that  which,  on  their  meeting,  may  seem  most  expedient  and  needful,  and  to  treat 
meanwhile  on  the  reparation  to  be  made  for  attempts  contrary  to  the  truce. 
Concerning  which,  noble  Prince,  our  most  dear  cousin,  in  case  that  you  are  willing, 
on  your  part,  to  act  in  like  manner,  and  what  shall  be  your  intention  in  this  case 
be  pleased  to  certify  by  your  letters  before  Christmas  next  coming,  at  our  town  of 
Berwick,  to  our  most  dear  son  John,  Warden  of  our  East  March  towards  Scotland,  to 
whom  we  have  written,  to  receive  the  same  certification  on  our  behalf  for  the  more 
speedy  fulfilment  of  the  business. 

Noble,  etc.,  may  our  Saviour  have  you  in  his  holy  keeping. 

Given  at  the  Abbey  of  St.  Alban's,  the  14th  day  of  November  (1410).1 

The  regency  of  Albany  was  signalised  by  the  establishment  of  the 
University  of  St.  Andrews,  which  was  the  first  in  Scotland.  It  was  opened 
in  the  year  1410,  and  several  of  the  clergy  were  appointed  Professors,  and 
began  their  prelections ;  but  the  deed  of  foundation  was  not  obtained  from 
Eome  until  the  year  1413. 

Alexander  Leslie,  ninth  Earl  of  Boss,  married  Lady  Isabella  Stewart,  one 
of  Albany's  daughters.  To  them  was  born  a  daughter  Euphemia,  who  is  said 
to  have  been  deformed,  and  on  that  account  to  have  entered  a  convent.  Her 
father  died  before  1405,  as  in  that  year  she  was  under  the  care  of  the  Duke, 
her  grandfather,  who,  in  a  precept  of  sasine  to  Donald  Caldor  of  the  offices 
of  Sheriff  of  Nairn  and  Constable  of  Nairn  Castle,  granted  at  Dingwall 
on  the  11th  of  July  of  that  year,  is  styled  Lord  of  the  Ward  of  Boss.2 
Countess  Euphemia  disponed  her  lands  to  her  maternal  uncle,  John  Stewart 
of  Buchan,  or,  it  may  be,  only  expressed  her  intention  of  doing  so,  without 
regard  to  the  claims  of  her  paternal  aunt  Margaret,  who  had  married  Donald, 
Lord  of  the  Isles,  and  was  next  heir.     In  right  of  his  wife  the  Lord  of  the 

1  Contemporaneous  Draft  on  vellum  in  the  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum. 

2  The  Thanes  of  Cawdor,  p.  5. 

VOL.  I.  2  E 


BATTLE  OF  EARL  AW,  1411. 

Isles  disputed  the  disposition  of  the  earldom,  and  prepared  to  take  it  by  force. 
Having  raised  an  army  of  ten  thousand  men  he  entered  the  earldom,  laying 
waste  all  the  country  he  passed  through,  and  proceeded  towards  Aberdeen, 
intending  afterwards  to  reduce  to  his  power  all  the  country  north  of  the  Tay. 
But  he  was  met  at  Harlaw  by  Alexander  Stewart,  Earl  of  Mar,  and  Alexander 
Ogilvy,  Sheriff  of  Angus,  with  all  the  available  strength  of  Mar  and  Garioch, 
Angus,  and  the  Mearns,  and  on  the  24th  of  July  was  fought  one  of  the 
fiercest  battles  ever  waged  on  Scottish  soil.  Although  Mar's  brave  army 
suffered  severely,  the  Lord  of  the  Isles  was  practically  defeated  by  him. 
Owing  to  the  great  slaughter  among  the  loyal  knights,  the  governor,  at  a  Parlia- 
ment held  soon  afterwards,  declared  that  the  sons  of  those  who  were  slain 
should  be  infeft  in  their  paternal  estates  without  payment  of  the  usual  feudal 
fees,  and  that  even  minors  should  be  permitted  to  enter  to  their  lands  at  once. 
The  Duke  of  Albany  followed  up  the  battle  of  Harlaw  by  assembling  an 
army  and  proceeding  to  the  castle  of  Dingwall,  the  chief  messuage  of  the 
earldom  of  Eoss,  which  had  been  in  the  possession  of  the  Lord  of  the  Isles. 
He  seized  the  castle,  and  appointed  a  keeper.  The  approach  of  winter 
prevented  further  operations  at  that  time,  but  in  the  ensuing  summer  the 
Duke  raised  three  armies  and  attacked  Donald,  Lord  of  the  Isles,  in  his  own 
strongholds.  The  island  chieftain,  however,  shunned  the  combat,  and  came 
to  the  Duke's  peace  at  Loch  Gilp,  where  he  gave  hostages  for  his  future  good 
behaviour,  and  for  indemnifying  the  injuries  he  had  caused  to  the  lieges.1 
The  Duke  of  Albany  also  took  the  opportunity  of  strengthening  the  power 
of  the  Crown  in  the  north,  by  causing  a  castle  to  be  built  at  Inverness,  under 
the  direction  of  Alexander,  Earl  of  Mar,  who  was  for  several  years  engaged 
in  superintending  its  construction,  and  also  with  others  in  securing  the  peace 
of  that  part  of  the  country  against  the  Lord  of  the  Isles  and  the  Caterans.2 
1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  445.  2  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  pp.  47,  58,  66,  69. 


The  Lord  of  the  Isles  renounced,  at  least  for  the  time,  his  claim  to  the 
earldom  of  Boss,  which  was  afterwards  resigned  by  Euphemia,  Countess  of 
Eoss,  into  the  hands  of  her  grandfather  the  Governor,  on  12th  June  1415,  and 
on  the  1 5th  of  the  same  month  it  was  regranted  by  the  Duke  to  her  and  the 
heirs  of  her  body ;  whom  failing,  to  John  Stewart,  Earl  of  Buchan,  and  his 
heirs-male ;  failing  him,  to  Eobert  Stewart  his  brother,  and  his  heirs-male ; 
and  failing  them,  to  the  King  and  his  heirs,  being  Kings  of  Scotland.1  John, 
Earl  of  Buchan,  afterwards  possessed  the  earldom,  and  was  for  some  time 
styled  Earl  of  Buchan  and  Boss.  He  was  slain  in  Normandy,  at  the  battle 
of  Verneuil,  in  August  1424.  Dying  without  issue,  his  brother  Bobert 
should  have  inherited  the  earldom  of  Boss,  but  as  it  was  claimed  by  the  Lord 
of  the  Isles,  King  James  the  First  appears  to  have  taken  advantage  of 
the  dispute  and  seized  the  earldom.  Although  Bobert  Stewart  lived  until 
1431,  he  is  never  mentioned  as  Earl  or  Lord  of  Boss,  but  only  as  a  Crown 
pensioner.  James  afterwards  bestowed  the  earldom  of  Boss  upon  Alexander, 
Lord  of  the  Isles. 

The  Duke  of  Albany  was  also  allied  by  marriage  with  the  family  of 
Argyll,  Duncan,  first  Lord  Campbell,  having  married  Lady  Marjory  Stewart, 
another  daughter  of  the  Duke.  Albany  granted  a  charter  to  his  beloved  son, 
Duncan  Campbell  of  Lochaw,  of  the  lands  of  Menstrie,  in  the  shire  of 
Clackmannan.  To  this  charter,  dated  at  Stirling,  18th  January  1414,  Henry 
Bercy,  Earl  of  Northumberland,  is  a  witness,  along  with  WiUiam  Douglas 
of  Logtoun.2  This  is  probably  the  only  instance  in  which  a  Bercy  and  a 
Douglas  have  been  found  together  as  attesting  witnesses  in  a  royal  Scotch 
charter.     The  young  Earl  was  still  a  refugee  at  the  Court  of  the  Governor. 

Although  a  six  years'  truce  had  been  agreed  to  in  1412,  of  which  the 

1  Original  in  Charter-chest  at  Leslie  House. 

2  Original  in  the  Duke  of  Argyll's  Charter-chest. 

220  THE  DUKE  AT  DOUNE  CASTLE,   1413. 

Duke  of  Albany  at  once  took  advantage  to  seek  the  release  of  King  James 
and  the  nobles  and  knights  held  in  captivity  by  the  English  king,  a  new 
truce  was  found  necessary  in  the  following  year.  A  commission  to  ambas- 
sadors was  granted  by  the  Governor,  at  his  castle  of  Doune  in  Menteith,  in 
the  autumn  of  1413,  which  is  here  translated  from  the  original  Latin : — 

Eobert,  son  of  the  King  of  Scotland,  Duke  of  Albany,  Earl  of  Fife  and  of 
Menteith,  and  Governor  of  the  kingdom  of  Scotland,  to  all  to  whose  knowledge  these 
present  letters  shall  come,  greeting  :  Know  ye  that  we,  fully  confiding  in  the  fidelity, 
wisdom,  and  prudence  of  our  beloved  and  faithful  Patrick  Dunbar  of  Bele,  our  cousin, 
William  Hay  of  Lochorwart,  and  William  of  Borthwick,  knights,  have  made,  constituted, 
and  ordained,  and  by  these  presents  make,  constitute,  and  ordain,  with  knowledge  and 
consent  of  Council,  them  and  each,  conjunctly  and  separately,  our  special  deputies, 
commissioners  and  ambassadors,  giving  and  granting  to  them  and  any  one  of  them, 
conjunctly  or  separately,  our  full  power  and  special  commandment  to  meet  with  any 
commissioners  or  deputies  appointed  by  Henry,  King  of  England,  our  adversary,  on 
days  and  at  places  on  the  marches  of  England  and  Scotland  or  thereabout  to  be  agreed 
upon  ;  also  to  treat  and  confer  with  the  saids  commissioners  of  our  foresaid  adversary, 
of  and  concerning  a  general  truce  by  sea,  and  a  particular  truce  by  land,  between  us 
and  the  kingdom  of  Scotland  and  our  said  adversary  and  kingdom  of  England,  and 
the  lieges  and  subjects  of  both  kingdoms,  to  be  made  and  confirmed,  and  to  endure  for 
such  time  as  shall  seem  expedient  to  you  and  the  commissioners  of  our  adversary  ;  and 
to  treat  of,  do  and  arrange  all  and  every  other  thing  needful  or  conducive  to  the  due 
expedition  of  the  premises,  even  although  these  should  require  a  more  special  com- 
mand ;  holding  and  promising  to  hold  whatever  our  said  commissioners  or  any  one 
of  them,  conjunctly  or  separately,  shall  cause  to  be  done  in  the  premises  or  any  of 
the  premises.  Given  under  testimony  of  our  Great  Seal,  at  our  Castle  of  Doune  in 
Menteith,  the  7th  day  of  the  month  of  August,  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand 
four  hundred  and  thirteen,  and  of  our  governorship  the  eighth  year.1 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  voL  ix.   p.  45.      This       been  erected  by  Murdach,   second  Duke  of 
castle  has  been  erroneously  supposed  to  have       Albany.     But  the  fact  of  the  existence  of  the 


The  commissioners  were  successful  in  arranging  a  truce  to  last  from  15th 
Aiiirast  to  the  1st  of  June  folio wino-.1 

In  the  same  year,  in  view  of  the  marriage  of  his  son,  John  Stewart,  Earl  of 
Bnchan,  which  had  not  yet  taken  place,  the  Duke  of  Albany  confirmed  a  number 
of  charters  of  lands  to  him  and  his  intended  spouse,  Lady  Elizabeth  Douglas. 
The  Earl  of  Douglas  resigned  into  the  Governor's  hands  the  lands  of  Stewar- 
toun,  Ormisheuch,  and  Dunlop,  in  the  barony  of  Cunningham,  and  the  lands  of 
Trabuyage  in  the  earldom  of  Carrick,  all  in  Ayrshire,  which  were  granted  to 
the  Earl  of  Buchan.  The  lands  of  Touchfraser,  in  Stirlingshire,  which  the 
Earl  of  Buchan  had  received  six  years  before  from  his  grandfather,  William 
Keith,  Marischal  of  Scotland,  were  also  resigned  by  and  regranted  to  him,  and 
the  Governor  added  the  barony  of  Tillicoultry,  in  Clackmannanshire.  Most 
of  these  charters  were  granted  about  the  beginning  of  November,  and  one  of 
them  on  the  24th  of  November,  after  the  Duke  had  returned  to  Doune  Castle.2 

The  Governor  becoming  anxious  for  the  return  of  his  eldest  son,  Sir 
Murdach,  from  England,  had  sent  repeated  embassies  to  obtain  the  release  of 
both  him  and  the  King,  but  hitherto  without  success.  In  this  year,  1413,  he 
sent  his  son  John,  Earl  of  Buchan,  to  the  King  of  England,  along  with  his  own 
chaplain,  John  Busby,  and  a  squire,  John  Porter,  to  treat  for  Sir  Murdach's 
release.3  The  last-named  commissioner  had  special  business  with  Sir  Murdach 
himself,  and  received  a  safe-conduct  to  go  to  him.4  There  were  at  the  same 
time  in  England  two  other  Scottish  embassies,  one  of  which  was  negotiating 
for  the  release  of  the  King,  the  other,  some  arduous  business  connected  with 
the  two  realms.5 
castle  as  a  residence  of  Duke  Robert,  shows  2  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  pp.  254-256. 


Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  48. 

that  his  son  could  not  have  been  the  builder 
of  Doune.  A  full  history  of  the  castle  is  given 
in  a  subsequent  chapter  of  this  work.  lota.  p.  IZo. 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  60.  b  Ibid.  pp.  71,  79,  145. 


The  Scottish  commissioners  appointed  to  treat  for  the  release  of  the 
Duke's  son  had  safe-conducts  from  Henry  the  Fifth  of  England,  dated  12th 
May  1415,  to  proceed  to  Calf  hill,  near  Berwick,  and  there  exchange  Henry 
Percy  for  Murdach  Stewart,1  but  the  proposal  was  not  at  that  time  carried 
out,  and  in  the  beginning  of  the  month  of  August  tidings  reached  King  Henry 
at  Southampton  that  the  Scots  were  preparing  to  go  to  war  with  England.2 
On  the  5th  of  the  same  month  he  appointed  commissioners  to  meet  with 
others  from  Albany  to  negotiate  a  truce,3  but  on  the  14th,  and  also  the  24th, 
the  King  of  England  stated  that  he  had  received  information  that  Albany 
was  about  to  lay  siege  to  Berwick-on-Tweed  both  by  land  and  sea,  and 
had  raised  a  very  great  army  for  this  purpose,  as  well  as  equipped  ships, 
and  that  the  attack  was  to  be  made  within  a  very  short  time,  an  invasion 
of  England  being  also  intended.4  We  do  not  find  that  any  such  grave 
conflict  took  place,  save  that,  as  an  ancient  historian  records,  in  this  year, 
1415,  the  town  of  Penrith  was  burned  by  Archibald,  Earl  of  Douglas,  and 
that  in  return  the  English  burned  the  town  of  Dumfries.6 

Before  the  close  of  the  year,  however,  Henry  agreed  to  carry  out  the 
arrangement  for  the  exchange  of  Sir  Murdach  Stewart  and  Henry  Percy, 
and  this  was  finally  accomplished  in  the  beginning  of  the  following  year. 
It  would  appear  as  if  this  exchange  had  been  first  moved  by  Percy  himself 
who  was  anxious  to  return  to  his  possessions  and  earldom  on  being  assured 
of  King  Henry's  good-will  towards  him,  but  the  Governor  refused  to  allow 
him  to  depart  until  some  arrangement  was  made  about  the  Scottish 
prisoners.  He  was  willing,  however,  to  agree  to  the  exchange,  and  the 
King  of  England  likewise  agreed,  but  only  on  condition  that  Percy  would 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  244.  4  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  ix.  pp.  307,  310. 

2  Ibid.  p.  299. 

3  Ibid.  p.  302.  b  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  44S. 


take  on  himself  the  burden  of  £10,000  demanded  by  him  for  the  ransom 
of  Sir  Murdach.  This  Percy  undertook,  and  settled  the  matter  with  Sir 
Murdach  afterwards. 

The  King  of  Scotland  was  too  valuable  a  prize  to  be  permitted  to  return 
to  his  country  on  similar  terms,  although  immediately  after  his  son's  release 
Albany  despatched  an  embassy  to  the  English  King  to  ascertain  on  what 
conditions  he  would  consent  to  restore  the  royal  captive.  The  commissioners 
were  John  Hailes,  Abbot  of  Balmerino,  Sir  John  Forrester  of  Corstorphine, 
and  Walter  Ogilvy,  and  their  endeavours  were  so  far  attended  with  success 
that  an  arrangement  was  made  by  which  James  was  to  visit  his  kingdom,  and 
return  again  into  England,  on  condition  of  hostages  to  the  value  of  100,000 
marks  being  found  for  him.  The  Scottish  commissioners  received  their  safe- 
conducts  in  the  beginning  of  May  1416,  and  before  the  expiry  of  that  year 
Henry  appointed  Thomas,  Bishop  of  Durham,  Henry,  Earl  of  Northumberland, 
and  Balph,  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  to  receive  the  hostages  and  securities.1 
On  the  same  day  (8th  December  1416)  on  which  Henry  granted  this  com- 
mission, he  also  empowered  the  commissioners  above  mentioned  to  grant 
safe-conducts  to  some  notable  persons  coming  from  Scotland  to  King 
James  in  England,  while  he  himself  granted  the  like  to  Walter  Stewart, 
Earl  of  Athole,  Sir  William  of  Graham,  Alexander  Lindsay,  Earl  of  Crawford, 
George  Dunbar,  son  of  the  Earl  of  March,  Henry,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews, 
William,  Bishop  of  Glasgow,  William  Douglas  of  Drumlanrig,  Archibald,  Earl 
of  Douglas,  Alexander  Stewart,  Earl  of  Mar  and  Garioch,  and  the  two  eldest 
sons  of  the  Duke  of  Albany,  Sir  Murdach  and  John,  Earl  of  Buchan.2  Their 
business  could  only  be  the  important  one  of  the  King's  release,  or  to  make 
arrangements  for  a  temporary  visit,  and  in  this  the  Duke,  as  he  could  not 
leave  the  affairs  of   the  kingdom  to   go   in  person   in  the  expectation  of 

1  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  417.  2  Ibid.  p.  418. 


meeting  Iris  Sovereign,  both  used  his  authority  as  Governor,  and  sent  his 
two  sons  to  represent  him.  The  arrangement,  however,  was  never  carried 
into  effect,  and  King  James  was  still  detained  in  England. 

Albany  continued,  therefore,  to  discharge  the  onerous  duties  of  Eegent, 
and  with  evident  acceptance  to  both  nobles  and  people.  He  gave  licence, 
dated  3d  March  1416,  to  James  Dundas  of  Dundas,  to  build,  fortify,  and 
erect  in  height  his  tower  at  Dundas  in  form  of  a  castle,  to  surround  it  with 
walls  and  ditches  as  he  pleased,  and  to  appoint  a  constable,  porter,  and  other 
keepers,  with  the  powers  usual  to  such  in  any  Scottish  castle.1  To  the 
Church  likewise  the  Duke  was  generous,  and  maintained  its  privileges. 
He  frequently  ratified  the  grants  and  immunities  which  had  been  conceded 
to  the  Church  by  the  Kings  of  Scotland,  besides  giving  grants  himself.  On 
8th  September  1406,  at  Falkland,  he  granted  the  third  part  of  the  lands  of 
the  barony  of  Bosyth  for  the  support  of  a  chaplain  in  the  parish  church 
of  Inverkeithing,  for  the  souls  of  his  wife  Muriella,  Duchess  of  Albany,  her 
father,  William  Keith,  Mareschal,  and  others;2  and  on  the  26th  of  June 
following,  he  gave  half  of  his  annual  rent  of  twenty  marks  of  the  lands 
of  Cragorth  for  the  sustenance  of  a  chaplain  in  the  chapel  of  Michael 
the  Archangel  in  Stirling  Castle,  where  masses  might  be  said  for  his 
own  soul  and  those  of  his  two  wives  Margaret  and  Muriel,  and  their 
children,  and  also  for  the  souls  of  the  Kings  of  Scotland  since  King 
Eobert  the  Bruce.2  In  1406,  when  the  Bailies  of  Ayr  were  condemned  in 
£140  for  absenting  themselves  from  the  Exchequer  Audits  for  fourteen  years 
past,  the  Governor  and  Lords  Auditors  remitted  the  amount  on  condition 
that  the  Communitas  of  Ayr  would  caiise  three  trentalia4  of  masses  to  be 

1  Historical  Manuscripts  Commission's  Third  Report,  Appendix,  p.  413. 

2  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  227.  3  Ibid.  p.  231. 

4  An  office  for  the  dead  lasting  thirty  days,  or  consisting  of  thirty  masses. 



celebrated  for  the  souls  of  the  Kings  of  Scotland,  the  Duke  of  Bothesay,  and 
all  the  faithful  deceased.1  Tn  1408  he  granted  the  rents  of  the  lands  of  the 
bishopric  of  Moray,  which  were  in  the  hands  of  the  Crown  for  the  time,  the 
see  being  vacant,  to  the  Earl  of  Moray,  for  the  rebuilding  of  the  Cathedral 
Church  of  that  diocese  at  Elgin,  and  another  grant  of  £79,  15s.  6d.  was  made 
to  the  Bishop  of  Moray  in  1413  for  the  same  purpose.2  The  whole  of  the 
fees  of  the  Chamberlain-ayres  at  Edinburgh,  in  1409  and  1413,  with  the 
exception  of  their  expenses,  were  granted  in  those  years  to  the  work  of  St. 
Giles's  Cathedral  in  that  city;  and  on  another  occasion,  in  1414,  when  the 
parish  church  of  Stirling  was  destroyed  by  fire,  he  granted  the  proceeds  of 
the  Chamberlain  Court  held  in  Stirling  for  its  restoration.3  Again,  on  the 
26th  June  1417,  when  the  Sheriffs  of  Aberdeen  and  Banff  were  disposed  to 
trespass  upon  the  privileges  of  the  clergy  in  that  part,  the  Duke  wrote 
straitly  commanding  them  to  forbear.4  And  thus  by  a  wise  discretion  he 
preserved  peace  and  harmony  in  the  country,  and  procured  for  himself  the 
favour  of  all  classes,  both  of  clergy  and  laity. 

Previous  to  22d  June  1417,  the  Duke  was  present  at  Justice-ayres 
held  at  Ayr,  and  also  at  Irvine.5  At  the  latter  burgh  he  adjudicated  on  a 
cause  which  had  arisen  betwixt  the  burghers  and  William  Frances  of  Stane, 
and  the  following  deliverance  is  interesting  as  revealing  his  sound  discretion 
and  prudence  in  such  matters : — 

Kobert,  Duke  of  Albany,  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  and  Governor  of  the  kingdom 
of  Scotland,  to  all  and  sundry  to  whose  knowledge  the  present  letters  shall  come, 
greeting.  Because  it  is  pious  and  meritorious  to  bear  testimony  to  the  truth,  and 
particularly  in  a  cause  or  case  in  which  concealment  of  the  truth  respecting  fees  and 
heritage  might  be  created  to  innocent  persons,  hence  it  is  that  we  notify  to  you  all, 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  pp.  22,  23.  4  Acts    of    the    Parliaments   of   Scotland, 

2  Ibid.  pp.  6S,  173.  vol.  xii.  p.  22. 

3  Ibid.  pp.  129,  188,  210.  5  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  91. 
VOL.  I.  2  F 


by  the  tenor  of  these  present  letters,  that  on  account  of  a  certain  disagreement  moved 
between  the  bailies,  burgesses,  and  community  of  the  burgh  of  Irwyne  on  the  one 
part,  and  William  Frances  of  Stane  on  the  other  part,  respecting  a  certain  claim  of 
heritable  possession  of  a  piece  of  moor  lying  at  the  west  end  of  the  chapel  of  Saint 
Bridgidie,  in  the  barony  of  Conynghame  in  the  sheriffdom  of  Are,  on  account  of 
which  disagreement  moved  betwixt  the  said  parties,  and  for  avoiding  the  evil  and  ills 
which  might  thence  arise,  we  caused  the  said  piece  of  moor,  with  its  pertinents,  to 
be  duly  recognosced  into  our  hands  a  long  time  ago,  and  afterwards  for  putting  a 
termination  to  the  said  disagreement,  and  for  seeing,  declaring,  and  finally  determining 
to  which  of  the  said  parties  the  said  piece  of  moor,  with  its  pertinents,  ought  to 
belong  and  of  right  and  reason  to  remain  with,  we  caused  to  be  duly  summoned  by 
our  bailie  of  the  barony  of  Conynghame,  by  our  letters-patent  under  our  seal,  the 
aforesaid  parties,  together  with  the  better  and  more  faithful  men  of  the  country,  in 
proper  person  to  appear  before  us  on  Saturday  the  24th  day  of  July,  personally  on 
the  said  account.  On  which  day  the  said  summons  being  duly  proved  before  us  then 
by  good  and  faithful  men  of  the  country,  by  whom  the  truth  of  the  thing  could  be 
better  known,  their  great  oath  intervening,  viz.,  John  of  Camera  of  Gadgirth,  John 
Locarde  of  the  Bar,  Kobert  Boos  of  Tarbart,  John  of  Aruot  of  Lochrig,  Bobert  of 
Fergushill  of  the  same,  Henry  of  Conynghame,  John  Boyle  of  Caleburn,  Alexander 
Frazer  of  Knock,  Finlay  Monfode  of  the  same,  John  of  Langmuir  of  the  same,  John 
Homil,  Gilbert  Spere,  John  Gibbouuson,  William  Dobynsoun,  and  Adam  Lachlane, 
we  caused  to  be  diligently  and  faithfully  inquired  which  of  the  said  parties  was  in 
possession  of  the  said  piece  of  moor  at  the  time  of  our  recognition  aforesaid,  and 
being  sworn  and  well  and  maturely  advised  and  counselled,  in  one  voice,  with  no 
difference,  said,  declared,  and  finally  determined  that  the  aforesaid  bailies,  burgesses, 
and  community  were  in  possession  of  the  said  moor,  with  its  pertinents,  at  the 
time  of  our  recognition  above  mentioned,  and  therefore  the  said  moor,  with  the 
pertinents,  in  presence  of  many  chiefs  of  the  realm,  barons,  knights,  and  nobles  of 
the  kingdom,  namely,  Murdach  Stewart  of  Kynclevine  our  lieutenant,  John  Stewart, 
Earl  of  Buchan,  our  dearest  sons,  John  of  Montgomeri  of  Ardrossan,  Winfrid  of 
Conynghame   of  Auchtercuachane,  knight,  Alexander   of  Levingstoun   of  Kalandare, 


William  of  Conynghame  of  Kilmawris,  and  Archibald  of  Conynghame  of  Auchinbowie, 
and  many  others  of  deliberate  counsel,  we  deliver  in  surety  to  the  said  bailies, 
burgesses,  and  community  as  possessors  of  the  same,  as  we  were  bound  and  ought  to 
do  in  consequence  of  the  office  we  had  undertaken,  etc.  etc.1 

The  King  of  England  had  gone  to  France  with  the  flower  of  his  army, 
leaving  his  own  kingdom  in  the  care  of  his  brother,  the  Duke  of  Bedford. 
During  his  absence,  says  an  English  historian,  the  Lollards  (a  political  party 
opposed  to  the  House  of  Lancaster),  under  the  leading  of  Sir  John  Oldcastle, 
began  to  scheme  madly  and  to  incite  the  Scots,  both  by  entreaties  and 
promises  of  money,  to  enter  England,  assuring  them  that  it  would  be  easy 
work.  William  Douglas,  it  was  said,  had  been  spoken  with  at  Pontefract,  and 
promised  a  large  amount  of  gold  if  he  succeeded  in  raising  his  countrymen 
to  undertake  the  invasion.  They  desired  the  Scots  also  to  bring  with  them 
the  person  at  that  time  at  Albany's  Court,  whom  many  thought  to  be  King 
Richard  of  England,  so  that  he  might  show  himself  as  King  of  England.2 
The  Scots  gathered  to  the  fray  with  alacrity,  and  the  Governor,  dividing  his 
army  into  two  portions,  sent  one  of  them  under  Archibald,  Earl  of  Douglas, 
to  besiege  Roxburgh  Castle,  while  he  himself  proceeded  to  Berwick.3 
Douglas  had  commenced  the  siege  of  Roxburgh  by  undermining  the  walls, 
but  when  the  Duke  of  Bedford,  with  other  English  nobles,  was  announced  to 
be  rapidly  approaching,  at  the  head  of  more  than  a  hundred  thousand  men,4 
the  enterprise  was  suddenly  abandoned,  and  the  Scots  retired  somewhat 
precipitately,  on  account  of  which  the  incident,  says  a  Scottish  chronicler, 
was  afterwards  commonly  known  as  "  the  foul  raid." 5 

In  the  year  1417,  the  question  of  the  occupancy  of  the  Papal  throne 
1  Translation  from  Topographical  Descrip-  2  Walsingham,  p.  446. 

tion   of   Ayrshire,   by   George   Robertson. —  3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  449. 

Original    in    Irvine    Town-Council   Charter-  4  Walsingham,  p.  447. 

chest.  5  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  449. 


commanded  the  attention  of  the  Parliament  and  people  of  Scotland  in  a 
special  manner.  The  Council  of  Constance  had  heen  sitting  for  several  years, 
but  without  any  representative  from  Scotland,  which  at  this  time  was  the 
only  kingdom  adhering  firmly  to  Pope  Benedict  the  Thirteenth.  In  this 
year,  however,  the  Council  sent  a  commissioner  to  invite  the  adherence  of 
Scotland,  who  made  known  his  errand  in  an  address  before  the  Governor, 
and  the  three  Estates  of  the  kingdom  met  in  Parliament  at  Perth.  The 
Emperor  Sigismond  wrote  at  the  same  time  to  the  Governor  and  Parliament 
urging  union  with  the  Council.  On  the  other  hand,  Benedict  wrote  to  the 
Governor  and  Parliament  to  stand  fast  in  their  obedience  to  him.  The  Duke 
of  Albany  personally  favoured  the  claims  of  Benedict,  and  obtained  an  English 
friar,  Kobert  Harding,  to  dispute  the  matter  against  the  commissioner  of  the 
Council  of  Constance.  The  entire  University  of  St.  Andrews  were  quite 
opposed  to  the  English  priest,  but  he,  backed  by  the  Governor,  stubbornly 
pursued  the  debate.  At  length  the  question  was  to  be  settled  in  Parliament 
on  the  2d  or  3d  of  October,  and  Harding  did  his  best  to  keep  back  the 
kingdom  from  the  Council,  and  from  transferring  their  obedience  from 
Benedict  to  Pope  Martin  the  Fifth,  who  had  lately  been  appointed  by  the 
Council  of  Constance  ;  but  it  was  to  no  purpose,  as  the  Scottish  clergy,  prefer- 
ring a  united  Church  to  standing  out  singly  for  Benedict,  obtained  a  resolution 
of  Parliament  to  accede  to  the  Council  of  Constance  and  Pope  Martin.1 

The  fate  of  King  Bichard  the  Second  of  England  became  a  question 
during  the  regency  of  Albany.  Towards  the  close  of  the  reign  of  King 
Eobert  the  Third  there  was  brought  to  his  Court  a  person  said  to  be  King 
Bichard.  He  had  been  found  wandering  in  the  Western  Islands,  and  was 
sent  to  King  Eobert  by  the  Lord  of  the  Isles,  under  the  belief  that  he  was 
the  late  King  of  England.     Although  the  captive  denied  the  identity,  he  was 

1  Fordnn,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  451. 


detained  at  Court,  and  after  King  Bobert's  death  Albany  continued  to  main- 
tain him.  On  his  death  in  1419  he  was  buried  at  Stirling,  and  a  monument 
erected  to  him  as  King  Richard.  Frequent  references  to  this  person,  as 
King  Eichard  of  England,  occur  in  the  Exchequer  Eolls,  between  the  years 
1408  and  1417,  showing  that  during  the  Eegency  he  was  maintained  at 
Albany's  own  charges.  A  memorandum  in  the  account  rendered  on  2  2d 
June  1417,  notes  that  Albany  had  received  no  allowance  for  the  expenses 
of  the  custody  of  King  Eichard  of  England  since  the  death  of  King  Eobert 
the  Third,  a  period  of  eleven  years.  The  auditors  estimated  the  cost  at  100 
merks  yearly,  and  stated  the  amount  due  to  the  Eegent  as  £733,  6s.  Sd.1 

While  the  Scottish  Court  treated  this  person  as  Eichard,  and  his  adhe- 
rents in  England  raised  rebellions  in  his  behalf,  King  Henry  the  Fifth  dealt 
with  him  as  an  impostor,  and  the  evidence  adduced  in  the  course  of  the 
discussion  which  the  subject  has  evoked  proves  that  he  was  Thomas  Warde 
of  Trumpington,  a  half-witted  Englishman,  who  bore  some  resemblance 
to  King  Eichard.  The  imposition  was  chiefly  maintained  by  an  accom- 
plice, William  Serle,  once  a  servant  of  Eichard,  who  obtained  possession  of 
the  royal  signet,  and  sealed  forged  letters  in  the  name  of  his  master.  Serle 
was  ultimately  taken  by  the  English  and  put  to  death. 

The  friendly  relations  between  England  and  Scotland  were  still  insecure, 
and  any  truces  made  were  little  regarded  when  anything  occurred  to  rouse 
the  spirits  of  either  nation.  Henry  was  again  at  war  with  France,  and  King 
Charles  the  Sixth,  feeling  himself  in  danger,  wrote  to  Albany  to  afford 
him  some  help  against  the  King  of  England,  in  accordance  with  the  treaties 
between  France  and  Scotland.  Before  doing  so,  the  Governor  assembled 
the  Barhament,  and  by  them  it  was  agreed  that  the  Governor's  second  son, 
John  Stewart,  Earl  of  Buchan,  who  was  already  famous  as  a  soldier,  should 
1  Chamberlain  Eolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  25. 

230  DEATH  OF  ROBERT,  DUKE  OF  ALBANY,  1420. 

go  to  France  with  seven  thousand  knights  and  soldiers.  The  Scots  were 
cordially  received  by  the  French  King,  and  won  laurels  for  themselves 
in  the  field,  the  Earl  of  Buchan  so  distinguishing  himself  by  his  bravery 
that  he  was  created  Constable  of  France.1  On  learning  that  ships  had 
been  despatched  to  Scotland  for  assistance,  Henry  wrote  to  England  with 
instructions  that  they  should  be  intercepted,2  but  if  any  attempt  was  made 
to  carry  out  this  order  it  was  not  successful. 

Not  long  after  this  the  Duke  of  Albany,  worn  out  by  a  long  life  of  labour, 
died  at  Stirling,  being  upwards  of  eighty  years  of  age.  He  died,  says  the 
historian,  quietly  in  his  bed,  after  partaking  of  the  Sacraments,  in  a  sound 
mind,  and  in  a  Christian  manner.  He  was  buried  in  Dunfermline  Abbey, 
between  the  choir  and  the  Chapel  of  our  Lady,  and  on  his  tomb  was  placed 
the  following  epitaph : — - 

Jura  tuens,  et  pacis  amans,  et  maximus  arims, 
Eobertus  primus,  dux  in  Albania  summus, 
Gratia  naturae  speculum,  quo  vera  refulcit 
Justitia,  et  quicquid  in  principe  mundus  adorat, 
Occidit,  et  pariter  decus  et  pax,  Scotia,  totus 
Excidit,  Boberto  custode  rebus  adempto, 
Anno  milleno  quater  C.  X.  que  noveno. 
Ejusdem  flamen  cum  Christo  gaudeat.     Amen.3 

Bower,  the  continuator  of  Fordun,  states  that  the  death  of  the  Duke 
took  place  on  the  3d  September  1419,  but  this  is  evidently  a  mistake,  as  it 
does  not  agree  with  his  statement  that  Albany  ruled  Scotland  for  fifteen 
years.  Besides,  in  the  Chamberlain's  account  rendered  at  Perth  on  28th 
July  1420,  there  is  evidence  of  the  Duke's  being  alive  at  that  date,4  while  in 

1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  458.  3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  466. 

2  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  791.  4  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  109. 



that  rendered  about  a  year  later  he  is  mentioned  as  deceased.1  And  in 
addition  to  these  there  is  in  the  Eegister  of  the  Great  Seal  a  charter  by  King- 
James  the  First,  dated  29th  August,  anno  25  (1430),  confirming  a  charter  by 
Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  to  William,  Lord  of  Graham,  and  his  wife  Mariota 
Stewart,  the  Duke's  sister,  and  Robert  of  Graham  his  son,  of  the  lands  of 
Aldmonros  and  others,  dated  at  "  Faulkland,  quarto  die  mensis  Augusti  anno 
Domini,  millesimo  quadringentesimo  vicesimo,  et  gubernacionis  nostre  quinto- 
decimo" — 4th  August  1420,  and  of  our  government  the  fifteenth  year.2 

It  will  not  be  amiss  to  notice  here  the  character  given  to  the  Duke  by 
those  historians  who  lived  in  his  time,  that  it  may  be  placed  in  contrast  with 
that  which  is  generally  attributed  to  him  by  later  historians.  The  facts  of 
his  life,  as  related  in  the  preceding  pages,  will  show  which  view  of  his 
character  is  the  correct  one. 

The  prejudices  of  Pinkerton  made  him  distort  almost  every  act  in  the  life 
of  Albany  to  his  discredit,  yet  he  is  obliged  to  admit  that  Albany  had  many 
good  qualities.  He  says  that  his  person  was  tall  and  majestic,  his  counten- 
ance amiable ;  temperance,  affability,  eloquence,  real  generosity,  apparent 
benignity,  a  degree  of  cool  prudence,  bordering  upon  wisdom,  were  among  his 
virtues,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  this  description  of  them  is  derived  from 
contemporary  historians.  The  vices  with  which  Pinkerton  charges  Albany 
are  vouched  for  by  no  authority  whatever,  but  derived  solely  from  his  own 
imagination,  which  from  his  youth  was  sometimes  too  lively. 

Tytler,  who  is  generally  impartial,  has  unfortunately  been  misled  by 
Pinkerton  in  estimating  the  character  of  Albany.  The  contemporary 
historians  are  much  more  reliable  than  those  of  modern  times,  and  we  shall 
hear  what  they  say  of  Albany. 

1  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  117. 

2  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  Lib.  iii.  No.  SI,  MS. 



The  continuator  of  Eordun,  Walter  Bower,  Abbot  of  St.  Colme,  in 
Albany's  earldom  of  Fife,  from  the  year  1418,  says  of  him: — He  ruled  as 
Governor,  after  the  death  of  Ms  brother,  for  fifteen  years ;  and  if  perchance 
it  was  the  case  that  great  crimes  committed  by  the  powerful  nobles  were 
as  if  winked  at  by  the  Governor,  it  was  owing  to  his  prudently  seeking  the 
most  fitting  season  for  bringing  about  a  reformation,  and  not  using  force 
where  it  would  not  have  been  successful.1  He  was  one  of  the  most  patient 
of  men,  gentle  and  kind,  affable  and  communicative,  ordinarily  sociable, 
somewhat  extravagant,  open-handed  to  strangers,  singular  above  all  his 
compeers.  In  stature  he  was  tall,  and  comely  in  form,  with  white  hair  and 
an  amiable  countenance ;  he  was  endued  with  patience  and  fortitude,  with 
temperance  and  constant  forbearance.  Indeed,  wisdom  had  so  adorned  him 
as  if  with  the  ornament  of  every  virtue,  that  his  speech  was  always  gracious 

1  The  crimes  to  ■which.  Bower  seems  here 
to  refer  were  probably  the  frequent  assaults 
made  upon  the  officers  of  the  Crown  who 
collected  the  revenues,  the  custumars  of  Edin- 
burgh and  Linlithgow  being  most  frequently 
the  victims.  The  practice,  initiated  by  the 
Duke  of  Rothesay  when  Lieutenant  of  the 
King,  had  been  imitated  by  several  of  the 
more  powerful  nobles  and  barons,  of  whom  the 
chief  offenders  were  the  Earl  of  Douglas  and  his 
brother  James,  Walter  of  Haliburton,  William 
of  Borthwick,  and  George  of  Dunbar,  son  of 
the  Earl  of  March.  These  at  times  waylaid  the 
custumars,  or  enticed  them  into  their  castles, 
and  refused  to  release  them  until  they  paid 
down  certain  sums  of  money,  and  at  other 
times  they  shipped  off  their  goods  or  removed 
them  from  bond  without  payment  of  the  dues. 
One  of  the  most  flagrant  of  these  assaults  was 

perpetrated  by  William  of  Borthwick,  captain 
of  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  who,  in  1419  or 
1420,  insisted  on  having  his  goods  shipped, 
although  the  Governor  had  prohibited  expor- 
tation for  the  time,  and  when  the  officer  in 
charge,  Robert  of  Lorn,  had  prepared  his 
books  for  the  Exchequer  Audit,  he  sent  for 
him,  took  his  books,  and  would  not  restore 
them ;  and  in  addition  to  this,  besides  the 
fee  for  the  custody  of  the  castle,  his  servants 
and  those  of  the  Earl  of  Douglas  had  taken 
from  the  customs  no  less  a  sum  than  £S84,  16s. 
For  his  care  in  making  a  note  of  what  skins 
William  of  Borthwick  had  got  shipped  during 
the  prohibited  time,  Robert  of  Lorn  was 
rewarded  by  the  Governor  with  a  gift  of 
£1,  13s.  4d. — [Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  pp. 


and  wholesome,  whether  in  the  highest  Courts  of  the  realm  or  in  any 
other.  This  is  valuable  testimony  as  coming  from  one  who  wrote  in  the 
reign  of  James  the  Second,  when,  as  a  recent  historian  remarks,  all  were 
at  liberty  to  speak  freely  of  the  actions  and  character  of  Albany,  and 
time  had  been  given  to  this  writer  to  investigate  and  discover  the  truth.1 

A  later  history,  which  does  not  take  a  favourable  view  of  Albany's 
character,  yet  says  very  little  about  him,  admits  that  great  fertility  reigned 
in  the  kingdom  under  the  Duke's  Government.2 

Wyntoun  also,  who  lived  in  Scotland  during  almost  the  entire  period  of 
the  Duke  of  Albany's  life,  is  entitled  to  be  heard.  He  was  Prior  of  St.  Serfs 
Inch  in  Lochleven,  in  the  county  of  Kinross  adjoining  Fife,  and  had  thus 
ample  opportunities  of  observing  the  true  character  of  Albany,  which  he 
extolled  in  the  following  glowing  encomium : — 

He  wes  full  brotliire  to  the  King, 
That  last,  as  ye  herd,  imiid  endyng. 
He  wes  a  [seimly]  fair  persown, 
And  had  of  wertewis  hie  renown  ; 
He  wes  fair  [and]  plesand  in  youtheid, 
Stout  and  wycht3  in  rype  manheid  ; 
In-til  his  eld  in-til  Scotland4 
Mare  wys  than  he  wes  nane  livand  ; 
He  wes  of  hey  and  faire  stature. 
He  luvyt  and  honouryt  his  Creature  ; 
At  Goddis  service,  and  at  his  Mes, 
In  all  tyra  rycht  dewote  he  wes. 
He  wes  a  constant  G'atholike  ; 
All  Lollard  he  hatyt  and  heretike. 

1  Tytler's  History  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  467.  3  Brave. 

2  Liber  Plusearclensis,  p.  369.  4  In  his  age  in  Scotland. 
VOL.  I.  2  G 



In  chastite  he  led  his  life, 

But  all  foul  lust,  be-sid  his  wife. 

He  ete  and  drank  bot  sobirly, 

And  all  tym  fed  hym-self  fairly. 

To  Lordis  a  meroure  clene  wes  he 

Of  honoure  and  of  honeste. 

To-giddir  had  all  the  pryncis  bene 

Of  all  the  warld,  and  he  thare  sene, 

Of  thame  all  suld  na  persown 

Be  than  he  worth  mare  renown. 

Be  wertuous  aporte,1  fair  having 

Besemyl  he  couth  a  mychty  King  ; 

To  that  baith  curtas  and  cunnand2 

He  wes,  bath  habyl  and  avenand  ; s 

To  knychtis  and  sqwyeris  and  all  gentyle 

He  wes  famyliare  and  humyle. 

Ye  bischopis,  abbotis,  and  prelatis, 

Throu  hym  ye  joysit  wele  your  statis  ; 

In  kyrke  for-thi  at  youre  alteris 

Ye  spend  for  hym  devote  prayeris. 

All  kyrkmen  of  laware  greis, 

Bowys  to  God  for  hym  youre  kneis ; 

He  wes  to  yow  in  generale 

Lele,  luvand,  and  ryeht  speciale. 

Ladys,  madynis,  and  women  all, 

This  Pryuce  ye  suld  your  consorte  call  1 

And  specialy  with  your  prayeris  pure 

Commend  hym  til  his  Creature. 

Husbandis  [hale]  that  wynnis  the  come, 

He  has  oft  gert  you  be  forborne 

1  Conduct.                       -  Courteous  and  knowing.                       3  Able  and  polite. 


Of  thd,  that  litil  or  nocht  wald  pay  ; 

It  is  youre  det  for  hym  to  pray. 

For  the  pure  commownys  he  maid  defens 

All  tym  wytht  gret  diligens  : 

His  bed-men  thai  suld  be  for-thi, 

And  pray  for  hym  rycht  hartfully. 

Lele  and  luvand  he  wes  but  let 

Tyl  all,  that  aucht  that  of  det. 

For  pete  he  wald  mony  spare, 

Set  cause  requiryt  to  greve  thaim  sair. 

The  tend  persown  he  wes  be  get 

In  lineale  descens  frd  Sanct  Margret  ; 

Of  that  rute  the  kynd  flewoure, 

As  flouris  havand  that  sawoure, 

He  had,  and  held,  and  all  tym  grew, 

Ay  burjownand1  in  bownte  new. 

Thare  mycht  of  hym  yeit  be  said  mare, 

Gyf  I  to  that  of  wertew  ware  ; 

Wyth  tethe  for-thi  my  toung  I  steke  : 

Of  hym  enuch  I  ean-noucht  speke. 

The  froit  of  hym  God  grant  to  be 

Sic,  as  in  his  tym  wes  he  ! 

Thine  propire  prole  hym  parify2  fr£  plycht,  and  M  pyne, 
Thou  vertuous,  inviolate,  and  verray  Virgyne.3 

There  existed,  in  the  church  of  St.  Giles  at  Edinburgh,  a  pillar  which 
bore  the  name  of  the  Albany  pillar,  from  having  on  its  capital  two  shields 
of  arms,  one  on  the  south  side  bearing  the  arms  of  the  Duke  of  Albany, 
and  the  other  on  the  north  those  of   Archibald,  fourth  Earl  of  Douglas.4 

1   Sprouting.  3  Wyntoun's  Cronykil,  vol.  ii.  pp.  41S-421. 

-  Protect.  *  Charters  of  Church  of  St.  Giles,  p.  xiii. 


Wilson,  in  his  Memorials  of  Edinburgh,  suggests  that  this  is  the  remaining 
token  of  an  expiatory  offering  of  a  chapel  for  the  murder  of  the  Duke 
of  Eothesay,  which  he  has  little  doubt  was  committed  by  these  two 
nobles.1  But  lie  might  have  found  a  better  reason  for  the  Albany  and 
Douglas  arms  being  in  the  church,  in  the  fact  of  their  being  contributors 
to  the  reparation  of  that  edifice,2  and  the  custom  which  obtains,  even  in 
the  present  day,  of  decorating  cathedrals  with  the  armorial  bearings  of  the 

The  Duchess  Muriella  survived  the  death  of  her  husband,  Duke  Eobert, 
for  a  considerable  time,  and  had  an  annual  pension  from  King  James  the 
First  of  £100.3  She  is  frequently  mentioned  in  the  Chamberlain  Accounts 
from  142G  to  1449,  as  receiving  payments  of  her  pension,  and  some  smaller 
grants.4     She  died  shortly  before  Whitsunday  1449. 

By  his  two  wives  Duke  Robert  had  four  sons  and  six  daughters. 

1.  Murdach,  only  son  of  Countess  Margaret.     He  succeeded  his  father 

as  Duke  of  Albany,  etc.,  and  was  eleventh  Earl  of  Menteith. 

2.  John  Stewart,  eldest  son  of  Duchess  Muriella.     He  became  Lord 

Chamberlain  of  Scotland,  and  was  created  Earl  of  Buchan.  He 
married  Lady  Elizabeth  Douglas,  daughter  of  Archibald,  fourth 
Earl  of  Douglas.  Their  only  child  Margaret  married  George, 
Lord  Seton.  As  already  stated,  the  Earl  of  Buchan  was,  for  his 
bravery  in  France  against  the  English,  created  by  the  French 
King  Constable  of  France.  He  was  slain  on  the  field  of  Yerneuil, 
in  France,  on  the  18th  August  1424. 

3.  Andrew  Stewart,  second  son  of  Duchess  Muriella.     In  the  grant  of 

1  Memorials,  vol.  ii.  p.  168.  3  Chamberlain  Bolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  212. 

-  Charters  of  Church  of  St.  Giles,  pp.  xci,  4  Ibid.  pp.  1S2,  219,  235,  and  Exchequer 

xciL  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  pp.  417,  466,  613,  clxxvii,  etc. 


the  earldom  of  Buchan  by  Eobert,  Duke  of  Albany,  to  his  son 
John,  on  20th  September  1406,  the  destination,  in  the  case  of  the 
failure  of  heirs-male  of  John,  is  to  Andrew  Stewart  his  brother- 
german,  and  the  heirs-male  of  his  body  ;  whom  failing,  to  Eobert 
Stewart  his  brother-german,  and  his  heirs-male ;  the  lands  of 
Touchfraser  and  barony  of  Obeyn,  given  to  John,  Lord  of  Buchan, 
by  Sir  William  Keith,  Marischal,  contained  a  similar  destination.1 
Andrew  appears  to  have  died  without  issue  before  the  year  1413, 
as  in  a  charter  granted  in  that  year  to  Euphame,  Countess  of 
Boss,  with  a  taillie  to  John,  Earl  of  Buchan,  he  is  omitted,  and 
the  destination  in  failure  of  heirs-male  of  John,  is  to  Eobert 
Stewart  his  brother,  etc.2 
4.  Eobert  Stewart,  youngest  son  of  Duchess  Muriella.  He  accom- 
panied his  brother  John  to  France,  and  is  generally  stated  by 
historians  to  have  fallen  with  him  in  the  battle  of  Verneuil. 
This,  however,  is  a  mistake,  as  he  was  alive  in  1431,  and 
received  in  that  and  the  two  previous  years  a  pension  out  of  the 
customs  of  the  burgh  of  Dundee  of  £13,  6s.  8d.3 

Of  the  six  daughters  of  Duke  Eobert,  Lady  Janet,  the  eldest,  is  the  only 

one  of  whom  it  can  be  said  with  certainty  that  Countess  Margaret  was  the 

mother.     But  the  Countess  was  probably  also  the  mother  of  several  of  the 

others.     The  names  of  the  daughters  are  : — 

1.  Lady  Janet,  who  was  contracted  in  marriage,  on  20th  July  1372, 

to  David  of  Loen,  eldest  son  of  Sir  Bertold  of  Loen  and  Lady 

Philippa  Moubray  of  Barnbougle.4 

1  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  pp.  229,  230.  2  Robertson's  Index,  p.  160. 

5  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  pp.  470,  500,  532. 

4  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  258.     See  also  p.  140  of  this  volume. 



2.  Lady  Maria,  married  Sir  William  Abernethy  of  Saltoun,  and  had 

issue.  Two  of  their  sons,  William  and  Patrick,  are  mentioned 
in  the  Chamberlain  Accounts  as  grandsons  of  the  Governor  in 
1407  and  1414.     The  latter  was  dead  in  1418.1 

3.  Lady  Margaret,  who  married,  1st,  after   1390,  John  Swinton  of 

Swinton,  who  was  killed  at  Homildon  in  1402  ;  and  2d,  Eobert 
Stewart  of  Lorn,  to  both  of  whom  she  had  issue.  A  son  by  her 
first  husband  is  mentioned  in  the  Chamberlain  Accounts,  in 
1415  and  1417,  as  John  of  Swinton,  grandson  of  the  Governor.2 

4.  Lady  Isabel,  who  married,  1st,  Alexander  Leslie,  Earl  of  Eoss :  2d, 

Walter  Haliburton  of  Dirleton,  to  both  of  whom  she  had  issue. 

5.  Lady  Marjory,  who  married  Sir  Duncan  Campbell  of  Lochaw,  after- 

wards Lord  Campbell.    Their  grandson  was  the  first  Earl  of  Argyll. 

6.  Lady  Elizabeth,  who  married  Sir  Malcolm  Fleming  of  Cumbernauld, 

and  had  issue.3 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  pp.  42,  197,  297. 
3  Ibid.  pp.  226,  279- 

3  Charter    2Sth    June     1413,    Diplomata 
Scotia?,  No.  lxii. 


r  r  rr:irr>  »  c"^i~ ., 


-  -^t-    "'^%siti'M'TTrrnrrrrrr'PTTi5^i8S<,     W 

9l*  g^  "  ^ 

g  iH 






LADY  ISABELLA,  COtTNTESS  OF  LENNOX,  his  Duchess,  1392—1460. 

SIR  MURDACH  STEWART,  the  eldest  son  of  Robert  Stewart,  then  Lord 
of  Menteith,  and  Lady  Margaret,  Countess  of  Menteith,  was  probably 
born  in  the  year  1362.  Owing  to  the  long  life  of  his  father,  the  first  Duke 
of  Albany,  Sir  Murdach  did  not  succeed  to  the  possession  of  any  of  the 
earldoms  until  he  had  attained  the  somewhat  advanced  age  of  fifty-eight,  and 
then  to  enjoy  them  only  for  a  few  years  before  the  headsman's  axe  parted 
him  from  them  for  ever.  During  the  reign  of  his  uncle,  King  Robert  the 
Third,  he  served  his  country  in  the  honourable  office  of  Justiciar  north  of 
the  Forth. 

He  was  appointed  to  that  office  at  a  meeting  of  Parliament  held  at 
Holyrood,  Edinburgh,  on  the  2d  of  April  1389,  when  the  three  Estates, 
taking  into  consideration  the  unsettled  condition  of  matters  in  the  country, 
and  that,  without  a  sufficiently  powerful  following,  the  duties  of  that  office 
could  not  be  easily  discharged  if  things  continued  to  be  the  same  as  they 
then  were,  arranged  that  his  father,  the  Earl  of  Fife,  should,  in  the  first 
instance,  cause  it  to  be  administered,  wdiich  the  Earl  promised  he  would  do.1 

Several  documents  afford  evidence  of  Sir  Murdach  Stewart's  exercise  of 
this  office.  Under  that  designation  he  witnessed  a  charter  by  Hugh  Fraser, 
Lord  of  Kinnell,  to  Walter  of  Tulloch,  of  lands  in  Forfarshire,  which  was 
granted  at  Inverness  on  5th  November  1390.2     Nearly  two  years  later  he 

1  Acts   of    the   Parliaments   of    Scotland,  2  Appendix   to   Seventh    Report   by   His- 

vol.  i.  p.  So  7.  torical  mss.  Commissioners,  p.  718. 


presided  at  a  justice-ayre  held  in  the  Burgh  Court  of  Perth,  where  John  of 
Logy,  who  had  only  recently  recovered  his  lands  from  the  Justiciar's  father, 
Robert,  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  claimed  jurisdiction  over  two  men  who  had 
been  brought  up  for  trial  at  Perth.  John  of  Logy  showed  the  royal  charters 
which  conferred  the  rights  of  jurisdiction  upon  him,  and  these  having  been 
read  in  Court,  it  was  agreed  to  transfer  the  men  to  the  regality  court  of 
Logy.  The  document  which  relates  this  procedure  styles  Sir  Murdach 
Stewart  Lord  of  Apthane,  as  well  as  Justiciar  north  of  the  Forth.1 

On  the  complaint  and  appeal  of  William,  bishop  of  Moray,  to  the 
Justiciar,  from  an  adverse  judgment  pronounced  against  him  in  the  Sheriff- 
Court  of  Inverness,  Sir  Murdach  Stewart  issued  a  letter  interdicting  the 
Sheriff  and  bailiffs  of  that  county  from  putting  their  judgment  (if  judgment, 
he  remarks,  it  ought  to  be  called)  in  force,  and  requiring  their  attendance,  as 
well  as  that  of  all  the  assessors  who  consented  to  that  decision,  at  his  next 
justice-court  within  their  bounds,  to  hear  his  determination  on  the  matter 
in  form  of  law.     This  letter  was  dated  at  Perth,  21st  October  1398.2 

The  salary  attached  to  the  office  of  Justiciar  was  probably  mainly 
dependent  on  the  fees  of  the  courts  held,  evidently  with  the  understanding 
that  if  they  did  not  amount  to  a  stated  sum,  they  were  to  be  supplemented 
by  the  Treasury.  The  notices  of  payment  in  the  Chamberlain's  Accounts 
are  very  few,  and  when  they  do  occur  in  connection  with  this  office,  it  is  a 
payment  in  complement  of  his  annual  fee,  or  as  part  payment  for  a  certain 
year,3  so  that  the  full  amount  of  the  fee  attached  to  the  office  is  not 

In  addition  to  being  Justiciar  north  of  the  Forth,  Sir  Murdach  Stewart 
was  appointed  by  King  Eobert  the  Third,  on  16th  July  1390,  one  of  the 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  2G6.  2  Piegistrum  Moraviense,  p.  210. 

3  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  316. 


conservators  of  a  truce  between  England  and  Scotland,  who  were  to  watch 
over  its  observance  as  well  by  sea  as  by  land,  and  towards  the  Marches. 
They  had  power  to  redress  all  wrongs  clone  in  prejudice  of  this  truce,  and 
also  to  punish  the  breakers  thereof.1 

When  Sir  Murdach  was  about  twenty-nine  or  thirty  years  of  age,  his 
father  arranged  his  marriage  with  Lady  Isabella,  eldest  daughter  of  Duncan, 
Earl  of  Lennox.  Duncan  was  the  last  Earl  of  the  race  of  Lennox,  and 
having  no  sons,  Lady  Isabella  was  the  heiress  both  to  the  earldom  and 
dignity.  Previous  to  the  marriage  an  indenture  was  made,  on  17th 
February  1392,  at  Inchmunin,  in  Lochlomond,  the  island  residence  of  the 
Earls  of  Lennox,  between  Earl  Duncan  and  Robert,  Earl  of  Fife  and 
Menteith,  in  which  the  terms  of  the  union  were  arranged  as  follows  : — 

Sir  Murdach,  son  and  heir  of  the  Earl  of  Fife,  should  have  to  wife 
Isabella,  the  eldest  daughter  of  the  Earl  of  Lennox,  and  endow  her  in  the 
barony  of  Redhall,  with  its  pertinents,  in  tenandry  and  domain,  and  the  Earl 
of  Lennox  agreed  to  resign  in  the  King's  hands  all  his  earldom  of  Lennox, 
with  its  pertinents,  for  new  infeftment  to  him  and  the  heirs-male  of  his 
body  ;  whom  failing,  to  Sir  Murdach  and  Isabella,  and  the  survivor  of  them 
two  and  their  lawful  heirs ;  whom  failing,  to  the  next  lawful  heirs  of  the  Earl 
of  Lennox,  and  to  purchase  the  King's  consent,  and  also  that  of  his  father 
Walter,  Allan's  son,  to  this  new  tailzie.  It  was  also  arranged  that  if  Earl 
Duncan  had  an  heir-male  born  to  him,  and  he  should  come  to  man's  estate, 
while  the  Earl  of  Fife  had  a  daughter  to  be  married,  then  Earl  Duncan's 
son,  as  he  would  be  Earl  of  Lennox,  should  marry  that  daughter  of  the  Earl 
of  Fife ;  but  if  the  Earl  of  Fife  had  no  daughter  for  the  son  of  the  Earl  of 
Lennox  to  marry,  he  was  to  wed  a  next  cousin  of  the  Earl  of  Fife  at  his  or 
Sir  Murdach's  assignation,  but  without  disparagement  of  the  Earl  of  Lennox 

1  Rymer's  Fcetlera,  vol.  vii.  p.  633. 
VOL.  I.  2  H 



or  his  heirs-male.  Earl  Duncan  agreed  to  pay  for  the  marriage  of  his  daughter 
Isabella  two  thousand  marks  sterling,  of  which,  however,  one-half  was  to  be 
returned  in  the  event  of  the  marriage  of  the  heir-male  before  mentioned,  or 
of  Earl  Duncan  himself :  the  Earl  of  Fife,  so  long  as  he  was  Justiciar  of  the 
sheriffdoms  of  Stirling  and  Dumbarton,  agreed  to  appoint  Earl  Duncan  his 
deputy  and  substitute  in  as  much  as  pertained  to  the  lordship  of  the  Lennox, 
and  to  give  him  the  third  part  of  all  his  profits  from  that  lordship.  Further, 
the  Earl  of  Fife  and  Sir  Murdach  his  son  were  to  be  faithful  helpers  and 
counsellors  to  the  Earl  of  Lennox  in  all  his  causes,  while  Earl  Duncan  was 
to  abide  by  their  advice  with  that  of  discreet  men  of  his  own  council. 
The  Earl  of  Fife  was  bound  to  procure  the  honourable  marriage,  at  his  own 
cost,  of  one  of  the  other  two  daughters  of  the  Earl  of  Lennox,  Elizabeth  or 
Margaret,  while  Earl  Duncan  and  Sir  Murdach  were  to  procure  the  marriage 
of  the  other  daughter  at  their  cost;  and  finally,  the  Earl  of  Fife  or  Sir 
Murdach  was  to  convey  as  much  land  as  now  properly  belonged  to  the  Earl 
of  Lennox,  heritably  to  the  heirs-male  of  Sir  Murdach  and  Lady  Isabella. 
All  which  faithfully  to  keep  and  fulfil  the  said  Earls  and  Sir  Murdach  made 
oath  upon  the  Gospels.1 

In  terms  of  this  arrangement,  the  Earl  of  Lennox,  in  the  same  year, 
resigned  his  earldom  into  the  hands  of  King  Eobert  the  Third,  who,  on 
Sth  November  1392,  regranted  it  to  the  Earl,  under  the  conditions  provided 
for  in  the  indenture.2  The  other  provisions,  which  were  not  conditional  on 
the  birth  of  an  heir-male  to  Earl  Duncan,  were  carried  out  in  due  course. 
Lady  Isabella's  two  sisters  seem  to  have  been  married  shortly  afterwards, 
Elizabeth  to  Sir  John  Stewart,  son  of  Sir  Alexander  Stewart  of  Darnley, 
and  Margaret  to  Eobert  Menteith  of  Eusky.3     By  a  charter  of  Eobert,  Earl 

1  Indenture  printed  in  The  Lennox,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  ii.  pp.  43,  44. 
-  Ibid.  p.  50.  3  Ibid.  vol.  i.  p.  Ii. 


of  Fife  and  Menteith,  dated  at  Stirling,  6th  March  1401,  Earl  Duncan  was 
created  coronator  of  the  whole  earldom,  of  the  Lennox,  with  all  the  fees  and 
emoluments  justly  belonging  to  that  office,  with  power  to  appoint  deputies 
and  servants  at  his  pleasure.     The  office  was  to  descend  to  his  heirs.1 

Sir  Murdach  Stewart  was  one  of  the  knights  pensioned  by  King  Eobert 
the  Third  for  the  securing  of  the  succession  of  his  sons  on  the  throne.  By 
a  charter  dated  at  Perth  on  8th  February  1393,  the  King  granted  to  Sir 
Murdach  and  his  heirs-male,  for  homage  and  service  and  special  retinue  to  Ms 
eldest  son,  David  Stewart,  Earl  of  Carrick,  and  if  he  should  die,  to  his 
second  son,  Sir  Eobert  Stewart,  one  hundred  marks  sterling  annually,  to  be 
paid  out  of  the  great  custom  of  Aberdeen.  In  case  of  deficiency  at  any 
time,  the  Lord  Chamberlain  was  to  pay  the  balance  for  that  time.2  The 
payment  of  the  pension  was  regularly  made,  as  appears  from  the  entries  in 
the  Chamberlain's  accounts.3  The  first  of  these  entries  is  worth  quoting, 
as  it  certifies  that  King  Eobert  the  Third  had  a  second  son  other  than  Prince 
James,  a  fact  which  has  not  been  generally  recognised : — 

By  payment  made  to  Sir  Murdach  Stewart,  the  King's  nephew,  for  his  homage 
and  service  and  special  retinue,  to  David,  eldest  son  of  the  King,  Earl  of  Carrick,  to 
be  continued  for  the  whole  term  of  his  life,  and  should  it  chance  the  said  David  to 
die,  to  be  continued  to  Eobert  Stewart,  the  second  son  of  the  King,  one  hundred 
marks  sterling  annually,  to  be  uplifted  from  the  great  custom  of  Aberdeen  by  the 
hands  of  the  King's  custumars  there  for  the  time,  etc.,  the  said  Murdach  also 
acknowledging  receipt,  ,£66,  13s.  4d. 

Prince  Eobert  Stewart  thus  referred  to  had  been  named  after  his  father ; 
and  he  must  have  died  soon  after  1393,  without  issue. 

1  Cartularium  de  Levenax,  p.  95.  3  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  pp.  326,   3(iO, 

2  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  p.  213.  3SS,  414,  441,  49S,  540,  G29. 



In  "one  document  alreadv  referred  to.  Sir  Murdach  is  designed  Lord  of 
Apthane,  but  his  general  designation  during  his  father's  lifetime  was  Lord  of 
Kinclevin,  and  he  is  so  styled  in  most  of  the  documents  issued  by  him  as 
Justiciar  north  of  the  Forth  which  have  come  down  to  us.  He  is  so  named 
in  a  writ  which  records  his  presidency  at  a  court  held  at  Aberdeen  in  the 
month  of  February  1397,  upon  an  inquisition  sought  by  two  heirs  to  a  piece 
of  land  from  which  they  alleged  they  had  been  unjustly  kept  back,  although 
they  were  the  nearest  heirs  of  the  lately  deceased  owner.1 

Sir  Murdach  Stewart's  career  in  Scotland,  and  his  occupancy  of  the 
important  offices  above  referred  to,  received  a  sudden  check  by  his  capture 
at  Homildon  on  14th  September  1402,  when  the  Earl  of  Douglas  was  defeated 
by  Percy,  and  he  himself  with  many  other  Scottish  nobles  taken  prisoner. 
The  circumstances  which  led  to  this  engagement,  and  the  battle  itself,  have 
already  been  described  in  the  preceding  memoir,  and  need  not  be  repeated 
here.  The  treasonable  proceedings  of  the  Earl  of  Northumberland,  and  his 
subsequent  defeat  at  Shrewsbury,  with  his  flight  into  Scotland,  have  also 
been  detailed,  but  Sir  Murdach  Stewart  does  not  appear  to  have  engaged  in 
Percy's  enterprise.  Perhaps,  as  the  most  important  of  the  Scottish  prisoners, 
he  had,  after  a  short  sojourn  in  some  of  the  Northumbrian  fortresses,  been 
transferred  to  the  English  capital,  and  consigned  to  the  Tower,2  but  on  a 
request  made  by  his  father  to  the  English  King,  he  seems  to  have  been 
permitted  to  remain  afterwards  at  the  English  Court.  An  attempt,  made 
by  the  Duke  of  Albany  about  this  time,  to  obtain  the  liberation  of  Sir 
Murdach  and  the  Earl  of  Douglas,  who  had  been  taken  prisoner  at  Shrews- 
bury, proved  of  no  avail,  although  King  Eobert  the  Third  used  his  influence 
with  Henry  the  Fourth.3 

1  Antiquities    of    Aberdeenshire,    vol.    iii. 
p.  263. 

2  Rymer's  Fceclera,  vol.  viii.  p.  346. 

3  Ibid.  p.  358. 



After  Prince  James  was  added  to  the  number  of  Scottish  prisoners  in 
the  hands  of  the  King  of  England,  repeated  attempts  were  made  to  procure 
the  restoration  of  both  him  and  Sir  Murdach,  several  of  which  have  been 
referred  to  in  the  preceding  memoir.  In  the  year  1413,  Sir  John  Stewart, 
Earl  of  Buchan,  was  despatched  to  arrange  his  brother's  liberation,1  but  was 
no  more  successful  than  his  predecessors.  In  the  following  year,  1414, 
another  attempt  was  made  by  the  despatch  of  Sir  Robert  Maxwell  of 
Calderwood  and  Master  Robert  Lany,  provost  of  St.  Andrews,  for  whom  a 
safe-conduct  was  granted  by  King  Henry  the  Fifth  on  the  8th  of  May,  to 
continue  in  force  until  the  1st  of  July.2  On  its  receipt  the  Duke  of 
Albany  granted  the  commission  to  his  two  nuncios,  of  which  the  following 
is  a  translation : — 

Robert,  son  of  the  King  of  Scotland,  Duke  of  Albany,  Earl  of  Fife  and  of  Menteith, 
and  Governor  of  the  foresaid  kingdom,  to  all  to  whose  knowledge  the  present  letters 
shall  come,  greeting  in  the  Lord.  Know  your  university,  that  we,  fully  confiding  in 
the  fidelity,  circumspection,  and  industry  of  our  beloved  and  faithful  Robert  Maxwelle 
of  Caldarwodde,  knight,  our  cousin,  and  Master  Robert  Lanyne,  provost  of  St.  Andrews, 
Licentiate  in  Decreets,  have  made,  constituted,  and  ordained,  and  by  these  presents  do 
make,  constitute,  and  ordain  them,  alike  of  our  sure  knowledge  and  deliberate  counsel, 
our  ambassadors,  commissioners,  and  special  messengers,  giving  and  granting  to  them 
our  full  power  and  special  mandate  to  treat,  agree,  and  conclude  with  the  most  serene 
Prince,  Henry,  King  of  England,  or  his  commissioners  whomsoever  having  sufficient 
power  from  him,  concerning  the  liberation  of  our  dearest  son,  Murdach  Stewart,  knight, 
and  to  do,  transact,  agree,  conclude,  and  explain  all  and  sundry  things  which  may  be 
necessary  or  in  any  way  serviceable  to  the  liberation  of  our  son,  even  if  they  should 
require  a  more  special  mandate  ;  promising  that  we  shall  perpetually  hold  valid, 
concluded,  stable,  and  sure,  whatever  our  said  commissioners  in  the  premises,  or  any  of 
the  premises,  shall  think  meet  to  do.     Given  under  the  testimony  of  our  Seal  at  our 

1  Eymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  48. 

-  Ibid.  p.  125. 


Manor  of  Falkland,  the   26th  day  of  the  month  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
1414,  and  of  our  government  the  ninth  year.1 

At  the  same  time,  a  similar  safe-conduct  was  procured  for  John  Porter, 
squire,  one  of  the  retainers  of  the  Duke  of  Albany,  to  proceed  to  where  Sir 
Murdach  was  for  the  transaction  of  some  affairs.'2  King  James  and  Sir 
Murdach  were  at  this  time  entertained  together  at  the  Court  of  King  Henry 
the  Fifth,  and  at  his  expense,  the  cost  of  their  maintenance,  along  with 
some  others,  being  twenty  shillings  a  day.3 

This  embassy  secured  no  better  results  than  any  of  the  former,  but  in 
the  following  year,  1415,  an  arrangement  was  made  by  which  Sir  Murdach's 
freedom  was  obtained.  Since  the  year  1403,  Henry  Percy,  the  grandson  of 
the  then  Earl  of  Northumberland,  had  been  an  exile,  but  had  found  an 
honourable  refuge  in  Scotland  at  the  Court  of  King  Eobert  the  Third,  and 
after  his  death  at  the  Court  of  the  Duke  of  Albany.  King  Henry  the  Fourth 
was  now  dead,  and  the  young  Earl  of  Northumberland  was  regarded  with  less 
disfavour  by  his  son,  King  Henry  the  Fifth,  who  was  not  unwilling  to  see  his 
return  and  restoration  to  his  important  earldom.  But  when  this  was  moved, 
the  Duke  of  Albany  refused  to  gratify  the  King  of  England  so  easily,  and 
detained  Percy  until  an  arrangement  was  made  whereby  he  could  be 
exchanged  for  Sir  Murdach  Stewart.4  On  12th  May  1415,  King  Henry 
granted  safe-conducts  to  a  number  of  Scotch  nobility,  Eobert  Stewart,  son 
and  heir  of  Murdach  of  Fife ;  George  Dunbar,  son  and  heir  of  the  Earl  of 
March ;  William  Graham,  Lord  of  Graham  [Kincardine]  ;  John  Stewart,  Earl 
of  Buchan ;  John  Stewart,  Lord  of  Innermeath ;  Eobert  Maxwell,  Lord  of 
Calderwood ;  and  Andrew  Hawyll  [Hawyck],  parson  of  Lyston.  These  were 
to  pass  to  a  place  called  Calfhill,  near  Berwick,  bringing  with  them  Henry 

1  Original  in  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum. 

2  Kymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  125.  3  Ibid.  p.  1S9.  4  Ibid.  p.  242. 


Percy,  son  and  heir  of  the  late  Sir  Henry  Percy,  and  having  delivered  him 
to  the  commissioners  of  the  King  of  England,  they  were  to  receive  Sir 
Murdach  Stewart,  and  return  with  him  to  their  own  country.1 

In  pursuance  of  this  agreement,  King  Henry  issued  an  order  on  the  24th 
of  May  to  the  constable  of  the  Tower  of  London,  to  deliver  Sir  Murdach 
Stewart  into  the  care  of  two  of  the  King's  esquires,  John  Hull  and  William 
Chancellor,  who  were  appointed  to  conduct  him  to  the  Borders.2  Instructions 
were  given  to  them  as  to  their  duties  at  the  several  stages  of  their  journey. 
These  instructions,  along  with  relative  letters  to  Sir  Eobert  Umfraville, 
the  Sheriff  of  Newcastle,  the  keeper  of  Warkworth  Castle,  and  others,  have 
been   preserved.      They  are  written   in   French,  and   translations   are  here 

The  instruction  given  to  John  Hulle  and  William  Chanceller,  esquires,  appointed 
by  the  King,  our  sovereign  Lord,  to  conduct  Morduk  of  Fife  to  northern  parts,  and 
there  to  make  deliverance  of  him  under  certain  manner  and  form  as  follows  : — 

First,  the  said  esquires  ought  to  conduct  safely  the  said  Morduk  to  the  town  of 
Newcastle-upon-Tyne,  and  on  arriving  there  they  ought  to  present  to  the  Mayor  and 
Sheriff  of  the  said  town  the  letters  of  the  King,  our  said  sovereign  Lord,  addressed  to 
them  under  the  privy  seal,  in  order  that  the  said  Mayor  and  Sheriff  may  be  in  waiting 
on  the  foresaid  esquires,  to  safely  conduct  and  convey  the  said  Morduk  to  the  castle 
of  Werkworthe,  and  to  bring  him  back  if  need  be  at  the  expense  of  the  King. 

Likewise,  the  said  esquires  should  also  deliver  other  similar  letters  to  the  Sheriff 
of  Northumberland,  that  he  may  attend  them  in  the  same  manner. 

Again,  whenever  the  said  Morduk  has  come  to  the  above-mentioned  castle  of 
Werkworth,  the  said  esquires  ought  to  deliver  to  the  constable  of  the  said  castle  other 
letters  under  the  privy  seal,  directed  to  the  said  constable,  to  receive  the  said  Morduk, 
and  to  assign  him  a  competent  place  within  the  said  castle,  where  he  can  be  quite 
honourably  and  safely  kept,  until  such  time  as  he  can  be  safely  conveyed  to  Berwick, 

1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  244. 

-  Ibid.  p.  250. 


when  the  said  esquires  are  assured  of  the  coming  of  Henry  of  Percy,  grandson  to 
the  late  Earl  of  Northumberland,  out  of  Scotland  towards  the  forenamed  castle  of 

Also,  the  said  esquires  ought  to  make  delivery  to  the  keeper  of  the  castle  of 
Berwick,  or  his  lieutenant  there,  other  letters  under  the  privy  seal,  directed  to  him  for 
honourably  receiving  the  aforesaid  Morduk  of  Fyfe  into  the  said  castle  of  Berwick,  and 
assigning  him  a  place  within  the  same  castle,  where  the  said  Morduk  can  be  honourably 
and  surely  guarded. 

Also,  afterwards,  in  case  that  the  foresaid  Henry  has  come  to  Berwick  for  his  own 
liberation  as  well  as  that  of  the  fore-mentioned  Morduk,  if  the  said  esquires  can  be 
loyally  informed  by  Sir  Kobert  Umfraville  and  Sir  John  Wytherington,  or  other  notable 
persons  who  have  good  knowledge  of  the  person  of  this  same  Henry  while  he  dwelt 
there,  and  if  the  same  esquires  have  security  of  the  said  Henry  in  presence  of  the  said 
knights  or  other  notable  persons,  that  this  same  Henry  is  willing  to  hold,  do,  and  loyally 
perform,  without  fraud  or  dissimulation,  all  that  the  foresaid  Bobert  and  John  have 
promised  to  our  said  Lord  the  King  on  the  part  of  the  said  Henry,  then  the  said 
esquires  may  deliver  the  said  Morduk  to  those  of  Scotland  who  shall  come  thither  to 
bring  there  the  said  Henry,  and  to  receive  deliverance  of  the  said  Morduk.  And  upon 
this  the  said  esquires  ought  to  signify  to  the  said  Henry  that  it  is  the  King's  will  that 
lie  prepare  to  come  to  his  presence  as  quickly  as  possible. 

In  whicli  case  the  King  our  said  Lord  wills  that  the  said  esquires  be  entirely 
discharged  towards  him  of  the  foresaid  Morduk  and  of  the  said  Henry. 

Likewise,  in  case  the  said  Henry  be  not  brought  thither  as  above,  as  the  Scots  may 
not  be  willing  to  allow  him  to  be  delivered  up,  then  the  said  esquires  can  keep  the 
foresaid  Morduk  there  until  the  first  day  of  July  next  coming,  and  for  one  or  two  days 
after  if  it  seem  good  to  them  to  await  the  arrival  of  the  said  Henry.  They  shall  not 
suffer  any  strangers  to  talk  with  the  said  Morduk  unless  in  their  presence,  or  in  the 
presence  of  one  of  them. 

In  case  of  the  non-arrival  of  this  same  Henry,  the  said  esquires  ought  to  conduct 
the  said  Morduk  back  to  the  Tower  of  London,  or  elsewhere,  at  the  will  of  the 


In  testimony  of  which  thing,  to  this  present  instruction  our  said  sovereign  Lord  the 
King  has  caused  put  his  Great  and  Privy  Seals,  and  also  his  signet.  Given  at  West- 
minster, the  21st  day  of  May,  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  our  said  sovereign  Lord 
the  King. 

By  the  commandment  of  the  King  at  Westminster,  the  day  and  year  above 
mentioned.      Present  there,  the  Earl  of  Dorset. 

Indorsed  :   Instruction  concerning  the  liberation  of  Mordac,  Earl  of  Fyffe.1 

Dear  and  well  beloved, — Inasmuch  as  we  have  ordained  and  charged  our 
beloved  esquires,  John  Hulle  and  William  Chanceller,  to  conduct  Morduk  of  Fiffe,  our 
prisoner,  to  our  castle  of  Werkworth,  for  certain  causes  moving  us  thereto,  we  will,  and 
straitly  command  you  in  express  terms,  that  ye  attend  on  our  said  esquires  safely  to 
convey  and  conduct  the  said  Morduk  to  our  forenamed  castle,  and  in  safely  conveying 
him  back  again,  if  need  be,  according  to  the  information  of  our  foresaid  esquires.  And 
this  by  no  means  omit,  etc.      Given,  etc. 

To  our  dear  and  well  beloved  the  Mayor  and  Sheriff  of  our  town  of  Newcastle- 

Similar  letters,  dated  2  2d  May,  were  sent  to  the  Sheriff  of  Northumber- 
land, Sir  John  Bartram,  knight,  Sir  Walter  Fauconberge,  knight,  Sir  John 
Wodryngtone,  knight,  and  to  P^obert  Harbottell,  a  squire. 

Dear  and  well  beloved, — We  straitly  command  you  in  express  terms  that  you 
receive  on  our  behalf  Morduk  of  Fiffe,  whom  our  loved  esquires,  John  Hulle  and 
William  Chaunceller,  at  our  commandment  will  conduct  to  your  presence,  for  certain 
causes  moving  us  thereto,  and  assign  him  any  competent  place  in  our  castle  of  Werk- 
worth, where  he  can  be  quite  honourably  and  safely  kept  for  the  time  which  our  said 
esquires  on  our  behalf  shall  declare  to  you.  And  this  by  no  means  omit,  as  we  rely 
upon  you.     Given,  etc. 

To  our  dear  and  well  beloved  the  constable  of  our  castle  of  AVerkworth.2 

1   Original  in  Cottouian  Library,  British  Museum.  2  Hid. 

VOL.  I.  2  I 


On  the  part  of  the  King. 
Beloved  and  Trusty, — As  we  have  ordained  and  charged  our  beloved  esquires, 
John  Hulle  and  William  Chanceller,  to  conduct  Morduk  of  Fyf,  our  prisoner,  to  our 
castle  of  Berwick-upon-Tweed,  for  certain  causes  moving  us  thereto,  we  will,  and 
straitly  command  you  in  express  terms,  that  you  attend  on  our  said  esquires,  safely  to 
convey  and  conduct  the  said  Morduk  out  of  the  castle  of  Werkworth,  as  far  as  our 
said  castle  of  Berwick,  and  for  safely  conveying  him  back  again,  if  need  be,  according  to 
the  information  of  our  foresaid  esquires ;  understanding  we  have  written  in  like  manner 
to  our  dear  and  trusty  knight,  John  Wydryngtone,  on  the  foresaid  business.  And  this 
in  no  wise  ye  leave  undone.      Given,  etc.  [third  year  of  Henry  the  Fifth,  21st  May.] 

To  our  dear  and  trusty  knight,  Bobert  Umfraville.1 

A  similar  letter  was  addressed  to  Sir  John  Wydryngtone,  and  an  order 
was  also  sent  to  the  keeper  of  the  Castle  of  Berwick,  containing  instructions 
for  Sir  Murdach's  honourable  confinement  similar  to  those  given  to  the 
constable  of  Warkworth. 

It  was  not  intended,  however,  that  a  pure  and  simple  exchange  of  persons 
shovdd  be  made.  The  King  of  England  put  a  ransom  of  ten  thousand  pounds 
upon  the  head  of  Sir  Murdach  Stewart ;  but  instead  of  exacting  the  money  from 
the  Duke  of  Albany,  he  made  it  a  condition  of  Percy's  return  that  he  should 
pay  that  sum,  leaving  him  to  arrange  its  recovery  from  Sir  Murdach  as  he  best 
could.  The  following  instructions  to  the  Earl  of  Westmoreland  disclose  this 
arrangement.    They  are  also  in  French,  but  only  a  translation  is  here  given : — 

The  Instruction  given  to  Balph,  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  appointed  by  our  Sovereign 
Lord  the  King  to  conduct  Morduke  of  Fyffe,  eldest  son  of  the  Duke  of  Albany,  from 
the  castle  of  [Warkworth]  to  the  castle  of  Berwick,  and  there  to  make  deliverance  of 
the  said  Morduke,  in  form  and  manner  underwritten. 

First,  the  said  Earl  shall  consider  by  what  way,  and  how  soon  he  can,  conduct  or 
send  the  foresaid  Morduke  to  the  said  place  of  Berwick.  Tf  it  seem  expedient  to  him, 
1  Original  in  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum. 


the  said  Earl  ought  to  send  letters  of  the  King  our  Sovereign  Lord,  addressed  to  the 
Mayor  and  Sheriff  of  Newcastle-upon-Tyne,  to  attend  on  the  said  Earl,  or  on  those  -whom 
he  shall  send  to  conduct  the  said  Morduke  to  the  place  of  Berwick  above  mentioned. 

Likewise,  if  it  seem  expedient  to  the  said  Earl,  he  ought  to  send  other  letters  of 
the  King  our  Sovereign  Lord,  addressed  respectively  to  the  Sheriff  of  Northumberland, 
Sir  John  Bertram,  Sir  Walter  Fauconberge,  Sir  John  of  Wodryngtone,  and  to  Robert 
Harbotil,  esquire,  to  wait  upon  the  said  Earl,  or  those  whom  he  will  appoint  to 
conduct  the  said  Morduke,  in  the  manner  as  to  which  the  said  Earl  shall  instruct  them. 

But  before  the  said  Earl  causes  the  said  Morduke  to  be  sent  nearer  the  said  place 
of  Berwick  than  the  castle  of  Werkworth  or  the  castle  of  Bamberghe,  as  shall  seem  best 
to  the  said  Earl,  he  ought  to  be  certified  by  the  Lord  of  Grey,  keeper  of  the  castle 
and  town  of  Berwick,  that  Henry  of  Percy,  grandson  of  the  late  Earl  of  Northumber- 
land, has  arrived  at  the  said  castle  of  Berwick  or  its  vicinity  ;  that  he  is  to  do  and 
accomplish  all  that  Sir  Robert  Umfraville,  Sir  John  Wodryngtone,  and  John  Burtoue, 
clerk,  have  promised  to  our  Lord  the  King,  for  and  in  name  of  the  foresaid  Henry  of 
Percy  ;  and  when  that  same  Earl  of  Westmoreland  shall  be  certified  that  the  said 
Henry  of  Percy  has  thus  arrived  at  the  said  castle  of  Berwick  or  its  vicinity,  he  ought 
to  conduct  or  send  thither  the  foresaid  Blorduke,  information  also  being  first  had  by 
means  of  the  foresaid  Sir  Robert  Umfraville  and  Sir  John  Wodryngtone,  and  other 
knights  and  notable  esquires  who  have  knowledge  of  the  person  of  the  foresaid  Henry 
of  Percy,  that  he  is  there  personally,  in  good  condition  ;  and  the  oath  of  that  Henry  of 
Percy  being  taken  in  presence  of  the  said  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  if  lie  shall  be  there, 
or  in  the  presence  of  those  whom  he  shall  send  with  the  said  Morduke,  as  well  as  in 
the  presence  of  the  said  Lord  of  Grey,  keeper  of  Berwick,  of  the  foresaid  Sirs  Robert 
Umfraville  and  John  of  Wodryngtone,  and  other  esquires  who  shall  be  there  for  the 
time,  that  the  said  Henry  of  Percy  will  do  and  entirely  fulfil  all  and  whatever  the  said 
Robert  Unifraville,  John  Wodryngtone,  and  John  Burton  have  or  any  of  them  has 
promised  to  our  said  Lord  the  King,  for  and  in  name  of  the  said  Henry  of  Percy, 
and  in  special,  that  after  the  foresaid  Moreduke  of  Fyffe  shall  be  delivered  at  the 
said  place  of  Berwick,  the  said  Henry  of  Percy  in  all  haste  possible,  transport  him- 
self to  the    presence   of  our  said    Lord   the  King,   in   whatever  place   he  shall  be, 

252  SIM  MUMD ACE'S  RANSOM  £10,000. 

[•st^as  soon  as  the  said  Henry  can  come  to  the  presence  of  the  Chancellor  of 
England/ftra*— JJenry  by  the  judgment  of  the  King's  Council  shall  make  him 
sure  of  ten  thousand  jJoTniiis-iJMthe  ransom  of  the  said  Morduke,  to  pay  in  the 
manner  he  prefers ;  that  is  to  say7"TnTCb-«£^all  the  lands,  tenements,  and  other 
possessions  of  the  said  Henry,  which  he  has  at  pr&3eWr--stfulwill  have  in  time  to 
come,  our  said  Lord  the  King  shall  have  and  take  two  thousan3^p«inds  yearly, 
until  the  foresaid  sum  of  ten  thousand  pounds  shall  be  fully  paid  to  him— vaSa*-] 
and  that  upon  the  form  and  tenor  of  the  said  oath,  the  said  Henry  of  Percy  makes 
under  his  seal  letters  testimonial,  to  which  also  all  the  lords  and  knights  who  shall  be 
present  when  the  said  oath  shall  be  made  shall  cause  put  their  seals,  and  such  letters 
in  due  form,  made  and  sealed  and  delivered  to  the  said  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  or  to 
those  whom  he  shall  send  with  the  said  Morduke ;  and  besides  this,  in  any  place  on 
this  side  of  the  water  of  Tweed  within  the  kingdom  of  England,  recognisance  be  taken 
of  the  said  Henry  of  Percy,  for  the  payment  of  ten  thousand  pounds  to  our  Sovereign 
Lord  the  King,  at  the  feast  of  St.  Michael  next  coming,  upon  condition  that  if  before 
the  1st  day  of  September  next,  the  said  Henry  of  Percy  grant  security  to  our  said 
Lord  the  King  of  two  thousand  pounds  of  land  or  of  rent  within  the  kingdom  of  England, 
to  be  held  by  our  said  Lord  the  King  or  his  assignees,  until  to  the  satisfaction  of  our 
said  Lord  the  King  ten  thousand  pounds  be  raised  and  fully  paid  for  the  ransom  of  the 
foresaid  Morduke,  according  to  the  form  and  tenor  of  his  schedule  hereto  annexed, 
the  said  Morduke  shall  be  delivered  to  the  foresaid  Henry  of  Percy. 

Likewise,  if  before  the  8th  day  of  July  the  foresaid  Earl  of  Westmoreland  be  not 
certified  by  the  foresaid  Lord  of  Grey  that  the  before-named  Henry  of  Percy  has 
arrived  at  the  castle  of  Berwick,  in  manner  as  above,  then  that  Earl  ought  to  conduct 
the  fore-mentioned  Morduke  back  to  such  place  as  the  King  our  Lord  shall  cause  to  be 
assigned  for  the  said  Morduke's  being  kept  until  our  said  Lord  the  King  as  to  this 
shall  have  ordained  otherwise. 

In  witness,  etc.,  given,  etc.,  the  18th  day  of  June,  the  third  year,  etc. 
By  commandment  of  the  King.1 

Indorsed  :   18th  June,  anno  3,  Henry  4,  1402. 2 
1  Original  in  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum.  2  Should  be  Henry  5,  1415. 


Sir  Murdach  Stewart  was  despatched  to  the  north  in  the  care  of  his  two 
guardians,  and  on  the  way  made  his  escape,  but  was  recaptured  by  Ralph 
Pudsay,  who  for  this  service  was  rewarded  by  Henry  on  25th  June  with  an 
annual  pension  for  life  of  twenty  pounds  from  the  customs  of  the  port  of 

The  exchange  of  the  two  prisoners  was  not  carried  out  on  this  occasion, 
and  Sir  Murdach  was  probably  located  in  one  of  the  castles  in  the  north  of 
England  under  the  charge  of  the  Earl  of  "Westmoreland,  until  the  resumption 
of  the  negotiations  in  the  close  of  the  year,  which  brought  the  matter  to  a 
successful  conclusion.  In  the  interval  the  two  countries  were  again  on  the 
verge  of  war,  but  the  crisis  passed  without  any  formidable  conflict.  On  9th 
December,  King  Henry  the  Fifth  drew  up  a  formal  document,  embodying 
the  terms  on  which  the  exchange  was  to  take  place.  Of  this  agreement, 
which  is  in  Latin,  a  translation  is  here  given : — 

Henry,  by  the  grace  of  God,  King  of  England  and  France,  and  Lord  of  Ireland, 
to  all  and  singular  who  shall  see  the  present  letters,  greeting  in  the  Lord.  As  we  have 
recently  understood  our  dearest  cousin,  Kobert,  Duke  of  Albany,  and  Governor  of  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland,  desires  Murdach  his  son,  whom  as  our  prisoner  we  hold  in  our 
custody,  to  be  restored  safe  and  sound  and  free,  in  return  for  whose  liberation  he  offers 
to  restore  to  us  our  cousin  Henry,  grandson  of  the  late  Earl  of  Northumberland,  whom 
now  for  a  long  time  he  has  detained,  as  he  at  present  detains  him  in  his  power,  we, 
by  the  tenor  of  these  presents,  promise,  in  good  faith  and  on  the  word  of  a  king, 
our  full  assent  to  the  said  liberation  and  restoration  mutually  to  be  made,  that  if  the 
foresaid  Duke  of  Albany,  at  a  certain  day  and  place  to  be  assigned  by  our  commissioners 
and  those  of  the  said  Duke,  shall  cause  the  said  Henry  our  cousin  to  be  brought  safe 
and  sound,  free  and  discharged  from  every  obligation,  article,  and  cause  on  account  of 
which  .  .  .  might  be  arrested,  or  otherwise  his  restoration  to  us  impeded,  or  if  he  shall 
really  restore  or  cause  to  be  restored  the  said  Henry  to  us  or  our  commissioners,  we,  at 
1  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  ix.  p.  2S0. 


the  same  day  and  place,  shall  cause  the  foresaid  Murdach  to  be  brought,  and  in  like 
manner  shall  cause  him  to  be  restored  to  the  said  Duke  his  father,  or  his  commissioners, 
safe,  free,  and  discharged  from  every  obligation,  article,  and  cause  on  account  of  which 
his  restoration  to  him  might  be  hindered,  fraud  and  guile  of  whatever  sort  being  laid 
aside.  In  testimony  of  which  thing  we  have  caused  these  letters-patent  to  be  made. 
Given  at  our  Palace  of  Westminster,  the  9  th  day  of  December  1415,  and  of  our  reign 
the  third  year.1 

Indorsed  ;  Instructions  as  to  the  liberation  of  Murdac  of  Fife,  eldest  son  of  the 
Duke  of  Albany,  and  the  restoration  of  Henry  Percy  by  way  of  exchange. 

No  mention  is  made  in  this  document  of  the  money  ransom  demanded 
by  the  English  King  and  Parliament  for  the  release  of  Sir  Murdach,  but 
it  is  referred  to  in  the  private  instructions  given  on  the  following  day 
to  those  intrusted  with  the  negotiation  of  the  business.  These  instructions 
are  written  in  French.     A  translation  is  here  given : — 

Instruction  given  to  Sir  Ealph  de  Yuer,  Sir  William  [Clayton  ?],  Master  John 
Hunteindun,  doctor  in  theology  and  Dean  of  Lancaster,  and  Master  Richard  Holme, 
Licentiate  in  Laws,  Canon  of  York,  to  them  four,  three  or  two  of  them,  commissioners 
and  deputies  of  the  King  our  Sovereign  Lord,  to  commune,  treat,  and  agree  with  certain 
ambassadors  and  messengers  of  Eobert,  Duke  of  Albany,  Governor  of  Scotland,  of  and 
upon  the  liberation  and  exchange  of  Morduke  of  Fiff,  eldest  son  of  the  said  Duke,  being 
at  present  in  the  ward  of  the  King  our  said  Lord,  as  a  safe  prisoner,  and  of  Henry  of 
Percy,  grandson  to  the  late  Earl  of  Northumberland,  now  in  the  ward  of  the  said  Duke. 

First,  the  said  commissioners  of  the  King  ought  to  induce  the  ambassadors  of  the 
said  Duke,  and  arrange  and  accord  with  them,  if  they  can,  and  by  mutual  agreement 
among  them,  to  fix  that  on  a  certain  day  before  the  fifteenth  of  March  next,  the  said 
Duke  of  Albany  shall  send  the  foresaid  Henry  of  Percy  to  the  town  of  Carlisle,  and 
if  the  said  ambassadors  are  willing  to  agree  to  this,  then  ought  the  said  commissioners 
to  arrange  and  agree  with  them  that  the  King  our  said  Lord  shall  send  the  foresaid 

1  Original  in  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum. 


Morduke  to  the  said  place  of  Carlisle,  to  be  there  delivered  by  way  of  exchange  for  the 
foresaid  Henry  ;  and  to  accomplish  such  arrangement  and  agreement,  the  said  Earl  of 
Westmoreland  shall  send  the  foresaid  Morduke  by  his  son,  John  of  Neville,  Warden 
of  the  West  Marches. 

And  in  case  the  ambassadors  of  the  said  Duke  are  unwilling  to  agree  that  the 
foresaid  Henry  should  be  thus  sent  to  the  said  place  of  Carlisle,  unless  other  surety  be 
given  for  the  deliverance  of  the  said  Morduke,  then  ought  the  said  commissioners  to 
arrange  and  agree  that  the  King  our  said  Lord  (his  letters  under  his  Great  Seal,  of  the 
tenor  as  follows  : — Henry,  etc.,  having  been  seen)  shall  cause  them  to  be  sent  to  the 
Earl  of  March  of  Scotland,  or  other  Earl  or  person  of  rank  of  Scotland,  who  shall  b3 
appointed  to  have  the  charge  until  the  foresaid  exchange  be  effected. 

And  if  the  ambassadors  of  the  said  Duke  are  altogether  unwilling  to  agree  that  the 
foresaid  Henry  should  be  thus  sent  to  the  said  place  of  Carlisle,  then  ought  the  said 
commissioners  of  the  King  to  arrange  and  agree  that  the  said  letters  of  the  King  shall 
be  sent  to  the  said  Earl  of  March,  or  other  Earl  or  person  of  rank  of  Scotland,  to  keep 
them  as  above  ;  and  in  case  the  said  ambassadors  themselves  wish  to  arrange  and  agree 
that  the  said  Duke,  on  a  day  to  be  fixed,  shall  send  as  above  the  foresaid  Henry  into 
the  castle  of  Berwick,  there  to  be  restored  to  the  said  commissioners  by  way  of  exchange 
for  the  said  Morduke,  the  said  commissioners  ought  in  this  case  likewise  to  yield ;  and 
if  such  arrangement  is  adopted,  then  the  foresaid  Earl  of  Westmoreland  ought  to  send 
the  foresaid  Morduke  to  the  town  of  Newcastle-upon-Tyne,  and  deliver  him  there  to  the 
Lord  of  Grey,  Warden  of  the  East  Marches,  in  order  that  the  said  Morduke  may  be 
conducted  to  the  foresaid  place  of  Berwick,  to  be  there  exchanged  in  manner  as  above. 

In  testimony,  etc.  Given,  etc.,  the  10th  day  of  December,  the  third  year,  etc. 
[Henry  5]. 

Instruction,  etc.,  given  to  the  above  mentioned. 
First,  although  the  King  our  Lord  caused  to  be  made,  the  day  of  the  making  of 
these,  another  instruction  to  his  said  commissioners,  containing  three  articles  concerning 
the  foresaid  liberation  and  interchange  in  one  of  the  three  ways,  yet  our  said  Lord  the 
King  wills  that  if  the  said  commissioners  cannot  induce  the  ambassadors  of  the  said 
Duke  to  agree  to  any  of  these  three  ways,  the  said  commissioners  ought  to  agree  and 


arrange  with  the  said  ambassadors  that,  on  a  day  before  the  fifteenth  day  of  March,  to 
be  fixed  between  them  by  mutual  consent,  our  said  Lord  the  King  shall  cause  the 
foresaid  Morduke  to  be  sent,  accompanied  by  two  thousand  horsemen,  or  other  greater 
number,  to  the  town  of  Berwick  or  other  place  upon  the  Marches  of  Scotland,  which 
shall  be  assigned  and  agreed  upon  by  the  said  commissioners  and  ambassadors,  to  be 
there  delivered  up  to  the  said  Duke  or  his  commissioners  and  deputies,  by  way  of 
exchange  for  the  said  Henry.  Moreover,  that  the  said  ambassadors  shall  arrange  and 
agree  with  the  said  commissioners  that  the  foresaid  Duke  shall  similarly  send  the 
foresaid  Henry  to  be  restored  to  our  said  Lord  the  King  or  to  his  commissioners  ; 
and  in  this  case  the  said  Earl  ought  to  deliver  the  said  Morduke,  in  the  town  of 
Newcastle-upon-Tyne,  to  the  Lord  of  Grey,  Warden  of  the  East  Marches,  who  ought 
to  accompany  Ralph,  son  of  the  said  Earl,  and  the  Lord  of  Clifford,  to  conduct  the 
said  Morduke  to  the  place  where  the  exchange  is  to  be  made. 

Further,  before  the  said  commissioners  cause  such  arrangement  to  be  closed,  they 
ought  to  receive,  by  some  messenger  from  the  said  Henry,  an  obligation  written  in  his 
own  hand,  for  twenty  thousand  marks,  by  which  he  will  be  bound  to  pay  the  said  sum 
to  our  said  Lord  the  King  on  the  sixteenth  day  of  March  next,  in  case  that  before  that 
day,  in  any  place  on  this  side  the  Water  of  Tweed  within  the  kingdom  of  England,  the 
said  Henry  does  not  make,  in  presence  of  any  person  having  power  to  receive  this  recog- 
nisance of  ten  thousand  pounds,  to  be  paid  to  our  said  Lord  the  King  the  1st  day  of 
April  next,  upon  condition  that  if  before  the  said  first  day  the  said  Henry  make  security 
to  our  said  Lord  the  King  of  two  thousand  pounds1  .   .  .  [The  remainder  is  wanting.] 

On  the  11th  December  King  Henry  granted  his  commission  to  the  four 
persons  named  in  the  foregoing  instructions,  and  at  the  same  time  empowered 
Kichard,  Lord  of  Grey,  Warden  of  the  East  Marches,  and  John  Neville, 
Warden  of  the  West  Marches,  to  facilitate  the  exchange  by  granting  the 
necessary  safe-conducts  to  both  parties.2 

The  release  of  Sir  Murdach  probably  took  place  shortly  after  this  date,  but 
there  is  no  information  as  to  how  it  was  effected.  About  a  year  afterwards, 
1  Original  in  Cottonian  Library,  British  Museum.  2  Kotuli  Scotise,  vol.  ii.  p.  215. 


on  24th  November  1416,  the  Wardens  of  the  Marches  were  again  instructed 
to  furnish  safe-conducts  to  certain  persons  coming  from  Scotland  with  the 
redemption  money  of  Sir  Murdach,1  but  the  amount  is  not  stated.  It  is  pro- 
bable that  a  portion  of  the  ten  thousand  pounds  was  meant  to  reimburse  the 
King  of  England  for  the  expenses  of  Sir  Murdach's  maintenance  while  with  him, 
and  also  that  a  considerable  sum  would  be  deducted  by  Henry  Percy,  now 
Earl  of  Northumberland,  on  account  of  his  long  sojourn  at  the  Scottish  Court. 

After  his  return  to  Scotland,  Sir  Murdach  Stewart  assisted  his  father  in 
the  government  of  the  country,  as  Albany,  now  between  seventy  and  eighty 
years  of  age,  to  lighten  his  own  labours,  appointed  him  his  lieutenant.  In 
that  capacity  he  was  present  with  his  father  at  Dunfermline  on  23d  March 
1420,  at  the  receiving  of  William  of  Maisterton  as  a  vassal  of  the  monastery 
of  Dunfermline.2 

Sir  Murdach  seems  also  from  an  early  period  to  have  occasionally  trans- 
acted business  on  the  family  estates,  granting  and  confirming  charters  of  lands 
as  the  son  and  heir-apparent  of  his  father.  An  instance  of  this  occurs  in  his 
confirmation  of  a  charter  granted  by  his  father  to  Sir  Robert  Stewart  of 
Schanbothy,  of  the  lands  of  Craggy  Gerpot  and  others,  in  Leuchars  in  Fife- 
shire.     The  charter  begins  thus  : — 

Omnibus  hano  cartam  visuris  uel  audituris,  Murdacus  Senescalli,  primogenitus 
et  heres  inclitissimi  et  potentissimi  viri,  domini  Roberti  Senescalli,  Comitis  de  Fytt' 
et  de  Meneteth,  eternam  in  Domino  salutem  :  Sciatis  nos  vidisse,  audiuisse,  ac  maturo 
et  diligenti  intelleetu  concessisse  quandam  cartam  dicti  domini  genitoris  nostri,  formam 
que  sequitur  continentem  : 

Omnibus  hanc  cartam  visuris  vel  audituris,  Robertus  Senescalli,  comes  de  Fyff  et 
de  Meneteth,  salutem,  etc. 

Quamquidem  cartam,  donationemque  et  concessioner  de  terris  de  Craggy,  Gerpot 

1  Rotuli  Scotise,  vol.  ii.  p.  218.  •  Registrum  de  Dunfermelyn,  p.  282. 

VOL.  I.  2  K 


cum  molendino,  et  de  tercia  parte  terrarum  de  Culbaky,  Fordale  et  Struben,  cum 
pertinentiis,  in  ipsa  carta  contentis,  necnon  omnes  et  singulas  ipsas  terras,  cum 
pertinentiis  dicto  domino  Eoberto,  tenendas  et  babendas,  sibi  et  heredibus  suis,  adeo 
libere,  quiete,  plene,  pacifice  et  honorifice,  in  omnibus  punctis,  articulis,  conditionibus, 
forma  pariter  et  effectu  prout  ipsa  carta  continet  et  proportat,  nos  pro  nobis  et  heredibus 
nostris  volumus,  concedimus  ac  presenti  carta  nostra  dicto  domino  Eoberto  Senescalli 
et  heredibus  suis  imperpetuum  confirmamus.  In  cuius  rei  testimonium  sigillum  nostrum 
presenti  carte  nostre  confirmatorie  est  appensum,  his  testibus,  nobilibus  viris,  dominis 
Patricio  de  Grahame,  domino  de  Kyncardyn,  Willelmo  de  Grahame,  eius  primogenito 
et  herede,  Bernardo  de  Havdein,  militibus,  consanguineis  nostris,  domino  Gilberto  decano 
Dunblanensi  et  Johanne  Eollok,  clericis  dicti  domini  genitoris  nostri,  ac  multis  aliis.1 

On  the  death  of  his  father,  Sir  Murdach  Stewart  became  Duke  of  Albany 
and  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith.  He  also  succeeded  to  the  office  of  Governor 
of  Scotland.  It  has  been  said  that  he  assumed  this  office  as  if  to  carry  on 
the  alleged  usurpation  of  the  government  by  his  father;  but  there  is  no 
ground  for  the  assertion,  and  the  evidence  is  all  the  other  way.  It  is  far  more 
probable  that  he  was  placed  in  it  by  Parliament,  although  no  record  of  a 
meeting  of  that  body  remains,  a  fact  applicable  to  too  many  of  the  parliaments 
of  this  date  to  be  a  conclusive  proof  that  none  was  held.2  A  charter  granted 
by  Duke  Murdach  on  26th  October  1421,  bearing  that  it  was  made  in  the  first 
year  of  his  government,  shows  that  he  was  not  Governor  previous  to  26th 
October  1420.3     But  he  was  Governor  on  16th  November  1420,  as  he  then 

1  History  of  the  Carnegies,  Earls  of  South-  DougaL  the  King's  chaplain,  serving  in  his 
esk,  by  William  Fraser,  Edinburgh,  vol.  ii.  presence  in  England  by  command  of  the  pre- 
p.  508.  sent  Lord  Governor  and  ordinance  of  Parlia- 

2  Evidence  is  so  far  afforded  of  such  a  meet-  ment.     He  seems  to  have  received  in  all  £21, 
ing  of  Parliament  towards  the  close  of  the  made  up  by  the  four  burghs  of  Dundee  (£6), 
year  1420  by  entries  in  the  Treasury  Accounts  Montrose  (£4),  Perth  (£5),  and  Aberdeen  (£6 ). 
for  the  year  between  28th  July  1420  and  24th  —[Exchequer  Polls,  vol.  iv.  pp.  339,  346.] 
July  1421,  of  payments  for  the  expenses  of  Sir  3  Original  in  Douglas  Charter-chest. 


made  an  indenture  with  Sir  Alexander  Stewart,  Earl  of  Mar,  in  which  the 
Duke  is  styled  Governor  of  Scotland.1  His  appointment  must,  therefore, 
have  taken  place  about  the  beginning  of  November  1420,  almost  two  months 
after  his  father's  death,  which  would  leave  sufficient  time  for  the  assembling 
of  a  Parliament  to  choose  him  as  successor  to  the  late  Eegent.  Besides,  it  is 
not  to  be  expected  that  the  nobles  of  Scotland  would  connive  at  any  such 
usurpation,  and  they  must  have  done  so,  if  such  there  was,  when  they 
accepted  charters  of  confirmation  from  his  hands  as  Governor.  But  in  all 
their  transactions  they  jealously  guarded  the  rights  and  privileges  of  King 
James,  and  the  Governor  as  much  as  any.  King  James  himself  repeatedly 
confirmed  charters  which  had  been  granted  by  both  the  Governors  during  his 
captivity,  which  of  itself  shows  that  there  had  been  no  usurpation  by  either. 
It  may  therefore  be  concluded  that  Duke  Murdach  was  duly  elected  successor 
in  the  office  of  Governor  of  the  realm,  after  the  three  Estates  had  anew  declared 
their  allegiance  to  King  James,  their  rightful  sovereign,  who  was  still  detained 
in  England  against  his  own  and  their  will,  and  that  his  exercise  of  the  office 
was  perfectly  legitimate.  King  James  at  this  time,  however,  was  in  France 
with  the  King  of  England,  for  Sir  William  Douglas  of  Drumlanrig  obtained 
a  safe-conduct  to  proceed  to  him  there,  in  the  month  of  September  1420,2  and 
by  him  he  would  probably  be  informed  of  what  had  taken  place. 

Duke  Murdach,  by  the  death  of  his  father,  also  became  keeper  of  Stirling- 
Castle,  an  office  granted  to  Duke  Eobert  for  himself  and  his  heirs,  and  for 
this  received  the  annual  fee  of  £133,  6s.  8d.3  He  was  likewise  heir  to  the 
hereditary  pension  obtained  by  his  father  from  the  lands  of  the  Abthaneiy 
of  Dull,  amounting  to  £136  yearly,  and  to  his  father's  pension  of  two  hundred 
marks,  for  homage  and  service,  and  special  retinue  to  David,  Duke  of 
Eothesay,  which,  with  his  own  pension  of  one  hundred  marks  for  a  similar 
1  Page  261,  postea.       2  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  x.  p.  19.      3  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  117. 


service  and  retinue,  increased  his  annual  pension  for  this  to  three  hundred 
marks.  In  addition  to  these  payments,  he  had  £1000  as  fee  for  the  office 
of  Governor;  and  in  the  account  rendered  by  the  Exchequer  Auditors 
on  24th  July  1421,  a  surplus  of  £458,  7s.  3d.  is  paid  Duke  Murdach  on 
account  of  expenses  incurred  in  previous  years,  while  the  Lords  Auditors 
admit  as  further  due  to  him  the  large  sum  of  £3152,  15s.  Sid.1 

Very  little  has  hitherto  been  known  of  the  history  of  Murdach,  Duke  of 
Albany,  especially  during  his  period  of  governorship.  It  will,  therefore, 
be  interesting  to  note  any  documents  or  records  which  throw  light  upon  the 
exercise  of  his  office.  The  opinion  of  the  contemporary  historian,  Bower, 
is  that  he  was  far  too  remiss  in  the  management  of  affairs,  and  also  in  the 
control  of  his  sons,  who,  he  adds,  were  exceedingly  insolent,  and  often  acted 
in  violation  of  the  laws.2 

Shortly  after  his  elevation  to  the  office  of  Governor  of  Scotland,  Duke 
Murdach,  on  the  16th  of  November  1420,  at  Perth,  entered  into  an  agreement 
with  Sir  Alexander  Stewart,  Earl  of  Mar  and  Garioch,  whereby  the  latter 
and  his  son,  Sir  Thomas  Stewart,  swore  special  fealty  and  retinue  to  the  Duke 
during  the  remainder  of  his  life,  their  allegiance  to  their  Lord  the  King  only 
excepted.  The  Governor  thereby  granted  to  the  Earl  of  Mar  half  the  profits 
of  the  justiciaries  of  Aberdeen,  Banff,  and  Inverness,  with  certain  exceptions, 
while  the  Earl  was  to  secure  that  the  justice-courts  should  be  held  to  the 
honour  of  the  Governor  and  profit  of  both ;  the  Governor  also  promised  to 
confirm  the  infeftment  of  the  lands  of  Mar  and  Garioch,  which  the  Earl  of 
Mar  was  preparing  for  his  son  Sir  Thomas,  provided  that  the  Earl  of  Mar 
showed  a  confirmation  of  our  Lord  the  King  to  our  Lord  the  Governor, 
given  to  him  and  his  heirs  and  assignees,  of  the  lands  of  Mar  and  Garioch 
foresaid.     Another  part  of  the  agreement  was  that  the  Governor  should  be 

1  Chamberlain  Rolls,  vol.  iii.  p.  118.  2  Fordun,  a  Gooilall,  vol.  ii.  p.  467. 



"■  steadhaldand "  to  the  Earl  of  Mar,  and  should  give  him  assistance  in  the 
same  manner  as  the  late  Governor;  and  that  he  would  not  permit  his 
eldest  son,  Sir  Walter  Stewart,  to  marry  the  daughter  of  Sir  Eobert  Erskine 
without  obtaining  the  Earl  of  Mar's  consent.  The  instrument  is  somewhat 
important,  and  may  be  here  given  in  full : — 

This  indenture,  made  at  Perth  the  xvi  day  of  the  mounth  of  November,  in  the  yeir 
of  our  Lord  a  thousand  four  hundereth  and  twentie,  betwix  [ane]  excellent  and  mightie 
prince,  Murtheu,  Dvck  of  Albaney,  Earll  of  Fife  and  Menteith  and  Governour  of  Scot- 
land, on  the  ane  pairt,  and  a  vorschipful  Lord,  Schir  Alexander  Stewart,  Earll  of  Marr 
and  Garviach,  on  the  tothir  pairt,  contenis  and  beris  vitnes  that  it  is  fullelie  accordit 
betwix  thame,  in  forme  and  maner  as  efter  sal  follow,  and  that  is  to  say,  that  the 
forsaid  Earll  of  Mar  is  becum  man  of  sp[eciale  feale]  and  reteneu  till  the  forsaid  Dvck 
of  Albaney,  Governour  of  Scotland,  for  all  the  terme  of  his  lyfle,  befor  and  aganis  all 
uthiris  deidlyk  personis,  his  alleagence  aucht  till  our  Lord  the  King  allenerlie  outane, 
and  he  salle  gifle  his  letter  therupone  till  our  forsaid  Lord  the  Governour  in  deu  forme 
under  his  seille,  for  certane  gude  dedis  done  till  him  be  our  said  Lord  the  Governour. 
Alsua  it  is  accordit  that  our  said  Lord  the  Governour  sail  gife  to  his  darrest  cousin 
forsaid,  the  Earll .  of  Mar,  the  [tane]  halfe  of  the  profittis  of  the  justry  of  Aberdeine, 
Bamffe,  and  Inuernesse,  and  als  oft  as  thay  be  haldane,  outtane  the  cornis  and  victualis 
of  men  and  horse  in  the  balding  of  the  said  ayeris,  and  the  said  Earll  of  Mar  sail  doe 
all  his  bisness  and  diligence  till  bring  justris  till  the  honour  and  profit  of  the  said 
Lord  the  Governour  for  beath  ther  profit.  Alsua  our  Lord  the  Governour  sail  gif  hes 
letteris  patentis  till  the  said  Earll  of  Mar  of  power  to  be  steadhaldand  till  him,  efter 
the  tennor  of  the  letters,  the  quhilks  the  said  Earl  hede  of  umquhilum  our  Lord  the 
Governour,  whom  God  assoyle.  Alsua  the  forsaid  Lord  the  Governour  is  assentit  and 
sail  gife  his  confirmatione  till  his  cusin,  Schir  Thomas  Stewart,  upon  the  infeftment 
that  the  said  Earll  of  Mar  makis  till  the  said  Schir  Thomas  hes  sone  apone  the  landis 
of  Mar  and  Garveach,  if  it  sa  beies  that  the  said  Earll  of  Mar  shaues  a  confirmatione 
of  our  Lord  the  King  till  our  Lord  the  Governour,  givin  till  him  and  hes  heiris  and 
assignais  apone  the  landis  of  Mar  and  Garviach  forsaids  ;  for  the  quhilk  confirmatione 


til  be  gevin  til  the  said  Schir  Thomas  throch  our  Lord  the  Governour  that  now  is, 
and  for  utber  gude  dedis  done  of  befortyme  till  the  said  Schir  Thomas  throch  our  said 
Lord  the  Governour,  the  said  Schir  Thomas  is  becum  mane  till  our  said  Lord  the 
Governour  of  sp[ecial  feale]  and  reteneu  for  all  the  tyme  of  his  lyffe  befor  and  agains 
all  uther  deidlyk  personis,  hes  alleagence  aught  til  our  Lord  the  King  allanerlie  outane, 
and  tharupon  sail  gife  his  letters  of  retenewe  in  due  forme  til  our  Lord  the  Governour. 
Alsua  it  is  accordit  that  our  Lord  the  Governour  sail  giff  hes  lettres,  baunde,  and  seille 
till  his  forsaid  cusin,  the  Earll  of  Mar,  of  mantinance,  helpe,  and  suppleie,  in  [deu] 
forme  and  in  effect  as  quhilum  our  Lord  the  Governour  hes  fader  did  [of]  befortyme, 
bot  fraude  or  gyle.  Alsua  it  is  accordit  betwix  the  forsaid  Lord  the  Governour  and  hes 
darrest  cusin  the  Earll  of  Mar,  that  sen  Valter  Steuart,  the  sone  and  ayire  appirand 
of  our  forsaid  Lord  the  Governour,  is  oblisched  till  the  forsaid  Lord  his  fader  that  he 
sail  not  tak  in  mariage  the  dochter  of  Schir  Robert  Erskeine  vithout  the  consent  of 
hes  forsaid  Lord  and  fader,  our  forsaid  Lord  the  Governour  is  oblischeid  and  oblischis 
him  be  this  indenture  till  hes  said  cusin  the  Earll  of  Blar,  that  he  sail  noeht  gife  hes 
consent  till  the  fulfillan  of  the  said  mariage,  vithout  vittining  and  consent  of  the  said 
Earll  of  Mar.  And  alsua  it  is  accordit  that  our  said  Lord  the  Governour  hes  gevin  to 
hes  forsaid  cusin  the  Earll  of  Mar,  the  profitis  cumand  of  the  landis  of  Badenach,  Urquart, 
and  Strathowne,  ay  till  the  tyme  that  thay  may  be  sett  to  profitt,  and  fra  thensfurth  our 
forsaid  Lord  till  haue  the  tane  halfe  of  the  profit  cumand  of  the  saidis  landis,  and  the 
forsaid  Erl  his  cusin  the  tother  haltfe  of  the  profitt  of  the  [saidis]  landis  endurand  the 
tyme  of  the  said  Earllis  lyve.  And  alsua  the  said  Earll  is  oblischit  and  oblissis  him  be 
this  indenture,  that  he  sal  doe  al  his  gudlie  bisnes  and  diligens  to  bring  and  sett  the 
saidis  landis  of  Badenacht,  Urquart,  and  Strathowen,  vith  the  pertinentis,  till  the  maist 
profitt  that  he  may,  and  vithin  als  schort  tyme  as  he  may,  bot  fraud  or  gyle.  In  the 
vitnising  of  the  quhilkis  thingis,  leillie  and  trewlie  for  to  be  keipit,  bot  fraud  and  gyle, 
the  seillis  of  the  forsaid  Lord  the  Governour,  and  of  the  forsaid  Earll  of  Mar  hes  cusin 
to  thir  indenturis  interchangabillie  ar  to  put,  the  day,  yeir,  and  place  forsaidis.1 

As  the  permanent  restoration  of  King  James  to  his  kingdom  and  crown 
1  Antiquities  of  Aberdeenshire,  vol.  iv.  p.  18.1. 


seemed  still  far  from  being  accomplished,  an  attempt  was  made  in  this  year, 
1421,  to  procure  his  temporary  release,  to  enable  him  to  pay  a  visit  to 
Scotland.  The  documents  which  reveal  the  transaction  do  not  inform  us 
that  it  was  in  the  least  a  national  concern,  but  lead  us  to  infer  that  it  was 
a  private  endeavour  on  the  part  of  the  Earl  of  Douglas.  The  incident  as 
gathered  from  the  documents  stands  thus : — 

Archibald,  Earl  of  Douglas,  in  the  beginning  of  the  year  1421,  proceeded 
to  London  and  had  an  interview  with  King  James,  to  whom  he  proposed  that 
if  he  wished  to  pay  a  visit  to  Scotland,  he  would  offer  his  services  to  the  King 
of  England  in  return  for  his  permission.  He  prevailed  upon  King  James  to 
consent  to  this  proposal,  and  also  to  give  him  his  authority  for  the  transaction, 
whereupon  the  Earl  of  Douglas  entered  into  an  engagement  with  King 
Henry  the  Fifth,  on  30th  May  1421,  at  London,  to  assist  him  against  all 
his  enemies,  his  Lord  King  James  and  his  successors  alone  excepted,  as  long 
as  he  lived,  with  two  hundred  knights  and  esquires,  and  two  hundred 
mounted  archers,  all  sufficiently  provided  for  war,  wherever  the  King  of 
England  wished,  either  by  land  or  sea.1 

This  agreement  was  followed  the  day  after  by  the  preparation  of  another 
between  the  two  kings,  by  which  King  James  was  to  be  granted  three  months 
to  go  to  Scotland  and  return  again,  on  condition  of  no  less  than  twenty 
persons,  and  some  of  these  the  most  influential  in  Scotland,  consenting  to 
remain  as  hostages  for  him.  These  were — Walter  Stewart  Earl  of  Athole, 
Walter  Stewart  eldest  son  and  heir  of  Duke  Murdach  the  Governor,  Thomas 
Earl  of  Moray,  William  Earl  of  Angus,  Alexander  Earl  of  Crawford, 
and  William  Earl  of  Orkney;  also  the  following  bishops — Henry  bishop 
of  St.  Andrews,  William  bishop  of  Glasgow,  Eobert  bishop  of  Dunkeld,  and 
Henry  bishop  of  Moray ;  and  in  addition  to  these,  James  Douglas  second 
1  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  x.  p.  123. 


sou  of  the  Earl  of  Douglas,  Bobert  Lord  of  Erskine,  William  Hay  Lord  of 
Errol  Constable  of  Scotland,  Eobert  Stewart  Lord  of  Lorn,  James  Sandilands 
Lord  of  Caldor,  Malcolm  Fleming  Lord  of  Biggar  and  of  the  Leynze,  James 
Hamilton  Lord  of  Cadzow,  Thomas  Boyd  Lord  of  Kilmornow,  Bobert  Keith 
Mareschal  of  Scotland,  and  William  Borthwick  Lord  of  Borthwick.1  It  is 
hardly  surprising,  in  view  of  depriving  Scotland  of  so  many  of  her  foremost 
statesmen,  including  the  Chancellor,  Constable,  and  Mareschal,  that  this 
agreement  was  not  carried  out,  and  that  King  James  still  remained  in 
England.  In  the  close  of  this  year,  on  4th  December  1421,  a  safe-conduct 
was  granted  for  the  conveyance  of  some  horses  from  Scotland  into  England 
for  King  James's  use.2 

On  the  4th  of  January  1422  the  Governor  was  at  Lindores,  where,  on 
that  date,  he  confirmed  a  charter  of  sale  and  alienation,  granted  by  William, 
son  of  John,  to  Patrick  Ogilvy  of  Grandoun,  son  and  heir  of  Alexander 
Ogilvy  of  Vchterhous,  Sheriff  of  Forfar,  of  the  fourth  part  of  all  the  lands  of 
Inchedrewir,  Culpoty,  and  Culbrynny,  in  Banffshire,  to  be  held  of  the  King 
and  his  successors.  From  Lindores  the  Governor  went  to  Stirling,  where,  on 
the  7th,  he  granted  a  precept  for  a  charter  of  regrant  under  the  great  seal  to 
William,  Lord  of  Graham,  and  on  the  following  day  the  charter  was  granted 
under  the  Governor's  great  seal  of  office.3  On  the  21st  he  granted  another 
charter  of  regrant,  also  at  Stirling,  to  James  of  Dunbar,  of  the  lands  of 
Frendraught  and  others,  which  James  Dunbar  had  resigned  in  the  Governor's 
hands.4     In  these  charters  he  is  particularly  careful  of  King  James's  rights. 

At  Stirling,  on  30th  November  1422,  Duke  Murdach  granted  a  charter 
to  John  Ker,  burgess  of  Lanark,  of  the  lands  called  Wafralandis,  and  it  is 

1  Bymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  x.  p.  125.  2  Ibid.  p.  158. 

3  Appendix  to  Third  Report  by  the  Commissioners  on  Historical  mss.,  p.  39S. 

'•  Antiquities  of  Aberdeenshire,  vol.  iii.  p.  5S7. 



impossible  not  to  see  in  some  of  the  clauses  of  this  charter,  as  in  all  the 
rest,  the  entire  absence  of  any  spirit  of  usurpation  in  the  Governor.  The 
reddendo  clause  is  as  follows  : — 

Faciendo  domino  nostro  regi  et  heredibus  suis  dictus  Johannes  et  heredes  sui  pro 
dictis  terris  cum  pertinenciis  pisturam  Wafrarum  dicti  domini  nostri  regis  quociens 
ipsum  dominum  regem  apud  Lanark  contigerit  residere  ; 

i.e.  the  said  John  and  his  heirs,  for  the  said  lands  with  pertinents,  to  perform 
for  our  Lord  the  King  and  his  heirs  the  baking  of  our  Lord  the  King's  wafers 
as  often  as  he  shall  happen  to  reside  at  Lanark.  The  witnesses'  names  are 
"William  bishop  of  Glasgow,  Chancellor  of  Scotland,  Alexander  Stewart  of 
Kinclevin  the  Eegent's  son,  Archibald  of  Cunningham  Sheriff  of  Stirling, 
Alan  of  Otterburn  Secretary  to  the  Eegent,  and  others.1 

In  a  precept  of  sasine  granted  by  the  Duke  while  at  his  castle  of  Falkland, 
on  28th  August  1423,  for  the  infeftment  of  Henry  of  Eamsay,  son  and  heir 
of  Alexander  of  Eamsay  of  Colluthy,  in  the  lands  of  Leuchars,  there  occur 
the  names  of  the  following  witnesses  : — Alexander  Stewart,  our  beloved  son, 
James  of  Douglas  of  Balveny,  our  beloved  brother,  John  de  Corntoune,  rector 
of  the  church  of  Eglishame,  John  of  Lumsden,  our  Sheriff  of  Fife,  John  of 
Wright,  our  Constable  of  Falkland,  and  Alan  of  Otterburn,  our  Secretary.2 

Another  charter  granted  by  the  Duke  at  Perth,  on  the  16th  October  of 

1  Appendix  to  Fifth  Report  of  Historical 
mss.  Commissioners,  p.  633. 

2  History  of  the  Carnegies,  Earls  of  South- 
esk,  by  William  Fraser,  Edinburgh,  vol.  ii. 
p.  510.  John  Wright  was  Constable  of  Falk- 
land when  the  Duke  of  Rothesay  died  there, 
and  was  accused  of  being  concerned  in  his 
death.  But  the  fact  that  he  continued  to 
hold  his  office  of  Constable  of  Falkland  for 
VOL.  I. 

upwards  of  twenty  years  afterwards,  affords 
evidence  that  he  was  innocent  of  the  crime 
popularly  laid  to  his  charge.  In  1412  aud 
succeeding  years  he  was  one  of  the  custumars 
of  Kinghorn,  a  small  trading  port  on  the 
Fifeshire  coast,  and  he  also  had  a  son  who, 
between  May  and  November  1413,  was 
appointed  Master  of  the  Hospital  of  St. 
Laurence,  near  Haddington.  —  [Exchequer 
Rolls,  voL  iv.  pp.  134,  1S2,  198,  etc.] 

2  L 


this  same  year,  1423,  marks  more  strongly  still  the  absence  of  jealousies  as  to 
the  rule  of  the  Besent  Murdach.  This  charter  was  granted  to  the  Governor's 
"  beloved  cousin,  Sir  Alexander  Forbes,  and  his  dearest  cousin,  Elizabeth  of 
Douglas,1  whom  by  the  grace  of  God  Sir  Alexander  had  married,"  and  was  a 
regrant  of  the  barony  of  Forbes,  which  Sir  Alexander  had  resigned  in  the 
hands  of  the  Governor.  Sir  Alexander  Forbes  was  a  close  friend  of  King 
James  the  First,  and  paid  repeated  visits  to  him  while  in  England,  on  one 
occasion  to  accompany  him  to  France.2  Yet  he  resigned  his  lands  into  the 
Governor's  hands,  and  accepted  a  regrant  of  them,  to  be  held  of  the  King  and 
his  heirs  ;  and  the  witnesses  were,  Henry  bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  Piobert 
bishop  of  Dunkeld,  William  bishop  of  Dunblane,  the  Governor's  uncle, 
Walter  Earl  of  Athole  and  Caithness,  his  dearest  brother,  John,  Constable 
of  France  Earl  of  Buchan  and  Chamberlain  of  Scotland,  his  dearest  cousin, 
Alexander  Earl  of  Mar  and  Garioch,  Alexander  Stewart  his  beloved  son 
and  Alan  of  Otterburn  his  secretary.3 

By  this  time  the  negotiations  which  were  to  issue  in  the  final  deliver- 
ance of  King  James  the  First  from  his  English  imprisonment  had  been 
initiated,  and  matters  had  assumed  an  aspect  which  betokened  a  greater 
amount  of  success  than  formerly.  King  Henry  the  Fifth  of  England  was 
dead ;  his  infant  son  had  been  crowned  as  King  Henry  the  Sixth,  and 
the  kingdom  of  England  placed  under  the  regency  of  Humphrey,  Duke  of 
Gloucester.4  King  James,  too,  had  made  friends  willing  to  expedite  his 
release,  by  wooing  and  winning  for  his  future  queen  a  lady  of  the  royal 
family  of  England,  distinguished  alike  for  beauty  and  accomplishments — 
Joanna  Beaufort,  daughter  of  John,  Earl  of  Somerset. 

1  Elizabeth    Douglas    was    the    sister    of  2  Antiquities    of   Aberdeenshire,    vol.   iv. 

William,   Earl    of   Angus. — [Antiquities    of       p.  3S6.  3  Ibid.  p.  3S7. 

Aberdeenshire,  vol.  iv.  p.  3S8.]  i  Kymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  x.  p.  26S. 


The  English  Court  now  encouraged  King  James  to  the  carrying  on  of 
negotiations  for  his  release,  and  on  12th  May  1423,  at  his  request,  granted 
a  safe-conduct  for  a  number  of  Scotch  magnates  to  come  into  England  about 
it.1  He  was  presented  on  21st  May  with  a  hundred  pounds  out  of  the  English 
Treasury  for  his  private  expenses,2  and  about  six  weeks  later,  on  30th  June, 
the  Treasury  was  ordered  to  defray  all  his  expenses  during  his  absence  from 
the  King's  palace,  as  well  as  of  all  his  attendants.3  The  English  were  the 
foremost  in  appointing  their  commissioners  to  carry  through  the  negotiations, 
their  instructions  being  dated  6th  July,  while  the  commission  for  the  Scottish 
ambassadors  was  only  granted  by  Duke  Murdach  on  the  19th  of  August. 
The  Scottish  commissioners  were  William  bishop  of  Glasgow  Chancellor  of 
Scotland,  George  Earl  of  March,  James  Douglas  of  Balveny  the  Eegent's 
brother-in-law,  the  Abbots  of  the  Monasteries  of  Cambuskenneth  and 
Balmerino,  Sir  Patrick  Dunbar  of  Bele,  Sir  Eobert  Lawder  of  Edrington, 
Master  George  Borthwick  Archdeacon  of  Glasgow,  and  Master  Patrick 
Houston,  Licentiate  in  Laws,  Canon  of  Glasgow  and  Secretary  to  the 
Governor.  Those  on  the  English  side  were  Thomas  bishop  of  Durham, 
Philip  bishop  of  Wygorn,  Henry  Earl  of  Northumberland,  Balph  Earl  of 
Westmoreland,  Sir  Eichard  Nevill  Warden  of  the  West  Marches,  Sir  Ealph 
Cromwell,  Sir  Thomas  Chaworth,  Master  John  Wodham,  Archdeacon  of 
the  Estrithing,  and  Eobert  Waterton,  Esquire. 

Several  of  the  commissioners  met  at  York  in  the  month  of  September, 
and  arranged  the  amount  of  money  to  be  paid  to  the  English  Government 
in  respect  of  King  James's  expenses  while  in  England.  Nothing  was  asked 
in  respect  of  ransom,  and  the  English  Government  was  prepared  to 
have  accepted  a  lower  sum  than  that  agreed  to  by  the  Scots.  In  their 
instructions  the  English  commissioners,  were  directed  to  give  the  Scottish 
1  Eymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  x.  p.  286.  !  Hid.  p.  290.  3  Ibid.  p.  203. 



commissioners  the  opportunity  of  stating  a  sum  which  would  cover  the 
King's  expenses ;  if  they  were  unwilling  to  do  that,  forty  thousand  pounds 
were  to  be  sought,  and  if  the  Scots  hesitated  to  give  so  large  a  sum,  they  were 
empowered,  after  negotiations,  to  reduce  it  to  thirty-six  thousand  pounds,  being 
two  thousand  pounds  for  each  of  the  eighteen  years  during  which  King  James 
had  been  detained  by  the  English.1  The  sum,  however,  was  fixed  at  forty 
thousand  pounds,  to  be  paid  at  London  by  instalments  of  ten  thousand  merks 
every  six  months.  The  Scottish  commissioners  also  expressed  themselves 
well  satisfied  with  the  proposed  marriage  of  King  James. 

To  allow  the  King  time  to  obtaiu  among  his  kindred  and  subjects  hostages 
of  sufficient  standing  to  insure  the  payment  of  the  money,  negotiations  were 
postponed  until  the  1st  of  March  following.  In  the  meanwhile,  however, 
the  commissioners  met  again  at  London,  early  in  December,  and  drew  up 
the  terms  of  the  Instrument  of  Eelease.  By  the  month  of  March  the 
arrangements  were  completed.  A  truce  of  seven  years  was  agreed  to,2  King 
James  was  to  obtain  his  freedom  and  bring  to  Scotland  as  his  queen  the 
lady  previously  mentioned,  who  was  a  grand- daughter  of  John  of  Gaunt, 
Duke  of  Lancaster,  and  whose  mother  was  Lady  Katherine,  niece  of  the  late 
King  Eichard  the  Second  of  England.3  On  account  of  his  marriage  with 
tins  lady,  King  James  received,  as  if  for  her  dowry,  a  remission  of  ten 
thousand  marks  from  the  sum  of  sixty  thousand  due  to  the  English  Treasury.4 
For  the  payment  of  the  remaining  fifty  thousand  marks,  the  four  principal 
burghs  of  Scotland — Edinburgh,  Perth,  Dundee,  and  Aberdeen — each  became 
responsible,6  in  addition  to  about  thirty  of  the  Scottish  magnates.6 

To  the  four  burghs  King  James  granted  his  obligation  to  relieve  them 

1  Eymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  x.  p.  295. 

2  Ibkl.  p.  328. 

3  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  474. 

4  llymer'a  Foedera,  vol.  x.  p.  322. 
6  Ibid.  p.  324. 
6  Ibid.  p.  327. 


of  the  sum  for  the  payment  of  which  they  had  become  bound.1  This  he 
did  while  at  Durham  awaiting  the  concluding  of  the  arrangements.  On  the 
28th  March  a  commission  was  issued  at  Durham,  which  appointed  the  Earl 
of  Northumberland  and  others  to  escort  King  James  with  all  possible 
honour  from  that  city  out  of  the  kingdom,2  and  he  left  it,  accompanied 
by  over  three  hundred  of  the  Scottish  nobility,  who  had  previously 
obtained  safe-conducts  from  the  English  Government  to  come  to  Durham 
for  that  purpose.3 

King  James  is  said  to  have  proceeded  directly  to  Edinburgh,  with  a 
short  delay  at  Melrose  on  the  5th  of  April,  for  the  confirmation  of  the 
arrangements  made  with  England  about  his  release.  His  first  act  on 
arriving  at  the  capital  seems  to  have  been  to  arrest  Sir  Walter  Stewart,  eldest 
surviving  son  of  Duke  Murdach,  with  Malcolm  Fleming  of  Cumbernauld, 
and  Thomas  Boyd  younger  of  Kilmarnock.  They  were  taken  on  the  13th 
May  within  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  and  Sir  Walter  Stewart  was  sent  in 
strict  custody  to  the  Bass,  Malcolm  Fleming,  first  to  Dalkeith  and  then  to 
St.  Andrews,  but  Thomas  Boyd  was  set  at  liberty.4  No  reason  is  given  for 
their  arrest.  Shortly  afterwards,  on  the  21st  May,  the  King  and  Queen 
were  crowned  at  Scone,  in  the  midst  of  the  bishops,  prelates,  and  nobles 
of  Scotland,  by  Henry  Wardlaw,  Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  while  Duke 
Murdach,  as  first  in  rank  among  the  nobles,  as  well  as  by  virtue  of 
the  ancient  privilege  of  the  Earls  of  Fife,  placed  the  King  in  his  regal 
chair.5       On    this    occasion,   along   with   a   number    of    others,  Alexander 

1  National  MSS.  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  No.  67-  Hering,  Constable  of  the  Castle  there,  received 

-  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  x.  p.  332.  several    allowances    from   the    custumars   of 

3  Ibid.  p.  309.  Haddington  and  North  Berwick  towards  the 

4  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.   481.      Sir  expenses  of  their  prisoner. — [Exchequer  Rolls, 
W alter  Stewart  was  placed  in  charge  of  Sir  vol.  iv.  pp.  3S0,  380.] 

Robert  of  Lawder  of  the  Bass,  who,  with  John  5  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  474. 


Stewart,  a  younger  son  of  Duke  Murdach,  received  the  honour  of  knight- 
hood from  the  King.1 

A  few  days  after  his  coronation,  King  James  assembled  his  first  Parliament 
at  Perth,  and  before  it  was  dissolved  the  people  of  Scotland  discovered  that 
although  they  had  welcomed  their  .sovereign's  return,  it  was  to  cost  them  dear. 
The  noblest  families  in  Scotland  had  sacrificed  much  to  procure  his  release, 
and  by  the  imposition  of  a  system  of  taxation  hitherto  unknown  in  Scotland, 
the  common  people  were  to  be  impoverished.  The  first  year  the  Auditors 
of  Exchequer  received  and  delivered  to  the  King  nearly  fourteen  thousand 
marks,  but  the  second  year  produced  a  sum  so  much  less,  that  the  King 
abstained  from  burdening  the  people  with  taxes  until  the  year  1433,  when, 
on  account  of  some  heavy  expenses  of  an  embassy  to  France  for  arranging  the 
marriage  of  his  daughter  with  the  Dauphin  [afterwards  Louis  XI.],  he  imposed 
a  tax  of  twopence  in  the  pound  universally  throughout  the  kingdom.  At 
this  renewal  of  the  grievance  the  commons  complained  against  the  King, 
which  coming  to  his  ears,  he  ordered  the  collectors  to  desist,  and  to  restore 
to  every  one  the  amount  which  had  been  uplifted  from  him.2 

In  this  first  Parliament  of  King  James,  an  Act  was  passed  "anent 
the  lands  and  rents  which  belonged  in  former  times  to  the  King's 
predecessors,"  in  which  instructions  were  given  to  all  the  King's  sheriffs  to 
make  inquiry,  by  their  best  and  worthiest  bailies,  as  to  what  lands,  possessions, 
or  annual-rents  pertained  in  former  times  to  the  King,  or  to  his  predecessors, 
Kings  David  the  Second,  Eobert  the  Second,  and  Kobert  the  Third,  and  in 
whose  hands  they  now  lay.  Of  these  inquiries,  the  sheriffs  were  to  furnish 
retours  under  their  seals,  and  by  the  same  Act  the  King  was  empowered 
to  summon  any  of  his  tenants  to  show  their  charters  and  evidents.3 

1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  4S2.  2  Ibid. 

3  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  4. 



It  would  appear  from  the  making  of  this  Act,  that  the  crown  lands  and 
rents  had  to  a  large  extent  passed  into  the  hands  of  others,  but  who  had 
obtained  possession  of  them  it  is  not  easy  to  discover.  The  Dukes  of 
Albany  do  not  seem  to  have  enriched  themselves  with  them,  nor  yet  to 
have  bestowed  them  upon  others,  but  to  them  the  King  naturally  looked 
for  the  preservation  of  them.  It  was  just  that  when  the  King  discovered 
the  state  of  matters,  he  should  take  steps  to  recover  his  own,  and  the 
passing  of  this  Act  was  perfectly  legal.  But  King  James's  temper  seems  to 
have  been  overstrained  and  broken  by  his  long  and  weary  captivity,  and  he 
had  not  patience  to  pursue  a  mild  policy  with  his  nobility,  by  which  lie 
might  have  accomplished  his  end  quite  as  effectually,  and  prolonged  his 
own  life.  The  King  made  many  good  laws,  and  did  much  to  improve  the 
condition  of  his  kingdom  in  a  social  aspect,  but  he  assumed  the  position 
of  a  tyrant  to  the  nobility  of  Scotland ;  his  measures  towards  them  were 
harsh  and  unjust ;  and  had  their  loyalty  and  devotedness  been  less  sterling 
than  it  appeared,  they  would  have  been  driven  by  his  oppression  to  rebellion 
long  before  they  were.  James  thus  showed  himself  cruelly  ungrateful  to 
those  who  for  his  sake,  either  in  their  own  persons,  or  in  the  persons  of 
their  eldest  sons,  had  become  exiles  among  their  traditional  enemies,  where 
they,  for  the  most  part,  either  died,  or  were  exchanged  for  others  of  equal 
importance;1  yet,  shortly  after  the  conclusion  of  this  arrangement,  and  before 
King  James  the  First  had  sat  a  single  year  on  the  throne  of  his  fathers, 
he  was  the  author  of  one  of  the  most  sanguinary  tragedies  ever  executed  on 
Scottish  soil, — two  knights,  with  their  a^red  father  and  more  ared  «rand- 
father,  the  most  venerable  of  Scotland's  nobles,  tried,  condemned,  and  hurried 
from  the  tribunal  to  the  block. 

Previous  to  his  coronation,  as  remarked,  King  James  had  caused  the 
1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  474. 


arrest,  along  with  two  others,  of  Walter  Stewart,  the  oldest  surviving  son  and 
heir  of  Duke  Murdach.  In  the  same  year,  1424,  Duncan,  Earl  of  Lennox, 
was  also  arrested  and  imprisoned  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  while  Eobert 
of  Graham  was  consigned  to  a  similar  fate  in  the  Castle  of  Dunbar.1 

The  King  held  his  second  Parliament  at  Perth,  on  12th  March  1425,  and 
on  the  ninth  day  of  its  sitting  lie  caused  to  be  arrested  Murdach  Duke 
of  Albany,  and  his  son  Sir  Alexander  Stewart,  with  twenty-six  others, 
namely,  Archibald  fifth  Earl  of  Douglas,  William  Douglas  Earl  of  Angus, 
George  Dunbar  Earl  of  March,  Alexander  Lindsay,  Adam  Hepburn  of 
Hailes,  Thomas  Hay  of  Yester,  Walter  of  Haliburton,  Walter  Ogilvy,  David 
Stewart  of  Eosyth,  Alexander  Seton  of  Gordon,  Patrick  Ogilvy  of  Ochter-,  John  the  Eed  Stewart  of  Dundonald,  David  Murray  of  Gask,  John 
Stewart  of  Cardine,  William  Hay  of  Errol  Constable  of  Scotland,  Alexander 
Irvine  of  Drum,  Herbert  Maxwell  of  Carlaverock,  Herbert  Herries  of 
Terregles,  Andrew  Gray  of  Foulis,  Eobert  Cunningham  of  Kilmaurs,  Alex- 
ander Eamsay  of  Dalhousie,  and  William  Crichton  of  Crichton.  On  the  same 
day,  John  Montgomerie  of  Montgomerie,  and  Alan  of  Otterburn,  the  Secretary 
of  the  Duke  of  Albany,  were  also  arrested,  but  shortly  afterwards  were 
released.  Immediately  after  these  arrests,  the  King  sent  and  took  possession 
of  two  of  Duke  Murdach's  castles,  Doune  in  Menteith  and  Falkland.  In  the 
former  he  found  Isabella,  Duchess  of  Albany,  and  sent  her  with  the  other 
prisoners  to  the  Castle  of  St.  Andrews,  but  he  afterwards  removed  her  to 
Tantallon,  and  the  Duke  of  Albany  to  Carlaverock  Castle.2  The  portion  of 
Carlaverock  Castle  in  which  Duke  Murdach  was  confined  is  still  preserved, 
and  is  known  as  "  Murdach's  Tower."  It  is  the  round  tower  on  the  south- 
western angle  of  the  Castle,  and  is  about  eleven  feet  in  diameter.  The  tower 
was  far  removed  from  the  vassals  of  Albany,  and  may  on  that  account  have 
1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  482.  2  Ibid.  p.  483. 


been  considered  the  safest  in  the  kingdom.  He  was  taken  from  it  to  his  trial 
and  execution  at  Stirling.1 

Only  one  of  Duke  Murdach's  sons,  James,  was  at  liberty,  and  he  would, 
no  doubt,  have  shared  the  fate  of  his  father  and  brothers  if  King  James 
could  have  captured  him.  He,  however,  escaped,  and,  enraged  by  the 
imprisonment  of  his  father  and  brothers,  attacked,  in  company  with  Finlay, 
bishop  of  Lismore,  and  others,  the  burgh  of  Dumbarton,  which,  in  spite  of 
strong  resistance,  he  burned,  and  slew  John  Stewart  of  Dundonald,  otherwise 
of  Burley,  called  the  Eed  Stewart,  an  uncle  of  King  James,  and  with  him 
thirty-two  other  persons.  For  this  the  King  pursued  him  so  closely  that  he 
was  compelled,  with  the  Bishop,  to  betake  himself  for  safety  to  Ireland, 
where  he  died.2 

Several  of  those  taken  along  with  Duke  Murdach  had  obtained  their 
liberty,  as  is  evident  from  the  Eed  Stewart  being  at  Dumbarton  when  it  was 
assaulted  by  James  Stewart.  Others  seem  to  have  been  set  at  liberty  on 
promising  to  assist  the  King  in  the  removal  of  Albany  and  his  sons,  for  they 
sat  on  the  jury  of  twenty-one  which  condemned  them  and  the  Earl  of 
Lennox.  Of  those  thus  liberated  there  were  eight,  namely,  Archibald  Earl 
of  Douglas,  William  Earl  of  Angus,  George  Earl  of  March,  John  Montgomerie, 
William  Hay  of  Errol,  Constable,  Herbert  Herries  of  Terregles,  Robert 
Cuningham  of  Kilmaurs,  and  Patrick  Ogilvy,  Sheriff  of  Angus,  who,  with 
those  already  in  the  King's  confidence,  were  sufficient  to  insure  a  verdict 
against  those  whose  life  the  King  sought. 

On  the  18th  of  May  the  King  continued  his  Parliament  at  Stirling,  and 
on  the  24th  of  that  month,  when  seated  on  his  throne  in  state,  Walter 
Stewart  was  brought  before  him  for  trial,  his  accusation  read,  and  he  being 

1  The  Book  of  Carlaverock,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  i.  pp.  56,  130.  ., 

2  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  4S3. 

VOL.  I.  2  M 

274        EXECUTION  OF  THE  DUKE  AND  HIS  TWO  SONS,  1425. 

convicted,  was  at  once  led  forth  and  beheaded  in  front  of  the  castle.  On  the 
morrow  similar  proceedings  took  place  with  regard  to  Duke  Murdach,  his 
son,  Sir  Alexander,  and  the  aged  Earl  of  Lennox.  They  shared  the  same  fate, 
and  with  like  haste ;  and  to  add  to  the  ghastly  spectacle,  on  the  same  day 
five  of  those  who  had  been  with  James  Stewart  at  the  burning  of  Dumbarton, 
who  had  been  taken  and  brought  to  the  King  on  the  8th  of  May,  were  drawn 
asunder  by  horses,  and  their  bodies  suspended  on  gibbets.1  The  bodies  of  the 
Earl  of  Lennox,  the  Duke  of  Albany  and  his  two  sons,  were  buried  in  the 
Church  of  the  Preaching  Friars  at  Stirling,  on  the  south  side  of  the  great  altar. 

The  scene  of  their  execution  was  an  eminence  to  the  north  of  the  castle, 
the  Gowling  Hill,  or  Heading  Hill,  as  it  was  afterwards  called  from  this 
sanguinary  scene.  The  event  itself  was  one  which  drew  from  those  who 
witnessed  it  expressions  of  deep  regret  and  compassion.  Duke  Murdach  and 
his  two  sons  were  men  of  gigantic  stature ;  and  of  Sir  "Walter  Stewart  it  is 
recorded,  in  marked  contrast  to  the  testimony  of  Bower,  that  he  was  a  most 
loveable  person,  of  sagacious  eloquence,  agreeable  to  every  one,  and  universally 
beloved,  and  that  his  death  was  deplored  not  only  by  those  who  knew  him, 
but  by  all  who  had  heard  of  his  fame.2  When  to  these  was  added  the 
spectacle  of  the  venerable  Earl  of  Lennox,  now  in  his  eightieth  year,  and  one 
of  the  most  peaceable  noblemen  of  that  time,  being  led  to  the  block,  it 
cannot  be  wondered  that  expressions  of  indignation  against  such  unsparing 
rigour  found  vent  amongst  the  spectators. 

Much  conjecture  has  been  raised  as  to  the  cause  of  this  procedure  on  the 
part  of  King  James.  As  has  been  stated,  the  arrest  of  Sir  Walter  Stewart 
was  made  before  the  coronation  of  the  King,  and  the  only  charge  which  is 
known  to  have  been  preferred  against  him  is  that  of  "  dc  rdborea"  of  which 

1  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  483. 

2  Scotichronicon,  Cupar  MS.,  quoted  iu  Fordun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  483,  note. 


he  was  convicted  by  the  assize,  and  beheaded.1  What  is  implied  in  this  term 
is  doubtful,  the  most  probable  suggestion  being  that  it  refers  to  the  spoliation 
of  crown  lands.  The  pretext  for  the  arrest  of  Duke  Murdach,  his  son 
Alexander,  and  the  Earl  of  Lennox,  with  so  many  other  nobles  during  the 
sitting  of  the  second  Parliament  at  Perth,  has  been  supposed  to  be  the  inatten- 
tion paid  by  these  nobles  to  the  laws  passed  by  themselves  at  the  previous 
meeting  of  Parliament,  evidence  of  which  appeared  at  the  second  meeting, 
upon  which  the  King  ordered  their  arrest.  But  all  the  others  were  released, 
and  only  Albany,  his  sons,  and  Lennox  chosen  for  the  slaughter,  while  no 
record  has  been  preserved  of  the  crimes  of  which  they  were  accused.  It  could 
not  have  been  usurpation  of  the  government  on  the  part  of  the  Duke,  as  has 
been  suggested,  for,  as  formerly  shown,  his  transactions  during  the  whole 
period  of  his  regency  were  not  only  never  called  in  question  either  by  the 
nobility  or  King  James,  but  were  actually  confirmed  by  both,  and  the  death  of 
the  Duke  alone  might  have  sufficed  had  such  been  the  crime.  Feelings  of 
revenge  against  the  whole  house  of  Albany  on  account  of  the  alleged  murder 
of  Eothesay,  and  detention  of  King  James  in  England,  are  also  stated  as  a 
reason  for  the  arrest ;  but  as  these  alleged  facts  have  been  shown  to  have  had 
no  foundation,  they  are  not  likely  to  have  given  rise  to  such  feelings.  It 
may  have  been  represented  to  the  King  that  the  power  of  the  Albanies 
had  become  too  great,  and  that  while  they  lived  he  would  not  be  able  to 
consolidate  his  own  power ;  but  these  reasons  will  not  provide  any  satisfactory 
ground  for  including  the  aged  Earl  of  Lennox  in  the  slaughter.     "Whatever 

1  SeotichronicoD,  Cupar  MS.,  quoted  in  For-  £15,   Os.   lOJd.,  and  this  was  considered  so 

dun,  a  Goodall,  vol.  ii.  p.  483,  note.    The  only  trivial  by  the  Lords  Auditors,  that  they  did 

instance  on  record  of  misdemeanour  on  the  part  not  think  it  worth  while  consulting  the  Gover- 

of   Sir  Walter  Stewart  was  his  detention  of  nor,  but  merely  instructed  the  custumars  to 

the  custumars  of  Linlithgow  in  his  castle  of  deduct  the  sum  from  the  next  payment  made 

Dumbarton  until  they  paid  him  the  sum  of  to  him. — [Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  p.  365.] 


his  reason,  King  James  evidently  sought  to  annihilate  the  house  of  Albany. 
Pinkerton  prints  a  contemporary  account  of  the  murder  of  King  James  the 
First,  which  refers  in  the  following  terms  to  the  execution  now  related : — 

"  Whos  deth  the  people  of  the  land  sore  grutched  and  mowrnid,  seying 
that  thay  suppoised  and  ymagynd  that  the  Kyng  did  rather  that  vigorious 
execucion  upon  the  Lordes  of  his  kyne,  for  the  covetise  of  thare  possessions 
and  goodes,  thane  for  any  other  rightfull  cause,  althofe  he  fonde  colourabill 
wais  to  serve  his  entent  yn  the  contrary  e."1 

At  all  events,  it  was  not  because  of  any  danger  to  the  State  that  King- 
James  procured  the  death  of  these  noblemen.  There  is  nothing  to  show  that 
they  were  moving  sedition;  they  attended  the  Parliament,  and  performed  their 
accustomed  duties  till  they  were  suddenly  and  unexpectedly  arrested.  Their 
lives  might  have  been  useful  to  the  country  had  they  been  spared,  but  the 
King's  jealousy  prompted  their  removal,  as  it  would  lessen  the  risk  of  failure  in 
his  own  succession  in  the  event  of  a  rising  of  the  other  nobles  or  people,  for 
they  were  the  next  heirs  to  the  crown.  Colourable  pretexts  may  have  been 
found  to  convict  them  of  treason,  but  it  is  more  likely,  judging  from  James's 
policy  towards  the  nobles,  that  he  succeeded  in  intimidating  those  who  sat 
on  the  jury  to  fulfil  his  wishes.     Sir  David  Lindsay  of  the  Mount  thus  refers 

to  this  deed : — 

"  Quho  rang  in  court  more  hie  and  tryumphand 

Nor  Duke  Murdoke,  quhill  that  his  day  indurit  I 
Was  be  nocht  gret  Protectour  of  Scotland  ? 

Yit  of  the  court  he  was  nocht  weill  assurit  ; 

It  changit  so,  his  lang  servyce  wes  smurit  ; 
He  and  his  sonne,  fair  Walter,  but  remede, 
Forfaltit  war,  and  put  to  dulefull  dede."2 

1  Pinkerton,  vol.  i.  Appendix,  p.  463. 

2  Poetical  Works  of  Sir  David  Lyudsay,  by  David  Laing,  vol.  i.  p.  77. 


The  death  of  Duke  Murdach  and  his  sons  being  ostensibly  for  high 
treason,  and  his  youngest  son,  James,  being  now  an  outlaw  on  whose  head  a 
price  was  placed,  the  vast  earldoms  of  Fife  and  Menteith  fell  into  the  King's 
hands.  A  charter,  granted  by  James,  Abbot  of  Dunfermline,  and  the  convent 
thereof,  on  4th  January  1506,  bears  that  the  deceased  Murdach,  Duke  of 
Albany,  Earl  of  Fife  and  Menteith,  tenant  to  the  said  abbot  and  monastery 
in  the  lands  of  Cluny,  had,  for  certain  treasonable  crimes,  forfeited  his  life 
and  lands  and  all  his  goods  within  Scotland  to  King  James  the  First ;  and 
although  the  said  King  and  his  successors  kept  the  said  lands  of  Cluny  for 
some  time  to  their  own  use,  and  disponed  them  to  certain  persons,  yet  King 
James  the  Fourth,  then  present  King  of  Scots,  moved  through  conscience 
and  his  accustomed  goodness,  and  being  advised  by  a  decree  of  the  Lords  of 
Council,  restored  the  superiority  of  the  said  lands  of  Cluny  to  the  said  abbot 
and  convent.1 

The  earldom  of  Lennox,  however,  was  not  forfeited,  but  was  inherited 
by  Isabella,  Duchess  of  Albany,  as  heir  to  her  father,  Earl  Duncan,  under 
the  feudal  investitures  of  the  earldom,  and  it  remained  in  her  posses- 
sion till  her  death.  After  her  release  from  Tantallon  Castle,  the  Duchess 
returned  to  the  home  of  her  childhood  in  Inchmurrin  Castle,  Lochlomond, 
the  principal  messuage  of  the  earldom  of  Lennox.  From  this  place  she 
managed  the  affairs  of  the  earldom,  and  numerous  charters  attest  both  her 
munificence  to  the  Church  and  her  capacity  for  business.  She  received, 
in  1434,  at  the  King's  command,  a  grant  of  £29,  6s.  8d.  from  the  Exchequer; 
and  probably  it  is  the  same  lady  who  is  referred  to  under  the  name  Elizabeth, 
Duchess  of  Albany,  as  the  recipient  of  £8,  2s.  for  clothing  and  furniture 
about    four   years   previously.2      Duchess    Isabella's   youngest   son,   James, 

1  Appendix  to  Fourth  Report  of  Historical  mss.  Commission,  p.  497. 

2  Exchequer  Eolls,  vol.  iv.  pp.  473,  591. 


died  in  his  exile  in  Ireland;  but  in  the  year  1445  three  of  his  illegi- 
timate sons  were  with  her  at  Inchmurrin,  whose  names  were  James, 
Arthur,  and  Walter,  and  they  witnessed,  on  15th  February  of  that  year, 
a  charter  by  Isabella,  Duchess  of  Albany  and  Countess  of  Lennox,  to 
William  of  Edmonstoun,  son  and  heir  of  Sir  William  of  Edmonstoun,  Lord 
of  Cullodene,  and  his  wife,  Matilda  Stewart  (a  grand-daughter  of  the 
Duchess),  of  the  lands  of  Duntreath,  in  the  earldom  of  Lennox.1  They 
were  still  with  her  in  the  year  1451,  and  witnessed  a  charter  granted  by 
her  at  Inchmurrin,  on  18th  May,  of  the  lands  of  Balylogan,  in  the  parish 
of  Kilrnaronock  and  earldom  of  Menteith,  to  John  of  Govane,  prior  of 
the  Preaching  Friars  of  Glasgow,  and  his  successors,  for  the  welfare  of  her 
soul  and  the  souls  of  her  late  husband,  Murdach,  Lord  Duke  of  Albany,  her 
father,  Duncan,  Earl  of  Lennox,  and  her  sons  Walter,  James,  and  Alexander. 

For  some  time  after  the  death  of  Duke  Murdach  there  were  two  Duchesses 
of  Albany  in  Scotland — Duchess  Muriella,  the  second  wife  of  Duke  Eobert, 
and  Duchess  Isabella.  The  former  must  have  been  well  advanced  in  years 
at  the  time  when  the  last  reference  to  her  pension  from  King  James  occurs 
in  the  Accounts  of  the  Auditors  of  the  Exchequer  for  1435,  and  she  probably 
received  the  money  from  the  forfeited  earldoms  of  Fife  and  Menteith. 
Duchess  Isabella  survived  until  about  the  year  1460,  and  saw  the  violent 
end  of  that  King  who  at  one  blow  deprived  her  of  father,  husband,  and  sons. 
She  also  lived  until  near  the  end  of  the  reign  of  King  James  the  Second. 

By  his  Duchess  Isabella,  Duke  Murdach  had  four  sons  and  one 
daughter : — 

1.  Robert  Stewart,  called  of  Fife.  He  is  mentioned  in  the  accounts 
of  the  year  1415  as  receiving  share  of  a  balance  of  £50,  lis.  9d. 
in  the  hands   of  the  custumars  of  North  Berwick,  which,  by 

1  The  Lennox,  by  William  Fraser,  vol.  i.  p.  269. 


command  of  the  Governor,  Duke  Robert,  was  divided  between 
him,  another  grandson,  John  of  Swinton,  and  Sir  Eobert  of 
Lawder.1  Eobert  Stewart  died  before  1421,  without  issue. 
2.  Sir  Walter  Stewart  of  Lennox,  but,  after  the  death  of  his  elder 
brother,  styled  of  Fife,  Lennox,  and  Menteith.  Previous  to  the 
year  1416  he  was  appointed  keeper  of  the  Castle  of  Dumbarton 
in  place  of,  or  along  with  Sir  Walter  Buchanan,  his  brother-in-law, 
who  received  twenty  marks  of  the  hundred  annually  granted  for 
the  office,  while  Sir  Walter  received  eighty.2 

Under  the  regency  of  his  father,  Sir  Walter,  as  his  eldest  sur- 
viving son  and  heir,  exercised  considerable  power,  a  proof  of 
which  is  his  writing  a  letter  to  the  French  King,  dated  at  Stirling, 
in  the  month  of  October  1423,  in  which  he  promised  to  observe 
and  keep  the  treaties  of  alliance  and  confederation  between 
the  kingdoms  of  France  and  Scotland.3  He  was  seized  and 
imprisoned  by  King  James  the  First  as  soon  as  the  latter 
entered  Scotland,  and  after  being  kept  a  year  in  captivity, 
was  tried  and  executed  at  Stirling,  on  24th  May  1425. 

A  marriage  was  arranged  between  Sir  Walter  and  Janet  Erskine, 
daughter  of  Sir  Eobert  Erskine,  and  as  they  were  related  to  one 
another  in  the  third  degree,  a  papal  dispensation  was  obtained 
from  Pope  Martin  the  Fifth,  dated  27th  May  1421.4  But  it  is 
unknown  if  this  proposed  marriage  was  ever  celebrated,  and  Sir 
Walter  left  no  legitimate  issue.5 

1  Exchequer  Rolls,  vol.  iv.  p.  226.  6  The  alleged  marriages  and  issue  of   Sir 

2  Ibid.  pp.  242,  363.  Walter  Stewart  have  formed  the  subject  of 

3  Report  ou  Foedera,  Appendix  D,  p.  128.  controversy.     According  to  the  family  tradi- 

4  Andrew  Stuart's  Genealogical  History  of  tion  of  the  Stewarts  of  Ardvoirlich,  who  are 
the  Stewarts,  p.  451.  descended  from  James  Stewart,   a  younger 


3.  Sir  James  Stewart,  called  More.     He,  as  formerly  narrated,  was 

driven  to  take  up  arms  on  the  arrest  of  his  father  and  brothers, 
and  after  burning  Dumbarton,  fled  to  Ireland,  where  he  died  in 
1451.  By  a  lady  of  the  family  of  Macdonald  he  left  a  natural 
son,  James  Stewart  Beg,  who  was  the  ancestor  of  the  Stewarts  of 
Ardvoirlich.  He  had  also  a  natural  daughter,  Matilda,  married 
to  William  Edmondstone  of  Duntreath.  This  marriage  is  proved 
by  a  charter  by  Isabella,  Duchess  of  Albany,  to  William  of 
Edmonstone  and  Matilda  Stewart  his  spouse,  of  the  lands  of 
Duntreath  and  others,  dated  15th  February  1445.1 

4.  Sir  Alexander  Stewart,  called  of   Kinclevin,  who  was  beheaded, 

along  with  his  father  the  Duke  and  his  grandfather  the  Earl  of 
Lennox,  at  Stirling,  on  25th  May  1425.     He  left  no  issue. 
The  daughter  of  Duke  Murdach  was — ■ 

Lady  Isabella  Stewart,  who  married  Sir  Walter  Buchanan  of  Buchanan 
in  Stirlingshire,  and  left  issue. 

brother  of  Sir  Walter,  Andrew,  Lord  Avail-  his   arguments   for   the   parentage   of    Lord 

dale,  was  also  a  son  of  James.     George  Craw-  Avandale,  Mr.  Stuart  is  more  successful  than 

furd,    Duncan    Stewart,    and    other    eminent  in  his  pleading,   however  plausible,  for  the 

genealogists,  believed  in  that  tradition.     But  legitimacy   of    Avandale    and    his    brothers 

the  question  of  the  parentage  of  Lord  Avandale  Arthur  and  Walter.     In  the  Act  of  Legiti- 

has  been  made  a  special  study  by  the  Hon.  mation  granted  to  them  by  King  James  III., 

and   Eev.   Andrew   Godfrey   Stuart    in    his  the  three  brothers  are  treated  as  bastards. 

History    of    the    Stuarts    of    Castle  -  Stuart  Buchanan  refers  to  Arthur  as  base  born,  thus 

(1854).    Mr.  Stuart  maintains  that  Sir  Walter  corroborating  the  legitimation  as  to  him  ;  and 

was  the  father  of  Avandale  and  three  brothers,  the   evidence  as  to  the  Campbell  lady  calls 

Alexander,  Murdach,  and  Arthur,  by  a  lady  her  an  unlawful  wife. 

of  the  name  of  Campbell,  and  that  by  a  second  l  Genealogical  Account  of  the  Family  of 

marriage  with  Janet  Erskine,  Sir  Walter  was  Edmonstone  of  Duntreath,  by  Sir  Archibald 

the  father  of  Walter   Stewart  of   Morphie,  Edmonstone   of   Duntreath,   Baronet,    1S75, 

ancestor  of  the  family  of  Castle-Stuart.     In  p.  32. 



By  the  forfeiture  of  Murdach,  Duke  of  Albany,  the  earldom  of  Menteith 
became  the  property  of  the  Crown.  As  King  James  the  First  had  also 
deprived  Malise  Graham  of  his  earldom  of  Strathern,  he  shortly  afterwards 
granted  to  him  a  portion  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith  as  a  new  earldom,  as 
will  be  shown  in  the  next  chapter,  on  the  history  of  the  Grahams,  Earls  of 

The  subsequent  history  of  the  title  of  Duke  of  Albany  shows  how  short- 
lived was  each  successive  creation  of  that  distinguished  dignity.  After 
having  been  extinct  for  nearly  half  a  century,  it  was  revived  before  1466  in 
favour  of  Alexander  Stewart,  Earl  of  March  and  Lord  of  Annandale,  the 
second  son  of  King  James  the  Second.  On  his  death  in  France  in  1485,  it 
devolved  on  his  eldest  lawful  son,  John,  who  for  nine  years  (1514-1523)  was 
Governor  of  Scotland  during  the  minority  of  King  James  the  Fifth,  and  was 
declared  next  heir  to  the  Crown  in  the  event  of  that  King's  death  without 
heirs.  Duke  John  died  in  France  in  1536,  when  the  title  of  Duke  of  Albany 
became  extinct  the  second  time.  It  was,  however,  in  1541  again  revived  in 
favour  of  Prince  Arthur,  second  son  of  King  James  the  Fifth ;  but  he  died 
in  childhood.  A  third  time  it  was  revived  by  Queen  Mary,  and  bestowed 
upon  Henry,  Lord  Darnley,  on  the  occasion  of  his  marriage  with  the  Queen 
in  1565.  On  Darnley's  death  the  title  of  Duke  of  Albany  descended  to  his 
son  King  James  the  Sixth,  who  created  his  second  son  Prince  Charles, 
afterwards  King  Charles  the  First,  Duke  of  Albany  on  the  occasion  of  his 
baptism,  on  23d  December  1600.  King  Charles  the  First  created  his  eldest 
son  Prince  Charles,  afterwards  King  Charles  the  Second,  Duke  of  Albany 
in  1631,  and  he  in  turn,  on  31st  December  1660,  created  his  younger  brother 

VOL.  I.  2  N 


Prince  James,  Duke  of  Albany.  The  latter  succeeded  as  King  James  the 
Second  of  England,  and  on  his  forfeiture  of  the  Crown  the  title  of  Albany 
was  again  extinguished.1 

After  the  accession  of  the  House  of  Hanover  to  the  British  throne, 
Prince  Edward  Augustus,  second  son  of  Frederick  Lewis,  Prince  of  Wales, 
was,  in  1760,  created  by  King  George  the  Second  Duke  of  Albany  and 
Yokk;  and  on  his  death  in  1767,  that  title  became  extinct.  It  was  once 
more  revived  in  1784,  by  King  George  the  Third,  in  favour  of  his  second 
son,  Prince  Frederick,  and  again  became  extinct  on  the  death  of  the  latter, 
without  issue,  on  5th  January  1827.  He  was  the  last  who  held  this  oft- 
created  and  oft- extinguished  dignity  of  Duke  of  Albany. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  during  the  five  centuries  through  which  this 
dignity  has  existed,  it  has  never  continued  under  the  same  creations  beyond 
the  second  generation,  having  been  interrupted  either  by  forfeiture,  failure 
of  heirs,  or  new  creations. 

1  Prince  Charles  Edward  did  not  assume  was  named   Charlotte  Stuart.     She  was  very 

the    title   of   King    as    his   father    did,    but  devoted  to  her  father  in  his  declining  years, 

contented  himself  with  the  humbler  dignity  He  legitimated  her,    and  went  through  the 

of    Count    of    Albany.       Charles    had    one  form  about  the   same   time  of  making   her 

daughter     by     Clementine     Marie     Sophie,  Duchess  of  Albany,  by  which  title  she  was 

daughter  of  John  Walkinshaw   of   Barrow-  known   till   her   death   in   November    1789, 

field,  in  the  county  of  Lanark.    The  daughter  being  then  about  forty  years  of  age. 





THE  Memoirs  of  these  two  Dukes'  were  in  type  and  ready  to  be  printed, 
when,  in  the  month  of  November  1880,  there  came  under  the  notice  of 
the  author,  while  examining  the  miscellaneous  collection  of  imprinted  manu- 
scripts in  Her  Majesty's  General  Register  House,  Edinburgh,  of  which  he 
had  in  the  previous  month  become  official  custodier  as  Deputy  Keeper  of 
the  Records,  the  note  of  a  large  sheet  of  paper  containing  three  separate  and 
two  circular  letters  by  King  James  the  First  to  his  uncle  the  Duke  of  Albany 
and  others  relative  to  his  release  from  his  captivity  in  England.  On  making 
inquiry  for  that  paper,  it  was  ascertained  that  it  had  been  found  in  the  year 
1853  by  a  gentleman  not  officially  connected  with  the  public  Records,  when 
professionally  engaged  in  making  searches  among  the  Warrants  of  Processes 
in  the  General  Register  House.  The  paper  was  handed  by  that  gentleman 
to  one  of  the  Deputy  Keepers  of  the  Records,  and  it  was  afterwards  placed 
within  cover  of  an  envelope,  where  it  appears  to  have  lain  undisturbed  from 
that  date.  The  fragment  appears  to  be  the  original  draft  by  the  secretary  of 
King  James  the  First  of  the  letters  before  being  engrossed  and  despatched 
to  the  respective  noblemen  to  whom  they  were  addressed.     N 

The  letters  are  all  dated  from  Stratford  Awe,  or  Avon.  They  do  not  state 
the  year  in  which  they  were  written.  They  must,  however,  have  been  written 
before  Sir  Murdach  Stewart  obtained  his  release,  about  the  beginning  of  the 
year  1416,  as  in  the  first  letter,  which  is  addressed  to  Duke  Robert,  the  King 


states  that  he  has  obtained  to  it,  in  addition  to  his  own  signet,  that  of  his 
cousin  of  Fife,  clearly  referring  to  Sir  Murdach  Stewart,  who  was  popularly 
called  "  of  Fife,"  as  the  eldest  son  of  Duke  Eobert,  Earl  of  Fife.  John  Lyon, 
the  King's  chaplain,  and  bearer  of  the  letters,  went  to  England  to  King  James 
in  May  1412  on  a  safe-conduct,  which  was  to  continue  till  the  King's 
liberation.1  Sir  William  Cockburn,  to  whom  reference  is  made  by  James,  is 
known  to  have  been  one  of  the  commissioners  in  England  treating  for  the 
King's  deliverance  in  July  or  August  141 3,2  though  he  may  also  have  been 
with  the  King  at  a  later  date,  while  the  following  letters  appear  to  have 
been  brought  to  Scotland  by  John  Lyon  in  February  1416,  as  on  the  20th 
January  of  that  year  he  received  a  safe-conduct  from  Henry  the  Fifth  of 
England  to  proceed  to  Scotland,3  and  the  letters  bear  date  the  30th  January. 

1.   King  James  the  First  to  his  Uncle,  Robert,  Duke  of  Albany.4 

Duci  tantum. 
Gretynge  as  to  our  selfe.  Most  der  and  best  belufit  eme,  it  is  nouch  vnknowin  to 
yhow  that  we  haue  syndry  tymys  writtyn  to  yhow  and  to  the  thre  Estattis  of  our 
rwme  for  our  deliuerans  witht  Archibalde  of  Edmondistoun  and  William  of  Cokbourne, 
our  trew  kynchtis,  and  now  of  late  witht  Jon  Lyone,  our  tiast  and  wel  belufit  chape- 
layne,  and  of  thir  letteris  ane  no  al  hade  we  neuer  answer,  and  tharof  vs  ferlyis  nouch 
lytyle.  Qwarfor  we  pray  yhow  effectusly  and  riqweris  that  of  tha  letteris  yhe  sende 
ws  answer  witht  our  forsayd  chapelayn,  berar  of  this  letter,  and  at  yhe  mak  exsecucion 
for  our  deliuerans  efter  the  ordinans  of  our  consale  generale,  so  dowly  that  in  yhour 
defaut  we  be  nouch  send  to  sek  remede  of  our  deliuerans  otherqware  in  tyme  to  cum. 
Alsswa  we  pray  yhow  effectusly  that  yhe  haue  the  berare  of  this  letter  wel  commendit, 

1  Rotuli  Scotue,  vol.  ii.  p.  200.  4  Original  Draft  of  this  and  the  four  follow- 

2  Ibid.  p.  206.  ing  letters  on  a  single  sheet  of  paper  in  Her 

3  Ibid.  p.  215.  Majesty's  General  Register  House,  Edinburgh. 


for  he  has  mad  to  vs  and  ouris  no  nother  caus,  thankit  be  Gode.  Writtyn  at  Stratforde 
Awe,  the  penvltyma  day  of  Janueir,  vndyr  our  propir  signe  manuele  and  signet,  witht 
the  signet  of  our  welbelufit  cosynge  of  Fyffe. 

2.  The  Same  to  the  Eaels  of  Douglas  and  Dunbar,  and  the  Lord  of  Dalkeith. 

Douglas.  Dalketht.  Dunbar. 
Gretynge  as  to  our  selfe.  Der  and  wel  belufit  brother,  we  haue  syndry  tymys 
writtyn  to  yhow  til  stere  our  most  lufit  erne  of  Albany  douly  to  trauele  for  vs  and  our 
deliuerans  efter  the  ordinans  of  our  generale  consale,  and  now  o  late  we  wrot  to  zhow 
witht  our  trast  and  wel  belufit  chapellayn  Jone  Lyone,  the  qwilk  zhe  resayfit  thankfully, 
as  he  has  lattyn  vs  wit,  and  tharof  we  thank  zhow  and  prayis  zhow  witht  al  our  hart 
to  labore  for  vs  and  our  deliuerans  eftter  the  tenor  of  tha  letteris,  sene  zhe  botht  wele 
cane  and  may,  and  our  speciale  trast  is  in  zhow,  and  the  delay  of  our  hamecome  standis 
al  anely  in  thaim  that  sowlde  persue  for  vs,  for  we  haue  commondit  witht  our  most 
gracious  cosynge  the  excellent  Kyng  of  Ingilland  for  our  deliuerans,  and  we  haue  foundyu 
hyme  so  gracious  that  in  hym  is  no  thyng  to  amende  as  the  berare  can  lat  yhow  wit,  witht 
qwilk  zhe  send  answer  qwat  zhe  haue  done  and  may  do  in  this  mater,  and  qwat  [zhe] 
thynk  war  vs  to  do  gife  delay  war  made  as  it  has  bene  in  tymis  [gane.    Wryttyn]  ut  prius. 

3.  The  Same  to  the  Lords  of  Graham,  Erskine,  and  Ardrossan. 

[On  margin :]  Grame.  Erskyn.  Ardrossan. 
Gretynge  as  to  our  selfe.  Trast  and  wel  belufit  brother  (Alyzhe),1  witt  zhe  we  haue 
comounit  for  our  deliuerans  [witht]'2  our  most  excellent  cosyng  the  gracious  Kyng  of 
Ingillande,  and  we  haue  fundyn  hym  mor  gracious  than  we  can  say  or  write,  thankit 
be  Gode ;  and  his  desyre  is  that  our  most  lufit  erne  of  Albany  dide  trewly  his  det  for 
our  deliuerans  eftter  at  the  consale  generale  has  ordanit  befor  tyme,  and  gif  he  wile 
nouch  so  do  we  mone  sek  other  remede  on  nede,  the  qwilk  we  trast  to  fynde  gif  Gode 
wile,  as  the  berare  of  this  letter,  Jon  Lyone,  our  trast  and  welbelufit  chapellayn,  sale  lat 

1  This  word  "  Alyzhe"  is  written  above  the  line  as  an  alternative  to  the  word  "  brother  " 
which  immediately  precedes  it.     The  original  word  "cosyng"  is  deleted.  2  Original  worn. 


yhow  wit,  to  the  qwilk  zhe  gife  i'erme  credens  and  answer;  and  gife  yhe  may  sterre 
oure  erne  most  lufit  beforsayde  to  do  his  det,  for  we  thynk  God  wilnande  to  mak  zhow 
and  yhowris  for  al  at  zhe  sale  do  gud  rewarde  in  tyme  to  cum.     Writtyn  ut  prius. 

4.  Cieculae  Letter  by  King  James  the  Fiest. 
[On  margin  :]  Pluribus  x. 
Gretynge  as  to  our  self.  Trast  and  wel  belufit  frend,  cosyng,  or  alizhe,  wit  zhe  we 
haue  comounit  for  our  deliuerans  witht  our  most  excellent  cosyng  the  gracious  Kynge 
of  Ingilland,  and  we  haue  fundyn  hym  to  vs,  thankit  be  God,  mor  gracious  than  we 
may  say  or  write,  as  the  berar  of  this  letter,  Jon  Lyone,  our  wel  belufit  chapellane,  can 
lat  yhow  wit,  witht  the  qwilk  we  pray  yho  sende  vs  answer  in  writ  qwat  yhe  haue 
done  or  may  do  to  the  letteris  we  send  yhow  last,  and  qwat  war  to  be  done  gif  our 
deliuerans  war  put  in  delay  as  it  has  bene  in  tyme  gane.  And  this  yhe  do  for  vs  as 
we  trast  in  yhow,  for  we  sale  mak  yhow  rewarde  tharfor  gif  God  wil  in  tyme  to  cum. 
Writtyn  ut  prius. 

5.  Another  Cieculae  Lettee  by  King  James  the  Fiest. 
[On  margin  :]  ij. 
Gretynge  as  to  our  selfe.  Wit  yhe  we  haue  resayfit  yhour  letteris  answer  of  the 
letteris  we  sende  to  yhow  witht  our  trast  and  wel  lufit  chapellan  Jon  Lyone,  of  the 
qwilkis  we  thank  yhow  witht  al  our  hart,  and  specially  of  the  confort  and  helpe  zhe 
made  to  the  forsayde  Jon  Lyone  for  our  sak,  and  yhit  we  pray  yhow  hartfully  to  stere 
in  this  consale  witht  al  the  helpe  of  frendschipe  and  of  our  trew  legemene  yhe  may 
get,  our  trast  and  mast  lufit  erne  of  Albany  to  do  for  our  deliuerans  efter  the  ordinans 
of  the  generale  consale,  for  as  we  vndyrstande  our  most  excellent  cosyng  the  mychty 
Kyng  of  Ingillande  wile  be  to  vs  gracious  and  helplik,  for  we  haue  comounit  witht  hym, 
as  the  berar  beforsayd  can  lat  yhow  wit  beforsayde,  witht  the  qwilk  yhe  sende  vs 
answer  in  writ  qwat  yhe  haue  done  or  may  do  in  this  mater,  and  qwat  yhow  thynk 
war  vs  to  do  gif  our  deliuerans  war  put  in  delay,  as  it  has  bene  [in  tymis  gane.  And 
this]  yhow  [do]  for  vs,  ut  prius. 


Another  letter  relative  to  the  same  matter  was  written  by  King  James 
to  the  burgh  of  Perth,  probably  on  the  8th  August  previous  to  the  writing  of 
the  foregoing  letters.  A  copy  of  that  letter  is  preserved  in  the  archives  of 
the  burgh.     In  it  James  wrote  that  he  had, 

thankit  be  God,  maid  appoyntment  of  our  delywerance  with  the  excellent  King  of 
Ingland,  and  for  neidful  dispenss  that  we  man  mak  on  our  passage,  and  for  payment 
that  we  sould  mak  quhair  we  ar  awand  in  London,  we  have  writtin  to  our  aime  of 
Albanie  to  send  us  of  our  awin  gudis  to  pay  our  debtis,  and  mak  our  oostis  as 
worschip  weeld,  and  gif  he  help  us  not,  as  we  haif  prayed  him  and  chargied,  necessitie 
compellis  us  to  pray  yow  till  help  us  with  some  pairt  of  dispenss  at  this  tyme. 
Quhairfoir  speciallie  we  pray  yow,  and  requyris  that  ye  gif  us  or  len  us  a  certain 
portioun  of  your  propir  guidis  as  ye  ar  disposed.  Quhilk  we  sal  gar  be  allowit  to  you 
in  your  earest  custome,  quhat  euir  it  be,  and  send  us  this  good  with  ane  honest  burges 
of  your  awin,  quhilk  sail  hawe  saif  conduyeit,  as  the  berare  of  this  lettres  sail  doe  you 
witt.  To  the  quhilk  ye  give  firme  credence  in  oure  name,  and  gif  ye  can  not  find  to 
refresh  us  in  this  mister,  we  doe  you  to  witt  that  it  is  oure  will,  and  we  chairge  yow 
ye  put  no  merchandise  to  the  see  that  aw  us  custom,  under  all  payne  that  may  follow 
in  tyme  to  cum,  till  ye  hawe  licence  and  commandement  of  us.  Wreitten  at  Londoun, 
the  aught  day  of  August,  under  oure  proppir  signe  manuall  and  signett. 

As  the  five  letters,  now  printed  for  the  first  time,  bear  closely  upon  the 
proceedings  of  Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  in  reference  to  the  liberation  of  King 
James  from  his  captivity,  and  as  they  are  new  to  history,  it  has  been  considered 
right  to  append  them  to  his  memoir  and  that  of  his  son,  as  they  could  not  be 
inserted  at  their  appropriate  place  in  chronological  order.  They  afford  an 
interesting  contribution  to  the  history  of  King  James's  captivity,  and  supply 
evidence  of  the  King's  great  anxiety  and  impatience  to  be  released,  and 
his  mistaken  opinion  that  his  release  was  simply  a  matter  of  exertion,  and 
entirely  in  the  power  of  his  uncle  Albany.  But  King  James,  owing  to  his 
youth  at  the  time  of  his  capture,  and  his  consequent  inexperience  of  the 


affairs  of  Scotland,  had  never  as  yet  known  the  extreme  poverty  of  his  own 
kingdom,  and  how  insurmountable  were  the  difficulties  of  obtaining  the 
large  ransom  demanded  by  King  Henry  the  Fifth.  James  afterwards 
learned  the  impossibility  of  paying  the  much  smaller  sum  asked  in  1424 
to  reimburse  the  English  Treasury  for  his  expenses.  But  at  the  time 
he  felt  flattered  by  the  compliments  and  courtesy  of  Henry,  who  seems  also 
to  have  encouraged  James  in  the  opinion  that  Albany  was  but  deceiving  him, 
and  that  his  deliverance  was  a  matter  of  less  difficulty  than  it  really  was. 
The  grants  of  freedom  which  King  Henry  had  shortly  before  given  to  several 
Scottish  barons,  including  the  King's  cousin,  Sir  Murdach  Stewart,  who  had 
been  his  fellow-prisoner,  strengthened  this  opinion,  and  induced  King  James 
to  blame  the  Duke  of  Albany  for  remissness.  But  it  is  evident  from  the  terms 
of  the  letters  that  he  was  not  quite  sure  of  the  justness  of  his  accusation. 
In  the  letter  to  the  Duke  he  calls  him  his  most  dear  and  best  beloved  "  eme  " 
or  uncle ;  and  though  this  may  be  considered  merely  a  formal  and  compli- 
mentary phrase  from  the  royal  nephew  to  his  royal  uncle,  it  is  really  more, 
as  when  the  King  wrote  to  the  others  he  also  in  their  letters  calls  him 
his  most  loved  uncle.  If  the  King  had  truly  thought  that  Albany  was 
conniving  at  his  undue  detention,  it  is  hardly  conceivable  that  he  would  have 
addressed  himself  and  other  noblemen  and  gentlemen  in  reference  to  him  in 
those  endearing  terms.  Nor  are  the  King's  terms  of  endearment  limited  to 
Albany  alone.  His  eldest  son  Murdach  had  long  been  a  fellow-prisoner  with 
the  King,  and  they  appear  to  have  lived  on  the  most  affectionate  terms.  The 
King  borrowed  from  him  his  signet  for  his  private  letter  to  his  uncle  Albany, 
and  styled  him  his  well-beloved  cousin  of  Fife.  Yet  in  a  few  years,  when 
James  had  gained  his  regal  power,  this  well-beloved  cousin  was  made  one 
of  the  victims  of  the  royal  revenge. 

MARION,  his  Countess. 
1427— 1490. 

ALTHOUGH  the  earldom  of  Menteith  was  possessed  by  a  branch  of  the 
"  gallant  Grahams  "  for  a  longer  period  than  by  any  other  family,  only 
one  or  two  of  the  Graham  Earls  of  Menteith  became  conspicuous  in  history. 
Their-  chiefs  in  the  main  line  of  Montrose  were  more  famous,  as  also  at  a 
later  date  the  branch  of  Claverhouse.  William,  the  seventh  Earl  of  Menteith, 
whose  remarkable  life  will  be  given  at  length  in  a  subsequent  section  of  this 
part  of  the  work,  was  the  most  distinguished  of  his  line.  A  short  statement 
will  elucidate  the  origin  of  the  possessors  of  the  new  earldom  of  Menteith 
given  to  Malise  Graham,  formerly  Earl  of  Strathern,  a  younger  branch  of  the 
direct  line  of  the  Grahams. 

Sir  David  of  Graham,  ancestor  of  both  the  Montrose  and  Menteith 
Grahams,  acquired  lands  in  Kilpont  and  Ulieston,  in  the  county  of  Linlithgow, 
from  Sir  Ralph  Noble  and  his  son,  Thomas  Noble,  in  the  reigns  of  the  second 
and  third  Alexanders.  These  lands  continued  for  centuries  in  the  Graham 
family,  the  actual  property  of  them  being  in  the  Menteith  branch,  and  the 
superiority  in  the  chief  or  Montrose  line,  in  which  it  was  confirmed  by  a 
charter  from  Murdach,  Duke  of  Albany,  on  8th  January  1421,  to  Sir  William, 

vol.  i.  2  o 


Lord  of  Graham.1  From  the  lands  of  Kilpont  the  junior  title  of  Lord 
Kilpont  in  the  Graham  Earls  of  Menteith  was  derived. 

The  great-grandson  of  Sir  David  of  Graham  was  Sir  Patrick  of  Graham, 
who  nourished  in  the  fourteenth  century,  and  was  the  father  of  Sir  William 
Graham,  the  ancestor  of  the  Lords  Graham,  and  of  the  Earls,  Marquises, 
and  Dukes  of  Montrose.  The  second  son  of  Sir  Patrick  was  Patrick  Graham, 
afterwards  Sir  Patrick  Graham  of  Kincardine,  who,  by  his  marriage  with 
Eufamia  Stewart,  Countess  Palatine  of  Strathern,  only  daughter  and  heiress 
of  Prince  David  Stewart,  Earl  Palatine  of  Strathern,  either  through  courtesy 
of  Ms  wife  or  by  creation,  became  Earl  Palatine  of  Strathern.  After  the 
death  of  her  father,  Countess  Eufamia  confirmed,  on  2d  March  1400,  a 
charter  granted  by  him  to  Sir  Eobert  Stewart ; 2  and  previous  to  6th 
December  1406,  she  married  Sir  Patrick  Graham,  who  on  that  day,  with 
her  consent,  granted  a  charter  to  Eufamia  of  Lindsay,  daughter  of  the 
deceased  Sir  Alexander  of  Lindsay  of  Glenesk.3  In  1408,  under  the  desig- 
nation of  Earl  Palatine  of  Strathern,  Sir  Patrick  confirmed  a  charter  by 
Earl  David,  granting  to  Maurice  of  Drummond  the  office  of  Steward  of 
Strathern.4  On  10th  August  1413  he  was  slain  by  his  brother-in-law,  Sir 
John  Drummond  of  Concraig,  leaving  his  Countess  with  two  daughters 
and  an  only  son,  Malise  Graham. 

The  marriage  of  Sir  Patrick  Graham  and  Countess  Eufamia  took  place 
probably  about  the  year  1406,  and  on  the  death  of  the  former,  the  dignity  of 
Earl  Palatine  of  Strathern  devolved  on  their  son,  Malise  Graham.  Being  a 
minor,  Earl  Malise  was  placed  under  the  tutelage  of  his  maternal  granduncle, 
Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Athole,  who,  in  his  capacity  of  tutor  to  Malise,  Earl 
Palatine  of  Strathern,  confirmed  several  charters  in  connection  with  that 
earldom.  Earl  Malise  was  proposed  in  1423  as  one  of  the  hostages  for  King 
1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  288.  -  Ibid.  p.  271.  3  Ibid.  p.  273.  4  Ibid.  p.  276. 

DEPRIVED  OF  THE  EARLDOM  OF  STRATHERN,  c.  14  26.       291 

James  the  First,  the  value  of  his  lands  being  estimated  at  five  hundred 
merks  ;:  but  he  did  not,  at  this  time,  become  a  hostage,  either  on  account  of 
his  minority,  or  because  fewer  sureties  were  required  after  the  sum  of  ten 
thousand  pounds  was  remitted  to  King  James  as  the  dowry  of  Queen  Joanna. 
He  was  one  of  those  Scottish  nobles  who  went  to  Durham  to  welcome  their 
monarch  on  his  return  from  his  captivity  in  England.2 

Not  long  after  his  restoration  the  earldom  of  Strath ern  attracted  the 
cupidity  of  King  James  the  First,  and  he  took  steps  to  bring  it  into  his 
own  power.  He  had  already  secured  the  earldoms  of  Fife  and  Menteith  by 
the  death  and  forfeiture  of  Duke  Murdach,  and  on  the  pretext  that  the 
earldom  of  Strathern  was  a  male  fief,  and  therefore  ought  to  have  returned 
to  the  Crown  on  the  death  of  Earl  David,  instead  of  passing  to  his  daughter, 
the  Countess  Eufamia,  and  through  her  to  Earl  Malise,  the  King  divested 
the  latter  of  the  earldom. 

These  were  not  the  only  earldoms  that  shared  such  a  fate.  In  1434  King 
James  carried  out  a  design  he  had  formed  of  seizing  the  extensive  lands  of 
the  Earls  of  March,  alleging  that  on  account  of  the  treason  of  the  Earl's 
late  father,  the  lands  had  been  forfeited  to  the  Crown,  though  since  his 
restoration  the  late  Earl  and  his  son  had  enjoyed  them  undisturbed  for  twenty- 
six  years.  Having  despoiled  the  Earl  of  March,  King  James  created  him,  as 
if  in  mockery,  Earl  of  Buchan,  with  an  assignation  of  four  hundred  merks 
annually  out  of  that  earldom.  Fearing  to  remonstrate  lest  worse  should 
follow,  the  Earl  did  not  resist,  but  immediately  afterwards  retired  to  England 
in  company  with  his  eldest  son.3  The  earldom  of  Buchan  had  also  come  into 
the  King's  hands,  which  seems  to  have  deterred  the  heir  to  the  earldom, 
Robert  Stewart,  youngest  son  of  Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  from  presuming  to 

1  Rymer's  Foedera,  vol.  x.  p.  307.  2  Ibid.  p.  309. 

3  Ty tier's  History  of  Scotland,  third  edition,  voL  iii.  p.  129. 


assert  his  claim  under  the  last  and  regulating  charter  of  the  earldom.  Soon 
thereafter  the  earldom  of  Mar,  in  terms  of  a  new  grant  of  that  earldom, 
became  the  property  of  the  Crown  on  the  death  of  Earl  Alexander  Stewart. 

This  seizure  of  earldom  after  earldom  alarmed  the  nobles.  They, 
however,  were  not  sufficiently  united  to  withstand  the  King,  whose  acts, 
though  coloured  at  times  with  a  legal  form,  they  felt  to  be  grossly  unjust  and 
oppressive.  Not  to  mention  the  cases  of  Menteith,  Fife,  Buchan,  or  March,  that 
of  Strathern  alone,  which  principally  concerns  us  here,  was  one  of  marked 
injustice.  This  was  proved  when  the  earldom  and  dignity  were  claimed  in 
1630  by  William  Graham,  seventh  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  his  right  legally 
established,  by  the  fact  that  his  arguments  and  feudal  titles  were  found 
unassailable,  although  it  may  have  been  inexpedient  to  seek  the  recovery  of 
what  had  been  long  before  settled  by  Act  of  Parliament.  The  cause  of  that 
Earl's  overthrow  was  not  because  his  claim  was  ill-founded,  but  because  its 
success  created  an  imaginary  danger  to  the  family  which  possessed  the  throne, 
which  it  was  considered  expedient  to  stamp  out  at  once. 

To  mitigate  the  severity  of  his  seizure  of  Strathern,  James  divided  the 
earldom  of  Menteith  into  two  parts,  one  of  which,  the  western,  he  erected  into 
a  new  eakldom  OF  Menteith,  in  favour  of  Malise  Graham,  while  the  other 
portion,  the  eastern,  was  reserved  to  the  Crown,  and  was  afterwards  known  as 
the  Stewartky  of  Menteith.  The  charter  by  King  James  the  First,  erecting 
the  new  earldom,  was  granted  on  6th  September  1427.1  It  contains  the  names 
of  the  lands  comprehended  in  it,  but  makes  no  mention  of  any  fortalice  or 
castle.  In  addition  to  this  grant  of  the  new  earldom  of  Menteith  to 
Malise  Graham,  King  James  bestowed  the  earldom  of  Strathern,  for  life  only, 
upon  "Walter  Stewart,  Earl  of  Athole  and  Caithness,  the  guardian  of  the 
despoiled  Earl  Malise.     But  these  acts  did  not  atone  for  the  arbitrary  seizure 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  293. 


of  the  earldom  of  Strathern  by  King  James,  for  though,  on  account  of  his 
youth,  Malise  was  unable  to  offer  objection  to  the  designs  of  the  all-powerful 
sovereign,  the  matter  was  taken  so  seriously  to  heart  by  Sir  Eobert  Graham, 
the  paternal  uncle  of  Earl  Malise,  that  it  was  one  of  the  main  causes  which 
led  to  the  assassination  of  King  James  the  First  by  that  resolute  man  in  1437. 
It  is  said  that  King  James  the  Sixth,  when  solicited  to  restore  the  title 
and  earldom  of  Strathern,  always  refused  with  the  remark  that  "he  had  no 
more  for  the  blood  and  slaughter  of  Kin«  James  the  First."1 

o  o 

Only  two  months  after  this  creation  of  the  new  earldom  of  Menteith, 
Malise  Graham,  in  November  1427,  entered  England  as  one  of  the  hostages 
for  King  James  in  room  of  Sir  Eobert  Erskine.2  He  seems  to  have  been 
confined  in  the  Castle  of  Pontefract,  from  which  he  was  not  released 
until  17th  June  1453,  on  supplication  made  by  James,  Earl  of  Douglas,  and 
James,  Lord  Hamilton,  to  King  Henry  the  Sixth  of  England.  An  arrange- 
ment was  made  whereby  Alexander  Graham,  son  and  heir  of  Earl  Malise,  was 
to  enter  as  hostage  in  place  of  his  father,  and  should  he  die  or  make  his 
escape,  Earl  Malise  was  to  return,  and  the  two  noblemen  who  made  the 
request  for  the  Earl's  release  became  security  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  terms 
of  the  agreement.3  Tytler  suggests  that  communications  of  a  treasonable 
nature  took  place  between  the  Earl  of  Douglas  and  Earl  Malise  on  this 
occasion.4  K-ut  there  is  no  evidence  to  establish  such  a  supposition,  as 
it  was  not  until  the  following  year,  1454,  that  the  Earl  of  Douglas  leagued 
himself  with  the  Yorkists  in  England  in  a  conspiracy  against  King  James  the 
Second,  and  on  the  flight  of  Douglas,  Earl  Malise  subjoined  his  seal  with  other 

1  Sir  John  Scot's  True  Relation,  quoted  by  2  Rymer's  Fcedera,  vol.  x.  p.  3S1. 

Sir  Harris  Nicolas,  History  of  the  Earldoms  3  Rotuli  Scotiae,  vol.  ii.  p.  oGS. 

of    Strathern    and    Menteith,    Appendix,    p.  4   History  of  Scotland,  third  edition,  vol.  iii. 

xxx.  p.  253. 


nobles  to  the  instrument  of  forfeiture  made  in  Parliament  on  17th  June 
1455.1  Besides  this,  as  James,  Lord  Hamilton,  was  the  brother-in-law  of  Earl 
Malise,  having  married  his  sister,  Eufamia  Graham,  after  the  death  of  her 
first  husband,  Archibald,  fifth  Earl  of  Douglas,  the  ties  of  kindred  would  be 
sufficient  to  impel  him  to  seek  the  release  of  the  Earl,  and  to  obtain  the 
co-operation  of  the  Earl  of  Douglas  in  it.  Earl  Malise  recognised  the  service 
done  to  him  by  James,  Lord  Hamilton,  by  granting  to  him  and  his  spouse 
Eufamia,  "  our  dearest  sister,  for  his  thankworthy  service  and  help  rendered 
to  us,  all  and  whole  our  lands  of  Illieston,  lying  in  our  lordship  of  Kinpunt, 
in  the  constabulary  of  Linlithgow  and  sheriffdom  of  Edinburgh." 2  In  the 
charter,  which  was  granted  at  Bothwell  Castle  on  17th  December  1453, 
shortly  after  his  release,  Earl  Malise  designates  himself  Earl  of  Menteith  and 
Lord  of  Kinpunt.3 

The  forests  in  and  around  Menteith  were  the  favourite  resorts  of  the 
Scottish  Court  when  at  Stirling  for  the  sport  of  the  chase,  and  in  order  to 
make  provision  for  himself  and  the  lieges  during  the  hunting  season  and  at 
other  times  in  Menteith,  King  James  the  Third,  on  8th  February  146G, 
erected  the  town  of  Port  into  a  burgh  of  barony,  granting  a  charter  to  Earl 
Malise  to  this  effect.4  But  the  Port  does  not  appear  ever  to  have  been  a 
burgh  of  importance. 

After  his  return  to  Scotland,  Earl  Malise  frequently  attended  meetings 
of  Parliament,  and  was  occasionally  on  committees.6  On  29th  March  1479, 
he  was  cited  before  the  Lords  of   Council,  and  found   by  them  to   have 

1  Acts   of   the    Parliaments    of    Scotland,  3  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  295. 
vol.  ii.  p.  77. 

2  It  would  thus  appear  that  Earl  Malise,  4  Ibid.  p.  297. 
though  deprived  of  the  earldom  of  Strathern, 

had  been  permitted  to  retain  the  paternal  in-  5  Acts   of    the   Parliaments   of    Scotland, 

heritance  of  Illieston.  vol.  ii.  pp.  77,  84,  88,  93,  100,  etc. 

HIS  DEATH,   1490  :  HIS  COUNTESS  MARION.  295 

wrongfully  taken  three  chalders  of  victual,  half  the  teind  of  the  kirk  of 
Aberfoyle,  which  belonged  to  William  Stewart  of  Baldorane  by  lease,  from 
Master  Patrick  Sandilands.  These  the  Earl  was  to  repay,  and  letters  were 
ordained  to  be  written  for  distraining  his  lands  and  goods  for  the  victual, 
and  for  twelve  shillings,  the  cost  of  three  witnesses,  and  twenty  shillings,  the 
costs  of  William  Stewart.1 

Earl  Malise  -is  said  to  have  been  present  at  and  taken  part  in  the  battle 
of  Sauchie  in  1488,  which  terminated  so  fatally  for  King  James  the  Third. 
He  had  the  command  of  the  Stirlingshire  men  and  those  from  the  west,  who 
composed  the  rear  division  of  the  royal  army.  At  first  the  King's  troops 
were  successful,  but  it  was  only  for  a  short  time,  as  on  the  approach  of  the 
Borderers,  who  fought  for  Prince  James,  the  King  and  the  royal  troops  were 
compelled  to  retreat.  King  James  the  Third  was  assassinated  the  same  day 
at  Beaton's  Mill,  near  Bannockburn.2 

Earl  Malise  died  in  the  year  1490.  He  is  said  by  some  peerage  writers 
to  have  married  Anne  Vere,  daughter  of  the  Earl  of  Oxford,  and  by  others 
Jane  Eochford.  But  no  sufficient  proof  has  been  found  that  either  of  these 
ladies  became  his  Countess.  Marion  is  mentioned  as  Countess  of  Menteith  at 
the  time  of  the  death  of  Earl  Malise ;  but  if  Marion  was  then  his  wife,  there 
is  reason  to  suppose  she  was  not  his  first  wife,  as  she  married  John  of 
Drummond  before  the  17th  of  May  1491.  Had  Countess  Marion  been  the 
first  wife  of  Earl  Malise,  and  about  the  same  age  as  himself,  she  must  at  the 
time  of  his  death  have  been  very  old,  and  would  not  likely  have  remarried.  It 
was  probably  after  the  Earl's  death  that  Countess  Marion,  in  1490,  instituted 
proceedings  before  the  Lords  of  Council  against  Walter  Buchanan  of  Buchanan, 
John  of  Drummond,  Macpherson  Neil  Macnare,  and  Eobert  Menteith,  in  which 

1  Acta  Dominorum  Concilii,  p.  28. 

2  Tytlers  History  of  Scotland,  vol.  iii.  pp.  429-432. 


she  produced  her  charters,  and  was  successful  in  asserting  her  right  not  to  be 
disturbed  by  Walter  Buchanan  and  the  others  in  the  possession  of  certain 
lands  which  she  held  in  liferent.1  On  1 7th  May  of  the  following  year,  the 
Countess  again  pursued  Walter  Buchanan  before  the  Lords  Auditors,  and  this 
time  in  conjunction  with  John  of  Drummond  her  spouse.  Walter  Buchanan 
was  bailie  upon  the  earldom  of  Menteith  for  Earl  Malise's  successor,  and  had 
without  power  or  licence  from  the  Countess  and  her  husband,  held  a  court 
upon  the  lands  of  Samchalze  and  others,  given  to  her  by  the  late  Malise,  Earl 
of  Menteith.  The  Countess  and  John  of  Drummond  produced  their  charters, 
confirmation,  and  letters  for  the  lands,  and  the  Lords  Auditors  condemned 
the  bailie,  who,  after  the  deliverance  of  the  judgment,  protested  for  himself, 
and  as  prolocutor  for  Alexander,  Earl  of  Menteith,  that  notwithstanding  the 
decreet  it  should  not  prejudice  the  Earl  in  his  inheritance,  nor  himself  in  his 
letters  of  bailiary.2 

Malise,  Earl  of  Menteith,  had  five  sons  and  one  daughter  : — 

1 .  Alexander  Graham,  Master  of  Menteith,  or  Lord  Kilpont,  who,  as 

son  and  heir  of  Earl  Malise,  became  hostage  for  his  father  in 
1453,3  and  appears  to  have  predeceased  his  father  in  exile  before 
1469,  without  issue  male. 

2.  John  Graham,  Master  of  Menteith,  or  Lord  Kilpont,  who,  as  son 

and  heir  of  Malise,  Earl  of  Menteith,  received  the  lands  of  Kil- 
bride from  King  James  the  Third,  by  a  charter  under  the  Great 
Seal,  dated  at  Stirling,  7th  April  1469,  upon  the  resignation  of 
them  by  his  father,  Earl  Malise.4  He  married  Margaret  Muschet, 
and  appears  to  have  died  before  1478,  without  issue  male,  but 
left  a  daughter,  who  was  contracted  in  marriage  to  Malcolm 

1  Acta  Dominonim  Concilii,  p.  157.  3  Rotuli  Scotise,  vol.  ii.  p.  39S. 

-  Acta  Auditorum,  p.  154.  4  Acta  Dominonim  Concilii,  pp.  23S-241. 



Drummond.1  Margaret  Muschet  had  the  terce  of  the  lands  of 
Kilbride  after  the  death  of  her  husband.2 

3.  Patrick  Graham,  Master  of  Menteith,  or  Lord  Kilpont.     On  19th 

October  1478,  as  son  and  heir  of  Malise,  Earl  of  Menteith,  he 
was,  on  a  precept  by  the  latter,  infeft  in  the  lands  of  Craigwchty 
and  Auchmar,  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith.3  He  married  Isobel, 
daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Erskine,  Lord  Erskine,  but  being  con- 
nected in  the  fourth  degree  of  consanguinity,  a  Papal  dispensation 
was  obtained  for  the  marriage.  The  dispensation,  after  being 
received,  was  presented  to  a  notary,  who  drew  up  an  instrument 
to  that  effect  on  24th  January  1465.4  Patrick,  Master  of 
Menteith,  was  the  father  of  Alexander,  the  second  Earl,  and  of 
Henry  Graham,  his  brother. 

4.  John  Graham,  who,  although  he  bears  the  same  name  as  the  second 

son  of  Earl  Malise,  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  him.  He  was 
probably  born  after  the  death  of  his  elder  brother.  On  8th 
December  1485,  at  Inchtoiloche,  Earl  Malise  granted  to  his 
son  John  Graham,  for  his  filial  affection,  and  to  the  heirs- 
male  of  his  body,  whom  failing,  to  revert  to  Earl  Malise  and 
heirs  whatsoever,  a  charter  of  the  lands  of  Port  Ernchome, 
Monvrachy,  Gartmulzie,  Mullen,  Cranysmore,  with  the  Lake  of 
Inchmahomok  and  islands  of  the  same,  extending  to  £20, 13s.  4d. 
of  old  extent,  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith  and  shire  of  Perth. 
This  charter  was  confirmed  by  King  James  the  Fourth  on 
29th  June  1489.5     Along  with  his  brother  Walter,  who,  as  will 

1  Acta  Dominorum  Coneilii,  pp.  217,  238.  2  Ibid.  p.  213. 

3  Original  Instrument  of  Sasine  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 

4  Inventory  of  Mar  Writs,  at  Glenalmond. 

3  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  Lib.  xii.  No.  103. 
VOL.  I.  2  P 


be  seen,  got  a  similar  grant  from  Earl  Malise,  John  Graham, 
on  25th  February  1494,  resigned  all  the  lands  given  to  him  by 
his  father.  In  the  instrument  of  resignation  John  and  Walter 
are  described  as  sons  of  the  late  Malise,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and 
that  "nocht  throw  na  drede  leide  nor  intyll  error  sliddin;"  and 
by  the  consent  of  their  respective  tutors,  John,  Lord  Drummond, 
and  Duncan  Campbell  of  G-lenorehy,  as  well  as  by  the  advice 
of  their  nearest  and  dearest  kin,  for  the  avoidance  of  much 
apparent  trouble  and  vexation,  and  promoting  friendship  betwixt 
them  and  a  mighty  and  noble  lord,  "  Alexander,  Erie  of  Mentetht, 
our  principale  lord  and  cheffe,"  they  had  resigned  all  right, 
property,  etc.,  in  the  lands  given  to  them  by  donation  of  their 
father  Malise.  The  deeds  of  gift  they  declared  to  be  entirely 
annulled  and  of  no  further  value,  and  also  discharged  Earl 
Alexander  of  the  sum  of  two  hundred  marks,  which  they  had 
paid  to  the  King  for  the  ward  of  the  lands.1  The  mention  of 
tutors  to  these  two  sons  of  Earl  Malise  shows  that  in  1494  they 
were  under  age.  In  1499  they  granted  a  bond  in  favour  of  Earl 
Alexander,  their  nephew,  bearing  a  procuratory  ad  rernanentiam, 
and  overgiving  of  certain  lands  of  the  earldom  of  Menteith, 
and  as  in  the  note  of  this  bond  in  the  inventory 2  there  is  no 
mention  of  tutors,  it  may  be  inferred  that  they  were  then  of  full 

John  Graham  probably  received  the  lands  of  Kilpont  by  way 
of  compensation  for  resigning  the  lands  given  to  him  by  his  father, 
as  there  is  a  note  of  a  letter  of  reversion  on  Kilpont  granted  by 

1  Original  Instrument  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 

2  Old  Inventory,  ibid. 



him  to  Earl  Alexander  in  1494.1  In  1500,  John  Graham  received 
a  premonition  from  Earl  Alexander  that  the  lands  were  to  be 
redeemed,2  and  an  instrument  of  redemption  following  thereon 
shows  that  they  returned  into  the  possession  of  that  Earl.3 

"We  have  not  ascertained  whether  this  John  Graham  married 
and  had  issue.  Tradition  points  to  a  Sir  John  Graham,  son  of  Earl 
Malise,  and  designed  of  Kilbride,  as  the  founder  of  the  families  of 
the  Grahams  of  Netherby  and  others,  but  in  support  of  this  tradi- 
tion no  proof  has  been  obtained.  The  elder  brother,  Sir  John, 
was  certainly  of  Kilbride,  but  he  died  without  heirs- male,  and  the 
younger  brother,  John  Graham,  had  no  connection  with  Kilbride. 
5.  Walter  Graham,  designed  Walter  Graham  of  Lochcon  or  Lochtoun, 
was  brother  of  John  immediately  preceding.  He  received 
from  his  father  Malise,  on  the  same  day  and  at  the  same 
place  as  his  brother  John,  a  charter  of  the  lake  of  Lochtoun 
(Loch  Achray),  with  its  islands,  half  the  lands  of  Glaskatre,  the 
lands  of  Calgart,  Sawnocht,  Inchre,  the  Miltoun  and  Kirktoun  of 
Aberfoyle,  Bofressely,  Bonynty,  Downan,  Baleth,  Garlonanbeg, 
Gartcarne,  Garhat,  and  Cranisbeg,  extending  to  a  £19  land  of  old 
extent,  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith  and  shire  of  Perth.  This  charter 
was  confirmed  by  King  James  the  Fourth  on  29th  June  1489.4 
Alexander,  Earl  of  Menteith,  granted  to  "Walter,  his  father's  brother, 
a  charter  of  the  lands  of  Kilbride,  which  was  confirmed  by  King 
James  the  Fourth  on  6th  January  1494;6  and  in  the  following 
month  Walter  resigned,  with  his  tutor's  consent,  all  or  most  of  the 
lands  gifted  to  him  by  his  father,  Earl  Malise,  to  his  nephew,  Earl 

!  Old  Inventory  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose.  2  Ibid.  3  Ibid. 

4  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  Lib.  xii.  No.  102.  5  Ibid.  Lib.  xiii.  No.  147. 


Alexander ;  but  the  lands  of  Kilbride  having  been  recognoseed 
by  the  Crown  because  granted  without  the  consent  of  the  King, 
from  whom  they  were  held  in  chief,  Earl  Alexander,  by  charter 
dated  14th  May  1510,  bestowed  on  his  uncle  some  of  the  lands  he 
formerly  held,  equal  in  value  to  the  lands  of  Kilbride.  This  charter 
was  confirmed  by  King  James  the  Fourth  on  3d  February  1511-1 2.1 

Walter  received  another  charter  from  Earl  Alexander  on  26th 
July  1518,  of  the  lands  of  Glassford,  Discheratoyre,  Blarerusskan- 
more,  and  Blarequhopill  ;2  and  in  1521,  whatever  right  may  have 
remained  to  him  in  the  lands  of  Kilbride  was  assumed  by  his 
grandnephew,  William,  Master  of  Menteith,  who  served  upon 
him  a  premonition  for  their  redemption,  and  further  intimated 
his  intention  of  redeeming  the  lands  of  Lochton,  Inchre,  Myln- 
toun,  and  Kirktoun  of  Aberfoyle,  Bofreslie,  Bonente,  Downans 
and  Daleth,  Gartlamanbege,  Gartlochrame  and  Gyrechat,  granted 
by  Earl  Alexander  in  1510.3 

Walter  Graham  married  Marjory  Campbell,  probably  a  daughter 
of  his  tutor,  Duncan  Campbell  of  Glenorchy,  and  was  ancestor 
of  the  Grahams  of  Boquhaple.  A  precept  was  granted  on  17th 
June  1523  by  William  Balfour  of  Buchopill  for  the  conjoint  infeft- 
ment  of  Walter  and  Marjory  in  the  five  merk  lands  of  Drongy, 
called  Gartinsalze  and  Blareholich,  and  twenty-five  shillings 
lands  of  the  Bra  of  Buchquhopill,  in  the  Stewartry  of  Menteith.4 
•  Walter  must  have  died  before  the  26th  February  1524-5,  as  on 

1  Eegistrum     Magni     Sigilli,     Lib.    xviii.  3  Original  Instrument  of  Sasine  in  Charter- 
No.  8.  chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 

2  Original  Charter  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  4  The  Stirlings  of  Keir,  by  William  Fraser, 
of  Montrose.  p.  321. 


that  day  Alexander,  Earl  of  Menteith,  at  Inchruahome,  granted  a 
precept  of  dare  constat  in  favour  of  Thomas  Graham  his  son, 
appointing  him  to  be  infeft  in  the  lands  mentioned  in  the  charter 
granted  to  his  father  in  151 8.1 

Thomas  Graham,  called  of  Boquhaple,  married  Cristina  Oliphant. 
He  obtained,  in  1541,  the  lands  of  Calzemuk  and  Balfour  Boqu- 
haple, in  1556  half  of  the  lands  of  Wester  Torrie,  and  about  1560 
the  lands  of  Bray  of  Cessintully  and  Balnadornok,  the  charter  of 
which  was  confirmed  in  1562  after  his  death.2  His  son,  George 
Graham,  was  infeft  in  1562  in  the  lands  of  Boquhaple,3  and  in 
1576  was  served  heir  to  his  father  in  the  lands  of  Blairgarry,  in 
the  earldom  of  Menteith.  He  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  Thomas 
Graham  of  Boquhaple,  in  1605,4  whose  son,  William  Graham,  fiar 
of  Boquhaple,  acquired  the  lands  of  Wester  Boquhaple,5  and  on 
28th  April  1625,  with  consent  of  Margaret  Stirling  his  spouse,  for 
a  sum  of  money  renounced  the  lands  of  Glassford,  Discheratoyre, 
Blairruskanmore,  and  Blairquhople,  given  by  Earl  Alexander  to 
AValter  Graham  of  Lochtoun,  his  "  f oir  grandsir  father,"  in  favour  of 
William,  seventh  Earl  of  Menteith,  of  whom  he  immediately  held 
the  lands.6  The  Boquhaple  line  has  not  been  further  investigated. 
6.  Lady  Euphame  Graham,  who  married  Sir  William  Stewart  of 
Dalswinton,  is  supposed  to  have  been  a  daughter  of  Earl  Malise. 
She  survived  her  husband,  and  was  alive  in  October  1495. 7 

1  Original  Precept.  4  Index  of  Retours,  Perthshire,Nos.  3S,  146. 

2  Eegistrum  Magni  Sigilli,  Kb.  xxx.  No.  5  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  Lib.  liii.  No.  16. 
551  ;  xxxi.  354,  472  ;  xxxii.  530.  c  Original  Instrument  in  Charter-chest  of 

3  Old    Inventory    of    Menteith    Writs,    at  Duke  of  Montrose. 

Buchanan.  7  Acta  Dominorum  Concilii,  p.  401. 



and  MARGARET  BUCHANAN,  his  Countess 

1490  —  1537. 

EARL  MALISE  was  succeeded  in  1490  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith 
by  his  grandson,  Alexander  Graham.  Considerable  difficulty  has  been 
experienced  in  ascertaining  which  of  the  sons  of  Earl  Malise  was  the 
father  of  Earl  Alexander,  but  the  evidence  points  to  Patrick  Graham, 
the  third  son,  as  the  most  probable.  Genealogists  generally  have  con- 
sidered Earl  Alexander  as  the  son  of  Alexander,  eldest  son  of  Earl 
Malise,  and  similarity  of  name  gives  some  colour  to  the  hypothesis ;  but 
it  is  not  reconcilable  with  the  evidence  of  the  charter  granted  by  Earl 
Malise  to  his  son  and  heir  John,  of  the  lands  of  Kilbride,  as,  if  a  son  of 
Alexander's  existed,  John,  who  was  younger  than  Alexander,  could  not 
have  been  the  heir-apparent  of  Earl  Malise.  For  a  similar  reason  Alexander 
could  not  have  been  the  son  of  John  the  Grahame,  as,  apparently  after 
the  decease  of  the  latter,  the  designation  of  son  and  heir  is  given 
to  Patrick  Graham,  the  third  son  of  Earl  Malise.1  The  whole  evidence 
points  to  the  conclusion  that  Earl  Alexander  was  the  son  of  Patrick  Graham. 
Robert  Buchanan  of  Leny,  a  grandson  of  Earl  Alexander,  about  the  year 
1560,  wrote  a  short  narrative  of  his  ancestry,  which  he  sent  to  Sir  James 

1  In  the  instrument  of  sasine  of  Patrick 
Graham,  on  8th  October  1478,  in  the  lands 
of  Cragwchty  and  Auchmor,  the  bailie  of  Earl 
Malise,  who  gave  infeftment,  is  called  John 
Graham  of  Kilbride.    He  must  have  been  a  dif- 

ferent person  from  either  of  the  two  brothers 
of  Patrick  of  the  name  of  John.  At  the  date 
of  this  infeftment  the  elder  John  Graham  was 
dead,  and  the  younger  John  was  not  of  age 
in  1478,  as  he  was  under  a  tutor  in  1494. 


Stirling,  Laird  of  Keir.  It  suffices  here  to  refer  no  further  back  than  to  Patrick 
Buchanan  of  Leny,  who  married  the  Laird  of  Buchanan's  daughter.  Their 
son  having  been  slain  while  hunting,  the  inheritance  passed  on  Patrick's 
death  to  his  youngest  brother  Eobert,  another  brother,  John,  having  been 
killed  at  Hodden  without  leaving  heirs.  Eobert  married  Marion  Graham, 
the  Earl  of  Menteith's  daughter,  of  whom  the  writer  says,  "  the  Laird  of 
Buchquhananes  doctir  wes  hir  mothir;  me  Lord  Grahame's  doctir  hir 
grandam,  Lady  Buchquhanane ;  me  Lord  Erskine's  doctir  hir  vthir  guidame, 
Countess  of  Menteith.  To  conclude,"  he  adds,  "  I,  Eobert  Buchquhanane  of 
Lany  that  ringis  now,  sone  to  Eobert  and  Marion  Grahame,  I  am  cheif  of 
the  avid  family  of  Lany."1 

In  1490,  Earl  Alexander  entered  into  a  contract  with  William,  Lord 
Graham,  in  which  the  latter,  as  superior  of  the  lands  of  Eilpont,  bound 
himself  to  see  that  these  lands  were  held  blench  by  Earl  Alexander.2 

Although  Earl  Malise  died  in  1490,  Earl  Alexander  was  not  infeft  in  the 
earldom  until  the  6th  of  May  1493.  His  infeftment  took  place  on  the  shore 
of  the  Lake  of  Inchmahome,  near  the  Coldon,  and  upon  the  ground  of  the 
lands  of  Port.3  This  delay  may  have  been  either  on  account  of  Earl 
Alexander's  being  under  age,  or  more  probably  on  account  of  the  part  taken 
by  his  grandfather  in  the  struggle  between  King  James  the  Third  and  his 
son,  now  King  James  the  Fourth,  as  for  a  time  those  who  had  opposed 
the  Prince  were  treated  with  disfavour. 

After  the  death  of  Eaid  Malise  a  litigation  arose  about  the  lands  of 
Kilbride,  which  were  claimed  by  Earl  Alexander  as  heir  of  his  grandfather. 
The  lands  had  formerly  been  held  from  the  Crown  by  Earl  Malise,  who,  in 

1  The  Stirlings  of  Keir,  by  William  Fraser,  p.  415. 

2  Old  Inventory  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 

3  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  302. 


1469,  resigned  them  into  the  King's  hands  for  a  regrant  to  his  son  John  the 
Graham;  but  on  the  latter's  death  they  reverted  to  Earl  Malise.  In  1 474  there 
was  a  cause  pending  before  the  Lords  Auditors  between  the  Earl  of  Menteith 
and  James  Muschet  of  Tolgart,1  and  on  7th  May  1487  the  latter  received 
from  King  James  the  Third  a  charter  of  apprising  of  the  lands  of  Kilbride,2 
by  virtue  of  which  Muschet  afterwards  alleged  that  the  lands  belonged  to 
him,  as  it  had  been  granted  for  a  certain  debt  of  Malise,  Earl  of  Menteith.8 
On  27th  February  1491-2,  the  tenants  of  Kilbride  raised  an  action  against 
James  Muschet  for  uplifting  the  mails  of  the  whole  of  Kilbride,  and  against 
Margaret  Muschet,  spouse  of  the  deceased  John  the  Graham,  for  uplifting 
the  third  part,  in  which  the  right  of  the  latter  was  upheld  because  of  her 
terce,  but  the  action  of  James  Muschet  was  condemned.4  Upon  this  James 
Muschet  required  the  Sheriff  of  Perth  to  be  ordained  to  show  on  what 
grounds  Margaret  Muschet  had  obtained  herself  served  heir  to  the  terce 
of  Kilbride.5  On  24th  June  1492,  Alexander  Graham,  as  heir  to  the  late 
Earl  Malise,  produced  the  charter  by  James  the  Third  to  John  the  Graham, 
and  protested  that  the  proceedings  should  not  prejudice  his  rights  ;6  and 
on  the  5th  July  following,  Patrick,  Earl  of  Bothwell,  appeared  before  the 
Council  and  protested  that  the  lands  of  Kilbride  were  a  tenandry  of  Bothwell, 
and  held  of  him  in  chief.7 

After  he  obtained  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  Alexander  granted  a  charter 
of  the  lands  of  Kilbride  to  his  uncle,  Walter  Graham  of  Lochtoun,  on  a  letter 
of  reversion  ;  and  this  charter  was  confirmed  by  King  James  the  Fourth  on 
6th  January  1494.8     Notwithstanding  the  confirmation,  the  King  followed 

1  Acta  Dominorum  Autlitorum,  p.  36.  5  Acta  Dominorum  Concilii,  p.  214. 

2  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  Lib.  x.  No.  132.  8  ibid.  p.  23S.                      7  Hid.  p.  241. 

3  Acta  Dominorum  Concilii,  p.  241.  8  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,   Lib.  xiv.  No. 

4  Ibid.  p.  213.  324. 


out  a  process  of  recognition  of  the  lands,  and  the  Lords  of  Council,  on  the 
27th  February  1508-9,  gave  their  judgment  in  favour  of  the  King  as 
follows : — 

Decretis  and  deliueris  that  Alexander,  Erie  of  Menteithe,  and  all  vytheris  havand 
or  traistand  to  haf  entres  to  the  landis  of  Kilbride,  with,  the  pertinentis,  has  tynt 
thair  properte  and  possession  thairof,  and  decernis  the  samyn  to  pertene  till  our 
souerane  lord,  and  to  be  disponit  at  his  plesour  in  tyrne  tocum  ;  becaus  the  mast  part 
of  the  saids  landis  are  analyt  without  license,  consent,  or  confirmation  of  our  souerane 
lord,  thai  beand  hald  of  his  grace  immediately  be  seruice  of  ward  and  releif,  for  the 
quhilk  cause  thai  war  recognost  in  our  souerane  lordis  handis,  and  nocht  lettin  to  borgh 
the  space  of  ane  zeir  and  ane  day  efter  the  said  recognition  being  past ;  and  alsua 
becaus  it  was  allegit  be  the  said  Alexander  that  the  saids  landis  of  Kilbrid  war  gevin 
to  his  forbearis  be  our  souerane  lord,  to  be  hald  of  his  hienes,  when  the  erldome  of 
Menteithe  was  gevin  to  thaim  in  contentation  for  the  erldome  of  Stratherne,  and 
falzeit  to  preif  the  samyn  at  the  terme  assignit  to  him  thairto  :  Our  souerane  lord, 
comperand  be  Master  James  Henrison,  his  aduocat,  and  the  saide  Alexander,  Erie  of 
Stratherne  (Menteith),  being  personally  present,  and  all  vytheris  havand  or  traistand 
to  haf  entres  to  the  saids  landis  being  lachfully  summoned  to  this  action,  oftentimes 
callit  and  nocht  comperit.1 

After  this  decision  the  lands  of  Kilbride  were  acquired  by  Sir  Harry 
Schaw,2  who  granted  a  letter  of  reversion,  whereby  it  was  in  the  power  of 
the  King,  or  Earl  Alexander  and  his  heirs,  to  redeem  the  lands  on  payment 
of  one  thousand  merks.  In  1521  the  Earl  acted  upon  this  privilege,  and 
served  premonitions  of  his  intention  to  redeem  the  lands  upon  all  having 
right  or  interest  in  them.  These  included  the  heirs  of  the  late  Sir 
Harry  Schaw,  David  Schaw  his  son,  and  Marion  Forrester  his  widow, 
and  Earl  Alexander's  eldest  son  and   heir,  William,  Master  of  Menteith, 

1  Acta  Domiuorum  Concilii.  2  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  Lib.  xviii.  No.  8. 

VOL.  1.  2  Q 


served  a  premonition  upon  his  granduncle,  Walter  Graham  of  Lochtoun.1 
In  1522  Earl  Alexander  received  a  charter  from  King  James  the  Fifth  of  two 
parts  of  Kilbride,  and  was  infeft  therein.  The  remaining  third  continued  in 
the  possession  of  the  representatives  of  Sir  Harry  Schaw,  evidently  as  the 
terce  of  his  widow,  Marion  Forrester,  until  it  also  was  redeemed  by  Earl 
Alexander  hi  1528  from  the  heirs  of  Sir  Harry  Schaw  and  James  Drummond,2 
and  he  completed  his  title  to  this  third  by  another  charter  from  King  James 
the  Fifth,  dated  2d  February  1531.3 

Alexander,  Earl  of  Menteith,  sat  as  one  of  the  King's  Council  at  Stirling, 
on  25th  August  1495.4  On  22d  January  1499  he  was  pursuer  in  an  action 
before  the  Lords  of  Council  against  Alexander  Campbell  of  Ardoch,  Donald 
Campbell  his  son,  William  Sellar  in  the  Greenyairds,  and  Sir  Alexander 
Cuningham  of  Polmais,  for  the  theft  of  nine  oxen  and  ky  and  two  mares  from 
him,  and  in  default  of  appearing  they  were  condemned,  and  ordered  to 
restore  the  property,  with  costs.5  He  joined  in  a  bond,  made  on  27th  May 
1501,  between  King  James  the  Fourth  and  a  number  of  his  subjects  who 
possessed  lands  in  Perthshire,  for  the  bringing  of  criminals  to  justice  ;6  and 
on  20th  November  1503  he  entered  into  an  indenture  for  mutual  defence 
with  James,  Earl  of  Arran,  Lord  Hamilton.7 

The  lands  of  Kinpont  and  Illieston  were  held  by  Earl  Alexander  from 
William,  Earl  of  Montrose,  and  as,  in  1508,  there  were  some  indications  of 
the  King's  intention  to  recognosce  them  to  the  Crown,  an  obligation  was 
granted  by  the  Earl   of  Montrose  to  the  Earl   of   Menteith,  on  the  14th 

1  Old   Inventory    of    Menteith    Charters,  3  RegistrumMagniSigilli, Lib.  xxiv.No.179. 
drawn    up     by    William,    seventh    Earl    of  *  Acta  Dominorum  Concilii,  p.  3S5. 
Menteith,  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Mon-  6  Acta  Dominorum  Concilii,  anno  1499. 
trose.  6  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  303. 

2  Old  Inventory  of  Charters  at  Buchanan.  7  Ibid.  p.  306. 


February  of  that  year,  in  terms  of  the  arrangement  of  1490,  that  if  the 
threatened  recognition  did  take  place,  he  would  redeem  the  lands,  and  infeft 
the  Earl  of  Menteith  again  in  them,  to  be  held  by  him  and  his  heirs  as  before 
in  free  blench  farm.1  The  lands  eventually  remained  in  the  possession  of 
Earl  Alexander. 

In  1512  Earl  Alexander  paid  a  visit  to  Rossdhu,  where,  on  1 3th  July, 
he  disponed  to  Sir  John  Colquhoun  of  Luss  the  lands  of  the  two  Craance  and 
Cragwchty,  in  the  parish  of  Aberfoyle.2  In  the  same  year  he  granted  a 
charter  to  William  Haldane  to  be  boatman  at  the  head  of  Forth.3  His 
charters  to  his  uncle  Walter  Graham  and  his  cousin  Thomas  Graham  have 
been  noticed  in  the  previous  memoir  under  Walter  Graham  of  Lochtoun. 

To  his  only  brother,  Henry  Graham,  Earl  Alexander  granted  at  Inchma- 
home,  on  1 6th  October  1510,  half  of  the  lands  of  Gardenycht  or  Auchmore, 
in  return  for  a  sum  of  money,  and  the  Earl  personally  infeft  him  in  the 
lands  on  the  following  day.4  In  1534,  shortly  before  his  death,  the  Earl, 
for  the  love  he  bore  to  "  his  beloved  only  brother-german,  Henry  Graham," 
ratified  and  confirmed  this  infeftment  to  him  and  his  heirs,  together  with  a 
lease  of  the  other  half,  for  a  period  of  nineteen  years,  and  whatever  other 
lands  or  gifts  he  had  given  to  him  besides  these.  The  confirmatory  instru- 
ment bears  to  have  been  written  in  the  "  court  (or  hall)  of  the  monastery  of 
St.  Colmoc,  in  the  island  called  Inchmaquhomok."5 

Earl  Alexander  married  Margaret  Buchanan,  daughter  of  Walter 
Buchanan  of  Buchanan,  and  by  her  he  had,  so  far  as  known,  two  sons  and 
a  daughter.  Walter  Buchanan  held  the  office  of  bailie  on  the  earldom  of 
Menteith,   but   renounced   it   on    6th   December    1519   in   favour   of    Earl 

1  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  307.  2  Ibid.  p.  309. 

3  Original  Inventory  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 

4  Original  Charter  and  Instrument,  ibid.  6  Original  Instrument. 


Alexander  and  his  grandson  William,  but  reserving  to  himself  the  enjoy- 
ment of  the  office  during  the  remainder  of  his  life.1 

The  Earl  was  present  in  Parliament  on  10th  July  1525,2  and  he  is  last 
mentioned  as  ratifying  his  brother  Henry's  charters  in  October  1534  at 
Inchmahome.  He  probably  died  in  1536  or  1537.  The  names  of  his 
children  are : — 

1.  William  Graham,  Master  of  Menteith,  Lord  Kilpont,  who  succeeded 

his  father  in  the  earldom. 

2.  Walter  Graham,  who  was  a  witness  to  the  instrument  of  sasine  of 

the  earldom  of  Menteith  in  favour  of  his  elder  brother,  is  said 
to  be  the  ancestor  of  the  Grahams  of  Gartur,  in  the  parish  of 
Port,  who  made  claim  to  be  the  heirs-male  and  representatives  of 
the  Graham  Earls  of  Menteith.  John  Graham,  the  last  male 
representative  of  the  Gartur  line,  died  in  1818,  and  was  buried 
in  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome.  A  marble  tablet  to  his  memory 
is  placed  in  the  inside  of  the  north  wall.  From  this  Walter 
Graham  the  Grahams  in  Shannochiel,  in  the  parish  of  Port,  also 
claim  descent.  A  pedigree  of  that  family,  now  represented  by 
Charles  Graham  Stirling,  Esq.  of  Craigbarnet,  in  the  county  of 
Stirling,  is  given  in  a  cognate  work.3 

3.  Marion,  married  to  Kobert  Buchanan  of  Leny.4 

1  Original  Instrument  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 

2  Acts  of  the  Parliaments  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  292. 

3  The  Stirlings  of  Keir,  by  William  Fraser,  pp.  127-136.  4  Ibid.  p.  415. 



MARGARET  MOUBEAY,  his  Countess. 


WILLIAM  GRAHAM,  the  eldest  son  of  Earl  Alexander,  succeeded  his 
father  as  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  was  infeft  in  the  earldom  on  the 
lands  of  Ernchome,  near  the  shore  of  the  lake  of  Inchmahome,  on  1 6th  May 

Previous  to  16th  June  1521,  William  Graham,  Master  of  Menteith  and 
Lord  of  Kilpont,  married  Margaret  Moubray,  a  daughter  of  John  Moubray 
of  Bambougle ;  and,  probably  to  provide  themselves  in  a  home,  they,  as 
assignees  of  Earl  Alexander,  took  advantage  of  a  letter  of  reversion  made 
by  Walter  Graham  of  Lochtoun  to  Alexander,  Earl  of  Menteith,  whereby 
the  latter  or  his  heirs  could  redeem,  for  a  sum  of  five  hundred  merles, 
the  lands  of  Lochtoun,  with  the  island  thereof,  the  Mylntoun  and  Kirktoun 
of  Aberfoyle,  and  other  lands.  To  effect  this,  they  caused  their  procurator, 
Thomas  Graham,  proceed  to  the  parish  church  of  Aberfoyle,  and  in  the  time 
of  high  mass  warn  Walter  Graham  and  all  others  interested  to  appear  on 
the  last  day  of  July  following,  at  the  high  altar  in  the  parish  church  of 
the  Holy  Cross  of  Stirling,  and  there  receive  from  William  and  Margaret, 
or  their  procurators,  the  sum  of  money  stated  for  the  redemption  of  the 
lands.     A  notarial  instrument  instructs  that  the  requisition  was  duly  made.2 

In  the  same  year  also  he  took  steps,  along  with  his  father  Earl  Alexander, 
to  effect  the  redemption  of  the  lands  of  Kilbride  from  his  father's  uncle,  the 
1  Original  Instrument  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose.  2  Original  Instrument,  ibid. 


same  Walter  Graham,  by  the  issue  of  a  premonition  ;x  and  about  that  time 
he  and  his  spouse,  Margaret  Moubray,  were  infeft  in  several  lands  in 
Menteith.2  A  few  years  later,  in  1528,  in  conjunction  with  his  father,  he 
redeemed  the  lands  of  Crantulliche  and  Glaschyle  from  Lord  Drummond, 
into  whose  possession  they  had  probably  come  by  mortgage;3  and  in  1534 
he  obtained  the  lands  of  Boquhaple  and  Drongy  from  the  laird,  Eobert 
Norie,  by  a  charter,4  which  was  confirmed  by  King  James  the  Fifth  on 
16th  February  1536,5  in  which  year  William  was  also  infeft  in  the  lands.6 

In  1537,  when  infeft  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  he  had  separate  sasines 
of  the  lands  of  Kilpont  and  two  parts  of  the  lands  of  Kilbride.7  Shortly 
after  his  succession  to  the  earldom,  on  14th  May  1539,  this  Earl,  as  superior 
of  the  lands  of  Illieston,  granted  a  precept  for  the  infeftment  of  James,  Earl 
of  Arran,  in  these  lands.8 

With  the  exception  of  these  few  transactions  in  connection  with  the 
lands  of  Menteith,  very  little  is  on  record  concerning  this  Earl.  He  is  men- 
tioned as  being  present  in  Parliament  on  10th  December  1540,  and  as  having 
appended  his  seal  to  two  important  measures  passed  by  that  convention,9 
but  nothing  further  is  known  of  his  life. 

The  death  of  the  Earl  was  somewhat  tragical.  It  occurred  in  the  year 
1543  or  1544,  under  the  following  circumstances: — An  expedition  of  the 
Stewarts  of  Appin,  under  the  command  of  Donald  the  Hammerer,  Tutor  of 
Appin,  returning  from  Stirlingshire  through  the  lands  of  Menteith,  reached 
a  house  where  a  wedding  feast  had  been  prepared,  to   which  the  Earl  of 

1  Old   Inventory    of   Menteith    Papers  in  6  Old   Inventory  of   Menteith   Papers,    ut 
Charter-Chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose.                       supra. 

2  Another  Old  Inventory,  ibid.  7  Ibid. 

3  Ibid.  4  Ibid.  8  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  311. 

5  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,   Lib.  xxv.  No.  9  Acts    of    the   Parliaments  of    Scotland, 

282.  vol.  ii.  pp.  355,  404,  405. 

HE  IS  SLAIN  BY  THE  TUTOR  OF  APPIN,  1544.  311 

Menteith  had  been  invited.  The  opportunity  offered  for  appeasing  their 
hunger  proved  too  much  for  the  Stewarts,  who,  regardless  of  consequences, 
devoured  all  the  viands  and  proceeded  on  their  way.  The  Earl  of  Menteith 
and  his  party  arrived  soon  afterwards,  and,  unable  to  stifle  their  indigna- 
tion at  the  insult  thus  offered  them,  at  once  set  off  in  pursuit.  They 
overtook  the  offenders  at  Tobanareal,  a  spring  on  the  summit  of  the  ridge 
which  separates  Menteith  from  Strathgartney,  between  Loch  Katrine  and  the 
Lake  of  Menteith.  A  sanguinary  engagement  ensued,  in  which  the  Earl 
and  nearly  all  his  followers  were  slain,  while  Donald  Stewart  is  said  to  have 
escaped  under  cover  of  night  with  only  a  single  follower.1 

By  his  Countess  Margaret,  who  survived  him,  Earl  William  had  five  sons 
and  one  daughter. 

1.  John  Graham,  Master  of  Menteith  and  Lord  Kilpont,  who  succeeded 

his  father  in  the  earldom. 

2.  Andrew  Graham,  who,  in  1547,  received  the  lands  of  Boquhaple 

from  his  brother  John,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  was  infeft  therein.2 
He  appears  to  have  died  in  the  same  year,  unmarried. 

3.  Bobert  Graham.     In  1547  he  was  infeft  in  the  lands  of  Wester 

Boquhaple  by  his  brother  John,  fourth  Earl  of  Menteith,  from 
whom  he  received  a  liferent  gift  of  the  lands.3  They  were  sold 
by  Eobert  to  his  brother-in-law,  Archibald,  Earl  of  Argyll,  and 
Colin  Campbell,  son  of  the  Earl  and  his  Countess,  Margaret 
Graham ;  and  a  precept  for  a  charter  of  confirmation  of  the 
charter  of  alienation  and  sale  was  granted  on  29th  August  1553.4 

1  Captain  Burt's  Letters,  by  Robert  Jamie-  4  Registrum  Secreti  Sigilli,  vol.  xxvi.  fol.  4. 
son,  Esq.,  F.S.A.,  vol.  i.  p.  Ixxiii.                             The  reason  of  this  transaction  is  explained  by 

2  Old   Inventory    of    Menteith    Papers    in       documents  in  the  Charter-chest  of  the  Duke 
Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose.  of  Argyll,  which  show  that  in  embarrassed 

3  Ibid.  circumstances    Robert    Norie   of   Boquhaple 


On  23d  May  1547,  Robert  Graham  acquired  by  charter  from 
Alexander  Makawlay  of  Erngabill  the  two  merk  land  of  Gartmore, 
to  be  held  by  him  and  the  heirs  of  his  body,  whom  failing,  by 
Gilbert  Graham,  his  brother-german,  and  his  heirs  whomsoever. 
The  charter  is  dated  at  Inchmahome,  one  of  the  witnesses  being 
"Jacobo  Bad,  canonico  professo  dicti  monastery."1  On  3d 
May  1554,  a  charter  of  sale  was  granted  by  Walter  McAwlay 
of  Gartmore  to  Eobert  Graham,  brother-german  of  John,  Earl 
of  Menteith,  and  the  heirs  of  his  body  ;  whom  failing,  to  Gilbert 
Graham  and  the  heirs  of  his  body ;  whom  failing,  to  the 
nearest  heirs  of  Eobert  whomsoever,  of  the  twelve  merk  land 
of  old  extent  of  Gartmore.  Among  the  witnesses  are  Gilbert 
Graham,  brother-german  of  John,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  Malise 
Graham,  not  designed.2  This  charter  was  confirmed  by  Queen 
Mary  on  24th  January  following.3  Eobert  Graham  married 
Elizabeth  Erskine,  and  on  19th  June  1563  a  charter  of  resigna- 
tion was  granted  by  Queen  Mary  to  Eobert  Graham  of  Gartmore, 

had   sold   his   lands   of   Easter   and   Wester  Menteith,   her  right  to  a  reversion  granted 
Boquhaple   at   different   times    to    William,  to  her  father  by  Margaret,  Countess  of  Men- 
third    Earl   of    Menteith,    when    Master   of  teith,  for  redemption  of  the  four  merk  land  of 
Menteith,    to    Countess    Margaret,    and    to  Wester  Boquhaple-Nory,  in  the  stewartry  of 
John  Wright  in  Dunblane,  taking  letters  of  Menteith,  upon  payment  of  four  hundred  and 
reversion  from  each.     These  reversions  were  twenty    merks    Scots.      On    14th  February 
assigned    in   July    1550   by   John   Norie   of  1552,  Archibald,  Earl  of  Argyll,  in  liferent,  and 
Boquhaple,  after  the  death  of  Robert  Norie,  Colin  Campbell  his  sou,  in  fee,   were  infeft 
to  Archibald,  Earl  of  Argyll.     On  29th  May  in  the  four  merk  land  of  Wester  Boquhaple, 
1551,  Agnes  Norie,  daughter  and  heir  to  the  on  a  precept  of  sasine  by  Robert  Graham, 
deceased    Robert    Norie,     with    consent    of  '  Original  Charter  at  Gartmore. 
Robert  Buchanan  her  husband,  renounced  in  2  Original  Charter,  ibid. 
favour  of  Robert  Graham,  son  to  the  Earl  of  3  Original  Charter,  ibid. 


brother-german  of  John,  Earl  of  Menteith,  and  Elizabeth  Erskine 
his  spouse,  in  conjunct-fee  and  liferent,  and  their  heirs,  whom 
failing,  to  the  heirs  of  the  said  Robert  whomsoever,  of  the  half 
of  the  twelve  merk  land  of  Gartmore.1  This  was  followed  by  a 
precept  of  the  same  date  for  their  conjunct  infeftment  in  the 
lands  of  Gartmore.2  Again,  on  2 2d  April  1568,  King  James  the 
Sixth  granted  a  charter  to  Eobert  Graham  of  Gartmore,  and 
Elizabeth  Erskine  his  spouse,  in  conjunct-fee  and  liferent,  and 
the  heirs  of  Eobert;  whom  failing,  the  heirs  of  the  body  of 
Gilbert  Graham,  brother-german  of  Eobert;  whom  all  failing, 
to  the  heirs  of  Eobert  whomsoever,  of  the  twelve  merk  land  of 
Gartmore.3  Eobert  Graham  died  in  May  1572,  apparently 
without  issue,  as  his  nephew,  William  Graham,  was  the  heir 
of  entail.  Eobert  was  survived  by  his  wife,  Elizabeth  Erskine. 
4.  Gilbert  Graham,  frequently  mentioned  in  the  Gartmore  charters  to 
Eobert  Graham  as  his  brother-german.  In  a  back-tack  or  lease 
granted  by  him  to  John  Blackader  of  Tulliallan  and  Margaret 
Haccarsoun  his  spouse,  of  part  of  the  lands  of  Tulliallan,  on 
27th  April  1551,  he  calls  himself  "Gilbert  Grahame,  brother- 
germane  to  ane  nobill  and  mychty  lord,  Johnne,  Erll  of 
Menteyth."4  He  received,  on  3d  April  1554,  a  respite  for 
nineteen  years  for  the  abduction  of  Isobel  Sandilands,  lady 
of  Gardane,  and  for  treasonable  intercommuning  with  the  late 
William,  Earl  of  Glencairn,  at  the  field  of  Glasgow.5 

It  was  probably  after  the  death  of  the  Countess  Margaret  his 

1  Original  Charter  at  Gartmore.  4  Original  Lease  in  Charter-chest  of  David 

2  Registrum     Seereti    Sigilli,     Lib.     xxxi.        Erskiue,  Esq.  of  Cardross. 

p.  122.  5  Registrum  Seereti  Sigilli,  vol.  xxvii.  fol. 

3  Original  Charter  at  Gartmore  34. 

VOL.  I.  2   11 



mother,  and  Walter  Graham  his  brother,  that  the  lands  of  Garta- 
vertane-Lindsay  came  into  the  hands  of  Gilbert  Graham,  who,  on 
21st  January  1572,  resigned  them  into  the  hands  of  the  Eegent 
Morton,  for  a  regrant  in  favour  of  William  his  son  and  apparent 
heir.1  On  the  same  day  William  received  a  Crown  Charter  of 
the  lands,2  and  was  infeft  in  them  by  virtue  of  a  precept  from 
Chancery  on  23d  March  following.3 

William  Graham  of  Gartavertane,  on  25th  June  1577, 
obtained  a  service  of  himself  as  heir  of  taillie  to  his  uncle 
(patruus),  Eobert  Graham  of  Gartmore.  The  retour  states  that 
he  was  of  lawful  age  by  virtue  of  the  King's  letters  of  dispen- 
sation, and  that  the  lands  were  now  in  the  hands  of  Elizabeth 
Erskine,  relict  of  the  late  Eobert  Graham,  by  reason  of  her 
conjunct  infeftment,  and  through  default  of  the  said  William 
not  having  hitherto  prosecuted  his  claim.4  In  1573,  William, 
fifth  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  retoured  heir  of  conquest  to  his  uncle, 
Eobert  Graham  of  Gartmore.5 

William  Graham  of  Gartavertane  married  Janet  Graham. 
They  received,  on  3d  January  1583,  a  charter  by  John  Drummond 
of  Drongy,  and  Matilda  (Mawsie)  Graham  his  wife,  of  the 
lands  of  Wester  Gartavertane,  to  be  held  by  them  in  conjunct- 
fee  and  liferent,  and  their  heirs,  whom  failing,  by  the  heirs 
whomsoever  of  William.0  William  Graham  died  about  the  year 
1589,  leaving  a  young  son,  Eobert;  and  before  1591,  Janet 
Graham,    Lady   Gartmore,   his   widow,   was    married    to    Colin 

1  Original  Instrument  at  Gartmore. 

2  Original  Charter,  ibid. 

3  Original  Instrument  of  Sasine,  ibid. 

4  Original  Retour  at  Gartmore. 

5  Original  Retour,  ibid. 

6  Original  Charter,  ibid. 


Campbell  (perhaps  of  Ardbeith).1  Eobert  probably  only  arrived 
at  lawful  age  in  1606,  when,  on  27th  May,  he  was  retoured 
heir  to  his  father,  William  Graham  of  Gartmore,  in  the  twelve 
merk  land  of  old  extent  of  Gartmore,  with  the  pendicle  called 
the  Bad,  the  four  merk  land  of  Gartavertane-Lindsay,  and 
the  western  half  of  the  lands  of  Gartavertane,  called  Thomlag, 
all  in  the  Stewartry  of  Menteith.2 

On  9th  October  1634,  Agnes  Graham  was  retoured  heir  to 
her  father,  Eobert  Graham  of  Gartmore,  in  the  same  lands.3  She 
married  John  Alexander,  a  younger  son  of  William,  Earl  of 
Stirling,  and  in  1636  disponed  the  lands  to  that  Earl.  They 
afterwards  passed  into  the  hands  of  Charles  Alexander,  brother 
of  Henry,  Earl  of  Stirling,  and  brother-in-law  to  Agnes  Graham. 
He  sold  them  to  the  Grahams  in  1644,  William  Graham  of 
Polder  being  the  purchaser  for  thirteen  thousand,  three  hundred 
merks  Scots.4  This  William  Graham  by  letters  of  apprising 
against  Katharine,  Jeane,  and  Margaret  Alexander,  daughters 
and  heirs-of-line  of  William,  Lord  Alexander,  and  grand- 
daughters and  apparent  heirs-of-line  to  the  late  William,  Earl  of 
Stirling,  was,  on  29th  January  1645,  adjudged  the  rightful  pro- 
prietor of  the  lands,5  and  was  infeft  in  them  on  30th  September 
1652.6  William  Graham  of  Polder,  on  28th  June  1665,  was 
created  a  Baronet  under  the  title  of  Sir  William  Graham  of  Gart- 
more, with  limitation  to  the  heirs-male  of  his  body,  and  the  lands 

1  Registrum  Secreti  Concilii,  anno  1591.  i  Original  Documents  of  Sale  at  Gartmore. 

2  Index  of  Special  Eetours,  Perthshire,  No.  .        . 

°  Original  Letters,  ibid. 
161.  8 

3  Ibid.  No.  437.  6  Original  Instrument,  ibid. 


of  Gartmore,  Gartavertane-Lindsay,  Tomaclag,  and  Spittal,  were, 
in  1672,  erected  into  the  barony  of  Gartmore.1 

5.  Walter  Graham.     On  16th  May  1545,  John  Buchanan  of  Garta- 

vertane  granted  to  Margaret  Moubray,  Countess  of  Menteith,  in 
liferent,  and  Walter  Graham  her  son,  and  his  heirs,  in  fee,  a 
charter  of  the  lands  of  Gartavertane,  in  the  Stewartry  of  Menteith. 
A  charter  by  Queen  Mary,  under  the  Privy  Seal  of  Scotland, 
confirmed  this  grant  on  20th  May ;  and  following  on  a  precept 
of  sasine  by  John  Buchanan,  of  the  same  date  as  his  charter, 
Countess  Margaret  and  her  son  Walter  were  infeft  in  the  lands 
on  22d  May  1545.2  One  of  the  bailies  for  the  infeftment  was 
Andrew  Graham.  A  new  infeftment  of  Countess  Margaret  and 
her  son  Walter  in  these  lands  was  made  on  26th  July  1548  ;3 
but  after  that  date  nothing  further  is  on  record  concerning 
Walter  Graham,  and  the  lands  of  Gartavertane  are  afterwards 
found  in  possession  of  his  brother  Gilbert. 

6.  Margaret  Graham.      She  became  the  second  wife  of    Archibald, 

fourth  Earl  of  Argyll,  on  21st  April  1541,  the  marriage  having 
been  celebrated  in  the  Priory  of  Inchmahome  by  a  chaplain, 
as  shown  in  the  account  of  the  Priory  in  a  subsequent  chapter. 
A  charter  of  confirmation  was  granted  by  King  James  the  Fifth 
on  27th  April  1543,  to  Lady  Margaret  Graham  and  the  heirs 
of  her  marriage  with  Archibald,  Earl  of  Argyll,  of  certain  lands 
in  the  shires  of  Argyll  and  Clackmannan.4  Their  son,  Colin 
Campbell,  succeeded  his  father  as  Earl  of  Argyll. 

1  Original  Charter  at  Gartmore.  3  Original  Instrument  at  Gartmore. 

2  Original  of  these  four  Documents,  ibid.  4  Eegistrum  Magni  Sigilli,  Lib.  xxix.  No.  11. 



MARION  SETON,  his  Countess. 


JOHN  GRAHAM  succeeded  his  father  as  Earl  of  Menteith  in  1544,  and 
as  such  sat  in  Parliament  and  Privy  Council,  but  he  was  not  infeft  in 
the  earldom  till  the  26th  May  1547,  although  for  the  purpose  of  implementing 
a  contract  made  between  Earl  William  and  James  Stirling  of  Keir  he  granted, 
on  7th  April  1544,  a  procuratory  for  haviug  himself  served  heir  to  his  father 
in  the  half  lands  of  Lany  and  Petquhonderty,  and  infeft  therein,  in  order  to 
his  resigning  them  again  in  favour  of  Janet  Buchanan,  one  of  the  heirs  of 
the  late  Patrick  Buchanan  of  Lany.1 

He  was  infeft  in  the  same  year  in  the  lands  of  Kilpont  and  Illieston,2 
was  retoured  heir  to  his  father  in  the  earldom  in  1546,3  and  in  the  following 
year,  when  his  infeftment  in  the  earldom  took  place,  he  received  sasine  of 
the  lands  of  Kilbride,  with  the  mill  thereof,  the  two  and  a  half  merit  lands  of 
Wester  Boquhaple,  and  the  third  part  of  the  five  rnerk  land  of  Drongy.4  In 
the  same  year  he  bestowed  the  lands  of  Boquhaple  upon  his  brother  Andrew, 
and  on  the  latter's  death,  apparently  in  that  year,  he  infeft  another  brother, 
Robert  Graham,  afterwards  of  Gartmore,  in  the  same  lands.5  The  lands  of 
Kilpont  he  granted  to  his  Countess,  Marion  Seton,  in  liferent,  and  they 

1  The  Stirlings  of  Keir,  by  William  Fraser,  p.  381. 

2  Old  Inventory  of  Menteith  Papers,  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 

:!  Ibid.  *  Original  Instrument  of  Sasine,  ibid.  5  Original  Inventory,  ibid. 



were  confirmed  to  her  in  1550.1     A  signature  of  the  whole  of  Kilbride  was 
granted  to  the  Earl  and  his  Countess  in  1558.2 

Earl  John  satin  Parliament  in  1545,  both  in  its  meeting  at  Stirling  in 
June,  when  he  pledged  himself  along  with  the  governor  and  the  rest  of  the 
nobility  to  proceed  with  the  King  of  France  against  the  "  auld  inimy  "  of 
England,  and  at  Linlithgow  in  October.3  He  was  present  at  a  meeting  of 
Privy  Council  in  the  following  February,4  and  at  another  meeting  on  17th 
March  1546,  he  subscribed  one  of  their  Acts  passed  for  the  protection  of 
Queen  Mary's  heralds,  pursuivants,  and  other  messengers,  who,  from  the 
nature  of  their  work,  frequently  got  a  very  unwelcome  reception.5 

John,  Earl  of  Menteith,  was  one  of  the  Scottish  nobles  who  accompanied 
the  young  Queen  Mary  to  France.  She  had  found  temporary  protection  in 
the  island  of  Inchmahome  in  the  Lake  of  Menteith,  in  close  proximity  to  the 
Earl's  residence  on  Inchtalla,  and  the  Earl  was  now  honoured  to  be  one  of 
her  guardians  during  the  voyage.  They  embarked  at  Dumbarton  early  in 
August  1550,  and  the  voyage  only  occupied  a  few  days.  The  Earl  of 
Menteith  probably  returned  to  Scotland  with  the  Queen  Dowager,  as  he 
was  present  with  her  at  meetings  of  the  Privy  Council  at  Stirling  on  20th 
March  1552,  again  at  Perth  on  19th  July  1553,6  and  he  subscribed  the  bond 
granted  by  the  Queen  Dowager  on  12th  April  1554  to  the  Duke  of 
Chatelherault,  on  the  latter's  demission  of  the  regency.7  He  received  from 
Queen  Mary,  Dowager,  on  16th  August  1554,  a  commission  as  justiciar 
over  both  the  earldom  and  the  Stewartry  of  Menteith.8 

1  Original   Inventory  in  Charter-cheat  of 
Duke  of  Montrose.  2  Ibid. 

3  Acts   of    the    Parliaments     of   Scotland, 
vol.  ii.  pp.  455,  595. 

4  Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland, 
vol.  i.  p.  22. 

5  Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland, 
vol.  i.  p.  60. 

6  Ibid.  pp.  119,  141. 

7  Acts    of    the    Parliaments    of   Scotland, 
vol.  ii.  p.  003. 

8  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  313. 


He  sat  again  in  a  Parliament  held  by  the  Queen  Eegent  at  Edinburgh 
in  November  1558,1  but  in  the  following  year,  becoming  displeased  with  her 
conduct,  he  forsook  her  party  and  joined  the  Lords  of  the  Congregation.  He 
took  this  step  when  the  army  of  the  Congregation  lay  before  Perth,  and 
was  present  at  the  surrender  of  that  town  in  June  1559.2  With  the  rest  of 
the  Lords  of  the  Congregation,  on  10th  September,  at  Hamilton,  he  joined 
in  a  letter  of  remonstrance  to  the  Queen  Eegent  for  allowing  the  French 
to  fortify  Leith  ;3  and  subscribed  with  them,  at  Stirling,  on  24th  December, 
an  extended  commission  to  Secretary  Lethington,  then  in  London,  for 
maintaining  negotiations  with  Queen  Elizabeth ;  and  in  the  following 
February,  subscribed  the  treaty  of  Berwick,  whereby  Queen  Elizabeth  pledged 
herself  to  assist  the  Lords  of  the  Congregation  in  driving  the  French  out  of 
Scotland,  while  these  Lords  in  return  promised  to  send  succour  into  England 
should  the  French  invade  that  kingdom.  The  Earl  of  Menteith  gave  his 
second  son  George  as  one  of  the  hostages  for  the  observance  of  the  treaty.4 

He  adhered  faithfully  to  the  Lords  of  the  Congregation,  and  was  one  of 
the  leaders  of  their  army  at  the  siege  of  Leith  in  1560.  After  the  death  of 
the  Queen  Eegent  and  the  restoration  of  peace,  he  sat  in  the  Parliament 
of  1560,  which  established  the  Eeformation,  and  ratified  the  Scots  Confession,5 
and  was  nominated  among  the  twenty-four  noblemen,  of  whom  twelve 
were  to  be  chosen,  as  members  of  the  Privy  Council.6  When  the  Scottish 
Parliament  sent  their  proposal  to  Queen  Elizabeth  that  she  should  marry 
the  Earl  of  Arran,  eldest  son  of  the  Duke  of  Chatelherault,  he  adhibited  Ins 
name.7     Although  not  a  member  of  the  Privy  Council,  he  was  present  at 

1  Acts   of    the    Parliaments   of    Scotland,  6  Acts    of    the   Parliaments   of   Scotland, 
vol.  ii.  p.  503.  vol.  ii.  p.  525. 

2  Calderwood's  History,  vol.  i.  p.  470.  6  Tytler's  History  of  Scotland,  vol.  v.  p.  14S. 

3  Ibid.  p.  518.  7  Acts   of    the  Parliaments    of    Scotland, 

4  Ibid.  pp.  578,  581.  vol.  ii.  p.  606. 


one  of  its  meetings  in  the  following  year,1  and  about  the  same  time 
subscribed  the  first  Book  of  Discipline.2 

John,  Earl  of  Menteith,  seems  to  have  been  alive  at  the  end  of  June 
1564,  and  to  have  been  present  in  the  General  Assembly  held  in  that  month, 
as  on  a  complaint  by  some  labourers  of  the  ground  about  the  rigorous 
exactiou  of  the  tithes,  the  Earl  of  Menteith  promised,  with  other  noblemen 
and  lairds,  to  be  content  with  either  money  or  victual.3  He  died,  however, 
in  that  year,  as  at  the  infeftment  of  his  son  and  heir  on  20th  November  1571, 
the  earldom  is  said  to  have  been  in  the  hands  of  King  James  the  Sixth  and 
his  mother,  Queen  Mary,  for  the  space  of  seven  years  and  a  term.4 

By  his  marriage  with  Marion  Seton,  daughter  of  John,  fifth  Lord  Seton, 
and  Elizabeth  Hay,  daughter  of  John,  Lord  Yester,  John,  Earl  of  Menteith, 
had  two  sons  and  two  daughters.  After  the  Earl's  death  Countess  Marion 
married  John,  tenth  Earl  of  Sutherland,  as  his  third  wife,  and  with  him 
was  poisoned  in  July  1567,  at  Helmsdale  in  Sutherland,  by  Isabel  Sinclair, 
the  wife  of  Gilbert  Gordon  of  Gartay,  at  the  instigation,  it  is  said,  of  George 
Sinclair,  Earl  of  Caithness.5 

The  names  of  Earl  John's  children  were  : — 

1 .  William  Graham,  Master  of  Menteith,  Lord  Kilpont,  who  succeeded 

his  father  in  the  earldom. 

2.  George  Graham,  ancestor  of  the  Grahams  of  Eednoch.    He  was 

one  of  the  hostages  given  by  the  Lords  of  the  Congregation  to 
Winter,  the  English  admiral,  for  the  observance  of  the  treaty  of 
Berwick,  and  by  the  terms  of  the  agreement  was  to  remain  in 

1  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland,  4  Original  Instrument  of  Sasine  in  Charter- 

vol.  i.  p.  192.  chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 

-  Calderwood's  History,  vol.  ii.  p.  50.  5  Genealogieai  History  of  the  Earldom  of 

3  Ibid.  p.  282.  Sutherland,  by  Sir  Robert  Gordon,  p.  146. 


England  for  a  period  of  six  months.1  On  12th  December  1579, 
he  acquired  from  Malise  Graham,  vicar  of  Aberfoyle,  a  lease  of 
the  half  of  the  rents,  profits,  and  emoluments  of  the  vicarage  of 
the  parish  kirk  of  Aberfoyle,  in  the  earldom  of  Menteith,  during 
his  life  only,  paying  therefor  yearly  £20  Scots.  He  signed  the 
lease  as  George  Graham,  brother  to  my  Lord  of  Menteith.  It  is 
witnessed  by  Walter  Graham,  fiar  of  Duchray,  James  Stirling  of 
Auchyll,  and  John  Stirling  his  brother.2  After  the  death  of  his 
elder  brother,  William,  fifth  Earl  of  Menteith,  he  became  tutor- 
in-law  to  his  nephew,  John,  the  sixth  Earl,  during  his  nonage, 
and  was  commonly  known  as  tutor  of  Menteith.  So  he  styles 
himself  and  is  designated  by  others,  as  appears  from  an  obligation 
granted  by  Sir  George  Buchanan  of  Buchanan  to  him,  on  8th 
January  1584,  for  repayment  of  a  loan  of  £200  Scots,  and  from 
the  acknowledgment  by  George  Graham  of  Bednoch,  tutor  of 
Menteith,  for  its  repayment  on  30th  June  1585.3  As  tutor  of 
Menteith  he  was  cited  on  20th  January  1585  to  appear  before 
the  Brivy  Council,  and  supply  information  by  which  the  thefts 
and  other  crimes  then  prevalent  around  Menteith  might  be 
repressed.4     He  probably  died  in  that  year. 

George  Graham  married  and  had  two  sons.  James  the  elder, 
as  his  son  and  heir,  received  charters  of  confirmation  of  the 
lands  of  Easter  Bednoch  from  King  James  the  Sixth,  on  12th 
February  1584  and  12th  June  1598.5 

1  Calderwood's  History,  vol.  i.  p.  5S1.  4  Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland, 

~*  Original  Lease  at  Gartmore.  vol.  iii.  j>.  718. 

3  Original    in    Charter-chest    of   Duke  of           5  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli,  MS.  Lib.  xxxvi. 

Montrose.  No.  116,  xli.  No.  397. 

VOL.  I.  2  S 


After  the  death  of  James  Graham,  his  brother  John,  on  10th 
March  1619,  was  served  heir  to  him  in  Easter  Eednoch,  and  also  in 
the  lands  of  Mondowie  in  Stirlingshire,1  which  had  been  acquired 
by  the  elder  brother  in  1603.2  John  Graham  of  Eednoch  had  two 
daughters.  Marian,  the  elder,  married  John  Graham  of  Duchray, 
who  obtained  through  her  the  lands  of  Eednoch.  Anne,  the 
younger  daughter,  married  Alexander  Colquhoun  of  Camstradden.3 
The  lands  of  Mondowie  were  granted  by  John  Graham  of  Eednoch 
to  William,  Earl  of  Airth  and  Menteith,  in  1G35.4 

3.  Lady  Mary,  who  married  John  Buchanan  of  Buchanan,  and  was 

commonly  known  as  Lady  Buchanan.  A  precept  was  granted  by 
Queen  Mary  on  10th  November  1561,  for  confirming  a  charter 
of  alienation,  made  by  the  late  George  Buchanan  of  that  Ilk  to 
Mary  Graham,  elder  daughter  (seniori  filie)  of  John,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  in  liferent,  of  the  lands  of  Gartfarin,  Arrochbeg,  Blair, 
and  Ardule,  in  the  barony  of  Buchanan  and  shire  of  Stirling.5 

A  gift  of  the  ward  of  the  lands  of  George  Buchanan  of 
Buchanan,  which  comprised  the  lands  of  Gartquhorie,  Ardbeg, 
Blair,  Cassillie,  Arrochdaill,  Cortcorplay,  Stronecluchane,  Dow- 
glengyle,  Auchedunereith,  and  Portnellans,  was  given  after  his 
decease,  on  23d  October  1561,  to  Earl  John  and  his  heirs.6 

4.  Lady  Christian  Graham,  who  married,  before  1553,  Sir  William 

Livingstone  of  Kilsyth,7  and  had  issue. 

1  Index  of  Retours,  Perthshire,  No.  265 ;  4  Original  Charter  at  Gartmore. 
Stirlingshire,  No.  96.  5  Kegistrum  Seereti  Sigilli,  Lib.  xxx.  p.  75. 

2  Original  Instrument  of  Sasine  at  Gartmore.  °  Ibid.  p.  56. 

■'!  The   Chiefs   of   Colquhoun,    by  William  7  Registrum     Magni    Sigilli,     Lib.     xxxi. 

Fraser,  vol.  ii.  pp.  204,  205.  No.  163. 



MARGARET  DOUGLAS  (of  Dkumlankig),  his  Countess. 

1564—  1579. 

A  CONSIDERABLE  time  intervened  between  the  death  of  the  fourth  Earl 
and  the  infeftment  of  his  eldest  son  William,  as  fifth  Earl,  in  the 
earldom  and  other  lands,  owing  to  the  latter  not  being  of  lawful  age ;  but  in 
the  interval,  on  10th  April  1565,  Queen  Mary,  by  letters  under  the  Privy  Seal, 
granted  to  William  Graham,  son  and  heir-apparent  to  the  late  John,  Earl  of 
Menteith,  the  ward  and  nonentry,  with  the  mails,  farms,  profits,  and  duties 
of  all  the  lands  and  rights  possessed  by  the  late  Earl,  so  long  as  they  lay  in 
the  hands  of  the  Crown,  until  the  lawful  entry  of  the  rightful  heir  or  heirs, 
they  being  of  lawful  age ;  and  likewise  granting  to  him,  his  heirs  and 
assignees,  his  own  marriage,  and  the  profits  thereof,  or,  in  the  event  of  his 
death  unmarried,  the  marriage  of  any  heirs  male  or  female  that  should 
succeed  to  him  or  the  late  Earl  in  his  lands  and  heritage.  In  connection 
with  this  gift  a  contract  was  made  between  Earl  William  and  his  mother, 
Lady  Marion  Seton,  by  which  the  latter,  with  her  own  money,  settled  the 
composition  with  the  Queen's  treasurer,  and  in  return  for  this  she,  and 
failing  her,  her  children,  with  the  exception  of  William,  and  Mary  Graham 
Lady  Buchanan,  were  entitled  to  uplift  the  rents,  etc.,  of  the  earldom  and 
other  lands,  the  heir's  expenses  being  first  deducted,  until  she  reimbursed 
herself  of  the  amount  expended  by  her  in  procuring  this  gift.1 

Although  still  in  his  nonage,  William  Graham  was  acknowledged  Earl  of 
Menteith,  and  was  appointed  one  of  the  commissioners  of  Parliament  to 

1   Original  Gift  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke  of  Montrose. 


receive  the  renunciation  and  demission  by  Queen  Mary  of  the  sovereign 
authority,  and  thereafter  to  inaugurate  the  young  Prince  James  as  King.1 
He  was  accordingly  present  at  Stirling  on  29th  July  1567,  the  occasion  of 
the  coronation  of  King  James  the  Sixth,  and  executed  his  commission  by 
taking  part  in  receiving  the  demission  by  Queen  Mary  presented  by  Patrick, 
Lord  Lindsay  of  the  Byres,  and  William,  Lord  Ruthven,  and  thereafter 
assisting  at  the  inauguration  of  the  Prince.2  He  was  a  member  of  the 
Parliament  which  sat  in  December  of  the  same  year,  and  ratified  these 
proceedings.3  After  Queen  Mary's  escape  from  Lochleven,  Earl  William 
joined  the  forces  of  the  Eegent  Murray,  and  was  present  at  the  battle  of 
Langside  on  13th  May  1568.4  He  sat  in  the  meeting  of  the  Privy  Council 
three  days  later  at  Glasgow,5  and  was  present  at  the  meeting  of  Parliament 
held  in  August  of  the  same  year.6  In  the  beginning  of  1569  he  attended  the 
meeting  of  the  Council  on  the  return  of  the  Eegent  Murray  from  England,7 
and  also  the  Convention  held  at  Perth  in  July  of  the  same  year.8 

On  16th  May  1571,  at  Leith,  Earl  William,  with  consent  of  Peter 
Cornwall  of  Ballinhard  and  John  Graham  of  Ballindorane,  his  curators, 
entered  into  a  marriage-contract  with  Sir  James  Douglas  of  Drumlanrig, 
and  Sir  William  Douglas  of  Hawick  his  son,  on  behalf  of  Lady  Margaret 
Douglas,  widow  of  Edward,  Lord  Crichton  of  Sanquhar,  by  which  he  was  to 
marry  that  lady.  In  the  event  of  his  dying  before  her,  she  was,  in 
satisfaction  for  her  terce,  to  receive  in  liferent  the  earldom  of  Menteith, 

1  Acta    of    the   Parliaments   of    Scotland,  b  Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland, 
vol.  iii.  p.  12.  vol.  i.  p.  623. 

2  Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland,  6  Acts   of    the   Parliaments   of    Scotland, 
vol.  i.  pp.  537,  541.  vol.  iii.  pp.  47-56. 

3  Acts   of    the   Parliaments   of    Scotland,  7  Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland, 
vol.  iii.  p.  4.  vol.  i.  p.  644. 

4  Calderwood's  History,  vol.  ii.  p.  415.  8  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  p.  2. 


and  the  twenty  pound  land  of  old  extent  of  Kilbride,  lying  in  the  Stewartry 
of  Strathern,  until  the  Earl  was  lawfully  infeft  in  the  fifteen  pound  lands 
of  Kilpont,  held  by  him  from  John,  Earl  of  Montrose,  when  he  was  to 
infeft  Lady  Margaret  therein,  and  that  being  done,  she  became  bound  to 
give  up  her  claim  to  the  earldom  of  Menteith.  To  implement  the  terms 
of  the  marriage-contract,  a  charter  was  granted  by  Earl  William  at  his 
residence  of  Illintuleich,  on  the  8th  of  December  the  same  year,  and 
thereafter  the  whole  party  concerned  in  the  making  of  the  charter  proceeded 
to  Leith,  where  it  was  confirmed  by  King  James  the  Sixth  on  the  12th  of 
the  same  month,  in  presence  of  the  witnesses  to  the  Earl's  charter.1 

Meanwhile  steps  had  been  taken  to  obtain  a  dispensation  from  the 
Crown,  so  that  the  young  Earl  might  at  once  enjoy  his  earldom  and  lands, 
and  this  was  granted  by  King  James  the  Sixth  (through  the  Eegent  Mar, 
who  subscribed  the  document)  at  Leith,  on  28th  October  1571.2  He  was 
accordingly,  on  the  20th  of  the  following  month,  infeft  in  the  earldom  of 
Menteith,  the  lands  of  Kilbride  and  mill  thereof,  the  two  and  a  half  nierk 
land  of  Wester  Boquhaple,  and  the  third  part  of  the  five  merk  land  of 
Drongy.3  Earl  William  was  also  infeft  in  the  lands  of  Kilpont  in  the 
year  1572.4 

After  the  death  of  his  uncle,  Eobert  Graham  of  Gartmore,  in  1572,  the 
Earl,  on  6th  November  1573,  obtained  a  service  to  him  as  heir  of  con- 
quest,6 and,  on  the  27th  of  the  same  month,  was  infeft  in  the  lands  of 
Gartmore.6  These  lands,  according  to  the  charter,  were  to  descend,  in  the 
event  of  the  death  of  Eobert  Graham  without  heirs,  to  his  brother  Gilbert 

1  Registrum  Magni  Sigilli.  i  Old  Inventory  in  Charter-chest  of  Duke 

-  Original  Dispensation  in  Charter-chest  of  of  Montrose.                 5  Original  at  Gartmore. 

Duke  of  Montrose.  °  Original   in   Charter-chest    of    Duke   of 

3  Original  Instrument  of  Sasine,  ibid.  Montrose. 


Graham  and  his  heirs.  Gilbert  may  have  predeceased  his  brother  Eobert, 
as  he  does  not  appear  to  have  laid  claim  to  the  lands,  and  his  son  William 
was  a  minor.  The  latter  was  served  heir  of  taillie  to  his  uncle  Eobert  in  the 
lands  of  Gartmore,  and  was  infeft  in  them  in  1577.1  By  a  renunciation  of 
one  Gilbert  Graham,  not  designed,  the  Earl  obtained  possession  in  1576  of 
the  lands  of  Gartrenich.2 

Earl  William  was  about  this  time  employed  by  King  James  the  Sixth,  on 
the  advice  of  the  Eegent  Morton,  to  apprehend  and  try  a  number  of  High- 
landers (whose  names  all  began  with  "  Mac  ")  for  theft  and  reset  of  theft,  and 
received  a  Commission  of  Justiciary  under  the  Great  Seal,  dated  at  Holy- 
rood,  2d  May  1574.3  After  this  he  is  thrice  mentioned  as  a  member  of  the 
Eegent  Morton's  Council,  in  February  and  August  1577/  and  once  in  April 
1578  after  the  assumption  by  King  James  of  the  regal  authority,5  having 
been  appointed  one  of  the  councillors  extraordinary,  who  were  only  summoned 
at  the  King's  pleasure.6 

In  this  Earl's  time  an  unhappy  feud  broke  out  between  the  vassals  of 
Menteith  and  those  of  Walter  Lecky  of  Lecky.  The  cause  from  which  it 
sprang  is  said  to  have  been  "  licht  and  slendir,"  yet  it  had  resulted  in  the 
slaughter  of  several  persons  on  both  sides.  The  matter  came  under  the  notice 
of  the  Privy  Council,  who  granted  time  for  an  amicable  arrangement,  but  the 
result  was  only  a  renewed  outbreak  of  hostilities  and  slaughter,  whereupon 
the  Council,  on  23d  May  1577,  caused  both  the  Earl  of  Menteith