King David's Ransom

During the Battle of Neville's Cross, when King David II of Scotland heeded France's request to attack England as part of their Auld Alliance, David realized things were going ill for him. Although the Scots had the greater numbers, and the belief was that the English army was fully engaged on the continent in the Hundred Years War, England had left its northern forces behind, precisely because Edward III didn't trust Scotland.

David had dismounted to fight, and his location on the battlefield had become unclear. He had taken two arrows to his face, and attempted to hide from the enemy. Contemporary accounts state that he hid under a bridge over the River Browney. A group of English soldiers near the bridge saw him reflected in the water of the river and moved to capture him. He fought back and knocked out two teeth of John de Coupland, who took him prisoner.

David was held prisoner from 1346 to 1357. First he was brought to Bamburgh Castle, where surgeons tried to remove the arrows. The tip of one could not be removed and was the cause of headaches for the rest of his life. (John Bradmore would have been useful here, but he was still a child. He was then taken to London and put in the Tower. When Edward III returned from France, David was transferred to Windsor Castle. Finally, David and his household were put in Odiham Castle (its ruins are pictured above). Captivity for a king was generally comfortable, but in 1355 he was forbidden any contact with his family, which may have accelerated negotiations for his ransom (Edward was always looking for more money for his wars).

On 3 October 1357, a treaty was signed that gave 10,000 marks each year for ten years as ransom. He returned to Scotland with an English mistress, Katherine Mortimer. (David had married Edward III's sister, Joan of the Tower, in 1328 when she was seven and he was four. They had no children. She died in 1362.) Mortimer was killed in 1360 by men hired by the Earl of Angus. David had another mistress, Margaret Drummond, whom he married in 1364. (Then he took another mistress, Agnes Dunbar.)

This ransom plan worked for a few years, but the Scottish nobles could not raise 10,000 marks in 1363, and David went to London to try to re-negotiate a settlement. He offered to leave Scotland to Edward or one of his many sons in David's will. In 1364 Scotland's Parliament rejected a proposal for Edward's son Lionel of Antwerp to become the next king. David kept talking to Edward, prolonging the consequences of non-payment (which would mean going back into captivity).

David died on 22 February 1371, aged 46. He was buried quickly in the nearest likely place, in Holyrood Abbey. He wished to be buried near his parents in Dunfermline, but his successor, Robert II, wanted to "conclude" David's reign as quickly as possible to begin his own.

Now, the transition above between paragraphs two and three was hardly a transition at all: it would appear that from his capture to his captivity just "happened" in a flash. It wasn't that easy, and John de Coupland almost got in trouble for it. When the dust settled, however, de Coupland made out extremely well. I'll explain his almost fall but steady rise tomorrow.

The Battle of Neville's Cross

Scotland's relationship with England has always been an issue on the island of Great Britain. They were "friendly enemies," since England would have loved to possess the entirety of the island. Sometimes it pursued this aim through warfare, sometimes through supporting or installing a king of Scotland that would be loyal to England's king. For its part, Scotland sometimes could not help but invade southward to gain real estate and resources, or simply go to war against England to assert its independence.

To that end, there were over the years what are called the wars of Scottish Independence. They were successful in that Scotland managed to maintain its independence from England. During the Second War of Scottish Independence, which took place between the years 1332 and 1357, one of the battles was fought at Neville's Cross, right next to Durham England.

The catalyst for this particular battle was not any particular incident of aggression between the countries. Scotland had made a treaty with France in 1295 called "the Auld Alliance" against their common antagonist, England. France was fighting England in the Hundred Years War, and called on Scotland to help based on the treaty. England was currently invading France, and Scotland's attack could either weaken England for a later counter-invasion by France or cause England to pull troops away from France.

As it turns out, it did neither. Scotland's army of 10-12,000 was led by King David II. They were met by Ralph, Lord Neville with about 6-7000 men. The Scots were soundly defeated and David captured. His ransoming effort also created a truce between the two countries that lasted four decades.

How did the superior numbers lose the battle? France convinced the Scots that they would have an easy time of it with the English army on the continent, but the English had plenty of soldiers at home who were more experienced. The Scottish army had a few noblemen on horseback, but the majority were on foot and had swords and daggers and shields. They had a few archers. The English had more archers with longbows and rained arrows on the Scots until the fighting got closer, and more plate armor.

Before being stopped at Neville's Cross (so-called because of an Anglo-Saxon stone cross at the location), the Scots did do damage to the countryside. They destroyed a castle called the Peel of Liddell and plundered the Great Priory of Hexham. They would have sacked Carlisle, but the city offered them money to leave them alone.

During the battle, King David had dismounted to fight on foot. At one point he decided to hide. I want to talk about his discovery, capture, and ransom next. See you tomorrow.

The Davidian Revolution

When David I became King of Scotland, little did the world know that the previous three decades of short reigns and rebellions would be replaced by three decades of reform and growth.

David was the youngest son of Malcolm III and Margaret of Wessex, and since his father's death in 1093 had seen an uncle and several brothers take their turns on the throne. David was not expected to have his turn, but was given part of Scotland to manage, which gave him the title Prince of the Cumbrians (overseeing the former Kingdom of Strathclyde) starting in 1113.

This was promoted by the king of England, Henry I, who cultivated David's friendship. Henry also, in 1113, arranged for David his marriage to Matilda of Huntingdon (and why not? Henry was married to David's sister, also called Matilda). This brought to David the "Honour of Huntingdon" which was a large area in northern England. This helped David increase his wealth and power even before achieving the throne.

When David became king in 124, he set about transforming Scotland into a country that more closely resembled the rest of Europe in its civil and political structure. He was able to do this partly by bringing in Norman support. He built castles and set up a feudal system of smaller and larger lordships. He established sheriffs to carry out administrative duties on behalf of the king. He also created two justiciars to preside over law cases, one each for above and below the river Forth.

He was able to mine silver at Alston to create Scotland's first silver coinage and further increase his power. One of the side-effects of minting coins with the king's image and seal is that those who come in contact with them are constantly reminded of the source of wealth and power, reinforcing loyalty to the king who has them.

Scotland until this time did not have organized towns or burghs as the rest of Europe and England knew them. Roxburgh and Berwick were created while he was prince of the Cumbrians, with definite boundaries, charters, and trading rights. Once he became king, he made more burghs at Stirling, Dunfermline and Edinburgh. More were to follow.

Religious reform was another of his goals, begun by his mother. David became one of Scotland's great monastic patrons, founding various abbeys. He increased the number of bishops in Scotland (from four to nine, according to Aelred of Rievaulx), but it is more likely that this expansion was brought about by of Thurstan, Archbishop of York, with Fergus of Galloway.

The reign was not entirely easy for him. He took sides in the period in England called The Anarchy, and lost the Battle of the Standard when he invaded England to support Empress Matilda. By and large, though, he is remembered for the "Europeanization" of Scotland.

One of the well-known abbeys he founded was Holyrood, which has an interesting legend about it. I'll share that tomorrow.

Alexander I

The fifth son of Malcolm III and Margaret of Wessex, Alexander got to be king of Scotland after Malcolm's death only after his uncle and his half-brother and his uncle (again) and his brother had their chance.

When Edgar died in 1107, he wanted Alexander to succeed him. He also wanted their younger brother, David, to have something of his own, so David was given an appanage. An appanage (from Latin adpanare, literally "to give bread") was traditionally a grant of land for a younger son who normally would not be in the line of succession because of primogeniture. David was given an appanage in southern Scotland, the former kingdom of Strathclyde. This was supported by Henry I of England, the boys' brother-in-law through marriage to their sister Edith, now called Matilda.

Another matrimonial link between the two countries took place when Alexander married Sybilla of Normandy. She was the first child of Henry I with his mistress, Lady Sybilla Corbet. We don't know when they married, but Sybilla was born c.1092, and they were married by 1114 when she was 22. In 1114 Alexander joined Henry on campaign in Wales against Gruffudd ap Cynan of Gwynedd.

Alexander and Sybilla seemed to be a devoted couple, but childless. She died in 1122 while at the village of Kenmore, and Alexander planned an Augustinian Priory at the location. He did not remarry.

Alexander later gained the nickname "the Fierce" because of his short temper with his subjects, but that temper supposedly was never aimed at clergy. He was considered very pious, like his wife. He was the senior lay person in 1104 when the remains of St. Cuthbert were examined before their re-interment, when Ralph d'Escures declared that the saint's body was uncorrupted. He founded religious institutions at Scone and Inchcolm, and had towers built at Dunfermline Abbey where his mother was buried.

His fierceness was earned when he was attacked by men from Moray, where the family of Macbeth ruled who had been his family's enemy not too long before. He pushed them and soundly defeated them.

Alexander died in April 1124, leaving the kingdom to David, who ruled for nearly 30 years and made so many changes that scholars refer to the Davidian Revolution. I'll explain just what changes he made next time.

The Repeat King

So when Malcolm III of Scotland died, his brother swept in and became King Donald III before Malcolm's sons could succeed their father. The sons fled to England for safety, reckoning they had no chance. There was one son of Malcolm who thought differently, however, and he was not a son this blog has recently covered.

Prior to his marriage to Margaret of Wessex, Malcolm had another wife, the Norwegian Ingibiorg Finnsdottir. Details are sketchy about this marriage, but they had at least one son, Duncan. In the initial clashes between Scotland and Duke William of Normandy, Duncan was offered as a hostage. Duncan was therefore being raised in Normandy. When William died in 1087, his son Robert Curthose released Duncan and knighted him. Duncan chose to go to England serve Robert's brother, William Rufus. Clearly, Malcolm had "written off" his eldest son by his first marriage, since he had declared his eldest by Margaret his heir.

Back in Scotland, Donald was having trouble: not everyone welcomed his return and rule. Duncan bagged negotiating with some of the landowners and local barons, making promises of land and titles. William Rufus gave him Norman military support. Within a year of Donald taking the throne, Duncan arrived at the head of an army in the summer of 1094. Donald was defeated, retreating to the Scottish Highlands.

Duncan was crowned king at Scone, but only controlled the southern part. The locals did not appreciate someone they saw as essentially an English vassal, or the presence of the Normans with him. This created discontent. He decided to send his foreign allies back to England, which created its own problems. Duncan had trouble with raids by rebels, and was forced to negotiate with them rather than defeat them.

Meanwhile, Donald was gathering his forces. After only a few months of rule, Duncan was attacked by Donald's army and killed in an ambush on 12 November.

Donald was, once again, King of Scotland, less than a year after being ousted. He chose his nephew, Malcolm's son Edmund, who had supported him after Malcolm's death, as his heir and co-ruler. This did not sit well with Edmund's siblings, as we shall see.

Donald III of Scotland

When Malcolm III died at the 2nd Battle of Alnwick, his eldest son died with him (and his wife died a few days later after hearing the news), but he had other sons who could succeed him. That did not happen, however, as another man swept in and seized the throne.

This other man was actually Malcolm's brother, Donald. Donald's activities for years prior to claiming the throne is unknown, because he was hiding in Ireland. Donald's father was Duncan, King of Scotland from 1034 to 1040 when he was killed (and succeeded by) Macbeth; yes, that Macbeth. Shakespeare has the boys old enough to manage this themselves:

Malcolm: “What will you do? Let’s not consort with them: To show an unfelt sorrow is an office which the false man does easy. I’ll to England.”

Donalbain:* “To Ireland, I; our separated fortune shall keep us both the safer: where we are, there’s daggers in men’s smiles: the near in blood, the nearer bloody.” [Macbeth, III,3]

Both the boys were very young in reality (Donald about seven). It is more likely that Duncan, when he was about to face Macbeth's rebellion, sent his sons away for safety himself.

Donald would have been 25 years old when Malcolm killed Macbeth and took the throne back into the family. Even with the family back in charge, we do not know exactly what Donald was doing or if he returned to Scotland. After the 1093 Battle of Alnwick and the death of the king and queen and immediate heir, he was able to come forward and present himself as the obvious choice for kingship.

This may not have been as radical a "coup" for Scotland as we might think. Although Malcolm and Margaret had a very successful marriage, Margaret may not have been the favorite of Scotland. She worked to change the Scottish church to bring its practices closer to what she grew up with on the continent. She was one of the last Anglo-Saxon princesses, and gave refuge at court to Anglo-Saxon exiles fleeing the Normans who had taken over England. She also broke tradition and gave Anglo-Saxon names to her children, rather than Scottish names.

John of Fordun (1360 - 1384, so not a contemporary) wrote that Donald came to Scotland "at the head of a numerous band" and besieged Edinburgh with Malcolm's sons inside. He adds that Edgar Ætheling (Malcolm's brother-in-law) took the sons to England. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says that Donald expelled all the English from his court.

So Donald was King of Scotland. It's a nice job...if you can keep it. Let's see how well he did at that. See you tomorrow.

*Donalbain = "Donald the Fair"

Saint Margaret of Scotland

Margaret of Wessex was almost 50 years old in 1093 when her husband, King Malcolm III of Scotland, and her eldest son went to war against the English at the Battle of Alnwick, where they were killed on 13 November. Tradition says that her son Ethelred, the lay abbot of Dunkeld, was with her when her son Edgar brought the news.

Margaret died three days later; no one assumes the cause was anything other than grief.

Her close friend, advisor, and biographer, Turgot of Durham, left us with a record of extreme piety. She worked on church reform, trying to bring the practices of the Scottish church closer to those of the continent (where she spent her childhood) and Rome. She performed charitable works, even washing the feet of the poor. She rose each midnight to attend Mass. She brought the Benedictines to establish a monastery at Dunfermline, and paid to establish ferries across the Firth of Forth to allow pilgrims to reach Saint Andrew's in Fife.

Her husband, whom the records call illiterate (but those may have been motivated by political enemies) admired her learning and had her books decorated in gold and silver. A pocket Gospel of hers is in the Bodleian.

Margaret was buried before the high altar at Dunfermline Abbey. Her husband's body had been interred in Tynemouth Priory, but was brought to Dunfermline for reburial near his wife during the reign of their son Alexander (1107 - 1124). That was not, however, the end of their love story.

Pope Innocent IV canonized Margaret in 1250 in recognition of her good works and personal piety. As a result, her body was disinterred at Dunfermline and the remains immediately placed into a reliquary appropriate for a saint of the Catholic Church. When they tried to carry the reliquary to its new location (a new shrine at Dunfermline), however, the path went past the location of Malcolm's remains. Those transporting the reliquary claimed it suddenly became too heavy to move. Interpreting this as a desire for Margaret to remain near her husband, Malcolm's body was likewise disinterred and placed near hers.

That was not the end of her body's travels. Mary Queen of Scots had Margaret's head exhumed and brought to Edinburgh as a "good luck charm" to assist in childbirth (N.B.: her son James was not born until 1566). In 1597 the head went to the Jesuits at the Scots College in France, but it was lost during the French revolution. The rest of her (and Malcolm) was transferred to Madrid by Philip II of Spain, but the location of their remains has been lost.

Malcolm and Margaret had several sons, any one of which could have assumed the throne in 1093 after Malcolm and his eldest, Edward, died. That was not to be the case, however. Malcolm's successor was Donald III, who swept in and laid siege to Edinburgh and Malcolm's family. Where did he come from? Let's look into that next time.

Malcolm and English Royals

King Malcolm III of Scotland (c.1031 - 1093) was alternately supporting and attacking English royalty. The tradition that his father had sent him to the court of Edward the Confessor in his youth suggested there would be strong ties to Scotland's neighbor to the south. The later Scottish historian John Fordun assumed that Malcolm spent Macbeth's seventeen-year-reign with Edward.

Orderic Vitalis wrote that Malcolm was betrothed to Margaret of Wessex, the daughter of Edward the Exile. (That's Margaret in the illustration, reading the Bible to Malcolm. She was later declared a saint.) When they married in 1070, this made Malcolm the brother-in-law of Edgar Ætheling, one of the potential heirs to the throne of England in 1066 after Edward the Confessor's death. This was the context for Malcolm supporting Edgar with troops in Edgar's attempts to capture the throne from the more successful claimant, William II of Normandy.

You can see here and here how Edgar relied on Malcolm for support and simply as a place of refuge when things got bad. Malcolm's good relationships were with English royals, not the Normans who invaded in 1066. His aid to Edgar helped prompt William to engage in the Harrying of the North, a series of military campaigns by the new king of England to devastate much of the north of England to punish for past and deter future attempts to coalesce around Edgar Ætheling and use him to replace William.

Malcolm and William finally met in 1072 and negotiated a treaty. Malcolm pledged his loyalty to William, which meant little: Malcolm continued raiding in Northumbria until Williams sent his son Robert Curthose in 1080 at the head of an army. This time Malcolm kept the peace to which he had agreed.

In 1091, when Robert Curthose started rebelling against his brother William Rufus (who had inherited after William's death), Malcolm did not take sides. He did, however, take advantage of their fighting to go south and besiege Newcastle and the castle built by Curthose. This was a step to pushing Scotland's boundary further south. An approaching English army led by Rufus motivated Malcolm to retreat north.

His final dealing with royalty came when he marched south with his son to discuss the return of lands given to Malcolm by William II. Rufus refused, saying that the matter would be settled by the English barons. Malcolm rejected this idea and returned to Scotland, gathering an army and ravaging Northumbria more harshly than ever before. On 13 November 1093, he was ambushed by the Earl of Northumbria, Robert de Mowbray, and killed.

His interment includes a story that needs to start with his wife, Margaret. Tomorrow I'll tell you about the queen who became a saint.

Malcolm III of Scotland

Almost exactly a decade ago I posted "The Real Macbeth" about how he killed Duncan I of Scotland. Well, let's talk about Duncan's son, who has been mentioned many times in the past several posts because of his links to English royals.

Malcolm's mother is a mystery. John of Fordun, a Scottish chronicler from a few centuries after Malcolm, says she was a blood relative of Earl Siward, Earl of Northumbria, but this was probably a late attempt to tie Scottish royalty closer to possessions in England (but see below). An even later story suggests she was the daughter of a commoner and Malcolm was born out of wedlock.

Where was Malcolm when Duncan was killed by Macbeth? Malcolm was only about nine years old, but chieftains could have supported him. Tradition says that Duncan had sent his sons (besides Malcolm there was Donald and Máel Muire*) away for their safety; Fordun says Malcolm was sent to England to the court of Edward the Confessor.

Fordun writes that in 1054, Earl Siward of Northumbria invaded Scotland with the intent to install one Máel Coluim, son of the king of the Cumbrians, on the throne of Scotland. This Máel Coluim was identified as Malcolm III Canmore. William of Malmesbury agrees with this event, and says that Macbeth was killed by Siward. The problem with this is that Siward died two years before Macbeth. More recent scholars believe that Siward's Máel Coluim was a later Malcolm.

Other chroniclers of the time state that Macbeth was killed by Malcolm on 15 August 1057, but Macbeth was succeeded by his son Lulach (actually his step-son, born to his wife Gruoch—yes, "Lady Macbeth" did have her own name—from her first marriage), who was crowned in September. Lulach (whose nickname was Tairbith "The Unfortunate") was then killed by Malcolm in April 1058, who then became king shortly after.

It was common for Gaelic rulers to start their reigns with a show of strength by mounting an invasion somewhere. Malcolm's supposed close connection with England did not stop him from plundering Lindisfarne in 1061. This was far enough from the seat of English monarchy that it probably did not draw much attention. The local alderman of Northumbria at the time was Tostig Godwinson, but not only was he away on pilgrimage to Rome for recent offenses, but also he didn't care much for his people anyway.

Malcolm actually offered Tostig asylum at a time when Tostig needed a safe place. That, and other ties to English royalty, will be the subject for tomorrow.

*not this Máel Muire, however.

Edgar Ætheling, Part 2

For Edgar Ætheling, landing in Scotland in 1068—whether by accident or design—was fortuitous. King Malcolm III took a liking to Edgar's sister Margaret, who was probably in her early 20s. They married in 1070 (see illustration), and had several children, including kings of Scotland David I and Alexander I.

Edgar's new brother-in-law supported Edgar's claim to the throne of England. Edgar's and Malcolm's plans caused the north of England—what is now Yorkshire, Durham, Northumberland, Lancashire—to start a series of local rebellions against Norman rule. This led to the Harrying of the North, William the Conqueror's campaign to subdue the northern territories and stop Edgar's plans. The Harrying was vicious, using scorched earth tactics to starve out the rebels and replacing all English aristocracy with Normans.

Edgar had returned to England to become the focal point for the rebellions, but retreated to Scotland when things got bad. Later that year, King Sweyn of Denmark arrived in the north, triggering a fresh set of uprisings. Edgar, the Northumbrians, and the Danes combined to take York from Norman control. William arrived later, bought off the Danes (they were still susceptible to Danegeld), and caused Edgar and his other followers to, once again, retreat to Scotland.

In 1072, William invaded Scotland, forcing Malcolm to recognize William's overlordship. Part of the agreement was the expulsion of Edgar, who went to Flanders where Robert the Frisian was hostile to Normandy. Edgar returned to Scotland in 1074, but then received an offer from Philip I, King of France. Philip offered him a castle near the Norman border from which he could hassle Normandy. Embarking for France, a storm wrecked his fleet along the English coast, whereupon Normans hunted him down. He fled back to Scotland on foot, after which Malcolm convinced him to give up his dreams of a throne and submit to William.

Edgar tried that route, but felt he deserved better treatment because of his status. The Domesday Book in 1086 lists two estates in Hertfordshire belonging to Edgar, although by that time he was no longer living in England. Dissatisfied, he had gone to Italy to settle in Apulia, which was occupied by Normans. A few years later, however, he returned to England.

After William's death in 1087, Edgar's fortunes seemed to rise a little with William's sons, who clearly had no concerns that this older man was going to try to take their throne. Instead, they involved him in their reigns.

For the happy remainder of Edgar's complicated life, tune in tomorrow.

The Fight for Scotland Concludes

(See Parts One and Two)

After rejecting the claims of others, The Great Cause concluded that John Balliol was the most appropriate choice for King of Scotland. Primogeniture was in his favor: he was the descendant of the eldest surviving child of Margaret of Huntingdon, the eldest daughter of David, Earl of Huntingdon, son of Henry, son of King David I. David had begun the tradition (familiar in England) of dynastic inheritance. Balliol supported the idea that Scotland was an indivisible kingdom and should not be split up, an approach the assembled nobles of Scotland preferred.

On 17 November 1292, Edward I of England announced the choice of Balliol, who was acceptable to the majority of nobles as well as John II Comyn, the most powerful baron and Balliol's brother-in-law. Even some of the supporters of Robert Bruce agreed to the decision.

At this point in his life, John Balliol was in his early-to-mid 40s. His father, John, 5th Baron of Balliol, had founded Balliol College in Oxford. He owned extensive estates in Galloway from his mother's side and English estates from the Huntingdon side, as well as properties in France.

His coronation did not put Scotland's rule back on an even keel. Edward's help was also seen as interference, and Edward continued to undermine Balliol's authority. He demanded homage; he insisted on authority over any legal disputes between Scottish and English subjects. Scots lost faith in King John, and gave him the nickname Toom Tabard ("empty coat"). To be fair, the nickname might not have referred to him lacking in authority, but might have been because the Balliol arms were a fairly simple escutcheon. (The illustration from 1562 shows the Balliol arms, but also mocks his situation with a broken scepter.)

Balliol might have thought making a treaty with France was a good idea and showed initiative and independence, but that did not sit well with Edward. Edward invaded Scotland in the first move of a trend that lasted into the early 14th century and has been named the Wars of Scottish Independence. Balliol abdicated in July 1296 after some bad military defeats. He was taken to the Tower of London, but in 1299 was allowed to go to France. He died at a family estate in Hélicourt, succeeded by a son, Edward, who later had some small successes at trying to claim the throne. John Balliol was succeeded as King of Scotland by Robert the Bruce, grandson of the Robert Bruce whose claim was rejected in favor of Balliol's.

Tomorrow let's look away from the mess in Scotland and head south to Oxford and Balliol College.

The Fight for Scotland Continues

(Part One) So the 13 claimants for the throne of Scotland came down to the four most likely candidates.

The An t-Adhbhar Mòr (Scottish Gaelic, "The Great Cause"), a group of 104 men plus King Edward I of England, would hear all the claimants and determine who should ascend to the throne. This was modeled on the centumviri (Latin "hundred men"), the court of 105 used in Roman Law to settle questions of succession to property. They included 24 of Edward's council.

One of the points that needed to be decided by the Great Cause was the primacy of primogeniture (of which there were different interpretations) or customary law. Primogeniture could be male-preference or any first-born child. "Customary law" would split the parent's possessions among the children. The four chief claimants, who hired lawyers to speak on their behalf, were as follows:

• John Balliol, Lord of Galloway
• Robert Bruce, 5th Lord of Annandale
• John Hastings, 1st Baron Hastings
• Floris V, Count of Holland

Floris V's great-great-grandmother was Ada, a daughter of Henry, Earl of Huntingdon, who was son of King David I of Scotland. Floris claimed that when William the Lion was king, William's brother David had abandoned his right to the throne of Scotland by accepting the title of Earl of Huntingdon. This would invalidate the claims of the three other men listed above, who were all descended from Earl David. The problem was he had no proof, and assured the investigators that there must be records of this in Scotland itself if they would only search. At the orders of Edward I of England, they did search, and found nothing after several months to support his claim. Floris abandoned his claim in summer of 1292.

John Hastings was also descended from Ada, daughter of David, Earl of Huntingdon. He was an Englishman with a distinguished pedigree who in 1290 was summoned to Parliament and made a peer as Lord Hastings. His genealogical claim wasn't strong, so he took a legal approach. He argued that Scotland was not a proper kingdom, since it was only recently that its rulers were crowned and anointed. Therefore, there was no need to hand an intact kingdom over to a single person, and customary law allowed it to be split up among the heirs. The Great Cause did not take much deliberation to reject this idea and dismiss Hastings' claim.

Robert Bruce was the closest in blood to the now-defunct dynasty that started with David I. His lawyers also claimed that Alexander III (whose death started this whole difficulty) had named Bruce as his heir at a time when there seemed to be no other option. It's also worth pointing out that Bruce (as well as Balliol) had jumped at the chance to make a claim as soon as news of Margaret's death was known. Bruce argued against Floris's claim that the kingdom could be split, declaring that Scotland was indivisible and primogeniture should apply. Unfortunately for that claim, John of Balliol was descended from a child (Margaret) of David of Huntingdon who was older than the child (Isobel) from whom Bruce was descended. King Edward ruled that primogeniture through eldest surviving child pertained, and Bruce was dismissed. (Note: Edward had already established that England would be inherited by his eldest, a daughter, if he had no sons; absolute primogeniture, which means the sex of the child doesn't matter, was on his mind.)

Edward's determination of Bruce's claim happened in November 1292. Then there was a "November Surprise": Floris re-asserted his claim, and Bruce showed up to offer his public support of Floris! Floris decided to argue that the documents that would support him must have been stolen and his case should be reconsidered. As for Bruce, he did a 180° turn on the indivisibility of the kingdom. It seemed that he and Floris had probably made a deal: if Floris won, Bruce would be given a chunk of Scotland. Floris' claim was thrown out again for lack of evidence.

You can probably guess who became the next King of Scotland, and we will definitely present that case tomorrow, but today I leave you with an interesting footnote that explains the illustration.

The illustration above is of Pluscarden Abbey, currently a Catholic Benedictine monastery near Elgin, Moray. It was founded by Alexander II for the now-defunct Valliscaulian Order, which was absorbed by the Cistercians in the 18th century. In The Hague, Netherlands, there is a "certified" copy of a document that claims exactly what Floris claimed, signed and dated 1291 by the Bishop of Moray. It was supposedly found at Pluscarden Abbey. It is, of course, considered a forgery by all (I assume; there may be descendants of Floris V who have other thoughts).

See you soon.

The Fight for Scotland Begins

After the death of Alexander III of Scotland and his granddaughter, Margaret, the problem of who would rule Scotland rose again in September of 1290. Thirteen claimants came forward, including a half-hearted attempt by Margaret's father, Eric II of Norway.

Of the claimants, all but one were linked to King David I of Scotland—even Edward I was descended from David's sister, Matilda—mostly through David's son Henry, the Earl of Huntingdon. 

Many of the claimants were related by "natural birth"; that is, they were from extramarital affairs by Henry of Huntingdon or by David's son William the Lion. Two of the claimants took action immediately after hearing the news of Margaret's death. John Balliol forged an alliance with Edward's representative in England, Bishop of Durham Antony Bek. Robert Bruce went to Scone with an army, looking to demand the throne from the Guardians of Scotland, who had assembled there to greet Margaret on her arrival.

The Guardians of Scotland, a group of six regents who managed the kingdom after the death of Alexander, appealed to Edward I of England for his assistance and support. Edward offered to help, but used the opportunity to gain something for himself: declaring Scotland's king as a vassal of England's king, and Scotland no longer an independent kingdom. Rather than offer evidence from the past that he was the feudal overlord of Scotland, he asked the Guardians to provide evidence that he was not. The Guardians replied that (being kingless) they had no one with the authority to agree with his claim.

Edward was not happy with this reply, but since they still needed his help, he was able to get the Guardians to agree to some lesser claims. They would agree that Edward was their rightful overlord, but not that this applied to the whole country. Edward also took control of the principal royal castles in this interim, with the understanding that everything would be returned to a king, once Scotland had one.

They instituted what was called An t-Adhbhar Mòr (Scottish Gaelic, "The Great Cause"), a group of 104 men who, with Edward, would review all the claimants and choose the next king.

The strongest claims were from four men:

• John Balliol, Lord of Galloway
• Robert Bruce, 5th Lord of Annandale
• John Hastings, 1st Baron Hastings
• Floris V, Count of Holland

Tomorrow we will look over these four claimants, and announce a winner.

Alexander's Fatal Marriage

After the death of his first wife, Margaret of England, Alexander III did not marry again for a decade. There was no "need," since he had three children by Margaret, any of whom could inherit the throne. Margaret (born 1261) was married to King Eric II of Norway. Alexander (born 1264) was heir, and David (born 1272) was only three at the time of his mother's death, but was next in line. (Alexander himself had come to the throne in his minority, and a regency council managed things until he was 21.)

Fate had other plans for the children of Alexander and Margaret, however. David died young, in 1281. Margaret died giving birth to her only child, also named Margaret, in 1283 (she was only 22). Then Prince Alexander died in January 1284, a week after he turned 20, leaving a widow and no offspring.

Alexander senior had to act. Now in his 40s, a direct heir would mean marrying again and impregnating a wife, and quickly. In the meantime, he persuaded the Parliament of Scotland to recognize Margaret, his granddaughter in Norway, as his heir. This was in 1284. On 1 November 1285, he contracted marriage with Yolanda de Dreux, the 22-year-old daughter of the Count of Dreux (near the boundary between Normandy and the Île-de-France).

Alexander was far from celibate for the decade between becoming a widower and getting engaged to Yolanda. The Lanercost Chronicle (an online translation is available), produced at the Augustinian Lanercost Priory, covers the years 1201 to 1346 in Northern England and Scotland. Of Alexander's decade as a widower it says:

...he used never to forbear on account of season nor storm, nor for perils of flood or rocky cliffs, but would visit none too creditably nuns or matrons, virgins or widows as the fancy seized him, sometimes in disguise.

Satisfying his carnal desires despite dangerous weather was his undoing, since it seems from the above statement that the next (and last) anecdote of his life was likely the reason for what transpired (or he just wanted to surprise her). On 19 March 1286, the queen was at Kinghorn in Fife. The king was at Edinburgh with his royal advisors. The next day was the queen's birthday. Alexander decided to ride to Kinghorn, a distance of at least 30 miles with the need to cross the Firth of Forth. The March weather was bad, and his advisors tried to dissuade him, but he was determined. He crossed the Forth, and arrived at Inverkeithing. It was dark and stormy, and he insisted on not stopping despite the late hour but continuing the last 10 or so miles. Supposedly one of the burghers in town said:

"My lord, what are you doing out in such weather and darkness? How many times have I tried to persuade you that midnight traveling will do you no good?"

Alexander wouldn't listen, but set off into the dark with a small retinue. At some point he was separated from the retinue. The next morning, near Kinghorn, he was found with a broken neck. The likeliest assumption was that his horse lost its footing in the dark, he was thrown, and therefore never made it to Yolande.

...and that is how a three-year-old Norwegian girl became the Queen of Scotland. Let me tell you about her tomorrow.

Alexander III

Alexander III of Scotland (4 September 1241 - 19 March 1286) wanted to finally bring all of Scotland and surrounding islands into one unified country, following the dreams of his forebears. This would not happen right away, since he was only seven years old when his father, Alexander II, died and the son was crowned (the illustration is of the coronation from a much later medieval work). His marriage in Christmas Day 1251 to Margaret of England, daughter of King Henry III (she was 11), reinforced relations between Scotland and England. This gave him an ally if he needed military support in his quest.

He announced his intention when he turned 21 and assumed his rights from the regency council. Alexander sent an embassy to Norway and King Haakon IV, who rejected the Scottish claim and planned a military expedition to the islands, anticipating trouble and wanting to set up negotiations. Trouble there was, because Scottish nobles started raiding the Hebrides. In 1263, Haakon and a fleet of 120 ships—a pretty common "negotiating tactic" for Haakon—arrived in the Hebrides in August and met Alexander's forces, settling down to negotiate.

Alexander kept the talks going deliberately to reach a time on the calendar when the weather would make the sea more dangerous. An impatient Haakon attacked in October at the Battle of Largs, but a storm damaged several of his ships and the battle was indecisive. Haakon died not long after, however, and Alexander was able to assert control over the Hebrides. They were formally traded to Scotland by Haakon's successor, Magnus VI, for money in 1266 with the Treaty of Perth.

Alexander's marriage to Margaret is an interesting story. They were too young at the start to consummate the marriage, and Margaret's time in Scotland as a pre-teen was not pleasant. The marriage got better for them, however, until Margaret's death. Alexander re-married, and this second marriage was the death of him. I'll explain tomorrow.

Alexander and Unification of Scotland

King Alexander II of Scotland had a problem: there were strings of islands off his northern and western coasts that he'd like to think of as part of Scotland, but they were controlled by others. The Norse controlled the Shetlands and Orkneys, as well as the Isle of Mann and the Hebrides.

Alexander got caught up in English politics early on, but in the north there was trouble. Adam, the abbot of Melrose and bishop of Caithness, was killed by burning because of a tax of butter he imposed on locals. The Norse ruler, the jarl ("earl") of Orkney, Jon Haraldsson, had supposedly uttered the words "The devil take the bishop and his butter; you may roast him if you please!" Adam was burned at his home on 11 September 1222.

Although Caithness was on the mainland, it was part of the Kingdom of Norway. When word got out of the death and Haraldsson's comment, the blame was put on the jarl. Alexander took an army north, intending to use the death of a mainland subject to assert control over this mainland part of the Orkney kingdom. He hanged most of the farmers and mutilated the rest. Haraldsson swore oaths to his innocence, so Alexander did not pursue further vengeance—but he kept the mainland.

Alexander also brought Argyll (including the Inner Hebrides) under his rule, and ended a revolt in Galloway in 1235. He tried to bring the Isle of Mann and Outer Hebrides into the fold, but he died while planning a military venture there.

That would wait until success by his son, Alexander III. This was not a son by his first wife, King John's daughter, Joan of England. Joan died in 1238, while she was only 27, having not produced an heir. Alexander then married Marie de Coucy (incidentally angering Henry III, because it created a Scottish-French alliance). When their son, Alexander III, turned 21, he pledged to fulfill his father's wish of bringing the western isles into Scotland proper.

How that turned out is a story for tomorrow.

Alexander II of Scotland

Alexander II came to the throne of Scotland at the age of 16 with two missions in mind: ensure Scotland's unity by subduing attempts by its various areas to restore their independence, and to restore Scotland's own independence from England.

He was born on 24 August 1198 to William I and Ermengarde de Beaumont, inheriting his father's red hair and ambition. The first trouble came one month after his coronation in December 1214, when the MacWilliams and MacHeath clans revolted. The MacWilliams were descended from Duncan I, and had been excluded from succession by David I, who adopted the English tradition of primogeniture. Their attempt to take the crown back was quickly put down by loyalists.

Alexander had been knighted a year earlier by King John; the Treaty of Falaise required that he spend time in his youth being educated at the English court. He and his status were known to the English barons; when they rebelled against John in 1215, Alexander joined them. John retaliated by sacking Berwick-on-Tweed in Northumberland, where the king had a mint. When the Magna Carta was drawn up for John to sign, reducing his power and granting more autonomy to the barons, Clause 59 was added for Scotland:

We will deal with Alexander, king of Scots, concerning the return of his sisters and hostages, and his liberties and right, in the same manner in which we deal with our other barons of England, unless it should be otherwise under the charters which we have from his father William, former king of Scots. And this will be by judgment of his peers in our court.

John later rejected the document he had been forced to sign, and took his army north to punish Scotland and “hunt the red fox-cub from his lairs”; he had to return south quickly, however, when he learned that the barons had invited French King Louis VIII to accept their homage and take John's place. (They gave up on Louis when John died and the child Henry III became king with a regency council.)

With Henry's regency supporting Magna Carta, Alexander could turn his attention from his relationship with England to his relations with his own neighbors, who until recently were independent until William I subdued them. Alexander also had parts of "his" realm ruled by the Norse and Norway. How he dealt with them is a story for tomorrow.

William Versus England

Although William I of Scotland fell out of favor with King Henry II of England, Henry did restore all the castles he had occupied when William sided with Henry's sons in open rebellion. He also provided William a bride, Ermengarde de Beaumont. William never regained good relations with England, however, and never stopped trying to gain Northumbria for himself.

He made a non-hostile attempt to gain Northumbria in 1194, when Henry's son Richard Lionheart was king. He offered £9,750 to buy it, which was tempting for Richard. Richard did not care so much for England as he did for two other things: his territory on the continent, and fighting; the money would finance the Third Crusade. William wanted possession of the castles in Northumbria as well, and Richard was not going to give away a potential defensive need.

William focused on uniting Scotland, bringing the formerly independent Galloway under his control, stopping insurrections in Moray and Inverness, and bringing Caithness and Sutherland into line with his rule. William's own banner, which showed a red lion (long after his death he was called "William the Lion") became the Royal Banner of Scotland.

As he aged, however, England in the form of Richard's younger brother, John, thought it a good time to increase control over Scotland. He took an army north, but was bought off with sums of money from William, as well as a promise that William's daughters would marry English nobles. This would give the offspring of those marriages a greater English presence in Scotland. William's son and heir, Alexander, was betrothed to John's daughter Joan. It is believed that Ermengarde managed these negotiations on behalf of her aging husband.

In his lifetime, William managed to not only unite parts of Scotland; he built new settlements, clarified criminal law, and expanded the duties of justices and sheriffs along English lines, a reform movement started by his grandfather, David I. Despite his futile attempts to expand his borders southward, he managed to strengthen Scotland, leaving behind a stronger and more unified country.

He died in 1214 at the age of 72 and was buried in Arbroath Abbey, which he founded in 1178. He was succeeded by his son, Alexander II, who learned nothing from his father's travails about trying to get along with England. But let's save that story for next time.

Ermengarde de Beaumont

Henry II of England had such a hold over William I of Scotland (after William joined in the rebellion of Henry's sons against their father) that he put his knights in control of several Scottish castles, forced William to pay him £26,000, and even chose William's bride. This was all done by the Treaty of Falaise that William was forced to sign to get out of captivity.

The bride-to-be was not inconsequential. Henry chose Ermengarde de Beaumont, a great-granddaughter of Henry I. More immediately, she was the daughter of a viscount, Richard I of Beaumont-le-Vicomte. One chronicler, Walter Bower, described her as "an extraordinary woman, gifted with a charming and witty eloquence." She was 16 when she married William at Woodstock Palace.

William objected (uselessly), feeling that a king should have a bride of higher status, but Henry was feeling generous: he offered to pay all wedding expenses and to return to William the castles he had taken due to the Treaty of Falaise. The Castle of Edinburgh was considered Ermengarde's dowry.

William accepted the bride under these conditions (again, he had little choice), but he may not have accepted his "marital duties." He had fathered illegitimate children by at least two women, but children by Ermengarde did not come until at least seven years after the wedding. Perhaps it was only his concern to produce legitimate heirs that prompted him to finally treat Ermengarde as his wife.

Ermengarde was not just a footnote to William's reign, however. She supposedly helped a royal chaplain obtain a bishopric after she (and the king) accepted a bribe. In 1209, she mediated on behalf of her aging husband (he was 67) with King John. She is said to have taken over some of his duties in his later years, and went with William to England in 1212 to secure from King John the succession of their son Alexander.

After William's death in 1214, she was described as being distraught. She spent her final years founding the Cistercian Balmerino Abbey in Fife, where she was buried after her death in 1234.

So...what was the mediation in 1209 with King John, you ask? Well, despite previous failures, William never gave up his (and his ancestors') dream of expanding Scotland to include Northumbria. Let me tell you tomorrow how that went.

Fergus of Galloway

In yesterday's post about St. Ninian, I suggested that the biography of him written 700 years later by Aelred of Rievaulx may have had a political origin. To explain that, we have to talk about Fergus of Galloway.

An 1136 charter by King David I of Scotland includes as a witness Fergus of Galloway. This is our first reference to him. In the early Middle Ages, Galloway would have been a "sub-kingdom" in southwest Scotland, and a king of Scotland like David would have been seen as a "first among equals" like the high-king in Ireland. Over time, these sub-kings were designated as hereditary lords. The dynasty of Fergus lasted from his time until 1234.

Digging into contemporary documents, it appears that he may have been married to an illegitimate daughter of King Henry I of England, Elizabeth Fitzroy. (By some counts, Henry had two dozen illegitimate children.) Fergus had three children: Uhtred, Gilla Brigte, and a daughter Affraic. The chronicler Roger de Hoveden refers to Uhtred as a cousin of Henry's son Henry II. Fergus' second son, Gilla Brigte, had a son who was referred to as a kinsman of Henry II and his son, King John. In other marriage news, Fergus married Affraic to with Óláfr Guðrøðarson, King of the Isles (the Isle of Mann, the Inner Hebrides, the Outer Hebrides, the Orkneys and the Shetlands). Their son, Guðrøðr Óláfsson, became King of Dublin and the Isles. A 12th-century monk and chronicler, Robert de Torigni, claimed that Guðrøðr was related to Henry II.

The Fergus dynasty was very supportive of Augustinians, Benedictines, Cistercians, and Premonstratensians (a strict order founded by a friend of Bernard of Clairvaux, Norbert of Xanten). In one case, records state that Fergus founded a Premonstratensian house at Whithorn. Supposedly, St. Ninian had started the diocese of Whithorn, but it had lapsed, to be revived in 1128. Other records suggest that Fergus founded an Augustinian house that was later converted to Premonstratensian by Christian, the second bishop of the revived Whithorn diocese.

Fergus' extensive support of monasteries and orders has caused some head-scratching to determine the cause. Did he simply want to mirror what other, more-powerful lords did in their realms? Or was there some other underlying purpose. As it turns out, the greatest atrocities during the Battle of the Standard in 1138 were (according to chroniclers) committed by Gallovidian soldiers supporting King David's attempt to capture more territory. It seems likely that Fergus's religious generosity may have had a penitential flavor. Is it possible that the Life of Saint Ninian by Aelred of Rievaulx was a royal request in exchange for a gift to Rievaulx Abbey? Royal patronage is not an unlikely answer. The fact that a biography of a saint who originally founded Whithorn and performed miracles would bring attention and fame to a location within the bounds of Fergus' realm was simply a happy bonus.

For all his publicly expressed piety, however Fergus did not have a happy end. I'll tell you about that tomorrow. The next time after that, however, we will see how the facts of your life don't matter if someone decides afterward that you'd make a good story. See you soon.