#Walter Comyn Earl of Menteith

[scotianostra]

On July 13th 1249 Alexander III, King of Scots, was crowned at Scone.

Alexander is regarded as one of our country’s greatest rulers. His reign marked a period of peace and prosperity in Scotland.

Alaxandair mac Alaxandair; became king at the age of seven after the death of his father, Alexander II. The years of his minority, (that is when he was too young to rule himself), saw a bitter struggle for the control of affairs between two rival parties, the one led by Walter Comyn, Earl of Menteith, the other by Alan Durward, Justiciar of Scotia. The former dominated the early years of Alexander’s reign.

In 1251 he married Margaret, the eldest daughter of Henry III of England. The wedding has been described as “the most spectacular wedding in the British Isles during this age.

On the one hand, he successfully maintained Scotland’s freedom resisting his more powerful neighbours’ territorial ambitions. On the other hand, his traders sold produce across Europe, so he did not isolate his small nation from the world beyond.

In 1262, Alexander laid claim to the Western Isles, at that time ruled by Norway, continuing a policy that Alexander’s father had pursued. King Haakon of Norway rejected the claim, but in 1263 he was defeated by the Scottish at the Battle of Largs. In 1266, by the Treaty of Perth, Norway gave Scotland control over the Isle of Man and the Western Isles. Alexander invested the title of Lord of the Isles in the head of the Macdonald family, Angus Macdonald, and over the next two centuries the Macdonald lords operated as if they were kings in their own right, frequently opposing the Scottish monarch.

Queen Margaret died in 1275, the monarchs had three children, their two sons died between 1281 and 1283, the daughter Margaret married King Eirik II of Norway. According to the Lanercost Chronicle, Alexander did not spend his decade as a widower aloneone chronicler wrote: "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.”

The death of his sons prompted Alexander to marry again in an attempt to produce an heir. Five months after his second marriage, on 19 March 1286, Alexander died after falling from his horse.

Alexander’s rule has been described as a period of little internal conflict. Scotland achieved a prosperity disproportionate to her size, due to excellent trade relations; “Her ambassadors and merchants contacted and carried on commerce with many nations” under his guidance.

Unfortunately his death left the country without a proper heir Edward I of England started his interfering in Scotland’s affairs, leading to decades of turmoil during The First Wars of Independence.

[weavingthetapestry]

Talking Together: The Earliest Record of A Scottish Parliament?

(A ninteenth century engraving of the great seal of Alexander II. Source- Wikimedia Commons)

On 8th April 1236, letters were issued on behalf of King Alexander II of Scotland, recording the settlement of a recent dispute between the Cistercian monks of Melrose and the nobleman Roger Avenel. Although at first sight this may appear unremarkable, the document which contains the Crown’s record of this settlement can be considered the earliest official evidence of a Scottish parliament.

Some time before 1236, Roger Avenel and his ancestors had granted use of some land in Eskdale (Dumfriesshire) to Melrose Abbey. The Abbey was heavily involved in wool and leather production. Access to upland grazing for the abbey’s livestock, as well as timber and arable, would have made this Eskdale land extremely valuable to the monks. Unfortunately for them, Roger Avenel also felt entitled to use the land exactly as he pleased, and had no qualms about obstructing the same monks he and his predecessors had endowed. Despite the terms of his previous charter, Roger and his men loosed their horses and other animals on the land, and destroyed the houses, ditches, and enclosures made by the Abbey. In order to settle “the controversies stirred between them on this account”, the dispute between the two parties was brought before the highest judge in the realm- King Alexander II of Scotland. Eventually, a compromise was reached, providing for the use of the land by both Melrose Abbey and Roger Avenel, albeit in different ways. The warring parties were thus reconciled, “in the presence of our barons at the colloquium at Liston”, in the year of grace 1235.

It is likely that the letters which record this settlement were made at least a couple of weeks after this assembly at Kirkliston, since they are dated 8th April “in the twenty-second year of the reign of our lord the king”- i.e. 1236.* The document itself was witnessed by Andrew, bishop of Moray; Clement, bishop of Dunblane; Walter Comyn, the earl of Menteith; Walter, the Steward of Scotland; Walter Oliphant, justiciar of Lothian; Henry Balliol; David Keith, the Marischal; and Geoffrey, the clerk of the liverance. This cannot be taken as a list of everyone who attended the ‘colloquium’ at Kirkliston, though I would argue that most of these men were probably present anyway. Nonetheless the letter is possibly the earliest surviving “official” Crown record of what we now call the Scottish parliament- though this is by no means certain since the early history of this institution is shadowy and fraught with ambiguity...

(The old kirk of Liston, presumably near to where the ‘colloquium’ of 1235 took place. The church has its roots in the Middle Ages and may have been standing at the time of the first Scottish parliament. Source is picture by Tom Sargent who has kindly made this picture available on wikimedia commons for reuse under the Creative Commons License)

The early development of “parliament” in Scotland is even more obscure than in neighbouring England. Very few Crown documents have survived from the thirteenth century which relate to meetings that could be considered parliaments, and even the terminology used to describe the kinds of assembly we now call parliament can be ambiguous. Thirteenth century writers do not always use the same terminology we would expect, and it is unclear whether the words they actually use had exactly the same meaning in the thirteenth century as they do now, and indeed whether these words were used consistently. Some mediaeval chroniclers do refer to certain assemblies which were held by the kings of Scotland before 1235, and which they give the name “parliament”. In one Anglo-Norman work, the twelfth century chronicler Jordan Fantosme states that William the Lion held “sun plenier parlement” (translated as his “plenary” or “full” parliament) in 1173, when he wanted to consult the wise men of his kingdom on whether or not he should support the rebellion of Henry “the Young King” against the latter’s father Henry II of England. “Gesta Annalia”, a late thirteenth century Scottish chronicle, also uses a Latinised version of the French term “parliament”, to describe an assembly held by King Alexander II in 1215. However, no official documents associated with these “parliaments” survive, and the chroniclers who referred to them did not define their use of the term.

In records produced on behalf of the Scottish Crown, the word “parliament” itself doesn’t appear very often before the end of the thirteenth century. However quite a few surviving records do use the Latin word “colloquium” to refer to certain assemblies of the king and his barons- indeed this is the word used to describe the meeting held at Kirkliston in 1235. “Colloquium” has a similar meaning to the French word “parliament”, in that they both loosely describe a “talking together” or a discussion. In thirteenth century England, the Latin and French terms were often treated as interchangeable, and so early twentieth century historians, searching for early evidence of a similar institution in Scotland, were quick to identify any colloquium mentioned in Scottish records as a parliament in the usual sense of the word. However the word also carries its fair share of ambiguity. We do not know whether a “colloquium” in thirteenth century Scotland would have looked anything like our idea of a mediaeval parliament, nor whether the term always meant the same thing, nor can we identify what it was that set a “colloquium” apart from any other assembly or council in which the king of Scots consulted his leading vassals. There is also the danger that, having first encountered the terms “colloquium” and parliament in English and French contexts, historians have gone looking for a similar phrase in Scottish sources and inadvertently analysed the evidence through a subjective lens, based on a preconceived notion of what a parliament was.

Although more recent historians have acknowledged this danger, unfortunately the nature of the surviving evidence seems to compel them to work within the same framework, using the existed, if limited, terminology as best they can. The “colloquium” of thirteenth century Scotland does seem to be the closest thing we have to a word for the kind of formal assembly of the political community, chaired by a king, which we might describe more easily as a parliament in late mediaeval and early modern Scotland. It is also possible (indeed, likely) that the colloquium held at Kirkliston in 1235 was not the first of its kind. Nonetheless with such fragmentary evidence, it is probably reasonable to view that assembly as a very distant ancestor of the Scottish parliament that we know today.

So what might this parliament have looked like? During the Late Middle Ages, yet another phrase was commonly used to refer to both parliaments and general councils in Scotland- these were described as meetings of the “Three Estates”. This seems to have originated from the mediaeval theory that a Christian society should be made up of three sorts of people: those who prayed, those who fought, and those who worked. Different parts of Christian Europe developed regional variations on this theory but, in the context of the Scottish parliament, the “First Estate” (those who prayed) tended to refer to the higher clergy (bishops and important abbots). The “Second Estate” (those who fought) meant the higher nobility (from dukes down to lords of parliament and richer freeholders), and the “Third Estate” (those who worked) only referred to the commissioners elected to represent the country’s burghs (so not the common man as such).

However, in 1235 this parliamentary model had not yet evolved. The exact composition of thirteenth century Scottish parliaments is obscure, but in the record of the colloquium held at Kirkliston only the king and his ‘barons’ are mentioned. Evidence from other thirteenth century assemblies indicates that it was primarily members of the higher nobility who attended these- earls and the most powerful barons. Although they are not mentioned in the record of the Kirkliston assembly, the kingdom’s bishops also seem to have been permitted to attend these other “parliaments”. Burgh representatives do not appear until the 1290s, and A.A.M. Duncan has argued that they were not a regular fixture until much later. The other freeholders of Scotland (below the rank of earl and great baron) also do not seem to have attended parliament much before the fourteenth century. So the colloquium at Kirkliston in 1235 was probably just a meeting of the king and his leading nobles, though perhaps some of the bishops also attended.

In any case, the number of attendees would probably have been quite small- G.W.S. Barrow has argued that they would have “numbered in dozens or scores rather than in hundreds”. Also the Scottish parliament was always unicameral, in contrast to the English institution, which seems to have developed its separate Houses by at least the mid-fourteenth century. There was also no fixed location where parliaments were held as yet, and aside from the 1235 assembly at Kirkliston, during the thirteenth century meetings were also held in Stirling, Roxburgh, Holyrood Abbey, Edinburgh, and Scone, among other places. Like the king, parliament would remain peripatetic for centuries, and though Edinburgh eventually emerged as the most popular location during the reigns of James II and James III, the Scottish parliament only established itself there permanently in the seventeenth century**. Other customs associated with pre-Union Scottish parliaments- for example the Riding of Parliament or the Lords of the Articles- were also probably unknown in the thirteenth century.

(The Scottish parliament or Estates processing in the late seventeenth century. Source- Wikimedia Commons)

Wherever they met and whoever attended, mediaeval parliaments must have differed in some way from regular assemblies. Their most basic function was to provide an opportunity for the king to consult the political community on important issues. But historians are divided over just what kind of issue which would have dominated proceedings at early parliaments. Twelfth and thirteenth century chroniclers seem to have been interested in the assembly’s role as a venue for political debate and diplomatic activity. However this was probably only part of the story. Meanwhile parliament’s financial role (approving extraordinary taxation) which was to be such an important factor in the development of the institution in England, does not appear to have been quite so central in Scotland. A third function of most parliaments- one which is particularly important in our own day- is to develop and enact laws. This was probably performed by early Scottish parliaments too, but we lack evidence for substantial legislative activity before the fourteenth century.

In 1928, while surveying the evidence of earlier thirteenth century assemblies as a preliminary to their investigation of Edward I of England’s Scottish parliaments, the historians H.G. Richardson and George Sayles focused on parliament’s function as the highest court in the land. They came to the conclusion that, “the primary purpose of these early parliaments of Scotland was the dispensing of justice.” Certainly this is the role which we can see the colloquium at Kirkliston performing in the single surviving record which that assembly produced. The next documented colloquium, which met in 1248 at Stirling, is also known only from the record of an arbitration which took place there, again under the eye of Alexander II, while legal cases again crop up on several occasions during the reigns of Alexander III and John Balliol and the minority of Margaret (the remainder of the documented parliamentary business during the late thirteenth century is largely concerned with international diplomacy, which may however simply be due to the fact that this was the only subject which was considered important enough to record). However, in the 1960s, A.A.M. Duncan disagreed with Richardson and Sayles’ verdict, pointing out that the fragmentary nature of the evidence makes it difficult to assign special significance to any one function of the early parliaments. For his own part, Duncan characterised the early Scottish parliament as a venue for the promotion of the Crown’s interests, and “the occasion on which the rights of the king could be asserted by customary judicial process with final authority.”

(The coat of arms of Alexander II of Scotland, as portrayed in the thirteenth century ‘Historia Anglorum’ of Matthew Paris. Reproduced by permission of the British Library under a Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.)

Given that any debate which can be had about the early Scottish parliament’s early activities is severely limited by the patchy and ambiguous evidence available, it is perhaps unsurprising that some historians have tended to dismiss the colloquium of 1235 and other early assemblies as hurriedly as possible, moving onto the better documented meetings after 1286. As discussed above, sometimes this has even led to doubt over whether the 1235 meeting can fairly be called the earliest parliament at all. As Keith M. Brown, Alastair J. Mann, and Roland J. Tanner state in their historical introduction to the online “Records of the Parliament of Scotland” project:

“Between 1235 and 1286, therefore, parliament exists for historians in a kind of limbo – we can see that the term is used (in the early colloquium form), but can tell almost nothing about what was meant by that term. What set the early colloquia apart from previous assemblies of the king and his subjects has been lost, although there could have been a clear distinction, and the primary purpose of those early assemblies is unknown – whether they were political, judicial or legislative. There are no criteria that can be used for parliament’s emergence other than the moment that contemporary Scots began to refer to their assemblies in official sources by either the word parliamentum or colloquium. The debate about the earliest known Scottish parliament, therefore, becomes very simple – it was the Kirkliston colloquium held in 1235. Whether this was the first assembly to be referred to as such, or whether it differed in any significant way from the royal councils and assemblies that had occurred before will almost certainly never be known.”

If there is anything else to be said, it is only that, over the centuries which followed the Kirkliston meeting, the Scottish parliament evolved in many different ways, most of which could not have been foreseen by any of the men present in 1235. The mediaeval institution did at different points in its history perform a variety of functions, whether political, financial, legislative, or judicial, and although the Crown did often attempt to use parliament to bolster its own position, communication between the two was not a one-way street, and on several occasions the Estates talked back. In the early modern period, further development of the institutions and ceremonial associated with parliament occurred, while the abolition of the institution in 1707 followed a century which had seen parliament operating in new territory on more than one occasion. The current devolved parliament, which met for the first time in nearly three centuries in 1999 and usually sits at Holyrood*** is not only a very different body to that which met at Kirkliston over six hundred years earlier, but has itself changed since it was reconvened over twenty years ago. Nonetheless, a line can be drawn between the shadowy, probably elitist, assembly which took place in 1235 and the principle of public consultation which is supposed to underly Scottish democracy today. Though political systems and values must inevitably evolve over time, and though many historical events are obscure, difficult to define, and not easily subsumed into a greater narrative, the colloquium at Kirkliston is at least worth remembering as the first stage in, “the journey begun long ago and which has no end.”

(The debating chamber in the current Scottish parliament building. Source- wikimedia commons, where this photo was kindly shared by user:pschemp)

Additional Notes:

*In many official and religious documents from the Middle Ages, the year was reckoned to begin on 25th March. So if the colloquium took place in 1235 but the letters were not made until 8th April 1236, then at least a fortnight must have passed between the date when the settlement between Melrose and Roger Avenel actually took place and the date when a document was created to record this.

** Interestingly Holyrood, where the modern parliament is now based, was technically in a separate burgh from Edinburgh in the Middle Ages, the burgh of Canongate.

***When it is not in recess, which it is currently in the run-up to the May elections.

Selected Bibliography:

- Records of the Parliaments of Scotland website and in particular the record of the Kirkliston Colloquium listed under the reign of Alexander II and the historical introduction. This website is a magnificent resource, so I encourage people to look it up anyway.

- Jordan Fantosme’s “Chronicle of the War Between the English and the Scots”, translated by Francisque Michel.

- “The Early Parliaments of Scotland”, by A.A.M. Duncan as published in the Scottish Historical Review, vol. 45 no. 139 Part 1 (April 1966). Link is to JSTOR.

- “The Scottish Parliaments of Edward I”, by H.G. Richardson and George Sayles, as published in the Scottish Historical Review, vol. 25, no. 100 (Jul. 1928). Link is to JSTOR.

- “The Origins and Development of the Scottish Parliament, 1249-1329″, by Alison A.B. MacQueen. Thesis submitted for award of PhD, available on St Andrews research repository here

- “1999 Speech at Opening of the Scottish Parliament”, given by Donald Dewar

[milenapetrofig]

Inchmahome Priory is situated on Inchmahome ("Inch" meaning an island), the largest of three islands in the centre of Lake of Menteith, close to Aberfoyle, Scotland. The name "Inchmahome" comes from the Gaelic Innis MoCholmaig, meaning Island of St Colmaig. The priory was founded in 1238 by the Earl of Menteith, Walter Comyn, for a small community of the Augustinian order (the Black Canons). The Comyn family were one of the most powerful in Scotland at the time, and had an imposing country house on Inch Talla, one of the other islands on the Lake of Menteith. There is some evidence that there was a church on the island before the priory was established.

[scotianostra]

On September 4th 1241, future King, Alexander III was born at Roxburgh.

Alexander was King of Scots, regarded as one of the country’s greatest rulers. His reign marked a period of peace and prosperity in Scotland. Alexander became king at the age of seven after the death of his father, Alexander II. The years of his minority saw a bitter struggle for the control of affairs between two rival parties, the one led by Walter Comyn, Earl of Menteith, the other by Alan Durward, Justiciar of Scotia. The former dominated the early years of Alexander’s reign.

In 1251 he married Margaret, the eldest daughter of Henry III of England. The wedding has been described as “the most spectacular wedding in  the British Isles  during this age.

On the one hand, he successfully maintained Scotland’s freedom resisting his more powerful neighbours’ territorial ambitions. On the other hand, his traders sold produce across Europe, so he did not isolate his small nation from the world beyond.

In 1262, Alexander laid claim to the Western Isles, at that time ruled by Norway, continuing a policy that Alexander’s father had pursued. King Haakon of Norway rejected the claim, but in 1263 he was defeated by the Scottish at the Battle of Largs. In 1266, by the Treaty of Perth, Norway gave Scotland control over the Isle of Man and the Western Isles. Alexander invested the title of Lord of the Isles in the head of the Macdonald family, Angus Macdonald, and over the next two centuries the Macdonald lords operated as if they were kings in their own right, frequently opposing the Scottish monarch.

Queen Margaret died in 1275, the monarchs had three children, their two sons died between 1281 and 1283, the daughter Margaret married King Eirik II of Norway. According to the Lanercost Chronicle, Alexander did not spend his decade as a widower alone: "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.”

The death of his sons prompted Alexander to marry again in an attempt to produce an heir. Five months after his second marriage, on 19 March 1286, Alexander died after falling from his horse.

Alexander's rule has been described as a period of little internal conflict. Scotland achieved a prosperity disproportionate to her size, due to excellent trade relations; “Her ambassadors and merchants contacted and carried on commerce with many nations” under his guidance. Unfortunately, leaving the country without a proper heir meant Edward I of England could start interfering in Scotland’s affairs, leading to decades of turmoil during The First Wars of Independence.

[scotianostra]

On July 13th  1249 Alexander III, King of Scots, was crowned at Scone.

Alexander is regarded as one of our country’s greatest rulers. His reign marked a period of peace and prosperity in Scotland.

Alaxandair mac Alaxandair; became king at the age of seven after the death of his father, Alexander II. The years of his minority, (that is when he was too young to rule himself), saw a bitter struggle for the control of affairs between two rival parties, the one led by Walter Comyn, Earl of Menteith, the other by Alan Durward, Justiciar of Scotia. The former dominated the early years of Alexander’s reign. In 1251 he married Margaret, the eldest daughter of Henry III of England. The wedding has been described as “the most spectacular wedding in  the British Isles  during this age.

On the one hand, he successfully maintained Scotland’s freedom resisting his more powerful neighbours’ territorial ambitions. On the other hand, his traders sold produce across Europe, so he did not isolate his small nation from the world beyond.

In 1262, Alexander laid claim to the Western Isles, at that time ruled by Norway, continuing a policy that Alexander’s father had pursued. King Haakon of Norway rejected the claim, but in 1263 he was defeated by the Scottish at the Battle of Largs. In 1266, by the Treaty of Perth, Norway gave Scotland control over the Isle of Man and the Western Isles. Alexander invested the title of Lord of the Isles in the head of the Macdonald family, Angus Macdonald, and over the next two centuries the Macdonald lords operated as if they were kings in their own right, frequently opposing the Scottish monarch.

Queen Margaret died in 1275, the monarchs had three children, their two sons died between 1281 and 1283, the daughter Margaret married King Eirik II of Norway. According to the Lanercost Chronicle, Alexander did not spend his decade as a widower aloneone chronicler wrote: "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.”

The death of his sons prompted Alexander to marry again in an attempt to produce an heir. Five months after his second marriage, on 19 March 1286, Alexander died after falling from his horse.

Alexander’s rule has been described as a period of little internal conflict. Scotland achieved a prosperity disproportionate to her size, due to excellent trade relations; “Her ambassadors and merchants contacted and carried on commerce with many nations” under his guidance.

 Unfortunately his death left the country without a proper heir Edward I of England started his interfering in Scotland’s affairs, leading to decades of turmoil during The First Wars of Independence.

[weavingthetapestry]

2nd January 1264: Marriage and Murder in Mediaeval Menteith

(Priory of Inchmahome, founded on one of the islands of Lake of Menteith in the thirteenth century)

On 2nd January 1264, Pope Urban IV despatched a letter to the bishops of St Andrews and Aberdeen, and the Abbot of Dunfermline, commanding them to enquire into a succession dispute in the earldom of Menteith. Situated in the heart of Scotland, this earldom stretched from the graceful mountains and glens of the Trossachs, to the boggy carseland west of Stirling and the low-lying Vale of Menteith between Callander and Dunblane. The earls and countesses of Menteith were members of the highest rank of the nobility, ruling the area from strongholds such as Doune Castle, Inch Talla, and Kilbryde. Perhaps the best-known relic of the mediaeval earldom is the beautiful, ruined Priory of Inchmahome, which was established on an island in Lake of Menteith by Earl Walter Comyn in 1238. Walter Comyn was a powerful, if controversial, figure during the reigns of Kings Alexander II and Alexander III. He controlled the earldom for several decades after his marriage to its Countess, Isabella of Menteith, but following Walter’s death in 1258 his widow was beset on all sides by powerful enemies. These enemies even went so far as to capture Isabella and accuse her of poisoning her husband. The story of this unfortunate countess offers a rare glimpse into the position of great heiresses in High Mediaeval Scotland, revealing the darker side of thirteenth century politics.

Alexander II and Alexander III are generally remembered as powerful monarchs who oversaw the expansion and consolidation of the Scottish realm. During their reigns, dynastic rivals like the MacWilliams were crushed, regions such as Galloway and the Western Isles formally acknowledged Scottish overlordship, and the Scottish Crown held its own in diplomacy and disputes with neighbouring rulers in Norway and England. Both kings furthered their aims by promoting powerful nobles in strategic areas, but it was also vital to harness the ambition and aggression of these men productively. In the absence of an adult monarch, unchecked magnate rivalry risked destabilising the realm, as in the years between 1249 and 1262, when Alexander III was underage.

(A fifteenth century depiction of the coronation of Alexander III.  Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Walter Comyn offers a typical picture of the ambitious Scottish magnate. Ultimately loyal to the Crown, his family loyalties and personal aims nonetheless made him a divisive figure. A member of the powerful Comyn kindred, he had received the lordship of Badenoch in the Central Highlands by 1229, probably because of his family’s opposition to the MacWilliams. In early 1231, he was granted the hand of a rich heiress, Isabella of Menteith. In the end, there would be no Comyn dynasty in Menteith: Walter and Isabella had a son named Henry, mentioned in a charter c.1250, but he likely predeceased his father. Nevertheless, Walter Comyn carved out a career at the centre of Scottish politics and besides witnessing many royal charters, he acted as the king’s lieutenant in Galloway in 1235 and became embroiled in the scandalous Bisset affair of 1242.

When Alexander II died in 1249, Walter and the other Comyns sought power during the minority of the boy king Alexander III. They were opposed by the similarly ambitious Alan Durward and in time Henry III of England, the attentive father of Alexander III’s wife Margaret, was also dragged into the squabble as both sides solicited his support in order to undermine their opponents. Possession of the young king’s person offered a swift route to power, and, although nobody challenged Alexander III’s right to the throne, some took drastic measures to seize control of government. Walter Comyn and his allies managed this twice, the second time by kidnapping the young king at Kinross in 1257. They were later forced to make concessions to enemies like Durward but, with Henry III increasingly distracted by the deteriorating political situation in England, the Comyns held onto power for the rest of the minority. However Walter only enjoyed his victory for a short while: by the end of 1258, the Earl of Menteith was dead.

Walter Comyn had dominated Scottish politics for a decade, and even if, as Michael Brown suggests, his death gave the political community some breathing space, this also left Menteith without a lord. As a widow, Countess Isabella theoretically gained more personal freedom, but mediaeval realpolitik was not always consistent with legal ideals. In thirteenth century Scotland, the increased wealth of widows made them vulnerable in new ways (not least to abduction) and, although primogeniture and the indivisibility of earldoms were promoted, in reality these ideals were often subordinated to the Crown’s need to reward its supporters. Isabella of Menteith was soon to find that her position had become very precarious.

At first, things went well. Although one source claims that many noblemen sought her hand, Isabella made her own choice, marrying an English knight named John Russell. Sir John’s background is obscure but, despite assertions that he was low born, he had connections at the English court. Isabella and John obtained royal consent for their marriage c.1260, and the happy couple also took crusading vows soon afterwards.

But whatever his wife thought, in the eyes of the Scottish nobility John Russell cut a much less impressive figure than Walter Comyn. The couple had not been married long before a powerful coterie of nobles descended on Menteith like hoodie-crows. Pope Urban’s list of persecutors includes the earls of Buchan, Fife, Mar, and Strathearn, Alan Durward, Hugh of Abernethy, Reginald le Cheyne, Hugh de Berkeley, David de Graham, and many others. But the ringleader was John ‘the Red’ Comyn, the nephew of Isabella of Menteith’s deceased husband Walter, who had already succeeded to the lordship of Badenoch. Even though Menteith belonged to Isabella in her own right, Comyn coveted his late uncle’s title there. Supported by the other lords, he captured and imprisoned the countess and John Russell, and justified this bold assault by claiming that the newlyweds had conspired together to poison Earl Walter. It is unclear what proof, if any, John Comyn supplied to back up his claim, but the couple were unable to disprove it. They were forced to surrender all claims to Isabella’s dowry, as well as many of her own lands and rents. A surviving charter shows that Hugh de Abernethy was granted property around Aberfoyle about 1260, but it seems that the lion’s share of the spoils went to the Red Comyn, who secured for himself and his heirs the promise of the earldom of Menteith itself.

Isabella and her husband were only released when they promised to pass into exile until they could clear their names before seven peers of the realm. John Russell’s brother Robert was delivered to Comyn as security for their full resignation of the earldom. Having ‘incurred heavy losses and expenses’, which certainly stymied their crusading plans, they fled.

In a letter of 1264, Pope Urban IV described the couple as ‘undefended by the authority of the king, while as yet a minor’. However, though Alexander III was technically underage in 1260, he was now nineteen and could not be ignored entirely. Michael Brown suggests that Isabella and her husband may have been seized when the king was visiting England, and that John Comyn’s unsanctioned bid for the earldom of Menteith may explain why Alexander cut short his stay in November 1260 and hastily returned north, leaving his pregnant queen with her parents at Windsor. Certainly, Comyn was forced to relinquish the earldom before 17th April 1261. But instead of restoring Menteith to its exiled countess, Alexander settled the earldom on another rising star: Walter ‘Bailloch’ Stewart, whose wife Mary had a claim to Menteith.

Mary of Menteith is often described as Isabella’s younger sister, although contemporary sources never say so and some historians argue that they were cousins. Either way, Alexander’s decision to uphold her claim was probably as much influenced by her husband’s identity as her alleged birth right. Like Walter Comyn, Walter Bailloch (‘freckled’), belonged to an influential family as the brother of Alexander, Steward of Scotland. From their origins in the royal household, the Stewarts became major regional magnates, assisting royal expansion in the west. The promising son of a powerful family, Walter Bailloch was sheriff of Ayr by 1264 and likely fought in the Battle of Largs in 1263. In 1260 Alexander III had the opportunity to secure Walter’s loyalty as the royal minority drew to a close. Conversely John Comyn of Badenoch found himself out of favour and was removed as justiciar of Galloway following the Menteith incident. The king would not alienate the Comyns permanently, but for now, the stars of Walter Bailloch and Mary of Menteith were in the ascendant.

(Loch Lubnaig, in the Trossachs, another former possession of the earls of Menteith)

Isabella of Menteith and John Russell had not been idle in the meantime. Travelling to John’s home country of England, they probably appealed to Henry III. In September 1261, the English king inspected documents relating to a previous dispute over the earldom of Menteith. On that occasion, two brothers, both named Maurice, had their differences settled before the future Alexander II at Edinburgh in 1213. The elder Maurice, who held the title Earl of Menteith and was presumed illegitimate by later writers (though this is never stated), resigned the earldom, which was regranted to Maurice junior. In return the elder Maurice received some towns and lands to be held for his lifetime only, and the younger Maurice promised to provide for the marriage of his older brother’s daughters.

It is probable that Isabella was the daughter of the younger Maurice, and that she produced these charters as proof of her right to the earldom. Perhaps Mary was her younger sister, but it seems likelier that Isabella would have wanted to prove the younger Maurice’s right if Mary was a descendant of the elder brother, and therefore her cousin. However despite Henry III’s formal recognition of the settlement, he did not provide Isabella with any real assistance: for whatever reason, the English king was either unable or unwilling to press his son-in-law the King of Scots on this matter. Isabella then turned instead to the spiritual leader of western Europe- Pope Urban IV.

(A depiction of the coronation of Henry III of England, though in fact the English king was only a child when he was crowned. Source: Wikimedia Commons)

A long epistle which the pope sent to several Scottish prelates in January 1264 has survived, revealing much about the case. Thus we learn that Urban was initially moved by Isabella and her husband’s predicament, perhaps especially so since they had taken the cross. Accordingly, he had appointed his chaplain Pontius Nicholas to enquire further and discreetly arrange the couple’s restoration. Pontius was to journey to Menteith, ‘if he could safely do so, otherwise to pass personally to parts adjacent to the said kingdom, and to summon those who should be summoned’. But Pontius’ mission only hindered Isabella’s suit. According to Gesta Annalia I, the papal chaplain got no closer to Scotland than York. From there he summoned many Scottish churchmen and nobles to appear before him, and even the King of Scots himself. This merely antagonised Alexander III and his subjects. Although Alexander maintained good relations with England and the papacy throughout his reign, he had a strong sense of his own prerogative and did not appreciate being summoned to answer for his actions, especially not outwith his realm and least of all in York. Special daughter of the papacy or not, Scotland’s clergy and nobility supported their king and refused to compear. Faced with this intransigence, Pontius Nicholas placed the entire kingdom under interdict, at which point Alexander retaliated by writing directly to the chaplain’s boss, demanding Pontius’ dismissal from the case.

Urban IV swiftly backpedalled. In a conciliatory tone he claimed that Pontius was guilty of ‘exceeding the terms of our mandate’ and causing ‘grievous scandal’. To remedy the situation, and avoid endangering souls, the pope discharged his responsibility over the case to the bishops of St Andrews and Aberdeen, and the Abbot of Dunfermline. Thus the pope washed his hands of a troublesome case, the Scottish king’s nose could be put back in joint, and Isabella’s suit was transferred to men with great experience of Scottish affairs, who should have been capable of satisfactorily resolving the matter. However, there is no indication that Isabella was ever compensated for the loss of her inheritance, and when the dispute over Menteith was raised again ten years later, the countess was not even mentioned (probably she had since died). Possibly her suit was discreetly buried after it was transferred to the Scottish clerics, a solution which, however frustrating for the exiled countess, would have been convenient for the great men whose responsibility it was to ensure justice was done.

(Doune Castle- the earliest parts of this famous stronghold probably date to the days of the thirteenth century earls of Menteith, although much of the work visible today dates from the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries)

The Comyns could not be dismissed so easily. Never resigned to losing Menteith, John Comyn of Badenoch claimed the earldom again c.1273, on behalf of his son William Comyn of Kirkintilloch. William had since married Isabella Russell, daughter of Isabella of Menteith by her second husband.* The 1273 suit was unsuccessful but William Comyn and Isabella Russell did not lose hope, and in 1282, William asked Edward I of England to intercede for them with the king of Scots. In 1285, with William’s father John Comyn long dead, Alexander III finally offered a compromise. Walter Bailloch, whose wife Mary may have died, was to keep half the earldom and he and his heirs would bear the title earl of Menteith. William Comyn and Isabella Russell received the other half in free barony, and this eventually passed to the offspring of Isabella’s second marriage to Sir Edward Hastings. Perhaps this could be seen as a posthumous victory for Isabella Russell’s late parents, but their descendants would never regain the whole earldom (except, controversially, when the younger Isabella’s two sons were each granted half after Edward I forfeited the current earl for supporting Robert Bruce).

Conversely, Walter Bailloch’s descendants remained at the forefront of Scottish politics. He and his wife Mary accompanied Alexander III’s daughter to Norway in 1281, and Walter was later a signatory to both the Turnberry Band and the Maid of Norway’s marriage negotiations. He also acted as a commissioner for Robert Bruce (grandfather to the future king) during the Great Cause. He had at least three children by Mary of Menteith and their sons took the surname Menteith rather than Stewart. The descendants of the eldest son, Alexander, held the earldom of Menteith until at least 1425. The younger son, John, became infamous as the much-maligned ‘Fause Menteith’ who betrayed William Wallace, although he later rose high in the service of King Robert I. Walter Bailloch himself died c.1294-5, and was buried next to his wife at the Priory of Inchmahome on Lake of Menteith, which Walter Comyn had founded over fifty years previously. The effigies of Walter Bailloch and Mary of Menteith can still be seen in the chapter house of the ruined priory: the worn faces are turned towards each other and each figure stretches out an arm to embrace their spouse in a lasting symbol of marital affection.

(The effigies of Walter Bailloch and Mary of Menteith at Inchmahome Priory, which was founded by Walter Comyn in 1238 and was perhaps intended as a burial site for himself and his wife Isabella of Menteith. Source: Wikimedia Commons).

The dispute over Menteith saw a prominent noblewoman publicly accused of murder and exiled, and even sparked an international incident when Scotland was placed under interdict. For all this, neither Isabella of Menteith nor John Comyn of Badenoch triumphed in the long term. Even Walter Bailloch eventually had to accept the loss of half the earldom after holding it for over twenty years. In the end the only real winner seems to have been the king. Although at first sight the persecution of Isabella and her husband looks like a classic example of overmighty magnates taking advantage of a breakdown in law and order during a royal minority, Alexander III was not a child and his rebuke of John Comyn did not result in any backlash against the Crown. Most of the Scottish nobility fell back in line once the king came of age, but the king in turn had to ensure that he was able to reward key supporters if he wanted to expand the realm he had inherited. Although it was important to both Alexander III and his father that primogeniture and were accepted by their subjects as the norm, in practice both kings found that they had to bend their own rules to ensure that the system worked to their own advantage. The thirteenth century is often seen an age of legal development and state-building, but these things sometimes came into conflict with each other, and even the most successful kings had to work within a messy system and consider the competing loyalties and customs of their subjects.

Selected Bibliography:

- “Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum”, Augustinus Theiner (a printed version of Urban IV’s original Latin epistle may be found here)

- “John of Fordun’s Chronicle of the Scottish Nation”, vol. 2, ed. W.F. Skene (this is an English translation of the chronicle of John of Fordun, made when Gesta Annalia I was still believed to be his work. It provides an independent thirteenth or fourteenth century Scottish account of the Menteith case

- “The Red Book of Menteith”, volumes 1+2, ed. Sir William Fraser

- “Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, Preserved Among the Public Records of England”, volumes 1, 2, 3 & 5, ed. Joseph Bain

- “The Political Role of Walter Comyn, earl of Menteith, during the Minority of Alexander III of Scotland”, A. Young, in the Scottish Historical Review, vol.57 no.164 part 2 (1978). 

- “Scotland, England and France After the Loss of Normandy, 1204-1296″, M.A. Pollock

- “The Wars of Scotland, 1214-1371″, Michael Brown

As ever if anyone has a question about a specific detail or source, please let me know! I have a lot of notes for this post, so hopefully I should be able to help!

[scotianostra]

On September 4th 1241, Alexander III was born at Roxburgh. 

Alexander was king of Scotland, regarded as one of the country's greatest rulers. His reign marked a period of peace and prosperity in Scotland. Alexander became king at the age of seven after the death of his father, Alexander II. The years of his minority saw a bitter struggle for the control of affairs between two rival parties, the one led by Walter Comyn, Earl of Menteith, the other by Alan Durward, Justiciar of Scotia. The former dominated the early years of Alexander's reign. In 1251 he married Margaret, the eldest daughter of Henry III of England. The wedding has been described as "the most spectacular wedding in  the British Isles  during this age. 

On the one hand, he successfully maintained Scotland's freedom resisting his more powerful neighbours' territorial ambitions. On the other hand, his traders sold produce across Europe, so he did not isolate his small nation from the world beyond. 

In 1262, Alexander laid claim to the Western Isles, at that time ruled by Norway, continuing a policy that Alexander's father had pursued. King Haakon of Norway rejected the claim, but in 1263 he was defeated by the Scottish at the Battle of Largs. In 1266, by the Treaty of Perth, Norway gave Scotland control over the Isle of Man and the Western Isles. Alexander invested the title of Lord of the Isles in the head of the Macdonald family, Angus Macdonald, and over the next two centuries the Macdonald lords operated as if they were kings in their own right, frequently opposing the Scottish monarch.

Queen Margaret died in 1275, the monarchs had three children, their two sons died between 1281 and 1283, the daughter Margaret married King Eirik II of Norway. According to the Lanercost Chronicle, Alexander did not spend his decade as a widower alone: "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." The death of his sons prompted Alexander to marry again in an attempt to produce an heir. Five months after his second marriage, on 19 March 1286, Alexander died after falling from his horse.

histlexandr's rule has been described as a period of little internal conflict. Scotland achieved a prosperity disproportionate to her size, due to excellent trade relations; "Her ambassadors and merchants contacted and carried on commerce with many nations" under his guidance. Unfortunately, leaving the country without a proper heir meant Edward I of England could start interfering in Scotland's affairs, leading to decades of turmoil during The First Wars of Independence.

[scotianostra]

On July 13th 1249 Alexander III, King of Scots, was crowned.

After Robert the Bruce, Alexander must surely be one of the most talked about Scottish Kings, mainly due to his untimely death and the crisis it plunged Scotland into during the first wars of independence.

Alexander III acquired the epithet 'the Glorious', he was the son of Alexander II and was crowned, aged 8, at Scone, on the Stone of destiny, the last pure Scottish monarch to have this honour. During the years of Alexander's turbulent minority Scotland was governed by rival factions that vied for influence.

For the first six years of Alexander's reign, Scotland was ruled by Walter Comyn, Earl of Menteith and his brother Alexander, Earl of Buchan who were opposed by Alan Durward, the young king was kidnapped in an attempt to force the regent to share power.

A marriage was negotiated for the young King with Margaret of England, the daughter of Henry III and Eleanor of Provence and he accordingly travelled to York for the marriage which took place in 1251. Henry III, eager to gain the upper hand and reassert England's overlordship of Scotland, asked the boy why he should not pay homage to him, he was reported to have responded that he came in peace, not to answer difficult questions. A shrewd response for one so young!

Alexander III took up his father's cause and launched raids at the Hebrides. It wasn't long before King Hakon of Norway decided to retaliate. In the summer of 1263, the Scandinavian King assembled a great fleet with which he sailed to Scotland. Alexander III, managed to open negotiations with the Norwegians and Islanders and delayed it until October. This was the season of autumn gales, and as he'd hoped, played havoc with Hakon's fleet as it lay in the Firth of Clyde. The Norwegians fought their way ashore at Largs in Ayrshire, where they were defeated on land and at sea by the Scots and had to withdraw in disorder.

King Hakon of Norway died from injuries from battle at Kirkwall on his way home. His successor, Magnus, signed a peace under which the Hebrides became officially part of Scotland, though remaining in practice, an independent kingdom under the Lords of the Isles, who for their part paid no more heed to their Scottish rulers than they had to their Norwegian overlords. Orkney and the Shetland Islands were left, for the time being, in Norwegian hands.

The remainder of Alexander III's reign was peaceful and prosperous. His marriage to Margaret, daughter of English King Henry III, secured peace with England, while their daughter Margaret married to the King of Norway in 1283, set the seal on the peace treaty of 20 years before, between Norway and Scotland, and established after four centuries of war and strife, a friendly relationship between the two countries which has lasted ever since. The home trade improved, revenue increased, law and order were fairly well maintained, education within limits prospered. Building was up, both domestic and ecclesiastical, and for the most part life became less dangerous than it had been.

In 1286, against the desires of his advisors, Alexander III, king of Scots, went for a midnight ramble to Kinghorn to see his new, young bride. "Neither storm nor floods nor rocky cliffs, would prevent him from visiting matrons, virgins and widows, by day or by night as the fancy seized him", said one contemporary. But it appears this night, Alexander was intent on being with his young bride. In the dark of night, traveling by steep mountains, plunged over a cliff and was later found with a broken neck.

The photo depicts the Coronation of King Alexander on Moot Hill, Scone. He is being greeted by the Ollam, the Royal poet who is addressing him with the proclamation "Benach De Re Albanne" Beannachd Dé Rígh Alban, "God Bless the King of Scotland"); the poet goes on to recite Alexander's genealogy. By Alexander's side is Máel Coluim II mac Donnchaidh Mac Duibh (Malcolm II, son of Duncan, Macduff) the mormaers of Fife had a traditional senior role in the coronation, holding the sword.

[scotianostra]

On July 13th 1249 Alexander III, King of Scots, was crowned at Scone.

The tale of Alexander is well known one and I don't want to go over it all again, to sum it up his legacies were, he gave us our national flower, from the battle of Largs and he fell off a cliff near Kinghorn, which ended up with Edward Longshanks attempts to take Scotland a his own.

So anyway I thought we would look at his coronation in a wee bit depth, and most significantly Ollamh Rígh. If you look at the picture, that's him on the left and on the arrival of Alexander at Scone to be crowned he proclaimed "Benach De Re Albanne" or "God Bless the King of Scotland" to you and I. Spellings may differ on the gaelic proclamation, so please no pointing this out to me!

The picture is not from the 13th century, but two hundred years later, taken from a fifteenth-century manuscript of Walter Bower's Scotichronicon, but it's the nearest we will get to the actual thing. Another thing I would like to point out is that in the true sense of the word it was not a coronation,until 1329 the ceremony by which a person became King of Scots was an inauguration, not a coronation. The key difference was that at a coronation the king would be anointed with holy oil, a right that could only be granted by the Pope. Attempts had been made during Alexander III's reign to secure this right for Scottish kings, but it was not until the final days of Bruce's reign that a Pope finally granted this right to Scotland. Thus it was Bruce's son and successor - David II - who became the first King of Scots to receive a coronation.

The specifics of the traditional Scottish inauguration ceremony are somewhat mysterious, due mainly to a lack of reliable sources, but broadly speaking it seems to have involved the new king being acclaimed King of Scots at Scone Abbey and then being processed to nearby Moot Hill to be enthroned on the so-called 'Stone of Destiny'. There he would be invested with the symbols of the office - a simple gold circet for his head, the word circlet is also used to refer to the base of a crown or a coronet with or without a cap.) and perhaps the sword and spectre of state - and then his genealogy would be recited before the assembled nobles would approach him and individually make oaths of loyalty to him. In the image above, the crown, sword and sceptre all reflect desgns that would have been recognisable to Bower's fifteenth-century audience, and are unlikely to have looked like that at Alexander's actual inauguration.

After the proclamation the poet goes on to recite Alexander's genealogy from memory giving the names of twenty one generations of the king’s ancestors.

The 37 year reign of Alexander III was one of the most stable, prosperous and peaceful in Scottish history. On the one hand, he successfully maintained Scotland's freedom resisting his more powerful neighbors' territorial ambitions. On the other hand, his traders sold produce across Europe, so he did not isolate his small nation from the world beyond. This legacy informs a tendency for Scotland to see herself as a secure and stable base from which people can participate in a global community. It's been called a Golden age for Scotland, and it is now wonder, that later the war mongering Edward I of England cast an eye towards Scotland enviously.

Aged only about 7 or 8 at his crowning Alexander's minority saw a bitter struggle for the control of affairs between two rival parties, the one led by Walter Comyn, Earl of Menteith, the other by Alan Durward, Justiciar of Scotia. The former dominated the early years of Alexander's reign. At the marriage of Alexander to Margaret of England in 1251, her father Henry III seized the opportunity to demand from his son-in-law homage for the Scottish kingdom, but Alexander did not comply, the ceremony was described as "the most spectacular wedding in Britain during this age."

On attaining his majority at the age of 21 in 1262, Alexander declared his intention of resuming his father's efforts to extend Scottish sovereignty over the Western Isles, which the death of his father thirteen years before had cut short. He laid a formal claim before the Norwegian king Haakon. Haakon rejected the claim, and in the following year responded with a formidable invasion. As I said before, you should know about this, with previous posts about The Battle of Largs.

Alexander's wife, Margaret died in 1274, they had three children together, their daughter Margaret was married off to King Eirik II of Norway, Prince Alexander of Scotland died aged about 20 in 1283 and David lived to be 8, both were buried in Dunfermline Abbey.

After gaining sovereignty of the Western isles and of Man, Alexander concentrated on improving the efficiency of his administration. He oversee an unparalleled period of prosperity. His rule has been described as a period of little internal conflict. Scotland achieved a prosperity disproportionate to her size, due to excellent trade relations; "Her ambassadors and merchants contacted and carried on commerce with many nations" under Alexander's guidance.

Scottish soldiers also fought in the Crusades and Alexander gave tax concessions to those who took the crusading oath. The main commodity was wool, sold to Flanders and to Italy with Bruges as an important Scottish outpost. Berwick (then Scottish) was the busiest port in Britain. Alexander also required Scottish farmers to cultivate more land.

Towards the end of Alexander's reign, the death of all three of his children within a few years made the question of the succession one of pressing importance. In 1284 he induced the Estates (Scottish Parliament) to recognize as his heir-presumptive his granddaughter Margaret, the "Maid of Norway". The need for a male heir led him to contract a second marriage to Yolande de Dreux on November 1, 1285.

Alexander maintained good relations with England. The issue of homage was tricky, because he held border counties South of the Scottish-English boundary in fief from England, for which homage was expected. He only did so after obtaining an assurance from the English king that he was paying homage only for his English lands, not for Scotland.

Scotland, he said, only paid homage to God.

Known as "Alexander the glorious" Alexander III is regarded as "one of the country's greatest rulers" whose "reign marked a period of peace and prosperity in Scotland."When Robert the Bruce became king, the task he set himself was to "restore Scotland to the state it had achieved under Alexander's personal rule." Alexander rule had seen little internal conflict, justice had been effectively administered and, all in all, his legacy represented "a model for a medieval king." It is not surprising that "Alexander's reign seems to have been revered.

Five months after Alexandrer's marriage to Yolande, the king was in Edinburgh to meet with his council. While he was in the royal burgh, the weather took a turn for the worst. That did not stop the king from setting out to see his wife in the Kingdom of Fife.

Though the storm was a northerly gale with heavy snow and led to a very dark night. He was able to sail across the Firth of Forth. The men in his party begged him to stay the night instead of continuing in his travels. He continued onward.

In the darkness, somehow the King of Scotland fell to his death. His body was found at the foot of the hill the next morn. The spot is now called the King’s Crag.

His wife was pregnant but she soon miscarried and the Maid of Norway died on the crossing to Scotland. The Wars of Independence would soon rage. If Alexander had rested his head instead jumped into his saddle then Scottish and world history would have changed.