Chapter 28

[336]Fordun, l. 4, c. 43.Appendix E.Welsh Gwerth.[337]Leg. Ini, 23. The Wealh-gerefa occurs in the Saxon Chronicle, and had no reference toWales. The meaning of Seneschal and Mareschal has been generally sought in the Teutonic dialects; but perhaps they are to be numbered amongst those composite words so often met with.Marchis certainly more Celtic than Teutonic; andSenis very like the Celtic word forSenior.Steel-bow, that mysterious appellation forferreum perus, is another instance in which the first part is Teutonic, the last the CelticBo, orcattle.[338]Const. Hloth. ad an823.Pertz Leg.vol. 1. p. 232.[339]Cod. Dip. Sax.No. 813. Osgar, “regiæ procurator aulæ,” is styled in 855 and 872, Osgar Stallr. The office was held previously by Osgod Clapa, a great Dane, who was outlawed in 1046 (Sax. Chron.) It may have been introduced by Canute; but the district, over which the Constable subsequently held jurisdiction, is first alluded to in the laws of Athelstan.[340]Ad Scotosin Christum credentes, ordinatur a Papa Cælestino Palladius, et primus episcopus mittitur. Such are the words of Prosper of Aquitaine in his Chronicle,ad an.431. Not only were therebelieversamongst the Irish at this time, butheretics, according to Jerome. The Pelagian heresy was sometimes calledPultis Scottorum.Videthe authorities, etc., quoted by O’Connor inRer. Hib. Scrip. Vet., vol. i. p. lxxi.[341]The date 432 is usually assigned to the arrival of St. Patrick in Ireland. There is nothing by which the real accuracy of this date can be tested, and it wears a very suspicious appearance, as if it had been originally fixed upon to favour the usual story of Patrick’s ordination by Pope Celestine, who died in that year. One of the earliest traditions about the Irish Saint—that contained in Nennius—couples “Bishop Germanus,” with Pope Celestine, and “Victor the Angel of God,” as the originators of Patrick’s mission, adding, that Germanus sent “Bishop Severus” with Patrick.Severuswas the companion of Germanus in his second expedition into Britain. In the old poem ascribed to Fiech (given by O’Connor as above, p. xc.) Patrick is said to have remained in southern Gaul and studied the Canons withGermanus. The fable of the Angel Victor is evidently founded on the following passage in theConfession of Patrick:—“Et ibi scilicet vidi in visu, nocte,virumvenientem quasi de Hiberione,cui nomen Victoricius, cum epistolis innumerabilibus, et dedit mihi unam ex illis, et legi principium epistolæ continentem Vox Hiberionacum.” The saint’s dream of the arrival of the human Victoricius from Ireland with a letter, bearing the prayers of the Irish to convert them, was magnified in after times into the miraculous appearance of the angel Victor from heaven.[342]Prosper,Chron.431. He affirms that Pope Celestine deputed Germanus at the instance of Palladius (Chron.429). Constantius of Lyons, in his life of Germanus, never alludes to the Pope, but attributes the mission of Germanus and Lupus to a Council of Gallican Bishops, assembled on account of the representations of the British Church. Beda, who must have had both accounts before him (for he quotes from both authorities), has literally transcribed the narrative of Constantius; and as he must have had some reason for this preference, I do not feel inclined to dissent from the venerable historian. Some clue may perhaps be afforded to the reasons for such opposite versions of the same story, by the remark of the Benedictine compiler ofL’Art de verifier les Dates, etc., “Ce pape (Zozimus) l’année précédente (i.e., 417) avait accordé le Vicariat du Saint Siege dans les Gaules à Patrocle, Evêque d’Arles;c’était une nouveauté pour les Gaules, ou elle excita de grandes contestations.” Prosper may have chosen to give a colouring to the proceeding which the Gallican Bishops would have been unwilling, at that time, to admit.[343]The scene of the labours of Palladius has been transferred to Scotland, a change of which Prosper appears to have been profoundly ignorant.[344]“Ingenuus fui secundum carnem, Decorione patre nascor,” are the words in his epistle to Coroticus. According to theConfession, Patrick was about sixteen years old when he was carried off to Ireland, whither he returned to preach Christianity about thirty years afterwards. It is curious to contrast the numerous miracles ascribed to his early youth and childhood by Jocelyn and others with the ingenuous admission in theConfession, of the temporary errors of his youthful days, and of his carelessness andunbelieffrom infancy until his captivity. TheConfessionandEpistle to Coroticuswill be found inRer. Hib. Scrip. Vet., vol. i. p. cvii.[345]Vit. St. Cudb., cap. 16.[346]It is difficult to conceive how the sister of thePannonianMartin could have been the wife of theBritishCalphurnius; and the story probably arose from thespiritualrelationship of St. Martin to the Apostle of Ireland. Ninian, the converter of the southern Picts, is also sometimes called a nephew of Martin. The dedication of the churches of Canterbury, Whithern, and Hereford, with the Irish Abbey at Cologne, to St. Martin, together with “the Gospel of St. Martin,” long preserved at Derry, and supposed to have been brought from Tours by St. Patrick, attest the veneration in which the name of the founder of monachism in Gaul was held throughout Britain and Ireland in early times.[347]Mabillon, Hist. Bened., l. x. c. 17. In the Rule of St. Columba, the first injunction is, “Be alone in a separate place near a chief city.”—Colton’s Visitation, I. A. S., Appendix D.[348]The Bishops of the Gaelic Church were ordained in the usual manner. Thus Finan, when he ordained Cedd, called in two other bishops to assist in performing the ceremony—Beda, Hist. Eccl., l. iii., c. 22. But many probably were chorepiscopi, at whose ordination it was only requisite for one bishop to officiate. It was this order, long suppressed and forgotten in the Roman Church, that scandalized Lanfranc, Anselm, and others, in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. That the leading bishops of the Gaelic Church at this time were regularly ordained, may be inferred from the fact that there is no allusion to anyre-ordinationof bishops at the time when the Churches of Scotland and Ireland were remodelled. Perhaps “the dignity of Noble Bishop” (Uasal Escop.,Vide A. F. M., 1106), may allude to the superior or episcopal order, as opposed to the inferior or chorepiscopal. The want of a fixed diocese must have contributed to impress the Irish bishops with that character for wandering which was so much complained of in the ninth century. Bishops without a diocese, however, were not confined to the Irish Church, as at a much later period, Olaf the Saint had his “Hird-Bishop,” whose peculiar duties must have attached him to the royal household. The necessity of episcopal ordination for the priesthood is implied in the story related of Columba by Adamnan, in his life of that saint. Upon hearing that Findchan, a priest, had “laid his hands” on the head of Aodh Dubh, to complete the ordination which the bishop had refused to proceed with, Columba exclaimed, “Illa manus dextra quam Findchanus,contra fas et jus ecclesiasticum, super caput filii perdicionis imposuit, mox computrescit.” Much information about the early Irish Church is contained in Dr. Reeves’Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Down, etc.,Appendix A. The custom of Iona, in the seventh century, as described by Beda, seems to have resembled the ancient custom of the Church of Alexandria, by which, “not the bishops, but twelve presbyters were the electors, nominators, and (according to Eutychius) consecrators.—(Stanley’s East. Church, p. 266, note 2.) These twelve presbyters are very like the twelve Culdees who formed, as it were,the Staffof every Gaelic monastery.[349]As tithes were unknown, asa fixed payment, in Gaul for some time after the mission of St. Patrick, it is not surprising that the Scots and Irish were ignorant of them in the twelfth century. It was the custom of Aidan and his followers to build churches “per loca” (Bed. Ecc. Hist., l. 3, c. 3), which appear to have been dependant on the monastery of the district. Thus, on the foundation of the regular diocese of Aberdeen, the monastery of Mortlach, with five churches and their lands, was made over to the new see.Reg. Aberd., vol. 1, p. 5, 6. From the same Registry, p. lxxvii., it appears that theCuairtwas eventually compounded for by the payment ofProcurationes.[350]Mr. Petrie (Tara, p. 172) enumerates fourCains—1. Cain Patraic, not to kill the clergy. 2. Cain Daire Chailleach (the nun), not to kill cows. 3. Cain Adomnan, not to kill women. 4. Cain Domnaig, or Sunday law. TheRiar Patraic(Patrick’s demand) is explained by Tighernach (ad an.986), to meanCuairt eitir Cill ⁊ Tuaith, “the Right of Visitation over Church and State” (or over Clergy and Laity). Dr. Reeves’ preface to “Primate Colston’s Visitation,”IAS., contains very full information on the subject of the early Irish Visitations. Inmesach is said to have introduced the custom in 721 (Tigh.), a few years after the Northern Irish, Pictish, and Scottish Churches had relinquished their early Cycle and Tonsure. The Cuairt was probably unknown to Patrick or Columba.[351]Thus Lorcan O’Tuathal preferred the abbacy to the bishopric of Glendalough, though it may be questioned whether the choice of the Saint was as purely disinterested as is sometimes asserted. “In hac autem ecclesiâ et Episcopatus erat et Abbatia; sed Abbatia quoad temporales divitias longé erat Episcopatu opulentior.”—Ware Antiq., vol. 1, p. 312, 372.[352]The first allusion to a Herenach occurs inTigh.605,An. Ult.604,A.F.M.601, but the office is not again met with before the close of the eighth century.VideMr. O’Donovan’sNote OtoA.F.M., 1179; though the description of the Herenach there quoted from Sir John Davies—paying a yearly rent to the Bishop, a fine upon the marriage of his daughter, and a subsidy to every Bishop on his first entry into the diocese; in other words, holding in fee-farm, withmerchet, and relief, or payment for a renewal of his lease—applies rather to his character after the English settlement had reducedCowarbsandHerenachsto a very different footing from their position in early times. The name ofAircinneach, meaningPrinceps, “Head of the Kin,” orOverlord(Reeves, Adamn. N.p. 364, note M), points to a high position. In a charter of the time of Otho I., dated in 952, a Count Hohold founds a convent, of which his sister is to be the first abbess, that dignity being always to be filled by a member of his race as long as it exists. He appoints himselfAdvocatus Monasterii, stipulating that the office should also be hereditary in his family (Ducange in voc. Advocatus). In Gaelic phraseology, then, the family of Hohold were hereditaryCowarbsandHerenachsof the monastery founded by their ancestor. TheAdvocatusfirst made his appearance in the church about the beginning of the fifth century—“post consulatum Stilliconis” (Lind. Gloss. in Advocatus), and the “tertia pars bannorum et tertius denarius” were amongst his privileges. From “Colton’s Visitation” it is evident that the oldTermon, or Church lands, were divided into three portions, two belonging to the rector and his vicar, and the remainingthirdto the Herenach under the Bishop, to whom also belonged the “blood-fines,” orEric,the overlord’s prerogative. From a charter quoted by Harris, c. 35, p. 233, it would appear that in theAnglo-Irishperiod, theRectorwas often identical with theCowarb, so that the two-thirds belonging to the Rector and Vicar represented the Abbot’s portion of the Termon lands; and as in theGaelicperiod the Bishop had no claim on the temporalities of the Church, it seems probable that the Herenach was originally thelay-lordof the Termon lands, holding them of the Abbot by the usual tenure of retaininga thirdof the fines and profits—tertia parsbannorum, et tertius denarius. After the Cowarbs became very generally laymen, they retained their portion of the Termon lands in their own hands, under the superintendence of their own stewards and deputies, and the office of Herenach, declining in importance, probably fell into the hands of less exalted members of the family. When the Gaelic Church system was superseded, the Herenach lands—Church lands held by a layman—appear to have been confiscated to supply an income for the Bishop, the former holders losing all their former claims upon “the thirds,” and retaining only that small portion of the land which was their actualduchas, or freehold; whilst as the families of the greater Cowarbs were generally very powerful, they were often, probably, allowed to retain thepatronage to the Rectoryin their family, provided it was presented to an ecclesiastic.[353]VidetheCatalogus Sanctorum Hiberniæ(attributed to Tirechan), in O’Connor’sAnnotationes ad SæculumVI.Rer. Hib. Script. Vet., vol. 2, p. 162. In the British monasteries the monks devoted themselves to manual labour, as at Bangor (Bed. Hist. Eccl., l. 2, c. 2); but the Irish monks were generally of thecontemplativeorder, as at Louth, the monastery of Mochta, the disciple of Patrick (Tigh.534).In this they strictly followed the rule of St. Martin, in whose monastery at Tours contemplation was the business of the senior monks, whilst the younger brethren were employed in writing.Vide Sulp. Sev. Vit. St. Martin, c. 7. The contemplative life long continued to be the characteristic of the Gaelic monks. The Gallican Liturgy (Cursus Gallicanus) appears to have been in general use both in the British and Gaelic Churches; and according to an old MS. quoted by Usher,Prim.p. 185, it was introduced by Germanus and Lupus. The diversity of Rules remained to astonish the Papal Legate in the twelfth century, who mentions a singular fact that shows how deeply wedded the Irish monks must have been to their peculiar Rule. “Quid enim magis indecens aut schismaticum dici poterit, quam doctissimum unius ordinis in alterius Ecclesia idiotam et laicum fieri” (Usher’s Sylloge, p. 77); by which the Bishop of Limerick seems to imply that the ordination of one order of monks was not acknowledged by another. This tendency to cling to a particular Rule was probably amongst the causes which led to the predominance over the Bishop of the Abbot, whose special duty was to preserve strictly the Rule of the Founder. There is no trace of any such narrow prejudice in favour of “the Rule,” as that to which Bishop Gillebert alludes, to be found in the early Gaelic Church.[354]The arguments of Laisren, Abbot of Lethglin, at the Synod held at that place, are said to have induced the Southern Churches to abandon the Cycle and Tonsure of their predecessors about 629–30.Usher Primord.p. 936. This Laisren has been erroneously confounded with Laistranus, one of the abbots addressed by Pope John about 640.Bed. Eccl. Hist., l. 2, c. 19. CompareBed. Hist. Eccl., l. 3, c. 26, l. 5, c. 15, 23. Saint Fintan was the opponent of Laisren, and tradition has ascribed to him a singular method of upholding his opinions. He offered three alternatives to Laisren—1. To throw two copies of the old and the new systems into a fire, to test which would remain unburnt. 2. To shut up two monks in a burning house, and submit them to the same ordeal! 3. Or to raise a monk from the dead and abide by his decision. Laisren declined the trial through fear of Fintan’s superior sanctity; and, at any rate, the two monks must have felt relieved by his humility. Cummian, however, appears to have been totally ignorant that any such alternatives were offered to Laisren during the Synod of Lethglin; for he represents the arguments of the principal opponent of the new system (whom he hesitates not to stigmatise asa whited wall) to have been based upon an appeal to the traditions and practice of their forefathers.Usher Brit. Eccl. Antiq., c. 17, p. 485; andSylloge, p. 33.[355]In his epistle to Bishop Egbert of York.[356]TheCowarbwas supposed to be the successor of the earliest abbot, orecclesiasticalfounder of the monastery; but in process of time he appears rather to have been the representative of thelayfounder, or, in other words, of the prince or chieftain who granted the Termon lands to the monastery. Thus most of the Cowarbs of St. Patrick (or Abbots of Armagh) can be traced to one of the various families of Oirgialla, of which race was Daire, who originally granted to St. Patrick the land for founding the monastery (A.F.M., 457); though in the ninth century the Hy Nial made several attempts to obtain the appointment for their own nominees. The whole monastery gradually became filled with “Founder’s kin,” and each leading family appears to have possessedthe patronageof the monastery of the district. Nor was this custom confined to the Gaelic Church, for it existed in Wales, Bretagne, Auvergne (videGoodall’s Preface to Keith), and in many parts of England, where the sons of priests were accustomed to inherit their father’s churches.Vide Ead. Hist. Nov., l. 3, p. 67. Instances still exist of the union of ecclesiastical and temporal power; for the Vladika of Montenegro is invariably the bishop, as well as the prince, of his wild country.[357]The wordCuldeesignifies nothing more than clergyman, and it was the general name for the clergy amongst the Gael. The Culdees can be traced in Ireland, just the same as in Scotland, and they were replaced by regular canons in the same manner. The Oratories and Culdees of Armagh are mentionedA.F.M.919,An. Ult.920. The Oratories were probably the seven churches, or chapels, which appear to have belonged to all the larger Gaelic monasteries, and the Culdees were the officiating ministers. The Prior and Culdees of Armagh retained many of their privileges down to the Reformation. Culdees were the ministers of York Cathedral, from the date of Oswald’s foundation until after the Conquest; and they probably inherited their privileges from the time of Bishop Aiden.Vide Ware’s Antiquities (Harris), vol. 1, p. 236. The old canons of Durham were exactly in the same position as the Irish or Scottish Culdees. They were the descendants of the bearers of St. Cuthbert’s body during the early Danish wars, inheriting their canonries by right of blood, and claiming to elect the bishop from their own body. In short, the see was in the hands of certain privileged families until the Anglo-Saxon Church beyond the Humber was remodelled after the Conquest.Vide Hist. Dun. (Twysden), l. 2, c. 6; l. 3, c. 6, 18. It is worthy of notice thata Hospitalis generally to be found where Culdees can be traced to have existed, and this hospital is generally dedicated to St. Leonard.[358]The power of the monastery depended very much on that of the chieftain of the district, and varied accordingly. Thus, in early times, Clonmacnois appears to have claimed the tribute of Connaught, though the primacy was eventually transferred to Tuam. Like St. Andrews in Scotland, Armagh had become far the most powerful abbey in Ireland in the twelfth century.[359]Ailred (Twysden), p. 348. David found three or four, and left nine sees.[360]Gregory and Cormac, the Bishops of Moray and Dunkeld, attested the Foundation Charter of Scone. At that time St Andrews was vacant.[361]Myln, Vit. Dunk. Ep., pp. 5–10.Reg. Aberd., vol. i. p. 76,note; vol. ii. p. 58.Reg. Morav., Nos. 46, 47, 48.Keith, Pref.p. 10. According toFordun, l. viii. ch. 73, Earl Gilbert gave a third of his earldom to Inch Affray, a third to the bishopric of Dunblane, and only retained a third for himself and his heirs; and the same earl is often described as theFounderof the see. In a strict sense this is doubtful, for Dunblane was undoubtedly amongst thenineSees existing, according to Ailred, at David’s death; and the poverty of the bishopric five years after Gilbert’s death, in 1223, hardly agrees with the supposed donation of a third of his earldom. Inch Affray was the Foundation of Gilbert, upon which he lavished the tithes of hisCan, his rents, his fines, and his offerings. Yet that the bishopric was endowed by the earls is a certainty, because in 1442 James II. declared, that the temporalities of the bishopric, hitherto held of the Earl of Strathearn, were henceforth to be held of the Crown. When the Pope granted to the Bishop a fourth of the tithes of the whole diocese for the support of himself, a Dean, and Canons, the Bishop seems to have abandoned “all right of pension out of the lands or churches of the Earl of Menteith,” who was permitted to found a house for Regular Canons at Inch Mahomoc, making over the church of Kippen to found a Canonry in Dunblane Cathedral, and the church of Callander for the Bishop himself. This arrangement wears very much the appearance of a compromise; as if, at the revival of the see, David had assigned the earldoms of Strathearn and Menteith to the bishop as his diocese, neither of the earls, in the first instance, resigning the church-lands in their possession, until the Earl of Menteith waived all claim to thepatronage of the See, in return for the permission to found thefamilyPriory of Inch Mahomoc; whilst the bishop waived all further claim upon the earldom of Menteith, in return for the churches of Kippen and Callander. The diocese was thenceforth confined, in point of fact, to the earldom of Strathearn, in which all its temporalities were situated; and in return for the patronage of the see, no longer disputed by the Earls of Menteith, the successors of Gilbert would have no longer had any reluctance to carry out his intentions.—Vide Innes’ Sketches, etc.;Inch Affray, pp. 204 to 219. In earlier times each earl would have placed his bishop in the family establishments of Inch Affray and Inch Mahomoc.[362]The Seven Churches, for instance, at Clonmacnois and Glendalough, in Ireland. According to Beda,Hist. Eccl., l. 2, cap. 2; the Welsh monastery of Bangor was divided intosevenportions, each containing three hundred monks, under a prior (præpositus). This arrangement may have had some connection with the peculiarity of Seven Churches. Seven British bishops are said to have attended the conference at Augustine’s Oak, and seven bishops are said to have preached the Faith in Gaul.—(Hist. Eccl. Franc., l. 1, cap. 28).[363]This description is taken from the “History of St. Rule,” etc. (Pinkerton’s Dissertation, vol. 2, Ap. No. 7, sec. 3, andJamieson’s Culdees, AppendixNo. 7), written by a contemporary of the kings Alexander and David. Like most tradition it is a singular mixture of truth and error. TheHungus filius Ferlon, and his sonHowonan, contemporaries of Constantine the Great, are evidently Angus Mac Fergus, who reigned from 820 to 834, and his son Eoganan, who was killed in 839. The “Devotion to St. Andrew”—(Pinkerton, No. 12)—exemplifies the growth of error in such traditions, for it represents the saint bidding Angus dedicate to the Churchthe tithesof his possessions.[364]Such were the Abbots of Dunkeld, ancestors of the royal line of Atholl, and those of Abernethy, ancestors of the family of that name. From the name of the first Earl of Ross, Ferquhard Mac-in-Sagart (the son of the priest), he was probably of a clerical family of this description. The lay Abbots of Brechin witness many charters. The Abbacy of St. Andrews was vested in the king.[365]This difference between the Irish and Scottish Churches may probably be traced to the time when Nechtan drove the monks of Iona out of his dominions, and transferred the superiority to Abernethy. It was adopted, most likely, from the Anglo-Saxons, amongst whom I cannot trace theadvocatusany more than theHerenachamongst the Scottish Gael. The character may have existed amongst both people, but I am not aware of anynamefor it; nor has any word likeVogtpenetrated into either English or Scottish, as it has into the Germanic and Scandinavian languages.[366]Reg. Prior. St. And., p. 186.Videalso p. 48, and other papal confirmations.[367]Reg. Prior. St. And., pp. 43–188. The little Abbey of St. Servans belonged to the bishop, as the brotherhood had, on its first establishment, made over their possessions to the bishop, according to the usual Gaelic custom, in return for food and clothing.—Reg. Prior. St. And., p. 113.[368]Reg. Aberd., vol. 2, p. 264.[369]Vide Goodall’s Preface to Keith’s Catalogue of Bishops.When David revived the See of Brechin, he merely granted to the Bishop and Culdees the right of holding a Sunday market in theirVillof Brechin. The Church-lands, originally “given to the Lord” by Kenneth II., were probably in the possession of theCowarbs, long represented by the lay Abbots of Brechin. Leod is the first known member of the family, attesting charters of David, as “Abbas de Brechin,” amongst the laity; and the form ofAbbeso often appears after the names of the family, that it has been taken for a surname; though, as the same individuals appear withAbbasorAbbatisappended to their names, it is evidently only a contraction. Morgund appears to have been the last direct heir-male—(Reg. de Brech. Pref., p.v., and No. 1.Reg. Vet. Arbr., No. 1, 70, 72, 73, 74—1, 2, 3). About the opening of the thirteenth century, other clerks appear in the Chapter; and as the charters quoted by Goodall mention “the Prior, Culdees, andothersof the Chapter of Brechin,” it is possible that these “others” were the Canons, who now began to share the privileges of the Culdees. The latter disappear towards the close of the reign of Alexander II., and their place is supplied by the ordinary “Dean and Chapter.” Morgund died in the same reign, and the property appears to have passed to Henry, an illegitimate offshoot from the royal family, who transmitted the name ofde Brechinto his descendants. In a charter, about the year 1267, his son, William de Brechin, couples with the name of his father Henry that of hismotherJuliana. In 1232 Alexander granted certain lands to Gillandrys Mac Leod, to be held by the service of one knight, “saving the rights of the clergy of Brechin, and the annual rent of 10solidi, due from a portion to the Abbot of Brechin,” together with other lands, to be heldper forinsecum servitium, “infra dictum servitium unius militis.” From all this, I think, it is allowable to suppose, that on the death of Morgund the king bestowed Juliana, the heiress of the last Abbot, on his kinsman Henry, with the proviso that the Culdees should be suppressed, or converted into the Chapter, at the same time erecting the lands of Gillandrys, the heir-male, hitherto held of the Abbot and Clergy, into a barony, held by charter of the Crown.—Reg. de Brech., Nos. 2, 3;Innes’ Sketches, etc., p. 156.[370]Reg. Prior. St. And.p. 318.[371]VideCharters inReg. Prior. St. And., from p. 362 to p. 376.Reg. Aberd., vol. 2, p. 264.[372]Reg. Morav., No. 260.VidealsoHailes’ Annals, vol. 3,AppendixNo. 4. The passage is curious, “Clerici vero uxorati ejusdem regni qui clericalem deferentes tonsuram clericati gaudere solent privilegio, et cum bonis suis sub ecclesiastice protectionis manere presidio ab antiquo, solite immunitatis beneficiis exuuntur et sub nova rediguntur onera servitutis.” As the date of this singular document is 31st May 1251, it must have been issued against Durward and his party, who at that time were in power.[373]Reg. Prior. St. And., p. xxxv, No. 16, xxxvii, No. 30, 32.Denmylne Charters, No. 19, 39. Amongst the Culdees who were converted into the Provost and Chapter of St. Mary’s was William Wishart, afterwards Bishop of St. Andrews. IfRobertWishart, afterwards Bishop of Glasgow, was also a Culdee—a clericus uxoratus—it may explain the passage in which Hemingburgh throws an aspersion on his morals, “filios etiam episcopi nepotum nomine nuncupatos.”Vide Innes’ Sketches, p. 50, note 4.[374]The Culdees were excluded from participating in the election of William Wishart in 1272 (Fordun, l. 6, c. 43). Every papal confirmation, however, in theReg. Prior. St. And.proves that the right of electing the bishop was confined to the Canons Regular of the Priory, the Culdees apparently having first been deprived of their right in the days of Turgot (Twysden, Preface, p. vi.) The expressions of Fordun can, therefore, only be explained on the supposition that they had recovered their original privileges for a short time about this period.[375]Fordun, l. 6, c. 44.Palgrave’s Documents, etc., cxlvii. cxlix.[376]Reg. Prior. St. And., p. xxxi.[377]Chron. St. Crucis, 1153. Boece attributes the rising of Somarled to a famine and pestilence, which the Chronicle places in the following year—the result rather than the cause of the invasion.[378]Chron. Man, p. 8, 9.An. F. M., 1106.An. Inisfal, 1094. The chronology, though very defective up to this point, is easily rectified. As Olave Godfreyson died in 1152, after a reign of forty years, he must have succeeded in 1112. Lagman, who was king at the time of Magnus Barefoot’s expedition, reigned seven years, which, added to the six years of Sigurd’s rule in the Orkneys, places his death thirteen years after that of his father, which occurred in 1095—or in 1108. The remaining four years are accounted for by Donald’s regency, and the interval before the arrival of Ingemund.[379]Chron. Man, p. 12, 13. The character of Olave is described in a passage redolent of the spirit of the age:—“Dedit ecclesiis insularum terras et libertates, et erat circa cultum divinum devotus et fervidus, tam Deo quam hominibus acceptabilis, propter quod isti domestico vitio Regum indulgebant.” The privileges of Furness Abbey were confirmed by a Bull of Pope Celestine, quoted inCamd. Brit., p. 1450. Wimund is one of the bishops called into existence by Stubbs, to be consecrated with the apocryphal Michael of Glasgow, by Archbishop Thomas of York, who died in 1114—(Twysden, p. 1713). It is scarcely necessary to point out the discrepancy of this date with the real period of Wimund’s adventures, as detailed by the contemporary Newbridge. Wendover calls Wimund the first Bishop of Man, and he is probably right in a certain sense; for the bishopric seems to have been revived or remodelled, as in the cases of Glasgow and Galloway, when Olave solicited a colony of monks from Furness; and as the Irish Northmen looked upon their bishops as members of the Anglo-Norman rather than of the Irish Church, Olave would naturally turn to the Archbishop of York to consecrate the first bishop of his newly-created diocese, which soon afterwards became dependant upon the Archbishop of Drontheim.[380]Chron. Man, p. 13–15.[381]Chron. Man, p. 15, 10.[382]An. F. M., 1142, 1146, 1160, 1167, 1170, 1171.[383]Chron. Man, p. 16, 17.[384]Chron. St. CrucisandChron. Mel., 1156.[385]Chron. St. Crucis, 1157.Reg. Dunf., No. 40.[386]Newbridge, l. 2, c. 4. Hoveden, a confidential servant of the English king, distinctly states that Henry made oath at Carlisle that if he ever ascended the throne of England, he would make over to David and his heirs Newcastle and Northumberland, and allow the kings of Scotland to possess without reserve all the lands between Tyne and Tweed (ad an.1148–49). Diceto, who had no object in favouring the Scottish claims, says as decidedly that Northumberland had not only been long in the possession of David, but that it had been granted and confirmed to him by charter (ad an.1173). Newbridge is more guarded, remarking that Malcolm might have brought forward the oath which Henryis saidto have sworn—ut dicitur—to David. John of Hexham does not allude to the agreement, for it was probably kept secret, and could hardly have transpired when he closed his history four years later; but he incidentally confirms its existence when he states that the Earl of Chester waived his claim upon Carlisle in favour of David, receiving the Honor of Lancaster in exchange, for which he performed homage to the Scottish king. At this time, then, Carlisle must have been the acknowledged property of David, and the homage of Ranulph in connection with the Honor of Lancaster, the subsequent claim raised by William in 1196 upon the same fief, and the grant of Furness to Wimund, look very much as if Lancashire, or its northern frontier, was also in the hands of David. His authority, however, extended far beyond the Tyne, and the possession of the castles of Carlisle, Bamborough, and Newcastle, goes far to prove that whilst he held all beyond that river in the name of the Empress Queen, he had stipulated that the earldom, which he looked upon as the rightful inheritance of his wife, should be permanently made over to himself and his heirs. Small facts are sometimes significant, and as most of the important meetings between the English and Scottish kings were held near their mutual frontiers, it is worth noticing that though Henry subsequently met Malcolm atCarlisle, the cession of the northern counties was made—at Chester. The possession of the northern counties was a matter of grave importance to both kings, for had they been held hereditarily by the Scottish princes, they would from their local position have undoubtedly become gradually incorporated with the Scottish kingdom. It was naturally the policy of the English kings to throw every obstacle in the way of such a contingency, and in estimating Henry’s conduct on this occasion, it would be the safest course for those who seek to palliate it, to ground their defence on the plea of “expediency.”[387]Newbridge, l. 2, c. 4.Hoveden1157.Wendover1157. Matthew of Westminster, far better informed than any contemporary authority, fabricates an invasion of England in order that Henry may be introduced as “vigorously repulsing” the Scots. This recalls the practice of some of the earlier chroniclers, who invariably raise a rebellion of the Scots at the commencement of every fresh reign, that they may easily and effectually crush the revolt with the same weapon that raised it—the pen. To the fiefs surrendered by Malcolm according to the contemporary authorities, Wendover adds “the whole county of Lothian,” a passage appearing also in Diceto; but I have given my reasons inAppendix L, pt. 2, for regarding it as an interpolation upon the “Imagines Historiarum,” and of no authority in either case. The meaning of a reservation in Malcolm’s homage, “salvis dignitatibus suis,” has occasioned some controversy, and has sometimes been considered equivalent to a reservation of the independence of his kingdom. I should be more inclined to regard the saving clause as applicable to all those points which, at the time of William’s homage to Richard at Canterbury, were left for the decision of four barons of each kingdom, and subsequently confirmed by a charter from the English king. CompareAppendix L, pt. 2.[388]HovedenandChron. Mel.1158–59. The question was probably about the nature of the homage rendered for Huntingdon, whetherliegeorsimple. Liegehomage, which was the tenure by which the English kings held their duchy of Guyenne—as Edward the Third admitted after some demur (Fœd.vol. 2, pt. 2, p. 765, 797, 813)—carried with it the obligation of liegeservice. The service of Malcolm, and subsequently of William, in the armies of Henry, established the fact that they held Huntingdon byliege homage; and the obligation of service was subsequently evaded by sub-infeoffing the fief, which imposed this duty upon theVavassor, or tenant of the Holder in Chief.[389]Hoveden1160.Wynton, bk. 7, c. 7, l. 199 to 216.Fordun, l. 8, c. 6. The Earls of Fife and Strathearn seem to have been amongst the most influential of the old Gaelic Mormaors, the former always staunch supporters of the reigning family, of which, perhaps, like the Earls of Atholl, they were a branch—for both these earldoms, connected with the monasteries of Dunkeld and St. Andrews, were originally “in the crown;” whilst the latter, who were “Palatines,” exercising the privileges of a Regality within their earldom, and with the patronage at one time of the Bishopric of Dunblane—apparently, like the Ealdormen of Northumbria, “mediatized princes”—will be generally found at this period at the head of the discontented, rather than the disaffected, Scots. Ferquhard never seems to have suffered for his share in this conspiracy. He was either too powerful, or, more probably, not personally disaffected towards the reigning family, but discontented at their innovations. As the earldom of Ross, of which a certain Malcolm was in possession at one period of this reign (Reg. Dunf.No. 43), was granted as part of the dowry of the princess Ada on her marriage with Florence, Count of Holland, in 1162 (Doc. etc. Illust. Hist. Scot., iv. sec. 5, p. 20), it must have been at that date in the crown; and if through forfeiture, the forfeited earl may have been one of the “Mayster Men.” Mr. Skene adds the Earl of Orkney and the Boy of Egremont on the authority of Wynton and the Orkneyinga Saga, but I can find no mention of either. The Saga only says that all the Scots wished to have for their king WilliamOdlingr—theAtheling—son of William Fitz Duncan, alluding most probably to the repeated attempts, in the succeeding reign, of Donald MacWilliam, generally known as “Mac William,” and sometimes called “William” inBen. Ab.Six years before the conspiracy of Perth, the Boy of Egremont was old enough to witness a charter of Bolton Priory, as son and heir of his mother, Cecilia de Rumeli (Dugd. Mon., vol. 6, p. 203), and as he died in his childhood—he was the hero of the well-known tale of theStrides—he was probably dead before 1160. In the conspiracy of Perth, Mr. Skene sees an attempt of the “Seven Earls” to assert their privileges and choose the son of William Fitz Duncan in the place of Malcolm. These earls and their privileges are as profound a mystery as the conspiracy itself.Vide Appendix S.

[336]Fordun, l. 4, c. 43.Appendix E.Welsh Gwerth.

[337]Leg. Ini, 23. The Wealh-gerefa occurs in the Saxon Chronicle, and had no reference toWales. The meaning of Seneschal and Mareschal has been generally sought in the Teutonic dialects; but perhaps they are to be numbered amongst those composite words so often met with.Marchis certainly more Celtic than Teutonic; andSenis very like the Celtic word forSenior.Steel-bow, that mysterious appellation forferreum perus, is another instance in which the first part is Teutonic, the last the CelticBo, orcattle.

[338]Const. Hloth. ad an823.Pertz Leg.vol. 1. p. 232.

[339]Cod. Dip. Sax.No. 813. Osgar, “regiæ procurator aulæ,” is styled in 855 and 872, Osgar Stallr. The office was held previously by Osgod Clapa, a great Dane, who was outlawed in 1046 (Sax. Chron.) It may have been introduced by Canute; but the district, over which the Constable subsequently held jurisdiction, is first alluded to in the laws of Athelstan.

[340]Ad Scotosin Christum credentes, ordinatur a Papa Cælestino Palladius, et primus episcopus mittitur. Such are the words of Prosper of Aquitaine in his Chronicle,ad an.431. Not only were therebelieversamongst the Irish at this time, butheretics, according to Jerome. The Pelagian heresy was sometimes calledPultis Scottorum.Videthe authorities, etc., quoted by O’Connor inRer. Hib. Scrip. Vet., vol. i. p. lxxi.

[341]The date 432 is usually assigned to the arrival of St. Patrick in Ireland. There is nothing by which the real accuracy of this date can be tested, and it wears a very suspicious appearance, as if it had been originally fixed upon to favour the usual story of Patrick’s ordination by Pope Celestine, who died in that year. One of the earliest traditions about the Irish Saint—that contained in Nennius—couples “Bishop Germanus,” with Pope Celestine, and “Victor the Angel of God,” as the originators of Patrick’s mission, adding, that Germanus sent “Bishop Severus” with Patrick.Severuswas the companion of Germanus in his second expedition into Britain. In the old poem ascribed to Fiech (given by O’Connor as above, p. xc.) Patrick is said to have remained in southern Gaul and studied the Canons withGermanus. The fable of the Angel Victor is evidently founded on the following passage in theConfession of Patrick:—“Et ibi scilicet vidi in visu, nocte,virumvenientem quasi de Hiberione,cui nomen Victoricius, cum epistolis innumerabilibus, et dedit mihi unam ex illis, et legi principium epistolæ continentem Vox Hiberionacum.” The saint’s dream of the arrival of the human Victoricius from Ireland with a letter, bearing the prayers of the Irish to convert them, was magnified in after times into the miraculous appearance of the angel Victor from heaven.

[342]Prosper,Chron.431. He affirms that Pope Celestine deputed Germanus at the instance of Palladius (Chron.429). Constantius of Lyons, in his life of Germanus, never alludes to the Pope, but attributes the mission of Germanus and Lupus to a Council of Gallican Bishops, assembled on account of the representations of the British Church. Beda, who must have had both accounts before him (for he quotes from both authorities), has literally transcribed the narrative of Constantius; and as he must have had some reason for this preference, I do not feel inclined to dissent from the venerable historian. Some clue may perhaps be afforded to the reasons for such opposite versions of the same story, by the remark of the Benedictine compiler ofL’Art de verifier les Dates, etc., “Ce pape (Zozimus) l’année précédente (i.e., 417) avait accordé le Vicariat du Saint Siege dans les Gaules à Patrocle, Evêque d’Arles;c’était une nouveauté pour les Gaules, ou elle excita de grandes contestations.” Prosper may have chosen to give a colouring to the proceeding which the Gallican Bishops would have been unwilling, at that time, to admit.

[343]The scene of the labours of Palladius has been transferred to Scotland, a change of which Prosper appears to have been profoundly ignorant.

[344]“Ingenuus fui secundum carnem, Decorione patre nascor,” are the words in his epistle to Coroticus. According to theConfession, Patrick was about sixteen years old when he was carried off to Ireland, whither he returned to preach Christianity about thirty years afterwards. It is curious to contrast the numerous miracles ascribed to his early youth and childhood by Jocelyn and others with the ingenuous admission in theConfession, of the temporary errors of his youthful days, and of his carelessness andunbelieffrom infancy until his captivity. TheConfessionandEpistle to Coroticuswill be found inRer. Hib. Scrip. Vet., vol. i. p. cvii.

[345]Vit. St. Cudb., cap. 16.

[346]It is difficult to conceive how the sister of thePannonianMartin could have been the wife of theBritishCalphurnius; and the story probably arose from thespiritualrelationship of St. Martin to the Apostle of Ireland. Ninian, the converter of the southern Picts, is also sometimes called a nephew of Martin. The dedication of the churches of Canterbury, Whithern, and Hereford, with the Irish Abbey at Cologne, to St. Martin, together with “the Gospel of St. Martin,” long preserved at Derry, and supposed to have been brought from Tours by St. Patrick, attest the veneration in which the name of the founder of monachism in Gaul was held throughout Britain and Ireland in early times.

[347]Mabillon, Hist. Bened., l. x. c. 17. In the Rule of St. Columba, the first injunction is, “Be alone in a separate place near a chief city.”—Colton’s Visitation, I. A. S., Appendix D.

[348]The Bishops of the Gaelic Church were ordained in the usual manner. Thus Finan, when he ordained Cedd, called in two other bishops to assist in performing the ceremony—Beda, Hist. Eccl., l. iii., c. 22. But many probably were chorepiscopi, at whose ordination it was only requisite for one bishop to officiate. It was this order, long suppressed and forgotten in the Roman Church, that scandalized Lanfranc, Anselm, and others, in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. That the leading bishops of the Gaelic Church at this time were regularly ordained, may be inferred from the fact that there is no allusion to anyre-ordinationof bishops at the time when the Churches of Scotland and Ireland were remodelled. Perhaps “the dignity of Noble Bishop” (Uasal Escop.,Vide A. F. M., 1106), may allude to the superior or episcopal order, as opposed to the inferior or chorepiscopal. The want of a fixed diocese must have contributed to impress the Irish bishops with that character for wandering which was so much complained of in the ninth century. Bishops without a diocese, however, were not confined to the Irish Church, as at a much later period, Olaf the Saint had his “Hird-Bishop,” whose peculiar duties must have attached him to the royal household. The necessity of episcopal ordination for the priesthood is implied in the story related of Columba by Adamnan, in his life of that saint. Upon hearing that Findchan, a priest, had “laid his hands” on the head of Aodh Dubh, to complete the ordination which the bishop had refused to proceed with, Columba exclaimed, “Illa manus dextra quam Findchanus,contra fas et jus ecclesiasticum, super caput filii perdicionis imposuit, mox computrescit.” Much information about the early Irish Church is contained in Dr. Reeves’Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Down, etc.,Appendix A. The custom of Iona, in the seventh century, as described by Beda, seems to have resembled the ancient custom of the Church of Alexandria, by which, “not the bishops, but twelve presbyters were the electors, nominators, and (according to Eutychius) consecrators.—(Stanley’s East. Church, p. 266, note 2.) These twelve presbyters are very like the twelve Culdees who formed, as it were,the Staffof every Gaelic monastery.

[349]As tithes were unknown, asa fixed payment, in Gaul for some time after the mission of St. Patrick, it is not surprising that the Scots and Irish were ignorant of them in the twelfth century. It was the custom of Aidan and his followers to build churches “per loca” (Bed. Ecc. Hist., l. 3, c. 3), which appear to have been dependant on the monastery of the district. Thus, on the foundation of the regular diocese of Aberdeen, the monastery of Mortlach, with five churches and their lands, was made over to the new see.Reg. Aberd., vol. 1, p. 5, 6. From the same Registry, p. lxxvii., it appears that theCuairtwas eventually compounded for by the payment ofProcurationes.

[350]Mr. Petrie (Tara, p. 172) enumerates fourCains—1. Cain Patraic, not to kill the clergy. 2. Cain Daire Chailleach (the nun), not to kill cows. 3. Cain Adomnan, not to kill women. 4. Cain Domnaig, or Sunday law. TheRiar Patraic(Patrick’s demand) is explained by Tighernach (ad an.986), to meanCuairt eitir Cill ⁊ Tuaith, “the Right of Visitation over Church and State” (or over Clergy and Laity). Dr. Reeves’ preface to “Primate Colston’s Visitation,”IAS., contains very full information on the subject of the early Irish Visitations. Inmesach is said to have introduced the custom in 721 (Tigh.), a few years after the Northern Irish, Pictish, and Scottish Churches had relinquished their early Cycle and Tonsure. The Cuairt was probably unknown to Patrick or Columba.

[351]Thus Lorcan O’Tuathal preferred the abbacy to the bishopric of Glendalough, though it may be questioned whether the choice of the Saint was as purely disinterested as is sometimes asserted. “In hac autem ecclesiâ et Episcopatus erat et Abbatia; sed Abbatia quoad temporales divitias longé erat Episcopatu opulentior.”—Ware Antiq., vol. 1, p. 312, 372.

[352]The first allusion to a Herenach occurs inTigh.605,An. Ult.604,A.F.M.601, but the office is not again met with before the close of the eighth century.VideMr. O’Donovan’sNote OtoA.F.M., 1179; though the description of the Herenach there quoted from Sir John Davies—paying a yearly rent to the Bishop, a fine upon the marriage of his daughter, and a subsidy to every Bishop on his first entry into the diocese; in other words, holding in fee-farm, withmerchet, and relief, or payment for a renewal of his lease—applies rather to his character after the English settlement had reducedCowarbsandHerenachsto a very different footing from their position in early times. The name ofAircinneach, meaningPrinceps, “Head of the Kin,” orOverlord(Reeves, Adamn. N.p. 364, note M), points to a high position. In a charter of the time of Otho I., dated in 952, a Count Hohold founds a convent, of which his sister is to be the first abbess, that dignity being always to be filled by a member of his race as long as it exists. He appoints himselfAdvocatus Monasterii, stipulating that the office should also be hereditary in his family (Ducange in voc. Advocatus). In Gaelic phraseology, then, the family of Hohold were hereditaryCowarbsandHerenachsof the monastery founded by their ancestor. TheAdvocatusfirst made his appearance in the church about the beginning of the fifth century—“post consulatum Stilliconis” (Lind. Gloss. in Advocatus), and the “tertia pars bannorum et tertius denarius” were amongst his privileges. From “Colton’s Visitation” it is evident that the oldTermon, or Church lands, were divided into three portions, two belonging to the rector and his vicar, and the remainingthirdto the Herenach under the Bishop, to whom also belonged the “blood-fines,” orEric,the overlord’s prerogative. From a charter quoted by Harris, c. 35, p. 233, it would appear that in theAnglo-Irishperiod, theRectorwas often identical with theCowarb, so that the two-thirds belonging to the Rector and Vicar represented the Abbot’s portion of the Termon lands; and as in theGaelicperiod the Bishop had no claim on the temporalities of the Church, it seems probable that the Herenach was originally thelay-lordof the Termon lands, holding them of the Abbot by the usual tenure of retaininga thirdof the fines and profits—tertia parsbannorum, et tertius denarius. After the Cowarbs became very generally laymen, they retained their portion of the Termon lands in their own hands, under the superintendence of their own stewards and deputies, and the office of Herenach, declining in importance, probably fell into the hands of less exalted members of the family. When the Gaelic Church system was superseded, the Herenach lands—Church lands held by a layman—appear to have been confiscated to supply an income for the Bishop, the former holders losing all their former claims upon “the thirds,” and retaining only that small portion of the land which was their actualduchas, or freehold; whilst as the families of the greater Cowarbs were generally very powerful, they were often, probably, allowed to retain thepatronage to the Rectoryin their family, provided it was presented to an ecclesiastic.

[353]VidetheCatalogus Sanctorum Hiberniæ(attributed to Tirechan), in O’Connor’sAnnotationes ad SæculumVI.Rer. Hib. Script. Vet., vol. 2, p. 162. In the British monasteries the monks devoted themselves to manual labour, as at Bangor (Bed. Hist. Eccl., l. 2, c. 2); but the Irish monks were generally of thecontemplativeorder, as at Louth, the monastery of Mochta, the disciple of Patrick (Tigh.534).In this they strictly followed the rule of St. Martin, in whose monastery at Tours contemplation was the business of the senior monks, whilst the younger brethren were employed in writing.Vide Sulp. Sev. Vit. St. Martin, c. 7. The contemplative life long continued to be the characteristic of the Gaelic monks. The Gallican Liturgy (Cursus Gallicanus) appears to have been in general use both in the British and Gaelic Churches; and according to an old MS. quoted by Usher,Prim.p. 185, it was introduced by Germanus and Lupus. The diversity of Rules remained to astonish the Papal Legate in the twelfth century, who mentions a singular fact that shows how deeply wedded the Irish monks must have been to their peculiar Rule. “Quid enim magis indecens aut schismaticum dici poterit, quam doctissimum unius ordinis in alterius Ecclesia idiotam et laicum fieri” (Usher’s Sylloge, p. 77); by which the Bishop of Limerick seems to imply that the ordination of one order of monks was not acknowledged by another. This tendency to cling to a particular Rule was probably amongst the causes which led to the predominance over the Bishop of the Abbot, whose special duty was to preserve strictly the Rule of the Founder. There is no trace of any such narrow prejudice in favour of “the Rule,” as that to which Bishop Gillebert alludes, to be found in the early Gaelic Church.

[354]The arguments of Laisren, Abbot of Lethglin, at the Synod held at that place, are said to have induced the Southern Churches to abandon the Cycle and Tonsure of their predecessors about 629–30.Usher Primord.p. 936. This Laisren has been erroneously confounded with Laistranus, one of the abbots addressed by Pope John about 640.Bed. Eccl. Hist., l. 2, c. 19. CompareBed. Hist. Eccl., l. 3, c. 26, l. 5, c. 15, 23. Saint Fintan was the opponent of Laisren, and tradition has ascribed to him a singular method of upholding his opinions. He offered three alternatives to Laisren—1. To throw two copies of the old and the new systems into a fire, to test which would remain unburnt. 2. To shut up two monks in a burning house, and submit them to the same ordeal! 3. Or to raise a monk from the dead and abide by his decision. Laisren declined the trial through fear of Fintan’s superior sanctity; and, at any rate, the two monks must have felt relieved by his humility. Cummian, however, appears to have been totally ignorant that any such alternatives were offered to Laisren during the Synod of Lethglin; for he represents the arguments of the principal opponent of the new system (whom he hesitates not to stigmatise asa whited wall) to have been based upon an appeal to the traditions and practice of their forefathers.Usher Brit. Eccl. Antiq., c. 17, p. 485; andSylloge, p. 33.

[355]In his epistle to Bishop Egbert of York.

[356]TheCowarbwas supposed to be the successor of the earliest abbot, orecclesiasticalfounder of the monastery; but in process of time he appears rather to have been the representative of thelayfounder, or, in other words, of the prince or chieftain who granted the Termon lands to the monastery. Thus most of the Cowarbs of St. Patrick (or Abbots of Armagh) can be traced to one of the various families of Oirgialla, of which race was Daire, who originally granted to St. Patrick the land for founding the monastery (A.F.M., 457); though in the ninth century the Hy Nial made several attempts to obtain the appointment for their own nominees. The whole monastery gradually became filled with “Founder’s kin,” and each leading family appears to have possessedthe patronageof the monastery of the district. Nor was this custom confined to the Gaelic Church, for it existed in Wales, Bretagne, Auvergne (videGoodall’s Preface to Keith), and in many parts of England, where the sons of priests were accustomed to inherit their father’s churches.Vide Ead. Hist. Nov., l. 3, p. 67. Instances still exist of the union of ecclesiastical and temporal power; for the Vladika of Montenegro is invariably the bishop, as well as the prince, of his wild country.

[357]The wordCuldeesignifies nothing more than clergyman, and it was the general name for the clergy amongst the Gael. The Culdees can be traced in Ireland, just the same as in Scotland, and they were replaced by regular canons in the same manner. The Oratories and Culdees of Armagh are mentionedA.F.M.919,An. Ult.920. The Oratories were probably the seven churches, or chapels, which appear to have belonged to all the larger Gaelic monasteries, and the Culdees were the officiating ministers. The Prior and Culdees of Armagh retained many of their privileges down to the Reformation. Culdees were the ministers of York Cathedral, from the date of Oswald’s foundation until after the Conquest; and they probably inherited their privileges from the time of Bishop Aiden.Vide Ware’s Antiquities (Harris), vol. 1, p. 236. The old canons of Durham were exactly in the same position as the Irish or Scottish Culdees. They were the descendants of the bearers of St. Cuthbert’s body during the early Danish wars, inheriting their canonries by right of blood, and claiming to elect the bishop from their own body. In short, the see was in the hands of certain privileged families until the Anglo-Saxon Church beyond the Humber was remodelled after the Conquest.Vide Hist. Dun. (Twysden), l. 2, c. 6; l. 3, c. 6, 18. It is worthy of notice thata Hospitalis generally to be found where Culdees can be traced to have existed, and this hospital is generally dedicated to St. Leonard.

[358]The power of the monastery depended very much on that of the chieftain of the district, and varied accordingly. Thus, in early times, Clonmacnois appears to have claimed the tribute of Connaught, though the primacy was eventually transferred to Tuam. Like St. Andrews in Scotland, Armagh had become far the most powerful abbey in Ireland in the twelfth century.

[359]Ailred (Twysden), p. 348. David found three or four, and left nine sees.

[360]Gregory and Cormac, the Bishops of Moray and Dunkeld, attested the Foundation Charter of Scone. At that time St Andrews was vacant.

[361]Myln, Vit. Dunk. Ep., pp. 5–10.Reg. Aberd., vol. i. p. 76,note; vol. ii. p. 58.Reg. Morav., Nos. 46, 47, 48.Keith, Pref.p. 10. According toFordun, l. viii. ch. 73, Earl Gilbert gave a third of his earldom to Inch Affray, a third to the bishopric of Dunblane, and only retained a third for himself and his heirs; and the same earl is often described as theFounderof the see. In a strict sense this is doubtful, for Dunblane was undoubtedly amongst thenineSees existing, according to Ailred, at David’s death; and the poverty of the bishopric five years after Gilbert’s death, in 1223, hardly agrees with the supposed donation of a third of his earldom. Inch Affray was the Foundation of Gilbert, upon which he lavished the tithes of hisCan, his rents, his fines, and his offerings. Yet that the bishopric was endowed by the earls is a certainty, because in 1442 James II. declared, that the temporalities of the bishopric, hitherto held of the Earl of Strathearn, were henceforth to be held of the Crown. When the Pope granted to the Bishop a fourth of the tithes of the whole diocese for the support of himself, a Dean, and Canons, the Bishop seems to have abandoned “all right of pension out of the lands or churches of the Earl of Menteith,” who was permitted to found a house for Regular Canons at Inch Mahomoc, making over the church of Kippen to found a Canonry in Dunblane Cathedral, and the church of Callander for the Bishop himself. This arrangement wears very much the appearance of a compromise; as if, at the revival of the see, David had assigned the earldoms of Strathearn and Menteith to the bishop as his diocese, neither of the earls, in the first instance, resigning the church-lands in their possession, until the Earl of Menteith waived all claim to thepatronage of the See, in return for the permission to found thefamilyPriory of Inch Mahomoc; whilst the bishop waived all further claim upon the earldom of Menteith, in return for the churches of Kippen and Callander. The diocese was thenceforth confined, in point of fact, to the earldom of Strathearn, in which all its temporalities were situated; and in return for the patronage of the see, no longer disputed by the Earls of Menteith, the successors of Gilbert would have no longer had any reluctance to carry out his intentions.—Vide Innes’ Sketches, etc.;Inch Affray, pp. 204 to 219. In earlier times each earl would have placed his bishop in the family establishments of Inch Affray and Inch Mahomoc.

[362]The Seven Churches, for instance, at Clonmacnois and Glendalough, in Ireland. According to Beda,Hist. Eccl., l. 2, cap. 2; the Welsh monastery of Bangor was divided intosevenportions, each containing three hundred monks, under a prior (præpositus). This arrangement may have had some connection with the peculiarity of Seven Churches. Seven British bishops are said to have attended the conference at Augustine’s Oak, and seven bishops are said to have preached the Faith in Gaul.—(Hist. Eccl. Franc., l. 1, cap. 28).

[363]This description is taken from the “History of St. Rule,” etc. (Pinkerton’s Dissertation, vol. 2, Ap. No. 7, sec. 3, andJamieson’s Culdees, AppendixNo. 7), written by a contemporary of the kings Alexander and David. Like most tradition it is a singular mixture of truth and error. TheHungus filius Ferlon, and his sonHowonan, contemporaries of Constantine the Great, are evidently Angus Mac Fergus, who reigned from 820 to 834, and his son Eoganan, who was killed in 839. The “Devotion to St. Andrew”—(Pinkerton, No. 12)—exemplifies the growth of error in such traditions, for it represents the saint bidding Angus dedicate to the Churchthe tithesof his possessions.

[364]Such were the Abbots of Dunkeld, ancestors of the royal line of Atholl, and those of Abernethy, ancestors of the family of that name. From the name of the first Earl of Ross, Ferquhard Mac-in-Sagart (the son of the priest), he was probably of a clerical family of this description. The lay Abbots of Brechin witness many charters. The Abbacy of St. Andrews was vested in the king.

[365]This difference between the Irish and Scottish Churches may probably be traced to the time when Nechtan drove the monks of Iona out of his dominions, and transferred the superiority to Abernethy. It was adopted, most likely, from the Anglo-Saxons, amongst whom I cannot trace theadvocatusany more than theHerenachamongst the Scottish Gael. The character may have existed amongst both people, but I am not aware of anynamefor it; nor has any word likeVogtpenetrated into either English or Scottish, as it has into the Germanic and Scandinavian languages.

[366]Reg. Prior. St. And., p. 186.Videalso p. 48, and other papal confirmations.

[367]Reg. Prior. St. And., pp. 43–188. The little Abbey of St. Servans belonged to the bishop, as the brotherhood had, on its first establishment, made over their possessions to the bishop, according to the usual Gaelic custom, in return for food and clothing.—Reg. Prior. St. And., p. 113.

[368]Reg. Aberd., vol. 2, p. 264.

[369]Vide Goodall’s Preface to Keith’s Catalogue of Bishops.When David revived the See of Brechin, he merely granted to the Bishop and Culdees the right of holding a Sunday market in theirVillof Brechin. The Church-lands, originally “given to the Lord” by Kenneth II., were probably in the possession of theCowarbs, long represented by the lay Abbots of Brechin. Leod is the first known member of the family, attesting charters of David, as “Abbas de Brechin,” amongst the laity; and the form ofAbbeso often appears after the names of the family, that it has been taken for a surname; though, as the same individuals appear withAbbasorAbbatisappended to their names, it is evidently only a contraction. Morgund appears to have been the last direct heir-male—(Reg. de Brech. Pref., p.v., and No. 1.Reg. Vet. Arbr., No. 1, 70, 72, 73, 74—1, 2, 3). About the opening of the thirteenth century, other clerks appear in the Chapter; and as the charters quoted by Goodall mention “the Prior, Culdees, andothersof the Chapter of Brechin,” it is possible that these “others” were the Canons, who now began to share the privileges of the Culdees. The latter disappear towards the close of the reign of Alexander II., and their place is supplied by the ordinary “Dean and Chapter.” Morgund died in the same reign, and the property appears to have passed to Henry, an illegitimate offshoot from the royal family, who transmitted the name ofde Brechinto his descendants. In a charter, about the year 1267, his son, William de Brechin, couples with the name of his father Henry that of hismotherJuliana. In 1232 Alexander granted certain lands to Gillandrys Mac Leod, to be held by the service of one knight, “saving the rights of the clergy of Brechin, and the annual rent of 10solidi, due from a portion to the Abbot of Brechin,” together with other lands, to be heldper forinsecum servitium, “infra dictum servitium unius militis.” From all this, I think, it is allowable to suppose, that on the death of Morgund the king bestowed Juliana, the heiress of the last Abbot, on his kinsman Henry, with the proviso that the Culdees should be suppressed, or converted into the Chapter, at the same time erecting the lands of Gillandrys, the heir-male, hitherto held of the Abbot and Clergy, into a barony, held by charter of the Crown.—Reg. de Brech., Nos. 2, 3;Innes’ Sketches, etc., p. 156.

[370]Reg. Prior. St. And.p. 318.

[371]VideCharters inReg. Prior. St. And., from p. 362 to p. 376.Reg. Aberd., vol. 2, p. 264.

[372]Reg. Morav., No. 260.VidealsoHailes’ Annals, vol. 3,AppendixNo. 4. The passage is curious, “Clerici vero uxorati ejusdem regni qui clericalem deferentes tonsuram clericati gaudere solent privilegio, et cum bonis suis sub ecclesiastice protectionis manere presidio ab antiquo, solite immunitatis beneficiis exuuntur et sub nova rediguntur onera servitutis.” As the date of this singular document is 31st May 1251, it must have been issued against Durward and his party, who at that time were in power.

[373]Reg. Prior. St. And., p. xxxv, No. 16, xxxvii, No. 30, 32.Denmylne Charters, No. 19, 39. Amongst the Culdees who were converted into the Provost and Chapter of St. Mary’s was William Wishart, afterwards Bishop of St. Andrews. IfRobertWishart, afterwards Bishop of Glasgow, was also a Culdee—a clericus uxoratus—it may explain the passage in which Hemingburgh throws an aspersion on his morals, “filios etiam episcopi nepotum nomine nuncupatos.”Vide Innes’ Sketches, p. 50, note 4.

[374]The Culdees were excluded from participating in the election of William Wishart in 1272 (Fordun, l. 6, c. 43). Every papal confirmation, however, in theReg. Prior. St. And.proves that the right of electing the bishop was confined to the Canons Regular of the Priory, the Culdees apparently having first been deprived of their right in the days of Turgot (Twysden, Preface, p. vi.) The expressions of Fordun can, therefore, only be explained on the supposition that they had recovered their original privileges for a short time about this period.

[375]Fordun, l. 6, c. 44.Palgrave’s Documents, etc., cxlvii. cxlix.

[376]Reg. Prior. St. And., p. xxxi.

[377]Chron. St. Crucis, 1153. Boece attributes the rising of Somarled to a famine and pestilence, which the Chronicle places in the following year—the result rather than the cause of the invasion.

[378]Chron. Man, p. 8, 9.An. F. M., 1106.An. Inisfal, 1094. The chronology, though very defective up to this point, is easily rectified. As Olave Godfreyson died in 1152, after a reign of forty years, he must have succeeded in 1112. Lagman, who was king at the time of Magnus Barefoot’s expedition, reigned seven years, which, added to the six years of Sigurd’s rule in the Orkneys, places his death thirteen years after that of his father, which occurred in 1095—or in 1108. The remaining four years are accounted for by Donald’s regency, and the interval before the arrival of Ingemund.

[379]Chron. Man, p. 12, 13. The character of Olave is described in a passage redolent of the spirit of the age:—“Dedit ecclesiis insularum terras et libertates, et erat circa cultum divinum devotus et fervidus, tam Deo quam hominibus acceptabilis, propter quod isti domestico vitio Regum indulgebant.” The privileges of Furness Abbey were confirmed by a Bull of Pope Celestine, quoted inCamd. Brit., p. 1450. Wimund is one of the bishops called into existence by Stubbs, to be consecrated with the apocryphal Michael of Glasgow, by Archbishop Thomas of York, who died in 1114—(Twysden, p. 1713). It is scarcely necessary to point out the discrepancy of this date with the real period of Wimund’s adventures, as detailed by the contemporary Newbridge. Wendover calls Wimund the first Bishop of Man, and he is probably right in a certain sense; for the bishopric seems to have been revived or remodelled, as in the cases of Glasgow and Galloway, when Olave solicited a colony of monks from Furness; and as the Irish Northmen looked upon their bishops as members of the Anglo-Norman rather than of the Irish Church, Olave would naturally turn to the Archbishop of York to consecrate the first bishop of his newly-created diocese, which soon afterwards became dependant upon the Archbishop of Drontheim.

[380]Chron. Man, p. 13–15.

[381]Chron. Man, p. 15, 10.

[382]An. F. M., 1142, 1146, 1160, 1167, 1170, 1171.

[383]Chron. Man, p. 16, 17.

[384]Chron. St. CrucisandChron. Mel., 1156.

[385]Chron. St. Crucis, 1157.Reg. Dunf., No. 40.

[386]Newbridge, l. 2, c. 4. Hoveden, a confidential servant of the English king, distinctly states that Henry made oath at Carlisle that if he ever ascended the throne of England, he would make over to David and his heirs Newcastle and Northumberland, and allow the kings of Scotland to possess without reserve all the lands between Tyne and Tweed (ad an.1148–49). Diceto, who had no object in favouring the Scottish claims, says as decidedly that Northumberland had not only been long in the possession of David, but that it had been granted and confirmed to him by charter (ad an.1173). Newbridge is more guarded, remarking that Malcolm might have brought forward the oath which Henryis saidto have sworn—ut dicitur—to David. John of Hexham does not allude to the agreement, for it was probably kept secret, and could hardly have transpired when he closed his history four years later; but he incidentally confirms its existence when he states that the Earl of Chester waived his claim upon Carlisle in favour of David, receiving the Honor of Lancaster in exchange, for which he performed homage to the Scottish king. At this time, then, Carlisle must have been the acknowledged property of David, and the homage of Ranulph in connection with the Honor of Lancaster, the subsequent claim raised by William in 1196 upon the same fief, and the grant of Furness to Wimund, look very much as if Lancashire, or its northern frontier, was also in the hands of David. His authority, however, extended far beyond the Tyne, and the possession of the castles of Carlisle, Bamborough, and Newcastle, goes far to prove that whilst he held all beyond that river in the name of the Empress Queen, he had stipulated that the earldom, which he looked upon as the rightful inheritance of his wife, should be permanently made over to himself and his heirs. Small facts are sometimes significant, and as most of the important meetings between the English and Scottish kings were held near their mutual frontiers, it is worth noticing that though Henry subsequently met Malcolm atCarlisle, the cession of the northern counties was made—at Chester. The possession of the northern counties was a matter of grave importance to both kings, for had they been held hereditarily by the Scottish princes, they would from their local position have undoubtedly become gradually incorporated with the Scottish kingdom. It was naturally the policy of the English kings to throw every obstacle in the way of such a contingency, and in estimating Henry’s conduct on this occasion, it would be the safest course for those who seek to palliate it, to ground their defence on the plea of “expediency.”

[387]Newbridge, l. 2, c. 4.Hoveden1157.Wendover1157. Matthew of Westminster, far better informed than any contemporary authority, fabricates an invasion of England in order that Henry may be introduced as “vigorously repulsing” the Scots. This recalls the practice of some of the earlier chroniclers, who invariably raise a rebellion of the Scots at the commencement of every fresh reign, that they may easily and effectually crush the revolt with the same weapon that raised it—the pen. To the fiefs surrendered by Malcolm according to the contemporary authorities, Wendover adds “the whole county of Lothian,” a passage appearing also in Diceto; but I have given my reasons inAppendix L, pt. 2, for regarding it as an interpolation upon the “Imagines Historiarum,” and of no authority in either case. The meaning of a reservation in Malcolm’s homage, “salvis dignitatibus suis,” has occasioned some controversy, and has sometimes been considered equivalent to a reservation of the independence of his kingdom. I should be more inclined to regard the saving clause as applicable to all those points which, at the time of William’s homage to Richard at Canterbury, were left for the decision of four barons of each kingdom, and subsequently confirmed by a charter from the English king. CompareAppendix L, pt. 2.

[388]HovedenandChron. Mel.1158–59. The question was probably about the nature of the homage rendered for Huntingdon, whetherliegeorsimple. Liegehomage, which was the tenure by which the English kings held their duchy of Guyenne—as Edward the Third admitted after some demur (Fœd.vol. 2, pt. 2, p. 765, 797, 813)—carried with it the obligation of liegeservice. The service of Malcolm, and subsequently of William, in the armies of Henry, established the fact that they held Huntingdon byliege homage; and the obligation of service was subsequently evaded by sub-infeoffing the fief, which imposed this duty upon theVavassor, or tenant of the Holder in Chief.

[389]Hoveden1160.Wynton, bk. 7, c. 7, l. 199 to 216.Fordun, l. 8, c. 6. The Earls of Fife and Strathearn seem to have been amongst the most influential of the old Gaelic Mormaors, the former always staunch supporters of the reigning family, of which, perhaps, like the Earls of Atholl, they were a branch—for both these earldoms, connected with the monasteries of Dunkeld and St. Andrews, were originally “in the crown;” whilst the latter, who were “Palatines,” exercising the privileges of a Regality within their earldom, and with the patronage at one time of the Bishopric of Dunblane—apparently, like the Ealdormen of Northumbria, “mediatized princes”—will be generally found at this period at the head of the discontented, rather than the disaffected, Scots. Ferquhard never seems to have suffered for his share in this conspiracy. He was either too powerful, or, more probably, not personally disaffected towards the reigning family, but discontented at their innovations. As the earldom of Ross, of which a certain Malcolm was in possession at one period of this reign (Reg. Dunf.No. 43), was granted as part of the dowry of the princess Ada on her marriage with Florence, Count of Holland, in 1162 (Doc. etc. Illust. Hist. Scot., iv. sec. 5, p. 20), it must have been at that date in the crown; and if through forfeiture, the forfeited earl may have been one of the “Mayster Men.” Mr. Skene adds the Earl of Orkney and the Boy of Egremont on the authority of Wynton and the Orkneyinga Saga, but I can find no mention of either. The Saga only says that all the Scots wished to have for their king WilliamOdlingr—theAtheling—son of William Fitz Duncan, alluding most probably to the repeated attempts, in the succeeding reign, of Donald MacWilliam, generally known as “Mac William,” and sometimes called “William” inBen. Ab.Six years before the conspiracy of Perth, the Boy of Egremont was old enough to witness a charter of Bolton Priory, as son and heir of his mother, Cecilia de Rumeli (Dugd. Mon., vol. 6, p. 203), and as he died in his childhood—he was the hero of the well-known tale of theStrides—he was probably dead before 1160. In the conspiracy of Perth, Mr. Skene sees an attempt of the “Seven Earls” to assert their privileges and choose the son of William Fitz Duncan in the place of Malcolm. These earls and their privileges are as profound a mystery as the conspiracy itself.Vide Appendix S.

Back to Index Next