• Discovering James de Tempilton
• Locating our ancestor
• James, the man
• Being a vassal landholder
- - see also "Vassalage in Scotland"
• Templeton's Norman heritage
• Reading a 14th century charter

 

Our first tip to the existence of James Templeton was cryptic enough:

"Jacobus de Templetone held land in Ayrshire in the reign of Robert the Bruce (RMS., I, 46)."*

That was all that was said by George Black in his The Surnames of Scotland: Their Origin, Meaning, and History1. Black's footnote reference in parenthesis took us to the Registrum magni sigilli regum Scotorum (The_Register_of_the_ great_seal_of_Scotland). The Register... is a compilation of royal documents and charters that were gathered by the chancery of Scotland, and the stormy early years of Robert the Bruce's reign provided many transfers of property and other royal orders to chronicle. One was the charter of the barony of Kilmarnock of 3 May, 1315,2 to a valued lieutenant, Robert Boyd, that mentions Jacobus (or more precisely, Jacobi, both are a Latinized rendering of "James").

By the time of Boyd's charter, the struggle for the throne of Scotland had waged for fifteen- or close to twenty years since the death of King Alexander III in 1286, and especially from the untimely death of his granddaughter, the Maid of Norway, a mere child, as she sailed from her Scandinavian home to claim her crown in the Fall of 1290. This three-cornered contest between the Scots camps of the Balliol family, the supporters of the Bruce family, and the meddling English king, Edward I, had devolved into a treacherous fight over an autonomous Scottish throne when Edward invaded Scotland in 1296 and the Scots' answer was a broad, popular uprising for independence led by William Wallace and Andrew de Moray.

Edward Longshanks was doggedly determined to subdue Scotland as a subject state to his more powerful English kingdom. Balliol and Bruce alternately played up to Edward and took up arms against the English king, often in counterpoint to the other, through the 1290s. Their noble allies followed the shifting allegiances with a wary eye to their own properties and interests while the lesser nobility and many in the Church -- notably Bishop Wishart of Glasgow -- maintained a constant Scottish patriot pressure.

John Balliol was initially given the throne by Edward and his court of auditors in 1292, but by 1296 political pressures and legal judgments of Edward's courts forced first his loss of authority to a council of Guardians, then King John I's humiliating abdication and exile to France. Wallace stepped into the power vacuum after his victory over the English at Sterling Bridge in 1297, then a succession of Guardian arrangements governed before Robert the Bruce, with a passionate act that cast him finally beyond equivocation, murdered John Comyn, Lord of Badenoch and Balliol partisan, in February of 1306. Robert crowned himself king with an orchestrated show of support from a number of nobles and Bishops at Scone seven weeks later. He then set about an eight year guerrilla campaign against the Comyns and the English -- now ruled by Edward II, Longshanks' weaker son -- to secure militarily what he had claimed politically at Scone.

It is in this brew of shifting alliances and unsettled politics (and property rights) that we come to know of our ancestor, James de Tempilton of Achindalosk.† Not surprisingly, our only notice of his existence and station in society comes in the form of a transfer of property stripped from old rivals of Robert the Bruce -- now Robert I -- to create a barony of suitable reward for Bruce's loyal lieutenant, Robert Boyd, in 1315. After all, it was the Bruce's rout of Edward II's army at Bannockburn on the 24th of June, 1314, that both locked up Robert I's hold on the crown, sealed Scotland's independence from England, and secured Robert Boyd the generous bequest from his victorious king.

What it meant to be a feudal "vassal" in Scotland Vassalage in Scotland followed its own unique set of obligations, expectations and rules. According to the scholar Susan Reynolds, the vassal of a great lord was more akin to a 'subject landowner' than what may be considered a classic Medieval fief as the distribution of rights and privileges moved down the social register from the Sovereign to the Great Lords to the lesser lords and then to their noble lieutenants.3 T.C. Smout observed, pithily, "Scotland was never merely a cultural extension of Anglo-Norman England -- the mingling of Celtic sentiments of kinship and the independency of the church prevented that." There was no notion of a nation, really, to bind the social order, either. Smout continues, "Nor was Lowland Scotland in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries inhabited everywhere by a people who thought themselves Scots rather than merely subjects of the Scottish overlord: William the Lyon (still addressed his charters to his 'faithful subjects, French, English, Scots, Welsh and Gallovidian'."4 Geoffrey Barrow acknowledged this in his discussion of a phrase commonly inserted in official documents of this time, "communitas regni Scotie" (the "community of the realm") when he observed, "it was in fact the nearest approach to the later concept of a nation or a national state that was possible in an age when, according to older and still deeply-entrenched belief, a kingdom was, first and foremost, a feudal entity, the fief -- and therefore, in a sense, the property -- of its king."5 The unsettled state of the throne for such a long period -- from the death of Alexander III in 1286 through at least Robert's accession at Scone in 1306 if not well beyond; a generation's time -- could only accentuate whatever autonomy tenants and vassal nobles may have had in the period. That, along with the anxiety and uncertainty they may have felt over their hold on their land privileges. We infer from this that there was a greater amount of autonomy on the part of the Scots landholder, particularly in matters of military obligation to the king, than might attach to his English or French counterpart. Certainly, the shifting allegiances of the aristocracy through the period running up to and through the Wars of Independence, set against the backdrop of a steadfast rebellious patriot cause of lesser nobles, knights and freemen (the institution of the feudal serf in Scotland was never a well-rooted tradition and was going the way of the dodo by the 14th century6), all connotes a national identity and ideology of more-or-less free affiliation up and down the social ladder through the period.

 

Boyd had been a close associate of Robert Bruce, and was the battlefield commander of Bruce's right wing at Bannockburn,7 taking charge of the division of the Scots army nominally under the king's brother, Edward.

“Ranged on the right the Southron legions stood,
And on their front the fiery Edward rode ;
With him the experienced Boyd divides the sway,
Sent by the King to guide him thro’ the day.”8

As the sun rose on the second day of battle, Boyd's command took the first blow from the Earl of Gloucester's intemperate knight's cavalry charge. Gloucester was killed and his assault repulsed. Across the line the English knight attack was pushed back with great losses into their advancing foot as they were making the crossing of the burn's ravine and stream. Confusion reigned among the English and the battle turned into a rout when the Scots camp followers appeared with banners and what weapons they possessed to join in the melee.‡

Boyd's was a well deserved elevation inasmuch he had declared his patriotism as a partisan of Wallace in 1297, and then very early-on steadfastly joined with Bruce in his years-long guerrilla campaign for Scotland's independence running up to the decisive battle. This condensed paraphrase of the charter establishing Boyd's barony of Kilmarnock describes the king's gratitude:

"For his faithful adherence to the cause he had a grant from King Robert to ‘Roberto Boyd, militi, dilecto et fideli nostro’ of the lands of Kilmarnock, Bondington, and Hertschaw which were John de Baliol’s; the lands of Kilbryd and Ardnel [Portincross] which were Godfrey de Ross’; all the land which belonged to William de Mora in the tenement of Dalry; seven acres which belonged to Robert de Ross in Ardnel; all of which were made into an entire and free barony to be held of the King."9

It's after listing the lands and names of the forfeited big lords we find the words, "de terre Jacobi de Tempilton de Achindalosk."

~ | ~

A fortune and fate obscured.

We are greatly hampered by not having a scholarly translation of the original warrant and charter that mentions our ancestor. Automated Latin translators found online are not up to the task of 1) translating several of the perhaps colloquial, perhaps antiquated, perhaps misspelled Latin words in the two versions of Boyd's charter that we have found (see "Warrant and charter", below), and 2) the subtlety of the usage of certain terms, the syntax, along with understanding standard forms of structure and terminology in royal charters of the period is evidently critical to knowing the standing of James Tempilton vis-a-vis the king and to the great lords mentioned before him in the charter, as well as 'getting' the disposition of his property rights as a consequence of Boyd's elevation to lord of the newly-established barony. Until we can enlist a generous historian and Latin scholar to translate the documents or find an already completed translation, we'll have to rely on very imperfect dictionary-based, literal translation of as many words as can usefully be pulled out, and on indications gleaned from similar examples of Robert I's charters that have been written about by others.

In short, right now we don't know exactly what action was taken in regards to James Tempilton's holding, much less the extent of his lands and the social status his estate carried with it. We don't even know where his land was located, beyond the undeniable likelihood it was in historic Cunninghame. "Tempilton of Achindalosk" is mentioned because he held his land under one of the lords that was dispossessed either among Balliol's in the vicinity of Kilmarnock, which seems the most likely to us at this stage in our research, or among the lands of the Ros (Ross) family near West Kilbride or on Dalry properties previously held of de Mora. Tempilton's holding, along with the other lesser "terre" holders, was specified as added to the lands held directly by the great lords as included in the royal bequest. It presumably would then be up to the new lord, Boyd, to take feu from them or dispense with the property within the constraints of custom and the terms of their tenancy. Another quite possible reason for the mention is that James' land bordered upon and therefore defined a boundary of a forfeited land being incorporated into the new baron's holding.

The support for the supposition that Tempilton didn't lose his land is obscured by the Latin, to say the least. The least of these 'supports' in our research was first found in a fragment of a paragraph in The acts of Robert I, King of Scots, 1306-1329 reproduced by by Google Books. The author is discussing the formal arrangement of the language in a charter of barony in the same period of ours:

… which is constructed thus: various lands are listed according to their former holders, ‘with pertinents’. The tenendas clause follows, holding in barony by right bounds, ‘with freeholders of the aforesaid lands namely of the land of Meneforde’ and various lands are listed, running straight into ‘freely, quietly…’. Plainly this is a clumsy construction separating the lands …11

The “tenendas clause” seemed to introduce the portion of the charter that describes the boundaries of the lands to be held by the new baron. In the above fragment it appears that Meneforde is losing his dominion but it was not clear that the freeholders of those lands are losing their rights to property. In fact, either they were still considered the "freeholders of the aforesaid lands" -- which was our reading of the fragment -- or are holders around the perimeter of the land in question. The bequest's "right bounds" is also an idea common to the two charters. Either possibility indicates that those listed after the "tenendas clause" remained on their land. The Latin charter mentioning James Tempilton shows that his name follows the words “Tenendas et habendas dicto,” ("to hold and govern as he says" is our best guess at a translation) in the same manner that Duncan says "various lands are listed" and so it is our inclination to believe Templeton maintained control of his estate.

Upon that thin reed we added the fact that one of the other persons mentioned along with our James Tempilton after the tenedas clause in Boyd's charter turns up in a later charter as still being in possession of lands around Dalry in the year 1320. Laurence de Mora's lands are included along with those of William Ker "in the parish of Dalry" among those forming the new barony of Ardrossan.12 While this fact isn't conclusive proof that de Mora retained the properties that were subject to the Boyd bequest, Iain Kerr, who strikes us as a careful researcher, in discussing the Ardrossan charter writes with the assumption that Ker (his namesake) retained his hold on Kersland with this later charter of barony:

The holdings of William Kerre, assigned by this charter, was evidence of the paramount superiority of the lands of Kersland. The charters of the lands up to the 19th century referred to the '20 merk land of Kersland', which though situated in the parish of Dalry, are said to be 'within the Barony of Ardrossane'.

Interestingly, Kerr observes that, "[p]rior to this Charter, the lands of Kersland were held by the Kerrs as the immediate vassals of the Crown," raising that portentous possibility viz. our charter's James de Tempilton.13

Perhaps the most solid endorsement for our assumption that Tempilton retained Achindalosk in vassalage to a new lord came in G.W.S. Barrow's observation that the Bruce disinherited very few nobles in his effort to re-knit his shattered kingdom; that he "held fast to the principle that there should be no disinheritance of men and women claiming property by hereditary right, provided that they were prepared to swear allegiance to him," and his handling of the issue was "informed by a spirit of conservatism and restoration." Robert was known as "The Good" because of his "patience and of his reluctance to admit failure in his efforts to win the nobles to his allegiance."14 This was despite the fact that, as vassals of Balliol in the early years of the Wars of Independence, most "landholders in Cuninghame gave the Bruce cause little known support until after Bannockburn."15 What is more, Barrow's extensive study found that even in a place and time that put great weight on family and feudal ties, "there was nothing vindictive in the king's treatment of men and women who bore the names of Balliol and Comyn."16

James de Tempilton was small fry in this mess of earls and barons and there's no indication that he did anything to warrant exception to the Bruce's general largesse.

We then came into possession of Duncan's work, and a complete reading of his analysis of the Boyd charter and the meaning of the tenendas clause was unequivocal:

The tenendas clause follows, holding in barony, by right bounds, ‘with freeholders of the aforesaid lands namely of the land of Meneforde’ and various lands are listed, running straight into ‘freely, quietly…’ Plainly this is a clumsy construction, separating the lands given from the subtenants. The engrossment groups all under the donation, but also adds to that donation. After the lands listed according to their former holders we have a wholly new phrase, ‘along with half of the lands of Blare, of Petecon, of Dalry, of Dogetlande and of Velscheton and with freeholders of the said lands and services of the same freeholders, along with the freeholders of the underwritten lands and their services, namely the land of Meneforde…’28

James was a subtenant that appears to have had his lands added to, or used to describe the ‘right bounds’ of Boyd’s barony, and was kept in possession of his property as a freeholder, and his "lands and services" were among those transferred to be held in feu to Robert Boyd.

~ | ~

James Templeton, the man.

Yes, we are being a bit facetious with the subhead, "James Templeton, the man" since there is virtually nothing in the sole source we have about the man other than that he was a land holder up until at least the year 1315. The historical record is a blank slate both before and after that moment when a handful of the most illustrious veterans of Bannockburn and the Wars of Independence, Thomas Randolph, Lord Chamberlain of Scotland, John de Menteith, James, Lord of Douglas, and Robert Keith, the king's most trusted cavalry commander, joined Bernard, the Chancellor of Scotland and Abbot of Arbroath Abbey, and the king himself, put their seals to the transfer of properties that were to make up the new barony. That such exalted company was gathered to witness the signing could have been, in part, a gathering of comrades-in-arms in acknowledgement of one of their own, but certainly was also an attempt to combine sufficient titular heft to dispossess a former king in the person of Balliol. One thing we know, at any rate, is that at least at the time of the warrant's signing, the cream of Scotland's leadership personally knew or certainly were familiar with our ancestor James.

Without a doubt, the object of king Robert's generosity, Robert Boyd, was acquainted with the Templeton family through Gilbert de Templeton, rector of Rothesay. Robert Boyd signed his homage to Edward I at Berwick-upon-Tweed at roughly the same time as Gilbert did, on the same day, and scholars place them both within the near orbit of James the Steward.17 Whatever the state of their acquaintance in 1296, we're confident their friendship and mutual respect deepened when Boyd sought and received asylum and protection from the English on Bute in the times of the Bruce's campaign against Longshanks and the Comyns, and Boyd undoubtedly worshiped at Rothesay Castle's chapel during his time there.18 If Gilbert was still on Bute in 1306, we're sure their paths crossed again when Boyd seized Rothesay Castle as one of his first acts after the murder of Red Comyn and the launch of the Bruce's final push for the throne.19

Unlike Gilbert, James does not appear on the Ragman Rolls. The reason for his not being included could be any one of several, but the circumstances of his property holding and familial connections to the high-born would by our estimation put him roughly of the status of Alan Wallace, the father of the hero, William Wallace, who was (probably) a signatory. James' absence from the Rolls may be no less significant than the absence of Alan's rebellious sons Malcolm, John and William, although there are other more prosaic reasons he may not have made the trek to Berwick-upon-Tweed to pay homage to Edward I, including the possibility that he was of insufficient status, himself, for the English king to have required his attendance.

~ | ~

A Scottish fortalice built ca. 1560. There were a few such fortifications
under Templar custodians through this period in the "County of Are".
- courtesy CelticCastles.com

James as vassal and landholder.

In addition to being a gentleman farmer for his own benefit and increase, Templeton could have held his lands in fief by serving his lord in one of three types of military obligation: by contributing to the support of a portion of a knight's upkeep, as a bowman (a military service that was more-and-more the choice of lesser landowners in Robert I's time) or as a freeholder providing his neighbors a fortalice stronghold. Lesser landholders or people granted rights to the use of property could also have simply paid a lord in specified products or money. The burden was not onerous. Neil Campbell's kinsman, Sir Arthur, was granted properties much more extensive than Templeton's -- land in Benderloch, the fortalices of Dunollie and Ardstaffnage –- for contributing one quarter of one knight’s service, for instance.20

Between 1306 and 1329 there was a marked tendency for knight service to be confined to the rich, and in the case of fees answering for more than one knight the tendency became an absolute rule. Thus great magnates like Randolph, James Douglas, Walter the Stewart and his son Robert, and substantial barons like Robert Boyd, Edward Keith, and Malcolm Fleming, are to be found holding fiefs for which the service was one or more knights. Fractional knights' fees tended to be the characteristic holding of men of rather less wealth and standing.21

Training, equipping and maintaining a mounted knight was a very expensive proposition. It is unlikely that Templeton, himself, was a full time knight even though he was of the "knightly class" and undoubtedly answered for some manner of military service in the course of the strife that repeatedly swept across the land. As a man of property, he would have been obligated to maintain a level of soldierly equipage and readiness, and would have had to answer calls to the service of the realm. In 1296, for example, a summons from the Guardians went out to raise a force to meet Edward Longshanks' invading force:

[A] national call to arms would require ‘free service’ and ‘Scottish service’. Free service was military service par excellence, performed by free men – barons, thanes, knights, serjeants and other freeholders – who according to their rank and wealth would be equipped either with a knight’s full armour or the rather lighter armour of a serjeant, and would be mounted on ‘barded’ horses, heavily built destriers protected by mail, or else lighter, weaker horses wearing coats of cuir bouillé – leather steeped in warm oil and wax. Scottish service or ‘Scottish army’ was demanded from the earldoms north of the Forth. It meant the attendance of able-bodied men from the ‘horseless classes’ – peasant farmers, herds, drovers, shepherds and hunters, fighting on foot and wearing no body armour. … The weapons used by these foot soldiers were chiefly the long spear and long-handled, pointed ‘Lochaber axe’. … Walter of Guisborough’s words suggest that the summons of 1296 was for the landholding and propertied classes only.22

The requirement of maintaining military readiness reached all the way down the social scale so that a free man in possession of no more property than the value of one cow was expected to have a "a good spear or a good bow with a sheaf of two dozen arrows."23

~ | ~

Templeton's Norman heritage.

We're confident that James was of Norman heritage, along with his more illustrious assumed kinsman, Gilbert. We know this from his use of a patrilineal last name -- explained fully in our profile of Gilbert -- and apparently was from a family that had been in Ayrshire for at least a couple of generations by the time he reached adulthood. His use of a 'modern' last name in the Anglo-Norman fashion is confirmed beyond doubt in the doubling up of "de Tempilton de Achindalosk"; which is to say that, where others he's named with in the charter -- Johannis de Kylmernoc and Villemlmi de Cobynschent for example -- may have been the first (or only) of their family to be known as "of Kilmarnock" and "of Gobensketh" ["Cobynschent"] for all we know, Tempilton was certainly known by that Normanized surname and had "of Achendolosk" appended. This would seem to indicate that he had acquired and made his family seat at Achendolosk, off of the original family holding, as a well-to-do son or grandson of the eponymous Templeton.

Another buttress to our conclusion that Templeton was of Norman heritage, and further evidence of his family's close association with the High Steward of Scotland, is in his first name. The Christian name "James" was rare enough in turn-of-the-14th-century Scotland to raise the question of kinship in Scotland and beyond: speaking of James Douglas, "son of the rough Sir William, who had died in the Tower of London about 1299," Barron observes, "James Douglas was the nephew and perhaps also (because of the great rarity of his Christian name in thirteenth-century Scotland) the godson of James the Stewart."24 §

~ | ~

It seems certain that both James and his near-kinsman, Gilbert, were patriots and of a knightly class of warriors, politicians, and theologians that acted in favor of the Nation of Scotland from the moment of the idea's inception, and must be revered among Scots as Founders and fighters for the very idea of The People's self-determination, long before their poor and scrappy woodsman descendant, William, fought another genration's English mercenaries for the independence of America.

. . .

# # #

Footnotes:

* Black uses the "Jacobus" Latinization, but all three of our cited Charters use "Jacobi", so that is how it is rendered, above, unless in specific reference to Black's cite. It's a bit of a mystery why Professor Black used a different form sice we've seen the text of the document he cites in a couple of places, and it is consistently spelled "Jacobi".

† We've encountered two spellings for James' name and property holding between the Scots Lore warrant and the official charter of the chancery: "Jacobi de Templetone de Achendolosk" is in the chancery document (near as we can tell) and Jacobi de Tempilton de Achindalosk in the warrant drafted on the scene and was in the possession of the Boyd decendants in the 15th century, presumably. However, Archibald Duncan, the scholar tapped to collect and interpret the charters of Robert the Bruce (Robert I) and cites the Scots Lore warrant while also having access to the chancery rolls accepts the "Jacobi de Tempilton de Achindalosk" spelling, so we will defer to his expertise with this nod to the fact that subsequent recorded members of our Medieval family accepted the spelling of their surname in official documents in many different renderings.

‡ There is a romantic fancy in the literature since the 19th century saying this charging Scots host at the Battle of Bannockburn were Knights Templar. In this bit of apocrypha the Templars had sought safe haven in Scotland upon the seizure of their properties and suppression following French King Philip IV's arrest of their Grand Master on October 13, 1307, and Pope Clement V's general arrest order, Pastoralis Praeeminentiae, that went out to all Christian monarchs. Robert the Bruce's excommunication and his need of experienced professional warriors, in this redrawing of history, was supposed to have led Robert I to extend his protection to the Templars in return for their allegiance and service.

§ "The name James was probably used in the Stewart family because their abbey of Paisley was dedicated to St James the Great (as well as to Mirren and Milburga of Wenlock). It was founded in 1163 by the first of the Stewarts, Walter, Alan's son, a close companion of King Malcolm IV, who about this time declared his intention of going on pilgrimage to Saint James at Compostella [Acts of Malcolm IV, No. 265]. In general, James is a name of infrequent occurrence in Scottish record before 1300." - Barbour, note 24.

§

Notes:

1) Black, George Fraser Ph.D., The Surnames of Scotland, Their Origin, Meaning, and History; New York Public Library, N.Y., 1946.  p. 766.
2) "Scots Lore", Vol. 1, Issues 1-7, Wm. Hodge & Co., Glasgow, 1895. p. 271.
3 ) Reynolds, Susan, "Fiefs and Vassals in Scotland: A View from Outside", Scottish Historical Review, Volume 82, Page 176-193 DOI 10.3366/shr.2003.82.2.176, ISSN 0036-9241. 2010.04.06
4) Smout, T.C., A History of the Scottish People, 1560 - 1830, Collins, St James's Place, London, 1969, p. 34.
5) Barrow, G.W.S., Robert Bruce and the Community of the Realm of Scotland, University of California Press, Berkeley & Los Angeles, 1965. p. 220.6) Smout, T.C., A History of the Scottish People, 1560 - 1830, Collins, St James's Place, London, 1969, pp 39-41. See also Oram, Richard, 'Rural society: 1. medieval', in Michael Lynch (ed.), The Oxford Companion to Scottish History, Oxford: University Press, 2005. p. 549.
6) Cooper, Charles Purton, An account of the most important public records of Great Britain and the Publications of the Record Commissioners..., Vol. 2; Baldwin and Cradock, London, 1832. p.
7) http://www.kilmarnock.com/boyds.html 2010.04.29 -- also others, including the nearly contemporaneous poet Harvey.
8) John Harvey, The Life of Robert Bruce, King of Scots : A Poem, Edinburgh, 1729, quarto, quoted in Paterson’s History of the county of Ayr:… p. 172.
9) http://www.scribd.com/doc/27688373/Boyd-Genealogy#about 2010.04.16
10) Cooper, op. cit., p. __.
11) Duncan, Archibald Alexander McBeth, The acts of Robert I, King of Scotland, 1306-1329, Volume 5 of Regesta regum Scottorum, Edinburgh University Press, 1988. p. 250.
12) Caldwell, David H., "Ardrossan Castle, Ayrshire: a preliminary account", Proceedings of the Society 1971-72, Edinburgh. p. 218.
13) Kerr, Iain, "Origins of the Surname Kerr", Rootsweb.com, KERR-L Archives, 18 April, 2000. 2010.06.13
14) Barrow, G.W.S., op. cit., pp. 352, 354.
15) Caldwell, op. cit. p. 216.
16) Barrow, G.W.S., op. cit., p. 363.
17) Barrow, Geoffrey and Royan, Ann, “James Fifth Steward of Scotland, 1260(?) –1309” in Stinger, K.J., ed., Essays on the Nobility of Medieval Scotland, John Donald Publishers, Ltd., Edinbugh, 1985. p. 176.
18) Reid, John Eaton, History of the county of Bute: and families connected therewith, Thomas Murray and Son, Glasgow, 1864. p. 30; Google Books, 2009.12.05. p. 48.
19) Barrow, G.W.S., op. cit., p. 191. also, www.argyll-bute.gov.uk (.PDF) 2010.06.15.
20) Barrow, ibid., p. 376.
21) Barrow, ibid., p. 404.
22) Barrow, ibid., p. 88.
23) Barrow, ibid., p. 386.
24) Barbour, Bruce, Cal. Docs. Scot., iii, No. 682. pp. 9, 421.
25) Cooper, op. cit., p. __.
26) "Scots Lore", op. cit., p. 271.
27) Public records: A description of the contents, objects, and uses of the various Works printed, Sir Nicholas Harris Nicolas, editor, Record Commission; Baldwin and Cradock, London, 1831.
28) Duncan, Archibald, The acts of Robert I, King of Scots, 1306 - 1329, University Press, Edinburgh, 1988. p. __.

<-- Back to Family Tree

<-- Back to Biographies

<-- Back To History