Henry, Lord Darnley, was murdered in Kirk O' Field on the 10th of February, 1567.
Henry Stewart gained a string of titles in his day, from Master of Lennox in Scotland as heir to his father, the 4th Earl of Lennox, through Lord Darnley, an English title, to the Earl of Ross and Lord of Ardmanach, the Duke of Albany, and, ultimately, His Grace The King of Scots. That latter was his greatest achievement and he got it by virtue of his marrying Mary I, Queen of Scots, to become her second husband. At the end of the day, there wasn't much virtue in Henry Stewart, but his pedigree made him a candidate for succession to the English throne after Elizabeth I and a suitable suitor for Mary. Henry Stewart, known to the world as Darnley, was one of history's nearly men; one who is more famous for dying than living.
As the father of Mary's son, Darnley is the direct ancestor of all the sovereigns of Scotland, England and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland since James VI became James I in 1603. Not a great pedigree and a fact that explains a lot. Born in England on the 7th of December, 1545, at Temple Newsom in Yorkshire, Darnley was ostensibly an English subject, who was also subject to controversy. The first contentious aspect of his pathetic life is the debate over whether Elizabeth I did or didn't want Darnley to marry Mary. At the time, Catholic Mary had the dilemma of whether to marry one of her own faith or a Protestant; not an easy choice. Elizabeth I apparently stated that she would name Mary as her heir if she married an Englishman, suggesting Darnley.
Contrast Elizabeth's alleged endorsement with Darnley's imprisonment, because he was a threat to her throne, her council's declaring its dislike of the proposed marriage and its demand for Darnley to return to London. Maybe Gloriana had second thoughts after she'd taken stock of her Royal Scottish cousin's strong character, which was in start contrast to Darnley's. No doubt Elizabeth I thought she could remotely control Darnley and through him, Mary I, Queen of Scots, to England's advantage.
What did happen was that Lang Mary was ta'en wi' Darnley at first, going so far as to describe him as “the properest and best proportioned lang man” that she had ever seen. Whether Mary I was truly infatuated or actually in love with Darnley is debatable, but, in any case, they were married on the 29th of July, 1565. It didn't take Mary long to see through Darnley's greed and desire, which wasn't for her. For Darnley, Mary was but a stepping stone to the English throne. To foil his ambitions, Mary made sure Parliament denied Darnley the Crown Matrimonial, which would have given him equal power, and instead he was merely 'His Grace The King of Scots'.
With his ambitions thwarted, Darnley went off in a sulk and devoted his time to gaining the reputation history has bequeathed him, namely that he was an arrogant, egotistical, dissolute, vicious and drunken man, disliked by many of his peers. Darnley took to gallivanting around with a crowd of low-life mates in search of sexual adventures, frequenting establishments of ill-repute. Certain Protestant Nobles took advantage of his having become estranged from Mary and inveigled Darnley into a plot to do away with the Queen's secretary, the Italian, Fiddler Davie, whom they saw as the Pope's secret agent, in exchange for promises of granting him the Crown Matrimonial. Darnley was persuaded that David Rizzio (or Riccio), the erstwhile fiddle player, was fiddling about with Mary's affections. Another straw on Darnley's camel-back came when she told him at Linlithgow, in the autumn of 1565, that she was pregnant with their child, the birth of whom would effectively ruin all his ambitions of becoming King of either nation.
On the 9th of March, 1566, Darnley and the conspiring Nobles brutally slaughtered Fiddler Davie in the presence of Mary, the Queen. Darnley may not have done any of the stabbing himself, but his knife was left in the body and it seems it was his spiteful idea to do the deed in front of Mary. His cruel notion was that Mary might miscarry and he'd still have a chance at the throne. You can just imagine the vicious expression on his face as he held Mary down, whilst his fellow conspirators were going “stabbetty-stab” – 56 times!
Less than a year later, Darnley got his comeuppance. Darnley had become more than a nuisance to many Nobles, not least his co-conspirators, whom he'd betrayed to Mary. He was also reputedly plotting to seize his son and rule as Regent. So the 'Darnley Problem' became the subject of more conspiracy. Mary was present at Craigmillar on the 20th of November, 1566, where divorce was mooted. Also suggested, albeit ambiguously, was the idea of 'removing' Darnley. Mary wasn't keen on divorce as she thought it would have an adverse affect on her son's legitimate claims to the throne, but neither did she want them to do anything that would taint her honour. Later, after Mary had retired, certain Lords, allegedly Huntly, Argyll, Maitland, Bothwell, Balfour, and Morton, agreed to a plot known as the 'Craigmillar Bond', the objective of which was Darnley's murder.
The official story is that about two o'clock on the morning of Monday the 10th of February, 1567, an explosion occurred at Kirk o' Field, the Old Provost's Lodging, south of the Cowgate. Gunpowder, placed into the Queen's chamber, below Darnley's room, was the cause of the explosion and his death. However, Darnley wasn't killed by any explosion. Darnley's half-naked body and that of his servant, William Taylor, were found in the adjacent orchard, about forty feet from the house. Both men had been strangled and there was no evidence of burns or damage from the blast on either man. Mysteriously, lying beside them were a cloak, a dagger, a rope and a chair. Solve that one, Mr. Holmes.
The Craigmillar Bond has conveniently disappeared and, in any case, its existence relies on the testimony of two men, extracted under torture. The Casket Letters, conveniently discovered by James Douglas, the 4th Earl of Morton, have equally conveniently disappeared. One of those, the Glasgow Letter, implicated both Mary and Bothwell in Darnley's murder. Bothwell was acquitted, but then again, he married Mary very soon afterwards. On the other hand, Mary's natural half brother, James Stewart, the 1st Earl of Moray, albeit absent in France at the time, became the main man behind the vilification of Bothwell and a suspect at the time. Morton, who later became Regent, is also a prime candidate for being the ringleader. It's also said that Darnley was involved in a fake attempt on his own life, but that persons unknown had other ideas and took advantage of the opportunity. It remains an unsolved murder mystery to this day.
Friday, 10 February 2012
Thursday, 9 February 2012
The Scots Magazine
The publication of the first edition of the Scots Magazine occurred on the 9th of February, 1739.
'The Scots Magazine' is probably the world's most widely-read Scottish interest publication. It is better for you than any fizzy continental lager and contains far more readable material than a bottle label. The magazine has a multi-national readership of over 190,000 and, reputedly, at over 275 years, it is the oldest magazine in the world still in publication. Today, the magazine features stories and information about Scotland, its people and their culture, covering its traditions and history, including the natural history. Its stand-first, which sums up its content very well, is 'SCOTLAND – PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE'. According to the website of its present manifestation, 'The Scots Magazine' “has evolved into a colourful, authoritative, thought-provoking monthly periodical with many thousands of readers worldwide.” The very first issue, published in Edinburgh on Monday, the 9th of February, 1739, was less colourful, but no less thought provoking.
In the 21st Century, it should come as no surprise to find that 'The Scots Magazine' is on Facebook, whatever thoughts that might provoke. Today, apart from on the Internet, you may find the A5-sized 'The Scots Magazine' in the waiting rooms of sundry doctors, dentists, lawyers, solicitors, accountants and estate agents, the length and breadth of Scotland. It had a similar distribution in the 18th Century, although the typical reader paid his 'tanner' for it, rather than read a second hand copy for nothing, except to while away the time in somebody else's ante-room. 'The Scots Magazine' is widely read among Scots overseas and wider still than the Scottish diaspora, it is also read by aficionados of Scotland and the Scots. That latter category of folks may not be Scots themselves, but they have, unsurprisingly, fallen in love with the place. Many foreign visitors to Scotland seem to find that the magazine appeals to them and they become subscribers. There's something for everyone in the magazine, not least some magnificent photos taken in all parts of Scotland.
The published in February, January retrospective of volume one was a forty-eight page pamphlet. Edited and printed in Edinburgh, the early issues of 'The Scots Magazine', were priced at sixpence (6d.) monthly. The magazine was originally intended to be a current affairs journal and prided itself on its foreign and domestic news service. Indeed, it seems to have been highly regarded for its coverage of world affairs. The magazine was probably the first source of news for many genteel Scots, in Edinburgh and beyond; wherever else it managed to find its way, rolled up and carried in a jacket pocket or stuffed down the side of a horse-carriage seat. In terms of newsworthy events, for instance, the May issue of 1746 contained an account of the defeat of the Jacobites at the Battle of Culloden. Hardly a story that could've been missed, you might say, but it wasn't a very balanced account as the magazine at the time, like most folks outside of the Highlands, was deeply Hanoverian in its sympathies.
The summary of its history published on its website tells also that it printed long parliamentary reports, perhaps in their entirety. However, the names of the speakers were given fictitiously, which was “a deliberate device to circumvent the ban on the reporting of parliamentary proceedings.” A pretty inventive lot, those Edinburghers of the late 1700s. Those reports were presented as the 'JOURNAL of the Proceedings and Debates in the POLITICAL CLUB'. You can get a flavour from an extract introduced in this manner: “In the debate begun in our December Magazine and continued in our Appendix, M. Agrippa ftood up next, and fpoke as follows.”
M. Agrippa was, as we know from the reference published at the back of the volume under the heading 'A List of the Noblemen and Gentlemen whose Characters the Speakers in the Political Club have assumed', Lord Carteret. And here is part of what was recorded as his opening paragraph: “My Lords, It fignifies nothing to make declamations against corruption unless we do something againft it. ...The people without doors will but little regard what we fay againft corruption; but the example of this houfe will have a great effect. Let us convince them by what we do, that no Lord of this houfe is guilty of being corrupted, which I am convinced is the cafe, and the crime will fink by the weight of its own infamy.” Lord Carteret was undoubtedly an optimist. One wonders what he'd make of Parliament today.
'The Scots Magazine' ceased publication in 1826, primarily due to declining sales figures, which were impacted by fresh competition from the likes of 'Blackwood's Magazine', with its revolutionary editorial policy. 'The Scots Magazine' disappeared entirely until 1888, when it got a new lease of life, for a while, when it was published by S. Cowan of Perth, until 1893. It re-emerged in April, 1924, under the auspices of the St Andrew Society, and since 1927, it's been published monthly without fail by the world famous D. C. Thomson & Co., Ltd., of Dundee.
You can find a copy of Volume 3, published in December, 1741, in Google Books. The volume is entitled: 'THE SCOTS MAGAZINE. CONTAINING, A GENERAL VIEW OF THE Religion, Politicks, Entertainment, &c. IN GREAT BRITAIN: And a fuccinct Account of PUBLICK AFFAIRS FOREIGN and DOMESTICK For the Year MDCCXLI.'
The information presented in those early, 18th Century issues of the magazine was quite varied, ranging from news of the war with Spain and commentary upon “the cruelty and injustice of the enemy,” designed to give its readers “a just View of the Interests of our country,” to the aforementioned 'Proceedings of a learned Political Club'. It also contained “Entertaining Essays” and poetry, and furnished “Gentlemen a means of communicating to the publick any discoveries they make in arts or sciences or whatever may contribute either to the utility or entertainment of mankind.” Unsurprisingly, it also contained a list of 'Marriages Births Deaths and Preferments' that gave its readers “an opportunity of observing what alterations happen in families of a middle as well as of a high station.”
These days, as in 1741, 'The Scots Magazine' won't strike you as a publication for readers the likes of whom prefer those 'red-top' newspapers, that's for sure.
'The Scots Magazine' is probably the world's most widely-read Scottish interest publication. It is better for you than any fizzy continental lager and contains far more readable material than a bottle label. The magazine has a multi-national readership of over 190,000 and, reputedly, at over 275 years, it is the oldest magazine in the world still in publication. Today, the magazine features stories and information about Scotland, its people and their culture, covering its traditions and history, including the natural history. Its stand-first, which sums up its content very well, is 'SCOTLAND – PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE'. According to the website of its present manifestation, 'The Scots Magazine' “has evolved into a colourful, authoritative, thought-provoking monthly periodical with many thousands of readers worldwide.” The very first issue, published in Edinburgh on Monday, the 9th of February, 1739, was less colourful, but no less thought provoking.
In the 21st Century, it should come as no surprise to find that 'The Scots Magazine' is on Facebook, whatever thoughts that might provoke. Today, apart from on the Internet, you may find the A5-sized 'The Scots Magazine' in the waiting rooms of sundry doctors, dentists, lawyers, solicitors, accountants and estate agents, the length and breadth of Scotland. It had a similar distribution in the 18th Century, although the typical reader paid his 'tanner' for it, rather than read a second hand copy for nothing, except to while away the time in somebody else's ante-room. 'The Scots Magazine' is widely read among Scots overseas and wider still than the Scottish diaspora, it is also read by aficionados of Scotland and the Scots. That latter category of folks may not be Scots themselves, but they have, unsurprisingly, fallen in love with the place. Many foreign visitors to Scotland seem to find that the magazine appeals to them and they become subscribers. There's something for everyone in the magazine, not least some magnificent photos taken in all parts of Scotland.
The published in February, January retrospective of volume one was a forty-eight page pamphlet. Edited and printed in Edinburgh, the early issues of 'The Scots Magazine', were priced at sixpence (6d.) monthly. The magazine was originally intended to be a current affairs journal and prided itself on its foreign and domestic news service. Indeed, it seems to have been highly regarded for its coverage of world affairs. The magazine was probably the first source of news for many genteel Scots, in Edinburgh and beyond; wherever else it managed to find its way, rolled up and carried in a jacket pocket or stuffed down the side of a horse-carriage seat. In terms of newsworthy events, for instance, the May issue of 1746 contained an account of the defeat of the Jacobites at the Battle of Culloden. Hardly a story that could've been missed, you might say, but it wasn't a very balanced account as the magazine at the time, like most folks outside of the Highlands, was deeply Hanoverian in its sympathies.
The summary of its history published on its website tells also that it printed long parliamentary reports, perhaps in their entirety. However, the names of the speakers were given fictitiously, which was “a deliberate device to circumvent the ban on the reporting of parliamentary proceedings.” A pretty inventive lot, those Edinburghers of the late 1700s. Those reports were presented as the 'JOURNAL of the Proceedings and Debates in the POLITICAL CLUB'. You can get a flavour from an extract introduced in this manner: “In the debate begun in our December Magazine and continued in our Appendix, M. Agrippa ftood up next, and fpoke as follows.”
M. Agrippa was, as we know from the reference published at the back of the volume under the heading 'A List of the Noblemen and Gentlemen whose Characters the Speakers in the Political Club have assumed', Lord Carteret. And here is part of what was recorded as his opening paragraph: “My Lords, It fignifies nothing to make declamations against corruption unless we do something againft it. ...The people without doors will but little regard what we fay againft corruption; but the example of this houfe will have a great effect. Let us convince them by what we do, that no Lord of this houfe is guilty of being corrupted, which I am convinced is the cafe, and the crime will fink by the weight of its own infamy.” Lord Carteret was undoubtedly an optimist. One wonders what he'd make of Parliament today.
'The Scots Magazine' ceased publication in 1826, primarily due to declining sales figures, which were impacted by fresh competition from the likes of 'Blackwood's Magazine', with its revolutionary editorial policy. 'The Scots Magazine' disappeared entirely until 1888, when it got a new lease of life, for a while, when it was published by S. Cowan of Perth, until 1893. It re-emerged in April, 1924, under the auspices of the St Andrew Society, and since 1927, it's been published monthly without fail by the world famous D. C. Thomson & Co., Ltd., of Dundee.
You can find a copy of Volume 3, published in December, 1741, in Google Books. The volume is entitled: 'THE SCOTS MAGAZINE. CONTAINING, A GENERAL VIEW OF THE Religion, Politicks, Entertainment, &c. IN GREAT BRITAIN: And a fuccinct Account of PUBLICK AFFAIRS FOREIGN and DOMESTICK For the Year MDCCXLI.'
The information presented in those early, 18th Century issues of the magazine was quite varied, ranging from news of the war with Spain and commentary upon “the cruelty and injustice of the enemy,” designed to give its readers “a just View of the Interests of our country,” to the aforementioned 'Proceedings of a learned Political Club'. It also contained “Entertaining Essays” and poetry, and furnished “Gentlemen a means of communicating to the publick any discoveries they make in arts or sciences or whatever may contribute either to the utility or entertainment of mankind.” Unsurprisingly, it also contained a list of 'Marriages Births Deaths and Preferments' that gave its readers “an opportunity of observing what alterations happen in families of a middle as well as of a high station.”
These days, as in 1741, 'The Scots Magazine' won't strike you as a publication for readers the likes of whom prefer those 'red-top' newspapers, that's for sure.
Sunday, 5 February 2012
William Cullen, Professor of Chemistry
William Cullen, the first Professor of Chemistry at Glasgow University, died on the 5th of February, 1790.
William Cullen was yet another of that merry band of men who contributed to the Scottish Enlightenment. That band comprised a large body of intellectuals, spanning all the arts and sciences, and its contribution to the enlightenment of its fellow man was considerable. Cullen isn't as famous as some of his mates and peers, nor even several of his students, but nevertheless, he was a weel kent figure in his day. Cullen is variously described as a physician, chemist, agriculturalist and author. However, it was as a professor of medicine and chemistry that Cullen made his name and that, in particular, because of his innovative teaching methods. A claim to fame for William Cullen, the tutor, is that he was the first man to deliver a series of independent lectures on chemistry and medicine in Great Britain. Of course, he delivered his lectures in Scotland, in Glasgow and in Edinburgh, where the medical school was then considered to be the leading centre of medical education in the English speaking world.
Cullen's “forceful, inspiring lectures” drew medical students to Edinburgh from far and wide and he was one of the first to teach in English rather than in Latin, which made his lectures eminently more accessible. Cullen was a practical man, who delivered his clinical lectures in the infirmary, lecturing from his own notes and with hands-on demonstrations for his students. Notwithstanding his own method of teaching, Cullen's book, 'First Lines of the Practice of Physic', was used as a textbook by his students. That textbook of his became popular for a time in Britain, throughout Europe and in the American colonies.
Cullen was a bit of an evangelist for the teaching of chemistry and for its becoming an academic subject in its own right. In 1747, after persuading Glasgow University to give him the thirty pounds salary that was saved during the time the Professor of Oriental Languages was abroad and getting them to top it up with a further twenty-two pounds, Cullen was able to get his laboratory and the first ever chemistry lectures up and running. According to the 'Senate Minutes' of the 26th of June, 1749, Cullen explained that “he had expended a much greater sum himself in purchasing cucurbits, boltheads and a great many other instruments.” The University duly acknowledged that “he has just right to these instruments and may dispose of and use them as he thinks fit.”
In terms of Cullen's overall contribution, there is a bit of a contradiction in that some folks have written that he was considered a “progressive thinker, for his time,” whilst others indicate that he was “unoriginal, but enlightened” and his work “derivative.” Cullen did, in fact, produce an influential 'ology'; a nosology, or classification of disease, which he described in 'Synopsis Nosologiae Methodicae', in 1769. The saving grace is that Rosalie Stott, PhD, Hannah Fellow in the History of Medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, suggests that Cullen's name is generally linked with that of Herman Boerhaave as one of “the two great teachers of clinical medicine in the 18th Century.” Stott's paper also quotes Lester S. King as having written that Cullen could confidently be called the “leading British physician of the 18th Century” and that W. F. Bynum points to Cullen as being “undoubtedly the most significant figure” in British medicine, in the second half of that Century.
Cullen also became famous as a scientist when he became the first to demonstrate in public the phenomenon of the refrigeration effects of evaporative cooling. Basically, in Edinburgh, in 1756, William Cullen invented the refrigerator, when he froze water, using a pump to create a partial vacuum over a container of diethyl ether, which then boiled and absorbed heat from its surroundings, leaving behind a small amount of ice. Earlier, at the University of Glasgow, in 1748, Cullen had made the first known, non-public demonstration of artificial refrigeration. What Cullen proved was that the previously postulated principles of artificial refrigeration worked.
Cullen wrote up his experiment in a notable paper entitled 'Of the Cold Produced by Evaporating Fluids and of Some Other Means of Producing Cold' that was published in 'Essays and Observations Physical and Literary Read Before a Society in Edinburgh and Published by Them, vol. II'. Unfortunately for Cullen, despite statements like “the cold that accompanies evaporating fluids could be useful,” he didn't pursue any commercial application. It was left to the American inventor, Oliver Evans, to design the first refrigeration machine, which he did in 1805. Three decades later, in 1834, Jacob Perkins built the first practical refrigerating machine, using ether in a vapour compression cycle.
A name dropping list of Cullen's cronies, peers and pupils includes so many names that are of significance that you cannot fail to be impressed. Think of it this way, though, not that Cullen knew these folks, but that they knew him. They had reason to thank Cullen for the education and instruction he imparted. He had their friendship and respect in return. Enlightenment Scots associated with Cullen include: David Hume and Adam Smith, to both of whom Cullen was physician; Joseph Black and William Hunter, to both of whom he was mentor; John Millar; Adam Ferguson; William Smellie; and Alexander Monro (Primus). Cullen's weel kent students also included several influential Americans, notably Benjamin Rush, signatory to the Declaration of Independence, John Morgan, who founded the Medical School at the College of Philadelphia, the first in the American Colonies.
William Cullen was born in Hamilton, Lanarkshire, on the 15th of April, 1710. Wee Willie attended Hamilton Grammar School, before, in 1726, starting a course at the University of Glasgow. Willie developed an interest in medicine and got himself apprenticed as surgeon apothecary to John Paisley at the University. After that, during 1729, Mr. Cullen was surgeon aboard a merchant vessel trading between London and the West Indies. The next two years Cullen spent in London as assistant apothecary to a Mr. Murray, of Henrietta Street. In 1732, Cullen went back to Scotland, where he established his own general medical practice near Shotts. Between 1733 and 1736, Cullen was also able to study medicine at Edinburgh University and, in 1736, he went back to Hamilton. In 1740, after eight years in private clinical practice, combined with studies in Edinburgh, Cullen was awarded a Doctor of Medicine degree from Glasgow University.
In 1743, Cullen moved to Glasgow, which is where his interest in teaching chemistry was encouraged by Dr. Johnstone, the Professor of Medicine. In 1751, Cullen got Johnstone's job, but, in 1755, he switched to Edinburgh, where, in 1766, he succeeded to the Chair of the Institutes (theory) of Medicine. In 1773, William Cullen became sole Professor of Physic, the position he held until shortly before his death, which occurred in Edinburgh, on the 5th of February, 1790.
William Cullen was yet another of that merry band of men who contributed to the Scottish Enlightenment. That band comprised a large body of intellectuals, spanning all the arts and sciences, and its contribution to the enlightenment of its fellow man was considerable. Cullen isn't as famous as some of his mates and peers, nor even several of his students, but nevertheless, he was a weel kent figure in his day. Cullen is variously described as a physician, chemist, agriculturalist and author. However, it was as a professor of medicine and chemistry that Cullen made his name and that, in particular, because of his innovative teaching methods. A claim to fame for William Cullen, the tutor, is that he was the first man to deliver a series of independent lectures on chemistry and medicine in Great Britain. Of course, he delivered his lectures in Scotland, in Glasgow and in Edinburgh, where the medical school was then considered to be the leading centre of medical education in the English speaking world.
Cullen's “forceful, inspiring lectures” drew medical students to Edinburgh from far and wide and he was one of the first to teach in English rather than in Latin, which made his lectures eminently more accessible. Cullen was a practical man, who delivered his clinical lectures in the infirmary, lecturing from his own notes and with hands-on demonstrations for his students. Notwithstanding his own method of teaching, Cullen's book, 'First Lines of the Practice of Physic', was used as a textbook by his students. That textbook of his became popular for a time in Britain, throughout Europe and in the American colonies.
Cullen was a bit of an evangelist for the teaching of chemistry and for its becoming an academic subject in its own right. In 1747, after persuading Glasgow University to give him the thirty pounds salary that was saved during the time the Professor of Oriental Languages was abroad and getting them to top it up with a further twenty-two pounds, Cullen was able to get his laboratory and the first ever chemistry lectures up and running. According to the 'Senate Minutes' of the 26th of June, 1749, Cullen explained that “he had expended a much greater sum himself in purchasing cucurbits, boltheads and a great many other instruments.” The University duly acknowledged that “he has just right to these instruments and may dispose of and use them as he thinks fit.”
In terms of Cullen's overall contribution, there is a bit of a contradiction in that some folks have written that he was considered a “progressive thinker, for his time,” whilst others indicate that he was “unoriginal, but enlightened” and his work “derivative.” Cullen did, in fact, produce an influential 'ology'; a nosology, or classification of disease, which he described in 'Synopsis Nosologiae Methodicae', in 1769. The saving grace is that Rosalie Stott, PhD, Hannah Fellow in the History of Medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, suggests that Cullen's name is generally linked with that of Herman Boerhaave as one of “the two great teachers of clinical medicine in the 18th Century.” Stott's paper also quotes Lester S. King as having written that Cullen could confidently be called the “leading British physician of the 18th Century” and that W. F. Bynum points to Cullen as being “undoubtedly the most significant figure” in British medicine, in the second half of that Century.
Cullen also became famous as a scientist when he became the first to demonstrate in public the phenomenon of the refrigeration effects of evaporative cooling. Basically, in Edinburgh, in 1756, William Cullen invented the refrigerator, when he froze water, using a pump to create a partial vacuum over a container of diethyl ether, which then boiled and absorbed heat from its surroundings, leaving behind a small amount of ice. Earlier, at the University of Glasgow, in 1748, Cullen had made the first known, non-public demonstration of artificial refrigeration. What Cullen proved was that the previously postulated principles of artificial refrigeration worked.
Cullen wrote up his experiment in a notable paper entitled 'Of the Cold Produced by Evaporating Fluids and of Some Other Means of Producing Cold' that was published in 'Essays and Observations Physical and Literary Read Before a Society in Edinburgh and Published by Them, vol. II'. Unfortunately for Cullen, despite statements like “the cold that accompanies evaporating fluids could be useful,” he didn't pursue any commercial application. It was left to the American inventor, Oliver Evans, to design the first refrigeration machine, which he did in 1805. Three decades later, in 1834, Jacob Perkins built the first practical refrigerating machine, using ether in a vapour compression cycle.
A name dropping list of Cullen's cronies, peers and pupils includes so many names that are of significance that you cannot fail to be impressed. Think of it this way, though, not that Cullen knew these folks, but that they knew him. They had reason to thank Cullen for the education and instruction he imparted. He had their friendship and respect in return. Enlightenment Scots associated with Cullen include: David Hume and Adam Smith, to both of whom Cullen was physician; Joseph Black and William Hunter, to both of whom he was mentor; John Millar; Adam Ferguson; William Smellie; and Alexander Monro (Primus). Cullen's weel kent students also included several influential Americans, notably Benjamin Rush, signatory to the Declaration of Independence, John Morgan, who founded the Medical School at the College of Philadelphia, the first in the American Colonies.
William Cullen was born in Hamilton, Lanarkshire, on the 15th of April, 1710. Wee Willie attended Hamilton Grammar School, before, in 1726, starting a course at the University of Glasgow. Willie developed an interest in medicine and got himself apprenticed as surgeon apothecary to John Paisley at the University. After that, during 1729, Mr. Cullen was surgeon aboard a merchant vessel trading between London and the West Indies. The next two years Cullen spent in London as assistant apothecary to a Mr. Murray, of Henrietta Street. In 1732, Cullen went back to Scotland, where he established his own general medical practice near Shotts. Between 1733 and 1736, Cullen was also able to study medicine at Edinburgh University and, in 1736, he went back to Hamilton. In 1740, after eight years in private clinical practice, combined with studies in Edinburgh, Cullen was awarded a Doctor of Medicine degree from Glasgow University.
In 1743, Cullen moved to Glasgow, which is where his interest in teaching chemistry was encouraged by Dr. Johnstone, the Professor of Medicine. In 1751, Cullen got Johnstone's job, but, in 1755, he switched to Edinburgh, where, in 1766, he succeeded to the Chair of the Institutes (theory) of Medicine. In 1773, William Cullen became sole Professor of Physic, the position he held until shortly before his death, which occurred in Edinburgh, on the 5th of February, 1790.
Saturday, 28 January 2012
Alexander McAlexander, son of Alexander III
Alexander McAlexander, son of Alexander III, died on the 28th of January, 1284.
Alexander III, the 'Glorious' King of Scots, was careless enough to have lost all three of his children, before he was lost, himself, in the early hours of the 19th of March, 1286. Actually, Alexander didnae lose his bairns, in the sense that they were tint; the tragic fact is that they had all died. All three of his children pre-deceased their father. With those premature deaths and the mysterious manner of the King's passing, you'd be forgiven for thinking that the family were cursed. Indeed, an omen surrounding the death of Alexander III appears to have been fulfilled by proxy, involving the rest of his family.
Alexander's wife, Margaret, daughter of Henry III and sister of Edward I, Kings of England, died in the February of 1275 (or 1274). And his youngest son, the seven year old David, died in 1280 (or June 1281, according to WikiPee). Alexander III’s eldest child, his daughter Margaret, she who had married Eric of Norway to become Queen, died on the 9th of April, 1283, shortly after giving birth to Alexander's granddaughter, the 'Maid of Norway'. At that point, all Alexander had left was his second child, eldest son and namesake, the great Scots hope, Alaxandair mac Alaxandair, Prince of Scotland.
Alexander, Prince of Scotland, was born at Jedburgh, on the 21st of January, 1264. At the time of his sister's death, Alexander Jnr. was a healthy young man of nineteen. He had been married to Marguerite, daughter of Guy de Dampierre, Count of Flanders, on the 15th of November, 1282, at Roxburgh. That marriage strengthened Scotland's ties with an important trading partner of the time, however, as the history books recorded, “No children were born of this union.”
The match also marked Scotland's re-emergence onto the European stage. However, it was ill starred. Like his ma and siblings, the young Alexander was to die before his time. Sadly for Scotland, that he did and suddenly, at Lindores Abbey in Fife, on the 28th of January, 1284. Wee Alexander – he lived to be a week over twenty years of age – was buried in Dunfermline Abbey, with his mother and brother. Nigel Tranter recounts these events in his novel, ‘Envoy Extraordinary’, in which he has Patrick, the 7th Earl of Dunbar and March, responding to an urgent message from the King; to collect him at Leith and ferry him to Fife so that he could conduct his son’s funeral to the royal burial place at the Abbey in Dunfermline.
Ominously, when the young prince Alexander died, Edward I sent his condolences to the King of Scots in a letter, in which Ed assured his brother-in-law, Alex, that they remained “united together perpetually, God willing, by the tie of indissoluble affection.” Edward's was an affection not reserved for Alexander‘s successors, Balliol and Bruce, as history and Hollywood has recorded. You can read more about the consequences in 'Anglo-Scottish Relations 1174-1328', ed. E. L. G. Stones, 'The Kings & Queens of Scotland', ed. Richard Oram, and ‘Robert the Bruce' by Caroline Bingham.
Because he was left with no male heir, Alexander had need of marrying again. All he had left as potential heir was his granddaughter, Margaret, the 'Maid of Norway'. So it was that Alexander contracted to marry Yolande (var. Yolent, Joleta, Iolanthe, & Violette), Comtesse de Montfort, daughter of Robert IV, Comte de Dreux. She was French, in case you hadn’t guessed, and by all accounts quite attractive. She was also much younger than Alexander, being twenty-two years his junior. The marriage was celebrated on St. Calixtus' day, the 14th of October, 1285, at Jedburgh Abbey. Five months later, tragedy struck.
On the night of the 18-19th March, 1286, King Alexander III, then still an active and virile forty-four, decided to return to Kinghorn Castle on horseback. He was no doubt keen to get back to his marital bed for a bit of siring. Nevertheless, he was advised not to make the journey over to Fife, because it was after dark and the weather was very bad. Nothing loath, he rode off anyway. On the way, he became separated from his escorts in the fog and whatever happened next, nobody really knows. In any case, that morning (the 19th) he was found dead, with a broken neck, at the foot of a very steep rocky embankment. The common belief is that his horse stumbled and threw him, pitching him to his untimely and accidental death.
One prophecy relating to the death of Alexander III was the work of Thomas Learmonth, better known as Thomas the Rhymer, True Thomas or Thomas of Ercildoune. Thomas was a 13th Century Scottish laird from Ercildoune (now Earlston) who is the protagonist of the ballad 'Thomas the Rhymer' (Childe Ballad number 37). Thomas was a bard and a harpist, and a bit of a prophet in his day, having gained his 'powers' from a chance meeting with a Faerie on a grey horse by the Eildon Tree on Huntlie Bank, near Melrose. The Faerie gave Thomas a magic apple, which he ate and in so doing gained the gift of prophecy in rhyme or the 'tongue whit canna lee'. Thomas is also reputed to have been the author of the Arthurian legend of Tristan and Isolde.
Thomas foretold the King's death after being encouraged to make a prophecy by the Earl of Douglas, at Dunbar. In most records, True Thomas is said to have spoken thus: “Alas for the morrow, day of misery and calamity! Before the hour of noon there will assuredly be felt such a mighty storm in Scotland that its like has not been known for long ages past. The blast of it will cause nations to tremble, will make those who hear it dumb, and will humble the high, and lay the strong level with the ground.”
Another prophecy, which you can read about in Marion Campbell's 'Alexander III', involves an omen, which occurred at the wedding of Alexander III and Yolande de Druex. According to Bower, in his 'Scotichronicon', at the wedding masque, an apparition was seen gliding in behind the musicians, which brought their playing to a sudden halt. All present were appalled at what was seen and the vision was taken as a premonition of the King's death.
Omen, premonition or prophecy, the 'blast' that occurred overnight on the 18-19th March was indeed a body blow to Scotland, notwithstanding the ramifications took a while to be fully understood. Alexander's death resulted in the crisis of succession that led directly to the Wars of Independence with Edward Longshanks and Norman England.
Alexander III, the 'Glorious' King of Scots, was careless enough to have lost all three of his children, before he was lost, himself, in the early hours of the 19th of March, 1286. Actually, Alexander didnae lose his bairns, in the sense that they were tint; the tragic fact is that they had all died. All three of his children pre-deceased their father. With those premature deaths and the mysterious manner of the King's passing, you'd be forgiven for thinking that the family were cursed. Indeed, an omen surrounding the death of Alexander III appears to have been fulfilled by proxy, involving the rest of his family.
Alexander's wife, Margaret, daughter of Henry III and sister of Edward I, Kings of England, died in the February of 1275 (or 1274). And his youngest son, the seven year old David, died in 1280 (or June 1281, according to WikiPee). Alexander III’s eldest child, his daughter Margaret, she who had married Eric of Norway to become Queen, died on the 9th of April, 1283, shortly after giving birth to Alexander's granddaughter, the 'Maid of Norway'. At that point, all Alexander had left was his second child, eldest son and namesake, the great Scots hope, Alaxandair mac Alaxandair, Prince of Scotland.
Alexander, Prince of Scotland, was born at Jedburgh, on the 21st of January, 1264. At the time of his sister's death, Alexander Jnr. was a healthy young man of nineteen. He had been married to Marguerite, daughter of Guy de Dampierre, Count of Flanders, on the 15th of November, 1282, at Roxburgh. That marriage strengthened Scotland's ties with an important trading partner of the time, however, as the history books recorded, “No children were born of this union.”
The match also marked Scotland's re-emergence onto the European stage. However, it was ill starred. Like his ma and siblings, the young Alexander was to die before his time. Sadly for Scotland, that he did and suddenly, at Lindores Abbey in Fife, on the 28th of January, 1284. Wee Alexander – he lived to be a week over twenty years of age – was buried in Dunfermline Abbey, with his mother and brother. Nigel Tranter recounts these events in his novel, ‘Envoy Extraordinary’, in which he has Patrick, the 7th Earl of Dunbar and March, responding to an urgent message from the King; to collect him at Leith and ferry him to Fife so that he could conduct his son’s funeral to the royal burial place at the Abbey in Dunfermline.
Ominously, when the young prince Alexander died, Edward I sent his condolences to the King of Scots in a letter, in which Ed assured his brother-in-law, Alex, that they remained “united together perpetually, God willing, by the tie of indissoluble affection.” Edward's was an affection not reserved for Alexander‘s successors, Balliol and Bruce, as history and Hollywood has recorded. You can read more about the consequences in 'Anglo-Scottish Relations 1174-1328', ed. E. L. G. Stones, 'The Kings & Queens of Scotland', ed. Richard Oram, and ‘Robert the Bruce' by Caroline Bingham.
Because he was left with no male heir, Alexander had need of marrying again. All he had left as potential heir was his granddaughter, Margaret, the 'Maid of Norway'. So it was that Alexander contracted to marry Yolande (var. Yolent, Joleta, Iolanthe, & Violette), Comtesse de Montfort, daughter of Robert IV, Comte de Dreux. She was French, in case you hadn’t guessed, and by all accounts quite attractive. She was also much younger than Alexander, being twenty-two years his junior. The marriage was celebrated on St. Calixtus' day, the 14th of October, 1285, at Jedburgh Abbey. Five months later, tragedy struck.
On the night of the 18-19th March, 1286, King Alexander III, then still an active and virile forty-four, decided to return to Kinghorn Castle on horseback. He was no doubt keen to get back to his marital bed for a bit of siring. Nevertheless, he was advised not to make the journey over to Fife, because it was after dark and the weather was very bad. Nothing loath, he rode off anyway. On the way, he became separated from his escorts in the fog and whatever happened next, nobody really knows. In any case, that morning (the 19th) he was found dead, with a broken neck, at the foot of a very steep rocky embankment. The common belief is that his horse stumbled and threw him, pitching him to his untimely and accidental death.
One prophecy relating to the death of Alexander III was the work of Thomas Learmonth, better known as Thomas the Rhymer, True Thomas or Thomas of Ercildoune. Thomas was a 13th Century Scottish laird from Ercildoune (now Earlston) who is the protagonist of the ballad 'Thomas the Rhymer' (Childe Ballad number 37). Thomas was a bard and a harpist, and a bit of a prophet in his day, having gained his 'powers' from a chance meeting with a Faerie on a grey horse by the Eildon Tree on Huntlie Bank, near Melrose. The Faerie gave Thomas a magic apple, which he ate and in so doing gained the gift of prophecy in rhyme or the 'tongue whit canna lee'. Thomas is also reputed to have been the author of the Arthurian legend of Tristan and Isolde.
Thomas foretold the King's death after being encouraged to make a prophecy by the Earl of Douglas, at Dunbar. In most records, True Thomas is said to have spoken thus: “Alas for the morrow, day of misery and calamity! Before the hour of noon there will assuredly be felt such a mighty storm in Scotland that its like has not been known for long ages past. The blast of it will cause nations to tremble, will make those who hear it dumb, and will humble the high, and lay the strong level with the ground.”
Another prophecy, which you can read about in Marion Campbell's 'Alexander III', involves an omen, which occurred at the wedding of Alexander III and Yolande de Druex. According to Bower, in his 'Scotichronicon', at the wedding masque, an apparition was seen gliding in behind the musicians, which brought their playing to a sudden halt. All present were appalled at what was seen and the vision was taken as a premonition of the King's death.
Omen, premonition or prophecy, the 'blast' that occurred overnight on the 18-19th March was indeed a body blow to Scotland, notwithstanding the ramifications took a while to be fully understood. Alexander's death resulted in the crisis of succession that led directly to the Wars of Independence with Edward Longshanks and Norman England.
Sunday, 22 January 2012
Sir William Paterson
Sir William Paterson, Scottish financier and founder of the Bank Of England, died on the 22nd of January, 1719.
Every schoolboy knows that the Bank of England was founded by a Scot, William Paterson, and that the Bank of Scotland was established by an Englishman, a London merchant called John Holland, although they probably don't know the names. However, most won't realise that William Paterson also had a hand in the founding of the Scottish bank. The Scottish bank came into being in 1696, the year after Paterson returned to his native Scotland and helped to persuade his fellows that there was a need for a bank to support foreign trade. Nevertheless, Paterson is more famous and rightly so, for his having been one of the co-founders of what was then a private English bank. Not only was Paterson a co-founder, the canny Scot, a natural successor to Jinglin' Geordie Heriot, was the conceiver and proposer of the idea, in 1691, three years before the Bank gained its Royal Charter.
The need for a bank willing to lend huge sums to King William II and his Government stemmed from the weakness of public finances. Orange Wullie needed money to pay for his wars and Paterson, with his fellow subscribers, proposed to loan the Government the sum of £1.2m at eight percent interest. Not a bad deal, eh? Paterson and his mates established a joint stock company, incorporated as The Governor and Company of the Bank of England and lent their money to the nation. The national debt became the stock of the Bank of England and it became the Government's banker.
Paterson's other grand idea was the unsuccessful Darien Scheme, which was intended to establish a commercial settlement in Panama. By 1700, tragically, for Paterson personally and for many others of the 1200 settlers who had left Leith in 1698, full of hope and ambition, the Scheme collapsed amidst disease, and due to English intransigence. It was in the aftermath of the financial collapse of Darien, which bankrupted many Scots, that the Act of Union was negotiated.
William Paterson was born in April, 1658, in his parent's farmhouse at Skipmyre, in the Parish of Tinwald, near Dumfries. At the age of seventeen, young Wullie emigrated – yes, that's the word for it prior to 1707 – to Bristol, in England. According to the NNDB website, Wullie's move south was due to “A desire to escape the religious persecution then raging in Scotland, and the immemorial ambition of his race.” The NNDB also quotes a pamphleteer from 1700 as having suggested that Wullie Paterson “ went through England with a pedlar's pack.” Pedlar or not, Wullie certainly had ambition and, whatever that had been in 1675, he achieved a good deal in his life.
From Bristol, Paterson sailed to the American Colonies and lived for a time in the Bahamas. It's unfortunate that so little is known of his time there, but the stories suggest he was a bit of a rogue. Perhaps he was acquainted with another of oor Scottish Wullies; Captain William Kidd, the Scottish privateer who was hanged at Execution Dock in London, for piracy and murder, on the 23rd of May, 1701. In any event, Paterson is said to have been either a member of a religious order or a buccaneer. The first is unlikely! He can't have been all good or all bad, but he was certainly an intellectual and left the Bahamas having become, one way or another, a prosperous merchant.
Paterson returned to England fired up by his Darien Scheme, which he'd conceived as a means of facilitating trade with the Far East, based on creating a trading company in a colony on the isthmus of Panama. If he'd only thought of building a canal. Posterity recollects that Paterson failed to persuade the government of James II to suport his plan, so he trotted off to the Continent and invested in Dutch banks. Paterson then touted his grand scheme around the courts of the Holy Roman Empire and the Dutch Republic like an early form of lobbyist. After visiting Hamburg, Amsterdam and Berlin, oor Wullie Paterson had to accept failure – put his ambitions on hold – and he returned to London.
Back in the capital of England, Paterson re-engaged in his profession as a trader, involved with the Merchant Taylors' Company. Paterson was also involved in the formation of the Hampstead Water Company and he was successful enough to have amassed a decent fortune by the time his next bright idea came to light. As an example of his intellect and influence, Paterson wrote, the better part of a century before Adam Smith published his seminal work, that, “Trade will increase trade, and money will beget money, and the trading world shall no more want work for their hands, but will rather want hands for their work.” Thus spake the future Governor of the Bank of England.
Paterson launched his grand banking idea in 1691, when he published a document called 'A Brief Account of the Intended Bank of England'. The concept was a private bank that would assist Government finance. Strapped for cash, another Wullie, the 2nd of England, by way of Orange, promptly approved the idea. The Bank of England's Royal Charter was gained on the 27th of July, 1694, and its first loan was a king's ransom of £1.2m.
Paterson was the conceiver, a co-founder and one of the original Directors of the Bank of England, but he was never its Governor. In terms of his contribution, William Paterson, Esquire, of London, subscribed with the sum of £2,400 and this fact is recorded in ledger folio 56 as entry reference 304 on page 10. In 1695, owing to a disagreement with his colleagues (according to some, he was removed after a financial scandal), Paterson withdrew from the board and devoted himself to his first grand scheme; that of Darien. Perhaps Paterson's fellow directors had become wary of his endless stream of ideas, one of which had been a plan for the 'Orphan Bank', which must have been seen as a dangerous rival to the emergent Bank of England.
Paterson, with his second wife and their child, were aboard one of the first five ships that left Leith for Darien on the 14th of July, 1698. Fifteen months later, he was back in Edinburgh, a widower and childless, and virtually bankrupt by the disaster of Darien. Thanks mainly to fears of upsetting the Spanish, his kingly namesake and the English Government had let him down by actively prohibiting assistance of the Scots colonists. You'd think then that Paterson would've been against the Act of Union, in 1707. On the contrary, he was an advocate of Union and a key figure in the financial negotiations for the Treaty. Perhaps that was his subtle revenge; engineering a settlement that was financially fairly favourable to Scotland. Under its terms, compensation was paid to those who had lost money in the Darien scheme.
Sir William Paterson died in Westminster, in London, on the 22nd of January, 1719. He was buried back in Scotland, in the graveyard at Sweetheart Abbey, where a commemorative plaque was unveiled, centuries later, in 1974.
Every schoolboy knows that the Bank of England was founded by a Scot, William Paterson, and that the Bank of Scotland was established by an Englishman, a London merchant called John Holland, although they probably don't know the names. However, most won't realise that William Paterson also had a hand in the founding of the Scottish bank. The Scottish bank came into being in 1696, the year after Paterson returned to his native Scotland and helped to persuade his fellows that there was a need for a bank to support foreign trade. Nevertheless, Paterson is more famous and rightly so, for his having been one of the co-founders of what was then a private English bank. Not only was Paterson a co-founder, the canny Scot, a natural successor to Jinglin' Geordie Heriot, was the conceiver and proposer of the idea, in 1691, three years before the Bank gained its Royal Charter.
The need for a bank willing to lend huge sums to King William II and his Government stemmed from the weakness of public finances. Orange Wullie needed money to pay for his wars and Paterson, with his fellow subscribers, proposed to loan the Government the sum of £1.2m at eight percent interest. Not a bad deal, eh? Paterson and his mates established a joint stock company, incorporated as The Governor and Company of the Bank of England and lent their money to the nation. The national debt became the stock of the Bank of England and it became the Government's banker.
Paterson's other grand idea was the unsuccessful Darien Scheme, which was intended to establish a commercial settlement in Panama. By 1700, tragically, for Paterson personally and for many others of the 1200 settlers who had left Leith in 1698, full of hope and ambition, the Scheme collapsed amidst disease, and due to English intransigence. It was in the aftermath of the financial collapse of Darien, which bankrupted many Scots, that the Act of Union was negotiated.
William Paterson was born in April, 1658, in his parent's farmhouse at Skipmyre, in the Parish of Tinwald, near Dumfries. At the age of seventeen, young Wullie emigrated – yes, that's the word for it prior to 1707 – to Bristol, in England. According to the NNDB website, Wullie's move south was due to “A desire to escape the religious persecution then raging in Scotland, and the immemorial ambition of his race.” The NNDB also quotes a pamphleteer from 1700 as having suggested that Wullie Paterson “ went through England with a pedlar's pack.” Pedlar or not, Wullie certainly had ambition and, whatever that had been in 1675, he achieved a good deal in his life.
From Bristol, Paterson sailed to the American Colonies and lived for a time in the Bahamas. It's unfortunate that so little is known of his time there, but the stories suggest he was a bit of a rogue. Perhaps he was acquainted with another of oor Scottish Wullies; Captain William Kidd, the Scottish privateer who was hanged at Execution Dock in London, for piracy and murder, on the 23rd of May, 1701. In any event, Paterson is said to have been either a member of a religious order or a buccaneer. The first is unlikely! He can't have been all good or all bad, but he was certainly an intellectual and left the Bahamas having become, one way or another, a prosperous merchant.
Paterson returned to England fired up by his Darien Scheme, which he'd conceived as a means of facilitating trade with the Far East, based on creating a trading company in a colony on the isthmus of Panama. If he'd only thought of building a canal. Posterity recollects that Paterson failed to persuade the government of James II to suport his plan, so he trotted off to the Continent and invested in Dutch banks. Paterson then touted his grand scheme around the courts of the Holy Roman Empire and the Dutch Republic like an early form of lobbyist. After visiting Hamburg, Amsterdam and Berlin, oor Wullie Paterson had to accept failure – put his ambitions on hold – and he returned to London.
Back in the capital of England, Paterson re-engaged in his profession as a trader, involved with the Merchant Taylors' Company. Paterson was also involved in the formation of the Hampstead Water Company and he was successful enough to have amassed a decent fortune by the time his next bright idea came to light. As an example of his intellect and influence, Paterson wrote, the better part of a century before Adam Smith published his seminal work, that, “Trade will increase trade, and money will beget money, and the trading world shall no more want work for their hands, but will rather want hands for their work.” Thus spake the future Governor of the Bank of England.
Paterson launched his grand banking idea in 1691, when he published a document called 'A Brief Account of the Intended Bank of England'. The concept was a private bank that would assist Government finance. Strapped for cash, another Wullie, the 2nd of England, by way of Orange, promptly approved the idea. The Bank of England's Royal Charter was gained on the 27th of July, 1694, and its first loan was a king's ransom of £1.2m.
Paterson was the conceiver, a co-founder and one of the original Directors of the Bank of England, but he was never its Governor. In terms of his contribution, William Paterson, Esquire, of London, subscribed with the sum of £2,400 and this fact is recorded in ledger folio 56 as entry reference 304 on page 10. In 1695, owing to a disagreement with his colleagues (according to some, he was removed after a financial scandal), Paterson withdrew from the board and devoted himself to his first grand scheme; that of Darien. Perhaps Paterson's fellow directors had become wary of his endless stream of ideas, one of which had been a plan for the 'Orphan Bank', which must have been seen as a dangerous rival to the emergent Bank of England.
Paterson, with his second wife and their child, were aboard one of the first five ships that left Leith for Darien on the 14th of July, 1698. Fifteen months later, he was back in Edinburgh, a widower and childless, and virtually bankrupt by the disaster of Darien. Thanks mainly to fears of upsetting the Spanish, his kingly namesake and the English Government had let him down by actively prohibiting assistance of the Scots colonists. You'd think then that Paterson would've been against the Act of Union, in 1707. On the contrary, he was an advocate of Union and a key figure in the financial negotiations for the Treaty. Perhaps that was his subtle revenge; engineering a settlement that was financially fairly favourable to Scotland. Under its terms, compensation was paid to those who had lost money in the Darien scheme.
Sir William Paterson died in Westminster, in London, on the 22nd of January, 1719. He was buried back in Scotland, in the graveyard at Sweetheart Abbey, where a commemorative plaque was unveiled, centuries later, in 1974.
Tuesday, 17 January 2012
The Battle of Falkirk Muir
The Battle of Falkirk Muir took place on the 17th of January, 1746.
The Battle of the South Muir of Falkirk was the second battle to take place near Falkirk and, from an essentially Scottish point of view, it was a case of having lost one; win one. The Scots under Wallace famously lost the first match at Falkirk in 1298, but in 1746, under Lord George Murray, the result was reversed and a modicum of revenge gained. In truth, the war of 1745-6 was more of a civil war than a Scotland vs. England affair, with its primary purpose being to restore the Catholic succession of the Old Pretender (James VIII he hoped, in vain). Falkirk Moor is remembered more for being the Jacobite’s final victory than a redressing of the balance after the Wallace débâcle.
A problem that presented itself to the Jacobite army of Bonnie Prince Charlie after it returned from its excursion to Derby – a short story of there and back again, which achieved precisely nothing – was that Government forces were closing in around Stirling and Edinburgh. By mid-January, 1746, Government forces were well entrenched in Edinburgh and the Navy were blockading the ports, notionally preventing the resupply or reinforcement of Charlie’s army by his French allies. Notionally that is, primarily because the idea of tangible support from the intransigent French was a bit of a myth.
The cockaded Jacobite army had marched out of Glasgow “in a handsome manner” on the 3rdof January. Six Highland battalions, under Murray, marched off in the direction of Falkirk, to make it appear as if they were heading towards Lieutenant-General Hawley’s Hanoverian army in Edinburgh. Instead, Murray’s column turned north for Bannockburn. Meanwhile, the ‘Young Pretender’ had arrived at Bannockburn, where he had set up his headquarters. In reality, the Jacobites were destined for a rendezvous at Perth, but they decided to tarry at Stirling, not because it was a strategic fortress that had to be reduced, but because Charlie couldn’t bear to see it remain in enemy control. Instead of French reinforcements, a number of cannon had been shipped to Glasgow and these were used to besiege Stirling Castle. What a waste of time that was.
Following the earlier defeat at Prestonpans, which took place before the Jacobite Army embarked on its futile march down and back up through in England, General 'Hey Johnny' Cope had been replaced as Commander in Chief of the Royal forces in Scotland, by Henry Hawley. Hawley led his Hanoverian army out of Edinburgh to relieve Blakeney, under threat at Stirling. A protégé of the Duke of Cumberland, Hawley as far as Falkirk. According to Horace Walpole, Hawley was illiterate and, from the evidence, he was also a brutal disciplinarian, with the nickname of ‘Hangman’ Hawley – a great name for the disciple of the 'Butcher'. Hawley also proved to have been incompetent, which must've cheered up wee Johnny Cope, who is reputed to have ₤10,000 in a bet, because Hawley, his successor , was beaten by the same Highlanders that had unceremoniously woken him up at Prestonpans.
Unlike Prestonpans, where untested government troops had broken in the face of the Highland charge, Hawley had well trained troops at his disposal. However, his handling of that army, mostly veteran regiments of foot from the Flanders war, was grossly inept. The arrogant Hawley had also formed the view, from his experience at Sheriffmuir in 'The 15', that the Highlanders would not stand against cavalry. He thought “these Rascalls“ of Highlanders weren't worth worrying about.
Those 'Hielant Rascalls' numbered approximately 8000 men. Around half were the combined Clans of MacPherson, Mackintosh, MacKenzie and the MacDonalds, plus the Appin Stewarts. The remainder of Murray's army were Lowland infantry militia, led by the Duke of Atholl and my Lords Gordon and Ogilvy, plus a few hundred horse led by Lord Elcho. The Jacobites marched out to do battle on the 15th of January and were then drawn up on Plean Muir, two miles south-east of Bannockburn. Eager to do battle, they waited in vain for an attack. They did the same on the next day, but again Hawley did not come. Murray then suggested that they took the initiative and occupy the rough upland of the South Muir of Falkirk. To deceive Hawley, Murray also proposed that Charlie's standard be left flying on Plean Muir and that a diversionary force under Drummond be sent up to Falkirk.
About noon on the 17th, Murray had drawn up his army on a ridge west of Falkirk, blocking Hawley‘s route to Stirling. However, confusion reigned on both sides. Murray and John O‘Sullivan, an Irish mercenary with the ear of the Prince, argued over the positioning of the troops. This led to Lord Drummond not being in place to command the Jacobite right at the start of the battle as Murray wished. Hawley, reminiscent of Cope, was taken by surprise at the presence of the Jacobites and struggled to get his 9000-strong army formed up in proper battle order. Hawley's army was made up of 6500 regular infantry, 700 dragoons, the mounted infantry, plus the Glasgow Militia and 2000 men of Clan Campbell. He also had artillery, but these became stuck in the mud, caused by heavy rain and took no part in the battle.
As the light faded in the worsening weather, Hawley ordered Colonel Ligonier to take three regiments of Dragoons against the Jacobite right wing. Without Drummond in command, the MacDonalds and Farquharsons fired an eager musket volley and this had a devastating affect on the Dragoons. As one observer noted, “in one part of them nearest us I saw daylight through them in several places”. The remains of both Ligonier‘s and Hamilton’s decimated regiments promptly fled. Cobham's regiment charged into the Highlanders, but were no match for the Scots, whereupon they too scarpered, to be pursued by the Clansmen.
The fleeing Dragoons rode straight through the waiting Hanoverian infantry regiments, causing more confusion and preventing effective fire on the pursuing Highlanders. Their rain sodden gunpowder didn't help either as one in four muskets failed. The MacDonalds were upon them with cold steel before they knew what had hit them and as the rest of the Clans joined in, the Government forces, with the Glaswegians in tow, turned tail and ran. Cluny MacPherson led a charge from the Jacobite left towards the Hanoverian right wing to complete the rout.
The Hanoverians lost around 350 men killed, wounded and missing in a battle that had lasted a mere twenty minutes. Some 300 were captured. The Jacobites lost less than 50 dead and had 70 wounded. The wretched Hawley fled, unharmed, to Linlithgow, where he penned his excuses to Cumberland in a letter that began, “Sir, my heart is broke...” The site of the battle is marked by an obelisk, which was unveiled by the Duke of Atholl in 1927.
The Battle of the South Muir of Falkirk was the second battle to take place near Falkirk and, from an essentially Scottish point of view, it was a case of having lost one; win one. The Scots under Wallace famously lost the first match at Falkirk in 1298, but in 1746, under Lord George Murray, the result was reversed and a modicum of revenge gained. In truth, the war of 1745-6 was more of a civil war than a Scotland vs. England affair, with its primary purpose being to restore the Catholic succession of the Old Pretender (James VIII he hoped, in vain). Falkirk Moor is remembered more for being the Jacobite’s final victory than a redressing of the balance after the Wallace débâcle.
A problem that presented itself to the Jacobite army of Bonnie Prince Charlie after it returned from its excursion to Derby – a short story of there and back again, which achieved precisely nothing – was that Government forces were closing in around Stirling and Edinburgh. By mid-January, 1746, Government forces were well entrenched in Edinburgh and the Navy were blockading the ports, notionally preventing the resupply or reinforcement of Charlie’s army by his French allies. Notionally that is, primarily because the idea of tangible support from the intransigent French was a bit of a myth.
The cockaded Jacobite army had marched out of Glasgow “in a handsome manner” on the 3rdof January. Six Highland battalions, under Murray, marched off in the direction of Falkirk, to make it appear as if they were heading towards Lieutenant-General Hawley’s Hanoverian army in Edinburgh. Instead, Murray’s column turned north for Bannockburn. Meanwhile, the ‘Young Pretender’ had arrived at Bannockburn, where he had set up his headquarters. In reality, the Jacobites were destined for a rendezvous at Perth, but they decided to tarry at Stirling, not because it was a strategic fortress that had to be reduced, but because Charlie couldn’t bear to see it remain in enemy control. Instead of French reinforcements, a number of cannon had been shipped to Glasgow and these were used to besiege Stirling Castle. What a waste of time that was.
Following the earlier defeat at Prestonpans, which took place before the Jacobite Army embarked on its futile march down and back up through in England, General 'Hey Johnny' Cope had been replaced as Commander in Chief of the Royal forces in Scotland, by Henry Hawley. Hawley led his Hanoverian army out of Edinburgh to relieve Blakeney, under threat at Stirling. A protégé of the Duke of Cumberland, Hawley as far as Falkirk. According to Horace Walpole, Hawley was illiterate and, from the evidence, he was also a brutal disciplinarian, with the nickname of ‘Hangman’ Hawley – a great name for the disciple of the 'Butcher'. Hawley also proved to have been incompetent, which must've cheered up wee Johnny Cope, who is reputed to have ₤10,000 in a bet, because Hawley, his successor , was beaten by the same Highlanders that had unceremoniously woken him up at Prestonpans.
Unlike Prestonpans, where untested government troops had broken in the face of the Highland charge, Hawley had well trained troops at his disposal. However, his handling of that army, mostly veteran regiments of foot from the Flanders war, was grossly inept. The arrogant Hawley had also formed the view, from his experience at Sheriffmuir in 'The 15', that the Highlanders would not stand against cavalry. He thought “these Rascalls“ of Highlanders weren't worth worrying about.
Those 'Hielant Rascalls' numbered approximately 8000 men. Around half were the combined Clans of MacPherson, Mackintosh, MacKenzie and the MacDonalds, plus the Appin Stewarts. The remainder of Murray's army were Lowland infantry militia, led by the Duke of Atholl and my Lords Gordon and Ogilvy, plus a few hundred horse led by Lord Elcho. The Jacobites marched out to do battle on the 15th of January and were then drawn up on Plean Muir, two miles south-east of Bannockburn. Eager to do battle, they waited in vain for an attack. They did the same on the next day, but again Hawley did not come. Murray then suggested that they took the initiative and occupy the rough upland of the South Muir of Falkirk. To deceive Hawley, Murray also proposed that Charlie's standard be left flying on Plean Muir and that a diversionary force under Drummond be sent up to Falkirk.
About noon on the 17th, Murray had drawn up his army on a ridge west of Falkirk, blocking Hawley‘s route to Stirling. However, confusion reigned on both sides. Murray and John O‘Sullivan, an Irish mercenary with the ear of the Prince, argued over the positioning of the troops. This led to Lord Drummond not being in place to command the Jacobite right at the start of the battle as Murray wished. Hawley, reminiscent of Cope, was taken by surprise at the presence of the Jacobites and struggled to get his 9000-strong army formed up in proper battle order. Hawley's army was made up of 6500 regular infantry, 700 dragoons, the mounted infantry, plus the Glasgow Militia and 2000 men of Clan Campbell. He also had artillery, but these became stuck in the mud, caused by heavy rain and took no part in the battle.
As the light faded in the worsening weather, Hawley ordered Colonel Ligonier to take three regiments of Dragoons against the Jacobite right wing. Without Drummond in command, the MacDonalds and Farquharsons fired an eager musket volley and this had a devastating affect on the Dragoons. As one observer noted, “in one part of them nearest us I saw daylight through them in several places”. The remains of both Ligonier‘s and Hamilton’s decimated regiments promptly fled. Cobham's regiment charged into the Highlanders, but were no match for the Scots, whereupon they too scarpered, to be pursued by the Clansmen.
The fleeing Dragoons rode straight through the waiting Hanoverian infantry regiments, causing more confusion and preventing effective fire on the pursuing Highlanders. Their rain sodden gunpowder didn't help either as one in four muskets failed. The MacDonalds were upon them with cold steel before they knew what had hit them and as the rest of the Clans joined in, the Government forces, with the Glaswegians in tow, turned tail and ran. Cluny MacPherson led a charge from the Jacobite left towards the Hanoverian right wing to complete the rout.
The Hanoverians lost around 350 men killed, wounded and missing in a battle that had lasted a mere twenty minutes. Some 300 were captured. The Jacobites lost less than 50 dead and had 70 wounded. The wretched Hawley fled, unharmed, to Linlithgow, where he penned his excuses to Cumberland in a letter that began, “Sir, my heart is broke...” The site of the battle is marked by an obelisk, which was unveiled by the Duke of Atholl in 1927.
Sunday, 8 January 2012
Edgar, King of Scots
Edgar, King of Scots, died on the 8th of January, 1107.
The story of Edgar, King of Scots, is really the story of the beginning of the end if you're of the view that Scotland's heritage revolves solely around its Picto-Scottish, Gaelic/Celtic period – the Alba of the Ravens. Of course, that's a very myopic viewpoint and there's surely no question that today, Scotland benefits from its broader heritage, encompassing a mixture of ancient Picts, Scots, Britons, Celts, Gaels, Angles, Saxons, Danes, Vikings (and Egyptians and Iberians if you want to add a myth or two – or take Neanderthal migration into account). However, as the then eldest surviving son of Malcolm III (Máel Coluim mac Donnchada, otherwise known as Malcolm Canmore) and his Queen, Margaret of Wessex, Etgair mac Mael Cholium was the first King of Scots to have both Celtic and Anglo-Saxon blood coursing through his veins, his rule spelled the end of a 'pure' Scots line.
Edgar's mother was a Princess of England, albeit she'd been born in exile in Hungary, who was also a granddaughter of England's 'Ironside', Edmund II, sister to the Anglo-Saxon Edgar (the) Ætheling, and became, famously, St. Margaret of Scotland. Margaret's father was Edward the Exile, so called after his banishment, following the conquest of England by the Danish King, Cnut the Great (Canute of the Waves), in 1016. Furthermore, the sainted Margaret's mother, Agatha, was a relative of the German Emperor. In such a manner, Edgar, King of Scots, named after an English bit-part King, was a composite of Picto-Scottish Gael and Anglo-Saxon, with a Teutonic tint and a pinch of Hungarian paprika thrown in for seasoning. Edgar was also the first of the 'Margaretsons', the first of three, to become King of Scots.
Born around 1074, Edgar's history really begins with his own exile and banishment, to England, once again following a battle and conquest. In late 1093, after evading capture at the Battle of Alnwick, in which his father and elder brother, Edward, had been killed, Edgar and his siblings were sent – or brought – to England. Queen Margaret wasn't able to go to England as she had died of a broken heart, nine days after Alnwick. When Edgar first appeared before his mother after the battle, she asked him, “How fares it with the King and my Edward?” and, on Edgar's eloquent silence, she is said to have exclaimed, “I know all!” Those that did go with Edgar were his younger brothers, Alexander and David, both of whom became Kings of Scots in their turn, and his sisters, Edith (who later married Henry I of England) and Mary (who married Eustace III of Boulogne). Edgar's two surviving older brothers, Ethelred who became Abbot of Dunkeld, and Edmund, remained in Scotland.
Edgar's émigré status was seemingly as a hostage for the good behaviour of the Scots, who were ruled by his uncle, as Donald III, or his half-brother, as Duncan II, after the death of their father. However, his journey to England may have been as a refugee from his uncle, Donald (Domnall mac Donnchada), known as Domnall Bán (Donald the Fair) or Donalbane. Edgar's status as a refugee is credible as there was a goodly deal of internecine strife abroad in Scotland following the demise of the Canmore. Malcolm III seems to have designated his eldest 'Margaretson', Edward, as his heir, but Malcolm's brother, Donald, had a better right to the throne according to ancient customs. So it was that, at least according to John of Fordun, Donald, “at the head of a numerous band,” laid siege to Edinburgh and caused Margaret's brother, the Ætheling, to remove her, and his nephews and nieces, to England.
Donald III ruled from November, 1093, to May, 1094, and from November, 1094, to sometime in 1097, when Edgar became King. The interruption came in May of 1094, when Donald's nephew, Duncan, aided by Edgar's older brother, Edmund, invaded with an army made up of Anglo-Normans and Northumbrians, under his father-in-law, the Gospatric Earl of Northumbria. The 'englishified' Duncan, a son of Malcolm Canmore by his first wife, Ingibiorg, the widow of Thorfinn Sigurdsson (Thorfinn the Mighty), the Norwegian Earl of Orkney, gained the throne for a wee while, but his short lived and unwelcome rule was brought to an end when he was “killed in action” on the 12th of November, 1094, at the Battle of Monthechin. As Donald then promptly appointed Edmund as his heir, there might be some truth in the claim, made in the Annals of Ulster, that Duncan was instead 'assassinated' on the orders of his uncle and a turncoat Edmund.
Unlike Alexander and David, Edgar didn't spend his formative years in England as he was twenty when he rode south to a brief exile. He was also mature enough to be not unduly influenced by the ways of the Anglo-Norman court in which he found himself. Nevertheless, he gained some empathy and support from the Norman, William Rufus, son of the Conqueror. In 1095, with Donald and Edmund engaged in supporting the latter's father-in-law, the Gospatrick, Robert de Mowbray's rebellion against Rufus, Edgar managed to gain control of Lothian. However, it wasn't until 1097 that Edgar invaded Scotland, accompanied by the Ætheling and an English army. Donald and Edmund were defeated and Edgar became King, four years after he had first claimed the throne on the death of his half-brother, Duncan II.
Although there is some contradiction between his derogatory nickname, 'the Peaceable', and the alternative 'Valiant', neither could be applied to Edgar in relation to how he dealt with his uncle and half-brother thereafter. The Annals of Tigernach indicate that Edgar had Donald's eyes put out and that is backed up by Fordun, who wrote that Donald was “blinded, and doomed to eternal imprisonment [by Edgar]”. Blinded or not, Donald was imprisoned at Rescobis (Rescobie), in Forfar, where he died, in 1099. It's less clear what happened to Edmund, but it seems he was banished, with his sight intact, to a monastery.
An incident, which is said to have given rise to Edgar's nickname of 'the Peaceable', occurred in 1098, when he signed the first formal treaty made by a Scots King, in ceding to Magnus Barelegs, King of Norway, the Western Isles and the peninsula of Kintyre. Magnus was a marauder and, having conquered the Orkneys, the Hebrides and the Isle of Man, he was able to persuade Edgar that a treaty, which incidentally, survived until the Battle of Largs, in 1263, was a better option than fighting to retain the Hebrides. Legend has it that Magnus made his agreement with Edgar on the basis that he would settle for all the islands of the west coast he could pass in a vessel with her rudder shipped. To that end, Magnus had a skiff “drawn over the strand at Cantire [Kintyre],” whilst “[he] sat in the stern-sheets, and held the tiller.” Longships were often drawn over the small neck of land between the mainland, and Magnus' adroit manoeuvre neatly severed the Isles and Kintyre from Edgar's newly won Scotland.
Edgar died in Edinburgh Castle on the 8th of January, 1107. The King of Scots with the Saxon name was buried at Dunfermline in the Holy Trinity Minster founded by his parents. Incidentally, Eadgar apparently means 'happy spear' in Old English and the first recording of its use in Scotland is thought to have been by Edgar, King of Scots.
The story of Edgar, King of Scots, is really the story of the beginning of the end if you're of the view that Scotland's heritage revolves solely around its Picto-Scottish, Gaelic/Celtic period – the Alba of the Ravens. Of course, that's a very myopic viewpoint and there's surely no question that today, Scotland benefits from its broader heritage, encompassing a mixture of ancient Picts, Scots, Britons, Celts, Gaels, Angles, Saxons, Danes, Vikings (and Egyptians and Iberians if you want to add a myth or two – or take Neanderthal migration into account). However, as the then eldest surviving son of Malcolm III (Máel Coluim mac Donnchada, otherwise known as Malcolm Canmore) and his Queen, Margaret of Wessex, Etgair mac Mael Cholium was the first King of Scots to have both Celtic and Anglo-Saxon blood coursing through his veins, his rule spelled the end of a 'pure' Scots line.
Edgar's mother was a Princess of England, albeit she'd been born in exile in Hungary, who was also a granddaughter of England's 'Ironside', Edmund II, sister to the Anglo-Saxon Edgar (the) Ætheling, and became, famously, St. Margaret of Scotland. Margaret's father was Edward the Exile, so called after his banishment, following the conquest of England by the Danish King, Cnut the Great (Canute of the Waves), in 1016. Furthermore, the sainted Margaret's mother, Agatha, was a relative of the German Emperor. In such a manner, Edgar, King of Scots, named after an English bit-part King, was a composite of Picto-Scottish Gael and Anglo-Saxon, with a Teutonic tint and a pinch of Hungarian paprika thrown in for seasoning. Edgar was also the first of the 'Margaretsons', the first of three, to become King of Scots.
Born around 1074, Edgar's history really begins with his own exile and banishment, to England, once again following a battle and conquest. In late 1093, after evading capture at the Battle of Alnwick, in which his father and elder brother, Edward, had been killed, Edgar and his siblings were sent – or brought – to England. Queen Margaret wasn't able to go to England as she had died of a broken heart, nine days after Alnwick. When Edgar first appeared before his mother after the battle, she asked him, “How fares it with the King and my Edward?” and, on Edgar's eloquent silence, she is said to have exclaimed, “I know all!” Those that did go with Edgar were his younger brothers, Alexander and David, both of whom became Kings of Scots in their turn, and his sisters, Edith (who later married Henry I of England) and Mary (who married Eustace III of Boulogne). Edgar's two surviving older brothers, Ethelred who became Abbot of Dunkeld, and Edmund, remained in Scotland.
Edgar's émigré status was seemingly as a hostage for the good behaviour of the Scots, who were ruled by his uncle, as Donald III, or his half-brother, as Duncan II, after the death of their father. However, his journey to England may have been as a refugee from his uncle, Donald (Domnall mac Donnchada), known as Domnall Bán (Donald the Fair) or Donalbane. Edgar's status as a refugee is credible as there was a goodly deal of internecine strife abroad in Scotland following the demise of the Canmore. Malcolm III seems to have designated his eldest 'Margaretson', Edward, as his heir, but Malcolm's brother, Donald, had a better right to the throne according to ancient customs. So it was that, at least according to John of Fordun, Donald, “at the head of a numerous band,” laid siege to Edinburgh and caused Margaret's brother, the Ætheling, to remove her, and his nephews and nieces, to England.
Donald III ruled from November, 1093, to May, 1094, and from November, 1094, to sometime in 1097, when Edgar became King. The interruption came in May of 1094, when Donald's nephew, Duncan, aided by Edgar's older brother, Edmund, invaded with an army made up of Anglo-Normans and Northumbrians, under his father-in-law, the Gospatric Earl of Northumbria. The 'englishified' Duncan, a son of Malcolm Canmore by his first wife, Ingibiorg, the widow of Thorfinn Sigurdsson (Thorfinn the Mighty), the Norwegian Earl of Orkney, gained the throne for a wee while, but his short lived and unwelcome rule was brought to an end when he was “killed in action” on the 12th of November, 1094, at the Battle of Monthechin. As Donald then promptly appointed Edmund as his heir, there might be some truth in the claim, made in the Annals of Ulster, that Duncan was instead 'assassinated' on the orders of his uncle and a turncoat Edmund.
Unlike Alexander and David, Edgar didn't spend his formative years in England as he was twenty when he rode south to a brief exile. He was also mature enough to be not unduly influenced by the ways of the Anglo-Norman court in which he found himself. Nevertheless, he gained some empathy and support from the Norman, William Rufus, son of the Conqueror. In 1095, with Donald and Edmund engaged in supporting the latter's father-in-law, the Gospatrick, Robert de Mowbray's rebellion against Rufus, Edgar managed to gain control of Lothian. However, it wasn't until 1097 that Edgar invaded Scotland, accompanied by the Ætheling and an English army. Donald and Edmund were defeated and Edgar became King, four years after he had first claimed the throne on the death of his half-brother, Duncan II.
Although there is some contradiction between his derogatory nickname, 'the Peaceable', and the alternative 'Valiant', neither could be applied to Edgar in relation to how he dealt with his uncle and half-brother thereafter. The Annals of Tigernach indicate that Edgar had Donald's eyes put out and that is backed up by Fordun, who wrote that Donald was “blinded, and doomed to eternal imprisonment [by Edgar]”. Blinded or not, Donald was imprisoned at Rescobis (Rescobie), in Forfar, where he died, in 1099. It's less clear what happened to Edmund, but it seems he was banished, with his sight intact, to a monastery.
An incident, which is said to have given rise to Edgar's nickname of 'the Peaceable', occurred in 1098, when he signed the first formal treaty made by a Scots King, in ceding to Magnus Barelegs, King of Norway, the Western Isles and the peninsula of Kintyre. Magnus was a marauder and, having conquered the Orkneys, the Hebrides and the Isle of Man, he was able to persuade Edgar that a treaty, which incidentally, survived until the Battle of Largs, in 1263, was a better option than fighting to retain the Hebrides. Legend has it that Magnus made his agreement with Edgar on the basis that he would settle for all the islands of the west coast he could pass in a vessel with her rudder shipped. To that end, Magnus had a skiff “drawn over the strand at Cantire [Kintyre],” whilst “[he] sat in the stern-sheets, and held the tiller.” Longships were often drawn over the small neck of land between the mainland, and Magnus' adroit manoeuvre neatly severed the Isles and Kintyre from Edgar's newly won Scotland.
Edgar died in Edinburgh Castle on the 8th of January, 1107. The King of Scots with the Saxon name was buried at Dunfermline in the Holy Trinity Minster founded by his parents. Incidentally, Eadgar apparently means 'happy spear' in Old English and the first recording of its use in Scotland is thought to have been by Edgar, King of Scots.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)