Earls of Fife, from existing charters 1070-1153

https://archive.org/stream/earlyscottishcha00lawruoft#page/n9/mode/2up

Anderson interpreted these as follows:

"Æthelred had become the first earl of Fife, and the abbot of Dunkeld. See St Andrews, 115 (L.C., no. 14, and pp. 243-244) ; cf. Dunfermline, nos. I, 2 (L.C., nos. 74, 209) ; S.P., iv, 2-3. Fordun (V, 24 ; i, 223 ; cf. i, 426) thought that Æthelred was buried at St Andrews. The abbacy had been occupied by his great-grandfather : see year 1045. He was succeeded in the earldom of Fife by Constantine (St Andrews, 116; Dunfermline, no. 1), who died ?1128 x 1136 (Dunfermline, no. 29; L.C., no. 94). Constantine was succeeded by Gillemichel (L.C., 245-246), who appears to have been surnamed Mac-Duf (Dunfermline, no. i ; + x 1136, L.C., 318) ; Gillemichel, by Duncan (L.A., 15-16 ; + 1204)."

Early Sources of Scottish History, 56
https://archive.org/stream/earlysourcesofsc02ande#page/56/mode/2up

If the Edgar charter is authentic and Constantine *is* a "macDuff", then he wouldn't be Ethelred's son (Ethelred probably did not have any children, perhaps not even a wife).

Wonder what titles Malcolm III handed out to his older sons - presumably he didn't just favor Ethelred. They would have reverted to the Crown, though, as (bar Duncan and Donald, and we're not 100% sure about *them*) all his sons except David died without legitimate offspring.

Maybe Constantine joined the cause of Edgar and helped put him on the throne, and maybe Edgar gave him the title his late brother had held. And maybe the story echoed back in time until it was Malcolm being helped to the throne by Constantine's (grandfather?).

About the first of these charters, Lawrie says:

"All are agreed that the charter is a forgery. The certificate by Sir James Balfour, "concordat cum autographo in omnibus," is an instance of that antiquary's want of accuracy, nay of truthfulness...."

"p. 9. Testibus. Sir James Dalrymple, Coll., p. 228, says : ' Nothing in the matter or the witnesses to this charter disagreeth with the time, for in his reign M'Duff is said to be Earl of Fife and Merleswine to have come to Scotland with Prince Eadgar and his sister Margaret : I would rather take it to be a charter by Malcolm IV., for I have seen one by Arnold, Bishop of St. Andrews, in the Lawyers Librarie, and .amongst the witnesses are Duncanus comes, Merleswine and Neis filius Will. And as Arnold was Bishop in the reign of King Malcolm IV., so I have seen a charter ... by King William in the beginning of his reign to Merleswine of the lands of Ardross ; no doubt this Merleswine was descended of that Merleswine that came in with Queen Margaret.'

The list of witnesses is spurious ; there is no mention in any other record of " Ivo Kelledeorum abbas." I will not say, as some do, that Macduff is a myth, but it may be doubted whether the Macduff of Macbeth's time survived until the marriage of Malcolm and Margaret. Duncan did not become Earl of Fife until about A.D. 1136. " Araldus comes " is unknown."

Early Scottish Charters. 237-8
https://archive.org/stream/earlyscottishcha00lawruoft#page/236/mode...

Dalrymple: "I would rather take it to be a charter by Malcolm IV". And as I pointed out, if that is the case, the "Macduff legend" got started a long time before John of Fordun.

Considering that some scholars think that Andrew of Wyntoun didn't just crib off John of Fordun (and may not even have known about him), that suggests they were independently working off an Ur-source which has been lost.

The earliest explicit statement I find that Æthelred had no children is Chronicle of Huntingdon, redacted 1291:

"(In 1070) Malcolm, Duncan's son, --- --- [took] in [marriage] Margaret, the said Edward's daughter ; --- --- [and he had] by her six sons, namely Edward, who died without an heir ; Edmund, who died without an heir; Æthelred, who died without an heir ; Edgar, who reigned, and died without an heir ; Alexander, who reigned, [and] died without an heir ; David, who reigned, and married Matilda, the countess of Huntingdon ...."

Early Sources of Scottish History, 28
https://archive.org/stream/earlysourcesofsc02ande#page/28/mode/2up

Well, he's right about the rest of them (unless you count Alexander's little "wild oat" Malcolm), so he's probably right about Ethelred also.

Seems entirely reasonable to me, just not ironclad. Would be better if the date were earlier. Better if it were from Scotland not Huntingdon.

Do add that text and attach the relevant profiles to the project, Maven.

We can probably cap this off with a citation to Scots Peerage (1907):

To summarize the version there:

1. Sir Robert Douglas (upon whose version this edition of Scots Peerage is based -- more about that later) began the line with Macduff, Thane of Fife, but John of Fordun in the 2nd half of the 14th century was the first to create Macduff, Thane and Earl of Fife. His story was embellished and handed on by Wyntoun, Boece, and Buchanan, but has been discredited by George Chalmers and Dr. Skene.

2. Edelrad or Ethelred, third son of Malcolm III, was undoubtedly the 1st Earl of Fife. He granted land to the Culdees of Loch Leven. The grant survives in two versions. The earlier, shorter version probably follows the original. The difficulty of two Earls of Fife being named in the longer version is explained by the fact that it is later (after 1107). Ethelred apparently died before 1098 when his next brother Edgar became king. Lord Hailes says Ethelred became a churchman but that is a misunderstanding. He was a lay-abbot of Dunkeld like his ancestor Crinan.

3. The next Earl of Fife was Constantine. There is no way of knowing who he was or how he became earl, but he apparently became earl about or before 1107, when he witnessed the confirmation of Ethelred's grant to the Culdees of Loch Leven. His name (Constantine) suggests a royal origin. He is called Constantine Macdufe at least once, but in a charter that might not be genuine "although maintained by able authorities".

4. Gillemichael succeeded Constantine. It is "not improbable" that the earldom first became hereditary for him and his heirs. It has been assumed he was son of Constantine but there is no proof. In a charter of King David to Dunfermline [missing from Maven's list above] there is a clause prohibiting any one of the heirs of Constantine, Earl of Fife, from calling the grant into question. The language implies Constantine was dead. Gillemichael is not mentioned as an heir of Constantine in the charter and he did not witness it. Whoever he was, he held a high position. In King David's confirmation charter to Dunfermline he appears as "Gillemichael Macduf" and is ranked immediately after the earls and before the chancellor and other nobles.

5. Duncan, the 4th Earl, succeeded sometime before July 1136. He was probably, but not certainly, son of Gillemichael. Etc.

https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun04pauluoft#page/viii/mod...

It's interesting to notice how much the 1907 account in Scots Peerage differs from earlier accounts, such as Sir Robert Sibbald's The History, Ancient and Modern, of the Sheriffdoms of Fife and Kinross (1710, 1803). Whatever we might think about the quality of Victorian scholarship, a lot was learned in those 100 years.

Sibbald's account is very different. He says:

1. The 1st Earl is Macduff, who "commanded the king's army against the rebels in Mar, and enjoyed the privilege was granted to him." In an earlier passage Sibbald's editor explains that the holding of a parliament by Malcolm III immediately after his accession rests entirely on the authority of Boeth. The editor thinks it was not properly a parliament, but he says Malcolm III introduced the English title of Thane, which would have been familiar to him because he was educated at the English court. "Hence Duncan Macduff became Thane of Fife, of which he before was chief, (by what title is not known) ...." [Note the name Duncan for Macduff.]

2. The 2nd Earl is Dufagan, Macduff's son, who witnessed Alexander I's charter to Scone: "The name of Dufagan shows him to be the Earl of Fife, 'tho Fife be not mentioned there : for there is no designation of the other Earls there mentioned as assenters, by their province, only their name is set down, and after that Comes." A footnote says, "The genealogists differ about the number and order of the descendants of Macduff, and the individuals from whom different families descended. The editor feels no inclination to enter into these disputes."

3. The 3rd Earl is Constantine, who is mentioned in the charter of Edelrad. Sibbald does not connect him to the earlier earls. He died 1129.

4. The 4th Earl is Gillimichael Macduff, eldest son of Constantine. He died 1139.

5. The 5th Earl is Duncan, who died 1154.

Sibbald and his editor go into detail about the arguments around Ethelred being Earl of Fife, but they are not aware of the earlier copy of Ethelred's charter, so they go through arguments that would have been easily solved. Sibbald thinks the answer is "The title Comes, was sometimes only a title of honour, without jurisdiction annexed to it ; and it would seem it was so in this case of Edelradus" (p. 223). His editor thinks there must be a mistake in transcribing the charter (note, page 226).

https://books.google.com/books?id=gGIBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA225&lpg...

For the record, Sir David Dalrymple, Annals of Scotland (1819) says much the same thing with the same sources:

https://books.google.com/books?id=5DJkAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA47&lpg=...

I wouldn't make too much of Lawrie XCIV (Dunfermline charter in re Kircaldy), as it was rather obviously intended to be binding on *all* heirs of Constantine ad infinitum. (Lawrie claims that Constantine had gotten piggy and withheld the lands/tithes, and this was intended to stop that ever happening again.)

Agreed. This is the argument of Scots Peerage, which is being exceptionally conservative in speculating about possible relationships among the earliest earls in the absence of direct evidence. However, an obvious objection is that Gillemichael might not have been "on hand" to witness the order against him ;)

FWIW, Scots Peerage says it is assumed Gillemichael was a son of Constantine, but many sources speculate instead that they were brothers.

>Alexander I's charter to Scone

The original has been lost, and what we have now is a copy (possibly a copy of a copy of a copy) or perhaps a "creative reconstruction" once somebody realized that they needed an actual document in hand.

That makes it a bit difficult to rely on it for "Dufagan, comes", as that might be a garbling of a somewhat similar name, or even pulled out of some scribe's inkhorn. Five Earldoms can be assigned with more or less certainty: Moray (Aed - on temporary good behavior, one assumes), Strathearn (Malise I), Atholl (Madach/Matad/Maddad), Mar (Ruadri), Buchan (Gartnach/Gartnait).

"Gospatricius Dolfini" (Gospatrick brother of Dolfin) didn't have an official Earldom yet (he was later styled Earl of Dunbar), but was apparently too important to leave out.

Angus is conspicuously missing from the list, and there is a corresponding void in the list of known lords. *A* Dubucan is noted among the earlier mormaers (Dubacan mac Indrechtaich, killed c. 937 at the Battle of Brunanburh). Note: the Wikipedia entry for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubacan_of_Angus claims that the Scone charter is spurious.

At or about this period the mormaer/Earl of Fife *should* be Constantine, but he's not on the list and no name similar to his is found anywhere on the document. Was he absent?

On the other hand, the Wikipedia entry for Scone Abbey says this: "The foundation charter, dated 1120, was once thought to be spurious but is now regarded as being of late 12th-century origin, perhaps the copying owing to the fire which occurred there sometime before 1163 (it would experience a similar destruction of records during the Wars of Scottish Independence)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scone_Abbey

"Divers hands" on Wikipedia leads to all sorts of conflicting information, and you have to pick your way through it carefully.

> difficult to rely on it for "Dufagan, comes

Arguments about this Dufagan are hard to make, either way, because they rely on guessing what sources the early authors had. Did they rely only on the charters we have today? Did they have an oral tradition? Did they have access to written material that has since been lost?

No way to know. All we can do is set the surviving charters alongside contemporary academic opinion about them, together with the earliest written sources, and look to see how well we can piece together a plausible and coherent story.

Bottom line is, I don't *think* "Dufagan" is Fife. Somebody's missing from that list, either Fife or Angus - and my bet is on Fife.

I'm an agnostic, as I am on most of these things.

What stands out for me is Sibbald's statement, "The name of Dufagan shows him to be the Earl of Fife".

He might be thinking Dufagan = Duff = Macduff = Fife.

If that's his only reasoning, I can't agree.

It really helps to know something of the structure of languages and names. I am *not* a philologist, but I know better than to match up homonyms willy-nilly. (

Cross-language homonyms are even worse - the French call them "faux amis", false friends, for very good reasons. Just consider the "English lesson" scene in "Henry V.... :-D

Or the interesting factoid that in German "Gift" means "poison".

One of the interesting things about "Henry V" is that *Shakespeare's audience must have known gutter French too*, or they wouldn't have gotten the (absolutely *filthy*) joke.

Side point. Thanks for developing the project :-)

From Oxford Dictionary of National Biography
http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/50328?docPos=6

Macduff family, earls of Fife (per. c.1095–1371), magnates, were the premier mormaers or (as they came to be known) earls in medieval Scotland. Closely associated with the Canmore dynasty, they were important in promoting acceptance of Anglo-Norman feudal practices in Scotland in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

The Macduffs and the first earls, c.1095–c.1136

The earls of Fife before Duncan (I) (d. 1154) are poorly documented and remain shadowy figures. Æthelred, the third or fourth son of Malcolm III and Margaret (both d. 1093), has been described as the first earl on record. In a later memorandum of his grant of lands in Fife to the Culdees of Loch Leven he is styled ‘a man of venerable memory, abbot of Dunkeld and moreover earl of Fife’ (Lawrie, no. 14). However, this is the only evidence to name Æthelred as earl of Fife, and there are many problems with accepting it at face value, or, indeed, with regarding Æthelred as having had any connection with the earldom of Fife. If Fife is not here an error for another name (unlikely in this context) the scribe may have attributed the title to him when he was in fact only the temporary recipient of the revenues of Fife, before the accession or restoration of Constantine [Constantine Macduff], earl of Fife (d. in or after 1128), who is more usually considered to have been the first earl. The date of Constantine's promotion is uncertain. He witnessed a charter of Edgar in 1095, but only by means of the attestation ‘Signum filii Magdufe Constantini’ (Lawrie, no. 15)—he is not styled earl; but he is earl in the confirmation of Æthelred's gift by Alexander and David, datable to before 1107. He last appears as a witness in a charter of c.1128, along with his successor Gille Micheil Macduff, who can plausibly be described as earl-in-waiting.

Even if Æthelred is excluded from their number, it nevertheless remains likely that the first earls were closely connected to the royal house. This is suggested by the fact that two of the first earls, Constantine and Gille Micheil, are called ‘Macduff’—a Scoticized form of two Gaelic words, mac and Dubh, meaning ‘son of Dubh’. In Scotland the only person of note to bear the name Dubh was Dubh, king of Scots from 962 to 966, making it virtually certain that the Macduffs were descended from him. The surname Macduff for his descendants may have come into use as early as 1128. According to the later chroniclers John Fordun (d. 1384) and Andrew Wyntoun (d. c.1422) the prominence of the Macduffs stemmed from their support for Malcolm III against Macbeth. Wyntoun records Macduff of Fife [see under Dubh] as requesting from Malcolm the privilege for himself and his successors of enthroning the kings of Scots, while Fordun makes Malcolm promise that Macduff will be the first in the kingdom. However, the historicity of these accounts remains highly contentious, and it seems more likely that the Macduffs represent a dynastic segment descended from King Dubh, who abandoned their claims to the kingship within the old kin-based system of succession in return for a privileged position which made them foremost among the Scottish nobles. The hypothesis that the earls of Fife were related to the ruling house is strengthened by the use of shared names such as Duncan, Malcolm, and especially the rare Constantine.

Constantine, called ‘filii Magdufe’ in King Edgar's charter of 1095, is the first earl to be firmly recorded as such and also the first to bear what became the established name of the lineage. Most of what is known of him derives from the record of a complaint made by the Culdees of Loch Leven against Robert the Burgundian in 1128. Constantine appears in the document as ‘earl of Fife, great judex in Scotia’ (‘comes de Fyf, magnus judex in Scotia’) and is also referred to as ‘a man of the greatest discretion’ (‘viri discretissimi’; Lawrie, no. 80). Constantine and two other judices, Mael-Domhnaich, son of Macbethad, and Dubgall, son of Mocche, acted as judges, and judgment was pronounced in favour of the Culdees. It is possible that justitia, justice, may have been confused with judex in this account, and that Dubgall was judex of Fife while Constantine held the new office of justice in Scotia. It has also been suggested that Constantine must have attended a native law school to allow him to participate in the proceedings, and it is possible that he presided over the court of the judexin his capacity as justice. Whatever the case may have been, Constantine certainly presents an early example of the transition between old and new in Scottish society. Moreover, the reference in this document to the multitude of men, mostly from Fife, and the provincial army or armies, is a reminder of the ancient responsibility of the mormaer for leading the common host of his province.

Constantine's successor was Gille Micheil, who appears to have held the earldom only from about 1128 to about 1136. His identity remains something of a mystery, as does his relationship to his predecessor, but in a confirmation of King David to Dunfermline Priory of c.1128 he appears as ‘Gillemichel mac duf’. Gille Micheil was clearly one of the most important men in the kingdom. In the 1128 charter to Dunfermline he was the first of the non-comital witnesses, and in another charter of David I to Dunfermline, c.1130, he was the first comital witness, appearing before even the important newcomer, Hugh de Morville (d. 1162). He was dead by 1136, when his successor appears on the record.

Duncan (I) and the development of primogeniture, c.1136–1154

Duncan (I) Macduff, third earl of Fife (d. 1154), had succeeded Gille Micheil by 1136, but their relationship remains uncertain despite frequent claims that he was the son of his predecessor. With Duncan (I) the seniority of the earls of Fife among the Scottish nobility becomes readily apparent. He was a regular witness in the charters of David I, and, like his predecessors, appears in a prominent position in witness lists. With Earl Duncan the significance of the earls of Fife in promoting the acceptance of new feudal ideals flowing north from England is evident, for about 1136 the earldom of Fife was transformed into a fief held of the king in return for fixed service. Although the exact terms of the grant are not known, there can be little question that Fife was now held in return for knight service. An episode near the end of the life of Earl Duncan (I) is also illustrative of the premier position of these earls. Following the death in 1152 of Earl Henry, King David's son and designated successor, the king made provision to ensure the peaceful succession of Henry's eldest son, Malcolm, in which the earl of Fife played a crucial role. The twelve-year-old Malcolm was entrusted to the care of Earl Duncan, who was given a large army and ordered to take the boy throughout Scotia and proclaim him heir to the kingdom. This demonstrates not only the seniority of the earls of Fife, but also the fact that their allegiance to the Canmore dynasty was unquestioned. It has even been suggested that this duty of escorting the young prince shows that Duncan was meant to act as an unofficial guardian until Malcolm came of age.

One major controversy surrounding the first earls is their relationship to one another. It has been noted that earls Constantine and Gille Micheil ‘Macduff’ both appear as witnesses to David I's charter to Dunfermline Priory about 1128, and that the latter is assumed to have been Constantine's son. But Gille Micheil is unlikely to have been styled Macduff in a Latin witness list if he were Constantine's son, and he is probably best regarded as tanist, or designated heir, to Constantine, perhaps a brother, nephew, or cousin. This same old-fashioned system of appointed succession makes it more likely that Duncan (I), Gille Micheil's successor as earl, was a son of Constantine rather than a son of Gille Micheil himself. But following the transformation of Fife into a fief in the time of Earl Duncan (I), primogeniture became the governing principle behind the succession. Thus, even though Gille Micheil did have a son named Aedh (Hugh), who might otherwise have been tanist to Duncan (I), on the latter's death it was his (presumed) son Duncan (II) who succeeded as earl, while Aedh became the ancestor of the lords of Abernethy.

Royal service and territorial expansion, 1154–c.1228

Earl Duncan (I)'s obit was recorded by the chronicle of Holyrood under the year 1154, and he was succeeded by Duncan (II) Macduff, fourth earl of Fife (d. 1204), who seems to have been a minor at the time—his first appearance as a witness did not occur until 1159, five years after his succession to the earldom, and he did not take Fife's accustomed position at the head of the comital witnesses to royal charters until as late as 1163. Duncan (II)'s tenure of the earldom was one of the longest on record, and the close connections between the earls of Fife and the royal house are readily apparent throughout his lifetime. Like his immediate predecessor, Duncan (II) was a regular witness to royal acts, and was in close attendance on the king. His seniority among the native earls is demonstrated by the fact that he had the privilege of speaking first in King William's council of 1173 when the decision was taken (against his advice) to go to war with Henry II of England; Duncan led a contingent of troops into Northumbria in the ensuing conflict. Following King William's capture at Alnwick in the summer of 1174 and his submission to Henry at York in 1175, the earl of Fife was one of several hostages given to secure the settlement. Between c.1172 and 1199 he was justice in Scotia, responsible under the crown for the administration of justice north of Forth and hearing pleas civil and criminal. He may also have sat in the exchequer, probably established in Scotland in the 1180s or 1190s.

In the thirteenth century the earldom of Fife passed regularly from father to son. Duncan (II)'s successor was his son Malcolm (I) who had been a frequent witness to royal charters from c.1177. One of the prominent themes in the history of the earldom from the middle of the twelfth century is highlighted in the time of Malcolm (I), namely, the extension of the bounds of the earldom through royal grants and marriage alliances. Not only was Malcolm confirmed in lands in the west of Lothian that had been granted to his father and grandfather in return for knight service, but he also received further extensive grants from King William, including the area around Culross. The bounds of the earldom were extended further when Malcolm married Matilda, the daughter of Earl Gilbert of Strathearn, probably some time between 1194 and 1198. With this marriage came extensive lands held of the earl of Strathearn, but, more importantly, the marriage represents an alliance between a family that had continually demonstrated its allegiance to the house of Canmore and one whose loyalty had recently wavered, for Gilbert's father, Ferteth, had been involved in an attempt to capture King Malcolm at Perth in 1160. It was through such marriages that the social and political structures of feudalism were further spread throughout the Scottish kingdom, with the earls of Fife, as the senior members of the Scottish élite, once more prominent in their promotion.

The thirteenth-century earls, c.1228–1289

Malcolm (I) died about 1228, and was buried in the Cistercian monastery at Culross which he had founded in 1217. He left no children, and on his death the earldom passed to his nephew, Malcolm (II), the son of Duncan, a younger son of Earl Duncan (II). As might be expected, the name of Malcolm (II) figures prominently in the list of those nobles who guaranteed the treaty of York between Alexander II and Henry III in 1237, while in 1260 he was one of the Scottish nobles to whom the English king pledged the safe return of the queen of Scotland and her child. On the other hand, neither Malcolm nor his immediate successors, Colban and Duncan, made many appearances as witnesses to royal charters, and Malcolm himself seems to have played a curiously negligible role in the events surrounding the turbulent minority of the young Alexander III in the mid-1250s. He had been present at the inauguration of the young king (no doubt in his capacity as inaugural official), and was one of those named to the new regency council in 1255, but when this council was ousted in a counter-coup in 1257–8, Malcolm simply dropped out of sight, neither punished nor favoured by the king, until his reappearance in 1260. Perhaps this should be attributed to the Comyn ascendancy at this period, but, whatever the case, little more is known of his activities before his death in 1266.

The next two earls of Fife succeeded as minors and enjoyed only brief tenure of the office. Malcolm (II) was succeeded by his teenaged son, Colban, who died c.1270. Young though he was, Colban must have married, for on his death he left behind an eight-year-old son, Duncan (III) Macduff, eighth earl of Fife (c.1262–1289). In the latter's minority the wardship of the earldom was held by Alexander, the son of Alexander III, and Duncan received authority over the earldom only when the king's son died in 1284. Two years later, in an assembly at Scone in April 1286, Earl Duncan was among the six guardians chosen to carry on the government of Scotland following the death of Alexander III on 19 March. In the light of Duncan's youth and inexperience, the assembly was probably paying homage to the senior position of his earldom, but the earl may also have been a supporter of Robert (V) de Brus (d. 1295) in his claim to the throne. He is known to have been in England in 1286–7, and also to have married Joan, the daughter of Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester (d. 1295). Earl Duncan was inexplicably murdered at Pitpollok near Brechin in early September 1289 by Sir Patrick Abernethy (a descendant of Aedh mac Duff) and Sir Walter Percy, and was buried at Coupar Angus Abbey. One chronicler attributes the murder to his cruelty and greed, but a more reasonable explanation is that his death was a result of the growing unrest in Scotland as tensions between the Brus and Balliol factions began to boil over into open conflict.

The wars of independence, 1290–1315

Duncan (IV) Macduff, ninth earl of Fife (1289/90–1353), was a posthumous child, born in late 1289 or early 1290 after the death of his father, and his minority was spent in England. This made it impossible for him to undertake the traditional role of the earls of Fife at the inauguration of John de Balliol as king of Scots on St Andrew's day 1292, which was therefore delegated by Edward I to Sir John de St John (d. 1302). In 1306–7 Edward I and Edward II arranged his marriage to the nine-year-old Mary de Monthermer, daughter of the earl of Gloucester, for which a papal dispensation was granted in 1307.

During the years of Duncan (IV)'s wardship in England, two other members of the house of Fife assumed prominence. The first was Macduff, a younger son of Earl Malcolm (II), who claimed to have been dispossessed of certain lands given to him by his father, and to have been denied justice by King John. In spite of the famous appeals which he made to Edward I on this issue in 1293, Macduff remained a patriot, for in 1297 he and his two sons joined William Wallace, and he fought and died at the head of the men of Fife at the battle of Falkirk in 1298. No less prominent in this period was Isabella Buchan (née Macduff), countess of Buchan, the sister of Duncan (III), who in the absence of the earl of Fife placed Robert Bruce on some substitute for the stone of enthronement at Scone on 25 March 1306, and was subsequently incarcerated by the English in a cage at Berwick Castle, from which she was not released until 1310.

Following the judgment of forfeiture at the Cambuskenneth parliament of 6 November 1314, Earl Duncan freed himself from English tutelage, and, leaving behind his wife (who did not join him in Scotland until January 1320), came into King Robert's peace. The earliest evidence that he was restored to his lands comes from an inquest of October 1316, but his seal was attached to a document of April 1315, which may indicate that he had been received into the king's peace by that date. Part of the reason for Duncan's restoration may have lain with King Robert's need to make a declaration on the succession, and the central part played by the earl of Fife in the inauguration of the king would make his adherence to the cause of the crown more important than that of any other noble. The details of the restoration were worked out by 23 August 1315, when an indenture was made between the king and Earl Duncan at Crichton. By its terms the earl resigned his earldom to the king and received it back, with an entail which eventually brought it to Robert Stewart, duke of Albany (d. 1420). Thus, at the age of about twenty-five, the earl of Fife was restored to his lands, due in large measure to the seniority of the earldom and the role of the house of Fife in the inauguration of the Scottish monarchs.

The last years of the independent earldom, 1315–1371

Earl Duncan (IV) maintained his allegiance to Robert I during that king's lifetime. He was the first of the Scottish nobles named in the letter of the Scottish barons to Pope John XXII (the so-called ‘declaration of Arbroath’) in 1320, and he was present in Edinburgh in 1328 for the conclusion of peace between the two realms. Duncan fought with the Scots at Dupplin in August 1332 against ‘the disinherited’ of Edward Balliol, and Fordun records that 360 men-at-arms were killed fighting under his banner. But he was subsequently captured and, in return for his liberty, joined Balliol. Thus, when Balliol was inaugurated as king in September, it was the earl of Fife, along with William Sinclair, bishop of Dunkeld (d. 1337—formerly one of King Robert's most ardent supporters), who performed the ceremony. With the return of King David II from France in 1341, Duncan again changed sides, and was captured with that monarch and many other Scottish magnates at the battle of Nevilles Cross on 17 October 1346. He was subsequently tried for treason by Edward III and sentenced to a traitor's death, but he obtained mercy and was allowed to return to Scotland to raise money for his ransom, set at 1000 marks, in 1350. He died in 1353, and his daughter Isabella succeeded as countess of Fife. There were no children of any of her four marriages, and in 1371, some eighteen years before her death, she resigned the earldom to Robert Stewart; it passed to the crown after the forfeiture of the Albany Stewarts in 1425.

The earls of Fife were the wealthiest of the Scottish magnates. In 1294–5 the lands of the earldom, then in wardship, were assessed at £432 per year, with the majority of this income derived from rents. Although this placed them on a par only with a modest English baron, their income was fully three times that of Neill, earl of Carrick, who died in 1256. Befitting their status as the premier nobles in the kingdom, the earls of Fife were generous benefactors of the church. Earl Malcolm (I) founded a Cistercian monastery at Culross, while Earl Duncan (I) had endowed a Cistercian nunnery at North Berwick between about 1136 and 1150. Duncan (I) was probably also responsible for the foundation of two hospitals, at Ardross and North Berwick, on the north and south ends of the ferry across the Forth. The patronage of reformed religious orders by these native lords represents yet another way in which they were instrumental in striking a balance between old and new in Scottish society.

Andrew McDonald

Sources

J. Bannerman, ‘Macduff of Fife’, Medieval Scotland: crown, lordship and community: essays presented to G. W. S. Barrow, ed. A. Grant and K. J. Stringer (1993), 20–38 • A. A. M. Duncan, Scotland: the making of the kingdom (1975), vol. 1 of The Edinburgh history of Scotland, ed. G. Donaldson (1965–75) • R. Nicholson, Scotland: the later middle ages (1974), vol. 2 of The Edinburgh history of Scotland, ed. G. Donaldson (1965–75) • Scots peerage, vol. 4 • G. W. S. Barrow, ‘The earls of Fife in the 12th century’, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 87 (1952–3), 51–62 • G. W. S. Barrow, Robert Bruce and the community of the realm of Scotland, 3rd edn (1988) • J. Bannerman, ‘The king's poet and the inauguration of Alexander III’, SHR, 68 (1989), 120–49 • G. W. S. Barrow, The kingdom of the Scots: government, church and society from the eleventh to the fourteenth century (1973) • G. W. S. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman era in Scottish history (1980) • A. C. Lawrie, ed., Early Scottish charters prior to AD 1153(1905) • A. O. Anderson, ed. and trans., Early sources of Scottish history, AD 500 to 1286, 2 (1922) • A. O. Anderson, ed., Scottish annals from English chroniclers, AD 500 to 1286 (1908) • Johannis de Fordun Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. W. F. Skene (1871) • A. Wyntoun, Orygynale cronykle of Scotland, ed. D. Laing (1872) • W. Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. D. E. R. Watt and others, new edn, 9 vols. (1987–98), vols. 5 and 6 • Jordan Fantosme's chronicle, ed. and trans. R. C. Johnston (1981) • CDS • A. A. M. Duncan, ed., The acts of Robert I, king of Scots 1306–29 (1988) • G. W. S. Barrow, ed., The acts of Malcolm IV, king of Scots 1153–65 (1960) • G. W. S. Barrow, ed., The acts of William I, king of Scots 1165–1214 (1971) • J. Stevenson, ed., Documents illustrative of the history of Scotland, 2 vols. (1870)

Plenty copypasta!

I'm inclined to the theory that Gillemichael was Constantine's younger brother, but that Duncan I was Gillemichael's older son. If the Macduffs were as Normanized as here presented, they wouldn't have been reverting to Gaelic rules of tanistry (which, clearly, weren't even practiced in Moray any longer).

This might also be helpful in some way:

"The demesne of the earls of Fife of this race appears to have consisted of the parishes of Cupar, Kilmany, Reres, and Cameron in Fife, and those of Strathmigio and Auchterinuchty in Follniff,[26] near which Macduff's Cross was situated, but whether this sept were the remains of the old Celtic inhabitants of the province, or a Gaelic clan introduced into it when its chief was made earl, it is difficult to say, but it is not impossible that it may have been a northern clan who followed Macbeth when the southern districts were subjected to his rule, and that there may be some foundation for the legend that the founder of the clan had rebelled against him, and adopted the cause of Malcolm Ceannmor, and so maintained his position. The fact that the race from whom the Mormaers of Moray derived their origin is termed in one of the Irish Genealogical MSS. Clan Duff, and the earls of Fife undoubtedly possessed from an early period large possessions in the north, including the district of Strathavon,[27] lends some probability to this supposition. The privileges of the clan, however, stand on a different footing. From the earliest period the territory of Fife comes prominently forward as the leading province of Scotland, and its earls occupied the first place among the seven earls of Scotland." (Skene, Celtic Scotland (1890), 3:305-6)

https://archive.org/stream/celticscotlandhi03skenuoft#page/304/mode...

I'd like to know what more modern scholarship has made of it. Back in Skene's day they were still babbling on about the "Aryan" race and believing that Englishmen were the Crown of Creation with everyone else in varying degrees of inferiority. :-P

Can't read some of that stuff nowadays without wincing.

And back in Maven's day they still had national borders, so you can imagine how horrible her scholarship was ;)

I posted this piece primarily for the details on the demesne of the Earls of Fife. It's those details that provide insights into tradition. What should stand out as though I'd shouted it is that Reres was a home of an early Wemyss family and Cameron the home of the early Camerons. Both the Wemyss and Cameron families have a tradition of being descended from the Earls of Fife. We see immediately how that tradition might have originated.

Modern historians aren't so interested in these ideas about the breakdown of the old tribes into clans. Interest seems to be coming back with DNA testing. It suddenly becomes very interesting to know where the old tribal centers might have been. Skene is trying to provide a context for understanding why the Earls of Fife might have had had their power center in the south but also held lands in the north. Nothing racist about that. He's doing it within the framework known to him -- Gaels and Picts united in one Scottish kingdom, the decay of the old tribal society, and the subsequent shifting around of many "septs" (proto-clans).

Better not try applying that kind of theorizing to the Domesday Book - that was William deliberately scattering his handouts around so that none of his followers had a consolidated power base. (Inevitably, that changed over time, but it worked for as long as, and maybe longer than, it needed to.)

What cannot be proved is whether Clan Duff was a northern clan that moved south, or a southern clan that was rewarded with lands in the north "for services rendered" (and/or to divide their power base?).

Entirely different cultural context. The Domesday book records the holdings of an elite who were recent immigrants. The English equivalent would be the movement of the Deisi from Ireland to Wales