V. Annals of Scotland. From the Acceffion of Malcolm III. furnamed Canmore, to the Acceffion of Robert I. By Sir David Dalrymple. 4to. 155. Boards. Murray.

THE

HE defign of this work is to exhibit a chronological view of the hiftory of Scotland, from the acceflion of Malcolm, furnamed Canmore, to the acceffion of Robert Bruce. The first of these epochs the learned author juftly confiders as the period when the Scottish history emerges from the obfcurity which involves the previous annals of that nation. The Hiftorical Memorials*, formerly published by the fame refpectable writer, who is one of the judges of the court of feffion, contained the cleareft evidence of his difcernment, and great erudition as an antiquary; and thefe eminent qualifications receive additional coufirmation from the elaborate refearches now before us.

To recite the public tranfactions of any country, from fo early a period as the middle of the eleventh century, in the form of regular annals, is a work impoffible to be executed without extraordinary induftry and attention. The exact afcertainment of the date of events, and the preservation of perfpicuous arangement in a narrative, the tenor of which is often interrupted by the variety of occurrences that arife, are objects which muft greatly retard the progrefs of an accurate and faithful hiftorian. If he pursues the detail in ftri&t chronological order, he will fometimes be embarraffed by the multiplicity of contemporary incidents, and fometimes be strongly tempted to fill the occafional chafms, either of important events or information, by the recital of fuch anecdotes as are too frivolous for the notice of history. Both these inconveniences, however, fir David Dalrymple has judiciously avoided; the former, by perfpicuity of method, and the latter by throwing those occurrences which were not of a political nature, into a feparate part of the work.

This learned author fuggefts in a note, a probable conjecture refpecting the place where Malcolm III. and William Rufus held their interview, which has been fo much contested by hiftorians.

The question is, fays he, what we are to underfland by Lothene on England, and Provincia Loidis. Some writers think, that Lothene on England means what is now called Lothian in Scotland; others that Provincia Loidis means the territory of Leeds in Yorkshire; and that Lothene in England must be understood of the fame place. I am not fatisfied with either hypothefis. 1. There is no reason to believe, that the Chr. Sax.

See Crit. Rev. vol. xxix p. 1.

by

by Lothene on England, meant what is now called Lothian; the word Lothene occurs but twice in Chr. Sax. at this place, and at p. 229. where fe Bifcop of Lothene J.' is mentioned. J. Bifcop of Lothene could not mean J. bishop of Lothian, as has been elsewhere fhewn, Remarks on the Hiftory of Scotland, p. 81; and if Lothene put fimply does not mean Lothian in Scotland, it would be strange if Lothene in England did. There is the highest probability that Chr. Sax. understood the paffage into Scotland to be at Solway or at the Tweed. This is inconfiftent with the idea of Lothian being in England, or of its being diftinguished from Scotland as a kingdom, in the days of Malcolm II. But, 2. There is no reason to believe, that, by Provincia Loidis, S. Dunelm meant the territory of Leeds in Yorkshire. It will be remarked, that Malcolm invaded England in May 1091, that he retreated from Chelter le Street, and that the meeting between Malcolm and William Rufus must have been as late as October 1091; for it happened after the deftruction of William's fleet by a tempeft, in the end of September if then Loidis Provincia means Leeds, it follows that Malcolm must have invaded England a fecond time, in autumn 1091, and must have penetrated farther fouth than he did in his expedition in May 1091. Now, this is inconfiflent with the general report of hiftorians, who agree that Malcolm invaded England five times; 1. in 1061, 2. in 1070, 3. in 1079, 4. in May 1091, 5. in autumn 1093 Had he invaded England in autumn 1091, and proceeded into Yorkshire, the number of his invafions would have been fix, not five. I have fometimes thought that there is an error in the MSS. or printed copies of the Saxon Chronicle, and that the word fhould be Lothere, not Lothene the difference between the Anglo-Saxon and is very minute, and might be eafily mistaken; the r is formed by drawing the firft ftroke of the n a little below the line. If this conjecture could be admitted, the place where the two kings met may have been Lothere, now Lowther, in the north parts of Weftmoreland, near the borders of that diftrict of Cumberland which Malcolm poffeffed, and in the neighbourhood of Penrith, the place concerning which, as I imagine, the controverly then was.'

:

The very flight difference between the names of the two places here mentioned, it must be acknowledged, renders this conjecture perfe&ly admisible; but whether Lowther was really the fcene of the congrefs, or not, we are clear in opinion, from hiftorical evidence, as we have repeatedly had occafion to affirm, that the fpot was certainly nigh the western borders of Scotland, and not within the limits of Yorkshire.

In a fubfequent note, Sir David likewife coincides with our opinion, formerly declared, that the territory for which William, king of Scotland, did homage to the English crown, was the lands he poffeffed in England, and not the kingdom of Scot

land,

land, as has been erroneously alledged by fome hiftorians. In elucidating this point, the author makes the following remark on a paffage in lord Lyttelton's history.

Lord Lyttelton fays, "The homage done to him by William must have been for Lothian, that prince having furrendered the earldom of Huntington to David his brother, who, in like manner, did homage on account of that fief;" vol. iv. p. 297. That excellent perfon did not recollect, that it was neceflary for William to be once vefted in the earldom of Huntington before he could furrender it, and that, when he furrendered it, it must have been to his lord, not to David, the new vaffal, After the fief had been once delivered back to the lord, the lord might confer it on another, and receive his homage. It is unfeudal to fpeak of the old vaffal furrendering the fief to the new. None of the English historians hint at any homage done, before this time, by William. Hence my conjecture of the nature of the ceremony is confirmed. It feems to have been this. William received the fief of Huntington from Henry II. and did homage to the younger Henry, with his father's approbation. He afterwards furrendered, or refigned it, to make way for David. David, in like manner, received it from Henry, and did homage. Without all this circuit of feudal ceremonies, the earldom of Huntington could not have been conveyed to David, as the immediate vaffal of Henry, unless William had difclaimed his inheritable right in it. This may fhew that there is no neceffity for the hafty fyftematical conclufion, "That William must have done homage for Lothian."

P. 218.

• But independent of this, Lord Lyttelton afferts, vol. vi. That in 1185, Henry restored to William the earldom [of Huntington], which that king and his brother David, infeoffed in it by him, had formerly enjoyed many years, till on account of the unjustifiable part they had taken in the young king Henry's rebellion, it was given to Simon the late earl of Northampton, in the year 1174. William now renewed the grant he had made before to his brother, who held it of him." This I understand to be a direct affertion, that William was the immediate vaffal of Henry, for the earldom of Huntington, until it was refumed in 1174. Hence I conclude, upon Lord Lyttelton's own principles, that, in 1170, William must have done homage to Henry for the earldom of Huntington.'

Sir David obferves, that much has been faid concerning the valuation of lands in Scotland by Alexander II. generally termed the old extent; but he produces a paffage from the chartulary of Aberdeen, to prove that the old extent is of higher antiquity. In an article of Rentale Regis Alexandri tertii Vicecomitat. de Aberdene et de Banff,' there occurs, • de Thanagio de Nathdole, fecundum antiquam extentam.'

Among

Among many inftances of hiftorical mifreprefentation here exposed to view, in confequence of the author's recourse to original papers, of the best authority, we meet with one, which entirely overthrows the reputed continency fo generally afcribed to Malcolm IV. From a grant which he made to the abbey of Kelfo, preferved in the chartulary of that place, it appears that he had a natural fon. The fact is fupported by this citation: Præcipio etiam, ut prædicta ecclefia de Innerlethan, in qua prima notte corpus filii mei poft obitum fuum quievit, ut tantum refugium habeat in omni territorio fuo, quantum habet Wedale aut Tyningham.'

It is not improbable, fays our author, that the appellation of Maiden, vulgarly bestowed on Malcolm IV. may have given rife to all the fables concerning him, and that that appellation may have been given to him by reafon of his effeminate countenance ; παις παρθενικον βλέπων, is an expreffion as old as the days of Anacreon. I am affured, that, in the Gaelic language, a fair young man is ftill termed a maiden.”

As fir David Dalrymple informs us, that the reafon why he has not brought down thefe annals to a later period than the acceffion of Robert Bruce, is, becaufe he is folicitous to know the opinion of the public refpe&ing his plan and its execution, it is proper that we fubmit to our readers a fpecimen of the work. The following extract, from the beginning of the volume, may fuffice for the purpofe. It is incumbent upon us, however, to obferve, that, in this part of the annals, there are more frequent chafms of chronology than occur through all the fucceeding pages; and that, for the fake of brevity, we omit the learned and curious annotations with which the narrative is accompanied.

Malcolm II. king of Scotland, had a daughter Beatrice, the mother of Duncan.

In 1034, Duncan fucceeded his grandfather Malcolm. In 1039. he was affaffinated by M'Beth.

By his wife, the fifter of Siward earl of Northumberland, he left two fons, Malcolm, firnamed Canmore, and Donald, firnamed Bane.

• M Beth expelled the fons of Duncan, and ufurped the Scottish throne. Malcolm fought refuge in Cumberland, Donald, in the Hebrides.

• When Edward the Confeffor fucceeded to the crown of England, [1043] Earl Siward placed Malcolm under his protection. Malcolm remained long at his court, an honourable and neglected exile.

The partizans of Malcolm often attempted to procure his restoration; but their efforts, feeble and ill-concerted, only ferved to establish the dominion of the ufurper.

· At

At length, M'Duff, thane of Fife, excited a formidable revolt in Scotland, while Siward, with the approbation of his fovereign, led the Northumbrians to the aid of his nephew Malcolm. He lived not to fee the event of his generous enterprize.

M'Beth retreated to the fattneffes of the North, and protracted the war. His people for fook his ftandard. Malcolm attacked him at Lunfanan in Aberdeenshire: abandoned by his few remaining followers, M'Beth fell [5th December 1056.]

The kindred of M'Beth placed a relation of his on the throne. No party efpoufed the cause of this pageant monarch. Malcolm foon difcovered his lurking-places, and flew him [at Effie in Strathbolgie, 3d April 1057.]

1057. Malcolm was crowned at Scone [on the festival of St. Mark, 25th April 1057.]

The patriot, who reftored Malcolm to the throne of his anceftors, demanded no reward in titles of dignity, penfions, or grants of crown-lands. The privileges which M'Duff fought, and the king bestowed, were, 1. That he and his fucceffors, lords of Fife, fhould have the right of placing the kings of Scotland on the throne at their coronation. 2. That they should lead the van of the Scottish armies, whenever the royal banner was difplayed. 3. That, if he, or any of his kindred, committed flaughter of fuddenty, they fhould have a peculiar fanctuary, and obtain remiffion, on payment of an atonement in

money.

1057. Little is known of the reign of Malcolm until the death of Edward the Confeffor, in 1066. Gratitude, as well as intereft, led Malcolm to cultivate friendship with England; fo that the first years of his reign are not diftinguished by predatory expeditions, fire, and bloodshed.

1061. The first military enterprife of Malcolm was rafh and injudicious. He had contracted a friend hip fo intimate with Toftig earl or governor of Northumberland, that they were popularly termed the fworn brothers. Some difgust arofe between them: Malcolm invaded Northumberland, laid waste the country, and violated the peace of St. Cuthbert.

1065. Edward the Confeffor died [5th January 1065-6.] He was fucceeded by Harold.

6

Ic66. Toftig, the brother of Harold, aided by the Norve gians, invaded England. Having been repulfed, he fought refuge with Malcolm, and remained in Scotland during the whole fummer.

If Malcolm had force fufficient to exclude fo formidable a guest, his reception of Toftig was equally unjust and impolitic. Harold king of Norway, and Toftig, were flain at the battle of Staneford-bridge, near Yorke, [25th September.} William duke of Normandy invaded England. Harold fell in battle at Haftings, [14th October.] William afcended the throne of England.

< 1968.