This Thor was typical of the English of Lothian, who continued to acknowledge the importance of St Cuthbert and the influence of his church but who were nevertheless content freely to acknowledge Edgar, King of Scots as their lord. He was happy to include prayers for his soul and for the souls of the rest of the Anglo-Scottish royal family. It was harnessing the loyalty of such men to the kings and the wider kingdom that would enhance its multicultural nature and ultimately contribute to its transformation into something new.
In 1124 the process of absorbing Strathclyde and, more particularly, Lothian had transformed the kingdom of Alba into a multicultural entity very different from the Gaelic kingdom of 900. The fusion of Gaelic Alba and English Northumbria had produced a unique new kingdom of Scotland. It was a kingdom where two different cultures, Gaelic and English, were felt to have a certain equality of status. It was no longer a Gaelic kingdom in which English was spoken but a hybrid kingdom in which Gaelic and English speakers existed side by side. This new reality was given concrete expression in the early charters of Kings Edgar and Alexander I, which were addressed to their subjects Scoti et Angli or ‘Scots and English’.
This new complexity in the culture of the kingdom would be a significant contributory factor to the success of King David I in introducing Anglo-Normans into Scotland after 1124. The addition of another cultural tradition to an already mixed culture is obviously much less problematic than its introduction into a single cultural zone. In Scotland the Normans simply added another element to the existing mixture. They appear in the charters of King David as Franci or ‘French’ alongside the Scots and English in the charters of his predecessors. In contemporary England and Wales and later in Ireland the Normans arrived as cultural outsiders in a well-established monoculture. The fact that the introduction of the Normans into Scotland came about relatively peacefully under recognised royal sponsorship rather than through aggressive foreign military conquest undoubtedly also helped the process.
In 900 the kings of Alba followed a succession system that selected kings from among adult males of identified lineages derived from a common royal ancestor. In the case of Alba, the common ancestor was Kenneth MacAlpin and the lineages were the MacKenneths, MacDuffs and MacHeths. This system had proved very effective at producing suitable adult male kings who were able to rule the kingdom and lead its armies. This was essential in the dangerous period of the Viking attacks and during the days of aggressive expansion that followed. The initial usefulness of this system was, however, undermined as the three lineages increasingly diverged over time. In this context the kingship was originally shared among brothers and close cousins with minimal disruption. In time, however, the kingship became a bone of contention between men whose relationships with each other were increasingly distant and tenuous. In the late tenth century, the succession had become a bitter struggle for supremacy between what were now three entirely independent and rival dynasties. This brought about frequent violent disputes that worked to the detriment of the kingdom as a whole.
In response to this situation each of the lineages sought to manipulate the system by eliminating or excluding their competitors and confining the succession within their own lineage. This should not be confused with the introduction of primogeniture, which did not happen until later in the twelfth century. In 1124 this process was well underway and since 1058 the succession had in practice been restricted to members of the lineage of MacKenneth and the descendants of King Malcolm II. The other lineages had not been eliminated entirely but had been effectively excluded for nearly sixty-five years. The MacDuffs had either been restricted to the reservation of Moray in the north or induced to accept compensation in the form of the position of mormaer of Fife and the major role in future royal inaugurations for their loss. The MacHeths had been temporarily subdued for reasons that are obscure but may have involved either or both of the possibilities noted for the MacDuffs. In the period following King David’s succession both of these ancient lineages would seek to revive their claims to the succession and cause problems for future kings of Scotland well into the thirteenth century.
The organisation of the wider society in the kingdom had undergone much less fundamental change than the royal dynasty itself. It remained at heart an agricultural society where the agricultural surplus produced by the farmers was controlled and administered on behalf of the king by various ranks of nobles. It had absorbed additional southern territories from English Northumbria which had a very similar social pattern. The impact of the introduction of large numbers of English-speakers on this society was therefore limited. It focused chiefly on a change in the titles for various ranks, which gradually shifted from Gaelic to English over a period of time. It happened as English titles for ranks were imported with the English-speaking population or from south of the border, slowly replacing the Gaelic titles previously employed. In this fashion the mormaers gradually became known as earls, the toiseachs as thanes and their estates as thanages. In addition to this straightforward change in nomenclature the new population brought its own nobles into the cultural mix. The ranks of Scottish society now included individuals whose names betrayed a variety of cultural origins in reflection of the new multicultural kingdom. The Gaelic mormaers were joined by Earl Gospatric of Dunbar and by his son and namesake. The English thanes and drengs, i.e. ‘freemen’ or ‘minor nobles’, of Lothian, such as Thor the Long, arrived to join the toiseachs of old Alba.
The purpose and actual functions of these various ranks of society did not really change in their essentials. They continued to mediate between the kings and their subjects, the farmers who produced the agricultural surplus to feed, clothe and shelter the entire kingdom. They had the dual role of representing local society at the centre and representing the king in the local area. They continued to contribute and lead local military contingents in war. It was the kind of society that was common across much of early medieval Western Europe and it had little difficulty later in absorbing Norman knights under King David. The most significant social change that would be introduced after 1124 was in fact the introduction of the borough of burgh from England as a centre for trade, manufacturing and marketing. This entity appears to have been completely absent from the kingdom of Alba before 1124 but would be a significant feature of King David’s reign. There were smaller and less formally organised trading, manufacturing and marketing centres like that unearthed by archaeological investigation at Whithorn. They serve as predecessors of the burgh but do not fulfil quite the same role.
The Scottish royal Court probably witnessed greater change in the period before 1124 than the wider society outside it. This change has usually been attributed to the influence of Queen Margaret, who it is often assumed – largely on the basis of a single source – single-handedly transformed the Scottish Court on the English model. The Life of St Margaret was written for her daughter Edith or Matilda, wife of King Henry I, possibly by Thurgot, Prior of Durham. It was intended to provide a speculum or ‘mirror’ for the new Queen of the English. It sought to portray the role of an ideal queen in the person of Queen Margaret so that Edith or Matilda might model her own actions on those attributed to her mother. This clear purpose means that the work highlights and in some cases exaggerates the role of Queen Margaret. At the same time and for the same reason it obscures and, in many cases, minimises or omits the role of her husband, King Malcolm III. In a period when so few sources survive, the existence of this unique but biased source has badly distorted the historical view of King Malcolm and the contemporary Scottish royal Court.
The Life of St Margaret presents the picture of an active queen who ruled not only her husband and the Court but also had considerable influence over the Church and wider society. In the words of its author, ‘All things which were fitting were carried out by order of the prudent queen: by her counsel the laws of the kingdom were put in order, divine religion was augmented by her industry and the people rejoined in the prosperity of affairs.’ It correspondingly re
duces and trivialises the role of King Malcolm, who is left with little to do but support his busy wife. In spite of the fact that Malcolm had been described by this same writer on the occasion of his marriage to Margaret as ‘the most powerful Malcolm, King of the Scots’, thereafter he meekly retreats into the shadow of this great woman, becoming little more than a cipher: ‘he dreaded to displease the queen . . . he used to rush to comply with her wishes and prudent plans in all things.’ This was the man who fought his way to the throne by killing two rivals and who ravaged northern England without mercy. There is clearly something wrong with this picture!
It was Queen Margaret, according to the Life, who ordered the building of a new church at Dunfermline, where she and Malcolm had been married, and decorated it in the Anglo-Saxon tradition with rich ornaments including a large gold crucifix. This was established as a Benedictine priory dedicated to the Holy Trinity as a daughter house of Canterbury Cathedral. She also made many rich gifts to other religious houses, including St Andrews, and to many individual hermits. There is no mention of her husband in all of this. In fact, a number of contemporary documentary sources reveal that the royal couple actually worked together to benefit the Church. A later charter of their son King David I reports that the Benedictine priory at Dunfermline was ‘first founded by [his] father and mother’. The royal couple can be seen together granting lands to the culdees of Loch Leven in the notitiae included in the later Register of St Andrews Priory. They are also found together in the covenant drawn up and agreed with Durham Cathedral in 1093. The role of King Malcolm has clearly been ignored in order to enhance correspondingly the role and the reputation of Queen Margaret.
It was Queen Margaret again, according to the Life, who attempted to reform the ‘many things in Scotland [that] were done contrary to the rule of faith and the holy custom of the universal church’. She is supposed to have done this through church councils, including one where ‘she alone, for the space of three days, [struggled] against those who defended false customs.’ The role of King Malcolm at this important church council was, supposedly, no more than to act as a ‘vigilant interpreter’ between his English-speaking wife and the Gaelic-speaking clergy. It is an uplifting story, but frankly unbelievable. It is much more likely that she supported the case for reform, either through her own clerical supporters or through the King himself rather than leading the debates. It is clear that the Life ignores, obscures or minimises the role of Malcolm in this area also.
The Life also emphasises Queen Margaret’s activities in spheres where she would more naturally have taken a prominent role, including the rearing of children, fashion and interior design in the Court and in wider society, Court ceremonial and charitable works. It should be noted that she appears to have sought in most of these areas to introduce things familiar to her from her years in the English Court. This would be completely natural but it should not be forgotten that Malcolm himself had been exposed to English influence in his youth and might also have wanted to do these things. It may be that once again Malcolm’s role in these changes is being omitted or played down. In the area of child-rearing, for example, Malcolm must have participated in the military training of his sons, just as Fochertach did for his son Cadroe. This is not mentioned in The Life of St Margaret, however, because it did not reveal her personal role. There is clearly much that is left out of this account.
The Life of St Margaret is a unique source for the Scottish royal Court during the late eleventh century with a great deal to offer, but it must be used with the utmost caution. It was written for a purpose, that of providing an exemplar of an ideal queen, and therefore quite deliberately selects and edits its information to fulfil that purpose. It is content to exaggerate the part played by the Queen in events and to minimise or omit the role of others, including King Malcolm himself. It may be a speculum or ‘mirror’ but, if so, it comes from a fairground sideshow since it badly distorts the picture that it offers of the royal Court. It is fortunate that other sources exist to provide a corrective to the warped image of Malcolm in this one. If The Life of St Margaret were the only source available, it would be impossible to identify Malcolm for what he is, a major political figure in Britain and a key player in the transformation of his kingdom.
The English exile of King Malcolm III and the English background of his wife and children perhaps inevitably persuaded them to favour English Court models. A range of new or newly renamed officials begin to appear at the Scottish Court in the documentary sources before 1124. They include a chancellor Herbert, a chamberlain Edmund or Adam, a butler Aelfric, a constable Edward, son of Siward, and the Englishman, Aelfwine MacArchill, who would be listed under the old Gaelic title of rannaire or ‘distributor’ but who was probably already fulfilling the duties of a steward. The few records that survive provide little more than names and titles for these individuals. It seems likely, however, that these in themselves are significant indicators that increasingly more complex administrative tasks were already being undertaken by the royal Court. This nascent Scottish royal Court would develop even more rapidly along English lines under King David after 1124.
In the period before 1124 there is fragmentary evidence for the work of this royal administration in a number of administrative documents. The earliest surviving Scottish charter is that issued by King Duncan II, which was produced by the clerks of the church of Durham. It is from the reign of King Edgar onwards that there survive charters, writs and other documents on English models, which were probably produced within the royal Court. A royal seal was employed to authenticate these documents and an impression of the seal of King Edgar which survives was modelled on that of King Edward the Confessor. The practice of issuing such documents under a seal may have been introduced during the reign of King Malcolm III but, if so, none has survived. They were, however, probably coming into widespread use before 1124 and those of King David are addressed to a wide range of people from earls and bishops down to quite minor individuals. For example, a writ of David I commands that the fugitive neyfs, or slaves, of a minor noblewoman called Leofgifu should not be detained but returned to her. It was a new administrative system based on written documents that would become commonplace under King David I after 1124.
The period before 1124 also witnessed the small but important beginnings of major changes in the Church in Scotland. In 1107 King Alexander I appointed Thurgot, Prior of Durham and possibly chaplain and biographer of Queen Margaret, to the vacant bishopric of St Andrews. This appointment of an advocate of church reform to the senior bishopric was a clear sign that Alexander intended to modernise the Scottish Church. Unfortunately, Thurgot had difficulty securing consecration since the Archbishop of York, who was embroiled in a dispute with Canterbury, had not been consecrated himself. In any case, King Alexander was concerned that such ceremonies might compromise his own authority over the Scottish Church. It was not until 1 August 1109 that Thurgot was finally consecrated by the Archbishop of York, but only with the proviso that he preserved the independence of the Scottish Church. The new bishop attempted to introduce some reforms which, coincidently or not, appear to match those that Queen Margaret reportedly pursued in The Life of St Margaret, possibly written by Thurgot himself! He attempted to seek Papal assistance with his improvements but King Alexander, who was concerned that this might compromise his authority over the Scottish Church, blocked these approaches. In the end Bishop Thurgot became discouraged and withdrew to Monkwearmouth in England where he died on 31 August 1115. In 1120 King Alexander sought to negotiate the appointment of Eadmer, a Canterbury monk and biographer of Archbishop Anselm, to the bishopric of St Andrews. He had clearly not abandoned his intention to modernise the Scottish Church. Unfortunately, Eadmer insisted he should be consecrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury. This potential compromise to his authority over the Scottish Church proved unacceptable to King Alexander and Eadmer duly returned to Canterbury within the year. It would be King David who would finally manage to secure suitable bish
ops to direct the modernisation of the Church in Scotland.
As already noted, King Malcolm III and Queen Margaret were responsible for the building of a new priory at Dunfermline, staffed by reformed Benedictine monks brought in from Canterbury. There is documentary support for this foundation in a letter of Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, which mentions the dispatch of Goldwine and two other monks at Queen Margaret’s request at some point between 1070 and 1089. The priory was also, according to a later charter of King David, provided with extensive lands by Malcolm and Margaret and, according to The Life of St Margaret, it was richly adorned inside in the Anglo-Saxon tradition and contained a large gold crucifix studded with jewels. The small advance party of monks was later joined by more sent from Canterbury by Archbishop Anselm at King Edgar’s request and Anselm subsequently sought King Alexander’s protection for these monks. According to David’s charter of 1128, the priory was subsequently augmented with more lands and buildings by the sons of Malcolm and Margaret. In 1120 it was administered by Prior Peter, who was the man sent to Canterbury to negotiate the appointment of Eadmer as Bishop of St Andrews.
The foundation of the Benedictine Priory at Dunfermline by Malcolm and Margaret set the pattern for future royal foundations. In 1113 Prince David founded a Tironensian priory at Selkirk in the region of southern Scotland which he controlled under his brother King Alexander. Not to be outdone, in 1115 King Alexander himself followed this up by recruiting six canons and a prior, Robert, to provide staff for his new foundation, an Augustinian priory to be sited at Scone. The process of introducing reformed church orders into Scotland under royal patronage was now well underway. This work would be continued on a grand scale by King David on his accession to the throne in 1124 and he would be assisted in this by many of his leading nobles.
Lords of Alba Page 21