(2) His relationship to his predecessor is unknown, but the rule of descent in Celtic tribes was in the male line from the common founder. It was not till after the introduction of the feudal system into Scotland in the 12th century that the Celtic Earldoms, as Crawford observes (vol.1, p.168), originally descendible to male agnates only, became thenceforward descendible to heirs general. A document of doubtful authenticity (see Archaologia, vol. xix, pp. 241-252)purports to be a grant, 10 Kalends of June 1171, by William the Lion of the Earldom of Mar to Morgund, and the Earldom of Moray is also therein attributed to him and to Gillocher. The deed was in the possession of Selden, who printed it in his Titles of Honour (p.700). It is therein represented that the Earldom was granted to Morgund, who had been found by inquest lawful s. and h. of his father. With respect to its value John Anderson observes (Scots Peerage, vol. v, p. 568): This writ as it stands is certainly spurious in its form, but while its authenticity is rejected by all historians, they all more or less agree that it may contain some important items of fact. . . . The statement . . . that Morgund was the son of a Gillocher may be correct, though the latter may not have been Earl of Mar. back

(3) These charters are undoubtedly suggestive of Morgund having been Earl in right of his wife . . . but it is difficult to reconcile this Supposition with the importance afterwards attached to the question of Morgund's legitimacy, and it would rather seem that some other explanation must be sought of Agnes thus dealing with the earldom in her own name. back

(4) In a bull of Pope Lucius III of that date he is referred to as quondam comitis de Mar. The Scots Peerage gives him six sons, Malcolm, James, Duncan (who became Earl), Donald, David and John, but observes that as only one mention is found of David, it may refer to Donald. back

(5) Rig. Episcopat. Aberdon. (Spalding Club), vol.1 P 2 His attestation as G. comes de Mar of a charter of William the Lion, circa 1169-70, has been accepted as evidence that he was then Earl; but this charter has been proved to be spurious by Burnett (Exchequer Rolls, vol. ii Preface, p. crix). back

(6) There is great uncertainty as to which Earl of Mar was the husband of Orabilis, who calls herself in another charter Comitissa de Mar. She was also wife of Robert de Quincy, and certainly mother of Saer de Quincy, Earl of Winchester. The chronology is difficult. She d. before 30 June 1203, when she is referred to as deceased in a bull of Innocent III (Chartulary of Inchafflay Abbey, Scot. Hist. Soc., pp.9, 20). back

(7) Morgund had two older sons, Malcolm and James. Between 1207 and 1228 Duncan is first definitely named in a confirmation by Malcolm, son of Morgund Earl of Mar, of his father's grant to St. Andrews, which confirmation is witnessed by James, s. of Moregrund, and Duncan his brother (Antiquities of Aberdeen and Banft; vol. ii, p.17, from Denmylne charters, Lib. of Advocates); but a quitclaim of David, brother of the King of Scots (about 1200) to G., Earl of Mar, is witnessed by Dunecano Maro (Illustrations of Scot. History, Maitland Club, pp.23, 24). In 1222 the priory of St. Andrews gave permission to their thrall of Tarland (the church of which place had been given to them by Earl Morgund) to remain with Sir J., son of the deceased M., Earl of Mar, during the prior's pleasure, and this permit is witnessed by Sir D.s. of M., late Earl of Mar, and Sir J. his brother-in this order (Antiq. of Aberdeen and Banif pp.18, 19, referring as above). James was living 9 Oct. 1232. In a composition (1242)with the Abbot of Lindores, touching the gifts of Morgrund, late Earl of Mar, Duncan the Earl is called heir of the said Morgrund. back

(8) The grounds of the Doorward's claim, and the terms of the settlement, are unknown. Our knowledge of both is derived from the titles of documents that were among the records in Edinburgh in 1291 and 1292 (Acts of Parl., vol. i, pp. 112, 116). The Scots Peerage suggests that it was then that the three hundred pounds of land alleged in 1290 to be lacking to the Earldom passed into other hands. The 1290 memorandum itself says the land was so lacking temp. William the Lion. The editor of the Antiquities of Aberdeen and Banif (vol. iv, p.693) says: We may be allowed to conjecture that it was under that settlement that Thomas Durward acquired his vast domains in Mar, stretching from Ivercanny on the Dee to Alford on the Don, from Coull on the W. to Skene on the East. back

(9) On the ground that Earl William's predecessors Morgund and Duncan were illegitimate. The question of the former's legitimacy was referred by the Pope (4 Oct. 1257) to the decision of two Scottish ecclesiastics, reserving the question of the Earldom to the King. Alan was accused of making use of forged letters as from the Pope In pleadings at Rome to this point, Alan's proctor says they cannot be proved false from their style. Whatever the event on the question of legitimacy, Earl William remained in possession of the Earldorn. It has been- suggested that Thomas Durward's mother was dau. and h. of Earl Gilchrist. His claim manifestly shows that at this period the Earldom was feudalised, so as to descend to the heir general, for the family of Lundin could have descended from that of Mar only through a female. back

(10) Acts of Parl., vol. i, pp.423, 424, 441. In these documents there is no trace of any constitutional distinction between the seven earls and the other earls, such as appears in the proceedings of 1290. back

(11)The King did not go upon this expedition, and it is unlikely that any of the Scottish notables joined the small force that was actually sent. back

(12) When the Earl of Carrick (afterwards King Robert I) was directed, probably as guardian of his nephew Donald, to put the castle of Kildrummy into the hands of a man for whom he could be answerable (Acts of Parl., vol. i, p. 122). It was through Earl Gratney's dau. Ellen that the Erskines claimed succession to the Earldom of Mar after the death of the Countess Isabela 1408. back

(13) Exchequer Rolls, vol. i, pp.512, 513. It is noticeable that, in these rolls, she is called either Lady Christian de Moray or Lady Christian de Bruys, and not Countess of Mar. Gratney, Earl of Mar, also, in such documentary evidence as has come down to us, is called Earl only in documents dated after his death. back

(14) In 1306 l'enfant qui est heir de Mar was ordered to be warded in Bristol Castle, but not to be put in irons, because of his tender years; as Donald, s. and h. of the Earl of Mar, he was delivered to the Bishop of Chester for this purpose, but by the King's subsequent order remained in the Royal household (Palgrave, Docs., pp. 353, 356). back

(15)He is said to be one of the pages of the Chamber of Edward II. Donald de Mar and his fellows had a bill of the wardrobe for their wages in 1309 and 1310. back

(16) His grant to Cupar for the soul of his father Sir Gratney, late Earl of Mar, confirms the grant of his aunt Marjory, Countess of Atholl. back

(17) Burnett attributes the disastrous defeat to the incompetency and imprudence of the Earl of Mar. His seal bore a bend, charged on the upper part with a mullet, between 6 cross-crosslets fitchee (Laing's Cal. of Scottish Seals, pp.690-693; Bain, Cal. of Docs., vol. ii, p.540, no.72). back

(18) There is, Burnett writes, record evidence that she was a Stewart (Faedera, vol. ii, p.1019), but it is not known to the writer of this whether there is any foundation for the common assertion that she was daughter of Sir Alexander Stewart of Bonkyl. If so, she must have been by a different mother from the Earl of Angus and [have] inherited [Cavers] through her mother. back

(19) Faedera, vol. ii, pp.876, 888. On the occasion of Baliol's homage to Edward III at Newcastle, 19 June 1334, the Chron. of Lanercost (p.277) describes him (seemingly in error) as present under the title of Earl of Mar. It is doubtful if he ever obtained possession of Kildrummy. back

(20) Both in his own instruments and at Court, when he witnessed the King's charters. No more direct evidence than the fact of his being so styled in the royal chancery remains of any official confirmation of the use, for both the Mar and Douglas charters have suffered the despoiling hands of raid and war, and the records of the Great Seal, very meagre in this period, contain nothing upon the subject. back

(21) Her earlier instruments use the style Countess of Mar and lady of the Garioch; she adopted, seemingly only after the death of her first husband, the style of Countess of Mar and of the Garioch; both her husbands styled themselves, in their deeds, lords of Mar, Drummond till his death, and Alexander Stewart till he had confirmation from the Crown of the peerage title. back

(22) Sir Malcolm witnessed his brother-in-law's charter at Etybredschiels, 27 July 1388; and fought with him at Otterburn, there being due to him 1/3 of the ransom of Sir Ralph de Percy, captured by the Scots with his brother Hotspur in that fight (Acts of Parl., vol. i, p.219 (581)). back

(23) It seems probable that the proceedings of the Erskine family to protect their rights of inheritance were begun upon the death of the Countess Margaret. The first reference known to Isabel as Countess of Mar and Garioch is in an undertaking by Robert III, 22 Nov. 1393, not to accept any resignation of the Earldom by her in prejudice of the Erskine family (Hailes, Additional Sutherland Case, chap. v, 11,p.44). back

(24) On 18 Mar. 1390/91 Sir Thomas Erskine of Alloa and Dun appeared in person on the hill N. of St. Andrews monastery, where the King was sitting in full parliament, and stated that a certain contract had been made between Sir Malcolm of Drummond and Sir John of Swinton touching the lands of the earldorn of Mar and lordship of Garioch, of which earldom and lordship Isabel, the said Sir Malcolm's wife, is very and lawful heir-and, failing the heirs of her body, the half thereof pertains to my wife, of right of heritage. He obtained the (ineffectual) guarantee of the protection of these rights (Acts of Parl., vol. i, p.216(578); Hist. MSS. Corn., Mar and Kellie MSS., Supplement, p. ii). The (second) wife of Sir Thomas was Janet Keith, widow of Sir David Barclay, of Brechin, dau. and h. of Sir Edward Keith of Synton(s. of Sir Edward Keith, Marshal of Scotland, by Isabel de Synton his wife, by Christian his wife, sister and coh. of Sir John Menteith of Strathgartney, and dau. of Sir John Menteith of Arran by Ellen his wife, dau. of Gratney, Earl of Mar, abovenamed. This pedigree was proved in 1438 by Sir Robert Erskine, son of Sir Thomas and Janet, and 13th Earl of Mar, in his proceedings to be retoured heir of the Countess Isabel after the death of her second husband Alexander. He established the marriage of Sir John Menteith and Ellen by an infeftment, 5 Apr. 1359, from David II of the lands of Strathgartney to Sir John Menteith and Ellen, dau. of Gratney, Earl of Mar, his spouse; the two following generations were proved by oral evidence, and also by deeds, (i) a charter of Sir John Menteith, lord of Arran, in favour of Sir Edward Keith and his dau. Christian Menteith, and (ii) of the above said Thomas Erskine and Janet his spouse, with consent of their son Sir Robert abovenamed, to Duncan of Wemyss, son of Sir John Wemyss, and Elizabeth Erskine his spouse, their daughter, being settlements of the same lands (viz. the lands of Pirchock and Ludcairn) on the two marriages sutcessively (Douglas, Peerage of Scotland, 1764, p. 466 (1st nos.), quoting from Mar family papers; Mar Minutes of Evidence, 1868, p.88). In addition to the evidence of descent produced by Sir Robert in 1438, further confirmation is found in charters recorded by the above-quoted Mar and Kellie Supplement. (p.4) a charter of Sir John de Menteth, Lord of Arran (s. and h. of the abovesaid Sir John and Ellen of Mar), 21 May 1343, to Edward de Keith, Kt., the son, and Christian Bruce his spouse, sorori mee, of the same lands of Lodcarna and Perchok (the name Bruce here remains to be explained); and a charter (8 Sep. 1368) of Jean de Berclay, dau. and h. of Sir Edward de Keith, lord of Synton, with consent of her mother, Lady Christian de Keith, in the widowhood of the said Jean, of the lands of Michelstoun to Duncan Fleming and Christian his spouse. David II confirmed to Edward Keith lands given him by Edward Keith the Marshal (probably his mother's lordship of Synton-Reg. Mag. Sig., 1306-1424, p. 584). Christian de Keith, after the death of her husband Edward, married Sir Robert Erskine, father of the abovenamed Thomas, becoming thus as well his stepmother as his mother-in-law (Acts of Parl., vol. i, p. 164). Christian, wife of Sir Robert, d. 1387-88. In 1387 she drew the annuity which in 1388 had become payable to Sir Thomas Erskine. Her dau. Jane or Janet d. between Nov. 1412 and Whitsuntide 1413 (Exchequer Rolls, vol. iv, pp. 184, 260). That the Janet who m. Sir Thomas was the widow of Sir David Barclay is proved by the Soothfast witnesing of Thomas Bisset of Balwillo, 6 June 1437. He relates that, in his youth, he was servant to Sir Thomas Erskine, and often heard him and my lady Dam Jehan his wif, that was modir to David Steuart's modir, say,(Maule, Reg. de Panmure, vol. ii, p.230). This David Stewart was son of Walter (Stewart), Earl of Atholl, by Margaret, lady of Brechin, dau. of Sir David Barclay and Janet his wife. Sir Thomas Erskine, as mentioned above, claimed a right to the inheritance of half the Earldom for his wife. In 1435 the heirship to the other half was in the family of Lyle (Book of Pluscarden Hist. of Scotland, vol. ii, p.287; Lfe and Death of James I, Maitland Club, p.15). back

(25)To hold to Alexander and the heirs of their bodies, failing whom to the heirs and assigns of Alexander (Reg. Mag. Sig., 1424-1513, no. 1239, where it was entered, 16 Apr. 1476, by special command of the King). back

(26) Isabel, supported bv influential friends, took up her stand outside the castle, and Alexander handed her the keys in token of seisin of the whole; whereupon she, holding the said keys in her hands, of mature advice chused the said sir Alexander for her husband, and in free marriage gave to him the said castle . . and all other lands belonging or which might belong to her, either by her father or her mother, within the Kingdom of Scotland, to be holden by her said husband and herself and the heirs procreate betwixt them ; which failing, to the said lady and her lawful heirs (Douglas, op. cit., p.461; Hist. MSS. Com., Mar and Kellie MSS., Supplement, p.13). back

(27) On 28 July she was dealing with Douglas property at Saint Saens, Normandy (Michel, Les Ecossais en France, vol. i, p. 64). Scots Peerage, vol. iii, p. 154, refers to a writ, dated 26 Oct. 1408, in the General Register House, Edinburgh (no. 220), in which she is referred to as then dead. There is a drawing of her seal affixed to a deed at Kildrummy, to Apr. 1303 [sic], in Harl. MS. 4964, fo. 19d. back

(28) Mar Minutes of Evidence, p. 386. It is usually stated that these two retours related respectively to the two halves of the lands of the earldom; nothing in either retour bears out this statement. The Lyle coheirs were prosecuting their claim to one half as late as 1452 (see LYLE). The retours are known only by the official copies used in 1626 in connection with the restoration of all and haill the Earldom to John, Earl of Mar, as heir of the Countess Isabel. The sole authority for the statement that the second retour related to the Lyle half appears to be the 1626 endorsement thereon, which calls it the uther halt back

(29) On 10 Aug. 1440 the Council undertook to deliver Kildrummy to Erskine until the King's coming of age, when Erskine was to come before the Three Estates, to show his rights and claims, meanwhile receiving half the revenues of Mar. This agreement was broken by the Crown, and on 9 Aug. 1442 Erskine protested and, being unable to secure peaceful possession, besieged and took the castle; the Crown replied by wresting Dunbarton from his deputy. Later Dunbarton was restored to the keeping of Lord Erskyne and his son. In 1447 he, as Lord Erskine, his son Thomas, and others in Kildrummy Castle were required to surrender it. On 20 June 1448 an agreement was made under which Erskine was to deliver Kildrummy before 3 July, until the King's coming of age, when it should be delivered to whom should have right thereto, at the sight of the Three Estates, at which time Erskine should account for half the earldom. The Crown not only took possession of Kildrummy, but appropriated the revenues; Thomas protested in his father's name and his own, 4 Apr. 1449 and 26 Jan. 1449/50 The accounts of Mar revenues rendered to the Crown remain from Mich. 1450. back

(30) Antiq. of Aberdeen and Banff vol. iv, pp.201,202; Reg. Mag. Sig., 1424-15I3, no.790. On Robert's death Thomas, his s. and h., was unable to obtain feoffment of the earldom ; his petition, 21 Mar. 1452/53, for justice with regard to the lands, received the reply that the King was shortly going north, and would do justice (Acts of Parl., vol. ii, p.75). Finally the retour of Robert Erskine was reduced, 5 Nov. 1457. back

(31) Mar Minutes of Evidence, pp.381,44. Between these dates on 16 Apr. 1476 the unconfirmed and superseded charter of 12 Aug. 1404 (which according to the decreet of 1626 was the sole foundation of the King's "pretendit " right of possession of the Earldom) was, more than seventy years after its date, inscribed on the Great Seal Register by special mandate of the King "irregularly and illegally introduced, no confirmation of the charter having passed the Great Seal, and no private charter, such as this of the 12th August, much less an unconfirmed charter, having a right to insertion there" (Crawford, vol. i, p. 299). back

(32) It has been said that he was murdered, by being bled to death, by order of his brother James III. But see Drummond of Hawthornden's History of Scotland, p 125, for a natural explanation of his death. back

(33) There appears to be no authority for this creation. Wood's Douglas suggests that the revenues of the Earldom may have been assigned to him; and it appears from the Exch. Rolls, vol. ix, pp xlii, xliii, that the revenues of the Earldom were out of the hands of the Crown during the time that Cochrane is said to have been Earl. back

(34) The two immediate successors (1488-14+2) of James III made no grant of the dignity of Mar, retaining the territorial comitatus in their own hands, though bestowing various portions and dependencies on their favourites, but to none on the same scale as the grants (1507-10) by James IV to Alexander Elphinstone (afterwards Lord Elphinstone), which comprised the King's castle of Kildrummie, the chief messuage of the Earldom of Mar (Crawford, vol. i, pp.299, 300). back

(35) He was a bastard of James V, by Margaret, dau. of John (Erskine), Lord Erskine, de jure Earl of Mar. Hence his choice of the title of Mar and his readiness to surrender it to its right heir, his uncle, John, 6th Lord Erskine, who was restored thereto in 1565. back

(36) The four points on which the retour rested are given in Wood's Douglas, vol. ii, p.205, and their refutation on p. 206. One of them was that the King was himself heir to Isabel, Countess of Mar, as descended from Isabel of Mar, wife of Robert I, whereas in point of fact Isabel of Mar was sister, while Ellen (ancestress of the Erskine family) was daughter, of Gratney, Earl of Mar, the great-grandfather of the said Countess Isabel. back

(37) Of his two elder brothers (i) Robert Erskine, Master of Erskine, being slain at the battle of Pinkie, 10 Sep. 1547; and (ii) Thomas Ersidne, Master of Erskine, sometime Ambassador to England, d. 1551. His next yr. brother was Sir Alexander Erskine, of Gogar, father of Thomas, Cr. Earl of Kellie in 1619, with rem. to heirs male, in consequence of which that Earidom was inherited in 1829 (on failure of the heirs male of the grantee's body) by John Francis Miller (Erskine), Earl of Mar. back

(38) Hist. MSS. Corn., Mar and Kellie MSS., p.17. An engraving of the "Earl of Mar's lodging" in Stirling Castle, said to have been erected in 1570, is given in Billings, Baronial and Ecclts. Antiq of Scotland, vol. iv. back

(39)It is not impossible that the issue of this service of 1565 may have been proceded [SIC] by an assize of error, and inquiry into and reversal of the proceedings of 1457. A document existed formerly in the Mar charter-chest, and is quoted by Sir Robert Douglas, in which reasons are assigned (according to Sir Robert's report) why the grounds of these proceedings were erroneous. But the document, whatever was its character, does not now, it would appear, exist, and consequently has not been available as evidence. The invalidity however of the service negative of 1457, based on the chatter 12th August 1404, is in no need of any independent vindication. Crawford, vol. i, pp. 333, 334). back

(40)The instrument of infeftment for Mar is missing, but that for Garioch, which is preserved, is dated 24 July 1565. back

(41)It is at this time, or a few days earlier, that, according to the decision of the House of Lords, 26 Feb. 1875, an Earldom of Mar is held to have been created de novo, with remainder to heirs male of the body of the grantee. back

(42) She was, according to Knox the Reformer, "a verray Jesabell." On the death of her husband she continued to be the young King's governess until 1578. In Apr. 1584 she was ordered to leave Stirling, and her house there was seized for the King (Cal. Scot. Papers, vol. vii, pp. 56, 61), whom she was accused of having conspired to kill. Later in the year, when her son the Earl was forfeited, she was down for forfeiture, but some thought that she would he spared rather for shame than affection. Her correspondence is in Hist. MSS. Com., 4th Rep. back

(43) The Privy Council held the Raid of Aug. 22-23 and all that followed "to have bene and to be gude, aufauld, trew, thankfull and necessar service to his Hienes, and profittable to his haill realme" (Reg. P.C., vol. iii, p 519). back

(44) (Notice the spelling of Erskin in this portion of the petition) His petition to Parliament, to confirm him the earldom as heir of Isabel and of Earl Robert, says that Robert, Earl of Mar, was lawfully served and returned heir to Isabel of the earldom of Mar, lordship and regality of Garioch . . . the King's mother granted to John, late Earl of Mar, the said earldom of Mar. The Act says considering yat be ye lawes and custume of ye realme the richt of blood nor zit ony heretable title fallis vnder prescriptione nor is tane away be quhatsumeuir lenth of tyme or laik of possessioun . . oure said souerane lord and thre estaittis of parliament . . . decernis and declairis ye foirsaidis richtis to haue als grite force strenth and effect in ye persoun of the said Johnne erle of Mar as ye samin had or micht haif in ye persone of ye said umquhile dame Isobell Dowglas or umquhile Robert erle of Mar lord Erskin hir air and he to haue full riclit thereby as air be progress to his saidis predicessouris to all and haill ye saidis lands wherein ye said umquhile dame Issobell Dowglas countesse or umquhiie Robert erle of Mar hir air deit vest saisit and retourit notwithstanding ye lenth and diuturnitie of tyme which hes intervenit sensyne during ye which space the said erle and his predicessouris be ye iniquitie of ye tyme hes bene wranguslie debarrit from the saidis landis and possessioun yairof and als decernis & declairis yat ye said complenairis richt to ye said erldome lordschip and regalitie and actioun for recovering yairof and possessioun of ye samin hes not nor sail not prescrive be ye course of ye said tyme hot yat he and his airis hes and salhaif als gude richt interest title and actioun in and to ye said erldome lordschip and regalitie as gif ye said erie were immediat air to ye said dame Issobell Dowglas or to umquhile Robert erle of Mar lord Erskin hir air. . (Mar Minutes of Evidence, pp.437-S). back

(45) While the Earl kept the Castle, the Prince was to continue vnder the nuritur of the said Annabell, Countesse of Mar . . as towards his mouth and ordering of his persoun (HisT. MSS. Com., Mar and Kellie MSS., p.40). The King wrote to the Earl in 1595 that he was not to deliver the Prince except by the King's own spoken command; and if the King die, neither for the Queen nor the Estates to deliver him till he was 18, and that he commande you himself. He incurred the unappeasable resentment of the Queen Consort Anne for detaining her children from her. back

(46) This embassy to England from Mar. 1600/01 to May 1601 was to congratulate Queen Elizabeth on the crushing of Essex's rebellion, and to try to secure the recognition of James as successor to the English throne. John Chamberlain, writing of him, 27 May 1601, after the conclusion of his embassy to the English Court, calls him a courtly and well advised gentleman. He is described at that date by George Carleton in a letter to his brother Dudley Carleton as a man of extraordinary courage and place. V.G. back

(47) On 13 Sep. 1603 he had a grant of the Rights and Privileges of a Subject of the Kingdom of England (Mar Minutes, pp.138-139). back

(48) Among his various employments, he was Collector Gen. of Taxation, 1619 and 1621; a member of a special Cabinet within the P.C. 1621; member of a commission to introduce new and to improve old manufactures in Scotland, 1623; joint commissioner for creating Baronets of Nova Scotia, 1625, 1626; a joint commissioner for the Surrenders under the Revocation Edict, 1626; joint commissioner for revising and printing the Statutes, 1628. back

(49) He had the second place in the P.C., after the Chancellor and before the Archbishop. On 15 Apr. 1622 he complained of the difficulties caused by ane erronious custome begone amongst our people to equall thair expenssis to the maner of Ingland, with whome we can not in any degree compear in wealth, wherof the subjectis heir have found the harme, to the undoing of many of the best sort-pensions have risen from marks Scottish to pounds sterling (Hist. MSS. Com., Mar and Kellie MSS., p.109). back

(50) He was placed above seven Earls who were created before 1565-namely, Rothes, Morton, Menteith, Eglintoun, Montrose, Cassillis and Caithness (Crawford, vol. ii, p.1, who examines the Decreet of Ranking and the Union Roll at considerable length). back

(51)In 1606 he brought to the King a complaint of Scottish masters and owners of ships that the form and patrone of the flaggis of schippis, send doun heir and commandit to be ressavit and used be the subjectis of boith kingdomes, is verie prejudiciall to the fredome and dignitie of Scotland. becaus... the Scottis Croce... is twyse divydit, and the Inglishe Croce . . haldin haill and drawne through the Scottis Croce, whiche is thairby obscurit, and no takin nor merk to be seene of the Scottis armes, (Reg. P.C.., vol. vii, pp 498-99). Many of King James's letters to him, both private and official, are to be found in Hist. MSS Com., Mar and Kellie MSS. The Earl, who had served James so faithfully at the Treasury, became very apprehensive when he heard that the new King was about to appoint a Commission of the Treasury, and wrote to Charles, 18 Nov. 1625: . . . I understoud that sum of my onfreinds had intension onder culler to mak your Majesties commoditie to putt upon me a mark of your distrust . . . Give any man vill accuss me thai I have nott doun the deutie of a treu Servantt unto your Majestie or to your vorthie father of good memorie, I am reddie to abyd my tryall be the most strictt form that lau vill allou (Mar and Kellie MSS., p.133). back

(52)The original of this will, and an earlier one, made 1 Apr. 1608, when he was Setting out to attend James I in England, were in 1873 in the muniments of Mrs. Erskine-Murray. See Hist. MSS. Com., 4th Report, p.527, where there is an interesting account of his bequest of the great diamond which he received from the King of France in 1605. back

(53)Her character was more strong than amiable. She basked all her life in the beams of Royalty with a pension from the Crown, and yet cultivated the Kirk, and hounded out her whelps to bark and bite in favour of the Solemn League and Covenant. For her correspondence and notes on her will, see Hist. MSS. Com., 4th Rep. V.G. back

(54) Of his seven yr brothers, all of whom were by his father's second wife, (i) James became Earl of Buchan in right of his wife, and was ancestor of the two succeeding Earls; (ii) Henry was ancestor of the Lords Cardross, and from 1665 of the Earls of Buchan; (iii) Col. Sir Alexander Erskine d. 1640. Sir Charles Erskine, of Alva, 6th son, was ancestor of the Erskines, Baronets, afterwards, 1805, Earls of Rosslyn. back

(55) She has been called Christian by some writers, but in Hist. MSS. Com., MSS. of David Milne Home (1902), p.246, is a letter signed Jeane Hay, dat. 22 May 1635, addressed To my honorable and loveing cousigne Sir Alexander Hume, and endorsed from the Countess of Mar. She being a Rom. Cath., James wrote to the Earl of Mar, 12 Oct. 1609, directing that befoir the matche be perfyited, the young ladye do give full satisfactioun to the Churche therein, whatever can be of hir justlye demandeit, for testimony of her owne professioun(Hist. MSS. Com., Mar and Kellie MSS., p. 65). back

(56)The Register of the Great Seal during the Commonwealth shows repeated sales of these estates. The Earl lived in a small cottage at the gates of Aloa House till the Restoration, when he was one of the three Earls (Crawford, Sutherland, and Mar) who bore respectively the Crown, Sceptre,and Sword (then lately recovered from their hiding-place in Kinneff Church) at the State opening of the Scottish Parl. 1 Jan. 166o/01. In the Parl. of 1663 he carried the Crown (Scots P., vol. v, p. 625, citing Lamont's Diary, p. 163). back

(57) He is said to have been deprived of this post in 1686 in consequence of his vote against the Act for relaxing the penal laws against Rom. Catholics, but he had a grant of 700 merks for repairs of the Castle 12 Aug. 1687, and was certainly in charge of it in May 1688 (Hist. MSS. Com., Mar and Kellie MSS., pp.219, 220). In 1683 he appears to have felt some insecurity in the tenure of this office, for he presented a memorial begging for his continuance in it and setting forth the long and faithful services of his family to the King and his ancestors His apprehensions may have been roused by the order, 1 May 1683, to the Lord Treasurer to treat with him for his hereditary right of keeping the Castle (S.P., Warrant Bk. 8, p.41). back

(58) Wood's Douglas, 2nd edit., vol. ii, p. 218. He thus disputed the precedence allotted, by virtue of office, to four (Argyll, Crawford, Errol, and Marischal) of the five Earls who were on that ground placed, in the "ranking" of 1606, before him (Angus, the remaining one of the five, having obtained a Marquessate), as also the precedence, by virtue of antiquity, allotted therein to Sutherland. back

(59) On 17 Sep. 1717 he addressed to Lord Cadogan a long letter proposing that King George should be sent back to Hanover. He Writes: My firm belief of your being a man of honour and one who wishes the good of your country as well as what is for your own advantage makes me venture giving you this trouble. Your lordship has too good sense not to see after the experience you have now had the misfortunes our country is cast into and the natural consequences that must have of violent parties and divisions at home . . . perpetual jars and confusions about a disputed succession . . . can only be cured be restoring the rightful and lineal heir . . . Had not your master better secure to himself and his family his old and just possessions and by the assistance of my master and others . . . acquire such new ones on the Continent as would make his family more considerable than any of its neighbours . . . (Hist. MSS. Com., Stuart Papers, vol. v, pp. 50-52). This is probably one of a number of similar letters sent out by him; another in the same terms has been seen in the possession of a nobleman who does not wish its whereabouts to be disclosed. back

(60) The friends of the family were allowed to buy back from the Government, much below their value, certain of the forfeited estates, including Alloa, for the heir of the house. This was completed in 1725, and the estates were settled by an entail dated 6 Jan. 1739. By terms of this entail-(i) The destination is to heirs-general in preference to heirs-male collateral,. of whom the nearest was Lord Grange [i.e. the Hon. James Erskine, a Lord of Session, next br. to the attainted Earl], himself the principal trustee. The attainted Earl's daughter succeeded under the entail, and on her death, her son, the afterwards restored Earl. (ii) It was obligatory on heirs-general, being strangers to the house of Erskine, to adopt the name and arms of the Erskines Earls of Mar. (iii) Should the attainder be reversed, the same class of heirs had to. adopt 'the title, dignity, and honours' of the family. The opinion of Lord Grange, as heir-male, a trustee, and a Lord of Session, was thus that the dignity was descendible to heirs general (Crawford, vol. ii, p. xvi). It is obvious that the clause as to adopting" the name and arms of Erskine "would not apply to the heirs male. back

(61)The Act proceeded upon a report to the Crown, drawn up by the Attorney Gen. (Copley) and the Lord Advocate (Rae), tracing his descent, through his mother, from the attainted Earl, without mentioning the fact of his also being (through his father) the great-nephew and collateral heir male of the said Earl, in which latter capacity (only) he could have inherited the Earldom under the supposed limitation thereof held (in 1875) by the House of Lords. It appears to be assumed (and is accordingly so treated in the text) that this last mentioned Earldom or supposed Earldom (to which, as before mentioned, his heirship was not set forth) was by this Act also restored to the restored Earl. back

(62)This was one of the ten Scottish peerages restored by Acts of Parl. (in 1824, 1826, and subsequently) out of 19 which had been forfeited for the Rising of 1715. back

(63)No other peerage dignity that was forfeited therewith was mentioned. The Barony of Erskine was undoubtedly so forfeited, as also was any right to any other dignity-e.g. that of the Earldom or Barony of Garioch which may have been vested in the attainted Earl. back

(64)The Royal warrant, 15 Oct. 1885, granting to the sisters of the Earl of Mar the precedence that would have been due to them if their mother had survived her brother (who died in 1866) and succeeded him as (suojure) Countess of Mar, indicates that the then advisers of the Crown did not consider the mediaeval Earldom (the only one which could thus have passed to a female heir of line) to have been surrendered or forfeited. There is nothing in this warrant to imply that a Restitution Act was needed before such female succession could have taken place, and the late Lord Mar stated(17 Nov. 1893) that be refused to accept the warrant when previously) it had been made in terms which conveyed the erroneous position that his mother, had she survived, would not have been a Countess in her own right but for such an Act as that of1885. back

(65) As to the Earidom of Mar evolved by the decision of 1875 (which declares it to be now vested in Walter Henry, Earl of Mar and Kellie), the Act of 1885 decrees that it shall be called in the place and order belonging to an Earldom created in 1565. Thus the Earldom of Mar on the Union Roll is the mediaeval dignity which is enjoyed by the heir general. back