CHAPTER VIII.

THE SCOTTISH CHURCH.

[Sidenote: A.D. 878-889.

First appearance of the name ‘the Scottish Church’ when freed

from servitude under Pictish law.]

‘This is he who first gave liberty to the Scottish Church which had been

until now under servitude, according to the law and custom of the

Picts.’[605] Such is the almost unanimous testimony of the chronicles as

to King Giric, who reigned from 878 to 889; and this is the first

appearance of the church under the name of ‘the Scottish Church.’ At

this time the kingdom ruled by the new dynasty of kings of Scottish race

was still the kingdom of the Picts, and the kings were still called

kings of the Picts. Giric therefore must be regarded as such; and he

seems also to have broken in upon the Tanistic law of succession, and

reintroduced the Pictish law, by which the throne descended to the

sister’s children in preference to the son’s; while by ‘the Scottish

Church’ could only be meant that church which his predecessor Kenneth

had constituted and placed under the rule of one bishop. The first, as

we have seen, was the abbot of Dunkeld; but the election of this bishop

was now in the hands of the church of Abernethy. Giric’s object

therefore probably was to secure the support of the Scottish clergy by

conferring a boon upon their church. Whatever that boon may have been,

the expression ‘that he first gave it’ seems to imply that it was

something which the Pictish kings had not previously given, but in which

he was followed by his successors. What then was implied by the church

being under servitude, and having liberty given to it? These are terms

which, in connection with the church lands, have a very definite

meaning. About thirty years before this date Ethelwulf, king of Wessex,

as we are told in the Saxon Chronicle, in the year 855, ‘chartered the

tenth part of his land, over all his kingdom, for the glory of God and

his own eternal salvation;’ and in the deeds rehearsing this grant we

find the same expressions used. Thus, in one grant he says that he has

not only given the tenth part of his lands to the holy churches, but

also ‘that our appointed ministers therein should have them in perpetual

liberty, so that such donation shall remain permanently freed from all

royal service, and relieved from all secular servitude;’ and in another

there is a still more detailed explanation of it. He grants the tenth

part of his lands ‘to God and St. Mary, and to all the saints, to be

safe, protected and free from all secular services, not only the greater

and lesser loyal tributes or taxations, which we call Witeredden, but

also free from every thing, for the remission of souls and my sins, to

the sole service of God, without hosting or construction of bridges or

fortification of citadels, that they may pray for us without ceasing, in

as far as we have freed them from their servitude.’[606] In the early

Irish Monastic Church, the land granted for the endowment of a church or

monastery to its first founder or patron saint, was usually called its

_Termon_ land, and was considered by right to have the privilege of

sanctuary and to be free from any rents, tributes, or other exactions by

temporal chiefs; but the close connection between the church and the

tribe, and the rights of the latter in connection with the succession to

the abbacy, led to a constant attempt on the part of the secular chiefs

to bring these lands under the same obligations towards themselves as

affected the tribe lands; and, when they succeeded in this, they were

held to have brought the church under servitude. This appears even as

late as the Synod of Cashel, in 1172, the fourth act of which is as

follows:—‘That all church lands, and possessions belonging to them, be

wholly free from exaction on the part of all secular persons, and

especially that neither petty kings, nor chieftains, nor any other

powerful men in Ireland, nor their sons with their families, are to

exact, as has been customary, victuals and hospitality in lands

belonging to the church, or presume any longer to extort them by

force;’[607] and there is an instructive passage in the Annals of the

Four Masters, about the same time, where we find it stated, in the year

1161, ‘It was on this occasion that the churches of Columcille in Meath

and Leinster were freed by the Coärb of Columcille, Flaithbheartach Ua

Brolchain; and their tributes and jurisdiction were given to him, for

they had been previously enslaved.’[608]

When the Columban monks were expelled from the Pictish territories in

the beginning of the preceding century, and a different system

introduced, the church lands would no doubt be brought under the same

burdens and exactions as applied to other lands. This appears to have

taken place about the same time in England; for St. Boniface, archbishop

of Mentz, who was himself an Englishman, writes to Cudberht, archbishop

of Canterbury about 745, regarding ‘the enforced servitude of the monks

in royal works and buildings, which is not heard of in the whole

Christian world save only among the nation of the Angles—which cannot be

acquiesced in or consented to by the priests of God—which is an evil

unknown to past ages.’[609] So it seems also to have been among the

Picts; and it had become their custom and usage that the church lands

and their occupants should not be exempted from secular services. It is

therefore probably by a prolepsis that the first grant of St. Andrews by

King Hungus is accompanied by exemptions really due to King Giric, when

we are told that the donation is ‘with such freedom that its occupiers

should always be free and quit from all hosting and construction of

castles and bridges, and the vexation of all secular exactions.’ The

ordinary burdens of the land among the Picts were exigible by their

kings, mormaers and toiseachs; and the proportion received by each was

termed their share, as appears from the grants in the Book of Deer. What

King Giric did, therefore, was probably to issue a decree, similar in

terms to that of the Synod of Cashel at a later period, ‘that all church

lands and possessions belonging to them be wholly free from exaction on

the part of all secular persons, and that neither kings nor mormaers nor

toiseachs are to exact, as has been customary among the Picts, victuals

and hospitality in lands belonging the church, or presume any longer to

extort them by force.’[610]

[Sidenote: A.D. 908.

Primacy transferred to St. Andrews. Cellach first bishop of

Alban.]

Though the church benefited by this act of King Giric, it does not

appear to have availed much, so far as his personal object was

concerned; for he was, along with his pupil the British son of Kenneth’s

daughter, driven out, and the throne was once more occupied by his male

descendants. They now were called no longer kings of the Picts, but

kings of Alban; and the districts between the Forth and the Spey are no

longer Fortrenn, or Pictland, but Alban. The reign of the second of

these kings of Alban was an important one for the Church, for in his

sixth year—that is, about 908—a great meeting was held on the Moothill

of Scone, at which King Constantin and Bishop Cellach ‘solemnly vow to

protect the laws and discipline of the faith, and the rights of the

churches and of the Gospel, equally with the Scots.’[611] Two facts may

fairly be deduced from the short notice of this meeting given in the

Pictish Chronicle; first, that it secured the rights and liberties of

the church as now amalgamated into one body; and secondly, that the

leading part taken in it by Bishop Cellach obviously places him at the

head of the church, and the primacy must now have been transferred from

Abernethy to St. Andrews. There are two lists of the bishops of St.

Andrews given to us; one by Bower, who was abbot of Inchcolm, and the

other by Wyntoun, who was primate of Lochleven. These lists agree, and

in both Cellach appears as first bishop of St. Andrews.[612] This

meeting may be held to have in fact finally constituted the Scottish

Church under its then organisation, in which it was placed under the

government of one bishop, who was designated _Epscop Alban_, or bishop

of Alban.[613]

[Sidenote: A.D. 921.

Introduction of canonical rule of Culdees.]

It is followed in some dozen years after by another event, which, though

the notice of it from another source is short enough, yet had evidently

a very important influence upon the church. We have already seen that a

fraternity of _Cele De_ are mentioned in connection with the Church of

Armagh as early as the year 921, when we are told by the Irish Annalists

that in that year Armagh was pillaged, on the Saturday before St.

Martin’s day, which was the 10th of November, by Gofirth, grandson of

Ivar, and his army, who spared the houses of prayer with their people of

God, the _Cele De_, and their sick, and the whole church town, except

some houses which were burnt through neglect; but two of the annalists

add in the same year that ‘Maenach _Cele De_, or the Culdee, came across

the sea from the west, that is, from Ireland, to establish the

ordinances of Erinn.’[614] We have thus the decrees of 908, followed by

a _Cele De_, or Culdee, coming over from Ireland and establishing laws,

which can only mean those rules which regulated the community of the

_Cele De_ at the time in Ireland, who had now been for a century under

the canonical rule; and at this period we must date the establishment in

Scotland of the form of canonical life which we find the Culdees in

Scotland afterwards exhibiting.

We get a glimpse into the state of the church in this reign too in the

Life of St. Cadroë. Having been fully instructed at Armagh, he returned

to Beanus, his uncle, and ‘scatters the seeds of wisdom throughout the

whole of Scotland; for, though the Scots have had many teachers, they

have not had many fathers. He here trained them in the knowledge of the

arts, whence, because he instructed many with his lips, he had no

associates; for, from the time of his arrival, none of the wise men had

crossed the sea, but still remained in Ireland. The old man rejoiced to

possess the youth, and had not his equal in anything which he tried.’ In

the meanwhile time passed on, and, as usual, he received a divine

warning that he was to leave his native country and go on a foreign

mission. There flowed near his residence a large river, close to which,

as it happened, was the trunk of a certain tree. Thither he went at

night, and removing his garments entered the stream in the extreme

rigour of cold, and, holding by the tree, that he might not be carried

off by the current, he recited Psalms, from the 118th to the 123d Psalm.

He then entered upon his pilgrimage, and as grief filled the whole

region, and the population assembled, the king of the country, called

Constantin, endeavoured to retain him. In his journey Cadroë, desiring

to pray, entered the monastery of St. Bridget, when the people coming

from different parts completely fill the noble and rustic church. All

begged him not to quit the country, and after some discussion a certain

abbot, called Maelodarius, came with the king and persuaded them to let

him go, and he departed to the land of the Cumbrians.[615] We need not

follow him any farther. As Cadroë was born about the year 900, his

return from Armagh was either coincident with or soon after the arrival

of the Culdee in 920, as is implied in his statement that he was the

last of the instructors who had come from Ireland. The large river was

no doubt the river Earn; and we may thus identify Beanus with the St.

Bean to whom the church of Kinkell in Strathearne, on the north bank of

the Earn, was dedicated. He commenced his foreign mission about the year

940. The monastery where he entered the Church of St. Bridget can have

been no other than that of Abernethy, and Maelodarius, or Maelodhar, was

no doubt its abbot. The first notice of the _Cele De_ at Armagh, as we

have seen, occurs in the same year in which Maenach the _Cele De_ came

to Scotland, and during the tenure of the abbacy by Maelbrigde, the

instructor of Cadroë; and he too probably was connected with the mission

which brought the _Cele De_ to Scotland, and with the establishment of

its rule. Constantin, who so strenuously urged his not leaving the

country, makes a fitting termination to his own reign when, according to

the Pictish Chronicle, worn out with age, he assumed the pilgrim’s

staff, and served the Lord, and resigned the throne to Malcolm, son of

Donald. This is echoed by St. Berchan when he says—

Afterwards God did call him

To the monastery on the brink of the waves,

In the house of the apostle he came to death;

Undefiled was the pilgrim.

By the house of the apostle St. Andrews is meant, and here, according to

the testimony of the same chroniclers who reported the grant in favour

of the church by King Giric, he becomes abbot of the _Keledei_, or

Culdees.[616]

[Sidenote: Fothad, son of Bran, second bishop of Alban.]

Whether Cellach the bishop was alive at this time we do not know, but

his successor was certainly Fothad, son of Bran. He appears in the

Chartulary of St. Andrews as having made an arrangement with the Keledei

of Lochleven, by which they gave the island of Lochlevyne to the bishop

of St. Andrews, who, in return, undertook to provide them with food and

clothing. This grant is said to have been made by ‘Ronan, monk and

abbot, a man of admirable sanctity, who first conveyed the place, by a

_precaria_, to the bishop Fothath, son of Bren, who then and since was

celebrated throughout all Scotland, and was of a commendable life. The

bishop gave his benediction to all who should observe that convention

and the friendship established between the bishop and the _Keledei_;

and, on the other hand, gave his malediction to all bishops who should

infringe or revoke that convention.’[617] Fothad remained bishop during

the whole of the reign of Malcolm, who succeeded Constantin; but we are

told that he was expelled by his successor, Indulph, who reigned from

954 to 962, and that he lived eight years afterwards. As his death is

recorded in the year 963, this places his expulsion in the year 955.

During the whole of this period the island of Iona was in the main cut

off from any connection with Scotland, by the occupation of the Western

Islands by the Norwegians, and its monastery had to fall back upon

Ireland for such nominal connection with the Columban monasteries as

could be kept up. One of the abbots of these monasteries was usually

elected coärb of Columcille, and the abbacy of Iona became a dependent

monastery under his rule. As we have seen, in the beginning of the

century a descendant of Conall Gulban, Maelbrigde, son of Tornan, had

been elected abbot of Armagh, and, as belonging to the tribe of the

patron saint, became coärb of Columcille; but on his death in 927,

Dubthach, son of Duban, who was also of the race of Conall Gulban,

became coärb of Columcille. He was abbot of Raphoe, in Ireland, and as

such was likewise coärb of Adamnan, and accordingly his death is

recorded by the Ulster Annals in 938 as coärb of Columcille and Adamnan;

but he is styled by the Four Masters ‘coärb of Columcille and Adamnan

both in Erin and Alban.’[618] During his time, however, the actual

government of the abbacy as a dependent monastery seems to have fallen

to the Anchorite, or _Deorad_ as he is termed in the Brehon Laws; for we

find that an anchorite had been elected abbot, though he died before his

right was confirmed, as in 937 the death is recorded of Angus, son of

Murcertach, a learned man, anchorite and abbot-elect of Iona.[619]

Dubtach’s successor was Robartach, who was likewise abbot of Raphoe, for

his death is recorded in 954 as coärb of Columcille and of Adamnan; and

during his time also we find an abbot of the dependent monastery in 947,

when Caen-comhrac, abbot of Iona, dies.[620]

[Sidenote: A.D. 955-963.

Malisius bishop of Alban.]

An attempt seems now to have been made to connect the monastery of Iona

with the Scottish Church, for the next two coärbs of Columcille,

Dubhduin and Dubhscuile, whose joint tenure of the coärbship extends

from the year 954 to 964,[621] do not appear to have had any connection

whatever with Iona; while Bower betrays the cause of the expulsion of

Fothad, when he tells us that his successor Malisius was a disciple of

the blessed St. Duthacus in Ireland, who had foretold of him that he

would be the future bishop of the Scots.[622] He quotes as his authority

a Life of St. Duthacus which does not now exist. This Duthacus can be no

other than that Dubhthach who was coärb of Columcille both in Erinn and

Alban from 927 to 938; and Indulph’s attempt was to bring Iona into

connection with the Scottish Church by placing a disciple of his in St.

Andrews as its bishop. The abbacy of Dunkeld, too, to which a Columban

monastery would naturally look as its head in Scotland, seems now to

have passed into the hands of laymen, and to have been held by a lay

abbot; for we find Dunchad, abbot of Dunkeld, taking part in the war of

succession between the kings Dubh and Cuilean, and being slain in the

battle of Duncrub.[623] Malisius is said to have been eight years

bishop, which is the exact time Fothad is said to have lived after his

expulsion; and St. Andrews seems at this time to have drawn pilgrims

from Ireland; for in 963 we find, in the Irish Annals, the death of

Aedh, son of Maelmithidh, in pilgrimage at _Cinnrimonadh_ or St.

Andrews.[624] But when Indulph was succeeded by Dubh, in 962, he appears

to have been restored in the last year of his life, as the first event

mentioned by the Pictish Chronicle in the reign of Dubh is the death of

Fothad the bishop, and in the year 963 the Annals of the Four Masters

record his death as that of Fothadh, son of Bran, scribe and bishop of

Inis Alban.[625]

[Sidenote: A.D. 963-970.

Maelbrigde bishop of Alban.]

The succeeding bishop was Maelbrigde, and during his time we find that

Dubhscuile, who is simply styled coärb of Columcille and died in 964,

was succeeded by Mughron, whose death is recorded in the Annals of

Ulster in 980 as ‘coärb of Columcille in Erinn and in Alban,’[626]

showing that Iona had once more fallen back upon the coärb of Columcille

in Ireland. During the first two years of Mughron’s possession of the

coärbship, the government of Iona as a dependent monastery seems to have

again fallen to the Anchorite, who joined with it the title of bishop,

but after his death, a new official makes his appearance—an _Aircinnech_

of Iona, whose death is recorded in 978.[627] The name of _Aircinnech_

first appears in the Irish Annals in the ninth century, when it is

occasionally mentioned, but more frequently in the succeeding centuries.

It was essentially a lay office, though we find it combined with the

titles of bishop, of abbot and of priest. The duties of the office were

to superintend the lands and farms of the church or monastery and their

tenants, to collect the rents or other tributes paid by them, and

perhaps also to distribute amongst the poor the alms or hospitality of

the coärb and his ‘familia.’[628] When the functions of abbot were

discharged by an anchorite, such an office became necessary for the

management of the secular concerns of the monastery.

[Sidenote: A.D. 970-995.

Cellach, son of Ferdalaig, bishop of Alban.]

The short and unsatisfactory notices of the church given in the Pictish

Chronicle show, in the reign of Cuilean, from 967 to 976, indications of

some disturbance in the church of St. Andrews, the nature of which we

can only guess at. We learn that a Marcan, son of Breodolaig, was slain

in the church of St. Michael, which was one of the seven churches of St.

Andrews; that Leot and Sluagadach go to Rome; that Bishop Maelbrigde

died, and that Cellach, son of Ferdalaig, ruled in his stead;[629] and

when Bower adds that he was the first who went to Rome for confirmation,

and lived twenty-five years after his confirmation,[630] we can see that

all these events were connected; but whether it was a violent attempt to

seize the bishopric, which ended in the pretender being slain in the

church, and whether Leot and Sluagadach went to Rome to obtain

absolution for the slaughter, or whether it was a contested election on

the death of Maelbrigde, and they went to obtain for Cellach the

additional authority of the pope’s confirmation, we cannot tell. The

reign of Kenneth, who succeeded Cuilean, was an important one both for

the Scottish Church and for Iona. The important event for the former was

the foundation of the church of Brechin, which appears to have taken

place early in his reign, and to have been dedicated to the Holy

Trinity. The short statement which the Pictish Chronicle gives us of

this donation to the church conveys no further information regarding it

than that Brechin was even then considered an important place.[631] We

can only infer, from its subsequent history, that it was a monastery

after the Irish model, in which form the Scottish foundations after the

accession of Kenneth mac Alpin appear to have been made, with which was

now combined a college of _Cele De_, and that it has left us, as a mark

of its early connection with Ireland, the only other specimen of the

round towers to be found in Scotland, besides that which had been

erected at Abernethy. The churches, too, which afterwards formed the

diocese of Brechin, were probably, even at this early period,

possessions of the new foundation at Brechin. In the districts of Angus

and Mearns the churches were shared between the dioceses of Brechin and

St. Andrews, in a manner so irregular and unsystematic as to point to a

mixed population in which some of the villages were still Pictish and

others had now a Scottish colony. It seems to have been through the

medium of the recovery of the old foundations, and the creation of new,

that a Scottish population was spread over the country; and the object

of King Kenneth in this foundation may have been to bring a Pictish

population more under the direct influence of the Scots. The church of

Brechin was founded during the time that Mughron was coärb of Columcille

both in Erinn and Alban, when probably there was freer intercourse

between the Scotch and Irish Churches; but his death, after he had held

the coärbship for sixteen years, was followed by events fatal for Iona.

[Sidenote: Iona ravaged by Danes. Shrine of St. Columba transferred to

Down.]

At this time the Western Isles, including the Isle of Man, were the

subject of a constant struggle between the Danes and the Norwegians, for

their acquisition by the former and their retention by the latter. The

Danes of Limerick had, during the latter part of this century, acquired

possession of the Isle of Man, and, as early as the year 973, we find

Maccus, son of Aralt, who was at their head, called king of many

islands;[632] but how far his sway over the Western Isles extended we do

not know. Of the two pagan races who infested Ireland and the West of

Scotland, the Danes were by far the more cruel and destructive in their

attacks upon the monasteries, and appear to have been most dreaded. The

last year of Mughron’s life had witnessed the arrival at Iona of one of

the most powerful kings of the Danes of Dublin, Anlaf Cuaran, who in

that year ‘went on a pilgrimage to Hi Coluimcille,’ where he died,

‘after penance and a good life;’[633] he was, however, closely connected

with the Scottish royal family, having been son-in-law of King

Constantin, and in close alliance with him, and had been baptized when

king of the Northumbrians; but Mughron’s successor, Maelciarain ua

Maigne, coärb of Columcille, ‘suffered red martyrdom from the Danes at

_Athcliath_,’—that is, was slain by the Danes at Dublin in 986; and in

the same year Iona is plundered by the Danes, on the eve of the

nativity, and the abbot and fifteen of the clergy of the church were

slain.[634] These were the Danes of Limerick, who were now under the

rule of Gofraigh mac Aralt, the brother of Maccus, and who is termed by

the Irish Annalists king of Innsigall, or the Western Isles. But he was

encountered by Sigurd, earl of Orkney, and we find that in the following

year a great slaughter was made of the Danes who had plundered Iona, and

three hundred and sixty of them were slain; while two years later their

king, Gofraigh, was himself killed in Dalriada, and the Isles once more

passed into the undisturbed possession of the Norwegians, and were

governed by the earls of Orkney.[635] The monastery which had been

plundered was of course that stone monastery which had been built after

the destruction of the wooden monastery by fire, and the small number of

monks slain indicates that the greater part had taken refuge in the

fort; but, like Blathmac, the abbot, whose name is not recorded,

remained at his post, and tradition still points out a bay in the north

end of the island, remarkable for its pure white sand, and called

_Traith ban na manach_, or the White Bay of the Monks, as the scene

where an abbot and fifteen monks were slain by the Danes. As this was

the last time that Iona was plundered by the Danes, who not many years

after were converted to Christianity, it is probably to this occasion

that the tradition regarding the shrine of Saint Columba, given by

Colgan on the authority of St. Berchan, may be referred. The story is

this: ‘Manderus, son of the king of Denmark and leader of a fleet of

Northmen, wasting the northern parts of Britain with fire and sword,

came to Iona, where these satellites of Satan, mixing sacred things with

profane, and pillaging everything which they met, excavated the ground

in search of hidden treasure. Among others they found the sarcophagus,

or shrine, in which was a true treasure, viz. the body of Saint Columba.

They took the shrine on board, and on their way to Ireland opened it;

but, finding nothing but the bones and ashes of a man, shut it again and

threw it into the sea. It was cast by the waves upon the shore at

Downpatrick, and the abbot, having found it, and being instructed by a

divine revelation that it contained the relics of Saint Columba, placed

it along with those of Saint Patrick and Saint Bridget.’[636] Certain it

is that in the following century the shrine was believed to be at

Downpatrick. In the old tract called the _Amra Coluimcille_ we find the

following statement:—‘In Dun’—that is Downpatrick—‘again, some say, the

resurrection of Coluimcille will be, as the poet has said—

Hy (Iona), with the multitude of its _martra_ (relics),

Of which was Colum, beauteous disciple;

He went out yet at last,

So that Dun is his blessed church.’[637]

St. Berchan, writing in the end of the eleventh or beginning of the

twelfth century, repeats as a saying of Saint Columba—

My grace on Hi (Iona) without crime,

And my soul in Derry,

And my body under the stone,

Under which are Bridget and Patrick.[638]

And we find that in the year 1127 ‘the shrine of Coluimcille was carried

off into captivity by the Galls of Atacliath’—or Danes of Dublin—‘and

restored again to its house at the end of a month,’[639] which certainly

implies that it was then in Ireland.

During the three years that followed this plundering of the monastery,

we find Dunnchadh Ua Robhacain coärb of Columcille and Adamnan, which

implies that he was abbot of Raphoe; but, on his death in 989, we find

that Dubdahthe, the abbot of Armagh, takes the coärbship of Columcille

by the advice of the men of Erinn and Alban.[640] The monastery of Iona,

however, appears soon after in an efficient state, as we find it

governed by a local abbot whose death is recorded in 1005.[641] In the

same year Malcolm the Second commenced his thirty years’ reign over

Alban, now for the first time called Scotia. He is said, in a chronicle

of the twelfth century, after the great battle of Carham in 1018, ‘to

have on that day distributed many oblations to the churches as well as

to the clergy.’[642] In Iona he appears for the time to have restored to

the abbot the title of coärb of Columcille, for we find that in 1007

‘Muredach mac Crican resigns the coärbship of Columcille for God’—that

is, becomes a recluse; and Ferdomnach is elected to the coärbship by the

advice of the men of Erinn at the fair of Taillten,[643] which implies

that his coärbship was limited to Ireland; and we find that he was in

fact abbot of Kells, as was his successor; while, on the other hand, the

death of Flannobra, coärb of Iona, is recorded in 1025.[644] In the

following year Maelruanaidh Ua Maeldoraigh, lord of Cinel Conall, that

is, of the tribe of Conall Gulban, went over the sea on his

pilgrimage.[645] The expression ‘over the sea’ implies that he went to

Iona.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1025-1028.

Alwynun bishop of Alban.]

Cellach, the bishop of Alban, is said to have filled that office for

twenty-five years, which brings his death towards the end of the tenth

century. The first bishop to whom we can assign a fixed date after that

is Alwynus, who is said to have been bishop three years, and whose death

must have taken place in 1028, which places his election as bishop in

the year 1025. Between Cellach and Alwyn we have two names given us by

Bower and Wyntoun, those of Malmore and Malisius; but we know nothing

beyond their names. During the tenure of one or other of them, the

district of Lothian was ceded to Malcolm the Second by Eadulf Cudel

after the battle of Carham in 1018, and the churches of Lothian

naturally fell under the superintendence of the bishop of St. Andrews as

sole bishop in Scotland. But not the least important event connected

with Malcolm the Second was that he gave his eldest daughter in marriage

to Crinan, lay abbot of Dunkeld, and by this marriage the hereditary lay

abbots of Dunkeld gave to the Scottish throne a dynasty of kings who

were destined to extinguish that ancient church, with its peculiar

institutions, from which their ancestors had emerged.

[Sidenote: Lay abbots of Dunkeld.]

We can readily trace this descent of Dunkeld from a high ecclesiastical

position to a lay possession. We see it first as a Culdee church,

founded shortly before the accession of the Scottish kings to the

Pictish throne; then as a Scottish monastery, its abbot filling the high

office of bishop of Fortrenn, the new kingdom acquired by the Scots.

Then the bishopric passes to Abernethy, and the successor to the abbot

who was first bishop, appears as ‘princeps,’ or superior, of Dunkeld, a

term which leaves it doubtful whether he was a cleric or a layman. Then

we find Duncan, abbot of Dunkeld, slain in battle while fighting for one

of the kings in a war of succession—evidently a layman. Then we have

Crinan, abbot of Dunkeld, marrying one of the daughters of the king,

while the other is given to Sigurd, earl of Orkney. The possessions of

Dunkeld were large and situated in the very heart of the kingdom, but

Crinan appears to have held, along with them, those of the monastery of

Dull, also secularised, which extended from Strathtay to the boundary

between Atholl and Argyll. Between the two, a large tract of country was

in his hands, and his following of men must have been very great. We

find him under the name of ‘Hundi jarl’ in the Orkneyinga Saga fighting

with the Norwegians along with other jarls, and in 1045 he is slain in

battle in a great contest between the people of Alban. The character of

these abbots as great lay lords seems plain enough, and their hereditary

descent equally so; for the name of Crinan’s son being Duncan gives a

strong presumption that he was himself the son or grandson of the former

abbot whose name was Duncan; and we find that the abbacy of Dunkeld

remained with his descendants. The abbey, too, seems, during his time,

to have come to an end, for we are told that in 1027 Dunkeld was

entirely destroyed by fire.[646]

[Sidenote: Hereditary succession in benefices.]

This state of matters, however, was not peculiar to Scotland, or very

different from what existed both in Ireland and in Wales at the time. In

the early Monastic Church of Ireland celibacy was enforced, at least

upon one class of the monks, for the saints of the second order ‘refused

the services of women, separating them from the monasteries;’ but still

there was a succession to the abbacy, the tribe or family in whom it was

vested providing a fit person in orders to fill the office; but when the

stringency of the monastic rule was broken in upon, under the influence

of the secular clergy, marriage was gradually permitted or connived at,

and at length became general, the rebound towards a secular state being

great in proportion to the enforced strictness of the previous system.

The natural consequence was that a direct descent from the

ecclesiastical persons themselves came in place of the older system of

succession, and the church offices became hereditary in their family.

The next step in the downward process was that the abbots and superiors

did not take orders, and became virtually laymen, providing a fit person

to perform the ecclesiastical functions, but retaining the name and all

the secular privileges and emoluments of the abbacy. The performance of

the church services was either intrusted to a secular priest, who was

called the ‘sacerdos,’ or _sagart_, or it fell to the _Cele De_, when

there was such a body connected with the monastery, or to both combined.

[Sidenote: Church offices held by laymen, and retained by their heirs.]

The great ecclesiastical offices thus became hereditary in the persons

of laymen in two ways; either by the usurpation of the benefice by the

lay chieftains from whose tribe or family it had been supplied, or in

the family of the abbot by whose direct descendants the office was

filled, and who ceased after a time to take orders. It must be borne in

mind that prior to 1139, though celibacy was enforced upon monks by

their monastic rule, and upon the clergy generally as a matter of

discipline, marriage, when it did take place, was not unlawful. It was

not till the second great Council of Lateran, held in that year,

declared all such marriages _ipso facto_ null and void, that they became

so; and the effect of this, where the benefice had become hereditary in

a particular family, was, instead of restoring the former clerical

character of its possessor, to stereotype their condition of laymen and

to convert them into a purely lay family. The well-known passage in

Giraldus Cambrensis’ _Itinerary of Wales_, in which, talking of the

church of Llanpadarn Vawr, he says ‘that this church, like many others

in Wales and Ireland, has a lay abbot; for a bad custom has prevailed

amongst the clergy, of appointing the most powerful people of a parish

stewards, or rather patrons, of their churches, who in process of time,

from a desire of gain, have usurped the whole right, appropriating to

their own use the possession of all the lands, leaving only to the

clergy the altars with their tenths and oblations, and assigning even

these to their sons and relations in the church. Such defenders, or

rather destroyers, of the church have caused themselves to be called

abbots, and presumed to attribute to themselves a title, as well as

estates, to which they have no just claim,’[647] gives us an

illustration of the first, and the equally well-known statement by St.

Bernard, in his Life of St. Malachy, as to the state of Armagh when

Celsus became coärb, or abbot, in 1105, affords an illustration of the

second. He says, ‘A scandalous custom had been introduced by the

diabolical ambition of certain of the nobles, that the holy see should

be obtained by hereditary succession. For they allowed no one to be

promoted to the bishopric unless such as were of their own tribe and

family. Nor was it for any short period this execrable succession had

continued, as nearly fifteen generations had already passed away in this

villainy; and so firmly had this wicked and adulterous generation

established their unholy right, or rather wrong, which deserved to be

punished with any sort of death, that although, on some occasions,

clergymen of their blood were not to be found among them, yet bishops

they were never without. In fine, there had been already, before the

time of Celsus, eight individuals who were married and without orders,

yet literates.’[648] The church of Armagh was situated in the

territories of a tribe descended from Colla-da-Chrioch, one of the

founders of the Oirghialla, or Oriel race; and Dr. Reeves tells us that

a descendant of Colla, named Sinach, founded a family, called from him

the Clann Sinaich, and that to this family the enjoyment of the abbacy

of Armagh, styled the coärbship of St. Patrick, became limited, so that

for a space of about two centuries it never left it. He adds that ‘from

the pedigrees of the Clann Sinaich, preserved in the Books of Lecan and

of Mac Firbis, illustrated by the details and chronology of the Irish

Annals, we are able to construct a genealogical table of the abbots of

Armagh, which answers with wonderful exactness to the statements of St.

Bernard.’[649] His account, too, of the state in which Malachy found the

great monastery of Bangor when he resolved to restore it, shows that it

also had fallen into the hands of a succession of lay abbots. After

referring to its ancient glory, and to its destruction by the Danes, in

which ninety of its inmates were slain in one day—which probably refers

to the event recorded in the Ulster Annals in 823, when ‘Bennchair was

plundered by the Gentiles, the oratory destroyed, and the relics of St.

Comgall shaken from their shrine’—he adds, ‘Still, from the time when

the monastery was destroyed, there were not wanting those who held it,

with its possessions; for they were appointed by the usual mode of

election, and called abbots, preserving in name, but not in reality,

what once existed.’[650] It was then possessed by a rich layman who was

St. Malachy’s uncle, and who retained the lands while Malachy refounded

the church.

The Irish Annals afford us several illustrations of the hereditary

succession, not only in abbacies, but in other offices at this time.

Thus, in the monastery of Lusk, in the list of abbots between the years

731 and 927, we find that the second and third abbots were brothers, and

sons of the first abbot named in it; that the fourth abbot and the prior

were brothers; that the son of the second abbot was ‘economus,’ or

house-steward; that the fifth abbot was son of the third; that the

eighth abbot was son of the sixth; and that the tenth abbot and the

bishop of Duleek and Lusk were brothers, and sons of the eighth

abbot.[651] Again, in the monastery of Gleann Uissean, near Carlow, we

find between 874 and 1016 the names of eight abbots and one

_Aircinnech_, or Erenagh. Of these, the second and third are brothers,

and sons of the first; the fourth and fifth are brothers, and sons of

the third; the sixth was foster-son to the second, while his son was

_Aircinnech_, or Erenagh; the seventh abbot was son of the fourth, and

the eighth, grandson of the second. Here the whole are direct

descendants of the abbot who died in 874.[652] Then we find also that

the office of ‘economus’ or house-steward of Armagh was hereditary from

779, when the death of Cearnach, son of Suibhne, who was bishop of

Armagh, is recorded, when he is called ‘economus’ of Armagh. He is

succeeded by three sons, one after another. His grandson by the third

son is bishop and anchorite of Lann Leire. Another grandson is abbot of

Lann Leire. The son of the latter is abbot of Lann Leire and ‘economus’

of Armagh, whose son again is abbot of Lann Leire.[653] But perhaps the

most instructive example is connected with the celebrated monastery of

Clonmacnois. Torbach, abbot or primate of Armagh in 812, was the son of

one abbot of Louth, and the father of another abbot of the same place;

and from him descended a family who filled many offices connected with

Clonmacnois, and among them we shall find that even the Anchorites

married and were succeeded by sons. This family were called the _Cinel

Torbaigh_. Their connection with Clonmacnois began with his son

Aedhagan, who died on his pilgrimage at Clonmacnois in 834; and his son

was Eoghan, the anchorite, who died in 845. Eoghan’s son Luchairen,

scribe and anchorite at Clonmacnois, died in 863; and in 893 his son

Egertach, the _Aircinnech_ or Erenagh of Eaglais-beg, or the little

church at Clonmacnois, died. In 947 the son of the latter, Aenagan,

Erenagh of the little church, and bishop and pure virgin—that is,

unmarried—died; and in 953 his brother Dunadhach, bishop of Clonmacnois;

whose son Dunchadh, _Ferleighinn_, or lector of Clonmacnois, and its

anchorite, afterwards head of its rule and history, died in 1005. He was

father of Joseph, who was _anmchara_, soul-friend or confessor of

Clonmacnois. Joseph’s son was Conn _na-mbocht_, or of the poor, who

appears in the Annals of the Four Masters in 1031 as ‘Head of the _Cele

De_ and Anchorite of Clonmacnois,’ the first that invited a party of the

poor of Cluain at Iseal Chiarain, and who presented twenty cows of his

own to it. Of this it was said—

O Conn of Cluain! thou wert heard from Erinn in Alban;

O head of dignity! it will not be easy to plunder thy church.

And Conn was father of Maolchiarain, coärb of Ciaran, or abbot of

Clonmacnois.[654] It is unnecessary to follow this further, but it is

obvious how prevalent at this time in Ireland was the marriage of the

clergy of all classes and the perpetuation of their ecclesiastical

offices in the lines of their own descendants, and that it had even

broken down the asceticism of the Anchorite and the canonical rule of

the _Cele De_ in this respect. In Scotland we find that the territory of

the old monasteries was called _Abdaine_, or Abbacy, a word represented

in Latin by ‘abbatia’ or ‘abthania,’ and had to a great extent passed

into the hands of laymen who often retained for several generations the

name of abbot.[655] The territory termed the Abthania of Dull, which was

of great extent and included the modern parishes of Dull and Fortingall,

seems to have been in the hands of Crinan, the lay abbot of Dunkeld,

and, along with the possessions of the latter abbacy must have placed

him on a par as to power and position with the great Mormaers of Alban.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1028-1055.

Maelduin bishop of Alban.]

During the reigns of his son Duncan, and of the usurper Macbeth, we find

that Maelduin, called by Bower son of Gillandris, was bishop. He appears

as Maldunus, bishop of St. Andrews, granting the church of Markinch with

all its land to God, St. Servanus and the _Keledei_ of the island of

Lochleven;[656] and his death is thus recorded in 1055 by Tighernac, who

was his contemporary: ‘Maelduin, son of Gillaodran, bishop of Alban, the

giver of orders to the Gael of the clergy, died in Christ.’[657] Wyntoun

tells us he was bishop twenty-seven years, which places the commencement

of his episcopate in 1028.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1055-1059.

Tuthald bishop of Alban.]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1059-1093.

Fothad last bishop of Alban.]

His successor was Tuthald, who is said by Bower to have held the

bishopric for four years only, and during his episcopate he grants the

church of Scoonie to the same Culdees.[658] This brings us to the year

1059 when Fothad became bishop, two years after Malcolm, surnamed

_Ceannmor_ or Great Head, had, by the defeat and death of Macbeth,

recovered for his family the kingdom of Scotia; and Fothad’s tenure of

the bishopric lasted throughout the whole of his reign. Probably the

most important act he performed, and one that exercised a most powerful

influence on his church, was the marriage of King Malcolm to the Saxon

Princess Margaret, which took place in the spring of 1069. Wyntoun tells

us—

Malcolme oure Kyng than till hys wyff

Weddyd Saynt Margret; wyth hyr hys lyff

In lele spowsale he thowcht to lede,

Departyd quhyll thai suld be wyth dede.

Off Saynt Andrewys the byschape than

The secund Fothawch, a cunnand man,

Devotly mad that sacrament,

That thai than tuk in gud intent.[659]

[Sidenote: Character of Queen Margaret and her reforms in the Church.]

There is perhaps no more beautiful character recorded in history than

that of Margaret. For purity of motives, for an earnest desire to

benefit the people among whom her lot was cast, for a deep sense of

religion and great personal piety, for the unselfish performance of

whatever duty lay before her, and for entire self-abnegation, she is

unsurpassed, and the chroniclers of the time all bear testimony to her

exalted character. Ordericus Vitalis says of her, in few words, ‘This

distinguished princess, descended from a long line of kings, was still

more eminent for her great worth and the sanctity of her life;’[660] and

the Saxon Chronicle considers that her marriage took place by divine

appointment, for ‘the prescient Creator knew beforehand what He would

have done by her; for she was to increase the praise of God in the land,

and direct the king from the erroneous path, and incline him, together

with his people, to a better way, and suppress the evil habits which the

nation had previously cultivated, as she afterwards did;’ and the

Chronicle sums it up by saying that she ‘performed many useful deeds in

the land to the glory of God, and also in royal qualities bore herself

well, as to her was natural.’[661] It was not unnatural that her

religion, though unquestionably pure and genuine, and the all-pervading

motive of her actions, should yet be identified with the church in which

this feature of her character had been developed, and that the rites and

customs of that church formed the standard to which she brought

everything as the only rule of right; and thus much that appeared

strange to her in the customs of the church of her adopted land could

only present itself to her mind as erroneous and as evil practices which

required to be corrected. Unfortunately the life of Queen Margaret which

has come down to us, and which has been attributed to Turgot, her

confessor, while it enters into details as to her private life which

amply bear out her personal character as a religious, pious and devoted

woman, is extremely meagre and unsatisfactory in describing her

relations with the native church.[662] It tells us that in the place

where her nuptials were celebrated, that is, in Dunfermline, she erected

a noble church, which she dedicated to the Holy Trinity; and she

decorated it with many ornaments, among which not a few of her gifts,

which were designed for the most holy service of the altar, consisted of

vases of solid and pure gold. She also introduced the crucifix into the

church, having presented one to this church richly ornamented with gold

and silver intermixed with precious stones; and similar crucifixes she

left to other churches, ‘as marks of her piety and devotion, of which

the church of St. Andrews affords an instance, where a beautiful

crucifix which she there erected is still to be seen.’[663] Her

attention, however, appears to have been soon directed towards the state

of the Scottish Church generally, in which she naturally found many

practices, peculiar to the old Celtic Church, which differed from those

she was accustomed to see in the church in which she had been reared.

Estimated by the standard of that church, they appeared to her ‘to be

contrary to the rules of the true faith as well as to the sacred customs

of the universal church,’ and she sought, by frequent councils, to have

them rectified. Her biographer tells us that ‘at the principal council

thus held she, with a few of her own ecclesiastics, contended for three

days with the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, against the

supporters of these strange customs; while her royal husband, who was

equally well acquainted with the Anglic language and with his native

Gaelic, acted as interpreter.’[664]

Margaret began by pointing out that they who agreed with the Catholic

Church in worshipping one God, in one faith, should not differ in regard

to certain new and strange practices. And she, first of all, ‘explained

they did not rightly observe the forty days’ fast, inasmuch as they did

not commence the fast, with holy church everywhere, on Ash Wednesday,

but on Monday in the following week. To which they replied, that what

they observed was a six weeks’ fast, on the authority of the Gospels

which narrate the fast of Christ. The queen answers that they differed

widely in this from the Gospel: for it is read thus, that our Lord

fasted forty days, which it is obvious you do not; for, if the six

Sundays during the six weeks are deducted from the fast, there only

remain thirty-six days for you to observe the fast. It is necessary,

therefore, to add four days to the time at which you commence the fast,

if you would follow the Lord’s example by fasting forty days; otherwise

you alone repudiate the authority of our Lord and the tradition of the

entire holy church. Convinced by this clear exposition of the truth,

they thenceforward commenced the solemn period of the Lenten fast at the

same time with the holy church everywhere.’ Here the whole point is

whether, as the Catholic Church at this time never fasted on the Lord’s

day, the Sundays should be counted in computing the forty days’ fast of

Lent, or not. That the forty days’ fast of our Saviour was a continuous

fast, is obvious, and in this the Scottish Church followed the

recognised practice of the earlier church. The queen then urged another

point, and ‘required them to explain why they refrained from partaking

of the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ on Easter day,

according to the custom of the holy and apostolic church.’ To this they

replied, ‘The apostle tells us, “He that eateth and drinketh unworthily,

eateth and drinketh judgment to himself;” and, as we feel that we are

sinners, we are afraid to partake of that sacrament, lest we eat and

drink judgment to ourselves.’ ‘What then,’ said the queen, ‘shall all

who are sinners refuse to partake of that holy mystery? No one in that

case ought to partake, for no one is free from the stain of sin, not

even the infant who has lived but a single day upon earth. But, if no

one ought to partake, why does the Gospel proclaim the saying of our

Lord, “Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, ye

have no life in you”? But the saying of the apostle, which you quote,

must evidently, according to the judgment of the Fathers, be otherwise

understood; for he does not esteem all sinners to be unworthy to partake

of the sacrament of salvation. For when he said, “He eateth and drinketh

judgment to himself,” he added, “not discerning the Lord’s body,” that

is, not distinguishing it in faith from ordinary food, he eateth and

drinketh judgment to himself. So he who without confession and

penitence, with the stains of his trespasses, presumes to approach these

sacred mysteries, he, I say, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself.

But we, who having, many days before, made confession of our sins, are

chastened with penance, worn with fasts, and washed from the stains of

our sins with alms and tears, on the day of the Lord’s resurrection,

approaching his table in Catholic faith, partake of the flesh and blood

of the immaculate Lamb Jesus Christ, not to judgment but to the

remission of our sins, and to the salutary preparation for the enjoyment

of eternal blessedness.’ Having nothing to oppose to these propositions,

they afterwards observed the rules of the church in the reception of

this life-giving mystery. Besides this, there were certain of the Scots

who, in different parts of the country, were wont to celebrate masses in

I know not what barbarous rite, contrary to the custom of the whole

church, which the queen—full of godly zeal—resolved to suppress and

abolish, so that henceforth no one in the whole nation of the Scots

should be found to presume to do such a thing. They were wont also to

neglect the due observance of the Lord’s day, prosecuting their worldly

labours on that as on other days, which she likewise showed, by both

argument and authority, was unlawful. ‘Let us keep,’ she said, ‘the

Lord’s day in reverence, on account of the resurrection of our Lord from

the dead on that day, and let us do no servile work on that day on

which, as we know, we were redeemed from the slavery of the devil. The

blessed Pope Gregory lays this down, saying that “we must cease from

earthly labour on the Lord’s day, and continue instant in prayer, so

that, if aught has been done amiss during the six days, it may be

expiated by our prayers on the day of our Lord’s resurrection.” Being

unable to oppose anything to these weighty arguments of the queen, they

ever after observed the due reverence of the Lord’s days, no one being

allowed to carry burdens, or to compel others to do so, on these days.’

It cannot certainly be said to be very consistent with modern theories

to find the Roman Church reproving the so-called pure Culdean Church for

celebrating the eucharist without communicating, and for desecrating the

Sabbath. It is obvious, however, from the mode in which these two points

are stated, that there was no neglect in the native church in

celebrating the eucharist; but that, while in the Catholic Church the

people were accustomed to communicate on the great festivals, and

especially that of Easter, the Scots celebrated on that day without

communicating; and that in some parts of Scotland the eucharist was

celebrated in a manner contrary to the custom of the church. It is not

explained in what this peculiarity consisted, but it was something done

after a barbarous manner, so that it was impossible to tell how it was

celebrated, and it was entirely suppressed. This is hardly applicable to

the mere introduction of some peculiar forms or ceremonies, and the most

probable explanation of these expressions is that in the remote and

mountainous districts the service was performed in the native language

and not in Latin, as was the custom of the universal church. Her next

point was that they did not duly reverence the Lord’s day, but in this

latter instance they seem to have followed a custom of which we find

traces in the early Monastic Church of Ireland, by which they held

Saturday to be the Sabbath on which they rested from all their labours,

and on Sunday, on the Lord’s day, they celebrated the resurrection by

the service in church. Thus Adamnan tells us that St. Columba, on the

last Saturday of his life, said to his attendant Diormit, ‘This day, in

the holy Scriptures, is called the Sabbath, which means rest, and this

day is indeed a Sabbath to me, for it is the last day of my present

laborious life, and on it I rest after the fatigues of my labours; and

this night at midnight, which commenceth the solemn Lord’s day, I shall,

according to the sayings of Scripture, go the way of our fathers.’[665]

There was no want of veneration for the Sunday, though they held that

Saturday was properly the Sabbath on which they abstained from work.

The last point, one which also savoured somewhat of Judaism, was that it

was not unusual for a man to marry his stepmother or his deceased

brother’s wife; but Giraldus Cambrensis accuses the Irish church of the

very same custom—that in some parts of Ireland men married the widows of

their brothers;[666] and it does not appear in either case that this was

a custom sanctioned by the church. ‘Many other practices which were

contrary to the rule of faith and the observances of the church she

persuaded the council to condemn and to drive out of the borders of her

kingdom.’[667] It seems, however, strange that more important questions

than these were not touched upon. There is nothing said about the

marriage of the clergy, about high offices in the church being filled by

laymen, about the appropriation of the benefices by the laity, and their

being made hereditary in their families. But possibly she was restrained

by the knowledge that the royal house into which she had married owed

its origin to the lay abbots of one of the principal monasteries, and

was largely endowed with the possessions of the church; and if in the

Council her eye lighted upon her young son Ethelred, who, even in

boyhood, was lay abbot of Dunkeld, her utterances on that subject could

hardly be otherwise than checked.

[Sidenote: Anchorites at this time.]

The biographer of St. Margaret bears testimony, however, in favour of

the Anchorites. He says that at this time ‘there were many in the

kingdom of the Scots, who, in different places, enclosed in separate

cells, lived in the flesh, but not according to the flesh, in great

straitness of life, and even on earth lived the life of angels. In them

the queen did her best to love and venerate Christ, and frequently to

visit them with her presence and converse, and to commend herself to

their prayers; and, as she could not induce them to accept any earthly

gift from her, she earnestly requested them to deign to prescribe for

her some work of charity or of mercy. Whatever was their desire she

devoutly fulfilled, either in recovering the poor from their poverty, or

relieving the afflicted from the miseries which oppressed them; and as

the religious devotion of the people brought many from all parts to the

church of St. Andrews, she constructed dwellings on both sides of the

sea which divides Lodoneia, or Lothian, from Scotia—that is, the Firth

of Forth—that the pilgrims and the poor might put up there and rest and

find there ready everything required for the refreshment of the body.

Servants were placed there to minister to them, and vessels provided in

which they were ferried across without payment.’[668] It is probable

that among those anchorites who commended themselves so much to her

favour were the _Cele De_ of Lochleven, for we find Malcolm and

Margaret, king and queen of Scotia, giving devoutly the town of

Ballechristin to God the Omnipotent and the _Keledei_ of Louchleven,

with the same liberties as before;[669] and Bishop Fothad too, here

called Modach, son of Malmykel, ‘a man of most pious memory, bishop of

St. Andrews, with whose life and doctrine the whole region of the Scots

was happily enlightened, gives to God and St. Servanus and the hermit

_Keledei_ on the island of Lochleven, living there in the school of all

virtues devoutly and honourably, with the same liberties, the church of

Auchterderran.’[670]

[Sidenote: Queen Margaret rebuilds the monastery of Iona.]

The church of Iona, too, benefited by her. When, on the death of

Thorfinn, earl of Orkney, in 1057, the provinces of Scotland which he

had subjected to his sway reverted to their natural rulers, the native

population of the Western Isles appear to have placed themselves under

an Irish chief, Diarmed, son of Maelnambo, who ruled them till his death

in 1072.[671] This led to a renewed connection with Ireland; for, in the

same year, 1057, Gilchrist Ua Maeldoraid, who was of the race of Connal

Gulban, became coärb of Columcille both in Ireland and in Alban, and

died in 1062,[672] and three years later Dubhtach of Alban, the chief

_anmchara_, or soul-friend, of Erinn and Alban, died at Armagh.[673]

This is no doubt that St. Duthac who has left his name on the west coast

in Loch Duich, and in Bailedhuich or Tain. After Gilchrist’s death we

find the coärb of Columcille at Kells, while there appears at Iona a

separate abbot, who is simply called grandson of Baetan; but in 1070 he

is slain by Gilchrist’s son,[674] and the absence of the Christian names

of both, with what appears to have been a violent attempt to establish

hereditary succession in the family of Ua Maeldoradh, rather indicates

that these were laymen. Two years after, on the death of Diarmed, the

Isles seem to have fallen into the hands of King Malcolm, and the state

of Iona with a ruined monastery, and the decay of its clergy, seems to

have attracted the attention of Margaret; for Ordericus Vitalis tells us

that, ‘among the other good deeds of this illustrious lady, she restored

the monastery of Iona, which Columba, the servant of Christ, erected in

the time of Brude, son of Meilocon, king of the Picts. It had fallen to

ruin in the storms of war and the lapse of ages, but this faithful queen

rebuilt it, and furnished it with monks, with an endowment for

performing the Lord’s work.’[675] It is clear from this statement that

what the queen repaired was the monastery. The existing ruins show no

appearance of any work of the time of Queen Margaret, but they are the

remains of a later monastery. What she restored was the older stone

monastery which preceded the present buildings. The church, which is

situated on the south side of the choir of the abbey church, and the

small oratory which had enclosed the shrine of St. Columba, were

probably still entire, and their remains belong to a still older period;

but the other buildings of the monastery were no doubt in a ruinous

state, and had perhaps been so ever since the great attack of the Danes

upon it in 986; and these she now rebuilt, and reorganised the

establishment of monks. It is probable, too, that she has left traces of

her restoration in the Norman doorway of the chapel of St. Odhran. In

the last year, however, of King Malcolm’s life the Western Isles passed

again under the rule of the Norwegians, having been ceded by him to

Magnus surnamed Barefoot, king of Norway; and this cession was renewed

by his son Edgar in 1097. The two expeditions by King Magnus to the

Western Isles, which led to their cession in these years, have been

combined in the Norse Saga into one, so that it is difficult to know to

which of them to refer the following incident related in the Saga:—‘King

Magnus came with his army to the Holy Island, that is, to Iona, and gave

quarter and peace to all men that were there, and to the property of

every one. It has been said that King Magnus opened the smaller church

of Kollum-killa, but did not go into it. He immediately locked the door,

and said that no man should be so bold as to go in there, and that

church has never been opened since.’[676] This was no doubt the small

oratory which had held the shrine of St. Columba. The Saga was written

about the year 1221, and it is unlikely that a church used simply for

the service of the monks should have remained closed for a century and a

quarter; but it is probable that if, as in the case of Templemolaga, the

ecclesiastical buildings consisted only of the larger church, the

remains of which still exist in what is called the Nameless Chapel, on

the north side of the choir of the abbey, and of the small oratory of

the shrine, the latter would be meant by the expression of the little

church of Kollum-killa; and the awe and reverence with which King Magnus

regarded it, and his motive for closing it, would be natural enough. In

the last year of the century but one, 1099, died Donnchad, grandson of

Moenaig, the last of the old abbots of Iona.[677]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1093-1107.

After death of Fothad, no bishop for fourteen years.]

The line of the native bishops of Alban, too, was to come to an end in

this century, for in the last year of King Malcolm’s reign died also

Fothad, who is termed high bishop of Alban,[678] and no successor was

appointed to him for fourteen years, when a stranger, the first of a

line of bishops who were of foreign descent, was placed in the see of

St. Andrews. We get a glimpse into the state of the church at this time

from a grant to the _Keledei_ of Lochleven by Ethelred, a younger son of

King Malcolm. It runs thus:—‘Edelradus, a man of venerated memory, son

of Malcolm king of Scotia, abbot of Dunkeld and likewise earl of Fyf,

gave to God the Omnipotent and St. Servanus and the _Keledei_ of the

island of Louchleven, with the utmost reverence and honour, and with

every freedom, and without any exaction or demand whatever in the world

from bishop, king, or earl, Admore, with its rightful boundaries and

divisions; and, seeing that this possession was given him by his parents

while he was yet in boyhood, he with the more affection and love

immolates it to God and St. Servanus and those men serving God there;

and this collation and donation, when first made, was confirmed by the

two brothers of Edelradus, David and Alexander, in the presence of

several men worthy of credit, such as Constantin, earl of Fyf, a most

discreet man, and Nesse; and Cormac, son of Macbeath, and Malnethte, son

of Beollan, priests of Abernethy; and Mallebride, another priest; and

Thuadhel and Augustinus, a priest, who were _Keledei_; and Berbeadh,

rector of the schools of Abernethy; and before the rest of the whole

community of Abernethy then living there, and before God the Omnipotent

and all saints.’[679] Here we find Edelradus, or Ethelred, the young son

of King Malcolm and Queen Margaret, appearing as lay abbot of Dunkeld,

and granting lands to the _Keledei_ of Lochleven, who still continued to

be the same community of hermits which they were at the beginning. The

grant appears to have been confirmed at Abernethy. The community there

were its witnesses, and we find that they consisted, first, of secular

priests, of whom two are named; secondly, of a body of _Keledei_, three

of whom are named, two of them being priests; and, thirdly, of a

functionary here called rector, or governor, of the schools, but who can

have been no other than the _Ferleighinn_, or lector, of the Irish

churches.

[Sidenote: _Keledei_ of St. Andrews.]

To the same period we may apply the description of the church of St.

Andrews given at the end of the larger legend of St. Andrew. We there

read that the ‘kingdom of the Picts having been entirely destroyed and

occupied by the Scots, the substance and possessions of the church

alternately increased or decreased as kings and chiefs showed devotion

to St. Andrew. Of these we cannot speak in detail, but we must treat

compendiously of what relates to ourselves. The royal city was called

Rymont, or royal mount, which King Hungus gave to God and the holy

apostle. Those holy men who brought the relics of the blessed apostle

having departed this life, as well as their disciples and followers, the

religious service there died away, as the people were barbarous and

uncultivated. There were kept up, however, by carnal succession, in the

church of St. Andrew, such as it then was, thirteen, commonly called

_Keledei_, whose manner of life was shaped more in accordance with their

own fancy and human tradition than with the precepts of the holy

fathers. Nay, even to the present day their practice continues the same;

and although they have some things in common, these are trifling in

amount and value, while they individually enjoy the larger and better

portion, just as each of them happens to receive gifts, either from

friends who are united to them by some unavoidable tie, such as kindred

or connection, or from those whose soul-friends, that is, spiritual

advisers, they are, or from any other source. And after they are made

_Keledei_ they are not allowed to keep their wives within their

lodgings, nor any other women who might give rise to injurious

suspicions. Moreover, there were seven “personæ,” or beneficiaries, who

divided among themselves the offerings of the altar, of which seven

portions the bishop used to enjoy but one and the hospital another; the

remaining five were apportioned to the other five members, who performed

no duty whatever either at altar or church, and whose only obligation

was to provide, after their custom, lodging and entertainment for

pilgrims and strangers when more than six chanced to arrive, determining

by lot whom and how many each of them was to receive. The hospital, it

is to be observed, had continual accommodation for a number not

exceeding six; but, from the time that, by God’s goodness, it came into

the possession of the canons, it has been open to all comers. The

above-mentioned beneficiaries were also possessed of their private

revenues and property, which, upon their death, their wives whom they

openly lived with, and their sons or daughters, their relatives or

sons-in-law used to divide among themselves; even the very offerings of

the altar at which they did not serve—a profanation which one would

blush to speak of, if they had not chosen to practise it.’ We are

further told that at this time ‘there were none who served at the altar

of the blessed apostle, nor used mass to be celebrated there, except

upon the rare occasions when the king or the bishop visited the place.

The _Keledei_, however, were wont to say their office after their own

fashion in a corner of a church, which was very small.’[680]

From this account we can gather that there were at St. Andrews at this

time in point of fact two churches, and that the community consisted of

two divisions, connected with these churches respectively. The first was

the church containing ‘the altar of the blessed apostle’ St. Andrew, and

the revenues of this church were appropriated by seven persons, one of

whom was the bishop, the second the hospital, and the other five laymen,

or lay rectors as they might be termed, who were married, and whose

portions were inherited by their families. The only burden imposed upon

them was to provide lodging and entertainment for pilgrims and strangers

beyond the number which the hospital could accommodate. There was no

provision for service in this church, except on rare occasions when the

king or bishop visited the place. The second was a smaller church, which

belonged to a body of thirteen _Keledei_, probably the prior or provost,

and twelve brethren, who lived apart, had wives, and possessed private

property, as well as certain ecclesiastical dues which were inherited by

their families. In this church they performed divine service according

to their own rite, and they also provided from their body an _anmchara_,

soul-friend, or confessor.[681] That this was one of their proper

functions appears from the Rule of the _Cele De_, attributed to

Maelruain, which contains the following passage: ‘Difficult indeed is

the duty of the _anmchara_, or soul-friend, because, if he give the

proper remedy, it is oftener violated than observed; but if the

soul-friend does not give it, its liability falls upon himself, because

several deem it enough to make the confession without doing the penance;

but it is better to proclaim their welfare to them, though they do not

respond to the penance enjoined by the confessor. Another soul-friend

may be gone to, if necessary, after the permission of the first

soul-friend.’[682] The one party represented that portion of the

community which formerly consisted of secular clergy, but whose position

and revenues had, with the exception of those of the bishop and the

hospital, been usurped by laymen, while their clerical duties remained

unperformed. The other party consisted of the only clerical portion of

the community. They represented what had originally been a society of

Anchorites or Hermits, but now presented all the features of Secular

canons, as they became modified in Ireland on the introduction of the

canonical rule. The state of the church of St. Andrews, as we find it

here pictured, is almost an exact reproduction of what we find at Armagh

at the same time. Here, prior to 1126, the abbacy was in the hands of

laymen, and there is no appearance of any of the usual officers of a

great monastery. The only clergy who are mentioned in connection with

the houses of prayer are the _Cele De_. Dr. Reeves gives us the

following account of the _Cele De_ of Armagh. After stating that the

‘community of the Culdees was originally a college of secular clergy who

lived together and submitted to a rule, the principal requirement of

which was a common table:’ ‘that they were analogous to secular canons,

who in many instances formed the ancient chapters of cathedral and

collegiate establishments;’ and also that ‘the maintenance of divine

service, and, in particular, the practice of clerical worship, seems to

have been their special function, and on this account they formed an

important element in the cathedral economy;’ he adds, ‘These _Cele De_,

then, of Armagh continued to be the officiating clergy of the churches

here, and by degrees grouped themselves around the great church, where

they became the standing ministers of the cathedral. They were presided

over by a prior, and numbered about twelve individuals. This prior had

the charge of the services in church, and superintended the order of

public worship, which was principally choral;’[683] and this

correspondence between the _Cele De_ of the metropolitan churches of

Ireland and Scotland is what we might expect, as we have seen that the

rules adopted in Ireland for the _Cele De_ were introduced into Scotland

in 921 shortly after the church of St. Andrews had been placed at the

head of the Scottish Church.

[Sidenote: The _Cele De_ of Iona.]

The only other church where we obtain some insight into its condition is

the church of Iona. It remained for upwards of half a century under

Norwegian rule, and we hear nothing of it after King Magnus’s visit to

the holy island; but when, along with the southern portion of the

Western Isles, it again reverted to their native rulers, we obtain a

notice of the state of the community, which we may well consider equally

applicable to this period. No abbot appears; but the goodmen, or chiefs

of the family of Iona, who claimed the right of electing an abbot, were

four in number. These were, first, the _Sacart mor_, or great priest;

secondly, the _Ferleighinn_, or lector; thirdly, the _Disertach_; and

fourthly, the _Cenn_, or head, of the _Ceile De_, and the rest of the

chiefs of the family.[684] During this period, when Iona was in the

hands of the Norwegians, the coärbs of Columcille were the abbots of

Kells, and we find in that church the counterpart of the first three of

these chiefs of the family. In the Irish charters in the Book of Kells

we find mention of the _Sacart_ and the _Ferleighinn_. Thus, in the

oldest charter, granted before 1084, there is mention of ‘the coärb of

Columcille, that is, Domnall mac Robartaigh, with all the ecclesiastics

of Kells, in like manner, both _Sacart_, or priest, _Epscop_, or bishop,

and _Ferleighinn_, or lector.’[685] Again, a charter, some ten years

later, relates to ‘land which the _Sacart_, or priest of Kells and his

kinsmen purchased, that is, O’Breslen and his kinsmen,’[686] which

rather implies that the priesthood was hereditary in his family. Then,

in a charter granted between 1128 and 1138, we have the ‘coärb of

Columcille, viz., Gilla Adomnan O’Coirthen, and the _Sacart_ of Kells,

viz., Maelmartin O’Breslen, and the _Ferleighinn_ of Kells, viz., Guaire

O’Clucan;’[687] and finally, in a charter granted between 1128 and 1140,

the goodmen, or chiefs, of Kells are mentioned. They are ‘Muredach

O’Clucan, abbot of Kells; Conaing O’Breslen, the _Sacart_; Guaire

O’Clucan, the _Ferleighinn_; and Aedh, son of Mac Rechtogan, the

Vice-Erenagh.’[688] From these charters we see that the office of

_Sacart_, or priest, was hereditary in the family of O’Breslen. The

charters of Kells, too, throw light upon the chief of the family of Iona

termed the _Disertach_; for the oldest charter in the Book of Kells is

one before 1084, in which the king of Tara, or of Ireland,

Maelsechnaill, and the coärb of Columcille, ‘with all the ecclesiastics

of Kells, both priest and bishop and lector, and also the vice-erenagh,

with the young clerics of the congregation of Columcille, have all

granted for ever Disert-Columcille in Kells, with its garden, to God and

to pious _Deoradh_, or pilgrims, no pilgrim having any lawful possession

in it at any time until he devotes his life to God and is devout.’ This

last clause is obviously to prevent the _Disert_ falling into the hands

of a layman.[689] Then, in a later charter, ‘the family of Kells have

granted, for the support of _Deoradh_, or pilgrims, Ardcamma, that is,

Baile Ui Uidhrin, with its mill and all its land, and Baile Ui

Chomhgain, with all its land and with its mill, to God and to Columcille

and to the bishop O’Cellaigh, the senior of all the men of Meath, and to

Malmaire O’Robhartaigh, the _Cenn_, or head, of the _Disert_, on the

third of the Ides of November, the feast of Martin, in the year when the

kine and swine of Ireland perished by a pestilence. The Disert of Kells

is granted to pious pilgrims for ever. Whatever layman or clergyman

shall oppose this grant, he shall be accursed of Columcille and Finan

and the clergy of Ireland and of the Christian church in general.’[690]

We find then the name of _Cenn na Disert_, or Head of the Disert,

appearing at Kells about the same time as that of _Disertach_ makes its

first appearance in connection with the family of Iona, and that in the

former case it originated from the abbot of Kells, Domnall Ua

Robartaigh, in conjunction with the king of Ireland, founding what was

called a Disert for pious _Deoradh_, or pilgrims, and that this Disert

became known by the name of _Disert Coluimcille_. The old burying-ground

in Iona, which, along with the remains of the vallum, is the sole relic

of the original monastery of Columcille, bears the name of _Cladh an

Disert_, or the burying-ground of the Disert; and as Domnall, the abbot

of Kells, was coärb of Columcille from the year 1062 to 1098, that is,

during the entire life of Margaret as queen, who had shown such a warm

interest in the anchorites and pilgrims of Scotland, it is not an

unreasonable supposition that she too, in conjunction with the coärb of

Columcille, had included in her work of restoration at Iona the

foundation here of a _Disert_ for pious pilgrims.

Of the _Cele De_ there is no trace at Kells, at least under that name,

for by this time the name of _Cele De_ had long passed in Ireland from

the _Deoradh_, or pilgrims, to the Secular canons, nor do they appear in

connection with any of the Columban monasteries in Ireland; but we find

the type of the Iona _Cele De_ in another Irish monastery. This was the

celebrated monastery of Clonmacnois, which was founded on the banks of

the Shannon in the sixth century by St. Ciaran, one of the twelve

apostles of Ireland, and where St. Columba had been received with so

much honour in the later years of his life. And here, with the exception

of the _Disert_ and its _Disertach_, which, as we have seen, had been

derived from the Columban monastery of Kells, we find the same

ecclesiastical functionaries in the community as appear in that of Iona.

The _Sacart_, or priest, makes his appearance at Clonmacnois before the

year 914, when the death of Maelbairrfinn, _Sacart_, or priest, of

Clonmacnois, is recorded. In 948 we have the death of a _prim-sacart_,

or chief priest of Clonmacnois; and in 1109 he appears under the same

designation as he bears in Iona, and in the same position of being, in

the absence of an abbot, at the head of the community; for in that year

died Flaithbertach Ua Loingsigh, coärb of Ciaran, and _Sacart mor_, or

great priest, of Clonmacnois. We also find the _Ferleighinn_ frequently

mentioned both under that title and that of _Scribnidh_, or scribe,

during the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh centuries, as one of the

community of Clonmacnois; and here, as elsewhere, this office was

frequently combined with others in the community. But the most

remarkable feature of the community at Clonmacnois is the appearance of

a line of hereditary Anchorites, descending from father to son for

several generations, and finally merging in the title of _Cenn na Cele

De_, or head of the Culdees. The first of these is Eoghan, Anchorite of

Clonmacnois, who died in 845. His son Luchairen appears as scribe and

anchorite at Clonmacnois. Egertach, the son of the latter, is Erenagh of

the little church of Clonmacnois, and his son Dunadhach is bishop of

Clonmacnois; but Dunadhach’s son Dunchadh is first _Ferleighinn_, or

lector, of Clonmacnois and afterwards its Anchorite. His son Joseph

appears as Anmchara, or soul-friend, of Clonmacnois, and he was father

to Conn _na mbocht_, or of the poor, whose death is recorded in 1031 as

_Cenn na Cele De_, or Head of the Culdees, and Anchorite of

Clonmacnois.[691] A century later we find this title of Head of the

_Cele De_ of Clonmacnois hereditary in a family called Ua Neachtain; for

in 1132 is recorded the death of Uareirghe Ua Neachtain, _Cenn Cele De_,

or Head of the Culdees of Clonmacnois. In 1170 that of Maelmordha, son

of Uareirghe, ‘a learned charitable senior, the prosperity and affluence

of Clonmacnois and _Cenn na Chele De_,’ or Head of the Culdees; and in

1200 that of Uareirghe, son of Maelmordha, son of Uareirghe Ua

Neachtain, ‘one of the noble sages of Clonmacnois, a man full of the

love of God and of every virtue, and _Cenn Cele De_,’ or Head of the

Culdees of Clonmacnois.[692]

We thus find this title of Head of the Culdees emerging in the eleventh

century out of that of Anchorite at Clonmacnois; and at Iona we likewise

find that there were Anchorites in the tenth century who occupied an

important position in the community, while a century later the same

title of _Cenn na Cele De_, or Head of the Culdees, appears there also.

The origin and position of the _Cele De_ were probably the same in both

communities.[693]

-----

Footnote 605:

Hic primus dedit libertatem ecclesiæ Scoticanæ quæ sub servitute erat

usque ad illud tempus ex consuetudine et more Pictorum.—_Chron. Picts

and Scots_, p. 151. The Chronicle of St. Andrews has, for

consuetudine, constitutione. The Chronicon Elegiacum has

Hic dedit ecclesiæ libertates Scoticanæ

Quæ sub Pictorum lege redacta fuit.

Footnote 606:

See Haddan and Stubbs’ _Councils_, vol. iii. pp. 636, 638, 641.

Footnote 607:

See King’s Introduction to the _Church of Armagh_, p. 18.

Footnote 608:

O’Donovan, _Annals of Four Masters_, vol. ii. p. 1143.

Footnote 609:

Haddan and Stubbs’ _Councils_, vol. iii. p. 382.

Footnote 610:

See on this subject Mr. Robertson’s _Statuta Ecclesiæ_, vol. i. p. 19,

and Dr. John Stuart’s preface to the Book of Deer, where the whole

subject is well and fully treated.

Footnote 611:

In vi anno Constantinus rex et Cellachus episcopus, leges

disciplinasque fidei atque jura ecclesiarum evangeliorumque, pariter

cum Scottis, in colle credulitatis prope regali civitati Scoan

devoverunt custodiri.—_Chron. Picts and Scots_, p. 9.

Footnote 612:

_Scotichronicon_, B. vi. cap. 24; Wyntoun, _Chron._, B. vi. cap. 9 and

following chapters. In his first edition Bower places Fothad as first

bishop and Kellach as second; but in his revised edition, two years

after, in the Cupar MS. he corrects himself, and puts Kellach as first

bishop.

Footnote 613:

In the legend of St. Andrew it is said of the bishops of St.

Andrews—‘Sic et nunc quoque in vulgari et communi locutione _Escop.

Alban_, id est, Episcopi Albaniæ, appellantur.’—_Chron. Picts and

Scots_, p. 191.

Footnote 614:

921 _Maonach Cele De do thiachtain don fhairrge aniar dodhenamh

reachta h-Erenn_.—_Chron. Scot._; _An. F. M._, p. 605. This passage

has been misunderstood. Mr. O’Donovan translated it ‘Maonach, a Cele

De, came across the sea westwards to establish laws in Ireland;’ but

Mr. Hennessy correctly points out that _aniar_ is ‘from the west,’ not

‘to the west.’ In fact _aniar_ is generally used for ‘from Ireland to

Scotland,’ and _anair_ ‘from Scotland to Ireland;’ but _reachta

h-Erenn_ means the laws _of_ Ireland, Erenn being the genitive form.

What he brought over may have been the rule of St. Maelruain.

Footnote 615:

See _Vit. S. Cadroë_, _Chron. Picts and Scots_, p. 113.

Footnote 616:

Et in senectute decrepitus baculum cepit et Domino servivit et regnum

mandavit Mael. filio Domnail.—_Pict. Chron._ Hic dimisso regno sponte

Deo in habitu religionis abbas factus est Keledeorum Sancti Andreæ,

quinque annis servivit ibi et mortuus est et sepultus.—_Chron. Picts

and Scots_, pp. 9, 151, 174, 288.

Footnote 617:

_Registrum Prioratus S. Andreæ_, p. 113.

Footnote 618:

938 Dubthach _Comharba_ Coluimcille et Adomnain in pace quievit.—_An.

Ult._

936 (_recte_ 938) _Dubhthach Comharba Coluimcille acus Adomnain i

nErinn acus i nAlbain_ deg.—_An. F. M._

Footnote 619:

935 (_recte_ 937) _Aonghas mac Muirchertaigh Saoi, Angcoire acus

tanaisi Abbaidh Iae_ decc.—_Ib._

Footnote 620:

945 (_recte_ 947) Caenchomhrac abb Ia decc.—_An. F. M._ 954 Robartach

_Comharba Coluimcille acus Adomnain_ in Christo pausavit.—_An. Ult._

Footnote 621:

959 Dubduin _Comharba Coluimcille_ obiit.—_An. Ult._ 964 Dubscuile mac

Cineda _Comhorba Coluimcille_ quievit.—_Ib._

Footnote 622:

Iste Malisius, ut legitur in vita gloriosi ac eximii confessoris beati

Duthaci, discipulus fuit beato Duthaco in Hibernia. Cui beatus

Duthacus vaticinando futurum episcopum Scotorum se dixit: quod et

adimpletum est.—_Scotichron._, B. vi. c. 24.

Footnote 623:

Bellum inter Nigerum et Caniculum super Dorsum Crup in quo Niger

habuit victoriam; ubi cecidit Du[n]chad abbas Duncalden et Dubdon

satrapas Athochlach.—_Pict. Chron._

Footnote 624:

963 Aodh mac Maoilmithidh in peregrinatione moritur, id est, _hi

Cindrimonaidh_.—_Chron. Scot._

Footnote 625:

Fothach episcopus pausavit.—_Pict. Chron._

961 (_recte_ 963) Fothadh mac Brain _Scribhnidh et Espucc Insi Alban_

decc.—_An. F. M._

Footnote 626:

980 Mugron _Comharba Coluimcille itir Erenn et Albain_ vitam felicem

finivit.—_An. Ult._

Footnote 627:

964 (_recte_ 966) Finghin, _angcoire et epscop Ia_ decc.—_An. F. M._

978 Fiachra _Aircinneach Ia_ quievit.—_An. Ult._

Footnote 628:

Dr. Todd, _Life of Saint Patrick_, pp. 60, 161. King’s _Introduction_,

pp. 23, 24.

Footnote 629:

Marcan filius Breodalaig occisus est in ecclesia Sancti Michaelis.

Leot et Sluagadach exierunt ad Romam. Maelbrigde episcopus pausavit.

Cellach filius Ferdalaig regnavit.—_Pict. Chron._

Footnote 630:

Dehinc secundus Kellach filius Ferdlager, qui fuit primus qui adivit

Romam pro confirmatione, et post confirmationem vixit xxv

annis.—_Scotichron._ B. vi. c. 24.

Footnote 631:

Hic est qui tribuit magnam civitatem Brechne Domino.—_Pict. Chron._

Footnote 632:

Florence of Worcester terms him, in 973, rex plurimarum insularum.

Footnote 633:

_Wars of the Gaedhel with the Gaill_, p. 47; _Annals of the Four

Masters_, p. 713. See also Tighernac.

Footnote 634:

985 (_recte_ 986) _Maolciarain Ua Maighne Comharba Coluimcille do dul

i ndergmhartra las na Danaraibh i nAthcliath._—_An. F. M._

986 _I Coluimcille do arcain do Danaraibh aidhchi n-otlac coromarbhsat

in Apaidh et_ xv. viros _do Sruithibh na Cille_.—_An. Ult._

Footnote 635:

See vol. i. p. 376.

Footnote 636:

Colgan, _Tr. Th._, p. 446. Though this appears in Colgan’s Latin

version of Magnus O’Donnel’s _Life of St. Columba_, it is not to be

found in the Irish text.

Footnote 637:

_Amra Coluimcille_, by O’Byrne Crowe, p. 39.

Footnote 638:

_Chron. Picts and Scots_, p. 81.

Footnote 639:

_Annals of the Four Masters_, p. 1027. Among the relics said to have

been preserved at Durham we find ‘De ossibus et reliquiis Sancti

Columkelli abbatis. De ossibus Sanctæ Brigidæ gloriosæ virginis. De

ossibus et reliquiis Sancti Patricii episcopi et Hyberniæ

apostoli.’—_Hist. Dun. Script._ Tres, p. cccxxx. These are obviously

the same relics which were said to be at Down, but how they came to be

claimed by the coärbs of Durham we cannot tell.

Footnote 640:

989 _Dunchadh hua Robacan Comhorba Coluimcille_ mortuus est.

_Dubdalethe Comharba Patraicc do gabhail Comharbain Columcille a

comhairle fer n-Erenn acus Albain._—_An. Ult._

Footnote 641:

1005 Maelbrigda hua Rimedha abbas Ia in Christo.—_Ib._

Footnote 642:

Ipse etiam multas oblationes tam ecclesiis quam clero ea die

distribuit.—_Chron. Picts and Scots_, p. 131.

Footnote 643:

1007 Muredach Mac Cricain _do deirgiu comarbus Coluimcille ar Dia_.

Ferdomnach _i comorbus Coluimcille con a comairle fer n-Erinn isin

oenach sin_.—_An. Ult._

Footnote 644:

1025 Flannobra _Comharba Ia_ in Christo quievit.—_An. Ult._ In the

_Annals of the Four Masters_ he is called _Comharba Ia Cholumcille_,

and the death of Maeleoin Ua Torain, _Comharba Doire Cholumcille_,

follows, which shows the division of the coärbship of Columcille at

this time.

Footnote 645:

1026 Maolruanaidh Ua Maoldoraidh _tigherna Cenuil Conaill, do dul tar

muir dia oilitre_.—_An. F. M._

Footnote 646:

1027 _Duncaillenn in Alban do uile loscadh_ (entirely burnt).—_An.

Ult._

Footnote 647:

Giraldus Cambrensis, _Itinerary of Wales_, Book ii. chap. iv.

Footnote 648:

_Vita S. Malachiæ_, cap. 7. _ap._ Messingham Flor., p. 358.

Footnote 649:

_Proceedings R. I. A._, vol. vi. p. 450.

Footnote 650:

Siquidem a tempore, quo destructum est monasterium, non defuit, qui

illud teneret cum possessionibus suis. Nam et constituebantur per

electionem etiam, et abbates appellabantur, servantes nomine (etsi non

re) quod olim extiterat.—_Vita S. Malachiæ_, Messingham Flor. p. 356.

Footnote 651:

See King’s _Introduction_, p. 20, for this list.

Footnote 652:

_Ib._

Footnote 653:

See King’s _Introduction_, p. 73.

Footnote 654:

See King’s _Introduction_, p. 21; _An. F. M._, vol. ii. p. 825.

Footnote 655:

See vol. iii. p. 261, and Fordun’s _Chronicle_, vol. ii. p. 413, for

an account of these Abthainries. From this word Abthania Fordun formed

his fictitious office of Abthanus, and from its apparent resemblance

to the word Thanus, with which it has no real connection, made him

supreme over the Thanes.

Footnote 656:

Maldunus episcopus Sancti Andreæ contulit ecclesiam de Marchinke cum

tota terra honorifice et devote Deo et S. Servano et Keledeis de

insula Louchleven cum prefata libertate.—_Chart. Prior. St. And._, p.

116.

Footnote 657:

1055 _Maelduin mac Gillaodran epscop Alban et ordan Gaedel o cleircib_

in Christo quievit.—_Tigh._

Footnote 658:

Tuadal episcopus Sancti Andreæ contulit ecclesiam de Sconyn prefatis

viris religiosis devote et integre cum omni libertate et honore pro

suffragiis orationum.—_Chart. Prior. St. And._, p. 116.

Footnote 659:

Wyntoun, _Chron._, B. vii. cap. 3.

Footnote 660:

Orderic. Vital., B. viii. c. 22.

Footnote 661:

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Thorpe’s edition, vol. ii. p. 172.

Footnote 662:

This life has been printed by Pinkerton in his _Vitæ Sanctorum_, and

also in the appendix to the edition of Simeon of Durham edited for the

Surtees Club, vol. i.

Footnote 663:

_Vita S. Margaretæ_, cap. iv.

Footnote 664:

_Ib._ cap. viii.

Footnote 665:

Adamnan’s _Life of St. Columba_, ed. 1874, p. 96.

Footnote 666:

Girald. Camb., _Topogr. Dict._, iii. c. 19.

Footnote 667:

See _Vit. S. Margaretæ_, cap. viii.

Footnote 668:

_Vit. St. Margaretæ_, c. ix.

Footnote 669:

Malcolmus rex et Margareta regina Scotiæ contulerunt devote villam de

Ballechristin Deo omnipotenti et Keledeis de Louchleven cum eadem

libertate ut prius.—_Chart. Prior. S. Α._, p. 115.

Footnote 670:

_Chart. Prior. S. A._, p. 117.

Footnote 671:

Tighernac, who is a contemporary historian, has, in 1072, ‘Diarmed,

son of Maelnambo, king of Breatan and Innsegall—or the Western

Isles—and Dublin and the south half of Ireland, slain by Concobur

O’Malsechlan in the battle of Odba, and great slaughter made of the

Galls and men of Leinster with him.’—_Chron. Picts. and Scots_, p. 78.

Footnote 672:

1062 _Gilchrist hua Maeldoradh comorba Coluimcille etir Erinn et

Albain_ in Christo quievit.—_An. Ult._

Footnote 673:

1065 _Dubhtach Albannach prim anmchara Erinn acus Albain_ in Ardmacha

quievit.—_Ib._

Footnote 674:

1070 _Abbas Ia_, id est, _Mac mic Baetan domarbhadh do mac ind Ab._

(slain by the son of the abbot) _hua Maeldoradh_.—_Ib._

Footnote 675:

Inter cætera bona quæ nobilis hera fecerat, Huense cœnobium, quod

servus Christi Columba tempore Brudei regis Pictorum filii Meilocon,

construxerat, sed tempestate præliorum cum longa vetustate dirutum

fuerat, fidelis regina reædificavit, datisque sumptibus idoneis ad

opus Domini monachis reparavit.—_Orderic. Vital._, B. viii. c. 22.

Footnote 676:

_Magnus Saga, Collect. de Rebus Alb._, p. 348.

Footnote 677:

1099 _Donnchadh mac mic Moenaig Ab._ Ia in pace pausavit.—_An. Ult._

The form of Mac mic, which appears in the names of the two last abbots

of Iona instead of the Irish form _hua_, rather indicates that these

two abbots were Scotchmen.

Footnote 678:

1093 _Fothadh Ardepscop Albain_ in Christo quievit.—_An. Ult._ The

legend of St. Andrew says, speaking of the title Episcopus Scottorum,

‘Sic quippe ab antiquo episcopi Sancti Andreæ dicti sunt et in

scriptis tam antiquis quam modernis invenientur dicti Summi

Archiepiscopi sive Summi episcopi Scotorum, Unde et conscribi fecit in

theca Evangelii Fothet episcopus, maxime vir authoritatis, versus

istos—

‘Hanc Evangelii thecam construxit aviti

Fothet qui Scotis Summus Episcopus est.’

Bower altered the expression ‘Summus Episcopus’ to ‘Primus Episcopus,’

and applied it to the first Fothad, whom he made first bishop, though

in the revised edition of the _Scotichronicon_ in the Cupar MS., he

corrects his mistake. Wyntoun takes the same view, but ‘Summus

Episcopus’ is the exact equivalent in Latin of the Irish _Ard epscop_,

and there is no doubt that the last Fothad is the bishop meant. The

Gospel he so carefully protected may have been a gift from Queen

Margaret.

Footnote 679:

_Regist. Prior. S. Andreæ_, p. 115.

Footnote 680:

_Chron. Picts and Scots_, p. 188. See also Dr. Reeves’s _British

Culdees_, p. 106, and the very valuable commentary in the notes.

Footnote 681:

Dr. Reeves was the first to give the correct explanation of this

passage in the legend. See _British Culdees_, p. 107, note.

Footnote 682:

Dr. Reeves on the _British Culdees_, p. 75.

Footnote 683:

Dr. Reeves on the _Ancient Churches of Armagh_, p. 21.

Footnote 684:

See _infra_, p. 414, note 780, for original of this passage.

Footnote 685:

_Miscellany of the Irish Archæological Society_, vol. i. p. 131.

Footnote 686:

_Ib._ p. 133.

Footnote 687:

_Ib._ p. 141.

Footnote 688:

_Miscellany of the Irish Archæological Society_, vol. i. p. 129.

Footnote 689:

_Ib._, p. 131.

Footnote 690:

_Ib._, p. 129.

Dr. Reeves has printed in the appendix to Bishop Colton’s Visitation,

edited for the Irish Archæological Society, p. 109, a rule of

Columcille taken from one of the Burgundian MSS. It is obviously the

same rule which Colgan describes as ‘aliam regulam eremiticam seu

præscriptum fratribus scripsit.’ It cannot be connected with St.

Columba himself, and it is probably a rule compiled for the _Deoradh

De_ at the time the Disert Columcille was founded at Kells. It will be

found in the Appendix.

Footnote 691:

See _antea_, p. 342.

Footnote 692:

These notices are taken from the Annals of the Four Masters, where

they will be found under their respective dates.

Footnote 693:

St. Ciaran, the founder of Clonmacnois, has left a trace of his name

in Iona; for a rising ground south of Martyr’s Bay is called Cnoc

Ciaran.