sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bishop of Brechin, Bishop of Dunkeld, Kingdom of Strathclyde

106 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1952-53.

VI.

SCOTTISH ' SEES BEFOR E REIGTH EF NO DAVID I.

BY GORDON DONALDSON, M.A., PH.D., D.LiTT., F.S.A.ScoT. The attribution to David I of the establishment of most of the Scottish episcopal sees has, if only through repetition, become a convention. Yet, while historians have bee generan ni l agreement about David's work, they have differed profoundly as to the details. A very recent writer has gone so far as to remark, "Before David's time St Andrews was the only bishopric Scotlann i d proper addedmorr e o h ; x esi probably eight." 1 Other modern historians have allowe r thredo thao e tw tsee s were founde e reigth nn i d of David's predecessor, Alexander I.2 The older historians and chroniclers were less confident about the extent of David's work. Boece attributed to Davi foundatioe dth onlf no y four bishoprics addition i , previouslx si o nt y existing,3 and he was followed by George Buchanan.4 says of David, "Finding four bishoprics in his kingdom, he founded nine more." 8 Two versions of Wyntoun, again, tell each a different story:

Bischopriki fan e t thresh dbo ; deite Both . i lefr x ,o he ,t Or Bischopis he fande bot foure or thre; Bot, or he deit, ix left he.6 This confusion might have suggested tha e conventioth t n requires critical examination. The source of the convention is undoubtedly the Scotichronicon; but the Scotichronicon is content to reproduce the statement of David's contemporary, Ailred of Rievaulx,7 who says something quite different from all later works, versione th wit f exceptioe o hWyntoun f th e o s on sayf e no H se .tha th n ti 1 Mackenzie, W. M., Scottish Burghs, p. 8. 2 E.g. Dowden, Bishops of , pp. 47, 98, 144, 294-5; Dunbar, Scottish Kings, pp. 51-52; cf. McBwan, Church History, I, 164. 3 Bettenden's Boece (S.T.S.), n, 172, 185. 4 Buchanan, Historia (1582) . 77vfo , . 5 Sistoria Majoris Britannice (S.H.S.), 141. These figures would giv etotaa thirteef o l n bishoprics kingdoe inth David'n mo s death, whe trutn i h there were onl (Orknen yte y anIslee dth s t beinye s ga outwith the Scottish realm, and Argyll not yet in existence). 6 Original Chronicle (S.T.S.), iv, 384-5. 7 Scotichron., . AndersonO . xlviii, A V . cf ; , Scottish Annals, . 233p . SCOTTISH BISHOPS' SEES BEFORE REIG 7 DAVIF NO 10 . DI whole kingdom of the Scots David found three or four bishops—not - rics; the other "churches" were suffering from lack of a pastor—and "churches" here means episcopal apparenseess i s a , t fro contexe mth d an t as can be proved by parallel statements in contemporary writings.1 David, Ailred goe , restoreson d som bishopricd eol founded san d som onesw ene o t , makedeaths hi t a ,totaa , ninef lo . This accoun Ailredy b t t wili , l emerge, is altogether more credible than the statements of later writers. Columbae th n I n Church wels i t li , known, jurisdictio pertained nha o dt abbote mighth o bishopa e mighr wh b ,therreasod o o t t n an , s eno i to nt dispute 's statement that in Scotland the primacy (if we may use the term) belonge e abboth f lonao o t d o whomt , , s onlthougwa a y e h presbyter, the whole province, including the bishops, were subject.2 Some of the developments in the century after suggest that this scheme might readily undergo modification. When Oswald, kin f Northumbriago , was introducing the mission from lona into his realm, it was for a bishop, not an , that he asked,3 and Aidan and his successors, Finan and Colman, were abbot f Lindisfarno s e arid bishop e e Angles.th th n f I o s

same period two Scots, Diuma and Ceollach, becam4 e bishops of the Mercians, and Finan consecrated Cedd as bishop of the East Saxons.5 Thus a kind of tribal, if not regional, episcopate would seem to have been taking shape,- under "Columban" auspices, even before the Synod of Whitby. The success of the Roman party at Whitby was very soon followed by change ecclesiastican i s l organisation. Theodore, regardes da organisee th Englise th f o r h Church, rule t Canterburda y690o t fro8 , m66 severa d diocesee an th e souther f th o l f so n province date their foundation in that period. In the north the same kind of thing seems to have happened, bishop1 68 fon i rs were appointe Hexhar dfo Abercornd man somewhad an , t later for —a development which represents something a little

more like diocesan6 episcopacy s trui t eI tha . e Abercorth t n experiment was shortlived, for Bishop Trumwin, appointed in 681, had to withdraw after Nechtansmere. t NorthumbriaBu 7 , thoug t hsufferei militara d d yan political defeat ecclesiastican presentls a n wa , wi o yt l victory, when early in the 8th century the king of the decided to submit to Rome. About 710 King Nechtan, on the advice of Ceolfrid, abbot of Jarrow, accepted the

E.g. "ne diutius [sine] pastore vacillaret eoclesia" (Symeou of Durham [Rolls Series], II, 204); " di1u ecclesia sine pastore fuit" (Raine, Historians Churche oth f of York, n, 127). 2 Bede, III. 4 , * Ibid., m, 3. e Iris* th Ibid., ho T annalists . in25 , , Aida "bishos ue Saxonswa th f po " (Skene, Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, pp. 71, 348). 6 Bede, in, 21, 22, 24. 6 Bede, IV, 12; v, 23. One can only note, without comment, the appearance in 660 and 689 of bishop Kingartf so , 349h73 , , (Picts 351Scots,d 71 . an ; pp Early Sources, , 176-7I , 198), followee th n di next centur abboty yb f Kingartso h , 359)(Picts Scots,d 76 . .an pp ' Bede, iv, 26. 108 PROCEEDING E SOCIETYTH F O S , 1952-53.

Roma kingdos hi t npu m used undersan patronage th t Peter.w S fe f eo A 1 years late expellee rh Columbae dth n clergy fro dominions.s mhi

In Scotland as in England the success 2 of the Roman party must have been followed by changes in organisation. As Skene observes, "With the expulsio famile th f lonnf o y o a terminate primace dth monasters it f yo y over . . . the kingdom of the Picts," 3 and a new organisation had to take the place of the old. It is perhaps to this point that we should assign the alleged bishopri Abernethyf co . There istatemensa Scotichronicone th n i t that at Abernethy, which was the chief royal and episcopal seat of the Pictish realm, three elections of bishops were made when there was only one bishop in Pictland. Some MSS. read "Scotland," but that "Pictland" is correct is apparent fro e context.mth Skene, reading "Scotland," assignee dth

Abernethy bishops to th4 e later part of the 9th century; yet, inconsistently, he recognises the existence of an "old Pictish bishopric of Abernethy," as if it had existed before the union of the Picts and Scots under Kenneth mac Alpin.5 As Abernethy was the Pictish capital, and as the church there had been endowe earliey db r Pictish kings, nothing would seem more likely than that

King Nechtan, after he decide6 d to follow the example of in other respects, would follow that example als plantiny ob t Abernethga ya triba regionar o lplan o that e woulb e n h to y l bishopo bishop.dg ma t I s

elsewhere in his dominions7 ; and there is evidence for the appearance at this point of Curitan, bishop and abbot of Rosemarkie, whom Skene identifies wit e legendarhth y Boniface (for whom, accordin o Wyntoungt , Nechtan "foundit Rosmarkyne"). significane b likelihooy e th ma f o t tI 8 d thae th t Romanisers introduced a new conception of the episcopal office, that at this period, whe lonn ni a itself prolongea ther s ewa d dispute betweee nth Roma nativd nan e parties "bishoa , lonaf po " appear firse th tr time.sfo 9 Skene assigns likewise to this period St Fergus, a bishop associated with

various parts of the country. Whatever the truth about the Pictish 0

bishop perioe th f generan o sdi aboud an l t Fergu particularn si cons i t i -,1 sonant wit theore hth y that bishops' sees were founde Pictlann di itsn do ' submissio e earl o Romt nh th century 8t yn i e , thae Fergustuson t r o , Fergusius, described as a Pictish bishop of Scotland, was present at a council

1 . Ibid.,21 , v 2 Early Sources, , 217I . 3 Celtic Scotland, n, 178. 4 Scotichron., iv, xii. Of. Extracta variise cronicis Scocie, . 44p : "Hiis temporibus fuit sedes ilia

principalis regali t pontificalise a tocius regni Pictorum; quum fuit solus unus episcopu regnn si o Pictorum." 5 Celtic Scotland, n, 310-1, 397. • Early Sources, I, 121-2.

7 This suggestion has the support, for what it is worth, of Boece (I, 411). 8 Celtic Scotland, n, 231; Wyntoun, iv, 122-3.

• (ed. Hennessy and MacCarthy), I, 160; Picts and Scots, p. 73.

0 Celtic1 Scotland, n, 232-3. SCOTTISH BISHOPS' SEES BEFORE REIG 9 DAVIF NO 10 . DI accompanies t Roma wa e 721n ei H . Seduliusy db bishoa , p of Britaif no Scottish race, in whom Skene sees a bishop set up by the Britons on their recovery from Anglian domination. Since the see of

Whithorn, as already mentioned, came into existence 1 about this time, it looks as if in the early 8th century there may already have been five or six bishops' seats withi bounde nlatee th th f r so kingdo Scotlandf mo . The positio f Abernethno e chieth s fy a bishopri f Pictland—ico f such e earl beed th century—wah y8t ha n n i t i s bounaffectee e b th o t dy b d transfee affectionth e Pictisf th o r f o sh t kingAndrewS o t s s before th e middle of that century, even although we do not hear of a bishop at St

Andrews until very muc2 h later. Before we have information about further developments there had occurred the union of the Picts and Scots under e apparenth Kennetr fa c Alpintw hdominatioma Ho . e Scottisth f no h element in the united kingdom was reflected in the restoration of "Columban" clerg centrao yt easterd lan n Scotlan hars i determinet do di t ; e -whol th e indicationn th eo t bu e thaar s t communication with became again closer, and that there was a certain reaction towards the earlier, "Columban," tradition, reflected in ecclesiastical organisation to extene th t thadevelopmene th t t toward normaa s l diocesan organisation was checke thad dan t reversiothera s ewa systea o nt m monase baseth n do - teries. Presently, too, Scotlan vers dywa largely isolate Norsy db e attacks and settlements, and the process of assimilation to England and other countries was interrupted for two centuries. The next recorded development concerns . The church there beed Pictisa ha ny t b Kennetfoundei 0 ho t king82 Alpic d . c dhma an ; n brought relic f Columbao s , apparently wit s becominha vieit o wt e gth ecclesiastical centrunitee th f eo d kingdom, supersedin t oncga ee lonth n ao one han Abernethd dan facAndrewt e emergS o t on otherr e yo e th n Th eso . theri5 s tha86 e n diei t a dcleri c describe n Irisi d h annal s "abboa s f o t Dunkel firsd dan t bisho .f po printinn I " Annale gth f Ulsteso n i r s Chronicleshi Picts e Scots,d th an f o Skene reproduce dreadina g "primus episcopus" and, contending that this bisho t firs firss no tim tn i pd twa ean in rank, was led to regard him as a sole bishop of Pictland and was com- pelled to relegate the Abernethy bishops to a later date. But the authori- tative reading is undoubtedly the Celtic "primepscop," which in Ireland carried the quite distinct connotation of the chief bishop of a tribe or

1 Labbe, Sacrosancta concilia, vi, 1458; Celtic Scotland, u, 220, 232. Fergus is designated " episcopus Scotiee Pictus," and has been taken to be a Pict who was a bishop in Ireland; but it seems as likely that he was a Pictish bishop (i.e., a bishop in Pictland) of Scottish (or Irish) race, and if the Scots were providing bishop r Englissfo supra)7 h 10 see . (p sthe y might well providr Pictlaudfo e eon . Sedulius was " episcopus Britanniae de genere Scotorum" scribe havy th d ema e an ,bee n deliberately varyins ghi diction. firse Th tz abbo t AndrewS f o t s die d(Early7 in74 Sources, , 238)I . Boece (who knows nothinf go interventioe th Dunkelf ninfra])o 0 11 . d[p say s tha bishop'e th t s translateseas wa t d from Abernethy to St Andrews (n, 63). 110 PROCEEDING E SOCIETYTH F O S , 1952-53.

kingdom, and the element "prim" normally means "primary, foremost, chief, principal".1 Skene' se situatio th vie f y thuw o e dismisse b ma ns s a d acceptee b untenablen ca dt i thad an t,t Dunkela ther s middle th ewa n di e centurh 9t e oyth chiefa f bisho f Fortriupo . Fortriu, whil t esometimei s had a narrower meaning, is quite consistently used by the Irish annalists to signif takeo e Pictise whols th th y e f nb eo h herey kingdom,ma . t i d an 2 If chiea ther s fe wa bisho t Dunkeldpa safa s ei assumptiot i , n that there were other, inferior bishops elsewhere; that the primepscop was an abbot- bishop suggests that the "Columban" reaction was predominant in central Scotland, but whether the inferior bishops were secular bishops, abbot- bishop bishopr so s subordinat abboto et s canno determinede b t . heae f abbot-bishopw o rl Thaal s i t t Dunkelda s e experimenth d an , t was evidently not enduring. It may be that a development at St Andrews, begun earlie interrupted ran intrusioe th y db Dunkeldf no soos n,wa resumed. It is believed that from 906 until 1093 there was at St Andrews a succession of bishops, bearing such titles as "episcopus Scotorum," "epscop Alban" or "ardepscop Alban," variously rendere s "heaa d d bishop r "higo " h bishop" of the Scots or of Scotland.3 Skene, elaborating this, held that each member of the line was not merely "high bishop," but sole bishop, and furthewe ear r aske believo dt e that linee afte lasdeate th e n f i ,th r th o t f ho 1093, Scotlan bishopo n d dha s whateve numbea r fo r f yearso r , untie th l vacancy at St Andrews was filled by Alexander I and the other sees founded Davidy b r o . m hi y b allegee Th t AndrewdS s successio itself o t f no wholl s ni y convincingd an , it might emerge on examination that some of the line really had their sees elsewhere earliee ;th 4 rt assig sourcesno ratey o an nd y ,t thea an , mo t specific seethed e "bishopan ,y ar t AndrewsS f o s "e page onlth f n o ysi Wyntoun, the Scotichronicon, and the Register of the Priory of St Andrews. An investigatio theif no r credentials, however t relevan presenno e s th i , o t t argument, which is concerned only to dispute the claim that there was, during thes centurieso etw , onl bishoe yon Scotlandn pi . It is true that it is not easy to produce the names of other Scottish bishops, besides allegee thosth n t ei Andrew dS s succession thin i , s period. But this is in no way surprising, in view of the great dearth of information 1 Annals f Ulstero (ed. Henness d MacCarthy)yan , 374I , ; Skene, Picts Scots,d . 361an pp , 405; Early Sources, "primepsco n 290, I O . p " havI e been abl consulo et t Professor Kenneth Jackson, whose

opinio incorporates ni d texte . Lin.th Cf Gougaud. , Christianity Celticn i Lands, . 219pp , 221. 2 E.g. Picts and Scots, pp. 72, 76; Annals of Ulster, I, 313, 333; cf. Chadwick, Early Scotland, p. 40. Scotichron.,iv, 17; VI,24; Wyntoun, iv, 182-5, 192-3, 244-7, 318-9, 345; Boece,-ii, 53, 122, etc.; 3 Beg. prioratus S. Andree, pp. 113, 116. Some of these bishops are known only from Pordun and Wyntouu. 4 Cellach, allegedl t AndrewS e firsth e yf th o ts line merels ,i y "Bishop Cellach" (Picts Scots,. d 9) an . p Fothadh, the second of them, is known to the Irish annalists as "bishop of the islands of " and appears als simpls oa y "Bishop Pothach" (Early Sources, , 471I ; Skeue, Celtic Scotland,d an , n. 0 n33 , Picts and Scots, Anderso. . O 10) p . A ; n though trutn i s th lonthae wa hea th e af th d o community e Th . third of the line is simply "Bishop Maelbrigde" in Picts and Scots, p. 10. SCOTTISH BISHOPS' SEES BEFORE REIG DAVIF NO . DI Il l about Scottish affairs at that time. And yet the sources do not entirely fail heause bishoa w f : r o 986 d loncouncif a po an t 966:n a 0 i x 98 ,l held in England in 977 or 978, a bishop from Scotland, Bernelm by name, is said to have been present ; and in 1055 we hear of a bishop called John, who

beed ha n consecrate e Orkney th s sen o wa t t y o b sScotlann d i wh d dan 2 Adalbert of Bremen. Such stray names are, however, the least of the

evidence that Scotlan t havno ed onl3 ddi y one bishop. The strongest evidence is perhaps the term "ardepscop Alban" itself. If there was a "high bishop" or "head bishop," at St Andrews or elsewhere, ther mors ei e tha npresumptioa n that there were other bishops, inferion i r status though not standing in the technical relation of suffragans to a metropolitan tere mTh . "ardepscop," likearliee eth r "primepscop,s "wa in regular use in Ireland, where, indeed, aird-easpog is still the term for an archbishop. t woulI incorrece db translato t terme eth , when we n fini t di

Irelan r Scotlando 4 . 1100dc s "archbishop,a , " sinc thay eb t time "arch- bishop" had come to have the technical sense of a metropolitan who had received the pallium from Rome. But there is some evidence of the recogni- tio contemporariey nb e ardepscopth f so , quitas e simply a metropolita, n without a pallium.5 The title might be rendered into tiatin as summus episcopus.* Epscop Alban, again, might be rendered episcopus Scotorum— not to imply that the possessor of the title was the sole bishop in Scotland, but to imply that whereas other bishops might be bishops of this see or that see, the head bishop was bishop of the nation, or the bishop par excellence, as an early writer puts it.7 The title episcopus Scotorum certainly does not impl ysola bishope e th bishopt Andrews S y t remainei f (b sr o e fo , us )n di long afte existence th r othef eo r see wels si l documented.

There are a number of statements in 8 the late llth and early 12th centuries which tend to confirm the view that there was a plurality of bishops' sees in Scotland before the reign of David I. In 1080 we read in an English chronicle that the , in consecrating the , could not obtain the assistance of the Scottish bishops, who were subject to him.9 In 1101 Pope Paschal II writes to the suffragans of the arch- 1 Early Sources, , 472I , 488 "Fotha,d 490 t AndrewsDi S .f o dI . 110"(p , reall) n4 . y belon thio gt s

succession at lona? 2 Wharton, Anglia Sacra, , 220n . 3 Early Sources, n, 8-9. The question should also be raised of the identity of " John, bishop of Athole," who appears in the Orkneyinga Saga in the 12th century (ed. Anderson, p. 113). One can only speculate about "Gervadius, bischop and prechour of Murraye," and "Glaciane, ane excellent doctou bischopd an r " (Boece , 17231 ;, II ,Skene , Celtic Scotland, , 369)n . "Dubthac Scote hth , chief confessor of Ireland and of Scotland," who "reposed1 in Armagh" in 1065, may or may not be the t DuthaS chies legendf cwa o f o bishowh , Scotlanf po d (Early n.)d Sources,an . , 10 , n

* Information from Professor Jackson.

5 Wharton, Anglia Sacra, II, 234-6; Symeon of Durham (Bolls Series), n, 204. 8 Wharton, loc. cit.; Picts Scots,d an . 190p . ' Picts and Scots, p. 191. 8 The style was used on seals until the end of the 13th century.

Earl Plummerd ean Saxono Tw , Chronicles, , 289I . 8 112 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1952-53.

bishopri Yorf co k throughout Scotland. n 1108I 1 , when Turgo beed ha tn appointed to St Andrews after a long vacancy, the bishop of Durham propose consecrato dt wit m assistance ehi hth bishope th f eo f Scotlan o s d Orkneyse th f o d ;an 2 this would suggest that there wer t leas ebishopa o ttw s on the Scottish mainland at a time when St Andrews was vacant. In 1119 and 1122, when St Andrews was once more vacant, we find the pope address- ing "al bishope lth s throughout Scotland rebukind "an g the carryinr mfo g out consecrations without reference to a metropolitan.3 It would seem a fair comment Scote thatth f si , wer epeculiaa r peopl neveo mord ewh rha e tha bishope n on sometime d an , noned sha , they were remarkably successful in concealing the fact from their neighbours in England and from head- quarter t Romesa . It may be suggested, further, not only that there was a plurality of bishops t thabu , t they were establishe seee somerection e di th sth f eo f no which has been wrongly ascribed to David I. . Whe e earliesnth t reference o bishopt s s after 1100 occur, they appear in charters sourca , informatiof eo n then appearin firse th tr s timei gfo t I . somewhat hazardous to' argue that, becaus s sooea charters na s appeae w r finnamee dth bishopsf so , therefore before there were charters there wero en attributbishopso t d "foundatione An e.th bishopria f dato "e th t ea o ct •which there occurs the first casual, isolated mention of the name of a bishop is wholly unsound strongeo n .n o (Yes ri evidenct i t e tha "creatione th t " of various seebees sha n attribute Alexandeo dt David.d an t mighrI I ) e b t sounder to argue that, because bishops appear when charters appear,' there- fore bishops already existed thid sAn argumen. t receives some confirmation fro namee earliese mth th f so t bishop appeao st recordn o r mosn I . t cases the first bishop named is clearly a native—Cormac, Gregory, Nechtan, e Anglo-NormanMacbeth—anth f o e on t dno s who innovatine mth g kings of the 12th century imported to fill the other high offices in church and state. Each of these manifestly Celtic bishops seems to represent not the beginning of a new line but the continuation of an old. The influenc olden a f eo r detectee regimb choice—ie y th ema n d i f choice indeed there was—of the bishops' seats. It does seem significant that, while abbeys were planted at sites such as Dunfermline, Scone, Cambus- kennet Holyroodd han closn i , e proximit royao yt l castle residencesd san , bishops' sees remained at what were evidently old ecclesiastical sites. If e supposeth d innovator t beeno nd buildin ha sfoundationsd ol n go , they might have been expected to plant their bishops at the seats of sheriffs, so that civiecclesiasticad an l l government should hav same eth e focust bu ; cathedra sheriff'd an l s seat coincided onl t Aberdeeya n Elgind i nan d an , eac thosf ho e instance bishop'e sth s sea knows i t havo nt e been moved.

1 Baine, Historians of the Church of York, in, 22. 2 Eadmer, Historia (Bolls Series), p. 198. * Baine, op. cit., in, 40-41, 45-46. SCOTTISH BISHOPS' SEES BEFORE REIGN OF DAVID I. 113 Ancient survivals are equally apparent in the boundaries of some of the . St Andrews straggled up the east coast from the Tweed to the Dee, including most of Berwickshire, the Lothians and and large tracts north of the Tay, and extending along the Forth beyond , up the Tay to Scone and far into the highlands of Angus. Intermingled with it lay detached portions of Dunkeld (e.g. Aberlady, Inchcolm, Cramon d Abercorndan d Dunblanan ) e (Culros Abernethy)d an s e th d an , whole of the scattered of . By contrast, , e northerth d an n dioceses represent continuous tract f territoryo s . Once more one feels that if the bishoprics had been founded in the 12th century they would have shown sign f coincidino s g with r approximatino , , to g sheriffdonis; but this they never do, except in the one case of Aberdeen, and eve t nincludei dsheriffdoe parth f o tevent y Banff f an mcontrase o n th ,I . t betwee interminglee nth d boundarie centrae th f so l diocesesimplee th d sran structure of those in the south and north demands some attempt at explana- tion, however tentative. The episcopate canno consideree b t detachmentn di t mus bu ,viewe e b t d in relation to the remainder of the ecclesiastical structure, of the character of which, at that period, we know far too little. Possibly the maintenance of servicee cur th f soul eo d san s were still somn i , e e countrypartth f o s , dependen monasteriese th n o t t leasa r o t, carrie within do framewore nth k n organisatiooa f n centree monasteryth n o d . Allow thae ancienth t t "Columban" mode beed ha ln retained beed ha n r revivedo , extene th o t ,t that administration pertained to the abbot, who might or might not be a bishop tha d bishoe an ,th t p migh subordinata t n i stil e b l e positioe th n ni monastery. What then happened when, as is usually accepted, the office of abbot became secularised? It seems very likely that an abbey would still maintain its bishop for the ordination and supervision of its clergy. If monasteriee th s were performing spiritual function t allbishoa se th , p would still be essential; and, while there might be lay , there could not be lay bishops. It may even be that, as the abbots relinquished ecclesiastical functions, these functions would fall increasingl e bishopsth o yt , whose importance would grow in consequence. Hence, by a natural process of development e bishoth , p might emerge from comparative obscuritd yan become a. prominent figure s spherHi .f wor o e k wouldt t no firsta , e b , a diocese as commonly understood, but the churches dependent on the monastery, which might be scattered over a large area. Such a development explaio t r woul e fa peculia nth o dg r boundarie e lateth f r o sdiocese f o s Dunkeld and Brechin, and perhaps .1 It is often said that in Dunkeld and Brechin, when the see was "created"

Dunkeld was undoubtedly the heir of loua. It included central and western Scotland until a bishopri1 c of Argyll was created c. 1200; thereafter it still retained the parish of Muckairn, and apparently claimed lona itself (Hunter, Diocese and Presbytery of Dunkeld, I, 75). VOL. LXXXVII. 8 4 11 PROCEEDING E SOCIETYTH F O S , 1952-53.

or "founded" in the 12th century, the abbot became the first bishop. Such

a development is prima facie unlikely, for a man already in episcopal 1 orders, although occupying a subordinate position, could more easily be turned into a than could a lay abbot. But it is, in any event, demon- strably untrue t Brechia r , fo line abbotf nth eo s continues long after bishops begin to be mentioned in charters, and we find an abbot of Brechin witnessing chartea bishoa y rb Brechinf po ; 2 whil t Dunkeldea t , althougno o d e hw find the name of an abbot so late, the "abbacy" of Dunkeld is mentioned c. 1150, in a charter to which the was a witness.3 If a bishop and abbot thus existed concurrently in the middle of the 12th century, hars i t deteco i dt reasoy they an t ynwh shoul t hav dno existeo es d much earlier. The monastery ,e whol howeverth t e no picture s i , . There were th e culdees, who, whatever they may have been in earlier times, were in their later days little else than colleges of secular priests. The possibility cannot be overlooked that in some instances the spiritual functions of abbeys had wholly lapse thad dan t those functions were instead performe culdeesy db . In any event, the existence of the culdees, bodies of clergy not dependent on monasteries, might suggest that there were necessarily non-monastic bishops. Moreover, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that there were, already before 1100, secular priests serving local churches. When, for, instance, a "church "givens "i previousld boda thae ha o culdees,"f b t y t o ti y ma y t 4i been served, and perhaps continued to be served, by a resident secular priest. If there were such secular clergy, they were presumably under the jurisdiction oterritoriala f monastica t no d ,an bishop. detectn ca tha e e b ,w t y eve ma centran ni t I l Scotland makine th , f go two distinct types of diocese, the monastic and the secular. Dunkeld and Brechi clearle nsuggestee ar b t yi monasticy d ma tha t t AndrewS bu t ; s was the seat of the bishop who had a sort of residual jurisdiction within the area, supervising the clergy of the churches served by seculars and not attached to monasteries ? In any event, the dioceses of the south and the north clearly hav edifferena t origin from centree thosth f eo . Glasgowt a , any rate, was the bishopric of the kingdom of Strathclyde, and it had not been affectee persistencth y b de monasti th f eo c traditio arean i s under " Colurnban " influence. To what extent it had been continuously effective is unknown, but there were appointments in the llth century, and the inquest into its possessions, made c. 1120, suggests that its existence as an entity 1 This is stated of Dunkeld by Myln in his Lives of the Bishops (Bannatyne Club, pp. 4-5), but Myln is demonstrably wrong on other matters, and no doubt ,he was concerned only to produce what seemed a simple explanation. 2 Liber de Aberbrothoc, , 134I , 163. 3 Lawrie, Early Scottish Charters, No. ccix. That there was an "abbacy," but no abbot, would be explaine t could-bi f di e shown tha abbee crowte th falled th y ha o nt afte deate th r Abbof ho t Ethelred, sou of Malcolm and Margaret. * E.g. Reg. . . Andree,S . 116p . SCOTTISH BISHOPS' SEES BEFORE REIGN OF DAVID I. 115 had not been in any doubt. Galloway, again, whatever its history between . 1100c d ,an emerge 0 e 1120'c80 th . s n clearli sa s e bishopriyth e th f o c lordship of Galloway. The position in the north is more obscure. One can only speculat whetheo t s ea seculaa r r clerg gained yha dfootina g thern ei the 8th century and had retained it when the "Columban" reaction, along monastic lines, took centre effeccountrye th th t thern f i eto Bu anothes e.i r possible explanation of the northern dioceses. The regions which formed them were llt e notth h n , i century , effectively subjec Scottise th o t t h crown. In the far north the earl of the Orkneys held Caithness and Sutherland and sometime a goos d deal more e rulinth ; g e provinchousth f eo f Moraeo y seem havo st eheigh e powes llte beeth it th t f h na o n t i r century this I .s situation reflecte earchurce e Orknef th l o Th n di h ? y establishe dbishopria c for his earldom; the king of the Isles established one for his realm; the lords of Galloway establishe their fo re lordshipdon t unlikeli s I . y tha greaa t t mormaer, of Moray or Ross, would establish, or foster, one for his ? * Some such theory would satisfactorily explai territoriae nth l diocese northe th f so . eventy an existencee n th ,I , before 1100 bishopf o , sucr sfo h comparatively small areas as Orkney and the Isles renders it highly improbable that one bishop sufficed for the entire Scottish mainland. Dunblan d Aberdeean e n require special mention. Dunblanes it n i , possession of the ancient ecclesiastical sites of Abernethy and Culross as detached parishes, partakes of the character of a monastic bishopric; but on the other hand, in its intimate association -with the earldom of Strathearn, whose earls wer patronss eit t resemblei , territoriae sth l diocese norte th f hso and Galloway in the south. It may be that it had a dual origin: there was within it a monastic bishop, who obtained recognition from the earl as the e earldobishoth r pfo f Strathearnm o . Aberdeel appearancal o t s ni a e purely territorial bishopric, and the choice of Aberdeen as a bishop's seat may well be attributed to a 12th-century king; but the tradition that the see developed from a monastic bishopric based on Mortlach must not be

dismissed merely because it happens to have been incorporate2 d in a spurious charter, and seems rather to represent the strong probability that there were Celtic bishops somewher areae verd th an ,n y i e likel t Mortlachya , before the casual appearance of the equally Celtic Nechtan at Aberdeen in the 12th century. Whateve e precisth r e situation before 1100 s plaii t i ,n tha a periot d of serious dislocatio havy nma e intervened befor e restorativth e e worf ko David I. No doubt one reason was the confused political situation following

askee b y d , theswhyma t so 1I thif s ei , dioceseswa t sho featuree no wth o sd otherf so non-royaf so l foundation—especiall e locath y l magnate's righ f patronageo t , which appear n Orkneyi s e Islesth , , Dunblan Gallowayd ean t ther bejittln Bu eca . e doubt tha Morayn i t suppressio e t leasta th , n o , f no virtuae th l independenc provincee th f eo crowe th , n would assum righte eth s formerly belongine th o gt mormaers. 2 Reg. Aberdeen, I, xvii, 3; II, 246-7; Scotichron., IV, xliv. 116 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1952-53. the death of Malcolm III; but another undoubtedly was the question, which was soo becomo nt e acutee validit th e appointmen f th o ,f yo f bishopo t s without confirmatio metropolitana y nb ratey t Andrewan S ,t A . s itself was apparently without a consecrated bishop from 1093 to 1109, and again from 1115 to 1127. If St Andrews, the chief see, could be so long vacant, other sees may well have been vacant as long or longer. In Glasgow, we are told, Archbishop Kinsi of York (1055—60) had consecrated Bishops Magsuea and John; thereafter, '' because of hostile invasion and desolation anbarbarite dth e lan lonr th churce dfo f g th yo withou s hwa pastor,a t " or "almost beyond memory had not had the solace of a bishop," until Michae s consecratewa l d bet-ween 110 d 1114. 9an t Dunblan A 1 e there was a tradition that there had been a vacancy of a century or more. It is

t difficulno understano t t Ailrey dwh d should writ f "churcheeo s wavering 2 withou pastor.a t " Ailred's statement that David found "three or four" bishops is perhaps takee b o nt s uncertaii t literally t no i d nan , whethe s accounhi r t refers Scotio t a whole nortForte th th Clyd d moderf f o heo t o an r eo n Scotland. That Davidaccessions hi n o , , found bishop t Dunkeldsa , Moray, Rosd san Mortlach or Aberdeen is more than likely. St Andrews was without a consecrated bishop, Whithorn had presumably been long without a bishop, and there may have chanced at the time to be no bishop at Brechin, while Dunblan vers ewa y likel a stat n f decayyi eo e th . r Caithnesfa y b s ha s strongest claim to be regarded as a new foundation by David; 3 but Dunblane possibly underwent such reconstruction David'ow n ni s hi t sa t reignno f i , hands, that it would be regarded as falling in the same category; and if David move da bishop' s seat from Mortlac Aberdeeno ht , then thae se t might likewis foundationw ene rana s ka . Glasgow whico ,t h appointments •were made when Davi s ear Cumbrian dwa i l , woul f reckonee do b e on s da his restorations. Some such picture agrees broadly with what Ailred says, d accordan s better wit e facthth s than does the" convention whics hha dominated most recent writers.

ADDITIONAL, NOTE. The English counci f Cealchytho l e [Chelsea], n 816i , laid down that f Scottiso e noon h race shoul allowee db administeo dt r Baptis r mHolo y Communio Englisy an n ni h diocese uncertai,s sincwa t ei n where andy b '

whom they had been ordained, and

the evidence from silence altogether too far to 4 say, as McEwan does, "To the establishment of dioceses they [Malcolm and Margaret] did not in any y contribute.wa ' " 6 1 Wilkins, Concilia, 170, concere I Th . n here doe t sees no mhav o t e been merely wit activitiee hth s of episcopi vagantes, which the council of Chalons, three years earlier, evidently had in view when it denounce ordinatione dth s "certaicarriey b t dou n Scots persons calling themselves bishops" (Labbe, VII, 1281-2). Cf. McEwan, Church History, I, 104. 2 Scotichron., . vi24 , 3 Baiiie, York, n, 126, 363. « Bellenden's Boece (S.T.S.), II, 172. 5 Church History, , 160I .