Message from discussion
Prince of Scotland
Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.moat.net!gail.ripco.com!not-for-mail
From: Francois R. Velde <ve...@heraldicanospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.talk.royalty
Subject: Prince of Scotland
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:55:53 -0600
Organization: Ripco Communications Inc.
Lines: 154
Message-ID: <p0bju0psi7sklm5cmo9pmo11e0if0uq5an@4ax.com>
Reply-To: ve...@heraldicanospam.invalid
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell2.ripco.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: e250.ripco.com 1105833354 15225 209.100.225.144 (15 Jan 2005 23:55:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ripco.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 23:55:54 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
An interesting (IMO) document, from the Times of 1924.
THE PRINCE OF SCOTLAND.
FIVE CENTURIES OLD TITLE, PLEA FOR HABITUAL USE.
By Dr. Walter Seton.
In my public inaugural lecture on February 21 in connexion with the new
lectureship in Scottish History in London, I alluded to the question —
comparatively well known in Scotland, but almost unknown in England — concerning
the present existence of the centuries-old title Prince of Scotland still
belonging of right to the Prince of Wales, as eldest son of the King. But as I
could not then do more than make some general observations, I think it well to
prepare and publish a considered statement setting out results gathered from a
fresh consideration of all the facts, for which results I do not claim either
novelty or. originality.
I will state first the conclusion which may be reached with certainty and then
discuss some of the evidence. The title Prince of Scotland, as applied to the
Heir Apparent when he was the King's eldest son, originated legally at the
beginning of the 15th century, about 1404. It was habitually employed as the
first and most honourable title of the King's eldest son up to the union of the
Crowns in 1603: from that date the title persisted and was generally, but not
always, united with the title Prince of Wales, so that the holder became known
as " Prince of Scotland and Wales." That is the conclusion: now for the
evidence.
Some who have handled this question have unintentionally cast an element of
doubt upon it by claiming too much. An attempt has been made to show that the
title Prince of Scotland can be traced back to about 1250 or even earlier, so
that it would then become anterior to the first creation of the title Prince of
Wales in 1302. It has also been asserted that the title Prince of Scotland is
the oldest title held by the Prince of Wales, older than the Dukedom of Rothesay
or the Earldom of Carrick. Those assertions go too far. It is quite true that
a Scottish historian, Bellenden, writing about 1530-40, speaks of Edward Prince
of Scotland as eldest son to King Malcolm — i.e., Canmore, who died in 1093 ;
that Bellenden also speaks of Alexander as being made Prince of Scotland in
1203, that he speaks of Hary, Prince of Scotland, in connexion with the
conditions of peace between Scotland and England in 1136, and that he records
the birth of Alexander Prince of Scotland in January, 1264. It may, however, be
supposed that Bellenden in using the title is unconsciously guilty of an
anachronism, in applying the terminology of his age to a much earlier period.
But it does show that by Bellenden's time, about 1530, " Prince of Scotland "
was an established title. It is also worth note that the title was likewise
habitually used by English 16th century historians, speaking of the Scots
heirs-apparent of those centuries. For example, Hall, writing of the reign of
Edward IV., says :—
"James the iii. of that name, King of Scottes, sent into England a solempne
ambassage, for to have the Lady Cicile, King Edwardes' ii. daughter to be
married to his eldest sonne, James Prince of Scotlande, Duke of Rothesay and
erle of Carricke."
Similar use of the title could be quoted from Holinshed, Grafton, and John
Harding. All this, however, falls short of actual proof that the title was
legally in existence in the 11th-l4th centuries. I do not exclude the
possibility that the title may have gradually come into common parlance at a
date earlier than that of the creation of the Principality. I cannot, however,
find a single reference to the title in any Act of Parliament, charter, or legal
instrument earlier than, say, 1400, or in any English chronicler of the 13th to
15th centuries.
If we want to find ourselves on firm ground and in a completely tenable
position, we must take our stand on official documents. In 1791 James Carmichael
published a tract called "A Memorial concerning the Principality of Scotland,
taken from a MS. written in the year 1752 by the late Mr. George Chalmers, Clerk
to the Signet, immediately after the death of the Prince of Wales." The Prince
of Wales, Frederick, son of George II., had died in March, 1751, and the
question had arisen then whether the titles of Duke of Cornwall and of Prince of
Scotland passed at his death to his son and heir (George, afterwards King George
III.) or reverted to his father, the King. Into that difficult legal question it
is unnecessary to enter here. The statements of Chalmers are sound as far as
they go, but they can be supplemented by evidence not accessible to him. The
first charter creating the Principality of Scotland is one granted on December
10, 1404, by King Robert III. in favour of his son James, empowering him to
hold the lands of the so-called Stewartry in free Regality for life. A copy of
that charter will be found in a MS. volume in the Register House, Edinburgh,
entitled " Abstract from the Publick Records of Charters, Acts of Parliament,
Treaties, etc., concerning the Stewartry and Principality of Scotland." Another
copy is in the Mar Papers (Historical MSS. Commission, page seven), prepared
when Charles I. was Prince and Steward of Scotland. The charter of 1404 was only
in life-rent, but it became permanent in the reign of James III. by Act of
Parliament which must have been passed between April 26, 1467, and October 31,
1477, but the Act itself is not extant. The legal arguments for the date are
discussed at length by Carmichael.
Let us start from, say, 1500 (by no means dogmatizing that there was no earlier
use), and note examples of the use of the title Prince of Scotland.
In the Great Seal Register, reign of James IV., there are numerous grants made
by the King on behalf of his eldest son " Jacobi, principis et saneschalli
Scotie," "James Prince and Steward of Scotland," ranging from March, 1507, to
July, 1513. The next holder of the title was Henry Frederick, eldest son of
James IV. In the Acts of Parliament of Scotland (Vol. IV.) we find (1599) the
King committing to the Earl of Mar and his mother " the custodie and education
of the prince his derrest sone henry, prince of Scotland."
After the union of the Crowns Henry was still Prince of Scotland, but he did not
become Prince of Wales until he was so created in 1613. Thus in 1612, after the
union but before his creation as Prince of Wales, we find in the Acts of
Parliament a grant made to the Duke of Lennox by the King as " Our said soverane
lord as Father and lauchfull administratoure, tutoure and gouernor of his hienes
dearest sonne Henrie Prince and Stewart of Scotland." Henry died early, and the
next heir-apparent was Charles, afterwards Charles I. There are numerous
references in the Acts of Parliament to " his hienes Charles Prince and Stewart
of Scotland," but there are also instances of the combined title. In the Seton
family archives there is a charter by Charles Earl of Dunfermline in name of
"ane Illustir and Serene Prince Charles, Prince of Scotland and Waillis, Duke of
Rothesay and Albanie."
When Charles I. succeeded to the Throne his son Charles, afterwards Charles II.,
held the title. I quote one instance only out of many—viz., an Act of Parliament
of 1641, a ratification to John Hamilton of Carlowrie: " Oure Souverane Lorde
for himselff and as father lauchfull administrator tutor guyder and governor to
his hienes derrest sone Charles Prince of Scotland and Wallis Stewart of
Scotland, duke of Rothesay, Cornwall, &c., Erle of Carick Kyle and Cunynghame,
Lorde of the Yle, baron of the baronie of Renfrew " an excellent instance
setting out the chief titles, both Scottish and English, Very fully.
The next holder was the son of James II., James Francis Edward. An Act of
Parliament of 1696 pledges the Parliament to stand by King William " against the
late King James and the Pretended Prince of Scotland commonly called the
Pretended Prince of Wales." I am not aware whether the later Stuarts ever used
the title- "Prince of Scotland" themselves.
So the history of the title could be traced from 1689 onwards. The Hanoverian
Sovereigns took extraordinarily little interest in Scotland, and the title
dropped largely into desuetude. Queen Victoria, as is well known, took the
keenest interest in Scottish affairs, an interest which has most fortunately
bean warmly maintained by King Edward VII. and by their present Majesties. As
regards the Principality of Scotland the fact that it still exists is
demonstrated by the existence of the Seal of the Principality which bears the
inscription "Prince and Steward of Scotland." But from the standpoint of public
and popular usage the title has been in desuetude, since the death of Charles I.
It is to be noted that within the last two or three years it has reappeared in
Burke and Debrett, although previously ignored.
To sum up the argument: the title "Prince of Scotland" is almost certainly not
the oldest title held by the Prince of Wales among his Scottish titles: the
oldest of his Scottish titles is Earl of Carrick, which fell to the Crown in
1344 ; and next after that probably the Dukedom of Rothesay, created in 1398.
The Prince of Wales was Prince of Scotland as soon as his Royal father became
King on May 6, 1910, but he was not created Prince of Wales until June 23; 1910.
The title Prince of Scotland can claim an existence of at least five centuries.
May it not be hoped that its full and habitual use will once again be restored,
and that the Prince of Wales will, on the occasion of his visits to Scotland, be
hailed as Prince of Scotland and Wales, and that Scots will be permitted to use
that old and honourable title in drinking his health in Scotland.
In preparing these notes I have received valuable advice and assistance from Mr.
Francis Grant, Rothesay Herald.
--
François Velde
ve...@nospam.org (replace by "heraldica")
Heraldry Site: http://www.heraldica.org/
|
