[368] Reg. Aberd., vol. 2, p. 264.
[369] Vide Goodall’s Preface to Keith’s Catalogue of Bishops. When David revived the See of Brechin, he merely granted to the Bishop and Culdees the right of holding a Sunday market in their Vill of Brechin. The Church-lands, originally “given to the Lord” by Kenneth II., were probably in the possession of the Cowarbs, long represented by the lay Abbots of Brechin. Leod is the first known member of the family, attesting charters of David, as “Abbas de Brechin,” amongst the laity; and the form of Abbe so often appears after the names of the family, that it has been taken for a surname; though, as the same individuals appear with Abbas or Abbatis appended to their names, it is evidently only a contraction. Morgund appears to have been the last direct heir-male—(Reg. de Brech. Pref., p.v., and No. 1. Reg. Vet. Arbr., No. 1, 70, 72, 73, 74—1, 2, 3). About the opening of the thirteenth century, other clerks appear in the Chapter; and as the charters quoted by Goodall mention “the Prior, Culdees, and others of the Chapter of Brechin,” it is possible that these “others” were the Canons, who now began to share the privileges of the Culdees. The latter disappear towards the close of the reign of Alexander II., and their place is supplied by the ordinary “Dean and Chapter.” Morgund died in the same reign, and the property appears to have passed to Henry, an illegitimate offshoot from the royal family, who transmitted the name of de Brechin to his descendants. In a charter, about the year 1267, his son, William de Brechin, couples with the name of his father Henry that of his mother Juliana. In 1232 Alexander granted certain lands to Gillandrys Mac Leod, to be held by the service of one knight, “saving the rights of the clergy of Brechin, and the annual rent of 10 solidi, due from a portion to the Abbot of Brechin,” together with other lands, to be held per forinsecum servitium, “infra dictum servitium unius militis.” From all this, I think, it is allowable to suppose, that on the death of Morgund the king bestowed Juliana, the heiress of the last Abbot, on his kinsman Henry, with the proviso that the Culdees should be suppressed, or converted into the Chapter, at the same time erecting the lands of Gillandrys, the heir-male, hitherto held of the Abbot and Clergy, into a barony, held by charter of the Crown.—Reg. de Brech., Nos. 2, 3; Innes’ Sketches, etc., p. 156.
[370] Reg. Prior. St. And. p. 318.
[371] Vide Charters in Reg. Prior. St. And., from p. 362 to p. 376. Reg. Aberd., vol. 2, p. 264.
[372] Reg. Morav., No. 260. Vide also Hailes’ Annals, vol. 3, Appendix No. 4. The passage is curious, “Clerici vero uxorati ejusdem regni qui clericalem deferentes tonsuram clericati gaudere solent privilegio, et cum bonis suis sub ecclesiastice protectionis manere presidio ab antiquo, solite immunitatis beneficiis exuuntur et sub nova rediguntur onera servitutis.” As the date of this singular document is 31st May 1251, it must have been issued against Durward and his party, who at that time were in power.
[373] Reg. Prior. St. And., p. xxxv, No. 16, xxxvii, No. 30, 32. Denmylne Charters, No. 19, 39. Amongst the Culdees who were converted into the Provost and Chapter of St. Mary’s was William Wishart, afterwards Bishop of St. Andrews. If Robert Wishart, afterwards Bishop of Glasgow, was also a Culdee—a clericus uxoratus—it may explain the passage in which Hemingburgh throws an aspersion on his morals, “filios etiam episcopi nepotum nomine nuncupatos.” Vide Innes’ Sketches, p. 50, note 4.
[374] The Culdees were excluded from participating in the election of William Wishart in 1272 (Fordun, l. 6, c. 43). Every papal confirmation, however, in the Reg. Prior. St. And. proves that the right of electing the bishop was confined to the Canons Regular of the Priory, the Culdees apparently having first been deprived of their right in the days of Turgot (Twysden, Preface, p. vi.) The expressions of Fordun can, therefore, only be explained on the supposition that they had recovered their original privileges for a short time about this period.
[375] Fordun, l. 6, c. 44. Palgrave’s Documents, etc., cxlvii. cxlix.
[376] Reg. Prior. St. And., p. xxxi.
[377] Chron. St. Crucis, 1153. Boece attributes the rising of Somarled to a famine and pestilence, which the Chronicle places in the following year—the result rather than the cause of the invasion.