The Orkneys were taken from the Picts about A.D. 838, by Kenneth II., king of Scotland, to which kingdom they were attached until 1099, when Donald VIII., surnamed Bane, brother to Malcolm Canmore, usurped the crown, to the prejudice of his nephews Edgar, Alexander, and David; and requiring assistance to maintain his position, he applied to Magnus, king of Norway, to whom, says Skene, "for help and supply he gave all the isles of Scotland (Camden says the Orkneys only), where, through and for other causes, many bloody battles were fought, until the battle of Larges, 3rd August, 1260, in the time of Alexander III. of Scotland, and Acho, king of Norway." The Scots proving victorious, Magnus of Norway, son and successor of Acho, made peace with Alexander, and renounced and discharged all right and title which he or his successors had, or might have or pretend, to the isles of Scotland, the king of Scotland paying therefor yearly to the said Magnus and his successors one hundred marks of sterling money. This contract was confirmed in 1312 by Haquin V. of Norway and Robert I. of Scotland. In 1426 Eric X. of Denmark renewed with James I. of Scotland these ancient treaties, particularly with regard to the Western Isles; the pension or annuity having been long omitted to be paid, Eric now freely gave it up to James; and thus, in appearance, the Orkneys were finally confirmed to Scotland; but virtually it was not so until 1468, when, says Skene, "at last the said annual, with all the arrearages and by-runs thereof, was discharged and renounced simpliciter, in the contract of marriage between King James III. and Margaret, daughter of Christian I., king of Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, on the 8th of September, 1468; which discharge is not only ratified, but renewed thereafter by the said king, on the 12th May, 1469. It appears that James III., on the 24th February, 1483, commanded his ambassador sent to the Pope to desire a confirmation of the said perpetual renunciation and discharge of the contribution of the Isles."
According to Dr. Wallace's account (1700), King Christian agreed that the isles of Orkney and Zetland should remain in the possession of King James and his successors, as the Princess Margaret's dower, until either King Christian or his successors should pay to King James or his successors the sum of fifty thousand florins of the Rhine; but in the year following, hearing of his daughter's delivery of a prince at Edinburgh, he "for joy thereof renounced for ever to the crown of Scotland all right or claim to the said isles."
Broctuna.
Bury, Lancashire.
Kirkwallensis seems to have been led into an error respecting the Orkneys. It is true that Orkney and Shetland belonged to the crown of Norway, to which the Scottish family of St. Clair, or Sinclair, rendered military service for the earldom. It was not, however, to an English king, but to James III. of Scotland that Christian gave the hand of "the Maid of Norway." In the marriage preliminaries the latter thus stipulates respecting the dower:—"Rex cedit sexaginta aureorum Rhenensium [florenorum] millia, ejus summæ priusquam è Danæ regno sponsa digrediatur numeraturus aureorum decem millia, quod verò reliquum esset supplerent insulæ regni Norvegici, jam memoratæ, Orcades, una cum jurisdictione ac cæteris eodem pertinentibus, hac tamen lege, ut insulas eas, eousque teneat Scotiæ Rex sub firma hypotheca donec vel ipse, vel ejus heredes, Daniæ ac Norvegiæ Reges, æqua vicissim portione easdem redimant." This article was afterwards embodied in the marriage contract:—"Et terræ insularum Orchaden Regi nostro Jacobo impignoratæ, ad Norvegiæ reges revertentur," &c. Both documents are preserved in Torfæus (Orcades, pp. 188—191.). Mr. Auker's discovery of the original is, however, an interesting circumstance, as it would seem that the marriage in question was but the result of an attempt to settle amicably an ancient dispute respecting the sovereignty of the Hebrides—"vetus controversia de Hæbudis et Mannia magnis utriusque populi cladibus agitata"—which the king of France, as umpire, had been unable to pronounce upon, in consequence of the loss or concealment of the original instruments.
W. G. A.
THE PASSAGE IN KING HENRY VIII., ACT III. SC. 2.
(Vol. vii., pp. 5. 111.)
Having no desire to enter into unnecessary controversy, I do not often reply to objections made to my conjectural emendations of passages in Shakspeare; but on the present occasion I think it incumbent on me to appeal to the common sense of those who take interest in such matters, by merely placing in juxta-position the reading I have proposed, and that of your Leeds correspondent, and thus leave it to their impartial decision without fear of the result. It may be necessary, as your correspondent has adverted to