The history of the Celtic
Province of Moray takes us back to a remote period, on which the light
is dim and fitful. All that any one can do is to endeavour to ascertain
the probable nature of movements, the details of which are obscure and
to most modern readers possessing but feeble interest. The facts in the
following paper are mainly derived from Mr. Skene’s “Celtic Scotland,”
and Mr. Anderson’s “Orkneyinga Saga,” but they are of course applied to
special purposes, and made the basis of inferences for which these
authorities are not responsible. I may say that our retrospect includes
the period from the seventh century to the twelfth, but before entering
on the narrative a few preliminary observations are necessary.
In the first place, it is
assumed that the so-called Picts of the early centuries of our era were
Celts—the ancestors of the race that still inhabits the Scottish
Highlands. Modern inquiry seems to establish this beyond reasonable
doubt. Although we cannot enter into the controversy, it may be pointed
out that a king of the Picts had undoubtedly a royal seat at Inverness
in the middle of the sixth century; and, when a few centuries later the
district becomes familiar to history, the inhabitants are found to be a
purely Celtic people. There is nothing whatever to show that in the
interval the Gael destroyed and supplanted an older race; while on the
contrary there is a good deal to show that the natives continued to
carry on a warfare, varying in fortune, but on the whole fairly
successful, first with Irish immigrants, then with Angles or Saxons, and
latterly with ferocious Norsemen. As the territory has been occupied by
Celts throughout the entire period of authentic history, it would
require very dear evidence to demonstrate that the Picts and Caledonians
of the immediately preceding centuries were a different race. To clinch
the argument, Mr. Skene famishes a list of about 150 Pictish words, a
portion of which are purely Irish or Gaelic in their forms, while the
rest show an admixture of other Celtic tongues.
The Romans finally
quitted the island of Britain in 410, and for centuries thereafter, so
far as there is any record at all, the history is a succession of
struggles either between native tribes and principalites, or between
Celts and Teutonic assailants. The purest and most conservative Celts
seem to have been the inhabitants of the district now known as the
counties of Inverness and Ross. Viewed on a large scale, the history of
the Highlands is the history of Celtic resistance to foreign inroads and
foreign usages. Many of the wars waged by the northern Gael against the
early Scottish kings arose from the devotion of the people to their own
customs and laws of succession, and their hatred of practices introduced
by the monarchs under English and Norman influences. There are three
marked periods in these struggles. The first is the reign of William the
Lion, who succeeded after repeated and severe efforts in quelling the
spirit of the north ; and the decisive battle was fought in 1187, while
the headquarters of the king were established at Inverness. The
discontent and turbulence of the middle ages received a decisive check
by the memorable battle of Harlaw, in 1411. Once again the Celts had
another chance—in the conflict between the Stuarts and their
Parliaments, and the revolution which placed the house of Hanover on the
British throne. We all know that this third rising ended in the
disastrous field of Culloden, and the ravages and proscriptions of
Cumberland.
In rapidly tracing the
early history, it is necessary to remark that we regard Inverness as
having been the centre of the native northern state. The town itself was
probably nothing more than a cluster of huts, and perhaps it did not
occupy exactly its present site; bat indications are not wanting that in
this neighbourhood there existed what was in some sort a native capital.
The central situation of the spot supports the supposition, and the
abundant archaeological remains with which we are familiar, are not
without significance in the same connection. But further we know, as I
have said, that a king of the Picts in the sixth century had his
residence at Inverness; and five centuries afterwards Macbeth had a
stronghold here. The conqueror of Macbeth, Malcolm Canmore, is said to
have erected a fortified place on the present Castle Hill; and soon
after*his day the Castle of Inverness was the most important stronghold
in the northern part of the kingdom. It is clear that the town, which
became a royal burgh in the twelfth century, was not then a new
creation. Its importance was only then recognised by William the Lion,
and it had previously been mentioned by David I. as one of the local
capitals of the realm. We do not say that in early days Inverness was a
populous place; but there seems little reason to doubt that it was the
residence of leading chiefs or princes, and in all probability the
capital of Moray-land.
After the departure of
the Romans, a century and a-half elapsed of which little is really
known. It appears, however, that about the year 498 or 500, a colony of
Scots came over from Ireland and settled in Kintyre. These Scots were
Christians, and the northern Picts were heathens; but in 563 Columba
arrived at Iona, and he and his successors converted the Picts to
Christianity. The visit of Columba to King Brude, at his palace near the
river Ness, does not enter into the scope of the present paper. What
then is the state of matters which we find existing in Scotland in the
seventh century We find four kingdoms—three of which are Celtic, and one
Teutonic. The largest of these consisted of the Picts, who occupied the
greater part of the territory north of the Firth of Forth; then we have
the Scots, who occupied the greater part of what is now Argyllshire ;
then the Britons, whose territory extended along the west from Clyde to
Cumberland ; and, lastly, the Angles, who held the east coast from the
Forth to the Humber. The Picts, though nominally united, consisted of
two divisions— one lying to the north, and the other to the south of the
Grampians; or, perhaps more exactly, one to the north, and the other to
the east and south of the Spey. Considering the nature of the country
and the tribal character of Celtic communities, it is not likely that
the union between the two parts was ever very strong; but they seem at
times to have recognised the same sovereign, and the feeling of race or
nationality was decided enough to induce them to combine against a
common enemy. The southern Picts were subjected to the more frequent
attacks, and they were more liable than their northern confederates to
have their customs gradually broken down by contact or collision with
aggressive neighbours. To this fact is to be attributed the separation
which ultimately took place between the two sections of the Pictish
race, and the greater tenacity with which our northern forefathers clung
to their native forms of law and government.
The order of royal
succession among the Picts is acknowledged to have been peculiar.
Brothers might succeed one another, but failing these, the relationship
was reckoned through the female line. The list of monarchs, we are told,
“does not present a single instance of a son directly succeeding his
father.” When brothers failed, the throne passed to the sons of sisters,
or to the nearest male relation on the female side. In the Scottish
kingdom of Argyllshire the custom was different. There the law of
Tanistry prevailed; that is, the most competent male member of the royal
house was chosen, under the name of Tanist, to lead the armies and to
succeed to the crown. Latterly, under the influence of the Teutonic
element, the succession from father to son began to prevail south of the
Grampians, and the resistance to this innovation led to frequent and
sanguinary contests. Here again it may be desirable to point out that
the northern Celts were, as we should expect, the last to acquiesce in
the new order of things.
The struggles between the
four kingdoms were fierce and protracted. The Argyllshire or Dalriadic
Scots maintained a long friendship with the northern Picts, but to the
east and south they, for a time, carried everything before them. Their
conquering career however was brought to a close in 642, when their
king, Donald Breac, was slain in a battle with the Britons of
Strathclyde. Next the Angles obtained supremacy, extending their empire
over Strathclyde, Dalriada, and the southern Picts. During this period
the northern Picts, sheltered behind the Grampians, retained their
independence. The tribes of the north selected as their king a scion of
the royal house named Bredei, who is recorded to have laid siege, in
680, to Dunbeath, in Caithness. He is also said to have laid waste the
Orkney Islands, and turning southwards he attempted, in concert with the
Dalriadic Scots, to make head against Ecgfrid, the powerful Anglican
King. In the plains of the Lowlands he had little chance of success, but
Ecgfrid had the temerity to advance northwards, and in 685 he was cut
off with his army in attempting to penetrate the mountain chain at
Dunnichen, in Forfarshire. Bredei once more united the Piets, but the
connection between south and north appears to have been looser than
ever. Religious dissensions helped forward separation. The Columban
Church had hitherto been independent of Rome, but the latter was
gradually pushing its way northward from England. The date for the
observance of Easter was a source of constant dispute, and in 710 King
Nectan submitted to Rome and adopted Latin customs. Not content with
this, he expelled the Columban clergy from the southern districts, where
his authority was supreme, and the exiles sought refuge among the Scots,
and probably also in the more remote districts of the northern Picts. It
would be superfluous to dwell upon this ecclesiastical quarrel here; we
merely note it as another of the forces which tended to break up the
unity of the Pictish kingdom.
Angus, a powerful king of
the Picts, who reigned from 731 to 761, conquered the Scots and turned
Dalriada into a Pictish province. Sometime afterwards, about 780, there
occurred, according to Mr. Skene, the first distinct breach in the
Pictish law of sue* cession. Through contact and occasional alliance
with the Saxony the southern Piets were now becoming familiar with alien
practices, and they accordingly chose Talorgan, the son of Angus, to be
their sovereign, while the northern provinces adhered to a king named
Drest, who, we may presume, was according to their law the legitimate
monarch. The breach appears to have been healed, but soon the attacks of
a new foe distracted the weakly-compacted kingdom. In 793 the Norsemen
descended upon the island of Lindisfarne, and for a long period they
continued periodically to alarm and devastate the country. Orkney became
an important seat of their power; Caithness became the patrimony of a .N
orse earl Norse vessels carried terror tilong the west coast and
throughout the western islands, where for a time the invaders were
supreme. The shores of the Moiay Firth became the scene of frequent
visitations, and indeed all parts of the coast* east and west, suffered
from these piratical inroads. During the period of confusion and anarchy
which occurred, a new dynasty established itself south of the Grampians.
Kenneth Macalpin, a Dalriadic Scot, but connected in some way with the
Pictish royal family, made good his claims with the sword. In 844 he
became firmly seated on the throne, and founded a line of sovereigns who
succeeded one another according to the law of Tanistry. But Mr. Skene
shows that their power was confined at first to the provinces of the
southern Picts, and their enemies were for a long time too numerous to
permit any extension of their sovereignty over the northern provinces.
We have now in some
measure disentangled the history of our northern district, and may
continue to follow more closely its individual fortunes. Our position is
that from the first the union between the northern and southern Picts
was but a slight confederacy —that from the nature of the country and
the known customs of Celtic tribes, it could not well have been
otherwise; that in course of time the connection was weakened by
transformations among the southern Picts; and that during the anarchy in
the middle of the ninth century, the northern district, or so much of it
as the Norse did not actually conquer, became virtually independent The
great northern province was Moravia, or Moray, which seems to have
extended, in its widest sense, from the river Spey on the east, to the
watershed of the present county of Boss on the west; and from Loch Lochy
on the south, to the Kyle of Sutherland on the north. From the few
indications that exist it is natural to infer—we should say it is almost
certain—that Inverness was the capital of this region. The native
rulers, styled Maormora—sometimes, indeed, called Kings— had by no means
an easy position. The Norse power, which had established its footing in
Caithness and Sutherland, pressed them on the one side, the Scottish
Kings on the other; and the recollection of this simple fact will help
to clear up much that would otherwise be unintelligible in our early
local history. We may believe that the princes of Moray and their people
cherished an almost equal dislike to their northern and southern foes.
The one was a race of pirates, the other of degenerate Celts; and the
primary duty of the Moraymen was to preserve their own independence and
the purity of their native laws. Unfortunately, the Maorrnor of Moray
was unable to cope single-handed either with the Earl of Caithness and
Orkney, or with the King of Scotia. In times of ’ extremity he was
obliged to ally himself with the one or the other, to help the Norsemen
against the Scots, or the Scots against the Norsemen. The sea-kings with
their swift vessels were at first his most dreaded antagonists. The
kings of Scotia were more remote and had other affairs on hand; but when
they found opportunity,1 they were not slow in advancing sovereign
claims and pushing their arms beyond the mountains. It was only after
long resistance that these claims were made good by the superiority of
the southerns in resources and armament. We shall see that Macbeth, the
most famous Maormor of Moray, had no scruple in allying himself with the
Norsemen, in order to get rid of King Duncan, and effect a partition of
the kingdom.
The first Norse leader
.who over-ran Moray was Thorstein the Red (875), a son of the Norse king
of ’Dublin. His power, however, only lasted for a single year; and the
next successful invader was Sigurd, the first Earl of Orkney, who
flourished towards the close of the same century. He over-ran Caithness,
Sutherland, Ross, and Moray, and built a tower at a spot which is
conjectured to have been Burghead. His chief antagonist was Mselbrigda
the Toothed, Maormor of Moray. Both came to an untimely end. They had
agreed to meet in conference, each with a guard of forty men, but Sigurd,
professing to be afraid of treachery, mounted eighty men on forty
horses. Mselbrigda advancing to meet him detected the deception, and at
once resolved to fight, exclaiming “let us be brave and kill each his
man before we die.” At Sigurd’s command half his men dismounted to
attack the enemy in rear; and the Celtic chief and all his party being
overpowered by numbere were slain. Sigurd and his followers fastened the
heads of their victims to their saddle straps and rode away in triumph.
But the feature which had given Mselbrigda his designation was the means
of retribution. In kicking at his horse, Sigurd scratched his leg with
the protruding tooth, and the wound proved fatal. The body of the Earl
was buried in a mound at a place called Ekkialsbakki, the site of which
is uncertain. Bakki meaning bank, Mr. Anderson indentifies the name with
the river Oykell (“ Bank of the Oykell ”) which divides the counties of
Boss and Sutherland, and falls into the Dornoch Firth. The exact spot he
considers to be Cyderhall, a name which is a corruption of Siddera, that
in its turn being a contraction for Siwardhoch, the designation given to
the place in a deed of the thirteenth century. Mr. Skene takes a
different view. From an examination of the narrative he arrives at the
conclusion that the meeting between Sigurd and Meelbrigda must have
taken place near the southern boundary of Moray. He is also of opinion
that the light occurred in the neighbourhood of Forres, and that the
remarkable sculptured stone near that town is a record of it. The stone
appears to tell the tale which has just been narrated. Among the
representations upon it is a leader with a head hanging at his girdle,
followed by three trumpeters sounding for victory, and surrounded by
decapitated bodies and human heads. Mr. Skene believes Ekkialsbakki to
mean the banks of the Find-horn. When digging into a mound close to the
Forres pillar, in 1813, eight human skeletons were found, and in 1827
there was dug out of a steep bank above the river a coffin of large
dimensions, composed of flagstones, containing the remains of a human
skeleton.
Whatever supremacy Sigurd
may have established, it does not seem to have survived his death. The
native chiefs of Moray resumed their independence, although they still,
no doubt, had conflicts to sustain with the great and aggressive
northern power. The southern monarchy was also ambitious of extending
its sway. It is recorded that Malcolm [942-954] made the first attempt
to push the power of the kings of Scotia beyond the Spey. He invaded the
province of Moray and slew its ruler, Cellach, but does not appear to
have made a conquest. A little later the Scottish kings extended claims
to Caithness, but their dominion there was at first even more shadowy
than in Moray. Such pretensions are natural to lan aspiring central
monarchy, and in the end generally come to be realised. Caithness and
Orkney were not always under the same earl. After a temporary separation
they were re-united by the marriage of Thorfinn, the skull-cleaver, with
the daughter of Duncan, jarl of Caithness. A series of quarrels occurred
among their sons, which are only notable in so far as that one of the
claimants received the support of Magbiodr, Maormor of Moray, and the
King of Scotia. Their assistance, however, was unavailing. The brother
in possession triumphed; and soon afterwards his nephew, a second Sigurd,
who entered on the earldom about the year 980, re-established the
supremacy of the Norsemen over the north of Scotland and the western
islands. The conquest, of course, was not accomplished without a severe
struggle. Finlay, another Maormor of Moray, brother to Magbiodr,
collected a large force and entered Caithness. At first Sigurd was
unable to cope with him. There were seven Scotsmen for one
Norwegian—odds which even the bold Scandinavian rovers were unable to
face. To gain assistance, Sigurd propitiated the Orkney freeholders by
restoring lands which they had resigned to his great grandfather; and
with augmented forces, he attacked the Scots and completely defeated
them. The mainland was now open for an advance; and in a few years the
authority of Sigurd was acknowledged from the Pentland to the Spey. The
King of Scotland continued the struggle with great spirit, but in the
end the rivals came to terms and formed an alliance. The friendship was
cemented by the marriage of the Norse chief with a daughter of Malcolm
II. Sigurd, born a heathen, was converted to Christianity by a peculiar
process. Olaf Tryggveson, the first Christian King of Norway, returning
from an expedition in 997, seized the Earl as he lay under the island of
Hoy with a single ship. Being offered the choice of baptism or death,
Sigurd chose to declare himself a convert, and became nominally a
subject of King Olaf. Yet seventeen years afterwards, at the battle of
Clontarff, in Ireland, we find him fighting in the ranks of the heathen,
and piling the field with Christian dead. In the heat of the contest
Sigurd was cut down by the Irish champion, Murcadh, and his fell was the
signal for the flight of the Norwegians.
We now approach a period
of peculiar interest in the history of Moray. On the death of Qigurd,
the province resumed its old position, and its Maormor, Finlay, is
described in the Ulster annals under a kingly title, indicating that he
claimed to be independent of both his neighbours. In 1020 he was slain
by his nephews ; but he was succeeded in his semi-sovereignty by his son
Macbeth, whose name has obtained such singular prominence in history and
dramatic literature. In 1034, King Malcolm of Scotland died, leaving two
grandsons who were destined to be fierce opponents. Duncan, the heir to
the throne, was the son of a princess married to Crinan, abbot of
Dunkeld; while Thorfinn, Earl of Caithness and Orkney, was the offspring
of another daughter, married, as we have seen, to Earl Sigurd. Macbeth
was in a difficult position, placed as he was between the two ambitious
cousins. His own wife was connected with the Scottish royal house, being
either the sister or the near kinswoman of a prince whom King Duncan’s
grandfather had slain. The presumption is that this unfortunate prince
was, according to the custom of the times, a dangerous rival to the
succession of Duncan. Thus Macbeth, through his wife, had a feud with
the dynasty which circumstances might at any moment quicken into
activity.
Thorfinn, Earl of
Caithness, was a man of energy and capacity, well-fitted to hold his own
in those wild times. He was only five years old when his father died,
and at fourteen he was a leader of maritime expeditions, ready, as his
bard said, “to defend his own land, or to ravage in another’s.” He is
described as a man of very large stature, uncomely, sharp-featured, dark
haired, sallow, and swarthy. Avaricious, harsh, cruel, and clever;
greedy of wealth and renown; bold and successful in war, and a great
strategist— such are the epithets iu which his character and powers are
summed up. Thorfinn had three half-brothers older than himself, among
whom the Orkneys were divided, while he received the Earldom of
Caithness. The death of two of his brothers, and an alliance with the
third, put him in possession of the islands, and thus he became a great
chief like his father Sigurd. His cousin Duncan, suspicious of his
growing power, wished to dispossess him of Caithness, or at least to lay
it under tribute. Earl Thorfinn refused to part with any of his rights,
and so war broke out. Duncan nominated a nephew of his own, named Moddan,
to be Earl of Caithness, and sent him down to collect forces in
Sutherland. This seems to have been the beginning of the conflict in
which King Duncan was to lose kingdom and life.
In such a struggle it was
important to secure the assistance of the great Maormor of Moray. "We
may believe that Macbeth aided Duncan from the outset. The Norsemen were
the nearest and most bitter foes of the Moravian Celts. In former times
they had once and again overrun the province, and Macbeth, like King
Duncan, must have viewed the increasing power of Thorfinn with great
distrust. If Duncan claimed his service as a tributary chief, Macbeth
probably waived such questions for the present, in order to deal with
his dangerous enemy in Caithness. But whatever the actual circumstances
were, we see no reason to doubt that the Maormor of Moray was an ally of
the king, and thus by his subsequent conduct laid himself open to the
charge of treachery, which has ever been associated with his name.
Without having a base of operations on the south side of the Moray
Firth, King Duncan could scarcely have carried on the war in the far
north. The precise relation of Sutherland to the northern rivals seems
uncertain. Very probably the people of that district detested Norse
rule, so that it was easy for Moddan to obtain support among them,
Thorfinn possessed a
valuable coadjutor in Thorkel Fostri, who is described as the most
accomplished man in all the Orkneys. He was bold and capable; be had
spoken up for the freeholders against the tyranny of a former Earl, and
tifeing compelled to flee, he took up his residence in Caithness, and
became foster-father to Thorfinn, who was then young. It was mainly
through this man's influence that Thorfinn gradually extended his
authority over the Orkneys. When the dispute occurred between the Earl
and his royal cousin, Thorkel raised a strong force in the Orkney
islands, and crossed to the mainland, and Duncan’s vassal, Moddan, found
himself obliged to retire. The Norse army carried its victorious arms
through Sutherland and Ross, and returned with great plunder to Duncans-bay.
The Scottish King determined on a more formidable attack. Moddan was
again despatched with troops to Caithness, while the King with a fleet
of eleven vessels sailed northwards along the coast. Thorfinn had only
five warships, but he gave battle in the Pentland Fiith, and inflicted a
severe defeat upon his opponent. Thorfinn is depicted, of course by
friendly chroniclers, as taking an active personal part in the fight,
cheering on his men, and urging, them to board the enemy’s ships. He
grappled with the royal vessel itself, and, shouting for his banner,
rushed on board. King Duncan escaped by jumping into another boat, and
hurrying off as fast as oars could carry him. The spirited description
of the fight by Thorfinn’s bard may be quoted :—
“Then the ships were
lashed together—
Know ye how the men were failing?
All their swords and boards were swimming
In the life-blood of the Scotsmen;
Hearts were sinking—bowstrings screaming,
Darts were flying—spear shafts bending;
Swords were biting, blood flowed freely,
And the Prince’s heart was merry.”
King Duncan escaped to
the coast of Moray, and hastened south to collect a fresh army. In the
interval, the Norse enjoyed rare opportunities for plundering, and the
ambitious Moddan—the rival Earl of Caithness—came to an untimely end.
While the Norsemen were ravaging in Moray, they heard that Moddan had
established himself with a large army at Thurso, and was awaiting more
troops from Ireland. The ever-ready Thorkel Fostri was equal to the
occasion. He marched north secretly, we are told, and was befriended by
the inhabitants of Caithness, who were true and faithful to him; “and no
news went of his journey,” says the story, “till he came to Thurso by
night, and surprised Earl Moddan in a house, which they set on fire.
Moddan was asleep in an upper storey, and jumped out; but as he jumped
down from the stair, Thorkel hewed at him with a sword, and it hit him
on the neck, and took off his head. After this his men surrendered, but
some escaped by flight. Many were slain, but some received quarter.”
After this feat, Thorkel Tejoined his chief with all the men he could
collect in Sutherland, Caithness, and Boss.
Meantime King Duncan
hurried north with a powerful army, collected from all parts of
Scotland, and including the forces which Earl Moddan had expected from
Ireland. Mr. Skene conjectures that Macbeth now filled the place which
Moddan had formerly occupied as leader of the King’s army. The battle
took place at a spot called Torfnes, which Mr. Anderson supposes to be
Tarbetness, but which Mr. Skene believes to be Burghead. “The Scots,” to
quote the Saga once more, “were by far the most numerous. Earl Thorfinn
was among the foremost of his men; he had a gold-plated helmet on his
head, a sword at his belt, and a spear in his hand, and he cut and
thrust with both hands. It is even said that he was foremost of all his
men. He first attacked the Irish division, and so fierce were he and his
men, that the Irish were immediately routed, and never regained their
position. Then King Kali had his standard brought forward against Earl
Thorfinn, and there was the fiercest struggle for a while; but it ended
in the flight of the king, and some say he was slain.” It is added that
Thorfinn conquered as far as Fife; and he became so enraged at a
threatened insurrection, that he harried the country, leaving scarcely a
hut standing. In the words of the Norse bard, “the flames devoured the
homesteads,” and the Scottish kingdom—meaning, we suppose, the eastern
Lowlands—“was reduced to smoking ashes.” “After this,” adds our
authority, “Thorfinn went through Scotland to the north until he reached
his ships, and subdued the country where-ever he went, and did not stop
till he came to Caithness, where he spent the winter; but every season
after that he went out on expeditions, and plundered in the summer time
with all his men.”
Two observations may be
made at this point; one that Macbeth is not mentioned in the Saga, and
the other that King Duncan is not designated by his historical name, but
is spoken of as King Kali Hundason, the son of the hound. Mr. Anderson,
therefore, does not absolutely identify Kali with Duncan, although he
acknowledges the probability that they were one and the same. Mr. Skene,
however, expresses little doubt on the point; and unless the annalists
are entirely wrong in their dates, there seems in reality no doubt
possible. At the time when, according to the Saga, this war occurred,
Duncan was unquestionably king of Scotland. All the other known
circumstances lead to the same conclusion. The fact that Macbeth is not
mentioned in the Saga is of no importance, for the Norse chroniclers
were not likely to pay any attention to him or his doings.
The question now arises,
What part did Macbeth really act at the crisis of the war? That he
joined Thorfinn is obvious, for he afterwards reigned peacefully over a
large portion of Scotland, owing, as is believed, to his alliance with
the Norse power. But when or how did he desert Duncan? Of course we are
here in the region of conjecture ; but the story we have been following
is not inconsistent with other narratives, and we must just interpret
the circumstances to the best of our ability. A contemporary chronicler
states that Duncan was slain in 1040 by his general, Macbeth. It is
probable that, seeing the cause of the King ruined, the Maormor of Moray
determined to forsake his standard and ally himself with his successful
rival. He knew the strength and the ruthlessness of the Norsemen from
the experience of his predecessors; and though he could doubtless have
found safety amidst the mountain fastnesses of the interior, he would
naturally have been reluctant to become a defeated and broken-down
fugitive. He was also an ambitious man; and revolving all the chances,
and difficulties of the situation, he may well have resolved to
sacrifice the Scottish sovereign to his own desires or necessities. If
he wanted to make his peace with Thorfinn, what more acceptable gift
could he bring than the head of King Duncan? Besides, as we have seen,
the southern kingdom had been pressing its own claims over Morayland.
Macbeth had no wish to be subordinate to the King of Scotia. He held
that he was himself an independent prince; and here was a good
opportunity once for all to destroy Scottish pretensions, or perhaps, if
Thorfinn was favourable, to seize upon the Scottish throne. His wife,
desirous to avenge her kinsman, doubtless encouraged such projects. Thus
influenced, it is reasonable to suppose that Macbeth slew Duncan after
the battle, and threw in his lot with Thorfinn. Their combined forces
ravaged the country east and south, and a partition of the kingdom
appears to have followed. The rule of Thorfinn was acknowledged
throughout the district north of the Grampians, while Macbeth ruled over
the central territory. Mr. Skene thinks that Cumbria and Lothian
remained faithful to the children of Duncan.
It is useless to discuss
the question where King Duncan was slain. It is certain that he was not
assassinated in the present Cawdor Castle, for that building was not in
existence until 400 years after his death. He may have been killed in
MacbetVs rath or stronghold at Inverness, but this is mere conjecture.
The older authorities state that he was murdered near Elgin at
Bothgofuane or Bothgowan, which is said to be Gaelic for a blacksmith’s
hut. If the decisive battle took place at Burghead, there is nothing
improbable in believing that he was killed in a wayside hut, while
fleeing from the victorious Norsemen.
The reign of Macbeth
extended to seventeen years, and was comparatively peaceful and
prosperous. The power of Thorfinn helped to render his throne secure;
but something must also have been due to the Conservative elements still
existing in the Scottish kingdom. The innovations which had been
previously introduced could not have failed to create a certain measure
of discontent. The old Pictish law of succession through the female line
had been abandoned; the law of Tanistry had next been undermined by
Teutonic influences; and to the southern Celts it may have been
satisfactory to obtain a Gaelic king like Macbeth, especially as he was
connected by his wife with their own royal family. Macbeth was in
reality the last truly Celtic king of Scotland. By the oldest writers he
is represented as a liberal and popular sovereign. Qe and his queen
twice gave grants of land to the Culdees of Loch-Leven, and Macbeth and
Thorfinn appear to have visited Rome in 1050, where the Scottish king
freely distributed silver to the poor. Several attempts were made to
dethrone him, but until 1057 without success. In that year Malcolm
Canmore, advancing from Northumberland, attacked him with a powerful
force. Macbeth was driven across the Mounth, and slain at Lumphanan in
Marr, where there is still a large cairn known as Cairnbeth. The causes
of Malcolm’s success are uncertain. The only conjecture Mr. Skene can
offer is that the warlike Thorfinn was dead and the Norse power in
decay.
The events that followed
Macbeth's death were shortly narrated by the essayist. By his victory in
1187, William the lion strengthened the central authority; and the
castles which he built at Redcastle and Dunscath (on the north side of
the Cromarty Firth) overawed the spirit of the north-eastern Celts.
Disturbances occurred often enough in subsequent times; but, on the
whole, after his day the power of the Scottish throne was generally
acknowledged in Morayland. |