The Aird
What follows is an attempt to tease out the ownership and assessment of the Aird.
Firstly we should note the spelling variants, e.g.
Ard, Arde, Aird
Beufort, Beuforte, Bewfort, Bewfurd, Beaufort
We also find references to the:
Barony of Arde
Barony of Bewfort
Strathglass
Lordship of the Ard
Lordship of the Arde & Straithglasche
Lordship of Bewfort,
Lordship of Bewfort in the Ard etc
We are talking about extensive lands over a long period of time. For the purposes of this study my focus is on the use of terms such as Ard or Bewfort in describing estates rather than geographies or legal entities. In the early mediaeval period some lords had huge possessions but they seldom, if ever, owned all the land. There were always parts, often very good parts, which belonged to the church. In some areas there were also properties, or estates, that did not form part of the possessions of the greatest lords. We should be wary of descriptions which imply the complete possession of one area by one family.
The setting for this documentary trail is the inheritance of, firstly, the Bissets and then the families who succeeded them: the Fentons/Fentouns, the Grahams, the family of del Ard, the Haliburtons, the Chisholms and the Frasers. Sources include: the listings given below from RMS, RSS, ER etc; ‘Registrum Episcopatus Moraviensis’, Edinburgh, 1837; ‘The Charters of the Priory of Beauly’ by E.C. Batten, London, 1877 and ‘The Fentons of the Aird, 1253-1422’ by Alexander Fraser in The Celtic Magazine, Vol II, Inverness, 1877. Some parts of this story are more opaque than others and the family of del Ard remain shadowy. In places I have followed the late-nineteenth century family histories although the details can be skimpy and the processes of inheritance not always clear. We know more about some of the Fentoun family than others. Some farms in the Aird are better documented, some less well. It is to be hoped that more of this detail can be fleshed out in future. This is just about trying to establish the skeleton.
It appears that the Bissets arrived in the area in the last decades of the 12th century and were endowed with an enormous holding by King William the Lion. In the area of Kirkhill, Convinth and Kiltarlity parishes John Bisset had 19 davachs (plus Buntait in Glenuquhart parish) in the years 1220-21. But he also held land in the Black Isle and Kilravock. In Kilmorack parish John gave perhaps 5 davachs to his family’s new foundation of Beauly Priory some time before 1231. A younger John Bisset died 1259/60 and left his estates to three daughters, Cecilia, Elizabeth and Muriel.
The evidence for this is found in two documents – concerning lands in Ireland – printed in Vol II of Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. J. Bain, Edinburgh, 1884. The first, No. 129 (p 28) of c. 27/10/1278, tells us the three daughters of the deceased John Biset were, from oldest to youngest, Cecilia, Elizabeth and Mulrella. They each appointed their husbands – William de Fentone, Andrew de Boys and David de Graham respectively – to receive their share of John’s lands in the king’s court. The second, No 163 (pp 49-50) of 10/8/1279, deals with an ‘extent’ or formal assessment of the lands of the late John Biset in Ulster. John is stated to have died 19 years previously. His nearest heirs are given as William de Fenton and Cecilia his wife, Andrew de Bosco and Elizabeth his wife, and David de Graham and Muriel his wife – those ladies being his (i.e. John’s) daughters, and of age.
If we then follow the descendants of Cecilia, Elizabeth and Muriel through the Scottish documentary records we should be able to track what happened to the respective shares and so build a better picture of the original Bissett estate. Of the three families the Fenton(e)s (also Fentoun(e)s) are perhaps the easiest to map. Just as with the Bissets, the Fenton inheritance disintegrated when the last male heir, William Fentoun, died between about 1415/16 & 1422, whereupon his estate was divided between his four daughters. Each daughter had a quarter-share of their father’s lands and by following these through to the late fifteenth-century we can reconstitute a Fenton ‘Beaufort’ estate of 6 davachs.
(However the Fentoun estate had earlier lost four half-davachs in a marriage contract of 1415/16 described in 3) below. They are described as being in the Barony of Arde. Possibly these should be added to the six davachs of Beaufort which would mean the Fentouns had eight davachs and therefore the Bissetts twenty-four).
Elizabeth Bisset married Andrew de Bosco (also de Boscho or de Boys), Lord of the Redcastle or Eddyrdor, opposite the Aird in Ardmeanach (Ross). (Batten, Beauly No VII pp 63-73, 1278). They had a daughter called Marie or Mariot who married a Hugh de Rose. After Andrew de Bosco’s death his widow, Elizabeth, described as Lady of Kelrevoch, gave Kilrevoch (Kilravock) to her daughter and son-in-law. (Family of Rose of Kilravock, Edinburgh, 1848, pp 28-9). Later (>= 1292) she resigned the same lands into the hands of King John Balliol for the same purpose. (Family of Rose of Kilravock, p 29). According to p 27 of Family of Rose of Kilravock, Andrew de Bosco and Elizabeth also had a son called Sir John de Bosco who died without male heirs. John de Bosco had 3 daughters, all of whom resigned any claim on Kilravock. (See Mackenzie, History of the Chisholms, p 32; Batten p 67; Family of Rose of Kilravock pp 113-115, 119, for details). This portion of the ancient Bisset estate then remained with the Kilravock family. To this Bisset portion we should add, at least, the davach of Kilcoy in Ardmeanach (Family of Rose of Kilravock pp 109-111).
The rest of that third of the Bisset estate which belonged to Elizabeth seems to have passed into the hands of a shadowy family described as ‘del Ard’ or ‘of the Ard/Aird’. There are several passing references to members of this family in the public records. We know of a William fitz Stevene de Arde in 1296 (Ragman Roll); a Christian de Ard in 1312 (GD82/4), as recipient of a charter in 1325 (RRS V (270) & GD52/390), and as a witness in 1328 (Batten, No X pp 83-4); Harold, the son of Donald del Ard c. 1315 (Batten, No VIII pp 74-77); a Godfrey del Arde in or before 1342 (ER I pp 503-4) and dead before 7/6/1362 (RRS VI (359)); a Margaret del Ard who was daughter of Godfrey del Ard and wife of Alexander Chisholm (RRS VI (359) 1366 on original agreement of 1362). There was also an Alexander del Ard who was the son of a marriage between Welandus de Ard and Matilda, daughter of Malise, Earl of Strathearn, by his first marriage. This Alexander had, through his mother, important rights in Strathearn and Caithness and features in the public records in the 1370s (RMS I (600-601) 1376-7, (614-5, 708-9) 1374-5). He appears to have died without legitimate issue. Margaret, Lady of Ard/Arde, appears in a marriage contract of January 1400/1401 which touches on the recovery of certain lands in Sutherland and Caithness (see below and Liber Insule Missarum pp l-li). Margaret de le Ard de Ercles and her son, Thomas de Chisholm, appear in RMS I (942) 1413, on original indenture of 1403.
It is difficult untangling this family and there remain uncertainties. It has been thought that there was one Margaret del Ard, who was sister of Alexander. But we then have to explain how the first Margaret was fathered by Godfrey and the second by Weland. Some attempts to unravel the family can be found in Charters of Inchaffray Abbey, SHS 1908, pp lxx-lxxi; Batten, Charters of the Priory of Beauly (1877) pp 94-5, 303; Mackenzie, History of the Chisholms (1891). For Alexander see also Crawford, The Northern Earldoms, pp 325-9 and Sinclair, Caithness Events, pp 157-160, 171.
In the late nineteenth century Christian de Ard of RRS V (270) & GD52/390 was identified with Christian de Forbes (Batten pp 84-6 and Mackenzie, History of the Chisholms pp 34-5). However, A & H Tayler, authors of ‘The House of Forbes’, Aberdeen, 1937, pp 13, 17-20, cast serious doubt on this attribution. Nevertheless, there remains a sentiment that would tie together the families of de Bosco, del Ard and Forbes. James Fraser, author of the Wardlaw MS (1666-c.1699), writes (p. 98) – of the time of Hugh Fraser of Lovat (obit c. 1450) – ‘the Forbes also were in Glenstrafarrer, his contemporaries, a numerous civil clan, did hurt to non whatever’. At this distance, and without fuller documentary sources, it is impossible to know what truth there is in these claimed family connections. What does seem certain is that most of Elizabeth Bisset’s third share of her father’s estates (c. 1259-1279) came down – by inheritance – to the Margaret del Ard who married Alexander Chisholm a generation before 1401.
Margaret del Ard was also known as Lady of Erchless and was plainly a significant landholder in the area. In 1401 there is an agreement between Margaret and her son-in-law Angus, son of Godfrey of the Isles. Details are given in Mackenzie, History of the Chisholms pp 36-8. It concerns the recovery of lands in Strathnaver, Sutherland and Caithness. What the agreement also reveals is that the davach of Croicheal and the half-davach of Comar Kinbaddy (both in Strathglass) belonged to Margaret del Ard and were presumably ex-Bisset lands.
Alexander Chisholm died before 1401 and was succeeded by his son, Thomas. In 1) of 1403 (below) Margaret del Ard and her son, Thomas, came to an agreement with William de Fentoun who had another one-third of the Bisset estate by inheritance from the Cecilia of 1279. The business of division was always fraught since it touched on issues of equity and fairness. Sometimes different farms went to different families. Sometimes the farms themselves were divided (e.g. Altyre (Kilmorack) amongst the Bissets (⅓ each); or Inglistoun between the Bissets (¾ to Elizabeth, ¼ to Cecilia?) and then Cecilia’s ¼ among the four Fentoun heiresses at 1/16th each)! Most of the subsequent debate seems to have been about other Bisset lands since it was agreed in 1403 that the lands in Aird should remain divided as they had been formerly. No detail is given but the absence of controversy on this point does suggest that the successful division of the Aird may date back as far as the period 1259-79.
Thomas was succeeded by his son, another Alexander Chisholm, who died without male issue and his one-third of the Bisset inheritance went to Catherine, his daughter, who married Walter Haliburton of the family of Dirleton. We have two sources which claim this was the subject of a charter under the Great Seal although there is nothing apparent in the printed Register of the Great Seal (RMS). Robert Douglas, The Peerage of Scotland, 1764, pp 321-2 claims that Catherine got a charter to Pitcur (Angus) in 1432. This claim is repeated in J Balfour Paul, The Scots Peerage, Vol IV p 334, which gives the charter date as 16/2/1433. Balfour Paul’s source appears to be p 2 of Memorials of the Haliburtons, Edinburgh, 1820, which was based on a family register beginning c 1650. Whatever the precise circumstances it is certain that Margaret del Ard’s share of the Bisset estates in the Aird (and other estates such as Gask) now passed – through her great-granddaughter, Catherine – into the family of Haliburton. The properties occur frequently in the documents given below but it should be remembered they are part of the old Bisset estate – not the Fentoun subset. Catherine Chisholm features in later records such as GD220/1/A/1/10/1 1452, GD236/2/27 1452 & 1453-4, GD220/1/A/1/10/2 1453.
Although the connections with families from the south of Scotland can be surprising we should see this within its historical context. Families like the Frasers and the Chisholms have been viewed as Highland for centuries but they first arrived here as Anglo-Norman adventurers marched in by monarchs like William the Lion. The Bissets, Grahams, Frasers, de Boscos, Fentons, Chisholms were all part of that wave of Anglo-Norman settlers brought in by royal policy to pacify and control the north. The Scottish military aristocracy were small in number but closely interconnected. Time and again we see them marrying into each other’s families, witnessing each other’s charters. As the years rolled on so they were absorbed into their cultural environment. But to begin with they ensured their holdings remained within like-minded families.The career of a military adventurer was high-risk but the rewards were great. The estates secured by the Bissets and their associates in the north were enormous.
The third share of the Bisset estate was that which went to the Graham family via Muriel Bisset. Mackenzie, History of the Chisholms (1891), p 32, claims that after Muriel’s son, Patrick Graham, died without male issue, Muriel remarried a Fraser of Lovat – taking her Bisset share with her. In his History of the Frasers of Lovat (1896) p 36 he is less specific but claims the Lovat lands came to the Frasers from the Grahams by marriage. He gives Skene, ‘The Highlanders of Scotland’ as his source. Skene (1902 edition, p 378) makes this claim but without quoting any authority. Batten (1877, pp 88-89) declares it a mystery. In short, this is probably how the Frasers acquired the Graham share but we currently lack the documentary evidence. Nevertheless Hugh Fraser, Lord of Lovat, is described in the Register of Moray (No’s 286 & 287, pp 368-9) as a ‘portionarius’ or ‘partionarius’ (i.e. part-possessor) of the lands of the Ard in 1367. Exactly the same term is used to describe William de Fenton, Lord of Bewfourd, in 1359 (No 285 pp 367-8). While in No 288 p 369 of 1368 Alexander de Chesolme (Chisholm) is described as a ‘comportionarius’ (i.e. co-possessor) of William de Fenton in the lands of Kiltarlity with the Ess (see also No’s 285-7). By 1368 it is clear the Bisset heritage in the Aird was shared between the Fentons, the Chisholms and the Frasers. Given the grant by Patrick de Graham of his one-third of Altyre (Batten No IX pp 78-82) in or before 1325 we can date the change from Graham to Fraser to the period 1325-1367.
The Wardlaw Manuscript (p 63) makes an interesting comment about the core of the estate held by the Frasers of Lovat. Writing of an early Simon Fraser (and allowing licence for doubt over precise names and dates) the author states:
All the interest and estate he had was Morvin or Lovet, Dochinbunach, Bailbrea, Fingasck, Lussnicorn, Cingily, the two Moniaks, Fochiness, the two davachs of Muy, Dunins, and Glenconventh.
A number of these properties feature in the Register of Moray (No’s 21 & 51) among the 19 davachs held by John Bisset in 1220-1. They include A’Mhormhoich or Lovat (1 davach, Kirkhill), Fingask (1 davach, Kirkhill), Lusnacorn (1 davach, Kirkhill), Moniack (2 davachs, Kirkhill), Phoineas (1 davach, Kiltarlity), Moy (2 davachs, Kiltarlity), Dounie (1 davach, Kiltarlity), Convinth (1 davach lay property, Kiltarlity). Cingily is Kingillie, Kirkhill; Bailbrea & Dochinbunach (where doch- < davach) are probably connected with Donaldston (Kirkhill) – see ST2 pp 231-5 & also under Donaldston in Kirkhill Table. We cannot take the Wardlaw Manuscript completely at face value since parts of Glen Convinth, the two Moys, Kingillie, Downie & Moniak belonged to families other than the Frasers in earlier times. However some farms in this estate seem to have always been theirs and probably came directly from the original Bisset holding, viz: A’Mhormhoich or Lovat, Dochinbunach & Bailbrea (=Donaldston), Fingask, Lusnacorn, Phoineas. These come to 5 davachs plus greater or lesser proportions of the other farms mentioned. The total value looks comparable to that held by the Fentons.
This complication about farms which were partitioned bedevils all attempts to reconstitute the original Bisset estate. It is fine when a particular farm travels, intact, down a family line. Where it becomes complcated – and it often does – is when a farm is internally divided and different parts are allocated to different families.
A further complication is thrown up by Beauly Priory. We only have some documentary records of Beauly Priory and these are dealt with by EC Batten in The Charters of the Priory of Beauly, London, 1877. Unfortunately we have no clear details as to its foundation although the Wardlaw MS (p 61) states that its bounds were ‘Inach tarridil to the east ad rivulum de Breckach westward’. W Mackay, the editor of the Wardlaw MS for the Scottish History Society, interprets ‘Inach tarridil’ as the moor or marketplace of Tarradale (presumably reading ‘inach’ for aonach) and ‘ad rivulum de Breckach’ as ‘to the Breakachie Burn’. The next paragraph in the Wardlaw MS goes on to describe the donation of the half-davach of Inach tarridil, mortified by Gillichrist a Rosse, granted ‘in burgo de Invernish’ (in the town of Inverness), March 1235. This paragraph bears an obvious relation to Batten’s Charter No VI pp 60-62.
The title given by Batten to No VI is that the charter is by David of Innerlunan of the land of ‘Auchterwaddalle seu [or] Onachterwadale’. The text states that David grants all his land there ‘ex consensu et voluntate Gillicrist Macgilliduffi’ (by the agreement and wish of Gilchrist Macgilliduffi). Apparently Gillicrist had already made over this land to Beauly by another charter. David holds this land at feu-farm from Gilchrist and it extends to half a davach. The place-name is spelled three times in the text as follows: Ouchterwaddale, Onachterwaddale and Onachteruedalle. In his part-translation Batten simply refers to the land as Ouchter-Tarradale.
I think this is misleading. The main part of the place name is simply Tarradale – then and later an important farm in Ross. The first element cannot be Ouchter or Auchter unless we presume the elision of Ter/Tar. ‘Auch’ (< achadh, field) is a possible prefix but I think unlikely here. The simplest explanation is to accept James Fraser’s Wardlaw MS transcription of ‘Inach’ for Gaelic ‘aonach’ (moor or marketplace). There remain problems. James Fraser gives 1235, Batten gives 1275; the former gives Inverness, the latter doesn’t. But notwithstanding these anomalies I think we can accept the existence of two charters granting a half-davach west of Tarradale to the new Beauly Priory.
How do the Wardlaw MS statements fit with what we know of the lands of Beauly Priory? At the east end of the Priory lands was apparently the half-davach of Aonach Tarradale. There is actually a Lettoch (an anglicised form of leth-davach – literally half-davach) at NH 536482. In 1757 Peter May produced a plan of the Estate of Lovat which had been forfeited or annexed after the last Jacobite Rising. This can be seen either as RHP6586 in the National Records of Scotland or as Lovat021 in the National Library of Scotland’s digital map library. Both of these clearly show Lettoch as being one of two farms at the extreme eastern end of the Lovat estate – the other, just north, is Ardnagrask. It is also marked at the eastern extremity of the Lovat lands in the Plan of Beauly (Lovat143 in the NLS digital map library) – bordering Tarradale. The thirteenth-century half-davach of Aonach Tarradale clearly survived as Lettoch – firstly as part of the Beauly Priory estate, latterly as part of the Lovat estate.
In the thirteenth century the western boundary of the Priory lands was what is now called the Breakachy Burn which runs into the River Beauly in NH 4744. Again, this burn (Autlvrachkakie – read Ault Vrachkakie) appears as the western boundary of the Lovat farms in Peter May’s plan of 1757. The Beauly Table (under Kilmorack parish, Ross) shows that most of the intervening farms belonged to Beauly Priory – except for Kilmorack – which presumably remained associated with the parish church.
Since the monks of Beauly Priory had no interest in preserving the old systems of land-division we have few references to davachs amongst the Priory lands. As a ‘guestimate’ I would reckon the value of lands between Aonach Tarradale and the Breakachy Burn to be 5-6 davachs. Although we can show that some Priory lands came from other donors it seems likely that the Bissets gave about 5 davachs in Kilmorack parish to their new foundation. Although life in the Priory came to an end during the sixteenth century many of the old patterns remained locked into the landscape. V Wills, Reports on the Annexed Estates, Edinburgh, 1973, pp 41-2, quotes from a 1755 document:
The barony of Beuly lyes on the north side of the Water of Beuly …This barony is all in the parish of Kilmorack (except the Mains of Tomich, Barnyards & Ardnagrask, which lyes in the parish of Urray) … This barony extends in length from Lettoch on the east to Inshlochell on the west 24 miles … and the east part of the barony, which lyes betwixt the kirk of Kilmorack on the west and Lettoch (formerly mentioned) on the east, being about three miles in length, is most excellent soil, the greatest part a clay bottom, & produces great plenty of good grain, viz. bear, rye, oats and pease, and on some farms there is very good pasture for black cattle and horses & tollerable pasture for sheep.
In sum the Bisset family founded their new monastic institution on prime land.
RMS IV (2020) 1571-2, on an original of 1571, deals with the estate of Beauly Priory. Amongst the lands were one-third of Meikle-Culmuling and the Easter Glen of Conveth, as well as a quarter of Faynblair. These are repeated in RMS V (2165) 1592 which affirms it is only one-third of the Easter Glen of Conveth. These documents help show Fanblair was originally a davach and shed light on the situation with Culmill. This latter is more difficult to interpret but if we take Culmill Beag as a ¼ davach then perhaps Culmill More was ¾ davach – of which ¼ davach (i.e. ⅓ of ¾) belonged to Beauly Priory. These divisions into thirds and quarters probably refer back to the Bisset and Fenton legacies. Batten (p 269) understood these fractions as clues to which family the original donor belonged to. If one-third then it was Bisset, if one-quarter then it was Fenton.
Between 1403 and 1568 we have a number of documentary sources describing parts of the Aird. I have examined the more significant ones with the aim of teasing out the ownership details over time and space. I have also put them into two files which accompany this text. One simply describes the 6 davach estate of the Aird which the 4 Fentoun daughters divided between them from about 1422. The second file attempts to offer a schematic where the data is assembled by individual farm. This helps reveal who had what, and when. With time, and further research, I hope this can be expanded.
The documentary sources I have used are:
1) 1403 – RMS I (942) 1413 and RMS II (3799) 1512-1513 reveal that in 1403 there had been an indenture between William de Fentoun and Margaret de Ard, lady of Ercles. Unfortunately they do not reveal much of the nature of the agreement between them as regards the Aird. Apparently an ordinance had been made at Dundee but we are given no details. The indenture is also given in GD236/2/27. The barony of Gask in Forfar (+ others) went to Margaret, lady of Ercles, and her son, Thomas, in exchange for renouncing their claims to other lands in Forfar, Perth and Lanark. This indenture is also noted in Memorials of the Haliburtons p 2 where we are told the lands divided were Gulas and Berlue. (It is possible that these two names are disguised forms of Glass [i.e. Strathglass] and Bewford). Although the original division must have taken place c. 1259-79 it seems that disputes – except in the Aird – rumbled on until being finally settled by this indenture of 1403. This is why, when we are first given details of the Haliburton estate in 1496 [RMS II (2320)] the family is referred to as Haliburtoun of Gask.
2) 1413 – RMS I (942) 1413 tells us that with regard to the Aird the lands would remain shared as they were anciently divided and the holding of them would follow the agreement at Dundee. Perhaps we may also infer that the agreement respected the earlier system of davachs and their boundaries?
3) 1415-16 – RMS II (178) 1430, on an original of 1415-16 – James I confirmed indentures between William de Fentoun and Hugh Fraser de Lowet whereby William granted Hugh and Jonet, (William’s sister – who was marrying Hugh), the lands of Ensowchtan (Guisachan), Kyrkomyr (Kirk Comar), Maule (Mauld) and Woster Eskdole (Wester Eskdale) lying in Strathglass, within the barony of the Arde, ‘in name and assent of 20 markis’. The last phrase is tricky but it likely means that the 4 properties had a total extent of 20 marks in 1415-16. Each of the 4 properties was probably worth 5 marks. Guisachan was a davach in 1221 but was later divided into two half-davachs and I think we are dealing with only one of these here. Kirk Comar was actually divided into four quarters and I think we are only dealing with two of them in 1415-16 – not the quarter called Clachan and not one of Balnahawen or Balnabruich. Mauld was a half-davach in 1637. The whole of Eskadale was a davach so it seems fair to assume that Easter and Wester Eskadale were each worth half a davach. We know that in this part of Inverness-shire (and some parts of Easter Ross) a davach was valued at 10 marks during the fifteenth century. It looks as if Hugh was getting 4 half-davachs worth a total of 20 merks. What this also tells us is that the Fenton estate before this contract was 2 davachs larger – totalling 8 rather than 6 davachs. If the Fentons had a third of the Bisset lands this implies the Bisset estate was actually (3 x 8 =) 24 davachs.
4) 1430 – RMS II (179) 1430 – James I confirmed to Hugh Fraser of Lowet lands detailed in a retour – specifically that Alex(ander), brother of Hugh, had died vest and seised in a third part of the barony of the Arde.
5) 1438-9 – (No Detail) – RMS II (220) 1439-40 – James II confirmed a charter (dated 1438-9) by Margaret de Fenton de Beufort, elder daughter of the late Walt(er) de F(enton) de B(eufort), and one of his heirs, which granted Walter Ogilby (her husband) the whole quarter part of her lands of Beufort and its manor, and the whole quarter part of her lands of Ard. (A fuller version is printed in Illustrations of the Topography and Antiquities of the Shires of Aberdeen and Banff, Vol IV, Aberdeen, 1862, pp 66-7).
6) 1448 – (No Detail) – RMS II (618) 1458 – James II confirmed a charter (dated 1448) by Joneta de Fentoun, one of the younger heirs of the late Walter de F(entoun), who granted her new husband William Haket the lands of a quarter part of Beuforte, in the Arde, and the lands of a quarter part of Strathglass. (She was the widow of Robert Stewart, son of the late Sir David Stewart of Rossitht).
7) 1458 – (No Detail) – RMS II (645) 1458 – James II granted Walter Lindesay de Kinblathmont (in Forfar) the lands of the barony of the Arde and Bewfort which Margaret de Fentoun had resigned.
For other lands resigned by Margaret de Fentoun to her Lindesay family see RMS II (630, 631) 1458.
8) 1459 – (No Detail) – RMS II (735) 1459 – James II granted Sir David Stewart, and Mariot his wife, ¼ of the lands of Ard & Strathglass; pertaining to the king by reason of the forfeiture of Sir James de Douglace and Joneta de Fentoune, his wife. (A fuller version is printed in Illustrations of the Topography and Antiquities of the Shires of Aberdeen and Banff, Vol IV, Aberdeen, 1862, pp 68-9).
9) 1470 – ER VIII p 60 1470-1 – This account, for the two terms (i.e. 1 year) between 10/7/1470 and 4/7/1471, tells us that Joneta Fentoune had given her lands in the lordship of Arde & Strathglasche to the king in perpetuity – in exchange for the Mains lands of Kinclevin to her and her husband, William Haket. This transaction is then referred to repeatedly in the ER accounts. (ER VIII pp 168 & 183 1473, p 416 1477; ER IX p 111 1481 – by which time William was dead; ER IX p 166 1482, p 396 1486, p 478 1487; ER X p 11 1488). The exchange is confirmed in RMS II (1368) 1477-8 where James III granted William Haket and Joneta Fentoun, his wife, the lands of Kinclevin, Perth, in compensation for ¼ of the lands of the barony of Bewfort, within the lordship of Arde & Straithglasche, which Joneta had granted the king. See also 6) above.
The ER accounts give the lands (with various spellings) as: Beufort, Menzeis, Belladrum, Kyntallerteyis (Kiltarlity), Monchrew (Bunchrew), Foppoquhy (Phopachy), Culbirny, Inglistoune. I am not sure if Menzeis is for Mains or Moys.
10) 1485 – (No Detail) – RMS II (1626) 1485 – James III confirmed a charter by Patrick Ogilvy de Calzhebroch (Kilbrochan) which granted his son Andrew the lands of a quarter part of the barony of … Arde. See 14) below.
11) 1496 – Haliburton estate – RMS II (2320) 1496 – James IV confirmed a charter by John Haliburtoun of Gask which granted his son, William, his lands (detailed, but without valuations) in the barony of Arde. They comprised: 3 parts (i.e. ¾?) Inglistoun, Knoktoun (= Kirktoun?), Kyngeile + yairs, Crywe, Faynellan, Crwlach, ½ Kyntallirgy + fishery, Ardblare, part of Faynblare, two parts (=⅔?) Colmullyne-more, 3 parts (i.e. ¾?) of Beldrum with Culmullyne-bege, Downegorre, mill of Bewfort with crofts and ale-house, Dunbailach with salmon fishery, Kylach, Cloynbaky, two Arcless + tenandry of Inchbary & yair. (See also 19) below. These properties are in or by the Aird – but were not part of the Fentoun estate.
RMS II (2783) 1504 is not relevant to the Aird but does prove that John Haliburtoun of Gask had some of the Fentoun estate. Cf. RMS II (618) 1458.
ER XIII p 658 1508 lists a sasine to James Haliburtoun of the lands of Inglistoun, Kyngely, Drumbalach, Baladrome, Ardblair, Senblair (read Fenblair), Killoch, Clonvak, Crew, Arcless, Fenellain, Cullodouny & Culmolinbeg. (Cullodouny is probably an error for Culmolinmore, or Dounie, or both).
12) 1497-8 – Lindsay estate – Sir David Lindesay of Bewfurde’s lands (The Book of the Thanes of Cawdor pp 87-88)
In January 1497-8 Sir David Lindesay granted Archibald, earl of Argyll, portions of eleven different properties. This appears to have been a quarter of the Fentoun Aird estate. This charter also gives merkland valuations in what is claimed to be Old Extent. These are important because they help indicate whether or not we are dealing with the whole property. For instance, a 1/16th part of Inglistoun is actually a ¼ of a ¼ which suggests that Sir David’s quarter share actually only refers to a quarter of Inglistoun – not the whole farm (the other ¾ is given in 11) above). The total OE value was 15 merklands which suggests the full valuation of the Aird estate was 60 merklands – possibly 6 davachs at a contemporary valuation of 10m each. These lands are probably those referred to in ER X p 769 1494 as the subject of a sasine to David Lindsay.
13) 1499 – ER XI p 390 p 446 1499, pp 352-3 1499-1500 – These three documents give data for what appears to be the same quarter of the Lordship of Beufort. (However, although the lands listed are the same as those in 12) above I assume we are here dealing with a different quarter share. It may be the Fentoun/Haket quarter mentioned in 6) and 9) above but the latter includes Kiltarlity which does not appear in either 12) or 13)).
The first ER document, dated 3 November 1499, gives the names of the occupiers of the respective lands – with two farms recorded as waste (i.e. nominally unoccupied). The value of the lands is given in Scots money – e.g ⅝m, 1¼m, 2½m. Appended are a couple of notes which demonstrate that the king’s ‘comptrollar’ (rent-collector in this context) was going to impose monetary sanctions on any who had ‘intercepted’ any rent or imposed more than was due.
The second document, dated the same day, is a ‘setting’ of the lands where each is let to a named individual. Again the land-values are given – in the same terms. It is apparent that the rent raised matched the land valuations e.g 16s 8d land (1¼m) gave 1¼m in rent. The total rent raised matched the total value of the lands – £10 2s 4d or 15m 2s 4d. Of this total I am going to disregard the 2s 4d since this represented a quarter of the croft of Downie and is something of an anomaly in the context. Without the croft the total rent and value were £10 or 15m. Since this represents ¼ of the estate then the whole would be £40 or 60m – which matches exactly with the data in 12) above.
The third document covers the same properties for two terms (i.e. 1 year) from 21 February 1499/1500. The valuations and totals are consistent and the differences between the three documents are very minor. It is clearly stated that these lands are the king’s property.
The rent collected – £10 2s 4d – is then repeated in ER XII pp 58-9 1501-2, p 127 1502-3, pp 217-18 1503-4, pp 347-8 1504-5, p 415 1505-6, p 516 1506-7.
14) 1501 – Ogilvy estate – RMS II (3184) 1507-8 – James IV confirmed a charter (dated 1501) by Pat(rick) Ogilvy de Kellebroauch (Kilbrochan) which sold to John Ogilvy de Laveroklaw his lands of a quarter of the Arde. The lands given match those in 12) above but represent a different quarter share. See 10) above.
15) 1506 – ER XII p 666 1506 gives details of lands which were let to Thomas Fraser of Lovet. One of the properties is half of ‘Artblaar’. See also in ER XV p 583 1524 (½ Ardblair), pp 625-6 1524-5; ER XIX p 553 1566 (½ Ardellan); ER XX p 534 1578 (½ Ardellane); ER XXI pp 87-8 1580 (½ Ardellan), pp 182-3 1582. Ardblare is given as a Haliburtoun property in 11) above so I think the entries in the Exchequer Rolls for 1506 & 1524 are mistakes for Ardellan. See also 28) below.
16) 1507 – Fentoun estate – RMS II (3158) 1507 is royal confirmation of a charter by Archibald earl of Argyll, which sold to Thomas Fentoun of Ogill, his lands of Bewfurd. This likely refers to some, or all, of the lands mentioned in 12) above. The Fentouns seem to have maintained an interest in their ancestral lands.
17) 1509 – Douglas estate – RMS II (3531) 1510-11 – James IV confirmed a charter (dated 1509) of Hen(ry) Douglace de Kilbirny (Culburnie) who sold to Thomas Frasere of Lovet his lands in the lordship of Beufort-in-Arde – despite the forfeiture of the late Sir James Douglace & Joneta Fentoun, his wife, to whom the lands formerly belonged. The lands given are not as complete a list as that given in either 12) or 13) above. These lands are probably those referred to in ER X p 769 1494 as the subject of a sasine to Henry Douglas.
18) 1511 – Ogilvy estate – RMS II (3602) 1511 – James IV confirmed a charter by Joh(n) Ogilvy de Laveroklaw which sold to Thomas Frasere de Lovet lands & yairs in the lordship of Bewfort in the Ard. The list of lands is not as complete as those given in 12) and 14) above. It is similar to – but not identical with – the list in 17) above.
19) 1512 – Haliburton estate – RMS II (3730) 1512 – James IV confirmed to James Haliburtoun of Gask (almost all) the lands detailed in 11) above.
20) 1512-13 – RMS II (3799) 1512-1513 reveals that in 1403 there had been an indenture between William de Fentoun and Margaret de Ard, Lady of Ercles.
21) 1524 – Fentoun estate – RMS III (285) 1524 is royal confirmation of a charter by James Fentoun of Ogill (given the same day) which sold the lands of Bewfurde to Lachlan Makintosche of Dunnauchtane and Joneta Gordoun his wife. ER XIV p 565 1514 gives a list of James Fentoun’s lands as including: Kynneres, Estir Eskadill, Halfardellem (i.e. half of Ardellane), Drumcardine, Holme, Cragot, ¼ of Phopachye, ¼ of Moncrew & 1/16th part of Inglistoune + yairs. See also ER XIX p 562 1567. See 16) above.
22) 1528-9 – Haliburton estate – RMS III (755) 1528-9 – James V granted Hugh Fraser of Lovate lands which Geo(rge) Halyburtoun of Gask had resigned.The list of lands matches that given in 19) above (RMS II (3730) 1512).
23) 1536A – RMS III (1601) 1536 – James V confirmed to Hugh Frasere of Lovett: the 2 Moys called Ardrannich; Kilbrenie (Culburnie) with the castle hill called Bewfort; Phopphachie (Phopachy) in the lordship of Bewfort.(Also RSS II (2100) 1536).
24) 1536B – RMS III (1639) 1536 is royal confirmation of a charter by John Forbes of Petslego who had sold his lands of Agaes Estir and Westir (E & W Aigas) to Hugh Fraser of Lovate. (Also RSS II (2204) 1536.
25) 1539 – RMS III (1958) 1539 – James V confirmed to Hugh Frasare of Lovet: the lands and baronies of Lovet … Ard, … Hereiclis (Erchless) alias Straglas, … lands of Ardranicht, Ki(l)birne, ¼ of Balladrum, … Comerkle (Kirk Comar) in the barony of Ard. (Also in RSS II (2979) 1539).
26) 1540 – Fentoun estate – RSS II (3619) 1540 lists lands belonging to the Fentouns of Ogill – including ‘Drumquhor, Deny, Crago, Escheintuly, 1/16th part of Inglistoun, and certane uthiris … lyand in Straglasche’. The 1/16th of Inglistoun suggests these are part of the ancient Fentoun inheritance.
27) 1542A – RSS II (4673) 1542 is a precept for a charter to Hugh Fraser of Lovet over the lands of 2 x Agaissis (Aigas) in the barony of Agaissis, with Fanellane in the barony of Lovet. See 24) above.
28) 1542B – RMS III (2733) 1542 – James V set in feufarm to Hugh Fraser of Lovet the Dawauch (davach) of Glenconweth, ½ of Ardellane, ¼ of Monchrow, ¼ of Foppewy (Phopachy), 1/16th of Inglistoun. See also RSS II (4794) 1542 where footnote 4 suggests that Ardblair has become replaced by Ardellan. I think this reflects the scribes finally correcting a mistake first made in 1506 – see 15) above.
29) 1552 – Fentoun/Mackintosh estate – RMS IV (704) 1552 – The Queen granted Alexander, Lord Gordon, the lands of Drumhardne (Drumchardonie), Incolme (Holme), Cragagis (Craggach), Kynnures (Kinerras), Eskedell (Eskadale) and Ardellane (Ardellan) which had been forfeited by William M’Intosche of Dunnauchtane.
30) 1554-5 – RMS IV (987) 1554-5 is a royal confirmation of lands to Alexander Fraser of Lovet. Included are 2 ploughlands of Commercroy and 2 ploughlands of Westir Crouchell. See also RSS IV (2945) 1554-5.
(Comer-Croy or Wester Comer was half of the davach of Comer Kirktown – see Kiltarlity Table.
Wester Crochail was half of the davach of Crochail – see Kilmorack Table).
31) 1566 – Retours (Inverness) (5) 1566 gives the lands of Beaufort as in 15) above – except for Ardellan replacing Ardblair as in 28) above. Repeated in Retours (Inverness) (8) 1578.
32) 1567 – Fentoun/Mackintosh estate – Mackintosh Muniments No 83 is a marriage contract which refers to some of the lands given in 29) above. See also Mackintosh Muniments No’s 101, 160, 194, 215, 261, 262 & 269.
33) 1568 – Fentoun/Mackintosh estate – RMS IV (2348) 1574-5 (on original of 1568) is royal confirmation of a charter by Lachlan M’Intoche of Dunnachtane who had sold to his son, Angus, the lands listed in 29) above (with the exception of Ardellan).
Summary
It is difficult to be sure of every detail as we wade through this welter of documents. For instance were there two daughters of Walter Fentoun called Joneta? In a Highland context this is not quite as unlikely as it sounds.
However, we can draw some broad conclusions. Each quarter of the Fentoun Aird estate was worth £10 or 15 merks. The whole was therefore 60 merks – or likely 6 davachs with each davach being valued (in Scots monetary terms) as 10 merks. Despite the claim in the 1497 document I do not believe this was properly Old Extent. Old Extent was a land-assessment system in davachs – or the merkland equivalent of davachs – which was thought to have prevailed ‘in tempore pacis’ (‘in the time of peace’, i.e. before the death of Alexander III in 1286). After the Scottish realm developed a coinage from the 1130s so each davach was given a monetary (merkland) valuation which probably reflected the rental it was expected to pay. In the 12th century this may have been a merk per davach. A century later, around the time of the death of Alexander III, it may have been four merks per davach. By about 1400 it may have been 10m per davach. The term ‘New Extent’ is sometimes attached to this last valuation but I think it dates considerably earlier in Inverness-shire than has traditionally been suggested.
If the earliest Fentoun estate based in the Aird and Strathglass was 8 davachs then the Bissett estate in the area must have been three times that or c. 24 davachs. The Moray Register for 1220-21 gives us 19 davachs which belonged to the Bissetts – but one of these was Buntait in the separate district of Glen Urquhart. To these 19 davachs we should add the lands which the Bissets gave to their new foundation of Beauly Priory. This amounted to at least another 5 davachs in Kilmorack parish. The evidence is broadly consistent so I think we can be confident in this overall picture of the land-holdings of the Bissets and the Fentouns.
When we get into the fine detail there are lots of extra complications. Some farms were paired with others; some were much broken up; some belonged partly to the church (either a parish or Beauly Priory). I have tried to address these issues in the accompanying schematic which shows the documentary evidence associated with each farm. The dates refer to the documents given above. The schematic does not include every farm in the Aird – Moniak and Phoineas being 2 exceptions – but it does give the broad pattern.
Leave a Reply