Tracts, legal and historical
(197) Page 181
Download files
Complete book:
Individual page:
Thumbnail gallery: Grid view | List view
181
conclusion is further said to be grounded upon the
consuetude and practice of the kingdom. Every
antiquarian will perceive that this doctrine is im-
portant, and may affect a question that excited
much controversy during the course of last century.
It is now proved by indisputable evidence, that
Robert II. and Elizabeth Mure were within the
forbidden degrees of propinquity, and had a large
family, including Robert III., before they obtained
the dispensation, in virtue of which they were after-
wards enabled to marry. The impression that this
connection left in the minds of the nation — though
distorted and misrepresented — was extraordinary,
and might give rise to suspicion. In the general
case, the law above stated is correct, but then the
dispensation of the parties (dated in 1347,) inti-
mates that they had been ignorant of their relation-
ship, 1 which circumstance, according to some, from
1 This document was discovered by Andrew Stewart in the
Vatican in 1789, who has inserted a full copy of it in his Supple-
ment to the History of the Steivarts, p. 418 — 19. The portion
here referred to is as follows, — " quod dudum, ipsis Roberto et
Elizabeth igaorantibus, quod dicta Elizabeth, et dilecta in Christo
filia nobilis mulier Ysabella Boutellier domicella ejusdem Dio-
cesis, in tertio, et quarto, ac Elizabeth, et Robertus prefati in
quarto consanguinitatis gradibus sibi inviceni attinerent, idem
Robertus dictam Ysabellam primo, et postmodum predictain
Elizabeth carnaliter cognovit, et quod ipse Robertus, et Eliza-
beth diu cohabitemtes prolis utriusque sexus multitudinem pro-
ocaveruut." Here, it will be observed, that there were two
legal impediments — one from Robert and Elizabeth, being with-
conclusion is further said to be grounded upon the
consuetude and practice of the kingdom. Every
antiquarian will perceive that this doctrine is im-
portant, and may affect a question that excited
much controversy during the course of last century.
It is now proved by indisputable evidence, that
Robert II. and Elizabeth Mure were within the
forbidden degrees of propinquity, and had a large
family, including Robert III., before they obtained
the dispensation, in virtue of which they were after-
wards enabled to marry. The impression that this
connection left in the minds of the nation — though
distorted and misrepresented — was extraordinary,
and might give rise to suspicion. In the general
case, the law above stated is correct, but then the
dispensation of the parties (dated in 1347,) inti-
mates that they had been ignorant of their relation-
ship, 1 which circumstance, according to some, from
1 This document was discovered by Andrew Stewart in the
Vatican in 1789, who has inserted a full copy of it in his Supple-
ment to the History of the Steivarts, p. 418 — 19. The portion
here referred to is as follows, — " quod dudum, ipsis Roberto et
Elizabeth igaorantibus, quod dicta Elizabeth, et dilecta in Christo
filia nobilis mulier Ysabella Boutellier domicella ejusdem Dio-
cesis, in tertio, et quarto, ac Elizabeth, et Robertus prefati in
quarto consanguinitatis gradibus sibi inviceni attinerent, idem
Robertus dictam Ysabellam primo, et postmodum predictain
Elizabeth carnaliter cognovit, et quod ipse Robertus, et Eliza-
beth diu cohabitemtes prolis utriusque sexus multitudinem pro-
ocaveruut." Here, it will be observed, that there were two
legal impediments — one from Robert and Elizabeth, being with-
Set display mode to:
Universal Viewer | 
Mirador |
Large image | Transcription
Images and transcriptions on this page, including medium image downloads, may be used under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence unless otherwise stated. 
| Histories of Scottish families > Tracts, legal and historical > (197) Page 181 |
|---|
| Permanent URL | https://digital.nls.uk/95036370 |
|---|
| Description | With other antiquarian matter chiefly relative to Scotland. By John Riddell. Edinburgh : T. Clark, 1835. Contents: 1. Reply to Mr. Tytler's Historical remarks on the death of Richard II -- 2. Observations upon the representation of the Rusky and Lennox families, and other points in Mr. Napier's Memoirs of Merchiston -- 3. Remarks upon the law of legitimation per subsequens matrimonium, the nature of our ancient canons, and question of the legitimacy of the Stewarts. |
|---|---|
| Shelfmark | L.C.758 |
| Additional NLS resources: | |
| Attribution and copyright: |
|
More information
|
|
| Description | A selection of almost 400 printed items relating to the history of Scottish families, mostly dating from the 19th and early 20th centuries. Includes memoirs, genealogies and clan histories, with a few produced by emigrant families. The earliest family history goes back to AD 916. |
|---|