05018691 Page 1

COURSE Dissertation SUPERVISOR Iain MacInnes TITLE How was territorial power and control in

medieval Argyll expressed through its built heritage and did this change as the region moved from Scotland’s periphery to its core?

STUDENT NAME

Ailsa Raeburn

SUBMISSION DATE

20 May 2011

05018691 Page 2

ABSTRACT

This dissertation considers how the physical expressions of power – both secular and religious –

developed as Argyll and the Southern Hebrides, the heartlands of the Lordship of the Isles, moved

from the periphery of the emerging Scottish nation state to its core. Reviewing evidence from

c.500 AD to the fall of the Lordship and coalescence of Campbell power, the methods of territorial

control can be tracked in the built landscape. It will also consider whether these changes were a

result of a royal policy of centralisation; forcing submission of peripheral regions by bringing them

politically, culturally and ideologically closer to the core. Or alternatively, was the extent and nature

of territorial, political and economic control of local leaders in the west, such that external influence

could only ever be minimal? Were the changes in the physical methods of religious and secular

control more an overlay of new ideas onto indigenous practices and regional necessity, than

evidence of centralisation?

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to my Supervisor, Dr Iain McInnes, for his guidance and support.

Most thanks to Ella and Iona for leaving me in peace while I wrote.

05018691 Page 3

CONTENTS

Chapter 1 Introduction 4 Chapter 2 Dal Riata and

Columba 7

Chapter 3 The Rise of the

MacSorleys 12

Chapter 4 The MacDonald

Hegemony 21

Chapter 5 Argyll After the

Lordship 30

Chapter 6 Conclusion 36 Bibliography 40 Appendices A: Map of Argyll 44

B: Early Historic Power Centres

45

C: Geneaology of the Lordship of the Isles – The MacDonalds and MacRuaris

46

D: The Western Seaboard in the central Middle Ages

48

E: Principal Cadets of the Loch Awe Campbells

49

05018691 Page 4

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

In the medieval period access to, and control over, physical resources was paramount as most

medieval societies still operated largely at a subsistence level. Where military or religious based

hierarchies did develop, additional resources were essential to feed, clothe and house these non

productive members of the population. Territorial power was therefore critical to ensure that

sufficient resources could be produced to support and defend the community. These resources

could be the stuff of subsistence; crops, animals and timber or it could be materials valuable for

trading, such as metals.

Control of religious power and authority was also key. Pre Christian kings were viewed as sacral

brings; a unique link between the people and the gods1. They possessed magical and supernatural

powers which included the bestowal of fertility on people and land, again controlling resources or

access to them. As the Irish Columban Church grew in importance from the sixth century, it became

the conduit between God and the people. Secular leaders recognised the power control over the

church could provide and used the church in inauguration ceremonies to claim a divine right to rule.

This dissertation will look at how the physical expressions of power – both secular and religious –

developed as the region moved from periphery to core. From the earliest Iron Age power bases,

through the great stone castles of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, to the fifteenth and

sixteenth century tower house, we can track, through the built heritage, how control of the region

changed. It will also consider whether these changes were a result of a royal policy of centralisation;

forcing submission of peripheral regions by bringing them politically, culturally and ideologically

1 F. Watson, 'The expression of power in a medieval kingdom: thirteenth-century Scottish castles', in Scottish Power Centres: From the early Middles Ages to the twentieth century, ed. S.M. Foster, A.I. MacInnes and R. MacInnes (Glasgow:, 1998) p 4

05018691 Page 5

closer to the core. Or alternatively, was the extent and nature of territorial, political and economic

control of local leaders in the west, such that external influence could only ever be minimal? Were

the changes in the physical methods of religious and secular control more an overlay of new ideas

onto indigenous practices and regional necessity, than evidence of centralisation?

Documentary evidence for this period is extremely limited; that which does exist was often written

much later. There are a number of charters issued by the Lords of the Isles and the crown that

highlight some of the issues, in particular the allocation of land and titles. The most complete

evidence is that from archaeological reports, and is obviously very dependent on interpretation of

the findings. Even this provides too little evidence to present an archaeological narrative for the

whole period.2 In addition, although the Lordship has been extensively considered by historians,

there is little comparative analysis on pre and post Lordship secular and religious power structures

and how this impacted on the landscape and built heritage. For a region so rich in built heritage,

with so many castles, churches and monumental architecture still visible to us, understanding their

history is both illuminating and valuable to those fascinated by Argyll’s past.

In this piece therefore, the legacy of the Iron Age and early Christian period will be considered; the

Irish inheritance of these periods strongly influenced how political, economic and territorial control

developed. Somerled established a hierarchy of economic and military power, from which a

network of castles could be built, to defend his possessions, and enable expansion in the Irish Sea

World. The MacSorley successors of Somerled built upon the foundations he laid for secular and

religious control of Argyll and the islands. Then, as the MacDonald kindred established hegemony,

they brought a period of relative peace and stability during which a complex administrative network

emerged, akin to that of a proto state. At the same time the Campbell kindreds, always more closely

aligned to the Scottish crown, were gradually establishing their influence on the periphery of Argyll,

and placing themselves in an unchallengeable position once the MacDonald territories were

2 I Armit, The Archaeology of Skye and the Western Isles (Edinburgh, 1996) p 206

05018691 Page 6

forfeited. They successfully straddled the Gaelic world of the west and the lowland world of the

crown. More exposed to new ideas of territorial management than the Lordship, their era of control

brought in new methods of estate management and religious patronage.

The geographical extent of this piece is confined to the boundaries of modern day Argyll and the

southern Hebrides, including the mainland territories of Kintyre, Knapdale, Lorn and Cowal and the

islands of Islay, Jura, Colonsay, Oronsay, Mull, Coll, Tiree, Giga, the Garvellachs and Treshnish Isles.

A map is included at Appendix A showing these areas. The traditional Lordship territories did, of

course, extend further into the northern Hebrides, to islands controlled by affiliated clans such as

the MacLeods of Lewis and Skye, and later into the northern mainland of Loichalsh and Ross.

However this dissertation aims to take a chronological view of how a region developed. For the sake

of space and clarity therefore, I propose to focus on Argyll. It is here that sufficient evidence

remains for us to track the Iron Age and early Christian period of development; the rise of the

MacSorleys and then the MacDonald hegemony; the threats from royal incursion, either directly or

via local agents, such as the Campbells; and finally changes in how control was exercised following

the downfall of the Lordship of the Isles. This choice of geographical extent is further validated by

the cultural impact of the Lordship, expressed principally in its unique funerary architecture; this is

very strong in the original heartlands of the Lordship, but tends to dissipate as territorial control

extends into Ross and the North. Throughout the terms ‘Argyll and the islands’ and ‘the west’ is

used interchangeably to denote the same area.

05018691 Page 7

CHAPTER TWO – DAL RIATA AND COLUMBA

Throughout Scotland, control of the landscape and resources were via a network of evolving petty

kingships before 1100AD. These kingships competed for access to wealth and political prestige,

achieved through controlling access to material resources, use of violence and personal charisma.

Power centres were critical to manage the collection and distribution of resources and to provide

safety and security in times of violence. Territorial control became more formal as societies

transformed from those based on kinship, to an early state organisation, where society was more

institutionalised and hierarchical. Relations of clientship developed involving the payment of tribute

or service in return for land, protection and patronage, rather than kinship. This gave all levels of

society a role in protecting that society. At the top stood the nobility and clergy, socially and

geographically mobile individuals between whom power was exchanged, either through agreed

modes of inheritance or aggression. Their authority was determined by the number of clients that

could be supported. This support required control over resources and the provision of security.

Throughout Scotland therefore, a network of kings and ‘sub king’s developed which became the

basis of medieval earldoms3.

In Argyll these societal developments were represented by power coalescing into a number of

kinship groups4. There were four main tribes of the Dal Riata. The Ceneln Gabrain were based in

modern day Kintyre and Knapdale with their power base at Dunadd.5 Dunadd appears to have

begun as a small Iron Age fort at the hill summit, constructed in around the fourth century AD and

3 In the North and East a hierarchy of leaders developed; toiseach – the leader of a kindred or clan, and a mormaer – the predominant toiseach in control of a number of clans. These became the bases of mediaeval earldoms. 4 SM Foster, Picts, Gaels and Scots (London, 2004) p 3 5 The Cenel Garbrian was the dominant lineage, retaining kingship over a relatively long period. Royal succession was based on the principles of tanistry; enabling successors to be nominated from alternating eligible kin groups, often in advance of the king’s death. However the accession of Cinead mac Alpin in 842/3 changed the pattern of succession confining it more closely to immediately family members.

05018691 Page 8

expanded in the sixth to seventh century by a series of enclosing walls. As the main power base for

the region, the site was abandoned as the early Dalriadic Kings moved eastwards to Scone. 6

The Cenel Loairn controlled Lorn with a power base at Dunollie. First recorded at the end of the

seventh century, by the thirteenth century Dunollie had become one of the main strongholds of the

MacDougall kindred.7

The Cenel Corugaill was based in Cowal. There is no evidence to suggest the location of their

principal power base although within Cowal. Finally the Cenel Oengusa was based on Islay; again the

location of their power base has not been identified.

The existence in Argyll of several sub kingdoms, therefore, created several power bases, some of

which provided the foundations of the late duns and castles of the medieval period. From the map

shown in Appendix B we can identify in Argyll a number of early historic power centres. These

include Dunstaffnage, Aros, Duart, Finlaggan, Tioram, Mingary, Ardtornish, Breachacha, Rothesay

and Castle Sween, all of which were still in use in the fifteenth century and later. These bases were

places where the people who controlled the material resources and technologies lived, and from

where resources were administered, collected, transformed and exchanged.

As Oram points out, there is, of course, a dearth of easily datable archaeological remains from the

period before 1150 from which to establish the character of native high status residences. However

up until c 1100 there appears to have been continuity of occupation at smaller sites, but some of the

larger sites declined in status or were abandoned. An inability to provision or defend physically

restricted sites like Dunadd could have contributed to their decline. Additionally it appears that

centres of power were moving to lower lying, less defensive and more commodious sites like Scone

and Forteviot.

6 SM Foster ibid p 5 7 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 Site ref 286

05018691 Page 9

Those sites that continued in use in Argyll as higher status power centres were largely situated in

defensive coastal locations, perhaps reflecting the unrest and instability between the death of

Somerled and the confirmation of MacDonald overlordship in the mid fourteenth century. Inland the

settlement record is dominated by lower status, drystone thick walled duns in prominent locations.

The number and nature of these structures appear to demonstrate that by c 500 AD land was being

held at a more devolved level, even by individual households8. Settlements ranged in size and

RCHAMS classification from hill forts serving small communities to duns serving a single family group

and were widely distributed. This demonstrates that social differentiation and stratification had not

occurred to any real extent in Argyll by this period9.

The arrival of Columba in Dal Riata in 563 heralded new forms of religious worship, which equally

impacted on the built landscape. Pre Christian kings in the region were viewed as sacral brings; a

unique link between the people and the gods10. They possessed magical and supernatural powers,

conferred in ritualistic inauguration ceremonies, including bestowing fertility on people and land.

As the Church became the conduit between God and the people, a central role for the Church, was

given at inaugurations, which enabled local leaders to claim a divine right to rule. As the Christian

church spread, early Christian sites were close to existing special places such as cairns and sacred

hilltops. Timber chapels and rude rubble cells were built together with the erection of high crosses,

such as at Iona, Kildalton and Keills, including inscriptions in Irish Ogham script11. In Mid Argyll in

particular, there is a rich record of early Christian burial or worship sites, with over one hundred

carved stones from the early Christian period.12 These tend to be concentrated in very specific

locations, especially the west coast of Knapdale and at primary sites such as Iona, Lismore, Kerrera

and Eileach an Naoimh. In Kintyre, early Christian monuments demonstrate a strong Irish influence,

which can still be seen in ogham inscriptions from this period. On Islay there remain a number of

8 D Omand, (ed.) The Argyll Book (Edinburgh, 2004) p 1 9 D Omand, ibid p 55 10 SM Foster, Picts, Gaels and Scots p 4 11 FA Walker, The Buildings of Scotland: Argyll and Bute (London, 2003) p 1 12 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 7 p 3

05018691 Page 10

chapels and burial grounds, very similar in size and design to the ‘Keills’ of the Isle of Man, again

demonstrating the sharing of cultures in the Irish Sea World even in this very early period.13

In the period directly before the rise of Somerled and the MacSorleys we can see, therefore, the

establishment of a dense settlement pattern of duns, forts, roundhouses and chapels. As the centre

of kingship moved eas,t several major sites appear to have been abandoned, possibly those used by

the leading groups who had relocated eastwards. Those kin groups left behind continued use of

their smaller sites and possibly filled the local power vacuum created by the move eastwards. A

network of holy sites developed, very much based on the Irish tradition of worship, and often linked

to local power centres14.

The medieval period would see the emergence of a greater range of elite dwellings and a firm

separation from the more transient homes of the general populace. The development of a petty

aristocracy drawing power from the distant MacDonald overlordship, would control very local

territorial domains, under the confederation of the Lordship. The established tradition of reusing

existing centres of power continued, occupation of which gave legitimacy to new chiefs.15 This all

contributes to the development of a more powerful and wide ranging hierarchical authority with a

more unequal access to wealth and power than before.16 How far this was a result of the growing

Scottish royal influence in the region, or other factors, remains to be considered.

13 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 5 p 27 14 The early churches at Kilmartin and Kilmichael Glassary are very close to Dunadd and the cairns of Kilmartin Glen. 15 I Armit, The Archaeology of Skye and the Western Isles (Edinburgh,1996) p 221 16 I Armit, ibid

05018691 Page 11

CHAPTER THREE – THE RISE OF THE MACSORLEYS

The MacSorley dynasty descend from Somerled, an early king of Argyll of mixed Norse Celtic stock

with a pedigree stretching back to ninth century Dalriada17. His power base may have been

consolidated and built when the Dalriadan kings moved east18. Until 1266, the region was nominally

independent with the Annals of Tigernach (1164) titling Somerled ri Innse Gall and Cind Tire (king of

the Hebrides and Kintyre19.) He was also referred to in the Melrose Chrinicle as ‘regulus eregeithel’

or King of Argyll.20 Some form of allegiance was, however, given to Scotland for the mainland

portions of the Somerled territories, and to Norway for the islands. MacDonald compares the

positions in Argyll and neighbouring Galloway as similar to control over eleventh century France.

The French King could exercise only very limited power beyond the royal enclaves of Paris and

Orleans; local French Princes were virtually independent of the King, maintaining many quasi royal

powers but pledging nominal allegiance to the Crown21.

The MacSorley kinship group descends from two sons and one grandson of Somerled. Dugald

controlled Lorn and Mull, his successors becoming the MacDougall clan. Angus controlled

Garmoran, Rum, Eigg, the Uists, Benbecula, Barra, Bute and Arran. His heirs were the MacRuaris

who amalgamated through marriage with the MacDonalds in the fourteenth century. The final

grouping was the MacDonalds, deriving from Ranald who took control of Islay, Morvern, Kintyre and

Ardnamurchan22.

17 I Cowan, ‘The Medieval Church in the Highlands’ in The Middle Ages in the Highlands, ed. L MacLean (Inverness, 1981) p 169 18 I Armit, The Archaeology of Skye and the Western Isles (Edinburgh, 1996) p 206 19 I Cowan, ‘The Medieval Church in the Highlands’ p 178 20 WDH Sellar, ‘Hebridean Sea-Kings; The Successors of Somerled, 1164-1316’ in Alba: Celtic Scotland in the Medieval Era eds Cowan EJ. & McDonald RA. (East Linton, 2003) p 189 21 I Cowan, ibid p 180 22 Precise evidence of exactly how the territories of Somerled were allocated is not available, with most suppositions based upon the much later Black Book of Clanranald – See D Caldwell, Islay (Edinburgh, 2008) p 38

05018691 Page 12

During the late twelfth and thirteenth centuries therefore Argyll and the Isles were undergoing a

period of change as the MacSorley dynasty both consolidated their own territories and feuded

internally with kin groups over other lands and resources. This was at a time when the Scottish

nation was being created by the Canmore dynasty, through a mix of feudalisation, force and alliance.

The core of the evolving Scottish Kingdom in the south and east was gradually being planted with

Anglo-Norman knights; a technique imported by David I and was based on a European method of

imposing royal authority.23 The new earls were expected to implement David’s programme of

judicial and administrative reform. Some of the existing Gaelic landowners in the north and east,

recognising the new political realities, swore allegiance to the Scottish Crown and were regranted

their estates. Where allegiance was not offered, the new feudal system was imposed by a heavily

armoured and expensive fighting class and maintained by the use of imported motte and bailey

castle techniques.

Until the 1220’s however there is no evidence of any intervention directly by the Canmores in the

west highlands and islands. The construction of a castle however between the Doon and Ayr by

William I in 1197 might have been the start of an attempt to provide a buttress against the

increasingly turbulent west. There were also a small number of mottes or motte like bases built

before the thirteenth century in Cowal24. Earthwork and timber motte and bailey structures were

used to acquire and defend territory by the feudal knights between 1100 and 1250. However the

highlands, and in particular the west, was not as readily planted with the new aristocracy. Dodgshon

attributes this to the territory neither being practically suited to the use of armoured knights or

significantly wealthy to support the heavy maintenance costs of funding what amounted to a

23 This programme also included reorganisation of the church, establishment of towns and mints, introduction of a new type of Norman sherrifdom and encouraged incomers like the Stewarts, Morays and Menzies to settle– see C Tabraham, Scotland’s Castles (London, 1997) p 15 24 These include evidence of a motte at Cnoc Mhic Eoghainn, close to Baillimore on Loch Fyne. Assumed to have been in the control of the McEwans of Otter, a family with close links to the MacSweens, Lamonts and MacLachlans – RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 7 Site ref 120

05018691 Page 13

standing army25. In a region where power depended on maritime capability, David I was forced to

rely on alliances with local magnates to keep the peace and gradually extend his influence. It was

also difficult to service any incursion into the west without a base from which to operate, which the

crown did not have before the mid thirteenth century.26 The west was still within the cultural and

political domain of the Irish Sea World; there were therefore a number of obstacles the crown

needed to overcome before it could properly control the west.

The Canmores focussed therefore on building alliances, which were usually rewarded with land or

castles. The MacNaughtons on Loch Awe were already Lords of Inishail on Loch Awe and Kilmorlich

Loch Fyne, when they were given custody of Fraoch Eilean Castle by a charter granted by Alexander

III in 1267.27 Fraoch Eilean was constructed by or on behalf of the crown in the third quarter of the

thirteenth century on a small island at the north end of Loch Awe, close to the strategic Pass of

Brander.28 At the opposite end of Locah Awe, the castle at Finchairn was included at the head of a

list of lands in a charter of 1240 granted or confirmed by Alexander II to Gillascop MacGilchrist.29

Alexander I or III was also thought to have been involved in the building of the first castle at Tarbert

which controlled access to Kintyre.30 At the south end of Kintyre was the castle of Dunaverty. First

recorded in the eight century, it was in crown hands in the 1240’s and was garrisoned by Alexander

III during Haakon’s expedition of 1263.31 Dunoon Castle was also either in crown control, or under

the control of the Stewarts, a Lowland family, by the second quarter of the thirteenth century.32

Finally the great island fortresses of Dun Chonnaill on the Garvellachs and the twin castles of Cairn

Na Burgh Mor and Beg were recorded as three out of four castles held by Ewen MacDougall of Lorn

25 R Dodgshon, The Age of the Clans: The Highlands from Somerled to the Clearances (Edinburgh, 2002) p 6 26 D Omand, ibid O p 4 27 GWS Barrow, Kingship and Unity: Scotland 1000-1306 (London, 1981) p 112 28 RCHAMS Argyll Vol. 7 Site ref 290 29RCHAMS Argyll Vol. 7 Site ref 130 30 RCHAMS Argyll Vol. 1 Site ref 316 31 RCHAMS Argyll Vol. 1 Site ref 309 32 RCHAMS Argyll Vol. 7 Site ref 127

05018691 Page 14

in 1249; by the time of the Treaty of Perth they were regarded as either crown possessions or within

the grant of the king.33

There were also local families who seemed neither to be allied to the MacSorleys or to the crown,

but still possessed considerable local influence. These included the MacSweens, MacNaughtons and

MacLachlans. The MacSweens were descended from Suibhne the Red, the Thane of Knapdaill and

Glassarie by the end of the twelfth century, and related by marriage to the royal family of Connacht,

the O’Connors.34 The MacSweens were responsible for building two of the earliest castles in Argyll,

Castle Sween and Skipness. Castle Sween is presumed to date from the end of the twelfth century.35

Although it appears a different design from earlier castles, it is thought in fact to be a rectangular

version of the more common shell keeps, such as Rothesay Castle. This was built by the Stewarts, a

family with close royal connections, as they established themselves in Bute in the twelfth century.36

Skipness Castle and chapel are thought to date from the first half of the thirteenth century. The

MacSweens are also thought to be responsible for building the chapels at Kilmory Knap and Keills in

Knapdale in the late twelfth / early thirteenth centuries.37

In 1262 both castles and estates came into the possession of the Stewart Earls of Menteith who

were allies of the crown.38 The MacSweens attempted to win them back, by allying with Edward I in

the Wars of Independence, but were not successful.

There were therefore families allied to the crown who were rewarded accordingly; and those who

chose to stand alone. By and large, this second independent group did not retain their territories

33 RCHAMS Argyll Vol. 3 Site refs 402 and 335 34 They also had links to the Lamonts of Ardlamont and the MacLachlans of Castle Lachlan – see GWS Barrow, Kingship and Unity: Scotland 1000-1306 p 111 35 16th century Irish chronicle records that Suibhne was the builder of Castle Sween which dates its construction to the end of the twelfth century 36 J Munro, ‘The Lordship of the Isles’ in The Middle Ages in the Highlands ed. L MacLean (Inverness, 1981) p 39 37 J Munro, ibid p 43 38 Barrow attributes this to the attainment of Alexander’s majority in 1261 and his wish to build alliances in the west. – see GWS Barrow, Kingship and Unity p 116

05018691 Page 15

beyond the end of the thirteenth centuries, as they were gradually squeezed out by crown agents or

the MacSorley dynasty.

The MacSorleys remained the leading local kindred and were able to emulate the crown by

establishing power bases from which tribute could be received, rents consumed and justice

dispensed. Somerled and his immediate descendants were also very active in establishing new

religious orders. Raoull Glaber, a Burgundian monk writing in 1200 said that in about 1000 ‘men

began to reconstruct churches... it was if the whole world were shaking itself free, shrugging off the

burden of the past, and cladding itself everywhere in a white mantle of churches.’39 This white

mantle reached Scotland under the Canmores, who used the establishment of religious orders as

one element of their policy of medieval state and kingdom building. Patronage of churches and

religious orders broadened however beyond just royalty, as nobles and knights founded modest

sized foundations on their own initiative. This was done either in conscious emulation of royalty or

to legitimise their own territorial control and power.40 Funded by the grant of lands to the

foundations, the patrons were rewarded with prayer and devotions for the souls of themselves and

their families. They also provided places of refuge and hospitality for leaders and unmarried

relatives.41 Some orders, such as the Cistercians, were also influential agricultural developers and

estate managers.

Ranald, son of Somerled, established a Cistercian abbey at Saddell in Kintyre in 1160 endowing it

with lands in Gigha, Knapdale, Carrick and Arran.42 Somerled also revived the religious community

on Iona against the wishes of the established Irish church, with Ranald introducing a Benedictine

Abbey and Augustinian nunnery on the island in the twelfth century. An extensive period of

39 RA MacDonald RA, 'Scoto-Norse kings and the reformed religious orders: patterns of monastic patronage in twelfth-century Galloway and Argyll', Albion, 27 (1995) p 187 40 In Wales by 1201, 9 out of the 13 Cistercian abbeys were either native Welsh foundations or in areas controlled by natuve dynasties. In Galloway Fergus of Galloway also introcuded a wide variety of religious orders including the founding of three abbeys at Soulseat, Whithorn and Dundrennan– MacD B 1 41 Ranald’s sister, Bethoc was the first prioress of the Augustinian nunnery on Iona – see WDH Sellar, ‘Hebridean Sea-Kings; The Successors of Somerled, 1164-1316’ p 203 42 RCHAMS Argyll Vol. 1 Site ref 296

05018691 Page 16

construction began, including new burial chapels at Reilig Odhrain and Cladh an Disirt, and a new

church dedicated to St Michael.43 Again significant lands and teinds were granted to the religious

houses to support their works. Ranald was also a significant benefactor to Paisley Abbey.44

The ongoing rivalries between the MacSorley kindred’s also gave both the Norse and Scottish Kings

opportunities to extend or recover lost influence. Between the death of Somerled in 1164 and 1300

the MacDougalls and MacDonalds took different positions in any external dispute, including the

Wars of Independence. The MacDonalds were often in conflict with the newly planted families

adjoining their territories, such as the Stewarts. In the north, the MacRuaris fought against alliances

of Norse clans led by the Godfreysons. Such a period of constant instability and violence saw the

building of many stone castles and updating of ancient defences. Most were concentrated in the

active frontier zone between the Scottish and Norse Crowns and consisted of simple stone curtain

wall enclosures often using an existing dun or fort, rock formation or island site. These included

Dunollie and Dun Ara, as well as the MacSween castles of Castle Sween and Skipness.

The death however of Alexander III in 1296 meant the removal of an active kingship, unity of

purpose and resources that allowed the extension of royal control. At this point the MacDonald’s

were the least successful of the three kindred’s45. The MacDougall’s were the most powerful of the

MacSorley descendants and used the power vacuum left by Alexander’s death to develop alliances

with other local magnates46. They had also begun the development of a significant number of power

bases from which they could exercise control over Lorn and the Islands. With the exception of

Dunollie, there is nothing in the archaeological record to suggest any great castles or settlements in

Lorn before the medieval period.47 Similarly there were few early Christian monuments in Lorn48. In

43 P Yeoman, Pilgrimage in Medieval Scotland (London, 1999) p 81 44 D Caldwell, Islay p 38 45 D Omand, (ed.) The Argyll Book p 123 46 This included the Turnberry Band of 1286 ; a bond of friendship between Angus Mor MacDonald and the Stewart Earls of Carrick and Menteith. The MacDougalls also forged close links with the Comyns of Badenoch principally via marriage alliances 47 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 p 22

05018691 Page 17

addition there does not appear to have been a developed parochial system, as in other parts of

Argyll by the twelfth century; the parish churches, chapels and funerary monuments all appear to be

of a late medieval date.49 This all suggests that, before the MacDougall consolidation, physical

representations of religious or secular power were rare in Lorn.

The MacDougalls used their period of control to build huge stone castles, such as those at

Dunstaffnage, Innis Chonnell on Loch Awe and Achadun and Castle Coeffin Castles on Lismore. They

were some of the largest castles built in Scotland in the thirteenth century, far distant from the

centralised Norman control of the Canmores’ and underlined both the MacDougall wealth and

territorial control. The general arrangement of Dunstaffnage resembled the great castles at

Dirleton, Coull and Inverlochy, suggesting continental ideas were being overlain on indigenous sites

and defensive designs.

Within the same period the MacDougalls were also responsible for Ardchattan Priory (1230-1),

Lismore Cathedral and Dunstaffnage chapel.50 Although remote today, Ardchattan sits at the foot of

the Benderloch Hills on a narrow strip of cultivable land adjoining one of the main medieval

communication channels from the west to the rest of Scotland, Loch Etive. The Valliscaulian priory

was founded by Duncan MacDougall of Lorn, directly from the principal house in Burgundy. It may

have been a peace offering to Alexander II, who was involved in the founding of the other

Valliscaullian houses at Beauly and Pluscarden.51 The Priory was endowed with lands in Benderloch,

Appin and Nether Lorn, as well and teinds or portions thereof as far afield as Kintyre and Tiree,

demonstrating the extent of the MacDougall control during this period.52 Dunstaffnage, although

only a chapel, was also well endowed, and was significantly more elaborate than similar size

48Although the cathedral at Lismore is assumed to exist before the founding of the See in 1189, the earliest building evidence dates from the fourteenth century RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 Site ref 267 49 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 p 23 50 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 Site refs: Ardchattan – 217; Lismore - 267; Dunstaffnage Chapel - 243 51DH Caldwell & NA Ruckley, ‘Domestic Architecture in the Lordship of the Isles’ in Lordship and Architecture in Medieval and Renaissance Scotland (Edinburgh, 2005) p 85 52 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 p 110

05018691 Page 18

churches of the period.53 Lismore however was less well provisioned, being the least elaborate of

the Scottish medieval cathedrals having with no transepts or aisles. It also bore little stylistic

relationship to other contemporary ecclesiastical buildings in Argyll.54

These castles and chapels reflect the semi regal ambitions of the MacDougalls. They required both

significant economic resources to import skilled masons and freestone and also demonstrated a

desire to emulate the crown in the founding of French religious houses. This replacement of

traditional Irish forms of worship with European orders signalled the region’s willingness to be part

of the cultural assimilation into Scotland through the medium of the Universal Church; the culture of

the dominant core was therefore infiltrating the periphery through assimilation.55

By the turn of the fourteenth century therefore, the MacDougall Lords of Lorn were ascendant,

controlling vast swathes of territory and having the power and wealth to construct elaborate castles

and endow monasteries. It was their alliance with the anti Bruce, Comyn faction by marriage

however that saw their downfall. The success of Bruce saw his supporters rewarded with castles

and lands forfeited from his enemies.

The MacDougalls lost most of their possessions.56 Innis Chonnell returned to the Campbells as

Robert I included it within the conferment of a free barony on Sir Colin Campbell in 1315, which

became the foundation stone for the eventual Campbell domination of Argyll. Dunstaffnage

remained in royal hands for a period, eventually also passing to the Campbell’s of Lochawe in

1321/2.57 During David II’s reign, it was restored to John Gallda of Lorn, along with Castle Coeffin on

53 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 p 23 54 As early as the mid thirteenth century the lack of financial support for Lismore had spurred the forceful Dominican Friar, Clement of Dundee who with responsibility for Argyll, urged King to transfer the See from Lismore to the mainland, sparking dispute with Ewan MacDougall of Lorn who considered the See to be under his family’s special patronage and therefore control. – see GWS Barrow, Kingship and Unity p 145 55 RA MacDonald RA, 'Scoto-Norse kings and the reformed religious orders: patterns of monastic patronage in twelfth-century Galloway and Argyll' p 188 56 It is thought Achadun may have remained in MacDougall hands before being garnted to the Bishops of Argyll in the fifteenth century – see D Turner D, 'The bishops of Argyll and the Castle of Achanduin, Lismore, AD 1180-1343' in Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 128 (1998) p 647 57 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 p 210

05018691 Page 19

Lismore. Both of these eventually passed by marriage to John Stewart of Innermeath in the 1460’s.

Dunollie was also retained by the crown, also passing to the Stewarts of Innermeath in 1388. The

Stewart Earls of Mentieth retained Knapdale and Kintyre, which included Castle Sween and Skipness.

The MacDonald’s were granted forfeited MacDougall lands in Ardnamurchan and Comyn lands in

Duror, Glencoe and Lochaber58.

Robert I used the forfeited estates therefore to create a new settlement in the west, one which he

could more effectively control by ensuring none of the main families had sufficient power to

challenge him. The Campbells and Stewarts in particular acted as a bulwark for the crown against

further advances of the still powerful MacSorley remainders – the MacDonalds and MacRuaris. The

alliance of these two clans by marriage in the 1340’s helped create a MacDonald hegemony which

threatened the very core of the Stewart monarchy. In the next chapter we shall look at how this

MacDonald hegemony represented itself in its physical control of Argyll.

58 D Omand, (ed.) The Argyll Book p 123

05018691 Page 20

CHAPTER FOUR – THE MACDONALD HEGEMONY

By the 1340’s the MacDonalds controlled most of Argyll and the Southern Hebrides, acquiring power

through either royal favour or marriage.59 Robert I had come as king to Kintyre in 1315, dragging his

galleys across the Tarbert isthmus, and rebuilding the castle at Tarbert to stamp royal authority on

the region.60 Despite this however, he recognised the need for strong local alliances to keep the

peace, appointing Dugald Campbell as Sheriff of Argyll, and John MacDonald as Baillie of Islay61.

Robert I’s success in the Wars of Independence saw him redistribute power and estates to reward

supporters, punish opponents and ensure power was not concentrated in any one family’s hands. .

The main beneficiaries in Argyll were the Campbells and MacDonalds, with the Stewart Earls of

Mentieth retaining land in Knapdale and on the region’s periphery in Cowal. In the thirteenth

century there had been about a dozen or so local baronial families with estates in Argyll. By the

1350’s most of these had either been forfeited of their territories or accepted the MacDonalds or

Campbell’s as overlords. The increasing strength of both kindred groups contributed to the

contemporary resurgence in Gaelic culture, and for the MacDonalds in particular, the intensification

of old links to Ireland.

Robert I’s death in 1329 however, saw his political settlement unravel. His death enabled John

MacDonald of Islay to capitalise on the uncertainty of the minority. He played the Balliol and Bruce

factions against each other, securing more promises of land and royal office from each. In

September 1336 an indenture with Balliol gave John fresh title to lands in Islay and new lordships in

Knapdale, Skye and Lewis as well as parts of Lochaber as guardian for David Strathbogie’s young

59 Through royal grant of forfeited MacDougall territories or via the marriage of John, Lord of the Isles to the MacRuari heiress in 1346 60 M Brown, The Wars of Scotland, 1214-1371 (Edinburgh, 2004) p 266 61 M Brown, ibid p 2

05018691 Page 21

son62. By 1337 John was adopting the title Dominus Insularum or Lord of the Isles. The murder of

Ranald MacRuari, the last male leader of the MacRuari kindred, and John’s brother in law, at Elcho

Priory in 1346 added the Uists and Garmoran to John’s possessions. Between 1346 and 1357 John

allied himself with the eventual winner of the Second Wars of Independence, Robert the Steward, by

marriage.63 This enabled a further extension of his control eventually to include Ross in the fifteenth

century.

Between the 1330’s and 1360’s therefore a loose but effective MacDonald hegemony had

developed.64 The manner in which the MacDonalds’ exercised power was particularly effective for

both the era and the fragmented nature of the region65. The institutionalisation of their control

through the adoption of primogeniture was assisted by their formal assertion of power over cadet

branches. These included unrelated groupings such as the MacLeans of Jura and Mull, the MacLeods

of Lewis and the MacKintoshes in Lochaber. A developing political hierarchy focussed around the

Council of the Isles based at Finlaggan and controlled by the Lordship, provided military support and

tribute for the MacDonald Lordship.

Membership of the Council also included the Abbot of Iona and Bishop of the Isles, thus giving the

administration religious authority.66 Given the size of the military arsenal of the Lordship, evidenced

in the huge numbers it could marshal at key battles, a vast support of labour and surplus economic

and agricultural production was required. Lands and rents were also often paid in the manner of

62 M Brown, ibid p 3 63 Divorcing his first wife, Amy MacRuari in the process. She had brought him the MacRuari territories of Garmoran and the Uists but was presumably seen as dispensable in the face of a greater opportunity of marriage to the king’s sister. 64 The fifteenth century poets the MacMhuirichs had access to the annalistic records of the Lordship – they reported by the end of the fourteenth century the title ‘Ri Airir Goidel’ or King of Argyll had disappeared, being subsumed within the broader ‘Ri Innse Gall’ or King of the Hebrides which Bannerman claims demonstrated the effective leadership of John, Lord of the Isles– see J. Bannerman, ‘The Lordship of the Isles’ in Scottish Society in the Fifteenth Century ed. JM Brown (London, 1977) p 210. It could of course also mean that the MacDonald control of Argyll was being gradually lost to the Campbells and Stewarts as his attentions were turning north towards Atholl, Lochalsh and Ross. 65 A Grant, ‘Scotland’s Celtic Fringe in the Late Middle Ages: The MacDonald Lords of the Isles and the Kingdom of Scotland’ in The British Isles 1100-1500: Comparisons, Contrasts and Connections ed RR Davies (Edinburgh, 1988) p 132 66 J Bannerman, ‘The Lordship of the Isles’ p 228

05018691 Page 22

gallowglass septs, professional service in war in return for permanent landholdings. A system of

controlling allocation of resources across such a vast swathe of territory required highly formalised

structures, akin to a proto-state. 67 The quasi-sovereignty they exercised was exemplified by their

use of titles such as ‘dominus’ and ‘ri.’

In anthropological terms the MacDonald Lordship of the Isles may not have merited the distinction

of an official state. However, the strong central administration, confederate organisation,

hierarchical society and distinctive culture made the Lordship comparable to many early European

kingdoms which later evolved into states. They were also able to develop a cultural package of

language, dress, societal network and architecture under the power and patronage of this powerful

proto state. Strongly influenced by both their early Christian links with Ireland and the intermarriage

of leading MacDonald clan members with Irish nobility, they practised a form of celtic conservatism.

They resisted the creation of commercial institutions such as the Burgh and repelled significant

settlement by non Gaelic families into their core heartlands.68 However, they were open to

adaptation, adopting the principle of primogeniture and feudal land holdings to control their

territories.

During the period of the MacDonald dominance there is also only a record of one religious

foundation being created – the Augustinian Priory on Oronsay. 69 This was founded by John, first

Lord of the Isles between 1325 and 1353, and was the last monastic house, other than for mendicant

orders, in Scotland.70 There is, however, evidence of existing churches or chapels being repaired

during the period at Iona, Orsay, Finlaggan and Texa by John or his son Reginald. On Eilean Mor John

created a vaulted chancel in the church and his daughter in law Mariota of Ross erected a cross at

67 Formal administrative offices of Secretary, Chancellor, Chamberlain, Steward and Chief Judge mirrored the Crown hierarchy and ensured consistent effective management, even of outlying regions - see A Grant, ‘Scotland’s Celtic Fringe in the Late Middle Ages: The MacDonald Lords of the Isles and the Kingdom of Scotland’ p 132 68 DH Caldwell & NA Ruckley, ‘Domestic Architecture in the Lordship of the Isles’ p 97 69 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 5 Site ref 386 70 D Omand, (ed.) The Argyll Book p 90

05018691 Page 23

the highest point of the island.71 This ongoing close involvement with the church demonstrates

John’s recognition of the value its control conferred. However towards the end of the period of the

Lordship, as power focussed on Ross, Alexander, Lord of the Isles, chose to be buried at Fortrose,

rather than Iona. Perhaps this marked the start of a change in the way in which the Lordship viewed

the traditional forms of worship in the west.

The importance of the MacDonald religious patronage is however demonstrated more clearly by the

extent and quality of the monumental sculpture of the period. There is a widespread distribution of

grave slabs, effigies and crosses throughout the heartland of the Lordship, but especially in Southern

Argyll and the islands. Cultural and political unity helped create a definitive culture which

manifested itself in a stylistically cohesive late mediaeval form of sculpture. It drew on Pictish, Anglo

Saxon, Norse and Gaelic elements creating a unique and vibrant West Highland style of architectural

ornamentation.72 Based on the earlier Irish tradition of crosses and funerary monuments the period

of the Lordship saw the creation of hundreds of monuments under highly stylised schools of carving.

These included the schools of Iona, Loch Awe and Loch Sween all with different techniques and

forms of ornamentation.73 The sculpture symbolises a male dominated martial society, with many of

the monuments depicting clan chiefs in body armour or hunting, a sport restricted to the higher

nobility and royalty.74 The elite used this monumental art and its association with religion and

martial prowess to underscore their secular power, linking their success to the divine authority and

power of the church thus legitimising their clan status.75

There are other aspects of material culture that also give the Lordship a distinctive heritage

unmatched by other parts of Scotland. The strong tradition of boat building as late as the sixteenth

century, the absence of a money economy and the tradition of handmade pottery matched only by

71 D Omand, ibid p 90 72 I Armit, The Archaeology of Skye and the Western Isles p 221 73 MacLean D., Early Medieval Sculpture in the West Highlands Thesis ref: 370588 p 481 74R Dodgshon, The Age of the Clans: The Highlands from Somerled to the Clearances p 6 75 I Armit, The Archaeology of Skye and the Western Isles p 221

05018691 Page 24

possibly kindred links in Ulster set the Lordship apart. The tradition of monumental sculpture did

not spread to Ross even after acquisition of the earldom there, or into Perthshire as the Campbells

extended their influence.76

It is interesting, however, that the military, economic and religious dominance of the lordship was

not expressed in developing major centres of power. As we have seen in earlier periods, power

bases were critical to receive, distribute and safeguard resources. The forts of Dunadd, Dunollie and

Dunaverty were rebuilt or replaced by the great thirteenth and fourteenth century castles of Castle

Sween, Dunstaffnage, Aros and Duart. However during the period of MacDonald hegemony no new

castles were built and the Lordship tended to either reuse existing bases or build centres on a more

domestic scale. Sites reused included Cairn na Burgh, Dun Chonnaill, Aros and Ardtornish. Aros had

been built by the MacDougalls and probably dates from the thirteenth century, but passed to the

MacDonalds as part of Robert I’s political settlement.77 Ardtornish is thought to have been a

MacRuari castle, erected in the late thirteenth century, but becoming a principal MacDonald

residence via marriage with John dying there in 1387.78

Watson explains this as partly a reflection of what was happening on a wider scale throughout

Scotland. Castles and power bases were becoming economic centres from which regions could be

managed.79 Contemporary political and social prestige was not bound up with building grand

modern fortifications. Throughout Scotland there were few highly defensive castles built during this

period. Those that were constructed, such as Dirleton, Kildrummy and Bothwell, were all French in

style and provided only limited defensive capability. Leading Scottish families funded institutions

that extended their power and/ or influence elsewhere. Examples include the Balliol’s patronage of

Sweetheart Abbey and Balliol College, Oxford and the founding of abbeys and collegiate churches by

76 DH Caldwell & G Ewart, 'Finlaggan and the lordship of the Isles: an archaeological approach', Scottish Historical Review, 72 p 164 77 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 5 Site ref 333 78 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 5 Site ref 332 79 F Watson, 'The expression of power in a medieval kingdom: thirteenth-century Scottish castles', in Scottish Power Centres: From the early Middles Ages to the twentieth century, ed. S.M. Foster, A.I. MacInnes and R. MacInnes (Glasgow, 1998) p 63

05018691 Page 25

other nobles. Watson concluded that outside the turbulent period of the Wars of Independence,

royalty and the higher nobility exerted power in a more ‘relaxed and self confident manner.’80 This

expressed itself in the building of more domestic luxurious accommodations than a castle built for

defensive purposes could provide.

There are also a number of other factors that may have contributed to the lack of castellar

construction post 1350. There was no longer the wealth or desire for new castles as the economies

or many regions had been significantly affected by decades of fighting. Climate change also

impacted detrimentally on the economic power of regions, especially those highly dependent on

agriculture. Under the Lordship’s control, the region itself had entered a period of relative stability,

which again negated the need for major defensive fortifications.

The ways in which estates were managed also dictated how power bases were built and where they

were constructed. Local lords or chiefs’ primary concerns would be local matters; the lack of a

strongly centralised system of government or justice, especially in peripheral regions like the west,

resulted in local nobility being responsible for the vast majority of issues that arose within their

region. This is demonstrated by the fact that before the fifteenth century very few matters were

brought before Parliament. Local magnates, such as the Lords of the Isles, would issue their own

charters, manage their own baronial or shrieval courts and control local markets. In the Lordship

this was achieved through the Council of the Isles, which brought together the leading clan chiefs to

manage the region. This form of power sharing was unique to the Lordship in the period and

appears to have allowed for both overall control by the MacDonalds, yet sufficient flexibility for local

chiefs to retain power and semi-sovereignty within their localities.

In the Lordship, the Lords of the Isles issued acts and decrees as a tool for managing a far flung

region, using laws that had been developed in the time of Somerled. Their main power base was at

Finlaggan where archaeologists have not uncovered any evidence of castellar construction. Based

80 F Watson, ibid p 64

05018691 Page 26

on two small islands, the power base appears to have been domestic in scale, with a large hall house

possibly being the location for the important rituals of feasting and displays of hospitality.81 The

smaller Eilean na Comhairle (Council Isle) was linked to the larger Eilean Mor (administrative centre)

by a stone and timber causeway.82 Loch Finlaggan was surrounded by good agricultural land and

there is evidence to show occupation of both island sites since the early medieval period.

Finlaggan was the nerve centre of the Lordship but not the only place where the Council of the Isles

met or leaders were inaugurated. Between 1444 and 1492 eleven charters state they were issued

by the Council of the Isles, but were dated at Dingwall, Inverness, Aros and Oronsay.83 Donald, Lord

of the Isles was inaugurated on Eigg in 1387.84 A territorial lordship on this scale would have

required a number of locations from which to redistribute goods, receive tribute, exercise justice

and enable craftsmen to work in safe proximity to patrons. The MacDonald castles at Aros,

Ardtornish, Dunstaffnage, Dunaverty and Skipness probably acted as these local bases, with support

from power bases of affiliated clans and kindreds.

In addition, the Lords of the Isles chose not to petition or create anything similar to a royal burgh in

their territories. The proximity of the royal burgh at Tarbert, and the burgh of barony established at

Inverary by the first Earl of Argyll in 1474, must have been known to the Lordship.85 Caldwell and

Ewart consider that Finlaggan would have met burghal requirements in terms of trade and the

proximity of a productive agricultural hinterland. However, either the crown refused to grant burgh

status, or the Lordship did not consider it necessary. There did not appear to be an independent

merchant class who might have pressed for burghal status, thus further evidencing the control of the

Lords over all sectors of society. In addition the lack of both an influx of new people – the Lordship

81 Both central to the developing clan culture, especially in times of scarcity, where the ability to supply food on a large scale, demonstrated the wealth of a clan or kindred. 82 DH Caldwell & G Ewart, 'Finlaggan and the lordship of the Isles: an archaeological approach' p 153 83 All in the fifteenth century as John MacDonald concentrated on the north, especially Ross, to the detriment of Argyll and the Hebrides – J Bannerman, ‘The Lordship of the Isles’ p 223 84 DH Caldwell & G Ewart, 'Finlaggan and the lordship of the Isles: an archaeological approach' p 146 85 DH Caldwell & G Ewart, ibid p 161

05018691 Page 27

resisting the encouragement of new settlers, and of a money economy, may have led to the decision

that burghal status did not fit the economy of the Lordship.86

During the period there were a number of smaller dwellings built, however, which included simple

hall houses and tower houses. Caldwell and Ruckley date hall houses to pre fourteenth century in

the west, with tower houses generally appearing later.87 Tower houses were common in the

lowlands, much less so in the western highlands and islands. Incorporating ground floor storage, a

first floor public hall for entertaining and feasting, and private accommodation above, they were

strong houses, not fighting bases. They were used in the lowlands to suggest the high status of their

owners and provide some measure of safety if attacked. Tower houses been found on Mull (Dun

Ban on Ulva and Dun Ara), Breachacha on Coll and in Morvern. Dun Ara is thought to have been a

stronghold of the MacKinnons as early as 1354.88 Breachacha was built by the MacDougalls of Coll in

the late 1400’s.89 Kinlochaline Castle and Moy Castles were both built by the MacLeans of Duart, in

the fifteenth century.90 MacLean of Kingairloch built Glensanda Castle in the same period. All were

territories under MacDonald overlordship, but with sufficient autonomy and wealth within the

locales to permit major construction projects.

These all demonstrate the confederate nature of the Lordship and, being largely domestic in

character, are perhaps indicative of the high degree of local stability and prosperity in the Lordship.91

Tabraham concludes therefore that the building boom of the fifteenth century was a reflection of

political stability and the growing confidence of the nobility in its future.92

86 Of the 197 coin finds from the period none comes from within the Lordship of the Isles area – suggesting a money economy and currency was not yet accepted – DH Caldwell & G Ewart, 'Finlaggan and the lordship of the Isles: an archaeological approach' p 159 87 DH Caldwell & NA Ruckley, ‘Domestic Architecture in the Lordship of the Isles’ p 115 88 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 5 Site ref 340 89 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 3 Breachacha ref 90 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 5 Site refs 343 and 346 91 J Dunbar, ‘The Medieval Architecture of the Scottish Highlands’ p 52 92 C Tabraham, Scotland’s Castles p 77

05018691 Page 28

In anthropological terms the MacDonald Lordship of the Isles may not have merited the distinction

of an official state. However the strong central administration, hierarchical society and distinctive

culture made the Lordship comparable to many early European kingdoms which later evolved into

states. John I’s death in 1386 ended an era of unparalleled growth based on superior lordship over

militarised clans and control of the church. A conservative society, it was led by a well organised

administration capable of securing and keeping the peace within its boundaries. Bannerman

characterised it as a ‘vital living organism which the conformist and unitary influences of central

government found difficult to penetrate’.93 This is demonstrated in the landscape by the absence

of major crown landholdings, by the growing number of mid status dwellings constructed by the

Lordship hierarchy and the continued control of religious life, especially via funerary monuments and

patronage.

93 J Bannerman, ‘The Lordship of the Isles’ p 239

05018691 Page 29

CHAPTER FIVE – ARGYLL AFTER THE LORDSHIP

As we have already seen, in many ways, the Lordship was unlike any other form of territorial control

in Scotland during the medieval period. The death of John 1st Lord of the Isles in 1386, at Ardtornish

however marked the end of the era of unparalleled growth. Within one hundred years the

territories had been forfeited, as a result of the disastrous political decisions of his heirs and the

consequent outbreak of civil war in the Lordship.94 Expansion into Ross saw a move from Finlaggan

as the basis of power to an Aros/ Ardtornish axis on the Sound of Mull.95 Both castles controlled an

important sea route and gave safe access to Loch Linnhe, Lochalsh and Ross. This change in focus to

their northern territories weakened the Lordship, leaving a power vacuum in the south, quickly filled

by ambitious warring MacDonald septs.96 The forfeiture of lands in lands in Ross, Knapdale and

Kintyre in 1476, led to civil war in the lordship between John and his heir, Angus Og. This

catastrophically weakened the MacDonalds and by 1493 all of the Lordship lands had been forfeited

and redistributed to crown favourites such as the Campbells of Lochawe and Glencorchy.

The Campbells were not newcomers, but had seen a gradual accretion of power since the thirteenth

century. As Barrow states however, they were only one of many families ‘greedy for lands and

power in a fiercely competitive environment’ and, until the end of the fifteenth century, never in a

position to challenge the MacDonald economic or military might.97

94 In particular the Crawford Douglas Ross Bond placed the MacDonalds in a camp directly opposed to the Stewart kings; this was exacerbated by John’s dissatisfaction with the regency of Queen Mary and led to the signing of the Westminster-Ardtornish treaty in 1462 under which he agreed to support Edward of England in his attempts to overthrown the Stewart monarchy. He would be rewarded with all lands north of the Forth, effectively becoming a quasi king of half of Scotland. 95 Of the eight charters issued by Donald that survive, 4 were issued at Ardtornish, 1 at Aros and none at Finlaggan 96 These included Donald Balloch, another signatory to the Westminster-Ardtornish Treaty, who had constantly attacked crown and Stewart possessions in the Clyde, and destroyed Brodick Castle on Arran in 1452 – see S Boardman, The Campbells, 1250-1513 (Edinburgh, 2006) p 173 97 GWS Barrow, Kingship and Unity: Scotland 1000-1306 p 111

05018691 Page 30

The earliest Campbell on record is Gillespic Cambell in 1263; his grandson was Neil Campbell, a close

friend, cousin and supporter of Robert Bruce; and from whom the rise of the Campbells’ can be

traced. Neil Campbell was rewarded for service to Robert I; following his death his son Colin was

confirmed Lord of Loch Awe, Ardskeonish, Kilmartin and Duntroon in return for the service of a

galley and 40 oars for 40 days.98 The Campbells of Glenorchy were made Constables of

Dunstaffnage and given swathes of forfeited MacDougall territories in Lorne.99 Neil had also

received the forfeited David Strathbogie Earldom of Atholl, as well as being appointed the King’s

lieutenant from Tyndrum to Lochgilphead and Loch Melfort to Loch Long. By marriage they also

acquired lands in Ayr, Glenorchy, Mestrie, Cawdor, Skye and North Uist. In 1334 Sir Colin Campbell

of Lochawe was given the hereditary keepership of the royal castle at Dunoon.100

Marriage alliances with the Lamont family of Cowal, together with inheritances from the Mentieth

lords, secured further lands in Cowal, Knapdale and Arran, including the keepership of Castle Sween

and Lochranza Castle. By 1395 Colin Campbell was openly using the title ‘Dominus de Eragadia’ –

Lord or King of Argyll. The Campbell of Lochawe’s original stronghold had been at Innis Chonnell on

Loch Awe and Caisteal an Nighinn Ruaidhe on Loch Avich – but as their territories expanded

southwards they developed a network of new fortifications, including at Carrick and Eilean Dearg,

staffed by cadet branches of the family. In the 1440’s the Campbells were given control over Royal

fortresses and lands on the west coast, to defend against further incursions by Donald Balloch and

the MacDonald’s. In 1457 Colin Campbell was made Earl of Argyll and made Jusiticiar of all Scotland

south of the Forth; in 1499 the family became the official figurehead of the crown in the west.

Within a period of 250 years therefore, they had risen from being local landowners, one amongst

many, to being amongst one of the most powerful and stable families in Scotland. This was

achieved through recognition of the value of close alliance with the crown, as well as the waning

98 D Omand, (ed.) The Argyll Book p 141 99 Ibid p 143 100 Ibid p 143

05018691 Page 31

fortunes of the MacDonald lordship. 101 Despite their close alliance to the crown however, the

Campbells still positioned themselves, and were accepted, as a leading Gaelic family for most of the

period. Consequently until c 1450 they continued to build in the west highland tradition, of reusing

existing power bases, and sponsoring the creation of funerary monuments. This is shown by the

development and use of Kilchurn Castle by the Campbells of Glenorchy. The castle at Kilchurn is

thought to date from the 1430’s with a design based on the traditional west highland tower, laich

hall, barmkin and barrack rooms.102 Although the castle lost its status as principal residence, when

the Glenorchy Campbells moved eastwards to Loch Tay, Kilchurn was retained and repaired. It acted

as a symbol of the origins and antiquity of lineage of the kindred, with its fabric being manipulated

to express the success of the clan as it grew through time.103

There was, however, a distinct move away from traditional forms of castellar construction, funerary

architecture and estate management from the middle of the fifteenth century onwards. The two

leading Campbell families, Lochawe and Glenorchy, appear to have been at the forefront of these

new developments; from them we can define a change in the built heritage and something distinct

from the traditional west highland approach.

As before, the Campbells had a need for power bases across their territories from which they could

manage their economic affairs and dispense justice. There were similarities therefore with the

Lordship, but more significantly differences. The Glenorchy Campbells began a new programme of

castle building unseen in the west since the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Located on important

trading routes they also tended to be close to sites where the monumental status of administration

already existed, legitimising Campbell power by association.104 New castles were built at Balloch ,

101 Although there is little evidence to show that they took any of the MacDonald assets for themselves by force. There appeared to be a natural reluctance to turn against MacDonald allies, friends and relatives by marriage. There was no open hostility between the clans until 1561 when Archibald, 5th Earl of Argyll attempted to bring the MacLeans of Duart to Glasgow on behalf o the crown – see D Caldwell, Islay p 77 102 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 2 Site ref 293 103 Ibid p 249 104 The tower at Strathfillan is sited close to a fourteenth century Augustinian priory, a burial mound and an assembly/ gallows hill – this is not dissimilar to the MacSorley choice of location for power bases – see C

05018691 Page 32

Edinample on the southern shore of Loch Earn, Achallader on Rannoch Moor, Barcaldine and Loch

Dochart in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. However, as Dalglish points out, this new

castellar construction was not necessarily associated with territorial expansion per se, but rather a

new method of estate management. There was a move from the use of kindreds to control

territories to more professionalised administrative and economic management, sometimes by

managers from outside the clan. Smaller, more manageable tower houses enabled a local presence

to be established and estates to be administered without the need for major defensive structures.

Clearly the Campbells in this period did not equate territorial possessions with military service, but

rather with economic gain. The design of these new castles were typical of a wider trend in Scottish

Renaissance architecture. The inclusive ideology of the great hall was replaced by separate rooms,

distancing the chief from the wider community, and any defensive capability was only limited, for

display rather than military value.

In the south the Campbells of Lochawe were also extending their territory into Cowal and Kintyre in

the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. They too began to adopt new forms of construction, the

compartmentalised tower house reflecting new trends in lowland Scottish architecture. Carrick

Castle is thought to be one of the earliest tower house castles still extant; its location critical on the

trading routes between the lowlands and highlands.105 At Inverary a tower house was built to

replace Innis Chonnell in the 1450’s as the principal residence of the Campbells of Loch Awe. Other

castles of similar date and design were Craignish, Dunderave and Carnasserie, all closely linked to

the Campbells.

None of the Campbell kindreds established traditional religious foundations in Argyll or the Isles.

The only record of significant religious patronage is their creation of a collegiate church at Kilmun in

Dalglish, ‘An Age of Transition? Castles and the Scottish Highland Estate in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’ in Post Medieval Archaeology 39/2 (2005) p 249 105 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 7 Site ref 116

05018691 Page 33

Cowal, endowed by Sir Duncan Campbell of Loch Awe in 1442.106 Collegiate churches were secular

foundations, popular in the rest of Scotland in the fifteenth century with over forty being founded.

They were either founded either de novo, or as in the case of Kilmun, by papal dispensation in favour

of an existing parish church.107 Cruden attributes their growth in popularity to the improving

economic conditions that facilitated the development of individual and corporate chantry chapels

outwith the control of the local church hierarchy.108 The style of the funerary monumental sculpture

adopted by the Campbells also differed from the Lordship tradition. Significant numbers were still

produced but in the Campbell dominated areas they tended to of lowland derivation, often

incorporating sandstone effigies and icons equivalent to late medieval grave slabs of eastern

Scotland.109

The Campbells adoption of burghal status for the main town at Inverary also marks a change from

the Lordship tradition of territorial management. As already stated, Finlaggan could have attracted

burghal status due to its economic and administrative importance to the lordship, but the Lordship

did not pursue this. As well as control over the trade in the town, burghal status also included rights

over neighbouring forests, ponds, royal lands, manors, farms and grain stores.110 Perhaps the

MacDonalds did not need any external recognition of their rights to such resources, given the extent

of their economic and military power. It could be surmised that equally the Campbells did not

possess equivalent powers, and the burghal status of its key town would provide this.

Towards the end of the period therefore a number of key trends are discernible that demonstrate a

move away from the Lordship traditions to a more outward facing culturally integrated approach to

territorial management. The castles, churches and funerary sculpture all embody how religious and

secular power was exercised; the fall of the MacDonalds, and the completion of Campbell hegemony

106 This became the burial place of the Earls of Argyll. See RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 7 Site ref 80 107 S Cruden, Scottish Mediaeval Churches (Edinburgh, 1986) p 183 108 Ibid p 184 109 RCAHMS Argyll Vol. 7 p 87 110 F Watson, 'The expression of power in a medieval kingdom: thirteenth-century Scottish castles' p 67

05018691 Page 34

resulted in long term changes that brought Argyll and the islands closer to the Scottish cultural

norm. This was achieved, again not through direct crown interference but by the use of allies who

straddled both worlds, and increasing cultural assimilation.

05018691 Page 35

CHAPTER SIX - CONCLUSION

As Fiona Watson states ‘There can be few more potent images of a power centre in the popular

mind than the late medieval castle.’111 They provide defensive capability in times of turbulence.

They symbolise the power and wealth of their creators, more so when the populace inhabited small,

slight, impermanent dwellings. This desire to impress or overawe could be directed against both

external aggressors and their own people; reinforcing their legitimacy of rule. They were also the

focus of an increasing complex economic network, a point at which tributes could be rendered and

redistributed and host the displays of feasting and hospitality central to Gaelic medieval culture.

Although we can discern an importation of external design ideas, the castles and power bases of

Argyll during the medieval period have many unique characteristics. Before 1200, and the rise of

the MacSorley dynasty, Argyll is ruled by a number of kinship groupings, or proto clans, with an Irish

and Norse heritage. Focussed very much on the Irish Sea World, there appears to be little early

Scottish or Pictish influence in the architecture of the heartland of Argyll, and especially its islands.

Whilst elsewhere in Scotland, the advancing Norman feudalisation of the Canmores employs early

motte and bailey castle techniques to impose and maintain control; this phenomenon does not

reach the west. Bases of power and economic distribution tend to be stone fortresses, often based

on or close to Iron Age forts, duns or roundhouses that have seen occupation for many centuries.

The influence of the Columban religious tradition is also strong in the early medieval landscape, with

numerous churches, chapels, burial grounds and crosses and grave slabs. As territorial power in

Argyll began to coalesce from the less stratified landholdings of the Ceneln, into smaller numbers of

kindreds, the leaders of the more hierarchical and stratified society developed closer links with the

111 F Watson, 'The expression of power in a medieval kingdom: thirteenth-century Scottish castles' p 59

05018691 Page 36

church. They constructed chapels and began to found religious foundations; in addition a strong

tradition of Irish influenced monumental sculpture develops. The chapels at Keills, Kilmory Knap

and Skipness, demonstrate how control of the religious landscape was as important as control of the

secular landscape. In a period when religion controlled all aspects of everyday life, secular and

religious power could be equally valuable in legitimising territorial control.

The rise to power of Somerled and the MacSorleys heralded a new form of territorial control in

Argyll. David I’s programme of Normanisation failed to reach the west; the Canmores recognised

the need for alliances with powerful local kindreds to keep the peace. These local kindreds resulted

in society becoming much more hierarchical and stratified. Territorial control was from great

castles, such as those built at Sween, Skipness, Dunstaffnage, Aros and Innis Chonnell, rare in

Scotland for the period and unique in their scale and distribution. This programme of castellar

construction appeared to be only partially influenced by Norman ideas of design and use. Whilst

some, such as Castle Sween mirror the shell keep design of the Lowland Stewart castle at Rothesay,

others such as Dunstaffnage, Aros, Caisteal an Nighinn Ruaidhe and Innis Chonnell are very much

indigenous overlays of new ideas onto traditional west highland and island power bases. Any crown

control was only indirect; principally through alliance although the crown nominally controlled bases

at Tarbert, Dunoon and Dunaverty. Cultural assimilation was slow, with many indigenous traditions

carried forward into the design and siting of new castles.

External influence, and possible emulation of Lowland cultural norms, can be found however in the

adoption of continental ideas on religious worship. This was restricted to the MacSorley family and

probably demonstrates their growing regional dominance, being the only kindred grouping with the

power, resources and international connections to found the new religious orders at Saddell,

Ardchattan and Iona. They may have denoted appeasement of the Scottish kings or their conscious

emulation, highlighting the MacSorley economic and cultural dominance in the region.

05018691 Page 37

Within Argyll the period of the Wars of Independence and the internal struggle for control, between

the leading families of MacDonalds, MacDougalls, MacRuaris, Campbells and Stewarts, was a very

turbulent one. The response to this was a programme of casteller construction at Tarbert, Duart,

MIngary, Ardtornish and elsewhere and upgrading of many of the early power bases, including

Dunstaffnage, Dun Chonnaill and Cairn Na Burg. As power coalesced into the single hands of the

MacDonalds, during the fourteenth century, the region became more stable. They used their power

and wealth to upgrade existing churches and chapels but rarely built new. The only religious

foundation created in this period is Oronsay Priory, founded by John between 1325 and 1353112

However it is notable that throughout the whole of the period under discussion, there were no

religious foundations created or supported by the crown. In all other regions of Scotland the crown

had some influence in founding or supporting new orders or cathedrals.

A strong, culturally unique tradition of monumental sculpture developed, with its roots very much in

the Irish tradition, but incorporating many of the cultural markers important to the Lordship.

Expressing military power, hunting prowess and control of the seas, this tradition of funerary

architecture marks the region and period out from the rest of Scotland. The medieval grave slabs

and crosses are as powerful as the standard expressions of religious and secular power – the

churches and castles – in confirming the Lordship of the Isles’ control over Argyll. They also

differentiated the region from the rest of Scotland – still definitely peripheral, rather than moving

towards the core. There was a limited presence of royal authority at Dunoon and Tarbert, but the

military and economic dominance of the Lordship was such that the Crown could only hope to keep

the peace indirectly, through alliance with the MacDonalds or the increasingly powerful Campbells.

It is only with the downfall of the MacDonalds, that we begin to see eastern and lowland influences

play a part in the siting and design of castles, religious development and territorial administration.

Even during this later, post 1493, period, the indigenous Gaelic traditions of the main beneficiaries of

112 D Omand, The Argyll Book p 90

05018691 Page 38

the MacDonald forfeitures, the Campbells, were to the fore. This ensured that the way in which

power was represented in the built landscape, still responded to local differences. This was

evidenced by their symbolic use of Kilchurn Castle as the seat of the Glenorchy kindred, representing

the ancient lineage of the clan.

From the mid fifteenth century new ideas of territorial management were emerging and the

Glenorchy and Lochawe Campbells were at the forefront of these new developments. These

included new ways of managing land and new relationships between clan chiefs and their kinsmen.

This new philosophy is expressed in the built landscape by numerous new tower houses as the

administration centre of a quasi modern estate. These enabled a local presence to be established

and estates to be administered without the need for major defensive structures. Their designs were

typical of a wider trend in Scottish Renaissance architecture whereby the inclusive ideology of the

great hall was replaced by separate rooms, distancing the chief from the wider community. Similarly

the major religious development during the period was the founding of the collegiate church at

Kilmun, by the Lochawe Campbells, a lowland tradition of religious patronage, not seen elsewhere in

Argyll. Whilst the Campbell kindreds therefore paid homage to their traditional Gaelic roots, they

were also experimenting with new forms of religious and secular territorial control. A philosophy

which underpinned their rise to power, and long term success, they managed to straddle both the

Gaelic and lowland worlds.

In Argyll therefore, there is a clear trajectory of changes in how territorial power and control was

expressed reflecting changing management regimes and approaches. Although evidence is limited,

particularly for the early period, a pattern of development unique to the west highlands can be

discerned. External influences appear to only ever be indirect, either through the import of ideas of

design or estate management, or via the crown’s allocation of land to local allies. Although the

region was part of Scotland since 1266, direct crown interference though the whole of the period is

extremely limited. Although the MacDonalds were to some extent involved in external affairs, Argyll

05018691 Page 39

remained very much at the periphery of Scotland and this was reflected in the way its territories

were managed and the type of buildings that were developed. Even at the end of the period, when

the Campbell hegemony coalesces, how land is controlled responds more to local circumstance than

the imposition of any central authority. This makes the west unique and undoubtedly contributed to

the continuing prejudiced view of the western highlands as uncivilised and barbarous, long after

other peripheral regions were fully assimilated into Scotland’s political and cultural core.

05018691 Page 40

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson MO., Kings and Kingship in Early Scotland (Edinburgh: Scottish Academic

Press, 1973)

Armit I., The Archaeology of Skye and the Western Isles (Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press, 1996)

Bannerman J., ‘The Lordship of the Isles’ in Scottish Society in the Fifteenth Century

ed. JM Brown (London: Edward Arnold, 1977)

Barrow GWS., Kingship and Unity: Scotland 1000-1306 (London: Edward Arnold,

1981)

Barrow GWS, ‘The Highlands of Scotland in the lifetime of Robert the Bruce, 1274-1329’, in Kingdom of the Scots: Government, church and society from the eleventh to the fourteenth century (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2003

Boardman SI., ‘ Pillars of the Community’: Clan Campbell and Architectural

Patronage in the Fifteenth Century’ in Lordship and Architecture in Medieval and

Renaissance Scotland (Edinburgh: John Donald, 2005)

Boardman S., The Campbells, 1250-1513 (Edinburgh: John Donald, 2006)

Brown M., The Wars of Scotland, 1214-1371 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University

Press, 2004)

Butler Rev. D., Scottish Cathedrals and Abbeys (London: A&C Black, 1901)

Caldwell DH & Ruckley NA., ‘Domestic Architecture in the Lordship of the Isles’ in

Lordship and Architecture in Medieval and Renaissance Scotland (Edinburgh: John

Donald, 2005)

Caldwell D., Islay (Edinburgh: Birlinn, 2008)

Caldwell DH and Ewart G., 'Finlaggan and the lordship of the Isles: an

archaeological approach', Scottish Historical Review, 72

Campbell I., 'A Romanesque Revival and the Early Renaissance in Scotland, c.1380-1513', Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 54:3 (1995)

Cannel J and Tabraham CJ., 'Excavations at Duffus Castle, Moray', Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 124 (1994)

Cowan I., ‘The Medieval Church in the Highlands’ in The Middle Ages in the

Highlands, ed. L MacLean (Inverness: Inverness Field Club, 1981)

05018691 Page 41

Cruden S., Scottish Mediaeval Churches (Edinburgh: John Donald, 1986)

Cruden S., Scottish Abbeys: An Introduction to the medieval Abbeys and Priories of

Scotland (Edinburgh: HMSO, 1960)

Cruden S., The Scottish Castle (Edinburgh: Nelson, 1960)

Dalglish C., ‘An Age of Transition? Castles and the Scottish Highland Estate in the

Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’ in Post Medieval Archaeology 39/2 (2005)

Dodgshon R., The Age of the Clans: The Highlands from Somerled to the

Clearances (Edinburgh: Birlinn, 2002)

Dunbar J., ‘The Medieval Architecture of the Scottish Highlands’ in The Middle Ages

in the Highlands ed. L MacLean (Inverness: Inverness Field Club, 1981)

Duncan AAM & Brown AL., ‘Argyll and the Isles in the Earlier Middle Ages’ in Proceedings of the Society of Antiquities, 1956-57 Vol. XIII.

Ewart G and Baker F., ‘Carrick Castle: symbol and source of Campbell power in south Argyll from the 14th to the 17th century’, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 128 (1998)

Fawcett R., Scottish Medieval Churches (Edinburgh: HMSO, 1985)

Fisher I., ‘The Heirs of Somerled’ in Lordship and Architecture in Medieval and

Renaissance Scotland (Edinburgh: John Donald, 2005)

Foster SM., Picts, Gaels and Scots (London: Batsford, 2004)

Grant A., ‘Scotland’s Celtic Fringe in the Late Middle Ages: The MacDonald Lords of

the Isles and the Kingdom of Scotland’ in The British Isles 1100-1500: Comparisons,

Contrasts and Connections ed RR Davies (Edinburgh: John Donald, 1988)

Grant IF., The Lordship of the Isles (Edinburgh: Mercat, 1982)

Grant IF & Cheape H., Periods in Highland History London: Barnes and Noble, 2000)

McDonald RA., The Kingdom of the Isles: Scotland’s Western Seaboard c.1100-

1336 (East Lothian: Tuckwell, 1997)

McDonald RA., 'Scoto-Norse kings and the reformed religious orders: patterns of

monastic patronage in twelfth-century Galloway and Argyll', Albion, 27 (1995)

MacGregor M., 'Church and culture in the late medieval Highlands', in The Church in

the Highlands, ed. J. Kirk (Edinburgh: Scottish Church History Society, 1998)

MacLean D., Early Medieval Sculpture in the West Highlands Thesis ref: 370588

05018691 Page 42

Munro J & Munro RW., Acts of the Lords of the Isles: Scottish History Society, Fourth

Series Vol 22 (Edinburgh: Blackwood, Pilland Wilson, 1986)

Munro J., ‘The Lordship of the Isles’ in The Middle Ages in the Highlands ed. L

MacLean (Inverness: Inverness Field Club, 1981)

Newton N., Islay (Devon: Pevensey Press, 1995)

Omand D., (ed.) The Argyll Book (Edinburgh: Birlinn, 2004)

Oram RD., ‘Royal and Lordly Residence in Scotland c 1050 to 1250: An Historiographical Review and Critical Revision’ in The Antiquaries Journal Vol. 88 (2008)

Roberts JL., Lost Kingdoms; Celtic Scotland and the Middle Ages (Edinburgh:

University Press, 1997)

Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments of Scotland Argyll; Volume 1

Kintyre (HMSO) 1971

Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments of Scotland Argyll; Volume

12 Lorn (HMSO) 1974

Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments of Scotland Argyll; Volume 3

Mull, Tiree, Coll and North Argyll (HMSO) 1980

Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments of Scotland Argyll; Volume 4

Iona (HMSO) 1982

Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments of Scotland Argyll; Volume 5

Islay Jura Colonsay and Oronsay (HMSO) 1984

Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments of Scotland Argyll; Volume 7

Mid Argyll and Cowal: Medieval and Later Monuments (HMSO) 1992

Sellar WDH., ‘Hebridean Sea-Kings; The Successors of Somerled, 1164-1316’ in

Alba: Celtic Scotland in the Medieval Era eds Cowan EJ. & McDonald RA. (East

Linton: Tuckwell, 2003)

Shaw FJ., ‘Landownership in the Western Isles in the Seventeenth Century’ in

Scottish Historical Review Vol. 56, No.161, Part 1 (Apr., 1977)

Simpson WD., The Ancient Stones of Scotland 2nd Ed. (London: Robert Hale, 1968)

Stewart JA., ‘Political and Cultural Change in the Seventeenth-Century House of Argyll and Clan Campbell’ Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium, Vol. 12

(1992)

Tabraham C., Scotland’s Castles (London: Batsford, 1997)

05018691 Page 43

Turner D., 'The bishops of Argyll and the Castle of Achandun, Lismore, AD 1180-1343' in Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 128 (1998)

Walker FA., The Buildings of Scotland: Argyll and Bute (London: Penguin, 2003)

Walker FA., Argyll and the Islands: An Illustrated Architectural Guide (Rutland:

Rutland Press, 2003)

Watson, F. 'The expression of power in a medieval kingdom: thirteenth-century

Scottish castles', in Scottish Power Centres: From the early Middles Ages to the

twentieth century, ed. S.M. Foster, A.I. MacInnes and R. MacInnes (Glasgow:

Cruithne Press, 1998),

Yeoman P., Pilgrimage in Medieval Scotland (London: Batsford, 1999)

Yeoman P., Medieval Scotland (London: Batsford, 1995)

05018691 Page 44

APPENDIX A – MAP OF ARGYLL

05018691 Page 45

APPENDIX B – EARLY HISTORIC POWER CENTRES

05018691 Page 46

APPENDIX C – THE MACSORLEY AND MACRUARI GENEAOLOGIES

05018691 Page 47

05018691 Page 48

APPENDIX D – THE WESTERN SEABOARD IN THE CENTRAL MIDDLE AGES

05018691 Page 49

APPENDIX E – PRINCIPAL CADETS OF THE LOCHAWE CAMPBELLS