Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Legislation, Treason and Parliament

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Parliament and Convention in the Personal Rule of James V of Scotland, 1528–1542

  • 202 Accesses

Abstract

Whilst the parliament shared many of its functions with conventions and operated in tandem with them, it retained two unique abilities: the power to pass permanently binding legislation and the capacity to try traitors. Parliamentary treason trials encompassed extra-parliamentary negotiations, but the parliament remained necessary because the threat of an in absentia conviction created a coercive environment for negotiations. Turning to statutes, the committee of the articles was occupied intensely with the review and revision of previous statutes to ensure they offered a proper deterrent to potential miscreants. This suggests the articles was a committee which reviewed laws almost as much as it was one which drafted them. It also argues for powerful continuities between late fifteenth- and early sixteenth-century efforts to codify the laws and the routine process of reviewing, revising and repassing laws.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    George Neilson and Henry Paton (eds), Acts of Lords of Council in civil causes 1496-1501 II (Edinburgh, 1918), pp. v-xcvii; Irene O’Brien, ‘The Scottish Parliament in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’ (unpublished PhD thesis, Glasgow, 1980), p. 142; Mark Godfrey, ‘Parliament and the Law’ in K. M. Brown and A. R. MacDonald (eds), Parliament in Context, 1235-1707 (Edinburgh, 2010), pp. 156-185. For the exceptions linked to remeid of law: J. D. Ford, ‘Protestations to Parliament for Remeid of Law’, SHR 225 (2009), pp. 57-107.

  2. 2.

    Julian Goodare, The Government of Scotland 1560-1625 (Edinburgh, 2004), pp. 71-3.

  3. 3.

    Godfrey, ‘Parliament and the Law’, p. 176.

  4. 4.

    Godfrey, ‘Parliament and the Law’, p. 178.

  5. 5.

    M. G. Kelley, ‘The Douglas earls of Angus a study in the social and political bases of power of a Scottish family from 1389 until 1557’ (unpublished PhD thesis, Edinburgh, 1973), pp. 751-2; John Finlay, Men of Law in pre-Reformation Scotland (East Linton, 2000), pp. 129-30.

  6. 6.

    Jenny Wormald, Court, Kirk and Community (London, 1981), pp. 21-2, 98-100; Goodare, Government of Scotland, p. 72.

  7. 7.

    A. J. Slavin, ‘Introduction’ to A. J. Slavin (ed.) The New Monarchies and Representative Assemblies: Medieval Constitutionalism or Modern Absolutism? (Lexington, MA, 1964); A. Marongiu, Medieval Parliaments (London, 1968), pp. 235-7; S. Gunn, ‘Politic history, New Monarchy and state formation: Henry VII in European perspective’, Historical Research 82 (2009), pp. 380-92; for a reassessment of parliament under a ‘new monarch’ south of the border: P. R. Cavill, English Parliaments of Henry VII 1485-1504 (Oxford, 2009).

  8. 8.

    P. G. B. McNeill (ed.), ‘Discours Particulier d’Escosse, 1559/60’ in W. D. H. Sellar (ed.), Miscellany II (Stair Society, 1984), pp. 117-19.

  9. 9.

    Above pp. 43-4. See also: Amy Blakeway, ‘Reassessing the Scottish Parliamentary Records, 1528-1548: manuscript, print, bureaucracy and royal authority’, Parliamentary History 40 (2021), pp. 417-442 at p. 427.

  10. 10.

    RPS, 1535/47. Date accessed: 22 June 2020.

  11. 11.

    For commissioners undertaking judicial work in parliament under James IV: Norman Macdougall, James IV (East Linton, 1997), p. 186.

  12. 12.

    RPS, 1543/3/29-39, 41-42, 44-48. Date accessed: 22 June 2020.

  13. 13.

    Godfrey, ‘Parliament and the Law’; Goodare, Government of Scotland, pp. 70-86.

  14. 14.

    J. H. Burns, The True Law of Kingship: concepts of monarchy in Early Modern Scotland (Oxford, 1996), p. 4.

  15. 15.

    McNeill (ed.), ‘La Discours Particulier d’Escosse’, pp. 116-121.

  16. 16.

    The reduction of his forfeiture explained this had originally been undertaken by act of adjournal—that is, in the justiciary court: RPS, A1540/12/1, 1543/12/47. Date accessed: 20 August 2021.

  17. 17.

    Robert Pitcairn (ed.), Ancient Criminal Trials in Scotland 1:1 (Edinburgh, 3 vols, 1833), pp. 184-5, 190-1.

  18. 18.

    Amy Blakeway, Regency in Sixteenth-Century Scotland (Woodbridge, 2015), pp. 183-191.

  19. 19.

    McGladdery, C. A. ‘Douglas, Janet, Lady Glamis (c. 1504–1537), noblewoman.’ Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. 23 Sep. 2004; Accessed 21 Jul. 2021. https://www-oxforddnb-com.ezproxy.st-andrews.ac.uk/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-7906.

  20. 20.

    Jamie Cameron, James V: the personal rule 1528-1542 (East Linton, 1997), p. 339; RPS, 1532/8. Date accessed: 20 August 2021.

  21. 21.

    RPS, 1528/9/48, 51. Date accessed: 7 August 2018.

  22. 22.

    RPS, 1528/9/53. Date accessed: 7 August 2018.

  23. 23.

    Pitcairn (ed.), Ancient Criminal Trials I:I, p. 141.

  24. 24.

    P. G. B. McNeil (ed.), The Practicks of Sir James Balfour of Pittendreich II (Edinburgh, 2 vols, 1962), p. 508.

  25. 25.

    Cameron, James V, p. 170.

  26. 26.

    Cameron, James V, p. 170.

  27. 27.

    Cameron, James V, p. 115-116.

  28. 28.

    NRS CS5/39 ff. 55r, 59r-70r, 126v. Patrick C. Hotle, Thorns and Thistles: diplomacy between Henry VIII and James V 1528-1542 (London, 1996), p. 41.

  29. 29.

    NRS CS5/42 f. 35r.

  30. 30.

    NRS E21/24 f. 36r.

  31. 31.

    Balfour, Practicks, I, p. 305.

  32. 32.

    Claire Hawes, ‘Community and Public Authority in later fifteenth-century Scotland’ (unpublished PhD, St Andrews, 2015), pp. 29-31.

  33. 33.

    NRS E21/24 f. 44v-45v.

  34. 34.

    NRS CS5/42 f. 144v.

  35. 35.

    RPS, 1531/7. Accessed 19 June 2020.

  36. 36.

    RPS, 1531/7, /10. Accessed 19 June 2020. The continuation noted 24 May but parliament sat on 26 so this was probably a scribal error.

  37. 37.

    See chapter 3 pp. 99–105 for the reconciliation process. For the remission: RSS II, 938.

  38. 38.

    NRS CS5/42 f.185r-v. RPS, 1531/13. Date accessed: 4 August 2021. The four were Adam Otterburn, Nichol Crawford, James Lawson and Francis Bothwell.

  39. 39.

    RPS, 1531/1-3. Date accessed: 27 August 2020.

  40. 40.

    RSS II, 2019.

  41. 41.

    It is worth dispelling any notions that the alleged treason was related to the activities of his kinsman Patrick Hepburn, third earl of Bothwell, who was imprisoned in Edinburgh Castle in 1532 following his offers of assistance to the English the previous year. The exact nature of Waughton and Bothwell’s kinship is unclear (Edward Hepburn, Genealogical Notes of the Hepburn Family (privately printed, 1925), pp. 33-5; Balfour, Peerage II, p. 136), but regardless of the strength of their own blood ties, the two men were certainly bound more closely by Waughton’s marriage to Helen Hepburn, the daughter of Adam Hepburn of the Craggis—brother of the first earl of Bothwell, and thus the third earl of Bothwell’s first cousin once removed. In addition, Waughton and Bothwell had been associates for a number of years (ADCP, p. 301). However, in May 1535, Bothwell’s ward had been relaxed and he was allowed to travel to Inverness and enjoy the freedom of the town and a two-mile radius about it (NRS CS6/6 ff. 121v-122v). 1536 seems on this basis an implausible time to begin pursuing his associates.

  42. 42.

    NRS CS6/7 f. 187v-188v; ADCP, pp. 452-3.

  43. 43.

    NRS CS6/7 f. 188r; ADCP, p. 453.

  44. 44.

    Above pp. 43-4.

  45. 45.

    RPS, 1540/12/25. Date accessed: 5 September 2019.

  46. 46.

    For previous relevant legislation see: RPS, 1318/23, 1425/3/23, 1458/3/38. Date accessed: 5 September 2019. For leasing-making and censorship after our period see: A. J. Mann, The Scottish Book Trade 1500-1720 (East Linton, 2000), pp. 162-191; A. J. Mann, ‘A “Mongrel of Early Modern Copyright”: Scotland in European Perspective’, in Ronan Deazley, Martin Kretschmer and Lionel Bently (eds), Privilege and property essays on the history of copyright (Cambridge 2010); A. J. Mann, ‘“Some property is theft”: Copyright law and illegal activity in early modern Scotland’ in Robin Myers, Michael Harris, and Giles Mandelbrote (eds), Against the law: crime, sharp practice and the control of print (London, 2004); A. J. Mann, ‘Scottish copyright before the Statute of 1710’, Juridical Review 1 (2000), pp. 11-25.

  47. 47.

    NRS CS6/14 f. 201v.

  48. 48.

    Blakeway, ‘Reassessing’, passim.

  49. 49.

    Godfrey, Civil Justice in Renaissance Scotland, pp. 432-6 especially.

  50. 50.

    NRS CS6/2 f. 184r.

  51. 51.

    NRS CS6/2 f. 184r. For payments for the precepts: NRS E21/26 f. 63v.

  52. 52.

    RPS, 1533/2. Date accessed: 13 June 2018.

  53. 53.

    RPS, 1533/1-28. Date accessed: 13 June 2018.

  54. 54.

    RPS, 1533/23. Date accessed: 13 June 2018.

  55. 55.

    No payments were made to messengers issuing new summons or precepts.

  56. 56.

    RPS, 1533/24-29. Accessed 18 August 2021. Continuations were made to 2 and 9 December, then to 26 January, when there is no record the meeting took place.

  57. 57.

    For the council and session sederunts on dates surrounding these continued sessions see: NRS CS6/5 ff. 111v-113v, 118r-120v, 158r,168r, 183r. Given the restrictions on attendance at legal sessions passed in the May 1532 parliament it is unlikely these judicial sessions would have been affected by parliamentary attendance, but combined with the lack of change to the seals witness lists (RMS/RSS) it is suggestive.

  58. 58.

    Tanner, The Late Medieval Scottish Parliament, p. 267.

  59. 59.

    Andrea Thomas, ‘Renaissance Culture at the court of James V’ (PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, 1997), p. 404.

  60. 60.

    Hugh prior of Durham and Franklin to Henry VIII, 9 July 1534, BL Cotton Caligula MS B VIII f. 162r.

  61. 61.

    RSS II, 1732, 1733, 1739, 1740, 1745.

  62. 62.

    LJV, p. 244-5; Cameron, James V, p. 235.

  63. 63.

    NRS PA2/8/III; Actis (1542). See also Blakeway, ‘Reassessing’, passim. Actis (1566) draws entirely on Actis (1542) for this session so cannot help us here.

  64. 64.

    LJV, pp. 239, 241-4; L&P IX, 538-9; John Herkless and R. K. Hannay, The Archbishops of St Andrews III (Edinburgh, 5 vols, 1907–1915), pp. 224-231; James K. Cameron, ‘Beaton, James (c.1473–1539)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004 [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/1824, accessed 19 Sept 2017]; Cameron, James V, pp. 134-6.

  65. 65.

    George Buchanan, History of Scotland, ed. Dana Sutton, http://www.philological.bham.ac.uk/scothist/14eng.html section 35. Since Dunbar died in March 1532 if this is accurate this must have referred to the period before this date.

  66. 66.

    NRS CS6/2 ff. 154r, 155r.

  67. 67.

    LJV, p. 244.

  68. 68.

    Lawson to Cromwell, 7 May 1533, TNA SP1/76 f. 21v.

  69. 69.

    LJV, p. 251.

  70. 70.

    LJV, p. 254.

  71. 71.

    NRS CS6/2 f.184r; RPS, 1533/23. Date accessed: 13 June 2018; NRS CS5/42 f. 35r. In 1531, the remissions to Mac Dhòmhnaill and his accomplices were granted at the same time as their treason cases disappeared from parliament, potentially, therefore, a remission for assisting Hector McIntosh issued on 5 December might relate to a case initiated in but dropped from parliament, but this is far from certain: RSS II, 1593.

  72. 72.

    Chalmers, ‘The King’s Council’, p. 159, for earlier parliamentary commissioners hearing civil pleas.

  73. 73.

    G. S. Pryde (ed.), Ayr Burgh Accounts 1534-1624 (Edinburgh, 1937), p. 78.

  74. 74.

    RPS, 1538/6. Date accessed: 27 August 2020.

  75. 75.

    RPS, 1538/11. Date accessed: 7 August 2018.

  76. 76.

    RPS, 1538/17. Date accessed: 7 August 2018; payment for these was only made shortly before the trial: NRS E21/36 f. 88v.

  77. 77.

    NRS E21/36 f. 88v.

  78. 78.

    NRS E21/36 f. 88v.

  79. 79.

    RPS, 1538/12. Date accessed: 13 April 2016.

  80. 80.

    RPS, 1538/14-17. Date accessed: 7 August 2018.

  81. 81.

    For parallel process in a fifteenth-century urban context see: Hawes, ‘Urban Community’, pp. 31-35

  82. 82.

    For the summons: NRS E21/38 f. 27r.

  83. 83.

    For Robert Colville: James Balfour Paul, The Scots Peerage II (Edinburgh, 8 vols, 1905), pp. 569-70.

  84. 84.

    RPS, 1540/12/36-7.

  85. 85.

    RPS, 1540/12/8. Date accessed: 29 August 2018.

  86. 86.

    G. Neilson and H. Paton (eds), Acts of the Lords of Council in Civil Causes vol II, 1496-1501 (Edinburgh, 1918), pp. lxi-lxii; Rab Houston, Punishing the dead? Suicide, lordship and community in Britain, 1500-1830 (Oxford, 2010), p. 238.

  87. 87.

    RPS, 1543/3/27. Date accessed: 19 August 2021.

  88. 88.

    Thomas A. J. McGinn (ed.), ‘The Ninth Book’ in Bruce W. Frier et al. (eds), The Codex of Justinian: a New Annotated Translation with Parallel Greek and Latin Texts III (Cambridge, 3 vols, 2016), p. 2293. I should like to thank Prof. Andrew Simpson for kindly corresponding with me on this subject and providing me with this reference. See also: Neilsen and Paton (eds), Acts of the Lords of Council in Civil Causes, p. lxii.

  89. 89.

    Gero Dolezalek, Scotland under Jus Commune (Stair Society, 3 vols, 2010); Andrew R. C. Simpson, ‘The Scottish Common Law: Origins and Development, ca.1124-ca.1500’, in Heikki Pihlajamäki, Markus Dirk Dubber and Mark Godfrey (eds), The Oxford handbook of European legal history (Oxford, 2018), pp. 450-474; J. D. Ford, Law and Opinion in Scotland during the Seventeenth Century (Oxford, 2007), particularly at pp. 29–59, 215–46; Gero Dolezalek, ‘The Court of Session as a Ius Commune Court—Witnessed by “Sinclair’s Practicks”, 1540–1549’ in Hector L. MacQueen (ed.), Stair Society Miscellany Four (Stair Society 2002), pp. 51–84; Andrew Simpson, ‘Legislation and Authority in Early-Modern Scotland’ in Mark Godfrey (ed.), Law and Authority in British Legal History, 1200–1900 (Cambridge University Press 2016), pp. 85–119.

  90. 90.

    Robert Lindsay of Pitscottie, The Historie and Cronicles of Scotland from the Slauchter of King James the First to the ane thousande fyve hundreith thrie scoir fyftein zeir ... I Edited by Æ J. G. Mackay (Edinburgh, 3 vols, 1849), p. 382.

  91. 91.

    Kelley, ‘Douglas earls of Angus’, pp. 748, 751. No evidence is provided by this author in his footnotes and I have found none elsewhere. The root of this slip in understanding seems to have been Neilsen and Paton (eds), Acts of the Lords of Council in Civil Causes, II, pp. lxi–lxii which suggests Leslie’s trial, like that of 1320, involved exhumation. This cites the parliamentary material and Robert Pitcairn (ed.), Ancient Criminal Trials in Scotland vol. II (Edinburgh, 1833), p. 278 which contains only discussion of Leslie’s posthumous trial, not exhumation, and again cites only the parliamentary material. Indeed, on the previous page Pitcairn cites several later legal commentators who explain that exhumation was not necessary to proceed in a posthumous treason trial. On Colville’s case Neilsen and Paton cite only the parliamentary evidence.

  92. 92.

    In Mary’s reign, it was only the summons of forfeiture which was reduced: RPS, 1543/3/46. Date accessed 20 August 2021.

  93. 93.

    RPS, 1540/12/117. Date accessed: 29 August 2018.

  94. 94.

    RPS, 1540/12/46-7, 50, 53. Date accessed: 29 August 2018.

  95. 95.

    RPS, 1540/12/35. Date accessed: 29 August 2018.

  96. 96.

    RPS, 1540/12/35. Date accessed: 29 August 2018.

  97. 97.

    Blakeway, Regency in Sixteenth-Century Scotland, pp. 84-8.

  98. 98.

    Roger Mason, ‘Renaissance Kingship?’ in Michael Brown and Roland Tanner (eds), Scottish Kingship, 1306-1542: essays in honour of Norman Macdougall (Edinburgh, 2008), pp. 255-278 at p. 273.

  99. 99.

    Mason, ‘Renaissance Kingship’, p. 262.

  100. 100.

    NRS E21/38 f. 27r. The decision appeared in the council register on 9 October: NRS CS6/13 f. 212v; ADCP, p. 495.

  101. 101.

    RPS, 1540/12/56. Date accessed: 29 August 2018; NRS PA2/8/III f.168v. The deletion suggests that the copy was prepared very shortly after parliament finished since Prince James died in April 1541. It is possible this was inspired by similar provisions under James I (RPS, 1425/3/19). Certainly this earlier act was copied out in a manuscript linked to Robert Reid, although when the copy was made is unclear: BL Harley MS 2363 f. 27; John Stuart (ed.), Records of the Monastery of Kinloss (Edinburgh, 1872), p. lxviii.

  102. 102.

    Blakeway, ‘Reassessing the Scottish Parliamentary Record’, pp. 433-9.

  103. 103.

    RPS, 1540/12/25. Date accessed: 29 August 2018.

  104. 104.

    RPS, 1540/12/27. Date accessed: 29 August 2018.

  105. 105.

    Kelley, ‘Douglas earls of Angus’, p. 748.

  106. 106.

    RPS, 1540/12/83, 71. Date accessed: 29 August 2018.

  107. 107.

    RPS, 1535/50. Date accessed: 29 August 2018. For comment on this: Godfrey, ‘Parliament and the Law’, pp. 168, 177.

  108. 108.

    Rait, Parliaments of Scotland, pp. 9-19.

  109. 109.

    O’Brien, ‘Scottish Parliament’, pp. 149, 161-2, 167-9, 235-51; Julian Goodare, ‘The Scottish Parliament and its early modern “rivals”’, Parliaments, Estates and Representation 24 (2004), pp. 147-172.

  110. 110.

    Athol Murray, ‘Sir John Skene and the Exchequer, 94-1612’, Stair Society Miscellany 1 (1971), pp. 125-155, at pp. 127-8.

  111. 111.

    Pryde (ed.), Ayr Burgh Accounts, p. 82.

  112. 112.

    For parliament and the college see: Mark Godfrey, ‘Control and the Constitutional Accountability of the College of Justice in Scotland, 1532-1626’, in I. Czeguhn, J. A. López Nevot and A. S. Aranda (eds), Control of Supreme Courts in Early Modern Europe (Berlin, 2018), pp. 123-9.

  113. 113.

    Actis (1566), pp. 113-117.

  114. 114.

    BL Harley MS 2363 ff. 18-22.

  115. 115.

    Godfrey, ‘Control and the Constitutional Accountability’, p. 138.

  116. 116.

    Goodare, Government of Scotland, p. 75.

  117. 117.

    RPS, 1532/6. Dated accessed: 18 August 2018; Mann, ‘House Rules: Parliamentary Procedure’, pp. 140-1.

  118. 118.

    Elizabeth Ann Bonner, ‘The recovery of St Andrews Castle in 1547: French naval policy and diplomacy in the British Isles’, English Historical Review 111 (1996), pp. 578-98; Marcus Merriman, The Rough Wooings: Mary, Queen of Scots, 1542-1551 (East Linton, 2000), pp. 215-218.

  119. 119.

    RPC I, p. 56.

  120. 120.

    ADCP, p. 378.

  121. 121.

    RPS, 1540/12/64. Date accessed: 26 November 2019; RPS, 1543/3/37. Date accessed: 26 November 2019.

  122. 122.

    Blakeway, Regency, appendix 4.

  123. 123.

    RPS, 1528/9/55-7. Date accessed: 26 November 2019.

  124. 124.

    RPS, 1528/9/52. Date accessed: 26 November 2019; Mann, ‘House Rules: Parliamentary Procedure’, pp. 140-1; Roland Tanner, ‘The Lords of the Articles before 1540: a reassessment’, SHR 79 (2008), pp. 189-212 at pp. 190-5, 211.

  125. 125.

    RPS, 1528/9/3, 52. Date accessed: 26 November 2019.

  126. 126.

    NRS CS5/39 f.57r-v. The council sederunt was: archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, bishop of Aberdeen; earls of Arran, Argyll, Bothwell, Eglinton; prior of St Andrews, abbots of Arbroath, Dunfermline, Melrose, Dryburgh.

  127. 127.

    P. G. B. McNeill (ed.), The Practicks of Sir James Balfour of Pittendreich (Stair Society, 1962), pp. 565-574 contains materials on the ayres, these articles are not included.

  128. 128.

    RPS, 1535/4, 1540/12/9. Date accessed: 27 August 2020.

  129. 129.

    David Lindsay, ‘Ane Satire of the Three Estates’, in The Poetical Works ed. David Laing (Edinburgh, 1879), Ll. 3801-3808.

  130. 130.

    NRS PA2/8/II f. 16r.

  131. 131.

    NRS CS6/4 f.131r; ADCP, pp. 422-3.

  132. 132.

    John Leslie, History of Scotland (Bannatyne Club 1830), p. 146.

  133. 133.

    NRS PA2/8/III f. 98r.

  134. 134.

    NRS PA2/8/I f. 23r.

  135. 135.

    Actis (1566), p. ii. For discussion of this edition more broadly: Goodare, Government of Scotland, pp. 76-7, 82.

  136. 136.

    This figure excludes private acts, acts appertaining to the royal lands (effectively these were private acts for the crown) judicial business and statutes which provided for a one-off event (for example a tax, or provincial council). For further discussion of this see the explanation at the start of Appendix B.

  137. 137.

    Goodare, Government of Scotland, pp. 72-3.

  138. 138.

    Goodare, Government of Scotland, pp. 75-6.

  139. 139.

    Godfrey, Civil Justice, p. 171.

  140. 140.

    Goodare, Government of Scotland, p. 82.

  141. 141.

    RPS, 1535/32. Date accessed: 28 August 2020.

  142. 142.

    The earlier acts: RPS, 1357/11/18; 1424/23; 1426/14. Date accessed: 28 August 2020.

  143. 143.

    O’Brien, ‘Scottish Parliament in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’, pp. 4-8.

  144. 144.

    Michael Brown, ‘Public Authority and Factional Conflict: Crown, Parliament and Polity, 1424-1455’, in K. M. Brown and R. J. Tanner (eds), Parliament and Politics in Scotland, 1235-1560 (Edinburgh, 2004), pp. 123-145 at p. 128; Michael Brown, James I (Edinburgh, 2015 edn), pp. 45, 61, 66, 88; RPS, 1540/12/10, 67, 25. Date accessed: 23 August 2021.

  145. 145.

    Tanner, ‘Lords of the Articles’, pp. 191-4.

  146. 146.

    RPS, 1540/12/77. Date accessed: 1 December 2019.

  147. 147.

    Murray, ‘Exchequer and Crown Revenue’, p. 165; Goodare, Government of Scotland, p. 119.

  148. 148.

    Goodare, Government of Scotland, p. 119.

  149. 149.

    Goodare, Government of Scotland, p. 120.

  150. 150.

    For desuetude in a later period: Ford, Law and Opinion, pp. 40-1, 54.

  151. 151.

    RPS, 1535/23. Date accessed: 1 December 2019.

  152. 152.

    A. R. MacDonald, The Burghs and Parliament in Scotland, c.1550-1651 (Aldershot, 2007), p. 127 whilst discussing parliamentary private acts secured by Edinburgh notes the fact that repassed laws were often amended.

  153. 153.

    RPS, 1532/7. Accessed 28 August 2020.

  154. 154.

    NRS CS6/1 f. 111r.

  155. 155.

    RPS, 1535/15; 1540/12/81. Accessed 28 August 2020.

  156. 156.

    James wrote to Rome frequently on the subject: LJV, pp. 332, 334-5, 345, 347, 348-9, 351.

  157. 157.

    RPS, 1535/17. Date accessed 18 August 2018. 

  158. 158.

    RPS, 1401/2/15; 1424/22; 1458/3/39; A1493/5/19. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  159. 159.

    RPS, 1425/3/11; 1458/3/31. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  160. 160.

    RPS, 1504/3/33. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  161. 161.

    RPS, 1535/41. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  162. 162.

    For an introduction to this in a Scottish context see: Goodare, Government of Scotland, pp. 173-220.

  163. 163.

    RPS, 1540/12/80. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  164. 164.

    RPS, A1504/3/134. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  165. 165.

    RPS, 1535/40, 45. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  166. 166.

    Some possibilities include: RPS, 1357/11/15, 1467/1/1. Date accessed 18 August 2018. For Stirling: RPS, 1327/4/1.

  167. 167.

    Isabel Guy, ‘The Scottish Export Trade, 1460-1599’ in T. C. Smout (ed.), Scotland and Europe 1200-1850 (Edinburgh, 1986), pp. 62-81 at p. 65.

  168. 168.

    RPS, 1318/13; 1401/2/11; 1424/10; 1425/3/13; 1430/27; 1450/1/2; 1458/3/34-5; 1490/2/21, 1535/25. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  169. 169.

    RPS, 1535/35, 1540/12/86. Date accessed 18 August 2018.

  170. 170.

    RPS, 1535/4. Date accessed: 28 June 2017.

  171. 171.

    Tanner, ‘The Lords of the Articles before 1540’, pp. 192-4.

  172. 172.

    RPS, 1535/17, 18, 19, 22. Date accessed: 28 June 2017.

  173. 173.

    RPS, 1535/41-3. Date accessed: 28 June 2017.

  174. 174.

    RPS, 1535/36, 14, 12. Date accessed: 28 August 2020.

  175. 175.

    NRS PA2/8/II ff. 102r-104r. I have discussed these annotations in the context of the manuscript more broadly in ‘Reassessing the Scottish Parliamentary Record’, p. 423.

  176. 176.

    ACA CA1.1.16 f.164; Aberd. Recs. I, pp. 154-5 gives 1538 in error for 1539: See p. 143 n. 15 for the recurrent problems with old and new style dating in this edition.

  177. 177.

    NRS PA2/8/II f. 104r; Actis (1542), 6v. This was noted by William Robertson (ed.), The Parliamentary Records of Scotland in the General Register House 1240-1571 (Edinburgh, 1804), p. 599; also in RPS, 1535/33. Accessed 2 September 2021.

  178. 178.

    RPS, 1540/12/15-17. Date accessed: 6 September 2019. 

  179. 179.

    RPS, 1540/12/14. Date accessed: 6 September 2019.

  180. 180.

    RPS, 1540/12/24. Date accessed: 6 September 2019.

  181. 181.

    RPS, 1540/12/11, Date accessed: 6 September 2019.

  182. 182.

    L. J. Mcfarlane, William Elphinstone and the Kingdom of Scotland 1431-1514: the struggle for order (Aberdeen, 1984), p. 423.

  183. 183.

    RPS, 1535/4, Date accessed: 6 September 2019.

  184. 184.

    RPS, 1540/12/9, Date accessed: 6 September 2019.

  185. 185.

    For the creation of ‘common knowledge’ in an earlier period: Hawes, ‘Community and Public Authority’, p. 139.

  186. 186.

    RPS, 1540/12/91. Date accessed: 10 August 2018.

  187. 187.

    See Appendix B Tables Bi–Biii.

  188. 188.

    See p. 216.

  189. 189.

    RPS, 1540/12/65-66. 28 August 2020.

  190. 190.

    Wormald, Court, Kirk and Community, pp. 21-2, 98-100.

  191. 191.

    S. E. Lehmberg, The Reformation Parliament 1529-1536 (Cambridge, 1970); John Guy, ‘Thomas More and Christopher St Germain’ in John Guy and Alistair Fox, Reassessing the Henrician Age: Humanism, Politics and Reform 1500-1550 (Oxford, 1986), pp. 95-120 at pp. 101-3; John Guy ‘Thomas Cromwell and the Intellectual Origins of the Henrician Revolution’ in Fox and Guy, Reassessing the Henrician Age, pp. 151-178 at p. 169.

  192. 192.

    RPS, 1532/5. Date accessed: 28 August 2020. See pp. 63-4 above.

  193. 193.

    NRS CS6/1 f. 24v; Godfrey, Civil Justice in Renaissance Scotland, pp. 129-31.

  194. 194.

    RPS, 1535/10-11. Date accessed: 28 August 2020.

  195. 195.

    RPS, 1535/12. Date accessed: 28 August 2020.

  196. 196.

    RPS, 1535/13. Date accessed: 7 April 2021.

  197. 197.

    For summons to the council: David Patrick (ed.), Statutes of the Scottish Church (Edinburgh, 1907), pp. 38-42; Godfrey, Civil Justice in Renaissance Scotland, p. 128.

  198. 198.

    Walker, Politics of Performance, p. 127.

  199. 199.

    RPS, 1540/12/55-7; 62, 63. Date accessed: 28 August 2020. Provisions for catching heretics were tightened up: RPS, 1540/12/60-1. Date accessed: 28 August 2020. See Appendix B for the legislation on which these drew. Legislation on cursing was also revised: RPS, 1540/12/11. Date accessed: 28 August 2020.

  200. 200.

    RPS, 1540/12/101. Date accessed: 28 August 2020.

  201. 201.

    RPS, 1540/12/55, 1425/3/19. This act was copied into BL Harley MS 2363 f. 27r, as discussed at n. 101, this manuscript was associated with Robert Reid.

  202. 202.

    RPS, 1540/12/58. Date accessed: 29 July 2020.

  203. 203.

    Eure to Cromwell, 26 January 1540, BL Royal MS 7 CXVI f. 137r.

  204. 204.

    Clare Kellar, Scotland, England and the Reformation 1534-1561 (Oxford, 2003), p. 31.

  205. 205.

    Kirsty McAlister and Roland Tanner, ‘Parliament and the Church’ in Brown and MacDonald (eds), Parliament in Context, p. 43.

  206. 206.

    RPS, 1443/11/2-3. Date accessed: 7 April 2021.

  207. 207.

    RPS, 1528/9/40. Date accessed: 19 September 2017.

  208. 208.

    RPS, 1540/12/102. Date accessed: 6 March 2018.

  209. 209.

    RPS, 1540/12/27. Date accessed: 28 August 2020; Thomas Innes, ‘The Scottish Parliament; Its Symbolism and Its Ceremonial’, Juridical Review 44 (1932), pp. 87-124 at pp. 116-121.

  210. 210.

    Walker, Politics of Performance, pp. 135-6.

  211. 211.

    James Miller, ‘The polish nobility and the renaissance monarchy: The “execution of the laws” movement: Part one’, Parliaments, Estates and Representation 3:2 (1983), pp. 65-87 at p. 69.

  212. 212.

    James VI, Basilicon Doron in J. P. Somerville (ed.), King James VI & I Political Writings (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 21-2.

  213. 213.

    Macfarlane, William Elphinstone, p. 423.

  214. 214.

    Blakeway, ‘Reassessing’, pp. 433-7.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of History, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife, UK

    Amy Blakeway

Authors
  1. Amy Blakeway
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy Blakeway .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Blakeway, A. (2022). Legislation, Treason and Parliament. In: Parliament and Convention in the Personal Rule of James V of Scotland, 1528–1542. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89377-4_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89377-4_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-89376-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-89377-4

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation