2'"' S. No 66., Mab. 28. '57.] 



NOTES AND QUEKIES. 



241 



Z,ONJ>ON, SATURDAY, MARCH 28. 1857. 

 MACBETH. 



In a former number of that able provincial news- 

 paper, the Kilmarnock Journal — in which a vast 

 mass of interesting antiquarian information is from 

 time to time preserved — there occurred a very 

 learned and ingenious argument, the object of 

 which was, if not fully to vindicate the character 

 of Macbeth, at least to remove much of the ob- 

 loquy thrown upon his memory. Concurring ge- 

 nerally in the conclusions the author has arrived 

 at, we have ventured to throw together a few ob- 

 servations on this interesting subject. 



We are not satisfied that the assassination of 

 Duncan by the hand of Macbeth is made out. 

 The " Chronicon Rythmicum," a document we 

 readily take as evidence, has these lines ; speaking 

 of Duncan it goes on — 



" A Finleg natus percussit euin Macabeta, 

 Vulneri letali, rex apud Elgin obit." 



This does not indicate such a murder as that per- 

 petrated by Robert de Bruce on the Red Comyn 

 before the high altar in Dumfries, but rather re- 

 sembles death following by the means of a deadly 

 wound inflicted by Macbeth or his adherents in 

 the course of some conflict which terminated 

 against Duncan. Barbarous as the age was, a 

 murder under trust — such as that represented to 

 have taken place at Glammis — would have been 

 viewed with disgust and indignation ; and it is 

 not supposable that the ancestors of the present 

 generation could have had less respect for the 

 rights of hospitality than the Arabs of the desert. 

 A man who ruled so ably for seventeen years, and 

 who probably would have died in his bed King of 

 Scotland, but for the English invasion, would 

 never have been tolerated had he been the villain 

 depicted by the imaginative Boece. 



Every respect was paid to the remains of Dun- 

 can, which were transferred from the place of his 

 death at Elgin, by order of the new monarch, to 

 the Regal Cemetery at lona. 



The Chartulary of the Priory of St. Andrews 

 was, a few years ago, presented to the members 

 of the Bannatyne Club, as the contribution of the 

 now deceased O. Tyndal Bruce, Esq., of Falkland. 

 The original, now belonging to Lord Panmure, 

 had been in the keeping of Andro of Wynton, and 

 had been judicially produced by him in Dec. 

 1413, as to certain law matters affecting the rights 

 of the Priory. 



Wynton is the most veracious chronicler we 

 possess of the earlier history of Scotland. Even 

 Pinkerton, the universal fault-finder, respects him. 

 It is in the volume of St. Andrew's Charters that 

 the remarkable entry occurs which proves that 



Macbeth was king, and Gruoch, filia Bodhe, was 

 Queen "of the Scots." We are fully warranted 

 in assuming that Wynton had documents and in- 

 formation which support him in what he asserts. 

 There is a singular contrast in the way in which 

 he treats of Macbeth. The weird sisters vanish 

 into air. Instead of this, an on dit is given that 

 Macbeth dreamed he was to be king. There is 

 also a long story of his mother having been be- 

 guiled by the devil, who was the real father of the 

 regicide. These are given merely as traditionary 

 reports, originating, no doubt, under the Canmore 

 rule, Malcolm being desirous to blacken the re- 

 putation of the man he slew, and who had a better 

 title to the crown than he — a natural son accord- 

 ing to Wynton — could possibly have had. 



But when Wynton comes to facts, he speaks 

 without hesitation. Thus he positively asserts 

 that Gruoch, the widow of Duncan, was espoused 

 by Macbeth, and that they reigned together — the 

 latter assertion being directly supported by the 

 St. Andrew's Charter-book. No doubt this as- 

 sertion is particularly startling, but that does not 

 make the tact the less true. 



Gruoch was the reputed wife of the Marmor of 

 Moray, who was burnt by the fierce Malcolm 11. : 

 an usurper, who murdered Kenneth V. (surnamed 

 Grim), a worthy who had previously slain Con- 

 stantine IV., the son of Culen (the Old King Coul 

 of Scottish song). If the lady was heiress in the 

 direct line of the crown, we do not suppose that 

 Malcolm II. would have much hesitation in slay- 

 ing the husband — whose claim to the throne jwre 

 uxoris must have been formidable, and uniting 

 her to his nephew, Duncan — in this way uniting 

 the conflicting claims. 



Wynton tells us that Duncan, having been haiv 

 boured by the Miller of Forteviot, fell in love 

 with the Miller's daughter, who bare him a son — 

 Malcolm Canmore. This event must have taken 

 place before the uncle's death, and It is not un- 

 likely that his marriage with Gruoch did not in- 

 terrupt this or other amours. The bastardy of 

 Malcolm Is treated by the chronicler as un- 

 doubted, and we know no distinct authority show- 

 ing his legitimacy. We are inclined to think that 

 Wynton's story of the miller's daughter is not 

 very far from the truth. One thing is plain 

 enough, no other historian informs us what became 

 of Duncan's widow after the husband's death. 



The relationship of Macbeth to Duncan is puz- 

 zling in the extreme. Wynton says he was hia 

 nephew. May not his mother have been a 

 daughter of Malcolm II. — older perhaps than Dun- 

 can's mother ? Boece asserts this positively — but 

 his authority goes a very little way. Of course, 

 all this is conjecture, but that he had some claim 

 on the crown I have little doubt ; and this he, 

 like Henry VII., made effectual by espousing the 

 heiress of line. It is worthy of especial notice 



