Dakota Beacon

In 1998, the United States Senate unanimously passed a resolution establishing April 6 as “Tartan Day” in recognition of the enormous contributions of the people and leaders of Scotland throughout its history, to the American Revolution, our Constitution and, of course, the settling of America.  Many of our presidents and other significant leaders have had Scottish ancestry but even more importantly, our freedoms have ancestry in those set forth by the Scottish nobles, clergy and barons who signed the document that came to be known as the Declaration of Arbroath.  In March I had the privilege of presenting a brief lecture on this topic at the Fargo-Moorhead Celtic Festival, and many were surprised at the close ties which bind the Scottish experience to that of our own in America.  It occurred to me that perhaps an explanation of Tartan Day and its significance to America might be long overdue.  Therefore, I thought that I would post, with minor adjustments, my comments from the event in Moorhead last month. 

King Robert the Bruce and the Declaration of Arbroath

Today, April 6, America observes Tartan Day.  Why Tartan Day and why April 6 . . . and why would Americans observe and celebrate this day?  Why is April 6 important to us?  To understand this we need to go back in time and visit Scotland just before the turn of the 14th Century.  It begins with a crisis.

King of Scots Alexander III was a very successful monarch.   He took the throne upon the death of Alexander II as a child of seven.  At the age of 10 he was married to Margaret, the daughter of King Henry III of England.  Obviously, England had designs on Scotland.  In the end, however, Alexander came into his own and not only rejected English control but also drove out the Norwegian forces, gaining control of the Isle of Man and the Hebrides.  His era was regarded as a “golden age” in Medieval Scotland.  But in the winter of 1286 it came crashing down, when King Alexander III died in a fall from his horse, leaving behind no heir but a granddaughter, the child of his own daughter Margaret and Eric II of Norway.  She (also Margaret)  was known as the “Maid of Norway”, a child of three.   In the following years a group of 6 regents known as the “Guardians of Scotland” agreed to an arranged marriage between this young queen and Prince Edward of England, who would become Edward II.  You might well ask, wouldn’t this spell the unification of Scotland and England?  This was covered by a provision that the kingdoms would remain separate, as would the church structure.  Margaret, “the Maid” would be Queen of Scots while Edward II would be King of England.  This child, Margaret, remained at home in Norway because of her tender years, until finally, in 1290 she was summoned to take up her duties as monarch.  Sadly for Scotland, this seven-year-old child died before she reached her realm.  This precipitated a grave crisis in the Scottish succession.

There were two main contenders for the Scottish crown - the Comyns and the Bruces - John Balliol of the Comyn faction and Robert Bruce of Annandale (grandfather to King Robert the Bruce).  Both claimed descent from King David I of Scots.  Bitter rivals, unable to come to terms with each other, they turned to King Edward I of England to arbitrate.  At this time there was no ongoing conflict with England.  Edward chose Balliol,  perhaps because he believed Balliol might be more malleable to Edward’s aims, perhaps because Balliol grew up in England, not Scotland, and therefore was really more English than Scottish, at least in the eyes of King Edward.  King John Balliol of Scots, then, was called upon to raise an army for Edward to deploy in his planned invasion of France.  Balliol was vigorously counseled against this by his Scottish advisors and instead he sent emissaries to inform the French.  There commenced an alliance with the French (it became known as “The Auld Alliance”) and this brought the wrath of Edward upon Scotland.  

There followed a tumultuous period during which time a “man of the people”(although the son of a knight), William Wallace undertook his fight to free Scotland of English domination.  In 1297 he defeated Edward’s army in the Battle of Stirling Bridge, becoming not only a knight but a legend and folk hero as well.  However, Edward got his revenge a year later when the Scots lost the Battle of Falkirk.  Although with the help of Bruce, Wallace was able to escape he was eventually captured and executed brutally in England in 1305.   In the meantime, the young Earl of Carrick and grandson of Bruce “the Competitor”,  as Balliol’s rival had been known, became a leader of the Scottish cause after some fluctuation due to his intense aversion to Balliol’s nephew and presumptive heir, John Comyn (known as the Red Comyn).  Bruce and Comym continued in a fierce rivalry which culminated in the killing of Comyn at Greyfriars Abbey in Dumfries.  We only know that Bruce stabbed Comyn - they were the only persons present.  Was it self-defense as some have held or was Bruce the aggressor?   It also meant excommunication by Pope Clement V for his killing of Comyn in a sanctuary.  Bishop Robert Wishart, a Scottish patriot, however, absolved him.  Instead of being held as an outlaw, Robert the Bruce was crowned King of Scots on the Stone of Destiny at Scone.  The English were quick to attack again, and following loss of a battle at Methven, Robert fled and went into hiding.  He escaped to Rathlin Island for a time.  Disheartened and overwhelmed, he waited.  Legend has it that while in a cave he was entranced by watching a spider.  Again and again the spider tried to make a web in an opening.  It kept failing to connect with its strands.  Each time, it tried again, never giving up.  Finally it managed to complete its course and create its web.  It is said that Robert took a lesson from this.  He would keep trying.  If one method failed he would find another.  He re-emerged to begin a guerilla war against his Scottish rivals as well as Edward II,   who had come to power in England.  He made a comeback and defeated the English at Bannockburn,  near Stirling Castle, in 1314 - 6,000 Scots against an army of more than 25,000 - cementing his reign as King.  He now turned his forces against northern England.  Despite continuing losses, Edward II refused to acknowledge Scottish independence.  Despite his defeat of the English, Bruce was not recognized as monarch by the Pope.  He was labeled “The Outlaw King”.  In 1318 a plot was discovered to dethrone him and replace him with the pro-English William Soules, most likely a placeholder for another Balliol king.  This attempt to subvert the kingdom was prevented and the proponents dealt with.  The pressure was mounting on Robert and by 1320 Pope John XXII was about to excommunicate him again.  In 1320, therefore, King Robert the Bruce summoned the nobles and members of the clergy to Arbroath Abbey,  and there they set their seals to a letter dated April 6 - an appeal to the Pope calling upon him to stand with their independence and compel Edward II to cease and desist from attacking them in their homeland.  It was an appeal, but couched in terms of strong insistence on their rights as an independent nation, with a catalog of their claims to sovereignty.   To the parchment were attached the seals of these nobles and clergy.  The original has been lost but there were copies and translations made and there have been more made in the modern era as well.  It has come to be known as “The Declaration of Arbroath”.

The letter, written in Latin, may have been modeled upon an earlier letter to the Pope from the Irish - known as the Irish Remonstrance, a missive which was dated 1317, just three years earlier.  The letter from King Robert began with the list of signatories and their titles.  It proceeded to enumerate the historical reasons for the independence of the Scottish kingdom and its uniqueness.  It includes a list of offences committed by the English.  The powerful message within the letter, however, has been passed down through the ages and inspired some other significant assertions of liberty, including our own Declaration of Independence.   It had the desired effect on Pope John XXII and he took the side of the Scots, for a while at least,  with a truce lasting for 13 years.   King Robert the Bruce died in 1329, leaving his son with his queen, Elizabeth de Burgh,   David II (age five) as his heir.  David II did not leave an heir; the crown passed to the child of his half-sister, Marjorie Bruce  and her husband, Walter Stewart - named Robert II, or “Robert the Stewart”.  Thus began the House of Stewart.

The content of this letter was revolutionary for its time.  It dictated, under Robert’s as well as clergy’s and nobles, hands, that should a king take the part of the English against Scotland, or should he otherwise betray the trust of the people of Scotland, he would be removed and replaced with a man equipped and willing to uphold Scottish independence.  The term King or Queen “of Scots” is an indication that the Scottish monarch in no way “owns” Scotland but rather rules at the  will of the people as expressed through the barons and nobles, not by birth alone, as in most medieval courts.  With this, it further goes on to state:

, , , for, as long as a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be subjected to the lordship of the English. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself. , , , 

The letter concludes with the strong suggestion that if the Pope wished to have Scottish support for his crusades in the Holy Land it would be in his interest to make sure that they were not occupied in defending their own land against the English.  

This sentiment of fighting for freedom alone, not riches or plunder, has come down through the ages.  It is entirely likely that the highly educated men who participated in our own fight for  independence from the British  - some of them Scottish-born and raised, like James Wilson and John Witherspoon, both highly regarded by our nation’s founders and among them were acquainted with this epistle to Rome, written 450 years earlier.  We find many of the same sentiments echoing in our Declaration of Independence - including the concept of the consent of the governed and the idea of fighting for justice, independence, human rights, but not for empire or worldly gain.  

A few points to ponder:

1. The Arbroath letter was led by Scotland’s King Robert the Bruce, who had been declared an “outlaw” and had been excommunicated by the Pope.  The signers of the American Declaration of Independence were making outlaws of themselves in the eyes of the authorities.  It was a daring act in both cases.

2. Both proclaimed the inherent rights of man, natural rights, consent of the governed, self-determination.

3. Both provided a list of offenses committed by the British crown against them.

4. Both spoke with the authority of a sense of nationhood and common cause.

5. Both were collaborative, one the agreement of nobles, barons and clergy of Scotland, representing the people altogether, and the other the work of people elected to act as a body to represent their constituents to assert their rights.

6. Both were strong, bold statements made under threatening circumstances, requiring the utmost courage and commitment of those who signed them.

7. Both rejected English hegemony.

Some have cast doubt on the influence of the Arbroath letter on our Declaration of Independence, inasmuch as the Arbraoth document had been long neglected, all but buried because once a union was effected joining England and Scotland, there was political pressure to suppress it for fear of re-kindling a resistance movement.  However, it must be noted that at least two of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Scottish-born.  Not only born and raised in Scotland, but highly educated and influential within the Continental Congress.  It would be difficult to imagine that these learned Scots, James Wilson and James Witherspoon, were not well aware of the letter of 1320 and its message of human rights, consent of the governed and self-determination.  

And so we return to the reason for our observation of our country’s invaluable Scottish heritage and foundation of freedom.  The Tartan is a symbol of the rich mosaic of Scottish clans, something we can all find meaning in.  Hence it seems an appropriate symbol for a significant date in Scottish history which brought the many clans of Scotland together as a nation.

For these reasons, Senator Trent Lott proposed Resolution 155, in 1998,recognizing April 6 as Tartan Day, joining many other nations which at least nominally recognize the principles set forth in the Declaration of Arbroath.  It passed unanimously, acknowledging dedication to common principles and heritage of freedom and our debt to the authors and signatories to the Declaration of Arbroath of April 6, 1320.  

..oo00oo..

Finally, why “Robert THE Bruce”?  There are two plausible explanations for this.  The first is that Robert, like nearly all Scottish and English nobles was of Norman descent.  These people brought with them an old form of French language.  They spoke (and wrote) in this language, not the native tongues.  It may well have been a corruption of “de Brus”, the old French form.   The other explanation, which makes some sense to me, is that Robert was Chief of Clan Bruce.  Clan Chiefs are generally referred to as “the” whatever the clan name is - “The Hamilton”, “The Wallace”, “The Oliphant”, “The Douglas”, “The Campbell”, etc.  Perhaps because of the friction of the two factions, Robert’s clan position was emphasized as “The Bruce”.  

It would be difficult to dispute that Robert the Bruce was Scotland’s greatest king.  Under his rule a nation was formed and united and a Scottish consciousness was born out of a collection of regional chiefs.  

A statue of King Robert the Bruce of Scots mounted on his charger stands today at the site of the Battle of Bannockburn, another equestrian statue is located in Calgary, Alberta, and, of course, one of him holding one side of the Declaration stands at Arbroath Abbey. 

Comments:  (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (please reference Dakota Beacon on your subject line)