Family and politics in Scotland, 1578-1596 : with particular reference to the Master of Glamis

Abstract

This study examines the importance of the family within Scottish politics during the period m which Glamis was head of the house of Glamis. and uses him and his family predominantly as an example. Its purpose was to find out whether or not the family was an important factor in later sixteenth-century Scottish politics, and. if so. to what extent'’ In order to do this, the topic was translated into two working propositions, the first working proposition hypothesied that if the family was an important organising factor in later sixteenth-century Scottish politics, then there w ill be a substantial inclination towards the family, in general, in the ideological, institutional, and past policy context within which the parliamentary process occurred. If. on the other hand, the family was not important then, then there will not be a substantial inclination towards the family within that overall political context. The ideological, institutional and past policy context was important because it largely determined whether or not families were either insiders or outsiders at any one particular point in time when it came to that process It gave families structural advantages or disadvantages in relation to others, which the decisions of individuals by themselves could not change The research found that there was a substantial inclination towards the family within the ideological context, which was apparent m the religious and secular thinking of the time. Ideas and beliefs about the family were clearly bounded by overriding ideologies, notably those that put religion before relatives and the state before dynasty, on the one hand, and simple pragmatism on the other Family members, such as Glamis. had a considerable degree of ideological choice There was also a substantial inclination towards the family within the institutional context. Thus was evident in the structure and function of the Scottish parliament as a whole, flic second estate (peers) and the first and fourth estates (prelates and lairds) had a strong hereditary and substantial quasi-hereditary character respectively, and. with regard to the third estate (burgesses), there was a familial interest, at least, in some of the burghs Dynastic ambition, family succession, and nepiotism were major factors in creating, maintaining, and bolstering any familial conduits within the institutional structure The institutional function favoured the crowns interests rather than those of the family There was a fairly substantial inclination towards with family within the past policy context Several public acts dealt directly with royal marriages, and a slightly greater number dealt with the family as such The second working proposition hypothesied that if the family was an important organising factor m later sixteenth-century Scottish parliamentary process (which was central to the later sixteenth-century Scottish political process as a whole), then there will be substantial family relations between Glamis and his family and other leading political actors and their families, or significant consequences from proposed or actual changes in Glaniis's own family relations within the politics involved m that process If on the other hand, the family was not important in this sense, then there will be no such relations or consequences within tliat process fhe second working proposition was investigated through three case studies that focused on the 1585. 1587. and 1592 parliamentary processes in general, and enactments concerning England and the kirk in particular The family was not the only organising factor in the later sixteenth-century Scottish political process, and. consequently, consideration was given, as an ongoing matter, to other individual resources of political power - personal qualities, ideology, numbers and organisation, wealth, and violence. in order to provide an overall perspective. The research found that there were substantial family relations between Glamis and his family and other leading political figures and their families within the politics of the 1585,1587 and 1592 parliamentary processes. None of the relations was at a primary level There were also significant consequences from proposed or actual changes in Glamis's own family relations, within the politics leading up to the 1587 and 1592 public legislation Marriage, in particular, was a u.scful political instrument, but it could also be a disappointing tool Surprisingly , family relations of any substance were not evident in the polity of the three parliaments Family relations were far less prevalent tlian associations formed through state office holding, and participation m the raid of Ruthven (I582) There was no reference to the family in terms of family relations or significance consequences m the policy enacted by any of the three parliaments The extent to which the family was important is not easy to detemiine. The family was not only significant as an individual resource of political power in its own right - it provided an entree into different levels of political groupings both nationally and locally, including the burghs. but also as an indirect and invasive element in other individual resources of political power. Its indirect influence on later-sixteenth century Scottish politics may have been more important than its direct one.

The study is unusual because it took a thematic approach to the Scottish nobility over a short period of lime, and employed a methodology based on current political theory and contemporary methods of historical investigation The application of such theory to the early modern period was an important secondary consideration. It did not. however. set out to prove that one approach or method is better than the other. Rather, a more circumspect v ievv prevailed. A focus on genealogy and family history was useful In providing information about Glamis and his family, which revealed a number of matters that would have been helpful to several recent historical studies Genealogy and family history still have an important role to fulfil in historical research. Despite this and other efforts, questions remain about the later sixlccnlh-ccntury family and politics, not least the nature and significance of policy Glamis loo deserves more attention, especially with regard to his role in the raid of Ruthven. and his handling of the treasury (1585-91.1593-6). He. like many of his contemporaries and less traditional approaches to the study of history, is far too important to disregard