Return to Library Index

Chapter 4a:
The Bissets’ arrival in Scotland

link to the main index

 

4.1 Background

In order to understand the political background for some of the reasons for the Bissets’ move to Scotland we need to look at the geo-political situation in North West Europe at approximately that time.

The heavyweight power of the day was the Angevin Empire, controlled by Henry Plantagenet as Henry II, King of England, Duke of Normandy and Duke of Aquitaine [through his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine] an Empire which ran from the Scottish borders to the Pyrenees and controlled from Anjou, rather than from England. This empire had come about by a combination of inheritance and judicious marriages leaving Henry the most powerful ruler in Europe. France, under Louis VII, Henry’s nominal overlord of his continental lands, and Scotland were minor players on the stage but capable of being annoying irritants from time to time particularly when they threatened to work together.

In 1157, Henry II, had, by diplomatic pressure forced Malcolm IV King of Scotland to restore Cumberland, Westmoreland and Northumbria to the English crown; this caused Malcolm difficulties with Galloway which had been a thorn in the side of the macMalcolm kings. Malcolm returned from Aquitaine in 1160, where he had been on campaign for his liege lord Henry II [liege for Malcolm’s English lands and any land he held direct from the English crown but not for Scotland] to be confronted by a revolt, which he put down with three separate punitive expeditions to Galloway which although temporarily subdued was along with Moray, to be part of a mixed legacy which he would leave to his brother William when he in turn took the throne in 1165.

The relationship between England and Scotland was always one open to misunderstanding by both sides. From 1072 when William I of England extracted the Treaty of Abernethy whereby King Malcolm III of Scotland became Williams’s man and gave his son Duncan as hostage, an arrangement renewed in 1091 by King Rufus of England. The English took the view that the Scottish crown and people were vassals of the English crown. The Scottish view was that only the crown was in vassalage to the King of England and only for those lands held by the Scottish crown in England.

Lack of clarity was to be the cause of endless campaigns between the two countries; the English view was as long as the Scots stayed behind their border they would be left alone and any small raids would be dealt with by the Northern barons. Major incursions would call for invasion by an English army, land and hostages taken and new oaths of fidelity taken. The marriage of members of the English royal house to future Scottish kings and the gift of the Honour of Huntingdon were indicative of England’s long term attempts to achieve a working entente with Scotland. The Scottish had always believed that Cumberland and Westmoreland and Northumberland were part of their heritage and at the first sign of any weakness they made opportunistic raids south. The logical geographical and economic expansion for Scotland at this time was always south, the north and western Isles were too hard a nut to crack and northern England offered the best chance of spoils and maybe territory.

It was not just lack of clarity it was also fuelled by what became an obsession of the Scottish crown in particular with William the Lion for control of the English northern counties of Cumberland, Westmoreland and Northumberland- an obsession which would cost them dearly over a long period.

The political reality was that the areas in dispute were at the far range of control and influence of both the opposing crowns. Scottish territorial ambitions had always lain to the south it offered the easiest and most profitable pickings, far easier than the north or west and much more fertile and prosperous. The English crown was by and large prepared to leave the area to the northern English barons to control; the obsession of the English crown was Normandy and the continent. Where power is seen to be weak those who think themselves powerful move in to fill the vacuum.

Despite the bad publicity the English have gathered over time with regard to their policy to Scotland with the exception of Edward I. I believe that the English were more than content at a status quo vis-à-vis Anglo-Scottish relations. The border as it stood, the Honour of Huntingdon as a sweetener to the Scottish crown and homage from the Scottish crown and baronage for their English holdings. The obsessive urge of the Scottish crown to claim the Northern Counties and break treaty obligations led the English to hit back time and time again and time and time again they were the victors except there were no real victors as each peace brought the dispute back to where it was previously. I know that this is a simplification of events and it was often more complicated but history can be made over complicated.

The Angevin “Empire” was not a unit of central control as we would now understand the word but a collection of semi-independent nations who individually owed their feudal allegiance to the same man, Henry. When in 1174 Henry II, was not only faced uprisings within his own “empire” on the continent led by members of his own family but the opprobrium of the civilised word for being seen as responsible for the murder of Thomas a Becket, he appeared to have his back to the wall. This was just the opportunity that William, King of Scots was looking for, the loss of Cumberland Westmoreland and Northumbria still rankled with him and he saw Henry’s apparent weakness as a moment to strike.

Unfortunately Scottish military strategy and foreign policy never quite managed to come to terms with its relationship with England. The border was historically quite fluid, at one time it had even been as far south as the Humber. National borders represented the physical extent of a rulers power at any given moment rather than a neat line on the ground. As that power ebbed and flowed so did the border, perceived weakness by one side led to military excursions by the other. Scottish economic and manpower restraints meant that Scottish military strategy led it to opt for punitive raids, but not as a rule to hold ground, then to retire back to the Scottish heartland. This provoked the English to return the compliment with interest but with the difference that the English tended to hold key ground, either as bargaining chips or with a view to more permanent occupation, which is how the Scots were to ultimately lose Berwick, a key Scottish town in its day. This type of warfare, like the Desert Campaign in World War II went back and forth, each side temporarily holding an advantage but more often than not in favour of the English.

William, King of Scotland gave way to the chance of regaining Northumberland rather than his obligation of fealty to Henry II and provoked a rash expedition into the north of England in 1174. He seriously misjudged Henry’s perceived weakness and managed to get himself surprised in the mist with only a few retainers and captured at Alnwick, by Geoffrey, Henry’s bastard son and Ranulf Glanville, Sheriff of Yorkshire. The news of William’s capture was the first good news Henry had had since the murder of Becket which had cast him in a bad light with most of what we could call Christendom. He took this unexpected news and saw this victory as a signal of divine forgiveness.

William, captured and led with his feet tied beneath his horse was taken in humiliating and ritual procession to Northampton and to a dungeon in Falaise in Normandy. Under the Treaty of Falaise, (1174) [see Appendix IV] William vowed homage to Henry II, “for Scotland and for all his other lands”; this treaty was to stay in place until 1189, when under a formal quit-claim made by Richard I of England it was abrogated. This Treaty was confirmed at York in August 1175. William, King of Scotland later called the Lion had been publicly and deliberately humbled.

The capture of William and his imprisonment in Falaise was the signal for a renewed revolt in Galloway and maybe why, when William returned to Scotland he was accompanied by a group of young Norman knights. As soon as William’s capture was known Gilbert and Uhtred the two sons of Fergus of Galloway returned to their own country to eject all the English, that is Anglo-Normans and then fight each other for possession. William knowing that he had a revolt on his hands needed military help, Henry also needed to keep William from making further mischief by keeping him occupied; sending him back with these young men served not only both those purposes but gave Henry eyes and ears at the Scottish court and was additionally a way of advancement for landless knights and second sons.

4.2 The Bissets arrival in Scotland

The how when and why of the Bissets arrival in Scotland is far from clear there being at least five scenarios to chose from. I intend to outline all those that I am aware of and then discuss in more detail.

Scenario 1: Probably the most commonly accepted theory and the one which occurs most often in historical writing is the text from the MS called Greys, “Scalacronica” [Maitland Club. p.41] which states that the Bysets or Biseys are named among those young nobles of England, the Balliols, Bruces and others who accompanied King William the Lion of Scotland on his return from captivity in 1175. This would be fine but for scenario 2 which states that……

Scenario 2: In a period between 1150/64 William Bisset known as the Carpenter was witness to a charter of King Malcolm of Scotland. And that in 1153 a Henry Bisset was also in Scotland and in that same year William the Carpenter witnessed three further charters of King Malcolm IV as he was to again in 1164. The earliest date of 1150 being 24 years before King William the Lion’s return. This would be fine but for scenario 3 which states that………..

Scenario 3: That by 1140 [see appendix II for dates] a Robert Bisset was already Lord of Upsettlington in Berwickshire, and in the same year founded a hospital, St Leonard’s at Horndean (CGB.) the manor of Upsettlington is mentioned in charters of the 11th and 12th C and was at that time in the possession of a family of the name of Bisset….the family came into England (no evidence that these Bissets came from England from English documentation) about the time of King William I (1165-1214) came north and settled in two branches, Berwickshire and Inverness, (HBNC p.370).

About or before 1140 a Robert Bisset obtained the manor of Upsettlington in the reign of King David I (1124-1153) where he entered into a covenant for the maintenance of a chaplain and two poor men founded and endowed a hospital at Horndean which was dedicated to St Leonard…….the charter of conveyance for this hospital to the monks at Kelso was witnessed by a William and a Walter Bisset of Upsettlington. (HBNC. p 373.)

Common sense dictates that he had probably been lord here for some years previously before embarking on a hospital building programme, so conservatively we could assume that he had been in Upsettlington. by 1130 at the latest. Some 45 years before William the Lion returned and 20 years before William the Carpenter’s arrival and taking him back to the reign of King David I. 1124-1153, which would be fine but for scenario 4 which states…….

Scenario 4: States that a Robert Bisset was prior at the monastery of Hexham in Northumberland and who in 1138 was visited by the papal legate Albein, Bishop of Ostia who as part of his tour of Northern England inspected the monastery at Hexham and then went on to Carlisle where he met King David of Scotland. He laid before him the complaints of the prior and King David made a promise of full restitution. These complaints related to the general destruction of the area by King David’s raiding army in the same year. The Scottish crown was keen to maintain friendly relations with Hexham as they had considerable interests at stake in Northumberland and Cumberland and a good understanding with Hexham would make their position in the district more secure. The restitution was related to the late war when Scotland invaded northern England.

Robert resigned as prior in 1141 and became a Cistercian, a more severe order than the Austin Cannons at Hexham. (NCH. p127.132. 134. 145. 164.). There must be a high probability that Robert was connected to the Upsettlington. Bissets just 74 miles by road to the north of him and does further point that the Bissets were in Upsettlington. by at least 1130 and possibly before, which would be fine but for scenario 5 which states that…….

Scenario 5: The first report of the family in Scotland was in 1057, “a Bisset with several others came to Scotland from France as Ambassadors from the court of King Henry I of France 1031-1060. To congratulate King Malcolm III of Scotland for his victory over the cruel tyrant Macbeth. Evidently “the Bisset” remained in Scotland for in 1060 when King Malcolm returned after repulsing a Danish attack on Murry [Moray] he was so grateful to his faithful friends and especially the strangers who had come out of France that he gave them estates and to the Bisset he gave Hadon in East Laudion”. [Hadden in Borders prior to 1974 Roxburghshire]

It is worth noting that in c1220 the Laird of Hadden and his heirs were obliged by charter to pay 20s annually for the guard at Roxburgh Castle which is approx 22 miles to the south west of Hadden. This is further away from the great castle at Wark was to Hadden so I make two tentative suggestions firstly that the “estate” at Hadden was still of significant size and wealth to be taxed for this duty and secondly that its land was situated to the south of Hadden ie a closer proximity to Roxburgh rather than Wark. The main significance of this item is that it confirms that the estate which it is “claimed” Malcolm III granted to a Bisset in c1056 appears to have survived 160 something years later, in what form, in whose hands and in what size we have no knowledge.

This statement is taken from an unsubstantiated posting (1998) on a Bisset website and despite numerous endeavours by the webmaster the origin of this statement is still unknown and therefore must be treated with great caution. But were there to be supporting evidence for this supposition it would take the Bissets arrival in Scotland back 118 years before Scenario 1, 93 years before Scenario 2 and at least 73 years before Scenario 4.

We can now look at these scenarios in more detail and try and assess their validity and relevance.

Scenario 1: To some extent whether this is a true statement or not is irrelevant as we know that an earlier arrival is confirmed by other facts. We do not know where the author obtained his information; it could have been written long after the event and used as a means of explaining away the arrival in Scotland of continental knights. But it was entirely feasible that the Bissets made more than one entry into Scotland and that the statement is perfectly correct.

King William I, of Scotland was deliberately humiliated by the means of his capture at Alnwick and by his subsequent journey to Northampton to meet his liege lord whose oath he had broken. This was a very public statement by King Henry I not just to William but to all who owed allegiance to him, “break faith with me and see what happens”.

The Treaty of Falaise (see appendix IV.) was a further humiliation to William and the Scottish nation (ibid p.33) which Scottish historians too often tend to gloss over very quickly.

However having emerged the victor, King Henry seems to have taken a very pragmatic view; he needed peace on his northern borders and needed to keep William fully occupied with Scottish matters and out of temptation to raid England. It seems that Henry decided that it would be a sensible policy to ensure that King William had an infusion of Norman knights in his retinue who would help to strengthen William’s own hand in Scotland, help some Norman second sons in advancement using a patronage which was not within his normal gift. Who better than relatives of one of his own favourites his steward Manasser Bisset; these knights might also have acted as Henry’s eyes and ears.

It is also quite possible that many of these “young nobles” came from within the Earldom of Huntingdon, traditionally the gift of the English king to the heir to the Scottish throne. This Earldom was ironically the greatest Earldom in England as far as territory was concerned and many of these young men may well have been known to King William, who had himself had held the earldom [the Honour of Huntingdon] prior to becoming King. They would have at sometime held a feudal obligation to William, as Earl of Huntingdon and to Henry King of England their supreme lord, an interesting but not unusual situation.

One of the aspects of William’s capture and the subsequent Treaty of Falaise was the efficiency of communication and logistic involved and this is discussed in Appendix IV.

From 1175, William was fully back in Scotland, but only with the death of Ralf, Lord of Nithsdale, was he at back effectively in control of Galloway. [In 1187 Henry II actually came as far north as Carlisle to check on the pacification of Galloway] these young “nobles” where probably very active on behalf of William in putting down this revolt.

In 1179 King William and his brother David, now back as Earl of Huntingdon led a large force into Moray to head off yet another revolt and unquestionably some of the “young nobles” were with him. In 1181, while King William and brother David were in Normandy as part of their feudal service with Henry II, Donald MacWilliam landed in Scotland and plundered the area. This came to nothing but five years later there were further outbreaks and in 1187, William led another army into Moray to deal with Donald MacWilliam. Donald was killed at Mam Garvia, probably Strath Garve. Donald was the son of King David’s nephew William fitzDuncan and had legitimate claims to the Scottish throne but the family had let this lie dormant for sixty years.

The upshot of both these rebellions was that that great and cheap motivator “patronage” came into play. William was able to depose existing tenants and give land and titles to reward those knights who had acted for him among who were undoubtedly the Bissets. By rewarding them with the one economic commodity they all craved, land - at no financial cost to himself he not only had their loyalty but he had in place followers who had a vested and identical interest to the King, land.

In summing up Scenario 1 we can say that it is possible and highly probable that one or more Bissets were in the party who returned to Scotland with William the Lion in 1169 what we cannot be sure of is who these were and must remember that the William the Carpenter Bisset and a Henry Bisset had already been recorded in Scotland in 1150 some 19 years previously and in the case of William the Carpenter already held land there.

Scenario 2: It is quite clear from charter evidence that both these Bissets were in Scotland at the time stated and were sufficiently close to the court to act as witnesses to the King’s charters. The first question has to be why were they there? Although there is no specific answer we can in the case of William the Carpenter Bisset (William C.) make some reasonable assumptions.

We know that William C was a son of William Bisset (3) a knight or baron in the service of the Counts of Aumale who had interests in Holderness in Yorkshire. Stephen Count of Aumale was also uncle to the Queen of Scotland, Matilda and great uncle to Henry, Earl of Huntingdon also great great uncle to both King Malcolm IV and King William the Lion. Another connection was that Hawise; Countess of Aumale was a daughter of William fitzDuncan of Moray, son of King Duncan II.

This is a good point to try and understand the reasons behind the Flemish input and influence on medieval Scottish history and why the House of Aumale featured in this. We need to go back a bit for this to become clearer, for those who wish to study this in much more detail I recommend The Scottish Hazard vol’s 1 & 2 by Beryl Platt.

“In the 9th and 10th centuries a number of ancient Comtes around Flanders attached themselves to the new State and survived in its shadow. Among them were Hainault, Mons, Louvain, Alost, Guines, Boulogne, which had their own subsidiaries of Lens, Hesdin and St Pol. Away on the Norman border, was Ponthieu which included Aumale. All these would become allied by close family ties to the comital family of Flanders; all were ruled in 1066 by men directly descended from Charlemagne.”

Adele of Normandy was the sister of William the Conqueror, both being the offspring of Robert of Normandy and Arlette, a furrier’s daughter from Falaise. Adele married firstly Enguerrand, son of Count Hugh of Ponthieu and his wife Berta of Aumale. Enguerrand was killed in 1053 and Adele remarried, Lambert Count of Lens, younger brother of Count Eustace II of Boulogne, they had a daughter Judith just before he too was killed in 1054.

Judith was to marry and move to England as the wife of Waltheof Earl of Northumberland. After the conquest of England there was a rebellion in the north of England of which Waltheof had some prior knowledge but took no part. He broke his oath of silence and was forgiven by King William but was later to be condemned to death by a Norman court and beheaded, reputedly on the evidence of his wife Judith. She went into purdah and lived within her now vast holdings in the East Midlands with her daughter, shunned by her peers for the dishonour of a wife who would send her husband to the scaffold.

After Hastings many of the Flemings who had supported William came to possess property in the East Midlands adjacent to Judith’s holdings and that of her daughter Maud. Maud was revered by the incoming Flemish knights as much as Judith was loathed. Maud built up a personal following; she had two sisters, Judith of whom little is known and Alice, who as a great niece of King William was married off to Rolf de Toeny.

Maud was to marry Simon de Senlis who was of Flemish stock and connected through family and marriages to most of the important Flemish families. The important fact to hold onto is that although these Flemish knights had arrived in England as a result of and under the umbrella of the Norman victory at Hastings and now held land there, they still considered themselves as Flemish. When Simon died Maud was left with two sons and a daughter and a vast inheritance, it was therefore important to marry her as a matter of some urgency to a new husband who could protect her, the family and their inheritance.

David Earl of Cumberland youngest child of Malcolm Canmore, brother and half brother to four successive kings of Scotland and at that time an unlikely candidate for the crown was chosen as the future husband of Maud.

At the same period Count Eustace III of Boulogne fresh from triumph and tribulations of the First Crusade married the youngest daughter of Malcolm Canmore, David’s sister Mary further strengthening the Flemish connection with Scotland. Henry I of England had married David’s elder sister Matilda and became joint guardian with Count Eustace, of Maud so we can now begin to see the web of Flemish relationships which would not only embrace the future King David and his Queen Maud but also have a lasting impact on Scotland.

David came to the throne of Scotland in 1124 and many of the knights of Flemish extraction who had been tenants and neighbours of his wife Maud and himself in the East Midlands were invited to join them in Scotland. These knights have been depicted by historians as being primarily Norman knights living in England but were in the majority of Flemish stock and from families holding land on both sides of the Channel.

They went north for two prime reasons firstly chivalry, their duty to protect and support their lady Maud in her new country and secondly they were invited for their administrative skills which David had witnessed and needed in his kingdom of Scotland. It was a neat compact which would bring benefits to both parties.

Aumale: Aumale was a sub-territory of Ponthieu, Agnes, sister of William the Conqueror had once been Countess of Aumale through her marriage to Count Enguerrand who was killed in 1053 leaving Adele with a daughter generally called the Countess Ada. In 1054 Adele remarried Count Lambert of Lens and it was this marriage which produced a daughter the Countess Judith, mother of Queen Maud of Scotland.

The countship of Ponthieu passed to Enguerrand brother of Guy, his niece Adel inherited some lands from her father which included the Count of Aumale. She died soon after Domesday by then having become the wife of Drogo de Beureure a prominent Fleming, the Aumale inheritance passed to her half brother Stephen who became Count of Aumale. Stephen was one of the many Flemish knights who answered Pope Urban’s II call in 1095 for a crusade to relieve Jerusalem.

Adele was to have a remarkable influence in Scottish royal history, her Lens granddaughter became Queen Maud, her Aumale granddaughter Agnes the youngest daughter of Count Stephen married Peter de Brus son of Robert de Brus the elder and in the next generation her great granddaughter Euphemia would marry Robert de Brus of Annandale becoming as Queen Maud already was the ancestress of Scottish kings.

Complicated as some of these relationships are, for William the Carpenter Bisset in service to the House of Aumale there was every reason why he should be deployed in the North of England and Scotland on Aumale business. In that capacity he would have been welcome through and on behalf of these relationships at court and later granted land. I do not think we need be over concerned as to the specific role he played. It is sufficient to demonstrate that he was in Scotland as proved by charter evidence he had motive and opportunity and access as did the Henry Bisset who also appears at the same time.

We have no confirmation that William C, was the eldest son or even if he was in England prior to his brother Manasser (7). We do know that during his lifetime he held property in Scotland which was regranted to a John Waleram by King William I presumably on William C’s death or the death of his natural heir Henry (11). We also know that Manasser his brother subinfeued his manor of East Bridgeford in Nott’s to his brother William C, which was close to his manor at Allington in Lincs and which was probably held through the Aumale service.

A possible scenario might indicate that William C, originally went to Scotland on behalf of his superior the Count of Aumale probably in direct connection with his property and family connections in the North of England and Scotland the property may well have been tossed back and forth between England and Scotland as the border moved first one way and then the other and would have needed a strong man on the spot to hold the ring. He may have set out from Normandy and only later received the manor of Allington. Manasser (7) may have passed on his manor of East Bridgeford at this time in order to make his brothers’ English holdings more viable and or because East Bridgeford was a holding of Manasser’s on its own and well away from any of his other properties but near Allington.

Another question we need to ask is which of at least three possible Henrys was the Henry who appears in Scotland in 1153 (HPB). We have a Henry (9) brother of both William C and Manasser. Henry (11) son of William C and Henry (14) son of Manasser. As there is no evidence of the forename Henry appearing later within the Scottish Bisset family I think that it is probably safe to conclude that this Henry was the brother of Manasser and William and came direct via Normandy with William.

It could be anyone of the three but I think we can rule out Henry (14) Manasser’s son for two reasons. Firstly there is no evidence as yet found to indicate that Manasser’s side of the family ever had any interest in Scotland in land or otherwise. Henry (14) received a very full English inheritance and probably through both parents a Norman inheritance and would have had no need to look for further expansion in Scotland. He only came of age in 1187 so would only have been 8 years old in 1153. Secondly at the date that William C’s Scottish lands were regranted, 1205 Henry (14) was still alive (d1208) so had they been within his inheritance he would surely had a claim on them.

Henry, son of the Carpenter (11) was believed dead by 1212 so this may also rule him out as well. He had made an important dynastic marriage to Albreda de Lesiures (11) which allied him to important families in the North West of England in particular through his wife, the Lacy family and his need to further any ambitions in Scotland may well have been tempered and I see any involvement by him in Scotland as marginal to nil.

This then leaves only Henry (9) in the frame, brother to both William C and Manasser as the most likely candidate. All we know about him apart from this relationship is that he was dead by 1177 (TC & TN) a date confirmed by charter reference. So he could have been the Henry noted in Scotland in 1153 but not the Henry who witnessed charters of King William I in the period 1180-89.

He could of course had a son Henry we just do not know so I think that the most likely scenario is that the Henry of 1153 may also have been in Aumale service and as there are no known records of him in England he may have operated direct from Normandy. There is no evidence that the Henry of 1180-89 was a son of Henry (9) but Henry (11) son of William C who would have been alive at that date and as son of William C must be the most likely candidate.

In summing up Scenario 2. Which states that the first Bissets in Scotland were William the Carpenter and a Henry Bisset. There seems to be no question that William the Carpenter was in Scotland at least by 1150, some 24 years before Falaise and a Henry Bisset by 1180, some 6 years after Falaise. Both are recorded as witnesses to state papers and as such we must accept these dates as fact.

Scenario 3: states that a Robert Bisset was Lord of Upsettlington in Berwickshire in or near 1140 (CGD) (HB. p.30.)[see appendix II re dates] There is no doubt that this is correct and if he were the first Lord of Upsettlington it would have made this a gift from King David I (1124-1153) who was the first king of Scotland known to have brought continental knights into Scotland as a deliberate policy. I feel certain that Robert Bisset did not suddenly appear and become Lord of Upsettlington he would have had to have earned that patronage so it would not be unreasonable to place him in Scotland between 1120-1130.
The Norman forename Robert does not appear in any of the Anglo-Norman Bisset lines and my instinct is that he came direct to Scotland from Normandy bypassing England except possibly for passage. And while obviously part of the greater Bisset family he was already somewhat removed from the Bissets who settled in England.

In summery we can reasonably say that Scenario 3 states that Bissets were in Scotland in 1140 and very probably anything up to 20 years prior to that date and the probability being that they arrived direct from Normandy and not England and there is no evidence to suggest any active connection with the English branch of the family. What the relationship was is not clear but it probably goes back to Henry (1) or William (3) and to their being brothers to either of these, once again the answer is probably in Normandy.

Scenario 4: concerns the Abbot of Hexham in Northumberland in 1138, who was also a Robert Bisset. Hexham is only 74 miles south of Upsettlington and as the same name occurs in both places at more or less the same time it seems reasonable to assume a family connection. Exactly what this was we do not know but a guess might indicate that the prior was maybe the father or Uncle of the Robert at Upsettlington.

If he had been the father the more likely role it would not be the first time that we encounter a knight who gave up the sword for the cross. We have an example of Fergus of Galloway who retired it must be said without much option as rex Galwitensium, princes Galwaie and comes in 1160 to become a canon at Holyrood.

If Abbot Robert had got religion as it seems as he left Hexham to become a Cistercian monk, a more severe order and one well supported by King David. It would not be that surprising if he had started at Hexham near his family base. As a rule I do not believe in coincidences and I lean strongly to Abbot Robert as being the father of the Robert Bisset of Upsettlington.

A further potential twist to this is that King David had a favourite knight named Arnulf (S-MK p146, p369, p376) now Arnulf is a Norman name and one not found in Scotland but it does happen to be a name that occurs in the Bisset family and found in Normandy, we have an Arnulf de Bretizel, an Arnulf lord of Bouafles. This in itself is no more than intriguing but the land King David granted him and the name he became known as was Arnulf of Swinton and Swinton is just under 9 miles from Upsettlington – coincidence or not one could easily see David rewarding a favourite knight after years of good service with land near his family, we shall probably never know.

This theory does not in itself prove that the Bissets were in Upsettlington and therefore Scotland earlier than stated in Scenario 3 but it does strengthen the likelihood of an earlier date at Upsettlington.

Scenario 5: Because this hints at the earliest date so far for a Bisset arrival it is clearly the most interesting and intriguing theory but unfortunately the one with no attribution or supporting evidence and therefore the one which we should give the least credence until such time as verification can be found.

Despite these reservations the temptation to look at this is just too great to resist. It is a very early date indeed, 9 years before Hastings and the Norman Conquest of England. How likely was this? At first reading not very likely, but closer study shows that there were precedents. Norman knights were in Herefordshire, England prior to Hastings in the shape of Osbern who had established large manors of Burhill and Hope under Dinmore. An unnamed Norman had also built and garrisoned a castle in Herefordshire, probably Ewias Harold in the Golden Valley. (ASE. p.652.) It seems [Manson, The House of Godwine] that King Macbeth’s (1040-57) house guards were in fact Osbern Pentecost and his men, the same Osbern from Herefordshire who built Mulsonestone Castle. Osbern and his men all died Lumphanan while Macbeth survived only to be killed later at Dunsinane. So there is no practical reason why a small group of Norman or French knights could not have been in Scotland at this time.

Why King Henry I of France of whom one historian wrote, “This king left no credible impression upon history,” should send an emissary to Scotland at this time is unclear. But by now the rulers of France were becoming greatly concerned at the growing power of their neighbours in Normandy and must have been keen to make alliances with other powers as and when the opportunity arose. The event of a new king in Scotland could be seen as such an opportunity and the perfect excuse to oil the wheels of real politic.

The reference to the tyrant Macbeth is pure spin by the chronicler. Macbeth was a successful ruler for 16 years and during that time was able to make a pilgrimage to Rome which at the very least indicates that the kingdom was stable enough to allow him to be absent for several months while on pilgrimage.

The fact that members of the emissary stayed on in Scotland is not unusual, in a similar but reverse mission from Scotland to France in 1389 the sons of one of the Ambassadors, Robert Grant stayed on in service to the French crown and prospered becoming Comtes de Vaux, surviving the French Revolution and members of that family are still active in France today. The family of the Comte de Vaux never forgot their Scottish and Grant origin.

If this Bisset had brought attention to himself by distinguished and loyal conduct in helping to repulse a Danish raid he might well have been rewarded with property by the crown in order to retain his services. And if he had been granted territory at Hadden which is only 17 miles from Upsettlington where we know they were to be found in c1140 or before, a period of between 63 and 83 years previous I believe that we could say that there was a high probability that the Hadden and Upsettlington territory could be seen as one.

We do not know a date for the Hadden grant (if there ever was such a grant) but it must have been 1060 or later, the date of the Danish raid, which narrows the gap to Upsettlington. to between 90 and 60 years when we know for certain that they were there, to a date they might have been there. Unfortunately without further corroboration we can only file this theory away for an other day.

 

Conclusions


To summarise the known facts appertaining to the Bissets’ arrival in Scotland we can state that from our knowledge of surviving charter data that Bissets were in Scotland by c1140 and holders of land. We can also state that there must be a strong possibility that they were there anything up to 20 years previous and an uncorroborated report that they may have been in Scotland as early as 1057.

We can also state that there was more than one migration to Scotland by Bissets; exactly what the relationship was between them is not clear but I believe that the common link to be in Normandy. The first definite migration was Robert Bisset of Upsettlington first noted in c1140. The second migration was by William the Carpenter who we know held property although what evidence there is does not indicate that he or his heirs stayed on in Scotland. The third migration was in 1169 with the return of King William I after Falaise although Bissets are mentioned in this connection there is no confirmation as to who they might have been and if they actually took part in this return and if so stayed in Scotland.

Another important factor is that the evidence or the lack of it from English records points strongly to the first two emigrations arriving from Normandy and not England and I have serious doubts as to the Falaise emigration ever happening. I have no evidence to support this view but as there is no surviving data to confirm this other than the well known quote from the Scalacronica, it reads more like someone’s explanation as to the arrival of certain continental families into Scotland.

So we can see that these emigrations predate Manasser Bisset’s entry into England by conservatively 14 years but not that of his father William who had land holdings in Nottinghamshire and Derby in 1130 not withstanding that we have no record of William actually being in England.

 

link to the main index

Chapter 4a:
The Bissets’ arrival in Scotland

link to the main index