On 03 Jan 2006 00:09:54 GMT, (Gary Holtzman)
Post by Matt LavengoodPost by Don AitkenThere was certainly a peerage, but I'm not sure whether the title was
Torthorwald or Carlyle of Torthorwald; such things were not always
clearly defined at that date. I will see what CP says about this
family, probably tomorrow.
Thanks.
Here is the story, which quite an interesting one. ("Complete
Peerage", Volume 3, pp. 40-43). The peerage was conferred at some time
between October 1473 and July 1474 on Sir John Carlyle, son and heir
or Sir William Carlyle, who died between 1452 and 1463. The original
title was "Carlyle of Torthorwald", although later peers are
frequently called Lord Torthorwald.
The first Lord died in 1501, having been predeceased in 1477 by his
eldest son (by his second wife, Janet), John, Master of Carlyle. He
was therefore succeeded by his grandson William, 2nd Lord, to whom he
resigned the lands and barony shortly before his death.
The second Lord died in 1524 or 1525 and was succeeded by his eldest
son, James, 3rd Lord, who in turn died without issue in 1525 or 1526
and was succeeded by his brother Michael, 4th Lord.
The death of Michael's eldest son, William, Master of Carlyle, in
1572, opened up a succession dispute between his second son, Michael
Carlyle of Locharthur, and the Master's heir, his daughter Elizabeth.
The 4th Lord clearly favored Michael, to whom he transferred the land
and Barony in 1574. He died the following year.
Elizabeth recovered her position by the cunning move of marrying Sir
James Douglas of Parkhead, illegitimate grandson of James, Earl of
Morton, who had been Regent of Scotland. Even after Morton's
execution, the Douglases were a power in the land, which the Carlyles
were emphatically not, the 4th Lord having blotted his copybook by
taking the losing side (that of Queen Mary) in the civil war of 1568.
Accordingly, Elizabeth and her husband, after "long litigation",
recovered the lands.
The succession dispute was over the lands, not the peerage. It seems
to have been accepted that the latter went to the heir of line, and
the Carlyles of Locharthur never claimed it, even when, four
generations later, the head of this branch obtained formal recognition
as heir male of the 4th Lord.
According to modern doctrine, Elizabeth became Lady Carlyle
immediately on her grandfather's death in 1575. In practice, no more
was heard of the peerage until her husband was recognised as Lord
Carlyle in 1606. He is not said to have sat in Parliament, although
their son, another James Douglas, did so, after his father's
assassination in 1608 but during his mother's lifetime. This James
sold the Torthorwald estate to the 1st Earl of Queenberry in 1622, and
in 1638 the peerage also was resigned to the Earl. It is unclear
whther this was by James (there being no other evidence that he was
alive after 1622) or by his son William, whose date of death is also
unknown. Eliabeth seems to have been still alive at this time.
The Earl of Queensberry is not recorded as using the Carlyle (or
Torthorwald) title, but his grandson, the first Marquess, was created
Viscount of Torthorwald along with the Marquessate; this peerage is
extant as one of the lesser titles of the Duke of Buccleuch.
If the resignation is regarded as invalid, as it certainly would be by
modern rules, the Carlyle peerage could still be revived; the earldoms
of Dundee and Annandale provide precedents. In that case, we need the
heir of line of the marriage of Elizabeth's granddaughter, Martha
Douglas, to Sir James Lockhart of Lee - I think that leads to the
issue of Admiral Sir Thomas Cochrane by his marriage to Matilda
Wishart-Ross in 1812.
CP make no reference to the two Adam Carlyles mentioned in the
postings by "CARLILE", but they would clearly not be in line to the
peerage on any theory, even if the genealogy is correct.
Post by Matt LavengoodBy the way, is CP available on disc?
No, unfortunately
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"