Bruce, Douglas, and Sinclair

["John S. Quarterman" <jsq@quarterman.org>]

>So to weave a thread on topic;
>If the Black Douglas' mother was a Sinclair, and 2 Sinclairs were with him
>in Spain; were they cousin and Uncle to him?

Good question.  Does anyone know?  Lena?  Niven?

>And do the Douglas' hold part of the Sinclair story?

Probably.  One thing I learned in my immediate family's
research on my paternal line is that many things that
the direct family may have thought too obvious to write
down may have been recorded by relatives, in their letters,
deeds, lawsuits, books, and wills.

>You know I have not been satisfied that they went fighting the moors as a
>distraction going to Jerusalem.
>The Bruce's heart was off-course for family business Sinclair/Douglas stuff!

Was it?  According to Barbour's Bruce, Bruce merely asked that his heart
be taken on Crusade; he said nothing about Jerusalem.  After all, he
died in 1329 and the Last Crusade was over in 1272.  The Spanish action
against the Moors in 1330 was the best thing going for Bruce's purpose.

This also fits the Sinclair Crusading tradition of that William Sinclair's son
William Sinclair dying in Lithuania in 1358 crusading with the Teutonic nights,
 ``The Pope initiated a crusade to the Baltics,
 whcich was considered to be equal before God as the crusade to Jerusalem. ''
 http://www.vernet.lv/VT/history.html

and his son Henry Sinclair probably being on King Peter's Crusade in 1365,
 http://sinclair.quarterman.org/kingpeterscrusade.html

Not to mention of course their ancestor Henry the Holy being on the
First Crusade.  And when infidels weren't available, English would do:
William (1240-1297) won the battle of Roslin Moor in 1303;
his son Henry (1275-1336) fought at Bannockburn and signed
the Declaration of Arbroath, and it was his son William
who died at Teba with Douglas and Bruce's heart, fighting the Moors.

>Any comment?

Let me quote from the preface to the second edition of The Baltic Crusade
by William Urban:

``It is an unfortunate fact that until recently most scholars who mentioned
the crusades discussed only those expeditions to the Holy Land that ended
in 1291. This circumstance may have been due to practical considerations
in writing and publishing, but just as often it seems to have originated
in a narrow definition of "the crusades." Be that as it may, the crusading
movement was not confined to the Near East. Crusades were declared against
heretics, pagans, and political opponents, as well as Saracens. They were
organized and led by popes, kings, nobles, hermits, peasants, children,
and excommunicants. They were organized against enemies of the Roman
Church in Greece, Spain, Germany, Bohemia, the Balkans, and Russia, as
well as in the Holy Land and North Africa--for the purposes of conquest,
booty, and revenge, as well as for protection of the holy places.

``In short, the crusading spirit and the crusading movement affected
every social class and every generation from 1100 to 1500 and virtually
every geographic location accessible to Europeans. Nor did the crusades
cease to be a factor in European politics with the end of the military
expeditions. The Renaissance papacy cannot be understood without
considering the financial and political difficulties imposed by recent
Turkish expansion at the expense of enemies both in the Islamic world
and Christendom. The Spanish conquest of the New World also exhibited
the spirit of the crusades and lacked only the formality of a papal bull
and the assent of historians to be called by such a name. From Clermont
to Tannenberg, from the cloisters to the courts, these four centuries
were a crusading era.''

 http://department.monm.edu/history/urban/books/Baltic_Crusade_Introduction.htm

And a dying king who had not gone on crusade would consider that a failing
in his duty that he would want to rectify.


Just ran across a citation for this book:

``Eric Christiansen,
The Northern Crusades
Penguin USA, 1998, 320 Pages [2nd Edition], Paperback.
A fascinating, well written account of the north-eastern part of European
history that is often missing in most books. While this is a book filled
with historic facts and dates, it is written in such a manner that it
is easy for even the non student to read and understand. Once started,
the book was hard to put down. It answered so many questions of who,
why and how the current nationalites emerged. So much was revealed about
the people and cultures of the area.  NEW    $11.16''

Has anybody read it?  Does it mention any relatives?

Here's an amusing web page:

``Hier die Geschichte des Clans Sinclair, der früher Caithness, das Land
unserer Lairds of Camster, Glencairn und John O'Groats beherrschte.

``...

``c 1358 Lithuanian Crusade William Sinclair, Baron of Rosslyn and
father of Prince Henry Sinclair dies in Lithuania crusading with the
Teutonic Knights

``...

``5 November 1999 Malcolm 20th Earl of Caithness and Peter 7th Earl of Rosslyn

``Elected Representative Hereditary Peers in House of Lords reform. John
3rd Viscount Thurso does not stand in election

``1. Januar 2000 Britain Travel Peter Storm Der Clan Sinclair beginnt,
seine Herrschaft über das Land durch die vielen Lairds of Glencairn,
Camster und John O'Groats zu verlieren.''

Apparently somebody in Germany likes Sinclairs.

Come to think of it, I've observed a fascination with Sinclairs
in Belgium, too, including tours to Scotland that feature Rosslyn.

>Regards
>Bruce

John S. Quarterman <jsq@quarterman.org>
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@quarterman.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://sinclair.quarterman.org/list.html