Andrew de Glasgu

Glasgow Name Study: project home · research directory · digital workbench

Biography

Alexander de Glasgow (fl. 1289/90) was a Scottish royal financial officer recorded as an escheator in the late thirteenth-century Exchequer Rolls of Scotland.

Only one record can presently be assigned securely to him. It shows that he received a substantial payment into the royal chamber and issued an open letter acknowledging the transaction. His birth, death, parentage, residence, marriage, landholding and subsequent career are not stated.

The original record calls him Alexander, not Andrew. “Andrew de Glasgow” and “Andrew de Glasgu” are unsupported readings of this entry.

Name and designation

The record uses the form:

Alexandri de Glasgow

The preposition de normally meant “of” or “from”. Alexander may therefore have originated in Glasgow, resided there, possessed connections with the burgh or used an already established family byname derived from it.

The single occurrence does not by itself establish that de Glasgow was hereditary. Other thirteenth-century people were independently identified by their place of origin, particularly after moving into ecclesiastical, mercantile or royal service.

Royal financial service, 1289/90

Alexander occurs in the account of James Stewart, Steward of Scotland and sheriff of Ayr. The account states that it was rendered in 1289, although the passage appears under the 1290 heading in the published roll. The date is therefore commonly expressed as 1289/90.

The relevant passage reads:

Computum Jacobi senescalli Scocie, vicecomitis de Air, redditum anno Lxxxix ... Per denarios solutos in cameram, et receptos per manum Alexandri de Glasgow, escaetoris, liij li. vj s. viij d.

In translation:

The account of James, Steward of Scotland, sheriff of Ayr, rendered in the year 1289 ... For money paid into the chamber and received through the hand of Alexander de Glasgow, escheator: £53 6s. 8d.

^[1]

The sum of £53 6s. 8d. was equivalent to eighty marks. It was a substantial royal-accounting transaction.

The account continues:

de quibus dictus vicecomes et balliui sui habent literam ipsius Alexandri patentem penes se, que non fuit presentata super computo

— for which the sheriff and his bailies had Alexander’s open letter in their keeping, although it was not presented during the audit.

The auditors directed that, should the letter subsequently be found and produced, it was to be treated as having no force or value. This was evidently intended to prevent Alexander’s acknowledgement from being presented later as evidence for a second allowance of the same payment.

Alexander’s letter is important evidence about his position. It shows that he:

• personally received or acknowledged royal funds;
• could issue a written instrument which the sheriff and bailies retained;
• operated within the Scottish Exchequer’s accounting procedures;
• and held a recognised office rather than appearing merely as an incidental witness.

The separate damaged receipt has a precise historical locator: Bain calendared it as Chapter House (Scots Documents), Box 94, No. 5. It is dated 7 March 1289/90 and records Thomas de Clenhil, knight, receiving £6 13s. 4d. from Sir Alexander Balliol through Alexander, escheator south of the Forth, for a fee due at Pentecost 1288. Bain described the document as mutilated and without a seal.^[2] This is not a current TNA orderable reference and the original has not been inspected.

Office of escheator

The roll describes Alexander as:

escaetoris

— escheator.

An escheator was concerned with property, goods or revenues which had fallen into royal hands through escheat, forfeiture or a related legal cause. The office required the collection, custody or accounting of money due to the crown.

The entry does not describe Alexander as “escheator of Ayr”, nor does it define a permanent territorial jurisdiction. His appearance in the sheriff of Ayr’s account proves that he handled money included in that account; it does not necessarily prove that he resided in Ayrshire or held a specifically Ayrshire office.

Likewise, the record does not call Alexander:

• a burgess of Glasgow or Ayr;
• a burgh official;
• sheriff, bailie or chamberlain;
• a landowner;
• or a member of James Stewart’s household.

Those descriptions should not be added without further evidence.

Historical setting

The account belongs to the period following the death of King Alexander III in 1286. Scotland was then governed by the Guardians of the Realm during the succession crisis preceding the accession of John Balliol.

Alexander therefore served in royal financial administration during a politically unsettled period in which the Exchequer continued to collect, audit and account for crown income.

His precise appointment date is unknown. He may have held office before 1289, but the surviving passage provides only a single secure date.

Possible Earlier Records

Alexander, son of Robert de Glascu, Dublin, 1238/39

The Dublin Guild Merchant Roll contains an earlier Alexander connected with the Glasgow name. Among the admissions for 1238/39 appears:

Alexander filius Roberti de Glascu

— Alexander, son of Robert of Glasgow.^[3]

This record establishes a genuine father-son relationship:

• the father was called Robert;
• Robert was designated de Glascu;
• and Robert’s son Alexander was admitted to the Dublin guild merchant.

The Latin grammar attaches de Glascu directly to Robert. It does not necessarily style the son himself “Alexander de Glascu”. The entry therefore proves that a man called Robert of Glasgow had a son Alexander, but it does not by itself prove that Alexander inherited Glasgow as a hereditary surname.

The same admissions list directly names another entrant:

Alexander de Ultonia

This confirms that the clerk could apply a direct locative to an Alexander when that was the form being recorded.

The identity of Robert

An earlier, undated part of the Dublin roll contains:

Ricardus de Glasgu 8 Sol. Robertus de Glasgu 8 Sol.

Richard and Robert appear consecutively and each paid eight shillings to enter the guild.^[4]

A further entrant, Gilbert de Glascu, appears elsewhere in the undated portion of the roll.^[5]

The earlier Dublin Robert is a plausible candidate for Alexander’s father. The chronology permits an established merchant to have a son entering the guild in 1238/39.

The later entry does not identify the father as “the aforesaid Robert”, a former guild member or the companion of Richard. The identification therefore remains a working hypothesis rather than a proved relationship.

Another Robert de Glasgu served among the clerks of Gilbert, bishop of Dunkeld, between 1229 and 1236. He could have been Alexander’s father, the earlier Dublin merchant, a relative of either man, or an unrelated person originating in Glasgow. No surviving record currently resolves these alternatives.

Could Robert’s son be the royal escheator?

Approximately fifty years separate the Dublin admission of 1238/39 from the Scottish Exchequer account of 1289.

Direct identity is chronologically possible. If Alexander entered the guild while a young adult, he could still have been active as an older royal officer in 1289.

There are, however, substantial difficulties:

• the Dublin entry does not securely give Alexander the personal designation de Glascu;
• no occupation, property or associate occurs in both records;
• no intermediate record calls the escheator a son of Robert;
• no source connects the escheator with Dublin or merchant activity;
• and a fifty-year interval is too long to bridge through name similarity alone.

The two records should not presently be merged as one man.

A younger relative—possibly a son, nephew, cousin or member of the same wider kindred—is equally plausible. No particular relationship is proved.

Alexander, son of Richard the messenger of Glasgow, 1283

The Paisley register supplies a closer local candidate. A receipt and associated burgage exchange in 1283 identify Alexander, son of the late Richard, messenger of Glasgow as a principal party who received five marks from Gilbert of the bishop's chamber.^[6]

His activity as a Glasgow property-holder only six or seven years before the escheator makes him the leading local identity candidate. The connection is still unproved: neither act calls him an escheator, and neither the receipt nor Exchequer account identifies the official's father or property.

The companion agreement also names a different Alexander, son of Richard the former constable of Glasgow as an adjoining landholder.^[7] The two 1283 men must remain separate unless another record equates their fathers or sons.

Possible Intermediate Record

Alexander de Dunbrekan, Dublin, 1261/62

Patricia Becker’s analysis and geographical appendix to the complete Dublin guild roll records:

1261–62 — Alexander de Dunbrekan

The entry occurs on membrane 41/B, roll page 105. Becker identified Dunbrekan with Dumbarton, Dunbartonshire, Scotland.^[8]

The same appendix records Baudric de Dunbretan in 1226/27 and likewise identifies his locative with Dumbarton.

This Alexander is a potentially important intermediate candidate because he appears:

• in the same Dublin guild as Alexander son of Robert;
• twenty-three years after the 1238/39 entry;
• under a locative associated with another Clyde burgh;
• and twenty-eight years before the royal escheator’s appearance.

Glasgow and Dumbarton belonged to the same broad Clyde commercial region. A merchant identified through his father as a young man might later have been recorded under his own residence or principal trading port.

A possible sequence is therefore:

This sequence is geographically and chronologically coherent, but it remains circumstantial.

No document states that Alexander de Dunbrekan:

• was the son of Robert de Glascu;
• was also called Alexander de Glasgow;
• held the escheator’s office;
• possessed property in either Glasgow or Dumbarton;
• or shared a named associate with either of the other records.

The three entries should remain separate identities unless an alias, patronymic, shared property, seal, family relationship or recurring associate is found.

Other Contemporary Glasgow Bearers

Several other people used Glasgow-derived locatives during Alexander’s lifetime.

John de Glasgu was chaplain to Gamelin, bishop of St Andrews, on 2 February 1259 and probably also appeared in a broad-dated Dunipace charter.^[9] He must remain separate from the John of Glasgow recorded in the Holyrood community in 1299; no office, patron, associate, property or explicit alias bridges the forty-year gap.

Hugh de Glasgw witnessed a secular property transaction concerning land in Glasgow’s Rottenrow in 1283.^[10]

The instrument witnessed by Hugh also calls Peter de Castro the son of the deceased Alexander de Castro. That explicit relationship belongs to the de Castro family and must not be reassigned to Hugh or to either Alexander son of Richard.

Master Walter de Glasgu witnessed Melrose charter material around 1291.^[11]

These records demonstrate that Glasgow-derived personal designations were in contemporary use among clerics, civic witnesses and educated officials.

They do not establish that John, Hugh, Walter or Alexander were related. Alexander could have been John’s son, nephew or another relative, but no document supports a specific relationship; this remains a working hypothesis rather than biography.

Assessment of the Evidence

Secure conclusions

The surviving evidence securely establishes that:

1. A man called Alexander de Glasgow was active in Scottish royal administration in 1289.

1. He held the title escheator.

1. He received or acknowledged £53 6s. 8d. in connection with James Stewart’s account as sheriff of Ayr.

1. He issued an open letter concerning that money.

1. The sheriff and his bailies retained the letter, although it was not presented at audit.

Plausible but unproved conclusions

It is plausible that:

• Alexander originated in or had substantial connections with Glasgow;
• he belonged to the same broad west-Clyde environment as the Dublin Glasgow merchants;
• Alexander son of Robert de Glascu and Alexander de Dunbrekan may represent earlier stages in his career;
• Alexander, son of Richard the messenger, may be the same man, with a substantially closer chronological and local fit;
• or the three records may concern successive members of one merchant and administrative kindred.

None of those propositions is yet demonstrated by a direct relationship or identity statement.

Unsupported claims to avoid

The available sources do not establish that Alexander:

• was called Andrew;
• was born in Glasgow;
• was a burgess;
• was an official “within the burgh”;
• was escheator specifically for the county or sheriffdom of Ayr;
• was related to John de Glasgu;
• descended from the earlier Dublin Robert;
• or continued in office after 1289.

Research Notes

Correct personal name

The primary Exchequer record reads:

Alexandri de Glasgow

The profile should therefore be named Alexander de Glasgow. “Andrew de Glasgu” is not supported by the cited record.

Dating

The account expressly says that it was rendered in 1289:

redditum anno Lxxxix

The printed page falls within a section headed 1290. The combined date 1289/90 avoids implying greater precision than the edition permits.

Profile separation

This profile should remain separate from:

• Alexander, son of Robert de Glascu, admitted at Dublin in 1238/39;
• Alexander, son of Richard the messenger of Glasgow, active in 1283;
• Alexander, son of Richard the former constable of Glasgow, a neighbouring landholder in 1283;
• Alexander de Dunbrekan, admitted at Dublin in 1261/62;
• and any unrelated Alexander of Glasgow appearing without sufficient identifying details.

Possible links should be recorded as research hypotheses, not as merged biography or established parentage.

Priority searches

The most useful further evidence would be:

1. Convert Bain's old Chapter House (Scots Documents), Box 94, No. 5 into a current TNA reference and inspect the mutilated receipt.

1. Another account naming him as escheator.

1. A surviving seal, endorsement or memorandum attached to his receipt.

1. Scottish or Dublin records identifying an Alexander as son or heir of Robert de Glascu.

1. Further occurrences of Alexander de Dunbrekan or a documented alias between Dumbarton and Glasgow.

1. Recurrences of Richard the messenger's son under the same burgage property, administrative office or associates.

1. Repeated associates connecting the Dublin guild entries with the Scottish Exchequer network.

1. Glasgow, Dumbarton, Ayr or Stewart estate records naming his wife, heirs, property or office.

Sources

• John Stuart and George Burnett, eds., The Exchequer Rolls of Scotland, vol. I, A.D. 1264–1359 (Edinburgh: H.M. General Register House, 1878), p. 47.
• Philomena Connolly and Geoffrey Martin, eds., The Dublin Guild Merchant Roll, c.1190–1265 (Dublin: Dublin Corporation, 1992).
• Patricia Becker, “An Analysis of the Dublin Guild Merchant Roll c.1190–1265” (M.Phil. thesis, Trinity College Dublin, 1996).
• People of Medieval Scotland, Alexander de Glasgow, person no. 18712.
• Robert de Glasgu, Dublin guild entrant; Robert de Glasgu, Dunkeld clerk; and Alexander, son of Robert de Glascu.
• Alexander, son of Richard the messenger of Glasgow and Alexander, son of Richard the former constable of Glasgow.
• John de Glasgu.

Notes