Earl of Dunbar Research Project

Project Overview

The Earl of Dunbar Research Project operates as an unincorporated association of researchers, genealogists, and historians dedicated to the scholarly preservation of the Earls of Dunbar’s history.

  • Nature of the Organization: We are a private, non-commercial collective, publishing under a collective pseudonym Arthur St. Clair. Our primary mission is the academic investigation and documentation of the history and succession to the titles of the Earls of Dunbar.
  • Publications: The Earl of Dunbar Research Project is committed to the documentation of history through recognized academic channels. We will publish our findings in scientific articles and scholarly monographs to ensure the preservation of this knowledge for future generations. We publish under the collective pseudonym Arthur St. Clair to ensure that our research is evaluated solely on its evidentiary merit, establishing a unified, enduring academic voice that transcends individual authorship.
  • Independence: This project operates independently of any government body but relies on verified records from national archives, heraldic authorities, and historical registries to substantiate its findings.

This project is dedicated to documenting the rich history of one of Scotland’s most prestigious titles. Our research focuses on the lineage of the Earldom of Dunbar, tracing its origins from the ancient House of Gospatric, through the 1605 creation for George Home, and other branches.

This project is executed to preserve the cultural and historical heritage, lines of succession and legal claims of the distinct branches, a necessary measure given that the official restoration of ancient titles is rendered impossible by the 100-year limitation on dormant peerages—a policy established following a May 31, 1927 House of Lords debate rather than a specific statute—under which the Attorney General and Committee for Privileges generally reject claims, as noted by Debrett’s, if the title has been in abeyance or dormant for more than a century.

Special recognition is due to the monumental scholarship of Elsa Catherine Hamilton. Her 2003 work, The Acts of the Earls of Dunbar Relating to Scotland c.1124-c.1289 (University of Glasgow), serves as a critical reference for this undertaking.

I. The First Creation: The Ancient House of Gospatric (1072–1435)

The original Earldom of Dunbar (often styled as Earl of Lothian or Earl of March) was a comital lordship of immense influence in the Scottish Borders.

  • Origins: The first to use the title was Gospatric II, son of the Earl of Northumbria. The family held the strategic fortress of Dunbar Castle.
  • The Succession: The title descended through the “Patricks” and “Georges” of the line for over three centuries. They were central figures in the Anglo-Scottish wars, often shifting allegiance between the crowns of Scotland and England to preserve their vast estates.
  • Forfeiture: In 1435, James I of Scotland declared the titles and estates of George de Dunbar, 11th Earl of March, forfeit. The line of the ancient earls retired into obscurity, though a branch retained a barony at Kilconquhar in Fife.

II. Branches and Historical Claims

Several branches have historically been associated with the Earldom or claimed rights to it.

The House of Home (1605)

The title was revived by King James VI & I for his trusted advisor, George Home (c. 1556–1611) who was created Baron Hume of Berwick in 1604 and Earl of Dunbar in 1605. While most historical accounts list the title as dormant following the death of the 1st Earl, extensive archival research indicates the title descended legally through the collateral male line of Alexander Home of Manderston, the uncle of the 1st Earl. The current line of succession is in the Juchter van Bergen Quast family.

The Jacobite Peerage (1721)

In 1721, the “Old Pretender” (James Francis Edward Stuart) created a Jacobite peerage for James Murray (c. 1690–1770), creating him Earl of Dunbar, Viscount of Drumcairn, and Lord of Hadykes. This title was never recognized by the British government and is separate from the 1605 creation.

The Home of Renton Claim

In 1810, Sir John Home of Renton, Bt., prepared a case to lay before the House of Lords, claiming the title as heir male to the first patentee. However, he did not pursue the case to a conclusion.

The Home of Wedderburn Claim

In 1776, John Home, a descendant of Sir David Home of Wedderburn, attempted to have the title’s privileges upheld. While initially successful in service as heir male, the service was later reduced by the Court of Session at the instance of a rival claimant, Sir George Home of Blackadder.

III. The Royal Warrant of 2004: A Constitutional Turning Point

Analysis of the Crown’s Prerogative in Peerage Recognition

The status of the Earldom of Dunbar is heavily supported by the constitutional shift in peerage law marked by the Royal Warrant of 1 June 2004. This legal instrument fundamentally altered how peerage dignities are recognized in the United Kingdom, separating the dignity of the title from the privilege of a seat in Parliament.

The Separation of Dignity and Legislature

Prior to 1999, the validity of a peerage was often conflated with the issuance of a Writ of Summons to the House of Lords. However, following the House of Lords Act 1999, the automatic right of hereditary peers to sit in Parliament was removed.

To clarify the status of the peerage following this reform, Queen Elizabeth II issued the Royal Warrant of 1 June 2004.

  • The Findings: This Warrant establishes that the peerage exists as a distinct legal dignity, independent of legislative functions. It affirms that the Crown retains the prerogative to recognize these dignities.
  • Relevance to Dunbar: This confirms that the dormancy of the Earldom of Dunbar (and its absence from Parliament for centuries) does not extinguish the title itself. The dignity remains “incorporeal heritable property” protected by the Crown, distinct from any parliamentary seat.

Crucially, the absence of a title from the Roll of the Peerage does not legally extinguish the dignity itself, nor does it negate the heir’s right to use the title in society.

  • Vesting by Blood (Jure Sanguinis): Under peerage law, a title is an “incorporeal hereditament” (a form of property). It vests in the rightful heir immediately upon the death of the previous holder, simply by right of blood (jure sanguinis). This legal succession happens automatically and is independent of registration or administrative validation (Earl of Oxford’s Case, 1626).
  • Declaratory vs. Constitutive: The Royal Warrant of 2004 acts as a declaratory instrument, meaning it acknowledges a pre-existing right rather than creating a new one. The act of recording a name on the Roll provides proof for official purposes, but it is not the source of the right itself.
  • Scope of Restrictions: The restrictions imposed by the Warrant—such as the loss of official precedence—apply strictly to the state’s recognition of the peer. They prevent the title from being used in official government proceedings or documents without registration. However, they do not confiscate the property right of the dignity, nor do they prevent the de jure holder from using their ancestral title in private, social, or professional capacities.

Key Legal Precedent: The Earl of Oxford’s Case (1626)

The Principle of Inalienable Dignity

The claim to the Earldom of Dunbar is firmly rooted in established Stuart peerage law, most notably the landmark opinion delivered by Sir John Doddridge, Justice of the King’s Bench, in the Earl of Oxford’s Case of 1626.

This case established the fundamental doctrine that a peerage title is a “personal dignity” that is permanently attached to the bloodline and cannot be lost simply through the passage of time or the alienation of land.

  • The Ruling: In his famous opinion, Justice Doddridge stated:“If a man be created earl to him and to his heirs, all men do know that although he have a fee simple yet he cannot alien or give away this inheritance, because it is a personal dignity annexed to the posterity and fixed in the blood.”
  • Application to Dunbar: This precedent confirms two critical points for the Dunbar succession:
  1. Fixed in the Blood: The title remains vested in the descendants of the original grantee regardless of their financial status or land ownership. Even when the family’s fortunes declined or they moved abroad (as with the Manderston line in the Netherlands and Germany), the dignity remained “fixed” in their blood.
  2. No Statute of Limitations: Unlike other forms of property, peerage titles are not time-barred. The fact that the title was dormant for centuries does not extinguish the right; it merely awaits a claimant with the correct proofs to assert the “termination of the dormancy”.

IV. Research Resources

  • Anderson, William. The Scottish Nation. Vol. 4, Edinburgh, 1867.
  • Balfour Paul, Sir James, ed. The Scots Peerage. Vol. 3, Edinburgh, 1904.
  • Bartholomew. Scotland of Old: Clan Names Map; The Lands, the Arms and the Crests. 1983. ISBN 0-7028-1709-0.
  • Burke, John. A Genealogical and Heraldic Dictionary of the Peerage and Baronetage of the British Empire. 6th ed., London, 1840.
  • Cokayne, G. E., Vicary Gibbs, and H. Arthur Doubleday, eds. The Complete Peerage. London, 1916.
  • Herquet, Karl. Miscellen zur Geschichte Ostfrieslands. Norden, 1883.
  • König, Joseph. Verwaltungsgeschichte Ostfrieslands bis zum Aussterben seines Fürstenhauses. Veröffentlichungen der nieders. Archivverwaltung, 2. Göttingen, 1955.
  • Lantzius-Beringa. “Nota zur Familie Fewen.” Quellen und Forschungen zur Ostfriesische Familien- und Wappenkunde, vol. 17, 1968.
  • Miller, James. The History of Dunbar. Dunbar, 1830.
  • Playfair, William. British Family Antiquity. Vol. 8, London, 1811.
  • Thomson, John Maitland, John Horne Stevenson, and William Kirk Dickson, eds. The Register of the Great Seal of Scotland. Vol. 9 (1634–1651) and Vol. 10 (1652–1659). Scottish Record Society, Edinburgh, 1984.
  • Weßels, Paul. Gut Stikelkamp. Aurich, 2002.
  • Weßels, Paul. Hesel: „wüste Fläche, dürre Wildnis und magere Heideplanzen”. Weener, 1998.