Bartholomew Bertolf de Leslie, 1st Constable of Inverurie - Are there any primary documents, or reliable secondary documents, concerning Bartolf de Leslie?

Thanks!

It’s difficult to read, but I think I get the gist.

So, am I right I thinking that this is an officially accepted connection, even though the primary evidence isn’t being cited?

If I put this another way —

How did John Brown know that there was a Beatrice, daughter of King Duncan of Scotland?

The information came from somewhere.

It’s making me nuts that the sources aren’t being given.

I found a link that allowed me to read the book mentioned above concerning historical documents and the Leslies.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Historical_Records_of_the_Fami...

And interestingly, though no sources are given, the author states that according to various authorities, there were competing stories about who Bartof married. Still no word on how James Brown came to the conclusion he did.

Darn.

One of the things we often see in genealogies from that time period is an assertion of documentation, without the documentation being given. And we also see, quite often, claims that are based on stories, without actual documentation. And in this case, the assertion of documentation is about the whole tree in general, not pointed to this particular problem.

In such cases, usually, we would keep the disconnection, adding in notes as to why we've disconnected.

What gives me pause is ONLY the fact that the tree was put together by the genealogist to the Prince of Wales -- in other words, it has authority through that.

But I'm really very very very troubled by the fact that, apparently, no primary documentation as to even the existence of Princess Beatrix has come to light. AND that there were, before John Brown's Tree, several conflicting stories, as given by unknown "authorities."

AND as well by the fact that this is a genealogy for the Prince of Wales, focused on the connection of the royal lines -- the offshoot branches are not of as much importance to the focus of the Tree -- and I'm also aware of conflicts in genealogies between the English and the Welsh, and the English and the Irish, and so I worry that what's going on here is that in this particular tiny piece of the Tree the inherited story of the connection of Bartolf's wife to royalty won out over the other inherited stories; that there was no evidence in any of the directions, but that was the most satisfying.

I'm greatly troubled.

In 1878 John Davidson hedges his bets and says Bartolf is "said to have married the KIng's sister" -- https://books.google.com/books?id=ZgrXRMc1O-sC&pg=PA567&lpg=PA567&d...

This may be of interest about John Brown.

http://www.clandonald.org/index.asp?pageid=681118

thank you, Erica Howton -- that VERY useful site causes me to think that I am indeed correct in questioning the accuracy of that Tree; Brown did use many actual good sources, but he also relied on inherited stories.

So, frankly, I myself do not believe that there was ever any such person as Beatrice, daughter of King Duncan.

However.

That Tree is generally accepted -- not by scholars, but by a whole lot of descendants of the people in that Tree, and so we have the problem of how to deal with this.

It's not a case where we can, at the moment, show that Brown was not stringent in dealing with the Lewis part of the Tree.

But it's highly problematic that there are NO primary sources which even mention her.

I would favor keeping her detached from Duncan, adding in lots of notes and explanations, and locking the profile down.