Alexander Stewart 'the Wolf of Badenoch' (-probably around 1405), Earl of Buchan

Same as
Additional names
Parents
Father:1Robert II (2 March 1315-6-19 April 1390), King of Scots
Mother:2Elizabeth Mure (-)
Spouses and relationship events
Married:324 or 25 July 1382Euphemia of Ross (-1394), Countess of Ross
This union was not a happy one. The Earl deserted his wife, and was ordered by an Ecclesiastical Court on 2 November 1389 to adhere to her. On 9 June 1392 Pope Clement VII issued a commission to dissolve her marriage with the Earl, and again on 5 and 15 December to grant a divorce a mensa et thoro.
Children
Children with :
Alexander Stewart (-1435), Earl of Mar4
Sir Andrew Stewart of Sandhauck (-)5
Duncan Stewart (-)6
James Stewart (-)7
Walter Stewart (-)8
Robert Stewart of Atholl (-)9
Margaret Stewart (-)10
Attributes
Occupation:11Lord of Badenoch
Occupation:12from 1372King's Lieutenant and Justiciar north of the Moray Firth
Occupation:13Earl of Buchan
Events
Died:14probably around 1405
Personal Info
He deserted his wife for a woman named Mariota, who may have been the mother of his illegitimate children.15
He had been imprisoned in Lochleven Castle in January 1368-69, at the instance of Margaret Logic, wife of David II, but was set free when she was divorced.16
For deserting his wife he was reprimanded and excommunicated, 2 November 1389, by the Bishops of Moray and Ross, and ordered to adhere to his wife and not illtreat her, under a penalty of £200. In revenge he burned the towns of Forres and Elgin, and the Cathedral of Elgin in 1390. Ecclesiastical penalties made him humbly submissive, and after satisfying the Bishop of Moray, and doing penance at the church of Blackfriars Monastery at Perth in presence of his father the King he received absolution from the Bishop of St. Andrews.17
He had no legitimate issue.18
Issues

Sources

1 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume I: (: David Douglas, 1904), Scotland, p. 15-17, Robert II.
2 Ibid
3 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume VII: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1910), Ross, p. 239-41, Euphemia.
4 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, volume III: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1906), Douglas, p. 148-55, William Douglas.
5 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume II: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1905), Buchan, p. 262-63, Alexander Stewart.
6 Ibid
7 Ibid
8 Ibid
9 Ibid
10 Ibid
11 Ibid
12 Ibid
13 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume I: (: David Douglas, 1904), Scotland, p. 15-17, Robert II.
14 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume II: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1905), Buchan, p. 262-63, Alexander Stewart.
15 Ibid
16 Ibid
17 Ibid
18 Ibid
CertainlyThe information is supported by primary sources.
ProbablyThe information is supported by secondary sources which is most likely based on primary sources.
PossiblyIt is unclear if the secondary source cited is based on primary sources, or the information is an assumption well supported by other evidence.
LikelyThe information is only found in secondary sources with questioned quality, or there is a reason to suspect the information is wrong. Or the information is a likely assumption based on other evidence.
ApparentlyThe information is doubtful and poorly documented, but still most likely correct.
PerhapsThe information might be correct or it might be wrong. It is not supported by any trustworthy sources.
DisprovedThe information is proven to be wrong.