ON 27 February i6o6 a discussion took place within the Scottish Privy Council that reveals in an interesting and colourful way contemporary attitudes to the nobility. An unusual complaint had been brought against John Scrimgeour, eldest son of Sir James Scrimgeour of Dudhope, a local nobleman who was also the provost and hereditary constable of Dundee, by David Flesher, a merchant burgess whose family had been at the forefront of a recent struggle in the burgh to oust the Scrimgeour faction from power. Flesher claimed that Scrimgeour'tane of his hat, cassin it to the erd under his feit, and boisteit to naill it to his head with ane whinger; and sensyne had met him upon the calsay of Dundie and had reiven af his hat af his head, and callit him knave'. The other party freely admitted to the truth of this accusation. However a heated debate then arose among the privy councillors over what to do with Scrimgeour. The Earl of Angus argued that'all cairlie and inferiour men aucht honour to noblemen, and aucht to be compellit gif they will not do it wilfullie, and thocht that the nobilitie wer far aneuch suppressit utherwayis albeit thay sufferit nocht themselfis to be misknawin be fellows and cairlis'. This gut reaction from the chief of one of the greatest noble houses in the kingdom received support from other noblemen on the council, and in spite of opposition from Chancellor Dunfermline and a number of his colleagues the constable's son was cleared of all charges, although he was censured for using force, and Flesher was' blamit for his unsauvitie'. 1 Both the original incident and its debate in the Privy Council give a fascinating insight into the noble mind. In the Privy Council there was clearly a clash between the ideas of personal honour and civil society, epitomized in the attitudes of Angus, a territorial magnate and chief of the Douglas kindred, and Chancellor Dunfermline, a younger son of a nobleman who had trained as a lawyer and followed a career in royal service. Here the contrast appears stark, but great lords like Angus were fully acquainted with both Renaissance and Reformation criticisms of the honour code, while the likes of Dunfermline were not above succumbing to its demands when the right occasion arose. In a sense the debate was an internal one in which noblemen sought to behave as good Christians, educated gentlemen and loyal subjects, while still remaining loyal to their conception of good lordship