Royalty of Scotland and Ireland


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
The Royal House of Alpin

​
The House of Alpin is the name given to the kin-group which ruled in Pictland and then the kingdom of Alba from the advent of Cináed mac Ailpín in the 840s until the death of Máel Coluim mac Cináeda in 1034.
Kings Kenneth I and his brother Donald I traced their descent from Cináed mac Ailpín as recorded by Irish genealogies in the Book of Ballymote and the Book of Lecan . The descendants of Alpin are Righ Alpin King Kenneth I and his brother Righ Alpin King Donald I and possible third brother Giric.
During the tenth century, succession alternated between the descendants of Righ Alpin King Kenneth I and his brother Righ Alpin King Donald I. Righ Alpin King Kenneths line went down to Bethoc and continued with her son, Righ Alpin King Donalds line did continue with all elder males in line of descent through MacKinnons, however; they were not recognized as Kings and were only given the title, "Chief"?

Descent of the Alpín kings

Ard Righ King Alpin
Righ Alpin King Kenneth
Righ Alpin King Donald

(Note:last two kings were sons of Alpin)

Notes

  1. ^ Woolf, Pictland to Alba, pp. 222–224; Broun, Irish Identity, pp. 173–174.
  2. ^ Woolf, Pictland to Alba, p. 173.
  3. ^ Woolf, Pictland to Alba, pp. 93–98 & 116–117.
  4. ^ Woolf, Pictland to Alba, pp. 122–126.
  5. ^ Woolf, Pictland to Alba, pp. 225–230.
References

  • Anderson, Alan Orr (1922), Early Sources of Scottish History A.D. 500 to 1286, I (1990 revised & corrected ed.), Stamford: Paul Watkins, ISBN 1-871615-03-8
  • Bannerman, John (1999), "The Scottish Takeover of Pictland and the relics of Columba", in Broun, Dauvit; Clancy, Thomas Owen, Spes Scotorum: Hope of Scots. Saint Columba, Iona and Scotland, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, pp. 71–94, ISBN 0-567-08682-8
  • Broun, Dauvit (1999), "Dunkeld and the origins of Scottish Identity", in Broun, Dauvit; Clancy, Thomas Owen, Spes Scotorum: Hope of Scots. Saint Columba, Iona and Scotland, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, pp. 96–111, ISBN 0-567-08682-8
  • Broun, Dauvit (1999), The Irish Identity of the Kingdom of the Scots in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, Woodbridge: Boydell Press, ISBN 0-85115-375-5
  • Broun, Dauvit; Clancy, Thomas Owen (1999), Spes Scotorum: Hope of Scots. Saint Columba, Iona and Scotland, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, ISBN 0-567-08682-8
  • Duncan, A. A. M. (2002), The Kingship of the Scots 842–1292: Succession and Independence, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, ISBN 0-7486-1626-8
  • Herbert, Máire (2000), "Ri Éirenn, Ri Alban: kingship and identity in the ninth and tenth centuries", in Taylor, Simon, Kings, clerics and chronicles in Scotland 500–1297, Dublin: Four Courts Press, pp. 62–72, ISBN 1-85182-516-9
  • Smyth, Alfred P. (1989) [1984], Warlords and Holy Men: Scotland AD 80–1000, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, ISBN 0-7486-0100-7
  • Taylor, Simon, ed. (2000), Kings, clerics and chronicles in Scotland 500–1297, Dublin: Four Courts Press, ISBN 1-85182-516-9
  • Woolf, Alex (2007), From Pictland to Alba, 789–1070, The New Edinburgh History of Scotland, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, ISBN 0-7486-1234-5
 
Last edited:
Duan Albanach records Ard Righ King of Dalraida and continues with Righ Alpin Kings.

The Duan Albanach (Song of the Scots) is a Middle Gaelic poem found with the Lebor Bretnach, a Gaelic version of the Historia Brittonum of Nennius, with extensive additional material (mostly concerning Scotland).
Written during the reign of Mael Coluim III, it is found in a variety of Irish sources, and the usual version comes from the early 15th century Books of Lecan and Ui Maine. It follows on from the Duan Eireannach, which covers the earlier history of the Gael.

The harp (or clarsach) was an instrument associated with medieval Scottish culture. This one, now in the Museum of Scotland, is a one of only three surviving medieval Gaelic harps.


It is a praise poem of 27 stanzas, probably sung at court to a musical accompaniment by the harp. If performed in a public context, it is possible that the audience would have participated in the performance.
The Duan recounts the kings of the Scots since the eponymous Albanus came to Alba or known as Albannia. The poem begins with the following stanzas.
A eolcha Alban uile, O all ye learned of Alba ! a shluagh feuta foltbhuidhe, Ye well skilled host of yellow hair ! cia ceud ghabhail, an eól duíbh, What was the first invasion – is it known to you? ro ghabhasdair Albanruigh ? Which took the land of Alba ? Albanus ro ghabh, lia a shlógh, Albanus possessed it, numerous his hosts; mac sen oirdérc Isicon, He was the illustrious son of Isacon, brathair is Briutus gan brath, He and Brutus were brothers without deceit, ó ráitear Alba eathrach. From him Alba of ships has its name.
​
In the final stanzas it is seen that the poem dates from the time of Malcolm III, in the second half of the 11th century.
Se bliadhna Donnchaid glain gaoith The six years of Donnchad the wise, xuii bliadhna mac Fionnlaoich, Seventeen years the son of Findláech; tar és Mec Beathaidh go m-blaidh, After Mac Bethad, the renowned, uii mís i f-flaithios Lughlaigh. Seven months was Lulach in the sovereignty. Maolcholuim anosa as rí, Máel Coluim is now the king, mac Donnchaidh dhata dhrechbhi, Son of Donnchad the florid, of lively visage, a ré nocha n-fidir neach, His duration knoweth no man acht an t-eólach as éolach. A eolcha. But the Wise One, the Most Wise. O ye learned.
​
External links

 
Royal House of Alpin down to the Royal House of Dunkeld

House of Alpin, (848–1034) was during the reign of Kenneth Alpin and his brother Donald Alpin begins what is often called the House of Alpin. The descendants of Kenneth of Alpin were divided into two branches; the crown would alternate between the two, the death of a king from one branch often hastened by war or assassination by a pretender from the other. Malcolm II was the last king of the House of Alpin; in his reign, he successfully crushed all opposition to him and, having no sons, was able to pass the crown to his daughter's son, Duncan I, who inaugurated the House of Dunkeld. The descendents of Donald of Alpin seemed to have continued to current day but were only recognized as Chiefs.
 
Lulachs father was descended from King Donald I Of Alpin line descent from MacKinnons

Findláech of Moray (or Findláech mac Ruaidrí) was the King or Mormaer of Moray, ruling from some point before 1014 until his death in 1020.
In the Annals of Ulster and in the Book of Leinster, Findláech is called rí Alban, which meant "King of Scotland" in the Gaelic language. As far as we know from other sources, the only rí Alban of the time was Máel Coluim mac Cináeda, i.e. Máel Coluim II, so this title can only mean that Findláech, as ruler of Moray, was understood by many to have been the High-King of all northern Britain.
However, Findláech's main claim to fame these days is as the father of Mac Bethad, made famous by William Shakespeare's play Macbeth. Indeed, the Irish historian known in Latin as Marianus Scotus calls Macbethad simply MacFindlaeg.
Historians are fairly certain that Findláech was ruling before 1014 because the Orkneyinga Saga reads that before the Battle of Clontarf, Jarl Siguðr of Orkney fought a battle with the Scots, who were led by a Jarl Finnlekr (i.e. Findláech the Mormaer). An Irish princess called Eithne made a banner for Siguðr, which had on it a raven. The saga records that Siguðr later brought the banner to Clontarf, where he was killed. If we believe this, then Findláech would be ruler quite a bit before 1014.
His death date, as mentioned above, derives from the Annals of Ulster, which notes s.a. 1020 Finnloech m. Ruaidhri, ri Alban, a suis occisus est, that is, that Findláech was killed by his own people. No reason for this is given, but the logical thing is to conclude that his successor, his nephew Máel Coluim mac Máil Brigti, had something to do with it. Indeed, the Annals of Tigernach tell us that the sons of Máel Brigte were responsible; the only sons we know of are Máel Coluim and Gille Coemgáin, both of whom evidently benefited from the killing, as both succeeded to the throne.
Bibliography

  • Anderson, Alan Orr, Early Sources of Scottish History: AD 500-1286, 2 vols., (Edinburgh, 1922)
  • Hudson, Benjamin T., Kings of Celtic Scotland, (Westport, 1994)
 
List of the Clan Chiefs of MacKinnon dating back to King Donald of Alpin

Date Chief Notes (Estimated dates are shown as strikethrough) I 821 Alpin 68th Fabulous, 28th authentic, King of Scotland, slain in Galloway, a.d. 841 by Brudus, King of the Picts, from whom he had wrested the scepter. II 837 Donald I of Alpin second son of Alpin. III 900 Doungallus His eldest son; he married Princess Spontana, daughter of a King Flann Sinne of Meath of Ireland. IV 930 FINDANUS son of Doungallus, was seized of the estate of the Tombermory in the Isle of Mull and Findanus Castle (Dunakin) in the Isle of Skye, known by the name of MacKinnon Castle in the present day; this castle was the residence of the Lairds of MacKinnon till the 14th century, when Strathardill, also in Skye, became their seat. Findanus and his bride, the Norse Princess nicknamed ‘Saucy Mary or Mary of Haralsdatter the Fair Hair,’ ran a heavy chain from Skye to Lochalsh and levied a toll on all shipping passing up and down. It is from him that the MacKinnon chiefs obtained their Gaelic Patronymic. V 976 MacFindanus MacAlpin Son of Findanus, called MacFingon MacAlpin, acquired further property in the Western Isles and in the shires of Perth and Ross. For some period after this the descendants of Alpin frequently assumed the patronymic of MacAlpin in addition to their other appellations. VI 1020 Donald MacFingon MacAlpin VII 1033 Cormac MacFingon MacAlpin VIII 1066 Lachlan IX 1096 Lachlan X 1126 Kenneth XI 1156 Donald XII 1186 Lachlan XIII 1216 Eowin or John XIV 1246 Alpin XV 1276 Lachlan XVI 1306 Donald XVII 1342 Eobhan or Ewen After the death of John, Lord of the Isles, circa 1350, MacKinnon took part in the rebellion against the heir to the Lordship, and was hanged for his trouble. XVIII 1350 Lachlan Called Sa’gartach, or Fogarach-Supposed to be the same who was concealed in MacKinnon’s Cave in Mull when pursued by the MacLeans. XIX 1409 Lachlan na Thiomlaidh “vir nobilis.” The Barterer; so called for having exchanged more valuable lands in Mull for the Isle of Scalpa, with MacLean of Duart.Witnessed MacLean Charter 1409. XX 1439 Nial Buidh XXI 1469 Lachlan Bhan XXII 1513 (1517) Nial Bhan MacLean of Dowart petitioned the Regent for free remission for all of their offences, which was granted on 12th March 1517 XXIII 1545 Ewen Ruadh nan Cath A celebrated warrior, who fought many battles against the MacLeans, aided by MacDonalds, in defence of his lands in Mull. Charged with rebellion by the Acts dated 1531 and 1545. Late in life he lived on good terms with the MacLeans. Carta Eugenii MacFigone 1542. XXIV 1557 Lachlan Dubh or Fynnoun Took the part of the MacLeans against the MacDonalds XXV 1590 Lachlan Og. XXVI 1601 Sir Lachlan d. 1634. 1606 Charter with Finlay MacNab of Bowaine. XXVII 1628 Ian Balbhan The Dummy. Died in suspicious circumstances and was buried at Castle Dunara. XXVIII 1641 Sir Lachlan Mor d. 1700. (His 2nd son Donald emigrated to Antigua after a disagreement with his father). 1671 Bond with MacGregor. Knight Banneret at Worcester 1651. XXVIX 1700 John Dubh b. 1682 d. 1756. Out in ‘15 and ‘45. XXX 1755 Charles d. 1796. XXXI 1796 John d. unmarried in 1808 (last of the direct line). XXXII 1808 William d. 1809 aged 77. (descendant of Donald of Antigua). He never knew he was chief. XXXIII 1809 William Alexander b. 1782 d. 1870, FRS, MP. XXXIV 1870 William Alexander b. 1812, MP. XXXV Frances Alexander b. 1848. d. 1947 XXXVI 1947 Aurthur Avalon d. 1964, Commander R.N. XXXVII 1964 Alasdair Neil Hood b. 1926, d. 1980? XXXVIII 1980 Anne Gunheild First Woman MacKinnon of MacKinnon

Note: This is from the Offical Clan Book of MacKinnon Chiefs with adjustments (due to new evidence) showing the line of MacKinnons was descended from King Donald I of Alpin. I have left the Chiefs list as is showing how it went down to the current Chieftess which has been found not to be the elder in line left. The Mishnish Heirs of MacKinnon are the eldest in line left but it will take the courts in Edinbugh to decide in the matter.
 
Kings of Picts traditionally counted as Kings of Scots or Albannia

Cináed mac Ailpín defeated the rival kings, winning out by around 845–848. He is traditionally considered first "King of Scots", or of "Picts and Scots", allegedly having conquered the Picts as a Gael, which is turning history back to front, as most modern scholars point out, he was actually 'King of Picts', and the terms 'King of Alba' and the even later 'King Scots' were not used until several generations after him. This is historically accepted.
ReignRulerOther namesFamilyRemarksDied 13 February, 858Cináed or Kenneth I of AlpinCináed mac Ailpín
Kenneth MacAlpineUnknown, but his descendants made him a member of the Cenél nGabráin of Dál RiataKenneth I of Alpin heirs did intermarry with his brothers line (King Donald I of Alpin)Died 862Domnall or
Donald I of Alpin
Domnall mac AilpínBrother of CináedMacKinnons are ancestors of Donald I of Alpin.
Died 877CausantínCausantín mac CináedaSon of CináedDied 878ÁedÁed mac CináedaSon of CináedDeposed 889 ?GiricGiric mac DúngailCináed's daughter's step son Associated, probably incorrectly, with EochaidDied 900Domnall
Domnall mac CausantínSon of Causantín mac CináedaLast to be called "king of the Picts"
King of Alba

ReignRulerOther namesFamilyRemarksAbdicated 943, died 952CausantínCausantín mac ÁedaSon of Áed mac CináedaFirst king of Alba, the kingdom that later became known as "Scotland".
Further reading

James E. Fraser, The New Edinburgh History Of Scotland Vol.1 – From Caledonia To Pictland, Edinburgh University Press (2009) ISBN 978-0-7486-1232-1
Alex Woolf, The New Edinburgh History Of Scotland Vol.2 – From Pictland To Alba, Edinburgh University Press, (2007) ISBN 978-0-7486-1234-5
Notes

  1. ^ Woolf, "Pictish matriliny reconsidered", p. 153.
  2. ^ Other names are only given where they differ significantly. See also Names above
  3. ^ Bannerman, pp. 92–94, identifies this Gartnait with Gartnait son of Áedán mac Gabráin, founder of the "genus Gartnait" of Skye.
  4. ^ Woolf, "Pictish matriliny reconsidered, pp. 160–161, suggests has been suggested that "grandson of Uerb" should be read son of Uerb. Alternatively, it has been suggested that Uerb may represent a legendary apical ancestor such as the Fer map Con in the ancestry of Run map Artgal in the Harleian genealogies. The sons of Uuid are presumed to be related.
  5. ^ For the identification as a son of Cano, grandson of Áedán mac Gabráin, see Bannerman, pp. 92–93.
  6. ^ Another list names Nechtan son of Fochle.
  7. ^ Previously thought to have been an Irish gaelicisation, now known to be an authentic form of his name found on the Dupplin Cross.
  8. ^ Grandson or grandnephew of Onuist per Broun, "Pictish kings", son of Fergus mac Echdach in older works.
References

  • Adomnán, Life of St Columba, tr. & ed. Richard Sharpe. Penguin, London, 1995. ISBN 0-14-044462-9
  • Anderson, Alan Orr, Early Sources of Scottish History A.D 500–1286, volume 1. Reprinted with corrections. Paul Watkins, Stamford, 1990. ISBN 1-871615-03-8
  • Bannerman, John, Studies in the History of Dalriada. Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh, 1974. ISBN 0-7011-2040-1
  • Bannerman, John. "The Scottish Takeover of Pictland and the relics of Columba" in Dauvit Broun and Thomas Owen Clancy (eds.) Spes Scotorum: Saint Columba, Iona and Scotland. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1999 ISBN 0-567-08682-8
  • Broun, Dauvit, "Dunkeld and the origin of Scottish identity" in Broun & Clancy (1999).
  • Broun, Dauvit, "Pictish Kings 761–839: Integration with Dál Riata or Separate Development" in Sally M. Foster (ed.), The St Andrews Sarcophagus: A Pictish masterpiece and its international connections. Four Courts, Dublin, 1998. ISBN 1-85182-414-6
  • Clancy, Thomas Owen, "Caustantín son of Fergus (Uurgust)" in M. Lynch (ed.) The Oxford Companion to Scottish History. Oxford & New York: Oxford UP, 2002. ISBN 0-19-211696-7
  • Herbert, Máire, "Ri Éirenn, Ri Alban: kingship and identity in the ninth and tenth centuries" in Simon Taylor (ed.), Kings, clerics and chronicles in Scotland 500–1297. Fourt Courts, Dublin, 2000. ISBN 1-85182-516-9
  • Skene, William F. Chronicles of the Picts, Chronicles of the Scots, and other Early Memorials of Scottish History. Edinburgh: H.M. General Register House, 1867.
  • Smyth, Alfred P. Warlords and Holy Men: Scotland AD 80-1000. Reprinted, Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1998. ISBN 0-7486-0100-7
  • Woolf, Alex, "Pictish matriliny reconsidered" in The Innes Review, Volume XLIV, Number 2 (Autumn 1998). ISSN 0020-157X
  • Woolf, Alex, "Ungus (Onuist), son of Uurgust" in M. Lynch (2002).
External links

 
Senchus Fer n-Alban , it provides the Kings list of Dal Raita

The Senchus Fer n-Alban (The History of the men of Scotland) is an Old Irish medieval text, believed to have been compiled in the 10th century. It may have been derived from earlier documents of the 7th century which are presumed to have been written in Latin.[1] It provides genealogies for kings of Dál Riata and a census of the kingdoms which comprised Dál Riata.
The Senchus exists in a number of manuscripts, of which the most important belonged to Dubhaltach Mac Fhirbhisigh and then to Edward Lhuyd. This, Ms. H.2.7 held by Trinity College Dublin, was compiled in the 14th century by Lúcás Ó Dalláin, probably working with Seán Mór Ó Dubhagáin (died 1372), the chief poet and historian of the Uí Maine. This manuscript was once thought to have formed part of the Book of Uí Maine, but this is no longer considered plausible. Other examples are found in the Book of Ballymote (1384x1406), the Book of Lecan (before 1418), and in Mac Fhirbhisigh's 17th century genealogical compilations.[2]
The Senchus is a relatively short document, around 70 or 80 lines of type depending on the variant used. To it is appended the Genelaig Albanensium which contains genealogies of Máel Coluim mac Cináeda and Causantín mac Cuilén, kings of Alba, and of Ainbcellach mac Ferchair and other Dál Riata kings.
Most versions of the Senchus follow the Dál Riata origins by beginning with Eochaid Muinremar and sons of Erc, Fergus Mór among them.[3] Mac Fhirbhisigh's own version of the Senchus begins with the earlier times, tracing Dál Riata to the Síl Conairi and Cairpre Riata (Rígfhota), son of Conaire Mór and/or Conaire Cóem, who may be the Reuda of Bede's Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum.[4] The Genelaig Albanensium, and the similar genealogies in the Rawlinson B 502 manuscript, make Cairpre Riata an ancestor in the tenth or fifteenth generation of Fergus Mór mac Eirc.[5]
The historical value of the Senchus rests largely in its later sections, which include historical kings of Dál Riata — myth may end and history begin in the reign of Conall mac Comgaill in the middle of the 6th century.[6] The last king who can be identified in the genealogies contained in the Senchus proper is Conall Crandomna, who died around 660.[7]
The Senchus lists the divisions of Dál Riata—the Cenél nGabráin, the Cenél Loairn, and the Cenél nÓengusa—and their obligations for military service, apparently at a time when the Cenél Comgaill remained part of the Cenél nGabráin.[8] These divisions need not be of great antiquity,[9] and the lists provided are not without problems.[10] The Senchus lists no kindreds or military obligations for the Irish lands, if any, which may have formed part of Dál Riata. One curious feature of the Senchus is the presence of Airgíalla in the lands of the Cenél Loairn. It is not apparent whether these represent settlers from Ireland, or simply people to whom the label "additional clients" was applied.[11]
 
Ancient Princess, your Sir Arthur looks like a fraud or a fantacist to me. VC & GC doubtful one would have both and especially with no military rank, and why add (Wales) after the KG? KCMG is awarded to senior diplomatic staff so doubt that is real either. He looks quite young for such grand decorations. Doubt if I would take too much he writes overly seriously

https://myaccount.rootsweb.com/publicprofile?mn=turthom&kurl=http:%2F%2Fwc%2Erootsweb%2Eancestry%2Ecom%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Figm%2Ecgi%3Fdb%3Daet%252Dt
 
Last edited:
I known the house of Stuart is history but are there any royal decendents of the house of Stuart or Mary,queen of scots left(besides QEII), what about Bonnie prince Charlie who was claiming the scottish throne?
 
Alright, what is the problem now? Is Sir Arthur a Fraud? I happen to like some of the articles of Wikipedia, is there a problem?
From what I know of Sir Arthur, he is the historian for HRH Sophie Helen Mountbatten-Windsor Countess of Wessex and approved by the Queen. I am aware of people trying to discredit the man but it was proven he was legitimate.

I would imagine there are heirs of the Stuart line but do not have information on them. Might be fun to find out if there is...I think there was two children born out of wedlock to Bonnie Prince Charles?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Grandduchess24 said:
I known the house of Stuart is history but are there any royal decendents of the house of Stuart or Mary,queen of scots left(besides QEII)
Click to expand...
Besides Elizabeth II? Well, there are her children and grandchildren, her niece and nephew and their children, her cousins of Windsor descent and their children... then there are the many non-British royal descendants of George I, George II, George III, Queen Victoria, Edward VII... plus all the royal descendants of those Stuarts in 1701 who were Roman Catholic and excluded from the succession by the Act of Settlement, and then there are the royal descendants of Ludwig III, King of Bavaria, including the Hereditary Princess of Liechtenstein and her four children...
 
Ancient Princess said:
Alright, what is the problem now? Is Sir Arthur a Fraud? I happen to like some of the articles of Wikipedia, is there a problem?
From what I know of Sir Arthur, he is the historian for HRH Sophie Helen Mountbatten-Windsor Countess of Wessex and approved by the Queen. I am aware of people trying to discredit the man but it was proven he was legitimate.
Click to expand...

What is the proof that "Sir Arthur" is legitimate???

I question the list of decorations he gives himself, which also makes me question his claims to be "Historian to the Countess of Wessex" and doubt such a position exists in the household of a junior royal when it does not exist as a position in the household of The Queen, and any information he might provide would also be open to questioning. I could not find him in the list of current Knights of the Garter or on the list of Victoria Cross holders (never a very long list). If you followed the link I originally provided above there is a picture of him and he seems rather young to have received such grand decorations. Anyone who had received the Victoria Cross along with the George Cross, the Knight of the Garter, the Knight Commander of the Bath and the Knight Commander of St Michael & St George would surely be world famous?!!! Surely such a distinguished individual would be listed in Whos Who but again no such luck. Pretty much the only important decoration he failed to award himself is the Order of Merit, lol. I doubt if a serious historian would quote "Sir Arthur" as a source for research.

"Sir Arthur Ewyn Turner-Thomas VC, GC, KG(Wales), KCB, KCMG Historian to H.R.H. the Countess of Wessex"

If you can provide proof of his position and honours, other than his own claims, I would be more than willing to admit the error of my ways.
 
Last edited:
Mac, Mc, M', Mack or Mak......?

It has to do with the time or period the name was taken into use.
There was no "set" way of writing back then. Only a "fashion" of writing.
They liked to abbreviate, hence the Mc instead of Mac or earlier even a simple M'.
In some cases Mack or Mak. From the 1700 onwards surnames become more known and an accepted spelling is fixed/used, usually Mc. (less so the use of Mac) Spelling of names have been changed over the centuries. To get a good insight into this, get this book: "Surnames of Scotland" by George F. Black. As for the many explanations of why it is one way or the other. The name means the same no matter how it's spelled. "Son of...."
 
Last edited:
Passing judgement is never a good thing...

My Name is James, glad to be here. I must admit I am here for acouple of reasons. I love learning about differant royals from around the world and I also have been researching and investigating the claims of the MacKinnon Mishnish Line for many years now. From what I and others have investigated thus far their claim as being of a Royal line is legitimate. I have noticed here on Royal Forums and Ancestry.com as well as other sites a Hester < ed Warren > has found it her quest to discredit Ancient Princess, Seanachaidh and the rest of the heirs of the Mishnish MacKinnon line. After careful examination of what Seanachiadh and Ancient Princess had as far as a genealogy and looking at why this "Hester" found it her responsibility to insult Ancient Princess I found "Hester" had alot to loose and had been following this. I have observed Hester trying to include her family line with the Mishnish Heirs. Hester adjusted her dates and names of people so it would end up she was directly related as a senoir heir. How do you explain this Hester????? There is a few facts you did not consider, 1. there is a bible that belongs to the legitimate heirs of Mishnish MacKinnon that dated back to Lt John MacKinnon & Sarah that already had the information (genealogy, birth records, death, marriage, etc) in it. And the documemnts you claim as yours, funny thing how those same documents are free to everyone online. Hester is claiming she is from the Senoir line of Mishnish MacKinnons when in fact she is not. Hester is from Col. Ranald MacKinnon & Letita son that migrated to the Carolinas in America and his name was Maj John MacKinnon and his son John MacKinnon married a woman that had the last name Lovitt or Lovett. I had also noticed Hester < ed Warren > had changed her line of MacKinnon three times to make her of the senoir line. How do you explain that Hester? You have pointed a finger at a legitimate heir for your own personal gain, do you not think you should pay attention to the four fingers pointing back at you. Shame on you Hester!!!!! You are nothing but a opportunistic fraud!!!!! And as far as the problem with Ancient Princess posting she had the support of Sir Arthur Turner Thomas I do not see why people are questioning her about this? How is that her fault to know for sure if this gentleman was legitimate or not, what does that have to do with anything. Some of you have insulted Ancient Princess and you enjoyed it. How cruel. Ancient Princess did make comment back to Hester and to be honest Hester had that coming even though it was a bit harsh. How would you all like to be judged in such a way? Ancient Princess has stated more than once the genealogy has to be put in front of the Lord Lyon Courts for a decision but it seems to me some of you have already judged her when it was not your right to do so. You all might want to research the proofs (even with a few mistakes) before passing judgement on Ancient Princess.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"And as far as the problem with Ancient Princess posting she had the support of Sir Arthur Turner Thomas I do not see why people are questioning her about this? How is that her fault to know for sure if this gentleman was legitimate or not, what does that have to do with anything"
The point would be that if the gentleman falsifies his own personal information it would naturally call into question the work that he purports to be true. I am not saying the work that he has done is in fact false merely that it would be open to question and independent verification.
 
More nasty individuals

James
You should never pass judgment nor point fingers when you are not privy to the entire story.
I have never tried to discredit Seanachaidh, ancient princess, < ed Warren > or whoever she is. I am not interested in trying to fit into her line as you have insinuated. This line is of no consequence to me as I research genealogy as an enjoyable past time. I am not interested in class action suits against some states (State of Rhode Island) or presenting my information to the Lord Lyon Courts .However I look for accuracy and when someone brings information to my attention that might be incorrect in my tree, I check it out as in the case with Seanachaidh. She left a few comments on my tree in ancestry and onto other fellow members. A few of us (one is an author and another a professional genealogist who works with television) and others are just avid genealogists such as myself. We checked out the information and as we did we found inaccuracies in her tree. I do not doubt her claim at all. Good luck to her but, it is necessary to be as accurate as possible.
When I checked out what people Seanachaidh commented on I realized that some of her dates were inaccurate and that she had women having children in their seventies and eighties. I had thanked her for her particular information but later when I found discrepancies, further commented on thes also. She was nice in the beginning but then blatantly accused me of doctoring a document from LDS saying that I wrote in a name to serve my purpose to fit into the tree. She also said that she had asked for the same copy from LDS and the name did not exist. I told her that she could not have done her homework too well because in fact this person did exist and was documented. I resubmitted a more legible copy and eventually I saw that Seanachaidh had added this person in question to her tree (with no apology forthcoming). In fact she has added many of my documents and people to her tree as we all do at ancestry.
Now about the other documents that were posted to this sight. I never said that I was the author of these documents. I said that they were my documents. I submitted them to ancestry and can prove it. Once you submit a piece of information and others want to add it , you should be well aware that it will say “originally submitted by” so in fact what is necessary to convey is that Seanachaidh used my records and these documents in question were submitted to this sight.
I tried to make Seanachaidh aware that if I found these errors, others will too and perhaps doubt the accuracy of her tree and the research, so it was important to revisit these dates and do more research. I told her that I was trying to help as she was trying to help me .When someone on ancestry has a query or comment I am thankful for their information and also try to help them, that is what ancestry is all about.
What I did not understand about her tree was that she has told many that it had been updated revised proved and registered and that it had already been sent to the Lyons Court .I would like to know who exactly sent this and when was it sent because in many posts Seanachaidh even back in 2009/2010 has mentioned that it had already been sent, so how do you explain this????
It is ovbious to me that it is the original heirs who have submitted it and not Seanachaidh herself who has personally taken on this quest and sent information herself to the Lyons Court.If there was a bible(I know there was one) with written dates ,then why did Seanachaidh's tree have so many incorrect dates.?
From Iain Na Mishnish down the dates certainly did not compute. I did see later that she revised some dates. As far as adjusting dates in my tree are concerned we on ancestry change dates when new information comes forth and if I have changed dates, this is the reason. It is absurd for you to insinuate that I want to “fit in” as you indicated. Even Seanachaidh has changed dates a few times.
Being as defensive and nasty as the above mentioned people, I can hazard a guess that you are attached in some way to them. How dare you call me an opportunistic fraud. I am sure the other members on ancestry whom I deal with on the Mackinnon line will be interested in your nasty comments; it certainly does not help out the situation for Seanachaidh.
Why you found it necessary to include Sir Arthur in this post was was just an additional way to to be nasty. I have nothing to do with Sir Arthur Turner Thomas
By the way you are so wrong about Ranald, Lettitia etc.and how they fit or do not fit in and also we never went to the Carolinas.
You have also indicated that I am on other sites, well that is an absolute lie as I am only on ancestry and this sight. I do not spread myself all over the internet as the above mentioned.
I did not want to dignify your nasty comments with a reply but since you brought ancestry into the equation I found it necessary to explain the whole story. My fellow ancestry members involved in this line see you as only bringing a more negative view not only for yourself but to Seanachaidh and ancient princess.
You should have left well enough alone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Warren said:
Besides Elizabeth II? Well, there are her children and grandchildren, her niece and nephew and their children, her cousins of Windsor descent and their children... then there are the many non-British royal descendants of George I, George II, George III, Queen Victoria, Edward VII... plus all the royal descendants of those Stuarts in 1701 who were Roman Catholic and excluded from the succession by the Act of Settlement, and then there are the royal descendants of Ludwig III, King of Bavaria, including the Hereditary Princess of Liechtenstein and her four children...
Click to expand...


Franz I. Stephan of Lorraine was a great-great-grandson of Mary Stuart, queen of Scots (via Elizabeth Stuart - Charles of the Palatinate - Elisabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate, duchess of Orleans - Elisabeth Charlotte d'Orleans, duchess of Lorraine - Franz Stephan of Lorraine), thus each and any Habsburg-Lothringen is a descendant of Mary Stuart... And just think of all the Habsburg-archduchesses who married around Europe. I guess it's difficult top find a Royal who is not descended from Mary.
 
Anniversary of the death of king lulach

ANNIVERSARY OF THE DEATH OF KING LULACH

Today is the 17TH MARCH. On this day in 1058, King Lulach mac Gille-Comgain, High King of the Scots, was killed in Essie, Strathbogie, Scotland, by Mael-coluim mac Donncaidh, claimant to the Scottish Throne. The Irish annals suggest he was killed "by treachery."

But who was Lulach "the Unfortunate"? He was the last King of the Scots from the original Gaelic royal house of Caibre Riada, and the last king to be raised to the kingship of Scotland according to the original Brehon law of succession which has always applied in Ireland, and which applied in Scotland officially until 1058. Lulach's ancestors had reigned as Kings of Scottish Dal-Riada from 480 to 843, and as Kings of Scotland from 843 to 1058. His victor, Mael-Coluim mac Donncaidh, was enthroned at Scone as king- illegally - according to Brehon law, since Mael-Coluim's father, Donncaidh (Donncaidh II) claimed the Scottish Throne through his mother, not his father. Under Brehon legal tradition, only adult males born in the male line of the Caibre Riada royal Derbhine could claim the Scottish Throne. Under this law, the Scottish Throne was not hereditary- the heir or tannaiste was elected by the reigning king from among the male agnates of the royal derbhine with agreement from the other members of the derbhine- including the heads of branch lines. Sometimes, succession was achieved by violence- but always within the Brehon legal system.

The new king, Mael-Coluim mac Donncaidh (Mael-Coluim III), changed all of this. He made the Scottish Throne hereditary, and under the influence of his English royal wife, Margaret of Wessex, replaced Gaelic customs and laws, the Gaelic language at Court, and suppressed the Columban Church of Scotland. He also moved the Scottish Royal Court from Dun-Fermline-in Fife to Edinburgh in Lothian. “Malcolm III” as he is known today belonged to a family which has been identified by DNA testing as a branch of the Irish royal house of O'Neill or Ui Neil. His grandfather, Crinan, Abbot of Dunkeld, married Princess Bethaig ingen Mael-Coluim, the eldest daughter of King Mael-Coluim II "the Destroyer". Since Mael-Coluim II had no eligible sons, he nominated his eldest daughter's son, Donncaidh mac Crinan as his heir- in violation of Brehon law which had governed the royal succession in the kingdom of Dal-Riada for centuries, and the royal succession in united Scotland since 847.

Mael-Coluim III was supported by the King of England, Edward "the Confessor", who in alliance with his vassal the Danish Siward, Earl of Northumbria, supplied Mael-Coluim with an army of more than 10,000 men made up partly of Englishmen, and partly of Scandinavian mercenaries, and a sea-force. In a four year campaign by land and sea, Soctland's legitimate royal house was overthrown and replaced by Crinan's family. First, King MacBeatha (Macbeth) was ousted as King of Strathclyde in 1054, then ambushed and killed at Lumphanan in August 1057. The Mormaors of Scotland enthoned Macbeth's cousin, Lulach- who was also his step-son. Lulach was enthroned –not because Macbeth had no sons, but because Lulach was the senior Heir-male of the Caibre Riada royal Derbhine, he was also the senior Heir-general of King Malcolm II's line - the Cinel Gabran which had become extinct in the male line in 1034. Lulach's mother, Princess Gruoch was the grand-daughter of King Cinnaedh IV who was killed in battle by his first cousin Mael-Coluim II in 1005. However it was Lulach's MALE line of descent which qualified him for the Throne, since his family, the Cinel Loairn was a surviving branch of the Caibre Riada dynasty who had been kings of Dal-Riada from 673 - 736. King MacBeth's own sons were probably teenagers at the time of their father's death, and therefore not yet eligible for the Throne under Brehon law. Recent research suggests that MacBeatha’s sons fled to Ireland afer Lulach was killed.

King Lulach married Fionghuala, daughter of Sinel, Mormaor of Angus. They had two children , Mael-Snechtai, afterwards, provincial King of Moray, and Princess Olith (some say "Tul"). The details of Lulach's enthronement and coronation at Scone Abbey in August 1057 are the first actually recorded in Scottish and Irish annals. He is believed to be one of the first Scottish kings who was actually crowned at his enthronement- since enthronement on the Stone of Destiny rather than crowning was the legal act of king-making in Scotland. Crowning was a later development.

Mael-Snechtai laid claim to the Scottish Throne in 1078, and the Anglo-Saxon chronicles report that King Mael-Coluim III raided Mael-Schectai's compound , seized his mother, Queen Dowager Fionghuala, and all his possessions. Mael-Schechtai himself, barely escaped. Now ruined, he entered a monastery where he died unmarried in 1085. Some writers suggest Mael-Schechtai may have been forced into a monastery by Mael-Coluim III. Mael-Schechtai's sister, Olith, married, according to Mackay tradition, her own cousin, Aedh, Mormaor of Ross, who according to Michael Mackay, was a male-line cousin of the late King Lulach descended from King Lulach's grand-uncle, Prince Domnall mac Ruaridh of Moray. Aedh succeeded Mael-Snechtai as Mormaor (not king) of Moray. He appears to have lived at peace with King Mael-Coluim's family, since he witnessed several royal charters. Aedh and Princess Olith had three sons. These sons revived their uncle's claim to the Scottish Throne. The eldest of these, Oengus, took the title of King of Moray on his father's death, and led an army south into Scotland proper in 1130. There he was slain -some say in single combat with a Norman knight- at the Battle of Inchbare. His brother MaelColuim , Earl of Ross, fought and was imprisoned by King Mael-Coluim IV. This king also expelled the Moray royal family from Moray, along with most of Morays' native inhabitants in a campaign which was conducted over about five years. The family resettled in Strathnaver, Sutherland where they founded a clan named Clan Aedh (sometimes referred to as Clan Morggan- Lulach's royal ancestor).

The present Chief of Clan Aedh, Lord Hugh Mackay of Reay, is the legal representaive of King Lulach's famly, although his DNA has not yet been tested. The Chiefs of Clan Gregor (MacGregor) and Finguine (Mackinnon) are descended in the male line from Bishop Cormac of Dunkeld, who, according to the Irish Annals of Tigernach, was a great/great-grandson of King MacBeatha.

Lulach's demise changed the course of Scottish history and caused Scotland to be transformed by Mael-Coluim III and his descendants from a Gaelic-speaking Celtic state to an Anglo-Scots speaking Anglo-Norman state. Eventually foreign Norman-Breton families such as the Bruces and the Stewarts acquired the Scottish Throne through the female line, after Mael-Coluim's family died out in the senior male line in 1286.

The junior male line of the family of King Mael-Coluim III, the Cinel Longseach, is today represented by the Chief of Clan Donncaidh, “Robertson of Struan” whose DNA has been tested. He is descended in the male line from Maeldred, a brother of King Donncaidh II, father of Mael-Coluim III.

SLAINTE LULACH! SLAINTE SIOL CAIBRE RIADA!
 
Once again the same issue concerning a disputed genealogy of the MacKinnon-Mishnish Line has arisen with unfortunately the same passion and paranoia that occurred the last time it erupted.

I am well-acquainted with the personal and defamatory allegations that have been bandied about here (largely deleted) and in some detail to me privately. To be fair I should add that from my observation the paranoia emanates from and is restricted to just one of the parties involved.
>> As both sides have had ample opportunity to state their case any further posts
that persist with this argument will be deleted without notice. <<

​

As an aside, one does not need to be a genealogist to question the bona fides and therefore the credibility of an hitherto-unknown individual who claims to have been awarded the Victoria Cross, the George Cross, and the Order of the Garter.

Warren
Administrator
 
Last edited:
This is a really interesting history, and could be an informative and interesting discussion and friendly exchange of research and views, but im genuinely shocked at some of the tone and venom in many of the posts in this thread.
It makes any further contribution or suggestions fairly pointless.

I also totally agree with Warren's point regarding it being only natural curiosity to question or wonder about such highly decorated claims and awards of an unknown or unproven "expert"!
 
Last edited:
Dear Warren. For the record, as a cadet of the Mackinnon chiefs whose DNA has been tested, I wish to state the following concerning the Mishnish claim:
1. The claim of seniority of the Mishinish cadet line of the Mackinnon clan chiefs is probably correct.
2. I believe the present line of chiefs -the Mackinnons of Acryse is probably a senior branch of my own family the Mackinnons of Kyle- one of who's members , Donald, dissapeared around the time that Chief Lachlan's "younger" son "emigrated to Antigua". Our family is JUNIOR to the Mishinish line
3. Under Brehon law, genealogical seniority is actually irrelevant- money and land ownership is considered more important.
4. Ancient Princess's claim to be descended from King Donald Mac Alpin is a fiction. The "House of Alpin" became extinct in the male line in 1034.
5. It has been reliably proved by several individuals that the male line of the Mackinnon chiefs is descended from Bishop Cormac of Dunkeld who died in 1132. Bishop Cormac may have been great -grandson of King MacBeth. He is listed by all the contemporary annals as a blood prince of King Macbeth's family the Cinel Loairn- a branch of the Scottish royal Dal-Riada clan.
6. The Mishnish claim will be settled by the Lyon Court. The Mackinnon succession must remain within the male line of the Chiefs- whether Mishinish, Kyle, or Acryse.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SCOTTISH REPUBLIC?

A recent poll by respected polling agency YouGov, shows that Scots have more pride in the Scottish commedian Billy Connolly than the Queen. The irony is that he is a Unionist , not a Nationalist- so no presidential aspirations for him. As for the Queen, she may be the last Scottish sovereign- unless the Scots decide to bring back the old Gaelic royal house. I have tremendous respect for the Queen- she reminds me a lot of my late Mother. They were both Women from the War generation- strong, loyal, and with selfless devotion to those around them. But her family is German. The House of Windsor is a branch of the House of Wettin, the former royal family of Saxony in Germany. Her ancestors got the British Throne because they were the nearest Protestant relatives of the last Catholic king, James VII & II. The English Parliament wanted no more Catholic monarchs, so it changed the succession, and forced the new succession on the Scots when the Treaty of Union was being negotiated. The previous dynasty, the Stewarts were also imports- they came with William "the Bastard", Duke of Normandy when he invaded England in 1066. The original Gaelic royal house of Scotland was driven out by an English-Viking army in 1054-1058. This family still thrives- many members have recently been identified by DNA profiling. The original English royal family, the House of Cerdic, was driven out by the afore mentioned Duke of Normandy. This family is possibly extinct in the male line- unless they left unrecorded descendants. David Hughes says that the Lougher family of Wales now represents the old Celtic English royal house. It will be interesting to see how this all pans out.
 
Splodger said:
There are no real direct decendents of the Kings of Ireland. Generaly speaking anyone from Ireland who has Celtic ancestery is decended from a "Royal Clan," however there is no way to trace through the first born decent to find a True Heir to one or other titles.

All the small Kingdoms passed between various families, and the title of High King also passed between different holders, however the most famous was probably O'Neill. I am not familiour with the McCarthy's (are they from the South - now the Republic?). However many other families, such as my own, are all branches of the House of O'Neill. Therefore many Irish familes are decended from the Kings of Ireland, even if they do not share the same family name, they are often all of the House of O'Neill. After the English took over, several powerful princes of Ireland were given English noble titles, however even here many have since died out.
Click to expand...

Technically, there are five direct descendants to the first Royal Family of Ireland that I know of. The first Royals of Ireland were the O'conners of the County Kerry, before that they were known as Tuatha A Dhiannon. Or loosely translated to ' Fairy ( Fey ) Kings'. Over time, this clan became the Kerry's of County Kerry, (still ruling of course) and eventually died out by as the name Kirby. I have done my ancestral tree and traced my grandmother( maternal) back all the way to one of the first O'conners. As well as being a distant cousin to The Clan Macdonald lord, and Fraser lord. And also, tracing a unnamed Royal Stuart in the Macdonald line to the late 1700's. Now I Am working on a rumor from my grandmother that we are related to Louis XIV somehow. So in answer to your question, there are no living Irish Royals.. But I am a descendant, so am able to lay claim if need be.

Personally I'd like to see an independant Scotland.. But not a republic. I like monarchies, but that's probably because I'm descended from one... So I am slightly biased. But still.. The USA is a republic and I don't think it's doing very well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Aoife of Leinster and Strongbow

Princess Aoife (Eva) was the daughter of the King of Leinster who was forced to marry the Norman Lord,Richard de Clare, 2nd Earl of Pembroke (better known as Strongbow).The couple had 2 surviving children,Gilbert de Clare-3rd Earl of Pembroke and Isabel de Clare, 4th Countess of Pembroke.

Princess Aoife was last recorded in a charter of 1188,but seems to vanished from historical records after that.

Aoife MacMurrough - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Richard de Clare, 2nd Earl of Pembroke (1st Creation) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Kingdom_of_Leinster-900.svg
 
I've always been very interested in Princess Aoife's daughter, Isabel de Clare.
Incidentally, it is through Isabel that Queen Elizabeth can claim descent from one of the most prominent High Kings of Iteland, Brian Boru.

Brian Boru -> Tadc -> Toirdelbach -> Muirchertach -> Mor -> Derbforgaill -> Murchad -> Donnchada -> Enna -> Diarmaid -> Princess Aoife -> Isabel de Clare -> Isabel Marshal -> Isabella of Gloucester and Hertford -> Robert, 6th Lord of Annandale -> Robert I of Scotland -> Marjorie -> Robert II of Scotland -> Robert III of Scotland -> James I of Scotland -> James II of Scotland -> James III of Scotland -> James IV of Scotland -> James V of Scotland -> Mary, Queen of Scots -> James VI and I of Scotland and England -> Elizabeth of Bohemia -> Sophia of Hanover -> George I -> George II -> Frederick, Prince of Wales -> George III -> Edward, Duke of Kent and Strathearn -> Queen Victoria -> Edward VII -> George V -> George VI -> Queen Elizabeth II
 
Isabel de Clare, 4th Countess of Pembroke is believed to have been buried at the now ruined Cistercian Tintern Abbey,I also read that her mother may have been buried here too.Her father Strongbow is buried at Christchurch Cathedral in Dublin.

I agree Isabel is a highly interesting lady!
 
Elizabeth Chadwick is an author who has written a ton of books, a series of them deals with the daughter of Aoife and her marriage to the Marshal...Aoife makes an appearance as well.

They are fairly accurate in their history.

LaRae
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
Kings and Queens of Scotland
Replies
10
Views
1K
Toledo
Toledo
Blog Real
Genealogy of Queen Mary of Denmark
Replies
1
Views
2K
Muhler
Muhler
Toledo
Empire and Kingdom of Haiti
Replies
1
Views
1K
Toledo
Toledo
D
Hello & looking for royal ancestry biography & research book collectors
Replies
1
Views
956
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
Blog Real
Curtea de Argeș Cathedral (burial place of the Romanian Royal Family)
Replies
2
Views
1K
Blog Real
Blog Real

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom