Follow Us
Like Us
Please wait.
loading...
Problem with this page?
I found an interesting article on the matrilineal descent options that might link Banquo to the Stewart line (rather than going with assumptions that it was fictitious) here: http://www.mckinneyandstewart.com/genealogy/getperson.php?personID=..., and I've also pasted it below.
I'm putting it here as a record; and for anybody so inclined to talk back to; or research further:
THE STEWARTS, VOLUME 21 No. 2 (2001), pages 97 to 100.
By Henry Stewart Fothringham
Walter Fitz Alan
The family tree of the
First High Steward of Scotland
The problem of who exactly was Walter Fitz Alan, Ist High Steward of Scotland, has perplexed many minds over the years and several different conclusions have been reached by different genealogists. Part of the problem has been the sparseness of the data and the different interpretations capable of being put upon them, compounded by what looks to some like deliberate obfuscation of the facts. In this brief paper the writer throws down the ancestral gauntlet for historians to pick up and challenge their own pre-conceived ideas by re-examining all the available sources with an open mind. The editor looks forward to receiving informed responses on both sides of the debate.
Genealogists up to the eighteenth century seemed happy to accept that the Stewarts were descended from Banquo, Thane of Lochaber. This was derived principally from Hector Boece's History of Scotland and the Chronicles of Holinshed but they both drew on older material for their narratives. The latter was the source used by Shakespeare for Macbeth.. These notions, which accorded with the 'Secret Knowledge' preserved by only a very few persons at any one time, were also supported by a 'folk memory' of the events and by ancient lore and legend, but by very little documentary evidence. The idea was subsequently discredited by the discovery of seemingly conflicting evidence.
The idea that supplanted the Thanes of Lochaber thesis was that the Stewarts were descended from the Senescalls of Dol in Brittany and there is certainly evidence to support this interpretation. The evidence was brought together and published by George Chalmers in his Caledonia (1807-24), the manuscripts of which are now in the Advocates' Library in Edinburgh. What has not been generally realised, however, is that there is room for both interpretations, not forgetting that Walter son of Alan had a mother as well as a father. Victorian genealogists seemed to have had a fixation about patrilinear descent, quite overlooking the fact that the maternal lines were of equal, or even greater, importance in early times. The principle by which a cousin or nephew on the mother's side usually succeeded as king persisted in the Scottish monarchy for hundreds of years. Further, the new theory propounded in Chalmers' Caledonia so busied the minds of genealogists trying to prove it to be true that they forgot about trying to disprove the old theory; had they tried to do so they would have found that it was not going to lie down and die as quietly as they expected. At about this point also, conspiracy theory kicks in, suggesting that the House of Hanover wished deliberately to suppress the Scottishness of the Stewart ancestry in favour of a European descent.
The genuine confusion was begun by mixing up two people called Alan, who turn out to be Walter's father and his maternal grandfather, and treating them as one and the same person. Because of this it was assumed that the older Alan was his father, whereas he was actually his mother's father. Walter's father was Alan, Thane of Lochaber, who died in about 1155. Walter's mother was Adalina of Oswestry, daughter of Alan Fitz Flaald de Hesdin, Sheriff of Shropshire (d. c.1122). It is therefore through his mother and not his father that Walter was descended from the Senescalls of Dol. That line of ancestry can be traced back an astonishingly long way, to the lst century AD and, if we are to believe the 'Secret Knowledge', even further. According to what you choose to believe, the descent goes back, like the famous Macleod family tree at Dunvegan with which it merges, at least as far as Adam and Eve.
On his father's side Walter's male line of descent leads back through, among other people, Fleance, Banquo (his great-great-grandfather) and King Aedh to Kenneth MacAlpin (10 generations) and thence back through that family tree, once again arriving rather optimistically at Adam and Eve. The reason for the descent from Banquo having been discredited since the late eighteenth century was that it was assumed to conflict with the Dol descent, whereas the two are perfectly compatible, as shown in the accompanying genealogical table.
Adelina's father, Alan de Hesdin, was Flaald, hereditary Steward of Dol in Brittany. In the early 1100s Alan was Baron of St Florent, Saumur; his early forebears were the Counts of Brittany, who were kin to the Merovingian Kings of the Franks. It is with Flaald and his wife that the genealogical confusion usually stems. Flaald was married to Aveline, daughter of Arnulf, Seigneur de Hesdin, but some peerage registers (including Burke's and the 1858 History of Shropshire) erroneously show Aveline as having been the wife of Flaald's son, Alan. The fact appears to be, however, that Alan Fitz Flaald was born with the 'de Hesdin distinction inherited from his mother, Aveline (Ava) of Picady. Her status is confirmed in the Cliartulary of St George, Hesdin. When Aveline's father, Arnulf (brother to Count Enguerrand de Hesdin), joined the crusade in 1090, Aveline became his nominated deputy in England. She was known as the 'Domina de Norton' (the Lady of Norton) and her son, Alan Fitz Flaald, was Baron of Oswestry during the reign of Henry I. As correctly detailed by Chalmers in his Caledonia, Alan was married to Adeliza, the daughter and heiress of SheriffWarine of Shropshire, thereby inheriting that office. Warine's arms consisted of a field azure and argent, the same tinctures as the fesse adopted by his Stewart descendants. This, and not the supposed chequer-board theory, was the true origin of the Stewart arms.
Alan de Hesdin's uncle (Flaald's brother) was Alan, hereditary Seceschal of Dol, who was a Crusade Commander and died on crusade in 1097. From his son, William Fitz Alan, the Fitzalan earls of Arundel descended, while his daughter, Emma, married Walter, Mormaer (or Thane) of Lochaber, the son of Fleance and grandson of Banquo. Walter of Lochaber died fighting at the side of Malcolm Canmore at Alnwick in 1093. Some sources make the error of showing him as being High Steward, which is either a blunder or, more probably, a 'pious' invention to enhance status.
From this initial marriage between the Scots and Breton families (c.1085) emerged Alan, Thane of Lochaber. Born c. 1088, he cemented a further alliance with the Breton house by marrying Adelina, daughter of Alan Fitz Flaald. It was their son, Walter, who succeeded to the Shropshire inheritance. By virtue of his Lochaber heritage and responsibilities, Walter was summoned to Scotland by his friend, David I, in c. 1136 and one of his first task was to guard the western coast from Loch Linnhe to the Firth of Clyde against the Norse invasions. On 22 August 1138 he fought at the Battle of the Standard, near Northallerton in Yorkshire, when the Scots were heavily defeated.
Banquo's son, Fleance, was the first husband of Princess Nesta of Gwynedd but, after Fleance's death, Nesta married Osbern Fitz Richard, grandson of Guiomarc, Comtede L6on, who held substantial estates in Dol. In later life, Guiomarc became a Benedictine monk of St Florent at Saumur, where Flaald of Dol was to become the Baron. Indeed, the family ties were very close, which is how Osbern came to marry Nesta.
In 1080 Flaald and his brother, Alan, Seneschal of Dol, consecrated St Florent Abbey. Two years later their younger brother, Rhiwallon of Dol, a monk, became its Abbot. In 1102 Flaald was present at the dedication of Monmouth Priory and Flaald's son, Alan de Hesdin, founded Sporle Priory in Norfolk as a cell of St Florent Abbey. Powerful families habitually intermarried with their close cousins in order to consolidate their power and possessions; Osbern and Nesta's son, Hugh, married Eustacia de Say of Clun, while William Fitz Alan married her sister, Isabel de Say. As previously stated, William's own sister, Emma, married Walter of Lochaber, son of Fleance and Nesta. This all sounds fearsomely complicated but the essential lines are much more easily followed in the genealogical table.
The writer is grateful to Laurence Gardner for permission to use his research and to Prince Michael of Abany for permission to reproduce the genealogical table. It was the exertions of Laurence Gardner which have brought this matter to public attention once more. He researched, among many other neglected sources, the family archives of Germaine Elize Segers de la Tour dauvergne and her husband, Michael Stewart of Annandale; the pre-1792 records of Lyon Court (publicly available on request); the Diocesan Archives of Angers; the Chartulary of St George at Hesdin; and the Chrtulary of St. Florent.
The following tables give a skeletal lay-out, generation by generation, as far back as Aminadab on Walter's mother's side and on his father's side to Ere of Dalriada. Among the early names there are many variations in spelling and some people have more than one name.
I: Patrilinear Descent of Walter the High Steward
Note.- each succeeding generation is the son of the previous one.
24.Ere of Irish Dairiada (Dal naraide)
23.Fergus Mor Mae Ere, d.501
22.Domangart
21. K. Gabran of Dalriada, c.548-558
20.Aedan Mac Gabran, d.608, m. Ygerna de Acqs
19.Eochaid Buide (younger brother of the historical King Arthur)
18.Donald Brec
17.Domangart
16.Eochaid, d.696
15. Eochaid
14. Aed the White (Aed Find)
13.Eochaid the Poisonous, d.781
12. Alpin
11. K. Kenneth MacA]pin
10. K. Aed (Aeth), d.878
9.Doir, b.870-d.936
8.Murdoch, b.900-d.959
7.Ferguard, b.929-d.980
6.Kenneth, b.960-d.1030
5.Banquo, Thane of Lochaber, b.990-k.1043
4.Fleance, Thane of Lochaber, b.1020-d. c.1064
3.Walter, Thane of Lochaber, b. c.1045-d.1093
2.Alan of Lochaber, b. c. 1088-d. 1 153, father of-
1.WALTER FITZ ALAN, 1st HIGH STEWARD OF SCOTLAND, d. 1177
II: Maternal Descent of Walter the High Steward
Note.- each succeeding generation is the son of the previous one,except for 2. Adelina, who was Alan's daughter.
34.Aminadab, 2nd century A.D., m. Eurgen, dau. of Lucius, son of K. Coel I.
33.Castellors
32.Manael
31.Titurel
30.Boaz (Anfortas)
29.Frotmund, k.404
28.Faramund, Lord of Franks, d.430
27.Fredemund
26.Nascien I, K. of the Septimanian Midi
25.Celedoin
24.Nascien II, K. of the Septimanian Midi
23.Galains
22.Jonaans
21. Lancelot
20. Bars the elder
19.Bars the younger
18.Lionel
17.Alain
16.Froamidus, Count of Brittany, c.762
15.Frodaldus, Count of Brittany, c.795
14.Frotmund, b.850
13.Flotharius
12. Adetrad
11.Frotbald, c.923
10.Alirad
9.Frotmund, c.982
8.Fretaldus, c.1008
7.Frotmund Vetuies, c. 1052
6.Fratmaldus the Senechal
5.Alan, Seneschal of Doi
4.Flaald, Seneschat of Doi
3.Alan Fitz Flaald, de Hesdin
2.Adelina of Oswestry, motliet- of-.
1.WALTER FITZ ALAN, 1st HIGH STEWARD OF SCOTLAND, d. 1177
J.H. Round: The Origin of the Stewarts: Part 1
Index Part 2 Addendum
Of the problems upon which new light is thrown by my Calendar of documents in France relating to English history, none, probably, for the genealogist, will rival in interest the origin of the Stewarts. It has long been known that the Scottish Stewarts and the great English house of Fitz Alan possessed a common ancestor in Alan, the son of Flaald, living under Henry the First. This was established at some length by Chalmers in his Caledonia (1807) on what he declared to be "the most satisfactory evidence."1 According to him, "Alan the son of Flaald, a Norman, acquired the manor of Oswestrie, in Shropshire, soon after the Conquest," and "married the daughter of Warine, the famous sheriff of Shropshire." Mr Riddell, the well-known Scottish antiquary, followed up the arguments of Chalmers, in 1843, with a paper on the "Origin of the House of Stewart,"2 in which he accepted and enforced the views of Chalmers, including his theory that Walter Fitz Alan brought with him to Scotland followers from Shropshire and gave them lands there. But research has hitherto been unable to determine the origin of Flaald father of Alan, or even to find, in England, any mention of his name.
No less an authority on feudal genealogy than the late Mr Eyton devoted himself to a special investigation on the subject of Alan "Fitz Flaald,"1 and arrived at the conclusion that, after all, he was a grandson of "Banquo, thane of Lochaber,", whose son "Fleance" fled to England. "My belief is," Mr Eyton wrote, "that the son of Fleance was named Alan ... and that he whom the English called Alan Fitz Flaald was the person in question."2 He admitted, however, of the priories of Andover, Sele, and Sporle, cells of the Abbey of St. Florent de Saumur, that he could "show a connection between Alan Fitz Flaald or his descendants and each of these cells3, which suggested an Angevin origin, and for which he could not account. But where he really advanced our knowledge was in showing that Alan Fitz Flaald married, not (as alleged) a daughter of Warine the sheriff, but Aveline daughter of Ernulf de Hesdin, a great Domesday tenant. I have now been able to trace Ernulf to Hesdin (in Picardy) itself, in connection with which his daughter 'Ava' also is mentioned.4 In 1874, an anonymous work, The Norman People, approached the problem from the foreign side, and adduced evidence to prove that Flaald was a brother of Alan, seneschal of Dol. But there was still not forthcoming any mention of Flaald in England, while the rashness and inaccuracy which marred that book resulted in his being wrongly pronounced a "son of Guienoc." The great pedigree specially prepared a few years ago for the Stuart exhibition by Mr W. A. Lindsay (now Windsor Herald) still began only with Alan son of Flaald, to whom a daughter of Warine the sheriff was assigned as wife. Moreover, in the handsome work on The Royal House of Stuart (1890), which had its origin in that exhibition, Dr. Skelton could only tell us that "there was (if the conclusions of Chalmers are to be accepted) an Alan son of Flathauld, a Norman knight, who soon after the Conquest obtained a gift of broad lands in Shropshire" (p. 5). Alan, we shall find, was not a Norman; the lands he was given were widely scattered; and he did not obtain them "soon after the Conquest."
The latest authoritative statement on the subject is that, it would seem, of Sheriff Mackay in the Dictionary of National Biography (1896).1 He tells us, of the House of Stewart, that
1 This passage is found in the biography of the first Stewart king, so that I only lighted upon it after this paper was written. It gave me the clue to Mr. Hewison's book, of which I had not previously heard, but which I have now read just in time to add his results to this paper (24th Jan., 1900). Its earlier genealogy is uncertain, but an ingenious and learned, though admittedly in part hypothetical, attempt to trace it to the Banquho of Boece and Shakespeare, Thane of Lochaber, has been recently made by the Rev. J. K. Hewison (Bute in the Olden Time [Vol. II] pp. 1-38, Edinburgh, 1895).1
Mr Hewison's volume opens with the words:-
The origin of the royal house of Stewart has long remained a mystery, perplexing historical students, who feel tantalized at knowing so little concerning the hapless victim of the jealousy of King Macbeth - Banquo, round whom Shakespeare cast the glamour of undying romance, and to whom the old chroniclers of Scotland traced back the family of Stewart.
The author's 'glamour' augurs ill, and in spite of the unique advantage he enjoyed in having access to the late Lord Crawford's MS. collections on the subject, we soon find ourselves wandering, alas, with Alice in Wonderland.
It may be concluded that Walter, the son of Fleadan, son of Banchu, is identical with Walter, son of [A]llan (or Flan), son of Murechach of the Lennox family, if not also with Walter, son of Amloib, son of Duncan of the other genealogy. Chronology easily permits of the equation of Murdoch, the Maormor of Leven ... with Banchu ... who might have survived even his son Fleance -- we, meantime, only assuming that Fleance was slain in Wales. Ban-chu, the pale warrior, would be his complimentary title; the old surname of his family ... also descended to his son, Flan-chu, the red or ruddy warrior, known to his Irish kinsmen as Fleadan.
We are surely coming to the Man-chu dynasty. But no.
This Irish form of the name Fleadan tan (i.e. either Fleadan the Tanist or Fleadan the younger) imports a significant idea -namely, flead ... a feast, which corresponds in signification with Flaald ...
Then there bursts upon us yet another discovery:-
Fleanchus ... is the Latinised form of Flann-chu, the Red or Ruddy Dog ... and is also a sobriquet - the Bloodhound. ... This nomenclature is evidently a reminiscence of the dog-totem or dog-divinity, etc., etc.
There remains, however, the standing puzzle1 why Walter the first Stewart was made by the old romancers a son of Fleance son of Banquo, though his father was indisputably Alan son of Flaald. One solution offered by our author is that "Ailin or Allan may have become the family name"; but his own view is that
The native name of Banquo's son would be the common Goidelic one Flann, which signifies rosy or fair, and has an equivalent in Aluinn, beautiful, fair, to which the word Alan, both in Britanny and Ireland, may be traced.
Thus it was that 'Flann' would become 'Alan' in Britanny, "more especially when, in the vulgar tongue of Dol, the former, denoting a pancake, would sound like a nickname." And if we should still have our doubts, is there not, at Dol, to this day -
an imposing edifice, built of granite, in the purest Norman style of architecture of the twelfth century, which tradition names 'La maison des Plaids,' and avers was the revenue office and court-house of the archbishops. this name, "the House of the
Plaids," is touchingly significant of Fleance with the royal wearers of the tartan ...
But I really cannot pursue further these "ingenious and learned" new lichts. A dreadful vision of dog-totems, arrayed in the Stewart tartan, and feasting, with fiery visage, on pancakes in the streets of Dol, warns me to leave this realm of wonders and turn to the world in which we live. From "the House of the Plaids" I flee.1
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/round/stewarts1.shtml
One caveat the the first article, above. It says, "The writer is grateful to Laurence Gardner for permission to use his research and to Prince Michael of Abany for permission to reproduce the genealogical table. It was the exertions of Laurence Gardner which have brought this matter to public attention once more."
Prince Michael of Albany is a pseudonym of Michel Lafosse, who claims to be heir of the Stewart kings and pretender to the throne of Scotland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Michael_of_Albany
Laurence Gardner is a popular writer of alternative history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_Gardner
Neither of them should be used as a serious genealogical source.
Justin, we already have several problems with people adding lines and connections based on his book.
See http://www.geni.com/discussions/113555
Private User do you think the Banquo/ Ragnhild "The Wicked" Eiríksdóttir descent is in the Gardner book too? If that's the ONLY reason it's there, then that’s good reason to cut it. Justin Durand I don't suppose you have the book in your bookshop?
The Stewart dynasty claim through Banquo (though, I'm not sure if it necessarily includes Ragnhild) does well predate Gardner, even though it is dubious. The question is whether it is any more dubious than the Orkneying saga data.
That is an interesting discussion to have, as I love the old stories, and believe we are finding it more and more likely that they are based in solid truth - if moulded by oral story telling traditions.
So, in Banquo's case - I'm presuming that "where there is smoke there might be fire" and the person he represents may well have existed - given the Lochaber location relative to Macbeth’s stronghold in Moray, and the defensive position required both up and down the Great Glen, from Viking insurgents. But that is going to take time to research. So, I thought I’d elicit opinions as I went. (Thanks guys)
The reason for my interest being piqued by the first article is that the matrilineal lines of inheritance are actually oddly ignored by historians in this area. So, for example, they’ll point to the fact of Pictish matrilineal patterns, but still profess mystification for the reasons Gruoch might have felt she conferred a claim to the throne etc etc!
The only web page that shows that connection with a source reference shows this source for it: "HRH Prince Michael of Albany, Albany, pg. 45."
http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~cousin/html/p128.htm#i14950
This seems to be the citation used originally on the profile: http://www.mathematical.com/eriksdottirragnild.html "Biographical Encyclopedia of the Kings & Queens of Great Britain" by Mike Ashley - but, as I pointed out in my initial query, even that thinks it is unlikely.
Will follow it up into Holinshed and Boece, but am happy to cut her off from Ferquard if we find nothing more - especially as there has been no objections / opinions from other managers.
Sharon, which book is it you wonder if we have? Laurence Gardner? If so, yes. We get them in used all the time, and they fly out the door. Some titles also rotate in and out of my personal library.
The maternal descent given in the first post above is a good example of Gardner's work. You can spot it a mile away. It's a mish-mash drawn from 12th and 13th century Arthurian romances. In other words, the invention of poets. As I said elsewhere, it would be like using Gone with the Wind to prove that Gerald O'Hara, according to his own statement, was a descendant of Irish kings.
I hope we'll ultimately choose to preserve the poetic lore in that genealogy, but get it isolated from the rest of the Big Tree. I might someday want an easy way to see how Sir Lancelot was supposed to be descended from Anfortas, the Grail King, but I hope I don't keep being descended from him ;)
Sharon, - if you check the web page I linked to, every statement have a source citation (as it should), - it is only the child Kenneth, Thane of Lochaber that is sourced to "The Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland". That is a good enough reason for me to cut the connection.
Your web page does not tell which information that is sourced by "Biographical Encyclopedia of the Kings & Queens of Great Britain" and without checking I am sure that it is only the parents of Ragnhild which most sources confirms (except which Gunhild, daughter of who, is the mother, but that is another issue currently solved by having two Gunhild as spouse of Eirik "Blood axe" Haraldsson where the wicked Ragnhild is assigned the mysterious Ozur as grandfather without any reason that it is mostly likely that the Nordic sources are more likely correct and we had to resolve the parent conflict).
Ahh, Justin I really love the idea of your book shop - (In my head it looks like the Shakespearian Bookshop in Paris - have you ever seen that?)
Yes, I meant Gardner
Okay, you guys have bolstered my own suspicions, and I will sever from Ferquard and Ragnhild, before she gets a chance to murder him :-)
As to fairytale trees - It would be such fun if Geni could give us walled off 'gardens' to grow those in.
As we don't, I agree that if we think the proof against the person's existence outweighs the circumstantial evidence 'for' it - then we should remove them.
Sharon, I've been trying for days to get back to this discussion to update you.
I checked the Laurence Gardner books.
In Bloodline of The Holy Grail, he shows Ferguard married to "daughter of Erik I", without further details. There is no direct indication about which Erik he means. The odd spelling Ferguard (rather than Ferquard) makes me suspect that the only source for the Geni profile was indeed Gardner.
I also checked Realm of The Ring Lords. This is the one where Gardner takes the Stewarts back to the Pharaohs and some Biblical genealogies. In Gardner's scheme, the Patriarch Isaac is the son of Sarah, but by Pharoah Senusret, not by Abraham. I thought I remembered Ferguard also being listed there, in the chart for the Elf Kings, but no. I was wrong.
And, I checked Genesis of the Grail Kings, which is the one that takes the Stewarts back to Adam, and the genetic manipulations of the space people who became the Sumerian gods. Nothing there. (I didn't think there would be.)
I also checked Mike Ashley's book. There doesn't seem to be any mention of this line. He lists two other sons for Aed, son of Kenneth MacAlpin, but not Doir.
If you want to preserve the Gardner line against the possibility that he might have preserved some good information, I would marry Ferguard to an unnamed sister of Ragnhild. Or, just let this discussion stand as a caution ;)
Not me, Bjorn, but it's one possibility for Sharon to consider. There are plenty of secondary sources -- like Gardner -- that do just that. I doubt that Gardner is any way original, and if you you're trying to identify an "Erik I", it makes sense to look for an Erik who is the first of something, and a contemporary. Maybe you know another Erik I who would fit?
Eric I "Ejegod " of Denmark as an example,- Numbering the kings are not a tradition in sources, it is mostly a modern invention and it provokes me a lot when US users put numbers on the old kings, especially when they they just was petty kings over a small area and not kings over the countries known as Norway and Denmark today.
Bjorn, I think you need to read the meta-data around searches of this type. When you're dealing with fake genealogies, you need to examine the process by which they evolved.
Ferguard (Ferchar, Ferquhar, Ferquard, etc.) is said here to have lived 929-980. His wife must have lived approximately near those dates.
There are many Scandinavian petty kings named Erik, but if we are taking Gardner at all seriously we need someone who lived in the 10th century. Erik Ejegod is 12th century. Too late.
We might not like the numbering of Scandinavian kings, but it was the academic fashion in Europe to invent number for all those kings. Eric XIV of Sweden, for example, might have been Eric VI or VII, but certainly not XIV. German academics were still inventing numbers for noble families into the 1800s and 1900s. Modern genealogists are just using old sources.
And it's not just US users. Throughout Geni we see people who want to use regnal numbers that the people never used in their lives. Remember, when we were drafting the naming conventions I was the one (the only one) who argued we should not be using fake numbers. If anyone agreed with me, they didn't speak up.
You are certainly correct that many of those kings ruled smallish kingdoms, and not the whole of Norway, Sweden or Denmark. Nevertheless, when we're examining old and questionable sources we have to make allowances for terminology. The 15-17th century Scandinavian kings promoted the idea that their predecessors ruled whole countries, and we're left with the legacy of their propaganda.
Laurence Gardner is British. He calls Erik, Erik I. So, he is using one of those numbering systems. If Gardner says the 1st, then he means 1st of Denmark, 1st of Norway or 1st of Sweden. Erik I Ejegod of Denmark, as I said, is too late. Erik I Björnsson of Sweden is early 9th century. Too early. But Erik I Bloodaxe of Norway (c. 885-954) is just right.
If we want further confirmation, it was the western Norwegian kings, not the Danes or the Swedes, who had cultural and kinship ties to northern Scotland and the Hebrides. So, Erik Bloodaxe fits there as well.
If you do a Google search for Ferquhar (and variants), Lochaber and Erik, you'll find hundreds of references to Ferquhar marrying a daughter of Erik Bloodaxe, usually Ragnahild. I didn't find any that cite another Erik, except one that says Eric VI Segersäll of Sweden. The right given name, but unfortunately not the right number and not the right geographic connections to Scotland.
Gardner's source, whatever it was, almost certainly identified Ferquhar's wife as a daughter of Erik Bloodaxe. I don't think there's any doubt about that. The question, I think, is whether it identified her as Ragnahild, and he (or someone else) has corrected it to an unnamed daughter, or whether it identified her as an unnamed daughter and many other people have falsely corrected it to Ragnahild.
I havent read the whole debate but for the official names and numbering of Norwegian Kings:
*http://www.kongehuset.no/c26982/artikkel/vis.html?tid=27626
And im not sure if I have ever heard about a Ferguar marrying a daughter of Eirik Bloodaxe, is this marriage mentioned in any Norse sagas, Anglo-saxon or anything real old litterature?
Some of the Saga litterature:
*Heimskringla: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/598/598-h/598-h.htm
*Fagrskinna: http://books.google.com.pk/books/about/Fagrskinna.html?id=jgYYAAAAYAAJ
*Agrip af Noregs Konungasogum: http://www.vsnrweb-publications.org.uk/Text%20Series/Agrip.pdf
*Historia Nowegiæ: http://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=blodaxe+ruled+norway+...
For further readings:
*A History of The Vikings: http://books.google.no/books?id=3Z8NgXgRytUC&pg=PA254&lpg=P...
*Anglo Saxon and Norse Poems: http://poppy.nsms.ox.ac.uk/woruldhord/attachments/226/173.226.origi...
*Disseminating the story of Eric Bloodaxe: http://daveratcliffe.blogspot.no/2011/04/transcriptiondisseminating...
Bjorn, it seems you are misunderstanding since you keep coming back to the same point after I've already told you no, that's not what I'm saying.
There are two questions here.
1. Is the information accurate? I don't think it is, but that's my personal opinion. By its nature, the link almost certainly derives from some Scottish chronicle. Looking in the sagas would be a waste of time. If I were to guess, I would start by looking at Hector Boece, a 16th century Scottish who invented (or "first recorded") many fanciful stories about Scotland's early history, including the Stewart descent from Banquo. If I didn't find it there, I would look at James Anderson's Royal Genealogies (1732), a monumental compilation that included many bits of lore and fantasy. It was seminal for the many bogus lines we see today.
2. Who did Gardner mean by Erik I? Gardner is no historian. He is a popular writer of "alternative history". He almost certainly means that Ferguhar's wife was a daughter of Erik Bloodaxe because (a) the name is right, (b) the regnal number is right, (c) the time period is right, (d) the geography, kinship networks and cultural influences are right, and (e) by process of elimination there are no other plausible Eriks. Moreover, knowing what we do about Gardner, we can add peripheral and indirect evidence (f) Gardner is not a historian. He uses a numbering system disfavored by historians. And he is British. So, when he says Erik I he means one of the three men called Erik I by English sources, not some more obscure Erik, and (g) Gardner's information generally matches the bogus genealogies that are easily available elsewhere, such a fabpedigree.com, so we can expect that his Erik I will be the same Erik I identified by other sources. As it happens, fabpedigree also uses the unusual spelling Ferguard and identifies his wife as Ragnhild, daughter of Erik Bloodaxe.
You see, I am not -- as you keep insisting -- making an argument solely from a regnal number. When you are evaluating the facts presented, a good genealogist or historian will also evaluate the source itself and the context for the claim. You have to know your sources as well as the information in them.
I come to two conclusions. (1) The link is probably a late invention. That's my opinion. At the very least, it probably comes from a late and unreliable source. (2) Gardner almost certainly intends his Erik I to be Erik Bloodaxe, exactly the same identification that everyone else reporting this line has made.
David, I don't think the sagas will help us here, and we already know the official regnal list that identifies Erik Bloodaxe as Erik I. This is a localized Scottish story that is part of the traditional descent of the Stewarts from Banquo. If it pre-dates the 16th century, which I doubt, the original source is lost. Probably, it was the invention of a genealogist under one of the early Stewart kings, trying to tart up the pedigree a bit.