Aed/Heth/Beth/Head, possibly also known as "AEthelred", alias Hugh

I'm removing these profiles as the children of Ethelred.
Recording them here, so we can go through them and rehome them without losing them:

Duff mac Eth, 2nd Mórmaer of Fife ,

Áed, Mórmaer of Moray ,

Aoidh (Ethelred) MacEth, Dunkeld ,

Eaill nic Eth ,

Gruaidh nic Áeda ,

Gillecoimded mac Áeda ,

Malcolm MacHETH (1st Earl of) ROSS .

I must be missing something here. I'm not quite as taken with Bannerman's theory as the rest of you seem to be.

To recapitulate: "He argues that the translator had been thrown off by the use of a singular Gaelic verb for a joint grant (i.e. where the verb had two subjects), common in Gaelic charters. As a result, the translator omitted the mormaer, Causantín. At any rate, it is clear that Ethelred was never a mormaer of Fife, since Causantín is attested in other sources."

Worded another way, the argument is that Aedh cannot have been "also Mormaer of Fife" as the heading claims, since Constantine the Mormaer of Fife was one of the witnesses to the same charter.

I read this as a good catch by a competent modern historian, but I think the implications have been overblown. The fact that he was not Mormaer in 1107 tells us nothing about his relationship with Fife except that he was not Mormaer in 1095, particularly in the face of Learney's statement that Constantine was himself Mormaer probably by marriage to a daughter or cousin of Aedh / Aethelred.

I can easily grant that the hallowed tradition being dismantled here might have been nothing more than a few generations of people following Fordun, but I think we're dismantling a bit too aggressively and doing it based on questionable assumptions.

I think what I need to do is take some time to type in the info contained in C. Thomas Cairney's very scholarly, Clans and Families of Ireland and Scotland: An ethnography of the Gael (1989). In my opinion, this is the best modern overview.

Beginning to transcribe a passage from C. Thomas Cairney, Clans and Families of Ireland and Scotland: An ethnography of the Gael (1989). I will do this in installments. I anticipate starting and stopping as the day goes on, so this might take a bit of time.

Page 111: "The Clan MacDuff descends from Gillemichael mac Duff, Earl of Fife in about 1133. But the significance of the name Duff (Dubh) goes back to the line of Duff, King of Albany in 967, whose descendants' patrimony was in Fife (the "kingdom" of Fife). His line, the Clan Duff, was collateral with the line of King Duff's brother, King Kenneth II, and the two lines alternated the High-Kingship of Albany until 1034, as both lines had their ultimate origin in sons of King Malcolm I of the line of the Cineal Gabhran who had inherited the Picto-Gaelic crown (hence their traditional descent, in the female line, from Conall Cearnach, traditional ancestor of the Cruithne).

"Both of these lines ended in heiresses about the year 1034: The Line of Kenneth II ending in Bethoc, who married Crinan, hereditary Abbot of Dunkeld, of the Kindred of St. Columba, mentioned above; and the Line of Duff ending in Gruoch, who married Gillacomgan, Mormaer (King) of Moray, of the line of the Cineal Loarn. Their son, Lulach, was thus Chief of Clan Duff (in those presurname times of Picto-Gaelic succession) and King of Moray, and was as well a rival King of Albany. His daughter and heiress, the Princess of Moray and heiress of Clann Duff appears to have "married" Eth (Aedh, later Aodh, Gaelic form of Aethelred), Last Abbot of Dunkeld, who himself was the eldest of the four royal sons of Malcolm III (whose father was Duncan I, mentioned above, heir of the Royal line collateral to the Clan Duff) by his second wife, St. Margaret, a daughter of the Saxon King of England (Duncan II, son of Malcolm III by an earlier marriage, was the ancestor of the famous "MacWilliam" claimants."

Continuing on page 111:

Eth seems to have been debarred from the throne, which could have been because of a blemish (a taboo) or perhaps because he was already an Abbot. [page 112] He was nonetheless the first earl of Fife, probably in right of his wife. His sons included Angus, King of Moray (killed 1130), and also Duff, Malcolm and Gillecoimded. These sons had a number of important inheritances to consider. There was the Kingship of Moray, and also the chiefship of the Clann Duff, and in the male-line, also the senior descent of, or position of precedence within, the royal Kindred of St. Columba in Scotland. The descendants of Duff (who predeceased his father Eth) took the latter two, as the senior line, while the descendants of Malcolm and Gillecomded "MacEth" threw in their lot with the Moray-men, whose Gaelic laws would prefer the succession of the living brothers of their king, Angus, over his living nephews, the descendants of Duff. On the death of Eth (Aedh), the Moray-men rose under King Angus and his brother Malcolm MacEth (Mac Aedh) in an attempt to put Angus on the throne of the Scots (as a son of the Abbot-Earl Eth, and as representative of the dispossessed Clan Duff). This was a reaction in part to the Normanizing influence at the Scottish court of David I, and in fact they were defeated and Angus killed by David's Norman mercenaries. Malcolm (called "Jarl" or ruler of Moray by the Norwegians) married a daughter of Somerled of the Isles, and carried on the struggle until one of his sons, Donald MacAedh, was captured by the forces of King Malcolm IV in 1156."

Continuing on page 112:

"At this point Malcolm became nominally reconciled with the King of Scots, and was made Earl of Ross, a post he held until his death in 1168. His grandson, Kenneth MacAedh, made a final attempt at the crown of the Scots in 1215, but was defeated and beheaded by the ancestor of the Ross clan, who subsequently became Earl of Ross (see Chapter IV). During these struggles, in about 1163, King Malcolm IV attempted to deprive Malcolm MacAedh of the earldom of Ross in order to give it to his own foreign brother-in-law, the Count of Holland (many knightly Flemings had already settled in Moray). Accordingly, the King transported many of the Moraymen extramontanas Scociae, that is, beyond the mountains of Scotland into Caithness, which was still under Norse control (Moncrieffe 145). The Jarl of Orkney and Caithness at the time was Harold, son-in-law of Earl Malcolm MacAedh.

"It is in the extreme northwest of Scotland, in the district of Strathnaver in western Caithness, that the later MacAedh chiefs appear in the early 13th century, and here the MacAedh chiefs gave rise to a very important clan, later known as the Clann Aodha or MacKays (Mac Aodha, earlier Mac Aedh), whose chiefs held Strathnaver for many centuries. They were also known as the Clan Morgan, Morgan having been a favorite name in the royal house of Moray. They adopted their current arms in the seventeenth century to reflect their traditional kinship with the Forbes clan, but their original arms were blue stars on silver, with a hand in chief, that is, the Royal arms and colors of the Kingdom of Moray, surmounted by a hand symbolizing "true family." They also share the "butcher's broom" plant badge (a symbol of tribalism) with their successors in the Kingdom of Moray, the Murrays and [page 113] Sutherlands. A branch went early to Ireland as gallowglasses (see under O'Crowley), the name being Anglicized there as MacCoy."

Continuing on page 113:

Duff mac Eth himself had two sons, Constantine MacDuff, second Earl of Fife, and Gillemichael MacDuff, third Earl of Fife (ca.1133). From Gillemichael are descended the later earls of Fife (which earldom they held "by the Grace of God," allodially, and not by feudal charter from the King of Scots), allies of the kings of Scots of the line of David I. As descendants of Eth, first Earl of Fife, they bear as a coat of arms the Royal Arms of the Kings of Scots undifferenced, that is, with the "Royal Tressure" (double flory counterflory) that marks the arms of the line of King David I, younger brother of Eth. This marks the heraldic seniority of their line to that of the kings of Scots themselves, as per Norman practice.

"These earls were the chiefs of Clan MacDuff, a clan-name combining the sense of "Clan Duff" and "Clan (Gillemichael) MacDuff." As the "senior" kindred and also as the heirs of the Sacred Family of Dunkeld, these earls held the most honored position of precedence in Scotland, an almost sacred position born of their lineage. The County of Fife is still referred to as the Kingdom of Fife, and the Earl's Kindred were legally accountable under a special code of ancient Scots law known as "the Law of Clan MacDuff," which meant that they could literally "get away with murder" (for a fee, and if they could first make it to the sanctuary cross of MacDuff near Abernethy in Strathearn). The earls of Fife held rich lands in the Lowlands of Fife, Stirlingshire, East Lothian and Midlothian, and these Lowland tracts were the chief seat of their power, which was centered in Fife. Nonetheless they also held wide lands in the Highlands of Perthshire, Banffshire, Inverness-shire and Moray."

End

Okay. Set against that Wall of Text that the site which is *actually studying the Dunfermline of Malcolm III's time and after* (http://www.royaldunfermline.com/)
cites a death-and-burial date for Ethelred of Dunkeld of 1098 http://www.royaldunfermline.com/Resources/royal_sepulchre.pdf or at latest 1105 (somewhat bombastic research paper: http://www.royaldunfermline.com/Resources/royal_tombs.pdf).

Since they are *in* Dunfermline and have ready access to the tombs and all, you'd think they'd have some inside information.

Now add that "Constantinus comes" was still witnessing charters as late as 1128. http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/SCOTTISH%20NOBILITY.htm#_Toc359671980

Now add that *NO* charter signed or witnessed by Aed/Heth/Beth/Head *ever* mentions *any* relationship to the Royal family whatsoever.

Now remember that Dorothy Dunnett cut herself with Occam's Razor when she came up with the theory that Thorfinn Sigurdarson of Orkney and Macbeth mac Findlaech were the same person (and that so were Gruoch and Ingibjorg Finnsdottir!).

Justin: do we have any "hard" evidence (charters, *anything*?) for the existence of this "Duff macEth" besides the "need" to "explain" a LATE derivation for "Clan MacDuff"? (Notice that Cairney is trying to have his cake and eat it too: the Clan MacDuff "descends from Gillemichael mac Duff", but "the significance of the name Duff (Dubh) goes back to the line of Duff, King of Albany in 967, whose descendants' patrimony was in Fife (the "kingdom" of Fife)".

That's called trying to square the circle, or reconcile two conflicting traditions. And considering that a "Constantinus" explicitly witnessed a charter as "Comes de Fyf" in the 1090s....

It was in *precisely* the period we are arguing over that the Scottish "mac" transitioned from literally "son of" to the more general "descendant of", partly (IMHO) because the locution "mac meic...." (son of son/descendant of), well attested in Ireland and also found in Scotland prior to this period, was so cumbersome. (The Irish ditched it for "Ua" or "Ui", which eventually became the familiar O'; the Scots were more...economical. ;-)

I enjoy demolishing old myths. It's a big part of what I do. The trick is to know when you've driven a stake through the heart and when you've merely drawn blood.

What I see here is a mishmash of "counter evidence" that's worse than the original, accompanied by a good deal of sleight of hand and misdirection.

If "RoyalDunfermline" is correct (and presumably they have the records), then Ethelred of Dunkeld died either before or shortly after the year 1100 - and *cannot* be the same person as the Aed/Heth/Beth/Head who was witnessing charters until c. 1130.

I think that's the strongest argument against their being the same person. :-)

Jacqueli, sorry to disappoint but I'm not supporting the traditional line. Following my earlier metaphor, Maven has definitely "drawn blood". I just don't think the beast is dead yet ;)

Maven, I agree. If there is good evidence to support a death date of 1098 or 1105, then that particular piece of the story would have to be reconsidered.

However, this date is one of the sleights of hand I'm complaining about. It's a very common mistake in medieval genealogy to create a circular argument in this form -- he must have died before XXXX because he disappears from the records after that date, so he can't be the same person as this other guy who appears in the records a few years later.

Absent an actual source, my first thought is that the date has been extrapolated. Perhaps they got it from that "somewhat bombastic research paper". It's meaningless unless we can see the basis.

Actually, the "bombastic research paper" is the outlier with a late date of 1105. Most of their other materials agree on 1098, though they don't explain how they arrived at it.

Findagrave.com mashes Ethelred up with his older brother Edward and ASS-umes that he was killed at Alnwick along with his father and older brother (BAD ASS-umption, as he certainly survived at least long enough to assist with conveying his mother's body to Dunfermline and seeing it interred there).

Ethelred is the least-known of the six sons of Malcolm and Margaret, and he is all too easily confused with the three of his brothers whose names also started with "Ed-" (Edward, Edmund and Edgar), not to mention relatives (and non-relatives) whose names start with "Aed(h)".

Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, Volume 26, pp. 104-113, has an article on Ethelred, and among the more useful conclusions are 1) that he was the *third* son of Malcolm and Margaret (other guesses ranged from second to sixth) and 2) that he was at his mother's bedside as she was dying.

This poses the question of why, if he was older than Edgar (who supposedly was the messenger who brought the news of the disaster at Alnwick), was he not with his father's army?

Did he have some disability that excluded him not only from the succession but from martial activity?

Was he as religious-minded as his mother and intending to enter the Church (if he had not already done so)?

Was he Margaret's favorite son and did she specifically request his presence as a comfort in her last illness?

Was it some combination of these factors?

Link: https://books.google.com/books?id=-x8nAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA111&lpg...

Wow Justin, thanks for all the work that must have taken. I always feel better when we have two scholarly arguments on record to weigh up. I think there is some intellectual work to be done here before we proceed.

And Maven and Jaqueli - it's so great that you're doing just that. I'm going to have to be the one who debates it out by myself while you're all asleep. Not half as much fun :-)

When we finish getting *this* mess sorted out, there's a worse one involving the descendants of David I - complicated by some Deathlocked profiles. :-O

Oh happy day ;-/

I'm a little confused! I don't believe that I had entered more than one Aethelred I of Wessex back in my family in 2003. This info came from Wiki. So, this info that I encountered through Ancestory, Family Search, and others besides Wiki. Is these sites bogus with wrong information? Can you direct me to the other entries that I had made that has AEthelred? I am very interested in making sure that I have the right data.

Respectfully,

Ken

Hello Kenneth. You and 60 other people entered him on your trees. But remember that Geni is one single world tree - so they all get merged together.
we're just sorting out the latest merge ins so that it represents the best of the info we all have. Come and help: it's like a great big detective game :-)

On the Question of Ethelred, Lay Abbot of Dunkeld's STATUS AS EARL OF FIFE: I've copied the pertinent bits of this conversation to the Discussion with that topic.
Please see: http://www.geni.com/discussions/151559?msg=1056546

This is so that it doesn't get lost for posterity, and also so we can view and decide on the argument as a totality.

I don't think so Jacqueli. All I see is a link to an internet copy of the Annals of Ulster. I doubt you can write notations on it.

Something changed between Crinan and Ethelred, and the something was Queen Margaret's "Romanization" of the Scottish church. She was brought up in Hungary, where there was tremendous religious fervor, and she brought it to Scotland with her and tried to make her new home more like the place she grew up. That included tightening the rules and changing certain feast days to conform to Roman practice.

Ethelred, moreover, was exposed to all this - as were his brothers and sisters, but (if the wording of that charter is any indication) he went well beyond them in religiosity. While the wording is more or less formulaic, it is also remarkably and repetitively fulsome - none of his sibs went on at *that* length about how cool it was to be giving something to the Church.

*Everybody* rewrote history in favor of their own ancestors/society - it's been going on since the invention of writing. (And before then it was retelling the old family legends with a slant to favor the current audience, so it's probably as old as speech. ;-)

It's a bit harder to do nowadays, with the sheer amount of information and innovative tools available.

Looked through it *carefully*, and it has nothing on the Ethelred question, or for that matter the identity of "Malcolm MacHeth/Macbeth/(Alaxandair?). Couple of confirmative notes on things everybody already agrees on.

Jacqueli Charlene Finley and Private User did you put jacqueli on time out or something? I can't message her instead I get contact profile mannager about her? I wanted her opinion on somthing else entirely but now can't contact her...

I'm not a Curator, I can't do anything like that.

ok just wondering cause instead of send this person a message i get contact profile managers on her page... just currious