scottish royal follow-up

And another thing about the royal family tree. You may have noticed that Henry VII’s daughter, Margaret Tudor, married King James IV of Scotland. This means that using the power of the internet I find that I can trace that line back directly through his father, James III (1451/1452 – June 11, 1488), then through his father, James II (October 16, 1430 – August 3, 1460) – take a look at the picture at that link and you’ll understand how I got my dashing physique – then through his father, you guessed it, James I of Scotland (December 10, 1394 – February 21, 1437). He seems to have had an amazingly eventful life, to say the least.

James the First’s father was Robert III of Scotland (c. 1340 – April 4, 1406), who was eldest son of King Robert II (March 2, 1316 – April 19, 1390). Robert II wasn’t the son of a king – he was the sole son of Walter Stewart, 6th High Steward of Scotland (1293 – 9 April 1326), who fought on the Scottish side at the Battle of Bannockburn, and Marjorie Bruce (December, 1296 – March 2, 1316), daughter of King Robert I of Scotland (11 July 1274 – 7 June 1329), also known as Robert the Bruce.

If you like you can keep following the wikipedia links further and further back in time, for example David of Scotland (c. 1144 – 17 June 1219) Earl of Huntingdon; Duncan I of Scotland (d. 14 August 1040), upon whom King Duncan in Shakespeare’s Macbeth is based; Donald II, King of the Picts in the late 9th century, nicknamed as a violent madman, and killed in battle at Dunnottar, just down the road from where my mother lives now.

The furthest back I managed to trace from the links was Kenneth I of Scotland – Cináed mac Ailpín if you prefer to be Scottish (after 800 – 13 February 858). From the wikipedia article:

he was king of the Picts and, according to national myth, first king of Scots. Cináed’s undisputed legacy was to produce a dynasty of rulers who claimed descent from him. Even though he cannot be regarded as the father of Scotland, he was the founder of the dynasty which ruled that country for much of the medieval period.

Before that it gets a bit confused, as you would expect with a lot of middle ages legend mixed with history. I would guess that having Viking marauders around would confuse things somewhat also. This article explains further, suggesting that the trail may go back to legendary Irish kings such as Conaire Mor, waaaay back in the second century BC.

I don’t know about you, but my head’s reeling somewhat from all that. It’s pretty crazy to think that there was all that historical skullduggery going on, which eventually lead to so many ancestors descendants, one of whom is now sitting in a room in Minneapolis.

2 Responses to “scottish royal follow-up”

  1. Layclerk says:

    ..all that historical skullduggery going on, which eventually lead to so many ancestors, one of whom is now sitting in a room in Minneapolis..

    But I’m afraid, my liege, that you may have confused ancestors with descendants. Although I suppose one could interpret it as you meaning it all led to ancestors of Toby and one of them, you, is sitting in Minneapolis. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt! (tugs forelock in deferential manner) :-)

  2. Hmm, fair point on that comment. I was clearly exhausted after several hours of research.

Leave a Reply