Text of a charter of RUAIDHRI MAC RAGHNAILL.

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Banks, Steven

Text of a charter of RUAIDHRI MAC RAGHNAILL.

Legg inn av Banks, Steven » 13 apr 2006 22:12:02

Hello all,

I've been a reading lurker for some time and this is my first post, so I apologize for anything pedantic or redundant in advance.

The text of a charter of Ruaidhri mac Raghnaill meic Somhairlidh, printed as an appendix to Duncan and Brown's
Argyll and the Isles in the Earlier Middle Ages, shows Ruaidhri granting lands to the church of St. John in Kintyre
and is dated, by Duncan and Brown, only as "probably before 1222". The text identifies Ruaidhri as
Rochericus Reginaldi filius domini de Kyntyre, that is 'Roderick (Ruaidhri) son of Reginald (Raghnall) lord of Kintyre.'
(Duncan and Brown, p. 219, Appendix III).

W.D.H. Sellar (Sellar p. 201), and more recently, Noel Murray (Murray, p. 291, note 25) have used this to state
that Ruaidhri is styling himself 'Lord of Kintyre', but if the Latin case endings are indeed correct, wouldn't 'domini' be
describing 'Reginaldi'? Sellar even emends the text in his article from 'domini' to 'dominus'. Duncan and Brown make
no comment on the form of the title, merely stating that "Roderick, however, twice appears in the charters of the
early 13th century as holding land in Kintyre..." (Duncan and Brown, p. 200)

Shouldn't this be read 'Ruaidhri, the son of Raghnaill lord of Kintyre' instead of 'Ruaidhri, the son of Raghnaill, lord of Kintyre',
i.e. that at the time of the recording of the charter that it was Raghnall who was designated 'lord of Kintyre' and not his son Ruaidhri?
If true, I don't think the assumption can be made that Raghnall was alive at the time of the
recording of the charter, he may or may not have been - there's no reason he couldn't be described as
'lord' (i.e. previoulsy) even if he were dead. Therefore, couldn't the text be interpreted to read 'Ruaidhri,
the son of Raghnaill (current, or previous) lord of Kintyre' and have Ruaidhri granting lands without holding titular authority?

If Raghnall was alive - why is he not the benefactor?

If Raghnall was dead, who had become 'lord of Kintyre' after his death if not Ruadhri? Was it his brother
Domhnall; contrary to the theory that Domhnall did not hold Kintyre until after the royal expeditions of the early 1220's?

Any thoughts?

Steve

Sources:

Duncan, A.A.M. and Brown, A.L. 'Argyll and the Isles in the Earlier Middle Ages', PSAS, vol. xc (1956-7) p. 192-219.

Murray, Noel 'Swerving from the Path of Justice: Alexander II's Relations with Argyll and the Western Isles, 1214-1249', in The Reign of Alexander II, 1214-1249, R. Oram (ed.), Brill, 2005 p. 285-305.

Sellar, W.D.H 'Hebridean Sea Kings: The Successors of Somerled, 1164-1316', in Alba: Celtic Scotland in the Medieval Era, R. McDonald and E. Cowan (eds.), East Linton, 2000 p. 187-218.

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»