This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tombstone
editMcDonald (The Kingdom of the Isles, p187) notes that a tombstone, inscribed "Here lies the body of Angusius, son of Lord Angusius MacDonald of Islay", is sometimes attributed to Angus Og but must refer to a later man. He cites Late medieval monumental sculpture in the West Highlands, by Bannerman and Steer. I think the stone must be the one pictured in The Clan Donald v1 p102-103, which is said there to be inscribed: Hic jacet corpus Angusii filii Domini Angusii Mac Domhnill de Ila. So, I've removed it from the article and placed it here.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 09:51, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- Could it be this Angus Og MacDonald (d.1615)? Regards Newm30 (talk) 20:07, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
TOMBSTONE RE-ATTRIBUTION TO ANGUS OG, 2013. On 5 Dec 2013, Historic Environment Scotland (HES), re-attributed the 700 year historically identified graveslab no. 150 at Iona, back to it's rightful identity, Angus Og, died c. 1318. The RCAHMS 1977 had incorrectly removed it's historic association with Angus Og and wrongly attributed it to an unproven, impossible entity. This 2013 decision was based on the research of Ian Macdonnell and approved by Peter Yeoman, Head of Cultural Heritage. Two points (out of many reasons) that proved the RCAHMS incorrect, and are easy to explain, are that the inscription on this graveslab spelt Islay as "YLE" (eg, not "ILA" as above). "YLE" had stopped being used permanently as the spelling after 1476 (5 extant seals of Lord John II provide proof) and "YLA" became the standard. It was therefore impossible to be RCAHM's only other choice, as he would have died well after that date - if he had existed. Secondly, the inscription is in Lombardic "script" and this had been replaced with Black Letter script at the time of RCAHMS's postulated person's death.
THERE WAS ONLY TWO ‘CHOICES’ OVER A 200 YEAR PERIOD. RCAHMS ADMITTED :- “there is no certain reference to a son of Angus (Master of the Isles) called Angus”. In fact, there is none whatsoever. The Royal charter of 1476 to Lord John II (Regrant after 1st forfeiture) shows no son in the succession plan and lands to “be held… by his (Lord John II’s) natural son Angus Master whom failing”… then to his (John II’s) other natural son John [“III”]. If Angus Master had had a son, legitimate or ‘natural’, he would have been included . He was approx. 30 y.o. and had not produced an heir.
In addition, the much later nebulous non-entity (postulated) son of Angus Master that Steer & Bannerman selected because they were misled by earlier mistakes, would never have even been buried in the "royal chantry chapel” of St Oran's which was reserved as the mortuary house for the exclusive use of the Lords of the Isles - ie, as per Angus Og.
Sources :- Credits on the back of the 'Official Iona Abbey Guidebook' include Ian MacDonnell's website. There is a letter from Stephen Duncan, Director Of Commercial & Tourism, HES, of 5 Dec 2013, which confirms this decision and a new sign was placed next to slab no.150 in the cloister of Iona Abbey to promote and publicise the re-attribution. Photos will be attached if possible. (PS : this is my first attempt at Wiki and sorry if its not done correctly. (my email is - imacdonn@bigpond.net.au). Website :- https://www.ionaabbeyandclandonald.com/angus-ogs-graveslab-no-150---savior-of-the-bruce.html
I Macca (talk) 10:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC) __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mother's Identity
editAccording to the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy, the only reference to Angus' mother is James Balfour Paul's Scots Peerage. You can see the mention on page 34 of Volume 5. As FMG notes, there is no primary source cited, hence the claim is suspect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iron0037 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC)