Talk:Fergus of Galloway

Y-DNA

I think most of these theories on Fergus of Galloway are incorrect. Ferguson/Bruce lines appear to be R-L21+ and not related to Somerled or Norse. As you know Robert the Bruce claims Fergus was his great great grandfather. You can view these matches on Ysearch.com( CC7N8 ). If anything they seem to have an Irish signature. I believe that he was native Galwegian of possibly ancient Irish or Pict stock. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmccown (talk • contribs) 14:15, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Is this original research?

"One theory is that Fergus was descended from a great pedigree of Gall-Gaidhel kings, who might have been known as Clann Dubgaill, claiming descent from a certain Dubgall. Adding believability to this view is the fact that the chief branch of descendants of Somairle mac Gilla Brigte took the name MacDougall, while the cognate name MacDouall was popular in Galloway. However, since the Argyll name comes only from after Fergus' time, this theory cannot be accepted."

In the above, who says "this theory cannot be accepted"? The author or a source? Why can it not be accepted? Just because a "name" comes after a certain time does not mean its roots did not originate earlier nor does it mean that the "name" did not exist prior to the accepted historical data. How much data was lost that may have substantiated the claim?

In this quote: "In light of the absence of other evidence, we have to accept that Fergus' father probably bore the name Somairle" is this a case of the absence of proof is proof of absence? (which by the way is false logic).

And here: "Writers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries had advanced the idea that Fergus was the childhood companion of David I at the Anglo-Norman court of King Henry I of England. This idea was given credence by his marriage to the daughter of King Henry I, his good relationship with David, and his friendliness towards Anglo-Norman culture.

In reality such a relationship is pure fiction. Fergus was almost certainly a native Galwegian."

Again, where is the reference. Why is it stated that this is pure fiction? How does the author demonstrate that it is pure fiction? As far as I can see it is an original assertion by the author.

I believe this article needs great scrutiny to assure that it is not original research. Sources need to be cited. It probably needs to be Wikified.

This article is very good because it reflects old fashioned knowledge very accurately. But is also very bad in not reflecting state of the art knowledge: Roel Zemel, The quest for Galiene. A study of Guillaume le Clerc's Arthurian Romance Fergus. Amsterdam etc. 2006. In this study nothing remains of this 'Scottish these'. I happen to be quite familiar with the subject. I wrote a study on the medieval Dutch translation/adaptation of the Roman de Fergus. Thesis University of Amsterdam 1989.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wthjmkuiper (talk • contribs) 22:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC) 

Copy Paste

Large sections of this are word for word the same as a publication called Carrick Genealogy which you can see on scribd.com. It also presents a point of view and doesn't cite sources, although the original article does. Paul S (talk) 16:29, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

That article on scribd was uploaded on 14 March 2010 whereas we've had the text much longer. With that in mind it seems very likely that they've copied from us rather than the other way around, especially as they reference us. I've therefore removed the tag. If you disagree with me doing so can I suggest listing at WP:CP as I'm pretty much the only person patrolling copypaste at the moment since the bot that automatically listed them at WP:CP broke a few months back. Dpmuk (talk) 20:11, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Death and aftermath - conclusions about relative influence

"Surviving sources reveal that he overshadowed his sons during his lifetime, with Uhtred witnessing only three charters and Gilla Brigte none at all." Little can really be drawn from this. Given that so very little of Galloway's own documentation from that period has survived century upon century of conflict, the random survival of four charters with one son rather than the other as a witness, is far too few instances to be informative. The two brothers each controlled a different part of Galloway after their father's death: it could as well be that this was anticipated, that they were called on to witness according to their presumed territorial sphere of influence, and that what we see is the survival of a few charters owing to geography as much as anything.

"The latter's [Gilla Brigte's] apparent exclusion from affairs of state could be relevant to the subsequent animosity between the siblings" It could equally be the reverse: it was Uchtred's son Lochlan/Roland who became pre-eminent, eventually, while Gillebrigte's son Duncan, held in England, was effectively sidelined. Lochlan would have had reason to want to expunge Gillebrigte's "fingerprint" from any documentation that came his way (eg confirming charters), given Gillebrigte's brutal assassination of Lochlan's father and given the possibility that Gillebrigte's son Duncan might try to assert a claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.187.191.38 (talk) 14:11, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fergus of Galloway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130412173927/http://www.vsnrweb-publications.org.uk/Saga-Book%20XXIX.pdf to http://www.vsnrweb-publications.org.uk/Saga-Book%20XXIX.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:59, 30 December 2016 (UTC)