The Legend of Holyrood Abbey
27 August 2010
The Legend of Holyrood Abbey At this time wes with the king ane man of singulare and devoit life, namit Alkwine, channon eftir the ordour of Sanct Augustine, quhilk wes lang time confessoure, afore, to King David in Ingland, the time that he wes Erle of Huntingtoun and Northumberland.
This religious man dissuadit the king, be mony reasonis, to pas to this huntis; and allegit the day wes so solempne, be reverence of the haly croce, that he suld gif him erar, for that day, to comtemplation than ony othir exersition.
Nochtheles, his dissuasionis litill avalit; for the king wes finalie so provokit, be inoportune solicitatioun of his baronis that he past, nochtwithstanding the solempnite of this day, to his hountis.
At last, quhen he we cumin throw the vail that lyis to the gret est fra the said castell, quhare now lyis the Cannongait, the stik past throw the wod with sic noyis and din of rachis and bugillis, that all the bestis were rasit fra thair dennis!
Now wes the king cumin to the fute of the crag, and all his moblis severit, heir and thair, fra him at thair game and solace; quhen suddenlie apperit to his sicht the farist hart that evir wes sene afore with levand creatour.
The novis and din of this hart rinnand, as apperit, with auful and braid tindis, maid the kingis hors so effrayit, that na renzeis micht hald him; bot ran, perforce, ouir mire and mossis, away with the king.
Nochtheles, the hart followit so fast, that he dang baith the king and his hors to the ground.
Than the king kest abak his handis betuix the tindis of this hart, to haif savit him fra the strak thariof; and the haly croce slaid, incontinent, in his handis.
The hart fled away with gret violence, and evanist in the same place quhare now springis the Rude Well.
The pepil, richt affrayitly, returnit to him out of all partis of the wod, to comfort him efter his trubill, and fell on kneis, devotly adoring the haly croce; for it was not cumin but sum hevinly providence, as weill apperis, for thair is na man can schaw of quhat mater it is of, metal or tre.
Sone eftir, the king returnit to his castel; and in the nicht following he was admonist, be ane vision in his sleip, to big ane abbay of channonis regular in the same place quhare he gat the croce.
Als sone as he was awalkinnit, he schew his vision to Alkwine, his confessour; and he na thing suspendit his gud mind, bot erar inflammit him with maist fervent devotion thairto.
The king, incontinent, send his traist servandis in France and Flanders, and brocht richt crafty masonis to big this abbay; syne dedicat it in the honour of this haly croce.
The croce remanit continewally in the said abbay, to the time of King David Bruce; quhilk was unhappely tane with it at Durame, quhare it is haldin yit in gret veneration.
BOECE
(Book 12, Ch. 16)
Posted at: 09:17 AM | Add Comment
Colleen Cahoon
said...
I posted this primarily for the 'link' it serves, linguistically.
There may be another reason to appreciate it as well, if indeed our Swansea Brickmaker Certain Ancestor, William Cahoone, truly descended from the Colquhoun Lairds of Luss, as so many of his descendants claim.
I am not so eager to presume that to be the case, as there is absolutely no proof... what so ever.... as to the parents of that ancestor.
However, Gary Calder, has made a very intriguing and potential case scenario, to possibly explain why there would be no such documentation.... and at the same time support a theory that our William could very well be the illegitimate son of Sir John Colquhoun 1st Baronet of Nova Scotia, who had kidnapped his living wife's (Lilias Graham aka Lady Montrose's) younger sister, Catherine Graham, (sound familar?) and fled with her to London, England..
That abduction and the charges that followed ... ARE documented in Scotland..
I don't intend to go into all that, here, but... would like to mention that IF IT IS TRUE THAT OUR WILLIAM was the son of Sir John and Catherine, then... two other relationships can be mentioned..
1. Our William's eldest half-brother and first cousin (sound familiar?) would have been John Colquhoun, 19th of Luss, 2nd Baronet of Novia Scotia, who was if all that were not enough, also dubbed "The Black Cock", due to his dark complication. That John being of course the eldest and legitimate heir to the titles of Colquhoun, Luss, and the Baronet.
2. The younger brother of Lilias and Catherine was James Graham... Earl of Graham, but best known as the highly celebrated Marquis of Montrose, who was ....
(An extract from The Chiefs of Coquhoun and Their Country:).
"... hung in the market-place of Edinburgh, near the Cross, on 21st May 1650, after which his head was placed on the Tolbooth of that city, whilst his arms and legs were exposed to public view in the four principal towns of the kingdom, and his body, being put into a chest, was buried among malefactors in the Burrow Muir of Edinburgh.".
Young John, The Black Cock, aided in the retrieval of his Uncle's remains:
[An extract from The Chiefs of Coquhoun and Their Country:]
" The collected remains of Montrose lay in state in the Abbey Church of Holyrood House from Monday 7th Jan to Sat 11th May 1661, the day on which the public funeral was performed with a splendour and heraldic pomp rarely equalled, by carrying his remains from the Abbey Church of Holyrood House to that of St. Giles. The corpse was carried by fourteen Earls and the pall above the corpse was likewise sustained by twelve nobleman."
And so it is, that I thought the Legend of Holyrood Abbey might be of interest, to those of us who have not eliminated entirely, a potential descent from Sir John Colquhoun and his abducted sister-in-law, Catherine Graham, sister to the celebrated Marquis of Montrose.
Such a descent would not surprise me in the least... Afterall, our Cahoon Grandfather did the same thing... running off with a younger sister-in-law... leaving behind a wife and children... and my own father 'abducted' his sister-law....
Sigh... "IF I CAN" is not necessarily entirely noble... with or without 'titles'...
Posted 27 August 2010 08:44 AM
| Reply to this comment
|
|
|