A trip to St. Andrews is not complete for those who are interested in early medieval history without a trip to see a magnificent Pictish monument which is on display in the Cathedral museum. The monument, known as the St Andrews Sarcophagus, was discovered in 1833 and reassembled in 1922. Initially covered by some sort of a roof, it has been suggested that it was built to contain human remains, possibly those of a noted individual. Large parts of three of its sides have survived, with the carvings on the one remaining long side being of most interest. These, as seen in the picture, show a hunt scene, with two main characters. One, on horseback, looks like they are being attacked by some sort of beast – perhaps a leopard – while the other, on foot, is chasing deer and surrounded by hounds. To the right of this scene is the figure of a man killing a lion by ripping its jaws apart. This man is usually identified as the Biblical King David, who is often associated with the Christianised Pictish kings.

This in turn has led to speculation that the Sarcophagus was designed to be the resting place (if in fact it really was a monument which interred someone’s remains) of Onuist I, who died in 761, although it is also possible that it represents the later King Onuist II, who died in 834. The Irish Annals suggest that the first monastery at St Andrews was established during the reign of Onuist I (Note 1) but it could be that he had the Sarcophagus built for his religious predecessor and apparent ally, Nechtan. Archaeologists have suggested that the Sarcophagus was built sometime in the century after 750.

Over the next few weeks (or, more likely, months) I’ll be looking at the Pictish Civil Wars which began in 724, a series of battles and political alliances which resulted in the Picts gaining dominance in the north of Britain. This would in turn create the conditions which would lead to the formation of Scotland in the following century and would ironically begin the slow journey to the disappearance of the Picts as an independent people.

As an introduction, I want to look at the origins of the first King Onuist who would come to play a major part in those wars and (spoiler alert) be the ultimate victor.

Onuist map Uurguist is possibly the name he called himself. The Scots seem to have known him as Óengus mac Fergusso. The modern Anglicized version of his name would be Angus, son of Fergus.

He is first mentioned in the Irish Annals in the year 728:

• Bellum Mónidchroibh inter Pictores inuicem, ubi Oenghus uictor fuit (Annals of Ulster 728.4: “The battle of Moncrieff between the Picts themselves, in which Aengus was victor).
• Cath Monaidh Craebi iter Picardachaib fein .i. Aengus ⁊ Alpine (Annals of Tigernach 728.4: The Battle of Moncrieff among the Picts, that is Angus and Elpin)

Other sources link him to the Irish royal dynasty known as the Eóganachta. This was a family which dominated much of southern Ireland (around Munster) during the 6^th to the 10^th centuries and which dated back to the legendary 4^th century figure of Conall Corc. The story goes that Conall travelled to Pictland and hooked up with the daughter of a Pictish King. The romance produced a son known as Coirpre Cruithnechán (the second word means “the little Pict”) and, according to an 11^th Century Manuscript (known as MS Rawlinson B502):

Cairpre Cruithnecháin a quo Éoganacht Maigi Dergind i n-Albae .i. dia rabi Óengus rí Alban. (“from Coirpre Cruithnechán came (the descendants, known as) the Eóganachtan Maige Gerginn in Alba,(including) Angus, king of Alba”).

This could lead neatly into a discussion on the various names used for Picts (such as Cruithne), Scotland (Alba) and even some Pictish territories (Gerginn) – but that will form part of a future post.

Whether any of this is true is probably immaterial to modern history, but what is not in doubt – as we shall see – is the influence Onuist/Oengus/Angus would have over the area now encompassing Scotland and northern England in the first half of the 8^th century.

One final thing to note.

In the year 731, Bede was finishing his history of the English people, just at the time the Pictish Civil Wars were ending. He wrote:

“At this time, the nation of the Picts are at peace with the English and rejoice in the unity of peace and truth with the entire Catholic church.” (Note 2)

However, things were about to change. The Picts were perhaps at peace with one another, but Bede’s work has some snippets added after his death, and the entry for the year 761 says: 

“Óengus, king of the Picts, died. From the beginning of his reign right to the end he perpetrated bloody crimes, like a tyrannical slaughterer.” (Note 3)

It seems that the after the strife in Pictland, the ultimate unity of the various groups who have come to be known as Picts allowed their king to become the most dominant political and military figure in northern Britain, much to the irritation of the English, the Scots and the Britons. Can it in fact be argued that, more than a century before Kenneth McAlpin, Onuist the Pict, was the first king of a united “Scotland”?

Notes

Note 1: The Annals of Ulster, for the year 747: “Mors Tuathalain abbatis Cinrigh Monai” (The death of Death of Tuathalán, abbot of Cinrigh Móna.) This is the old Gaelic name for the town (sometimes modernised as Kinrymont) containing the words for head or peninsula (ceann), king (ríg) and hill or moor (monahd). This is possibly an adaptation on an earlier Pictish name, such as Pennrimond.

Note 2: Pictorum quoque natio tempore hoc et foedus pacis cum gente habet Anglorum, et catholicae pacis ac ueritatis cum uniuersali ecclesia particeps existere gaudet. (HISTORIAM ECCLESIASTICAM GENTIS ANGLORUM: 5.23)

Note 3: Oengus Pictorum rex obiit, qui regni sui principium usque ad finem facinore cruento tyrannus perduxit carnifex; et Osuini occisus est. (BAEDAE CONTINUATIO)