Echmarcach mac Ragnaill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Echmarcach mac Ragnaill
Echmarcach mac Ragnaill.jpg
Echmarcach's name as it appears in the 16th-century manuscript of the Annals of Ulster, housed in the Bodleian Library at the University of Oxford.
Died 1064 or 1065
Place of death Rome
Issue Mór
Dynasty possibly Uí Ímair

Echmarcach mac Ragnaill was a mid 11th century Norse-Gaelic king who, at his height, ruled a kingdom which spanned the Irish Sea region, and included Dublin, at least part of the Isles (the Hebrides and Mann), and much of Galloway. The precise identity of Echmarcach's father, Ragnall, is uncertain. One possibility is that Ragnall was one of two early 11th century like-named rulers of Waterford. Another possibility is that Echmarcach's father was a particular early 11th century ruler of the Isles. If either of these identifications are correct, Echmarcach may have been a member of the Uí Ímair.

Echmarcach first appears on record in about 1031 or 1032, when he was one of three kings in northern Britain who submitted to Knútr Sveinnsson, King of Denmark, England, and Norway. Echmarcach is recorded to have ruled over Dublin from 1036–1038, and 1046–1052. After losing Dublin for the final time, he appears to have seated himself on Mann. About a decade later, in 1061, Echmarcach appears to have been expelled from Mann, and may have then fallen back into Galloway.

Echmarcach appears to have forged an alliance with the powerful Uí Briain. He may well have been the brother of Cacht ingen Ragnaill, wife of Donnchad mac Briain, King of Munster; furthermore, Echmarcach is recorded to have had a daughter who married one of Donnchad's Uí Briain kinsmen. Echmarcach's violent career brought him into bitter conflict with a branch of the Uí Ímair who had held Dublin periodically from the early 10th century. This branch was supported by the rising Uí Cheinnselaig, who finally drove Echmarcach out of Dublin (and likely Mann) once and for all.

In 1064, having witnessed much of his once expansive sea-kingdom fall into the hands of the Uí Cheinnselaig, Echmarcach accompanied (a then deposed) Donnchad upon a pilgrimage to Rome. Possibly aged about sixty-five at this point in his life, it was here that Echmarcach died, in either 1064 or 1065. On his death, an expatriate Irish monk appears to have styled Echmarcach "King of the Rhinns", in reference to what may have been his last holding, in Galloway.

Uncertain parentage[edit]

Some places named in the article.

The identity of Echmarcach's father, Ragnall, is uncertain. Modern scholars have offered evidence for several candidates.[1][note 1] One possibility is that Ragnall was a member of a late 10th- and early 11th century dynasty that ruled the Norse-Gaelic enclave of Waterford. Specifically, several scholars have argued that Ragnall was one of two Waterfordian rulers: Ragnall mac Ímair, King of Waterford (d. 1015 or 1018), or his like-named son, Ragnall mac Ragnaill, King of Waterford (d. 1035).[3][note 2] An alternative possibility is that Echmarcach belonged to a late 10th- and early 11th dynasty that ruled in the Isles (the Hebrides and Mann). Specifically, several scholars have argued that Echmarcach's father was: Ragnall mac Gofraid, King of the Isles (d. 1004 or 1005), son and possible successor of Gofraid mac Arailt, King of the Isles (d. 989).[9][note 3] As a descendant of either of the two aforementioned dynasties, Echmarcach may have been a member of the Uí Ímair.[note 4]

Submission to Knútr[edit]

Three kings: Máel Coluim, Mac Bethad, and "Iehmarc"[edit]

Echmarcach first appears on record in the first half of the 11th century, when he was likely one of the three kings who submitted to Knútr Sveinnsson, King of Denmark, England, and Norway (d. 1035).[16] The event was noted by the early 11th century Icelandic skald Sigvatr Þórðarson, in his Knútsdrápa.[17] Although the drápa does not name the kings who met with Knútr, it does indicate that the submission took place in Fife.[16] The contemporary Anglo-Saxon Chronicle also notes the submission. The "D" version of the chronicle records that, in 1031, Knútr went to Rome and soon after travelled to Scotland and received the submission of an unnamed Scottish king. The "E" version of the chronicle states that, in 1031, after his return from Rome, Knútr went to Scotland and received the submission of three kings named "Mælcolm", "Mælbæþe", and "Iehmarc".[18] These three names are attempts to render Gaelic personal names into Old English,[19] and almost certainly refer to: Máel Coluim mac Cináeda, King of Alba (d. 1034), Mac Bethad mac Findlaích (d. 1057), and Echmarcach respectively.[20][note 5]

Of the three kings, Máel Coluim was likely the most powerful, and it is possible that Mac Bethad and Echmarcach were underkings or clientkings of his.[22] Mac Bethad appears to have become Mormaer of Moray in 1032, after the slaying of his kinsman, Gilla Comgáin mac Máel Brigti, Mormaer of Moray (d. 1032).[23] Previous rulers of Moray are sometimes styled "King of Alba" by certain Irish annals,[24][note 6] which could explain why Mac Bethad was called a king when he met Knútr.[26] The chronology of Mac Bethad's accession to the mormaership could be evidence that the meeting with Knútr took place in 1032 rather than 1031.[27][note 7] The record of Echmarcach amongst Máel Coluim and Mac Bethad could indicate that he was, in some sense, a 'Scottish' ruler, and that his powerbase was located in the Isles.[28] Máel Coluim's influence in the Isles may be evidenced by the Prophecy of Berchán, which appears to indicate that he resided in the Isles for a time, specifically on Arran and Islay.[29] Further evidence may be contained within the Annals of Ulster and the Annals of Tigernach, which record the death of a certain Suibne mac Cináeda (d. 1034). These particular annals variously style Suibne "King of Gallgáedil"[30]—a term that can either refer to a Norse-Gaelic population group, or to the region of Galloway.[31] In fact, Suibne's patronym may be evidence that he was a brother of Máel Coluim. If the two were indeed brothers, Suibne may have been set up by Máel Coluim as a subordinate in an area of Scandinavian settlement.[32] The aforementioned record from the Prophecy of Berchán may be evidence that this region encompassed the lands surrounding Kintyre and the Outer Clyde.[33] The record could also be evidence that Máel Coluim was overlord of the Kingdom of the Isles.[34]

Possible motives for the submission[edit]

Some places named in the article.

The submission to Knútr may have been related to Máel Coluim's violent 1018 annexation of Lothian,[35] a region that likely encompassed an area roughly similar to the modern boundaries of Berwickshire, East Lothian, and possibly parts of Mid Lothian.[36] The substantial span of years between this conquest and Knútr's meeting, however, might suggest that there were other reasons.[37] There appears to be evidence that the violent regime change in Moray (which enabled Mac Bethad to assume the mormaership) prompted Knútr to meet with the kings. Echmarcach and Máel Coluim may thus have been bound to keep the peace with Mac Bethad's troubled lordship. Specifically, the aforementioned versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle record that Knútr met the kings in "Scotland", a region that likely refers to land north of Firth of Forth. Furthermore, the absence of the King of Strathclyde from the assembled kings, and the possibility that Echmarcach's powerbase was situated somewhere in the Isles beyond Kintyre (rather than in Galloway) could indicate that Knútr's main focus was on Moray.[38]

Knútr may have sought the submission of the kings in an attempt to protect his northern borders. Additionally, he may have attempted to prevent these kings from lending aid to potential Norwegian challengers.[39] Only a few years before, in 1028, Knútr seized control of Norway, after defeating Óláfr Haraldsson, King of Norway. Knútr proceeded to appoint his own nephew, Hákon Eiríksson (d. 1029 or 1030), as Earl of Norway, in the capacity of regent.[40] Unfortunately for Knútr, Hákon perished at sea in late 1029 or early 1030. About three years later, Knútr's rule was challenged by a certain Tryggvi Óláfsson.[41] The actions of Tryggvi are recorded within saga-tradition, which claims that Tryggvi was a son of Óláfr Tryggvason, King of Norway and a particular princess from Dublin.[42][note 8] In about 1033, Tryggvi arrived in Norway; and although he received considerable local support, he was nonetheless defeated by forces loyal to Knútr.[42]

Close connections between the rulers of Orkney and the family of Óláfr Haraldsson may well have posed a potential threat to Knútr.[44] The accord between Knútr and the three kings could have been a calculated attempt to disrupt the spread of Orcadian power, and an attempt to block possible Orcadian intervention into Norway.[45] Specifically, Knútr may have wished to curb the principal Orcadian, Þórfinnr Sigurðarson, Earl of Orkney. In fact, Þórfinnr appears to have been in open conflict with Mac Bethad.[46] This violence may be evidenced by (chronologically-suspect) saga-tradition, which appears to indicate that Mac Bethad and his father warred with Orcadian earls.[46][note 9] Saga-tradition may also indicate that Echmarcach and his family suffered from Þórfinnr's military advances.[49] For example, Orkneyinga saga states that, after Þórfinnr's consolidation of Orkney and Caithness[50]—an action that likely took place after the death of his brother Brúsi (d. 1030–1035)[51]—Þórfinnr was active in the Isles, parts of Galloway and Scotland, and even Dublin.[50] The saga also records that Brúsi's son, Rögnvaldr (d. 1046), arrived in Orkney at a time when Þórfinnr was "much occupied" with men from the Isles and Ireland.[52] Óláfs saga helga, preserved within Heimskringla, claims that Þórfinnr controlled a far-flung lordship which encompassed Orkney, Shetland, and the Hebrides; the same source also claims that Þórfinnr exerted power in Scotland and Ireland.[53] Further evidence of Þórfinnr's activities in the region may be found in Arnórr Þórðarson's Þórfinnsdrápa, preserved within Orkneyinga saga. The drápa relates that Þórfinnr raided throughout the Irish Sea region, as far south as Mann, and that he fought the English and "old Ragnall's family".[54]

It is possible that Knútr took other actions to contain Orkney. Evidence that Knútr installed Hákon as overlord of the Isles may be preserved within Ágrip af Nóregskonungasögum.[55] The historicity of this event is controversial, however, and Hákon's authority in the Isles is not attested in any other source.[56] Be that as it may, the author of the text states that Hákon had been sent into the Isles by Óláfr Haraldsson, and that Hákon ruled the region for the rest of his life.[57] After Hákon's parting from Norway, which appears to have taken place after Óláfr assumed the kingship there in 1016,[58] Hákon is known to have been in Knútr's service in England.[59] Hákon's death at sea (in 1029 or 1030) could thus have been directly related to the submission of the three kings.[60] If Hákon had indeed been the overlord of the Isles until his death, his demise may well have paved the way for Echmarcach's rise to power.[1] Knútr may thus have relied on Echmarcach to block the ambitions of the Orcadians, who may have attempted to renew their influence in the Isles following Hákon's death.[60]

Uí Briain alliance, and conquest of Dublin[edit]

Following his meeting with Knútr, Echmarcach appears to have allied himself with the Uí Briain,[61] the descendants of Brian Bóruma mac Cennétig, High King of Ireland (d. 1014).[62] In 1032, the Annals of Inisfallen record that Donnchad mac Briain, King of Munster married "Ragnall's daughter",[63] elsewhere identified as Cacht ingen Ragnaill (d. 1054),[64] who may well have been Echmarcach's sister.[65] At about the time of his marriage, Donnchad aspired to become High King of Ireland; and Echmarcach, with powerful fleets at his command, would have thus made an important ally.[39] Clear evidence of an alliance is preserved in the Banshenchas, which records that Echmarcach's daughter, Mór, was married to Tadc, son of Toirdelbach Ua Briain.[66][note 10] Annalistic evidence of an alliance is found after Echmarchac's floruit, well into the late 11th century; kinship between his descendants and the Uí Briain even led to the accession of one of Echmarcach's maternal grandson's to the kingship of the Isles, at about the turn of the 12th century.[note 11]

Men and women who may, or may not, descend from the same Ragnall. Pedigree 1 concerns Echmarcach's immediate descendants. Pedigree 2 concerns a possible sister (Cacht). Both pedigrees illustrate intermarriage with the Uí Briain. Pedigrees 3–5 concern a possible brother (Amlaíb), two possible nephews (Gofraid and Sitric), and possibly either sons or additional nephews (killed in 1087).

If Echmarcach was a son of Ragnall mac Gofraid, an alliance with the Uí Briain would have been a continuation of amiable relations with Echmarcach's father and grandfather, evidenced by various Irish sources.[39] For example, in 984, Ragnall's father is recorded to have combined forces with Brian Bóruma in a proposed attack on Dublin;[78][note 12] and Ragnall himself is recorded to have died in Munster, in 1005.[80][note 13] On the other hand, if Echmarcach and Cacht were descended from the Waterford dynasty, an alliance with the Uí Briain may have played a part in the conflict between the Uí Briain and the Uí Cheinnselaig.[84] The leader of the latter clan, Diarmait mac Máel na mBó, King of Leinster (d. 1072),[85] was Donnchad's main rival. While Donnchad appears to have aligned himself with Echmarcach's family, Diarmait appears to have backed the descendants of Amlaíb Cuarán, and certainly came into conflict with Echmarcach at a latter date.[84][note 14]

In 1036, Echmarcach replaced Amlaíb Cuarán's son, Sigtrygg Silkbeard, as King of Dublin.[90] The Annals of Tigernach,[91] and the Dublin Annals of Inisfallen specify that Sitric fled "overseas" when Echmarcach took control.[92] An alliance with Donnchad could explain Echmarcach's success at forcing Sitric from the kingship.[39] Although Donnchad and Sitric were maternal half-brothers, descended from Gormflaith ingen Murchada (d. 1030),[93] Donnchad's hostility towards Sitric is revealed by the record of a successful attack on Dublin, in 1026.[39] Echmarcach's seizure of Dublin occurred only a year after Knútr's death. There appears to be numismatic and annalistic evidence which indicates that, during Sitric's reign, Knútr and Sitric cooperated together in terms of trade and military actions in Wales. The relationship between Knútr and Echmarcach, however, appears to have been less amiable. In fact, it is possible that Echmarcach's submission to Knútr may have bound him from taking action against Sitric;[94] and that the confusion caused by Knútr's death may have enabled Echmarcach to seize control of the Irish Sea region.[1] If Echmarcach was a member of the Waterford dynasty, his action against Sitric may have been the continuation of the bitter conflict between Dublin and Waterford in the late 10th, and early 11th centuries.[95] If so, Sitric's expulsion may have been an act of vengeance for Sitric's slaying of Ragnall mac Ragnaill (then King of Waterford),[96] an event recorded within the Annals of the Four Masters,[97] and the Annals of Ulster, the year before.[98]

Little is known of Echmarcach's short reign in Dublin other than an attack on Skryne and Duleek, recorded in the Annals of the Four Masters, in 1037.[99] Although there is no direct evidence that Echmarcach controlled the Isle of Man at this point in his career, Sitric does not appear to have taken refuge on the island after his expulsion from Dublin. This seems to suggest that the island was outwith Sitric's possession, and may indicate that Mann had fallen into the hands of Echmarcach sometime before. In fact, it is possible that Echmarcach may have used the island to launch his takeover of Dublin.[100][note 15]

Loss and regain of Dublin, Manx numismatics, and possible actions in Wales[edit]

Silver coin and mixed hoards which can be dated from coins, found in regions of Scandinavian Scotland and Mann. The third peak, during the 1030s–1050s, may illustrate intense conflict in the Irish Sea region.[102]

Þórfinnr's military activities in the Irish Sea region may have contributed to Echmarcach's loss of Dublin, in 1038.[54] In this year, the Annals of Tigernach,[103] and the Dublin Annals of Inisfallen record that Ímar mac Arailt succeeded Echmarcach as King of Dublin,[92] indicating that Echmarcach was forced from the kingship.[104] Ímar may have been a descendant (possibly a grandson) of Amlaíb Cuarán,[105] and thus a close relative of the latter's son, Sitric,[106] whom Echmarcach drove from the kingship only two years before.[107] Ímar may have received some form of support from Knútr's son and successor in England, Harold Cnutsson, King of England (d. 1040). The latter was certainly in power when Ímar replaced Echmarcach;[108] and an association between Ímar and Harold could explain why the Annals of Ulster recorded the latter's death two years later.[109] Ímar's reign lasted only eight years. In 1046, the Annals of the Four Masters state that he was expelled by Echmarcach, who was then elected king by the Dubliners;[110] the Annals of Tigernach, on the other-hand, simply indicate that Echmarcach succeeded Ímar.[111][note 16] Echmarcach may well have controlled Mann throughout his second reign in Dublin.[114]

Silver hoards uncovered on Mann, dated by their coins to the years 1030s–1050s, may well be the by-product of the intense conflict wrought for control of the island.[102] At some point in the early 11th century, a mint may have functioned on Mann,[115] and coins which may have been minted on the island roughly coincide with Echmarcach's rule. These coins are very similar to those produced in Dublin, and may be evidence that Echmarcach attempted to harmonise the coinage utilised within his realm. The production of coins on Mann appears to be evidence of a sophisticated economy in the Isles.[116] In fact, the wealth and sophistication of commerce in Echmarcach's realm could in part explain why the battles for control of Dublin and the Isles were so bitter, and could explain Þórfinnr's possible presence in the region.[117]

During his second reign, Echmarcach may have been involved in certain military activities in Wales, allied with Gruffudd ap Rhydderch (d. 1055).[118] English and Welsh sources record that, in 1049, Gruffudd utilised Norse-Gaelic forces against his Welsh rivals and English neighbours. Specifically, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (the "B" and "C" versions), Brut y Tywysogion (the Peniarth MS 20 and Red Book of Hergest versions), and Brenhinoedd y Saeson indicate that a Norse-Gaelic fleet sailed up the River Usk and ravaged the surrounding region. The "D" version of the chronicle and English chronicler John of Worcester (fl. 1095–1140) state that Gruffudd and his Norse-Gaelic allies later surprised and routed the English forces of Ealdred, Bishop of Worcester (d. 1069).[119]

Downfall in Dublin and Mann[edit]

In 1052, Diarmait drove Echmarcach from Dublin.[120] The event is recorded within the Annals of the Four Masters,[121] the Annals of Tigernach,[122] the Chronicon Scotorum,[123] and the Dublin Annals of Inisfallen. These annalistic accounts indicate that, although Diarmait's conquest began with a mere raid upon Fine Gall, this action further escalated into the seizure of Dublin itself. Following several skirmishes fought around the town's central fortress, the aforementioned accounts record that Echmarcach fled "overseas", whereupon Diarmait assumed the kingship.[113] With Diarmait's conquest, Norse-Gaelic Dublin ceased to be an independent power in Ireland;[124] and when Diarmait and his son, Murchad, died about twenty years later, Irish rule had been exercised over Fine Gall and Dublin in a degree unheard of before.[125] About a decade later, in 1061, Murchad (then ruler of Dublin) launched a successful seaborne invasion of Mann.[126] The Annals of the Four Masters,[127] the Annals of Tigernach,[128] and the Dublin Annals of Inisfallen record that, in consequence of this intrusion, a tax was collected from Mann, and a man called "Ragnall's son" was driven from the island.[129][note 17] The defeated son of Ragnall likely refers to Echmarcach;[130] and his flight from Mann appears to show that, after fleeing from Dublin in 1052, Echmarcach had been seated on the island.[131][note 18]

Magnús and Ælfgar[edit]

In 1055, after being outlawed for treason, English nobleman Ælfgar Leofricson (d. possibly 1062) fled from England to Ireland.[134] According to English sources, Ælfgar was strengthened by the Irish in the form of eighteen ships, and together with Gruffudd ap Llywelyn, King of Gwynedd and Deheubarth (d. 1063), invaded Herefordshire.[135][note 19] In 1058, English and Welsh sources indicate that Ælfgar (then Earl of Mercia) was again exiled from England, and that he proceeded to ally himself with Gruffudd and a Norse fleet.[137][note 20] The Annals of Tigernach indicate that the leader of this fleet was Magnús Haraldsson, son of Haraldr Sigurðarson, King of Norway, and record that Magnús' forces were composed of Orcadians, Islesmen, and Dubliners.[140] Although Ælfgar's Irish confederate of 1055 is not identified in any source, Ælfgar may well have been outfitted in Dublin, then ruled by Murchad (with Diarmait as overlord).[141] Likewise, since Diarmait's Leinstermen had driven Echmarcach from Dublin in 1052, and (likely) from Mann in 1061, Magnús' campaign of 1058, which utilised Islesmen and Dubliners, appears to have involved Diarmait as well.[142]

The prospect that Diarmait aided Ælfgar, however, is at odds with the understanding that Diarmait lent assistance to Ælfgar's enemies, the Godwinsons, in the years 1051/52 and 1066.[136] Furthermore, although Diarmait gained control of Mann by at least 1061, Echmarcach would have likely been overlord of at least parts of the Hebrides in 1058; since Magnús utilised Islesmen during his English campaign, it is conceivable that Echmarcach may have played a prominent part. If Echmarcach was indeed involved in the campaign, the enmity between him and Diarmait may suggest that the two were unlikely to have cooperated as allies. In fact, it is just possible that, in 1055, Ælfgar actually received aid not from Diarmait, but from Donnchad—Diarmait's enemy and Echmarcach's possible brother-in-law—who then controlled Norse-Gaelic enclaves of Limerick and possibly Waterford as well.[143] Be that as it may, the probability that Diarmait backed the cause of Ælfgar in 1058 (and the cause of Ælfgar's enemies in the years before and after) appears to be evidence of Diarmait's opportunistic nature.[144]

Pilgrimage and death in Rome[edit]

In 1064, Echmarcach seems to have gone upon a pilgrimage to Rome, accompanied by Donnchad.[145] Both men may have been elderly at the time of their long trek,[146] and soon afterwards both men appear to have died in the city.[147] Surviving sources give conflicting dates for Echmarcach's passing, and it is uncertain whether he died in 1064[148] or 1065.[149] The Annals of Inisfallen,[150] the Annals of Loch Cé,[151] and the Annals of Ulster indicate that he died in 1064.[152] The contemporary 11th-century Irish chronicler Marianus Scotus (d. 1082) recorded that Echmarcach died in 1065,[153] in a statement which suggests that Echmarcach and Donnchad travelled to Rome together.[154][note 21] If Echmarcach's father was indeed Ragnall mac Gofraid, and if Echmarcach had been born only a few years before his father's death, Echmarcach would have thus been about sixty-five when he himself died.[164]

Marianus' Latin account of Echmarcach's demise accords him the title "rex Innarenn".[165] This title may be a garbled form of the Latin "rex insularum", meaning "King of the Isles".[166] An alternate possibility is that it means "King of the Rhinns", in reference to the Rhinns of Galloway.[167] During this period of history, the latter region would have included not only the modern boundaries of the Rhinns, but also what is today the Machars; the entire region during Echmarcach's floruit would thus have stretched from the North Channel to Wigtown Bay, and would have likely encompassed an area similar to the modern boundaries of Wigtownshire.[168] Earlier in the century, the entire region may have formed part of Sitric's realm,[169] and various Irish and Welsh sources indicate that it may have been held by his son, Amlaíb mac Sitriuc (d. 1034).[170][note 22] If Echmarcach was indeed the son of Ragnall mac Gofraid, and succeeded his father sometime in the 1030s, Echmarcach may well have first seized control of the Rhinns when he began his domination of the Irish Sea region in 1036[1] (the year he first seized Dublin). On the other hand, if Echmarcach was in fact a native of what is today the south-west of Scotland, the title accorded him in 1065 could be evidence that, on the collapse of his once expansive kingdom, Echmarcach proceeded to entrench himself in the protection of his native home.[175]

Margaðr and Guðormr[edit]

Echmarcach has sometimes been identified as a certain Margaðr who appears in various mediaeval Norse sources. One such source is Haralds saga Sigurðarsonar, within Heimskringla.[176] The earliest account of Margaðr occurs in the 12th century Acta sancti Olavi regis et martyris.[177] According to the aforementioned saga, Margaðr was a King of Dublin, and a close friend of a winter resident of Dublin, one Guðormr Gunnhildarson, nephew of Norwegian kings Óláfr Haraldsson and Haraldr Sigurðarson. Late one summer, the saga relates that Margaðr and Guðormr took part in particularly successful raid on Wales. As their loot of silver was being assessed, Margaðr demanded Guðormr's share, forcing the latter to fight for his portion of the plunder. Although outnumbered sixteen ships to five, the saga relates that, through the miraculous intervention of God and Guðormr's saintly uncle (Óláfr Haraldsson), Guðormr was able to defeat and slay Margaðr and all his followers in the ensuing battle.[178]

The fateful encounter between Margaðr and Guðormr is sometimes dated to 1052, in the belief that Margaðr was Echmarcach, and that the event must have taken place at the conclusion of Echmarcach's second reign in Dublin.[179] In fact, the Old Norse personal name Margaðr is a form of the Gaelic personal name Murchad;[180][note 23] and the accounts of Margaðr likely refer to Echmarcach's nemesis Murchad, rather than Echmarcach himself.[182] Although the saga claims that a thankful Guðormr donated a portion of his silver to the shrine of his saintly uncle at Nidaros,[183] it is unlikely that any church would have accepted property known to have been looted from Christians. Guðormr's hoard of silver may have actually been the tax that Murchad collected from Mann, in 1061, on the expulsion of "Ragnall's son" (who was likely Echmarcach).[184][note 24]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ One identification, propounded by the mid 19th century scholar James Todd, is that Echmarcach's father was: Ragnall mac Amlaíb (d. 980), son of Amlaíb Cuarán, King of Dublin and Northumbria (d. 980 or 981).[2]
  2. ^ Scholars who have argued for a Waterford connection include: Seán Duffy,[4] and Richard Oram.[5] Duffy called the descendants of Echmarcach's immediate ancestor the "Uí Ragnaill",[6] and "the Mac Ragnaill family",[7] while Oram called them the "meic Ragnaill".[8]
  3. ^ Scholars who have argued for descent from Ragnall mac Gofraid include: Cólman Etchingham,[10] Benjamin Hudson,[11] and Alex Woolf.[1] Hudson called Echmarcach's family "the Haraldsson dynasty",[12] named after Ragnall mac Gofraid's paternal-grandfather.
  4. ^ Gofraid mac Arailt's father was possibly Aralt mac Sitric, King of Limerick, great-grandson of the eponymous ancestor of the Uí Ímair.[13] An alternate possibility is that Gofraid mac Arailt's father was a certain 10th century Danish chieftain from Normandy, unrelated to the Uí Ímair.[14] The Waterford dynasty descended from Ímar, King of Waterford; although his parentage is unknown, the names borne his kin, and the known events surrounding the dynasty itself, suggest that it was likely a branch of the Uí Ímair.[15]
  5. ^ Echmarcach/Iehmarc is sometimes mistakenly identified as a figure who appears in mediaeval and early modern genealogies concerning Clan Donald. The confusion is due to a 19th-century misreading of one such pedigree in the Book of Ballymote. This misreading gives "Imergi" instead of what actually reads "Indergi".[21]
  6. ^ In 1020, Mac Bethad's father, Findláech mac Ruaidrí, Mormaer of Moray, is styled "King of Alba" within the Annals of Ulster. In 1029, Mac Bethad's kinsman, Máel Coluim mac Máel Brigti, Mormaer of Moray, is styled "King of Alba" within the Annals of Tigernach.[25]
  7. ^ There are several explanations for the seemingly contradicting dates of Mac Bethad's accession to the mormaership (in 1032), and the meeting (in 1031). For example, Knútr may have actually returned from Rome in 1031, only to have arrived in Scotland in 1032; alternately, Gilla Comgáin's death may have actually occurred in 1031, but was only recorded in 1032.[27]
  8. ^ Recorded in: Óláfs saga helga, a saga preserved within Heimskringla.[43]
  9. ^ Recorded in: within: Orkneyinga saga.[47] Further evidence preserved within this particular source may be the account of the warring between Þórfinnr and a certain Karl Hundason.[48]
  10. ^ The Banshenchas states that the couple had three sons and a daughter: Donnchad, Domnall, Amlaíb, and Bé Binn.[67]
  11. ^ An alliance with Echmarcach's family could account for the rapidity in which the Uí Briain attempted to regain control of Dublin and Mann immediately following the death of Diarmait mac Máel na mBó, in 1072. That year, Toirdelbach Ua Briain seized Dublin, and appears to have handed it over to a certain Gofraid mac Amlaíb meic Ragnaill, who may well have been Echmarcach's nephew.[68] The following year, the Annals of Ulster record that Mann was invaded by two members of the Uí Briain and a certain Sitric mac Amlaíb (d. 1073),[69] who appears to have been Gofraid's brother.[68] In 1087, the Annals of Ulster record an invasion of Mann by the King of Ulaid and "Ragnall's grandsons" (d. 1087),[70] who may have been grandson's of Echmarcach's father:[71] possibly sons of Gofraid mac Amlaíb meic Ragnaill, or sons of Echmarcach himself.[72] In 1096, the Annals of the Four Masters indicate that Echmarcach's maternal-grandson, Amlaíb mac Taidc, was slain on Mann.[73] Finally, the Chronicle of Mann indicates that Amlaíb's brother, Domnall, was appointed King of the Isles,[74] either at the end of the 11th century,[75] or in the first quarter of the 12th century.[76] In fact, Domnall's appointment could suggest that he was, by this time, the senior male representative of the line of Echmarcach's father.[77]
  12. ^ Recorded in: the Annals of Inisfallen.[79]
  13. ^ Recorded in sources such as: the Annals of Inisfallen (in 1004),[81] the Annals of Ulster,[82] and Chronicon Scotorum (in 1003).[83]
  14. ^ An alliance between Diarmait and Amlaíb Cuarán's descendants may be evidenced by personal names. For example, Amlaíb Cuarán's son, Sitric mac Amlaíb, King of Dublin, had a brother (d. 989) and a son (d. 1031) named Glún Iairn, while Diarmait also had a son with the name (d. 1070).[86] The name itself is Gaelic, and is an adaptation of the Old Norse byname Járnkné, both of which are composed of elements meaning "iron" and "knee".[87] The Gaelic personal name is also normalised Glún Íarainn,[88] and Glúniairn.[89]
  15. ^ It is unknown how Mann came into Echmarcach's possession. One (unsupported) possibility is that Sitric's maritime strength may have declined due to the back and forth warring with Ulaid, and that the erosion of Sitric's forces may have enabled Echmarcach and his family to seize control of Mann.[101] Certainly, in 1022, Niall mac Eochada, King of Ulaid is recorded to have defeated a Dublin fleet; and an attack on Fine Gall by the forces of Ulaid is recorded in 1026.[101] Ulaid is not otherwise known to have been a maritime power, which may suggest that the kingdom was assisted in its naval victory by Echmarcach and his family.[101]
  16. ^ In their accounts of this event, the Annals of Tigernach,[112] and the Dublin Annals of Inisfallen erroneously render the name of Echmarcach's predecessor as Aralt.[113]
  17. ^ The Annals of the Four Masters date the event to 1060.
  18. ^ The gathering of tribute was a mediaeval "right of kingship", and could be employed by an overking without displacing a subordinate local king.[132] Murchad's collection of tribute could be evidence that, as the King of Dublin, Murchad regarded himself as the rightful overlord of Mann.[133]
  19. ^ Sources such as: the "C", "D", and "E" versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.[136]
  20. ^ Sources such as: the "D" version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, the "B" and "C" versions of Annales Cambriae, Brenhinoedd y Saeson, Brut y Tywysogion (the Peniarth MS 20 and Red Book of Hergest versions), and John of Worcester.[138] The event is not recorded in Norse sources.[139]
  21. ^ Donnchad is regarded to have died in 1064.[155] The Annals of Clonmacnoise,[156] the Annals of Loch Cé,[157] the Annals of the Four Masters,[158] the Annals of Tigernach,[159] the Annals of Ulster,[160] and the Chronicon Scotorum state that Donnchad went to Rome and died in 1064.[161] The Annals of Inisfallen record his trek to Rome, but not his death.[162] The Annals of Clonmacnoise,[156] the Annals of the Four Masters,[158] the Annals of Tigernach,[159] and the Chronicon Scotorum[161] specify that he died in what is variously called "Stephen's monastery", a location which likely refers to Santo Stefano Rotondo on the Caelian Hill.[163] Donnchad's burial there is marked by a non-contemporary plaque. An Irish community, Sancta Trinitas Scottorum, was located nearby the monastery.[154]
  22. ^ The Annals of Loch Cé record that men from the Rhinns and Mann formed part of the Dublin-led forces at the Battle of Clontarf,[171] which may suggest that Amlaíb controlled these regions before 1013.[172] Furthermore, the Historia Gruffud vab Kenan claims that Amlaíb ruled the Rhinns and Galloway.[173] However, the annalistic records of Suibne's death in 1034 may contradict the claim that Amlaíb ruled in Galloway.[174] Likewise, if Echmarcach's submission to Knútr is evidence that Echmarcach's powerbase was located in Galloway or the Isles, the claim that Amlaíb held sway in these regions may be contradicted as well.[28]
  23. ^ An Old Norse form of the personal name Echmarcach would likely be similar to "Iehmarc", recorded in the Old English Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.[181]
  24. ^ The payment of silver as a tax in the Irish Sea region is noted in several historical sources. For example, Cogad Gáedel re Gallaib states that silver was paid for a nose tax.[185] Saga-tradition, preserved in Eyrbyggja saga, states that Sigurðr Hlöðvisson, Earl of Orkney collected a tax of silver from Mann.[186]

Citations[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e Woolf 2007: p. 246.
  2. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 129. See also: Todd 1867: p. 291 fn 22.
  3. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 246. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 198, 227–228. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 129. See also: Etchingham 2001: pp. 158 fn 35, 181–182. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 102.
  4. ^ Duffy 1992: p. 102.
  5. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 198, 227–228.
  6. ^ Duffy 1992: pp. 102, 105, 109.
  7. ^ Duffy 2006: pp. 58, 62.
  8. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 231–232.
  9. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 246. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 129, 130 fig 4. See also: Etchingham 2001: pp. 158 fn 35, 181–182. See also: Hudson 1992: pp. 555–556.
  10. ^ Etchingham 2001: pp. 158 fn 35, 181–182.
  11. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 129, 130 fig 4. See also: Hudson 1992: pp. 555–556.
  12. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 129, 130 fig 4.
  13. ^ Downham 2007: pp. 186–191, 192 fig.
  14. ^ Downham 2007: pp. 186–191, 192 fig, 193 fig 12. See also: Woolf 2007: p. 207. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 65–70, 130 fig 4.
  15. ^ Downham 2007: pp. 56 fig 10, 57.
  16. ^ a b Hudson 2005b: p. 132.
  17. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 132. See also: Hudson 1992: p. 350.
  18. ^ Hudson 1992: p. 350.
  19. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 198.
  20. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 245. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 132–133. See also: Downham 2004a: p. 64. See also: Hudson 1992.
  21. ^ Hudson 1992: p. 351. See also: Sellar 1966: pp. 130–131. See also: Skene 1876: p. 397 fn 22.
  22. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 132–134.
  23. ^ Broun 2004.
  24. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 145. See also: Woolf 2007: p. 228.
  25. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 228.
  26. ^ Hudson 1992: p. 354.
  27. ^ a b Woolf 2007: pp. 246–247.
  28. ^ a b Etchingham 2001: p. 161.
  29. ^ Woolf 2007: pp. 225–226, 253. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 133. See also: Hudson 1996: p. 90.
  30. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1034.3. See also: Mac Carthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2008: 1034.10. See also: Woolf 2007: p. 253. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 133. See also: Mac Carthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2000: 1034.10. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin 1996: 1034.3.
  31. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 253, 253 fn 45.
  32. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 253. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 133.
  33. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 253.
  34. ^ Hudson 1996: p. 223.
  35. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 133. See also: Hudson 1992: p. 358.
  36. ^ Woolf 2007: pp. 234–235.
  37. ^ Hudson 1992: p. 358.
  38. ^ Woolf 2007: pp. 247–248.
  39. ^ a b c d e Hudson 2005b: p. 134.
  40. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 147. See also: Woolf 2007: p. 246. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 196–197. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 131. See also: Krag 2003: pp. 194.
  41. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 147. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 197–198.
  42. ^ a b Bolton 2009: p. 147.
  43. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 147. See also: Laing 1907a: pp. 647–649.
  44. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 148.
  45. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 150.
  46. ^ a b Bolton 2009: pp. 143–146.
  47. ^ Bolton 2009: pp. 143–146. See also: Anderson 1873: pp. 209–210.
  48. ^ Bolton 2009: pp. 143–146. See also: Anderson 1873: pp. 17–18.
  49. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 146. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 135.
  50. ^ a b Bolton 2009: p. 146. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 135. See also: Anderson 1873: pp. 27–30.
  51. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 146.
  52. ^ Bolton 2009: p. 146. See also: Anderson 1873: pp. 26–27.
  53. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 273. See also: Hollander 2002: p. 362. See also: Laing 1907a: p. 409.
  54. ^ a b Hudson 2005b: p. 135.
  55. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 246. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 197–198. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 129–131.
  56. ^ Driscoll 2008: p. 97 fn 78. See also: Woolf 2007: p. 246. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 131.
  57. ^ Driscoll 2008: p. 37. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 129–130.
  58. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 246. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 129.
  59. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 129–131.
  60. ^ a b Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 197–198.
  61. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 232. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 134.
  62. ^ Hudson 1996: p. 94.
  63. ^ Mac Airt 2008: 1032.6. See also: Mac Airt; Färber; 2008: 1032.6. See also: Bracken 2004. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 97.
  64. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1054.4. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 134. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin; 1996: 1054.4.
  65. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 232. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 130 fig 4, 134. See also: Bracken 2004. See also: Downham 2004b: p. 89.
  66. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 232. See also: Downham 2004b: p. 89. See also: Duffy 1992: pp. 105, 105 fn 59.
  67. ^ Duffy 1992: pp. 105, 105 fn 59.
  68. ^ a b Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 232.
  69. ^ MacCarthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2008: 1073.5. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 232. See also: Mac Carthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2000: 1073.5.
  70. ^ MacCarthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2008: 1087.7. See also: Mac Carthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2000: 1087.7. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 105.
  71. ^ Duffy 1992: pp. 105, 109.
  72. ^ Oram 2000: p. 19.
  73. ^ O'Donovan; Priour; Beechinor 2008: 1096.8. See also: O'Donovan; Ó Corráin; Cournane 2002: 1096.8. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 109.
  74. ^ Duffy 1992: p. 109. See also: Anderson 1992b: pp. 100–101. See also: Munch; Goss 1874: pp. 54–55.
  75. ^ Duffy 1992: p. 109.
  76. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 198–199.
  77. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 236. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 109.
  78. ^ Downham 2007: pp. 191, 195. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 134.
  79. ^ Mac Airt 2008: 984.2. See also: Mac Airt; Färber; 2008: 984.2. See also: Downham 2007: pp. 191, 253.
  80. ^ Downham 2007: p. 197. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 134.
  81. ^ Mac Airt 2008: 1004.5. See also: Mac Airt; Färber; 2008: 1004.5. See also: Downham 2007: pp. 193 fig 12, 267.
  82. ^ MacCarthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2008: 1005.1. See also: Downham 2007: pp. 193 fig 12, 267. See also: Mac Carthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2000: 1005.1.
  83. ^ Hennessy; Mac Niocaill; Färber; Murphy 2012: 1005. See also: Hennessy; Mac Niocaill; Färber; Murphy 2010: 1005. See also: Downham 2007: pp. 193 fig 12, 267.
  84. ^ a b Duffy 1992: pp. 96–97.
  85. ^ Hudson 2004a. See also: Duffy 1992: pp. 96–97.
  86. ^ Duffy 1992: p. 97 fn 17.
  87. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 222 fn 9. See also: Fellows-Jensen 2001: p. 111. See also: Fellows-Jensen 1998: p. 29. See also: Etchingham 1994: p. 120.
  88. ^ Etchingham 1994: p. 120.
  89. ^ Fellows-Jensen 2001: p. 111.
  90. ^ Connon 2005: p. 429. See also: Hudson 2004b.
  91. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1036.8. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin; 1996: 1036.8.
  92. ^ a b Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2. See also: O'Conor 1825: p. 73.
  93. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 134. See also: Bracken 2004. See also: Hudson 2004b.
  94. ^ Downham 2004: pp. 63–64.
  95. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 227–228. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 129. See also: Etchingham 2001: pp. 181–182. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 102.
  96. ^ Duffy 2006: p. 55. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 96.
  97. ^ O'Donovan; Priour; Beechinor 2008: 1035.3. See also: O'Donovan; Ó Corráin; Cournane 2002: 1035.3. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 96.
  98. ^ Mac Carthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2008: 1035.5. See also: Mac Carthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2000: 1035.5. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 96.
  99. ^ O'Donovan; Priour; Beechinor 2008: 1037.10. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 135. See also: O'Donovan; Ó Corráin; Cournane 2002: 1037.10. See also: Cogan 1862: pp. 35–36.
  100. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 229–231.
  101. ^ a b c Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 230–231.
  102. ^ a b Williams 2004: pp. 74 fig 2, 75.
  103. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1038.1. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin 1996: 1038.1. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 96. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  104. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 228. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 135.
  105. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 83 fig 3, 135, 171.
  106. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 228. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 83 fig 3. See also: Duffy 1992: pp. 96, 96 fn 14, 106.
  107. ^ Hudson 2004b.
  108. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 135–136.
  109. ^ MacCarthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2008: 1040.6. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 135–136. See also: MacCarthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2000: 1040.6.
  110. ^ O'Donovan; Priour; Beechinor 2008: 1046.8. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 228. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 137. See also: O'Donovan; Ó Corráin; Cournane 2002: 1046.8. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 96. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  111. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1046.6. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 228. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 137. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin 1996: 1046.6. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 96.
  112. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1046.6. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin 1996: 1046.6. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  113. ^ a b Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2. See also: O'Conor 1825: p. 74.
  114. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 229.
  115. ^ Williams 2007: p. 204. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 137–138.
  116. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 137–138.
  117. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 140.
  118. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 137. See also: Walker 2004b.
  119. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 137. See also: Lawson; King 2004. See also: Walker 2004b. See also: Maund 1991: p. 164. See also: Lloyd 1912: p. 362. See also: Williams 1860b: pp. 42–43.
  120. ^ Hudson 2005a: pp. 127–128. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 94. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  121. ^ O'Donovan; Priour; Beechinor 2008: 1052.8. See also: O'Donovan; Ó Corráin; Cournane 2005: 1052.8. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 94. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  122. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1052.2. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin; 1996: 1052.2. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  123. ^ Hennessy; Mac Niocaill; Färber; Murphy 2012: 1052. See also: Hennessy; Mac Niocaill; Färber; Murphy 2010: 1052. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 94. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  124. ^ Byrne 2008: p. 864.
  125. ^ Duffy 1993: p. 14.
  126. ^ Duffy 2006: p. 55. See also: Hudson 2005a: pp. 127–128. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 100.
  127. ^ O'Donovan; Priour; Beechinor 2008: 1060.6. See also: O'Donovan; Ó Corráin; Cournane 2005: 1060.6. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 100. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  128. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1061.3. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin 1996: 1061.3. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 100. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  129. ^ Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2. See also: O'Conor 1825: pp. 76–77.
  130. ^ Hudson 2005a: pp. 127–128. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 100. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  131. ^ Duffy 2006: p. 55. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 100.
  132. ^ Duffy 1992: p. 100.
  133. ^ Duffy 2006: p. 56.
  134. ^ Downham 2004: p. 67. See also: Williams 2004.
  135. ^ Downham 2004: p. 67. See also: Walker 2004. See also: Maund 1991: p. 165.
  136. ^ a b Downham 2004: p. 67.
  137. ^ Maund 1991: p. 165.
  138. ^ Maund 1991: p. 165. See also: Lloyd 1901: pp. 170–171. See also: Williams 1860a: p. 25. See also: Williams 1860b: pp. 44–45.
  139. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 267.
  140. ^ Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1058.4. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin 1996: 1058.4. See also: Maund 1991: p. 165. See also: Anderson 1922b: p. 1.
  141. ^ Woolf 2007: pp. 266–267. See also: Hudson 2005a: p. 128. See also: Downham 2004: p. 67. See also: Maund 1991: p. 165.
  142. ^ Hudson 2005a: p. 128. See also: Downham 2004: p. 67. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 154.
  143. ^ Etchingham 2001: pp. 154–155.
  144. ^ Downham 2004: p. 67. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 154.
  145. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 143. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 182, 182 fn 108. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 97. See also: Hudson 1992: p. 356. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  146. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 143–144.
  147. ^ Flanagan 2010: p. 231, 231 fn 196. See also: Bracken 2004. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 182, 182 fn 108. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  148. ^ Downham 2007: pp. 171, 193.
  149. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 245. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 129. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  150. ^ Mac Airt 2008: 1064.7. See also: Mac Airt; Färber 2008: 1064.7. See also: Downham 2007: p. 193. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  151. ^ Hennessy 2008: 1064.7. See also: Downham 2007: p. 193. See also: Hennessy; Ó Corráin 2002: 1064.7. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  152. ^ MacCarthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2008: 1064.9. See also: Downham 2007: p. 193. See also: MacCarthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2000: 1064.9. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  153. ^ Downham 2007: p. 171. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 229. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 129, 138. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 160. See also: Duffy 1992: pp. 98–99. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2. See also: Waitz 1844: p. 559.
  154. ^ a b Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196.
  155. ^ Flanagan 2010: p. 231. See also: Bracken 2004.
  156. ^ a b Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: Murphy 1896: p. 179.
  157. ^ Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: Hennessy 2008: 1064.3. See also: Hennessy; Ó Corráin 2002: 1064.3.
  158. ^ a b Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: O'Donovan; Priour; Beechinor 2008: 1064.6. See also: O'Donovan; Ó Corráin; Cournane 2005: 1064.6.
  159. ^ a b Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: Mac Niocaill; Purcell; Ó Corráin 2010: 1064.2. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 182 fn 108. See also: Stokes; Ó Corráin 1996: 1064.2.
  160. ^ Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: MacCarthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2008: 1064.4. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 182 fn 108. See also: Mac Carthy; Mac Airt; Mac Niocaill et al. 2000: 1064.4.
  161. ^ a b Hennessy; Mac Niocaill; Färber; Murphy 2012: 1064. See also: Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: Hennessy; Mac Niocaill; Färber; Murphy 2010: 1064.
  162. ^ Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: Mac Airt 2008: 1064.5. See also: Mac Airt; Färber 2008: 1064.5. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 182 fn 108.
  163. ^ Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 182 fn 108.
  164. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 129.
  165. ^ Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: Downham 2007: p. 171. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 229. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 129, 138. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 160. See also: Duffy 1992: pp. 98–99. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2. See also: Waitz 1844: p. 559.
  166. ^ Flanagan 2010: p. 231 fn 196. See also: Duffy 2006: p. 57.
  167. ^ Hudson 2005b: pp. 129, 138. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 160.
  168. ^ Woolf 2007: pp. 245, 254. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 138.
  169. ^ Woolf 2007: p. 254.
  170. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 229–230. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 99.
  171. ^ Hennessy 2008: 1014.3. See also: Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 229–230. See also: Hennessy; Ó Corráin 2002: 1014.3. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 99.
  172. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: pp. 229–230.
  173. ^ Forte; Oram; Pedersen 2005: p. 229. See also: Etchingham 2001: p. 158. See also: Duffy 1992: p. 99.
  174. ^ Downham 2007: p. 198 fn 125.
  175. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 138.
  176. ^ Byrne 2008: pp. 888–889. See also: Hudson 2006: p. 75. See also: Barlow 1970.
  177. ^ Hudson 2006: p. 71. Hudson 2005b: p. 143. See also: Storm 1880: pp. 133–134.
  178. ^ Barlow 1970: pp. 200–201. See also: Laing; Anderson 1907b: pp. 745–747.
  179. ^ Byrne 2008: pp. 888–889. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  180. ^ Byrne 2008: pp. 888–889. See also: Woolf 2007: p. 244 fn 29. See also: Hudson 2005b: p. 143. See also: Poole 1991: p. 131. See also: Anderson 1922a: pp. 590–592 fn 2.
  181. ^ Hudson 2006: p. 75.
  182. ^ Hudson 2006: p. 16. See also: Hudson 2005b: pp. 8–9, 143.
  183. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 143. See also: Laing; Anderson 1907b: pp. 745–747.
  184. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 143.
  185. ^ Hudson 2005b: p. 143. See also: Todd 1867: pp. ciii, 50–51.
  186. ^ Williams 2007: p. 95, 95 fn 139.

References[edit]

Primary sources
Secondary sources
Regnal titles
Preceded by
Sitric mac Amlaíb
King of Dublin
1036–1038
First reign
Succeeded by
Ímar mac Arailt
Preceded by
Ímar mac Arailt
King of Dublin
1046–1052
Second reign
Succeeded by
Murchad mac Diarmata