Carrach Calma ancestry table (was: Laigsech Ua Morda...)
Luke Stevens
Stewart Baldwin wrote:
> I never got around to attempting an ancestor table for Carrach Calma.
> Are there any marriages in his ancestry which lead somewhere
> interesting?
I completed an examination of his ancestry several months ago, and may
as well post the information I have, so here it is. Pardon my indulgence
in late sources for early genealogies and my anachronistic use of
titles. The standard warnings about the earliest generations and the
missing accent marks apply.
Oengus, rigdamna (i.e. prince) of Tara, d. 1017, was son of
Donnchad Carrach Calma, d. 969, son of
Murchad, son of
Oengus, rigdamna of Tara, d. 915, son of
Flann Sinna and an unknown mother. [NHI]
Ahnenlist of Flann Sinna:
1. Flann Sinna, K. Ireland, d. 916 [NHI]
2. Mael Sechnaill, K. Ireland, d. 862 [NHI]
3. Lann, d. 890 [BS 186:14; AU]
This is the same woman as the mother of Cennetig, K. Leix, in the
ancestry of Eve of Leinster, which see for ancestry.
4. Mael Ruanaid, K. Meath, d. 843 [NHI]
5. Arog [BS 335,186:12,225:4]
8. Donnchad Midi, K. Ireland, d. 797 [NHI]
9. Be Bail, d. 801 [BS 334, 186:7, 224:11; AU]
10. Cathal, K. Fircall & Rath Airther, d. 810 [BS 335,186:12,225:4; AU]
16. Domnall Midi, K. Ireland, d. 763 [NHI]
17. Ailbini [BS 334,186:5,224:9]
18. Cathal, K. Leth Cathail (Ulster) [BS 334,186:7,224:11; CGH p.327]
20. Fiachra, K. Fircall, d. 786 [AU; AFM]
32. Murchad Midi, K. Meath, d. 715 [AU; CGH]
33. Ailphin [BS 334,186:3,224:5]
34. Ailill, K. Ciannachta, d. 702 [BS 334,186:5,224:9; AU]
35. Eriu [BS 334,186:5,224:9]
36. Oengus [CGH p.327]
40. Cathal [AU; AFM]
64. Diarmait Den, K. Meath, d. 689 [AU; CGH]
66. Comgall of Delbna Mor [BS 186:3,224:5]
BS 224:5 and CGH p.171 give his pedigree as Comgall m. Sarain m.
Brocain m. Comgaill Bricc m. Blait m. Sige m. Aindiled m. Beccain
(or Bicc m. Baedain [BS]) m. Delbaeth m. Thail Caiss.
68. Cenn Faelad [AU]
perhaps the Cenn Faelad m. Gerthidi, K. Arda Ciannachta, d. 662 [AT]
70. Fergus, K. Ulster, d. 692 [BS 332,182:10,219:10; NHI]
CGH p.326 shows Fergus m. Aeda(in) m. Mongain m. Sarain m. Maine m.
Fothaid m. Conaill m. Echach Coba m. Cruind Ba Drui.
71. Mael Teglach [BS 332,182:10,219:10]
72. Mael Coba, K. Ulster, d. 647 [NHI]
128. Airmedach Caech [CGH; AU 862]
142. Mael Odar Caech, K. Airthera, d. 639 [BS 332,182:8,219:8; CS]
BS calls him king of Oriel, so he was probably either identical or
confused with Mael Odar Macha, K. Oriel, d. 636? [AFM].
O辿art's "Irish Pedigrees" p. 371 (Brody) says that this
Mael Odar Caech, alias Brodach, was son of Feradach Culdub, son of
Amalgaid, s. Ailill, s. Eochaid, s. Fedelmid, s. Fiachra Casan,
s. Colla Fo Chrith, which is in fact the same line as in CGH p.181
except that the latter omits Mael Odar Caech.
144. Fiachna Dubtond, K. Ulster, d. 627 [NHI]
256. Conall Guthbin, K. Meath, d. 634 [AU; AT; AFM; CGH]
288. Demman, K. Ulster, d. 572 [NHI]
289. Garb [BS 332,183:1,221:10]
512. Suibne, K. Meath, d. 600 [NHI; AU; AFM]
576. Cairell Coscrach, K. Ulster [NHI], d. 526? [AFM]
578. Eillen [BS 332,183:1,221:10], or (I presume) Neilline [CGH p.134]
1024. Colman Mor, K. Meath, d. 557 [NHI]
1152. Muiredach Muinderg, K. Ulster [NHI]
See CGH p.322. A late interpolation in AT says he died 490,
though O'Rahilly believes he lived well into the sixth century.
1156. Muircertach MacErca, K. Ireland, d. 534/6 [BS 221:10; NHI]
2048. Diarmait Derg, K. Ireland, d. 565 [NHI]
2049. Erc (or Eithne) [BS 330,181:2,217:12]
BS 330 and 217:10 call her Erc, while BS 181:2 calls her Eithne.
BS 330, 181:12, and 219:2 all say that Eithne was wife of Aed
Slaine, half brother of Colman Mor. This is either a sister of
Erc or an alternate name for Erc herself. BS 330 and 218:1 each
offer an alternative account of the mother of Colman Mor, but
both can be dismissed as errors, in light of other entries
(BS 180:13,181:3,217:10).
2312. Muiredach [NHI]
2313. Erc (or Eithne) [BS 330,180:8,217:7]
4096. Fergus Cerrbel [NHI], occ. 483 [AU]
4097. Corbach [BS 330,180:10,217:9]
4098. Brenaind Dall of Conmaicne [BS 330,181:2,217:12]
This is presumably the one in CGH p.318 called Mael Brenaind Dall
m. Echtgaile m. Moicain m. Findsciatha m. Forsada m. Congein m.
Congeith m. Cuanscrine m. Cairthind m. Etnai m. Caireda m.
Findchaem m. Cuscraid m. Cecht m. Eircc m. Erccdail m. Duib m.
Ma Druaid m. Nertai m. Fhernertai m. Cecht m. Uisli m. Beirre m.
Beidbi m. Luigdech m. Conmaic (whence Conmaicne) m. Oirbsen Mair.
4614. Eogan, d. 465 [NHI; AU]
4615. Indorb Find [BS 329,180:7,217:6]
"the eloquent daughter of the Saxon (recte British?) king."
4616. Loarn Mor, K. Dalriada [BS 330,180:8,217:7]
"Compendium of World History" indicates that he died 10 years
after his father Erc and 16 years before Fergus, i.e., 484/5.
8192. Conall Cremthainne [NHI], d. 480 [AU]
8194. Maine of Leinster [BS 330,180:10,217:9], unidentifiable to me
9228. Niall (same as #16384 below)
9232. Erc, K. Dalriada, d. 474? [AFM]
16384. Niall of the Nine Hostages
AFM = Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland, by the Four Masters
AT = Annals of Tigernach
AU = Annals of Ulster
BS = Ban Shenchus
CGH = Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae
CS = Chronicon Scotorum
NHI = A New History of Ireland
Luke Stevens
Stewart Baldwin
ste...@pss.fit.edu (Luke Stevens) wrote:
>I completed an examination of his ancestry several months ago, and may
>as well post the information I have, so here it is. Pardon my indulgence
>in late sources for early genealogies and my anachronistic use of
>titles. The standard warnings about the earliest generations and the
>missing accent marks apply.
I have not yet examined this table in detail, but I did notice a
couple of links which could use better documentation. I will probably
have other comments when I get the chance to look at it more closely.
I have edited out other parts of the chart to save space.
>4. Mael Ruanaid, K. Meath, d. 843 [NHI]
>8. Donnchad Midi, K. Ireland, d. 797 [NHI]
>9. Be Bail, d. 801 [BS 334, 186:7, 224:11; AU]
>16. Domnall Midi, K. Ireland, d. 763 [NHI]
>17. Ailbini [BS 334,186:5,224:9]
>18. Cathal, K. Leth Cathail (Ulster) [BS 334,186:7,224:11; CGH p.327]
What source do you have which proves that Be Bail's father Cathal was
the same person as this Cathal in the Dal Fiatach pedigrees? The Ban
Shenchus calls Cathal king of Ulster, but the kinglists of Ulster show
no king of Ulster by that name who could be identified as Be Bail's
father. The Annals of Ulster give her father's name as Cathal,
without further identification. What evidence do you have that this
is the right Cathal? By the way, the pedigrees state that Cathal was
ancestor of the sept of Leth Cathail, but that does not necessarily
mean that he was himself king of Leth Cathail. Do you have a source
for that statement?
>34. Ailill, K. Ciannachta, d. 702 [BS 334,186:5,224:9; AU]
>35. Eriu [BS 334,186:5,224:9]
What is your source that Eriu was Ailbine's mother? BS.182,219 calls
Eriu the wife of Ailill, but does not call her the mother of Ailbine.
BS.186,224 apparently gives a certain Oirindi (genitive form) as the
mother of Ailbine. Is "Oirindi" an acceptable genitive form for Eriu?
>70. Fergus, K. Ulster, d. 692 [BS 332,182:10,219:10; NHI]
> CGH p.326 shows Fergus m. Aeda(in) m. Mongain m. Sarain m. Maine m.
> Fothaid m. Conaill m. Echach Coba m. Cruind Ba Drui.
>71. Mael Teglach [BS 332,182:10,219:10]
Correction: Mael Teglaig (The "Mael" element in a personal name is
followed by a genetive form.)
Stewart Baldwin
Stewart Baldwin
ste...@pss.fit.edu (Luke Stevens) wrote:
>Stewart Baldwin wrote:
>> I never got around to attempting an ancestor table for Carrach Calma.
>> Are there any marriages in his ancestry which lead somewhere
>> interesting?
>I completed an examination of his ancestry several months ago, and may
>as well post the information I have, so here it is. Pardon my indulgence
>in late sources for early genealogies and my anachronistic use of
>titles. The standard warnings about the earliest generations and the
>missing accent marks apply.
[many omissions to save space]
>18. Cathal, K. Leth Cathail (Ulster) [BS 334,186:7,224:11; CGH p.327]
[the following two quoted paragraphs inserted from a different
posting]
>This was an unproven rash assumption on my part. Since the annals
>and king lists do not, so far as I know, show a Cathal at this
>period, there must be someone who had been called King of Ulster at
>least by some but was later not acknowledged as such. The Cathal
>from whom was named Leth Cathal seems an almost perfect fit, since
>the chronology fits, his grandfather was king of Ulster, and he
>presumably ruled at least this good chunk of Ulster, by the very
>fact that it was named after him. It would not be asking too much to
>suppose he was an unsuccessful claimant, or perhaps a usurper,
>unnoticed in the annals. The source for the entry in BS could of
>course be expected to use the more flattering title, whereas once
>his rivals gained predominance no one thereafter would recognize
>him as such. This Cathal seems to me the only reasonable choice,
>though I'd like to see any other ideas as well.
I agree that this Cathal seems the most likely one, but the falsely
given title "king of Ulster" is still worrisome, and I think that
better evidence is needed before we can be sure about this link.
>I presumed also that Cathal at least ruled the territory named after
>him, since no examples come to mind of a case where this reasoning
>is not valid. Although it would not be called Leth Cathail as such
>until later, I have, as I warned, made due with the anachronistic
>title for lack of a better one.
The reasoning is not valid, because the phrase "a quo Leth Cathail"
menas only that Cathal was the ancestor of the sept known as Leth
Cathail, and no more. The choice (presumably made by his descendants)
to name the sept after him does not tell us anything about what
happened during the lifetime of Cathal. As for making due with a
title, why add a title at all when solid evidence for one is lacking?
>34. Ailill, K. Ciannachta, d. 702 [BS 334,186:5,224:9; AU]
>35. Eriu [BS 334,186:5,224:9]
Based on Dobbs's translation of the metrical Ban Shenshus, it looks
like Oirind(i) is an acceptible genitive form for Oiriu. Since Oiriu
is apparently a variant of Eriu, it looks like this link is probably
OK.
>68. Cenn Faelad [AU]
> perhaps the Cenn Faelad m. Gerthidi, K. Arda Ciannachta, d. 662 [AT]
This is correct. See CGH p. 247 [Rawl. B 502, fol. 154a, or section
1351 in the www version] for proof. Two additional generations can be
added:
136. Gerthide mac Cronain, king of Ciannachta, living 593 [AU]
272. Cronan mac Tigernaig, king of Ciannachta, living 573 [AU]
Earlier generations from Rawl. B 502 are Tigernach m. Ailella m.
Echach Binnich m. Dubthaich m. Bressail m. Fiachach m. Thaidgc, of
which all but the latest one or two should probably be taken with a
grain of salt.
>1024. Colman Mor, K. Meath, d. 557 [NHI]
For the very early kings of Mide (Meath), "king of Uisnech" would be a
less anachronistic title. See Mac Niocaill's "Ireland before the
Vikings".
>2048. Diarmait Derg, K. Ireland, d. 565 [NHI]
Diarmait's status as a descendant of Niall is regarded as suspicious
by some recent historians. See for example, Byrne's "Irish Kings and
High-kings". That his father was named Cerball is reasonably certain,
but the claim that this Cerball was the same person as (the possibly
ficticious) Fergus Cerrbel is uncertain.
>2049. Erc (or Eithne) [BS 330,181:2,217:12]
> BS 330 and 217:10 call her Erc, while BS 181:2 calls her Eithne.
> BS 330, 181:12, and 219:2 all say that Eithne was wife of Aed
> Slaine, half brother of Colman Mor. This is either a sister of
> Erc or an alternate name for Erc herself. BS 330 and 218:1 each
> offer an alternative account of the mother of Colman Mor, but
> both can be dismissed as errors, in light of other entries
> (BS 180:13,181:3,217:10).
Once you reach the early sixth century, all entries in BS should be
regarded with skepticism.
>2312. Muiredach [NHI]
>2313. Erc (or Eithne) [BS 330,180:8,217:7]
She should be omitted. The name "Mac Ercca" is a perfectly acceptable
personal name (compare Mac Bethad, the famous Macbeth), and does not
necessarily imply the name of his mother. No early source makes
Muircertach Mac Ercca a grandson of Loarn of Dal Riata.
>4615. Indorb Find [BS 329,180:7,217:6]
> "the eloquent daughter of the Saxon (recte British?) king."
As I stated above, BS entries from this time period should be taken
with a grain of salt. However, if the entry itself is valid, I see no
good reason to emend "Saxon" to "British".
>4616. Loarn Mor, K. Dalriada [BS 330,180:8,217:7]
> "Compendium of World History" indicates that he died 10 years
> after his father Erc and 16 years before Fergus, i.e., 484/5.
When you have to resort to the "Compendium of World History" as a
source for early Irish and Scottish history, I think that the
information thus obtained can be safely discarded until such time (if
any) that it is found in a more appropriate source.
Stewart Baldwin
Luke Stevens
> The reasoning is not valid, because the phrase "a quo Leth Cathail"
> Cathail, and no more. The choice (presumably made by his descendants)
> to name the sept after him does not tell us anything about what
> happened during the lifetime of Cathal. As for making due with a
> title, why add a title at all when solid evidence for one is lacking?
My reasoning would have a hole in it if we were talking about a sept or
tribe, since they are named after their progenitors, whereas territories
are named after their rulers; but my understanding was that "leth"
referred to territory, specifically half of some greater area. Is this
not right?
It was not so much a matter of supplying a title that wasn't there, as
emending "King of Ulster" to something more precise. I suppose you could
say BS was totally wrong to call him king of anything, but this seems
less likely to me. But you are right, that the title would be better
omitted here for lack of clear evidence (not to mention clear territory).
> >2312. Muiredach [NHI]
> >2313. Erc (or Eithne) [BS 330,180:8,217:7]
>
> She should be omitted. The name "Mac Ercca" is a perfectly acceptable
> personal name (compare Mac Bethad, the famous Macbeth), and does not
> necessarily imply the name of his mother. No early source makes
> Muircertach Mac Ercca a grandson of Loarn of Dal Riata.
Are you meaning to say that this Erc was invented to explain why
Muirchertach was called Mac Ercca?
> >4615. Indorb Find [BS 329,180:7,217:6]
> > "the eloquent daughter of the Saxon (recte British?) king."
>
> As I stated above, BS entries from this time period should be taken
> with a grain of salt. However, if the entry itself is valid, I see no
> good reason to emend "Saxon" to "British".
This was a relic of something I read in O'Rahilly a while back, to the
effect that later documents referring to this period indiscriminately
substiute "Saxon" for "British", since the Saxons dominated the island
at the time of the writing, for example when Niall's mother is
anachronistically said to be a daughter of the Saxon king. Since it is
doubtful that at this period the Irish had any contact to speak of with
the Saxons, whereas the raiding and settling of Wales & Scotland were
very active, this interpretation seems the more likely one.
Luke Stevens
Stewart Baldwin
anfo...@geocities.com (Luke Stevens) wrote:
>> The reasoning is not valid, because the phrase "a quo Leth Cathail"
>> means only that Cathal was the ancestor of the sept known as Leth
>> Cathail, and no more. The choice (presumably made by his descendants)
>> to name the sept after him does not tell us anything about what
>> happened during the lifetime of Cathal. As for making due with a
>> title, why add a title at all when solid evidence for one is lacking?
>My reasoning would have a hole in it if we were talking about a sept or
>tribe, since they are named after their progenitors, whereas territories
>are named after their rulers; but my understanding was that "leth"
>referred to territory, specifically half of some greater area. Is this
>not right?
The reasoning is still not valid. The name of Leth Cathail which
Cathal's descendants chose might be regarded as a claim by them that
Cathal held that territory, but such a retroactive claim cannot be
regarded as evidence that he actually did so, in the absense of
supporting evidence. Note that in the case of the other two well
known examples of the prefix "Leth" as applied to a territory, i.e.,
Leth Cuind and Leth Moga, the claim that the (probably fictional)
"ancestor" in question ruled over that territory must be regarded as a
political claim rather than historical fact.
>It was not so much a matter of supplying a title that wasn't there, as
>emending "King of Ulster" to something more precise. I suppose you could
>say BS was totally wrong to call him king of anything, but this seems
>less likely to me. But you are right, that the title would be better
>omitted here for lack of clear evidence (not to mention clear territory).
>> >2312. Muiredach [NHI]
>> >2313. Erc (or Eithne) [BS 330,180:8,217:7]
>>
>> She should be omitted. The name "Mac Ercca" is a perfectly acceptable
>> personal name (compare Mac Bethad, the famous Macbeth), and does not
>> necessarily imply the name of his mother. No early source makes
>> Muircertach Mac Ercca a grandson of Loarn of Dal Riata.
>Are you meaning to say that this Erc was invented to explain why
>Muirchertach was called Mac Ercca?
This seems the most likely explanation. Consider the following.
1. Mac Ercca is a perfectly legitimate Irish personal name.
2. The claim that Mac Ercca was so called because of his mother is
suspicious to begin with. How many well documented historical
examples can you name in which an Irish king was commonly referred to
by a matronymic? (I know of none. The are examples from the Ulster
cycle, but they are not historical.)
3. On the other hand, the use of "Mac" as an element of a first name
was rare enough that it could cause confusion, even in early medieval
times. Thus, an early medieval writer who saw Muircertach mac
Muiredaig referred to as Mac Ercca could easily assume that this was
giving the name of his mother, even if that were not the case.
4. No early source gives the name of Muircertach's mother.
While this explanation as a mistake cannot be considered certain, it
is likely enough that the identity of Muircertach's mother should be
regarded as unknown.
>> >4615. Indorb Find [BS 329,180:7,217:6]
>> > "the eloquent daughter of the Saxon (recte British?) king."
>>
>> As I stated above, BS entries from this time period should be taken
>> with a grain of salt. However, if the entry itself is valid, I see no
>> good reason to emend "Saxon" to "British".
>This was a relic of something I read in O'Rahilly a while back, to the
>effect that later documents referring to this period indiscriminately
>substiute "Saxon" for "British", since the Saxons dominated the island
>at the time of the writing, for example when Niall's mother is
>anachronistically said to be a daughter of the Saxon king. Since it is
>doubtful that at this period the Irish had any contact to speak of with
>the Saxons, whereas the raiding and settling of Wales & Scotland were
>very active, this interpretation seems the more likely one.
If one accepts the artificial chronology in which Niall dies in 405,
then this argument might be stronger. However, Niall, if he existed,
would have almost certainly died in the middle of the fifth century,
by which time (on the testimony of Gildas and the contemporary
Frankish chronicles) the Saxons were already present in England in
considerable numbers. Whatever the case might be for the early fifth
century, a well informed Irish man would probably have known the
difference between a Saxon and a Briton in the late fifth or early
sixth century.
Stewart Baldwin