good bad and ugly by claire downham

THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY: PORTRAYALS OF VIKINGS IN ‘THE FRAGMENTARY ANNALS OF IRELAND’

Clare Downham Abstract The ‘Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ contains a lively pseudo-historical narrative

which has been dated to the eleventh century. I explore how the portrayals of different groups of vikings in this text were engineered to preserve and enhance the reputation of its Irish royal hero: Cerball of Osraige (r. 842-888). This study highlights how ninth-century history was re-written to suit eleventh-century political circumstances. I also analyse the structure of chronicle, and question how it has influenced historians’ perceptions concerning the identities of different viking-groups in Ireland.

The lacunose compilation known as ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ survives only in a seventeenth-century transcript kept at the Royal Library in Brussels (MS 5301-5320 [4641], fols 3-38: Van Den Gheyn et al. 1901-48: VII, 48-50). The text survives in five fragments. It begins with the year A.D. 573 and ends at 914. The chronicle as a whole is characterised by a com-bination of short annalistic entries and longer pseudo-historical narratives. In this paper I shall examine the portrayals of vikings in the pseudo-historical accounts found in the fourth section of this chronicle, which covers the years from 849 to 873. The text exhibits interesting variation in the ways in which different groups of vikings are portrayed. Vikings had terrorised the coasts of Ireland from the end of the eighth century and began to play a role in Irish politics soon after. As a result, vikings figure prominently in ‘The Fragmentary Annals’. However, the hero of the narrative is Cerball mac Dúnlainge, a king who ruled Osraige from 842 to 888. Cerball is portrayed ‘as a man worthy to possess all Ireland’ (§260) and his worthiness is often measured in relation to his victories over different groups of vikings. Therefore the portrayal of various viking-contingents can be seen as a foil to enhance the reputation of this king. The composition of the pseudo-historical narrative about Cerball is thought to have been sponsored by his descendant, Donnchad of Osraige (Radner 1978: xxvi; Radner 1999: 322). This highly successful king extended his sway over the province of Leinster in the 1030s, and he may have desired to control the wealthy viking-towns on the coast of that province. Donnchad may

28� Clare Downham��

have developed the cult of his ancestor, Cerball, to justify his ambitions, and to glorify his lineage. The pseudo-historical narratives in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ can be seen to belong to a genre of Irish literature which developed in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, celebrating the victories of earlier Irish kings over their viking-enemies (Ó Corráin 1975: 32; 1998a: 443; Ní Mhaonaigh 1998: 401; Dumville 1999: 104-5). Contemporary kings seemed eager to bene-fit from the prestige of their ancestors who overcame foreign enemies. This xenophobic trend in Irish literature has been attributed to a growing sense of Irish identity which could be positively pitched against a negative foreign other (Ó Corráin 1975: 31-32). These stories can be seen as a means of justifying Irish control over the viking-settlements in Ireland, which had been subject to Irish overlordship from the late tenth century, although they retained a degree of local autonomy (Duffy 1992: 94-95). Ninth-century chronicle-reports provided the basis for the pseudo-historical account in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’. This can be shown by comparing the main outline of events with other Irish chronicles. A sense of historical authenticity was clearly important to the author of this pseudo-historical text, and others of its type (Ó Corráin 1974: 60-69; Ní Mhaonaigh 1996; Radner 1999: 320). However, the devil is often in the detail, for it is in the way in which these events are interpreted that the eleventh-century author of these narrative sections exhibited his creativity and inventiveness. It appears that ninth-century reports were remodelled and elaborated to suit eleventh-century political aims, literary tastes, and perceptions of vikings. It is fortunate that a good deal of near-contemporary evidence about the career of King Cerball can be gleaned from other Irish chronicles. This demonstrates that Cerball was in contact with three main viking-groups during his career (Chronicum Scotorum [847], [858]; The Annals the Four Masters 845 [=847], 856 [=858], 857 [=859], 858 [=860]). These are the Finngaill (Fair Foreigners), Dubgaill (Dark Foreigners) and Gall-Goídel (Foreign-Irish). These three groups are also represented in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’. The records show that Cerball fought against, and allied with, vikings at different times during his career. During Cerball’s reign, Osraige rose from political obscurity to become major players in Irish politics (Radner 1999: 322). Because of this Cerball was a suitable role-model for later kings of the Osraige to emulate and eulogise. Cerball’s post mortem fame even extended as far as Scandinavia. According to Landnámabók and Orkneyinga saga, Cerball’s daughters married prominent vikings and a number of Icelandic families claimed descent from this Irish king (Todd 1867: 297-302; Ó Corráin: 1998, 440-41). However, Irish records provide no mention of Cerball’s marriage-alliances with vikings. Donnchadh Ó Corráin has argued that these references to ‘Kjarval’ in Norse literature owe more to eleventh-century contact between Ireland and Iceland than ninth-

Portrayals of Vikings in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ 29 �

century oral memory (Ó Corráin 1998: 444). It is possible that these stories developed as Cerball’s cult was promoted in Ireland in the eleventh century. ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ can therefore be seen as a key-text in the development of Cerball’s literary persona. Some discussion of this chronicle is necessary before I analyse the portrayals of vikings within it. The prologue of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ gives us some evidence of its textual history. The surviving text is a transcript of a seventeenth-century copy of a book of Giolla na Naemh Mac Aedhagáin (Radner 1978: xxvi; Ó Muraíle 1996: 86). Mac Aedhagáin’s floruit was in the late fourteenth century (Ó Riain 1978: xxvi). Before this date, the textual history the chronicle is less certain. In the fourth fragment of the chronicle which deals with Cerball of Osraige, we can identify two main components in the compilation. One is the pseudo-historical narrative which celebrates the deeds of Cerball. Joan Radner has called this component ‘The Osraige Chronicle’: it is the focus of my discussion. The second main component is a derivative of the lost ‘Chronicle of Clonmacnoise’, an early or mid- tenth-century source which underlies several medieval Irish chronicles (Dumville 1999: 107-10). Occasionally an entry from another source was included. An example is §330, an account of the sack of York by vikings and an adventurous journey to North Africa (Radner 1978: 118-21). Donnchadh Ó Corráin has suggested that this was derived from legends of Ragnarr loðbrok, which were circulating in the eleventh century (Ó Corráin 1998a: 447; McTurk 1991: 1). It is relevant that when the pseudo-historical sections are extrapolated and compared with other chronicles they can be shown to run in chronological order. The chronological errors which abound in this section of the chronicle tend to occur at the interface between ‘Clonmacnoise-chronicle’ entries and the longer pseudo-historical narratives (see Appendix). It appears that these two texts once existed as separate entities but they were spliced together to create ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ in its present form. The key-point is that the present ordering of the pseudo-historical entries in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ preserves largely or entirely the sequence of entries found in the antecedent texts. By identifying the separate sequences of entries in the compilation, we may also be able to fill some of the gaps in the dating of individual annals or annal-entries.


Table showing ‘The Osraige-Chronicle’ entries in Section Four of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’.1 Entry Year � Entry Year � Entry Year Number � Number � Number 233 851 � ?263 858 � 340 866 234 851 � 265 859 � 341 ? 235 852 � 266 ? � 342 867 236 852 � 267 861 � 347 867 239 853 � 277 860 � 348 867 243 ? � 278 ? � 349 867 244 852 � 279 860 � 350 ? 246 854 � ?280 861 � 365 ? 247 856 � 281 ? � 366 868 249 ? � 292 862 � 377 869 251 ? � 294 862 � 387 870 252 ? � 314 864 � 388 870 253 ? � 327 866 � 400 ? 254 856 � 337 866 � 401 ? 260 858 � 338 ? � 408 ? ?262 858 � 339 ? � 410 ? By isolating the sequence of pseudo-historical entries in our chronicle, we can study narrative developments in the portrayals of vikings. The eleventh-century author of the pseudo-historical narrative wished to praise King Cerball in conventional terms as an Irish hero who fought vikings. However, the author faced a major difficulty when looking back over the historical records. Cerball had allied with vikings as well as fighting against them (Chronicum Scotorum [858]; The Annals of Ulster 858 [=859].2). Rather than deny the evidence of other Irish chronicles, the author of the pseudo-history devised several ways of justifying Cerball’s actions. This justification was based on the portrayal of the three main viking-groups which Cerball is said to have encountered. In eleventh-century terms the author identified Dubgaill (Dark Foreigners) as Danes. They are described as unpleasant but useful to Irish kings (§§235, 251). The Finngaill (Fair Foreigners) are identified as Norwegians and were shown to be greedy, treacherous and heathen (§§243, 254). The final group, the Gall-Goídil (Foreign-Irish) are described as Irish foster-children of the vikings who adopted their ways, and are sometimes called Northmen (§§247, 260). This group is regarded as the most despicable of all. It is notable that ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ is the earliest surviving text to define ‘Dark’ and ‘Fair’ Foreigners in ethnic terms as ‘Danes’ and ‘Norwegians’.


Quality of viking in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ BAD Danes/Dark Foreigners (Danair/Dubgaill) semi-christian

WORSE Norwegians/Fair Foreigners (Lochlannaig/Finngaill) pagan

WORST Foreign-Irish/Northmen (Gall-Goídil/ Normannaigh) apostate By catagorising viking-groups in levels of depravity the author of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ developed a defensive strategy for Cerball’s activities in two ways. The most powerful king in Ireland, Mael Sechnaill, was shown to ally with vikings before Cerball. Furthermore, Cerball was shown to ally with some viking groups with the forgivable intention of defeating worse viking enemies. The section under discussion begins abruptly in 851. It opens with a description of the arrival of Danes in Ireland and their first battle against the Norwegians who were already raiding in Ireland. The prowess of the new arrivals is applauded. The Danes killed three times their own number and they beheaded everyone whom they killed (§233). Furthermore, they are perceived as agents of divine retribution: ‘Afterwards the Danes seized the women and gold and all the goods of the Norwegians, and thus the Lord took from them all the wealth they had taken from the churches and holy places and shrines of the saints of Ireland’ (§233: Ra gabsat tra na Danair ar sain mna, 7 ór, 7 uile mhaithius na Lochlannac[h]; go rug an Coimdhe uatha amhlaidh sin gach maith rugsat a ceallaibh 7 nemeadaibh 7 sgrínib naomh Eireann). The next reference to the Danes again shows them as victors over the Norwegians, and the scene after the battle is described thus (§235):

As in tand sin ra chuir Maoilseachlainn, rí Teamhra, teacht[a] uadh d’ionnsoighidh na nDanar. As amlaidh ro bhattar na Danair, ag luchtaireacht ara gcionn, 7 as iad ba gabhla do ccoireadhaibh, cairn do corpaibh na Loc[h]lannac[h], 7 cidh na beara ara mbiodh an fheóil, as for corpaibh Loc[h]lannac[h] no bhídis a leithcinn, 7 an tine ag losgadh na ccorp, go mbiodh an fheóil 7 an meathradh ra chaithsiot an adaigh remhe ag maidhm asa ngailibh amach. Ra battar dna teachta Maoilseachlainn ’ga fféghadh amhlaid sin, 7 ra battar ’ga thathaoír um na Danaraibh sin. As eadh ra raidhsiot na Danair: “As amhlaidh sin budh maith leo-sum ar mbeith-ne.” Clas mór lán aca do ór 7 da airgead da thabhairt do Pádraicc. Uair as amhlaidh ra bhattar na Danair, 7 cinele crabhaidh aca, .i. gabhaid sealad fri fheóil 7 fri mhnáibh ar chrabhudh.

(It was at that time that Máel Sechlainn, king of Temair, sent messengers to the Danes. When they arrived the Danes were cooking, and the supports of the cooking-pots were heaps of the bodies of the Norwegians, and even the spits on which the meat was [roasting] rested their ends on the bodies of Norwegians, and the fire was burning the bodies, so that the meat and fat that they had eaten the night before was bursting out of their bellies. The messengers of Máel Sechlainn were looking at them thus, and they were reproaching the


Danes for it. That is what the Danes said: ‘They would like to have us like that.’ They had a huge ditch full of gold and silver to give to Patrick. For the Danes were like that, and they had kinds of piety — that is, they abstained from meat and from women for a while, for the sake of piety.)

The type of piety expressed by the Danes, and the image of human flesh roasting while the food is being cooked, may be suggestive of near cannibalism and near paganism, two traits which represent the apotheosis of evil in medieval literature, as can be seen in the Anglo-Saxon poem Andreas but is also found in the Icelandic Sörla saga sterka, where the giantess Mána is seen preparing human flesh and horsemeat (Bradley 1982: 110-53; Lukman 1977: 46). This image in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ is linked with representations of Danish generosity and bravery, creating a scene which seems to be deliberately ambiguous, situating the Danes between good and evil. That the Danes are considered to be better than the Norwegians is illustrated in succeeding references. The following entry identifies the Norwegians as entirely pagan and shortly after shows the Norwegians to be levying heavy taxes and breaking their oaths to the Irish (§§236, 239, 243). The portrayal indicates a highly unfavourable view of this viking group. Such a picture provides a suitable backdrop to Cerball’s ‘great massacre’ of Norwegians, which is soon related (§249). It also justifies Cerball’s acceptance of the Danes’ request to ally with him against the Norwegians (§251). This pact allows more Norwegians to be slain (§254), and Cerball is shown to inspire great fear among his enemies, demonstrated during a nocturnal attack on his camp: ‘This is how Cerball came out of his chamber: with a huge royal candle before him, and the light of that candle shone far in every direction. Great terror seized the Norwegians, and they fled to the nearby mountains and to the woods’ (§277: As amlaidh táinig Cearball immach asa grianán 7 rioghchainnel mhór re(a)imhe, 7 rá bhoí soilsi na caindle sin go fada ar gach leith. Ra ghabh úamhan mór na Lochlannaig; 7 ra theichsiot fona sleibhtibh faigsibh dhóibh 7 fona cailltibh). This is not the only incident where Norwegian cowardice is exaggerated: in a later battle ‘they fled into the bog and were all killed in the bog, and dogs devoured their corpses’ (§338: ro theichsiod ’san mhónaidh gur ro marbhaidh ’san mónaidh uile iad, go nduattar coin a ccolla). As in the incident of the cooking spits, this seems to be regarded as an appropriate end for the Norwegians’ various crimes. The most heinous people, Gall-Goídil, are introduced part-way through this fourth section of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’. They are initially described as Gaels who abandon their faith and join Scandinavians in plundering churches (§244). In the next allusion they are called vikings’ foster-children who deserved to be killed (§247). Finally we are told that ‘although the original Northmen were evil to the churches, these were much worse’ (§260: ger bó olc na Normannaigh bunaidh dona h-eaglaisibh, bá measa go mór iad-saidhe). Thus the image of the Gall-Goídil deteriorates with each


description and emphasis is placed on their apostasy. It can be argued from medieval Irish literature (as from elsewhere in Christian writing) that this makes them worse than pagans, as people who knowingly reject God rather than merely being ignorant of Him (see for example Bernard and Atkinson 1898: I, 68, and II, 151, 156; Carey 1998: 35). These descriptions may serve as a prelude to and a vindication of Cerball’s alliance with Norwegians to wage war against Gall-Goídil in 858 (§263). Cerball then proceeds to ally with Norwegians against the people of Mide. The only way in which the author defended this action was by referring in the same entry to praise poems made for Cerball. There follows a brief lament on Irish disunity (§§265, 266). Thus the author promoted the idea that it was acceptable for Cerball to ally with some vikings as long as he was seen to use them against worse afflictions. The images of different viking-groups seem to have been deliberately manipulated for this purpose. The final point which I wish to develop concerns the extent to which the portrayal of viking-groups in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ reflects eleventh-century perceptions of viking identities as much as ninth-century realities. Gall-Goídil are named for a brief period in the mid- ninth century in an Irish context. They reappear in eleventh-century references to Galloway in Scotland (The Annals of Ulster 1034.10). The statement in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ that the ninth-century Gall-Goídil were fosterchildren of the vikings has been rejected by recent commentators (Crawford 1987: 47; Dumville 1997: 26; Ó Corráin 1998b: 326; Ní Mhaonaigh 2001: 391-92). Instead it has been argued that they represent a group of mixed ethnicity who first appear in the Gaelic world in the 850s following viking settlement in the Hebrides and Ireland (Dumville 1997: 26-29). How valid then are the other ethnic interpretations? The identification, made by ‘The Fragmentary Annals’, of eleventh-century Danes (Danair) with ninth-century Dark Foreigners (Dubgaill) on the one hand, and Norwegians (Lochlannaig) with Fair Foreigners (Finngaill) on the other, has recently been criticised (Dumville, forthcoming). These colour terms, ‘fair’ and ‘dark’, which were used in the ninth and tenth centuries, cannot satisfactorily be applied to ethnic distinctions such as hair colour or dress, although various commentators have attempted to do so. Alfred Smyth has argued from the basis of Irish genealogical literature that ‘light’ or ‘fair’ is associated with older lineages or individuals. ‘Dark’ is applied to younger ones. A possible translation for these terms is ‘new’ and ‘old’ Foreigners (Smyth 1974-7). The Dark Foreigners arrived in Ireland in the mid-ninth century: they were therefore ‘newer’ than the vikings who were there before. The vikings who were already established in Ireland were identified as Fair Foreigners following the arrival of this new group (The Annals of Ulster 850[=851].3; The Annals the Four Masters 849 [=851]; Chronicum Scotorum [851]).


It has been argued that the ethnic distinctions, Norwegians and Danes, are unlikely to have been recognised by Irish chroniclers in the ninth century. Thus their later equation with the names Finngaill and Dubgaill is wrong. Dubgaill can be consistently linked with the family and descendants of the ninth-century viking leader Ívarr. Dumville has suggested that the name describes vikings under the leadership of this family. Comparison with other European chronicles also suggests a lack of concern to categorise viking groups in terms of ethnicity in the ninth century. Distinctions are rather based on the name of viking leaders and their location in an immediate local context. An example is provided by the Seine and Loire vikings, two rival groups named in Frankish chronicles (Gillmor 1998). One solution to these difficulties is to present the possibility that the author of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ reinvented (or adopted a reinvention) of the terms Fair and Dark Foreigner along ethnic lines, guided by political circumstances in the eleventh century. According to the ‘The Annals of Ulster’, Danair or Danes as an identifiable group first appeared on the Irish political scene in the late 980s when Svein Forkbeard began mounting campaigns against England.2 By the 1030s, when our narrative appears to have been written, Danes had become significant players in Insular politics. This decade also witnessed much friction in the relationship between Danes and Norwegians, who are equated with the inveterate enemies Dubgaill and Finngaill in ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ (Syrett 2001: 75). It may have made sense to an eleventh-century chronicler to interpret ninth-century rival groups in terms of contemporary politics. As ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ is the first surviving text to provide this ethnic interpretation, the subsequent widespread use of those interpretations deserves to be questioned. In summary, one can say that the author of the pseudo-historical narrative in the fourth section of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ based his account on records of events found in earlier chronicles. These reports were elaborated and reworked in order to enhance the image of Cerball of Osraige. This served the political ends of his descendants in the eleventh century. The portrayals of vikings are thus a blend of fact and fiction and ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ is the earliest known text to make explicit ethnic identifications for the labels Fair and Dark Foreigner. This has been accepted by most subsequent historians, but this may be a retrospective interpretation which was developed in this fascinating chronicle.3


Notes 1. Based on Radner 1978: xxix-xxx. The dates given were verified by cross-reference with other

chronicle-sources: Fragmentary Annals §§239, 254, 377; cf. The Annals of Ulster, 853.2, 856.6, 869.4; Chronicum Scotorum, [853], [856], [869]. Fragmentary Annals §§262, 263 and 280 may be linked to ‘The Osraige Chronicle’.

2. The Annals of Ulster 985[=986].2, 985[=986].3; A distinction between Danair and Gall is suggested by The Annals of the Four Masters 989[=990].

3. I would like to thank Erik Kooper who made my attendance at the Medieval Chronicle conference possible through a subsidy from Utrecht University. My thanks also go to David Dumville who read and corrected a draught of this paper, and to Dan MacCarthy who read and discussed the Appendix.


APPENDIX

Chronology and structure in the fourth fragment of

‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ What we appear to have in this section of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ is a combination of two major texts with minor additions. Both of the major texts appear to have been chronicles. Joan Radner has argued that brief annalistic records from a version of the lost ‘Chronicle of Clonmacnoise’ (which she called ‘The Irish World Annals’) provided a chronological backbone into which longer pseudo-historical narratives from ‘The Osraige Chronicle’ were inserted (Radner 1978: xiii). Some additional material seems to have been included in the compilation which cannot readily be assigned to either the ‘The Chronicle of Clonmacnoise’ or ‘the Osraige Chronicle’. The argument that most of the shorter entries in ‘The Fragmentary Annals’ derive from a single chronicle is supported by the succession of kalend-markers which are predominantly associated with the shorter ‘Clonmacnoise-chronicle’ entries. This is demonstrated in the table below. Entries with kalend-markers 237 240 241 245 256 (260 264 271 282 285 308 312 325 331 343 351 367 378 389 402

Year 849 850 851 852 853 *858 859 856 857 *858 862 863 *865 *865 866 867 869 870 871 872

Other method of dating within entry 12th regnal year of Maelshechlainn)


Out of twenty-one kalend markers there are two cases where one year appears to have two kalends. I have shown these with an asterisk, above. These could imply that two texts organised by kalend markers were used. Often a kalend marked entry is followed by a group of short entries belonging to the same year, which may have been lifted together from a single text (for example, §§ 238, 257-59, 272-76, 283-85, 287-91, 308, 313, 332-36, 344-45, 352-60, 368-76, 379-86, 390-99, and 403-7). Such order does not always prevail, as some of the shorter entries are not chronologically linked to the nearest kalend marker, and their order is confused (for example, §§ 295-307, and 361-64). For the most part, however, the short entries appear to stem from a single chronicle text. The impression that two major source chronicles have been spliced together in this section of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ is reinforced as chronological dislocations in the text are often introduced at the interface between the shorter annal entries and the pseudo-historical narratives (for example at §§ 237, 256, 260, 270, 277, 282, 292, 295, 316, 343; Radner 1978: xxix-xxx). The two types of entry maintain a degree of chronological order when considered as separate elements, but they have been poorly combined with respect to the sequence of years (Radner 1978: xxxiii). The compilation of the two main elements in ‘The Fragmentary Annals’ appears to predate the late fourteenth-century Book of Mac Aedhagáin. This intermediate stage or stages in the textual history of the text is suggested by ‘The Annals of the Four Masters’. This seventeenth-century chronicle draws on both main elements of our chronicle. Joan Radner has identified twenty-nine entries unique to ‘The Annals of the Four Masters’ and ‘The Fragmentary Annals’ for the years from 849 to 873 (Radner 1978: xxix-xxx). Occasionally ‘The Annals of the Four Masters’ has a fuller record of events in these entries, which indicates some relationship with another earlier version of our chronicle (§§ 293, 318). The dating of the compilation called ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ has been linked to the pseudo-historical element within the text. This describes affairs in Osraige and it has been assigned (as mentioned above) to the eleventh century. It is not clear to me that the pseudo-historical narrative in the text was composed at the same time as ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ were compiled (Radner 1999, 323). Instead I propose a date for the compilation of ‘The Fragmentary Annals of Ireland’ after the composition of ‘The Osraige Chronicle’ and before the Book of Giolla na Naemh Mac Aedhagáin (therefore c.1030× c.1400).


Bibliography Primary Sources Altus Prosator. See The Irish Liber Hymnorum (I, 62-83, and II, 23-26, 142-69), and Carey (1998:

31-50). Anglo-Saxon Poetry: An Anthology of Old English Poems. Trans. S. A. J. Bradley. London: Dent,

1982. Annala Rioghachta Eireann: Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland by the Four Masters, from the

Earliest Times to the Year 1616. Ed. and trans. John O’Donovan. 2nd edition. 7 vols. Dublin: Hodges, Smith and Company, 1856.

The Annals of Inisfallen (MS Rawlinson B.503). Ed. and trans. Seán Mac Airt. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1951.

The Annals of Ulster (to A.D. 1131). Ed. and trans. Seán Mac Airt and G. Mac Niocaill. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1983.

Chronicum Scotorum: a Chronicle of Irish affairs, from the Earliest Times to A.D. 1135: with a

Supplement, containing the Events from 1141 to 1150. Ed. and trans. William M. Hennessy. London: Longmans, Green, Reader and Dyer, 1866.

Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh: The War of the Gaedhil with the Gaill, or the Invasions of Ireland

by the Danes and other Norsemen. Ed. and trans. James Henthorn Todd. London: Rolls Series, 1867.

Fragmentary Annals of Ireland. Ed. and trans. Joan N. Radner. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1978.

The Irish Liber Hymnorum. Ed. and trans. J. H. Bernard and R. Atkinson. 2 vols. London: Henry Bradshaw Society, 1898.

Secondary Literature Byrne, Francis J. (1973). Irish Kings and High-Kings. London: B. T. Batsford. Carey, John, trans. (1998). King of Mysteries. Early Irish Religious Writings. Dublin: Four Courts

Press. Clarke, Howard B., et al., ed. (1998). Ireland and Scandinavia in the Early Viking Age. Dublin:

Four Courts Press. Crawford, Barbara E. (1987). Scandinavian Scotland. Leicester: Leicester University Press. Duffy, Seán (1992). ‘Irishmen and Islesmen in the Kingdoms of Dublin and Man, 1052-1171.’ Ériu

43: 93-133. Dumville, David N. (1997). The Churches of North Britain in the First Viking-Age. Whithorn:

Friends of the Whithorn Trust. ——— (1999). ‘A Millennium of Gaelic Chronicling.’ In The Medieval Chronicle. I. Ed. Erik

Kooper. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 103-15. ——— (forthcoming). ‘Ethnicity, Politics, and Settlement in Viking-Age Britain and Ireland: a

Historian’s View.’ Etchingham, Colmán (2001). ‘North Wales, Ireland and the Isles: the Insular Viking Zone.’ Peritia

15: 145-87. Gillmor, Carroll (1998). ‘Wars on the Rivers: Viking Numbers and Mobility on the Seine and Loire,

841-886.’ Viator 19: 79-110.


Lukman, Niels (1977). ‘An Irish Source and Some Icelandic Fornaldarsögur.’ Mediaeval

Scandinavia 10: 41-57. MacShamhráin, Ailbhe (2002). The Vikings: An Illustrated History. Dublin: Wolfhound Press. McTurk, Rory (1991). Studies in Ragnars Saga Loðbrókar and its Major Scandinavian Analogues.

Oxford: Society for the Study of Mediaeval Languages and Literature. Ní Mhaonaigh, Máire (1996). ‘Cocad Gáedel re Gallaib and the Annals: a Comparison.’ Ériu 47:

101-26. ——— (1998). ‘Friend and Foe: Vikings in Ninth- and Tenth-Century Irish Literature.’ In Clarke

(1998). 381-404. ——— (2001). ‘The Outward Look: Britain and Beyond in Medieval Irish Literature.’ In The

Medieval World. Ed. Peter Linehan and Janet T. Nelson. London: Routeledge. 381-97. Ó Corráin, Donnchadh (1972). Ireland before the Normans. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan. ——— (1974). ‘Caithréim Chellacháin Chaisil: History or Propaganda?’ Ériu 25: 1-69. ——— (1975). ‘Nationality and Kingship in Pre-Norman Ireland.’ Historical Studies [Irish

Conference of Historians] 11: 1-35. ——— (1998a). ‘Viking Ireland — Afterthoughts.’ In Clarke (1998). 421-52. ——— (1998b). ‘The Vikings in Scotland and Ireland in the Ninth Century.’ Peritia 12: 296-339. Ó Muraíle, Nollaig (1996). The Celebrated Antiquary Dubhaltach Mac Fhirbisigh (c. 1600-1671):

his lineage, life and learning. Maynooth: An Sagart. Ó Riain, Pádraig, ed. (1978). Cath Almaine. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies. Radner, Joan N. (1978). See Fragmentary Annals of Ireland. ——— (1999). ‘Writing History: Early Irish Historiography and the Significance of Form.’ Celtica

23: 312-25. Smyth, Alfred P. (1974-7). ‘The Black Foreigners of York and the White Foreigners of Dublin.’

Saga-book of the Viking Society 19: 101-17. Syrett, Martin (2001). Scandinavian History in the Viking Age. A Select Bibliography. Cambridge:

Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse, and Celtic, University of Cambridge. Todd, James Henthorn (1867). See Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh. Van Den Gheyn, Joseph, et al. (1901-48). Catalogue des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque royale de

Belgique. 13 vols. Bruxelles: Henri Lamertin (etc.).

good bad and ugly by claire downham

Documents