Historical Context
The Viking Invasions:
 According to the sagas, during this period the Vikings were oppressive
and onerous foreign invaders in Ireland, e.g. they reputedly cut off the
noses of those that did not pay them yearly taxes, displaced native landowners
and forcibly took the best land, forcibly removed young people to other
countries, billeted Viking warriors in private homes, etc.. Many written
sources describe how domineering and how miserably they treated the native
Irish in the areas they controlled (see e.g. The War of the Gaedhil with
the Gaill, J. Todd, 1867; Bugge 1905). On the positive side, they founded
many towns in Ireland and engaged in commerce (as well as piracy). Some
contemporary historians argue for a revision of this view of the Vikings
and argue that they were more peaceable and more assimilated into the culture
(Maire Ni Mhaonaigh 1998; O Corrain 1998).
The chaos of Ireland in the early tenth century (the period just before
Ceallachan was elected king in 944 AD) has been described by historians
Peter and Fiona Somerset Fry as follows:
"Early in the tenth century there was a renewal of large-scale
Viking raids on Ireland. This time the raiders came not from Scandanavia
but from Scotland and northern England, made up of warriors from families
long established in those parts. Many areas were attacked, and the worst
affected area appears to have been Munster, which was penetrated deeply
in several sectors" (Frey and Frey, 1988, A History of Ireland,
Routledge: London and New York, p. 52).
This makes clearer what was meant when an Irish poet described Ceallachan
as
"Ceallachan chosnas a chro."
"Ceallachan who defends his home" (Bugge 1905).
Early events during Ceallachan's reign
"Ceallachan of Munster . . . after his accession, had begun to
rebuild Eoghanacht supremacy in the kingdom, taking the Danish strongholds
in Cork and Waterford. Following the usual procedure, the towns had been
evacuated, but not reduced, after their capitulation; and while Ceallachan
concentrated on his scores with the Ui Neill, he allowed the Danes slowly
to return and restore.. . . The Ardri ["High King" or monarch],
Donnchadh, viewed developments in silent fury for, as the annalists recount
[The Annals of the Four Masters] he 'displayed no great talents or patriotism,
and envied the exploits of Ceallachan, which he ought to have imitated .
. .'" (Newman 1983:61).
 A Cleric and Warrior from the Cross of the Scriptures,
Clonmacnoise (McClintock 1950: Fig.3; Photo by T. H. Mason & Sons, Dublin).
What it meant to be an Eoghanact and the King of Munster.
O Corrain has stated that: "According to the classical law tracts,
there were three distinct grades of king: ri or ri tuaithe,
the king of the local tuath or petty tribal kingdom; ruiri or
great king who, in addition to being king of his own tuath, was the
personal overlord of a number of other tribal kings; and lastly, ri ruirech
or 'king of overkings', who is identified with the king of a province. No
higher grade of king, 'high king' or king of Ireland is known to the classical
law texts" (O Corrain 1972:28). Ceallachan was a ri ruirech
or king of overkings i.e. the king of the province of Munster. Munster was
the largest, richest, and most beautiful province of Ireland.
The kingship of Munster was a "well-developed institution.. .
. An early law tract states baldly that 'supreme among kings is the king
of Munster' and the dictum bespeaks a self-confidence which is borne out
by the annals. Another law text refers to the special position of the provincial
king in terms of his rechtgae rig 'special royal ordinance', 'as
in the case of the rechtgae of the king of Cashel'" (D. O Croinin,
1995, Early Medieval Ireland 400-1200, Longman: London and New York. pp.58-59).
 eallachan identified himself (as did his followers) as an Eoghanacht
of Munster. In the second century Oilill Olum was said to have controlled
all of southern Ireland. He divided it between his sons Cormac Cas and Eoghan
Mor. The descendants of Oilill Olum are the Eoghanacta (Newman 1983:49).
The Dal Cas of Thomond (northern Munster) trace their lineage through Cormac
Cas and the Eoghanact trace their lineage through Eoghan Mor. Ceallachan
claimed to be a direct descendant in this royal line and that is part of
the reason why he was able to successfully become king. He was elected by
17 tribes as their leader. He probably was perceived by those that made
him king to be able to do something to restore Munster and the Eoghanacts.
As the Eoghanacht king, Ceallachan would have to militarily drive
the Danes and Norwegians out of Cashel, Cork, and Waterford, keep the Ui
Neill's of Ulster out of Munster, and keep the Dalcassians of Munster who
were allies, but also competitors for the kingship of Munster, which alternated,
from usurping him.
The monastery at Clonmacnoise was in Ui Neill controlled territory
and was generally allied with the Ui Neill's of Ulster (and was therefore
no friend of an Eoghanacht Munster). According to Bart Jaski, "The
influence of the Vikings on political developments in Ireland from c.850
to 980 was considerable, and they contributed significantly to the decline
of the Uí Néill as the paramount dynasty. On several occasions
they served as mercenaries or allies of Irish kings who resisted the power
of the king of Tara" (Jaski, Peritia 9; 1995:310-53). According to
the Chronicum Scotorum, Danes and Ceallachan's men both plundered
Clonmacnoise. It was also plundered by other churchmen and other Irishmen
over the centuries. The annals report a couple of hundred instances of the
plundering of monasteries over time, often by Irish forces. Different monasteries
even raised armies and went to war with each other and other political leaders.
O Corrain states that after 849 AD "the Vikings had become familiar
with the country; they had founded small but fairly permanent settlements
and had become a factor in the country's politics, and they were accepted
as such. Likewise the Irish had grown familiar with them, and from this
point Norse-Irish alliances, especially in the incessant dynastic squabbles
and in the struggle for paramountcy amongst the Irish kings, became commonplace.
Nor were such activities looked upon with reproach" (O Corrain 1972:92-93).
O Corrain points out that Viking cities in Ireland sometimes attacked each
other (e.g. Vikings from Dublin attacked Viking Limerick in 924 AD) and
sometimes one Viking city allied with the Irish to drive out Vikings from
another city (e.g. Viking Limerick allied with the Irish in Munster in 926
AD to repel an incursion from the Vikings of Waterford). A couple of modern
ethnocentric historians have tried to adopt a moralistic tone as a result
of an entry in the annals that Ceallachan "partaked with Danes"
however temporary alliances of that nature were commonplace during that
century.
 Two Chiefs from the Cross of the Scriptures, Clonmacnoise (McClintock
1950: Fig.2; Photo by T. H. Mason & Sons, Dublin).
The High Kingship of Ireland was not hereditary and shifted from province
to province over time so the fact that an Ui Neill happened to be High King
at the time did not mean it would stay there. The Kings of Munster had been
High Kings both before and after this period. According to the Frys, "There
was practically no cooperation, no understanding of alliance, between the
four main kingdoms (Ulster, Connacht, Leinster, Munster), or between the
many subkingdoms nominally owing allegiance to one or other of the four.
Indeed, few Irishmen grasped the concept of national unity. The high kingship,
which in theory carried the right to call out a national army in time of
danger, was seldom recognized in any one person by everyone else. The role
was not an hereditary one, even though the Ui Neills who, from Tara, ruled
much of the north and some of the east, had some claim and did from time
to time assert it" (Fry and Fry 1988:53).
 Ceallachan basically accomplished all of these military and political
goals in about ten years and also demonstrated the personal qualities people
looked for in a tenth century king. For this he was apparently loved by
his followers and respected and feared by his enemies.
Hindsight and Historical Perspectives
Later historians do not necessarily view individuals from the perspective
of their own time. Some historians who look backwards in time with a nationalist
and pro-monarchist perspective see provincial kings asserting and restoring
their traditional rights as impediments to the gradual historical progress
of nationalism (and those pesky Scots should never have opposed rule from
London). Historians often disagree with each other on major points.
Some historians like Peter and Fiona Somerset Fry (1988:53) who, in
hindsight, see the major threat to Ireland in the tenth century to have
been the Viking foreigners, somehow claim he did not do enough to drive
them out and restore Eoghanacht power (a rather easy thing to say from an
armchair a thousand years later. If they actually were standing in the front
lines facing a foreign enemy with superior armor I suspect they might have
a slightly different perspective of Ceallachan's accomplishments. The Freys
do acknowledge that he had to contend not only with the Vikings but with
threats from the Ui Neill's who temporarily, at least, made him a captive
as described in the Circuit of Ireland).
You should keep in mind that although he and his followers won their
battles, Ceallachan's enemies, including monks whose monasteries had been
sacked by Ceallachan, wrote some of the history and the poems such as in
the various annals and The Circuit of Ireland.
This would be analogous to reading a biographical description of William
Wallace (the thirteenth century historical figure portrayed in the movie
"Braveheart") written by his political enemy, King Edward I.
 In the ever changing period of struggles, invasions, and quickly
shifting alliances between 300 AD and 1100 AD it was not clear which, if
any, area might end up in control of Ireland, and if that control would
only be temporary. Historically, the King of Munster did not recognize any
higher legal authority. Donnchadh, the Ui Neill High King, (not to be confused
with Donnchadh of Caem, Ceallachan's friend and ally) had approved the Viking
plot to kill Ceallachan and they were mortal enemies.
There is some indication that Ceallachan considered himself a high
king (with a small "h") as opposed to what a historian might call
a "petty" king. Munster was a free territory and Ceallaghan was
presumably responsible for maintaining that free status.
Ireland had areas of free territories and areas of subjection. At
the time that Muircheartach of the Leather Cloaks was traveling clockwise
('keeping his left hand to the sea') around Ireland taking hostages (like
Ceallaghan of Cashell), to consolidate his power as heir to the throne,
he was allied with the Ui Neill (Ui Niall), Donnchadh, the Ardri, "High
King," or monarch.
In earlier years, however, this same Muircheartach had feuded with
Donnchadh (the High King) and they had been enemies. The two laid aside
their differences just before a battle.
 Left: Detail showing the exile of Columcille from the Cross of Muiredach,
Monasterboice (Porter 1931: Fig.52).
Muircheartach, who was the heir to the throne of Ireland, undertook
an unexpected winter expedition with 1000 men around Ireland to consolidate
power. The long standing practice of taking hostages was to ensure political
loyalty (or at least temporary control) and could avoid battles.
A. J. Goedheer in Irish and Norse Traditions about the Battle of
Clontarf (Haarlem:Tjenk & Zoon) described this episode as follows:
"A remarkable feat was accomplished by Niall's son Muirchertach
of the Leather Cloaks, king of Aileech, who made a circuit of all Ireland
with a thousand men in 941 and brought back the hostages of the kingdoms,
except those of the Dal Cais in co.Clare. The hostages were handed over
to the reigning high-king Donnchadh. This campaign was held in winter and
the warriors protected themselves against the cold by the leather cloaks
from which the king received his surname. Their arrival must have made a
deep impression, for the circuit was achieved almost without a blow being
struck. A campaign round the whole country, and in winter too, was an event
without precedent. High-kings usually preferred to interfere as little as
possible with the neighboring kingdoms, especially with Munster, which for
a long time had held an isolated position" (Goedheer 1938:113-114).
Daily Life in Ireland during the 10th Century
This is a large subject which is beyond the present scope of this
website. You might want to read Donnchadh O Corrain's Ireland before
the Normans (1972) where he generally described politics and
society in Ireland during the 350 years between the first Viking raids and
the Norman invasion. Chapter 2 describes the structure of Irish society
and of the economy during this period. |
