This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kingdom of the Isles article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Kingdom of the Isles has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"To the MacSorleys and Manx kings, as well as to others who plied the western seas in their war-galley, these seaways defined their core; Scotland, Ireland, and England were their periphery." —R. A. McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles
I hope the list gets restored in an accurate form, soon. Srnec ( talk) 00:12, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Removing the list entirely was not really appropriate. Undoubtedly, with information of this era, there will be discrepancies and parts that are less clear - and this will tend to get worse the further back you go. Likewise, there are different Anglicisations of the spellings. However, there are other sections that are pretty well established. So, instead of wholesale removal, the particular sections of concern should be addressed. Mauls ( talk) 17:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Disagree. Users on other projects are copying this list believing it to be accurate. In fact, names like Svein Kennethsson border on WP:HOAX. I will put in a more reliable list ... spellings will likely be addressed as Angus (as he surely will) or someone else goes through each ruler. Another problem that needs addressed is that being ruler of Man doesn't make you ruler of the Isles. That's a different list that coincides a few times, but not enough to merge the two lists. What's more, after Somerled they verifiably have almost nothing to do with each other (save a few invasions). Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 08:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I've done a more reliable list in my userspace. But I'm reluctant to add just yet because this article currently doubles up on:
While there is no article on actual rulers of the Isles. "King of Mann and the Isles" was just a title used by some of the late kings of Man to claim overlordship [ineffectively] over other islands. One is tempted to get rid of this article and the King of Man and create a new List of rulers of the Isle of Man and List of rulers in the kingdom of the Isles (or something like that). Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 09:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
[Restored from previous version of this page - history is at Talk:Kingdom of Man and the Isles]
What are the sources that Orkney and Shetland were ever a part of this kingdom? I have never seen that mentioned anywhere.-- Barend ( talk) 21:46, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Before any more work is done here, editors need to know that most of what exists in this article, including much of the table contents, is going to get thrown out. The sources currently being used are no good. I don't have the time right now, but eventually I or someone will come along with the annals and modern scholarly literature. DinDraithou ( talk) 15:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Excellent - that is how we improve articles - by adding better sources. I make no pretence of being an historian and I am doing my best at making sense of what is clearly a complex period with the sources I have. I assume you are grumbling about Gregory as the other two I have used so far (Hunter & Thomson) seem more than adequate to me. If there are on-line sources you can recommend, all the better. Ben Mac Dui 16:54, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Well it's now 2 years, 11 months and 6 days since the original discussion above started. The article is now somewhat longer, although whether it is really closer to the truth is a matter for debate.
1) The real problem with the sources is not dates and names - although they are perplexing enough, it is the almost total lack of information about the geography of the islands displayed by the writers, especially of the Irish chronicles. Given their proximity and the connection to Dalriada it is baffling. At times one suspect that by "the Isles" they mean simply the Isle of Man and its outliers. There are almost no specifics at all until the late 12th century.
2) The contrasting views of the sources make life difficult and I have attempted to address some of these in the "notes"
3) Given the many choices of names (see e.g. Amlaíb Cuarán) I have tried to:
4) Arguably the article is too long and could be split into earlier and later. Arguably the title is incorrect. Very few of the rulers had the style "King of Mann and the Isles" and the Manx kings that did were generally not the rulers of the entire territory but it is at least convenient to use the term . "Rulers of the Suðreyjar" might be more accurate, but this a much less common name.
5) A lot of tweaks needed but I don't think there is any point in sorting out the details until it becomes clear the general outline is acceptable.
6) Some details.
There is, I think, an alternate and better way to display what is going on. Unfortunately it is an exercise in OR. If we accept:
We have the table below.
This may explain the higher number of Norse place names in the northern Hebrides and the lack of Hebridean place names in the Irish annals. It also avoids silly overlapping dynasties in the ruler lists for the late 10th and the 11th century and deals with the Echmarcach mac Ragnaill problem. Ben Mac Dui 08:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Ui Imair rulers of Mann | Dates | Norse rulers of the Hebrides | Dates |
---|---|---|---|
Gofraidh | ?-873 | Kettil Flatnose | 890-900 |
Ivar | 873 | Thorstein the Red | |
Ragnall ua Ímair | - 914 | ||
Sihtric Cáech | ?-927 | ||
Aulaf mac Sitric | c. 941?–980 | ||
Maccus mac Arailt | 980–? | ||
Gofraid mac Arailt | ?–989 | Gilli | 990–? |
Ragnal mac Gofraid | ?–1005 | Sigurd the Stout | 1005–1014 |
Unknown | 1015–? | ||
Gothfrith ua Ímair | pre 927 to? | ||
Olaf Sigtryggsson* | ?–1034 | ||
Echmarcach mac Ragnaill* | 1030s-1061 - NB | Thorfinn the Mighty | c 1035–c 1064 NB |
Murchad mac Diarmata* | 1061–1070 | ||
Diarmait mac Maíl na mBó | 1070–1072 | Decreasing Norse influence under Irish pressure | 1070-98 |
Godred Sitricson | ? - 1074 | ||
Fingal Godredson | 1074- ? | ||
Godred Crovan | 1079–1094 | Godred Crovan | 1079–1094 |
Instability | 1095–1098 | Instability | 1095–1098 |
[Restored from previous version of this page - history is at Talk:Kingdom of Man and the Isles]
I think the title "Kingdom of Mann and the Isles" should be kept as a redirect to Kings of Mann and the Isles (as it is currently titled). The article here adds little except a template, Infobox Former Country and a few "see also"s and there is very little in the way of information available about the nature of the Kingdom itself. The only purpose of keeping it would be if the short Geography section at "Kings" could be expanded in some way here plus a bit of archaeology, but it's hard to see that happening. Ben Mac Dui 15:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
My sources for Mann are not extensive and there are a number of issues.
The Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium of Societas Celtologica Nordica, pp. 13-14 has a comment by Etchingham as follows:
The second poetic reference to Laith- linn, recently publicised, occurs in a verse attached to the Four Masters’ version of the annal-record of a battle in 868 at Cell ua nDaigri—according to Edmund Hogan (1910: 214), Killineer near Drogheda, Co. Louth.
- Dos-fail dar Findabhair find
- Fiallach grinn dond Laithlind luind
- As ar chédaibh rímhter Goill
- Do cath fri rígh nÉtair n-uill"
- There comes over fair Findabair
- a keen host from fierce Laithlinn
- the Foreigners are counted in hundreds
- to do battle with the king of great Étar’
He gets excited about the mention of Laithlinn, but (and I accept that I speak neither Norse nor Old Irish) isn't this a possible reference to Harald Fairhair? Ben Mac Dui 20:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Just came across this recent BBC story when Googling about: Viking ancestry explored on the Isle of Man by researchers. Here's the link to the project's website [7].-- Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 09:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I've been watching this interesting article for a while, without having much to contribute to it. I see Kingdom of Mann and the Isles was merged to here in January, and really this article is about much more than the Kings of Mann and the Isles. I can't help wondering if Kingdom of Mann and the Isles isn't a better title for the page? My second thought is that this must surely now be better than a Start class article, does anyone disagree with my making it a "C"? Moonraker2 ( talk) 21:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Was there even such a thing? It's seemingly a creation of Magnus Barelegs, and that's the only time it seems to exist; and Mann got regarded in the 12th century as some kind of centre for the whole Norwegian diocese of Sodor ("Man and the Isles") because that's where the bishop was, though it's no richer or more populous than islands like Islay and Skye. Man isn't much of a place. All the rulers of any importance prior to MB were primarily rulers of somewhere else (Dublin, Northumbria, Rhinns of Galloway). Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 16:26, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
The southern Hebrides for sure, although there is evidence of ongoing Crovan activity in the "North Isles". However, the main point here is the appearance of the concept "King of Mann and the Isles". The article currently has Godred the Black/Godred Olafsson using the title. This is from Duffy (1992), although on examination it is not clear cut. He refers to an attack on Dublin, apparently in 1162, which he says may refer to "an attempt by the king of Man and the Isles to annex Dublin". But is this just an expression rather than a specific appellation? Lower down on the same page we read that Gofraid is the "king of Man" although on the next page he lets "all the chieftains of the Isles (omnes principes insularum) return home." I'd say not proven, but either way I don't think it has a bearing on the page move, which there seems to be agreement on. Just as well there are no passing post-structuralists (- what do we mean by "king", Mann", "Isles" etc. etc.). Ben Mac Dui
@ MacDui, yes for a and b. @ Brianann, you're a bit confused on several points, so I suggest you read what I've written again and check out Sellar again, the list of styles on table 1. Sellar provides a list of royal styles that show the "King of Mann and the Isles" is only used by two Manx rulers who died in the 1240s. I quoted myself because you made a statement which showed no knowledge of some things I'd previously written, so I draw attention to the relevant passage for you. Ideally people would read what's already been written and there wouldn't be a need for self-quotations. :) Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 10:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
This is note #31, which is sourced from "Gregory (1881) p. 5".
"The Anecdotes of Olave the Black states that there were 3 Sudreyan kings all existing at one time who were sons of Somerled and who were "very untrue to King Haco".
I don't think that Somerled's son Angus should be listed amongst the kings in the chart. He was killed in 1210, long before Uspak's expedition in c1230. I don't see where Gregory makes him a king, or includes him amongst the three 'untrue kings'. According to Anderson 1922a, pp.lxi-lxii, Johnstone translated and edited parts of Hákonar saga Hákonarsonar in his 1780 Anecdotes of Olave the Black.
Here's Johnstone's 18th century translation of the relevant part p.5:
"But the Sudureyan Kings, they which were Somerleds family, were very untrue to King Haco. These Kings of the Sudreys were Dugal Scrag, and Duncan his Brother the father of John who since was King. They were the sons of Dugal the son of Somerled. A person named Uspac had long been with the Birkebeins. It came out that he was the son of King Dugal, and brother to the other two. A relation of theirs, called Somerled, was then also a King in the Sudreys.
Here's a 20th century translation of the relevant part: Anderson 1922b, pp.464-465:
"But the kings of the Hebrides, who had come of Somerled's race, were very unfaithful to king Hakon. The kings in the Hebrides were Dugald Screech, and his brother Duncan, the father of John was king afterwards. These were the sons of Dungal, Somerled's son. Uspak was the name of a man who had long been with the Birchlegs; it came out that he was a son of Dungal. Somerled was the name of a relative of theirs, who was then another king in the Hebrides".
So the 'three kings' weren't the sons of Somerled, but his descendants. Dugald Screech and Duncan are certainly sons of Somerled's son Dugald; Uspak and the other Somerled could also be sons of Dugald (see Sellar Hebridean Sea-Kings p.202, and the chart on p.194). Here's Sellar on p.195:
"Of Angus nothing is known, save that he fought and defeated his brother Ranald in 1192, and was killed along with his three sons in 1210. His line died out.
-- Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 09:33, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
I asked Malleus Fatuorum for some advice re advancing this article to GA etc. and he replied "I'd definitely spin the embedded tables out into a separate 'list' article; they really intrude on the narrative". Somewhat reluctantly, given the recent stability of the article, I have to agree on the grounds that the embedded tables also diminish the space available for further detail being added about the "kingdom" rather than its rulers. I'll embark on an extraction process in a few days unless I hear contrary opinions. Ben Mac Dui 19:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
I just noticed that couple weeks ago there were a few things written about the kingdom at http://www.iomtoday.co.im/
-- Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 10:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Kingdom of the Isles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kingdom of the Isles article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Kingdom of the Isles has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"To the MacSorleys and Manx kings, as well as to others who plied the western seas in their war-galley, these seaways defined their core; Scotland, Ireland, and England were their periphery." —R. A. McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles
I hope the list gets restored in an accurate form, soon. Srnec ( talk) 00:12, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Removing the list entirely was not really appropriate. Undoubtedly, with information of this era, there will be discrepancies and parts that are less clear - and this will tend to get worse the further back you go. Likewise, there are different Anglicisations of the spellings. However, there are other sections that are pretty well established. So, instead of wholesale removal, the particular sections of concern should be addressed. Mauls ( talk) 17:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Disagree. Users on other projects are copying this list believing it to be accurate. In fact, names like Svein Kennethsson border on WP:HOAX. I will put in a more reliable list ... spellings will likely be addressed as Angus (as he surely will) or someone else goes through each ruler. Another problem that needs addressed is that being ruler of Man doesn't make you ruler of the Isles. That's a different list that coincides a few times, but not enough to merge the two lists. What's more, after Somerled they verifiably have almost nothing to do with each other (save a few invasions). Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 08:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I've done a more reliable list in my userspace. But I'm reluctant to add just yet because this article currently doubles up on:
While there is no article on actual rulers of the Isles. "King of Mann and the Isles" was just a title used by some of the late kings of Man to claim overlordship [ineffectively] over other islands. One is tempted to get rid of this article and the King of Man and create a new List of rulers of the Isle of Man and List of rulers in the kingdom of the Isles (or something like that). Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 09:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
[Restored from previous version of this page - history is at Talk:Kingdom of Man and the Isles]
What are the sources that Orkney and Shetland were ever a part of this kingdom? I have never seen that mentioned anywhere.-- Barend ( talk) 21:46, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Before any more work is done here, editors need to know that most of what exists in this article, including much of the table contents, is going to get thrown out. The sources currently being used are no good. I don't have the time right now, but eventually I or someone will come along with the annals and modern scholarly literature. DinDraithou ( talk) 15:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Excellent - that is how we improve articles - by adding better sources. I make no pretence of being an historian and I am doing my best at making sense of what is clearly a complex period with the sources I have. I assume you are grumbling about Gregory as the other two I have used so far (Hunter & Thomson) seem more than adequate to me. If there are on-line sources you can recommend, all the better. Ben Mac Dui 16:54, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Well it's now 2 years, 11 months and 6 days since the original discussion above started. The article is now somewhat longer, although whether it is really closer to the truth is a matter for debate.
1) The real problem with the sources is not dates and names - although they are perplexing enough, it is the almost total lack of information about the geography of the islands displayed by the writers, especially of the Irish chronicles. Given their proximity and the connection to Dalriada it is baffling. At times one suspect that by "the Isles" they mean simply the Isle of Man and its outliers. There are almost no specifics at all until the late 12th century.
2) The contrasting views of the sources make life difficult and I have attempted to address some of these in the "notes"
3) Given the many choices of names (see e.g. Amlaíb Cuarán) I have tried to:
4) Arguably the article is too long and could be split into earlier and later. Arguably the title is incorrect. Very few of the rulers had the style "King of Mann and the Isles" and the Manx kings that did were generally not the rulers of the entire territory but it is at least convenient to use the term . "Rulers of the Suðreyjar" might be more accurate, but this a much less common name.
5) A lot of tweaks needed but I don't think there is any point in sorting out the details until it becomes clear the general outline is acceptable.
6) Some details.
There is, I think, an alternate and better way to display what is going on. Unfortunately it is an exercise in OR. If we accept:
We have the table below.
This may explain the higher number of Norse place names in the northern Hebrides and the lack of Hebridean place names in the Irish annals. It also avoids silly overlapping dynasties in the ruler lists for the late 10th and the 11th century and deals with the Echmarcach mac Ragnaill problem. Ben Mac Dui 08:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Ui Imair rulers of Mann | Dates | Norse rulers of the Hebrides | Dates |
---|---|---|---|
Gofraidh | ?-873 | Kettil Flatnose | 890-900 |
Ivar | 873 | Thorstein the Red | |
Ragnall ua Ímair | - 914 | ||
Sihtric Cáech | ?-927 | ||
Aulaf mac Sitric | c. 941?–980 | ||
Maccus mac Arailt | 980–? | ||
Gofraid mac Arailt | ?–989 | Gilli | 990–? |
Ragnal mac Gofraid | ?–1005 | Sigurd the Stout | 1005–1014 |
Unknown | 1015–? | ||
Gothfrith ua Ímair | pre 927 to? | ||
Olaf Sigtryggsson* | ?–1034 | ||
Echmarcach mac Ragnaill* | 1030s-1061 - NB | Thorfinn the Mighty | c 1035–c 1064 NB |
Murchad mac Diarmata* | 1061–1070 | ||
Diarmait mac Maíl na mBó | 1070–1072 | Decreasing Norse influence under Irish pressure | 1070-98 |
Godred Sitricson | ? - 1074 | ||
Fingal Godredson | 1074- ? | ||
Godred Crovan | 1079–1094 | Godred Crovan | 1079–1094 |
Instability | 1095–1098 | Instability | 1095–1098 |
[Restored from previous version of this page - history is at Talk:Kingdom of Man and the Isles]
I think the title "Kingdom of Mann and the Isles" should be kept as a redirect to Kings of Mann and the Isles (as it is currently titled). The article here adds little except a template, Infobox Former Country and a few "see also"s and there is very little in the way of information available about the nature of the Kingdom itself. The only purpose of keeping it would be if the short Geography section at "Kings" could be expanded in some way here plus a bit of archaeology, but it's hard to see that happening. Ben Mac Dui 15:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
My sources for Mann are not extensive and there are a number of issues.
The Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium of Societas Celtologica Nordica, pp. 13-14 has a comment by Etchingham as follows:
The second poetic reference to Laith- linn, recently publicised, occurs in a verse attached to the Four Masters’ version of the annal-record of a battle in 868 at Cell ua nDaigri—according to Edmund Hogan (1910: 214), Killineer near Drogheda, Co. Louth.
- Dos-fail dar Findabhair find
- Fiallach grinn dond Laithlind luind
- As ar chédaibh rímhter Goill
- Do cath fri rígh nÉtair n-uill"
- There comes over fair Findabair
- a keen host from fierce Laithlinn
- the Foreigners are counted in hundreds
- to do battle with the king of great Étar’
He gets excited about the mention of Laithlinn, but (and I accept that I speak neither Norse nor Old Irish) isn't this a possible reference to Harald Fairhair? Ben Mac Dui 20:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Just came across this recent BBC story when Googling about: Viking ancestry explored on the Isle of Man by researchers. Here's the link to the project's website [7].-- Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 09:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I've been watching this interesting article for a while, without having much to contribute to it. I see Kingdom of Mann and the Isles was merged to here in January, and really this article is about much more than the Kings of Mann and the Isles. I can't help wondering if Kingdom of Mann and the Isles isn't a better title for the page? My second thought is that this must surely now be better than a Start class article, does anyone disagree with my making it a "C"? Moonraker2 ( talk) 21:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Was there even such a thing? It's seemingly a creation of Magnus Barelegs, and that's the only time it seems to exist; and Mann got regarded in the 12th century as some kind of centre for the whole Norwegian diocese of Sodor ("Man and the Isles") because that's where the bishop was, though it's no richer or more populous than islands like Islay and Skye. Man isn't much of a place. All the rulers of any importance prior to MB were primarily rulers of somewhere else (Dublin, Northumbria, Rhinns of Galloway). Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 16:26, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
The southern Hebrides for sure, although there is evidence of ongoing Crovan activity in the "North Isles". However, the main point here is the appearance of the concept "King of Mann and the Isles". The article currently has Godred the Black/Godred Olafsson using the title. This is from Duffy (1992), although on examination it is not clear cut. He refers to an attack on Dublin, apparently in 1162, which he says may refer to "an attempt by the king of Man and the Isles to annex Dublin". But is this just an expression rather than a specific appellation? Lower down on the same page we read that Gofraid is the "king of Man" although on the next page he lets "all the chieftains of the Isles (omnes principes insularum) return home." I'd say not proven, but either way I don't think it has a bearing on the page move, which there seems to be agreement on. Just as well there are no passing post-structuralists (- what do we mean by "king", Mann", "Isles" etc. etc.). Ben Mac Dui
@ MacDui, yes for a and b. @ Brianann, you're a bit confused on several points, so I suggest you read what I've written again and check out Sellar again, the list of styles on table 1. Sellar provides a list of royal styles that show the "King of Mann and the Isles" is only used by two Manx rulers who died in the 1240s. I quoted myself because you made a statement which showed no knowledge of some things I'd previously written, so I draw attention to the relevant passage for you. Ideally people would read what's already been written and there wouldn't be a need for self-quotations. :) Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 10:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
This is note #31, which is sourced from "Gregory (1881) p. 5".
"The Anecdotes of Olave the Black states that there were 3 Sudreyan kings all existing at one time who were sons of Somerled and who were "very untrue to King Haco".
I don't think that Somerled's son Angus should be listed amongst the kings in the chart. He was killed in 1210, long before Uspak's expedition in c1230. I don't see where Gregory makes him a king, or includes him amongst the three 'untrue kings'. According to Anderson 1922a, pp.lxi-lxii, Johnstone translated and edited parts of Hákonar saga Hákonarsonar in his 1780 Anecdotes of Olave the Black.
Here's Johnstone's 18th century translation of the relevant part p.5:
"But the Sudureyan Kings, they which were Somerleds family, were very untrue to King Haco. These Kings of the Sudreys were Dugal Scrag, and Duncan his Brother the father of John who since was King. They were the sons of Dugal the son of Somerled. A person named Uspac had long been with the Birkebeins. It came out that he was the son of King Dugal, and brother to the other two. A relation of theirs, called Somerled, was then also a King in the Sudreys.
Here's a 20th century translation of the relevant part: Anderson 1922b, pp.464-465:
"But the kings of the Hebrides, who had come of Somerled's race, were very unfaithful to king Hakon. The kings in the Hebrides were Dugald Screech, and his brother Duncan, the father of John was king afterwards. These were the sons of Dungal, Somerled's son. Uspak was the name of a man who had long been with the Birchlegs; it came out that he was a son of Dungal. Somerled was the name of a relative of theirs, who was then another king in the Hebrides".
So the 'three kings' weren't the sons of Somerled, but his descendants. Dugald Screech and Duncan are certainly sons of Somerled's son Dugald; Uspak and the other Somerled could also be sons of Dugald (see Sellar Hebridean Sea-Kings p.202, and the chart on p.194). Here's Sellar on p.195:
"Of Angus nothing is known, save that he fought and defeated his brother Ranald in 1192, and was killed along with his three sons in 1210. His line died out.
-- Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 09:33, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
I asked Malleus Fatuorum for some advice re advancing this article to GA etc. and he replied "I'd definitely spin the embedded tables out into a separate 'list' article; they really intrude on the narrative". Somewhat reluctantly, given the recent stability of the article, I have to agree on the grounds that the embedded tables also diminish the space available for further detail being added about the "kingdom" rather than its rulers. I'll embark on an extraction process in a few days unless I hear contrary opinions. Ben Mac Dui 19:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
I just noticed that couple weeks ago there were a few things written about the kingdom at http://www.iomtoday.co.im/
-- Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 10:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Kingdom of the Isles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)