Talk:Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair

Charles O Conor

The Eighteenth century Charles O Conor of Ballinagare was able to trace his ancestry directly to the Ruaidhrí Ó Conchobhair here. Tom Bartlett of UCD mentions this in his 'Fall and Rise of the Catholic Nation'.

Naming

Why not just name this page Ruaidri Ua Conchobair? That's how he's referenced throughout the article, and it seems to be the practice with the Irish kings to use the Irish names unless they have a more common English version.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

He has a common English version of his name, so like Diarmait mac Murchada, the article is called by it rather than his Irish one. That isn't what WP:IMOS says to do, but no doubt there's a good reason for ignoring it. Just ask Jtdirl what it is, because he's the man who moved it here. Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair is not unambiguous (check Kings of Connacht where there are three or four others) but I don't think that there's much doubt that this is the Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair which people would expect to find there. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I just moved it. He's the only Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair who has a page, as far as I can tell, and if the others get one, we can make a disambiguation.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

You were correct, although I'm not too clear myself about the distinction between Ua and Ó; if the latter is a modern version of the former as I suspect it is I would suggest using that. Ruairí Ó Conchúir would be the full modern version. 194.125.72.144 20:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I feel like hopelessly suggesting Rory O'Connor as the common English name. john k 13:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Ua Conchobair, Ruaidrí (Rory O'Connor) (c.1116–1198), high-king of Ireland doesn't convince you otherwise? It would indeed be odd to see Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair popping up in an article on English history, but we have Rory O'Connor (High King) too. Heading off at a tangent, I see that Roderick O'Connor redirects here, but according to the Oxford DNB, the target for that would be Ruaidrí na Saide Buide, on whom, sad to say, we have no article yet. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, I can't argue with you. Fair enough. john k 13:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Last high king?

I understand that the title was briefly and unsuccessfully revived later, but to all intents and purposes, Rory O'Connor was the last high king. He is pretty universally referred to as the last high king. If one had to explain why O'Connor was an important historical figure, one would say "because he was the last High King of Ireland." I am going to restore that reference. john k 12:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me, as it mentions the title was brought back later. Berengar I, Holy Roman Emperor was not the last Holy Roman emperor, because the title was revived later (though much more successfully than the Irish High King).--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The failure of the revival, I think, makes the status of those later "high kings" dubious at best. Rory was the last generally acknowledged high king. john k 22:21, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 07:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Polygamy and the alienation of Pope Adrian IV

I read somewhere that Ruaidhri O Conchobhair had gained the ire of Pope Adrian IV, by refusing a command to limit the number of wives he had taken to "six." To which Ruaidhri replied "at once?" The Irish continued taking multitudes of wives long after their christianization, in accordance to Brehon law. So the physics of whats proposed is possible but Is any of this verifiable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloody Sacha (talk • contribs) 17:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality control

This one is terrible, and for all the Irish names it isn't on Irish wikipedia (if he was so important).86.44.218.191 (talk) 20:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

This article needs a lot of serious work, there is a large volume of information available on Rory O'Connor. It never mentions how he was beaten by Diarmuid Mac Murcada (technically as Mac Murcada controlled all Ireland at the time of his death save Connaught, which did not have the strength to oppose him), thanks to the Normans. Although he did not live to get Rory's recognition as High King. He had regained some of his power after Mac Murcada death but then had to submit to Henry II as his liegeman, however Henry allowed him to retain his title as high King of Ireland. Source: Nicolas Furlong, Diarmuit, King of Leinster, 2006 Someone who is better versed on this period of Irish history than I should write it though in order to avail of the wide variety of sources that must be available such as Cambrensis, Book of Leinster, Annals of the Four Masters etc. So much information missing overall it is terrible, it doesn't even mention that his father was no longer High King at the time of his death, in fact he had submitted to Mac Laughlin well in advance of this.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.238.19 (talk) 19:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)