l Exhibiting the invisible – Clontarf 1014: Brian Boru and the Battle for Dublin

Exhibiting the Invisible – Clontarf 1014: Brian Boru and the Battle for Dublin

CLAIRE ANDERSON

1. This article was undertaken as part of a collaboration on the Clontarf 1014: Brian Boru and the Battle for Dublin’ exhibition. Thanks are due to Dr Andy Halpin, NMI lead curator for his input and advice.

Introduction1

In 2014, the National Museum of Ireland – Archaeology in kildare Street, Dublin unveiled a new temporary exhibition commemorating the millennium anniversary of that legendary and most famous battle of early medieval Ireland – the Battle of Clontarf. Traditionally viewed as the victory of Ireland’s greatest high king, Brian Boru, over the Viking settlers led by Sitric Silkbeard, king of Dublin, much myth and folklore grew up around the battle both in Irish and Scandinavian traditions. Later revisionist authors have attempted to reframe both the events that took place that day and the outcome of the battle. It is in this spirit that the NMI – Archaeology (NMI) has endeavoured to re-examine the evidence for events leading up to, including and following on from that Good Friday, the 23rd April, 1014.

Brian Boru

The Battle of Clontarf was traditionally portrayed as a righteous victory for the ‘true’ high king and Christian leader, Brian Boru, over the pagan Viking ‘invaders’. Brian was seen as the saviour of Ireland, a united Christian country, in direct contrast to the ‘foreigners of Dublin’ who were completely defeated and finally driven from our shores after centuries of oppression. This view of Brian as a national hero was revived in the Irish independence movements of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. It became an accepted part of the national consciousness in Ireland but could the story really have been that simple?

This version of the Clontarf story derived from the earliest and most important source for the battle, Cogadh Gáedhel re Gallaibh (‘The War of the Irish against the Foreigners’), a tract written around 1100AD. Although written relatively close in time to the events themselves, and possibly even based on accounts from survivors of the battle, the Cogadh is essentially an excellent piece of medieval propaganda. It may have been commissioned by Brian’s great-grandson, Muirchertach ó

Briain, in order to boost his own claims to the high-kingship of Ireland by portraying his ancestor Brian as a national hero. That is not to say that the Cogadh does not contain any historically accurate facts about the battle, however caution must be exercised in taking the story at face value.

Alternative interpretations

One of the first academic attempts to re-assess this version of the battle was by Fr. john Ryan in 1938. Rather than a national struggle, Ryan reinterpreted Clontarf as the climax of an attempt by the kings of Leinster and Dublin to assert their independence from Brian Boru. He highlighted the role of Mael Mórda, king of Leinster, in this rebellion and thus recast the battle more as a conflict between Munster and Leinster, than as a war between the ‘Vikings’ and the ‘Irish’. Although Ryan’s theory has received much support from later historians, it has made surprisingly little impact on the popular imagination which remains heavily influenced by the nationalistic view proposed in early sources for the battle.

The most recent and authoritative voice on the subject is Sean Duffy’s Brian Boru and the Battle of Clontarf published in 2013. Although Duffy rejects Ryan’s interpretation of Clontarf as a Munster-Leinster conflict, seeing Máel Morda as subordinate to Sitric Silkbeard, he emphasises the importance of Sitric’s recruitment of Scandinavian forces from neighbouring settlements such as Orkney, the Isle of Man and possibly further afield. In 1013, the year before Clontarf, the Danish king, Sweyn Forkbeard, conquered England. Duffy argues that there is some evidence to suggest that Brian’s victory at Clontarf may have foiled any similar attempts on the island of Ireland. This could be seen as reinforcing the nationalistic view of Brian Boru as the saviour of Ireland, however Duffy’s theory is much more subtle and complex.

Exhibition design

In designing an exhibition on the Battle of Clontarf, the National Museum wanted to challenge existing popular perceptions about the battle and its key players. This it does by evaluating sources available for the battle and asking what we really know about how events unfolded on that day. The exhibition focuses on what led up to the battle and what was Brian Boru’s real motivation in fighting. Although there are many different interpretations of events at Clontarf, the National

Museum’s research pointed to the importance of the city of Dublin in Brian’s overall campaign. The earliest and most accurate sources for the battle, the Annals of ulster and of Innisfallen, do not refer to Clontarf specifically but instead state that the battle occurred near Dublin. Clearly fighting did take place at Clontarf – however Brian’s real goal was to take control of Dublin town itself.

Thus the Museum’s exhibition begins by examining popular perceptions of the battle, its key participants and its outcome, and by illustrating the various source materials available on the subject. Visitors to the museum’s first floor are met by a large curved feature wall at the entrance to the exhibition, which mirrors the shape of the replica Viking ship, the Gokstad Faering, directly in front of it. Graphic panels on this introductory wall illustrate sources for Clontarf such as the Annals of ulster and of Innisfallen, the Cogadh, the Scandinavian sagas and myths such as Njáls saga and finally archaeological evidence. The key players at Clontarf are also introduced here; Brian ‘Boru’ mac Cennétig, high king of Ireland, and his main ally Máel Sechnaill MacDomhnaill, king of Tara, Sitric Silkbeard, Hiberno-Norse king of Dublin, Máel Morda mac Murchada, king of Leinster, and Sigurdr, jarl of Orkney.

Before the visitor turns a corner into the main body of the exhibition, they are greeted by a large stand-alone glass case dedicated to the main player at Clontarf, Brian Boru. Although archaeological evidence for Brian’s life is scant, certain valuable objects illustrating his rise to power are displayed here; the Liathmore shrine fragment (Figure 1), the Scattery Island bell shrine, a selection of Viking silver from Munster and an inscribed slate fragment from Brian’s base at killaloe, Co. Clare. Brian Boru rose to prominence from the Dál gCais whose small kingdom was located in north Munster. A rise to high king of Ireland would not have been expected from such obscure origins. From an early stage in his career, however, Brian understood the importance of harnessing the power of Scandinavian settlements in Ireland more than any other king before him. Brian became over-king of Munster following the deaths of both his father, Cennétig, and brother, Mathgamain. In 977 he killed Ivarr, Viking king of Limerick, and his two sons at Scattery Island effectively bringing the Limerick Vikings under his control. He subsequently controlled the Viking settlement at Waterford and after the Battle of Glenmama in 999 had also secured control of Dublin. The military and naval technologies coupled with

Figure 1: This fragmentary inscription from a shrine or reliquary is one of the few known objects directly related to Brian. It currently reads: ….[M]AC CENEDIC DO RIG E[RENN] It can be reconstructed as “A prayer for XXX son of Cenedic, for the king of Ireland”. © National Museum of Ireland. the economic wealth of these various Viking settlements were now at Brian’s disposal, and were critical factors in his eventual rise to high king.

Viking Dublin

The National Museum’s rich collection of archaeological objects from Viking Dublin make it very well placed to illustrate why control of the town and its resources was Brian’s key motivation in the Battle of Clontarf. When Sitric rebelled against Brian in 1013, Brian knew he had to fight back in order to retain control of these resources and Dublin itself. Scandinavian naval technology was among the most advanced in Europe and shipbuilding was taking place in Dublin. The largest exhibition case displays ships timbers excavated in Dublin by the NMI from Viking sites around Wood Quay. Dublin’s military technology was among the most advanced in Europe in 1014. Displayed in this exhibition is a wide selection of iron spearheads, swords and axeheads and a wooden bow with arrowheads. Exciting additions to the exhibition are three Viking-style iron axeheads with wooden shafts, found in 2013 in a sunken boat in Lough Corrib and excavated by the underwater Archaeology unit of the National Monuments Service (see Figure 2). These axes illustrate that Irish warriors were also using Viking-style military technology. One very advanced weapon only available to Dublin’s Hiberno-Norse warriors however was the crossbow, represented in the exhibition by a number of crossbow bolt heads and a fragmentary crossbow nut from Dublin.

Dublin’s wealth is also clearly evidenced from a number of artefacts on display in the exhibition. Three silver coin hoards, cached in Dublin in the 990’s, illustrate the emergence of the first coin-based economy in Ireland and also the town’s trade with England. Although these hoards contain English coins, Sitric was the first king to mint his own coins in Ireland and one of these is also on display. Dublin’s wealth was partly based on trade in slaves, a practice common across early medieval Europe, as represented in the exhibition by an iron slave chain and

collar from the Irish midlands. A silk cloth from Dublin is evidence that the town was also trading luxury goods with cities as far away as Constantinople. Clearly therefore, control of Dublin meant control of its great wealth and economic prosperity – something which was of huge value to the high king.

A Hiberno-Norse society

This exhibition also aims to highlight the fact that Scandinavian and Irish cultures had, by this time, merged together into a new ‘Hiberno-Norse’ society in towns such as Dublin, Waterford and Limerick. Two zoomorphic pins, one bronze from Cashel (see Figure 3) and one bone from Dublin, are used to illustrate this point. The style of decoration on both pins is almost identical, yet they were found in so-called ‘Irish’ and ‘Viking’ areas of the country. Ringed pins in the exhibition also show that an Irish type

of cloak fastener was being used and made in Hiberno-Norse Dublin. Furthermore, many of the characters in the Clontarf story were related! Gormlaith, the main female character in the story, was the mother of Sitric, ex-wife of Brian, sister of Máel Morda and possibly also sometime consort of Máel Sechnaill. Sitric was married to Brian’s daughter, and was born in Dublin to an Irish mother and Viking father. Vikings had been in Ireland for over two centuries at this stage and had integrated into Irish society to a large degree. Therefore it is more accurate at this stage to refer to them as ‘Hiberno-Norse’.

Figure 2: Three Viking-style iron axeheads with wooden shafts found in 2013 in a sunken logboat in Lough Corrib. © National Museum of Ireland.

Figure 3: Zoomorphic-headed bronze stick pin found at Cashel, Co. Tipperary. © National Museum of Ireland.

The Battle of Clontarf

Brian Boru’s campaign against Dublin had started by the autumn of 1013, when Sitric and Máel Morda had risen up in an attempt to

overthrow his control in Leinster and Dublin. He camped outside the walls of the town in the winter of 1013, besieging Dublin and her residents. When supplies ran out Brian’s forces had no option but to return to Munster, although everyone knew he would be back. Loss of control of Dublin’s wealth and military and naval technologies would have greatly weakened his position as high king. When both armies finally came face to face on the battlefield in Clontarf that day, we know that they would have been fighting with quite similar weapons. The National Museum has commissioned two illustrations of warriors from each side for this exhibition. These show that although both sides would have fought with spears, axes and swords, Sitric’s warriors would have had superior weapons such as the crossbow available to them. They may also have had an advantage due to their chain mail armour, while the Irish warriors probably fought in inferior leather protective clothing.

All accounts of the battle agree that fighting on the day was protracted and bloody, ending in enormous loss of life on both sides. Brian Boru, although probably not fighting in battle due to his age, was killed at Clontarf and his son Donnchadh succeeded him as king of Munster. His claims to the high kingship, as illustrated in this exhibition on the Stowe missal shrine, do not seem to reflect reality. Certainly, he was never as powerful as his father had been. Sitric watched the battle from the safety of the walls of Dublin, so that although his forces lost, he himself continued to reign as king of the very prosperous and powerful settlement of Dublin. The image of Brian Boru as the saviour of Ireland and a national hero is explored in the final cases of the exhibition. It is hoped that the visitor may view this idea with a perhaps slightly more questioning eye at this point. Although the legend of Brian Boru was much loved by authors down through the centuries, in effect, there were no winners at Clontarf as all sides had been greatly weakened and Dublin continued to prosper.

One of the main challenges facing the National Museum in commemorating the Battle of Clontarf in 2014 was how to design an exhibition around a battle for which there is no battlefield and there are no actual artefacts. The exact site of the battlefield is unknown and there are no artefacts in the national collections or elsewhere from the battle itself. The Battle of Clontarf is thus ‘invisible’ in the archaeological record. A further challenge to the curatorial team was to balance the many, often contradictory, existing theories about the battle,

its causes and outcomes in order to tease out an accurate and meaningful interpretation for the museum’s wide range of visitors. The Museum realised that one of its main strengths in terms of exhibiting Clontarf was the large collection of artefacts from its excavations in Viking Dublin in the 1960’s, 1970’s and 1980’s. In particular, the ships timbers and range of weaponry excavated from these sites are used in the exhibition to illustrate the importance of the town’s naval and military technologies. The curatorial team aimed to emphasise the overall importance of Dublin as a motivating factor in the battle. Control of the wealth, naval and military technology of Hiberno-Norse Dublin was extremely important to Brian’s reign as high king of Ireland and when Sitric rebelled against him in 1013, Brian knew that he had to respond.

Conclusion

The exhibition concludes with two cases displaying later representations of the nationalistic view of Brian Boru the Irish hero whose most famous victory liberated Ireland from foreign oppression. Having challenged these popular perceptions of the Battle of Clontarf throughout this exhibition, it is hoped that at this stage the visitor will have gained a new appreciation for both the motivations of the main protagonists and the complexities of the events and outcomes of the Battle of Clontarf.

Claire Anderson is Assistant Co-ordinator (Culture & Heritage Studies LTI) at the National Print Museum