Talk:Ottir

Untitled
It was new to me that Ottar of Hålogaland visited Ireland. That piece of information should probably be referenced, and also added to the article Ohthere of Hålogaland. Best regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 21:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It actually says so under the map in the article. I tried to follow the links to read the story but they're dead. In any case I direct you to the discussions under User_talk:Brianann_MacAmhlaidh and User_talk:Urselius. Even if Ottir Iarla and Hålogaland are not identical there is a good chance they were related. According to the scholar Gareth Williams this was a dynastic name. It has the look of a Norwegian dynasty operating alongside the Uí Ímair. The Cotter family now look very much like they derive from them in some manner. See also Talk:Cotter family. And we desperately need you to read that passage in Steenstrup (pp. 13 ff) so we can talk about Ottir's career in Dublin, Scotland and England. My Scandinavian is not good enough. This ancient family have been partly neglected and partly remaining in secret and require exposure. Judging from the names Thorfin and Therulfe in their "family manuscript" I would guess they are of Norwegian derivation. DinDraithou (talk) 22:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Alright so "desperately" was too strong. Now that you have the passage I'm happy. No hurry. I plan to get it translated by Google but then will face the problem of still not being sure of who this person really is. Maybe some day you'll come across something. His dynasty have almost been lost and forgotten because of the prominence of the Uí Ímair. But it may turn out that we will one day be familiar again with the House of Ottar. They came to the scene a little later than the other dynasty, and surely in less numbers, but they did their best and hung in there. DinDraithou (talk) 01:23, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Fragmentary Annals of Ireland
Here the account from the so-called Fragmentary Annals of Ireland:

Annal FA 459

In that year great armies of Dark Foreigners and Fair Foreigners Danish and Norwegian Vikings came again to attack the Saxons, after the installation of Sitric grandson of Imar as king. They challenged the Saxons to battle, and the Saxons did not delay, but came at once to attack the pagans. A hard and ferocious battle was fought between them, and there was great energy and heat and contention on both sides. Much noble blood was spilled in this battle; nevertheless, it was the Saxons who won victory and spoils after massacring the pagans. For the king of the pagans was taken ill, and he was carried out of the battle to a forest nearby, and he died there.

Now Oittir, the most greatly esteemed earl in this battle, when he saw the Saxons slaughtering his people, fled into a dense wood near him, along with those of his people who survived. A huge throng of Saxons came after him, and they surrounded the wood. The Queen commanded them to hack down all of the forest with their swords and battleaxes, and they did so. First they felled the trees, and then all the pagans who were in the wood were killed. The pagans were slaughtered by the Queen like that, so that her fame spread in all directions.

Aethelflaed, through her own cleverness, made peace with the men of Alba and with the Britons, so that whenever the same race should come to attack her, they would rise to help her. If it were against them that they came, she would take arms with them. While this continued, the men of Alba and Britain overcame the settlements of the Norwegians and destroyed and sacked them.

The king of the Norwegians came after that and sacked Srath Cluada, and plundered the land. But the enemy was ineffectual against Srath Cluada.

Original research
Some original research tags have been added to the article, I like to comment on them (per this revision. Numbers correspong to ref's tagged OR.)
 * 1) This sentence starts: "The Cogad Gáedel re Gallaib describes him..." - I can't see how using Todds translated edition of CGG as a source for what CGG says is "original research".
 * 2) "Later the same epic describes...." like above.
 * 3) I accept this one, we can hardly use the Annals of Ulster as a source for Joan Radners opinions, this is infact part of the later citation to Downham, but I'll add a note to the page in Radners FAI for clarity.
 * 6 Guilty as charged I'll add a citation to Downham here.

Finn Rindahl (talk) 01:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Even deciding that a source is worthy of being quoted requires some degree of professional judgment. While not as risky to Wikipedia as other primary source uses on Wikipedia, it carries some risk and is forbidden by WP:PRIMARYSOURCE. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 04:20, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hm, that's not what I'm reading in WP:Primary: "...primary sources are permitted if used carefully" and "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements that any educated person, with access to the source but without specialist knowledge, will be able to verify are supported by the source." I can't really see a problem with the two first statements originally tagged, the two last statements have now additional citations to secondary sources. Now, revert warring over article tags isn't getting us anywhere, I hope all editors concerned will use this talk page for discussion. Finn Rindahl (talk) 10:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Almost the entire article consists of WP:OR and quotes from secondary primary sources. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 11:43, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Did you mean "primary" and not "secondary" just now? - otherwise I can't make sense of your reply at all. Finn Rindahl (talk) 11:47, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Were Ohtor and Hroald killed in 917??
The article says AD 917, Anglo-Saxon Chronicle section, but they were killed no later than AD 915. From History of Herefordshire:

Herefordshire escaped most of the battles with the Vikings, but in 914 the Danes again visited the area and ravaged Archenfield, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (AD 915, Worcester Manuscript, p. 99). The jarls leading the raids, Ohtor and Hroald, captured Cyfeiliog (Cimeliauc), the Bishop of Llandaff; he was later ransomed. The jarls were killed in a subsequent battle at "Killdane Field" (or "Kill Dane") in Weston-under-Penyard and the raiders were subdued.

The citation: Peter K Burian (talk) 15:30, 24 November 2019 (UTC)


 * This source also states that they were killed in AD 915: https://books.google.ca/books?id=5OC3DwAAQBAJ&pg=PT62&dq=Danes+killed+Ohtor+and+Hroald&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiXnt23l4PmAhXtg-AKHQxtDeEQ6AEIMjAB#v=onepage&q=Danes%20killed%20Ohtor%20and%20Hroald&f=false ...  The Anglo-Saxons at War, Paul Hill, Pen and Sword Military, Jul. 19, 2012. Paul Hill, formerly curator of Kingston Upon Thames Museum in Surrey, is well known as a lecturer, author and expert on Anglo-Saxon and Norman history and military archaeology, and he has written several books on these subjects, among them The Age of Athelstan: Britain's Forgotten History, The Viking Wars of Alfred the Great and The Anglo-Saxons at War 800-1066. Peter K Burian (talk) 15:45, 24 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Your thoughts on the year, @User:Dimadick? Peter K Burian (talk) 15:48, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * There are 9 different versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, by different scribes. The difference in dates may derive from different primary sources. You can add the new information in the article. Please also check whether other details are missing. Dimadick (talk) 08:07, 25 November 2019 (UTC)