e than on the Continent. But the statement of _A.F.M._ as to the
anointing of Maelsechlainn is not confirmed by the more reliable
authority of _A.U._

That at least five of the eight were, as St. Bernard says, "married men"
is shown by the following table, compiled from _A.U._ and MacFirbis
(_R.I.A._, MS. 23 P. 1, p. 308). The persons whose names are printed in
italics were coarbs of Patrick.

Cellach
|-------------|
| |
Eochaid _Dubdalethe II_ +998
|
_Mael Muire_ +1020
|
|--------------------------------------------------|
| | |
_Amalgaid_ +1049 _Dubdalethe III_ +1064 Aed +1042
| |
| Aed +1108
|
|----------------------------------------------------------|
| | | |
_Mael Isa_ +1091 _Domnall_ +1105 Dubesa +1078 Eochaid(?) +1038
| |
|-------------| _Muirchertach_ (Sec. 20) +1134
| |
Aed +1095 Flannacan +1113
|
|----------------------|
| |
_Cellach_ +1129 _Niall_ (Sec. 22) +1139

This table also confirms the statement that the abbots all belonged to
the same family, and so obtained office by a sort of hereditary right.
St. Bernard gives no hint which would enable us to identify this family.
But the genealogy given by MacFirbis enumerates the ancestors of Cellach
in a direct line up to Fiachrach, son of Colla fo Crich, and is headed
"Genealogy of Ui Sinaich, _i.e._ the coarbs of Patrick." The Bodleian
MS., Rawl. B. 502,[1201] has the same genealogy, and entitles it
"Genealogy of Clann Sinaich." The family then from which the abbots of
Armagh were taken was the principal branch of that sept. From the
genealogy it appears that the sept was derived from Sinach, from whom
the fifth in descent was the Cellach whose name appears at the head of
foregoing table.

St. Bernard represents Malachy to have said in 1132, when he was induced
to oppose Murtough, that the system of hereditary succession had alread