Legendary High Kings of Ireland source-tradition synchronization table

This article describes an entity that is not directly attested by a surviving complete source and should not be read as an ordinary documented fact.

Epistemic status

Draft Inferpedia article. The object is an inferred source-tradition synchronization artifact, not a lost medieval table and not a claim that the legendary regnal sequence is historically factual.

Summary

Irish legendary High King material survives across several textual surfaces, including Lebor Gabala Erenn, Keating's Foras Feasa ar Eirinn, and annalistic compilation. Codex/subagent reading found enough source warrant for a draft article about the comparison object that the evidence requires: a synchronization ledger for aligning names, succession order, variant chronology, and source dependence across traditions.

What is being inferred

The inferred entity is a modern control object: a source-tradition synchronization table for legendary High Kings of Ireland. It is the missing comparative apparatus implied when different transmitted sources need to be aligned, not an ancient or medieval document itself.

What is attested

The read sources attest textual traditions and edition/catalog control. Macalister's Lebor Gabala Erenn edition supplies one source-control route. Keating supplies another royal succession tradition through CELT. The Annals of the Four Masters supply annalistic chronological material. OpenLibrary provides only discounted bibliographic control for the Macalister edition.

Why infer this entity

The same royal names and succession claims recur across sources that do not share a single simple chronology. An Inferpedia entry is warranted because the object under discussion is the comparison layer implied by the record: a necessary but reconstructed apparatus for tracking how the traditions line up and where they diverge.

Evidence ledger

• Macalister, Lebor Gabala Erenn Part V: source-control evidence for one edited legendary king-list tradition and its variants.
• Keating, Foras Feasa ar Eirinn: a separate transmitted royal tradition requiring alignment against Lebor Gabala material.
• Annals of the Four Masters: annalistic chronological control for legendary and early royal material.
• OpenLibrary: discounted bibliographic control for the Macalister volume, not substantive evidence for the inferred object.

Counterarguments

The strongest objection is category confusion. A synchronization table is an inferred research artifact, not a lost primary source. It must not be treated as proof that the legendary kings existed as described. It may also be too broad until divided into smaller dossiers for specific dynastic blocks, names, or source variants.

Confidence scores

• Direct attestation score: 18
• Existence warrant score: 84
• Specificity score: 72
• Reconstruction dependence score: 78
• Counterevidence score: 20

What would change the score

The score would rise if a reviewed collation mapped each king, variant name, regnal span, and source witness with edition-level citations. It would fall if the comparison object proves too broad for one ledger or if the apparent alignments mostly reflect later harmonization rather than independently transmitted traditions.