"> Furthermore the genealogy given in LL. 3300 'Eocho rigeices m. Oengusa m.
> Dallain m. Dubthaig m. Miannaig m. Lugdach' would also seem to be incorrect
> at least is missing his immediate ancestors as [...] Lugaid Lorc [...] was
> King of Ulster in the mid-fifth century, i.e. 150 years before the floruit of
Applying the standard period of 33 years between generations, that would
give us approximate dates as follows:
Lugaid Lorc 450, Miannach 483, Dubthach 516, Dallán 549, Óengus 582, Eochu
In Scéla Mongán, Eochaid Rígéces is a contemporary of Mongán, who died in
625. So there does not appear to be any reason on that account to assume
'missing' generations in Eochaid's pedigree.
> Furthermore Eochu was a guest of Daimhin Damhairgitr (qui hospitatus
> apud Daimine) who died in 560 A.D. according to the Annals of the Four
Similar dates (565, 566) are given for Daimíne's death in the earlier
annals. Again, supplying extra generations for Eochaid's pedigree would
make his visit to Daimíne even less likely."
Perhaps I did not phrase it correctly. It was Forga who died in 465, not Lugaid
Lorc who lived c.260 A.D., so there is still a 150 gap between father (Óengus)
and supposed son (Eochaid Rígéces).