The contrasting reports of Conchobor son of Máel Dúin’s end are especially revealing: one annal records a death, while another describes a killing. Rather than allowing a dramatic reconstruction, this difference highlights how succession, violence and political obligation can remain partly obscured even when rulers are named. The article also places this uncertainty beside remembered ecclesiastical leadership at Clonmacnoise and Armagh, suggesting that annalistic priorities shaped what later readers can know about 706. How might historians responsibly compare these notices with archaeology, genealogy and evidence from neighbouring Irish Sea communities to assess whether leadership changes altered alliances or everyday life?