Ok a "5 CO o rri in <r> o £ tn .— i=i S eo U) O o >> to 1 h* 01 ^ c 3 CO ^«^ the pResence of this Book in thej.m. kelly liBRARy has Been maöe possiBle thRouQh the qeneRosity of Stephen B. Roman From the Library of Daniel Binchy m ZEITSCHRIFT FUR CELTISCHE PHILOLOGIE HERAUSGEGEBEN VON KUNO MEYER X. BAND HALLE A. S. MAX NIEMEYER LONDON W. C. NEW YORK WILLIAMS & NOKGATE G. E. STECHERT & CO. 14, HENRI KTTA S'IREET 151-155 WEi>T 25th STREET COVENT GARDEN 1915 Inhalt. Seite C. Plummer, The miracles of Senan 1 J. Pokorny, Über das Alter der Würzburger Glossen 36 K. Meyer, Mitteilungeu aus irischen Handschriften (Fortsetzung) . . 37 J. Fräser, The present and future tenses of the verb in Scotch Gaelic 55 J. Pokorny, Irische Miscellen (1. aife, 2. Wb. 33a2, 3. du-cuitig, ad- cititccht, 4. Zur Flexion von anini 'Seele') G7 P. "Walsh, Place names in Vita Finniani 73 J. Fräser, Etymologica 78 J. MacNeill, On the reconstruction and date of the Laud synchronisms 81 A. G. van Hamel, On Lebor Gabála 97 J. Pokorny, Zur irischen Wortkunde (1. ro-tethaind, 2. riched, 3. esclae, 4. do-nessa, 5. é 'Salm'; 6. montar, muinter) 198 R. Thurneysen, Zur Tain Bo Cúailnge 205 L. Gwynn, The recensions of the saga Togail Bruidne Da Berya . . 209 .D.Hyde, Trachtad ar an Aibidil 223 A. M. Scarre, The meaning of birth-days 225 A. Kelleher, Betha Coluimb Chille (continuation) 228 R. Flower, A fir na hegna d'iarroigli 260 R. Thurneysen, Flann Manistrechs Gedicht: Bedig dam, a de do nim, CO hémig a n-innisiri. 269 R. I. Best, Comhrag Fir Diadh é Chon Cculainn (Tain Bo Cúailnge) 274 A. Meillet, Irlandais nóib — niab 309 J. Pokorny, Entgegnung 310 H.Hessen, Beiträge zur altirischen Grammatik 315 K. Meyer, Mitteilungen aus irischen Handschriften {Fortsetzung) . . 338 — , Erläuterungen und Besserungen zu irischen Texten (1. O'Davorens Glossar, 2. O'Mulconrys Glossar) 849 — , Über einige Quellenangaben der Togail Tröi 358 — , Das Wörterbuch der Kgl. Irischen Akademie 361 R. Thurneysen, Zum Lebor Gabúla 384 — , Nochmals Flann 3Ianistrechs Gedicht: Redig dam usw 396 K. Meyer, Miscellen (1. Quantitierender Gleichklang in der dritten Strophenzeile irischer Gedichte, 2. Tätowierung bei den Iren, 3. Die Leibeslänge Christi) 398 IV Seite J. Pokoniy, Zur irischen Etymologie uud Wortkunde [1. og. ci, 2. air. *fothae, 'S. air. fni, 4. og'. net(t)a(s), niot(t)a(s)] 403 R. Thurneysen, Eine Variante der Brendan -Legende 408 ■ — , Allerlei Irisches (I. Bec mac De, II. Scéla geine Cormaic, III. Aird Echdi, IV. Comrac Fir Diad, V. Eine Fälschung auf den Namen Cinaed ua h-Artacáiu, VI. Die Interpolation von Fled Bricrend in LU, VII. Ir.a/r(7 'oder') 421 K. Meyer, Nachtrag zu ochtfodach Coluim Cille 444 Berichtigungen 444 Erschienene Schriften : K. Meyer, Über die älteste irische Dichtung I 445 Festskrift Alf Torp 448 F. W. O'Connell, A Grammar of Old Irish 449 C. J. S. Marstran der, Dictionary of the Irish Language, Fasc. I . 452 K. Meyer, Zur keltischen Wortkunde II— VI 453 Anecdota from Irish Manuscripts, Vol. IV. V 454 K. Meyer, Über die älteste irische Dichtung II 454 Festschrift Ernst Windisch 454 Eegister zu Band VI — X 456 Register zu den Mitteilungen aus irischen Handschriften von K. Meyer in Band IIl-X 472 VIRO CLARISSIMO DOCTISSIMO ERNESTO WINDISCH RERUM CELTICARÜM IN GERMANIA STUDIOSORÜM NESTORI QUARTUM DECIMUM LUSTRUM CLAUDENTI HOC VOLUMEN SACRUM ESSE VOLEBANT KUNO MEYER HERMANN NIEMEYER THE MIRACLES OF SENAK Introduction. The Miracles of Senan are here edited from two of the O'Clery MSS. in the Royal Library of Brussels, ii"^ 2324 — 2340 fol. 241b — 248 a (text A), and no^lQO — 4200 fol. 277 a — 279 b (text B). In A the miracles follow a copy of the Life of Senan similar to that printed by Stokes in 'Lives of Saints from the Book of Lismore ' ^). In B they follow a copy of the 'Amra Senain', which was printed by Stokes in this 'Zeitschrift' III 220 ff., from H. Ill 17. Of the B text a late 18*^» century copy exists in RIA 23 LH p. 241 (Hodges and Smith n° 9), but it is a wretched scrawl, and I have not collated it. Of the two texts A is, as a rule, the fuller and clearer, but there are very interesting points in B^). A is the text here printed, but all variations of importance in B are given in the textual notes, and these are either incorporated [within square brackets] in the translation, or given in the notes to it. The writer himself calls attention to the fact that these Miracles of Senan are modern miracles; that is, not miracles wrought by the saint in his lifetime, but contemporary, or nearly so, with the writer, and in many of them there is nothing miraculous apart from the assumption of the writer that the events narrated were brought about by the special intervention of the saint. Some of them have to do with the relations of 1) Cited as LS. *) Perhaps the most iuterestiug is the mention of Cnklees at Scattery, § 5B. Keeves, Culdees, part II § 10, says that they came to an end 'about the close of the 12tii century ' ; yet here we have clear evidence of their con- tinuance into the i4ß^ century. Zeitschrift f. celt. Philologie X. j_ 2 C. PLUMMER, the chiefs of Thomond of the O'Brien family ^) to Scattery and its dependent churches in the early 14*^ century. Hence they furnish some interesting illustrations of contemporary manners, and of the relations between Scattery, the principal foundation of St. Senan, and other churches and communities which ascribed their origin to him. They also enable us to identify the names of two or three places, especially in the neighbourhood of Kilrush, which are either not mentioned or not identified by Father Hogan in his Onomasticon. 2) In A the tract concludes with a poem which gives a list of the saints with whom St. Senan had made alliance in his lifetime, and who are bound, on the performance of certain rites, to come to avenge any wrong done to his churches. I have thought it worth while to print this poem, as it possibly gives an idea of the monasteries with which Scattery had relations of con- fraternity in the 14^'^ century. The former part of the poem in which the saints are enumerated ^) is fairly clear, but some ^) The members of this family whom I have identified from the Annals are the following: Brian Roe, Lord of Thomond, f 1277, §§ 3, 12; Brian son of Domnall, do. 7 1350, § 12; Conchobar na Siudaiue, s. Donnchad Cairbrech, do. t 1268, §3; Diarmait s. Donnchad, 'the cleric', 7 1311, § 3; Donnchad Cairbrech, Lord of Dal Cais, 7 1242, § 3; Donnchad s. Brian Roe, Lord of Thomond, f 1284, § 3; * Donnchad s. Domnall, King of Munster, j- 1317, § 12; Donnchad s. Toirdelbach, Lord of Thomond, f 1311, § 3; *Mathgamain s. Domnall, tanist of Munster, 7 1320, § 13; Muircertach s. Toirdelbach, do. t 1348, § 3; Tadg 'Caeluisce', son of Conchobar, rigdamna of Munster, 7 1259, §§ 3, 4 (A); * Toirdelbach, s. Tadg, Lord of Thomond, -j- 1306, §§3 — 5, the hero of 'Cathreim Toirdelbaigh'. Those marked with an asterisk are actors in the narrative, the others occur only in genealogical contexts. Murchad 'the son of the bishop', the actor in § 6, I have not identified, unless he is the Murchad son of Mathgamaiu, the murderer of Donnchad O'Brien, king of Munster, in 1311. Richard de Clare the hero of §§ 7, 8 died in 1318. *) Carnain, § 13, Carnaun, parish of Kilrush; Cell Cuiridain § 12 (A), Kilcredaun, parish and barony of Moyarta, v. Antiquarian Handbook Series, VI 106; Cell na gCaillech, 'the Nuns' Church', Kilnagalliach, parish Kilfearagh, barony Moyarta, §§ 9 — 12 , v. ib. p. 108. Places which I have not identified are : Cell mic Ronáin, § 19, Forbor, § 4 (B), and Ros an Aircéil, § 12, probably the same as Ros na nArc, ib. ') Of the saints contained in the list, I have identified more or less certainly the following, who will be found in the Irish Calendars and Martyro- logies at the dates given after their names : Ailbe of Emly, September 12, § 22 ; Bairre of Cork, September 25, § 18; Beoog, perhaps Mart. Don. October 25, § 18; Berach of Termonbarry, February 15, ib.; Berchan of Clonsast, De- THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. stanzas in the latter part are very obscure, and I am very far from being satisfied with my translation of them. The text in A is divided into chapters; I have subdivided these into sections numbered continuouslv for convenience of reference. cember 4, § 20; Blathmacc of lona, July 24, § 22; Brendan, probably of Clonfert, May 16. § 19; Caimiu of Inisbcaltra , March 24, §22; Cainuech of Aghaboe, October 11, § 23; Candan, perhaps November 1st or November 4, § 21; Carthach , perhaps of Drnim Fertain , March 5, § 23 (Carthach alias Mochnda of Lismore has been previously mentioned): Cellach s. Conmac, v. Mart. Don. April 1st, §21; Ciaran of Clonmacnois, September 9, §18; Coemgen of Glenda- lough, June 3, § 18 ; Colum mac Crimthain of Terryglass, December 13, § 22 ; Coman, probably of Eoscoramon, December 26, § 19; Comgall, of Bangor, May 10, §23; Fechiu of Fore, January 20, §20; Fergus, a bishop, probably March 30, § 19; Findan, either Finniau of Clonard. December 12, or Finnian of Movilla, September 10, § 23; Finnchvi, of Brigówn, November 25, ib.; Flannan of Killaloe, December 18. § 21 ; Flann s. Airchellach, of Denynavlan, December 21, § 23; Fursa of Peronne, January 16, § 21; Gall craibdech (an) 'The devout foreigner', of Inchagoill in Lough Corrib, which takes its name from him, § 21; Grellan of Creeve, November 10, § 21; larlaithe of Tuam, December 26, § 19 ; Lachtiu of Freshford, March 19, § 23 ; Luchtigern, probably of Isel Ciarain, brother of Ciaran of Clonmacnois, VSH I 209 note; Macduach (Colman) of Kilmacduagh, February 3, § 22; Mac Leinin (Colman) of Cloyne, November 24, § 23; Maelcorgais, cf. Mart. Don., March 12, LL368f., § 19; Manchán, of Lemanaghan, January 24, § 20; Mochúa of Balla, March 30, §§ 21, 23 ; Mochuda of Lismore, May 14, § 18 ; Mochuille of Innsnat, June 12, § 22; Molaga, of Tulach min Molaga, January 20, § 23; Mughna, perhaps Mosenog Mughna, of Ballaghmoon, December 11, § 20; Muinend, perhaps Moinend of Cloncurry, September 16, § 19; Nessan, of Cork, December 1st, § 19; Ruadhán of Lorrha, April 15, § 23; Senan of Scattery, March 1st and March 8 passim; Subach of Corann, August 1st and November 21 (latinised Hilarius, Mart. Don. p. 472), § 18; Ua Suanaigh, there were thi-ee brothers of this name, the one intended is probably Fidmuine of Eaheu, May 16, § 21; the Eralt of § 20, probably represents an English Harold, or a Scandinavian Haraldr, but I cannot trace him. In A this poem is followed by nine other poems relating to Senan of which the incipits are as follows: 1. Aontaidh doronsat, nar ghann, Senan, Laichtin, is Comgall (fol. 248 a); 2. Cána doradsatt na naoimh Do Senan, do cniocht na ngniomh (fol. 248 b); 3. Inné so do dubh dioghlach sa Dar marbhais Dal cCais (fol. 249 a) ; 4. Do bhadhus is Brenainn go rath Secht mbliadna ag Comhgall ghégach (fol. 249b); 5. Is me Senan fuasnadach (fol. 251 b) ; 6. Nessan dixit: Abair friom a Seuain seing (fol. 254 a); 7. Bennach dúinn a naoimh Brenainn (fol. 255 a) ; 1* 4 C. PLUMMER, Míorlbuile Senáin. 1. 1. Beccán do sccélaib Senáin an ard-naoimli uasail oiregh- dha anwso, doróine na fiorta follws-mhóra 7 na míorbuile toghaidhe si, 7 antí ag-a rabliatar naomhóga^ lom-nochta gan croicinw acc iomloctadh chuicce 7 uaidh tar an bfmVrge^); 7 antí do sháidh a bhachaill eter na buaibh 7 na gamlmaibli^), co wach facaidh bó na gamliaiu a cheile dibli'*), 7 antí(/oZ. ^4^a)nasa ttraighedh an mhuirlán, 7 'ga líonadli sí 'na diaigh»), 7 é ag breith damh a atliar lais^). Ociis an damh do itliettar na coin allta ind SiCchaid sin, ro bás acc tabacVt a aithbliir fairsiumh. larsin im- morro no ticcedh dawli ollaidh asan sliabh gitsan seisiigh no gMsan ugliaim tre rath an mheic so, 7 do theighedh 'san ughaim uadha fein, 7 do threabadh mar gach ndamh oile'). 2. Ba maith rath ^) an mheic so .i. Senán, óir do biod deich- neabhar 7 secht fichit senoir salmach do lucht ^) cuinge crsibaidh 7 d'flor-muinwtir De gach noidhche 'ma mhéis, mar dherbw5 an rand so: Secht fichit senoir salmach 'Na thegiach go med remenn^^), Gen ar, gan biiain, gan tioradh, Gan gniomlwadh acht madh leighenw. 1 — '") see opposite, p. 5. (Continuation of the note on p. 3 :) 8. Fionmaith inghe[n] Báedain bil Mathair Senáin caoim-craibhtig (fol. 255 b); 9. A macaiu, tainic mo trath (fol. 256 a). No 8 exists also in Eawlinson B. 486 (fol. 44 a). Of the rest I know no other copies. At the end of these poems O'Clery adds the following colophon: Ar slicht Conaire óig meic Couaire, meic Muiris í Maolconaire do sgriobus mior- buile Senaiu, 7 gach a ffuil iua ndiaigh anúas in ceidfeacht i ILuimniuch, arna sgriobadh do sein as seiu-leabhar dorcha meamruim, 7 do sgriobhus annso andara fecht i ccouueint na mbrathar ag Drobhaois, 1. December, 1629; i. e. From the copy of Conaire O'Mulconry the younger &c., which he had made from an old obscure vellum book, I wrote these miracles of Senan and all that follows them to this point the first time at Limerick; and I re-wrote them here in the convent of the friars on the Drowse (i. e. Donegal), De- cember 1st, 1629. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. ' 5 Translation. 1. Here are a few of the stories relating to Senan, the noble eminent high saint, who wrought these great and evident wonders, and excellent miracles, the man who had hare boats without hides, plying backwards and forwards across the sea; who planted his bachall between the cows and the yearlings, so that neither cow nor yearling saw each other; before whom the full tide ebbed, and came to the full again, as he was taking his father's cattle with him. And the ox which the wolves ate that night ; the blame of it was laid to him. Afterwards a stag would come from the mountain to the plough i) and to the plough- tackle, through the grace of this son, and would get into the tackle of itself, and would plough like any ox, [and would depart at the time of unyoking 2).j 2. Good was the grace of this son, Senan; for there were ten, and seven scores of psalm-singing elders, folk [of regular life, and] of the yoke of ascetism, and of the true family of God, around his table every night, as this verse shows: 'Seven score psalm -singing elders In his household with great [or royal B] courses, Without ploughing, without reaping, without drying. Without any activity except study 3).' 1) To the yoke-pin, and would put its head under the yoke of itself B. *) Passages in square brackets are from B. 3) This verse, applied to St. Mochta of Louth, occurs, with same varieties of readings, LL 361 bottom margin; Félire notes August 19; Mart. Don. August 19. The last is nearer B than A. Notes from p. 4 : ») naeithe B. ^) lS 2391. ") laeghaibh B. *) LS 1958. -■>) LS 1944. «) LS 1940. ') asin tsleibh gonuicce an cuing- elach go ccuiredh a chenn fou cuing uadha, 7 ro imthigedh in am sccuir B. **) gniomartha B. ") do lucht cinnte bethadh 7 cuinge B. ^°) 'na theglach, rioghda remenn B. 6 C. PLUMMER, Ociis ba he sin tra lion no biodh ina proinntigh fein im trátli coda gach noidlice, a neccmais a lochia fritholma 7 áosa óccbaidli a noilen htidáéhi ; 7 a thighe oireghdha aoidhedh i cCill Eois ag sásadh bocht 7 nocht, trén 7 trnagh, ind oidhche 7 a 1161). Ocus do beirthi bairghen cowa hanland i Uaimh gach aon duiwe, 7 a chomairce go cend mbliadlma, dia riccedh a les; 7 tiodhlacai^Ä 2) iomlán iarsin. Ocus gion go ndechaid acht noi niommVe iar cladh a thermainn amach. 7 a iompodh 'sa tegh ceina aris, do ghébhadh an frithólamh ceína. 2 b. Do bi 3) immorro an tegh sin re linn tSenáin ag freccra an móir-fhedhma sin; 7 ro faccaibh Senan a bhennac/ii ag gach comharba da tiuccfaci/i dia eis do chionw a einigh do coimhétt. Ocus asi aithne deighenach do aithin ag dul docum nimhe do, a shamhadh 7 a einech do coimhett mar dherhhus an rand so: Mo bhoicht is mh'aidhidh go hán Tarm eis, a maccan, et reliqua. 3. Cid tr& acht ni téttadh'^) tenga a tuiremh acht muna beith Dia 'ga turkilemh, {fol. 242l>) a nderna Senan do mhior- builibh, 7 do mhóir-flortaibh tre rath an Coimde. Acht cena, an meid as toghtha 7 as uaisle dibli atád scriobhta hi sein- leabhraibh fó chádas 7 fo onoir móir. Ni dona fertaibh na dona miorbhuilibh doronadh remhainw re lind tSenáin as ail lind labairí anois, acht na neithe nuaidhe nemh-doirche, 7 na fiorta fiadlmacha, 7 na miorbuile mor-aidhble doni se anois, 7 dorinwe re lind Toirrdhealb/ia?V//i m?c Taidg, mic C'owcobha/r ■'>), m?c Donn- chaidh Cairbrigh, do bi 'na Úa Briain náoi mbliadhna iichet, 7 re lind Bonáchaidh míc Toivrdelbaigh mic Taidg, 7 re lind Diar- mata mic Domichaidh, mic Briaiw ruaidh, 7 re limi Mhuircertaigh mic Toirrdelbaigh mic Taidg. Oir ni raibhe mac i nucht, na inghen ar altrom, na ócc, na áosmar •■'), nar bo fiadaiw ar na fior- I) gan diultadh re dreich nduiue don Adhamchloinn add. B. ^) 7 & idhlacadh B. ä) This section is not in B. *) Cidh tenga iarainn no beith hi ccinn dano 7 aingel De aga aisneis, do badh urmaisin maith do, da fétadh áirerah a nderna 7 c. B. 0) na Siudaine add. B. ^) na óigfher gan aosmaire B (inepte). THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 7 That was tlie number in his reflectory at the time of re- fection every night, besides the attendants and servants in the island itself; while his noble guest houses at Kilrush were satis- fying the needs of poor and naked, hale and sick, by night and day, [without rejecting the face of any of the seed of Adam]. And a loaf with its kitchen was given into the hand of every man, and protection, if required, for a whole year, 'and full escort afterwards. And though he (the refugee) went but the length of nine furrows beyond the mound of the termon, and then turned back to the same house, he would receive the same tendance. 2 b. Now during Senan's time that house answered for all this great expense, and Senan left this blessing on each succeed- ing coarb, on condition of his maintaining his hospitality. And this is the last charge that he gave, when he went to heaven, that his congregation and his hospitality should be maintained, as this verse shows: 'Maintain my poor and my guests After me gloriously, o youth, &c.' 3. Moreover no tongue ^), unless inspired by God, could relate what Senan did in the way of miracles and mighty works through the grace of the Lord. However, the most select and noblest of them are written in ancient books with reverence and great honour. It is not of the mighty deeds and miracles wrought before our days in the time of Senan that we wish to speak now, but of things clear and recent, the evident wonders, and the stupendous miracles, while he works now, and which he wrought in the time of Tordelbach son of Tadg, son of Con- chobar [of the Siudan], son of Donnchad Cairbrech, who was the O'Brien for twenty-nine years, and in the time of Donnchad, son of Tordelbach, son of Tadg, and in the time of Diarmait son of Donnchad, son of Brian the Red, and in the time of Muirchertach son of Tordelbach, son of Tadg. For there was no boy in arms, ^) Though a man had in his head a tongue of iron , and au angel of God relating it, he would be very lucky if he could relate, &c. B. 8 C. PLUMMER, taibh so, 7 arna miort)uilibh dorinde Senan re reimhes na riog- raidhe sin; óir ge ata drem deigh-riogh anwsin re a náirem, is gairitt airmhim si iad i). 4. Scela an Toirrdelbaig sin mic Taidg. Do ghabli-sein rieche an gharbh-chóigidh .i. Tuadmumaw, 7 do bái gacli maitlies re a linn, oir do ba torthacli talamli 7c. Ocus ro bái re Imihaid d'aimsir mar sin 2). larsin immorro do tóccbadh nós 7 áMcched i naimsir Thoirrdealba/^/i 3) : gibe duine do muirfedh duine ele 'san tir, muna beith a lain-éraic^) aicce fein, a biiain da aicme; 7 muna beith aga aicme, a bhúain da thiiaith; 7 muna beith 'ga tiiaith, a bhúain dona secht tuathaibh hud goire doibh'»). Do hairccedh 7 do lomad morán leisan nos^) sin, 7 ge do éirgettar uird riaghaltana heccaílsi^), nír cuiredh an reclit siw ar cul léo. 5. (fol 243 a) Tarla do dhuine do muinwtir Senaiu duine do Tiiar\)adh\ 7 do bái'') an éraic aga Xúsivvaidh ar thermanw Senain; 7 aduba/rt an comharba, 7 an prióir, 7 an sacrista Inwsi Cathaigh, 7 in coimhthionol go hiomlán, nach tiubhraitis fein uatha hi, 7 gurb eccóir a hiarra?VZ/i ar aonduine acht ar anti do dhenadh an gniomh, 7 nir gd^hadh sin uatha; oir tainic Toirr- delbacli mac Taidg fein da nionnsaicched, go rainicc go tegh 1) as gerr a reimhes re a rim B. 2) do gabh somh righe Tuadhmuniau go toicteach turcoirthe 0 Luacliar go Bladhma 7 0 Leim Conculaind go Forbor, 7 0 Medhraide go Bealach Abhrat B. 3) do cumadh reacht leisan righ sin B. *) a Ian-chin B. ^) a buain don tuaith budh nesa do, 7 mar ein go cend an secht- madh tuath B. ^) reacht B. ") do éirgettar braithre 7 lucht uird B. ^) For 7 do bái . . . uatha, B reads: 7 do lenadh on recht sin go hiomarcach, conar fetsat fulang na hiomarcaighe ; 7 dob eiccin an ein do srethadh ar shaccartoibh 7 ar cheilibh De an baile, 7 aran ccomhorba, 7 ariu bprioir, 7 aran sacrista Innsi Cathaigh, 7 ro chuirsiot a nochána 7 a nosnadha ina diaidh. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. S) nor girl in fosterage, nor youth, nor old man, who was not witness to the mighty works and miracles which Senan did in the days of these chiefs. For though this is a goodly company of chiefs to enumerate, yet I reckon them (i. e. their reigns) as but a short period. 4. As to this Tordelbach son of Tadg — . He succeeded to the kingship of ' the Rough Province ', to wit, Thomond ') ; and there was all good in his time; for the earth was fruitful, &c. And so things continued for a while. But afterwards an ordin- ance and law was set up in the time of Tordelbach, that if any man should slay another in the land, and the full eric was not got fi'om him (the slayer), that it should be exacted from his family, and if it were not obtained from them, it was to be ex- acted from his tribe, and if it was not got from them, it was to be exacted from the seven tribes most nearly connected with them 2). Many were harassed and stripped of their property under this ordinance ; and though the regular orders of the church rose against it, they could not procure its withdrawal. 5. It chanced that a man of the (monastic) family of Senan slew a man: and^) the eric was demanded from the termon lands of Senan; and the coarb, and the prior, and the sacrist, and the convent of Scattery in general, said that they would not pay it; and that it was unjust to demand it from any man except the doer of the deed. But this plea was not accepted, for Tordel- bach son of Tadg himself came against them, and reached the 1) He succeeded to the kiugship of Thomond prosperously and hickily from Slieve Lougher to Slieve Bloom, from Loop Head to Forhor (?), and from the Maree Peninsula to Belach Abrät (in Slieve Reagh) B. 2) From the tribe nearest to him, and so on to the seventh tribe inclusive ß. ^) And (the murder) was prosecuted so oppressively under this law, that the oppression became intolerable. And the compensation had to be assessed on the priests and Culdees of the place, and on the coarb, prior, and sacrist of Scattery; and the}' groaned and sighed in consequence B. 10 C. PLUMMER, Senain maille le sochraite mor sluaigh, 7 do ümirigh anw^) an oidhclie sill, 7 dochúaidli ar na Marach go CiU mic an diibám, 7 do bí anw ind oidhche sin; 7 tainic Senan i naisling chum an priora ind oidliche sin, 7 do bhendaigh do 2), Oais do tiartaigh an prioir de crét dob ail leis^). Ocus Siáubairt simb: 'Racbat', ar se, 'do dioghail cena mo cleireach, 7 mo thermainn ar Tkoirr- dealbac7i iia mBriáiw'. 'Cidb nach aréir do dhioghlais sin fair?' ar an prioir. "Nirb ail damh im thigh fein', ar Senan, 'ar nach abradh nech gurab im biadh do dhenainw é.' Ocus docuaidh Senan go Cill mic an diibhain ^), 7 Uicc buille do los a throsdain i mnllach l«//-ge Toirrdhealbhaigh. 'Cidh 'ma bfiiile damh? a deirigh', ar T oirr dhealbhach. 'Ar sou eccóra do denamh ar mo therman«', «rse--). larsin^) téid Toirrdhealbac/i dia thigh, 7 nir thoccaibh a cend go üuair bás. II. 6. Fesicht oile immorro da ttainic Murchadh mac an Espíííc hi Briai« co hinis Catha/r/, 7 do bháttar báid inwte, 7 do shsLutaigh ') siumh bad ar éiccin do bhreith eiste, tionoilit amach ^) an baile 7 an coitcend go léir, 7 tuccatar fein 7 ^lurchadh tres aggarbh ainmin'J) da ceile'"). Cidh ira acht do imtigh Murc/iad ar eiccin, 7 do loit se cleirec/i don coitchendi')- Tainic Senan cuicce ind oidhche sin, 7 do gabh grain 7 eccla 7 omhan mor eissiumh roimhe, {fol 2i3 b) 7 do eigh co hard 1^) ; 7 do gabh ace taüVccsin a chruidh 7 a fheraind dilis do Dhia 7 do Shenan. Ocus ro chiiala a bhen 7 a mhuinnter an comhradh sin; 7 do 1) 7 ro biathadh B. 2) 7 atchi an prioir aislinge .i. Seuau dfaiccsin ag fagbáil na liinnsi go ffeircc 7 go loinde B. ') de: 'Ga conair teighi?" B. •») 7 do ci Toindelbach cuice he add. B. '") 'iman ein tuaithe' ar Senan B. ^) 'arsin imtbighis Senan go hopann aiuserccach 7 B. ') ro samhail B. ") sámadh B (rede). 9) tres tulborb troda B. ") d'armaibh 7 clochaibb arfiZ. B. ") acht beiridh M. ar e. an bad, 7 ro ben a lamh do cleiriuch do muintir Senain, 7 ro loit socraidhe dibh B. 12) 7 teid ar comairge Senain uó go ttiosadh da thigh fein. Gidhedh gabhais sláedau tiugaide tromgalar in oidhce sin, 7 as súaill nar marbh ; 7 im- chnirther go a dfinánis fein. Mar tainicc, do connairc Senan cona trosdán chuicce add. B. THE MIRACLES OF SENAX. 11 house of Senan with a great conipaiij', and remained [and received refection] there that night. And the next day he went on to Kilmacduane, and was there that night. And the same night i) Senan appeared to the prior in a vision, and greeted him. And the prior asked him what his pleasure was. And he answered: 'I am going', said he, 'to avenge my clerks and my termon on Tordelbach O'Brien'. 'Why didst thou not take vengance on him for that last night?' said the prior. 'I did not like to do so in my own house',- said Senan, 'for fear it should be said that I had done so (merely) for a matter of food.' And Senan went on to Kilmacduane, [and Tordelbach saw him coming], and he struck Tordelbach on the upper part of the thigh- with the butt end of his staff. 'What is thy grudge against me? clerk', said Tordelbach. 'For-) the injustice done to my termon', said he. After this [Senan departed suddenly in wrath, and] Tordelbach went to his house, and never lifted his head till he died. 6. Now on another occasion Murchad mac-an-espoic (son of the bishop) O'Brien came to Scattery, and there were boats there. And Murchad wished to carry off a boat by force. So the company of the place and the community mustered in full force, and they and Murchad had a sharp and rough encounter [with weapons and stones]. However 3), Murchad got off by dint of force after wounding a clerk of the community. Senan came to him that night, and fear and dread and horror seized him at the sight, and*) he screamed aloud, and began offering his own land and stock to God and to Senan. And his wife and house- 1) The prior saw a vision: Senan leaving the island in rage and fury. And he asked him: 'AVhither goest thou?' B. 2) 'For the tribal compensation', said Senan B. ä) However, M. carried off the boat by force, and cut off the arm of a clerk of Senan's family, and wounded many of them. *) And he went under the protection of Senan, till he should reach his own house. However, a severe and fatal lung -disease seized him that night, and he nearly died. And he was carried to his own stronghold; and when he came there, he saw Senan coming to him with his staff. 12 C. PLUMMER, ü.dLriaig]ieiar de cred an comradh sin do bi aga dhenamh aicce. 'Ataim', ar sé, 'acc tairccsin chendaigh móii' do Senán; 7 ní gha- blianw uaim hé. Ocus tucc buille do los a throstain hi mnWach mo chiche clí, gur gabh an talanih tríom. Ocus 'déntar mo thiomna anosa, iiair as deimliin go ffuiger bás trém toiscc go hlnis Catlia?^ an ta« so)'.' III. 7. Fecht ele da tliainicc Risderd de Clara lion a thionoil^) go crich Corca Basciwd. 7 do hairccedh an tir léo, eter túaith 7 chill, 7 do sháraigh sé temp«?? 2) Senáin^). larsin teid an gall^) da daingen, 7 cid áím-drus fein. Ocus fa áwhach droch-mhen- mnach an samhadh 7 a coitchen^i da sárucchacZ i neimedh Senáin^), 7 darónsat sin gerán") fri Dia 7 fri Senán. Ociis^) do iarratar ar Dhia cend na comhairle do chiorrbadh; 7 an lucht sinte laimhe do léir-sccrios. 8. Tainic Senan in oidche sin d'ionwsaicched an tsacrista. Ocus do thiartai'gh an sacrista de ca raibhe ag dol. Aduba/rt Senan go rachacZ do dhioghail a sháraighthe arin cClárach, 7 do gabh an ranw do: Do aeonaigh damh Ri nimhe, Ri an tsloigh, cend gach comhairle, Lucht craite mo cuirp fam cill-') A ccuirp do cradh gan choigill, Cidh^o) tra acJit nir bo cudrama an coimhgleic, úair tarla buille do trosttán Senáin don Chlárach, gur thimchill a shaoghal ; 7 do 1) 7 an tan tairnic do sin, fuair has add. B. 2) ar creich add. B. ^) 7 ro saraigedh termonn B. *) 7 bnailte an coitcinn, 7 Inis Cathaigh ima comaixge; uair do shaoil nar mhilledh comairge d'Inis Cathaigh crodh na ifiledh do hreith eiste add. B. '-') naibhrech urramhta add. B. ^) tridsim, .i. a ccomairge do clodh 7 a samhadh do sanighadh B. ■>) toirsi B. *) 7 aduhhrattar nar tualaing é a comairge do dhiogail, uair as amhlaidh do dlighfidbe a ndioghail sin na comairge .i. cenn cecha comhairle 7c. B. ^) mo bhocht go grinn B. 1°) Before this B inserts: Jarsin téid Senan gnsan maighin a mbáoi in Clarach, 7 tuccsat coimescar da cele. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 13 hold overheard this talk, and asked what this conversation might be. And he said: 'I am offering great terms to Senan, and he does not accept them, and he has struck me with the butt end of his staff above the left breast, and it has gone through me into the ground. And let my will be made now, for assuredly I shall die as the result of my expedition to Scattery at this time.' [And when he had finished speaking, he died.] 7. Another time Richard de Clare came in full force [on a foray] into Corcovaskin, and the land was harried by them, both clergy and laity, and^) he outraged the church of, Senan. After this the [proud and arrogant] Englishman went to his own fort and stronghold. And the company and community were sad and downcast that 2) they should have been outraged within the sanctuary of Senan, and they made their complaint to God and Senan. And^) they besought God that the author of this design might be cut off, and the folk Avho had executed it utterly destroyed. 8, Senan came that night to the sacrist, and the sacrist asked him where he was going. Senan said that he was going to avenge his outraging on de Clare, and he recited this stave: ' The King of heaven, the King of the host, has granted to me the author of every design, (and) the folk who plague my body in respect of my church^), that their bodies should be plagued without mercy.' [Thereupon Senan went to the place where de Clare was, and they had a tussle together.] But the contest was no equal one, ^) And the termoii of Seiiau was outraged, and the booleys of the com- munity and the asylum rights of Scattery; though (lit. for) people thought that those rights Avould never be violated by taking therefrom the property of the poets B. 2) That their asylum should be invaded, and their congregation out- raged B. ä) And they said: 'Could he not avenge (the violation of) his asylum?' for the vengeance due therefor was this, that the author of any design, &c. B. *) Plague my poor deliberately (?) B. 14 C. PLUMMER, inwis fein ar na raharacli día mlminntir, go ffacaidh se cléireach i) 'san aird aniar chuicce go ffeirg móir, 7 gur mliescc 2) a chiall 7 a chuimline. 7 gur bhiiaidliir é uile. A ccionn an tres lái^) iarsin do chúaidli an Clarach for sluaighedli, 7 do gabliadh a chosae {fol.24áa) 7 a lamha fair, go ffrith 1 naisccidh é, 7 co ffua?r bás tre mhiorbhail Senain, gér bo fer comhlaind cei conuicce sin lie. IV. 9. Araile Mair do bái tempaZZ do tliemplaibli Senáin .i. Cill na GdÄWighi ba dona reicclésaibli ba hannsa le Senán da raibhe aicce he, acht Inis Cathaíí/ amháin, arashon sin do bhái do m\\ét inweacha2íí 7 aincreidimh in phopa?7, gur leiccset gan ord, gan aifrionw, gan altóir anw he; acht snip tuighedh 'ma chend, 7 búaladh 7 losccadh, 7 gach ni da anúaisle da dhenai?2h anw mar gach tegh oile*). Gabhais fercc immorro an terlamh trid sin, 7 is^edh do roine. La da raibhe ben ace dógh^) arbha don taoibh thoir don tempaZZ fedh urchazr, 7 an gháoth aniar go direch, do ling \mmorro gealbhonji do mwWach an tempa?7Z6) mar a raibhe an bhen, 7 do gabh seimhin') ar lasadh ina bhél, 7 do ling chum an tempaill aris; 7 ro leicc an seimhin ar lasadh 'sa tuighe, go ro loiscceci/i an tempaZ?, eter tuighe 7 chrand, 7 cloich^). larsin 9) immorro do chuirettar ^uUmig in bhaile rempu in tempaW do dhénamh asa niia ; 7 do thionwsccnatar teini aoil do dhénamh ara bharach. 10. Tainicc im>Morro Senán an oidhce siw fei« cum fir don bhaile darb ainm Giolla Senáin 0 hEttromáiw, 7 atbert fris: 'Eirigh a marach go huillin»'*») tighe inghine iii Brúachain, 7 tochail 11) tri troighthe ó uillinw an tighe amach >2) 7 doghébhaír 1) ferccach fuasnadach add. B. 2) 7 go ttucc coimhesccar do : ' 7 do bedga[s] sa remhe ', ar se B. *) a ccinn se laithe B. *) losg[adh] gran, 7 muiunterdhaclit anu B. ^) losccadh B. ®) The scribe at first wrote tighe. ') simha B. *) 7 ro hái seal amlaidh sin add. B. ^) 7 adubratar duthchusaigh an bhaile, gur choir teine aoil do dhenamh, 7 an tempall do chorugadh B. 1") airtheraigh add. B. ") 7 togbáil (no tomais interlined) B. 1*) on udhnocht amach B. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 15 for a blow from Senan's staff lighted on de Clare, which cut short his life; and he himself related to his household on the morrow that he had seen a [furious angrj^] clerk in the air coming- to him out of the West in great wrath, [and he had a tussle with him], and') he confused his mind and his memorj-, and made him all distraught. At the end of the third day follow- ing 2) de Clare went on a hosting, and could not move hand or foot, so that he was at the mercy of his enemies ; and so he died through the miraculous power of Senan, though previously he was a fighter equal to a hundred. 9. There was once a temple of Senan's, to wit, Killna- galliach, which of all Senan's churches was his favourite, save Scattery alone. Yet such was the wickedness and infidelity of the people that they left it without rite, or mass, or altar; with wisps of thatch over it, and threshing and parching [of grain], and all the most menial offices being done there, as in any common house. The patron saint was highly incensed at this; and this is what he did. One day a woman was parching corn a stone's throw from the East end of the church, and the wind due West, when a sparrow hopped down from the top of the church to where she was, and seized a burning straw in its beak, and hopped on to the church again, and dropped the burning straw on to the thatch, and the church was burnt, thatch and stick and stone ; [and it remained for a time in that state]. After this the inhabitants of the places) proposed to rebuild the church, and the next day they began to make a lime kiln. 10. However, that very night Senan came to a man of the place named Gilla-Seuain O'Hettroman, and said to him : ' Go to- morrow to the [East] corner of the house of Ni Bruacháin, and dig three feet out from the corner, and thou shalt find plenty of ') 'And I started at the sight of him', said he B. 2) Of six days B. ^) Said that it would he a good thing- to make a lime -kiln, and restore the church B. 16 C. PLUMMER, do sháith áoili) aim'. Eirg-liis Giolla Senain ar maidin, 7 ruc- ciistair rámhaud 7 slíiasat lais, 7 do thochail ag uillinw an tiglie 7 tnair an taol an?^ amail adubaíVt Senán fris; 7 nír bó lughaitte an táol a mbeirthi as. Ocus do ruccatar a sáitli léo de, go ndernsaí an tem^all go diongmala, gurab cill cádhítsacli cóir osin alle hi. Sgela na teinedh áoil ó sin amacli: gacli uile cinel galair do bliiodh for dhuine no for ainmidhe gan acht an taol sin (fol 2M h) do chumailt de, do bhiodli slán gau f uirech ; nú doch '■) da bfaghtaoi an?^, 7 a téghadh, 7 a cur i ndigh doibh, do icadh each 7 c. 11. Robái3) mennan becc bacach gabhair ag mnáoi 'san mbaile si«, 'ar mbrisedh a dhá chos 7 a dhroma. Dochuaidh leis gifsan teine aóil, 7 adubha^Vt: 'D«r mo bhreithir', ar si, 'ni thiocfair assin, go ttaiséna Senán a mhiorbuile fort.' Do fhac- caibh an oidhce sin «rin aol é, 7 docúaidh da fhechain ara bhoracb, 7 is amhla?t?/i fiia^r é, 7 nth mór hdlmie aicce, 7 e fein slan ina shesamh, 7 do slánaigedh a bhainwe gach galar, 7 gach X teidm da rabiodh ar dhaoinibh 7 airnéisibh; 7 do beirti do riogh- aibh 7 d'escopaibh a bhainne siii osin amach. Ocus fós gach áon troisccfes ar lathaiV na teinedh aoil siw fri Dia 7 fria Senaw, 7 do dhéna a fhaoisittin iarsin, 7 glacfus Corp Crist, do gebha an athchuinghe bás ail lais, muna raibhe i nacchaiVZ aiccnidh. TL 12. Feac/íí anw do gabh J^omiohad mac Domhnaill mic Briain ruaidh cendws'') ar crich Chorea Baisciwd, gur chuir a shlóigh 7 a buanwadha istech foran tir^), 7 ro bái d'iomat a cheitherns) 7 a dhamh coimhittec/i^a, co roichedh bnanda «rna tri búaibh ') da raibhe 'san tir, 7 nir dhiol doibh siw. Dochuaidh Donwchad úa Briain fein do shárucchacZ cheall t-Senái«, 7 do thabairi a ccruidh uatha d'áis no d'éiccen. Ocus docuaidh go Cill na Cailbi///i, 7 go Cill Chuiridáin, 7 go Ros an Aircéil, 7 ^) foge'oha tene aoil B. ^) gach cliabh-galar no treabhlaid do bhiod for each no duiue, acht co mberbhtha clocha na teinedh doibh, ba slan B. 3) This section is very much shorter in B. *) nert B. ^) go ro sreth a shiagh forra B. ^) eachtrauu B. ') 7 aran da ba, 7 aran en bhoin B; luhich abbreviates the remainder of the section to the detriment of the clearness of the narrative. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 17 lime') there.' Gilla-Senain arose the next morning-, and took spade and shovel, and dug at the corner of the house, and found the lime there, as Senan had said; and the lime was not di- minished by what was taken out. And thej* carried away as much as they wanted, and built the church worthilj^, so that thenceforth it was held in due honour. As to the subsequent history of the lime -kiln: — every kind of disease in man or beast, if only (the patient) were rubbed with the lime, would be healed at once, or 2) if a stone taken thence were heated and put in their drink, it would cure ever3'one, &c. 11. A woman in the place had a little lame kid, which had broken two of its legs and its back. She took it to the lime -kiln, and said: 'Upon my word', said she, 'thou shalt not come out. till Senan displays his miracles on thee'. She left it in the kiln that night, and the next day she went to look at it, and found it standing quite healed Avith a great udder of milk, and the milk healed every illness and every plague in man and cattle, and was carried thenceforth to kings and bishops. More- over everyone who fasts to God and to Senan on the site of this lime-kiln, and makes his confession afterwards, and receives the Body of Cluist, shall obtain any boon he pleases, if it be not contrary to nature. 12. Once upon a time Donnchad son of Domnall son of Brian Eoe (the red) assumed the chief ship of Corcovaskin, and he quartered his bands and bonaghts in on the land, and so many were his kernes '-^) and attendants that the bonaghts would find out (lit. reach) three cows [or two cows, or even a single cow] that existed in the land. And as if that was not enough for them, Donnchad O'Brien himself went to outrage the churches of Senan, and to carry off their cattle from them whether they 1) Find a lime-kilu J5. 2) (And) every lung -disease or (other) trouble iu horse or man, if only stones of the kiln were seethed for them, would be cured B. ä) Foreigners B. Zeitschrift i". oelt. riiilologit X. 18 C. PLUMMER, do haircceáh lais íatt. 0 'tcualai) comharba Senain sm, do thionóil an dara comharba chuicce maille lena raiblie do cliléir- cibli anwsa tír, 7 andsaii mbaile sin tSenáin. Ocus tuccattar a ccluicc, 7 a cceolána 7 a mbaclila, 7 a nuile mionna léo, 7 do- chóttar bail i rraibhe Donwchad, 7 adubhrattar, muna ttviccadh sé doibh gacli a nice uatlia, go ccuirfittis Dia 7 Senan 'na diaigh air. Ocus adubawt siurali, (fol 245 d) nach úwhradh. larsin tuc- cattar san gáir mbv, eter útirech, 7 céolán, 7 clocc, 7 bachaill, gur chomhmbuaidhrettar a chiall, 7 gur mesccattar a inchinw ina chiond. AdubaíVí siumh friu: 'Gabhaidh búandadha', ar sé. 'Do dhénam sin', ar na cleirchi, "7 cuirmit Senan 'na dhiaigh ortsa.' Do cuiredh deichneabh«>- ar coitcheanw Senáin, 7 a mhéid do toccratar féin ariw ccomharba, 7 búanda ar Mac Sioda an chluicc, 7 búanwa ar úúúvigli Ruis na nArc, 7 buanda ar chleirf^Ä Cille na cCaillec/?, 7 buanda ar oXúúvigli Chille Cuiridáin. Oirisit marsin 0 fhéil Senáin go céid-féil Muire. Ocus do chuir^) Dond- chad flos arna bíiandadhaibh anwsin clium aidhmillte do denamh i naird oile. Ocus do Miarhadh Donwchad anwsin, 7 an deich- nebhar dá bhraitnbh^) do bi maille ris ag sárucchad Senáin, 7 na búandadha nile. Ocus os é Brian naV sharaigh Senán^), do imthigh slán. YII. 13. Uair ele aaohuaid Mathgamhain mac Domhnaillj mio, MvLÍrcertaigh, do breith áirnéisi '') do bái arna Carnánaibh leis ar eiccin, 7 íatt ar comairce comharba Senáin; 7 do gabh tre^) buailidh an choitcinn. Ocus do heiccedh air, 7 tainic in comh- arba') 7 in coitcend chuca, 7 do feradh treis aggarbh») ettorra ar lár bíiailedh in choitchinw. Ocus do chaith Mathgamhain fein da soighitt risan ccomarba 7 do bhuaii air iatt, 7 nir tholl cidh a aédach. Ocus anuair do connairc Mathgamain an comharba *) For o'tcuala . . . Senain B reads 7 ro lensat an da choitchinn é. ') For 7 do chuir . . . alle B reads toccthar iad chum tochair na main- istreach. 8) cethrar da síol B. *) nach raibhe a ngoire do Senan B. =) eallaigh B. «) asé eolus do gliaibh an teallach súas go b. B. ') ar toradh a retha a ndiaigh na comairge add. B. *) tulborb B, which abbreviates the rest of the section. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 19 would or no. And he came to Kilnag-alliacli, and to Kilcredaun, and to Eos an Aircéil, and plundered them. When i) the coarb of Senan heard this, he sent for the other coarb, and all the clerks who were in the land and in that place of Senan. And they brought their bells and hand -bells and bachalls, and all their other treasures, and they proceeded to the place where Donnchad was; and they said that unless he gave back all that he had taken from them, they would set God and Senan after him. And he said that he would not make restitution. Then they raised a great noise, clerks, and bells, and hand-bells, and bachalls, so that they perturbed his mind, and confused his brain in his head. He said to them : ' Eeceive (my) bonaghts ', said he. ' We will do so ', said the clerks, ' and Ave will set Senan at thee afterwards'. Ten men Avere quartered on the community of Senan, and as many as they claimed on the coarb, and bonaghts on Mac Sida (steward) of the bell, and on the clerks of Ros na nArc, and on those of Kilnagalliach and Kilcredaun. They re- mained thus from the festival of Senan to the first festival of Mary. And then 2) Donnchad sent for the bonaghts to ravage in another quarter. And there Donnchad was killed, and ten 3) of his kinsmen who took part with him in the ravaging of Senan, and all the bonaghts. And as for Brian, who"*) did not outrage Senan, he came off safe and sound. 13. On another occasion Mathgamhan son of Domnall, son of Muirchertach, went to carry off forcibly some cattle that were at Carnaun under the protection of Senan's coarb. And [the herd] proceeded through the booley of the community. And a hue and cry was raised; and the coarb came [at the top of his speed in pursuit of the protected cattle (lit. protection)] and the community also, and a sharp struggle took place between them in the midst of the community's booley. And Mathgamain 1) And the two communities pursued him B. -) They were brought to the causewaj' of the monastery B. 3) Four of his seed B. *) Was not near Soian B. 2* 20 C. PLUMMER. ag imtliecht, dochóid fein fón ccrodh, 7 do marhli mart dibh. Ocus beiritt na cléirigh an cliuid ele leo dibh, 7 ro Mrigh Mathgamam 'san mbaile ind oidhche sin. Ocus do gabh galar trom é, gur bú marhh^), 7 gur mliair cethraimhe don mart sin do marbh fein. 7 a croicenM2) dia eis. go ffuil^) sin ar cuimline 0 sin anúas. Till. 14. Fecht ele tangattar gadaighthi ar buaile in coit- chinw, 74) gabliait {fol. 245h) áonmhart amháin do bái ace senoir nasal do bliái ina sliaccart 'san mbaile, 7 beirit go liionad imchian leo hi, 7 marbliait, 7 do cuirettar a croicend^), 7 an laogli boi ina bolcc, hi ffolach hi bpoll móna^). Do tóccradh an mart iarsin'), 7 nir adaimh aon duiwe an mart. Ocus do iarr an senoir sin .i. an saccart ua hUiginii ar Dia 7 ar Senán ffoillsiuccad/i d'faghail do ara bhoin. A cciond miosa iarsin, tangattar na g&áaighe remh- ráite dochum an phuill mhúna inar fáccbatar croicend 7 laogh na bo, 7 do toccbhattar asan bpoll iatt; 7 ace sccaoilet?/» an eroicinw dóibh, do eirigh an laogh, 7 do léicc a tri géimionwa ass. Ocus fa raór an tiowgnadh 7 an tnathbás leisna gadaighibh in ni sin, 7 do sléchtsat do Dhia 7 do Senáu, 7 tangattar gussin ssigart, 7 tuceattar a bhreith fein«) do, 7 do gheallatar gan en ni húdh olce le Senan do dhénamh go brath. IX. 15. Feclif ele do bhattar cleirigh an bhaile fein^) i ccai- bidilio), 7 dorónsat do chomhairle sépel do aeiiamh do Muire; 7 do ^) an tres trath arua mháirech add. B. '^') seiche B. 3) go ffuil ina ball coimesa 0 shoiu, 7 co mbia go brath B. *) CO ttarla scaói do crodh an choitchinn doibh ace éirghe 7 gabhaitl mart B, which omits the passage about the priest here, inserting it loiver down adding: 7 an sagart MacUiginn. ■') seiche B. 8) hi bpoll phortaigh, 7 ethait an mart B. ') cuirther fa choinnlibh an mart i necclasaibh an cboitcinn B. **) a riar B. ^) batar coitcinn Senain ina suidhe B. "} a haithle a nespartan add. B. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 21 himself discharged two arrows at the coarb, and they hit him, but did not pierce even his clothing. And when Mathgamain saw the coarb escaping, he himself attacked the cattle and killed a heifer. But the clerks got off with the rest of the cattle. Mathgamain remained in the place that night ; and was attacked by a severe illness, so that he died [at the third hour on the morrow]. And a quarter of the heifer which he killed, and its skin remained, and remains there from that time forth as a memorial ^). 14. Another time thieves came to the booley of the com- munity, [and a herd of cattle on the move belonging to the community met them], and they took a single heifer belonging to a noble elder of the place [and the priest's name was Mac Uiginn (Quiggin)]; and they carried it off to a remote spot, and killed it, and hid the hide, and the calf that was in its womb, in a hole in a bog, [and ate the heiferj. The'O (loss of the) heifer was cried after this, but no one confessed to the theft. And the senior, that is the priest O'Huiginn. besought God and Senan to make knoAvn to him about his cow. At the end of a month the aforesaid thieves came to the hole in the bog where they had left the hide and calf of the cow, and took them out of the hole. And when they unwrapped the hide, the calf stood up, and bellowed three times. And great was the astonishment and horror of the thieves at this, and they prostrated themselves before God and Senan, and came to the priest, and offered him his own terms. And they promised not to do anything displeasing to Senan till doom. 15. Another time the clerks of the place held a chapter [after vespers] ; and they resolved to build a chapel to the Virgin, y ') As a witness for ever B. "^) The heifer was put under candles in the churches of the community (i. e. the thieves were excommunicated) B. 22 C. PLUMMER, bí ') ina ceist orra gan cloclia aca "dmm aoil do áemimh, 7 gan cloclia snoigliti aca 'clmm na hoibre féin do denamli, 7 docliódrtr do choáladh in oidhce sin. Ocus-) ro eivigh deirech dibh ar maidin arabhaíach, 7 íaair an meid doch Mdh maith lais. Ociis nir bó ferr dodia ar bitli ina iatt. X. 16. Taispenadh adhuathmliar tadhbás don tsenóir Úa Ca/rill .i. saccart Innse Catha/(/ aroile oiddie ina iarmeirge. Ocus is amhlaidh tainicc cuicce .i. dealbh coirtighe, dordubh. 'Cros Crist ettrowi 7 tú', ar an saccart, '7 cía tú féin?' 'Macbethadh mac Neil! (fol. MÚa) mic Murdiac/a meisi', ar sé. 'Cidh rod áúbhustair fon ionmís sin tú?' ar in senoir. 'Niwsa, Roimét^) mo peine 7 mo plieacaf?/i, óir is amhla?V/// bim, 7 pliic mor do demhnaibh umam isind áer, 7 sústa imdJia iamaidhe aca aga ngabháil im cend dibh. Ocns gidli áoiligh damli sin. as doilglie damh m'atha?V do beitli ina comnaidhe ar múr naoimh, 7 maíVcc bhios and. Ocufi is ma?Vcc damlisa secli cácli m'atliair do blieith a ccomfoccíí.s don diill: úair gib é do dliéna ingreim ar mliúr naoiíHh ar bith, 7 co liáiridlie ar Inis C-dÜiaig, beid na deich cet 7 an ficlie cet naomh doróine cairdes 7 aonta fii Senán aga aithber air fein, 7 am shliocht ina dhiaigh. Ocus au tan dognither eccóir no in- ghieim aran inis naoimh so, teccait na naoimh sin as gach aird dia dhioghail a>-an lucht ros dingne; 7 ro chan an láidh an«^): *) 7 ba troiu leo ceudacli ua ccloch iiáoil , uair do beiidis da sgilliug ar gach en lucht B. *) larua mharach iminorro do tiomaicctidlie comhard tempaill do clochaibh aelbuigh timcell na hinnse, co nach rangatar a les clocha do cendach B. ^) From this ])oiyit to the end of the section B reads thus: Ro-iomat mo phecadh 7 ro-throma mo peine, uair as amiaidh bim, 7 pine do demhuaibh agam rébadh, 7 cidh mor pian t'uil oram, as doilge damb aithber iomaithber oram ara bith a ccomharsauacht lunsi Cathaigh, uair maircc bhios a ccomharsanacbt naoimh, 7 maircc doriuue 7 dingenas iughreim ar luis Cathaigh 7 ar lucht aittreba an náim sin i talamh, uair an deich cced 7 an fhichet céd naomh dorinne codach re Seuan, beid sin uile acca dioghail fair fein, 7 ara mhac, 7 for a iarsma co deiredh betha .i. for auti doghéua ingreim arin ccatraigh naoimh sin ; 7 gach uair da ndiugentar eccoir ar luis Cathaigh, 7 ar Cill Rois, 7 ar termoun Seuain co coitciouu, teccaid samhaidh Senain co leic an chodaigh, 7 tabrad tri gaire eter clocc 7 duine, 7 tioccfaid na naoiuih sin do dhioghail na neccórach dognílider re Senan. *) B onúts the j^oeni, and gives the following colophon: As leabhar comharba Shenain o luis Cathaigh do sgriobad an Ambra sm Senain, 7 ua sgeoil becca nuaidhe amhail atád sunna, a ccouveint brathar Chuiuuche i (Continued on p. 24.) THE MIRACLES OF SENAX. 23 and ') it was a difficult}' to them that the}' had no stones from which to make lime, nor any dressed stones for the work itself; and they retired to rest that night. And 2) a clerk of them arose on the following morning, and found as much stone as he could desire. And no stones in the world were better than they. 16. A dreadful vision appeared to the elder, O'Cairill. a priest of Scattery. one night at mattins; and thus it came to him as a tanned jet-black form. 'Christ's cross (be) between me and thee", said the priest, "and who art thou?" 'Macbeth, son of Xiall. son of Murchad', said he. 'AVhat has blackened thee like that'?' said the elder. 'That is soon told' (said he) -the enormity of my torment and m}' sins; for thus I am, with a great horde of demons hovering ^) about me. with many iron flails which they ply upon my head. And though this be grievous to me, more grievous *) is it to me that my father is settled on the boundary (lit. Avail) of a saint, and woe to him who is there. And woe to me beyond anything that my father should be near the church, for whoever shall trespass on the boundary (lit. wall) of any saint, and especially Scattery. the three thousand saints who made alliance and union with Senan will avenge it on the doer, and on his seed after him. And when Avrong or trespass is done to this sacred island [to Scattery and KiLrush, and to the termon of Senan generally, the congregations of Senan come to the Stone of the Treaty, and send forth three cries of man and bell, and] these saints come from every quarter to avenge it on the per- petrators. And he recited this lay''). 1) And the purchase of lime -stone was a heavy burden to them, for the}' had to pay two shillings for eveiy load B. ^) But on the morrow were seen limestones to the height of a church all round the island, so tlÉt they had no need to purchase any B. *) Rending me B. *) Is the twice-told vengeance on me for being in the vicinity of Scatter}', for woe to him who is in the vicinity of a saint, and woe to him who has, committed or shall commit trespass on Scattery and the dwellers on the saint's land B. '") B ends here with the following colophon: From the book of the coarb of Senan of Scattery this Amra Senain and the little modern tales were copied, as here given, in the friars" convent of Quin in Thomoud in the summer of the year 1634, Father Donnchad mac Gilla Senain (^Magilsinan) being Warden. The friar Michael O'Clery wrote it the first time, and also now, June li, 1635. 24 C. PLUMMER, 17. An an catliair caomli so anocht, Inis Csithaig, caomh a tlacht; Mochen corpán téid fo híiir, lomdha aingel ciuil 'na port. Maircc thocráidhes an saor seng, Senan sochla na smith mbinn; y As Í falaidh bia do anw. Nemh is talamh uaidh da chiond. Luclit dioghla taladh an naoimh Is solamh teccait fon ngáir; Deich cet ar fichit Q,et naonih Teccait go saor tar in sal. 18. Maith an toirecht ticc a túaid Do naomhaibh Doire fon ngáir, Oirecht Mocliuda do céin, Is Bairri budein ina ndáil. Ticc Ó Ohlnain Eraird a ccéin Buidhen tseimli d'áos in gniidh, Oirecht fial Ciaráin ó Clúai«, Siar go mór-dhail Muighe Mail. Ticc Caoimhghin 6 Ghlion« da Loch. Ticc Berach go fir in flaith, Do ice SubttcA, saor an smith, Ticc Béoog on tuinw nioir maith. 19. Muinend, is mac Solaim siar, Is solamh teccait fon ngáir, In tespoc Fergíís fionw fial Go mer-gws dian ina ndáil. {fol. 246 h) Do ic Maolchorgais ale Go hiarlaith for cona?r ngle. Is Foil an do ice anoir, Comán CO cei naomh sodhain. {Continuation from 2). 22.) tTuadhmumain a Samhradh ua bliadhna sa, 1634, darbo Gairdian an tathair Dondchad mac GioUa Seuain. An brathair Michel 0 Clevigh ro sgiiobli an ceidfecht, 7 sonna 14 lunii, 1035. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 25 17. Glorious the beauteous city to night, Scattery, fair its array. Blessed the corpse that goes under its soil; many a quiring angel is in its harbour. Woe to him who provokes the emaciated noble one, far- famed Senan of the melodious sages. This is the punishment which will be to him therefor, deprivation of heaven and earth. The avengers of the saint's wrath, promptly they come at the call; three thousand saints come nobly across the brine. 18. Goodly the company of the saints of Derry which comes from the north at the cry ; the company of Mochuda from afar, and Barry himself to meet them. There comes from Clonard afar a lean troop of clerics and the noble company of Ciaran of Clonmacnois, westwards to the meeting of Magh Mail. There comes Coemgen from Glendalough. there comes Berach the prince in sooth ; Subach comes, noble the sage, comes goodly Beoog from the great wave. 19. Moinend and Mac Solaim in the West, promptly they come at the cry, fair noble Fergus the bishop, with eager fervid strength to meet them. Thither comes Maelcorgais to larlaithe on the bright path, from the East comes Follán, and Comán with a hundred monks. 26 C. PLUMMER. Dosíicc Brénainn hmáhnech bán, Ticc cet 0 Cill mic Ronáin; Ticc Nessaii mor tar in sal, Re les teccait na Cronáin. 20. Tiocfaidh Caireall, cáid an cing, Tar sál ó Arainn gan fheall; Ticc Feichin F?ibair in fionw Tar lind do cliabhair na cceall. Ticc Lughna [an] Aonaígh an aigh, Is ticc slogli Miiglma da ndéoin, Teccaitt na Colmáin go caidli, Uch, a Dhé, as anbháil an fhoir. Ticc Eralt fa slien ale Co slogli do naomliaibh Luigne; Ticc Manclián do dlieoin Dé dil, Ticc Berchán cowa buidnibh. 21. Ticc Tigernan Oiridli án, Ticc Mocúa Balla fa déoigli; Ticc an Gall craibhdecli co cáidh, Le laimli ni háilghen an flióir. Greallan Craoibhe cruaidh na cath, Lendán fuair gacli rath 'na ritli; Tiocfaidh Fursa, flal an flaitli, Cidh cian, as daitli thiocfus sin. Ticc Ceallach mac Conmsic caidh, Ticc an feoclia<V íial Flandán, Ticc úa Siianaiyh sun?i fon ngair Go sluagliaibli caomha Candáin. 22. Colara mac Criomlitliain go ratli, Ba rond nir thiormaigh a ghuth; Caimin Inwsi Cealtra a cath Asa indsi ticc fan nguth. Ticc Ailbhe sech giein ale Da réir, ocus mac Luighne, Ocus ticc Mac Duach alle Co luath, ocus Mochuille. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 27 Fair Brendan of the hosts comes, come a hundred from Cell mic Ronain; great Nessan comes across the brine — profitably come the Cronans. 20. Cairell will come, venerable the champion, across the brine from Aran without fail; Feichin the fair of Fore comes across the water to help the churches. Lughna the warlike of Nenag-h comes, and the host of Mug'hna comes willingly, reverently come the Colmans; Ah God, wondrous is the help. Eralt comes thither with (good) augury, and a host of the saints of Luigne, Manchán comes by dear God's will, and Berchán with his companies. 21. Glorious Tigernan of Errew comes, Mochiia of Balla comes at last, reverently comes the devout foreigner; not gentle is the help at hand. Grellan of Creeve, hardy in battles, a favourite who attained every grace in his course; Fursa will come, generous the prince, though far off, quickly will he come. Cellach comes, the venerable son of Conmac, and the fierce generous Flannan, Úa Suanaigh conies here at the call with the fair hosts of Cannan. 22. Colum son of Crimthan with grace, his voice was a stream which never dried, Caimin of Inishcaltra in battle came from his island at the sound. Ailbe, who surpassed the sun, comes hither at his will, and Mac Luighne and Macduach swiftly, and Mochuille. 28 C. PLUMMER, Ticc Luchtigern go dian d'ítr ffios, Dobeir Scenmán sciath 'sa treas; As ratlimhar a nglór a bhus, Blathmac leisan slogh d'ar les. 23. Mac Leinin au gai géir gloin, Molaga fá dheoigli mar ailt, Fionwchu Bri gobhanw an guirt Ni anfa co ticc fon aire. Comhgall, Cainweach, Lactin lais, Mochua Balla, caidh a tres, Ruadhán Lotlira luatli don lios Ticc leisan sluagli d'ar les. (fol 2á7a) Ticc Flanw m«c Airchealla/í^ ain, Ticc an feoclia/r íial Findán, Do ice Carrtacli as taom trir, Ticc Mainech ') mór mat Lairin. 24. Ticc oireaclit Árand aniar Tar sal-mong mara nach min; Teceait naoimh in cadaigli cáidh G«sin abbaidh nán co fir. Go Senán eáidh ina chill, Go sosadh na sáor-long seng, Gér bó hoclit a ré rea lind, Aec Mac ochta Dé ni fand. Mor socraite in naoimh, ni brécc, 0 Cham i Neid go Sliabh Fúaid, Tieicli cet sin ar fhicit céd. Is Í med teccait fon riiaig. 25. Maircc duisges an slogh sa amach Tre shárucehací na cathrach, Bidh gairitt, bidh suaill a rath, Bidh fada biian bus Siithieach. *) This name is imderlined as if for deletion. THE MIRACLES OF SENAX. 29 LucMigern comes quickly at our summons, Scenmán bears his shield into the contest; gracious their speech in this world. Blathmac with the host comes to our profit. 23. Mac Leinin of the keen bright spear, Molaga at last, like a hero, Finnchu of Brigown of the garden; he will not stay till he comes to the contest (lit. trouble). * Comgall, Cainnech, Lachtin with him. Mochua of Balla, venerable his conflict. Euadhan of Lorrha comes with the host swiftlv to the fort to aid us. Flann. son of glorious Airchellach comes, and the fierce generous Findan; Carthach comes who is a match (?) for three, and great Mainech son of Lairin. 24. From the West comes the company of Aran across the brine of the rough crested sea; the saints of the A'enerable coven- ant come to the abbot who is g-iorious indeed. To Senan the venerable in his church, to the station of the slender noble ships, though his time was poor in his life, he has power with God's bosom Son. Great the company of the saint in sooth fi'om Carn iii Xéit to the Fews, three thousand is the sum of those who come to the onset. 25. Woe to him who rouses up this host by outraging the city (monaster)'), short and scant will be his grace; long and lasting will be his ruth. 30 C. PLUMMER, Maircc do blieir an sluagh sa alle 0 chriochaib cíana Cime, Ni bá sámhucchaíí bias de Tre shárucchaíí na cille. Atú ag rádh briathar nach bras Cille caidhe is caoimhe atclos; Oirecht aingeal and gan ces 0 26. Mac me meic heümd nach buan Eter sretaibh sluagh nach saor, Kopsam tendál ar bith buan, Mimbhadh Senan na sluagh saor. Maircc beires ferond an náoimh, Ni mochenonu beith 'na ndáil; Maircc da gach duine fofuair Beith go cruaidh 'na cuile caidh. Uch, dam ratt mo naomh go nocht, As oram do thuit a claon olc, Isedh do bheir me uaidh go hole, Beith go cfuaidh isin naomh -port. 27. Maircc bios a ccomhfoccws ceall, Maircc nach ai thigh go haifren?2, Ferr beith a ccloch-dinibh ceall Na ag droch-daoinibh na ngaithlend. Occlach bios a nulca naoimh Ro fhedar nocha bia a mháoin; Téid as a eland is a chrod. Is bidh fein tall ar droch-shorthan, Dámadh Ian dorn siol gach raon, Nocha raghaind [si] re taobh; Nocha berainwsi a tir uaidh, Gemadh lionmar mo mor-sluaigh. ») A line missing; space left blank in the MS. THE MIRACLES OF SEN AN. 31 Woe to him who brings this host hither from the distant bounds of Cime; 'tis no peace -making that will result from it, from outrag-ing: the church. I say a word which is not boastful of tlie venerable church, the most beauteous ever heard of ; a company of angels is there unweariedly . . . J) 26. A son of a son of life not lasting among the ranks of hosts not free, a firebrand for evermore were I. but for Senan of the noble hosts. Woe to him who steals the land of the saint, ill is it to have to meet them (i. e. the saints); woe to each man who contrived to be oppressively in his (Senan's) venerable store. Alas ! my saint has stripped me bare, on me has fallen his headlong wrath; this it is which evilly separates me from him, my being oppressively in his sacred harbour. 27. Woe to him who is near churches, woe to him who frequents not mass; better to be in the shelter of stone churches, than with evil men of the spear. A man who is under the wrath of the saint, I well know will not profit by it; his children and cattle perish, and himself will be in evil case in the other world. Though every road were thronged with my seed, I would not rely on them; I would not take his land from him. however numerous my mighty hosts. *) A line raissing. 32 C. PLUMMER, {fol 247 h) Ge adértai mo ghort glau. 's gurab é m'athaí/- no tlireabad, Da mbeith a bfocci<s don cill, XÍ ragh air acht go hinMÍll. 28. Fúd do breith d'feronw na uaomli Xodia déoin don Spín/í Naomh; Maircc bheires do fein gid gar, y Ar a fhod bais a dhioghal. Maircc doni tegli ar mnr naoimh, Maircc don fhine téid re a thaoibli. ]\Iaircc uma meic ociis flora, Do gheibli ^;-a a troim-iodha. Baoghal don rigb ticc re cill, Do faoth d'faobhar no do rinw, Gan crodh, gan coimdlie teit as. Do blieir an Coimdlie d'ludas. 29. Gach a ndernií5 im chorp criadh Do gach olc, da gach anriar, As mo do cwir meisi hi ftan A thir do breith ó Senán. Aithnim im dhiaigh da gach laoch Giow go ffaghbha tir acht fraoch, Na héirgedh ar tir na cceall, Na dech le a gniomh i nifrenw. Da ndechaind isin saogal seng. Do berainw tres re leigend, Ni beind oil re hóil 'sa ceall Ar ioniat óir na hEirenw. Is Í mo cluimh is mo lend, A huir mar tá fam leit-cen«; As fir gurab cuidh an ceall As dion anma gid leith-glend i). ») ? Leithglend. THE MIRACLES OF SENAN. 33 Though it (the land) were called my field in clear possession, and though it were mj' father that occupied it, I will not enter on it save under securitj'", if it be near the church. 28, To take a sod of the land of the saints is displeasing- to the Holy Spirit; woe to him who appropriates even a little of it, on his own 'sod of death' it will be avenged. AVoe to him who makes a house on the wall (boundar}') of a saint; woe to the sept which supports him (in doing so); woe to his sons and his men, he shall receive heavy pains for it. There is danger for a king who attacks a church, he shall fall by blade or point, without property, without security he goes forth; the Lord places him with Judas. 29. Of all the ill I did in my body of clay, of all the rebellion, that which has ruined me most, is taking land from Senan. I bid ever}" layman after me, though he obtain no land but (mere) heath, not to attack church lands, lest he go with his deed to hell. If I were to return to the meagre world. I would fight on behalf of study; I would not be cheek by jowl with his church for all the gold of Erin. This is my covering (lit. plumage) and my mantle, his soil thus under the side of my head; it is true that the cliurch is a portion, even Leighlin (?) is a protection of the soul. Zeitaclirift f. celt. Philologie X. 34 C. PLUMMER, 30. Maith leis gachi) anmaiw truaigh, Fáidh gotha cluicc gan an 2) buai«, Gidh siublac?/i uirre ima liuaigh Ind oidhce geimridh glaw-fúair. Maith le gach corp taidlech tend A uaigli uime. gidli aithgerr. Altaighim do Dia na rend Gan beith go ciaw 0 aifrend. Maircc do chomliaight/iec/i an naoimli. An oilithrigli biiidhn?^7i bain, NÍ bá rabhartaigli 'na tir, Munba tabhartaigh a chain. Ni feiT dligeas cios is cáin Da mhanach diles bucZdein, Xa don allmaracli glic glua?V Ticc le buaibh d'adhbbronda(?/t féir. 31. Leac an codaigh le gacli ngliaidh Agan cuire caidh nacb cláow; Tnrloch a ccatraigli caidh Ag urgnamh don &hhaidh náomh. (fol. 248 a) Goit na cathrach maitli rea cur. Rathmar a rath 0 ro gein, Ar^ na naingeal tall 'na fhail, Daingen nar lamhadh le neimh. Biadh^^a oiremh[an] bfionw bfial, Accar glmirt na naingeal nan; Loim na heillte a ceuid caomh, Ar brú reilge na naomh nan. An. ^) '? Is maitb le gach; cf. next verse. ') ? a. THE MIRACLES OF SEN AN. 35 30. It is good for every unhappy soul that the sound of the bell's voice be not evoked (lit. strnck), thoiigh it be carried (lit. though it go) over it round its grave on a winter's night clear and cold. Good for every strong bright body its grave about it, though it be but short; I give thanks to the God of the stars for not being far from mass. Woe to the man who is neighbour (?) of the saint, of the fair pilgrim of the hosts ; he will not be powerful (?) in his land, unless he be generous of his tribute. (lirtH-y /■: -^- Not better is (the man who owes , rent or tribute to his (Senan's) own monk, than /the cunning bright foreigner who comes with kine to consume' pasture. 31. The stone of the covenant in every contest is Avitli the venerable and righteous band ; a pool in the venerable mouastei-y does service to the holy abbot. The field of the monastery is good in its site, abundant its increase since the beginning; the Angels' Height is there near it, a fortress which was never assailed by violence. The support of his fair generous ploughmen is the acre of the field of the glorious angels; the doe's milk is their fair portion, on the edge of the cemetery of the glorious saints. Glorious. Oxford. C. Plumm eu. ÜBER DAS ALTER DER WÜRZBURGER GLOSSEN. Man pflegt jetzt die Hauptmasse der Würzburger Glossen allgemein in die Mitte des 8. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. zu verlegen, da dieselben entschieden älter sind, als der Kalender des Oengus, andererseits aber bedeutend jünger, als die 713 v. Chr. von Dorbbéne geschriebene Vita Columbae des Adamnán. Ihr Alter läfst sich aber noch genauer fixieren und zwar mit Hilfe der bekannten Erzählung von der Vertreibung der Déisi, die aus historischen Gründen um das Jahr 750 n. Chr. aufgezeichnet worden sein mufs; die Version aus Rawl. B. 502 ist von Kuno Mej^er im Cymmrodor XIII 104 ff., die Version aus Laud 610 in Ériu III 144ff. herausgegeben. Hier finden sich nun eine Reilie von Formen, die deutlich älter sind, als die Sprache der AVürzburger Glossen. So finden sich in der Laud -Version Formen wie to-llotar (Z. 32), to-lUicset (Z. 56), to-cliomairc (Z. 92), to-heir (Z. 105), ton- fair (Z. 168), to- chumlat (Z. 185), tos-herat (Z. 186), to-tet (Z. 188), während im Wb. vortoniges to- regulär als do- erscheint. Beachtenswert ist ferner das au in Maugdornce (Z. 117), wogegen Wb. stets die Form mug hat. Sehr alt ist auch der Genetiv Niod in Rawl. (§ 9), doch dürfte es sich hier, ebenso wie beim Namen Condla hOs (Laud, Z. 235) um einen traditionellen Archaismus handeln. Jedenfalls wird man aber die Niederschrift von Wb. um wenigstens 10—20 Jahre lierabrücken müssen, also frühestens um 760 — 770 n. Chr. ansetzen dürfen. Wien. Julius Pokorny. MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN HANDSCHRIFTEN. Ochtfoclach Coluim Chille. Bald nachdem ich dies Gedicht in Bd. VIII, SS. 198 — 317 aus Laud 615 ahgedrucld hatte, fand ich eine siveite Handschrift 5 in dem Buch von Lecan, fol. 170hl. Als Titel steht dort freilich In ochtfoclach hi Emin annso, rvird also einem (mir unbekannten) ua hEmin zugeschrieben. Die erste Strophe lautet: Dia moir {sie) dorn imditen. 10 Dia mor dorn imdeadail, Dia mor dorn foirceadal, Dia mor im faih Dia mor dom chaisearcad, Dia mor dom imradad, 15 Dia mor dom imgnadad, Dia mor romain. Im folgenden teile ich nun die Varianten von Strophe zu Strophe mit: 2 Int athair cumachtach, comsich m'anmchara rig 20 in rigthig- rignime 3 dilgadach dercach ndealbaim ri tai- cheanach tidlaiceach ceil chrithearghna 1 in firdia in firdiiine bias aeon breitheamnus breath briatharglan 5 harchaiuglib ilcheol oirisem uacht chunscnugud (sie) in choimdead eistecht riu each enen (sie) fri ebnes 25 6 cathairi coinnlecha chirt choir siroirfe ban sliab 7 atchaiiigel hanmehairdib imad ba rigr cunlacht in -jö KUNO MEYER. cliosdada in clieocadail (sie) doisdid co each (sic) 8 glas- cliedal re cloisteand cluas in taitnema an oircedail dou trinoit 9 indisin in atliar oirniwdte ni chuimgend ro- chaimi in rachoimdead ri in domnaig- adrici 10 Is bua- 5 dach in brathairsi is buideach diadi deicliaid uacht chom- rath n-anfoirfe, is can ecnach 11 can imorbus ann tochostal tuaraithli, con tluag- fail 12 Can tigi d'athchuindgid arcait na hoir, can chrud muc mochergi. can iwmbuar mbogemneach, can mna, can milana cun munter (sic) moir 13 mor teist a 10 tigerna itat na n-amsine biidig bithbudig bad bolltnigthi bithlana 14 Tria bithu mbithlanti blatholus rofiarfaid litheg in rig oenlaith (sic) ica n-orfided tria bithu na sir 15 fin prim- aibni mar tat ar each eon etrochta 16 Aibni na har- dena, ailli na hilcheola, imda na hilblasa, lébda ináerdeir 15 blaith meth minabaig moigib raorsoillsi rigtheg reill 17 Eoiseam roatrebam in duileamon iar tabairt doman ehe ditten rondiitneba descin a deaclita a dualas a doenachta donarus de. D. 18 Dia nathar (sic) atchimsea. ar uath ar egomnart. ar olcuib aideitchib i n-agaid gaid. cumthach roncumtigba. in 20 coimdiu cumachtacli. in cara coindirclecli 19 Comnart in chom- airgi. cunchim dum cheartnadud. Crist ar each comrorgin. o mo ehurp chain, tic tlieasarcain. thes ristabraim taeb. 20 Ticfa dorn tlieasarcain. itú ica torbrid anbonni m'imeaela 21 in chomairgi chondailbi tolloirbe tolltar ua thri. in 25 om. uas sligi uasermagrib naemainglig conic each ni. 22 acarnsenabaid (sic) rienabaig ronesemnacair in ehuing fethel CO fsebruge seathar soeglaigi 23 ind irecna rigetla CO ndirigi a dreach. caemni (sic) ronaemastair. sierni ronsaerastair. naemni ronsemastair. naemastair nech. 2'1 ar in ntjm naom- 30 anglech. na hoig na hathrigig. eo ndligud de. berthar bith cha^m che 25 comrachi ar coiletliib elumgeala ehrand is ed fognas and. 26 Adbli fria n-innisin. adamra ind iruasal. immad na n-anaichnid. nach aichnid duind. a druim fria diumsachaib. a dreacli fria dedblenaib. a deas fria desciblaib. 35 duileani na «dull (sic) 27 A seela d'indisin is disceoil discru- dain. is torsi dithrubach. fri dune dall. artri can artrigud. iener can oenoman. endia 7 enolad. innister ann. 28 Isu coim- diu cumachta. cumthigthi atchid. gebid mor d'athlechaib (sic). oppuid mor d'ecnaigib. athriguig ardrigu. artrigud rig. 29 Rig 40 tren in tatnema. taitneam na trocairi. turacht each triuin. MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN HANDSCHRIFTEN. 39 siitroll ar soillsichtlii. sidbarr ar sidaidcln. samri ar samaigchi, slanti iar snil. 30 Is esem slanicid. sil Adaim athramail. athair na hicslanti tanic diar cu condalb cartinmil. cimarad comaided. cotarsna 31 clioimgine corancobrarni. corocho- grani. statt rotochtsamar: rocliansomar statt rogeallsamar: 5 rodailsemar tria chness 32 in langlacad. latruind tiug tromfsebracli intortdescin arii^d roirgabad rohathi- sead 33 Cocar rochocradsom chomideclit sin chetain cetchrutta cetaib rabuadirtlia. bethud rabaetliigtha. bel- gacha 34 Briathar in morclioimdead deiscibal {sie) isin 10 dardain caplati. atmait-ni ita dorn apstaib {sie), apsdal na midbranwsa. fri croicli fri cesachtain 35 cliian in goibes faistine derb leis rolamsad?ir. in lucht ba lia. Iiidas rotair- . cestair. do ludib rotliregestair. rothreic rothreic som 36 Dia enni ditini {sie). d'Isu ba dochraiti. is de ita in segsatharnacli. 15 masecli. iniarmergi ind adlaein. asnarracht neach. 37 Iar uairifrind iar n-ergi a liadlocad ardapsdal dodealbad 38 Randuscfa in bruth baranta. bid bloiscuem brecthen- tech in forcliongro os chach. 39 Bid cumug-som. bid cumang-ni. Crist corcra atchiflnm-ni. rancigfi at- 20 cluinfea in tocliidi. uid tuacliell taiceris. bid bid 40 fir purgadoir malartfuid. bid mairc dia choimidchib. bid garb in cith. bid garb a ilglasad. n-anbasad. bid marb in uadblas- rach. uasin bith. 41 ger gataide. gillanraid gelentecb. gu gloir each ascebthar serfiter, cascebtbar clsefiter. trascebthar 25 traethfider. uan 42 Uid trom leo in t-aclimosan a tiiaris- cbail. dofitcr digfiter. uan tenid (t)eiud. deamnacda dichuib- sech 43 droclirig uaibreclia dimsacha. na dam aid comairli. na tescfa in trenlasair. nastollfa in trenoigread. nistamain meas- raidthi. isin 44 do each cristaidi comailleann compatnus. 30 corium cerd cirmairi. cendaigi cruaid. filig ciatfedamla. na fegad firindi. foichleat in rothenid 45 romiadcha. roscleathna robeg bic derlugit eia beth dia lanailli. mina beat landercaich i laithi in criathartha. bad cruim 46 Crossana cruitiri. cethirn each cuanberla. each cheana adchid. digfiteV dilfit/r. a druim in 35 duileaman. do reir a duthrachta. each ina ole dib 47 Dail- fiteV dortfit/)- scol ca scribabthar bid a seel, taisich ac tren- eithiuch trocairi. taicthig can 48 minalaind. tesleamna sa- daile. olc leam inan iarmairt drutha diglecca. dicles doniat each n-uroprud 49 Olc dona sacartaib. diseireacht nacenta 40 40 KüNO MEYER, fes orcliindech ecraiduech. eagnaid can earnaiclii. espoc ag adaltros. imadall ngraid 50 Gnath risna brecairib. ni soiii in bregoirecht. biaid uair a aclimosan. bid ec re neach. sosceli su- aichinti. siriud i samradaib selcuireaclit santugud 51 Adaim 5 anacrid tochastol tabrad dia rer. morri na mordala timairgfeas tall ar in 52 Ticfad sin toirithin tnsnigtliid tusnicliter thall robeathaiged. biaid ac in breitlieamnus 53 dindsaidig dosraga ticfa im gar uar taismenaid toi- cebuid thaeb tn/Taclit 54 Taiceraid firindi. beraid breath 10 breclitnaigthi acambia in cliroch roceartaiged iarna at- chifi 55 mo na each ongfaid na ethgecu. badfid brufid in brecthene 50 ar des ndesbeblaig {sie), beti na iter idiu is tall trenadbal uaraíigbaid enadlaid and 57 Oes trich- taig doibsidhe. do lucht d'fir na mnai comeasa cosmaile. 15 can aenmet enordlaig. d'esbaid na d' imarcaid 58 Atrse in frsech bid fothrann foniorda. bid feidm na faelastair bid fuach. fri brnth fri brig frisin mbrath mbemeannach. lemeannach 50 Locha bid Inath co loiscfidear lasfaid na luathaibne. lanantach leir. dresfid in dubthalam. fri dreich na 20 damthenead. bid bee nach taimnielifia dou talmain trein 60 Fothar na tromthenead. ie tur na tromchinead. tarneaeh na tendelaideb daig asa thoig borbasnaeh 61 ina deargfasach ar bith einem ehe 62 greehfaidit re guth in duileamau adbera som dingbad ass trenamail cotm 25 eiul eathamail n-itmaraig n-uair 63 don lueht risn-eport ni basiad uas. tegaid co mhed. i mbeathaieh 64 adbera ria firenchaib. imthiget madehin da tecema. don lucht nasere- deba ebera 65 morchomdiu. niongenar gairfe-sun. ehuiei nosdiultfa-som nosbrecfa-som. im brat is am biad 66 Mongenar 30 gairfe-som. mongenar glanfa-sim. mongenar eharfa-som. carthain roclas techtfa-som nem ea noehtaib sium boeht 67 Roisem oentaid na n-archaingel. na sreath na sarchaingen. acht dia bodein ni roich ag nanurrad sragalla 68 nonciimtaig- fea noncertaigfea nonbeartaigfea ar nim 's ar in rigtaig 35 raglanwa i n-eglais 69 co rothuilleam-ni gnathirsi. bid fal fon faithimsea. baig brathirsi. bith dun argen 70 ron- foeela ronfrecera ronteeema. do thig de des ronfuari- stair rofegastair. is leir ronleidistair les 71 liaig lugort ar leastar lan d'or. in delb ar deargastair. d'ordan is d'aireo- 40 chas. dsenacht na deaehta. deacht na dsennaehta. in dia mor MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN HANDSCHRIFTEN. 41 mor 12 Moiigenar caidclii nocliomaillead iimaloit inisli eclas de d'athaide. dilgud do chach 73 trocairi. caendu- thracht cobais rell reitliineacli. derc risna deiblenaib tidnocol. da tecma a dual 74 dubalchaib drochraitib. disli each acobair. etacli don bocht gnatlifaidfeas. grema i iigna- 5 thiigud. g-eanmnaideaclit blathchoemda 75 bas tathachtach tuirmim-sea ca fuigebthar. bid fearrdi inig-abail ind almsa fir 76 ernedach each rochret ar deismirecht ser {sie) dgeine ar daig Meachta. is dearb do sere 77 nos- coimetann ceneol bad ind oigi do thaiselbad. assu 10 indawmaithrigi loin accu d'athathris. ni hathathris 78 — 80 om. Lee. 81 im Michel nochon i berair comit a cathu- g'ud ra cathmilig fri deman iidiir 82 Teacaid lecaid mo daerad-sa. bet acorn d'ainglib bat astairig-. Patricius an seinen ausgefallenen Zaliu. 15 Aus Laud 610, fol. 74 a 1. — Vgl. Trip. Life, S. 140 und LLSoSd. A fir há! íoqus mennataiii) i mbá: üa tamma-) inair^) mbíu nochot-aca cossin[d]íu. Cein robämar immalle in föilaiigar^) hüact na te, bennacht for Rig na n-uile! roscar-^), a det findbuide. 20 Cip e g'ellas [dit]") nacli tan imm anmaim-se cot") adrad, gellfat-sa de flad ile iss^) Fiadat flndnime. And'J) aidche co ränaci") rini, atberim flad Eig na rinn^i)» ni dechoid feöil torut sis, nl thänic [góu] 12) anís dart c[h]enn. In Fíada fiun fll for nim, conecna'^) lim Crlst cöemdil, 25 donicci'i) fo bathis bäin bil, nomleic'^) fo athis öenfir. A fir. *) maccnutan Stokes, yerperam. 2) Lies Ó ataäm oder vielleicht ó atáim-ne. LL liat otú. ') Lies inar. *) Besser mit R nirodämar im Reim »u'í bäinar. =) Besser mit R ronscar ,,er hat uns getrennt". ^) sic R. ') icom R. 8) Lies i tig? ») Lies óud, LL. 1°) condranac LL. ") Lies rend mit LL. ^^) sie LL. ") Lies conacna mit R. '*) domicc LL domrolat R. ^^) nimreilce R. 42 KUNO MEYER, Aus Laud 610. fol. 75 b\ A fir togbas na taise, cuirim ort a fladnaise, nach adbifr cäile áon curp da fadbafZ äil[l]e ar msacht 5 Ib., fol. 121a, tnary. inf. Acht CO saothraib ar hseircc De, acht co n-aine 's co [n-oighe, fri fig-hlib rohsin a acht, rorir cech dän ar dhiadacht. lb., fol. 32a marg. inf. Ciima lium cidh toll mo lend, cuma Hum cid seang mo [brri, 10 is roc[h]uma lium go derb gidh robeg mo sealb do bhü. Ib., fol- 30 b marg. inf. Dia ndernta óeine cech lái is beith i ndóire do Dia, is ferr comól risin trúag, is romó[r] an liiagh rotfia. 7 rl. 15 Tadc mac Céin. lb. fol. 74 a 1. — Vgl. Death -tales of the Ulster Heroes, S. 18. Coica traiged tölaib tlacht flad sliiagaibh sainser srlan- [balc, fot in gargleir {sic) co ngart, Taidg meic Céin otát Clannacht. Die Söhne Eres. 20 Cethri meic i nAiliuch do liEirc, ba saer sraen, Feradach is Tigernach, Murchertach is Máen. Cethri meic la Fergus dond Eire cubaid cedna, Fedilmid is Loarn, Brenainn agíí^ Sétna. Die Söhne des Fergus mac Conaiil. 25 Fedilmid, Fiachra febhda, Brenainn, Sétna saerdelbdha, Ninnid, Fidi'äi fri nlth nas, Cäirthenn is Loarn länmas, oc[h]t meic tuaith Bregrossa baind Fergusa caind meic [Conaiil. MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN ilANDSCHRIFTEN. 43 Die Söhne Conall Gulbains. Fergus, Öengiis, Ecliaig, Xathi. Böguiiie, dodluigtis fiiilt, hit eat sain fri sitb[f]Iaitli sodaing se mt'?c Cona'ill Gwlhain [guirt. Deich meic Eogain gil glain ociis meic Conaill Gulpain 0 Ma[i]g Ene co Dim mBó fersat cath each belato. 5 Mochutta .cc. Aus der Brüsseler Handschrift 2324 — 2340, fol. 263b. 1 lud ecclas nsemh nemda, is sa^r hi, is crodh cundla: tsibraidh taobh i-e sniithneit, is cruithnecht, is craobh [cumra. 2 Da iigabaid ind-ecclais, curbá haltrom iiieidheu, 10 gurab tren bhar mbrlathar occ blathad a háidhedh.i) 3 Is sTad so na háidhigh-) is dir isin ecclais: lucht lubra 7 léiginn, boc[h]täin deibleiu diadha: mogenar dogenad cobair ac a fegadh. oc denamh a [riara. 4 Da ngabhaitt i n-ecclas. fograim däibh a pudar^): 15 abraidh náchas gebaid no denaid a lubair. 5 Da lubhair a tempuil: ceilebradh is crabhadh; a haltoir [maith maLisech, CO raibh si arua sen ad, gurab csemh re fegadh iar [ndenum a caiseal. 6 Da ngabaid a n-ecchis. foccruim, nT rädh rúine, daigh is lim as cumhan. gurab eirghe curadh, bidh ulad 20 [cech ciiile. 7 A haith[lie 11a n-ulad fóccraim, is vMh. bunaidh, da ndernaidh bar saethar, da möraidh bar lubhair, saothraighet bar ccosa, imdaighter bar lossa, töccbaid súas bar mbosa, bid crosa ós gach ulaigli.^) 8 A hait[h]le cros cinnte da cinuid bar saethar, ni abraim 25 [ribh anad, bar ndul amach^) re blladain, gurbat faicet fiadaigh oc [larra/rf/i bhur manach. 1) Lies óiged. ^) Lies húigid. ^) Vielleicht: cen pluidiiir. *) Lies ulaidli. '•') Lies macli. 44 KUNO METER, 9 Gach manacli dolDera a edhbairt don ecclais, do dheuamli a si?ethaii\ do mhöradh a c[h]ille, rob leis fein a dini oc treabhadh a tire, cii rachtea ar crine a righe ar muigh nimlie. 5 10 Gach manacli näc[li] tiubhrae a edbairt don ecclais, do denam a sáetlia[i]r, do móradh a liibhar, >. a gort ni rab genas, rob olc gach ni treabhas, giirab demon bheires, gurab^) de lenas pudhar. 11 Ná rap pudar daibh-si, troiscidh ar na manc[h]aibh, 10 diiiltfaid for ind ecclais. iss edh dlegur düibh-si, mad becc libh a mberaitt. eirghidh 7 treabhaidh, dénaid gurta gemhair, lenaid as in ecclass. Ind ecclas usemh nemdha 7 rl. König Fedlimid und der junge Priester. 15 Alis 23 A' 10, S.18. Das folgende GedicM wird einem Fedlimid, Bischof und König von Munster zugeschrieben, tvorunter ohne Zweifel der beJiannte Sohn Crimthanns gemeint ist, der von 820 — 8á7 König in Cashel icar. Er wird zwar sonst meines Wissens nicht epscop, 20 wohl aber in der kurzen Notiz von seinem Tode in den Annalen von Ulster ancorita genannt, ausserdem optimus Scotorum scriba^). Ein anderes ihn beigelegtes Gedicht habe ich in der Zeitschrift III, S. oá abgedrucld. Feidlimidh espoc 7 rl Munian rocan ann so dia araille {sie) 25 sacart böi ar brfi na Samaire. Abond isidhe fil hi medön muighi Miiman. 1 A fir uird na haräide, mairg is meraige a dana, a sagairt') na Samäire, romoch dogabnis gräda. 2 Nuchar furäil fisegna d'aithne in uird iarsin mbaisdcrf, 30 grädha do c[h]ur for giUaib^) imaire eich g-á.n aister. 1) Lies gurb. -) So ist wohl zu lesen, nicht, icie Hennessy druckt und übersetzt: optimus Scotorum, scriba et ancorita. ^) sagairt MS. *) Lies vielleicht: grád do cliur for gilla(u)raid. MiTTEILÜNGEN AUS IRISCHEN HA-NDSCHRIFFEN. 45 3 Fot glün nocliomdeisigfinn, cid ed woseclmainw muin sin, don espnc is esiudill a lüas rodleig fon cuing-sin. . 4 lud eclas do mothugudli in monar duine daoibrl, iia gräda do c[li]othugud is feidm üasaZ mör aonf/r. A íir. Uga Corl)maic meic Cuileudäin. Alis 23N10, S.17. Von diesem Gedichte waren mir eijiselne Strophen aus Zitaten in den metrischen und grammatischen TraJctaten i) lange bel'annt, ehe ich auf eine Handschrift des Ganzen stiefs. Diese findet sich 10 in dem ersten auf Pergament geschriehenen Teil von 23 N 10, ivo sie dem heliailnten Casheler Kirchenfürsten zugeschriehen wird, während LL 37 c nur Cormac nennt und die Uraicept die elfte Strophe zuerst Colum Cille, dann einem Cormac hard zulegt. 1 In roghso, a El 2) na rün, Tar comso clüm ocus ceol 15 mo brogad for mara mür, mii c[li]ül do t[h]ocliar frim eol? 2 In mbeo i mboclita isin c{li]atli tre rath in Rlg^), ri ein [meth, ein miad mör, ein carpat údh, ein or, ein argat, ein ech? 3 Cin öl medracli mescthar druing, ein tna[i]tli truim, ein [teglacli trom ^), ein broscTath •'>), cin alle n-arm, cin cüach, cin euirm is cin 20 [cornd? 4 Cin etiud min mas ar süil, cin clüim nat caro cec/i naomli, acht barrän beithe fo böaidh fo c[h]iülche c[h]rGaidh frim [da taob? 5 In timger celebrad cöir d'innsi möir mac MilefZ müaidh? innamtairber fo Christ cuing ria techt tar tuind Maro [Raaidh? ») In der Abhandlung über trefocul LL 37 findet sich die 8.-9. Strophe (3? c 55 ff.) und in Uraicept na u-éces fBBj die 11. Strophe zioeimal zitiert. Die 29. ist vollständig in dem Glossar in H. 3. 18, SS. 66 und 633, und ihr erster Vers in Coiinacs Glossar ^369 unter den sogen. ..Additional Articles" angeführt. 2) rig 3) ri 4) jjes torm. *; brusc uia nö brosciath. 46 KUNO MEYER, 6 In rädiubh-sa, rad ndTu[i]t ndian, mo c[li]oibsen clan, conial [crüaid i) '? in ferfat, a Rl^) na nell, frasa mo der dar mo grüaidhV 7 In tiurs) nio laim do g-ach credit for bru tuinde toirbe [bare ? in fuiceb oc maro mür slicht mo da glun isin träclit? 5 8 An toig-eb^) mo c[h]urcliEn dar ös aigen^) uchtlet[h]an an? in rag, a Rl -) richid reil ^), as mo t[h]oil fein foran ") sal '? 9 Im ba sessoch, im ba seng, im ba tressacli folingg tond^), a Christ, an cuingena lium-') ö thl co^o) techt tar^O lind [Ion d 12)? 10 Cla leth cobra i^) Tar coairdi^) cros cossalua mo c[li]oblacli is) [eres ? 10 in 16) ba soir no i') siar, ni süaill, in i^) ba u[o]thnaidli i^) [no budesi'')? 11 Fa mba tre fochaid co ngrain romficfa a ndail bratlio [bilain ? fa mba lasmbess det oc toir dilgud mor ar monar soaill? 12 Saorsa lacöp na cet cloth, ba moch robo rlgmac raith, trocaire indlight/icc/i (?) an breth resiu dogne[th] nl do [maith. 15 13 Maith siecht in puiplecain blaith fo c/te/aip credit, comal [crüaid, do no tempwZ (?), nirbo tlaith, ar beluiph cäich áohirt büaidh. 14 Büi Matha mör, monar ndür, fo mür annaigh oirgce slfiaig, luid lat, leigis leábaid lain mainc[h]ine rig Roman rüaid. 15 Nl rocéss an laoch don leirg i tigh pinne, bes lar faidg, 20 ar do saordeis a baois buirb adaig daoib im aonmeis aird. 16 A mböi in ballglandu, ba cäin, Moire Magdalida, miond öir, aonta demna, dreman cleir, foi for grein in c[h]rotha cöir. ^) nö uuag (i. e. n-Gag). ^) rig ^) Lies tiurr. *) hl tocéb L. ■') for inn ocian L. ^) in rigthigb rel N. ') arin L. ") fressach torgib droing L. tresach türme glonn B. ^) iu congebha liun B. in cuügene frimm L. ") oc L. ") for L. ar B. ^^) long B. 13) ced letb co brátb L. cia letb gu bratb B. ") cuairt LB. 15) coslafea mo bacblach L. cosluidfea mo coblacb B. 1«) im L. 1') sair ba B. i») fothuaid L. ") im ba fodess L. MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN HANDSCHRIFTEN. 47 17 Dob/rt dl la dilgud plan beitli ar do dreicli. dllgud mär, meruidh a coissceíu clan cen merus soisceZa slän. 18 Saitliemail breth romb?'>-t tall ar bannscäil n-ann o roell, ö tarmairt ann aibel i) drong- doch gacli aonür ina ceann. 19 Coicert«[i]5 in dine ndian, a Ei sTde, sorcha däl, 5 arnä clochad ria gacli cüain do c[li]uail pecuid fer ba [slän. 20 Saor docüaid iter da recht. nl fQair let lecht ar a locht, in adoltroch rodomert, in malortac/j im a c[h]orp. 21 Cain dorolgis do each naill, do gach pect[h]ach, brat cech [cind, nirb ard n-aithisech a greim, inge näd n-aithersed inn. 10 22 An fer maith is möam rotc[h]ar, Petar aupstal, aurtaig [tor, nächatfedir, a De bl, atc[li]uitig fa thrl, ba col. 23 Cia rotsenustar2) ar tläs do miiinterus, mö gach drüis, dorolgis do, demin see?. Tar sceit[h] a der tar a gnüis. 24 Gabuis dlabul cacht ein elith for laoch roalt frie cecA 15 [toich, ö tarcuib for doma[i]n dreich for leitJi co farguib a croieh. 25 Ö creidis innint a recc medön laithi, nirbo lag, hi parthus lar n-oidche üair, is e gill« docüaid lat^). 26 In lin roleicis fot barr-*) it lir gainim maro min, in 0) lin ronescmart as each n-ing at lir na rind hl a nimh. 20 27 A näsadli na n-aingel n-än don riched rän rechta reil domfieib-sa6) cobuir cöir fo bltliin is töir a n-eimh. 28 Ar do c[h]esad, ar do c[h]roich, ö eotris do muintír [mait[h], nimfärgbadh-sa amuic[h] dodt eis a n-iiibaid noteis it üaith. 29 Peeiid büanoll brath gach mbl. nlrbo') üaith im c[h]rT 25 [com c[h]rö, am*») daonnacht, a me?c De bl, cid tu ba^) ri nl boi") rö. In. r. ') Lies in döibel. ') Voti Strachan, Érm III, S. 114 v. 51 rotsreiigustar verlesen. ^) Hier steht zxoischen den Zeilen : bodie mecum eris in paradiso [Lucas 23, 43]. *) Oder bair. *) Auszulassen. "^) Lies doraiced-sa. ') nirob E. nirbo Cortn. § 369. ») im H. ») bud n\ bu H^-. 10) bu H'^. 48 KUNO MEYER, Memento mori. Aus Laud 615, S. 138. 1 Eirigli cumm na liiarmerg-he, is múr oraind a hadlibar: ni fidiV til sul ti an prlmli nacli dingna in Rl do marbad. 5 2 Freccair aifrinn in domlmaig! is mör ocainn a eagia: nl 'fedrais-[sji sul ti an lüan nach ba hi in liadh i) do leaba. 3 An leaba si ataoi-si mjus do ben geal grädhach, nocha döcha h'erghi-si no do beth marb amärach. 4 Mir dot c[h]uid don ocarach, 's e ísa dít ro-athain: 10 nl fedrais a fuil ar do meis xwch necli tar h'eis rocaithfedh. 5 Lucht na luinge luchtmaire, siad a comradh re ceile: meinicc ticc tonn cuca-san ö nach fetfuidis erghe. 6 Me Collum mac Feidlimidh, creidim do Righ na greine: mairg nach giiidenn Ri[g] nime ic luighe agus ice erghe. 15 E. Coluim Cille .cc. lb. S. 78. 1 Benaidli bhar cluig ar Conall doni andlighedh orainn, gurab oinbit^) 's närab rlgh^), go ndecha a brigh ar [deimbrigh'*). 20 2 Domnall dorinne oirnn maith fa dheoigh goma fer raith, sochaidhi ag dáil a dighe, airemh 'sa reim vig\\vaidh%. 3 Conall thsaraighes na cleirigh, guidhim-si Righ na greine, nä rabli síl aige ná ar, is när fagha se deighbew. Benaid. 25 Colum Cille .cc. Ibidem. 1 Gabh mo thegasc, a Aodh na n-ech, a mh^c ädhmha[i]r [Ainmerech, bidh do miiindter agad, a fir, no bl-si agan muinntir. 2 Nä bldh^) ;i n-aghaidh*^) Righ nime, a Aodh is cend ar [gach fine, 30 nä tairg gaetli do denamh d'fir do baoth- dia da muintir. >) Lies úagb. ^) = óiumit. «) Lies rí. *) Lies neniiií. ^) Lies bí. •*) adh- MS. MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN UANDSCHKIFTEN. 49 3 Da fagha tu necli san c(li)än 's gan a cen ar naomh nö ar dhäw, na glacadh colg re do linn 's na bidh at forb nö at f 4 Gebe benus deigsith ^) modli is benus da gacli cill crodh, madli all let agh ort, a fir, cuir a ngeimil gac7i greimli gabli. G. 5 Colaim Cille .cc. lb. S. 79. 1 Tiucfa aimser dnbacli cumthach brönach derach, ar deredh an tsaoghail beid rlgha fa méla. 2 Nl bla cor na coingeall a n-éndroing do hsil Ädliaini, lo acht lán cruais is gainde, siad uile cen cllrab^íí7. 3 Bla na fir ag cesacht, nT bla mes ar crannaibh, nl bla recht nö riaghal, nä rath fein a talamh. 4 Bla cleirigh ag altrom, hud athtrom a sge/a, bla cealla fa merú ag na sesraibh trena, 15 5 Tiucfa fuacht is gorta, fctath is olc is deine, seal caidh ni ba treimsi, treicfwZ iascach aibne. 6 Blaidh airces is crine isna dáiniph dáora, dogebaid trena serba sioua garbha robha {sic)'^). 7 Beidid breithimh cama ag na tendaibh dána, 20 Ymtaidh brég na tuatha. nch! \)ud trüagh a ndála. 8 Beid ollaimh ag gerán, budh deröil a n-indtind, \)ud tuirrsech na seinns/r isinn aimsir timcill. 9 Beid na reilge derga ona fergaibh ])en:Caidh, bia cogadh is esra a certlár gach tealla«^. 25 10 Beid na righa bochta go holca re haidhibh, hud binde leó geöcaid na ceöil corta <} thsaithibh. 11 Baithfighter go cinnte coindle gacha áomlmaigh, dober med a cor cen toradli ar umhla-^). 12 {S. 80) re feire (?) na naeis. . (?) 30 cen cert is cen córtus on tsósar don tseindser, 13 Nl ceinneöchar ealadha 's ni ba genamhail duine, ni bia rath na feile ach deine 7 gainde. 14 Budh lethglas na sina, biaidh saoire gá brisedh, hudh linta gach endrem do mi[gh]r[e]ann 's do miscne. 35 1) An leg. d'eig-sibh (BerginV^ -) Leg. saoblia. Bergin. *J Leg. iibhlaibh, Bergin. Zeitschrift f. lelt. liiilolo''i<- X. A 50 KUNO MEYER, 15 Beicl na cleirigli mealltach re fallsaclit na litrech, ni bia brlgli 'sua mindaibh, bia gach fine cintach. 16 Töigebhthar na hindsi ar na linntibh uisci, blaidli imatt na ng*alar, fmdid ana cuile. 5 17 Beitt meic righ cen chomhall. hud cumang gach murrachj isna sTnaibli gEhhaidh beid dämha go dubach. 18 Beid ögmnä cen dergadh, hud fergach a llatha, hud terc suth na loilgliecli, hud fingalacli triatha. 19 NT bia nienma a n-ögaibli, berthar fogra ar cliaraibh, 10 ni bia bun ar nosaib, bia pösadli gan fmgain. 20 Budh értliacli na Imaisle fana dnasaibh ganna, raclia gaolta a füardhacht, biaidli büannacht ar cealk/. 21 Ag sin deiredh dhomliain do reir leabair dirigli, budh ainfesach cleirigh fana feiltipli fire. 15 22 Anüair is tren a mbagur ar lagadh a mborra, hud nemhglan magh taghaill on aghaltras colach. 23 Mein caidh aris inneösat ö imeöchus an feile, adhbhar fá faghaid anóir heth ag fanamad fo chéile. 24 Is misi Colum Cille ante is grinne laphrus, 20 dochi i n-am a niarghan^) derbán gacha heölais. 25 Tiúttid lucht an cntiasaidh a n-úsúracht 's an-eithech, liontaid saint gach craosach, hud dlmsach gach säit[h]ech. 26 Eider ingin is mäthair blaidh ferg gnäth is gere, beid comursain fealltach füar fallsa fa ceile. 25 27 Blat each uile ag gadaiph, blaidh sdat isna Mihaib, bíaidh mírann'^) is secadh iter mac is athair. 28 Ag sin sgeoil na ndäine isna sinaibh thiucftts, budh mesa 's hudh claoine gach dine da tiudaidh. Tiucfa aimser. 30 lb. S. 82. 1 Gebe benus a dhubhthai^*) do neoch ar talmain tnúthaí^, ben tar tech Eigh ni me dhe a n-inadh acinaidhe. 2 Gebe dhiultus da diibhtha/g cen egöir a trxath gá múchad, nl dligh a sochur na 51 har, 's ni dhligh a gort nä a ghemar. 35 3 Gebe nach denann tech n-aidhedA ina duhthaig da riribh, nocha dligind sé drud re, sé flarfaiges si de cé. Gebe. ') = meardlián, Bergin. ^) = luighreann, Bergin. ^) = díitliaig. MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN HANDSCHRIFTEN. 51 Colum Cille .cc. Ib. S. 101. 1 A Dhe dliil! tabair dliam-sa adhám digh: ctimet mli'einig-h ar talmain. fochraig dorn anmuin ar [nimh. 2 Teid an flal a tecli De bi. ted an t-ainflal ar nemhfni. 5 is bether go liTsiul de go ti grisadh na grüaidhi. 3 Ts romhör lüacli an enigh cidh cia donl go deimhin, tlr gan füaclit is gan omhan, flaitli nime gan cumsanadli. 4 Is maitli misi, ar in flal. düthraigim mo biad gu cian. ferr damli asgatli as gach modh mac De bi dorn forcetul. 10 5 Is olc misi, ar an gann, is dimdrtc/i dim Rl na rann, amliail bhlos cnti caocli ar clioll gidli olc sunn me. mesa [than. 6 Is he a comartha is tir tall úuaig an enigh na ndegclaww: edach sröil 'ma corpaib cain is cimsa óir reá n-aichthai6. 7 Soichill 1) is mian re mac nDe. gach gräd go roithend doni, 15 gach ni mar imres a lamh dogeibh is gräd mic De bl. a Dhe. Coliim Cille .cc. Ih. S. 77. 1 Trtiag lern, a Baithin dil bias, fis damarfás ag Druim Lias: 20 do neoch rot/weab tlr tuile cen dechma/r? gach enduine. 2 Dechmad na n-oighedh tlar is tair iter Erinn is Albain, dosberut baith aneölaig"2) do chonaib 's do coinnleöraib. 3 Dechmad gacha treibe tra la gach fer a läimh a mná, is truagh in dll, a De dels, dosberat tar cend abrais. 25 4 Dechmad na firenach flal a fogus, a n-eid/rclan, a tabairt ar grädh m/c De do lucht ecna ailithre. 5 Dechmad gach rTgh nach ric nemh do cur a laim na niitmier, nl gebt[h]ar taithlecli nach tan, b^V? aithrech int innarrad. 6 Doragha in buidhi fa tliri do dighail na dechmaidi, 30 do dith mac is fer is ban fer nÉrenn 7 Alban. 7 Bid olc do Conallchaib so, tiucfa muir tar a mtlro, derba/^ döib 7 deimnig, baitir a mZainn geimrigh. 1) hies soichell. ") = i ntleolaidb, Bergin. 52 KUNO MEYER, 8 Isinii errach iiia deoig-h, is ann doragiia in feil Eoiii. trüadh in bet dotig döib de, a n-ec uile acht cetliraime. 9 In cetliraime fagabar ann do tsluadli Gaidel 7 Gall, a m/c Muire, as mor in pladh, dib ni bla diiine comslän. 5 10 Da fätli ar a tig ferg De do digliail na decbmaide: olcus an aosa gräda dobértar na mörplädha. 11 Fer dTb toirnes ar éicin a toil n-ííatlimair n-aineitigli, nochar toirinn saint a bfos nä ceilg nä teirg na dimus. 12 Is tar sárugud nGrighair adubaíVt na degliubair, 10 gacha bfuidhbe ar bathais ngloin is ar cumain comaircidli. 13 Nocha fuirthe litíaid in boclit noblad turbadach täebnocht, is de dlegliar gsm tregadh a blathad, a bläitlieidedli. 14 Mairg dobera :\ cend fo läim fer üasal an üasalgraidh, go cuiredli tiad gan tläithi ocht n-airic[h] na ndu- [bäilc[h]i. 15 15 Da mbe aontoil dlb 'na curp go brät[h] 's Tar ffibräth hid [lör d'ulc, nocha cluinfe mac Muire gacha ndingna d'edarguide. 16 Cia tairnidh sis a mslaig is cia faldiaid a agaidh, in räiti cräibt[h]ech re nech minab ailgen irnaight[h]ech. 17 Cid älaind a cruth amach iter deilb 7 cumdach, 20 nocha n-air sein berar bi'eth, acht ar in leith blas fri [nech. 18 Fada blas Eiri 'na hulc lar ndlth do Colmän easpog, ö sin amach go bráth mbán cenn cuingi Crist ga« [co[n]gb(7Z. 19 Is maith do Chonall go nibäid lar n-indscuchwc? do [Colmän, tairrngert fein ö sin amach Ere gan laech, gau cleirech. 25 20 (S. 78) Cen laich, gan flaith, gan luighe, is mairg taircebe [in cuire, na cleirig gan ceim n-oigi ag timt[h]ireacht altoire. 21 Nogo mbeith secht mblladna deg 7 Crist og a coiméd, nach Tadfa a läim am nech tan rogeba in coilech. 22 Mad ar Dia dech fo grädhaib is e is ferr do sTl Ädhuim, 30 niagh d'laruidh bo 7 brat rohad ferr do in gaduidecht. 23 Marbt[h]ar in gaduidhe glúair ar a bäidhi re haontiair, robeir Rl in tsrotha ar neni he ar tri gotha aithrighe, 24 A De, is olc bias Ere sund in tan atre donn aifrinn in sagart sanntach sealbach celgach fergach mormenmnach. MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN HÄNDSCHRIFTEN. 53 25 Mairg- fer gräidh dobeir fo c[h]oim in läim ara lluonn [a broimi, bether co fada a mbochta, a füacht is a sirnóchta. 26 Mairg fir gräidh ag- nach tachrat na dl läim, in läm t{h]imsaighes in crodh 's a lämh eli 'g-a sgäiled. 27 Nl moc[h]in in fer gräid ibes an digh, 5 don linn mesca cidh maith leis, is Tad sin desca in dimais. 28 Mairg- ara Ieigt[h]er grädh cert nvän fäema gan tairim- [t[h]echt, a De, is fada fada úad heth go rotoirrsech rotrüadh. Tritagh. Ib. S. 103. 1 Ränag- i Rachrainn na righ gu slänab sil Cuinn is Che[i]n, 10 fecht foroll gaw gainne ngräidh go Col«m cäidh clainni [Nein. 2 Naomhcathir coir clainni Cuinn cus caornhthatha/^ an muir [mall, is cosmail re fäidhnew« finn ar cinn Gäidel 7 Gall. 3 Clasa aingiul, ard a modh, dron a daingen Dia ruscar, i port na brasairdbhi bil fóa sir in glasfairgi nglan. 15 4 Gabuis naom fáa soigid slóigh 'sa röimh a foilid na righ, ig muime gach ratha rain gaír na tuinne frisin tir. 5 Tórruma na naomh do nimli is lat a slögmodo sain, glanoll a büaid is a hlacl on uair rusgabh Colum cain. 6 Colum, Cainnech, Comghall coir, nistorband gach töir 20 [gaw tair, rannsat na mbuidinn go mbrigh in tir re mac Cmlinn [caidh. 7 Carsat Rachruinn dar do rian flal re gach ferchlainn [iar fir, tri 6'öeca[i]t naomh do nim nár ré taeb an ciiaoc?ii ran righ. 8 Roichell go vohlad, go rath, a fuil senadh salmgla;* smith, taithnid aoba for a dre[i]ch, it caomha gan cleitli a cluith. 25 9 Cathair \aj:\hair betha buain, samaiZ re Rüaim Letha lain, in Macha re each a cé[i]n, fírpoz-t feigh fiun flatha Fail. 10 Ferr d'feraibh an fer rusfuair acht Ri rogelaigh in gTe[i]n, fiaith g?in clechtgainne, gan cradli. Colum cádh nert- [chlaiuni Neill. 54 KÜNO MEYER, MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRISCHEN HANDSCHRIFTEN. 11 NÍ bec a clmaírt Cohiim cäim, nT duairc a rath an iiaoim [nair, it ardmaniiigh do go n-üaill G-diäil glüair, Albanuigh ain. 12 In rómail gu roimhsibli ngh, in retla dia soills7(7 s\uag. in tuili treb 'na ritli ran. an fer dian hin in bith buán. 5 13 In bairchrann bendachtach bäidli. in alchuing targa [gach tir. in cridhi coraliiiirlec/?- cäidh. bfiaidh mail in modhaingkc/i [min. 14 Mac Feidlimthe in flaith maith mor, in fer gu n-imat [ra[i]th reil, met a erghnusa 'gun righ, uá fen fir Ferghusa feih 15 Is fls do Cokim gan mheirg, nodmolaim, nodmol gach bard, 10 Ian de an bith brainechda borb, fer na n-ord n-airec[h]dha [n-ard. 16 Nert Cohiim lim is lain ceill romsaora fen Colnni cadh, Colum mo din[n] is mo dun, Colum lini re gacli rnii ran. Rcinag. a Rac. Charlottenburg. Kuno Meyeu. THE PRESENT AND FUTURE 0 TENSES OF THE VERB IN SCOTCH GAELIC. According- to tlie native g-rammarians there is in Scotcli Gaelic no simple present tense; cf. Gillies, Elements of Gaelic Grammar, p. 85: 'There is not in Gaelic as there cannot be in anj^ correct expression of exact thought, an indefinite present tense'. The same view is implied hy Stewart, Gaelic Grammar ^ p. 89 : ' This (future) tense is used in a peculiar sense in Gaelic, to signify that an action or event takes place uniforml}' . . . Thus: Blessed is he that considereth the poor, expressed according to the Gaelic idiom, would be: Blessed is he that will consider', &c. This doctrine has found its way also into Pedersen's Vergl. Grammatik II 305 : 'Auch im Nsch. hat das Präs. futurische Be- deutung: théid "wird gehen" ... es bedeutet zugleich, was zu geschehen pflegt; die Präsensbedeutung im eigentlichen Sinne wird durch eine Umschreibung ausgedrückt {ta mi ag hualadh "ich schlage"); das alte Fut. ist verloren 2).' The orthodox view then is that the present tense is made with ta and the verbal noun, the old present is used as a future, and the old future formations have disappeared. This view is quite untenable, and quite unsupported by the usage of the spoken and of the written language. That this is so Avill, I think, be made sufficiently clear by an examination of the following examples. It is scarcely necessary to say that we must begin by considering as not proved such statements as that Gaelic employs the future tense to indicate an action that ' takes place, uniformly, habitually'. 1) There are some traces of g-futures, but they do not affect the present question, and will not be referred to. 2) So too II 363. 56 J. FRÄSER. Tlie formal distinction between verbal forms expressing con- suetudinal and non-consuetudinal action is unknown in Scotch Gaelic except in the solitarj^ case of the substantive verb. But even here tM and hi are no longer kept distinct. Both when thej- are used independenth' and when they are employed with the verbal noun to form the periphrastic pres. and imperf. tenses: there is a growing tendency to prefer thd, and, in dependent, negative and interrogative sentences, hlieil, eil, to hi. This ten- dency is illustrated in the examples below, most of them taken from works written in purely colloquial language. I. Present (imperfect) consuetudinal with hi. 1, Ord heag a hhios mi giulan am pJioca nuair a ghahhas mi 'm cheann teicheadh o'n tigh, Fear-Ciuili) 151, 'a small hammer which I am accustomed to cairy in my pocket Avhenever I think of escaping from the house', 2, Clmala mi iomadh uair gur e sud suidheuchadh ^san h i iad nuar tha sealladh a 'tiglmin micn coinneatnh Speis-) 73, 'I've often heard that that is their customary position when a vision confronts them'. 3, Is trie a hhitlieas-'') mi fJiin a smaointinn, ib, 83, 'I myself often think". 4, Faodaidh mi a radh nach 'eil e comasach do luingcas sum hith faotain as an aite . . , ma hhios a' gaoth thun a' chladaich, hheir an srtith 's a' gaoth a d/^' ionnsuidh heul na h-aimhne iad; agus gcd a hhiodh a ghaoth hhar an fhearainn, tha fascadli na heinne 'ga cumail uapa, Sgeul. Arab. ■•) III 26, 'I may say that it is impossible for any ships to get away from the place. If the wind is off the sea, the wind and the current carry them towards the mouth of the river; and though the wind should be from the land, the intervening hill keeps it from them'. 1) Am Fear-Ciuil !iy D. Mackecbuie, 2. editiou, Ediuburgh 1910. 2) Gii'n d'thiig i Speis do'n Armuiun, Stirling 1908. 3) The monosyllabic 3 sg. pres. bios <C bis has been orthographically confused with the disyllabic 3 sg. fut. <C bias. *) Sgeulachdan Arabianach. The Arabian Nights in Gaelic, Inverness, I'^ 1906, II 1809, III 1900. PRESENT AND FUTURE TENSES OF THE VERB IN SCOTCH GAELIC. 57 5. Fiigli nan Innsean, roimh am hi ceud elefant ag imeachd. . . Sgéul. Arab. Ill 32, ' King of the Indies before whom a hundred elephants march'. II. Present (imperfect) consuetudinal with thd. 1. Tha moran dhaoine tha tuiteam 's a' clieart mhearachd sin, Fear-Ciuil 133, 'there are many men who fall into that very error'. 2. Tha Mr. C. ag radh mii'm fagadJi iad tir a dJiol air turus mara, gu rohh iad ag iarraidh heannachaidh air a hliata, ib. 177, 'Mr. C. says that, before leaving for a voyage, they would ask for a blessing on the boat'. 3. Cha'n ^ eil mi fhéin a' toirt moran gcill do thaibhsearachd, Speis 80, 'For myself, I do not put much faith in second sight'. 4. Faodaidli heagan deth hid annainn air fad, ged nach 'eil sin a' gahhail heachd air mar a ghahhas cuid eile, ib. 82, 'All of us may have a little of it though we do not view it in the same way as others'. 5. Cha'n fhearr oinseachan tha dol far am hheil i, ib. 48, 'no better are the foolish women who visit her'. 6. Tha niise gacli latha air mo chlaoidh le obair chruaidh, Sgéul. Arab. II 99, 'I am daily exhausted with hard work'. 7. An iiair a smaoinicheas mi air, tha e cur ioghnadli orm gu'n d'rinn mi leithid, ib. Ill 24, 'whenever I think of it I am amazed that I should have done such a thing'. 8. Anns gach aitc tha na h- aimhnichean a ruith don chnan, ib. Ill 25, 'everywhere the rivers flow towards the sea'. 9. Nuair a thuitheadh an rud amis a rohh a spor a sds, hha 1) 'w spor a' hualadli an rud a hha tkairis air an rud anns a rohh am fitdar, Seanchaid na Traghad^) 12, 'when the thing which held the flint fell, the flint would strike the thing above the receptacle for the powder'. 10. Is iomadh naidheachd aighearach a tha air a h-aithris gus an latha 'n diugh, ib. 26, 'many a merry tale is told to this day'. *) Here the synthetic tense bluudleadh would be more usual. -) Seau-na Traghad, le Iain mac (Jormaic, Stirling 1911. 58 J. FRÄSER, The confusion of the consuetudinal and the non-consuetudinal forms is evident. The cause of this confusion is probably two- fold. In the first place it is quite clear that the forms of the consuetudinal present were phonetically confused with those of the future. The result was that it came to be felt that forms like hi mi, hhios, &c. should be reserved for the expression of the future, particularly as the present had at its disposal another set of forms tha, &c. which were quite unambig'uous. The fact that all other verbs had only one form for the 3 sg-., also, doubt- less, helped the preference for tha. On the other hand there was a farther psychological reason for the use of the non-con- suetudinal forms. In II 4 above, ged a hliiodh a' ghaoth hhar an fhearainn, tha fasgadh na heinne 'ga cumail uapa, the use of tha instead of U particularises, and adds to the vividness of the picture. Instead of telling what happens to all ships that find themselves in this dangerous neighbourhood, the speaker selects one vessel to illustrate the fate of all. But for our present purpose, what is of most importance to observe is that the examples in which the consuetudinal forms are used show that 1)1, hios, have a present meaning-, not a future as one might infer from the statements of the grammarians. I shall, in the next place, give examples of the synthetic present tense of other verbs. I. Synthetic forms in independent sentences. 1. Positive sentences. 1. Expressing habitual action: Tuigidh an cii fein a chionta, Speis 48, 'even a dog- understands when he does wrong'. 'S e aite crcagacli, dosgacJi a tha 's a Choire Ghlas . . . Ilia aogasg ag atharrachadh lets na montan . . . An samradh a' tighinn le thrus- gan aotroni hlath . . . A 'ghrian a' spiitadh a gaithean d speur ghorni . . . Air a shdil thig am foghar, Sean*na Tragh. 5, "A craggy leafy place is the Blue Corrie . . . Its appearance changes with the seasons . . . The summer comes with its light warm mantle , . . The sun pours out its rays fi'om a blue sky ... At its heel comes autumn.' Thig fear an t-saoghail fhada troimh gach cunnart, Speis 24, 'A long-lived man escapes every danger'. PRESENT AND FUTURE TENSES OF TEIE VERB IN SCOTCH GAELIC. ol» 2. Expressing- noii- habitual action: 'Co tha 'n sud\ deir ise, Sean*na Trag-h. 29, '"Who is there?" saj's she'. Ch\ mi luchd nan cbtaicliean dearga 'n an shieadh air an raon, Speis 71, 'I see the red -coated folk lying on the field'. Measar dhuinne giir mac rath thu, Campbell, Fiannsi) 42, 'We are of opinion that you are a child of grace'. Guidheam ort, Sgéul. Ai^ab. I 5, 'I pray you'. Feumaidh mi, thu, faodaidh mi, thu, are con- stantly used with present meaning 'I, you may, must', cf. Speis 23, 82^ Sgéul. Arab. Ill 26. 2. Negative and interrogative sentences. Cha chreid mi giis an latha 'n diugh, Sean*na Tragh. 12, 'I do not belieA^e till this day'. Cha ghahh e innseadh na hha de bhadhar luachmlior agiis de shaoibhris air a chladach, Sgéul. Arab. Ill 25 , 'It is impossible to tell '. An saoil sibh nach do chtiir so amhluadh nach bu bheag arm, Fear-Ciuil 150, 'Do you doubt...' An cluinn sibh sin? Seaii'na Tragh. 30, 'Do you hear that?' Cha'n fhaod thu . . . Sgéul. Arab. Ill 99. Am feumar . . .? ib. 94. XL Synthetic forms in dependent sentences. 1. Positive sentences. 1. Expressing habitual action: Tha mhaise 'na chois nuair thigh an reothadh . . . agiis ghlaiseas e gach ni fo eigh, nuair a bhitheas comhdach mar ghloine liohlite air uachdar na lochan mora, Seau'na Tragh. 6, 'Winter has its own beauty when the frost comes . . . and locks up everything under ice . . .' Tha rudan neonach air an innseadh gu dearbh: 's nuair a chluijineas sinn páirt diubh a' tighinn air an cois . . ., Speis 35, 'Strange things are indeed told of, and when Ave hear of some of them . . .' 's iomadh rud a thig duine troimhe eadar a bhreith 's' a bhas, ib. 19. 'A man has many adventures between the cradle and the grave'. An uair a smaoinicheas tni air, tha e cur ') The FiannS; ed. J. G. Campbell (Waifs and Strays of Celtic Tradition), London 1891. 60 J. FRÄSER, ioghnadh orm gu'n cVrinn mi leitlúd, Sgéiil. Arab. Ill 24. 'When I think of it, I am amazed that I did such a thing'. 'S e Bun- easain a their sinn ar fad hho'n is e is fearr a thuigeas coim- liich, Speis 58, 'We all call it B., for strangers understand that best'. Nach neönach far an stad bruidhinn, c'aite 's am bith an to is ich i, ib. 36, 'Is it not strange how a conversation may end, no matter how it begins?' 2. Expressing non- habitual action: Ä hhaobh a nigheas an t-eudach, Campbell, Fianns 39, 'Spirit that washest the gar- ment'. Nach aisde leumtar ambreac? Campbell, Pop. Tales 1 91, 'Is it not out of it the trout leaps?' 2. Negative and interrogative sentences. Nan sguireadh tu de dheoghal na pwba sin nach teid as do phluic o^n a dh'eireas gus an laidh thu, Fear-Ciuil 156, 'If you ceased sucking that pipe which never leaves your lips from the time 3'ou rise till you go to bed'. Cha'n 'ell teagamh agani nach 'eil a leithed de ni ann ged . . . nach gahh e sgriidadh, Speis 82, 'I have no doubt that there is some such thing though it does not admit of investigation; From the above examples it will be quite clear that the (luestion Avhether the old synthetic forms of the present tense are used in modern Scotch Gaelic with the meaning of the present admits of no discussion. Independent and dependent forms {faod- aidh : cha'n fhaod) are used in this way to express habitual or non -habitual action. But w^hen the action is of the latter kind the periphrastic forms are, by far, the commoner except in negative or interrogative sentences. Thus, chi mi is much less frequent than tha mi [ag] faicinn, while on the other hand cha'n fhaic mi am faic thu? are, in the spoken language, equally common with cha'n 'eil mi [ag] faicinn, am bheil tJiu [ag] faicinn? In certain types of sentence the present or the future can be used indifferently without affecting the sense to any appreciable extent. These will be mentioned later. But apart from them, it is often difficult or impossible to give good reasons for regard- ing as future rather than present in meaning forms used as in the following examples: 's gann gu'n mi gear a leas innseadh CO mum bheil na briathran so air an labhairt, Caraid nan PRESENT AND FUTURE TENSES OF THE VERB IN SCOTCH GAELIC. 61 Gaidheal 1) 462, 'It is (will be) scarcely necessary to explain to whom these words refer'. Ged a dKolainn na galain a h-uile car a théid diom, elm t[h]rodadh mo bhean rium, is cha leig i an t-aran am dliith, Duncan Ban 2) 14, where tliéid, leig may be equally well understood as consuetudinal presents or futures. From an examination of examples taken almost entirely from the modern colloquial language we have now learnt: 1. that the synthetic forms which in the grammars are called future, can be, and are, used as presents, and 2. that such forms are often used in contexts where, in the absence of external grammatical distinction, it is impossible to decide wiiether we should call them presents or futures. I shall now give examples from a somewhat older stage of the language, where there can be no doubt as to the precise meaning of the forms employed. The development of Scotch Gaelic during the last two centuries can be followed to a certain extent by an examination of the language of the successive editions of the Gaelic Bible. The earlier editions 3) are practically reprints, in vulgar Eoman characters, of the Dublin version of 1602. The first translation of the New Testament that shows any independence in matter of language is that of Stewart, Edinburgh 1767. But here, too, the influence of the Irish version is still strong, and every sub- sequent edition has brought its tale of modification in point of spelling, morphology and syntax^). A few examples of the gradual adaptation of the Irish original to Scotch usage are: 1) C. n. G. by Norman Macleod, D. D., Edinbui-gh 1910. -) Songs of Duncan Mac Intyre in Gaelic and English. Ed. by George Calder, Edinburgh 1912. ^) See Reid, Bibliotheca Scoto-Celtica, Glasgow 1832. *) The treatment of the nominal declension in the successive editions de- serves investigation. Here one or two examples may be noticed : ri, pi. righthe 1G02, Apoc. 1, 6, righridh Stewart, righre 1807, 1842: morain d'uisgeadhuibh 1602, Apoc. 1, 15, m-nisgeacha Stewart, m-nisgeachan 1842; cridhe, ace. pi. croidheacha Stewart, Apoc. 2, 23, cridheachan 1807, 1842; talamh. g.sg. talmhan 1602, Mark 4, 5, tahnhain Stewart, talmhainn 1807; dearhlirnithreacha 1602, 62 J. FRA8ER. Mark 5. 7 cuirim a huchd De ort, 1602, cuiream ort a Jmchd JDe, Stewart 1807, 1823, tha mi a' cur ort. 1848; Apoc. 3, 19 cronaicJieam ogus smacJidaicheam,, Stewart 1807, tha mi a' cronachadh agus a' smachdachadlt 1842; deirim, Stewart pass., for ata mi ag radii of recent editions. Instances of the retention of the form of the 1^* pers. sg*. in the modern Bible are samhlicheam, Song of Sol. 1,9, and cuiream, ib. 2, 7 in 1848. The value of the translation of the Bible for the study of the use of the verbal forms depends on the fact that the Scotch translators always have their ej^e on the Irish vei'sion. A com- parison of the latter, therefore, enables us to say when the so- called future verbal forms of the Scotch version were intended to have a present meaning, and when a future. Thus in Mark 1, 17 Stewart and later editions have ni mi '« ar iasgairihh air daoinihh sibh, the Dublin translation has doghéna me; Apoc. 1, 19 na nitJie a hhitlieas ami Stewart, &c., thiucfus 1602; Mark 4, 13 donnas ... a thuigeas sibh gach uile chosa'lachd? Stewart &c., donnas tuigfidhe an uile chosmhalachd? 1602. Here, for example in Apoc. 1, 19 the Irish form leaves no doubt as to the tense of hhitheas. On the other hand we can be equally confident that when the Irish version has the present, the Scotch form too is intended for such. In some case the synthetic form of the Irish is represented by the periphrastic present, as in Apoc. 12, 14 .sa ndit a noiltear hi, 1602, far am hheil i air a halirum, Stewart, &c. Mark 4, 15 Achd taréis a chloisdeana tig Satan ar an mhall, 1602, Agus tareis doihh a chluinntin, air hall ata Satan a teachd, Stewart. Mark 1, 7 tig am dheaghuidhsi neach . . ., 1602, ata neach a teachd a' m' dhiaigh sa, Stewart, &c. Mark 3, 31, hräithre Stewart, bräithrean 1807; teangn g. pi. Stewart, Apoc. 10, 11, 1807, teanganna 1842; lucht üitheachadh Stewart, Apoc. 11, 10, I. äiteachaidh 1807; do na naoimhibh 1&)2, Apoc. 11, 18, erwiinoiw/i Stewart; ainglibh \Qfy2,, Apoc. 16, 1, aingil Stewart. PRESENT AND FUTURE TENSES OF THE VERB IN SCOTCH GAELIC. 63 Otherwise the synthetic form is used in the Scotch version as in the Irisli: Mark 1, 3 Guth an ti éigheas ar an hhflidsach, 1602, Giiih anti cWcigheas ann san fhdsach, Stewart, &c. Mark 10,12 7nci Uigeann bean a fear fein agus gu hpósfadh si re fear eile, 1602, 3Ia chuireas hean air falhh a fear fein, agus ma hhitheas i air a pósadh re fear eile, Stewart, á'C. Mark 9, 18 Gach uile hhall a mhéireann si air, 1602, Ge h'e ionad sam hitJi an glac se é, Stewart, &c. Mark 4, 20 Noch éisdeas . . . agus ghahhus . . . agus dohheir toradh uadha, 1602, An dream a chluinneas . . . agus a ghabhas . . . agus a hheir amacli toradh, Stewart, &c. Mark 4, 16 An dream éisdeas an hhriathar agus ghabhus chuca i do Idthair, 1602, Muintir, nuair a chluinneas iad am focal, a ghabhas e air ball, Stewart, &c. It is now quite evident that Scotch Gaelic forms like bheir, chluinneas, have always been used with the meaning of present tenses. That the employment of such forms in the literary language is not merely an Irishism is shown by the usage of the colloquial language. We must, therefore, speak of a presens-future tense with the following forms: Independent: cluinnidh mi, t(h)u, e S:c. Dependent: cluinn mi, t{h)u, e &c. Relative: cluinneas^) This composite tense may be due to one or both of two causes. 1. One of the two tenses, present and future, which originally were formally distinguished, may have, Avhile retaining its own sense, assumed that of the other as well. In this case, ^) The relative forms are in some dialects nserl inilependently with future meaning. 64 J. FRÄSER. that is equivalent to saying that the old present is now used as a present and as a future. 2. The other possibility is that, through phonetic changes, the two old sets of forms have fallen together. The claims of either possibility will be considered separately. 1. In some types of verbs the present tense, owing to the nature of the action expressed by the verb, has the sense of the future 1). Such are Eng. go, Gk. diii, Skt. émi. The result has been that in some languages, e. g. Germanic and Slavonic, the future tense has disappeared, and its meaning is expressed by the present, or when necessary, by a periphrastic tense, cf. Streit- berg, Gothisches Elementarbuch'* p. 199, Leskien, Altbulgarische Grammatik p. 213. That the same tendencj^ should be respon- sible for the use of the old present as a future in Scotch Gaelic is in itself a plausible theory, and for some forms like théid the only admissible one. There seem, indeed, to be some traces in Mid. Ir. of the use of some forms of tiagii with future meaning, cf. da leth tra tcgi, a ro-thruag, no cindus lamai aula, no cia maitJi fil acut in tan tégi dochumm nime, Atkinson PH 8217, where in tan tégi, even if Ave understand it as 'now^ that you are going to heaven', shows hoAV closely the meaning of the present approximates to that of the future. A less equivocal example (if the text is sound) is Is i ndighail marbtha Eoin Bautist tic in scuab a Fanait do erglanadh Erenn fri deredh in domain, aniail do tairrnger Eleran ind ecnai y Colum Cille A. I teirt do sunnradli tic fa in scuab a Fa?iait, ut dixit Colum Cille F(ranciscan MS) ad Fél. Oeng., Aug. 29 (Stokes 1905, p. 190). Here both the sense of the passage and the use of ticfa in the second version establish the future meaning of i/c2). 2. The disappearance of the old future through formal con- fusion with the present has parallels elsewhere. In Welsh, for example, the use of the present for the future is partly due to ^) The future, on the other hand, is used for the present as a gnomic tense, cf. qui homo tiniidus erit, in rebus dubiis naiici nan erit. Plautus, Most. 1041. '■') It should be noticed that the present here occurs in a prophecy. For the use of the prophetic present in e. g. Greek, cf. Brugmann, Gr. Gr.^ p. 486. PRESENT AND FUTÜKE TENSES OF THE VEKB IX SCOTCH GAELIC. 65 such confusion, cf. Stracliau, Introduction to Earl}' Welsh p. 83; Loth, Eemarques et Additions p. 90f. In the more recent stages of Irish, where the -f- of the future has for the most part be- come -h-, the possibility' of confusion between e. g. cuiridh and cuirßdh is obvious ^). In Scotch Gaelic, where the entire disappear- ance of -h- would be general 2), the two sets of forms could not possibh^ be kept distinct. Cuiridh and cuirftdh would have exactly the same pronounciation. If we now claim that where in the modern language cuiridh, huailidh are used with the meaning of the future, these forms represent in simplified spelling- older cuirfidh, huailfidh, we can appeal onh' to the probability of the supposition. From the nature of the case absolute proof is impossible. But attention may be drawn to a fact in the older written language which deserves consideration in this connection. As has been mentioned above, every edition of the Gaelic Bible has made some advance on its predecessor in, among other things, the adaptation of the orthography to the actual sounds of the language, principally by way of omitting silent consonants. The following four examples, out of many, bear on the present question. At Apoc. 17, 8 Stewart has (in footnote) sgriosfar e, the edition of 1807 has sgriosar; at Mark 5, 23 Stewart has mairßdh si 1807, and following editions mairidh i\ at Mark 1, 8 the Dublin version of 1602 has haisdfidh, Stewart baistidh; at Mark 9, 49, 1602 has saillfUhear, Stewart saillthear, 1807 saiUear. The dependent forms of the future, cha chuir may be explained in the same way, < cuirfe, or as due to the analogy of the independent forms. What has been said of the present and the future applies, of course, to the imperfect and conditional. Chuir inn '1 would (used to) put' and ^I would (have) put', represents, phoneticall}' and in point of meaning, both tlie older chuir inn and chiirfinn. ') Pederseu is probably right iu attributiug, Vergl. Gramm. II 335, the extension of, the ending -ewn of 3 sg. pres. to the desire of distinguishing between the present and the future. *) This can be inferred from the fact that in the modern language unvoicing in Sandhi before -h- is known only in a few dialects, and is there couliued to one or two petrified phrases, as sibh fhéi7i, pronounced Zeitschrift f. celt. Pliilulogie X. 5 GG J. FRÄSER, THE PRESENT AND FUTURE TENSES, &C. The main points which this paper aims at establishing are, 1. that in Scotch Gaelic the distinction between habitual and non- habitual action is not always expressed in the one case where it is possible to do so, 2. that the synthetic verb forms commonly called futures are used with the sense of presents, both of habitual and non -habitual action, and that the identity of the forms of the present and the future tense is due, partly to the fact that the present verbal stem has in some cases a future sense, but, particulary, to phonetic development which has removed the formal differences which origin- ally distinguished them. Aberdeen. J. Frasek. IRISCHE MISCELLEN. 1. aife .„Abhauis:''. In der Sage Ftngal Jiónáin (ed. Kuno Mej'er, Kev. Celt. XIII 368 IT.), die noch der altirischen Zeit zugewiesen werden mufs (vgl. den durch den Reim gesicherten Genetiv Haue Fothartaig, zweisilbiges ó'ic, núa[e], dó'i, h'iad usw.), heifst es in dem Liede des Mdel Fothartaig (S. 385): Is tiar fri cloi n-gaühe do neoch in-gair bil Aife. K. Meyer übersetzt „Cows of Aife". Auf S. 379 versucht der irische Schreiber, den Ausdruck he Aife zu erklären: ./. cloclia filet la tóeb int sUihe. It cosmailc fri hü finna do cliéin. For aife int sléibc ataat: ..nämlich das sind Steine am Hange des Berges. Sie gleichen von weitem weiisen Kühen. Auf der aife des Berges befinden sie sich." K. Meyer hat aife hier unübersetzt gelassen. In seinen „Sagen aus dem alten Irland" hat jedoch Thurneysen dieses aife mit „Abhang" übersetzt und auch hic Aife in dem erwähnten Vers mit „Kühe des Abhangs" wiedergegeben. Ihm folgend hat sodann K. Meyer in seinen Contributions ein Wort aife „slope?" eingefügt. Es kann gewifs kein Zweifel bestehen, dafs das erstgenannte aife in der Glosse des Schreibers und im Text des Gedichtes dasselbe Wort darstellen sollen. Wie der Reim mit gaithe („des Windes") zeigt, mufs aife hier mit einem Diphthong angesetzt werden. Ein Wort aife (mit Diphthong), das Abhang bedeutet, gibt es aber überhaupt nicht. Die ganze Frage ist vielmehr auf folgende Weise zu lösen: 68 JULIUS POKORNY, In dem Gedicht ist Aife nichts anderes, als der Name einer mythischen Persönlichkeit. Es gibt mehrere Frauen dieses Namens. Welche hier gemeint ist, läfst sich nicht mit Gewifsheit fest- stellen. Die Felsen am Abhang- des Berges können sehr wohl von weitem wie Kühe ausgesehen haben und aus uns nicht bekannten Gründen als „Kühe der (Zauberin) Aife" bezeichnet worden sein. Der Schreiber der erwähnten Glosse kannte offenbar ebenso- wenig wie wir jene Geschichte, die sich an die „Kühe der Aife" knüpfte. Aufserdem stehen die Verse, aus denen der anlautende Diphtliong des Wortes erschlossen werden kann, an einer späteren Stelle des Textes, so dafs er um so leichter in einen groben Irrtum verfallen konnte. Es gibt nämlich tatsächlich ein Wort für Abhang, das ganz ähnlich in der gesprochenen Sprache klang, nämlich aitlibe (Verbalsubstantiv zu ad -hen, aus "^ate-hhijom) „Ebbe, Abnahme, Zurückweichen", daher auch „Abhang (des Berges)", das im Mittelirischen, also zur Zeit der Abschrift unserer Sage, genau als aife (also etwa äfe) gesprochen wurde. Der Schreiber konnte somit das ihm vorliegende aife (= aife) irrtümlich als das ihm wohl geläufige Wort aithhe auffassen. Daher fügte er aus Eigenem hinzu: „/br aife (recte: aithhi, älter aitlibiu) int sléibe ataaV Dieses zweite aife ist natürlich mit dem zuerst genannten aife, das er näher erklären will, nicht identisch. Im Gedicht mufs es daher ,, Kühe der Aife " und nicht „Kühe des Abhangs" lieifsen. 2. Wb. 33a2. Diese Glosse: „leissom atech didiu '/ isJie conidrotig; ferimr diamuintirsom inti moysi'' enthält die eigentümliche Abkürzung imr. Im Thesaurus (I 707) ist das Wort unerklärt gelassen 0- Ich zweifle nicht daran, dafs es einfach in im(;m)urgu aufzulösen ist, was auch dem Sinn nach vortrefflich pafst. Kurz darauf kommt in ähnlichem Zusammenhang (33 a 5) zweimal das Wort im{m)urgu vor. ') Dieselbe Abkürzung in Wb. 5 c 5, wo sie richtig in imnmrgu auf- gelöst ist. IRISCHE MISCELLEN. 69 3. da-caitig „hat geschworen", ad-ciiitecht „ist abgewiesen worden". Die Form du-cuüig zu tong{d)id „schwört" mufs, wie das palatale t beweist, auf urkeltisch ''^to-l-on-fetoge zurückgehen. Da vor s3mkopiertem e niemals die Hebung- von o zu u eintreten kann, befremdet das zweite ti in du-cuüig. Die Möglichkeit, dafs hier in der Reduplikationssilbe ein i stecken könnte (so zweifelnd Hessen, CZ IX 21), mufs als völlig ausgeschlossen bezeichnet werden. Es kann sich somit in diesem Fall nur um eine ana- logische Umbildung handeln. Das Vorbild dazu ergibt sich ganz ungezwungen. Die echt komponierte Form der 3. Sg-. Perf. mufste nämlich (wenn wir annehmen, dafs hier, wie auch sonst häufig, die Sj'nkope der zweiten Silbe durch Einflufs der unecht kom- ponierten Form und durch das etymologische Bewuistsein unter- blieb) *-tochiiitig lauten und es liegt auf der Hand, dafs *'du- coiiig durch Einflufs von "^-tochnitig, wo das u in unbetonter Silbe berechtigt war. zu du-ciiiüg werden konnte. Auf ähnliche Weise ist ad-cnüecht „ist abgewiesen worden" zu erklären. Ein ursprüngliches *ad-coitig (urkeltisch *ad-Jcpn- tetoge) „er hat abgewiesen" war zuerst durch Einflufs der echt komponierten Form ^-accuitíg zu "^ad-cuitíg gew^orden. Hierauf wurde dann das passive Präteritum *ad-cofacht (^ ad -hon -tog -to-) durch Einflufs des aktiven "^ad-cuitig, *-accuitig zu ad-cuitecht umgestaltet, auf dieselbe Weise, wie z. B. das passive Präteritum *fo-ruilecht durch Einflufs des aktiven Präteritums fo-roiblaing zu fo-roiblacht „praeventus est" umgestaltet wurde (mehr Bei- spiele für die Beeinflussung des passiven Pi-äteritums durch das aktive bei Thurneysen, § 710). 4. Zur Flexion von nnini „Seele". Die Flexion von anim „Seele" zeigt im Altirischen eine ganze Reihe von Eigentümlichkeiten. Im Singular sind folgende Formen belegt: Xom. ainim (2). anaiw, anim (4). animm, anam\ Gen. anme; Dat.-Acc. anhn (4), animm (2), anmimi, anmain (5), anmin (2); Voc. anim; im Plural: Xom. anmin, anmain, Dat. aw- manih. anmanaih. Acc. anmana. 70 JULIUS POKOUNY, Fügt man dazu die im Félire des Oeiigiis durch den Reim gesicherten Formen Dat. Sg". (tnainim (: caraimni). Gen. PL anman (talman) und den im Gebet an Columba (CZ YIII 287) vor- kommenden Nom. Sg. anaimm (: Coluimm, colainn), so kann man folgendes altirische Paradigma aufstellen: Sing. Nom.-Voc. anam{t7i), an{a)im{m). a{i)mm(m), Gen. an{m)m{a)e, Dat.-Acc. anf)i(a)in {anmuin), an{a)im(m), a{i)nini{ni); Plur. Nom. anm{a)in. Gen. anman, Dat. anman{a)ih, Acc. anmana. Zur Erklärung dieser Unregelmäfsigkeiten in der Flexion pflegt man gemeiniglich anzunehmen, dafs sich in diesem Para- digma ein einheimischer Stamm *ana-mon- mit dem lateinischen Lehnwort anima vermischt habe. Diese Annahme kann jedoch nicht alle Schwierigkeiten erklären. Ein (wie das auslautende unlenierte m zeigt) jüngeres Lehnwort aus latein. animä würde nämlich im Singular Avie folgt flektiert worden sein: Nom. anamm, Gen. *ain(m)mc, Dat.-Acc. ainhnm. Der belegte Genetiv anm{a)e, sowie die Nominative anaimm, ainhnm blieben sohin unerklärt, da man selbst bei Annahme einer analogischen Beeinflussung des Nominativs durch die andern Kasus nur die Form *ninemm (vgl. derart entstandene Nominative, wie maiten, fairenn. neben regel- mäfsigem matan usw.) erwarten dürfte. Die Sachlage dürfte sich vielmehr so verhalten: Im altirischen Plural liegt noch die reguläre Flexion des echt keltischen Stammes ^ana-mon- vor; wie der Reim mit tahnan (Félire des Oengus, 27. März) beweist, war das m ordnungs- gemäfs leniert. Im Singular dagegen haben drei verschiedene Einflüsse zusammengewirkt. Der Nominativ anamm, sowie der Dativ und Akkusativ ainimm stammen von dem oben besprochenen Lehnwort aus lateinisch animä. Der Dativ und Akkusativ anmain {anmuin) sind regelmäfsig vom keltischen Stamm *a«a- mon- gebildet; der Reim mit adhail und talmain (Félire des Oengus, 21. August, Epilog 296 usw.) beweist die Lenierung des m. IRISCHE MISCELLEN. 71 Die übrigen Formen des Singulars erklären sich durch Einflufs des w- Stammes ainm{m) ..Name''. Der enge Zusammen- hang zwischen Xarae und Seele ist eine derart evidente Tat- sache, dafs ich darüber wohl erst kein Wort zu verlieren brauche (vgl. Frazer. The golden Bough). Auch der formelle Ausgangs- punkt der Analogiebildung ist ganz klar. Es ist dies der Dativ- xlkkusativ ainimm des Lehnwortes anamm. Dieses ainhnni fiel nämlich in der gesprochenen Sprache fast vollständig mit ainmm, dem Dativ- Akkusativ von aiyimm ,,Xame" zusammen: zwischen dem n und mm hatte sich ein deutlich hörbarer Svarabhakti- Vokal entmckelt, wie aufser dem Xeuirischen auch die einmalige Schreibung senim „Tönen, Ton'' statt gebräuchlicherem semm(m) beweist (irrig hierüber Thurne^ysen, Handbuch S. 205, 415). Der Gen. an{m)m{a)e ist ganz deutlich aus der Flexion von ainm{m) bezogen. Nun drang begreiflicherweise auch der Nominativ ainm{m) (sprich än'm) in die Flexion von anam{m) ein: so erklärt sich der Nominativ ainimm: der Nominativ anaimm ist eine Kompromifsbildung aus anamm und ainimm; aus dem Nominativ und Genetiv übertrug sich dann das nicht -palatale n in den Dativ -Akkusativ, daher dort anaimm neben regelmäfsigem ainimm. Die Richtigkeit dieser Annahme wird anch durch das Mittelirische bestätigt; hier hat sich nämlich der Einiiufs von ainm{m) „Name'' noch deutlicher geltend gemacht, indem das unlenierte n der Endung in die Pluralflexiou von anhn eindrang, also Nom. Plur. anmanna, Gen. anmann usw.; zu gleicher Zeit war auch das lenierte m in allen Formen von an im. soweit es erhalten war. durch Einflufs von ainm{m) durch unleniertes tn{m) ersetzt worden. Vgl. z. B. die Dativform anmmain in Atkinsons Passions and Homilies, während das m im Altirischen, wie aus der Poesie erhellt, noch leniert war. Umgekehrt hat ainm(m) im Plural das auslautende -a von anim übernommen. Neuirisch ist im Nominativ nur mehr die Form anam gebräuchlich; die andern Kasus, nämlich der Gen. Sing, und der Plural zeigen die Formen anma, bezw\ anmanna. anmannaib, deren Entstehung oben besprochen wurde. Es bleibt schliefslich nur noch das mittel- und neuirische Wort ainm{h)iä{Ji)e zu besprechen, das ..Tier", urspünglich jeden- falls „belebtes Wesen'' bedeutet. Das Wort kann nicht echt keltisch sein, da urkel tisch '^anamadjo- nur '""anmaide ergeben 72 JULIUS POKORNY. IRISCHE MISCELLEN. konnte. Es miifs somit ein aus dem lateinisclien anhnä in älterer Zeit (wie die Lenition des m zeigt) entlehntes, archaisch etwa *anem anzusetzendes Lehnwort darin stecken. Wenn man sich aber gegen die Annahme sträubt, dafs animU zweimal, in älterer und jüngerer Zeit (nämlich mit leniertem und unleniertem in) aus dem Lateinischen entlehnt worden sei, so ist auch die An- nahme möglich, dafs es sich um ein britannisches Lehnwort handelt, dafs zu einer Zeit entlehnt worden wäre, als urkeltisch *ana-mö über ^anamü "^anaml erst zu '^anem'i (mit leniertem m) und noch nicht zu "^encm'i geworden war. ainm{h)id{li)e kann somit auf ""'animaide (enthaltend latein. anima) oder ""'anemidc (enthaltend britannisch ''aneml) zurückgehen. Es könnte sich- jedoch auch um eine Kontamination eines echt irischen *amnaide „seelisch" (vgl. lat. animal is) mit einem (nicht belegten) Lehnwort ^ainnid (aus lat. anima, woraus auch cymrisch anifail) handeln. Wien. Julius Pokokny. PLACE NAMES IN VITA FINNIANL A comparison of certain passages in the Latin Life ') of Finnian of Cluain Eraird with the Irish Life 2) published by Stokes helps us to identify some place names found in both. Considering- the confusion which the commentators display in their remarks on the passages in question, it is not surprising that Hogan's Onomasticon does not give much help beyond the collecting of references; in one case, indeed, it makes confusion worse confounded by suggesting a second wrong identification. 1. Escair Branáu. There is more than one indication that in early times an ancient road led from Cell Dara northwards into Meath through the district of Fid Gaible and the territory of Fotharta Airbrech, which latter extended eastwards from Bri Eile (the hill of Croghan in King's Co.) into Co. Kildare, as will appear later. The Connacht people, returning from Brüden Maic Dathó, fled 'past Druim Criaig, which is to-day called Cell Dara. past Ráith Imgain (now Rath- angan) in Fid Gaible. to Ath mac Lugnai. past Druim da maige^) over Droichet Cairpre'^j. When Patrick went on a visit to the king of the two Munsters he travelled the same route '^). Finnian, we are told, coming fi'om the south, paid a visit to Brigid at Cell Dara. Proceeding by the route referred to. he came ad fines Forthartensmm. where he met Cassanus. sou of Neman. Of this Cassanus I find a trace in Cloncassan, the name of a townland ') Codex Sahnanticensis, col. 189 — 210. -) Lives of Saints from the Book of Lisniore, p. 75 — 83. ä) Drumoniuy in Kiug"s Co. See Irish Ecclesiastical Record (1913), U 197. «) Irische Texte 1 106. ^) AcaUam na Sejwrach 1. 693. 74 PAUL WALSH, in the parish of Clonsast, barony of Coolestown. Next he crossed the Bo3'ne, and came ad locum qui Escayr Branan clicitiir, et ibi fundauit ecclesiam atque in circuitu eius fossauit^). The Irish Life says: tciinic Finnen iar sin tar Bóinn co JiEiscir niBrandin ait ltd Ard Relec iniú 'Finian came after that over the Boj-ne*^) to Eiscir Branáin, tlie place where Ard Relec is to-day ' 3). But where is Ard Relec? Certainly not at Ardsalagh. as Cogan t/ says in a passage referred to in the Onomasticon. He probably took this from some other writer. Nor will anyone who scans the official maps or lists of place names find it. There was once a parochial church or vicarage there, but in 1302 it was worth 'nothing, because waste '^). The name appears as Ardrelicke in 1597^), and as Ardrellick in Charles I.'s time«)- It is still remembered in the locality of Clonard. See sheet 47 of the Ordnance Survey 6 - inch map of Co. Meath. Colgan says') that Aengussius. by whom he means the author of the litany in LL 373, calls Escair Branan by the name of Ard bren ndoranaich, but we learn nothing from LL itself as to where the latter place was: in da fer dec de muntir Finnio i nAird bren domnaiy. The Codex Salmanticensis has no such name, though the Onomasticon would imply that it has. 2. Ros Fiudchuill. Colgan states^) that Cluain Eraird was formerly known as Ros Findchuill. For this statement he is taken to task by Reeves 'j). Let us examine our narratives: ') Cod. Sahn. § 16. ^) If the Yellow River, the first tributary of importance which euters the Boyae, be not thus referred to, Finniau probably crossed the Boyue itself twice. ^) Lis))iore Lives 1. 2()24. *) Calendar of Documents, Ireland, 1802 — 1307, p. 257. The place is corruptly called Ardrely and Ardri. 5) Fiants of Elizabeth, uo. 6185. 'Licence to Thomas, lord bishop of Meath, to alien to Edward Loftus, sou of Adam, lord bishop of Dublin and Chancellor, the manor of Killian and lands of Molericke. Ardrelicke, Clonard, Monygaliagh and Rosan.' All these places are in the Clouard district. ^1 Leinsler Inqimitions, Meath no. 140. ■) Acta SS. 398, u. 21. ») Ibid. u. 23. '•') Life of Columba, 286. PLACE NAMES IN VITA FINNIANI. 75 Cod. Salm. §17. Finnian finds lii8 suc- cessor at Escair Branáu. 18. Alio die iienit angelus ad eum dicens: Noli hie ampUus laborare, quia non erit tua resiirrectio ibi, sed familiae tuae tantum. Surgens ergo uerus ohediens, seen his est angelum iisqiie ad locum qui Cluayn Irayrd dicitur. In- gressus ergo locum dixit: Haec requies mea, (Cc. Then a boar flies from him. Tlien an inter- view with a magus nomine Fraechanus takes place. Lism. 11. 2628—2639. F. finds his suc- cessors but, being warned by God, moves a little to the East (seal soir). 11.2640 — 2645. The coming of three thousand disciples and the selection of the twelve Apostles of Ireland. 11. 2646 — 2652. A story and prophecy about Colum Cille. 11.2653 2660. The Lismore text is here slightly wrong owing to the mistake of the scribe occasioned by two occurrences of the word Finnen. Follow- ing the Brussels MS. the read- ing is: Tdinic aingel Be co Finnen co n-ehert fris, ni he so inad th' eiséirghe atré dano drem mór dot muindtir isund. Tdinic ria^) Finnen cu Bos Findchiiill, is éisidhe Les in Memra inniu. Annsein ga- hhuis Finnen in fersa fcUhach- da. Uec requies mea yrl. 'The angel of God came to Finnian. and said to him : " This is not the place of thy resurrection, but man}- of thy disciples shall rise here"'. He came with Fin- nian to Ros Findchuill, that is Les in Memra to-day. Then he sang the prophetic verse Haec requies &'c^ Then follows 1) The CO in Stokes' edition really belongs to the opening of the first sentence, also the word aingel. 76 PAUL WALSH, Cod. Salm. Lism. an interview with the druid Fraechán. § 19. Coming- of remarkable di- sciples, j § 20. Story of Columba. To an3'0ne who reads these narratives it mnst be evident that they refer to the same events and places, and that Cluain Eraird and Eos Findchuill are identical as Colgan says. Compare also the words of the Irish Life Avith the following- entry in the Four Masters 1): Cluain Eraird do losccadh ass an rainn as ma im Less an mtmra. The monasteiy which was founded at Ros Findchuill was afterwards known as Cluain Eraird, and was a little to the east of the church Finnian had already founded in the neighbourhood. Reeves had, however, authority for stating- that a Ros Find- chuill was anciently called Eiscir Branáin. He cites a passage from a tale named Caithréim Dathí mic Fiachra, of which there is a complete copy in 23 Nil, R. I. A., and a portion in 23D15. It is quite modern in language. It states that Ros na righ was once known by the names just mentioned. There is absolutely no evidence or reason for connecting this place with those in the Lives of Finnian. Yet it is hardly possible that the two places, Escair Bran an and Ros Findchuill should be connected in suc- cession Avith Finnian, and that in another portion of the country two identical names should be given in succession to one place. It seems to be a case of an old tradition retouched at a later time by a person who had not grasped the real facts. 3. Cell Bignaige. We read that Rignach, sister of Finnian, with her mother, and the mothers of Ciaran and Colman, resided in a cell called Cella Sanctae Rignachae'-). Except that the Lismore Life mentions two sisters and omits Colman's mother, the texts agree 3). Colgan, ') A. D. 1143. -) Cod. Salm. § 22. Rignathae is a misreading. 2) Stokes' i. 1. 2662 should be 7 {ocus). PLACE NAMES IN VITA FINNIANI. 77 commenting on the Latin Life, says KiUrighnaiglie est parochialis ecclesia diocesis Clnanensis^), meaning thereby the church of Righnach in the town of Banagher, parish of Reynagh and dio- cese of Clonmacnoise. By the time he compiled his Indexes he had changed his mind; he has Killrignaiglie, eccl. in occidentalis Medice et Lagenice conßnibus-). The place is, of course, the modern Kilreiny in the Co. Kildare, on the opposite side of the Boyne to Clonard. There is record of a grant of the rectory of Kylreyny 'parcel of the possessions of the late abbey of Clonard' to William Bermj'ngham, Knt. in 1541^). Hogan's conjecture that Cell Eignaighe is in Wexford is due to the fact that it is stated to have been in Fotharta Airbrech ; but Fotharta Airbrech is not the baronj' of Forth in Wexford. 1) Acta SS. 399. -') Ibid. 881. ^j Fiants of Henry VIII no. 191. Mullingar, St. Finnian's College. Paul Walsh. ETYMOLOGICA. 1. Ir. tonn, W. ton, 'wave*. This words offers another example of the treatment in Celtic of initial tu- discussed recentl}- \)y Vendrj^es in Meyer's Mis- cellany p. 286 ff. Celtic "^tuon-na is to be connected Avith Lith. tuanas "flood', tuanus 'swelling', Goth. JnvaJil 'bath'. Both ^tuon- and ^tuolc- are extensions of the root of Lat. tumere, Ir. torn. For the development of meaning from 'swell' to 'wave' cf. Gk. xr\aa : {'yy.vog. 2. Ir. lith, Br. lid * festival'. Henrj^, Lex. etym. du breton. mod. p. 187, connects both words with Gk. h/TovQ'/ía; this seems phonetically impossible. Pedersen's explanation of iHh, lid and W. Hid 'anger' as connected with Goth, leijm 'Obstwein', Vergl. Gramm. I 132, is unsatisfactory for phonetic reasons (the Goth, word has probably the dipthong), and also on semantic grounds. The Irish word points to the idea of 'festival' in a religious sense rather than to that of 'feasting' ^). Should the Welsh word be compared with Lat. lis < sfhs (bor- rowed?). Ir. lith and Br. lid < *l/t- are to be connected with Lat. litare-) 'to obtain favourable omens', with the alternation U'.K For the sense compare in particular adrad litlia 'worship of auguries', K. Meyer, Hail Brigit, p. 14, 1-4. Lith would thus mean, original!}', 'a day for the taking of auguries'. >) For this reason, too, Thurneysen's etymology « ^pletnn), Stokes' Festschrift p. 30 ff., is to be rejected. -) For *lltare with which Boisacq operates. Diet. etym. de la laiigue grecque p. 585, there is no authority. ETYMOLOGICA. 79 3. Ir. abann *lasli'. This form occurs with the above sense RC XIV 485. Erin V 40. It is generally compared with W. afivyn 'rein", and so explained as the borrowed Lat. habmae, cf. Vendryes, De vocab. hibern. p. 109, Pedersen o. c. I 210. But neither the form nor the meaning of the Irish word necessitates identification with the Welsh, Abann is the Lat. amentum 'the thong attached to the shaft of a spear'. 4. Ir. W. galar. Pedersen, o. c. II 25 compares Gk.xo/í^(>í: 'Magenkrankheit': other explanations are mentioned by Osthoff IF, IV 287. Against Pedersen's etymology must be urged that from the sense of the Irish word 'sickness', and from that of the Welsh, 'pain, sorrow' one would assume that the Celtic word had originally the meaning of 'uneasiness' rather than of 'disease', still less of any particular disease. The development of meaning from 'sorrow' to 'disease' is an easy one, and is illustrated by the Lat. dolor ^grieV : dolor latenim 'consumption'. For this reason I would connect galar with Gk. yaXaoj 'loosen', yaXaQoc 'relaxed, languid'. 5. Ir. idan 'pure*. Whether this word is or is not the same as idan 'faithful', the sense forbids comparison with Gr. rríóivó^ 'level', Pedersen, 0. c. n 57. i'/LTHh^ cannot be used to support this etymology for the meaning 'steadfast' is given to it only by composition with íí'- For idan 'pure' we must postulate 'Hdhenos, and com- pare Skt. idhyate^is kindled'. Gk. Ifhcuro) • irrqnovHv. Hes. lOagcdg • ÍÁaQcdc id., cddco, lufhi'jQ. 6. Ir. bratmi 'salmon, large flsh'. For the suffix cf. Ir. scaian 'herring'. With the stem we may perhaps compare Gk. iSar^ayog 'frog', Ion. ikc&Qcr/cog, ^h'jT{^>ayog, ßQOrayoQ < ^ßgcWayog < '^gurdhn- cf. Boisacq, Diet. etym. de la laugue grecque p. 116. As to the meaning, it is to be noticed that the name ßargayog was applied to a fish of the ObXayog variety, Arist. H. A. 5, 5, 3. This Qilayog < ""selm- is to be con- nected with the Lat.- Celt, sahnu, cf. Salmöna, a tributary of the Moselle, Ir. sdige 'tortoise', Lith. sU'kas 'earthworm'. 80 J. FlíASElí, ETYMOLOaiCA. 7. Ir. sah. For examples of this word v. Glossary to MartjTology of Oengus ed. Stokes, London 1905. The spelling sai^h seems common, so in F. ad June 22, July 1. I take it to be the bor- rowed Lat. sophus < Gk. úocfóg, cf. fellsuh < pJiilosopJius. The meaning "sage' would clearly suit in e. g. April 12 sah soer suidi Phetair, July 1, bus nArUin, sab sruithe. The sense of 'strong' attributed to the word by the native lexicographers could easily develop from that of 'wise', 'clever'. 8. Ir. ethre 'end'. Example of the word are: sernait ethre nAuguist, Fel. Oeng. Aug. 31, sernait . . . Ochtimhir ard ethre, ih. Oct. 31. Ethre comes from *peino-:Lat. petere &c. This group of words has the meaning of 1. extension in a space, Gk. jcsrdvvvfii, Lat. patere, 2. progress through a space, Skt. pdtati 'flies', Gk. cxiThrai id., Lat. proteruos, 3. aiming at something removed by a space, Lat. petere, with the additional idea of attainment as in Gk. üitotTv, 4. something that bounds a space, Goth. f(i])a, Mid.-H.-G. vade, 'fence', Welsh etem 'thread'. The development of meaning from pdtati 'flies over' to ethre 'end' is well illustrated by the history of Lat. terminus 'boundary, end', Gk. TtQd^Qov 'end': Skt. tdrati, tarana- 'crossing over', Gk. tíqho, rÍQtTQor 'bore', Skt. pCtrdm ' end ' : G. fahren ^). 9. Ir. tore, W. twrch *boai*'. This word comes from *{s)tor-J:o-s : Gk. oztQtog, arsQQÓg 'firm', Skt. sthirds id., G. starr, starh, Stc'irJce (?). The deve- lopment of meaning, 'strong" : 'male animal' is common, cf. Lat. uerres 'boar': Skt. vri/mw- 'strong, mighty". ') The development of meaniug assumed here seems to me much more probable than that proposed by Marstrander, ZCP VII 384. The meaning 'feather', 'tin' 0. N. fiöri, cf. Gk. tixíqov, Lat. penna, is based on 2. above, and not immediately connected with that of 'end'; though the two may occasion- ally coincide. Aberdeen. J. Frasek. ON ^PHE EECONSTRÜCTION AND DATE OF ^J^HE LAUD SYNCHRONISMS. In the latest number of Eriu (VIL pt. 1). I liave sought to prove that the first and second fragments of the Annals of Tiger- nach. the third fragment as far as Finis Chronici Eusehii. and the Annals of Ulster down to the same point. A. D. 609, are founded on an earlj^ chronicle Avhich was written in vertical sjiichronic columns: and to show in the extant annals the traces of the de- rangement of this original form. Great then was my gratification. on examining Kuno Meyer's text of the Laud Synchronisms, to find not only Irish examples of synchronic tabulated history of very early date, but also, side by side with these, examples of the gradual derangement of part of the material through its tran- scription into a form in which the synchronic tabular arrangement was abandoned. As a further probable cause of derangement, I suggested that the unfilled parts of the columns were used for tlie introduction of glosses and supplementary matter. The Laud tract shows a good instance of this. In the first synchronic table (113 a). the second column is occupied by the list of kings of Jerusalem, but. after the capture of Jerusalem, this list is replaced by the pedigree of Saint Joseph, "custos Mariae', from King Josias. As we may judge from the printed text, this pedigree occupied mucli less space than the lists on either side of it. A portion of the space thus left vacant was used to receive the added note -Is ed innisit . . . Forgus Fortamail', 473, 15 — 21. The note, however, extended above and beloAV one of the items in the pedigree, 'Eliud genuit Elispur. 473,18. The scribe who undertook to reduce the material from its original tabular order to continuous paragraphic form did not understand the text or w'orked mechanicallj-, with the result that the item "Eliud genuit Zeitschrift f. pelt. Philoloírie X. í', 82 JOHN MAC NEILL, Elispul' is now found embedded in the added note, and in sucli a position that it separates the name Loegaire from its epithet Lore. This note deserves further attention. Where it has '.xiiii.' (do rigaib hErenn). an older text must have had '.xiii.'. for 'Melge 7 Cobthach' is a scribal error for 'Melge mac Cobthaich' — V. 474, 2. The note was inserted, as we have seen, while the text retained the tabular arrangement. For what purpose? In the tabular arrangement the kings of Ireland were necessarily sj^nchronized with certain 'kings of the world'; but the thirteen kings of Ireland named in the note cannot have been exactly synchronized with the three 'kings of the world' named in the note; for in that case, the note would have been superfluous. Here therefore we see a revising hand at work on the earlier tabular text. Of what nature was the revision? AVe cannot sav with certaint}^ It is indicated in the note that the text, as the reviser found it, differed from the teaching of certain 'senchaide ocus libuir'. The difference may have extended only to the chronological relation of the two lists, kings of the world and kings of Ireland. If so, it seems to me that tlie correction would have taken another form. It seems much more likely that the list of Irish kings in the text was greatly different from the extant list, and that the text itself was amended, at the time of inserting the note or afterwards, to bring it into accord with the 'senchaide ocus libuir', and with the developments of the legend of the kingdom of Ireland. The text indeed retains some indications of such revision, AVe are told (473, 34) that Ugaine Mór began to reign in the second year of Ptolemy son of Lagus ; also (472, 19) that Oengus Turbech began to reign in the fourteenth year of Ptolemy Euergetes. BetAveen these come the thirteen kings of the note. The paragraph '0 rogaib Sirna Sirsaeglach co ragaib Ugaine &c.' requires to be completed by adding a sum of years, as in the other paragraphs of this kind (v. 474, 30. 475, 16). AVe find the sum of years misplaced by the scribe in the preceding item ' Ugaine . . . .xl. bliadan jj no .Ixuii. bliadain 7 .cc.'. The model and ultimate basis of Irish sjmchronic histories is St. Jerome's version of Eusebius. This gives: lerusalem capta {= 1 Sirna, 475, 32) an. ab Abraham 1426; 2 Ptolemaei Lagi f. (= 1 Ugaine, RECONSTRl'CTION AXÜ DATE OF THE LAUD SYNCHRONISMS. 83 473,35) = an. ab Abraham 1G93; difference 267 years, as the text has it. But the sum of years of the Irish reigns given in detail in the text fi'om 1 Sirna to 1 Ugaine is 342. It follows either that the years of certain reigns have been increased or that additional reigns have been interpolated since the tract was originally drawn up. Since there are thirty reigns in the period, giving an average of less than twelve years, and since no single reign exceeds thirty years, the addition of years to the reigns originally given seems less probable than the insertion of additional reigns. The method and manner of this expansion of the legend of tlie kings is susceptible of explanation. The time of 'Gabálmacc Miled" was once synchronized with Alexander the Great, 'king of the world" (v. BB 19 a 5). In the Laud tract, it is synchronized with Salomon. A later tract places it two centuries earlier, in the reign of the Assyrian 'king of the Avorld'. ^lithraeus (= 'Meta- ralitis* BB 12 a 2). Much earlier dates are found in other docu- ments. These successive extensions of the synchronic plan necessi- tated corresponding adjustments of the pedigrees originating in Mil, by the introduction of additional names in each line of Mil's descendants. But the increased time assigned to the race of Mil the Gaedhil, in Ireland, required also to be filled up with additional kings, and to provide these, recourse was had to the amended pedigrees. How the pedigrees and the regnal lists were thus stretched out, we are able to see from another text recently published by Meyer '), the seventh century pedigree of the kings of Munster, which we shall compare with the regnal list in this synchronism and Avith the later pedigrees of the Munster kings in LL and BB. The names in the later pedigrees which are not in the earlier pedigi-ee are marked *. The names in BB (172 b) which are not in LL (320 col. 2) are marked f. The names in LL Avhicli are not in BB are marked §. I begin with Eogan Taidlech. eponA'mous ancestor of the Eoganachta, and proceed, as in the pedigrees, in the inverse order of ancestrv. ') riier die älteste irische Pichtiiny I ÜÜ. 84 JOHN MAC NEILL. Eogan Taidlecli, diarl>o ainm Mug ^uadat roraind \iKvinn ra Cond Cétchothach. Mug- Néit. *-(- Berg. Dergthene. *§Derg. '■'§Dergfotlia. *§Fothortheclit. *Énda Mimchain. Loch Mor, do cer i Tain Bo Cuailngi i mBregaib. *§Laigne Birb. §Mafemis. §Letlidarbri. §Eocliii Míímo, 0 rate)- Mumu * Muredach Muchna. *f Eochu Fer Äine. Daui Donn dalta Dedad. Cairpre Lose Lethet, diatä Lethet Luise. Luguid Lagne, las cetna dernit gai 7 cruen in hErinn 9- Findtad Mär, dia ro^) giallsat Brega fo secht. Nia Segamon las a mbligtls diabulbuar. .i. bai 7 elti. Flidais Foltchain a mäthair diambtar bae elti^). *f Adamair Foltchain. Fer Cerb4). =^tMug Corb. Cobthach Coel-'^). *§Coilub Cloair. Rechtaid Rigderg, ro cliumrig hErmw, ro ort flaith nAlban. Triur rochomort flaith nAl- ban do hErendchaibj .i. Rech- taid Rigderg, Labraid Long- sech, Crimthaw?^ Múr mac Fidaigc). Oenges Obne'). fEnda Doid. Daui Find. Findruth*). Brisse Rl, imeronaisc cath for Fomaire ■•). '•'Tmliuch, las cetna dernta classa dime in hErinn ar tús i"). Ellim Ollí'inac/iía'i); is leis rofer snec[h]ta fina im YiKrinn. Eochu TJarcheis i'^. Luguid (fir erduirn BB). Änruth. Road Rotlichendi^*), lasa ngabtha comgnei*) 7 iüulechti Temair ar tils. Roan. ') ri lais céíua dearnta gai 7 cruain BB. -) lasar BB. '■') BB omits all after buar. *) Corb BB. '-) caem BB. ") BB omits rccbumrig hErinn, has docompairt for rochomort, Gaedelaib for hEreudchaib, atid adds in cethramad Bresall Brec m. Luigdech Lain. ') LL omits Obne. ^) Findrotha, gen. LL. BB substitutes Sedna Findarraig. gen. '^) Bresi rig, gen. BB. Bressi. IS é ro fich txicha cath for Fomore LL. ^°) Gen. Airt Imlig prius lasa clasa dnine i tosacb BB. n) Felim Olfinnsneachta J5J5. 1-) Urchain LL. !■') Roide Rotec/ii BB. ") las cetna dernta comraach LL. KECONSTRUCTIOX AXD DATE OF THE LAUD SYNCHRONISMS. »0 *RTgarlid, las cetna dérnta car- '"Cainrothec[li]taid (ludroitec/i^ pait in hErmni). aig, gen. BB). -fFailbe Ilc[h]oi'acli, lasa cetna Riiss. g-abtlia corthaig. Aiiif echtuacli {Intoihaig.gen.LL). Cetcliumiiecli , las cetna dernta *§Couas (or Cu Ais, gen. Conais J clmmni in ogmaib artus in LL). hEr inn-). "§ Glass. '''Aed Derg, las dernta fessa *§Nuadu Fail. 7 forfessa in liErinn ar *§Ailcliid (gen. Ailcheda), tils 3). *§Conmael (so the nom. is nsnaJ- Mainmairec. las cetna crecad or h/ found, gen. Conmáil LL. 7 argat in YiEvinn^). It seems to be the Cymric *-|-0itliec7?Y. lasa n-Rivicht or 7 equivalent of Irish Conmál airgead ardüs. < Cunomaglos). Cass Clothacli (confollnastar brig Eber. Breaga BB). *'\-Bi\e. Airer Arda {gen. Aiiair LL). Mil Espaiwe. In the versified pedigree, edited by IMej'er. Luath (6) slionld perhaps be Loch (son of Mofebes. slain hy CiiChulainn in Tain bo Cúailnge) ; liath (7) seems also to be a proper name = Leth Darbri LL. I have not marked the seemingly corresponding names in the later pedigrees as missing from the earlier. The pedigree in BB. like the Laud synchronic tract, claims the Psalter of Cashel as its source, and perhaps represents an older version than the LL pedigree^). The seventh century pedigree is increased by eleven generations in BB, by sixteen generations in LL; and. since we may count three generations in a century, it will be evident that these increases must correspond to great readjustments of the chronology, and con- sequently of the regnal lists. Among the names that are absent from the seventh c^tury pedigree, but are found in the later pedigrees, the following are also found in the list of the kings of Ireland in the Laud tract: ') lasa ugabtha carpaid BB. *) Gen. Ceidi Cumnig, lasa ceta cumui BB. ■^) Faelderg dergdoid lasa feasa for fric BB. *) Gen. Muinemoin, the rest omitted, BB. *) Note the early relative usage imeronaisc. 80 JOHN MAC NEILL. Coumael mac Ebir. 474, 27. Eochu Faebarglas, 375, 3. He is son of Coimiael, and in some pedigrees (BB 171 a 13) lie takes the place of Ailchid iu the LL pedigree, father of Nuadii father of Glass. His reign in the synchronic list is separated by 120 years from the reign of his father Conmael. The next king of Ireland from Munster in the list is Eochu Momo, thirteenth in the composite pedigree quoted by me. In the list, he is separated from Eochu Faebarglas by twenty years, in the pedigrees by many generations. Allerg mac Muinemon, 475, 13. Art Imlig, 476, 6. Mug Corp mac Cobthaig, 474, 8. Amadair Foltchain. 474, 9. This is the most noteworthy in- stance, and shoAvs in a striking w^ay how the chrono- logical gaps were filled and the regnal lists extended by taking names from the pedigrees. Flidais Foltchain. according to the LL pedigree, was mother of Xia Sega- mon. The wild deer were her kine, and so during her son's reign, two sorts of kine (diahid-huar) were milked. Some scribe mistook the words amdthair Flidais Foltchain for the name of Xia Segamon's father, and so we find the name in the BB pedigree 'm. Xiad Segamain m. Adamair Foltc[h]ain m. Fir Corb'. Later on came the historian in search of names to fill the chronological void which himself, perhaps, had created; and finding this ghost- name Adamair (< Amadair < amátliair) in a suitable l)lace, he forthwith raised it to the rank of king of Ireland! Though LL has not this pseudo- ancestor in the pedigree, the name is found surrounded with circum- stance in the LL text of Flaithiusa hÉrenn, 22 b 1(3: 'Ailül Casfiaclac/i mac Conla .xxu. i rrlge liÉrenn conid- romarb Amadir Flidais Foltchain. Amadir mac Fir Chuirb .u. hliadna i rrige hErenn co tovcJiair la Echaig Altlethan." When these things are done in the green wood, what may not be done iu the dry'? When I was a youngster, I used to hear that Colum Cille left a curse on every- body that allowed a story to lose in his telling of it. Those who liave transmitted from century to century the RECONSTRUCTION AND DATE OF THE LAUD SYNCHRONISMS. 87 historical legend of pre-Christian Ireland have avoided Colum Cille's curse. Even the seventh century poet did not earn it. He makes Mafemis twenty-seventh in descent from Eber son of Mil. But the Eoganacht genealogy in BB has a preface apparently founded on an ancient Latin tract which is quoted in its beginning (171a). According to this preface Mafeibis was third in descent from Eber (1. 15). The stretching of 267 to 342 years in a section the Irish reigns of the Laud tract shows that the process of expansion has been at work on the face of this document, and that the original tract has been freely amplilied by interpolation in its Irish section. It seems fairly certain that the original tract was drawn up throughout in synchronic columns. The evidence of synchronic arrangement is wanting only for the first 10 lines of the printed text. The order of the original tract can be restored by the aid of the Eusebian model. Eeges Mundi Hebraeorum Judices et Reges EÍ2' Éreuu I Taulaues 321 [Tautens 40] [Thinaeiis 30] [Dercylus 40] Eupales38(-Palesi) 471, 23) Nuadu 20 (471, 13) Thola 72 (= Metulli 471. 12) Jah- 22 (= lar 471 note) Bres 7 Jephte (Galaadites Bede) 6 (471 Lug- 40 note) Hesebon (Abesan Bede) 7 (471 note) Aelon (Achialou Bede) 10 (471 note) Labdon 8 (471 note) Samson 20 (471 note) ; In Dagda 80 Heli sacerdns 40 (471 uote) Samuel et Saul 40 (Samuel 12, [ Delbaetli 10 Saul 20, Bede [471 note]) | ' Fiachna 10 [David 40] ; Tri maic Carmada 28 1) Or rather Lapales, v. K. I. A. Proceedings XXVIII C ti, \k 147. JOHN MAC NEILL. The foregoing section, in whicli I have abbreviated the extant Irish portion, was followed in immediate sequence by the contents of 113 a — b; all the intervening matter on 112 a 3 and 112 b having become misplaced. The intervening matter was transposed from its original tabular arrangement and brought into great confusion. It is. however, nearl}- all preserved, and the tabular arrangement can be approximately' restored in im- mediate sequence after 113 b (476,28). When the kingdom of Judea ceases in column 2, the remainder of the column is used to set forth the pedigree of St. Joseph from King Josias; this pedigree, as well as the succession of the kings of the world and kings of Ireland, is found continued on 473, 6 of the printed text. Artaxerxes Muemon -iO Memnon 473, 7) Artaxerses Oclius 26 (= Ochus .xuii. 473, 9) Arses Ocbi lilius -i (Arres mac Ochi .iiii. 473, 10) Darius 6 (473, 11) Alexander 5 (473, 12) Ptolomaens Lagi filius 40 (473, 13) Ptolomaeus Philadelphus 38 (473, 15) Ptolomaeus Euergetes 26 ('.xui." 473, 22) Azor geiiuit SaJoc (473,6) Arg'atinar30(473,24) Dui Ladgair 10 Luguid Loethech 7 Sadoc y. Achim (473, 8) Aed Rnad 21 Achim g. Blind (473, 14) Cimhaeth 28 Macha 7 Rechtaid Rigdorg 20 Eliud g. Eleazar (473, 18) L'gaiiic Mór 40 (here foUoics the list. 473,37 — 474,12) Eleazarg. Mathaii (473,2.';) Oeiigus Turbeth 40 The sentence beginning "0 rogab ügaine . . ." 474, 13 is found continued at 472, 18, where it has been merged in the end ol' a distinct paragraph: 'gorrogaib Oengns Turbech bliadain ar diet isin .xiiii. ilathiusa Ptol. Euergites'. Ptolomaeus Lagi lilius 2 (= Ugaine Mor 1) = Eusebian an. ab Abr. 1694. Ptol. Euer- getes 14 (= Oengus Turbech 1) = ab Abr. 1784. The difference is 90 years, not 101 as in the text. The error may be explained if we suppose that, as already suggested, the reigns of Mug Corb. six years, and Amadair. five years, were interi»olRted. and that RECONSTRUCTION AND DATE OF THE LAUD SYNCHRONIs:\rs. 80 tile sumniaiy of years, calculated on the Irish reigns, was altered, the Eusebian data being- ignored. But the total of the Irish reigns in the actual text from the accession of Ugaine to the accession of Oengus Tiirbech is 221 years; showing that since the summary in the text was calculated, a number of reigns have been further interpolated. The series of 'kings of the world' between Ptolomaeus Euergetes and Octavianus Augustus is missing from the text. The continuation of the pedigree of St. Joseph, however, was preserved, and is given by the scribe in the note at the bottom of 112 a and concludes with the paragraph 'losep . . . sechtmaine' in the middle of 112 a 3 (472, 10 — 18). We cannot well doubt, therefore, that the arrangement in parallel lists was continued dow^n to the Passion of Christ (472, 9. 473. 5). In this section, column 1 continued the rulers of Egypt down to Cleopatra: then Julius Caesar, Octavianus Augustus (472, 1), and Tiberius Caesar (472, 8). Column 2 continued the pedigree of St. Joseph, and doubtless ended with the note on the date of Christ's birth, 472, 10 — 18. Column 3 contained the continued list of the kings of Ireland, 472, 20 — 473, 5. Thus the original sequence of all the material on 112 a 3 and 112 b can be restored. The sum of years from Oengus Turbech 1 to Eochu Feid- lech 1 is given as 220. Eochu Feidlech 3 = gein Christ (472, 11) = Octavianus 40. The Eusebian total from Ptol. Euergetes 15 to Octavianus 40, is 216. The Irish reigns in the text, beginning with Oengus Turbech 474, 12, and continuing through the list 472, 20 — 31, give a total of 213 years. The discrepancies may easily have arisen from mistranscription of Roman numerals. The further sequence of the text from 1. Tiberius, 2. the Passion of Christ, and 3. Conaire Mór is found on 114 a (476,31), the succession of popes now occupying the second column. The material for columns 1 and 2 is still supplied by the Eusebian chronicle as continued by St. Jerome and Prosper. This source fails after A. D. 449, and so, from the time of St. Patrick, the contents of the columns are changed. The spiritual succession is continued in column 2 in the line of 'comorbai Phátraic'. The kings of Ireland get the first column, and column 3 is assigned to the kings of Munster. There is no break in the chronological sequence from 114 b to 115 a. A series of regnal lists of the Irish provincial dynasties belonged evidently to the same tract. 00 JOHN MAC NEILL. fur tlie initial and terminal dates correspond closeh* to those of the SA'nchronic lists. The revisers hand may also be traced in the section that immediatel}' precedes St. Patrick, i. e. in 114 b. At the end of 114a. we are told. Conn Cetchathach 1 = Seuerns 6. This is A. D. 200 in the Eusebian reckoning-: and. at the head of 114b, we are told that 199 j'ears from the birth of Christ preceded Conn's accession. The Irish reigns on 114 a = 156 years, which Avith 33 years of the life of Christ and 10 years of Conaire Mór thereafter (473,4) make np 199 j^ears. The chronology of 114 a is therefore consistent. Not so with 114 b. This section brings the history down to the year of St. Patrick's arrival, the fourth of Loeguire, the first of Pope Sixtus, the ninth of Theodosius, A. D. 432. The total of years on this page, 114 b, should accord- ingly be 233, but the Irish reigns amount in sum to 310, and the years of Conaire mac Moga Lama are not supplied. In this section, then, the list of kings of Ireland has once more been artificially extended, nor can there be much doubt as to the added names. In the synchronic history prefixed to the Annals of Tigernach and written early in the seventh century, the kings of Ireland from Luguid Reoderg to Loeguire, as from Loeguire onwards, belong all to the line of Conn Cetchathach. The syn- chronic tract embodied in the Lebor Gabála (BB and Lecan) and discussed by me in the Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, vol.28, C6, dates from the year 721, a little earlier than the Laud tract, and in it also the kings of Ireland, during the Christian era, are all of the line of Conn. Now the years ast;igned in tlie Laud tract to the kings of this line alone are more than sufficient to fill up the time between Conn's accession and St. Patrick's arrival. Hence we may infer that the reigns not belonging to this line have been interpolated in the Laud tract. The date of the compilation of the Laud tract is established by the terminal reigns of the dynasties. 1. King of Ireland, Domnall mac Murchada, 743 — 763. 2. Successor of Patrick, Céle Petair, 750 — 758. 3. King of ]\lunster, Cathussach mac Etersceoil (17 years after Cathal mac Finguine), 742 — 759. 4. King of Dal Araidi. The names in 480, 10 belong to this list, as may be seen from the list in LL 41. Lethlobar mac RECONSTRUCTION AND DATE OF THE LAUD SYNCHRONISMS, i'l Ecliacli f 709. For Dubthach mac Congail (mac ('oiigarb LL) read Dub-da-inber mac Congalaig- (ri Cruitline AU 725) -[- 726. Eochu mac Ecliacli (regnare incipit 726. Tigernacli; in recording- his death, the Annals of Tigernach and the Annals of Inisfallen call him king- of Dal Riada) f 73o. Inrechtach (BB 167 b 35) was son of Lethlobar mac Echach, and father of Tomaltach f 790 J king of Dal Araidi. Catlmssach mac Ailella, Avho suc- ceeds Inrechtach in the list of LL, Avas killed in 749. Inrechtach fought a battle in 741, and the data here cited dispose of the editorial doubt AU p. 200, note 2. The utmost limits of the reign of Inrechtach are 733 — 749. 5. Kings of Mide. The list begins without title at 480, 1 1 — Conall Cremthainne son of Niall Nóigiallach, and ends with Domnall mac Murchada 480, 27, already given as king- of Ireland 743 — 763. As king- of Mide for 46 years, Domnall should have reig-ned from 717 — 763. 6. Kings of Connaclit (sic legend urn ) 482. 30. Fergus mac Cellaig, 742 — 756. 7. Kings of Ailech. led Ollán. 722 — 743. 8. Kings of the Ulaid. The list begins without title at 484,11 and ends with Bressal mac Áeda Róin 735 — 750. The tract gives the length of Bressal's reign as one year. Tlie list in LL also gives Bressal one year, and Cathussach mac Ailella, also mentioned, as his successor for 16 3'ears. If we could take these data as authentic, we should have to suppose that Bressal was deposed c. 736, and that Cathussach, king of Dal Araidi. then assumed the kingship of the Ulaid. There is nothing in the Annals to warrant such a supposition, and we may Avell think that the list in LL is derived, up to this point, from a version of the list in the Laud tract. We shall see that a version of this list was used also by Flann IManistrech, and was able to mislead him. The list in LL gives, in succession to Cathussach, Fiachna mac Áeda Róin, Bressal's brother, with a reign of 38 years. Fiachna died in 789. His reign should thus have begun in 751 ; the Annals indicate that he was reigning in 753. The compiler of the LL list, following, as I think, the authority of the list before us, found a blank in the succession between Bressal 736 and Fiachna 751, and filled it up by transferring Cathussach from the line of Dal Araidi; but Cathussach Avas killed in 749. The 02 JOHN MAC NEILT.. g-eiiealogical doctrine of the descent of Dal Araidi from Conall Cernacli lias caused that folk to be confused by many writers down to our time with the Ulaid. The two peoples occupied distinct territories under distinct dynasties. There are thus eight terminal reigns which should afford anterior and posterior limits for the compilation: 12 3^ j4 5 ^ 7 8 743 750 742 733 717 742 722 735 763 758 759 749 763 756 743 750 These dates, as tliey stand, though they suffice to show that the document Avas compiled about the middle of the eighth century, do not enable us to fix even the limits of its date. The latest initial year. 759, is later than tlie earliest terminal year, 743. In order to find a common period, we have two alternatives. We may suppose that in the seventh list one name, originally standing last, has been omitted, the name of Xiall Frossach, who succeeded his brother Aed Ollán as king of Ailech, and became king of Ireland after Domnall. in 763; and that in the fourth list two names have been omitted — Cathussach who succeeded Inrechtach and was killed in 749. and Flathruae, next in the LL list, who died in 774. This would limit the date of com- pilation to the year of Céle Petair's accession and BressaFs death, 750. Against this explanation, apart fi'om the supposed omissions, there are two difficulties. The compiler. Avriting in 750. would not be likely to omit the name of Cathussach. slain in battle in 749; and the length of BressaFs reign would not be given as one year. The other alternative may. I think, be adopted. The first, second and third lists have been continued by a later redactor doAvn to the beginning of tlie eleventh century. The Armagh succession is given from Fer-da-chrich (481, 12), who succeeded Céle Petaii', down to Mael Muire (482, 5). wlio died in 1020. The Munster succession is given, without heading, from (482, 6) Mael Uúin 7 786 to Brian 7 1014. The list in LL 320, after the name of Catlial mac Finguine. says "atberat araile combad ri Muman Maelduin mac Aeda Benno in'; and does not include the name of Tnúthgal. but includes Artri mac Cathail. named before Tnúthgal RECONSTRUCTION AND DATE OF TUP: LAUD SYNCHRONISMS. 9o ill the Laud listi). The succession of kings of Ireland is given, also without heading, from Xiall Frossach (480, 28). who suc- ceeded Domnall in 763, down to Mael Sechnaill -J- 1022. I suggest that the reviser Avho continued these three lists found sufficient space in his MS. to insert the first name of each list at the end of the original tabular list. On this hypothesis the original document had for its terminal reigns in lists 1, 2, and 3: . J ^.,. ( 734 ., \ 730 ., ., , i 713 Aed Ollan ^ ^^^ Congus ^ ^.^ Cathal j ^^^ The tract would thus have been compiled in 742, the 3- ear in which Cathal mac Finguine, king of Munster, died and Fergus mac Cellaig became king of Connacht. In six of the eight lists that end about the middle of the eighth centuiy, the entire length of the terminal reigns is stated. In one list, that of Deal Aiaidi, no regnal years are given, and the absence of regnal years in the corresponding list in LL indicates that they were omitted in the original document. Doubtless the compiler was unable to find sufficient data. So far as I have been able to trace, we have no evidence that, down to the time of this document, any consecutive chronicle of events existed in Ireland except the chronicle or chronicles still preserved in the Annals of Ulster and the Annals of Tigernach. Of the kings of Dal Araidi in our list, this record gives the death -dates of the following only: Eochu ffi. Conlaid 553 or 558, Cathussach 682, Aed Dub 558, Ailill 690, Fiachna Lurgu 626, Aed Airdd (= Aed Airech) 698, Lochéne 645, Cú Chúaráin 708, Eochu larlaithe 666, Lethlobar 709, Mael Caich (not called king) 666, Dub-da-inber (= Dubthach) 727, Dúngal 681, Eochu mac Echach 733. To determine the length of a reign, the end of the preceding reiffn must be dated, and in our list the Annals fulfil this con- ') Heuce it seems probable that the compiler of the list in LL, though he possessed a version of the Laud synchronism, did not iind in it the con- tinued sections after A. D. 750. 94 .lOIlN MACNEILL. ditioii only for Fiaclina Lurgn, Eochii larlaithe. Mael Caicli, his son Catliussacli, Ailill, Aed Airdd, Ci'i Clniaráin, Lethlobar, and Eochu mac Echacli, that is, for nine of the twenty- three kings. The original tract must have been written mainly in Latin. The name of Bressal mac Aeda, last in the tract, may have been followed by the word ' an[nisj ', leaving out the number, as Bressal was still reigning; or the entry may have been "(Bressal mac Aeda) roin' read by a scribe as Pregnavit oin (bliadain)'. Had Bressal ceased to reign in 736, the name of his successor should have appeared in the tract. It has occurred to me that the document may have been first drawn up in 736, when Bressal had reigned 'one year'. If so, the terminal dates already dis- cussed show that additions were made as late as 742. The presence of the total years in terminal reigns elsewhere in the document must be ascribed to later revision. A version of the Laud list Avas a principal source of the versified list of the kings of Mide by Flann Manistrech, LL 184 b. Murchad mac Diarmata (460. 24) was killed in 715, his father Diarmait in 689. Hence if Murchad reigned only 20 years, there is a space of six years not accounted for. The names of Diarmait and Airmedach, successors of Murchad, are not found in the Annals. Aed and Colgu were brothers of Mur- chad, but did not succeed him in the kingship. In 714, the year before Murchad's death, Aed and Colgu fell in the battle of Bile Tenedi). If they reigned, they must have been joint-kings with Murchad, and this, I think, may have been the original purport of the entry, for the date of these men is too near the time of compilation to admit of the supposition of a gross inaccuracy. The names 'Diarmait Airmedach' above 'Aed 7 Colgu' no doubt arise from an interlineation 'm. Diarmato m. Airmedaich'. Aed Colgu and Murchad being sons of Diarmait son of Airmedach. The reign of Domnall lasted 46 years according to the Laud tract and Flann's poem. The list in LL 42 gives 43 years, doubtless to make room between Murchad and Domnall for tlie ') Described in AU as 'bellum imesecli'. The editor has 'a battle imeseeh' in his translation, explains the Irish word correctly in a note, and then goes on most ineptly to say : ' a battle imeseeh would mean " a free fight "." As the text shows clearly, the meaning is a battle with alternating fortuueS; those who at first appeared to win being afterwards defeated. RECONSTRUCTION AND DATE OF THE LAUD SYNCHRONISMS. 95 five years assigned to Diarmait, Airmedach, Aed. and Colgu. Since Domnall died in 703. his reign as king of Mide should have begun in 717, leaving an interval of two years after the death of Murchad. According to Flann. Murchad was put to death by Conall Grant (Conall Gured. LL 42), then apparently king of Brega. Conall Grant was put to death by Fergal. king of Ireland, in 718, He may have held the kingship of Mide in the meantime to the exclusion of the local dynasty. The years 718 — 763, reckoned inclusively, will give 46 years for Domnall's reign. Flann's account is founded on a version of the list before us, containing the errors that have been shown, and a further note (as in LL 42) stating that Aed and Colgu fell in the battle of Bile Tened. Having given the lengtli of Murchad's reign as 20 years, Flann proceeds thus : Diarmait Airmedach iarma. Aed Colgu cóic certbliadna .iiii. rig Mide na mmed*romarbtha oc Bile Theined. Like the three parallel lists, 115 a, the Jive lists that follow begin with the time of Saint Patrick: Dal Araidi : the Annals do not supply death-dates for the first three kings, but Fiachra Lon (= Fiachna Lonn 480, 3) fought in the battle of Oche, A. D. 482 or 483. Mide: Conall f 480 or 485. Connachta: Amalgaid mac Fiachrach is named in various lives of Saint Patrick as his contemporary. Ailech : Eogan mac Neill f 465, riaid: Muiredach Muinderg 'quem benedixit Patricius' BB 165 b 22. Since these lists synchronize at beginning and end with the three lists which have been preserved in synchronic arrangement we are led to infer that this arrangement originally included all the regnal lists, and that the whole tract followed the Eusebian model. We shall find this inference sufficiently confirmed. A feature of the Eusebian chronicle is the summation of years at various points of importance, e. g. (462, ab Abr.) '.xxxv, anno Mosis, Cecrops regnabat in Attica, a quo usque ad captivitatem Troiae fiunt anni 375 '. This feature has been frequently imitated in tlie Irish svnchronisms and in their Irish section: see 474,31 on JOHN MAC NEILL. RECONlVrUUCTION OF THE LAUD SYNCHRONISMS. 475, 16. 477. 29 in the Laud tract. The presence of the same feature in the Annals of the fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries may he added to the evidences adduced in my paper on the Annals of Tig-ernach to show that the basis of the Annals for that period was the synchronic tract. See AU 432, 481, 482, 492, 570, 616, 663. We find the same feature in the continued section of the Laud tract 480, 33, where the deaths of Conchobar king- of Ireland, and Artri successor of Patrick, who died • within the same month" in 833, are dated '400 years fi'om the coming of Patrick to Ireland*. Following these indications, I infer that the continuation preserved the synchronic form, and a fortiori that the whole of the original tract was drawn up in that form. In fine, this tract, though it has suffered much from redaction and scribal transmission, represents one of the earliest of Irish histories. There are tliree that may be dated earlier, the Irish 'Chronicon Eusebii', AU 609, its continuation embodied in AU for about a century later, and the Lecan-Ballymote synchronism dated 721 ; not to mention writings known only in quotation, and of uncertain scope and contents, such as the Book of ( 'uanu. Dublin. John MacNeill. ON LEBOR GABALA. I. The text. § 1. The manuscripts. The text commonlj' known as Lehor Gábála or tlie Book of Invasions, has come down to us in several MSS. which, apart from the Latin relation given by Xennius in his Historia Brittommi, all belong either to the Middle -Irish or the Earlj^ Modern -Irish period. The various MSS. may be reduced to four versions, the mutual relations of which I shall endeavour to establish. The versions will be distinguished as follows: A. Book of Leinster (LL) fol. la— 26b; Book of Fermoy (F), p. 1 — 16; B. Eoyal Irish Academy DVl (S)^); Royal Irish Academy DIVl (S)^); Rawlinson B 512 (R), fol. 76A^— 97- Book of Lecan (Lee I), fol. lO'"— 22^"; Royal Irish Academy DIV3 (s); C. Book of Balljnnote (LB), p. 15 a — 51a; Book of Lecan (Lee II), fol. 264^ — 302^ ; D. O'Clery version. One copy is in the possession of Pro- fessor Kuuo Meyer 2), while the R. I. A. has two other MSS. in the handwriting of O'Clervs. ') See p. 99 for my reason for indicating these two MSS. by the same character. -) I wish to express here my sincere thanks to Professor Meyer not only for the loan of this important MS., but also for many valuable hints and suggestions as well as for the general interest he has taken in my work. Zeitachrift f. oelt. I'hilologie X. J 98 A. G. VAN HAMEL, § 2. Versions. Professor Rudolf Thurneysen lias been the first to attempt a classification of the MSS. '), but a careful examination of them all has led me to different conclusions. None of our MSS. provides a complete text, 5^et if we keep in mind that in all the versions an appendix has been added, entitled do flathiusaib Hercnn y dia hamseraih o re Mac Milcd co hamsir Tuathail TccJttmair, which originally did not belong to the body of the saga, we may form^ from the various MSS. a fair idea of the contents of each version ; for it does not impair the text of LG proper if a part of the appendix is lacking. I agree with Professor Thurne3'sen in assigning the first place to version B, though not for the same reasons. Of the five MSS. which belong to it, only two — R and Lee I — preserve the final portion which unfortunately has been lost in the other ones. After a copy of LG and a long synchronism of the kings of Ireland with the kings of the provinces since the coming of the faith, there follows in these two MSS. a second copy of LG or, as it is styled in the text, Miniugud gahál nErenn y a senchas 7 a rémmend rígraide innso sis y ethre a mbcolu aisneisin 7 Idbra ógh dond ni remunn ó thosach ind libair cotici indso ut dicit historia. The copy to which this heading has been prefixed, begins by a short Latin introduction, and then brings a recension of version A, differing only in a few trifles from LL. Thus the MSS. R and Lee I — and, as may be assumed, S and s also — contain two copies of LG, either of which represents a distinct version. The first of these, as it is found in R, Lee I, S and s, will be indicated as Ba, the other one, which agrees with LL, as Bb; in the same way I shall use the formulas Ra, Rb, Lee la, Lee lb. Professor Thurneysen is so much impressed by the im- portance of Bb that he has not realised the true position of Ba. Bb, in fact, is another recension of A, and enables us, by a few old touches it has preserved, to go back a step beyond LL. However, there is not much gain in this, A not being our principal source of the saga. In Ba, on the other hand, Professor 1) See: Zu irischen Handschriften und Literaturdenkmälern, 2nrt series (Abh. d. Kgl. Ges. d. Wiss. zu Göttingen, Philol.-Hist. Klasse. Neue Folge, vol. XIY no. 3. Berlin 1913, ed. Weidmann). ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 99 Tliunieysen sees only au abridgment of A. This I do not under- stand. A glance at one of the many texts constituting- version B will suffice to show that Ba not only contains an older re- cension of LGr than A, but a much more detailed and circum- stantial one. abounding- in episodes for which we look in vain in A. These episodes give Ba the right to being made the starting- point for an investigation of LG, and I certainly should have designated it by the first letter of the alphabet as its «mm ncUles but for fear of making the matter even more intricate by deviat- ing from Professor Thurneysen's practice. In what follows Bb will be treated as belonging to version A, Avhile Ba will be considered as the true representative of version B, § 3. Version Ba. The reason that this version has been undervalued up to the present, is that E, which does not contain the best text, has always been considered as its chief representative. S, in fact, affords a much better text; only it breaks off abruptly and lacks the portion corresponding to Eb and Lee lb. The MS, D V 1 begins at the very beginning of LG, and runs on till the end of the invasion of the Tuatha De Danann. It is written in a beautiful 13*^ century hand, and gives all the poems in extenso and in a better form than any other MS. The MS. DIYl takes up the story exactly where D V 1 has left it, at the Invasion of the Goidels, and brings it down to the end of LG and even a good deal farther, until it breaks off at the end of ]\Iaolmuire Othna's poem Fland for Erind. The handwriting-, the colours of the initials, the size of the leaves, and everything else are identical with DVl. The con- clusion is obvious: DVl and DIVl are portions of the same MS., and were bound separately in error. My view is corroborated by the fact that in each volume a portion of another tract follows, in a very remarkable hand, which is also the same in both. The obvious identity of DVl and DIV 1 implies that we may consider them as one text (S), so that together they contain a full copy of the Ba version. It goes back to the 13^^ century, and belongs to the same period as E, but is far superior to that MS., as the scribe makes fewer mistakes in the prose, and never abridges the poems. It is a pity therefore that the final section (Bb) has been lost in it. 100 A G. VAN HAMEL. In order to establish the true relation of S and R we must compare the texts of both carefully. No importance need be attached to the misarrangement of the leaves in R, which has upset the whole order of the MS., as it is due to later carelessness, just as the separation of DVl and DIVl. 1. Biblical preface. R has lost this portion. 2. Introduction on the Goidels. R preserves only a few lines = S. 3. Ceasair. Preserved in both MSS. R omits: a) Poem: Hériu cia fiarfaiger^); b) Note on Ceasair: asherat uraile comad Banha ainm na liingine sin rogah Erind ria ndilind y comad uaithi noheth Banha for Erind. Variants: S (doluid Ceasair . . .a liindsi) Meroen ; R Mara Hen. 4. PartJwlon. Preserved in both MSS. R omits : after poem Ä clioemu cldir Chuinn a short account of the division of Ireland by Partholon's four sons. Variants: S seolad mis do co hAladaciam; R co calad JDaciam. 5. Nemed. Preserved in both MSS. (synchronism only partially in R). R omits: a) From genealogy of Nemed after Agnoman: mic Bairn mic Sera:, b) From genealogy of the five sons of Dela after Semeon: mic Erglain; c) A remark from Cin Dromma Snechta, which also occurs in LB: dognitis harca doib din mholgaih no is iat liherna rig Gréc dogatsat leo do teclit i nErind amal ashert Cin Droma Snechta-). 1) R never gives a poem in extenso, but only quotes it by a line or two. Whenever I put B omits a poem, even the short quotation is not given. ^) So we find Cin Dromma Snechta mentioned in a IS^ii century version of LG. This shows that Professor Thurneysen is mistaken Avhen in his first Abhandlung Zu irischen Handschriften und Literaturdenkmälern he assumes that this book was unknown to any scribe of LG until version C. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 101 6. Fir Bolg. Only partly in E. E omits: a) Particulars of King Fodbgenid (cf. LB) ; b) Particulars of King Eoclm mac Eire (cf. LB and LL); c) Account of Nuadu's hand being cut off by Sreng. and poem on same b}' Tanaide (cf. LB); d) Poem Findaig in senchus diatá (cf. LB); e) The division of Ireland by the Fir Bolg ^). 7. Tuatha Be Banaun. Partially lost in E. R omits (unless the order was upset and the missing portions occurred in the lost part): a) Account of the four cities, where the Tuatha De Danann learned their draoicVieacM: b) Poem Hcrin co n-uaill. R also abridges the list of Tuatha De Danann. 8. Meic Míhd. Last part lost in E. E omits: a) In tale of Ith's death on Mag Itha: do ortadar demna fer do muindtir Itha ./. Olhtm a ainm y is e cedmarh Erenn do sil GaidiJ; b) Mention of Fintan (Tuan mac Cairill) who wrote down the story of LG on the knees of Finnan and Colum Cille. The above list contains all the more important variants and omissions in E when compared with S. It could easily be made longer by the addition of many minor differences, where S alwaj's has the better reading. Not only does E's rejection of the poems stamp it as an inferior text, compared with S, but also its occasional carelessness in the prose. That the extra matter of S is not due to later additions is proved by a completely independent version like A, where notwithstanding its strong tendency to abridge, some of the extra details of S have been preserved, viz. the poems Hériu cia fiarfaiger and Hériu co n-uaill, and in the Invasion of the Fir Bolg the particulars about King Eochu mac Eire and a reminiscence of their division of Ireland. ') I suppose this was already related iu tlie begiimiug of Ka, which has been lost, for S has it twice, in the beginniug and at the end. 102 A. G. VAN HAMEL, On the other hand, tliere is no case where ß affords a better reading than S. Therefore I take R to be a copy of S. As both MSS. seem to belong io the 13'^' century-, E cannot have been written mnch later than S. The misarrangement of the leaves in R, in consequence of which the Invasion of the Fir Bolg and the beginning of the Tuatha De Danann come first and are followed l)y the feAv remaining lines of the intro- duction, is clearly due to a later possessor of the MS. Where we have the text of S, R has no value whatever, but, as an almost contemporary copy, it gains an enormous interest as soon as S breaks off. As regards the original form of Bb, R represents the oldest accessible version. We should, however, remember that R being itself a copy, it is liable to tlie intrusion of mistakes. A glance at the MS. will show how defective Rb is in this respect. Fortunately R is not the only MS. that preserves a copy of Bb: a portion of it also occurs in Lee I. This MS. must now be examined. The text of Lee la begins on fol. 10 of the Book of Lecan with the concluding lines of the poem Findaig in senchus diatá, which forms part of the Invasion of the Fir Bolg and is also found in S. Next come the prose tract and the poem on the division of Ireland by the Fir Bolg, Avhicli we know already from S. In the same way, there is an absolute agreement between Lee I and S as to tlie Invasion of the Tuatha De Danann. where R deviates from both by its strong tendency to abridge. Only one scribal error is there to show that Lee I is a transcript i). In the Invasion of Meic Miled Lee I also has but a few omissions: Loch Febail is left out in the list of places visited by Ith before his meeting with Mac Ouill, Mac Cecht, and Mae Greine, and Fintan is not mentioned as an authority for the names of Erimon's companions. For the rest Lee I appears to be an excellent copy of S, and sometimes a more trustworthy one than R. Therefore it will be useful to compare Lee I b and Rb carefully, as in case of variant readings Lee I b will often represent that of the original. In fact, a comparison of the two, which must be deferred till the examination of version A, justifies this preference for Lee lb, where all the poems are given in ') O lotur side Ina ii-uathhas runqjo instead of Dolotar, i5tc. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 103 extenso. Unfortunately this second part of Lee I is but frag- mentary; it breaks off in the middle of the list of pagan kings, added to the real LG, after King Sirna Saeglach and a poem on Cath Mona Trogaide, with these final words: Finit Adam OCiiirnin do scrioh do Gilla Isu mac lirhissigh A. d' Ollamh o Fiachrach. Anno doniini M°cccc,°xviii. So this text, clearly another copy of S, was made in 1418, but it has preserved with admirable conservatism many old forms, and the language, save for a few modernised spellings, is that of S. The fourth text belonging to version B is s. It occurs in the R. I. A. MS. D IV 3, and is wTÍtten in a clear 14*^ or 15* century hand. It begins in the middle of a poem belonging to the Intro- duction (Athair cdich coimsich nime, also in S and Lee II), and runs on through the whole LG and the appendix, through the synchronism of the Irish pagan kings with the kings of the world, and ind direm cétach, and through the poem Béidig dam a de do nim, to the middle of the poem Héremón is Eber ard. So the lost part of the MS. probably contained a synchronism of the Irish kings after the faith and a copy of Bb. The scribe of s dealt with his authorities in a much more independent way than those of E and Lee I. There can be no doubt that he followed S, but in the later portions of LG, especially in the Invasions of the Tuatha De Danann and the Meic Miled, he has enlarged the bulk of the text considerably by introducing im- portant additions. From these it becomes clear that he consulted other authorities on those two invasions as well, while, on the other hand, in the beginning his tendency was largely to abridge. The following list shows that s sometimes has the same omissions as R, but as no further influence of R can be traced in the whole text of s, no importance must be attached to it. These omissions common to s and R are all found in the four earlier invasions, which seem to have appealed to our scribe less than the two later ones : there he altogether discontinues his former practice of abridging, whereas it is pursued by R until the very end. Biblical preface. Lost in s. Introduction on the Goidels. Verbally = S, save for a con- siderable abridgment in the account of the Scots in Egypt, Ceasair = S. . . 104 A, G. VAN HAMEL. Partholon. Verbally = S, but for the omission of the passage on the division of Ireland. Nemed. Agrees with S; two omissions: a) The wives of Nemed's sons are not mentioned ; b) The passage from Cin Dromma Snechta is left out. Fir Bolg = S. Several omissions: a) Particulars of King Fodbgeuid; b) Poem on the cutting off of Nuadu's hand. c) Poem Findaig in senchus diatá. In two cases the order has been changed: a) The poem Fir Bolg hátar sunn a sei, and the prose tract Fir Bolg rothamnaif have changed places; b) The same thing has happened with the syn- chronism and the passage on the division of Ireland by the Fii- Bolg. TnatJia T)i JJanami. This invasion may be divided into three parts: the introduction on the arrival of the Tuatha De Danann, their history in Ireland, and the account of their people (genealogies, acs ddna, &c.). Of these the two first parts agree verbally with S. allowance being made for some changes in tlie order. In the third part, however, which is on the whole also taken from S. there is a remarkable interpolation. It begins as an abridg- ment of S, with sometimes slight changes in the order, until the poem Hériu co n-uaill. Later on. it resumes the text of S a little before the point where it was left, at Tri mic Cermada Milheoil. But between these two portions taken from S, a list of genealogies is introduced, which does not occur in S, but corresponds closely to the lists in LL and Rb. There is nothing strange in this, and it does not prove that s used LL as an authority for these genealogies: the scribe of s, who was copying S, had before him a copy of version Bb — as it must have constituted the final part of S — and. no doubt, he found there these genealogies*). ^) In that case Sb had preserved several details which were omitted later in Lee lb and Eb, for the genealogies are more elaborate in s than in those two MSS. ON LEBOK GABÁLA. 105 3Ieic Mücä. The description of the last invasion in s is very much like that of S. But the order has been entirely upset, especially in tlie later parts. At the same time the wording of each separate passage was not altered, and they still coincide with those of S. So there cannot be any doubt as to the principal source used by s. It is possible, however, that here, too. our scribe occasion- ally consulted the text of Bb, but we do not find so con- clusive a proof of it here as in the preceding invasion. The mention of Dil's death, however, ut alii clicunt, after the drowning of her husband Donu, might point to it. If this really is the case, it might be questionable whether the lost part of s did ever contain a version of Bb: for then there would be some probability that the scribe of s did not add Bb as a separate version, but selected the most striking details from it, and embodied them in his copy of Ba. We should then have to consider s as the prototype of version C. Now we are able to establish the relationship of the MSS. belonging to version B. All the. younger texts, E, Lee I, and s, are copies of S. Lee I has followed the examplar most closely; R and s make a few omissions, while s also introduces some notes from the text of Bb into its copy of Ba. None of these MSS. has preserved a complete text. S contains a version of Ba without gaps, which cannot be said of any other ]\rS. On the other hand, S has lost a part of the appendix, viz. the final synchronisms and Bb. while these parts have been preserved, although but fragmentarily. in the younger MSS. Of these Lee I, as a rule, gives the most trustworthy readings. § 4. The versions A and Bb. The available MSS. are LL, F, Lee lb and Eb, the two former containing version A, the two latter representing Bb. The chief characteristics of these versions, when compared with Ba, are a different biblical preface, the absence of the second visit of the Scots to Egyi^t, deviations in the text of the poems, and abridgments in almost all the Invasions. But these will be discussed later on. 106 A. G. VAN HAMEL, The iii'st thing- I shall have to account for, is the position assigned here to F. In Professor Thurneysen's paper F is placed along with BB and Lee II, i. e. under version C. I do not see the reason why. The first 16 pages of the Book of Fermoy contain a version of LG — down to the end of the invasion of Nemed, where it breaks off in the middle of the poem Erni oil oirdnid Gaedil. The first page is quite illegible, but in the open- ing line the words In principio may be discerned; they show that this page contains the beginning of LG. Comparing LL and F, we have: 1. Preface. As far as may be discerned from F and LL, F verbally = LL. Only Ibath is omitted from the second genealogy of Baath, owing to a scribal error, 2. Introduction on the Goidels. Verbally = LL but for one mistake {A ein da ficid hliadan 7 da deich tra ar nenam in tuir rogab Nin mac Beil rigi in domain for I cinn dd hliadan 7 da ficlied), and the addition of one poem on the exodus of the Scots from Egypt {Cethracha y cetliri cét\ which also occurs in S. o. Ceasair. Verbally == LL, with four additions: a) A passage from Cin Dromma Snechta to the purport that Bauba was the first to occupy Ire- land with fifty maidens and three men (also in LB and Lee II) ; b) A short note on the Invasion of Cappa, Luasad and Laigne before that of Ceasair, with a poem (also in the versions Ba and C); c) A poem Ceasaair canas tdnic si (also versions Ba, C) ; d) A poem Cethracha truth (also in Ba and C). 4. Partkolon. The first part, again, is verbally that of LL, but some additions are subjoined: a) A short tract on the division of Ireland by Par- tholon's sons; b) Some short prose notes on muinter Partholoin with poem, Pi,obo maith in muinter mór] c) A concluding poem ParthoUn canas ianic. All these additions are also found in the versions Ba and C. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 107 5. Kerned. The whole of this Invasion corresponds ^■erbally to the text of LL. I can only detect a few short additions : a) F mentions Xemed's wandering for a year and a half and his arrival at Inber Scene; b) The number of those who died of the pestilence is given as 2000 (R: 4000); c) Among Nemed's chieftains the names of Ergal and his brothers Madan and lartacht are given; d) After the battle of Tor Conainn. Ebath and Baath fly to the North of the world; e) On Semion's descendants, who returned to Ireland from Greece, F adds No is iad liharne rig Grec rogaitsid leo do tliecJit amnl. ashert Gin Broma Snechta. These intercalated particulars cannot all have been taken from a copy of Ba; they must have been drawn either from version C or from special sources, as the Book of Druim Snechta itself, a poem on the First Battle of Moytui-a, &c. The material of F is too scanty to enable one to draw definite conclusions from it. Yet this much is manifest: the scribe of F w^as copying LL, for the two texts are practically the same, and all the characteristics of the versions Ba and C are wanting. Only a very limited use of other sources, among wliich probably figured a copy of version Ba. can be traced. F is, therefore, to be considered as a slightly extended copy of LL. and the text of the poems points to the same direction. Now we come to Lee lb and Rb. both representing version Bb, which is, as Professor Thurneysen has recognized, closely akin to A. It has already been pointed out that Lee lb probably contains the better text, and is nearer to the lost Sb. That this is really the case, can be seen from the many instances where Rb is unintelligible, while Lee I b preserves the original reading. Lee lb also shows that' the scribe of Rb never made any important omissions on his own account, for wherever Rb abridges in a rather arbitrary way, Lee lb displays quite the same deficiencies, so that the very succinct treatment of the three first invasions in all texts of Bb must be imputed to their common origin, 108 A. G. VAN HAMEL, iiamel}^ Sb. Onlj' as regards the poems does Eb follow the same practice as Ra, and quotes merely the two initial lines of them, whereas Lee I b preserves them all in extenso. Both Lee lb and Rb are derived from Sb, the oldest attain- able cop,y of Bb. "We must endeavour now to establish the relation between Bb and A. Neither can be a copy of the other, for in both we find passages unknown in the corresponding- version, while at the same time these passages may claim a consider- able antiquity. So in Bb the invasions of Partholon and Nemed are dismissed in a single sentence, and that of Cesair is not mentioned at alU). On the other hand, the Latin pre- face of Bb impresses one as older, and the introductory words ut (licit historia point to another authority than LL. It will be necessary, therefore, to make a close comparison of these two texts. L Preface. In the beginning there is a remarkable difference. After the heading 3Iinmgnd gahal nErenn 'j a senchas y a remmend rigraide innso sis y etlire a mheolti aisneisin 7 labra ógli dond ni remmm o thosach ind lihair cotici indso ut dicit historia, Bb has an introductory' passage in Latin on Ireland and its inhabitants. A gives instead a short survey of the creation and the deluge. After this the parallelism begins. Apart from minor discrepancies the only noteworthy thing is that Bb inserts a tract on the division of the Gaelic language and its names; it does not agree with the rest and must have been taken from elsewhere. As to the seventy -two languages, A gives a list of them in prose as well as in verse, while Bb has only the poem. 2. Introdtiction on Goidels. In some respects A is more circumstantial, especially where it speaks of Brath's companions on his expedition to Spain. I cannot make out whether these details have been added in A or left out in Bb. the whole journey of Brath with Ucee and Occe being unknown in version Ba. But, waiving this aside, we notice a close agreement between our two versions. 1) That Cesair was known in the original is proved by the üual words of LG proper : í.s- amlaid sin royal Jfcrinn 6 cHgahdl Cesrn co gnhdil Mac Miled. ON LEBOR GABÁLA, 109 3 — 5. Cesair — Nemcd. Here the (■omparison is impossible, these three invasions being treated in too arbitrary a manner in Bb. 6. Fir liolfj. Bb still abridges : the wives of the five leaders, and the passage on the division of Ireland are left out. LL makes a scribal error, saying Fodhgen torchair la Eochaid mac Einnal, where Rb and Lee lb have the correct reading la Eochaid mac Eire. 7. Tuatha De Danami. Bb omits the introduction relating the coming of the Tuatha De Danann in mists, the First Battle of Moytura, and the story of the Lia Fail; after- wards it curtails the account of the Second Battle of Moytura, and the genealogies of the Tuatha De Danann. The antiquity of all these passages is shown by Ba. Bb inserts a separate tale called Imthechta Tuirill Bicreo, followed by a poem Etsid in senchas sluaghacli^ of which Lee I b preserves a complete text. On account of this tale Tuirill Bicreo gets a place in the Tuatha De Danann genealogies. It does not belong to the old stock of LG, as it occurs nowhere else, and must have been imported from elsewhere. 8. Meic Miled. Bb omits many characteristic details: the whole of the story of Ith, the death of Airennán, Scene, Ir, Donn and Herech, Amargen's poems, Erimon's wives, &c. The reason is that all these particulars occur in Ba, and it was the scribe's aim to give in Bb only the facts that were passed over in the preceding version. There- fore he has preserved in Bb three poems that we do not find in Ba, and which, strange to say, are even lacking in A: Secht mud mac Miled, Anmand na toisecli deilm tenn, and Sé meic Miled miad n- ordain. Of the second poem the antiquity may be questionable, but the other two with forms like la maccu do not seem to be 13^''^ century fabrications, although monosyllabic coir shows that they are no survivals from the earliest period. Besides, Bb preserves the names of the mogaid na mogad of the Meic Miled that have been lost in all other versions, but recur later in LB. For the rest the parallelism of A and Bb is complete here also. 110 A. G. VAN HAMEL, From the above summary we may gather that A and Bb are two versions, drawn from one common source. As the tendency of both is to abridge the text, they sometimes preserve different portions of the original, and this circumstance will account for occasional deviations of Bb from A. But as a rule the general trend of the two texts is remarkably the same. The only question now remaining is one as to the nature of the original of A and Bb, which we shall henceforth denote as 0. From the Latin preface in Bb Professor Thurnej^sen infers that 0 was a Latin Liher Occupationis. AVhether this title is right is a subordinate question, but I may point to the fact that Lee lb, when dealing with the Fir Bolg, says: ut supra dicebamus in capturis, .i. i ngahalaih, Hibernie. So Liber Capturae may be the more correct name. The gloss i ngabalaib is from the scribe of Lee I, for R has not got it, and the Latin phrase refers to Ba, which was certainly an L'ish text; so no proof could be derived from it that the version Bb originated in a Latin text. But there is some other evidence in support of Professor Thurnej^sen's view. Rb and Lee lb sometimes have a Latin sentence in the middle of the Irish narration, where the sup- position that these Latin phrases escaped a translators attention, might account for the sudden change of language. So the Gabál Partholoin is recorded in both MSS. b}' the words Anno Ix" aetatis Abram tenuit Partolon Iberniam. Ab Adam autem ii milia 7 dc y viii anni. In the enumeration of Mil's descendants we read Ni farcaib Eber Bonn no Airecli clann no Erannan non habnait filios quum mersus est statim in palude Scenes. In the pedigrees of the Tuatha De Danann, which section, as I have noticed alreadj", has been preserved particularly well in s, we find another Latin note: Orbsen proprium nomen Manannain unde diciiur Siagnum Orbsen apud occassum. Quum Manannanus sepuUus est, stagmim ucnit per terram per tumidum eius. The corresponding passage in LL is also in Latin. Hence one might infer that 0 was a Latin version, and that both A and Bb are translations of a Latin original. But before this conclusion is accepted, it should be realised at the same time that it can only be partially true. For the poems, several of which were composed before the ll*'^ century (see § 5), must be original Irish work. What makes the matter still worse, is the similarity of expression in A and Ba, even in the prose sections. Consequently I could, ON LEBOR GABÁLA. Ill at its best, only regard 0 as a somewhat Latinised version of an Irish text. Nor do I think the question of so much importance as Professor Thurneysen, who considers A as the oldest attain- able form of LG. In § 5 it will be shown that Ba represents a more genuine form of the saga, and an older stage of the text, whereas A is merely an abridgment. Hence the original language of Ba must be that of LG. Xow no one will hesitate to regard Ba as a purely Irish work, so that the question of the original language of 0 amounts only to this: has there ever existed a recension of LG partially written in Latin? The Latin preface of Bb is of no importance; it is a later addition, particular to that version, while A preserves the old biblical preface which we find also in Ba (see p. 127). The sparse Latin phrases, indeed, point to a somewhat Latinised version. Possibly 0 had even more of them than A and Bb, but we cannot go farther in our conclusions. Nor will this argument affect in any degree our views on the origin of LG. In Ba we possess an older and purely Irish version that has come down to us directly from the original without ever having passed through a Latin form. Besides, Ba is in another respect also a more valuable text than A, as it was never subjected to any uniforming process. This will appear best from a comparison of A and Ba. § 5. The original of A (or Bb) and Ba (X). An examination of the best representative of Ba. that is of Sa, and not only of the much shorter Ra, shows that this text is more elaborate in almost every respect than A and Bb. It is a pity Professor Thurneysen has failed to see this; for this is the fact that compels us to face the principal question concerning the relationship of the MSS. : if both Ba and A descend from the same tradition, are the differences, existing between them, due to digressions of Ba or to abridgments on the part of A? A priori both solutions of the problem are equally probable. The Latinised version 0, from which A has been taken. Avas possibly intended as a short survey for learned men desiring to acquaint themselves with the stories of the ancient Irish populations, without being overwhelmed by too many details. On the other liand. such a curious patchwork as LG was from the 112 A. G, VAN HAMEL, veiy beginning", was more than any other mediaeval saga liable to continual expansion b}^ the addition of parallel traditions that had escaped the notice of earlier scribes. Consequently it would be but natural that both these forces should have worked together, and that Ba should have enlarged the body of LG in several parts, while at the same time many details were omitted in 0. In most cases internal evidence will furnish a clue to the disentanglement of these difficulties. Putting together the results of a comparison we find the principal points to be as follows: a) Preface. Both have an opening passage on the creation, Adam and Eve &c., which is much more circumstantial in Ba. But the next section, the division of the earth between Noah's three sons, is more elaborate in A. Then comes a marked divergence as to the descent of Nél and Goidel Glas. The origin of this strange discrepancy will be discussed in § 13; for the present it may suffice to assign priority in this resi)ect to Ba. b) Introduction on the Goidels. A describes the struggles between the two royal races of Scythia (of Noenual and Nél) with a great profusion of details, while Ba just mentions them summarily. On the other hand, Ba has got an admirable account of the Goidels' stay in Egypt, and also records their second visit to that country, which is altogether unknown to A. For the rest there are only minor differences. c) Cesair. In Ba there precedes a short passage on an invasion by Capa and others even before Cesair ; it does not occur in A, For the rest the conception is quite the same in the two texts, but where A has nothing but a short note, Ba offers a pleasing narrative. d) Partholon. On the whole the two relations are identical, save for the summarising of A. A remarkable genealogical difference will be explained in chapt. II. A mentions Tuan mac Cairill. e) Nemed. The identity of Ba and A is evident, only A is much shorter and deviates in the enumeration of the plains which where made by Nemed and his sons. ON LEBOIi GAHALA. 113 f) Fir Jjohj. A has not the digression on the origin of the names Fir Domnann and Galeoin. or the conclud- ing account of the later adventures of the Fir Bolg in the islands, and their taking service with Coirpre Niadfer and Medb. Ba omits the names of the five queens. g) Tuatha De Danann. A leaves out the history of the Tuatha De Danann in the North, their magic cities, their battle with the Philistines, and the Avav they reached Ireland. But Ba has fewer genealogies. h) Meic Miled. In A the tale of íth is not so elaborate, and the tract Caiti tairthiud fir Mac Miled is lacking altogether. The order of the story is also different in both. The above list shows that Ba is in almost every section more extensive than A not only in the number of details but also in the manner of telling. After each invasion, there is a synchronism of the Irish events with the kings of the world, and Ba also contains several poems of which there is no trace in A: Doluid Miled asshi Sceithia (Introd.), Roho maith in muinter mór (Parth.), Findaig in senchais diadd (Fir Bolg); the contrarj^, however, is the case with a few other poems: Dene mo fresnéis a mic (Fir Bolg), and Eistid a eolchu cen on (T. D. D.). As has been said alreadj^, every additional passage either of Ba or A must be examined separately in order to discover Avhether it belonged to the stock of X or not. An investigation of this kind would, how- ever, take us far beyond the scope of the present chapter, which deals only with the mutual relation of the MSS.; it must be re- served for Chapters II and III. At present I only want to prove that neither A nor Ba are copies of one another, but that both are independent copies of the same original. This will be seen best, if a few salient points are brought forward, where there is an inherent disagreement between the two; for then it is clear that both have found their own way through the various literary traditions, preserving genuine elements by themselves, without being indebted for them to each other. According to A, Fénius Farsaid was a son of Baath mac ]\ragoch meic lafeth, whereas Ba has an entirely different genea- Zeitschrift f. ci-lt I'liildloylt- X. {^ 114 A. G. TAN IIAMEL, logy. Altlioug-h Ba preserves the older recension i). tli^t of A has also a claim to considerable antiquity, for it occurs in the Liber Sex Aetatum, from which it must have been taken. This points to a purposed alteration of the text, so that A cannot be considered as a mere copy of Ba: the author of 0 may have omitted as much as he chose, but he also put a personal stamp on his recension by introducing this and similar modifications. In the same way the antiquity of some parts at least of the additional matter in Ba, too, can be shown. Tliere is a poem by Maol Muru Othna. who died in 887, beg-inning- Canam hunadas na nGaedel (LL 133 b). Here we discover why it was that the the Goidels left Egypt under Sru's guidance and tied to Scithia: because they had not supported Pharao Cincris against tlie Israelites, and therefore were afraid of the Egyptians' vengeance. LL never mentions the fact that the Goidels had intercourse with the Israelites, but Ba has a long episode about it, and this episode apparently preserves an old tradition. By these few examples the relation of A and Ba is sufficiently illustrated: neither of them is dependent on the other, but each represents a distinct version of its own, though descended from a common ancestor. Which of the two has diverged least from the common originalX(X), cannot as yet be anticipated. Still, as Ba offers a much fuller text, and as we have found that in one very im- portant instance at least it has preserved an undoubtedly old trait, there is some probability as to the genuineness of Ba's traditions in general. But even if a tradition of Ba is genuine, it need not haxe formed a part of X, for there were evidently isolated tracts current among the Irish which were never embodied in the official LG. The Book of Lecan has preserved some of these along with its two versions of LG. Every additional passage of Ba therefore must be submitted to careful examination before we may infer that it really once belonged to X. and was omitted from in A. As to the age of X it can be established approximately b}^ that of the poems. There is a considerable stock of poems common to both A and Ba. They are either ascribed to early poets such as Ferchertne and Fintan, or to Eochu ua Floinn ^) On the very interesting problem of these genealogies see § 13. ON LßliOK GABALA. 115 who died in 1003 i). Of the latter we have A clioemu cldir Cuind (Parth.), Heriu co n-uaill co n-idnaih, Estid ws ecna aihind (T. D. D.), Toisig na loingse tar ler-) (Meic Miled), and Ugaine uallach amra (continuation on Irish kings). All these poems are found in A, and in S as well, except Etsid ccs ecna which does not occur in A ; but we know that the scribe had it before him. for he saw his omission, and wrote in the margin of fol. 18 a: hie debet esse Etsid, &c. So X cannot have been wiitten before the time of Eochu ua Floinn, that is before the second half of the 10*^^ century. But in LG there are poems b}' later poets too. S has a poem Doluid Milid asin Sceitliia hj Cennfielad (f 1048), LL has one b^' Flann Mainistrech (f 1056 : Eistid a eolcJm gan on), and a few by Gilla Coemain (f 1072: Gaedil Glas otdd Gaedil, Tigernmas mac Ollamhan aird, and Eriu ard mis na rig). So already in the second half of the IV^^ century A and Ba must have existed as separate versions. The conclusion is that X was composed between 950 and 1050. which takes us back more than a century before our earliest MS. And if we assume — what seems highly probable, owing to the large number of his poems — that Eochu ua Floinn was himself the author of X, the date of this MS. could be approximated even more closely, and placed between 950 and 1003. We are now in a position to draw up a pedigree of the MSS. belonging to the versions A and B. It is as follows: X Sa 0 III I I Ra Lee la s Sb LL III I Kb Lee lb sb(?) F On the left are the MSS. belonging to group Ba, on the right those of groups A and Bb. A secondary influence has been ex- ercised on s hy some MS. of the group to the right, and by some ') I am not able to identify Tanaide who composed Tuntha Dc Danann fo diamair. This poem occurs in both versions. -) Tlie prose of LL ascribes this poem to Fh^nn Maini-strecb, but in the poem Eo(?h\i na Floinn is mentioned as tlie anthor. 116 A. a. VAN HAMEL, MS. of the other group on F. Two groups of MSS. still remain to be dealt with, C and D. These have a quite different cha- racter from the others, being typical compilations. This will be manifest from the following surve}'. § 6. The version C. C is represented by two MSS. : LB and Lee IL It is gener- ally assumed that LB was written about 1391, and Lee II after 1416. So LB could not have been taken from Lee II. The two texts are practically identical, as the mixing together of the versions Ba and A has been accomplished in both in exactly the same way. The only natural conclusion seems to be that either Lee II is a transcript of LB or that both have a common ancestor. Lee II presents a better text than LB, being less corrupt, especially in the poems, and written in an older ortho- graphy. This would point to an older lost MS. But this is not the only possible solution, and as it is advisable not to postulate more lost MSS. than are strictly necessary, I prefer another one. There is sufficient proof that Lee II also knew S, for it contains portions of S that are missing in LB. So, while following LB closely in its composition and arrangement, Lee II may have con- sulted S at the same time, and taken over in many cases its older orthography and its better readings. In this way can be accounted for the many survivals of 13^'' century orthography in a MS. even later than LB. Moreover, Lee II also uses other sources than S and LB, as will appear from a survey of the contents of the two texts. a) Preface. In LB a leaf is missing, which may have con- tained everything we find in Lee II. But in any case the section on biblical history is shorter in Lee 11 than in LB. b) Introduction on the Goidels. The two texts are identical ; only Lee II inserts a short passage on the name Fenius Farrsaig. c) Ceamir. There is but one difference: the names of Cesair's companions given by LB in the poem Cam roind rorandsaniar occur also in the prose in Lee TI. ON LEBOK GAliÁLA. 117 (1) FatlhíAon. Here the influence of Sa (or some other text of Ba) ma}* be traced in Lee II: the account of Partholon's wanderings cannot have been taken from LB. but must liave been corrected after S. For the rest Lee II has a remarkable tale which is found now-here else (except in the younger version D) of Partholon's wife Delgnat and his servant Toba, whose misconduct caused the cét-ct Erend. e) Nemed. Although this section is practically the same in Lee II and in LB, Lee II shows clearly traces of different sources too. For here we find not only tw^o short sj'nchronisms added, different from those in LB and S, but also a tract on the origin of the name Fir Bolg, and another un the real nature of the Tuatha De Danann. In these latter tracts a great many opinions are discussed, which may be partly the results of the scribe's own reflections. One unknown authority, however, is mentioned at the end, namely, the •Libar de Subternis'. This book has not yet been identified. f) Fir Bolg. Lee II differs from LB only by the insertion of the poem Bene mo fresnéis a mac by Colum Cille, Avhich also occurs in A and Bb. No final synchronism. g) T'Utdha Be Banann. Lee II adds a few particulai'S of the arrival of the Tuatha De Danann, and the reasons why they burnt their shii)s on landing. The synchronism at the end is made up from the synchronisms belonging to Nemed, Fir Bolg and Tuatha De Danann in LB and S. For the rest the two MSS. are identical. li) Ileic Miled. On the whole Lee II = LB, but the younger MS. gives a much more detailed list of the descendants of Erimon and Eber. So far the relation of LB and Lee II has been illustrated. Lee II follows LB closely, corrects from S, and adds from unknown sources. It remains to investigate the sources from which LB, the older of the two, was compiled. A glance at the text will convince us that LB made use of a text of all the versions we have distinguished until now, that is to say of A, Ba and Bb. 118 A. G. VAX IIAMEL. And as LB must have had a copy ui the twu B- texts coiitaiiimg- the complete poems, the MSS, used must have been: LL, Sa and Sb. Eacli of these contains passages or traits that are un- known to the others, and they are found in LB. From LL have been taken the prose list of the seventy- two languages, the parting words of Noah to Cesair, the allusion to the story of Tuan mac Cairill, the circumstantial narrative of the battle at Conang's Tower, and many details of the second battle of Mag Tuired. To Sb the scribe of LB was indebted for the curious tract on the division of the Gaelic language and its names in the four chief tongues of the world, as well as for the names of the 'mogaid na mogad' who came over with Mil. Sa was LB's authority for the story of Xél's intercourse with the Jews, and the Goidels' second visit to Eg3'pt, for the coming of Capa to Ireland, for the tale of Cesair and the angel, for Partholon's wanderings and his battle with the Fomoraig, for the adventures of the Fir Bolg after the first battle of Mag Tuired, and those of the Tuatha De Danann before they reached Ireland; the alleged descent of all the invaders from Rifath Scot can only be founded upon Sa. The almost endless catalogue of the Tuatha De Danann is a compilation from the three older versions, and of the two genealogies given of Partliolon one is based on Sa and one on LL. These instances will suffice to show that LB did not neglect the work of his predecessors. Thus version C represents a new stage in the development of our text. The period of filiation has passed, that of comiiilation has come. And, all the older MSS. being ready at hand, none of them was left out of account. This development has gone still farther in Lee II, where even sources not belonging to the regular tradition of LG have left their trace. This, however, has also happened, though in a lesser degree, in LB. LB has a ' few notes taken from Cin Dromma Snechta, cf. Professor Thurn- eysen's paper quoted on p. 101. One of these, as has been pointed out, Avas already known to the scribe of Sa. Another, that on Banba's occupation of Ireland before the Deluge, also occurs in F. The third (luotation from the same book, that of the colloquy of the Meic Miled with Banba and Eriu, does not occur anywhere else: but F has a gap in this section, and it may have been tiiere. Yet there is at least one decisive proof that the redactor of LB also consulted the Book of Druim ON LEBOR GABILA. 119 Siifcclita liimisel)'. In the Invasiun of Partholon, LB lias a short passage on tlie division (f Ireland by Partholon's sons. It also occurs in Sa, from which it may have been taken. But in a marginal note in LB we are told that the passage is based on the Lebor Dromma Snechta. F omits it, though the whole Gabáil Partholoin is preserved in that MS. There is but one possible conclusion: tlie redactor of LB had the famous old book before him. Of all the references to Cin Dromma Snechta in the Lebor Gabála text of LB this marginal note is the only one that proves this fact conclusively. Therefore it deserves a place in the list of instances given by Professor Thurneysen. The matter is even more significant: it shows us that the redactor of LB intended to do more than give merely a somewhat fuller copy of LG, his desire being evidently to bring together all the exist- ing traditions, even those that had not 3'et been embodied in a coherent text. In this respect he continued in the direction of his predecessors, for. as will appear in chapter II, S was put together upon the same principle. Lee II elaborated it even more by adopting passages from numerous other sources. And it is this general character, uniting LB and Lee II, which justifies us in treating these two texts as belonging to one version. hoAvever considerable the additional matter of Lee II may be. § 7. The version D. O'Clery's version is principally included here for sake of completeness, rather than for its own interest. It was compiled by Cucogry 0"Clery from earlier texts b}^ omitting a great many details that seemed inconsistent with the rest of the story, and \)y making the order and the contents uniform. O'Clery's characteristic way of working will appear from the short account of D given in § 14. The introduction on the oldest Goidels, Fénius, Nél, &c. is transferred from the beginning of the whole work to the end of the Tuatha De Danann section. The adventures of the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danann after the battle of Conaing's Tower are no longer given as an appendix to the Invasion of Nemed, their common ancestor, but as introductions to the two subseiiuent invasions. And there are more instances of arbitrary changes introduced by O'Clery. This, howevei-, need not prevent us from 120 A. a. VAN IIAMEL, tracing the older versiuiis lie consulted, A few illustrations will disclose his authorities. According to D Partliolon came to Ireland ona atharda .?'. SiceU Greic. C has asin Megind .?. asin Greg Sceitlieagda, where- as S says asin Midi Greic. The influence of some text belonging to the Ba group is evident here. This is also the case, when in the Invasion of Xemed D mentions the names of Xemed's daughters-in-law. or when Ave are told that Macha died on the 12^h day after her arrival in Ireland; for C does not know^ the names of these women, and according to the same version Macha's death took place in the 12*^'' year. Still these un- mistakable traces of Ba are not very numerous, and on the whole the text is that of C, allowance being made for O'Clerj-'s introducing his own style in many episodes. Of the two MSS, constituting version C O'Clery apparently follows Lee II and not LB, for he has all the characteristics of Lee II and none of LB's. The account of Partholon's wanderings is that of Lee II, and the tale of Delgnad (Elgnad) and Toba occurs only in Lee TI and D. The explanation of the names of tlie Fir Bolg, Fir Domnann and Galeoin — especially the last named — can only have been taken fi'om Lee II, D tells us the Tuatha De Danann came from the innsi tuaiscertacha na Grecci, just as Lee II makes them begin theii" w'anderiugs «5« Grec Sceitheacda: no other ]\IS. mentions them in connection with Greece. All these salient points prove that Lee II was the real source of D, though there is clear evidence of O'Clery's having consulted some version of B also. This is only natural, for if he worked at Lee II, Lee I must have been also in his hands. O'Clery had no need to look for a second MS., for the Book of Lecan provided two different versions, and these are the very same versions of whose influence there are traces in D. Nothing points to his having knowm A or F. The text of the poems is quite untrustworthy as it abounds with conjectures by O'Clery himself; what makes these poems inter- esting are the numerous glosses he adds, although they are often merely attempts to elucidate corrupt readings. For the understanding of the structure of LG, D has no value wliatever. Its immediate exemplar, Lee, is one of the most valuable of our MSS.: in Lee I it contains the oldest version of LG attainable in a fixed and uncorrupted form, while in Lee II it shows the latest development of tlie story, where all the scattered ON LEBOK GABÁI.A. 121 traditions extant have found a place. In D, Ü"Clcry has endeavoured to bring these incongruous traditions into harmon}- with one an- other. And this could not he eifected without violating- the text. The uniforming process it underwent, rendered many departures from the traditional LG inevitable. They can all be accounted for from the standpoint of O'Clery's preconceived design. Therefore a thorough study of this version would be of more significance for the understanding of the man and his work than for the present investigation. II. The lutrodiictioii on the Goidels and the Preface. § 8. The tradition of A and Ba. The most important differences between the two oldest ver- sions present themselves in the Introduction ; therefore this portion of LG will more than any other furnish a clue to the solution of problems concerning the growth and evolution of the saga. In order to understand fully the signification of these differences, we must have before us a separate survey of the two traditions. Leaving alone the biblical and genealogical preface for a moment, we have in A first an account of Fénius Farsaich '), king of Scythia and his two sons, Xél and Noenual. Fénius leaves his kingdom to Noenual, while he himself goes to Asia in order to assist at the building of the Tower of Babel; there Xél is born. Nél comes to Egypt, where he begets a son, Goidel Glas, who forms the Gaelic tongue out of the seventy-two languages. The names of all the languages are given. Sru and Eber Scot, Goidel's descendants, leave Egj-pt for Scythia. Eber Scot seizes the kingdom, but is afterwards killed by Noenual's son Xoemius, and from this time on the descendants of Xél and Noenual alter- nately usurp the kingdom of Scythia but are always killed by their rivals. At last Refloir. a descendant of Noenual. becomes ') We üud Farsaich, Farsaig aud Farsaid. I pi'efer the first foriu. Farsaid = old, can only be a late etymology, for the Old Irish form of this word is ars^aid. The Latiu preface of Rb has Fenins Farmieus, which must couvey the real meauiug of the name. Farisaeus is, indeed, an excellent epithet for the man who knew all languages. On Farsaid = Phnrisec see Atkinson. Passions and Homilies, p. 953. 122 A. G. VAN HA MEL, king of Scythia. and expels the Güidels. Aíter many wauderiugs they reach Sliab Rife, under Agnomen and Laimfind, where theii- drui, Caicher, prophesies that one day their progeny will possess Ireland. They remain in the Maeotic marshes until one of Láimfind's descendants, Brath macDeatha, leads them to Spain. Here they fight three battles, 'for Toiseuu, for Bachra, for Long- barda'. Great numbers of them die from the plague. Bregon, Erath's son, erects the city of Brigantia and a high tower in it, from which Ireland was seen for the first time by Ith. According to Ba, Fénius Farsaich and his school wander fi'om Scythia to the Tower of Babel, after it had been built by Rifath Scot and others. There they learn the various languages. On account of liis learning Nél is invited to Egypt by Pharaoh Cincris, who gives him his daughter Scota in marriage. Nél makes friend with Aaron, the leader of the Israelites, especially when his young son (Toidel Glas is saved by Aaron from a snake's bite. After Cincris has been drowned in the Red Sea the Goidels are banished, because of their fi'iendship with the Jews. Under Esru and p]ber Scot they reach Scythia. Here they live in constant struggles with the other royal race, until MiU) mac Bile kills Refeloir. Mil is expelled, and goes with Ms people to Egypt. They are well received by Pharaoh Xectinebus, and ]\Iil is married to his daughter Scota. The Goidels learn the arts in Egj-pt. Mil is a contemporary of Alexander the Great, who invades Xectine- bus" country, founds the city of Alexandria, and turns out the king. Mil and his people fly, and after endless troubles they land in Spain. There are not three but fifty- four battles now, for Fresseno 7 for Lonybardoib 7 Bachraih 7 rogahsat Espain ar d(jiu 7 rocumtaiged catJiir and la Breogund mac Bratha .i. Brigancia ainm na cathrach 7 tor for a h-inchaih 7 is on tor sin atcessa Eriu hi fescur gaimrid. Atascondairc Ith mac Bregoin. The principal differences between the two texts may be summed up thus: 1. In Ba, Féuius does not build the Tower of Babel himself, but it has been built before this time. This is a con- sequence of the different genealogies of Fénius given by A and Ba. See § 13. 1) I use the earliest form of the name, thoxigh S and E always have Miled; the oldest genealogical poems have Mil. ox I.EBOR GABÁLA. 123 2. The adventures of ilie Guidels in E^^jpt are related much more circumstantially in Ba. 3. The feuds of the two royal races of Scythia are more detailed in A. •4. Ba has a second visit to Egypt, of which there is no mention in A. 5. In A the Goidels are led out of Scythia by Agnomen and Láimfind. and in Spain by Brath; in Ba both these acts are performed by Mil. 6. A has three. Ba fifty -four, battles in Spain. In order to trace what is old in these traditions, we must now examine the scattered remnants of the saga that have come down to us fi'om an earliei- period than any version of LG. Among these there are three whose date may be approximately fixed; viz., the account in Xennius' Historia Brittonum (HB), Máilmuru Othna"s poem Canam hunadas na nGaedel (MO), and a note to Fiace's Hymn (Thes. Pal. II p. 316). § 9. The earliest vestiges of the story. It may be useful to reprint the passage from HB (sc. § 16) once more in extenso. St qiiis scire volnerit quando vcl quo tempore fuit inlidb Hob ills et descrta Hihernia, sic mihi pcritissimi Scottorum nunciaverimt. Quando vcncrunt per Marc Ituhruiit filii Israel, Aegyptii venerunt et sceuti sunt eos et demersi sunt, ut in Lege dicitur. Erat vir nohilis de Scythia cum magna familla apud Aegyptios, et expídsus est a regno suo, et ihi erat quando Aegyptii mersi sunt, et non perrexit ad sequendum populum Bei. Uli autem, qui super faerant , inierunt consilium ut expellerent ilium, ne regnum illorum ohsideret et occuparet, quia fratres illorum demersi erant in Itubrum Mare, et expulsus est. At ille per quadraginta et duos annas amhulavit pier Afjricam; et venerunt ad Aras Fhilistinorum per lacum Salinarum et venerunt inter liusicadam et mantes Azariae et venerunt per flumen Malvam, et transierunt per maritima ad Columnas HercuUs, et navigaverunt Tyrrenwn Mare, et pervenerunt ad Hispaniam usque et ihi halita- verunt per nmltos annas et creverunt et multiplicati sunt niniis, et gens illorum multiplicata est nimis. Et postea venerunt ad 124 A. G. VAN HAMEL. Hiberniam i)Ost male et duos annos postquam mersi sunt Aegypt'd in Faibrum Mare, ct ad regiones Barieta in tempore quo regnabat Brutus apud Bomanos. &c. The other early allusion to LG. in a note to vs. 35 of Fiacc's Hymn (Fatraic pridchais do Scottaib) is as follows: Do Scottaib 0 Scotta ingen Foraind rig Egipt nominantur, ocus is asso roásdetar (leg. rodssatar) :i. Nél mac Goedil Glais meic Feniusa Farsaid, fer foglama he, uoluit scire lingas. Venit a Scithis ad Campnim Sennar iibi sunt diuisce lingce; ^ ita uenit A. cum Jxx. duobus tdris, y tnissit eos sub regiones mundi ut disce- rent lingas; unum ad unam misit, et postea uenerunt ad cum cum peritia omnium lingarum. y habitaidt in Campo Sennar y docxdt ibi lingas. Ft auditdt Farao re:c Fgipti ilium studiosum esse, et uocauit eum ad se ut doceret Egiptios circa lingas 7 dedit ei filiam suam y lionorem maximum y ab ilia Scotti nominati sunt. Góidil imtnorro do rad dib 0 GoediulGlas, mac Feniusa FarrsaidxmtreNiuil. The above two Latin accounts belong- to quite diííerent periods. That of Xennius, whether it already existed in the first recension of HB or did not come in until the second stage, takes us back at least to the end of the 8^'' century. The note to Fiacc's Hymn, on the other hand, only occurs in one of the MSS. of that hymn, and was written, at the earliest, towards the end of the 11^'' century; so it is very little older than LL, and later even than X. The more remarkable is the fact that it represent.s a difierent tradition. P'or here Xél is not GoideFs father, but his .sun; and it was Xél, not Fénius, who taught the languages in the plain of Sennar. So even at this late period there was no fixed tradition concerning the three eponymous ancestors of the Goidels. This will prove an important conclusion in estimating the general character of LG, but for the earlier history of the text it has no significance. Xext in age to Xennius is Máilmuru Othna. As this poet died in 887, iiis poem must be placed in the 9^^ century. In any case it is later than HB. It contains the following tra- dition of LG. The Goidels descend from Jafeth mac Xoe. When Xembrúth has built the Tower of Babel, Fénius leaves Scythia and goes to the tower, where he teaches all the languages. There his son Xél is born. Pharaoh sends for him. and gives him his daughter Scota. Their son is Gaedel Glas. The Goidels do not support Pharaoh against the Israelites, and, fearing the vengeance ON LEROR GABÁLA. 125 of tlie Egyptians, tliev take fliglit in the king's sliips. Tlie^' Avancier through India, Asia, Scj'thia, the Caspian Sea, the island Coronis, Sliab Riffl, Golgatha!), where they remain two hundred j'ears, Creta, and Sicilj' to Spain. Bregond conciuers Spain, and founds the city of Brigantia. There he erects the tower, and from its summit Ireland is discovered by Ith. Tlien the story of the Meic Miled follows. § 10. The earliest evolution of the stor}'. We shall now compare HB and MO with A and Ba, with special reference to the points of difference between the two latter MSS. enumerated on p. 122 f. ; for such a comparison will enable us to make out which of the two has least diverged from the original version. 1. HB does not mention the Tower of Babel at all. MO agrees with Ba: Xembrúth builds the tower, and Fenius visits it from Scythia. 2. Both HB and MO relate some of the details concerning the stay in Egypt. HB relates that the noble Scythian in Egypt non perrexit ad sequendum populiim Dei, and that the Egyptians turned him out of the kingdom for fear that he should occupy it himself. In the same way MO tells us that the Goidels did not take arms against the Israelites. A has none of these particulars, and Ba dwells with preference on the friendship between the Goidels and Israelites, and also mentions that Esru and Eber Scot Avere expelled by the Egyptians. 3. The struggles between the two royal races in Scythia, which are told so much more circumstantially in A than in Ba, are not even mentioned in HB and MO. 4. The second visit to Egypt, being known only to Ba, does not figure either in HB or MO. 5. Neither HB nor MO give the names of the leaders of the expedition to Spain. G. The two earliest sources do not speak of the battles in Spain. ') A uiarvellous corniptiim of the Gaethlaig Maeotecdal 126 A. G. VAN HAMEL. Nos. 1 — 3 prove that Ba preserves old traditions which were lost in A, but at the same time no. 4 shows an inclination on the part of Ba to add to the original text. Still it will not he difficult, following HB and MO, to separate from the hody of LG the later additions, and this done, we possess in Ba a much more perfect text than A. For not only has A left out several important episodes, but the text has been unreasonably altered in this version : for instance, it was an unnecessary innovation of A to make Fénius build the Tower of Babel himself. Consequently the superiority of Ba is now established once for all. A careful study of the succeeding accounts of HB, MO and Ba makes it possible to trace the growth of the earliest traditions on the Goidels throughout the 9*^^ and 10^'^ centuries. 'J'he original story, existirg in 800 A. D., so far as we can judge from HB, was this : A noble Scythian, called Miles Hispaniae or Mil, was living in Egypt at the time of Moses. He was expelled by the Egyptians, and fled by the shortest route, through Africa, to Spain. There his descendants increased in number, until they came over to Ireland. This happened because they had discovered Ireland from the tower at Brigantiai). The additions which were introduced gradually, may be classified thus: 0"' century. The Scythian chieftain 2) becomes Fenius Far- saich, a teacher of the seventy- two languages in the plain of Shinar, or rather his son Nél Avho visits Egypt in order to propagate linguistic knowledge in that country, and is married there to Pharaoh's daughter Scota. She gives birth to a son, Goedel Glas (MO). After being expelled they wander through India, Asia and Scythia, and even remain for two hundred years in the Maeotic marshes (MO). Their adventui'es in Spain are related with more details, for Mil has now to fight for the possession of the country. 10^'' century. The next stage is X, the common source of A and Ba. Here a biblical preface is prefixed, because of the opening story of the Tower of Babel. — Elaborate 'J That this is an original trait of LG may be inferred from the occnr- rence of Brt'gond in a Ttl' century genealogy, see § 13. -) On the oUlest genealogical traditions relating to this person see § 13. ON LEHOU GARÁLA. 127 genealogies are added i). see § 13. The sta}' in Egypt is elucidated b}' a circumstantial relation of the Goedels' connections with the Israelites. But the most important innovation is introduced in the passage relating their journey from Egypt to Spain. HB does |not mention at all the Goidels" passing through Scythia, in MO this country figures as one of the places they Aásit on their way to the West, but of a prolonged stay there is no mention. In X this hurried passage through had 'developed into a settling for many generations. For in Sa we find the following account, which is not even so elaborate as that of LL. Olid ahnsir shi (sc. the coming of Eber Scot to Scj'thia) CO li- ahnsir Befeloir meic Nema y 3Iiled mac Bile A. Galum a ainnt: mor do cathaih y do chongalaib 7 do cJioicthih y do fmgalaib roimirset etorru frissin re sin corrogon Miled mac Bile Befelair mac Nema .xii. hliadna ar noe ceiaih rohui in cosnum sin. Dolnid Miled for longais iar sain .iiii. longa doih y .v. lanamna dec y amas in each luing dih. As has been said, LL goes even farther and gives the names of the kings of the two races who killed each other successively; perhaps these names were already known in X and for some reason omitted in Sa. When the Goidels are banished from Scythia they have to wander once more over many seas and lands, until they reach Spain at last. But in this last section of their adventures A and Ba diverge so much from each other that it would be impossible to establish the original tradition of X without first examin- ing the two texts separatel}'. § 11. Version A (11^^^ or early 12^1^ century). In the first place A expands the biblical preface by a di- gression on the tribes of Europe and Asia and their lineage. In Ba this preface begins with the words In iirindcipio fecid dens ctlnm et terram. JJorigline dia neam y talmain ar fus, (tc. Then ') The genealogies themselves are, of course, older, but there is no reason tliat tlipy should have been eiuboclied in LG before the IC'' oentnry. 128 A. G. VAN HAMEL. follows an account of the creation, of Lucifer, of tlie first sin. and of Noah and his sous, ending in a short poem. After this Ba goes on: Cmn tra rogah side inn Affraicc y deisscertleth na liAissia. Sem for medon Aissia o srutli Eofrait co tracld airtkir in hethad. Is lafeih tra tuaiscerileth na liAissia 7 lucM na liEorpa uile y dia clainn duinde innar nGaidelaib. The storj' of Fénius, Nél and Goidel follows immediatelj'. A has a much longer passage instead, which I quote from a text of Bb (viz. Lee I), practically identical with that of A, and where it has been better preserved: 0 tri maccaib Noe tra roUnait tri randa an tulman A. Eorpa y Africa 7 Aissia. Sem mac Nae tra rogah i nAisia 7 .vii. cenela .XX. uad innte. Cam i nAffraic 7 .xxx. genela uad. lafetli i nEoraip 7 tuaiscert Aissia. Coic genela dec uad inntih, de qitihus Jioc cairmen: Sent rogah in Asia n-ait, Cam cona clainn in Afraic lafeth nasal is a meic, it e roirehsat Eoraip. Tricha chenel, comol ngle, cinset 0 Cam mac Noe, A odd fichct uad 0 Sem, a coic dec ó lafeth. 0 lafeth dano int airthertuaiscert, Scithecdai 7 Armendai 7 lucht na hAisia Bice 7 ergahala 7 ciniuda na hEorpa uili co lucht na n-innsi atait fria anes 7 atiiaith 7 aniar otha Slcbi Ripe alaaid CO traig hAespaine. Ocht meic lafeih, 7 3Iagoch, ha se ant ocht- mad. Da mac dano la, Magoc :i Baad 7 Ihad. 0 Ibad iarum rig Boman. Mac dano la Baad Fenius larsaich 0 fuil Scithecdai 7 is dia sil Gaidil. 0 Ibad Frainc 7 Bomain 7 Saxain 7 Bretain 7 Albanda. 0 Magoch mac lafeth na tuatha rogabsat Erinn ria nGaidilaib. Partolon mac Soera mic Sru mic Esru mic Bramin mic Fathecht mic Baaid mic Magoicli mic lafeth mic Noe. Nemed mac Agnomain mic Phaim mic Tait mic Sera mic Zru 7 clanna Nemid .i. Gaileoin 7 Fir Bole 7 Fir Domnann. De quihiis hoc carmen cZicitur Finntan. Magoch mac an lafeth ataseinnte ') a thlann dib Partolon Banba roba chalma a bann. Ba dib Nemid noethech mac Agnomain oen, Gann dih, Gcenann Sengann, Slaine soer. Clanna Elatha imdha \ba dih^ Br es cen hreic mac Elathain felgaith mic Delbceth mic Neit, ') Sic. at aichi)Uc R, ata chili F. ON LEBOR GABÁT.A. , 129 3Iic Inndiii mic Alldui, Alldui ha mac Tait mic Tabuirnn mic Ceno mic Baaid mic Ibuith aitt. BetliacJi ha mac larhoncol mic JSfemid hui Paim PaitH mac Tait mic Sera Zru mac Ezru Briaim hain [sic]. Briamain ha mac Fateclit mic 3Iagoch, mor hlad, rohassa riana n-aimsir co taihsin rUi magJi. M. Atherat araile comhad Baad mac Ihaid meic Goimeir meic lafeth et is uad Gaidil y fir na Scithia y mac do Fen/us Farsaich. Here we find the first significant interpolation in A. Though the tendency of A as a rule is rather to abridge the text as it existed in X, it sometimes borrows illustrations from other sources. and inserts them in extenso in the text. The reason of the present interpolation is obvious. As appears from Ba, a connection had already been established in X between the biblical preface and the history of the Goidels through the statement that the Irish were descended from Jafeth mac Xoe (see the sentence quoted on p. 128), the genealogies serving also for the same purpose; and even in MO Jafeth had been indicated as the ancestor of the Goidels. So it was but natural for A to make a digression on this subject, if there existed a special Irisli work dealing with it. In the Irish Liber Sex Aetatum (LS A), in the Secunda Aetas, there is a tract on the descent of the 'Clanna lafeth', Avhich w^e possess in a very old recension (Lebor na hUidre, fol. 1), al- though Eawl. B. 502, fol. 69 (facs.) contains a better text i). It runs thus: Da mac Magog mic lafeth mic Not .?'. Baatli y Ihath. Baatli mac do side Fenius Farsald a quo sunt ScitJu et Gothi .i. Fenius mac Baatli mic Magog mic lafetJi mic Noi yrl. Ibad dano in mac ailc do Magog, mac do side Elonius no Alaniiis. Tri meic aid side A. Armon, Negiia, liisicon. Coic meic ic Armon :i. Gothus, Uolegothus , Cehidiis, Burgandus, Longuhardns. Negua dano .Hi. meic les .i. Uandalus, Saxus, Bogardus. Hisicon dano .iiii. meic aice .i. Francus, Bomanus, AJhanus ota ind Alhain airtherach isind Asia Mor, Britus o rater Inis Bretan. Is andsin rorran- naid in domun i tri rannaih .i. Eoraip, Afraic, Asia .i. Sem i uAsia, Cam i n Afraic, la fed i nEoraip. y is v céthfher de sil lafeth tánic i nEoraip .i. Alanius mac Ihath mic Magog mic 1) According to LU there are 44 tribes claimiug- tlieir descent from Cam, while Rawl. B. 502 has 27, like LG. Zeitschrift f. celt. IMiilologie X. 9 130 A. G. VAN HAMEL. lafetli mic Noi. Is amlaicl tdnic Alan'ms y a tri meic las A. Armon 7 Negiia y Hisicon conid i fns rochlannaigset na maccn atclmadamar. Saxus mac Negua mic Alanii mic Ibath mic Magog mic lafeth mic Not, is uad atat Saxain. laban dano mac lafetJi mic Koe .iiii. meic aca side .i. Elisa, Tarsis, Cethrim, Bodanim. Tarsis is uad 7 Cilecdai. Cethrim is uad Cethri, tiadih side ainm- nigther catJiir na Ciprecda .i. Citheum. Bodanim dano uad side Bodii. Is uadib sidi rofodlait inse Mara Tirritce frisin abhertar Muir Torren cona cenelaih écsamlaib y cona mberlaib. Is iat sain .XV. primchenela clainni la fed cona fochenelaib roselbsat feranna imda isin nAsia 0 Sleib Imai 7 0 Sleib Tuir co sriith Tanai 7 connici in Scithia 7 roshelbsat inn Eortiip idi connici inn ocian muridi ftiineta, insi Bretan 7 inn Espain co h-nilinn talman^). Tlie whole interpolation in A. except the poem, must have been derived from LSA doAvn to the words 0 Magoch mac lafeth na tuatha rogabsat Erinn ria nGaidilaib. It is nothing but an abridgment of the above passage in LSA. It begins with the limits of Jafeth's race, given at the end of the tract in LSA. Here LL mentions the Armenians as belonging to the 'clanna lafeth', a name not occurring in LSA. But the SUab Imai of Rawl. B. 502, or rather SUab Imari as it is called in LU stands for Armenia: Cinel fd i Sleib Armenia .i. Hibiri a slonnud, says a separate tract in Ba. For the rest our interpolation down to the sentence quoted is identical with LSA, but all that does not concern the Goidels is omitted. What follows then was added by the scribe himself on his o\mi initiative : it Avas necessary for him to give a survey of the invaders' genealogies, as he had to make them conform to the preceding interpolation. See § 13. It may be inferred from the above that although the author of LSA was no doubt acquainted with the saga of LG (he mentions 'Fenius Farsaid'), there was no connection whatever established between the two works, until the preface of A was amplified by materials from LSA. The accounts of the Invasions of Ireland in HB, ]VtO and Ba bear no ti-ace of having been influenced by LSA. So Zimmer was certainly wrong in supposing that 'die Abhandlung über die Sex aetates mundi und der Lebor Gabala eng zusammengehören, erstere gewissermafsen als allgemeine ') LU has in Espain ulide. The variant from Raw). B. shows the real meaning of the nsnal epithet for Spain in Irish poetrj-. ON LEBOIi GABÁLA. 131 Einleitung galt' (Nenn. Vind., p. 226). He consulted only LL and LB, tlie two principal representatives of the versions interpolated from LS A, which never until the redaction of A formed a part of LG. In addition to the interpolation on the descendants of Jafeth from LS A. there is another section in A that does not appear to have belonged to the original LG. there being no trace of it either in MO or Ba. It is the list of the seventy -two languages, out of which Goidel Glas formed the Gaelic language. There is nothing unnatural in its having been introduced into LG after Fenius and Nél had become teachers on the plain of Shinar and in Egypt. There undoubtedly existed lists of these languages in a metrical form at a ^ery early period. Consequently the poem on them in LG is likely older than the prose-paraphrase, given in LL ; besides, Lee lb and Eb have only the poem. I give it here from Lee lb, Avhich seems to be the better text. Berla in domain decJiaid lib: Betliin, Scethin, Scill, ScartJiain, Goith, Grec, Goill, Germain co ngrain, Poimp, Frigia, Dal- [mait, Bardain, Paimpil, Morinn, Lignirn lir, Ogu, Creit, Coirsic, Cipir, Tesail, Caspia, Armen ain, Beit, Sicil, Sarait, Sardain, Belgait, Boet, Britain himi, JEspania, Romain, Bugind, Huminn, Innia, Araih oir, Magoic, Moesic, 3Iaicidoin. Parthia, Calldia, Siria, Sax, Acliain, Achait, Alban cass, Ehra, Ardain, Galait glain, Troia, Tesalia co laich, Moessia, Media, Fairne, Frainc, Grinni, Laicdemoin^ Long- [baird, Tracia, Numia, Achdid, Eisil eirc, Uircain aird, EtJioip, Egipt. Acsain lin mberla cen meirg as roteip Goedel Gaidilc, Aichnid do ara n-ergna an aicme na n-ilberla. Berla. In this form the poem is certainly corrupt. Some of the names are unintelligible, others are given tAvice over (1. 4 Tesail — 1. 8 Tesalia, 1. 6 Moesic — 1. 9 Moessia). 1. 10 is too long owing to the repetition of Acliaid (= Achait 1. 7), and, moreover, there are not 72 names. Still it is a most interesting fragment of Irish literature, as the list of languages (or names of places, as they mostly are) diverges considerably from the various lists which have come down to us from earlier writers. 9* 132 A. G. VAN HAMEL, all of them modelled on the hat J laiuíjíoi/ó-: Isid. Etym.IX, Ex- ceriüa latina Barhari, Liber Generationis (MGH Auct. Ant. IX), Several oriental nations have been snpplanted bj' Teutonic ones, what makes it probable that the same Frankish list of nations Avas used in the composition of the poem that is also embodied in LSA (see Zimmer, Nenn, Vind., p. 231), Fortunately, however, we possess this poem in a much older form. In his 'Über die älteste irische Dichtung' (Kgl. Preufs. Akademie d. Wiss., Berlin 1913, pp. 26 and 51) Professor Kuno Meyer includes two poems in rhythmical alliterative form, In Fursimdud aile Ladcinn and Luccretli mocu Chiara .cc, Avith genealogies of the kings Enna Cennselach and Cu-cen-Mathair backto Jafeth. The couplets 41 — 50, or 23 — 31, contain an alliterating list of 64 or 56 languages, and Professor Meyer suggests that one or two couplets may have been omitted. It cannot be a mere accident that this list also begins: Bethin, Scithin, Scuit, Scill, Scarthaig (Scarthin), Greic, Gothia {Giiitli), Gaul. Of course, the scribe who modernised the form of this poem, and made it conform to the rules of syllabic poetrj»^, was obliged sometimes to upset the order of the names, but wherever possible he left it as it was. So in both versions Dahnait and Dardain, Croit and Coirsic, Atliain and Achait are brought together. This shows that the alliterating list, which is placed by Professor Meyer in the first half of the 7*^*' century, was the source of the poem we find in A and Bb, There are slight differences between the two, and in each are found names unknown to the other, but neither of the two is free from corruptions or even complete. AVe can even make out which of the two alliterating poems is nearest to the later S3'llabic one. Ladcenn has Scarthaig, Gothia, Point, Nonihithi, Bethain, where Luccretli has Scarthin, Giiith, Poimp, Numin, Boet; thus the poem in LG agrees with the latter. A conclusive proof that this alliterating list really was the source, is furnished by the words ijrinne fairne, trans- lated by Professor Meyer as "ein Bündel von einem Volk, d. h. eine Völkergemeinschaft': the redactor of A has misunderstood them, taking them for names of nations, and separated them accordingly. ON LEBOR GABALA. 133 So far tlie additions in A. For the rest this version is identical with that of MO : the poem Canam hunadas na nGaedel is based on exacth' tlie same recension of LG as A. As A pre- serves more details than MO, it is impossible that this poem could be the only source of A: a prose version underlies both. Yet A kneAV the poem, for it quotes two lines from it: Fctii 0 Feniiis asamhertar, Gaedil ó Gosdiiil Glas garfa, du cen dochta, Scuitt 0 Scotia. This quotation was not introduced into A until a very late period, that is to say, by the scribe of LL, for Bb, the text most closely akin to A. has not g-ot it. It will be our present task to examine Ba in the same way, and to establish its relation also with X. The problem that will most claim our attention is this: did Ba. too. add some new matter to the text, or leave it just as it was before? As to Bb. this version differs in no way from A save for one very curious addition. In Bb the intercalation of a poem on the 72 languages has caused another interpolation on the division of the Gaelic language and its names. It is a tract not found elsewhere; and it is difficult to make out the exact meaning. I give the text from Rb with variants from Lee lb : Ceithri ranna dano ac lucid an eohisa fovsin nGoidilc sc rotcip Goidil 7 ceithri anmann fovaib. Sench'ds mor y hretha nemed, ai Cermna y na cane in cethrumad ^) , y canoin an rann sin 7 a ainm-) ar imat a fir y a roscad. Tri coecait ogam y na remenn''') y rem n-ena*) y na duili feda y in as dir doih inn rami tanaise y gramatach a ainm, ar imat a sois, av is i sdinir'") eolvLsa in lahartha cirt. Na fesa i?/diu y na foirhesa y na togla 7 na triclia sccl y in .xl.^) roger y in as dir doih /^ed in tres rann 7 a stair a ainm ar isinnte hiaiter scela y coimgneda. BretJia Cae immoYi'o cona n-imtegar') in cethram&á rann y rim a h-ainm. De quibiis dicitiir : 1) na chan in cetran. 2) om. 7 na revienn. ^) ar as i a stiair (?). '•) n-imiecor. -) a h-ainm, na rinde sin. *) remenna. '') .Ir. 134 A. G. VAN HAMEL. Ceiliri rauna raiter de for suidiu^) na Gaidilce: canoin, gramatach 7 staii- 7 rim cona rogail'-). Is i an canoin, ni celeh^), senchSiS mór, bretha nemed nochasderna ^) dui de at cane y na cermna •'>). Is in ait gramatach^) na tri coecait craohogam, na remend'') reim n-ena 7 na duill dagfheda. Is i an sdair rosdiuir mesa na fessa, na forhessa, togla, tana^) tricha seel 7 tvi fichii roger. Is i an rim nochasrecah ■') hreth Cai con n-imtecar his Qsba a secJma sona ^^), cnesda na ceitri ranna. C. Ceithire anmann dawQ for an Goidilc fo rainne^^) no conad ainm cecli priiuberla dona trih primherlaib .i. Ebra. 7 Gvec 7 Latin 7 a h-ainm diles 0 Gaidil. Ticcolatha ainm Ebra., Maloth ainm Grecda, Legulas^-) a Laitin, TinoHtech a Gaidilc la Gaidel rostoba ^^). Be qnibns lioc cairmen d\- citur ; In berla tobaide trie rolesaig Goidel glahigllcc hiiathsiá ^■^) do sil Gaidil gairb duine ga mheith a firainm. Gaidilc atberas^'") som fris in lucht aineolach^^) ni nesa do Gaidil^') glic indas da cech ni as air dire. Mad ail dam a rddh fri each coraib co falhis in fath atat sunn cen gnimradh ngae ^^) ceithri anmae in berloj. In bev\-A. Tteolad a Ebvd ard 3Ialoth a Grec glegarc LegulsiS a Lait'm le TinoiUecJt a re fcne. Gebe bes or aniar air etir dascair^'->) is diamair Is col dam ecu time tra anmanmi binnc an berla. In berla. 1) suithe. ■■') robail. =') ceiledh. *) nochon as dernai. ■•') ai cermna 7 ai chanai. ^) gramatach na nglonn. ') remenna. **) tana togla. •') nocliorcobh. '") so. ") fo comniumir n rainne. '-) Uynlxis. 1^) rodostoba. '*j 0 uathad. ^*) Gaidel getbsvat. '») aineolach ainbßss. i') Gaideleg. •■■*) ngle. ^") descair. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 135 § 12. The version Ba. Leaving the question of the genealogies over for the next paragraph, we have now to fix the amount of work done by the redactor of Ba for the evolution of LG. Did he import any passages from other known works, as for instance the scribe of A? Did he alter the aspect of the saga in any other way? It has already been pointed out that those portions of the Introduction bearing on biblical history are related quite circum- stantiallj- in Ba. and it is uncertain how much is genuine in these biblical passages. But the germ of them is very old. The long preface on the creation ác. recurs in A, though in a much more concise form. All that is lacking in A need not be an addition in Ba, for A abridged as much as possible; and Maol- niuru Othna, who was celebrating the origin of the Goidels, left out the biblical stories simply because they did not refer to his subject. In any case A shows conclusively that there was a biblical preface in X, and all that Ba may be accused of, is to have amplified it a little. In the same way HB proves that the relations between the Jews and the Goidels in Egypt — which Ba dwells upon with evident satisfaction — were known already in the 8^^^ century. Here, too, it is only a possi- bility that Ba embellished the tale by a few digressions on this point. And even in assuming this we should be on our guard; for the epithet of Glas applied to Goidel which occurs as early as MO, seems to have been derived from the snake's bite, which made him blue in appearance until Moses cured him: and this story of Goidel and the snake is found only in Ba. And even if the biblical passages did assume somewhat larger proportions in Ba than in a previous stage of the text, this is of no great importance, for it does not affect the subject matter of the saga to any extent. So if we want to characterize the part played by Ba in the evolution of LG, we must not look for salient points in those biblical portions. As to the adventures of the Goidels themselves, Ba is identical with MO in the beginning. Fenius comes to the Tower of Babel after it has been built, his son Nél goes to Egypt, where he marries Pharaoh's daughter. His descendants Esru and Eber Scot have to leave the country, being expelled by the Egyptians. They fiy to Scythia, where iheir race 136 A. G. VAN HAMEL. lives ill endless strugg-les "vvitli their kinsmen, until they are driven out. So far Ba does not deviate in an}' respect from Xj being virtually identical with A. notwithstanding its greater length. But now the agreement ends. The journey to Spain by the 'Muinchend Mara Caisp, Mnir Libis, Sliab Riffe, Gsethlaige Meotecda, Creit, Sicil, Colomna Hercuil'. as it is given with slight variations in MO, A and Bb, turns into something quite different. Another visit to Egypt is introduced, and an entirely new tradition is formed. It is no longer Agnoman and Láimfind who leave Scythia, but Mili) mac Bile with four ships. He and his companions Avander through 'Aissia sairdess" and 'Inis Deprofane", where they remain for three months, and only reach Egypt after another three months' wandering on the sea. There they are received by Pharaoh Nectinebus, the 35*'' or the 15*'^ king after Cincris. Nectinebus gives his daughter Scota in marriage to Mil; he remains in Egypt, until his father-in-law is expelled by Alexander the Great, Avho occupies the whole kingdom and founds the city of Alexandria. Mil's companions had learned the principal arts (na prímdána) in Egypt. Mil does not remain in Egypt after the expulsion of Nectinebus. He leaves the country with his wife and his com- panions. On his wanderings he has the same adventure with the mermaids as Agnoman and Láimfind had, Caicher having to save him and his people from their advances by putting wax in their ears. At length they come to Spain and occupy the country after fifty-four battles. The city of Brigantia is then founded. What have we to think of this passage? Obviousl}- it is an interpolation, for none of the older versions has it. It bears a general likeness to some of the older traits of the saga: e. g. NéTs first visit to Egj^pt and Agnoman's travels from Scythia to Spain. We have noticed that there existed a tendency to prolong the Journey from Egypt into Spain: MO inserted a second visit to Scythia, which X elaborated into a settlement of many generations. Did Ba but follow this same tendency by introducing the second visit to Egypt, borrowing its characteristics from the first? This supposition is only partially true. There Avas a still better reason for the interpolation. ') The oldest form of the name is Mil, cf. the genealogical poems qnotecl on p. 132. In the prose texts we ahvaj's find Miled. ON LEBOR GABXlA. 1^7 In the Invasion of the Meic Miled, midway. Ba lias a curious tract. It does not occur in other versions, and spoils the context. After the account of Ith"s expedition to Ireland, which ended with his death at the hands of the Tuatha De Danann. and the enumer- ation of the sons of Mil and Bregon Avho determined to avenge their former companion, we should expect to find something on the Milesians" coming to Ireland. And there is, in fact, a passage beginning 0 dodeochatar morlonyais mac 3Iücd do gahail in ninher Sla'me to,. But first comes another stor}', which seems to be quite out of place here. Here it is. Ceist: caHl tairfhind fir mac Milcd'^ iS7ansa. Cinel fil i Slcil) Armenia .?'. Hibiri a slonnud. Bai ri amra occo .i. Mile mac Bile meic Nemain. Bui sen oc cosnam flaithiusa fria hraihair a athar fri Beflair mac Nema[i.n]. Dolluld .iiii. harca for longais y .v. lanamna dec cecha hairci 7 <ü)ias forcraidh cen mnai. Ba tuisecJi amra occa .?'. Uca 7 Occe. Lotar for Muir Cais}) amach for inn ocian n-imechtracli. Dollotar timclnd na liAisia sairdes co hinis Beprofane .Hi. mis doih iidi .Hi. mis aili for fairci CO riaclitatar co liEyipt fodeoid i cimi .iiii. mhliadan .1. ar. ccc. ar mili 0 cdyahail liErenn do Bartolon. I cinn .iiii. mhliadan .x. ar .dcccc. iar mhadud Forainn for Muir Buad rosiacldatar Egipt. Paro Nectonihiis ha ri Egepte an inbaid sin 7 is c sÍ7i in coiccd ri .xl. iar For ami Cingcris rohaided i Muir Buad; odd mbliad- na do for Egipt co rohaided. Baro Ceres ba ri ina diaid .xv. bliadna. Is coir a fis conid Forann ainni cech rig i nEgipt amail ash c rar Cesair da cech rig i Bo im 7 Ptolomcus da cecli rig i nAlaxandria. Armadis iarum .v.h. Bamesses post .Ix. Amenoscs .xl. Amenemes .xxviii. Tures .vii.h. Is ria lind side rotoglad Troi 7 is cuici rosiacJd Menelaus 7 Elena iarsin togail. Brcmendis .iii.b. XX. Psenres .xl. Thusthus .ix.h. Oscorus .vii. mbl. Psinaclius :ix.b. Bsusencs .v. bliadna flehet. Sessoncltos .xxi. Bsamus ..rl.b. Bachor .xlvii. Is re lind rolabar an t-uan i nEgipt. Etliops .xii. Sibiccus .vx. EtJiiops .xx. Etiops Nemes .xii.b. Stabantes .vii.h. Encepros .vii.h. Ncchdo .riii.h. Psanet .x. Nechod .vi. P.samotcs .xii. Hufripis .xxx.h. Amiris .xlii. Amarteres .vi.h. Nefrites .vi. Anchoris .xii. Muteis .l.b. Xectonihus Faro .xviii. Is é ba ri Egipte ar cinn Mili meic Bile cona longais 7 fuair failte oca fri re .viii. mhliadan 7 dobeir a ingen Scota do. Et ba si sin aimsir dolluid Alaxandair Mor mac Pilip isin Aisia 7 rotairhir an Egipt fo reir 7 roinnarb Faro Ncclonibus a Egipt asin Etheoip 7 rondichuir Arfarxerxes 138 A. G. VAN HAMEL, ar tus fccid n-aili i uEgqH. Cumdaigther iarmn catliir la Alaxan- dair i nEgipt .i. Alaxandria a li-ainm. Et discailtcr flaithnis diles a nEgipt ann sin 7 gahais Grec foriamlas indti 7 ic Greic Alaxandair rohai fJaitldus ind Egipt 0 sein amach, conid and sin tanaic Mili a Egipt doclmm a cinil fein^). Finit. The initial Ceist and the concluding- Finit give tliis tract the character of a separate tradition, not belonging to the body of LG as we found it in MO and X. The passage quoted on p. 124 from a note to Fiacc's Hymn shows that there were such separate traditions current as late as the end of the ll*'^ centmy. For the redactor of Ba, whose aim was to include every detail available, it was but natural to bring- this tradition into his version of LG. Its contents are quite simple. There was an Armenian king who was expelled- from his country because he had opposed his uncle. He comes to Egypt, where he marries Scota, Pharaoh's daughter. Afterwards he leaves the country, and reaches Ireland. For the rest it consists of chronological and historical allusions. The reason Mil had to leave Egypt is that the country was conquered by Alexander, So Mil's father-in-law must be identified with Nectonibus, who according to Eusebius was the last Egyptian Pharaoh. From this it follows that the whole list of Pharaoh's was introduced from Eusebius. The mention of Pharaoh Cingcris (AkhenJcheres annis .xui ; sub hoc Moses ludaeonim ex Egipto egressus dux fuit. Euseb. ed. Arevalo I 145) in the beginning makes no allusion to any visit of the Goidels to Egypt during the reign of that king, nor does it prove that such a visit once was part of this tradition. On the contrary, if it had been so, there certainly would have been an allusion to it in this tract, and it is not too much to liasard the hypo- thesis, that this earlier visit never was a part of this tradition at all. Consequently we have here a tradition parallel to that of MO and A: both speak of a Scythian king who came to Egypt, who married the king's daughter Scota, and afterwards left the country 2). ') i. e. to tlie Tuatlici De Dauaim, ar ba do doinn Rifaith Scuit doib dib liniiib as Ba says previonsly. The common descent of all the subsequent populations of Ireland from Rifath Scot is one of Ba's favourite tenets. See § 13. '^) Another intei'esting detail is that both speak of the two leaders Ucee and Occe. ON LEÍBOR GABÁLA. 139 Along- with the version of MO and A we have traced now another tradition preserved in Ba. I'he heroes of the former are Nél, Goidel Glas and Agnoman, the latter mentions only Mil. Neither has a claim to priority. Zimmer (Nenn. Yind p. 220) was the first to discover the existence of this second tradition. But he did not draw the right conclusion from it. For lie identified it with the tradition in HB, and if this were right, it would prove that the tradition of Nectinebus and Mil existed before that of Cingcris and Nél. But as HB states that the vir nohills de Scytliia wlio resided in Egypt non perrexit ad sequendum poimlnm Bei, there can be no doubt that Nennius was thinking of the tradition we find in MO and X, and not of Nectonibus and Mil. This is a very im- portant fact, for it implies that Zimmer's theoiy as to tlie relation of HB and LG cannot be upheld. We can now go back even a step farther. From the two parallel versions may be reconstructed their common original which existed even before HB was written. It was the history of a noble Scythian, called Mil ur ]\iiles, who lived in Egypt at an indefinite period, and who was married to some Pharaoh's daughter Scota. Afterwards he left that country, without any stated reason, for Spain. From thence Ireland was discovered. All chronological connections, either with Cingcris or Nectinebus, have come in later, for this is the point at Avhich the two traditions diverge. Each version established a chronology of its own, and this involved divergent reasonings as to the cause of the Goidels' fiight from Egypt. See on this § 22. A comparison of the original tale, as it has been retraced noAV, with the 7^^' century genea- logical poems treated in § 13, will show that only one additional element may be pointed out as an essential trait of the original story, namely the discovery of Ireland from the tower of Brigantia (see p. 12G). This reconstruction of the introduction in its germ will prove of no small help in retracing the origin of LG. Now let us return tu the Introduction of Ba and compare the account of the Goidels' second stay in Egypt with the new- found parallel version on Mil. In both Mil is the hero, in both the route of his journey to Scytliia is exactly the same. Nectinebus and Alexander occur in the same connection in the two versions. Ba evidently interpolated the loose tradition concerning Mil into the text of LG. The scribe Avho found the tract did not know M() A. G. VAN HAMEL wliat to do with it; he did not understand tliat it was but a variant of the other tale, and finding a later chronological refer- ence in it, inserted it in its place. It was a verj^ easy task to accomplish this. Tlie return to Scythia and the long struggles between the two royal races, which had entered in X, afforded the necessary lapse of time to bring the history down from Cingcris to Nectonibus. Nothing was more natural than that tlie redactor of Ba should think the second tradition referred to the journey of the Goidels after this repeated visit to their native country. Therefore he left out the end of the story as it occurred in X, and put instead of it the whole second tradition. This manipulation did not involve any insuperable difficulties, for the interpolation fitted in quite well with the rest of the story. There are still a few particulars in tlie passage introduced into Ba that (dairn our attention. The end of the Introduction in this version does not agree in every respect with the isolated tract quoted above. In the first place the Introduction speaks of Nectine- bus' daughter Scota, who is not named in the separate tract ; nor does the tract say anything of Mil's expedition from Egypt to Spain and from thence to Ireland, whereas the Introduction treats this in a very circumstantial way. It might be suggested that these latter details were borrowed over again from the original narrative in X that had been done away with. But this seems scarcely probable. Of course, so far as the introduction of a second Scota is concerned, there could be no objections against tlie supposition. But with the rest it is otherwise. Although both have the same story of Caicher protecting his companions from the mermaids, Ba hasn't the account of Caicher's prophecy. Moreover, the localities belong to different spheres. Whereas X made the Goidels pass by Sliab Rife, the Maeotic marshes, the Tyrrhenian Sea, Crete and Sicily, Ba speaks of Inis Deprofane (= Ceylon), India, Asia, Scythia, the Indian Sea, &g. These, in fact, are the localities of the second tradition, where India and Asia are also found. Then, after the arrival in Spain there are not three but flft3'-four battles for Fresseno 7 for Lonyhardaib 7 Bacliraih. All this cannot have been taken over from X, for it difl'ers too much from the tradition of MO and A. There is but one possible explanation left, namely tliat these details also all belong to the second tradition. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 141 The separate tract, (luoted on p. 137 must originally have contained more than in its present form. Scota must have figured in it as well as Mil's companions who learned the principal arts in Egypt; and it must have ended with an account of Mil's wanderings from Egypt to Spain and the building of Brigantia — everything in accordance with the end of the Introduction in Bai). Why then was all this omitted by the scribe of that version? Because he had already given it once. He had already embodied the whole story in the Introduction: vvhy then copy it once more in its unabridged form? There was no sufficient reason for this. It is fortunate enough that the isolated tract w^as preserved at all, and we probably are indebted for this happy circumstance to the list of the Pharaohs that had been incorporated in it. This list seems to have aroused the chronological interest of our scribe so that he determined to give it a place in his version of LG, leaving- the framework of the tract, in a shorter form, around it. But if we wish to know its original contents, we must refer back to the Introduction on the Goidels in Ba, where we find it unimpaired without omissions. It would be difficult to over- estimate the importance of this fact; for now^ we possess a variant of the other tradition, preserved by HB, MO and X. It looks very old, being quite simple: Mil, a chieftain fi'om Armenia or Scythia, is expelled from his country; he flies to Egj'-pt; afterwards he leaves this country and settles in Spain. In fact, this version is very near akin to HB. Zimmer was wrong doubt- less in identifying the two (see p. 139), for HB manifestly contains the tradition of MO and A in its germ, though they have much the same aspect. Only the difference in the chronological refer- ences stamps them as two distinct variants. A comparison of these two variants brings us nearer to a solution of the problem as to the origin of the saga. See on this chapt. lY. 1) As I bave shown ou p. 189 that this traditiou diverged from that preserved in HB at a very early period, even before Nennius, it is impossible that the details both have in common — snch as the story of Caicher drni — could have already been present in the original version from which these both arose. Therefore we must assume that the close relation between them Avas never wholly forgotten: when a new element was adopted in one it was liable to be introduced into the other version too. Rut in other instances each went its own way. 142 A. ft. VAN HAMEL. § 13. The genealogies. The most salient divergence of A (and Bb) and Ba lies in the g-enealogies. The first traces of the tale of the coming of tlie Goidels to Ireland must have arisen in a period when classical and biblical studies were already flourishing- in Ireland; this appears from the allusion to Egypt and the Israelites. Avhich occurs as early as HB. So no wonder that the Irish wanted to establish a genea- logical connection between themselves and Noah, the common ancestor of the human race. According to all the versions of LG it was Sru mac Esru mic Goidil who brought the Goidels fi'om Egypt to Scythia. We have now to examine every single version as to the descent of Goidel Glas from Noah. We can distinguish three versions: a) The first version of A and Bb: 'Goidel son of Nél son of Fenius Farsaich son of Baad son of Magoch son of Jafeth'. b) The second version of A and Bb: Atherat araile comhad Baad mac Ibaid meic Goimeir meic lafeth (thus Bb ; in LL the initial words atherat araile have been omitted). c) The version of Ba: Gaidcl Glass ar senathair. Mac side Niiiil meic Feniusa Farrsaidli meic Eogein meic Glunfmd meic Lamfhind meic Etheoir meic Thóe meic Boidb meic Sein meic Mair meic Aurtliacht meic Ahuitli meic Ara meic lava meic Sru meic Esru meic Baaith meic Rifaith Scuit. According to Gen. X 3 Rifath is a son of Gomer. Among the sons of Jafeth there are two from whom the Goidels claimed their descent, Magoch and Rifath. The reason is obvious, for from these two the Gauls and the Scythians descended. Cf. Isid. Etjin. IX 1, 26 — 27: Filii lafeth septem nominaniur: Gomer, ex quo Galatae id est Galli; Magog a quo qiiidem arhitrantur Scythas et Gothos traxisse originem. Two (luestions arise: is a or h the primary version of A, and does A or Ba preserve the original tradition of LG? So far as the first question is concerned, we have a clue to its solution in the text of A (and Bb) itself. In the genealogical poem quoted on p. 129 we read in 1. 8: mic Baaid mic Ibaith (Lee lb) or mic Baaid ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 143 mic EhaWt (J Am F). while Eb lias mic Baa'id mic Ilagoicli. In 1.11 Rb and LL have mac Baaith mic Magoch^). The prose, however, always makes Baad the son of Magoch. So the poem belongs to a different tradition than the prose; Kb felt the anomalj", and altered the poem accordinglj'. On p. 130 I have shown that the prose preceding the poem is an interpolation from LSA. This work mentions Baath as the son of Magocli, and hence after the prose interpolation, Magoch was put instead of Ibath in the poem also. Fortunately Lee lb and LL did it rather carelessly, so tliat in 1. 8 Ibath was overlooked. Here we have a proof that Ibath was the original ancestor in A, whereas Magoch did not come in until the adoption of the genealogical theory of LSA. In fact, LSA attributes two sons to Magoch, namely Baath and Ibath; Fenius Farsaich is a son of Baath. So a was taken from LSA at the same time that the passage on the division of the world was interpolated from that work. Consequently h represents the old tradition of A; it has been preserved in the sentence beginning with atherat araile. Xow the other question remains: is ?> or c the original version? There are two salient differences between h and c: they make Baad descend from different sons of Gomer (Ibad and Rifatli), and h hasn't the fourteen intermediate links bet- ween Baad and Fenius, figuring in c; for tlie rest the two are identical. Among the ancestors of the Goidels there are three eponym- ous heroes: Fenius, Nél and Goidel Glas; Scota, NéPs wife, is closely connected with them. As Maolmuru Othna puts it: Féni 0 Fenius asamhertar, clu cen dochta, Gaedil ó Gceduil Glas garfa, Scuiit o Scotta. As to Nél. I take his name to be derived from the glorious royal family of the Ui Néill (perhaps in connection with that of the Nile? Nél lived in Eg^-pt). These eponj'mous heroes do not occur in the oldest sources. Nennius, who in § 17 gives a long pedigree from Noah downwards, does not name them at all, while they are also unknown in the 'second tradition' of Ba, see p. 137. In some later genealogies thej' come in at a quite ') Here Lee lb deviates by saying- mac Fatecht mic Magocli. 144 AG. VAN HAMEL. dift'ereiit point. In 'Fianaigeclif. p. 28. 30. there is a list be- ginning- Avith Jafetli, in wliich Glas and Scot figure as the son and grandson of Lámfhind. while Nél is made the son of Mil! And in the note to Fiacc's Hymn (see p. 124) Xél is the son, not the father, of Goidel Glas, who is himself a son of Fenius. What results from these contradictions is this: Fenius, Nél and Goidel did not originall}' belong- to the tradition of LG but were in- vented by the Irish as their eponymous heroes after the example of Britus, Saxus, Sec. Xow they had to get a position in the genealogy of LG also, but were by different scribes put in at different places. Wherever Fenius was made the son of Baad, and the grandson or great-grandson of Jafeth, he was supposed to have lived at the period of the ToAver of Babel; for Cham's grandson Nimrod and Senrs great-grandson Phaleg assisted at its building and undoing. Thus arose the legend of Fenius' adventures at the ToAver. It cannot therefore belong to the old stock of LG. Who then was the ancestor of the Goidels, living at the time of the Tower of Babel? This Avas another grandson of Jafeth: Eifath son of Gomer. Gomer. as Ave have seen, Avas made an ancestor of the Goidels, because, according to Isidorus, the Gauls descended from him. His son Eifath seems to have been chosen as the next link because of the similarity of his name Avith that of Sliab Eife. the range of mountains enclosing Scythiai). And now there is a passage in Ba — Avhicli has preserved so many genuine traditi ns — shoAving that originallA' it Avas Eifath and not Fenius. Avho assisted at the building of the ToAver of Babel. It seems that the redactor of Ba kneAV the innovation of A, for at the end of the genealogy, Avhere he makes Goidel Glas descend from Eifath Scot, he states: use Ilifath Scot luce tuccasiar (sic) Scotic on tur ar ha se in sesed primtuisech roha ic cumtach in itiir Nemruaid. la follus desin nach raihe Fenius id cumtach in tiiir mar atberat na senchaide cen comshiniud comhaiseraid. Is aire so on, ar isse Foenius Farsaich in seissed fer dec do sil Pdafaid tue Scotic on tur . . . .xl. bliadna o scailiud in tuir CO tanic Fenius Farsaidh attiaidh asin Sciihia cona scoil 1) The same counectiou is made b^' LS A: Paplagoni gens, doini filet i Slebib Riphi qui et Colchi aunt; cf. Isid. Etj'm. IX 1. 33: Rifath a quo Paphlagones. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 145 do iaraidh na mherla. Here Ba evidentlj' defends the old tradition against a later one. Fenius originally had nothing to do with the building of the Tower, he only had a school where the languages were taught. But in A Eifath had to make place for Magoch, who came in from LSA, and consequently Fenius took the part of Eifath at the erection of the Tower of Babel. His son Nél was in Egypt when Pharaoh and his host were drowned in the Red Sea. In HB the Scythian living in Egypt was still a name- less hero; now the eponymous hero Nél had also to get an occupation, and probably the one in Egypt was reserved for him because of the general likeness of his name to that of the river Nile. But these changes involved a complete upsetting of the chronology : Fenius lived when the Tower of Babel was built, Nél in the time of Moses! It is clear that in another respect, too, Ba preserves a better tradition than A: there are some fourteen generations wanted between those two episodes of biblical history, which fortunately Ba has preserved. A priori it is highly probable that the fourteen names given in c (see p. 142) are old. This supposition is confirmed by the second genealogical poem edited by Professor Kuno Meyer in his 'Über die älteste irische Dichtung' (see p. 132), where an almost identical genealogy occurs (cf. vs. 36 — 39) : Gablach gliad Agni an, art glonn Glunfind Ian. Läfiifind, Fether, Agnoman, Tai, Bodb, Sem, Mäir, mö each ái. Ethecht, Aurthecht, Ahoth, Aur, Ara, lara, cäinem caur. Cäin-SrU, EsrU, airir han, Boad, Rifad, Gomer glan. Eogan must be a corruption of Agni, and Ether of Fether, whereas Agnoman, Ethecht and Aur were omitted ; for the rest the two lists are the same. The two next poems in Professor Meyer's collection contain the same genealogy. The poems are dated by him as early as the 7^^ century. They prove conclusively that c preserves the oldest tradition of LG as to the genealogies. As father of Agni (= Eogan) the poem names Eber Glass; instead of him c put Goidel Glas, and with him Nél and Fenius came Zeitschrift f. celt. Philologie X. -[Q 146 A. G. VAN HAMEL, in. It is an interesting fact that the genealogical poems, too, were subject to the tendency to introduce these eponymous heroes, for one of the MSS. has instead of vs. 36: gaUach gliad, Nel fri Mg, an fer Foenhis, Ghinfincl bar. As to the origin of all these strange names I can offer no suggestion whatever. There existed variants, however, as appears from a comparison of the lists in 'Fianaigecht' p. 28, 30 and HB § 17. When Fénius Farsaich in A took the part that was originally assigned to Rifath, namely the building of the Tower of Babel, all the intermediate links were left out. Still, A also has preserved a portion of the old genealogy. As we have seen, in the oldest form of the saga, as preserved in the 'second tradition' of Ba, it was Mil who led the Goidels from Scythia to Spain. When, however, the settlement for several generations in the Maeotic marshes was introduced into this story, as was done in A, the chief who left Scythia with them could no longer be Mil, since he had to conquer Spain for them. Then A assigned the former task to Glunfind and Laimfind, who took the Goidels down to the Maeotic marshes; their descend- ant Brath afterwards found the way to Spain for them. A (and Bb) gives this genealogy of Brath: Brath mac Death m. Erchada m. Alloit m. Nuadat ni. Nenuaill m. JEbir Glais m. Agni m. Ehir Glunfind m. Laimfind m. Tait m. Ogamain m. JBeomain m. Ehir Scuit. In Lee lb the end is different: Glunfind m. Agnomain m. Thaitt &c. So the original reading might be: Glunfind m. Laimfind m. Agnomain m. Tait m. Ogamain &c. Cf. again: 'Über die älteste irische Dichtung' II 33 — 37: Bräth batar flaiihi fedma fäth. Art fri duir ndorair ndeirgg Beüith mar mandras Eilgg. Aireid, Alldoit, nöidiu nass, Nüadu, Nöenal, Eber Glass. &c., see p. 145. If Tait = Tai, the two genealogies are identical save for Ogaman, Beoman and Eber Scot in A; these innovations were probably introduced, because A had to establish a connection with Goedel Glas, who did not occur in the poem. A evidently ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 147 used the old genealogy to fill up the gap between the leaving of Scythia and the conquest of Spain. And so Ba and A together furnish the proof, that LG once had exactly the same chronology as the 7*^ century poems. There is one question left. What have we to think of Ibad, who according to b was the son of Gomer, from whom Baad descended ? He takes the place of Eifath in c. I think the passage quoted from Ba on p. 144 shows that Eifath was the real ancestor of the Goidels in LG. Still, Ibad seems to be an old variant of Eifath. While nos. II and IV in Professor Meyer's collection give Eifath as the father of Baad, in has Ibath, son of Gomer. In LSA Ibad is a son of Magoch, and HB § 17 mentions Jobaath son of Jovan (Javan). So this personage figures subsequently as the son of three different sons of Jafeth, and he was probably nothing but a kind of passe- partout that could be employed everywhere. In LSA he is not even an ancestor of the Goidels but of the Eomans. Nor does Nennius regard him as such, for the genealogy he gives in HB § 17, though it corresponds in many respects with that of LG, is one of Alanus, a progenitor of Teutonic tribes. Therefore Ibad's occurring in some traditions of LG also must have been caused by mistake or carelessness; possibly on account of the resemblance of his name to that of Eifath. There are a few other genealogies in the Introduction of LG. As least in version A (and Bb): that of Eefloii' (Eefelair), descendant of Noenual, second son of Fenius: of Occe and Uicce; of Caicher and Mantan. They must all have been newly compiled, as they refer to episodes that were added in A. For the most part they consist of names taken from the old genealogy preserved in Ba: Noenual, Alloit, Ogaman, &c. Perhaps the other names too will be found in old genealogical poems. In any case these genealogies are of no further im- portance. The comparison of the genealogies in the different versions of LG appears to be of the highest significance. It confirms what has been stated in §§ 8 — 12: Ba is the only version pre- serving the genuine traditions. A modifies the text after the model of other authorities, especially LSA, fi'om which source A has taken not only the preface on the population of the world (see § 11) but also its entire genealogical system. 10* 148 A. G. VAN HAMEL, § 14. The versions C and D (14*^ and Ib^^ century). The versions C and D represent a further stage of evolution of the saga : that of compilation. We shall recognize almost every portion in these versions as one originally belonging to A, Ba or Bb. For the rest some details were added independentlj^ and the scribes, for example, were in the habit of adding in the accounts of the routes from Egypt to Scythia &c. all the geo- graphical names they could lay hold of. It is unnecessary to point out all these insignificant additions here. In LB and Lee II we find the biblical preface, the story of Nectinebus and Mil &c., based upon Ba ; the descent from Magoch, the aid given by Fenius at the building of the Tower of Babel &c., all borrowed from A; the tract on the division of the Gaelic language and its names clearly points to BC. There is but one thing interesting in the composition of C: the way it brought together the traditions of both A and Ba on the relations of the Scythians with the Egyptians. As we have seen, in A Sru and Eber Scot lead the Goidels from Egypt to Scythia, where they struggle with their royal kinsmen for many generations, until Lamfind and Glunflnd lead them from Scythia to the Maeotic marshes, and a few centuries later Brath takes them from thence to Spain. In Ba Mil guides them from Scythia to Egypt, where he is married to Scota, daughter of Nectinebus; afterwards Mil brings them to Spain. In C Sru and Eber Scot arrive with their companions in Scythia, where they and their descendants also have to fight for the supremacy with the ruling rate.i) At last Mil, though his wife, Seng, is one of the rival family (a new episode), has to leave Scythia. Then follows the entire tradition of Ba : they go to Eg3"pt, Nectinebus, Scota and Alexander are mentioned, and Mil takes the Goidels to Spain 2). There they fight 54 battles; Brigantia has no longer to be founded, for it existed already, but fa falam siden ara cionn. This last sentence contains the first deviation from Ba. The reason is obvious, for the text runs on: atbearat araile do ^) These strug-gles are not described in the same way as in A. In Ba they were only mentioned incidentally. ^) In Mil's travels an interesting episode is interpolated on a meeting of the Goidels with the Picts in Germania. ON LEBOK GABÁLA. 149 eolchaib is i seo gnathsliged na nGceideaJ, uair is ac Ogamain ro facsamar 7 ge roleanamar do Milig cona muinter is Jind impod CO hOgamaiyi torisi (sic). Now we are told that jome of the Goidels had remained in Scythia after Mil; to them belonged Agnoman and Lamfind. and thus a connection with A is established. The whole tradition of A follows, in Spain Breogon founds the city of Brigantia, so that this explains why Mil found it ready on his arrival. Thus the Introduction affords a splendid illustration of the way version C was compiled. In version D (O'Clery) we also find A and Ba reproduced, though not in the same way- as in C. Here the tradition of A is given first : the Goidels come fi'om Egypt to Scythia, they leave it again under Lamfind, and reach the Maeotic marshes; afterwards Brath. and with him Occe and Uicce, leads them to Spain, where Brigantia is built. One of the Goidels, Galamh (i. e. Mil), has a fancy to visit his relations in Scythia. With grandsons of Occe and Uicce, bearing the same names, he goes to the land of his fathers. There he is married to Seng, but notwithstanding this he has to leave the country because of difficulties with his father-in-law, Refloir. He flies to Egypt, where he is received by Xectinebus. who gives him his daughtei- Scota in marriage. From thence he goes back to Spain, as in Ba, where the city of Brigantia has been destroyed and is rebuilt by Galamh or Mil. The reader may discover, in which of the two the combination of K and Ba has been most ingeniously effected, in C or D. III. The invasions. § 15. The first Invasion. The earliest Invasion, before the Deluge, is in the principal MSS. styled that of Cesaii\ daughter of Xoah. But there are other traditions too, deviating more or less fi'om that of A and Ba. There is one in Cin Dromma Snechta, a lost MS. placed by Professor Thuraeysen in the 8*^ century, and another has been preserved in a separate section in Ba. Moreover, we find indications that this first Invasion, whatever old traditions it may contain and in whatever form it may present itself, was only at a late period 150 A. G. VAN HAMEL, prefixed to LG; so it must have first existed as a separate legend. In the first place Cesair (or any equivalent) is not mentioned in HB, where we have a full account of the invasions in Ireland ; there that of Partholon is the first one. Besides, Ba ends the tale of Cesair with the following words: in gabail tra Cessra nisgdbsat araili hi son gdbala, acht is iat fosfuair Erind ar tiis. So there existed at least one version of LG where Cesair did not figure at all. and the final words of the sentence quoted sound even as an apologj^ of some scribe who had inserted Gabál Cesra himself. In the same way the Tale of Tuan mac Cairill shows that the first invasion does not belong to the original body of LG. This is the story of the only man among Partholon's companions who survived the plague, which destroyed ihem all, and all the subsequent invasions, in order that he might preserve the memory of them to later generations (LU 15« — 16^). The ingenious Irish invented this story as a necessary commentary to LG. But if they had known from the very beginning an earlier invasion than that of Partholon, they never would have selected a man of his people to transmit Ireland's oldest 'history', but one of Cesair's. The tale of Tuan mac Cairill must have arisen at a time when the invasion of Cesair formed no part of LG. Later the mistake was noticed and Fintan, Cesair's brother or uncle was given a part similar to that of Tuan. Cf. LL 12 a: is iat so in sessiur ar .xxx. do thoesechaih amal roscrib Fbitan mac Bochra Ruaid — .vii. mhliadna rian dilind co secht mbliadnaih do fhlaith Diarmata mac Cerhaill ha sé sen a shcegiil Fhintain — for glim Finnen 7 Coluim Cille. All this is nothing but an imitation of the Tale of Tuan, who also related his adventures to Finnián and Colum Cille 1). On the other hand, the Invasion of Cesair had already been added in X, for both A and Ba have got it. Cesair was a daughter of Noah 2), who forty days before the Deluge came from the island of Meroen 3) to Ireland ; she had three men and fifty maidens with her. The three men were Bith, Ladru and Fintan. They came 1) InBaFintau and Tuau are identified; cf. Ra fo. 84a2; asberar co mba se (sc. Fintan) Tua^i mac Cairill. 2) lu other sources Cesair is a daughter of Bith. Cf. Rennes Dind- senchas § 1 (RC XV p. 277): 0 aimsir Cesra ingine Beatha. 3) The town Merom in Egypt might be meant. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 151 to a place called Comar na tri nUisce, and there the three men divided the fifty maidens. Ladru had to content himself with only sixteen of them ; but obstinate as he was, he left his companions and died in Ard Ladrann. Then Bith and Fintan each got twenty-five maidens; Bith went to the North and died in Sliab Betha. Fintan had now all the maidens; he left Cesair with them and fled to Tul Tuinne near Loch Dergderc. Cesair herself went to Cviil Cesra and there her heart broke for grief. It is obvious that all the personal names have been derived from names of places. This points also to a comparatively late origin of the story. Fortunately we can catch a glimpse of an older form of the same tale. In Ba, after the introductory phrase of Gabál Cesra, we read : asberat araile cotnacl Banba ainm na hingine sin rogab Erind ria ndilind 7 comad uaithi nobeth Banba for Erind. It is not difficult to make out which authority is meant by this araile, for LB gives a note from Cin Dromma Snechta that Banba was the first woman who occupied Ireland, together with Ladru, before the Deluge. The author of Ba knew the Cin Dromma Snechta, cf. p. 100, so he probably took his remark on Cesair or Banba from that book. Originally Banba seems to have been the heroine of this Invasion, which agrees with the fact that in Lee II Cesair is glossed by Eriu and Fotla. In this case its purport is clear enough: it was intended to explain the poetical names of Ireland and other topographical particulars. Afterwards a connection was established between this story and LG, and it was prefixed as the earliest Invasion. At the same time it was embellished with biblical ornaments: Bith (called after Sliab Betha) was made a son of Noah, and in some versions he was no longer Cesair's father, but had to yield this position to Noah himself. These biblical touches point to the same period of the evolution of LG as the elaborate treatment of Nél's connections with the Israelites in the Introduction, namely theO'^^ century. We cannot follow the evolution of Gabál Cesra step by step as was the case with the Introduction, all the versions of LG being practically identical on this subject, but from the few indications that may be found in the text, it may be inferred that the same forces were operating in it. My view on the original position of Gabál Cesra, viz. that it arose from a separate tale of Banba, which served to explain certain names, is corroborated by the coincidence that we know another similar storj^, which was never officially embodied in LG 152 A G. VAN HAMEL, and never was taken hi son gahala. It has been preserved in Ba, which was not subject to the same unifying process as A, but eagerly assimilated all dispersed traditions. Before the tale of Cesair, Ba says: Asberat araili co mbeitJi gabdil md-E>ind ria Cesair. Capa 7 Laigne y Luasat, triar iascaire do luclit na JiEspaine dochumlaisetar co JiErinn co facatar a suthaige, co romidraiset techt ar cula ar cenn a tri mhan. Oc tinntiid doth dosfarraid an diliu co roshaid oc Tiiaig Inhir y ni farcabsat clanna. De quihus hoc carmen: Capa is Laigne is Luasat grind 7 rl. A lacks this episode, so it need not have belonged to X. But the redactor of Ba found it in some older authority. It was apparently never intended as a part of LG, for it represents a separate tale, probably a local tradition, of three fishermen coming from Spain to Ireland. It never was so fortunate as to find a place among the official Invasions, but just on this account it is the more instructive. It provides a plain proof that at an early period there were isolated traditions on men coming to Ireland from foreign countries. It throws a light on the composition of LG, but it never influenced the growth of the saga in any way. § 16. Partholon. The Invasion of Partholon was already a part of LG when that of Cesair was prefixed. It occurs in the very earliest account of the saga we possess, namely in that of Nennius. As is related in HB § 13: Primus atiiem venit Partholomaeus cum mille hominibus, tarn de vir is et mulieribus, et creverunt usque ad quattuor millia hominum; et venit mortalitas super eos et in una septimana omnes perierunt, et non remansit ex Ulis etiam unus. We also find an early allusion to Partholon in Cin Dromma Snechta, preserved in LB, as appears from a marginal note in that MS., on which see p. 119. This note, however, onty concerns the division of Ireland among Partholon's sons, and does not tell anything about the tradition represented by the Cin, The next mention of Gabál Partholóin is that in Ba. According to Ba Partholon came 311 or 1002 years after the Deluge, assin Midi Greic by Aladacia, Gothia and Espain to Ireland. He had with him three sons and four women, and a great retinue besides. Seven years after his arrival he won a ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 153 battle over the Fomoraig under Cicul Grigenchos; it was a magic battle and was fought against men with one foot, one hand and one eye. Many rivers, lakes and plains were made in his age. Partholon lived thirty years in Ireland; then he died on Mag Elta. His sons divided Ireland into four parts, and this division remained until five hundred years after Partholon's death. For then all his descendants, 5000 men and 4000 women, died of a plague. Three poems illustrate the story of Partholon: one on his companions (Robo maith in muinter nwr), one on his arrival (Partholon canas tdinic), and one on his adventures {A choemu cldir Cuind). In A the narrative does not deviate from that in Ba, but it is much shorter. Now one might suppose that A represents the version of X in a purer form, while Ba may have expanded it by introducing interpolations from elsewhere. But. at least in one instance, there is a clear indication that, here also, the redactor of A was abridging in his usual manner. According to A Partholon died of the same plague as his muinter, while Ba records an interval of 500 years between the two events. Now the poem A choemu cldir Cuind, which forms part of both versions, agrees with Ba, so that here A makes a mistake in order to be brief. This makes it probable that in other instances, too, Ba represents X better than A. In A the battle with Cicul Grigenchos is left out as well as the passage on the muinter and the plague. Of course, omissions of this kind do not stamp A as a new stage in the evolution of LG; but some other trifling modifications do. In the first place A introduces the tale of Tuan mac Cairill (see p. 150), which is so far unknown to Ba. As 1 have already pointed out, its earliest version occurs in a fragment in LU, and it arose from a reasonable desire to explain the existence of sur- viving traditions on the earliest invasions, after the people who had taken part in them had perished. Yet it cannot be ancient, as Nennius expressly states that not even one of Partholon's companions survived. This remark of Nennius shows that here A added on its own account. Of course the storj^ of Tuan itself may be much older than its interpolation in LG, and this even must be so, as it is older than the Invasion of Cesair (see p. 150), which occurs in both A and Ba. Only Ba represents an older stage of LG, where it had not yet been introduced into the body of the saga. 154 A. G. VAN HAMEL, Of even more importance is the genealogical connection. As we have seen in § 13, Ba has preserved the oldest form of a genealogical connection between the Goidels and Jafeth son of Noah, by making them descend from Rif ath mac Gomer meic laf eth. A on the other hand, does away with the original genealogy and adopts that of LSA by giving Magoch and his son Baad the place that was first assigned to Gomer and Rifath. Now Partholon, according to Ba is: mac Sera mic Sru mic Esru mic Baaili mic Mifaith Scuit, for, as it is expressed in Ba: is dann Ri faith Sciiit Cecil gahail rogah Eri acht Cesair y ic Sru mac Esru cutric cairdes Fartlioloin ;■ Netnid. 7 Fer niBolc 7 Tuath nJDe Danann 7 Milid Espain. So here already a genealogical connection has been estab- lished between Partholon and the Goidels, and I think it is a genuine element of Gabál Partholóin, cf. § 23. A has changed the whole matter, according to the principles of LSA: Partholon mac Sera mic Sru mic Esru mic Briamin mic Fathecht mic Baaid mic Magoich mic lafeth. But the assimilation to the new genea- logical principle of A was accomplished in a very imperfect way, for in the Introduction Esru is the son of Goedel Glas, while here an older tradition still peeps through. So far the innovations of A. They are important enough as concerns the leading forces in the evolntion of LG, especially the character of A, but they do not effect a great change in the general trend of the story, and both A and Ba, but for A's giving way to the authority of LSA, may be said to represent fairly well their common original X. Only Ba has preserved several details more carefully. Nor does the tale seem to have changed much in the centuries lying between HB and X. For, waiving the possibility that so many details were not known in Nennius' time — who will inform us ? — the general character was quite the same in the 8* century and in the 11"\ Nennius does not speak of rivers and lakes bursting from the earth, or of plains being laid down, but even these insignificant details may have been omitted by him in his short account. In any case, the Gabál Partholóin does not show such a gradual evolution as the Introduction. Nor do the later versions bring many important innovations. Yet there existed isolated traditions of Partholon, too, just as was the case with the first Invasion. We find some of them in the versions C and D but not in LB, which is entirely based on Ba, save ON LEBOR GABÁT.A. 155 for a few additions from A (or Bb), but in Lee II. So Lee II has another tradition of Partholon's death, in connection with the battle of Cicul Grigenchos: Mad iar n-aroile slicht is re mPaniholon domebaid [so. in cath] 7 is and romarhad Cicol mac Nil y tucad ara nmintir 7 co ngonad ParrtJiolori y co rob do gaih cro na ngon si fuair has iar trill mair tar eis in catha. More remarkable is the episode on the first jealousy of Partholon (cét-ét Erend), when his wife Delgnad or Elgnad was taken in adultery with his servant Topa. It is entitled Do gahail FarrthaJoin heos 7 dia sligid 7 dia imthechtaih 0 Meigind^) co liErinn, and makes the impression of being an isolated tract. It is interspersed with short poems, the text of which is unfortunately very corrupt. It was also adopted by O'Clery in his cop}'. The intercalation of this story of the first jealousy represents the last episode in the evolution of Gabál Partholóin, for neither in C nor in D were any other additions made. Therefore no more details on this Invasion need be given now. As to its origin see § 23. § 17. Nemed. The third Invasion also, was first mentioned by Nennius, HB § 13: Seciindus ad Eiherniam venit Nimeth, filius quidam Agnominis, qui fertur navigasse siqjer mare annum et dimidium, et postea tenuit portum in Hibernia, fractis navibus ejus, et mansit ibidem per mtdtos annos, et iterum navigavit cum suis et ad Hispaniam reversus est. Et postea venerunt tres fdii cujusdam militis Hispaniae cum triginta ciulis apud illos, et cum triginta conjugibus in unaquaque ciula, et manserunt ihi per spacium \mius anni. Et postea conspiciunt turrim vitream in medio mari, et homines conspiciebant super turrim et quaerébant loqui ad illos et nunquam respondebant; et ipsi uno anno ad oppugnotionem turris properaverunt cum omnibus ciulis suis, et cum omnibus mulieribus, excepta una ciula, quae confracta est naufragio, in qua erant viri triginta totidemque midieres. Et aliae naves navigaverunt ad expugnandam turrim; et dum omnes descenderent in littore quod erat circa turrim, operuit illos mare et demersi sunt, et nan evasit unus ex Ulis; et de familia illius quae relicta 1) C has Meigind for Midi Greic in Ba. According to A, P. came de Grecaib Scythia. 156 A. G. VAN HAMEL, est propter fractionem, tota Hihernia impleta est usque in hodier- niini diem. Et postea venerimt paulatim a partibus Hispaniae et tenuerunt regiones plurimas. The next allusion to Gabál Nemid is that in Cin Dromma Snechta, but this does not throw any light on the version con- tained in that MS., for LB and S have transmitted nothing from it but a short remark belonging to the last portion of the Invasion: gnídís harca doihh dia mboJgaihh no siad libhearna rig Grec dogad- sad leo do theacht i nErinn, amal asheart Cin Dronia Snechta. So we have no text to compare with HB until the 10*^^ century, namely X. In order to fix the tradition of that authoritj^, it will be necessary to examine Ba and A first. After the pestilence that carried of£ all the descendants of Partholon's colony, Ireland lay waste for thirty years. Then Nemed came from Scythia. According to both A and Ba he is a son of Agnoman and a descendant of Sru, who sprang from the race of Rifath (Ba) or Magoch (A). He brought thirty-four boats and in each boat there were thirty men. In the midst of the sea they found a golden tower. A vehement desire for the gold seized them, so that tliey did not perceive the rising of the sea Avith the tide, and all were drowned except the crew of one boat. After a year and a half they reached Ireland. The story of the tower and the long wanderings is only found in Ba. Both texts give the names of Nemed's four sons (Ba with the addition of their wives) and of the lakes, plains and raths that were made in their age, as well as of the battles they fought against the Fomoraig. There are only a few slight differences between A and Ba, and besides A omits all superfluous details. At last Nemed himself dies of the plague. His progeny is put under a heavy tax by the Fomoraig. A son of Nemed, a grandson, and a great-grandson, Fergus Lethderc, Semeon mac larboueoil Fatha and Erglan mac Beoain mic Stairn, lead an army of sixty thousand men against the oppressors. They attack the tower of Conang, king of the Fomoraig, and they are about to conquer it, when an- other Fomorian, More, comes up with a large fleet. At the same time the tide comes in and the descendants of Nemed are all drowned save thirty men. Bethach, son of larbonel Faith, remains in Ireland with ten men and their wives, but they all die after sixty years. Semeon flies to Greece, where his descend- ants are enslaved by the Greeks, until they escape and return ON LEBOK GABÁLA. 157 to Ireland as Fir Bolg. Fergus Lethderc and his son Britan Maol go to Britain, where they fill the country with their progeny, together with the race of Britus mac Isicoiu, until the arrival of the Saxons. The descendants of Bethach son of larbonel, at last, leave Ireland for the northern islands of the world, whence they return later as Tuatha De Danann. The account of the struggle with the Fomoraig is more detailed in A, while for the rest the two texts are pretty identical. As we may assume that not only A but also Ba must have abridged the text in some respects, there results but one important question concerning the tradition of X from the above comparison of A and Ba: is the tale of the golden tower in the sea old, or is it but an interpolation in Ba? For the solution of this problem we have to go back to the passage quoted on p. 155 from HB. A careful reading shows that it is somewhat corrupt. The sentence on the tres filii cujusdam militis Hispaniae does not fit well in the context. The writer, who had first related Xemed's retiu-n to Spain, overlapped the rest of the story and mentioned Mil and his sons, because they also came from Spain. Then he returns to Nemed. The reason of the introduction of a sentence i) on Mil lies apparently in the fact that the end of Xemed's invasion was given before the details of their struggle at Conang's tower. The rest of Xennius' description of the battle of Tor Couaing agrees wonderfully well with that of LG. The men of Xemed besiege the tower in the sea cum omnibus chdis suis] then there come aliae naves ad expugnandam turrim. The other boats cannot have been Xemed's but the enemy's : so it is understood that Xemed had conquered the tower, for the enemy wanted to attack it again. This is exactly what is told in LG and the aliae naves corres- pond to Morc's fleet in A (so this represents an old tradition though it is not mentioned in Ba). Afterwards they were all swallowed up by the sea, except the crew of one boat: here, too, we find again the tradition of A and Ba. Xow does HB contain a trace of the story of the golden tower, visited by Xemed before 1) I think this sentence was misunderstood by Zimmer (Nenn. Yiud. p. 221). HB § 13 says the Meic Miled remained in Spain per spacium imius anni, while § 15 has per imdtos annos. This controversy is removed if we take apud illos in the sentence quoted as 'with the descendants of Nemed': the Meic Miled had arrived in Spain many years before, but they did not meet theii' kinsmen until then : they remained together in Spain for another year. 158 A. G. VAN HAMm.. he reached Ireland? I think it does. The words tennit porfutn in Hibernia fractis navihus ejus cannot have any other meaning than that Nemed's ships were wrecked before he came to Ireland, and the story of the golden tower is the only means to explain it. Consequently the fact is once for all established that A and Ba represent together the exact tradition of X, which — leaving aside the creation of plains, lakes &c.. a usual ornament of every invasion — had not changed in any respect since HB. But there is a portion of Gabál Xemid, which does not properly belong to it at all: the end, containing the adventures of Nemed's descendants. According to LG some of them went to Britain, others to Greece, and a third group to the Northern Islands. Of all this HB has not one word; in § 13 it is under- stood that Nemed went back to Spain and that from thence his descendants came to Ireland; then § 14 goes on: novissime venit dam hodor, et ihi habitavit cum omni genere suo usque hodie. Istorith, Istorini films, ttmrit Dalrieta cum suis] Builc autem cum suis tenuit Euboniam insulam, et alias circiter; filii Liethcm ob- tinuerunt in regione et in aliis regionibus, id est Guir et Ceigueli, donee expulsi sunt a Cuneda et a fíliis ejus ab omnibus Brittanicis regionibus. On the filii Liethan, who do not concern us here, see Nenn. Vind. p. 92. Zimmer has made it probable that with dam hoctor the Tuatha De Danann are meant (Nenn. Vind. p. 222), while Builc, of course, is a designation for the Fir Bolg. The tradition that they populated Man and other islands is doubtless genuine, as appears from the Gabál Fer mBolg: co ragaibset i nAraind y i nlle 7 a Recliraind y a nlnsib Gall 7 a n-arailib innsib olchena ut dicitur in Britania^) (Sa). Nennius evidently knew similar traditions about the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danann as LG, but he made them come from Spain; afterwards LG introduced an innovation by designating Greece as the origin of the Fir Bolg — probably in order to create a new connection between the Irish and the Greeks — , and the northern islands as that of the Tuatha De Danann on account of their magical powers, cf. § 26. It is obvious that HB represents an older tradition, as it agrees with the general idea of LG that all the colonies of invaders ') Ut dicitur in Britmiia shows that this passage was taken in Ba from the Irish Nennius, where it occurs in exactly the same words. So the Irish translator of B did not draw it from LG; but he must have had some other Irish source, where it occurred. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 159 came over from Spain, wliich again is based on a sentence in Orosius' 'Adversus Paganos' (see § 22). Here we have again an indication of the evolution of LG in the earliest centuries. As to the Fir Bolg, we are even able to establish the exact time when the innovation was introduced. For LB preserves a sentence from Cin Dromma Snechta quoted above on p. 156, proving that at the end of the 8*^^ century the two traditions existed alongside of each other. Probably the one current in Britain at the time was somewhat older than the one in Ireland, but there cannot be a long interval between them, and we may take the second half of the 8^^ century as the period when the Greek origin of the Fir Bolg was established. These details on the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danann bring us to the two following invasions. Are the short phrases on da?n hoctor and Builc cum suis in § 14 the survivals of Gabál Fer mBolg and Gabál Tuath nDé Danann in LG? It is hardly possible. Of Partholon and Nemed HB gives a full account, why not then of their successors? We should expect to hear some- thing of the two battles of Magh Tuired and so much more, if Nennius had found the two invasions after Xemed related circum- stantially in his copy of LG. From the text of HB as it is now it can only be inferred that Nennius never saw a complete account of the invasions of the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danann. His short remarks on these invaders have doubtless for their origin only the final passage of Gabál Nemid in LG. For there the descendants of Nemed are enumerated in the same peremptory w^ay as in HB. Nennius may have left out some details, but at the same time there were in his copy particulars of other descend- ants of Nemed that do not figure in LG: Istorith and the sons of Liethan. This is an important conclusion: in Nennius' time the Invasions of the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danann did not yet exist as separate portions of LG, but only as an appendix to the Invasion of Nemed. And even here these two invasions were yet in an older stage. of their evolution, both still having for their starting-point Spain and not Greece or the northern islands. So far the period of organic evolution (HB, A, Ba). In that of compilation (C, D) not much was added. LB again gives the text of Ba with a few interspersed remarks from A, Thus the passage on the battle at Conang's tower, where Ba omits all details of More and his sixty ships, is completed in LB from A. 160 A. G. VAN HAMEL. In the same way some other insignificant particulars are intro- duced from A. Lee II goes a little farther than LB by giving some new traditions, at least in the final section. But as these additions mainly refer to the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danann, it will be better not to give them here, but in the two next paragraphs. As to Gabál Xemid itself, Lee II only adds a genealogy of Nemed and Partholon. which does not agree with any other tradition and probabij^ was taken from a rather corrupt source: Is examail fogahar in genelacli sa Parrthaloin 7 Nemid .i. da mac Agnoimean mic Sdairn mic Thceid niic Beoem mic Mair mic Airrthecht mic lathacht mic lathfeth mic Ncei mic Laimiach. Sil mBeotJioich mic lardanainis, Sil Semiainis mic Sdairnainis. Sil Fergusa Leithderg mic Nemid, is ead fd i Mainn Conain. Nowhere else is there a tradition that Partholon and Xemed were brothers 1), and the rest of the genealogy, though it contains some very old names (see § 13), is quite incomplete if compared with the original genealogy in Ba. So it may be dismissed here as a corrupt offspring of the pedigree quoted on p. 142. For the rest there is nothing new on Nemed in Lee II. The same thing may be said of D, except the account of the battle at Conaug's tower. This story is more elaborate in D than in any other text, and probably O'Clery used other sources for it. All the additions in D cannot be based upon mere fiction, as the poem 'Togail Tuir Couainn* (LL b 7), for instance, agrees with D in some respects; thus in both sources the three chiefs who escaped from the battle, divide Ireland into three parts, and do not leave the country until they are compelled by a pestilence and by fear of a second attack by the Fomoraig. It is very likely that there existed a separate account of this battle, just as there were separate tales of the two battles of Mag Tuii^ed, but it would be beyond the scope of the present investigation to look for traces of it here. § 18. The Fir Bolg. Builc cum suis teniiit Euhoniam insulam et alias circiter, this is all HB has of the fourth invasion; besides, as has been shown on p. 158, HB still made the Fir Bolg come over fi'om Spain 1) Ba and C preserve an additional tradition that Xemed descended from Agla, a sou of Partholon. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 161 and not from Greece. So the tradition of their sojourn in Greece and the hard slavery they endured there did not yet exist. HB does not teach us anything more. . That the Gabál Fer mBolg- occurred in Cin Dromnia Snechta, even with the Greek episode in it, is seen in the phrase preserved in Ba and C, and quoted on p. 155. Yet neither HB nor Cin Dromma Snechta knew this invasion as a separate portion of LG, for, so far as we can judge from the scanty vestiges, both treat the story of the Fir Bolg as a sequel to Gabál Xemid: in HB only one short sentence is devoted to it, while the preceding invasions are given at full length, and the one phrase of Cin Dromma Snechta bearing on it that has survived, is given in the MSS. under Gabál Nemid, and not under Gabál Fer mBolg. An argumeiitum ex silentio is always somewhat dangerous, but liere it seems to be justified by the wording of HB. If the whole of Partholon's and Xemed's invasion is ancient and the full history of the Meic Miled, why then not give the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danann in extenso too? The supposition that the fourth and the fifth invasion did not yet exist as separate episodes in Nennius' time attains a high degree of probability, which is increased by the consideration that they are given twice in our texts of LG: once in a short form at the end of Gabál Nemid, and once more elaborately afterwards. But of course, the supposition needs to be corroborated by more conclusive arguments; on which see §§ 24—26. The first full account we have of the fourth invasion is that of Ba, as preserved in S. Semion and his companions fled after the battle of Tor Conaing to Greece, where they were enslaved and had to make fertile plains out of the rocky soil: tarriidh uire for leccaib lomma comtar ^miiglie fo scothaih. Loathing their bondage, they made boats from the bags (bolga) in which they had brought the soil from Ireland, and went back to their own country. This happened two hundred years after the battle. They divided Ireland into three parts, and of their five chiefs Slaine got the first part, Gann and Sengann the second, Genann and Rudraige the third. These three groups are the Fir Bolg, Fir Domnann and Galeoin. Then follow different etymologies of these names. The five chiefs just mentioned were the first five kings of Ireland. Their successors were Fiacha Ceunfinn mac Stairn, under whom all the cattle had white heads, Rinnal mac Genainn, Fodbgenid mac Zeitschrift f. celt. Philologie X. H 162 A. G. VAN HAMEL, Sengainn, under whom spears grew on the trees, and Eochu mac Eire. During the reign of the last king came the Tuatha De Danann and the first battle of Magh Tuired was fought. In this battle Eochu was killed. In his time there had been no rain but only dew in Ireland, there was no year without harvest, and he was the first to make laws. Nuadu. king of the Tuatha De Danann, lost his hand in the same battle, so that he had to get a silver hand. The Fir Bolg fled to the surrounding islands, where thej^ lived until they were banished bj^ the Picts. Then they came back to Ireland, and received land from Coirpre Niafer; but afterwards they were exterminated by the Ulstermen under Cuchulainn and Con all Cernach. The whole narrativ'e is illustrated by these poems: Fir Bolg hatar sunn a sei, on the length of each king's reign, Findaig in senchus diadd, on the whole Invasion, Coic coicidh on the division of Ireland. The tradition of A, of course is much shorter, especially as it lacks the adventures of the Fir Bolg after the first battle of Mag Tuired, and even the account of the battle itself. Is this an addition in Ba, or was it omitted in A? The battle of Mag Tuired had no need to be described here, for a longer narrative on it recurs in the Invasion of the Tuatha De Danann. In fact, here it serves only as an introduction to the later adventures. In those further adventures there is an allusion to the Ulstersaga, which does not occur anywhere else in LG. Besides, Ba states in the middle of the story: is í sin iniirci 31ac nUmoir, and the narrative breaks off suddenly with the words yrl. Hence it follows that W' e have here a separate tale, entitled Imirci Mac n Umoit-, w^hich was interpolated by the author of Ba, as it bore on the same subject as the Gabál Fer mBolg. For the same reason the poem Findaig in senchus seems to be a recent addition in Ba, as well as the account of the first battle of Mag Tuired. But A also introduced a few additions: a poem by Columcille {Dene mo fresneis a mit) and a genealogy of King Slaine back to Nemed: Fir Bole clanna Dela mic LoitJi (or Loicli) mic Tait mic Ortait mic Trihuit mic Gothoirb mic Goiscen mic Fortech mic Semion tnic Ergalain mic Beoain mic Stairn mic Nemid. This genealogy does not occur in Ba, and may have been taken from elsewhere. For the rest Ba and A are identical, save for some slight details. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 163 The same may be said of C, at least of LB, which obviously is but a compilation of A and Ba. But Lee II intro- duces a few innoA^ations, especially on the origin of the Fir Bolg and the etymology of their names. These are given, however, in the final portion of Gabál Nemid, where the Fir Bolg are mentioned for the first time. Of course they do not all represent ancient traditions, but are rather the results of recent speculations. I give them here as a curiosity: Fir Bolg immorro do rada riu ona lolcaib criad rocuirsead forna lecaih loma 7 Fir Domnand 0 domain toirneam na h-niri forna lecaih Inma 7 Gaileoin ona gaib leoin rohai nco oc tachailt na h-uiri. No Fir Bole do rada riu dia fuaridar crich urclioideacli sa Greic 0 rig Grec Ian do piastaih nevie co rohe ccemna doronsat forna piastaih uir Erenn do tharrad leo i mholcaih comho Fir Bole iad ona holcaih uiri rucsad leo na curehaih. . . . Is airi adbearar Fir Bole frill uair doherdis uir leo a Herind da reic re Grecaih ar or y ar airgead do thuigiudug na eathraeh. Uair dohadar naithreaelia nemneclia nemi 7 piasta urcJioidecha isna catlirachaih sin la Greeu y is esin hunad firindi in adhair fa n-ahar Fir Bole riu y no iheiddis eusin cendaigecht sin soir y anoir cacha hliadna 7 Fir Domnann 0 domain toirnem na li-uiri isna holeaih 7 Gaileoin ona tachailt. Ocus is do sil Nemid doih dihlinaih [sc. Fir Bolg and Tuatha De Danann]. All this is but an expansion of the etymologies given in Ba, though there is no mention made there of the venomous animals in Greece: but the well-known legend that Ireland does not tolerate serpents or snakes will easily account for this additional etymolog}'. On the other hand it should be noticed that Lee II omits a second etymology of 'Gaileoin' that was given in Sa: gaileon no gailfhian, .i. in trian nogehedh lama forna da trian aile\ this was adopted by O'Clery: Galcoin eccin (A. go deimhin) ona ngail rogahhsat ainmniucchudh. As to D, it does not contain anything new, but for the introduction of another poem Ere dras na n-iorgal. But the composition of the whole section is changed. O'Clery had omitted the final portion of Gabál Nemid on the further adventures of the descendants of Semion and Bethach. He prefixed the passage referring to the Fir Bolg to the fourth invasion, and that on the Tuatha De Danann to the next. Though this change doubt- less meaiit a considerable gain to the unit}" of the work, its original aspect was to a large extent altered by it. 11* 164 A. G. VAN HAMEL, § 19. The Tuatha De Danaiin. Zimmer (Nenn. Vind. p. 222) suggests that the following passage in HB § 14 contains an allusion to the Gabál Tuath nDé Danann: novissime venu dam Jiodor ('a company of eight men'); et ibi habitavit cum owmi gcnere suo usque hodie. He compares it with a passage in Ba, which apparently represents a very old tradition: Atberat co mhad é Bethach mac lardainis tuisech na gabala 7 na n-eladan 7 secJit toisig iar sin .^. Dagda, Diancecht, Creidni, Lucha, Nuada Argatlam, Lag mac Cein, Goibnenn. Unfortunately Zimmer does not adduce any arguments in favour of his hypothesis, and therefore it is better to leave the question open as to whether Nennius knew at all of the Tuatha De Danann or the 'Clanna Beothaig'. In any case he does not give their name nor was there in his copy of L6 a separate chapter devoted to them ; but if they really are implied there, they were treated as the Fir Bolg, that is to say in the appendix to the Invasion of Xemed. From Cin Dromma Snechta not even the slightest allusion to them has been preserved. Our oldest trust- worthy authority on the Tuatha De Danann is the next one : Ba, where we find the following account. The Tuatha De Dauann came to Ireland in clouds and mists and burned their ships after them. They had been living in the northern islands of the world, where they had learned the art of sorcery. They had used it in a battle between the Athenians and the Philistines by resuscitating the Athenian dead. They had learnt their art in four cities, Failias, Goirias, Finnias and Muirias; from the first of these they brought the Lia Fail to Ireland. On their arrival Nuadu was their king; but when in the first battle of iiag Tuired his hand had been cut off by the Fir Bolg, they put Bress in his place. Afterwards Diancecht made a silver hand for Nuadu, and he was restored in the kingdom; but in the second battle of Mag Tuired the Fomoraig killed him. In the same battle Lug killed his grandfather Balar Balcbéimnech. For this same Lug the feast of Lugnasad was celebrated; his fostermother was Tailltiu, who was married successively to Eochu mac Eire and to Eochu Garb mac Duach Daill, and who gave her name to the town of Tailltiu. The successive kings of the Tuatha De Danann were: Nuadu, Bress, Lug, Eochu Ollathair or the Dagda, Delbaed mac Ogma, Fiacha mac Delbaed, and the ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 165 three sons of Cermad, Mac Cuill, Mac Cecht and Mac Greine. For the rest the whole chapter consists of the names of their aes ddna and their g-enealogies. Along with a few shorter poems, there are two long- ones illustrating- the prose text, Heriu co n-ualll CO n-idnaih and Tuaiha De Danann fo ch'amair. On the whole the account of A agrees with that of Ba. But in some particulars there are salient differences. A omits the story of the Athenians and the Philistines as well as the four magic cities, although the mentioning- of the Lia Fail makes it probable, that they did occur in the source of A. In the same way A hasn't the statement on the eight leaders of the Tuatha De Danann, quoted on p. 1G4, or a tract as to whether they were demons or not. On the other hand, A adds to the list of people belonging to the Tuatha De Danann several genealogies — perhaps in order to make good the loss of some mythical aes ddna — , and a poem Esiid a eolcliu can on by Flann Mainistrech. It is impossible now to make out what is ancient in these traditions, and what is due to recent speculations; an investigation of the Gabál Tuath nDé Danann would be in itself very interesting, but out of place here. It is very likely that both A and Ba, after they diverged from X, added some passages; for there were so many tales extant on the Tuatha De Danann. Even in Bb this was done, as appears from the tale entitled Imthcchta Tuirill Bicreo, which is not even found in A. Besides, it should be noticed that Gabál Tuath nDé Danann in its literary form is still in the process of formation more than any other Invasion. The trad- iticns it contains are not yet fixed. Thus Ba first says of the Tuatha De Danann dolotar dochum Herenti cen ethru cen bar- ceo i nnellaih ciach co rofersait for Sliahh Chonmaicnc Bein i Connachtaihh , but athearat araile comad i n-dhraih notluustais. The second opinion recurs in the next portion: atherat immorro fairenn aili comad morlonyas tancatar Tuatha De Danann a n- Erinn y roloiscsit a mharca 7 is don dluim dach hai dib ica losead adubratar araile conid isin dluim ciach thistais 7 ni h-eadh on, ar is iat so na da fochaind ararloiscsit a longa A. arna fogbatis fini Fomra iat do fogail forro 7 arna fogbatis fein conair theichid a hErinn. There is another controversy as to whether the Tuatha De Danann were demons or not, which is answered by Ba in the negative, because the arts that were introduced by them never were destroyed, not even after the coming of the Faith. 166 A. G. VAN HAMEL The numerous stories current on the Tuatha De Danann caused a gradual amplification of their Gabál during- the evolution of LG, In LB different opinions are expressed (as on Orbsen, whether he was Manannan himself or his brother) and many names of aes ddna are added, new particulars on Lug are given, and the whole of the 'Tuatha' are summed up in a long poem Eisdead ces eagnai. This poem was left out in A as appears from a marginal note in LL: Hie debet esse Estid ces egna. Lee II does not deviate from LB in the Gabál Tuath nDé Danann it- self, but it adds many suppositions as to the origin of the Tuatha De Danann, just as it does for the Fir Bolg in the final part of Gabál Nemid. They are as follows: Adbearaid aroile Tuatha De Danann comad do sil Beothaich mic lardanainis doih A. do muinter Nemid, don lucJit dochuadar soir do chuindgid na h-ingine ar gahastair, 7 doronsat feis niair thair CO tangadar iarum cind re maire a n-ui 7 a n-iarmui; la med a n-eolais dano dolodar cen noithi cen eathra co ndeisidar for Sleib Comnaicne Bein i Condachtaib. Alberaid araile comad deamna grada ecsamla teachadar do nim arten risin hinges dodea- chaid Luitcifear cona deamnaih do nibh, ar fcemad cliuirp cerda umpu, do millead 7 d' aslach for sil nAdaim. Is he les fristucadar ces in iarmorachta sin i ndiaid demain 7 a muintiri. Tiagaid thra in lucht sin i sidaib 7 tiagaid fo mtiirib 7 tiagaid i conrechtaib 7 tiagaid co h-amaide 7 tiagait co tuaiih cingtha. Is as sin is bunadas doib uili A. muinter demain. Ni ruca gcnelach na ndaine sea for ciila nocho rofeasidar ßr in domain olchena. Ocus do- rcebadar in sluag sa uili la fcrindi Mac Milead 7 la tairchidal chreidme Crist. Acht ata isin lihar de subternis asbeartadar araile comad fileada do Grecaib Tuatha De Danann co n-iniad a cumachta CO n-imthigdis for muirib cen leasdru i ndiaid ina deasorbibain bithfaithi (sic), llobdar tuatha rig 7 cenela, it e anmanna na coimthech cona tuatJiaib dea .i Dealbceth 7 Ealathan 7 Breas, las roferad cath Brcsi A. cath Muigi Tuiread fri Fomorchaib, 7 Dagda 7 Lug Lamfota fodcn. With this theory of the mysterious 'Liber de Subternis' cf. the statement in the Gabál Tuath nDé Danann of Lee II: tancadar asa Grec Sccitheacda. As to version D, the Gabál here begins with an introduction taken from the appendix of Gabál Nemid, in the same way as Gabál Fer mBolg. O'Clery makes the Tuatha De Danann come from the innsl tuaisccrtucha na Grecci. The section on the ces ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 167 ílána is veiy succinct. No innovations are introduced, but for a very strange genealogy of Bress' grandfather Net who according to all the other versions was a grandson of Alldui, the ancestor of all the Tuatha De Danann; while D has: Breas m. Ealatliain m. Ned m. Ciolcaigh m. Floisc m. Lipairn m. Galalm m. Larccaidh m. Mercill m. Sailtcldaraigh m. Sdairn FMaclaiyh m. Sipuirn m. Sadail m. Jjcad m. Effic m. Pelist m. Fedil m. Cais m. Caim m. Nóe. By tracing this genealogy back to Cam, O'Clery probably wanted to corroborate his view^ that the Tuatha De Danann really were demons. § 20. The Meic Miled. Nennius § 13 speaks of the sons of 3JÍ1 : et postea veneriint ires filii cujusdam militis Hispaniae cum triginta cndis apud illos et cum triginta conju gibus in unaquaque ciula, et mansenint ihi [sc. in Hispania] per spaciiim nnius anni, and again in § 14: et postea veneriint ad Hiherniarn post mille et duos annos postquam mersi sunt Aegyptii in Faihrum Mare. From Cin Dromma Snechta LB has taken a remark concerning the meeting of Banba and Eriu (queens of the T. D. D.) with the sons of Mil ; and a note on the same matter is quoted from Liber Hymnorum in the Trip. Life of S. Patrick (ed. Stokes p. 426). Another note in Liber Hymnorum, glossing Fiacc's Hymn vs. 37 (Thes. Pal, II, p. 316) saj^s : Se meic Miled y se meic Bile meic Breguin simul veneriint ad Hiherniarn sed clariores sunt filii Miled quam fblii Breguin. Haec sunt nomina filioruni Miled: Eber, Erimon, Ir, Bonn, Amargen, Colptlia. 0 Eber atat fir Muman et ab eo Mumonia dicitur; o Erimon immorro ata LetJt Cuind ule y Lagein cemnithaat Ulaid, 0 h' immorro ataatside. It uate dano clanna in triir aile y nescio ubi sunt. Acht is o Band nominatur Tech nBuind fri Uerind aniar. 0 CJtolptha dano Ether Colptha uhi Boand in mare exit. Except these sparse statements on the sons of Mil we have no sources on their early exploits other than Ba and A. Fortunately the notes in HB and in Lib. Hymn., scanty though they be, teach us something. Both A and Ba record nine sons of Mil, only two of whom left children, Erimon and Eber. HB knows but three sons of Mil, and Lib. Hymn, states that only Erimon, Eber and Ir were the progenitors of Irish tribes. This 168 A, G. VAN HAMEL, genealogical theoiy seems to be very old, for in the 7*^ century- genealogical poems edited by Kuno Mej^er the sons of Mil already figure as ancestors of royal families. So the three sons of Mil alluded to by Nennius must have been these three pro- genitors of the Irish race^). The other six were added later, as well as, of course, the sous of Bregon &c. No further infor- mation can be drawn from the earliest sources. Let us now consider the earliest texts of LG. The Gabál Mac Miled consists of two parts: the story of Ith and the invasion of the sons of Mil proper. On a fine winter- evening Ith saw Ireland from the tow^er of Brigantia. Though he was mocked at by his brothers, he crossed to the unknown country. His help was required there to settle a controversy between the three reigning Tuatha De Dannan kings on the partition of a certain treasure. Ith advised them to keep friends with each other, and he praised their countrj^, is maitli for n-innsi, as inula a mil y a mes 7 a cruitlinecht, 7 as mesraigthe ar tlies 7 uaclit, ata for furthain iiili innte. The Tuatha De Danann fearing his envy killed him on Mag Itha. His com- panions took his body to Spain, and it was to avenge his death that his brothers went after him. One question obtrudes itself immediately: is this story old? Nennius does not allude to it, but no great importance should be attached to this argu- mentum ex silentio. There are other proofs, however. The praise of Ireland by Ith seems to be an anticipation of that by Amargen, son of Mil, whose priority is vindicated by a (corrupt) retoric occurring in it {lascacli muir — mothach iir — tomaidm n-eisc — iasc and fo thuind — en lethach — mil partacJi lag — tomoAdm n-eisc — iascacli muir). The quarrel among the three T. D. D. kings has nothing to do with Ith but belongs to the stories of the Tuatha De Danann. The name of Ith is merely an abstraction from Mag Itha. And LL (I4b20 — 22) preserves a 1) Notice that they are the three whose uames are taken from various place uames: Erbnon from Erin, Eber from Irish -Latin Eberia, Ir from Old-Norse Iraland or Irar, or perhaps rather from Ang-lo- Saxon Irland or Yrland. My view is corroborated by a line in the poem Naoimsenchas naomh in7isi Fail, of which there are two copies in the Brussels MS. 5100 — 5104: Eiremhon, Hir, Eimher ail tri meic Miled go morghrain or Eireamon, Eber, Ir ail tri mtic Miled a liEaapain. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 169 passage showing- that originally the sons of Mil had' themselves seen Ireland from Brigantia: doronsat meic Miled immarhdig imrama ic tiachtain docimm Herend assin baile in fhaccatar Herind uadib. These words along with the other indications furnish a conclusive proof that the story of Ith is but an inter- polation, and it is no mere accident that it is altogether lacking in HB. As we possess no intermediate stage between HB and X, we cannot infer from external evidence at what time it came in, but this happened in anj' case before the end of the 10*^^ century-, for both A and Ba have it. In the Invasion of the Meic Miled proper we read of acci- dents during the crossing , of struggles with the T. D. D. , who try to keep them off the coast, of the battles of Sliabh Mis and Tailltiu against the demons, of the meeting with Banba, Eriu and Fodla, and of Amargen's retorics in order to ascertain the conquest of the island by the Goidels. Then a struggle arises between Eber and Erimon on the division of the countr}', but Amargen makes peace. Henceforth the descendants of Erimon live in the North, and those of Eber in the South. A comparison of A and Ba shows that this section is almost the same in both. The order is somewhat different as A mentions the death of Airennán, ír, and Scene before the Meic Miled reach Ireland, whereas in Ba it is recorded later, along with that of Donn and Erech. A does not speak of the battle of Tailltiu, and Ba, on the other hand, has but a very summary account of the meeting with Banba, Eriu, and Fodla. But all these slight modifications should be imputed to the scribes, and not to variants in the tradition. Though Ba has one poem, Ocht meic Galaim, which must be based on the story of Galam and Xectinebus, that is to say on a tradition unknown in A, most of the poems are the same in both, even the retorics by Amargen. Another poem that only occurs in Ba, Tascwr Mac Miled dar muir, must be quite late, and the same must be said of Se meic Miledli in A. We may fairly assume that, but for unimportant additions and modifications, A and Ba represent the text of X. "We know that X had not quite the same version as HB, for X had nine (or eight) sons of Mil instead of three. For the rest, none of the traditions enumerated seem to have existed in Nennius' time, for there is not the slightest trace of them in HB. Accordingly, the great development of this Gabál 170 A. G. VAN HAMEL, took place between the 8^^ and the 11^^ century. Before that time it existed onl}' in germ. As to version C, its earliest representative LB once more appears to have been made up of the versions A, Ba and Bb. In the main Ba is followed, but the account of the death of Scene, for instance, has been taken from A. For a few particulars LB is indebted to Bb: for the instance names of the servants' servants {mogaidna mogad) at the crossing to Ireland, which are only found in Bb; for this reason probably LB adds: 7 ni h-iad is lanoirdraica isna leabraibh. "When speaking of Banba, Fodla and Eriu, LB inserts a passage from Cin Dromma .Snechta, and in some other places the text is enlarged a little on the scribe's own account. In the same way Lee II does not deviate much fi-om the older text. The only addition in this MS. that claims special mention is in the tract on Erimon's sons. Of Irial Faith mac Erimoin it is said: is ris adeirthe Nuada Airgedlam, a statement which could hardly be based on a genuine tradition. After a long digression on Erimon's sons and their descendants, the text runs on: Airmidter eland aile do breith do JEremon i n Erinn. i. Alan, Eidenn, Aine, Caithiar, Caithear, Cerna; and in the same way Lee II says of Eber: 7 airmid eolaig eland do beith aiei i n-Erinn A. Conmcel mac Ebir rogob rigi uErenn, 7 Alban, 7 Caur, Corand, Edar, Airb, Airbe. But, as these names themselves show clearly, they owe their existence to comparatively late specu- lations. C therefore does not represent a much further developed stage of the saga. The same may be said of D : O'Clery's version does not go bej^ond Lee II. § 21. Synopsis of the growth of the six Invasions. As to the antiquity of the current traditions, they do not take us back so far here as in the Introduction on the Goidels. There a few remarks in the genealogical poems showed that there existed a story of Mil even before Nennius. Here we have no traces taking us back beyond HB. The copy of LG, used by Nennius. consisted of but three sections: Gabál Partholoin, Gabál Xemid with an appendix on Xemed's descendants, and Gabál Mac Miled. Though several details may have been lacking in that remote period, as, for instance, the making of plains, lakes, forts &c., yet the general trend of Nennius' LG was not ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 171 much different from the one we know from A and Ba. The principal additions in the period 800 — 1000 are : The Invasion of Cesair, which is based on an equally old, but isolated tradition, and the Invasions of the Fir Bolg- and the Tuatha De Danann, which developed from the appendix of Gabál Nemid, under the influence of popular stories. In fact, the germ of these tAvo Invasions was given in that appendix: several groups of invaders, all descending from Nemed, are mentioned there, and among them- Builc and Dam hoctor "the company of eight men'. All additional particulars about them are but later ornaments, in HB they still come over from Spain — like all the other invaders — and not from Greece or the Nortliern islands. According!}' in the sections on the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danann there must have been forces at work in those two centuries that gave the stories quite another aspect; cf. §§ 25 — 26, where it w'ill be shown, that those additions for the most part w^ere patched up from hetero- geneous legends. The Invasion of the sons of Mil, too, Avas subject to important alterations. The tradition represented bj" HB is this: Three sons of Mil — probably Erimon, Eber and ír, as the two first names occur already in early 7*'^ century poems — come from Spain and occupy Ireland. In the period 800 — 1000 the story of Ith was prefixed and the number of companions increased. Of course the account of the struggle between the sons of Mil and the Tuatha De Danann also belongs to that same period, as the Tuatha De Danann themselves were yet unknown as invaders of Ireland in Nennius' time. For the rest no important interpolations can be placed with certainty before the second half of the 10^1^ century. As to later times, both A and Ba have their own inno- vations, which were introduced, however, on a very moderate scale. The same may be said of still later texts, namely the version C and D, where sometimes additional tracts, varying traditions &c. are found, without affecting in any way the original form of the saga. In this regard the history of the Invasions differs widely from that of the Introduction, where so many sepa- rate traditions, belonging to the oldest period, were preserved in the process of compilation. Therefore the Introduction presents a clearer image of the composition of LG, and is the better guide to find its real nucleus, though occasional illustration may also be afforded by the Invasions themselves. 172 A. G. VAN HAMEL, IT. Origin and structure of Lel)or Gral)ála. § 22. Mil and his sons. In the preceding chapters I have endeavoured to show that the history of LGr can be separated into two main periods, that of evolution (till 1000) and that of filiation and compilation (from the 11*'^ till the 17*^^ centurj'). It will be our present task to trace the origin of the traditions that constituted LG as it existed in the second half of the 10* century, viz. in X, Among these again two groups must be distinguished: those occurring in the earliest documents, before 800, and those added in the years 800 — 1000. In § 21 I have given as my opinion that Nennius' copy of LG contained these three sections: the history of the Scotti of Scythia and their coming to Ireland as sons of Mil, the Invasion of Partholon and the Invasion of Nemed with an appendix. Which of these is the real germ of LG? In Ba it is stated that all the successive invaders of Ire- land descended from Eifath Scot. No»v Mil and his sons were, according to the earliest genealogical poems (7* century), the direct descendants of Eifath, while Partholon and Nemed are still unknoAvn. So even in our oldest sources there already existed a connection between Eifath and Mil, so that the story of Mil evidently represents the germ from which LG arose. There are three statements, bearing on Mil and his race, that take us back beyond 800: in HB, the second tradition in Ba (see p. 137 — 130), and the genealogical poems. As none of them preserves a complete version, we shall have to make up the full story out of these three authorities. The elements of the tale that must have existed before 800 are these: The three sons of Mil or Miles Hispaniae came from Spain to Ireland; their starting-point was Brigantia (as appears from the occurrence of Bregou in the genealogical list). Before their sojourn in Spain they had been in Egypt, whither they had fled after being expelled from their original country, Scythia. A genealogical tradition existed already drawing their lineage from Eifath Scot, grandson of Jafeth. No chronological connection had as yet been established, as has been proved on p. 139 from a com- parison of HB and the second tradition of Ba. In the same way the account of the wanderings of the Goidels presents ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 173 quite a different aspect in those two oldest versions; consequently it is not a genuine element of the saga. Whj' did the sons of Mil come from Spain? It was not only they who took that country as their starting-point, but Partholon and Nemed, as well according to Nennius, though later recensions have invented new origins for these. The entire story of the Meic Miled seeing Ireland from BrigantiaO and their coming over from Spain is based on two passages in Orosius' Adversus Paganos: 12 §39, Hiberm'a insula inter Britanniam et Hispaniam sita longiore ah africo in hoream spatio porrigitur. Huius partes priores intentae Cantabrico oceano Briganiiam Gallaeciae civitatem ah africo sibi in circium occurrentem, spatioso intervallo procul spectant, ah eo praecipue promuntorio, uhi Scenae fluminis ostium est et Velabri Lucenique consistunt, and I 2 § 33, Secundus anguhis [sc. Hispaniae] circium intendit, uhi Brigantia Gallaeciae civitas sita altissimum farum, et inter pauca memorandi operis ad speculam Britanniae erigit. Isidore, in the introduction to his 'Historia de regibus Gothorum, AVandalorum et Svevorum', § 1 thus apostrophises his country: Omnimn terrarum^ qtiaeque sunt ah occiduo usque ad Indos pulcherrima es, o sacra, semperque felix principiim, gentium mater Htspania. This expression gentium mater gave birth to the opinion that Spain was the starting- point of all the successive invaders, while the two passages from Orosius explain the story of the tower at Brigantia and the landing at Inber Scene. The next question that arises is: why was Scythia the original country of the Goidels? Here a wrong etymology was at work: Scotti or Scuit = Scythia. Once Scythia was accepted as the origin of the Goidels, their ancestry was fixed also. According to Isidore's Etymologiae — and all other authorities based upon the Aiafisgioi/dg T?jg yijg — it was Gamer ex quo Galatae, id est Galli (1X2,20). Among Gomer's sons, Eifath was the one from whom the Fapldugoni drew their origin; in later Irish tradition the Paphlagoni were the doeni filet i Sleibib Iliphi (LSA), and there is no reason why this tradition should not have been current in the 7^^' century also. The Irish regarded themselves as closely akin to the Gauls, who descended from Gomer; of Gomer's sons there was one whose 1) Cf. p. 169 where it has been shown that originally the sons of Mil themselves saw Ireland for the first time. 174 A. G. VAN HAMEL, progeny lived in Sliab Rife, the mountain range bordering Scytliia. Hence resulted the theory that Eifath was the proge- nitor of the Goidelic race. So far the tradition might have developed naturally from well-known classical works. Now the Goidels had still to be transported from Scythia to Spain. Of com\se, Egypt lay on the route. But why introduce a sojourn of the vir nohilis de Scythia, as Xennius puts it, in Egypt? For this addition the compilers of LG were indebted to another passage in Orosius, whose exact meaning they did not grasp: Adv. Pag. I 10, 19 = His etiam temporihus [sc, when the Israelites left Egypt] adeo iugis et grauis aestus incanduit, ut sol x)er deuia transuectits Universum orbeni non colore affccisse sed igne torruisse dicatur, imjyressumque feruorem et Aetliiops plus solitum et insolitum Scytlia non tulerit. The final words were only intended to help the readers' imagin- ation in order to give an idea of the heat prevailing in Egypt at that time. But the Irish, who regarded the ancient Scythians as their own ancestors, were struck by the word Scyiha and inferred from the passage that there was a Scythian living in Egypt. This conclusion fitted wonderfully well with the theory that the Scythians had moved from their own countr}^ to Spain, as Egypt lay on the way. Only one element of the story now remains to be explained. Why were there three sons of Mil? Here we have the purely Irish part of the saga. We know from the genealogical poems that two of the three sons, alluded to by Nennius, were Erimon and Eber, and in § 20 I have suggested that the third should have been Ir (see p. 168). These three were the hypothetical an- cestors of the Irish royal races, whose names had been fabricated from Eriu^), Eberia (the usual Irish form for Latin Iberia,- 2& appears from the Liber Generationis or Cosmographia, Mon. Germ, Hist. Auct. Ant. IX) and from Anglo-Saxon Liand or Yrland. In case the name Ir should not be so old as the others — it does not figure in the genealogical poems — it may equally well be based on Old-Norse Irar. The name Eber from Eberia'^) proves 1) For the formation cf. other learned names as Partholón, Semión, &e. 2) It does not seem very likely that this name should have arisen under the influence of the Hebrew ancestor EOer, Gen. XI 14. Likewise it is impossible that Eier should preserve the n of the old name for Ireland: Enerio. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 175 that the saga of the Spanish origin of the Irish already existed when those eponymous ancestors were invented, and that these names were fabricated in connection with it. Eber occurs in an early 7^^ century document and Orosius' history was composed in the first half of the 5*^ century; so that we may indicate the 6^^ century as the period when the original LG was composed. Along with it the genealogical tradition of the Irish kings arose. Then the germ of LG was ready. Except Erimon. Eber and perhaps Ir, the story contained hardly any proper names: only Bregon existed as the founder of Brigantia, and the name Mil, father of Erimon and Eber, was adopted from the Latin sub- stantive ?niles] this last, more than any of the others, clearly bears the ti'aces of its learned origin. Bregon was made an an- cestor of Mil. Now we proceed to the period 800—1000. In these years for the first time a chronological association was looked for. At what time did Orosius' Scythian live in Egypt, and why did he leave that country? There were two solutions of this problem: 1« he was there when Pharaoh was drowned in the Bed Sea, and the cause of his expulsion was his help given to the Israelites; and 20 his sojourn fell in the time of Alexander's conquest, and he was driven out by the great Macedonian ruler. So there arose two variant traditions, one of which is preserved in HB and the other in the second tradition of Ba. Both have one element in common: the Scythian is mariied to Pharaoh's daughter Scota. So this princess, who gave her name to all her progeny, must still belong to the preceding period. But in the rest the two versions diverge more and more in the coming centuries. That of HB became the popular one, and was adopted by Maolmuru Otlma and X; its rival was preserved in almost its original form, until it was discovered by the scribe of Ba who inserted it in his copy of X, cf. § 12. The tradition represented by HB was handled by so many scribes that it was greatlj^ enlarged and embellished. Let us now consider its additions. In the first place the genealogical theory was elaborated. There existed already some eponymous heroes of the Irish: Erimon, Eber (Ir?), and Scota. Now three new heroes were in- troduced: Nél, Goedel Glas and Fénius Farsaich. They all got a place in the pedigree of the Meic Miled, but not the same in the various sources, see p. 124; the order, differing in the note 176 A. G. VAN HAMEL, to Fiacc's Hymn, wliere Nél is the son of Goedel Glas, from the usual tradition of LG, where Nél is the father and Goedel the son, as well as the different position occupied b}' Fénius in LSA and in Ba (cf. p. 144), show that these eponymous heroes came in at a period when there was alread}' a number of distinct versions current. The vir nobilis de Scythia, who lived in Egj^pt, banished from his own country, was called Nél. This was, of course, a homage to the royal family of the Ui Néill, being the more acceptable because of the likeness of their name to that of the Egytian river, the Nile. Nél and Scota had a son, Goedel Glas, whose name is said to have passed over to the Goedels. From Féne, the old originally tribal designation of the Irish, Fénius was moulded. This Fénius found his way into LSA, where he was styled a son of Baath mac Magoich meic Jafeth, whereas in LG (as preserved in Ba) he was given a place in the old genealogy of the Irish kings (see p. 142). Other ancestors of the Goedels to whom a special task was assigned on the long way from Scythia to Ireland, were all taken from the same old genealogy: Sru and Esru lead the Goidels from Egypt back to Scythia, Agnoman and Lámfind brought them from Scythia to the Maeotic marshes, Brath guided them from thence to Spain. But these genealogical digressions were not the only add- itions of the period 800 — 1000. Except several that developed naturally out of the text itself (see §§ 10 — 12), there came in a few new connections with biblical history, the origin of which it will be necessary to point out here. A basis of these biblical associations was given by the chronological theorj' of HB that the vir nohilis de Scythia (or later: Nél) was living in Egypt at the time Pharaoh was drowned in the Eed Sea. This theory involved that Nél had known Moses and Aaron; and their relations accordingly were depicted as being of the most intimate nature: so a legend arose that supplied at the same time a good reason for the Goidels' leaving Egypt, as they must have been distrusted by the surviving Egyptians. This legend must be pretty old, as it occurs already in MO: the Goidels are befriended by the Israelites, and after the disaster in the Red Sea they are afraid of the Egyptians, because they have not joined them in the persecution of the populus Dei, and for that reason they leave the country. The most remarkable episode in the whole story is that of Goidel Glas and the snake. Nél's son ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 177 Goidel is bitten by a venomous snake and his death is almost certain: his colour turns livid — hence his epithet 6rZa5. But his father's friends Moses and Aaron cure him : obviously a reminiscence of Num. XXI 6 — 9. The character of Nél, the learned man, who comes to Egypt to teach the languages, seems to have been influenced by that of Joseph (see Orosius, Adv. Pag. I 8). Another connection with biblical history is contrived at an earlier point. Eifath Scot, the biblical ancestor of the Goidels, was a contemporary of Nimrod, in whose lifetime the tower of Babel was built. This coincidence gave birth to the tradition that Eifath had brought with him the Gaelic language from the tower (so in Ba). In later versions this task was assigned to Fénius, the father of Nél, who was said to have fabricated the Gaelic language from the 72 languages. This was the opinion ofLSx\, which was adopted by A; but it quite upsets the chronology, cf. p. 144. An older stage of it is simply this, that Fénius had a school where the languages were taught (MO). No w^onder that LSA, where Eifath was done away with, gave his position at the tower of Babel to Fénius, who had already some connection with it. These biblical touches involved the pre- fixing of a preface which is entirely based on the first chapters of Genesis. It should be noticed, however, that these stories of Nél in Egypt or Eifath at Babel are no slavish imitations of biblical traditions, but independent accretions having only some external relation to them; for the rest they are creations of the imagin- ation. In the same way LG was gradually illustrated by other imaginative digressions: descriptions of their wanderings, founded on the geographical knowledge of the Irish, an account of the struggles between the two royal races in Scythia, and of their battles in Spain, &c. From Isidore a list of Pharaohs was in- troduced into Ba. Of all these further innovations one group particularly claims our attention, namely those based on Irish literature itself. In the first place there is the story of Caicher drui. After leaving Scythia, whither they returned from Egypt, the Goidels are allured, on their voyage, by the song of the mermaids (niedrad na miirduchonn). The druid Caicher saves them by putting wax in their ears. Afterwards they reach Sliab Eife. There Caicher says: 'lEirgid, ni anfam de co risani Erinn! 'Cia h-airm ita an Erinn', ar Laimfinn. 'Is sia uait indai in Scithia 7 ni sinne fen Zeitschrift f. celt. Philologie X. 12 178 A. G. VAN HAMEL, ric (sic) acht ar dann hi cinn xcc. hliadan.' From Sliab ßife they come to the Maeotic marshes, where they remain for many generations, until Bráth leads them to Spain. The sojourn in the Maeotic marshes came in in the 9^^' century (see p. 126), so we may fairly assume that the tale of Caicher was introduced at the same period, as these two elements are closely connected. The singing" mermaids are of course a reminiscence of the Odyssey. The idea of a prophecy about Ireland may have been borrowed from Exodus XXXIII 1, but the way it is worked out stamps it as belonging to a special class of innovations. The druid possessing supernatural knowledge belongs neither to biblical nor to classical saga, but is an element of the purely Irish tales. It would be quite be3^ond the scope of the present investigation to trace the original meaning of the druid in Irish literature i); it will suffice to state that in the 9*'* century LG began to be Irish- ised, or that in this period elements from Irish saga- literature were adopted in LG. The prophesying druid is a well-known figure in the Ulster -saga, from which it was borrowed by the pseudo- classical saga. The history of the Introduction of LG enables us to point out the exact time that this happened. See on this also §§ 24—26. Nor is the story of Caicher the only instance belonging to this class of innovations. The further adventures of the sons of Mil afford many instances of it. In MO the whole Gabál Mac Miled appears in its final form, whereas in HB there is not a single trace of the many particulars that give to it its special character. Yet from Gin Dromma Snechta we know that in the 8*^ century there existed a tradition that the sons of Mil, at their arrival in Ireland, found Banba and Eriu living there^). So at that time some legend of their coming to Ireland had already arisen, but we do not know how far it was developed. It cannot have been very old then, for Gin Dromma Snechta also preserves the older tradition that Banba was the first woman who reached Ireland before the Deluge (see p. 151). It seems highly probable that the transferring of Banba from antediluvian times to the Invasion of the sons of Mil was the cause of the addition of all ^) See on this my hypothesis in the Actes du IVe Congrés international de I'histoire des religions, Leiden 1912, p. 147. ^) Cf. also Cormac § 1265 (Anecd. IV) : Tres enim erant regine A. Ere et Fotla et Banba. Lege Gabala Erenn si uis plenius scire. ON LEBOR GABÁLA. 179 their further adventures; for Banba was considered as a queen of the Tuatha De Danann, who inhabited Ireland before the Goidels. Therefore the 9*^ century, or perhaps the second half of the 8*^^ century — for Nennius may have used an older copy — may be indicated as the period these adventures were introduced. The first of these additions is the story of Ith, on which see p. 168. It was introduced in order to provide a reason for the sons of Mil crossing over to Ireland. Its elements are perspicuous: the name is derived from Mag Itha, where Ith was killed; his meeting with the kings of the Tuatha De Danann and his eulogy of Ireland before them, is a reminiscence of Exodus XXXIII 3. For the rest there is nothing new in it, but for an allusion to a Tuatha De Danann story (viz. that of the treasure of Fiaclma mac Delbaith), which confirms my hypothesis that it was in this period the first connections with Irish literature proper were effected: all the traditions of the Tuatha De Danann came in then. More interesting is the real Gabál Mac j\Iiled. The three sons of Mil have increased in number; the six new sons bear names partly taken from geographical ones {Bonn from Tech Duinn, Colptha from Inher Colptha), while Erannan is a new formation from Eriu, Febria occurs in the oldest genealogical poems, and Airech acquired his name from a well-known noun. The other companions, as the sons of Bregon, &c., all have names reminiscent of Irish topography. Only Amargen ('the Grief -born') is an exception. His name stands apart from the others, and so does the part he plays in the saga. He is the only character of the story. After the sons of Mil have reached the coast, they are driven back to sea by the 'demons', who raise a magic tempest which causes fearful havoc; many of the sons of Mil are drowned, Donn and Airech near Tech Duinn, Erennan falls from the mast, &c. At last Amargen saves them from the evil plight to which they are brought by the Tuatha De Danann. Amargen is the centre of all the stories contained in Gabál Mac Miled. Of the two battles fought by the Goidels against the Tuatha De Danann we know nothing but the mere names: Cath Sléibe Mis i) and Cath Tailtenn. But of Amargen we hear a 1) This must have been a cath draoidhechta. Cf. a note in the Franciscan Lib. Hymn, (cited Trip. Life p. 38): intan tancadar meic Miled a liEaspain ille dochum tiErend 7 intan doroactatar co Sliab Mis i Ciairrigi Luachra, atconcatar in sliab Idn do demnaib fo sciathaib. 12* 180 A. G. VAN HAMEL, good deal. Still lie does not yet occur in HB, and as he does not leave anj* children, he cannot be an old trait of the saga, which was originally genealogical. He must have come in at the end of the 8*^^ or in the 9*^^ century. \^^e have four retorics ascribed to him: one containing his judgment, when his com- panions are not allowed to land by the Tuatha De Danann (Fir torachta tuinide dar not tonda), one when the tempest, raised by the Tuatha De Danann. tosses the Goidels about on the sea {Ailiu iath Erenn). one when they reach the coast {Am gdeth i