Notes to Poem XIX
i. MS Text: The text of this poem begins at the foot of p. 205 of the MS; it occupies the whole of pp. 206 and 207, and concludes at the top of p. 208. Fading in the margins of certain pages sometimes affects the legibility of line endings, but not seriously; a lacuna caused by the removal of a small section of the folio destroys part of the first line on pp. 206 and 207.
The scribe has corrected orthographic and other errors in the draft, but there is no conclusive evidence that another version of the poem was available.
A cross has been inserted in the left hand margin of the text, beside the opening line; this is probably the work of a later hand, perhaps aimed at drawing attention to the poem.
ii. General background: The poem is in the form of a dialogue between Eimhear, the wife of Cú Chulainn, and Conall Cearnach, an Ulster hero who has just completed the avenging of Cú Chulainn’s death. He brings to Eimhear the heads of Cú Chulainn’s adversaries; these are strung out on a thong (gad), and Eimhear asks Conall to identify the heads in turn.
The avenging of Cú Chulainn’s death by Conall Cearnach is told in a prose tale known as ‘Deargruathar Chonaill Chearnaigh’ (DCC). This tale may be found independently, or it may occur alongside the story of Cú Chulainn’s death, or as part of a composite biography of the hero (for editions see Van Hamel, Compert CC, 115-33; J.H. Lloyd, Dearg Ruathar CC, which has the text of the poem). The present poem is commonly found at the end of DCC; it is thus placed in RIA MSS 23 K 37, 23 L 27, and Nat. Lib. Scot. MS 72.1.38. When the poem occurs independently, it may be preceded by a brief prose introduction explaining its relationship to DCC, as in RIA MS 23 L 13. Even when no such explanation is given, as in BDL, one may suppose that a knowledge of DCC is assumed, since the relationship between the poem and the prose tale is close, but the poem does not elucidate the circumstances of Conall’s retribution.
iii. Later versions: As indicated in the preceding section, the poem occurs in MSS later than BDL which are found in both Ireland and Gaelic Scotland. It is clear that the versions preserved in both countries are very closely related, since they generally agree with one another in presenting a sequence of quatrains different from that in BDL, and in attesting a number of quatrains not found in the BDL text. The text reproduced in DCC is typical of this later MS group; it contains the following BDL quatrains in the order indicated: l, 2, 4, 6, 13, 5, 10, 14, 15, 16, 12, 17, 18, 7, 8, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 (vaguely). BDL q. 9 and q. 24 thus appear to be unattested. The most conspicuous number of quatrains not found in BDL occurs at the end of the DCC text; here there are three further quatrains in which Eimhear elaborates her grief for Cú Chulainn, and repeats her plea to be placed in the same grave, while one of the quatrains laments the death of Cú Chulainn’s two horses. RIA MS 23 P 13 has a quatrain referring specifically to the digging of the grave, and although this is not attested in DCC, it occurs in Nat. Lib. Scot. MSS 72.1.36 and 72.1.38. Following their equivalent of BDL q. 13, the later group also include a quatrain identifying the heads of Maol and Miodhna, who, according to DCC, were found playing hurley with Cú Chulainn’s head (Van Hamel, p. 122). This quatrain does not appear in BDL. The later versions have two interrogative quatrains by Eimhear (following their equivalents of BDL qq. 6 and 10) which are not attested in BDL, although the latter echoes BDL q. 13.
A Scottish Gaelic version of the poem is preserved by Kennedy. This divides into two sections, the first of which would appear to be Kennedy’s own work. The second section contains much genuine material, which includes the quatrain on the heads of Maol and Miodhna (here Manus and Suimhne). This quatrain is also found in an attenuated form in another Scottish version of the poem collected in Islay by Alexander Carmichael.
Given that DCC records the decapitation of Maol and Miodhna, it is conceivable that BDL is idiosyncratic in not attesting a quatrain about their heads, especially as it is so consistently preserved in the later versions. However, it seems evident that the later versions have a tendency to add quatrains, particularly towards the end of the poem; this is indicated by the way in which lines and general ideas from certain BDL quatrains (e.g. BDL q. 24) seem to be dispersed or echoed in the quatrains characteristic of the later texts. In addition, the later versions of the poem lack the formal dúnadh found in BDL.
iv. Metre: Rannaigheacht Mhór
v. Line annotation
Ascription:
Conall: The MS form ċonnil clearly attests a punctum over the initial letter, but it seems unlikely that we should interpret this as ch-; as indicated elsewhere (see coilean, XVI, 8 n), /x/ and /k/ appear not to be distinguished decisively in the MS. This could account for the use of -sch- in the MS form eddirschoil in this same ascription, where one might expect -sc- or -sk-. Cf. 16, 23, 28 n, 49, 50 etc.
1 cá: The context will not allow MS ċa to be taken as cha here. See the previous note.
4 <fo bhaidhbh>: HP interprets the MS reading foo fyve as fá a bhfaidhbh, and translates the line ‘recount the men whom thou hast despoiled of them’, the literal translation presumably being ‘whose spoils they were’. The possibility that MS fyve could represent a form of fadhbh is supported by the Ed. MSS: thus dar bfhaobh (Ed.36) and dan faidhbh (Ed. 38); cf. d’ár baineadh (DCC, and other Irish MSS). Nevertheless the HP interpretation seems strained. The present tentative restoration suggests that badhbh, ‘scald-crow’, is perhaps to be recognised in the MS form fyve, and that the reference is to men ‘under a scaldcrow’, i.e. lying dead on the battle-field.
5 nighean Fhorghaill: Cf. XXIII, 34 n.
6 na <b[reith binn]>: The lacuna in the MS folio has removed most of this phrase; it is restored as suggested on the evidence of the Ed. MSS and 23 L 27, but cf. na mbrat mbinn (DCC, na mbrat mín (23 L 13).
9 <Cia>: The initial letters of this line and 11 are slightly smudged in the MS, but there is little doubt about the words represented in either case.
12 < >: It is difficult to know how the MS form ne/raa is to be understood. It seems likely that the oblique stroke is meant to separate two elements which the scribe originally wrote as if they constituted one word. HP restores the reading as nár athruigh, following DCC and the other later versions, but while this gives good sense it is hard to reconcile with the MS evidence. It is, of course, possible that the MS reading is based on scribal error; did the scribe intend to place letters in superscript to make up a lost syllable in his first attempt?
18 sli<m>: Gum obscures the final letter(s) of the MS form, but Cameron (RC I, p. 66) was able to read sleme.
22 dho <chreach>: ȝi ȝrach MS. If the second element of the MS reading does represent chreach, which seems highly likely, it is nevertheless unusual to find ȝ- in the MS for ch- in normal orthography. It may be that the scribe was influenced by his having written ȝ- as the initial of the preceding element; with this lenition of the preverb cf. MS ȝo we for dho bhí in XXVII, 43. do chreach (DCC, and most other MSS).
25 Cia an: The first letter of the second element in the MS reading ka in appears at first sight to be o, but this is evidently due to slight smudging.
ghabhas tú: ȝawis tow MS. It seems possible that the verb form could be understood as pres. rel., and it could have been such an interpretation which was responsible for the use of the 2 sg. pers. pron. HP restores to the 2 sg. pret. form ghabhais and omits the pron. as in DCC. This improves the line, since it is hypermetric unless we allow elision between tú and ad, and this suggests that ghabhais may have been the original reading.
28 ciod <bheir> thú: keid verre how MS. The MS reading verre how is taken tentatively as the analytic 2 sg. pres. indic of beirim, but verre could perhaps represent bheire, its synthetic equivalent, or even bheireadh, the mod. Sc. G. form of the condit. The first possibility best accommodates the pron. form thu, and it maintains the length of the line; cf. the preceding note. HP emends to créad fa bhfuile, as in DCC and most other versions.
air leas a c[h]inn: RIA Dict. s.v. 1 les (b) cites the idiom ar les x, ‘for the benefit of x’. In the context, however, the legal sense of ‘redress’ might be more appropriate for leas (see ibid. (b)); the reference would appear to be to the head of the dead Cú Chulainn, and Eimhear would seem to ask Conall what he is bringing her to make up for its loss. HP’s emended form of the line (see previous note) which is translated ‘how art thou fortunate enough to possess the head?’ does not carry conviction. On the apparently unlenited MS form kinn see the note on the Ascription.
30 <mhic Mhuireadhaigh>: The first element of this phrase is represented in the MS as vc written immediately above the last letter of the preceding word. This suggests that it is a later insertion, and it is probably significant that its removal corrects line length. The insertion was conceivably an attempt to clarify the identity of the Muireadhach referred to. This was in fact the first name of mac Fearghusa himself (Van Hamel, Compert, p. 127), although it seems to have been taken as the name of his father by the BDL scribe or his source. HP emends the line to Muireadhach do chreach gach gort, which may well have been the original reading; Muireadhach (DCC, and most other versions).
c[h]reach: After the first letter of the MS form, the scribe appears to have written l, which he later deleted. This is followed by superscript e representing -re-.
31 <theann>: This interpretation of the MS form hang is consistent with the reading of the later versions; but the MS form could also represent sheang.
34 léi<r>: The final letters of the MS form are now illegible, but the restoration seems clear enough from context and rhyme.
35 <uras>: This interpretation of the MS form hurris would give the line the meaning ‘it is easy to recognise/tell by its grin’; the h- of the MS form need have no phonetic value. HP’s restoration fuaras is not supported by the MS spelling.
37 Leis a súd: les a sowd MS. HP emends to Is leis súd; Is leis sin (DCC, and most other MSS).
38 do-rad: HP translates this line ‘I have left his body crushed and wet with gore’, but do-rad is 3 sg., and the subject is likely to be Lughaidh mac Con Raoi.
dtais: Note the eclipsis of the adj., indicating that the prep. fo (later fa, fá) here takes the accus.
41 To obtain correct line length, one must assume elision between Cia and an, and also between o and as, in addition to that between faide and amach; cf. 33, 49. DCC attests an identical form of this line.
42 a bhrath: The verb would seem to mean ‘spied, reconnoitred’ in this context (cf. RIA Dict. s.v. brath (b)), but the subject is not clear; Conall could have spied on the baidhbh, or vice versa.
43-44 oirnn…ghoin: The MS reads orn̄ and ȝon respectively, but HP restores to orm and dhonn, following DCC and consciously rejecting oirnn; with the restoration ghoin for MS ȝon, cf. do ghoin (23 L 13).
44 na h-airm: ne herm̄ MS. HP emends to an t-arm; in the light of the restoration badhbh (rather than baidhbh); t’arm (DCC, and similarly most other versions).
47 <[do ghuin súd Cú]> : The lacuna in the MS has removed this section of the line, but Cameron (RC I, p. 68) was able to read Di ȝone swt cowchullin, which is the basis of the present restoration. Do ghoinsead Cú Muighe Cairn (DCC); do ghonsad cú chulainn cairn (Ed. 3 and similarly Ed.63).
48 <suinn> : The MS form sw<in> might also be read as sw<m>; the final letter(s) cannot be distinguished easily. The present restoration interprets the form as the pl. of sonn, ‘stake, post, beam, prop’, here used figuratively of a hero (RIA Dict. s.v. 2 sonn). tríd do dheargas m’ airm ’na bhfuil (DCC, and most other versions). HP reads the MS as ’s uime, which might be possible if the actual MS form were swm, but nevertheless emends to tríd following DCC.
50 go <geal ghnaoi>: gi gal ȝnee MS. HP, being uncertain about the interpretation of the MS reading, follows DCC which has go ngoil ngaoith, and similarly Ed. 38. This is not impossible, but it is not easy to reconcile MS ȝnee with ngaoith, unless one supposes that ȝn- is an attempt at conveying eclipsed g-. The present restoration suggests that the noun is gnaoi, ‘distinction, fame’ (RIA Dict. s.v. gnóe II (c)), and that the adj. geal precedes it, forming a loose compound giving the phrase the meaning ‘of brilliant fame’. The interpretation of MS gal as geal may, however, depend on aicill, and whether one restores MS s<e>irre in the previous line as sear or sair, the latter being the restoration in HP.
51 <f>olt: It is unusual to find f- represented by v- in the MS, and the MS form volt in this instance may be influenced by the following eclipsed gen. pl. form verr.
58 The line lacks a syllable as it stands, and HP reads ar an mhoigh thuaidh, as in DCC.
60 C[h]onaill: Before writing the MS form coŋil, the scribe wrote ċw<nn>lai, which he then cancelled. It seems likely that he momentarily confused Conall with Connla, who is referred to as Connla cruaidh in 53.
61 dh’eascairdean: ȝascardin MS. Note the Sc G. pl. ending, and the replacement of the dat. pl. by the acc. pl. in this form.
62 <c>lann Chailidin: ċlann ċallidtene MS. It is difficult to know whether the initial of the first element is to be restored as c- or ch-, given the apparent lack of differentiation between the two forms in this MS text (see note on the Ascription). The fact that the word ċlann is not dat. suggests the former, and that the phrase is to be understood in apposition; but this consideration may not be valid, and it may be that the prep. de was felt to be present (see previous note).
65 Ath Fhir-Dhiadh: The MS attests three attempts to spell this place-name, with relatively slight orthographic differences between the two completed attempts; on the use of r- where one would expect ȝ- in the second element of each of these, see XII, 50 n.
66 <cia an>: The MS form keyn probably reflects the coalescing of the two elements cia and an, and the representation of -ia- in normal orthography by -ey- in the MS, a common occurrence. The MS form might conceivably he restored as caoin, ‘beautiful’, but the interrogative particle best suits the context, as in other quatrains.
dā[n] giall: The MS reading da gallit may be intended to convey da[n] gealladh, but this makes the line hypermetric, and breaks the aicill.
70 mhic nic Niadh: vcnecnee MS. Ros Ruadh is evidently regarded here as the son of mac Niadh’s daughter. HP omits nic, but gains line length by reading MS laɱ as lé mo. Maicniadh fuair bás lem’ neart (DCC); mhic niadh fuar bás lem neart (Ed. 36).
75 eagnaidh: The MS attests a second, and preferable, attempt at spelling this word.
76 na Con: Here and in 82, 90 and 92, cú is regarded as f., but it is m. in 61 and 96.
78 féin: peyn MS. See II, 9 n.
’s: MS is requires to be read as ’s for line length.
A C[h]onaill: Following this phrase in the MS, the scribe wrote vor, representing mhóir, which he then cancelled. It would seem that his eye slipped back to 73 or 65, or that he had become used to writing A Chonaill mhóir, and wrongly anticipated it at this point.
84 <na> bhfeil: na vil MS. It is difficult to know how MS na is to be interpreted. HP assumes that it represents the interrogative particle, but could it be the Sc. G. form of the demon. rel. ‘that which’? If so, the couplet might mean that grief for Cú Chulainn was all that the women of Ireland could express.
85 do-ghéan féin: This restoration follows the original MS reading di ȝeyn fein; the scribe later cancelled ȝeyn fein and wrote ȝarni mai in superscript. The reason for the change is not obvious; the fut. gives better sense than the pret., and the original reading is supported by the later versions.
86 <fā> seach: Cf. V, 27 n.
91 rachainn: The MS form rachfen contains an unhistorical -f- which has presumably come about by analogy with the condits. of regular verbs.
92 na Con: Ultra-violet discloses the faint traces of what may have been the repetition of the opening words of the poem in the manner of a dúnadh in the right-hand margin. Cf. VII, 41-48 n.