Notes to Poem XX
i. MS text: The text occupies the whole of pp. 220–222 of the MS as numbered. The writing is generally clear throughout, except on the outer margins where friction has caused fading. A few readings are therefore difficult to retrieve. Scribal carelessness (it would seem) has resulted in the omission of an entire couplet in one instance (q. 21).
It is apparent that the text of the lay was modified after the writing of the first draft in the MS. One additional quatrain occurs at the foot of p. 221, and four additional quatrains are inserted at the foot of p. 222. The desired position of these quatrains relative to the first draft is indicated by the scribe, using insertion marks and other indicators. An alternative position is also shown for one of the quatrains of the original draft. The additional quatrains are differentiated from the main body of the text not only by their position but by the colour of their ink. The nature of these emendations does not suggest that they arise from carelessness in writing the first draft; rather, it seems more probable that the BDL scribes had access to more than one version of the poem.
The present edition distinguishes the additional quatrains from those of the first draft, but it presents them in the context of that draft, in the positions desired by the scribe.
Below the ascription a later hand, possibly that of the Rev. Dr John Smith (Black, ‘Draft Cat.’), has added ‘Fainsolas. See Miss Brook p. 288’.
ii. General background: This poem was very popular in Ireland and Gaelic Scotland after BDL. In the former it was known as ‘Laoidh Mná an Churacháin’, “Laoidh Easa Ruaidh” or “Laoidh an Bhoidhre Bhoirb”. In the latter it was called “Cath Rìgh na Sorcha”, or “Eas Ruaidh” (O Síochfhradha, p. 151; Thomson, “Catalogue”, item 39).
The BDL version tells how fifty Fian warriors are at Eas Ruaidh (Assaroe, Co. Donegal), when they see a large coracle approaching rapidly under sail. The coracle contains a young girl whose surpassing beauty is apparent when she steps ashore. The warriors escort her to Fionn’s tent, where she is asked to explain her business. She identifies herself as the daughter of the king of Tír fo Thuinn (“The Land under the Waves”), and she requests Fionn’s protection against a ruffian called Daighre, the son of the king of Sorcha, who wishes to marry her against her will, and who is in hot pursuit. She has already told him that she will seek this defence against him. Oscar speaks up and pledges his word. They immediately see a warrior of enormous size and frightening appearance coming from the same quarter as the girl, and she identifies him as her pursuer. Goll and Oscar rise to protect Fionn, but the warrior rushes towards them and scares off the girl. Goll and Oscar now attack him. Oscar kills his horse, and the stranger then vents his fury on the Fian. The entire contingent of fifty warriors can scarcely match his strength, and a large number are trussed up by him. Eventually Goll mac Morna manages to slay the warrior, and the Fian bury him by the Eas. Goll himself spends ten years recovering from his wounds. Thereafter the girl stays with Fionn for a year.
(1) The relationship between the lay and a story in the Acallam:
The narrative of the poem bears an interesting resemblance to a story in the twelfth century Acallam (Irische Texte, ll. 5910 ff).
According to this story, Patrick, accompanied by a number of old Fian warriors, reaches Cathair na Cét to the south of Sliab Mis, a mountain in Kerry immediately south-east of Tralee Bay. While they are there, Eogan Leithderg, king of Munster, asks Caoilte the story behind three place-names in the area, one of which is Druim na mna mairbhe, “The ridge of the dead woman”. Caoilte then replies that when Fionn and the three battalions of the Fian went out hunting one day, they found a woman sitting on a tulach close to their present location. She wore magnificent clothes, but even more striking than her clothing was her immense size. Because of her height the Fian were unable to communicate with her when she stood up, and Fionn had to ask her to recline on her elbow on the hillock, so that they could speak to her! Fionn then asked her where she had come from, and she explained that she was from “Tír na n‑ingean aniar mara fuinend grian” (“the land of girls in the west where the sun sets”), that she was the daughter of the king of that land, and that her name was Bebind ingen Treoin. Her father had three sons and 149 daughters, whence the name of the country. The land nearest to it was Tír na fear (“the land of men”), whose king, Cétach Crobderg, had one daughter and 160 sons. Bebind explained that she was in fact fleeing from Cétach’s son, Aed, and that she had fled from him twice before. She had been informed of Fionn and his country by fisher folk, and now sought his protection. Fionn advised her to make Goll mac Morna her protector, which she did.
Soon afterwards, a young man of even greater size than the girl appeared. He was well dressed, and equipped with a sword and spear. The girl immediately identified him as her pursuer. The stranger made his way up to Fionn and Goll, and then thrust his spear right through the girl, so that she was fatally wounded. Thereupon, the Fian chased the stranger as far as Tralee. Caoilte, being swiftest, was able to get closest to him, and hurled his spear at him. The spear cut the sling of the stranger’s shield, and penetrated his left shoulder. Caoilte then took the stranger’s spear from him, but by this time they were fighting in the sea. As the company looked on, a galley with two rowers came out of the west and took the warrior on board. The Fian then turned back, Caoilte bearing the stranger’s shield and spear. The woman explained that the shield was called the donnchraebhach (“the red arabesqued one”), and the spear the torainn-chleasach (“performer of the thunder feat”). She then instructed Fionn to attend to her grave and burial, and having given her bracelet to Fionn’s musicians, she died. She was buried in the ridge known thereafter as Druim na mná mairbhe.
(a) Similarities: It will be apparent from the above summary that the BDL lay and the Acallam story share much common ground. Both have a strongly mythological background, the lay describing events at Eas Ruaidh, where there was a well known sídh, and the prose tale starting off at a tulach. This, however, need not connect them specifically, since the appearance of women from the sídh, with subsequent amatory adventures, is a common theme in Celtic literature. More striking are the roles of the protagonists, the pursued maiden and the pursuing ogre, the former seeking the protection of the Fian, and the latter arriving from the sea to obtain his unwilling partner. The royal lineages of both characters correspond, and so, in general, do their descriptions in the poem and the tale.
(b) Differences: While there can be little doubt that the poem and the prose tale draw on the same basic story, they show interesting points of divergence. The most obvious difference is that whereas the girl is killed in the Acallam, and her pursuer escapes with only a few wounds, the BDL lay portrays the opposite situation, with the deliverance of the girl and the death of her pursuer. It is difficult to know which version preserves the original account. In the Acallam, the place-name Druim na mná mairbhe is likely to have had a controlling influence on the story, and may even have led the story-teller to alter an existing account of the type represented in the BDL lay. Certainly, the death of the woman reflects poorly on the competence of the Fian, and one might therefore suppose that it is the later version. However, it is equally possible that the composer of the lay, conscious of the unflattering nature of the Acallam story which served as a source, adjusted his material to give a nobler ending. It is worth noting here that a group of similar ballads, which preserve the same basic theme, relate the maiden’s death in a manner resembling the Acallam.
It may also be that there were two different versions of the story from an early stage, perhaps associated with different parts of Ireland. The Acallam story is firmly located in the south of Ireland, around Tralee, while the BDL lay places the action at Assaroe in Co. Donegal. The northern affinities of the lay may be reflected further in the major role which it ascribes to Goll mac Morna in killing the ogre. In the Acallam, he accepts the protection of the girl, but Caoilte takes the leading part in attacking the stranger.
As well as structural differences, the Acallam tale and the BDL lay have less conspicuous discrepancies which are of some significance. These involve the names ascribed to the principal characters and their places of origin. In the Acallam, the girl, Bebind ingen Treoin, comes from Tír na n-ingean, while her attacker, Aed son of Cétach Crobderg, is from Tír na fear. In the lay, the girl is not specifically named, but her place of origin is Tír fo thuinn. The pursuer is Daighre borb, who hails from Sorcha, and is described as mac ríogh na Sorcha, “the son of the king of Sorcha”. The nomenclature of the lay corresponds most closely to that of medieval Romantic tales. Tír fo thuinn does not occur in any other known lay, but it is common in Romantic prose. Sorcha is attested in other ballads, where it is a country of adventure, but it is more prominent in the prose context (Bruford, 21-2). In particular, Am Macaomh Mór, mac ríogh na Sorcha, often features as the villain in Romantic tales. This tends to suggest that the BDL lay was influenced by the concepts of the Romantic era, and that it may be a comparatively late composition.
(2) The relationship between the lay and Viking ballads:
In the Acallam prose version discussed in the preceding section, the maiden’s attacker is given a close connection with the sea, being rescued eventually by a galley with two rowers. He is not, however, described as a Viking.
In the BDL lay, Daighre borb comes over the sea on horseback, from the same direction as the girl. Again, he is not said to be a Viking, but the portrayal of his fight with the Fian is generally close to the description of encounters with Vikings in “The Lay of Airrghean the Great” (DF LXVII) and “Goll’s Tomb and the Coming of Magnus the Great” (DF LXIV). In both ballads the Fian are facing defeat, until Goll does battle with the stranger single-handed, and slays him. A similar situation is found in “The Coming of Dearg, son of Droicheal” (DF LXIII). This stranger, who is not specifically called a Viking, is overcome by Goll, who suffers such bad wounds that he is sick for a year. A quatrain telling how Goll spends ten years recovering from his wounds is inserted into the BDL text of the present poem, and occurs commonly in later versions of “Eas Ruaidh”.
It is difficult to establish the precise relationship between this lay and the others mentioned in this section. The general pattern of the fight corresponds in each case, but the details differ, and the direction of influence is arguable. The evidence nevertheless suggests that a sub-cycle of poems celebrating Goll’s triumphs over strangers may once have existed, and that “Eas Ruaidh” belongs to this sub-cycle.
(3) Related ballads on the theme of the Distressed Maiden:
At least two other poems on the theme of the Distressed Maiden or Unwilling Bride are found in Scottish and Irish tradition later than BDL. The first of these, usually known as “An Ionmhuinn”, occurs frequently in Scotland, and occasionally in Ireland (LF, 133-7; O Síochfhradha, 263-5). The Irish version follows the Acallam story-line remarkably closely, preserving the identity of the girl (Inghean an Treoin) and of her attacker (Aodh mac Céadaigh). The only significant difference is in the fate of the attacker, since he is not rescued by a galley according to the poem, but tumbles into the sea, and colours the waves with his blood.
The Scottish version of “An Ionmhuinn” has the same general outline as the Acallam, but appears to be further removed from it than the Irish version. The girl is not given a specific name, and her attacker is called “An t-Iollann mór mileanta mear, Oighre Rígh na h-Easpainte”. Having landed, he slays a hundred men of the Fian, as well as the “Ionmhuinn”. He then binds a number of Fian warriors (Faolan mac Finn and thrice nine others), before being attacked and decapitated by Oscar, rather than Goll (Thomson, Cat., 184-6).
In spite of these differences, however, the Irish and Scottish versions have common features: they are in the same metre (forms of Deibhidhe); they are set in the context of an Oisean/Patrick dialogue; they evidently portray the death of the attacker (unlike the Acallam); and they locate the grave of the girl (and of her attacker in the Scottish version) on a tulach.
Essentially the same story appears in another ballad known as “Cath Chnuic an Air”. This occurs mainly in Ireland, where it was very popular, but it is also found occasionally in Scotland in connection with the MacMhuirichs. According to this poem, the Fian were assembled on a hill (cnoc) when they saw a beautiful woman coming towards them. She identified herself as Niamh-nuadh-chrothach, daughter of Garradh, son of Dolar Déin, and disclosed to Fionn that the king of Greece had forced her to marry a certain Tailc mac Tréin against her will. He is described as being particularly ugly with “dhá chluas, iarball a’s ceann cait”, and the woman, having been refused by many other chiefs, seeks and obtains Fionn’s protection against him. Soon Tailc himself arrives in pursuit, and he kills an enormous number of the Fian. Oscar asks permission of Fionn to engage Tailc, and this is granted. Oscar eventually kills Tailc, after a struggle lasting five days and five nights. When the girl sees the extent of the slaughter, she dies and the hill is afterwards called “Cnoc an Air” (“The Hill of the Slaughter”) (see text in TOS, IV (1856), 64-93).
“Cath Chnuic an Air” is obviously related to the Scottish version of “An Ionmhuinn”. Like the latter it is set within the context of an Oisean/Patrick dialogue, and it shows the same type of nomenclature, which is indebted to the Gaelic Romances (cf. Bruford, 262). Both poems also attribute the major role in killing the pursuer to Oscar and not to Goll, which is interesting in view of other ballads about the prowess of Oscar (see BDL XXI and XXII). The main points of divergence are that the maiden is not killed by her pursuer in “Cnoc an Air” but dies of grief; and that the “Cnoc an Air” poem is in a different metre (Rannaigheacht Mhór).
The Irish and Scottish versions of “An Ionmhuinn”, as well as the ballad on “Cath Chnuic an Air”, agree with the Acallam story in telling of the girl’s death. “Cath Chnuic an Air” lessens the slight on the competence of the Fian by making her die of grief and not by the hand of her pursuer. Like “Cath Chnuic an Air”, the “Ionmhuinn” versions also record the death of the villain, which may reflect another attempt to vindicate the protectors. By contrast, “Eas Ruaidh” fully preserves their honour, and it may well be that this represents a restructuring of the original story.
Only the Irish version of “An Ionmhuinn” preserves the Acallam forms of the protagonists’ names. The Scottish versions of “An Ionmhuinn”, “Cath Chnuic an Air” and “Eas Ruaidh” have all been influenced in this respect by the milieu of the Gaelic Romances.
iii. Later versions: Later versions of “Eas Ruaidh” in Scottish tradition bear a very close resemblance to those in Irish, and both Irish and Scottish versions are similar in broad outline to the final BDL text. There are no salient peculiarities which immediately distinguish textual families, and fairly small details must be utilised in establishing the nature of the BDL text. We may set out the characteristics of the Irish and Scottish versions in turn, before discussing their relationship to BDL.
(a) Irish: The Irish versions usually include almost all of the verses in the final BDL text. The only quatrain which is not normally found in Irish tradition is BDL 26, one of the five quatrains added to the BDL text at a later stage. The other four additional quatrains in BDL are attested regularly on the Irish side in positions close to, or identical with, those indicated by the BDL scribe. With the remaining quatrains, the Irish texts show some variation from the BDL order, but this is not very significant. One Irish version (RIA MS 23 A 47) confuses the texts of “Eas Ruaidh” and “Cath Chnuic an Air”, but this is exceptional. All Irish versions give the name of the villain as Maighre or Baighre borb (with several slight variations).
(b) Scottish: The Scottish versions form two main groups. Group (1) is represented by McLagan MS 69, and by Turner, Gillies and probably the versions preserved by Kennedy, in spite of the fabrications of the latter. Turner and Gillies’s versions are marginally closer to one another than to McLagan MS 69. Bona fide texts in this group are fairly close to the final BDL text, but they omit the following BDL quatrains: 3 (attested in Turner and Gillies), 21, 22, 31, 33, 42 and 40 (Turner and Gillies only). Group (2) is represented by McLagan MS 109 and by MacNicol’s version, both texts being very similar. They omit the following BDL quatrains: 1, 3, 19, 21, 22, 32, 33, 34. Confusion and conflation of quatrains are also apparent, and it seems fair to conclude that these texts derive from a degenerate version of the type found in Group (1). Nevertheless, they preserve BDL 42, a quatrain omitted in the first group of versions.
Versions in both groups include BDL q. 26, which does not appear in Irish tradition. They also attest the other additional quatrains in the BDL text (apart from q. 32, which does not occur in Group (2)), but the location of these quatrains does not correspond as closely to BDL as one finds in the Irish versions. Both McLagan MS 69 and MS 106 refer to the villain as Maighre borb (borg of MS 106 is probably an error), but MS 69 offers the alternative Daighre.
...
The evidence of the later versions might possibly indicate that the original BDL version of “Eas Ruaidh” (i.e. the first draft minus the additional quatrains) may have been idiosyncratic, since no other version preserving a similar text is now known. Certainly, it would appear that in inserting the five additional quatrains (and in transferring BDL q. 41 to a new position), the BDL scribe brought his original text into line with what came to be the normal version in later Irish and Scottish tradition. It is apparent that none of the additional quatrains is crucial to the story-line of the ballad; all supplement the narrative. It is therefore possible that they represent a growth in the text which came about some time after the first draft was committed to BDL, and that the scribe was trying to cope with an evolving poem. We can now see that it did not develop much beyond the final version in BDL, and the fact that the supplementary quatrains occur, with one exception, in later Irish and Scottish tradition lends considerable interest to the scribe’s motive in making his alterations.
The only additional quatrain which is not found in both later traditions is BDL q. 26, which occurs solely on the Scottish side. This could suggest that the scribe derived his extra quatrains from a Scottish exemplar which may already have exhibited a regional development.
iv. Metre: Rannaigheacht Mhór
v. Line annotation
Ascription: The poem is first ascribed to Oscar, but his name is later deleted in the MS and that of Oisean added to the right of the original name. The first ascription may be accidental, but one would have thought that it would be more natural for the scribe to insert Oisean’s name initially; it is possible that the scribe’s first source ascribed the poem to Oscar, and that this was corrected in the light of the later source (see Section iii above).
2 cuirthe: cwrre MS. nach ccuirfidh (B): nach ionncurtha (23 O 32, 23 O 33)
an s<uim é>: Fading and trimming have removed the final letters of this line in the MS, but the suggested restoration may be made with confidence in the light of several Irish and Scottish versions; thus B, 23 L 8, G.
4 rém ré: rame ray MS. Line length requires ré mo ré.
5 Do bha<ma[r] n[e]>: Di wamyn̄ MS. For a note on the development of this verb form, see II, 11 n. Cf. di waymi’ (24), Di chemyn̄ (7), and similarly Di chemyn (61). Note that in the present instance, and probably in 61, the emphatic enclitic -ne is accommodated by line length, but that its presence makes 7 and 24 hypermetric.
6 na n-éigin mall: ny’ neggin mawle MS. The MS form eggin, restored as éigin, would appear to be a later development of éigne, “salmon”, with which Eas Ruaidh was often associated (RIA Dict. s.v. éicne). This development is reflected in the later Scottish versions: nan Egin mall (MacN); na n’ éighin mall (G).
7 do-chí<mi[d]-n[e]>: See 5 n.
fā sheól: It seems likely that the final -t of the MS holt is either a dialectal development, or an attempt at representing broad l.
10 gníomh: This restoration of the MS form gneeic is supported by aicill and by certain later versions; thus B, 23 L 8, G; but cf. ar ngnaoi (23 O 32, 23 O 33).
11 fir <dh>ár n-éis: Fir rair nes MS. It seems probable that the initial r- of the MS form rair can be taken as equivalent to ȝ; the attraction of ȝ to a preceding r is attested elsewhere (see XII, 50 n). Most other versions support this interpretation: dar ndéis (8); dá éis (23 O 32, 23 O 33); nar deigh (G).
12 do ghabhmaois: di ȝowmist MS. See II, 4 n.
15 churaigh: The lenited initial of the MS form churryth probably indicates that the article is assumed to be present, as in all other versions; but note that its formal insertion here would make the line hypermetric.
16 HP omits bha and inserts ag before the vb. n., following the reading of B, na réimh ag sgailteadh na ttonn, to which other Irish versions are basically similar; for support for the inclusion of the subst. vb., cf. ’S do bhi treun aig sgolta thonn (G).
17 <támh[a]>: The MS form could be interpreted either as ta’m or ta’ni, depending on how one regards the dot above the last minim. The first interpretation gives good sense, and is followed here, although a pl. form is required for line length; it is difficult to see how one might accommodate tána, which the second interpretation might suggest. HP emends MS Ne to Nocha initially, and reads támh here.
19 The line lacks a syllable as it stands. HP therefore reads ag toidheacht for the present a’ teacht.
20 The line lacks a syllable as it stands, and it seems most likely that the article has been lost before macaomh; it is attested in most Irish versions, but ad éirghe as macaomh mná (B).
21 deallradh: Metathesis is apparent in the MS form darli.
23 an inghean: I’ ny’ni’ MS. But the mod. Sc. G. form nighean seems to be attested fairly regularly elsewhere; cf. 29, 33, 37.
24 do bha<ma[r]-n[e]>: See 5 n. Similarly do bhámairne (23 O 32, 23 O 33, 23 L 8).
27 ’na thím: na hem̄e MS. This would appear to mean “in his time”, i.e. in his own good time. But nár thím (23 O 32, and other Irish versions).
29 D’<fharraid>: It is possible that the MS form Darri<t> could represent D’fhiaruigh (< fiafruighim); thus Dfhíafruigh (MOL), and similarly HP.
30 dathghloin: Although the line as it stands is the correct length, it fails to give proper rhyme with 32. It seems probable that the original line was hypermetric, and that a syllable is missing (perhaps through trimming of the MS page); thus dathghluin úir (23 O 32, 23 O 33, with hypermetric lines).
32 go gar dhúinn: gi gar rown̄<e> MS. Cf. 11 n.
33 For the significance of the names here and in 51–52, see Section ii (1) (b) above.
36 do <fhlaith Fáil>: di l<acht f > MS. While this reading cannot be retrieved from the MS in its entirety, ultra-violet light makes it reasonably clear that the second letter of the second word is a. It seems that the HP restoration do shliocht Fáil should therefore be rejected. The present restoration follows B, with which most Irish versions agree. The line would thus mean: “in which I did not seek a fian-band belonging to the lord of Ireland”, i.e. Fionn.
39 toisg: The MS form tosga attests an unhistorical final syllable.
40 domh féin: doyt pen MS. See II, 9 n.
45 D’<fharraid>: Derrit MS. See 29 n.
46 Sloinnich: The MS reading slone’iċ would appear to represent a disyllabic form of the 2 sg. impv. of this verb which is attested in Sc. G. (Dwelly s.v.). Its use here makes the line hypermetric; HP thus restores to Sloinn.
do: The MS represents the unstressed form of the 2 sg. poss. pron., namely a.
47 <gabhaim>: It is difficult to feel confident that the proposed restoration represents what is intended by the MS form Coym, although this interpretation is supported by most Irish versions. The MS could convey cum, or perhaps cum[aim], but in terms of sense this seems less satisfactory than gabhaim.
an <gcrí>: This restoration of the MS form i’ greic would mean “in the flesh, alive” (RIA Dict. s.v. crí). The Irish versions point in the same direction; thus i gclí (8). an gcrích, “in the territory”, might also be possible, but is less compelling in terms of rhyme and sense.
49-50 muir…goil: Aicill is lacking as the lines stand, and HP therefore restores MS mvrri to moir; the Irish versions attest the same problem.
51 Sorcha: The MS form sorchir attests a final -r which would appear to be intrusive.
56 a ghnaoi: This restoration of MS a ȝnee is preferable to HP’s a ghníomh on grounds of aicill, and is supported by several Irish MSS, although B reads a ghníomh. Transl. “his distinction, fame” (RIA Dict., s.v. gnóe II (c)).
58 [an] fear: The line lacks a syllable as it stands in the MS, and it seems most likely that the article has been lost before fear; but HP reads fear sin do choisgeadh gach rígh. fear coisgithe dínn gach laoch (23 O 32, 25 O 33).
61 Do-chí<mi[d]-n[e]>: See 5 n.
64 chéad<na>: The MS form chadin would represent chéadan, perhaps a dialectal variant.
65 <teine>: It is difficult to be sure what the scribe intended to convey by the MS form teyġne; the proposed restoration suggests that he was thinking in terms of teine, “fire”, perhaps in the sense of “fiery bright”. HP reads teimhnidh, “dusky”, but this adj. is normally trisyllabic (RIA Dict. s.v. teimnide), and its sense is less dramatic. But Clogad theann theimhnighe fo a cheann (B).
cheann: Aicill evidently fails in this couplet; this happens also in 73–74 and 83–84. Cf. 49–50 n. There are several other instances of poor aicill in the poem.
68 <druimlēan>: This restoration of the MS form dru’lin is tentative; no such word appears to be known elsewhere. The reference to cleas would suggest that the object in question was used for particular feats or tricks. B, while preserving a reading fairly close to BDL, seems to have lost its significance; thus droim lán accleas. Other Irish texts do not help.
76 mar [soin]: The line lacks a syllable as it stands in the MS; aicill and the evidence of the Irish versions suggest that soin has been omitted accidentally by the scribe.
77 If the ampersand represents agus, and if hiatus is allowed between it and the preceding vowel, the line is the correct length. HP emends to Do bhí néal flatha is rosg ríogh, on the model of the Irish versions: Bhí néull flatha, is rosg ríogha (B); Do bhí innioll flatha agus rosg ríogh (23 O 32).
78 caomh: This provides aicill with the preceding line if -ao- is pronounced as /i:/, as happens in Irish dialects (cf. de Bhaldraithe, The Irish of Cois Fhairrge, p. 84).
81 The second couplet of this quatrain is not attested in the MS. Its absence is probably a scribal accident, perhaps caused by turning a page in the exemplar. B completes the quatrain thus:
ní facas samhail an fhir
teacht go noighe sin i ccein
83 [a] bhíomar: wemir MS. This would normally be do bhámar in E. Mod. Ir.
85 The line is hypermetric as it stands. HP reads eagla for eagal, thus losing a syllable by elision, but correct length may also be obtained by reading MS is as ’s.
88 d’<fharraid>: darrit MS. See 29 n.
90 The line is hypermetric as it stands; it is thus in all Irish versions. HP reads deir for adeir to lose a syllable.
92 <fomhair>: fowir MS. HP follows B in restoring the MS form as pudhar, “harm, misfortune”. In view of the clearly defined initial f- of the MS form, this interpretation seems dubious. The present restoration suggests fomhair, “Fomorian” or, in its later sense, “giant” (RIA Dict. s.v. fomóir). This would be an appropriate term for an invader of this sort, but it fits somewhat uneasily into the line as a whole; the sense may be “we regard him as a giant attacking your Fian”, i.e. you are mere minnows beside him.
93 HP emends this line in the light of B, and reads tairgfidh mise do bhreith leis.
99 This quatrain is a later addition to the BDL text, and occurs in the lower margin of MS p. 221. Its position relative to the first draft is indicated by means of a line drawn in the inner margin of the page. The quatrain is usually found only in Scottish versions of the poem, in the position indicated in BDL. Given that the BDL scribes clearly mark the position of other additional quatrains in this text (see 123, 139, 147, 151), there is no reason to suppose that the line is the work of a modern reader or editor.
The first couplet, and particularly the first line, pose problems of interpretation. The restoration is tentative, and individual difficulties are discussed below. As presently restored, the couplet may mean: “He could not be beaten off by the shield of any hero or lord of those who were there”.
Ní: The MS preserves a faint outline of what may be either Ne or No. Here, Ne is taken to be the more likely, and this is transliterated as the negative particle.
cúradh: The scribe first wrote chur, and then added re immediately above the final r of this form. The MS form could represent curaidh, “hero”, but this is difficult to relate to the rest of the line. The present restoration suggests cúradh, “act of beating, chastising, punishing” (RIA Dict. s.v. cúrad). The lenition of the initial of the MS form could be caused by the preceding, but cancelled, i, perhaps standing for a, the 3 sg. m. poss. pron.
o: This is preceded in the MS by what may be either na or ua, which is hard to interpret. It seems unlikely that na/ua and o should both figure in the restored text, and na/ua is omitted. The difficulty in the MS line may be the result of an attempt to clarify its meaning.
Most later Scottish versions would support na rather than ō, but it is difficult to fit na into the BDL line, and o is therefore preferred here. Apart from this, the Scottish versions show considerable variation in this line; thus Níor fheach e chloidheamh no sciath (McL, and similarly T); Ni ’n d’fheuch é lann no sgiath (G); Cha’ d fharraid e Curruidh na Triath (MacN); Cha d’ath do churaidh na do thriath (B).
Note, finally, that the line is hypermetric even as presently restored; the pron. sé must be omitted to gain correct length.
100 <nā tréith>: The MS form na thraa could also derive from nár thréith, “who was no weakling”.
101 The line is hypermetric as it stands; no may be omitted to restore line length.
112 <[chlé]>: The last syllable of this line is now illegible through fading and trimming of the MS. Cameron, however, read chl(ai) (RC I, p. 26).
115 ’Nuair: In the MS form No<o>r, the second o occurs directly above the r. It could derive from the Irish scribal convention of representing vowel + r.
119 An taobh muigh: In teiwe moe MS. The line is hypermetric as it stands, and HP, following B, emends to Ré amuigh. Leath amuith (23 O 32, 23 O 33).
121 <ciseadh>: cessow MS. HP, evidently reading the initial of the MS form as s, restores to seasamh. The Irish versions read gaisge. The present restoration suggests ciseadh, a vb. n. attested in IGT Verbs § 71, and associated with the vb. cingid, “steps, paces, proceeds, goes” (RIA Dict. s.v.). The reference here might be to the skilful foot movement of the fighters.
123 This is the first of the additional quatrains appended to the poem on MS p. 222. Its position relative to the first draft is indicated by a caret. This corresponds fairly closely to its position in Irish MSS (where it usually follows BDL q. 33) and in Scottish MSS (where it follows BDL q. 30 in McL MS 69). Its position as q. 41 of the HP text goes against the BDL evidence.
126 dā gheobhadh: The condit. form gheobhadh here replaces the historically correct 3 sg. past subj.; thus HP’s emendation dá bhfaghadh.
an ceart <[cóir]>: Rhyme alone would indicate that the line lacks a syllable, now illegible in the MS. The suggested restoration follows H; cf. a cheart choir (McL). Note, however, that the line thus becomes hypermetric, and the pron. sé must be omitted to restore line length.
129-130 <fo úir>…<mar thrúth[a]>: These restorations make good sense in the context; transl. the couplet: “We should all have been under the earth, like doomed men, in single combat”. With the MS form mir hw giving mar thrúth[a], cf. MS nar hay giving nar thréith (119). For trú, “doomed person, wretch”, see RIA Dict. s.v. HP emends to san uaigh…dá bhfaghadh uainn following B, to which other Irish versions are similar.
134 a <chur>: It seems possible that the scribe understood this verb form as an infinitive, and that the couplet could be translated thus: “although it was difficult to put the binding of the three narrow parts on each one of those”. Nevertheless, B and several Irish and Scottish versions read do chuir, i.e. 3 sg. pret., and HP follows suit.
136 The line is hypermetric, as in the later Irish versions, without any obvious solution.
an gar <dhó>: The MS reading i’ gor <roy> evidently attests a development discussed in 11 n.
139 This is the second of the additional quatrains appended to the poem on MS p. 222. Its position relative to the first draft is indicated as in the case of q. 32 (see 123 n) by a caret placed in the left hand margin. This is its normal position in Irish MSS, and in certain Scottish versions (e.g. McL MS 69, G).
141 <c>omhrag: Lenition of the initial of the MS form chorik may suggest that the prep. do was felt to be present, as in the later Irish texts.
142 ní <fhaicfead>: The sense of this line would suggest that the 1 sg. fut. conjunct form fhaicfead would be appropriate here, as indeed one finds in B, 23 O 32, and MOL, and it is therefore restored. However, the MS form aykych scarcely represents the normal E. Mod. Ir. form. In addition to the loss of the -f- of the fut. stem, it appears to attest the weakening of the final d of the ending to dh, resulting in a form which might be restored as fhaiceadh, and which resembles the condit. conjunct in modern Sc. G. Cf. VI, 19 n, 29 n.
air mo ré: The line is hypermetric as it stands, and HP emends to rém ré as in B.
144 Sorcha: sorchir MS. See 51 n.
<muar>: The last syllable of this line is obscured by fading and trimming, but what appears to be mo is just legible. Cameron (RC I, p. 28) was able to read mor confidently. Restoration to muar in view of 146 seems likely.
146 an <gar [dho chuan]>: Beyond MS i’ ga, the final section of this line is now illegible because of fading and trimming. Cameron (RC I, p. 28) indicates that this part of the line was indistinct at that time, but he was able to read gar (ȝi) ch(oyn), and the present restoration follows his reading. Note, however, that the presence of dha makes the line hypermetric (but cf. 156); thus HP restores as i ngar chuain. sa ccuan (B, and similarly other Irish versions).
147 This quatrain, and the next, comprise the third and fourth of the additional quatrains appended to the poem on MS p. 222. Their position relative to the first draft is indicated by a caret in the left hand margin with two bs set beside it; these bs correspond to letters found in the same margin beside each of the two additional quatrains. The editorial letters are clearly in the hand of the BDL scribes. In later Irish versions, BDL q. 38 occupies the position indicated here, but BDL q. 39 normally follows BDL q. 40. In Scottish tradition, BDL q. 38 usually follows BDL q. 37, but BDL q. 39 occurs after BDL q. 41 in its revised position (see 159 n). On balance, therefore, the position suggested for the additional quatrains in BDL is closer to the later Irish texts.
149 meóir: In the MS form moyeir, the third minim of the initial m is covered by the following o.
150 <a n-onóir>: The MS form i’ na’no<ir> presents difficulties. It is possible that the last two letters could be read as -y, in which case the phrase might be restored as a n-aindeóin, “in spite of” (RIA Dict. s.v. aindeóin); this would imply that Fionn was unwilling to recognise the royal status of the stranger by bestowing rings upon him. Most Irish versions agree with B in reading an onóir mo Rígh. Whatever the interpretation of the preceding phrase, BDL agrees with the Irish texts in including the 1 sg. poss. pron. in the line, thereby making the rí refer to Fionn, and not to the stranger. HP omits mo, believing that metre and sense are thus improved.
151 bliadh<n[a]>: The MS form bleyin could represent bliadhain, but this seems improbable after deich. Note, however, that B and most Irish versions read Leith bhliadhain. Could the BDL MS form bleyin indicate that the period of time has been increased without due attention to the form of the noun? Blia’na dhoibhsin (McL MS 69)
Gholl: The lenition of the initial shows that the prep. do is assumed to be present, although its formal inclusion would make the line hypermetric.
<na>: The MS form i’, normally used for the sg. article, seems erroneous here, as the eclipsis of the adj. indicates that the following noun is gen. pl.
157 The line is hypermetric as it stands, but it occurs in precisely this form in several Irish MSS; thus 23 O 32, 23 O 33, and MOL. HP, following B, omits Thír; Rígh Fa-thuinn (McL MS 69).
159 When revising the original draft of this poem, and presumably at the time when the additional quatrains were appended at the foot of MS p. 222, the scribe wished this quatrain to be moved to an earlier position in the text. This position, following BDL q. 34, is indicated by an insertion mark at that point in the MS, with the Latin Hic written alongside it, in the left hand margin. Hic is also written in the same margin beside this quatrain. The editorial hand is clearly that of the BDL scribes. The revised position of this quatrain in BDL corresponds to its normal position in the later Irish texts, and also in the Scottish ones.
160 The line lacks a syllable, as in the later Irish versions.
162 a <chrí>: The MS form chneic can scarcely represent chneas as restored in HP. The present restoration suggests that the word intended is crí, “body, flesh” (RIA Dict. s.v.); cf. 48 n. a chneas (B); a dhá thaoibh (23 O 33, MOL, and similarly 23 O 32). Note that the line lacks aicill as it stands; cf. 65 n.
<d[o chréacht]>: Gum has now obliterated the final syllables of this line and 164. The present restoration follows Cameron (RC I, p. 28), who read di (chrecht). This interpretation is supported by the later Irish texts.
164 <[níor éar]>: Cf. 162 n. The present restoration follows Cameron (RC I, p. 28), who read neir (er), although the final syllable was even then indistinct. A similar reading is preserved by the later Irish texts, but at the beginning of the line.