Notes to Poem XXVI
i. MS Text: The text of this poem occupies the lower half of p. 294 of the MS, and almost the whole of p. 295. On both pages the poem is written in three consecutive columns, each line of which contains one line of the poem. This arrangement of the lines differs from that usually found in BDL, whereby one couplet is accommodated per line. The scribe was evidently concerned to make maximum use of the available space. The text is generally clear and easily legible, with the exception of qq. 11 and 12, which occur at the lower right and top left hand corners of p. 294 and p. 295. Here, fading and staining have affected legibility.
The text contains several emendations which suggest that another version of the poem was available.
A later hand, possibly that of Donald Mackintosh, has written ‘Ossianic’ above the first column.
ii. General background: The poem is an elegy on the death of Fionn, purporting to be spoken by Oisean. The overall technique is close to that of normal panegyric, and the poem is basically a catalogue of Fionn’s virtues.
iii. Later versions: Occasional versions of the poem occur in later Irish and Scottish tradition. A version consisting of 18 quatrains occurs on the Irish side in RIA MS 24 P 29. This preserves the following BDL quatrains in the order indicated: 1, 2, 29, 26, 23, 24, 25, 16, 8, 15 cd, 3 a, 4 ad, 12, 30. Where only individual lines or couplets from BDL are found in the Irish version, the quatrains are filled out with material using the same sort of formulae as one finds elsewhere in the poem. 24 P 29 attests five complete quatrains not found in BDL.
In Scotland, a version very close to that in 24 P 29, and likely to have derived directly from later Irish tradition, occurs in Nat. Lib. Scot. MS 72.1.48 which was previously known as Edinburgh MS XLVIII, and was compiled by MacMhuirich scribes (MacKinnon, Catalogue, 98, 158). This matches 24 P 29 verse for verse, and has only minor differences of wording.
On the Scottish side also, two solitary quatrains of the poem are found in Turner’s collection. These consist of BDL q. 30, and a quatrain which echoes lines in other quatrains, but is not attested in BDL. The severe reduction thus exemplified in the Turner version reflects the formulaic nature of the poem, and the lack of a cohesive story-line. This reduction is evident, although not on such a large scale, in the versions of 24 P 29 and Ed.
iv. Metre: Leathrannaigheacht Mhór
v. Line annotation:
2 The restoration of this line follows the scribe’s original reading cha nak mai fin; later the first three words were deleted and foo <nt> vaga, representing bho nach <fh>aca, written in superscript. The pron. mé is required by the superscript to complete the sense, although it has been deleted from the original reading; its formal inclusion would, however, make the line hypermetric. Later versions are closer to the superscript, but do not include (bh)o: nach fhaca mé fionn (24 P 29, and similarly Ed.). It is interesting to note that the BDL superscript improves the sense of the couplet.
3 The restoration of this line follows the scribe’s original reading cha nakim rem rai; subsequently the last two letters of nakim were deleted and a written in superscript, thus giving chan fhaca. As in 2 n, the emendation improves the sense; but it also improves the verb form: chan fhaicim contains a 1 sg. pres. indic. form with fut. or past reference, but chan fhaca contains the 3 sg. pret. used analytically with mé understood. ní fhaca re mo re (24 P 29, Ed.).
5 Cf. XXV, 63 n.
17 iollánach: The MS reading hillanit contains an alternative form of ioldánach, ‘having many gifts or accomplishments’ (RIA Dict. s.v. il), reflecting -d- > -dh- > Ø. Cf. Dinn. s.v.
19 <air ghníomh>: HP restores MS er ȝneit as ar ghnaoi, which is a possible alternative. As presently restored the line would mean ‘he was an ollamh in his actions’; HP’s interpretation would give it the meaning, ‘he was an ollamh with regard to his fame’ (i.e. he had the reputation of an ollamh for learning). On gnaoi, see RIA Dict. s.v. gnóe.
20 <síoth >: HP interprets the MS form sceit as sdéidh, presumably taking the second letter as t rather than c. The present restoration has the advantage that it satisfies aicill with the previous line even if ghnaoi rather than ghníomh is the last word therein (see 19 n); but to give sense to the line, one would need to take seirm as ‘noise’ rather than ‘melody’; thus the line could mean ‘he was peace in every noise’ (i.e. he quelled all uproars). With HP’s restoration, the line is taken to mean ‘[he was] a master of all melody’, apparently deriving the sense ‘master’ from ‘basis, foundation’, the primary meaning of stéidh in Sc. G. (Dw. s.v.).
25 teachtaire: The MS clearly reveals the abbreviation mark signifying -er-/-ar- in the form techteri. HP reads teachta, presumably for reasons of line length. But the line can be read as five syllables even with the present form, if we elide the final e of teachtaire and take the article as ’n.
35 air <ghníomh>: See 19 n.
39 Laigh<ean>: The MS form lynyt appears to represent Laighne.
42 ghlais: Immediately to the right of the MS form of this word there are letters which, under ultra-violet light, appear to be ma. Their significance is not obvious; they could represent an alternative to ghlais, perhaps m[h]aith. See next note.
43 The restoration of this line is tentative, and lacks a syllable as it stands. HP makes up the syllable by restoring MS ȝair as ghartha, but queries this restoration; HP offers the translation ‘of the rough and lustrous (?) field’. Ultra-violet light indicates the existence of letters directly above MS ȝerve, but they cannot now be deciphered.
44 [fā]: The line lacks a syllable as it stands in the MS, and it seems reasonable to suppose with HP that the past of the copula has been omitted.
<nochar thais>: notcha <th>ra<i> MS. The reconstruction of the phrase is based, for the second element at any rate, on the rhyme required with ghlais in 42. Transl. ‘which was not feeble’.
45 Severe staining affects the whole of this line and the opening words of the other three lines in the quatrain. Ultra-violet light retrieves most of the words now obscured.
Note that 45–6 are presented as one line in the MS, rather than as individual lines, which is the scribe’s normal practice with this poem. This may have been an error caused by starting a new page in the MS.
46 brugh[aidh] bhán: The lenition of the adj. indicates that brughaidh, normally m., is regarded as f. in this instance; this may reflect a scribal error. For a discussion of the designation brughaidh, possibly signifying a sort of hereditary land-owner, see K. Simms, ‘Guesting and Feasting in Gaelic Ireland’, pp. 71-74.
48 In contrast to the later versions, this line emphasises the leniency of the tribute demanded by Fionn: as budh cruadh an cáin (24 P 29, and similarly Ed.).
51 <Fionn [an]>: The scribe appears to have written i’ originally, this representing the article; he then realised that he had omitted Fionn’s name, and placed f (in lighter ink) before i’, thus robbing the line of the article.
53 <Fhir screadaigh>: Er s<c>ra<tt>yt MS. The interpretation of the second element depends on whether we read c or t in the case of the letters in brackets. The possibility that the vb. n. sracadh, ‘pulling, tearing’, is involved has been considered, but it is difficult to make sense of this. The present restoration supposes that Oisean is making his point to Patrick, whom he addresses as ‘Screeching man from God’, perhaps with reference to Patrick’s chanting. Such intemperate talk is characteristic of the Oisean/Patrick debate in later tradition.
54 nār chéal: nar chail MS. The verb form is apparently 1 sg. fut. of ceilim, and for this reason nar (classical nár) is difficult to construe syntactically. HP emends to ní which would fit the tense; the line could thus mean ‘I shall not hide [the facts about] Mac Cumhaill’. It seems likely that MS nar is an error.
55 adeir<ear>: It is difficult to know what value to attach to a backward curving stroke found appended to the final r of the MS form Id deir<’>. It may be no more than the final flourish commonly found with r in the MS; or it could be the abbreviation mark for -ar-/-er-/-ir-, although it is not as sharply hooked as one would normally expect of such a mark. The present restoration tentatively accepts the latter possibility, making the vb. pres. indic. pass.; HP, however, restores to adeirim.
58 iarr[adh]: The MS form air<‘> has a final flourish of the kind discussed in 55 n; here it is probably not an abbreviation mark, and we may suppose that the unstressed final syllable of the original verb form has been lost (> /ə/ > Ø).
61 <éag>: HP interprets the MS form aik as fhág, which is certainly possible; cf. Nír fhacc peist a loch (24 P 29, and similarly Ed.).
64 Ní h-innis<eadh>: ne hy’nasse MS. HP restores the MS reading to Ní h-inneósta, reconstructing the verb form as the standard E. Mod. Ir. condit. pass. of innisim, and this may well have been the form which appeared in the original poem; it is noteworthy that this form gives correct line length by elision of the final syllable. However, the MS form does not attest the -eó- stem, nor does the ending -ta seem to be represented by it. To judge by MS y’nasse in 67 n, it would appear that the present MS form indicates that the condit. pass. has fallen together with the pret. pass. of this verb at least in the scribe’s dialect, if not farther afield. Cf. VI, 19 n, 29 n.
65 [d]ā beinn: Cf. XXV, 25 n.
67 níor inniseadh: The form of the neg. níor from MS ner indicates that the following verb is to be taken as pret. pass., but it has perfect force: ‘there has not been told by me (lit. from us)’.
68 a bhuaidh-se bha: This restoration follows the scribe’s original reading a voy si waa, which would give the line the meaning ‘a third of the virtue of the one who once was’. Later the scribe deleted the last two words, and wrote mir haya, representing mar tha, in superscript. This emendation would make the line mean ‘a third of his virtue as it is’. Given that Fionn is dead, the original reading makes better sense than the superscript; this, together with the fixing by metre of bha, the mod. Sc. G. form of E. Mod. and Mod. Ir. bhí could suggest that the quatrain originated in Scotland, but the evidence is extremely tenuous, and certainly cannot be applied to the poem as a whole.
74 aithne: Lenition of the following adjs. is not shown in the MS, and this could suggest that the scribe regarded aithne, normally f., as m. However, -g- and -gh- in normal orthography can both be represented by MS g.
75 The restoration of this line gives good sense in the context: ‘a king pays no attention to gold’. The main difficulty lies in the interpretation of MS <nui>e, with its succession of five minims.
80 <ciabh>: HP interprets MS keive as cioth, ‘shower’, translating the line as ‘I am a shower after death’. HP notes that while its suggested form satisfies aicill, it does not suit the MS. The present restoration offers ciabh, ‘hair (of the head), lock of hair’, probably used here in the sense ‘foliage, branches’ (RIA Dict. s.v. ciab). The line would thus mean ‘I am [like] dead foliage’. This is consistent with the reference to crann in the previous line.
86 The restoration of this line follows HP without complete confidence; we should perhaps read MS t<re>ne as terne, the expansion -er- being more consistent with the abbreviation mark used (cf. 55 n). The line could thus be interpreted as air tearnadh [’n]am ghníomh, ‘having declined or failed in my activity’ (cf. RIA Dict. s.v. do-érni (b)). It is also possible that MS ȝneit could represent ghnaoi, from gnaoi which can mean ‘distinction, fame’ (cf. 19 n).
90 mac Cumhaill: At the beginning of the line the scribe wrote ac, which he later cancelled; this presumably represents ag, and it was probably deleted to maintain line length.
go<m>: The MS form gy’ derives from gon, with the eclipsed form of the following consonant tacked on. Cf. 104 n.
95 gan dtiom: The scribe originally wrote gin dymmi; later dymmi was deleted and ym ȝwn was written in superscript. The superscript probably represents iomghuin, ‘slaying, conflict’ (RIA Dict. s.v. 1 imguin). With the superscript reading the line becomes hypermetric, and the metre requires a monosyllable at this point. gan diomhadh (24 P 29 and similarly Ed.).
96 timcheall: The scribe first wrote tymchill, which was later cancelled and y’me written in superscript, whence the HP reading iomdhaidh. The reading timcheall may be acceptable here if we suppose that it refers to the circumference of each iomdha, ‘couch’, mentioned in 52 (cf. RIA Dict. s.v. timchell I (b)). ar gach niomdhuidh dhibh (24 P 29, and similarly Ed.).
díobh: The scribe originally wrote d<i>ew, but this was cancelled, perhaps at the same time as tymchill, and ȝeive written to the right in the margin.
99 usgar: The MS form vrskir clearly represents usgar, ‘ornament, jewel’ (RIA Dict, s.v. uscar, but with an intrusive r. HP restores to easgar, ‘cup, goblet’, perhaps under the influence of the later versions; thus x.c. easgra gorm (24 P 24, and similarly Ed.)
104 gon: MS gy’ (< gon) can also represent gan, ‘without’, as in 105, but the latter interpretation would destroy sense in this context.
105 The line lacks a syllable as it stands in the MS, and it seems likely that the prep. o may have been omitted, as HP suggests.
108 The line lacks a syllable as it stands, without any obvious solution.
109 <so ceann>: so<thc>an̄ MS. This part of the line is found in the MS as part of the preceding line (cf. 45 n), and the remaining space in this line is filled by what appears to be three ms, or three sequences of minims. It is not immediately obvious how the MS form is to be interpreted; the present suggestion would give the line the meaning ‘this puts an end to his vigour’.
112 HP restores this line as ré nduine ní níor dhiúlt, and notes that it is hypermetric and lacks aicill. While aicill cannot be satisfied, correct line length may be achieved by regarding MS ni, the source of HP’s ní, as part of the MS spelling of dhuine, namely ȝwneni, and not as a separate word.
114 <loinn>: HP restores the MS form lynn as lionn, ‘ale’, but this does not satisfy the MS spelling, which suggests loinn; the latter can mean ‘pleasure, joy, gladness’ in Mod. Ir. (Dinn. s v.), and in addition to these meanings, it can signify ‘good condition, fatness, beauty, elegance’ in Sc. G. (Dw. s.v.). Either range of meanings could be appropriate in the context; Fionn refused nobody, even when he himself was in hard circumstances. a lionn (24 P 29, Ed.).
115 char chuir: char churre MS. The MS form churre could be taken as representing the pret. pass. chuireadh. but this has the disadvantage of making the line hypermetric. is nior chuir (24 P 29).
116 dhār dtáinig: ȝar danyg MS. Following dhar, one would expect lenition, as in dhar thiodhlaic in 120. Eclipsis here seems to reflect the form without -r, deriving from di plus the demon. rel. an.