The evolution of kingship and government in early medieval Ireland
p. 397-409
Texte intégral
1Apart from the writings of St Patrick little source material has survived before the seventh century. During that century we have a variety of sources both secular and ecclesiastical.1 There is no doubt that information from earlier periods is incorporated within these documents but the difficulty has been to determine if any of these materials can take us back to the period when the Irish were pagan. Scholars pursued linguistic forms and vocabulary, and literary and mythological motifs back into the Indo-European period in an attempt to recover institutions and ideas from the pagan past of the Irish.2 During the second half of the last century there has been a determined and at times a strident attack upon this approach.3 Such an attack has gone much too far. If Dillon and Binchy were at fault it was that, in pursuing the ‘Archaism of the Irish tradition,’4 they neglected to examine in detail the unfolding of events in Ireland during the seventh and eighth centuries as a backdrop to the texts they were studying. Their work presented Ireland as a conservative, archaic society in which little changed. Indeed the very detailed and idealised description of Irish society in the law tracts served to reinforce these ideas.
2With the publication of the Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae by M. A. O’Brien in 1962,5 however, it was possible to more easily reconstruct a political narrative using the genealogies alongside the annals.6 This meant that a reasonable view of the political situation was possible for the seventh century and indeed, in part, for the late sixth century. Alfred Smyth’s analysis of the Annals of Ulster provided a model whereby later accretions to the contemporary record could be discovered and removed.7 The resulting sparse nature of the early annals has meant that scholars have turned to literary texts to augment their material and in doing so are confronted with the propagandist nature of these sources.
3What constitutes a community in early Ireland?8 Who is its leader? How does one relate to the other? When we delve into the details of the genealogies and make comparison with events in the annals we encounter a picture that is far removed from the almost static view that is presented by the law tracts. Here we find a society that is dynamic. There is constant movement, geographically, politically and socially. It is clear that many communities that had been politically important in an earlier period were now being suppressed. Many of the successful dynasties that emerged between about 680 and 730 were to occupy centre stage until the twelfth century.
4It is clear that there had been very significant social and political changes taking place between the fourth and the seventh centuries. Undoubtedly the expansion of the Roman Empire to cover Britain as far as southern Scotland had a major impact upon Ireland. The importation of slaves, the adoption of new technology and the introduction of the alphabet must have hastened change. More particularly the acceptance of Christianity and the embracing of Romanitas in general had a profound impact upon the Irish.
5By the seventh century we see the emergence of the new dynasties that were to dominate the scene until the twelfth century. They had imposed or were in the process of imposing their authority over older and less successful population groups. Indeed some of the successful dynasties must have originated in just such old groups. But much of this activity is obscure to us.
6Among old groups were the Érainn, Cruthin, Sogain, Partraige,9 Loígis—and the early Irish genealogists indicate separate ethnic origins for them. But any racial differences must have belonged to the remote past.10 Recently it has been argued by Peter Schrijver that the tribal name Partraige may indicate people of a non-Celtic and even non-Indo-European origin.11 This may very well be the case but by the time we encounter them in the light of history they and all other tribes would seem to be Gaelic speaking. It is likely, as he has suggested, that old groups adopted Gaelic pedigrees to become respectable under more recent overlords.12 By the seventh and eighth centuries, however, the reason for assigning diverse origins to peoples was yet another means of expressing social and political relationships—of stating who owed tribute and to whom. Many of the early tribes have the element -rige or -raige, < *rīgion, ‘kingdom,’ in their names. A small sample out of the one hundred or more collected by Professor Eoin Mac Neill,13 are the Partraige, Osraige, Artraige, Sordraige, Dartraige, Gabraige, Ciarraige, Cerdraige meaning, ‘Crab People’, ‘Deer People’, ‘Bear People’, ‘Ram People’, ‘Calf People,’ ‘Goat People,’ ‘Black People,’ ‘Craft People’ respectively. These form part of his classification of collective names. These and others may represent the primary political units, the túatha, of the earliest historical period.14 Some are named after animals or colours and are perhaps totems of the tribe while others reflect the occupation of the people. Other names seem to have the name of a god. Mac Neill has shown that some names stretch back into the pre-historic past and that the classification to which they belong was obsolete by the beginning of the Christian period.15
7Examples of other peoples were the Lugni, presumably because they were followers of the god Lug. The Laigin, the Leinstermen, were also known as the Gáileóin (‘Spearmen’?). The word Dál, ‘division,’ was used of other groups such as the Dál Riata. Corco, ‘seed,’ designated others such as the Corco Duibne, Corco Óchae, Corco mDruad. Individuals within such tribal groups were frequently referred to by the term moccu as in the south Leinster saint, Abbán moccu Cormaic, Abbán of the tribe of the Dál Cormaic. This tribal formula finally disappears during the course of the eighth century in a period when the major dynasties were spreading and consolidating their territories. The above is merely a sample of the range of people-names that may be found in our earliest historical documents or fossilized in genealogies or place-names. It is these very early communities that were under pressure with the rise of dynasties beginning in the late seventh century. It is clear that a new order with a different naming strategy was coming into existence.
8The emerging dynasties used the term Uí, ‘the descendants of’, as in the famous Uí Néill, ‘the descendants of Niall.’ Síl, ‘seed,’ is used to describe segments within such dynasties as in the Síl Máeluidir, ‘the seed of Máeluidir,’ a branch of the Uí Chennselaig of south Leinster. They gave their name to the barony of Shelmalier, Co. Wexford. The word cenél referred to a ‘kindred’ as in the branches of the northern Uí Néill, Cenél Conaill and Cenél nÉogain. Many of the earlier groups that lost political power had once occupied compact blocks of territory. By the time that they are recorded in the genealogies they now form disparate communities—small enclaves within the territory dominated by the new dynasties. Such are the Dál Cormaic in Leinster who are to be found scattered over North Leinster. The more recent Uí Máil (> Glen of Imaal, Co. Wicklow) lost power at the beginning of the eighth century and fragmented into three separate branches in three different territories. Another Leinster group was the Fothairt that had been important in the remote period. By the seventh century they are found in various areas—in the Liffey valley, in Carlow, Wexford, Offaly and outside of Leinster in Louth, Armagh, east Donegal and other places. What is remarkable is that they seemed to maintain a sense of their common origins despite being settled in different and distant locations. The cult of St Brigit is particularly associated with areas in which the Fothairt reside and abbesses of her chief monastery of Kildare were chosen from these disparate groups.16 Similar tribal associations exist within the cult of other saints too. Such disparate peoples could be represented by a bishop as in the case of Mael Finnian ua hOenaigh, comarba Feichini 7 episcopus Tuath Luighne, in Christo Iesu pausauit whose death is recorded in the annals of Ulster in 993, ‘Mael Finnian ua hAenaigh, the comarb, ‘successor,’ of Saint Feichíne (of Fore in Co. Westmeath) and bishop of Tuath Luighne, or perhaps the ‘peoples of the Luigne,’ rested in Jesus Christ.’ The Luigne are represented in the barony of Lyney in Co. Sligo and Lune in Co. Meath.
9An early Irish text likened the situation in the populous area of Meath to rods of gold (the ruling Uí Néill dynasty) over rods of silver, over rods of bronze. This describes the political relationships among the politically significant groups within Meath. Less important peoples were the Uí Moccu Uais Breg, the Mugdorna and the Ciannachta.17 No doubt fragments of peoples such as the Déssi, the Dál Conchobor at Ardbraccan, the Corco Saí (Saírige) around Duleek and numerous others were lower still in the pecking order and provided various collective services for their politically successful masters. In south Leinster amongst the Uí Chennselaigh it can be demonstrated that as the dynasty spread, its side branches took over lands of their neighbours. One might imagine that the Uí Dega on the coast of Wexford continued as an independent group but it is clear from the annals that at a point in the eighth century, the kings of the Uí Dega, a name that perhaps by now was simply a territorial name, were members of the Uí Chennselaigh.18 The same dynasty also took over the lands of the Uí Dróna (barony of Idrone, Co. Carlow) and in a similar fashion gave themselves the title of ‘kings of Uí Dróna.’ In other areas pressure such as this pushed peoples onto marginal land or depressed them to the status of rent-payers to their new overlords. These mechanisms can be seen at work throughout the island.
10We can follow the rise of dynasties and the collapse of others in some detail. The branches of the southern Uí Néill expanded in the midlands. At first exercising overlordship over what had once been Leinster territory they gradually took possession of the land, settling and pushing the borders of Leinster back to the boundaries of the province as it is more or less today. At the top end of the political spectrum the relationship between rulers and ruled must have been under constant negotiation. At the lower end ‘negotiation’ is probably a euphemism since total absorption was undoubtedly the end result.
11A famous example, at the higher end of the political spectrum, of such negotiation was that between the Airgíalla and the Uí Néill. The text was recently re-edited by Edel Bhreathnach and Kevin Murray19 with a commentary on the legal content by Thomas Charles-Edwards.20 This is known as the Airgíalla Charter poem. While the poem claimed that the agreement was made in the sixth century it was actually made c.734 between Áed Allan of the Cenél nÉogain branch of the Northern Uí Néill and the Airgíalla. It was brought into being following the collapse of the power of the Cenél Conaill and the corresponding rise of the Cenél nÉogain. As the Cenél nÉogain consolidated in central Ulster in the lands to which they gave the name Tír nEóghain (Tyrone) and advanced southwards into the territory occupied by the Uí Chremthainn, to the north of Lough Erne, and the Airthir, around Armagh, it was necessary for these Airgíallan groups to create a new relationship with the Uí Néill. The Airgíalla had been independent since the battle of Mag Roth in 637 and the overkingship circulated amongst their various groups. With the advance of the Uí Néill they now claimed to be their close kin and thus have a right to a favourable relationship with them. They also became their closest military vassals. This agreement provided a defence against Uí Néill encroachment until they were decisively defeated by the Uí Néill in the battle of Leth Cam beside Armagh in 827.
12Thomas Charles-Edwards has summarised this agreement as follows:
I Historical prologue: §§1-12.
- The first ordering of the seating plan of Tailtiu (conceived as occurring before the genealogical separation of the Airgíalla and the Uí Néill, although the Connachta are already a separate political entity with its base in the west): §§1-4.
- The land settlement between the Uí Néill and the Airgíalla, made by their common ancestor, Coirpre Lifechair: §§5-7.
- The implications of the settlement: §§8-12.
II The rights of the Five Kindreds of the Uí Néill: §§13-20.
The rights of the Uí Néill apparently over all their subjects, including, but not confined to, the Airgíalla.
III The Airgíalla’s side of the bargain: §§21-39.
- The obligations of the king of the Uí Néill: §§21-2.
- The limited military obligations of the Airgíalla, §§23-5, balanced by rights arising out of military service, §§26, 28-9.
- The four offences that the king of the Uí Néill can judge on his own (implying that others are judged by him together with the king of whichever branch of the Airgíalla is affected): §§30-3.
- Rights irrevocably conceded to the Airgíalla: §§40-44.
IV The contract made in the sixth century: §§40-8.
- Between the Airgíalla and the Uí Néill: §§40-44.
- Between the branches of the Airgíalla to uphold their rights against the Uí Néill: §§45-8.
V Conclusion:
The seating of the Airgíalla, very probably at Tailtiu (although the reference to Tailtiu is likely to be a gloss): §49.21
13Tailtiu in this agreement is Telltown on the river Blackwater in Co. Meath where the Uí Néill had their assembly. It was at such assemblies that treaties and other agreements were announced. The ‘seating’ arrangements at such assemblies were a highly visual, physical demonstration of the political and social relationships amongst all the peoples taking part.
14From all of this it may be seen that the concept of a ‘community’ in early Ireland varied from the scattered remnants of once powerful peoples, still perhaps nominally independent, but who were under the constant threat of absorption, to those in varying degrees of political independence right up to the greatest of overlords whose ‘territory’ consisted of such groups. The relationship among these groups was varied and varying depending upon the fluctuating political fortunes of their overlords. Their obligations ranged from military service at the higher end to tributes in goods services and food supplies at the lower end. By the eighth century the leaders of some peoples who had previously been called rí, ‘king,’ were now given the title dux or taoísech, ‘leader,’ (if this is not simply the fashion of the writer of the Annals of Ulster at the time) and at the same time there would seem to have been a more ruthless assault upon old tribal peoples.22 At first sight the welter of shifting alliances and counter-alliances is bewildering. But if we stand back from this we can see that it had its own rhythm and produced, in a phrase coined by the anthropologist Max Gluckman (writing of African states), ‘an oscillating equilibrium.’ 23
15There were also communities in the ecclesiastical sphere as well. Some of the smallest political communities such as the Corco Saí, mentioned above, had their own Domnach, ‘church,’ from Latin Dominicum, a word that takes us back to the missionary period, and their bishop. This was a discrete people under the pastoral care of a bishop. These churches were often envied by more powerful rivals and were absorbed by them, usually at the same time as the communities they served came under political domination. Monastic churches with a mother church had daughter houses scattered throughout different territories often with strong tribal affiliations. Ecclesiastical structures and secular structures mirrored each other to a remarkable extent.
16In the course of the seventh century Armagh, encouraged by the oldest churches, those aware of their origin in the sub Roman world, the ecclesiae primitivae, ‘the churches of first foundation,’ as mentioned by Tírechán,24 sought to establish a compact territorial archiepiscopal diocese, the boundaries of which are established in the Liber Angeli.25 This was based upon the boundaries of the Airgíalla following their victory over the Ulaid (the Ulstermen) in the battle of Mag Roth in 637. As I have indicated above the encroaching Uí Néill meant that a compact Airgíallan ‘state,’ despite the agreement outlined above, could not be sustained for long. The idea of a hierarchy of dioceses under Armagh as head of the Irish church was an experiment that was to fail. As the authority of Armagh spread throughout Ireland it was the more fluid and flexible model of the monastic church with scattered daughter houses that was to prevail. Bishops still controlled territories that waxed and waned in extent in tandem with the rhythm of secular politics.26 They ruled from within the great monastic ‘cities’ —settlements controlled by the comarb, ‘successor, of the saint who might on occasion be a bishop. The manner in which the princes of the church ruled their ‘cities’ and territories again echoed secular organization—indeed not infrequently the head of a church was also the local king.
17In the midst of such diversity, and the waxing and waning of the power of peoples and their rulers, how could there be a concept of the common good? Kingship meant government—however embryonic in form that might be. It is clear that the institution of kingship in early Ireland was extremely ancient and has Indo-European origins.27 There were different grades of kings according to the law tracts. The basic type of king was the rí. He ruled over his kingdom. This was the túath. This word comes from the word *teutos which has the basic meaning of ‘people.’ This was the fundamental political unit of early Ireland. But as I have pointed out, already during the seventh and eighth centuries this type of kingship was under political pressure from those above. Indeed the law tracts ask the question: what is a túath?—and the answer is that it is only a túath if it has a king, a churchman/scholar and a poet.28 Some of these petty kingdoms, therefore, by this period were already disappearing and even within the law tracts it is over-kingships that have real political power.
18While the túath has been presented as a discrete unit, multiples of which made up over-kingships, as I have indicated above, the situation on the ground must have involved a multiplicity of overlapping relationships. As well as the agreement between the Uí Néill and the Airgíalla, mentioned above, we have other examples of contracts between under-kings and their over-kings establishing their respective rights and duties. Frithfholad Muman, ‘the counter obligations of Munster,’ is a contract limiting the power of the king of Cashel and the rights of his vassal-kings.29 Such contracts were widespread. In contrast to this type of contract is that within the early eighth-century law tract, Críth Gablach, that Thomas Charles-Edwards has recently identified.30 He says, ‘What was remarkable about the latter was the recognition of a collective entity, the people, as a contracting party, not the notion of a contract of clientship between a king and his overlord.’31 He also says that ‘Críth Gablach’s contract between a king and his people may seem an extraordinarily precocious venture in political thought, especially to readers accustomed to the contract theories of such thinkers as Locke and Rousseau.’32 Indeed it was part of an on-going attempt on the part of the clergy to create a specifically Christian form of government in early Ireland.
19The tract shows clear Latin influence particularly from the grammarians. It is essentially a text dealing with the grades of the laity, culminating in the grades of the king. Following this a question is asked: ‘Which of the two is of higher status, king or people?’ Here the people are a collective entity. The paradoxical answer is: ‘The king is of higher status, although they are of equal status; for it is the people that ordains a king, it is not the king which ordains a people.’33 Thomas Charles-Edwards points out that:
“Oirdnidir, conventially translated ‘ordains’, is, more exactly, to give a person higher rank. Ordan, from which oirdnidir is derived, may be used both of high rank itself and of a person enjoying high rank. Furthermore, the word ordan is of Latin origin (a loan-word from the oblique stem of Latin ordo via the British source of Welsh urdden); yet although oirdnide, the past participle of oirdnid(ir) is used in the Milan Glosses to explain unctus in regem and christus, it does not signify royal unction as such: anointing was merely one way of giving a person higher rank.”34
20The relation between king and people is here expressed within the framework of contractual law. The raising of a noble to the rank of a king creates mutual obligations, folad, between king and people. The king has the right to impose certain exactions upon his people such as the tribal óenach, ‘fair,’ but the people have the right to decide on how it should be ordered. He has the right to impose rechtgae, ‘edicts,’ upon his people. One of four such edicts is Fénechas, ‘native law’ —the people adopt, the king enforces.
21The next section deals with the way in which a king might loose his royal status and the contractual structure is not to the fore. The king has the duty to conduct himself and his affairs in a way appropriate to a king—the córus ríg. One of these duties was that he should always be accessible to his people. It is also clear that his week is that of the Christian calendar. As Charles-Edwards makes clear the point of this section is to demonstrate that the just king’s manner of life should be a Christian one (this echoes the mid seventh-century text De Duodecim Abusivis Saeculi).
22The text develops through three phases:
- the ordination of a king by a single people
- the obligations of a king to the people who ordains him
- rights of the king against the people
- the obligations a just ruler to his peoples.35
23The text goes from a king of his people to a king of peoples. In this way it moves into the realm of the over-kings. The over-king’s rights are that of calling for a slógad, ‘a hosting,’ pledging a rechtgae, ‘an edict,’ and cairde, ‘making a treaty or alliance.’ The king of a single túath has obligations towards other kings and peoples, to provide his peoples with certain needs or services such as a judge, and to be maintained as he maintains his people. The duties of the just ruler of several túatha are, by contrast, general and moral requirements.
24There are other texts that deal with instructions to a king, tecosc ríg. One of these is Audacht Moraind, ‘The Testament of Morand’.
§4 Let him keep my advice36 which follows here.
§5 Tell him before every [other] word,
Bring him with every word this lasting advice.
§6 Let him preserve justice, it will preserve him.
§7 Let him raise justice, it will raise him.
§8 Let him exalt mercy, it will exalt him.
§9 Let him care for his tribes, they will care for him.
§10 Let him help his tribes, they will help him.
§11 Let him soothe his tribes, they will soothe him.
§12 Tell him, it is through the justice of the ruler that plagues [and] great
lightnings are kept from the people.
§13 It is through the justice of the ruler that he judges great tribes [and]
great riches.
§14 It is through the justice of the ruler that he secures peace, tranquillity,
joy, ease, [and] comfort.
§15 It is through the justice of the ruler that he dispatches (great) battalions
to the borders of hostile neighbours.
§16 It is through the justice of the ruler that every heir plants his house-
post in his fair inheritance.
§17 It is through the justice of the ruler that abundances of great tree-fruit
of the great wood are tasted.
§18 It is through the justice of the ruler that milk-yields of great cattle are
maintained(?).
§19 It is through the justice of the ruler that there is (?) abundance of every
high, tall corn.
§20 It is through the justice of the ruler that abundance of fish swim in
streams.
§21 It is through the justice of the ruler that fair children are well begotten.
(with tears(?) of … ?)
§22 Tell him, since he is young, his rule is young.
Let him observe the driver of an old chariot.
For the driver of an old wheel-rim (= chariot) does not sleep.
He looks ahead, he looks behind, in front and to the right and to the left.
He looks, he defends, he protects, so that he may not break(?) with neglect
or violence the wheel-rims which run under him.37
25This text dates to c.700 and is contemporary with those that have been discussed above. There are two versions of the text. Of the three recensions, B has few Latin loan words and scholars have argued that it contains pagan concepts of kingship. The text was of interest to the clergy, however, because many of the ideals expressed within could be adopted in the process of creating a specifically Christian kingship.38
26In seventh-century hagiography, particularly the Life of Colum Cille by Adomnán, there is a theme of kingship running through the text. In this text it is Colum Cille who ordains Áedán king—not the people.39 The relationship between ruler and ruled is now shifting to that between ruler and God. It is clear that in parallel with the secular texts another discourse was under way.
“This Aid the Black had been a very bloody man, and a slayer of many men; he had also killed Diormit,40 Cerball’s son, who had been ordained, by God’s will, as the ruler of all Ireland. This same Aid, then, after passing some time in pilgrimage, was ordained as priest, although not rightly, in the above-mentioned Findchán’s monastery, a bishop being summoned for the purpose. But the bishop dared not lay his hand upon Aid’s head, until first Findchan (whose love for Aid was earthly) laid his right hand upon Aid’s head, for confirmation. When the ordination thus made was afterwards reported to the holy man, he was much displeased. Thereupon he pronounced the following terrible sentence upon that Findchan, and upon the Aid who had been ordained, saying: ‘That right hand which, contrary to divine law and the law of the church, Findchan has laid upon the head of a son of perdition will presently rot, and after torments of great pain will precede him into the earth in burial; and surviving after his hand has been buried he will live for many years. And Aid, unworthily ordained, will return like a dog to his vomit, and he will again be a bloody killer, and at last, pierced with a spear, will fall from wood into water, and die by drowning. He has deserved such an end much sooner, who has slaughtered the king of all Ireland’. This prophecy of the blessed man was fulfilled in regard to them both. For the right hand of the priest Findchan decayed first, and preceded him into the earth, being buried in the island that is called Ommon. But he himself, according to the word of Saint Columba, lived for many years afterwards. And Aid the Black, priest only in name, returned to his former evil deeds, and, pierced with a spear by treachery, fell from the prow of a ship, into the water of a lake, and perished.”41
27In this episode we have mention of the ‘king of all Ireland’ and since he is ordained by God, as the Lord’s anointed, his killer deserved a terrible death. The high-kingship of all Ireland does not occur in the law tracts. In the vernacular literature the inauguration of the high-king at Tara has a clear pagan ancestry and the ceremony itself was heavily sexual in which the king to be, mated with the earth goddess. The twelfth-century description of an inauguration in Donegal by Giraldus Cambrensis has its nearest parallel in the aśvamedha, ‘horse sacrifice,’ of ancient India.42 It contained everything that the clergy loathed. Adomnán’s reference to the depravity of the eating of horseflesh is surely a reflection of this ceremony.43 So why do the seventh-century Irish hagiographers make so much of this ideal kingship?
28The Uí Néill dynasty appears in the hagiography and this has led to the idea among scholars that the church was recognising the greatest power in the country at the time. But the clergy were not interested in the Uí Néill as such. They were concerned with the creation of a Christian form of government. With the unceasing warfare among the multiplicity of competing kingships and overlordships peace in society was short lived. As in Merovingian Gaul the hagiographers were concerned with succession. They were concerned to drive home the message that the king who submits to the church will have a successful reign.44 And they favour a powerful kingship over the island that would bring the constant warfare to an end. While the high-kingship may have been an ideal it was an ideal that embraced the entire island. By Christianizing this pagan kingship, by ordaining its kings, the clergy hoped to introduce a strong Christian government. With such a powerful king as an ally the Church could carry out its mission.
29In the late seventh century one such king ruled for a period. This was Loingsech mac Óengusso a member of the same dynasty to which Adomnán himself belonged. Under his auspices (as with the royal-led councils of Gaul) the great Synod of Birr in County Offaly was held in 697 and Adomnán had his Lex Innocentium passed in which women and children and non-combatants in general would be spared in situations of warfare.45 This great king was killed in battle in 704 on Saturday July 12 at the 6th hour. This most detailed entry was made in the Iona annals and he was given the title rex Hiberniae. The title was premature for social and political conditions were not yet ripe for such an institution. All of this shows the vision that the clergy of Ireland had for a Christian form of government. Kingship was religious whether pagan or Christian. At the inauguration of a high-king in the pagan past the world was remade. The Christian clergy in early Ireland were faced with a sophisticated ideology—they had to work very hard to re-mould it to their liking and even then they could do so only partially. It is no wonder that Irishmen, such as Sedulius Scottus, were at the forefront of political theory in the early Middle Ages.46
Notes de bas de page
1 For an assessment of these sources see Byrne F.J., “Seventh-century documents,” Irish Ecclesiastical Record, no 108, 1967, p. 164-182.
2 Foremost among those scholars were Dillon M., Celts and Aryans: survivals of Indo-European speech and society, Simla, 1975; Binchy D.A., “Linguistic and legal archaisms in the Celtic law-books,” in Jenkins D. (dir.), Studies presented to the International Commission for the History of Representative and Parliamentary Institutions, no 42, Bruxelles, 1973, p. 109-120; Idem, “Celtic suretyship, a fossilized Indo-European institution?,” in Cardona G. (dir.), Indo-European and Indo-Europeans: papers presented to the third Indo-European conference, Philadelphia, 1970, p. 355-367; Wagner H., Studies in the origins of the Celts and of early Celtic civilisation, Tübingen, 1971; Rees A. et B., Celtic Heritage: ancient tradition in Ireland and Wales, Londres, 1961; Mac Cana P., Celtic Mythology, Londres, 1970.
3 This culminated in the work of McCone K., Pagan Past and Christian Present in Early Irish Literature, Maynooth, 1990.
4 Dillon M., “The Archaism of the Irish Tradition,” Proceedings of the British Academy, no 33, 1947, p. 245-264.
5 O’Brien M. A. éd., Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae, Dublin, 1962.
6 Mac Niocaill G., Ireland before the Vikings, Dublin, 1972; Corráin D. Ó, Ireland before the Normans, Dublin, 1972; Byrne F.J., Irish kings and High-kings, Londres, 1973.
7 Smyth A. P., “The earliest Irish annals: their first contemporary entries and the earliest centres of recording,” Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, no 72c, 1972, p. 1-48.
8 For a recent discussion see Charles-Edwards T.M., Early Christian Ireland, Cambridge, 2000, p. 68-123.
9 Ó Muraíle N., “Some early Connacht population-groups,” in Smyth A.P. (dir.), Seanchas. Studies in early and medieval Irish archaeology, history and literature in honour of Francis J. Byrne, Dublin, 2000, p 161-177 at p. 174-175.
10 Byrne F. J., “Tribes and tribalism in early Ireland,” Ériu, no 22, 1971, p. 128-166 at p. 136.
11 Schrijver P., “Varia V. Non-Indo-European surviving in Ireland in the first millennium AD,” Ériu, no 51, 2000, p. 195-199.
12 Ibidem, p. 198.
13 Mac Neill E., “Early Irish population-groups: their nomenclature, classification, and chronology,” Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, no 29c, 1911-1912, p. 59-114.
14 Ibidem, p. 64-82 at p. 67.
15 Ibid., p. 60.
16 Charles-Edwards T.M., “Early Irish saints’cults and their constituencies,” Ériu, no 54, 2004, p. 79-102 at p. 82-92.
17 Bhreathnach E., “Medieval sub-kingdoms of Brega: the kingships of Calatruim, Déssi Breg, Mugdornae Breg and Uí Maic Uais Breg,” in MacShamhráin A. (dir.), The island of St Patrick: Church and ruling dynasties in Fingal and Meath, 400-1148, Dublin, 2004, p. 38-51; Bhreathnach E., “The Medieval Kingdom of Brega,” in Bhreathnach E. (dir.), The Kingship and Landscape of Tara, Dublin, 2005, p. 410-422; For extensive genealogical tables of the more important peoples in Brega see Byrne F.J., “Appendix 1.1, Genealogical Tables,” Byrne F.J., Jenkins W., Kenny G. and Swift C. (dir.), Excavations at Knowth 4: historical Knowth and its hinterland, Dublin, 2008, p. 55-87.
18 Cellach Bairne. i. taisech Hua nDega, ‘Cellach Bairne, that is, chief of the Uí Dega’ as he is styled in the Book of Leinster genealogies (LL. 317a 15 = O’Brien, CGH p. 347) was a member of the Uí Chennselaigh dynasty who died in 809.
19 Bhreathnach E. and Murray K., “The Airgíalla Charter Poem: Edition,” in Bhreathnach E. (dir.), The Kingship and Landscape of Tara, Dublin, 2005, p. 124-158.
20 Charles-Edwards T.M., “The Airgíalla Charter Poem: The Political Context,” in Bhreathnach E. (dir.), The Kingship and Landscape of Tara, p. 100-123.
21 Ibidem, p. 101.
22 Ó Corráin D., “Nationality and kingship in pre-Norman Ireland,” in Moody T.W. (dir.), Nationality and the pursuit of national independence, Belfast, 1978, p. 1-35 at p. 9-10.
23 Balandier G., Political anthropology, Harmondsworth, 1972, p. 189.
24 The Patrician texts in the Book of Armagh, éd. Bieler L., Dublin, 1979, p. 138-139, § 18(4). Tírechán is echoing and amplifying similiar ideas in the Liber Angeli. See Bieler, Patrician texts, p. 184-191.
25 Ibidem, p. 184-185.
26 Etchingham C., Church organisation in Ireland A.D. 650 to 1000, Maynooth, 1999.
27 Binchy D.A., Celtic and Anglo-Saxon Kingship, Oxford, 1970; McCone, Pagan Past, op. cit., p. 107-137.
28 Jaski B., Early Irish Kingship and Succession, Dublin, 2000, p. 39.
29 O’Keeffe J. G., “Dál Caladbuig and reciprocal services between the kings of Cashel and various Munster states,” in Fraser J., Grosjean P. and O’Keeffe J.G. (dir.), Irish Texts i, Londres, 1931, p. 19-21; Ó Buachalla L., “Contributions towards the political history of Munster, 450-800 A.D.,” Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society, no 57, 1952, p. 67-86 at p. 78-86; Byrne, Irish Kings, op. cit., p. 196-199; Charles-Edwards, Early Christian Ireland, op. cit., p. 534-548.
30 Charles-Edwards T.M., “A contract between king and people in early medieval Ireland? Críth Gablach on kingship,” Peritia, no 8, 1994, p. 107-119.
31 Ibidem, p. 117.
32 Ibid., p. 116.
33 Ibid., p. 108.
34 Ibid., p. 109.
35 Ibid., p. 114.
36 The advice is that of Morann, a wise mythical judge. The text is an example of the Speculum Principum or ‘Mirror of Princes,’ a literary genre consisting of advice to a king.
37 Audacht Morainn, éd. Kelly F., Dublin, 1976, p. 4-9.
38 Doherty C., “Kingship in Early Ireland,” Bhreathnach, Kingship and Landscape of Tara, op. cit., p. 3-31 at p. 25-31.
39 Adomnan’s Life of Columba, éd. Anderson A.O. et M.O., Londres, 1961, p. 472-477.
40 Diarmait mac Cerbaill, high-king. He is famous for being the last high-king to hold the pagan inauguration rite, the Feis Temro, ‘Feast of Tara’ in 560AD. He was killed in 565AD.
41 Adomnan’s Life of Columba, op. cit., p. 280-283.
42 Doherty C., “Kingship in Early Ireland,” p. 17-20.
43 Adomnan’s Life of Columba, p. 250-53.
44 Doherty C., “Kingship in Early Ireland,” p. 26.
45 Adomnán at Birr AD 697: essays in commemoration of the Law of the Innocents, O’Loughlin T. (dir.), Dublin, 2001.
46 Hellmann S., Sedulius Scottus, Munich, 1906; Sedulius Scottus On Christian Rulers and The Poems, Doyle G. (trad.), Binghamton, 1983.
Auteur
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Un constructeur de la France du xxe siècle
La Société Auxiliaire d'Entreprises (SAE) et la naissance de la grande entreprise française de bâtiment (1924-1974)
Pierre Jambard
2008
Ouvriers bretons
Conflits d'usines, conflits identitaires en Bretagne dans les années 1968
Vincent Porhel
2008
L'intrusion balnéaire
Les populations littorales bretonnes et vendéennes face au tourisme (1800-1945)
Johan Vincent
2008
L'individu dans la famille à Rome au ive siècle
D'après l'œuvre d'Ambroise de Milan
Dominique Lhuillier-Martinetti
2008
L'éveil politique de la Savoie
Conflits ordinaires et rivalités nouvelles (1848-1853)
Sylvain Milbach
2008
L'évangélisation des Indiens du Mexique
Impact et réalité de la conquête spirituelle (xvie siècle)
Éric Roulet
2008
Les miroirs du silence
L'éducation des jeunes sourds dans l'Ouest, 1800-1934
Patrick Bourgalais
2008