Morice's Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l'histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Bretagne.

2. The life of St. Nonna, or Nonita, a dramatic poem preserved in a paper MS., which was found by Marzinus, notary to the Bishop of Quimper, on his pastoral circuit, and presented by him to the editor. This MS., which Zeuss thinks belongs to the fourteenth century, has been published under the title: Buhez Santez Nonn, ou vie de Sainte Nonne, et de son fils Saint Devy (David) Mystere composé en langue bretonne anterieurement au 12me Siecle, publié d'apres un manuscrit unique, avec une introduction par l'Abbé Sionnet et accompagné d'une traduction littérale de M. Legonidec et d'un facsimile du manuscrit, Paris, 1837.

ART. V.-The "Tri Thruaighe na Scéalaigheachta”, (i. e., the "Three Most Sorrowful Tales",) of Erinn.

I. "The Exile of the Children of Uisnech";-[edited from the old MS. called the "Yellow Book of Lecain", in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin.] By EUGENE O'CURRY, M.R.I.A.

HE Tri Thruaighe na Scéalaigheachta, (lit. "the Three most Sorrowful of [Irish] Story-telling",) as they are popularly called, have for a long time been in high favour with the bards, story-tellers, and romance-writers of Ireland.

Of these three Tragical Tales, two (those which we shall give here as the second and third in order),—the Fate of the Children of Lir, and that of the Children of Tuireann,—are of course pure romance, and are both ascribed to the time and race of the Tuatha De Danann; whilst the first,-the "Exile of the Children of Uisnech",-is referred to the Milesian time and race, and is, though somewhat poetized, founded on true history, with real historical characters.

The Tale of the Exile (or the Tragical Fate, as it is more popularly called) of the Children of Uisnech, is already well known to the readers of Irish romance, from the favourable place which, in its manuscript condition, it has for so long a time held in popular estimation, as well as from its having been already pubfished by the "Gaelic Society of Dublin" in the year 1808. It may be fairly asked then, what occasion there is to publish it again, and upon what grounds it seeks a place in the literary pages of the ATLANTIS? To these questions I have but to answer, that, although there have been two versions of this Tale published by the "Gaelic Society", neither version is a true representation of the original, either in text or translation; and that neither of them, printed in that volume, is of any value in a philological point of

III.

25

view. It is strange that the Editor of the Gaelic Society's Transactions gives no indication whatever of the difference of style in his two versions, or where he found either of them; he quotes Dr. Keting for the history of the tale, and then introduces both versions in succession, without any reference to the place or the character of the manuscripts from which he has taken them, contenting himself with a general criticism on MacPherson's Darthula, and some few notes, indicative, I shall only say, rather of the patriotic spirit, than of the historical or philological learning of the writer. In the absence then of any reference to the originals from which the Gaelic Society's versions have been taken, we must only look for the probable sources in our own city; and it is satisfactory to find that we have, I am satisfied, the originals of both versions.

The first, or more modern and diffuse version, is preserved in a paper manuscript (Class H. 1. 6, fol. 50 b), in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin. This volume is in the handwriting of Hugh O'Daly, and appears to have been transcribed for Dr. Francis O'Sullivan, of T.C.D., in the year 1758. This transcript is a rude and wretched one indeed, containing no reference to the source from which it was derived, nor any means of ascertaining whether O'Daly took any liberty with the orthography of his original or not. Assuming then that this is the transcript from which the published version was taken by its editor, Theophilus O'Flannagan (and indeed there is little room to doubt it), that gentleman, without any explanation, took very great liberties with his text, in rejecting redundancies, supplying omissions, and changing the character of the orthography from the most modern commonplace to much more ancient forms, agreeably to certain rules laid down by the learned Richard MacEllegot, in his Essay prefixed to the volume; thus giving to his text an appearance of antiquity to which it had no real pretension in its present form. It is not, however, my desire to deal severely with O'Flannagan; he was a clever scholar, though more inclined to prefer giving a polished and readable, than a correct but stiff and close, translation of his original,—the importance of the Gaedhelic language in what I may call a scientific point of view, not having attracted the notice of scholars at that time as it has done since.

The second, and much older version of this tale, published in the same volume, appears to have been taken from an inaccurate copy preserved in the MS. H. 1, 13 (folio 323), in the same library, and in the hand-writing also of the same Hugh O'Daly. In this copy, too, the original has suffered considerably, but whether from the hand of O'Daly or of his immediate predecessors, we

have no means of knowing, since he gives no intimation from what MS. he copied. In this case, however, we are more fortunate in having a really ancient copy of the original version; whilst in the former no older copy than that published is known, at least to me.

The copy of the older version to which I refer is preserved in the vellum MS. class H. 2, 16 (at col. 749), in the same library. This part of the volume was compiled in the year 1391, by Gilla-Isa Mór Mac Firbisigh, one of the hereditary historians of Lecain Mac Firbisigh, in the county of Sligo; and it is written in another part of the volume that the name of the book was "The Yellow Book of Lecain" (Leabhar Buidhe Lecan). The language in this version, too, though so ancient, must have undergone some grammatical changes, which it would be useless to dwell on here; but the space of time indicated by the difference even between the language of this version as it stands and that of the first modified version noticed above, could not, I think, be much less than a thousand years. At what time ancient condensed historical tales came to be amplified, and more storified, if I may so express it, or vice versa (but I think that the more ancient were generally the more condensed versions, though not always), it would now be hard to say. Including the present tale, however, I am acquainted with four instances of considerable amplification; and I am certain that many more, if not all, the short tales we find in ancient MSS. have, perhaps, from the ninth to the twelfth century, undergone a similar change, either for the purpose of embodying from other sources and preserving all the circumstances and names of the actors, or in the mere spirit of the romance of the times, and the growing requirements of the constantly increasing reading classes of society.

I may mention one or two remarkable instances of what I

mean.

There is in this same volume (H. 2. 16), a very ancient, but very brief account of the Battle of Dúnbolg, fought near BelachCon-gluis (Baltinglass), in the county of Wicklow, A.D. 599, in which Aedh Mac Ainmiré, the monarch of Erinn, was killed by Bran Dubh, the King of Leinster. This, however, is but a mere record of the facts and cause of the battle, and stands as a rushlight to a torch, when compared with the ample details and circumstances of the same battle, as they are preserved in the tract on the history of the Boromean Tribute, preserved in the Book of Leinster, a MS. of the twelfth century; but although these versions differ so much in details, there is no perceptible difference in style or language between them.

Again, in the same volume (H. 2. 16), we find a very brief, condensed version of the Battle of Magh Rath, fought in the year 634, between the monarch Domhnall, son of the above Aedh, son of Ainmiré, and Congal Claen, a prince of Ulster. This version fills less than two pages of the volume, while another version in the same volume, and not differing in style of composition or language, fills several pages, as may be seen in the volume of the Irish Archæological Society's publications for the year 1842, in which it is printed, with an English translation.

The same volume (H. 2. 16), contains another condensed tale, called Táin Bó Flidais; one of the many cattle spoils ordered by the King and Queen of Connacht preparatory to their setting out on the famous expedition of the Táin Bổ Chuailgné. The scene of this tale is laid in Erris, in the county of Mayo. Flidais was the wife of Oilill Finn, a famous warrior of that country; and she and her cattle (among which was the celebrated Mael Flidais, or "the Hornless Cow of Flidais") were carried off forcibly by Ferghus Mac Róigh, the Prince of Ulster, after her husband and all his followers had been killed in their defence. There is a copy of this condensed version preserved in the Book of Leinster, already mentioned, but there is a large fragment of a much more detailed version of it, somewhat modified in language, in a MS. on vellum, bound up in the same volume, H. 2, 16, but written in an inferior hand, and evidently no part of the original volume.

It may be, after all, that the more copious are the older versions of all these tales, and that where the language has suffered in these versions, it is owing to their being the more popular, and consequently the oftener transcribed and softened from the more ancient and stubborn diction of the Táin Bó Chuailgné, the Bruighen Da Derga, and other pieces in very ancient and, to us, rugged language.

An apt illustration of this probability will be found in another very curious piece, in the same volume from which the following version of the Story of Deirdré and the Children of Uisnech is taken; the MS. (H. 2. 16., T.C.D.) called the Yellow Book of Lecain. I refer to the detached Fragment of the same story, in a subsequent part of the volume, which I have given in full at the end of the present article (post, p. 416). It will be found, not only in this, but in other views, singularly interesting, when we conclude, as we must do, that this fragment, as well as perhaps a great deal more, belonged to the earlier versions of the tale. This detached fragment of the Fate of the Children of Uisnech is preserved in the MS., H. 2. 16., T.C.D., at cols. 880,

881; and it is also to be found in the Book of Ballymote, R.I.A., at fol. 141.

To return to the Tale of the Children of Uisnech, there is no reason to doubt that this story is a true one. Almost all the characters introduced into it are so well known in Gaedhelic history, that to doubt the authenticity of its leading facts would be to throw doubt on the truthfulness of all our most prized chronicles and historical documents.

Conchobhar, the famous King of Ulster, the contemporary of our Saviour, was an undoubted character, whose descendants continued to be recognized and identified in various parts of this island down to the Anglo-Norman Invasion; indeed they may be recognized still, and the descendants of Fergus MacRóigh are still well known and distinguished in the O'Conors of Kerry, the O'Conors of Corcomroe, the O'Loughlans of Burren, and in many families in Connacht.

The present version of the Tragedy of the Children of Uisnech is taken from H. 2, 16, T.C.D., col. 749, already mentioned. Like all ancient Gaedhelic MS., the text is much contracted, and often written in whole lines without any distinction or separation of the words. Some person, however, at some unknown time, went over the whole of this tract, as well as others in the same volume, and made a proper division of the words by placing a caret below the line between them; and this being the case, and the division being correct to my own understanding, I have followed it, and hope it will be acceptable to all my readers. This certainly is the most convenient form in which to print the piece, for learners and persons but partially acquainted with our language; while to the educated, practised philologist it can offer no difficulty, as from his acquaintance with pieces already published in the exact form in which the words stand in the originals, he can have but little or no difficulty in combining or compounding them according to the rule of his system, whatever it be. With the speculations connected with the various systems proposed by modern scholars on this subject I have, however, nothing to do at present. I have only endeavoured to place before the readers of the ATLANTIS, another pure specimen of early Irish Historic Literature, very unlike that which has already been published in these pages, and in some respects even more interesting both in a literary and a historical point of view; and I have done so in that form which appears to me at least to be the most correct, and the most faithful to the original.

I may add that there is a copy of this tale preserved in the Book of Leinster, T.C.D., fol. 192; but although that MS. is