| Re .0:
First, a warning: Robert Charroux is a French equivallent of Von
Daniken and Velikovski. The best use you can put his books to is to
light your chimney fire with them this winter. The most charitable
suggestion about him is that he's feeble-minded...
Now about 'Lebor na hUidre', commonly known as 'the Book of the Dun
Cow'. I think it is kept in the library of the Royal Irish Academy. It
is the oldest (late 11th or early 12th century) among the few
manuscripts which contain most of what we know of early Irish
literature. It was compiled in the monastery of Clonmacnoise. The other
best known manuscripts of the same kind are the 'Yellow Book of Lecan',
and the 'Book of Leinster'. They include miscellaneous stories (many
versions) of four main groups of myths or legends:
-Stories about the 'Tuatha D� Danann', among them the 'Lebor Gab�la',
or 'Book of Conquest', which tells how the Tuatha D� Danann, or tribes
of the goddess Danu, conquered Ireland over the Fomorians.
-The Ulster cycle, stories about King Conchobor and C�chulainn, chief
of the warriors of the Red Branch. The 'T�in B� C�ailnge' or 'Cattle
raid of Ulster' is part of this cycle.
-The Fenian cycle, stories about Finn mac Cumaill, his son Ois�n and
the other warriors of the Fiana.
-A group of stories and genealogical tracts centred on various kings
said to have reigned between the 3rd century BC and the 8th century AD.
The beginning of the historical period, with the first Irish chronicles
(in Latin) is in between, in late 6th century.
The text in 'Lebor na hUidre' is badly flawed and mutilated. I
don't know the name of the monk(s?) who compiled it, his name might
well have been Moelmuire, as Charroux transcribes it, but he must not
be confused with his homonym Mael Mura of Othain who died in 887, one
of the most well known ancient Irish poets, author of many of the poems
included in the aforementionned manuscripts.
As for Conn C�tchathach (Conn of the hundred battles), he's the
eponym of Connacht and the various chronologies place him between the
first and the third century AD. Professor Thomas F. O'Rahilly has
convincingly demonstrated that he is not an historical king, but one of
the names of the Otherworld god from whom the Celts believed themselves
to be descended. More precisely, he's the ancestor god of the Goidels
invaders, who conquered Ireland over the other tribes who were already
there (Picts -or Cruithni-, Belgians -or Belgae or F�r Bolg-, Lagin,
Domnainn and G�lioin, all of them being Celts too, although it's not
absolutely sure for the Picts). On the other hand, Conn's alleged
grandfather, Tuathal Techtmar, is practically sure to have been a real
man, the actual chief of the invading Goidels. Con(d)la is a form of
Conn's gilla, or servant (or follower) of Conn. The myth of Conla is
indeed in the 'Lebor na hUidre' which has been edited by Best and
Bergin. I'm sorry, I don't know if this edition is in (old) Irish only
or bilingual and I don't have the date either. Various editions of
'Lebor Gab�la', 'T�in B� C�ailnge' and other extracts of the
manuscripts can be found in Ireland. Maybe some dweller of the Green
Isle will be able to give you more info about it.
Denis.
|
| There is a beautiful and very readable version of the Tain Bo Cuailnge that was
put out by Irish University Press in 1969, translation by Thomas Kinsella and
drawings by Louis le Brocquy (Dolmen Editions IX). I have seen it used for
design bindings in exhibition. Of course, it might be a rare book by now, but
I think it's worth keeping your eyes open for.
I have purposely not used accents, because the machines here are geared to print
Hebrew, and when they receive Irish, all the accented letters come through as
infrequently used Hebrew letters. Mixed with the Irish, it makes a very
interesting tho' puzzling combination.
-Seamas Mac Fhlaithbheartaigh
|
| Re .2: Part of .1 comes from the notes and addenda in my copy of that
edition of the T�in, bought in Dublin 2 and 1/2 years ago. The rest
comes mostly from "Early Irish History and Mythology" by T. F.
O'Rahilly, published by the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies in
1946 and republished 11 or 12 time since. But I didn't mention this
edition of the T�in in .1 because the myth of Condla doesn't belong to
that part of "Lebor na hUidre" and consequently is not included in this
book. As far as I can tell, it is part of the stories related to the
genealogical tracts, and I don't know if it is published in a book that
is not now out of print. Anybody knows?
Denis.
|