302 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



119. Question — Which is higher in dignity, king or tuatli ? The king is 

 higher. What dignifies him (above the tv.nthy. Because it is the tvMth that 

 raises the king to honour, not the king that raises the tuatJi. 



What are the sustaining means of a king toward the iuath that raiises him 

 to honour ? Making oath on their behalf to (another) king at the bounds of 

 the border ; he makes denial on oath for (lit. from) them ; he makes superior 

 oath over them (to the extent of) sexencunials; he goes into joint adjudication, 

 into joint evidence, with (another) king on behalf of his tuath. It is their 

 right that he be a faithful judge to them. It is their right (that he give) 

 pledge on their behalf. It is their right (that he give) sick-maintenance as 

 he is maintained. It is their right that he do not pledge them to hold 

 an assembly (in which) he does not assemble the whole tuath but only the 

 co-nobles.' 



120. There are three requisitions that are proper for a king (to levy) on his 

 iuatJia, an assembly, and a convention for enforcing authority, and a hostmg 

 to the border. The joint holding (?) of an assembly, however, belongs to the 

 hiath. What a king pledges for an assembly is his (to decide), pro%'ided that 

 the pledge he gives be a proper one.- 



' " Sustaining means," fohtid: this word, a plural masculine, signifies the means, 

 assets, functions, etc., by which a person discharges his duties or liabilities. 



This is an interesting passage, in which the king appears less as ruler than as agent of 

 the tuath. The king is higher than the tuath, but only because he is raised by the 

 tuath above themselves. He transacts their legal business with other fiiaiha, for each 

 tuath formed a separate and complete jurisdiction. The kings thus provided the nexus 

 by which these distinct states were bound into a single nation and by which the national 

 law, common in theory, was made common in fact. The king's function as judge is 

 said to be a service to the iuath to which they are entitled from him. The last sentence 

 is rendered by O'Curry : ' ' They are entitled that he does not pledge them for a fair, that 

 he assemble not the whole territory, but the neighbours (or co -occupants)." The tuath, 

 however, means the body of freemen under a king. Comaithe is taken by OCurry to be a 

 miswriting of comaifhig, and this word, which means "co-vassals," that is, clients who 

 practised agriculture to some extent in common, came afterwards to mean " neighbours," 

 from which it has also developed the sense "strangers," and hence an adjectival 

 form, which maybe written cofm'vch and cvihich, "wUd," etc. But O'Curry's rendering 

 wotdd require iui'nnmllit not tuinmelt, '-assembles." I do not understand what is 

 meant by " pledging an assembly on the tuath," unless it be that the king is not to give 

 a pledge to cause his tuath to attend an assembly outside of their own territory. I take the 

 conimaithe, "co-nobles," to mean the soercheti of the kings, called in the annals his 

 socii. These were as a rvde the principal nobles of the tuath, who by law were obliged to 

 become free clients to the king if he so required. They were thus bound to attend his 

 court, and no doubt to accompany him when he attended an external assembly. I under- 

 stand the text to mean that the other freemen of the Iuath were not so bound. 



■ The second and third of the foregoing sentences appear to have reference to a joint 

 assembly of several iuatha. Such an assembly would be convened by a superior king. 

 To ensure attendance, the superior king would begin by requiring a pledge, something 

 specially precious, from each of the subordinate kings. 



