Above : Picture Of Fergus Mac Roigh

” Leabhar na g-Ceart ” takes in orderly sequence each one of the seven independent states of Ireland, enumerates the clans which comprise them, and records the tribute which each clan must pay to the King, and, on the other hand, the “tuarasiail” or wages or stipends which the King bestows in return on the chief of each clan. The work is preceded by an account of the rights of the ” King of Eire.” This is, as has been said, the least reliable part of the work, and it is remarkable that the rights of the ” Ard Ri ” are only given under the section allotted to Caiseal, and he is dealt with as if he were also King of Caiseal. The ” rights ” too, are purely personal, being merely the privilege of bestowing gifts or ” tuarastail” on the other provincial Kings, and receiving hospitality from them in return. The supremacy of the Ard Ri was, as has been seen, in fact only a titular one, was confined to the Ui Neill for five centuries, and was little recognised except by the ” Siol Ghuinn ” states, of which he was the nominal head.

But the work is much more definite and practical in dealing with the internal arrangements of the states. Each state comprises several ” clans,” each occupying a definite territory, which form the units of political organisation. The members of each clan are—in theory, although most probably not in fact—of com­mon descent, and each clan is ruled by its own chief, the King of the state being also the chief of his own particular clan. To each King of a state, nearly all the clans pay a fixed tribute in kind—cattle, sheep, hogs, cloaks, etc. These are carefully set down, and vary considerably in amount. On the other hand, to each chief of a clan the King makes gifts. They are of a different nature from the tribute from the clan, as they consist of swords, shields, tunics, steeds, hounds, etc. These gifts are the ” wages,” the acceptance of which is equivalent to an act of homage to the King by the chief, presumably on behalf of his clan. The clans whose tributes were thus regulated were called ” saor-chlanna,” or ” free tribes “— ” free ” in the sense that they occupied their own lands under their own chiefs, subject only to this fixed payment. There were also in every state ” daor-chlanna,” or ” unfree tribes,” who appear to have been subject to arbitrary impositions.

In each of the states there was a large number of the ” free clans,” varying roughly from ten to fifteen. These, it is important to note, came of various stocks, and, more remark­able still, the clans akin to the dynasty were only a small minority, and occupied only a small portion of the territories of the state. The majority of the clans traced their ancestry to sources other than the creators of the dynasty. The states, therefore, were not at all homogeneous but consisted of different clans of diverse origins, and with varying obligations towards the head of the state. They were federations accepting the leadership of recognised dynastic families.

There were, accordingly, in each state a limited number of clans—not more than two or three—which boasted of a descent from the founder of the dynasty. These clans, and these alone, were free from tribute ; the ” gifts ” to their chiefs, too, were profuse and dignified. From them, alone, the Kings of the states were selected. In all the course of history no member of any other family appears as an independent King. They were ” ruling clans” free of tribute, descended from the founder of the Kingdom, and privileged to put forward, from one or other of their clans, the ruler of the state. Their leadership is hardly ever disputed, and it is recognised in some form as long as the Gaelic polity exists.

All the other ” free clans ” had to pay the tributes laid down by ancient law. These, the majority of the inhabitants, were not, as has just been said, of the same lineage as the ” ruling clans ” (except in one or two cases). Instead of finding their origins in the founders of the dynasties, they traced their ancestry to other and less reliable sources—mostly external. Many clans scattered through different Kingdoms claimed descent from a common head.* The most numerous and important of these were the many clans in different parts of Ireland (chiefly on the western sea-board), who all derived their lineage from Fergus Mac Roigh, the ” Red Branch ” hero of the ” TAin.” f The tributes these clans paid varied considerably, and appear to have depended upon the conditions under which each clan became part of the Kingdom—as kindred, or as allies, or as defeated clans making terms with their conquerors.

The ” ruling clans ” all took their names from their respective ancestors—generally the immediate descendant of the founder of the dynasty. This name was prefixed by some such word as Siol, Dal, Clann, Ui, Cineal, etc., all of which indicate descent from the person whose name is appended. When the clans, in course of time, became split up into different families under new names (page 85), the original name was still used to include them all collectively. Many of the other clans were named in the same manner. But a very large number bore names which were based on a different system. Instead of being named after a common ancestor, they were known by descriptive and collective or ” group ” names. Of these it is noticeable that most of them terminate in the suffix -f\Ait>e (-ree). Another remarkable feature is the number of these ” subordinate clans ” in different parts of the country which bear the same name and boast of a common origin.*

* From four or five ancestors nearly all the ” subordinate clans ” claimed descent. But these ancestries are legendary, and in some cases far from creditable.

t This circumstance (and others) has led to the suggestion that the ” Ultaigh,” or Clanna Rury, were the representatives of earlier rulers of the whole island, who retained their independence only in Ulaidh.

The territories occupied by the different clans, both ” ruling ” and ” subordinate,” were generally known by the name of the clans that inhabited them. Thus, ” Tir Eoghain” was the territory occupied by the various families that belonged to the ” Cineal Eoghain”; and “Muscraidhe,” ” Dal Riada,” etc., came to signify not only the clans themselves, but the lands they owned. In many cases, however, there were distinct territorial names, either descriptive or coming down from pre-historic times. Many of these figured con­stantly in history, such as Breifne, Cuailgne (Cooky), Magh Breagh (or Bregia), Fercal, Cuala, etc.

The supremacy of the Kings, therefore, was only to a limited extent a territorial one. They were the chiefs and rulers of their own clans only, and they were also entitled to tribute from the subordinate clans. But in the internal affairs of the latter they had only a very nominal—if any—right to interfere. On this account the titles always given to them are, in most cases, derived from their chief seats. The annalists always refer to the Kings of Tara, Aileach, Cruachan, and Caiseal, and rightly so. They were Kings in those places, and there they received the tributes of their Kingdoms. To speak of a King of Connacht or of Munster would be to suggest a much more centralised authority than he possessed.f Similarly there were Kings of the Leinstermen, or Laighin ; the Ulstermen, or Ultaigh, and Oirghialla. The local titles used by the annalists are, therefore, more accurate than the wider territorial ones, and will be mostly employed in this book.

The seven states, therefore, were not simple organisms of one piece, but federated groups of diverse elements in which the two or three dynastic families were a minority. In Tara, Oirghilla and Aileach the subordinate clans, although numerous, were not individually conspicuous in history ; in Cruachan, Caiseal, and Laighin, however, they are not only numerous but important (especially on the entire western sea-coast), and many play an important part in later events ; in Ulaidh, the Dal Riada in the North, occupying both shores of the narrow sea, are only nominally subordinate. A peculiar position is occupied by Osraidhe (Ossory), lying between the Kingdoms of Laighin and Caiseal, claimed by both, and yet maintaining a doubtful independence —the only one of the ” raidhe ” peoples to do so.

[As the " ruling clans " become the recognised leaders of the country, and their relations with each other and with their subordinate clans affect very deeply the future history, the attached table and map should be useful for reference.]

* Like the Muscraidhe, Conma^cne, Dealbhna, etc. n 1 t Compare “German Emperor,” “Emperor of the French,” “King of the Belgians,” as being more democratic :c-/n:; in modern times.