Part 5

The sixth and twelfth fragments contain dialogues between the poet and the son of Alpine. This was no doubt, in the original, the usual dialogue between Ossian and Patrick, always called in Scotch Gaelic poems Macalpine. The sixth fragment appears also in the quarto, in the so-called Epic of Fingal; but the dialogue is omitted, and the translation greatly altered.

To the fourteenth fragment there is appended the following note:--“This is the opening of the epic poem mentioned in the preface. The two following fragments are parts of some episodes of the same work,” and they accordingly appear in the quarto, in the epic poem of Fingal.

The fourteenth fragment, however, relates to Cuchullin alone; and in those tales and poems which we know to be genuine, Cuchullin and Fingal are never brought together.

Macpherson seems, at this stage of his collection, to have conceived the idea of weaving the short poems into one epic; but his unskilful junction of Cuchullin and Fingal in the same transactions, betrays its artificial construction.

Such was the result to which the committee appeared to come, and which may fairly be deduced from this inquiry; all intelligent inquirers seemed now to adopt this result, and the unbiassed public generally acquiesced in it,--the only difference of opinion being as to the greater or less extent to which Macpherson carried his process of adaptation and amalgamation.

The publication in 1806 of what was called the original Gaelic of Ossian, did not affect this conclusion, or tend to alter the general acquiescence of the public in it. Instead of consisting of genuine extracts from old MSS., or copies of pieces taken down from oral recitation, it proved to be a complete version in Gaelic poetry of the English version transcribed under James Macpherson’s eye, and left by him in a state for publication. It was a smooth and polished version in Gaelic verse of the entire poems, in the same shape as they were presented in English, and written in the modern Gaelic of that time.

It is very difficult, however, to believe that this Gaelic version had been composed subsequently to the publication of the English Ossian, and translated from it. To any one capable, from a knowledge of Gaelic, of judging, such a theory seems almost impossible; and it is difficult to acquiesce in it. A review of all the circumstances which have been allowed to transpire regarding the proceedings of James Macpherson, seems rather to lead to the conclusion that the Gaelic version, in the shape in which it was afterwards published, had been prepared in Badenoch, during the months Macpherson passed there, after his return from his Highland tour, with the assistance of Lachlan Macpherson of Strathmashie, and Captain Morrison, and that the English translation was made from it by Macpherson in the same manner in which he had translated the fragments,--a conclusion which is the more probable, as, while James Macpherson’s acquaintance with the language seems not to have been sufficiently complete to qualify him for such a task, there appears to be no doubt of the Laird of Strathmashie’s perfect ability to accomplish it.[30]

[30] Some years ago I happened to pass a couple of months in the immediate neighbourhood of Strathmashie, and I recollect having been informed at that time, but by whom I cannot now tell, that, after Lachlan Macpherson’s death, a paper was found in his repositories containing the Gaelic of the seventh book of Temora, in his handwriting, with numerous corrections and alterations, with this title,--“First rude draft of the seventh book of Temora.”

Mr. Gallie sent to the Highland Society a part of the Gaelic of Fingal, which afterwards appeared in the Gaelic version subsequently published. He said he had taken it from a MS. he had recovered, written by a friend “who was at that time with Mr. Macpherson and me, a gentleman well known for an uncommon acquaintance with the Gaelic, and a happy facility for writing it in Roman characters.”

On being pressed to say who this friend was, he says, “his name was Lachlane Macpherson of Strathmashy. He died in 1767.”

This Gaelic version seems, therefore, to have been put together before 1767; and if before 1762, it will account for the original of the seventh book of Temora having been published in that year, and also for an advertisement which appeared soon after the publication of the second quarto, that the originals were lying at the publisher’s, and would be published if a sufficient number of subscribers came forward; but as few subscribers appeared, and fewer came to look at them, they were withdrawn.

The so-called originals were, no doubt, this Gaelic version, which there is every reason to believe had preceded the English version in its preparation.

But while from this date the controversy in England may be said to have terminated, with the exception of an occasional reproduction of old arguments and of criticism long superseded, by enthusiastic young Highlanders, and occasional discussions at young debating societies, it broke out from a new quarter, and in a different shape.

The Irish, who had been long murmuring under the neglect of their claims to literary notice, and the absorbing attention obtained by the Highlands, suddenly burst forth with a succession of violent and spasmodic attacks, of which the partial detection of the Ossian of Macpherson afforded a favourable opportunity.

In 1784 Dr. Young, afterwards Bishop of Clonfert, a good Irish scholar, had made a tour in the Highlands, with the view of collecting Gaelic poems, and ascertaining from what materials Macpherson had constructed his Ossian. He published an account of his journey in the first volume of the Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, in which he maintained that any poems that existed were Irish, and that Macpherson had founded his Ossian on some of these, “retrenching, adding, and altering as he judged proper.”

In 1789 a collection of Irish Ossianic poems was published by Miss Brooke, termed Reliques of Irish Poetry. They consisted of short poems, either attributed to Ossian or on Ossianic subjects, and were accompanied by the original Irish version from which they were translated. Where that was obtained is not stated.

In 1807 the Dublin Gaelic Society was formed, for the purpose of publishing the contents of Irish MSS.; and in the only volume of transactions published, the subject of Ossian was taken up. The prose tale of Deirdre, the original of Macpherson’s Darthula, interspersed with fragments of poetry, is there given; and the volume likewise contains strictures upon Macpherson, in which his work is boldly denounced as an entire fabrication and imposture from beginning to end, and the assertion made, that no poems of Ossian ever existed in Gaelic except those in Ireland.

In 1827 the Royal Irish Academy offered a prize for the best essay on the poems of Ossian. The subject proposed was “to investigate the authenticity of the poems of Ossian, both as given in Macpherson’s translation and as published in Gaelic (London, 1807), under the sanction of the Highland Society of London.” The prize was awarded in 1829 to Dr. Drummond, their librarian, whose essay is published in the sixteenth volume of their Transactions. In this essay the arguments of Dr. Johnson and Malcolm Laing are adopted; and the assertion of the former is re-echoed, that “there does not exist in the whole Highlands a person who can repeat one poem of Macpherson’s Ossian.” Another essay, given in by Edward O’Reilly, the author of an Irish dictionary of no great repute, is printed in continuation of Dr. Drummond’s, also asserting the modern fabrication of the whole of the poems published by Macpherson, and that the Gaelic poems of Macpherson contain in them the substance stolen from Irish poems.

In 1853 a society was formed in Dublin, “whose object should be the publication of Fenian poems, tales, and romances illustrative of the Fenian period of Irish history, in the Irish language and character, with literal translations and notes explanatory of the text.” This society was termed the Ossianic Society, and they have already issued six volumes of Transactions.

In the fifth volume there is an essay on the poems of Ossian by Macpherson, which may be considered as a summary of the case of Ireland against Scotland as to these poems.

This essay is, like the others, violent in language and uncandid in spirit. It deals with the controversy as it existed in the last century, and its strength consists in simply ignoring altogether the inquiry made by the Highland Society of Scotland, the whole of the great mass of facts collected by them being passed over in silence, and in imputing to the Scots of the present day the views and feelings of those of a century back, before the rise of a true spirit of historic inquiry and genuine criticism had led them to a just appreciation of their national history, and of the claims of Macpherson’s Ossian to be viewed as an authentic work.

The publications of the Dublin Gaelic Society and of the Ossianic Society have, however, not merely assailed the Ossian of Macpherson as a fabrication, and denied to Scotland the possession of any Ossianic poems whatever; they have at length given to the world those genuine Ossianic poems alleged to exist solely in Ireland.

The former contains the prose tale of Deirdre, interspersed with short poems. The latter have presented to the public a number of poems in the original Irish, with literal translations. The first volume contains a poem extending to no fewer than 180 quatrains, termed the Battle of Gabhra, to which is added a short poem termed the Rosg Catha of Oscar son of Ossian; but, strangely enough, though there is an elaborate introduction, no hint is given of where the originals of these poems were obtained. The second volume, besides a short poem given in a long and elaborate introduction, contains a prose tale called the Festivities of the House of Conan of Ceann-sleibhe; and in this volume, for the first time, the source from which this tale and the poem in the previous volume was taken is stated. They are from a MS. collection made by a celebrated scribe named Foran, who resided at Portland, in the county of Waterford, in the year 1780, that is, twenty years after Macpherson had published his Ossian.

The third volume contains a long prose tale, interspersed with poetry, termed the Pursuit of Diarmaid and Grainne; another prose tale, termed How Cormac mac Art got his Branch; and a poem, termed the Lamentation of Oisin after the Feinne. And the sources of these tales are stated to be--_1st_, The collection made by Laurence Foran in 1780, termed Bolg an tsalathar; and _2dly_, A closely written quarto of 881 pages, from the pen of Martan O’Griobhta or Martin Griffin, an intelligent blacksmith of Kilrush, in the county of Clare, 1842-43, called an Sgeulaidhe, and containing thirty-eight Fenian and other legends, some of which are said to have been transcribed from MSS. of 1749.[31]

The fourth volume contains ten poems, which, with the exception of two, were taken from the collection of 1780, from another collection made in 1812 by the Rev. Thomas Hill of Cooreclure, and from the volume of the intelligent blacksmith in 1844.

The fifth volume contains a long prose tale termed the Proceedings of the Great Bardic Institution, an essay on the poems of Ossian, published by Macpherson, and several short poems which are ancient, but not Ossianic.

And the sixth and last contains nine Ossianic poems, which are stated to be taken from Foran’s collection in 1780, from that of Mr. Hill in 1812, and from the intelligent blacksmith of 1844.

No information whatever is given as to the sources from whence these respectable collectors obtained their poems; they are all posterior to the publication of Ossian’s poems by Macpherson; and, so far as we are yet informed by the Irish editors, the Ossianic poems published by them stand in no better position in regard to their antiquity or authenticity than those of Macpherson.[32]

[31] In vol. iv. p. 230 of these Transactions, it is admitted that some of the poems transcribed in 1749 were the composition of the writer, Michael Comyn.

[32] Those poems published by the Ossianic Society which are of any length, and especially the poem termed the Battle of Gabhra, show evident indications of the same process of patching and dovetailing together of shorter poems which characterize Macpherson’s Ossian.

Professor O’Curry, in his valuable lectures on Irish literature, with that scrupulous accuracy which always distinguishes him, admits that there exists in Ireland only eleven Ossianic poems prior to the fifteenth century--seven ascribed to Fionn himself, two to his son Oisin, one to Fergus Filidh, and one to Caoilte. Most of these are extremely short, and are found principally in the book of Leinster, supposed to be compiled in the twelfth century, and in the book of Lecan in the fifteenth.

The theory, that Macpherson stole his poems directly from Ireland, is obviously untenable and inconsistent with all that we know of his proceedings, for he never was there, and had apparently no communication with Irishmen, or access to their MSS. What he obtained, he got in the Highlands of Scotland, and the collection of poems made by the Dean of Lismore and his brother tends to confirm the result which had been attained by the inquiry made by the Highland Society of Scotland, for it contains poems attributed directly to Ossian and others which may be called Ossianic, collected in the Highlands of Scotland upwards of three hundred years ago. The persons named, and the subjects, are of the same character with those in Macpherson, and such poems must have been handed down by oral recitation, as many of the poems obtained from recitation during the Highland Society’s inquiry are the same as those in this MS.

Assuming, then, that Ossianic poems existed in the Highlands of Scotland, and were both preserved by oral tradition, and transcribed in MS. collections, the question arises, What is their real position in the literature of the Highlands? and this question leads to a preliminary question which will materially aid its solution.

Who were the Feinne of tradition, and to what country and period are they to be assigned?

To this question the Irish historians give a ready response.

They were a body of Irish militia, forming a kind of standing army, employed for the purpose of defending the coasts of Ireland from the invasion of foreign foes. They were billeted upon the inhabitants during winter, and obliged to maintain themselves by hunting and fishing during summer. Each of the four provinces had its band of these warriors, termed Curaidhe or champions. Those of Ulster were termed the Curaidhe na Craoibh Ruaidhe, or champions of the red branch, and were stationed at Eamhain or Eamania, near Ulster. To this body belonged the celebrated Cuchullin and the sons of Uisneach. The militia of Connaught were the Curaidhe or champions of Jorras Domnan, otherwise called the Clanna Morna, to which belonged Goll Mac Morn, stationed at Dun Domnan, in Mayo. The militia of Munster were the Curaidhe Clann Deaghadh, to which belonged Curigh Mac Daire, stationed at Cathair Conrigh, in Kerry. The militia of Leinster were the Curaighe Clanna Baoisgne, to which belonged the renowned Finn Mac Cumhal, his sons, Ossin and Fergus Filidh, his grandson Oscar, and his relation, Caoilte Mac Ronan. Cuchullin lived in the first century, in the reign of Conaire Mac Eidersgeoil, King of Ireland, and Conchobar Mac Nessa, a king of Ulster; and at the same period lived Curigh Mac Daire, who was slain by him. Finn Mac Cumhal lived in the reign of Cormac Mac Art, who ruled from A.D. 227 to 266, and whose daughter Graine he married, and Goll Mac Moirna was his cotemporary. Finn was slain in the year 285, his grandson Oscar having fallen in the battle of Gahbra, fought in the following year. Oissin and Caoilte survived to the time of St. Patrick, whose mission to Ireland fell in the year 432, and related to him the exploits of the Feinne; one conversation between these aged Feinne and the apostle of Ireland having been preserved, and is termed Agallamh na seanorach or the Dialogue of the Sages.

Such is the account of the Feinne given by the Irish.

If this is history, _cadit questio_. The ancient Irish militia, like their more modern representatives, could not, it is presumed, be called upon to leave their country, except in case of invasion; and poems narrating their adventures and exploits must have been as Irish as the heroes which were the subject of them.

But we cannot accept it as history in any sense of the term. It is as illusory and uncertain as are the dates of St. Patrick, and the narrative of which the one forms a part, is as little to be regarded as a veracious chronicle, as the life of the other can be accepted as a genuine biography. The chronology of the one is as questionable as the era of the other.

Prior to the year 483, the Irish have, strictly speaking, no chronological history. The battle of Ocha, fought in that year, which established the dynasty of the Hy’Neills on the Irish throne, and the order of things which existed subsequent to that date, is the great chronological era which separates the true from the empirical, the genuine annals of the country from an artificially constructed history.

Prior to that date, we find the reigns of a long succession of monarchs recorded, with a strange mixture of minute detail, chronological exactness, and the wildest fable, a wonderful structure of history palpably artificial, and ranging over a period of upwards of 3000 years. Passing over the arrival of Casar, Noah’s niece, who landed in Ireland forty days before the deluge, on the fifteenth day of the moon, the so-called Irish history records the arrival of four colonies before that of the Milesians. First, that of Partolan and his followers, who landed at Inversceine, in the west of Munster, on the 14th day of May, in the year of the world 2320 or 2680 years B.C., and who all perished by a pestilence in one week to the number of 9000 on the Hill of Howth, thirty years after their arrival. Secondly, the Nemedians, under their leader Nemedius, thirty years after, who, after remaining 217 years in the island, left it, in consequence of the tyranny and oppression of the pirates, termed the Fomorians, in three bands,--one going to Thrace, from whom descended the Firbolg; the second to the North of Europe or Lochlan, from whom descended the Tuatha De Danann; and the third to Alban or Scotland, from whom descended the Britons. The third colony were the Firbolg, who returned to Ireland 217 years after the arrival of the Nemedians, and consisted of three tribes, the Firbolg, the Firdomnan, and the Firgailian under five leaders, by whom Ireland was divided into five provinces. With Slainge, the eldest of the five brothers, the Irish historians commence the monarchy of Ireland and the list of her kings. The fourth colony were the Tuatha De Danann, who went from Lochlan to Alban or Scotland, and from thence to Ireland, where they landed on Monday the 1st of May, and drove out the Firbolgs, after they had been thirty-six years in Ireland, to be in their turn driven out by the Scots, under the three sons of Milesius, Eremon, Eber, and Ir, who, with their uncle’s son Lughadh, the son of Ith, led the fifth and last colony from Spain to Ireland. The island was divided between the two brothers Eremon and Eber, the former having the north, and the latter the south half of Ireland; Ir obtaining Ulster under Eremon, and Lughadh a settlement in Munster under Eber.

From the sons of Milesius to the reign of Lughadh, who was placed on the throne by the battle of Ocha, there proceeded a line of monarchs amounting to 116 in number, and extending over a period of upwards of twenty-one centuries, the descendants of the different sons of Milesius alternating with each other from time to time, and the reign of each given with an exactness of date and minuteness of event which betrays its artificial character. As part of this narrative is introduced the existence of these bands of Fenian militia, with the dates at which their leaders are said to have lived.

Is it possible, however, to accept this extraordinary bead-roll of shadowy monarchs during Pagan times, with their exact chronology, and the strange and almost ludicrous peculiarities by which each are distinguished, as serious history, or even to attempt to discriminate between what may be true and what is false? Are there any materials, or any data upon which we can even fix upon a date, within a reasonable compass of time, and say all before that is fable, all after may be history, till we arrive on firm ground, after the introduction of Christianity? Professor O’Curry is right when he says, in his admirable lectures on the MS. materials of ancient Irish history, that he cannot discover any ground on which the annalist Tighernac was able to say, “omnia monumenta Scotorum usque Cimbaoth (a king of Ulster, who flourished in the seventh century, B.C.) incerta erant.”

From Slainge, the first king of the Firbolgs, who began to reign 1934 years B.C., and ruled only one year, or even from Eremon, the first monarch of all Ireland of the Milesian race, who began to reign 1700 years B.C., down to Dathy, who was killed by a flash of lightning at the foot of the Alps in the year 428, and Laogare, his successor, who was slain by the elements for refusing obedience to St. Patrick’s mission which is said to have taken place during his reign, every reign is stamped with the same character; and what to accept and what to reject is a problem, for the solution of which the history itself affords no materials.

If this narrative is to be submitted to historic criticism, is the later portion less an object of such criticism than the earlier? There seems no reason why we should accept the history of Neill of the nine hostages, who reigned from 379 to 405, and had subjected all Britain and part of France to his sway, and reject that of Ugony More, who reigned 1000 years earlier, and whose conquests were equally extensive and equally unknown to European history, or why Ugony’s twenty-five sons are less worthy of credit than the thirty sons of Cathoirmor, who reigned 750 years later. Why the division of Ireland into the two great portions of north and south, between Conn of the hundred battles and Modha Nuadhat, in the second century, is to be accepted in preference to the original division into the same districts between Eremon and Eber, the sons of Milesius; or which of the divisions of Ireland into five provinces, that by Tuathal the acceptable, or Eochaddh, called Feidhlioch, from the deep sighs which he constantly heaved from his heart, or that by Slainge, the first king of the Firbolgs, is to be held to represent the event which produced it.