From the evidence before us it would seem, on the whole, that the practice described under imbas forosnai in Cormac’s Glossary is most fully represented in the Finn stories, and that the technique ascribed here and elsewhere to the fili is most clearly exemplified in Finn himself. An attentive reading of the earliest stratum of Finn stories shows us Finn enacting, at one time or another – possibly all in close juxtaposition – the principal items of the procedure set forth by the author of the Glossary. Moreover, if we read the passage in the Glossary in the light of these Finn stories, though much still remains obscure to us, yet there is no doubt that many of the original obscurities become clearer – the raw meat, the ‘chewing,’ the association with the ‘stone’ and the ‘doorway,’ the heathen gods,’ or ‘idol gods’ (which we may presume to be the form of diction in which the Christian author refers to the side), the mantic sleep, the people watching over him, and the reference to the shaking or turning of the sleeper. It almost looks as if the Christian antiquarian author of the passage in the Glossary has been pursuing a line of study not very dissimilar to our own, and searching the heathen traditions for accounts of mantic practices. If so we must suppose that the picture of the practice of the fili given in the Glossary is a synthesis based, not on observation, but on deduction from literary sources, perhaps not always very clearly understood. This would be fully in accord with what we know of his practice in other passages. If this conclusion is correct, we must suppose, either that the redactor has been drawing his material from a series of traditional stories of Finn, such as those which we have been considering, or else that the passages in the Glossary and the Finn Cycle are based on a common and widespread practice of which, nevertheless, we have no satisfactory traces elsewhere. Even if we suppose that the name of Finn has been inserted into some of these stories at a comparatively late date (cf p. 144 above, foot-note 1), we need not suppose that the character of the stories has been substantially modified. The consistency of their general character would, indeed, be against such a supposition.
For many reasons the second of the alternatives suggested above is improbable. Considering the great wealth of Irish leterary evidence, it is surprising that if the stories of imbas forosnai and tenm laida were commonly associated with other known heros or filid besides Finn so few references to them should have been preserved. Nor have we anything in the Annals or the stories of the kings to suggest that such mantic practices were common. We have seen that the terms are found frequently in the metrical tractates and schedules for the education of the filid. But these entries contain nothing which suggests the widespread practice of the process under discussion. On the contrary, these references rather suggest, on the whole, that they are, like the entry in the Glossary, the result of antiquarian speculation on metres and poems to which the names imbas forosnai, tenm laida, etc., have become attached after the terms had lost their original significance. And in several cases we have seen that the examples cited are identical with others which we have found in the sagas, from which there can be little doubt they are temselves derived.
Against this it may be urged that references to the actual practice of imbas forosnai and tenm laida are to be found in the ancient Irish laws. Thus there occurs in the Commentary on the Introduction to the Senchas Mor, a reference to the means employed in order to discover a name. The passage opens with the words, ‘Indiu is do cendaib colla tall’ ; but the passage which follows is strongly reminiscent of our own and other passages in Cormac’s Glossary, to which it appears to me to bear direct and close verbal relationship. The passage in the Senchas Mor tells us that when the fili sees a person or thing before him he recites an extempore verse (comrac) do focetair do cendaib a cnama. ‘But this is (only) since the Conversion ; before St Patrick’s time it was performed differently. At that time the fili placed his staff on the person’s body or head (fors in colainn no fors in cend) and found his name . . . and discovered every unknown thing which was put to him co de (? for cend) nomaide do dala no tri ; and this is tenm laida or imbas forosnai, for the same thing used to be revealed through them ; they, however, were performed after a different manner, for a different kind of offering was made at each of them (ar is inand ni do foillsigtea trepta ; ocus ba sain imorro amail do gnitea cectar de, .i. sain cinel nudbairt do gnitea oc cectar de).
. . . But Patrick abolished those three things from among the poets, because they were heathen rites (anidan), for neither tenm laida nor imbas forosnai could be performed without the accompaniment of heathen offerings (gin udbairt do deib idal ocaib).’
Again, in one of the ‘Stories from the Law Tracts,’ recently edited and translated by Myles Dillon, the nobles of Ireland are represented as referring to the filid, ‘so that they should try the revelation of imas as to what state Angus (i.e., an ancient King of Leinster) was in after death on account of the judgement, false through carelessness, which he had given.’ The story goes on to tell that the filid ‘tried the revelation of true imas, and he was shown to them condemned to half punishment,’ etc. (ocus gu ndernsatsum faillsiugudh in fhirimais, ocus is amlaid ro faillsiged doib he iar tabairt leth-indechda.) There can be no doubt, however, that these references in the Laws are merely literary allusions, and cannot be used as evidence of historical practice.
The absence of satisfactory corrobrative evidence in early Irish literature or of traces in early Irish history of the actual practice of the type of imbas forosnai described in the Glossary and the Finn stories is rather surprising, even making allowance for it’s notoriously heathen character. Indeed, we may suspect that literary men of antiquarian interests had themselves observed and been struck by the absence of such evidence, and had for this reason surmised that the rite had been bansished by St Patrick at the outset. It is, moreover, surprising that the poetry generally cited as recited by Finn or other filid when they sing through imbas forosnai or tenm laida appears to be for the most part absolutely untranslatable.
We have seen that the fili Amargin is also represented in the Leabhar na Gabhala as reciting a set of rhetorics immediately on landing in Ireland. Presumably, therefore, he had acquired them elsewhere. The authroity is too late to have independent value, but the rhetorics themselves resemble those ascribed to the Welsh poet, Taliesin, and those contianed in the dialogue between Ferchertne and Nede in the Immacaldam in da Thuarad, which is ascribed to the tenth century. In the latter work we are told that the youthful sage Nede, who is represented as defeated by the elderly sage, Ferchertne, in filidect, has just returned from Britain, where he has been acquiring imbas. We have seen also that in the CuChulainn Cycle imbas forosnai is said to have been learnt by the banfhaid Fedelm in Britain, and to have been practised by Scathach, also in Britain. It was long ago suggested by Sir John Rhys that Welsh tradition has also preserved traces of communities resembling those of Scathach and Aoife in the CuChulaunn Cycle. In particular he pointed to the Nine Witches of Gloucester, who appear to be endowed not only with skill in arms, but also with the gift of prophecy, and who are also responsible for the training of the hereo, Peredur. A careful scrutiny of this and other Medieval Welsh stories – notably that of the Cave of the Addanc, also in Peredur – would doubtless bring other instances to light. Rhys regarded both the Welsh and Irish stories of female communities where instruction was given in military and mantic art as derived from a common origin, but he sought this origin in a ‘Goidelic’ community settled in the south-west of England. If he were right in this, and if the arts were pre-eminently Irish, we may, indeed, ask why the prophetess Fedelm, and many heros, notably the popular hero CuChulainn himself, should be obliged to come over to this country to learn them?
We have seen, however, that the chief exponent in Irish legend of both the imbas forosnai and the tenm laida is Finn mac Cumail, or more correctly, Finn mac Umail, who is represented in Irish tradition as having acquired all his magic arts in Ireland, though these traditions vary considerably among themselves as to the exact manner in which he acquired these arts. Finn is, perhaps, the most gifted magician of all Irish legend. He is, in fact, more of a magician than a hero. his character and mantic experiences have more in common with those of Conn Cétchathach and his line than with those of CuChulainn, on the one hand, or the more authentic historical traditions of later kings on the other. These experiences, however, are never identical with those of Conn’s line. We search the baile literature in vain for traces of mantic experiences analogous to those of the passage in Cormac’s Glossary under imbas forosnai, or to those in the stories of Finn.
How are we to account for these individualites of Finn? And where do his closest affinities lie?
The nearest analogies of the stories associated with Finn which we have been considering are contained, not in Irish tradition, but in Welsh legend. These stories of Finn are analogous especially to those of Pwyll Prince of Dyved, who, like Finn visits Annwn or the heathen spirit world. We may refer also to Rhonabwy who lies down to sleep on a yellow calf-skin, and has a mantic sleep and dream. One would like to know the relationship between Finn and Gwyn (the Welsh phonetic equivalent of Finn) ap Nudd, to whom, according to a passage in Kulhwch and Olwen, ‘God gave control over the devils in Annwn’ – the Welsh equivalent of the side of Irish saga, and of the ‘idol gods’ of Cormac’s entry.
Pingback: Folk Art Cat