king

king. Rí is the Irish word for king. Traditionally, Irish kingship has been seen as retaining archaic features deriving from Indo‐European custom. These include inauguration ceremonies which involve killing horses or bulls and drinking and/or bathing in the resulting soup, chariot‐riding, especially on hilltops associated with the síd (otherworld), phallic stones, and marriages between king and sovereignty goddesses, symbolized by gifts of ale. The texts describing these practices vary in specifics, date, and geographical location; the belief that they reflect prehistoric ceremonies derives ultimately from 19th‐century scholars of myth (notably J. G. Frazer in The Golden Bough) and is currently a matter of debate. References to taboos on royal activities and the need to be physically unblemished are common in secondary literature but less so in early sources. More substantial evidence exists for a widespread Irish belief that a kingdom's fertility and success was directly related to royal righteousness (fír flathemon or the justice of a ruler).

Mid‐20th‐century scholarship argued that Irish annals depicted powerful warriors who had superseded what have been called the ‘priestly vegetables’ of sacral kingship. This change is often termed the transition from tribal to dynastic kingship, exemplified by the 8th‐century disappearance of moccu‐names and by Uí Néill territorial expansion. The timing of change has been left unclear, but there is general agreement that it had occurred by the 11th century, when Irish kings are seen as exercising a rule similar to that of their counterparts elsewhere in Europe. In contrast to the generally static view of royalty for the early period, kingship in Ireland is seen as developing rapidly in the centuries immediately prior to the Anglo‐Norman invasion.

More recent doubts about this model have been fuelled by the work of Liam Breatnach, Kim McCone, and Donnchadh Ó Corráin, which has undermined Daniel Binchy's contention that Irish law tracts delineated a society pre‐dating that in which the tracts themselves were written. The description of kings in 7th‐ and 8th‐century legal texts is now being harmonized with the evidence of other medieval sources to produce a picture of rulers who were entitled to tribute from all free families, had the right to hospitality for themselves and their retinues, were forbidden to undertake servile work, helped to promulgate law and often enforced it, occasionally acted as judges, and were served by a mandarin class of clerics and fili (poets), who attempted to provide a Christian ideology concerning royal office. Accession depended as much on control of resources and proximity to the political centre as it did on lineage. Royal power is thus seen as developing along lines similar to elsewhere in Europe.

The perceived hierarchy of kingship has also been modified. Eoin MacNeill and Daniel Binchy argued for a three‐tier model: rí tuaithe (king of a tuath), ruiri or rí tuath (overking or king of more than one tuath), ruiri or ní tuath (king of overkings). The rí cóicid (king of a province) was seen as paralleling the rí ruirech, although this is not specified in the sources. The status of each is mirrored in his lóg n‐enech (honour‐price—see enech), the fine payable to him for offences committed against himself or those under his protection. In contrast, recent scholars have underlined the inconsistency of terminology used to describe both kings and territories as well as the categorization of both lords and kings simply as members of the grád flatha (grade of nobility). They tend to make a functional distinction between king and overking, with the proviso that some overkings were more powerful than others. Liam Breatnach has also adduced evidence disproving Binchy's contention that a kingship of all Ireland was unknown to early lawyers.

Regardless of the exact status of either overlord or subordinate king, all scholars are apparently agreed that submission to a superior was indicated by entry into his house or acceptance of rath (gift made by overking to applicant). The king became a céile (client) of his overking, engaging to pay tribute (usually cattle), provide hospitality for the overking and forces for his army, and attend his óenach (assembly). Exactions varied, depending on the status of the subordinate and his dynastic links to the overking.

Bibliography

Binchy, D. A. , Celtic and Anglo‐Saxon Kingship (1970)
Charles‐Edwards, T. , ‘Early Medieval Kingships in the British Isles’, in S. Bassett (ed.), The Origins of Anglo‐Saxon Kingdoms (1989)
Kelly, F. , A Guide to Early Irish Law (1988)

Catherine Swift