No edit summary
m (Text replacement - "{{MS↵|" to "{{MS |Select=Manuscript |")
Line 9: Line 9:
|Language=Ó Cathasaigh argues that the two manuscript versions derive from a common ancestor written in classical Old Irish. While he allows for the possibility that the latter may be a reworking of the text made in the Middle Irish period, “we can be reasonably sure that the content of the story is much as it was in the O. I. ancestor of L and H”.{{Note|{{C/s|Ó Cathasaigh 1977|at=115-117}}.}}
|Language=Ó Cathasaigh argues that the two manuscript versions derive from a common ancestor written in classical Old Irish. While he allows for the possibility that the latter may be a reworking of the text made in the Middle Irish period, “we can be reasonably sure that the content of the story is much as it was in the O. I. ancestor of L and H”.{{Note|{{C/s|Ó Cathasaigh 1977|at=115-117}}.}}
|Manuscripts2={{MS
|Manuscripts2={{MS
|Select=Manuscript
|prefix=*
|prefix=*
|MS=Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 610/Leabhar na Rátha
|MS=Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 610/Leabhar na Rátha
Line 14: Line 15:
|comments=Abrupt ending.
|comments=Abrupt ending.
}}{{MS
}}{{MS
|Select=Manuscript
|prefix=*
|prefix=*
|MS=Dublin, Trinity College, MS 1336
|MS=Dublin, Trinity College, MS 1336

Revision as of 14:02, 26 June 2023

This page has not as yet been published.

It is work in progress, but we hope to get it published in the foreseeable future.

Details


Page name:
Scéla Éogain ocus Cormaic
Namespace
Main
Current visibility
Page class
texts