Gleeson P. Kingdoms, communities and óenaig: Irish assembly practices in a northwest European context. Journal of the North Atlantic 2015, Special Volume 8, 33-51.

Copyright:

This is the published PDF of the article and is posted here in accordance with the journal’s green open access policy, which allows authors to post the pdf reprints of their articles on their own website or within the repository of their affiliated institution.

The publisher, Eagle Hill Institute, reserves the copyright to all its publications. Any reproduction, other than for an individual's own personal and private use, or distribution of journal content is prohibited without written permission from Eagle Hill Institute (http://www.eaglehill.us/).

DOI link to article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3721/037.002.sp801

Date deposited:

09/10/2015

Newcastle University ePrints - eprint.ncl.ac.uk

Kingdoms, Communities, and Óenaig: Irish Assembly Practices in their Northwest European Context Author(s): Patrick Gleeson Source: Journal of the North Atlantic, 8():33-51. Published By: Eagle Hill Institute DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3721/037.002.sp801 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3721/037.002.sp801

BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder.

BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. 2015 Debating the ThingJournal in the of North:the North The Atlantic Assembly Project II Special Volume 8 2015 Journal of theP. Gleeson North Atlantic Special Volume 8:33–51

Kingdoms, Communities, and Óenaig: Irish Assembly Practices in their Northwest European Context

By Patrick Gleeson*

Abstract - This paper explores the nature of assembly practices in early medieval Ireland (AD 400–1100). It focuses spe- cifically on the óenach, the pre-eminent assembly of each level of community and kingdom in Irish society, and it engages critically with how assembly as a topic has been traditionally understood and analyzed by Irish scholarship. Through analysis of the nature of the óenach, I suggest that the predominantly economistic interpretation of this institution by Irish scholarship is misplaced and that rather the óenach was an Irish equivalent of pan-European assembly practices. Accord- ingly, this paper explores the character of óenaig (plural of óenach) in the context of this pan-European phenomenon. Furthermore, some preliminary results from ongoing research offer insights into the archaeological manifestation of as- sembly practices, the spatial dynamic of assembly landscapes, and the implications of the same for our understanding of civil society, scales of identity, and the practice of assembly in early medieval Ireland.

Introduction assembly will be less prominent themes below; my Almost a century ago, the great revolutionary intention here is rather to critically assess scholarly scholar Eoin MacNeill (1921:110) lamented that and popular perceptions of assembly in early Ireland “hardly studied at all as yet, nowhere studied sys- through placing these practices within their Euro- tematically, is the subject of the public assemblies pean context. Through that prism, I want to examine of ancient Ireland”. Despite MacNeill’s formative societal norms and power structures and how the role in the study of early Ireland, its people and same were implicated in economic activity and the political structures, understandings of the assembly construction of different scales of identity. places and practices of early medieval society (AD 400–1100) have improved little in the interim. With few exceptions (e.g., FitzPatrick 2001, 2004), the Defining Assembly in Early Medieval Ireland institution of assembly has been remarkably under- While assembly is a term permeating scholar- researched, especially in contrast to the importance ship on royal landscapes, kingship, and society in accorded assembly practices elsewhere in north- later prehistoric and medieval Ireland, the manner western Europe. Scholars of early medieval Ireland in which “assembly” has tended to feature is generic face many of the intractable, daunting issues that and all too often problematic. A threefold hierarchy scholars of civil society and assembly elsewhere in of kings defined early medieval Irish kingship, and Europe grapple with, namely the archaeological di- although codified by the law-tracts during the th7 –8th mension of assembly and the difficulties associated century AD, that hierarchy is at least as old as the 5th with identifying assembly places systematically on century, when it was articulated in the confessio of a large scale (cf. Sanmark and Semple 2013). For- St. Patrick (Ó Corráin 2010:284–286). In ascending tunately, the extent to which these issues have been order, this ranged from a local petty king, to a king analyzed by European colleagues, including those who was the overking of a number of petty kings, to involved in The Assembly Project, suggests pan- the highest grade of king, one who was the overlord European patterns as well as important regionalities of several overkings. While this idealized structure and variation in cultures of assembly, which make does not automatically preclude additional scales addressing these issues considerably easier. This of polity and community (below), a model of early paper stems from research I carried out as a part of Irish polities can nevertheless expect that each level The Óenach Project, which engages with the need to or scale in that hierarchy had a caput, a place as- clearly identify assembly places for early medieval sociated with inauguration, and a locus of assembly Ireland on a systematic basis. More specifically, (Gleeson, in press a). Within that model, these func- given this special volume’s thematic parameters, this tions could be found vested in a single landscape contribution focuses on elucidating the nature of ear- (e.g., Mag Adhair; FitzPatrick 2004:52–59), but are ly Irish assembly practices by defining the character more commonly found to be dispersed, either as- and function of institutions like the óenach (plural: sociated with distinct locations within an extensive óenaig). As such, the monumental iconography of royal estate, or within discreet landscapes spread assembly places and the archaeological footprint of throughout a kingdom (Gleeson 2014, in press d).

*Department of Archaeology, National University of Ireland, Galway; [email protected]. 33 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson

For instance, the landscapes of Tara and Cashel be signified by toponymic terms including drung, were places of paramount ceremonial and inaugura- dál, forrach, and óenach. These types of assembly tion, and yet, neither landscape is associated with could fulfill distinct purposes; arígdál , for example, the regular or institutionalized assemblies of their was an exceptional assembly convened between respective kingships; their assembly landscapes kings for the specific purposes of realpolitik. Al- were, respectively, Óenach Tailtiu (Teltown, County though this diverse lexicon may describe different Meath; Swift 2000) and Óenach Clochair (Knock- types of assembly, it seems that such gatherings long/Clogherbeg, Knocklong parish, County Limer- were nevertheless convened at traditional assembly ick; Gleeson, in press c; Ó Riain et al. 2003:62–63). places: locales set apart by communities for the Descriptions of such landscapes as assembly places purpose of assembly. For instance, the earliest in- and, more particularly, venues of óenaig (e.g., Mac- stance of a rígdál is the late 6th-century convention Cotter 2008:50) are therefore unwarranted. While of Druim Cét between the kings of Cenél Conaill understandable in the context of the historiography and Dál Riata (Sharpe 1995:120–121). Druim Cét of Irish kingship and royal landscapes (cf. FitzPat- incorporates the assembly term cét, and thus literally rick 2004), such attributions are only tenable within means “ridge of assembly”. It is usually agreed that out-moded models of Irish kingship. this was the townland of Mullaghs on the bank of the The study of early Irish kingship can be divided river Roe south of Limavaddy, County Derry (Lacey into two schools: those who study the practice of 2006:201–203). On the opposite (eastern) bank of kingship and the powers exercised by kings, and the river Roe is Enagh townland, which incorporates those who study the kingship’s ceremonial and ideo- the toponymic element óenach, identifying this as logical dimension. While generally the former is the the óenach-assembly place of Ciannacht Glinne preserve of historians, archaeologies of kingship Geimin (Gleeson 2014:885–886). The conjunction most confidently and predominantly engage with of a rígdál-type assembly, an early medieval cét the latter. The sundering of these two inter-related place-name and an óenach toponym illustrate the themes is debilitating, and apart from ensuring the degree to which different categories of assembly subordination of archaeological narratives to models practice overlapped within distinct “multi-purpose” derived from historical research, it completely fails landscapes; this arrangement, as much as anything to engage with the spatial nature of authority and its else, probably reflects how assembly landscapes constant reproduction. Furthermore, this disjuncture were appropriate to different scales of assembly represents one of the principal reasons why as- simultaneously. sembly has, to date, been analyzed generically and While there was a complexity of assembly prac- why Irish kings are seen to have been less powerful tices, it is relatively certain that the óenach was the than European contemporaries (cf. Binchy 1970, most important form of assembly in early medieval Charles-Edwards 2009, Wormald 1986). As such, society. Óenaig were convened by a king on mruig the uncritical manner in which assembly has tended ríg, which was “royal land/estate(s)” representing to be analyzed by Irish scholars (e.g., Gleeson 2012, the prerogative of the office of kingship (Kelly Johnston and Wailes 2007) not only misunderstands 1997:403). As kingship in Ireland was fundamen- the nature of assembly, it fails to engage with the tally vested in places, this mruig ríg constituted the spatial complexity of royal landscapes and how pre-eminent symbol of regality. Thus, any attempt to different locales within these arenas articulated to- locate and define an assembly landscape is simulta- gether to create landscapes of governance through neously to account for and compose a land-holding which power was exercised. system. Prior to any examination of the role of assembly As a term, óenach is a derivative of óen, “one”, in the exercise of kingship, however, it is convenient explicitly articulating a concept of unification de- firstly to engage with the issue of defining different rived from this being the principal assembly of a categories and scales of assembly in early medieval kingdom and/or community, wherein ties of alle- Ireland. Just as the early Irish hierarchy of kings giance, kinship and political economy were negoti- made for relativities of kingliness, so too were there ated, agreed, and renewed. Nevertheless, by far the different types of assembly, some closely proscribed most common understanding of the Irish óenach is and convened for specific purposes, but all of which that it was an essentially economic institution, an were entwined within structures and practices of as- understanding embodied in the usual translation as sembly appropriate to different scales of polity and “market/fair” (cf. Binchy 1958; Gwynn 1913, 1924; community. The Old Irish lexicon for assemblies Jaski 2000:49–56). included terms like óenach, airecht, tíonol, cét, dál, This economic understanding of óenach as es- mór-dál, rígdál, and comdál, all of which signified sentially the market institution of early Ireland types of assembly. Similarly, assembly places could was articulated most forcefully by Charles Doherty 34 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson (1985), who argued that the óenach was essentially a secondary by-product of such practices, includ- a sacral gathering of the tribe, which, from the 7th ing, for example, the disposal and sale of surplus. century onwards, was slowly adopted/usurped by This aspect of óenaig as places for tribute-taking the church as ecclesiastical establishments devel- and gift-giving is explicit in saga literature: the tract oped proto-urban functions. Somewhere within that on the taboos of the kings of Ireland lists the items process, the óenach was metamorphosed to a simple to be brought to the king of Tara at Lughnasad on market, which thus re-imagined the economic and the occasion of Óenach Tailten (Dillon 1951:8–9), trade functions of a pre-urban society. Similarly, for instance. Support for this aspect of the óenach Simms (1987:63) goes so far as to state that the evo- is provided by the archaeology of these landscapes, lution from a secular to ecclesiastical óenach meant where evidence for large-scale crop-processing and that such gatherings lost whatever political signifi- craft-working finds its best context in the systems cance they once possessed, as they were no longer of obligation and tribute negotiated and exercised presided over by kings. The understanding of the through assembly practices. óenach articulated in these assessments is simplistic, First and foremost therefore, the óenach was a highly problematic, and not borne out by the evi- political institution. Despite the unanimous empha- dence; there was no necessary dichotomy between sis on games, entertainment and horse-racing, the secular and ecclesiastical óenaig, and the associa- sources are equally unambiguous in articulating the tion of ecclesiastical establishments with assembly legal and judicial functions of óenaig from an early places originated at least as early as the conversion date. At an óenach, a king would enact a law or ordi- period (Gleeson 2014, in press a; cf. Swift 2000). nance or pledge his people. Críth Gablach (ca. 700), Recently, in a lucid critique of Doherty’s thesis, for instance, associates óenaig with rechtge, and Colman Ethcingham (2010) has reverted to F.J. By- the late 7th–9th century saw cáin-laws promulgated rne’s (1973:30–31) definition of óenaig: over supra-regional kingdoms within major óenach “[The Óenach –] was an important event in landscapes (Binchy 1941:lines 515–524, Charles- the calender of a rural society, and was at Edwards 2000:556–569, Gleeson 2014:718–720). once political assembly, market-fair … and Likewise, airecht was a term which came to mean an occasion for general jollification. In fact, it the royal entourage, but which, originally, signified corresponds very closely to the Scandinavian an “assembly” of free-men (aire) and a “law-court” and Icelandic thing. Games and horse-racing (Simms 1987:60). The sources are ambiguous as to were an essential element of the óenach. whether airecht in the sense of a law-courts were There is little doubt that these were funerary normally convened as a part of óenaig, but one may in origin, and that the “fair” was held on the agree with Charles-Edwards (2000:559, 2005:342) site of the ancient tribal cemetery.” that it seems likely that such meetings were a normal and indeed integral part of óenaig, if only because The association of óenaig with games, enter- the powers needed to convene an airecht, witness tainment, and horse and chariot-racing is a point it, and carry out its judgment would normally have which has come to be specifically emphasized by coalesced at the time of the óenach. recent scholarship (e.g., Etchingham 2010, Gleason The perception that óenaig were essentially 2002, Kelly 1997:99). This dominant association is funerary games (e.g., Byrne 1973:30–31, Ettlinger th already present in the 7 -century speculum princi- 1953) arises from statements in a number of texts pum, Audacht Morainn (cf. Kelly 1976:8–9), and that specific óenaig were celebrated to commemo- was indeed so pervasive that Sanas Cormaic (com- rate famous ancestral figures (male and female) in- posed ca. 900) spuriously derived óenach from áine terred within the “assembly mound”. In an important ech, literally “to drive horses” (Meyer 1912:86). In reassessment of this material, however, Alexandra fact, there appears to be remarkably little evidence Bergholm (forthcoming) has shown that the texts for retaining the economistic understanding of an which articulate such a genesis are all Middle Irish óenach as a “market/fair”. While óenaig were prob- in date and, furthermore, consciously model an im- ably convened on one or more of the festivals that age of Irish assembly culture in the 10th–12th centu- divided the year (i.e., Imbolc, Samhain, Beltaine, ries on Classical accounts of the origins of games and Lughnasad), they are predominantly associated like the Olympics. Thus, while there is a marked with Lughnasad and, thus, the harvest in early August funerary dimension to assembly practices, we must (MacNeill 1965). As Cathy Swift (2000:116–119) construct more nuanced narratives and engage more has intimated, this association makes it highly likely critically with that relationship. Rather than the as- that the market/fair understanding of the óenach sembly practice being a derivative of a funerary and grew out of its role as an occasion where tribute was sepulchral function, both aspects are intimately con- rendered and redistributed, with trade perhaps being nected, such that these landscapes were places for 35 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson assembling the communities of living and dead from of victories (Barnwell 2005; Cameron 1976:162– their inception. 163, 182–183; McCormick 1986). As Paul Barnwell (2005:179) notes, so intimate became the Impe- rial rituals associated with the circus, and indeed, An Image of Assembly: The Specter of Imperial amphitheatres, that “Germanic” rulers of many of Heritage? the kingdoms which were established in the former Considered together, the functions vested in western provinces of the Empire imitated Imperial the óenach suggest that it represents the Irish ceremonies at the circus, After regaining Rome in equivalent of the thing and moot of Scandinavian 550 following Justinian’s attempt to take Italy back and “Germanic” communities, respectively, across into the Empire, the king of the Ostrogoths, Totila, northwestern Europe, albeit with an important ca- held horse-races to celebrate his victory. Theuderic I veat being, that óenaig may be more specifically of the Franks earlier acted similarly after gaining akin to an althing or shire moot in terms of scale the former Imperial capital of Arles, while in 577 (further below). Byrne (1973) was perhaps uniquely Chilperic I built circuses at his seats of kingship at perceptive in highlighting these similarities, with Paris and Soissons to provide entertainment for the that equation also receiving the imprimatur of more citizens (ibid., Halsall 2007:491). recent scholars (e.g., FitzPatrick 2004). Although Thus, it seems that late Roman and early Byz- the thing is most commonly defined as “an assembly antine cultures of civic community and public of people with legislative and judiciary authority” entertainment did influence assembly practices and (Storli 2010:137), other scholars rather appropri- elite culture in the post-Roman world and western ately highlight how saga literature suggests other provinces to a greater degree than is commonly important activities, including cult, trade, and games recognized (cf. Gleeson, forthcoming c; Halsall or competitions, including horse-racing (Brink et al. 2007:488–494). While the image of the óenach 2011:97), while there is also limited but convincing presented by the 10th–12th-century literati resulted evidence that such associations were a facet of the from particular political exigencies, the Irish had Anglo-Saxon moot (Pantos 2004:166). To note these equated óenaig with aspects of classical civic culture similarities merely highlights the well-appreciated from at least the 7th century; terms like agon (Greek: fact that assembly is a universal facet of civil com- “games/contest”) were used as synonyms for óenach munities’ functioning and central to the practice of in annals and hagiography (e.g., Bieler 1979:132), civil society across early medieval northwest Eu- and circio, spectaculum, and theatrum were used rope. to gloss, and in place of, óenach in law-tracts, ge- While the similarities between the iconography nealogies, and annals (Annals of Ulster 800.3; Ho- and character of assembly places and practices in gan 1910:558, O’Brien 1962:230). Although little northwestern Europe is well appreciated and lucidly is known about administration in the late Roman analyzed in much recent scholarship (e.g., Barnwell Empire, it has been shown that theaters were used and Mostert 2003, Pantos and Semple 2004), the spe- for assembly of citizens where magistrates could cific reasons for such concordance have not always be elected by acclamation and where provincial been articulated. This is perhaps particularly true in governors could read out imperial letters or transact an Irish context, where the experience of polities and public business (Barnwell 2005:179–180; Brown elite culture is often portrayed as singular and insular, 1992:85, 149). The óenaig of early Irish polities thereby perpetuating a myth that Irish kingship was may not seem entirely different, and certainly, terms peculiar in a northwest European context. like agon, circio, and theatrum suggests that there As in Ireland, power and authority in late antique is little reason to regard the Irish experience or Europe neither rested solely on hereditary rights, perception of assembly practices as something in- kinship, or military might. Rulers had obligations dependent, peculiar, or indeed, entirely aspirational, to provide entertainment, fecundity, and stability, particularly when the formative influence of the later expectations which grew out of late Roman civic Empire upon on the institutions of late Iron Age and culture and concepts of citizen-constituted commu- early medieval Ireland is increasingly recognized nity. Thus, one of the more famous expressions of (Gleeson forthcoming c; Newman 1998). This influ- royal power in the early Byzantine empire was the ence permeated religious practices, strategies of self circus at Constantinople, important for horse and adornment, concepts of rulership, and polity build- chariot-racing, and indeed, as an occasion where the ing, and as such, it would seem foolhardy to regard Emperor were seen in the midst of the people to be assembly practices as entirely exempt; the fact that acclaimed and to receive petitions. Gradually, the a large proportion of Roman material from Ireland circus evolved specific imperial associations related comes from landscapes later documented as royal to emperor-making ceremonies and the celebration assembly places is pertinent here also (ibid.). 36 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson In such a light, it appears a reasonable suggestion (see Etchingham 1996:128–136, 1999:146–147; that the similarities between aspects of assembly Zumbuhl 2005:275–284). While there were impor- practices in Ireland and elsewhere in northwestern tant changes to the practice of kingship in the 7th–9th Europe reflect the fact that the specter of an Impe- century, this latter fact has considerable repercus- rial heritage thoroughly conditioned a burgeoning sions for the understanding of Irish kingship and culture of assembly across the post-Roman West, society. Although largely outside this paper’s scope, and moreover, that elites in nascent kingdoms it is important to highlight that evidence for a sub- within and without the former Empire moulded and trícha cét assembly structure most probably reflects actively constituted their strategies of lordship and the constituent polities of a petty kingdom having re- practices of assembly as a part of a pan-European tained semi-autonomous governance, and certainly phenomenon. This is an important context, both for a distinct locus of assembly. In the kingdom of Fir analyzing óenaig during later Antiquity and more Maige Féne (see MacCotter 2012a) there are two generally throughout the early medieval period, but definite assembly places, both of which are located also for interrogating evidence for the material sig- on the royal estates of the major polities of the king- nature and wider structure of assembly practices in dom documented in Críchad an Caoille, namely Fir northwestern European societies. Maige Féne and their overlords Síl Cathail (Gleeson 2014:183–185). Similarly, the local kingdom of Uí Fháeláin (as territorial kingdom, rather than dynastic Structure and Practice: Defining Assembly polity) encompassed segments of Dál Messin Corb, Landscapes Uí Bairrche, Uí Enechglais, Fothairt, and Dál Cor- Leaving aside issues of the origins and mean- maic Loisc (Gleeson and Ó Carragáin, in press), and ing of similarities in assembly practices, further the high number of assembly places within that unit comparisons may be drawn by summarizing some indicates that these retained autonomous assembly preliminary patterns in the character of assembly functions within that polity (see Fig. 2). landscapes in Ireland. Figure 1 depicts a corpus of Likewise, the building blocks of such poli- ~115 assembly landscapes identified through docu- ties and kingdoms, whether local and petty, or mentary research and a variety of interdisciplinary supra-local and/or regional overkingships, were methodologies (see Gleeson 2014:808–916). These the politico-spatial units known as túath (plural assembly places are categorized according to the túatha; see MacCotter 2008, 2012a), and it seems type of evidence indicative of an assembly func- that we must allow that each such unit/polity also tion, namely a documented óenach, a documented maintained a locus of assembly. For instance, the assembly place, an óenach/assembly place indicated trícha cét of Cenél nÉogain (Inishowen) comprises by toponymy, and a royal landscape for which an as- three túatha, each of which has a distinct place of sembly function can justifiably be inferred through assembly signified by a drung place-name (Gleeson a combination of evidence (Gleeson 2014:84–147). 2014:185–186, Lacey 2006:114–115, cf. MacCotter Correspondingly, these are mapped here within 2012b). Considered together, the combined evidence their local trícha cét/cantred, as defined by Paul for the perpetuation of a semi-independent assembly MacCotter (2008). While this presentation allows practice by both the constituent groups within a pol- a reasonable approximation of the administrative ity/kingdom and the túath that comprised the polit- geography of Ireland ca. 1100 AD, there is consider- ico-spatial building blocks of such polity/kingdom able evidence that some trícha céts represent units of suggests a need to engage with complex hierarchies land-holding of some antiquity (ibid.). The distribu- and structures of assembly that exist independent of tion of assembly places, moreover, clearly suggests a general assembly (i.e., an óenach). Thus, while an a sub-trícha cét structure, where, for instance, more óenach was probably a kingdom’s principal assem- than one assembly place occurs within a trícha cét. bly, there were levels of assembly that existed below This structure reflects the fact that while the majority that principal gathering, some of which may have of trícha céts are identifiable with kingdoms, they been quasi-regal. This point receives some support might each comprise a number of distinct, semi- from the law-tracts, where assemblies of túath are autonomous polities. alluded to and, moreover, are clearly discreet from Contrary to previously dominant evolutionary higher-order gatherings, presumably óenaig (?), at models of Irish kingship (e.g., Ó Corráin 1978), it Lugnasad (Binchy 1978:ii. 469. 7–11, 19–23, 29–32 now appears unlikely that more-minor kings began and 471. 22–25). to lose the prerogative of kingship from the 7th–8th Although this issue has been either skirted around century, as apparently happened in Anglo-Saxon or ignored by Irish scholars and certainly occluded England (cf. Yorke 1990). Rather, minor lordships by debates over the meaning of “túath” within law- retained regal status into the 11th and 12th centuries tracts (e.g., MacCotter 2008, 2012a; cf. Etchingham 37 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson

1996; Ó Corráin 1978), the existence of a hierarchy if not also the assemblies one may hypothesize for of assemblies is neither unique nor surprising within subject communities within petty kingdoms (further a northwest European context. In terms of the scale Gleeson 2014). This equation, of course, is not an of polity that these tiers relate to, an óenach is prob- exact science, and the inherently dynamic nature of ably best regarded as the equivalent of an althing or the early Irish geo-political landscape necessitates a shire moot of Scandinavian or Anglo-Saxon poli- caveat that the scale of assembly such places relate ties, while the lower-order thing or hundred moot to could change overtime. Nevertheless, appreciat- relates more readily to assemblies of local túath, ing the existence of a tiered structure of interlocking

Figure 1. Map of 115 assembly landscapes (from the catalogue in Gleeson 2014) within their local trícha cét (after Mac- Cotter 2008). 38 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson

Figure 2. Map showing the number of assembly places alongside evidence for burial within the kingdom of Uí Fháeláin. This density supports identifying a sub-trícha cét structure of assembly for the constituent polities. 39 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson scales of assembly is a crucial context for analyzing Sheehan 2008:358–361). Likewise, the 5th- to 8th- the archaeology of assembly places and practices in century cemetery complex at Carrigatogher-Harding Ireland; the manner in which that scale of assembly (Taylor 2010) is located on the outskirts of Óenach finds a spatial expression within assembly land- Téite/Aurmuman, while the cemetery complex at scapes is illuminating. Augheraskea (Knockmark parish, County Meath), One emerging theme in research pertaining to has also been shown to define the landscape of an assembly across Europe is the use of burial places óenach on Knockmark ridge, near the important ear- and sepulchral landscapes for assembly practices. ly royal site of Lagore (Carty and Gleeson 2013:48– This interpretation has been cogently argued 55). Support for the identification of such complexes in Northern Britain, Anglo-Saxon England, and as túath assembly places comes from the fact that Merovingian Gaul, as well as elsewhere, such that, the archaeological evidence shows that most such again, this characteristic of assembly practices locales remained centers of activity and feasting may be described as a pan-European phenomenon after burial had ceased, while in a number of cases, (Brookes and Reynolds 2011, Effros 2002, Halsall such complexes can be associated with specific, 2010:202–231, Maldonado 2013:24, cf. Sanmark documented kin groups. For instance, taking Óenach and Semple 2013:532–534, Semple 2004, Williams Carman specifically, the Corbally complex remained 2004). The Irish evidence is no different and, indeed, a center of activity until at least the 9th/10th century may be uniquely robust and early enough that it is (Coyne 2010), despite adult burial having ceased capable of demonstrating the existence of assembly during the 7th century, while alongside Greenhills, structures from at least the 5th–6th century (Gleeson Corbally was likely an assembly place of Uí Gar- 2014). Particularly, I have argued that recently rchon, a segment of Dál Messin Corb (Gleeson and excavated complexes in Ireland variously termed Ó Carragáin, in press). Likewise, the genealogies of “cemetery settlements”, “settlement cemeteries”, Uí Bairrche record a branch named Uí Langení, as- and/or secular cemeteries (Ó Carragáin 2009, 2010; sociated with Killashee, but whose caput was Caisse O’Sullivan et al. 2013; Stout and Stout 2008) are (O’Brien 1962:54); this is Mullacash (from Mullach best understood as local túath-level assembly places Caisse; Hogan 1910:167–168), where a number of (Gleeson 2014, in press a; Gleeson and Ó Carragáin, 5th–7th-century burials have been excavated adjacent in press). In general terms, these sites consist of a de- to the parish/royal estate boundary (Ó Ríordáin in fined burial locus, usually (although not universally) Cahill and Sikora 2012:55–69, cf. MacCotter in Ó contained within a series of enclosures. This burial Carragáin and Sheehan 2008:358–61). locus is normally the focus of a much larger complex As the example of Óenach Carman illustrates, that includes the remains of rubbish pits, animal these cemetery complexes frequently cluster togeth- remains, and food waste, most likely from feast- er (Figs. 3, 4), defining, delimiting, and demarcating ing, associated with evidence for craft- and iron- the boundaries of these assembly landscapes and, by working as well as crop-processing, but for which implication, their associated royal estates (Gleeson more conventional evidence for “habitation” in the 2014, in press a). The mruig ríg of the principal form of structures and hearths is absent. For present assembly of the kingdom of Osraige (Counties purposes, it is sufficient to note that, apart from the Kilkenny and southern Laois), Óenach Roigne, ap- non-burial archaeological assemblage of these sites pears to approximate to the parishes of Dunbell, being best interpreted as evidence for both funerary Kilfreagh, and Grangekilree which spanned the feasting and assembly practices, there is a significant river Nore south of Kilkenny city (see Gleeson, in correlation between assembly landscapes and these press a). This landscape had a central royal focus locations of burial, whether isolated, inserted into in Dunbell (from Dún Bíle, “fort of the [sacred] older monuments, or within cemeteries (Fig. 3). tree”), but complexes with evidence for 5th–9th cen- Furthermore, the analysis of these sites within their tury burial at Sheastown, Kilree 3, Kilree 4, Hold- local territorial, administrative and political frame- enstown 1, and Holdenstown 2 define its boundaries works often supports their interpretation as assem- (Bhreathnach and O’Brien 2011; Gleeson, in press bly places, and a few brief examples will serve to a; Whitty and Tobin 2009). More generally, the illustrate that pattern here. burial places within and defining these landscapes The major assembly landscape of Óenach Car- are normally located in close proximity to a modern man focuses upon Silliothill, Carnalway parish, parish boundary (usually less than 600 m; see Glee- County Kildare (Ó Murchadha 2002), the royal son 2014:110–169), which research by Paul Mac- estate of which is demarcated by a number of burial Cotter has shown frequently preserve the structure complexes at Corbally, Greenhills, Mullacash, and of early landholding units, often 5th–6th century in Coughlanstown (Fig. 4; Coyne 2010; Gleeson and Ó origin (Gleeson and Ó Carragáin, in press; MacCot- Carragáin, in press; MacCotter in Ó Carragáin and ter 2012a; cf. Ó Carragáin, in press). 40 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson Importantly, the propensity for these complexes local kin-based identities onto a topography of as- to be situated close to boundaries suggests that sembly that articulated more encompassing scales they were consciously defining and demarcating of polity and community. The decision by the con- assembly landscapes that served to bring communi- stituent communities of a polity to bury on the royal ties of the living and dead together. As they cluster estate near to its boundaries was something that together, and were associated with specific kin- re-imagined and sanctified that office and estate for groups, it seems clear they were deeply implicated those communities through the passing of genera- in maintaining local, kin-based identity. We can also tions. Notably, this was by the internment therein of consider them as sepulchral landscapes that mapped the corporeal fabric of the body politic, such that the

Figure 3. Map of 115 assembly places in Ireland within their local trícha cét, with places showing evidence for early me- dieval burial also shown. 41 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson royal estate, the pre-eminent symbol of regality, was core royal focus, but were, nevertheless, extensive also an emotive and consistent symbol of an identity and poly-focal, with a multiplicity of nodal points of shared by diverse communities subject to a single activity, such that each constituent element of a pol- political suzerain. ity had their own discreet place of assembly within These patterns allow a working model to be pro- the broader landscape. Given that these nodal points posed: early Irish assembly landscapes could have a are located on, near, and defining royal estates, that

Figure 4. Map showing the royal demesne of Óenach Carman (after MacCotter in Ó Carragáin et al. 2008:358–361). Note the concentration of burial places around the estate boundary. 42 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson estate should be regarded as having approximated in opens up interesting avenues of enquiry pertaining its entirety to the assembly landscape. To return to to both regional differences in power structures and the analogy of a túath-scale assembly approximating how different scales of identity were constructed and to a moot or thing, the latter appear to have met every maintained. Indeed, such regionalities may also be few weeks, and we may seem justified in imagining explored through contrasting areas where clusters of that so too a túath would have assembled on a more so-called cemetery settlements—possibly a regional regular basis than an óenach. At least hypothetically phenomena themselves—suggest centralized assem- this allows us to see how different scales of assem- bly practices, with regions, like Inishowen (above), bly could have operated spatially through single where assembly toponyms indicate more dispersed landscapes, with local túath assemblies convened on practices. kin-group burial places and cemeteries regularly, but with a higher-order, more formal assemblies, annual Creating Christian Communities: Assembly and or bi-annual óenaig, convened less regularly around Conversion the core royal locus of activity. This scenario, of course, would have given ample opportunity for the Returning to the nature of assembly landscapes, political dimension of supra-local assembly within some other notable patterns have significant implica- such landscapes to come to the fore. For instance, tions for understanding the role of these landscapes óenaig would undoubtedly have been stage-man- within social and religious discourse. Alongside a aged; as much is stated outright in texts like the Air- core royal focus, the propensity for early conver- gialla Charter Poem, which refer aspirationally to sion-period churches to be located within assembly the arrangement of the major regional kings around landscapes is such that we may normally expect the king of Tara at Óenach Tailten (Bhreathnach each assembly landscape to have had at least one and Murray 2005:129). A multiplicity of routeways church (Gleeson, in press a). The royal estate of within and through royal estates could have served Óenach Tailten, for instance, may correspond to the to choreograph solemn entries, both for a presiding parishes of Teltown, Donaghpatrick, and Martry, and king and subject vassals. Indeed, a sunken routeway that unit’s early origins are testified by the fact that in Tatestown defines one such approach from the de- the only locations with evidence for early medieval mesne boundary of Óenach Tailten to Ráith Airthir, burial within that landscape are located precisely the principal royal assembly focus within that land- on its boundaries: at Oristown, Kilmainham, and scape. Status and rank would also no doubt have Grange 2 (ibid.). Likewise, an early medieval date been performed through formal and ad hoc proces- for Teltown church is suggested by LiDAR survey sions, as much as within the assembly itself, where that shows the site to be surrounded by a large circu- the physical ordering of space and personnel repre- lar enclosure, while Martry and Donaghpatrick are sented indicators of status, at least as significant as also documented early ecclesiastical establishments. the hierarchies of speech and silence that defined the The latter (Domnach Pátraic), is located immedi- solemnities and rancour of the gathering and its as- ately adjacent to the principal royal assembly focus sociated discourse. of the wider Tailtiu landscape, Ráith Airthir, and is While space does not permit a detailed explora- intimately associated with this site in hagiography tion of these issues here, regarding how these land- (Bieler 1979:133; Gleeson, in press a; Swift 2000). scapes were implicated in the production of author- Domnach churches, moreover, would appear to ity, it is worth highlighting that an implication of the have a particularly strong association with assem- fact that cemeteries utilized as local túath assembly bly places; of 115 assembly landscapes mapped in places cluster around royal assembly landscapes Figure 1, thirty-nine have an associated domnach and define them is the notion that kings must have church (Gleeson 2014:147–160). The importance of exercised a modicum of control over burial and local this fact is partly the status of these sites as Ireland’s assembly practices. With reference to the theme of earliest churches; domnach ceased being used as societal norms, there seems a very real possibility an active toponym by the 7th century, and possibly that this aspect of royal power, or perhaps more so as early as the 5th–6th century (Charles-Edwards the exercise of overkingship, is the role that kings 2000:184–185, Flanagan 1984). played in the mediating dispute between heirs fol- Despite these patterns, Irish kingship is normally lowing bereavement and death within a kindred depicted as an institution which defied Christian- through regulating and over-seeing the redistribu- ization, and indeed, it has been suggested that tion of resources, particularly land. An Old Irish early church sites often encircle rather than encroach poem edited by D.A. Binchy (1971), for instance, upon the major royal landscapes (see Bhreathnach shows that a king was expected to be proficient 2011:127–134, Schot et al. 2011:ix). While some in things like land-law (cf. Doherty 1985:8). This churches are located around the boundaries of these 43 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson landscapes (e.g., Domnach Mór Maige Selca at likely to represent the perpetuation of a cultic func- Carnfree on the boundaries of Óenach Crúachan), tion through the sanctification of an assembly place this spatial relationship is akin to the burial sites for a Christian society. that define these same boundaries, namely sanc- The propensity for domnach churches to be tifying them for a Christian society. Furthermore, located in assembly landscapes is intriguing in it has become increasingly evident that the rite of this regard, as this type of ecclesiastical site was east–west-extended inhumation burial in Ireland is particularly appropriate to assembly places. The a phenomenon of the 5th century at the earliest, and nomenclature of these establishments normally sig- given that it seems this new rite was being used to nals that they were the principal church of a specific define the assembly landscapes wherein one also geographical area or a named kin-group (e.g., either encounters the earliest churches in Ireland, it may Domnach Mór Maige X or Domnach Mór Ua/Uí X). be that this rite was likely to be emerging within Certainly, this implies pastoral and probably also a Christianizing context (Gleeson 2014, McGarry episcopal obligations (for debates on church orga- 2010, Ó Carragáin 2010). The process of conversion nization, see Etchingham 1999). In this regard, the clearly had a profound effect on assembly places domnach church may seem particularly comparable and practices as well as the institution of kingship to the later fylki churches of Scandinavia (cf. Skre (Gleeson, in press a). 2007:392–396). It is worth stating outright that the conjunction While the character of domnach churches per- of a documented royal assembly locus, early (5th–6th haps singles them out as exceptionally suited to the century) burial places and contemporary conversion- functions of assembly places, another type of church period churches (e.g., domnach sites) indicates that site that may be specifically associated with assem- the assembly function of these landscapes in Ireland bly places are martartech churches. While I have seems likely to be at least as old as the 5th–6th centu- encountered only three such securely identifiable ry. At least in some instances, the burial places sug- churches, all are associated with assembly land- gested here as local assembly places may have been scapes: Martry at Óenach Tailten, and two domus redefining pre-existing land-holding units in the marterium establishments mentioned by Tírechán 5th–6th century period; the early medieval burials at in the late 7th century (Bieler 1979:162–163, Walsh Holdenstown 1 (Óenach Roigne) were inserted into 2003:75), probably identifiable with Dunmurraghill pre-existing ring-ditches of Iron Age date (Whitty in County Kildare and Kilree (from “church of the and Tobin 2009), while the complex at Kilmainham, king”) near Óenach Roigne (Gleeson, in press a). defining the western boundary of Óenach Tailten, The term martartech/domus marterium implies that was associated with an Iron Age linear ditch (Walsh such places housed relics, with similar associations 2011). Without more detailed analysis, this is no implied elsewhere, for instance, at Baslick (County more than a conjecture, but nevertheless, kingship Roscommon) on the boundaries of Óenach Crúachan in late Iron Age Ireland was indisputably sacral (see (Doherty 1984:304–305; Gleeson, in press a). A Gleeson 2012; Newman 2007, 2011), and at least in likely explanation for the association of churches, some cases a pre-existing cultic function is testified relics, and assemblies is the legal role of relics and by, among other things, the votive deposition of cemeteries for things like swearing oaths at assem- Roman material in wells (e.g., at Óenach Tailten; blies and burial places (cf. Kelly 1988:199). The im- Kelly 2002, Mallery 2011). Furthermore, there is portance of relics to the proceedings of an óenach is considerable comparative material which indicates also clearly evident in the Annals of Ulster s.a. 784, that missions were usually directed towards elites which refer to the “adventus of the relics of [St.] Erc (consider various papers in Carver 2003; Gleeson into the ciuitas of Tailtiu”. Notably, through the use and Ó Carragáin, in press; Sanmark 2004). As such, of adventus, a term used to signify a solemn entry by it may seem appropriate to imagine that assembly Emperors into late Roman cities, the annalist articu- landscapes were the principal venues within which lates an image of assembly places and practices as communities debated together the merits of conver- part of pan-European culture thoroughly influenced sion. In the case of Palladius, the first bishop sent by by the specter of an Imperial heritage (cf. Kantoro- Pope Celestine in 431 to the “Scotti (‘Irish’) believ- wicz 1944), a concept equally as evident in the use ing in Christ” (Charles-Edwards 2000:202–214), of ciuitas to describe Óenach Tailten. there are hints in the geographical associations of Further evidence that the church had become Palladius’ reputed followers (Auxilius, Isserninus, integrated into structures of assembly from an early and Secundinus) that he led a systematic mission date, at least the conversion period, is provided by centered on a polity associated with Óenach Carman the fact that church synods could run concurrent (Gleeson and Ó Carragáin, in press). The building with óenaig (Charles-Edwards 2000:287–299, of a church in assembly landscapes therefore seems Swift 2000). Indeed, so intimate was the association 44 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson of synods with assembly practices that the Latin approaching avenue, would have been highly vis- synodus was borrowed into Irish as senad, eventu- ible. One could easily relate the layout of the airecht ally coming to be used as a toponym that signified in the tract on court procedure to such a landscape, the principal assembly place of some kingdoms. with a king presiding over proceedings from the bar- I have encountered three such instances (Gleeson row, and two tall satellite mounds immediately north 2014:879–881, 890), and while it is uncertain how perhaps being the seats of a bishop and poet. Cases early this borrowing occurred, the best known ex- and pleadings could have been formally brought ample of the Shanid, County Limerick, assembly of to these figures through the northeast–southwest- Uí Fhidgente is documented from the 830s (MacCot- orientated avenue. Such a reconstruction is intended ter 2008:51). as an imagined conjecture, but nevertheless, the tract Clearly therefore, Christianity, including its on court procedure specifies that the king presiding clerical ritual specialists, were formative in shaping over the airecht was not an average petty king, but the character of assembly landscapes from at least the highest grade of king described by the law tracts the conversion period. Thus, it can no longer be de- (Kelly 1986). The king of Cashel, who presided over nied that the practice of kingship developed within any proceedings at Óenach Clochair, was certainly at a Christianizing context. Likewise, it appears that least of such a rank, and Raheennamadra is located clerics encouraged kings to extend their authority only 5 km west of Emly, Munster’s chief church. into the judicial realm and encouraged them to prac- In any case, while the recognition of the role tice capital punishment from an early date (Zumbuhl that paramount kings played in judgment (cf. Chap- 2005:157–158). Tracts like The First Synod of St. man Stacey 2007, Gerriets 1988) is tempering the Patrick (6th–early 7th century) make it easy to see previously dominant understanding of Irish kings as why an ambitious king would desire an early church bereft of any real power, it is important to highlight in a royal landscape under his authority, as they in- that the greatest evidence for the participation of fer that an aspect of conversion could have been the kings in judicial practice in Ireland pertains to the emergence of two “rival” Christian and pagan legal higher grades of king (Charles-Edwards 2009). This systems (Bieler 1963:56–57; Gleeson, in press a). insight perhaps illuminates why ambitious kings An Old Irish tract on court procedure details the lay- may have looked favorably upon conversion, but out of an airecht in which a king presides over the nevertheless, we cannot assign the powers exercised proceedings and pronounces the judgment alongside by higher grades of king entirely to that process. a poet and bishop (Kelly 1986). Interestingly, the The basis for suggesting that the threefold tract conceptualizes the airecht and its sub-courts hierarchy of kingship in early Ireland is at least as discreet assemblies, and although it is not proven 5th century in origin (above) is a reference in St. that an airecht was convened at an óenach (above), Patrick’s confessio to those who judge throughout such a conceptualization would certainly be appro- the regions. Ó Corráin (2010:284–286) has shown priate to the multiplicity of polities that an assembly this to be a learned reference to paramount king- landscape related to. ship after a biblical model. If so, then the judicial While a mound was neither a prerequisite or powers of paramount Irish kings may seem equally ubiquitous aspect of assembly culture in Ireland, archaic. Furthermore, the episcopal structure of the it is clear that they were used for the promulgation early Irish church described a threefold hierarchy of judgments (FitzPatrick 2004:43). In the case of (see Etchingham 1999), which in this light seems Óenach Clochair, the pre-eminent assembly of Mun- most likely modelled upon its royal counterpart. ster (Gleeson, in press c), there is clear evidence Thus, while the church may have been formative in for a mound forming the central focus of activity. shaping the practice of Irish kingship, it is probably On the crest of Raheennamadra Hill, LiDAR survey more appropriate to envisage early ecclesiastics be- has highlighted a ring-barrow approached through a ing co-opted to the process of polity building, rather northeast–southwest-orientated avenue (Fig. 5). The than according them responsibility for the genesis latter is later than the ring-barrow, but also skirts and evolution of that process. around the northwestern portion of a large oval en- This is an important distinction when one con- closure containing a ringfort, probably constructed siders the development of burial patterns within in the 8th century or later as a royal seat (Fig. 5; assembly landscapes. While burial is not assembly, Gleeson, in press c; Stenberger 1966). The barrow the act of burying in a place used for local assembly on the crest of Raheennamadra hill is topographi- says important things about the nature of a kin-group cally orientated southwards, where the land falls identity, and how it was expressed and articulated away before rising sharply, giving the surround- in relation to more encompassing scales of polity ing landscape the appearance of an amphitheatre and community. Correspondingly, the fact that from (Fig. 5). Any activity on the barrow, or indeed, the ca. 700 the so-called “cemetery settlements” cease 45 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson being used for burial (O’Brien 2003, 2009) indicates cated the church was in processes of polity building. that important changes in that process were under- The removal of burial from assembly places may be way. While this is neither a sudden or rapid process, argued to reflect changes in the nature of local iden- but rather one drawn out over a number of centuries, tity and how this was articulated relative to more with some places retaining a burial function into the encompassing scales of polity and community. In the 10th and 11th century, we are probably justified in main, these changes can be suggested to be directly inferring that the burial function was being removed related to the development of major supra-regional to church sites (see Ó Carragáin 2009, 2010). In kingdoms in Ireland from ca. 700 onwards (further general, the terminal phase of archaeological sites Gleeson 2014:768–778). is difficult to isolate and date, but nevertheless, it Although full exploration of the latter point is be- is clear that many of these cemeteries remained yond the present paper’s scope, there are examples centers of activity after their burial function ceased, where the effects of such processes are visible within presumably because they retained importance as assembly landscapes. For brevity, I confine myself assembly places. Given the suggestions above that to a single instance, namely Nenagh, County Tip- clerics were actively shaping the character of assem- perary (from “óenach”), which was Óenach Aurmu- bly landscapes and burial practices from at least the man, “the óenach of east Munster”, also known as 5th–6th centuries, it seems unlikely that developments Óenach Téite. Téite was a mythical female said to in the burial record from the 8th century reflect the have been interred within the assembly mound and establishment of proper Christian burial practices in whose memory the games were said to have been (pace O’Brien 2003, 2009); rather, the evidence for convened in Middle Irish literature (cf. Bergholm, in the regulation of burial reflects how deeply impli- press; Ettlinger 1953). A large cemetery complex at

Figure 5. LiDAR model of Raheennamadra hill, the core focus of Óenach Clochair, Munster’s pre-eminent assembly place. The ring-barrow on the crest of the hill is approached through a (later) northeast–southwest orientated avenue, and has two tall satellite mounds located immediately south. The avenue skirts around a large oval enclosure containing a platform ringfort that was constructed in the second half of the early medieval period, probably as a royal seat. 46 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson Carrigatogher-Harding was located on the outskirts tury, it also provides a material expression of the of Nenagh, focusing on a natural knoll. This site discourses pertaining to the function and image of overlooked a routeway called the Slige Dála, “the assembly places, including the the role they played road of assembly”; this did indeed connect a number in articulating different scales of identity and com- of óenaig, and is therefore perhaps analogous to the munity. Importantly, this development occurred at a Eriksgata of medieval Sweden (cf. Sanmark 2009). time when the patchwork of local identities which While established probably during the 5th–6th cen- characterized the 5th–7th century geo-political land- tury, the Carrigatogher cemetery fell out of use dur- scape was knit into the evolving superstructure of a ing the 8th century (Taylor 2010). Correspondingly, tapestry and web of kinship that traced the descent a natural knoll to the northeast at Tullaheady (Cleary of all the “Irish”, as a single people, back through and Kelleher 2011) was “activated” during the late a biblical narrative of world history to Adam (cf. Ó 8th century and converted into a mound by the dig- Corráin 1986, 1998). ging of a ditch around the knoll’s base. This knoll/ mound thereafter became surrounded by a number of Conclusion rubbish pits, with the fill of the latter and the ditch mainly comprising food waste as well as honestones The present paper has hopefully demonstrated and whetstones (Cleary and Kelleher 2011:429– the complex and multifaceted nature of assembly 431). These pits and food waste, a common feature landscapes and the associated practices that de- of assembly places across Europe (e.g., Ødegaard, fined civil society in early medieval Ireland. In the in press; Sanmark and Semple 2013:519–524), prob- process, it raises as many questions as it answers. ably represent evidence for periodic feasting, and What I hope to have shown, however, is that a criti- comparable material is found at other assembly sites cal appraisal of structures and practices of assembly in Ireland (Gleeson 2014). Likewise, there was some in Ireland can provide important insights into the evidence that the ditch was cleaned out on a regular material apparatus of kingship as well as its cer- basis (Cleary and Kelleher 2011:429–431), perhaps emonial. Moreover, I have attempted to challenge related to proscriptions in law tracts that assembly the predominantly economistic understanding of places should be prepared and cleared of things like the óenach by highlighting the degree to which such gorse prior to an óenach (cf. Binchy 1978). places and practices were implicated in the exercise Probably most important point here is the fact of royal power, the constitution of authority, and in that Tullaheady became a center of activity during the discourses which defined communities and their precisely the same period that the Carrigatogher- relationships to one another. In this regard, I hope Harding burial complex ceased to be a locus of that the spatial dynamic of authority that is clearly activity. Moreover, both events are contemporary at play in assembly landscapes demonstrates the with the emergence of “East Munster” as an admin- importance of engaging with royal landscapes in istrative entity and district, for which Nenagh was Ireland on a more holistic basis, understanding them the assembly place (see Gleeson 2014:760–766, in as places implicated in discourses of power and place press b). In such a context, it is difficult to resist as much as venues that perpetuated coded and ar- suggesting that the place-name Tullaheady derives chaic ideologies of sacral authority. These places are from Tulach Téite, “the hillock/mound of Téite” (a implicated in the process of conversion and Chris- quo Óenach Téite). Topographically, Tullaheady tianization, and they appear to have been diplomatic townland is flat, such that the tulach element of the spaces that played an integral part in processes of place-name probably refers to a mound/knoll. If polity building, and the production and maintenance Tulach Téite is an acceptable hypothesis, then the of different scales of polity, community, and iden- processes that saw local assembly places like Car- tity. Furthermore, in tentatively identifying burial rigatogher cease being used for burial entailed the sites as assembly places, I have identified a working mythologization of landscape, which can probably model for composing and analyzing how structures justifiably be related to the creation of an entity and practices of assembly operated through discreet known as “East Munster”. This may be reflected not royal landscapes. While this represents a preliminary only in the shift of activity to Tullaheady, but also account of the nature of Irish assembly practices, I in the reimagining of the genesis of the assembly hope that it highlights pertinent issues, some ten- function and its commemorative aspect through the tative patterns, and the uniquely robust and early invention of a myth of Téite, which served to anchor nature of evidence from Ireland that has a broader the landscapes’s ancestral dimension in a fictive and relevance for the evolution of assembly practices imagined primordial past. across northwestern Europe and the significance of Thus, while Tullaheady represents evidence for such patterns for understanding the evolution of civil the creation of an assembly mound in the 8th cen- society in early medieval Ireland. 47 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson

Acknowledgments Brookes, S., and A. Reynolds 2011. The origins of po- litical order and the Anglo-Saxon state. Archaeology This article is based on research undertaken as part International 13/14:84–93. of a Ph.D. in the Department of Archaeology, University Brown, P. 1992. Power and persuasion in late Antiquity: College Cork, funded by a W.J. Leen studentship from Towards a Christian Empire. Wisconsin University UCC, and an Irish Research Council scholarship. It also Press, Madison, WI, USA. 184 pp. draws from work conducted as part of The Óenach Project Byrne, F.J. 1973. Irish Kings and High-kings. Four Courts which was established through an IRC New Ideas grant. Press, Dublin, Ireland. 341 pp. I am extremely grateful to Alexandra Bergholm, Tomás Ó Cahill, M., and M. Sikora 2012. Breaking Ground, Find- Carragáin, and Marie Ødegaard for providing copies of ing Graves, 2 Volumes. Wordwell, Bray, Ireland. 1275 forthcoming work. Additionally, I owe sincere gratitude to pp. my supervisor, Tomás Ó Carragáin, for both encouraging Cameron, A. 1976. Circus Factions: Blues and Greens at me to develop this line of analysis, and for much discus- Rome and Byzantium. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK. sion, debate, and sage insight. 374 pp. Carty, N., and P. Gleeson. 2013. Kingship, violence, and Literature Cited Loch Dá Gabhor: Royal landscapes and the production of authority in early medieval Brega. Ríocht na Midhe Annals of Ulster (AU) CELT database. Available online 24:29–72. at http://www.ucc.ie/celt/online/T100001A/. Last ac- Carver, M.O.H. (Ed.) 2003. The cross goes north: pro- cessed 10 November 2013. cesses of conversion in northern Europe, 300–1300. Barnwell, P. 2005. Anglian Yeavering: A continental per- Medieval Press, York, UK. 588 pp. spective. Pp. 174–84, In P. Fordsham and C. O’Brien Chapman Stacey, R. 2007. Dark Speech: The Performance (Eds.), Yeavering: People, Power, and Place. The His- of Law in Early Ireland. University of Pennsylvania tory Press, Stroud, UK. 254 pp. Press, Philadelphia, USA. 354 pp. Barnwell, P. and M. Mostert (Eds.). 2003. Political As- Charles-Edwards, T.M. 1994. A contract between king and semblies in the Earlier Middle Ages. Brepols, Turn- people in early medieval Ireland: Críth Gablach on hout, Belgium. 404 pp. kingship. Peritia 8:107–119. Bergholm, A. Forthcoming. Assemblies and funeral Charles-Edwards, T.M. 2000. Early Christian Ireland. games: re-reading the literary evidence. In P. Gleeson Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 707 pp. (Ed.). Landscapes of Assembly in Medieval Ireland. Charles-Edwards, T.M. 2005. Early Irish law. Pp. 331–70, Bhreathnach, E. 2011. Transforming kingship and cult: In D. Ó Cróinín (Ed.). A New History of Ireland, Vol. The royal provincial ceremonial capitals in the early 1. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. 1219 pp. medieval period. Pp. 97–114, In R. Schot, C. Newman Charles-Edwards, T.M. 2009. Celtic kings: “Priestly and E. Bhreathnach (Eds.). Landscapes of Cult and vegetables”?. Pp. 65–81, In S. Baxter, C. Karkov, J. Kingship. Four Courts Press, Dublin, Ireland. 322 pp. Nelson, and D. Pelteret (Eds.). Early Medieval Stud- Bhreathnach, E., and K. Murray. 2005. The Airgialla ies in Memory of Patrick Wormald. Ashgate, Surrey, Charter Poem: Edition. Pp. 124–58, In E. Bhreathan- UK. 582 pp. ach (Ed.). The Kingship and Landscape of Tara. Four Cleary, R., and H. Kelleher 2011. Archaeological exca- Courts Press, Dublin, Ireland. 536 pp. vations at Tullaheady, Co. Tipperary. Collins Press, Bhreathnach, E., and E. O’Brien. 2011. Irish boundary Cork, Ireland. 455 pp. ferta: Their physical manifestation and historical con- Coyne, F. 2010. Corbally, Co. Kildare: The results of text. Pp. 53–64, In F. Edmonds and P. Russell (Eds.). 2003–2004 excavations of a secular cemetery. Pp. Tome: Studies in Medieval Celtic History and Law. 77–90, In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (Eds.). Death Boydell and Brewer, Woodbridge, UK. 238 pp. and Burial in Early Medieval Ireland. Wordwell, Bray, Bieler, L. 1963. The Irish Penitentials. DIAS, Dublin, Ireland. 316 pp. Ireland. 367 pp. Dillon, M. 1951. The taboos of the kings of Ireland. Pro- Bieler, L. 1979. The Patrician Texts in the Book of Ar- ceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 54(C):1–36. magh. DIAS, Dublin, Ireland. 288 pp. Doherty, C. 1984. The Basilica in early Ireland. Peritia Binchy, D.A. 1941. Críth Gablach. Stationary Office, 3:303–15. Dublin, Ireland. 109 pp. Doherty, C. 1985. The monastic town in early medi- Binchy, D.A. 1958. The fair of Tailtiu and the feast of eval Ireland. Pp. 45–75, In H. Clarke and A. Simms Tara. Ériu 18:113–138. (Eds.). The Comparative History of Urban Origins Binchy, D.A. 1970. Celtic and Anglo-Saxon Kingship. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. 53 pp. in Non-Roman Europe BAR. Archaeopress, Oxford, Binchy, D.A. 1971. An archaic legal poem. Celtica UK. 748 pp. 9:152–168. Effros, B. 2002. Creating Communities with Food and Binchy, D.A. 1978. Corpus Iuris Hibernici, vi vols. DIAS, Drink in Merovingian Gaul. Palgrave Macmillan, New Dublin, Ireland. 2343 pp. York, NY, USA. 174 pp. Brink, S., O. Grimm, F. Iversen, H. Hobæck, M. Øde- Etchingham, C. 1996. Early medieval Irish history. Pp. gaard, U. Näsmen, A. Sanmark, P. Urbanczyk, O. 123–56, In K. McCone and K. Simms (Eds.). Progress Vésteinssen, and I. Storli, 2011. Court sites of Arctic in Medieval Irish Studies. The Cardinal Press, May- Norway: Remains of thing sites and representations nooth, Ireland. 275 pp. of political consolidation processes in the northern Etchingham, C. 1999. Church Organisation in Ireland, c. Germanic world during the first millennium AD. Nor- 650–1000. Laigin Publications, Maynooth, Ireland. wegian Archaeological Review 44(1):89–117. 538 pp. 48 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson

Etchingham, C. 2010. The organisation and function of Hogan, E. 1910. Onomasticon Goedelicum. Four Courts an early Irish church settlement: What was Glendal- Press, Dublin, Ireland. 695 pp. ough?. Pp. 22–53, In C. Doherty, L. Doran, and M. Jaski, B. 2000. Early Irish Kingship and Succession. Four Kelly (Eds.). Glendalough: City of God. Four Courts Courts Press, Dublin, Ireland. 360 pp. Press, Dublin, Ireland. 383 pp. Johnston, S., and Wailes, B. 2007. Dún Ailinne: Excava- Ettlinger, E. 1953. The association of burials with popular tions at an Irish Royal Site, 1968–1975. Pennsylvania assemblies, fairs, and races in ancient Ireland. Études University Press, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 232 pp. Celtique 6:30–61. Kantorowicz, E. 1944. The “King’s Advent” and the FitzPatrick, E. 2001. The gathering place of Tír Fhia- enigmatic panels in the doors of Santa Sabina. The Art chrach: Archaeological and folkloric investigations Bulletin 26(4):207–231. of Aughris Head, Co. Sligo. Proceedings of the Royal Kelly, E. 2002. Antiquities from Irish holy wells and their Irish Academy 101(C):67–105. wider context. Archaeology Ireland 16(2):24–8. FitzPatrick, E. 2004. Royal Inauguration in Gaelic Ire- Kelly, F. 1976. Audacht Morainn. DIAS, Dublin, Ireland. land, c. 1100–1600: A Cultural Landscape Study. 83 pp. Boydell Press, Woodbridge, UK. 294 pp. Kelly, F. 1986. An Old Irish text on court procedure. Peri- Flanagan, D. 1984. The Christian impact on early Ireland: tia 5:74–106. Place-names evidence. Pp. 25–52. In P. Ní Chatháin Kelly, F. 1988. A Guide to Early Irish Law. DIAS, Dublin, and M. Richter (Eds.). Ireland and Europe: The Early Ireland. 358 pp. Church. University Press, Stuttgart, Germany. 458 pp. Kelly, F. 1997. Early Irish Farming. DIAS, Dublin, Ire- Gerriets, M. 1988. The king as judge in early Ireland. land. 751 pp. Celtica 20:29–52. Lacey, B. 2006. Cenél Conaill and the Donegal kingdoms Gleason, A. 2002. Entertainment in early medieval Ire- AD 500–800. Four Courts Press, Dublin, Ireland. 351 land. Ph.D. Dissertation. Trinity College Dublin, pp. Dublin, Ireland. MacCotter, P. 2008. Medieval Ireland: Territorial, Politi- Gleeson, P. 2012. Constructing kingship in early medieval cal, and Economic Divisions. Four Courts Press, Dub- Ireland: Power, place, and ideology. Medieval Archae- lin, Ireland. 320 pp. ology 56:1–33. MacCotter, P. 2012a. Túath, manor, and parish: Kingdom Gleeson, P. 2014. Landscapes of kingship in early medi- of Fir Maige, Cantred of Fermoy. Peritia 22:211–248. eval Ireland. Ph.D. Dissertation. University College MacCotter, P. 2012b. Drong and Dál as synonyms of Óen- Cork, Cork, Ireland. 964 pp. ach. Peritia 22:1–6. Gleeson, P. In press a. Converting kingship in early Ire- MacNeill, E. 1921 (reprinted 1986). Celtic Ireland. Uni- land: Re-defining practices, ideologies, and identities. versity Press of Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. 197 pp. In N. Edwards, R. Flechner, and M. Ní Mhaonaigh MacNeill, M. 1965. The Festival of Lughnasa: A Study of (Eds.). Converting the Isles, Vol. 2. Brepols, Turnhout, the Survival of the Celtic Festival of the Beginning of Belgium. the Harvest. Comhairle Bhealoideas Eireann, Dublin, Gleeson, P. In press b. Making provincial kingship in early Ireland. 700 pp. medieval Ireland: Cashel and the creation of Munster. Meyer, K. 1912. Sanas Cormaic: an Old Irish glossary In J. Carroll, A. Reynolds, and B. Yorke (Eds.). Power compiled by Cormaic úa Cuilennáin. Anecdota from and Place in Late Roman and Early Medieval Europe: Irish Manuscripts 4:1–128. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Governance and Maldonado, A. 2013. Early medieval burial in Scotland: Civil Organisation. British Academy, London, UK. New questions. Medieval Archaeology 57:1–34. Gleeson, P. In press c. Assembly and elite culture in late Mallery, S. 2011. The Marriage Well at Teltown: Holy Antique Europe: Óenach Clochair and the Balline well ritual at royal cult sites and the rite of temporary hoard. Journal of Irish Archaeology. marriage. European Review of History 18(2):174–197. Gleeson, P. In press d. Finding the royal heartland of Dál McCormick, M. 1986. Eternal Victory: Triumphal ruler- Riata: Landscape and kingship at Dunseverick, Co. ship in late antiquity, Byzantium and the early medi- Antrim. In J. Fenwick (Ed.). Lost and Found, Vol. iii. eval West. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Wordwell, Bray, Ireland. UK. 454 pp. Gleeson, P., and T. Ó Carragáin. In press. Christianisation McGarry, T. 2010. Late pagan and early Christian burials in Leinster’s royal heartland: An interdisciplinary case in Ireland: Some issues and potential explanations. Pp. study. In T. Ó Carragáin and S. Turner (Eds.). Making 173–186, In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (Eds.). Death Christian Landscapes: Settlement, Society, and Re- gionality in Early Medieval Europe. Cork University and Burial in Early Medieval Ireland. Wordwell, Bray, Press, Cork, Ireland. Ireland. 316 pp. Gwynn, E. 1913. The Metrical Dindshenchas, Vol. 2. Newman, C. 1998. Reflections on the making of a “royal” School of Celtic Studies, Dublin, Ireland. 1578 pp. site in early Ireland. World Archaeology 30(1):127–141. Gwynn, E. 1924. The Metrical Dindshenchas, Vol. 3. Newman, C. 2007. Procession and symbolism at Tara: School of Celtic Studies, Dublin Ireland. 1578 pp. Analysis of the Tech Midchúarta in the context of Halsall, G. 2007. Barbarian migrations and the Roman the sacral campus. Oxford Journal of Archaeology West, 376–569. Cambridge University Press, Cam- 24(4):414–438. bridge, UK. 592 pp. Newman, C. 2011. The sacral landscape of Tara: A prelim- Halsall, G. 2010. Cemeteries and Society in Merovingian inary exploration. Pp. 22–43, In R. Schot, C. Newman, Gaul: Selected Studies in History and Archaeology. and E. Bhreathnach (Eds.). Landscapes of Cult and Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands. 417 pp. Kingship. Four Courts Press, Dublin, Ireland. 322 pp. 49 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson O’Brien, E. 2003. Burial practices in Ireland, first to sev- Sanmark, A. 2004. Power and Conversion: A Comparative enth centuries AD. Pp. 62–72, In J. Downes and A. Study of Christianisation in Scandinavia. Occasional Ritchie (Eds.). Seachange: Orkney and Northern Eu- Papers in Archaeology, Uppsala University Press, Up- rope in the Late Iron Age, AD 300–800.The Pinkfoot psala, Sweden. 322 pp. Press, Angus, UK. 216 pp. Sanmark, A. 2009. Administrative organisation and O’Brien, E. 2009. Pagan or Christian? Burial in Ireland state-formation: A case study of assembly sites in during the 5th to 8th centuries AD. Pp. 134–53, In N. Ed- Sodermanland in Sweden. Medieval Archaeology wards (Ed.). The Archaeology of Early Medieval Celtic 53:205–41. Churches. Maney Publishing, Leeds, UK. 424 pp. Sanmark, A., and S. Semple. 2013. Assembly in northwest O’Brien, M.A. 1962. Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae. Europe: Collective concerns for early societies. Jour- DIAS, Dublin, Ireland. 764 pp. nal of European Archaeology 16(3):518–42. Ó Carragáin, T. 2009. Cemetery settlements and local Schot, R., C. Newman, and E. Bhreathnach (Eds.). 2011. churches in pre-Viking Ireland in light of comparisons Landscapes of Cult and Kingship. Four Courts Press, with England and Wales. Pp. 239–261, In J. Graham- Dublin, Ireland. 322 pp. Campbell and M. Ryan (Eds.). Irish/Anglo-Saxon Sharpe, R. 1995. Adomnán of Iona, Life of St. Columba. Relations Before the Vikings. The British Academy, Penguin, London, UK. 406 pp. London, UK. 482 pp. Simms, K. 1987. From Kings to Warlords: The Chang- Ó Carragáin, T. 2010. From family cemeteries to commu- ing Political Structure of Gaelic Ireland in the Later nity cemeteries in Viking Age Ireland?. Pp. 217–226, Middle Ages. Boydell, Woodbridge, UK. 191 pp. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton 2010 (Eds.). Death and Skre, D. 2007. The Skiringssal thing site Pjodalyng. Pp. Burial in Early Medieval Ireland. Wordwell, Bray, 385–406, In D. Skre (Ed.). Kaupang in Skiringssal. Ireland. 316 pp. Kaupang Excavation Project Publication Series, Vol. Ó Carragáin, T. In press. Churches and social power in 1. Åarhus University Press, Århus, Denmark. 502 pp. early medieval Ireland: A case study of Fir Maige. In J. Stenberger, M. 1966. A ringfort at Raheennamadra, Escalona and M. Shapland (Eds.). Churches and Social Knocklong Co. Limerick. Proceedings of the Royal Power in Early Medieval Europe. Brepols, Turnhout, Irish Academy 65(C):37–54. Belgium. Storli, I. 2010. Court sites of Arctic Norway: The remains Ó Carragáin, T., and J. Sheehan, 2008. Making Christian of Thing sites and representations of political con- landscapes: Settlement, society, and regionality in solidation processes in the northern Germanic world early medieval Ireland. Phase 1: 2008. Unpublished during the first millennium AD. Norwegian Archaeo- report for The Heritage Council, Kilkenny, Ireland. logical Review 43(2):89–94. 623 pp. Stout, G., and M. Stout 2008. Excavation of a Secular Cem- Ó Corráin, D. 1978. Nationality and kingship in pre- etery at Knowth Site M, Co. Meath and Related Sites in Norman Ireland. Historical Studies 11:1–35. north Leinster. Wordwell, Bray, Ireland. 174 pp. Ó Corráin, D. 1986. Historical need and literary narra- Swift, C. 2000. Óenach Tailten, the Blackwater Valley and tive. Pp. 141–158, In D. Ellis Evans, J. Griffith, and the early Uí Néill kings of Tara. Pp. 109–120, In A. E.M. Jope (Eds.). Proceedings of the 7th International Smyth (Ed.). Seanchas: Studies in Early and Medieval Congress of Celtic Studies. Oxford University Press, Irish Archaeology, History, and Literature in Honour Oxford, UK. 324 pp. of Francis John Byrne. Four Courts Press, Dublin, Ó Corráin, D. 1998. Creating the past: The early Irish Ireland. 478 pp. genealogical tradition. Peritia 12:177–208. Taylor, K. 2010. An early medieval enclosure and cem- Ó Corráin, D. 2010. The Church and secular society. Pp. etery at Carrigatogher (Harding), Co. Tipperary. Pp. 261–322, In L’Irlanda e gli Irlandesi nell’alto medio- 281–294, In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (Eds.). Death evo. Presso La Sede Della Fondazione, Spoleto, Italy. and Burial in Early Medieval Ireland. Wordwell, Bray, 770 pp. Ireland. 316 pp. Ó Murchadha, D. 2002. Carmain: The site of Óenach Walsh, F. 2011. Seeking sanctuary at Kilmainham, Co. Carman—a proposed location. Éigse 33:57–70. Meath. Archaeology Ireland 25(2):9–12. Ó Riain, P., D. Ó Murchadha, and K. Murray. 2003. His- Walsh, P. 2003. Irish Leaders and Learning Through the torical Dictionary of Gaelic Placenames: A. Irish Texts Ages: Essays Collected, Edited, and Introduced by Society, Dublin, Ireland. 172 pp. Nollaig Ó Muraíle. Four Courts Press, Dublin, Ireland. O’Sullivan, A., F. McCormick, T. Kerr, and L. Harney. 636 pp. 2013. Early Medieval Ireland AD 400–1100: The Evi- Whitty, Y., and M. Tobin 2009. Rites in transition: The dence from Archaeological Excavations. Royal Irish story told by Holdenstown 1 and 2. Seanda: NRA Ar- Academy, Dublin, Ireland. 584 pp. chaeology Magazine 4:19–21. Pantos, A. 2004. The location and form of Anglo-Saxon Williams, H. 2004. Assembling the dead. Pp. 109–134, assembly-places: Some “moot” points. Pp. 155–180. In A. Pantos and S. Semple (Eds.). Assembly Places In A. Pantos and S. Semple (Eds.). Assembly Places and Practices in Medieval Europe. Four Courts Press, and Practices in Medieval Europe. Four Courts Press, Dublin, Ireland. 251 pp. Dublin, Ireland. 251 pp. Wormald, P. 1986. Celtic and Anglo-Saxon kingship: Pantos, A., and S. Semple (Eds.) 2004. Assembly Places Some further thoughts. Pp. 151–183, In P. Szarmach and Practices in Medieval Europe. Four Courts Press, (Ed.). Sources of Anglo-Saxon Culture. Michigan Uni- Dublin, Ireland. 251 pp. versity Press, Kalamazoo, MI, USA. 457 pp.

50 2015 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 8 P. Gleeson Yorke, B. 1990. Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo- Saxon England. Seaby, London, UK. 218 pp. Zumbuhl, M. 2005. The practice of Irish kingship in the central Middle Ages. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. 335 pp. Ødegaard, M. In press. Cooking-pit sites as possible as- sembly places: Lunde in Vestford southeast Norway— Regional assembly site in the Early Iron Age? In J. Carroll, A. Reynolds, and B. Yorke (Eds.). Power and Place in Later Roman and Early Medieval Europe: In- terdisciplinary Perspectives on Governance and Civil Organization. The British Academy, London, UK.

51