> Thanks for the clarification here. I was interested to read this
> because it's a 'first-hand' account of a poet practicing the skills of
> the barrister before this role passed to the legal specialists.
Incidentally, in the Introduction to Senchas Már the passing of the
right to give judgments from the poets to legal specialists is
directly linked to and justified by the events of Immacallam in dá
Thúarad. The relevant passage has been cited by me at:
IMHO, when interpreting Immacallad, we should keep in mind the
sentiment conveyed by the passage in Senchas Már, as an important
(the only one?) contemporary testimony to the story. The attitude of
the nobles of the Ulaid towards the dialogue of the two sages is a
basically negative one: they simply did not understand, what the two
were talking about. Possibly Immacallam is just that: a deliberate
attempt at obscurism to convey the impression of pure
unintelligeability, perhaps with the aim of satirising professional
poets of the highest order.