Neil McLeod wrote:
> David Stifter wrote:
>>>>> Do-gní in liaig a leges & osclaicid na crêchta & do-bertar baicc
>>>>> taris et dergthair coltur iar sain i tenid et do-be[i]r in liaig
>>>>> ammus de for broind ind f*ir. Co tânic in días êorna & in duirb mét
>>>>> lochad & in gaî & cech a mbaí and archena.
>>> Absolutely. The 'stagecraft' is is emphasised somewhat by the word
>>> 'ammus', which means not just an 'attack', but an 'attempted attack'
>>> (one not necessarily succeeding); so in this case a 'feigned attack'.
>>> (Cf the translation at DIL A 309.54).
> Because he has already cut the skin open (osclaicid na crêchta), and
> applied the hooks, before he heats the coulter. And he makes an attack
> on Tadg's stomach, rather than specifically on one of the wounds.
And with this in mind, I don't think 'baicc' here can't be 'hooks'
really. Fingin does not lean forward to carefully extract the objects
with the coulter. He makes an 'ammus'.
Now, even a badly-ill Tadc could probably dispatch Fingin if he was
under attack. And that is why Fingin first immobilises Tadc with
'baicc'. I think that these must be 'restraints'. Note that the 'baicc'
are applied 'taris' (over him - Tadc) not 'tairsiu' (over them - the