Breandán wrote:
timluascein wrote:
Seventh stanza, at the end of the second line, "ar do haoi"? Doesn't make much sense.
Since it is after
do,
h doesn't make any sense, but
n could. My guess is that it might be a mis-spelling (or older or alternative spelling) of
naí, which FGB gives as 1. Infant, babe. 2. Young, innocent girl.
It's in Dinneen as
naoidhe, so it might be quite a leap, though.
All I can think is that the writer started to write
naoidhe then pressed for space opted to shorten thw -
idhe to
-í. (An ordinary i wouldn't have had a dot on it at all.)
And then there's the problem that the writer probably doesn't think the girl is innocent.

Well, it's a theory, but I must say it doesn't seem to me terribly likely - the penman is quite careful about silent letters (e.g. spelling out 'luighe' when he clearly intends it to be pronounced 'luí') and as you say it doesn't fit the sense. A 'naoidhe' would really only be an infant or a young girl; besides, if the poet meant to refer to the woman, he would surely have used 'ar do mhnaoi', which fits the rhyme perfectly. So the 'naoidhe' in question, if there is one, must be a child. However, no child of the union has been hinted at and in fact it's strongly suggested in the final verse that the priest is getting on in years, flesh 'tormented completely by barrenness' as he puts it.
I'm afraid I don't have a more plausible alternative to offer though.
Unless - it's just possible - could it be 'aoi', with the 'h' an odd grammatical interpolation? I'm thinking of the compound preposition 'ar aoi' (usually 'arae' nowadays)... if that were in the second person it would be 'ar d'aoi'... 'ar do haoi' is a scribal leap away but not an unimaginable one.
... only it still doesn't quite make sense in context, does it? 'danger every day on account of you'? No, no, it's back to the drawing board, I'm afraid.