An Enquiry into the History of Scotland preceding the Reign of Malcolm III, or the year 1056. (A dissertation on the origin and progress of the Scythians.) ... In two volumes

Front matter

AN ENQUIRY INTO THE HISTORY OF SCOTLAND, preceding THE REIGN OF MALCOLM III. OR THE YEAR 1056. INCLUDING THE AUTHENTIC HISTORY OF THAT PERIOD. IN TWO VOLUMES. By JOHN PINKERTON. Hftigai _m/\tst7r<si p&xgrv^is o-otfsarurci. Veritas temporis filia. Adagia. A NEW EDITION, WITH CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS. VOL. II. EDINBURGH : Printed by James Ballantyne and Co. FOR BELL & BRADFUTE," WILLIAM LAING; DOIG & STIRLING; WILLIAM BLACKWOOD ; AND OLIPHANT, WAUGH & INNES. 1814. CONTENTS OF VOLUME SECOND.

PART IV.

The Dalriads. PAGE. Chap. I. Irish origins ; and progress of the Dalriads from Ireland to North Britain - - 3 II. The first colony of Old Scots in North Britain, under Riada, about the year 258, being the Dalreudini or Attacotti - - - - 6l III. The second arrival of the Ancient Scots in Britain ; and first establishment of the Dalriadic kingdom in 503 - - - - 88 IV. Extent of the kingdom of Dalriada - - 96 V. Catalogue of the Dalriadic kings - -- - 101 96 VI. Manners, language, antiquities, fye. of the Old British Scots - - - - - - 139

Appendix

TO VOL. II. Numb. I. Extracts from the Annals of Ulster - - 307 II. The Albanic Duan, with translations - - 321 III. The succession of Scotish kings, inserted in the Chronicle qf Melrose ; comprizing the Chronicon Elegiacum ----- 330 IV. Kings of Norway ----- 33s V. Kings of Denmark ----- 343 VI. Kings qf Sweden ----- 346 VII. Earls of the Orkneys - 348 VIII. Some themes for dissertations on Scotish history 350 Genealogy of kings, fronting _ _ - 352 Tables of kings - 354 DISSERTATION ON THE ORIGIN, AND PROGRESS OF THE SCYTHIANS, OR GOTHS. INDEX. 7 DF.ol

PART IV.

The Dalriads. VOL. II. A — ,- ' Dtst'byKHi Us.ur K.lm ' AN ENQUIRY INTO SCOTISH HISTORY PRECEDING THE YEAR 1056.

PART IV.

The Dalriads.

Chapter I

Irish origins ; and progress of the Dalriads from Ireland to North Britain. The remote origin of the Irish settlers in North Britain, little concerns the history of Scotland. But as much has been written on this subject, and this work might be regarded as imperfect, without some illustrations upon it, a few shall be propounded, with as much brevity as possible.

PART IV.

4 DALRIADS. Section I. Irish Origins. At this moment, when entering on a subject es sential to ancient Irish history, I feel myself as much a native of Ireland as of Britain. Far from violating the reverence due to the antiquities of that noble island, I should be happy to support and illustrate them, as far as lay in my power. But having treated the antiquities of my own country with all the free dom of an ardent enquirer after truth, I must beg leave to assert the same philosophic privilege in respect to other realms. It may be imagined that I, who confess no further knowledge of the Celtic language, than is picked up from a lew grammars and dictionaries, am but ill qualified to discuss a subject, whose evidences are wrapt up in that language. But from complete and repeated perusal of most Irish and other writers, who have treated this matter in Latin or English, certainly all the information necessary on this point may now be had.

The works of Mageogaghan, Stani hurst, Colgan, Usher, Ware, Keating, Maccurtin, Kennedy, O'Flaherty, O'Conor, &c. &c. derived from all the monuments in the Irish language, surely af ford full and sufficient materials, and as complete knowledge of the original evidence, as can be procured from that evidence itself. I hope therefore to escape any charge of rashness, while I examine this important part of Irish history, upon the testimony of Irish writers. Were I writing on the his tory of Ireland, or Wales, in a total ignorance of the Irish and Welch languages, there would be room solas much blame, as if one should attempt to paint without colours, or to build without materials. But as I am only occupied with the history of Scotland, of which there is not one monument in the Celtic tongues,' it is hoped a laborious perusal of the Irish writers in Latin or English will, in this instance, atone for my ignorance of the Celtic.

It is well known that the history of Ireland has, like that of Scotland, had a singular fate. While the history and antiquities of Scotland have been, for five centuries, a field of forgery, falsification, and perver sion of all authorities, those of Ireland have afforded a scene as deplorable, though not so detestable, of weakness and credulity. The contest between the Irish antiquaries, who were right, and the Scotish, who were wrong, became unequal, by the natural preponderance of cunning over weakness. The fables, gross beyond those of childhood or anility, and disgraceful to the very name of human reason, which stained the page of Irish history, now begin slowly to vanish. According to the present state of anti quities in Ireland, there remain only three additional fables to be thrown aside. 1.

That concerning the Fir-bolg. 2. The Tuath de Danan. 3. The Mile sians. Those abandoned to utter oblivion precede these three in antiquity ; and are, 1. The three daughters of Cain. 2. Cæsara, Noah's niece. 3. Partholanus. 4. The race of Nemedius. Let us examine the three remaining fables •; yes, at the end of the eighteenth century, let us examine fables that would disgrace the twelfth. ] . The Fir bolg. It is unnecessary to sicken the reader by any detail of these fables. The Fir-bolg, according to Irish antiquaries, came to Ireland about * The Duan in the Appendix to this volume only concerns the Dalriads, whose history is not that of Scotland any more than the history of Wales is that of England,

PART IV.

6 DALRIADS. 1500 years before Christ. The Tuath de Danan about 250 after. The Milesians about 1O0O years before our æra. Simply to enquire how the memory of these events was preserved, in an illiterate country, is a sufficient confutation of those childish fables. He who believes them is incapable of reason, or conviction. It would therefore be labour lost to confute absurdity ; for the prejudiced cannot be convinced ; and those indued with good sense would only smile. In this fable the name alone is just ; for it is now allowed that the Fir-Bolg were the Belgæ, placed by Ptolemy, the geographer, in the south of Ireland. But these Belgæ, as appears by the dissertation annexed, could not be there till about 300 years before Christ, so that the reality of the name, as preserved in Irish tradition, palliates not the fable ; which ought to be wholly set aside, especially as it precedes the Milesians, a race entirely fabulous.

It is indeed clear that those dreaming compilers, who mention the Fir-bolg and Tuath de Danan, have erred grossly in placing the Milesians after them. None of those Irish fablers are older than the Twelfth century, and have altered the real series of the fables in order to make their favourite Milesians the last, and conquerors of all the former. Nennius, who wrote in 858, and used the Irish accounts then existing, says nothing of the Fir-bolg, nor Tuath de Danan ; but only tells of the Spanish (or Milesian) colonies as the first inhabitants of Ireland.1 So also Giraldus Cambren sis, who wrote about 1 1 70. The Psalter of Cashel, which seems the very fountain of these visions, is by * Nennius knew nothing of Milesius, but only mentions Miles . quidato Hispanus, a certain Spanish soldier. Of this Miles the Irish made Milesius : as of Julius Cæsar they made Cæsara, Noah's niece ! some Irish antiquaries said to have been written by Cormac, king of Ireland, about the year 260.

Others ascribe it to a Cormac, king and bishop of Cashel, about the year 900. Mageogaghan, who details a long account of the matter, gives it to King Brian Borowe's time, about the year 1008. I have read many quotations and extracts from it, and it seems a collection of poetical romances on Irish history, compiled in the thirteenth century, at the earliest, and kept and found at Cashel, whence the name. 2. The Tuath de Danan. That a great part of the Damnii fled from North Britain into Ireland, before the Pikish pressure, has already been shewn to be highly probable. But this event could not happen above 200 years before our æra ; whereas these Tuath de Danan are placed about 1250 years before Christ. The name, as with the Fir-bolg, seems genuine, and traditional : but the Irish account of this colony of magicians, for such they are represented, is ridiculously false.

All the Irish accounts agree that the Tuath de Danan went from North Britain to Ireland ; but represent them as before that, residing in Denmark, and practising magic An ingenious Irish author, who is writing an history of Ireland, and whose judgment despises what even fancy cannot believe, is inclined to think that the Tuath de Danan were the Danes. Certain it is that Danan was, and is, the Irish for a Dane. But it is also certain that the name of Dane was unknown till the sixth century, when Jornandes and Procopius first mention it.' The Danish writers allow it not to have been the ancient name, but to have proceeded from a king called Dan, or from Doun, our down, * Jornandes wrote about 530, Procopius about 560. Gregory of Tours, who wrote about 591, mentions the Danes under the year 515, " Dani cum rege suo Chlochilaicho," as ravaging Gaul.

PART IV.

8 DALRIADS. " Low country," as Denmark is to Scandinavia. And from a complete series of writers, and geographers in particular, it is perfectly known that the name was not existent till the sixth century. Like the name of Saxons, Franks, Alamans, Slavons, it seems to have arisen at a late period, from some adventitious circumstance. That no Scandinavians nor Danes proceeded to Ireland till the end of the eighth century, shall be presently argued. Had the Tuath de Danan been Danes, how came they to be totally un mentioned in the Annals of Ulster, or more ancient writers, till the eighth century ? To them who know the nature of tradition, and of Celtic tradition in par ticular, it will not indeed be surprising that ignorant bards of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries should confound all chronology, so far as to make the Danes, who arrived in Ireland in the eighth century, settle there more than a thousand years before Christ.

In this view, but in no other, the Tuath de Danan may be the Danes. But as the Milesian fancies follow these Tuath de Danan, there is no reason to discri minate them, or the Fir-bolg, from the mass of fable, merely because the names may be real and tradition al, while that of Milesians confessedly is not. If the Irish antiquaries, as they have from the beginning daily changed their ground, will change it once more, and put the Milesians first, and the Fir-bolg and Tuath de Danan after, some plausible discussion might follow. But as the case stands, the Fir-bolg, Tuath de Danan, and Milesians, form one mass of fiction. 3. The Milesians. This fabulous progeny, according to Irish accounts, after many adventures in Eu rope, Asia, and Africa, arrived in Spain-, and from thence came to Ireland, about 1000 years before Christ.

There subduing the Tuath de Danan, they founded a great and powerful kingdom, flourishing in literature, arts, and arms, but, by a singular fate] CHAP. I. 9 ORIGINS. unknown and invisible to other nations. The kings and leading people of Ireland were all, in the disea sed imagination of later bards and antiquists, descended from the Milesian stock ; and hence of course the chief fables of Irish antiquity rest upon it. The Fir bolg, and Tuath de Danan, are regarded as foreign ers ; and the Milesians as the ancestors of the Irish nation. As this Milesian Tale is the grand object of reli gious faith, and reverent research, among the Irish antiquaries, and of derision among those of all other countries, it is hoped that a short account of it will not be unacceptable. There are two systems of this deplorable piece of absurdity : that of the Irish au thors, and that of the Scotish.

The latter, as Father Innes shews at great length, is by far the more ra tional of the two ; and is also the most pure and an cient, being in consonance with Nennius, and other early writers, while the Irish is perverted and corrupt. The Irish story is briefly this. Fenius Farsa was great grandson to Japhet, one of Noah's sons. Far sa's son Niul, came from Scythia to Greece. Niul's son Gathelus went to Egypt ; and thence to Spain, where he founded a kingdom, which there lasted for thirteen generations before Milesius. This Mile sius went to Scythia, where he served under king Refloir : thence to Egypt, where he married Scota, the daughter of Pharaoh, and carried her to Spain. Heremon, eldest son of Milesius, led the Milesians to Ireland, and founded his kingdom there about 1000 years before Christ.

From him the catalogue of Irish kings is drawn in constant succession. Hi ber, the brother of Heremon, also attended him, and had the north of Ireland. The Scotish account, as given by Fordun, Winton, Boyce, &c. runs thus : Niul, the twentieth from Japh et, went from Scythia to Greece. Gathelus, Ni-

PART IV.

10 DALRIADS. ul's son, went to Egypt, where he married Scota, the daughter of Pharaoh ; and, after the Egyptians were drowned in the Red Sea, he proceeded to Spain, and founded a kingdom. Eber, the son of Gathelus, discovered Ireland, and called it Scotia, in honour ot his mother ; and it was also called Hibernia from the discoverer. But he founded no kingdom there, re* turning immediately to Spain. Milesius, whom the blundering transcribers of Fordun call Micelius, Win ton, Milet, was the thirteenth from Gathelus, and reigned in Spain. Heremon, Partholm, and Hybert, sons of Milesius, led a colony to Ireland ; and the two last remained there, but assumed no kingly title. Heremon returned to Spain, where he succeeded his father. Winton makes no mention of any colony being led by the sons of Milesius ; but puts him barely in the list of the successors of Gathelus.

The seventeenth in a right line from Milesius was the famous Simon Brec ; who, by the Scotish tale, brought the noted stone from Spain to Ireland ; and founded the monarchy there. Winton says that Fergus, son of Ere, who brought the stone to Scotland, and founded the Scotish monarchy, was in the fiftieth and fifth degree of descendance from Simon Brec. With this illustrious founder of the Irish monarchy, according to the Scotish account, Old Sir Simon the King, the later Irish antiquaries are so angry, that, to prevent the Scotish tale from prejudicing Here mon, they have some of them hanged Simon Brec, and others have torn him in pieces, for some pretended crime, of which they cannot at this day produce any evidence. As a Scotishman, I must loudly, in the name of my country, protest against this gross injustice, of hanging a man without hearing his de fence : and wonder that Mr Goodal, or some such zealous Scotish author, has not written " A Defence of Simon Brec, alias Old Sir Simon the King, against the bloody, atrocious, and crying slaughter, committed on him after he was dead, by certain Irish antiquaries : with some reflections from the book called God's Revenge against Murder."

But to be serious if possible. The Scotish account is more coherent and plausible than the Irish, as Father Innes shews at great length. To add to the absurdity ofthe latter, Donald O'Neal, king of Ulster, in his letter to Pope John XXII. in the year 1317, informs the pontiff, that it was then about 3500 years since the three sons of Milesius settled in Spain ; that is, they were there about 2200 years before Christ's birth. But the grand and radical difference, between the Irish and Scotish account is, that the former commences the Milesian monarchy with Heremon, the eldest son of Milesius, and, as stated by O'- Flaherty, about 1000 years before Christ ; whereas the Scotish relation begins that monarchy in the person of Simon Brec, the sixteenth in degree from Heremon, and yet about 1200 years before Christ.

By the old genealogy there are fifty-eight generations, from Simon Brec, down to Fergus, son of Ere ; though Winton makes but fifty-five. Of these generations there are twenty-four from Simon to Forgo, the mock Fergus I. of Scotish dreamers : and thirty-four from Forgo to Fergus, son of Ere. Allowing 30 years, as usual, to each generation, fifty-eight generations extend to 1740 years. Twenty-four generations make 720 years from Simon to Forgo ; and thirty-four make 1020 from Forgo to Fergus, son of Ere. Fergus, son of Ere, ascended the Scotish throne about 503 years after Christ ; and of course, by the Scotish account, Simon Brec lived about 1200 years before Christ ; and Forgo about 500, instead of 330, as Fordun, Boyce, Buchanan date him, merely to make him contemporary with Alexander the Gre^t. Such are the two Milesian systems, that of the

PART IV.

12 DALRIADS. Scotish, and that of the Irish writers. Since the sixteenth century the Scotish authors have totally dropt it on their part ; or mentioned it merely as a weak fable. But the Irish writers persist in it to this hour ; and regard those who despise it as enemies of their nation, and invidious of its honour ! Deluded men ! they are themselves the worst enemies of their country ; and the real and unmerciful destroyers of its honour, of its character among all nations. For from the writers of any country, a judgment is often rashly formed concerning the knowledge and wisdom of the country at large. In the present case no error can be greater ; as, out of two millions in Ireland, not a thousand have even heard of those lamentable delusions ; and of that thousand, nine hundred utterly despise them.

True it is, that the fabling and mercenary bards and sennachies thought to get mo ney, and favour, by giving genealogies of their pa trons, carried up to Heremon and Milesius, nay to Adam, and far beyond. And the Irish antiquists, as O'Conor the translator of Keating, and others the true heirs of the delusion of the sennachies, and in fact mere modern sennachies, attempt to continue the imposture, by tracing all the chief families of Ireland up to Milesius, in order by this pitiful trick to engage them all under the banners of delusion. But these families, having solid claims of respect, do generally contemn these poor delusions ; and are content, as other noble families of Europe, to close the genealogy at the first shade of uncertainty ; for falsehood, far from adding honour, is infamous in it self, and can only bring infamy and derision.

Men of reading are, in their closets, apt to dream of opinions being national, which are in fact confined to a few visionaries. Antiquarian matters are, as I hum bly conceive, seldom national ; as there are seldom above a dozen antiquaries in a nation ; and in the British empire, where alone antiquary and visionary are synonymous, the nation only laughs at its antiquaries. On the continent indeed, where an antiquary is a sacred and most important character, that of a man of profound and solid learning, who confers honour on his country by a most laborious research into its genuine antiquities, and introducing them to the most rigorous discussion of the whole republic of letters, the highest respect is paid to antiquaries ; and their province is justly regarded, as one of the most difficult, and, of course, the most honourable in the whole circle of science.

But even there, antiquarian matters are not national : but only known to the thinking and learned few. It is therefore merely the vanity of authors that dreams of nations being inte rested in support of their opinions ; while not above one in ten thousand of the nation has ever heard any thing of the matter. With these views, though I have the most sincere respect for the Irish nation, yet I scruple not to hold to due contempt the Irish sennachies and modern antiquists, which last would be called children, and not antiquaries, on the continent : and believe that every sensible native of Ireland will see, that to expose the absurd enemies of the true honour of that country, is to do a service to its cause. For, if I am rightly informed, in Ireland, as here, and in the rest of Europe, the very name of Milesians is a jest ; and the acceptance of any part of the fable is esteemed an infallible criterion of a weak writer.

Indeed, as there is no credit due to any account of Irish kings, or their actions, preceding the christian era, the very mark A. M. or Anno Mundi in Irish affairs, is well interpreted Asinaria Maxima by foreigners, and affords perpetual laugh ter. These fables shall be dismissed with a remark or two, naturally arising from the subject. The whole

PART IV. DALRIADS.

tale ofthe Milesians, and the history of the monarchs of that mock line, preceding our era, or for a thousand years, is the most deplorable piece of delusion, that ever stained the annals of mankind. The fables of the other Grand Celtic race, the Welch, as delivered to us by Geoffrey of Monmouth, and deduced from Brutus, great grandson of Eneas, who, as they tell, came to Britain about 1 000 years before Christ, are sober and sapient, compared to the Irish fictions. In the page of Geoffrey of Monmouth may be found an Imogen, a Locrine, and Guendolen, with their daughter Sabra ; a Bladud ; a Lear, and his daughters ; a Gordobuc ; a Belinus ; a Lud ; an Arthur j all non-existences, yet well known in the regions of poetry and romance. But the whole Irish historic fictions are not only beneath contempt, as history ; but beneath contempt, as fictions.

Zealous as I am for what little truth can be found in history, were I a native of Ireland, and could evidence the veracity of these tales to all Europe by irrefragable proofs, I would give my vote for their being left in utter oblivion, lest they should dishonour my country. Boyce, Buchanan, and the other Scotish forgers, made their fictions lessons to monarchs ; and it is to their falsehoods that we owe the death of Charles I. and abdication of James II.' The tales of the Welch and Scotish forgers had an influence on the whole history of Europe : those of the Irish never had nor can have any effect, being wholly contemptible even to imagi nation. Bishop Nicolson, in his Irish Historical Li brary, has most facetiously attempted to bring the Irish lables into a similar point of view with the Is- * See Nicolson's Scotish Hist.

Lib. p. 41. Sir James Turner, a colonel of Charles I. declared that Buchanan's books had alone rai sed the nation against the king. They were universally read : and the English argued that if the Scots had power over their kings, they had the same. landic. On the very plan he has followed, a comparison might also be drawn of the Hottentot traditions with the Gothic : and he seems totally to have forgot that the power of the human mind is no where better distinguished than in fiction, its own creation. The Gothic tales are often ingenious, always vigorous, sometimes sublime. Even the wildest of them has always strong marks of NOTE, of thought, of sense. The mythology, and well-known unconquerable character ofthe people, live, and breathe in them all. The Irish legends are in all points the reverse.

The Milesian fable is connected with Pharaoh ; and bears other palpable marks of being invented long after Christianity was established in Ireland. Odin was the god of war ; and can be traced in most writers of the middle ages, long before the Icelandic monuments were written. Snorro, who wrote in the thirteenth century, places the arrival of Odin in Scandinavia, about seventy years before Christ.1 Donald O'Neal, in the fourteenth, placed the arrival of the sons of Milesius, who were never heard of before, about 2200 years before Christ ! Beda, who wrote in 731, mentions Odin ; but, though intimate with many of the most learned men of Ireland, had never heard a syllable of the Milesian tales, but puts Ireland as the patria, or first habitation of the Scots. Let any one read the northern sagas, and he will find manly judgment, and fine imagination, while the Irish tales are quite destitute of these qualities.

The Scandinavians we know had letters, and yet their antiquaries build not on this : the Irish we know had none, till converted by Patrick, and yet their writers are forced, as one absurdity includes another, to build their fairy mansion upon the use of » Edda, apud Tors. Ser. Reg. Dan. Mallet has adopted this pue rile opinion. It is doubtful if Snorro wrote that preface, for in his history he dates Odin under the Roman emperors. TART IV. DALRIADS. letters, among a people marked by the Greek and Roman writers as utterly savage. Bishop Nicolson's parallel only shews the infallibility of the axiom, that fancy will find resemblances any where; while to discriminate is the peculiar province of judgment. Others have said that there are fables in early Greek and Roman history, and why not allow the Irish to pass as such ?

With all my heart ; but observe at the same time that the Greek and Roman fables vary a little from the Irish ; the former being produced by great and able writers, and deservedly admired for many centuries ; the latter the weak effusions of silly sennachies, and only fit for the flames. The argument is modest ; but there is, as is generally be lieved, a difference in fable ; some slight shade of dissonance between the history of Tom Jones, and that of Tom Thumb. There are also degrees in nonsense ; some nonsense is risible ; other nonsense, as the old Irish history, is merely of the soporific de scription. As history or as fiction, it is equally abr surd. Allegory is the last apology for nonsense j" but even John Bunyan could not allegorize Milesian history. Late Irish wTriters say, that Fenius Farsa was a name for the Phœnicians ; Simon Brec for Sampson, who broke the heads of the Philistines, &c. There is one infamy yet greater than telling a falsehood, and that is, to make an apology for that falsehood.

The more plausible the apology is, it is the more scandalous. So much the better, so much the worse. For to impose on society is one crime ; 1 Late writers have attempted to compare Irish names and his tory with those of Egypt, Armenia, Otaheite, &c. ; but, not to speak of their gross misquotations and misrepresentations, the same fancy might find resemblance in any objects whatever. In the mental, as in the natural night, all objects are confounded. To shew the Chinese history the same with the Dutch, in names and events, would only require one quality in any writer, a disordered imagina tion. but to colour that imposition afresh, and dress falsehood in the holy robes of truth, is a far greater crime. No modification, nor apology of any kind, can be ac cepted. The point is utterly to give up these ab surd fables ; and till this be done, the Irish antiquaries will have them all to themselves, without one ri val.

For how can the literati of Europe converse with those who give evident signs 'of delusion, of a delusion unknown to any other nation ? Before proceeding to consider the real and genuine origins of Irish history, it becomes necessary to no tice the claim, which some Irish antiquaries pretend their country has to the use of letters before Chris tianity was planted there. Keating tells that Fenius Farsa, great grandson of Japhet, and ancestor ofthe Milesians, set up a school of learning in the plains of Senaar, about one hundred and fifty years after the deluge ; and invented Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Irish characters. These earliest Irish characters were the YBetliAuis-nion and Ogum, according to To land, who gravely relates this puerile fiction as mat ter of fact. Charles the Second said of Isaac Vos sius, that he believed every thing but the scripture ; and this character is justly applicable to Toland, whose incredulity must have been the fruit of vain glory, and not of strength of mind.

For there is no thing in scripture so absurd as this : and he who be lieved this should have boggled at nothing. The mind of Toland must, like that of Isaac Vossius, have been very ill poised, and instead of calling such men philosophers, it can only be said that they were visionaries, who believed, or disbelieved, as the whim led them. For sound reason knows no prejudices, but weighs every thing in the same scales. The Irish history also bears, that King Tigermna, and after him Eocha Ollam-fodla, about 800 years before Christ, gave great encouragement to learning, ordered an- VOL. II. B