therefore, safe to conclude that there was a supreme monarch in
Britain and in Gaul as well as in Ireland; and since the Britons,
after having lost for several centuries their autonomy of government,
thought of reestablishing this supreme authority as soon as they
were free to do so, it is clear that they attached a real
importance to it, and that it entered as an essential element
into the social fabric.

But what in reality was the authority of the Ard-Righ in Ireland,
of the Penteyrn in Britain, of the supreme chief in Gaul, whose
name, as usual, is not mentioned by Caesar?

First, it is to be remarked that a certain extent of territory was
always under his immediate authority. Then, as far as we can gather
from history, there was a reciprocity of obligations between the
high power and the subordinate kings or chieftains, the former
granting subsidies to the latter, who in turn paid tribute to
support the munificence or military power of the former.

We know from the Irish annals that the dignity of Ard-Righ was
always sustained by alliances with some of the provincial kings,
to secure the submission of others, and we have a hint of the
same nature in the passage, already quoted, from Caesar, as also
taking place in Gaul.

We know also from the "Book of Rights" that the tributes and stipends
consisted of bondsmen, silver shields, embroidered cloaks, cattle,
weapons, corn, victuals, or any other contribution.

The Ard-Righ, moreover, convened the _Feis_, or general assembly