THE UNIVERSITY 
 OF ILLINOIS 
 LIBRARY 
 
 From the collection of 
 James Collins, 
 Drumcondra, Ireland. 
 Purchased, I9.i8. 
 
 94 !• 5 
 K5SI 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY 
 AT UR3ANA-CHAMPAIGM 
 STACKS 
 
LECTURES, 
 
 &c. &c. 
 
ff 
 
 I 
 
 ^2 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 • £ 
 
 * a- 
 
 3 ' 
 
 O ."3 
 
 ? a 
 
 « s 
 
 JT 8 
 
 J ® 
 
 *5 4r 
 
LECTURES 
 
 ON THE 
 
 HISTORY OF IRELAND. 
 
 DOWN TO A. I). 1534. 
 
 BY 
 
 A. G. RICHEY, ESQ, 
 
 !•« 
 
 DUBLIN: 
 
 E. PONSONBY, 116 , GRAFTON-STREET. 
 LONDON: SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO., PATERNOSTER-ROW. 
 1869. 
 
DUBLIN: 
 
 ^rintetf at tf)e ®nlbersttp ^3ress, 
 
 BY M. H. GILL. 
 
1 ©cV 2S LdOidlaw 
 
 q^H.5 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 These Lectures, delivered to the Pupils of the 
 Alexandra College during the Hilary and Easter 
 Terms of 1869, were not originally intended for 
 publication. 
 
 Their object was to popularize the study of Irish 
 history, to free it, in some degree, from the tedious- 
 ness and monotony of which it is accused, and by 
 treating it in distinct periods, concisely to state 
 the results of the prevailing political and social 
 ideas. 
 
 > / / 
 
 8 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2016 
 
 
 https://archive.org/details/lecturesonhistorOOrich 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 LECTURE I. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 The Celts and the Tribal System, 3 
 
 LECTURE II. 
 
 The Early Christian Church of Ireland, 25 
 
 LECTURE III. 
 
 The Danish Invasions and King Brian, 50 
 
 LECTURE IV. 
 
 The Invasion of Ireland by the Normans, 80 
 
 LECTURE Y. 
 
 The Conquest of Ireland by the Normans, 100 
 
 LECTURE VI. 
 
 The Government and Policy of England in Ireland from 1172 
 to 1315, 130 
 
 LECTURE VII. 
 
 The Invasion of Bruce, and the Statute of Kilkenny, .... 159 
 
 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 The English Government and Policy in Ireland from a. r>. 1366 
 to A. d. 1534, 
 
 194 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 LECTURE I. 
 
 THE CELTS AND THE TRIBAL SYSTEM. 
 
 In every system of national education on the Continent 
 the history of their native country is considered a neces- 
 sary subject of instruction for the young. In France a 
 French history for the use of schools .has been compiled, 
 and is regularly written up under government direction. 
 The case is otherwise in Ireland. The young of this country 
 are left in absolute ignorance of the history of their fore- 
 fathers. There do not even exist books suitable for in- 
 struction in this department. The indifference of the 
 middle classes upon this subject is so great, that no author 
 with a reasonable prospect of success attempts to publish 
 an Irish history. Two reasons are alleged for this ano- 
 maly. We are told that a knowledge of Irish history is 
 dangerous ; and further, that the history itself is useless and 
 uninteresting . I maintain, on the contrary, that a know- 
 ledge of the truth is never dangerous, though ignorance may 
 be so ; and still more so is that half knowledge of history 
 w 7 hich enables political intriguers to influence the passions 
 of their dupes, by misleading them with garbled accounts 
 of the past, so inaccurate that they would be rejected with 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 LECTUJ8.ES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 contempt by their readers, if they knew anything of the 
 matter at all. I do not confine these observations to the 
 writers of any creed or politics. 
 
 I deny that the history of Ireland is either dangerous 
 to learn, or uninteresting, or unprofitable to study ; so 
 far from exasperating the feelings of those who have ho- 
 nestly engaged in it, the study of Irish history does not 
 excite political animosity, but leads to the very opposite 
 result. Thoroughly to appreciate the history of this or 
 . any country, it is necessary to sympathize with all par- 
 ties — to understand their prejudices, their difficulties, and 
 their errors. Those who take an interest in the subject 
 must feel a warm sympathy for the tragic decay and 
 ruin of the noble Celtic nation, but will feel an equal 
 sympathy for the gallant Norman gentlemen, who, turn- 
 ing their backs upon France and Italy, were wafted by 
 an ill wind to this country, and thus involved in a net 
 of difficulties common to themselves and the conquered. 
 To understand the wars of Elizabeth, we must appreciate 
 the difficulties and high aims of the Tudor statesmen, while 
 we mourn over the despairing struggles of the last Irish 
 prince. We must understand the perplexity of the Catholic 
 noblemen of the Council of Kilkenny, and the loyal Pro- 
 testantism of the Duke of Ormonde. We all must respect 
 those stern men who maintained their religion and the 
 English connexion behind the walls of Derry, but we 
 should at the same time sympathize with the faith and 
 loyalty of the high-born gentlemen who abandoned home 
 and wealth for their Church and their King. A study of 
 Irish history teaches us sympathy for all Irish parties. 
 
 We are further told that Irish history is useless and un- 
 interesting : this, again, I deny. Placed far away in the 
 Western Ocean, Ireland was not the scene of any of the 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 3 
 
 struggles which decided the destiny of Europe ; Ireland 
 has not produced historians of genius, whose chronicles 
 take a place in universal literature. The great battles of 
 history have not been fought, nor the great battles of poli- 
 tics decided on Irish soil ; but in Ireland almost every 
 system, social and political, has been successively tried, and 
 found wanting. The characteristics of political systems are 
 often better tested by failure than by success. The glory 
 of temporary success hides the weakness of a form of go- 
 vernment, but the history of its decay discloses the radical 
 errors. As has been observed, in Ireland every system, 
 social and political, during the Middle Ages met with equal 
 failure. The tribal system was crushed before it was deve- 
 loped into the results which arose in other countries ; it 
 ended in barbarism and confusion. The feudal system was 
 introduced in its strictest theory, and ended in utter anarchy. 
 The high aims and lofty ideas springing from the notion of 
 Divine right, and combining force and justice, which were 
 maintained by the Tudors, were tried in Ireland, and ter- 
 minated in tyranny and disorder. The history of these 
 failures cannot but be instructive. Irish history resembles 
 that of Spain during the last three centuries, described by a 
 modern writer as the elaboration of all those ideas of law 
 and political economy, according to which a nation should 
 not be governed. In the present series of Lectures it is not 
 attempted to detail the facts of Irish history, but rather to 
 indicate the several standpoints from which it should be 
 regarded, and the spirit in which it should be investigated. 
 Irish history may be divided into the following periods : — 
 First — The mythical or traditional, extending from remote 
 antiquity down to the introduction of Christianity into the 
 country. Secondly — The Christian Celtic, from the ar- 
 rival of St. Patrick until the Norman invasion of Ireland. 
 b 2 
 
4 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Thirdly — The Norman invasion and colonization during 
 its period of vigour and apparent success, from 1170 to 
 1315. Fourthly — The history of the Norman colony 
 
 during the period of its failure and weakness, from 1315 to 
 1534. Fifthly — The Tudor government of Ireland, from 
 1534 to 1603. Sixthly — The Stuart government in Ire- 
 
 land, including the period of Cromwell, from 1603 to 1690 ; 
 and, lastly, the period of Protestant ascendancy, ending 
 with the Union. The present Lectures are intended to deal 
 with the first three periods, and partially with the fourth. 
 It is not, perhaps, advisable at present to include in them 4 
 the latter and more exciting portion of Irish history. 
 
 In considering the history of a country, our attention must 
 first he drawn to the geographical position and divisions of 
 the country, its natural products, and their effect upon its 
 inhabitants ; secondly — The race and natural qualities of 
 that subdivision of the human species who occupied it. 
 
 The former of these heads may be conveniently postponed 
 until a subsequent lecture, treating of the Norman Con- 
 quest. As to the former, whatever may be the nature 
 of the early immigrations into Ireland, during the historical 
 period the inhabitants of the island appear as a pure Celtic 
 race. There is no such difference of language or structure 
 among them as would authorize us in attributing any por- 
 tion of them to a separate origin. Who were the Celts? 
 and what their peculiar characteristics ? 
 
 It is difficult fairly to answer this question. The Celts 
 are generally considered as one of the beaten nations of 
 the world, as the great historical failure. It may be 
 doubted whether the past history justifies this opinion — 
 still more, whether future history will confirm it. 
 
 As the necessary consequence of the prevalence of this 
 idea, German and English historians have studiously de- 
 
LECTURES ON IEISH HISTORY. 
 
 5 
 
 predated the Celts; and, in opposition to them, Irish 
 writers have as extravagantly praised them. When we 
 first hear of the Celts, they appear as a great and con- 
 quering nation. Thronging the valley of the Danube, 
 they thence flooded Gaul, and broke into Greece and 
 Italy ; from Gaul they spread northward, and occupied 
 the British Islands. Tor ages they were a terror to the 
 Greek, and equally so to the Boman. They were the 
 great recruiting ground from whence the Carthaginians and 
 other nations hired their mercenaries; but suddenly the 
 whole Celtic nationality was crushed. They were hard 
 pressed by the Germans on the east, when Cassar assailed 
 them on the south : a few short years saw-Gaul conquered 
 and civilized, according to Boman ideas. The fate of the 
 Celts in England was similar to that of those in Gaul. 
 The only independent remnant of the nation were the 
 Irish Celts and those who still held out in the north of 
 Scotland. 
 
 Was it the peculiar character of this nation which led 
 to this catastrophe ? Two characters have been drawn of 
 the Celtic people — the one most hostile, by Mommsen, 
 their depreciator ; the other friendly, by Monsieur Thierry, 
 the historian of the Gaulic Celts. 
 
 The following passage occurs in the seventh chapter of 
 the fifth book of Mommsen’s “History of Borne — “All 
 was over with the Celtic nation ; its political annihilation 
 had been completed by Caesar ; its national annihilation 
 was already begun, and in regular progress. This was 
 no accidental destruction, such as destiny sometimes pre- 
 pares even for people capable of development, but a self- 
 incurred, and in some measure, historically necessary 
 catastrophe. The very course of the war proves this, 
 whether we view it as a whole or in detail. When the 
 
6 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 establishment of foreign rule was in contemplation, only 
 single districts, mostly German or half- German, offered 
 energetic resistance. When the foreign rule was abso- 
 lutely established the attempts to shake it off were either 
 undertaken altogether without judgment, or they were to 
 an undue extent the work of prominent nobles, and were 
 therefore immediately and entirely brought to an end with 
 the death or capture of their leader. The sieges and gue- 
 rilla warfare, in which, elsewere, the whole moral depth of 
 a nation’s struggle displays itself, were and remained in 
 the Celtic struggle of a peculiarly pitiful character ; every 
 page of Celtic history confirms the severe saying of one of 
 the few Eomans who had the judgment not to despise the 
 so-called barbarians, 6 that the Celts boldly challenge dan- 
 ger while future, but lose their courage before its presence. 
 
 “ In the mighty vortex of the world’s history, which 
 inexorably crushes all nations that are not as hard and 
 flexible as steel; such a nation could not permanently 
 maintain itself. With reason, the Celts of the Continent 
 suffered the same fate at the hands of the Eomans as their 
 kinsmen in Ireland suffer down to our own day at the 
 hands of the Saxon — the fate of becoming merged as a 
 leaven of future development in a politically superior na- 
 tionality. On the eve of parting from this remarkable 
 nation, we may be allowed to call attention to the fact, that 
 in the accounts of the ancients as to the Celts on the Loire 
 and Seine we find almost every one of the characteristic 
 traits which we are accustomed to recognise as marking 
 the Irish. Every feature reappears ; the laziness in the 
 culture of the fields, the ostentation, the droll humour, the 
 hearty delight in singing and reciting the deeds of past 
 ages; the most decided talent for rhetoric and poetry; the 
 curiosity — no trader was allowed to pass until he had 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 old in open street what he knew or what he did not 
 know; the extravagant credulity which acted on such 
 accounts, the childlike piety which sees in the priest a 
 father, and asks him for advice in all things ; the unsur- 
 passed fervour of national feeling, and the closeness with 
 which those who are fellow-countrymen cling together, 
 almost like one family, in “opposition to a stranger; the 
 inclination to rise in revolt under the first chance leader 
 that presents himself, and to form bands, hut at the same 
 time the incapacity to preserve the self-reliant courage, 
 equally remote from presumption and from pusillanimity to 
 perceive the right time for waiting and for striking ; to 
 attain, or even to tolerate any organization, any sort of 
 fixed military or political discipline. It is, and remains at 
 all times and all places, the same indolent and poeti- 
 cal, irresolute and fervid, inquisitive, credulous, amiable, 
 clever, hut in a political point of view, thoroughly useless 
 nation ; and therefore, its fate has been always and every- 
 where the same.” 
 
 Contrast with this the character of the same nation, as 
 drawn in the introduction to the first volume of the “His- 
 tory of the Gauls”: — “The characteristics of the Gaulic 
 family, those which distinguish it the most, in my opinion, 
 from other human families, may be summed up as follow : 
 Personal bravery unequalled amongst ancient nations, a spirit 
 free, impetuous, open to all impressions, remarkably intel- 
 ligent ; but, side by side with this, an extreme suscepti- 
 bility, want of perseverance, marked dislike to the idea of 
 discipline and order (so strong among the German nations), 
 extreme ostentation, and, in fine, perpetual dissension, the 
 fruit of excessive vanity. If we desire to compare, in a 
 few words, the Gaulic nation with the Germans of whom 
 we have been just speaking, we might say that among the 
 
8 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 former the personal sentiment, the idea of self, is too much 
 developed, and among the latter it is too little so. Thus 
 in every page of the history of the Gauls we find origi- 
 nal characters which vividly excite and concentrate upon 
 themselves our sympathies, while they cause us to forget 
 the existence of the masses of the nation. It is otherwise 
 in the history of the Germans,* where it is from the masses 
 generally that great national movements originate. ,, 
 
 Two characters of the Celtic race are thus laid before us 
 — the one hostile, the other friendly. If I were addressing 
 an English audience, I should not, perhaps, have read in 
 full the passages from Mommsen; but, speaking to an Irish 
 audience, it is better to present to them the uncomplimen- 
 tary remarks of a German historian. 
 
 The unfriendly criticisms of a neighbour, equally intel- 
 ligent, and fully as prejudiced as ourselves, are useful in 
 teaching us the weak points of our character : it is well 
 to know what our neighbours think of us. Yet it may be 
 fairly contended that the failure of the Celtic race is not 
 so much attributable to the inferiority of their organization 
 to other races, as to the fact of their possessing, to a certain 
 degree, a higher organization. The key to the latter 
 character may be found in their peculiar susceptibility. 
 As contrasted with the Teuton, the Celt possesses a peculiar 
 susceptibility of emotion, and a peculiar rapidity of percep- 
 tion, so much that it may be almost said that an idea has 
 passed away from the mind of a Celt before a Saxon begins 
 to understand it at all. But this has an unfortunate result 
 in practice, because it too often amounts to an incapacity 
 of holding an idea for a long period. One thought rapidly 
 conceived is as rapidly effaced by another, which produces 
 an equally vivid and transient impression. The Celt con- 
 ceives ideas rabidly and clearly, but forgets them as easily. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 9 
 
 He is brilliant, but not persevering; his thoughts are vivid, 
 but not enduring. This is marked in the whole history of 
 the Gallic race, and particularly in the want of tenacity 
 exhibited by them in their struggles with Home, and in 
 modern history by the half- Celtic Trench in many of their 
 wars. The broadswords of the Gallic hosts, with one 
 rush, swept the Roman legions from the battle-field of the 
 Allia; but their army sickened in the blockade of the 
 Capitol, and, for a paltry ransom, spared their future de- 
 stroyer. The fate of Gaul was decided by the siege of 
 Alesia, and their independence perished in one short 
 struggle. The character of their national resistance was 
 embodied in their last hero. Upon this point may I again 
 cite Mommsen. “ As Hannibal stands at the close of the 
 Phoenician history, so does Yercingetorix at the close of the 
 Celtic ; they were not able to save the nations to which 
 they belonged from a foreign yoke, but they spared them 
 the last disgrace of an inglorious fall. The whole ancient 
 world presents no more genuine knight, whether as regards 
 his essential character or his outward appearance, but man 
 ought not to be a mere knight, and least of all the statesman. 
 It was the knight, not the hero, who disdained to escape 
 from Alesia. It was the knight, not the hero, who gave 
 himself up as a sacrifice. It is impossible to part from 
 the noble King of the Averni without a feeling of historical 
 and human sympathy ; but it is characteristic of the Celtic 
 nation that its greatest man was, after all, merely a 
 knight.” 
 
 At the end of the fifteenth century, the Trench swept 
 all resistance before them in Italy. The Italians dreaded 
 the astonishing furia Francesca ; but after a few months 
 every Trench conquest collapsed, from the want of steady 
 perseverance. 
 
10 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 The same characteristics appear in Celtic art and litera- 
 ture. Irish poetry consists of exquisite lyric outbursts ; 
 but, alone of all nations of Europe, the Celts do not possess 
 an epic poem which takes an acknowledged place in uni- 
 versal literature. 
 
 As to Celtic music, the separate airs handed down from 
 remote antiquity are unequalled in variety, tenderness, 
 and expression ; but Irish music has never risen beyond an 
 air; operas, oratorios, and concerted pieces have been 
 produced by people of inferior sympathies, but greater 
 industry. 
 
 In Irish architecture, the most exquisite and elaborate 
 carvings are lavished upon buildings of insignificant size. 
 Cormac’s Chapel on the Eock of Cashel, the largest of 
 ancient Irish buildings, excels, certainly rivals, any Erench 
 or English-Horman work, but its size is that of an ordinary 
 church. It was for a patient, hopeful, long-enduring 
 people to raise the cathedrals of the Middle Ages, the foun- 
 dations of which were laid by those who knew that their 
 grandchildren would never see their completion. The toil 
 of now nigh six centuries expended on Cologne Cathedral 
 testifies the faith and perseverance of the German people. 
 The fierce impulse of Celtic art expended itself in the 
 carving of a doorway, or the illumination of a manuscript. 
 
 The chief political historical characteristic of Celtic na- 
 tions is a want of perseverance in exertion to attain a given 
 end, and inability permanently to unite for any definite ob- 
 ject ; but want of active perseverance must be distinguished 
 from what we may call the passive resistance in old ideas. 
 Though the Celts do not exert a continued effort to accom- 
 plish a given object, yet they will cherish a fixed desire to 
 attain that which they have failed to accomplish. Ancient 
 traditions and national longings form the staple of their 
 
LECTURES OX IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 11 
 
 political ideas to such an extent, that they do not appreciate 
 existing circumstances, and fail to adapt themselves to an 
 altered state of things. 
 
 What are our sources of knowledge as to the early history 
 of this Celtic people ? I have styled the first period of their 
 history mythical, and have done so advisedly. What is a 
 myth ? It is a relation of supposed facts of uncertain date, 
 and unaccredited by the name of any author — which is 
 handed down from generation to generation, and claims to 
 be believed merely because it has been believed. Modem 
 criticism refuses to credit histories of kings, invasions, and 
 battles, where it is impossible to discover how the narrator 
 of them could know anything upon the subject. It may 
 be said that he learned it by tradition. A few examples 
 will show how tradition fails to retain the record even of 
 recent events. Bede wrote his Ecclesiastical History 285 
 years after the coming over of the Saxons. He practically 
 knows nothing of the Saxon invasion, nor of English his- 
 tory down to the arrival of Augustine. In the Irish Gildas 
 we have minute accounts of imaginary personages, but an 
 astounding ignorance of the history of the Romans in Britain. 
 In the Irish history of Iar Connaught we have detailed 
 accounts of the Celtic first settlement in Ireland, with an 
 absence of an accurate knowledge of the conquest of that 
 province by the De Burghos. It is wonderful, not how 
 much tradition preserves, but how little it retains. It 
 may be replied, however, that we have ancient Celtic 
 documents containing the history of the ancient kings, 
 worthy to be believed. But the value of a document 
 depends upon the means of information possessed by the 
 writer. An author in the twelfth century does not primd 
 facie know more than an author of the nineteenth century 
 of events that occurred before the Christian Era. The fact 
 
12 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 that a work has an historical character rests upon the satis- 
 factory proof that the author was either himself a witness 
 of the events he narrates, or possessed contemporaneous 
 evidence, verbal or written. It may he again objected — 
 even if these so-called histories are reduced to the level of 
 ancient tales and poems — must we not assume as true the 
 events detailed in them, and which have been believed 
 by generation after generation to be true, until they are 
 proved to be untrue ? Such, indeed, was the theory of 
 history until later years. The history of Greece used to 
 commence with the Trojan war : the sullen vengeance of 
 Achilles, the death of Hector, and the fall of Troy, were 
 taught as events whichhad actually occurred. How, without 
 additional evidence upon the subject, the tale of Troy is sum- 
 marily rejected from history altogether, and why? Although 
 we have no additional evidence upon the matter, the Iliad 
 is repudiated as an historical document, because in the 
 case of other poems equally minute and vraisemblable , and 
 fully believed in by generation after generation, we find 
 there exists either none or but the smallest element of 
 actual fact. The Lay of Roland was believed in during 
 the Middle Ages as historical — the invasion of Spain by 
 Charles the Great — the passage of the Pyrenees — the 
 treachery of Ganelon — the death of Roland — were all 
 supposed to be facts. Possessing contemporary historical 
 evidence, we are able to test the truth of this recital. 
 Roland and his followers, Ganelon and his treason, are 
 relegated to the realms of fancy; and, although Charles 
 remains an historical character, his description in the poem 
 is worse than an invention — it is a misrepresentation. 
 
 The great German epic of the Niebelungenleid stands 
 precisely in the same position. The murder of Siegfried, 
 the revenge of Chriemhilde, the glorious character of Hagen, 
 
LECTTJBES ON IEISH HISTOEY. 
 
 13 
 
 the massacre at the palace of Etzel appear more vivid to us 
 than many historical facts. But we know that no Burgun- 
 dian princes ever travelled on such an errand ; that the tale 
 of Siegfried and Brunhild was recited in Scandinavia pro- 
 bably before the time of Attila ; and, in fact, that whole 
 poem does not contain an element of history. 
 
 But it may be asked, Are such works historically 
 useless? No, most useful; but for purposes different 
 from those to which they are ordinarily applied. They 
 are useful, not as evidence of facts which occurred at a 
 date long prior to the writer, but as evidence of the 
 habits, civilization, and ideas which existed at the time 
 of the writer. They exhibit, not the events which they 
 detail, so much as the mode in which such events might 
 be supposed by the author to occur at his own time. It 
 is waste of time to detail the events related in such 
 poems or stories ; but it is most useful to exhibit the 
 ideas which they assume. Early Irish history must be 
 treated in this manner. It is waste of time to cite from 
 manuscripts of the tenth century events supposed to have 
 occurred 1000 years before ; but it is most useful to publish 
 the literal and exact translations — not paraphrases, in which 
 ancient barbarous chiefs are toned down to knights and 
 gentlemen, and the women of half-savage tribes refined 
 into modern ladies. If we are to have them at all, let us 
 have them in their baldness and coarseness, but let us 
 utterly repudiate the spurious and adulterated article 
 served up to us in most Irish histories. 
 
 Another source of information on which Irish his- 
 torians have much relied are genealogies, but to these 
 too little credit cannot be given. Let us test this by 
 genealogies which were treated for centuries as histo- 
 rical. We have the genealogy of the kings of Sparta. At 
 
14 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 one end are the historical kings, whose existence is as 
 certain as that of the Plantagenet monarchs, at the other 
 end are Heracles and Zeus. Again, in the genealogy 
 of the Saxon kings, Edward the Confessor is the last, 
 and Odin the first in the chain. One end of the chain 
 of the genealogy is historical, the other fabulous. Where 
 can we draw the line which divides the mythical from the 
 real personages ? To make any use of a genealogy, we must 
 possess contemporary historical information. The genealogy 
 may indicate ethnic relations, clear up a question of de- 
 scent, or fix the date of a birth or death of an historical 
 character; but as an original source of information it is 
 useless. 
 
 The early history of Ireland, composed of legends 
 strung upon imaginary genealogies, dissolves into nothing, 
 on the first touch of criticism. 
 
 But, besides poems, legends, and genealogies, there 
 remains another source of information of great and, until 
 lately, unappreciated value, viz., the ancient laws and 
 customs of the people. These, though often unpalatable to 
 the ordinary reader, when analyzed and compared, afford 
 the clearest insight into the life and condition of ancient 
 society. 
 
 The mere fact that a certain king, at a certain date, 
 slew another king, and reigned in his stead, can scarcely be 
 considered useful knowledge. History deserves to be 
 studied only as far as it exhibits human nature, and affords 
 us the means of ascertaining the law of human progress. 
 “ In the series of human events we attribute, in general, 
 too much importance to such of them as can, in some sort, 
 be seen and felt — the capture of cities, battles, negociations 
 accomplished on a wide stage, the career of some great 
 man. These are events of which the influence is imme- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 15 
 
 diate, brilliant, and capable of being perceived and stated ; 
 but there are other influences, of perhaps a superior order, 
 secret, slow in their development, and which properly con- 
 stitute the philosophy of history. I can mention such a 
 principle, imbedded in a code as yet ill understood, which 
 will end by producing greater changes among men than 
 the ravages of Attila, or the brilliant conquests of Alex- 
 ander. The four lines which, in the Code Napoleon, 
 abolish primogeniture, will affect more profoundly the 
 fortunes of the Trench people than all the victories of the 
 Empire.”* 
 
 Irish history is fortunate in this particular. We still 
 possess a code of Celtic laws, probably the oldest in 
 Europe — so old that, in an unknown antiquity, the 
 language became obsolete, and two successive commen- 
 taries remain, written themselves in two successive anti- 
 quated dialects. I, of course, refer to the Brehon Laws, 
 now in course of publication by the Government. These 
 laws, and the ancient poems and tales of Ireland, enable us 
 to realize the society in its pre-historic state. 
 
 It is well known that Irish society was formed upon the 
 tribal system. The tribal system is the first shape into which 
 human society is moulded. It arises from the condition and 
 necessities of the earliest immigrants or wanderers. Most 
 nations may be traced back to this primitive form, and it still 
 subsists over a large portion of the world. This is the sys- 
 tem which English lawyers imagined to be exceptional — of 
 which an English Act of Parliament declares that the laws 
 which the Irish use are hateful in the sight of God. The 
 English were ignorant that their Saxon ancestors lived 
 after such a fashion ; and it was in the last few years that 
 
 Louis Blanc, “Ilist de la Bev.,” tom. i. p. 1 7 1 . 
 
16 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 an English Chief J nstice in Calcutta failed to realize that 
 the Indian Land Law was different from the principles of 
 Common Law. 
 
 So essentially similar are the ideas of all nations in 
 this early state of society, that the difficulties in un- 
 derstanding the Irish tribal system are often cleared up 
 by an examination of the Tillage Laws of India, or the 
 village communities of Russia. The tribe system is a 
 development of the family. The first wanderer from the 
 original seat of his people strays forth into foreign lands at 
 the head of his family; the father is at once the priest, the 
 judge, and the king. He rules his children, as the ablest 
 and wisest ; round the original family gather their slaves 
 and dependants. All the members of the original family 
 and their followers form a single political unit. Ho indi- 
 vidual has an existence, except as a member of this body. 
 Their flocks and herds form a common property. They 
 possess no clear idea of individual ownership. This state 
 of things is vividly brought before us in the Scriptural 
 accounts of Lot and Abraham. When the father dies, the 
 sovereignty remaining in his family passes to the most 
 capable member of that stock — not by the law of primo- 
 geniture, for the rulership belongs to the family, not to the 
 individual. Such a system of descent exists at the present 
 moment among the Turkish sultans — a last tradition of 
 this wandering life. Similarly, the various trades and 
 offices are perpetuated in the family of the original artificer. 
 Any newcomers admitted into such an organization are 
 assumed by fiction to be descendants of the original family. 
 The tribe exists upon the assumption of common descent, 
 so much so, that we find in antiquity where, for political 
 purposes, new tribes were created, they generally took 
 their name from an imaginary ancestor, and adopted reli- 
 gious rites as a symbol of their union on this basis. 
 
LECTUEES ON IEISH HISTOEY. 
 
 17 
 
 Suppose a tribe of this nature to abandon its wandering 
 life, and conquer for itself a district in some foreign 
 country ; the principles upon which the land would be 
 occupied flow from the ideas on which the tribe is consti- 
 tuted. The tribe is an undivided whole. The land would 
 be conquered by all for the benefit of all, and would belong 
 to all in common. For the convenience of cultivation, 
 separate lots might be appropriated to individuals, but 
 none would gain an absolute ownership in his allotted 
 portion. His occupancy would be subject to resumption 
 by the tribe, and the arable land might be from time to 
 time redivided, as would suit the convenience of all. The 
 pasture lands would remain open for the cattle of the 
 tribe, subject to such rules as from time to time might be 
 thought necessary ; such is the system of village life in 
 India. Similar communities are found all over the face of 
 the globe, and traces of this system linger in remote dis- 
 tricts in every part of Europe. But the increasing desire 
 to acquire private property tends, with advancing wealth, 
 to sap the foundations of the system. In the early Saxon 
 tribes, the folkland was gradually converted into bookland. 
 The component parts of the tribe are gradually changed, 
 from a further cause. Exiles from other tribes, strangers, 
 fugitives, and traders take up their residence within the 
 limits of the tribe ; they form a class outside of the tribe, 
 not worshipping the same gods, confessedly of a different 
 ancestry, who live among, but are not portion of the people. 
 Many of this class form the retinues of powerful chieftains 
 — such were the theigns among the Saxons, originally 
 strangers ; the dwellers outside the palisade of the German 
 cities ; the plebeians of Borne. 
 
 When this class increases in number and power, it may 
 force the original tribe to remodel itself upon an entirely 
 , c 
 
18 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 different basis, as the plebeians compelled the patricians 
 at Rome. It may reduce the tribe to a state of insignifi- 
 cance, as the theigns in England ultimately became an 
 aristocracy in respect of Ceorls, the original tribesmen. Most 
 of these phenomena occur in Irish tribal history. The 
 district occupied by an Irish tribe generally amounted to 
 about the area of a modern barony, and belonged, as a 
 rule, to the tribe. This common land seems to have been di- 
 vided into common pasture land, common tillage land, pri- 
 vate demesne land, and demesne land of the tribe ; each man 
 of the tribe had a right to pasture as many cattle as he 
 possessed on the common grazing land, and in proportion 
 to the number of cattle thus pastured by each was the 
 share of the common tillage land assigned to him upon the 
 annual partition. The private demesne lands were the 
 distinct property of individuals, who were entitled to 
 acquire and transmit them by certain qualifications, not 
 very clearly explained. The demesne lands of the tribe 
 were set apart for the maintenance of the chief, the chief 
 elect, or tanist, the bard, the doctor, and Rrehon. The 
 four offices of chief, bard, doctor, and Rrehon, were 
 descendable in distinct families, but not necessarily from 
 father to son ; rather the contrary. Upon his demesne 
 lands the chief established his tenants, many of them not 
 members of the tribe ; he thus provided for his military 
 followers, whom he also had a right of quartering from 
 time to time on the members of the tribe itself. Such 
 a state of society appears to us violent and oppressive ; 
 but it is one which produced profound devotion and at- 
 tachment, and to which its members clung with extreme 
 tenacity. 
 
 At the date of the Mahratta conquest in South India, 
 numerous village communities were dispersed, their lands 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 19 
 
 abandoned, and their villages covered with jungle and 
 forests. Sixty years afterwards, when tranquillity was 
 restored, the descendants of the original communities, who 
 during all that time had preserved the tradition of their 
 common origin and common worship, returned to the 
 valley of the JN'erbudda, and reoccupied the tribe lands. 
 In a few years the communities were re-established, and 
 every trace of their exile disappeared. 
 
 If the terms upon which land was thus held seemed 
 strange to the English, still stranger seemed the mode in 
 which justice was administered. The idea of the State, as 
 something distinct from the individuals comprising the na- 
 tion, is very modern. In European society the State, as a sort 
 of Providence, punishes, or professes to punish violence and 
 wrong as an offence against itself, preserves peace and order, 
 and administers justice between individuals. But such a 
 conception of the State does not occur to men at an early 
 period of their civilization. Yiolence or injustice is a 
 wrong done by one individual to another, in which stran- 
 gers have no concern, and the offended party may retaliate, 
 if able to do so ; the murderer is not arrested by the autho- 
 rity of the State, but pursued by the avenger of the blood 
 of the slain. The o first improvement introduced is not 
 to substitute punishment for private vengeance, but to 
 mitigate revenge, and fix the amount of compensation. 
 Thus, among barbarous nations, we find the custom of 
 atonement for murder by a fixed fine proportionate to 
 the rank of the slain — in Irish law to the rank both 
 of the murderer and the slain. Upon the payment of 
 thi3 compensation, the blood feud terminated, and matters 
 were as if no crime had been committed. The same prin- 
 ciple applied to offences of a lesser nature. The conflict of 
 this principle with English law appears in the case of 
 c 2 
 
20 
 
 LECTTJKES ON IBISH HISTOBY. 
 
 Nicholas, Bishop of Down, at the close of the thirteenth 
 century. He chose to administer Irish law in the Manor 
 Courts of the Church lands of Down ; and upon the occasion 
 of the murder of an Englishman, found the murderer guilty, 
 but compelled him only to pay a fine or erick. When 
 he was brought before the Council, upon this and other 
 charges, it appeared that his predecessors had administered 
 justice on similar principles; and it was discussed whether 
 the murderer, if indicted in the King’s Court, could plead 
 a previous conviction, or whether the whole transaction 
 amounted to a pardon by the bishop — a grace which 
 he could not confer. But the Irish tribe possessed, in the 
 administration of justice, one remarkable peculiarity — the 
 original right of administering justice did not exist. Nei- 
 ther the chief, nor the assembly of the tribe, nor the 
 Brehon, could summon offenders before them, and adjudi- 
 cate upon a case. The Brehon was simply an official arbi- 
 trator, who could not decide without the submission of the 
 parties. Eor the purpose of getting over this difficulty, 
 the Irish laws contained the complicated method of dis- 
 tress — a procedure by which one party could compel ano- 
 ther to agree that their case should be heard by the Brehon. 
 For his services, by way of remuneration, the Brehon 
 received a fixed proportion of the sum awarded by him ; and 
 the English writers of the reign of Elizabeth frequently refer 
 to the alleged corruption of justice, arising from this cause. 
 
 The next question which arises is, in what relation 
 did these separate tribes stand towards one another? In 
 theory each tribe was perfectly independent and com- 
 plete ; but there were various causes which tended to com- 
 bine the tribes into a loose nationality. In nations or- 
 ganized upon the tribal system, there is generally a belief 
 that the separate tribes are offshoots of one original tribe, 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 21 
 
 and that there is some family representing the stock of the 
 first tribe chief, who possesses a right of sovereignty over 
 the entire nation. It is not necessary that this family 
 should he the head itself of any specific tribe. The right 
 of sovereignty is supposed to reside in the divinely de- 
 scended stoek, however scattered. Such among the Irish 
 Celts were the supposed descendants of Mall. A national 
 sovereign was regularly elected out of his family ; and as the 
 chief of a tribe possessed a separate appanage, so the 
 head chief of the nation enjoyed Meath as his demesne 
 land. As the separate chiefs entertained their followers in 
 their houses upon their respective demesnes, so he was 
 supposed to receive at Tara the under chiefs of the various 
 tribes. The tributes to be paid to the national king were 
 ascertained and definite, and the homage and duties of the 
 lesser chiefs are detailed in ancient Celtic poems. Inferior 
 kings, also, of the royal race stood in the same position to- 
 wards the inhabitants of each province as the national 
 king to the whole body of the Celtie Irish. As a further 
 but less peaceful cause of union, the more powerful tribes 
 reduced into subjection their feebler neighbours, and formed 
 systems of tribes, in which the leading tribe possessed the 
 hegemony. The chief of such a tribe was over-lord of the 
 chiefs of the dependent tribes. Such were the tribal con- 
 federacies of which the O’Neills and O’Donels were the 
 leaders. In other instances tribes united upon the basis of 
 a treaty, the over lord of a confederacy being succes- 
 sively elected out of each tribe : such was the King of 
 Cashel, chosen alternately from the descendants of Eoghan 
 Mor and Cormac Cas. 
 
 It is evident that such a system formed a very feeble 
 bond of national union, and the existence of peace depended 
 altogether upon the energy of the ruling national chief. 
 
22 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 There is one peculiarity in the Irish tribe system which 
 cannot be omitted from observation, viz., the entire want 
 of a public assembly. How the chief or tanist was elected 
 it is difficult to ascertain ; but, although elected in the 
 presence of the people, it is clear he was not elected by the 
 people, but by some special electors qualified by birth or 
 office. We hear of no regular assembly held to discuss 
 matters of importance : by regular assembly must be under- 
 stood an assembly of the tribesmen, meeting according to 
 stated rules, and with definite power. In the German 
 tribes a mass of freemen met, armed. The chief proposed 
 for acceptance or refusal such laws as he or his council 
 deemed necessary, and the people finally accepted or re- 
 jected them. Similar are the meetings described in Homer 
 of the early Hellenes. At the present moment the inhabi- 
 tants of the Swiss forest Cantons assemble every year in 
 arms, to reject or ratify the propositions laid before them 
 by the committee of management. The weak point in the 
 Irish tribe seems to have been the absence of any regular 
 appeal to or interference by the general tribe ; and to this 
 must be attributed many of the abuses which occurred in 
 the latter periods of the Irish history. 
 
 This tribal system has been equally depreciated and 
 eulogized. The English wasted upon it every term of 
 opprobrium. We are told it could not come from hell; 
 for, if hell had been so governed, Beelzebub would have 
 long since been dethroned. On the other hand, mo- 
 dern Irish enthusiasts speak of this system as a perfect 
 scheme for human happiness, during the existence whereof 
 a Paradise had been created, which was destroyed by the 
 advent of Danish and English invaders. Judging by the 
 condition of nations now living upon a similar system, we 
 can estimate more fairly its probable working. A consi- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 23 
 
 derable amount of happiness and well-being was enjoyed 
 by those who lived under it ; a sense of independeuce, and 
 a loyalty to the chief and devotion to the tribe existed 
 amongst its members. As the protection of the tribe ex- 
 tended to all the tribesmen, they enjoyed a considerable 
 amount of personal security ; and it is impossible that a 
 chief of such a community could have acted tyrannically 
 for any prolonged period. The tribe law itself contem- 
 plated the expulsion of the king who refused justice. On 
 the other hand, the whole system must be considered as but 
 the first step in political organization. The whole country 
 was split into separate communities, practically unre- 
 strained by any central power. Civil wars were neces- 
 sarily frequent; hostilities were embittered by the small 
 number of the combatants on either side; wars were 
 waged as blood feuds ; much suffering must have been con- 
 stantly caused to the entire community from the plunder 
 and waste arising from disorder. Justice was imperfectly 
 administered, and order scarcely maintained. Such a state 
 of things also prevented any accumulation of capital or cen- 
 tralization of wealth : thus further progress in civilization 
 was rendered difficult. 
 
 The first step in every nation’s history is to establish 
 such a system ; the next, to abandon it, and substitute one 
 more developed. 
 
 Each form of government should be but a step in a series, 
 an improvement upon the past, and a preparation for the 
 future. 
 
 The tribe is formed from the family, and the nation is 
 formed by the consolidation of the tribes. Nations are 
 thus formed out of tribes by various processes : by conquest, 
 as in the case of France, where the Romans shivered the an- 
 cient tribes to pieces, and crushed them into a homogeneous 
 
24 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 nation; by a powerful and ambitious tribe absorbing its 
 neighbours, and compelling them by conquest or treaty to 
 enter into its system; so the West Saxons swallowed up 
 the other kingdoms of the Heptarchy, and Eome bound the 
 nation of the Latins by a perpetual treaty. 
 
 Hone of these events occurred in Ireland. Once, and 
 once only, did the Irish tribes seem about to unite as the 
 subjects of a national monarchy. Ireland was never com- 
 pletely conquered, nor was the tribe system allowed to 
 work itself out. The disorder of the Celtic Irish, their 
 feebleness and catastrophe, are the natural results of an ar- 
 rested development. 
 
LECTURE II. 
 
 THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHIJRCH OF IRELAND. 
 
 The introduction of Christianity is a most important era in 
 Irish history. It marks the commencement of the historic 
 period. By an historic period I mean one during which 
 current transactions are habitually and contemporaneously 
 recorded in writing. Hot merely that legends are com- 
 mitted to writing, or the current transactions are handed 
 down by tradition, but that writing is ordinarily employed 
 to perpetuate the records of ordinary events. Itj can 
 scarcely be pretended that writing was known prior to the 
 introduction of Christianity. The passages usually cited 
 for this purpose are extracts from poems and tales written 
 down, perhaps composed, after the Christian era, which 
 represent pagan heroes as making use of the art of writing. 
 But such passages do not prove that writing was used by 
 the heroes of old, but that it was in ordinary use in the 
 time of the author or compiler. It is not now pretended 
 that the tale of Bellerophon in the Iliad proves that writing 
 was known or used by that mythical personage, or that it 
 was known or used at the time of the Trojan war. If any- 
 thing, it merely shows that the author of the Iliad may 
 have had some knowledge of that art. So, in an Irish poem, 
 the incident that an ancient hero carved his name upon a 
 spear, and cast it into the river, that it might be recognized 
 
26 
 
 LECTURES ON IKISH HISTORY. 
 
 by his followers, does not carry back the date of the writing 
 farther than the date of the composition of the work. 
 
 As to inscriptions of an enduring character, there are 
 none whose date can be carried back to the pre-Christian 
 period, except, perhaps, the Ogham inscriptions, which, as 
 far as our present information on the subject extends, con- 
 tain nothing more than the name and patronymic of some 
 deceased person. 
 
 Dr. Todd is, however, of opinion that there existed in 
 Ireland before the arrival of St. Patrick a pagan literature, 
 of which some fragments are still preserved. He refers to 
 certain passages which are found amongst the fragments 
 of the Brehon laws, as having internal evidence of a pagan 
 origin.*' But the pagan character of a passage fails to prove 
 its antiquity, since Dr. Todd himself is of opinion that 
 paganism lingered in Ireland long after the first introduc- 
 tion of Christianity; and early Christianity itself was 
 deeply tinged by pagan influences. But whether or not 
 writing existed before the arrival of St. Patrick, it was 
 introduced and systematically taught by the first Christian 
 missionaries. We find it recorded that St. Patrick, on 
 several occasions, taught the alphabet to such of his con- 
 verts as were destined for holy orders. This is sometimes 
 expressed by saying he wrote out for them the “ elements ” 
 In the Tripartite Life of St. Patrick we find that, when St. 
 Patrick was in the county of Mayo, he found Ernase and 
 his son Lauran sitting under a tree, “ with whom he re- 
 mained, together with his twelve companions, for a week, 
 and they received from him the doctrine of salvation. In 
 the meanwhile he instructed Lauran, for whom he wrote 
 an alphabet in the rudiments of learning and piety; ” f In 
 the Book of Armagh, we hear that St. Patrick, with eight 
 
 Life of St. Patrick, p. 515. 
 
 f Ibid., p. 207. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 27 
 
 or nine companions, having tablets in their hands, written 
 after the manner of Moses, was seen by some pagan inha- 
 bitants of the country, who cried out to slay the saints, 
 and said, “ they have in their hands swords for the slaying 
 of men, which appear in the day-time wooden, but which 
 we think are iron swords for the shedding of blood.”* The 
 early Christian missionaries must have introduced many 
 manuscripts of the Scriptures and such books as would be 
 necessary for the formulae of their worship. The great 
 collection of the Brehon laws appears to have been made 
 about this time, and from the works of Cormac M^Cullinan, 
 Bishop of Cashel, it appears that there must have existed 
 in the tenth century a large mass of ancient literature, 
 which then required critical and grammatical explanation. 
 The list of abbots and bishops, extending from an early 
 period, may be received with considerable confidence, as 
 both the art of writing was known, and the names of the 
 Church officials would probably have been recorded in the 
 ordinary course of business. 
 
 Under these circumstances, we may treat the establish- 
 ment of Christianity in Ireland as introducing such his- 
 torical evidence as enables us to treat facts subsequently 
 recorded in a manner, to a great extent, different from 
 that in which we have treated the mythical period. It 
 is not meant by this that a great portion of written do- 
 cuments, handed down from periods subsequent to the 
 introduction of Christianity, do not contain a vast amount 
 of simply mythical stories. This element exists in all 
 popular literature; but in history subsequent to the 
 arrival of Christianity there is to be found an amount 
 of facts recorded in writing by contemporaries which, 
 although dry and meagre, may be separated from the 
 
 Life of St. Patrick, p. 509. 
 
28 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 purely mythical element, and treated as historical. The 
 legends of saints also afford a clear insight into the habits 
 and ideas of the period. How rich a mine of historical 
 inquiry may he found in this despised branch of literature 
 the French historical writers, especially Monsieur Amedee 
 Thierry, have taught us. 
 
 The history of the early Irish Church is instructive, not 
 merely as the religious history of the Irish race, but as 
 throwing a remarkable light upon their social and political 
 economy. In dealing with the delicate subject of the 
 Irish Church, we desire to abstain from all doctrinal ques- 
 tions, and the controversy, as to what were its dogmas, and 
 to what Church it should be affiliated. We shall consider it 
 for the purpose of elucidating the social tendencies of the 
 Celtic population, and attempt to show how, from its pecu- 
 liar form, it seriously influenced the temporal destinies of 
 the country. 
 
 It is admitted by all writers on the subject that the 
 Irish Ecclesiastical system was essentially different from 
 that upon the Continent. The anomalies of the Irish 
 Church have been the subject of discussion almost since 
 its first establishment. They were noticed in the Synod 
 of Hereford and Council of Chalons-sur-Marne ; they 
 were discussed by St. Bernard and St. Malachy; they 
 formed an excuse for the invasion by Henry II. ; they were 
 investigated by Ussher, and are still a subject for contro- 
 versy rather polemical than historic ; but writers who have 
 examined the Irish system from an exclusively Irish point 
 of view have failed to see the several particulars in which 
 it clashed with the ideas of the rest of Europe. In this 
 case and most others, Irish history must be understood not 
 by an exclusive study of Irish authorities, but by a con- 
 tinued comparison with the political and religious systems 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 29 
 
 which at the same time existed upon the Continent of 
 Europe. 
 
 I have in the last Lecture indicated to you the leading 
 principles, political and social, of the Irish tribe system. 
 A brief consideration of the manner in which the Christian 
 Church developed itself on the Continent of Europe will 
 show how utterly unfit the Continental or Eoman form of 
 Church government must have been for Ireland. The 
 Christian Church came into being during the existence of 
 the Eoman Empire : the state of society at that time was 
 remarkable, as exhibiting extreme development in cities 
 and an extreme deterioration of country life. Erom the 
 great Imperial city stretched the military roads to the ex- 
 tremities of the empire ; along those at intervals stood the 
 municipal towns, which possessed to a great degree self- 
 government, and were independent corporations, flourishing, 
 wealthy, and secure. The eastern half of the empire con- 
 tained numerous cities, many older than Eome itself, once 
 independent, and still to a considerable extent self-govern- 
 ing ; but the intervening tracts of land were in a state of 
 continued deterioration. The country was eaten up by the 
 great states of Eoman and provincial nobles, which were 
 cultivated by slaves attached to the ground ; and in many 
 districts the only sign of civilization was the villas occa- 
 sionally occupied by the wealthy proprietors. In such a 
 state of things, the city was everything and the country 
 w T as nothing. 
 
 The early Christian teachers would have found it a 
 waste of time and energy to have traversed as mission- 
 aries the country. Like all successful leaders of revo- 
 lutions, they threw themselves upon the centres of intel- 
 ligence ; when expelled from one city they went to another 
 city, as the next available place for the preaching of their 
 
30 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 doctrine. Saint Paul established himself successively at 
 Phillipi, Corinth, and Athens, without regarding the coun- 
 try districts. Thus the labours of the Christian mission- 
 aries being directed to the conversion of the town popula- 
 tion, the early Christian Churches were confined to the 
 larger cities. Long after the nominal establishment of 
 Christianity, paganism lingered in the country. Saint 
 Martin, of Tours, employed himself in destroying rural 
 temples in the south of Prance. Saint Benedict found 
 an altar to Apollo upon Mount Casino. 
 
 It may be a question how far the doctrines of any 
 new religion are merely an answer to the moral wants 
 of the age ; but there can be no doubt of this, that 
 every new religion is organized according to the politi- 
 cal form of government prevalent at the time. Its first 
 followers supply it with a system which is an imita- 
 tion and reflection of the political government of the 
 period. Mahomedanism was ruled by a Caliph ; Calvinism 
 was organized in imitation of the oligarchy in Geneva ; 
 early Christianity adopted the form of the municipal go- 
 vernment. In each city the bishop presided over the 
 Church, assisted by ecclesiastical assessors. At an early 
 period the bishop enjoyed a jurisdiction amongst the Chris- 
 tians themselves, originally voluntary, of the nature of an 
 arbitration. When Christianity became- the established re- 
 ligion of the empire, the bishop occupied a legal judicial 
 position. The exercise of judicial functions implies a dis- 
 tinct area in which they should be exercised ; this was na- 
 turally fixed with reference to the limits of the civil juris- 
 diction within which the bishopric was established. When, 
 for the purposes of internal government, the bishops were 
 subordinated to one another, the bishop of the city, the re- 
 sidence of the Boman governors, naturally became the arch- 
 
LECTTJEES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 31 
 
 bishop of the province. In the great divisions into which 
 the Eoman empire in its latter days was divided, there na- 
 turally arose patriarchs who governed the grand provinces 
 of the empire. As Eome was supreme amongst cities, the 
 Patriarch of Eome became supreme in the Church. 
 
 This system of Church government is manifestly founded 
 upon the existence of cities and the division of the territory 
 into definite political districts : hence has grown up the doc- 
 trine that a bishop must he a bishop of a certain place. At 
 present in the Eoman Church, when the rank of a bishop 
 is conferred without any accompanying duties, a local title 
 is given, by attaching the bishopric to some place in par- 
 tibus injidelium. But in a bishop of the Eoman, or any 
 Protestant Episcopal Church, we must distinguish his 
 judicial office from his purely spiritual function. Every 
 bishop can exercise his spiritual office effectually in any 
 place, although he may be restrained from doing so by the 
 canons of the Church ; on the other hand, he possesses no 
 judicial authority beyond his own diocese. Such a system 
 as had been established on the Continent could not have been 
 introduced into Ireland. It would have been utterly repug- 
 nant to the political system of the Celts. In Ireland there 
 were no great towns, no wealthy emporia, no roads cross- 
 ing the island, rendering communication easy ; there were 
 no political districts, for the civil jurisdiction of the chiefs 
 was exercised over the individuals of the tribe, wherever 
 they might be, and had no connexion with the lands which 
 they occupied. If the Christian missionaries had attempted 
 to establish in Ireland bishops with territorial jurisdiction, 
 the system would have failed. Ho tribal chief would have 
 submitted to the jurisdiction of the bishop connected with 
 or resident in another tribe. 
 
 We must now consider how the first Christian mission- 
 
32 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 aries met the difficulties which the state of Ireland pre- 
 sented. 
 
 The first question which presents itself is, what religious 
 system did they find existing in the Island ? Druidism. 
 Eut as to what Druidism was, either in speculation or 
 practice, we have very little information. Its doctrines 
 cannot have had a strong hold upon the minds of the 
 people, nor can it have possessed any definite mythology. 
 Odin and Balder survived the destruction of Norse Pa- 
 ganism ; but of the early Irish deities, their history or 
 their worship, not a trace remains — their very names have 
 perished. As far as we can conjecture, their religion must 
 have consisted of tribal divinities and local rites. As to 
 the Druids themselves we have no distinct information* 
 The practices and rites of the Druids form a subject fasci- 
 nating from its extreme obscurity. The information of 
 the ordinary public upon this subject is chiefly derived 
 from the opera of “ Norma,” which suggests a confused 
 idea of gloomy oakwoods, white-robed priests, and pro- 
 phetic virgins. The so-called learning of the last century 
 upon this subject was more definite, but equally unsatis- 
 factory. The early antiquarians, upon the suggestion of a 
 few passages from the Latin authors, laid a foundation of a 
 fanciful edifice, which their followers completed, the con- 
 jectures of each sage being the facts assumed by his pupils 
 This airy edifice fell to the ground upon the first applica- 
 tion of criticism; and, so strong has been the reaction, 
 that authors are now found to deny the existence of Druids 
 altogether. 
 
 As far as the lives of St. Patrick and of St. Columba 
 enable us to form any opinion, these missionaries did not 
 find in Ireland or Scotland any hierarchical system ; they 
 did not encounter any arch-Druid as the representa- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 33 
 
 tive or head of a national religion ; they met abundant 
 opposition from the Druids of particular chiefs and places 
 but they found no priesthood occupying a definite political 
 position, which the ministers of the new religion could ap- 
 propriate. The Druids of this period, at least, seem to be 
 nothing more than the local priests or magicians attached 
 to the several tribe chiefs — perhaps not better than the 
 medicine men of the North American Indians. 
 
 The first Christian missionaries had to discover a system 
 upon which the Church to be established in Ireland could 
 be organized. 
 
 In tracing the early form of the early Church, the posi- 
 tion, character, and origin of the first missionary, are an 
 important subject for consideration. 
 
 Attempts have been made to depreciate the historical 
 position occupied by St. Patrick, but unsuccessfully. We 
 possess documentary evidence as to his life and doctrine, 
 which may be fairly treated as his own composition, or, at 
 least, that of some of his cotemporaries. The documents in 
 question are as follows: — The Confession of St. Patrick — 
 a copy of which was transcribed, at the end of the eighth, 
 or very early in the ninth century, into the collection 
 known as the “ Book of Armagh.” It professes to be taken 
 from an autograph of St. Patrick, for this seems to be the 
 meaning of the colophon : “ Thus far the volume, which 
 St. Patrick wrote with his own hand.” It was certainly 
 transcribed from a manuscript which, in the year 800, was 
 beginning to become obscure, and of whose obscurities 
 the scribe more than once complains. Although not free 
 from what we now, at this age, would call superstition, it 
 contains none of the ridiculous miracles attributed to St. 
 Patrick by later writers. It is “ altogether such an account 
 of himself” as a missionary of that age, such as St. Patrick 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 was himself, might have composed. Its Latinity is rude ; 
 it quotes the ante-Hieronymian Yulgate, and contains no- 
 thing inconsistent with the century in which it is supposed 
 to have been written. If it be a forgery, it is not easy to 
 imagine for what purpose, and how it could have been 
 forged.* Secondly, the Epistle to Coroticus, attributed to 
 St. Patrick. The Latinity of the work is apparently of 
 the same age, and from the same pen, as the Confession. 
 It quotes the old Latin version of the Bible, and there 
 seems no internal evidence against the supposition that St. 
 Patrick was its author. Objections have been made to the 
 authenticity of this work on the ground of its rude and 
 barbarous Latinity. It is said that it is difficult to believe 
 that the Boman Pontiffs were so stupid as to send forth 
 missionaries to instruct others, who were themselves inca- 
 pable of writing good Latin. Who can believe (if St. 
 Patrick were a man of learning and celebrity in the fifth 
 century) that he could have written in so barbarous a 
 stj'le? But this is an argument against the theory that 
 this work is a forgery. No ecclesiastic of a later period 
 would have concocted such a document. None but St. 
 Patrick could have written such a work at, or shortly 
 after, the period of his mission. f We have several subse- 
 quent lives of St. Patrick, in which the element of the 
 miraculous increases as the date of the production becomes 
 more removed from the transactions it professes to recount. 
 
 There is no certain information as to the birth-place of 
 St. Patrick — a question which has proved a source of endless 
 controversy. According to his own statement in the Con- 
 fession and Letter, he was the son of Calpurnius, a Deacon, 
 the son of Potitus, a Priest. He was of respectable family 
 according to the flesh, his father having been a Decurio ; 
 
 * Life of St. Patrick, pp. 346, 7. 
 
 f Ibid . , p. 349. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 35 
 
 and he gave up his nobility to prosecute his missionary 
 enterprise. An ancient hymn tells us he was born at 
 Hemthur. The Confession states that his father was of 
 the village of Bonavem Taberniae, and had there a small pro- 
 perty, from whence St. Patrick was taken away captive. 
 The unknown names Bonavem Taberniae and Hemthur go 
 but a short way towards fixing St. Patrick’s birth-place. 
 Later biographers have endeavoured to bring him over 
 from the Continent, chiefly for the purpose of connecting 
 him with the Papal See. Hence has arisen great confusion 
 as to the events of his life ; for numerous acts attributed 
 to Pellagius, an earlier Eoman missionary, have been trans- 
 ferred to St. Patrick. But in the works attributed to St. 
 Patrick himself there is no allusion to the Continent, or to 
 any special commission from, or connexion with, a Conti- 
 nental Church. According to his own statement, he learned 
 Latin at an advanced period of life — a fact confirmed by 
 his barbarous Latinity. It is utterly impossible that any 
 native of Gaul, the son of a municipal officer under the 
 Eoman Government, could have been entirely ignorant of 
 Latin. His original birth-place must be sought in some 
 of the provinces never completely Latinized. 
 
 In his Confession, St. Patrick speaks of Britannia as his 
 native country, which would imply that he was born in one 
 of the provinces of Britain, and probable conjecture fluctu- 
 ates between Alcluaid (now Dumbarton) and Wales. He 
 was carried into Ireland as a captive in his youth, and 
 before his conversion to Christianity. In his own narra- 
 tion he says — “I, Patrick, a sinner, the meanest of all 
 the faithful, had for my father Calpurnius, a Deacon, son of 
 the late Potitus, a Presbyter, who was of the town of Bo- 
 navem Taberniae ; for he had a farm in the neighbourhood, 
 where I w r as taken captive. I was then nearly sixteen 
 d 2 
 
36 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH .HISTORY. 
 
 years old. I was carried in captivity to Hiberio, with 
 many thousands of men, according to our deserts, because 
 we had gone back from God, and had not kept His Com- 
 mandments, and were not obedient to our priests, who 
 used to warn us for our salvation.” He was employed in 
 Ireland as a slave, tending the cattle, but was then frequent 
 in prayer, and thus, he says, the love and fear of God in 
 faith “ increased upon him.” After six years’ servitude, he 
 escaped, and returned to his parents or relations, who re- 
 ceived him as a son, and besought him “that after endur- 
 ing so many tribulations, he should not depart anywhere.” 
 He was, however, constrained by a vision, which he saw 
 in the night, to return to Ireland to preach the Gospel. 
 “ In the dead of the night I saw a man coming to me, as 
 if from Hiberio, whose name was Victorious, bearing innu- 
 merable epistles; and he gave me one of them, and I read 
 the beginning of it, which contained the words 4 the voice 
 of the Irish and while I was repeating the beginning of 
 the epistle, I imagined that I heard in my mind the voice 
 of those who were near the wood Foclut, which is near 
 the western sea, and thus they cried: 4 We pray thee, 0 
 holy 3 'outh, to come and henceforth walk amongst us;’ 
 and I was greatly pricked in heart, and could read no 
 more, and so I awoke.” 
 
 I have referred to the origin and early life of St. Patrick, 
 and the impulse which constrained him to preach the Gos- 
 pel in Ireland, as showing that neither in his origin, edu- 
 cation, nor feelings, was he a Eoman ; that his religious 
 tendencies were rather towards the moral and mystical, 
 than the dogmatic points of Christianity. This view is 
 confirmed by his Creed, or Confession of Faith. The ar- 
 rival of St. Patrick may be fixed about the middle of the 
 
 fifth century. The first Council of Nice was held in 
 
 0 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 37 
 
 a. d. 325; the Council of Sardica in a. d. 347; the Council 
 of Ephesus a. d. 431; yet St. Patrick appeared ignorant of 
 the Creed, as settled even by the first Council. He makes 
 no mention of the resurrection of the body, nor our Lord’s 
 descent into hell; he does not mention our Lord’s burial. 
 He attributes the creation of all things to the Son. He 
 teaches his disciples that the Second Person of the Trinity 
 pours into us the Holy Ghost. This creed could scarcely 
 pass for orthodox among any sect of Christians, but it is 
 exactly the doctrine which might have been taught by a 
 missionary issuing from a remote province of the Homan 
 Empire, to which the decrees of the Council had not yet 
 penetrated, and who had never been instructed in the 
 theological subtleties of this time.* 
 
 We must remember that the Western Church wisely 
 never involved itself in theological speculation. The doc- 
 trinal questions which disturbed the Church in the early 
 ages originated in the eastern world ; and in the remote 
 provinces of Britain the perplexing inquiries about the 
 Trinity may have been disregarded, and were certainly 
 not appreciated. But the hymn known as the breastplate 
 of St. Patrick proves how deep was the faith of the Chris- 
 tians of that period in the Omnipotence of God, in the 
 mercy of Christ, and the primary principles of Christianity. 
 
 We are not to imagine that St. Patrick lauded in Ireland 
 in the simple garb of a modern missionary. He, from the 
 first, assumed the attire and position of a Christian bishop. 
 This appears from the ancient verses preserved by the 
 Scholiast on Fiacc’s hymn, as translated by Dr. Todd: — 
 
 u He comes, he comes, with shaven crown, from off the storm-tossed sea, 
 His garment piercing at the neck, with crook-like staff comes he; 
 
 Far in his house, at its east end, his cups and patens lie; 
 
 His people answer to his voice: * Amen, Amen,’ they cry.” 
 
 Life of St. Patrick, p. 3D0. 
 
38 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 The position taken by St. Patrick in Ireland is clearly 
 shown in his conflict with Laoghaire, King of Meath. Having 
 left his ship at the month of the Boyne, St. Patrick travelled 
 to Slane, in the county of Meath. There he pitched his tent, 
 and began the solemn devotions of Easter Eve. The legend 
 tells us : — “ Kow there happened in that year the idola- 
 trous Festival, which the Gentiles were wont to observe 
 with many incantations and magical inventions, and other 
 superstitions of idolatry; gathering together the kings, 
 satraps, dukes, chieftains, and nobles of the people ; sum- 
 moning also the magicians, enchanters, and augurs, with 
 the inventors or teachers of every art and gift, unto 
 Laoghaire, as unto King Nabucodonossor of old, to Temoria, 
 wdiich was their Babylon, and on the same night on which 
 St. Patrick was celebrating Easter, they were worshipping 
 and exercising themselves in that Gentile festivity.” The 
 legend informs us that the pagan festival began by extin- 
 guishing every fire in the country, and whoever kindled a 
 fire on that night, before the king’s fire was kindled on the 
 Hill of Tara, should perish. St. Patrick lighted his Pas- 
 chal fire on the hill of Slane ; and this being seen from 
 Tara, the king demanded who was guilty of this insolence. 
 The Druids replied that the fire they saw would never be 
 extinguished unless it could be put out that night. The 
 king thereupon yoked his chariots, and proceeded to Slane 
 with his two chief Druids. On their arrival at Slane, the 
 Druids would not permit the King to enter the enclosure, 
 where St. Patrick’s fires were burning. They counselled 
 that St. Patrick should be sent for. He entered the as- 
 sembly, entoning the verses : — Some put their trust “ in 
 chariots, and some in horses ; but we will remember the 
 name of the Lord our God. ,, Hereupon follows a strange 
 contest between St. Patrick and the Druids, which, of 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 39 
 
 course, eventuated in the defeat of the latter. After this, 
 the king, humbled and terrified, returned to Tara, with a 
 few attendants who survived. In this, as in other instances, 
 we are struck by the fact that St. Patrick did not commence 
 by preaching to the body of the people, but addressed 
 himself, in the first instance, to the local chiefs, according 
 to Dr. Todd. 
 
 “ This policy may have been pursued by St. Patrick 
 as much from necessity as from a knowledge of the 
 character and habits of the people. The chieftain, 
 once ‘ secured/ the clan, as a matter of course, were 
 disposed to follow in his steps. To attempt the con- 
 version of a clan in opposition to their chief would pro- 
 bably have been to rush on inevitable death, or, at the least, 
 to risk immediate expulsion from the district. The people may 
 not have adopted the outward habits of Christianity (which 
 was all, perhaps, that they at the first instance adopted) 
 from any clear or intellectual appreciation of its superiority 
 to their former religion; but to obtain from the people 
 even an outward profession of Christianity was an impor- 
 tant step towards ultimate success. It enabled Patrick to 
 plant in every tribe schools, churches, and monasteries. He 
 was permitted, without opposition, to establish among the 
 half-pagan inhabitants of the country societies of holy men, 
 whose usefulness, devotion, and piety, soon produced an 
 effect upon the most barbarous and savage hearts. This 
 was the secret of the rapid success attributed to St. Patrick’s 
 preaching in Ireland. The chieftains were at first the real 
 converts. The baptism of the chieftain was immediately 
 followed by the adhesion of his clan. The clansmen pressed 
 eagerly round the missionary who had baptized their chief, 
 anxious to receive that mysterious initiation into the new 
 faith, to which their chieftain and father had submitted. 
 
40 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 The requirements previous to baptism do not seem to have 
 been very rigorous ; and it is not improbable that in Tyraw- 
 ley and other remote districts Patrick, as he tells us himself, 
 may have baptized some thousands of men.”*' 
 
 What was the form of society which St. Patrick thus 
 established in Ireland ? Amidst lawless and savage pagan- 
 ism, it would have been dangerous to disperse individual 
 missionaries. It was necessary that the Christians should 
 form communities capable of defence, and thus a monastic 
 character was impressed upon early Irish Christianity. But 
 the tribal system prevented the early missionaries securing 
 lands for the formation of monastic establishments. There 
 was not wealth in the country to endow or support monas- 
 tic institutions, such as were subsequently established on 
 the Continent. This difficulty was obviated by the creation 
 of artificial tribes, of which the first missionary became the 
 chief. Land granted to St. Patrick, or to any other eccle- 
 siastic, by its original owners, conveyed to the Clerical 
 Society, of which it was the endowment, all the rights of 
 the chief of the clan. The curious history of the foundation 
 of the bishopric of Trim illustrates this. Fedleaid, when 
 converted, dedicated to Lonmen, and Patrick, and Fort- 
 chenn, his son, all his territory and possessions in Trim, 
 “ with his possession, and with all his substance , and with all 
 his clan 
 
 The tribe thus created consisted both of the monks and of 
 the original tribesmen. The priest or saint to whom it was 
 originally dedicated, filled three distinct characters : First, 
 Temporal Chief of the Clan ; second, Abbot of the Monks ; 
 third, that of Bishop of a Community. Upon the death of 
 the original saint, who was the founder of this society, his 
 powers passed to his co-arb or heir. The three offices exer- 
 
 * Life of St. Patrick, p. 498. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 41 
 
 cised by the original founder might be united in one person, 
 or divided among three ; but his successor in the office of 
 abbot was specially deemed to be his co-arb or heir, and 
 was the ruler or head of the ecclesiastical portion of the 
 tribe. Thus we have two lines of descent from the origi- 
 nal founders of this clan — one representing his lay and the 
 other his clerical successors. 
 
 It was not necessary that the abbot should be a bishop ; 
 and yet it was necessary that a bishop should form part of 
 the community, for the purpose of the performance of those 
 rites requiring episcopal intervention. 
 
 Under these circumstances jurisdiction over the religious 
 community was appropriated to the abbot, and the bishop 
 was considered merely as a superior priest who exercised 
 a peculiar function. As the bishop had no judicial autho- 
 rity, his exercise of his office was not confined to any parti- 
 cular district. Nor was it necessary that the number of 
 bishops should be limited. A bishop was employed in a reli- 
 gious house to exercise the functions of his degree in subor- 
 dination to the head of the monastery. We meet continued 
 instances of this in the lives of the Irish saints. When 
 St. Brigid erected her monastery on the plain of Liffey, 
 she reflected that she ought to provide with prudent care 
 regularly in all things for the souls of the people, as well 
 as for the churches of the many provinces which adhered 
 to her ; she came to the conclusion that she could not do 
 without a high priest to consecrate churches and settle ec- 
 clesiastical decrees in them. She therefore selected a holy 
 man, a solitary adorned with all virtues, and by whom 
 God had wrought many miracles. She sent for him from 
 the desert, and went herself to meet him. He agreed to 
 her proposals, and she engaged him to govern the Church 
 with her in Episcopal dignity, that nothing of a sacerdotal 
 
42 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 order should be wanting. But Condlaed, the bishop thus 
 selected by St. Brigid, was subject to the orders of the 
 abbots. 
 
 “ This Condlaed was Brigid’s principal artist, and he 
 was devoured by dogs, because he set out for Borne in op- 
 position to Brigid’s command, wherefore Brigid’s prayer 
 that he might come to a sudden death by the way, which 
 was fulfilled.”* 
 
 As the Episcopal office was not exercised in any specific 
 district, the number of bishops was immaterial, and so nu- 
 merous were bishops, or rather priests having Episcopal 
 orders, that we find small communities exclusively of bi- 
 shops. The Martyrology of Donegal mentions six groups 
 of seven bishops, and a litany of the ninth century refers to 
 141 groups of seven bishops each, at various places and 
 churches in Ireland. St. Patrick is stated to have con- 
 secrated 350 bishops. The Eour Masters speak of 700 
 bishops. 
 
 We may easily believe, under these circumstances, that 
 the bishops were not surrounded by the pomp which they 
 enjoyed in other countries, as appears from the legend of 
 St. Columba. “ Bishop Etchen is venerated in Cluain-fota- 
 Boetain in Eerra Bile in the south of Meath, and it was 
 to him that St. Columba went to have the order of bishop 
 conferred on him. Columba sat under the tree which is at 
 the west side of the church, and asked where the cleric 
 was. ‘ There he is/ said a certain man, ‘ in the field where 
 they are ploughing below.’ ‘ 1 think,’ says St. Columba, ‘it 
 is not meet for us that a ploughman should confer orders 
 upon us, but let us test him.’ ” The bishop, by miracle, 
 vindieated his sacred character, and Columba received ordi- 
 nation at his hands. 
 
 * Life of St. Patrick, p. 11. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 43 
 
 The peculiarities of the Irish ecclesiastical system may 
 be summed up — 1st, the bishopric was simply an ecclesias- 
 tical degree or spiritual function without any judicial or ad- 
 ministrative power ; 2ndly, the country was not divided into 
 districts with local ecclesiastical authority, but the Church 
 consisted of isolated monasteries which were practically 
 independent of each other; 3rdly, the clergy exercised 
 no judicial power over the laity. 
 
 The Irish monasteries were constituted in the following 
 manner : — The artificial tribe created by the founder of 
 the institution was governed by the co-arb or heir of 
 the original saint, who enjoyed all the rights and prin- 
 cipalities which belonged to the original chieftain, as well 
 as the abbatial authority of the saint, but the temporal 
 and spiritual portions of the office were generally di- 
 vided. The spiritual co-arb was elected by the commu- 
 nity of monks over whom he presided. The chieftain 
 (or secular co-arb) was elected under certain restric- 
 tions by the clan. In this system there was an obvious 
 tendency not only to restrict the chieftainship to the fa- 
 mily of the original founder, but to throw the spiritual 
 succession in the same line. 
 
 The family of the monastery comprised as well the 
 monks as the clansmen, vassals, and serfs living on the 
 territory of the co-arb. In many cases they were very 
 numerous, as appears from the battle between the families 
 of the monks of Clonmacnoise and Durrow in the year 
 764. The collection of the produce of the farm and rents 
 and tributes of the tenants was made by an officer called 
 Erenach. The internal domestic affairs of the monastery 
 were overlooked by the (Economus or houseman, who su- 
 perintended the labours of the monks, and saw the estab- 
 lishment supplied with food and other necessaries. 
 
44 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 The Church, thus organized, afforded safety and security 
 to its members, and naturally became a refuge for fugitive 
 ecclesiastics from Britain and Gaul ; hence sprung up the 
 schools of learning, for which Ireland was celebrated at the 
 beginning of the Middle Ages. We must neither over es- 
 timate nor depreciate these establishments. The learning 
 they possessed must be judged by the cotemporary state of 
 Europe, not by reference to the education of the present 
 day. They undoubtedly were in advance of any schools 
 existing on the Continent, and the list of the books pos- 
 sessed by some of the teachers prove that their institutions 
 embraced a considerable course of classical learning. The 
 civilization of Ireland at this period, as far as it arose from 
 monastic institutions, was strictly confined within the 
 limits of the monasteries, and did not affect the general 
 condition of the people. 
 
 The introduction of Christianity was not attended with 
 the establishment of law and order ; the form of the Church 
 rather repelled than favoured the growth of a national sen- 
 timent ; commerce and wealth could not flourish in default 
 of a strong government, and where wealth and commerce 
 are impossible, civilization is of tardy and feeble growth. 
 The monasteries were themselves but communities of ascetic 
 and hard-working men who, though faring coarsely and liv- 
 ing rudely to some extent, cultivated learning as part of their 
 religious profession, but had not the means, nor probably the 
 desire, of practising the refinements of civilization, or of 
 devoting themselves to learned leisure. 
 
 There soon arose in the Irish Church a zealous missionary 
 spirit. St. Columba, banished from Ireland, established 
 the monastery of Iona, and by himself or his mission- 
 aries preached Christianity throughout Scotland. In lea- 
 thern boats, which would not now be thought seaworthy, 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 45 
 
 these zealous preachers of the Gospel went northward as far 
 as Iceland, for the Norse, when they first colonized that 
 island, found traces of the residences of Irish monks, and 
 the legend of Saint Brendan would lead us to suspect these 
 enthusiastic missionaries sailed westward into the Atlantic 
 in quest of distant lands to conquer for the Gospel. 
 
 Irish missionaries crossed over to England, and found 
 their way to Gaul, Switzerland, and Germany, where 
 the peculiar discipline of their Church rapidly brought 
 them in conflict with the ecclesiastical system on the 
 Continent, for the Irish bishops, disregarding the Canon 
 law, exercised their episcopal functions without reference 
 to the territorial jurisdiction of the local bishops; and 
 the episcopi vag antes are alluded to and condemned in 
 various canons. By the Synod of Hereford, a.d. 675, it 
 was enacted that bishops who were monks should not go 
 about from place to place, or from monastery to monastery, 
 unless sent by the abbot, but should continue in the same 
 obedience they promised at their conversion. The Council of 
 Chalons- sur-Saon, in 813, declares the orders conferred by 
 these Scottish bishops to be null and void, expressing a doubt 
 as to the validity of their episcopacy, and accusing them of 
 admitting unfit persons to orders. The title of this canon 
 is, “ On the nullity of the Ordinations conferred by the Scoti 
 who call themselves Bishops.” At the Synod of Cealcythe ? 
 in the year 816, by the 5th canon, it was ordained that no 
 person of the Scotic race be permitted in any diocese to 
 exercise the sacred ministry, and it is declared unlawful to 
 receive any assistance from these Scotic ecclesiastics either 
 in Baptism, or the celebration of the Mass, or administering 
 the Eucharist to the people — 1st, because it is uncertain 
 whether or by whom the Scotic bishops were ordained ; 
 2ndly, because they scrupled not to enter other dioceses 
 without the consent of the diocesan. 
 
46 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 A third reason is added, which points to the peculiar con- 
 stitution of the Irish Church. “We know it to be en- 
 joined in the canons that no bishop or presbyter venture to 
 intrude upon the parish of another without the consent of 
 his own bishop. So much the more should we refuse to re- 
 ceive the sacred ministrations from foreign nations, amongst 
 whom no rank is given to the metropolitans, nor honour to 
 the other bishops.” It is probable also that many im- 
 postors, pretending to be Irish bishops, travelled on the 
 Continent, and assumed to perform episcopal functions. 
 At a later period Irish pseudo-bishops are especially men- 
 tioned. We can thus form an idea of the mode in which 
 the Irish Church was regarded by Continental ecclesiastics. 
 There is no allusion to any difference of doctrine. The 
 Irish are never spoken of as heretics, and the validity 
 of their orders was practically acknowledged; but the 
 organization of the Church was regarded as anomalous, 
 and their system of Church government was esteemed to 
 be barbarous. Speaking of St. Malachy, St. Bernard 
 writes : — “Our friend Malachy was born of a barbarous 
 people in Ireland. There he was educated ; there he was 
 taught literature; but from his native barbarism he has 
 drawn nothing, no more than the fish of the sea retains 
 the taint of the salt of the ocean/ 
 
 During the early period the Irish ecclesiastics appear as 
 an aggressive body in England and the Continent — eccle- 
 siastical interlopers, who put into confusion, and set at 
 defiance, the ecclesiastical arrangements of the countries 
 which they visited. Proud of their native Church, they 
 claimed to be duly ordained bishops, and asserted a right, 
 whenever and wherever they pleased, of exercising their 
 spiritual office ; but subsequently the position of the Irish 
 Church was changed by the effects of the Danish invasions. 
 
 Op. St. Bernard, vol. i., col. 659. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 47 
 
 Their monasteries were devastated, their schools of learn- 
 ing broken up, and as fugitives they sought the Continent, 
 which they had before visited as missionaries. Under these 
 circumstances, the influence of the Continental Church 
 reacted upon Ireland. 
 
 In the eleventh century the intercourse between this 
 country and the Continent became very active. What 
 did an Irish monk, sojourning upon the Continent, then 
 behold? He saw emphatically, in one word, Eome. The 
 ancient Eoman empire had perished; but the idea of 
 a grand Imperial Eome still possessed the imagination 
 of mankind. Not merely was there spiritual Eome, but 
 also the German empire inherited in popular belief the 
 position and the glories of the Eoman. The idea of 
 spiritual and temporal unity possessed the imagination 
 of mankind. Eome was the seat of a great bishop, who 
 claimed to rule the Christian Church, and vindicated reli- 
 gion and justice in opposition to the caprices of local 
 tyrants. The Church, represented by the Pope, ruled in 
 all things spiritual, extending its jurisdiction over an un- 
 broken hierarchy from the centre of its government to the 
 remotest portions of the Christian world. At the same 
 time, in theory at least, there was an Emperor unquestioned 
 in his power as the vice-regent of God, dealing out justice 
 impartially to all men. What must have been the feelings 
 of an Irish ecclesiastic who viewed this mighty system ? He 
 must have contrasted it with his native island, broken up 
 into petty tribes, incessantly warring with each other, pre- 
 sided over by a powerless king, who had neither the means 
 nor the inclination to control his so-called subjects. He must 
 have thought of the monasteries not yet resuscitated, the 
 schools of learning deserted and almost forgotten, and 
 longed to have assimilated his Church and country to the 
 great system of the Continent. 
 
48 
 
 LECTURES ON fRISH HISTORY. 
 
 How then, also, must the Eoman ecclesiastics have 
 regarded the Church of Ireland? They could not have 
 entertained the idea of a separate and National Church, 
 organized according to the social wants of a small and 
 barbarous people ; nor could they have tolerated the idea 
 of schism or separation. Their theory was the establish- 
 ment of one consistent system — a great imperial govern- 
 ment in things temporal — a great ecclesiastical govern- 
 ment in things spiritual. 
 
 Under these circumstances, it is not wonderful that Con- 
 tinental influence reacted upon the Irish Church. Irish 
 priests, who had sojourned at Eome, esteemed as barbarous 
 those parts of their own Church’s government which were 
 national and Celtic, and set about reforming and altering it, 
 so as to assimilate it to the Continental pattern. 
 
 Such were the views of Celsus and St. Malachy, the 
 latter of whom acted under the influence, and by the 
 advice, of the great St. Bernard. In 1016, a Synod was 
 held, not for the purpose of discussing doctrinal points, 
 as to which there was then no question, but with the 
 object of assimilating the government of the Irish Church 
 to that of Eome, and bringing it into immediate connexion 
 with the Papal See. In 1152, a Council was held at Kells, 
 at which John Paparo appeared as legate of Pope Eugenius 
 the Third. He brought over four palls to Ireland, one of 
 which he conferred on Armagh ; another he gave to Dub- 
 lin ; the third to Cashel, and the fourth to Tuam. At this 
 Council Ireland was divided into dioceses, and the pre- 
 eminence of the several archbishops definitively recognized. 
 As we shall see afterwards, from the Council of Cashel, 
 about or subsequent to this time, parishes were created, 
 and priests established throughout the country, who were 
 not supported by, or connected with, monastic establish- 
 ments. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 49 
 
 There had in the course of the eleventh century grown 
 up another Church in Ireland among the Danish colonists, 
 who had been converted to Christianity by missionaries 
 from England, and their bishops derived succession from 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury, and not from the Irish 
 Church. The existence of this Danish Church is not of 
 much importance in subsequent history, but explains many 
 statements made by ill-informed English writers as to the 
 position of the Irish Church. 
 
 Such was the state of the Church in Ireland prior to 
 the date of the English Invasion. We have seen that 
 this Church was originally modelled after the fashion 
 of the political and social form of Celtic society, and 
 was gradually adopting the system of Church govern- 
 ment prevailing on the Continent. It was looked upon 
 as a Church in some degree isolated from the rest of the 
 world — of peculiar organization, and irregular character, 
 severed, as it were, from the great body of Christendom. 
 It was the object of the most learned men of the Irish 
 Church itself, and of the ecclesiastics of the Continent, to 
 reclaim it from barbarism — to assimilate it to the Conti- 
 nental Church, and to make it an integral portion of the 
 spiritual empire of Dome. 
 
 "When we come to the English Conquest we shall see 
 how far this object was put forward as an excuse for an 
 unprovoked invasion; and, at a subsequent period, we 
 shall observe how far the attempt to carry out this object, 
 or perhaps the failure to do so, effectually aggravated the 
 disorders which affected Ireland. 
 
 E 
 
LECTURE III. 
 
 THE DANISH INVASIONS AND KING BRIAN. 
 
 The period intended to be embraced in this Lecture is 
 that extending from the first appearance of the Danes at 
 the end of the eighth century down to the battle of 
 Clontarf (known in the Norse annals as Brian’s battle), 
 which was fought on Good Friday, 1014. This epoch is 
 marked by three series of events — first, the intermittent 
 invasions of the Danes, which entailed upon the Irish great 
 and protracted suffering, and destroyed the incipient civi- 
 lization fostered by the monastic establishments ; secondly, 
 the attempted colonization of Ireland by the Danes, who 
 established themselves upon the sea-board in fortified towns, 
 as partly military, partly trading communities ; and lastly, 
 the great uprising of the Celtic population against the 
 Scandinavians, under the command of King Brian, which 
 almost ended in the establishment of a powerful national 
 monarchy. 
 
 The name “ Danes” is associated in the minds of the 
 Irish with the memory of barbarous pirates, who sought 
 merely for plunder, and wantonly extinguished Christian 
 civilization and learning. When we call these invaders by 
 their true name, “Norsemen” we at once attain a clear idea 
 of their character and object. Ireland was not exposed to 
 a storm which did not waste the rest of Western Europe, 
 and those who afflicted this land were not an unknown or 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 51 
 
 obscure people, but a branch of the great nationality who 
 at first ravaged and subsequently reinvigorated the Conti- 
 nent. 
 
 The Danish invasion was the first of the numerous 
 attempts, so often repeated, to conquer the Celtic popula- 
 tion, and to establish among them a foreign dominion. 
 The Danes failed, as so many others have since done, from 
 the interminable resistance, though ill-conducted and inter- 
 mittent, always offered by the Irish Celts to an invader ; 
 and also because their manner, character, and ideas of 
 government, were antagonistic to the feelings of a Celtic 
 tribal people. To understand this, we must realize who 
 and what were these Danes, to whose ferocity and barbarism 
 so many evils have been attributed. 
 
 From the limits of Schleswig northward to the polar seas 
 had settled, in remote ages, the great Scandinavian race, so 
 long quiescent, but which at the end of the eighth century 
 broke upon Europe with resistless energy. Their peculiar 
 characteristics were created, or rather exaggerated, by the 
 nature of the country which they inhabited. 
 
 The great Scandinavian peninsula is divided by a range 
 of mountains traversing it from north to south; on the 
 east of these lies Sweden, a land of lakes and forests, but 
 affording large tracts susceptible of cultivation ; to the 
 west, Norway, the land of the Norse, par excellence . Here 
 the mountain ridges approach the western shores ; below 
 the highest ranges stretch the uplands, uninhabitable dur- 
 ing winter, but affording in summer a pasturage for cattle ; 
 seaward from these stretch innumerable rocky promontories, 
 which break the coast into a succession of separate glens. 
 Along the margin, and at the head of the long narrow bays 
 there are found secluded spots fitted for human habitation, 
 where the native population settled in isolated communi- 
 e 2 
 
52 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 ties. Between these settlements there was little commu- 
 nication, save by sea; the surrounding mountains long 
 restrained the Norse from forming a definite nation ; the 
 limits within which each colony was straitened prevented 
 even the establishment of tribes ; as the people described 
 by Homer, they had not council-bearing assemblies, nor 
 sacred ordinances, but they each ruled their own children 
 and separate household, and heeded not for one another.* 
 As in the case of the ancient Hellenes, the nature of the 
 sea coast forced them to become sailors from their infancy. 
 Thus they acquired their most distinctive characteristic — 
 boundless self-confidence, self-reliance, and (to use a Trench 
 term) individualism. The Norse bonder ruled supreme in 
 his own household ; standing by himself, he formed no 
 portion of a tribe in which his personalty was merged ; 
 his energies were not cramped by any political system ; 
 subject neither to tribal chief nor feudal lord, he tilled his 
 rocky farm, and if his ordinary resources failed, of his own 
 impulse and free will he betook himself to the ocean to 
 mend his ruined fortune. 
 
 The most conspicuous instance of this trait of their cha- 
 racter is the colonization of Iceland by the Norse. When 
 Harold Fairhair succeeded in establishing himself as a 
 king in Norway, the noblest of the Norse, repudiating the 
 idea of royalty, started forth to colonize a distant inhospi- 
 table island ; but they did so rather by common impulse 
 than prearranged plan. Each head of a family embarked 
 by himself with his household, and landed by himself 
 where he first made land. 
 
 Iceland for a short time presented the extraordinary 
 
 * Toiaiv d* our ’ ay opal (3ov\rjpopoi, ours BepiarsQ’ 
 
 QepiOTSVSi de SKaoroc 
 
 7rctidu)v rj5’ aXo^wv' oud ’ d\\i)\ujv aXeyovoi. 
 
 0 d. ix., 112. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 53 
 
 spectacle of a number of families living in absolute inde- 
 pendence, and without any political union. Then was 
 exhibited the second characteristic of the Norse race — a 
 voluntary acquiescence in self-imposed law. The island 
 was divided into districts, the celebrated assembly of the 
 Thingvalla instituted, and law and order established among 
 a kingless people, who governed themselves of their own 
 sovereign will. 
 
 In their ordinary life the Norse were justice-loving, free, 
 gentle, and hospitable, hard working, ever striving (from 
 an unfruitful soil, and under a wintry sky) to gain the 
 means of bare subsistence. It was, when painfully weeding 
 his fields, that an Icelandic hero received the affront so fatal 
 to him and others. Free and thrall, they worked together in 
 planting and reaping their scanty crops, in gathering in the 
 hay harvest, and pasturing their flocks on the upland. But 
 whether as a reaction against the monotony of their lives, 
 or stimulated by the fierce powers of nature which were 
 exhibited around them, there glowed in the breast of the 
 Norse a partly suppressed but wild and melancholy enthu- 
 siasm — their mythology was stern and fantastic ; their ideas 
 were full of war and destruction. The feelings of every 
 Norse could at intervals, upon occasion, break into stern 
 but sorrowful lyric. Thus, though in ordinary life simple 
 and self-conscious, by love and wine they were stimulated 
 to such expression of their feelings, and when drunken 
 with the madness of battle, they then passed into the 
 ecstacies of the terrible berserker rage. Inhabiting a 
 northern and barren country, they ever lived at the verge 
 of subsistence : a bad harvest, a political commotion, innu- 
 merable other causes might suddenly reduce them to want ; 
 but they were not men to patiently endure, to submit to 
 their destiny, and perish; their boldest and best would 
 then take to the sea as to their native element, and in vo- 
 
5 f 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 1 lintary bands sail southward, in search of subsistence 
 rather than of plunder : they were not mere pirates, who 
 defied law, and preferred crime and plunder to steady in- 
 dustry, but rather hungry wolves, in winter time issuing 
 from their woods and slaying others, that they themselves 
 might live. They were not mere plunderers by choice : 
 with equal energy they embarked in trade, and were will" 
 ing to take service under any chief who would hire them. 
 But in all their wanderings their hearts turned to the 
 lonely home in some northern fiord ; they went thence 
 forth to bring back to their family wealth and plenty, and 
 the fierce marauders who had harassed the coast of France 
 or England came back stained with blood, to the embraces 
 of their wives and children. 
 
 The deep feelings of these pirate Norsemen, as also their 
 unbounded energy, are shown in the passage in the Burnt 
 Njal, where the brothers Gunnar and Kolskegg (marked 
 for vengeance for the shedding of blood, although in self- 
 defence), having bade adieu to their home, rode down to 
 the ship which was to bear them away to safety. “ They 
 rode down the Markflect, and just then Gunnar’ s horse 
 tripped and threw him off. He turned with his face to- 
 wards the Lethe, and the homestead at Lethend, and 
 said — ‘ Fair is the Lethe, so fair that it has never seemed 
 to me so fair ; the corn-fields are white to harvest, and the 
 home mead is mown ; and now I will ride back home, and 
 will not fare abroad at all/ ‘Do not thus give joy to thy 
 foes,’ says Kolskegg, ‘ by breaking thy atonement, for no 
 man could think thou wouldst do this, and thou may’st be 
 sure that all will happen as Njal has said/ ‘ I will not go 
 away any whither,’ said Gunnar; ‘and so I would thou 
 
 shouldst do too.’ But he would not, and so they 
 
 parted there and then. Gunnar rides home to Lethend, 
 but Kolskegg rides to the ship and goes aboard.” The 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 55 
 
 gentler brother went back and met his doom ; the sterner 
 “was baptized in Denmark, but still he could not rest 
 there, but fared east to Bussia and was there one winter. 
 Then he fared thence out to Micklegarth (Constantinople), 
 and there took service with the Emperor.”^ 
 
 Those who fared forth were not mere adventurers : they 
 were the noblest and the freest of their nation. The esta- 
 blishment of royal power in Norway drove them out, and 
 the kings of Norway, who pursued them into new homes, 
 scattered them further southward. “As we now regard 
 the establishment of royal power in Norway, we see that 
 what to them was unbearable tyranny was really a step in 
 the great march of civilization, and that the centralization 
 of the royal authority was, in time, to be a blessing to the 
 kingdoms of the north. But to the freeman it was a curse. 
 He fought against it as long as he could : worsted over and 
 over again, he renewed the struggle, and at last, when his 
 isolated efforts were fruitless, he sullenly withdrew from 
 the field, and left the land of his fathers, where (as he 
 thought) no free-born man could now care to live. Now 
 it is we hear of him in all lands. Now France, now Italy, 
 now Spain, feel the fury of his wrath, and the weight of 
 
 his arm But of all countries, what were called 
 
 the western lands were his favourite haunt — England, 
 where the Saxons were losing their old dash and daring, 
 and settling down into a sluggish, sensual race ; Ireland, 
 the flower of Celtic lands, in which a system of great age 
 and undoubted civilization was then fast falling to pieces, 
 afforded a tempting battle-field in the everlasting wars be- 
 tween chief and chief ; Scotland, where the power of the 
 Piets was waning, while that of the Scots had not taken 
 firm hold on the country, and most of all, the islands in 
 the Scottish main — Orkney, Shetland, and the outlying 
 * The Burnt Njal, vol. i., pp. 237-256. 
 
56 
 
 LECTUEES ON IEISH HISTOEY. 
 
 Faroe Isles, — all these were his chosen abode. In these 
 islands he took deep root, established himself on the old 
 system, shared in the quarrels of the chiefs and princes of 
 the mainland — now helped Piet, and now Scot; roved the 
 seas and made all ships prizes ; and kept alive his old 
 grudge against Harold Fairhair and the new system by a 
 long series of piratical incursions on the Norwegian coast.”* 
 But besides those who fled from oppression, or sought 
 subsistence, the North furnished an unbounded supply of 
 mere sea rovers. Among all nations who reside upon the 
 sea-board, piracy has once been an honourable calling. In 
 ancient days pirate galleys of the Hellenes cruised in the 
 Mediterranean. Far down into the sixteenth century, 
 the Christian nations of Europe acted much in the same 
 manner. The old law, or no law, lingered in the Ameri- 
 can waters, and Drake and Frobisher robbed and burnt, 
 with the support of the government and the approbation 
 of their cotemporaries. But no nation ever took to the sea 
 with such unanimity and heartiness as the Northmen. The 
 two causes which have been mentioned — political disturb- 
 ance, and the pressure of population on the means of sub- 
 sistence — may have originated, but do not account for, this 
 almost national impulse. Many a freeman, who might 
 have followed as a retainer some leader by land, or ruled a 
 petty king on shore, sought and found a home and king- 
 dom upon the sea. 
 
 The profession of a sea rover was called in Norse 
 “ Viking” — a patronymic formed from “ Yik” (a bay); 
 the sea rover himself was called “ Yikinge. ” There 
 were vikings of every character — some, fierce robbers, 
 who spared neither sex nor age, of whom, as of the 
 buccaneers, were strange stories told, in both cases, proba- 
 
 * Dasent’s Introduction to the Burnt Njal, p. ix. 
 
LECTTJBES ON IBISH HISTOEY. 
 
 57 
 
 bly, equally wonderful and apocryphal. Some vikings 
 possessed the gentleness and honour which are attributed 
 too exclusively to the age of chivalry. Thorwald — a just 
 man, and though a heathen, in charity resembling a Chris- 
 tian saint — was a viking ; so was the gentle Gunnar of the 
 Burnt Njal.* 
 
 As the ideas of law and Christianity gradually spread, 
 public opinion turned against the professional viking. The 
 word viking was used to express any robber, and the pro- 
 fession of a viking died out when it was admitted to be an 
 anomaly, and felt to be a nuisance. 
 
 Owing to the misconception prevailing even among 
 educated persons in Ireland as to the origin and objects 
 of the Danes, I have been the more anxious to enable 
 you to realize their national character. They were a people 
 which, if transplanted to the shores of the Mediterranean, 
 might have rivalled the ancient Hellenes ; but their glorious 
 gifts did not mitigate the sufferings which they inflicted, 
 and their genius and energy gave them (in the case of 
 Ireland at least) greater capacities for mischief. 
 
 "We must distrust the statements in Irish Chronicles as 
 to the number of the invaders. The difficulties involved in 
 transporting large bodies of men were far greater then 
 than now, and the fleets which assailed Ireland were not 
 equipped by the resources of a wealthy state. They con- 
 sisted merely of volunteers, joint-stock partners in a pirati- 
 cal expedition, or of petty chiefs, with their immediate 
 followers. Twice was the whole power of the North mar- 
 shalled to assail Great Britain, on both occasions to meet 
 with disaster; but neither Harold Harfagr, nor Eric, 
 brought to the battles of Stamford Bridge or Largs any 
 large number of fighting men. The force of the Norse 
 
 Dasent’s Burnt Njal, vol. ii., p. 251. 
 
58 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 vikings lay rather in the picked character and equipment 
 of their followers, their reckless bravery, the suddenness 
 of their onset, and the rapidity with which they moved 
 from point to point in their vessels. Landing unexpect- 
 edly, they made directly for some well-known monastery, 
 whose wealth they carried back to their ships. Little 
 plunder could be obtained from the Celtic inhabitants, and 
 the efforts of the invaders were, therefore, directed against 
 the ecclesiastical establishments. 
 
 The monastery of Armagh was rebuilt ten times, and as 
 often destroyed. It was sacked three times in a month. 
 The result of these constant invasions was the extinction 
 of the feeble sparks of civilization which had been kindled 
 among the monks — the schools of learning were dispersed, 
 and the Celtic nation more disorganized than before. 
 
 The Danes appear in the Irish seas, for the first time, in 
 the year 795 (circa), when they plundered the island of 
 Eechru. The plundering of the religious houses and the 
 devastation of the country was carried on by the Danes 
 irregularly, but, on the whole, with great perseverance, 
 down to the middle of the ninth century, and afterwards, 
 as political or natural causes drove the Horse from their 
 homes, down to the period of Brian. 
 
 A determined effort permanently to conquer Ireland was, 
 about a. d. 832, made by a viking, named in the Irish 
 Annals Turgesius. Encouraged by the dissensions among 
 the native chieftains, he seems to have aimed at establish- 
 ing a sovereignty over his own countrymen in Ireland, the 
 foundation of a permanent colony, and the conquest or ex- 
 termination of the Celtic population. He would appear, 
 also, to have attempted to establish the Paganism of the 
 Horse in place of Christianity in Ireland. After a pro- 
 longed contest with the natives, he perished in the year 
 a.d. 845. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 59 
 
 When we consider the energy of the Norse, their 
 superior equipment, and experience in war, and the dis- 
 sensions which continually raged among the native chiefs, 
 it may seem strange that the Celtic population did not 
 succumb, and Ireland suffer the fate of the Western 
 Isles. But a nation organized upon the tribal system, and 
 inhabiting a country of sufficient extent, is equally inca- 
 pable of resistance and conquest. The invaders arriving 
 upon any point of the coast meet with a feeble and ill-con- 
 ducted resistance from the local chieftain ; hut the defeated 
 tribe, though perhaps crippled and pillaged, retires as un- 
 broken in organization as a regular army into its natural 
 fastnesses. As the invaders advance, a similar resistance 
 encounters them in each successive district. Their forces 
 waste in continually renewed and indecisive battles. There 
 is no capital, where the government of the natives is con- 
 centrated, which may be captured, and the natural resistance 
 thereby paralyzed. The natives of the country do not 
 gather of one accord into a body, and stake their freedom 
 on the issue of a single decisive engagement. As the in- 
 vaders traverse the country, they are exhausted by fruitless 
 combats, and dispirited by a prolonged resistance, which 
 could not have been reasonably expected, while their com- 
 munications are ever cut off by enemies, who, although 
 defeated, yet close upon their rear like water. The strength 
 for resistance in a nation so organized arises from its poli- 
 tical disorganization. Like an animal of the lower order, 
 it may be stabbed through, again and again, without a 
 mortal wound being inflicted. 
 
 Such is the history of the Danish predatory invasions — 
 a prolonged and hopeless struggle — the only result of 
 which was the extinction of nascent civilization, and the 
 degradation and debasement of the suffering people. 
 
60 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Many of the Danes, who had probably sought Ireland as 
 invaders, settled permanently in the country. They did 
 not, however, amalgamate with the Celtic inhabitants, but 
 founded numerous trading communities upon the coast. 
 Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, &c., were originally, and 
 always continued to be, Danish cities. The local names, 
 such as Howth, Skerries, Leixlip, &c., show how firmly 
 the Norse colonists established themselves. The cities 
 built by the Danes altogether differed from the temporary 
 constructions of the Celtic tribes ; they were at once gar- 
 risons and emporia, well fortified, and capable of defence. 
 An imperfect mutual league seems to have existed among 
 the chiefs of the towns and the Norse inhabitants of Man 
 and the southern islands ; the looseness of this alliance, and 
 the power which it possessed, when once got into action, 
 will be sufficiently shown in the history of Brian. 
 
 The establishments of the Norse might have had a favour- 
 able effect upon the condition of the island ; in them com- 
 merce might have been fostered, the accumulation of capital 
 stimulated, and that introduced which was so remarkably 
 deficient in the condition of the Irish — viz., a reasonable sti- 
 mulant to such industry as would tend to produce an 
 improvement in the material condition of the mass of the 
 people. The Danish colonies produced no such results ; they 
 rather aggravated the civil dissensions, and ultimately proved 
 the obstacle to the consolidation of Ireland into a national 
 monarchy. They were not sufficiently wealthy and power- 
 ful to command respect. Their civilization was not con- 
 spicuously superior to that of the natives, and the Paganism 
 still retained by the Danes deprived them of all moral in- 
 fluence among a people, of less political vigour, but pro- 
 fessing a purer creed. All the circumstances which enabled 
 the colony of Marseilles to exercise so beneficial an influ- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 61 
 
 in southern Gaul were utterly wanting to the Danish trad- 
 ing towns. Their precarious position left two courses only 
 open to them — amalgamation with the natives, or, by the 
 subjection of adjoining tribes, the establishment of a pow- 
 erful Danish state. The former they never attempted ; 
 the latter they wholly failed so accomplish. 
 
 The difference in the social and political ideas of the 
 Dane and Celt naturally rendered the former impossible. 
 How could a Celt be induced to become the citizen of a 
 Danish town? Could he abandon the ties of tribe and 
 clanship, quit the lands of which he was a joint owner, 
 leave the service of the Christian religion, and join an 
 assembly of men, half rovers, half traders, who, self-confi- 
 dent, bound together by no tie but voluntary acquies- 
 cence, gathered in arms at the Thingmot to ratify by the 
 popular voice the councils of an elective chief ? How could 
 the foreign colonists be absorbed into the surrounding tribes ? 
 Which association of clansmen would admit into the privi- 
 leges of their community aliens in blood and language, of 
 a hateful faith, and the descendants of those who had 
 wasted their country and desecrated their shrines ? Could 
 the sea-loving, wandering Dane have been fused together 
 with the sea-hating, home-abiding Irish, whose sympathies 
 were ever influenced by traditional or local associations ? 
 
 Conquest, when attempted upon a grand scale by Horse 
 adventurers, had failed for the causes before mentioned ; 
 much less could small town communities hope to succeed 
 in such a task. Their utmost efforts could not do more 
 than secure the district immediately around their homes ; 
 and they effected this by playing off the Irish chiefs against 
 each other, joining with them successively in temporary 
 alliances, and always ready to unite against that chief 
 whose power inspired them with most apprehension. Thus 
 
62 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 these cities formed constant centres for disturbance, and 
 were ever enlisted on the side of anarchy and disorder. At 
 intervals, when some crisis in the northern regions sent 
 out a fresh swarm of adventurers, an effort at conquest and 
 subjection by brute force was made ; but such power, ac- 
 quired by temporary, overbearing violence, was short-lived, 
 and matters regularly relapsed into their former condition. 
 For nearly two centuries such was the history of Ireland. 
 The Annals contain, during this period, merely a recital of 
 interminable battles with the foreigner, in which, with 
 commendable patriotism, the historians attribute many 
 more victories to the natives than the general result of 
 affairs would warrant. 
 
 Although it is certain that the Irish, if left by them- 
 selves, could not have led, under their system of govern- 
 ment — or rather absence of government — a life of peace 
 and quietness : yet no civil wars could have produced the 
 ruin and national and moral deterioration which were the 
 result of the first invasion and continued presence of the 
 Fanes. 
 
 Toward the end of the tenth century it at last seemed 
 that the long- afflicted nation had found a saviour in the 
 person of the only Irish king who has acquired a position 
 in European history. At this date the Fanes of Limerick, 
 largely reinforced by fresh arrivals, attempted the conquest 
 of Munster. The event is thus described in the Irish Annals : 
 “ There came after that an immensely great fleet, with 
 Imar, the grandson of Imar, the chief king of the 
 foreigners, and with his three sons. They landed and en- 
 camped near the harbour of Limerick. Munster was 
 plundered and ravaged on all sides by them, and they 
 levied pledges and hostages from all the men of Munster. 
 They brought them, under indescribable oppression, to the 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 63 
 
 foreigner and the Dane. Moreover, he ordained kings and 
 chiefs, stewards and bailiffs, in every territory, and after 
 that in every chieftaincy, and he levied the royal rent. 
 And such was the oppressiveness of the tribute, that there 
 was a king from among the foreigners over every territory 
 — a chief over every chieftaincy — an abbot over every 
 church — a steward over every village — and a soldier in 
 every house. So that none of the men of Erinn had power 
 to give even the milk of his cow, nor so much as the clutch 
 of eggs of one hen, in succour to the aged or a friend, but 
 was forced to preserve them for the foreigner ; and, though 
 there were but one milk-giving cow in the house, she durst 
 not be milked, but kept for the foreigner ; and, however 
 long absent he might be, his share durst not be lessened. 
 Although there was in the house but one cow, it must be 
 killed for the meal of one night, if the means of supply 
 could not be otherwise obtained; and the tribute of an 
 ounce of silver was paid for every head, and he who had 
 not the means to pay himself, went into slavery. No Irish 
 chief was able to give them deliverance from the foreigner, 
 because of the excellence of their armour, the greatness of 
 their achievements, their strength and valour, and the ex- 
 cess of their thirst for the fruitful, grassy lands of Erinn/’*' 
 Among the tribes who suffered from the Limerick Danes 
 was the Dal Cais Borumha, or the race of Cas Mac Tail, 
 grandson of Lughaidh, called Borumha — some say, from the 
 name of a village near Killaloe. The privileges and pre- 
 rogatives of this favourite tribe are described as follows : — 
 They were exempt from all taxes, hostages, rents, and fees 
 to the King of Cashel, or any other chieftain, “ so long as 
 Erinn was not theirs.” They were bound to defend the 
 King of Cashel against aggression, and to support his rights 
 
 * Wars of the Gaedhil and the Gaell, p. 49. 
 
64 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 against the northern half of Ireland — that is to say, against 
 the chief Kings of Tara, who were of the O’Neill race, and 
 whose sovereignty over Munster was disputed by the de- 
 scendants of Oilioll Olum. The Dal Cais occupied the van 
 on entering an enemy’s country, and guarded the rear in 
 retreat. They had an alternate right to Cashel — that is, 
 the kings of Cashel were to be chosen in alternate succes- 
 sion from the descendants of Eoghan Mor and Cormac Cas, 
 of which latter race the Dal Cais of Thomond were the 
 most celebrated.* 
 
 To understand the position of the Dal Cais, we must 
 bear in mind that they were not of the royal race of Mali, 
 and it was impossible that a chieftain of a subordinate line, 
 however illustrious, could legally occupy the throne re- 
 served for the sacred lineage The Dal Cais were at this 
 time under the leadership of two brothers — Mathamghain 
 (, Anglice , Mahon), and Brian. 
 
 These two brothers, refusing to submit to the foreigner, 
 carried off their people and their chattels over the Shannon 
 westward, and for some time carried on a merciless guerilla 
 warfare. At length, both parties being thoroughly tired 
 of each other, a peace was made between Mathgamhain 
 and the chieftains of the foreigners. But the younger and 
 more determined brother, refusing to make peace, betook 
 himself to the forests of North Munster. In the prolonged 
 contest which ensued he and his followers suffered severely, 
 and the foreigners cut off his people, so that he had no more 
 than fifteen. Compassionating his brother’s misfortunes, 
 Mathgamhain opened communications with him. In a 
 conference between them, Brian fiercely told his more 
 yielding brother that he should not speak of submission, 
 
 4 ‘ because it was hereditary for him to die, and hereditary' 
 
 * Wars of the Gaedhil and the Gaell, p. 53. 
 
LECTTTEES ON IEISH HISTOEY. 
 
 65 
 
 for all the Dal Cais, for their fathers and grandfathers had 
 died, and death was certain ; but it was not hereditary to 
 submit, for their fathers had not submitted to any one on 
 earth. It was no honour to their courage to abandon, 
 without battle or conflict, to dark foreigners and dark grim 
 Gentiles the inheritance their fathers and grandfathers had 
 defended in battles against the chiefs of the Gaedhil.” 
 Thereupon the tribe of the Dal Cais were assembled before 
 Mathgamhain, and he appealed to them whether they would 
 have peace or war. "With one voice, young and old, they 
 answered that they preferred death in defending the free- 
 dom of their patrimony to submission to the tyranny of 
 the pirates; “and this was the voice of hundreds as the 
 voice of one/’ It was arranged that they should rally for 
 battle on their original tribe land, “for it was better and 
 more righteous to do battle for their inheritance than for 
 land usurped by conquest and the sword.”* 
 
 In a. d. 968 a decisive battle was fought between the 
 Danes of Limerick and the Dal Cais at Sulchoit, near the 
 town of Tipperary. The Danes were utterly routed, and 
 the city of Limerick captured. “ They followed them also 
 into the fort, and slaughtered them in the streets and 
 houses, and the fort was sacked by them after that. They 
 carried off their jewels and their best property, their sad- 
 dles, their gold, their silver, their beautifully- woven cloth 
 of various colours, their satins, and silken cloth ; they car- 
 ried away their girls, their silk-clad women, their boys. 
 The fort in the good town they reduced to a cloud of smoke. 
 The whole of the captives were collected on the hills of 
 Saingel. Every one that was fit for war was killed, and 
 every one that was fit for a slave was enslaved. ”f 
 
 * Wars of the Gaedhil and the Gaill, p. 69. 
 
 f Ibid., p. 79. 
 
 E 
 
66 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Mathgamhain now established himself upon the throne 
 of Munster. He had broken the power of the Danes in 
 Limerick, and took hostages from the rival chieftains of 
 his own race, and reigned without dispute for about six 
 years. He was subsequently treacherously slain by a con- 
 spiracy of the tribal chiefs. 
 
 Brian succeeded to his brother, and reduced Munster to 
 complete obedience. He took hostages not only from the 
 chiefs of that district, but also of the churches, lest they 
 should receive rebels or thieves to sanctuary. Thus early 
 in his career Brian exhibited his determination to maintain 
 order and administer justice. 
 
 Ossory was next subdued, and at Magh Ailbhe he re- 
 ceived the homage of the kings of Leinster. This was in 
 a.d. 984,’ and subsequently Brian assumed to act as the 
 Supreme King of Ireland. In a.d. 1000 the Leinster men 
 revolted, and made an alliance with the Dublin Danes, 
 who were naturally anxious to prevent the establishment 
 of a vigorous national monarchy. On the advance of Brian, 
 the Leinstermen sent their cattle and families into the 
 territory of the Dublin Danes, and the allied forces ad- 
 vanced to meet the king. The celebrated battle, which 
 finally established Brian upon the throne of Ireland, took 
 place at Glen-Mamma, near Dunlavin, in the County Wick- 
 low. The Danish forces were entirely defeated. The 
 remnants of the beaten army fled to Hollywood, thence to 
 the Horse-pass ford on the Lifley, above Poul-a-phouca, 
 where they were again routed. Maelmordha ( Anglice , 
 Macmurrough) was captured concealed in a yew tree 
 near Hollywood, from which he was dragged by Murchadh 
 {Anglice, Mourrough), the son of Brian. Dublin is stated 
 to have been captured and plundered, though perhaps we 
 may doubt this statement of the Irish annalists. The fo- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 67 
 
 reigners were, however, for the time reduced to subjection. 
 “ Ill-luck was it for the foreigners when Brian was horn, 
 for it was by him they were destroyed and enslaved. 
 There was not a winnowing sheet from Howth to Kerry 
 that had not a foreigner in bondage, nor was there a mill 
 without a foreign woman. JSTo son of a soldier or officer 
 of the Gaedhil deigned to put his hand to a flail or any 
 other labour, nor did a woman deign to put her hands to 
 the grinding mill, or to wash her clothes, but had a foreign 
 man or woman to work for them.”* 
 
 Brian was now undisputed master of Ireland, king, not 
 by hereditary right or popular election, but a king in a 
 higher sense as possessing supreme power, which he wielded 
 for the maintenance of justice and law. ITe may be called 
 a usurper, but he was (like Cromwell) a usurper far su- 
 perior to a mere king. Malachi of Meath, the titular king 
 of the sacred race, submitted without a struggle, and 
 assumed a position subordinate to the real ruler. 
 
 Bor several years Ireland was firmly governed by this 
 self-appointed sovereign, and there is no question as to the 
 excellence of his government. “ By him were erected in 
 Erinn noble churches and their sanctuaries. He sent pro- 
 fessors and masters to teach wisdom and knowledge, and 
 to buy books, beyond the sea and the great ocean, because 
 the writings and books in every church and sanctuary had 
 been destroyed by the plunderers ; and Brian himself gave 
 the price of learning and the price of books to every one 
 separately who went on this service. Many churches were 
 built and repaired by him, bridges and roads were made, 
 the fortresses of Munster were strengthened.! .... 
 
 * Wars of the Gaedhil and Gaill, p. 117. 
 
 f Ibid., p. 139. 
 
68 
 
 LECTUKES ON IKISH HISTOEY. 
 
 “ He continued in this way prosperous, peaceful, hospitable, 
 just-judging, venerated, with law and rule among the 
 clergy, with honour and renown among the laity ; power- 
 ful, secure for fifteen years in the chief sovereignty of 
 Erinn.” 
 
 A truly national government of this description found 
 its bitterest enemies among the provincial chiefs, who longed 
 to restore anarchy, and were willing to league with the 
 foreigner for that purpose. It required years of stern re- 
 straint to crush local tyrants into obedient nobles ; and 
 Brian was not granted a sufficient space of days, nor found 
 a successor capable of fulfilling his self-imposed task. 
 The final outburst, which ended in the death of Brian at 
 the hour of victory, and threw Ireland back into hopeless 
 confusion, arose, as might have been expected, from the 
 wounded vanity of a provincial chief. Maelmordha, the 
 defeated, of Glen Mamma, was conducting to Brian’s palace 
 of Cenn Coradh three masts of pine. A dispute arose in 
 ascending a boggy mountain, whereupon the chief himself 
 put his hand to one of the masts. He had on him at the 
 time a silken tunic which Brian had given him, and with 
 the exertion one of the buttons of the tunic broke. When 
 he arrived at Cenn Coradh, he sent the tunic to his sister 
 Gormlaith, a step-daughter of Brian, to have it repaired. 
 Gormlaith cast the tunic into the fire, and reproached her 
 brother, saying she deemed it foul scorn that vassalage 
 should be suffered by him, whose fathers had never endured 
 it, and that his degradation would be entailed upon his 
 children. Full of angry thoughts and discontent, Mael- 
 mordha stood by the next day at a game of chess played 
 between Murchadh, who had dragged him from the yew 
 trees at Glen Mamma, and Conaing, a nephew of Brian. 
 Maelmordha having advised a move by which Murchadh 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 69 
 
 lost the game, the latter cried, “ ’Twas thou that gavest 
 advice to the foreigners when they were defeated. 5 ’ Angry 
 taunts were at once exchanged. “ I will give them advice 
 again, and they shall not he defeated . 55 “ Have a yew tree 
 ready .’ 5 Then Maelmordha turned, and without leave-taking 
 fled from the king’s presence. Brian sent after him a messen- 
 ger of peace ; but the angry prince turned, and struck him 
 to the earth at the head of the bridge of Killaloe. “ Some 
 were anxious to pursue him then, and not to allow him to 
 escape until he had made submission ; but Brian said it 
 should be at the threshold of his house he would demand 
 justice from him, and that he would not prove treacherous 
 to him in his own house. 55 * 
 
 Leinster at once rose to arms, and the most zealous allies 
 of the insurgents were the Danes of Dublin, ever anxious 
 to promote disorder. Sigtrygg was then the Danish kiug 
 of Dublin; his mother’s name was Kormlada. “ She was 
 the fairest of all women, and best gifted in everything that 
 was not in her own power ; but it was the talk of men that 
 she did all things evil over which she had any power.” 
 Kormlada was the divorced wife, or the discarded mistress, 
 of Brian ; and “ so grim was she against King Brian after 
 their parting, that she would fain have him dead.”* King 
 Sigtrygg was himself married to a daughter of Brian. 
 
 The Dublin Danes, remembering the battle of Glen 
 Mamma, distrusted their own strength, and desired to enlist 
 in their cause the Norsemen of the "Western Isles. The 
 times were singularly propitious for such a project. The 
 increasing power of the Norwegian king and the extension 
 of Christianity had crippled the power of the western jarls. 
 
 * Wars of the Gaedhil and Gaill, pp. 143-147. 
 
 f Burnt Njal, vol. ii., p. 323. 
 
70 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 They feared and hated the extension of the sovereign power; 
 they loathed Christianity, as a religion forced upon them 
 by brute violence. The doctrines of the Gospel had been 
 preached among the Norse as they never were else. Their 
 watchword was, “ Baptism or death and those who un- 
 willingly had submitted to that rule were eager to relapse, 
 on the first safe opportunity, into their former faith. The 
 western jarls must have readily accepted an alliance which 
 promised to them fresh conquests, and an opportunity of 
 establishing themselves in security after the old ways. 
 Chief of the Orkney jarls was Sigurd, a Christian by 
 name, but who had only yielded to the preaching of King 
 Olaf, Tryggvi’s son, when that zealous missionary had him 
 entirely in his power, and had threatened to hew off his 
 son’s head before his eyes over the gunwale. To the court 
 of Sigurd came King Sigtrygg, seeking aid. The tale of 
 how he fared is told in the Burnt Njal : — 
 
 “ Then King Sigtrygg stirred in his business with Earl 
 Sigurd, and bade him go to the war with him against King 
 Brian. 
 
 “ The earl was long steadfast ; but the end of it was that 
 he let the king have his way, but said he must have his 
 mother’s hand for his help, and be king in Ireland if they 
 slew Brian. But all his men besought Earl Sigurd not to 
 go into the war, but it was no good. 
 
 “ So they parted on the understanding that Earl Sigurd 
 gave his word to go ; but King Sigtrygg promised him his 
 mother and the kingdom. 
 
 “It was so settled that Earl Sigurd was to come with 
 all his host to Dublin by Palm Sunday. 
 
 “ Then King Sigtrygg fared south to Ireland, and told 
 his mother, Kormlada, that the Earl had undertaken to 
 come, and also what he had pledged himself to grant him. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 71 
 
 a She showed herself well pleased at that, but said they 
 must gather greater force still. 
 
 “ Sigtrygg asked whence this was to be looked for ? 
 
 “ She said there were two Vikings lying off the west of 
 Man ; and that they had thirty ships, and, she went on, 
 they are men of such hardihood that nothing can withstand 
 them. The one’s name is Ospak, and the other’s Brodir. 
 Thou shalt fare to find them, and spare nothing to get 
 them into thy quarrel, whatever pine they ask. 
 
 “ Now, King Sigtrygg fares and seeks the Vikings, and 
 found them lying outside off Man ; King Sigtrygg brings 
 forward his errand at once, but Brodir shrank from helping 
 him until he, King Sigtrygg, promised him the kingdom 
 and his mother, and they were to keep this such a secret 
 that Earl Sigurd should know nothing about it ; Brodir, too, 
 was to come to Dublin on Palm Sunday. 
 
 “ So King Sytrigg fared home to his mother, and told 
 her how things stood. 
 
 “ After that those brothers, Ospak and Brodir, talked 
 together, and then Brodir told Ospak all that he and Sig- 
 trygg had spoken of, and bade him fare to battle with him 
 against King Brian, and said he set much store on his 
 going. 
 
 “ But Ospak said he would not fight against so good a 
 king. 
 
 “ Then they were both wroth, and sundered their band 
 at once. Ospak had ten ships, and Brodir twenty. 
 
 “ Ospak was a heathen, and the wisest of all men. He 
 laid his ships inside in a sound, but Brodir lay outside him. 
 
 “ Brodir had been a Christian man, and a mass-deacon 
 by consecration, but he had thrown off his faith, and be- 
 come God’s dastard, and now worshipped heathen fiends, 
 and he was, of all men, most skilled in sorcery. He had 
 
72 
 
 LECIT7EES ON IEISH H1STOEY. 
 
 that coat of mail on which no steel wonld bite. He was 
 both tall and strong, and had such long locks that he 
 tucked them under his belt. His hair was black. 
 
 “ It so happened one night that a great din passed over 
 Brodir and his men ; so that they all woke, and sprang up, 
 and put on their clothes. 
 
 “ Along with that came a shower of boiling blood. 
 
 4 ‘ For two nights followed other portents. 
 
 “ On the fourth night they went to sleep first of all, but 
 when Brodir woke up, he drew his breath painfully, and 
 bade them put off the boat, ‘ for,’ he said, ‘ I will go to 
 see Ospak.’ 
 
 u Then he got into the boat and some men with him, 
 but when he found Ospak he told him of the wonders which 
 had befallen them, and bade him say what he thought they 
 boded. 
 
 “ Ospak would not tell him before he pledged him peace, 
 and Brodir promised him peace, but Ospak still shrank from 
 telling him till night fell. 
 
 “ Then Ospak spoke and said — ‘When blood rained on 
 you, therefore shall you shed many men’s blood, both of 
 your own and others. But when ye heard a great din, 
 then ye must have been shown the crack of doom, and ye 
 shall all die speedily. But when weapons fought against 
 you, that must forebode a battle ; but when ravens pressed 
 you, that marks the devils which ye put faith in, and who 
 will drag you all down to the pains of hell.’ 
 
 “ Then Brodir was so wroth that he could answer never 
 a word, but he went at once to his men. . . . 
 
 “ Ospak saw all their plan, and then he vowed to take 
 the true faith, and to go to King Brian, and follow him 
 till his death day 
 
 “ Then Ospak told King Brian all that he had learned. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 73 
 
 and took baptism, and gave himself over into the king’s 
 hand.”* 
 
 At the appointed time Earl Sigurd arrived in Dublin, 
 proclaiming his heathendom, by carrying in front of his 
 army the famous Eaven banner, wrought by magic spells, 
 which bore victory to the host before which it fluttered, 
 but death to the man who bore it. Hither, too, came 
 Brodir, the apostate deacon, and Maelmordha, with the 
 men of Leinster, and the Hy-Kinshela of the county of 
 Wexford. 
 
 Meanwhile Brian approached Dublin with the troops 
 of Munster, Connaught, and Meath ; having burned Kil- 
 mainham, he despatched his son, Donough, to plunder 
 Leinster, and himself encamped on the green of Dublin. 
 
 “ Brodir tried, by sorcery, how the fight would go, but 
 the answer ran thus, that if the fight were on Good Friday, 
 King Brian would fall, but win the day ; but if they fought 
 before, they would all fall who were against him.” 
 
 On the eve of the battle various portents appeared, which 
 show how fully alive both parties were to the great issue 
 between them. Odin appeared in the pagan army. During 
 the night Brian was warned by the guardian spirit of his 
 race. At length, on the morning of Good Friday the allied 
 army issued out from Dublin. 
 
 To understand what occurred, we must remember how 
 much of Dublin has been built over lands reclaimed from 
 the sea in the last century. The city covered only the 
 region on which Christ Church stands. The river was 
 crossed by a bridge at the foot of the present Bridge-street, 
 beyond which there was a fortified suburb, whence ran the 
 great northern road, now known as Stoneybatter. The 
 sea-shore ran from Essex-bridge, through Abbey-street, 
 
 * Burnt Njal, vol. ii., pp. 227-232. 
 
74 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Sackville-street, and below the ridge upon which Summer- 
 hill is built, down to the present Ballybough-bridge, where 
 was then a stake-weir. It was perfectly possible, from 
 the fortifications of the old city, to see the whole shore of 
 the north side of the bay, which was then fringed with 
 scrub-wood. 
 
 The Danes and Leinster men marching out from Dublin, 
 instead of advancing northward, and securing their retreat 
 to Dublin, turned due east towards Clontarf, losing all 
 connexion with the city, and trusting for retreat to their 
 galleys, which were brought up to the shore. 
 
 The Irish army must have been drawn up facing the 
 south or south-west. In its array, also, Irish and Danes 
 were mingled. The Yiking Ospak was opposed to King 
 Sigtrygg of Dublin, and the Irish of Leinster were opposed 
 to the Munster Irish of Brian. Lor the Irish, their ex- 
 istence as a nation was staked upon victory and the life 
 of Brian. By the Norsemen the combat was rgarded as 
 the last struggle of heathendom. 
 
 The annalists inform us — and their statement is confirmed 
 by incidental evidence — that the struggle was protracted 
 from sunrise to sunset, when, at length, the allied Danes 
 and Leinster men gave way. 
 
 Dark forebodings that they were fighting on a losing 
 side seem to have filled the breasts of the bravest Norse. 
 Two successive bearers of the Haven banner were slain. 
 “ Then Earl Sigurd called on Thorstein, the son of Hall 
 of the Side, to bear the banner, and Thorstein was just 
 about to lift the banner, but then Asmund the White 
 said : — 
 
 “ ‘ Don’t bear the banner ! for all they who bear it get 
 their death.’ 
 
 “ ‘ Hrafn the Bed !’ called out Earl Sigurd, ‘bear thou 
 the banner.’ 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 75 
 
 44 4 Bear thine own devil thyself/ answered Hrafn. 
 
 44 Then the Earl said : — 
 
 44 4 Tis fittest that the beggar should bear the bag/ and 
 with that he took the banner from the staff, and put it 
 under his cloak.”* 
 
 Sigurd accepted his fate as the last hero of a beaten creed. 
 
 The routed army was driven hack, not upon Dublin, 
 hut upon the sea. A fierce struggle took place at the 
 ford of the Tolka, the only means left of reaching Dublin, 
 which the remnants of the Danes, flying towards the city, 
 held against their pursuers. 
 
 The Irish legends tell us that all day long Sigtrygg 
 viewed the battle from the battlements upon which, in the 
 next century, the last Danish king was beheaded in view 
 of the Scandinavian fleet. By him sat his wife, the daugh- 
 ter of Brian. As they saw on the northern shore of the hay 
 the fury of the first assault of Sigurd’s Orkney men, 44 "Well, 
 do the foreigners reap the field,” said the king to his wife ; 
 44 many a sheaf do they cast from them.” 44 The result 
 will be seen,” said she, 44 at the end of the day.” As the 
 flight of the Danes to their ships was seen by Sigtrygg 
 and his wife, 44 It seems to me/’ said Brian’s daughter, 
 4 4 that the foreigners have gained their patrimony.” 4 4 What 
 meanest thou, woman,” said the king ? 44 Are they not 
 rushing into the sea,” said she, 44 which is their natural 
 inheritance ? I wonder are they in heat, like cattle ? If 
 so, they tarry not to be milked.” In his rage, the king 
 struck her in the face, j 
 
 Meanwhile what had been the fate of Brian ? Too old 
 to join personally in the combat, he remained in the rear 
 of the host. A cushion was spread under him, and he 
 
 * Burnt Njall, vol. ii., p. 334. 
 f Wars of the Gaedhil and the Gaill, p. 193. 
 
76 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY . 
 
 opened his psalter, and as a Christian king he prayed for 
 victory. As the day wore on he asked for tidings — what 
 was the condition of Murchadh’s standard? He was told 
 it was standing and many banners of the Dal Cais around it. 
 Again he asked the same question, and was told that the 
 banner of his tribe was flying at the west of the array. 
 Towards evening he again repeated the question ; he was 
 told that of the armies on either side the greater part was 
 slain, the foreigners were defeated, but Murchadh’s stand- 
 ard had fallen. On the death of his eldest and best be- 
 loved son, the old man lost all heart. He would not mount 
 his horse and retire to the camp, and declared that in a 
 vision the spirit of his house had foretold to him he should 
 be slain. While he lingered, a party of Danes approached 
 them ; it was the viking Brodir, who, disdaining flight, had 
 fought his way through the opposing enemy, and with two 
 attendants alone sought the woods. “ There are people 
 coming toward us here,” said his attendant to Brian. 
 “Woe is me ! What manner of people are they?” said 
 Brian. “ Blue, stark-naked people,” said the attendant. 
 “Alas ! ” said Brian, “ they are foreigners of the army; it 
 is not to do good to us they come.” As Brodir, in his 
 haste, passed by without observing the king, one of his 
 attendants plucked him back, crying, “ The King ! The 
 King ! This is the King.” “Ho,” cried Brodir, “ a priest ! 
 a priest!” “No,” said the soldier, “it is the great 
 king Brian.” Brodir turned back, and the last heathen vi- 
 king and the only king of Ireland fell by each other’s hands. * 
 Both parties might now count their losses. The bravest 
 and best of the champions on either side had fallen. The 
 Irish army, mangled and weakened, held the field of battle. 
 
 Wars of the Gaedhil and the Gaill, p. 197. 
 
LECTTJBES ON IEISH HISTOEY. 77 
 
 The remnant of the Danes and Leinster men still occupied 
 Dublin, and the Danish fleet of Sigurd still rode at anchor 
 in the bay. Both parties were practically defeated — both 
 parties lost the great stake for which they had played. Ire- 
 land was not to be handed over to heathen invaders, nor 
 was it longer to endure the blessing of a just and powerful 
 government. This day of bloodshed and slaughter, of dis- 
 aster and double failure, was long remembered in the an- 
 nals of the North. Dor the last time by mortal eyes the 
 weird sisters were seen to weave their fatal woof which they 
 tore asunder, as if to typify that ruin and destruction fell 
 that day on all alike. In their magic song they predicted 
 that a new nation was to conquer and rule Erinn : — 
 
 “Now new-coming nations 
 That island shall rule, 
 
 Who on outlying headlands 
 Abode ere the fight. 
 
 I say that king mighty 
 To death now is done, 
 
 Now low before spearpoint 
 The Earl bows his head.” 
 
 In Ireland, at Swinefell, blood appeared upon the priest’s 
 stole on that fatal Friday, and at Thvattwater the priest at 
 Mass that day saw such awful sights that it was long ere 
 he could sing the prayers.* 
 
 After the battle, Donnchadh returned with the poor 
 spoil of five and twenty oxen, which were slaughtered by 
 the remnant of the Irish on the green of Dublin, upon 
 which angry challenges occurred between the Danish king 
 of Dublin and Donnchadh, Brian’s heir, but neither party 
 were inclined to renew the battle. That night the Irish 
 camp was all confusion. The reluctant vassals of Brian 
 
 * Eurnt Njal, vol. ii., p. 339-342. 
 
78 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 hailed his death as the restoration of freedom, or at least 
 scorned to submit to his successor. They said among them- 
 selves — “ The attention of Brian’s son will be on you, to 
 seek for lordship and power such as his father had, and 
 should he reach his home he will be more difficult to meet 
 than now.”* The Munster men, remembering that the 
 right of the Dal Cais was to an alternate sovereignty only 
 at Cashel, insisted that Brian’s son should abdicate and 
 sink to the position of a subject. 
 
 Donnchadh replied to this, that it was not voluntarily 
 they had become subject to his father or to his father’s 
 brother, for the whole of Munster had been wrested by 
 Brian from the foreigners when the natives were unable to 
 contest it with them ; that if he had equal numbers on his 
 side they never should have left him till they had submitted. 
 
 The Munster men rose in arms against the son of Brian. 
 Thus, within three days after the death of the king we find 
 the only surviving son of Brian assailed by the remnant of 
 the Irish army. The dissensions of his assailants, who 
 quarrelled among themselves, enabled the remnants of the 
 Dal Cajs to escape; but so enfeebled were they, and so 
 utterly, with the death of Brian, had they lost their supre- 
 macy, that they barely escaped at Athy from the hands of 
 the men of Ossory, whose chief had been formerly taken 
 prisoner by Brian and forced to give hostages. 
 
 Such was the end of the battle of Clontarf, in which, if 
 the foreigners were defeated, a far greater disaster fell upon 
 the Irish people, and the real victory was won by anarchy 
 over order. The dethroned Malachi resumed his kingdom 
 as if his administration had never been interrupted. Brian 
 was treated as a usurper ; and in the same century Tigher- 
 
 Wars of the Gaedhill and the Gaill, p. 213 
 
LECTURES OK IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 79 
 
 nach, recording the death of Malachi and the length of 
 his reign, ignored the twelve years of Brian’s usurpation, 
 including them in the total which he assigned to Malachi 
 
 as in English history we count the years of Cromwell’s 
 
 government as portion of the reign of Charles II. 
 
 The Norse were not driven out of any of their sea-board 
 towns ; retaining their former position, they continued their 
 usual conflicts with the native tribes. The Normans, upon 
 their arrival in Ireland, found the sea-hoard towns in the 
 hands of independent Danish communities. After a short 
 but fierce resistance, the Danes amalgamated with what must 
 have seemed to them a kindred race, and we find them at a 
 very early period actively assisting the Anglo-Norman in- 
 vaders. Dane and Norman, in the eyes of the natives, 
 were alike styled Gaill, or foreigners ; but for centuries the 
 Scandinavian descent of the citizens of many Irish towns 
 was an acknowledged fact, and their position and privileges 
 were recognized by the English Government. 
 
 But upon the Celtic nation fell ruin and disorder. 
 There was none powerful or wise enough to carry out the 
 great views of Brian. The old system, ill-constructed as 
 it was, had lost hold of the national mind. The constitu- 
 tional principle under which the Ard-Righ (or supreme 
 king) had been exclusively elected from the descendants 
 of Niall of the Hostages was no longer acquiesced in. 
 The princes of Connaught and Leinster asserted claims to 
 the throne, maintaining that they had as good a title as 
 Brian to become Ard-Righ in their turn. So, from the 
 death of Malachi to the arrival of Strongbow, Ireland was 
 a chaos, in which the chiefs of the great separate tribes 
 struggled to secure temporary supremacy. . It is not so 
 strange that the English invasion succeeded in a. d. 1170, 
 as that so tempting a field had not been previously occu- 
 pied by some other adventurers. 
 
LECTURE IY. 
 
 THE INVASION OE IRELAND BY THE NORMANS. 
 
 In the twelfth century it must have appeared certain 
 that the powerful and ambitious Norman rulers of England 
 would extend their power over all the British Islands. It 
 might have been supposed that such an extension of their 
 power would have proved advantageous to nations, who, 
 although differing in language and origin, had identical 
 interests, material and political. But that which seemed 
 certain and imminent required more than four centuries for 
 its accomplishment ; that which might have seemed ad- 
 vantageous cost both nations unbounded treasure and 
 outpourings of blood, and brought upon Ireland the con- 
 temptuous pity, and upon England the moral reprobation, of 
 Europe. 
 
 I stated on the last occasion that it is not so surprising 
 that Ireland was conquered, or rather assailed, in the 
 twelfth century, as that such event had not occurred se- 
 venty years before. The Red King from the coast of Pem- 
 brokeshire had gazed upon the Western Island as a des- 
 tined conquest. A petty prince of the Isle of Man had 
 conceived and essayed this enterprise. Ireland seemed to 
 invite a conqueror. 
 
 The Irish nation was in the condition of political and 
 social dissolution. The royal house of Niall no longer ruled 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 81 
 
 in undisputed sovereignty. The hill of Tara had long been 
 crowned but with ruins ; thither no supreme elected chief 
 summoned his kindred rulers of provinces, and subordinate 
 chiefs of less distinguished but as ancient lineage, who, 
 thus reminded of their common origin, returned home to 
 maintain order and right each in his native tribe. This 
 government, perhaps mythical and ideal, had passed away 
 for ever. It had been ruined and trembling to its fal], 
 when Brian levelled it to the earth for ever. He strove to 
 found a well-ordered kingdom by force, enlisted in the 
 cause of order — the rule of the sword, sternly wielded in 
 the name of justice and peace ; but he, too, had perished, 
 and with him his system. Ho successor to his noble ambi- 
 tion arose strong enough to grasp his fallen sceptre. How 
 reckless chiefs fiercely struggled for illusory supremacy. 
 How few without crime reached the throne ! How few 
 died a bloodless death ! And meanwhile, each local chief- 
 tain in his narrow sphere did what seemed right to him in 
 his own eyes ; if powerful, oppressing his neighbours ; if 
 weak, oppressed by them. The monastic establishments, the 
 only refuges for religion and civilization, had been annihi- 
 lated during the Danish invasions. 
 
 The state of the nation called for a radical change. Po- 
 litical disorganization cannot be the normal condition of 
 any people. If so, the world would relapse into worse 
 than ancient barbarism. Political disorganization is the 
 certain precursor of political and social revolution — of one 
 of those crises in history which resemble the cataclysms 
 conceived by former geologists as terminating an era, and 
 introducing a new creation. A disorganized nation is a 
 mournful spectacle. To us at present there is no more me- 
 lancholy study than the people of Mexico ; but still more 
 melancholy to imagine a people so brilliant and gifted as 
 
 G 
 
82 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 the Celts, abandoned without guidance, and blindly stum- 
 bling they knew not whither. 
 
 Terrible seems the crisis when it arrives. It is intro- 
 duced and accomplished amid increased personal suffering. 
 Those whom we most respect as individuals, all that is 
 most to be sympathized with, are enlisted in the party who 
 strive to support the impossible. But after the heat and 
 confusion of the combat has passed, and we look back upon 
 it as an historic past, we generally see that the nation’s 
 regeneration has been cheaply purchased by the sufferings 
 of individuals. The destruction of the Roman Empire is 
 the most terrible event in history. Unspeakable were the 
 miseries which accompanied its fall. But when we be- 
 hold the glorious edifice of the Middle Ages arising amidst 
 its ruins, or when we look round upon Christian civilized 
 Europe, can we regret for a moment the fall of the corrupted 
 Pagan world ? When we behold civilized and well-ordered 
 Germany, our satisfaction is not diminished by the recollec- 
 tions of the Saxon war of Charlemagne, or the merciless 
 conquests of the Teutonic knights. Though we read with 
 horror the history of the Reign of Terror, do any French, 
 except the fashionable coteries of the Faubourg St. Ger- 
 main — does any educated man desire that the verdict of 
 the Revolution were reversed, and that a degenerated 
 Bourbon still ruled over France ? 
 
 The advantage, however, of a revolution is in the pro- 
 portion of its intensity and completeness. It must utterly 
 annihilate the past arid its traditions, that a clear stage 
 may be left for the new construction. What is to be done 
 should be done quickly, as Napoleon wrote to Cialdini, 
 “ Frappez vite et frappez fort.” For, of all political dis- 
 asters, the worst is that a nation socially disorganized 
 should suffer from an unsuccessful revolution or an incom- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 83 
 
 plete conquest. The latter state of that nation is worse than 
 the first. Political disorder is exasperated by class and 
 personal animosities, and civil war inflamed by national 
 hatred. In the fourteenth century, in France, Marcel, 
 with ideas far before his time, attempted to reorganize 
 his country. When he perished, he left the condition of 
 France worse than before. Thus in Ireland an incomplete 
 conquest and ill-conducted colonization gave over the island 
 to greater confusion, and that which in ordinary cases 
 might have been a cure proved in this an aggravation of 
 the disease. 
 
 In considering the subsequent history of Ireland, we 
 should avoid entertaining the embittered feelings of party. 
 We must regard and study the past with calmness and pa- 
 tience, knowing that whatsoever has been done was so done 
 under the direction of an all- wise Providence ; and that we 
 may feel sure that a future generation, who will look 
 back upon our time as an historic past, will be able in this 
 instance as in all others, to say, <c God is justified in all 
 His works.’’ 
 
 The subject of to-day’s Lecture is what is called the 
 “ Conquest of Ireland by England,” an expression in every 
 way incorrect. There was an invasion, feebly and ill-con- 
 ducted, which ended in a conquest at the commencement 
 of the reign of James I. Further, there was not existing 
 in the twelfth century any kingdom corresponding to what 
 we now call “ England.” Henry II. was then, indeed, the 
 King of England, but he was also Duke of Normandy, 
 Count of Anjou, and ruler of many fair lands in France. 
 He had his palace in England, but sojourned most of his 
 time on the Continent. He had no English ideas or sym- 
 pathies ; he did not speak the English language ; if his 
 mother was a daughter of the Norman ruler of England, he 
 g 2 
 
84 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 drew half his blood, and more than half his character, from 
 the princes of the robber house of Anjou. Rightly he rests 
 in the Abbey of Fontevrault, near the city of Angers ; and 
 lately, when uncritical English patriotism desired to re- 
 move his tomb to Westminster, the local feeling of Angers 
 protested against the desecration, truly saying, “Was he 
 not an Angevin ?” Various were the nations over whom he 
 ruled, without any national or political unity ; but if the 
 subject races and townspeople differed in language, customs, 
 and ideas, over them all extended a ruling class, organized 
 according to the feudal system, inspired with similar ideas, 
 speaking the same language, and for the most part sprung 
 from the Norman race — that race which then, as adven- 
 turers and rulers, was scattered over every land, from the 
 Frith of Clyde to the Strait of Messina, from the banks of 
 the Seine to those of the Euphrates. 
 
 Who were those Normans, and what were the ideas and 
 laws they were destined to introduce into Ireland ? As we 
 all know, they were but a few generations removed from 
 the genuine Norse followers of the famous Rolf ; yet in this 
 short time they had been much altered by changed habits, 
 infusion of foreign blood, and subjection to a new form of 
 government. By intermarriage with French they had lost 
 the tinge of northern melancholy, the deep sympathy with 
 nature, and that love of their lonely homes which their fathers 
 had entertained. In place thereof they had acquired a light 
 and superficial gaiety, a love of pomp and pleasure, and a 
 true sympathy for art ; they were no longer worshippers of 
 Odin, but among the most zealous patrons of the churches 
 they had wasted. Their Christianity, it must be admitted, 
 was but superficial, and seldom influenced their, words and 
 actions, until a tardy repentance was manifested in the en- 
 dowment of a church or retirement to a cloister. No longer 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 85 
 
 did they rove the seas as born sailors, ready to sail before 
 any wind or land on any shore ; they had become a nation 
 of heavy- armed horsemen, dwelling apart in their several 
 castles, and ruling over a conquered and inferior race. 
 Their fathers had scorned the idea of a sovereign lord, 
 and in open assembly had debated public affairs, or 
 in bands of free companions had started upon adventures. 
 The descendants of the Norsemen had grown into an 
 aristocracy, overbearing to inferiors, but in turn repressed 
 by the able and vigorous government of the descendants of 
 Eolf. 
 
 We may realize the great external change thus wrought 
 among the Normans by picturing to ourselves the different 
 scenes which the two great battles fought in England in 
 the autumn of 1066 respectively presented. At Stamford 
 Bridge, Harold Harfagr, the last great Norse adventurer, 
 led for the last time a Norse army to battle on the soil of 
 England. Side by side on foot, in one dense array, they 
 gathered for the fatal struggles, shoulder to shoulder, as 
 brothers and equals, fighting with sword and battleaxe ; 
 and when the masses of the Saxons gathered round, and 
 defeat and destruction were imminent, their great leader 
 rode along their line upon his black war-horse, and, burst- 
 ing into wild poetic frenzy, poured forth his exulting, 
 though despairing, death song, the last and brightest gem 
 of northern poetry. A few short days after Harold saw 
 the Normans advancing from their wooden castles on the 
 shore, in dense bodies of mail-clad horsemen, preceded 
 by clouds of archers of inferior rank, and supported by 
 mercenaries from every land in Northern Erance. The 
 organized array moved like a machine, under the guidance 
 of their experienced leader; the foremost ranks were 
 marshalled by the warlike Bishop of Bayeux ; and in front 
 
86 
 
 LECTUEES OX IETSH HISTOEY. 
 
 of all rode the Jongleur Taillefer, singing in Norman-French 
 the renown and death of Boland. 
 
 But one quality the Normans inherited from their ances- 
 tors unimpaired — their boundless self-confidence and love 
 of adventure. They had begun to extend beyond the limits 
 of Normandy, when the events of the eleventh century 
 precipitated them upon Europe. In 1066 William the 
 Bastard conquered England ; and those who followed him 
 in that adventure, as squires and grooms, became belted 
 knights and estated barons. About the same time the 
 news must have reached Normandy that a wandering band 
 of Norman pilgrims had, by sudden and miraculous deeds, 
 become rulers of the southern half of Italy. Almost im- 
 mediately after followed the first Crusade, in which the 
 Norman leaders took the most active part It was not they 
 who toiled on to the walls of Jerusalem, and freed the 
 Holy Sepulchre. They left that task to less worldly en- 
 thusiasts, whilst they themselves conquered and possessed 
 fair cities in Syria, even to the banks of the Euphrates. 
 
 It is not wonderful if, after such events, there arose a 
 spirit of adventure such as possessed Europe in the sixteenth 
 century ; that every landless man, or who had lost his land, 
 was ready to start upon any expedition, picturing to him- 
 self wealth to be gained and kingdoms to be won. From 
 their original seat the Normans had wandered northward 
 to the Scottish hills, southwards to the shore of Sicily, 
 eastwards even beyond the Holy City. Were not they 
 to spread westward also ? They had crossed the British 
 Channel and overborne a powerful nation. Was the narrow 
 strip of water between Ireland and Wales to check their 
 progress? Were they to halt upon the western shores of 
 England, when beyond the narrow sea the fair western 
 island seemed to offer itself an easy prey ? At last the 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 87 
 
 wave of Norman aggression broke npon our shore, and the 
 first straggling adventurers were merely the foam and scum 
 cast forward by the advancing billow. 
 
 We must here pause. The history of Ireland now as- 
 sumes a new aspect — it is no longer that of an isolated 
 people, living apart from Europe, with peculiar ideas and 
 an antiquated social state. It is now for the first time in- 
 volved in the web of European history, political and moral. 
 Henceforward no great events occur on the Continent 
 without ultimately affecting Ireland — no new ideas, poli- 
 tical or religious, arise which are not in some form applied 
 to the government of Ireland. The feudal system and 
 Continental ideas were suddenly and violently transplanted 
 into this country. The Scottish and French wars of the 
 Edwards, and subsequently the wars of the Eoses, weak- 
 ened and almost annihilated the Norman race in Ireland. 
 It is impossible to understand Elizabeth’s policy in Ireland 
 if we do not bear in mind that it was part of the great 
 contest in which she struggled for life against Philip of 
 Spain. At the Boyne little did William regard the ques- 
 tion of this country’s future. He repelled the attack 
 which, through Ireland, Louis XIY. aimed at England, 
 while the two Irish parties were each but pawns in the 
 great European game. 
 
 European ideas have also constantly reacted upon Ire- 
 land, and affected its government. Feudalism was intro- 
 duced almost directly from the Continent into this island. 
 The great German Eeformation, which Dean Milman truly 
 styles “the Teutonic development of Christianity” — an 
 event wholly repugnant to the Celtic mind — has perma- 
 nently affected the condition of the country. The cele- 
 brated penal laws are the reflection of the equally detestable 
 legislation of the Bourbons. The strange policy of England 
 
88 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 during the last century was a logical adoption of the com- 
 mercial theory. I therefore protest against the method 
 adopted by Irish historians of shutting themselves out 
 from all the events which occur beyond a narrow local 
 horizon. They endeavour to learn the history of this country 
 by devoting their attention to it alone, and ignoring the 
 rest of the world. Suppose such a course of study applied 
 to any other subject. If a naturalist, who undertook to 
 write a monograph upon any special species, entered upon 
 the task ignorant of the nature of the place where the 
 animal was produced, and how it had been nourished, igno- 
 rant of all other similar and dissimilar species, what would 
 be the value of his work ? He would mistake the object 
 of its peculiar organs ; would expatiate at length upon or- 
 gans common to it with others, and would fail to observe 
 its peculiar deficiencies. Yet this is the spirit in which 
 Irish history is usually studied and written. But as ana- 
 tomy has only risen into a science when studied compara- 
 tively, so only can the history of a country be clearly 
 understood by ceaselessly comparing its laws, political in- 
 stitutions, and ideas with those of other nations. This 
 appears to me especially applicable to Irish history, which 
 is the record of the prolonged struggle between two distinct 
 nations subsisting within the narrow limits of this island, 
 but, like oil and water in one vessel, refusing to amalga- 
 mate — the one nationality clinging to its ancient, almost 
 traditional policy, the other constantly imbibing the new 
 ideas which from time to time became accepted in England. 
 
 The first effect of the arrival of the Normans was the 
 introduction into Ireland of the feudal system. What were 
 the peculiar points and ideas in that system which con- 
 flicted with the ideas prevailing among the Celts ? It is 
 necessary to draw your attention to the pervading ideas of 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 89 
 
 this form of government. It was the habit of those writers 
 of the last century who involved in indiscriminate condem- 
 nation the period they ignorantly termed “ the dark ages,” 
 to treat the feudal system as devised by a barbarous aris- 
 tocracy for the purpose of riveting the chains of degraded 
 serfs. In their minds it is associated with robber barons 
 and a pillaged and outraged people. The writers upon 
 Irish history, particularly those professing national senti- 
 ments, affect these opinions, which are now laughed at by 
 the educated foreigner, and assert that the vile laws of 
 feudalism, displacing those of the tribal system, have en- 
 tailed ruin upon the country. But what was the feudal 
 system? It was that great organization under which 
 France extricated herself from the disorders which followed 
 the fall of the Carlo vingians, and gradually attained the 
 civilization of the thirteenth century. It is the system by 
 which the reign of definite law was again established, and 
 under which the great abbeys and universities were founded, 
 the scholastic philosophy flourished, and the works of art 
 were produced which we now strive to imitate, with the 
 consciousness that they are as inimitable as the Parthenon 
 itself. 
 
 The feudal system was founded upon two distinct ideas 
 — the one a principle of Boman law, the other a custom of 
 the Teutonic tribes. The Boman emperors, as the repre- 
 sentatives of the people, concentrated in themselves the 
 powers and property of the nation. They could truly use 
 the boastful expression of Louis XIV., “ L’etat, c’estmoi.” 
 They were the sole fountains of law, justice, and honour. 
 They claimed to possess all property which had not been 
 appropriated to private individuals. A theory so advan- 
 tageous to the ruler could not fail to be adopted by the 
 Teutonic chiefs, who succeeded to their inheritance. Upon 
 
90 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 the conquest of Gaul, the Frank kings appointed “ counts” 
 to govern the several districts of the country. These counts 
 originally were supposed to fulfil the sovereign’s duties in 
 their respective localities, and collected the revenues and 
 occupied the lands of the State, or such confiscated lands 
 as were allotted for their maintenance ; hut the power they 
 exercised and the property they enjoyed were held by them 
 by a strictly official title, and were not transmissible to their 
 descendants. From among whom were these counts se- 
 lected ? Every Teutonic chief was surrounded by a band 
 of personal followers, styled by French historians their 
 “lendes.” These “lendes” entered into a compact with 
 the chief to serve him, to fight for him, to remain faithful 
 to the death. The chief undertook to protect them, to 
 maintain them, and to act as their patron. This was not 
 a servile connexion, but an engagement of free men to 
 follow their chosen chief, and it might be dissolved and 
 abandoned by either party. The chief was their lord, and 
 they became his men. The same relation existed among 
 the Saxons in England, where we find frequent allusions 
 to the “ house carls,” ever true to death, of whose organi- 
 zation we have a detailed account in Kemble’s “ History of 
 the Anglo-Saxons.” A local governor, appointed from 
 among this class, was bound to the king in the double cha- 
 racter of a public functionary and a personal retainer. 
 When the feudal vassals in France succeeded in making the 
 estates they enjoyed heritable by their descendants, they 
 transmuted in “ property” what had previously been merely 
 an official position, with its attendant emoluments. But 
 the property they so acquired naturally retained many cha- 
 racteristics of its former nature. The owner of a fief did 
 not hold it as “his own,” with which he might do as he 
 listed. He had distinct duties, which he was bound to 
 
LECTURES OK IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 91 
 
 perform. He owed military service to his lord, and justice 
 to his own vassals and subjects. If he failed in this, he 
 entailed upon himself the loss of his estate, which, wholly 
 or partially, fell back into the hands of the king, by whom 
 it had been originally granted. If he were guilty of breach 
 of fealty, or crime against the State, he incurred forfeiture. 
 If he died without heirs, his estate “escheated.” If the 
 owner of the fief were a woman, the lord had the right to 
 provide a husband fit to fulfil the duties incident to her 
 property ; if a minor, the lord assumed the fulfilment of his 
 duties during his minority, and saw to his fit education 
 These were the right of marriage and wardship. As the 
 king enfeoffed his vassals, so they in turn made similar 
 grants to subordinate tenants, who held of them upon the 
 same conditions. Also the owners of private or “ allodial” 
 property, finding no protection in a turbulent age save in 
 the patronage of some powerful chief, voluntarily abandoned 
 their independent position, and became the “men” of the 
 nearest lord, converting their absolute property into “ fiefs.” 
 The principles and growth of the feudal system are bril- 
 liantly summed up by a French writer: — “ Presque aus- 
 sitot apres la conquete, il arriva que voulant recompenser 
 tels ou tels de leur compagnons des chefs opulents leur 
 donnerent au lieu d’ argent, d’armes, ou de cheveaux, des 
 portions de terre, auxquelles, par l’effet de ce don, se lia 
 une idee de dependance. Les domaines concedes de la 
 sorte ne le furent pas sans reserve ; ils resterent charges 
 d’une redevance; ils ne confererent, d’abord, qu’une pos- 
 session dont sa vie determinait la duree et en virtu de la- 
 quelle il fut tenu, sous le nom de vassal, a suivre la ban- 
 niere du donateur, son suzerain. Ce sont les domaines de 
 cette derniere espece qui, du Y e au X e siecle, portent dans 
 les documents anciens le nom de benefices, du mot 4 be - 
 
92 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 neficium ? bienfait, et qui a dater du. X e siecle prennent 
 le nom de ‘fief/ des deux mots germaniques i fee' salaire 
 et 4 old' propriete. La necessite pourles chefs de s’ assurer 
 par des recompences la fidelite de leurs compagnons ; la 
 difficulte de le faire autrement que par des concessions 
 d’immeubles, a une epoque ou Y argent etait rare ; la tend- 
 ance des proprietaires faibles et menaces a rechercher la 
 protection des proprietaires plus puissants, en les prenant 
 pour suzerains, tout cela contribua si bien a etendre la 
 propriete beiflsficiale, qu’ insensiblement les aieux dispa- 
 rurent; la maxime^tfs de terre sans seigneur prevalut, et 
 a la fin du X e seicle Y enchainement hierarchique de 
 benefices ou fiefs, declares deja hereditaires par Charles le 
 Chauve, constitua d’une maniere definitive le regime 
 feodale.” 
 
 Thus the feudal system gradually extended over France, 
 not suddenly or by any ordinance of the sovereign, but 
 gradually, and because it afforded to the mass of the peo- 
 ple a comparative orderly government, in which each 
 found his definite legal position. Even at the end of the 
 seventeenth century there were districts in France to 
 which feudalism had not penetrated. Thus there was 
 established a vast hierarchy, extending from the sovereign 
 at its summit to the lowest vassal at its base, each occupy- 
 ing a definite position, having rights and duties in relation 
 to those placed both above and below him. We even find 
 that, after no long interval, the duties and position of the 
 serfs became fixed and defined. Although still serfs, they 
 ceased to be slaves subjected to capricious tyranny. This 
 system, arising in France (then, as now, the originator of 
 new social ideas), was adopted by the Normans, and car- 
 ried out by them to the highest point of logical develop- 
 ment. They carried it with them in all their wanderings. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 93 
 
 Upon it alike were organized their settlements in Ireland 
 and their possessions in Syria. By this was the whole 
 legislation of England penetrated, so that English lawyers 
 believed it to be the highest and most perfect system — in 
 fact, could conceive no other, and, with sublime English 
 complacency, assumed every other code not to he “law,” 
 hut a confused aggregate of dangerous customs. 
 
 Ho two forms of social life could be more contradictory 
 than the tribal and the feudal systems : the former was a 
 development of the family, the latter a complicated po- 
 litical and military organization. The former was based 
 upon blood-relationship ; in it the land belonged to the 
 tribe as a whole, the chief was the elected minister of the 
 tribe, the property he possessed was enjoyed merely during 
 the tenure of his office, from which he could be expelled 
 for conspicuous failure in the performance of his duties. 
 Each member of the tribe shared, as of right, in the tribal 
 property, was defended and avenged by the tribe, was 
 judged by the tribal Brehon, and formed a member of a 
 community which, however small, was in theory indepen- 
 dent. 
 
 In the feudal system the land belonged in absolute owner- 
 ship to the Crown, which permitted certain individuals, 
 by virtue of a defined contract, to possess in it a limited 
 ownership. The lord ruled his vassals in virtue of his 
 ownership of the land, not as being of their kin or by their 
 election. The vassals had no connexion among themselves, 
 save the accident of standing in the same relation to the 
 one lord. They held their lands, not as their own, hut 
 upon the performance of specified duties. They were sub- 
 ject to the jurisdiction and control of the heirs of their 
 lord, and the rights over them passed like other property. 
 
 It cannot be denied that both of these systems were 
 
94 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 admirably adapted to meet the difficulties of that social 
 state in which they respectively originated ; but none of the 
 advantages of either were possessed by the other, and the 
 ideas they fostered were altogether different. 
 
 Among what manner of men, and into what country, 
 were the Normans about to introduce this feudal system ? 
 In the first Lecture a slight sketch has been given of the 
 polity of the Irish Celts. It remains now to draw your 
 attention to the geographical position of Ireland. 
 
 The physical conformation of Ireland differs from that of 
 almost every other island, and its political history has been 
 largely affected by its physical condition. Most islands 
 are traversed by mountain ranges on the line of their 
 greater length, and the highest mountain peaks are found 
 in the central districts. The reverse is the case in Ireland, 
 which, resembling a plate, has the centre depressed, and a 
 mountainous seaboard. 
 
 The most remarkable feature in the distribution of high 
 and low land in Ireland is the great plain which occupies 
 almost the entire central district, and extends from Dublin 
 on the east to Galway on the west, and from Sligo and 
 Fermanagh on the north to the confines of Cork and Water- 
 ford on the south. 
 
 The chief mountain groups are external to this plain. 
 Commencing from Dublin, where the plain reaches the sea, 
 we find the ranges of the Wicklow and Leinster mountains, 
 which extend southward from the county of Dublin to the 
 confluence of the Barrow and the Nore. From the south- 
 ern extremity of this range commences a series of mountain 
 groups, skirting the plain on the south. These, known as 
 the Slievenaman, Knockmildown, and Gaitee ranges, ex- 
 tend across the south of Kilkenny, Tipperary, and Lime- 
 rick counties. Southward from these, the west of the 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 95 
 
 county of Cork and the county of Kerry are occupied by a 
 series of hills of moderate elevation toward the west, but 
 which in the south and west of Kerry swell into precipi- 
 tous and sterile ridges. Prom the north of Galway Bay, 
 the mountains of Connemara stretch to the strip of low 
 land which connects the plain of Mayo with the head of 
 Clew Bay, from the north of which extends a wild and 
 hilly country through the counties of Mayo and Sligo, 
 almost to the borders of Donegal. A similar district occu- 
 pies the county of Donegal, and parts of the counties of 
 Derry and Tyrone. To the south of the counties of Down 
 and Armagh are the Mourne Mountains and Slieve Gal- 
 lion. 
 
 The central plain is divided from north to south by the 
 chain of lakes and marshes through which the Shannon 
 flows; in other directions, by the line of lakes extending 
 from Mullingar almost to Lough Erne, by Lough Keagh 
 and the Kiver Bann, and by the great tracts of bog extend- 
 ing through the King’s County, Longford, Westmeath, 
 and Kildare. 
 
 Erom the above remarks it will appear that the coast 
 from Dublin to Dundalk on the east, and Galway on the 
 west, are the only two available points by which invaders 
 can assail the central districts of Ireland; but that, when 
 advancing from either of these seaboards into the in- 
 terior, they must leave behind them inaccessible mountain 
 tracts, from which their rear may be threatened ; and their 
 advance would be checked by the course of the Shannon, 
 the lake districts, and the tracts of bog. There is no one 
 portion of Ireland, except the inconsiderable districts lying 
 outside the mountain chains, which could be completely 
 conquered and securely occupied. At the same time, an 
 army occupying either Dublin or Galway could prevent 
 
96 
 
 LECTURES OX IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 the natives permanently making head in any portion of 
 the central plain. Its natural conformation, prior to the 
 modern inventions facilitating the movement of troops, 
 rendered Ireland difficult to defend, and impossible to oc- 
 cupy. 
 
 The political condition of the people, which we before 
 noticed, checked the accumulation of capital, and prevented 
 the population being gathered into cities. These results 
 of the political condition were aggravated by the climate, 
 unfavourable to cereal agriculture, and pre-eminently 
 adapted for pasturage. The moistness of the climate, in 
 the absence of good roads, rendered it most difficult to 
 move bodies of heavily equipped men across the country. 
 It must also be remembered that in the twelfth century 
 large districts, now absolutely treeless, were dense forests, 
 and that there is reason to believe the annual rainfall was 
 then much greater than at present. 
 
 We now proceed to the important consideration why the 
 ISTormans failed (as we shall show hereafter they did) 
 to completely conquer and occupy the country. 
 
 If we confined our attention to the events which took 
 place in Ireland alone, we should experience some difficulty 
 in discovering the causes of this failure. The first step 
 towards ascertaining the causes of this want of success in 
 Ireland should be to inquire why they met with such re- 
 markable success elsewhere. We can thus ascertain what 
 were the peculiar difficulties which they encountered in 
 Ireland. 
 
 Four great conquests or colonizations (among others) 
 were accomplished by feudal invaders in mediaeval Europe, 
 all of which, though originally attended by great suffering, 
 were generally advantageous to both, and always to 
 one or other of the conquerors or conquered. These four 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 97 
 
 instances are as follows : — First, the organized conquest 
 of England by William of Normandy ; secondly, the oc- 
 cupation of Southern Scotland by Normans and Saxons; 
 thirdly, the conquest of Naples by the Normans ; and, 
 fourthly, the conquest of Prussia by the Teutonic knights. 
 
 England, when assailed by William of Normandy, might 
 have been expected to offer a fierce and prolonged resist- 
 ance. The government was centralized in the hands of a 
 man of high ability, and the landed estates of the country 
 were held either by members of the royal family or by great 
 noblemen, whose position and existence were at stake in 
 the national struggle. Yet these were the very causes 
 which enabled William to achieve a rapid and complete 
 success. With the natural desire of checking the invasion 
 at its outset, Harold risked and lost his throne and life in 
 the battle of Senlac. Upon the death of the king, the pre- 
 vious concentration of the government, and even the great 
 abilities of the fallen prince, whom there could be found 
 none to replace, paralyzed the national resistance ; and 
 William ascended, almost unopposed, the vacant throne. 
 The great landowners and official governors of shires were 
 expelled, and Normans substituted in their place ; where- 
 upon, without any immediate social change or shock to the 
 national feelings, matters went on much as they had done 
 before. The causes of William’s success may be thus 
 summed up : — A concentrated national sovereignty, large 
 private landed estates, and the government of extensive 
 districts by high officials who possessed no special local ties , 
 
 Almost contemporaneously with the conquest of England, 
 southern Scotland was flooded by Saxon exiles and Norman 
 adventurers. Within a short period the government of 
 Scotland, which had been Celtic, was transformed into 
 Norman, and the original inhabitants driven back into the 
 
 H 
 
98 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Northern Highlands or the wilds of Galloway. The eastern 
 half of the Lowlands had formed portion of the Northum- 
 brian- Saxon kingdom, but the western half was still in- 
 habited by Celts, and the government was thoroughly Celtic. 
 The Norman and Saxon strangers gradually occupied all the 
 Lowlands up to the foot of the mountains, introduced the 
 feudal system, and modelled the government after the pat- 
 tern of England. After a short struggle, the native Celts 
 were penned up in the mountains, and never after mate- 
 rially affected the history of the country. Why did not the 
 Norman and Saxon adventurers meet the same difficulties 
 in Scotland as their compatriots in Ireland ? Because they 
 occupied a specific district of moderate extent, and having 
 an easily defensible frontier. 
 
 The Normans who conquered Naples were few in number, 
 and far removed from their original seats. They could 
 expect no succour, and had to rely altogether upon them- 
 selves. Any Norman who established himself in Italy bade 
 farewell to home and kindred for ever. In this we may 
 discern the cause of their success. They threw in their 
 fortunes with the land of their adoption. They did not 
 attempt to form a Norman nation in Italy, but made them- 
 selves Italians, and, if of foreign extraction, acted as a native 
 aristocracy. 
 
 The Germans found in the Sclaves more dangerous ene- 
 mies than did the Normans in the Irish. Their resistance 
 was protracted ; they were not merely obstinate, but ag- 
 gressive — so much so, that the feudal system was utterly 
 inadequate to check them. Eor this purpose the order of 
 the Teutonic knights was instituted, which formed in itself 
 a permanent and organized army. Step by step, and by 
 manj 7 ' dearly-bought victories, the Sclaves were driven 
 backward, but the ground once won by the Teutonic Order 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 99 
 
 was never left unoccupied. A constant stream of German 
 colonists occupied the freshly-acquired territory, castles and 
 cathedral towns rose upon the battle fields, and every dis- 
 trict lost by the Sclavonians was lost by them for ever. 
 The success of the Teutonic knights arose from the posses- 
 sion of a standing army, and the rapidity with which the 
 conquered lands were absorbed into the unbroken mass of 
 the German Empire. 
 
 In Ireland none of these causes of success existed ; rather 
 the opposite. There was no powerful Celtic king who 
 dared to fight on equal terms with the Norman invaders, 
 and whose throne Henry II. might have ascended. There 
 was no great nobility depending on the Crown, whose 
 estates could be confiscated, and handed over to Norman 
 adventurers. There were no definite portions of the island 
 divided by a defensible frontier, which could be respectively 
 occupied by the invaders and natives. The Norman nobles 
 who settled in Ireland still held demesnes in Erance and 
 England, and, confident in the support of the English 
 Crown, sought at first rather to oppress the native Celts 
 than to become their leaders. The Government possessed 
 no standing force; and when by some spasmodic effort it 
 drove back the Celtic population, the Irish Channel, at 
 once too narrow and too broad, checked the influx of Saxon 
 colonists. 
 
LECTURE Y. 
 
 THE CONQUEST OE IRELAND BY THE NORMANS. 
 
 The best introduction to this Lecture is found in the open- 
 ing paragraphs of the well-known tract — viz., “ A Disco- 
 very of the True Causes why Ireland was never entirely 
 subdued — 
 
 “ During the time of my service in Ireland (which began 
 in the first yeare of his Majesties raigne), I have visited 
 all the Provinces of that Kingdome in sundry Journies and 
 circuits ; wherein I have observed the good Temperature 
 of the Ay re ; the Fruitfulness of the Soyle ; the pleasant 
 and commodious seats for habitation ; the safe and large 
 Ports and Havens lying open for Traficke into all the West 
 parts of the world; the long Inlets of many Navigable 
 Rivers, and so many great Lakes and fresh Ponds within 
 the land (as the like are not to be seene in any part of 
 Europe) ; the rich Fishings and Wild Fowls of all kinds ; 
 and lastly, the bodies and minds of the people, endued 
 with extraordinarie abilities of nature. 
 
 “The observation whereof hath bred in me some cu- 
 riositie to consider what were the true causes why the 
 Kingdome whereof our Kings of England have borne the title 
 of Sovereign Lords for the space of four hundred and odde 
 years (a period of time wherein divers great Monarchies 
 have risen from Barbarism to Civilitie, and fallen againe to 
 ruine), was not in all that space of time thoroughly sub- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 101 
 
 dued and reduced to obedience of the Crowne of England, 
 although there hath been almost a continuall warre between 
 the English and the Irish ; and why the manners of the mere 
 Irish are so little altered since the days of King Henry the 
 Second, as appeareth by the description made by Giraldus 
 Cambrensis (who lived and wrote in that time), albeit there 
 have been since that time so many English Colonies planted 
 in Ireland, as that if the people were numbered at this day 
 by the Poll, such as are descended of English race would 
 be found more in number than the ancient Natives. 
 
 “ And truly, upon consideration of the conduct and 
 passage of affairs in former times, I find that the state of 
 England ought to be cleared of an imputation which a vul- 
 gar error hath cast upon it in one point — namely, That Ire- 
 land long since might have been subdued and reduced to 
 Civility^, if some Statesmen in policy had not thought it 
 more fit to continue that Eealme in Barbarisme. Doubt- 
 less this vulgar opinion (or report) hath no true ground, 
 but did first arise either out of ignorance or out of malice. 
 For it will appeare by that which shall hereafter be laide 
 downe in this discource, that ever since our Nation had 
 any footing in this land, the State of England did earnestly 
 desire and did accordingly endeavor, from time to time, to 
 perfect the conquest of this kingdom, but that in every age 
 there were found such impediments and defects in both 
 Realmes as caused almost an impossibility that things 
 should have bin otherwise than they were. 
 
 “ The defects which hindered the Perfection of the Con- 
 quest of Ireland were of two kinds, and consisted first in 
 the faint prosecution of the warre, and next in the loose- 
 nesse of the civill government. For the Husbandman must 
 first break the Land before it be made capable of good 
 seede ; and when it is thoroughly broken and manured, if 
 
102 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 he do not forthwith cast good seed into it, it will grow 
 wilde againe and beare nothing but weeds. So a barbarous 
 country must be first broken by a warre, before it will be 
 capable of good government ,* and when it is fully subdued 
 and conquered, if it be not well planted and governed after 
 the conquest, it will eftsoones return to the former Barba- 
 rism. 
 
 “ Touching the carriage of the Martiall Affaires from 
 the 17th yeare of Xing Henry the Second, when the first 
 overture was made for the conquest of Ireland (I meane 
 the first after the Xorman conquest of England), until the 
 nine and thirtieth yeare of Queene Elizabeth, when that 
 Eoyal Army was sent over to suppresse Tirones Bebellion, 
 which made in the end an universall and absolute conquest 
 of all the Irishrie ; it is most certaine that the English 
 forces sent hither, or raised heere from time to time, were 
 ever too weake to subdue and master so many warlike 
 nations (or septs) of the Irish, as did possesse this Island ; 
 and, besides their weaknesses, they were ill paide and 
 worse governed. And if at any time there came over an 
 army of competent strength and prower, it did rather 
 terrifie than breake and subdue this people, being ever 
 broken and dissolved by some one accident or other before 
 the perfection of the conquest. 
 
 “ Eor that, I call a perfect conquest of a country, which 
 doth reduce all the people thereof to the condition of sub- 
 jects, and those I call subjects which are governed by the 
 ordinary Laws and Magistrates, and Sovereigne. For 
 though the Prince doth beare the title of Sovereign Lord 
 of an entire country (as our King did of all Ireland), yet, 
 if there be two-third parts of the country wherein he 
 cannot punish treason, murders, or thefts, unless he send 
 an army to do it, if the jurisdiction of his ordinary Courts 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 103 
 
 of Justice doth not extend into those parts to protect the 
 people from wrong and oppression, if he have no certain 
 Revenues or no Escheats or forfeitures out of the same, I 
 cannot justly say that such a country is wholly con- 
 quered.” 
 
 Sir John Davis, the most able statesman sent over to Ire- 
 land in the 17th century, was the author of this passage, 
 which is cited, not as giving a complete explanation of the 
 difficulty, but to show that every historian who has fairly 
 examined the question must admit that the common phrase 
 repeated by English historians, “ conquest of Ireland in the 
 12th century,” is an utter misnomer. 
 
 The actual details of a conquest are seldom instructive. 
 When a flooded river has burst through the dikes too 
 weak to resist it, it is waste of time to calculate at what 
 point the water first broke in. At innumerable points the 
 barrier was ready to yield. Of all the weak spots, which 
 was the weakest is very immaterial. 
 
 Great national movements do not spring from trivial 
 accidents ; they result from causes linked together, in an 
 endless chain, far beyond our knowledge, and form in 
 themselves successive links, in the endless series of events. 
 Superficial thinkers, when they discover in some miserable 
 crime or intrigue the immediate antecedent, imagine they 
 have described the cause, and blankly wondering at the 
 mysteries of Providence, teach us that great events from 
 trivial causes spring. 
 
 The excuses for the invasion of Ireland are of the vul- 
 garest. Let an Irishman read the story of the conquest of 
 South Wales by the fathers of the invaders of Ireland ; if 
 he change the names the story is told of ourselves. It is 
 not, therefore, without a special reason that on this occasion 
 I shall go at some detail into the first invasion of Ireland ; 
 
104 
 
 LECTTJEES ON IBISH HISTOEY. 
 
 I do so because in that event the contradiction between 
 Norman and Celtic ideas, both social and religious, comes 
 out with peculiar vividness, and there are there fore- 
 shadowed the numerous perplexities which have since em- 
 barrassed the English government. 
 
 Dermot MacMurrough, the elective chief of the domi- 
 nant tribe in Leinster, and as such king of that province, 
 had been expelled from his chieftainry; he is universally 
 described as violent, overbearing, and ferocious ; he was 
 banished by his own tribe, probably in full accordance with 
 Celtic law, as an unjust king ; for we must reject the le- 
 gend of Dervorgil as inconsistent with well known dates. 
 
 Dermot could claim his crown neither by sacred unction 
 nor hereditary right, yet, when driven from Ireland, com- 
 ported himself in the usual fashion of royal fugitives or 
 pretenders. He made his way to Aquitaine, to obtain as- 
 sistance from Henry II., willing to make any promise or 
 sacrifice to secure his restoration. Henry II. was then un- 
 able personally to enter upon the adventure, the time was 
 not propitious, and he had already enough elsewhere upon 
 his hands ; at the same time he was anxious not to lose so 
 fair an opportunity of invading Ireland — a project which he 
 had previously contemplated — and, from the necessities of 
 Dermot, he could obtain promises without immediate pay- 
 ment for them. He gave letters to Dermot, authorizing him 
 to recruit adventurers within his English and Continental 
 dominions ; in return for this recommendation, Dermot did 
 homage, and took an oath of fealty. The transaction is so 
 curious, that the parties themselves could scarcely have 
 understood the effects of the engagement. Did Dermot, 
 an exiled chief, who never had possessed any land in Ire- 
 land, save in virtue of the office from which he had been 
 deposed — who possessed no right of jurisdiction over his 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 105 
 
 tribe, save by their consent and election — who was not a 
 king either by religious sanction or hereditary right — who 
 had not then adherents nor a footing in Ireland — did he 
 swear to hold all the lands of his own and the subject tribes 
 as a vassal of the English king, upon the terms of feudal 
 tenure ? Did Henry II. know the royal position of Dermot 
 when he received this illusory homage, or did he simply 
 receive his personal fealty in hope thereby on some sub- 
 sequent occasion to gain an excuse for interference in Ire- 
 land ? The form of the letter given to Dermot, and the 
 subsequent homage by Strongbow, would lead to the suppo- 
 sition that Dermot merely engaged himself as the king’s 
 man without reference to any specific territory. The cele- 
 brated letter ran thus : — “ Henry, King of England, &c., 
 &c. Whensoever these our letters shall come unto you, 
 know ye that we have received Dermotius, prince of Lein- 
 ster, into our grace and favour ; wherefore, whosoever with- 
 in the bounds of our territories shall be willing to give him 
 aid as our vassal and liegeman in recovering his territories, 
 be assured of our favour and licence in that behalf.” 
 Armed with this letter, Dermot fixed himself in Bristol, 
 striving to raise recruits, but at first with little success. 
 He shortly after fell in with an adventurer exactly suited 
 to his purpose. 
 
 Hot far from Bristol stands the castle of Chepstow ; four 
 miles thence on the old high road to Abergavenny once 
 stood the castle of Strigul, where resided Kobert de Clare, 
 better known as Strongbow. The great family of De 
 Clare, descendants of Godfrey, an illegitimate son of Bich- 
 ard I. of Hormandy, were originally Counts of Brionne, 
 which fief they had exchanged for Tunbridge in Eng- 
 Jand. Gilbert de Clare, the father of Bichard, had, under 
 licence of Henry I., made extensive conquests in South 
 
106 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Wales, and had been created Earl of Pembroke in 1138. 
 The De Clares had been hitherto unfortunate in politics, 
 being generally found upon the losing side ; as a natural con- 
 sequence of which the Earl Richard had been stripped of 
 his inheritance by Henry II. Such a man was admirably 
 fitted for the purposes of Dermot ; of broken fortune, he 
 was willing to enter upon any adventure however despe- 
 rate ; his high birth and admitted abilities enabled him to 
 gather adventurers around him, and his fathers memory 
 lent him the prestige of successful conquest. 
 
 The King and Earl soon came to an arrangement ; the 
 terms of which are remarkable, viz., that in the ensuing 
 spring the Earl should lend his aid for the recovery of 
 Dermot’ s kingdom, upon the condition of obtaining the 
 hand of the king’s only daughter and the succession to 
 his kingdom. The succession to the kingdom of Lein- 
 ster was to pass to the husband of Dermot’ s only daughter: 
 this arrangement, perfectly reasonable and legal as applied 
 to a feudal fief, was unintelligible when made with refe- 
 rence to a kingdom in Ireland. Dermot had no kingdom 
 in Ireland : even were he still in possession of the 
 throne of Leinster, he would have held it merely for 
 his own life, without any pretension to transmit it to 
 his issue. Here we have the first instance of the conflict 
 of the Horman and Irish land laws ; all the tribe and tribal 
 property of Leinster were to pass through a woman to a 
 foreigner, as if they had been landed estate in England. 
 Strongbow must have entered into this agreement in perfect 
 ignorance of the Celtic customs, for he met with but ene- 
 mies where he expected to find vassals, and the promise of 
 Dermot gave him no possible claim to the kingdom. The 
 Irish king was of course willing to make any contract ; he 
 cared for nothing but to induce Strongbow to cross the 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTOHT. 
 
 107 
 
 Channel, leaving it to him to assert his illusory claims as 
 best he might. 
 
 In this transaction is foreshadowed the dealings of the 
 English government with the Irish people for more than 
 four centuries. Through the same confusion between the 
 office of the chief and the ownership of the lands, James 
 confiscated the estates of Tyrconnel and O’Neill upon their 
 attainder, treated the occupiers of the lands, who were not 
 even charged with being privy to the alleged treason of their 
 lords, as not possessing any estate in the lands, asserted 
 them to be mere tenants at will, and capable of being ex- 
 pelled from their homes at the pleasure of the Crown, 
 which, by the felony of the “landlord,” had resumed the 
 fee, and thus cleared the northern counties for the planta- 
 tion of Ulster. 
 
 Derrnot, after this arrangement, proceeded to St. David’s, 
 where he met the knight, who was the real leader of the 
 invasion of Ireland. As he and his connexion formed the 
 mass of the original adventurers, so long the surest sup- 
 port of the Norman colony, and the objects of suspicion and 
 fear of the English government, I must here explain his 
 origin and antecedents. 
 
 Nesta, the daughter of Rhys -ap- Tudor, prince of South 
 Wales, and sister of his son and successor, Griffith-ap-Rhys, 
 was originally the mistress of Henry I., and subsequently 
 married — firstly, Gerald de Windsor ; and secondly, Stephen 
 the Castellan of Abertivy. She had thus three distinct 
 families, the members of which almost all embarked in the 
 Irish speculation, and are described by Giraldus Cambrensis 
 a3 the Giraldines — a name subsequently restricted to a 
 single branch. Her descendants, who took part in the inva- 
 sion, were as follows : — Three grandsons of the first family, 
 Meyler, Robert, and Henry Fitzhenry ; of the second fa- 
 
108 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 mily, Ei chard and Milo do Cogan, Gerald the historian, 
 Philip and Eohert de Barri, Alexander, Gerald, and William 
 Fitzgerald, Baymond le Gros, and Henry de Montmaurice, 
 who had married Nesta, a sister of the Fitzgeralds ; and of 
 the third family, Eobert Fitzstephen. This Eobert Fitz- 
 phen had been made prisoner by the Welsh prince, his 
 uncle, Bhys-ap-Tudor, and after long imprisonment had 
 agreed to abjure his fealty to the English king, and to join 
 the Welsh. 
 
 When pressed to fulfil his promise, Fitzstephen hesi- 
 tated. If he refused, he had to fear renewed imprisonment 
 at the hands of his uncle ; if he fulfilled his undertaking, 
 he had to dread the vengeance of the English king, his 
 former master. An alliance with Dermot, and an expedi- 
 tion to Ireland, would free him from his difficulties ; and 
 in this he was assisted by the friendly intervention of the 
 Bishop of St. Davids. 
 
 The terms of his arrangement with Dermot were, that 
 he and his cousin, Maurice Fitzgerald, who had joined in 
 the adventure, should assist Dermot in recovering his terri- 
 tory, and receive, as the consideration for so doing, the 
 town of Wexford and a district adjoining, to be held in fee. 
 When it is remembered that the town of Wexford and the 
 surrounding territory were in the possession of a Danish 
 colony, Dermot appears to have made a very cheap bargain 
 with his allies. At the same time, it shows how deeply 
 the Normans were impressed with the idea that a king 
 could allot to his vassals any portion of his kingdom, and 
 deal with it as a private estate. They probably believed 
 the town of Wexford to be one of those feeble municipali- 
 ties which, in England and elsewhere, afforded to the 
 dominant lord a source of revenue arising from exactions 
 levied or privileges bestowed. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 109 
 
 Through Eobert Eitzstephen and Maurice Fitzgerald, 
 almost all the descendants of Nesta were drawn into the 
 speculation. They do not appear to have been subordinate to 
 or acting in conjunction with Eichard de Clare ; and from 
 their descent (which was half Welsh) could have felt but 
 small loyalty to the Norman king. This mixture of blood 
 seems to have been indicated by the coat armour of Eitz~ 
 Stephen, which bore the well-known saltier cross of the 
 Geraldines, half of the shield being red, half ermine, and 
 the arms of the cross of the same colour as the opposite half 
 of the ground. 
 
 About the 1st of May, a. d. 1170, Eitzstephen landed 
 near Wexfo rd, and on the next day Maurice de Prendergast, 
 apparently an independent adventurer ; with their united 
 forces, probably amounting to about 600 men, they advanced 
 against W exford. The Danish inhabitants, who, as Giraldus 
 remarks, “ had been previously independent,” advanced 
 against them ; but, alarmed by the unusual appearance of 
 heavily-armed horse, retreated to the town, and, after some 
 resistance, submitted to Dermot, who had joined his allies. 
 Whereupon Dermot, ‘ ‘ the more to animate the courage of 
 his adherents/’ granted the town, with the whole territory 
 appertaining thereto, to Eitzstephen and Maurice, according 
 to the stipulation of the original treaty. He also conferred 
 on Henry of Montmaurice (who had accompanied his rela- 
 tions) two cantreds lying between Wexford and Waterford, 
 “ to hold to him and his heirs for ever.” There cannot be 
 conceived a more extraordinary confusion of law and right 
 than this transaction. The tribal chief of the Celts of 
 Leinster confers upon two half-Norman half- Welsh knights 
 the town and district then occupied by a Danish population , 
 to hold to them and their heirs for ever, as vassals to him 
 and his heirs — whatsoever that might mean. Put in this 
 
no 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 case, as in many others, legal complexities were easily cut 
 through with the sword. 
 
 The establishment of the Normans in Wexford as allies 
 of Dermot soon drew the attention of Roderic O’Connor, 
 the then king of Ireland, who, having convoked his 
 chiefs, resolved to make war on Dermot. The latter, 
 alarmed at the threatened storm, made peace upon 
 the terms that all Leinster should be left under his 
 dominion, and that he in his turn should submit to Roderic 
 as chief king, paying the usual homage and service. It 
 was secretly agreed between them that no more foreigners 
 should be brought over, and that those then in Ireland 
 should be sent hack upon the first opportunity. But the 
 current of adventurers once set in motion could not thus be 
 checked. Maurice Fitzgerald, Raymond le Gros, and at 
 length the Earl Richard himself, successively arrived (23rd 
 August, 1171). The first exploit of the two latter was the 
 conquest of Waterford ; where, shortly afterwards, Richard 
 de Clare married Eva, the daughter of Dermot. Thus a 
 large force of Normans was gradually established in Ire- 
 land, under the command of a chief claiming the succession 
 to the crown of Leinster by a right utterly repugnant to 
 all Celtic law and tradition, and which could only be es- 
 tablished by an enforced change in the ideas and customs 
 of the natives, their subjection to the condition of serfs, 
 or their expulsion from the districts. Dermot, who had 
 hoped to use the foreigners as his tools, became a puppet 
 in their hands, and accompanied, rather than conducted, 
 them in their expedition against Dublin, which was cap- 
 tured by a treacherous surprise — the Danish king and the 
 majority of his followers taking to the sea in their galleys. 
 
 The whole Celtic population was filled with alarm by 
 these events, and the clergy assembled at Armagh to search 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Ill 
 
 into their sins. The results of this synod are thus de- 
 scribed by Giraldus : — 
 
 “ It was unanimosly resolved that it appeared to the 
 synod that the Divine vengeance had brought upon them 
 this severe judgment for the sins of the people, and espe- 
 cially for this, that they had long been wont to purchase 
 natives of England, as well from traders as from robbers 
 and pirates, and to reduce them to slavery ; and that now 
 they also, by reciprocal justice, were reduced to serviture 
 by that very nation. It was, therefore, publicly decreed 
 by the before-mentioned synod, and publicly proclaimed by 
 universal accord, that all Englishmen throughout the island 
 who were in a state of bondage should be restored to free- 
 dom. 
 
 This decree of the Synod of Armagh has been a fa- 
 vourite subject for commendation by Irish writers ; but, 
 rightly considered, it is the clearest proof that the state of 
 the Celtic people was beyond all hope of self- amendment. 
 It was the want of law, order, and justice, the absence of 
 self-knowledge and self-control — not the possession of some 
 English slaves — which had paralyzed their national action, 
 and reduced the power of the chief king to insignificance. 
 The ruined prodigal, when looking back upon the sad his- 
 tory of a blighted career, instead of realizing the great 
 failure of his life, flatters himself that some particular sin 
 or accident was the origin of all his sufferings. At the 
 crisis of their fate, the Celtic nation, as represented by their 
 Church, could not realize that the insubordination of the 
 chiefs, the incapacity or powerlessness of their kings, their 
 perpetual civil wars, and their utter political disorganiza- 
 tion, were the true causes which rendered the foreigners 
 so formidable. When Israel repented of its sin and ido- 
 latry, such repentance was manifested by a return to their 
 
112 
 
 LECTURES 0 N IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 ancient law, and by discipline and obedience to their judge 
 or king ; but the Irish people, foredoomed to destruction, 
 thought that they might still continue in their political 
 sins, and at the same time bribe Heaven to interpose in their 
 behalf, by making restitution for one venial among many 
 grievous errors. 
 
 If the native Irish were beset by alarm and perplexity, 
 both Henry II. and the first adventurers were suffering 
 equal alarm. Henry II. had not foreseen the extent to 
 which his recommendatory letters would have been acted 
 upon by adventurers from England. He may have 
 anticipated that Dermot would have failed to gather 
 the requisite number of recruits, or that if he had secured 
 some assistance, it would have been sufficient merely to 
 keep the Irish question open, and to leave an opportunity 
 for the English king to interfere with imposing power ; 
 but he now saw a powerful and successful army in possession 
 of Leinster, and occupying the chief maritime cities of the 
 island. This independent force was under the control of two 
 leaders of doubtful fidelity — De Clare, who had been stripped 
 of most of his English estates, and Eitzstephen, who had 
 agreed with Ehys-ap-Tudor to join the Welsh against the 
 English. The establishment of an independent Norman 
 state in Ireland would have been a disastrous event for 
 an English king. Celtic Ireland, if independent, was not 
 aggressive, and, as incapable of defence, had been marked 
 for conquest; but a Norman state in Ireland, under the 
 rule of the De Clares or Fitzgeralds, might have been as 
 great a difficulty to England as Scotland afterwards proved 
 to be. Henry, therefore, dreaded beyond anything lest 
 Strongbow and Eitzstephen should succeed, and at once 
 proceeded to check their further progress, by cutting off 
 their supplies and recalling such of their followers as would 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 still obey him. Here we observe the first instance of the 
 policy so often adopted by the English Government toward 
 the Anglo-Norman colonists, who, though put forward by 
 England to conquer Ireland at their own cost, for the be- 
 nefit of the English Crown, were invariably more suspected, 
 and frequently worse treated by England than the native 
 inhabitants themselves. 
 
 The Earl Eichard himself, threatened on the one hand 
 by Eoderic O’Connor and the entire Celtic population (for 
 Dermot had lately died), and having his supplies from 
 England cut off, was filled with equal apprehensions ,* and, 
 as the only means of escaping from his difficulties, resolved 
 to submit to the king and to hold the kingdom of Leinster 
 as his vassal. He despatched the following letter to the 
 king : — “ My lord and king. It was with your licence, as 
 I understood, that I came over to Ireland, for the purpose 
 of aiding your faithful vassal Dermot in the recovery of his 
 territories. Whatsoever land, therefore, I have had the 
 good fortune to acquire in this country, either in right of 
 his patrimony or from any any other person, I consider to 
 be owing to your gracious favour, and I shall hold them at 
 your free disposal.” The offer made in this letter by the 
 earl to the king shows distinctly the position which he 
 had previously imagined himself to occupy. To this letter 
 no answer was returned ; and the king pushed forward 
 very large preparations for the invasion of Ireland. 
 
 Meanwhile the storm broke upon the Normans with even 
 greater fury than had been anticipated : not only were 
 they assailed by the natives under the chief king, Eoderic, 
 but also by a more formidable enemy, the Danes, previously 
 expelled from Dublin, who returned to regain their native 
 city with the aid of their countrymen of the Western Isles. 
 “ About the feast of Whitsuntide, Hasculf, who had been 
 
 i 
 
114 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 king of Dublin, with sixty ships’ full of Norse and Isles- 
 men, sailed into the Liffey. Landing from their ships in all 
 haste, they sat down before the east gate of the city and 
 prepared to assault it. They were under the command of 
 John the Mad (probably a Berserker), and were all war- 
 riors armed after the Danish fashion, some having long 
 breast-plates, and others shirts of mail ; their shields were 
 round, and red, bound about with iron. Iron-hearted were 
 they as well as iron clad. Milo de Cog an, the governor of 
 the city, boldly marched oukto attack them, though with 
 unequal force. But not being able with inferior numbers 
 to withstand the enemy’s attack, he was compelled to re- 
 tire within the gate. At length Richard de Cogan, sallying 
 unobserved from the eastern postern, fell on the enemies’ 
 rear ; by which unexpected attack they were thrown into 
 confusion, and being quickly routed, took to flight.” 
 
 Hasculf, the last Danish king of Dublin, was captured 
 upon the stand, and was beheaded in consequence of some 
 rash and arrogant expressions which he used. Thus for 
 ever perished the Danish power in Ireland, and the remain- 
 ing Danish inhabitants acquiesced in the Norman rule, and 
 so thoroughly did they ally themselves to the Norman as 
 against the Celt, that in a. d., 1174, upon a defeat near 
 Thurles of the Dublin levies, which had advanced towards 
 Cashel to form a junction with Earl Richard and Raymond 
 le Gros, who were lying there, upwards of 400 Ostmen 
 were counted among the slain. 
 
 Scarcely had the Normans escaped this danger, when 
 they were assailed by Roderic O’Connor and the united 
 force of the native Irish, while Godred, king of Man, with 
 his fleet, blockaded the port. 
 
 The Norman leaders, evidently ignorant how inefficient 
 large bodies of ill- disciplined footmen prove when exposed 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 115 
 
 to cavalry in the open field, remained within their fortifb 
 cations until their provisions failed them, whence they 
 issued at last with the intention of staking their fortune 
 upon a desperate venture. Before the onset of heavily 
 armed horse, the host of the besiegers broke up in confu- 
 sion; King Boderic barely escaped with his life. This feeble 
 and ill- conducted expedition proved to be the only national 
 effort made by the Irish under an Irish king to expel the 
 foreigners from their land. “ On the morrow the English, 
 leaving a garrison in the city, unfurled their standards, 
 and, flushed with victory, marched by the upper road 
 through 0 drone towards Wexford.” 
 
 In spite of the King of England, with their supplies cut 
 off, and abandoned by their countrymen, they, unaided, had 
 defeated alike the Norse and the Celts ; there remained no 
 organized power to resist them, and Earl Bichard may have 
 now seen the sovereignty of Ireland within his grasp. 
 But if they entertained these hopes, they were soon disap- 
 pointed; at Waterford the Earl received letters from the 
 King inviting him to come over to England, and he was at 
 the same time, doubtless, informed of the powerful armament 
 assembled by the King and ready to cross over the channel. 
 The Earl proceeded to Gloucester, where he met the King : 
 what occurred is thus related by Gerald : “ While there he 
 succeeded, after much altercation, by the address and media- 
 tion of Hervey, in appeasing the King’s displeasure.” The 
 letter sent by the Earl to the King is inconsistent with the 
 story that the Earl had disobeyed the King’s orders by em- 
 barking for Ireland ; he does not there excuse any disobe- 
 dience on his part, but boldly relies upon the licence given 
 by the King to his subjects to assist King Derrnot. The 
 King was displeased with him because he had done too 
 much — because he had forestalled him in what must have 
 
 i 2 
 
116 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 seemed the conquest of Ireland — because he had almost be- 
 come an independent prince. The King was determined to 
 bind him in the strictest bonds of feudal obligations, and 
 to check his power and lower his position, by depriving 
 him of Dublin, even then considered as the capital of the 
 island, together with the surrounding district. The Earl 
 made his peace with the King upon the terms of renewing 
 his oath of fealty, surrendering to him Dublin and the ad- 
 jacent cantred, with the towns on the sea coast and all 
 the fortresses ; and submitting to hold the rest of his con- 
 quests to him and his heirs of the King and his heirs. 
 
 That the King’s anger against the Earl Richard did not 
 arise from any special act of disobedience of which he had 
 been guilty, appears from his conduct to Eitzstephen, who 
 certainly had not been desired to abstain from the enter- 
 prise — “ While the King was resting at Waterford, the 
 men of Wexford, to court his favour, brought to him in 
 fetters their prisoner Eitzstephen” (who had been taken 
 prisoner shortly before, according to the Welsh historian, 
 under circumstances of gross treachery), “ excusing them- 
 selves because he had been the first to invade Ireland 
 thout the royal licence, and had set others a bad example. 
 The King having loudly rated him, and threatened him 
 th his indignation for his rash enterprise, at last sent 
 ni back loaded with fetters, and chained to another pri- 
 son er, to be kept in safe custody in Reginald’s tower.” 
 
 Re King landed at Waterford on the 18th of October, 
 2; he had with him a large and carefully equipped 
 >roe, more than sufficient to overbear any resistance in the 
 open field; but he neither had the means nor the time to 
 r upon a protracted campaign, such as the complete 
 conquest of the island required. 
 
 :Le had already sufficiently curtailed the power of the 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 117 
 
 first adventurers, reduced them to the position of feudal 
 vassals, and secured the possession of Dublin and the prin- 
 cipal seaports; but as he could not maintain a standing 
 force in Ireland, it was his interest to support the first ad- 
 venturers in their estates, as they constituted an unpaid 
 and permanent garrison available against the natives. To- 
 wards the original inhabitants his policy was equally 
 obvious : to crush them down by means of the army, which 
 he had brought over, would have proved advantageous to 
 the first settlers only ; the Celtic population might prove 
 useful as a counterpoise to the Earl Richard and Eitz- 
 stephen ; they might be induced to enter into feudal obli- 
 gations, which, though for the time being unfruitful and 
 even unmeaning, could afford an excuse for any subsequent 
 interference : thus the Normans and Irish, both brought 
 within the jurisdiction of the English Crown, might be set 
 off against each other, and on fit occasion the King could 
 intervene, to his own profit, as their supreme lord and final 
 arbitrator. 
 
 The Irish chiefs themselves were doubtless impressed by 
 the display of power made by the English King; they were 
 as yet ignorant how deceptive was this outward show, and 
 how useless in a country such as theirs was a feudal Norman 
 army. They had been lately shamefully defeated before 
 Dublin by the comparatively small force of the Earl Richard; 
 their fears were rather directed to the first adventurers, who 
 had come over to win, with the strong hand, estates in the 
 islands, than towards the King, who represented himself to 
 them as resolved sternly to repress the lawlessness of the 
 Earl and Eitzstephen ; thus in the King they may have 
 hoped to find the only enemy whose force was irresistible, 
 and the only available protector against further aggression. 
 
 It is not to be wondered at if, under these circumstances, 
 
118 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 the various tribal chiefs, first those adjoining Waterford, 
 subsequently almost all throughout the island, repaired to 
 the English camp and made their submission, which was 
 gladly received by the King, with whose policy it coincided, 
 and who was desirous to leave Ireland as soon as possible. 
 The English army, after a royal progress rather than an 
 hostile invasion, through part of Munster and Leinster, 
 arrived at Dublin, where the Irish chiefs were hospitably 
 received with a splendour calculated at once to win their 
 good will and increase their estimate of the wealth and 
 power of the English King. 
 
 The only exception to this ostensibly lenient conduct of 
 the King towards the Irish chiefs was the grant of Meath 
 to De Lacy, but this, the appanage of the chief King of Ire- 
 land, may have been naturally considered by Henry as a 
 portion of the royal demesne, and O’Rorke, who was then 
 in possession — bow and why we are ignorant — treated as an 
 intruder. 
 
 The submission of each chief included the act of 
 homage, by which he undertook to hold the territory which 
 he ruled, as a vassal of the Crown of England, and the ge- 
 neral form of such arrangements may be gathered from the 
 final treaty between Henry and Roderic O’Connor, as pre- 
 served by Roger of Hoveden : — “ The King of England 
 grants to the above named Roderic, his liegeman, the king- 
 dom of Connaught, so long as he shall faithfully serve him, 
 so as to be king thereof under him, and ready to do him 
 service as his liegeman : that he shall hold his lands as well 
 and peaceably as he held the same before our lord the King 
 of England entered Ireland, always paying him tribute, 
 and that he shall hold all the rest of that land, and the in- 
 habitants of that land, in subjection to himself, and shall 
 execute justice over them in such way that they shall pay 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 119 
 
 full tribute to the King of England, and by his hand pre- 
 serve their rights. And those who now hold lands are to 
 hold the same in peace so long as they shall observe their 
 fealty to the King of England, and fully and faithfully ren- 
 der him tribute and his other rights, which they owe to him, 
 by the hand of the King of Connaught, having in all things 
 the rights and honour of our lord the King of England and 
 himself. And if any of them shall become rebels against 
 the King of England and himself, and shall be unwilling by 
 his hand to render tribute and his other rights unto the 
 King of England, and shall withdraw from their fealty to 
 the King, he shall take judicial cognizance thereof, and re- 
 move them therefrom; and if of himself he shall not be able 
 to carry out his sentence against them, the constable of the 
 King of England and his household in that land shall aid 
 him in so doing when they shall have been called upon by 
 him, and it shall to them seem that it be necessary to do so. 
 And by reason of this treaty the aforesaid King of Con- 
 naught shall render tribute each year to our lord the King, 
 that is to say, for every ten animals one skin such as may 
 be approved of by dealers, both from the whole of his own 
 lands, as also from those of others,” &c., &c. This docu- 
 ment, whether authentic or not, gives a fair idea of the re- 
 lation in which the English believed the Irish chiefs, who 
 had submitted, to stand towards the English crown. 
 
 Although the policy first adopted by Henry II. was sub- 
 sequently abandoned by him, it was resumed by the ‘Eng- 
 lish Government at a later period, and the document which 
 has been just cited exhibits in a clear light the relative 
 positions of the parties. 
 
 As to the effect of such an arrangement, it is to be ob- 
 served — firstly, it is not, either in form or substance, a 
 treaty between the English King and the Celtic chief on 
 
120 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 behalf of his clan, but a grant by the King, as absolute 
 owner of all ungranted land, of the district comprised in 
 the grant to the Irish chief as a private individual; secondly, 
 the line of succession in which the estate is to pass would be 
 determined by the principles of feudal law ; thirdly, though 
 establishing a feudal relation between the crown and the 
 grantee, it does not determine the rights of the grantee over 
 the inhabitants of the district, but assumes that he, and 
 those claiming through him, will possess a certain indefi- 
 nite executive and judicial power ; and lastly, it is made 
 without any reference to the assent or legal rights of the 
 native inhabitants. 
 
 Insuperable difficulties naturally arose from such ar- 
 rangements ; the grantee stood towards the Crown in the 
 position of a feudal vassal, but according to what law 
 were questions arising between him and the inhabitants 
 to be decided. Upon the death of the grantee, the in- 
 herent vices of the transaction were at once developed. 
 Who was to succeed the deceased grantee ? Had he taken 
 the grant for his personal benefit or as a trustee for the 
 tribe, of which he was merely the elected chief? Was his 
 heir, according to feudal law, to possess the position of 
 hereditary chief? Could the English crown change what 
 was a tribal office into an hereditary jurisdiction, and en- 
 tail on the descendants of its grantee the powers of a native 
 chieftain ? or was the subsequently elected chief to occupy 
 the position of a feudal vassal ? or could there possibly co- 
 exist in the same district the heir of the grantee possessing 
 the property of the land and the consequences, which, 
 under the English law, flowed from the fact of ownership, 
 and also the tribal chief elected by the people, and acting 
 according to the Brehon Law ? These difficulties at a sub- 
 sequent period embarrassed the Tudor government as poli- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 121 
 
 tical questions, and at last, in the reign of James I., were 
 referred to the law courts, where, in the celebrated Ta- 
 nistry case, all rights arising from Irish law were finally 
 abolished. 
 
 No contract can be carried out to which parties, respec- 
 tively, attach different meanings. Henry II. may have 
 believed that he acquired an absolute right of supremacy 
 over the Irish chiefs, but the Irish chiefs themselves sub- 
 mitted to him as to any Irish chief king of that period for 
 the time being, because his force seemed irresistible, and 
 only for so long as he was capable of compelling obedience. 
 When the English king withdrew, the obligation on the 
 part of the Irish chiefs to admit his supremacy de facto 
 ceased. They might have cited the principle of English 
 law cessante ratione , cessat lex . 
 
 Henry II. further relied upon the assistance of the 
 Church. He put himself forward as the champion of the 
 Homan hierarchy in opposition to the Celtic form of eccle- 
 siastical government. For this purpose he had obtained a 
 Papal Bull either shortly before or at the date of his expe- 
 dition, of the following tenor : — 
 
 “ Adrian the bishop , the servant of the servants of God , to 
 his most dearly beloved son in Christy the illustrious King of 
 England , sendeth greeting , with the apostolical benediction .* 
 
 “ Your Majesty (tua magnificentia ) laudably and profit- 
 ably considers how you may best promote your glory on 
 
 * Adrian IV. held the Papal See 1155-1159. A copy of the 
 grant of Ireland made by this Pope to Henry II. is also preserved by 
 Roger de Wendover, who says that it was obtained in 1155 : so that 
 Henry’s designs on Ireland, though early entertained, seem to have 
 long slumbered. Henry procured a confirmation of Pope Adrian’s 
 grant from his successor, Alexander III. There is a translation of 
 it in Hooker’s edition of the History of Giraldus. The grant appears 
 to have been made in 1172. 
 
122 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 earth, and lay up for yourself an eternal reward in heaven, 
 when, as becomes a Catholic prince, you labour to extend 
 the borders of the Church, to teach the truths of the Chris- 
 tian faith to a rude and unlettered people, and to root out 
 the weeds of wickedness from the field of the Lord ; for 
 this purpose you crave the advice and assistance of the 
 Apostolic See, and in so doing, we are persuaded that the 
 higher are your aims, and the more discreet your proceed- 
 ings, the greater, under God, will be your success. For 
 those who begin with zeal for the faith, and love for reli- 
 gion, may always have the best hopes of bringing their un- 
 dertakings to a prosperous end. It is beyond all doubt, as 
 your highness acknowledgeth, that Ireland and all the 
 other islands on which the light of the gospel of Christ has 
 dawned, and which have received the knowledge of the 
 Christian faith, do of right belong and appertain to St. 
 Peter and the holy Eoman Church. Wherefore we are the 
 more desirous to sow in them the acceptable seed of God’s 
 word, because we know that it will be strictly required of 
 us hereafter. You have signified to us, our well-beloved 
 son in Christ, that you propose to enter the island of Ire- 
 land in order to subdue the people, and make them obe- 
 dient to laws, and to root out from among the weeds of sin ; 
 and that you are willing to yield and pay yearly from 
 every house the pension of one penny to St. Peter, and to 
 keep and preserve the rights of the churches in that land 
 whole and inviolate. We therefore, regarding your pious 
 and laudable design with due favour, and graciously as 
 senting to your petition, do hereby declare our will and 
 pleasure, that, for the purpose of enlarging the borders of 
 the Church, setting hounds to the progress of wickedness, 
 reforming evil manners, planting virtue, and increasing the 
 Christian religion, you do enter and take possession of that 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 123 
 
 island, and execute therein whatsoever shall be for God’s 
 honour and the welfare of the same. And further, we do 
 also strictly charge and require that the people of that land 
 shall accept you with all honour, and dutifully obey you, 
 as their liege lord, saving only the rights of the churches, 
 which we will have inviolably preserved ; and reserving to 
 St. Peter and the holy Eoman Church the yearly pension 
 of one penny from each house. If therefore you bring 
 your purpose to good effect, let it be your study to improve 
 the habits of that people, and take such orders by yourself, 
 or by others whom you shall think fitting, for their lives, 
 manners, and conversation, that the Church there may be 
 adorned by them, the Christian faith be planted and in- 
 creased, and all that concerns the honour of God and the 
 salvation of souls be ordered by you in like manner ; so 
 that you may receive at God’s hands the blessed reward 
 of everlasting life, and may obtain on earth a glorious 
 name in ages to come.’ 5 
 
 The existence of this document has been a stumbling- 
 block to Irish Catholic writers. They cannot understand 
 how a Pope could have granted to an English king sove- 
 reign powers over the faithful and Catholic people. It 
 must be remembered, however, that Henry II. professed 
 to act in the interest of the Papacy, and that such an exer- 
 cise of Papal power was not unusual. It resembles the 
 grants made by Popes to the Spanish and Portuguese 
 Governments, and is not as extraordinary as the Papal in- 
 vestiture of Naples granted to Norman adventurers, or the 
 approval and sanction given by a Pope to the invasion of 
 England by William the Conqueror. The reality and 
 great effect produced by this document appear from the 
 statement in Roger de Hoveden : — “ There came to the 
 King at Waterford all the archbishops, bishops, and abbots 
 
124 
 
 liECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 of the whole of Ireland, and acknowledged him as King and 
 Lord of Ireland, taking the oath of fealty to him and to his 
 heirs, and admitting his and their right of reigning over 
 them for all time to come and also from the remonstrance 
 addressed by Donald O’Xeill to Pope John XXII., a. d. 
 1318, which complains that Pope Adrian, acting on the 
 representation, false and full of iniquity, made to him by 
 Henry II., King of England, and being blindedby his own 
 English prejudices, as being himself an Englishman, had 
 made over to the English monarch the realm of Ireland, 
 thus bestowing de facto upon a sovereign, who, for his 
 murder of St. Thomas of Canterbury, ought rather to have 
 been deprived of his own kingdom — a kingdom which de 
 jure the Pope had no right to bestow, and that this grant 
 was the real source of all the miseries of the country. 
 
 What were the weeds of sin which Henry II. was to 
 root up in Ireland? Giraldus Cambrensis, a most un- 
 friendly witness, in his topography of Ireland, entitled the 
 nineteenth chapter of the third book thus : — u How the 
 Irish are very ignorant of the rudiments of faith.” But 
 the only specific charges brought against them in this 
 chapter are the non-payment of tithes, irregularities as to 
 marriage, and the celebration of marriages within the de- 
 crees forbidden by canon law. 
 
 As to the clergy, he says : iC We come now to the 
 clerical order. The clergy, then, of this country are 
 commendable enough for their piety; and among many 
 other virtues in which they excel, are especially emi- 
 nent for that of continence. They also perform with 
 great regularity the services of the psalms, hours, lessons, 
 and prayers, and, confining themselves to the precincts 
 of the churches, employ their whole time in the offices 
 to which they are appointed. They also pay due attention 
 
LECTTJRES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 125 
 
 to the rule of abstinence and a spare diet, the greatest part 
 of them fasting almost every day till dusk, when by sing - 
 ing complines they have finished the offices of the several 
 hours for the day. Would that, after these long fasts, they 
 were as sober as they were serious, as true as they are 
 severe, as pure as they are enduring, such in reality as 
 they are in appearance. But among so many thousands 
 you will scarcely find one who, after his devotion to long 
 fastings and prayers, does not make up by night for his 
 privations during the day by the enormous quantities of 
 wine and other liquors in which he indulges more than is 
 becoming.’ ’ 
 
 He complains that the bishops did not preach or rebuke, 
 “for as nearly all the prelates of Ireland are elected from the 
 monasteries over the clergy, they scrupulously perform the 
 duties of a monk, but pass by all those which belong to 
 the clergy and bishops. An anxious care for the good of 
 the flock committed to them is little cultivated, or made a 
 secondary concern.” 
 
 The indefinite charge by Giraldus against the manners 
 of the Irish clergy may be dismissed. Their conduct ap- 
 pears, at least, to have been superior to that of the English 
 clergy of the period, whose lives, when they arrived in that 
 country, scandalized the members of the Irish Church. The 
 sum of the charges brought against the Irish Church ap- 
 pears to amount to this, that the government of the Church 
 by the bishops was such as might have been expected from 
 the monastic traditions of the Church, and that canon law 
 had not been established in the country. 
 
 Eor the purpose of carrying out the views of the Papal 
 Government and the promises of the King in a. d. 1172, a 
 council was held at Cashel, under the presidency of Chris- 
 tian, the Bishop of Lismores the Papal Legate, and in the 
 
126 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 presence of commissioners on behalf of the King. The 
 more important resolutions of this council were the follow- 
 ing 
 
 “First. It is decreed that all the faithful throughout 
 Ireland shall eschew concubinage with their cousins and 
 kinsfolk, and contract and adhere to lawful marriages. 
 
 “Second. That children be catechised outside the church 
 doors, and infants baptized at the consecrated fonts in the 
 baptisteries of the churches. 
 
 “ Third . That all good Christians do pay the tithes of 
 beasts, corn, and other produce, to the church of the parish 
 in which they live. 
 
 “ Fourth . That all the lands and possessions of the 
 Church be entirely free from all exactions of secular men ; 
 and especially, that neither the petty kings ( reguli ), nor 
 earls, or other great men in Ireland, nor their sons, nor 
 any of their household, shall exact provisions and lodgings 
 on any ecclesiastical territories, as the custom is, nor under 
 any pretence presume to extort them by violent means ; 
 and that the detestable practice of extorting a loaf four 
 times a year from the vills belonging to the churches, by 
 neighbouring lords, shall henceforth be utterly abolished. 
 
 “ Fifth. That in the case of a homicide committed by 
 laics, when it is compounded for by the adverse parties, 
 none of the clergy, though of kindred to the perpetrators of 
 the crime, shall contribute anything ; that, as they were 
 free from the guilt of the homicide, so they shall be also 
 exonerated from any payment in satisfaction for it. 
 
 “Sixth. That every good Christian, being sick and weak, 
 shall solemnly make his last will and testament in the pre- 
 sence of his confessors and neighbours, and that, if he have 
 any wife and children, all his moveable goods (his debts 
 and servants’ wages being first paid) shall be divided into 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 127 
 
 three parts, one of which he shall bequeath to his children, 
 another to his lawful wife, and the third to such uses as 
 he shall declare. And if it shall happen that there be no 
 lawful child or children, then his goods shall be equally 
 divided between his wife and legatees. And if his wife 
 die before him, then his goods shall be divided into two 
 parts, of which the children shall take one, and his resi- 
 duary legatees the other. 
 
 “ Seventh. That those who depart this life after a good 
 confession shall be buried with masses and vigils and all 
 due ceremonies. 
 
 “ Finally . That divine offices shall be henceforth cele- 
 brated in every part of Ireland according to the forms and 
 usages of the Church of England. Eor it is right and just 
 that, as by divine Providence Ireland has received her Lord 
 and King from England, she should also submit to a refor- 
 mation from the same source. Indeed both the realm and 
 church of Ireland are indebted to this mighty King for 
 whatever they enjoy of the blessings of peace and the 
 growth of religion ; as before his coming to Ireland all sorts 
 of wickedness had prevailed among this people for a long 
 series of years, which now, by his authority and care of the 
 administration, are abolished.” 
 
 None of these resolutions refer to any question of doc- 
 trine. It is not asserted that the Irish Church, in point of 
 doctrine, was different from the Continental ; they all re- 
 late to questions of discipline, such as would naturally arise 
 at a time when the monastic system of government was 
 not altogether broken up, and the diocesan and parochial 
 system were not as yet firmly established. The first resolution 
 of the council introduces the canon laws with regard to the 
 prohibited degrees of affinity. The second regulates the 
 mode of administering a sacrament. The third introduces 
 
128 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 the regular payment of tithes. As soon as the clergy 
 ceased to be gathered together in self-supporting monasteries, 
 it was necessary that some provision should be made for 
 the support of an episcopacy and a parochial clergy, and 
 the obvious means of meeting this requirement was the in- 
 troduction of tithes, long since established in the rest of 
 Europe. The fourth and fifth resolutions were rendered 
 necessary by the introduction of parochial clergy. The 
 former of these was intended to protect them against the 
 exactions of the tribal chiefs ; the latter, to remove them 
 from the jurisdiction of the Brehon law, and to free them 
 from the consequences of their blood relationship to members 
 of the tribe. The sixth resolution introduces the right of 
 testamentary disposition and distribution of intestates’ pro- 
 perties. The eighth and most important regulates the rites 
 of the Church, and declares the supremacy of the English 
 King. 
 
 The English Crown found its most vigorous supporters 
 in the aristocracy of the Catholic Church. Yivianus, the 
 Papal Legate, in a. d. 1177 (?) held a synod of bishops in 
 Dublin, in which he made a public declaration of the rights 
 of the King to Ireland and the confirmation of the Pope, 
 and strictly commanded and enjoined both clergy and 
 people, under pain of excommunication, on no rash pre- 
 tence to presume to forfeit their allegiance. “ And, inas- 
 much as it was the custom in Ireland for stores of provi- 
 sions to he carried to the churches in times of trouble for 
 safe keeping, the Legate allowed the English troops en- 
 gaged in any expedition to take what they found in the 
 churches when they could not obtain food elsewhere, pay- 
 ing what was justly due for the care thereof to those who 
 had charge of the churches.” It does not appear that the 
 English soldiers were required to make any payment to 
 the owner of the goods. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 129 
 
 A more remarkable interference by the Church on behalf 
 of the English Government, on the occasion of the invasion 
 of Ireland by Edward Bruce, will be subsequently noticed. 
 
 Henry returned to England, having accomplished the 
 purpose of his expedition. He had curtailed the power of 
 the first adventurers, obtained a nominal submission from 
 the Irish chiefs, and enlisted the Church in his behalf. But 
 his success had been obtained by a display of power, and, 
 when that power was removed, his authority and influence 
 fell to the ground. TJpon the failure of his first designs, he 
 adopted, as we shall see in the ensuing Lecture, an entirely 
 different policy. 
 
 K 
 
LECTURE YI. 
 
 THE GOVERNMENT AND POLICY OF ENGLAND IN IRELAND FROM 
 
 1172 TO 1315. 
 
 Let us reconsider the position of Henry II. as regards Ire- 
 land. The first Norman adventurers had submitted to hold 
 as his vassals the lands they had received by gift from King 
 Dermot, and also those which they claimed by inheritance. 
 The Irish chiefs had taken an oath of fealty, by virtue of 
 which, in the King’s opinion at least, they held the tribe 
 lands as vassals upon the terms of feudal tenure. Remark 
 how different was the King’s conduct to each of these 
 classes. He treated the Normans with insolence and dis- 
 trust in the hour of their sorest need ; he called upon their 
 followers to abandon them, and cut off all supplies from 
 England ; he compelled Strongbow upon his knees to ask 
 for pardon ; he deprived him of Dublin and the surround- 
 ing districts ; he threw into chains Fitzstephen, the first ad- 
 venturer, and received him into favour again only upon the 
 terms of his surrendering Wexford and the adjoining coun- 
 try. Against the Irish chiefs, on the other hand, he waged 
 no war, he deprived none of them of their estates, and he 
 sought in Dublin to dazzle them by his pomp, as he had 
 previously intimidated them by his power. It is evident 
 that the Normans, and not the Irish, were the objects of his 
 fears. He dreaded the establishment of a Norman mo- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 131 
 
 narchy rather than the maintenance of Irish nationality ; 
 and his apprehensions were well founded, for those who 
 in Ireland subsequently strove to establish themselves in 
 independence of the English King were not Celts, but Nor- 
 mans. The De Courcy, De Lacy, De Burgh, and the two 
 families of Eitzgeralds, were the most active enemies of the 
 English Crown. 
 
 This distrust of the Normans by the King is strikingly 
 shown by what occurred upon the arrival of Eitz Adelm,. 
 the first Viceroy. Kaymond le Gros set forth to meet 
 him and to do him honour. They met at the confines 
 of Wexford, and what occurred is thus described by Cam- 
 brensis : — a Fitz Adelm seeing Kaymond surrounded by so 
 gallant a band, and beholding Meyler and his other ne- 
 phews and kinsmen, to the number of thirty, mounted on 
 noble steeds in bright armour, and all having the same de- 
 vice on their shields, engaged in martial exercises on the 
 plain, he turned to his friends, and said in a low voice, 
 
 4 I will speedily put an end to all this bravery ; these 
 shields shall soon be scattered/ ” 
 
 The wars waged by Irish chiefs were essentially defen- 
 sive; in the period we are now treating of, the Irish 
 never united for national purposes ; each chief in his own 
 district sought to maintain a tribal independence and 
 nothing more. 
 
 King Henry may have desired to find in the Irish 
 chiefs a counterpoise to the Norman barons, and to play 
 off one race against the other — the constant policy of 
 English governments; and in fact he was unable to do 
 more. lie had no standing army sufficient to attempt 
 or complete the conquest of the island. We are ac- 
 customed to consider the feudal kings as possessed of 
 great military power. In this we are misled by appear - 
 k 2 
 
132 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 ances. The outward show, the pomp of knights, the ex- 
 ternal splendour, mislead us. We mistake acts of violence 
 for the exercise of real power. A feudal army could be 
 rapidly gathered, and was available for the purpose of 
 temporary defence, or transient invasion; the soldiers 
 served only for a limited term, did not possess the equi- 
 page or supplies necessary for a prolonged campaign, and 
 disbanded as rapidly as they had been assembled. It was 
 not in the power of a king at this period to collect an effi- 
 cient mercenary army. His estates supplied him with the 
 means of supporting numerous retainers, but afforded him 
 no regular monied income. The supplies arising from 
 customs or taxation were contemptible. At intervals he 
 might obtain a subsidy of moderate amount; but when 
 that was expended, he had to apply to an unwilling par- 
 liament for a repetition of the gift ; add to this that the ex- 
 penses of an army were then far greater than at present. 
 The wages of a knight was equivalent to that of a moderate 
 colonel ; that of an archer equal to the present pay of sub- 
 altern : for example, when Lord Lionel, the son of King 
 Edward III., landed in Ireland, he received himself 65 . 8d. 
 per diem, each of his knights 2s. ; each esquire 1 2d . ; each 
 archer 6d . ; multiply these sums by 16, and you will have 
 the value in present currency. It was therefore equally 
 impossible for Henry II. to maintain a permanent army, 
 and without such an army to retain any influence in 
 Ireland. 
 
 Eor some reason, of which we are ignorant, Henry II. 
 suddenly abandoned the policy he had at first adopted, and 
 pursued one altogether different. It may be that the re- 
 newal of the war, upon his return to England, proved to 
 him that his first design could not be executed. For the 
 jNTorman adventurers to halt was equivalent to destruction; 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 133 
 
 their safety depended upon continued aggression. The Irish 
 chiefs had bowed before the first display of force as reeds 
 before a blast ; they yielded because they believed the 
 king’s force to be irresistible ; when this force was with- 
 drawn, they returned to their former independence; they were 
 ignorant how ineffective a feudal army must prove in an 
 uncultivated and rude country; they had miscalculated the 
 force of the invader, and underrated their own powers of 
 resistance ; they had submitted to King Henry as to the 
 many usurpers who for the last century and a half had oc- 
 cupied the throne of Ireland, simply because he was the more 
 powerful. When his power was removed, they were re- 
 mitted to their original position. It may be that the King 
 was overpowered by the pressing instance of fresh adven- 
 turers and favourites, whom he sought to provide for in a 
 manner wholly inexpensive. Whatever be the cause, he 
 identified the English government with the party of the 
 Norman invaders, and sought for the sovereignty of Ireland 
 no longer by conciliation, but by conquest ; but in so doing 
 he took care not to increase the already threatening power 
 of the first colonists ; he granted out the country to fresh 
 adventurers, who undertook to conquer and occupy it at 
 their own expense, but as his subjects. He possessed an 
 apparent title by gift of the Pope, and the submission of 
 the inhabitants — a title which he was utterly unable to en- 
 force ; they offered in exchange for lands, which the King 
 did not possess, to wage war, and extend his dominions ; 
 but the peculiarity of the transaction was, that the King did 
 not profess to confer lands which had been forfeited to him 
 in consequence of the treason of their owners, or which lay 
 waste and unoccupied ; the existence of the Irish people 
 was absolutely ignored, and estates were granted, as if 
 there had been no owners. A proceeding identical with 
 
134 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 this were the grants by the English Crown of tracts of 
 land in America to English adventurers. This arrange- 
 ment was peculiarly advantageous to the Crown : if the ad- 
 venturers succeeded, the English kingdom was extended ; 
 if they failed, so much the worse for them, and in a sub- 
 sequent year fresh grants would be made to new spe- 
 culators. 
 
 Take for example the grant of Meath from King Henry II. 
 to Hugh De Lacy, a. d. 1172.* “ Henry King of England, 
 &c., &c., to the Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earls, 
 &c., &c., French, English, and Irish of his whole land, 
 greeting : Know ye that I have given and granted, and by 
 this my present charter confirmed to Hugh De Lacy for 
 his service the lands of Meath with all its appurtenances 
 by the service of fifty knights to him and his heirs, tp have 
 and to hold from me and my heirs, as Murcardus Hu-Me- 
 lachlin, or any other before or after him better held the 
 same. 
 
 De Lacy found Meath in the occupation of O’Korke, 
 whose defeat and death was a necessary preliminary to the 
 enjoyment of the King’s grant. 
 
 As the Celtic people were ignored in these transactions, 
 let us for a moment forget their existence, and consider 
 the feudal system created in Ireland by the English Crown. 
 The whole country was divided into vast districts to be 
 granted to colonists, whose mutual jealousies were probably 
 counted upon as the sole means of preserving the King’s 
 pre-eminence. 
 
 We have seen that the district of Meath was conveyed to 
 Hugh De Lacy. The lands comprised in this grant con- 
 
 * This grant was made before Henry left Ireland, but was part of 
 the policy subsequently adopted by him. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 135 
 
 tained about 800,000 acres. The grant was made without 
 any reservation to the King of judicial power, without any 
 rent except the service of fifty knights. De Lacy obtained 
 by this grant all sovereign powers, and was, in fact, consti- 
 tuted as the King in this district. It appears that daring 
 the reign of Henry II., Hugh De Lacy and his family after 
 him actually held their courts therein, with cognizance and 
 jurisdiction of all pleas, as well of burning, treasure trove, 
 rape, and forestalling, as of all others arising within the 
 land, with all officers, and their proper seals, &c., which 
 cognizance and jurisdiction are distinctly stated to have 
 been enjoyed by virtue of this grant. 
 
 The lordship of Leinster, which composed several coun- 
 ties, had been claimed by Eichard De Clare, by virtue of 
 his intermarriage with the daughter of the King of Lein- 
 ster ; he obtained a grant of this district from King 
 Henry II., which grant was confirmed, in 1207, by King 
 John, to William Earl of Pembroke, who had married the 
 only daughter of Strongbow. 
 
 The lordship of Ulster, comprising about one- sixth of 
 the entire island, was one of the largest seigneiories held 
 under the Crown in England or Ireland. It was originally 
 granted by Henry II. to John De Courcy, who enjoyed it 
 as an earldom, with the same rights and privileges as were 
 exercised by the De Lacys in Meath. 
 
 The largest district in the south, namely, that of Cork, 
 was granted by Henry II. to Mylo De Cogan and Eobert 
 EitzStephens. 
 
 We have already seen that in 1175 Eoderick O’Connor, 
 the last King of Ireland, consented to hold Connaught as 
 a vassal under the King of England ; but this did not save 
 that district from the assaults of Horman adventurers. 
 Eoderick had submitted to do homage and fealty to 
 
136 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 the King of England, and he was thereupon to hold 
 the kingdom of Connaught, with the title of King, under 
 him, “Rex sub eo,” and that in as ample a manner as 
 he had done before the coming of the English ; never- 
 theless, the King, in open violation of the treaty which he 
 had so recently entered into, and which it could not even 
 be alleged was infringed in any respect by Roderick, in the 
 year 1179 granted the entire province of Connaught to 
 William Eitz Adelm and his heirs. Cathal, the son of 
 Roderick, in the year 1206, surrendered two parts of Con- 
 naught to the King, and agreed to pay 100 marks yearly 
 for the third part, which he was to hold in vassalage. Ne- 
 vertheless, on the 12th of September, 1215, King John 
 granted to William De Burgo the entire of Connaught, 
 which was stated to be held by his father, at the yearly 
 rent of 300 marks. This grant was confirmed in 1218 by 
 Henry III., with a proviso that it should not take effect 
 until after the death of Cathal, who died in 1223. On the 
 12th of June, 1225, an order was issued directing the 
 Lords Justices to seize the whole county of Connaught, 
 then stated to be forfeited by O’Connor, and to deliver it 
 to Richard De Burgo, at a fixed yearly rent, excepting cer- 
 tain lands near Athlone, which were reserved, it may be 
 supposed, for the use of the garrison. 
 
 It may here be stated what was the subsequent devolu- 
 tion of these grants, as it is important to bear in mind 
 for subsequent purposes in whom these several lordships 
 vested. 
 
 1. On the death of Walter De Lacy, his son, Gilbert, 
 succeeded, and had issue, Walter, Matilda, and Margaret. 
 Walter died without issue, whereupon Meath became di- 
 vided between his two sisters, one of whom, Matilda, mar- 
 ried Geoffrey De Genvile, and the other, Margaret, married 
 * 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 137 
 
 John De Yerdon, Baron of Dundalk. The moiety of Meath 
 acquired by De G-envile was called the Liberty of Trim : 
 this lordship was carried into the family of the Earl of 
 March, and, being inherited by the Duke of York, finally 
 vested in the Crown. 
 
 2. The earldom of Leinster, like many other Irish 
 estates, passed into a female line. Strongbow was suc- 
 succeeded by William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, his son- 
 in-law, whose five sons died without issue. Whereupon 
 his estates were divided among his five daughters, or their 
 husbands, as co-heirs. The county of Carlow was assigned 
 to the Countess of Warrenne; the county of Kilkenny to the 
 Earl of Gloucester; Wexford to John De Monte Caniso ; 
 Kildare to De Yesci; and the residue to Boger de Mor- 
 timer. 
 
 3. The seigneiory of Lister was regranted to Hugh De 
 Lacy upon the attainder of De Courcy, and afterwards 
 passed by inheritance into the family of De Burgo, in 
 right of Matilda De Lacy. After the murder of the last 
 male De Burgo, it was carried by his heirs to Lionel, son 
 of Edward III., from whom it was inherited by the Earl 
 of March; it descended afterwards to Richard Duke of 
 York, whose son Edward becoming King of England, the 
 earldom of Ulster merged into the Crown. 
 
 4. The earldom of Connaught followed the same course 
 as that of Ulster, and the title to it, but not the actual pos- 
 session of it, passed to Lionel Duke of Clarence. 
 
 5. The kingdom of Cork ultimately formed the great 
 estates of the Southern or Desmond Geraldines. 
 
 As to all these grants, it must be remarked that they 
 were of a much wider nature than was usual in England, 
 carrying with them to the grantees all power and privilege 
 of the Crown, and originally constituting what are techni- 
 
138 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 cally called counties palatine. The great grantees of the 
 Crown proceeded to regrant the lands to subordinate vas- 
 sals. It would appear that this was done in as full a 
 manner as the estates had been granted to themselves ; for 
 example, in the year 1177 Hugh De Lacy granted the ba- 
 rony of Delvin to Sir Gilbert De Hugent in the following 
 terms : — “ I have given to Gilbert De Hugentand his heirs 
 all Delvin, &c. &c., for the service of five knights, to be 
 rendered in my land of Meath to him and his heirs freely 
 and quietly, &c. &c., with all liberties and free customs 
 which they have or ought to have.” Similarly, Ditz Stephen 
 conveyed to Philip De Barry lands in Cork, to hold by the 
 service of ten knights as freely as EitzStephen held of the 
 lord the king. In this manner the lords of Leinster granted 
 the lands of Skrine, Rathregan, &c. &c., and other lands 
 now merged in the baronies of Slane, Dunboyne, Navan, 
 Gormanstown, &c. The early Horman colonists did not 
 merely confine themselves to the creation of subfeudato- 
 ries ; they also to a very large extent attempted to found 
 municipal towns, and granted numerous charters in the 
 hopes of attracting colonists. 
 
 We have thus, in theory at least, and in view of strict 
 English law, a complete feudal system established in Ire- 
 land ; at the top stood the King, at the bottom the lowest 
 vassal, and this legalized form of society presented a con- 
 sistent form. But the feudal system as established in 
 Ireland differed in important respects from that existing in 
 England. It is usual for Irish writers to attribute much 
 of the sufferings of Ireland to the misgovernment of Eng- 
 land and the introduction of feudalism, whereas most of 
 these evils may be referred rather to English non-govern- 
 ment and to the peculiar anomalies of the Irish feudal sys- 
 tem. The feudal system as introduced into Ireland, like 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 139 
 
 most other institutions imported from England, was altered 
 in such a manner as to retain all its evils, and lose all its ad- 
 vantages. The Crown in Ireland possessed no power of con- 
 trolling its vassals. When William the Conqueror distributed 
 the lands of England he retained in his own hands a larger 
 proportion of manors than he granted to any of his follow- 
 ers. He thus became himself the most powerful feudal lord 
 in the country. Similarly, the early kings of Erance of the 
 house of Capet held large estates in the Isle de Paris, and 
 elsewhere in France, and thus were enabled single-handed 
 to maintain their ground against any rebellious vassal. 
 How important it was for a feudal king to possess resources 
 of this description may be seen by the example of the Ger- 
 man Empire, where the power of the Kaiser, and conse- 
 quently the peace and well-being of the entire nation, de- 
 pended upon the accident whether the Emperor was the 
 owner of large hereditary estates, or the representative of 
 some petty principality ^ In Ireland there were no manor 
 or valuable estates that the Crown could appropriate, the 
 entire country had to be conquered ; and as the Crown did 
 not assist in the conquest, it received no part of the spoils. 
 Thus we find the Crown had absolutely no demesnes of 
 its own, and, being deprived of any military force of its 
 own, it had to rely upon such of the great feudal vassals as 
 might remain loyal for the purpose of crushing those who 
 might be in rebellion. The inevitable result of this policy 
 was to kindle a civil war and excite personal feuds in the 
 attempt to maintain order. 
 
 Thus the feudal system in Ireland was deprived of the only 
 force which could keep it in regular and harmonious work- 
 ing : like a machine without a fly wheel, its movements be- 
 came uncontrolled and irregular. It was, however, possible 
 that the several grantees of large tracts of land from the 
 
140 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Crown should have established themselves like petty 
 princes, and occupied a position resembling that of the 
 great vassals of the German Emperor; but the jealousy 
 of the Crown towards its Norman vassals prevented this 
 result. As I before remarked, the direct vassals of the 
 Crown in Ireland were very limited in number — perhaps 
 not more than six or seven. According to the strict 
 theory of feudal law, these were the only vassals of 
 the King, and they alone should have formed his council ; 
 as the King stood towards his immediate vassals, so they 
 stood towards their sub-feudatories; as the King’s vassals in 
 chief were “ implead able ” in his court, so the sub-vassals 
 were in the court of their immediate lord; there should 
 have been no legal relation between the Crown and the sub- 
 vassals, except when they came to complain of the tyranny 
 of the immediate lord ; but no sooner had the Crown made 
 to its first grantees the ample gifts which we have before 
 mentioned than it proceeded to undermine their power, by 
 putting itself in immediate relation with their sub-ten- 
 ants. Eromthe earliest period we find the Crown attempt- 
 ing to exercise authority over all the English inhabitants, 
 whether holding mediately or immediately ; for example, 
 King John issued orders prohibiting recognitions to be 
 made in any court except his own, and commanding that 
 no person should be outlawed but in his, the King’s court. 
 In his sixth year he directs writs to the barons, &c., of 
 Ireland, acquainting them he had given power to his 
 Justiciary to issue writs throughout the King’s whole 
 land and dominion in Ireland. Parliamentary writs were 
 directed by the Crown, not only to its own grantees, but 
 also to their sub- vassals ; and we find the Crown joining in 
 and confirming grants made by its own vassals to their feu- 
 datories, thus ignoring the full effect of its own previous acts. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 141 
 
 Upon every occasion, when any heir of a grantee sought a 
 confirmation of the original charter, the extent of the origi- 
 nal gift was cut down, by reserving to the Crown certain 
 of the powers which had been granted by the former charter. 
 
 Had the Crown possessed any actual power, or seriously at- 
 tempted to enforce law and order throughout the entire island, 
 such proceeding might he evidence of an intelligent policy ; 
 but as the Crown possessed no force to give any sanction to 
 the decrees of its courts, did not maintain any police, and 
 was powerless in enforcing its authority, such a course 
 evinced merely a desire to restrain the power of the greater 
 vassals, and was, perhaps, caused by no higher motive than a 
 desire to secure the emoluments then arising from the exer- 
 cise of justice ; and arose rather from a blind imitation of 
 the forms usual in England, than any serious intention to 
 fulfil the ordinary duties of government. 
 
 We have thus a feudal system, in which the Crown is 
 powerless to fulfil its duties, yet active in preventing the 
 greater nobles from exercising that influence which might 
 have secured a reasonable degree of order. The whole 
 energy of the nobles was turned away from government to 
 war; and lest they should become local potentates, they 
 were allowed to degenerate into local tyrants. 
 
 But what, meanwhile, had become of the Irish nation ? 
 As the feudal system ignored their existence, we have 
 permitted them to fall out of our view, but they still 
 existed, and still were politically independent. The 
 invaders had occupied the flat country, suitable for the 
 operation of their forces, and the original inhabitants had 
 retired into either the mountainous districts, impassable to 
 cavalry, or into districts protected by the bogs, and diffi- 
 cult of access ; nay, even in some parts of the island, where 
 the Normans were not in force, they had re- occupied large 
 
142 
 
 LECTURES 0 N IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 portions of the open country. They did not retire as dis- 
 organized fugitives, but the tribes retreated, keeping their 
 social organization unbroken ; and, although removed from 
 their original habitations, still preserved their social iden- 
 tity. 
 
 The remarkable point in the conquest was, that the Celtic 
 population was not driven back upon any one portion of the 
 kingdom, but remained as it was, interpolated among the 
 new arrivals. The distribution of the two populations may 
 be briefly sketched as follows: — The Normans occupied, in 
 considerable force, the counties of Antrim and Down, in 
 Ulster ; in Leinster, the counties of Louth, Meath, Dublin, 
 Kildare, and the greater portion of Westmeath, were densely 
 colonized by Normans and Saxons; southward, the colo- 
 nists occupied, in a narrow line, portions of the King’s and 
 Queen’s Counties, and Carlow ; they held the counties of 
 Kilkenny and Wexford, and the eastern part of Tipperary 
 and the eastern part of Munster ; they occupied Limerick 
 and the adjoining districts, and their castles extended to the 
 mouth of the Shannon. In Connaught, the territories of the 
 De Burgo stretched from Galway northward and eastward 
 over the plain portion of Connaught, and communicated 
 through Athlone with their countrymen in Leinster. On 
 the other hand, the residue of Ulster was occupied by 
 the O’Neils and O’Donels, and their subordinate tribes. 
 South of them extended the districts of the OTarrells, the 
 O’Beillys and O’Rorkes. In Leinster, the O’Tooles and 
 O’ Byrnes occupied the mountains of Wicklow, and the Car- 
 low and Kilkenny hills were in the hands of various tribes, 
 of which the chief was the M‘Murroghs, subsequently known 
 as Kavanaghs. The west of Munster was strongly held 
 by the Mac Carthys and their subordinate tribes; Clare 
 was occupied by the O’Briens ; the western coast beyond 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 143 
 
 Lough Corrib remained in the possession of the O’Elahertys, 
 and the north-east of Connaught was under the control of 
 the O’Connors. 
 
 The Celtic population possessed no definite legal posi- 
 tion, filled no place in the feudal hierarchy, and was in the 
 eyes of the English government hostile and alien ; the 
 only exception to this was the case of the O’Briens, who, 
 though not actually feudal vassals, had their estates secured 
 by a charter, and five Irish families, through some unknown 
 reason, were considered as the King’s men and entitled to 
 his protection ; these were known as the five bloods, who 
 enjoyed the law of England to the extent of the privilege 
 to sue in the King’s courts, viz., O’Keil, O’Molaghlin, 
 O’Connor, O’Brien, and M‘Murrough. 
 
 Let us now consider, in accordance with the ideas of 
 law then prevalent, what was the legal position of the 
 mass of the Irish people. It is a modern idea that the 
 King’s courts or any courts are open to the complaints of 
 or against any person found within their jurisdiction. The 
 feudal courts were held to decide the rights of the vassals 
 of the lord ; the municipal courts to adjudicate upon the 
 suits of the members of the corporation. 
 
 Those who were not entitled to appeal to those courts 
 had technically no locus standi there ; they were strangers 
 whose existence was altogether ignored by the courts unless 
 they claimed protection by virtue of some specific treaty, 
 or by way of reciprocity. The principle, strange to a 
 modern audience, must be familiar to all those acquainted 
 with the origin of Roman law, or mediaeval customs. Let 
 us suppose that the Celtic people had been driven into a 
 definite district, and were treated as a foreign, and indepen- 
 dent nation, the principles thus applicable to such a state 
 
144 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 of things are laid down in the 8th chapter of the 1st Book 
 of Cibrario, Political Economy of the Middle Age : — 
 “ Christianity for the first time proclaimed the idea of a 
 human society, all the members of which are brethren, and 
 possess the same origin and a similar destiny ; but the con- 
 trary idea, which caused every stranger to be considered 
 an enemy, or at least as unworthy to participate in the 
 advantages of the social state, had such profound roots in 
 public opinion, that the sublime philosophy of Christianity 
 experienced much difficulty in causing the consequences of 
 its doctrines to be generally adopted. Among the Greeks 
 every stranger was called a barbarian, and put beyond the 
 pale of common right. Among the Latins the word ‘ hostis’ 
 signified at once a stranger and an enemy ; the Germans 
 called such ‘ war g eng us,’ a wanderer ; the Anglo-Saxons, a 
 1 wretch ,’ as worthy of pity. After this we must not be 
 surprised if strangers were declared incapable of acquiring 
 or succeeding to property ; if, on their death, their goods 
 were confiscated ; if the tribunals in very many countries 
 could not protect their rights against a member of the 
 city ; if they became serfs, when they fixed their residence 
 upon the lands of a lord without authorization. It is true 
 that the contrary principle gradually insinuated itself into 
 the habits and laws of nations ; under the name of hospi- 
 tality, the Burgundian laws desired that none should refuse 
 a stranger lodgment, fire, or water, &c. &c. In some places 
 they admitted the right of reciprocity ; the stranger was 
 treated as strangers were in his country. 
 
 “ From these principles, framed for the purpose of 
 creating isolation, had flowed another maxim, which, in 
 the case of strangers, rendered all the members of the same 
 city responsible for the acts of any one of their citizens 
 {solid air es) ; hence arose frequent complaints by one state 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 115 
 
 against another for debts, for wrongs, for injuries caused 
 to the member of one state by the members of another. If 
 the slightest negligence was shown in repairing the da- 
 mage, letters of reprisal were issued to the injured citizen, 
 that is to say, he was given full liberty of himself and by 
 force to levy full damages upon the persons and property 
 of citizens of the state, to which the offender belonged.” 
 
 The Irish in Ireland were treated by the King’s courts 
 in Ireland as an alien and hostile nation ; an Irishman out 
 of the King’s peace could not bring an action against 
 an Englishman ; for example, in the 28th Edward III., 
 Simon Neal brought an action of trespass against William 
 Kewlagh, for breaking his close at Clondalkin, in the county 
 of Dublin ; the defendant pleaded that the plaintiff was a 
 mere Irishman, and not of the fivebloods. The plaintiff re- 
 plied he was of the five bloods, viz., of theO’Keills of Ulster, 
 who by the grant of the ancestors of our lord the King 
 ought to enjoy and do use English law, and are esteemed 
 “ freemen,” that is “men of the King.” Again, in 29th 
 Edward I., Thomas Botter brought an action against Robert 
 D’Almaine for certain goods; the defendant pleaded he was 
 not bound to answer the plaintiff, inasmuch as he was an 
 Irishman, and not of free blood. The plaintiff replied he 
 was an Englishman, and sought for an inquiry as to his 
 country. 
 
 Likewise the Irish were treated as being beyond the 
 protection of the King’s peace, so that it was no legal 
 offence to kill one of them ; thus, in the 4th of Edward IT. 
 at Waterford, before John Wogan, Lord Justice, it is re- 
 corded that Robert La Waylys was put to trial for the 
 death of John, the son of Ivor MacGillmory, &c. &c. The 
 defendant comes and admits that he had killed the said 
 John; however, he says that by so slaying him he could 
 
 L 
 
146 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 not commit felony, because he says he was a mere Irishman, 
 and not of free blood ; and when the lord of the said J ohn 
 (whose Irishman the said John w r as) shall desire compensa- 
 tion for the death of the said John, he, Kobert, will be will- 
 ing to settle with regard to such compensation as justice 
 may be ; and upon this comes one John Le Poer, and on 
 the part of our lord the King, says that the said John and 
 his ancestors of his own name, from the time of Henry II., 
 was in Ireland unto this day, ought to have and be judged 
 according to English law, and then sets out a charter of 
 denization granted to the Ostmen. 
 
 Again, in the 29th Edward I., before Walter Lenfant and 
 the other Justices Itinerant, at Drogheda, John Lawrence 
 was indicted for the murder of Galfred Doudal. He came 
 and admitted that he had killed him, but said that the said 
 Galfred was a mere Irishman, and not of free blood. The 
 j ury found that Galfred was an Englishman, upon which 
 verdict John Lawrence was convicted and hanged. 
 
 As to the right of reprisals exercised against the Irish 
 tribes, we may refer to the 10th Edward IV., 1476, when 
 it was enacted that if any Englishman be damaged by an 
 Irishman not amenable to law, he shall be reprised out of 
 the whole sept or nation of the party doing the injury, 
 according to the discretion of the chief governor of the land 
 and the King’s counsel. In consequence of these principles 
 of legislation, we find numerous charters of denization 
 granted by the Crown from time to time to Irishmen, as if 
 they were actual foreigners. 
 
 We are ignorant how an Englishman would have been 
 treated if he had wandered into the districts occupied by 
 the Irish tribes, but it may be presumed that similar prin- 
 ciples were used upon both sides. 
 
 The peculiarity of the state of affairs in Ireland was not 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 147 
 
 that the legal principles adopted were unusual, but that 
 ordinary admitted principles were applied under exceptional 
 circumstances. Rules of law, which were harsh and mis- 
 chievous enough when applied in the case of two distinct 
 nations, became extravagant and tyrannical as between Nor- 
 mans and Celts, neighbours inhabiting the same district. 
 
 But, though legally ignored, the Irish tributes could not 
 be politically disregarded. The English government used 
 their assistance to repress the rebellions of insurgent vassals. 
 The Viceroy used the assistance of the O’Connors to check 
 the growing independence of the De Burghs. They were 
 called on to furnish assistance to the English armies, and on 
 many occasions we find their chiefs summoned by writ of 
 Parliament, as if feudal vassals ; but the mode in which 
 they were treated depended upon the immediate objects 
 and want of the English Government, and the general 
 course of conduct pursued towards them was such as has 
 been previously stated ; and, as contributing to the exten- 
 sion of Royal influence, every Anglo-Norman noble was 
 permitted to wage war upon them to the best of his ability, 
 and as suited his convenience. 
 
 We must now briefly consider the condition of the Church 
 in Ireland. The archbishops and bishops who assembled at 
 Cashel in 1172 were the warmest supporters of the English 
 King, and a close alliance was, as we have seen, formed be- 
 tween the foreign government and the authorities of the 
 Church ; but the alliance of the Church rapidly became 
 useless, from the mode in which the appointments to bi- 
 shoprics and other clerical offices were filled up. A Norman 
 priest who spoke only the French language, or perhaps a 
 little English, could exercise no influence over the Irish- 
 speaking population ; an Irish priest who spoke no French 
 would have been despised by a Norman noble. Both classes 
 l 2 
 
148 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 of the population required a separate priesthood, and we 
 consequently find the Church divided between the priests 
 and monks who spoke English or spoke French, and those 
 w T ho spoke merely Irish. The monasteries within the Eng- 
 lish districts refused to receive Irish- speaking monks ; the 
 monasteries of the Irish district expelled the English monks, 
 and the distinction of English and Irish priests extends 
 down into the middle of the sixteenth century. The ap- 
 pointments made by the English Government to bishoprics 
 were as a rule Normans; the series of archbishops of Dub- 
 lin, in point of ability and position, equals that of any Eng- 
 lish bishopric, but the archbishops of Dublin were as a rule 
 Normans. They were employed in high state offices and 
 embassies by the English kings, were conspicuous in Eng- 
 lish history, and, in fact, devoted their talents to every duty 
 except that of their archbishopric. On the other hand, a 
 bishop who came closely in contact with the Irish people 
 tended to fall into their habits, and abandon his position 
 as an English prelate. Eor example, the Eishop of Down 
 was, in the reign of Edward I., tried and convicted for 
 the following offences : — 1st, That he had combined with 
 M‘Melissa, Archbishop of Armagh, in issuing certain regu- 
 lations in his diocese, for the purpose of excluding English 
 monks from the monasteries ; 2nd, That upon the Church 
 lands he had administered justice, not according to English 
 but to Irish law. In 1297, the Crown having sent to the 
 convent of St. John, at Down, a letter of licence to elect its 
 nominee as abbot, the same bishop broke into the convent 
 and carried off or destroyed the King’s letter, appointing of 
 his own authority his own nominee as abbot. 
 
 The Church in Ireland was thus divided into two fac- 
 tions, not differing in ‘doctrine or discipline, but hating 
 each other with a national animosity. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 149 
 
 It is needless to refer to the numerous English laws 
 against the admission of Irish clerks. The Irish clergy 
 were equally exclusive. In the 15th Edward II., it appears 
 that there existed in Mellefont the custom that none should 
 be admitted into the house without giving proof that he 
 was not of the English race. As the abbey of Mellefont 
 was in shire land, it may be suggested that this regulation 
 applied only to those born in England. 
 
 Previous to this date M ‘Melissa, Archbishop of Armagh, 
 and Nicolas, of Down, seem to have combined for the pur- 
 pose of excluding English clerks from the monasteries in 
 their dioceses. 
 
 “In 1325,” writes Eriar Clynn, “ there was discord al- 
 most universally among all the poor religious of Ireland, 
 some of them upholding, promoting, and cherishing the 
 part of their own nation, blood, and tongue; others of them 
 canvassing for the office of prelates and superiors.” 
 
 The alliance of the Church, under these circumstances, 
 afforded the English Government but little assistance. The 
 Norman and English prelates were devoted supporters of 
 the English Crown, but failed to exert any influence over 
 the native population. 
 
 "We thus find the English and Irish races hopelessly at 
 variance, and it would seem that one or other must have 
 been crushed out in the contest ; but such was not the re- 
 sult ; they both survived, and, contrary to reasonable ex- 
 pectations, the Irish exhibited the greater vitality. 
 
 The expulsion of the English colony was an effort beyond 
 the power of the disunited Irish tribes ; for in the darkest 
 hours of the English settlement the power of England was 
 ready, by some sudden effort, to reassert the English supre- 
 macy. 
 
 But why did the Anglo-Normans wholly fail to subdue 
 
150 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 the Irish. Prom the facts stated in this and the preceding 
 Lecture, the reasons of their failure may be suspected. I 
 should briefly state them as follows : — 1. The large extent 
 comprised in the grants made to the first colonists led to a 
 dispersion of the Norman nobles over the more fertile por- 
 tions of the country. The English colony never formed 
 one compact body capable of combined action. The lord- 
 ship of Ulster communicated with Leinster through the 
 passes of the Mourne mountains. The English in Leinster 
 communicated with those in Connaught by the difficult 
 route of Athlone. The road to Kilkenny and Carlow was 
 threatened by the Irish tribes of the Wicklow Mountains, 
 and the woody and boggy country to the west. The settlers 
 in Wexford were practically isolated, and the communication 
 with the southern Geraldines became difficult at an early 
 period; the districts also occupied by the English were 
 sparsely populated by the colonists — they had never been 
 altogether abandoned by the original inhabitants, and were 
 never fully occupied, with the exception of Meath, by 
 English colonists. Under these circumstances the English 
 occupied a position affording little means for successful ag- 
 gression, and utterly incapable of regular defence. The 
 efforts of any of the scattered portions of the colony, how- 
 ever successful, did not tend to drive back the Irish popu- 
 lation, or coop them up in any particular district. The 
 tribes defeated in one quarter would be thrown back upon 
 another portion of the English colony, and the ultimate 
 conquest of the island remain as incomplete as ever. 
 
 2. The military equipment of the Normans, and their 
 mode of carrying on war, rendered their forces wholly in- 
 efficient, when leaving the flat country they attempted to 
 penetrate the fastnesses of the native tribes. The unsuc- 
 cessful expedition of Richard II. was a remarkable instance: 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 151 
 
 the archers were ineffective in a closely-wooded country ; 
 the heavy cavalry could not he moved on the boggy grou nd ; 
 the infantry were worn out by cutting passes through the 
 woods, and one of the largest armies which ever invaded 
 Ireland failed to subdue the counties of Wexford and 
 Carlow, and, after great sufferings, scarcely escaped by sea. 
 
 The remarks of Giraldus upon the two preceding reasons 
 are so much to the point that I quote them at length : — 
 
 “ The Normans who are newly come among us (viz., the 
 first Welch-Norman adventurers), may be very good sol- 
 diers in their own country, and expert in the use of arms and 
 armour after the Trench fashion, but every one knows how 
 much this differs from the mode of warfare in Ireland and 
 Wales. In France war is carried on in a champagne 
 country — here it is rough and mountainous ; there you 
 have open plains — here you find dense woods ; in France 
 it is counted an honour to wear armour — here it is found to 
 be cumbersome ; there victories are to be won by serried 
 ranks and close fighting — here by the charge of light armed 
 troops; there quarter is given, prisoners taken, enemies 
 admitted to ransom— here their heads are struck off as tro- 
 phies, and no one escapes. Where armies engage in a plain 
 country, heavy and complex armour, whether shirts of mail 
 or coat of steel, is both a splendid ornament of the knights 
 and men-at-arms, and is also necessary for their protection ; 
 but where you have to fight in close passes and in woods 
 and bogs, in which foot soldiers are more serviceable than 
 horsemen, a far lighter kind of armour is preferable. In 
 fighting against naked and unarmed men, whose only hope 
 of success lies in the impetuosity of their first attack, men 
 in light armour can pursue the fugitives. The Normans, 
 with this complex armour and their deeply-curved saddles, 
 find great difficulty in getting on horseback and dismount- 
 
152 
 
 LECTT7KES ON IKISH HISTOKY. 
 
 ing, and still greater when occasion requires that they 
 
 should march on foot 
 
 “ Moreover, the part of the country on this side, as far 
 as the river Shannon, which forms the boundary between 
 the eastern parts of the island and the western part, should 
 be protected by strongly fortified castles, built in different 
 places ; and further, in the meantime, let all the country 
 beyond the Shannon, including Connaught and part of 
 Munster, he subjected to annual tribute, except the city of 
 Limerick, which should by all means be recovered and oc- 
 cupied by the English ; for it would he better, far better, 
 to begin with building fortresses on suitable situations, 
 proceeding by degrees to construct them, than to erect a 
 great number at once in a variety of places at a great dis- 
 tance from each other, where they would be entirely discon- 
 nected, and could afford no mutual aid in time of need.” 
 
 We may observe in this last passage a kind of foresha- 
 dowing of the system adopted by Cromwell in Ireland. 
 
 3. Erom the absence of any central government, civil 
 wars continually arose between the several Norman lords; 
 thus the military power of the colonists was frittered away 
 in dissensions, in which each belligerent was hut too will- 
 ing to avail himself of the assistance of the adjoining Irish, 
 who profited by the disasters which befel either of the 
 combatants. 
 
 4. The English government continually called upon the 
 Irish Barons for aids and military service, to be em- 
 ployed in wars elsewhere than in Ireland. Eor example, 
 in the 38th Henry III. a writ is issued to Maurice Fitz- 
 gerald, respecting the army of Christians and Saracens who 
 were hastening to the invasion “ of the king’s dominions in 
 Gascoigne, and who would thereby obtain an entry into 
 England and Ireland ; for this reason he is desired to como 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 153 
 
 with all his friends to the King in Gascoigne, so that they 
 be at Waterford against Easter, ready to embark with 
 horses, arms, and soldiers, for never in future time can their 
 aid in counsel he so required as at present.” The forces of 
 the Irish Barons were used for the purposes of the Scotch 
 wars. Edward I., in 1295, issued a writ to the Justiciary, 
 requiring him to raise a certain number of horsemen, and 
 10,000 foot, who were to be fully accoutred, and sent over 
 for service in England. Money was also frequently raised 
 from Irish Parliaments, which we may assume was spent 
 by the King for purposes he deemed more pressing than the 
 completion of the conquest of Ireland. 
 
 5. Many of the estates of the Korman nobles descended 
 to heiresses, who married Englishmen already possessing 
 estates in England : hence arose absenteeism, the evils of 
 which at the period of which we are now treating were 
 altogether different from its present results. 
 
 An Irish estate then afforded no pecuniary income ; it 
 involved duties, but no emoluments. The lord was enabled 
 by the aid of his personal retainers, whom he supported, at 
 least to hold his own against his Irish neighbours ; but no 
 English nobleman was willing to abandon his secure pos- 
 sessions in England to fulfil irksome duties in a then barba- 
 rous country. The absence of the lord with his retainers 
 would have left the castles vacant, and it became necessary 
 for him to employ a permanent garrison. As has been already 
 observed, the pay of English troops was then exorbitant ; 
 but, on the other hand, Irish gallowglasses could be retained 
 at a comparatively trifling expense. As a natural conse- 
 quence, the castles of the absentee lords soon became exclu- 
 sively garrisoned by Irish mercenaries, commanded by an 
 Irish seneschal, both of whom, governor and garrison, revolt- 
 ed upon the first favourable opportunity : for example, in 
 
154 
 
 LECTTJEES ON IEISH HISTORY". 
 
 Glynn’s Annals we find : — “ 1342 — obiit Leysert O’Mortli*. 
 vir potens dives et locuples et in gente sua honoratns. Hie 
 fere omnes Anglicos de terris suis et hereditate violenter 
 ejecit, nam nno sero viii castra Anglicorutn combussit et 
 castrum nobile de Dunmaske (Dunamasc) Domini Bogeri, 
 de Mortuomari, destruxit et dominium sibi patriae usurpavit 
 de servo dominus , de subjecto princeps effectus.” 
 
 “ In the year 1342 died Leysert O’Moore, a man power- 
 ful, wealthy, rich, and honoured in his own tribe. He, by 
 force, thrust out almost all the English from his lands and 
 inheritance, for in one night he burned eight English 
 castles, and destroyed the noble Castle of Dunamase, the 
 property of the Boger Mortimer, and acquired for himself 
 the lordship of his country, having made himself lord in- 
 stead of serf, prince instead of subject.” 
 
 6. Even the lords, who resided constantly upon their 
 Irish estate, gradually lost their Norman habits, and tended 
 to assimilate themselves to the manners, and to adopt the 
 language, of the Irish. Irish writers are fond of attribut- 
 ing this to some peculiar fascination which the tribe life of 
 the natives possessed, to the charms of their society, and 
 the gentleness of their character. No such explanation is 
 necessary. Separated from their countrymen in England, 
 living in isolated castles, and necessarily brought into con- 
 tact with the native, the associations and prejudices, 
 which are the strength of a dominant aristocracy, were 
 gradually enfeebled. The utmost hostility cannot exclude 
 many occasions of social intercourse. Foreign intruders, 
 unless they can establish themselves as a dominant aristo- 
 cracy, must gradually be fused into the mass of the con- 
 quered race. Thus arose intermarriages and fostering, 
 which seduced the Normans from their original allegiance, 
 and taught them to regard their Celtic neighbours as friends 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 155 
 
 and compatriots rather than hereditary enemies. The 
 strict law and feudal obligations which bound the feudal 
 vassal to his superior seemed irksome when contrasted with 
 the complete freedom of a Celtic chief. To throw off the 
 mail, to don the saffron, to become the leader and ally of 
 his former enemies, was the obvious course by which a 
 If orman lord could escape from the oppression of his feudal 
 superior. But even the obstinate Norman found it difficult 
 to preserve his nationality. An Irish tribe resembled a 
 moveable column. Its integrity and existence did not de- 
 pend upon the maintenance of any town or castle. If 
 overpowered by the enemy, it abandoned its village of 
 cabins, and plunged deeper in the natural fastnesses of the 
 country ; it might be exterminated, but was incapable of 
 conquest. On the other hand, if the vigilance of the Nor- 
 man castellan relaxed for a moment, the ever-watchful 
 enemy broke in upon his estates ; his crops were destroyed, 
 and flocks driven off before the feudal levy could be got 
 together for resistance. 
 
 Colonists in the position of the Anglo-Norman settlers, 
 if they fail to reduce the native population to serfdom, re- 
 quire a permanent armed force for the purpose of protection 
 — a truth which the bitter experience of modern colonists 
 has abundantly proved ; but the feudal system afforded no 
 force of such description. The vassals served for stated 
 periods, and according to the rules of their tenures, and 
 being agriculturists, objected to being harassed by perpe- 
 tual summons to arms. A permanent force was an absolute 
 necessity to the lord ; his vassals failed to supply this want, 
 and, as before explained, the expense of English merce- 
 naries was excessive. As a natural consequence, the resident 
 lords also fell into the habit of employing mercenary gallow- 
 glasses. Irish followers exhibited greater personal devotion 
 
156 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 and obedience than feudal vassals, and were maintained at 
 a cost insignificant as compared with English soldiery. But 
 even for their maintenance the legitimate revenue of the 
 lord was insufficient ; to supply them, the feudal tenants 
 were oppressed by exactions hitherto unknown. The Irish 
 retainers were quartered upon them— a practice borrowed 
 from the Irish chiefs ; but in this case imposed upon a 
 people to whom it was distasteful, and seemed unjust, and 
 exercised in the most irregular and oppressive manner. 
 Under these circumstances, the smaller English freeholders 
 in great numbers abandoned their lands, and returned to 
 England. Their deserted farms were occupied by Irish 
 retainers, and the English settlers, thus gradually weeded 
 out, were replaced by the original occupiers. 
 
 The position of the Norman lord himself became strangely 
 altered ; instead of occupying a definite place in a system 
 with his duties to his superior and rights over his inferiors, 
 he became the irresponsible leader of devoted followers, who 
 knew no law but his will. The peculiarities of this state 
 of things would be exhibited upon the death of the lord, if 
 his heir, according to English law, were a minor or a woman. 
 According to English ideas, the estate would in such case 
 pass to a minor heir or the heiress, and the Crown would ex- 
 ercise the rights incident to its feudal superiority. But what 
 was the estate ? The original estate had disappeared, and for 
 it there had been gradually substituted “ a tribe” of which 
 the original mercenaries formed the popular element, and 
 the family of their first employer the ruling house. If the 
 Crown attempted to enforce its feudal rights, or supported 
 the claim of the minor heir or heiress, a district originally 
 held by feudal tenure was suddenly converted into Irish 
 tribe land. Bearing these considerations in mind, we can 
 easily understand why the English law frequently de- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 157 
 
 nounced the keeping of gallowglasses, and quartering them 
 upon the country (coigne and livery), as amounting to acts 
 of treason. 
 
 7. The Irish Channel, although wide enough to check 
 colonization, and render military expeditions to Ireland 
 difficult and costly, afforded no insuperable obstacle to the 
 passage and return of those who repaired to Ireland to seek 
 their fortune, or who, having failed there, desired to return 
 to England. 
 
 Hence the constant arrival of fresh adventurers, who 
 sought by grants from the Crown and legalized plunder to 
 repair their fortunes, but rarely desired to make Ireland 
 their permanent home. Unprincipled foreign speculators 
 and beggarly court favourites afflicted Ireland, and were 
 the instigators of and sharers in the constant confiscations 
 of the estates of Norman and Celt alike. These new Eng- 
 lish arrivals arrogated to themselves the name of “ Eng- 
 lish,’ ? treating their brethren who had the misfortune to 
 have been born in Ireland, as an inferior class. To gratify 
 the former class, and to mortify the Irish English in 1341, 
 Edward III. resolved to resume into the hands of the 
 Crown all lands, tributes, seignories, and jurisdictions which 
 he or his father had granted in Ireland (1341). In the 
 following year (1342) Desmond and the confiscated lords 
 at Kilkenny asked of the King the parliament questions, 
 “ How an officer of the King, who entered very poor, could 
 in one year heap up more wealth than men of great estates 
 in many?” and “how it chanced, since they were all called 
 lords by their own, that the Sovereign lord of them all 
 was never the richer for them ?” In 1361 Lionel, Duke of 
 Clarence, arriving with an English force, by proclamation 
 forbade any of the old English to join his army or approach his 
 camp. Bitter animosities arose between the, English by birth 
 
158 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 and the Irish English; the former were nicknamed “ Eng- 
 lish hobbies;” the latter styled “Irish dogs.” Such dissen- 
 sions tended to enfeeble the power of the English colony, 
 and to render the original settlers less unwilling to amal- 
 gamate with the natives. 
 
 These various causes of the failure of the Anglo-Norman 
 colonists did not come into full operation until the four- 
 teenth century. At the close of the reign of Edward I., 
 the English influence was predominant in Ireland ; but its 
 system, political and social, was utterly rotten, and even 
 without foreign interference, could not have been perma- 
 nently maintained. 
 
 It was shivered to pieces by the Scotch invasion of 1315, 
 which, with its consequences, will form the subject of the 
 succeeding Lecture. 
 
LECTURE VII. 
 
 THE INVASION OF BRUCE, AND THE STATUTE OF KILKENNY . 
 
 At the commencement of the fourteenth century the posi- 
 tion of the Anglo-Norman colony in Ireland seemed unassail- 
 able ; so far from requiring constant aid from England, large 
 supplies of men and arms were furnished from Ireland for 
 the war in Scotland. The most important military com- 
 mands were held by members of the Norman-Irish houses. 
 But in this century commenced a series of events, which, 
 in the space of fifty years, overthrew the supremacy of the 
 English Crown, and compelled it to abandon its aggressive 
 attitude towards the Celtic population, and adopt a purely 
 defensive policy. 
 
 The most important event from the date of the English 
 so-called conquest, to the commencement of the Tudor go- 
 vernment m a.d. 1534, is, undoubtedly, the invasion of Ire- 
 land by Edward Bruce in a. n. 1315. In the tedious recital 
 of aimless civil war which encumbers the history of Ireland, 
 the peculiar bearing of this event has been overlooked ; but 
 it undoubtedly constituted the turning point in the history 
 of this country, and accelerated the collapse of the feudal 
 government. 
 
 The result of the national struggle in Scotland could not 
 but react upon Ireland. The Celtic population were en- 
 couraged to aim at national independence by the success of 
 the Bruce, and the prestige of the English Crown was 
 
160 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 seriously diminished. On the other hand, interference in 
 Ireland was the natural policy of the Scottish King. It 
 was his obvious interest to cut off the supplies drawn by 
 England from this country, and to establish his brother in 
 an independent sphere of action. The victory of Bannock- 
 burn placed the Crown of Scotland upon the head of Kobert 
 Bruce, the last successful Norman adventurer ; but, in the 
 protracted struggle with England, the younger brother had 
 exhibited equal vigour and perseverance, if not equal 
 ability. Edward Bruce could scarcely sink into the posi- 
 tion of a vassal, and he might have proved a formidable 
 rival. Under these circumstances, the native Irish chief- 
 tains and the Scottish King easily came to an agreement in 
 their common design of expelling the English, and placing 
 the Crown of Ireland upon the head of Edward Bruce. 
 
 The complaints and desires of the Irish chiefs are fully 
 set forth in their celebrated letter to Pope John XXII., 
 one of the most important documents in our history :* — 
 
 “ To our most Holy Father in Christ, the Lord John, by 
 the grace of God Supreme Pontiff, his attached children, 
 Donald O’Neyl, King of Ulster, and rightful hereditary 
 successor to the throne of all Ireland, as well as the 
 princes and nobles of the same realm, with the Irish people 
 in general, present their humble salutations, approaching 
 with kisses of devout homage to his sacred feet. 
 
 ‘‘Least the bitter and venomous calumnies of the English , 
 and their unjust and unfounded attacks upon us, and all 
 who support our rights, may in any degree influence your 
 mind (though Heaven forbid it should do so), or least cir- 
 cumstances unknown to you, and made by them the subject 
 
 * The original is contained in the Scotichronicon of Fordun, sub anno 
 1318. An English translation is to be found in King’s Primer of Church 
 History of Ireland, supplemental vol., Appendix xix. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 161 
 
 of misrepresentation, may seem to require some correction 
 at your hands, as though their statements were fully in 
 accordance with the truth ; with loud and imploring cry we 
 would convey to your holy ears, in the contents of the pre- 
 sent appeal, an account of our first origin, and of the condi- 
 tion in which our affairs at this moment stand ; and also 
 of the cruel injuries to us and our forefathers, indicted, 
 threatened, and to the present hour continued, by succes- 
 sive kings of England, and their wicked ministers, and 
 Anglican barons of Irish birth ; that so you may have it 
 in your power to examine into the particulars of the case 
 at issue, and thus to discern for yourself which party it is 
 that has been compelled by real grievances to raise a cla- 
 mour. And then shall it be for your judgment, after care- 
 ful and satisfactory inquiry into the matter, to determine, 
 according to the character of the evidence brought be- 
 fore you, what punishment or correction should visit the 
 offences of the delinquent party.” 
 
 The complainants then set out the ancient independence 
 of the Irish realm, the piety and virtue of its native princes, 
 and trace their subjugation and misery to the unrighteous 
 obsequiousness of Pope Adrian in granting the kingdom of 
 Ireland to Henry II. To the Papal Bull of a. d. 1170 they 
 attribute the sufferings and misery of their country, and 
 state, as an undoubted truth, that, in consequence of that 
 fatal grant, upwards of fifty thousand persons of both na- 
 tions had perished by the sword, independently of those who 
 were worn out by famine, or destroyed in dungeons. They 
 assert that the terms upon which the Bull was granted 
 had been constantly violated by the English kings. “ For 
 the territories of the Church are so curtailed, narrowed, and 
 mutilated by them, that some cathedral churches have 
 been plundered of a moiety, and more than that, of their 
 
 M 
 
162 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 lands and property, while ecclesiastical privileges of every 
 kind are, for the most part, entirely abolished by those in- 
 dividuals here spoken of. And our bishops and prelates 
 are indiscriminately summoned, arrested, seized upon, and 
 imprisoned by the ministers of the King of England in Ire- 
 land ; and, though suffering as they do, such constant and 
 serious injuries, they are yet so strongly influenced by such 
 slavish timidity , that they never venture to bring before your 
 Holiness any representations concerning them . In conse- 
 quence of such scandalous silence on their part, we are also 
 disposed to refrain from any further observation on this 
 topic.” 
 
 As regards the conduct of the English Government to- 
 wards the natives, the complainants state: — “ They have 
 also deprived them of their written laws, according to 
 which they had been governed for the most part in pre- 
 ceding times, and of every other law, excepting that with 
 which they could not be forced to part ; introducing mean- 
 while, with a view to the extermination of our people, in- 
 famous laws of the most abandoned and unprincipled cha- 
 racter, some of which, by way of example, are here in- 
 serted ; and those which we subjoin are inviolably observed 
 in the Court of the King of England and Ireland, viz. : — 
 
 “ 1. That permission is given to every person who is not 
 Irish, to summon at the law any Irish person, in any sort 
 of action whatsoever. But every Irishman, whether he be 
 clerk or layman, the prelates alone excepted, is ipso facto 
 excluded from commencing any action whatsoever. 
 
 “ 2. Further, as it very constantly happens, whenever 
 any Englishman, by perfidy or craft, kills an Irishman, 
 however noble, or however innocent, be he clerk or layman, 
 be he regular or secular — nay, even if an Irish prelate were 
 to be slain, there is no penalty or correction enforced in the 
 
LECTURES OX IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 163 
 
 said Court against the person who may he guilty of such 
 wicked murder ; but rather, the., more eminent the person 
 killed, and the higher the rank which he holds among his 
 own people, so much the more is the murderer honoured 
 and rewarded by the English ; and not merely by the peo- 
 ple at large, but also by the religious and bishops of the 
 English race ; and, above all, by those on whom devolves 
 officially the duty of inflicting on such malefactors a just 
 reward, and equitable correction for their evil deeds.” 
 
 These first two heads of complaint refer to the fact that 
 the King’s courts exercised no jurisdiction, either to main- 
 tain the rights or punish the wrongs of Irish aliens, the 
 origin of which apparent anomaly has been explained in a 
 preceding Lecture. 
 
 u 3. Furthermore, every Irishwoman, whether of noble 
 rank or otherwise, who marries any Englishman, is de- 
 prived, on her partner’s death, merely because she is an 
 Irishwoman, of the third part of the landed property and 
 other effects which belonged to her deceased husband.” 
 
 The meaning of this section appears to be that, inasmuch 
 as the intermarriages of feudal tenants with women of Irish 
 birth, was forbidden by English-Irish Statutes, the courts 
 did not admit such marriages as legal, and rejected the 
 widow’s claim to dower. At this period, questions as to 
 the personal estate of intestates could not have come before 
 the King’s courts, but would have been subject to the juris- 
 diction of the ordinary. 
 
 “4. Again these English, whenever they can compass 
 the destruction of an Irishman by violent means, will not 
 by any means allow such Irishman to dispose of his own 
 property by his last will or testamentary arrangement of 
 any kind. But on the contrary, they make their own of all 
 his goods, depriving the Church of her just rights, and by 
 m 2 
 
164 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 their violence reducing, on their own authority, to a state 
 of bondage the blood which flowed in freedom from the days 
 ofold.” 
 
 The Irish, in this complaint, show how little the English 
 Common Law was understood by the native Celts. Ho feudal 
 vassal at this period had a power of disposing by will of real 
 estate. The principle of English law here referred to is 
 evidently the attainder of those who were executed as 
 traitors or felons, whose blood was corrupted, so that heir- 
 ships could not be traced through them, and whose pro- 
 perty was forfeited to the Crown. 
 
 Their flfth cause of complaint was the exclusion of Irish 
 ecclesiastics from religious houses, as to which they cite a 
 Statute alleged to have been lately passed at Kilkenny — 
 viz., “ It is ordained that all the religious who dwell in the 
 land of peace among the English are prohibited from re- 
 ceiving into their order or form of religion any excepting 
 such as are of the nation of the English.” 
 
 As to this complaint, it may be observed that it dealt 
 only with the religious * ‘ who dwell in the land of peace 
 among the English,” and was not aimed at monastic insti- 
 tutions situated in tribal territory ; and further, that in the 
 Irish monasteries the English seem to have been recipro- 
 cally excluded. 
 
 The complainants then state that the Anglo-Hormans in 
 Ireland were guilty of constant acts of cruelty and perfidy, 
 “ for they have kept up ever since the days of old this wicked 
 and unprincipled usage, which is not even yet falling into 
 disuse amongst them, but, on the contrary, gaining every 
 day new strength, and becoming more inveterate — viz., 
 that when they invite to an entertainment some of the 
 nobles of our nation, at the very time of repast, or during 
 the hours devoted to rest, they will shed without mercy the 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 165 
 
 blood of the unsuspecting guests whom they have invited, 
 
 * terminating in this way their abominable feasts.” Five 
 instances are cited in proof of this assertion, one of which 
 does not appear apposite, and in three of the remaining 
 four the victims were Normans, not Irish. 
 
 They further allege that the laity were supported in these 
 outrages by the clergy, who openly asserted that it was no 
 sin to slay an Irishman. 
 
 “ For it is not merely their lay and secular persons, but 
 even some of the religious among them too, who are assert- 
 ing the heretical doctrine that it is no more sin to kill an 
 Irishman than a single dog or any other brute animal. 
 And in confirmation of this heretical opinion, some of their 
 monks audaciously affirm, that if it were to happen to them, 
 as it often does happen, that they should kill an Irishman, 
 they would not for this refrain from the celebration of the 
 mass even for a single day. And accordingly what they 
 preach in words is unhesitatingly and shamelessly put in 
 practice in their deeds, by the monks of the Cistercian 
 order of Granard in the diocese of Armagh, and also by the 
 monks of the same order belonging to Inch in the diocese 
 of Down. For making their appearance publicly in arms, 
 they invade and slaughter the Irish people, and yet cele- 
 brate their masses notwithstanding.” 
 
 After stating that a warm appeal had been made to 
 the English King through the Bishop of Ely for the 
 removal of these grievances, and that they were re- 
 solved to enforce their rights by the sword, they proceed 
 thus : — “ In order to effect our object in this behalf with 
 more promptness, and in a dignified manner, we are invit- 
 ing to our aid and assistance Edward De Bruce, the illus- 
 trious Earl of Carrick, brother german of the most illus- 
 trious Lord Kobert, by the grace of God King of the Scots, 
 
166 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 and descendant of some of the most noble of our own an- 
 cestors. . . . May it please thee, therefore, most Holy 
 
 Father, out of a regard for justice and the public peace, 
 mercifully to sanction our proceedings relative to our said 
 lord the King, prohibiting the King of England and our ad- 
 versaries aforesaid from further molestation of us. Or, at 
 least, be graciously pleased to enforce for us from them the 
 due requirements of justice.’ ’ 
 
 Ko answer was returned by the Pope to this appeal — at 
 least no such document appears in Theiner’s collection of 
 Letters and Bulls relative to Ireland, lately published by 
 authority of the Holy See; but the original document, with 
 a copy of Pope Adrian’s Bull, was forwarded by the Pope 
 to Edward II., together with a letter containing the follow- 
 ing passage: — “We therefore, by these presents, earnestly 
 beg of your royal excellency . . . that you will take 
 
 these matters into your calm, deliberate consideration, and 
 confer upon them with your discreet council, and in this 
 way proceed to command and enforce a just and speedy 
 correction and reform of the grievances aforesaid ; . . . 
 
 so that those Irish people, following more wholesome coun- 
 sels, may render you the obedience due to their lord , or if 
 (which Heaven forbid) they shall be disposed to persist in 
 foolish rebellion, they may convert their cause into a matter 
 of open injustice, while you stand excused before God and 
 man.’’ 
 
 Without waiting for further communication either from 
 the King or the Irish, the Pope issued Bulls to the Irish 
 archbishops, desiring them to excommunicate all those who 
 had taken up arms with Bruce in Ireland, and all those 
 w r ho, either openly or in secret, furnished them with counsel, 
 weapons, horses, money, or any other aid, in their opposi- 
 tion to the Pope’s most dear son Edward, the illustrious 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 167 
 
 King of England. The Bulls desired that all such persons 
 should he shunned as under the ban of the Church, and 
 commanded the clergy of Ireland to read aloud the sentence 
 of excommunication every Sunday and festival with lighted 
 candles and tolling of bells, in such places as they should 
 deem expedient, but especially in the seaports. 
 
 Thus the Church again supported the cause of England 
 against the native Irish, as it had opposed the national re- 
 sistance in Scotland. But, if the hierarchy of the Church 
 abandoned the native Celts, that portion of the regular 
 clergy, most intimately acquainted with the condition of 
 the people, stood by them in the struggle. The poor bre- 
 thren of St. Erancis stimulated their countrymen in their 
 efforts, and proved so formidable to the English govern- 
 ment, that two of the English friars of the order, one of 
 whom was the head of the order in Ireland, were despatched 
 by the King to their general minister^ to require that the 
 Irish friars should be canonically suppressed. 
 
 In May, a.d. 1315, Edward Bruce landed near Carrick- 
 fergus with 6000 men, and accompanied by many of the 
 best soldiers in Scotland. Amongst his followers we find 
 Randolph, the Earl of Moray, and the well-known names 
 of De Mowbray, Menteith, Soulis, and Lord Allan Steward. 
 At this date the earldoms of Ulster and Connaught were 
 united in the person of the great De Burgo, known as the 
 Red Earl, under whose command the colonists of eastern 
 Ulster encountered Edward Bruce on the Bann, and were 
 utterly defeated. Dundalk and the town of Carrickfergus 
 were immediately captured, the castle of the latter place still 
 holding out. The Red Earl was again defeated by Bruce close 
 to the town of Connor, near the present town of Ballymena. 
 Edward Bruce, who had been crowned king by his adherents, 
 having left a force to carry on the siege of the castle of 
 
168 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Carrickfergus, wintered in Westmeath, whence, in the en- 
 suing spring, he advanced southward, and defeated the 
 Viceroy, De Boutiller, at Ardscull, in Kildare. He thence 
 proceeded through Leinster, captured the castle of Ley, 
 near Portarlington, and totally defeated at Kells the army 
 of De Mortimer, lord of a moiety of Meath. The allied 
 Scotch and Irish, though suffering great losses from famine 
 and exhaustion, wasted and destroyed the lands of the 
 Anglo-Normans in Meath and Kildare, and returned in 
 spring to Carrickfergus, where Edward Bruce held a regal 
 court. Towards the close of a.d. 1316, Kobert Bruce ar- 
 rived with reinforcements, and the castle of Carrickfergus 
 was captured shortly afterwards. 
 
 In the spring of a.d. 1317, the Bruces, accompanied by 
 their Irish allies, set out southwards upon a progress round 
 Ireland, with the intention of utterly extirpating the Anglo- 
 Norman colony. The nature of this warfare is briefly de- 
 scribed by friar John Clyn, a devoted English partizan : — 
 “Item, in the same year, about Christmas, arrived Lord 
 Kobert le Brus, who pretended to be King of the Scotch, 
 passing across through the whole land of Ulster, where he 
 landed, almost to Limerick ; burning, slaying, plundering, 
 sacking towns, castles, and even churches, going and re- 
 turning. ’’ They arrived near Dublin, and captured the 
 castle of Knock. After a few days’ sojourn at Leixlip, they 
 marched through Naas, Castledermot, Gowran, Callan, 
 Cashel, and Nenagh, where he wasted the estates of the 
 Viceroy de Boutiler; thence to Castle Connell, and back, 
 through Kells in Ossory and Trim, to Ulster. 
 
 Some writers have hesitated to attribute to Kobert Bruce 
 the merciless destruction with which this campaign is said 
 to have been attended ; but knightly courtesy and chivalry 
 were perfectly consistent with great barbarity, and the mode 
 
LECTURES OH IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 169 
 
 of conducting this war exactly resembles that adopted by 
 Wallace in England, and by the English themselves re- 
 peatedly in Scotland. The peculiar havoc produced in 
 Ireland arose from the protracted nature of the struggle 
 and the inability of those who were expelled from their 
 homes, again to take possession. 
 
 Robert Bruce after this campaign returned to Scotland, 
 leaving a Scotch army under the command of his brother. 
 The colonists now made strenuous efforts to assemble a 
 force, and took up a position between Eaughard and Dun- 
 dalk, at the mouth of the pass subsequently so well known 
 in Irish wars. The English forces were commanded by the 
 celebrated Jean de Birmingham, between whom and Ed- 
 ward Bruce was fought the battle which decided the fate 
 of Ireland. Bruce’s chief counsellors earnestly dissuaded 
 him from engaging forces so superior ; but rendered confi- 
 dent by eighteen successive victories, he declared he would 
 fight, even were the enemy three or four times stronger ; 
 and that none should say he was daunted by numbers. 
 The issue of the celebrated battle is well known. Bruce 
 and his chief officers were slain, but the mass of his army 
 escaped into Scotland. 
 
 It has been frequently asserted that his Irish confede- 
 rates did not support the king whom they had chosen. 
 The Rev. Mr. Butler, in his introduction to Clynn’s Annals, 
 states: “ He (Bruce) was not effectively assisted by the 
 native princes. The usual fate awaited him of those who, 
 for their own aggrandizement, interfere in the civil dissen- 
 sions of a foreign country. The objects of the parties are 
 different, and each hopes to use the other only so far as 
 may promote their own purposes. The Irish princes did 
 not fight to change their masters, but to secure their inde- 
 pendence, and they were no more willing to submit to a 
 
170 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 Scoto-Xorman than to an Anglo-Xorman baronage.’ ’ This 
 is scarcely consistent with the following passage of his 
 author : — “ In the same time the Scots landed in Ulster, 
 to whom, during the whole time they were in Ireland, 
 almost all the Irish of the land adhered, very few preserv- 
 ing faith and fidelity” (to the English king). 
 
 But whatever was the conduct of Bruce’s Irish allies, 
 the Irish people bore in memory the desperate cruelties 
 inflicted, and miseries suffered during this prolonged strug- 
 gle, which evil memories were inseparably connected in the 
 popular mind with the name of the chivalrous and brilliant, 
 but most unfortunate, Edward Bruce. In speaking of his 
 death, the Irish Annals of Clonmacnoise declare that he 
 was slain “to the great joy and comfort of the whole 
 kingdom in general, for there was not a better deed that 
 redounded more to the good of the kingdom, since the 
 creation of the world, and since the banishment of the 
 Fine Fomores out of this land, done in Ireland, than the 
 killing of Edward Bruce ; for there reigned scarcity of vic- 
 tuals, breach of promises, ill performance of covenants, and 
 the loss of men and women, throughout the whole kingdom, 
 for the space of three years and a half that he bore sway ; 
 insomuch that men did commonly eat one another, for want 
 of sustenance, during his time.” 
 
 Meanwhile, two bye-battles between the Anglo-Xormans 
 and the native Celts had been fought in other parts of the 
 country. The entire clan of the O’Connors was defeated, 
 if not annihilated, in the battle of Athenry by the Xorman 
 barons under the command of Bichard de Birmingham, but 
 the Anglo-Xormans were not so successful in South Lein- 
 ster, where they were defeated by O’ Carrol of Ely, nor 
 again in Xorth Munster, where the O’Briens defeated and 
 slew Bichard De Clare at the head of an army of Xorman 
 
LECTTJEES ON IK1SH HISTOEY. 
 
 ] 71 
 
 settlers and Irish retainers in the decisive battle of Dysart 
 O’Dea. 
 
 Thus, upon the whole, the Anglo-Normans emerged tri- 
 umphant from the struggle; but though the Scotch and 
 western Irish were defeated, though Edward Bruce’s head 
 had been exposed in Westminster, though no organized 
 native or Scotch force remained in Ireland, the English 
 colonists suffered such serious losses, their social system 
 was so disorganized, and their power so thoroughly shaken, 
 that within fifty years the English were compelled to aban- 
 don the project of finally conquering Ireland, and to adopt 
 the policy embodied in the Statute of Kilkenny, hereafter 
 described. 
 
 The condition of the English Settlement, and the suffer- 
 ings of the poorer classes of the English freeholders, which 
 form the true strength of every society, are described by 
 theKev. Wm. Butler, in his introduction to Clynn’s Annals, 
 as follows : — “ Many generations passed before the devastat- 
 ing effects of the Scottish invasion, passing thus like a stream 
 of lava through the country, were done away. The ani- 
 mosity between the English and the Irish was embittered, 
 the sense of the greatness of the English power was dimi- 
 nished, the authority of law and order was impaired, the 
 castle and the farm-house were alike ruined. The castle was 
 more easily rebuilt than the more important farm-house. 
 The noble may have had other resources : in later times we 
 know that his castle was repaired at the expense of the dis- 
 trict ; he was bound by stronger ties to the country ; and 
 when his castle was rebuilt, it was at least comparatively 
 secure : but when the homestead was wrecked and burned, 
 and the haggard robbed of its stacks, and the bawn left 
 without horse or cow, and ‘all his gear were gone,’ the 
 farmer, as he looked about him in despair, might well be ex- 
 
172 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 cused if he fled away to some safer country ; or if, listening 
 to hunger, that evil counsellor, he became an idleman or a 
 kerne, ready to plunder, as he had been plundered, and eat- 
 ing up the produce of other men’s labours. 
 
 “ If he endeavoured to remain, what was before him, but, 
 poor and dispirited, deprived of his accustomed comforts 
 and of his comparative respectability, to sink hopelessly into 
 a lower stage of society, and to yield to its customs ; or 
 rather to turn in sullen or in passionate anger from the 
 civilization in which he no longer had a share, and to resent, 
 as an injury, the existence of comforts which had been his 
 once, but were to be his no more, and to hate and to scorn 
 their possessors ? 
 
 “ Such, doubtless, was the history of the degradation of 
 many English freeholders, consequent upon the Scottish in- 
 vasion ; nor could the degradation be limited to the retainer 
 alone. In a country in which there is no foreign inter- 
 ference, no rank of society can stand apart from others, 
 and in proportion to its height it needs the more numerous 
 supporters. The castle walls can no more keep out the in- 
 fluence of the social maxims and principles of the lower 
 ranks of the people, than they can keep out the contagion 
 of their diseases, and the lord necessarily partook of the de- 
 gradation of the vassals. 
 
 “ To the Scottish invasion, then, may, at least partly, be 
 ascribed the barbarism and the consequent weakness of the 
 English in Ireland during the greater part of the fourteenth 
 and the whole of the fifteenth century. In the thirty years 
 that elapsed between that event and the close of Clyn’s 
 Annals, that barbarism had made great progress. The 
 power of the central government grew weaker ; the lords, 
 whether of Irish or of English blood, became more inde- 
 pendent and irresponsible, and, consequently, more arbitrary 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY, 
 
 173 
 
 and tyrannical ; and private fends, resulting in open vio- 
 lence, became of more frequent occurrence. The control 
 of law nearly ceased, and little remained, as a rule of 
 conduct, except the will of the stronger. It then became 
 a question whether this anarchy should continue, or whether 
 it should result in the prevalence of either the English or 
 the Irish system, or, as seemed more probable and more 
 reasonable, whether some third system should not be de- 
 veloped, formed from the amalgamation of these two, and 
 the natural growth of the circumstances of this country.” 
 
 During the ensuing fifty years events rapidly succeeded, 
 which show this disorganization of the social system of the 
 English colony, and continually increasing feebleness of the 
 government. In the parliament held in Dublin by Sir Jean 
 D’Arcy, in a. d., 1323-4, the lords there assembled under- 
 took, before the next parliament, to arrest, or cause to be 
 arrested, all felons and robbers of their families or surname, 
 with their adherents in the neighbourhood, and to make 
 them and other malefactors in their lordships amenable to 
 the King’s courts, with due regard to their own oaths, their 
 franchises, and personal safety. 
 
 In a. d. 1327 the English government wrote to their Vice- 
 roy, that as the Irish enemies and English rebels were 
 ravaging the royal lands and those of the absentees who 
 provided no sufficient defence for their estates, the proprie- 
 tors of castles on the march should be directed to take 
 measures for defence. In the event of their non-com- 
 pliance, the Viceroy was directed to take possession of the 
 castles, and maintain them out of their receipts as he deemed 
 most advantageous. 
 
 The same year the Leinster Irish elected as King Donal 
 MacMurrough, who at one time advanced to within two 
 miles of Dublin. 
 
174 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 The violent dissensions of, and outrages committed by, 
 the colonists rendered any concerted defence impossible, 
 and caused some families to abandon their allegiance. In 
 a. d. 1329, Jean de Birmingham, the victor of Faughard, 
 was murdered by his own English vassals of the county of 
 Louth. With a view of exterminating the kindred of the 
 De Birminghams, they slew not only their lord himself, 
 but also his brothers, nephews, and retainers, to the amount 
 of two hundred. The Norman families in the county of 
 Louth, when summoned to answer for this crime, refused 
 to appear before the King’s court, and resisted the Sheriff 
 when directed to attach them for contempt. The armed 
 force of the loyal inhabitants of Louth failed to execute the 
 writ, and the murderers remained unpunished. 
 
 The events of the year 1329 are thus summed up in Cox’s 
 history : — 
 
 “ Sir John Darcy, Lord Justice, in whose time Maco- 
 ghegan of Meath, and other Irishmen of Leinster, O’Bryan 
 of Thomond, and his confederates in Munster, broke out 
 into rebellion ; and yet this common calamity could not 
 unite the English, although their own experience had 
 taught them (and frequent instances have convinced the 
 succeeding ages since) that the English never suffered any 
 great loss or calamity in Ireland, but by civil dissensions 
 and disagreement among themselves. When the Earl of 
 Louth, and many other of the Birminghams, Talbot of Ma- 
 lahide, and an hundred and sixty Englishmen, were mur- 
 dered by the treachery of their own countrymen, the 
 Savages, Gernons, &c., at Balibragan, in Urgile ; and 
 when the Barry s and Roches in Munster did as much for 
 James Eitz-Robert Keatinge, the Lord Philip Hodnet, 
 and Hugh Condon, with an hundred and forty of their fol- 
 lowers ; what wonder is it if Macoghegan defeated the Lord 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 175 
 
 Thomas Butler and others near Molingar, to their loss of an 
 hundred and forty of their men ? Or if Sir Simon Genevil 
 lost seventy-six of his soldiers in Carbry, in the county of 
 Kildare; or if Brian O’Bryan ravaged over all the country, 
 and burnt the towns of Athessel and Typerary.” 
 
 Into this state had the English Government allowed Ire- 
 land to fall, and such was the country from which they 
 were still endeavouring to draw supplies for the Scotch 
 wars. 
 
 In a. d. 1331, the Viceroy, unable himself to repel the 
 Irish, aggravated the confusion by calling on the Earl of 
 Desmond for assistance ; for, being unable to pay the Mun- 
 ster army, he was obliged to permit their leader to quarter 
 them upon the colonists, and to take coigne and livery, 
 that is, to exact money and food for men and horses with- 
 out any payment. 
 
 In the same year, the English Parliament attempted the 
 reform of Ireland. The existence of Irish not subject to 
 the King had previously been ignored by the English Go- 
 vernment : now at last they were compelled to recognize 
 this fact, and provide for it by legislation. Their views of 
 reform did not, however, proceed beyond the enforcement of 
 the principles of feudal law, and they imagined that an Act 
 of Parliament, passed for the benefit of all, would be ac- 
 quiesced in by both the Anglo-Normans and the Celts. By 
 the ordinances passed on this occasion the power of the 
 Viceroy and others to grant pardons was restricted. One 
 and the same law was declared applicable to both Irish 
 and English, with the exception of serfs in the power of 
 their lords, in the manner used in England in the case of 
 villeins. The Viceroy was restrained in granting custodies 
 and wardships : sheriffs and coroners were to be elected by 
 the county courts, and in no other way; no protections 
 
176 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 were to be granted by the Yiceroy or by any nobleman ; 
 truces made and to be made between the English and Irish 
 should be observed, and neither party should do injury to 
 the other during the truce, and whosoever did so should be 
 treated as a felon ; all officers of the King, accountable in 
 Ireland, and not having lands and property in Ireland, 
 should give security to answer the King ; no person should 
 keep kern or idle men except on his own estates and for his 
 defence ; all who had land and tenements in Ireland, as 
 well religious as lay, should be admonished to reside upon 
 them, or to place sufficient guard in them before the feast 
 of St. Peter, and, in default of so doing, the King should 
 seize the lands into his own hands, and provide for the de- 
 fence ; none of any rank or condition should maintain, 
 foster, or defend the Irish, or any one breaking the King’s 
 peace, and whoever did so should be esteemed a felon. 
 
 The policy of these ordinances may be called Imperial- 
 ism. They attempted to establish English ideas and laws 
 among a totally dissimilar people, to bring about a unity of 
 the two countries, by extending to and enforcing in Ireland 
 English law and government. But such a policy must be 
 maintained by force, or be preceded by a complete conquest. 
 As the English Government in Ireland could scarcely main- 
 tain its own existence, and the English King neither at- 
 tempted nor was able to reduce the native Celts to obedience, 
 this Act, like many other Irish enactments, never had any 
 practical results. 
 
 In 1333, a large portion of Ireland was suddenly lost to 
 the English, in consequence of the assassination of the last 
 direct male representative of the great house of De Burgo. 
 The Ked Earl had been succeeded by his grandson, William, 
 in the earldoms of Connaught and Ulster. One-fourth of 
 the English territory, vested in him as sole feudal pro- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 177 
 
 prietor, gave to William, the “Brown Earl,” a military- 
 force which was the greatest obstacle to the efforts of the 
 western and northern Irish to establish their autonomy. 
 By the accident of his death, this vast district was suddenly 
 thrown into the hands of the most uncompromising oppo- 
 nents of English rule. On the 6th of June, 1333, William 
 De Burgo was assassinated at Carrickfergus by Bichard De 
 Mandeville, an Ulster noble, his own uncle by marriage. 
 His immense estates passed, according to English law, to 
 his infant daughter, subsequently the wife of Lionel Duke 
 of Clarence, son of Edward III. The junior branches of 
 the house of De Burgo and the feudal vassals of Connaught, 
 however, refused to be treated as so much landed property, 
 and rejected as their feudal head an infant girl, who had 
 been removed by her mother to England. They clearly 
 saw the consequences of such a step : they could not remain 
 the subjects of the English Crown, and reject the unques- 
 tionable rights of the Xing to the wardship of the minor. 
 The refusal to admit the claims of the heiress were equiva- 
 lent to an entire renunciation of English law and rule, and 
 could only be effected by the open adoption of Irish cus- 
 toms, and an intimate alliance, upon this basis, with 
 the native tribes. This design was at once carried out by 
 the two chiefs of the cadet branches of the De Burgo 
 family. 
 
 Sir William and Sir Edward De Burgo, the ancestors 
 respectively of the Earls of Clanrickarde and Mayo, occu- 
 pied and divided between themselves the lordship of Con- 
 naught, comprising the present counties of Galway and 
 Mayo. Combining with the Irish clans, they solemnly 
 renounced the allegiance of England, and adopted the Irish 
 language, apparel, and laws. On the banks of the Shannon, 
 in sight of the royal garrison of Athlone, they stripped 
 
 N 
 
178 
 
 LECTURES OK IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 themselves of their Norman dress and arms, and assumed 
 the saffron robes of Celtic chieftains. 
 
 Sir Edmund Be Burgo assumed the title of M ‘William 
 lochtar, the son of William of the upper territory, and lord 
 of the town of Galway. Sir William Be Burgo styled 
 himself M‘William Uachtar, or of the lower district. 
 These patronymics, ever after used by their descendants, 
 were taken from the name of their father, Sir William Be 
 Burgo, the Yiceroy in 1308. 
 
 At the same time the territory of Eastern Ulster was 
 lost to the English Crown. This district had suffered 
 most severely during the invasion of Edward Bruce ; its 
 castles had been ruined, and the colonial population almost 
 destroyed. Under these circumstances the sept of the 
 O’Neills, known as “ Clan Aedha Buidhe,” or the tribe of 
 Hugh the Bed, crossed the Bann, expelled the remaining 
 settlers, and established for themselves a principality, 
 known as Claunabuy. In Antrim, formerly the residence 
 of the great Earls of Ulster, there was found in the six- 
 teenth century a compact Celtic population, which offered 
 a protracted and long successful resistance to fresh floods of 
 English colonists. 
 
 In a. d. 1337, Edward III. attempted to remodel the 
 Irish Government by committing it to officials accustomed 
 to the management of the Welsh ; but this measure ap- 
 pears not to have been attended with any beneficial results. 
 
 In a. d. 1338, Edward III., in still further pursuance 
 of this policy, decreed that none but Englishmen should be 
 admitted to any legal office under the Crown in Ireland. 
 The effects of this ordinance were the very opposite of what 
 the King had anticipated. The Irish officials had been 
 corrupt, and jobbed for the benefit of their friends. The 
 pure-bred English legal administration, like the officials in 
 
LECTURES 0 X IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 179 
 
 the eighteenth century sent to India by the East Indian 
 Company, plundered for themselves, and matters became 
 rather worse than before. 
 
 Events now rapidly following in succession show the 
 weakness of the English Government. The Connaught 
 septs captured the three royal castles of Athlone, Koscom- 
 mon, and Eandoun. The south-east of Leinster, from Car- 
 low to the sea, passed into the hands of O’Byrnes, O’Tooles, 
 and Mac Murroughs. Lisagh O’Moore captured the castle 
 of Dunnamaise, and established himself in the Queen’s 
 County. The colonists of the County Louth, unable to pro- 
 tect themselves, entered into a separate treaty with the chief 
 of the O’ Hanlons. This arrangement was actually approved 
 of by the King of England, and imitated by the Irish Go- 
 vernment, who covenanted to pay out of the public exche- 
 quer an annuity to the chief of the Mac Murroughs to secure 
 his neutrality. 
 
 At this period Edward III., pressed to meet the expenses 
 of his Continental wars, attempted to raise money from his 
 unfortunate Anglo-Horman subjects in Ireland. After various 
 feeble tentatives of administrative reform, he issued, in a. d. 
 1341, the following writ : — “ Whereas, expressive grants of 
 lands, tenements, and liberties in Ireland, have been made, as 
 well by Edward II. as by the present King, upon untrue 
 and deceitful suggestions of petitioners, the King, desirous 
 to baffle deceitful machinations of this nature, by the ad- 
 vice of his council, has thought fit that all grants of lands, 
 tenements, and hereditaments, such as aforesaid, should be 
 revoked until he be made certain of the merits of the 
 grantees, the causes and conditions of the grants ; and, 
 therefore, the Justiciary of Ireland (Viceroy) is ordered to 
 cause all aforesaid lands, tenements, &c., to be seized into 
 the King’s hands. 5 ’ 
 
 n 2 
 
180 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 An estate in Ireland, at this period, can have had no 
 appreciable money value. It entailed responsibilities and 
 duties, but returned little profit. The sole object of this 
 writ must have been to raise money, by compelling the 
 several grantees to compound by means of fines. As if 
 desirous that no class of the community should escape from 
 the royal exactions, a writ was issued, ordering that all 
 pardons and suspensions of the King’s debts, that were 
 by green wax or otherwise, except pardons or releases 
 under the Great Seal of England, should be vacated. 
 
 The natural result of these measures was the universal 
 discontent of the Anglo-Horman population. The exclusion 
 from office of Irish-born subjects produced dissensions be- 
 tween the English by blood and the English by birth. 
 The resumption of previous grants, and the re-levying of 
 Crown debts previously discharged, excited the entire Anglo- 
 Norman population. 
 
 The Earls of Desmond, and the chief nobles of the colony, 
 refused to attend the Parliament summoned to meet in 
 Dublin in October, 1341. They convened a meeting at 
 Kilkenny in the succeeding month. This meeting sent 
 messengers to the King with their complaints, couched in 
 the three following queries : — 
 
 Eirst — How a realm of war could be governed by a man 
 unskilled in all warlike service ? Second — How an officer 
 under the King, that entered very poor, could in one year 
 heap up more wealth than men of great estates in many 
 years ? Third — How it chanced, since they were all called 
 lords of their own, that the sovereign lord of them all was 
 never the richer for them ? 
 
 At the same time they despatched to the King a memo- 
 rial in Erench, representing that the Irish enemy had 
 retaken more than one-third of the lands which had yielded 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 181 
 
 revenue to the King’s predecessors, and had captured and 
 destroyed many castles, the chief defence of the English ; 
 that the Anglo-Kormans were reduced to such a state of 
 poverty, that they could not exist unless some remedy was 
 devised. The loss of the Crown revenues was ascribed no 
 less to the incessant war, than to the embezzlement and 
 extortions practised by English-born officials, who de- 
 frauded the constables of the royal castles ; entrusted 
 their custody to incompetent warders, or to those who 
 employed deputies, merely to extort fees; charged the 
 Crown for goods and valuables taken for its use, but for 
 which they never paid ; entered in their accounts salaries 
 to governors of castles which were either demolished, in 
 the hands of the enemy, or had never existed ; and exacted 
 money from the King's subjects on various pretences. In 
 addition to the complaints of the local executive, the peti- 
 tioners represented that many districts of the colony had 
 been ruined, as the proprietors never came thither from 
 England, nor made any expenditure towards their main- 
 tenance, but sought, by setting them to farm, to extract all 
 the money they would yield. They concluded by appealing 
 against the inj ustice of resuming lands and grants given to 
 them and their progenitors in return for services, and in- 
 sisted that they should not be deprived of their freeholds 
 without being called to judgment in accordance with the 
 great charter. 
 
 Edward III. was constrained to comply with this peti- 
 tion; but coupled his consent with a request for further 
 assistance in his French wars, and, as a remedy for the 
 state of Ireland, issued another series of utterly useless 
 ordinances. 
 
 In a. d. 1349, the English Viceroy, scarcely able to hold 
 out in Dublin, entered into negociation with the border 
 
182 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 septs, and hired a chief of the O’Tooles to protect the Eng- 
 lish borders about Tallaght, and in certain parts of the 
 county Wicklow. As to the less amenable chiefs, rivals 
 were hired to dispute their authority in their clans, and 
 rewards were offered for their capture or assassination. 
 Eor the protection of the English district, constant assess- 
 ments were levied, and the colonists perpetually kept 
 under arms. The English population naturally began to 
 quit Ireland to such an extent, that, in a.d. 1353, the 
 King, by a proclamation, forbade the departure from Ireland 
 of any ecclesiastic, noble, or able-bodied man, capable of 
 defending the country ; the penalty of forfeiture was de- 
 creed against any English subject who should quit Ireland 
 without special licence. On this occasion the Archbishop 
 of Armagh was specially noticed as an absentee, who spent 
 his revenue abroad, instead of devoting it to fortifying and 
 defending the lands of his See, then invaded by the Irish. 
 Meanwhile the native Celts proceeded to elect kings and 
 chiefs according to their ancient customs, observed the 
 Brehon law, and utterly ignored the existence of an Eng- 
 lish Government. Many of the more important Anglo-Nor- 
 man houses — such as the De Burghs, Le Poers, St. Aubyns, 
 De Boches, De Cantellons — seceded from the English Go- 
 vernment, and many more further wholly assimilated them- 
 selves to the Celtic population. 
 
 In a.d. 1361, Lord Lionel, Duke of Clarence, came 
 over as Yiceroy, nominally to save the English subjects in 
 Ireland from utter destruction ; but also, probably, with a 
 view of obtaining possession of the large Irish estates, 
 which he claimed in right of his wife, the heiress of the 
 last De Burgo. Eor the purpose of thi3 expedition, on 
 July 2, 1361, proclamation was made in England that all 
 those who held property in Ireland should at once proceed 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 183 
 
 thither in arms, or send representatives to dwell upon 
 their estates, and to aid the prince in defending their 
 lands against the enemy ; and that all Crown lands occu- 
 pied by the Irish, and demesnes, whose proprietors should 
 be absentees at the date of the prince’s arrival, should be 
 seised, and granted for ever, in the King’s name, to Eng- 
 lish subjects who would dwell upon and defend them. 
 
 The Duke of Clarence landed in Ireland with a consi- 
 derable and highly-paid force of English soldiers expe- 
 rienced in the French wars. Confident in the native 
 English force which accompanied him, he issued a procla- 
 mation that none of the old English should join his army, 
 or approach his camp. The conduct of the war in Ireland by 
 him was such that, on 10th February, 1362, the King 
 issued a writ declaring that his very dear son, and his com- 
 panions in Ireland, were in imminent peril from the daily 
 increasing strength of the enemy, and again ordering the 
 absentee lords to appear at "Westminster in the second 
 week of Lent to receive instructions as to an expedition 
 into Ireland. 
 
 Matters gradually arrived at such a condition in Ireland 
 that the English Government apparently resolved to adopt 
 a newline of policy. From the ordinance of a., d. 1331, the 
 King appears to have discovered the existence of an inde- 
 pendent Celtic population which rejected the rule of the 
 English Crown, and had attempted to legislate for them. 
 In a. d. 1366, the English had further discovered that the 
 Celtic population and the degenerate Anglo-Kormans paid 
 not the slightest regard to the ordinances or overtures of 
 the English King, and finding it totally impossible to con- 
 quer them, resolved to adopt a simply defensive policy, to 
 confine its efforts to the maintenance of English law and 
 custom in the districts which were still loyal, and to treat 
 
184 
 
 LECTTTBES ON IEISH HISTOEY. 
 
 the Celtic Irish and degenerate Anglo-Normans as foreign- 
 ers, leaving them altogether to their own devices. This 
 policy was embodied in the celebrated Statute of Kilkenny. 
 
 This remarkable Act has been represented as an attempt 
 to enforce English customs upon the reluctant Celts. M. De 
 Lolme describes it as a declaration of perpetual war against 
 those persons and chieftains of the English race who were 
 settled up and down the country, and had been more or less 
 necessitated to adopt Irish customs and laws. Mr. Plowden 
 writes of this Statute : — “ Imagination can scarcely devise 
 an extreme of antipathy, hatred, and revenge, to which this 
 code of aggravation was not calculated to provoke both na- 
 tions.” Authors who have expressed such opinions pro- 
 bably had not the advantage of having ever read the Sta- 
 tute, since it does not appear, from the reign of James I., 
 to have been seen by any of the writers on Irish affairs, who, 
 as a rule, have made use of the synopsis contained in Sir 
 John Davis’s works. The original, lent out of the Kolls 
 Office in a.d. 1639, was not returned, and the Act does not 
 appear in the Irish Statute Book. The original French 
 text (with a translation, and most valuable notes) was pub- 
 lished for the first time in a. d. 1843, by the Irish Archeo- 
 logical Society, from a transcript in the Lambeth Library. 
 
 It must be premised that the Act applied only to the 
 districts still remaining loyal to the English Crown, subse- 
 quently known as the Pale. The English Pale, originally 
 denominated “ The English Land,” to distinguish it from 
 the surrounding territories possessed by the mere Irish, did 
 not designate any definite district, but meant the territory in 
 which the King’s writ ran, and which was de facto subject 
 to the enactments of the Irish Parliament. This district fluc- 
 tuated in extent from time to time, continually decreasing, 
 until in a.d. 1515 its limits were as follows: — Taking 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 185 
 
 Dundalk as the starting point, the frontier ran through 
 Denver, Ardee, Sydan, Kenlys, Dengle, to Kilcock ; thence 
 to Naas, Kilcullen, and Ballymore-Eustace, whence it turned 
 backward to Bathmore, and passed through Tallaght to 
 Dalkey. 
 
 The scope and intention of the Act appear sufficiently 
 from the preamble. 
 
 “ Whereas at the conquest of the land of Ireland, and for 
 a long time after, the English of the said land used the 
 English language, mode of riding and apparel, and were 
 governed and ruled, both they and their subjects called 
 Betaghes, according to the English law, in which time God 
 and holy Church, and their franchises according to their con- 
 dition were maintained [ and themselves lived'] in [due] sub- 
 jection ; but now many English of the said land, forsaking 
 the English language, manners, mode of riding, laws and 
 usages, live and govern themselves according to the man- 
 ners, fashion, and language of the Irish enemies ; and also 
 have made divers marriages and alliances between them- 
 selves and the Irish enemies aforesaid ; whereby the said 
 land, and the liege people thereof, the English language, the 
 allegiance due to our lord the King, and the English laws 
 there, are put in subjection and decayed, and the Irish ene- 
 mies exalted and raised up, contrary to reason ; our lord 
 the King considering the mischiefs aforesaid, in consequence 
 of the grievous complaints of the commons of his said land, 
 called to his Parliament held at Kilkenny, the Thursday 
 next after the day of Cinders [Ash Wednesday], in the 
 fortieth year of his reign, before his well- beloved son, 
 Lionel Duke of Clarence, his lieutenant in the parts of Ire- 
 land, to the honour of God and of His glorious Mother, 
 and of holy Church, and for the good government of the 
 said land, and quiet of the people, and for the better obser- 
 
186 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH’ HISTORY. 
 
 vation of the laws, and punishment of evil doers there, are 
 ordained and established by our said lord the King, and his 
 said lieutenant, and our lord the King’s counsel there, with 
 the assent of the archbishops, bishops, abbots, and priors 
 (as to what appertains to them to assent to), the earls, ba- 
 rons, and others of the commons of the said land, at the 
 said parliament there being and assembled, the ordinances 
 and articles under written, to be held and kept perpetually 
 upon the pains contained therein.” 
 
 For the purpose of preventing connexions between the 
 English of the Pale and the native Celts, it was provided by 
 section 2 that — 
 
 “ Ko alliance by marriage, gossipred, fostering of chil- 
 dren, concubinage, or by amour, nor in any other manner, 
 be henceforth made between the English and Irish of one 
 part, or of the other part ; and that no Englishman, nor 
 other person, being at peace, do give or sell to any Irish- 
 man, in time of peace or war, horses or armour, nor any 
 manner of victuals in time of war ; and if any shall do to 
 the contrary, and thereof be attained, he shall have judg- 
 ment of life and member, as a traitor to our lord the 
 King.” 
 
 To prevent the adoption by the English of Irish customs, 
 language, and dress, section 3 enacts that — 
 
 “ Every Englishman do use the English language, and be 
 named by an English name, leaving off entirely the manner 
 of naming used by the Irish ; and that every Englishman 
 use the English custom, fashion, mode of riding and appa- 
 rel, according to his estate ; and if any English, or Irish 
 living amongst the English , use the Irish language amongst 
 themselves, contrary to this ordinance, and thereof be at- 
 tained, his lands and tenements, if he have any, shall be 
 seized into the hands of his immediate lord, until he shall 
 
LECTURES 0 N IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 187 
 
 come to one of the places of onr lord the King, and find 
 sufficient security to adopt and use the English language, 
 and then he shall have restitution of his said lands, by writ 
 issued out of the said places. In case that such person shall 
 not have lands or tenements, his body shall he taken by any 
 of the officers of our lord the King, and committed to the 
 next gaol, there to remain until he, or some other in his 
 name, shall find sufficient surety in the manner aforesaid : 
 And that no Englishman who shall have the value of one 
 hundred pounds of land or of rent by the year shall ride 
 otherwise than on a saddle in the English fashion ; and he 
 that shall do to the contrary, and shall be thereof attainted, 
 his horse shall be forfeited to our lord the King, and his 
 body shall be committed to prison, until he pay a fine ac- 
 cording to the King’s pleasure for the contempt aforesaid ; 
 and also, that beneficed persons of holy Church, living 
 amongst the English, shall use the English language ; and 
 if they do not, that their ordinaries shall have the issues of 
 their benefices until they use the English language in the 
 manner aforesaid ; and they shall have respite in order to 
 learn the English language, and to provide saddles, be- 
 tween this and the feast of Saint Michael next coming.” 
 
 The object of compelling the use of saddles was to pre- 
 vent the English horsemen abandoning the use of the lance 
 couched under the arm, according to the English and Erench 
 fashion, and degenerating into cavalry armed like the Irish, 
 who held their lances by the middle, and used them fre_ 
 quently as javelins. 
 
 To prevent the adoption of Brehon law by the English 
 living along the marches or within the Pale, and to restrain 
 the constant quarrels between the English by blood and the 
 English by birth, section 4 was enacted : — 
 
 “ Also, whereas diversity of government and different 
 
188 
 
 LECTURES OIT IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 laws in the same land cause difference in allegiance, and 
 disputes among the people; it is agreed and established, 
 that no Englishman, having disputes with any other Eng- 
 lishman, shall henceforth make caption, or take pledge, 
 distress, or vengeance against any other, whereby the people 
 may be troubled, but that they shall sue each other at the 
 common law ; and that no Englishman he governed in the 
 termination of their disputes by March law nor Brehon 
 law, which reasonably ought not to be called law, being a 
 bad custom; but they shall be governed, as right is, by the 
 common law of the land, as liege subjects of our lord the 
 King ; and if any do to the contrary, and thereof be at- 
 tainted, he shall be taken and imprisoned, and adjudged as 
 a traitor ; and that no difference of allegiance shall hence- 
 forth be made between the English born in Ireland, and the 
 English born in England, by calling them English hobbe, or 
 Irish dog, but that all be called by one name, the English 
 lieges of our lord the King ; and he who shall be found \_doing~\ 
 to the contrary, shall be punished by imprisonment for a 
 year, and afterwards fined, at the King’s pleasure ; and by 
 this ordinance it is not the intention of our lord the King 
 [ but~\ that it shall be lawful for any one that he may take 
 distress for service and rents due to them, and for damage 
 feasant as the common law requires.” 
 
 The taking of pledges and distress, mentioned in this 
 section, evidently refers to the initiatory procedure of a 
 Brehon lawsuit, by which the defendant was compelled to 
 submit to the arbitration of the Brehon. 
 
 The colonists appear to have abandoned the use of the 
 bow, whereby the English forces lost their most material 
 advantage over their Celtic antagonists. To obviate this, 
 section 6 was enacted : — 
 
 “ Also, whereas a land, which is at war, requires that 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 189 
 
 every person do render himselfe able to defend himself, it 
 is ordained, and established, that the commons of the said 
 land of Ireland, who are in the different marches at war, 
 do not, henceforth, use the plays which men call hurlings, 
 with great sticks [ and a ball ] upon the ground, from which 
 great evils and maims have arisen, to the weakening of the 
 defence of the said land, and other plays which men call 
 quoiting ; but that they do apply and accustom themselves 
 to use and draw bows, and throw lances, and other gentle- 
 manlike games, whereby the Irish enemies may be the 
 better checked by the liege people and commons of these 
 parts ; and if any do or practise the contrary, and of this 
 be attainted, they shall be taken and imprisoned, and fined 
 at the will of our lord the King. 
 
 It has been already remarked in an earlier Lecture that, 
 according to the principles of law then existing in Europe, 
 all the members of a sept would have been considered re- 
 sponsible for the debts of any single member, and the cre- 
 ditor could have obtained from the English Government a 
 right of reprisal. To prevent hostilities arising out of trans- 
 actions of this nature, section 1 1 enacts that — 
 
 “ If any Irishman, being at peace, by borrowing, or pur- 
 chase of merchandize, or in any other manner, become 
 debtor to an English or Irishman being at peace, that for this 
 cause no other Irish person belonging to him, under him, or 
 in subjection to him, nor his goods, shall be seized nor ran- 
 somed for such debt, if he be not surety for the same debt ; 
 but his remedy shall be against the principal debtor, as the 
 law requires. Let him be well advised to give his mer- 
 chandize to such person as he can have recovery from.” 
 This is a very remarkable section in advance of the ge- 
 neral legislation of the times, and the more so since, accord- 
 ing to Irish Brehon law, the whole sept was liable for the 
 
190 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 offence of an individual member. It is a proof of the ex- 
 treme desire of the framers of this Statute to prevent hosti- 
 lities between the two nations. This section was, how- 
 ever, repealed in 16th Edward IV. (Irish), a.d. 1476. 
 
 It was the custom of the native Irish that the tribal 
 cattle should be driven out to pasture in the woods during 
 the summer season. The whole herd was removed to fresh 
 land from time to time, according as they consumed the 
 pasturage. A similar custom still prevails in Norway, 
 where the cattle are driven from the summer pasturage to 
 the fjelds. The cattle were, in fact, accompanied by the 
 tribe, who erected temporary huts, where they made their 
 butter during the fine season; the temporary hut was called 
 a luaile , whence the custom itself was called buailidheacht . 
 To prevent the introduction within the Pale of Celts not 
 subject to the King, and at the same time to obtain the 
 acquiescence of the Irish in this arrangement, it was enacted 
 by section 12 that — 
 
 “ In every peace to be henceforth made, between our 
 lord the King and his liege English of the one part, and the 
 Irish of the other part, in every march of the land, there 
 shall be comprised the point which follows, that is to say, 
 that no Irishman shall pasture or occupy the lands belong- 
 ing to English, or Irish being at peace, against the will of 
 the lords of the said lands ; and if they so do, that it shall 
 be lawful for the said lords to lead with them to their pound 
 the said beasts so feeding [or] occupying their said lands, 
 in name of a distress for their rent and their damages, so 
 that the beasts be not divided or scattered as heretofore has 
 been done ; but that they be kept altogether as they were 
 taken, in order to deliver them to the party in case that he 
 shall come to make satisfaction to the lords of the said lands 
 reasonably, according to their demand ; and in case any one 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 191 
 
 shall divide or separate from each other the beasts so taken, 
 he shall be punished as a robber and disturber of the peace 
 of our lord the King : and if any Irish rise by force to the 
 rescue of those reasonably taken, that it be lawful for the 
 said English to assist themselves by strong hand, without 
 being impeached in the court of our lord the King on this 
 account ; and that no Englishman do take any distress 
 upon any Irishman of any part between this and the Feast 
 of St. Michael next to come ; so that the Irish of every 
 part may be warned in the meantime.” 
 
 This remarkable clause, which indicates the utmost de- 
 sire to prevent any conflict with the Irish, has continually 
 been represented as an act of tyranny towards the native 
 Irish. It is obvious that those who have made such criti- 
 cisms upon this section have only read the synopsis of the 
 Act in Sir John Davis’s work, for the section itself does not 
 make it penal for the English to permit the Irish to graze 
 on their lands. It, on the contrary, provides that arrange- 
 ments shall be made between the Irish and English to 
 prevent the Irish depasturing lands belonging to a subject 
 of the English Crown, against the will of the lord of the 
 land ; and further provides that if the Irish committed a 
 trespass of that description, their cattle should be kept 
 safely for them until they had made reasonable compensa- 
 tion. 
 
 Sections 13 and 14 prohibit any Irishman being inducted 
 into a living, or received into a monastery ; but these sec- 
 tions are specially confined to benefices and religious 
 houses situated among the English. 
 
 Section 15 is the celebrated section, represented as aim- 
 ing at the suppression of the Irish bards. Its real object 
 was to prevent the introduction of Irish spies into the Eng- 
 lish territory. This appears upon the face of the section 
 itself : — 
 
192 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 “ Also, whereas the Irish agents who come amongst the 
 English, spy out the secrets, plans, and policies of the Eng- 
 lish, whereby great evils have often resulted ; it is agreed 
 and forbidden, that any Irish agents, that is to say, pipers, 
 story-tellers, babblers, rimers, mowers, nor any other Irish 
 agent shall come amongst the English, and that no English 
 shall receive or make gift to such ; and that he that shall 
 do so, and be attainted, shall be taken, and imprisoned, as 
 well the Irish agents as the English who receive or give 
 them any thing, and after that they shall make fine at the 
 King’s will ; and the instruments of their agency shall for- 
 feit to our lord the King.” 
 
 By Section 17 the English subjects were restrained from 
 keeping u kerns, hoblers, or idlemen,” except those who 
 dwelt on the marches, who were required to do so at their 
 own expense. 
 
 The desire of the framers of this Act to preserve peace 
 between the inhabitants of the Pale and the Irish, and, for 
 such purpose, to prevent acts of violence by the English 
 upon the marches, is shown by section 26, which is as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 “ Also, it is ordained that if truce or peace be made by 
 the justices, or wardens of the peace, or the sheriff, between 
 English and Irish, and they shall be broken by any EDglish, 
 and thereof be attainted, he shall be taken and put in prison 
 until satisfaction be made by him to those who shall be 
 disturbed [or] injured by that occasion, and he shall more- 
 over make fine at the King’s will; and if there is not 
 wherewith to make restitution to those who shall be in- 
 jured, he shall remain in perpetual confinement. And 
 such wardens and sheriffs shall have power to inquire con- 
 cerning those who shall have broken the peace.” 
 
 A fair analysis of the Act leads to the conclusion that the 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 193 
 
 English Government, at this time, abandoned the prospect 
 of reducing to obedience the Irish and degenerate English, 
 and, adopting a policy purely defensive, sought merely to 
 preserve in allegiance to the English Crown the miserable 
 remains of the Irish kingdom. The policy of the Act, if 
 steadily carried out, might have been advantageous to both 
 the English and the Irish in Ireland ^ but it required a 
 vigorous executive and a standing police, both of which 
 were wanting to the English Government in Ireland, and 
 it was never pursued with any amount of perseverance. It 
 was undoubtedly a retrograde step, and an admission of 
 defeat. A vigorous policy may end in failure, hut will not 
 entail dishonour ; a feeble policy, feebly and irresolutely 
 conducted, and varied by intervals of spasmodic action, in- 
 evitably leads to utter failure and equal disgrace. That 
 such was the conduct of the English Government, during 
 the fifteenth century, and such its results, will appear in 
 the following Lecture. 
 
 o 
 
LECTURE Till. 
 
 THE ENGLISH GOVERNMENT AND POLICY IN IRELAND FROM 
 A. D. 1366 TO A. D. 153*. 
 
 The effect of the Statute of Kilkenny is thus described by 
 Sir John Davis : — 
 
 “ These and other lawes, tending to a general reformation, 
 were enacted in that Parliament ; and the execution of 
 these laws, together with the presence of the king's son , made 
 a notable alteration in the state and manners of this people, 
 within the space of seven years, which was the term of this 
 prince’s lieutenancy. 
 
 44 For all the descources that I have seen of the decay of 
 Ireland do agree in this — that the presence of the Lord 
 Lionel, and these Statutes of Kilkenny, did restore the Eng- 
 lish government in the degenerate colonies for divers years. 
 And the Statute of the 10th of Henry YIIL, which re- 
 viveth and confirmeth the Statutes of Kilkenny, doth con- 
 firm so much. For it declareth that, so long as these laws 
 were put in use and execution, the land continued in pros- 
 perity and honor ; and since they were not executed, the 
 subjects rebelled and digressed from their allegiance, and 
 the land fell to ruin and desolation. And withal, we find the 
 effect of these laws in the pipe-rolls and plea-rolls of this king- 
 dom; for from the 36th Edward III., when the prince en- 
 tered into his government, till the beginning of Richard II. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 195 
 
 his reign, we find the revenue of the Crown, both certain 
 and casual in Ulster, Munster, and Connaught, accounted 
 for ; and that the King’s writ did run, and the common law 
 was executed in every of these provinces. I join with 
 these laws the personal presence of the King’s son, as a con- 
 current cause of this reformation. Because the people of 
 this land, both English and Irish, out of a natural pride, 
 did ever love and desire to be governed by great persons. 
 And therefore I may here take occasion to note, that first 
 the absence of the Kings of England ; and next, the absence 
 of those great lords who were inheritors of those mighty 
 seigniories of Leinster, Ulster, Connaught, and Meath, have 
 been the main causes why this kingdom was not reduced 
 in so many ages.” 
 
 That Sir John Davis, the advocate of a strong English 
 government, and an imperial policy, takes a far too favour- 
 able view of the practical result of this Statute will appear 
 from what follows : that the Statute was never practically 
 put in execution is shown by the numerous Acts of the 
 Irish Parliament, re-enacting it, in whole or in part; and the 
 position and conduct of the English government nullified 
 the policy which had been advisedly adopted. 
 
 “ In our land of Ireland,” wrote Bichard II., “ there are 
 three kinds of people — wild Irish, our enemies, Irish rebels, 
 and obedient English. To us and our Council it appears that 
 the Irish rebels have rebelled in consequence of the injustice 
 and grievances practised toward them, for which they have 
 been afforded no redress; and that, if not wisely treated and 
 given hope of grace, they will, most likely, ally themselves 
 with our enemies.” 
 
 The Irish enemies had now reoccupied a large portion of 
 the feudal estates of the original conquerors, and were per- 
 petually eating into the districts still loyal to the Crown. 
 
196 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 They were no longer a broken remnant “ compelled to re- 
 pair, in the hope of saving their lives, to mountainous, 
 woody, swampy, and barren spots.” They had assumed the 
 offensive, and were the more dangerous as their attacks were 
 made from every point, with unconcerted, but unceasing 
 energy. The great difficulty in dealing with them lay in 
 the absence of any government with which the English 
 Viceroy could treat, or central point which he might assail. 
 Such enemies could be disposed of only by complete con- 
 quest, almost amounting to extermination, or by a regular 
 and organized resistance along the whole extent of an irre- 
 gular and indefensible frontier. 
 
 The Irish rebels, descendants of the first conquerors, al- 
 though wholly rejecting the English Government, and now 
 assimilated to the native population, were not actively ag- 
 gressive, but any attempt to reduce them to obedience 
 could only end in their intimate alliance with the Irish 
 enemy, and an aggravation of the dangers which assailed 
 the colony. 
 
 The obedient English may be divided into two classes — 
 the lords of the English Pale, who inhabited portions of 
 the former seigniory of Meath, and the three great lords of 
 Kildare, Desmond and Ormond. The former, by constant 
 ill-government, had been reduced to a state of feeble- 
 ness and misery. The latter were quite out of the control 
 of the English government, and merely co-operated with it 
 as it suited their convenience. The Desmond still acted 
 as Norman lord in his relations to the English government, 
 but towards his subjects had adopted the position of an 
 Irish chief, and the inhabitants of Munster, under his rule, 
 were completely Celticized. The Kildare Geraldines occu- 
 pied a somewhat similar position, but their proximity to 
 Dublin brought them into closer connexion with, and more 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 197 
 
 under the influence of, the English Government. The 
 family of Butler ruled over the large but detached body 
 of English colonists occupying the counties of Kilkenny 
 and North Tipperary — a district originally densely colonized, 
 and containing numerous castles, monasteries, and cities of 
 some importance. James Butler, Earl of Carrick, had 
 married a cousin of Edward III., and in the third year of 
 that King obtained a grant of the regalities and liberties of 
 Tipperary, and the rights of a Palatine in that county. His 
 successors subsequently intermarried with various English 
 ' heiresses, and acquired vast estates beyond the Channel. The 
 Irish family of Butler, until the execution of the senior 
 branches in the reign of Henry VII., played a conspicuous 
 part in the English civil wars, as the Lancastrian Earls of 
 Wiltshire. Under these circumstances, the Earls of Ormond 
 retained a closer connexion with the English government ; 
 but, at the same time, failed to obtain the same local in- 
 fluence which the chiefs of the Geraldines enjoyed. 
 
 Effectually to carry out the policy of the Statute of Kil - 
 kenny, it was requisite that the government of the English 
 Pale should possess an organized military force, secure 
 its subjects the benefits of public order and a regular 
 administration, and pursue some consistent course of policy 
 towards the Irish enemies and Irish rebels. But as the 
 wretched executive of the Pale was left wholly unpro- 
 provided with men or money, the English subjects were 
 harassed by continual military service, and impoverished by 
 exorbitant taxation ; the only efforts to check the Irish 
 tribes being occasional hostings, by which the territory of 
 some sept was devastated, but no permanent result obtained. 
 
 The English Government during this period was a source 
 of unmixed evil to the country. The English kings had 
 practically abandoned the exercise of sovereign power in 
 
198 
 
 LECTUEES ON IEISH HISTOET. 
 
 Ireland; and the only means by which any government 
 could have been established was the expansion of the local 
 seigniories into small kingdoms. The English executive 
 neither fulfilled the duty of a government nor permitted 
 any other to be established. Their highest aim was self- 
 preservation, and the means by which they sought it were 
 the fomenting of civil war between the barons and chiefs 
 outside the Pale, the rendering of assistance to any pre- 
 tender who promised to embarrass or depose a tribal chieftain, 
 and frequent razzias, equally barbarous and futile. Under 
 these circumstances, although efforts from time to time 
 were made by the English kings, their government sunk 
 into greater feebleness and contempt, and their decadence is 
 marked by a distinct series of events. 
 
 In a. d. 1368, the Irish Parliament, addressing the King, 
 declared that the Irish, with his other enemies and rebels, 
 continued to ride over the country in hostile array, slay- 
 ing those who opposed them, despoiling the monasteries, 
 churches, castles, towns, and fortresses of the English, with- 
 out reverence for God or holy Church, to the great shame 
 and disherison of His Majesty, by which his land was likely 
 to be totally lost unless immediate remedy was supplied. 
 In the same year a Parliament at Dublin repeated the ordi- 
 nary complaints as to the conduct of absentees ; and, in com- 
 pliance with their advice, a Statute was enacted by the 
 English Parliament, directing the return of all absentee lords 
 to Ireland. 
 
 In a. d. 1371, the O’Byrnes having made a descent on 
 Carrickinayne, De Cotton, Dean of St. Patrick's, marched 
 against them with his own retinue and a considerable force, 
 remaining in arms at his own expense on one occasion for 
 eight days ; on another, for a month. The treasury being 
 empty, and none of the King’s officers being willing to un- 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 199 
 
 dertake the defence of Newcastle Mac Kinegan, on the 
 Wicklow frontier, the same warlike dean, raised money by 
 pawning his own goods, and with thirty- six men held the 
 castle for five days. 
 
 At a Parliament, summoned in Kilkenny, a. d. 1374, the 
 Viceroy, Sir William de Windsor, officially announced that, 
 in consequence of the expenditure required for foreign 
 affairs, the King was no longer able to defray the great cost 
 of maintaining wars for the defence and preservation of his 
 territories in Ireland. Sir Nicholas Dagworth, on behalf 
 of the Crown, solicited a reasonable contribution for the 
 maintenance of the war, the salvation of the land, and the 
 support of its government. But the prelates, lords, and 
 commons excused themselves, and declared that on account 
 of their poverty and inability they could not grant any sub- 
 sidy. Whereupon the Viceroy, in pursuance of secret in- 
 structions, and for the purpose of crushing out all resistance 
 among the loyal English, attempted a coup dPetat by issuing 
 writs, requiring the clergy and laity to elect representatives 
 and despatch them at their own expense to England, to con- 
 sult and agree with the King and his Council on the govern- 
 ment and defence of his land in Ireland, and on aid to be 
 levied there in support of His Majesty’s war. This attempt 
 to ignore the liberties of the English colony threw the 
 whole country into confusion. The ecclesiastics elected 
 representatives in compliment to His Majesty, hut declared 
 they were not hound, agreeably to the liberties, privileges, 
 and customs of the Church and land of Ireland, to elect any 
 of their clergy, or send them to any part of England for the 
 purpose of holding Parliaments. “ We do not,” they said, 
 u grant, by any means, to the representatives we have 
 elected any power of assenting to burthens or taxes, to be 
 imposed on us or our clergy, to which we cannot yield, by 
 
200 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 reason of our poverty and daily expense in defending the 
 land against the Irish.” The nobles and commons also de- 
 clared they were not bound to send representatives to Eng- 
 land, and reserved to themselves the power of agreeing to 
 subsidies. 
 
 The colonists, while holding debate upon their constitu- 
 tional rights, were simultaneously assailed on every side by 
 the “enemies” and the “ rebels.” Newcastle, on the 
 Wicklow frontier, was taken and dismantled. Communi- 
 cation by land with Wicklow being cut off, relief had to be 
 sent to the garrison by sea. The O’Briens appeared before 
 Limerick ; Youghal was attacked by the clan Gibbon and 
 the De Roches ; Adare was burned ; the Viceroy feared to 
 proceed southward ; and the Bishop of Meath was sent with 
 relief to the remaining colonists of Munster. The war was 
 carried on by forced loans, and by exacting supplies from 
 the wretched peasantry. The English men-at-arms and 
 archers disbanded, and attempted to return to England, but 
 were prevented from so doing by orders for their arrest, 
 sent to the seaport towns. 
 
 The reign of Richard II. opened with still greater humi- 
 liation and disaster. An ordinance appears on the Rolls of 
 the English Chancery in Dublin, whereby, after reciting 
 that Art Mac Murragh Cavanach, assuming to be chief 
 captain of the Irish in Leinster, and claiming eighty marks 
 a year from the King of England as his fee, had assembled 
 a multitude of Irish, and committed divers slaughters, de- 
 vastations, and burnings, in the counties of Wexford, Kil- 
 kenny, Carlow, and Kildare, and would not make peace 
 until his demand was satisfied, it was ordered that, to 
 prevent further imminent danger and peril, the Viceroy 
 should, out of his own money, advance one quarter of the 
 sum demanded, and retain Art on behalf of King Richard 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 201 
 
 for one year. The Irish chiefs might now have found 
 levying war against the English Government highly profit- 
 able, but for the poverty of the Dublin treasury. Murragh 
 O’Brien advanced upon Leinster, whence, after some nego- 
 tiation, he agreed to retire in consideration of one hundred 
 marks. At this time there was in the Irish treasury no 
 more than nine marks, and the balance was made up by 
 borrowing the amount in the following manner: — From 
 the Prior of the Hospitallers, sixteen marks ; from William 
 Fitz william, a horse, price twenty marks ; from John 
 Fitz-Gerand, Master of the Hospitallers of Kilclogan, a horse 
 and a cuirass, price twenty marks ; from Robert Lughte- 
 burgh, a horse, price twenty marks ; from John More, a 
 bed, price thirty shillings ; from Sir Patrick and Sir 
 Robert de la Freigne, seven marks and ten shillings. 
 
 We now arrive at the celebrated expedition of Richard 
 II. to Ireland, which is thus described by an English his- 
 torian: — “The Irish rebels were, on their submission, 
 taken under protection, and obtained a promise of a full 
 pardon on payment of a proportionate fine. Richard, 
 though he devoted much of his time to parade, did not 
 neglect the reformation of the Government. Grievances 
 were redressed, the laws enforced, tyrannical officers 
 removed, and the minds of the natives gradually recon- 
 ciled to the superiority of the English.” Lingard, vol. iii. 
 176 . 
 
 As a rule, every successive English historian appears 
 anxious to obliterate the records of English failure, and to 
 tone down disasters until they assume the appearance of 
 success. In the seventeenth century, Sir John Davis, then 
 also attempting to represent this expedition in the most 
 favourable light, tells the history of Richard’s Irish expe- 
 dition as follows : — “ This King committed the government 
 
202 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 to such, great lords successively as he did most love and 
 favour: first, to the Earl of Oxford, his chief minion, 
 whom he created Marquis of Dublin and Duke of Ireland ; 
 next, to the Duke of Surrey, his half-brother; and, lastly, 
 to the Lord Mortimer, his cousin, and heir-apparent. 
 
 “ Among the Patent Rolls in the Tower, the ninth of 
 Richard II., we find five hundred men-at-arms at twelve 
 pence a piece per diem, appointed for the Duke of Ireland 
 (De Yere) super conqiiestu illius terra per duos annos. For 
 these are the words of that record ; but for the other two 
 lieutenants, I do not find the certain number whereof their 
 army did consist. But certain it is, they were scarce able 
 to defend the English borders, much less to reduce the 
 whole island. Eor one of them — viz., the Earl of March, 
 was himself slain upon the borders of Meath ; for revenge 
 of whose death the King himself made his second voyage 
 into Ireland, in the last year of his reign. Eor his voyage, 
 in the eighteenth year of his reign (which was, indeed, a 
 voyage-royal), was made upon another motive and occa- 
 sion, which was this : Upon the vacancy of the empire, 
 this King having married the King of Bohemia’s daughter 
 (whereby he had great alliance in Germany), did, by his 
 ambassadors, solicit the Princes Electors to choose him 
 Emperor ; but another being elected, and his ambassadors 
 returned, he would needs know of them the cause of his 
 repulse in that competition. They told him plainly that 
 the Princes of Germany did not think him fit to command 
 the empire, who was neither able to hold that which his 
 ancestors had gained in France, nor to rule his insolent sub- 
 jects in England, nor to master his rebellious people of 
 Ireland. This was enough to kindle in the heart of a 
 young prince a desire to perform some great enterprise. 
 And, therefore, finding it no fit time to attempt France, he 
 
LECTURES 0 N IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 203 
 
 resolved to finish the conquest of Ireland ; and, to that 
 end, he levied a mighty army, consisting of four thou- 
 sand men-at-arms, and thirty thousand archers, which was 
 a sufficient power to have reduced the whole island, if he 
 had first broken the Irish with a war, and after established 
 the English laws among them, and would not have been 
 satisfied with their light submission only, wherewith in all 
 ages they have mocked and abused the state of England. 
 But the Irish lords, knowing this to be a sure policy 
 to dissolve the forces which they were not able to resist 
 (for their ancestors had put the same trick and imposture 
 upon King John and King Henry the Second), as soon as 
 the King was arrived with his army, which he brought 
 over under St. Edward’s banner (whose name was had in 
 great veneration amongst the Irish), they all made offer to 
 submit themselves. . . . The men of Leinster — namely, 
 Mac Murrogh, O’Byrne, O’Moore, O’Murrogh, O’Holan, 
 and the chief of the Kinshelaghes, in an humble and solemn 
 manner did their homages, and made their oaths of fidelity 
 to the Earl Marshall, laying aside their girdles, their skeins, 
 and their caps, and falling down at his feet upon their 
 knees, which, when they had performed, the Earl gave 
 each of them osculum pads. 
 
 “ Besides, they were bound by several indentures, upon 
 great pains to be paid to the Apostolic Chamber, not only 
 to continue loyal subjects, but that by a certain day pre- 
 fixed, they and all their swordmen should clearly relin- 
 quish and give up unto the King and his successors all 
 their lands and possessions which they held in Leinster, 
 and (taking with them only their moveable goods) should 
 serve him in his wars against his other rebels. In consi- 
 deration whereof the King should give them pay and pen- 
 sions during their lives, and bestow the inheritance of all 
 
204 
 
 LECTURES OX IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 such lands upon them as they should recover from the rebels 
 in any other part of the realm. And thereupon a pension of 
 eighty marks per annum was granted to Arthur mac Mur- 
 rogh, chief of the Kavanaghs ; the enrolment whereof I 
 found in the 'White Book of the Exchequer here. . . . 
 
 44 These indentures and submissions, with many other 
 of the same kind (for there was not a chieftain or head of 
 an Irish sept, but submitted himself in one form or other), 
 the King himself caused to be enrolled and testified by a 
 notary public, and delivered the enrolments with his own 
 hands to the Bishop of Salisbury, then Lord Treasurer of 
 England, so as they have been preserved, and are now to 
 be tound in the office of the King’s Remembrancer there. 
 
 “ With these humilities they satisfied the young King, 
 and by their bowing and bending, avoided the present 
 storm, and so brake that army, which was prepared to 
 break them- Eor the King, having accepted their submis- 
 sions, received them in osculo pads, feasted them, and 
 having given the honour of knighthood to divers of them, 
 did break up and dissolve his army, and returned into 
 England with much honour and small profit (saith Frois- 
 sard ). For though he had spent a huge mass of treasure 
 in transporting his army, by the countenance whereof, he 
 drew on their submissions, yet did he not increase his re- 
 venue thereby one single pound, nor enlarged the English 
 borders the breadth of one acre of land ; neither did he ex- 
 tend the jurisdiction of his courts of justice one foot fur- 
 ther than the English colonies, wherein it was used and 
 exercised before. Besides, he was no sooner returned into 
 England, but those Irish lords laid aside their masks of 
 humility, and scorning the weak force which the King had 
 left behind him, began to infest the borders ; in defence 
 whereof, the Lord Boyer Mortimer, being then the King's lieu- 
 
LECTURES O N IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 205 
 
 tenant, and heir apparent of the Crown of England, was 
 slain as I said before. Whereupon, the King being moved 
 with a just appetite of revenge, came over again in person, 
 in the twenty-second year of his reign, with as potent an 
 army as he had done before, with a full purpose to make a 
 full conquest of Ireland. He landed at Waterford, and 
 passing from thence to Dublin, through the west countries 
 of the Murroghs, Kinshelaghes, Cavanaghes, Birnes, and 
 Tooles, his great army was much distressed for want of 
 victuals and carriages. So as he performed no memorable 
 thing in that journey, only in the Cavanaghes’ county, he cut 
 and cleared the paces, and bestowed the honor of knighthood 
 upon the Lord Henry, the Duke of Lancaster’s son, who was 
 afterwards King Henry the Fifth, and so came to Dublin, 
 where, entering into counsel how to proceed in the war, 
 he received news out of England of the arrival of the ba- 
 nished Duke of Lancaster at Kavenspnrgh, usurping the royal 
 authorit} r , and arresting and putting to death his princi- 
 pal officers. This advertisement suddenly broke off the 
 King’s purpose, touching the prosecution of the war in Ire- 
 land, and transported him into England, where shortly after 
 he rendered both his reign and his life. Since whose time, 
 until the thirty-ninth year of Queen Elizabeth, there was 
 not any army sent over of a competent strength or power to 
 subdue the Irish ; but the war was made by the English 
 colonists only to defend their borders ; or if any forces were 
 transmitted over, they were sent only to suppress the re- 
 bellions of such as were descended of English race, and 
 not to enlarge our dominion over the Irish.” 
 
 Sir John Davis omitted to state that Bichard’ s army, 
 after its short campaign against M‘Murrogh, reduced to 
 utmost destitution, and entirely disorganized, only escaped 
 by the fortunate arrival of the English fleet. 
 
206 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 At the commencement of the fifteenth century, portions 
 only of the four shires of Dublin, Meath, Kildare, and Louth, 
 acknowledged the English jurisdiction. The three great 
 lords of Kildare, Desmond and Ormond, acted as indepen- 
 dent princes, excluding the royal interference. The colo- 
 nists found the Statute of Kilkenny more irksome than 
 beneficial. Constant licences were granted by the Crown 
 to elude its enactments. The native Irish lived in complete 
 independence of the English Government. As for the English 
 residents within the Pale, their condition is thus described 
 in Mr. Gilbert’s valuable history of the Viceroys of Ireland: — - 
 The internal condition of the settlement and manifold in- 
 justices perpetrated by the officials of the Colonial govern- 
 ment or those under their control, tended to repel, rather 
 than to attract the Irish towards the English system, as 
 then administered. Many of the judges and chief legal offi- 
 cials of the colony were illiterate, and ignorant of law, ob- 
 tained their appointments by purchase, and leased them to 
 deputies who promoted and encouraged litigation, with the 
 object of accumulating fees. Commissioners of Oyer and 
 Terminer were multiplied, before whom persons were con- 
 stantly summoned by irresponsible non-residents, to such as 
 extent that no man could tell when he might be indicted or 
 outlawed, or if a process had issued to eject him from his 
 property. The King’s officers often seized lands, and appro- 
 priated the results, as long as legal subterfuges enabled them 
 to baffle the claims of the rightful proprietors, and thus 
 agriculture and improvements were impeded. Ecclesiastics, 
 lords, and gentlemen, were not unfrequently cast into gaol 
 by officers of the Crown on unfounded charges, without in 
 dictment or process, and detained in durance till compelled 
 by rigorous treatment to purchase their liberation. The 
 agricultural settlers and landholders were harassed by troops 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 207 
 
 of armed kerns and mounted idlemen who levied distresses, 
 maltreated and chained those who resisted, and held forcible 
 possession of the farmers’ goods, till redeemed by money. 
 The troops engaged for the defence of the colonists became 
 little less oppressive than enemies. Under the name of 
 livery, the soldiers took, without payment, victuals for them- 
 selves and provender for their horses, and exacted weekly 
 money paym ents, designated ‘ coygnes.’ The constables of 
 royal castles and the purveyors of the households of the 
 Viceroy seldom paid for what they took ; and for the pur- 
 pose of obtaining bribes to release their seizures, they 
 made exactions much more frequently than they needed.’ ’ 
 
 In the reign of Henry V., so rapidly did the colonists 
 emigrate back to England that the English Parliament en- 
 acted that all Irishmen and Irish mendicant clerics should, 
 for quietness and peace within the kingdom of England, 
 and for the increase and fill ing of the land of Ireland, be 
 voided out of the realm of England, under pain of losing 
 their goods and being imprisoned during the royal pleasure. 
 
 The history of the feebleness of the English executive, 
 and their fruitless efforts to maintain their hold upon the 
 Pale, is fully exemplified by the legislation of the next two 
 reigns, contained in the Irish Statute .Book. The 25th Henry 
 VI., chap. 24, is as follows: — “Eor that that*' now there 
 is no diversity in array between the English marchers 
 and the Irish enemies, and so by colour of the English 
 marchers the Irish enemies do come from day to day to 
 other into the English counties as English marchers, and 
 rob and pill by the highways, and destroy the common 
 people by lodging upon them in the nights, and also do kill 
 the husbands in the nights, and do take their goods to the 
 Irishmen, wherefore it is ordained and agreed that no 
 
 * Sic. 
 
208 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 maner man, that will be taken for an Englishman, shall 
 have no beard above his mouth, that is to say, that he 
 shall have no hairs upon his upper lip, so that the said lip 
 be once, at least, shaven every fortnight, or of equal 
 growth with the nether lip. And if any man he found 
 amongst the English contrary thereunto, that it shall be 
 lawful for every man to take them and their goods as 
 Irish enemies, and ransom them as Irish enemies.” 
 
 The conduct of the Irish retainers of the members of the 
 English executive is described in the next chapter of the 
 Statute : — “ Divers Irish enemies be many times received 
 by lieutenants and justices of this land to become liege- 
 men, and thereto are sworn to be loyal lieges during their 
 lives, and after many times they do not periinplish the 
 same, but do rob, burn, and destroy the King’s liege- 
 people, and the same liege-people, for fear to be impeached, 
 dare not kill nor imprison the said enemies, nor take their 
 goods nor chattels, whereby the said liege- people do take 
 great hurt and hinderance.” 
 
 The oppressions suffered by the inhabitants of the Pale 
 appear in the recitals of the 28th Henry YI., chap. 1 : — 
 “ Whereas the marchers of the county of Dyvelin, and 
 other marchers of sundry counties, and other men within 
 the land of Ireland, do keep horsemen and footmen, as well 
 Irish as English, more than they can maintain at their own 
 costs, or upon their own tenants, and from day to other do 
 coyne them upon the poor husbands and tenants of the 
 land of Ireland, and oppress and destroy them, and namely, 
 in time of harvest upon their corn and meadows, with their 
 horses, both day and night, and the captains of the said 
 marchours, their wives and their pages, certain times of the 
 year do gather and bring withthem the King’s Iri sh ene- 
 mies, both men and women, and English rebels, with their 
 horsemen and footmen, as well in time of war as of peace, 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 209 
 
 to night suppers, called cuddies, upon the said tenants and 
 husbands, and they that are the chief captains of the said 
 marchers do lead and lodge them upon one husband one 
 hundred men, horsemen and footmen, some night, and upon 
 one other tenant or husband so many one other night, and 
 so every captain, and their wives, pages, and sons, as well 
 as themselves, and every of them do lead and bring with 
 them so many of the said Irish enemies and English rebels, 
 with their horsemen and footmen, and so they espy the 
 secrecy of the said land ; and after that every of the said 
 marchers, and their wives, pages, and sons, have overgone 
 the husbands and tenants of the said marchers in the form 
 aforesaid, then they go to the captains aforesaid, and there 
 the thieves of the said marchers do knit and confeder toge- 
 ther. And that, that* the said marcheours thieves do 
 steal in the English country, they do put out to them in 
 the march, and in time of war the men of the said marche- 
 ours, as well horsemen as footmen, do guide the said Irish 
 enemies and their thieves into the English country, and 
 what tenant or husband will not be at their truce, they do 
 rob, spoil, and kill, and for the most part the said land is 
 wasted and destroyed. And if such rule be holden not 
 punished, it is like to be the utter destruction and undoing 
 of the said land.” 
 
 That the English Government had neither the means nor 
 the inclination to preserve order, appears by the third chap- 
 ter of the same Act, by which it intrusted to mere volun- 
 teers the maintenance of order and punishment of crime : — 
 “ Whereas, thieves and evil-doers increase in great store 
 and from day to other do increase in malice more than 
 they have done hitherto, and also do cause the land to fall 
 into decay and poverty, and waste every day more and 
 
 * Sic. 
 
 p 
 
210 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 more, and so it is like to be confounded, if there should 
 not he remedy. ... It shall be lawful to every 
 liegeman of our Sovereign Lord the King, all manner 
 notorious and known thieves, found robbing, and spoiling, 
 or breaking houses by night or by day, and thieves found 
 with the manner, to kill them, and to take them without 
 impeachment, arraignment, or grievance, to him to be done 
 by our Sovereign Lord the King, his justices, officers, or 
 any of his ministers, for any such manslaughter or taking. ” 
 This provision, not proving sufficiently stringent, it was 
 enacted by the 5 Edward IV., ch. 2, as follows : — “ Item, at 
 the request of the commons, that for that that* divers 
 great robberies, thefts, and murders be done from night to 
 night by thieves upon the faithful liege-people of the King, 
 within this land of Ireland, specially and most commonly in 
 the county of Meath, which hath caused and made great deso- 
 lation and waste in the said country. ... It shall be 
 lawful to all manner of men that find any thieves robbing 
 by day or by night, or going or coming to rob , or steal , in 
 or out , going or coming , having no faithful man of good 
 name or fame in their company in English apparel, upon 
 any of the liege-people of the King ; that it shall be lawful 
 to take and kill those, and cut off their heads, without any 
 impeachment of our Sovereign Lord the King, his heirs, 
 officers, or ministers, or of any others, and of any head so 
 cut, in the county of Meath, that the cutter of the said head, 
 and his ayders there to him, cause the said head so cut to 
 be brought to the Portreffe of the town of Trim, and the 
 said Portreffe to put it upon a stake or spear upon the 
 castle at Trim ; and that the said Portreffe shall give his 
 writing under the common seal of the said town, testifying 
 the bringing of the said head to him. And that it shall be 
 
 * Sic. 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 211 
 
 lawful, by authority of the said Parliament, to the said 
 bringer of the said head, and his ayders to the same, for to 
 distrain and levy by their own hands, of every man having 
 one plough-land in the barony where the said thief was so 
 taken, two pence ,* of every man having half a plough-land 
 in the said barony, one penny ; and of every cottier having 
 house and smoke, one half-penny ; and if the same Port- 
 reffe refuse for to give the said certificate by writing freely 
 under his said common seal, then the said Portreffe to for- 
 feit to the said bringer of the said head ten pounds ; and 
 that he may have his action by bill or by writ, in whatso- 
 ever court shall please the bringer of the said head, for the 
 said ten pounds, against the said Portreffe.”* 
 
 This Act, which is usually cited as evidence of the 
 ferocity of the English Government, is the clearest proof 
 of its absolute inefficiency. The Executive, unable to 
 maintain order themselves, appeal to the unfortunate colo- 
 nists, and license them in their own protection to fulfil the 
 duties of a government which had abandoned its functions. 
 
 This feebly-forcible legislation did not check the incur- 
 sions of Irish thieves, and for this purpose an Act was 
 
 * It may have been expected that this Act would work ; the remedy 
 was summary, the remuneration moderate, and recoverable by the simple 
 process of distress. As to the general working of such an Act, vide the 
 trial of Whollaghan in a.d. 1798, before a Court-martial, presided over 
 by Lord Enniskillen — “The real defence was, that the prisoner and his 
 companions had been sent out with general orders from their officer to 
 shoot anybody they pleased. The Court seemed to have been of opinion 
 that such orders were neither unusual nor unreasonable ; and it is difficult 
 to collect from their finding that they thought the prisoner had been guilty 
 even of an error of judgment. They found ‘ that the prisoner did shoot 
 and kill Thomas Dogherty, a rebel; but do acquit him of any malicious 
 or wilful intention of murder.’” Massey’s Hist, of England, vol. iv. 
 page 386. 
 
212 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 passed in the celebrated Parliament held at Drogheda in 
 a. d. 1494 : “ As the marches of four shires lie open, and 
 not fensible in fastness of ditches and castles, by w h Irish- 
 men do great hurt in preying the same ; it is enacted that 
 every inhabitant, earthtiller, and occupier in said marches, 
 i.e. in the county of Dublin, from the water of Aulifiy to 
 the mountain in Kildare, from the water of Auliffy to Trim, 
 and so forth to Meath & Uriel, as said marches are made 
 & limited by an Act of Parliament, held by 'William, 
 Bishop of Meath, do build and make a double ditch of six 
 feet high above ground, at one side, or part w h mireth* 
 next unto Irishmen, betwixt this & next lammas, the 
 s d ditches to be kept up & repaired, as long as they 
 shall occupy s d land, under pain of 40 s .,” &c., &c. This 
 ditch was broken down by the Irish enemy, but subse- 
 quently repaired, “ to the great succour, comfort, and 
 defence of the county Dublin.” Por the maintenance of 
 this formidable fortification, penalties were enacted against 
 any subject who broke a tract or made a road over it, and 
 that all hogs, goats, cows, or cattle, injuring it by rooting, 
 grazing, or otherwise, should be confiscated and taken at 
 the king’s price, the proceeds to be expended on the repairs 
 of the wall. 
 
 The Government having no forces whatsoever to main- 
 tain order, the inhabitants, in self-defence, combined for that 
 purpose. In 12th Edward IY., it was enacted that there 
 should be a fraternity of arms of the number of thirteen 
 persons of the most honourable and faithfully disposed in 
 the counties of Kildare, Dublin, Meath, and Louth, three 
 out of each county and four for Meath ; that they and their 
 successors should assemble in Dublin every St. George’s 
 day, and choose their captain for the next year, the captain 
 and brethren to be created a society by the name of the 
 
 * Sic . 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 213 
 
 captain and brethren at arms ; the captain to keep one 
 hundred and twenty archers on horseback, forty horsemen, 
 and forty pages, to have for such purpose one twelve pence 
 per pound out of all merchandize sold in Ireland, the fra- 
 ternity to have power to make laws for the good governance 
 of the society, and to elect a new brother in the place of 
 any deceasing, and the captain to have power to apprehend 
 all outlawed rebels that would not be justified by law. 
 
 The territories of the Pale having been, contrary to the 
 provisions of the Statute of Kilkenny, gradually occupied 
 by Irish, a feeble attempt was made by the Parliament to 
 force these intruders to become English by Act of Parlia- 
 ment ; and it was enacted, by the 5th Edward IY., chap. 3, 
 “ That every Irishman that dwells betwixt or among Eng- 
 lishmen, in the county of Dublin, Meath, Uriel, or Kil- 
 dare, shall go like an Englishman in apparel and shaving 
 of his beard above the mouth, and shall be within one year 
 sworn the liegeman of the King in the hands of the lieute- 
 nant or deputy, or such as he will assign to receive this 
 oath, for the multitude that is to he sworn , and shall take to 
 him an English surname of one town, as Sutton, Chester, 
 Trym, Skryne, Cork, Kinsale ; or colour, as white, black, 
 brown ; or art or science, as smith or carpenter ; or office, 
 as cook, butler ; and he and his issue shall use this name 
 under pain of forfeiting of his goods yearly, till the premises 
 be done, to be levied two times by the year to the King’s 
 wars.” 
 
 Legislation of this nature was never nor could never be 
 practically enforced, and such futile attempts at reform 
 merely prove that the intruding Celts had already invaded 
 the very heart of the English colony. 
 
 The regular assembling of the Irish Parliament became 
 impracticable, if the law, that the proctors, knights, and 
 burgesses, should be residents of the diocese, county, or 
 
214 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 town for which they served, were longer enforced; and by 
 the 18th Edward IV., c. 2, it was enacted: “ The premises 
 considered, and how great a distance and how great a peril 
 it is of the King’s Irish enemies and English rebels, as well 
 by sea as by land , and openly known how great mischiefs 
 so oftentimes have been done in the ways, as well in the 
 south part and the north, as in the east and in the west part 
 of the said land, by reason whereof they may not send 
 proctors, knights, citizens, or burgesses, according to the 
 said acts and ordinances ; wherefore if any such acts be, 
 it is ordained that such acts be void.” 
 
 In consequence of such enactments, or rather of the facts 
 recited in them, the Irish Parliament dwindled into an 
 assembly of the counties adjoining Dublin, and became a 
 mere tool in the hands of the Government. 
 
 It is unnecessary to accumulate further evidence as to 
 the character of the English Government in Ireland. It 
 has been accused of violence and tyranny toward the Irish 
 population. During this period at least it may be acquitted 
 of such a charge, but convicted of faults much more serious — 
 of imbecility, folly, and corruption. The stringent and 
 ferocious Statutes, which, down to Henry VIII.’s reign, are 
 to be found in our Statute Book, are evidence of fear and 
 helplessness, not acts of overbearing force. If a capable 
 Executive had existed in Dublin, marauders and thieves 
 could not have infested the adjoining district ; they would 
 either have abstained from such courses, or, if they had 
 persevered, would have been hanged by the Government, 
 and nothing said upon the subject. It was the helplessness 
 of the Executive which, as a last resource, appealed to 
 private violence for the repression of public disorder. 
 
 In the reign of Henry VI., Richard Duke of York was 
 sent over to Ireland as Viceroy, not for the purpose of 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 215 
 
 maintaining the English Government, hut rather in the 
 hope of removing him from England by a colonial appoint- 
 ment, then equivalent to temporary exile. The duke, by 
 his brilliant personal qualities, his moderation, and justice, 
 acquired extreme popularity among the population, both 
 English and Celtic, and attached to himself to a great 
 extent, the nobility and chiefs of both nationalities. But 
 from so fair a commencement flowed the misfortunes which 
 gave the mortal blow to the Anglo-Norman colony. 
 
 When exiled from England in 1459, the Duke took 
 refuge in this island, and sought in the Irish Parliament a 
 support against the then dominant Lancastrian party. In 
 this he fully succeeded. In opposition to the English at- 
 tainder, he was formally acknowledged as Viceroy by the 
 Anglo-Irish Parliament. Supported by the Duke’s pre- 
 sence and authority, the Irish Parliament declared the com- 
 plete independence of the Irish Legislature, and boldly 
 affirmed those constitutional rights which, though involved 
 in the existence of a separate Parliament, had not hitherto 
 been categorically expressed. They asserted their rights 
 to a distinct coinage, and their absolute freedom from all 
 laws and statutes except such as were by the Lords Spiri- 
 tual and Temporal, and Commons of Ireland freely admitted 
 and accepted in their Parliament. They declared that no 
 Irish subject was bound to answer any writs except those 
 under the great seal of Ireland, and enacted heavy penalties 
 against any officer who should attempt to put English 
 decrees in force in Ireland. They, in fact, took the same 
 position and laid down the same principles as the celebrated 
 Parliament of 1782. The Irish lords proved their devo- 
 tion to the house of York in the two fatal battles of Sandal 
 Castle and Stoke, in the latter of which the flower of the 
 colony perished, but not without honour. 
 
216 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 The position of Henry YII. towards Ireland was peculiar. 
 The colonists had shown themselves the most determined 
 enemies of his house. He had no desire, therefore, even if 
 he had the means, to support them against the Celtic popu- 
 lation. It was his interest rather to cripple their power, 
 and to crush out the independence of the Irish Parliament. 
 With this view, the Deputy, Sir Edward Poynings, coerced 
 the Parliament of the Pale to pass the celebrated Act of the 
 10 Henry YII., chap. 4, enacting that “No Parliament be 
 holden hereafter in the said land (of Ireland), but at such 
 season as the King’s lieutenant and council there first do 
 certify the King, under the great seal of that land, the 
 causes and considerations, and all such acts as to them 
 seemeth, should pass in this same Parliament ; and such 
 causes, considerations, and acts affirmed by the King and 
 his council, to be good and expedient for that land, and his 
 licence thereupon, as well in affirmation of the said causes 
 and acts, as to summon the said Parliament under his great 
 seal of England had and obtained ; that done, a Parliament 
 to be had and holden after this form and effect before 
 rehearsed : and if any Parliament be holden in that land 
 hereafter, contrary to the form and provision aforesaid, it 
 be deemed void, and of none effect in law.” 
 
 This, the most disgraceful Act ever passed by indepen- 
 dent legislature, and wrung from this local assembly of the 
 Pale, bound future Irish Parliaments for three hundred 
 years. At the same time, all English Statutes then existing 
 in England, were by the same Statute (chap. 22) made of 
 force in Ireland. At the same time also it was enacted that the 
 chief castles in Ireland should be committed exclusively to 
 governors of the realm of England. The Irish Parliament 
 was thus deprived of all initiatory power, and reduced 
 to. the position of Erench Parliaments, whose sole duty it 
 
LECTTJEES ON IEISH HISTOEY. 
 
 217 
 
 was to register the edicts of the Sovereign. English legis- 
 lation was introduced en bloc , and the chief fortresses were 
 secured to the Crown of England, or rather perhaps to the 
 house of Lancaster. 
 
 An attempt was then made to govern Ireland through 
 exclusively English officials, which met with the usual 
 failure attendant upon such policy. The English King was 
 determined to continue Lord of Ireland, but desired to 
 avoid the expense of maintaining his position and the du- 
 ties which it imposed upon him. The plan next devised was 
 to commit the government of Ireland to the most trouble- 
 some and powerful noble, who, in consideration of his 
 nominally acting as the King’s lieutenant, was permitted 
 at his own expense to conduct the government for the 
 benefit of himself and his faction. The principle of this 
 policy is pointedly put in the apocryphal story that when 
 the Bishop of Meath concluded his charges against the Earl 
 of Kildare, by declaring that all Ireland could not rule this 
 Earl, the King replied, “ Then in good faith shall the Earl 
 rule all Ireland.” 
 
 Hence arose the Geraldine supremacy, which with some 
 interruptions lasted till a. d. 1534. So utterly perverted 
 during this period was the government to the private pur- 
 poses of the Geraldines, that in consequence of a personal 
 feud between the Earl of Kildare and his son-in-law, Mac 
 William of Clanricarde, the royal banner was carried at 
 the battle of Knock-Tow ; in which the De Burghs, the 
 O’Briens, Mac Namaras, O’Carrolls and other southern 
 chiefs were defeated by the combined forces of the Pale 
 and the O’Beillys, Mac Mahons, O’Earrells, O’Donels, and 
 other Northern chiefs. 
 
 The Geraldines, though brave and enterprising, cour- 
 teous and generous, and possessing all the qualities which 
 
218 
 
 LECTURES ON" IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 ensure personal popularity, were totally devoid of any of 
 the qualities requisite for the character of a statesman, and 
 had no higher views than the maintenance of their position 
 as chiefs of the most powerful Irish clan. The character 
 and conduct of the Geraldines has lately been made the 
 subject of contemptuous criticism by a well-known English 
 historian ; but if they were no better than he represents 
 them, how great was the degradation and sin of the Eng- 
 lish Government, which purchased a nominal sovereignty 
 by so gross a neglect of all its duties. 
 
 In a. n. 1534, the last Geraldine Viceroy, being sum- 
 moned to London, left his son, Thomas “ The Silken 
 Lord,” as Deputy in Dublin. 
 
 Suddenly, the report spread that the Earl had been exe- 
 cuted in London. The executive was in the hands of a 
 Geraldine, and the town was full of his followers. The 
 English officials assembled in St. Mary’s Abbey, not so 
 much with the intention of dying at their posts, as devising 
 how to save their lives and property. The Silken Lord re- 
 solved to disclaim his allegiance to the English Crown, and 
 might, as the first step in such a course, have seized the 
 castle and the capital ; but, full of chivalrous, and perhaps 
 theatrical ideas, he resolved to signalize his defection by 
 some public and dramatic act. While the councillors sat 
 in St. Mary’s Abbey in doubt and terror, the young lord, 
 followed by his adherents, burst into the chamber. He 
 stood at the foot of the table, his followers flooded the hall. 
 The Chancellor addressed them, with entreaties and argu- 
 ments, imploring them to abandon their design. As none 
 of the Geraldine retainers understood English, the oration 
 was wasted upon them. For a moment Lord Thomas 
 stood irresolute, but his Irish minstrel — the Irish minstrel 
 of an English deputy — reminded him of the prowess and 
 
LECTUEES 0 N IEISH HISTOET. 
 
 219 
 
 honour of his house. The Lord Thomas flung to the ground 
 the sword of state, abjured his allegiance to the English 
 Crown, and rode forth into the country, amid the shouts 
 of “ Crom-aboo.” 
 
 Here ends the mediaeval history of Ireland. The feeble 
 reed upon which the English Government had lent pierced 
 their hand. The miserable deceit of a nominal government, 
 which had abdicated alike duty and power, was exploded 
 for ever. The English rule in Ireland disappeared in a 
 moment. 
 
 Three hundred and sixty-two years previously an Eng- 
 lish king “ had turned his thoughts, in the proper spirit of 
 a Catholic prince, to the object of widening the boundaries 
 of the Church, explaining the true Christian faith to igno- 
 rant and uncivilized tribes, and exterminating the nurseries 
 of vice from the Lord’s inheritance.” Upon which occasion 
 Pope Adrian IY. had declared, “ observing as we do the 
 maturity of deliberation and the soundness of judgment exhi- 
 bited in your mode of proceeding, we cannot but hope that 
 peopoetionate success will, with Divine permission, attend 
 your exertions.” 
 
 To what condition was Ireland reduced by the first 
 three hundred and sixty- two years of English rule ? I 
 shall not myself attempt to describe it, nor shall I refer to 
 any Irish author. The tale is told in the great document 
 which stands first in the Irish State Papers of the reign of 
 Henry VIII., “ The State of Ireland, and the Plan of its 
 Reformation.” 
 
 “ Who list make surmise unto the King for the reforma- 
 tion of his Land of Ireland, it is necessary to show him the 
 estate of all the noble folks of the same, as well of the 
 King’s subjects and English rebels, as of Irish enemies. 
 And first of all to make His Grace understand that there 
 
220 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 were more than 60 counties, called Regions, in Ireland, 
 inhabited with the King’s Irish enemies; some regions as 
 big as a shire, some more, some less, unto a little ; some as 
 big as half a shire, and some a little less ; where reigneth 
 more than 60 chief captains, whereof some calleth them- 
 selves Kings, some King’s peers in their language, some 
 Princes, some Dukes, some Archdukes, that liveth, only by 
 the sword, and obeyeth unto no other temporal person, 
 but only to himself that is strong ; and every of the said cap- 
 tains maketh war and peace for himself, and holdeth by the 
 sword, and hath imperial jurisdiction within his room, and 
 obeyeth to no other person, English or Irish, except only to 
 such persons as may subdue him by the sword — also the son 
 of any of the said captains shall not succeed to his father, 
 without he be the strongest of all his nation ; for there shall 
 be none chief captain in any of the said regions by lawful 
 succession, but by fort mayne and election; and he that 
 hath strongest army and hardiest sword among them, hath 
 best right and title ; and by reason thereof there be but 
 few of the regions that be in peace within themself, but 
 commonly rebelleth against their chief captain. Also in 
 every of the said regions there be diverse petty captains, 
 and every of them maketh war and peace for himself, with- 
 out licence of the chief captain. 
 
 “ Also, there be 30 great captains of the English folk, 
 that followeth the same Irish order and keepeth the same 
 rule, & every of them maketh war and peace for himself 
 without any licence of the King or of any other temporal 
 person, save to him that is strongest, and of such that may 
 subdue them with the sword. Here followeth the names 
 of the counties that obey not the King’s laws, and have 
 neither justice, neither sherriff under the King, the county 
 of Waterford, the county of Cork, the county of Kilkenny, 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 221 
 
 the county of Limerick, the county of Kerry, the county of 
 Connaught, the county of Ulster, the county of Carlow, 
 half the county of Uryel, half the county of Meath, half 
 the county of Dublin, half the county of Kildare, half the 
 county of Wexford. All English folks of the s d . counties 
 be of Irish habits, of Irish language, and of Irish conditions, 
 except the cities and the walled towns. Also, all the 
 English folk of the said counties, for the more party would 
 be right glad to obey the King’s laws, if they might be de- 
 fended by the King of the Irish enemies ; and because they 
 defend them not, and the King’s deputy may not defend 
 them, therefore they are all turned from the obeisance of 
 the King’s laws, and liveth by the sword after the manner 
 of the Irish enemies : and though that many of them obey 
 the King’s deputy, when it pleaseth them, yet there is 
 none of them all, that obeyeth the King’s laws. Also, 
 there is no folk daily subject to the King’s laws, but half 
 the county Uryel, half the county of Meath, half the 
 county of Dublin, half the county of Kildare ; and there 
 be as many Justices of the King’s Bench, and of the Com- 
 mon Pleas, and as many Barons of the Exchequer, and as 
 many officers, ministers, and clerks in every of the said 
 counties as ever there was, when all the land for the most 
 part was subject to the laws. 
 
 “ Wherefore the said subjects be so grievously vexed daily 
 with the said Courts, that they be glad to sell their free- 
 holds for ever, rather than to suffer always the exactions 
 of the said Courts, like as the freeholders of the Marches, 
 where the King’s laws be not obeyed, be so vexed with 
 extortion, that they be glad in likewise to sell their lands 
 and freeholds to such persons, that compelleth them, by 
 means of extortion, to make alienation thereof, rather than 
 alway to bear and be under the said extortion. 
 
222 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 And so, what with the extortion of coygne and livery 
 daily, and with the wrongful exaction of hosting money of 
 carriage and cartage daily, and which with the King’s 
 great subsidy yearly, and with the said tribute and 
 black rent to the King’s Irish enemies, and other infinite 
 extortion and daily exactions, all the English folk of the 
 counties of Dublin, Kildare, Meath, and Uryell, be more 
 oppressed than any other folk of this land, English or 
 Irish, and of worse condition be they at this side than in 
 the marches. 
 
 “ The premises considered the Pandar showeth in the 
 first chapter of his book, called ‘ Salus Populi,’ that the 
 holy woman Brigitta, used to inquire of her good angel 
 many questions of secret divine, and among all other, 
 she inquired of what Christian land was the most souls 
 damned ? The angel showed her a land in the west part 
 of the world. She enquired the cause why ? The angel 
 said for there the Christian folk dieth most out of charity ; 
 she enquired the cause why ? The angel said, for there is 
 most continual war, root of hate and envy, and of vices con- 
 trary to charity ; and without charity the souls cannot be 
 saved. And the angel did show to her the lapse of the souls 
 of Christian folk of that land, how they fell down into hell 
 as thick as any hail shower. And pity thereof moved the 
 Pandar to consign his said book, as in the said chapter 
 plainly doth appear, for after his opinion this is the land 
 the angel understood ; for there is no land in the world of 
 so long continued war within himself, ne of so great shed- 
 ding of Christian blood, ne of so great robbing, spoiling, 
 praying, and burning, ne of so great wrongful extortion 
 continually as Ireland. Wherefore it cannot be denied 
 that the angel did understand the land of Ireland. 
 
 “ What might the King do more than he has done ? He 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY, 
 
 223 
 
 did conquer all the land unto little, and did inhabit the 
 same with English folk, subject to his laws, after the man- 
 ner of England, and so the land did continue and prosper 
 100 years and more; and since the land hath grown and 
 increased near hand 200 years in rebellion against the King 
 and his laws. Many folk doth enquire the cause why that 
 the Irish folk be grown so strong, and the King’s subjects 
 so feeble, and fallen in so great rebellion for the more part. 
 
 “ What pity is it to hear, what ruth is it to report, there 
 is no tongue that can tell, no pen that can write. It passeth 
 far the orators, and the Muses, all to show all the order of 
 the noble folk, and how cruel they enterith the poor com- 
 mon people, what danger is to the King anent God, to 
 suffer the land whereof he bear the charge, and the care 
 temporal under God, under the see Apostolical, to be of 
 said misorder, so long without remedy ; it were more ho- 
 nour and worship to surrender his claim thereto, and to 
 make no longer persecution thereof, than to suffer his poor 
 subjects always to be so suppressed, and all the noble folk 
 of the land to be at war within themselves, in shedding of 
 Christian blood alway without remedy. The herde must 
 render account of his folk and the King for his. 
 
 “ Some sayeth that the prelates of the Church and clergy 
 is much cause of all the misorder of the land ; for there is 
 no archbishop, ne bishop, abbot, ne prior, parson, ne vicar, 
 ne any other person of the Church, high or low, great or 
 small, English or Irish, that useth to preach the word of 
 God, saving the poor friars beggars ; and where the word 
 of God do cease, there can be no grace, and without the spe- 
 cial [grace] of God the land may never be reformed ; and 
 by teaching and preaching of prelates of the Church, and by 
 prayer or orison of the devout persons in the same God 
 useth always to grant his abundant grace ; ergo the Church 
 
224 
 
 LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 not using the premises is much cause of all the said mis- 
 order of this land.” 
 
 Such was the condition of Ireland after more than three 
 centuries of English so-called government. 
 
 In the twelfth century the Irish Celts were in a state of 
 political disorganization, but they still had a feeling of na- 
 tionality, and had the form at least of a national monarchy ; 
 and justice, criminal and civil, was administered among 
 them according to a definite code of law ; at the commence- 
 ment of the sixteenth century there remained no tradition 
 of national unity, no trace of an organization by which they 
 could be united into one people; the separate tribes had 
 been disorganized by civil wars, and the original tribesmen 
 were supplanted and oppressed by the mercenary followers 
 of the several rivals for the chieftaincies. The Celtic po- 
 pulation had found the rule of England scarcely less inju- 
 rious to them than the invasions of the Danes. 
 
 The Anglo-Normans, thwarted in their first attempts at 
 colonization by the watchful jealousy of England, had been 
 since subjected to constant injustice and oppression, and in 
 a relapse to a lower political and social state, sought for 
 personal security and freedom, and an escape from the ex- 
 actions of an inefficient and corrupt executive. The An- 
 glo-Saxon tenants of the first feudal lords had wholly 
 disappeared; they had either fled hack to England, 
 perished in the constant warfare, to which they were ex- 
 posed, or assumed the Irish dress and language. Of the 
 many municipal and corporate towns established by the 
 first settlers, most had been destroyed utterly; the residue 
 had been reduced to an impoverished and ruinous condi- 
 tion. 
 
 Every trace of English government, save the miseries 
 which it had caused, had passed away from Ireland. The 
 
LECTURES ON IRISH HISTORY. 
 
 225 
 
 English King had no force in Ireland, nor any ally, save 
 the hereditary enemies of the house of Kildare. The Eng- 
 lish conquest was confessedly a failure. The Anglo-Nor- 
 man colony had disappeared, or been absorbed in the Celtic 
 population. If the King of England were any longer to 
 be Lord of Ireland, the conquest of the island m ust be com- 
 menced again. The Irish question rose before English 
 statesmen — Was England to hold Ireland, and, if so, how ? 
 Long the Tudor princes shrunk from looking this difficulty 
 in the face ; they temporized, vacillated, and sought some 
 middle course, some compromise. But the Irish question 
 became at length (amid the complications of the sixteenth 
 century) the question of English politics. England found 
 that she must either conquer Ireland, or herself succumb 
 in the struggle. 
 
 For years was this struggle protracted ; year after year 
 brought on both islands fresh sufferings and misery ; new 
 wrongs inflicted and endured. Until after unstinted ex- 
 penditure of blood and treasure, England trampled under 
 her feet alike Norman and Celt — the O’Neill and the 
 Geraldine ; and by the defeat — almost the annihilation — of 
 the inhabitants of Ireland, obtained a brief respite in this 
 struggle of races, so often apparently concluded, yet as 
 often renewed. 
 
 THE END. 
 

 
 
 
 

 H *