Ireland under the Normans

IRELAND UNDER THE NORMANS

ORPEN

IRELAND
UNDER THE NORMANS

1169-1216

BY

GODDARD HENRY ORPEN

LATE SCHOLAR OF TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN

EDITOR OF 'the SOXG OF DER.MOT AND THE EARL '

MEMBER OF THE ROYAL IRISH ACADEMY

VOL. II

OXFORD
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

1911

HENRY FROWDE, M.A.

PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

LONDON, EDINBURGH, NEW YORK
TORONTO AND MELBOURNE

CHAPTER XII

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER
1177-85

The untimely death of Richard of Striguil Conse-
was a heavy blow to the prospects of the Anglo- o"stron^
Norman colony, which, in Leinster at least, was ^^^^
beginning to settle down to peaceful progress
and orderly rule. It left the king without a
representative in Ireland, and the great fief of
Leinster without a lord. The Countess Eva,
daughter of King Dermot, had borne only one
child to the earl, a daughter named Isabel, and
she, an infant of not more than five years of age,
was heiress to the earl's vast fief. The valuable
feudal incidents of the wardship and marriage
of this heiress now accrued to the king as
dominus, and it was important for him at once
to secure his rights. The commissioners sent to
recall Raymond, seeing that it would be mad-
ness at this moment to execute their original
commission, and that in the changed circum-
stances it was necessary to apply to the king
for new instructions, left Raymond as pro-
curator in Ireland, while they hastened to the

6 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

king to acquaint him with the facts and learn
his pleasure.^

Henry, however, had already conceived a
distrust of Raymond, and indeed it is suffi-
ciently obvious that Raymond was not fitted
either to control the colony or to secure the
interests of the Crown in Leinster. Accordingly
William Henry appointed his dapifer, William Fitz
Audeiin Audelin, whom he had previously on two
Chief occasions employed in Ireland, as procurator
ine. instead of Raymond, and sent him immediately
to Ireland with orders to seize into the king's
hand all the earl's castles {munitiones) in
Leinster.^

Along with William Fitz Audelin came John
de Courcy, Robert Fitz Stephen, and Miles de
Cogan, each with ten men-at-arms. The two
last, and probably all three, had fought for
King Henry both in England and in France in
his war with the barons, and might naturally
expect their reward in Ireland now. John de
Courcy may have accompanied Henry to Ireland
in 1171, but this is the first time he came to
stay in the country where he was soon to become
famous. All three, according to Gerald de
Barry, were joined in the commission with
WilHam Fitz Audelin. Of the latter Gerald

1 Giraldus, v. 334.

2 Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 125. The title ' procurator ' is
taken from Giraldus.

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 7

gives a very unfavourable portrait : a courtly,
luxurious man, smooth-spoken, but full of guile,
a bully and a coward, greedy of gold, and
a seeker after court favour.^ Acting, as is
hinted, and as was very probably the case,
under instructions from Henry, he seems to
have endeavoured to thwart in every way the
bolder spirits of the conquest, and in particular
the Geraldines. Maurice Fit z Gerald, the head
of the clan, died about the 1st of September
in this year. Strongbow had given to him
Wicklow Castle, which had at first been reserved
by Henry along with the maritime district south
of Dublin, but was afterwards, as we have seen,
granted to Strongbow. Now Fitz Audelin took
the castle out of the hands of Maurice's sons,
presumably to be held for the king during the
minority of Strongbow' s heir. Ferns was given
to them by way of exchange, and they im-
mediately set about building a castle there ;
but, according to Gerald, Walter ' Alemannus ',
or the German, a nephew of Fitz Audelin and

^ V. 337-8, %vith much more to the same effect. He has
been strangely identified with WilHam de Burgh, ' the
conqueror of Connaught,' a man of a very different type.
William Fitz Aldehn or Audehn, as the name should be
written (not ' Aldelm '), was son of Aldelin de Aldefeld, and
held a knight's fee in Yorkshire. His wife was Juliana,
daughter of Robert Doisnell : see Round's Feudal England,
p. 518, and the cartae of 1166 printed in Hearne's Liber
Niger Scaccarii.

Courcv.

8 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

Gustos of Wexford (now also in the king's
hand), bribed by Murtough Mc Murrough,
Dermot's nephew, caused the castle to be
destroyed.^ Fitz Audelin is also said to have
disappointed both Raymond and Fitz Stephen
by refusing to give them any of the more
secure lands near Dublin or Wexford, and
leaving to them only the more remote lands on
the marches.
John de One adventurous spirit showed his discontent
with Fitz Audelin' s policy by organizing and
carrying out a raid on his own account, which
would seem to have been the act of a madman
had it not been successful, and which resulted
in subjecting a large portion of another pro-
vince to English domination. This was John de
Courcy, whose story is like a wild romance, and
would hardly be believed were it not for many
solid and enduring facts which testify to its
essential truth.

Of his antecedents little is known. He came
of a family seated at Stoke Courcy in Somerset-
shire and was related to William de Courcy
(ob. 1176), dapifer of Henry II and at one time

1 Gir. Camb. v, 337. Wicklow Castle was afterwards
restored to the Geraldines, and we find it belonging to the
Baron of Naas in 1229 : C. D. I., vol. i, no. 1757. It is
probable that Ferns, the old royal seat of Leinster, was left
at this time in the possession of Murtough McMurrough,
who was friendly to the English, and had assisted Raymond
at the relief of Limerick early in the year.

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 9

Seneschal of Normandy.^ He probably accom-
panied Henry to Ireland, as the Song of Dermot
expressly says that Henry, while in Ireland,
granted to him ' Ulster, if he could conquer it '.^
Niall O'Loughlin, King of the Cinel Owen, a
group of tribes whose king, when strong enough,
was recognized as high-king of the whole
northern province, had alone among the prin-
cipal kings of Ireland held entirely aloof from
Henry during his visit, and Henry, who was
himself unwilling to attempt a winter cam-
paign in Ulster, may have half -jestingly granted
a licence to John de Courcy to take the province
if he could. As we have seen, the licence
originally granted to Richard of Striguil a
couple of years earlier is said to have been of
a similar half -jesting nature.

John de Courcy is described as a tall fair man His de-
with big bones and muscular frame, of immense
strength and remarkable daring. A born warrior,
in action ever in the front, ever taking upon

1 Along with his brother Jordan de Curci, John witnessed
a grant by William de Curci, steward of the king, for the
souls of his grandfather Wilham de Curci and his father
William, to the monks of St. Andrew of Stoke. Hist. MSS.
Com., 9th Rep., Part 1, p. 353 b.

2 A un Johan Uluestere,

Si a force la peust conquere,
De Curci out a nun Johan
Ki pus i suffri meint [a]han.

11. 2733-6.

10 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

himself the brunt of the danger. So keen
a lighter was he that even when in command he
would forget the calmness that befits a general
and become an impetuous soldier. In private
life he was modest, sober-minded, and pious, and
gave to God the glory of all his victories.^

Such a mettlesome warrior could not but

grow restive under the timid and politic rule

Advances of Fitz Audelin. Accordingly, in spite of Fitz

Ulster, Audelin, he took the bit in his teeth. He

' ■ gathered round him some of the garrison of

Dublin who were discontented like himself, and

with a little band of twenty-two men-at-arms

and about three hundred others, supplemented

perhaps by some of the Irish themselves,^ boldly

advanced into Ulster, where English arms had

not yet attempted to penetrate. He marched

rapidly through Meath and Uriel, and on the

fourth day — about the 1st of February — he

And cap- took by Surprise the city of Down. This was

Down- an ancient ecclesiastical site associated with

pa ric . g^^ Patrick, and here the saint was believed to

have been buried. It was also the chief seat of

the kings of Uladh, or Ulidia, i. e. that part of the

modern province of Ulster lying to the east of

^ Gir. Camb. v. 344. John de Courcy was one of those
with whom Gerald must have come into contact in 1185^6.

2 ' Associatis sibi Hyberniensibus illis qui parti eorum
favebant ' : Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 137. According to the
Book of Howth (p. 81) John had 700 men at the battle
of Down.

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 11

the Bann and the Ne\vry river. The king, who
was a member of the family called Mac Donlevy,^
fled, but only to collect his host.

It happened that Cardinal Vivian was in the
city of Down at this time on a mission from
the Pope, and he endeavoured to make peace
between de Courcy and the king, on the terms
that the latter should pay tribute to the English
and the former retire from the territory, but
his good offices were fruitless.^ In eight days

^ He is called ' Dunlevus ' by Gerald, and the name
appears as ' Macdonleue ' (representing Mac Duinnsleibhe)
in the Song. The members of this family were always
killing one another, and which of them was acknowledged
king at this moment is hard to determine. See O'Donovan's
notes to Four Masters, vol. iii, pp. 30 and 39, which, how-
ever, do not seem to clear up the point. At any rate, Rory
Mac Donlevy seems to have been in command both in 1177
(Ann. Inisfallen, Dublin MS. ; Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 137,
where he is called Rodericus rex Ulvestere) and in 1178
(Ann. Inisfallen, Ann. Tigemach). For the ambiguity in
the name Uladh or Ulster see O'Donovan's note to Four
Masters, 1172, p. 7. In the twelfth century the name was
(properly speaking) confined to the district represented
by the modern counties of Down and Antrim.

2 Giraldus, v. 340. William of Newburgh, vol i, p. 238,
says that Vivian advised the Irish to fight for their country.
According to the Gesta Henrici (vol. i, p. 137) Vivian met
de Courcy's army while he was journeying along the coast
on his way to Dublin. He may have returned to Down
with it. He had come to Down from the Isle of Man, where
' Godredum regem legitime desponsari fecit cum uxore sua
nomine Phingola (Finnghuala) filia Mac Loclen filii Mur-
kartec regis Hybemiae, matre scilicet Olavi qui tunc triennis

12 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

The Mac Donlevy returned with a huge army, said

Drnvn."^ to number 10,000 men, to recapture the city.
Meantime de Courcy had constructed a weak
fort in a corner of the city,^ but he preferred
to meet the enemy in the open, on ground
chosen by himself. Including his Irish auxili-
aries he had perhaps 700 men.^ A more than
Homeric battle ensued, in which John de Courcy,
his supposed brother-in-law Almaric de St. Law-
rence, and Roger le Poer did wonders. We shall
not attempt to describe the battle, for which
indeed trvistworthy details are wanting.^ The

erat' : Chron. Manniae, 1176. This is a late example of an
Irish lady in high position entering into a marriage not
recognized by the Church. Her grandfather was Murtough
O'Loughlin, King of Ireland (with opposition), si. 1166, and
her father was, I suppose, Melaghlin O'Loughlin, who in this
very year (1177) killed Aedh O'Neill, a former king of the
Cinel Owen.

1 ' Exile municipium quod in urbis angulo tenuiter
erexerat ' : Gir. Camb. v. 340.

2 This is the number given in the Book of Howth.

^ Gir. Camb. v. 340-2. The fullest account, which reads
like the tale of an Irish shanach}', is contained in the Book
of Howth, pp. 81-4, in a passage not taken from Giraldus,
but probably ' from a translation by Primate Dowdall made
in 1551 out of a Latin book found with O'Neill in Armagh ^
(see the colophon, p. 117). This Latin book seems to have
contained the gestes of John de Courcy. Mr. Brewer's account
of the Book of Howth is very faulty ; see Round, Commune
of London, pp. 146-9. Roger de Hoveden (ii. 120) says :
' Johannes de Curci, amissaexercitus sui parte magna, victoria
potitus est,' and adds that the bishop of Down was taken
prisoner but was released at the entreaty of Cardinal Vivian.

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 13

Northerners fought with their usual courage,
but in the end were utterly defeated. The
fight seems to have taken place in the low lands
to the north of the city, which were intersected
by the swamps of the river Quoile. Probably
the narrow strips of firm land gave little ad-
vantage to numbers, and superior arms and
discipline and, above all, the deadly arrows,
turned the scale.

John de Courcy had now a breathing-space
in which to fortify himself in his new possession.

There can be little doubt that now was the His mote-
castle,
time when the great mote, situated about a

quarter of a mile to the north of the cathedral
town, was erected, and that it was the caislen or
castrum which he is said to have built at this
time.^ From this centre John de Courcy gradu-
ally extended his sway over Uladh, represented
now by the counties of Down and Antrim, and
over much of Uriel as well. But he was not
always successful. Giraldus enumerates five

•^ . His live

battles, in three of which he was victorious and battles.

1 This mote has in comparatively recent times been
supposed to be Rath Celtair or the Fort of Celtar, a hero
mentioned in early bardic story. But this has been dis-
proved, and the real situation of Rath Celtair, which was
known in John de Courcy's time, shown to have been on
the hill where the cathedral now stands (see Eng. Hist.
Review, 1907, p. 440, and the Journ. R. S. A. 1. 1907,
p. 137). In a map dated 1729 the mote is called ' Enghsh
Mount '.

14 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

in the other two narrowly escaped with his life.
He is, I think, substantially borne out by the
Irish annals. The second battle was fought on
the 24th of June, also at Down. It is described
at some length in the Dublin copy of the Annals
of Inisfallen. This time Rory Mac Donlevy,
at the head of the Ulidians, was supported by
Melaghlin O'Neill, lord of the Cinel Owen, and
accompanied by the Archbishop of Armagh and
others of the clergy, who bore numerous relics
with them to secure the victory. The Cinel
Owen and the Ulidians were defeated with the
loss of 500 men. ' The Archbishop of Armagh,
the Bishop of Down, and all the clergy were
taken prisoners ; and the English got posses-
sion of the croziers of St. Comgall and St.
Dachiarog, the Canoin Phatruic [i. e. the Book
of Armagh], besides a bell called Ceolan an
Tighearna. They afterwards, however, set the
bishops at liberty and restored the Canoin
Phatruic and the bell, but they killed all the
inferior clergy and kept the other noble relics,'
which are stated to have remained in the hands
of the English. ^ The third engagement was

^ This passage from the Annals of Inisfallen is quoted
in O'Donovan's note to Four Masters, vol. iii, p. 31. The
older annals; in recording the names of the chieftains of
the Cinel Owen who were killed, virtuall}^ corroborate this
account. It is curious to note that the possession of the
' noble relics ' seems to have been as much prized, presum-
ably for battle-luck, by the victors as by the vanquished.

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 15

at Fir-Li, where De Courcy was raiding some
cattle, when he was overpowered in a narrow
pass and barely escaped with eleven of his
knights to his castrum at Down. Fir -Li was a
tribal district on the Bann in the north of
Antrim, and this defeat at the hands of Cumee
O'Flynn, lord of this district, is recorded in the
Irish annals under the year 1178. The fourth
battle was in Uriel, where de Courcy lost many
of his men ; and the fifth apud pontem Ivori
(Newry) on his return from England, from
which, however, he escaped to his own district
victorious.^

^ It is harder to identify these last two battles with the
entries in the Annals, but the battle at Uriel is probably that
mentioned in the Annals of Ulster in 1178, when John with
his knights went pillaging from Dun (Downpatriek) to the
Plain of Conaille (i.e. the low lands in Louth, a part of
Uriel), and was attacked and defeated byMurroughO'Carroll,
King of Uriel, and Mac Donlevy, King of Uladh, at Glen-
righ (see, too, Four Masters and Ann. Inisf alien, MS.
T. C. D.) ; and the fight at Newry may be that recorded
in the Annals of Inisfallen (Dublin MS.) under the year 1180,
where it is stated that John de Courcy plundered Machaire
Conaille and Cuailgne and carried off 100 cows, but was
pursued and overtaken by Murrough O'Carroll and others
and defeated ; and John de Courcy fled to Skreen Columb-
kille to the castle he had himself made there. This would
be Castleskreen in Lecale, Avhere the original mote may still
be seen. O'Donovan, indeed, identifies the battle apud
pontem Ivori with the first raid on Machaire Conaille and
the defeat at Glenrigh, because Glenrigh was the old name
for the vale of the Newry river. But this river was also
the boundary of Uriel. Moreover, O'Donovan makes no

16 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

The

legend of
Evora
Bridge.

Causes
of his

success.

A legend of the St. Lawrence family, as old
as the Book of Howth,^ locates pons Ivori at
Howth, the ancient seat of the family, and here
on the Ordnance Survey Map may be seen the
name ' Evora Bridge '. But the legend will
not stand examination, and we may suspect
that Evora Bridge owes its name to the legend,
and lends it no support. The Irish name for
Newry was lubhar cinn tragha, ' yew-tree of
the head of the strand.' By shortening it to
lubhar, prefixing the article {an), and adding
a termination, the name Newry was evolved.
Gerald's form represents the Irish sound without
the article.

One would like to be able to trace more clearly
the steps by which this remarkable man secured
his position in Ulidia and dominated the whole
country; but Giraldus, who alone throws any
light on the subject, expressly tells us that
he handles the matter briefly and by way of

attempt to identify the admitted defeat apud Uriel, or to
trace in the pages of Giraldus the battle described in the
Annals of Inisfallen, 1180. The equations suggested above
seem substantially to reconcile the authorities. The last
two battles, in fact, took place in very nearly the same place,
but that apud Uriel was after a raid into Uriel and was
admittedly a bad defeat, while that apud pontem Ivori
might be characterized differently according to the sym-
pathies of the writers.

1 Book of Howth (Car. Cal.), p. 90. The district about
Howth and ^or a considerable distance to the north must
have been subdued many years before this battle.

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 17

episode, leaving to de Courcy's own writers to
tell of his great exploits.^ We may, however,
indicate some of the conditions which probably
aided him in accomplishing his purpose. In
the first place, we have only to glance at the Internal
Irish annals for the period to see that the
northern tribes, so far from being ready to
combine steadily against the invaders, were
incessantly fighting among themselves or with
their neighbours in Connaught and in Ulidia.
Thus the entries for the years 1177-80 are
mainly concerned with the internal disputes
of the subordinate tribes of Tir-owen. In 1181
we find the Cinel Connell inflicting a great
defeat on Connaught, in which ' were killed
sixteen sons of kings of Connaught and stark
slaughter of Connaught besides '. Still more
to the point, in the same year the Cinel Owen,
under their king, Donnell O'Loughlin, ' gained
a battle over the Ulidians and over Ui Tuirtri
and over Fir-Li around Rory Mac Donlevy and
Cumee O'Flynn,' who were hitherto John de
Courcy's chief opponents ; while again in the

1 It is not improbable that Giraldus here actually alludes
to some such work as was probably the original of those
passages in the Book of Howth which tell of the gestes of
John de Courcy, but in reading these stories as they have
come down to us we note the entire absence of the acute
observation, critical insight, and general moderation of
statement for which Giraldus, by comparison with other
writers of the time, is remarkable.

1226 u B

18 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

same year other tribes of the Cinel Owen ' took
away many thousands of cows ' from the same
territories.^ We may reasonably suspect that
these chieftains, after this treatment by their
neighbours, were ready to invoke the assistance
of de Courcy even at the price of submitting
to his rule. Indeed the first entry in the next
year (1182) goes far to prove the truth of this
supposition. It tells of a new hosting of Donnell
O'Loughlin to Dunbo in Dalriada ^ (a general
name including the same districts in the north
of Antrim), and of a battle there in which he was
met and defeated by the Foreigners (i. e. John
de Courcy's men). Furthermore, there is no
record of any subsequent fighting between the
Irish of Ulidia and John de Courcy, while on
two occasions Rory Mac Donlevy was joined
by the English on expeditions against Tir-owen
and to Armagh. We may fairly conclude that
there was no considerable displacement of the
Irish population, but that after the first severe
fighting the people settled down peaceably
under their new rulers. Secondly, John de

^ Ann. Ulster, Ann. Loch Ce, Four Masters.

2 Dunbo is now the name of a townland and parish on
the west side of the Bann, and according to 0' Donovan
Dalriada was bounded by that river. The point is im-
material for present purposes, as it is pretty plain that
Donnell O'Loughlin was proceeding against Dalriada, and
at one time, at any rate, the Fir-Li extended on both sides
of the Bann. See Book of Rights, p. 123, note m.

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 19

Courcy strengthened his position by marrying His
Affreca, daughter of Gottred, King of Man.^ mamage.
The Isle of Man was long connected with
Ulidia, and the Northmen still lingered in some
of the ports on the mainland. When in 1204
John de Courcy was driven out of Uladh,
Reginald, King of Man, assisted him, because
he was his brother-in-law.^ He may have
received assistance from the Manxmen before.
At any rate, by his alliance with the King of
Man, de Courcy did much to keep open com-
munication by sea with England and with
Dublin, and to secure his position generally.

Thirdly, he was a great builder of mote- His mote-
castles,^ and the motes dotted all over the
counties of Down and Antrim indicate, more
surely than any records which have survived,
the precise centres of the manors created by
him. Some few, indeed, we can positively
connect with the castles mentioned in our
scanty records, such as those at Downpatrick
and Castleskreen (already mentioned), Mount
Sandall near Coleraine, and one in Coleraine
itself. Others can be shown with more or less
probability to date from his time. Such are

1 According to the Annals of Inisf alien (MS. T. C. D.)
this marriage took place in 1180.

2 Chron. Manniae (Manx Soc, vol. xxii), a. 1204, 1205.

^ ' Ultoniam undique locis idoneis incastellavit ' : Gir.
Camb. V. 345.

B2

20 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

the so-called Crown Rath near Newry, the motes
at Antrim, Donaghadee, Holy wood, and Dromore,
and the castle sites of Castlereagh, Clough, and
others. The original castles at Carrickfergus,
Carlingford, and Dundrum were on rock sites,
and were probably built of stone from the first.
Support- Fourthly, John de Courcy found a strong
Church, supporter in the Church, of which he was a muni-
ficent benefactor. He introduced Benedictine
monks from the abbey of St. Werburgh in
Chester into the priory of St. Patrick,^ as he
renamed the church of the Holy Trinity at
Downpatrick. He confirmed the see of Down
in its ancient possessions, and added largely
thereto.^ He also introduced Benedictine monks,
from the priory of St. Andrew endowed by his
ancestors at Stoke Courcy, into his new founda-
tion, the priory of St. Andrew in the Ards,
County Down.^ He granted to the monks of

1 Rot. Pat., 41 Ed. Ill, pt. 2, m. 11, a,n inspeximusoi seven
charters. The monks replaced the secular canons, but the
church of Dowti was to be free from all subjection to the
church of Chester. Malachi III, Bishop of Down, con-
firmed the grant, he remaining ' guardian and abbot of the
black monks as in the church of Winchester or Coventry '.
See Dugdale, Mon. Angl. (ed. 1830), vi, 1124.

2 John de Courcy's gifts to the see of Down were con-
firmed by Hugh de Lacy, Earl of Ulster, and are enumerated
in an inspeximus, Rot. Pat., 16 Ed. Ill, pt. 2, m. 17. See
Reeves, EccL Ant., p. 164.

^ Dugdale, vi, 1123. This gift was confirmed by Pope
Innocent III, Papal Letters, vol. i, p. 17.

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 21

St. Bega of Coupland, also Benedictines, the
church of the island of Neddrum, now Mahee
island, and two-thirds of the island itself, the
remaining third being reserved to the see of
Down.^ He brought Cistercians from the abbey
of Furness in Lancashire to Inishcourcy, now
called Inch Abbey, near Downpatrick,^ to atone,
it is said, for having destroyed a Benedic-
tine monastery in the neighbourhood; and he
established Cruciferi or Crutched Friars in the
priory of St. John the Baptist at Downpatrick.^
He also endowed the house of St. Mary of
Carrickfergus to the use of canons of the Pre-
monstratensian order,* while his wife, Affreca,

1 Nine documents concerning Neddrum are summarized
in Reeves, Eccl. Ant., pp. 190-4, from a thirteenth-century
roll, Cotton MSS., Brit. Mus. See also Dugdale, vi, 1127.
Neddrum or Nendrum represents the Irish n-Oendruim,
where there was formerly a Celtic monastery, the last
abbot of which was ' burned in his own house ' : Four
Masters, 974. The first abbot was Mochaoi (ob. 496,
Four Masters), from whom the island was known as Inis
Mochaoi or Mahee island. John de Courcy's foundation
is ascribed by Bishop Reeves to the year 1178.

2 Inishcourcy is a peninsula opposite to Downpatrick
running into Strangford Lough. Its Irish name was Inis
Cumhscraidh. The foundation of the abbey is ascribed
to the year 1187 : Ann. St. Mary's Abbey, Chart., vol. ii,
p. 288.

^ Rot. Pat., 10 Ed. Ill, p. 2, m. 35, an inspeximits of
six charters.

* Royal Letters, no. 799; see Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i,
no. 1227.

22 THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER

in 1193 founded the Cistercian monastery De
Jugo Dei, the ruins of which are now known
as the Grey Abbey, in Lower Ards.^ He was
also a benefactor of St. Thomas's Abbey ' and
of Christ Church, Dublin.^
Not inter- Fifthly, and perhaps this was the real secret
^^^^^ of his success, he was let alone. Until the period

with.

preceding his final expulsion in 1205 he was not
interfered with either by king, justiciar, or
brother baron. Though there is no evidence
that he was ever created Earl of Ulster, he was
de facto what the monk Jocelin called him,
Princeps Ulidiae.* He practically exercised jura
regalia even more completely than the great
palatine lords of Leinster and Meath ; he had
a virtually unlimited jurisdiction, appointed
his own feudal officers, created barons, and
parcelled out the greater part of the territory
among them. Unfortunately we have no au-
thentic list of his barons,^ and no account of

1 Chron. Manniae, 1204 ; Ann. Laud MS., Chart. St.
Mary's, Dublin, vol. ii, p. 306.

2 Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 221.

3 Christ Church Deeds, no. 10 ; cf. Liber Niger Ch. Ch.,
no. 9. This deed should be dated 1182-6. Amauri de
Obda, one of the witnesses, is probably Almaric de St.
Lawrence of Howth, brother-in-law to John de Courcy.

4 Dedication to his Life of St. Patrick.

5 Sir John Davies in the Case of the County Palatine
of Wexford mentions two of these barons, ' the baron
Misset (a mistake for Bisset) and the baron Savage,' but
there were many more. Thus King John addressed his

THE CONQUEST OF ULSTER 23

his sub-infeudation, so that its extent is largely
a matter of inference.

He had officers of his household just like any
king or prince, and from his charters, several
of which are known to us, we can tell some of
their names. Thus it appears, from his charter
granting jurisdiction to the Prior of Down,
that Richard Fitz Robert was his seneschal,
Roger de Courcy of Chester was his constable,
and Adam his chamberlain.^ Other witnesses to
the same charter are William Savage, William
Hach' [Hacket], and William Saracen. In the
list of hostages required from John de Courcy
in 1204^ the sons of these six individuals are
named with three others, and we may be pretty
sure that the fathers were among John de
Courcy's most trusted vassals.

mandate ordering the arrest of John de Courcy as follows :
' Rex omnibus Baronibus de Ultoniae,' &c. : Pat. Roll, 6
John.

1 See inspeximus of this charter in Dugdale from Pat.
Roll, 41 Ed. Ill, p. 2, m. 11, These three officers witness
other charters of John de Courcy. The other witnesses to
this charter were WilMam and Henry Copland, WiUiam de
Curci, PhiUp de Hasting, Simon Passelew, Richard de Du[n]-
donenald (i.e. Dundouenald or Dundonald, where there was
an early castle now marked by a mote), and Reinard his
brother, Walter de Loga[n].

Another charter (Reg. St. Thomas's, p. 222) was witnessed
by Henry Purcell, constable, Roger Poer, marshal, and
Adam, chamberlain.

2 Rot. Pat., 6 John, p. 55 b.

CHAPTER XIII

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK
1177-85

To return to the year 1177. After the battle Synod

undGr

of Down, Cardinal Vivian proceeded to Dublin, Cardinal
where he convened a synod of the bishops and i}^;*"'
abbots of Ireland. At this synod, according to
Giraldus, he made a public declaration of the
king's title to Ireland and of the papal confirma-
tion thereof, and enjoined both clergy and laity,
under pain of excommunication, to be true to
their allegiance. Also, inasmuch as the Irish
were accustomed to store their provisions in
churches, he gave permission to the English
troops, on any expedition, when they could not
get food elsewhere, to take what they found
in the churches on paying a just price. ^ This
custom may seem at first sight curious and the
licence given improbable ; but there is indepen-

^ Gir. Camb. v. 345. The Four Masters enigmatically
state of this synod of the clergy that ' they enacted many
ordinances not [now] observed '. When Vivian landed in
England in July 1176 he was compelled to swear that he
would do nothing against the king : Gesta Hen., vol. i,
p. 118. The synod at DubUn is incidentally mentioned,
ibid., p. 161.

26 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

dent evidence of the custom, and the statement
throws light on the conduct of the Irish of
Connaught in the face of an Enghsh expedition
which took place soon afterwards in the same
year, and which indeed seems to have been the
immediate occasion for the licence. For this
expedition we have the independent accounts
of the Irish annals, which corroborate in a
Futile ex- remarkable way the account of Giraldus. It
into Con- appears that Murrough O' Conor, one of the sons
naught, ^f ^Yie King of Connaught, invited the English
' to destroy Connaught for evil towards his
father '. What the exact pretext was we do
not know. Possibly we have here only the first
example of those jealousies and dissensions
among the members of the 0' Conor family
which broke out again and again during the next
century and gave the English full opportunity
to interfere and dismember the province. But
as not only Fitz Audelin, but also Cardinal
Vivian, seem to have countenanced the expedi-
tion, we must suppose that some plausible case
was made out for an interference in the affairs
of Connaught, which certainly appears to have
been a violation of the recent treaty between
Henry and Rory.

With or without plausible grounds, however.
Miles de Cogan, who was constable of the
garrison of Dublin and custos of the city, with
a band of 540 men crossed the Shannon and.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 27

guided by Murrough 0' Conor, advanced as far
as Roscommon and Tuam. The men of Con-
naught, not daring to oppose the invaders in the
field, thwarted this expedition by the double-
edged device of creating desolation before it
throughout a large part of the province. They
' burned Tuam and the churches of the country
besides, for evil towards the Foreigners '.^
Giraldus explains this entry by his more ample
statement. ' The Connaught men,' he says,
' with their own hands set fire to their towns
and villages in every direction, and whatever
provisions they could not conceal in under-
ground chambers they burned together with the
churches ; and in order to bring scandal on
our people and draw down upon their foes
the vengeance of Heaven, they took down the
crucifixes and images of the saints and strewed
them on the plains before us.' ^ It seems,

1 Ann. Ulster, Ann. Loch Ce, 1177. The Annals of
Tigernach and the Dublin Annals of Innisfallen give
a detailed account of the places through which the English
passed, and of how they escaped defeat at the Tochar
mona Coinneadha (a causeway through a bog in the parish
of Templetogher, County Galway) owing to the guidance of
Murrough O'Conor.

2 Gir. Camb. v. 346. The statement that they bumed
all provisions ' quae hypogeis subterraneis abscondere non
poterant ', is interesting as apparently indicating that what
antiquaries call ' rath-caves ' or dry-stone chambers and
passages to be found underneath many of the raths or ring-
forts of the country, were at this time in use. It has been

28 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

indeed, that it was the custom of the Irish,
not only in Connaught but elsewhere, to store
their corn in churches in the winter, and this
custom enables us to understand how the
burning of their own churches operated as
* evil to the Foreigners ', and renders intelligible
the statement of Giraldus as to the licence
given by Cardinal Vivian. By these tactics
the Connaught men, with whatever ultimate loss
and hardship to themselves, gained their im-
mediate object. The English took no prey and
indeed barely escaped with their lives, and
Murrough 0' Conor was blinded by his father in
revenge for the expedition.

Henry now recalled William Fitz Audelin,
Miles de Cogan, and Robert Fitz Stephen. He
may have been displeased at the Connaught
expedition, but the grants which he soon after-
wards made at the Council of Oxford show
that his displeasure was not deep-seated. Fitz
Audelin had been in office for only about ten
months. At some time during this period, in
the presence of Laurence the archbishop and

absurdly taken to refer to crypts under the churches.
Most of these churches were probably of wood, and at any
rate contained no crypts.

The practice of drawing down the wrath of Heaven on
one's foes by strewing crucifixes, &c., on the ground was
observed by the Anglo-Norman Archbishop Cumin in his
quarrel with Hamo de Valognes, the justiciar, in 1197 :
Hoveden, iv, 29.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 29

Cardinal Vivian, he had founded, on the king's
behalf, a church dedicated to St. Thomas the Church
Martyr, just outside the western gate of Dublin, Thomas
and endowed it with a carucate of land there. ^ Martyr
This was the origin of the famous abbey of
St. Thomas, which was served by Augustinian
canons of the order of St. Victor, and soon
became endowed by Anglo-Norman settlers
from all parts of Ireland where they held
lands.

The Register of Deeds of the abbey is one of
our most important sources of information as
to the extent and progress of the Anglo-Norman
settlement up to near the close of the thirteenth
century. ' Its abbots were appointed subject to
the approval of the king, they became members
of his council in Ireland, peers of his parliament
there, and administered justice in the court of
the abbey.' The Liberty of Thomas-court sur-
vived the dissolution, and became the Liberty
of the Brabazons, earls of Meath, and the last
court-house building still exists to mark the spot
where the famous abbey stood. ^

1 The charter is transcribed by Leland (vol. i, p. 127)
from an ancient roll in the possession of the Earl of Meath.
It is witnessed by the bishops of Meath, Kildare, and
Waterford, and by some of the principal barons of Leinster,
and some of the citizens of Dublin. It was confirmed by
Henry, probably at the Council of Oxford in the same year.
See too, Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 2.

2 Joum. R. S. A. I. 1892, p. 41.

30 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

The One other ' remarkable deed ' is ascribed to

Jesu. William Fitz Audelin at this time. He caused
a most sacred relic, called the Bachal Isa, or
' Staff of Jesus ', to be transferred from Armagh
to Dublin.^ The possessor of this staff at
Armagh had been regarded as the true successor
of Patrick, and it was probably brought to
Dublin with the idea of assisting the cathedral
church of that city in its claim to supremacy.
It was used for centuries in Christ Church for
the taking of solemn oaths, but was burned
as an object of superstitious veneration at the
Reformation.^

Hugh de Lacy was now appointed ' pro-
curator general' of Ireland in place of William
Fitz Audelin. This new appointment appears
Council to have been made at the Council of Oxford in
1177, ' May 1177,^ when a number of appointments
were made in the Irish establishment and some
new and far-reaching grants were conferred.

1 Gir. Camb. v. 347.

2 Four Masters, anno 1537, and O'Donovan's note, p. 1446.
^ In the Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 161, it is said that Henry,

apparently while still at Windsor, ordered Hugh, Earl of
Chester, to go to Ireland to subdue it for Henry and his son
John ; but there is no indication anywhere that this Hugh
ever went to Ireland, and the whole passage reads like
a confused account of what was done at the Council of
Oxford, which is told immediately afterwards in a fuller
and more orderly fashion : ibid., pp. 162-5. The passage
is omitted by Roger of Howden.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 31

In the first place, Henry, with the authority
of the Pope, constituted his son John, then a boy John,
in the tenth year of his age, ' King of Ireland,' Hibemiae.
or perhaps we should say Dominus or Lord of
Ireland,^ that being the title which afterwards
appears on John's writs. Moreover, the title
Dominus Hibemiae appropriately expresses the
feudal and territorial relation which it was
desired to create, and accordingly Henry caused
the new donees to whom grants were made at
this council to do homage and take the oath of
fealty to John as well as to himself for their
lands. To these grants we must now turn.

First of all, he gave to Hugh de Lacy, by a new Grants of
charter, the whole of Meath for the service, as
is stated, of one hundred knights. This grant
must have been confirmatory of the previous
grant made at Wexford in 1172. The increased
service — one hundred knights instead of fifty —
may have been due to the fact that Hugh de

^ The distinction is an important one, but it is not, as is
sometimes supposed, that the title of Rex is higher in degree
than that of Dominus. The titles imphed distinct relations
and presupposed different ceremonies. The former title
is national, the latter territorial. Strictly speaking, a person
could not be Rex without having been elected and crowned,
and could not be Dominus without having received homage
and an oath of fealty from his vassal. Indeed from the
feudal point of view it might be more important to be
Dominus than Rex alone. Thus WiUiam the Marshal
refused to fight for his king (John) against his lord (Philip
Augustus) : Hist. Guill. le Marechal, 11. 13060-256.

32 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

Lacy was now appointed custos of the crown
lands of Dublin and of the northern part of
Leinster, now in the king's hand. In later times,
however, we find that Meath owed only fifty
services to the Crown ^ (or in money value £100),
exactly as stated in the Song of Dermot with
regard to the original grant, and as provided
in King John's confirmatory grant to Walter
de Lacy in 1208. In the next place, Henry
granted to Robert Fitz Stephen and Miles de

Cork. Cogan the kingdom of Cork from Cape St.
Brendan (Brandon Head in Kerry) to the river
(Blackwater) near Lismore, for the service of
sixty knights. From this grant was excepted
the city of Cork and the cantred of the Ostmen
of the city, which the king retained in his
own hands, giving the custody only to Fitz
Stephen and de Cogan.^ In the same way he

And granted the kingdom of Limerick (with the

exception of the city and one cantred [of the
Ostmen], which he retained in his own hands)
to Herbert Fitz Herbert, William, brother of
Earl Reginald of Cornwall, and Joel de la

1 See the Irish Exchequer Memoranda of the reign of
Edward I : Eng. Hist. Rev. 1903, vol. xviii, p. 505.

2 This charter is printed in Littleton's Hen. II (App. Ill
to vol. v) from Ware, and translated in Harris's Ware,
Antiquities, p. 194. Among the witnesses connected with
Ireland were Augustin, Bishop of Waterford, William Fitz
Audelin, Hugh de Lacy, Maurice de Prendergast, Hervey
de Montmorency, and Robert Fitz Stephen.

Limerick.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 33

Pomerai, for the service of sixty knights.
Later in the year, however, Henry granted the
kingdom of Limerick to PhiHp de Braose, as
the former grantees renounced the gift on the
ground that the territory had not yet been won,
and was not subject to the king.^

It is, of course, impossible to reconcile these
sweeping grants with our ideas of equitable
dealing ; but it is the business of those who
study historical actions to endeavour to under-
stand the point of view of the actors, rather
than to weigh their acts in modern scales of
equity. It seems probable that Henry was by
this time convinced that the Treaty of Windsor
was utterly unworkable. It was based, as we
have seen, on the hypothesis that Eory 0' Conor
was a real king, able to enforce his authority
over all Ireland outside the portions which Henry
retained in his direct dominion and in that of
his barons. But events had shown that in this
sense Bory was no king, at any rate outside
his own province, and hardly within it. The
conditions of the treaty could not possibly be
enforced. Peace could not be maintained under
it,, and the aggressive spirit of the Norman
barons was only too ready to take advantage of
the inevitable dissensions that broke out among
the Irish themselves. Henry may well have

1 Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 172 ; Roger Howden, vol. ii,
pp. 133-6.

1226 II 0

34 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

thought that the time had come to tear up this
futile treaty and devise a new and more hopeful
scheme of government. Besides, here was an
opportunity to provide a lordship for his
favourite son John. So John was made Dominus
Hiherniae, and the policy was adopted of par-
celling out his as yet unconquered territory
among trusted vassals as rapidly and as com-
pletely as might be, leaving it to them to conquer,
organize, and settle the lands thus granted to
them. A commencement was made with the
kingdoms of Cork and Limerick, or Desmond
and Thomond, which had been torn by the
recent struggle between the Kings of Connaught
and Thomond, and by the intestine quarrel
between the King of Desmond and his son.

It would have been more creditable, as well as
probably more effective, if Henry had come
himself with the armed forces of the Crown
to impose his dominion over the length and
breadth of Ireland, and to make a settlement
which, while inflicting the minimum of hardship
on Irish kinglets, might have introduced a better
security for order and peaceful progress than
any the Irish kinglets could offer. But Henry's
energies, great as they were, were fully em-
ployed in other parts of his vast dominions,
which extended from the North Sea to the
Pyrenees. Ireland was only an inconsiderable
fraction of these dominions, and accordingly

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 35

Henry adopted there the less exacting method
which had already been tried, with but partial
success it is true, in Wales, of leaving the
subjugation of the country in private hands.
And this suggests a sounder ground for con-
demning the method — it was only partially
successful in Ireland too.

Henry next appointed custodians of the lands Custo-
which were in his hand, including, of course, the Dublin,
great fief of Leinster, and named the places ^^^^^^^ '
where the feudal services in respect of these Water-

^ ford.

lands should be paid or performed. He gave
the custody of Wexford to William Fitz Audelin,
his dapifer, that of Waterford to Robert le Poer,
his marshal, and that of Dublin to Hugh de
Lacy. Further, he defined the lands that were
to be thenceforth appurtenant to each of these
cities, and in doing so he seems to have had
in view a further reduction of the late Earl
Richard's fief.

Thus to the service of Wexford, at this time Appor-
the caput of the lordship of Leinster, Henry of ser-
appears to have assigned only the following ^'^^^'
lands : Arklow, the lands comprised in the
present baronies which adjoin the eastern and
southern coasts of the County Wexford, the
baronies of Forth and Idrone in County Carlow,
the southern part of the County Kildare, to-
gether with Leix, and the districts left to the
O'Tooles in the inland parts of the County

C2

36 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

Wicklow.^ These places were presumably in-
tended to represent Strongbow's fief. To the
service of Waterford Henry assigned not only
all the land between the city and the Black-
water beyond Lismore,^ but also the whole of
Ossory, usually regarded as part of Leinster ;
while to the service of Dublin he assigned the
lands of Offelan, Offaly, and Kildare, as well as
Wicklow (i. e. the castle and lands held there-
with) and Meath. It is possible that this dis-
tribution of services was intended only as a
temporary arrangement, made for convenience,
while the fief of Leinster was in the king's hand
and Hugh de Lacy was custos of Dublin ; but
in view of the disputes and even warfare that
afterwards occurred when William Marshal suc-
ceeded to the fief of Leinster, it seems probable
that it was interpreted by John, if not intended

1 The scribe of the Gesta has blundered ov'er some of
the names, and the passage is corrupt in places, but, with
the exception of the tenementum Machtaloe (as to the position
of which I am uncertain), the districts above described are,
I think, alone included. For terra G. de Bisroharde see
Song of Dermot, 11. 3114-7 and note. Other less obvious
equations are, Fernregwinal, the Femegenal of the Song,
1. 3074 ; Druua (read Druna) : ui Drona, Idrone. Utmorthi
is not a man's name in the genitive, but represents ui
lluireadhaigh, usually anghcized Omurethy ; and Leghlin :
Leighlin was a separate tenement.

2 It will be remembered that by the Treaty of Windsor
the western boundary of the royal demesne at Waterford
was fixed so as to include Dungarvan only.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 37

by Henry, as defining the limits of that fief. It
may be regarded as some confirmation of this
view that Giraldus afterwards mentions with
some bitterness that Kildare and the adjacent
territory, which had been given by the earl to
Meiler Fitz Henry, was taken away from him,
and the rugged, woody, and hostile march-
lands of Leix given to him by way of exchange-
Also, if Offelan, Offaly, and Kildare were at
this time added to Meath, the increased service,
that of one hundred knights instead of fifty,
required, according to the Gesta, by the new
charter of Meath, would be intelligible.

The grantees of the kingdoms of Cork or The
Desmond, and Limerick or Thomond, set out in SkepS-
company in the month of November, each with ^^^^ ^"
a band of retainers, to take possession of their
new fiefs. We can readily understand that this
promised to be no easy matter. Rory 0' Conor,
indeed, was not likely to assert his overlordship
or interfere in any way, but the provincial kings,
Dermot McCarthy and Donnell O'Brien, might
be expected to have a word to say. We might
indeed have supposed that these princes would
have united with all their forces against their
common foe, but, so far was this from being
the case, that, according to an Irish authority,
Murtough, son of Donnell O'Brien, actually
assisted the foreigners against the Eang of
Desmond, the hereditary foe of his house, and

38 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

' accompanied Fitz Stephen and de Cogan to
Cork, where they committed many depreda-
tions '.^ This refers to the country about Cork,
as there was already a Norman governor,
Richard de Londres, in the city, who received
them with honour. We are also told that ' the
churches of the Plain of Munster were burnt by
Donnell O'Brien ' and the Norman leaders of
the expedition.- Thus, as in so many other
cases, it was by Irish aid that Dermot Mc
Carthy and the lesser chieftains of Desmond
were speedily overcome, and Fitz Stephen and
de Cogan were enabled to win for themselves,
not indeed the whole province at once, but
seven of its cantreds near the city of Cork.
These seven cantreds were then divided by lot
between the grantees, the three eastern ones
falling to Fitz Stephen, and the four western
ones to de Cogan.^
But de- Having thus arranged matters in Cork, the
attempt wholc party of adventurers marched to Limerick
imeric. ^^ place Philip de Braose in possession of his
fief. Donnell O'Brien was now no longer a
welcome ally, but a formidable opponent, and
' for dread of the Dal Cais (Donnell's tribes-

1 Ann. Inisfallen, Dublin MS., 1177.

2 Ibid., and Ann. Tigernach. The latter adds, ' and for
dread of the Dal Cais they (the Foreigners) returned without
(obtaining their) desire.' This seems to refer to the failure
to get possession of Limerick. ^ Gir. Camb. v. 348.

I

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 39

men),' we are told, the * foreigners returned
without obtaining their desire '. When they
reached the river in front of the town, they
saw the desperate citizens (presumably Ostmen)
once more setting fire to their buildings. Fitz
Stephen and de Cogan were ready to attempt
to cross the river and storm the town, or, if
de Braose preferred, to construct a fortified
camp for him on the opposite side of the river.
But Philip, though personally brave, yielding
to the pusillanimous advice of his friends, pre-
ferred to return safe home rather than to face
the perils of fortune in so remote and so hostile
a land.^ Twenty-four years later Philip's grant
was renewed to his unfortunate nephew, William
de Braose,^ and indeed before that time the city
and much of the territory south of the Shannon
was in the hands of the foreigners, but for the
moment, at any rate, Limerick was left un-
disturbed.

The adventurers in Desmond for a time fared
better. For the space of five years, we are told,
they jointly governed the province in peace,
restraining by their mild rule the impetuous
spirits of the young men on both sides.^ The

1 Gir. Camb. v. 349.

2 Rot. Chart., 2 John, m. 15 (p. 84 b).

3 In the Register of St. Thomas's Abbey (pp. 201, 209,
211, 220) will be found several charters which show that
Gregory, Bishop of Cork, and Reginald, Archdeacon (after-

40 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

families of the leaders became united in mar-
riage. Fitz Stephen, indeed, had no legitimate
children, but he had two illegitimate sons with
him. One of these, Meredith, died soon after
the arrival in Cork, but the other, Ralph, was
now married to Margarita, who seems to have
been the only child and presumptive heiress of
Miles de Cogan. Were it not for the illegitimacy
of Ralph Fitz Stephen the two houses were
likely to become one. Soon after the marriage
was effected, however, this prosperous beginning
was interrupted by a tragedy which nearly
resulted in the destruction of the Anglo-Norman
settlement in Desmond. Miles de Cogan, Ralph
Fitz Stephen, and five other knights went in
the direction of Lismore to meet the men of
Miles de Watcrford in a parley. While awaiting the
and^"^ advent of the latter they were treacherously
siain^^ attacked by Mac Tire, chieftain of Imokilly, and
1182. all slain.^ This massacre led to a general rising

wards bishop), acted at this time with Miles de Cogan and
Robert Fitz Stephen in endowing the new foundation of
St. Thomas's, Dubhn, with churches, lands, &c., in Cork
and the neighbourhood.

^ Gir. Camb. v. 350. The account in the Annals of
Loch Ce states that besides Miles de Cogan and ' the two
sons of Stephen ' there were slain ' Mac Sleimne, Thomas
Sugach ("the Merry"), Cenn Cuilenn (" Holly-head"), and
Remunn,' Who were meant by these names is unknown.
Remunn was certainly not Raymond le Gros (as stated in
the Annals of Clonmacnois), nor Raymond Fitz Hugh (as
supposed by the editors of the Annals of Loch Ce and of

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 41

of the Irish of Desmond against the EngUsh,
and Robert Fitz Stephen was hemmed in by his
enemies on all sides, in the town of Cork. Ray-
mond le Gros, however, on hearing of his uncle's
perilous condition, came to the rescue by sea
from Waterford with a small band. With his
usual success, he quickly dispersed the Irish and
brought peace once more to the district. Richard
de Cogan was now sent by the king to take the
place of his brother Miles,^ and in February 1183
Philip de Barry crossed over to Cork both to aid
Fitz Stephen and to undertake the governance
of Olethan, which had been granted to him by
his uncle. Along with Philip came his brother
Gerald, the historian, to whose observation and
inquiries we owe much of our knowledge of
recent and contemporary events.^

Ulster), for the latter witnessed a grant by Philip de Barry,
which was also witnessed by Gerald the historian, and must
be dated 1183 : Eeg. St. Thomas's, p. 205. Cenn Cuilinn
cannot be a corruption of Reimundus Kantitunensis, as
suggested by the editor of the Annals of Loch Ce, for,
according to Gerald, he was slain in Ossory c. 1185 : Gir.
Camb. V. 386.

1 i.e. as baiUff of the king's demesnes in the city of Cork
and its vicinity.

2 Gir. Camb., p. 351. ' Master Gerald the Archdeacon '
[of Brecknock] was one of the witnesses to a grant made
at this time by Philip de Barry of two carucates of land
adjoining the bridge of Dungarvan [close to the town of
Cork] and the site of a mill to the church of St. Thomas,
Dublin : Reg. St. Thomas's, p. 205.

42 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

We hear nothing more of Robert Fitz Stephen
and little more of Raymond le Gros. Probably
the former did not long survive the rising of
1182, though he was clearly alive when his
nephew Gerald first came to Ireland in 1183.^
When and how Raymond died is also quite
uncertain. He was alive when John came to
Ireland in 1185,^ and must have been dead
before the close of the century, when we find his
widow Basilia married to Geoffrey Fitz Robert.^
On the other hand, Raymond can hardly have
died before 1189, as otherwise his death would
surely be noticed in the Expugnatio, first pub-
lished when Henry II was alive, and probably
in that year.* Ware mentions a tradition that
Raymond was buried at the abbey of Molana,

1 Gerald says that his brother, PhiHp de Barry, came at
the end of February 1183 ' ad avunculi subventionem ', and
describes himself as coming in the same ship and 'tarn
avunculum quam fratrem plurimum consiho juvans '. There
is httle doubt that it was from Fitz Stephen he derived most
of the early story of the invasion. He does not expressly
record his uncle's death, but the allusion to Raymond ' in
hereditatem patruo succedens ' (which appears in the early
MSS.) implies it.

- ' Reimundus filius Willelmi ' is one of the witnesses to
John's confirmation charter to St. Mary's Abbey, tested at
Dublin. See Chartulary, vol. i, pp. 85, 86.

3 Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 112. Witnessed by John,
Bishop of Leighhn, who was consecrated in 1198 (Papal
Letters (Bliss), vol. i, p. 3) and died c. 1201 (Ware).

4 For the date of the first edition of the Expugnatio, see
Mr. Dimock's preface, pp. Ivi-lviii.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 43

situated on the Blackwater a little above
Youghal, and this tradition may have been well
founded, though both Raymond and his wife
bequeathed their bodies to be buried in the
abbey of St. Thomas, Dublin, of which they
were munificent benefactors.^ It is unfortunate
that, owing to the imperfection of our records,
the passing of Raymond, the most brilliant
commander and the most picturesque figure in
the army of the invaders, should be so obscure.

It is not possible to give a full account of the
early sub-infeudation of the ' kingdom of Cork ',
or even to be sure how far it was carried in the
lifetime of the original grantees. In the case Fitz
of Fitz Stephen, at any rate, it is pretty plain graStSs.^
that, besides making large grants out of the
three cantreds to the east of Cork originally,
with the acquiescence of Dermot Mac Carthy,
allotted to him, he made what we may call
' speculative grants ' of lands far removed from
these cantreds. Thus by his charter to Philip
de Barry he granted not only Olethan, but also
two other cantreds, to be determined by lot.^
What these two cantreds were ultimately decided
to be, we know from John's confirmatory charter

1 Reg. St. Thomas's, pp. 113 (c. 1184), 111 (c. 1200).

2 ' Olethan cum omnibus pertinentiis suis et duas alias
cantredas in regno Corehaiae prout sorte obvenient ei pro
servitio decem militum ' : Lodge, vol. i, p. 287, and Harris's
Ware, Antiq., p. 195.

44 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

to William de Barry, Philip's son, made in
1207.^ They were ' Muscherie Dunegan' and
'Killede', of which the former is roughly repre-
sented by the barony of Orrery and Kilmore,
County Cork, and the latter was comprised
in the barony of Glenquin, County Limerick.^
To Alexander, son of Maurice Fitz Gerald,^

1 Chart., 9 John, m.5{p. 172), Cal. Docs. Irel., vol. i,no.340.

2 Muscherie Dunegan appears as the deanery of 'Muxy-
donnegan ' or ' Muscridonegan ' in the ecclesiastical taxations
of 1302-6 (Cal. Docs. Irel., vol. v, pp. 277 and 314), and
the parishes enumerated are comprised in the barony of
Orrery and Kilmore with smaU adjacent parts of the
baronies of Duhallow and Fermoy. The position of
' Killede ' was long unknown, but that it is now represented
by KiUeedy in the barony of Glenquin, County Limerick,
appears from an inquisition post mortem on the lands of
John Fitz Thomas, 10 Ed. I, no. 21: 'Idem Johannes
tenuit unum cantredum apud KyUyde Hy Connil et castrum
in eodem comitatu (Limerick) de Johanne de Barry pro
duobus serviciis miUtum.' The ruins of a castle at Killeedy
are situated on an artificial mound near a bend of a stream.
The mound probably represents the original mote, and
is an indication that the grant was utiUzed probably before
the close of the twelfth century at latest. For the identifi-
cation of Killeedy, co. Limerick, with the Killede of Philip's
charter see the writer's paper, ' Notes on some Limerick
Castles,' Journ. R. S. A. I., 1909, p. 30.

^ Alexander Fitz Maurice granted the church, &c., 'de
villa mea que vocatur KilHe' [Killeigh in Imokilly], to the
Abbey of St. Thomas, Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 206.
The lands probably passed to Alexander's brother, Gerald,
who held the land of Oglassin in this district (Cal. Docs.
Irel., vol. i, nos. 586, 598), and from him to lois son Maurice,
who may be regarded as the founder of Youghal.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 45

Fitz Stephen seems to have made a grant
in Imokilly which was the origin of the Fitz
Gerald property here. Other landholders in
Fitz Stephen's time were, in Imokilly, Raymond
Mangunel,^ and Robert and Thomas des Auters
or de Altaribus ; ^ and in Fermoy, Alexander and
Raymond Fitz Hugh.^ Modern writers speak of
Alexander Fitz Hugh as de Rupe or Roche, but
in the charters he always appears as Alexander
filius Hugonis, and Giraldus calls his brother
Raymond 'Hugonides' and seems to include him
m the noble band of his own kinsmen.

As to the four cantreds assigned to Miles de De
Cogan on the western side of Cork we have no cantreds
direct information, but they perhaps included
the barony of Muskerry and a broad strip along
the coast between the harbours of Cork and
Glandore. In 1207 King John made large grants
within these districts to Richard de Cogan,
Philip de Prendergast, and Robert Fitz Martin,
to hold of the king in fee. Also a grant to
David de Rupe of the cantred of Rosselither

1 Raymond Mangunel held Cahirultan, in the parish of
Ballyoughtera, Imokilly ; Reg. St. Thomas, Dubhn, p. 216.

2 These brothers held Castleoor (Middleton) and Castle-
martyr in Imokilly (ibid., p. 319) ; lands which afterwards
were purchased by Richard de Carew (ibid., p. 200).

^ Alexander and Raymond Fitz Hugh held Kilcummer
in Fermoy (ibid., p. 217), and the former afterwards founded
the Priory de Ponte (Bridgetown) ; see the Charter in
Dugdale, vi. 1146, and Cal. Charter Rolls, ii, p. 341.

46 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

(Rosscarbery).^ These grants certainly seem
to deal with Miles de Cogan's cantreds and to
ignore the de Cogan seignory. Perhaps no
effective settlement had been made in them
during Miles' s lifetime, but in any case arbitrary
dealing of this sort with lands already granted
was eminently characteristic of King John.
Some grants by Miles de Cogan have been
preserved in the Register of St. Thomas's, but
with the exception of the grant of a knight's
fee in Cridarim {Crich Dairine, i. e. Rosscarbery ?)
they were all made on behalf of the king and
were concerned with houses and lands in or near
the town of Cork, i. e. within the crown lands
there. Among the witnesses to these charters were
the following (who were also probably grantees
of his lands) : Richard and Geoffrey de Cogan,
Richard de Pincheni, William de Bridesal, Roger
de Chirchehille, Lucas de Londiniis, who married
Leuki, daughter of Robert (p. 207), Roger of
Oxford, and Richard Fitz Godebert, who may have
been the knight of Pembrokeshire whom Dermot
brought back with him in 1167, and whose sons
probably took the name of de Rupe or Roche, as
their cousins in the County Wexford did.

What became of the seignory of the lands
included in the grant to Miles de Cogan and
Robert Fitz Stephen has never been elucidated.

1 Rot. Chart., 9 John, pp. 171-3, where 'Insovenach ' is
Inishannon, and its port is Kinsale Harbour.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 47

It was indeed the subject of a claim made nearly
four centuries later by Sir Peter Carew. How-
ever preposterous, after such a lapse of time,
was Sir Peter's claim, it seems certain that
throughout the greater part of the thirteenth
century a Carew and a de Courcy shared in equal
moieties the interests of the original grantees.^

Can we discover the heirs of the original
grantees ? We are expressly told that Ray-
mond le Gros succeeded to the inheritance of
his uncle, Robert Fitz Stephen, and obtained Fitz
the custody of the town of Cork.^ Raymond moiety" ^
died childless, and his heir was probably his
next brother, Odo de Carew. By what steps the

^ Thus in the roll of services due to the king in the different
counties of Ireland c. 1297-8 the total due from Cork is
61 1 services. Of these 30 were due from Robert de Carew
and the like number from Patrick Courcy, thus making up
the original 60 services. The remaining 1| services were
due from Gerald de Prendergast : Irish Exchequer Memo-
randa transcribed Eng. Hist. Rev., vol. xviii (1903), p. 504 ;
cf . Car. Cal. Misc., p. 232, and Cal. Docs. Irel. 1296, nos. 288,
473. A Patrick Courcy and Robert de Carew (predecessors
of the above ?) were among the magnates of Cork from
as early as 1221 : Cal. Docs. Irel., vol. i, nos. 1001, 2266.
In the inquisition on the lands of Gerald de Prendergast
in 1251 (Cal. Docs. Irel., vol. i, no. 3203) it was found
that he held of the king in capite Bellonar and Dufglas
(i.e. Beavor or Carrigaline and Douglas, south of the town
of Cork) by the service of two knights.

2 Gir. Camb. v. 350. If, as is generally supposed,
Robert Fitz Stephen was a bastard, Raymond's succession
to his inheritance must have been due to a fresh grant.

48 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

seignory passed from Raymond's heir to the
Robert de Carew who was tenant-in-chief in
1221 is obscure, but that it remained in the
family for more than a century seems certain.^
How the seignory was eventually lost to the
Carews is perhaps clearer to us than to those
who opposed Sir Peter Carew' s claim in the
latter part of the sixteenth century. An
attempted alienation without licence of the
cantred of Fermoy by Maurice de Carew, then
tenant-in-chief, was held in 1302 to work a for-
feiture, as contrary to the newly enacted Statute
of Quia Emptores, and David de Rupe (Roche),
who held the cantred under Maurice de Carew,
became tenant-in-chief. ^ Possibly at this time
the dominium was more burdensome than it
was worth. In the next generation Thomas
de Carew, son of Maurice, released to David
de Barry the manors of Olethan and Muscry-
donegan, and consequently the latter, in the
year 1336, became tenant-in-chief of the Crown. ^

1 From a confirmatory charter preserved in the Register
of St. Thomas's, p. 200, it would seem probable that about
1224 Richard de Carew held the seignory of Fitz Stephen's
moiety. Cf . for the date, charter, ibid., p. 213, and the con-
firmations by Marian O'Brien, Bishop of Cork, pp. 220-1.

2 See the Cal, Justiciary Rolls for 1302, pp. 383-5, where
the proceedings are reported. This David de Rupe was son
of Alexander, and grandson of David.

3 Irish Close RoUs, 32 Ed. Ill, no. 26. The father and
grandfather of this David de Barry were both named David.

THE OCCUPATION OF CORK 49

As to the moiety of Miles de Cogan, his De
heir was his daughter, Margarita de Cogan, the moiety.
tiewly-made widow of Ralph Fitz Stephen.^ She
may possibly have had an only daughter and
heiress, perhaps a posthumous child, by Ralph
Fitz Stephen, but, as we have seen, her claims
For the time appear to have been ignored. How
the seignory passed to the de Courcys, as it
seems to have done early in the thirteenth
century, has not been precisely ascertained.
Probably a de Courcy married a de Cogan
heiress. Lodge, indeed, states that the Patrick
de Courcy, who appears along with Robert de
Carew as a magnate in Cork in 1221, married
the daughter and heir of Miles de Cogan. ^ But
for such a marriage there is no actual authority.^

1 She was given by Robert Fitz Stephen, as her marriage
portion with his son, one half of Inismor, i.e. the Great
Island in Cork Harbour, and she gave to St. Thomas's the
church of CloenmedU there, i. e. Clonmel in Great Island,
not Clonmel Tipperary, as absurdly stated by the editor :
Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, pp. 226-7.

2 Vol. vi, p 146. The treatment in Lodge, however, of
the early pedigree of the barons of Kinsale does not inspire
confidence.

^ It appears, however, from the Pipe Rolls, that in 1212
Thomas Bloet owed 500 marks ' for having all the land
which belonged to Milo Cogan in Ireland with his niece
(or granddaughter ?) in marriage ' : Cal. Docs. Irel., vol. i,
nos. 422, 452. But this fine was still unpaid in 1227 (ibid.,
no. 1504), and in that year Kilmohanoc (now Kilmonoge) in
Kinalea, which had formerly belonged to Miles de Cogan
(Chart. St. Mary's, ii. 4), and appears to have been held by

1226 II D

50 THE OCCUPATION OF CORK

Thomas Bloet, was granted during pleasure to Richard de
Cogan (Cal. Docs. Irel., i, nos. 1537, 1646), and was subse-
quently treated as an escheat : ibid., ii, nos. 262, 390.
Meantime, in 1217, soon after the accession of Henry III,
Margery Cogan (presumablj^ the widow of Ralph FitzStephen)
offered 100 marks * to have the land of her inheritance in
Desmond ' ; Close Roll, 1 Hen. Ill, p. 297. This she seems
to have obtained, and we find ' Margarita filia Milonis
de Cogan ' at about this date making a large grant in
Rosselethry (Rosscarbery), and confirming her father's grant
of Kilmohanoc to St. Mary's Abbey, DubUn ; see Chartulary,
vol. ii, p. 4. It looks as if the de Cogan seignory, over-
ridden by John's grants of 1207, was, in part at least,
restored to Margarita on the accession of Henry III. At
this time she must have been at least fifty years of age ;
but she may have been long married to a de Courcy. It
was customary for heiresses to retain their maiden names.

CHAPTER XIY

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

1172-86

While John de Courcy was carving out
a lordship for himself in Ulster, and Robert
Eitz Stephen and Miles de Cogan were endea-
vouring to establish themselves in Munster,
Hugh de Lacy, the newly-appointed viceroy, Hugh de
was strengthening the position, both in Meath chief
and in Leinster, by building castles and by the ^^v^^'^^^-
wisdom and moderation of his rule. This re-
markable man, the fifth Baron Lacy by tenure,
was descended from Walter, the first baron, who
died in 1089. The family received their name
from their original seat at Lassy in the Vire
country in Normandy. The principal estates
of the Lacy family lay on the borders of Wales
at Ewias Lacy, Staunton Lacy, and Weobly.
Ludlow Castle also belonged to them.^ Hugh His
de Lacy is described by Giraldus ^ as a swarthy tion,
man with small black deep-set eyes, a flat nose,
an ugly scar on his right cheek caused by a burn,

1 Diet. Nat. Biog. In 1165-6 Hugh de Lacy held 58|
knights' fees and had nine tenants without knight service :
Eyton, Shropshire, vol. v, p. 253. 2 y, 354.

D 2

in:

52 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

a short neck, and a hairy, sinewy body. He was
short and ill-made in person, but in character
firm and resolute, and of French sobriety. He
was very attentive to his private affairs, and
in office a most vigilant public administrator.
Although much experienced in military matters,
he was not fortunate as a general. After his
wife's death he fell into loose moral ways. He
was very covetous, and immoderately ambitious
of honour and renown.
Not much Upon his first appointment, in April 1172, he
prior to ^^^ ^^^t remain many months in Ireland. He
seems to have visited the country again in the
early part of 1174, when he erected the mote-
castle of Trim, but he left before its destruction
by Rory 0' Conor in that year. Thenceforward
we can trace him in the entourage of the king
up to the Council of Oxford in 1177, and he
cannot have been long, if at all, in Ireland during
these years. ^ He had, however, already made
many grants of lands within his lordship.

1 Hugh de Lacy was at Canterbury on December 29,
1172 : Gir. Camb. vii. 69. In 1173 he was at Alen9on
in April, defending Verneuil in July, and at Caen in
December. He seems to have come to Ireland early in
1174 : Song of Dermot, 11. 3222-31 ; but he was at Rouen
in December. In 1175 he was at Valognes in April, at
Northampton in August, and at Feckenham in October.
In 1176 he was at Shrewsbury in January, and at Win-
chester in April ; and in 1177 he was at Reading in April,
and at Oxford in May : Eyton's Itin.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 53

During his tenure of office we hear of Uttle or His rule,
no fighting either in Meath or in Leinster. An
apparently unsuccessful attempt was made to
gain a footing at Clonmacnois, where, however,
the churches and bishop's houses were respected,
and a battle was fought between Art O'Melaghlin
and Melaghlin Beg, rival claimants to the king-
ship of Westmeath, in which the English joined
on the side of the former.^ Clearly Hugh de
Lacy was no mere filibuster, though he was
determined to hold with the strong hand and
bo rule the districts committed to his charge.
With this object he erected many castles, of
a type similar to the castles of Trim and Slane,
both in Meath and in Leinster. He made it his
first care, we are told, to invite back to peace
the rural inhabitants who had been violently
3xpelled from their territories — probably in
the course of the reprisals which followed on
Rory O'Conor's hosting of 1174 — and to restore
bo them their farms and pasture lands. His
next aim was to restrain the townsfolk and
compel them to obey the laws and submit to
governance. Thus he soon established peace
in the land, and indeed, by his liberal treatment

1 Ann. Tigernach, Four Masters, 1178. In the latter
contest Murtough, son of the Sinnagh (i.e. O'Caharny sur-
lamed the Fox), was slain. This is perhaps noteworthy,
IS it was at the instigation of ' the Sinnagh ' that Hugh de
Lacy was murdered in 1186.

54 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

and affability, so gained the hearts of the Irish
people — winning over even their chieftains to
his side — as to give rise to the suspicion that he
meditated renouncing his allegiance and usurping
the crown of Ireland for himself.^
ifugh That Henry was for some reason dissatisfied

super- with Hugh de Lacy appears from the fact that

seded. j^ ^^y jjgj ^^ ^^^^ jj.^^ j^.^ ^^^ custody of

Dublin and sent over in his place to that city
John (de Lacy), Constable of Chester, and Richard
de Pec, an itinerant justice. One reason given
for this change is that Hugh had married, accord-
ing to the custom of the country, the daughter of
the King of Connaught without Henry's licence.^
Henry was always suspicious of his Irish barons
and jealously watchful lest they should get too
powerful, and he may have thought that this
alliance with Rory O'Conor's daughter, like
Strongbow's marriage with Eva MacMurrough,
might lead to the acquisition of too great power.

^ Gir. Camib. v. 353. William of Newburgh also says
that Hugh de Lacy aspired to obtain the crown of Ireland
for himself, vol. 1, pp. 239-40. Early in 1179 some Irish-
men came to Windsor to complain of unjust treatment at
the hands of Hugh de Lacy and WiUiam Fitz Audelin :
Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 221.

2 Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 270. The marriage ' secundum
morem patriae ilhus ' was probably some sort of loose
union repudiated by the Anglican Church, perhaps 'a
Teltown marriage '. It took place in 1180 : Ann. Inis-
fallen (MS. T. CD.); of. Gir. Camb.'s account of Hugh
de Lacy's character.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 55

But that Hugh de Lacy had really any intention
of ' usurping the crown of Ireland ' is incon-
sistent with all we know of his character and
actions.

Before departing, however, Hugh de Lacy Castles
advised with the new governors as to the erection by him in
of several castles in Leinster, which we have ^^^°^*^'"-
already mentioned when treating of the sub-
infeudation of that lordship. One other castle is
expressly named as having been erected by him
a little earlier. This was the castrum Lechliniae,
or castle of Leighlin, and from the description
given it is very probable that its site is marked
by an important mote, called Burgage or Bally-
knockan mote, on the west bank of the Barrow,
about haK a mile below Leighlin bridge.^ It
appears that Henry had ordered that a fortress
should be erected here, but Robert le Poer, the
custos of Waterford, who, according to Gerald,
was wanting in energy and valour and utterly
unfit for border warfare, had failed to carry out
the royal command.^ A namesake now, but

^ Gir. Camb. v. 352 : ' Super nobilem Beruae fluvium
a latere Ossiriae trans Odronam in loco natura muni to
Lechliniae castrum erexit/

2 ' A quo Robertus Poer cui regio mandato injunctum id
fuerat ante defecerat,' ibid. This sentence follows that last
quoted, and has, I think, been misunderstood. According
to the Annals of InisfaUen (DubHn copy), Robert Poer
was killed in 1178 in an expedition against the O'Tooles of
Hy Muireadhaigh (South Kildare). He was succeeded in

56 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

a very dififerent man, Roger le Poer, who had
fought courageously under de Courcy at the
battle of Do^vn, was placed at the head of the
garrison here, and gained great renown until he
and many of his followers were cut off in Ossory
about the year 1188. Of this mishap we have
no details, but it is said to have led to a wide-
spread conspiracy of the Irish against the English,
and to the destruction of many castles.^
Death of On November 14, 1180, Laurence O'Toole, the
bishop last Celtic archbishop of Dublin, died.^ Since
Laurence, jjenry's visit to Ireland, if not before, Lau-
rence O'Toole, in common with the Irish clergy
generally, seems to have loyally acquiesced in
the new regime and cordially co-operated with
the new rulers. Verifiable facts concerning him
during this period are few. He was an assenting

Waterford by William Poer : Gir. Camb. v. 354. In the
Pipe Roll, 25 Hen. II (1178-9), p. 67, is the entry ' pro cc.
summis frumenti missis Roberto Poherio in Hibemia
XX. 1. per breve regis '. Com was sent in the same year to
Raymond Fitz William and to the officers of Hugh de Lacy.

1 Gir. Camb. v. 341, 354, 387. The date 1188 is from
the Annals of Inisfallen, DubMn MS.

2 That this was the true date appears from a comparison
of the statement in his Life, by Surius, as to the day of his
death, Friday, November 14, with the year 1180 as given
in the Irish annals, though his death is referred to earh- in
1181 in Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 270. See Ussher's Sj'lloge,
note to no. 48. Probably the date in the Gesta, post
Purificationem S. M., 1181, should really refer only to the
seizure of the archbishopric into the king's hand, to which
the account of the death of the archbishop is introductory.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 57

party at the Council of Cashel in 1172. He
witnessed Strongbow's grant of the abbacy of
Glendalough to ' Thomas his beloved cleric '.
He saw the commencement of the building of
the new and stately fane of the cathedral church
of the Holy Trinity in Dublin. In it he buried
Kichard of Striguil, and to it, when Hugh de
Lacy was constable, probably in 1178, he con-
firmed all its numerous possessions.-^ He was
present at the Council at Windsor on the
6th of October 1175, and witnessed the treaty
there made between Henry and Rory 0' Conor. ^
In March 1179 he attended the general council
of Lateran, when he was accompanied by
Catholicus and five or six Irish bishops. On
their way through England they obtained leave
from Henry to go to Rome, on their solemnly
swearing that they would seek nothing to the
detriment of the king or his kingdom.^ Giraldus

1 Chartae Privil. et Immun., p. 2 ; Cal. Liber Albus,
Ch. Ch., no. 42. This deed must be subsequent to 1173,
when the predecessor of Eugenius, Bishop of Clonard, died
(Ann. Ulster), and therefore subsequent to Hugh de Lacy's
appointment as custos of Dubhn in May 1177. It should
probably be dated May 14, 1178, before the archbishop
went to the Lateran Council. It shows that the churches
of St. Michan, St. Michael, St. John the EvangeUst, St.
Bridget, and St. Paul, were all then in existence. Tor-
quellus, the archdeacon, and some of the attesting presbyters
have Scandinavian names.

2 Gesta Hen. i. 102 ; Hoveden, ii. 83.

^ Gesta Hen. i. 221. The prelates were assisted in the

58 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

states that Henry was afterwards displeased
with Archbishop Laurence on the ground that
he had obtained some privileges at the Lateran
Council inconsistent with the royal dignity, and
that consequently Henry detained the Arch-
bishop both in England and in France, and that
at length he died at Eu in Normandy.^ The
archbishop did indeed bring back two privilegia
from Pope Alexander III : one confirming to
him and his successors the rights and posses-
sions (enumerated at length) of the see of Dublin,
with metropolitan jurisdiction over the dioceses
of Glendalough, Kildare, Ferns, Leighlin, and
Ossory ; the other making a like confirmation
to Malchus, Bishop of Glendalough, and his
successors, in each case threatening spiritual
penalties on anybody interfering with those
possessions.^ It is possible that Henry had
already entertained the design of uniting the
sees of Dublin and Glendalough, and in any case
he may have resented this interference of the
Pope. But the English Chroniclers, who had
better means of knowing the facts, say nothing
about Henry's displeasure. They state that
the archbishop crossed the sea to the king in

passage by the CrowTi : Pipe Roll, 25 Hen. II, and the
sherififs of London and Middlesex redeemed some pledges
for Archbishop Laurence and for Brictius, Bishop of
Limerick : ibid. To travel from Dublin to Rome in the
twelfth century was an expensive matter.

1 Gir. Camb. v. 357. ^ Crede Mihi, nos. i and iii.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 59

Normandy, bringing with him the son of Rory
0' Conor as a hostage for the due performance
of the treaty to pay tribute, and that, having
obtained leave to return to his country, the
archbishop got as far as Eu, where he was
detained by illness and after a few days died.*
It would seem, then, that the archbishop had
returned to Ireland after attending the Lateran
Council, and that it was on the occasion of
a subsequent mission to Normandy ^ with the
hostage of the King of Connaught that he died.

According to aU testimony, Laurence 0' Toole
was a just and good man and had the best interest
of his country at heart. Forty-six years after
his death he was canonized as a saint. But, as
has been weU remarked, in those times of transi-
tion statesmen and not saints were needed,^
and the next three archbishops belonged to the
former category.

Henry at once sent over his officers to take
possession of the temporalities of the see of
Dublin. This was early in 1181, when the new
custodians of Dublin were appointed.* In Sep-
tember Henry's nominee, John Cumin (or Comyn,
as the name came to be written), a monk of

1 Gesta Hen. i. 270 ; Hoveden, ii. 253.

2 Henry did not leave England for Normandy until
April 1180 : Eyton's Itin., p. 232.

^ Stokes, Anglo-Norman Church, p. 199.
4 Gesta Hen. i. 280,

60 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

John the abbey of Evesham in Worcestershire, was
elected elected by the bishops and clergy of England and
bishop of some of the clergy of the metropolitan church
Dubhn. Qf Dublin who had come to England for the
purpose. He had at the time only deacon's
orders, and was an ambassador, a judge, an
officer of the court, rather than a pastor.^ On
March 21, 1182, he was consecrated Archbishop
of Dublin by Pope Lucius III at Velletri, and
about the same time he obtained from the
Pope a new privilege confirming to him and his
successors the possessions, rights, and metro-
politan jurisdiction of the see.^ This document
does not, like its predecessor, give a long list
of Irish names denoting the churches, vills,
and possessions of the see. In the phraseology
of Norman law it mentions only the manor of
Swords, the vill of Lusk, and the Great Vill

1 In 1164 John Com}^! or Cumin was ambassador at the
court of the Emperor Frederic. In 1166-7 he was at
Rome wdth reference to the dispute -with Becket (by whom
he was afterwards excommunicated), and again in December
1170, at the time of Becket's murder. In 1177 he was sent
as ambassador to Spain. We find him repeatedly acting
as a justice in eyre and amongst the king's entourage ; see
Eyton's Itin. of Hen. II. It is expressly stated in the Gesta
Henrici (vol. i, p. 287) that John Cumin was honourably
received by the Pope, and ' ab eodem factus est cardinalis,
ut gratius imponeret ei summus Pontifex munus ordinationis
et consecrationis '. So Giraldus was not alone, as Dimock
thought, in calling Cumin a ' presbyter cardinalis ' : Gir.
Camb., p. 358, n. 2 Crede Mihi, no. ii.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 61

(Finglas or Tallaght ?), and lumps the rest in
general terms. It is noteworthy that it speaks of
the see of Wexford, and not of Ferns, the old Celtic
seat of the bishopric, and terms the see of Glenda-
lough, Insularum Episcopatus. But historically its
most important provision was that which forbade
any archbishop or bishop from holding synods,
hearing causes, or transacting any ecclesiastical
business in the diocese without the assent of the
Archbishop of Dublin — a provision which led to a
lengthened dispute with the Primate of Armagh.
John Cumin's tenure of the see was remarkable
for many changes in the direction of promoting
its temporal power and welfare. He was in- Union of
strumental in uniting with it the see of Glenda- of ^DubUn
lough, including ultimately the rich lands of the ^"f^^^^"'
abbey, which were distinct from those of the
bishopric. At the time of the S3niod of Kells
(1152) Dublin seems to have been regarded as
within the diocese of Glendalough, but there
were two bishops in the diocese, the Celtic
bishop of Glendalough and the bishop of the
Ostmen of Dublin. At that synod, however.
Cardinal Papiro, the papal legate, gave one of
the four palls to Dublin, ' as being most fitted
for a metropolitan city,' and probably as being
already in connexion with Rome, and made
a division of the diocese. Even at the coming
of the Normans, however, all the endowments
of the archiepiscopal see were in the near neigh-

62 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

bourhood of Dublin. Glendalough was a purely
Celtic monastery, in which the abbot was a more
important personage than the bishop, though
both bishopric and abbacy were extensively
endowed. The absorption of the bishopric and
rich abbatial possessions of Glendalough into
the see of Dublin was an object early aimed at
by the Anglo-Norman rulers, but it was not fully
attained until after the death of William Piro,
Bishop of Glendalough, in 1214.^ Even before the
union was completed, however, the archbishop
became the largest landholder in the neighbour-
hood of Dublin, and, apart from his prerogatives
as a prelate, exercised in his demesne lands all
the rights and jurisdiction of a feudal baron.
The col- Archbishop Cumin constituted the ancient
clSxch parochial church of St. Patrick, which stood
Pah-ick outside the walls of Dublin, a prebendal church,
and in it created ' a college of clerics of approved
life and learning, who should afford by their
honest conversation an example of living for all,
and by their learning an instruction to the
illiterate '.^ This collegiate church he endowed
out of the possessions of the see, and assigned
to it thirteen churches, which became the

^ See Note appended to this chapter.

2 gee the foundation charter in Mason's History of St.
Patrick's, Appendix I. It must be dated in or prior to
1191, when it was confirmed by a Bull of Pope Celestine III :
ibid., App. II.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 63

original prebends of the new college.^ He made
no change with regard to the church of the
Holy Trinity, which still remained the sole
cathedral church with a prior and monastic
chapter, and it was not until the year 1219
that Cumin's successor, Archbishop Henry de
Londres, by a new charter ^ creating a dean
and chapter, raised the collegiate church of
St. Patrick to the rank of a cathedral. About it after-
the close of the twelfth century monastic becomes
chapters were out of favour with many English ^^t*^^^
bishops, and there was a movement to substitute
secular canons, over whom the bishops would
have more control. Hence the raising of St.
Patrick's to the rank of cathedral, and hence
the anomaly of two cathedral churches in the
same diocese. The co-existence of two cathe-
drals in Dublin, however, led, as might be
expected, to disputes as to precedence, rights,
and jurisdiction, which were not finally arranged
until the year 1300.^ Archbishop Cumin is said

1 The names of the original prebends are given in Celes-
tine's Bull. They seem to have been, Swords, Clonmethan,
Ireland's Eye (afterwards Howth), Finglas, Clondalldn,
Imelach (Tavelach, Tallaght ?), Killesantan, Stahelach
(Stahney, Taney ?), Donnachimelecha (now Burgage),
Stagonil (included in Powerscourt), St. Nicholas of Dublin,
Ballymore (Ballymore Eustace), Donaghmore (Yago).

2 Mason's Hist, of St. Patrick's, App. IV.

^ See the Pads compositio in Mason's Hist, of St. Patrick's,
App. VI.

64 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

to have demolished the old parochial church
of St. Patrick, and to have built for his new
foundation a new edifice which was dedicated
on St. Patrick's Day, 1191. The existing fabric,
however, a fine example of Early English, belongs
to a somewhat later date.^ Like Christ Church,
it has been recently restored and provided with
suitable surroundings by the munificence of a
family of which Dublin may well be proud.
John Cumin is also believed to have built the
The palace of St. Sepulchre, close to his collegiate

of St. church, as an archiepiscopal residence. This

Sepulchre, i , i j. £ ^ • j • • •

^ became the seat oi his adjonnng manor or

liberty, as it was called, of St. Sepulchre, wherein
the archbishops of Dublin exercised jurisdic-
tion up to recent times. The manor originally
embraced the parishes of St. Kevin (now in-
cluded in St. Peter's) and St. Nicholas Without.^
The former residence of the archbishops was
close to the church of the Holy Trinity,^ but
Cumin appears to have given this up to the

1 In 1225 protection was granted for four years for
the preachers of the fabric of the church of St. Patrick,
DubHn, going through Ireland to beg alms for that
fabric : Rot. Pat., 9 Hen. Ill, Cal. no. 1241. This
probably affords an indication of the date of the existing
building.

2 -por an account of the Manor of St. Sepulchre in the
fourteenth century see papers by Mr. James Mills, Journ.
R.S. A. I., 1889 and 1890.

3 Qal. Liber Niger, Ch. Ch., no. 140.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 65

^rior and canons for their offices.^ Li moving
jhe archiepiscopal residence from beside the
cathedral to the vicinity of his new collegiate
ihurch, Cumin was escaping from the jurisdic-
bion of the civil and military authorities, with
whom at one time he was in bitter conflict, and
making his residence the caput of a liberty of
his own.

Hugh de Lacy was not long under the cloud Hugh
of the royal displeasure, and in the winter of again''
1181-2 he was again entrusted with the govern- Qovernor.
nient of the country. This time a certain cleric,
called Robert of Shrewsbury, was joined in com-
mission with him as coadjutor and councillor,
and a witness of his actions on the king's behalf.
During the next three years he continued the
work of castle-building, and we can trace the
sites of his castles by the motes or mounds of
earth that still remain at the places indicated
in nearly every case. One of these was at
Timahoe in Leix, marking an advance, which
was perhaps not very permanent, in a hilly
district in Queen's County. The land here had
lately been given to Meiler Fitz Henry as a recom-
pense for some land which he claimed about
Kildare, but it was yet to be conquered. At
the same time Hugh de Lacy gave his niece in

^ Cumin gave to the prior and canons ' aream curie sue
ad oificinas suas edificandas ' : Chartae, &c., p. 10. This
probably included the old archiepiscopal residence.

1226 II E

1184.

66 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

marriage to Meiler/ but though some twenty-
four years later we hear of Meiler's son, it would
seem that he was not the offspring of this
marriage, as Giraldus, in the so-called preface
to his second edition of the Expugnatio, written
about the year 1210, expressly says that Meiler
had no legitimate issue.^ Other castles were
built in the valley of the Barrow and in Hugh
de Lacy's own lordship, especially in Westmeath,
where the castles of Clonard, Killare,^ Delvin,
and others were now erected.
Finally But in the summer of 1184 Henry's inveterate

seded, distrust of Hugh de Lacy, combined with his
inordinate desire for the aggrandizement of
the most worthless of his sons, led to Hugh's
final supersession and to a new scheme for the
government of Ireland. To this scheme, and
to John's visit to Ireland in 1185 as Dominus
Hiberniae, we shall recur in chapter xvi.

Hugh de Lacy witnessed, as constable, John's
Dublin Charter of 1185,* and was with John at

1 Gir. Camb. v. 356.

2 Ibid. V. 409. The writer of the Histoire de Guil-
laume le Marechal says of Meiler (1. 14134), il n'aveit nul
certein eir, adding niistakenly, Quer feme esposee n'out
unques.

^ The castle of Killare [Cell-fair) was erected in 1184 :
Ann. Ulster, Ann. Loch Ce. These annals also state
that Art O'MelaghHn was killed treacherously by Dermot
O'Brien at the instigation of the Foreigners, and that
Melaghlin Beg took the kingship in his stead.

4 Hist, and Mun. Docs, of Ireland (Gilbert), p. 49.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 67

Ardfinan,^ but he was probably one of those
who, we are told, disgusted with the insolence
of the new-comers and the turn which affairs
had taken, kept silent in the background and
awaited the issue of events.^ At any rate, after
John's departure he was out of favour with
the king. By one chronicler he is said to
have disregarded the king's order to return,^
given possibly in consequence of some report
from John. Indeed, Irish annals, not, how-
ever, a good authority on such a point, state
that John, on his return to England, com-
plained that Hugh de Lacy had prevented the
Irish kings from sending him either tribute or
hostages. However this may have been, it is
probable that he afforded the new government
little or no assistance. In 1185, indeed, his
lordship of Meath was invaded by the Cinel
Owen under their chieftain, but they were
repulsed by William le Petit, one of Hugh de
Lucy's principal feudatories.* In July 1186,
however, Hugh de Lacy's career was abruptly His

murder,

closed. He had built a castle within the pre- ii86.
cincts of an old Columban monastery at Durrow,
near the borders of Westmeath (in the modern

^ Black Book of Limerick (Mac Caffrey), p. 103.

2 Gir. Camb. V. 391.

3 William of Newburgh, vol. i, p. 240.

* Gir. Camb. v. 386. Melaghlin, son of Murtough
O'Loughlin, was slain by the foreigners, probably in this
raid : Ann. Ulster, 1185.

E 2

68 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

King's County), and, according to the oldest
account, came out to look at it, when a youth
with the curious name, Gilla gan-inathair ^
O'Meyey, suddenly cut off his head with one
blow of a battle-axe which he had concealed
about his person, and head and body both fell
into the castle-ditch. The murderer then fled
to his foster-father O'Caharny, called an Sinnach
or ' the Fox ', the chief of Teffia, at whose
instigation the deed was done.^
His dis- When Henry heard the news that a certain
Court. Irishman had cut off Hugh de Lacy's head he
is said to have rejoiced thereat,^ for Hugh had
in many ways displeased and disobeyed him.
We have seen that Henry w^as angry with him
for marrying Rory 0' Conor's daughter, and
was jealous of his great power and popularity.
It was even rumoured that he aimed at making
himself an independent king. He was, indeed,
probably regarded by the Irish, unfamiliar with
feudal relationships, as a king, and some of the
Irish annals speak of him as such.* John and

^ Gilla gan-inathair, ' the lad without bowels,' a sobriquet
perhaps alluding to the extreme sHmness which enabled
him to outstrip his pursuers. ^ Ann. Loch Ce, 1186,

^ William of Newburgh, vol. i, p. 240.

4 Ann. Loch Ce, 1185 : ' For it was Hugh de Lacy that
was King of Erinn when the son of the King of the Saxons
came.' And again, ibid. 1186, when recording his death,
' for he was King of Meath and Breffny and Uriel, and it
was to him the tribute of Connaught was paid.' The Four

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 69

his followers may have given support to the
rumour to hide their own utter discomfiture.
But it is very unlikely that Hugh had any
aspirations inconsistent with his loyalty to
Henry or his position as a tenant of the Crown.

Hugh de Lacy was not a Geraldine. Never- His
theless, of all the leaders portrayed in Gerald's misfor-
pages, with the possible exception of Richard irXnd
of Striguil, he appears to have been the best
equipped for the work of transformation taken
in hand, and to have had just the qualities
required at that moment for ruling Ireland
and bringing peace and prosperity to the land.
A strong, provident man, who took the neces-
sary steps to make Norman rule effective, and
gradually to supplant the antiquated clan system
by an organization more fitted to preserve peace
and promote progress ; but one who at the same
time did not despise the native Irish, but did
his best to win their confidence and reconcile
them to the new order of things. Like Strong-
bow, he had married an Irish wife and thrown
in his fortunes with Ireland. He had made
enemies, no doubt, among the chieftains whose
power he had curtailed, but he was popular
among the people, and his very popularity had
aroused the suspicions of the English king. So
far as we can see, the battle-axe of O'Meyey

Masters in each case alter the expression, but probably on
their own authority.

remains.

70 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

struck a bad blow for Ireland, and not only for
the English colony, when it tumbled Hugh de
Lacy's head into the castle-ditch at Durrow.
His The subsequent history of Hugh de Lacy's

remains is curious. In 1195 Matthew, Archbishop
of Cashel and papal legate, and John Cumin,
Archbishop of Dublin, removed the body of
Hugh de Lacy from the Irish territory, probably
at Durrow, where it had been buried, and
solemnly interred it at the Cistercian monastery
of Bective in Meath, but his head for some reason
was either then or at some previous time
deposited in the monastery of St. Thomas in
Dublin.* A lengthened dispute arose between
these two houses for the possession of the com-
plete remains, which, after an appeal to the Pope,
was finally settled in the year 1 205 by a conclave of
archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors, and other dis-
creet and venerable persons, in favour of the canons
of St. Thomas.^ Hugh de Lacy, whatever his merits
may have been, was not recognized as a saint, and
it appears from further documents that the real
dispute was not about his relics, but concerned
certain lands which had been conferred along with
his body upon the monastery of Bective.^

1 Grace's Annals, 1195; Annals, Laud MS., Chart.
St. Mary's Abbey, Dublin, vol. ii, p. 307.

2 Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 348.
2 Ibid., pp. 350, 352. The last document is wrongly

dated 1240, or the bishop's name is \^Tongly given. Simon
Rochford, Bishop of Meath, died in 1224.

NOTE

THE GRADUAL ABSORPTION OF THE SEE
OF GLENDALOUGH

The principal steps by which the bishopric and
the abbatial lands of Glendalough were absorbed
in the see of Dublin appear to have been as
follows : —

In 1185 John 'son of the king', when in
Ireland, purported to effect the union of the
sees "pro raritate populi et 'paupertate ecclesie
Duhlinensis} This grant clearly met with
opposition and was inoperative. In 1192 John
' earl of Mortain and lord of Ireland ', while
confirming the abbacy of Glendalough and its
lands to Abbot Thomas,^ again granted the
bishopric to the Archbishop of Dublin, ' so that
when the cathedral church should fall vacant
the archbishop should take the bishopric into
his hand until he should provide a pastor for it,
and that the Bishop of Glendalough should be
chaplain and vicar to the Archbishop of Dublin.' '
John also gave to the archbishop (Cumin) and
his successors the half-cantred of the abbey-
lands of Glendalough which was next to the
archbishop's castle of Ballymore (now Ballymore
Eustace),^ and the land of Coillacht in haroniam.^

1 Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 4. Crede Midi, no. xxiv.

2 Chartae, &c., p. 6. Crede Mihi, no. xxxii.
^ Chartae, &e., p. 6. Crede Mihi, no. xH.

4 Ibid., no. xxvi, . ^ Ibid., no. xxvii.

72 HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH

Coillacht was a forest region which appears
to have extended from the mountains about
the upper basin of the river Doddagh to near
Tallaght.^ Later, in the reign of Richard I,
John appears to have granted the whole abbacy
of Glendalough to the archbishop, as a grant
by him to this effect was confirmed by Matthew
O'Heyney, Archbishop of Cashel and papal
legate, who invoked ' the wrath of Almighty
God and of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul
if any one should presume to assail this con-
firmation '." Nevertheless, Pope Innocent III
in 1199, by a Bull, took the church of SS. Peter
and Paul at Glendalough, with all the abbey-
lands (enumerating them), under his protection,
adding a similar comminatory clause.^ Perhaps
in consequence of the Pope's interference. King
John in 1200 granted to Thomas, Abbot of
Glendalough, for his life, forty carucates of the
abbatial lands,^ In 1213 John granted to Henry,
Archbishop of Dublin, both the bishopric and
the abbey of Glendalough, saving to Abbot
Thomas during his life half a cantred to hold
of the archbishop.^ William Piro, the last
recognized Bishop of Glendalough, died in 1214.
Probably Abbot Thomas died about the same
time. At any rate, in 1215, Innocent III, acting
on the alleged intentions of Cardinal Papiro in
1152, that the two sees should be united on
the death of the then Bishop of Glendalough,
confirmed the transference of the bishopric of
Glendalough to the Archbishop of Dublin.^ The
papal sanction to the absorption of Glendalough
in the see of Dublin, which was confirmed in

^ Liber Niger Alani, p. 259. 2 Chaxtae, &c., p. 10.

3 Ibid., p. 11. 4 Rot. Chart., 2 John, p. 78 b.

5 Ibid., 15 John, p. 194 b. ^ Chartae, &c., p. 15.

HUGH DE LACY, LORD OF MEATH 73

1216 by Honorius III/ appears to have been
obtained through the personal exertions of
Archbishop Henry, who went on an embassy
from King John to Kome,^ and who appears
to have been armed by a testimonium from
FeHx O'Ruadhan, Archbishop of Tuam, and
his suffragans, as to the intentions of Cardinal
Papiro. This document, which reads Hke a piece
of special pleading, ends with the following
remarkable statement : ' The church in the
mountains (i.e. the cathedral of Glendalough)
was held in great reverence from the earliest
times on account of St. Keywvyn, who lived
as hermit there, but for nearly forty years it has
become so deserted and desolate as to be used
as a den for robbers, and more homicides are
committed there than in any part of Ireland.' ^
As part of the bargain with the Pope, a hos-
pital for pilgrims to the shrine of St. James
of Compostella, the patron saint of lepers, was
founded by Archbishop Henry near the place
of embarkation on the Stein at Dublin, and
he endowed it partly out of the lands of the
see of Glendalough.* The spot appears to be
marked on Sir William Petty's map of the
half -barony of Rathdown as ' Lowzy (i.e. Lazar)
Hill '.^ Thus ended the ancient Celtic bishopric
of Glendalough, eaten up by its more stalwart
Dano-Norman rival. When the power of the
latter waxed faint in the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries there was, however, an unofficial
revival of Irish bishops at Glendalough.

1 Chartae, &c., p. 16. 2 ibid., p. 18.

3 Cal. Christ Church Deeds, no. 20.

^ Chartae, &c., as above, p. 18.

5 See Halliday's Scandinavian Dublin, map facing p. 151.

CHAPTER XV

THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

At the time of Hugh de Lacy's death, in 1186,
the lordship of Meath ' from the Shannon to the
sea was full of castles and of Foreigners '.^ We
can in general fix the sites of these castles by
the motes which in nearly every case remain.
There are upwards of sixty motes, big and little,
within the lordship of Meath. They were not,
however, all erected within Hugh de Lacy's
lifetime, and we shall here notice only those
which mark the centres of manors known to
have been created by him. The principal castle Seignoriai
and manor of the whole lordship was Trim,
where, as already mentioned, the first mote-
castle was destroyed in 1174. It was soon
rebuilt, but the first regular stone castle — the
keep of which is perhaps the massive twenty-
sided structure still standing — appears not to
have been erected until about 1220.^

Other seignoriai castles in East Meath were :

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1186. Giraldus, speaking of the year
1181, says, ' Hactenus enim Media plurimum, Lagenia
parum, fuerat incastellata ' : v. 355.

2 Ware's Annals, and compare ante, vol. i, pp. 338-42.

manors.

76 THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

Ratoath, where Hugh de Lacy appears to have
retained a seignorial manor. He gave the tithes
of Ratoath and DunshaughUn, and a grange
at the latter place, to the abbey of St. Thomas,
Dubhn, before 1183.^ After the year 1196
Walter de Lacy gave the land of Ratoath to his
brother Hugh,^ who soon afterwards confirmed
his father's grant of the church to the abbey
of St. Thomas.^ In the middle of the village of
Ratoath is a very fine mote, which has not,
I think, been described. It must suffice here
to say that it is about fifty feet high and very
steep, with a circular flat area on top of about
twenty paces in diameter. At the base is a
shield-shaped bailey, and both mote and bailey
are surrounded with deep fosses and wide
ramparts in a typical Norman manner. The
whole is a magnificent specimen of a Norman
earthwork, and there can be little doubt that it
represents the elder Hugh de Lacy's castle.

Clonard. The castle here was erected in
1182.^ In 1200 ' Clonard (i. e., probably, the new

1 Reg. St. Thomas's, p. 280. Robert le Poer, who seems
to have had the custody of Hugh de Lacy's lands after his
death, confirmed tliis grant : ibid., p. 26.

2 Gormanston Register, f. 188 dors. The parcels include
' totam terram de Rathtowtht sicut melius et plenius
eandem terram unquam tenui, et de incremento Treuthd '
(Trevet Grange). ^ Reg. St. Thomas's, p. 8.

* Gir, Camb. v. 356, where ' Clunaret ' is the better read-
ing ; Ir. Cluain-irdird.

THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH 77

monastery) was burned by O'Keary to injure
the English who were in it '.^ This was the site
of the famous Celtic monastery of St. Finnian,
which, however, appears not to have survived
the repeated ravages of Norsemen and Irish.
An Augustinian priory, dedicated to St. Peter,
was founded here, probably by Hugh de Lacy.
Even of this latter foundation nothing has been
preserved except an octagonal Gothic font, and
the lofty mote of Hugh de Lacy's castle is the
most conspicuous object in the deserted place.
Clonard, in the twelfth century, and probably
up to its burning in the year 1200, was the seat
of a bishopric, afterwards removed to Trim.
Eugene, the bishop from 1174 to 1194, appears
to have acted from the first with the Anglo-
Norman settlers in furthering the interests of
the Church,^ and in particular in endowing the
abbey of St. Thomas, Dublin — to such an extent,
indeed, as to impoverish the see of Meath and
give rise to a dispute which was compromised
in 1235.=^

Kells, the seat of a famous Columban
monastery, marked still by its early stone-
roofed church, its ecclesiastical round tower, and

1 Four Masters, 1200. O'Keary {Ua Ciardha) was chief-
tain of Carbury (Cairbre), a district separated from Clonard
by the river Boyne.

2 See, for instance, his precept enjoining the payment of
tithes : Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 259.

3 Ibid., pp. 246-52.

78 THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

its beautiful crosses, was protected by Hugh de
Lacy, and was probably the seat of a seignorial j
manor. ' A castle was in process of erection at
Kells ' as early as 1176, but in the same year, |
consequent on the destruction of the castle of
Slane, it was razed and left desolate through
fear of the Cinel Owen.^ There is no further '
early mention of a castle at Kells. Hugh
de Lacy granted to the canons of St. Mary
at Kells a number of places with Irish names,
presumably their former possessions,^ and he
is said to have re-edified the abbey. Walter
de Lacy, in the reign of Richard I, granted
a charter to the burgesses of Kells, conferring
on them 'the law of Bristol'.^ Hugh de Lacy
gave Emlagh, to the north-east of Kells, to
Thomas de Craville,^ but the barony of Kells
does not appear to have been granted in one
parcel, and we may perhaps conclude that
the manor of Kells was retained in Hugh de
Lacy's hands.

Similarly in the case of Duleek. Hugh gave
to Adam Dullard (whose brother was Pagan
or Payn Dullard) certain lands which we may
identify with Dollardstown and Painestown in

1 Ann. Ulster, 1176.

2 See this charter in Dugdale, Mon. Angl. vi. 1143.

^ Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 10. Walter retained
mills in Kells : Cal. Docs. Irel., vol. i, no. 1909.
4 Song, 11. 3166-73, and note.

THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH 79

this barony,^ but there appears to have been no
large grant made here. There was, however,
a very early castle erected at Duleek. It was
destroyed at the same time as Trim Castle, and
afterwards restored.^ At Duleek Hugh de Lacy
founded a monastery for canons regular, and
made it a cell of his favoured abbey at Llanthony.
In the same barony at Colp, near the mouth of
the Boyne, he also subjected another foundation
to the same abbey. Duleek appears as an
important manor of Theobald de Verdun,^ who
succeeded the de Lacys in a moiety of Meath,
and it is probable that it was a seignorial manor
throughout.

Drogheda. Though the castle here does not
appear to be mentioned before 1203, when John
gave ' to Nicholas de Verdun the custody of the
[castle of the] bridge of Drogheda, as it was
in the king's hand and as Nicholas's father
[Bertram de Verdun] held it ',* there can be
little doubt that it was erected by Hugh de Lacy.
The above entry shows that the castle was in

1 Ibid., 11. 3164-5, and note. There is a terraced mote
at DoUardstown. ' The land of Adam Dullart and Payn
his brother ' belonged to the Hospitallers before 1212 :
Papal Letters (Bliss), vol. i, p. 36.

2 Gir. Camb. v. 313.

3 In 1284 he was granted a yearly fair at his manor of
Dyvelek ; Cal. Does. Irel., vol. ii, no. 2303. There was
a mote at Duleek, but it has been nearly cleared away.

* Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 185.

80 THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

existence about the time of Hugh de Lacy's
death, when Bertram de Verdun (who died on
the crusade in 1192) was in Ireland. Besides,
though the castle was retained as a royal castle
when the other seignorial castles were restored
to Walter de Lacy, compensation was paid to
Walter and his successors, showing that it
admittedly belonged originally to the de Lacys.^

The castle-site is marked by the ' Mill Mount ',
a formidable mote commanding the bridge
across the Boyne, and connected with the later
town walls on the Meath side. So important
a site could hardly have been neglected by
Hugh de Lacy.

In Westmeath Hugh de Lacy, in 1184, built
a castle at Killare, within sight of the sacred
hill of Usnech, near the spot where stood and
still stands the ' stone of the divisions ', the
' navel of Erin ', where in prehistoric times
the five provinces met.^ This appears to have
been at first the principal seat of the lordship

1 For proof of this and a description of the site see my
paper on ' Motes and Norman Castles in the County Louth ',
Joum. R. S. A. I. 1908, pp. 246-50.

2 Gir. Camb. v. 356 ; Ann. Ulster, 1184, where the place
is called Cill Fair ; Four Masters, 1184 (Cill air). Giraldus,
speaking of the five sons of Dela, says : ' Et eam (Hiberniam)
vacuam invenientes, in quinque portiones aequales inter
se diviserunt ; quarum capita in lapide quodam con-
veniunt apud Mediam juxta castrum de Kilair ; qui lapis
et umbehcus Hibemiae dicitur quasi in medio et meditulUo
terrae positus ' (v. 144).

THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH 81

n West Meath,^ but in 1187 the castle was
iestroyed and its garrison slain by the Irish. ^
rhe castle does not appear to have been rebuilt,
3ut the mote remains to mark the site. Lough
5ewdy, or Ballymore Lough Sewdy, as it
3ame to be called,^ was afterwards the principal
5eignorial manor in West Meath.

An early seignorial castle was erected at
Fore (Ir. Fahhar, latinized Favoria and, by
Siraldus, F over a) in West Meath, where there
w^as an ancient monastery founded by St. Fechin.
The castle was one of those seized by King John
in 1210 and restored to Walter de Lacy in 1215.
It probably owed its origin to Hugh de Lacy,
who was in occupation of the place circa 1180.*

1 Hugh de Lacy's charter to WiUiam le Petit provides
that the service due should be performed at ELillare :
' inde servicium unius militis pro quibuslibet xxx carucatas
[sic\ terre predicte apud Killar faciendum ' ; see transcript,
Song of Dermot, p. 310.

2 Four Masters, 1187.

^ It was restored to Walter de Lacy in 1215 ; C. D. I.,
vol. i, no. 612, where it is corruptly printed Loxhundy.
The Irish is Loch Seimhdidhe, of which Lough Sewdy is
a phonetic rendering. The place long remained an impor-
tant seat of the de Lacys, and a stone castle was built
at Ballymore, of which some remains exist. A peninsula,
called an island, in the lake seems to have been originally
a fort of the O'MelaghHns. This was probably the site of
Hugh de Lacy's castle. Abandoned for the stone castle
of Ballymore, it was long afterwards, in 1641 and again in
1691, garrisoned and held as the strongest place in the
neighbourhood. * Gir. Camb. v. 134, 354.

1226 II F

82 THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

It appears to have been Hugh de Lacy, and
not, as usually stated, his son Walter, who first
gave to the monks of St. Taurin at Evreux the
churches of Fore and the tithes, and St. Fechin's
mill there, and the wood near the town for their
habitation.^ There is a mote at Fore.

Hugh de Lacy also retained in his own hand
' the lake and vill of Dissert (i. e. Lough Ennell,
south of Mullingar, and Dysart on its western
shore) and one knight's fee around the said vill '.
The place was excepted from Hugh de Lacy's
grant to William le Petit, to be presently men-
tioned. Malachi II, King of Ireland, lived at
Dun na Sciath (a rath, still known by that
name, or as ' Malachi's fort ', on the border of
the lake in the parish of Dysart), and died at
Cro Inis,^ a fortified island in the lake just
opposite, and it is supposed that this was a seat
of subsequent kings of Meath. There does not
appear to have been a seignorial manor or early
castle here, and it may be that Hugh de Lacy
reserved it as a residence for the particular
O'Melaghlin favoured at the time by him.
The We now turn to Hugh de Lacy's principal

Meath fcudatories. As in the case of the sub-infeuda-
lands. ^"^ ^ion of Lcinstcr, our principal authority is the
Song of Dermot. The Trouvere may have had

^ Cal. Docs. France (Round), vol. i, p. 105, where grants
to St. Taurin from Walter de Lacy are also calendared.
2 Ann. Tigemach, Ann. Clonmacnois, 1022.

2 Tyrel.

THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH 83

document ^ before him containing a list of
"ugh's grants. Certainly most of his state-
lents can be verified from other sources, and
one of them has been shown to be inaccurate.

To Hugh T3rrel, who had been his custodian Hugi
-J Trim, Hugh de Lacy gave Castleknock.
} would seem, however, that this grant was
lade by Hugh ' while he was the king's bailiff ',
nd on behalf of the king. Certainly at a later
me the three services due for Castleknock were
aid to the Crown, and not to the lords of Meath.^
he site of the castle, a little to the west of
hoenix Park, near Dublin, is well known. It is
fine example of a ditched and ramparted mote,
ith remains of a wall about seven feet thick
[iclosing an oval space on the top. On one end
I this oval, on a secondary mound, there are
3mains of an octagonal tower. Hugh Tyrel and
is successors were known as ' barons of Castle-
nock '. The castle was more than once ordered
y John and Henry III to be prostrated as

danger to Dublin, but the owner, Richard
'yrel, appears to have avoided compliance
ith the order, and eventually, on giving his

1 In 1. 3133 the writer expressly says solum Vescrit.

2 Song, 11. 3132-3. The Irish name for the place
as simply Cnucha, and this name probably referred
) the natural hill which rises a little to the east of the
lote.

^ Irish Exchequer Memoranda, temp. Ed. I, Eng. Hist.
-ev. 1903, p. 502.

p 2

84 THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

son as a hostage, was allowed to retain its
custody.^
Joceiin Navan and the land of Ardbraccan were

de

Nangie. granted to Joceiin de Nangle ^ or de Angulo, as
the name appears in Latin documents (i. e. of
Angle in Pembrokeshire). Joceiin is said to
have founded St. Mary's Abbey at Navan in the
twelfth century, and the town grew up under
the Nangles. Four centuries later we find a
Nangle baron of Navan. ^

Gilbert To Jocclin's SOU, Gilbert, Hugh de Lacy

Nangle. granted the barony of Morgallion.* His castle
was at Nobber, a name which means ' the work '
(Ir. an obair), and was perhaps what the Irish
called the novel kind of castle, perched on an
artificial hillock of earth, erected there. Gilbert
de Nangle was outlawed in 1196, and the castle
and lands reverted to Walter de Lacy, who
granted them to his brother Hugh.^

Richard Twenty knights' fees in the barony of Slane
were granted to Richard le Fleming, who, as we

le Flem
ing,

1 Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, nos. 515, 844, 1047, 1139.

2 Song, 11. 3144-7. There is a lofty mote at Navan
formed out of a hillock of gravel, and a small one at
Ardbraccan.

3 ' The Bamet of Navan, his name Nangle, his hous at
the Navan,' Hogan's Ireland in 1598, p. 95 ; and indeed
in 1636, Inquis. Lageniae, Meath, 23 Car. I.

* Song, 11. 3142-3. There is a remarkable mote at Nobber.

5 Gormanston Register, f. 188 dors : ' totam terram de
MackergaUnge . . . sicut eandem Gilbertus de Angulo . . .
tenuit.'

THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH 85

have seen, erected the mote at Slane near the
site of the ancient monastery.^ In 1598 a
Fleming was still Baron of Slane. ^

Twenty knights' fees in the barony of Skreen Adam de
were granted to Adam de Feipo, as well as the ^^^^"
fee of one knight in the crown lands at Santry,
near Dublin.^ Hugh de Lacy built a castle for
Adam de Feipo in Meath, presumably at Skreen,*
where there is a mote in the grounds of the
modern castle. A small town arose here. The
Feipos were barons of Skreen up to the close
of the fourteenth century, when an heiress
carried the barony to the Marwards. The barony
of Deece was granted to Hugh de Hose.^ His Hofe!

1 Song, 11.3174-201. For Crandone we should probably
restore Slan donat (as suggested by Mr. Round, Commune
of London, p. 142).

2 Hogan's Ireland in 1598.

3 Song, 11. 3156-7. For Santry, see Chart. St. Mary's,
Dublin, ii. 95, and Exchequer Memoranda, Eng. Hist.
Rev. 1903, p. 502.

4 Gir. Camb. v. 356. Adam speaks of the chapel of
St. Nicholas ' que sita est in castello meo juxta Scrinium ' :
Chart. St. Mary's, Dubhn, ii. 21.

5 Song of Dermot, 11. 3162-3 ; Ware, quoting from Hugh
de Lacy's charter or a transcript thereof, says that Hugh
gave to Hose or Hussy ' all the land del Dies which Shaclin
held'. This was clearly Mac Gilla Seachlainn, lord of
Southern Breagh : Topogr. Poems, p. 12. The last chieftain
of this name mentioned in the Four Masters was slain by
Tigheaman O'Rourke in 1171. Cf. a charter from John
de Hereford (to whom Hugh de Hose seems to have given
lands in the barony) : Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 123.

86 THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

castle at Galtrim (where the mote remains) was
one of those abandoned after the destruction
of Slane Castle in 1176.^ The Husseys, as the
name came to be spelled, were still barons of
William Galtrim in 1598.^ The barony of Lime was

(id

Messet. granted to William de Muset (Messet, Misset) ; ^
and a district in the barony of Lower Kells,
including Emlagh, to Thomas de Cravile.*
In West Meath the barony of Magheradernon

William was granted to William le Petit.^ His chief
manor was at Mullingar, where the original
mote and later stone castle of the Petits were
finally removed in the last century to make way
for a jail.® The barony was long known as
' Petit' s Barony ', and as late as 1596 was largely

1 Ann. Ulster, 1176.

2 Hogan's Ireland in 1598, p. 95 : ' The bamet of Galtrim
his name Hussy, his Hous Galtrim.'

3 Song of Dermot, 1. 3159 ; cf . Harris's Ware, p. 193. The
cafut baroniae was probably Athboy. In 1213 Peter Messet,
' baro de Luyn juxta Trym,' died, and the inheritance
passed to his three daughters, of whom the eldest
married Lord de Vemaill, the second Talbot, the third
Loundres : Annals Laud MS., Chart. St. Mary's, Dublin,
vol. ii, p. 312.

* Song of Dermot, 11. 3166-73, where Eymlath began is
Emlagh of St. Becan, and the other places mentioned are
in the barony of Moygoish, co. Westmeath.

5 Song of Dermot, 11. 3134-7.

6 Eng. Hist. Review, 1907, p. 237 ; and cf. Inquis.
Lageniae, Westmeath, 6 Jac. I, where Thomas Pettit was
found seised of the manor of Mullingar, including a water-
mill called ' the moate mylle ' in the town.

THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH 87

inhabited by Petits.^ William le Petit was also
given Rathkenny in Meath, and some lands in the
barony of Shrule, County Longford, and 'Chastel-
brec ', the position of which is uncertain.^

The barony of Delvin was granted to Gilbert Gilbert

(16

de Nungent (Nugent), ' which the O'Finelans Nugent.
held in the time of the Irish,' for the service
of five knights.^ Gilbert de Nugent is said to
have married a sister of Hugh de Lacy, and
Hugh built a castle for him,* the mote of which
remains at Castletown Delvin, close to the later
castle.*

To Richard de Capella, frater germanus of

1 Perambulation of the Pale, Car. Cal. 1596, p. 192.

2 In 1229 Nicholas le Petit was granted a market at ' his
manor of Ratkenny ', a fair at ' his manor of Dunboyny ',
and a free warren ' in the demesne of his manor of Ad-
molinger ' : CD. I., vol. i, no. 1673. Was Castlebrack
a name give to William's castle at Dunboyne ?

^ Song of Dermot, 1. 3158. The charter is transcribed
from Sir William Betham's Collections in Butler's Trim,
p. 252, and is translated from an old copy in the Clarendon
Collection in Lynch's Legal Institutions, p. 150. The
original was seen by Ware. CeUach O'Findallan, Lord
of Delbna Mor, is mentioned as assisting the foreigners of
Dubhn in killing Muhony O'Keary, lord of Carbury. Ann.
Tigemach, Four Masters, 1174.

^ Gir. Camb. v. 356 ; and Lodge, Westmeath.

5 The first stone castle at Delvin was probably built
after 1220, when a year's service from the land of Meath
was ordered to be given to Richard de Tuit ' to enable him
to fortify (firmare) a castle in Delven ' : Cal. Docs. Ireland,
vol. i, nos. 884, 970. This Richard de Tuit was, jure uxor is,
third baron of Delvin.

tentm.

88 THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

Richard Gilbert de Nugent, lands were also given by

Capeila. Hugh de Lacy, but their position is not
stated.^ He succeeded to his brother as second
baron of Delvin, and his daughter and heiress
carried the barony to the Tuites for many
generations.^

Robert de E-ATHWIRE (Ir. Bath-Guaire), in the barony

^^^' of Farbill, was granted to Robert de Lacy, and

Hugh is said to have built a castle for him there.^

The mote remains with considerable foundations

of a stone castle in the bailey.

KiLBixY, near Lough Iron, in the barony of

Geoffrey Moygoish, was given to Geoffrey de Costentin,
andacastle was erected here in 1192.* The mote
remains, but nothing else, except the name
' Burgage lands ', to testify to the ancient im-
portance of the place. Near by, Geoffrey de

1 Song of Dermot, 11. 3152-3.

2 Burke's Peerage, ' Marquis of Westmeath.'
2 Song of Dermot, 11. 3150-1 and note. Rathwire and

Kilbixy were plundered and burned by Mageoghegan in
1450 (Four Masters).

4 Song of Dermot, 11. 3154-5, where Kelberi and Rath
eimarthi are corruptions for Kilbixi and Rathconarti, the
latter being the ancient name of the barony now called
Rathconrath. The castle is called caislen Cille Big sigh e
(Ann. Loch Ce, 1192), i.e. the church of St. Bigseach.
Walter de Lacy, in what was probably a confirmatory
charter, granted to Geoffrey de Costentin ' five knights'
fees in the theof of Kilbixi with a castle and fifteen knights'
fees in the land of Conemake next adjoining to the said
castle, beyond the water of Ethne (the river Inny) by the
service of four knights ' : Harris's Ware, Antiq., p. 193.

THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH 89

Costentin founded a priory of canons regular
at Tristernagh.^

The cantred of Ardnurcher was given to Meiier
Meiler Fitz Henry.^ It is now a parish, more Henry,
commonly known as ' Horseleap ', in the barony
of Moycashel. A castle was erected here in 1 192.^
Its site is well known. As in some other cases,
the end of a natural ridge was selected, and this
was cut off from the rest of the ridge by a double
trench. An oblong mote with flat top, twenty-
five by twelve paces, was formed. The summit
is about thirty feet above the ditch at the upper
side. There is a small raised bailey at one side,
defended by a ditch. Two pieces of a massive
wall seem to indicate where a bridge crossed
this ditch to the bailey.

To Richard de Tuit was given ' a rich feoff- Richard
ment ' including a district about Granard, in
County Longford.* Here, in 1199, he erected a

^ The foundation charter is given in Dugdale's Mon. Angl.
(1830), vol. vi, p. 1147.

2 Song of Dermot, U. 3138-41.

3 Caislen Aiha an Urchair. Ann. Loch Ce, 1192. The
castle of Kilbixy, where the mote is also of an oblong shape,
was erected in the same year.

* Song of Dermot, 11. 3148-9. It is probable that Richard
de Tuit was also given lands in a more settled district,
perhaps at Tuitestown (5 miles to the north-west of Mul-
lingar) and at Sonnagh (3 miles further), where we afterwards
find Tuits. In several cases Hugh de Lacy gave lands on
the marches of his lordship as well as lands nearer the centre
to the same feoffee.

90 THE SUB-INFEUDATION OF MEATH

castle as a stronghold against O'Reilly in South
Breifny. A high mote is to be seen here with
traces of stone buildings on the top. Near
Granard, in 1210, Richard de Tuit founded the
Cistercian monastery of Larha, now Abbeylara,
and in the same year his castle was visited by
King John.

It would seem probable, then, that in Hugh de
Lacy's lifetime little or no attempt was made to
occupy the three western baronies of Westmeath,
nor those parts of the ancient kingdom of Meath
which are now included in King's County and
Longford. Even those districts which were
parcelled out among the barons were not all
occupied and turned to profit at once. Hugh
de Lacy was himself building the castle of
Durrow when he was murdered in 1186, and the
border castles of Granard, Kilbixy, and Ardnur-
cher were not erected until the last decade in the
century. Indeed, in several districts the Irish
chieftains were never entirely dispossessed. The
O'Melaghlins were styled kings of Meath for
many generations, but they became confined to
the barony of Clonlonan. The Mageoghegans
in Moycashel, the O'MoUoys in Fircall, the
O'Caharneys in Kilcoursy, the MacCoghlans in
Garrycastle, the O'Farrells in Annaly, and other
ruling families, retained to the last their posi-
tions as chieftains of their respective tribes.

CHAPTER XVI

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE
1185

In 1 184, while Hugh de Lacy was stiU justiciar, Henry
King Henry prepared to carry out a design toTenT
which he had long meditated. At the Council of t"^"^^^
Oxford in 1177 he had, as we have seen, appointed
his youngest son, John, ' Lord of Ireland,' and
made the new grantees of lands there swear
fealty and do homage to John as well as to
himself. But John was too young to undertake
the government, being then only in his tenth
year. Now, in the summer of 1184, Henry sent
John Cumin, the new archbishop, to Ireland to
prepare for the coming of the prince. He also
once more superseded Hugh de Lacy, and in
September sent Philip of Worcester in his place Piiilipof
with forty men-at-arms.* Philip is described as madepro-
a sumptuous, open-handed man, and a brave ^"^'^*"r-

1 Gir. Camb. v. 359. Up to this moment Henry had
vainly endeavoured to persuade his son Richard to give up
Aquitaine to John : Gesta Hen. i. 311, 319. Gerald says,
' revocato Hugone de Laci,' but if Hugh went to the king
he was back in Ireland next year, when he witnessed some
of John's charters as constable.

92 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

soldier. We shall meet with a Philip of Worces-
ter, presumably the same man, ten years later
in Desmond. At this time not much is recorded
of him. He revoked some grants of lands
which had been improperly alienated by Hugh
de Lacy in the north of the present county of
Dublin, and restored the lands to their original
purpose as mensal lands of the viceroy.^ By his
charter Hugh had power to grant fiefs in the
neighbourhood of Dublin, but only while he
was the king's bailiff, and to enable him to per-
form the king's service in Dublin. In March 11 85
Expedi- Philip of Worcester headed an expedition to
Armagli. Armagh, where he exacted a large tribute from
the clergy. Hugh Tjnrell, who accompanied
him, carried off a large cauldron from the clergy,
and brought it as far as the town of Louth.
Here a fire broke out in the house in which he
lodged, and the two horses which had drawn the
boiler were burnt, and a great part of the town
also. Frightened at this judgement, Hugh Tyrell

1 ' Terras quas Hugo de Laci alienaverat, terrain videlicet
Ocadhesi, et alias quam plures, ad regiam mensam cum omni
solicitudine revocavit ' : Gir. Camb. v. 359-60. The ' terra
Ocadhesi ' (O'Casey) was equivalent to the barony of Bal-
rothery West. Hugh seems to have granted all the eccle-
siastical rights over this district to the Prior of Llanthony ;
see note by Bishop Reeves to Topogr. Poems, p. v, and Crede
Mihi, Ixiv. Of. too, as to the tithes of Lusk in Balrothery
East, Chart. St. Mary's, Dubhn, i. 173. This deed was
attested by ' Geroldus archidiaconus de Sancto David ' and
must be dated 1185-6.

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE 93

restored the cauldron.^ The stage in the evolu-
tion of morals when even men of light and
leading did not scruple to pilfer a convent of
monks was coincident with the stage in the
evolution of reason when the same men were
most subject to the influence of imaginary signs
of divine wrath.

On Mid-Lent Sunday, 1185, Henry at Windsor
knighted his son John, and sent him to govern John
his lordship of Ireland.2 He travelled by the l^Zn±
coast -road of South Wales to Pembroke, where
a numerous fleet had assembled in Milford Haven
to transport him and his army. He was accom-
panied to this point by Ranulf de Glanville,
Justiciar of England, who, in 1182, or perhaps
a little earlier, had been appointed his tutor and
guardian.^ A favourable wind suddenly sprang
up from the east, which might have been con-
sidered a good omen, but by taking advantage
of it John had to omit the usual visit to the
shrine of St. David — a sinister sign. He sailed

^ Gir. Camb. v. 132, 360. The former passage indicates
that a quarrel broke out within the year between Hugh de
Lacy and Hugh Tyrell which caused great disturbance.
The Annals of Ulster and Loch Ce, 1185, record that Philip
of Worcester, accompanied by the Foreigners of Erin, re-
mained at Armagh for six days in the middle of Lent.
Whatever the object of the expedition, it does not appear
to have been a regular raid. More probably it was an
attempt to interfere in the election to the primacy, which
took place in this year.

2 Gesta Hen. i. 336. 3 ibi^j. i. 305.

94 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

on the evening of April 24, and arrived at noon
next day in Waterford. He had with him about
300 knights and a large force of horse-soldiers
and archers. Among those in the prince's ship
was Gerald de Barry, the historian, who had
been specially sent by the king to attend his
son.^ This was Gerald's second visit to the
island, and, as before, he employed his time
well in collecting materials for his Irish works.
Among the officers of John's household who
came with him to Ireland were Bertram de
Verdun, his seneschal, William de Wendeval,
his dapifer, and Alard Fitz WilUam, his chamber-
lain. Others who witnessed his charters were
Hugh de Lacy, constable, Philip of Worcester,
Gilbert Pipard, and Theobald Walter. It is
probable that the two last also came over with
John.

Of the new-comers Theobald Walter, Philip of
Worcester, Bertram de Verdun, and Gilbert (or
perhaps his brother Roger) Pipard received from
John about this time large grants of land, and
Theobald became founders of great Anglo-Irish families.
The most illustrious of these, and one conspicuous
throughout the whole subsequent history of
Ireland, was that of the Butlers, descended from
Theobald Walter. He was son and eventual heir
of Hervey Walter of Amounderness, in Lanca-
shire. His elder brother, Hubert, afterwards
1 Gir. Camb. v. 380-1.

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE 95

Archbishop of Canterbury, was at this time one
of the king's justices. Ranulf de Glanville, Chief
Justiciar of England, was his uncle by marriage,
and the two brothers appear to have been reared
in Ranulf's household, and to Ranulf's influence
with John should probably be ascribed the favour
shown to Theobald at this time.-^ In spite of
statements to the contrary, it is probable that
Theobald came to Ireland for the first time with
John, and that it was John who gave him the
office and emoluments of chief butler.

John's expedition to Ireland was a disastrous
failure. So much is clear. Unfortunately,
Gerald de Barry, who had such ample oppor-
tunities of knowing the facts, tells us little in
detail concerning the expedition, though he indi-
cates clearly enough in general terms the chief

^ That Hubert and probably Theobald were brought up
by their aunt and Ranulf de Glanville appears from Hubert's
charter to the Praemonstratensian House at West Dere-
ham : Dugdale, Mon. Angl. vi, p. 899 ; and of. Norgate's
Angevin Kings, ii. 332, note. Theobald's relations are
indicated in his foundation charter to the Cistercian house
at Arklow (where he also held a fief from John, perhaps
granted at this time) : Dugdale, Mon. Angl. vi. 1128. His
mother was Matilda de Valognes, and his second wife,
mother of Theobald Walter II, was Matilda de Vavasor :
Rot. Pat., 9 John, p. 74 b. By a former wife he had
a daughter, Beatrice, who married (1) Thomas of Hereford
and (2) Hugh Purcell, baron of Loughmoe; Reg. St. Thomas's,
Dublin. Another daughter married Gerald de Prender-
gast : Inquis. P.M., 36 Hen. III.

96 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

Insolent causes of its failure. At Waterford, immedi-
ment of ately on John's arrival, the leading Irishmen of
princes ^^® neighbourhood, who had hitherto been loyal
to the English and had lived peaceably, came to
welcome the king's son as their lord and to give
him the kiss of peace. But John's Norman
retinue treated them with derision, some even
rudely pulling their long beards in ridicule of the
alien fashion. This irresponsible levity had its
natural effect. The Irishmen, deeply incensed,
betook themselves and their families to Donnell
O'Brien, and disclosed to him and to Dermot
Mc Carthy, and even to Rory 0' Conor, the treat-
ment they had received, adding that the king's
son was a mere stripling surrounded and coun-
selled by striplings like himself, and that from
such a source there was no prospect for Irishmen
of good government, or even of security. Influ-
enced by these reports, these three chief kings
of the south and west of Ireland, who, we are
told, were prepared to wait upon John and offer
him their submission as they had previously
done to Henry, were induced to take a very
different course. Laying aside for the moment
their interminable quarrels, which had hitherto
given opportunity to the advance of the
foreigners, they formed a league together, and
unanimously determined to defend with their
lives their ancient liberties. This example was
followed by the other native chieftains, who all

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE 97

held aloof from John and his giddy court.^ ' We
speak what we do know and testify what we
have seen,' says Gerald solemnly, and we can
believe him. A proud and sensitive people never
willingly submits to the rule of a master, how-
ever mighty, who despises them.

But of course this rude plucking of the beards
was only a symbol of that want of consideration
for the native Irish which exhibited itself in
more harmful ways. Continuing with the causes
of the failure of the expedition, Gerald says : F^endly

^ "^ Irisbmen

' Contrary to our promises, we took away the deprived
lands of our own Irishmen — those who from the lands,
first coming of Fitz Stephen and the earl had
faithfully stood by us — and gave them to our
new-comers. These Irishmen then went over to
the enemy and became spies and guides for them
instead of for us, having all the more power to
injure us because of their former familiarity with
our ways.' ^

It is to be regretted that Gerald was not more
explicit, but a careful consideration of John's
acts in Ireland at this time, so far as they are
known, tends to confirm and further elucidate
this general statement. Almost the only military John's
measure known to have been taken by John g^^^"
was the erection of castles at Tibberaghny, policy.
Ardfinan, and Lismore.^ Tibberaghny is on the

1 Gir. Camb. v. 389. 2 ibid., p. 390.

^ Ibid. V. 386. The erection of castles at Tipraid

1226 n G

98 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

borders of Ossory, north of the Suir and east
of Carrick. Ardfinan and Lis more are near the
frontiers of the territory known as the Decies.
Motes remain at Tibberaghny and Lismore,
probably indicating the exact positions of John's
castles. Ardfinan was probably a ' promontory
castle ', situated on a precipitous rock, where
the remains of a later, but still early, castle
stand, commanding a ford over the Suir. The
castles seem to have been erected with a view
to holding the Decies, and as bases for an advance
into parts of Munster not yet occupied. The
Decies, though already regarded as crown lands
— at least from the Blackwater beyond Lismore
eastwards — had probably not yet been com-
pletely settled by the Normans. Melaghlin
O'Faelain, the native prince, whose life had been
spared at the taking of Waterf ord, was one of the
first to submit to Henry on his arrival, and ever
since he seems to have been true to his oath
of fealty, and to have lived peaceably. It is
probable that he was left undisturbed in part,
at any rate, of his territory. But now it appears
that he was one of those whom John's retinue
treated disrespectfully, and who complained to

Fachtna and Ard Finain is mentioned in the Annals
of Loch Ce, 1185. Ardfinan as well as Lismore was
within the territory of the Deisi, which may be regarded
as coterminous with the dioceses of Waterf ord and
Lismore.

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE 99

Donnell O'Brien and the princes of Munster.^
We may therefore infer that his territory was
confiscated at this time, and that he was
one of those to whom Gerald alludes when
saying that John took away lands from faithful
Irishmen and gave them to new-comers. This
presumably was John's immediate answer to the
disaffection which his inconsiderate conduct had
provoked.

But further, it seems clear that, as a reply to
the opposition shown by the princes of Munster,
a reckless immature scheme was adopted for Scheme
annexing the whole of the eastern part of annexing
Munster, where hitherto the native princes had ^^"^°"'^-
been left undisturbed by the adventurers in
Ck)rk. From the Irish annals, as well as from the
brief statements of Giraldus, we learn that out
of his newly-erected castles John sent plundering
parties into Munster. On two occasions, once
in a neighbouring wood and once when taking
a prey in the direction of Limerick, part of the
garrison of Ardfinan was cut off by Donnell
O'Brien, whose forces, however, suffered a defeat
at Tibberaghny, in which two of the petty
chieftains of Thomond fell.^ Before the year

1 O'Faelain is expressly named in the Annals of Inisf alien
(DubUn MS.).

2 Gir. Camb. v. 386 ; Ann. Loch Ce, Four Masters, 1185.
Gerald mentions that an Irish noble named Oggravus
was slain with many others at Tibberaghny. He was
clearly Ruaidhri O'Gradha (O'Grady), who with Ruaidhri

G2

100 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

No

general
league
against
John.

Intestine
commo-
tions in
Con-
naught.

was out Dermot McCarthy and several others
were slain by the men of Cork and the followers
of Theobald Walter on the occasion of a parley
near Cork.^

It is clear, however, that no general league to
take common action against the invaders can
have been formed at this time between the
Kings of Connaught and Munster, such as might
perhaps be inferred from Gerald's language.
The Irish annals state that in this year Rory
O'Conor ' came from his pilgrimage ', i.e. came
out of the monastery of Cong, to which he had
retired two years previously, when he left the
reins of government in the hands of his son,
Conor Maenmoy. Aided by Donnell O'Brien and
the English of Cork, he destroyed the west of
Connaught, both church and territory, in the
endeavour to recover his kingdom from his son.

O'Conaing ' was slain by the Foreigners in the slaughter of
Tipraid Fachtna ' : Ann. Loch Ce. These annals also state
that * the foster-brother of the son of the king of the Saxons '
was slain in an engagement with Donnell O'Brien. Who
was this foster-brother ? In 1182-3 John was reared in
Ranulf de Glanville's household, and Ranulf's sons would
be John's foster-brothers. John's grant of Ormond was
made to Ranulf de Glanville and Theobald Walter jointly.
Ranulf, the justiciar, may have accepted this speculative
grant for one of his sons • and if we suppose that he sent
this son to join Theobald in his venture, and that he was
John's foster-brother slain by O'Brien, the hypothesis
would seem to fulfil the conditions.

^ Gir. Camb, v. 386 ; Ann. Loch Ce, Four Masters, 1185.

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE 101

A temporary peace was patched up between
father and son, on the basis of a division of
Connaught. This would of course involve the
withdrawal of Donnell O'Brien from Connaught,
and is probably the peace to which Gerald
alludes. Later on in the year, however, Conor
Maenmoy's son, Cathal Carrach, plundered and
burned Killaloe in retaliation for the churches
which the men of Munster had burned, and
Thomond was pillaged by Conor Maenmoy at
the head of some English mercenaries. These
latter then came as far as Koscommon with
Conor, ' who gave them 3,000 cows as wages.'
Finally Conor Maenmoy assumed the entire
kingship,^ and next year expelled his father
Rory. The league, then, must have consisted
merely in a common resolve not to do homage
or renew the oath of fealty to John. The peace,
however, set free Donnell O'Brien, with whom
Grerald's friends in Cork had probably been

1 In the Annals of Loch Ce these entries are placed before,
and in the Four Masters after, the entry as to John's visit
to Ireland. Probably Rory agreed to the peace when
Donnell O'Brien had to withdraw to meet the aggression
of the garrisons of Ardfinan and Tibberaghny. R-obably,
too, the mercenaries, whom we hear of for the first time
in Connaught, were deserters from John's army. In the
Gesta Hen. (i. 339) it is said of John's army, 'Maxima
pars equitum et peditum qui cum eo venerant ab eo
recesserunt et ad Hibernenses contra eum pugnaturos
perrexerunt.'

102 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

acting, and enabled him to concentrate the Irish
forces of Munster against John's aggression.

But we have more certain evidence of John's
intentions regarding Munster than is afforded
by these encounters with Donnell O'Brien.
John's John's grant to Theobald Walter of the large
Theobald district afterwards known collectively as Ormond
Walter. ^^ ji^g^ Munstcr, was tested at Waterford,
and must be referred to this year. By it
the borough of Killaloe and five and a half
cantreds in ' the land of Limerick ' were granted
to Theobald and his uncle by marriage, Ranulf
de Glanville, Chief Justiciar of England, for the
service of twenty-two knights.^ These cantreds
appear to have been mentioned by name in the
original deed, and the names are repeated in an
agreement made between William de Braose and
Theobald Walter in 1201 touching the lands of
the latter, to which we shall have to recur. ^ They
included the south-western extension of the
present King's County and the whole of North
Tipperary,with a portion of the County Limerick.
At the time this was a speculative grant of lands
not yet acquired, but before the close of the

1 See Carte's Life of Ormond (ed. 1851), Introd., p. xlv.
In Carte's time the original deed was at Kilkenny. Ranulf
de Glanville, the justiciar, remained in that office up
to 1189. He went on the crusade and died at the siege
of Acre in 1190: Norgate, Angevin Kings, ii. 279. It is
highly improbable that he ever came to Ireland.

2 Facsimiles Nat. MSS. of Ireland, vol. ii, no. Ixvii.

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE 103

reign of Richard I, at any rate, Theobald seems
to have been firmly seated in his new posses-
sions.^ It may be conjectured that a similar
speculative grant in Southern Tipperary was
made at this time to Phihp of Worcester, and
was the origin of the claims which, as we shall
see, he made a few years later to lands in this
district.^

Of John's personal movements in Ireland at John's
this time little is known. A few points are, ments
however, fixed by his charters, which indicate charters'^
that he followed pretty closely his father's
route. His grant to Theobald Walter was, as
we have seen, tested at Waterford. At Lismore,
where he built a castle, he granted a charter
to the Cistercian monastery de Valle Salutis at
Baltinglas, confirming to the monks the lands
which thejT" had of the gift of Dermot Mc Mur-
rough before the coming to Ireland of Earl
Kichard.^ At Ardfinan, where he built another
castle, he made a grant of four ploughlands

1 Theobald's charter to the Cistercian monastery of
Wodeny (Irish, Uaithne, variously anghcized Wetheny,
Abbey Owney, Abington, &c.) was made in the reign of
Richard I, circa 1197 : Chartae, &c., p. II, and cf. Carte's
Life of Ormond, Introd., p. xlii. His principal seat seems
to have been at Nenagh, near which he founded a priory
of St. John Baptist circa 1200.

2 Philip of Worcester had a castle at the mote of Knock-
graffon probably from 1192 : Journ. R. S. A. I. xxxix (1909),
p. 275. 3 Cal. Pat. Rolls, anno 1337, p. 402.

104 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

near Limerick to the cathedral church there.^
Perhaps this was to ingratiate himself with the
clergy there, in view of his hostihties with
Donnell O'Brien. At Tibberaghny, where he
also built a castle, he granted a charter of con-
firmation to the new Cistercian house founded
by Hervey de Montmorency at Dunbrody, and
gave it a letter of protection.^ At Kildare he
confirmed his father's charter granting Dublin
to the men of Bristol.^ Here he also confirmed
Wilham, son of Maurice Fitz Gerald, in his
barony of Naas, and probably at the same time
confirmed William's grant to his brother Gerald
(ancestor of the earls of Leinster) of lands about
Maynooth and Rathmore.* At Dublin, where
he probably stayed most of his time, he granted
to John Cumin, Archbishop of Dublin, and
his successors the bishopric of Glendalough,^
but this attempted union of the sees was for
the time ineffectual. Also to the abbey of

1 Black Book of Limerick (MacCaffrey, p. 103). The
editor strangely fails to date this charter, which is the
oldest in the book.

2 Chart. St. Mary's, DubUn, ii. 166, 168.

3 Hist, and Mun. Docs. Ireland (J. T. Gilbert), p. 49.

* Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 5. See too, Gormanston
Register, f . 190 dors. One of the witnesses was Reimundus
filius Willelmi. For John's grant to Gerald, son of Maurice
Fitz Gerald, see Red Book of Kildare, H. M. C., 9th Rep.,
App., p. 265 ; and Facsimiles Nat. MSS. Ireland, vol. iii,
pi. Ix. ^ Chartae, &c., p. 4, and Crede Mihi, p. 5.

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE 105

St. Thomas a carucate of land at Wicklow.^
Incidentally we learn that he made several
grants of valuable plots of land and messuages
outside the western gate of Dublin to members
of his household and others.^ Moreover, to this
time should probably be referred the exten-
sive Pipard and de Verdun grants in the present
county of Louth. To these we shall recur
in the next chapter.

John returned to England on December 17,^
having been in Ireland for nearly eight months. Results of

Ills Visit.

In this brief period he had driven the Irish into
open opposition, alienated the sympathy of the
Anglo-Norman colony, dissipated the treasure
entrusted to him, and frittered away his army
to no purpose. He had shown no capacity either
to govern with prudence or to fight with success.

1 Ibid., p. 5 ; cf. Reg. St. Thomas's, DubHn, p. 166.

2 The forta occidentalis itself was given by the citizens at
John's request to Henry Mausanure, one of John's men :
Hist, and Mun. Does. (Gilbert), p. 56. To William de
Wendewal, his dapifer, John gave a messuage between the
church of St. Thomas and the curia of Bertram de Verdun,
also very probably the gift of John at this time : Reg.
St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 417. To PhiMp of Worcester he
gave land in front of the gate of the abbey of St. Thomas,
ibid., p. 407. To Henry Tirel land near Kilmainham,
ibid., pp. 383, 392. John had already provided for his
chamberlain, Alard Fitz WiUiam, by a grant of lands near
Waterford and ' entertainment ' at various houses, ' by the
service of six pair of lambskin gloves and one thabur ' :
Lynch's Legal Institutions, p. 93.

* Ralph de Diceto, ii. 39.

106 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

Further
causes of
his
failure.

Gerald, whose words, from the point of view of
the invaders, are full of wisdom and good sense,
explains in general terms, though clearly enough,
the causes of John's failure to quell the storm
which his contemptuous behaviour and reckless
grants had stirred up.

The custody of the maritime towns and castles
(i. e. principally, Dublin, Waterford, and Wex-
ford, and perhaps Cork), with the adjacent lands
and tributes, was given to men who, instead
of using the revenue for the public good and
the detriment of the enemy, squandered it in
excessive eating and drinking. Then, though
the country was not half subdued, both the
civil and the military command was given into
the hands of carpet knights, who were more
intent on spoiling good citizens than in attacking
the foe — men who, reversing the politic maxim
of the ancient Romans, oppressed those who had
submitted while leaving the enemy unscathed.
So that nothing was done, either by making
incursions into the enemy's country, or by the
erection of numerous castles ^ throughout the
land, or by clearing the ' bad passes ' through
the woods, to bring about a more settled state
of things. The bands of mercenaries were kept
within the seaport towns, and, imitating their
captains, gave themselves up to wine and
women, so that the march lands were left
^ ' Crebra castrorum constructione.'

JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE 107

undefended, and the intermediate villages and
fortified posts were abandoned to the fire and
sword of the enemy. Meanwhile the old soldiery,
feeling themselves, in the growing insolence of
the new-comers, despised and out of favour,
kept quietly in the background, awaiting the
issue of all this rioting and disorder. Thus the
country went from bad to worse. Even in the
towns, where alone there was the semblance of
order, the veteran soldiers of the conquest,
instead of being led against the enemy, were
harassed with lawsuits. In this way the power
of the colony was enfeebled, while the enemy
became more daring in revolt ; and thus were
affairs mismanaged until the king recalled the
new-comers as incompetent, not to say cowardly,
and, turning once more to the men already
experienced in the conquest of the island,
entrusted John de Courcy with the administra-
tion of affairs.^

In all this Gerald evidently avoids laying the
blame expressly on John. He had nothing good

1 Gir. Camb. v. 390-2. The account given in Gesta
Hen. i. 339 is in the main consistent with Gerald's : ' Sed
ipse Johannes parum ibi profecit, quia pro defectu indige-
narum qui cum eo tenere debebant, et pro eo quod stipendia
militibus et solidariis suis dare noluit, fere amisit totum
exercitum suum in pluribus conflictibus quos sui fecerunt
contra Hibemienses. . . . Et sic praedictus Johannes, filius
regis, ad opus suum omnia retinere cupiens, pro defectu
auxilii terram Hiberniae relinquens, in AngHam rediit.'

108 JOHN DOMINUS HIBERNIAE

to say of him, so he says Httle or nothing. In
the circumstances, we could hardly expect him
to be more outspoken. Indeed, for a writer
who was a courtier, and whose works were
immediately published, we are astonished at
his boldness in some passages, both here and
elsewhere.

CHAPTER XYII

JOHN DE COURCY AND EASTERN
IRELAND

1186-1205

§ 1. The Succession of Chief Governors

The period from the death of Hugh de Lacy An ob-
to the beginning of John's reign is one of great pg^od.
obscurity in the history of the Anglo-Norman
settlement in Ireland. Gerald de Barry, to
whom we owe so much of our knowledge of
the previous years, now fails us, and the great
series of state papers and enrolments do not
yet come to our help. Even the succession of
justiciars is uncertain, for the list given by
Walter Harris and followed by Gilbert and
a host of writers is not correct. In tracing the
progress of the English we must, to some extent,
work backwards from their better ascertainable
position at the commencement of the thirteenth
century. Eor the stages of that progress we
have some indications in the Irish annals, which
record the erection of a few castles and mention
certain English expeditions, but these annals
are largely taken up with the inter-tribal

110 JOHN DE COURCY AND

wars and plunderings of the Irish themselves,
which seldom had any permanent effect beyond
weakening the Irish and giving the English
opportunity to extend their influence. No
useful purpose would be attained by mentioning
these conflicts, except so far as they may help
to explain English action, or had permanent
results. A few charters which have been
preserved throw a more certain light on some
points, while recent archaeological research en-
ables us to indicate with precision the principal
manorial centres, and define more closely than
has hitherto been done the area of Anglo-
Norman rule.

We shall first endeavour to ascertain who

were the chief governors or justiciars of Ireland

during this period.

The sue- On the failure of John's mission to Ireland in

oHiiief 1185, Henry, as we have seen, appointed John

Gover- ^^ Qq^yqj as I'usticiar, and he remained in this

capacity up to at least the beginning of the

reign of Richard I.^ Who succeeded him, and

at what precise date, is uncertain. In the list

of chief governors compiled by Walter Harris,

and followed by Gilbert and other writers,

' Hugh de Lacy the younger, lord of Meath,'

^ John de Courcy was justiciar after the time when John,
the king's son, became Earl of Mortain ; see Henry Tirel's
charter, Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 383, and Grant from
DubHn Commonalty, Hist, and Mun. Docs. Ireland, p. 56.

nors.

EASTERN IRELAND 111

appears as justiciar from 1189 to 1191. But
Hugh de Lacy the younger was never lord of Hugh de
Meath, and it is very improbable that he was younger
made justiciar at this time. His father, Hugh de justiciar.
Lacy, left at his death, by his first wife, Roheis
de Monemue (Monmouth), two sons, viz. Walter,
who afterwards succeeded to the lordship of
Meath, and Hugh, who was created Earl of
Ulster in 1205, and a daughter, Elayne, who mar-
ried Richard de Beaufo.^ Walter and Hugh were
apparently minors at the time of their father's
death, and Henry at once made arrangements
for his son John to return to Ireland, and take
the fief of Meath into his hand. John had got
as far as Chester with this object, when Henry,
on learning of the death of his son Geoffrey
of Brittany, recalled him,^ and sent Philip of

^ Diet. Nat. Biog. Richard de Bellofago was a witness
to Hugh de Lacy's grant of Skreen to Adam de Feipo :
Chart. St. Mary's, Dubhn, vol. ii, p. 21. The family appear
to have settled in Ireland. Almaric de Beaufo possessed
the de Burgh Castle of Esclone in County Limerick in 1215 :
C. D. I., vol. i, no. 585 ; and Isabella de Beaufo appears in
1245 as owner of the castle of Clonard in Meath : ibid.,
no. 2762. By his Irish wife, the daughter of Rory O'Conor,
Hugh de Lacy had a son, Wilham, who afterwards appears
as a disturber of the peace and was ultimately killed by
O'Reilly of Breifny in 1233 (Four Masters). Three brothers
of William de Lacy, named Sir Henry Blund, Thomas
Blund, and another, are mentioned, C. D. I., vol. i, no. 1203.
Probably Hugh de Lacy's widow married a Blund.

2 Gesta Hen., vol. i, p. 350. Henry appears to have had
a scheme at this time for crowning John king of Ireland,

112 JOHN DE COURCY AND

Worcester to Ireland in John's place. ^ John's
grant of Meath to Walter de Lacy was made in
the reign of Richard I,^ and it is probable that
Walter did not get actual possession until 1194,
when he did homage to Richard I for his lands,
and when, we are told, he 'received the lord-
ship of Meath and apprehended Peter Pipard,
justiciar, with his comrades '.^ If this be so,
it is impossible to believe that Hugh de Lacy,
Walter's younger brother, could have been
justiciar in 11 89-9 L Moreover, the authority
for this statement seems to be the Book of
Howth, but the account there is quite untrust-
worthy, and actually confuses Hugh de Lacy
the elder with his son of the same name.*

and had obtained from Pope Urban III his sanction and
a crown of peacocks' feathers embroidered with gold (Rog.
de Hoveden, vol, ii, pp. 306-7), but it came to nothing.

1 Chronicle of St. Werburg's Abbey, Chester, as quoted
in Ware's Annals.

2 Gormanston Register, f. 5 dors. For Richard's con-
firmatory grant see ibid., f. 5.

3 Hist. GuiU. le Marechal, U. 10297-304, and Marl-
burgh's Chron. 1194 : ' Walterus de Lacy recepit dominium
de Media et Petrum Pipard justitiarium cum suis mihtibus
deprehendit' (T.C.D. MS. E, 3, 20, p. 135). Was Peter
Pipard intriguing with John against Walter de Lacy, just
as Meiler Fitz Henry afterwards intrigued against WiUiam
the Marshal ?

* Carew Calendar (Book of Howth), pp. 105-17. If the
whole passage be read attentively it will be seen that the
original compiler — adding, as he says, to the account of
Giraldus some passages from an English translation made in

EASTERN IRELAND 113

The next justiciar, according to Harris, was
William le Petit in 1191. This may be correct,
but the authority is not forthcoming. He was
a powerful baron in Meath, and, at any rate,
appears as justiciar later. Then in the same
year and up to 1194, when Peter Pipard is said
to have been justiciar, Harris places WiUiam the William
Marshal as governor. When we come to narrate Marshal
the doings of this great man we shall see how goygi-nor.
extremely improbable it is that he was governor,
or indeed in Ireland at all, at this time. In
short, our scanty authorities only warrant us in
stating that Peter Pipard was probably justiciar
in 1194;^ that Hamo de Valognes was justiciar
from about 1196 to shortly before the begin-
ning of John's reign ; ^ and that Peter Pipard

1551 by Primate Dowdall out of a Latin book found with
O'Neill at Armagh — has attempted to weave into the narra-
tive of Giraldus some traditional stories as to the death of
Sir Almaric de St. Laurent, the taking of John de Courcy,
and the subsequent career of the latter ; but in doing so
he has hopelessly confused the two Hughs. Probably he
intended the elder Hugh throughout. The confusion be-
comes quite manifest when the murder of the elder Hugh
at Durrow is spoken of as a just punishment for his malicious
treatment of John de Courcy (pp. 116-17).

^ Marlburgh's Chron. (as above). The entry on the
Coram Rege Roll relating to Peter Pipard's justiciarship
(Cal. Docs. Irel., vol. i, no. 116) probably refers to 1198-9.

2 Dubhn Annals of Inisf alien, 1196. In the Charter Roll
of the 1st John, Hamo de Valognes is repeatedly referred
to as having been justiciar. He was apparently still justiciar
in 1198 : Papal Letters, vol. i, p. 3.

1226 n H

114 JOHN DE COURCY AND

and William le Petit were ' joint justiciars ' for
a short time in 1198-9,^ until Meiler Fitz Henry
was appointed by King John.^ Meiler appears
to have been justiciar continuously up to about
the autumn of 1208, and Harris's list is again
faulty in making Hugh de Lacy lord-deputy in
1203 to 1205.^ There are many mandates to
Meiler as justiciar during this period. Hugh
de Lacy was, no doubt, carrying out the king's
wishes (and his own) in chasing John de Courcy
from Ulster, but this did not make him governor
or displace Meiler.

§ 2. John de Courcy as Justiciar and

IN Ulster

John de Of John de Courcy' s justiciarship we have few
ChiS'^ particulars. Giraldus tells us in general terms
Governor, ^j^^j. u^dcr his vigorous rule the kingdom began

1 Chart. St. Mary's, Dublin, vol. i, p. 144 ; vol. ii, p. 28.
This charter must be dated after Sept. 1198, when John,
a Cistercian monk, was consecrated by the Pope Bishop of
Leighlin : Papal Letters, vol. i, p. 3. Simon de Rocheford,
another witness, is called ' elect of Meath '. He is usually
stated to have succeeded Eugenius in 1194, but it is pretty
clear that he was not consecrated Bishop of Meath until
about 1198-9.

2 Rot. Chart., 2 John, p. 98 b. There are mandates to
Meiler as justiciar before this date. The earliest is dated
Sept. 4, 1199. Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 90.

^ Perhaps this second tenure of office was also suggested
by the apocryphal story in the Book of Howth : Car.
Cal., p. 111.

EASTERN IRELAND 115

to enjoy a more extended peace. The peace,
however, was confined to the settled districts in
the east of Ireland, as our author immediately
goes on to say that de Courcy did not permit
his troops to lie idle, but led them to the furthest
parts of the land, to Cork and Connaught, and
feared not to try the doubtful chances of war,
which were sometimes in his favour and some-
times against him. This leads to the exclama-
tion, ' Would that he had shown the prudence
of a general as well as the bravery of a soldier ! ' ^
The Irish annals say nothing about the expedi-
tion to Cork, which was presumably to aid the
settlers there, but under the year 1188 give some
details of the expedition to Connaught. This His ex-
province was still torn by the conflict between to Con-
Rory 0' Conor and his son Conor Maenmoy. jjgf *'
The peace patched up between them in 1185,^
on the basis of a division of Connaught, did
not last long. Before the year was out Conor
Maenmoy 'assumed the sovereignty of Con-
naught ', and next year he expelled his father.^
The new king was hostile to the English, and in
favour of taking active measures against them.
In 1187 he made an attack on Meath, burned
the newly erected mote-castle of Killare, and
killed all the English who were in it.* It was

1 Gir. Camb. v. 392. 2 Supra, p. 101.

3 Ann. Ulster, Ann. Loch Ce, 1186.

4 Four Masters, 1187.

H2

116 JOHN DE COURCY AND

probably to punish him for this outrage that
John de Courcy, as justiciar, made an incursion
into Connaught in the following year. He was
accompanied by Conor O'Dermot, an illegiti-
mate son of Rory 0' Conor, ^ and we may
perhaps infer that the pretext of the incursion
was the reinstatement of Rory 0' Conor. The
expedition was unsuccessful, however. Donnell
O'Brien on this occasion came to the support
of his former enemy, Conor Maenmoy, and the
English, after fruitlessly burning some churches,
endeavoured to return by way of Tirconnell.
They got as far as Ballysadare, when, on learning
that the Cinel Council were assembled to oppose
them, they once more turned through Connaught,
and after suffering some loss in the Curlew
Mountains they were forced to leave the
country ' without a whit of triumph '.^ Clearly
John de Courcy was outgeneralled, and it is
possible that he was soon afterwards superseded.
When John de Courcy surrendered his office
of justiciar he no doubt retired to his lordship
of Ulster, the southern part of which, at any

1 This Conor, grandson of Dermot, seems to have been
a son of Rory 0' Conor. It was at his instigation that Conor
Maenmoy was killed next year. He is then called in the
Annals of Loch Ce (1189) ' own brother ' of Conor Maenmoy ;
cf. Ann. Ulster, 1189. He may have been one of Rory's
numerous illegitimate progeny. He was killed in the same
year by Cathal Carragh, son of Conor Maenmoy.

2 Ann. Ulster, Ann. Loch Ce, 1188,

EASTERN IRELAND 117

rate, was already fully organized. As early as
1188 we read of the foreigners of the castle of
Magh Cobha ^ making an incursion into Tiro wen,
and in 1189 Armagh was plundered ; but no
permanent settlement was made there, and the
Newry river and Glenrigh may be regarded as
the boundary of the lordship in this direction.
Indeed, in many of the inland parts of the present
counties of Down and Antrim the Irish tribes
seem to have accepted the new order of things
and to have been undisturbed.

For several years we hear little more of John
de Courcy, and that ' little ' has already been
indicated in chapter xii. We may leave him
building his castles, founding his religious estab-
lishments, and governing his lordship like an
independent monarch, while we take a rapid
survey of the other great feudal lordships and

^ Magh Cobha was the name of the plain extending from
Dromore to Newry inhabited by the tribe of Ui Eathach
Cobha, a name now preserved in the baronies of Iveagh.
Perhaps the great mote at Dromore represents John de
Courcy's castle. The castle of ' Maincove ' is mentioned in
the confirmation by Innocent III of John de Courcy's
charter to St. Andrew de Stokes : Papal Letters, vol. i,
p. 17. It was rebuilt in stone in 1252 (Ann. Ulster ;
C. I). I., vol. ii, no. 124), and demolished by Brian O'Neill
in the following year : Ann. Ulster. It was restored
c. 1260: Irish Pipe Roll, 45 Hen. III. See Facsimiles
Nat. MSS. Ireland, pt. ii, pi. 73. The river Lagan, which
flows by Dromore, was in Magh Cobha. See Hogan's
Onomasticon.

118 JOHN DE COURCY AND

districts in the east of Ireland, and, so far as
our scanty materials allow, note the progress
made by the English colonists during the two
decades that followed Hugh de Lacy's death.
We shall then describe their expansion in Mun-
ster, and their dealings in Connaught during
the same period.

§ 3. English Uriel

Uriel. Between Ulster and Meath lay the Irish dis-

trict of Oirghialla (anglicized Uriel), roughly
equivalent at this time to the modern counties
of Louth, Armagh, and Monaghan. The eastern
portion of this district was overrun as early as
1176 by the English of Meath, and after 1177
by John de Courcy from Ulidia, but probably
no organized settlement was made in it, except
at Drogheda, and perhaps at Dundalk, until
after John's visit to Ireland in 1185. At that
time, or soon afterwards, John seems to have
treated the modern county of Louth as already
conquered, and to have granted two large
fiefs in it to two of his followers, while reserv-
ing a considerable slice for the Crown. ^ To
Bertram de Verdun, his seneschal, he gave
a district now represented by the barony of

1 References to the authorities for the statements in this
section as to the Anglo-Norman settlement in Louth will
be found in my paper on ' Motes and Norman Castles in
Co. Louth ', Joum. R. S. A. I. 1908, pp. 241-69.

EASTERN IRELAND 119

Dundalk, and perhaps the eastern half of the
barony of Ferrard as well, and to Roger (or
perhaps to Gilbert) Pipard he gave the barony
of Ardee. Certainly this barony was afterwards
held along with the parish of Donaghmoyne, in
Farney, County Monaghan, by Roger, brother of
Gilbert Pipard. The king retained the barony
of Louth in his own hand, and portions of it
were granted from time to time to smaller
holders. The church-lands of Iniskeen, Dromis-
kin, Termonfeckin, Mellifont, and Monaster-
boice were, as usual, not interfered with. The
abbey of Mellifont, founded by Donough 0' Car-
roll in 1158, was now at the height of its fame,
and here in 1189 died Donough's son, Murrough,
the last king of undivided Uriel, and here in
1193 Dervorgil, the teterrima causa belli, ended
her days at the age of eighty-five.

Bertram de Verdun was made custodian of Bertram
the Bridge of Drogheda. This expression would verdun.
seem to include the castle of the bridge, often
afterwards mentioned. This castle stood on the
mote which still exists on the Meath side of the
river. It was probably erected by Hugh de
Lacy the elder to guard the bridge, and came
into John's hand on Hugh's death. It was
afterwards retained as a royal castle, and rent
by way of compensation was paid to Walter de
Lacy and his successors for more than a century.
When the town was walled on the Meath side,

120 JOHN DE COURCY AND

the town walls were carried up the steep river
bank to join the wall of the castle-bailey, and
the mote and bailey then probably occupied
the southern salient of the town walls. ^ At
some subsequent time the wall on the eastern
side was altered so as to include St. Mary's
Church and a larger portion of the town.
More recently the place was fitted up for
barracks, but with all the changes of cen-
turies the original mote and bailey plan has
been in all essentials preserved up to the
present day.

The caput of the de Verdun barony of Dundalk
was at Castletown, about a mile to the west of
the town, where an important mote marks the
site of the first Norman castle. This mote has
been supposed to be the dun delga of Cuchulainn,
one of the principal figures in the Red Branch
cycle of tales. It is possible that it occupies
the site of an older Celtic fort, but as it stands
it is essentially a Norman structure.^ There was
an ancient fishing-village at Dundalk before this,
but * the new vill ' or ' Stradbally (street-town)
of Dundalk ' owed its origin to the Anglo-

1 This may be inferred from the murage grants, that of
1318 being ' in subsidium ville predicte claudende usque ad
muros castri nostri ejusdem ville' : Hist, and Mun. Docs.
Ireland, p. 413. At the present day the remains of the toM n
wall join the wall of the bailey on the west side.

2 See my paper, ' Motes and Norman Castles in Co. Louth '
(as above), pp. 256-61.

EASTERN IRELAND 121

Norman settlers, and to the protection afforded
by the castle-town. Bertram de Verdun re-
mained in Ireland after John left at the close
of 1185, when Gerald de Barry was his guest. ^
The position of his house just outside the walls
of Dublin, was long marked by the name
' Curia Bertrami '.^ He is said to have founded
the hospital of St. Leonard at Dundalk for
Ouciferi, but how far he exploited his lands in
Uriel is uncertain. He accompanied Richard I
on his crusade and died at Joppa in 1192. He
was succeeded by his son Thomas, about whom
little has hitherto been known. A remarkable
document, however, preserved in the Gorman-
ston Register, explains how Hugh de Lacy the
younger obtained lands from Thomas de Verdun
in the north of the present county of Louth,
and throws light on the methods of expansion
contemplated by the settlers. This document is,
in the first place, an acknowledgement that
Thomas de Verdun had given to Hugh de Lacy
in frank marriage with Thomas's sister Leceline
de Verdun the moiety of his land in Uriel,
retaining, however, to himself and his heirs the
castle of Dundalk and five knights' fees in its
vicinity ; and, in the second place, an agreement
to divide equally between the parties whatever
they may acquire in the ' land of war ' in their

1 Gir. Camb. i. 65.

2 See Gilbert's Hist, of Dublin, vol. i, p. 239.

122 JOHN DE COURCY AND

respective parts of Uriel. ^ Hence, probably, the
division of the barony into Upper and Lower
Dundalk.

Thomas de Verdun died in 1199, presumably
without issue, and was succeeded by his brother
Nicholas. The latter, in 1203, was given the
custody of ' the bridge of Drogheda as his father
held it ',^ and soon afterwards he obtained
seisin of all his father's lands in Ireland.^ He
was the ancestor of a distinguished Anglo-Irish
house, and his grandson, John de Verdun, by
his marriage with Margaret de Lacy, one of the
two granddaughters and co-heiresses of Walter
de Lacy, became entitled to a moiety of the
lordship of Meath.
Roger The ca'put of Roger Pipard's barony was at

Ardee, where a great mote known as ' Castle-

1 Gormanston Register, f. 189 dors. This agreement
must be dated between 1192 and 1199. The latter clause
runs as follows : ' Et quicquid prefati Thomas et Hugo de
Lacy poterint conquirere in terra gwerre in partibus suis
terre de Ergallo totum inter se dimidiabunt sicut dimidiaue-
runt inter se terram pacis.' For the date of Thomas de
Verdun's death I can only refer to Gilbert, Chart. St. Mary's,
Dublin, vol. i, p. 66, note.

2 Liberate, 5 John, p. 59.

^ Rot. Claus., 7 John, m. 23 (p. 38). His principal manors
were Dundalk and Clonmore ; the latter was in the barony
of Ferrard. One of his feudatories was Henry de Wotton,
to whom he granted five knights' fees in the hilly district
north of Dundalk : Chart. St. Mary's Abbey, Dublin,
vol. i, p. 65.

EASTERN IRELAND 123

guard ', though much mutilated, in all probability
marks the spot.^ Roger was brother of Gilbert
Pipard, who accompanied Prince John to
Ireland in 1185, and may have been the original
grantee,^ and of Peter Pipard, justiciar in 1194,
and he was himself a trusted officer of King
John. He founded the priory of St. John the
Baptist at Ardee.^ In 1193 he erected the castle
of Donaghmoyne, where a strongly-defended
mote, bearing the ruins of a later stone castle,
still excites the wonder of the visitor by its
size and strength.* Roger Pipard was a faithful
servant of King John, and was made seneschal
of Ulster and custodian of the castle of Rath
(Dundrum), after the disseisin of Hugh de Lacy

^ This mote as figured in Louthiana (by T, Wright, 1748)
shows the foundations of an octagonal keep surrounded
by an octagonal parapet or wall on its summit. It was
encircled by two ditches and ramparts, and had an earthen
wall or approach crossing the ditches and running up the
mote.

2 Gilbert Pipard accompanied Richard I on his crusade,
and died at Brundusium : Gesta Ricardi, p. 150.

3 This foundation is placed by Ware in the year 1207.

^ Ann. Loch Ce, 1193. In the year 1244 it was enclosed
or fortified with stone, do chumhdach do chlochaibh : Ann.
Ulster. The ruins at present existing may well date from
this time. The earthworks consist of a lofty mote sur-
rounded by a deep fosse and wide rampart. The western
end is further defended by a second fosse and rampart, and
an excavated pond. At the eastern side is a lofty bailey,
strongly fortified, and beyond this a second one at a lower
level.

124 JOHN DE COURCY AND

in 1210. For about a century he and his
representatives were lords of Ardee. He died
in 1225. His great-grandson, Ralph Pipard, in
the beginning of the fourteenth century, sur-
rendered all his Irish lands to Edward I.

Among the feudatories of Roger Pipard were
Ralph de Repenteni, lord of Drumcar and
Killany, now parishes at the east and west
extremities of the barony ; Ralph de Vernun,
lord of ' Balisconan ' (including Stabannon),
whose daughter, Cecilia, married Geoffrey des
Auters. Other tenants or sub-tenants were Hugh
de Clinton (Clintonstown and Drumcashel in the
parish of Stabannon), Geoffrey de Hadeshore,
Peter de Maupas (Mapestown), and Robert Mor,
all bearing names for many years distinguished
in the County Louth. ^
Barony In John's barony of Louth the castle was

already in existence in 1196, when it and the
town were plundered and destroyed by Niall
MacMahon and the Ulidians.^ The castle was
soon rebuilt, and in 1204 Meiler Fitz Henry, the
justiciar, was ordered to take the city of Louth
into the king's hand, and make what improve-
ments he could in it.^ The castle was probably
situated on the mote which still exists near the

^ These and other names may be gleaned from among
the benefactors of St. Mary's Abbey, DubUn.

2 Ann. InisfaUen, Dubhn MS., 1196.

3 Rot. Pat., 5 John, p. 38 ; Rot. Claus., 6 Jolin, p. 16 b.

EASTERN IRELAND 125

glebe-house, and which appears to have been
connected with the town trench. We read also
of two subordinate manors in the neighbourhood,
Castlefranc and Ays, the capita of which are now
represented by the motes of Castlering and Mount
Ash. In the eastern part of the barony of
Louth the old Celtic monastery of Dromiskin had
long ceased to exist, but the church-lands there
were recognized as a manor belonging to the
Archbishop of Armagh. Among the knights
who followed John in 1210 to Carrickfergus were
Robert de Mandeville and Ralph Gernon. To
the former he seems to have granted the lands
known from him as Mandevillestown ^ (now
corruptly Mansfieldstown), and perhaps the
latter was the first grantee of the manor of
Killincoole, which, together with Gernonstown
(now Castlebellingham), was held by a family
of that name for centuries.^ The first grantee
of the manor of Darver is uncertain.^

^ See Close Roll, 13 Hen. Ill, m. 9; Calendar, vol, i,
no. 1677, where ' Lune ' stands for ' Luveth ', and cf.
nos. 1284 and 1681.

2 Richard, son and heir of WiUiam Gernon, was a tenant
in capite of the Crown in 1229 : Cal. Docs. Ireland, i, no.
1729, 38th Rep. D. K., p. 72.

^ Prior to 1286 the Manor of Derver was held by Richard
of Exeter as tenant in capite of the Crown : Irish Pipe Roll,
16 Ed. I, 37th Rep. D. K., p. 35. A member of the family
of Babe held it from the close of the fourteenth century to
Stuart times.

126 JOHN DE COURCY AND

§ 4. Meath

Meath. Hugh de Lacy's murder in 1186 was probably

an act of private revenge, and does not appear
to have been followed by any general outbreak
in Meath. His lands were taken into the king's
hand, and it was probably not until 1194 that
Walter Hugh's son Walter got possession.^ Walter
continued his father's work of feudal organiza-
tion, renewed the grant which had already been
made of ' the law of Bristol ' to the burgesses of
Trim, and, perhaps for the first time, gave a
similar charter to the burgesses of Kells.^ To
Hugh his brother, Hugh de Lacy, he gave the barony
junior. ' of Ratoath, and at the same time the confiscated
lands of Gilbert de Nangle, in the barony of
Morgallion.^
Simon de The first Anglo-Norman Bishop of Meath was
ford/ Simon de Rocheford (1198-1224). He founded
T/Meath ^^ Augustinian priory at Newtown near Trim,
the picturesque ruins of which still remain, and
for about three centuries the chapel of the
priory served as the cathedral church of the
diocese. It was probably after the year 1200,
when Clonard was burnt by the Irish, that the

^ Supra, p. 112. ^ Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 10.

3 Gormanston Register, f. 188 dors. Supra, pp. 76, 84.
John's confirmatory charter, as transcribed in the same
Register, is dated December 4 a. r. 10 Richard I (1198).
' apud [Injsulam Andh[elys]."

EASTERN IRELAND 127

episcopal seat was moved here. Simon de
Rocheford did much to consoHdate and organize
the diocese. In early times there were several
bishops in Meath. As elsewhere, they were
tribal rather than diocesan, but the rural
deaneries of Meath may be taken as representing
the ancient bishoprics. The policy of consolida-
tion began with the Synod of Kells in 1152,
but Simon de Rocheford carried it further by
ordaining that ' in the churches of Trim, Kells,
Slane, Skryne, and Dunshaughlin, which were
at one time episcopal sees in Meath, but are now
heads of rural deaneries, for the future arch-
presbyters be appointed '.^

During all this period we hear of no serious
fighting with the native tribes. The whole of
East Meath and much of West Meath had been
parcelled out amongst Hugh de Lacy's barons,
and the whole lordship was studded with mote-
fortresses. The Irish inhabitants seem in general
to have lived quite contentedly under their
new lords. The late ruling family, the O'Melagh-
lins, still claimed to be kings of West Meath,
but their power appears to have been gradually
confined to the barony of Clonlonan. Almost
the only recorded disturbance arose from out- Castle of
side. In 1187 Conor Maenmoy, who had expelled
his father Rory from Connaught, made an

^ Wilkins's Concilia, i, 547.

128 JOHN DE COURCY AND

unprovoked incursion into West Meath, and,
assisted by Melaghlin Beg, burned and destroyed
the castle of Killare and killed its garrison.^ It is
doubtful if it was ever rebuilt, but the position
in the west of the lordship was strengthened
Other by the erection of mote-castles at Rathconarty
(now Rathconrath) in 1191, and at Ardnurcher
and Kilbixy in 1192.^ The two last were in
lands granted to Meiler Fitz Henry and Geoffrey
de Costentin respectively, and in process of time
they were replaced by stone castles and small
towns grew up under their protection. At
Tristernagh, near Kilbixy, Geoffrey de Costentin,
about the year 1200, founded a priory of canons
regular.^ In the same year Richard de Tuit
erected a castle on a large mote at Granard in
the present county of Longford, ' as a stronghold
against O'Reilly of Brefifny.' * This may be
taken as the limit of the colony in this direction,
though some other mote-fortresses were built in
the south-eastern baronies of County Longford,

1 Four Masters, 1187. 2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1191, 1192.

^ Ware, quoting from the Register of Tristernagh.

4 Ann. InisfaUen (Dublin MS.), Ann. Loch Ce, 1199.
The mote is about 40 feet high, and still retains traces of
stone foundations round the top surface. There is a small
bailey attached, and the whole is nearly surrounded by
a mutilated earthen rampart. O'Donovan says that about
fifty years before he wrote the arched vaults of a castle, built
of cut stone and well cemented, were found within the mote :
Four Masters, 1262, note o.

EASTERN IRELAND 129

then considered part of the ancient kingdom
of Meath. A few years later Richard de Tuit
founded the Cistercian abbey of Larha, near
Granard. We do not know exactly when the
mote at Athlone was erected to guard the im-
portant ford across the Shannon against the
0' Conors, but it was probably before the year
1199, when Cathal Crovderg burned the bawn of
Athlone and carried off many cows from the
foreigners.^

§ 5. Dublin

Dublin appears to have grown considerably, Dublin,
and to have become a flourishing commercial
town during these twenty years. To this period
must be referred the list of 1600 Dublin citizens,
of which we have already given an analysis.^
In the year 1192 John granted an extended Charter of
charter to his citizens of Dublin — to those
dwelling outside the walls as well as to those
dwelling within.^ The boundaries south of
the Liffey extended from the river Dodder to
Kilmainham, and on the north from Grange-
gorman to the river Tolka. The principal
liberties granted by this charter were to the
following effect : that citizens should not be
obliged to plead beyond their walls except as
regards external tenements, nor be liable to

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1199. 2 Swpra, vol. i, pp. 270-1.

^ Hist, and Mun. Docs. Ireland, pp. 51-5.

1226 II I

130 JOHN DE COURCY AND

a general fine for murder ; that they might
clear themselves on any appeal by compurgation,
instead of by wager of battle ; that they should
not be liable to forcible billeting ; that (as before)
they should be free from certain tolls throughout
John's dominions ; that they should not be
amerced in fines except according to the law
of their hundred-court ; that the usages of the
city should prevail as regards their lands, debts,
and mortgages held or contracted therein ; that
no foreign merchant should buy corn, hides, or
wool in the city except from a citizen, nor
should open a wine-tavern except on board ship,
nor sell cloth by retail in the city, nor tarry
therein with his wares for more than forty days ;
that citizens, other than the principal debtor or
sureties, should not be distrained anywhere for
debts ; that they might contract marriages for
themselves, their sons, daughters, and widows,
without licence of their lords, who should only
have the custody during infancy of tenements
of the lord's fee ; that no assize of recognition
should be held in the city ; that the citizens
should have all reasonable guilds as the burgesses
of Bristol had ; that the citizens, by common
consent, might dispose freely of lands and
messuages within the boundaries to be held in
free burgage, and might freely build, subject to
the rights of those to whom John had already
given charters. This, the first extended charter

EASTERN IRELAND 131

granted in Ireland, was modelled on the charter
given by John to Bristol in 1188, and was soon
followed by others, similarly framed, and granted
by the various feudal owners to the principal
towns in their domains, as they grew to be of
consequence.

As we have already noted, it was during this
period that Archbishop Cumin converted the Arch-
parochial church of St. Patrick de Insula into cumm.
a collegiate church, and endowed it with thir-
teen prebends. Close by, at St. Sepulchre's, he
appears to have had his principal residence.
By moving outside the walls, however, he did
not escape coming into conflict with Hamo de
Valognes, who was justiciar in 1196-8. Hamo
and his men are said to have done great injuries
to the archbishop and the Church in 1197. What
these injuries were we are not told, but the
archbishop took them so seriously that he excom-
municated the offenders, and, pronouncing an
interdict upon the archbishopric, went into exile.
Like the men of Connaught in the face of Miles de
Cogan's incursion in 1177, he 'ordered the crosses
and images of the cathedral church to be laid
an the ground and to be surrounded with thorns,
that thus these malefactors might be smitten
with fear and be checked in their intentions to
rage against the property of the Church '. The
3arved Christ on the cross showed, it is said,
miraculous signs of agony, but in vain. The

12

132 JOHN DE COURCY AND

archbishop appealed to King Richard and to
Earl John, but without success.^ In December
1204 the Pope threatened an interdict if John
did not replace the archbishop in his favour.^
Ultimately Hamo is said to have compensated
the archbishop by a grant of ' twenty carucates
of land in Ucunil '.^ John Cumin had other
quarrels about property with King John. Like
Becket, when once made archbishop he was
a great stickler for the rights of his see, which
he left immensely richer than it was when he
received it.

§ 6. The Crown Lands and Leinster

The In the crown lands of Dublin, Wicklow, and

lands and Watcrford, as in the whole lordship of Leinster,
einster. ^^ read of no fighting. As we saw when review-
ing the sub-infeudation of Leinster, large tracts
of country were left by Earl Richard in the
hands of the Irish, either by arrangement with
the native princes or because they were not
thoroughly subdued. Thus in the northern

1 Roger de Hoveden (1197) iv. 29-30.

2 Cal. Papal Letters (Bliss) i. 18.

3 Crede Mihi, p. 66, Tliis grant probably consisted of
one knight's fee in Culballysiward (near Bruree in Upper
ConneUo), together with a tenement in Bruree, given by
Hamo, Lord of Tniskyfty, to the predecessor of John de
Sanford, Archbishop of Dubhn, as found by an inquisi-
tion of 1289 (quoted by Mr. Westropp, Journ. R. S. A. I.
1903, p. 29). Cf. Cal Liber Niger Alani, p. 771.

EASTERN IRELAND 133

part of the present county of Wexford and
adjoining portions of the Counties Carlo w and
Wicklow, the tribes of Okinselagh seem to have
been left by the earl under the rule of Murtough
McMurrough. He lived on to 1193. We hear
no more of the Mc Murroughs nor of any disturb-
ance from them until the reign of Edward I.
Indeed, even then the disturbance first arose
from the O'Tooles and 0' Byrnes. In Upper
Ossory the Mac GiUapatricks still held sway ;
in parts of Leix the O'Mores, and in the western
parts of Offaly the 0' Conors and O'Dempsys
held much of their own. The county of Kildare
was, as we have seen, very fully parcelled out,
and some of the tribes, such as the O'Tooles and
O'Bjrrnes, retreated to the uplands of the County
Wicklow, where they maintained their tribal
organization and a lawless freedom, and were
afterwards from time to time a source of danger
and injury to the colony.

In 1189, after the accession of Richard I,
Isabel de Clare, the heiress of Leinster and of
many lands besides, was given in marriage to
William Marshal, and soon afterwards he seems
to have obtained seisin of his Irish lordship.
With the possible exception of one or two brief
visits, he did not come to Ireland until the close
of the year 1206, and we shall reserve our
account of him and his doings in Ireland to
a subsequent chapter.

134 JOHN DE COURCY AND

§ 7. The Downfall of John de Courcy

We must now return to John de Courcy,

who after twenty years of prosperity in Ulster

entered upon a stormy period which ended in

John de his downfall. While the air in the north was

maS" still unruffled, however, acting apparently as an

iUWone^ emissary of the government and accompanied

by one of the de Lacys, probably his neighbour

Hugh, he led an army in 1195 to Athlone,

where he negotiated a peace with Cathal Crovderg

O' Conor, King of Connaught, who had been making

raids on the Anglo-Norman settlement inMunster.

To this expedition we shall recur when we have

described the events in Munster which led to it.

In 1197 Jordan de Courcy, John's brother,

Murder of was slain by an Irishman of his household. This

Jordan de ■, . i x • • j. • t i ?

Courcy. murder seems to mark a turning-point m J ohn s
career. Certainly after it he became more
aggressive. He is said to have avenged his
brother's death on certain petty kings, sub-
jugating their territories and giving no small
part of them to Duncan, son of Gilbert of
Galloway, who had come to his aid.^ This is
the first we hear of a Scottish settlement in the
neighbourhood of Coleraine, where large grants
were afterwards made to Scots of Galloway
by King John. Indeed, we need have no hesi-
tation in connecting the erection in this year of
^ Roger of Hoveden, iv. 25.

EASTERN IRELAND 135

the castle of Kilsantain or Kilsantail, identified The

ofisljjf* or

with the mote of Mount Sandel near Coleraine, Kiisan-
and the devastation of the adjoining cantred of
Keenaught in Tirowen,^ with this expedition.

Since the year 1177 an intermittent struggle
for the kingship of Tirowen appears to have been
going on between the 0' Loughlins and the O'Neills ,
the latter a name afterwards illustrious in the
annals of Ireland, but now for the first time
coming to the front. Between the years 1186
and 1201 no fewer than four kings of the
Cinel Owen were killed and three deposed, while
for several of these years Flaherty O'Muldory,
King of Tirconnell, taking advantage of the
weakness due to this intestine feud, had imposed
his rule over Tirowen. In 1196 an O'LoughUn
was killed by his own people, and it was appar-
ently on behalf of another O'Loughlin that the
first expedition from the castle of Kilsantail
into Tirowen was made in 1197.^ In that year Raids
Flaherty O'Muldory died, and for four years Tirowen.
John de Courcy made repeated plundering
expeditions, with varying success, to Derry and
Inishowen, but no permanent settlement seems
to have been effected.

In 1201 John de Courcy, in company with

1 Ann. Ulster, Four Masters, 1197 ; Ann. Loch Ce, 1196.

2 Ann. Ulster, 1197 ; Ann. Loch Ce, 1196. John de
Courcy' s men ' were slaughtered to a large number around
the son of Ardgal O'Loughlin'.

136 JOHN DE COURCY AND

Expedi- Hugh de Lacy, made an unsuccessful expedi-
te Con- tion into Connaught to assist Cathal Crovderg
"20^*' O' Conor, who had been expelled by his grand-
nephew Cathal Carragh.^ He seems, indeed,
always to have welcomed the prospect of a fight
and to have hearkened to the call of almost any
dispossessed chieftain, hoping no doubt to get
profit to himself by the way. But in all his
campaigning, which for the most part was un-
successful, we seem to see the truth of Gerald
de Barry's criticism that he was ' more of a
soldier than of a general '. Within his lordship
of Uladh, however, after the first few years of
his occupation, we hear of no fighting. We may
conclude that he dominated the whole country
to the east of the Bann, Lough Neagh, and the
Newry river,^ and that the native tribes there
acquiesced in his rule. To attain this result he
must have been something of a statesman.
But the fall of this remarkable man was near
The fall at hand. He incurred the wrath of King John
Courcy. ^ ^^^ succumbcd to the treachery of his com-
panions in arms, the de Lacys. John de
Courcy's expeditions into Connaught will be
better understood when the relations of the
rival claimants to the throne there with the

1 See below, p. 187.

2 The distribution of motes in Ulster, most of which were
probably erected in John de Courcy's time, would alone
indicate this.

EASTERN IRELAND 137

English government and with WilHam de Burgh
have been examined. Here we may observe
that these expeditions cannot have been the real
cause of the king's ire against John de Courcy
or of his ultimate ruin.^ This supposition would
not only seem to be excluded by the dates,
but would fail to account for the royal favour
bestowed on the de Lacys, one of whom at any
rate shared in de Courcy' s expedition. Some
other cause of the royal ire must be sought.
Probably de Courcy refused to do homage to
John as king, and claimed to rule in Ulster
independently.^ Perhaps, too, there is truth
in the tradition that he afterwards used very

1 In a mandate dated the 4th of September, 1199, the
king bids Meiler Fitz Henry inquire whether Henry Tirel
' had sided with John de Courcy and W. de Lacy and aided
them in destroying the king's land of Ireland ' : Cal. Docs.
Ireland, vol. i, no. 90. This cannot refer to the Connaught
expedition of 1201, and is unlikely to refer to that of 1195.
It is more probable that it refers to John de Courcy's raids
into Tirowen in 1198-9, though there is no mention in
the annals of his being accompanied there by one of the
de Lacys. According to the story of John de Courcy's
treacherous arrest as told by Roger de Hoveden, Hugh de
Lacy said he was John's liegeman. It is very probable
that Hugh held lands of John in Ulster or perhaps in the
north of the present County Louth. Perhaps the W. de
Lacy of John's mandate was WiUiam de Lacy, son of the
elder Hugh by the daughter of Rory O'Conor.

2 This is intimated in the Laud MS. Annals (Chart.
St. Mary's, Dublin, ii. 309) and in the Book of Howth,
p. 111. Roger de Hoveden (iv. 162), when giving, after

138 JOHN DE COURCY AND

plain language with regard to John's treatment
of Arthur of Brittany. Nothing would have
been more Hkely to arouse John's vindictive-
ness. But, indeed, to judge by authenticated
facts alone, John would appear to have behaved
with unwonted forbearance, and the person
whose conduct in the affair shows worst was
not the king, but Hugh de Lacy, who was ready
to do the bidding of the king, to his own advan-
tage, but to the ruin of his former friend and
companion in arms. The authenticated facts
are as follows : On arriving in Meath after his
forced retreat from Connaught in 1201, John
de Courcy was treacherously arrested by the
de Lacys, and would have been delivered up
to the king, ' who had long wished to take
him,' only that his release was obtained by his
followers as the price of their ceasing to ravage
the de Lacv lands. ^ He returned to Uladh,
and in July 1202 was offered a safe-conduct to
and from the king's court ' to treat of peace '."
This he must have ignored, for in 1203 Hugh de
Lacy followed him to Uladh, defeated him in

the manner of chroniclers, a list of sovereigns synchronously
reigning in the year 1201, winds up in a curious way with
' John de Courcy reigning in Ulster'. This has the air of
being a court sarcasm current at the time.

^ Roger de Hoveden, iv, 176 ; Ann. Loch Ce, Ann.
Inisfallen (DubHn), Ann. Ulster, 1201 ; cf. Ann. Clonmac-
nois, 1200, and Four Masters, 1199. The true date seems
to be 1201. 2 Rot. Pat., 4 John, m. 11 (p. 15 b).

EASTERN IRELAND 139

a battle at Downpatrick, and banished him
from his lordship.^ In September a safe-conduct
was issued to him to go to the king and return
' if he does not make peace with us '.^ Appar-
ently he gave hostages at this time and under-
took to go to the king, but failed to perform his
undertaking. On the 31st of August, 1204, the
king ordered Meiler Fitz Henry and Walter de
Lacy to summon John de Courcy to come forth-
with to the king's service, ' as he had sworn and
given hostages to do ', and in default to con-
fiscate his lands.^ Probably the list of his
hostages entered on the Patent Roll for the 6th
John are those referred to. The names are those
of his principal vassals or their sons.* At the

1 Arm. Loch Ce, Ann. Clonmacnois, Four Masters, 1203,
Ann. Ulster, 1204. 2 Rot. Pat., 5 John, m. 6 (p. 34 b).

3 Pat. Roll, 6 John, m. 9 (p. 45).

* Pat. Roll, 6 John, m. 1 dors (p. 55 b). The names are
Milo, son of John de Courcy juvenis ; Robin, son of William
Salvage ; John de Courcy, son of Roger of Chester ; Wilkin,
son of Augustine de Ridal ; Peter, son of Wilham Haket ;
Alexander, son of WilUam Sarazein ; John, son of Adam
the chamberlain ; John, son of Richard Fitz Robert. Of
these names the following appear as witnesses to John de
Courcy's charter granting full jurisdiction over their men
and tenements to the prior and monks of the church of
Down : Wilham Savage, Roger of Chester, WiUiam Hacket,
Wilham Saracen, Adam the chamberlain, and Richard
Fitz Robert : Pat. RoU, 42 Ed. 111. Milo, son of John de
Courcy, is supposed by Lodge to have been son of the
conqueror of Ulster and ancestor of the Earls of Kinsale.
He may have been son of John, son of Roger of Chester.

140 JOHN DE COURCY AND

same time the king ordered all the barons of
Ulster, who had pledged their oaths and given
hostages for John de Courcy, to cause their
lord to come to the king's service, and threatened
in default to betake himself to their hostages
and their fiefs. ^ John de Courcy must have
still proved contumacious. A new expedition
was made by Hugh de Lacy, apparently in
September; a battle was fought, and John de
Courcy was taken prisoner. He was, however,
permitted to go free, according to one account,
' on being crossed to go to Jerusalem '. He
appears, however, to have gone to Tirowen
instead.^ On the 21st of October a new safe-
conduct was given to him to Mid-Lent,^ and
this was afterwards extended till Easter, but
there is nothing to show that he availed himself
of it. The forfeiture was at last deemed com-
Hugh de plete, and Hugh de Lacy got his reward. On
Ivelted ^he 29th of May, 1205, the king granted to Hugh
Earl of (Je Lacy all the land of Ulster, whereof the king
belted him earl, to hold of the king in fee as
John de Courcy held it on the day when Hugh
conquered and took him prisoner in the field,

1 Pat. Roll, 6 John, m. 9 (p. 45 b).

2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1204. In the Ann. Clonmacnois and
Four Masters (1204) and Ann. Ulster (1205) it is stated that
he sought protection in Tirowen — a further indication
that there was a party which favoured him there.

3 Pat. Roll, 6 John, m. 7 (p. 47) and m. 4 (p. 50).

EASTERN IRELAND 141

rendering the service of one knight for every
cantred.^

John de Courcy, however, made a further
effort to recover his lordship. He appealed to
the Pope and obtained a worthless mandate
addressed to the Archbishop of Armagh, the
Bishop of Down, and the Abbot of Ines, to order
Hugh de Lacy, if he had unjustly made war
against John, to restore what he had taken.^
He obtained more tangible assistance from his Joh" dp

^ _ Courcy s

brother-in-law Reginald, King of Man and the last
Isles, and, having collected a large host and
a fleet of one hundred ships, he landed at
Strangford harbour and proceeded to lay siege
to ' the castle of Rath '. This castle has been
identified with the well-known castle of Dun-
drum,^ the ruins of which include a fine circular
donjon tower built on a platform of rock, and
possibly dating from John de Courcy' s time.
It guards the only practicable approach by land
into Lecale, and hence the importance of securing

1 Rot. Chart., 7 Jolm, p. 151 ; Rot. Pat., 6 John, p. 54.
A httle later (June 30) the king bade Meiler Fitz Henry
place confidence in the representations of Hugh de Lacy,
now sent by the king as a sort of coadjutor. The justiciar
was not to wage war against the marchers except by advice
of Walter and Hugh de Lacy and of the other subjects of
the king whose fidelity and service are necessary to main-
tain war.

2 Papal Letters (Bhss), vol. i, Kal. Jul. 1205.

^ Joum. R. S. A. I. 1909, pp. 23-9. It may, however, be
doubted whether the circular keep was introduced so early.

142 JOHN DE COURCY AND

it at once. The castle, however, was apparently
too strong to be taken by assault, and John
commenced the tardier operations of a siege.
The effort was of no avail. Walter de Lacy
came with a large army and dispersed the
invading force. ^ What happened to John de
Courcy is obscure. He certainly never recovered
his lordship. There are numerous legends,
some of them of respectable antiquity,^ but in
the absence of confirmation we can place no
reliance upon them. All we know for certain is
that on the 14th of November, 1207, the king
granted him licence to come to England and
remain with his friends, adding that when it

1 Cliron. Manniae et Insularum, 1204-5 (Manx Society,
vol. xxii). Reginald, King of Man, is here called John de
Courcy 's son-in-law {gener). He was his brother-in-law.

2 The oldest form in which these stories have reached us
is to be found in the Laud MS. Annals (printed Chart.
St. Mary's Abbey, Dublin, vol. ii, pp. 308-10), a transcript
dating from the fifteenth century. According to this it
would appear that John de Courcy was captured by Hugh
de Lacy in 1204 and thrown into prison. Afterwards King
John sent for him to fight a duel as his champion against
the champion of the King of France. The latter, however,
hearing of de Courcy's prowess, dechned the combat. The
two kings, after witnessing a proof of de Courcy's extra-
ordinary strength, rewarded him, and John gave him
back his lordship of Ulster. Accordingly de Courcy made
fifteen attempts to land in Ireland, but failed each time
through contrary winds. He then, after staying a while
with the monks of Chester, returned to France, where
he died.

EASTERN IRELAND 143

was the king's pleasure he should no longer
remain the king would give him forty days'
notice.^ Probably John de Courcy accepted
this permission and became reconciled with the
king, as it seems that the king afterwards made
use of his services. For, as we shall see, when
King John came to Ireland in 1210, fulminating
wrath and destruction on Hugh de Lacy and
all his kith and kin, he seems to have brought
John de Courcy with him, and to have employed
him specially to bring into captivity some of
the fugitives from Carrickfergus. And again
at a later period, on the 20th of June, 1216,
just at the moment when Louis of France, to
whom London had opened its gates, was
besieging Winchester, John issued a mandate
to all his constables to aid John de Courcy and
his followers in annoying the king's enemies and
in securing any booty he might acquire from
them.^ This mandate can hardly refer to any one
but the former lord of Ulster. There is some
evidence that early in the reign of Henry III
some of his English lands were restored to him ; ^

1 Rot. Pat., 9 John, p. 77.

2 Rot. Pat., 18 John, m. 7.

3 Rot. Claus., 2 Hen. Ill, m. 15 dors (p. 376), where his
name occurs in a hst apparently of those who had returned
to their allegiance, and to whom seisin of their lands was
to be given. See Mr. Round's article in the Diet. Nat.
Biog., and cf. the curious certificate given by Hen. Ill in
1251, Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 3202.

144 JOHN DE COURCY

but he must have died before the 22nd of Sep
tember, 1219, when a mandate was issued to the
justiciar of Ireland to cause Affreca, wife of the
late John de Courcy, to have dower out of the
tenements of her late husband.^

John de Courcy left no legitimate offspring,-
and no records are forthcoming to connect him
with the Patrick de Courcy who appears in 1221
as a tenant-in-chief in Cork,^ and who may be
regarded as a progenitor of the long line of
barons of Kinsale. Some relationship between
the two is very probable, though on this point
history is mute. But history is not mute as to
the effect of John de Courcy's rule in Uladh.
From his time and to his orderly rule we may
trace the early prosperity of Eastern Ulster * ;
and this prosperity, though in after ages nearly
destroyed, was never wholly lost.

1 Rot. Claus., 3 Hen. Ill, p. 401 b.

2 Gir. Camb. v 409 (written c. 1210).
^ See supra, p. 49.

4 Few monetary records survive ; but in 1226, though
following on a disturbed period, the sums received from the
baiUwicks of Antrim, Carrickfergus, the Ards, Blathewic
(Lr. Castlereagh), and Lecale, amounted to £936. Rot.
Claus., 11 Hen. Ill, p. 205. Thirty-six years later the sum
of £464 was received by the Crown from a few manors in
the northern part of County Antrim : Facsimiles Nat.
MSS. Irel, pt. ii, pi. 73.

CHAPTER XYIII

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK
1192-1206

While throughout the eastern half of Ireland
the inhabitants were everywhere settling down
peaceably to the new order of things, a forward Forward
movement was made in Munster which led to mentin
some desultory fighting, and ultimately to a large i^^ ^^'
expansion of the area of Anglo-Norman occupa-
tion. As we have seen, when John came to
Ireland in 1185 his insolent conduct alienated
the three great potentates of the west, Dermot
McCarthy, Donnell O'Brien, and Rory O'Conor,
and they abstained from doing him homage.
At this time, it seems, he made what must
be regarded as ' speculative grants ' of large
portions of the present County Tipperary to
Theobald Walter, Philip of Worcester, and
others. His newly erected castles at Ardfinan,
Lismore, and Tibberaghny were used as bases for
expeditions into Munster, which at first appear
to have met with no success. In 1192, how-
ever, a new forward movement was made. The
English advanced as far as Killaloe and a little
beyond into Thomond, when they were checked

1226 n K

146 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

by Donnell O'Brien. The expedition, however,
resulted in the building of the two great mote-
fortresses of Kilfeacle and Knockgraffon.^ The
grassy fosse-encircled mounds remain with traces
of later stone-castles on their summits or in their
attached baileys, and from the size of the earth-
works we can judge of their early importance.
Castle of The mote of Kilfeacle lies close to the road

Kilfeacle -, r^ ^ ^

between Tipperary and Cashel, near the ancient
church-site, and the castle there was one of
those restored to William de Burgh in 1203,
and it became the caput of an important de
Burgh manor. ^ We may perhaps infer that it
was William de Burgh who erected it in 1192.
William This remarkable man, afterwards known to the
Irish of Connaught as ' William the Conqueror ',
was brother to Hubert de Burgh, John's faithful
minister,^ and progenitor of the de Burghs or
Burkes, earls of Ulster, and of the Burkes of
Connaught and Munster. He has generally
been represented by modern writers as the same

1 Four Masters, 1192 ; Ann. InisfaUen (Dublin MS.), 1192.
According to the latter annals, in 1196 the castle of KiKeacle
was destroyed by Donnell mor na Curradh, son of Dermot
Mc Carthy. But it must have been soon rebuilt again.

^ Liberate, 5 John, p. 67, and see the extent of the manors
which belonged to Richard de Burgh in Munster at his death
(1243) : Inquis. P. M., 27 Hen. Ill, Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i,
no. 2607 ; Cal. Inquis., vol. i, p. 6.

^ Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent, is called by Henry 111
uncle of Richard de Burgh, Wilham's eldest son : Rot. Pat.,
18 Hen. Ill, m. 3, Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 2217.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 147

person as William Fitz Audelin, who first came
to Ireland with Henry II, but for this identifica-
tion there is no good authority and it must be
rejected. He held two knights' fees about
Ardoyne, near Tullow, from Theobald Walter/
and it is probable that he came to Ireland with
John in 1185 and received a grant in Munster ^
about the same time as Theobald received his
large grant there.

The mote of Knockgraffon lies not far from Castieof
the Suir above Caher. It is similar in the graffon.
arrangement of its defences to that at Kil-
feacle, but is even a finer example. It bears
traces of a stone building on its summit, and the
remains of a stone castle in its bailey. Save
for the neighbouring ruins of a church with some
Early English features, it rises lonely from the
swelling plain, conspicuous from afar, an im-
perishable memorial of the expedition of 1192.

1 Reg. St. Thomas's, p. 104. This grant was before 1202,
when it was ratified by Giovanni di Salerno, Cardinal
Legate : ibid., p. 225.

2 Probably the grant by ' John son of the King of
England and Duke {dux ?) of Ireland to Wilham de Burgh
of half a cantred at Tilra'ct in which is Kilsela to be holden
by the service of two knights ' (H. M. C, 3rd Rep., p. 231),
means the half -cantred containing Kjlsheelan, near Tibract,
i.e. John's castle, now written Tibberaghny. Both Kil-
sheelan (written Kilsilan) and Tiperacht were de Burgh
manors (Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 2607). The latter
was granted to de Burgh in 1200 ; Rot. Chart., 2 John,
p. 7 b.

K2

148 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

In 1202 it belonged to Philip of Worcester,^ and
perhaps it was for him it was erected.
Friendly Some arrangement seems to have been made
with with Donnell O'Brien, as in the next year
O'Brien. (1193) he is Said to have consented to the
erection of the castle of Briginis in Thomond
' for the purpose of distressing Mac Carthy \^
The hereditary hatred of the Dalcassians for the
Eoghanachts was stronger than any jealousy of
the progress of the invader. Indeed, there are
other grounds for thinking that friendly rela-
tions were formed with the house of O'Brien
at this time. William de Burgh is stated by
an early Irish genealogist to have married one
of Donnell O'Brien's daughters,^ and as Richard
de Burgh, the eldest son of this union, appears
to have come of age in 1214,* the marriage must
have taken place in 1193 at latest. Like Hugh
de Lacy in Meath and John de Courcy in Ulster,
William de Burgh by this alliance undoubtedly
strengthened his position in Munster.

Next year (1194) Donnell O'Brien died. He

1 Eot, Pat., 4 John, m. 10 (p. 16). For the mote of
Knockgraffon see Journ. R. S. A. I. 1909, p. 275.

2 Ann. InisfaUen (Dublin MS.), 1193.

3 See the Tribes of Hy Manj^ (ed. O'Donovan), p. 45,
a tract from the Book of Leacan, a compilation (from earHer
sources) of about the year 1418.

■* On the 11th July in this year John ordered seisin to be
given to Richard de Burgh of his land in Ireland : Rot. Pat.,
16 John, p. 118 b.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 149

had been King of Thomond and the most Death of
powerful prince in Munster from the first com- oSll
ing of the Normans to Ireland. His marriage i^^^-
with a daughter of Dermot Mac Murrough, his
hereditary feud with the house of 0' Conor
in Connaught and with the race of Eoghan in
Munster, made him in general friendly to the
invaders, except when they carried their aggres-
sion beyond Leinster and seemed to threaten
Thomond. Then he more than once sternly and
successfully repelled them. But towards the close
of his career he seems to have entered into those
closer relations with the English of Munster which
formed a marked feature in the policy of his sons.

The succession to the throne of Thomond now Succes-
becomes somewhat obscure, probably because ^Hhe
no successor was universallv recognized. We l^o"eof

•^ * Thomond.

hear repeatedly of three sons of Donnell O'Brien,
viz. Donough Cairbrech, Murtough Finn, and
Conor Roe. One annalist tells us that Donough
Cairbrech was made king by the English,^ but
it is probable that he was not accepted as such
by the Irish of Thomond. The Four Masters
state that Murtough O'Brien, son of the late
king, ' assumed his father's place,' using a phrase
which implies that he was not formally chosen
by the tribesmen. At any rate, for some years
we find the three brothers acting in harmony
with each other and with the English, until

1 Ann. Inisfallen (Dublin MS.), 1194.

150 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

in 1203 Conor Roe was slain by Murtough Finn.^
In 1208 Murtough himself ' was taken prisoner
by the English of Limerick in violation of the
guarantee of three bishops and by order of his
own brother Donough Cairbrech '.^ In 1210,
however, ' Mariadac ', King of Limerick, is
mentioned in an English Roll,^ and this name
represents Murtough. He died in 1239, but from
about 1210 up to his death in 1242 Donough
Cairbrech seems to have been king. There were
other rivals to the throne, however, not sons of
Donnell O'Brien, but with rights of seniority.
Two of these were got out of the way at once by,
or in the interests of, Murtough Finn. Donough,
son of the late king's elder brother, was killed,*
and Murtough, representative of the senior line
traced from Murtough Mor, King of Munster,
was blinded and otherwise incapacitated from
ruling.^ The following table will make the
relationship clearer, and will serve to indicate the
ruthless way in which the claims of seniority were
from time to time met by the house of O'Brien.

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1203.

2 Four Masters, Ann. Clonmacnois, 1208,

3 Rot. de Prestito, 12 John, p. 196.

4 Four Masters, 1194.

5 Ann. Ulster, Ann. Loch Ce, Ann. Boyle, 1194. John
O'Donoghue, in his Historical Memoirs of the O'Briens,
makes Murtough Dall or ' the Blind ' the immediate succes-
sor of Donnell Mor. There may be authority for this, but
he seems to be mistaken in supposing him to be Donnell's son.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 151

s

-^

CO

w

2

MtS

n

ft",

&

o

o

Pk

!?

S>

OT3

o

00

o

-■© ■

o";2

d
.2 ^

•lit ^

00 ^

o

O— M.

0}

n
o

o

bl
-=3 J

*c

^^

^ii

o°

bcfl

SO

3 O

3 *3

'§0

s *-

^ -2

t-t TO

00

o
o

•w2

M

o -^

a »o

CO
CO

(-<
® •

o

S !^ J

o -^

>>q5

05

O

o

o
t>
o

P5
O

"O —

a
a

K

1-3

.^ — . t-(

d

_§g|S
"■ft

O lU

S;|S

t4

M o Ooo
- S d ®

oSB 2

P to W)Q

37:

-§S2

. a

-Kg

»

W
o

o

O

Q

O c3

ts .20

o

o

o

E-
X

■"" o.
d
o

bO

» d „

o O M

«; -w o

d K^ c

o

J3
-02

(D

d

d
o

J3
O

i-H ^

-rt-S d-
0^-2

-OH

00 ui

•-' bD

d-d =•-
" O (U o

2 C

s s

d r^,

.a 'S -d ]S
bcg bpS

-1: >>-e

ffl

3-^ 3-?,

O

152 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

Alliance Whoever is to be regarded as the titular king
eons of ^ of Thomoiid at this time, the chief power was
Donneii goon to become centred in WilHam de Burgh.

0 Bnen. =»

It is pretty clear that William and his com-
panions now, or very soon afterwards, made
an alliance with his brothers-in-law, the sons
of Donnell O'Brien. In all probability the
foreigners were to be allowed to settle in
Limerick and in the greater part of the kingdom
south of the Shannon (mainly at the expense
of the Eoghanachts), in return for their sup-
porting the claims of Donnell O'Brien's sons
to the kingship of Thomond, as against the
representatives of elder branches of the house,
and in return for protection against the inter-
ference of the O' Conors. That there was some
such treaty or arrangement the events of the
next few years seem to show.

At first sight these events as recorded in the
Irish annals present a tangled skein, hard to un-
ravel, and even after patient study we cannot be
quite sure that we follow all the threads correctly.
The bare fact of an incursion is mentioned
without motive assigned, and sometimes the
statement is so meagre that it is not easy to
assign either cause or consequence. Two results
are, however, plain enough from the clearer light
of slightly subsequent English records : first,
that before the close of the century the town of
Limerick was finally occupied by the Anglo-

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 153

Normans, and henceforth became an Enghsh
town ; secondly, that the Anglo-Norman settle-
ment and feudal organization soon extended
over the greater part of the present counties of
Limerick and Tipperary.

Interpreting the annalistic records as best we
can in the light of established facts, the course
of events seems to have been as follows : —

The year after Donnell O'Brien's death 'Philip Philip
of Worcester came to Ireland to reinforce the cester.
English of Munster '.^ Ten years previously he
had been with John in Ireland as justiciar, and
he appears to have been again sent over to take
the fief of Meath into the king's hand on Hugh
de Lacy's death. The large grant which Philip
had probably already received about Knock-
graffon in Southern Tipperary supplied a per-
sonal motive for his interference, but we may be
sure he did not come without John's assent and
encouragement. William de Burgh was already
in Munster, and the disputed succession to the
throne of Thomond gave the adventurers an
opportunity of making a bargain with the sons
of Donnell O'Brien as the price of their support.
The latter, at any rate, made no opposition to
the renewed activity of the settlers in Munster,

1 Ann. Inisfallen (Dublin MS.), 1 195. Philip of Worcester
is said to have founded the Benedictine Priory of Kilcumin
(Kilcommon near Caher, co. Tipperary ?), c. 1184 (Harris),
but the date is probably too early.

154 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

but the King of Connaught thought fit to inter-
Raid of fere. ' Cathal Crovderg 0' Conor and Mac Cos-

Cathal , . r

Crovderg. tello, with some of the English and Irish of
Meath, marched into Munster until they reached
Emly and Cashel, and they burned four large
castles and some small ones.' ^ This raid, which
appears to have been quite unprovoked, was
primarily directed against William de Burgh,
Philip of Worcester, and their companions,
whose encroachment so near his southern border
Cathal no doubt viewed with concern. But
Cathal probably also meant to assert the ancient
supremacy of Connaught over Munster. Very
r-ih ri significant, too, is the part played by ' Mac
Nangie. CostcUo '. We havc known him hitherto as
Gilbert de Nangie, or de Angulo, to whom Hugh
de Lacy had given the barony of Morgallion in
Meath. ^ Gilbert, however, preferred the wild
ways of the Irish to the more orderly life of
a feudal baron. In 1193 we find him and his
band of foreigners joining the Irish in plundering
Inchcleraun, an island in Lough Ree,^ and next
year he led an expedition to Assaroe, on the

1 Four Masters, 1195 ; cf. Ann, Loch Ce, 1195, where
Mac Costello is said to have been ' apprehended ' [by John
de Courcy], but the entry is incomplete.

2 Supra, p. 84. He was called by the Irish GilUpert
Mac Goisdealbh (son of Jocelin), a name which came to be
written Mac Costello, and long afterwards the barony of
Costello in Mayo took its name from the family.

3 Ann. Loch Ce, 1193.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 155

border of Tirconnell, but ' without much profit '.^
This was presumably on behalf of the King
of Connaught. At any rate, in 1195 he took
service under Cathal Crovderg in his raid
against the Normans in Munster, and for this
he and probably his brother Philip were out-
lawed and deprived of their lands in Meath.
Gilbert seems to have remained permanently in
Cathal' s service, and was rewarded by a grant
of the cantred of Maenmagh near Loughrea.^
He is an early example of an hibernicized Nor-
man (or perhaps Fleming), or at least of one
who cast in his lot with the Irish.

While Cathal Crovderg was engaged in this
raid there was also ' a hosting by John de Hosting
Courcy and the son of Hugh de Lacy [probably deCour"y
the younger Hugh] to assume power ', we are Lacy^^
told, ' over the foreigners of Leinster and
Munster.'^ The motive assigned is ambiguous,
but they were probably sent by the government
to control the operations in Munster. They
seem to have summoned Cathal to Athlone,
whither he came with twelve hundred men, and
the parley, we are simply told, resulted in his
obtaining peace.* What the terms were we do not

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1194.

2 In 1207 Gilbert was pardoned, and the cantred of
Maenmagh, given to him by the king of Connaught, was
confirmed to him : Rot. Claus., 8 John, p. 78 b.

3 Ann. Loch Ce, Ann. Ulster, Four Masters, 1195.

4 Ann. Loch Ce, 1195.

156 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

knoAV, but he was probably recognized as King of
Connaught on the promise of not interfering any
more in Munster, and of good behaviour generally.
At any rate, he committed no further depredation
on the English for the next four years.

At some time, however, during the reign of
Richard I, John appears to have made a specu-
lative grant of the whole or part of Connaught
to William de Burgh,^ who in his turn made
a similar grant of ten cantreds in the north of
Connaught to Hugh de Lacy.^ This latter grant
may have supplied the motive for Hugh de Lacy's
hosting at this time, and the services of John
de Courcy may have been similarly enlisted.
To these grants we shall recur, but for the time,
at any rate, they were inoperative, and were
held in suspense by the peace of Athlone.
Limerick The city of Limerick, captured, relieved, and
evacuated by Raymond le Gros twenty years
previously, was now in Norman hands, and
apparently with the consent of the O'Briens.
Next year indeed we are told that Donnell, son

^ John's grant to William de Burgh is referred to in his
subsequent grant to Richard de Burgh (September 13,
1215) of 'all the land of Connaught wliich WiUiam, his
father, held of the King ' : Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 218 b.

2 Gormanston Register, f. 189. These cantreds were
the Three Tuatha (Four Masters, 1189, note), Moylurg and
TirerriU as one cantred, Corran, Carbury-Drumchff, Tir-
eragh on the Moy, the two cantreds of Tirawley, Erris,
Leyney, and SHeve-Lugha (south of Leyney).

man
hands

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 157

of Dermot Mc Carthy, defeated the foreigners
and afterwards expelled them from Limerick.^
Whatever opposition there was came from the
Eoghanachts. But the expulsion can only have
been for the moment. Soon afterwards, pro-
bably in 1197, we fuid Hamo de Valognes,
the justiciar, in Limerick, making grants of
burgages in that town to the leaders of the
forward movement, to whom he probably at
the same time made the large grants of lands
in the neighbouring districts which were con-
firmed by King John in 1199.^ Indeed we know
that John, before coming to the throne, and
probably in 1197, granted to Hamo himself
* two cantreds in Hochenil (Ir. Ui Conaill) in the
land of Limerick ',^ and about the same time he
gave a charter to the city of Limerick conferring
on the citizens all the liberties and free customs
enjoyed by the citizens of Dublin.* He also

1 Ann. Ulster, Four Masters, 1196 ; Ann. Loch Ce, 1195.
It is probably to this temporary loss of Limerick that some
fourteenth-century MSS. of the Expugnatio Hibernica refer :
[urbs Limiricensis] ' longe post sub Hamone de Valoingnes
justitiario fraudulenter destructa et per Meilerium recu-
perata' : RoUs ed., p. 342.

2 King John's grants in 1199 refer to previous grants by
Hamo of burgages in Limerick, and appear to be con-
firmatory.

^ See John's confirmatory grant. Rot. Chart., 1 John,
p. 19.

4 Rot. Cancellarie Cal. (Tresham), p. 5, no. 13, and
Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 36.

158 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

appears to have granted to Walter de Lacy a
messuage in Limerick and three knights' fees in
the cantred which he retained for his own use,
i. e. that near Limerick.^

How, or exactly when, the Normans obtained
possession of the city of Limerick we are not
told. We hear of neither siege nor capture, nor
of warfare of any sort. Irish annalists are more
ready to record and even magnify the defeats and
disasters of the foreigners than to mention the
stages of their advance. Thus they leave us
here to infer that the Normans had got possession
of Limerick from the statement that in 1196
Donnell Mc Carthy drove them out.
Limerick It must be bornc in mind that Limerick,
man city, though in general politically subject to the King
of Thomond, was still essentially an Ostman city.
Its inhabitants in 1 157, and again in 1 171, are
called Galls or Foreigners by the Foiu* Masters ;
its first four bishops appear to have been of
Scandinavian extraction ; the surrounding dis-
trict on both sides of the river was ' the cantred
of the Ostmen ' ; the first provost of the city
under its new charter was Syward, presumably
an Ostman ; and we shall find Ostmen jurors
serving on the inquisition as to the lands of
St. Mary's Church. It is probable that soon
after the death of Donnell O'Brien the Ostmen
of Limerick transferred their allegiance to the
^ Gormanston Register, f. 5 dors.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 159

Normans, to whom they were more akin, not
only in race, but in habits and customs, than
they were to the Irish. Probably, too, the sons
of Donnell O'Brien, in return for Norman sup-
port, acquiesced in the Norman occupation of
the town, as they appear to have subsequently
acquiesced in the Norman occupation of the
kingdom south of the Shannon. The immediate
granting of a charter to Limerick similar to that
given to Dublin in 1192 is a clear indication that
Limerick was occupied by agreement and not
by force, and at a later period, about 1210, we
find forty carucates of land, part no doubt of ' the
cantred of the Ostmen ', secured to the citizens
in burgage tenure.^

Indeed in the year 1197 the new settlers seem joint
to have endeavoured to carry out their part of tSTinto
the bargain with the O'Briens. ' Donough Cair- Thomond.
brech brought the English into Thomond, where
they slew Covey Macnamara, Conor O'Quin, and
many others.' ^ Macnamara (Mac Conmara) was
by hereditary right the chieftain to inaugurate
the O'Brien, and O'Quin was a neighbouring
chieftain. We cannot be far wrong in supposing
that the object of this expedition was to force
the tribes there to accept Donough Cairbrech as
king and to inaugurate him in due form on the
sacred mound of Magh Adhair. Whether the

1 Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 211.

2 Annals of I'nisfallen (DubUn MS.), 1197.

ans

160 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

object was then effected or not, the grants of
lands on both sides of the Shannon showered at
this time on the leaders of the forward movement,
and confirmed and perhaps added to by King
John in 1199, were probably made with the con-
sent of Donnell O'Brien's sons and at the cost of
the Eoghanachts and other recalcitrant chief-
Feud tains. That the hereditary enmity of the Dal-
the Dai- cassians to the Eoghanachts had not at this time
cas^ians (Jiminished in fervour we have clear evidence.
Eugeni- Ij^ J178 Donnell O'Brien had driven the greater
part of the race of Eoghan out of his kingdom ;
and, in particular, the O'Coilens of Lower Con-
nello and the O' Donovans of the valley of the
Maigue were forced to fly southwards over
Mangerton mountain.^ Some of the Eoghanachts
still remained or had returned, and in 1199 ' the
whole country along the Shannon was laid waste
by a great war between English and Irish '.^
If we may trust a late Irish writer,^ Coilen
O'Coilein, chief of Ui Conaill Gabhra, was killed
at this time by the seed of Maurice Fitz Gerald.
In the ensuing year (1200) ' a great army was
mustered by William de Burgo and all the

1 Annals of Inisf alien (DubHn MS.). See the passage
quoted and commented on by O'Donovan, Four Masters,
1178, note m ; and cf. the Bodleian Ann. Inisf alien, 1175,
1177.

2 Ibid., 1199.

3 Michael O'Clery (one of the * Four Masters '), in his
Book of Pedigrees ; see Joum. R. S. A. I. 1879-82, p. 225.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 161

English of Munster, joined by Murtough Finn,
Conor Roe, and Donough Cairbrech, the three
sons of Donnell Mor O'Brien, and they marched
through Munster to Cork. They encamped for
a week at Kinneigh, where Auliffe Mor 0' Dono-
van and Mac Costello were slain. Then came
Mahon O'Heynie, the Pope's Legate, and the
bishops of Munster, and made peace between the
O'Briens [on the one side] and the Mac Carthys
O'Donohoes and the rest of the Eugenians [on
the other].' ^

This helps us to understand how so much of
the present county of Limerick was ready to
receive new rulers. Lower Connello and the
valley of the Maigue, territories of the O'Coilens
and 0' Donovans respectively, were among the
first districts settled.

We have now reached the time when, with the
beginning of John's reign, our regular records
commence, in a stream thin at first, but gradually
increasing in volume. Henceforth we are able
to check, interpret, and supplement the Irish
annals and English chronicles by a more authori-
tative source. In particular we are enabled to
gain some idea of the extent of the new settle-
ment of the Normans in the counties of Limerick
and Tipperary about the year 1200, and to trace
the beginnings of the more important manors
there.

1 Aim. Inisfallen (Dublin MS.), 1200.

1226 II L

162 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

In September 1199, when Philip Augustus

was commencing hostiUties against John, the

Enfeoff- latter at Rouen and other places in Normandy

nient or x ^

Limerick, made a number of grants of lands within the
kingdom of Limerick on both sides of the
Shannon. In most cases a grant of one or more
burgages in the town of Limerick was also made,
and these burgages are stated to have been
already delivered to the grantees by Hamo de
Valognes, when justiciar. We may infer that the
grants themselves were really confirmatory of
what had already been done in John's name by
Hamo a year or two earlier. It is hard to identify
some of the Irish place-names, disguised as they
are by the strange spelling and positive blunders
of scribes and transcribers. To attempt to do
so in all cases would involve an unduly minute
investigation, and we shall content ourselves
with mentioning only such grants as seem to
have been the origin of the more famous manors
of later times.

Hamo de To Hamo de Valognes himself John confirmed
his grant of ' two cantreds in Hochenil in the
land of Limerick ', to hold by the service of ten
knights.^ The tribal territory designated appears
to have included the whole western half of the
present county, but Hamo's two cantreds were
probably comprised in the present baronies of

^ Rot. Chart., 1 John, p. 19. ' Hochenil ' represents the
Irish Ui Conaill or Ui Conaill Gabhra : Topogr. Poems, p. 1 16.

Valognes.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 163

Upper and Lower Connello. A kite-shaped
island in the river Deel, two miles from its
source, was chosen by Hamo as the seat of his
principal manor, and here in 1199 he built the
castle of AsKEATON.^ There is a rocky platform
with precipitous sides in the middle of the
island, and on this the ruined keep and inner
ward of a later castle stand. This was no doubt
the site of Hamo's castle. He was superseded as
justiciar by Meiler Fitz Henry, but he got letters
of protection and a special licence to colonize
his lands.^ In 1203, presumably after Hamo's
death or forfeiture, John ordered the castle to
be delivered to William de Burgh.^ In 1207
Hamo's land and castles were restored to his
son and heir Hamo, at the time a minor,* and
in 1215 seisin was given to him.^ All through
the thirteenth century a Hamo de Valognes was
a tenant-in-chief in Limerick,^ but about the

^ Ann. Inisfallen (Dublin MS.), 1199. Askeaton repre-
sents the Irish Eas Geibhtine,'' the cataract of G.' — probably
a man's name. In early records the castle is generally
called Iniskefty (variously disguised), pointing, in an earlier
stage of phonetic rendering, to Inis Geibhtine.

2 Rot. Chart., 2 John, p. 96 b.

^ Liberate, 5 John, p. 67.

* Rot. Claus., 9 John, p. 96 b. At this time the custody
was given to Hugh de Neville.

^ Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 147.

6 In the time of Edward I, Hamund de Valoniis owed
eight services to the Crown ; Irish Exchequer Memoranda,
Eng. Hist. Rev. 1903, p. 506.

L2

164 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

middle of the next century the manor of Askeaton
passed to the Earl of Desmond. The first Hamo
appears to have granted the church of Askeaton
(with others) to the abbey of Keynsham in Somer-
set,^ and, as we have seen,^ it was apparently with
one knight's fee at Culballysiward and a tene-
ment at Bruree, that he compensated Archbishop
Cumin for the injuries he had done to him.

Three of the sons of Maurice Fitz Gerald
shared in the exploitation of the land of Limerick,
as they had, doubtless, shared in subduing such
Thomas chieftains as resisted. Thomas, son of Maurice,
Maurice. ^^^ recognized as the progenitor of the House
of Desmond, was probably granted at this time
the lands which were afterwards known as
the cantred of Shanid, and there can be little
doubt that the castle-crowned mote of Shanid,
long afterwards called ' Desmond's first and most
ancient house ', represents the seat of the manor
created at this time.^ His son John Fitz Thomas
granted the church of ' Senode ' (Shanid) to the

^ Black Book of Limerick, no. Iv (p. 47), to be read with
no. xcv (p. 84).

2 Swpra, p. 132, note.

^ In the Charter Roll, 1 John, p. 19 b, is a grant to Thomas
son of Maurice of ' five knights' fees in the thwedum [Irish,
Tiiath] of Eleuri and cantred of Fontimel'. The position
of this cantred is, however, doubtful. I have attempted to
show that it may have included Shanid (Journ. R. S. A. I.
1909, pp. 34-9). In any case the manor of Shanid was held
in chief by John Fitz Thomas, and the original grant pro-
bably dates from his father's time.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 165

church of St. Mary of Limerick/ and held the
cantred called Shennede of the king in chief.^
From him it descended to Thomas, son of
Maurice (Fitz Gerald), the justiciar, who died in
1298.^ Probably about the same time the first- Gerald
named Thomas's brother Gerald, who married Maurice.
the daughter of Hamo de Valognes, and was
ancestor of the earls of Kildare, obtained
Croom, in the valley of the Maigue.* It was
held by his successors until forfeited by Silken
Thomas in the sixteenth century. These two
castles supplied the war-cries of the two houses —
' Shanid aboo ! ' and ' Crom aboo ! ' — and each
became the nucleus of several additional manors
acquired from time to time. A third brother,
William of Naas, was granted the castle of William
Carrickittle in the parish of Kilteely, with
five knights' fees near the castle.^ Near the
village of Kilteely there was a remarkable rock
(now mostly quarried away) rising sheer out of
the plain, on which the earl of Kildare built

1 Black Book of Limerick (ed. Mac Caffrey), p. 114.

2 Cal. Inquis. P. M., Ed. I, vol. ii, p. 252.

3 Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. iv, pp. 260, 340.

4 In 1215, when Gerald's son Maurice came of age, he
obtained seisin of his father's lands and of the castle of
Crumeth (Croom) of his inheritance : Rot. Pat., 17 John,
p. 147.

5 Rot. Chart., 1 John, p. 196. David, third Baron of
Naas, gave all his land of "Karkytil' to his daughter
Matilda in frank marriage with John Pincema : Gor-
manston Register, f. 192 dors.

166 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

a castle in 1510. This was presumably the site
of the twelfth-century castle.

William de Burgh had lands about Kilfeakle
in the barony of Clanwilliam, County Tipperary.
Here, as we have seen, a mote-castle was erected
in 1192, and near at hand he founded the Augus-
tinian priory of Athassel, about the year 1200.^
Extensive ruins of this priory remain and attest
its former magnificence. The main building
has been assigned on architectural grounds to
the middle of the thirteenth century.^ The
manor of Kilsheelan, too, on the Suir below
Clonmel, where a mote marks the castle site,
probably belonged to William de Burgh from
even an earlier period,^ and both it and Kilfeakle
were important manors of his son Richard.*
In 1199 John gave William de Burgh Ardpatrick
with part of the cantred of Fontimel.^ This is
supposed to refer to the place now known as
Knockpatrick, in the parish of Robertstown,

1 Ware. In 1206 King John confirmed the prior and
canons in their possessions, without the demesne of WiUiam
de Burgh, and granted them protection : Rot. Chart., 7 John,
p. 165.

2 See Paper by Dr. Cochrane, Journ. R. S. A. I. 1909,
pp. 279-89.

^ The grant by ' John son of the King of England and Duke
of Ireland to William de Burgh of half a cantred at Tilra'ct in
which is Kilsela, to be holden by the service of two knights'
(H. M. C. 3rd Rep., p. 231), probably refers to Kilsheelan.

4 Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, nos. 2422, 2607.

5 Rot. Chart., 1 John, p. 19 b.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 167

north of Shanid. A castle is said to have been
built at Ardpatrick in 1198,* but nothing else is
known to connect the de Burghs with the place.
Perhaps it was forfeited by William de Burgh
along with other lands in 1203, and not restored.^
In the year 1201 John is said to have given
the tuath of Castleconaing (Castleconnell) to
William de Burgh, ' yet so that if he shall
fortify the castle, and we shall desire to have it
in our own hands, we shall give him a reasonable
exchange for it.^ The castle here was built on
an isolated flat-topped rock, close to the Shannon,
above Limerick. The manor belonged to William
de Burgh's descendants for many centuries. At
least one other manor in the County Limerick
belonged to William de Burgh. This was the
manor of Esclon * (Ir. Aes Cluana), a district
now comprised in the parish of Kilkeedy,^ in

1 Ware's Annals, 1198. There is another Ardpatrick
near Kilmallock.

2 Robert de Guher had a castle not far off from quite
early in the thirteenth century.

3 Ware's Annals, and Ann. Inisfallen (Dublin MS.), 1201.
It was probably the site of an Irish fortress. According to
the Four Masters it was ' at their own house at Caislen ui
Conaing ' that Donnell O'Brien blinded two of his rivals to
the throne, in 1175.

* William de Burgh made a grant of some lands of his
fee of Escluona to Donatus O'Brien, Bishop of Limerick,
ob. 1207 ; Black Book of Limerick, p. 110.

^ ' Ecclesia de Escluana alias Kylkyde cuius Rector est
prior de Athissell ' : Taxation, 1418, Black Book of Limerick,
p. 146.

168 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

the barony of Pubblebriaii. The ' castle of
Askelon ' (under which more famihar title that
of Aes Cluana first appears) was ' restored ' to
Richard de Burgh in 1215/ and the manor
appears afterwards as belonging to him and his
descendants, earls of Ulster. In all probability
the castle-site was that well known as Carrigogun-
nell (properly Carraig ui gCoinnell, or the ' Rock
of the O'Connells ') though in the thirteenth
century the castle is nearly always called, from
the district or manor, the ' Castle of Esclon '.^

1 Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 147 b, where it appears as
' Askelon '.

2 Mr. Westropp, however, thinks that the two castles
were distinct (see his Paper, showing great research, on
Carrigogunnell Castle, Journ. R. S. A. I. 1907, pp. 379-82) ;
but his principal argument against their identity, viz. that
' Carrigogunnell was granted in 1209 {sic) to O'Brien, while
Esclon was held by de Burgo ', loses all force and indeed
supports the opposite view, when we recollect that the manor
of Esclon was in John's hand from 1206, when William de
Burgh died (Rot. Pat., 7 John, p. 60 b),' until 121.3, when
Richard, his son, came of age and obtained seisin of his
father's lands (Rot. Pat., 16 John, p. 118 b). This very
fact would enable John to deal with the castle and manor,
and in the Annals of Inisfallen, the sole authority for the
supposed inconsistent ' grant ', it is merely stated that
Donnough Cairbrech O'Brien at Waterford (i.e. in 1210)
' received a charter for Carrigogunnell and the lordship there-
unto belonging, for which he was to pay a yearly rent of sixty
marks ' (see Four Masters, anno 1209, p. 163, note). John was
quite capable of making a grant in fee of his minor's pro-
perty, but after all it appears that he did nothing inconsistent
with the minor's rights — at least, not by this charter.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 169

The site — ' a volcanic plateau of trap rock and
ash falling in low cliffs at nearly every point ' —
is marked out by nature as the castle-site of the
district. Indeed, like that of Castleconnell, it
was probably occupied by a fortress in pre-
Norman times. No part of the existing building,
however, is supposed to date from the thirteenth
century.

Geoffrey de Marisco (or Mareis), who was Geoffrey
nephew of Archbishop Cumin, and played an Marisco.
important, but not always creditable, part in
the affairs of Ireland, had a manor at Anya {Aine,
now Knockainy), though it is not certain that
he was the first grantee.^ Near this, at Hospital,
he founded a preceptory for knights of St. John
before 1215.^ In 1226 he was granted a fair
at this manor, and also at Adare on the
Maigue,^ which may have belonged to him from
the first. After his outlawry, c. 1236, both
manors escheated to the CroAvn. Anya was for

1 Perhaps the grant of ' Katherain ' with ten knights' fees
to Geoffrey (Rot. Chart., 2 John, p. 80) refers to Aine, but
the mandate (Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 529) that the men
of Anya (i.e. the Hospitallers ?) were to hold their lands
as in the time of William de Lacy seems to imply that the
latter had been owner.

■^ Ware's statement to the above effect is partly confirmed
by the mandate in 1215 that ' the knights of the valley of
Anya should have their liberty saving a moiety of their
service to the king ' : Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 673 ;
cf . nos. 675, 676.

3 Rot. Claus., 10 Hen. Ill, p. 126.

170 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

some time retained by the king, but Adare soon

passed to the Fitz Geralds of Offaly.

Geoffrey Geoffrey Fitz Robert, baron of Kells in

Fitz ^ -^

Robert. Ossory, appears to have been the first grantee

of the manor of Grene or Esgrene ^ {Aes Greine,
now Pallas Grean). After his death it came
into the king's hand, when it was let to the
Bishop of Emly, who confirmed the gift of the
church (evidently Geoffrey's gift) to the monas-
tery of Kells.^ In 1233 the manor was granted
during pleasure to Maurice Fitz Gerald of Offaly.^
About forty yards from the later castle-site
at Pallas Green is a mote.

The castles erected by the lords of these
manors were probably all of the keep and bailey
plan. Like those found almost universally in
the earlier settlements in the east of Ireland,
the works at Shanid and Pallas Green, and
perhaps at Adare, Aney, and other places,
included a mote or artificial mound of earth
as a substratum for the turris or keep. The
castle-sites at Askeaton, Castleconnell, Esclon
(Carrigogunnell), and Carrickittle appear to
have comprised an isolated rock forming a

1 Register of the Monastery of Kells. In the Charter
Roll, 1 John, p. 28, is a grant to Geoffrey Fitz Robert of a
fee of five knights at ' Radhoger ' in the cantred of Huhene
(Uaithne), which probably included Pallas Grean.

2 Rot. Glaus., 18 John, p. 279 ; Register of Kells.

3 Gal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 2045. In 1234 Maurice
was granted a fair at his manor of Gren : ibid., no. 2182.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 171

natural substitute for an artificial mound of
earth. In these cases probably the tower and
its defences were of stone from the first. In the
occupation of the kingdom of Limerick south of
the Shannon the settlers were assisted by the
O'Briens, and seem to have met with com-
paratively slight opposition. Hence there was
the less need of hastily throwing up earthworks.
Rock-sites suitable to their purposes were often
at hand, and being able now to obtain the
skilled labour required and the necessary
materials they could build more leisurely and
more effectively in stone.

The property of the see of Limerick was Church
respected, and in 1201 an inquisition was held ^^
by William de Burgh, who is described as ' Vicar
of Munster ', as to its lands. This inquisition
was taken by the oaths of 36 jurors, composed
of 12 Englishmen, 12 Ostmen, and 12 Irishmen
(including Conor Roe O'Brien), and was certified
b}^ Meiler Fitz Henry, the justiciar.^ At this
time the bishop was Donough or Donatus
O'Brien, presumably a member of the ruling
family, who had been appointed about the time
of the English occupation. John had already
granted him protection, and the royal letter
speaks warmly of the bishop's devotion to John's
interests.^ About the same time the Cistercian

* Black Book of Limerick, nos. xxiii, xxiv.

2 Ibid., no. xxxix, apparently before John's accession.

172 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

The
Honour
of

Limerick
granted
to Wil-
liam de
Braose.

abbey of Monasteranenagh was confirmed in the
possession of a long list of lands about Lough
Gur.i

Other grants were made by King John in
September 1199, or soon afterwards — some of
them dealing with lands to the north of the
Shannon — but those mentioned above were
historically the most important, and may suffice
to show the system adopted in the feudaliza-
tion of North Munster. The whole ' kingdom '
was not conveyed in one vast fief to a single
grantee to be sub-infeudated and organized by
him, but the land was parcelled out by the
king himself among a number of tenants-in-
chief, most of them holding five knights' fees
or even smaller quantities, and rendering in
knight-service one-third of that quota to the
Crown.

In January 1201, however, John disturbed this
arrangement, and with his usual capriciousness
reverted to the former policy of making one
supreme lord, by granting the honour of Limerick
to William de Braose.^ William was nephew of
Philip de Braose, who had been granted the
' kingdom of Limerick ' by King Henry in 1177,
but, as we have seen, Philip had failed to
prosecute his claims, and the grant had been
treated as lapsed. William de Braose was a great
landholder in Sussex and Devon, and in the

1 Rot. Chart., 2 John, p. 78. - Ibid., p. 84 b.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 173

Breichiniog in Wales. He is represented by
Giraldus as an excessively pious man, always
prefacing his actions by saying, ' Let this be
done in the name of the Lord,' paying his
clerks extra for concluding his letters with the
words ' by divine assistance ', and never passing
a church without saying a prayer.^ Nevertheless,
this piety did not restrain him from acts of the
grossest cruelty and treachery, such as the
massacre of the chieftains of Gwent at Aber-
gavenny Castle in 1176.^ William de Braose
was connected with some of the magnates of
England. Giles, one of his sons, was Bishop of
Hereford. One of his daughters was married to
Gruffudd ap Rhys, and another to Walter de
Lacy. He had been a strong supporter of John's
succession to the throne, and in the year 1200
John had granted him all the lands which he had
acquired, or might in future acquire, from the
king's enemies of Wales as an increase to his
barony of Radnor.^ Soon afterwards John
thought further to reward him and benefit his
own pocket by the sale to him of the honour of
Limerick for 5,000 marks, to be paid at the rate
of 500 marks a year. The honour was co-extensive
with Henry's grant to Philip de Braose, that is

1 Gir. Camb. ; Itin. Camb.

2 Brut y Tywys. 1175, p. 227. Giraldus minimizes the
connexion of William de Braose with this affair.

3 Rot. Chart., 2 John, p. 66 b.

174 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

to say, it included the whole ' kingdom of
Limerick ', and was to be held by the service
of sixty knights. There were some exceptions
from the grant. The king retained in his
demesne the city of Limerick, the gift of bishop-
rics and abbeys and all royalties, the cantred of
the Ostmen, and the Holy Island. A special
exception was made of the lands and tene-
ments of William de Burgh, who was still in
favour, and was to continue to hold of the
king in chief.
Conse- This grant, as might have been anticipated,

of this created a flutter among the settlers in North
''*"*^- Munster. By it Theobald Walter and Philip
of Worcester, who held vast districts in the
County Tipperary, and the new grantees other
than William de Burgh in the County Limerick,
were deprived of the privileged position of
tenants-in-chief, and were reduced to the subor-
dinate status of under-tenants owing fealty to
William de Braose. Moreover, they w^ould have
to make terms with their new lord if they
were to continue to hold their lands. Theobald
Walter, indeed, procured a contemporaneous
grant of his lands from William de Braose for the
sum of 500 marks. By this grant, which is still
extant, William granted to Theobald five and
a half cantreds in Munster (being in fact the
lands which Theobald had previously held under
John's grant of 1185), to be held of William by

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 175

the service of twenty-two knights.^ Philip of
Worcester, on the other hand, tried the arbitra-
ment of the sword,^ and ' a great war broke out '
between him and WiUiam de Braose, and
Magh Feimhin (a plain to the north of the
Suir, including Knockgraffon) was wasted by
them.^ Even Meiler Fitz Henry, the justiciar,
appears to have been reluctant to carry out the
king's mandates touching the affair of William de
Braose, until the king summoned him to come
to him and put the government into commission
consisting of Humphrey de Tickhill and Geoffrey
de Costentin/ Then in August 1202, John sent
a peremptory mandate to Philip of Worcester to
deliver up to William de Braose all his lands and
castles, including Knockgraffon, in the honour of
Limerick.^ Philip probably submitted, as we
find him in 1207 and afterwards employed by

1 Facsimiles Nat. MSS. Ireland, vol. ii, no. Ixvii, and see
supra, p. 102. The parcels were as follows : the burgh of
Kildelo {Cill da lua, Killaloe) with half the cantred called
Truoheked Maleth {Triclm ced o m-bloid) in which the burgh
is situated, and the entire cantred of Elykaruel {Eile
ui CearbJiaill, the baronies of Clonlisk and Ballybrit, King's
County), Elyhohogarthy {Eile ui FJwgartaigh, Eliogarty),
Ewurmun {Oir Mumhan, Orniond), Areth and Wetheni
{Ara and Uaithne, Ara and OA^Tiey, Tipperary), Owetheniho-
kathelan {Uaithne ui CatJialain), and Owenihoiffernan
{Uaithne ui h-Ijearnain) — these two last were districts in
Owney beg, County Limerick : Topogr. Poems, p. 130.

- Roger de Hoveden, iv. 153.

^ Ann. Inisf alien (Dublin MS.).

4 Rot. Pat., 3 John, p. 4. ^ jbid., 4 John, p. 16 b.

176 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

John in confidential affairs of state,^ and in 1215,
after the outlawTy of William de Braose, Philip
was granted five cantreds in Southern Tipperary,
including the castles of Knockgraffon, Kiltinan,
and Ardmayle.^
Custody With regard to the city of Limerick, John's
city^of policy was marked by even greater tergiversa-
Limerick. tion. At first the custody was given to William
de Burgh, but in the opening years of the
thirteenth century, as we shall see in the next
chapter, William de Burgh was actively engaged
in the affairs of Connaught, and in 1203 came
to loggerheads with Meiler, the justiciar, and
fell under the suspicion of the king himself.
Accordingly, on the 8th of July in this year,
John gave the custody of Limerick to William
de Braose at the yearly farm of 100 marks.^
Disturbances, however, continued, and on the
2nd of November, 1204, John ordered Walter
de Lacy, who acted as bailiff for his father-in-
law, William de Braose, to deliver up the city
to Meiler, as the king had been informed (pro-
bably by Meiler himself) that he could not
maintain peace in his lands of Connaught and
Cork, nor rule those lands unless he held in his
hand the city of Limerick with the cantred *

1 Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, nos. 377, 379, 385.

2 Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 147 b.

3 Rot. Chart., 5 John, p. 107 ; cf. Ann. Loch Ce, 1203.

4 Rot. Pat., 6 John, p. 47.

THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK 177

(of the Ostmen). It is not clear what action,
if any, was immediately taken under this
mandate. At any rate, on the 23rd of August,
1205, John once more gave the custody of
Limerick to William de Braose.^ At this moment
the de Lacys were high in favour with the king,
and Meiler was ordered to wage no war except by
their advice.^ It was probably in the winter of
1206-7 that Meiler, son of Meiler Fitz Henry,
took Limerick by force.^ Hence, it is said, great
disturbances broke out between Meiler and the
de Lacys in Meath. Before the 12th of February,
1207, William de Braose complained that Meiler
and his son had seized his constablewick (Lime-
rick), his knights, men, land, and chattels,
although he had not been wanting in right ; and
John, with characteristic double-dealing, while
ordering the knights, land, &c., to be restored,
directed Meiler to retain the city of Limerick
if it had been taken into the king's hand,* and
on the 21st ordered that Meiler' s son should not

1 Rot. Claus., 7 John, p. 47 b. 2 ibid., p. 40.

^ Four Masters, 1205 (probably antedated by one year),
Walter de Lacy appears to have been again baiUff for William
de Braose in Limerick. See the king's letter to the barons
of Meath, Feb. 21, 1207 : Rot. Pat., 8 John, p. 69. Up to
this date the barons had been quiet.

^ Rot. Claus., 8 John, p. 77 b. A month later the king
seized Walter de Lacy's castle of Ludlow, and summoned
him to stand to right in the king's court : Rot. Pat., 8 John,
pp. 69 b, 70 b.

1226 II M

178 THE OCCUPATION OF LIMERICK

answer for the taking of Limerick except before
the king.^ It is easy to believe that William
de Braose did not find his Irish lordship very
profitable, but he was soon to lose it and every-
thing else at the hands of his vindictive and
ruthless master.

* Rot. Pat., 8 John, p. 69. It is clear that these mandates
refer to the forcible taking of Limerick by Meiler's son,
wrongly placed by the Four Masters sub anno 1205. Miss
Norgate has, I think, here missed the true sequence of
events : John Lackland, pp. 144-5.

CHAPTER XIX

WILLIAM DE BURGH IN CONNAUGHT

1200-6

At the close of the twelfth century, when the
settlers in the kingdom of Limerick were begin-
ning to establish their manors, and to extend
the feudal organization throughout the district,
the aggressive action of Cathal Crovderg 0' Conor
and his conflict with his rival, Cathal Carragh,
afforded at once a pretext and an occasion for
the interference of the English in Connaught.
Accordingly the affairs of that province now
demand our attention.

Since 1177, when Murrough O'Conor brought Contests
Miles de Cogan into Connaught ' for evil towards tiuone
his father ',^ no attempt against the king of that nlu^g^".
province seems to have been made by the
English. In 1183 Rory O'Conor, we are told,
' went on his pilgrimage ' to the monastery of
Cong and left the sovereignty in the hands of his
son, Conor Maenmoy.^ Probably the ex-ard-rl
was forced into this cloistral retirement by the
more energetic spirit of his son. The latter was
clearly not disposed to observe the restrictions

1 Supra, p. 26. 2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1183.

M 2

180 WILLIAM DE BURGH

of the treaty of Windsor, and next year we find
him in company with an O'MelaghHn invading
Meath and destroying an unnamed castle.^ In
1185 Rory 'came from his pilgrimage', but,
like many another king, he found it easier to
lay aside than to reassume the reins of authority.
A general war broke out in Connaught among
the ' roydamnas ' or aspirants to the throne.
These were Rory himself, Conor Maenmoy and
Conor O'Dermot (sons of Rory), Cathal Carragh
(son of Conor Maenmoy), and Cathal Crovderg,
a younger brother of Rory. Rory obtained the
assistance of Donnell O'Brien, and the English
of Munster — assistance which took the form
of burning and pillaging the churches of the
west of Connaught. In spite of a patched-up
peace, Cathal Carragh in retaliation burned and
plundered Killaloe. Conor Maenmoy, who was
aided by some English mercenaries, now once
more assumed the kingship, and next year
expelled his father from Connaught.^ In 1187
Conor Maenmoy, anxious probably to secure his
position by some exploit against the English,
made an incursion into West Meath, and burned
and demolished the castle of Killare.^ It was

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1184 — if indeed this entry be not
anticipatory of the destruction of Killare in 1187 (Four
Masters).

2 For these events see Ann. Ulster, Ann. Loch Ce, and
Four Masters, 1185-6. ^ Four Masters, 1187.

IN CONNAUGHT 181

in reply to this attack, and probably with the
object of reinstating Rory 0' Conor, that next
year John de Courcy, the justiciar, and the
Enghsh of Ireland, accompanied by two of
Rory's sons, made the unsuccessful expedition
already noticed into Connaught.^ In 1189 Conor
Maenmoy, who seems to have been a strong
king, was murdered by his own people at the
instigation of his brother, Conor O'Dermot.^
The Sil Murray, Rory's own tribe, now invited
Rory to resume the kingship, but his own
family would not support him. Cathal Crovderg
must now be regarded as King of Connaught,
though he was opposed by some influential
tribesmen, and an attempt by the successor of
Patrick (the Archbishop of Armagh) and others
to reconcile him and Cathal Carragh proved
unavailing.^

As for Rory 0' Conor, we find him in 1191 going Death of
to Tirconnell, then to Tirowen, then to the o'Conor,
English of Meath, and lastly to Munster, seeking ^^^^'
in vain for assistance to recover his kingdom.
Finally the Sil Murray gave him some lands in
the south of the County Galway, and he died
in 1198, in the monastery of Cong. Modern
writers usually characterize him as a weak and

1 Supra, p. 116.

2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1189. Conor O'Dermot was killed in the
same year by Cathal Carrach.

3 Four Masters, 1190.

182 WILLIAM DE BURGH

irresolute prince, and regard it as the crowning
misfortune of his country that he should have
been ard-ri at the time of the English invasion.
But the records in the Irish annals show that
just before the coming of the English Rory
O' Conor came more nearly to forcing his rule
over the length and breadth of Ireland than any
provincial king had succeeded in doing since
the days of Brian. There is no reason to suppose
that any one else would have fared better. It
was the clan-system and the weakness and
irresolution inherent in it, rather than lack of
courage and determination in any individual,
that rendered continuous and united opposition
to the foreigners impossible. There was no
national sense of country — only a ' tribal
patriotism ' and consequent anarchy.
English From the above summary it appears that
aries^" ^^ early as 1185 there were some English in
in Con- Connaught. They were mercenary troops em-

naugnt. o j ./ x

ployed by Conor Maenmoy in his struggle against
his father, and probably consisted of a body of
deserters in that year from John's army.^ Then

^ V. supra, p. 101. Conor Maenmoy is described by the
Four Masters (1189) as ' King of all Connaught both Enghsh
and Irish ', and after his death when the king of Tirconnell
entered Connaught ' all the Conacians both English and
Irish came to oppose him '. In the Gesta Hen. (i. 330) it is
said of John's army, ' Maxima pars equitum et peditum qui
cum eo venerant ab eo recesserunt, et ad Hibernenses contra
eum pugnaturos perrexerunt.'

IN CONNAUGHT 183

in 1193-5, as we have seen,^ Gilbert de Nangle,
with a band from Meath, took service under
Cathal Crovderg and joined in Cathal's Munster
raid of the latter year. For this Gilbert was
outlawed, but he obtained the cantred of
Maenmagh, a district about Loughrea, County
Galway, from Cathal, and remained permanently
in his service.

Cathal Crovderg' s position as King of Con- Cathal
naught was probably recognized by the Peace ^ ^ ^^^'
of Athlone (1195), whatever the exact conditions
of that peace may have been ; and for the
following four years he confined his military
operations to his own province, where he was
still opposed by influential chieftains. In 1199, Plunders
however, he broke out again, burned the bawn
of Athlone, killed many persons, and carried off
many cows.^ A mote-fortress appears to have
been already erected here — perhaps under the
conditions of the Peace of Athlone — to guard the
ford (or wooden bridge) across the Shannon at
this strategic point. The existing castle com-
mands the gate of Connaught, and has had an
eventful history, but in all the storm and stress
through which it has passed it has embraced
within its strong walls, up to the present battle-

^ V. supra, p. 154.

2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1199. The text has simply bodhun Afha,
'the bawn of the ford,' but as the editor says, Ath-luain
(Athlone) is probably meant.

184 WILLIAM DE BURGH

ments on the river-side, a great mass of made
earth, which, there is Httle doubt, represents
a mote such as the Normans at this time usually
raised for their fortresses.^ Next year (1200)
Cathal Crovderg, with Mc Costello in his com-
pany, followed up this exploit by a cattle-raid in
West Meath.^ These were unprovoked attacks.
Now came the turning-point. He led a hosting
Attacks against Cathal Carragh, with whom he had made
Carragh. peacc in the previous year, and to whom he
had assigned lands in the extreme south of the
province. This is described by the annalist as
' a treacherous and malicious hosting, of which
came the destruction of Connaught and his own
destruction '.•' It was indeed the occasion of
renewed civil war in Connaught, with consequent
ravaging and plundering of the province. The
assistance of powerful Anglo-Norman lords was
invoked by one side or the other. There was
shifting of alliances, and a good deal of (at first
sight) confused fighting. It resulted in the
definite dependence of the kings of Connaught
on the English Crown, and the gradual acquisi-
tion of lands or of claims to lands here and there
in the province by William de Burgh and others,
and ultimately, about a generation later, to
the effective partition of the province and the

1 See my paper, ' Athlone Castle : Its Early History,'
Joum. R. S. A. I. 1907, pp. 257-76.

2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1200. 3 Ibid.

IN CONN AUGHT 185

virtual domination of William de Burgh's son.
In order to see how the first stages of these
important results were brought about it will be
necessary to recount briefly the main facts of
the conflict between the two Cathals, and, in
particular, of the part played by the English
therein, as they may be gleaned from the annals,^
filling up gaps and testing the story, as far as
may be, from the English records and other
available sources.

Cathal Crovderg's attempt to entrap Cathal
Carragh did not succeed, and a detachment
sent to capture him was badly beaten. Cathal
Carragh, however, knew that he could not stand
up alone against the King of Connaught, so he Who
invoked the assistance of William de Burgh, at aid from
this time governor of Limerick, and delivered ^^g^h.
to him his own son as a pledge for the pay of the

1 The various annalists do not differ materially as to the
chief events of these campaigns or as to their sequence,
but vary as to the dates. The fullest and most coherent
account, and apparently the true chronology, are given in
the Annals of Loch Ce. Thus John de Courcy's intervention
(and the death of Rory MacDunlevy) are fixed to the year
1201 by Roger de Hoveden. John, cardinal priest and
papal legate, was in Ireland in August 1202 (Rot. Pat.,
4 John, m. 10, Cal. no. 168). William de Burgh's turning
against Cathal Crovderg seems to be fixed to the year 1203
by John's mandate of the 7th July of that year granting
a safe-conduct to William (Rot. Pat., 5 John, p. 31 b),
and by the grant of the custody of Limerick to William de
Braose on the following day.

186 WILLIAM DE BURGH

foreigners. William de Burgh had a score to
pay off against Cathal Crovderg for the Munster
hosting of 1195, and perhaps for the burning of
' the bawn of Limerick and Castleconnell ' early
in 1200.^ The King of Connaught had also
forfeited the favour of the Crown by his attack
on Athlone and raid into Meath. It is probable
that William de Burgh thought the moment
favourable to endeavour to make effective John's
grant to him of Connaught, to which we have
alluded. Accordingly he assembled a large force
from Dublin and Leinster as well as from
Limerick and Munster, and, accompanied by two
of the sons of Donnell O'Brien and their Irish
forces, came to the assistance of Cathal Carragh.
Some of the Connaught tribes at once gave
hostages to Cathal Carragh, and Cathal Crovderg,
unable to face the forces opposed to him,
retreated to the north of Ireland to seek assis-
Cathai tance there. Then the rest of Connaught was
Carragh Carried ruthlessly into submission, and Cathal

becomes ^

king. Carragh assumed the nominal kingship.

Next year (1201) Cathal Crovderg made two
attempts to recover his kingship. In the first
he was accompanied by O'Neill, King of Tiro wen,
and O'Hegney, King of Fermanagh, but the com-

1 It is not quite certain that this took place before
WiUiam's advance into Connaught. It is given as an
isolated entry near the end of the entries for the year 1200
in the Annals of Loch Ce.

IN CONN AUGHT 187

bination failed through disunion in the camp.
The northern chieftains, when they undertook
the campaign, understood that there were no
foreigners against them, and they refused to
face William de Burgh. The consequence was
they were cut off in detail. O'Hegney was slain,
and O'Neill had to give hostages. In the second
attempt Cathal Crovderg was assisted by John de -De
Courcy and Hugh de Lacy. The latter, as we assists
have seen, had received a speculative grant Qi.o^(jerg
from William de Burgh of the northern third of ^^^^•
Connaught,^ but as he was ostensibly acting on
behalf of Cathal Crovderg, whom William had
just expelled from Connaught, he can hardly
have been relying at this time on William's grant.
It appears, in fact, that John, when Earl of
Mortain, had made a similarly speculative grant
to Hugh de Lacy of six cantreds in the north of
Connaught,^ and it was probably in the hope of
taking possession of these that Hugh made this
second expedition in company with John de

1 SuprUi p. 156.

2 See the cancelled charter of King John to Hugh de Lacy
in 1204, confirming the grant of six cantreds in Connaught
made by the king when Earl of Mortain : Rot. Chart.,
6 John, p. 139 b. The cantreds were the Three Tuatha,
Moylurg-Tirerrill,Moy Ai, Corran, Slieve Lugha, andLeyney,
to be held of the king in fee by the service of twenty knights.
It was not until about 1229 that Hugh de Lacy obtained
an effective grant in Connaught, and then the grantor was
William de Burgo's son Richard : Gormanston Register,
f. 189.

188

WILLIAM DE BURGH

English
support
trans-
ferred to
Cathal
Crovderg.

Probable
explana-
tion.

Courcy into Connaught. According to the Irish
annals he marched through three of the cantreds
granted to him by John, namely Corann, Moylurg,
and Moy Ai. Then he went further south as far
as Kilmacduagh in the attempt to recover the
spoil which Cathal Carragh had driven off. The
host, however, was caught in a pass through
the woods, and defeated, and John de Courcy
with difficulty led his army back by Tuam and
Roscommon to Rinn-duin, and so by boats across
Lough Ree.^

And now a curious change of alHances took
place, the cause of which is obscured by what
seems to be a mutilation in the annals. Up to
this point William de Burgh, and apparently the
English government too, favoured Cathal Car^
ragh; but now, at the moment when Cathal
Crovderg had twice failed to recover his kingdom,
the support of both William and the Crown was
transferred to him. How is this change of policy
to be explained ? We are told that ' when the
foreigners arrived in Meath (i. e. after the retreat
across Lough Ree) they arrested Cathal Crovderg
as a pledge for the payment of wages, and that
he [Cathal] was taken to Dublin until he gave
pledges for himself that he would obey the King

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1201. Rinn-diiin, 'the Point of the
dun,' is a promontory jutting into Lough Ree. It was
afterwards the site of an important castle, as to which see
Journ. R. S. A. I. 1907, p. 274.

IN CONNAUGHT 189

of the Saxons '.^ In all probability Cathal
Crovderg at this time, in consideration of being
recognized as King of Connaught by the English
king, and being assisted to recover his throne,
agreed to surrender some lands in Connaught to
the Crown. We can even fix pretty confidently
what these lands were. In November 1200
John had granted to Geoffrey de Costentin a
cantred near Athlone afterwards known as the
Fews of Athlone, and in April 1201 this grant
was amplified by the addition of the adjoin-
ing cantred of Tirmany. Probably Cathal now
agreed to the surrender of at least these cantreds.
At any rate, it is certain that from this time
forward Cathal Crovderg was supported by the
Crown, even when William de Burgh turned
against him, and that he soon agreed to give
even a larger slice of his territory to the Crown.
As to John de Courcy, we have the indepen-
dent account of Roger de Hoveden that he was
treacherously entrapped in this year (1201) by
Hugh de Lacy, his late companion-in-arms, into
his castle^ 'for the purpose of delivering him up

1 This is the translation of the passage as it originally stood
in the Annals of Loch Ce, but the name Eoain (John) has been
interlined, so as to make the passage mean that John de
Courcy was taken to Dublin and gave the pledges. But it is
probable that the statement as originally written was correct.

2 This was no doubt the castle of Nobber, to which, as
stated in the Annals of Clonmacnois, Cathal Carragh {recte
Cathal Crovderg) was also at first taken. The Annals of

190 WILLIAM DE BURGH

to the King of England, who had long wished
to take him ', but that John de Courcy's men
ravaged the lands of the de Lacys until their lord
was delivered up to them.^
Secret On November 2, 1201, the king gave a secret

commis- . . -._ ., ^^. ^ ttt-it

sion. commission to Meiler b itz Henry, \\ lUiam de
Burgh, and Geoffrey de Costentin, and commanded
the barons of Meath to have faith in what these
commissioners should tell them on the king's
behalf.^ This may have been the way the new
policy of supporting Cathal Crovderg was com-
municated. At any rate, Cathal himself, on

Hosting being released, went to William de Burgh, who,

by Wil- , . o ' '

Ham de in accordance with the new policy, early in 1202,
1202. ' accompanied by Murtough Finn, Conor Roe, and
Fineen Mc Carthy, marched with Cathal Crov-
derg into Connaught and proceeded to fortify
himself at the monastery of Boyle. While the
Cathal fortification was going on, Cathal Carragh was
siain?^ killed in a skirmish in the neighbourhood. Thus
the war came to an end. The O'Briens and
Fineen Mc Carthy returned to their homes,
William de Burgh's troops were billeted through-
out Connaught, while William himself and Cathal
Crovderg went in all friendship to spend Easter
at Cong.

Inisfallen mention that John de Courey ' was taken prisoner
by the sons of Hugh de Lacy, by the advice of the King of
England'.

1 Roger de Hoveden, 1201. - Rot. Pat., 3 John, p. 2 b.

IN CONNAUGHT 191

But to secure peace it is not always enough for
rulers to agree, if their peoples are not friendly
at heart. Besides, in this case it was Cathal's
people who had to pay in the coin of cows for
past services. On a false rumour that William Massacre

. of Wil-

was dead the Connaught men acted ' as if they uam's
had taken counsel together ', and each tribe killed ^^"^^'^P^'
the foreign soldiers billeted upon them, to the
number altogether of 900 or more. We may
acquit Cathal of all treachery in this matter,
and yet not wonder that this massacre led to a
rupture between him and William de Burgh. ^

So far William de Burgh had clearly acted William

invades

in accordance with the new arrangement with con-
Cathal Crovderg, but now, early in 1203, accom- "203/ '
panied by the sons of Conor Maenmoy, he entered
Connaught, probably to take possession, in spite

^ Ann. Loch Ce, 1202. In describing this massacre as
the consequence of a plot by de Burgh against Cathal's
life, Miss Norgate does not display her usual care ; nor in
calling Wilham a double-dyed traitor does she shoAv her
usual restraint of language (John Lackland, p. 139). The
account in the Annals of Loch Ce, 1202, hints indeed at
an uneffected plot, but as the direct consequence, not the
cause, of the massacre. Even the entries in the Annals of
Clonmacnois followed by the Four Masters (a much inferior
authority, especially for Connaught) do not warrant this
harsh judgement on William de Burgh. It is true that he
twice changed his alliances ; once apparently in consequence
of the changed policy of his lord, and again in consequence
of the treacherous massacre of his troops. If for such
changes he deserved to be called " a double-dyed traitor ',
what words are left for, say, Donnell O'Brien ?

192 WILLIAM DE BURGH

of Cathal Crovderg, of some lands which he had
been granted there, perhaps by King John in 1195,
perhaps by one or other of the Cathals. He
erected a castle at Meelick, near the Shannon, in
the County Galway, ' and the spot where the
castle was erected was round the great church
of the place, which was filled round about with
earth and stones up to the gables.' ^ In other
words, it seems that the church of Meelick was
used as the core of a mote for the new castle.
From this castle William de Burgh and his
Connaught allies devastated the country, going
as far as Knockmoy, Mayo, and Cong. Cathal
was unable to resist him, until Meiler Fitz Henry,
Is sum- the justiciar, and Walter de Lacy summoned
bSorethe William to Limerick in the name of the king,
king. Evidently the Crown still held by the arrange-
ment with Cathal Crovderg. William then sub-
mitted, recalled the garrison of Meelick, and
surrendered Limerick and his Munster castles to
Meiler as the king's representative.^ In the
July of this year the king gave William a safe-
conduct to and from the king's court, provided
he answered the complaints made against him

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1203. I have given the words their
Hteral meaning, and this rendering brings out the nature
of the work more clearly than the editor's rendering.

2 This is evident from the statement in the Annals of
Loch Ce (1203) of what occurred, when read in connexion
with the records. Up to this period William de Burgh had
the confidence of the king.

IN CONNAUGHT 193

by Meiler/ At the same time the custody of
Limerick was given to William de Braose.^ By
October William de Burgh had been to the king
and was so far restored to favour that the lands
he had pledged and the castles of Kilfeakle and
Askeaton were to be restored to him, but the
justiciar was to keep in safe custody William's
sons and other hostages.^

Evidently John was not very angry with
William de Burgh. Meiler, however, formulated
complaints against him, and he against Meiler.
In March 1204 the king took the unusual course
of appointing a special commission to try and
determine the cross plaints between Meiler and
William.* A month later John virtually over-
rode the jurisdiction of this commission by
respiting all plaints against William de Burgh
(whom he intended at the time to take to Nor-
mandy with him) and commanding the justiciar
to give full seisin to William or his agents of all ^gj^J^'^'
his lands except the land of Connaught, which ^on-

. ^ ' naught,

was to remam m the king's hand.® It would restored.

1 Rot. Pat., 5 John, p. 31 b.

2 Rot. Chart., 5 John, p. 107.

3 Liberate, 5 John, p. 67. Askeaton, as we have seen,
must have been granted to WiUiam de Burgh after Hamo
de Valognes' death or forfeiture.

* Rot. Pat., 5 John, p. 39 b. The commissioners were
Walter de Lacy, Henri de Londres, then archdeacon of
Stafford, Godfrey Lutterel, one of the king's trusted officers,
and WiUiam Petit. 5 Rot. Pat., 5 John, p. 41 b.

1226 n If

194 WILLIAM DE BURGH

appear, however, that this mandate was not
immediately carried out, as it was virtually
repeated in the September following. William
had undertaken to stand his trial in the king's
court in Ireland to answer all appeals, and
Connaught was to be retained in the king's hand
(theoretically, we must suppose) pending the
result of the trial.^ How the trial ended, or
whether it ever took place, does not appear.
Death of William returned to Ireland, but only to die
de^Bur^h. i^ ^hc winter of 1205-6.^ In April 1206 Meiler
Fitz Henry was ordered to take into the king's
hand all William's lands.^ His son Richard was
a minor, and did not get seisin until 1214.*
His The annalist of Clonmacnois, a place which

William de Burgh had plundered from his castle
of Meelick, shows his animus against him and
exhibits the prevailing superstition of the time
by ascribing his death to a loathsome disease
inflicted on him by God and the patrons of the
churches he had plundered. But the translator
adds : ' These and many other reproachful words
my author layeth down in the old book, which
I was loath to translate because they were uttered
by him for the disgrace of so worthy and noble

1 Rot. Pat., 6 John, p. 46. ~ Ann. Loch Ce, 1205.

3 Rot. Pat., 7 John, p. GO b.

* Ibid., 16 John, p. 118 b. Another son, Hubert, be-
came Prior of Athassel and afterwards (1223) Bishop of
Limerick.

IN CONNAUGHT 195

a man as William Burke was, and left out other
his reproachful words which he (as I conceive)
rather declared of an evil will he did bear towards
the said William than any other just cause.'
0' Donovan, assuming, as has been usually done,
that William de Burgh was the same person
as William Fitz Audelin, endeavours to defend
the annalist as against the translator by addu-
cing the unfavourable description of Fitz Audelin
given by Giraldus.^ It is strange that O'Donovan
did not perceive that this description could not
possibly apply in its entirety to William de
Burgh. Giraldus again and again sneers at the
slothfulness and cowardice of William Fitz
Audelin,^ but these qualities were surely alien
to the ' William Burke ' of the annalists. Wil-
liam de Burgh was probably neither better nor
worse than other vigorous spirits of the age, but
no man could master two provinces of Ireland in
the course of a decade, as he did, without being
both energetic and brave.

As to the plundering of churches and monas- why the
teries so often laid to the charge of eminent plundered
Anglo-Norman leaders — and indeed to Irish churches.

1 Four Masters, 1204, note o.

2 Giraldus speaks of Fitz Audelin as ' Imbellium debella-
tor, rebelUum blanditor ; hosti suavissimus, subdito gravis-
simus ' (v. 338) ; he also exclaims at his unfitness for a
lord-marcher, * strenuitate carens ' (p. 352), one whose
maxim was ' Hostibus illaesis semper spoliare subactos '
(p. 391), and much more to the same effect.

N2

196 WILLIAM DE BURGH

chieftains too — by the monkish annaUsts, a fur-
ther word of explanation may be advisable. If
we may judge from the number and magnificence
of their religious foundations in Ireland, these
leaders were certainly not wanting in piety as
understood at the time, while the plunder and
destruction of churches, as such, was obviousl}*
not a military measure. But it was the custom
of the Irish to store their corn and other property
within the sanctuary of a church, presumably as
being safer there than elsewhere. In proof of
this we have not only the direct statement of
Giraldus that this was the custom, and that in
view of it Cardinal Vivian, the papal legate, in
1177 gave permission to the English, on any
expedition when they could not get supplies else-
where, to take what they found in the churches
on payment of a just price. ^ At this particular
time, however, the men of Connaught, by way
of creating desolation before the advance of
Miles de Cogan, with their own hands burned
what provisions they could not conceal, together
with the churches in which they were stored.^
But the Irish annals themselves afford other
instances. Thus in the very passage describing

^ Gir. Camb. v. 346 ; cf. the statement on p. 137 that
the Irish, not having any castles, used to seek protection
for themselves and for their goods in churches.

2 The Annals of Loch Ce, 1177, here virtually corroborates
Giraldus ; see above, p. 27.

IN CONNAUGHT 197

the harrying of Connaught by Cathal Carragh
and WiUiam Burke and the two O'Briens, it is
said that they carried off ' all the property, stock,
or food that was in the churches, without regard
to saint or sanctuary or any earthly terror.' ^
In 1214 Thomas Mac Uchtry and Rory Mac
Rannall ' carried off the precious things (goods)
of the community of Derry, and of the north of
Ireland besides, from the middle of the great
church of the monastery.' ^ In 1236 Richard de
Burgh, endeavouring to quell disturbances in
Connaught, went to Tuam and Mayo and other
ecclesiastical centres, ' and not a stack of seed or
corn of all that was in the great relig (church-
yard) of Mayo, or in the relig of the church of
Michael the Archangel, was left without being
taken away ; and threescore or fourscore baskets
were brought out of these churches.' ^ Now to
reduce to submission an enemy that will not
meet you in the field, and that possesses no
castles or fortified towns which might be taken
and held against him, almost the sole, and cer-
tainly the most merciful, military measure is to

^ Ann. Loch Ce, 1200, p. 212, where the words of the text
for what was carried off are each crodh ocus each eallach no
bhidh is na templuib.

2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1213 ; Ann. Ulster, 1214. The word
here, set, translated ' precious things ', was used to designate
goods and chattels of any kind : O'Donovan's supplement
to O'Reilly's Dictionary.

3 Ann. Loch Ce, 1236, p. 339.

198 WILLIAM DE BURGH

cut off his provisions and destroy his property.
At the present day we are perhaps more soft-
hearted, but certainly not more pious than the
Normans, and if circumstances should render
the taking of a church a measure of prime mili-
tary importance there is no general who would
hesitate to sound the assault.

It was not the methods of William de Burgh,
but his policy, that the Irish annalists viewed
with disfavour. Had he been an Irishman with
the same record he would have been described
as ' Flood of the glory and prowess of the
Western World.' By some Irish writers he is
called ' William the Conqueror ', and though he
did not fully earn that title he was at least
the ' King-maker ' of Connaught. No one there
could stand against him, and the subsequent
kings of Connaught remained subject, and in
general obedient, to the English Crown.

CHAPTER XX

WILLIAM THE MARSHAL IN IRELAND

1207-13

At the commencement of the year 1206
WiUiam de Burgh and Theobald Walter were
both dead. They were succeeded by minors,
and their lands were taken into the king's hand.
John de Courcy, too, had been banished from
Ulster. The leading figures among the Anglo-
Normans were Hugh de Lacy, now Earl of Ulster ;
his brother Walter, Lord of Meath ; Meiler Fitz
Henry, the justiciar in Dublin; and in Munster,
Walter de Lacy as seneschal for William de
Braose, and Geoffrey de Marisco, Thomas Fitz
Maurice, and other large landholders there.
But early in 1207 there appeared in Leinster a William
greater than any of these in the person of William comes to
Marshal, as he is usually called, Earl of Pembroke {207°^'
and Striguil and Lord of Leinster. Writers of
Irish history have said little about this great
man, and that little in important points wrong,
partly because until recently not much was
known of his doings in Ireland. Now, however,
we have a most valuable biography of William His bio-
Marshal in the form of an Old French poem or ^^^ ^'

200 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

rhymed chronicle.^ From its concluding verses
the editor infers that it was composed by a pro-
fessional trouvere at the request of William
Marshal the younger, from materials, which
probably took the form of written memoirs,
supplied by John d'Erlee, one of the Marshal's
most faithful followers.^ The work appears to
have been completed about the year 1226. For
us it supplies several new facts concerning
William Marshal in Ireland, throws fresh light
on an obscure page of the history of the country,
and helps us to form a true estimate of King
John's character as displayed in his dealings
with his Irish barons.

His ecarly William Marshal was born about the year 1 144.

years. jj.^ father, John, son of Gilbert, succeeded to the
office of Marshal of England granted to Gilbert
by Henry I. The office was hereditary, and

1 L'Histoire de Guillaume le Marechal, Comte de Striguil
et de Pembroke, ed. Paul Meyer, 1891-1901.

2 John d'Erlee received his name from a village now
called Early in Berkshire, not far from Reading. In Latin
documents it appears as Erleia, Erleya, Erleg', Erlegh'.
He is first mentioned in the Histoire in 1188, when he was
William's esquire, and he appears frequently afterwards.
He accompanied his lord to Ireland in 1207 (Rot. Pat.,
8 John, p. 69), and was given the custody of Southern
Leinster when WiUiam was summoned back by John. He
witnessed the Marshal's charters to Tintern, Dunbrody,
Duiske, and Kilkenny, and was granted lands in the County
Kilkenny, where the parish name Erleystown (now corruptly
Earlstown) long preserved his name.

IN IRELAND 201

supplied a surname for the family. In 1152,
when about eight years old, William was given
as a hostage to King Stephen, then besieging
Newbury. His life, according to the rules of war,
became forfeit, and it was proposed to place him
in the sling of a pierriere and hurl him into the
castle. But Stephen, won over by the trustful
ways of the child, who asked to be given a swing
in the machine, would not allow him to be in-
jured, and then we have the pretty picture of
the king in his tent playing at jack-straws with
the little boy.^ William is said to have grown to
be a well-formed man, perfect in limb as a beau-
tiful statue, with brown locks and a presence
that would grace a Roman emperor. ' He who
made him,' says the poet, ' was a great Master.' ^
During the years 1170-83 he was a member of the
household of Henry ' the young king ', a victor
in many a tournament, and ever faithful to his
lord — even in his revolt against his father — up
to the day of his death. He then went to the
Holy Land in vicarious fulfilment of the young
king's vow, and after his return was one of King
Henry's most faithful followers to the last.

It was about May 1189 that Henry, lying ill is pro-
at Le Mans, promised William the hand of Isabel Isabel
de Clare, the heiress of Leinster, in recompense f^^^^l^
for his good service,^ and ordered Hubert Walter, "age.

1 Histoire G. le Mar., 11. 467-650.

2 Ibid., 11. 715-36. 3 Ibid., 11. 8303, &c.

202 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

then Ranulf de Glanville's clerk, to give him
possession of the lady and her land on his re-
turn to England. When in the following month
Henry was flying from Le Mans with the Marshal
guarding the rear, Richard of Poitou overtook
them. The Marshal turned and spurred towards
Richard. ' God's limbs ! Marshal,' cried Richard,
' slay me not. That would be foul. I have no
hauberk.' ' Nay,' replied the Marshal, ' may
the Devil slay thee, for I will not ' ; and with
that he plunged his lance into the horse, threw
the rider, and stopped the pursuit.^ When less
than a month later Richard met William beside
Henry's bier at Fontevrault, he not only bore
him no ill will, but confirmed his father's gift
to him of the damisele cU Estregoil, and sent
him on an important mission to London.^
On the way he visited the Pays de Caux to
take possession of his bride and of some lands
there to which she was entitled by inheritance.^
Then, after accomplishing his mission in England,
he married Isabel in London, at the house of
the sheriff.

Soon afterAvards we have an instructive scene.
John refused to give the Marshal seisin of his

1 Histoire G. le Mar., 11. 8837-49. Gerald de Barry (viii.
236) alludes to this incident, though without mentioning
the Marshal's name.

2 Ibid., 11. 9321-71.

* Ibid., 11. 9455-62. Longue villa was the caput of the
fief, which came to Isabel through her father.

IN IRELAND 203

Irish lands, and the latter had to seek the king's John
intervention. Richard insisted, and John re- give him
luctantly consented, ' provided,' he said, ' the Leister,
grants of lands I have made to my men hold
good and be confirmed.' ' That cannot be,' said
the king. ' For what would then remain to him,
seeing that you have given all to your people ? '
Finally, John asked that the land he had given
to Theobald Butler {au boteillier Tiebaut) should
be left to him. To this the king consented,
provided Theobald held of the Marshal in chief. ^
This was not the only case in which John
endeavoured to create tenancies to be held
of himself in chief in lands which he only
possessed in wardship. As we have seen,^
he seems to have done the same thing in Cork
with the lands of Miles de Cogan, and there
were probably other cases both in Meath and in
Leinster.

William Marshal did not go to Ireland to take
possession of his fief, but sent Reinalt de Kedeville
as his bailiff or seneschal for that purpose. The
writer of the Histoire calls Reinalt a rogue, and

1 Ibid., 11. 9581-618. John in Henry's reign had granted
Arklow to Theobald Walter, and WiUiam Marshal, probably
in pursuance of the above arrangement, made a similar
grant with additions including Tullow. See Carte's
Ormond, Introd., p. xlvi, where Carte was puzzled by the
two grants of the same place by different persons. The
above scene explains the difficulty.

2 Supra, pp. 45-6.

204 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

intimates that he played false to his lord.^
William himself was now appointed by Richard
one of the subordinate justiciars of England,
first under Hugh, Bishop of Durham, and then
under William de Longchamp, and he held some
office of this kind during the whole time Richard
was absent from England.^ Modern writers,
following Walter Harris's Table of Chief Gover-
nors of Ireland, place William Marshal in that
capacity from 1191 to 1194.^ But, as we have
seen, Harris's list, in the early portion at any
justiciar rate, is full of errors. As for William Marshal,

of Ir6~

land. no authority has been produced for inserting

1 Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 9619-30. In the lines

Reinalt de Kedevile, un fals
Veirement fu de Kedevile
Quer toz diz le servi de gile

there is an evident play on the name, which puzzled the
editor. Might not the place-name have suggested the word
chetif to the trouvere ? The place intended may have been,
as M. Meyer suggests, Quetieville (formerly Chetivilla,
Ketelvilla, Keteuvilla) or Quetteville, both in Calvadoz.
Probably the ' caitiff ' played into the hands of John in his
intrigue with Meiler against the Marshal's lands.

2 Walter of Coventry, vol. i, pp. 378, 388, 432. William
was given the custody of Nottingham Castle on July 28,
1191 (ibid., p. 462), and was acting against William Long-
champ in the following October (ibid., vol. ii, p. 5). In
March 1193 he was besieging Windsor with liis Welsh fol-
lowers : Roger de Hoveden, iii. 206 ; Gerv, Cant., vol. i,
p. 515 ; Hist. G. le Mar., 1. 9898, &c.

^ Harris did not invent the statement ; for though Ware
and Hanmer are silent. Cox makes William Marshal governor
from 1191 to 1197.

IN IRELAND 205

him in the list, no charters executed by him as
governor are forthcoming, not a single act is
anywhere ascribed to him in Ireland at this time,
and his position and doings in England during
these years seem to negative the possibility of
his holding office in Ireland. Moreover, it was
very much against his will, and only at the king's
command, that John put William Marshal in
possession of his lands ; and we shall find John,
when king, refusing William permission to go to
Ireland to visit his fief, intriguing against his
interests there, and endeavouring to thwart him
in every way. The appointment, if made, must
have come from John, and John is unlikely to
have made it.

After Nottingham was surrendered to Richard
in person in 1194, the chancellor (meaning, ap-
parently, William de Longchamp) called upon
Walter de Lacy to do homage to the king for
his land in Ireland. This Walter did. Then
the chancellor called upon William Marshal to
do the same. But William refused, saying that Refuses
it would be felony to John, to whom he had done homage
homage for all that he held of him, and that he ^i^hard i
would deceive nobody by flattery. The kinej i^^.

'^ •; -^ ^ Leinster.

thereupon said he was right, and the barons
approved. William added : ' If any man in the
world seeks to obtain Ireland, I shall range
myself with all my force on the side of him whose
man I am. I have faithfully served our lord the

206 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

king here for the land I hold of him, so that
I have nothing to fear.' ^ One does not know
which to admire most, the fearlessness of the
Marshal or the good-humoured toleration of the
king.

William appears to have been almost con-
tinually in Normandy with Richard up to the
time of the king's death. He was one of the prin-
cipal supporters of John's succession, and received
from John the formal investiture of the earldom
of Pembroke and a confirmation of the office of
marshal of the household.^ He may have paid
a brief visit to Ireland in the winter of 1200-1.^
Certain Latin annals place the founding of the
Monas- monastery de Voto or Tintern (County Wexford)
de Voto. in this year, stating that William, when in peril
by sea, vowed that if he reached land in safety
he would erect a monastery to Christ and His
mother Mary.* This he did at the head of
Bannow Bay, and we may conjecture that the
Marshal's ship found refuge in the bay not far

1 Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 10289-340.

2 Roger de Hoveden, iv, 90 ; Rot. Chart, 1 John, p. 46.
On November 12, 1207, John granted to William Marshal's
nephew, John Marshal, the marshalcy of Ireland and the
cantred of Kilmeane near Roscommon : ibid., 9 John, 173 b.

^ He can be traced with John's court every month up
to the 3rd September 1200, but from this date to March
1201 we seem to lose sight of him in the records.

4 Annals, Laud MS., Chart. St. Mary's, Dublin, ii. 307,
and cf. ibid., p. 278.

IN IRELAND 207

from where Robert Fitz Stephen first landed
in Ireland. William brought monks from the
Cistercian house of Tintern in Monmouthshire
to supply the Monasterium de Voto, and hence
the latter came to be known as ' Tinterna Minor '.
As to the date, however, the charter by which
William endowed his new foundation has been
preserved to us in an inspeximus and confirma-
tion of the time of Richard 11,^ and from the
names of the witnesses it would seem to belong
to the period 1207-13, during which William was
almost continuously in Ireland. The vow, of
course, may have been made some years earlier.

We need not here follow William Marshal's Becomes
career in Normandy and England during the from
early years of John's reign. Suffice it to say that ° "'
he became more and more estranged from the
king. When through John's supineness Richard's

1 Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 80, The names of the
witnesses mentioned are those of WiUiam's feudatories :
Jordan de Saukvill, John d'Erlee, John Marshal, William
and Maurice de Londres, Walter Purcell, Baldmn and
Robert Keting, WiUiam Chevre, Nicholas Brun, and Philip
the Cleric. Of these John Marshal was sent by his uncle
to Ireland in 1204 to take over the seneschalship of his lands
and castles : Rot. Pat., 5 John, p. 42. John d'Erlee came
to Ireland with his lord in 1207 ; Rot. Pat., 8 John, p. 69.
Jordan de Sauqueville and Walter Purcell were in Ireland
with the earl in 1207-8 ; Hist. G. le Mar. {infra, p. 211).
Compare, too, the witnesses to the earl's charters to Kil-
kenny, Dunbrody, and Duiske, all of which seem to date
from about the same time.

208 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

' Saucy Castle ' had fallen and Normandy was
hopelessly lost, William was one of those who
thwarted John's belated efforts to lead an
expedition against Philip, and this no doubt
contributed to John's ill will. But John was
jealous of William's reputation, power, and
independence, and would have humbled him if
he could. William's unswerving loyalty and
tact, however, gave him no opportunity.

About the close of the year 1206 the Marshal
Obtains sought John's Icavc to go to Ireland to visit his
go to lands there. The king gave an unwilling consent.
re an . jj^ j^^^ been often asked to grant this leave, but
hitherto had always refused.^ William had not
got beyond his castle of Striguil, however, when
he was overtaken by a messenger from the king
demanding his second son as a hostage. Wil-
liam's eldest son was already a hostage in the
king's hands, and a less prudent man than
William would have refused this new demand.
Disregarding the advice of his countess and his
barons, he told the messenger that he would
gladly send all his sons to the king if he desired
it ; ' but,' he added, ' tell me, for the love of God,
why he acts thus towards me ? ' The messenger

1 Hist. G. le Mar. U. 13311-20. The writer says that
WiUiam had never seen his lands ; but if the date (1200)
assigned for the founding of the Monasterium de Voto (or
even for the vow) be correct, this statement cannot be
accurate.

IN IRELAND 209

replied that the king desired above all to prevent
the Marshal going to Ireland. ' By God,' said
the Marshal, ' for good or for ill I shall go, since
he has given me permission.' On the morrow he
sent his son Richard to the king and set sail for
Ireland.^

And now opens a story of intrigue against intrigue
the Earl Marshal which we should never be and
able to piece together without the Histoire, but ^03^
which, confirmed as it is on many points by the ^T^^^^k^J
records (which it explains), we may confidently
accept as in all essentials true.

When the Earl Marshal landed in Ireland,
most of his men, we are told, welcomed him with
honour, but some there were who in their hearts
were much chagrined at his coming. Foremost
among these was Meiler Fitz Henry, the justiciar.
It appears indeed from the records that Meiler,
while in general only carrying out John's orders,
had by his high-handed action in one way or
another aggrieved many of the magnates of
Ireland and despoiled them of their rights. His
action towards William de Burgh was hardly
justified by the king. He had, as we have seen,
taken Limerick by force from Walter de Lacy,
who held it for William de Braose, and the king

1 Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 13335-422. The king's protection
for the lands of William Earl Marshal while in Ireland is
dated Feb. 19, 1207 : Rot. Pat., 7 John, p. 69. He was
accompanied by Henry Hose and John d'Erlee.

1226 H O

210 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

had not scrupled to profit by the violence.^ He
had also by John's orders taken into the king's
hand the whole of the kingdom of Cork and
made a number of new grants there, which were
subsequently confirmed by the king, and which
apparently ignored the seignory of the heirs of
the original grantees, and perhaps disallowed
the rights of some of the former tenants.^ In
Leinster, on no apparent legal grounds, he had
taken OfPaly into the king's hand, and, as we
shall see, he seems also to have taken possession
of Fircal in Meath ; and when the barons of Meath
and Leinster attempted to get redress they were
indignantly reprimanded by the king.^ William
Marshal's name is not mentioned, but he was
aggrieved by the seizure of Offaly, and presum-
ably supported his barons. At any rate, Meiler
is said to have told the king that if he permitted
the Marshal to remain long in Ireland it would
be to his detriment. John summoned both the
Marshal and Meiler to his presence. This was pro-
bably in October 1207. Meiler reached the king
early in November, apparently before the earl.

1 V. supra, p, 177.

2 V. supra, p. 45, and see Meiler' s grants in Desmond
referred to in Rot. Pat., 8 John, p. 71 b.

3 This was on May 23, 1207 : Rot. Pat., 8 John, p. 72.
The barons were charged with estabhshing a ' new assize '.
Perhaps Meiler had been summoned to answer for his con-
duct before the chief courts of the Liberties ; cf . Rot. Pat.,
9 John, p. 76 b, translated. Early Statutes (Berry), p. 3.

ance.

IN IRELAND 211

Anticipating disturbance, the earl made his The Mar -
arrangements. He gave the custody of his lands ticipates
to Jordan de Sauqueville and John d'Erlee, and "^^"^ "
left with them his cousin, Stephen d'Evreux, and
some of the knights he had brought with him,
and bade them act by the advice of Geoffrey
Fitz Robert, Walter Purcell, Thomas Fitz An-
thony, and Maillard, his standard-bearer.^ Then
the earl summoned his barons to Kilkenny.
Leading his countess by the hand before them,
he said : ' My lords, you see here your rightful
lady, daughter of the earl who liberally granted
you your fiefs when he had conquered the land.
She abides here in your midst enceinte. Until
God brings me back again I pray you all to
guard her well and loyally, for she is your lady.
I have naught here except through her.' They
all promised to do right, but some of them failed
to keep their words.^

1 Hist. G. le Mar., 13424-512. Stephen d'Evreux (or
de Ebroica, Chart. St. Mary's, Dublin, ii. 183) was perhaps
founder of the family of Devereux in co. Wexford. Geoffrey
Fitz Robert had been, and perhaps still was, the earl's
seneschal : Reg. St. Thomas's, p. 125. He has been con-
founded Avith, but must be distinguished from, his name-
sake, the second husband of Basilia de Clare. He speaks
of his wife, Eva de Bermingham, as living, in a charter
witnessed by Hugh le Rous, Bishop of Ossory, i.e. after
1202. BasiUa's husband was hving 1199-1201 : Reg. St.
Thomas's, no. cxxix ; and she seems to have survived
him : ibid., cxxvii, cxxxvi.

2 Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 13527-50.

0 2

212 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

Meiler's No sooner had the earl landed in Wales on his

raid New way to the king than Meiler's men and kinsfolk
^°^^' raided his territory. They burned his granges
at his newly formed port, now known as New
Ross, slew twenty of his men, and carried off a
prey from the town. And thus the disturbances
commenced.^

Meanwhile Meiler was with the king at Wood-
stock on the 8th of November, when the new
grants in Cork were confirmed. According to
the biographer of the Earl Marshal, Meiler offered
to raise a host at his own cost and take both
William de Braose and William Marshal prisoners
The Mar- and bring them to the king. As a preliminary
chie/men ^6 got the king to send letters summoning to
sum- England John d'Erlee, Stephen d'Evreux, Jordan

moned to => ' jr '

England. (Je Saukeville, and other leading followers of the
Marshal,^ under penalty of losing the lands which

1 Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 13551-74. M. Meyer is unfortunate
in his suggestion that the novele vile of 1. 13569 is Newtown-
barry, a town which only got its name from an ancestor
of Lord Farnham in the latter part of the sixteenth century.
It is undoubtedly the villa novi pontis, or New Ross, where
John stopped on June 21, 1210 — a town which clearly owed
all its early importance to William Marshal.

2 Ibid., 11. 13575-670. The editor could find no trace
of these letters, but that they were actually sent appears
from the Close Rolls. On Februar}^ 20, 1208, John wrote
to the Earl Marshal as follows : ' We have ordered that
the land which John de Erleg' held of j^our fee and which
was taken into our hand be restored to you. We caused
him to be disseised because for more than two months

IN IRELAND 213

they held of the king in England. The king,
too, gave permission to Meiler to return to
Ireland,^ but when the Earl Marshal afterwards
asked for leave to return it was refused.

Meiler, on arriving in Ireland, found that
matters had not gone well with his friends,
several of whom were in prison for their mis-
deeds. He summoned the earl's men to a parley
at Castledermot,^ and there the king's messenger
gave them the royal letters recalling them to
England. They took counsel together and were
convinced that the king meant to disseise their
lord. Accordingly they decided to remain in They

^ '^ -^ decide to

Ireland and defend the land which the earl had stay.

he failed to come to us after being ordered to do so We
desire you to send back him and the others whom \\e
lent you, and that they come to us since we have need of
their service, and until they return we shall hold their
lands in our hand ' : Rot. Claus., 9 John, m. 8, p. 103. On
March 19, 1208, John ordered the sheriff of Buckingham-
shire to dehver Jordan de Saukeville's land to William
Marshal (ibid., p. 106 b) ; and on the 20th there is a similar
order as to John d'Erlee's Enghsh lands (ibid.).

1 Meiler probably returned to Ireland soon after Nov.
14, 1207, when he was with the king at Gloucester. The
events next related must have taken place before the
end of March 1208, when the king became reconciled Avith
the Earl Marshal.

2 The text of the Histoire is here corrupt, and the place-
name disguised. Meiler held his parlement Jiors ceiste [or
teiste] de mot (1. 13697) ; but we can confidently restore
tristerdermot, the usual Anglo-Norman form of the Irish
' Disert Diarmada ', now Castledermot.

214 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

entrusted to them. They then sought aid from
Hugh de Lacy, Earl of Ulster, who speedily
came with 65 knights and 1,200 men, and they
devastated Meiler's lands.^ Here we have a con-
firmation with fresh details in the Irish annals.
The de ' The SOUS of Hugo de Lacy,' we are told, ' and
JlkT"* the English of Meath marched to the castle of
^g^""^" Ardnurcher, and continued to besiege it for
five weeks, when it was surrendered to them,
as was also the territory of Fircal, and Meiler was
banished from the country.' ^ Ardnurcher had
been granted to Meiler by the elder Hugh de Lacy,
but from this entry it would seem that Meiler
claimed Fircal (an adjoining district in King's
County, but belonging to Meath), adversely
to Walter de Lacy — just as he claimed Offaly
adversely to William Marshal, and Limerick
adversely to William de Braose. Probably
Meiler had acted according to John's directions
throughout. If so, we must regard this wide-
spread disaffection among the Irish barons at
this time as the Irish counterpart of the disaffec-
tion which grew to a head among the barons of
England a little later, and as due to the same
cause: the capricious, oppressive, and, as we

1 Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 13680-786.

2 j^our Masters, 1207 ; cf. Ann. Loch Ce, 1207. Perhaps
the beginning of 1208 was the true date. In this latter
year the annals also mention Geoffrey Mareis or de Marisco
as defeating some of Meiler's men at Thurles : Ann. Laud
MS., Chart. St. Mary's, Dubhn, ii, p. 311.

IN IRELAND 215

would now say, unconstitutional action of the
Crown.

Meanwhile, Earl William, who was following
John in his movements in England, knew
nothing of what was going on in Ireland. Indeed,
as seems to have often happened, all communica-
tion with Ireland was cut off during the winter.^
One day at Guilford ^ the king asked the earl
if he had heard any good news from Ireland.
On the earl replying in the negative, John told
an imaginary tale of how the countess had been
besieged at Kilkenny by Meiler, how Meiler had
at last been beaten, but John d'Erlee, Stephen
d'Evreux, and Ralph Fitz Pain had been killed.
The earl was much grieved at this, but wondered
to himself how the king could have got the news.
When Lent came both king and earl learnt the
facts : that Meiler had been beaten and taken Meiler
prisoner, and had been obliged to make peace ^**^"*
with the countess and give his son Henry as
a hostage, and that Philip de Prendergast and
the rest who had taken Meiler' s part had also
given hostages.^

Having failed to humble the Earl Marshal by
means of Meiler, John executed one of his rapid

1 It is said in the Histoire, 11. 13672-5, that Meiler's was
the only ship that crossed over from Michaelmas (1207) to
la Chandelor (February 2, 1208).

2 John was at Guilford, January 25-7, 1208.

3 Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 13787-888.

216 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

John changes of front. He took both WiUiam Marshal

pL o ■pf/pg

front? ai^d Walter de Lacy into favour, restored to them
their lands, discredited Meiler, and before long
superseded him in the office of justiciar. The
steps by which this change was effected are all
attested by the records. On the 7th of March,
1208, probably soon after the authentic news
came from Ireland, John informed Meiler that
William Earl Marshal had shown himself suffi-
ciently submissive to the king's will, and ordered
the justiciar to observe the existing peace in
Ireland, adding that if any raids had been made
by the justiciar's people on the earl's land the
justiciar should make the best amends he could,
the earl having given a reciprocal undertaking.'^
This mandate and the authenticity of the letters
recalling the marshal's chief men go far to con-
firm the story told in the marshal's biography.
On the 19th John gave a similar order with
regard to Walter de Lacy.^ On the 20th he
sent Philip of Worcester and others to see
that his orders were carried out.^ On the
21st he ordered Meiler to give seisin to the
earl of the land of Offaly with its castles, for
which, however, the earl was to give .300

1 Rot. Claus., 9 John, p. 105. Probably the earl at this
time assented to the restrictions on behalf of the Cro'wii
afterwards inserted in the new charter of Leinster.

2 Ibid., p. 106 b.

3 Ibid, They were to be summoned to the councils of
the justiciar : ibid., p. 107.

IN IRELAND 217

marks ; ^ and on the 28th he gave to the earl
a new charter of his land of Leinster.^ This
was followed a few weeks later by a similar
charter to Walter de Lacy of his land of
Meath.^ The exact date of Meiler's supersession
is unknown, but according to the Annals of
Inisf alien Hugh de Lacy was appointed justiciar
in this year.*

The earl returned to Ireland, landing at The Mar-
Glascarrig probably in April. He dealt gener- turns to
ously with those of his men who had acted J^Jj"*^'
against him,^ and restored to them their hostages.
Afterwards Meiler, no longer justiciar, came to
terms with him. He agreed to give up to him
at once his castle of Dunamase, the remains of
which (or rather of some later reconstruction)
may still be seen crowning a rock in Queen's
County, and after his death all the rest of his

1 Rot. Pat., 9 John, p. 80 b.

2 Rot. Chart., 9 John, p. 176. For the restrictions in-
serted in this charter see Appendix to this chapter.

3 Ibid., p. 178.

* There seems to be no reason to doubt this apx^oint-
ment. Harris places it in October 1208, which may
be right. Hugh de Lacy can only have held the appoint-
ment for a few months, as by favouring WiUiam de
Braose he soon fell from the king's good graces. John
de Gray appears to have been justiciar from about the close
of 1208.

5 Philip de Prendergast and David de la Roche, both of
Flemish descent from South Wales, were the principal of
these. They had just received large grants in Desmond,

218 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

land ^ — a pretty clear admission that it had been
wrongfully taken.

In the next chapter we shall see that Earl

William, through his sheltering WilUam de

Braose from John's wTath, once more fell under

that capricious king's ill will, but with the

exception of a campaign in Wales in 1211, when

William fought for his unworthy master, he

And re- seems to have remained in Ireland until early in

most con- 1213. He was then once more summoned to

t!ri2i3''^ England by John, who, when in difficulty, knew

his real worth and (almost excessive) loyalty to

the throne. After this it is doubtful if he

ever resided in Ireland again. At most he can

only have visited his lands for brief periods.

From this time up to the death of the king the

earl appears to have been one of John's prin-

probably through Meiler's influence : Rot. Chart., 9 John,
pp. 171 b, 172 b.
1 A lui en tel guise fina

Que son boen chastel otreia,
Donmas al conte en heritage.
Apres le jor de son aage
Li otreia tote sa terre.

Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 14127-31.

The editor, ignorant of Irish topography, supposes Donmas
to be the caislen na Dumach (recte Dumhcha), or Dough
Castle, in the Co. Clare, referring toO'Donovan's note to Four
Masters, 1422. It is undoubtedly the castle of Dunamase
(Irish, Dun Masc), as to which see vol. i, p. 375. John took
the castle into his own hand in 1210 (Hist., 11. 14330 et seq.),
but it was ordered to be restored to the earl in 1215-16
(Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, nos. 644, 664, 684), and afterwards
became the chief castle of his successors in Leix.

IN IRELAND 219

cipal counsellors, and certainly when regent for
Henry III he did not leave England.

I have dealt with the life of the great Earl
Marshal, so far as it was concerned with Ireland,
in some detail, because trustworthy details
concerning him, though not generally known,^
happen to be forthcoming, and we are thus able
to form a completer picture of him than of any
other Anglo-Norman leader of his time. He His char-

^ acter and

must not, however, be taken as an average work in
example of an Anglo-Norman feudal lord, but
rather as one of the finest human products of the
feudal system : brave, generous, upright, and
ever true to his lights, the highest realized type
of chivalry. So far as appears, with the excep-
tion of the skirmish carried on by his men to
baffle the intrigues of King John and Meiler,
he engaged in no wars or fighting in Ireland.
His work was entirely one of construction — to
build up and perfect, so far as he could, the
feudal organization which was to give to his
Liberty of Leinster, for about a century, a peace
and prosperity and a reign of law hitherto
unknown in Ireland. So far indeed as this peace
was infringed within his fief during this period,
the infringement, as we shall see, was almost
entirely due to dissensions among the feudal
lords themselves. His connexion with Ireland,

1 Miss Norgate has made good use of the Marshal's
biography in the ' Angevin Kings ' and ' John Lackland '.

220 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

indeed, was only a comparatively uneventful
episode in an eventful life. With the govern-
ment of the country he had little or nothing
to do, but only with that of his liberty. He was
too upright and too independent a man for John,
while his will was unfettered, to choose as his
minister. Almost to the last John viewed him
with unmerited jealousy and suspicion. But
when the deserted king found himself in dire
straits he made use of the marshal's extra-
ordinary loyalty and known integrity to help
him out of his difficulties. It would have been
well for the success of the new regime in Ireland
had William Marshal been invested with the
chief official power, but he was called away, even
from the humbler work of organizing and deve-
loping his fief, to greater issues elsewhere.

As throwing a further light on the mind of

The final this great man, the final scene, gleaned from his

biography, may be referred to here, though

much was to happen before it took place. In

May 1 219, as he lay on his death-bed, his

faithful follower Henry Fitz Gerald, probably

inspired by some cleric, said to him : ' Sire, it is

right to think of your salvation. Death is no

respecter of persons, and the clergy teach us

that nobody shall be saved who does not restore

what he has taken.' The Marshal replied :

' Henry, listen to me a moment. The clergy

are too hard on us. They seek to shave us too

scene

IN IRELAND 221

close. I have taken in my time 500 knights,
and have retained their arms, horses, and
accoutrements. If the kingdom of heaven is
closed to me for this, there is nothing to be done ;
for I cannot give them back. I can do no more
for God than give myself up to him, while
repenting of all the wrongs I have done. . . .
Either the clergy are wrong in their reasoning
or no man can be saved.' ' Sire,' said John
d'Erlee, ' that is the very truth ; but I warrant
there is hardly one of us who in his last days
would dare to say as much.' ^ The marshal's
sentiments have indeed a surprisingly modern ring
about them. A little later, when it was a ques-
tion what should be done with the rich robes and
furs he had for ceremonial purposes, a cleric
named Philip suggested that they would fetch
a great sum for purchasing his salvation. ' Hold
thy peace, bad man,' said the earl. ' I have had
too much of your counsel, and want no more
of it. A plague on bad counsellors ! It will
soon be Whitsuntide, when my knights will want
their robes. It will be the last time that I shall
give them to them, and you seek to cajole me
out of them ! ' And then he ordered the robes
to be distributed among his men, and more to be
procured if there were not enough for all.^ Yet
it would be a great mistake to suppose that
William the Marshal had freed himself generally
1 Histoire, 11. 18461-501. 2 ibid., 11. 18675-18716.

222 WILLIAIVI THE MARSHAL

from mediaeval ideas about the Church. He
was its firm friend and munificent patron. He
had founded and endowed monasteries at
Tintern, Duiske or Graig-na-Managh, and Kil-
kenny, in Ireland, and he remembered them
handsomely in his will. It was to the Pope's
legate that he handed over the guardianship of
the young king. One of his last acts, touchingly
described by his biographer, was to take an
affectionate farewell of his wife, and symbolically
give himself up to God and become a Templar.
But with all his extraordinary loyalty to throne
and Church, he never feared to withstand either
king or priest when his reason and conscience
forbade him to perform their will.

We shall now describe the earl's principal
dealings with his fief, so far as we can ascertain
them : —

From the spring of 1207, then, to the spring
of 1213, William the Marshal abode almost con-
tinuously in Ireland, and it is to this period that
most of his doings there are to be referred. He
Kilkenny chose Kilkenny as his principal place of abode,
seat of and made it the chief centre of his whole lord-
shfp.^^^ ship, and to him and his son William the early
greatness of that town is mainly due. Indeed,
the rapid development of Ossor}^ which in the
course of a generation completely outstripped
the other divisions of Leinster, progressive as
they too were, may be traced to his influence.

IN IRELAND 223

As we have seen, Strongbow made grants of Previous
lands at the two extremities of Ossory, at
Aghaboe and Iverk.^ It is probable, too, that in
his time were erected the motes of Castlecomer
and Odagh, which afterwards became centres of
important seignorial manors.^ He even erected
a similar mote at Kilkenny, which was, how-
ever, abandoned by its garrison and destroyed
by Donnell O'Brien, the bitter foe of Ossory, in
1173.^ During the minority of Isabel de Clare,
John, as Dominus Hiberniae, appears to have
made further grants of lands on the borders of
Ossory. To him should, perhaps, be ascribed the
grant of Gowran to Theobald Walter, as well
as grants of lands to Manasser Arsic, Richard
Fitz Fulk, and others in the north of the present
County Kilkenny.*

As early as 1185 John erected the mote-
fortress of Tibberaghny on the south-western
frontier, and this afterwards became the centre
of a de Burgh manor. In Central Ossory, how-
ever, Donnell Mac Gillapatrick seems to have

1 Supra, vol. i, pp. 388-9.

2 For the grounds of this suggestion and for the Anglo-
Norman settlement in Ossory generally, see my paper on
' Motes and Norman Castles in Ossory ', Journ. R. S. A. I.
1909, pp. 318-42. 3 Sujyra, vol. i, p. 332.

* See John's charter to Jerpoint confirmatory of grants
to that monastery prior to c. 1189, and for the identification
of the places mentioned see Journ. R. S. A. I., as above,
p. 315.

224 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

ruled undisturbed, under English protection, up
to his death in 1185.^

How or exactly when the Mac Gillapatricks
were ousted from Central Ossory we do not
know. Certainly we hear of no fighting or violent
expulsion, and it may have been a gradual
process. Of Melaghlin, DonneU's successor,
nothing is recorded except his death in 1193.^
When next we hear of the family they were
located near Slieve Bloom, where they were
probably assigned lands, and where they lived
as Irish chieftains for centuries, at first appar-
ently in amity with their English neighbours.^

1 He made a grant of Kilferagh, near Kilkenny, to John
Cumin, Archbishop of Dubhn, between 1181 and 1185
(Crede Mihi, no. xxxiii) ; and about the same time he granted
numerous lands to Jerpoint (see John's confirmatory
charter, c. 1189, in Dugdale's Monasticon Angl.). He has
indeed been usually regarded as the founder of Jerpoint,
but there appears to have been a Cistercian monastery here,
from which sprang the monastery of Killenny prior to 1165 :
Facsimiles Nat. MSS. Ireland, pt. ii, pi. Ixii, and Carrigan's
History of Ossory, vol. iv, pp. 279-84. It is probable,
however, that the splendid abbey church of Jerpoint was
commenced soon after the monastery was endowed by King
Donnell and the Norman benefactors mentioned in John's
charter. Some features of the existing ruins seem to
indicate this period for their original construction.

2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1193.

•"' In 1213 Donnell Clannagh Mac Gillapa trick and other
Irish chieftains ' gave an overthrow to Cormac Mac Art
0 ' Melaghlin ', a determined foe of the English and one who
had recently defeated the justiciar, John de Gray, in Fircal :
Ann. Clonmacnois, 1212 {rede 1213).

IN IRELAND 225

In 1192, soon after Earl William Marshal Kilkenny
obtained seisin of his lands, a castle is said to
have been built at Kilkenny.^ Perhaps this
castle was little more than a strengthening or
reconstruction of Strongbow's mote. Whatever
may have been its precise form, the original
mote appears to have been preserved, and even
as late as the year 1307 formed part of the
precincts of the castle.^ From about the time
of the erection of this castle we may probably
date the commencement of the sub-infeudation
of Central Ossory. It must have been about
this time that the earl gave Geoffrey Fitz Robert Geoffrey
a grant of lands on the King's river, which Robert
formed the ' Barony ' of Kells. Here Geoffrey
erected a mote, which still remains with the
later stone walls of the castle-bawn running up
towards it. A small town grew up in connexion
with the castle. Close by he founded the great
priory of Kells, to rule which he brought four
canons from the priory of Bodmin, in Cornwall.^

^ Ann. Inisfallen, Dublin MS., and Ware's Annals, 1192.
A castle at Kilkenny is alluded to in a grant by Felix O'Dulany
(ob. 1202) : Hist, of St. Canice, Graves and Prim, p. 29.

2 In an Extent of the lands and tenements in the burgh
of Kilkenny which belonged to Joan, Countess of Gloucester,
who died April 19, 1307, it was found that she held in the
vill of Kilkenny a castle in which were ' una aula, quatuor
turres, una capella, una mota, et alie domus diverse ad idem
castrum necessarie ' : Inquis. P. M., 35 Ed. I, no. 47, m. 34.

^ The Registrum Chartarum Monasterii B. M. de Kenlis in
Osseria is only known to us by an abstract made by Sir

1226 II P

226

WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

John
d'Erlee

Geoffrey was the earl's seneschal of Leinster at
the beginning of the thirteenth century,^ and
perhaps earlier. Higher up the King's river
was formed the seignorial manor of Callan.
Two of the Marshal's followers, John d'Erlee, his
biographer, and Maillard, his standard-bearer,
were given lands at Erleystown, now corruptly
Earlstown, and at Mallardstown, between Callan
and Kells. Other probable feoffees of the earl
were Thomas Fitz Anthony, afterwards his senes-
chal, and William de St. Leger. The former
founded the priory of Inistioge, and held the
manor of Grenan, or Thomastown, as the vill
came to be called after its founder. The latter,
besides the manor of RosconneU in the north,
held lands at Tullaghanbrogue, near Kilkenny.
Kilkenny. Kilkenny itself, though not mentioned in the
early centuries for which we have annalistic
records, and, so far as is known, not at any time
the seat of the kings of Ossory, must have
been an ecclesiastical site of some importance in

Thomas

Fitz

Anthony.

James Ware, of which there are copies, T. C. D., F. 4. 23,
and Brit. Mus., Lansdowne, 418. No foundation charter is
forthcoming, but the register contains a sort of confirmatory
memorandum by Geoffrey referring to his grant and its
confirmation by Earl William Marshal. This memorandum
must be dated after 1202. The date usually assigned for
the foundation of the monastery is 1193. For the charter
to the town of Kells, see Chartae, &c., p. 16.

1 He was seneschal when Meiler Fitz Henry was justiciar :
Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 125.

IN IRELAND 227

pre-Norman times, as is shown by its ancient
ecclesiastical round tower, and by some slight
remains which have been discovered of a
Romanesque church.^ From 1192, when the
first castle of the Marshals was built, we may
trace the beginnings of the civil importance of
the town. At this time the church at Aghaboe
was the cathedral church of the diocese of
Ossory, and it is stated to have so remained up
to the death of Bishop Felix O'Dulany in 1202.^
The new bishop, Hugh le Rous, one of the canons
brought from Bodmin to rule the new priory at
Kells, was no doubt readily persuaded by Earl
William to move the seat of the bishopric from
the march-lands of Aghaboe to the new seignorial
centre at Kilkenny. He gave the see-lands of
Aghaboe to the earl in exchange for other lands
in more settled districts near Kilkenny,^ and also
granted to him, ' to enable him to enlarge his

^ The burning of Cill Cainnigh, meaning probably the
church and ecclesiastical buildings of Kilkenny, is recorded
by the Four Masters under dates 1085 and 1114. In 1169
Maurice de Prendergast and his band of about 200 men
lodged for the night at Kilkenny : Song of Dermot, 1. 1311.

2 Nomina Episcoporum Ossoriensium, &c., Brit. Mus.,
Sloane MS. 4796. Transcribed in Carrigan's History of
Ossory, Appendix, vol. i.

3 For the deeds effecting this exchange see Journ. R. S.A.I.
1858-9, pp. 327-9. The bishop's name is usually written
' de Rous ', but seemingly on no contemporary authority.
As it was translated Rufus, I have ventured to restore
' le Rous ', 0. Fr. for le Roux.

P2

228 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

vill of Kilkenny,' some of the land on which
the present town is built.^ Between 1207 and
1211 the earl granted a full charter of liberties
to the burgesses of Kilkenny, which must have
already become an important town.^ He is
said to have built a castle there after 1207,*
and, though no early authority is quoted for this
statement, it is probable that when he came to
dwell in Kilkenny he built a regular stone castle
for his habitation.
Religious The beautiful cathedral of Kilkenny was
tions. probably completed about the middle of the
thirteenth century, but the precise date of its
commencement is uncertain. The architecture
of the nave is certainly later than Earl William's
time, but in spite of the statement in a sixteenth-
century compilation,* that Hugh de Mapilton

1 Liber Albus Ossoriensis ; Cal, Docs. Ireland, vol. ii,
no. 861. The portion of land granted is described as
* extending from Keuerocke's well to the river called
Bregath running under Coterel bridge '. Keuerocke's well
probably represents Tobar Chiarog or St. Ciaran's well. It
has been identified with a well near the centre of the town,
south of the old market, in the garden of what is supj)osed
to have been the house of the famous Kyteler family.
Coterel bridge is represented by the Watergate bridge over
the Bregagh river, which henceforth separated the Irish
town from the High or English town.

2 Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 33.
^ Hanmer, p. 173 ; Cox, p. 54.

* Nomina Episcoporum Ossoriensium, &c., Sloane MS.
4796, Brit. Mus.

IN IRELAND 229

(bishop from 1251 to 1260) was the first founder
of the church, it is on architectural and general
grounds probable that the choir, at least, was
built in the time of Earl William or of his eldest
son. To the elder William Marshal is attri-
buted the foundation of the priory of St. John
the Evangelist on the left bank of the river
at Kilkenny, and this is perhaps in substance
correct, but the charter granting a new site
and rich endowments to the priory, quoted as
evidence thereof, was actually given not by
him, but by his son, William Marshal junior,
probably about 1223.^ Besides founding the
Monastery de Voto, or Tintern Minor, already
mentioned, and confirming the charter of Dun-
brody, the elder William Marshal founded

1 From this charter (Dugdale, vi. 1143) it appears that
the friary buildings had previously been commenced close
to St. John's Bridge. The friars were here prior to 1202,
as is evidenced by a charter of Fehx O'Dulany contained
in the cartulary of the priory. This site may have been given
them by the elder Wilham Marshal. His son moved them
'ad caput parvi pontis de Kilkennia', i.e. to the site of
the present St. John's church, near the bridge over the mill-
stream in St. John's Street. The charters of these two
earls are frequently confused, but a comparison of the
witnesses to the undoubted charters of the younger William
Marshal, Reg. St. Thomas's, no. 137, and the second charter
to Kilkenny, dated April 5, 1223 (Chartae Priv. et Immun.,
p. 34, and cf . p. 80), with the charters to St. John's Priory
(Dugdale, vi. 1143) and to the burgesses of Carlow (Chartae,
&c., pp. 37-8), will show that these four charters were
executed by the same person and about the same time.

230 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

another Cistercian house known as Duiske, or
as it was afterwards called Graig-na-managh.^
Other foundations attributed to the earl are the
priory of St. John at Wexford for knights of the
Hospital, and an Augustinian priory at Kilrush
in the County Kildare.
Efforts to But more important for the temporal pros-

foster

trade. Parity of Leinster than the numerous religious
houses founded by the earl and the greater
landholders about this time, were the efforts
made to foster trade and commerce and civic
life, which, together with the advance in agricul-
ture, changed the whole conditions of living in
the province. Now that Leinster was really
under one lord increased use was made of the
great river-ways for transport, and the rivers
themselves were bridged in places, not with
a view to plunder, but to facilitate peaceful
intercourse and trade. One of the earl's first
cares was to establish a port on the Barrow in
The port his manor of Ross, and to give it an independent
^ ^^^' existence, at the same time bridging the river
at this point, so as to connect the new town
with the road to Kilkenny. The place was
variously called ' William Marshal's town ', ' the
town of the new bridge of Ross ', or ' Rosponte',
and afterwards New Ross, to distinguish it from
Old Ross, as the seat of the manor came to be
called. Situated within the tidal way, New Ross
^ Facsimiles Nat. MSS. Ireland, vol. ii, no. Ixix.

IN IRELAND 231

was within reach of the largest merchant vessels
of the time. From it, too, in boats of light
draught, goods could be brought up the Nore to
Inistioge and Thomastown, if not to Kilkenny,
and up the Barrow to St. MuUins, Graig-na-
managh, Carlow, and even as far as Athy.^
Thus New Ross became the port of South
Leinster. In the course of the thirteenth century
its trade far outstripped that of Wexford, and
appears even to have surpassed that of Water-
ford, in spite of the royal favour shown to the
latter town.^

Indeed, the formation of towns was perhaps Forma-

, . tion and

the most significant feature of the new regime, growth of
Apart from the Scandinavian seaports, which ^^^'
themselves were the first to expand under
Norman rule, small towns grew up in the time
of the Marshals under the protection of the
castles at the seignorial manors of Ferns, Old
Ross, the Island, Carrick on Slaney, and Bannow,
in the County Wexford ; at Carlow, Forth
0' Nolan, and St. Mullins, in County Carlow ;

1 Cal. Justiciary Rolls (1298), p. 202. The jurors pre-
sented that the passage of boats that used to come from
Ross to Athy was obstructed by a weir.

2 Thus for the five years following May 4, 1275, the
receipts from the ' new custom ' granted to the Crown
amounted in New Ross to £2632, in Waterford to £1865,
and in Wexford to only £22 : Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. ii,
no. 1902, and Irish Pipe Rolls, 36th Rep. Dep. Keeper,
which makes some corrections and additions.

232 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

at Kilkenny, Callan, Castlecomer, Odagh, and
Aghaboe, in Ossory ; at Kildare ; and at
Dunamase ; and the same thing in a less degree
followed on the erection of many of the castles
of subordinate grantees. Thus may be said to
have commenced civic life in Ireland, and this
civic life rendered possible the growth of trade,
and pari passu with that growth the towns
themselves grew and prospered.

NOTE

KING JOHN'S CHARTERS OF LEINSTER AND

MEATH

King John's confirmatory grant of the land of
Leinster to WiUiam Marshal, Earl of Pembroke,
is dated the 28th of March, 1208 (Rot. Chart.,
9 John, p. 176). It is nearly similar in form to
the confirmatory grant of the land of Meath
to Walter de Lacy four weeks later (ibid., p. 178).
Both grants contain reservations to the Crown
of rights which seem not to have been reserved in
the original charters of Henry II, or in the charter
by which John, when Earl of Mortain, restored
the land of Meath to Walter de Lacy. Henry
had granted the land of Meath to Hugh de Lacy
to hold from the king and his heirs 'as Mur-
chardus Hu Melachlin or any other before or
after him better held the same', and Hugh was
to have ' all liberties which Henry had or was
able to give there '. But now John took care,
both in the case of Leinster and of Meath,
expressly to reserve to himself and his heirs the
pleas of the Crown, namely of treasure-trove,
rape, forestalling, and arson, and the plea where
one appeals another for felonious breach of the
peace, and he provided for appeals to the king's
court in case of default of justice in the lord's
court, and in the case of complaints of injury
done by the lord himself or his court. Cross-
lands and dignities appurtenant to them (i. e.
church-lands and the higher ecclesiastical pre-

234 WILLIAM THE MARSHAL

ferments) were also reserved to the Crown. One
disputed case of feudal incidents seems to have
been provided for favourably to the lord of the
liberty. Where a tenant-in-chief died, leaving
heirs who were minors, the Crown latterly seems
to have claimed the custody of all his lands,
even of those which he held of some mesne lord,
and this was one of the grievances of the barons
of England. John now granted to Walter de
Lacy and William Marshal that in such a case
they should have the custody of fees held of
themselves, but that the ' marriages ' of the
heirs should belong to the Crown.

CHAPTER XXI

KING JOHN IN IRELAND
1210

At the commencement of the year 1210, King King

"^ John

John, in his home dominions at least, was to all at the
appearance at the height of his personal power, ^f Ms
It is true that he had lost nearly all his ancestral ^^^^^^^^
possessions in France, that England lay under
the papal interdict, and that he himself was
excommunicate, but the loss of his heritage over
sea caused him to concentrate his attention upon
his island dominions, and the fulminations of the
Pope, for the moment at all events, served as
a pretext for enriching himself at the expense of
the fugitive clergy. In Ireland indeed, to which
the interdict did not apply, these fulminations
hardly resounded at all.^ In the summer of 1209
William the Lion was forced to come to terms
with John, and in October — ' what had never

1 So little did the Irish clergy enter into the spirit of the
contest of their class in England against the king that
Eugenius the Primate (who, Hke Stephen Langton, had been
designated by the Pope in opposition to the royal nominee)
accepted in July 1207 a commission from the king to execute
the episcopal ofl&ce in the see of Exeter, left derehct owing
to the Interdict : Rot. Claus., 9 John, m. 17 (p. 88).

236 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

been heard of in times past ' — all the Welsh
nobles came to him at Woodstock and did him
homage. In the same year, too, the king received
homage from all his free tenants, and even from
boys of twelve years of age, throughout the
whole kingdom, and after they had done fealty
he dismissed them with the kiss of peace.^
' There was not a man in the land,' complains
one chronicler, ' who could resist his will in
anything.' ^ Another, with reference to the
clergy, bitterly says : ' When they saw the
wolf coming they quitted the sheep and fled.' ^
Matilda There was one baron, however, who failed to
refuses givc the hostagcs required in 1208, and who
hostages ^^^ ^^ Ireland to escape the king's wrath.
When the king's messengers came to William de
Braose and demanded hostages, William's wife,
Matilda de St. Valery, with feminine boldness
taking the word out of her husband's mouth,
replied : ' I will not deliver up my son to your
lord. King John, for he basely murdered his
nephew Arthur, when he should have kept him
in honourable custody.' Her husband reproved
her foolish tongue and offered, if he had offended,
to give satisfaction according to the judgement of
his peers. But this was of no avail. When the
king heard of it he secretly sent soldiers and

1 Roger of Wendover, vol. ii, pp. 50-1 . Rymer's Foedera,
vol. i, pt. 1, p. 103. 2 Gerv. Cant., vol. ii, p. 100.

^ Roger of Wendover, vol. ii, p. 48.

Braose.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 237

bailiffs to seize William and his whole family.
The latter, however^ forewarned, fled with his
wife and sons to Ireland.^

In a document ^ which John put forward John's
to the world in 1210, and which was evidently for his
intended by him as a justification of his actions agaJ^gt
towards William de Braose, a different com- ^^^
plexion is sought to be given to the matter.
William de Braose owed a large sum to the king
in respect of the lordship of Limerick, which,
owing to the opposition of the barons already
in occupation under grants from the Crown, had
doubtless brought him no profit. John repre-
sents his action as arising out of William's
defaults in payment and resistance to the
processes of the law. According to the above
document, John ordered his bailiff, Gerard de
Athiis,^ to distrain on William's Welsh property
for the amount of the debt, which John charac-
teristically exaggerates.* An arrangement is then

1 Rog. Wend., vol. ii, pp. 48-9, sub anno 1208.

■^ Rymer's Foedera, vol. i, pt. 1, p. 107.

^ It is worth noting that one of the provisions ^vrung
from John by Magna Carta was : ' Nos amovebimus penitus
de balliis parentes Gerardi de Athyes quod de cetero nuUam
habeant balliam in Anglia.'

4 In 1205-6 William owed £2865 6s. 8d. (Pipe, 7 John,
Rot. 8), and the accomit stood at the same figure in 1209-10 :
ibid., 11 John, Rot. 1. John says that William owed 5,000
marks, which was the sum originally agreed to be paid at
the rate of 500 marks a year. William had already paid
£468, which John omits to notice. John also claimed five

238 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

said to have been made by which William sur-
rendered his castles in Wales to be held by the
king, mortgaged all his lands in England, and
gave hostages, until his debts should be paid.
Nevertheless, William attempted with a large
force to enter his castles, and, failing in this,
burned half the town of Leominster. Whereupon
John sent Gerard de Athiis to capture him, but
William fled with his family to Ireland, and was
there harboured by William Marshal and Walter
and Hugh de Lacy. The latter undertook that
William would make satisfaction, and that if he
failed to do so they would no longer harbour him.
This promise not being kept, the king raised an
army with the intention of going himself to
Ireland.

It is not difficult to accept John's version of
the facts as in the main correct, though exag-
gerated and misleading, and yet believe that the
true motive for his vindictiveness against Wil-
liam de Braose was personal animosity connected
with the tragic fate of Arthur of Brittany.
William de Braose had been given the custody
of Arthur before he was handed over to Hubert
de Burgh, and perhaps William knew more
about the real end of Arthur than we do.

It was in the hope of finding a refuge with his

years of the farm of the city of Limerick (at 100 marks a
year, from 1203-8), but he omits to notice that during
part of this time Meiler held the city for the king.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 239

son-in-law, Walter de Lacy, that William de
Braose fled with his family to Ireland. This was
probably in the winter of 1208-9.^ He was
driven by stress of weather to Wicklow, where
Earl William Marshal was then sojourning, and De
the earl gave him and his family kindly shelter sheltered
and entertained them for twenty days. When EarV^
the justiciar, John de Gray, heard of it he at ^^arshai.
once informed the earl that he was harbouring
the king's traitor, and on the part of the king
ordered the earl to deliver him up to him without
delay. The Marshal replied that he had only
sheltered his lord,^ as he was bound to do, and
that he did not know that the king was other-
wise than well disposed towards him. To deliver

^ The flight of William de Braose to Ireland is placed in
1208 by Roger de Wendover (vol. ii, p. 49) and by the
Laud MS. Annals, Chart. St. Mary's, Dublin, vol. ii, p. 310 ;
of. Brut y Tywys. 1207. Miss Norgate, however, places it
in 1209, but without giving her authority : John Lackland,
p. 150. From the passage in L'Histoire de G. le Marechal
immediately referred to it appears that the flight took place
when John de Gray Avas justiciar. Unfortunately, in the
absence of the Patent and Close Rolls for 1209, the date
of John de Gray's appointment is uncertain. The Four
Masters place it in 1208 {recte 1209). He was certainly in
Ireland at the close of 1209 (Rot. Misae, p. 144), and Hugh
de Lacy, if appointed justiciar in the autumn of 1208,
would probably have been soon superseded owing to his
comiexion with William de Braose.

■^ How William de Braose was the Marshal's seignor is
obscure. Possibly it was in respect of some of the de Clare
property in Wales.

240 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

him up now to the bishop would be a treachery
which he refused to commit. Accordingly he
conducted him safely to Walter de Lacy.^ The
Marshal was prepared to resist John's will and
risk the loss of his fief rather than do a dis-
honourable act.
King According to his own account, then, it was

motive in simply to chastise William de Braose and his
Ireland *° aiders and abettors, and to enforce payment of
a crown debt, that John made his expedition to
Ireland in the summer of 1210. This may seem
a mean and paltry motive for the royal expedi-
tion, but John's motives were often mean and
paltry. Moreover, he certainly did not come to
quell dissension among the barons, for he had
received the dissentient barons into favour two
years previously, and since Meiler was discredited
and superseded there were no further dissensions.
Nor was there any turbulence among the barons,
except what had been excited by John's relent-
less persecution of William de Braose, his family,
and those who sheltered them. Even more
certainly he did not come either to protect the
Irish from aggression or to put down their
revolt, though all these causes have been alleged.
There had been no inter-racial conflicts for some
years, while, as we shall see, the policy of his
new minister, John de Gray, was first to obtain
control in Connaught, and next to subdue the
1 Histoire, 11. 14137-232.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 241

chieftains of the north. It will be seen, too,
that all John's military efforts, when he was in
Ireland, were expended in taking possession of
the lands and castles of the de Lacys, and in
endeavouring to capture their persons, as well as
to hunt down Maud de Braose and her family.

As to William de Braose himself, John in his John's
elaborate statement goes on to say that William c?n-°^^
came to the neighbourhood of Pembroke, where ti'^^ed.
the king was with his army, and offered by
his intermediaries 40,000 marks for the king's
peace. But the king replied that he well knew
that William was not his own master at all,
but was ruled by his wife, who was in Ireland,^
and proposed that William should accompany
him to Ireland and that the matter should be
settled there. William, however, remained in
Wales. Evidently he feared to put himself into
John's power.

One incident of disturbance is indeed usually Black
here mentioned as having taken place in 1209, ^°°^^y-
namely, a massacre of 300 of the citizens of
Dublin, who were making holiday near the town
on a certain Easter Monday. This day, remem-
bered as Black Monday, is said to have been
celebrated in Elizabeth's time by the mayor,

1 So I understand the passage : ' Quod bene novimus quod
non erat omnino in potestate sua, sed magis in potestate
uxoris suae quae fuit in Hibernia ' : Rymer's Foedera, vol. r,
pt. i, p. 107.

1226 n Q

242 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

sheriffs, and citizens feasting on the spot, and
daring the enemy to come and attack them.
But the sole authority for this story is Hanmer,^
who, it should be needless to say, is no authority
for the thirteenth century. His account of the
period is often a mere travesty of the facts, and
sometimes dull invention. Black Monday may
have been celebrated in Hanmer's time, as he
says, and the tradition of a massacre on the
spot may have been well founded, but there is
good reason for thinking that in ascribing it to
the year 1209 tradition (or Hanmer) antedated it
by half a century at least, as we have no evidence
of any raids of the O'Birnes or the O'Tooles until
near the close of the reign of Henry III.
John's We shall now endeavour to follow John in his

progress in Ireland. Unfortunately there is at
this period a great gap in the series of enrolments
which from the beginning of John's reign have
thrown authentic light on affairs in Ireland. The
Patent, Close, Charter, and Fine Rolls for the
eleventh to the thirteenth years of John's reign
are missing. Also the Close Rolls for the tenth
John. Had these been preserved we should
probably have a much clearer idea of what had
happened in Ireland immediately prior to John's
visit, and of his transactions during his visit.
Covering the period of his stay in Ireland we
have indeed the Prestita Roll of the twelfth
1 Hanmer's Chronicle (1633).. p. 186. Hanmer died in 1604.

Itinerary

in

Ireland

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 243

regnal year. This contains accounts of payments
made to the Earl of SaHsbury and other officials,
for their fees and for the pay of soldiers and sailors
and others connected with the expedition. It
gives long lists of the knights and others who
accompanied the expedition, and, above all,
from it we can glean an authentic itinerary of
the king's visit. ^ We are thus enabled to follow
John's course almost from day to day, to note
some of his transactions, and, by requisitioning
information from other scattered sources, form
a correct, though no doubt incomplete, idea of
the purpose, scope, and results of his expedition.

From the 3rd to the 16th of June John was Cross on
at Cross on the sea, below Pembroke, the usual jun?^'
place of embarkation.^ Here he was busy ^~^^'
making final arrangements for the expedition,
and made payments to knights, mariners, &c.,
amounting to £1,433 13^. 6d. His half-brother,
William Longsword, Earl of Salisbury, supposed
to be son of Henry II by Rosamond Clifford,
was in chief command of the army. John
landed at Crook, near Waterford, on June 20, Crook,
thus following precisely the route which his

1 The Rotulus de Prestito does not account for all of the
53 dozen skins of parchment which John brought with him
to Ireland : Rot. Misae, 11 John, p. 167.

2 ' Apud Crucem subtus Penbroc ' or 'super mare'. Cf.
Song of Dermot, 1. 2590, note ; where, however, delete
the suggestion that Carew Cross marks the place. More
probably it was near Pembroke Dock.

Q2

244 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

father had adopted thirty-nine years before, and
which he himself seems to have taken in 1185.
At Crook he was joined by the justiciar, the
Bishop of Norwich, with a body of Irish troops.
John, no doubt, visited Waterford, where, we are
told, Donough Cairbrech O'Brien repaired to
make his submission, and received a charter
for Carrigogunnell and the lordship thereunto
belonging at a yearly rent of sixty marks.^
New On June 21 John was at New Ross,^ having

Ross, ' ^

June 21. perhaps come from Crook or Waterford by river.
This town owed its origin to William Marshal,
or perhaps, following tradition, we should say,
to the Countess Isabel. It is generally supposed,
indeed, to have been the site of a great monastery
founded by St. Abban in the sixth century, but
the identification is very doubtful, and in any
case this monastery seems to have disappeared
before the arrival of the Normans. Situated on
the banks of a great navigable river. New Ross
soon became the principal port of the lordship
of Leinster, in the race for trade outpacing the
old Scandinavian port of Wexford, and rivalling
the king's vill of Waterford. So keenly did the
latter port feel the rivalry that for nearly two
centuries it endeavoured to deprive New Ross

1 Ann. Inisfallen (Dublin MS.), 1209. As to tliis grant
see ante, p. 168, note 2.

2 'Apud pontem novum,' also referred to as 'villa Willielmi
Marescalli'.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 245

of the privileges of a trading port. Already at
the date of John's visit William ]\Iarshal had
spanned the" river with a wooden bridge at the
spot, thus facilitating the connexion with Kil-
kenny. Hence, the town was called villa
novi pontis, or villa de Eosponte. The caput of
the manor, however, throughout the century was
at Old Ross, some five miles to the east, where
a mote still marks the original castle-site.

Next day John was at a wood near the J^®.^'"

•^ mis-

land of Thomas Fitz Anthony.^ He was one tiogue,

June 22.

of William Marshal's principal tenants, and at
a later period his seneschal. Thomastown,
situated at a bend of the river Nore about ten
miles above its junction with the Barrow, pre-
serves the name of Thomas Fitz Anthony. He
founded a monastery for canons regular at
Inistiogue.^ There is a mote here, and it may
have been the caput of the manor at the time
of John's visit, and the wood where he halted
and made a payment for ' six galleys going with
Geoffrey de Lucy in search of pirates ' may be
now represented by Woodstock demesne. He
probably went on to Earl William Marshal's
castle of Kilkenny for the night. Here he and

1 'ApudBoscum juxta terrain Thome filiiAntonii'. He is
called seneschal of Leinster in 1215 (C. D. I., vol. i, no. 673).
He probably succeeded in that office Geoffrey Fitz Robert,
baron of Kells, who died circa 1211.

2 Circa 1206, Dugdale, Mon. Angl., vol. ii, p. 1041 ; but
according to Archdall, circa 1210.

246 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

Kilkenny, his host Were entertained by the earl, who had
22-4. accompanied him from Pembroke/ We have
abready noted the early history of this castle,
so far as it is ascertainable, and have shown
that what became known as the ' High town '
or ' English town ' of Kilkenny owed its origin
and incorporation to the earl. It was the earl's
chief seat in Leinster, and the river was already
spanned by a bridge connecting the town with
the new foundation of the priory of St. John's
on the north-eastern side.

On June 24 John was still at Kilkenny, and

on the 26th he was at Naas.^ At this time the

baron of Naas was William Fitz William.* In a

Naas, pedigree in the Gormanston Register he appears

as second son of the William to whom John

confirmed Naas in 1185, but he must hav^e been

older than his brother David, whom he preceded

in the barony.

Dublin, On June 28 John was at Dublin. Here he

28-9. probably stayed at the rich abbey of St. Thomas,*

1 Hist. G. le Mar., 11. 14259-66. John probably arrived
at Kilkenny on the evening of the 22nd June and left on
the morning of the 24th : Rot. de Prest., pp. 247 and 179.

2 From Kilkenny to Naas must have been two days'
journey. One night was perhaps spent in tents : ' quando
dominus Rex jacuit in papihonibus ' : Rot. de Prest., p. 181.

3 Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 448, and of. no. 89. Ho
married the widow of Philip de Braose ; ibid., no. 962.

' A battlemented building here was known in 1634 as
* King John's chamber ' (Journ. R. S. A. I. 1907, p. 395).

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 247

founded thirty-three years before. At Dublin
he gave audience to some of the barons of Meath,
who came to intercede on behalf of their lord,
Walter de Lacy. In his name they offered his
complete submission, endeavoured to dissociate
him from the action of his brother Hugh, and
prayed the king to relax his ire.^ The inter-
cession was of no avail. John now proceeded
to take possession of Walter's principal castles
in Meath (as well as Hugh's), and it was not
until 1215 that he came to an agreement with
Walter for the restoration of his lands.

On June 30 John advanced as far as Greenoge, Greenoge,
in the barony of Ratoath and county of Meath,
and on July 2 he was at Trim. He must there-
fore have passed by Ratoath, where Hugh de
Lacy had an important mote-castle, which was
now seized by the king. Indeed, Hugh, as we
have seen, held the whole barony of Ratoath
(as well as that of Morgallion) of his brother
Walter.^ By a deed which may be confidently
assigned to this period John granted the whole

1 These "barons of Meath were William le Petit, Richard
de Tuit, Richard de Feipo, Richard de Capella, and Hugh
Hose : Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 402, According to
WilHam of Newburgh (vol. ii, p. 511), ' Walterus de Lacy
se et sua omnia ei reddidit, quod ilium postea poenituit,
quia ilium praedictus rex abjurare omnia tenementa et
terras et redditus quos habebat in Hibernia fecit, ipsumque
postea et omnes suos de Anglia depulit.'

2 Supra, p. 76.

248 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

of Ratoath to Philip of Worcester for the ser-
vice of one knight. Among the witnesses, who
we may infer had not risen to arms with the
de Lacys, were Richard Tyrell, Richard de
Tuit, Wilham le Petit, Peter de Meset, Richard
de Feipo, Martin de Mandeville, and Adam
Dullard.^

John was now accompanied by a considerable
force, including, besides Flemish mercenaries, an
Irish contingent from Munster and Desmond, and
troops which came with Geoffrey de Marisco,
Trim, Thomas Fitz Maurice, and others. At Trim,
where John remained until July 4, he, no doubt,
took Walter de Lacy's castle into his hands.
It was one of those restored in 1215. What sort
of castle it was is obscure. Probably the original
mote-fortress had been vastly strengthened by
stone walls, but it would seem that, like other
Irish castles, it was too small for John to hold
his court in it. Accordingly here, as in several
other cases, his writs are dated at a mead
(pratum) near the place. He evidently held his
court under a tent in the open field. The keep,
the oldest part of the existing castle-ruins at
Trim, is of a peculiar plan. It may be described

1 Gormanston Register, f. 6. The castle of Ratoath was
restored to Walter de Lacy in 1216 : Rot. Pat., 18 John,
p. 194, The large grant made about the same time to
Philip of Worcester in Munster may perhaps be regarded
as compensator}'.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 249

as a square with a square tower projecting from
the middle of each of the four sides, thus forming
a twenty-sided figure. It resembles in plan the
keep of Warkworth castle in Northumberland,
which is a square with a semi-octagonal pro-
jection in the middle of each side. The latter
keep is said to have been built in 1200, but the
keep at Trim is probably somewhat later. It
may be ascribed with much probability to about
the year 1220.^

From Trim John moved by way of Ardbrac- Aid.

braccan.

can to Kells. At Ardbraccan, Cathal Crovderg

1 To this year is assigned the building of the castle of
Ath Truim in the Annals of Inisfallen (Dubhn MS.)- So
in Hanmer's Chronicle (which is followed by Ware), with
the confused addition that it was after the wars between
WilHam Marshal and Hugh de Lacy, when Trim was be-
sieged and brought to a lamentable plight, ' to prevent
after-claps and subsequent calamities, the castle of Trim
was builded ' (p. 189). But the siege of Trim took place in
1224, and as the castle then withstood successfully for seven
weeks all the efforts of so skilful a commander as WiUiam
Marshal the j^ounger, we must infer that it was an excep-
tionally strong castle (see Royal Letters, ed. Sliirley, vol. i,
p. 500). Moreover, in the previous March, when the castle
was in the king's hand, the justiciar was commanded to
allow ' Walter de Lacy to have the hall, houses, and cham-
bers in the castle of Trim, in which he and his retinue
may dwell while he is fighting the enemies of the king
and himself ' : Rot. Claus., 8 Hen. Ill, p. 591). From this
mandate we may not only infer that a strong and well-
provided castle then existed, but that the turris or keep was
to be retained by the king's constable. All this bears out
the date given in the Amials of Inisfallen.

250 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

0' Conor, King of Connaught, made submission
to King John, and accompanied him as far as
Carrickfergus.^ John's prests on the 4th and

Keils, 5th July are dated ' at a mead near Kells '. It
is doubtful whether there was any castle here at
this time. It was not one of those restored, and
at any rate its site is unknown. Here John
dispatched a small expeditionary force under
John Marshal, probably to take possession of
some other de Lacy strongholds. John himself
now turned northwards to Uriel — probably
taking possession of the castle of Nobber, which
belonged to Hugh de Lacy, on the way — and
stopping on the 7th at his own vill of Louth.

Louth, There is a small mote at Louth, formerly con-
nected with the town trench which marks the
site of the castle.^

1 Ann. Clonmacnois, where Cathal is said to have ' come
to the king's house ' at ' Tibreydultan called Ardbracken
in Meath '. St. Ul tan's well {Tioprait Ultdin) is still
pointed out at Ardbraccan close to the church. Land here
as well as at Navan had been given to Jocelin de Angulo.
A lofty mote on an esker-knoll at Navan, and a small mote
on high ground near the church and village of Ardbraccan,
mark the Norman centres.

2 j'or this and other motes in the neighbourhood see my
paper on ' Motes and Norman Castles in County Louth ',
Joum. R. S. A. I. 1908, pp. 241-69. John paid his hunts-
men on July 7 ' apud pratum juxta Luvet ' (Louth) : Rot,
de Prest., p. 248 ; but after leaving Kells he made prests
for his army ' apud pratum subtus aquam quandam que
vocatur Struthe ' : ibid., p. 192. 'Struthe' represents the
Irish sruth, ' a river,' perhaps the Dee near Nobber.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 251

On the 8th John was seemingly at Dundalk,^ Dun-

J 11 /n\

the chief manor of Nicholas de Verdun. Here juiy s. '
he made a prest for 400 soldiers lately come
[to their allegiance], who had been with Hugh
de Lacy. Evidently in the face of the king's
advance Hugh could no longer command the
allegiance of all his followers. We are told that
Hugh, ' when he found that the king was going
north, burned his own castles in Machaire
Conaille and Cuailgne (the baronies of Upper
and Lower Dundalk) before the king's eyes, and
also the castles which had been erected by the
Earl of Ulster [John de Courcy ?] and the men
of Uriel, and he himself fled to Carrickfergus,
leaving the chiefs of his people burning and
destroying the castles of the country.' ^ It is
probable, then, that the mote-castle of Dundalk
was one of those burned by Hugh de Lacy at this
time. In spite of the agreement with Thomas
de Verdun to which reference has already been
made, Hugh seems to have claimed the castelry
of Dundalk,^ but King John gave it to Nicholas
de Verdun with the whole barony of Lower Dun-
dalk, and Nicholas was now in John's army.

From Dundalk John went to Carlingford, parlmg-

° ford,

where he seized the castle, which belonged to Juiy9-ii.

1 ' Apud pratum juxta Cadelac ' (Gather Delgan ?).

2 Ann. Inisfallen, Dublin MS. 1211. This passage is
quoted by 0' Donovan, Four Masters, vol. iii, p. 164, note.

3 Supra, p. 121, and see Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 9.

252 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

Hugh de Lacy. The existing ruins, in the main
Edwardian, stand on a rock overlooking Carhng-
ford Bay. It was retained as a royal castle until
1 226, when it was restored to Hugh de Lacy.^ Here
John stayed for three days (July 9-11), and made
payments for carpenters, quarriers, ditchers, and
miners, probably for the repair of injuries made
by Hugh de Lacy on abandoning the castle.

So far John had advanced without meeting any
opposition, and, seemingly, had not unsheathed
a sword. Hugh de Lacy, however, evidently
hoped to defend his lordship of Ulster against
him. The only practicable approach by land
into Lecale was by a long and difficult detour
between the Mourne Mountains on the south and
those which culminate in Slieve Croob on the
north. This was called the gate of Lecale, and
it was already guarded by the castle of Dundrum,
then known as the castle of Rath.^ As its ruins

1 Rot. Pat., 17 John, m. 19 (p. 148), and Cal. Docs.
Ireland, vol. i, nos. 742, 1015, 1386. We have already seen
{supra, p. 121) that Hugh de Lacy obtained the barony of
Lower Dundalk from Thomas de Verdun. Probably Hugh
built the first castle of Carlingford. He afterwards granted
the castle to his daughter Matilda, together with all the
lands which he had received with her mother in ' Cole et
Ergalea ' (Cooley and Uriel) on the occasion of Matilda's
marriage with David, baron of Naas : Gormanston Register,
f. 191 dors.

2 For the identification of the castrum de Rath with the
castle of Dundrum see my paper, Journ. R. S. A. I. 1909,
pp. 23-9.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 253

still bear witness, this castle was a formidable
structure, built on a rock, and consisting of
a massive circular donjon-keep surrounded by
stout walls and rock-hewn trenches. Here, if
anywhere, Hugh de Lacy must have prepared to
make a stand. But John had collected a large
fleet of transports. He threw a bridge of boats
across Carlingford Lough, probably at Narrow-
water, and sent the main body of his troops
across the bridge to advance round the moun-
tains towards the castle of Rath, while he
himself with the rest went by sea. He landed
first at Ardglas, where he was on the 12th at Ardgias,
Jordan de Saukeville's castle, and then he
immediately turned back to the castle of Rath,
which appears to have been for the moment the
objective.^ Probably its defenders, seeing them- ^un-

drum,

selves out-manoeuvred, retreated before retreat July u.
was cut off. At any rate, on the 14th the castle
was occupied by John, apparently without

1 That there was some such manoeuvre appears to follow
(1) from the statements in the Annals of Inisf alien (see
Four Masters, sub anno 1209), which after mentioning
Hugh's retreat says that the king at CarUngford ' made
a bridge of his ships across the harbour by which he landed
some of his troops on the other side and proceeded thence
to Carrickfergus partly by sea and partly by land ' ; (2) from
the recorded itinerary of the king ; and (3) from general
topographical considerations. John brought a vast number
of pontes — I suppose materials for making pontoon bridges
— with him to Ireland, as many as 155 from York and still
more from Dorset and Somerset : Pipe Roll, 12 and 13 John.

254 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

resistance, and Hugh de Lacy's supporters con-
centrated at Carrickfergus.

On the 12th, while at Ardglas, John made
a prest to ' Mariadac, King of Limerick '. This
was Murtough Finn, son of Donnell O'Brien,
who had apparently come with a contingent
from Thomond. Jordan de Saukeville appears
to have been disseised of his lands at Ardglas,
Hotywood, and other places in Ulster at this
time, as in 1217 his lands there were restored
to him.^ A mote on the 'Ward of Ardglas',
a promontory forming the southern boundary
of the harbour, probably represents the original
castle-site, but even at this early period
the town, as the principal seaport of Lecale,
must have risen to some importance, and
a stone castle may have been already built
there.^

At Rath, or Dundrum, John also set his
carpenters, quarriers, and ditchers to work,
probably, as at Carlingford, to repair the damage
done by Hugh de Lacy. The castle was left in
the custody of Roger Pipard, and was retained
as a royal castle for seventeen years.^

1 Rot. Claus., 1 Hen. Ill (p. 304 b).

2 A well-preserved castle at Ardglas, known as ' Jordan's
castle ', is, however, of later date. In 1220-1 Jordan de
Saukeville obtained respites ' in fortifjdng his land ' : Rot.
Clans., 4 Hen. Ill (p. 413 b), and 5 Hen. Ill (p. 455). These,
however, may have referred to other lands of his.

^ See my paper, as above, p. 24.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 255

On the 16th John was at Downpatrick, the seat Down-

• IP 11 pTi patrick,

of the bishopric, and lormerly the caput oi John juiy i6.
de Courcy's lordship. But now the objective
was Carrickfergus. This was Hugh de Lacy's Camck-
strongest castle, and the remnant of his followers juiy
were gathered together in it, apparently pre- ~ *
pared for a siege. John, however, made a great
concentration of his forces here, both by sea and
by land, and the castle soon surrendered. A
large number of knights and gentlemen, feuda-
tories of the de Lacys, and their retainers, were
taken prisoners in the castle and deprived for
the time of their lands. ^ Hugh de Lacy himself,

^ Upwards of thirty are mentioned by name in the Rolls as
having been taken prisoners in the castle, and subsequently,
at different times extending over six years, as being released
on payment of a fine. Among those connected with Ulster
may be mentioned William and Luke de Audley, a name
which survives in Audley Castle on Strangford Lough ;
Walter de Logan, witness of John de Courcy's charter to
the church of Down, and one of the magnates of Ireland
in 1221 ; Robert de Weldebuef, whose land called Edereskel
lay between Holy wood and BaUyoran (Reeves, Eccl. Tax.,
pp. 359, 361) ; Robert and Thomas Talbot, who had lands
at Ire we and Brakenberg (Reeves, Eccl. Tax., p. 57) ; and
Ralph de Rossal (RusseU). Among those connected with
Meath were Hubert Hose of Galtrim, Lucian de Arquilla, and
Gilbert de Weston, who had lands in the honour of Nobber;
John de Feipo, son of Adam de Feipo of Skreen ; Michael,
son of Adam le Gros, and Walter Sancmesle, both of whom
were again in rebelhon in 1224. On the other hand, several
names of those who either at this time or soon afterwards
were landholders in Ulster, Uriel, or Meath appear among
the knights who supported John, e. g. Robert and Thomas

256 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

however, at the king's approach, escaped in
a boat to Scotland, and at the same time Maud
de Braose and her sons William and Reginald
also fled. Maud, her son William, and others
of the family were immediately captured by
Duncan of Carrick, uncle of Alan of Galloway,
but Hugh de Lacy and Reginald de Braose
succeeded in escaping. The king, informed of
this while still at Carrickfergus, sent John de
Courcy (seemingly the former lord of Ulster)
and Godfrey de Craucumbe to convey the
prisoners to him, which they did.^

At first sight it may seem strange that the
king should have become reconciled with John
de Courcy, and should bring him on this expedi-
tion to his former lordship, without intending
to reinstate him ; but John's ways were not
as other men's ways, and he probably de-
rived a malign pleasure, first in using against
Hugh de Lacy the man whom he had sup-

le Savage, Robert de Mandeville, Ralph Gernun, Eborard de
Vernun, Hugh de Bernevall ; besides Nicholas de Verdun
and Roger Pipard, tenants in capite in Uriel.

1 Rymer's Foedera, vol. i, pt. i, p. 108. There is just an
element of doubt as to the identity of this John de Courcy,
as there was another John de Courcy, son of Roger of
Chester, who had been one of the hostages of the conqueror
of Ulster {supra, p. 139, n.), and who early in the next reign
claimed his father's lands in Ulster : Cal. Docs. Ireland,
vol. i, no. 833. But for reasons already given {supra, p. 143)
there can be little real doubt that it was the former lord of
Ulster who accompanied King John.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 257

planted, and then in withholding from John
de Courcy the lordship of which he had been
deprived.^

As to Maud de Braose, according to John's John's
own statement, when she was brought before conSed
him she offered 40,000 marks for life and limb
of her husband, her family, and herself, her
husband to quit-claim to John all his lands and
castles. It is obvious that these preposterous
conditions must have been imposed by John,
not with any expectation that they could be
fulfilled, but in order that their non-fulfilment
might form a pretext for confiscation and out-
lawry. Ultimately the terms were agreed to
and ratified, but default was made in the first
payment, Maud declaring that she had not
the money. Thereupon WiUiam de Braose was
declared an outlaw. So far, with many addi-
tional details to emphasize his forbearance, John
gives his account of the matter, and as the
document is attested by the Earl of Ferrers,
nephew of William de Braose, and by Adam de
Port, his brother-in-law, as well as by several
eminent men, we may accept the facts stated as
formally correct though misleading. John does
not tell the sequel, however. William de Braose
died next year, an exile in France, while his

1 Before John left Ireland a prest of 20 marks was made
to John de Courcy, presumably for his services : Rot. de
Prest., p. 227.

1226 H R

258 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

wife and eldest son were starved to death in
prison by order of the king.^
The As for the de Lacys, a story is told in some

and St. late Latin annals to the effect that on being
expelled from Ireland they fled for refuge to
the monastery of St. Taurin in Normandy, and
worked there, unknown, in menial employment
until at length the abbot discovered who they
were ; that at the abbot's intercession the king
restored them to their former rank and lord-
ships ; and that Walter de Lacy, out of gratitude,
gave to the abbot's nephew, John Fitz Alured,
the lordship of Dengyn, and brought monks
from St. Taurin and gave them farms and the
cell called Foure.'' Though most of the details
of this story can be shown to be apocryphal, it is
not improbable that the de Lacys did actually
seek shelter and hospitality from the monks
of St. Taurin at Evreux. It appears, however,
that it was Hugh de Lacy the elder who granted
to those monks the churches and tithes of
Fore, and the mill of St. Fechin there, and a
wood near the town for their habitation ; ® while

1 So much seems certain. The story of John's vengeance
is told with many variants by the chroniclers. See Miss
Norgate's John Lackland, p. 288, where the statements are
collected and examined.

'^ Laud MS. Annals, printed in Chart. St. Mary's, Dublin,
vol. ii, p. 3n. The story has been reproduced in the Book
of Howth, p. 121, Grace's Annals, &c.

^ Cal. Docs. France (Round), vol. i, p. 105. The charter

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 259

Thomas and Walter, sons of Alured, made grants
of the church of Laracor (the parish in which
Dengyn, now Dangan, is situated) at dates pre-
ceding the expulsion of the de Lacys.^ This
already established connexion may have induced
the de Lacys to seek shelter with the monks of
St. Taurin.

John was at Carrickfergus from the 19th to
the 28th of July, and we have long lists of the
knights to whom he made payments, dating
from the 20th, when we must suppose the castle
was in his hands. As at Carlingford and Rath,
he made payments to carpenters and stone-
workers, apparently for repairs to the castle.
Indeed these three castles were the principal
— perhaps the only — regular stone castles in
the lordship. Carrickfergus is a well-preserved
example of the keep and bailey plan, situated on
a rocky headland. It is doubtful whether the
keep should be ascribed to Hugh de Lacy or to
John de Courcy, but it is probable that the latter
had a castle here.^ The gateway and mural

is by Hugh de Lacy the elder ; with the witnesses compare
those of the elder Hugh's grant to William le Petit (one
of whom was Thomas Fitz Alured) : Song of Dermot, p. 310.
Walter de Lacy further endowed the monks of Fore, but, in
part at least, before his expulsion. ]

1 Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, p. 42. The name Fitz Alured
became Fitz Averay, and a Thomas Fitz Averay was lord of
the manor of Dengyn (now Dangan) in 1300 : ibid., p. 421.

- From a letter of Reginald, Bishop of Connor, c. 1224, it
apj)ears that John de Courcy endowed the House of St. Mary

Il2

260 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

towers are later. While at Carrickfergus John
sent a force to seize the castle of Antrim, and
directed John de Gray to have two galleys built
there for service on Lough Neagh. He gave
Carrickfergus Castle to the custody of Geoffrey
de Serland, and it was retained in the king's
hand up to 1226.^ Having made provision for
the custody of his prisoners, and having dis-
missed his Irish auxiliaries, he now returned
southwards. i

Holy- On the 29th John was at Holywood, on the

July 29. southern shore of Belfast Lough. This place,
as well as Ardglas, appears to have belonged to
Jordan de Saukeville,^ and until recently there
was a mote in the town. He visited ' Balimoran ',
probably now Ballymorran, a townland in the
parish of Killinchy, barony of Dufferin, where
' White's Castle ' stands on an earlier earthwork.
Probably about the same time he seized the
castles of Ballymaghan and Dundonald in the
neighbourhood, as these castles were in the king's

of Carrickfergus to the use of canons of the Premonstraten-
sian Order, and conferred on them the church of St. Nicholas
at Carrickfergus, which he had probably built : Royal
Letters, Cal. Docs. Ireland, i, no. 1225. From this it seems
probable that John de Courcy defended the place with
a castle.

1 Rot. Pat., 10 Hen. III. Geoffrey de Serland was suc-
ceeded as constable by WiUiam de Serland, who in 1223
was appointed Seneschal of Ulster: Rot. Pat., 7 Hen. III.

2 Rot. Claus., I Hen. Ill (p. 304 b).

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 261

hand in 1221.^ On the 2nd and 3rd of August Do^vB-
John was again at Downpatrick, and on the 4th Aug. 2-3,
at the river Bann. The exact spot on the river was
probably at the place now called Hilltown, in the
parish of Clonduff, where there is a mote. It lies
on the direct route from Downpatrick to Narrow
Water, where John probably crossed the inlet on
his wav back to Carlinsfford, which he reached Cariing-

^ ^ ford,

on the 5th. Here he sent an officer to the Isle Aug 5.
of Man 'to guard the king's supplies there', but,
according to unofficial accounts, the island was
plundered by John's men at this time.^

On the 8th John was at Drogheda, where the Diog-

heda,

castle on ' the Millmount ' guarding the bridge was Aug. 8.
taken into his hand and retained permanently.
On the 9th he went on to Duleek, on the 10th
to Kells, and on the 1 1th to Fore, where he took
Walter de Lacy's castle into his hand.^ On

1 Called ' Dundunnelan and Balimichgan ' : Rot. Pat.,
6 Hen. III.

2 In the Aimals of Loch Ce it is stated that, after taking
Carrie kfergus, John sent a fleet of his people to the Isle of
Man and ' they plundered it and killed its people '. So
WilHam of Newburgh,vol. ii, p. 511, ' insulam Man destruxit.'
In May 1212 John granted to Reginald, King of Man,
a knight's fee near Carhngford and 100 seams of wheat to
be received yearly at Drogheda, and the two kings recipro-
cally bound themselves to punish acts of violence of their
subjects on each other's territory : Rot. Chart., 14 John,
p. 186 b ; Rot. Pat., 14 John, p. 92 b.

^ Fore (Irish, FahJiar, latinized Favoria) was restored
to Walter de Lacy in 1215 : Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 148 b.

262 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

the 12th he reached Granard, the mote-castle of
Richard de Tuit/ on the north-western frontier

Ratiiw-ire, of the lordship of Meath. He now turned south,

"^ ' and was at Rathwire on the 14th. It belonged

to Robert de Lacy. The remains show that it

was a mote and bailey castle, and that a stone

castle was afterwards built in the bailey.

John and At Rathwirc Cathal Crovderg came to meet

Cathal

Crovderg. John, according to arrangement, but failed to
satisfy him. The relations between Cathal and
John at this time are somewhat obscure. Cathal,
as we have seen, owed his crown to the support
given to him by William de Burgh and the
English king — a support which was not given
for nothing. When William de Burgh turned
against Cathal after the massacre of his men
in 1203, John, through Meiler Fitz Henry, forced
William to give way, and continued to support
Cathal, retaining in his hand, however, the rights
acquired by William in Connaught. In March
1204 the king sent Meiler and the Archdeacon
of Stafford (Henri de Londres, the future Arch-
bishop of Dublin), along with Walter de Lacy to
arrange matters with Cathal.^ W^e have records
of two proposals made to regulate Cathal's

1 Apud Grenard, called 'castrum Eicardi de Thuit ' : Rot.
de Prest., 12 John, p. 248. It was restored to Walter de
Lacy along with other castles in 1215, but Richard de Tuit
was killed in 1211, and the castle may in consequence have
been in the king's hand.

2 Liberate, 5 John, p. 83.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 263

position. The first was communicated by Meiler
in August 1204. By it Cathal was to quit-claim
two-thirds of Connaught to the king and retain
the remaining third as an estate of inheri-
tance at a rent of 100 marks.^ John's rapacity
probably caused the negotiations to fail. In
December 1205 a new proposal was presented
by an Irishman ^ on Cathal's behalf, namely
that he should hold in fee of the king a third of
Connaught as a barony at 100 marks a year, and
for the remaining two-thirds he should render
a tribute of 300 marks. He was to grant to the
king two cant reds with their villeins to farm or
do his pleasure therein.^ A charter appears to
have been granted on some such terms, and is
referred to in a later document.* In 1207 the
king made grants of lands in Connaught to John
Marshal and Gilbert de Angulo.® These lands
appear to have been (partly at any rate) comprised
in the baronies of Athlone and Longford, in the
counties of Roscommon and Galway respectively.

1 Rot. Claus., 6 John, p. 6 b, Cal. no. 222 ; Rymer's
Foedera, vol. i, pt. i, p. 91.

2 The Irishman's name is printed Deremunt. It is
probable that the individual was Dermot Mac Dermot,
King of Moylurg, who accompanied Cathal to Rath\\dre and
was seized as a hostage.

3 Rot. Claus., 7 John, p. 62, Cal. no. 279.

4 Ibid., 8 John, p. 78 b, Cal. no. 311, confirming Cathal's
grant of Maenmagh to Gilbert de Angulo.

5 Ibid., 9 John, pp. 173, 173 b.

264 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

When John came to Ireland, Cathal Crovderg
accompanied him with a force to Carrickfergus.
On their return from the north it was arranged
that Cathal was to meet John in a fortnight and
bring his son Aedh with him as a hostage, and
that John would grant him a charter, framed
apparently so as to include Aedh, for the third
part of Connaught. 0' Conor, on reaching home,
however, adopted the advice of his wife not to
take his son to the king, 'although,' says the
annalist, 'this was the worst counsel.' Accord-
ingly, when Cathal came to Rathwire without
his son, John was evidently enraged, and seized
four important members of 0' Conor's retinue,
and took them with him as hostages.^ Later in
the year, as we shall see, O' Conor was forced to
come to terms with John de Gray, the justiciar,
and to give his son Turlough as a hostage.
Dublin, On the 18th of August John was back at

i8"-24. Dublin. Here he stayed for six days before his
departure, and we have a long list of his knights

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1210. The men seized as hostages were
Dermot Mac Dermot, King of Magh Luirg, Conor O'Hara,
King of Luighne, Find O'Carmacan and Toirberd, officers
of O'Conor's household They were released next year
when Cathal's son was sent. John stopped at Castellum
Bret on the 17th. Its position is uncertain. Milo le Bret
had lands near Dublin for which an exchange was ordered
to be given him in 1207 : C. D. I., vol. i, nos. 360, 361. His
principal seat seems to have been at Mainclare, said to be
Moyclare in Meath: Chart. St. Mary's, Dublin, vol. i, 128-9.

John

accuses

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 265

to whom he made payments. On the 24th he
was at a mead near Dubhn, perhaps at Ringsend Fish-
(if this was the place of his embarkation), and fjfg. 20
on the 26th he was at Fishguard.

When John was in Dubhn after the surrender King
of Carrickfergus, he charged the Earl Marshal
with having sheltered William de Braose, his ™hai
mortal enemy, and having aided his escape.
The earl made much the same answer as he had
previously made to the justiciar, adding that
if any one except the king accused him he was
ready to defend himself according to the judge-
ment of the court. As had happened once
before, no one accepted the challenge. The king
then demanded hostages, and named Geoffrey
Fitz Robert, Jordan de Sauqueville, Thomas de
Sanford, John d'Erlee, and Walter Purcell, and
required that the castle of Dunamase should be
delivered up to him. Only the two last named
were present. These readily consented to give
themselves up as hostages, and the earl delivered
them and his castle to the king. John was
still unsatisfied, and insisted on getting security
from all the earl's barons who were present
for the complete fulfilment of his demand. All
agreed except David de la Roche, who was
regarded with contempt by the rest.^ When
John returned to England he bailed out his
hostages in various places there. Next year the
1 Histoire, 11. 14283-446.

266 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

Marshal fought for the king against Llewelyn
in Wales, and then the king restored to him his
hostages, but to Geoffrey Fitz Robert death came
before liberty.^ The earl returned to Ireland and
remained there until the beginning of the year
1213, when he was again summoned to England
in view of the threatened invasion of England by
Philip Augustus. Then at last the king handed
over the earl's two sons, one to John d'Erlee
and one to Thomas de Sanford.^
Whole- John was about nine weeks in Ireland. During

fisSitk>ns. this time he had crushed William de Braose,
expelled the de Lacys, and confiscated their
lands. Even from Earl William Marshal he had
exacted a number of hostages and taken the
castle of Dunamase. In the course of his
progress he had seized the principal castles of
the lordships of Meath and Ulster, including
the following : in Meath, Trim, Drogheda, Rat-
oath, Nobber, Fore, Granard, Loughsewdy, and
Clonard ; and in Ulster, Carrickfergus, Antrim,
Carlingford, Dundrum, and others.^ Those in

1 Histoire, 11. 14447-86. This was the Welsh war of
1211 : Rog. de Wend., vol. ii, p. 58.

2 Ibid., 11. 14487-578, and cf. Rot. Claus., 14 John,
p. 132 b.

3 This, the main result of John's progress in Ireland, has
not, I think, been dul}^ noticed. Even so perspicacious a
writerasDr. G. T. Stokes describes John as merely ' personally
inspecting the fortresses from Carrickfergus in the north . . .
to Waterford in the south' : Anglo-Norman Church, p. 242.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 267

Meath, except Ratoath and Nobber (which had
belonged to Hugh de Lacy) were restored to
Walter de Lacy for a fine of 4,000 marks in 1215,
while the castles of Ulster were not restored to
Hugh de Lacy until after 1226. Of the de Lacy
feoffees John had taken a large number prisoners
at the surrender of Carrickfergus, and these he
committed to the custody of various persons in
England. It would seem that by far the major
part of the lands of the barons of Meath and of
Ulster were confiscated or held to ransom, and
in several cases new grants were made to those
of John's adherents whom he wished to reward.
Thus John immediately granted to Duncan, son
of Gilbert, lord of Carrick, who had captured
Maud de Braose and her son, ' the town of
Wulfrichford (the Ulfreksfiordr of the Northmen,
now Larne), and all the lands which Roger de
Preston and Henry Clemens held near Wulfrich-
ford ' and as far as Glenarm.^ Other grantees
had afterwards to give up for an exchange the
lands granted to them when the former owners
were restored.^

1 Cal. Cane. Hib., vol. ii, p. 354, and see Rot. Claus.,
3 Hen. Ill, p. 402 b, where the charter is stated to have been
mspected.

2 Thus Sir William le Pugneor, ' the king's knight,' had
to give up the land of William de Cusac in Ulster when
the latter was reinstated : Rot. Pat., 18 John, p. 191 b ;
and so of Godfrey de Serland, constable of Carrickfergus :
Rot. Claus., 18 John, p. 271.

268 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

Irish John was not ignored on this visit by the Irish

assist princes, as he had been on his visit twenty-five
John. years before. Indeed, the difference in their
attitude is the measure of the growth of Anglo-
Norman influence during the interval. At his
summons the kings of Limerick or Thomond,
Connaught, and Tirowen all appear to have led
contingents to Carrickfergus. Aedh O'Neill was
ready enough to assist in expelling his enemy
Hugh de Lacy, but he managed to return home
without giving hostages to John.^ Cathal Crov-
derg's position was less independent, and, as
we have seen, he was forced to give hostages.
Murtough O'Brien ^ and his brother Donough
were entirely dependent on English support.
According to Roger de Wendover, more than
twenty kinglets came to meet John in Dublin,
and these, stricken with fear, did him homage
and fealty. A few, however, who dwelt in inac-
cessible places scorned to come to the king,* and
the king, it may be added, in the spirit in which
he had lost Normandy, seems to have scorned
to subdue them.

After this expedition, John was in a very

^ Four Masters, sub anno 1209.

2 A prest of 10 marks was given to Mariadae, King of
Limerick, at Ardglas : Rot. de Prest., p. 196. Indeed
the Irish contingents must have been considerable : there
was a prest of £100 to the Bishop of Norwich for Irish
soldiers he had retained, ibid., p. 178 ; and again £40,
ibid., p. 188. ^ Rog. of Wendover, vol. ii, p. 56.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 269

literal sense dominus Hiherniae, meaning by Results
Hibernia the parts occupied by the English, expedi-
The lordships of both Ulster and Meath, with *^°"-
their castles, were in his hand. Even the fiefs
of most of the subordinate barons had been
confiscated, only to be redeemed on payment of
fines, and many of the owners were his prisoners.
The settled parts of the kingdoms of Limerick
and of Cork had been dealt with at one time or
another almost at his will, and the principal
tenants there held directly of him. The counties
of Dublin (including most of Wicklow) and
Waterford were from the first crown-lands. No
great fief remained in the hands of his barons
except the lordship of Leinster. This indeed he
had endeavoured to curtail, and had it been in
the hands of any one less strong, less patient,
less upright, and less unswervingly loyal to the
throne than William Marshal, he would assuredly
have found some excuse for confiscating it also.
Even of the Irish kinglets there were none except
the chieftains of Irish Ulster and Irish Uriel that
were not more or less dependent on his favour.
From the greater part of these vast territories
he enforced not only the feudal dues recognized
as of right belonging to the immediate lord, but
also in many cases those increases and arbitrary
exactions which in a short time banded the
barons of England together to wring from him
the Great Charter.

270 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

Had John really established the domination of
the Crown over 'the five-fifths of Ireland', Celtic
and Norman, and left behind him an organization
and a government capable of maintaining peace,
much might be said for this curbing and crushing
of the Irish barons. But he personally made no
attempt to do anything of the kind. The net
result of his personal interference in Ireland
would seem to have been to disturb and weaken
the settlement which had already been effected,
and to divert a considerable portion of the issues
and profits of the land into his own coffers.
Joiin But John is credited with introducing English

with ad- laws iuto Ireland, organizing the administration
Uve^^^'^^ of justice, parcelling out the parts of Ireland
reforms, subject to his jurisdiction into counties, and
appointing sheriffs to execute the judgements of
the courts. Let us examine how far this was
so. The principal authority on the subject is an
English chronicler whose cursory notice of John's
visit to Ireland certainly contains one misstate-
ment of fact. He says that John ' established
there the laws and customs of England, ap-
pointing sheriffs and other officers to administer
justice to the people of that kingdom according
to English laws.'^ This statement, as it stands,
is probably not incorrect. It is, however, vague
and perhaps misleading. On the one hand, it
must not be inferred that English laws and
1 Rog. of Wendover, vol. ii, p. 56.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 271

customs were introduced into Ireland for the first
time in 1210; and on the other, the statement
as to sheriffs and other officers is no authority
for the definite assertion, made first apparently
by Hanmer at the close of the sixteenth century,^
then by Sir John Da vies in 1608,^ and since
blindly repeated by a host of wTiters, that John
' made twelve shires in Leinster and Munster,
namely Dublin, Kildare, Meath, Uriel, Carlow,
Kilkenny, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick,
Kerry, and Tipperary '.

Whether by a formal ordinance to that effect English

• T ■ Tx IT 11 '^^ intro-

or by mere implication, Henry had undoubt- ducedby
edly introduced English laws and customs into ^^^
Ireland, so far at least as the new settlers, who
were alone prepared to accept them, were con-
cerned. His grants of the lordships of Leinster
and Meath to be held on feudal conditions would
alone show that English law and custom were
to rule, and it seems unnecessary to labour the
point ;^ but, except in the court of the justi-
ciar and as regards the lands retained by the
Crown, the administration of law would seem
to have been left to the lords of the liberties
themselves.

1 Hanmer's Chronicle, first ed., p. 188. Hanmer (ob. 1604)
was clearly only amplifying in his usual way Roger de Wen-
dover's statement.

2 Sir John Davies's Discovery (ed. 1787), p. 93 ; first
published 1612. ^ See Lynch's Institutions, c. i.

272 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

John's The dominating note of John's poUcy in Ireland

crease tiie was the increase of the power of the Crown and
Qi'^^l the weakening of that of the lords of the great
Crown. liberties. In 1204 he granted authority to the
justiciar that ' his writs should run throughout
the king's entire land and dominion of Ireland ',
namely the writs of Right, of Mort d' Ancestor,
of Novel Disseisin, of Fugitives and Villeins,
and for Making Bounds ; ^ and in 1207, at the
time of the dissensions between Meiler and the
barons, he forbade his subjects to answer in any
court respecting their free tenements or on any
plea of the Crown, save only before the king or
his justiciar, or before the justices whom they
should send for the upholding of the law.^
These ordinances appear to have been directed
against the courts of the liberties, which had
apparently assumed a co-ordinate jurisdiction
with the justiciar's court. When in 1208 John
granted confirmation charters to William the
Marshal and Hugh de Lacy, he introduced, as we
have seen, some express exceptions and reserva-
tions not contained in the previous charters,
and provided for appeals in certain cases to
the king's court.

It seems that when John came to Ireland in

1 Rot. Pat., 6 John, p. 47 b.

2 Rot. Pat., 9 John, p. 76 b ; cf. the king's reprimand
of the barons of Leinster and Meath for attempting to create
a new assize . Rot. Pat., 8 John, p. 72.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 273

1210 he took some formal steps to enjoin He took
and secure the observance of EngUsh laws and It^l to
customs. There are several allusions to this in En^Jjgf^
the rolls of Henry III. Thus in 1228 the king '^w,

,,.,..._. especially

commanaed the justiciar Richard de Burgh to proce-
read before a specially convened assemblage ' the ^^^^'
charter of the lord King John, our father, to
which his seal was appended, which he caused
to be made and to be sworn to by the magnates
of Ireland concerning the observance of the
laws and customs of England in Ireland ', and
to enjoin again obedience to those laws and
customs ; ^ and in the year 1233, in another
ordinance, concerning pleas of lay fee and
advowsons of churches, the king refers to ' the
laws and customs of the realm of England which
the lord King John our father of happy memory,
with the common consent of all men of Ireland,
ordained to be kept in that land.' ^ Here again
it would seem that, though no doubt the whole
common law of England was included by the
terms of this ordinance, the main object was
to settle the jurisdiction and procedure of the
various courts.

1 Rot. Claus, 12 Hen. Ill, m. 8 ; Early Statutes (Bern),
p. 23.

2 Rot. Pat., 18 Hen. III. m. 17 ; Early Statutes, p. 24.
By ' all men of Ireland ' is of course meant the Norman or
English magnates. To have imposed English laws on the
Celtic chieftains and their tribesmen would have been an
utterly impossible task.

1226 II S

274 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

Itinerant The appointment of justices in eyre probably
dates from about this time. Itinerant justices
are alluded to in John's charter to the city
of Waterford in 1215,^ and in an ordinance of
Henry III certain assizes are directed to be
taken ' in the same form and plan and before the
same judges as assizes were taken from the time
when King John established English laws and
customs in Ireland '.^ But the jurisdiction of
these justices, except as regards pleas of the
Crown, was limited to the settled districts out-
side the great liberties, and was probably only
gradually extended over even this restricted
area, and proceeded pari passu with the forma-
tion of counties in the strict sense of sheriffdoms.
As long as a liberty existed ordinary legal
processes therein were executed by the officers
of the lord of the liberty, and not by a sheriff
appointed by the Crown. Indeed, the touch-
stone of a true liberty was that in it the king's
writs were addressed to the lord of the liberty
or to his seneschal, and not to the king's
sheriff.

* Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 13, where the charter is
wrongly dated the 7th instead of the 17th John ; of. Cal.
Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 580, and the witnesses to John's
Dublin charter of 1215 and to his grant to Thomas Fitz
Anthon}^, July 3 There appear to have been justices in
eyre in Ulster in 1218 : Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 833.

2 Rot. Claus., 10 Hen. Ill, m. 2, Up to 1221 only a single
justice went on circuit : Rot. Claus., 5 Hen. Ill, p. 451.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 275

The assertion that John divided Leinster and Forma-
Munster into twelve counties in the sense of counties
administrative units subject to sheriffs, is demon- !;,Sl*!o*'
strably incorrect. Sheriffs may have been ap-
pointed by the Crown or by the justiciar for the
districts retained in the king's hand from the
first, but there is no clear evidence of this until
after John's visit. Soon after this we find
Geoffrey Luterel, who was one of John's officers
on his Irish expedition, described as vicecomes
Dubliniensis,^ and we read of the counties
(comitatus) of Waterford and of Cork or Desmond,
which, however, were given to the custody of
Thomas Fitz Anthony, who no doubt appointed
his own legal officers. Uriel and the forfeited
liberty of Ulster are called bailiwicks in 1215,
when they were in the custody of Roger Pipard
as seneschal.^ Meath, until restored to Walter
de Lacy in 1215, may have been similarly treated.
The honour of Limerick does not appear to
have been revived, though the castle and city of
Limerick were granted to the custody of Reginald
de Braose, son of William de Braose, by Henry III
in his first year at ' the old farm ', and the
lands of his father were restored to him. When
Limerick was first treated as a county under the
, jurisdiction of a sheriff does not appear, but in
the Pipe Roll of the 19th year of Henry III

1 Chart. St. Mary's, Dublin, vol. i, p. 249 ; Reg. St.
Thomas's, p. 17. 2 Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 148.

82

276 KING JOHN IN IRELAND

(1235) ^ we have the accounts of sheriffs for the
counties of Dublin, Munster (or Cork), Limerick,
Uriel, Waterford, and Kerry. In 1261 there
were in addition sheriffs for the counties of
Tipperary and Connaught,^ from which last-
named was afterwards distinguished the county
of Roscommon. So the list remained until the
year 1297, when the first council of the magnates
of Ireland which deserves the name of a parHa-
ment assembled. The writs summoning this
parliament, called Wogan's first parliament, were
addressed to the sheriffs of Dublin, Louth,
Kildare, Waterford, Tipperary, Cork, Limerick,
Kerry, Connaught, and Roscommon, and to the
seneschals of the liberties of Meath, Wexford,
Carlo w, Kilkenny, and Ulster.^

It would be out of place here to pursue this
inquiry further. Enough has been said to show
that the formation of counties (in the sense
of administrative units where pleas were heard
before itinerant justices and legal processes were
executed by a sheriff appointed by the central
government) was a very gradual process, and

^ 35th Rep. Dep. Keeper Ireland, pp. 34-7.

2 Ibid., pp. 40, 44.

^ Early Statutes of Ireland (Berry), p. 195. The text is
given in Irish Arch. Soc. Misc., p. 15. Kildare here appears
for the first time as a sheriffdom. It had been recently
surrendered to the king, so that the liberty had merged in
the Crown : Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. iv, no. 365. By this
parliament Kildare was constituted a separate county.

KING JOHN IN IRELAND 277

did not extend to the liberties included in the
' twelve counties ' mentioned for many genera-
tions. A beginning, however, was probably
made about the time of King John's visit, but
for this and other administrative improvements,
as well as for an improved coinage, credit should
probably be given not directly to John, but to
his minister, John de Gray, whom he left behind
him as justiciar. The appointment to the chief
office in Ireland of a cultivated English eccle-
siastic, trained in affairs, and with a practical
knowledge of legal and administrative machinery,
was the best thing John did for Ireland at this
time.

I

CHAPTER XXII

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS
1210-16

When King John departed from Ireland he 'The

. Foreign

left behind him his faithful minister, John Bishop.'
de Gray, Bishop of Norwich, as justiciar.^ By
the Irish annalists he is usually designated ' the
Foreign Bishop '. The epithet, whether so in-
tended or not, may serve to recall the facts
that he was the first episcopal viceroy and, with
one or two unimportant exceptions, the first
chief governor who had not already thrown in
his fortunes with Ireland and was not a great
Irish landholder. Meiler Fitz Henry was a brave Mejler

dencient

soldier and an able commander, and one well as a
adapted to the rough-and-tumble work of the
' first conquest ', but he had not developed the
qualities of a statesman, and possessed neither
the prudence, the tact, nor the authority requisite
to guide and control the barons of Ireland. In

^ The Four Masters in recording the bishop's appointment
under the year 1208 (which may be right) add : ' and the
Enghsh were excommunicated by the successor of St. Peter
for sending the bishop to carry on war in Ireland ' — a novel
reading of papal motives in proclaiming the interdict !

280 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

the course of his ten years' tenure of office he had
fallen foul of, and even come into armed collision
with, William de Burgh, William de Braose,
Walter and Hugh de Lacy, Geoffrey de Marisco,
and William Marshal. He had not even the
territorial status to enable him, apart from his
office, to take his place among the greater barons.
He held lands about Dunamase in the lordship of
Leinster and about Ardnurcher in the lordship
of Meath, but he was tenant in capite only of
some distant and unprofitable lands in the west
of Kerry. Nor, so far as we can judge, was he
always justified in his opposition to the great
barons. It may indeed be said that he was
always loyal to the Crown, and was at worst only
the tool of a capricious and tyrannical master ;
but there is reason to think that in some
cases, at any rate, he was not merely a willing
tool, but that in the counsel he gave to his
sovereign he aimed rather at advancing his
own interests than at promoting the general
weal.

The new justiciar, whatever his imperfections
as an ecclesiastic may have been, was a trained
statesman and man of affairs, and something of
a military strategist besides. He regarded the
colony as a whole, set about strengthening the
weak parts in its defence, and by diplomacy
backed by military measures endeavoured to win
the submission of those Irish chieftains who still

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 281

retained more or less of their independence. He
at once saw the strategic importance of Athlone. Athione
Whoever held the passage over the Shannon here ^f con-
held the gate between Connaught and Meath. "^"g^^*-
This indeed had long been perceived by the
O'Conors. As long ago as 1129 they had erected
a fort of some sort here, and had again and again,
in 1120 and subsequent years, thrown wicker-
bridges across the river in order that, as one Irish
annalist explains, ' they might at their pleasure
have access to take the spoils of West meath '.
As often as built, however, the bridges at the
first opportunity had been destroyed by the
O'MelaghHns of Meath, whose land was threat-
ened thereby.^

1 Here are the notices in the annals of the Four Masters
of the bridge of Athlone, which has been strangely described
as ' a work of much merit and utility in those days ' : —
1120 : Bridge built by Turlough O'Conor, after making
' a false peace ' with Murrough O'MelaghHn. 1 125 : Bridge
destroyed by the men of Meath. 1129 : Bridge and castle
built by Turlough. 1133: Bridge and castle destroyed
by O'Melaghlin and O'Rourke. 1140: A wicker-bridge
made by Turlough, and ' he devastated the west of
Meath '. 1153 : The wicker-bridge destroyed by Melaghlin
O'MelaghHn and its fortress (daingen) demolished. 1155 :
A wicker-bridge was made by Turlough '-for the purpose
of making incursions into Meath '. It Avas destroyed in the
same year, and its fortress {longport) burned by Donough
O'Melaghlin. 1159 : A wicker-bridge made by Rory
O'Conor ' for the purpose of making incursions into Meath ',
The forces of Meath went to prevent the erection of the
bridge, and a battle was fought at Athlone.

282 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

Athlone had been occupied by the EngUsh
before 1199, when, we are told, the bawn there
was burned by Cathal Crovderg ; ^ and it seems
probable that the mound of earth, to this day
contained by the curtain walls of the castle,
represents the mote thrown up in connexion with
this bawn. Possibly the original wooden tower
and wooden defences were no longer in existence
in 1210. At any rate, immediately after the
king's departure John de Gray commenced to
build a bridge — no doubt a wooden bridge — and
A castle a strong castle at Athlone." We are expressly
buUt^"^ told by one Irish annalist ^ that the castle was
there. of stouc, from whicli we may infer that such
a castle was even then a novelty, at least in this
neighbourhood. It included ' a stone tower ' or
keep, built, no doubt, on the summit of the
mote where its successor stands to-day. This
tower, perhaps owing to the looseness of the
artificial foundation, fell next year^ and in its
fall killed Richard de Tuit and eight Englishmen
besides. He was the Richard de Tuit at whose
castle of Granard King John had stopped on

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1199, where the hodhun Atha, ' the ba^vn
of the ford,' seems clearly to refer to Athlone. It was
probably by way of reply to this attack that the cantred
in Connaught known as Tir Fhiachrach bhfeadha, or the
Faes of Athlone, was granted in the next year to Geoffrey
de Costentin : Rot. Chart., 2 John, p. 79 b.

2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1210.

•^ Ann. Clonmacnois : caislen cloiche — tor cloiche.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 283

August 12, 1210, and was probably the same
Richard de Tuit to whom the elder Hugh de
Lacy had granted 'a rich feoffment'. According
to some of the Irish annals he was left in Ireland
as Lord Chief Justice in 1211, when John de Gray
and the magnates of Ireland were summoned by
the king to attend the expedition undertaken
in that year against Llewelyn of Wales. This
statement is probably correct, and Richard de
Tuit was probably concerned with the castle of
Athlone in his capacity as deputy at the time
of his tragic death. ^

^ See Ann. Clonmacnois and Four Masters, 1210 (the
true date was 1211 : Ann. Loch Ce ; Laud MS. Ann., Chart.
St. Mary's Abbey, Dublin). O'Donovan, on quite insuffi-
cient grounds, questions the statement that Richard de Tuit
was justiciar at the time, but though the date is wrong and
the entry in the Four Masters confused, it is pretty clear
that John de Gray and the magnates were summoned for
the campaign of 1211 (described by Rog. de Wendover,
vol. ii, p. 58), as they certainly were for the abortive one of
1212 (Rot. Claus., 16 John, p. 131 b). In the Histoire de
Guillaume le Marechal it is expressly stated (11. 14447-86)
that Wilham Marshal fought for the king against Llewelyn
in the year after John's Irish expedition. From the
Pipe Roll, 13 John, it appears that the Bishop of Nor\vich
brought the king's money from Ireland in that year, and
Roger de Wendover includes him among the king's con-
siliarii iniquissimi at the time (Aug. 30, 1211) when Pandulf
the papal legate absolved John's subjects from their allegi-
ance. During the absence from Ireland of the Bishop of
Norwich somebody must have been appointed justiciar or
deputy in his room, and there is no reason to doubt that
this was Richard de Tuit.

284 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

The castle of Athlone was soon rebuilt, and
perhaps the mote was this time revetted with
masonry, similarly as we see it to-day, so that the
disaster should not recur. The castle has been
altered from time to time to suit later military
requirements. It was tremendously shattered
by Ginckell in 1691, and since restored. Yet it
remains to-day in essentials much as we may
suppose it to have been left by John de Gray :
a great platform of earth, raised some twenty-
five feet above the river-bank, held in position
by strong retaining walls, and bearing on top
a massive decagonal donjon-tower. The recon-
structed castle was given to the custody of
Geoffrey de Costentin, to whom John had pre-
viously given lands in the neighbouring district
on the Roscommon side, and except for a com-
paratively brief period in the fifteenth century,
when the Crown lost possession of it, it has
always remained a royal castle.^
Peace of While John de Gray was building this castle
mo?"^' ^^^ bridge at Athlone in 1210, an expedition,
probably authorized by the king, was led into
Connaught by Geoffrey de Marisco, Thomas
Fitz Maurice, and the English of Munster, sup-
ported as usual by Donough Cairbrech O'Brien
and his men. Aedh, one of the sons of Rory
0'Conor,was brought with them, in case it should

^ See my paper, ' Athlone : its early history,' Journ.
R. S. A. I. 1907, pp. 257-76.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 285

be necessary to play off a rival claimant to the
throne. Cathal, however, showed no fight, and
on his agreeing to meet the justiciar all depreda-
tions were stayed. At Athlone peace was con-
cluded between the justiciar and Cathal. The
latter was now prepared to satisfy King John's
demands. The obligation to pay rent or tribute
was again acknowledged, and Cathal gave his
son Turlough and the son of another noble as
hostages.^

The terms of the Peace of Athlone were ap-
parently more favourable to Cathal than the
arrangement of 1205. They were finally em-
bodied in the charter of 1215, by which John Charter
granted and confirmed to Cathal all the land of naught,
Connaught to hold of the king in fee during good ^^^^'
service, and so that the King of Connaught
should not be disseised of his land without
judgement of the king's court, rendering for ever
to the king 300 marks, and saving to the king
the castle of Athlone.^ The grant, however,

1 Ann. Clonmacnois, 1208 or 1209 (recte 1210) ; Ann.
Loch Ce, 1210. Next year (1211) the four hostages forcibly
taken by John at Rath wire were restored (ibid. 1211).
Cathal kept Christmas probably in 1212 with the deputy
in Dublin (Ann. Clonmacnois, 1211). Cathal's son, Tur-
lough, died in restraint with the Englishmen (ibid. 1213).

2 Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 219. Cathal was to pay
5,000 marks for this charter; Rot. Claus., 17 John, p. 228 b.
At the same time an alternative charter was prepared
granting to Richard de Burgh all the land of Connaught
which William his father held of the king . Rot. Chart.,

286 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

was personal to Cathal, and he was liable to be
disseised by judgement of the king's court in
default of good service. In pursuance of this
treaty two cantreds in the neighbourhood of
Roscommon, which had been granted under the
former arrangement to John Marshal and Philip
de Angulo respectively, appear to have been re-
stored to Cathal and the feoffees compensated.^
The Peace of Athlone seems to have been on
the whole loyally observed on both sides until
after Cathal's death in 1224. Cathal remained
a faithful vassal of the king, sending petitions
to him directly or through the English justiciar, )
and in common with other tenants in capite
receiving the king's mandates.^ Though he was
attacked more than once by the sons of Rory,
these aspirants to the throne of Connaught

17 John, m. 3 (p. 218 b). This charter, we must suppose,
was to be dehvered only if Cathal failed to take up the other,
and in the events which happened became for the time
a dead letter. It is, however; an example of John's double-
deaUng.

1 Rot. Claus., 17 John, p. 223, Cal. no. 630, Avhere ' the
cantred of Roscoman ' appears to be equivalent to Moy Ai,
and Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 152, Cal. no. 537 where ' Kilman '
is probably now represented by the parish of Kilmeane,
where we may perhaps see a trace of Anglo-Norman tenure
in the demesne of Mote Park ; cf . the grant to John Marshal
in 1207 (Rot. Chart., 9 John, p. 173 b) ' of the cantred in
which the vill of Kylmien is situated '.

2 Royal, &c., Letters, Hen. Ill (Shirley), vol. i, pp. 165,
183, 223 ; Rot. Claus., 3 Hen. Ill, p. 390 b, and 5 Hen. Ill,
p. 476 b.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 287

received no assistance from the English. Once
indeed in 1221 Walter de Lacy made an attempt
to build a castle at Athleague, a ford over the
Shannon to the north of Lough Ree, but he was
at once compelled by Cathal to desist ; ^ and
once in 1219 Richard de Burgh, who had here-
ditary claims to parts of Connaught, privately
sought to obtain a charter curtailing Cathal's
rights,^ but this proposal was for the time
rejected, and to the end Cathal remained King
of Connaught, owing tribute to, and receiving
protection from, the English Crown.

The ultimate aim of John de Gray's policy. Policy
like that of Henry VIII more than three centuries ae Gray.
later, seems to have been to convert the Irish
kings who were still independent into feudal
barons holding their several tribe-lands directly
from the English Crown. No attempt was made
to impose feudal law on the tribesmen, and
though the charter to Cathal was in form similar
to the grant of a liberty to an English baron,
reserving the pleas of the Crown, it is probable
that no attempt was made to hold these pleas or
interfere in any way as long as Cathal ' served
the king well'. A rent of 300 marks was ex-
acted and an occasional aid demanded, as from
the English barons. In return letters of protec-
tion were granted, and, as we have said, during

1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1221.

- Rot. Glaus., 3 Hen. Ill, p. 401, Cal. no. 900.

288 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

CathaFs lifetime the treaty seems to have worked
well. It was certainly an improvement on the
Treaty of Windsor, which left the other Irish
kings subordinate to the King of Connaught,
and tributary, through him, to the English
Crown. This, as we have seen, was from the
first unworkable. But even if John de Gray
had succeeded in making similar arrangements
with the northern chieftains, we may well doubt
whether the aim of the policy could have been
effected. On the one hand there was the constant
pressure of English barons seeking more land and
offering better security to the Crown for rents and
services, and on the other there was a constant
temptation, if not to the actual chiefs, at least to
some aspirant to the throne, to gain popularity
and power by refusing to pay tribute, throwing
off the slight restraints imposed by the treaty,
and carrying out some successful raid against the
foreigners. Above all, the effect of granting the
tribal territory as an hereditary fief to the existing
chieftain was to introduce the feudal rule of descent
and to disappoint the roydamnas, other than the
chieftain's eldest son, of all hope of succession.

Having thus secured the allegiance of the
King of Connaught, while that of the O'Briens
of Thomond was already assured, John de Gray
next turned his attention to the chieftains of the
north of Ireland. Aedh O'Neill, the most power-
ful of these, had, as we have seen, joined the

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 289

expedition to Carrickf ergus to expel his dangerous Attempt
neighbour Hugh de Lacy, but he avoided giving the chief-
hostages to King John — perhaps he refused to tEorth.
give them. We may conclude that John had
directed his justiciar, after securing Cathal's
allegiance, to take measures to enforce the sub-
mission of the north. It was a difficult enter-
prise, as the whole history of Ireland shows, and,
with the scanty means at the bishop's disposal, an
impossible one. Nevertheless the bishop seems
to have laid his plans well. The recalcitrant
chieftains were attacked from three different
quarters. First of all a hosting of Connaught
men, presumably by agreement with Cathal, was
sent under the leadership of Gilbert Mc Costello
(who had long been in Cathal's service, and held
land in Connaught) to Assaroe, at the debatable
borderland between Connaught and Tirconnell.
Here, somewhere in the district known as
Caol-uisce (Narrow Water), where the waters of Castle of
Lough Erne begin to narrow into the river, they uisce.
erected a castle.^ This was the gate of Con-
naught from the north, and the scene of many
a battle with the Cinel Connell. Cathal may
have consented to the erection of a castle here
to protect Connaught from his hereditary foes,

1 Ann. Ulster, Ann. Loch Ce, 1212 ; Four Masters, 1211.
In 1214 the territory of Carbury (Co. Sligo), not many miles
south of Assaroe, is called by the Four Masters the posses-
sion of Philip Mac Costello.

1226 n T

290 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

while John de Gray's object may rather have
been to obtain a basis for action in this direc-
tion against the northern chieftains. About the
same time the bishop led an English force to
Castle of Clones and erected a castle there, with the object,
according to an Irish annalist, ' of taking posses-
sion of the North of Erinn '. Clones was an
ancient ecclesiastical centre in Irish Uriel, and
lay outside the area of English domination, the
limits of which in this region seem to have been
marked by Roger Pipard's castle of Donagh-
mojme. There is a steep mote at Clones which
may be regarded as a memorial of this expedi-
tion. The attempt, however, failed. Mac Mahon,
chieftain of Uriel, checked the advance into Tir-
owen, and Aedh O'Neill completed the defeat.^
Lastly, the bishop probably countenanced, if
he did not actually plan, an incursion made in
Incursion this year by the Scots of Galloway to Derry and
Scots of Inishowen against the Cinel Owen. John, as
* °^*y- we have seen, had rewarded Duncan of Carrick's
capture of Maud de Braose by a grant of territory
between Wulfrichford (near Larne) and Glenarm
in Antrim. He also, it seems, promised a huge
grant of lands in the northern part of the lordship
of Ulster to Alan Fitz Roland, Earl of Galloway,
Duncan's nephew.^ Some time in the spring of

1 Aim. Loch Ce, Aim. Ulster, 1212 ; Four Masters, 1211.

2 ' Alanus filius Roulandi ' accompanied John's army in
Ireland ; Rot. de Prest., 12 Jolm, p. 1S6.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 291

1212 the bishop met at Carrickfergus emissaries
from Alan, including Alan's uncle, and there
assigned to Alan on the king's behalf 140 fees,
extending apparently over the whole north-east
of Ulster from the river Foyle to the Glynns of
Antrim. From this grant were excepted ten
fees on each side of the Bann near the castle of
Kilsantan, which were to be retained in the
king's hand ; also all church-lands, and the lands
already granted to Duncan of Carrick.^ It can
hardly be a mere coincidence that in this same
year Alan's brother, Thomas, Earl of Athol, and
some of the Mac Donnells came with a fleet of
seventy-six ships to Derry, and in company with
O'Donnell spoiled Inishowen.^ Indeed the expe-
ditions of the men of Galloway mentioned in
the annals are regularly followed by grants from

1 Rot. Pat., 14 John, p. 98; C. D. I., vol. i, no. 427.
vSee tills document transcribed with annotations by Bishop
Reeves : Eccl. Ant. Down, Connor, and Dromore, pp. 323-5.
The grant to Alan was confirmed by John in 1215 (Rot.
Chart., 17 John, p. 210), and by Henry III in 1220 ; Rot.
Claus., 4 Hen. Ill, p. 420 b.

2 Ami. Ulster, 1212 ; Ann. Loch Ce, 1211 ; Four Masters,
1211. There can be little doubt that the true date of all
three expeditions, to Caol-uisce, Clones, and Derry, was 1212.
The entries in the Four Masters at this period are regularly
antedated by a year. Inishowen, the peninsula between
Lough Swilly and Lough Foyle, was for centuries debatable
land between the Cinel Owen and the Cinel Connell. It had
been plundered by John de Courcy in 1197, and seems to
have been taken by O'Neill from O'Donnell after a bloody
battle in 1209 (Ann. Ulster, &c.).

T 2

292 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

the Crown to the leaders engaged. Thus the
expedition of 1212 was rewarded in July 1213
by a grant to the Earl of Athol of that part of
Derry which belonged to O'Neill.^ Again, in 1214
Thomas Mac Uchtry (as the Irish annalists call
the Earl of Athol after his grandfather, Uchtred
Castle of or Gothred) built the castle of Coleraine, ' and
they threw down all the cemeteries and clochans
(probably dry-stone beehive-shaped cells) and
buildings of the town, excepting the church alone,
in order to build this castle.' ^ It was evidently of
stone. On the same day as King John confirmed
the charter to Alan of Galloway (June 27, 1215)
he granted another to his brother Thomas,
including Kilsantan and the castle of Coleraine,
with ten knights' fees on both sides of the Bann.^

1 Rot. Chart., 15 John, m. 3 (p. 194), where ' Talachot '
is perhaps Tullyhoe in the parish of Tallaght-Finlagan,
Keenaught, and not, as has been supposed, Tullaghoge near
Dungannon. There are indications that this grant was not
wholly inoperative. There were Mac Donnells in Derry in
the middle of the thirteenth century. Thus in 1259 Aedh
O' Conor went to Derry to espouse the daughter of Dugald,
son of Sorley Mac Donnell, and he brought home eight-score
men with her, together with Alan Mac Sorley ; Ann. Loch Ce.

2 Ann. Ulster, 1214 ; Ann. Loch Ce, 1213. In the
previous year O'Kane, the petty King of Ciannacta and
Fir na Craibhe, districts west of the Bami which had been
granted to Alan, was killed by the Foreigners ; and in 1214
Thomas of Galloway and Rory Mac Raghnall (Mac Donnell)
again plundered Derry and carried off the loot to Coleraine.

3 Rot. Chart., 17 Jolm, pt. i, m. 10 (p. 210). The castle
of Coleraine was demohshed by Hugh de Lacy and Aedh

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 293

Thus early were the Scots planted in the north-
east of Ireland, where they lived for centuries
and formed a clan distinct from, but hardly
less turbulent than, the Irish clans of Tirowen.

Notwithstanding these comprehensive plans, The
the attempt to enforce the submission of Aedh unsuc-
O'Neill was a failure. Not only did he repulse ^^^^^'^^'
the advance into Tirowen from the newly erected
castle of Clones, but in the following year, 1213,
he burned the castle itself.^ About the same
time, at his instigation, the subordinate chieftain
of Fermanagh, named O'Hegney, whose daughter
Benmee was married to Aedh, burned the castle
of Caol-uisce and killed its garrison, including
Gilbert McCostello ; ' and in 1214 Aedh ' dealt
a red slaughter ' on the foreigners of Ulidia.^

O'Neill in 1222 (Ann. Ulster, 1222 ; Ann. Loch Ce, 1221).
When Hugh de Lacy's lands were restored in 1226-7 it
would seem that the restoration was made ' saving the
seisins of Alan and Thomas de Galloway ' (C. D. I., vol. i,
nos. 1372, 1498). In the to\\'n of Coleraine on the west side
of the Bann is an artificial mound known as Gallows Hill,
near the church of Killowen. This was probably the site
of Thomas of Galloway's castle, and also of a later castle,
called Drum Tairsigh, erected in 1248.

1 Ann. Ulster and Ann. Loch Ce, 1213.

2 Ibid. O'Hegney's name is given, Ann. Clonmacnois
and Four Masters, 1212. Benmee died 1215.

3 Ann. Ulster and Ann. Loch Ce, 1214. O'Neill is said
at the same time to have burned ' the Carlongphort '. This
has been taken to refer to CarUngford, but it can hardly
mean the castle, which seems to have been at this time safe
in the custody of Roger Pipard (Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 148),

294 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

In fact, during a long reign of upwards of thirty
years, though his territory was frequently raided
by the foreigners, and though he had many con-
flicts with the Cinel Connell, with Connaught,
and even with his own tribesmen, Aedh O'Neill
remained to the last ' a king who gave neither
pledge nor hostage to Foreigner nor Gael '.^

After his repulse by Mac Mahon and O'Neill
in 1212, John de Gray's attention was diverted
Disturb- by disturbances in the south-western portion of
Fiicai, Meath, which it will be recollected was at this
and^Eiy. ^^^^ ^^ ^^® king's hand. The ancient kingdom
of Meath extended into the western part of the
modern King's County, where the barony of
Garrycastle represents the Irish district of Delvin
Mac Coghlan, and the baronies of Ballycowan,
Ballyboy, and Eglish represent the district of
Fircal. The remaining western baronies, Bally-
britt and Clonlisk, were included in Ely 0' Carroll,
which was reckoned part of Munster, and in
the diocese of Killaloe. Since 1184, when Art
O'Melaghlin, King of West Meath, was killed,
Melaghlin Beg, or ' the Little ', was king of the
Irish of that region. In recent years, like the
Kings of Thomond and Coimaught, he seems to

and it may be doubted whether it refers to that place at all,
which is elsewhere always called Cairlinn in the Annals.
Perhaps some minor fortress or fortified camp (longport) in
the neighbourhood of Coleraine was intended.
1 Ann. Loch Ce, 1230.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 295

have acquiesced in the Norman policy of ' pacific
penetration ', in the building of castles and
planting of English settlements in various parts
of his reduced kingdom, and we find Norman
baron and subordinate Irish chieftain living in
amity as neighbours. But there were among
the ' roydamnas ' some who resented the sub-
mission of their rulers, and perhaps thought by
a ' spirited foreign policy ' to earn for themselves
the succession to the chieftainship. Such were
Murtough, son of Brian O'Brien of Slieve Bloom, Mur-
and Cormac, son of Art O'Melaghhn. Brian of BrikT
of Slieve Bloom had been for a brief period, in ^f ^heve
1168-9, King of Ormond, when he was blinded
by his brother, Donnell Mor O'Brien,^ and thus
Murtough had through his father special claims
on Ormond, including presumably Ely 0' Carroll,
or the territory to the west of Slieve Bloom.
This district was included in the grant to
Theobald Walter ; but he died in 1206, and as
his son was a minor ^ the fief was taken into
the king's hand. In 1207, however, John gave
Matilda le Vavasour, widow of Theobald Walter,
in marriage to Fulk Fitz Warin, with seisin of
one-third of Theobald's land in dower.^ How

^ Ann. Tigernach Continuation, 1168 ; Four Masters,
1169. See Pedigree of the O'Briens, supra, p. 151.

2 This son, Theobald II, came of age and obtained seisin
in 1221 : Rot. Glaus., 5 Hen. Ill, p. 463 b.

3 Rot. Glaus., 9 John, p. 92 b.

296 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

far Theobald had exploited his Irish lands cannot
be stated with certainty,^ but he gave a large
grant in Ely in frank-marriage to his daughter
Beatrice (by a former marriage) and Thomas de
Hereford,^ and we may perhaps infer that the
castles in Ely to be mentioned presently were
erected by Theobald's feoffees. Fircal, as we
have seen, seems to have been claimed by Meiler
Fitz Henry adversely to Walter de Lacy, but in
the winter of 1207-8, in the course of his dispute
with William Marshal and the de Lacys, Meiler
was driven out of Fircal and out of his castle
of Ardnurcher. Soon afterwards, taking advan-
tage, no doubt, of the falling out of the invaders
to endeavour to regain the territory near Slieve
Bloom, Murtough O'Brien destroyed the castles
of Kinnity, Birr, and Lothra — perhaps Lorrha,
in County Tipperary, or perhaps the place now
known as the Mote of Laragh (Ir. Lathrach), in
Upper Ossory.^ This was in 1208. In the

^ We can trace Theobald exercising acts of ownership
at Caherconlish and Abbeyowney in County Limerick, at
Nenagh, Thurles, and perhaps Lorrha, in County Tipper-
ary, as- well as in Ely. He also held lands at Arklow,
Tullow, and Gowran, in Leinster, and at Ardmulchan in
Meath. ♦

2 These lands included Corcatenny (now the parish of
Templemore) and Ikerrin in County Tipperary : Reg. St.
Thomas's, Dublin, pp. 196-7. Beatrice afterwards married
Hugh Purcell, baron of Lochmoe (ibid., p. 193). Roger Poer
was another of Theobald's feoffees in Ely (ibid., p. 198).

3 Ann. Clonmacnois, 1207. At this time Murtough

1

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 297

preceding year the sons of Art O'Melaghlin, who
was the predecessor of Melaghhn Beg in the
titular kingship of Meath, preyed the town of
BaUyloughloe and burnt part thereof. Melaghhn
Beg and certain English forces overtook the
marauders, but were discomfited, and a son of
the king was slain.^ In 1212 Cormac, one of Cormac
the sons of Art O'Melaghlin, again became very laghiin.
active. He was opposed not only by the English
settlers, but sometimes by Irishmen as well, but
he was generally successful, especially over the
English. He wrested Delvin Mac Coghlan from
them, probably early in 1212. Thereupon ' the
foreign bishop' hastened to Leinster, and, joined
by the forces of Munster under Donough Cair-
brech O'Brien, delivered battle at a place called
Kilnagrann in Fircal, but was defeated with loss
of ' cows, horses, gold, silver, and other things '.^
Next, in 1213, a purely Irish combination, con-
sisting of an O'Brien of Thomond, an O'Melaghlin

O'Brien, with the sons of O'Conor of Connaught, also
spoiled the castle of Athronny in Leix, identified by
O'Donovan with Balljroan in Queen's County. There are,
or were, motes at these four places : Journ. R. S. A. I.
1909, p. 336.

^ Ann. Clonmacnois, 1206. BaUyloughloe (Ir. Baile locha
Luatha, ' the town of the lake of ashes,' i. e. dried-up lake ?)
is six miles east of Athlone. There is ' a typical Norman
mote here fashioned out of an esker ridge, and apparently
untouched since it bore its wooden tower and wooden
paUsades ' : Journ. R. S. A. I. 1907, p. 273.

2 Ann. Clonmacnois, 1211 ; Ann. Loch Ce, 1212.

298 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

of Meath, an O'Dempsy of Clan Malier, and a
Mac Gillapatrick of Upper Ossory, succeeded
in giving Cor mac ' an overthrow '.^ Evidently
Cormac was a discontented roydamna, who tried
to win a principality, or at least plunder, for him-
self, and cared not at whose expense. Then the
Englishmen of Meath combined against him, but
once more were overthro^vn at the same battle-
field of Kilnagrann in Fircal. Among the names
of those slain we can recognize Piers Messet,
Baron of Lune in Meath. This time Cormac
was assisted by Aedh, son of Conor Mainmoy,
and Melaghlin, son of Cathal Carragh, disap-
pointed ' roydamnas ' like himself.'^ They formed
a sort of ' cave of AduUam '. On the side of
the English was Geoffrey de Marisco, who was
perhaps temporarily appointed custos or deputy

^ Ann. Clonmacnois, 1212. These chieftains had all
probably made terms with the English. They were Mur-
tough O'Brien of Thomond, Donnell, son of Donnell
Bregach O'Melaghlin, the recognized tanist of Melaghlin
Beg of West Meath, Cuilen O'Dempsy of Clan Malier, and
Donnell Clannagh MacGillapatrick of Upper Ossory. All
of them were left in possession of parts of their territories.

2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1213 ; Ann. Clonmacnois, Four Masters,

1212. The editor of the Annals of Loch Ce, following
O' Donovan, suggests that the two entries as to Kihiagrann
refer to the same battle, but the details as well as the
dates are different. The second battle probably took
place after John de Gray's return to England in July

1213. Obit Petrus Messet, 1213, Chart. St. Mary's, DubUn,
vol. i, p. 31,

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 299

in the place of the Bishop of Norwich, prior
to the arrival of the new justiciar, Archbishop
Henri de Londres.^

Henri de Londres had been recently appointed Hemi de
Archbishop of Dublin in succession to John justiciar.
Cumin, who died about the close of 1212. He
had been a trusted minister of King John from
the beginning of his reign. He was an expe-
rienced lawyer, and had acted as an itinerant
justice in Berkshire and as a judge of the king's
bench at Westminster. He was a skilful diplo-
matist, and had been employed on various
embassies to foreign countries. He had served
as a treasury official, and it is probable that
his experience as such was not the least of his
recommendations for his new post in his master's
eyes, now that Ireland was becoming a consider-
able source of revenue to the Crown. He was
not unknown in Ireland. As Archdeacon of
Stafford he had formed one of a special commis-
sion sent to Ireland in 1204 to adjudicate on the
cross plaints of Meiler Fitz Henry and WiUiam
de Burgh, and at the same time he was com-
missioned along with Meiler Fitz Henry to
negotiate with Cathal Crovderg concerning the

^ The Bishop of Norwich, with 500 knights and many
horsemen from Ireland, attended the great muster at
Barham Down near Canterbury, May 4-6, 1213, and appears
not to have returned to Ireland : Rog. of Wend., vol. ii,
p. 67. Archbishop Hem^i did not reach Ireland before the
end of July, when he came as justiciar.

300 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

future tenure of Connaught.^ He was again sent
to Ireland in June 1212,^ but for what purpose
does not appear. And now, on July 23, 1213,
three days after the ceremony of the king's
absolution from the papal excommunication,
John thanked the prelates and magnates of
Ireland for their good and faithful service, which
had been commended by the Bishop of Norwich,
and notified to them the appointment of Arch-
bishop Henri as justiciar.^ At this time the
archbishop retained the office of justiciar for
barely two years, when he was summoned to the
king's presence and stood by the king at Runny-
mede on June 15, 1215.^ On July 6, Geoffrey
de Marisco was formally appointed justiciar in
his stead,^ and it was not until July 1221 that
the archbishop was again in complete control,
under the king, of the government of Ireland.^ As
justiciar, and still more indelibly as archbishop,
he has left his mark on the country. At present,
however, we are only concerned with his doings
during his first tenure of office, when he was

1 Rot. Pat., 5 John, p. 39 b ; Rot. de Lib., 5 John, p. 83.

2 Rot. Claus., 14 John, m. 8.

3 Rot. Pat., 15 John, p. 102.

^ Rog. of Wend., vol. ii, p. 118.

5 Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 148.

6 Cal. Docs. Ireland, no. 997. Prior to this, in 1217,
Geoffrey de Marisco was ordered to abide by the archbishop's
counsel, especially as to disbursements from the Exchequer,
and do nothing without his assent ; ibid., no. 780.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 301

more of a statesman and less of an ecclesiastic
than he afterwards became.

The new justiciar arrived in Ireland about
the beginning of August 1213, and had at once
to deal with the disturbances in Ely 0' Carroll,
Fircal, and Delvin. Carrying out the plans of
castle-building initiated by his predecessor, he
first of all built or completed a castle at Roscrea/ Castle at
The situation, near the southern end of the
Slieve Bloom Mountains, was well chosen to
command and keep open at this critical point
the main route from Dublin and Kildare to
the newly settled districts in Ormond and
Limerick. It was on the line of the ancient
Irish road known as slighe Data. The old but
now probably disused monastery of St. Cronan,
still marked by the ruins of a round tower and
Romanesque church, formerly existed at Roscrea,
and the church-lands on which the castle was
built belonged to the see of Killaloe, in which
the ancient bishopric of Roscrea had been
recently merged. An inquisition taken in 1245 ^
informs us of the circumstances in which the
castle was built, and is substantiated on all
essential points by the annals. It is interesting,
too, as showing incontrovertibly that even at
this period the Normans, sometimes at any rate,

1 Four Masters, 1212 {recte 1213).

2 Inquis. P. M., 29 Hen. Ill, no. 43 ; Cal. Docs. Ireland,
vol. i, no. 2760.

302 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

built castles of the mote and bretesche type.
The inquisition was evidently taken at the re-
quest of Donatus or Donough O' Kennedy, then
Bishop of Killaloe, with a view to obtaining com-
pensation for the church-lands occupied by the
castle. The jurors found that in time past Mur-
tough Mac Brien ravaged the land of Ormond
and Ely 0' Carroll, and levelled five castles there,
whereupon the king's force and council assembled
at Roscrea to expel Murtough. The king's
council commenced fortifying a castle in the
vill of Roscrea, by erecting a mote and bretesche
{mota et britagium). The lands at the time
belonged as of right to the bishopric of Killaloe,
and the bishop, Cornelius or Conor O'Heney,
hearing that Archbishop Henri had by King
John's direction repaired to the vill, came thither
and forbade, under penalty of excommunica-
tion, the continuing of the work. The justiciar
thereupon besought Bishop Cornelius on behalf
of the king that he might be allowed for the
common good to fortify the mote and bretesche
until the termination of the Avar, undertaking
in the king's name that the bishop should then
have the vill and its appurtenances, or the just
value thereof. The bishop thereupon granted
permission accordingly. The j urors further found
that the lands were worth thirty-five marks
a year, and that the custodian of the castle
received the marches as his fee. Whether the

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 303

bishop obtained compensation immediately as
a result of this finding does not appear, but
ultimately, in 1280, when an Edwardian castle,
the ruins of which remain, was being built at
Roscrea, the matter was settled by the bishop,
Matthew O'Hogan, granting to the king the
manor of Roscrea, and the king ' releasing ' to
the bishop three carucates and 84| acres of
land in the manor of Newcastle de Leuan in
the vale of Dublin.^

After building the castle the English forces
fought a battle with Murtough, son of Brian
of Slieve Bloom, at Killeigh, a little to the
south of TuUamore, in which Melaghlin, son of
Cathal Carragh, was killed.^ We hear no more
of Murtough.

Next year (1214) Cormac, son of Art O' Me-
laghlin, continued his raids and succeeded in,
taking spoils from the castles of Ardnurcher and
Kinclare. Then a great muster was made of
all the forces of the English ' together with all
the Irish forces that owed service to the King
of England ', and at last Cormac suffered a defeat
at their hands, probably at Clara, in the barony
of Kilcoursy, and Cormac was banished from
Delvin.^ Then the English built a castle at Castle

of Clon-

Clonmacnois, where a mote and bailey sur- macnois.

1 Rot. Chart., 8 Ed. I ; Cal. Docs. Ireland, ii, 1663, 1664.

2 Ann. Clonmacnois, Four Masters, 1212 {recte 1213).

3 Ibid. 1213 {recte 1214).

304 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

rounded by a deep ditch still support the ruins
of a later stone castle. They also repaired or
re-erected the castles of Durrow, Birr, and
Kinnitty,^ so that the whole district was ringed
round with castles, all probably of the mote and
bretesche type. The wooden defences of these
castles, once they were carried, were easily de-
stroyed, but the earthworks remained and were
almost as easily re-fortified.

Like the castles of Athlone and Roscrea, the
castle of Clonmacnois was built on church-
land, and for all three compensation was duly
paid to the ecclesiastical owner. In the case of
Athlone the tithe of the expenses of the castle
was ordered to be paid to the prior, and four
cantreds in the fee of Loughsewdy, confiscated
from Walter de Lacy, were assigned to him,
and when these lands were restored to Walter
an exchange was ordered to be made. For many
years an annuity of ten marks for ' the vill, castle,
mill, and fishery towards Connaught ' was paid
to the prior of Athlone.^ In the case of Roscrea,
as we have seen, the compensation appears to
have been delayed, but when given at last it

1 Ibid. In the Annals of Loch Ce, 1214, is mentioned the
building of the castles of Clonmacnois and Durrow, and
further depredations of Cormac, son of Art, including the
burning of the bawns of the castles of Ballyboy in Fircal
and of Birr.

2 Rot. Claus., 16 John, p. 170 b ; 18 John, p. 273 ; Cal.
Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 2289.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 305

was given with a generous hand. In the case
of Clonmacnois the justiciar was ordered to
compensate the bishop for his land occupied
in fortifying the castle, for his fruit-trees cut
down, his cows, horses, oxen, and household
utensils taken away or ' commandeered ' during
the carrying on of the works.^

This favourable treatment of church property, Favour-

abletreat-

and indeed of the rights of the Church generally, ment of
by the Normans in Ireland contrasts strongly property.
with their comparative disregard of the rights
and property of laymen, whether princes or
peasants, and whether native or foreign, and
indeed is a complete inversion of more modern
notions on the subject. Laymen of Norman
blood were disseised by the Crown, in John's
reign at all events, on the slightest pretext.
Irish tribe-lands were disposed of even before
the tribes were subdued, but in the grants made,
whether by the Crown or by the barons, church
property was habitually respected. In Ireland,
as elsewhere, the clergy enjoyed under the
Normans many rights and exemptions denied
to laymen, and occupied in the eye of the law
an exceptionally favourable position. These
and other considerations make it impossible
to believe that the plundering of churches so
frequently recorded by the monkish annalists,
especially in the earlier years of the invasion,

1 Rot. Claus., 18 John, p. 273.
1226 II tr

306 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

was due to want of piety or due respect for
the Church. We have already given positive
proof, both from EngHsh and from Irish
sources, that it was usual, at any rate in
times of disturbance, to store provisions and
goods of all sorts in churches, or within the
sanctuaries of churches, for their better pro-
tection.* To seize these was an ordinary military
measure, and does not evince a sacrilegious
spirit. Nor was it a measure adopted only by
the Normans. Cormac, son of Art O'Melaghlin,
we are told, ' went to the castle of Birr, burned
its bawn, and burned the entire church and
took all its food {biadh) out of it, in order that
the Foreigners of the castle should not get food
in it.' 2

First j|3 ig probable that about this time the first

stone ^

castle in stonc castlc in Dublin was completed. There

com- was indeed a castle here of some sort from the
^®*^^ ■ early days of the Norman occupation. Accord-
ing to the Song of Dermot, when Henry was
leaving Ireland he gave the custody of the city
of Dublin and of the castle and the keep (e le
chastel e le dongun) to Hugh de Lacy.^ These
are the very words with which the same writer
describes the mote-fortress erected soon after-
wards for Hugh de Lacy at Trim, and the
inference is that the fortress at Dublin was of

1 Supra, pp. 195-8. 2 Ann. Loch Ce, 1214.

3 Song of Dermot, 1. 2715.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 307

the same type. The porta castelli is mentioned
in one of Strongbow's grants.^ To judge by the
analogy of other walled towns, Wexford, for
instance, the mote would have been erected
adjoining the walls at some one point so as to
form part of the general enceinte for defensive
purposes against outside attack, and yet be
separated by its ditch from the town, so as to be
capable of defence in this direction also. That
the castle of Dublin was surrounded by a ditch
and approached by a bridge prior to John's
reign we know from a curious record of the
year 1200. This was a criminal pleading which
came before the king concerning the murder
of William le Brun, who was struck on the
bridge of Dublin Castle by a man with a hatchet,
and fell into the castle-ditch.^ This description,
so far as it goes, harmonizes with the supposition
that the castle was of the mote type. Further,
that it was not a strong stone castle appears
from a mandate of King John to Meiler Fitz
Henry in 1204, directing him to build one.

This mandate was to the following effect :
* You have informed us that you have no fit
place for the custody of our treasure, and inas-
much as for this and for other purposes we need
fortalices at Dublin, we command you to con-
struct a strong castle there with good ditches

1 Reg. St. Thomas's, Dublin, no. 419. Supra, vol. i, p. 370.

2 Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, no. 116.

U2

308 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

and strong walls in a suitable place for the
governance and, if need be, the defence of the
town ; but first you are to construct a tower
or keep {turris), where afterwards a castle and
bailey {castellum et haluum) ^ and other necessary
works may conveniently be constructed. For
this at present you are to take 300 marks which
Geoffrey Fitz Robert owes us.' ^ This keep may
have been built by Meiler, but we have no proof.
The works, however, appear to have extended
over several years, and it is probable that John
de Gray, who, as we have seen, was an energetic
castle-builder, had much to do with pushing on
its construction. At all events, the king's castle
of Dublin was in existence at the close of John
de Gray's term of office, when its custody was
ordered to be delivered to Archbishop Henry, the
new justiciar.^ To the archbishop, indeed, the
building of the castle is ascribed in the annals
of St. Mary's abbey, but probably he only
completed the works. To make room for the
fortifications of the castle certain churches were

1 This is a good example of the distinction at this time
between the turris or keep and the castellum or enclosing
walls. So in the Song of Dermot we have the expression
donjon e chastel, and in Irish tech ocus caislen.

2 Rot. Claus., 6 John, p. 6 b. The debt of 300 marks had
not been recovered from Geoffrey Fitz Robert by March 6,
1206, when Meiler was ordered to distrain Geoffrey's lands
for it : C. D. I., vol. i, no. 287.

3 Rot. Pat., 15 John, p. 105 b.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 309

cleared away, for which the archbishop received
a grant of two cantreds without DubUn as
compensation.^ This castle, of the keep and
bailey plan, occupied part of the site of the
present castle, and it seems probable that the
Record Tower still preserves in its lower stages
some of the masonry of the original keep.

During the years that followed John's visit Loyalty
to Ireland the barons there, unlike the English Irish
barons, seem to have been thoroughly loyal to ''^^°°^-
the Crown. This may have been in part due to
the severe lesson which John had given to the
de Lacys and William de Braose, but their loyal
conduct, for which the king thanked his Irish
barons more than once, should also be attributed
to the skilful handling of the justiciar, John de
Gray, and above all to the example and leading
of the greatest of them, William Marshal. Two
remarkable letters from the king, and a still
more remarkable manifesto of the barons, are
evidence of this loyalty. It is difficult to date
these documents precisely, or even to determine
their relative sequence, but on the whole it is
probable that the manifesto preceded the letters,
which seem rightly ascribed to about October
1212.^ This manifesto purports to proceed from

1 Rot. Pat., 1 Hen. Ill, m. 2 ; Cal. Docs. Ireland, no. 805.

2 From its opening words the manifesto apparently
followed the Pope's action in absolving or threatening to
absolve the king's subjects from their fealty to the king.

310

EPISCOPAL VICEROYvS

Their
mani-
festo.

John's
letters
to the
Bishop
of Nor-
wich and
William
Marshal.

William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, and twenty-
six of the principal magnates of Ireland on
behalf of the rest. ' Moved with grief and
astonishment,' they say, ' they had lately heard
that the Pope proposed to absolve the subjects
of the king from their fealty, because the king
resisted the injury done to him regarding the
matter of the church of Canterbury.' They go
on to defend the king's action as directed to
preserve the liberty and dignity which the Crown
had hitherto enjoyed, and conclude by stating
that ' with the king they are prepared to live
or die, and to the last they will faithfully and
inseparably adhere to the king.' ^

John's letter to the Bishop of Norwich com-
mends the discretion of the bishop, thanks him
and the barons of Ireland for the oath of fealtv
which the barons lately tendered, and repeats
the substance of his letter to the Earl Marshal.
In this latter John returns special thanks to the
earl as the prime mover in the matter (which

This appears to have been done either by Pandulf on the
failure of his negotiations with John on the 30th August,
1211 (Ann. of Burton), or, more probably, b}^ the Pope
himself on the return of his envoj^s (Rog. de Wendover^
ii. 59). Doubt has been thrown on this storj^ by Sir James
Ramsay (Angevin Empire, p. 430), but it would seem to
have been believed at the time in Wales : Brut y Tywys.
(1212), p. 273.

1 Cal. Docs. Ireland, i, no. 448, from the Red Book
Exchequer, Q. R.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 311

we can well believe), begs him to remain in
Ireland to assist the bishop in expediting the
king's affairs, sends a transcript of letters (about
which nothing further is known) made to the
king by the magnates of England, and prays the
earl with the other barons of Ireland to put their
seals to similar letters. Finally, he alludes to
the Marshal's counsel about establishing peace
with the Church, and desires him to notify under
what form it seems meet to the common council
of the king's faithful subjects of Ireland that
peace should be made without injury to the
king's rights.^

Early in 1213 King John issued a general
summons to all who owed him fealty to muster
at Dover at the close of Easter. This was in
view of the meditated invasion of the French
king. The muster took place, and the troops,
said to be 60,000 strong, were reviewed at ij,Jij
Barham Down near Canterbury, early in May. ^^^^^^ ^^
Among those assembled were Bishop John of Barham

Down,

Norwich and Earl William Marshal, with 500 May 4-6.
knights and many other horsemen from Ireland.^
That Ireland could be denuded of such a force
without any disturbance arising, beyond a con-

1 Rot. Claus., 14 John, p. 132 b.

2 Roger of Wendover, vol. ii, p. 67. William Marshal,
when summoned to John, is said to have advised this
muster : Hist. G. le Marechal, vol ii, p. 161 ; where ' le
mont de Brandone " no doubt represents Barham Down.

312 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

tinuance of the petty raids of the disappomted
roydamnas, is a noteworthy proof of the strength
of the Enghsh colonists when not divided against
themselves, and a striking indication of the
general contentment of the Irish among them
with the new order of things.
John's On May 15 John met Pandulf the papal legate

der. at the house of the Templars near Dover, where
' of his own free-will and by the common counsel
of his barons ', as he says, he surrendered to
the Pope the realms of England and Ireland to
receive them back and hold them as a feudatory
of the Roman Church. He also swore fealty to
the Pope and undertook to pay to the Roman
Church 1,000 marks annually, 700 for England
and 300 for Ireland. Among the witnesses
to this humiliating charter were Henry, Arch-
bishop of Dublin, John, Bishop of Norwich,
and William, Earl of Pembroke.^ This took place
a few days before Ascension Day. Verily the
hermit Peter, who prophesied that on that day
John would no longer be king, might claim that
his prophecy had come true. The immediate
effect, however, was to disperse the storm that
was gathering both at home and abroad, and
fix John's crown more securely on his head. In
Ireland, indeed, John's reconciliation with the
papacy had no more effect than his previous
quarrel. The interdict did not apply to Ireland,
1 Roger of Wendover, vol. ii, pp. 74-6.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 313

and there were now no disloyal barons. They
had expressed their indignation at the Pope's
sentence of deposition and their determination
to adhere to the king, but at the same time they
had apparently counselled him to make peace
with the Church, and their leader and spokesman,
William Marshal, stood by John's side when
the submission was made. In Ireland there was
certainly no indignation at the surrender, if
indeed that sentiment was widely felt anywhere
at the time.

In the wringing of the Great Charter from Magna

Carta.

John the Irish barons, though they had suffered
much from his exactions, extortions, and oppres-
sions, played no part. It may be, however,
that, while the chief credit for that achievement
must be assigned to the firmness and far-sighted
statesmanship of Stephen Langton, John was
actually induced to sign the document by the
upright, wise, and loyal counsel given him by
William the Marshal, who stood by his side and
acted as intermediary, rather than by the bluster
and threats of the revolted barons. John in
his adversity had at last learned to value and
trust in the earl as one who would give him
disinterested, if not always palatable, advice,
and for the last three years of his reign kept him
pretty constantly at his side.

In the weeks that followed the signing of the
Great Charter, John made a large number of

314 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

Followed grants to towns and individuals in Ireland of

numerous ^ beneficial nature. The object in view may

^^"0^10 ^^^ve been to keep the Irish barons steadfast in

Ireland, their loyalty, or even largely to obtain money,

but in the wise attention bestowed on Irish

affairs at this time we may perhaps detect the

influence of William Marshal and of the Dublin

archbishop, both of whom were among the king's

diminished counsellors.

Charters Some of thesc grants we may here mention.

Water- ^ ' To the citizcus of Dublin John granted the city

Dungar-^ ^^^^ ^^^ provostship to be held in fee-farm at an

van, 1215. annual rent of 200 marks, adding some new

privileges and confirming all liberties and free

customs previously conferred.^ To the citizens

of Waterford he gave a charter defining the

extent of the port of Waterford and granting

a number of liberties and free customs similar

to those given to Dublin by the charter of 1192,

and in addition a declaration that all ships or

boats entering the port between Rodybanke

(Red Head, near Dunmore) and Ryndowane (the

Hook) should load and unload at the Quay of

Waterford and nowhere else within the port.^

William Marshal, who witnessed this charter,

1 Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 210 b.

2 Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 13, where the charter is
wrongly dated 3rd July, a. r, vii, instead of 3rd July, a. r.
xvii. It is witnessed by H[enri] Archbishop of DubUn and
others who were all present at court on the 3rd July, 1215.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 315

cannot at the moment have foreseen how unfairly
this exclusive privilege would work against his
own port of New Ross, for there was no way of
reaching it except between Red Head and the
Hook. A few weeks later he obtained a mandate
from John authorizing shipping to come to New
Ross, ' provided no injury should thereby accrue
to the king's vill of Waterford ' ; ^ but the
proviso virtually nullified the concession, and
century-long disputes resulted. To the burgesses
of Dungarvan John granted all the liberties and
free customs of Breteuil,^ a town in Normandy.
This expression has been misunderstood. Fol-
lowing the precedent of Henry's charter to
Dublin, it became customary in Ireland, when
granting charters to towns for the first time, to
grant to them ' the law of Bristol '. Thus John
in Henry's lifetime seems to have granted to the
citizens of Cork the same free laws and free
customs as the citizens of Bristol enjoyed.^
After 1188, when John granted an extended
charter to Bristol, the law of Bristol would in-
clude the liberties and free customs mentioned
in that charter. These were substantially the
liberties and free customs expressly included in

1 Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 153 b.

2 Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 211: ' omnes libertates et
hberas consuetudines de Bretoill[io],' absurdly taken by
Sweetman, Cal., vol. i, no. 578, as meaning ' bridge-toll '.

^ See Council Book of Cork (Caulfield), p. x, referring to
Harleian MS. no. 441.

316 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

John's Dublin charter of 1192. In 1213, how-
ever, John granted to the burgesses of Drogheda
the law, not of Bristol, but of Breteuil, with all
the Hberties and customs appertaining to that
law.^ And now in granting a charter to Dun-
garvan a similar phrase is used. What these
customs of Breteuil exactly were we do not
know, but they were probably not dissimilar
from those granted to Bristol in 1188. In the
first year of his reign John granted a charter to
his burgesses of Breteuil {de Bretolio), on account
of the great loss they had incurred in his service,
that they might buy and sell throughout his
land by the same liberties as were enjoyed by the
burgesses of Verneuil (near Breteuil).^ The feudal
lords in Ireland, however, in granting charters for
the first time, granted liberties ' according to the
law of Bristol ' . Thus Walter de Lacy granted the
law of Bristol to his burgesses of Trim and Kells,
and we find the burgesses of the archiepiscopal
towns of Rathcoole, Ballymore, and Holywood
holding according to the same laws and liberties.^

1 Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 194: 'legem de Breteill[io]
cum omnibus libertatibus et consuetudinibus ad eandem
legem pertinentibus.'

2 Rot. Chart., 1 John, p. 5 : 'ut emant et vendant per
totam terram nostram per easdem Ubertates quas burgenses
nostri de V[er]nolio habent.'

^ For Trim and Kells see Chartae Priv. et Immun., p. 10 ;
for Rathcoole, ibid., p. 33 ; for Ballymore and Holywood,
Cal. Lib. Niger, Proc. R. I. A., xxvii (c), pp. 60, 62.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 317

Whatever the motive may have been, John's
grants of charters to the seaport towns of Ireland
gave a great impetus to the growth of Irish trade.

His grants and restorations of lands to Grants to
individuals at this time were no less remark- ^uais.
able, and did something to restore the sense
of security which must have been shattered by
his wholesale confiscations in 1210. The lord-
ship of Ulster was not restored to Hugh de Lacy,^
but many of the freeholders there and in Meath
who had been taken prisoners in the castle of
Carrickfergus were restored on payment of fines
to their liberty and their lands. About the same
time large grants of lands in the north of Ulster
were, as we have seen, made to Thomas and
Alan of Galloway and their uncle, Duncan of
Carrick. With Walter de Lacy, however, the
king now came to terms, and, in consideration
of a fine of 4,000 marks, restored to him his
lands and castles, except the castle of Drogheda,
which was retained as a royal castle.^ In
Leinster John made, or purported to make, a
tardy restitution to William the Marshal by re-
peatedly ordering that the castle of Dunamase,
and all his fees in the lands held by Meiler

1 There appear to have been negotiations for the restora-
tion of Ulster to Hugh, but the stipulated fine (the amount
is not stated) was not paid, so the king announced that he
could only convert the land of Ulster to his own profit :
Rot. Pat., 16 John, p. 134.

2 Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 181.

318 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

Fitz Henry, should be restored to him.^ It
seems, however, that these orders were not
entirely carried out in John's lifetime.^ In
Munster John granted to Thomas Fitz Anthony
and his heirs the custody of the counties of
Waterf ord and Desmond and of the city of Cork,
and of all the demesnes and escheats of the king
in those counties, for the yearly rent of 250
marks.^ John appears to have treated the
southern portion of the present county of Tip-
perary as his demesne or escheat, probably as
having been demesne of William de Braose, and
for a fine of £100 he now granted to Philip
of Worcester ' to maintain him on the king's
service ' five cantreds in this district, and the
castles of Knockgraffon, Kiltinan, and Ardmayle.*
The honour of Limerick was not revived, but
Kichard, son of William de Burgh, Maurice, son

1 Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, nos. 644, 647, 664, 684,
689, 691.

2 On December 2, 1216, a few weeks after John's
death, Meiler's service for his land in Leinster was ordered
to be restored to the earl in a remarkable mandate : Rot.
Pat., 1 Hen. Ill, m. 16. It would appear from Rot. Pat.,
17 John, pp. 161 b and 180, touching the restoration of
Dunamase, that John employed certain secret signs {inter-
signa) without which his justiciar was not to carry out his
ostensible orders.

3 Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 210 b.

4 Rot. Pat., 17 John, p. 147 b. The castle of Ardmayle,
however, had belonged to Walter de Lacy and was afterwards
restored to him. For Knockgraffon see supra, p. 147.

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 319

of Gerald Fitz Gerald, and Hamo, son of Hamo
de Valognes, were given seisin of their respective
fathers' lands ; ^ while the cantred of Okonach
(Coonagh), which seems to have been also demesne
of William de Braose, and the vill and cantred
of Tibrary (Tipperary) were granted to Arch-
bishop Henry. ^ As regards Connaught, John
made the grant to Cathal Crovderg to which we
have already referred.^

John made several other grants and conces-
sions to his Irish subjects during the last year
of his reign, but we have mentioned the most
important. Altogether the fines payable for
them amounted to a considerable sum, which
was badly needed for ' the Barons' War '. One
of his very last acts indicates remorse for one
of his many crimes. On the 10th of October,
1216, he granted to Margaret de Lacy a site
whereon to build a monastery for the good of the
souls of her father, William de Braose, his wife
and son.* John died on the 18th of October, 1216.

It has been the fashion, especially with Charac-
writers who have seldom a good word for Eng- John's
lish policy in Ireland, to bestow a considerable "'^ ™ ^'
measure of praise upon the action of King John
in that country. But if we have correctly read
the record of his rule, this praise was wholly

1 Rot. Pat., 16 John, p. 118 b ; 17 John, p. 147.

2 Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 213.

3 Supra, p. 285. « Rot. Pat., 18 John, p. 199.

320 EPISCOPAL VICEROYS

undeserved. We need not recall his disastrous
boyish visit in 1185, nor dwell on the obscure
period that elapsed before his accession to the
throne. But from the commencement of his
reign until near its close, when by his conduct in
England he had alienated almost all support and
could no longer make his will prevail, his action
in Ireland seems to have been swayed by
capricious favouritism or by vindictive personal
animosity, without any regard for the general
weal of his Irish dominion. For the native
Irish themselves, in common with too many of
his contemporaries, he had no sort of regard.
But while aways ready to grant away their
territories (for a consideration) to his favourites,
he gave the latter no assistance in making his
grants effective, and no support in establishing
their rule. On the contrarv, with or without
pretext, he again and again overrode his own
grants in the most capricious manner. To recall
only the principal examples : He first parcelled
out the kingdom of Limerick among a number
of tenants-in-chief of the Crown, and then, with-
out any regard to the rights so conferred, sold
the whole honour of Limerick to his favourite
for the moment, William de Braose. A few years
later he remorselessly hunted down William de
Braose and his family, because he was unable
to pay the stipulated consideration. He encour-
aged Hugh de Lacy to make war upon John

EPISCOPAL VICEROYS 321

de Courcy, and when Hugh had succeeded,
loaded him with honours and granted him the
lands which his victim had won and organized.
Then five years later he led a great army into
Ireland, expelled both Hugh and his brother
Walter, and confiscated their lands, on no better
pretext than that they had endeavoured to
shelter the objects of his tyranny. He similarly
encouraged his justiciar Meiler Fitz Henry to
make private war on William Marshal, and it
was only when Meiler failed that he grudgingly
acknowledged the earl's rights. Had John dared,
however, we can hardly doubt that the fief of
Leinster would have gone the same way as
those of Limerick, Ulster, and Meath. John, in
a word, was the same man in Ireland as in
England : capricious, vindictive, tjrrannical, only
that in his tyranny he was even less under
control. But when he found himself almost
alone and in need of the support of his Irish
barons, then he did something to undo the evil
he had done, to reinstate those he had dispos-
sessed, and to grant a number of charters
favourable to the trade of the seaport towns.
Among the first acts of the new boy-king, or
rather of his great regent Earl William Marshal,
was to extend to Ireland the liberties which had
been wrested from John for England, and to
further the work of undoing, so far as might be,
the wrong that John had done.

1226 n 5

\

CHAPTER XXIII

AFTER FIFTY YEARS

Not quite half a century had now elapsed The Pax

■XT

since the Norman invader first set foot on nica'^lth.
Bannow Island, and in the course of that brief ^^^^^

colony.

period a great change had taken place over
at least two-thirds of Ireland. In the eastern
parts of Ulster and Uriel, throughout the whole
of the ancient kingdoms of Meath, Leinster,
Ossory, Desmond, and Limerick, the Normans
dominated almost everywhere. In each lord-
ship, after the first few years of resistance, a
period of comparative peace and order com-
menced such as Ireland had never known before.
It was a veritable ' pax Normannica ', and was
co-extensive with Norman sway. It was not
produced by strong legionary forces encamped
at strategic points, nor by armed garrisons
within impregnable castles of stone. Wooden
fortresses protected by earthworks were indeed
erected on almost every manor, but except as
j a safe retreat in the event of a sudden rising or
for a last stand in the face of overwhelming odds,
they were of little military avail, and in most
cases after a generation or so were either con-

X2

324 AFTER FIFTY YEARS

verted into stone castles or fell into disuse. The
conquest, rendered inevitable by the previous
anarchy, was effected primarily by superior
weapons and better discipline in the field, but
the position won was maintained and peace
secured by that instinct for organized rule which
is the mark of progressive races all the world
over, and which, for the time at any rate, in the
districts named, led to a general acquiescence
in the change of rulers.

Some disturbances, no doubt, took place
within this region, especially along the marches
or borders between ' the land of peace ' and ' the
land of war ', as the English and Irish districts
were sometimes respectively called ; ^ but they
were of small moment in comparison with the
desolating raids that went on with little rest
before the strong hand of the Normans stayed
them. Above all, there were no more inter-
provincial wars in this region. Neither an
O'Brien, nor an 0' Conor, nor an O'Rourke, came
swooping down with their hosts over Leinster or
Meath, carrying off whatever booty they could
lay hands on. Nor was the lordship of Ulster
subject any longer to periodical devastation at
the hands of the Cinel Owen. Only in those
districts where the Normans were not supreme

^ The use of the term ' English Pale ' to denote the
districts dominated by the English prior to the fifteenth
century is a misnomer and an anachronism.

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 325

did the turmoil of the past continue — a turmoil
now caused partly, but not exclusively, by the
efforts of the new-comers to extend their domina-
tion. Some of the leading barons, indeed, op-
posed armed resistance to the forces of King
John's first justiciar, and writers have dwelt
on these conflicts as evincing the innate turbu-
lence of the Normans. We have traced these
disturbances, such as they were, to him who
appears to have been their real author ; but in
any case they were as nothing to the ' Barons'
War ' which broke out in England a few years
later from the same cause. On the whole, with
one or two exceptions, the barons of Ireland
stood faithfully by each other and by the
common cause of the colony.

As to the treatment of the Irish by the invaders Treat-
I do not propose to consider the question from the Irish.
the moral point of view. This is emphatically
one of those questions which cannot be fairly
or usefully discussed with a tacit reference to
modern standards. In any case we must first
of all find out, if we can, how the Normans did in
fact treat the Irish. Then those whose knowledge
of history is sufficient for the comparison may, if
they wish, compare the action of the Normans with
that of other conquering races in similar conditions
elsewhere. To the preliminary investigation,
which is encompassed by much difficulty, we may
make the following tentative contribution.

326 AFTER FIFTY YEARS <

From what is known of the sub-infeudation
of Leinster, Meath, and Uriel — and the same
is probably true of other districts also — each of
the larger sub-grants appears to have generally
comprised the territory of a distinct sept, or
smaller tribe, and to be now roughly represented
by the baronial divisions. The few surviving
charters or transcripts of charters show that the
lands were conveyed under their old denomina-
tions without any express mention of boundaries,
and often as some particular sept or chieftain
Expio- of a sept held the same. The former chieftain,
Sf former whcthcr of a scpt or of a group of septs or larger
chief?. division, was of course deprived in whole or in
part of his ancient privileges. Where he resisted
the invaders he either fell in the conflict or was
expelled, or perhaps retired into a monastery.*
In most cases, however, even in Meath and
Leinster, and apparently still more often in
Ulster and Munster, the more important chief-
tains submitted to terms, accepted portions of
their former territories, and continued to rule
there according to Irish law. Thus the O'Me-
laghlins in part of Westmeath, the 0'B3rrnes
and O'Tooles on the skirts of the Wicklow Moun-
tains, the MacMurroughs about the northern
borders of their former principality, the O'Conors

* Faelan MacFaelain, lord of Offelan, died in the monas-
tery of Old Connell founded by Meiler Fitz Henry : Four
Masters, 1203.

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 327

Faly and the 0' Mores in the western parts of
their territories, the Mac Gillapatricks in Upper
Ossory, and other smaller chieftains, continued
their tribal rule and organization, though in
much more confined areas. In Munster, and
perhaps in Ulster, English and Irish districts
seem to have been still more closely intermixed.
As an example of the gradual expropriation of
an Irish chieftain we may mention the case of
Donnell O'Faelain, lord of the Decies of Munster,
who in 1204 quit-claimed to the king the pro-
vince of Dungarvan, one of the three cantreds
held by him, on condition that the other two
should remain with him, one for his life, and
the other as an inheritance.^ Somewhat similar
arrangements were made, as we have seen, with
the Mac Carthys, the O'Briens, and the 0' Conors.
There is also at least one example — that of
Donnell Mac Gillamocholmog — of an Irish chief-
tain who became a feudal lord, and whose
grandson, by intermarrying with the Geraldines
and dropping the Irish surname, became almost
indistinguishable from his Norman neighbours.^
Of the smaller chieftains some may have been
treated similarly. Others perhaps were driven

^ Rot. Claus., 6 John, p. 6 b : ' ita quod alii duo sibi
re maneret, scilicet alter eorum in vita sua et alter hereditarie.'

2 Supra, vol. i, p. 368, and see Gilbert's History of Dublin,
vol. i, pp. 230-5, and Mr. Mills's paper, Journ. R. S. A. I.
1894, p. 162.

tricts.

328 AFTER FIFTY YEARS

into the Irish districts at once. Sooner or later,
throughout large parts of the east and south of
Ireland, the lands held in severalty were ex-
propriated, and probably became the demesnes
of early Norman manors.
Inter- Thus in many parts of the region nominally

spersed

Irish dis- dominated by the Normans, as well as in the
parts where they had effected no settlement,
there remained Irish districts where the former
Irish tribal organization was continued, where
the ancient Brehon law was observed, where the
former ruling families still continued to draw
the allegiance of the tribesmen, and where the
king's writ did not run. Even when these Irish
districts were quiet and at peace with the
Normans there was at first no amalgamation of
the two peoples ; and, except so far as the Irish
may have adopted from their neighbours some
improved methods of building and perhaps of
agriculture, or have taken advantage of the
greater facilities now offered for trade, they seem
to have participated but little in the increased
prosperity of the rest of the country. On the
other hand, these Celtic tribes interspersed
among the feudalized districts had always the
feeling rankling in their minds that the invaders
had robbed them of the best lands, and they
remained always ready, when opportunity should
occur, to raid and plunder as of old, and if
possible recover the land they had lost.

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 329

But though sooner or later most of the free Retention
tribesmen were thus in one way or another cleared of the
off the feudalized districts, it was not so with the ^^^ "
actual tillers of the soil. Every inducement was
offered to them to remain on the newly settled
land, and a variety of evidence goes to show
that the inducements offered were effective. We
have not only the express statement of Giraldus
that it was a prime object with Hugh de Lacy
to invite back to peace the rural inhabitants
who had been driven out in the course of the
reprisals that followed the rising of 1174, and to
restore to them their farms and pasture lands,
but we can see from the Treaty of Windsor with
Rory O'Conor in 1175,* and from the mandate
to the justiciary in 1204, ' to cause the villeins
and fugitives from the province of Dungarvan
to return with their chattels and retinue,' ^ that
measures were taken to enforce the return to
their homes of those who had fled when their
tribe-land was first overrun. Moreover, from
the surviving extents and accounts of manors Betaghs.
dating from about the middle of the thirteenth
century and from other sources, it appears that
a class of Irish farmers called betagii or betaghs
was generally to be found on each manor. Thus
in the earliest Irish Pipe Roll that has been
preserved we find in the crown-lands near Dublin
considerable sums paid as rent by the betaghs
* Supra, vol. i, p. 350. ^ j^q^^ Claus., 6 John, p. 6 b.

330 AFTER FIFTY YEARS

of Othee, Obrun, and Okelli, tribe-lands on the
skirts of the DubUn and Wicklow mountains.^
In some manors the rents of the betaghs were the
principal source of income,^ and we can hardly
doubt that they were very numerous, especially
in the settled districts more remote from Dublin.
Betaghs are identified as regards their legal
status with the nativi or villeins of feudal law.*
In the Rolls of Court they are often termed
hihernici in a technical sense — in full phrase,
hibernici servilis conditionis} Probably they
represented the ' daer-stock tenants ' or ' base
vassals ' of the Brehon law, who, as we have
seen, were bound to pay food-rents and provide
refection for their lord, to whom they had parted
with their honour-price, and against whom they
could not bear witness.^ Similarly in the Anglo-

1 Irish Pipe Roll, 13 Hen. Ill, 35th Rep. D. K., p. 29.

2 See the account of the manor of Lucan, Pipe Roll,
2 Ed. I, summarized by IVIr. Mills, Journ. R. S. A. I. 1894,
p. 174 ; and for further evidence as to the position of betaghs,
the same writer's notice of the manor of St. Sepulchre,
ibid. 1889, pp. 31-41, and 1890, pp. 54-63 ; and the extents
of certain Munster manors, Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. i, nos.
2607 (Kilsheelan) and 3203, vol. iii, no. 459.

3 Stat., 14 Ed. II and 5 Ed. Ill, § 3 ; Early Statutes
(Berry), pp. 292, 325 ; and cf. Harris's Ware, Antiquities
(1764), p. 157.

* Justiciary Rolls, Pref., p. viii. This double meaning
of the term hibernicus has misled many writers.

^ Supra, vol. i, p. 116. It would seem that the name
must be connected with hiathad, the word used in the Book
of Rights for refection. Orha hiatach is applied in the

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 331

Irish courts it was a valid plea in bar that the
plaintiff was a betagh or hibernicus who had
not obtained the right to use English laws ; ^
and again similarly the Anglo-Irish lord could
recover damages for the killing, assaulting, or
robbing of his hibernici.^ It would seem, then,
that the Normans, in not admitting betaghs to
the full rights of freemen, were not lowering their
status. The hibernicus might, however, be en-
franchised by the king, or by his immediate lord,^
and in most of the cases that came before the
courts such enfranchisement was in fact proved,
and the plea in bar failed. Betaghs were perhaps
at first adscripti glebae, like the sept of Mac-
feilecan, transferred with the land of Baldoyle by
Dermot's charter to the canons of All Saints,
Dublin,* but some of them seem to have risen into
the class of firmarii^ whose position was regulated
by contract.

Besides betaghs there was a large class of Irish
agricultural labourers, including the lord's churls,

Brehon Laws, vol. iv, p. 44, 1. 10, to lands set apart for
providing food for the chief. The hiatach coitchenn, or
' public hospitaller', must, however, be distinguished from
these ordinary betaghs : Four Masters, 1225, note s ; and
cf. the Idnbiatach of the Ann. Ulster, 1178.
^ Justiciary Rolls, pp. 82, 454, &c.

2 Ibid., pp. 156, 162, 221, &c.

3 Ibid., p. 271, where Walter Otothel (O'Toole) produced
a charter of enfranchisement given to his great-grandfather
by William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, in the tenth year
of King John. * Reg. All Hallows, I. A. S., p. 50.

332 AFTER FIFTY YEARS

who worked on his farms, and who perhaps
represented the fuidhirs or bondsmen of the Celtic
chief. Above these classes were Irish artisans
of various sorts, who, though hibernici, were
not of servile condition, and could sue and
recover damages even against their employers.^
Mr. Mills, the present deputy-keeper of the
records in Ireland, who has studied the condition
of the inferior agricultural classes in the thir-
teenth century, considers that their condition
'was steadily improving where the power of the
Norman colony was least disturbed, and while
it retained anything of its pristine vigour '.^
'No To modern minds, however, the withholding

to kiH the benefit of the laws of England from the Irish
is the greatest blot on the record of the Normans
in Ireland. Sir John Davies puts it in the fore-
front of ' the defects in the civil policy and
government which impeded a full conquest '.
To take the most glaring case, ' it was often,' he
says, ' adjudged no felony to kill a mere Irishman
in time of peace.' ^ This is a difficult subject,
which has never been adequately treated, and

^ See Just. Rolls, p. 342. A case where the jury found
that the plaintiff and his father were hibernici (Irishmen)
and millers of the defendant and his father, but not hiber-
nici (villeins) of the defendant. The plaintiff was therefore
capable of suing, and in fact recovered damages. This is
a good example of the double meaning of hibernictis.

2 Journ. R. S. A. I. 1890-1, p. 62.

3 Discovery (1787), pp. 75-7.

an Irish
man.'

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 333

cannot here be fully discussed. It may, however,
be observed, in the first place, that it would
have been quite futile to attempt to extend
English laws over all Ireland without having first
established adequate machinery to enforce them.
The laws would have been contemptuously dis-
regarded by the Irish themselves. Sir John
Davies in fact inverts cause and effect. Until
the conquest was perfected it was obviously
impossible to maintain sheriffs and enforce
judgements in Irish districts. It was difficult
enough to do so after the Elizabethan wars. If
an Irishman living in an Irish district killed an
Englishman in time of peace we may be quite
sure that, unless caught by the English, he would
either be not punished at all or at most be liable
under the Brehon law to pay a fine for the
homicide. With the Irish it was certainly no
felony to kill an Englishman. This being so, we
can hardly wonder that in the converse case an
Englishman could not be hung. Again, in the
case of Irishmen of servile condition living under
a lord in a feudalized district, it would be un-
reasonable to expect the Normans, at the period
we have reached, at any rate, to grant them, as
a body, liberties which they had not enjoyed
under their former chieftains, and that, too, at
a time when similar classes in England were in
a state of serfdom. The lord of the betagh, as
we have seen, had his remedy in damages for

334 AFTER FIFTY YEARS

Real case any violence done to his men. There remains
treat- then only the case of those Irishmen who had
"^^^ ' enjoyed freedom under the Brehon laws and who
remained in the feudalized districts. Probably
these free-born Irishmen so remaining were not
very numerous, and probably, too, the right to
use English laws was granted to most of them
individually, though here again, perhaps follow-
ing the unfortunate precedent of the Brehon law,
the English law ' as to life and limb ' seems not
at first to have been included in the grant — so
slow were the Normans to admit any class of
Irishmen to equality with themselves.^

A wider experience has gradually taught the
western world that to make a united and con-
tented nation equal rights before the law must
be secured to all. Such a conception was, how-
ever, entirely beyond the ken of the statesmen
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and
indeed could not have been realized in Ireland
without a complete conquest and a rooting up
of old customs, which would have inevitably
entailed, for the time at any rate, immense hard-
ship. But had the Normans been wiser in their
generation, they would have spared no pains to
induce as many as possible of the free-born Irish-
men to remain amongst them, and by good faith

^ It was extended to them by Stat., 14 Ed. II ; Early
Statutes, p. 292 ; cf. Rot. Glaus., 12 Hen. Ill, m. 8 ; ibid.j
pp. 2a-4.

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 335

and liberal treatment have won them over to
the support of the new regime. This, indeed,
appears to have been the idea of Giraldus.^ They
might, we should imagine, have converted them
into feudal owners, living in their midst, and
thus have enormously strengthened their own
position, and, while preserving their own more
advanced ideas of order and government, have
made a commencement in the amalgamation of
the two races. But it is plain that the Normans
regarded the Irish as an uncouth and barbarous
people and the fit spoil of their conquerors, and
those who guided the destinies of the colony were
not far-seeing enough to perceive the ultimate
effect of a half-conquest carried out in such a
spirit.

The Ostmen of the seaport towns were perhaps Treat-
more ready than the Irish to accept the new Sie°Os*tf-
regime, and were treated more liberally ; but in °^®"-
their case it is obvious the same difficulties did
not arise. In Dublin they were given a district
to inhabit on the north side of the river, outside
the waUs. This was long known as the villa
Ostmannorum, Ostmantown, or (corruptly) Ox-
mantown. In Waterford they were given a
charter by Henry II entitling them to the law of

^ See his condemnation of the taking away ' the lands
of our Irishmen who had faithfully stood by us from the
first ', vol. V, p. 390, and his opinion (p. 398) as to how
Ireland should be governed.

336 AFTER FIFTY YEARS

the English,^ and, perhaps after the revolt of
1174, they were settled in a quarter of their own
outside the town.^ Henry III took them under
his protection, and Edward I confirmed his great-
grandfather's charter.^ The Ostmen of Limerick,
however, as we have seen, remained in the
city and supplied the first mayor to the newly
chartered town. In all cases the Ostmen seem
to have had full rights of holding and inheriting
property and of suing in the courts, though
sometimes they had to prove that they were not
Irishmen, and to petition for a recognition of
their rights as Ostmen.'*

The cantred of the Ostmen both at Cork and
at Limerick was retained in the king's hand along
with the cities. At Limerick forty carucates of
this land were afterwards granted to the citizens

^ A transcript of this charter is among the Carew Papers :
Cal. Misc., p. 466.

2 The vill of the Ostmen near Waterford is referred to
in Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. ii, p. 426. The finding of a jury
in 1310 as to the cause of the expulsion of the Ostmen
of Waterford cannot, I think, be taken as correct. See
Facsimiles Nat. MSS. of Ireland, vol. iii, Introd. vi, pi. vii,
and App. iii, and supra, vol. i, p. 336.

^ Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. ii, no. 2134, where Henry II's
charter is stated to have been inspected. For Custmanni
read Oustmanni.

* See the petition of Philip Mac Gothmond, ' an Ostman
and EngUshman ' of Waterford, for himself and 400 of his
race : Cal. Docs. Ireland, vol. iii, p. 305 ; also of Maurice
Macotere, ibid., p. 306.

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 337

in burgage tenure.^ Most of the Ostmen men-
tioned in the records belonged, as might be
expected, to the towns, but some of them were
to be found in rural parts as agriculturists. Thus
about the year 1283 a Wexford jury found that
there were in the time of the Marshals 100 well-
to-do Ostmen, possessed of cattle, who had to pay
certain dues to the provosts of Wexford for the
lord of the liberty, and that provided they paid
these dues they were free to hold of any lord
in the county they chose. Some forty of these,
reduced in wealth, survived in the time of
William de Valence, when they were freed from
the aforesaid burdens, and given licence to hold
land of any lord in the county at rents and
services proportionate to their reduced numbers
and means. ^

It is quite certain then that there was no No

^ _ , general

general clearance of the native population. There clearance.

P • T ^ J • n i- !• • of popula-

is no sign oi any considerable influx ot foreigners tion.
into the rural parts of Ireland. Land without
inhabitants was obviously of no value to the
Anglo-Norman lords, and it was their aim to
retain as many of the former cultivators of the
soil as possible. To the mass of these the Anglo-
Norman settlement meant little more than a

1 Rot. Chart., 17 John, p. 211.

2 See this document transcribed in an interesting paper
on the EngUsh and Ostmen in Ireland by E. Curtis, Eng.
Hist. Rev. 1908, p. 217.

1226 n Y

338 AFTER FIFTY YEARS

change of territorial rulers. Instead of the
exactions of their former chiefs, some small
rents and certain services were required by their
new lords. Some liberties might be lost, but in
return they obtained greater security for their
cattle and a better market for their produce.
Though East Meath was more fully occupied by
the foreigners than perhaps any other rural part
of Ireland (with the possible exception of the
parts near Dublin and the south-east corner of
the County Wexford), and though that occupa-
tion remained unchecked through the centuries,
Irish continued to be the language spoken by the
mass of the people, and in process of time even
by some of the descendants of the foreign
settlers, up to at least the middle of the seven-
teenth century, and it only finally died out
amongst the old people within living memory.
Feuda- We have mentioned that the mote-castles of
irdand. the first settlcrs served only a temporary mili-
tary purpose, but as manorial centres they or
their successors soon became the foci of new
activities, agricultural, industrial, and com-
mercial. Demesne lands were marked out,
commons were set apart, in some few cases
forests were reserved for game. Grants of lands
were made to a number of free tenants of foreign
birth, to be held for military service, and sub-
ordinate manors were created. Lands were also
let to farmers at a rent, and these were in some

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 339

cases of Irish extraction. Improved methods of
agriculture were introduced on the home farms.
The manorial courts in their several degrees
administered justice and settled disputes. Vills
sprang up under the protection of the castles
and grew to be towns where new industries were
carried on, and where no doubt the foreign
element predominated. Many of these are still
among the chief towns of Ireland, while the
memory of others which have entirely disappeared
survives in persistent local tradition. Lands in
the vicinity of the towns were divided among the
burgesses at low fixed rents as burgage-land, and
charters were granted to the more thriving towns
to encourage trade and secure improvements.
Even where the Norman mote now rises lonely
amid the fields we often find records or traces or
traditions of a town close at hand, and, except
in cases where the manorial centre seems to have
shifted at an early date, it is rare not to find the
remains of a later castle, the ruins of a church
with some early English features, and the evi-
dence of an ancient mill-site, in close proximity
to the grass-grown mound. Navigable rivers
were now used for commerce, and not for raids,
and were bridged in places for the same purpose.
The Church was at the same time better organized
and more adequately endowed, and her temples
were re-erected on a grander scale and in the new
transitional or, later, in the Early English style.

y 2

340 AFTER FIFTY YEARS

New monastic establishments were founded and
endowed with indeed reckless profusion. Large
sums were paid into the English exchequer,
which, if of no benefit to Ireland, were at least
a proof of growing wealth ; and again and again
a feudal host was dispatched to the aid of the
king in his wars in France, in Wales, and against
his own revolted subjects.

Thus in the course of two generations the whole
face of two-thirds of Ireland became changed.
The seaport towns in particular, most of which
owed their origin and small beginnings to the
Norsemen, rapidly expanded and became centres
of a growing foreign trade. In a future work we
hope to trace the development of this new life
and to analyse the causes which ultimately
checked and defeated its earlier promise. Here
Weak it must sufficc to note two weak points in that
the^struc- feudal organization which for the first time ren-
ture. dered these peaceful activities possible. It did
not extend all over Ireland within the four seas.
It embraced in a firm grasp only the eastern
parts of the island. It had a weaker hold on
the south, while most of the north and west lay
practically beyond its control. Moreover, the
keystone of the structure was lacking, and its
place filled by a weak substitute. The strong
restraining hand of the Dominus Hiberniae was
far away, and he was too fully engaged with
other concerns, and indeed, in the person of

AFTER FIFTY YEARS 341

King John, was not morally equipped, either
to rule his barons with justice or to restrain
them from harsh treatment of his Irish subjects.
The first shock to the structure came not from
the Gael, not even, if we go to the root of the
matter, from the Norman barons, but from
the alternate neglect and capricious interference
of the Dominus Hiberniae himself.

NOTE TO MAP SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION

OF MOTES

This map must be regarded as only a tentative
survey. For want of space, and because they
are of minor importance, I have not inserted all
the true motes known to me in Leinster and
Meath. Moreover, I have not personally in-
spected the greater number of those marked
throughout Ireland, and in many cases have had
to rely on the descriptions of others. It is often
difficult to distinguish between a mote, the forti-
fications of which have been obliterated, and
an ancient Celtic mound erected for sepulchral,
ceremonial, or other purposes. It is probable,
too, that in several cases the Norman mote
occupies the site of an earlier Celtic fort which
was adapted for the purpose, and this adapta-
tion may account for some divergences from the
normal type, especially in the plan and defences
of the bailey or enclosure at foot. These and
other circumstances sometimes render it doubtful
whether we should regard a given earthwork as
a mote or not.

Outside the area of Eastern Ulster, Meath,
Leinster, Tipperary, and Waterford, I have
aimed at marking all earthworks which should
be regarded as belonging to the type in question.
In some of these districts, especially in parts of
Mayo, Galway, and Roscommon, there are a
few earthworks which appear from early Anglo-
Norman times to have been called motes, but
they are distinguishable in type as not contain-
ing a high enclosed mound. They generally
consist of a rectangular platform, sometimes
artificially or naturally raised a few feet, and
surrounded by ditches and ramparts rectangular

344 NOTE TO MAP

in plan. Though from their features and sites,
taken in connexion with the data of history, they
appear to be Norman or English works, they are
distinct in type from the high motes, and were
probably formed at a later period, under different
conditions, and with a somewhat different object.
I have accordingly not included them.

With the above qualifications and explana-
tions the map shows with, I think, substantial
accuracy the distribution of motes in Ireland,
and this distribution, apart from other evidences,
seems to offer a conclusive proof of their Norman
origin. They are found thickly scattered through-
out the lordships of Meath, Leinster, and Ulster,
at the chief manorial seats. There are some fine
examples, also at early manorial centres, in
Southern Tipperary, and a few in other parts of
the south of Ireland. In all Comiaught there
are only a very few rather degraded examples,
while in the districts to which the Normans did
not penetrate there are, so far as is known, none
at all. Even in Leinster and Meath the areas
to which the Irish tribes appear to have been
confined show no motes. The map, therefore,
incidentally serves not only to indicate the general
area of Norman domination about the close of
the reign of King John, but also to mark nearly
all the more important centres of manors and
sub-manors formed at that period.

For some of the evidence of Norman mote-
building in Ireland, and for a description of
a mote, see supra, vol. i, pp. 338-43 ; and for
further evidence on the subject, and references
to the writings of others, consult the papers
mentioned in the note to p. 342o In chapters xi
and XV, and elsewhere, allusion has been made
to many of the motes marked on the map.

INDEX

Abbeylara or Larha, Leth-rdith,
ii90.

Aberteivi (Cardigan), i 97, 253.

Adam, camerarius of J. de
Courcy, ii 23.

Adare, Aih-dara, ii 169.

Adrian IV, Pope, his so-called
Bull 'Laudabiliter', i 80, 82,
278, cap. ix ; translation of the
text, 294-7.

Affreca, w. of J. de Courcy, ii 19,
21, 144.

Aghaboe, Achadh-hd, i 388-9 ;
text of Strongbow's grant of,
394 ; ii 227, 232.

Ail ward juvenis, ' the king's
merchant,' i 274.

Aldelm, Adelelmus Dives of
Bristol, i 272 and note.

Alemannus, ' the German,' Wal-
ter, ii 7.

Alexander III, Pope, his confir-
mation of Adrian's Privilege,
i 297 and cap. ix passim ; his
letters (1172), 301-6 ; confirms
possessions of Dublin and Glen-
dalough, ii 58.

Antrim Castle, ii 20, 260.

Ardbraccan, Tioprait Ultdin, ii
84, 249.

Ardee, Ath Fir-diad, ii 122-4.

Ardfinan, i 261 note ; ii 98, 99,
103.

Ardglas, ii 253-4.

Ardmayle, Ard-mdille, castle of,
ii 318.

Ardnurcher, Ath - an - urchair,
castle of, ii 89, 128, 214, 303.

Ardpatrick, ii 166.

Ardri, now Ardi-ee, i 384.

ard-ri, ' high-king,' his authority,
i 23 ; his office the spoil of the
strongest, 36 ; co fressabhra, 37.

Argentan, in Normandy, Henry's
council at, i 248, 250.

Arklow, i 371, 380 note ; ii 203

note.
Armagh, council at (1170), i 216

expedition to, ii 92, 93 note

plundered, 117. Book of

Candin Phatruic, i 30 note ; ii

14.
Armagh, archbishops of, Celsus,

Cellach, i 43 ; Gelasius, Gilla

Mac Liag, i 52, 62, 63, 275.
Arsic, Manasser, ii 223.
Askeaton, Eas Geibhtine, castle

of, ii 163, 193 ; church of, 164.
Athady, Ath fadat, now Aghade,

cell of, i 72.
Athassel, Ath-an-tuisel, priory

of, ii 166.
Athiis, Gerard de, ii 237 and note.
Athlone, Ath-luain, ii 129, 155,

183, 281-3, 285, 304.
Athol, Thomas, earl of, called

Thomas Mac Uchtry, ii 291-2.
Auters, Robert and Thomas des,

de Altaribus, ii 45.
Ays, now Mount Ash near Louth,

ii 125.

Bachall Isa, ' Staff of Jesus,'

ii30.
Baginbun, site of Raymond's

camp, see Dundonnell.
Balimoran, now Ballymorran,

ii 260.
Bally loughloe, Baile locha luatha,

ii 297.
Ballymaghan, castle of, ii 260.
Baltinglas, Belach conglais,

monasterium de Valle Salutis,

founded by Dermot, i 72 ;

charter confirmed by John,

ii 103.
Bannow, Cuan an bhainbh, i 149 ;

ii 231.
Barham Down, muster at (1213),

ii 311.

346

INDEX

Barry, Gerald de, one of the
chief authorities for the inva-
sion, i 8 ; his parents, 96 ; his
chief sources of information,
132 ; his account of the social
state of Ireland, 133-40 ; visits
Ireland (1183), ii 41 ; attests
documents, ibid, note, 92 note ;
accompanies John to Ireland
(1185), 94 ; his account of the
causes of John's failure, 96-7,
106-8 ; remains in Ireland
after John's departure, 121.

Barry, Philip de, b. of Gerald, ii
41, 43.

Barry, Robert de, b. of Gerald,
i 145, 154, 178.

Barry, William de, s. of Philip,
ii 44.

Basilia, sister of Strongbow, see
Clare.

Beg-erin, Beg-Eri, i 234.

Bermingham, Eva de, w. of
Geoffrey Fitz Robert, ii 211
note.

Bermingham, Robert de, i 381.

Betaghs, hibernici, nativi, ii
329-31.

Bigarz, Robert de, i 383 note,
384.

Birr, castle of, ii 296, 304.

' Black Monday,' ii 241.

Blinding, the, of rivals and
hostages, i 58-60.

Bluet, or Bloet, Thomas, ii 49
note.

Bluet, Walter, i 182, 226.

Bohun, Humphrey de, i 256, 281.

Boisrohard, Gilbert de, i 390.

Boyle, Buill, ii 190.

Braose, Philip de, one of the
custodes of Wexford (1171), i
281 ; kingdom of Limerick
granted to, ii 33 ; fails to take
possession, 38.

Braose, William de (1), accom-
panied Henry to Ireland, i 256,
286.

Braose, William de (2), s. of
Wm. (1), Honour of Limerick
granted to him, ii 172 ; grants
to Theo. Walter the lands pre-
viously given to him by John,

174 ; conflict with Ph. of
Worcester, 175 ; custody of
Limerick given to him, 176 ;
and forcibly taken from him,
177 ; escapes from the ^\Tath of
John to Ireland, 236 ; is shel-
tered by Wm. Marshal, 239 ;
his chastisement John's object
in coming to Ireland, 240 ; dies
an exile in France, 259.

Braose, Matilda de, w. of Wm.
(2), refuses hostages to John,
ii 236 ; is captured, 256 ; and
starved to death, 258.

Braose, William de (3), s. of
Wm. (2), ii 256, 258.

Braose, Reginald, s. of Wm. (2),
ii 256.

Breffny, Breifne, i 22.

Brehon laws, i 104-32.

Bret, Milo le, ii 264 note.

Breteuil, the law of, granted
to Dungarvan, ii 315, and to
Drogheda, 316.

Brian Borumha, i 30.

Brien, perhaps for ui Briuin
Cualann, granted to W. de
Ridelisford, i 369.

Bristol, Dermot goes to, i 77-8,
85 ; Dublin granted to men of,
268-72.

Bristol, the law of, granted to
Trim and Kells, ii 126 ; to Cork,
315 ; to Rathcoole, Ballymore,
and Holy wood, 316.

Buildwas, Ralph, abbot of, i 275,
293 ; Dunbrody granted to
monastery of, i 323.

Burgh, William de, mote of
Kilfeacle erected for, ii 146 ;
his land at Ardoyne near Tul-
low, 147 ; married d. of Donnell
O'Brien, 148 ; alliance with
Donnell's sons, 152 ; receives
a grant of lands in Conn'aught
from John, 156 ; attacks the
Eugenians in Munster, 160 ;
his lands in counties Tipperary
and Limerick, 166-8 ; holds
inquisition as to see of Limerick,
171 ; makes C. Carragh king of
Connaught (1200), 186 ; makes
C. Crovderg king (1202), 190 ;

INDEX

347

his troops massacred in
Connaught, 191 ; invades Con-
naught (1203), ibid. ; disseised
and summoned by John, 192 ;
his lands, except Connaught, re-
stored, 193; dies, 194 ; wTongly
identified with Wm. Fitz
Audelin, 195 ; cf. p. 7 note.

Burgh, Hubert de, b. of Wm.,
ii 146.

Burgh, Richard de, s. of Wm.,
ii 318.

Burgh, Hubert de, s. of Wm.,
ii 194 note.

Callan, ii 226, 232.

Canthordis, abbot of St. Bran-
don, i 349.

Caoluisce, castle of, ii 289, 293.

Capella, Richard de, ii 87.

Carbury, Ui Cairbre, co. Kildare,
i 378.

Carew, castle of, i 96.

Carew, Odo de, brother of Ray-
mond le Gros, ii 47.

Carew, Robert de, ii 47 note, 48.

Carew, William de, nephew of
Raymond le Gros, i 387.

Carlingford, cairlinn, castle of,
ii 251, 261.

Carlo w, i 374 ; ii 231.

Carrick (in Scotland), Duncan 6f,
ii 134, 256, 267, 291.

Carrick on Slaney, Fitz Stephen's
castle at, i 177, 232-3 ; to^vn of,
ii 231.

Carrickfergus, castle of, ii 255,
259-60.

Carrickittle. Carraic Cital, castle
of, ii 165.

Carrigogunnell, Cafraic OgCoin-
neall, castle of, probably same
as ' Castle of Esclon ', ii 168
note, 244.

Cashel, Caisel, council of, i 274—7,
293; Strongbowat,333;thepass
of (perhaps the ' pass of Cumsy '
leading from Ossory), 353.

Cashel, archbishop of, Donatus
or Donnell O'Huallaghan, i 261,
274.

Castlecomer, an Comar, mote of,
i 376 ; ii 232.

Castleconnell, Caislen uiConaing,

ii 167.
Castledermot, called Tristerder-

mot for Disert Diarmata, i 386 ;

ii 213 and note.
Castlefranc, now the mote of

Castlering, co. Louth, ii 125.
Castleguard, mote near Ardee,

ii 122.
Castleknock, Cnucha, O'Conor's

camp at, i 224, 229 ; Hugh

Tyrel's mote at, ii 83.
Castlemore, mote of, Raymond's

castle, i 387.
Castleskreen, ii 15 note, 19.
Castletown-Delvin, mote of, de

Nugent castle, ii 87.
Castletown-Dundalk, mote of, de

Verdun Castle, ii 120, 251.
Castles, not used by the Irish,

i 139-40. For Norman castles

see the various place-names and

' motes '.
Churches, used for storing food,

ii 25-8, 195-8, 306.
Church property, favourable

treatment of, i 273 ; ii 119, 171,

304-6.
Cilgerran Castle, near Cardigan,

i 97, 253.
Cinel Connell, Cenel Conaill,

122, 266; ii 116.
Cinel Owen, Cenel Eoghain, i 22,

53, 266; ii 67, 116, 135.
Clahul, John de, Strongbow's

marshal, i 366, 385.
Clahul, Hugh de, first prior of

Kilmainham, i 365.
Clane, Claenad, synod of, i 62 ;

barony of Otymy, 379.
Clare, Richard de, see Striguil,

earl of.
Clare, Isabel de, ii 5, 133, 201-2,

211.
Clare, Basilia de, sister of Strong-
bow, i 323, 334, 336, 356, 387 ;

ii 211 note.
Clares, the, in Wales, i 85-90.
Clmton, Hugh de, ii 124.
Clonard, Cluain Irdird, castle of,

ii 66, 76 ; priory of, 77 ;

Eugene, bishop of, ibid.
Cloncurry, Cluain Conaire, i 379.

348

INDEX

Clondalkin, Cluain Dolcan, i 209,
369.

Clone, castle of, i 390.

Clones, Cluain-eois, castle of,
ii 290, 293.

Clonmacnois, castle of, ii 303,
305 ; Dervorgil's church at,
i 58.

Clontarf, Cluain-tarbh, battle of
(1014), 1 28 ; Henry's grant of,
to Templars, 274 note.

Cogan, Miles de, at taking of
Dublin, i 211 ; left there as
custos, 217 ; besieged there,
226; defeats O'Rourke, 240;
and Haskulf, 240-4 ; attached
to Henry's household, 279 ;
returns with Fitz Audelin, ii 6 ;
invades Connaught, 26-7 ; re-
called, 28 ; granted a moiety of
the kingdom of Cork, 32 ; slain,
40 ; cantreds assigned to, 45 ;
devolution of his moiety, 49-50.

Cogan, Richard de, b. of Miles,
i 243 ; ii 41, 45.

Cogan, Margarite de, d. of Miles,
married to Ralph Fitz Stephen,
ii 40 ; supposed marriage with
a de Courcy, 49-50 and note.

Coibche, a nuptial gift also used
for a nuptial contract, i 127-9.

Coillacht, ii 71.

Coleraine, Cuil-ratliain, castle of,
ii 19, 292.

Colp, cell of, ii 79.

Cork, i 261 ; ii 32, 38, 41.

Costentin, Geoffrey de, ii 88, 189,
190, 284.

Counties, formation of, a gradual
process, ii 275-7.

Courcy, John de, comes to Ire-
land with Fitz Audelin (1176),
ii 6 ; supposed grant to, of
Ulster, 9 ; his description, ibid. ;
takes Downpatrick, 10 ; battle
there, 12 ; erects a mote there,
13 ; his five battles, 14-15 ;
his marriage, 19 ; his mote-
castles, 19-20 ; his religious
foundations, 20-2 ; his house-
hold officers, 23 ; appointed
justiciar (1185-6), ii 107, 110;
expedition to Connaught (1188),

115-16; negotiates peace with
C. Crovderg (1195), 134, 155;
assists C. Crovderg (1201), 136,
187 ; arrested and released,
138, 189 ; defeated by H. de
Lacy, 139 ; his lands given to
H. de Lacy, 140 ; attempts to
recover his lands, 141 ; legend
concerning him, 142 note ;
subsequent notices, 142-3 ; ef-
fect of his rule in Ulster, 144 ;
sent to fetch the de Braose
prisoners, 256 and note.

Courcy, Jordan de, brother of
John, ii 134.

Courcy, Patrick de, ii 47 note, 49.

Courcy, Roger de, John's con-
stable, ii 23.

Craville, Thomas de, ii 78, 89.

Cridarim, perhaps Crich Dairine,
i. e. Rosscarbery, ii 46.

Crook, landing-place near Water-
ford, i 193, 243, 255 ; granted
to the Templars, 274 note.

Croom, Cromadh, ii 165.

Cross, la Croix, Crux, place of
embarkation near Pembroke,
i 255 and note ; ii 243.

Crown lands, i 258-9, 367-70;
ii 132.

Crown Rath, near Newry, ii 20.

Crumlin, Cromghlenn, royal
manor near Dublin, i 370.

Cuailgne, Cooley, Lr. Dundalk,
ii 15 note, 251, 252 note.

Cursun, Vivien de, i 370.

Daingean Bona Cuilinn, now
Dangan, p. of Kilmore, co.
Roscommon, i 55.

Dalkey (a Norse name), i 224.

Dalriada, the northern part of
CO. Antrim, ii 18.

Deece, barony of, co. Meath, Deist
Temrach, ii 85.

Dengyn, now Dangan, co. Meath,
ii 258.

Dervorgil, Derbforgaill, w. of
T. O'Rourke, elopes with Dcr-
mot, i 55 ; returns to O'Rourke,
67 ; her gifts to Mellifont, ibid. ;
retires to Mellifont and dies, 58.

Desmond, Des-mumain, the

INDEX

349

' kingdom of Cork ', i 23 ; ii
32-50.

Dissert, now Dysart, W. Meath,
ii82.

dominus, distinguished from rex,
ii 31 note, 205.

Donaghadee, mote of, ii 20.

Donaghmoyne, Domhnach Maig-
hen, castle of, ii 123.

Downings, p., co. Kildare, i 379.

Dovfrnpa,tTick,Di(n-lethglaisseand
Dun-dd-lethglas, taken by J. de
Courcy, ii 10 ; battle at, 12 ;
church of, 20 ; K. John at, 255,
261.

Drogheda, Drochait-dtha, mote-
castle at, ii 79, 119, 261.

Dromiskin, Druim-inesdainn, ii
119, 125.

Dromore, mote of, ii 20 ; and see
Magh Cobha.

Dublin, Dubhlinn (Norse, Dyflin)
or Baile-atha-cliath, first Nor-
man expedition against, i 176 ;
the Scandinavian town, 203-4 ;
in communion with Canterbury,
205 ; relations with Irish kings,
206-8 ; taken by Strongbow,
211 ; besieged by O' Conor,
223-30; assaulted by O'Rourke,
239-40 ; and by Haskulf, 240-
4 ; date of Haskulf s attack,
245-6 ; Henry's palace in, 267 ;
first charter, 268 ; first citizen-
roll, 270-2; synod at (1177),
311 ; charter of 1192, ii 129 ;
K. John at, 246, 264 ; and see
' Ostmen of Dublin '.

Dublin, archbishops of, Dunan
or Donatus, i 205 ; Laurence,
Lorcan ua Tuathail (1162-
81), i 63, 223, 227, 275, 349,
358,369; ii56-9; John Cumin
or Comyn (1181-1212), elected,
ii 59 ; constitutes St. Patrick's
a collegiate church, 62 ; his
palace of St. Sepulchre, 64 ;
his conflict with Hamo de
Valognes, 131 ; Henri de Lon-
dres, archdeacon of Stafford,
elected (1212), ii 63 ; appointed
justiciar, 300 ; builds castle
at Roscrea, 301 ; completes

Dublin Castle, 308 ; raises St.
Patrick's to a cathedral church
(1219), 63.

Dublin, castle of, in existence in
Strongbow's time, i 370 ; a
strong castle built, ii 306-9.

Dublin, churches of, the cathe-
dral of the Holy Trinity or
Christ Church, i 361-4; its
chapel of St. Edmund, 363
note ; its chapel of St. Mary,
' called Alba ', i. e. of Alba
Landa, 366 note ; St. Patrick's
Cathedral, ii 62-4; St. Andrew's,
i 267 ; St. Mary del Dam, i 242,
370; St. Mary's Abbey (Qs-
tercian), i 327, 328 note, 369;
St. Thomas the Martyr, Abbey
of, ii 29, 105, 246 ; All Hallows
Priory, i 72, 273 ; St. Mary
de Hogges, nunnery of, i 72 ;
other churches c. 1178, ii 57
note.

Duffry, the, Dubh-tkire, i 168,
237, 322, 390.

Duiske, Dubh-uisge, see Graig-na-
managh.

Duleek, Damhliac, castle of, i
344 ; ii 78, 261.

Dullard, Adam, ii 78, 248.

Dunamase, Dun Masc, i 375,
382 ; ii 217, 232, 265, 317.

Dunbrody, Monasterium de
Portu, i 323-5.

Dundalk, see Castletown-Dun-
dalk.

Dundonald, castle of, ii 260.

Dundonnell, Dun Domhnaill,
now Baginbun, Raymond land^
at, i 183 ; and forms a camp,
184 ; battle at, 185-8.

Dundrum, castle of, called ' cas-
trum de Rath,' ii 20, 123, 141,
252-3.

Dungarvan, i 350 ; ii 315.

Dunleckny, i 387.

Durrow, Dermagh, castle of,
ii 67, 304.

Ely, Eile, divided into Ely
O' Carroll and Ely O'Fogarty
(Eliogarty), ii 175 note, 294-6,
302.

350

INDEX

enecJi-lann or log-enech, honour-
price, i 121, 142.

Enniscorthy, castle of, i 391.

eric, composition for murder, i
52, 120, 172.

Erlee (Erlegh), John de, ii 200,
209 note, 211, 212, 221, 226.

Erleystown, Earlstown, co. Kil-
kenny, ii 226.

Esclon, Aes cluana, ii 167.

Esgrene, Aes greine, ii 170.

Esker, royal manor near DubUn,
i 370.

Evreux, Stephen de, ii 211, 212.

Faithlegg, i 274.

Feipo, Adam de, ii 85.

Feipo, Richard de, ii 248.

Fernegenal, Ferann-na-Cenel, i
391.

Ferns, Ferna-m6r, i 66, 69, 155,
161, 221, 390 ; ii 7, 231.

Ferrard, Fir-arda, ii il9, 122
note.

Fid dorcha, probably ' the Leve-
rocke ' near Clonegal, i 66, 141.

Fircal, Fir-cell, ii 214, 284, 296.

Fir-Li', ii 15, 17.

Fitz Alured, John, Thomas, and
Walter, ii 258-9.

Fitz Anthony, Thomas, ii 211,
226, 245, 318.

Fitz Audelin, William, Henry's
dapifer, i 256 ; receives 0' Co-
nor's submission, 264 ; custos
of Wexford, 281 ; letter of
credence to, 289 ; transcript
and date of same, 313-4 ;
publishes ' LaudabiUter ', 294 ;
inquisition as to lands of St.
Mary's Abbey, 327 ; appointed
procurator, ii 6 ; wTongly iden-
tified with W. de Burgh, 7 note
(cf. p. 195) ; recalled, 28; given
custody of Wexford, 35.

Fitz Bernard, Robert, i 256, 263,
281, 327.

Fitz Fulk, Richard, ii 223.

Fitz Gerald, Alexander, s. of
Maurice (1), i 227 note ; ii 45.

Fitz Gerald, David, bishop of
St. David's, s. of Gerald of
Windsor, i 98, 99, 254.

Fitz Gerald, Gerald, s. of Maurice
(1), i 227 note, 380; ii 104, 165.

Fitz Gerald, Henry, follower of
Wm. Marshal, ii 220.

Fitz Gerald, Maurice ( 1 ), s. of
Gerald of Windsor, his agree-
ment with Dermot, i 98 ; comes
to Ireland, 174 ; leads expedi-
tion to Dublin, 177 ; is besieged
in Dublin, 226 ; left in garri-
son at Dublin, 281 ; Naas and
Wicklow granted to him, 379 ;
dies, ii 7.

Fitz Gerald, Maurice (2), s. of
Gerald, ii 319.

Fitz Gerald, Miles, s. of David,
the bishop, i 99 ; lands in Ire-
land, 145 ; besieged in Dublin,
226 ; in garrison at Dublin,
281 ; custos of Limerick, 349 ;
Iverk granted to him, 389.

Fitz Gerald, Thomas, s. of
Maurice (1), ii 164, 199, 248,
284.

Fitz Gerald, WilUam (1), called
'of Carew', s. of Gerald of
Windsor, i 96, 332.

Fitz Gerald, William (2), baron
of Naas, s. of Maurice (1), i 380 ;
ii 104, 165.

Fitz Gerald, William (3), baron
of Naas, son of William (2), ii
246.

Fitz Geralds or Geraldines, de-
scendants of Gerald of Windsor,
see Table of Descendants of
Nest, i 18.

Fitz Godebert, Richard, i 141 :
ii46.

Fitz Godebert, Robert, i 391.

Fitz Harding, Robert, reeve of
Bristol, i 77-8, 80, 85.

Fitz Henry, Meiler, his parent-
age, i 95; lands in Ireland, 145;
description, 147 ; aids O'Brien,
178 ; besieged in Dublin, 226 ;
in garrison at Dublin, 281 ;
at taking of Limerick, 348 ;
granted Carbury, 378 ; and
Leix, 381-2 ; marries niece of
H. de Lacy, ii 65 ; granted
Ardnurcher, 89 ; justiciar (1199
-1208), 114; his dispute with

INDEX

351

W. de Braose and W. de Lacy,
176-7 ; and wdth W. de Burgh,
192-3 ; his intrigue with K.
John against Wm. Marshal,
209-15 ; superseded, 217 ; his
deficiencies as a ruler, 279-80.

Fitz Henry, Meiler, s. of Meiler,
ii 177.

Fitz Henry, Robert, b. of Meiler,
i95.

Fitz Hugh, Alexander and Ray-
mond, ii 45.

Fitz Pain, Ralph, ii 215.

Fitz Richard, Robert, baron of
the Norragh, i 383.

Fitz Robert, Geoffrey, baron of
Kells, ii 170, 211, 225, 265, 266.

Fitz Robert, Richard, seneschal
of J. de Courcy, ii 23.

Fitz Stephen, Robert, his parent-
age and arrangement with
Dermot, i 97-8 ; lands at
Bannow, 145 ; description, 147;
assaults Wexford, 153 ; forms
a fastness in the DuflFry, 168 ;
assists O'Brien, 178 ; besieged
and taken prisoner at Carrick,
232-4 ; brought in chains before
K. Henry, 259 ; released, 262 ;
in garrison at Dublin, 281 ;
summoned by Henry, 327 ;
joined in commission with Fitz
Audelin, ii 6 ; recalled, 28 ; is
granted a moiety of the king-
dom of Cork, 32 ; rising there
against him, 41 ; his grantees,
43-5 ; devolution of his moiety,
47-8.

Fitz Stephen, Ralph, s. of Robert,
ii 40.

Fitz Warin, Fulk, ii 295.

Fitz William, Alard, John's
chamberlain, ii 94, 105 note.

Fitz William, Raymond, nick-
named ' le Gros ', sent to Ire-
land by Strongbow, i 181 ;
description of, 182 ; attacked
at Dundormell, 183-8 ; joins
Strongbow at assault of Water-
ford, 193 ; at taking of Dublin,
211 ; sent by Strongbow to
K.Henry, 218; besieged in Dub-
lin, 227 ; attached to Henry's

household, 279 ; is refused
Strongbow' s sister and leaves
Ireland, 323 ; sent as coadjutor
to Strongbow, 326 ; raids Offe-
lan and Lismore, 329 ; goes to
Wales on his father's death,
332 ; returns to Strongbow's
aid, 335 ; marries Basilia, 336 ;
captures Limerick, 345-9 ; is
recalled, 352 ; relieves Limer-
ick, 353 ; parleys with O' Conor
and with O'Brien, 354 ; receives
news of Strongbow's death,
356 ; evacuates Limerick, 357:
is granted Forth, Idrone, and
Glascarrig, 387 ; appointed pro-
curator, ii 5 ; is superseded by
W. Fitz Audelin, 6 ; assists
Fitz Stephen in Cork, 41 ; un
certainty as to date of his death,
42 ; succeeds to the inheritance
of Fitz Stephen, 47.

Fitz William, Griffin, b. of Ray-
mond, i 18.

Fleming, Richard le, baron of
Slane, i 340 ; ii 84.

Fleming, Thomas le, i 383 note,
384.

Flemish element among the
settlers, i 396-8.

Fore, Fablmr, i 320 ; ii 81, 258.
261.

Forth, b., CO. Carlo w, Fotharfa
ui Nualldin, i 163, 387 ; ii
231.

Forth, b., CO. Wexford, Fotharta
an Chairn, colonized largely by
Flemings, i 373 ; peculiar dia-
lect of, 397.

Fosterage, custom of, i 130.

Fretellus, governor of Waterf ord,
i335.

Galloway, Alan, s. of Roland,

earl of, ii 290, 292.
Galtrim, Calatruim, castle of, ii

86.
Gerald of Windsor, i 95-6.
Gernon, Ralph, ii 125.
Gilbert, s. of Turgerius, Ostman

of Cork, i 330.
Giraldus Cambrensis, see Barry,

Gerald de.

352

INDEX

Gisors, frontier fortress in Nor-
mandy, i 325.

Glanville, Ranulf de, i 256 ; ii
93, 95, 100 note.

Glascarrig, i 387.

Glendalough, i 209, 369, see of,
united with Dublin, ii 61-2,
71-3 ; Laurence O'Toole, abbot
of, i 63 ; Thomas, abbot of, ii
71 ; William Piro, last bishop
of, ii 72.

Godebert, a Fleming of Rhos
near Haverford, i 392.

Graig - na - managh, Oraig - na-
mbreathnach (so named from the
Welsh colonists, Hogan's Ono-
masticon), or Duiske (Black-
water), ii 230.

Granard, castle of, ii 87, 128, 262.

Gray, John de, see Norwich,
bishop of.

Greenoge, ii 247.

Gundeville, Hugh de, i 256, 281.

Hackett, William, ii 23,

Hadeshore (Hadsor), Geoffrey
de, ii 124.

Haskulf, s. of Raghnall, s. of
Thorkill, k. of Dublin, i 208 ;
driven out of Dublin by Strong-
bow, 211 ; attempts to recover
the town, 240 ; death, 244.

Hastings, Philip de, i 281.

Henry II, Dermot's interview
with, i 81 ; gives licence to his
subjects to aid Dermot, 84 ; his
equivocal licence to Strongbow,
181 ; forbids Strongbow's ex-
pedition, 193 ; recalls the in-
vaders, 217 ; prepares expedi-
tion to Ireland, 249 ; receives
Strongbow's submission in
Wales, 250 ; shows favour to
Rhys, 252-3 ; receives deputa-
tion from Wexford, 254 ; lands
at Crook, 255 ; his army and
its supplies, 257 ; receives
Strongbow's homage for Lein-
ster, 258 ; imprisons Fitz Ste-
phen, 259 ; goes to Lismore,
260 ; to Cashel, 261 ; to Dublin
263 ; receives submission of
Irish kings, 264-5 ; except the

northern chiefs, 266 ; his palace
at Dublin, 267 ; his charter to
Dublin, 268 ; to All Hallows,
273 ; to Ailward juvenis, 274 ;
to the Templars, 274 note ;
summons council of the clergy
at Cashel, 275 ; grants Meath
to H. do Lacy, 279, 285-6;
final arrangements, 281 ; leaves
Ireland, 282 ; results of his
visit, 283-4 ; takes Strongbow
into favour, 326 ; treaty with
Rory O'Conor, 349-50 ; recalls
Raymond, 352 ; creates his son
John dominus Hiberniae, ii 31 ;
his grants of Cork and Limerick,
32 ; is displeased with H. de
Lacy, 54, 66 ; sends John to
Ireland, 93 ; appoints J. de
Courcy chief governor, 107,
110; promises Isabel de Clare
to W. Marshal, ii 201.

For Henry and the papal Privi-
legia, see cap. ix.

Hereford, Adam de, i 330, 379,
388, 394.

Hereford, Thomas de, married
Beatrice Walter, ii 95 note.

' Hochenil,' Ui Conaill, Connello,
CO. Limerick, ii 157.

Hogges (hoga, howe), an arti-
ficial mound on the Steine out-
side DubUn, i 242 ; nunnery of
St. Mary of, i 72.

Holywood, sanctum nemus, co.
Down, ii 20, 260.

Holywood, CO. Wicklow, ii 316.

Hose (Hussey), Hugh de, ii 85,
247 note.

Howth, Benn Edair, confirmed
to Almaric de St. Laurent, i
370 ; legend of Evora bridge at,
ii 16.

Howth, Book of, ii 12 note, 16,
17 note, 112 note, 114 note.

Iniskeen, Inis Cain Dega, co.

Louth, ii 119.
Inistioge, Inis-teoc, priory of, ii

226; mote of, 245.
Inishcourcy, Inis-cumhscraidh,

Cistercian monastery at, ii 21.
Inis Teimle or Inis Doimle, now

INDEX

353

called ' Little Island ', near
Waterford, i 335.

Ireland in the tribal state, i 20-3,
25 ; causes of backward de-
velopment, 26 ; physical aspect
in the twelfth century, 101-3 ;
social customs of, 104-40 ;
treatment of the Irish in the
feudalized districts of, ii 326-35,

Iverk, Uibh Eire, i 389.

Jerpoint abbey, de Jeriponte
(where ' Jeri ' perhaps repre-
sents a latinized form of Eoir,
the river Nore), ii 224 note.

John, s. of Henry II, created
dominus Hiberniae, ii 31 ;
knighted and sent to Ireland
(1185), 93 ; insolent treatment
of Irish chiefs, 96 ; aggres-
sive policy, 97 ; his grant of
Ormond, 102 ; his movements
in Ireland, 103 ; results of his
visit, 105 ; causes of its failure,
106-8 ; his grants in co. Louth,
118-19 ; his treatment of John
de Courcy, 136-43 ; his grant
of Connaught as Earl of Mor-
tain to W. de Burgh, 156 ; his
grant of six cantreds in Con-
naught to H. de Lacy, 187 ; his
charter to Limerick, 157 ; his
grants as king in the kingdom
of Limerick, 162-72 ; grants
the honour of Limerick to W. de
Braose, 172 ; consequences of
this grant, 174 ; tergiversation
as to custody of Limerick, 176-
7 ; forced to give seisin of
Leinster to W. Marshal, 203 ;
reluctantly gives him leave to
go to Ireland, 208 ; intrigues
with Meiler against him, 209 ;
summons William and Meiler,
210 ; summons William's chief
men, 212 and note ; takes Wil-
liam and the de Lacys into
favour and dismisses Meiler,
216-17; reservations in the new
charters of Leinster and Meath,
233-4 ; his apology for his

(treatment of W. de Braose,
237-8, 241, 257 ; his motive in

1226 II

coming to Ireland (1210), 240 ;
his itinerary in Ireland, 243-
65 ; grants Carrigogunnell to
O'Brien, 244 ; and Ratoath to
Ph. of Worcester, 248 ; makes a
pontoon bridge near Carlingford,
253 ; seizes four of Cathal's
men as hostages, 264 ; accuses
W. Marshal and exacts hos-
tages, 265 ; his wholesale con-
fiscations, 266-7 ; his Irish
auxiliaries, 268 ; results of his
expedition, 269 ; his title to the
credit of extensive administra-
tive reforms examined, 270-7 ;
orders the building of a castle
at Dublin, 307 ; his letter
thanking W. Marshal, 310 ; his
surrender to the Pope, 312 ;
beneficial charters and grants,
314-19 ; character of his rule
in Ireland, 319-21.

John ' the Wode ' assists Has-
kulf, i 240-4.

Justices in eyre, ii 274.

Justiciars or chief governors, list
of, i 15-17.

Kavanagh, Donnell, Domhnall
Caemanach, s. of Dermot Mc
Murrough, i 73, 159, 163, 166,
223 ; appointed seneschal of the
Irish of Leinster by Strongbow,
238 ; killed, 239.

Kedeville, Reinalt de, first senes-
chal of W. Marshal, ii 203 ; play
on his name, 204 note,

Kells, CO. Meath, Cenannus, 1214;
ii 77, 249, 261.

Kells, CO. Kilkenny, mote and
priory of, ii 225.

Kilbixy, Cell Bicsighe, castle of,
ii 88, 128.

Kilculliheen, nunnery of, i 389.

Kildare, Cdl-dara, i 374, 381 ;
ii 104, 232.

Kildrought, Cell-droichit, now
Celbridge, i 379.

Kilfeacle, Cell fiacla, mote of, ii
146, 166.

Kalkea, mote of, i 386.

Kilkenny, Cell Cainnigh, town
and castle, i 175, 332, 376 ; i

354

INDEX

222, 225, 246 ; bishops of, Felix
O'Dulany and Hugh le Rous
(Rufus), ii 227 note ; the
cathedral, 228-9.

Killaloe, Cdl-da-lua, church of
St. Flannan, i .31 note ; bishop
of, Conor O'Heyne, ii 302.

Killare, Cell-fair, castle of, ii 60,
80, 127.

Killeedy, co. Limerick, Cell-Ite,
granted to Philip de Barry, ii
44 and note.

Killeshin, mote of, i 386.

Kilmainham, Cell Maighnenn,
i 224 ; Hospital of St. John of
Jerusalem founded by Strong-
bow at, 365.

Kilnagrann, Coill - na - gcrann,
battles at, 297, 298.

Kilsantain or Kilsantail, now
Mount Sandell near Coleraine,
castle of, ii 19, 135, 292.

Kilsheelan, Cell Sildin, manor of,
ii 166.

Kiltinan, Cell Teimhnein, castle
of, ii 318.

Kinclare, Cenn Chldir, castle of,
ii 303.

Kinnitty, Cenn Eitigh, castle of,
ii 296, 304.

Knockainy (Anya), Aine, manor
of, ii 169.

Knockgraffon, Cnoc Graffann,
mote of, ii 146-7, 175, 318.

Lacy, Hugh de (1), comes to
Ireland with Henry II, i 256 ;
sent to receive submission of
O' Conor, 264; is granted Meath,
279 ; grant transcribed, 285 ;
made constable of Dublin, 281 ;
parley with O'Rourke, 320 ;
defends Verneuil, 325-6 ; ap-
pointed procurator-general, ii
30 ; new grant of Meath, 31 ;
his description, 51 ; mostly
absent from Ireland before
1177, 52 and note ; his rule, 53 ;
superseded (1181), 54; his
marriage with O'Conor's daugh-
ter, ibid. ; reappointed, 65 ;
finally superseded, 66 ; mur-
dered, 67 ; his burial, 70 ; bis

sub-infeudation of Meath, cap.
XV ; his offspring. 111 and
note.

Lacy, Hugh de (2), s. of Hugh ( 1 ),
not justiciar in 1189-91, ii
111-2; nor in 1203-5, 114;
marries Leceline de Verdun and
obtains lands in Uriel, 121 ;
granted Ratoath and Morgal-
lion, 126 ; accompanies J. de
Courcy to Connaught in 1195,
134, 155; and in 1201, 136,
187 ; treacherously arrests J.
de Courcy, 138, 189 ; defeats
him and banishes him from
Ulster, 139 ; created Earl of
Ulster, 140 ; besieges Ard-
nurcher, 214 ; burns his castles
near Dundalk and flees before
K. John, 251 ; escapes to
Scotland, 256 ; Ulster not
restored to him by K. John, 317
and note.

Lacy, John de. Constable of
Chester, joint governor, ii 54.

Lacy, Matilda de, d. of Hugh (2),
w. of David, baron of Naas, ii
252 note.

Lacy, Margaret de, d. of W. de
Braose, w. of Walter de Lacy,
ii 173, 319.

Lacy, Robert de, lord of Rath-
wire, ii 88.

Lacy, Walter de, eldest s. of
Hugh (1), given seisin of Meath,
ii 112 ; arrests J. de Courcy,
138 ; raises siege of Rath (Dun-
drum), 142 ; his wife, 173 ; acts
as bailiff for W. de Braose in
Limerick, 176 ; harbours W. de
Braose, 238, 240 ; his barons
intercede with K. John for him,
247 ; his castle of Trim seized
by John, 248 ; story of his
exile, 258 ; his castles restored,
267, 317.

Lagore, Loch gabliar, Crannog of,
i 101.

Land tenure, Irish system of,
i 110-19.

Lanfranc, his letters to Gothric,
k. of Dublin, and Turlough
O'Brien, i 129, 205.

INDEX

355

Laraghbryan, Ldthrach Briuin,
i 380.

Legal procedure in the king's
court, curious illustration of,
1263, of. 237.

Leicester, earl of (Robert Beau-
mont), defeated by aid of Irish
barons near St. Edmunds, i 327
note.

Leinster, Laighin, early kings,
i 23 ; the weakest of the pro-
vinces, 71 ; sub-infeudation of,
cap. xi.

Leix, Laeighis, i 23, 175, 381-2.

Leixlip, Laxlob (Scandinavian)
=«saltus salmonis, i 379.

Liamain (anglicized Leuan,
Lyons), i 368 note.

Limerick, Hiimrik (Scandina-
vian), Luimneck, Fitz Stephen
leads a force in aid of O'Brien
to, i 178 ; Henry sends a con-
stable to, 261 ; captured by
Raymond, 345-9 ; garrison
relieved by Raymond, 353-4 ;
evacuated, 357 ; granted to Ph.
de Braose, ii 32-3 ; fired by
citizens, 39 ; in Norman hands,
156 ; Hamo de Valognes grants
burgages in, 157 ; essentially
an Ostman city, 158 ; its
custody, 176 ; forcibly taken
by Meiler (2), 177.

Limerick, bishops of, Brictius,
ii 58 note ; Donatus O'Brien,
171.

Lismore, i 260, 329 ; castle of,
261 ; ii 98 ; bishop of. Chris-
tian, Gilla-Crist Ua Condoirche,
i 260, 275, 293, 301, 303.

Llandaff, Ralph, archdeacon of,
i 261, 275, 293, 303.

Londres, Henri de, archdeacon
of Stafford, ii 262 ; afterwards
archbishop of Dublin and jus-
ticiar ; see Dublin, archbishops
of.

Londres, Richard de, custos of
Cork, ii 38.

Lothra (Lorrha or Laragh),
castle of, ii 296.

Louis VII of France, Henry's
war with, i 326.

Louth, Lughmadk, castle of, ii

124, 250.
Lough Sewdy, Loch seimkdidhe,

manor of, ii 81.
Lucius III, Pope, ii 60.
Lune, Luighni, barony of, ii 86.
Lusk, Lusca, manor of, i 369.
Luterel, Geoffrey, vicecomes

Dubliniensis, ii 275.

Mac Carthy, Cormac, k. of
Munster, dethroned by Tur-
lough O'Conor (1127), i 45;
slain by Turlough O'Brien
(1138), 48 note.

Mac Carthy, Cormac Liathanach
(of Olethan), s. of Dermot,
deposes his father (1176), i 355.

Mac Carthy, Dermot, s. of Cor-
mac, k. of Desmond, i 172 ;
submits to Henry II, 259 ; put
to flight by Raymond at Lis-
more, 331 ; obtains aid against
his son from Raymond, 355 ;
yields seven cantreds of his
kingdom to Fitz Stephen and
de Cogan, ii 38 ; slain, 100.

Mac Carthy, Donnell, s. of Der-
mot, ii 146 note, 157.

Mac Carthy, Fineen (Finghin),
s. of Dermot, ii 190.

Mac Coghlan of Garrycastle,
Mac Cochlainn of Delbna, ii 90.

Mac Costello, Mac Ooisdelhh, see
Nangle.

Mac Dermot, Mac Diarmada,
Dermot, k. of Moylurg, 263
note, 264 note.

Mac Dunlevy, Mac Duinnsleibhe,
k. of Uladh, i 224 ; ii 11.

Mac Dunlevy, Eochy, blinded by
Murtough O'Loughlin, i 64.

Mac Dunlevy, Rory, ii 11 note,
17, 18.

Mac Gillamocholmog, Donnell,
k. of Ui Dunchada, at siege of
Dublin, i 225 note ; parley with
de Cogan, 241 ; joins the win-
ning side, 243 ; submits to
Henry, 264; his lands, 368;
example of a Normanized Irish-
man, ii 327.

Mac Gillapatrick, Donough, k. of

Z2

356

INDEX

Ossory, obtains part of Okinse-
lagh, i 69 ; blinds Enna Mac
Murrough, 70.

Mac Gillapatrick, Donnell, s. of

Donough, i 157, 166, 175, 262,
348, 353 ; ii 223-4.

Mac Gillapatrick, Donnell Clan-
nagh, of Upper Ossory, ii 224
note, 298.

Mac Maelnamo, Mac Mael-na-
mbd, Dermot, ard-ri with oppo-
sition, i 37, 216 note.

Mac Murrough, Dermot, s. of
Donough, k. of Leinster, date
of birth, i 39 ; succeeds to
Okinselagh, 40 ; his claims to
Leinster set aside by Turlough
O' Conor, 43 ; rises to power,
47 ; makes alliance with O'Me-
laghlin, 48 ; ' removes ' the
roydamnas, 49 ; gives hostages
to Turlough O' Conor, 51 ; elopes
with Dervorgil, 54 ; blinds
O'More, 58 ; his power on the
wane, 60 ; gives hostages to
O'Loughlin, 61 ; obtains sway
over Dublin, 63 ; dethroned by
Rory 0' Conor, 65 ; expelled by
O'Rourke, 68 ; his religious
foundations, 72 ; his family,
73 ; goes to Bristol, 77 ; seeks
aid from Henry II, 78 ; agree-
ment with Strongbow, 91 ; with
Fitz Stephen, 98 ; returns to
Ireland, 100 ; is attacked by
O'Conor, 141 ; makes terms,
142 ; joins Fitz Stephen and
assaults Wexford, 150 ; expe-
dition to Ossory, 153 ; to
Offelan, 161 ; to Omurethy,
162 ; to Ossory again, 163 ;
gives his son as hostage to
O'Conor, 167 ; aids O'More,
175 ; aids O'Brien, 178 ; as-
pires to the sovereignty, 180 :
gives his daughter to Strong-
bow, 197 ; leads the army to
Dublin, 209 ; invades Meath,
214 ; his hostages put to death
by O'Conor, ibid. ; dies, 221 ;
his age, 222 note.

Mac Murrough, Donough, f. of
Dermot, slain, i 40.

Mac Murrough, Enna, s. of Der-
mot, blinded, i 70.

Mac Murrough, Eva, Aife ingen
Mic Murchada, d. of Dermot,
i 74 ; her marriage with Strong-
bow, 197-202.

Mac Murrough, Murrough, Mur-
chadh na nGaedhal, i 69, 72.

Mac Murrough, Murtough, Muir-
certach na Maor, i. e. ' M. of the
stewards,' s. of Murrough, at
siege of Dublin, i. 223 ; granted
lands in Okinselagh, 238 ;
death, 239 ; at relief of Lim-
erick, 353 ; probably left in
possession of Ferns, 390 ; ii 8,
133.

Macnamara, Covey, Cumedha
Mac Conmara, ii 159.

Maenmagh, a cantred about
Loughrea, granted to Gilbert de
Nangle, ii 183.

Mageoghegan, Alac Eochagain, ii
90.

Magh Cobha, castle of, ii 117
note.

Magheradernon, 'Petit's barony,'
ii 86.

Maillard, Wm. Marshal's stan-
dard-bearer, ii 211, 226.

Mainham, i 137.

Man, Isle of, Gottred, k. of, i 224;
ii 11 note, 19 ; Reginald, k. of,
ii. 141, 261 note.

Mandeville, Martin de, ii 248.

Mandeville, Robert de, ii 125.

Mangunel, Raymond, ii 45.

Mangunel, William, i 398.

Marisco (Mareis, Marsh). Geof-
frey de, ii 169, 199, 248, 284.
298.

Marisco, Richard de, i 226.

Marriage customs of the Irish,
i 124-30.

Marshal, John, nephew of Wil-
liam, ii 207 note, 250, 263.

Marshal, William, earl of Pem-
broke, not justiciar (1191-4),
ii 113, 204-5 ; his biography,
198 ; his early years, 200 ;
marries Isabel de Clare, 201 ;
given seisin of Leinster, 203 ;
founds Tintern Minor. 206 ;

I

INDEX

357

goes to Ireland, 208 ; K. John
and Meiler intrigue against him,
209 ; summoned to John, 210 ;
his chief men summoned to
England, 212 ; but remain to
protect his lands, 213 ; conflict
with Meiler, 214-15 ; John
changes front, 216 ; William
returns to Ireland, 217 ; his
character and work, 219 ; the
final scene, 220 ; his dealings
with his fief, 222-32 ; shelters
Wm. de Braose, 236 ; inspires
loyal manifesto of the barons,
310 ; present at Barham Down,
311; at John's surrender to the
Pope, 312 ; and at Runnymede,
313.

Maskerel, William, i 279.

Matilda, mother of Henry II,
dissuades Henry from invading
Ireland in 1155, i 292.

Maupas, Peter de, ii 124.

Maynooth, Magh Nuadat, i 380 ;
ii 104.

Meath, Midhe, i 23 ; grant of,
transcribed, 285-6 ; sub-infeu-
dation of, cap. xv ; bishop of,
Simon de Rocheford, conse-
crated c. 1198, ii 114 note,
126-7.

Meelick, MiUc, castle of, ii 192.

Mellifont, Cistercian monastery
of, i 57, 58, 65; ii 119.

Messet (Muset, Misset), Peter de,
ii 248, 298.

Messet, William de, ii 86.

Molana, abbey of, ii 43.

Montmorency, Hervey de, de-
scription and parentage, i 146-7 ;
at Dundonnell, 185-8 ; sent on
embassy to Henry, 248 ; ap-
pointed constable, 323 ; founds
Dunbrody, 323 ; reappointed
constable, 332 ; defeated at
Thurles, 333 ; intrigues against
Rajmiond, 352 ; is granted
Obarthy, 393.

Mor (Moore), Robert, ii 124.

Morgallion, Gailenga mora, ii 84,
126.

Motes, the earthworks of early
Norman castles, i 341-3, and

see under the names of castles

and manors.
MuUingar, manor of, ii 86.
'Muscherie Dunegan,' Muscraige

Donnagdin, ii 44.

Naas, Nds, i 379 ; ii 104.

Nangle (de Angulo), Gilbert de,
s. of Jocelin (called by the Irish
Mac Goisdealbh hence Mc Cos-
tello), granted Morgallion, ii 84 ;
joins C. Crovderg, 154 ; out-
lawed, 155 ; given Maenmagh
by C. Crovderg, 183 ; given
lands in Connaught by K. John,
263; erects a castle at Caoluisce,
289 ; slain there, 293.

Nangle, Jocelin de, baron of
Navan, ii 84.

Navan, St. Mary's Abbey at,
ii84.

Neddrum, n-Oendruim or Inis
Mochaoi (Mahee island), ii 21.

Nest, d. of Maurice Fitz Gerald,
i 324 note.

Nest, d. of Rhys ap Tewdwr,
table of her descendants, i 18
her children, 94-7.

Newcastle Lyons, Liamain, i 370

Newcastle Mc Kynegan, i 371.

Newnham in Gloucestershire
the muster-ground of Henry's
army, i 249.

New Ross, villa novi pontis, ii
212, 230, 244, 315.

Newry, pons Ivori, lubhar, ii
15-16.

Nicholas, archdeacon of Coven
try, the king's chaplain, i 275.
293.

Nobber, an obair, castle of, ii 84,
189 note, 250.

Norrath le, Narragh, i 383.

Norwich, bishop of, John de
Gray, justiciar, 1209-13, orders
Wm. Marshal to deliver up
Wm. de Braose, ii 230 ; meets
K. John at Waterford, 244 ;
administrative reforms due to,
277 ; builds a stone castle at
Athlone, 282 ; concludes peace
with C. Crovderg, 285 ; his
policy, 287-8 ; attempts to

358

INDEX

subdue northern chieftains, 289 ;
builds castle at Clones, 290 ;
countenancesincursions of Scots
of Galloway, 290-2 ; defeated
by Cormac O'Melaghlin, 297 ;
John's letter of thanks to, 310.
Nugent, Gilbert de, ii 87.

Obarthy on the sea, Ui Bairrchi,

Bargy, i 393.
Oboy, Ui Buidhe, i 384.
O'Brain, O'Breen of the Duffry,
i237.
O'Brien, Ua Briain, Brian of

Slieve Bloom, ii 295.
O'Brien, Conor, k. of Munster,
gs. of Turlough (1), i 47-8, 50.
O'Brien, Conor Roe, s. of Donnell,

ii 149, 161, 171, 190.
O'Brien, Donnell, k. of Munster,
s. of Turlough (2), son-in-law of
Dermot Mac Murrough, i 74 ;
becomes k. of half Munster, 172;
turns against O' Conor, 177 ;
obtains assistance from Fitz
Stephen, 178 ; at siege of
Dublin, 224 ; joins Strongbow
against Ossory, 235 ; submits
to K. Henry, 261 ; destroys
castle of Kilkenny, 332 ; cuts
off Ostman force at Thurles,
333 ; blockades Limerick, 353 ;
parleys with Raymond, 354 ;
burns Limerick, 357 ; supports
Conor Maenmoy, ii 116 ; checks
English advance into Thomond,
145-6 ; enters into alliance
with the English, 148; dies, 149.
O'Brien, Donough, k. of Munster,

s. of Brian Borumha, i 33, 37.
O'Brien, Donough Cairbrech, k.
of Thomond, s. of Donnell, ii
149 ; leads the English into
Thomond, 159 ; joins English
against Eoghanachts, 161 ; rents
Carrigogunnel from the Crown,
168 note, 244 ; supports Eng-
lish against C. Crovderg, 284 ;
and against Cormac O'Melagh-
lin, 297.
O'Brien, Murtough Mor, ard-ri
with opposition, s. of Turlough
(1), i 37.

O'Brien, Murtough, s. of Brian
of Slieve Bloom, ii 295-6, 302-3.
O'Brien, Murtough Finn, k. of
Thomond, s. of Donnell, assists
Fitz Stephen to take possession
of Cork, ii 37 ; assumes the
kingship of Thomond, 149 ;
assists Wm. de Burgh against
Eoghanachts, 161 ; and against
C. Carragh, 190 ; joins K. John
at Ardglas, 254.
OBrien, Turlough (1), ard-r{
with opposition, gs. of Brian
Borumha, i 37.
O'Brien, Turlough (2), k. of
Munster, gs. of Turlough (1),
i 51, 53, 54, 61.
O'Caellaidhe, Dermot, i 388.
O'Caharny, Ua Catharnaigh, ii

53 note, 68, 90.
O'Carmacan, Find, ii 264 note.
0' Carroll, Ua Cerbfiaill, Donough,
k. of Uriel, i 64, 65, 67.
O' Carroll, Murrough, k. of Uriel,
i 225, 264 ; ii 15 note.
O' Casey, Ua Cathasaigh, 1. of

Saithni, ii 92 note.
O'Coilein, Coilen, 1. of Ui Conaill

Gabhra, ii 160.
O'Conarchy, Christian, see Lis-

more.
O'Conor, Ua C'onchobhair, Aedh,
s. of Rory, ii 284.
O'Conor, Aedh, s. of C. Crovderg,

ii 264.
O'Conor, Aedh, s. of C. Maen-
moy, ii 298.
O'Conor, Cathal Carragh, k. of
Connaught, s. of Conor Maen-
moy, burns Killaloe, ii 180;
attacked by C. Crovderg, 184 ;
with the aid of Wm. de Burgh
becomes king, 185-6 ; slain,
190.
O'Conor. Cathal Crovderg,C roibh -
derg, ' red-hand,' k. of Con-
naught, s. of Turlough, raids
Munster, ii 154 ; retains Mc
Costello in his service, 183 ;
plunders the bawn of Athlone,
ibid. ; attacks C. Carragh. 184 ;
banished by Wm. de Burgh,
186; attempts to recover his

INDEX

359

kingdom, 187 ; obtains support
of the Crown and of Wm. de
Burgh, 188-9; submits to
John, 250 ; his relations with
John, 262 ; obtains a charter
from John, 285 ; and remains
loyal, 286-7.

O'Conor, Conor Maenmoy, Maen-
maighe, k. of Connaught, s. of
Rory, assists Donnell O'Brien
against Strongbow, i 333 ; ex-
pels his father, ii 100-1 ; burns
castle of Killare, 113 ; at-
tacked by de Courcy, 116 ;
murdered by Conor O'Dermot,
181 ; his English mercenaries,
182.

O'Conor, Melaghlin, s. of C.
Carragh, ii 298, 302.

O'Conor, Murrough, s. of Rory,
brings English into Connaught,
ii 26 ; blinded by his father, 28.

O'Conor, Turlough, ard-rt with
opposition, father of Rory, aims
at the throne, 41 ; sets up kings
in Leinster, 43 ; raids Okinse-
lagh, 44 ; and Munster, 45 ;
imprisons O'Melaghlin, 51 ; the
Church endeavours to repress
his turbulence, 52 ; defeats
Turlough O'Brien, 54 ; joins
O'Loughlin and Mac Murrough
against O'Rourke, 55 ; dies, 60.

O'Conor, Turlough, s. of Cathal
Crovderg, ii 285.

O'Conor, Rory, Ruaidhri, ard-ri
with opposition, s. of Turlough
[ard-ri), becomes k. of Con-
naught, i 61 ; rises to power,
65 ; dethrones Dermot, 66 ;
takes hostages from Dermot.
142 ; hosting against Dermot,
167-70 ; his poHcy, 171-3 ;
comes to Dublin to aid Haskulf,
209 ; his inaction ex^ilained,
212 ; kills Dermot's hostages,
214-15 ; besieges Dublin, 223-
30 ; meets Henry's messengers,
264 ; raids Meath, 336 ; invites
the English to take Limerick,
345-8 ; treaty of Windsor, 349 ;
parley with Raymond, 354 ;
war with Conor Maenmoy, ii

100 ; expelled from Connaught,

101 ; his efforts to recover the
throne, and death, 180-2.

O'Conor Faly, Ua ConchobJiair

Failghe, k. of Offaly, Cu-aifne,

s. of Aedh, i 323 note, 381.
O'Dempsy, Ua Dimasaigh, 1. of

Clan-Malier, i 322.
O' Dermot, Ua Diarmata, illegi-
timate s. of Rory O'Conor, aids

J. de Courcy against Conor

Maenmoy, ii 116.
Odoth, Odagh, Ui Duach, i 236,

376; ii232.
Odrone, Idrone, Ui Drona, pass

of (Scollagh Gap), i 231 ;

granted to Raymond, 387.
O'Faelain, Faelan, k. of Offelan,

i 66, 161 ; ii 326 note.
O'Farrell, Ua Fergaih of Annaly,

ii 90.
Offaly, Ui Failghe, i 23, 377, 381,

ii 36.
Offelan, Ui Faddin, i 23, 161,

329, 377, 379 ; ii 36.
Offelimy on the sea, Ui Feilimidh

deas, i 390.
O'Flynn, Cumee, Cu-maighi Ua

Floinn, l.of Ui Tvirtri, ii 15, 17.
O'Garvy, Aulaf, Ua Gairbhidh,

1. of TuUow Offelimy (?), i 223.
O'Hara, Ua liEghra, Conor, k. of

Luighne, ii 264 note.
O'Hegney, Ua hEignigh, k. of

Fermanagh, ii 186, 293.
O'Huallaghan, Ua hUaUachdin,

Donatus, see Cashel, archbishop

of.
OirghiaUa, Uriel, i 22 ; ii 15,

118-25.
Okinselagh, Ui Cennselaigh, i 23,

39, 44, 66, 141, 238.
Okonach, Ui Cuanach, ii 319.
Olethan, Ui Liathdiyi, ii 41.
O'Loughlin, Ua Lochlainn, Don-
nell, ard-ri -with opposition, i 38.
O'Loughlin, Donnell, s. of Aedh,

k. of Cinel Owen, ii 17, 18.
O'Loughlin, Murtough, s. of

Niall, ard-ri with opposition,

i 53 ; joins T. O'Conor and

Dermot against O'Rourke, 55 ;

secures Dermot in Leinster, 61 ;

360

INDEX

blinds Eochy Mac Dunlevy, 64 ;

slain, 67.
O'Loughlin, Niall, k. of Cinel

Owen, i 266 ; ii 9.
O'Melaghlin, Ua Mad - Shech-

lainn. Art, 1. of West Meath, i

337 ; ii 53.
O'Melaghlin, Cormac, s. of Art,

ii 295, 297-8, 303.
O'Melaghlin, Dermot, k. of

Meath, i 61, 65, 68-9, 141, 167.
O'Melaghlin, Donnell Bregach,

1. of Meath, i 214, 337.
O'Melaghlin, Manus, 1. of East

Meath, i. 337, 344.
O'Melaghlin, Melaghlin, s. of

Murrough, 1. of East Meath, ii

55, 58.
O'Melaghlin, Melaghlin Beg, 1. of

Meath, ii 53, 249, 297.
O'Melaghlin, Murrough, last k. of

undivided Meath, his alliance

with Dermot, i 48 ; imprisoned

by T. O'Conor, 51 ; restored to

West Meath, 55 ; father of

Dervorgil, ibid.
O'Meyey, Oilla gan-inathair Ua

Miadhaigh, ii 68.
O'More, Ua Mordha, k. of Leix,

i 175.
O'Muldory, Flaherty, Flaithber-

tach Ua Maddomidh, k. of Cinel

Conaill, ii 135.
Omurethy, Ui Muiredhaigh, i23,

162, 377, 386.
O'Neill, Aedh, k. of Cinel

Eoghain, ii 268, 288, 290.
O'Nolan, Ua NuMlain, k. of

Fotharta Fea, i 387 note.
O'Phelan or O'Faelan, Melaghlin,

1. of the Decies, i 186, 196, 262 ;

ii 98.
O'Reilly, Ua Eaghallaigh, a

chieftain of Breii'ny, i 223.
O'Rourke, Donnell, s. of Annadli,

1321.
O'Rourke, Tiernan, Tighernan

Ua Ruairc, k. of Breffny, raids

Okinselagh, i 44 ; attacks

O'Melaghlin, 48 ; given part

of Meath, 52 ; submits to

O'Loughlin, 53 ; his wife ab-
ducted by Dermot, 55 ; sub-

mits to T. O'Conor, 57 ; joins
Rory O'Conor, 62 ; expels Der-
mot, 68 ; accepts his I6g enech
from Dermot, 142 ; joins host-
ing into Okinselagh, 167 ; comes
to aid Haskulf at Dublin, 209 ;
instigates O'Conor to kill
Dermot's hostages, 215 ; at
O' Conor's siege of Dublin, 225
note; assaults Dublin, 240; sub-
mits to K. Henry, 264 ; burns
round tower of TuUyard, 320 ;
slain, 321.

O'Ryan, Ua Riain, k. of Odrone,
i 186, 231-2.

Ossory, Osraighi, i 22, 155-61,
163-5, 388-9 ; ii 36, 222-8.

Ostmen of Dublin, i 40, 63, 65,
69, 71, 167, 176, 203-13, 269,
333 ; of Limerick, ii 158-9 ; of
Waterford, i 185, 193-6,334-6 ;
of Wexford, i 150-4, 163.

Ostmen, how treated by the
Normans, ii 335-7.

Uthee, Ui Teigh, i 370.

O' Toole, Ua Tiiathail, k. of
Omurethy, i 162, 264.

O' Toole, Laurence, see Dublin,
archbishop of.

Oughterard, Uachtar-ard, i 379.

Oxford, council of, ii 30-7.

Pax Normannica, ii 323-5.

Pec, Richard de, ii 54.

Petit, William le, ii 67, 86, 113,
248.

Pipard, Gilbert, ii 94.

Pipard, Peter, justiciar, ii 112-13.

Pipard, Roger, ii 119, 122-3, 254.

Poer, Robert le, custos of Water-
ford, i 371 ; ii 35, 55.

Poer, Roger le, ii 12, 56.

Pollmounty, pass of, i 167, 231.

Pons Ivori, Newry, ii 15-16.

Portnascully, mote of, i 389.

Prendergast, Maurice de, lands
in Ireland, i 148 ; leads expe-
dition into Ossory, 159 ; leaves
Dermot, 165 ; takes service
under k. of Ossory, 166 ; es-
capes to Wales, 174-6 ; returns
with Strongbow, 189 ; besieged
in Dublin, 226 ; summoned by

INDEX

361

Henry, 327 ; prior of Kilmain-

ham (?), 366 ; granted Ferne-

genal, 391.
Prendergast, Philip de, s. of

Maurice, i 391 ; ii 215, 217 note.
Purcell, Hugh, baron of Lough-

moe, ii 95 note.
Purcell, Walter, ii 211, 265.

Quency (Quincy), Robert de, i

226, 322.
Quency, Maud de, d. of Robert,

i391.
Quoile, the river, ii 13.

Raheny, Rath Enna, i 370.
Rath, castle of, see Dundrum.
Rath-caves, ii 27 note.
Rath Celtair, its true position,

ii 13 note.
Rathcoflfey, i 139.
Rathconarty, Rath cuanartaigh,

now Rathconrath, castle of, ii

128.
Rathcoole, i 369.
Rathkenny, ii 87.
Rathmore, i 380 ; ii 104.
Rathwire, Rath Giiaire, castle of,

ii 88, 262.
Ratoath, castle of, ii 76, 126, 247.
Raymond le Gros, see Fitz Wil-
liam, Raymond.
Reban, castle of, i 383.
Reginald's Tower, Turris Ragh-

naldi, Waterford, i 195-6, 259,

336.
Repenteni, Ralph de, ii 124.
Rhys ap Tewdwr, i 90, 98, 252.
Richard, count of Poitou, after- '

wards k. of England, ii 202, 203,

205.
Ridelisford, Walter de, i 226,

369, 386.
Rinn duin (Randown or St.

John's), ii 188.
Roche (de Rupe), David de la,

i 392, ii 45, 265.
Roche's land, i 393.
Ros, manor of. Old Ross, i 374,

ii 231.
Rosconnell, ii 226.
Rosselither, Ros aiUthir, now

Ross Carberv. ii 45, 50.

Round, Mr. J. H., his position as
to ' Laudabiliter ' examined, i
317-18.

Roydamna, ridomna, meaning of
the term, i 49 ; war among
roydamnas of Connaught, ii
180 ; disappointed roydamnas,"
295, 298.

St. Laurent (St. Lawrence), Al-
maric de, i 370 ; ii 12.

St. Leger, William de, ii 226.

St. Michael, Robert de, i 383.

St. Mullins, Tech Moling, i 167,
387; ii231.

Saggart, Tech Sacra, i 370.

Salisbury, John of, i 290-1.

Salisbury, William Longsword,
earl of, ii 243.

Sanford, Thomas de, ii 265.

Saracen, William, ii 23.

Saukeville, Jordan de, ii 211,212,
253-4, 260, 265.

Savage, William, ii 23.

Sellarius, Saveric, i 370.

Serland, Godfrey de, ii 260.

Shanid, Senat, mote of, ii 164.

Shankill, Senchell, i 369.

Sheriffs, gradual introduction of,
ii 275-6.

Sinad (Sinnott), David, s. of
Adam, i 392.

Sinnott's land, i 393.

Skreen, Serin Coluim Cille, castle
of, ii 85.

Slane, castle of, i 340 ; ii 84.

Slievemargy, barony of, i 385.

Steine, the, i 241 ; ii 73.

Straffan, i 380.

Striguil, Richard Fitz Gilbert de
Clare, earl of, his ancestry, i
85-8 ; agreement with Dermot,
91 ; seeks licence from K.
Henry, 181 ; sends Raymond
before him, 181 ; advances
through South Wales, 189;
Gerald's description of, 190-2 ;
lands, 193 ; takes Waterford,
196 ; his marriage with Eva,
197-202; takes Dublin, 208-11;
besieged in Dublin, 226 ; his
sortie, 228 ; forces ScoUagh
Gap, 231 ; parley with the k. of

362

INDEX

Ossory, 236-7 ; provides for
Murtough Mac Murrough and
Donnell Kavanagh, 238 ; meets
K. Henry and submits, 249-51 ;
refuses to give his sister to
Raymond, 323 ; summoned to
Normandy, 325 ; given custody
of Ireland, 326 ; his attack on
Monster frustrated, 333 ; pro-
mises BasiUa to Raymond, 334 ;
marches to the relief of Trim,
339; his death, 356-8; his
tomb, 359-60 ; his grant of
Kilmainham, 365 ; his dealings
with his fief, cap. xi.

Strongbow, see Striguil.

Swords, Sord Coluim Cille, i 369.

Syward, provost of Limerick, ii
158.

Taghadoe, Tech Tua, i 380.

Tallaght, Tamlacht Maelrtuiin,
i369.

Templars, grant of Clontarf to,
date of, i 274.

Termonfeckin, Termonn Feichin,
ii 119.

Tethmoy, Tuath da muighe, i 381.

Thatcher, Prof. O. J., his posi-
tion in relation to ' Laudabi-
liter ', i 399-400.

Thomastown or Grenan, Baile
mic Antdin, ii 226.

Thomond, Tuath Mumain, or
NorthMiinster,sometimes called
' the kingdom of Limerick ',
comprised the diocese of Killa-
loe ; afterwards distinguished
from Ormond, and confined to
CO. Clare, i 23 ; enfeoffment of,
162-78.

Thurles, Durlas, Ostman force
cut of? at, i 333.

Tibberaghny, Tiobraid Fachtna,
i 262 ; ii 97, 98, 104.

Timahoe, Tech ino-Chua, castle
of, i 382 ; ii 65.

Tintern, monasterium de Voto,
ii 206-7.

Toirberd, reachtaire or steward of
C. Crovderg, ii 264.

Trim, Ath Truim, castle of, i 338,
344 ; ii 75, 248-9.

Tristeniagh, priory of, ii 89, 128.
Tuam, Tuaiin da ghualann, ii

27 ; archbishop of, Catholicus,

Cadhla Ua Duhhthaig, i 275, 349,

351; ii57.
Tuit, Richard de, ii 89, 248, 262,

282-3.
Tullaghanbrogue, ii 226.
Turris, distinguished from castel-

lum, ii 308 note.
Tyrrell, Hugh, i 338, ii 83, 92.
Tyrrell, Richard, ii 248.

Ui Conaill Qabhra, now barony
of Connello, co. Limerick, ii 157,
160.

Ui Tuirtri, a tribal district in
North Antrim, afterwards com-
prised in the deanery of Tuirtre,
iil7.

Ulidia, Uladh, Eastern Ulster,
i 22, 53, 64 ; ii 10.

Uriel, see Oirghialla.

^"alognes, Hamo de. justiciar c.
1196-8, ii 113; his conflict
with Archbishop Cumin, 131-2;
in Limerick, 157 ; grant to,
162 ; his son Hamo, 319.

Valognes, Matilda de, mother of
Theobald Walter, ii 95 note.

Vavasor, Matilda le, wife of
Theobald Walter, ii 295.

Verdun, Bertram de, John's
seneschal, i 256 ; ii 80, 94, 118,
121.

Verdun, John de, gs. of Nicholas,
ii 122.

Verdun, Leceline de, d. of Ber-
tram, given in marriage to
H. de Lacy the younger, ii 121.

Verdun, Nicholas de, s. of Ber-
tram, ii 79, 122, 251.

N'erdun, Thomas de, s. of Ber-
tram, grants lands in Uriel to
H. de Lacy the younger, ii
121-2.

Vernun, Ralph de, ii 124.

Verneuil, in Normandy, defended
by Hugh de Lacy, i 325-6.

Villa Ostmannorum(Ostmaneby,
Oxmantown), i 269.

INDEX

363

Vivian, Cardinal, holds a synod
in Dublin, i 311, ii 25 ; meets
da Courcy in Downpatrick,
ii 11.

Walensis, David, nephew of Ray-
mond le Gros, i 348.

Wallingford, Nicholas, prior of,
i294.

Walter, Beatrice, d. of Theobald,
ii 95 note, 296.

Walter, Theobald, John's pin-
cerna, ii 94-5 ; granted
Ormond, 102 ; purchases a re-
grant from Wm. de Braose, 174;
his land in Leinster to be held
of Wm. Marshal, 203 ; his land
in Eile, 295-6.

Walter, Hubert, brother of Theo-
bald, clerk to Ranulf de Glan-
ville, afterwards archbishop of
Canterbury, ii 95, 201.

Ward, hill of, Cnoc Tlachtgha, i
320.

Waterford, Vedrafiordr, Port
Ldirge, men of, attack Dun-
donnell, i 185 ; the Ostman
town, 193-5 ; taken by Strong-
bow, 196 ; revolt of the Ostmen
in, 324 ; in custody of Robert

le Poer, 371 ; K. John's charter
to, ii 314.

Wendeval, William de, John's
dapifer, ii 94.

Wexford, Loch Oarnidm, the
Ostman town, i 150-2 ; as-
saulted, 153-4 ; Fitz Audelin
constable of, 281 ; granted
to Strongbow, 326 ; seignorial
manor of, 373 ; priory for
knights of the Hospital founded
at, ii 230.

Wiking raids, i 27.

Winchester, council of (1155),
i 291.

Worcester, Philip of, appointed
procurator to supersede H. de
Lacy, i 368 ; ii 91 ; expedition
to Armagh, 92 ; his grant in
South Tipperary, 103 ; sent to
take Meath into king's hand,
112 ; takes part in the forward
movement in Munster, 155 ;
takes up arms against Wm.
de Braose, 175 ; granted lands
in Tipperary, 318.

Wulfrichford, Ulfreksfiordr, near
Lame, ii 267.

Youghal haven, sea-fight in, i
330.

END OF VOL. n

OXFORD: HORACE HART, M.a.
PRIKTEK TO THE UNIVERSITY

2d9

f

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY