Page images
PDF
EPUB

equal to the emergency, and were obliged to drop their burthens and make the best escape they could.* They then made the best of their way to the king, and remained with him until he had reduced the Welch and strengthened his garrisons in that country; after which Maurice returned into Ireland. On his return he found the country in a state of insurrection. The deaths of Hugh de Lacy and Richard de Burgo, with the absence of the lord justice, seemed to afford an occasion for gaining some advantage to O'Donel, who overran Ulster and committed great waste. Maurice marched against him; and, with the aid of Feidlim O'Conor,† easily reduced O'Donel and restored peace to that district. He also forced O'Neale to give hostages, whom het secured in his castle of Sligo. Other important services are mentioned by historians.

But Henry had been dissatisfied at the tardy succour which he had received in his Welch campaign; or, as is far more likely, some turn of court intrigue operating to the prejudice of the absent-Maurice was superseded, in 1245, by Sir John Fitz-Geoffrey, son of Geoffrey de Montmorres. This change revived the turbulent designs of the Ulster chief, and Sir John was speedily involved in hostilities which occupied his entire administration. It was only by the dissensions of these restless chiefs that he was enabled to subdue this obstinate toparch; the jealousies and enmities of the neighbouring chiefs afforded willing aid against a powerful and perhaps oppressive neighbour.

Maurice died on the 20th May, 1257, in the habit of St Francis, and was buried at Youghal, in a friary of his own foundation.§ Lodge mentions that this friary was built in consequence of a very slight incident. 66 Being about to build a castle in the town, and the work men who were digging the foundation, on the eve of some festival, requesting a piece of money to drink his health, he directed his eldest son to give it, who, instead of obeying, abused the workmen; at which he was so concerned that he altered his design, and changed the castle into a friary, taking upon himself the habit of the order."||

Theobald Walter.

DIED A.D. 1206.

THE prominence in Irish history of the family of Theobald Walter, gives him a title to notice beyond the claim of many whose deeds and renown, in this period, have necessarily occupied a more considerable space in our pages. An old writer of the last century makes the remark, that " a family has a right to preserve its whole line from oblivion, which has produced one man worthy of a history." Such a right, if admitted, is confirmed in the line of Walter, by many an illustrious claim.

Antiquaries and heralds are not agreed in their accounts of the ancestry of this family. It is traced-without certainty, yet with no

* Cox. † Leland; Lodge and Cox say, with the aid of Desmond Hugh MacRory. Ibid.

Camden.

§ Lodge.

inconsiderable probability-from the Dukes of Normandy, through Richard, a follower of the Conqueror, whose name is on the roll of Battel Abbey; and who, on the score of kindred, as well as service, received the earldom of Clare. From Herveius, the grandson of this nobleman, the genealogy of the family runs clear from conjecture; he was the father of Theobald.

It is generally agreed that Theobald accompanied Henry II. into France, on the occasion of the persecution which that monarch underwent on account of the assassination of the turbulent and intriguing Becket. When the king came to Ireland, in the following year, he attended him thither.

His services, on that occasion, cannot easily be distinguished, as he does not appear to have had any military command. But they were, perhaps, not of the less importance in the council of his master, or in the detail of civil offices, which, though little important in the historic page which is occupied with gross results, are yet, in the current order of affairs, the source of influence and the basis of events; it is plain, there must have been high favour, and the dignity of hereditary station. The office of chief butler, in the English court, appears to have descended, for some generations, in the family; and that of chief butler in Ireland seems to have been a simple recognition of the claim. This dignity was some time after bestowed by Henry on Theobald, with large Irish possessions. It was the duty of the office to attend on the kings at their coronation; and at the feast, upon that occasion, to present them with the first cup of wine. In addition to this, and probably as appendant to the office, Henry granted him the prisage of wines.* By this he had a right to two tons of wine in every ship "which broke bulk in any trading port in Ireland, and was loaden with twenty tons of that commodity, and one ton from nine to twenty, &c."† This grant was renewed through many reigns, and continued in the house of Ormonde till late in the 18th century.‡`

During his life, he was appointed to several offices both in England and Ireland, and is mentioned as having endowed several charitable and religious foundations. His possessions in England were small, and probably in Lancashire, where he was sheriff in the reign of Richard I. and that of king John. His grants in Ireland were ample. Among those which Lodge enumerates, we find the castle and town of Arklow, to hold by the service of one knight's fee.

He married the daughter and heir of Robert de Vavasor, and left one son, Theobald, with a daughter. In 1204, he gave, it is said, "two palfreys" for licence to go to England, where he died in 1206, and was buried in Wotheney abbey.

[blocks in formation]

1

Feidlim O'Conor, Prince of Connaught.

SUCCEEDED A.D. 1228.

On the death of Cathal O'Conor, a son of his, named Tirlogh, was elected by the people; he was expelled by the lord justice, De Maurisco, or Montmorres, and Aedh, a son of Cathal, established in his place. Aedh was soon after slain by a most unfortunate misapprehension, of which the following account is given:-Aedh had involved himself in hostilities with the English; and, having no effective means of resistance, was quickly reduced to sue for terms: attending on Montmorres for this purpose, a quarrel arose between his attendants and those of the English baron, in which he was slain. Of this incident, a version by no means improbable is given by some of the annalists:-On his visit to Montmorres, the king of Connaught, Aedh, met with very kind attentions from the wife of one of the English attendants, who offered him the refreshment necessary after his journey, to enable him to appear before the English governor. Aedh, after the fashion of his own country, showed his gratitude by kissing his benefactress. The simple warmth of the Irish manner-which even still is observably marked with the emphasis of a fervid and enthusiastic nature, such as often to give the tone of strong passion to slight courtesy-made a fallacious impression of jealousy upon the cooler and more matter-of-fact perceptions of the English husband, who judged according to the more quiet manners of his own country. He probably watched for the opportunity of revenge, and there could not be one more convenient than the confusion of a riot, easily excited among the class to which it is ascribed. The assassin was immediately discovered, and executed by order of Montmorres.

Tirlogh assumed the sovereignty; but Richard de Burgo, who had himself a claim to succeed Cathal, for reasons not stated, thought proper to raise Feidlim to the succession. Such apparently was the course most favourable to his plans of self-aggrandizement. The obstacles his ambition feared were more likely to arise from the suspicions of the king of England, and the vigilance of his governors, than from a small provincial ruler, whom he considered as existing only by his favour, and whose name and authority he might hope to use as the mask and instrument of his designs. He was, however, mistaken in his choice.

From Feidlim, De Burgo received a lesson which belonged peculiarly to the experience of his time. Feidlim was a prince of very uncommon spirit and sagacity, and quickly saw and seized on the advantages of his position; these are so obvious, that we may assume them safely. It must have been plainly apparent that by a tame submission to De Burgo, he could be nothing more than an instrument in the absolute power of that encroaching baron, who simply raised him to occupy a nominal right over territory which he found it dangerous to seize at once, until it should be effected by slower and more safe degrees, by means of a

succession of arbitrary and oppressive acts. Sooner than submit to such an abject and precarious footing, Feidlim preferred to hazard all; but he had caution and foresight equal to his boldness. He justly reckoned on the troubles in which the turbulent ambition of De Burgo would quickly and frequently involve him; and relied also on the steady character of the English protection, could it once be obtained, free from the capricious intervention of the barons and their dependents. He formed his plans accordingly.

He commenced by resistance to oppressive and unjust demands. De Burgo, who was little likely to acquiesce in resistance from one whom he considered as the creature of his will and convenience, at once marched against him, and made him prisoner. Feidlim had the good fortune to escape. Still more fortunately for him, Hubert de Burgo, the English justiciary at this time, fell into disgrace; and, in consequence, his nephew was deprived of the government, and Maurice FitzGerald appointed in his stead. Feidlim, with ready sagacity, seized upon the favourable moment. Aware of the insufficiency of any means of resistance in his power, and reckoning justly on the effects of De Burgo's discredit, he made a pathetic and forcible appeal to the king, in which he set forth, in strong terms, the known fidelity of his father, Cathal, and his own-the extensive cessions they had freely made—the strong pledges of protection they had received—and the unjust and insatiable rapacity of De Burgo. To these considerations he added a strong description of his disregard of the royal rights in Ireland—his seizure of the king's forts-his depredations and military inroads upon his faithful liegemen—and his general assumption of powers altogether inconsistent with the fidelity of a subject. To this representation he added an earnest request to be permitted to repair to England, and cast himself at the foot of the throne, that he might more fully explain the crimes of De Burgo, and his own wrongs. This judicious step of O'Conor was successful. Henry was surprised at an account so different from those with which he had been duped, according to the consistent and fatal policy of his Irish barons and ministers, whose immunities were extended and their crimes concealed by continued misrepresentations to the crown. Of O'Conor, he had been given to understand that he had led an army of Connaught men into the king's lands, and had been defeated with the loss of 20,000 men. This monstrous falsehood induced Henry to act with caution. He wrote to O'Conor, directing him to defer his journey till he had, with the concurrence of the lord deputy, endeavoured to take the castle of Melick from De Burgo; after which service, when the province of Connaught should be peaceably settled, and delivered up to the lord deputy, he might be admitted to his presence, and his cause fully heard. In the mean time, the king wrote to Fitz-Gerald, apprizing him of this letter, and desiring him to employ trusty persons to ascertain the truth. This answer of the king's effected the immediate purpose of O'Conor, as it recognised him as a vassal, and authorized him to act against his oppressor. The consequence was, that he was allowed to enjoy his province without further present molestation, under the sanction of Henry's support. The gratitude of Feidlim was shown by loyalty and active service: in 1244 he accompanied Maurice Fitz-Gerald, with an Irish force, against

the Welch. The circumstances are mentioned in our notice of FitzGerald.

Of Feidlim there is nothing further worthy of remark to be distinctly ascertained. His life had been a succession of struggles, in which his energy, courage, and sagacity, were unremittingly employed, to maintain possession of the little that remained of his ancestral dignity and possessions. The comparative peace of the remainder of his life may be inferred from the silence of historians. The time of his death is not specified.

age

Walter de Burgo.

DIED A.D. 1271.

Or Walter de Burgo we have little notice of a nature strictly personal. Eminent, in his own day, for power and enterprise, his actions are scantily recorded; and the events in which he bore an active part, are but indistinctly to be collected from the history of the darkest of Ireland. With a few exceptions, such is the common character of this long and perplexed period. It presents a lengthened succession of confused and obscure, yet strikingly tempestuous and destructive scenes, of which the incidents are rendered impressive by their frightfully peculiar uniformity, and their dark breadth of infliction and suffering. But the separate agents are only to be seen, like the moving figures in some remote conflagration, as the bursts of ravage and ruin happen from time to time to cast a gleam upon them. We are, therefore, for the remainder of this period, compelled to carry on our chain of persons and events by memoirs, in many of which little can be related of the individual. These the reader will however find to contain the main events of their time, or some appropriate notice of such questions as they suggest.

Walter de Burgo succeeded his father, Richard, already mentioned. By his marriage with the heiress of De Lacy, he acquired the earldom of Ulster. His contests with the O'Conors have been

noticed.

During his time it was that the effect of the absence of any fixed and independent authority in the country began to be more fully understood by the native Irish; and a general desire began to be felt, among those who bordered upon the English settlements, for the advantages of English law. The difficulties attendant on such a change were greater than can now be easily allowed for; and, while we accord with the general principle assumed by those historians who exclaim against the injustice or impolicy of denying the boon so long and anxiously sought, we must adhere to our opinion, already expressed, that it is very doubtful whether it could have been acceded to without depriving the pale of the only protection they had against their inveterately hostile neighbours. The opposition of the English was founded on two distinct classes of motive-one of which was unjust and impolitic, the other necessary and hardly to be dispensed with; and the obviousness of the first has prevented historians from suffi

« PreviousContinue »