Page images
PDF
EPUB

Of all branches of education, which is not absolutely scho-
lastic, there is none more useful or ornamental than history.
Without a knowledge of it suitable to our position in so-
ciety we have really but little of what we are all inclined
to affect, that is a polite education. Ignorance of Homer,
Euclid, and Rossini, is less reproachful than ignorance of
history. There are two consequences of this ignorance which
much escape observation: it confines the sphere of our obser-
vation to our native county or thereabouts; and it confounds
that familiarity with current events, which is obtained from
the newspapers, with general information. To speak plainly,
those who neglect the study of history, discard one of the most
essential acquisitions of a lady or a gentleman.

But if history should be cultivated, even as a mere accom-
plishment, we ought not allow that of other countries to su-
persede our own. With regard to Ireland, its story has till
lately attracted little general attention even at home. The
History of Ireland, however, though not so showy, is intrin-
sically as interesting and instructive, as that of any modern
nation in Europe. But, hitherto, its external appearance has
not been very attractive. Irish histories have been chronicles
of petty feuds, of brawls, dignified by the name of battles,
and predatory raids narrated as gravely as if they had been
campaigns; compilations from the mythic inventions of the
bards, or other romantic exaggerations; or such discordant
mixtures of archæology and hagiology, of private, political,
and ecclesiastical affairs, as to make it hard to guess whether
history was intended to have been their object at all.

Two or three modern writers are, indeed, for the most part,
free from these disagreeable features; but still they are
too diffuse for general readers. The great complaint, however,
is that they do not, like Goldsmith in his three celebrated his-
tories, keep the leading events so connected, that their stream
can be easily traced from the fountain-head to the em-
bouchure. The reader, it is expected, will not readily lose
the thread of his discourse, while pursuing the subsequent
pages; from which the Celt may learn something to im-
prove his patriotism, and the Saxon much to enlarge his phi-
lanthropy.

March 1, 1863.

THE

HISTORY OF IRELAND.

INTRODUCTION.

SECTTION I.-NAMES AND ANTIQUITY.-EARLY COLONIES.BARDIC ACCOUNTS, AND PROBABLE COLONIZATION.

THERE are few European nations that have not been known by more than one name. The origin of the names is generally traceable to some real or mythic conqueror or colonist; to the principal feature of the country, or peculiarity of its boundaries; or to some characteristic of the inhabitants themselves.

I. The most ancient name by which the inhabitants of Ireland called their country is, probably, the Woody Isle, a name descriptive of the appearance of the country in remote and even in later times. It is thought to have been known to Himilco, the Carthaginian voyager, about 550 years before Christ, or as some say 1000, by the name of the Sacred Isle. An Athenian poet who flourished 516, B. C., mentions Ireland by its Celtic title, Iernis, in the poem on the Argonautic Expedition. Though Rome can boast of a greater antiquity by two centuries, yet there is no mention of that city in any author as ancient as the Athenian poet.

The Milesian invasion, which, according to some writers, took place 1000 years before our Saviour's birth, gave rise to other names for this Island. Milesius had eight sons, of whom three are remarkable: Heremon, the first king of Ireland; Heber, after whom the country is called Hibernia; and Ir, from whom are derived Ireland and Erin, the first of late introduction, but the last

B

two traceable to the second century. It was also called Greater Scotia, the origin of which is referred to the Scythian colonists. Greater Scotia was retained to the tenth century, and served to distinguish it from Scotia (or Scotia Minor), Scotland. The appellation of the Island of Saints was, probably, bestowed on it even in Pagan times, when it had acquired celebrity from its Druidic superstitions; in the early ages of Christianity it enjoyed and merited such a title.

The

Another name remains for notice,-Inisfail. Tuatha-de-Danaans, invaders who preceded the Milesians, brought with them into Ireland a stone called Lia-fail. It was said to be enchanted, and to send forth a noise like thunder when one of the royal Scythian race was crowned upon it. The Irish monarchs were inaugurated on this stone till its removal to Scotland, in the year of our Lord 513, by Fergus, King Murtough's brother, who had subdued the Scots, and who thought he should secure the succession to his posterity by getting himself crowned on the Stone of Destiny. It remained in Scotland till removed in 1296 by Edward I., who, perhaps, regarded it with superstitious feelings himself, and sought by its removal to impress upon the Scots that the fatal period had arrived for the dissolution of their monarchy. Edward conveyed it to Westminster Abbey, where it is still, placed under the Coronation Chair. The fatality supposed to be connected with it has been enunciated in some Irish and Latin verses, which may be thus translated :—

If Fate's decrees be not pronounced in vain,
Where'er this stone be found the Scots shall reign.

The removal of this stone, so long credited, has been lately questioned by that distinguished Irish antiquary, Dr. Petrie, who has produced passages from writers of the tenth century, in which the Lia-Fail, or Stone of Destiny, is mentioned as still in Ireland, on the hill of Tara, The pillar-stone yet on the hill is supposed to be this interesting relic, which originated the appellation Inisfail, or Isle of Destiny.

« PreviousContinue »