"And when he came in view of his beloved Salzburg, and its encircling

hills, he began to weep copious tears, and he cried out--Haec requies mea,

hic habitabo quoniam elegi eam--and having celebrated the Holy Sacrifice,

he died without pain--leni correptus morbo--on the fifth day before the

Kalends of December, A.D. 784; or according to another, but less probable

account, in A.D. 780. His body was buried in the southern wing of the

monastery which he himself had spent twelve years in building. There he

was honourably buried as became a great High Priest, and his soul went up

to enjoy the fellowship of heavenly citizens for endless ages."

We hear no more of St. Virgil for four hundred years, until near the end

of the twelfth century, when his Life was written by one who was himself a

witness of many of the facts which he relates. "In the year of our Lord's

Incarnation, A.D. 1171," he says in the opening paragraph:--

"On the fourteenth day before the Kalends of March, in the twenty-first

year of the Pontificate of our Lord Pope Alexander III., the most Serene

Prince Frederic being august Emperor of the Romans, and Otto of

Witelenspach, most renowned Duke of Bavaria; when the edifice of the

aforesaid monastery of St. Peter, which had some years before been

destroyed by fire, was being rebuilt at the expense and by the command of

the illustrious Pastor Chunrad, Archbishop of Salzburg, Legate of the

Apostolic See in Germany, and Cardinal Priest of St. Marcellus, through

the co-operating grace of the Holy Spirit, and the suffragant clemency of

the Divine Majesty, it came to pass that the body of the blessed

Virgilius, which had been hidden from all persons for many centuries, was

wonderfully brought to light."

"It happened on a certain day that some stones having fallen from the

wall, gave an opportunity to the passers-by to look into the opening, in

which they noticed signs of a hollow space, and the outlines of an ancient

picture were observed drawn in gold. Thereupon the canons of the church

made an investigation; and upon further opening the wall, the tomb and

image (depicta imago) of St. Virgilius, eighth Bishop of Salzburg after

St. Rudbert, was discovered, with the following inscription:--'Virgilius

templum construxit schemate pulchro.' And moreover the day of his death

was marked, the fifth before the Kalends of December (27th Nov.) Anno

781."

Then the writer goes on to narrate how the archbishop and the clergy, and

all citizens, crowded to the tomb to venerate the sacred relics; and he

gives a long list of most extraordinary miracles which were daily

performed at the tomb, but which we cannot stay to transcribe.

The name of St. Virgilius is not found in the Roman Martyrology, says

Basnage, but he is always spoken of as a saint in the _Annals of the

Benedictines_; and in the Canons of a Council of Salzburg, held in A.D.

1274, the assembled prelates declare that they recognise Rudbert, Virgil,

and Augustine, as the patrons of that church, and command, under penalty

of excommunication, their feast days to be kept as holidays. It is hardly

necessary to add that the festival of Virgilius, Bishop and Confessor, is

celebrated by the Irish Church on the 27th November.[424]

II.--SEDULIUS, COMMENTATOR ON SCRIPTURE.

Another eminent Irish scholar of the Dispersion was Sedulius, the

Commentator on Scripture. Sedulius the Elder, of whom we have already

spoken at length, is known as the Poet; the present Sedulius is, for the

sake of distinction, commonly called Sedulius the Younger, or the

Commentator.

Of his personal history unfortunately we know only two facts--first, that

he was an Irishman; and secondly, that he was, as his writings abundantly

prove, a most distinguished scholar. We cannot even identify him for

certain amongst the many Irish scholars, who are known to have borne this

name during the eighth and ninth centuries.

There was a Sedulius, who is supposed to have been Bishop of Strathclyde

in Scotland, and who was certainly present at a Council held in Rome, A.D.

721.[425] He describes himself under his own hand as a British Bishop of

Irish birth;[426] and he was accompanied by another prelate who calls

himself Fergustus Episcopus Scotiae Pictus--that is a Pictish Bishop of

Scotia, which at that time must mean a Bishop of the Irish Picts. Both

happened to be in Rome together, and were invited to assist at this

Council and subscribe their names. It is another of the many proofs that

indicate the close union between Rome and the Celtic Churches at this

period.

The Four Masters, A.D. 785 (_recte_ 789), make mention of the death of

Siadhal, or Sedulius, 'Abbot of Dublin.' The same entry (A.D. 789) is in

the _Annals of Ulster_, but in the _Martyrology of Donegal_ he is

described as Bishop of Dublin, and in the _Tallaght Martyrology_ on the

same day (12th Feb.) he is simply called 'Siadal Bishop;' but nothing more

is known about him. If there was a Bishop in Dublin, there certainly was

no See of Dublin at this period; for the See was certainly of Danish

origin.

There was also a Siadhail, abbot and Bishop of Roscommon, who died in A.D.

813.[427] Another Siadhail, or Sedulius, who died in A.D. 828, was abbot

of Kildare; and according to Lanigan he was 'unquestionably' the author of

the _Commentaries_, which are ascribed by all the learned to some Irishman

of that name, who flourished about this period. Lanigan, however, has

given no satisfactory evidence of this 'unquestionable' fact; and although

it is quite possible that Sedulius of Kildare may have been the author of

the _Commentaries on St. Paul's Epistles_, it is just quite as possible

that he was Sedulius, the Bishop-abbot of Roscommon, or some Hibernian

exile of the same period, who flourished in the Schools of France or

Italy.

Whoever he was, he was certainly a learned man. Montfaucon has preserved a

Greek psalter,[428] written by this Sedulius, which is of itself quite

satisfactory evidence of his Greek scholarship. He was besides an

accomplished Latin poet, and his patristic lore is simply marvellous. No

doubt his work as a commentator consists, to a very large extent, of

extracts from the Fathers of the Church, both Greek and Latin; but so does

every commentary of the kind worth reading. Where commentators begin to be

original, they generally cease to be orthodox. At best their learning can

only succeed in putting the old truths in a new way. It has been

insinuated[429] that Sedulius in his _Commentaries on St. Paul_ adopted

what are now called Calvinistic views about grace and predestination.

There is not a shadow of foundation for the charge, except that Sedulius

quotes and approves of the teaching of St. Augustine. But how far St.

Augustine was from holding such views, it is quite unnecessary to show in

this place. These _Commentaries on St. Paul_ are really very valuable, and

even at this day are worthy of careful study.

Besides the _Commentaries on St. Paul_, Sedulius also wrote a _Commentary

on St. Matthew_, the proper title of which is--_Collectaneum Sedulii in

Mattheum ex diversis Patribus excerptum_. He is also said to have written

a grammatical commentary on Priscian, and on the _Secunda Editio_ of

Donatus, works which were both in common use in the ancient schools of

Ireland. He was somewhat of a politician also, and wrote a treatise on

Politics in Aristotle's sense, not referred to by Lanigan, for it was only

discovered in comparatively recent times by Cardinal Mai in the Vatican,

and has been published by him in the ninth tome of his _Nova Collectio

Scriptorum_. Everything goes to show that he was a man of the very widest

culture attainable in that age, and that he, like Virgilius and John

Scotus Erigena, of whom we are now about to speak, acquired that culture

in the schools of his native land.

III.--JOHN SCOTUS ERIGENA.

John Scotus Erigena, a man of Irish birth and education, was by far the

most distinguished scholar of the ninth century in Western Europe. He was

at once theologian, philosopher, and poet; he could write Greek verses and

expound the Scriptures in the Hebrew and the Septuagint; he was familiar

with Aristotle and Plato, as well as with St. Basil and St. Augustine, and

was not only rector of the Royal School of Paris, but is also said to have

been professor of dialectics and mathematics. He was known as the "Master"

by excellence, and was spoken of as a "miracle of knowledge." Even in our

own time critics of great name have ranked Scotus with Chrysostom, Dante,

and Thomas of Aquin, partly from the beauty and sublimity of his thoughts,

partly from the originality, depth, and subtlety of his philosophical

speculations. No doubt he erred seriously, and was censured justly. He

erred, however, not in the spirit of Luther and Calvin, but of Origen and

St. Cyprian; for one who ought to know, and was no great friend to the

Irish stranger, has attested that he was in all things a holy and humble

man, filled with the Spirit of God. But he sailed through unknown seas

where there was no chart to guide him. His daring spirit, soaring on

strong pinions, essayed untravelled realms of thought, and in the quest of

truth he often followed wandering fires; yet, as he himself tells us, in

the light of God's revelation and the strength of His grace, the wearied

spirit always found its homeward way again. He was in reality the first of

the schoolmen, and his very errors, like the wanderings of every explorer

of a new country, served to guide those who came after him. Moreover, he

has been censured not only for his real errors, but for doctrines which he

never held, although condemned under his name; and so it came to pass that

he was unduly blamed by those who knew little of his history and less of

his teaching, and unduly praised, we think, by those who are much more

ready to eulogise him for his errors than for his virtues.

Like many other good things which Ireland has produced, both England and

Scotland have striven to make Scotus their own. Thomas Dempster, the

saint-stealer, in his _Menologium Scotorum_, published in A.D. 1621, and

dedicated to Cardinal Barberini, has endeavoured to prove that Scotus

Erigena was a native of North Britain; as, however, his arguments are

founded on the similarity in sound between Ayr and Erigena and between

Scotus and Scot, we need not now refute them at length. Thomas Gale, an

Englishman, who was the first to publish at Oxford, in A.D. 1681, Scotus'

treatise, _De Divisione Naturae_, maintains that he was of English birth,

and was born at a place called Eringen or Ergerne, in Herefordshire, as

that name is very like Erigena--for he gives no other shadow of positive

proof! It is now superfluous to show at length, what all modern scholars

admit, that "Scotus," in the ninth century, and even down to the eleventh

century, was exactly equivalent to "Irishman" now, although of course even

then they sometimes spoke of the "Scoti of Alba" as we speak of the "Irish

of Glasgow" at present. But when used alone in those early centuries the

terms "Scoti" and "Scotia" were applied exclusively to the primitive race

and their dwelling-place--the Milesian Scots of Ireland, of whom the

Albanian Scots were a colony. In A.D. 812, before the birth of Scotus,

Eginhard, the secretary of Charlemagne, says that a fleet of Normans

invaded Ireland, "the island of the Scots;" and, after the death of

Scotus, Alfred the Great, in his translation of Orosius, speaks of Ireland

as "Hibernia, which we call Scotland." So the very name John Scotus is the

same as John the Irishman, and this name was given to him by all his

contemporaries. Pope Nicholas I. calls him, in a letter to King Charles,

"Joannes genere Scotus," and Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, who knew him

intimately, calls him "Scotus" and "Scotigena," or Irish-born. But what

settles the question is the way in which Prudentius, in his treatise on

Predestination, speaks of Scotus, for Prudentius says he was himself the

friend of Scotus--quasi frater--he lived some time with him in the palace

of the king, and no one could know better whence Scotus came. "Te Solum,"

says Prudentius, "omnium acutissimum Galliae transmissit Hibernia." So it

was Ireland, then, and not England or Scotland, sent him over to France.

Later on in the eleventh century when, after the fusion of the Picts and

Scots into one nation, Scotia came to signify Scotland, the cognomen

Erigena was given to Scotus to signify that he was not an Albanian but an

Irish Scot. We do not find, however, that any of his contemporaries gave

him that name, and the form Erigena, from which Dempster infers his

Caledonian origin, is not found in any existing MS. copy of his works. In

most of them it is written Ierugena, which Dr. Floss, the learned editor

of the works of Scotus, published in Migne's Patrology, thinks is derived

from the Greek, and signifies "native of the sacred isle"--insula

sanctorum. But although Scotus himself was certainly fond of Greek

compounds, very few scholars of the tenth and eleventh centuries were able

to make them. For our own part we should prefer to adopt the reading

Eirugena, which is found in the Florentine and Darmstad manuscripts as

being a far simpler and more natural form. Eriu is the older nominative,

and its vowel termination would render it better adapted to form a

compound than the genitive form Erin, and thus we get Eriugena, which no

doubt would very soon be contracted into Erigena.

Unfortunately we know neither the exact date of Erigena's birth, nor where

he was born and educated. We find him an inmate of the palace of Charles

the Bald in A.D. 851, when he published his book on Predestination. He

must have been at that time some time in France, for he was then well

known as a distinguished scholar, so that if we assume that he was born

about A.D. 820, and came to France about A.D. 850, we cannot be very far

astray. We know from a letter of Eric of Auxerre to Charles the Bald, that

a crowd of Hibernian philosophers came to France, attracted by the

liberality of that prince, and driven out of their own country by the

invasion of the Danes.[430] All the Irish annalists tell us that from

A.D. 815 to 845 the Danes under Turgesius plundered, desolated, and burned

the whole country, but especially the churches, monasteries, and schools.

In A.D. 843 "Turgesius plundered Connaught, Meath, and Clonmacnoise with

its oratories;" in the same year "Forannen, the Primate of Armagh, was

taken prisoner, with his relics and people" (to the number of 3,000), "and

they were carried by the Danes to their ships at Limerick." It is easy to

see how young Scotus might be captured by the foreigners, and succeed in

making his escape to France, or seek an asylum there, most probably either

in this or the next year.

Charles the Bald, son of Louis le Debonaire, and grandson of Charlemagne,

was at this time king of Northern France and Burgundy. He had few of the

kingly virtues of his great grandsire, but he was a zealous patron of

literature, very fond of theological discussions, was present at many

French Councils, and on the whole, was far better fitted by nature to be a

monk than a monarch. He received the young Irish scholar with great

kindness, and treated him with marked distinction. Scotus had apartments

in the palace, was made Capital, or head, of the Scholæ Palatinæ, and

frequently admitted to the royal table. He was a great Greek scholar, and

the king wanted him to translate into Latin the works of Dionysius the

Areopagite, a task which none of his subjects was able to accomplish.

Moreover, the Irishman was witty as well as wise, and the king loved a

joke quite as much as he loved learning. William of Malmesbury has

preserved two of the witticisms of Scotus. On one occasion, when the wine

was going round the table, the Irishman by some word or act offended

against the etiquette due to royalty. The king, who was sitting opposite

to Scotus, good-humouredly rebuked him by asking--"Quid interest inter

Scottum et Sottum?" "Tabula tantum," says the witty Hibernian, and the

monarch greatly enjoyed this turning of the tables against himself. On

another occasion, Scotus was dining at the table of the king with two

other clerics. We cannot, indeed, ascertain for certain whether Scotus

himself was a cleric or not; he certainly does not appear to have been a

priest. These two clerics were very big men, and Scotus was, like some

other great men, very small. Three fishes were brought in by an

attendant--one small and two large ones. The king beckoned Scotus to

divide the fish with his companions. Scotus did so, giving them the small

one, and keeping for himself the two big ones. The king protested against

the unfair division. "It is perfectly fair, my Lord the King," said

Scotus, "for here," pointing to himself and his plate, "we have one small

and two big, and there," pointing to his companions, "they have two big

and one small." The king laughed, and probably a fairer division was

afterwards made by Scotus.

He might have long enjoyed his honours and emoluments in the palace in

peace if he were prudent. But just at this period two fierce theological

disputes arose in France, and either his friends at court, or his Irish

blood, prompted him to mingle in the _mêlée_.

Just about the time when Erigena arrived in France, began the first and

the warmest controversy of the ninth century concerning the abstruse

question of Predestination. Most of the French bishops and theologians

took part in this discussion, which was hotly debated for twelve years.

Its author was a Benedictine monk, of the famous abbey of Fulda, who was

called Gotteschalk, or Servant of God. Raban Maur, one of the most learned

men of his own time, and for many years head of the great School of Fulda,

who was now Archbishop of Mayence, cited Gotteschalk to appear before a

Synod and account for his doctrinal novelties. The Council was held on the

1st of October, A.D. 848. Gotteschalk did appear in person, and handed in

a profession of faith, which, according to Hincmar, was undoubtedly

erroneous.

He was accordingly condemned by the Council, and Raban wrote a letter to

Hincmar to inform him that a vagabond monk (gyrovagus), of the diocese of

Soissons, held heretical doctrine, and was condemned by the Synod with the

approbation of King Louis. He also requests Hincmar to convene a Synod in

his own diocese, and condemn his doctrines in like manner. Hincmar was not

slow in following this advice. That great bishop, for more than thirty

years the central figure of the French Church, was in every way qualified

to fill the high place which he occupied as the first prelate and peer in

France. He was learned, eloquent, and resolute, a lasting friend, and, to

those whom he considered in the wrong, an unrelenting foe. In his youth he

had been a monk of the great Abbey of St. Denis, so that between Raban

Maur, a Benedictine monk of Fulda, and Hincmar, a Benedictine of St.

Denis, the former now the most powerful prince-bishop in Germany, and the

latter the first prelate in France, the unfortunate Gotteschalk, a runaway

monk of their order, could hope for little mercy. A great Synod of his

province was convoked by Hincmar in the palace of Quiercy. The king was

there, and a great number of his bishops and abbots. Gotteschalk was

introduced and interrogated, but persisted in his opinions, and, if we may

credit Hincmar, was very insolent in his demeanour. So the bishops ordered

him to be degraded, and the abbots ordered him to be flogged according to

the rule of St. Benedict, and after that to be imprisoned in an

ergastulum. A great fire was kindled, Gotteschalk was ordered to take his

MS. on Predestination in his hand, and the lash was then applied until he

should himself fling the book into the flames, which he was glad to do

very soon. He was afterwards imprisoned in the Convent of Hautvilliers,

where he remained contumacious for nine years, and died, it is said, in

the same spirit.

But the severity of Hincmar defeated his purpose. He was so severely

attacked by several French theologians that he found it necessary to ask

his friend, Scotus, to come to his assistance, and the "Master" promptly

responded to the call. In A.D. 851 he published his _Liber de

Prædestinatione_, a short treatise in nineteen chapters, on a very burning

question. This book at once raised a tremendous storm on all sides. He

adopted a new system of discussion, arguing rather from reason than

authority, and dealing his blows indiscriminately on friend and foe. He

ranges through all metaphysics, discusses the nature of sin, the origin of

evil, the eternal punishment of the wicked, and the qualities of the

bodies that will be hereafter united to the glorified and condemned souls.

He somewhat contemptuously speaks of his opponents, and acts on those

independent principles which he elsewhere so eloquently proclaims in a

sentence that has something of the sonorous ring of a Ciceronian

period.[431] Wenilo, Archbishop of Sens, at once sent this treatise of

Scotus to Prudentius, and he was not very long in pronouncing what he

thought of it. The next year he published his great treatise _De

Prædestinatione contra Joannem Scotum_, with an introduction addressed to

Archbishop Wenilo. We have no hesitation in saying that this introduction

is written in language rather vulgar, and by no means charitable. He heaps

all manner of abusive epithets on the head of the redoubtable Scotus, and

although he declares that he is animated only by zeal for the Catholic

faith, and the affection of true charity, we think he would have given

better proof of both by greater moderation in his language. He declares

that he found in the book of Scotus the poison of Pelagianism, the madness

of Origen, and the wild fury (furiositatem) of the Collyrian heretics. He

speaks of the impudence of Scotus in barking at (oblatrantem) the orthodox

faith and the Catholic Fathers, and he hints pretty clearly that it was

the devil himself who vomited so many blasphemies by the mouth of John and

Julian, and so on to the end of the chapter. In the same spirit, but in

more moderate language, Florus attacked the book of Scotus, whom he calls

a "vaniloquus et garrulus homo," and speaks of his writings as "plena

mendacii et erroris." For the present we shall not discuss in what or how

far Scotus erred in his book, but he was certainly on the right side in

supporting Hincmar, and although neither Florus nor Prudentius held all

the opinions of Gotteschalk, it would not be difficult to extract from

their writings many propositions, which would need to be interpreted in a

very charitable spirit, indeed, before they could be reconciled with the

commonly received doctrines of our Catholic theologians.

But Hincmar was not the man to yield to the noisy declamation of the

theologians of the South. In A.D. 853 he convened another Synod at

Quiercy, in which he formulated with great accuracy his own doctrine on

grace and predestination. They are well known as the Capitula

Carisiaca.[432]

It is said that Prudentius signed them, but he certainly in a short time

afterwards formulated four counter-propositions, which it is not easy to

reconcile with Catholic doctrine, and in this proceeding he was

countenanced by Remigius of Lyons. Later on, in the Council of Valence in

A.D. 855, and in that of Langres in A.D. 859, the southern theologians and

bishops attacked the capitula of Hincmar, at least by implication, and

denounced the book written by Scotus as a devil's commentary rather than

an argument of faith, and said it contained nothing but old women's

stories, and Irish porridge nauseous to the purity of faith. They did not

expressly mention his name, but there can be no doubt about the reference

in the words--"Scotorumque pultes puritati fidei nauseam inferentes." But

in the end Hincmar prevailed, and his doctrine was sanctioned in the Synod

of Tousi, in the year A.D. 860, where a great many prelates of both

parties were assembled from fourteen provinces, with twelve metropolitans,

and the three kings at their head--Charles the Bald, Lothaire of Lorraine,

and Charles of Provence. So the censures of Florus and Prudentius, and the

condemnation of Valence and Langres cannot have much weight in blackening

the theological character of Scotus Erigena.

The next discussion in which Scotus is said to have taken part occurred

shortly afterwards. It has been stated by many writers that he was the

first who denied the doctrine of the Real Presence in the Western Church.

Certainly, Berengarius, in the eleventh century, claimed Scotus as his

teacher on the new doctrine which he introduced; and the Sacramentarians

regarded him as a great apostle of what they called the truth. A book on

the Eucharist, attributed to Scotus by Berengarius, was condemned in three

synods, and committed to the flames as impious and heretical.

But there is no contemporary evidence to show that Scotus wrote a treatise

on the Eucharist, and, on the other hand, there is positive evidence which

goes to show the identity of the work attributed to Scotus with the

treatise that has certainly been written by Ratramnus. The very words, on

account of which Berengarius says the book was ordered to be burnt at the

Council of Rome in A.D. 1059, namely--"ea quae in altare consecrantur esse

figuram, pignus, et signum Corporis et Sanguinis Christi," and which were

used in a heretical sense by Berengarius but not by their author, are

found in the _Book of Ratramnus_, the MS. of which still bears his name in

uncial letters of the tenth century. Another expression attributed by

Ascelinus to the unfortunate Irishman--"specie geruntur ista, non

veritate"--are nowhere to be found in the existing writings of Scotus, but

are found exactly in the same MS. of Ratramnus. There can be no doubt that

Scotus, in his commentary on St. John, did use inaccurate language, but

certainly not in a heretical sense.[433] Yet, his language displeased some

of his best friends, so that Hincmar in his second book on Predestination

seems to attribute to Scotus--for he does not mention his name--the error

of teaching that the Sacrament of the Altar was not the real body and

blood, but only a memorial of them, whereas Scotus taught in reality, or

certainly meant to teach, that it was both--namely, a memorial, and at the

same time a reality. Adrevaldus, too, wrote a treatise--"De Corpore et

Sanguine Domini contra ineptias J. Scoti." This is the only contemporary

evidence we have concerning the alleged errors of Scotus on the Eucharist.

Just 200 years later, however, in consequence of the fame of Scotus, and

the similarity of their style, the _Book of Ratramnus_ was attributed to

Scotus both by Berengarius and most of his contemporaries. So it shared

the fate of Berengarius himself, it was condemned by the Council of Paris

in A.D. 1050, and in the same year it was anathematised by the Councils of

Rome and Vercelli. Nine years later Pope Nicholas II. made Berengarius

himself throw the book into the fire in presence of an immense crowd of

people at Rome. And so it came to pass that Scotus was censured for

opinions which he never held, and for a book which he never wrote.

Almost from his first arrival in France, Scotus had been engaged in

translating from the Greek into Latin the writings of Pseudo-Dionysius. In

the year A.D. 828 the Greek Emperor, Michael Balbus--the stammerer--had

sent, as a present to Louis le Debonaire, a copy in Greek of the writings

attributed to Dionysius, the Areopagite. Dionysius, mentioned in the 17th

chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, was said to have been at first bishop

of Athens, and to have been afterwards sent into France by St. Clement,

where he preached the Gospel for many years, and died a martyr's death.

The works attributed to St. Dionysius, although really written by some

forger of the end of the fifth or beginning of the sixth century, were at

this time regarded as genuine. Hence, the Greek Emperor's gift was very

highly prized in France, and preserved with the greatest care and

veneration as the undoubted work of the apostle of the French people, and

especially of Paris, where the great Abbey of St. Denis, for many ages the

cemetery of the kings of France, was built in his honour. But these

writings in Greek were a sealed fountain to most of the French scholars at

the time. Hilduin, a monk of St. Denis, was charged with their custody,

and commissioned to translate them, but failed in the attempt. When,

however, the exiled Irish scholar came to Paris, the king, to his great

joy, soon discovered that he was a perfect master of the Greek tongue,

and asked him to undertake the translation of the writings of the

Areopagite. Scotus gladly undertook the task imposed upon him by his royal

patron, and executed it in such a way as to please the man of all others

best qualified to pronounce a critical opinion--Anastasius, the Roman

Librarian. In a letter written to the king, in A.D. 875, he declares it to

be a wonderful thing that a man like Scotus, a barbarian, living at the

end of the world--vir ille barbarus in finibus mundi positus--could

understand and translate into another tongue the writings of the

Areopagite. But the Holy Spirit, he says, was the chief agent who filled

him at once with fire and eloquence--qui hunc ardentem et loquentem

fecit--and charity was the mistress who taught him for the instruction and

edification of many. He adds that his only fault was to translate too

literally, and the cause of that was his great humility, which did not

permit him to change the exact order and meaning of the words of so great

a writer.

We cannot ascertain for certain the year of its appearance; it was

probably about A.D. 855, but in this case, too, Scotus was unfortunate.

Whether it was that the French theologians had given him a bad character

in Rome on account of the book on Predestination, or, as others think,

that the Greek scholar was considered to be a supporter of Greek

influences in the Court of Charles during the Photian intrigues, it is

certain that at this time he was no favourite at Rome. Accordingly, when

his work appeared, Pope Nicholas wrote a letter to Charles the Bald, in

which he complains of the publication of this translation without the

usual apostolic sanction--quod juxta morem ecclesiae nobis mitti

debet--especially as John the Scot, who translated it, although said to be

a man of much learning, was by many persons regarded as not altogether

sound in his doctrine--non sapere in quibusdam frequenti rumore dicitur.

Therefore the Pope orders Charles either to send the aforesaid John to

Rome to give an account of himself, or at least not to permit him to

remain any longer at Paris as the head of the University--aut certo

Parisiis in studio, cujus capital jam olim fuisse perhibetur, morari non

sinatis. This letter was written in the third year of Nicholas's

pontificate, either A.D. 861 or 862. We do not know what effect the letter

produced, whether the king dismissed Scotus from his high position or not.

It is very improbable that he did dismiss him, seeing the way in which

Anastasius, himself a Roman, spoke of Scotus twelve years later as a holy,

learned, and humble man. Most probably by that time they had got better

information concerning Scotus in Rome, and found out that he was neither

so unsound in doctrine, nor so Photian in his tendencies as his enemies

made him out to be. At this time, however, when the Pope wrote to Charles,

Scotus took very good care not to go to Rome, where he might have met the

fate of Gotteschalk; nor does it appear that Charles dismissed his

favourite from the palace, although requested to do so by the Pope

himself.

Scotus not only translated and wrote extensive commentaries on the

writings of the Pseudo-Dionysius, but about the same period composed a

profound, original, and eloquent work in five books, which he entitles

Περὶ Φυσέως Μερισμοῦ, seu De Divisione Naturae. This work has been greatly

praised, and greatly and justly censured. We shall, however, for the

present reserve our judgment on its undoubted merits, as well as on its

demerits, and confine ourselves to sketching its eventful history. It is a

dialogue between a master and his pupil after the Platonic fashion, not

indeed with Plato's unrivalled beauty of form, but with much of the

eloquence and subtlety of the Greek mind. No other scholar of the Western

Church in any age was so filled with the spirit of the philosophy and

theology of the Greeks, and whose mind was so closely akin to the mind of

Greece. The Irish, like the Greek mind, has a natural love for

speculation, is quick, subtle, and far-seeing, has greater power of

abstraction and generalisation--that is to say, greater metaphysical power

than the phlegmatic Anglo-Saxon. Scotus was a typical Celt, strongly

developing all the intellectual peculiarities of the race. Moreover, he

was familiar with Plato, and Aristotle, and the Greek Fathers, far more

than with the Latin Fathers. He had, by close study, imbibed the spirit of

Neo-Platonic philosophy from the writings of Dionysius, whom he not

unnaturally regarded with the reverence due to an apostle, and so his

whole soul was made by nature, study, and duty, intensely Greek. No doubt

this was in itself one great source of his errors, both real and

imaginary, because his critics seeing how he erred in some things where

they could fathom his philosophy, imagined he erred in many more where

they could scarcely guess at the meaning of his words. Hence William of

Malmesbury very justly says of this work of Scotus, "De Divisione

Naturae," that it was very useful for the solution of some difficult

questions, "Si tamen ignoscatur ei in quibusdum, quibus a Latinorum

tramite deviavit dum in Græcos acriter oculos intendit." His eyes were on

the Greeks, and his spirit was with the Greeks, and so his teaching and

his language in many respects seemed strange and erroneous to the Latins.

It has been said that this book of Scotus was corrupted by his enemies the

more easily to refute him, and by heretics the more easily to defend their

own errors. But the supposition is quite gratuitous, unsupported by

evidence, and unnecessary as an explanation of facts. His doctrine in many

points was attacked in his own time, his errors were palliated by friends

and amplified by enemies. In later ages erratic sectaries, who vexed the

Church of France in the beginning of the thirteenth century, appealed to

the writings of Scotus in defence of their errors, and thus he was made a

third time a scape-goat to carry the sins of others. We learn from the

Chronicon of the monk Alberic, but from no other source, that in the year

A.D. 1225, Honorius III. sent a Brief to the archbishops and bishops of

France, in which he passed a severe judgment on the book of Scotus,

entitled "Periphysis," for so the monk writes it. The Bishop of Paris had

informed the Pope that this work was full of heretical depravity, and had

been condemned by the Archbishop of Sens and his suffragans, that it was

hid in many monasteries, where cloistered and scholastic men, thinking it

a great thing to propound new opinions, spent much time in the study of

the book. So the Pope ordered it to be carefully sought after, whenever it

was found to be solemnly burned, and inflicted excommunication, _ipso

facto_, on those who should knowingly presume to keep it in their

possession. This severe prohibition was effective. The MS. copies were

everywhere sought out, and nearly all destroyed, and no Catholic dared to

publish it. But in the year A.D. 1681, Thomas Gale, of Oxford, printed it

at that city. A few years later, in A.D. 1685, the old prohibition was

renewed, and the work placed on the Index, where it still remains,

although reprinted in Migne's Patrology.

Scotus also wrote several Greek and Latin poems on various subjects,

thirteen of which, mostly Latin, are printed in Migne's edition of his

works. Like most poems in foreign, and especially in dead languages, they

are merely artificial flowers of poesy--stiff, scentless, and lifeless;

but they serve to show the familiarity of the writer even in that rude age

with the languages of Greece and Rome.

How Scotus ended his life we know not. William of Malmesbury, whom many

other authorities blindly follow, states that it was a common report--_ut

fertur_--that he was invited to England by King Alfred, that he lectured

at Oxford, and afterwards retired to Malmesbury, where he was stabbed to

death by his pupils with their pens, or perhaps penknives (graphiis). His

body was at first secretly buried in the Church of St. Laurence, where the

crime was committed, but a bright light shining nightly on the spot warned

the monks to transfer the holy remains of the martyred scholar to the left

corner of the high altar in the great Church of Malmesbury, where they

reposed in peace and honour until another abbot, Warinus de Lira, exhumed

the bodies of Scotus and other saints, and buried them without honour or

ceremony in an obscure corner of the Church of St. Michael. But his memory

was long venerated as a holy martyr, and his feast celebrated on the 10th

of November, on which day his name was inserted in the Antwerp edition of

the _Roman Martyrology_, until Cardinal Baronius had it expunged. The

story of William of Malmesbury is altogether improbable, and we have no

contemporary evidence in its support. It arose in the beginning from

confounding Scotus Erigena, or, as he was sometimes called, Joannes, with

another John, abbot of Etheling, who was invited to England by Alfred,

about the year A.D. 880. In the letter written by Anastasius in A.D. 875,

he not obscurely speaks of John Scotus as already dead, at least he uses

the past tense throughout. It is not improbable, therefore, that shortly

after the Pope's letter in A.D. 862, Scotus may have deemed it prudent to

retire from Paris, and, with an Irishman's love of home, returned to his

native country, where he is said to have died in peace and holiness in the

year A.D. 874.

It has been said, too, that he travelled to Athens, and visited various

parts of the East, and that he was skilled in most of the Oriental

languages. But these statements appear unfounded; they are certainly

destitute of any reliable authority. What we know for certain is that

Scotus was an Irishman, that he was the first scholar of his time, that he

acquired his knowledge even of the Greek language, in the schools of his

native country. He was loved and honoured by friends who knew him, and

misjudged both during his life and after his death by many who knew

neither the man himself nor his writings. His career was short and

brilliant; comet-like he blazed for a while in the sunshine of royal

favour; he appeared and disappeared in a strangely eccentric orbit. For

ages he was lost to view, but in our own time is seen again shining in the

literary heavens with even more than his ancient splendour. We are not

inclined to extol him unduly, neither does it become us to judge him

harshly; but whatever may be said of his errors, all must admit that John

Scotus Erigena was a man of saintly life, a prodigy of learning, and an

honour to the country which gave him his name and his knowledge.

IV.--FOREIGN SCHOLARS IN IRELAND.

We have already spoken of several foreign scholars, who came to our Irish

Schools; but there are a few others to whom it is necessary to make more

explicit reference.

The hill of Slane, on the banks of the Boyne, near Drogheda, is one of the

historic sites of Ireland. It commands a noble prospect of all the

swelling plains of Meath and Louth, bounded on the north by the distant

Mourne Mountains rising from the sea, and on the south beyond the smoky

pall of Dublin, by the many topped summits of the Wicklow Hills. There,

close at hand on this same left bank of the river towards Drogheda are

Brugh and Dowth and New Grange, the cemeteries of pre-historic kings;

while just in front beyond the river is Rosnaree, where the great King

Cormac sleeps with his face to the rising sun, the daily herald of his

immortal hopes. Further off in the distance to the south and west, may be

seen Royal Tara, and Skreen of Columcille, and Kells of the Crosses, and

the towers of Trim and all the other storied ruins that once guarded the

passes of the Boyne from Newtown of the Normans, by Bective, Navan, and

Donore, whence fled the chicken-hearted James, down to the obelisk by

yonder bridge that marks the spot where the gallant Schomberg fell.

It was on this hill of Slane that St. Patrick lit his Paschal fire for the

first time in Erin, within view of King Laeghaire and his Druids from

Tara. And it was here too that Erc, "the sweet spoken judge of Patrick,"

built his oratory and little cell, which in after ages grew to be a great

monastery and a great college. There is now no trace of the oratory of St.

Erc at Slane. The ivy-clad ruins that still remain on the hill seem to be

of Norman origin, dating probably from the twelfth century. The history of

the ancient monastery has likewise disappeared, almost as completely as

its buildings. One interesting fact, however, is still preserved by local

tradition,[434] and that tradition has been amply confirmed by the

researches of scholars in our times. It is said that a king of France was

educated long ago at the great College of Slane, but his name and date are

forgotten. We are, however, enabled to supply these particulars. St.

Sigebert III. was king of the Austrasian Franks from A.D. 632 to 656.

This pious king was more given to prayer than to warlike enterprise; and

so Grimoald, Mayor of the Palace, became virtually ruler of Austrasia.

When Sigebert died in A.D. 656, Grimoald, wishing to have the name as well

as the power of a king, caused the late king's son, Dagobert, to be

tonsured, and then sent Dido, Bishop of Poitiers, to carry off the boy

secretly to Ireland, to be educated there as a monk in one of its famous

monastic schools. Tradition tells us that the school was Slane, and that

Dagobert spent eighteen or twenty years in its halls, and acquired during

that long period all the learning of the Scots. Meanwhile Grimoald

received the fitting reward of his treason. He was captured by Clovis of

Neustria, and put to death with torture, not long after he had sent the

young prince to Ireland. When Dagobert was grown to man's estate he

returned home to Austrasia, and mounted his father's throne as Dagobert

II., by which name the student of Slane College is known in French

history.[435] It is obvious that Slane was selected, not because it was

the most celebrated school at the time, but because it was in Meath, where

the High-kings mostly dwelt; and it was only natural to bring the royal

boy to some college near the royal court. It was through the agency of

Wilfrid, Archbishop of York, that Dagobert was restored to his friends and

his kingdom about the year A.D. 674, after the deposition and death of

King Childeric II.

Another eminent saint and scholar of foreign origin, contemporary with

Dagobert in Ireland, was Egbert of Northumbria. Bede gives a very

interesting account of this eminent man.[436] He was sprung from the

nobility of Northumbria, and appears to have been born in A.D. 639.

With another young noble named Ethelun, Egbert went over to Ireland, like

the crowds of his countrymen, 'to pursue divine studies, and lead a

continent life.' They sojourned in the monastery, called in Irish

Rathmelsigi, which Bede's editor and translator[437] foolishly calls

'Melfont.' He meant Mellifont, near Drogheda; but there was no monastery

at Mellifont for nearly five hundred years afterwards. As the same learned

editor makes Columba's noble monastery of Dair-magh to be Derry, instead

of Durrow, we need not attach much importance to his notes on Bede

concerning Irish matters. Colgan says that this monastery of Rathmelsigi

was in Connaught; but he does not specify, and probably did not know, the

exact locality. In the _Martyrology of Donegal_, we find reference to

"Colman[438] Rath-Maoilsidhe" (at Dec. 14th), which is in all probability

the monastery referred to by Colgan. This Colman is different from Colman

of Innisboffin, whose festival day is the 8th of August. It is not

improbable that his monastery was situated at the place called Rath-maoil,

or Rath-Maoilcath, both of which were situated near Ballina, on the right

bank of the Moy. Everything points to the fact that most of the young

Northumbrian nobles and ceorls, who came to the West of Ireland in crowds

at this period, landed in the estuary of the Moy, and then going

southward, took up their abode, or founded their religious houses wherever

they could obtain suitable accommodation. St. Gerald's Abbey of Mayo was

not then established (in A.D. 664); and so Egbert and his companions put

themselves under the guidance of St. Colman, or some of his successors, in

this monastery of Rath-Maoilsidhe.

Just then the terrible Yellow Plague made its appearance in Ireland, and

carried off one-half of its population. All the companions of Egbert and

Ethelun were cut off by the plague; and now they themselves were attacked,

and became grievously ill. Then Egbert, whilst he had yet a little

strength remaining, rose up in the morning, and going out of the chamber

of the sick, he sat down alone, and began to think of his past sins; and

he asked God's pardon for them with many tears. He prayed, too, earnestly

that God would not yet take him out of the world, but would give him time

to atone by his good works for the sins of his youth. And if God deigned

to hear his prayer, he vowed never to return again to his native Britain,

but to live as a pilgrim in some strange land; and, moreover, to recite

the Psalter daily, and to fast continuously for twenty-four hours once a

week. When he returned to the sick chamber, Ethelun, his companion, was

asleep; but presently awaking, he told Egbert that his prayer was heard by

God; then he gently rebuked him, for he had hoped that together they would

go into life everlasting. Next day Ethelun died; but Egbert recovered from

his sore sickness, and lived to be ninety years of age, when he departed

from this life.

He was ordained a priest; "and his life," says Bede, "adorned the

priesthood, for he lived in the practice of humility, meekness,

continence, justice, and all other virtues." He loved the Irish greatly,

and lived amongst them for fifty years (A.D. 664-715), preaching the

Gospel, teaching in his monastery, reproving the bad, and encouraging the

good by the bright example of his blameless life. He not only kept his

vow, but he added to it, says Bede; for during the whole Lent he took but

one meal in the day, and that was nothing but bread in limited quantity,

and thin milk from which the cream had been skimmed off. Whatever he got

from others--and he got much--he gave to the poor.

For many years he had been resolving in his mind to sail round Britain,

and go to Germany to preach the Gospel to the pagan tribes who dwelt

there, and who were kindred to his own nation of the Angles. But God had

willed otherwise. There was in Egbert's monastery an old monk who had many

years before been minister to Boisil, Abbot of Melrose, an Irish

foundation in Scotland. Now one morning after matins, Boisil appeared to

this aged monk, who at once recognised his old master, and commanded him

to tell Egbert that it was God's will that he should give up his proposed

journey to Germany, and go rather to instruct the Columbian monasteries in

the right method of keeping Easter, and of tonsuring the head.

Egbert fearing that this vision might be a delusion, still continued his

preparations for Germany, and did not obey the direction given by Boisil.

Then that saint appeared a second time to his minister, and commanded him

to make known to Egbert, in a more imperative way, what it was God willed

him to do. "Let him go at once," he said, "to Columba's monastery of Hy,

_because their ploughs do not go straight_, and he will bring them into

the right way." Moreover, the ship in which he was preparing to set out

for Germany was wrecked in a storm, and thrown upon the shore, leaving,

however, his effects intact. Egbert, taking this as a further

manifestation of the Divine will, gave up his project of going to Germany,

and set sail for Iona. Wictbert, however, one of his associates in

religion in Ireland, went in his stead, and for two years preached the

Gospel in Friesland, but reaped no harvest of success amongst the pagans.

So he returned once again to Ireland, and gave himself up to serve God

during the rest of his life, as he was wont to do before his departure, in

great purity and austerity; "so that if he could not be profitable to

others by teaching them the faith, he took care to be useful to his own

beloved (Irish) people by the example of his virtues."

Now when this holy father and priest, Egbert, beloved of God, and worthy

to be named with all honour, came to the monastery of Iona, he was

honourably and joyfully received by the community. He was also a diligent

teacher, and carried out his precepts by his example, so that he was

willingly listened to by all the members of the community. The effect of

his frequent instructions and pious exhortations, was that at length the

community of Hy consented to give up the inveterate tradition of their

ancestors in religion, and adopt the new discipline, which by this time

had been received everywhere else throughout the Irish Church. Now surely,

this was, as Bede observes, a wonderful dispensation of Providence, that

these very monks of Iona, who were the first to preach the Gospel in

Northumbria, should afterwards be persuaded by this Northumbrian priest to

accept the correct discipline and true rule of spiritual life. And

stranger still, it was on Easter Day, the 24th of April, A.D. 729, that

this man of God went to his eternal rest; whereas, but for his exertions,

that Easter festival would not have been duly celebrated on that day, but,

in accordance with the unreformed system, would have been celebrated in

that year towards the end of March, whilst the rest of the Church was

observing the fast of Lent.

With Egbert also dwelt in the same monastery the celebrated St. Chad, or

Cedd, Bishop of Lichfield. Chad is justly regarded, on account of his

learning and holiness, as one of the Fathers of the Anglo-Saxon Church. He

was one of four brothers, like Egbert himself, of Northumbrian origin, two

of whom became bishops, and two were holy priests. Chad was one of that

crowd of Northumbrian nobles, who, in the days of Bishops Finan and

Colman, flocked to Ireland for instruction in theology and religious

discipline. Bede says expressly that he with the most reverend Father

Egbert, when both were youths, led for a long time a monastic life

together in Ireland--praying, observing continency, and meditating on the

Holy Scriptures. Chad, however, returned after a time to his own country;

but Egbert continued in Ireland until he set sail for Iona.

Chad was, as we have already seen, present at the Conference of Whitby in

A.D. 664, and having been educated in Ireland, he naturally sympathised

with Bishop Colman and the Irish party. He was subsequently appointed to

the see of York, but still sympathising with the Irish party, he was

deposed through the influence of Wilfrid. Yet he was sometime after

appointed to the See of Lichfield. He was a man of great holiness of life;

but his episcopacy at Lichfield only continued for two years and a half.

He died probably in A.D. 671 or 672, and was buried in St. Mary's Church;

but his bones were afterwards translated to the present Cathedral of

Lichfield.

A little later in the same seventh century, the celebrated St. Willibrord,

afterwards Archbishop of Utrecht, was a student in our Irish schools, and

most probably, we should say, at Mayo of the Saxons. His father Wilgils,

was also of the English nobility, but after the birth of his son he

retired from the world, and built himself a cell at the mouth of the

Humber, where he led a life of the most austere virtue. Willibrord in his

youth was trained in the great school of St. Wilfrid at York; but about

the age of twenty, in order to finish his education, like most of his

countrymen at the time, he passed over to Ireland. This much we know from

Bede, who also adds that whilst yet only a priest in Ireland, he led

therein the life of a pilgrim--forsaking his earthly country through love

of his heavenly country. Willibrord also testified to Bishop Acca and

Bishop Wilfrid, that once on a time, when he was in Ireland, the plague

overtook a certain student of the Scottish, that is the Irish, race. This

young man, though well skilled in literature, had been rather heedless

about the welfare of his soul. When he fell sick he at once sent for

Willibrord, and telling him how much he feared to die on account of his

sins, he besought him, if he had any relics of the good King Oswald, to

apply them for his benefit.

Then Willibrord said that he had a portion of the stake on which the

pagans fixed the head of the martyred king; and "blessing some water he

put into it a chip of the aforesaid oaken stake, and gave it to the sick

man to drink. He presently found ease, and recovering from his sickness he

lived a long time after; and being entirely converted to God in heart and

actions, wherever he came, he spoke of the goodness of his merciful

Creator, and the honour of his faithful servant."[439]

It was the holy Egbert, who sent Willibrord with twelve companions to

preach the gospel to the Frisians. And shortly after two other priests of

the English nation, who had long lived as pilgrims in Ireland, following

their example, went to preach in Saxony, where they gained the crown of

martyrdom within a few years. This is not the place to narrate at length

the apostolic labours of Willibrord and his associates--how he was

consecrated by Pope Sergius in Rome, and was commissioned to preach to the

Frisians; how completely he succeeded where others had failed; how he

laboured there for fifty years in all--during thirty-six of which he was

Archbishop of Utrecht. These things are told at length by Alcuin in his

beautiful _Life of St. Willibrord_, which also describes the saintly end

of the long and laborious career of this venerable servant of God.

It is surely a credit to our Irish schools to have trained up so many

learned and apostolic men, like Egbert and Willibrord. It was in Ireland

they were trained in divine studies, as Bede testifies; it was in Ireland

they learned the continent and self-denying life of all true apostles; and

it was from Ireland they went forth to preach the Gospel to the fierce

pagan tribes of Germany, where so many of them were privileged to meet a

martyr's death.

Another Irish student at this period was Agilbert, afterwards Bishop of

Paris. He was, says Bede, a Frank by birth, who came from that country to

Ireland, "and lived a long time there for the purpose of studying the

Scriptures." Bede seems to imply that he was a bishop before he came to

Ireland,[440] for he describes him as a 'Pontifex natione Gallus.' This

shows in what high esteem our Irish schools must have been held at this

period, when even bishops came from France to study divinity in their

halls. Agilbert afterwards passed over to England, and for a time held the

See of Dorchester or Winchester. He was present at the Conference of

Whitby, and took the side of Wilfrid, but finally returning to his native

country he was made Bishop of Paris. The year of his death is not known.

It was probably about A.D. 680.

CHAPTER XXIV.

GAEDHLIC SCHOOLS AND SCHOLARS OF ANCIENT ERIN.

"The Gaedhlic tongue! the Gaedhlic tongue! why should its voice be

still,

When all its magic tones with old and golden glories thrill--

When, like an aged bard, it sings departed warriors' might--

When it was heard in kingly halls, where thronged the brave and bright;

When oft its glowing tales of war made dauntless hearts beat high--

When oft its tales of hapless love drew tears from beauty's eye?"

--_Anonymous._

Hitherto we have spoken chiefly of the monastic schools, and the clerical

scholars of ancient Erin. We are not to assume, however, that the Gaedhlic

tongue was not cultivated in those schools, and that the eminent saints of

ancient Erin were not excellent Gaedhlic scholars. We know for certain

that the contrary was the fact. Several of them, like Columcille, were

eminent Gaedhlic poets; many of them, like St. Carthach of Lismore, even

wrote their monastic Rules in Gaedhlic; and, of course, even scholars,

like Adamnan, who wrote learned treatises in the Latin tongue, must have

preached the Gospel, and taught the people in the vernacular language. St.

Patrick himself, who was a Briton, found it necessary to do so, and, as

far as we can judge, he must have been an accomplished speaker in the

ancient Gaedhlic tongue.

Still the monastic schools were more given to the cultivation of the

classical languages than to the study of the Gaedhlic; and when their

great scholars wished to deal with theological or scientific subjects,

they wrote in the Latin language. Even some of our Annalists, when they

wished to give special prominence to their entries, wrote in the Latin

rather than in the Gaedhlic.

At the same time, we are not to suppose that during this period there were

no Gaedhlic schools in the sense in which we now speak of English as

opposed to Classical schools--that is, academies in which the Gaedhlic

language, and literature, and history were the subjects chiefly, if not

exclusively, taught. On the contrary, we have abundant evidence that there

were several schools of this character, in which the vernacular language

was cultivated with great success, and not merely the language, but also

the history, the antiquities, the laws, and the literature of the nation.

We are even inclined to think that in Celtic Ireland the vernacular

language was more carefully cultivated during this period, and that laymen

generally had better opportunities of obtaining what would now be called a

university education, than they had in any other country of western

Europe. This statement is, in our opinion, capable of clear proof from

existing monuments; but for the present we need not go beyond the admitted

facts that both clerics and laymen from the Continent came to the schools

of Erin in large numbers, to acquire the culture of our Celtic schools;

whilst on the other hand, when our Irish scholars went abroad during the

ninth and tenth centuries, they were at once entrusted with the highest

offices in the Continental schools, and proved themselves to be, not only

amongst the ablest theologians of the time, but also the first men of that

age in Greek and Latin Literature. The history of men like Virgilius, and

Dungal, and John Scotus Erigena, proves the truth of this statement beyond

denial or controversy.

The Lives of the Saints furnish materials for the history of our monastic

schools; but our lay scholars, having no such records of their lives and

learning, are forgotten, except in so far as some treatise, or fragment of

a treatise, of their composition may have survived the wreck of time.

We find, however, from references in the Brehon Laws, that lay Schools and

lay Professors occupied a recognised and honourable position in the social

polity of the time.

I.--ORGANIZATION OF THE GAEDHLIC PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS.

In the Sequel, or Second Part, of the _Crith Gabhlach_ the legal rights

and social position of the Professors of the Liberal Arts are set down

with a considerable degree of fulness and accuracy. We are aware that it

has been said[441] that these, and some other portions of the _Crith

Gabhlach_ "are the fantastic production of an antiquarian lawyer of a

strong ecclesiastical bias." It is hardly necessary to question the

competency of this writer to pronounce such an opinion. He appears to have

been wholly unacquainted with the Irish language, and obviously has only

a lawyer's knowledge of our ancient Annals. For those very things,

regarding the orders, rights, and privileges of the Church, which he so

coolly describes as the fantastic production of a lawyer with an

ecclesiastical bias, are shown in every page of our Annals to be amongst

the recognised institutions of the Celtic tribes in Erin. It is, in fact,

quite clear that he admits only as authentic laws those which seem to

harmonise with his own pre-conceived notions of ecclesiastical polity; but

those which do not fit in with these pre-conceived views, he rejects as

fantastic! Such is the critical faculty of some of those to whom the

publication of the Brehon Laws has been entrusted.

In this Sequel to the _Crith Gabhlach_,[442] 'profession' is set down as

one of the things which give social status in Erin. And, as in the Church,

and amongst the land-owning classes, there were several grades, so there

were also amongst the professional classes. These grades are set down as

seven; but it is not easy for us to realise the degrees of gradation

between them, since that state of society has totally passed away; as

surely it would be difficult in similar circumstances to discriminate

between the various grades in the learned professions that exist amongst

ourselves to-day. It would not be easy for us to explain for the Maoris

how those entitled to write after their names A.B., or M.A., or LL.D.

differ amongst themselves; or in what the Q.C. is superior to the Stuff

Gown; and the same difficulty will be found to exist in all the degrees,

whether academical or professional, on which men set so much value at

present.

In like manner, in ancient Erin, the 'seven grades of wisdom' are

carefully distinguished by law, although it is not easy for us in every

case to perceive the point of the distinction.

There was a High-professor (_rosai_), and a simple Professor (_sai_);

there was an _anruth_ and a _sruth_, that is, a 'noble stream' and a

'stream,' which, in our opinion, have not been at all explained; there was

an 'illustrator,' and an 'interrogator,' and a 'pupil'--or, as we should

now call them, a grinder, and a tutor, and an undergraduate. The

High-professor was also called an _ollamh_ and a _sai litre_, that is in

modern parlance a LL.D. (speaking of laymen), and a Doctor of Literature.

The most important point is that the Ollave was entitled to sit at the

king's table as an honoured guest. In point of knowledge he was qualified

to answer all questions in the four great departments of learning--that

is, in poetry, literature, history, and, like a LL.D., in canon and civil

law.

He was entitled to bring four-and-twenty persons in his retinue, or

peripatetic school; and neither he nor they could be denied food without

incurring a severe penalty--one-seventh of his death-eric. One of his

functions and rights was to be 'in the bosom of his disciples,' always

imparting knowledge to them on all suitable occasions.

The _anruth_, or 'noble stream,' was only entitled to half this company,

but in other respects he was supposed to be a junior Ollave or Fellow--in

the number of his intellectual gifts, in the eloquence of his language,

the greatness of his knowledge, and the nobility of his teaching--but he

had not yet reached the 'pinnacle' of knowledge, like the full-blown

Ollave.

We cannot now discuss at greater length the various other sub-divisions,

both amongst masters and pupils, which were almost as numerous as in the

Intermediate Schools and Royal University--all put together, including the

Senators, Fellows, Teaching-Examiners, and Graduates.

The learned professions were, in like manner, carefully discriminated and

sub-divided. Leaving out the Church, it seems that there were at this

period three great lay professions--Poetry, Law, and History. Poetry

(_filidecht_), generally gets precedence; and the Ollave-poet seems to

have been at the very top of the learned professions. The 'bard' at this

period is distinguished from the 'poet.' The former is described as a man

"without lawful learning but his own intellect;"[443] that is a man who

had from nature the gift of music and of song, but who was never regularly

trained, and never graduated in the School of Poetry. Not so the _file_ or

poet. He was trained in all the mysteries of the various kinds of Gaedhlic

verse; he could compose _extempore_ or in writing; he knew the legal

number of recognised poems and tales, and was pronounced qualified to

recite them before kings and chieftains, whether in the banquet hall, or

on the battle-march. He could eulogise, too, and satirise; and he and all

his company were entitled both to fees and refection.

The course in poetry extended over 'twelve years of hard work;'[444] and

besides the knowledge of the seven kinds of verse, in each of which the

Ollave-poet was supposed to be able to compose extemporaneously, he was

also required to know seven times fifty tales by heart for public

recitation. These tales were of a wild and romantic character, but for

that very reason were highly popular with all classes in ancient Erin.

They included tales of Battles, Voyages, Cattle-spoils, Sieges, Sorrows,

Slaughters, and so on, through the lost list of the legendary poems of

Erin. Fortunately many of them still survive in manuscript, and a few have

been published; which even in faulty translations are found to be

exceedingly interesting and amusing. It was, doubtless, the popular and

entertaining character of these romantic stories that placed the

Ollave-poet at the head of the learned professions, even on an equality

with kings and bishops in point of social dignity. There were seven grades

or degrees in this great fraternity, from the _fochloc_, or scholar-poet,

up to the great Ollave himself, who was the head of the school, or band of

twenty-four that formed his train.

In like manner with the Brehons, there was an Ollave-Brehon who

corresponded with a judge of the High Court in our own times; and then

there were seven grades of inferior brehonship, descending from this high

official to the raw law student, who was just beginning to take out his

lectures and eat his dinners--for, in ancient, as in modern Erin, the

lawyers made eating an essential part of their professional career. The

fees of the Brehon were fixed by law, and to withhold them was a grave

offence, for which a distress might be levied after an interval of three

days.[445]

Whoever looks over, even in a cursory way, the four large volumes of the

ancient Brehon code already published, will readily admit that to be an

accomplished lawyer in ancient Erin required long and careful study under

competent masters. At length the system grew so intricate and complicated

that the Brehonship was confined to a few families, who transmitted from

generation to generation the key to the interpretation both of the written

and customary law. Every _righ_ was entitled to have his own Brehon, who

sat on stated days, generally in the open air, for the adjudication of all

the causes arising in the tribe. The litigants might, of course, have

their own advocates, but they were generally young Brehons of inferior

degree belonging to the school of the chief Brehon. Amongst these legal

families the MacEgans of Duniry in Galway, and Ormond in Tipperary,

became the most celebrated, so that members of that family were employed

as judges by most of the kinglets beyond the Shannon.

The Historical Poets or Chroniclers seem to have constituted a separate

professional class in Ireland during this period. O'Donnell, in a passage

from the Irish Life of St. Columba, clearly defines their duties, and he

must have known them well, for the O'Clerys, his own hereditary

Chroniclers, were the most illustrious members of that profession that

ever appeared in Erin. It was their duty to record--(_a_) the

achievements, wars, and triumphs of the kings, princes, and chiefs; (_b_)

to preserve the genealogies and define the rights of noble families; (_c_)

to ascertain and set forth the limits and extent of the sub-kingdoms and

territories ruled over by the princes and chiefs. There is no statement in

the Brehon Code as to the duties of the Chronicler so definite as this,

because the code supposes that these things were perfectly well known to

all the Feni, from their own daily experience.

In the earlier periods of our history these important duties were

discharged by the Bards; but by degrees it was found more convenient to

confine them to a separate class, which afterwards, like the Brehons, came

to be hereditary. As the _righ_ was entitled to have his Bard and Brehon,

so also he was entitled to have his Chronicler to discharge those duties

to which we have referred above. Up to the eleventh century the Chronicles

were written in verse, but after that period they began to be written in

prose; and in many cases they are written both in prose and verse--the

verse being nearly always the older form of the Chronicle.

Many of these Rhyming Chroniclers record merely the local history of their

own chieftains; but in other cases the poet-historian took a wider scope,

and gave a narrative not only of Irish history, but of universal history,

in a brief way, down to the time of St. Patrick. Most of these Chroniclers

were laymen, although several of the most distinguished amongst them were

monks or priests in some of the great monastic schools.

It is quite clear from various references both in our Annals, and in the

Brehon Code, that these three professions were kept quite distinct from

the sixth to the twelfth century, that they were taught by different

professors, and in different schools--these professors being generally but

not always laymen.

Perhaps the earliest school of this character to which we find any

definite reference is the School of Tuaim Drecain. It is doubtless only

one of many similar institutions that flourished in ancient Ireland, but

as we have more accurate information, although incidental, concerning this

establishment, we propose to give an account of this typical seminary in a

separate section.

II.--THE SCHOOL OF TUAIM DRECAIN.

St. Bricin's School of Tuaim Drecain is one of those mentioned in

O'Curry's catalogue of celebrated schools in ancient Ireland. Moreover,

although its founder and rector was a saint, whose festival is found

marked in our martyrologies, it seems to have been a lay school of general

literature, or, as we should say, a school of arts rather than of

scripture or theology. It has besides produced one very distinguished

Irish poet, some scraps of whose writings have come down to us, and

therefore deserves a special notice at our hands.

Its founder is described in the _Martyrology of Donegal_ (5th Sept.) as

"Bricin of Tuaim Drecain, in Breifne of Connaught; but it is in Breifne Ui

Raghallaigh it is, and he was of the race of Tadhg, son of Cian, son of

Ollioll Olum." We find off-shoots of that race of Tadhg, son of Cian, in

Bregia, and in Leyney, county Sligo, and elsewhere also, but to which

branch of the race he belonged we are not informed.

Tuaim Drecain is now called Tomregan, which very nearly represents the

pronunciation of the Irish word. It is a parish situated partly in three

baronies and in the two counties of Cavan and Fermanagh, where the

Woodford river, after draining several of the Leitrim lakes, flows on to

join the river Erne, near Belturbet. The name signifies the tomb or grave

of Drecan, some ancient warrior of whom nothing is known. It would,

however, be interesting to know if there is any tumulus, or stone circle,

in the parish which might help to explain the origin of the name. We know

from the _Annals of the Four Masters_ that Eochaidh Faebhar-glas, King of

Ireland, from A.M. 3707 to 3727, fought a battle at Tuaim Drecon; and it

was probably from the tumulus raised over Drecon on this occasion that the

place got its name.

St. Bricin flourished during the early years of the seventh century, and,

besides his other scholarly acquirements, it seems he had also some

knowledge of medicine. Amongst his pupils the most celebrated was

Cennfaeladh the 'learned,' who in his youth had been a distinguished

soldier, and took part in the great battle of Magh Rath (now Moira, co.

Down), which was fought in the year A.D. 634. On that fatal field he

received a very dangerous wound in the head, which was very near bringing

his learned career to a premature close. He was, however, carried off from

the battle field, and taken to Armagh, whence Senach the Primate, sent him

to Tomregan, that he might have the benefit of the surgical skill of

Bricin. The saint succeeded in healing the wound in the poet's head,

although he had actually lost through the wound a small portion of the

brain. This, however, in his case only added to his powers of memory and

general intelligence, which goes to show that in some cases the skull is

really too thick, and is the better of being trepanned.

At this time St. Bricin was the head of a great lay college at Tuaim

Drecain, which consisted of three distinct schools carried on in different

buildings, each having its own professor--one a School of the Brehon Law

(Feinechas), another a School of Poetry and History, and the third a

School of Classical Learning. These schools were, it appears for

convenience sake, located at the junction of three streets, so that the

pupils could, when necessary, easily pass from one to another.

Now, as soon as Cennfaeladh's wound began to heal, he employed his leisure

in attending the lectures delivered in these various schools; and his head

having been specially opened, he acquired, and what is more, he retained

all the lectures delivered in the different schools, so that he afterwards

opened a similar academy himself, and was able to instruct his pupils in

all these various branches of knowledge. Poetry, it seems, he made the

vehicle of communicating his information, which was quite the usual

practice in those early days; and it had this one great advantage when

books were so scarce--it greatly helped the memory, thus rendering it much

easier for the master to teach, and for the pupil to learn.

Some of the treatises thus composed by Cennfaeladh for the use of his

schools have fortunately survived the ravages of time. O'Curry thinks it

probable that he was the author of an entire Grammatical Tract which has

been preserved in the _Book of Leacan_ and the _Book of Ballymote_.

This Tract, O'Curry tells us, is divided into four books. The authorship

of the First Book is ascribed to Fenius Farsaidh, or Fenius the

Antiquarian, an ancestor of Milesius, who may be regarded as a mythical

personage, his name being introduced to lend an air of antiquity to the

work. The Second Book is, for a similar reason, ascribed to Amergin, a son

of Milesius. The Third Book is attributed to Ferceirtne the Poet, who

flourished in the time of Conor Mac Nessa; but the Fourth Book is clearly

the work of Cennfaeladh himself, who, if he did not compose, certainly

revised the entire treatise. Cennfaeladh died about A.D. 678; and O'Curry

thinks the work was retouched after his death by later scholars--most

likely by Cormac Mac Cullinan, or some of his pupils, towards the close of

the ninth century.

This most interesting work is unfortunately hitherto unpublished, for few

scholars are qualified to undertake the task of its publication. It not

only deals with the principles of the Irish grammatical construction, but

compares the Gaedhlic forms with the Latin of Priscian, Donatus, and other

authors then familiar to Irish scholars; and even to some extent it

compares the Irish inflections with those of the Greek and Hebrew

languages.

Cennfaeladh also compiled a Law Tract which has been published by the

Brehon Law Commissioners; and moreover, he was the author of several

historical poems, fragments of which are still extant. His poem on the

Migrations of Milesius from Scythia to Spain is complete; but we possess

only a fragment of another equally interesting one on the Death of the

Ultonian Heroes of the Red Branch. To him also O'Reilly attributes the

authorship of the poem on the Teach Midhchuarta, which describes all the

furniture and arrangements of the great Mead-Circling House of Tara. So

that it may be truly said that few schools in Ireland produced a more

distinguished scholar than Bricin's Academy at Tomregan in Breifne.[446]

III.--CORMAC MAC CULLINAN.

This is, perhaps, the most fitting place to give an account of the life

and writings of the celebrated Cormac Mac Cullinan, the Bishop-king of

Cashel. It is as a Gaedhlic scholar he is best known to posterity,

although his high position, his valour, his piety, as well as his tragical

end, have all combined to render his career singularly interesting to his

fellow countrymen.

Cormac was born so early as the year A.D. 835, at the very time when

almost all Ireland was writhing under the oppression of the Danes. He was

sprung from the chief royal family of Desmond, that is, the Eoghanachts

of Cashel. It is well known that the entire province of Munster was

divided between two sons of Ollioll Olum--Eoghan, the elder taking

Desmond, and Cormac Cas the younger getting Thomond for his principality,

with alternate right for both brothers to the sovereignty of the entire

province. The Eugenian line, however, contrived to keep the sovereignty of

the province for the most part in their family; and, as these kings lived

generally at Cashel, the royal family of South Munster came to be called

the Eoghanachts of Cashel.

No mention of Cormac is made in our Annals until he was called to the

throne of Cashel by his fellow tribesmen, A.D. 900, when he had attained

the mature age of sixty-five. The Four Masters, however, tell us that

Sneidgius, the wise man of Disert-Diarmada, was his tutor; the latter died

A.D. 885 (_recte_ 888), as we find it in the more accurate _Chronicon

Scotorum_. Disert-Diarmada, now called Castle-Dermott, is a place of

ancient fame in the south of the County Kildare. It took its old name from

a hermitage founded there by St. Diarmaid, otherwise called Ainle, because

he was a 'fresh-complexioned youngling,' as the Gloss on Ængus tells us,

when he retired to the hermitage that has borne his name ever since. The

ancient round tower still standing, as well as the old stone cross, and

the broken shaft of a second cross, show that the old abbey, on whose site

the Protestant Church now stands, was a place of great ecclesiastical

importance. The Crouched Friars were established there by Walter de

Riddlesford, and Thomas, Lord of Offaley, founded a convent for

Franciscans in the same place. It was called Castle-Dermott from the

castle erected by de Riddlesford in the reign of King John. It was a place

of much strength, surrounded by walls, and defended by this strong castle;

and hence we find that two Parliaments of the Pale were held here--one in

the reign of Edward IV., and the other in A.D. 1499. Its chief glory,

however, will always be that it was there Cormac Mac Cullinan was

educated, and there he was buried. It gave him knowledge, and when his

brief and stormy reign was over, it gave him the rest of the grave.

It seems that during the ninth century at least, the abbots of

Disert-Diarmada enjoyed quasi-episcopal jurisdiction. Some of them were

certainly bishops; and, no doubt, had a territory which owned their

spiritual sway. In A.D. 842, we are told that "Cumsudh, son of Derero and

Maenach, son of Sadchadach, who were both bishops and anchorites, died in

one night at Disert-Diarmada." A.D. 895 died Muirghaes, Bishop and Abbot

of Disert-Diarmada; and again in A.D. 1038, we hear of the death of a

'distinguished bishop' of Disert-Diarmada.

The learning of Cormac Mac Cullinan was, no doubt, acquired within the

walls of this ancient monastic school. Sneidgius, the sage (_egnai_) of

Disert-Diarmada, was his tutor, and from the acquirements of the pupil, it

is not difficult to infer the learning of the master. We have now no

means, however, of knowing how long Cormac remained at Disert-Diarmada.

He was certainly a bishop before he became King of Cashel, but it is

difficult to say what See he was placed over, or whether he ever had

charge of any See at all. We do not read in any of our Annalists that he

was Bishop of Cashel before he became King of Munster; indeed it is very

doubtful if he were ever Bishop of Cashel at all. There is no reference

made to a Bishop of Cashel before this period, so far as we know, in any

of our ancient authorities. It was the seat of the temporal royalty, but

it had not yet become the seat of spiritual authority. The Four Masters

say that Cormac was King and Bishop, but they do not say he was Bishop of

Cashel. The _Annals of Ulster_ call him King of Cashel, but do not call

him 'bishop' at all. The _Chronicon Scotorum_ describes him as "King of

Cashel, a most excellent scribe, a bishop, and an anchorite;" but makes no

reference to his See. Keating is, so far as we know, the first who calls

Cormac, not Bishop, but Archbishop of Cashel. In fact down to the year

A.D. 1101, Cashel was simply a royal dun, which gave its name to the

kingdom of South Munster. There was up to that time no church or monastery

at Cashel, of which we have any information. But in that year a remarkable

event took place, thus recorded by the Four Masters: "A meeting of Leath

Mogha was held at Caiseal by Muircheartach O'Briain with the chiefs of the

laity, and O'Dunan, noble bishop and chief senior with the chiefs of the

clergy; and on this occasion Muircheartach O'Briain made a grant, such as

no king had ever made before, namely, he granted Caiseal of the kings to

the religious, without any claim of laymen or clergymen upon it, but the

religious of Ireland in general." Here we find at the beginning of the

twelfth century, that for the first time in its history, Cashel was given

up for religious purposes, and ceased to be the royal residence of the

southern kings. We find down to that time frequent mention in our Annals

of the kings and royal heirs of Cashel, but of no Bishop of Cashel.

Thenceforward, however, we hear of the Archbishops, but not of the kings

or tanists of Cashel. The thing appears to have been brought about in the

following way.

In consequence of the temporal sovereignty of Cashel, the prelates of

Emly, in whose diocese it was situated, began to claim metropolitan

jurisdiction over all Munster, especially when the O'Brian family began to

claim the sovereignty of Ireland during the eleventh century. Hence we

find that Domhnall Ua Heni is called in the _Chronicon Scotorum_

'Archbishop of the men of Munster' (Anno 1094). Celsus, the Primate, was

anxious to oblige the King of Munster, and, moreover, O'Dunan, successor

of O'Heni (from A.D. 1094-1118), was the personal friend and admirer of

Celsus. Hence St. Bernard tells us that Celsus consented to establish _de

novo_ a second metropolitan See in Ireland, subject, however, to the

primatial See of Armagh. O'Dunan was the first who _de jure_, if it can be

so called, enjoyed the metropolitan dignity in the South of Ireland; and

we know that St. Malachy was anxious to obtain the pall for the new See of

Cashel, as well as for his own primatial See of Armagh. And it was

doubtless to provide a sufficient endowment and a becoming See for the new

metropolitan that the king made over his own royal fortress, and a part of

his mensal estates for that purpose.

King Murtogh O'Brian was succeeded in the year A.D. 1119 by Cormac Mac

Carthy, a pious and munificent prince. He did not reside at Cashel, for it

was now church property; and it is highly probable the 'noble senior and

chief bishop of Munster' had already established his episcopal palace on

the famous Rock. He was not yet, however, formally recognised as

archbishop, for he was present at the Synod of Fiadh Mic Ænghusa, which,

according to the Four Masters, was held in A.D. 1111, and he is there

simply described as 'noble senior of Erin,' and as _Bishop_ of Munster, or

as others have it, Bishop of Cashel. He was the first prelate who bore

that title _de jure_, and he was a man who in every respect seems to have

been worthy of the eminent dignity to which he was now elevated. He died

at Clonard in the year A.D. 1117, according to the Four Masters, who

describe him as "the head of the clergy in Ireland (in merit) and lord of

the alms deeds of the West of Europe."

If, as the Four Masters say, his death took place in A.D. 1117, it was

just two years before the death of his friend Murtogh O'Brian, "King of

Munster and of Ireland," the munificent prince who gave over Cashel for

religious purposes. Cormac, his successor, was not to be outdone in

generosity, so we find that in A.D. 1127 he began to build the beautiful

church on the Rock of Cashel, which has ever since been known as Cormac's

Chapel. It is sometimes ascribed to Cormac Mac Cullinan, but Petrie

conclusively shows that it was begun about A.D. 1127 by Cormac Mac Carthy,

and consecrated seven years later in A.D. 1134, as all our annalists

declare.

It is a singular fact, too, that Cormac Mac Carthy, shortly after the

chapel on the Rock was begun, was driven from his throne by Turlough

O'Conor, and was compelled to take refuge at Lismore, and there also "took

the staff-bachall"--or crozier[447]--and was honoured with the counsels

and friendship of St. Malachy. Hence he is called a bishop-king by a

contemporary writer, Maelbrighte, in his copy of the Gospel now preserved

in the British Museum. The Four Masters also referring to his murder in

A.D. 1138, describe him as Lord of Desmond, and Bishop-king of Ireland;

and add, that he was treacherously slain by Turlough, son of Diarmaid

O'Brian, a grandson of the previous king. Our own opinion therefore is,

that O'Dunan, the noble senior, was the first Bishop of Cashel, that it

was Murtough O'Brian gave him his See-lands, and that it was Cormac Mac

Carthy, himself a King-bishop, who built the beautiful chapel on the Rock,

rather, however, as an episcopal oratory, than as a cathedral properly so

called.

Now to return to Cormac Mac Cullinan. He became King of Munster in the

year A.D. 900, when, as the _Annals of Ulster_ tell us, there was a

'change of kings' at Cashel, viz.: Cormac Mac Cullinan in the place of

Cenngegain, that is Finnguine--the former term was, it seems, a nick-name

of the previous king, who became unpopular and was deposed by the

tribesmen. Next year he was murdered, but it was by his own kinsmen.

There is no doubt that Cormac was, as we have said, a bishop at this

period. He was not Bishop of Emly, for the See was then filled. Neither

was he Bishop of Lismore, as some writers have asserted, for his namesake,

the Bishop of Lismore, lived until A.D. 1119. It is not necessary, indeed,

to assume that he had any See. Hitherto he seems to have been a man of

studious habits, as he certainly was a man of great learning. Being a

member of the royal family of Munster, it would, so to speak, be the

right thing to make him a bishop; but, in all probability, he spent most

of his time in retirement at Disert-Diarmada, and was no doubt reluctantly

called to the throne, as next in blood, by the revolution which deposed

his predecessor.

All our annalists agree in representing Cormac as both a pious and learned

prince; but we cannot call him either a great king or a great saint. That

he was a just man according to the ordinary standard, he gave proof soon

after his accession to the throne of Munster. The old rule of alternate

succession between the Eugenian and Dalcassian lines had, as the learned

Cormac was well aware, been scandalously violated. He resolved, so far as

he could, that justice should be done when his reign would come to an end.

Calling around him the chiefs both of Desmond and Thomond, he reminded

them of the ancient rule of alternate succession, and confessing that the

Eugenian line hitherto had enjoyed more than they were entitled to of the

sovereign power, he besought the princes of his own house to consent to

the succession of a Dalcassian prince to the throne of Munster. The

princes of Desmond listened in respectful silence, and pretended to assent

to the proposed arrangement, but afterwards declined to carry it out.

The seven years' reign of Cormac was full of stirring events. The first or

second year of his reign was marked by "the expulsion of the Gentiles from

Ireland, _i.e._, from the fortress of Ath-Cliath," as the _Annals of

Ulster_ express it. They had, for some years, been losing ground on the

eastern coasts, but at this period met with such a crushing disaster from

Cearbhall, King of Leinster, that all the foreigners fled from Dublin,

half-dead with terror, having left most of their ships behind them. It was

the beginning of the 'forty years' rest,' which poor Ireland then enjoyed

from their perpetual incursions. No doubt colonies of Danes still remained

in the great sea-port towns, which they had built; but they were too much

broken down by defeat to risk any new enterprises, and gladly confined

themselves within their walls, spending their time rather in trade and

commerce than, as hitherto, in war and rapine.

No sooner, however, did the native princes once more breath freely, than

they turned their arms against each other. Flann Sionna, son of

Maelsechnaill, was then King of Ireland. He had already reigned more than

twenty years as Ard-righ; and what is more wonderful still, he was

destined to reign sixteen years more, and, strangest of all, to die in

his bed. He was a restless and ambitious prince, and seems to have

inherited all the ancestral jealousy of the South of Ireland. In A.D. 904

he made a wanton raid into Ossory. Next year he led a hosting against

Munster, and in conjunction with Cearbhall, King of Leinster, he plundered

all the Golden Vale, from Gowran to Limerick. The men of Munster were now

fairly roused, and even the Bishop-king was put upon his mettle. He levied

a great army, and marched northwards to meet the troops of Flann and his

allies in a fair fight. The rival hosts met on the same field of Magh

Lena, which had witnessed the great battle between Conn the Hundred

Fighter, and Eoghan Mor. Once more it was North and South arrayed against

each other in fratricidal strife, whilst Danish colonies still held all

the ports of the kingdom. Of old the North was victorious at Magh Lena;

but now fortune favoured the men of Munster. Flann and his allies were

completely defeated, and driven off the field. Not content with this

victory, the King-bishop crossed the Shannon, and marching into the very

heart of Connaught defeated and plundered the Connacians, who were allies

of Flann. The hostages of the western provinces were carried off in

triumph, and the fleets of Munster sailing up from Killaloe plundered the

islands of Lough Ree.

So far no blame can be thrown on the King-bishop. He had merely defended

his own territories, and chastised the insolence of an aggressive foe. But

the victors were now grown wanton from success, and resolved to carry

their triumphant arms into Leinster, as they had already done into

Connaught. The pretext for this wanton invasion was the recovery of the

old Borrumean tribute, which, it was alleged, the Leinster men had not

paid for 200 years, and which the chiefs of Munster were now determined to

exact. Cormac was himself entirely opposed to this unjust war. He felt, no

doubt, that this alleged non-payment of the tribute was merely a pretext

for a war of conquest. But his subjects were full of confidence from

previous success; and, moreover, he was urged on to battle by his evil

genius, Flaithbeartach, abbot of Inniscathy, a member of the royal house

of Munster, and subsequently King of Cashel.

This restless ecclesiastic was the real author of all the evils that

followed. He seems to have been a headstrong and impetuous man, fond of

strife and prodigal of blood.

Cormac's greatest fault was weakly yielding against his own better

judgment to the counsels of this evil adviser, who urged him to prosecute

a war which Cormac in his own conscience believed to be unjust. The

Leinster King had sent an embassy to Cormac offering to submit the

questions at issue to the decision of a friendly conference--meantime

asking a cessation from arms, and offering to give as a hostage the abbot

of Cormac's own monastery of Disert-Diarmada. Cormac was willing to accept

these terms; but the abbot of Inniscathy spurned them and declared he

would alone fight the Leinster men. "Then," said Cormac, "I will not

desert you, but I feel the issue of this battle will be fatal to me and

mine." Thereupon he made his will, leaving rich gifts in gold and

vestments to many churches, and desiring that his body should be buried,

if possible, at Cloyne; if not, in Disert-Diarmada, where he was educated,

and had spent so many quiet and happy years before he was called to bear

the burden of a crown.

The battle was fought at Ballaghmoon, close to the ancient Campus Albus,

where the great Synod was held in A.D. 630 with reference to the Paschal

question. On this historic field the old quarrel of North against South

was once more to be fought out. Flann, the King of Erin, and Cathal, son

of Conor, King of Connaught, came to aid the King of Leinster with all

their forces. On the other side were, besides Cormac and his chiefs,

Ceallach, King of Ossory who, like Cormac himself, had suffered much from

Flann's previous incursions, and other subordinate kings. From the first

the tide of battle turned against the South. The gallant chieftains of

Leath-Mogha would not desert their king, but they had no stomach for the

fight. Ceallach of Ossory fled ingloriously from the field, and it is said

that one Munster prince, a friend of the king, turned his horse's head

from the foe, crying out bitterly, "It is a battle brought on by

clerics--let the clerics fight it out." Cormac's horse, it is said,

slipped in the blood pools, and fell upon his rider, who was thereupon

seized and beheaded by a soldier of the North, on a stone which is still

shown at Ballaghmoon. The nobles of the South fell thick around him, and

the White Field was made red with the blood of the men of Munster. Amongst

the slain were several abbots and other ecclesiastics who had followed the

King-bishop to the field, but Flaherty, abbot of Inniscathy, the author of

all the mischief, succeeded in effecting his escape.

The head of Cormac, after the battle, was carried by some soldiers to King

Flann, but he rebuked them for their brutality, and ordered the body of

his fallen foe to be sought for on the field of battle, and buried with

the head at Disert-Diarmada, which was not far from the fatal field.[448]

IV.--WRITINGS OF CORMAC MAC CULLINAN.

Cormac Mac Cullinan is described by the Four Masters "as a king, a bishop,

an anchorite, a scribe, and profoundly learned in the Scotic tongue." The

_Martyrology of Donegal_ adds that although he had been married to the

celebrated Gormlaith, daughter of Flann, his conqueror, he had always

lived a perfect virgin, sleeping covered only with his thin tunic, and

frequently immersed in cold water whilst chanting his psaltery. We,

however, are more concerned with the king's writings than with his

penances. Enough of his works still remain to prove the truth of the

Masters' statement, that he was profoundly versed in the Scotic tongue,

and we may add, not only in the language, but in the laws, the literature,

the history, and the antiquities of his native country.

Cormac's _Glossary_ is a work that is now well known to Irish scholars,

thanks to the diligent labour of John O'Donovan and of Dr. Whitley Stokes,

by whom it was translated and published in 1868. The book is now a rare

and dear one, but invaluable for a student of the Celtic language and

literature. It contains quotations from Latin authors, from Irish

chronicles, and from the poems of our native bards and ollaves. There are

also numerous references to the laws, romances, druidism, and mythology of

ancient Erin. From another point of view the work is interesting, not so

much for its philological learning, as because it shows the extent and

variety of the scholarship, cultivated in our Irish Schools during the

ninth century. As O'Curry says--"The author (of the Glossary) traces a

great many of the words, either by derivation from, or comparison with,

the Hebrew, the Greek, the Latin, the British, and (as he calls it) the

Northmantic language, and it contains at least one Pictish

word--_Cartait_--almost the only word of the Pictish language that we

possess."[449] There is no work in any living European language that gives

such evident proof of high culture in the ninth century as this most

interesting monument of Celtic learning.

A second great work that has been usually attributed to Cormac is the

_Psalter of Caiseal_. O'Donovan in his learned Introduction to the _Book

of Rights_ explains, we think, very satisfactorily the conflicting

statements that have been made by Irish scholars with reference to this

famous compilation. Colgan and Keating, two eminent authorities, both

ascribe to Cormac Mac Cullinan the composition of that noble work,

"which," says Colgan, "has always been held in the highest estimation." On

the other hand, Connell Macgeoghegan, the translator of the _Annals of

Clonmacnoise_, ascribes it to Brian Boru, and that, too, in the most

formal language. Stranger still, Colgan himself, in another passage

attributes the famous Chronicle called the _Psalter of Caiseal_ to St.

Benignus, the favourite disciple of St. Patrick; but he cautiously adds

that Benignus began its composition--inchoavit et composuit--which can be

well reconciled with what he says of Cormac Mac Cullinan's share in the

work. In a word, Benignus began it, and made it suitable to his own time;

Cormac enlarged and perfected it, making all the necessary changes in

point of language and matter, which the lapse of 350 years imperatively

demanded; and finally, in the time of King Brian Boru it may, as

Macgeoghegan asserts, have been still further corrected and enlarged to

suit the needs of the time, and then formally approved of by that monarch,

as well as by his bishops and his nobles.

St. Benignus, though born in Meath, was of Munster origin. St. Patrick

sent him to preach especially in those districts which he did not himself

visit. Hence Benignus, we are told, went through Kerry and Corcomroe in

his missionary labours; but particularly devoted himself to Southwestern

Connaught, and built his chief church at Kilbannon, near Tuam. He also

specially blessed that province, the natives of which still affectionately

revere the memory of the gentle saint with the sweet voice and winning

gracious ways.

Now, when the Munstermen heard of the preference and the blessings which

Benignus gave to Galway, they were jealous, and complained that he

slighted his own kindred. So to please them, Benignus went down to

Caiseal, and remained there from Shrovetide to Easter, composing in his

own sweet numbers a learned book, which would immortalise the province of

his kinsmen, and be useful, moreover, both to her princes and to her

people.

Such was the beginning of the _Psalter of Caiseal_, the great Domesday

Book of the South, written in verse, and recording the sub-divisions of

the kingdom, the rights and privileges of its various sub-kings, the gifts

they were entitled to receive from the King of Caiseal, the boundaries of

their territories, and so forth. A portion of this primitive _Psalter of

Caiseal_ appears to have been embodied in the existing work, the

authorship of which, although not in its present form, has been rightly

attributed to the same St. Benignus.

Cormac Mac Cullinan in his own day undertook to re-edit this _Psalter of

Caiseal_, and no man was better qualified for the purpose, both by his

office and by his learning. In the accomplishing of his task he was

assisted by his secretary, Selbach, the Sage, a Munster poet, whom Colgan

describes as a man of singular piety and learning,[450] and also by Ængus,

another sage, of whom nothing else is known. Several poems have been

likewise attributed to Cormac, but their authenticity is very doubtful.

Colgan, Keating, and Sir James Ware all speak of the _Psalter of Caiseal_

as extant in their own time; but it has since unhappily disappeared,

although a very considerable fragment is contained in a MS. now in the

Bodleian Library of Oxford. That MS. was, O'Donovan tells us, transcribed

in A.D. 1453 for Mac Richard Butler, by Shane O'Cleary, doubtless a member

of the famous antiquarian family of that name. It contains several ancient

poems and other treatises which undoubtedly formed part of the _Psalter of

Caiseal_ as compiled by King Cormac.

Besides his share in the composition of the _Psalter of Caiseal_, Selbach,

Cormac's learned secretary, is also said to have been the author of a work

well known to Irish scholars as the _Naoimh-Senchus_, or poetical history

of the saints of Erin. It is one of the authorities which Michael O'Clery

constantly quotes in the _Martyrology of Donegal_; and Colgan expressly

attributes its authorship to Selbach the Sage, or, as he calls him in

Latin, Selvacius, and he frequently cites that work under his name.[451]

The _Naoimh-Senchus_ has also, but with less probability, been attributed

to Ængus Ceile De, of whom we have already spoken.

There is an excellent copy of this ancient poem in the _Book of

Leacan_;[452] there was another copy in the Burgundian Library of

Brussels, which is, we believe, now in the Franciscan Convent, Merchants'

Quay, Dublin.

CHAPTER XXIV--(_continued_).

OTHER DISTINGUISHED SCHOLARS OF OUR GAEDHLIC SCHOOLS.

"I'd rather turn one simple verse

True to the Gaelic ear,

Than classic odes I might rehearse

With Senates list'ning near."

--_M'Gee._

I.--GAEDHLIC SCHOLARS OF THE SIXTH AND SEVENTH CENTURIES.

Besides Cennfaeladh and Cormac Mac Cullinan, there were from the sixth to

the seventh century at least twelve or thirteen other Gaedhlic writers,

whose names cannot be passed over without some notice in a work like this.

Our account of these writers, however, must necessarily be very brief, for

in many cases little or nothing is known of the history of their lives,

and to a great extent their writings are still unpublished. O'Curry[453]

and O'Reilly[454] are the two principal authorities in this part of our

subject.

The first on O'Curry's list is Amergin Mac Awley (Amalgaidh), the author

of the celebrated work known as the _Dinnsenchus_. This ancient and highly

interesting topographical poem was, it is said, compiled at Tara, so early

as the year A.D. 550, that is, during the reign of Diarmaid Mac

Cearbhaill, but it has certainly received some additions from later hands.

Amergin himself is described as chief poet of that monarch; but according

to O'Reilly, he must not be confounded with another Amergin Mac Awley, who

flourished towards the end of the seventh century, and was the author of

some law tracts, copies of which are still extant in the library of

Trinity College. The _Dinnsenchus_ has been recently published in _fac

simile_ by Professor Atkinson of Trinity College. The work is specially

interesting and valuable on account of the incidental historical

references, which it contains, and the topographical information which it

supplies. The stories themselves, though in many instances far-fetched and

improbable, are not without their value in illustrating the habits and

thoughts of our Celtic ancestors. Copies of this ancient tract are found

in the _Book of Leinster_, the _Book of Ballymote_, and there is also an

imperfect copy in the _Book of Leacan_, which shows the value that was set

upon it by our ancient scholars. The published _fac simile_ copy is taken

from the _Book of Leinster_.

Of Dallan Forgaill, who flourished towards the end of the sixth century,

we have already spoken in connection with the Columbian Schools. Besides

the _Amhra Cholumchille_, which is still extant, Dallan also composed an

_Amhra_, or Elegy, on the death of St. Senan, or Senanus, of Scattery

Island, in the estuary of the Shannon. He was recognised during his life

as chief poet of all Erin, and he appears to have been on terms of

friendly intimacy with Columcille. His death is said to have taken place

in A.D. 598, shortly after that of Columcille himself.

Senchan Torpeist, then a young poet of known talents, was called upon to

pronounce the usual bardic elegy on the death of the Chief Poet of Erin,

and acquitted himself so creditably that he was unanimously chosen to take

the vacant chair of Dallan Forgaill.[455] He was not insensible to the

responsibilities of his high office; and hence, according to the account

in the _Book of Leinster_, shortly after his acceptance of the post of

chief poet, he called a meeting of all the _Files_ of Erin in order that

they might take measures to recover the lost work known as the _Cuilmenn_,

and which, it appears, contained the only complete copy of the celebrated

historical tale known as the _Tain bo Chuailgne_. How it was recovered is

told in prose by O'Curry, and by Ferguson[456] in a poem of marvellous

imaginative power, which might have been fitly pronounced, if written in

Gaedhlic, by Senchan himself. Senchan flourished during the first half of

the seventh century, and though his travelling school was a large one, he

appears to have always found a welcome in the court of the King Guaire the

Hospitable, who dwelt at Durlus, near Gort, in the county Galway. O'Reilly

says that one of Senchan's poems, in which he celebrates the victories of

Fergus Mac Roy, is still extant in the _Book of Leacan_.

II.--GAEDHLIC SCHOLARS OF THE NINTH AND TENTH CENTURIES.

The ninth was more remarkable than the eighth century for Gaedhlic

scholars of distinction. Of these one of the most celebrated was Maelmura

of Fathan, called also Maelmura of Othan, for it is the same name when the

letter _F_ is aspirated and omitted as silent in the pronunciation.

Maelmura merely means servant of Mura, the patron saint of Fathan. The

parish of Fahan, which takes its name from St. Mura's ancient monastery

near the village, is situated on the eastern shore of Lough Swilly, under

the shadow of Slieve Snaght, the loftiest mountain of Inishowen. The death

of Maelmura is noticed by the Four Masters, A.D. 884, and he is described

as "a truly intelligent poet, and erudite historian in the Scotic

language." The Masters also quote a _rann_, which declares that--

"There trod not the charming earth, there never flourished at affluent

Tara,

The great and fertile Erin never produced a man like the mild fine

Maelmura;

There sipped not death without sorrow, there mixed not a nobler face

with the dead;

The habitable earth did not close over a historian more illustrious."

These testimonies are extracted from the _Leabhar Gabhala_ of the

O'Clerys, and sufficiently show the estimation in which Maelmura was held

by our ancient Celtic scholars.

There is a poem published in the Irish _Nennius_,[457] which is attributed

to Maelmura, and which really appears to be a composition of very

considerable merit. The language is very striking, and the Gaedhlic

original has a stately rhythm, as well as much vigour both of thought and

language. It contains 335 lines, and purports to give poetical account of

the origin of the Gaedhil, "men of high renown in stiff battles, whom the

mighty stream of Ocean wafted hither to Erin." These epithets are quite

Homeric, and are not lavished with the prodigality too common to our Irish

bards, but employed with discriminating intelligence to lend a poetic

vigour to the historical narration. There is another poem of Maelmura

quoted by O'Reilly in praise of Tuathal Techtmar, whom he describes with

similar vigour as a flowing ocean, in strength a lion, a wily serpent, and

a wounding warrior.

In another poem he gives a catalogue of all the monarchs, of Erin from

this Tuathal to Flann Sionna, the reigning king in his own time. It is

highly probable that Maelmura was educated at the monastic School of

Fahan, which from its foundation by St. Mura seems to have been a very

celebrated establishment. The founder's Book and Bell were long treasured

as precious relics in Inishowen.

Flann Mac Lonan was another celebrated historical poet, who flourished

during the latter half of the ninth century. He appears to have been a

native of South Connaught, and held the high office of Chief Poet of Erin

during the earlier years of the reign of Flann Sionna. He is described as

Flann O'Guaire in the _Annals of Ulster_; and the Genealogies of the

Hy-Fiachrach represent him as ninth in descent from Guaire Aidhne, the

celebrated king of the Southern Hy-Fiachrach, who flourished during the

first half of the seventh century. It was from the same stock that the

O'Clerys derived their descent, so that a love of poetry and history seems

to have been hereditary in that tribe. It is evident also from the

writings of Flann that he was patronised by Lorcan, king of Thomond, the

grandfather of Brian Boru, and also by his son, Cinnedigh, the father of

the hero of Clontarf. This King-poet, as he is called, met with an

untimely end. He was assassinated by the Ui Fothaith at Loch-Dachaech in

Desmond. Loch-Dachaech, the Lake of the two Blind Men, appears to be a

part of the estuary of Waterford Harbour;[458] but what motive can have

instigated the sons of Corrbuidhe to murder the harmless poet does not

appear. He is described by the Four Masters as the Virgil of the race of

Scota--the Milesian Irish--Chief Poet of the Gaedhil, and the best poet

that was in Ireland in his time. The _Annals of Ulster_ give the true date

of his death at A.D. 895, where they record how "Flann, son of Lonan

O'Guaire, was slain by the Desi of Munster."

Copies of three poems written by Flann still remain in manuscript. The

first is a poem of eighty-eight verses, celebrating a great victory, which

Lorcan of Kincora gained over Flann Sionna, the King of Erin. The second

also, containing forty-eight verses, celebrates the warlike exploits of

the same hero, and the third describes his royal residence of Kincora so

rich in wealth, and harvest stores, and so beautifully situated on the

Shannon just where Lough Derg contracts its waters to force a passage

through the hills of Ara to the sea.

The two most distinguished poet-historians of the tenth century were

Cinaeth O'Hartigan and Eochaidh O'Flinn. Cinaeth is described by

Tighernach as the chief of the learned men of Leath Cuinn. He was also

Chief Poet of Erin, and was the son of Cernach the Haughty,[459] who was

grandson of Aedh Slaine, High King of Tara. Sprung from the royal race of

the Southern Hy-Niall, it was only natural that Cinaeth should devote his

talents to celebrate the ancient glories of the then deserted Tara, and of

the heroes and heroines who once thronged its waste and silent halls.

These poems are preserved in the _Dinnsenchus_, and are especially

valuable for the information they contain with reference to Tara and the

reign of Cormac Mac Art. He also gives an account of the origin of Aicill,

and of the Book which takes its name from the hill, and has been published

in the third volume of the Brehon Law series.[460]

Eochaid O'Flinn was a still more celebrated poet-historian, and it is

quite evident from the care that was taken to preserve his numerous

compositions that his works were very highly valued by all our ancient

Celtic scholars. We find copies of his poems in the collections at all the

great schools, and preserved by our greatest scholars. They are to be

found in the _Dinnsenchus_, the _Book of Invasions_, the _Book of Leacan_,

the _Book of Ballymote_, the _Book of Glendaloch_, as well as in several

other compilations and manuscripts. One of the most important of these is

a chronological poem contained both in the _Book of Leinster_ and the

_Book of Leacan_, in which the writer gives a list of the Ulster Kings

from Cimbaoth to Fergus Fogha. Tighernach recognises the historical

authority of this poem, which he follows in his own great work, and which,

so far as it goes, seems to have been his chief source of information both

for his facts and his dates, at least as regards the kings of Emania.[461]

In another poem he gives an interesting account of the invasion of Ireland

by Partholanus, which has been copied into the _Book of Invasions_ by the

O'Clerys.

Keating, too, borrows largely from the poems of O'Flinn, of which a very

full list may be seen in O'Reilly's _Writers_,[462] but which it is

unnecessary for us to reproduce here. We must not suppose that O'Flinn and

his contemporaries drew largely on their imagination for the contents of

those poems. They did nothing of the kind. They simply put in form the

bardic traditions that were handed down in writing with the greatest care

from time immemorial. If they had dared to invent anything new to their

learned contemporaries, they would at once have been dismissed from the

office of Chroniclers of Erin, and would besides have been severely

punished. It is evident, too, that they had earlier documents which they

made use of in the composition of their own poems, but which were all

unfortunately lost during the Danish invasions. There was, however, always

a regular succession of these poets whose duty it was to get by rote the

historical traditions of their predecessors, which were thus preserved for

posterity.

III.--GAEDHLIC SCHOLARS OF THE ELEVENTH CENTURY.

Mac Liag, Secretary of Brian Boru, held that office during the reign of

Brian in the kingdom of Thomond, and his extant work--_The Wars of the

Gaedhill with the Gaill_--shows how thoroughly and conscientiously he

discharged his official duties. It was one of the very earliest

compositions of this character written in prose; but when he wishes to be

particularly eloquent and impressive, and rise to the dignity of some

great theme, he has recourse to poetry. To record the events of his own

time in Thomond was not, however, his only duty and his only task,

although it was undoubtedly his primary work, for the vigorous and warlike

Brian kept his hands as a contemporary chronicler pretty full of work. His

'Lament' for Brian after the battle of Clontarf is one of the most

beautiful and pathetic poems to be found in any language. Even Clarence

Mangan could not reproduce all the touching pathos of the original.

"Oh, where, Kincora! is Brian the Great?

And where is the beauty that once was thine?

Oh, where are the princes and nobles that sate

At the feast in thy halls and drank the red wine?

"They are gone, those heroes of royal birth,

Who plundered no churches, and broke no trust,

'Tis weary for me to be living on earth,

When they, oh, Kincora, lie low in the dust.

"I am Mac Liag, and my home is on the Lake;

Thither often to that palace whose beauty is fled,

Came Brian to ask me, and I went for his sake,

Oh, my grief that I should live and Brian be dead."

Neither Colgan, Keating, nor the Four Masters expressly name Mac Liag as

the author of the _Wars of the Gaedhill with the Gaill_.[463] Dr. Todd,

the editor of that work in the Rolls Series, declares that Dr. O'Connor

had no sufficient authority to justify him in attributing the work to Mac

Liag, and declines to do so himself, although he admits that the work was

originally compiled by one, who was either an eye-witness of the battle of

Clontarf, or who had certainly derived his information from those who were

eye-witnesses. Our own opinion is that although there is no direct

evidence to prove that the book was written by Mac Liag, the

circumstantial evidence, to which we cannot now refer at length, is

entirely in favour of that supposition.

This work is exceedingly valuable as the trustworthy record of a

contemporary writer during one of the most important epochs of Irish

history, and its careful perusal will be found to throw much light on the

history of that period. The author is much too fond of indulging in

high-flown descriptions, and of unduly multiplying bombastic compounds.

But, on the other hand, notwithstanding this wordiness, he frequently

writes in a spirit of genuine eloquence, as for instance when he describes

the Danish oppression in Ireland, and "the excess of their thirst and

hunger for the brave, fruitful, nobly-inhabited, cataractful rivers and

bays, and for the pure, smooth-plained, sweet-grassy land of Erinn." He

tells how, if there were but one milk-giving cow in the house, she durst

not be milked for an infant of one night, nor for a sick person, but must

be kept for the steward, or bailiff, or soldier of the foreigners. And

however long he might be absent from the house, his share or his supply

durst not be lessened; "although there was in the house but one cow, it

must be killed for the meal of one night, if the means of a supply could

not otherwise be procured."[464]

But the good sword of King Brian soon changed all that. "He conquered,

exterminated, enslaved, and bondaged them, so that there was not a

winnowing sheet from Benn Edair to Tech Duinn in Western Erin, that had

not a foreigner in bondage on it, nor was there a quern without a foreign

woman. So that no son of a soldier, or of an officer of the Gaedhil,

deigned to put his hand to a flail, or any other labour on earth; nor did

a woman deign to put her hands to the grinding of a quern, or to knead a

cake, or to wash her clothes, but had a foreign man or a foreign woman to

work for them."[465]

This is no doubt a highly-coloured description, but it is graphic in its

details, and gives us valuable information as to the state of social life

at that period.

Equally graphic and interesting is the sketch which Mac Liag gives of the

great achievements of Brian Boru. He tells how after Brian's royal

visitation throughout Erin, all his enemies were brought into subjection,

and the country enjoyed a period of profound peace and much-needed repose.

He enforced the law with a strong hand, and repressed trespass, robbery,

and murder. 'He hanged, killed and destroyed' all thieves, robbers, and

plunderers throughout Erin. He banished or enslaved the foreigners

throughout the length and breadth of the land--their stewards and

collectors, their swordsmen and their mercenaries, their tall and comely

youths, and their fair and graceful maidens became the bond-servants of

the victors. It was then that Erin enjoyed such peace and security that a

lone woman journeyed from Tory Island in the north to Cliodhna's

loud-voiced wave in the south of Erin, carrying a golden ring on the top

of the wand; yet no man ventured to rob, or to insult her. This blessed

period of justice and peace, so rare in Erin, has been celebrated both by

ancient and by modern bards.[466]

Nor was Brian less enlightened and munificent in cultivating the arts of

peace. He erected many noble churches and church towers in Erin, as at

Killaloe, Iniscaltra, and Tuam Greine, where the remains of the buildings

erected by Brian are still to be seen. He constructed several bridges,

causeways, and high roads. He strengthened all the royal fortresses of

Munster both in the islands and on the mainland. He sent professors and

masters to teach wisdom and knowledge, also to buy books in foreign

countries, and bring them home from beyond the great sea. This was all the

more necessary as the writings and the books in every church and sanctuary

of Erin where they were, were all burned or thrown into the lakes and

rivers by the plundering Danes. It was Brian himself, who from his own

resources gave the means of purchasing this new supply of books beyond the

seas.

Such was Brian Boru, a hero in peace and in war, the sword and shield of

his country, during whose glorious reign Ireland reached the zenith of her

power and prosperity. Mac Liag died shortly after his royal master in A.D.

1016.

Cuan O'Lochain was another very celebrated scholar who flourished during

the first quarter of the eleventh century. His writings, his talents as a

statesman, and his tragic end have all contributed to his celebrity. The

family which derived its descent from Cormac Gaileng, son of Tadhg,

grandson of Ollioll Olum, was at first settled in the territory of Ely;

but afterwards removed to Gailenga Mor, on the borders of Meath and

Longford. This territory took its name from Cormac Gaileng, and retains it

to the present day in the name of the barony of Morgallion, which is

merely another form of Gailenga Mor. It appears that the O'Lochains were

chiefs of this district, and that the poet's family was held in high

esteem in Meath.

After the death of King Malachy II. (Maelseachlainn), in the year A.D.

1022, an interregnum of twenty years intervened, during which there was no

recognised High King of Erin. A joint government was established during

the interregnum; and it is said the regency was administered by Cuan

O'Lochain, the Chief Poet of Erinn, and Corcran the Cleric; or, as it is

quaintly put in Macgeoghegan's _Annals of Clonmacnoise_--"A.D. 1022--After

the death of King Moylesleaghlyn, this kingdom was without a king for

twenty years, during which time the realm was governed by two learned men,

the one called Cwan O'Lochan, a well-learned temporall man, and chiefe

poet of Ireland; the other, Corcran Cleireagh, a devout and holy man, that

was chief anchorite of all Ireland, whose most abiding was at Lismore. The

land was governed like a free state, and not like a monarchie by them." It

is curious that we find no reference to this interregnum in any of our

Annals, and hence the truth of Macgeoghegan's statement has been

questioned by certain writers. But O'Curry shows[467] that the same

statement is made in the _Book of Leinster_, an almost contemporaneous

record, although it is there stated, probably by a mistake of the scribe,

that this joint government continued for forty or fifty instead of for

twenty years.

It was the form of government, however, not the two governors themselves,

which continued for twenty years, for the poet-regent was soon slain by

the men of Teffia on the borders of his native territory in the County

Longford. The sword of justice, which the great Brian had wielded so

well, was broken at Clontarf and buried in the hero's grave. Once more

outrage and lawlessness with the evil spirit of discord spread throughout

the land. We know not the motive or circumstances of this great crime

perpetrated by the men of Teffia, but Providence itself avenged the poet's

death. According to one authority[468] God manifestly wrought a poet's

power upon the parties who killed him, for they were put to a cruel death,

and their bodies putrified until the wolves and vultures devoured them--a

fitting end for the wretches who violated the sacred person of the poet.

Macgeoghegan says that he was killed by one of the land of Teffia, and he

most probably had heard the living local tradition; "after committing

which evil fact, there grew an evil scent and odour of the party that

killed him, so that he was easily known amongst the rest of the land. His

associate Corcran lived yett, and survived him for a long time

after"--that is until A.D. 1040.[469]

O'Curry gives a very full account of six historical poems of which Cuan

O'Lochain was the author. One of them to which we have already

referred[470] gives an exceedingly interesting account of Cormac Mac Art,

and of his great palace at Tara, which the poet describes with great

fidelity and minuteness. It has been printed in Petrie's _Antiquities of

Tara Hill_. Another highly interesting poem of O'Lochain gives an account

of the 'prohibitions' and 'prerogatives' of the High King of Tara, and the

provincial sub-kings. This poem may be seen in the _Book of Rights_,

edited by O'Donovan. Some of the prohibitions certainly savour of a pagan

and superstitious origin, as, for instance, when the High King is

forbidden to alight on the plain of Bregia on a Wednesday, or to traverse

Cuillenn after sunset, or to launch a ship on the Monday after May-day.

But his privileges are innocent enough--to have the salmon of the Boyne,

which was a royal river; to eat the fruit of Man, and the deer of

Luibnech; to get the bilberries of Bri-Leith, and the cresses of the river

Brosnach; to drink of the spring water of Tlachtga, and hunt the hares of

Naas. Cuan's legendary poems on the Shannon are also highly interesting,

but we cannot refer to them further at present.

Errard Mac Coisé was chief poet to King Malachy II., who died in A.D.

1022, and hence he was a contemporary both of Mac Liag and Cuan

O'Lochain. Both Mac Liag and Mac Coisé were natives of Hy-Many, in the

County Galway, and appear to have been rivals in genius, but intimate

friends and associates in social intercourse. One of Mac Coisé's most

interesting works is a poetic dialogue between the two poets, which

reveals their friendship, their talents, and their common love for the

history and antiquities of Erin. He appears to have died the year after

his royal master in A.D. 1023.

Flann of the Monastery, is, perhaps, the most justly celebrated of all

those poet-historians of ancient Erin. O'Reilly calls him "Abbot of the

Monastery of Bute," and gives a list of fourteen considerable historical

poems still extant in manuscript, of which he is the reputed author. It

does not appear, however, that Flann was either an abbot or a monk in holy

orders, although he certainly sojourned and taught at Monasterboice, in

the County Louth, just as his contemporary, Conn-na-m-Bocht, did at

Clonmacnoise. The death of Flann is marked in the _Chronicon Scotorum_ at

A.D. 1054; and he is described as Ferlegind, or professor of the

monastery, and "the last sage of the Gaedhil both in reading and history."

In the _Annals of Ulster_ he is called Chief-lector of Monasterboice and

historical sage--_sai senchusa_--of Erin, under date of A.D. 1056, which

is the true date. The Four Masters also describe him as a lector of the

monastery of Buite, and the 'paragon'--_sai egna_--of the Gaedhil in

literature, in history, in poetry and in science. There is no doubt that

here we have a complete list of the subjects taught in what may be called

the schools of general literature in ancient Erin. In the _Book of

Aicill_,[471] as we have already seen, it is expressly stated that

Cennfaeladh attended three schools in Tuaim Drecain, a School of

Literature (_leigind_), a School of Law (_feinechais_), and a School of

Poetry (_filidechta_); these schools were held in different houses, and

taught by three different professors. Cennfaeladh was a soldier, and,

therefore, a layman, and hence there is no reference here to a School of

Divinity, of the Canons, or of the Scriptures. In the subjects taught by

Flann at Monasterboice we find no reference to the _feinechas_ or Brehon

Laws, because there does not appear to have been a School of Law in the

Monastery of Buite. But there was clearly a School of General Literature,

and a School of Poetry, and although Flann is described as chief professor

in the former school, he is also said to have been--and his writings prove

that he was--an accomplished poet. As Ferlegind, it is clear that his

duty was to teach classics, including in that term the vernacular Gaedhlic

tongue; for it is described as one of the four principal languages of the

world. These are Gaedhlic, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. We have already

furnished abundant proofs of the cultivation both of Latin and Greek in

our Irish schools; and they tried their hand at Hebrew also, but we cannot

say much for their success in studying that difficult language, which was

then almost entirely unknown in the Western Empire.