Gaelic Knighthood and Nobility in Ireland
By J. McShane

Irish history, or should I say truthful Irish history is a difficult subject to pursue. So many historians over the centuries twisted or distorted Gaelic customs, traditions, and Brehon Law so flagrantly, that finding the truth about authentic Gaelic Ireland is no easy task.

The typical 15th and 16th centuries "historical" accounts of the Gaelic Irish to as "savage tribes" needing civilization, simply are not true. Unfortunately for the Irish, much of what is considered history today, is nothing more than the unchecked lies of the past. There has been an institutional effort made by different sources to destroy any truth coming forward about Gaelic Ireland, usually to justify what was done to Ireland. Whether the effort comes from London, Paris or Rome, proving any purely Gaelic concept of history is tantamount to disproving the Old Testament. And when it comes to their own history, the modern Irish are as bad at accepting the truth as their former enemies.

Organizations like the Standing Council of Irish Chiefs and Chieftains and the Gaelic Heritage Society, do much toward the truthful, rediscovery of Gaelic history. The different articles and books distributed among the modern and far-flung Irish, have created a fire for knowledge that will spread through the continuing generations.

My intent is to show that there was an existing concept of Gaelic knighthood and a noble class, prior to and after the Norman invasion. And, I intend on proving this using the words of the non-Irish historians, contemporary administrators, royal visitors to Ireland and ancient texts.

The idea of the misrepresentation of the Irish in history is best captured in the words of Geoffrey Keating in his History of Ireland. (These writers) "inasmuch as it is almost according to the fashion of the beetle they act, when writing concerning the Irish. For it is the fashion of the beetle, when it lifts its head in the summer time, to go fluttering, and not stoop towards any delicate flower that may be in the field, or any blossom in the garden, though they be all roses or lilies, but it keeps bustling about until it meets with dung of horse or cow, and proceeds to roll itself therein."

Early Ireland

Ireland was not one nation but a geographic location of four Gaelic kingdoms; (Connacht, Leinster, Ulster, Munster). The Kingdoms operated their own governments, wars, international trade, preserved Christianity and were lighthouses of learning after the fall of the Roman Empire. While each of these Kingdoms were independent, they were united under Brehon Law. Brehon Law can rightly claim to be the oldest surviving codified legal system in Europe. (2)  From 123AD until the 13th Century, Ireland was divided into two spheres of influence and control - Leth Cuinn, the northern half dominated by the Uí Néill, and Leth Moga the southern half of the MacCarthys, Ui Brien, and MacMurchada. In each regional kingdom there existed a group of feudal type warriors called champions, loyal to their King and forming the initial level of structure for an army. Gaelic feats of courage and intensity in battle were legendary to the Romans, Gauls, Picts, and Saxons. Today many Arthurian scholars agree that the concept of the "Knights of the Round Table" may well have come from the old tales of Gaelic knightly orders. (3)

In 1166 AD King Diarmait MacMurchada of Leinster was expelled from his land by allies of the King of Tara Ruaidrí Ua Conchobhair (Rory O'Conor). Diarmait fled to Bristol and from there to London, where he swore homage to Henry II of England in return for permission to recruit a mercenary army to restore him to his throne. He recruited The Earl of Pembroke (otherwise known as Strongbow or Richard FitzGilbert de Clare) and his knights (Maurice FitzGerald, Robert FitzStephen, Meiler FitzHenry, and Robert de Barry), who were getting a difficult time from the Celts of southern Wales (whom they were trying to subdue). The promise of rich reward lay across the sea in Leinster. Thus the introduction of the Norman English outside of Dublin, and the beginning of the conflict between Norman and Gaelic Lord. Here too is the supposed entrance of knights into Ireland. I contend that they already existed long before the arrival of Strongbow and his men.

Irish Knighthood

Did the Irish have their own knights? Or did the first knights come only to Ireland with the invasion of the Normans or later with the Kingship of Henry VIII? It is a question that has to be answered by first deciding what constituted a knight.

Historians have a clear idea as to the concept of knighthood left from the many nations that used "Knight" as a title of honor and nobility. There is not one set of rules spanning Europe as to the qualifications of a knight; German knights had great, independent powers, order knights of the Holy Land were usually men of the clergy, and English knights were rarely from any where but the Kings' orders. However, one key element is found in all kingdoms of the world; a knight held land from a Lord of some rank in return for military service.

Using that standard, Ireland, with a structured professional warrior class (Cavalry, Gallowglas, Kerne), clearly practiced the tradition of a unique, Gaelic knighthood, long before the concept of European chivalry was introduced to Ireland. While the actual word "knight" is first used to refer to Norman soldiers after 1166, the Irish used the Anglo-Saxon term for knight Ridire, the gaelic term Horseman, and the Latin word for knight Miles in their histories and epic poems to refer to that class of Irish warriors raised by Kings and Chiefs, and who made up their "household troops".(4) These noble warriors held lands in return for their service and were given the same honors and privileges granted a knight anywhere else in Europe.

Dr. Katherine Simms, noted professor of Irish history, provides in this passage, a text book description of the typical European Knight-Lord relationship. However, the description tells of lands held from the Gaelic kings prior to and at the beginning of the Norman movements outside of Dublin, not in Europe. In twelfth and thirteenth century annals, words for "household"-teaghlach or lucht tighe are consistently used to describe a group of warriors attached to each of the major kings, who form the most effective section of his fighting-force, and are mainly recruited from sub-chieftains and their kinsmen who live under his jurisdiction. Rather than serving for wages, these close followers seem to have received grants of estates from the king's mensal lands.(5)

So, by the time the Norman Lords arrived, the grant of admission into their Orders held little interest for Irish knights. Why? Because these men already enjoyed the rights and privileges of knighthood from their own Lords.

The first written English accounts of Irish knights and nobles are recorded at hostings after the arrival of Henry II in the late 1100s to check the power of Strongbow in Ireland. After presentation of the Gaelic Kings to Henry, Irish knights were presented as the military might of Gaelic Ireland and recognized as having "an ancient custome of knighthood before they received the manners of English civility."(6)

Two centuries later, in 1385, Richard II visited the English colony of the Pale (Dublin and the area of Leinster and Meath), visiting Irish Kings and noblemen were placed under the care of Henry of Castille, of Richard's household staff.

Castille asked of those deemed worthy by English:

"... if they would receive the Order of Knighthood and that the King of England should make them Knights according to the usage of France and England and other countries. They answered how they were knights already and that that sufficed for them. I asked where they were made knights, and how, and when? They answered that at the age of 7 years they were made Knights in Ireland and that a King maketh his son a Knight, and if the son have no father alive them the next of kin maketh him a knight."(7)

Canon Bourke, examiner in Celtic History at the Royal University of Ireland, specifically identified this existing knighthood as five separate military orders in his history of pre-christian Ireland. He writes that the orders accompanied the five great kingdoms of ancient Ireland. They were: Curraidh na Craoibhe Ruaidhe, Clanna Deagha, Niagh Nasc, Clanna Baoisgne and Clanna Morna.(8)

In more specific terms as to the origin of one of these orders, ancient Irish knighthood was further identified and discussed in this passage about the ancient Nasc Niad,

"There was an order of Chivalry, the distinguishing mark of which was what was called Nasc-Niad. Neither the order nor the course of the decoration was conferred except of battle. And the person who won the Nasc-Niad was called Nia-Naisc or Champion won on the field of the Collar like the English Knight of the Garter". (9).

An in another passage on the ancient usage and practice of Irish knighthood, the great historian of Ireland, Geoffrey Keating, writing in 1633, tells us that King Muinheamhoin of Munster "ordered that all (Niadh Nasc) should wear about the neck a chain of gold to show their rank and to distinguish them from the common people. (10)

The English were not the only people to write about Irish knights. Prior to the subjugation of Ireland by the English, Ireland was the site of regular religious pilgrimages, especially to St. Patrick. In 1397, Catalonian Count, Ramon de Perellos made such a pilgrimage to the shire of St. Patrick in Donegal. The Count wrote a journal of the entire experience including his stay at the Court of the King of Ulster, The O'Neill. In that journal he describes in detail the 40 "horsemen" or knights attending the Great King, "They ride without saddles on a cushion and each wears a cloak according to his rank. They are armed with coats of mail and round iron helmets like the moors and Saracens. Some of them are like the Bernese. They have swords and very long knives and long lances."(11)

Between the Count's use of the term "horsemen" and his exact description of the household troop of The O'Neill Mor, I doubt an account of a group of Knights of the Garter, Malta, or Golden Fleece would have sounded any different. Clearly Count Perellos viewed them as knights just as in the European tradition, or why else compare them to the Swiss?

The practice of raising men to knighthood and granting them land in return continued to flourish in those areas that resisted the Norman invasion and remained under the power of the hereditary Gaelic Lords. Even in the face of the Henry VIII claim of Kingship of Ireland, and thus the only font of honor for Ireland, Dr. Simms shows that the ancient Ulster Lords continued to raise knights and create a Gaelic nobility, separate from London.

By the fifteenth and the sixteenth centuries, the lands around the chief residences of the Great O'Neill of Tir Eoghain, MacMahon lord of Monaghan and O'Reilly lord of Cavan were called the chief's lucht tighe or household, presumably because they were parceled out among the minor nobles who staffed his househlod. In point of fact, in the case of the Great O'Neill, the sub-chiefs who occupied his lucht tighe lands, O'Hagan, O'Quinn, and O'Devlin were called the 'horsemen of O'Neill. (12)

Even in the twilight of the Gaelic system, glimpses of the old practices show up. After five years of rebellion against Queen Elizabeth, Sir Tirlough O'Neill, Lord of the Fews, was offered a pardon in 1602. Sir Tirlough only consented to a pardon for his entire clan. The pardon was granted to the entire family and the first census of the region took place. In the rolls, Tirlough lists all the male members of his family that are of the age to carry a sword, and those widows who hold lands outright. He includes under the term "horsemen" 10 O'Neills, 7 McShanes, and 3 O'Cahans. (13)

Over time, the tradition of Irish provincial knighthood was lost to knighthood attained solely from the English Crown. However, at least from the 10th to the 17th century, Irish royalty and nobility continually raised men to the rank of knight, gave them land in return for military service, and provided for them all the privileges the the rank of knight authorized. There are even accounts as to the idea that the class of mounted warriors has had an elevated position in Irish society going back to the time St. Patrick!

The Gaelic Nobility

Not everyone considered the Irish to be without indigenous nobility. The French and Spanish, dealt with the Gaelic Kings and Princes not as vassals, like the English viewed them, but as individual monarchs. Monarchs able to conduct affairs as Divine Right Kings, fully royal in nature and in deed. To prove this recognition, the Kings of Spain and France and the Pope entered into Treaties with these Irish Kings, they presented and accepted ambassadors, gave full recognition to the Gaelic titles of nobility and what is most important recognized their titles as EQUAL to their own. That recognition continues into this century.

There are constant examples of interaction between continental kingdoms and Ireland. The different invasion plans organized against the English Crown in Ireland allied with the France and Spain, following the creation of the Church of England is.

Following the destruction of the Gaelic order in the 17th century Europeans monarchs granted high, noble titles to the Irish Lords and nobles who fled Ireland at different times during the fighting. If the Spaniards or French considered them "Savage" why then would they risk war with England or later grant them large estates within their own Kingdoms, or give them command of their armies?

King James II placed the last of his trust in these Irish Lords, and fought the final battles of the Tudor Dynasty in Ireland. He took many of these men into exile with him in France.

The Popes in Rome, after their destructive Bulls granting England the right to conquer Ireland, later reversed course and fully recognized the right of the Irish Kingship. After the siege of Dingle, in the 17th century, there were two Knights of the Holy Sepulcher captured as representatives from the Pope to Ireland. Irish Lords like The O'Conor Don, Prince of Connaught, were acknowledged as such by the Holy See into the 20th century.

Clearly they were not seen as "savage," but as Catholic sovereigns displaced by the marauding English. The prominence of the O'Neill's of Portugal and Spain, the MacCarthys of France, and the O'Donnells of Spain, along with Papal recognition of these families, lends great credence to the power and recognition of the nobility of the Gaelic Irish Lords.

Moreover, command of the Army was regularly given to titled Irish exiles. Irish Colonels commanded Regiments in Catholic countries for centuries. Not until Catholics were allowed to serve in the British Army did the French and Spanish regiments stop filling Irish regiments. Some units so famous that even today, some modern French regiments keep the old Irish regiments in their lineage.

Would a King risk his army on a "heathen bog runt"? Napoleon, King Louis XIV, Popes, and Charles III of Spain all put exiled Irish noblemen in command of their armies with great success.

One only needs look back at the early days of the English presence in Ireland to see the initial view of the Crown's representative in Ireland. The Lords Lieutenant of Ireland wrote in their reports as to the nature of the Irish nobility. This passage, written in 1515, is degenerative of the men described herein; however, the key is that this gentleman refers to the nobility of Ireland as such. He writes (In Ireland) where reigneth more than 60 Chief Captains, were of some calleth themselves kings, some king's peers, in their language, some princes, some dukes, some archdukes, that liveth only by the sword, and obeyeth to no other temporal person, but only to himself that is strong". (14)

During the reign of Henry VIII, the English fully recognized and courted this same nobility of the Gaelic Irish. In 1541, at the instance of the Irish Parliament accepting the kingship of Henry VIII of England as overall King of Ireland, Sir Anthony St. Leger penned the following roll of Gaelic nobility present to accept Henry VIII as the King (in name) of Ireland:

There was at the same consent 2 earls, 3 viscounts, 16 barons, 2 archbishops, 12 bishops, Donough O'Brien, and the doctor O'Nolan and a bishop, deputies assigned by the great O'Brien to be for him the Parliament, the great O'Reilly, with many other Irish captains (Chiefs) and the Common House, wherein are divers(e) knights and many gentlemen of fair possessions."

Indeed, there may be some English titles represented in this roll, some perhaps the result of re-granting an Irish Lord with an English title. But there can be no doubt that The O'Brien and The O'Reilly are purely Irish, as are the "many other Irish captains". Openly, St. Leger recognized the nobility of two purely Gaelic royal houses and numerous noble families. (15)

Years earlier, the Spanish King sent representatives to hold talks with Irish Lords in open rebellion against the English Crown. This report of Gonzalo Fernandez, Chaplain to and Royal Envoy of Charles V, King of Spain, was on the position and power of the Earl of Desmond, then in rebellion. The report details the official position of Spain on the Irish nobility.

I disembarked at Dingle, and was well received by all the town, and by some knights dispatched by the Earl to meet me. In four hours come the Earl himself, with about 500 horse and as many halberdiers " and further in speaking about the Earl, " He has many knights who pay him tribute." (16)

If there were only "wild Irish" living in Desmond, then surely he would not have spoken of knights living in Munster, so who are these knights? Clearly Fernandez speaks twice in his report to King Charles of "knights" in the service of the Earl of Desmond (The O'Brien) and of 500 horsemen and 500 pikemen. This was no small number of warriors. These "Knights who paid tribute to the Earl", clearly were not knights of an English Order. These were obviously men of the Gaelic type of knighthood. And as the O'Briens were royal in their own right, it is quite conceivable that these "knights" were indeed provincial Gaelic knights of the time, dubbed by the Earl.

Lastly, in what may be the clearest identification of the existence of a Gaelic noble class, we use a source written during the "Nine Years War" (1594-1603) prior to the collapse of the Gaelic system and the departure of its leadership for the Continent. This is a contempory history of one of the great Chiefs of Ulster, "Red" Hugh O'Donnell, written in 1595. The book details a meeting called by Hugh and attended by all the local Chiefs and nobility of his realm. In the account of this meeting, the exact levels of the Gaelic nobility structure is defined. It is important to first state that the first text of this book was written in Gaelic, not English. So, the text contains the usage of titles, as they would have practiced them in 1595.

In the text the attendants of the meeting were described initially as Chiefs and Baruins. "Baruin" is the Gaelicized version of the Norman-French word for "Baron" and used as the general term for all noblemen who were not heads of septs. Later in the text the entire Gaelic, feudal rank structure is listed by rank as: An Taoseach (the chosen one), An Togaidhe do Chenal (a Chief), An Tigernus an Tire ( Lord of the land), An Tiarna (Lord), An Triath an Tire (Lord of a thirty), An Treabhann ( a Tribune Chief). (17)

Clearly, this society had nobility. It was specifically named in account after account by the English, the Spanish and the Irish themselves. The Deputies in Ireland dealt with native Kings, Chiefs, and nobility from 1166 to 1609, constantly! Many of these men were given English titles in the Surrender and Regrant policy. Without a doubt, this rewrite of the truth was a conscience effort to erode the power of this nobility, and replace it with foreign powers loyal to England. That and that alone is the cause for the debasement of the existence of a Gaelic noble class.

Conclusion

Foreign writers of Ireland's history have tried to defend the different invasions throughout history. Historians have hidden the facts with misrepresentations and lies. The real truth was that Ireland was a Christian nation, with full sovereignty, international trade, an educational system, the oldest Codes of Law in Europe, a fully operational societal system, a structured military system, and a Gaelic noble class. Through time, power, and intrigue, the English slowly destroyed that system and substituted it with their own. Only now has the real history of Ireland begun to be told.

It is difficult to imagine Ireland without the English presence of the past 500 years. Once the jewel of learning for all of Europe, and the savior of Christianity, Ireland survived in spite of England's occupation. Indeed, Ireland and England of today have put the past behind them and work toward a useful middle ground as cousin nations with a difficult past. Ulster alone remains the hotbed of hatred and seemingly mindless violence. At some point though, the killing and hatred will end.

The time for the Gaelic traditions has not past. Its revolution has just begun.

If not for organizations working toward the preservation of the ancient customs, traditions, and families, all would be lost. Ireland, Great Britain, and scattered Irish must work to incorporate into their national history more than just 1916 to present. There are good measures started, like the Standing Council of Chiefs and Chieftains, heritage centers, literature and restoration projects.

But the Irish have a responsibility to excavate history, strip away the bias and untruths and pass the real or truthful history of Gaelic Ireland forth to the world. That, which we record today, becomes our history tomorrow.

Footnotes:

'It has been brought to our attention that J. McShane may be mistaken when he speaks about King James II fighting the final battles of the Tudor Dynasty in Ireland.  A concerned member has stated that James II was a Stewart, not a Tudor monarch.'  The above is printed as received.

1. History of Ireland. Geoffrey Keating, London, 1633

2. Dictionary of Celtic Mythology by Peter Berresford-Ellis - Constable. London Written in Bérla Féini - ancient Irish and passed by oral tradition, they were though to be codified for the first time in the 5th century at the instigation of St Patrick, enlightener of Ireland. The most exact texts were published in Dublin between 1865 and 1901, in 6 volumes as 5 "Ancient Laws of Ireland"

3. The Wapenshaw ", Ray Guyder, RGG historical account, pg. 3.

4. 'Gaelic Warfare in the Middle Ages", Katherine Simms, A Military History of Ireland, pg. 99

5. "Military Service in Gaelic Ireland", Katherine Simms, GHS Journal ed II, 2000, pg. 8.

6. Selden, Titles of Honor, London, 1621Chap IV pg. 842.

7. Froissart's Chrionicles, MacCauley, G.C. ed, London 1904 Chapter CXCVII, pg 433.

8. Pre-Christian Ireland, Burke, Canon U.J., Dublin, 1887 pg 175.

9. Joyce P.W. A Social History of Ireland, Vol. I pg. 99-100 Dublin 1903.

10. History of Ireland. Geoffrey Keating, London, 1633.

11. "The Pilgrim from Catalonia/Aragon,Count Ramon de Perellos,1397", Dorthy Carpenter in M. Haren & Y. de Pontfarcy, eds. The Medival Pilgrimage to St. Patrick's Purgatory, Enniskillen 1998, pg 110.

12. Katherine Simms, "Military Service in Gaelic Ireland", GHS Journal ed II 2000, pg. 8.

13. Census of of the Fews, 1602.

14. State of Ireland, and Plan for it's Reformation 1515, Lord Justice Drury, State Papers Henry VIII vol 2, pg. 79.

15. Sir Anthony St. Leger Life &Papers of Henry VIII, vol. III, 26 June, 1541.

16. Gonzalo Fernandez, Life &Papers of Henry VIII- Report to Charles V, 28 April, 1520.

17. The Life and times of Red O'Donnell).

18. Maxwell, Irish History from Contemporary Sources 1509-1610, London, 1923.