‘It is old story and a true one that Irishmen have not studied and do not study the history of their own country. The omission to do so was intelligible in the past, when such study was proscribed, and when the rhymer and the story-teller were equally banned by law. But those days are part, and while there is little encouragement given to the study of Irish history as compared with other branches of knowledge, there is at least no prohibition. Irishmen may learn its facts if they will; but they are not willing, and there are few countries in the world where the people are so ignorant of their country’s history. [See further in Quotations, supra.]

Introduction - Various Names of Ireland
‘[…] For ages, down to the eleventh century, Ireland bore the name of Scotia, a name which is often derived from a Scythian source, the opinion being that if the Scythians were not the first inhabitants, they were at least among the first, and have thus left their impress on its name. But there are others who think the name Scotia comes from Scota, the wife of Gadelius, a lady who is reputed to have been the daughter of Pharoah, while there are yet others who hold the opinion that the word comes from the Greek word σκόΤος which signifies darkness, possibly, says Harris, because of its dark aspect, [being] [4] anciently overgrown with woods. Another name which it bore, and which still survives in a slightly altered form, was Irlandia, which is taken to mean the land of Ir, the first of the sons of Milesius, who was buried in the island. It was also called Fidh-Inis, or woody island, and Inis-Elga, form the name borne by the wife of Parthalon. By Plutarch, and after him by O’Flaherty, the island was called Ogygia, a word which signifies very ancient; and if, says Camden, what the Irish writers relate be credited, Ireland was not without good reason called Ogygia by Plutarch, for the Irish begin their histories form the earliest accounts of time, so that, in comparison, the antiquity of all other countries is in its infancy. / The last name that need be mentioned is Inisfail, a name which, in poetry especially, has survived. This name it got from the fatal stone called Liafail, which was carried to Ireland by the Tuatha-de-Danaan. It was called the stone of destiny and upon it kings of the Scythian race were always crowned. Long preserved in Ireland with the greatest care, it was taken to Scotland at a date not known. At Scone, in that country it long continued, and each Scottish king was crowned upon it, until it was carried (1296) to Westminster, where it was made part of the coronation chair, and has been so used since then. The Liafail was the stone of destiny, and the island in which it was preserved and venerated was the Isle of Destiny, or Inisfail. [refs. to Harris, Ware, Vol. II, pp.9-10; here pp.4-5.]

‘Should any one assert that the accounts of these various invaders - their voyages, their wanderings, and their battles - are nothing more than fables, he might be accused of temerity; but, on the other hand, should any one accept all these stories in full and write them down as history, he might as easily be accused of being over-credulous.’ (p.9). Dalton proceeds to cast doubt on the extra-Mediterranean voyages of the Egyptians and their successors, while the very existence of the Formorians and the Firbolgs is disputed. [9]

Efforts have been made to ascertain what the race was to which these Firbolgs belonged, and for this purpose Dr. Wilde had recourse to ethnology. Skeletons long buried in the earth were dug up, and also implements of a very ancient and very primitive kind. With the zeal of an antiquarian and the skill of an anatomist, Wilde examined these ancient remains. Comparing in particular the conformation of the skulls, he concluded that the Firbolg were Teutonic, small, lively, with aquiline noses, dark complexions, and heads of great length from front to back. He also concludes that they used stone and flint hatchets, shell ornaments, stone mills, and clay urns; that they came from Norway and Sweden; and that theTuatha-De-Danann were Celts, who used bronze in their weapons and implements. His industry and research were considerable, but his data were insufficient, his arguments are inclusive, he takes too much for granted, and his conclusions are therefore unreliable.’ [Ftn. rems. that ‘Dr. Wilde, afterwards Sir W. Wilde, wrote Lough Corrib and The Beauties of the Boyne and Blackwater, but supplies no reference.] (p.10.)

Vol. II ends with the Reformation: ‘A religion which was avowedly novel, and above all whose high priest was an English king, was certain to be regarded by the Irish with suspicion and ill-favour; but when it furthermore involved the destruction of churches, the suppression of monasteries, and the murder of priests and monks and nuns, it was equally certain they would regard it with aversion and hate. [538]. There must have been many in Ireland who wished well to England and who hoped that Henry’s attack on the Church was but a passing storm which, at least with his death, would subside. They knew that the people would not embrace the new doctrines or abandon the old without a struggle and if the efforts to change them were continued, then, for the first time, both Anglo-Irish and Irish would unite, and trouble and bloodshed and misery both for England and Ireland would ensue.’ (pp.538-39; END VOL.)

Half-vol. III: 1547-1649: thanks include those to Bagwell for maps and to Colonel Moore, C.B., for ‘reading over the portions of the volume dealing with battles and sieges’ as well as to Mrs Conor Maguire, Dr. M’Donald of Maynooth, Father O’Reilly, Lib. of Franciscan Library, Merchant’s Quay; Martin J. Blake, BL of Lincoln’s Inn, and Brother Joseph of the Monastery, Castle bar.

Of the ‘Rebellion of 1641’: ‘It is the testimony of Sir John Davies that no nation under the sun loved even-handed justice better than the Irish, or would rest better satisfied with the execution of it, even though it were against themselves’ (Hist. Tracts, p.227; here 232).

On Rinnuccini: ‘For this position he [the Pope Innocent X] selected Rinnuccini, Archbishop of Firmo. A native of Rome, and of noble parents, he was a man of strong will, of great piety, and of the purest motives. At the time of arriving in Ireland, he was a little more than 50 years of age. The Pope instructed him to beware of those timid Catholics who would be content with the private celebration of the Mass; to insist on the free and public exercise of religion; to reform the clergy, and recommend suitable persons for the episcopacy. He was specially warned against Ormond, and the cessation and peace with him were condemned. But while the Nuncio was to see that the Catholics entered into no disadvantageous peace, he was not to encourage them to strive for national independence, but rather to advise them to be faithful to the King and aid him against the Puritans. In return, the King was to revoke all penal laws against the Catholics, to abolish the Oath of Supremacy, to admit them to all public offices. In order to secure these conditions all fortresses in Ireland were to be put into Catholic hands. In April the Nuncio left Genoa …’ (Vol. 4, p.278.)

Quotes Petty’s calculation that, out of a population of 1,466,000 Irish, 616,000 had perished during these wars [i.e., the Rebellion], citing Tracts Relating to Ireland (The Political Anatomy of Ireland, p.312; here p.340.

‘And what was the character of the Protestant bishops and clergy? Of the former most were English, for the position was too good for a mere Irishman; and of these Swift’s description is well known: ‘Excellent and moral men had been selected upon every occasion of a vacancy; but it unfortunately happened, that, as these worthy divines crossed Hounslow Heath on their way to Ireland, to take possession of their bishoprics, they have been regularly robbed and murdered by the highwaymen frequenting that common, who seize their robes and patents, come over to Ireland, and are consecrated bishops in their stead’ (Prose Works, III, p.220.) At all events they had no zeal. For the 11 years that he was Bishop of Raphoe, Porter lived outside his diocese, except for 18 months. Hackett of Down was 20 years a bishop, and all the time resided in Hammersmith, near London. Ashe of Clogher and Digby of Dromore were both absentees, and the latter was appointed because he could paint well. At the age of 76, Fitzgerald of Clonfert married a girl of 20, and for the 112 years he lived, it was his wife who ruled the diocese, so that there was “no discipline nor care of spiritual or temporals” (quoting Mant, II, pp.283-380; here p.482.)

‘The lands of the Primacy were worth the enormous total of £100,000 a year. [Cites Arthur Young, Tour of Ireland, II, pp.112-13; here p.483) / From ministers of the gospel such as these, wealthy, arrogant, pleasure-loving, as well as form the religion which they professed, the Irish Catholics turned with loathing and horror. They turned instead to the clergy of their own race and blood, and together they fought for their faith. If they had been a minority of the nation their resistance would, no doubt, have been overcome; but it is not possible to coerce effectually a whole nation, nor can a minority, however powerful, permanently hold them down.’ In detailing the life of the Irish priest, educated at Louvain or Salamanca, and returned to Ireland D’Alton quotes John Mitchel’s History of Ireland, I, p.24, and Moran, Persecution under the Puritans, pp.121, 134; here IV, p.483.)

‘When Cromwell became Lord Protector of England in 1653, the Instrument of Government placed the legislative power of Great Britain and Ireland in his hands jointly with a Parliament of 460 members, 400 of whom were English, 30 Scotch, and 30 Irish. Catholics were ineligible to sit in Parliament, or even vote for its members, and the 30 Irish who sat in the United Parliaments of 1654-1656 and 1658 were either officers of Cromwell’s army or his personal friends. / It does not appear that the mass of Irish Protestants approved of this arrangement, and when the Irish Parliament was restored with the restoration of the Stuarts, no voice in Ireland was raised in protest, and for many years none to favour a legislative Union except Sir William Petty.’ (Lecky, V, p.121; here Vol. V, p.77.)

‘Many at that time and since have adversely criticised the policy and sought to minimise the services of O’Connell. They blame him for his sharp censures of the men of ’98, for his constant denunciation of the rebellion, for his abandonment of the Clontarf meeting, for his alliance with the Whigs, for the poor legislative results which followed so many years of agitation and sacrifice. But they lose sight of the difficulties. The French Revolution and the ’98 Rebellion gave him a horror of seeking reform through violence, and he knew that it was the Rebellion of ’98 which had made the Union possible. Few will agree with him that it is never lawful to rebel; for tyranny sometimes becomes unbearable, and the history of the world shows that it is only by the sword some of the greatest victories of human liberty have been won. After all, to hold the Clontarf meeting would probably have ended in massacre, and O’Connell’s error was not in abandoning it, [206] but in thinking that a mere display of force would have succeeded in 1843 as it had in 1829. The legislative fruits of the Whig alliance were indeed small. Yet is was something to end the tithe war, to reform the corporations, to emancipate the Catholics. Nor must Drummond’s adminstration be forgotten, when the tithe-proctor was curbed, the landlord reminded of his duties, and law impartially administered. But much more than all this was the change effected in the people themselves. When O’Connell commenced his public life he found them beaten and cowed, without courage, without spirit and hope and confidence, taught them to feel their strength and bid defiance to their landlords, who had hitherto led them to the polling-booths like sheep. He fought their enemies at the Bar, restrained the violence of their tyrants on the Bench, chastised their traditions in the Senate, made their cause known to the world, and was one of the few men in the British Isles large enough to be seen throughout Europe. He had his faults, as all men have, and perhaps his countrymen like him all the better for this, for his faults and failings were their own. In his own day no man could compete with him for popular favour, and the verdict of his own day has become the verdict of history. Ireland was grateful, and has not failed to give visible proof of her gratitude. The finest street in her metropolis bears his name; facing O’Connell Bridge, his colossal statue, the product of Irish genius, looks down on the crowd as they pass and repass; and as the traveller from the country approaches Dublin his attention is arrested by a graceful round tower which stands sentinel over O’Connell’s grave. A grateful nation thus honourably discharges its debt in paying fitting homage to the memory of the greatest of her sons.’ (Vol. V, pp.206-07.)

‘There were many who wished to go further [than the Whig Clubs] and one of the most respected of the citizens, a woollen draper named Samuel Neilson, founded a small society in the summer of 1791 which was intended to bring together all classes and creeds. “Our efforts for reform”, he said, “have been hitherto ineffective, and they deserved to be so, for they have been selfish and unjust, as not including the rights of the Catholics in the claims we put forward for ourselves.” (Madden, IV, p.4-5; here p.27.) D’Alton’s length account of the Rebellion is concerned with Leinster, Munster and Connacht and only returns to Ulster for on paragraph at the close: ‘Meanwhile there had been partial outbreaks in Antrim and Down. The rebels, led by MacCracken [sic], attacked Antrim on the 7th June, and with difficulty were driven off after an obstinate contest. A few days later MacCracken was captured and put to death. Another body of rebels took Saintfield and Newtownards; but a third body were defeated with heavy loss at Ballinahinch by General Nugent. Their leader, Monroe, was taken prisoner and executed at Lisburn. Nothing further was done in Ulster. The Government regularly forewarned of everything by informers, had been able to anticipate the rebels and defeat them; and by defeating those in arms they discouraged others from joining in the rebellion. The character of the insurrection in Wexford reawakened the Ulstermen’s hatred of popery. They would have no share in a cause which was controlled by priests; and such was the change among them, that on the 14th June 6,000 Presbyterians at Omagh volunteered to serve against the Wexford rebels. (Lecky, IV, pp.415.) / The strength of those rebels was now broken […]’ pp. 71.)

Vol VI: ‘There is a deep pathos in the words of Mr John Parnell as he describes the change which came over his brother. Wearied by exacting public affairs, the Irish leader was wont to rush back from London to Avondale. He loved his beautiful Wicklow home, and in the woods and field around he shot and fished and rode and talked to the workmen and was happy. Then there was a change. Round Mrs. O’Shea he hovered as the moth does round the candle, and to her home in Eltham he bent his way instead of crossing the sea. And he forgot his duty to Ireland as he forgot Avondale. This is not denied by his able and sympathetic biographer, always anxious as he is to shield Mr. Parolee’s memory from reproach. He confessed “frankly and fully” that during the years 1882-1884 “there were weeks and months which he (Parnell) could have spent in Ireland, to the immense advantage of the National movement, but for his unfortunate attachment.,” (O’Brien, Parnell, II, p.165.) The struggle in Ireland was then fierce and bitter …’ (p.370.)

‘At that date the best known among them was Father Eugene O’Growney, a many of singularly loveable character. Modest, unassuming, and retiring, he was without a trace of vanity or self-conceit. …’ (p.497) .D’Alton takes issue with those who disparage his lack of academic honours at Maynooth.

The work which he had so much to heart was carried on in his declining years, as it has been since, by his colleagues in the Gaelic League, and notably by its President Dr. Douglas Hyde. Though a Protestant and educated at Trinity College, Dr. Hyde is thoroughly imbued with the Irish national spirit. He is a man of considerable ability, with a special aptitude for languages, and has done much propagandist work. He has travelled through all parts of Ireland, talked the old language with the people, and taken from their lips old stories and songs, and has thus been able to write much on Irish legends and folk-lore.’ [Further mentions as ‘less prominent but scarcely less enthusiastic’ the names of MacNeill, Fr. Dineen, Dr. O’Hickey, Fr. O’Reilly, Fr. O’Leary ‘and others’.] (p.498.)

‘In English, however, there has been a literary revival largely due to the spirit evoked by the Gaelic movement. In Dublin there is a National Literary Society at which papers are read on national subjects. In London there is a similar Society, under whose auspices valuable monographs have been published on such men as Davis, Sarsfield, Owen Roe O’Neill, and Dr. Doyle.’ Goes on to mention honourably Mr Graves, Mr. Standish O’Grady, Michael McDonagh, DJ O’Donoghue, Ethna Carbery and Moira O’Neill (‘both sweet singers from Ulster’). Also T. D. Sullivan, Dr. Sheehan, Miss Lawless (‘Anglo-Irish rather than Irish’); Miss Barlow (‘happy in describing the Irish peasantry’); Lady Gregory whose ‘attachment is for Pagan Ireland’ and who ‘has also had a large share in establishing the Irish Literary Theatre, win which several plays written by Lady Gregory herself and some of her literary friends ha have been produced.’ Of Russell: ‘he is not easily understood and is more of a mystic than any of his contemporaries. Without caring to describe the scenery of his country or its ruins, or to grow enthusiastic about the great [501] events of its history; yet he is Irish to the core. Vague, indefinite, idealistic, he is pantheistic in his philosophy and pagan in his belief, one to whom Pagan Ireland rather than Christian Ireland appeals. Mr Yeats, however, is the most famous of the group, the high-priest of the Irish Literary Theatre. … It is doubtful if he is a Christian, for he does not approve of the morality of the Churches; and he cares little for the concrete facts of Irish history. To the solid earth on which he stands, to the sights and scenes around him, he prefers the palace of the fairy and the land of the every young, and not infrequently he is so misty and indefinite that he eludes the ordinary intelligence. He has his admirers, and they are not few, but he can never become a national poet, nor be the head of a great literary movement; for the people are not likely to accept as their leader or as a literary prophet one who lives for ever with fairies and dreams, and who clings to a philosophy and a religion (if they can be called such) which he himself is unable to explain.’ [Ftn. here refers in an article in North American Review, Oct. 1902, by Fiona MacLeod.] (p.501-02.)

The volume concludes with an account of the success of Irishmen among the ‘educated classes’ abroad, chiefly in the US and Australia, and ends with these sentiments: ‘It is the strong and healthy and enterprising who go, the persons with initiative and ambition, leaving behind them the weak of body and mind. Of those who reach America healthy and strong some indeed succeed, but others go down in the struggle, wasted by exhaustion and labour, by keen competition, by different climatic conditions. A small portion, especially of the girls, come back to Ireland, but how woefully changed! Still young, the elasticity has left their step, the light has gone from their eye, the roses have faded from their cheeks; and the beautiful girl who left Ireland but a few years before has returned prematurely old, perhaps to die, or it may be to get married at home and become the mother of unhealthy children. And thus the exodus to America is responsible not merely for the diminution, but also the deterioration of the race. How to induce the people to remain at home is a question which demands the most serious thought of our public men; for it is evident that if the present exodus continues unchecked, the Irish race in Ireland is doomed.’ [End].