how old is dublin?

Irish Jesuit Province

How Old Is Dublin?Author(s): George A. LittleSource: The Irish Monthly, Vol. 82, No. 966 (Feb., 1954), pp. 43-48Published by: Irish Jesuit ProvinceStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20516695 .Accessed: 15/06/2014 17:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Irish Jesuit Province is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Irish Monthly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.210 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:43:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ijphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20516695?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

HOW OLD IS DUBLIN?*

By DR. GEORGE A. LITTLE

THE next point to consider is the churches which we know were

in pre-Scandinavian Dublin. Fortunately, there is the one fact in

the whole of this thesis regarding which everybody agrees, that

there were churches in pre-Scandinavian Dublin. There were of these

certainly seven and probably nine. Granting that we were always a

very pious people, this seems to be an over generous supply for an

unspecified region. The first of these churches was that of MacTail.

Mac Tail pronounced properly in Irish was confused with that of the

Irish form of Michael hence the Normans give it the name " Michael

de la Pole "; the latter name resulting from the fact that it stood near

a pool which lay at the foot of Ship Street. The site of the old church

is still marked. It is important for one point principally, namely, that

it is the only one of the pre-Scandinavian churches of which we have

a picture. St. Michael's was not taken down until the first half of

the 18th century. It had a round tower associated with it. This

building was greatly loved by the people of Dublin.

Now, St. Bride's?beyond the fact that it was in Bride Street, we

know almost nothing about its founding. Just the name of it survived.

St. Kevin's?that stood about the site of the ruined St. Kevin's

in Long Lane, near the Meath Hospital. That is a very important

example of the churches since we know, actually, the name of the

person who built it. He was a Dubliner named Garbhan, and

Garbhan built it in honour of St. Kevin. It is interesting if only because it is the earliest dedication of the kind that we know of in

Ireland. Most of the early churches were simply named after the

owner or founder, but in this case there was a definite dedication in

the modern sense and the occasion of the dedication possibly gave the hagiographical symbol to St. Kevin. In art St. Kevin is always shown with a bird in his hand. Here is the story: Garbhan was

travelling through the mountains between Dublin and Wicklow when

he met Kevin, who, strangely enough, had got tired of his students

and had run away from them. Garbhan asked Kevin where was he

* From a recorded lecture.

43


http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

IRISH MONTHLY

going and Kevin replied he was "

looking for some peace. He wanted to say his prayers." And Garbhan, who was an older man, said: " You belong to Glendalough. Go back to your work. Remember,

Kevin?no bird ever laid its eggs when on the wing." And Kevin

returned to Glendalough and remained there to his death. Garbhan

returned to Dublin and built that church in Long Lane, which he

dedicated to God and to Kevin. Of course, there are no remains

of that original church, but the old ruins which stand there now, stand approximately on the site of it.

The next church on our list is Christ Church. You must all have

wondered at some time how it was that a church always entitled either the Cathedral or Church of the Holy Trinity was never called

that, but always Christ Church. Officially never Christ Church, but

still no Dubliner ever calls it by any other name. Now, why is this?

Apparently, according to O'Donovan, the reason was that it was built on the foundation of a much earlier church. One built by Ceile

Chriost, who was a Bishop from old Kilcullen,who came and settled

here.

St. Patrick's Church comes next in order. There is a good deal

of information about this church on account of St. Patrick's own

visit there. The idea of the visit of St Patrick is one which is always met with disbelief; the reason for this attitude is because it is not

mentioned in the official "

Lives ". The authority for this statement

is usually given as Joycelin's Life of St. Patrick, and every second line

of this work almost contradicts itself and there are foolishnesses in

the narrative which are unforgivable. Therefore, it is a completely

unworthy source and therefore (it is said) Patrick did not come to

Dublin. That appraisal is completely true in one sense. But there is a

suppressio veri. Joycelin was a bad historian; he was unreliable and

he did write nonsense, but we have no reason to trouble much about

him, because one of the four books he used as an authority for his " Life

n still exists?the Book of Rights, which contains all the facts

without the foolishness or the contradiction and, so far as I am aware,

nobody yet has suggested that the book is inaccurate, or that it has

noticeable inventions in it. We can, I believe, depend on it as an

authority and therefore we have reason to believe that St. Patrick

came here and cured the son of the king. Eolathach MacAlpin was

King of Dublin at that time, and it was his son, Eochy, whom Patrick

healed. When Patrick was leaving Dublin the king ordered that

44



OLD DUBLIN

in future there would be a special cess payable from every ship

visiting the Port of Dublin, to the See of Armagh in gratitude for

Patrick's kindness. That cess was paid even 200 years after the

Norman invasion of Ireland. If people had not believed in St.

Patrick's visit, do you think they would have paid the tax?

The next church which is of interest to us in this context is "

St.

Aud n's ". Aud n's is always recognised as a Norman foundation

and rightly, for it was built by them and named after their great

patron, St. Ouen, whose name is found in the name of the City of

Rouen. But the policy with the Normans always was suppression and supersession. They were always anxious to seem to have roots

sunk deep into our land and the result was they always built on our

foundations when they could. You have seen that in the case of

St. Patrick's and Christ Church and others. They did it, too, in the

case of St. Aud n's. I am indebted to Rev. Professor Aubrey

Gwynn, S.J., for the following information, because it was he who

discovered it, and it is of first rate importance?that on that site

where now stands St. Aud n's, was the Church dedicated to St.

Colm Cille. He found the evidence in two documents which went

to Rome in the period of St. Laurence O'Toole. They were simply

ordinary diocesan business documents in which certain facts were

attested by the parish priests of Dublin. There were only a couple of years between the two MSS. The first list gives all the parish names, with a church called St. Colm Cille in it . . . but no St.

Aud n's. The second list gives them all again, but this time St.

Aud n's and no St. Colm Cille's. That in convincing, even if we

did not have (as we have), a cross-inscribed slab at St. Aud n's

which certainly dates back as far as the 8th century and possibly even a century earlier.

Now, we also had Gill Duileach's in Fishamble Street (the same St.

Duileach as he to whom the church on the Malahide Road is dedicated

?of him we know nothing except that he was an Irish saint. And

I need not remind you that the Norsemen, even when they became

Christians, did not name their churches after Irishmen.

The last church on our list is St. Catherine's, of Meath Street?that

church puzzles me, because there is a tremendously strong tradition

that St. Catherine's had been an Irish foundation?a pre-Scandinavian foundation. I can find no reason for believing that, but it is well to

listen to tradition. It is usually correct, or but little incorrect.

45



IRISH MONTHLY

However. I could find no facts to substantiate tradition, but in my

seeking I found record of another church only about 150 yartf? from

it, which had apparently been forgotten altogether? called St. Molloyes ?that is probably "St. Molua's." Now, I think that the pie

Scandinavian description of St. Catherine's was really attached to

St. Molloyes and not to St. Catherine's. I may be wrong in this, but at any rate one or other (or both!) was pre-S?andinavian.

In addition to our churches we have a list of Dublin Bishops. This list was taken entirely from foreign sources; and it has been

declared to be completely invalid. That is regrettable, because this

list was compiled partly by Ware, who was not only a very well-known

historian, but who had behind him a very superior historian in the

person of his secretary, no less a person than Dougald Mac Firbisigh ?one of the last of Irish historians of the ancient tradition. It was

borne out and added to by Colgan in writing his Mission records in

Louvain. These two authorities are sound; it was dangerous to call

their list invalid. It was worse than dangerous; it was foolish, because

the reason advanced for the alleged invalidity of this list of Bishops was that there was no bishopric in Dublin in the pre-Scandinavian

period. That does not prove anything, since there was no definition

of diocese in Ireland in the modern sense until the Synod of

Rathbreassail in 1111 A.D. The Bishops are, briefly, Livinius?the

Irish of which is Molibba. He died in 633. Desibed, died 676.

Wiro?who is Bearaidh in Irish, died 775. Gualafar died about that

time, but the exact date is missing. Rumold?that is Rumsel?died

775?he is, of course, one of the patrons of this diocese. Sedulius?

Siadhal Mac Luath in Irish, died 785; and Cormac died about 840.

These were all missionary Bishops. Each is marked in the records as

" Bishop of Dublin

" and since most of those records were compiled

from the individuals themselves, I think we may believe them.

Now, there were also in addition, of course, a great number of

people who could be considered as also having to do with these

churches; namely?the patrons. It was the Gaelic custom to call

the churches, not after some notional person, but after someone who

had either built the house; granted the land; or said the first Mass

in that particular church. It may be taken, therefore, that most of

the patrons that I have mentioned also visited the city. Now, what sort of city had we got? It has been described as a

peninsulated city. The river spread out wide arms; it was not locked

46



OLD DUBLIN

into a central channel as it is to-day. It surrounded a peninsula and

that peninsula was surmounted by the crest of Cork Hill. The

Liffey joined the river there which was afterwards called "

The

Poddle". Great sea marshes lay above the water line spanned by the Ath Cliath Duibhlinne. The summit of this peninsula is the

eastern spur of Eiscir Riada and here ended the Slighe Mor. Furnish

ing the top of that hill was the Dun Duibhlinne, the citadel of this

early city. Around Dublin, stretching out towards Kilmainham, was

a place which remained famous for a very long time afterwards; the

lands of the Dun Duibhlinne?the Faithche Atha Cliath. This area

continued to be mentioned well down into Norman times. There was also a place called The Derndall; the remains of which you can

see to-day at the back of the Castle, in that little garden. Derndall

is almost certainly Doire na Dala?the Oakgrove of the Parliament or

Speaking Place; a meeting place. There, too, the Platea, the Rath or market square apparently part of High Street. There were several Raths. Baggot Rath was one. There was one also off Luke Street.

Another off Pearse Street. Another near the Styne. Then there was

the Thingmote, which stood in that angle made by Suffolk Street, Church Lane and College Green. It was actually an Irish mound of

the terraced type. It was claimed, of course, to be Norse, but as the

Norse never claimed it, nor ever built one in Norway, or anywhere else in Ireland (and we built many in Ireland) I think the ascription of it to the Irish is hardly to be questioned.

Consider now, the written references to Dublin: Classically, in

Ptolemy, A.D. 120?that was the earliest one by name, but as early as B.C. 104 Artemidorus mentioned that there were eleven important cities in Ireland. Tacitus, I have already told you, has already

mentioned them. The Scandinavian references are very important, because not in one single instance is it claimed from any Scandinavian

country that any of them founded Dublin. Without a single exception they all state that Dublin was taken by them. The first of these

historians who comes to mind is Saxo Grammaticus. He was a

Danish priest who was the secretary of the Bishop of a Danish diocese. This Bishop selected the man he considered to be the

greatest living scholar, who had earned, in fact, the tide

"Grammaticus", to write the history of Denmark. In doing so, Saxo described the taking of Dublin, which with other details, he

said was taken by the same subterfuge as one of the Scandinavian

47



IRISH MONTHLY

cities had been taken by a man named Hadding; namely, that the

Norsemen collected swallows and placed burning wicks under their

wings and the frightened birds, returning to their nestsr in the thatch in the city, set the entire town on fire. The city was easily taken

then when in the consequent state of panic. There is also $ similar reference in Sturlasen's Heimskringla Saga. The Annales Norwegi a very important Latin annals describes these people and their voyage down from the North, of their taking various places in the Hebridean

Islands; North of England, Scotland and eventually?(these are the words) **. . . they took Dublin and other maritime cities. . . ."

There are also, of course, references in the Burnt Njal Saga. Now, the Irish references are plentiful enough; slight, but significant. The

Annals of Tighernaeh, A.D. 166: there is given the reference to Con and Mogh which I have mentioned. Now, in the Book of Leinster

and in the Book of Lecan is mentioned the name of the earliest

inhabitants of Dublin that we know of: the Dermaisig. The

Dermaisig inhabited here about 150 years before the Scandinavian

invasion. They took their name from Dere Maiseach, the son of

Cathair Mor, who in the second century was King of Ireland. They continued in Dublin, holding it as their own territory until dispossessed just about 100 years before the Norsemen came, by the sept of the

Ui Donochu, who captured Dublin and possessed themselves of it.

This sept eventually sub-divided themselves into the O'Byrnes and the

O'Tooles and the particular family who had the greatest' holding in Dublin took the name of their patron Colman, in the name of

Gillmacolmog. There are references in the Annals of Clonmacnoise

?the first taking of Dublin by the Scandinavians and also the matter

is referred to again in The Annals of Ulster. The Book of Leinster

also mentions Conal Cearnach visiting Dublin.

Here then concludes the main heads cf evidence that Dublin existed

before 836 and was an important city. We have got the name; we

have got the ford; we have got the harbour; we have got the churches; we have got the bishops; and we have got the various visitors and

something of the lay-out of the City itself as proof.

48



Article Contentsp. 43p. 44p. 45p. 46p. 47p. 48

Issue Table of ContentsThe Irish Monthly, Vol. 82, No. 966 (Feb., 1954), pp. 43-84Front MatterHow Old Is Dublin? [pp. 43-48]American Inquiry [pp. 49-54]The Irish: Sensitive? Comments of a Frenchwoman [pp. 54-58]The Catholic Press in Britain [pp. 58-62]Father Benedict Williamson. I: Early Life and Training [pp. 62-67]Review: Records Review [pp. 68-70]Man's Dignity [pp. 71-77]Reviews of BooksReview: untitled [pp. 78-79]Review: untitled [pp. 79-81]Review: untitled [pp. 81-82]Review: untitled [pp. 82-84]Review: untitled [p. 84-84]

how old is dublin?

Documents