"There is a double cause why I should
be careful of the welfare of that people [the Irish]: first, as the king of
England, by reason of the long possession the crown of England hath had of that
land; and also as king of Scotland, for the ancient kings of Scotland are
descended of the kings of Ireland." - Speech of King James I. at
Whitehall, Apr. 21, 1613.
F.R.A. Glover: There is a passage in Scottish History, connected with Irish Legend,
which appears so extravagant in itself, that it has been pronounced to be
utterly beyond the possibility of reality; it has, indeed, been stigmatized as
much as if it had been invented, merely to show how far absurdity could be
carried or credulity taxed. If it stood alone, one's wonder might almost be
excited that any man of so much mental culture as to have attained the position
of a chronicler, should have troubled himself to refer to such a poor story;
or, much more, have thought it worth the time occupied in transcribing it.
Therefore Mr. Moore's observations concerning it are not altogether surprising.
It may, however, be neither untrue nor
stupid; and it is, in any case, doubtless, founded on fact.
When the Picts "first desired that some
of the Milesian Women should accompany them to Scotland," so runs the
Legend, "they pledged themselves solemnly that, should they become masters
of the country they were about to invade, the Sovereignty should ever after be
vested in the descendants of the female line" (Moore, i, 111). In so far
there is nothing very extravagant; this was evidently to secure that the Blood
Royal of Scotland should be one with the Blood Royal of Scotia Major, i.e.,
Ireland. What follows is, however, treated in the comment of Mr. Moore, as
being too strong for his digestion. He says, " This matrimonial compact
is, thus, in a spirit far worse than absurd, misrepresented by O'Halloran.
'They, at the same time, requested wives from Heremon; engaging, in the most
solemn manner, that not only then, but for ever after, if they, or their
successors, should have issue by a British and again by an Irish woman; that
the issue of this last only, should be capable of succeeding to the
inheritance! and which law continued in force to the days of Venerable Bode;
i.e., about 2000 years! A mark of such striking distinction, that it cannot be
paralleled in the History of any nation under the sun!" Vol. ii. ch. 4,
O'Halloran' (Moore i, 111, note).
Yet this story, absurd as it seems, and
against which, as the representation of a supposed state of things, the
Historian found it in his conscience to reclaim as above, must have had some
foundation of fact, on which to have been based; and, indeed, the chronology
corrected, - i.e. for 2000 Years read 1000, - might, under certain imaginable
circumstances, be not only reasonable but true; and even by us, at this time,
be reasonably held, according to the view of the case taken by the imponents,
to be a necessary imposition. And, seeing that these certain
circumstances trench very closely on the hypothesis of this work, and that the
Irish King would, if such circumstances had existed, have had, on the one hand,
high authority to adduce for the laying down of the stipulation; and the
Scottish, on the other, would have had good reason for accepting it; it almost
becomes a duty in us, for the credit's-sake of our ancestors, to inquire,
whether such circumstances did exist as, existing, would convert the absurd and
unreasonable into what would have been a perfectly intelligible and justifiable
requirement; and therefore reasonably likely on the part of the Scottish, to be
acquiesced in.
Can any good reason, then, be assigned for
the stipulation, on the part of the Irish Monarch, that could have produced
such a willing acquiescence on the part of the Scottish, as Bede declares to
have been the case in this matter, and to have had such a long endurance?
It is not necessary, however, it must be
remarked, that the supposed facts, in such imaginable circumstances, should
have ever really existed. It is sufficient to make the story probable, that the
general belief was, that the case was as it was imagined to be. And it may be
remarked, generally, that it is hardly becoming in us to travel out of the
record, for the purpose, as it were, of impugning the intelligence of our
ancestors, by proving to our own satisfaction that they were mere dupes; when,
if we keep strictly within it - as we ought, at least, not to neglect to do, -
investigation of the marks along the highway which they trode, may show us,
that those whom we think to have been unwise, because they did not act just as
we think we should have done, are, on the contrary, the wise: .. those, whose
acts bear witness for them, and who do not, like some others, bear witness for
themselves, and "warm themselves in their own sparks" (Isa. 1:11).
Credulity is a poor thing, it may be; and our poor half-civilized ancestors may
have been credulous. Nevertheless, it is astonishing how much credulity some
people have, who are credulous of their own wisdom, as they compare themselves
with "ancient men and their good fathers who begat them"
(Ecclesiasticus 44). A wretched example of this self-adulation has recently
been most painfully presented to the world! [JML: Does the reader know to what
the writer, in 1861, is referring?]
What good reason, then, - what sufficient
reason can be assigned, for the stipulation, on the part of the Irish King; and
the covenant entered into by the Scottish Petitioners? such as may account for
that willing acquiescence on the part of the latter, which Bede declares to
have been of so enduring a character among their descendants?
We know that from the time when it was
declared that "the Seed of the woman was to bruise the Serpent's
Head," (Gen. 3:15) that "the man from the Lord" (Gen. 4:1)
appointed in the Divine Counsels to do it, was "the desire of women:"
(Dan. 11:37) and that, amongst the Jews, this promised seed was so earnestly
longed for by every woman individually, that barrenness of the womb was held to
be a curse from the Lord amongst those of whom Messiah could possibly come. And
though, ultimately, the Shiloh, "the desire of all nations," (Hag.
2:7) was announced as to come of Judah, still, the feeling had been so strongly
implanted in the minds of all, that "the desire of women" continued a
well-known form of expression: however, in reality, universally recognized,
that the field of the possible occurrence of the Event was narrowed, even
among, the descendants of Judah, to the Root of Jesse: i.e., to the Descendants
of David. (Mic. v. 2.) Consequently, in the event of any woman of the Seed
Royal of David, being granted, in alliance, beyond the pale of her own people,
- (the possibility of the birth of the Messiah through her womb, being a
part of her endowment, and may it not have been to this, that "the
mystery not to be uttered," alluded?) - it would be natural, that those
who were conscious of this possibility of Descent, should stipulate, before
they granted the favour solicited, - viz. to spare a portion of the Elect Seed,
- for such terms as they felt would be necessary to secure, that Descents from
her, should take precedence of all other Descents. For the expected Seed was to
be, it is to be remembered, born, a pre-eminent monarch. And if, on the one
hand, those solicited, explained to those who solicited, why they demanded
this; and on the other hand, those who solicited the favour and the honour,
believed that the others spoke the truth; then it was, would be, would have
been, entirely reasonable, that they who acknowledged the reality of the
declared endowment, should give in to such demand, and, that all concerned in
it, should acquiesce therein.
Now, if we suppose that the Royal Family, or
the Chief Race in Ireland, had reason to believe that they were of the Race
from which Messiah, the true Jodhan Moran, who was to be, according to their
notions, the bearer of the Stone back to the East, in triumph, was to spring;
.. and of which Race, they showed the Standard, the Standard of Judah, as their
own; being also, at the same time, as they thought, able to affirm, that they
had the mark of the assurance of God's favour in the possession of that Stone,
of which it was declared, with great confidence, that it was to be with their
Race, until some one of those connected with them, should return with it, to
the East, as a Sceptred Monarch, as the promised Messiah, as the Righteous
Judge, the expected Shiloh; - then, would they not only have been
perfectly right in making the alleged stipulation, but it would have been most
culpable in them to have neglected any thing which they should have thought to
be their duty, towards God and Man, with respect to a due provision for such a
possible Event.
But that is the very hypothesis; and which
is assumed to be the actual fact in the case: not, indeed, that the Messiah was
to come of that Stock, but that, they thought, He might come
of it.
The Hebrews, down to the time of the coming
of the Messiah, were universally of opinion that He was to be the restorer of
the Monarchy of Judah, which would be a monarchy in "the East," as
the people in the West would see it, - and a universal King. The belief,
therefore, to the same effect, of these simple ones of the West, was no more
discreditable to them, than was the persistence in that opinion to the learned
hierarchy and fully-civilized intelligence of Judea at the time of the Advent
of Christ. For entertaining that opinion, it is to be remembered, that the Jews
were never blamed. It was for their persistence in the opinion, after
proof sufficient had been exhibited to them that they misunderstood the time
rather than misread the predictions, that they were blameworthy: and for which,
and their conduct influenced by such misunderstanding of the time, the Jews of
the Crucifixion and their descendants suffered. [JML: e.g., the Bar Cochba
(=son of the star = Messiah) rebellion and the consequent expulsion of the Jews
from Palestine].
The allegation, therefore, of the ancient
Chronicler, becomes, not a self-evident fiction, credulously accepted by
"fanciful Old Bede," but the credible declaration of a reasonable
fact by the Venerable Historiographer: and, the conversion, by such a
supposition, of what would be utterly extravagant, not to say nonsensical and
inconceivable among rational men, into reasonableness and propriety, affords
strong ground for presuming that this was the very idea that possessed those
who made the stipulation; and that it was accepted as stated, as the Rule of
Succession, willingly, by those upon whom it was imposed. And the rumour or
declaration that such an extraordinary Rule of Succession prevailed, and was
acted upon, affords strong ground equally for the belief that the stipulation
was made, and by some of the descendants of some branches of the original
stock, maintained, and to a comparatively late period, acted upon: and an
argument, in so far, that all the parties, respectively, believed that they had
amongst them the favoured Seed of the Perpetual Race to whom had been assigned,
the Throne of David, the Sceptre of Judah, and the invaluable endowments of
Jacob, as inherited from Abraham.
This is an argument that will have little
weight with such as treat the Revelation of God as an elaborate fiction. But
the fiction of Revelation is not now, nor here, the question. It is
not, "Were these people right, to believe so and so?" - but,
"Are there fair reasons for assuming that they did so believe?" If
there are, they acted as has been declared by Venerable Bede. And, so acting,
as they did not do so, without some assignable grounds for their belief, those
grounds are the marks along the highway which show us by which road our
ancestors traveled, and at the same time indicate the reasons why they took
that particular way. And we may be erring against truth not less than against
decency to pronounce the record nonsense, or the reasonable conduct of the
ancients, incredible folly, because some dare to think Revelation, in which our
ancestors believed, a fiction, and themselves warranted in denying premises, on
which they formed their conclusions.
Had Mr. Moore had any idea of the real value
of this fact, which it fell in his way to relate and comment on, or of the
character and name of the several persons and things connected with Irish and
Scottish ancient History, and of Tara in particular, of which he has spoken
with less consideration than they deserve, we may be sure that he would have
given the subject all the advantage that it could have derived from being
handled by one of his extensive local knowledge.
Go to Previous
Chapter
Go to Next Chapter
Go to First Chapter