1 alphabetic characters, previous to their Bethluifnion, which all the learned agree, is but an imitation of the Roman character, is founded in the groffeft fiction. According to Keating, whofe hiftory is the grand repofitory of all the Irish fables," the famous Feniufa Farfa, the fon of Ma gog, King of Syctbia, defirous of becoming mafter of the 72 languages, created at the confusion of Babel, fent 72 persons to learn them. He efta blished a University at Magh-Seanir, near Athens, over which, he, Gadel and Coaith prefided. Thefe formed the Greek, Lstin, and Hebrew let lers. Gadel was ordered to digeft the Irish into five dialects. The Finian to be spoken by the militia and foldiery: the poetic and hiftoric, by the Scanachies and Bards; the medical, by the phyficians, and the common idiom by the vulgar." Geoffry Keating, whom Mr. Plowden extols as an hiftorian, was a fecular prieft, who died about the year 1625, a short time after he had finished his hiftory, which Sir Richard Cox, in his excellent Hiftory of Ireland, calls a beap of filly fictions; and which Dr. Talbot, titular Archbishop of Dublin, characterifes in a very few words, by faying, infigne plane fed inf num opus." Some of the principal events in his hiftory turn upon magic and necromancy. O'Flaherty, who deals in fable as much as Keating, fays, "what if I fhould affirm, that our Phonicus was the Phænican Cadmus, who depicted the antient Greek letters, and which refembled the Latin Nor are the Irish far diftant from the Latin " Here he speaks the truth, though reluctantly; for the Irish elements are derived from the Latin, and the Latin from the Greek. O'Conor's Differtations on the antient History of Ireland, are nothing but fcraps tranflated from O'Flaherty's Ogygia, and Lynch's Cambrents Everfus. In the one part of this work, O'Conor obferves, on the Bethluifnion, "this has not the leaft resemblance with either the Greek or Roman alphabets;" and yet, afterwards, he admits that "the letters ufed by the old Irish (the Bethluifnion) fince the reception of Chriftianity, are evidently borrowed from the firft Christian Milioners, as more commodious than the old, uncouth, and virgular forms imported into Ireland, by the Celto Seythian colony from Spain. This is a direct contradiction to what he faid before. Sir George Ma kenzie, and, Bishop Stillingfleet, had examined the Irith claim to remote hiftory and iterature, and found it to be a mafs of filly and impertinent imposture. Father Innes, the two Macpherfos, and Mr. Whitaker, have fince totally fubverted it. It is univerfally allowed, that there is not one Irish manu; fcript extant older than the 11th century. The annals on which the Ir fh hiftorians principally rely, and from which Keating has derived many of his abfurd and fabulous relations, are the Pfalter of Cafhell, Cormacs Glotlary, the Leaver Gabb la and the 'Lavar Lecan. Walth gives the following extract from the first, which muft completely, deftroy its authenti.ity, as an hiftorical record. "That the Pics ferved in Thrace under one Polycornus, that they fled that coun try, and roamed up and down at fea, till they came to Gaul, and there founded the city of Pictavia: that they were forced to leave Gaul, and retire to reland: that Trofdan, a magician, advised the Irish amry to bathe in the milk of oue hundred and fifty white crumple horned cows, as a fure antidote against the envenomed arrows of the Britons." Stillingflect, * A Francifcan Friar who lived in the 17th century. Innes, and Pinkerton, condemn it as a Romance. As to Cormacs Gloffary, Lynch in his Cambrenfis Everfus, page 301, fays, it was the work of Cairbre Liffechair, A. D. 27. Colgan, equally entitled to credit, afcribes it to Cormac Ulfhada, A. D. 257. O'Conor who published O'Flaherty's Ogygia vindicated, in 1775, and was well acquainted with Irish Eterature, had never seen this gloffary, and fears it was loft to the public. Though it has been afcribed by many Irish antiquaries to Cormac, Prince of Muefter, and Bishop of Cafhell. Lynch and O'Conor, who were fuppofed to be well versed in Irish antiquities, are of a different opinion, and say is was compofed by others, who lived above 600 years before Cormac; but they are romancing, when they fuppofe letters to have been known, or common in the third century. It is now 1500 years, ac cording to Lynch and Colgan, and 900 according to others, fince this pretended gloffary was fuppofed to have been written. Has the Irish tongue fuffered no alteration in that great length of time? It must have been aftonishingly changed, when General Va lancey, who devoted great part of his life to the cultivation of Irish literature, tells us, in his grammar of that language, that the Irish language of 400 years back, is totally different from the prefent, in sense and orthography. The Leavar Gabhala and Leavar Lecan, which have never feen the light, are much of the fame ftamp with those which we have defcribed. It is pretended in these wretched forgeries, compofed in an obfcure corner of the globe, not only to fupply the defects, but to fill up the chafms of facred and profame hif tory, that the genealogies of the Virgin Mary, Joleph, and other holy perfons in the Scripture, are not to be had, but in this book of Lecant. Lynch is of opinion, that it was compiled between the years 1380 and 1417, A. D. a period like the rest, of rebellion and domeftic confufion; but many perfons well verfed in Irish literature, differ from him, as the language is too modern for fo early a date. The Irish were attached to their barbarous Brehan inftitutions, and being unwilling to fubmit to the wife and falutary regimen of English law, their miferable feanachies, or bards amufed themfelves, and their countrymen, with fabulous tales of the antiquity and nobility of their defcent, the grandeur and power of their former princes, and the diftingu.shed learning and civility of their ancef tors. The pretenfions of the Irish to very high antiquity can be fupported only by authentic records; but all thofe were deftroyed by St. Patrick in the 5th century, by the Danes in the 9th, and by the English in the 12th, what knowledge then could fucceeding annalifts have of them? But it is no less fingula than true, that none of the old Irish mauuscripts quoted by any of the Irish historians or antiquaries of the 15th or 16th centuries, have ever been produced, though they are faid to be in public libraries, or in private collections, or were quoted in detached scraps. "Therefore,' fays Stillingfeet, in 1685, "it would tend very much to the clearing of anti * Ogygia Vind. p. 161.John Lynch, who endeavoured to impeach the credit of Giraldus Cambrenfis, in his Cambrenfis Everfus, published in 1662, was a feeular priest. + Lhuyd Archæolo. Brit. p. 435. Antiq. of Brit. p. 248, 249. quities, if fome of thefe antient annals and leger books were printed. Fot it hath rendered their credit the more fufpicious, because they have been fo long kept up, when all the old English annals have been carefully published." Innes, in 1729, after defcribing the manner in which Irish fictions were, by the moderns, brought into fome confiftence and fhape, observes *, that the originals are kept out of fight to conceal their deformity, and their contradictions to all true hiftory; and he pertinently obferves, "we are now no more in ages of ignorance and credulity. Men have begun long fince to measure their belief of remote antiquity by their vouchers." In 1783, Mr. Edmund Bu ke declared his opinion, "that extracts † from Irish manuscripts only increased curiofity; and the juft demand of the public for fome entire pieces; and that until this is done, the antient period of Irish hiftory, which precedes official records, can not be faid to ftand on proper authority." In 1786, Mr. Burke fays in a letter ‡, "will you have the goodness to pardon me for reminding you of what I once before took the liberty to mention; my earneft with that fome of the antient Irifh historical monuments fhould be published as they ftand, with a translation in Latin or English. Until fomething of this kind is done, criticifm can have no fecure anchorage." The earneft with of these eminent scholars would have been long fince complied with, were fuci antient Irish manufcripts in exiftence; but the Irish antiquaries have never ventured to give any thing more than extracts from them; and from the fpecimens which they prefented of them to the public, it is certainly for the honour of the country to fuffer them to remain for ever in obfcurity. After having convicted Mr. Plowden of the groffeft literary and hiftoric falfhoods and mifreprefentations, we fhall proceed to examine the profpectus of Charles O'Concr, D. D. published in the Annual Regifter for 1803, and intitled, Reruni Hibernicarum Scriptores Antiqui, &c. a Carolo O'Conor, D. D. He profeffes himself to be the grandfon of the late Charles O'Conor, of Belamgare, and of courfe pretends to be defcended from Roderic O'Conor, the laft Monarch. We shall now examine, 64 66 Quid dignum tanto feret hic promiffer hiatu." Our author begins his intended work with the annals of Cluain, otherwife called Tigernach's Annals, which come down to the year 1088, A.D. Father Innes, who examined these annals in the Duke of Chandos's li brary, fays, they want fome leaves in the beginning, and elsewhere, and begin only about the time of Alexander the Great; but till St. Patrick's time, they treat chiefly of the general hiftory of the world, and contain but very little of Ireland." This annalift, fays Bihop Nicholfon, allows, that omnia monumenta Scotorum, ufque Kimboathi (who is faid to have reigned A. M. 3596, about 440 years before our Saviour's incarnation) incerta erant. These two citations fupply criteria to judge, whether interpolations fhall be hereafter foifted into a modern edition of thefe annals. Tigernach has always fupported a good character, and the Crit. Eff. Vol. II, p. 499. † Collectan. No. 13, p. 133. § Critical Effay, p. 453. Irish Historical Library, p. 31. The early appellation of the Irish. reafon, reafon is given by O'Brien in the preface to his Irish Dictionary (p. 40), "becaufe fabulous ftories are taken no notice of." Doctor O'Conor, therefore, acted wifely in placing him at the head of his Irifh annalists. But his doing fo, was impolitic on another account, for he deftroys the credit of the other Irifh hiftorians, who abound in abfurd fables and monftrous fictions. Though Tigernach is much fuperior to them, he is not implicitly to be relied on, as he contradicts the venerable Bede, and other writers of credit. The uncertainty of Irish literary monuments, which he acknowledges, receives the ftrongest confirmation from what Nennius faid, 250 years before: "That he confulted the most eminent Irish antiquaries, and that (nulla certa hiftoria) no certain history of the nation was extant."? The fecond in our author's feries of annals, are thofe of Ulfter, otherwife called Annales Sonatenfes. According to this profpectus, they reach to the year 1131. They begin A.D. 444, and end A.D. 1541. "This year, fays Nicholson (p. 37), died Roger Caffidy, who wrote the latter part of thefe annals entirely, and made great additions to the former." Thus dreffed up by a bigotted Irish ecclefiaftic, and adapted to the taste of au ignorant and fuperftitious multitude (as the Irish were in 1541), no reliance can be placed on them. The next are the annals of Innisfallen, written A. D. 1318. They give a sketch of univerfal history, from the creation to the year 430, with very little relative to Ireland. Both Ware and Nicholfon are of opinion, that their author, who is anonymous, lived about the year 1215, fo that thefe, like the Ulfter annals, have been interpolated, and continued to 1318, and are of equal authority. The The annals of Boyle fucceed, commonly called Annales Conatienfes. They begin at the year 1232, A.D. and end 1253, and are of little importance. He clofes his lift of the Irifh annals, with thofe of Donegal, commonly called thofe of the four mafters. This work confifts of two thick volumes 4to. It begins A.M. 2527, and ends A.D. 1171. It was the work of four Francifcan Friars, Michael and Peregrine Clery, Maurice, and Fearfeara Coury, but principally of the firft, who had been employed by Colgan in collecting materials, for his acta fanctorum Hibernix, and who was eminent in that contemptible line of literature. reader fhall know the object of his ftudies from three works which he compofed. One was an account of the Kings of Ireland, the years of their reigns, and their genealogies, &c. The fecond confifts of the genealogies of the Irish Saints, arranged under thirty-feven claffes. The third treatife gives the firft Planters of Ireland, from the Flood. Such a compilation of abfurd fables raised the indignation of Doctor Talbot, titular Archbishop of Dublin, who condemned, and declared them to be unworthy of credit; and yet they were called the four masters by Colgan, as preeminent among the Irish annalifts. Doctor Talbot obferves on Keating, "Nor is there any reliance to be placed on him, who follows them; for he treats of the genealogies of the Irish, deducing them, in diftinct gene * John Colgan, an Irish friar, a divinity lecturer in the University of Louvain, who wrote three large volumes of the lives of Irish faints in the beginning of the 17 century. + See his obfervations, in p. 3. rations from Adam. Many things he introduces from Bardic Poems, with ftories of giants. What valuable information can be had from fuch writers, I profefs myself ignorant.' Such were the fentiments of Doctor Talbot*, a man, who from his habits and education as a Popish eccle fiaftic, was as little inclined to diminish the credit of Irish fabulous hiftory, as Keating or O'Flaherty, but whofe good fenfe would not fuffer him to give them any countenance. If then our most celebrated Irish annals, can not, in the opinion of their countrymen, ftand the test of criticism, can Doctor O'Conor think the literary public fo weak and ignorant, as to imagine that the authority of these works can be propped up by metrical romances, compofed feven or eight centuries earlier? Not one hiftoric fact, nor any useful information of the ftate of fociety in remote ages can be elicited from thefe contemptible Bardic fictions. not. The publication of these annals is artfully made fubfervient to the pofe of introducing its principal objects, which are a topographical chart, and a dictionary of the forfeited eftates," to affift local refearches." Do the modern poffeffors of them in Ireland want fuch affiftance? They do They must then be for the use of the old proprietors, who complain of being unjustly deprived of their antient patrimonies. This chart and dictionary are probably intended to enable them to afcerrain their claims; and in case of a revolution, with the aid of old title deeds, and other monuments, formerly lodged in Cooke-street Chapel, in Dublin, and now faid to be transferred to the Popish College of Maynooth, in the county of Kildaret, will maintain the hopes of the antient proprietors, of being able to evict the prefeat poffeffors. That judicious hiftorian, Mr. Carte, obferves, in his Life of the Duke of Ormond‡. "But there are two confiderable bodies of men still discontented (in Ireland), both of great power among the people; yet it was impracticable to gratify either in their defires, without endangering the Crown, and throwing the whole kingdom into confufion; tis eafy to fee that I mean the Romish Clergy, and the old Irish Septs. The former have an abfolute power over the bulk of the Irish Papifts (who being ignorant, fuperftitious, and bigotted, are blindly led by them at their pleasure); and no little influence over the gentry of their communion. The other body are the leaders of the Irish Septs, difpoffeffed of their eftates, which they had forfeited by rebellion §. Did not Dr. O'Conor's grandfather publish a chart of the forfeited eftates, and foon after give an edition of Curry's Civil Wars of Ireland, which contains as grofs a mifrepresentation of those events as Mr. Plow. den's Hiftorical Review; and it with equal effrontery denies, or palliates, the bloody atrocities committed during their progrefs? Did not those Charts, and many other feditious publications tend to promote the rebellions of 1798 and 1803, by exciting difcontents, and reviving animofities? And will any one deny that a fimilar work will have the fame effect; and that it would deferve no encouragement, either on the score of intrinfic merit, or good intent? Our duty and our allegiance to the king and con See his Memoirs in Harris's Edition of Ware's Writers. Vol. I. p. 155. § This work was published near a century ago, and these observations are applicable to the prefent time. stitution |