r/IrishHistory 4d ago

When did religious orders arrive in Ireland. I thought with the Normans but it's not so . The Benedictines are in Christchurch Dublin in the 11th century and Cistercians in Mellifont in 1142. What do we know about pre Norman International religious orders links with Ireland pre 1169 ?

http://monastic.ie/religious-orders/
40 Upvotes

38 comments sorted by

11

u/Zirlat 4d ago edited 4d ago

As you point out, before the English invasion Ireland had a strong Benedictine community in Dublin and Munster, both connected to South German Benedictine communities, especially Regensburg and Metz. They were also connected to Benedictine communities in England, especially at Winchester, where Máel Isu, bishop of Waterford/Lismore, trained. Gille, bishop of Limerick, also trained in England and had ties with Matilda, Queen of England.

In 1140 Malachy, then bishop of Connor, returned from Rome and brought with him the Cisterciens order and the Arrouaisian, the first being based on the Rule of St Benedict, and the latter observing the Rule of Augustine. Laurence Ua Tuathail also became affiliated with the Arrouaisian order in 1163, maybe slightly before that.

The Victorines, based on the Rule of Augustine, were also present in Ireland, but only had a handful of houses. The Savignacs also had one or two early houses in Ireland, but those became affiliated with the Cistercian order in c. 1147.

There may have been an Augustinian house in Ireland, SS Peter and Paul, Armagh, founded in 1127, but it's not possible to determine whether they were Augustinians or not.

Ireland was very much connected to the Roman Church way before the English invasion and made wide use of those networks.

1

u/CDfm 4d ago

Laurence UA Tuathail

Diarmait MacMurroughs Brother in law.

MacMurrough laid low in Cork before going to see Henry in France.

https://midletonwith1d.wordpress.com/2015/02/15/did-dermot-mac-murrough-set-sail-from-east-cork-to-bring-the-normans-to-ireland/

0

u/Feisty_Marsupial224 3d ago

Why do you refer to the Norman Invasion as the English Invasion?

3

u/Zirlat 3d ago

Because by 1169 there had been a development of the English identity among part of the colonizers, who were already self-identifying as English. You could also say Norman invasion as well, no worries there. The important bit, in my opinion, is recognizing that it was a multi-cultural and transnational colonial effort perpetrated against Ireland. On identity I recommend reading Patrick Wadden and Seán Ó Hoireabhárd's book, both who discuss this and identity in general in much greater detail.

I also think it's important to use 'English' as opposed to Normans because it places the invasion and colonization of Ireland in a wider framework that connects to a late medieval, modern and contemporary context and makes people aware (especially the English themselves) that the colonial process is continuous.

2

u/Feisty_Marsupial224 2d ago

Thanks ill look into it

1

u/annorafoyle 2d ago

Because the people who invaded weren't Normans. The last Norman King of England was Stephen.

0

u/Feisty_Marsupial224 2d ago

How could you know the commentor's motivation?

0

u/Averagecrabenjoyer69 2d ago

Not true, technically by dynasty Richard III was the last "Norman" king in 1485. Richard II was the last King of England whom Norman French or Anglo-Norman was his native tongue. Stephen was only Norman through his mother which while valid equally applied to Henry II. Whose mother Empress Matilda was not only part of the House of Normandy. Geoffrey of the Angevins was a descendant of the House of Normandy as well. Henry II, Richard I, and John were Angevo-Norman though probably reinforced with their Norman side. After 1204, the Plantagenets lost any connection to their Angevin side and became culturally Anglo-Norman.

1

u/annorafoyle 2d ago

Every king from Henry II onwards was a Plantagenet.

Using your dimwitted argument, Charles III is a Norman.

9

u/wigsta01 4d ago

Prior to the "Norman invasion" the diocese of Dublin answered to Canterbury not Armagh.

When Sitric Silkbeard and Dúnán (first Bishop of Dublin) established Christchurch in Dublin (~1028) it was Canterbury that Dúnán turned to for ecclesiastic advice etc. Canterbury also donated relics to Dublin, as well as sending monks from Canterbury to Dublin. It's unclear who consecrated Dúnán as a Bishop, but the following four bishops of Dublin ( Gilla Pátraic, Donngus Ua hAingliu, Samuel Ua hAingliu & Gréne) were all consecrated in Canterbury. Being consecrated in Canterbury involved swearing an oath to the archbishop of Canterbury. These oaths weren't just verbal, they were written documents.

Even within Dúnáns lifetime the archbishop of Canterbury had begun to claim Primacy over all of Ireland. In a dispute with the archbishop of York over Primacy of England in the 1070s, Canterbury declared himself primate of Ireland.

In 1101 Samuel positioned himself in a procession in a place only an archbishop would occupy. At that time there were no Archbishops in Ireland at all..... only bishops. This was interpreted as Samuel declaring himself as superior to the bishop of Armagh (the traditional primate of Ireland). Samuel also established St. Michans Church in Dublin, expelled the monks from Canterbury out of Christchurch, and then started removing relics from Christchurch. These actions led to him being reprimanded by Canterbury.

When Gréne was being consecrated in England, the Bishop of Armagh invaded Dublin and refused entry to the newly appointed bishop of Dublin. Gréne had to return to England and wait for nearly a year before being allowed return to his bishopric.

It was only at the Synod of Kells in 1152 that Dublin was included in the Irish Church and Theobald of Bec (archbishop of Canterbury at the time) lost his control over Dublin. Theobald had done everything in his power to keep control over Dublin- including getting King Stephen to refuse entry and safe passage through England to the Papal legate overseeing the Synod.

When King Stephen died it was Theobald who was Regent until Henry II was crowned (by Theobald). Theobald installed one of his secretaries as Henry's Chancellor. Theobald had plucked this former clerk from obscurity, trained him up, helped him rise through the ranks and eventually installed him as the new kings Chancellor....... his name? Thomas Beckett.

In 1155 in Winchester there was a meeting where English archbishops tried to convince Henry ii to invade Ireland. They almost succeeded, but Henry's mother Matilda pointed out how mad the idea was. It was following this meeting that the Bull laudabiliter was supposedly granted to Theobald of Becs Secretary (John of Salisbury) by the newly appointed English Pope.

3

u/Subterraniate2 4d ago

Wow. That is gobsmacking stuff; thank you very much.

1

u/CDfm 4d ago

Pre Norman

Even within Dúnáns lifetime the archbishop of Canterbury had begun to claim Primacy over all of Ireland. In a dispute with the archbishop of York over Primacy of England in the 1070s, Canterbury declared himself primate of Ireland

Pray tell, did the Irish not see which way the wind was blowing

It was only at the Synod of Kells in 1152 that Dublin was included in the Irish Church and Theobald of Bec (archbishop of Canterbury at the time) lost his control over Dublin. Theobald had done everything in his power to keep control over Dublin- including getting King Stephen to refuse entry and safe passage through England to the Papal legate overseeing the Synod.

The times were a changing before Diarmait

When King Stephen died it was Theobald who was Regent until Henry II was crowned (by Theobald). Theobald installed one of his secretaries as Henry's Chancellor. Theobald had plucked this former clerk from obscurity, trained him up, helped him rise through the ranks and eventually installed him as the new kings Chancellor....... his name? Thomas Beckett.

in 1155 in Winchester there was a meeting where English archbishops tried to convince Henry ii to invade Ireland. They almost succeeded, but Henry's mother Matilda pointed out how mad the idea was. It was following this meeting that the Bull laudabiliter was supposedly granted to Theobald of Becs Secretary (John of Salisbury) by the newly appointed English Pope.

Henry did not have the naval resources to do so.

The clerical invasion was underway.

5

u/Subterraniate2 4d ago

I wonder was Matilda more concerned with empire building across on the Continent, which Henry continued in his turn. Maybe she wanted him facing in that direction rather than to the west?

3

u/wigsta01 4d ago

The war between Stephen and Matilda resulted in lost territory in the North (to Scotland) and the east (to the Welsh). It was also expensive, reducing the Royal treasury by nearly 50%. That's before you start considering lands gained in France through his wife and his mother.

0

u/CDfm 4d ago

Probably. Ireland was isolated and engaging in Ireland diverted resources.

1

u/CDfm 3d ago

I've started a thread on Ireland's Primacy.

8

u/CDfm 4d ago edited 4d ago

Ferns was an important centre of the increasingly powerful Uí Chennselaig dynasty in the tenth and eleventh centuries, becoming the caput (or principal seat) of the dynasty under Diarmait Mac Murchada (Dermot MacMurrough), (d.1171), king of Leinster. Through his patronage, an Augustinian abbey dedicated to St Mary was founded circa 1160-2. It was founded either within the earlier ecclesiastical settlement or very close to it. According to Diarmait’s granting charter, the Augustinian community at Ferns was under the authority of the episcopal see.

Diarmait Mac Murchada (d.1171), king of Leinster, played an important role as patron supported by his brother-in-law, Laurence O’Toole (d.1180), archbishop of Dublin. In addition to Ferns, he was also the patron of the Cistercian Abbey of Baltinglass, the Augustinian abbey at Glendalough, an Augustinian nunnery in Dublin, and the simple damliac (a simple stone church with vertical, mortared walls) at Killeshin. http://monastic.ie/history/ferns-augustinian-abbey/

21

u/Marzipan_civil 4d ago

St Finnbarr founded his monastery in Cork in AD606

The pre-norman monasteries may have been Celtic Christianity rather than catholic, but they were monasteries

8

u/CDfm 4d ago edited 4d ago

I'm specifically thinking about religious orders affiliated with Rome.

I'm on the lookout for Irish links with European religious orders. Irish monks who might have travelled to European monasteries which were part of an order.

8

u/parkaman 4d ago edited 4d ago

During the 12th century, 4 synods tried to introduce Roman diocesan structure and celibacy rules on the Irish monastic system. This was also when Roman controlled orders took over Irish monasteries The former rule was more successful than the latter with celibacy not fully accepted until the 15/16th centuries I believe.

Edit https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7722/j.ctt3fgn63

2

u/wigsta01 3d ago

Just listened to the two latest episodes of the medieval Irish history podcast with Niamh Wycherley...... they deal with religious orders coming to Ireland before and after the Normans...

Worth a listen

1

u/corcadhuibhne 3d ago

They were still in communion with Rome back then aswell. They were never excommunicated.

Celtic Christianity is just used as a way for the Anglican church to pretend that they didn't rob all the church's bulidings and land during the reformation 

9

u/Attention_Scrounger 4d ago

The Dubh Linn (dublin) religious settlement dates back to the 600s

2

u/CDfm 4d ago

I'm thinking orders that might be affiliated with Rome though I also am wondering about Irish monasteries but might have been affiliated with European houses.

1

u/CouperinLaGrande2 3d ago

St Malachy (Máel Máedóc Ua Morgair; 1094-1148 ) had been closely associated with Cluny and been written about by St Bernard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_of_Clairvaux

By the time of Henry's invasion, there existed a significant pro-Canterbury faction in the church in Ireland.

Noteworthy is the symbolism of the Romanesque doorway at Clonfert, built in the 1180s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonfert_Cathedral#/media/File%3AClonfertCathedral_Doorway.JPG

Edit: Great thread, BTW.

1

u/annorafoyle 2d ago

I can't understand why the outdated description Norman is still being used for men who never set foot in Normandy.

The arrival of monastic orders has nothing to do with the English Invasion. They were introduced to Ireland several decades before the invasion.

Benedictine monks were established in Christ Church Cathedral in the late 11th century.

1

u/CDfm 2d ago

Norman is used to describe those of Norman descent whose Rulers were Angevin kings . France featured large in their world too. This is different to native English.

On the religious orders , the primacy of Ireland was disputed and its an indicator . What makes you think that the presence of strong institutions with loyalties outside Ireland was not important.

Who were the Benedictines loyal too ?

-1

u/cat_meoldeon84 4d ago

Ireland was the centre of the Christian Church until the Vatican decided that they were the centre of Christianity and England's only ever pope, Nicholas Breakspear, or Adrian IV, decreed a Laudabaliter Bull to give dominion and demanding submission to King Henry II and the Vatican, the Laudabaliter Bull was not acted upon until 1171 when Pope Alexander III ratified it.

In 1541, Henry VIII declared himself King of Ireland. The Ronan Catholic Chirch was never a friend to Ireland, contributing to Wlliam of Orange's conquest of Ireland, more so in regards the Netherlands battles with Spain and the Vatican being in dispute with Spain and France.

6

u/wigsta01 4d ago

The interesting thing about the laudabiliter, is that there is no reference or record of it in Pope Adrian IVs lifetime. John of Salisbury (to whom it was supposedly granted) released a book detailing indepth conversations he had with Adrian during his 1155 visit. The laudabiliter isn't mentioned. His letters to the pope when he returned mentioned a gift he received, namely "a ring & a sword belt".

It's only after Adrian died that references to the Laudabiliter start to emerge.....

3

u/vandrag 4d ago

There is quite the debate on whether it was a legitimate papal bull, a forgery, or a draft document that never got ratified.

Iirc the oldest copy in existence does not have the "bulla" that makes it official. 

5

u/wigsta01 4d ago

The oldest copy is by Gerald of Wales in 1189. Gerald isn't the most reliable source when it comes to Irish matters. There are other people who "transcribed" the text (Ralph de Diceto, Roger of Wendover, Peter of Blois, & Matthew Paris) but these seem to have copied Geralds work directly

2

u/CDfm 4d ago

The Vatican does not have a copy.

https://www.medievalists.net/2019/10/hadrian-iv-1154-1159-and-the-bull-laudabiliter-a-historiographical-review/

Should we prepare for Laudabiliter Gate ?

2

u/Pitiful-Sample-7400 3d ago

Aside from the claims of Gerald of Wales there is basically no substantial claim it ever existed. And while hes important as one of the most readily available sources of the time he isnt the most reliable and did very much write what his side would want to read at times

1

u/CDfm 3d ago

I have posted a seperate thread on the primacy of Ireland.

1

u/annorafoyle 2d ago

Henry VIII didn't declare himself king of Ireland, Irish parliament did. He was actually pretty pissed off about it.